Could Israel Separate Syria from Iran?

Separating Syria from Iran: Israel's main condition for peace with Syria
Giving back the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, which was called the Syrian Heights in Israel before, has always been as condition for Syria for peace between Israel and Syria.
Dr. Alvin Lille, General former Director of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and former Israeli ambassador to South Africa, who was hugely entertaining in Israeli negotiations with Syria in the past, notes that the main issue is to dissuade Tel Aviv from accepting peace. He stressed that 85% of the issues in the negotiations between Syria and Israel has been accepted by Damascus and Tel Aviv.
The main issues for establishing peace between Damascus and Tel Aviv were resolved in 2000, including water rights for Israel from Syrian territory, Israeli guaranteeing and access to the Golan Heights after giving it back to Syria and security guarantees between the two sides.
Due to domestic politics of Tel Aviv, the peace was not available in the shadow of agreement of two parties during the years 1993, 1995, 1996 and 2000. The situation was intensified after 2001 and the beginning of an aggressive policy of America in the Middle East. Alun Lille said in relation to the problem of peace between the two sides: "Israel has never intended to return the Golan Heights to allies of Iran."
Tel Aviv has imposed greater demand as peace costs to Syria. This is one of the strategic interests of America and Israel to isolate Iran, even at the price of peace with Syria.
In this regard, Syrian internal affairs and foreign relations are as determining factors in relation to the negotiations. Syria and Iran are part of a strategic alliance in the Middle East resisting against the interests of America, Britain, Israel, France and Germany. Other actors in the Middle East who oppose with the same foreign interests are in cooperation with Syria and Iran and are allies within an obvious block which is the resistance block.
It is in this context that one finds that Israel is not interested in peace with Syria, but threatens Syria to war if it does not leave Iran and its allies.
On the eve of Israel's major military maneuver in which Syria and Israel fought a fictitious war, Israeli Deputy Prime Minister, Chaim Ramon, said in a radio interview that Syria's concerns are pointless, and Israel seeks for peace with Syria, but he added that unfortunately Syria is deeply stuck in the axis of evil and communication with Hezbollah.
Chaim concluded that Damascus has chosen strategic choice to preserve its alliance with Iran instead of pursuing peace with Tel Aviv. In addition, in December 23th 2003 also Shimon Peres stated that peace talks with Syria while the country supplies arms of Lebanon, is not possible.
This is a reference to Syria's important role as a Middle Eastern man between Tehran and the Levant.

Making Syria neutral is the necessary condition to neutralize Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran
Damascus is the axis of the resistance in the Middle East against Israeli interests, Anglo-America and Franco-German. Syria acts as a bridge between Iran and Iraq on one hand and between Levant and the Middle East on the other hand.
Lebanon, the occupied Palestinian territories, Iraq and Iran are all connected via Syria.
In this regard, the Syrian acts as communicative link of gathering resistance forces of a new regional order in the Middle East and is also considered as a new project for Middle East. What the Israelis are struggling to do with America, Britain, France and Germany is removing Syria from the alliance and disconnection between Iran and the Levant. The main objective of pressure on Syria is the country's peaceful political surrender (just as Libya did for Britain and America in 2003) and separating the country from Iran is the Arab-Palestinian and Lebanese resistance.
"Shalomo Ben-Ami", former Israeli foreign minister, said in October 2007 that if Syria's does not cut its relationship with Iran peacefully, a military solution is inevitable. Creation of a wedge between Syria and Iran and drying Hezbollah by cutting off lines of arms supply, allowing the vital measures to stabilize Lebanon (ie empowering client forces in Beirut) and avoiding what is now a realistic scenario of Tri war of Israel against Syria, Hamas and Hezbollah will be strategic results associated to the Syrian-Israeli peace.
Removing Syria from the resistance block is the necessary condition for Israel and America and their partners to deal with Iran. By removing Syria from the circle of allies of Iran, the whole region of Levant can be controlled, and resistance in the Palestinian territories and Lebanon by actors like Hamas and Hezbollah can be weakened considerably. With the establishment of such a framework, the Levant will be able to enter the economic order that "Western powers" are considering under the Washington Consensus and the Mediterranean Union: That is where the Middle East interests of Israel, the Anglo - America and Franco - German have been merged together.
In 2006, the last Israeli attack aim on Lebanon was removing Syria from its alliance with Iran and placing Damascus in orbit of new regional order. Recognizing this, later it became clear that Israel's 2006 attack on Lebanon was designed to target Syria.
However, war turned into a costly option for America, England, Israel and their partners, and that is why after the defeat of Israel in Lebanon, diplomatic channels were taken into account for communication with Damascus.
Haaretz revealed investigative report to Damascus in August 2007, titled the true nature of the diplomatic mission "Nancy Pelosi", chairman of the House of America's Representatives. The purpose of his visit to Damascus was to help establishing peace between Israel and Syria and better relations with America, but the terms of this objective was not fully revealed.
Syria's attention was captured to abandon Iran, as Italy's attention to drop Germany in World War I was captured. "Tom Lentus", America's Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman, who was accompanied Nancy Pelosi on this trip, said: "Assad should be given a final opportunity to withdraw from the Axis of Evil." According to Lentus' statements, in a few years, Sunni Muslims, nor Iran, in the region will be under the control, and this is an advantage for Damascus to know which side to be on.
To Tel Aviv and its partners, if separating Damascus from its alliance with Tehran is not possible through diplomatic economic, threats or pressure, then the main source of further action is fighting on three fronts against Syria and Lebanon and the Palestinian territories which is another option. This hostility could lead to confrontation with the Iranians and could be a major clash in the Middle East and Central Asia.
Ehud Olmert declared: "I believe we can expect a calm summer, a calm autumn and a calm winter (included November 2007 to March 2008) when tensions between Syria and Israel in 2007 will rise."
The threat of war in 2007 was a part of the tactics of intimidation to pressure Syria to surrender and accept the country's geo-strategic interests of America, Britain, Israel, France and Germany.
So far, all efforts to detach Syria from its allies have failed. Obviously, Israel is preparing for war in the vast area.
At the same time, Tel Aviv is ready to attribute fault of any potential regional war on the Syrians, Lebanese, Palestinians, even the Russians and above all on the Iranians.