After sidestepping accusations regarding who carried out air strikes in northern Syria on Sept. 6, senior American government officials quoted in The New York Times strongly stuggest Israel was behind the strike. While Israel flexes its muscles over Syrian airspace, it is worth noting that the Israeli strikes were not only intended to send a message to officials in Damascus, but more so to those in Tehran. Just recently we have begun to hear that perhaps the Syrians were trying to acquire nuclear materials from North Korea ‘ much like Iran has ‘ thereby justifying military action in the eyes of Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.

While Olmert may feel threatened by an old Chevy pick-up truck driving into Syria, it is preposterous that the Western world did not discipline him for his nation’s violation of Syrian territory. How can it be acceptable for Israel to carry out military operations inside of another country? Can you just imagine the Western world’s response if Syria had carried out air strikes within Israel and targeted the nuclear weapons that Israel has yet to officially acknowledge they own?

Of course the Western world, and particularly the United States, has a large interest in and an alliance with Israel. The seat of government in Tel Aviv seems to escape public scrutiny faster than that of any Muslim country would, particularly Syria with its Iranian ties. In fact, the anti-Syrian sentiment in the United States and Israel is so high that it is now politically incorrect to even mention the idea that Damascus would one day retake the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights after 40 years.

With a track record like that of the Israeli military, in addition to their recent history, it is not hard to see why both Syria and Iran would want weapons to defend themselves. The last thing any country wants is to become the next Lebanon: targeted by decision-makers in Tel Aviv who seem to hold little regard for peoples of other nations. Although there was once a period when Iran was the escalator of crises in the Middle East, it is safe to say that the powers stationed in Tel-Aviv have taken that role away.

It is baffling that Olmert’s government would attempt to deter Damascus and Tehran from going nuclear in such violent ways. Tehran in particular wants nuclear materials and weapons for the same reasons Israel once did: national defense, regional influence and national respect rank as high on Iran’s shopping list as they did on Israel’s list not too long ago. Just as Israel feels threatened by many Muslim nations and radical groups, Iran feels threatened by Israel and many of the ethnic Arab nations who hold their Persian heritage in contempt.

With so many parallels, Israel should be able to understand Tehran’s motivation for developing nuclear powers. This is why it is unbelievable that Israel would think it wise to provoke the Iranians by attacking Syria, their close ally. Tel Aviv is not only sending across the wrong message, but it is bringing the region even closer to another conflict it does not need. It is time for Olmert’s government to end this era of aggression, ‘fess up to its international violations and begin to display the discipline of a developed nation entrenched in a chaotic part of our world.