Stopping Iran Through Syria

Hi everyone!

Before I begin today, I just wanted to alert all of you to a special promotion I'm currently running on Amazon.com. Starting today and lasting through February 12th, you can download the Kindle version of my novel "Birds of Dreams" for free. Yes, that's right. For free. The same promotion is running concurrently on Amazon.co.uk for those of you living in the UK. After February 12th, the price will go up...so take advantage of this offer now. "Birds of Dreams" is a satirical look at contemporary reality TV-obsessed society and portrays the lengths people will go to for a shot at their own Kardashian dreams. It's funny, it's irreverent, it's a novel for our times.

Changing focus...I was particularly gratified to read an Op-Ed piece in today's New York Times by Efraim Halevy, the former Israeli national security adviser, ambassador, and Mossad director from 1998 to 2002. In his column, entitled "Iran's Achilles Heel," Mr. Halevy argues that the best (and most overlooked) way for the West to defeat Iran's spreading influence in the Middle East is to support regime change in Syria. Never mind, he writes, a military strike on Iran's nuclear processing facilities that would prove extremely costly and would run the risk of furthering antagonizing Iran into its own strikes against Israel and other Western interests in the Middle East.

A far better approach--and one that no one in the U.S. seems to be considering as all focus is on weighing the pros and cons of a U.S. or Israeli missile strike---is to undermine Iran's influence by tightening the noose around Bashar al-Assad's neck. If the West works to build unity among and influence upon the various rival factions within the Syrian opposition, it can effectively cut off Iran's conduit to its allies in Hamas and Hezbollah, get rid of Iran's Republican Guard training camps throughout the country, and thereby limit the scope of Iran's influence in the country upon which it most relies as a proxy for regional dominance.

Of course a major stumbling block in this scenario is continued Russian intransigence. But, Mr. Halevy writes, this is not necessarily insurmountable. If the West and the post-Assad government is able to assure Russia that it can maintain naval access to its Mediterranean ports at Tartus and Latakia and continue to serve as an arms supplier to Syria, Russia might be feel that its interests are not being overlooked. Russia needs to feel that it is not being sidelined in any negotiations involving the future of Syria, its main ally in the region. Russia will not allow another repeat of Libya, hence its unconscionable veto of the U.N. Security Council/Arab League-backed resolution.

Russia is trying its own diplomatic approach and claims it is committed to peace in Syria. Despite the Russian flag-waving and pro-Kremlin rallies that greeted the Russian delegation in Damascus yesterday, it seems very little was actually accomplished. Bashar is stubbornly holding fast.

Mr. Halevy, you've got it right. Your strategy is exactly the one I've been suggesting here for days. A missile strike or any overt military action against Iran's nuclear sites, regardless of their possible justification, is only going to make matters worse. By focusing on Syria, we'd be killing two birds with one stone--assuring regime change in Syria which--if managed correctly--will put a stranglehold on Iran's influence not only in Syria, but around the world.

Ciao.