JERUSALEM — Behind an official wall of silence, Israel is signaling it wants the U.S. to strike Syria sooner rather than later, fearing that continued inaction could hurt American credibility in the region.
Yet at the same time, Israel appears to have little desire to see Syrian President Bashar Assad toppled, on the theory that a familiar foe is preferable to some of those who might replace him, especially the Islamist extremists who are increasingly powerful in the rebellion.
These contradictory forces have put Israel in a delicate position as the U.S. contemplates military action. In public, Israeli leaders have said little about President Barack Obama's handling of the Syria crisis. But following his decision over the weekend to postpone military action by seeking the backing of Congress, the signs of confusion and consternation appear clear.
"I have full faith in President Obama's moral and operational stance. I recommend patience," President Shimon Peres said in a radio interview Monday, seeking to calm a nervous public. "I am confident that the United States will respond in the right way to Syria."
Israeli leaders have been careful about voicing their thoughts about what the U.S. should do, wary of creating any perception that they are meddling in either American politics or the civil war in neighboring Syria.
On Sunday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rebuked a junior Cabinet minister who publicly criticized Obama. In a radio interview, Housing Minister Uri Ariel compared the American foot-dragging to Western inaction during the Holocaust. He also said American inaction sent a message to terrorists and hostile governments that there was no price to pay for using nonconventional weapons.
Netanyahu ordered his Cabinet to keep their opinions to themselves, stressing the need to behave "responsibly" at such a sensitive time.
But in a meeting last week with the visiting French foreign minister, Netanyahu himself called for a tough response to Syria, saying the world's reaction to the use of chemical weapons would have deeper implications for the international handling of Iran's nuclear program.