The next stage in the war on terror

Now that U.S. forces have moved into Baghdad and statues of Saddam have come tumbling down, it’s time to look ahead to what could be the next stage of the Bush Administration’s war on terror. Naturally, the next step in the process is a direct result of what has already been accomplished. The expected replacement for Saddam is a coalition run by and for Americans, which will probably allow American companies to gain control over the oil in Iraq, as well as allow us to establish military bases throughout the country. Iraq is smack in the middle of the Middle East, and therefore gives the United States an invaluable base for military operations in the region.

The next target is probably Iran, which seems reasonable enough. The U.S. government has hated Iran ever since the Revolution under the Ayatollah and the hostage crisis of 1979. George W. Bush cited Iran as a member of the Axis of Evil, and Iran is probably much more dangerous to the United States than Iraq was under Saddam. So it doesn’t seem surprising that Bush now wants to focus attention on Iran after having defeated Saddam.

The other country that has become a target is Syria. Located just to the west of Iraq, Syria has always been something of a thorn in America’s side. Now Bush is charging them with providing safety for Iraqi leaders who escaped the American invasion, along with developing chemical weapons and supporting terrorists. You’ll notice these are pretty similar to the charges that were made against Saddam.

That’s not all the two countries have in common. Syria has had its own form of Saddam in President Hafez al-Assad, who ruled the country with an iron fist. Just like Saddam, Stalin and Big Brother, he put up pictures of himself all over the place. In 1999, he managed to earn no less than 99.9% of the vote in the Presidential election. When he died the next year, his son Bashar took power and has ruled ever since. So if the goal of the war is to liberate people from a despotic dictator, then Syria seems like a very good target indeed. Perhaps we can expect to see Operation Syrian Freedom go into effect within the next year or so. Although for now, Bush is merely calling for some sort of economic sanctions against Bashar’s regime.

Bush is correct when he calls Syria a nation that supports terrorists, because the Syrian government openly supports Hezbollah against Israel. There are some pretty good reasons for Syria to hate Israel, however. Israel has been occupying the Golan Heights ever since 1967, when they were a part of Syria. This strategically valuable area is part of the occupied territories that the United Nations has told Israel to withdraw from. Syria is an important part of the Arab coalition that is calling for a Palestinian state within Israel. And they have always protected the interests of Lebanon, another state at odds with the Israelis. You might remember that back in the 1980s, Lebanon was the scene of a terrorist attack against an American military compound in Beirut that killed 241 Marines. Beirut remains one of the world’s most dangerous war zones to this day.

There once was a state known as Greater Syria that included modern-day Lebanon, Jordan, and Israel. And there are some people who would like to see Greater Syria reestablished, which would obviously mean the end of Israel. Since Israel is America’s strongest ally, any country with so many reasons to oppose Israel would naturally become an enemy to the U.S.

Occupying Iraq provides the perfect position from which to strike at both Syria and Iran. There are even historical ties between the two countries, as Syria stunned the Arab world by supporting Iran against Saddam and Iraq in their brutal war back in the 1980s. So as the administration makes its way around the world, Syria and Iran are the most obvious places to go into after conquering Iraq.

But is a campaign against Syria the right thing to do? Surely another war would only strengthen anti-American sentiment throughout the Middle East. The response to an American invasion of Syria may well be an increase in the number of terror attacks against Jews in Israel. And Syria lacks the oil resources of Iraq.

So if the United States wants to avoid making the situation in the Middle East even worse, they would be smart to avoid attacking Syria at all. An even smarter idea would be to get Israel to comply with the United Nations by withdrawing from the Golan, as well as the rest of the occupied territories. This would almost certainly lead to less suicide bombings in Israel, not to mention showing respect for international law. If history is any indication, this is the last thing Israel and their American allies will be willing to do. And an attack on Syria and Iran is only going to make the situation in the Middle East that much worse.