In January 2006, Raghida Dergham, New York bureau chief for the London daily Al-Hayat, published an analysis titled "Various Scenarios That Would Prompt an Israeli Strike on Lebanon and Syria." In one of the scenarios she described, Syria and Iran would try to draw Israel into a war by using Hizbullah and Palestinian factions, with the aim of easing the international pressure on them. [1]

The following are excerpts from the English translation of the article, which was posted on the author's website: [2]

Iran and Syria "Might Consider It in Their Interest to Provoke Israel Through Hizbullah and the Palestinian Factions"

"There is talk within international circles about various scenarios that would influence decisions relating to the existence of Syria and Hizbullah; these international circles also warn that attacking Israeli towns from across the Lebanese border could entail repercussions on all of Syria and Lebanon. This is not random talk, but is based on indications that Syria will most probably resort to measures that would prompt an Israeli attack on Lebanon and Syria. In addition, there are indications that Syria will stir up the Palestinian-Israeli scene by activating and empowering pro-Syrian Palestinian factions.

"When it comes to Lebanon, the most important link through which and on which measures will be taken is Hizbullah, which possesses tools allowing it to implement or disrupt any measures. That's why the responsibility of implicating Lebanon in an Israeli attack or invasion falls on the shoulders of the Hizbullah leadership, which is required to choose today between fortifying Lebanon against being used for revenge or any other reason and between sacrificing it to the benefit of Syria or Iran.

"At this juncture, the leadership in these two countries might consider it in their interest to provoke Israel through Hizbullah and the Palestinian factions, either to divert attention and pressure away from them or to mobilize anti-Israeli sentiment for local and regional consumption. The situations in Syria and Iran are completely different, but the means and tools for effecting change are the same for Damascus and Tehran, namely, [through] Hizbullah and the Palestinian factions present in Lebanon and those that receive money, aid and weapons from Syria and Iran."

"Any Cross-Border Operations That Hizbullah Would Conduct Into Israel Would Be Considered a Calculated Decision Calling for an Israeli Strike on Lebanon"

"Moreover, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's extremely deteriorating state of health places matters in an even more dangerous realm. For it is in such transitional periods that states become even more prepared and eager to resort to big military operations in order to prove that they are capable of keeping things under their control. For this reason, any cross-border operations that Hizbullah would conduct into Israel, at this point, would be considered as a calculated decision calling for an Israeli strike on Lebanon. And any Syrian encouragement for such a development would also be considered as a dormant [Syrian] desire for provoking an Israeli strike on Syria, something which would lead Damascus to raise hell in the Arab region for being in a state of war with Israel."

Larijani Threatened That "If the U.S. and Israel Commit any 'Mistake' With His Country" They Would Enter "'A Hell Which They Could Not Easily Come Out of'"

"The secretary-general of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, Ali Larijani, warned the day before yesterday [January 4, 2006] against pushing his country 'into adopting another option that had been planned in advance,' in terms of the nuclear weapons dossier, so that it could confront pressures that are meant to deprive Tehran of 'its right' to nuclear enrichment and to [possessing] technology for the production of nuclear fuel. Larijani threatened with 'dragging the region into war' if Tehran is forced to give up nuclear enrichment, and he also warned the United States and Israel of committing 'any mistake' with his country, noting that Iran had already 'prepared a scenario to respond to this matter', and he threatened with 'a hell which they could not easily come out of.'

"Although there might be divisions within the ruling leaderships in Iran, it is clear that Iran places its nuclear ambitions above all considerations and it is willing to use Palestine and all Arabs to accomplish its goals.

"Larijani's statements are not just talk, but they are the epitome of frankness and truth when it comes to Iran's priorities and the means for achieving them. His threats of 'dragging the region into war' and his acknowledgment that Tehran had plotted for the option of war, in advance, is a clear indication of Iran's commitment to using others to implement its own nuclear strategy..."

"The Catastrophe Scenario... is a Scenario of 'If We Go Down, We All Go Down Together' - A Scenario That Would Call for Blowing up the Lebanese Situation"

"The main scenarios being discussed within international circles, regarding Syria, are three:
In the first scenario, Syrian President Bashar Assad would reach the conclusion that in order to save Syria from sanctions and punishment, and in order to save himself from being held to account, he would have to follow a course of action that is fundamentally different from the one he has been following up till now. And this would require him to sacrifice anyone and everyone who played a role and was implicated in the assassination of the Lebanese former prime minister Rafiq Hariri, even if they were among his closest relatives or if they held the highest [government] ranks.

"If Bashar Assad managed to take such a decision and implement it, he would have made a historic contribution in saving Syria from punishment, and with that, he would have placed his country above and beyond the regime, contrary to what ousted Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had done...

"...The second scenario being discussed within international circles... is the scenario of coups d'état, most notably, a Sunni revolt in alliance with key Alawite figures, which would spare the country a major turbulence or a catastrophic war...

"What's important is that the second scenario, which has been dubbed the 'middle' scenario, is regularly being discussed and taken into account, and it is being prepared in a number of capitals and with the involvement of more than one person, especially since Abdel-Halim Khaddam is not the last episode in the [series of] confessions [expected] from Damascus, but he could be the first...

"What Khaddam has offered, up till now, in his public declarations, and his claim that he has more to disclose, allows for a qualitative change in the investigation because Khaddam considered the Syrian president a party in the 'instigation' [against Hariri], something which raised pressures on Damascus to unprecedented levels, particularly since the investigation committee has publicly requested to interrogate the Syrian president as witness, after it had requested to interrogate his brother-in-law, Assef Shawkat, chief of Syrian military intelligence, as 'a suspect.'

"This substantial development could prompt Bashar Assad to become convinced of the need to adopt a policy of qualitative change in his course of action, but it could also prompt him, on the other hand, to resort to complete escalation, since there is no option other than him. Such an escalation brings us to the third scenario, which is known as the 'catastrophe scenario.'

"The catastrophe scenario does not protect Syria or the ruling Baath regime, but it is a scenario of 'if we go down, we all go down together' - a scenario that would call for blowing up the Lebanese situation.

"Specifically, it is about blowing up the situation on the border, through the Shebaa Farms and utilizing Hizbullah and the Palestinian factions. It also involves the blowing up of Lebanese-Lebanese relations, both at the sectarian and party levels, and fabricating problems within the internal Lebanese scene. It also involves instigating a Lebanese-Palestinian confrontation and not just provoking a Lebanese-Syrian confrontation. But this scenario will not be satisfied with just blowing up the Lebanese scene but its goal is to drag the entire region into a regional war. For what is being said in international circles is that the attempts to instill terror in the hearts of Lebanese through the series of assassinations [that have taken place] have proved to be a failure, because Lebanon remains cohesive and it did not succumb to a civil war, as Syria would have wished for.

"For this reason, the only alternative option right now is to completely and qualitatively change the course of action so that the confrontation would become at all levels by using all Lebanese and Palestinian actors in order to provoke Israel into grand-scale measures that would change the focus of discussions away from Syria's role in Lebanon and the international community's holding Syria to account for the actions made by its military leadership.

"So which of these scenarios is forthcoming? The answer is still not clear...

"What remains is that the biggest responsibility, at the Lebanese level, falls on Hizbullah, as it would have to decide for the last time if it is truly a Lebanese party and a Lebanese citizen or [if] it is a soldier that executes the Syrian or Iranian order of 'dragging the region' into war and turning Lebanon into a 'scene of hell', to the benefit of Iran's nuclear [agenda] or to exempt Syria from being held to account for the assassination crimes..."