THE SYRIANS ARE AGAIN THREATENING TERROR

Danny Reshef 3.3.00

We should keep in mind that the basic conditions have not changed and that the Syrians and the Lebanese have many good reasons not to bet mixed up with any adventures in renewing Palestinian terrorist attacks from Lebanon.

Ehud Yaari, the analyst for Arab affairs, reported this evening over the news satellite of Channel One, that Lebanon and Syria have explicitly threatened to renew Palestinian terror attacks upon the

Galilee after the withdrawal of the IDF.

This new theme is a threat towards Israel.

The threats are in contrast to the efforts of Syria since 1992 to be removed from the list of states that support terror, as a condition for economic rehabilitation.

The threats do not correlate with the declaration two days ago of the Prime Minister of Lebanon, Salim al Hous, who welcomed the withdrawal of the IDF, although he would have preferred it to be the product of an agreement.

The threats of a renewal of Palestinian terrorism adversely affect the sovereignty of Lebanon and are liable to arouse grave unrest in the country among all the ethnic communities.

Only recently has the Lebanese central government taken harsh measures, which are still partially in effect, against the formation of armed Palestinian organizations, including close supervision over the refugee camps.

Furthermore, the vulnerability of Lebanon to attacks from Israel and to the damage that is liable to be caused to its economic and social stability is well known and remains unchanged.

There is room for inquiring about how much these threats can be believed and how much of a danger that they pose.

Israel is now conducting negotiations on two parallel tracks, the Palestinian and the Syrian, to achieve peace and a final settlement.

The assumption is that any progress on one track creates pressure to progress on the other one as well, thus creating a dynamic situation of mutual pressures between the Syrians and the Palestinians to move forward in the negotiations.

It is natural that Syria would direct its policy towards obstructing Israeli moves.

On January 15, after the talks at Shepherdstown, Saab Arikat announced that the negotiations with Israel would be accelerated to achieve a framework agreement by February 15.

On January 16, the Syrians rushed to react in the Lebanese newspaper Al-Saphir, by some so-called Syrian Amendments to the Shepherdstown Document, in which they demanded to solve the problem of the Palestinian refugees within the framework of the negotiations with Syria.

In effect, the Syrians had linked themselves to the Palestinian track and deterred Arafat from quickly and unilaterally concluding his negotiations with Israel.

The intention, of course, was not to enable Israel to dictate at will the pace of progress between the tracks.

And wonder of wonders! Barak met yesterday with Arafat and only one day later the Palestinian track comes back to life, threatens to isolate the Syrians and leave them behind, just as Barak would like.

This arouses the Syrians to remind Arafat that he is not the only patron of the Palestinian problem and that he cannot make commitments to Israel without Syrian approval about terminating Palestinian terror.

The Syrians are also threatening Israel that a unilateral withdrawal from Lebanon and isolation of the Syrians would neither deter them nor lead them to soften their positions in the face of the dual pressure of a unilateral withdrawal from Lebanon on the one hand and progress on the Palestinian track on the other hand.

One must view the Syrian threats within the context of the renewal of the negotiations with the Syrians and the Syrian desire to make it more difficult for us and for the Palestinians in the process of making decisions. We should remember that the fundamental conditions have not changed and that the Syrians and the Lebanese have many good reasons not to get tangled up in any adventure of renewing Palestinian terror from Lebanese territory.