The increasing likelihood of a collapse of the Syrian regime of President Assad has led other nations to make contingency plans to prevent his stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons falling into the hands of terrorists.
There are reports that the stockpiles, and the manufacturing hubs that produced them, have been under intense surveillance for months by Russian and NATO intelligence agencies.
One particularly troubling report claims that several weeks ago President Assad authorised the deployment of these weapons against the Syrian forces fighting his regime, but was advised against such action by the Russian government.
Advertisement
If this is correct, it is a relief that Assad backed away from using these terrible weapons.
However for the first time a regime spokesman has confirmed the existence of the stockpiles, claiming that while the weapons will not be deployed against the Syrian people, he could not rule out using them against any foreign forces.
Given that Assad has claimed repeatedly that terrorist groups are seeking to overthrow his government, it is not difficult to see the regime using alleged foreign support as a pretext for future use of these weapons.
The Israeli military is reportedly watching traffic from Syria to Lebanon for any evidence of weapons being transported to the Iranian-backed terror group Hezbollah.
Some of the chemical and biological weapons dumps are apparently within 2 hours drive of the border with Lebanon.
Israel has indicated it will take military action to prevent such weapons being transported into the hands of extremists.
Advertisement
The global community is also rightly expressing alarm over reports of al Qaeda operating within Syria and actively seeking to gain control of these weapons.
There is little doubt that Russia, the United States and other countries will make contingency plans for safeguarding these stockpiles in the event that the Assad regime is no longer able to do so.
However this may prove challenging if there is a chaotic collapse of the Assad regime rather than an orderly transition of power.
This makes it vitally important for a negotiated end to the conflict in Syria.
Russia will be held responsible for the outcome, given that it has vetoed the recent efforts of the United Nations Security Council to place Assad under greater pressure.
While Russia must play a crucial role in any settlement in Syria, if large-scale loss of life is to be avoided Russia will need to put more pressure on President Assad than has been the case to date.
Iran is another factor in the Syrian conflict. The Assad regime has been a key strategic partner of Iran and has allowed Iran to provide ongoing support to Hezbollah.
There is considerable uncertainty as to how Iran will react to any collapse of the regime in Syria although it is safe to assume that it will not be supportive of any new government that it views as potentially hostile to its interests.
While the fate of the Assad regime and its stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons will be watched closely in coming weeks and months, other nations in the Middle East are taking steps to increase their military capability.
The Government of Saudi Arabia is reportedly negotiating with China to buy ballistic missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads.
This development follows reports that Saudi Arabia has also reached in-principle agreement with the Government of Pakistan for the purchase of one or more nuclear weapons.
If these reports are accurate, it can be assumed that the Saudi Government is taking steps to defend itself against Iran, should that nation develop nuclear weapons.
The troubling aspect of the Saudi manoeuvre is that if it obtains a nuclear weapon then Iran could seek to justify the open pursuit of an Iranian nuclear weapons program.
It would also make it more difficult for the United States and Israel to justify an attack on the Iranian nuclear facilities if they were simultaneously turning a blind eye to a Saudi Arabian purchase.
The Iranian regime could prevent further escalation of regional tensions by first agreeing to cooperate fully with the inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency and dispelling international suspicions about its nuclear program.
There can be no excuse for failing to allow inspectors if, as the Iranians claim, the nuclear program is entirely for peaceful purposes.
Any proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East risks putting the region on a slippery slope towards eventual use.
That would have profound implications for global peace and security throughout the world.