Not sure why Israel’s Vice Premier went public with a threat that his country may attack Syria if Israel determines that the Assad government is about to lose control over the chemical weapons in Syria’s arsenal. But he did, earlier today:

(Reuters) – Any sign that Syria’s grip on its chemical weapons is slipping as it battles armed rebels could trigger Israeli military strikes, Israel’s vice premier said on Sunday. […]

The Israeli meeting on Wednesday had not been publicly announced and was seen as unusual as it came while votes were being counted from Israel’s parliamentary election the day before, which Netanyahu’s party list won narrowly.

Should Lebanon’s Hezbollah guerrillas or rebels battling forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad obtain Syria’s chemical weapons, Shalom told Israel’s Army Radio: “It would dramatically change the capabilities of those organizations.”

This isn’t the same situation that Israel faces vis-a-vis Iran, where Israel has made threats to attack nuclear facilities in order to stop Iran from developing nukes. President Assad’s regime has admitted it possesses chemical weapons and the capability to deliver them using missiles. Syria has never seriously threatened to use those weapons against Israel, however, nor hand them over to organizations hostile to Israel.

Bashar Assad has always been more willing to allow proxies in Lebanon such as Hezbollah to act against the Israelis (more to appease those groups than because he has a vested interest in seeing Israel destroyed, in my opinion), but he has never given them any of Syria’s chemical arms, and probably with good reason. Israel has far greater military resources and capabilities than Syria, including the ability to massively retaliate for any chemical attack with conventional weapons and even nukes should Israel’s government choose to do so. And Assad knows from experience that he cannot prevent Israeli air strikes against military targets in his country, a lesson he learned in 2007 when Israeli air power destroyed a site in Northern Syria near near Dayr al-Zawr on September 6, 2007, purportedly because it was part of a nuclear weapons program. Whether that was true or not, Syria certainly appreciates that Israel has the ability to strike Syrian military targets at will.

I suspect that Israel and Syria previously had a tacit agreement to allow Assad to maintain a chemical arsenal. After all, Assad has never been terribly concerned with territorial expansion. On the contrary, his primary concern has always been maintaining his own power. He is a member of the Alawite sect of the Shi’a branch of Islam. The majority of Syrians are Sunni, and the rebels currently fighting his regime are primarily Sunnis. Assad’s chemical arsenal may have been viewed by the Israeli government as primarily intended to threaten internal opposition to his power, or Assad may have communicated in secret with Israel that he had no intention of ever using his chemical armaments against Israel, directly or indirectly, except in defense.

Obviously it would be very bad news for Israel if Syria’s chemical weapons fell into the hands of Hamas or Hezbollah, so I understand the Israeli government’s concern and the reason for the special cabinet meeting during the time of the elections. But why publicize the purpose of that meeting now? One would think that Israel would prefer to keep quiet before any military operation of such magnitude is attempted.

One thought I have is that the information may have already been leaked to the press and this forced the Israeli government’s hand. Or perhaps it’s a shot across the bow of both Assad and Russia, Syria’s principal non-Islamic “ally,” if I can use that term to describe Russia’s relationship with Assad, to force them to make plans for removing or neutralizing the weapons prior to the fall of Assad’s regime, which is still a very real possibility.

(Reuters) – Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s chances of retaining power are getting “smaller and smaller” every day, according to the transcript of an interview with CNN released by Medvedev’s office on Sunday.

His remarks were the most vocal Russian statement that Assad’s days could be numbered. But he reiterated calls for talks between the government and its foes and repeated Moscow’s position that Assad must not be pushed out by external forces.

And then again, maybe its a shot at the Obama administration and NATO as well, an attempt to force them to become more involved diplomatically and possibly militarily to bring an end to the civil war in Syria. We know Netanyahu wasn’t thrilled that Obama was re-elected, and feels rightly or wrongly that American policy during the past four years has often acted as an anchor to political and military actions Netanyahu’s government desired, such as an attack on Iran. It’s difficult to discern all of Israel’s motives for making this threat public, but I have no doubt part of the reason is to pressure other countries who have an interest in the region to take action to prevent what Israel sees as an immediate threat to their security.

I don’t know how if anyone has a good feel for how concentrated or widely dispersed Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal is, or even how large it is, even the Mossad. By some accounts Syria has weaponized stockpiles of Sarin and other nerve agents, as well as mustard gas. I don’t foresee Assad willing giving away his stache of such weapons to Russia or NATO for safekeeping.

Is this just a bluff? I don’t think so, considering past actions by Israel when they perceived Syria’s weapon development programs to pose a threat. The real question is would an Israeli strike or series of strikes eliminate the threat posed by the existence of these WMDs, or only contribute to the chaos inside Syria and thus increase the risk that some of them would fall into the hands of terrorist and other organizations opposed to Israel and or the US. Still, I’m not sure what Russia, the US, NATO or any other interested party can do to prevent Israel from taking attacking Syria if it chooses to. Absent Assad agreeing to surrender or disable the most dangerous arms he possesses in his fight against the rebels, that is, which is also extremely unlikely to occur.