Israel Syria attack: Why current surge in Crude Oil could be short lived

Last Updated : 06 May 2013 at 06:15 IST

Israel has attacked Syria on Friday last week as well as Sunday this week in an apparent bid to stop the Iran-made Fateh-110 precision missiles from getting into the hands of Lebanon’s Hezbollah. While Israeli officials on condition of anonymity have confirmed the attack, no political leader in Israel would do the same.

Israel had launched a similar attack in January as well; at that time to block the SA 17 anti-aircraft missiles from falling into the hands of Hezbollah. 

This attack was met with sound and fury, but the consequences were muted. The scenario could not be different this time as well as Assad may want the words to be louder than actions this time too as his position is severely compromised and his regime is deeply mired in the civil war against rebels who seek to oust him.

The Financial Times reports: 

Speaking to CNN, Faisal al Mekdad, Syria’s deputy foreign minister, described the attack as a “declaration of war” and said it would retaliate in its own time and way. Syria had the right “to defend its people by all available means”, said Omran al Zoubi, information minister, adding that the attacks were a “flagrant violation of international law” and made the Middle East “more dangerous”.

No wonder, crude oil prices have climbed on the Globex platform of NYMEX.

As of 05.53 AM IST, WTI crude oil for delivery on June 13 was seen trading at $96.88 registering a gain of $1.27 or 1.33%. Brent crude oil on the same platform for the same date was spotted trading at $105.35 a barrel, providing for a gain of $1.22 or 1.17% as of 05.56 AM.

The futures began to climb on Friday when the US jobs data said hiring by firms in US picked up in April more than anticipated and unemployment rates dwindled.

So, will there be a war?

The same Financial Times report adds: “analysts said that, while escalation was possible, neither side had much interest in launching a full-scale war against the other. A broader conflict with Israel would open a dangerous new front for the Assad regime at a time when it is already stretched by a two-year-old armed rebellion”

Chances are miniscule that Syrian rebels would join Assad in a fight against a foreign enemy that is Israel:

“We call on the Syrian people to hold steadfast onto the revolution, and to reject the regime’s consistent aggression against the interests of the country and its people. We ask the Syrian people to continue working towards our goal of ridding the country of the destruction and chaos created by the Assad ruling family, who has consistently allowed its interests to take precedent over national interests,” statement released by Syrian Coalition Media Office , the media wing of Syrian rebels said, subseqent to the attacks. 

While Middle East ideologically has become more dangerous and the scenarios there much more uncertain, on a functional level, the status quo would be maintained as an otherwise-scenario would be chaotic to the core. In times of uncertainty chaos is at best avoided and nobody knows this better than Israel helping them take a calculated risk.

The current fillip to the crude oil futures could thus be short lived. The futures would be much more sensitive to data from Eurozone and Europe in the days ahead at least in the medium term. 

As published here: http://www.commodityonline.com/news/israel-syria-attack-why-current-surge-in-crude-oil-could-be-short-lived-54277-3-54278.html 

Has Israel just helped Assad win the Syria civil war?

Last Updated : 01 February 2013 at 14:05 IST

The reported strike by Israel on Syria has raised more questions than answers. Probing them could be worthwhile, but reaching definite conclusions premature.

Reports suggest that Israel attacked Syrian convoy carrying SA-17 anti-aircraft missiles even as Damascus say that attacks were carried out on a research facility in Syria. Israel has neither confirmed nor denied.

The questions that the reports raise:

--Whether the strike has actually been carried out by Israel?
--Provided the strike was actually carried out, where in Syria it has happened?
--What was the motive behind the alleged attack?
--What are the repercussions in store for Syria and Assad?

Addressing the first question:

Israel has not confirmed or denied that it has carried out the attack. Nonetheless, Syria has lodged its protest with the United Nations. [They have outlined that Syria has “the option and the capacity to surprise in retaliation.”]

Now, this is something serious. Syria already mired in civil war and severely compromised may not dare to estrange the UN by bluffing. The fact that issue has been taken up at the highest levels in itself is a testimony to the possibility of an attack in concrete terms.

The fact that Israel has neither confirmed nor denied the attack--not denying the attack giving rise to enough of confirmation of the possibility of an attack—almost furnishes the view that Israel has indeed carried out the attack. Otherwise, it would have denied the attack in vociferous manner.

Addressing the second and third questions:

Syria says that attack has been carried out in one of its scientific research centres even as reports suggest that Israel was targeting a convoy that was transferring Russian made anti-aircraft SA-17 missiles to Lebanon.

The picture is hazy here:

Israel has already clarified that it would target Syria if chemical weapons were seen to be transferred to terrorists in the neighbor hood.

“If there will be a need, we will take action to prevent chemical weapons from being transferred to Islamic terror organizations,” Mr. Shalom, a vice prime minister of Israel said on Army Radio recently and was quoted by The New York Times as saying.

“We are obligated to keep our eye on it at all times, in the event chemical weapons fall into Hezbollah’s hands.” he added.

However, if it were a convoy that Israel was targeting, it would not have targeted without having knowledge of the cargo in the first place. And if it were chemical weapons, Israel would have done something else rather than attacking a convoy of sensitive weapons. [Chemical weapons would prove to be lethal if they are left in the open and an attack can rip the weapon cases helping chemicals to get exposed to environment.] Israel, if it has attacked, knew what it was attacking. And it was not chemical weapons that it was targeting.

SA-17 anti-aircraft missiles can be a game-changer and the possession of the same by Hezbollah can disrupt Isreali defence superiority. No wonder, the missile system possibly fell prey to attacks with its easily identifiable radar systems and paraphernalia on the course of transfer.

Reports suggest that Syria has construed the attack as being had on the research facility to garner international support. Moving out some missiles is a better reason for carrying out attacks as far as Israel is concerned and may tilt the balance in favour of that nation, it is widely believed. Hence the Syrian lie, reports suggest.

Addressing the fourth question:

Now, if Israel does confirm, the ball would be in the court of Syria and its sovereignty having violated in blatant terms, it will be forced to proceed with military retaliation. There are views that it may not happen as Syria is mired in a civil war and Assad's position is severely compromised in every ways.

But Assad may spot an opportunity in this development and may use the crisis to turn the tide in his favour. He may seek to garner support from the rebels and subjects portraying Syria as a victim of attacks.

The rebels have reportedly condemned the attacks. And by doing so, they have built a common ground with Assad.

If Syria opens a war front, then chances are more that rebels would have to join forces with Assad against the common enemy, or lose the civil war.

History is a testimony to patterns playing out like these. 

Published here: http://www.commodityonline.com/news/has-israel-just-helped-assad-win-the-syria-civil-war-52538-3-52539.html