WarSclerotic

US Urges Americans Out of Syria.

(AFP) – The US government Thursday urged Americans to leave Syria “immediately while commercial transportation is available.”

In an updated travel warning, the State Department also said that “given the ongoing uncertainty and volatility of the current situation, US citizens who must remain in Syria are advised to limit nonessential travel within the country. US citizens not in Syria should defer all travel to Syria at this time.”

Noting the massive, recurring demonstrations against the government of Syrian President Bashar al Assad, the statement said, “We remind US citizens that even demonstrations intended to be peaceful can turn confrontational and escalate into violence. US citizens are urged to avoid the areas of demonstrations if possible, and to exercise caution if within the vicinity of a demonstration.”

It also warned, “Syrian efforts to attribute the current civil unrest to external influences have led to an increase in anti-foreigner sentiment. Detained U.S. citizens may find themselves subject to allegations of incitement or espionage.”

Syrian authorities sometimes wait days or weeks to notify the US embassy of the arrest of an American citizen, it cautioned, and “there have been numerous credible reports of torture in Syrian prisons.”

Last July, the American embassy in Damascus was violently attacked by pro-government demonstrators and closed for a day.

However, the statement said the embassy “continues to provide passport services, as well as other emergency services to U.S. citizens.”

The State Department ordered all eligible family members of US government employees as well as certain non-emergency personnel to leave Syria on April 25.

Energy Tribune- Spying Iran’s Nuclear End Game.

As John le Carré’s Cold War spy movie Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy opens to rave reviews in London, so the story of Iran’s nuclear program is taking on a dark le Carré-esque ‘keep-em-guessing’ undercurrent. Probably how Teheran’s ‘cloak and dagger’ regime prefers it. The question is: whose intelligence (pun intended) would it fool?

Iran’s nuclear activities happen to be in the shadow of the post-Fukushima world which, among other things, includes Germany’s knee-jerk reaction to dump its nuclear program. And presently, the nuclear explosion at Marcoule, France is making news – not least for the problems it is likely to create for the vital implementation of nuclear policies in places such as Britain. Plenty on our nuclear radar to keep us busy then.

Meanwhile, the Islamic Republic’s first nuclear power plant finally opened for business this month garnering surprisingly few headlines. While for some, Iran’s nuclear ambitions remain unclear with the real stories currently in Germany and France, just as in a le Carré novel, there is a growing abundance of tantalising ‘clues’ that suggest a more significant master plan taking shape out east. All along, there is this widespread suspicion that a nuclear reactor in Iran is not just for power generation in the first place so the same soul searching now gripping several countries simply does not apply.

Just before midnight on Saturday September 3, the Russian-built, Bushehr nuclear plant finally began trial producing 60 megawatts of power to the country’s power grid. Just nine days later, however, senior Iranian and Russian officials were in attendance as the $1 billion plant officially opened shifting gear to deliver between 350-400 megawatts, around 40 percent of the plant’s proposed capacity. The 1,000 megawatt facility is scheduled to operate at 100 percent capacity by December 2011. Thereafter Iran proposes a network of similar plants that will help Iran “abandon its reliance on fossil fuels”.

Ironically, if people could trust Iran, there is quite a rational reason for the country to develop nuclear power. That would free quite a bit of fossil fuels now used in power generation. Iran with massive oil and natural gas reserves but with a burgeoning population has been dependent for years on the importation of foreign refined gasoline to run its cars. Sanctions and a woefully inefficient energy management have prevented Iran to develop its fossil fuel reserve potential.

As the Bushehr trial got under way in early September, U.S. State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told AFP that the, “agreement with Iran on Bushehr means that Russia will provide fuel for Bushehr and will take back the spent fuel”. So there it is. Russia is pencilled in both to provide the enriched uranium Bushehr needs and will also remove the spent fuel rods. Unfortunately for those weary of Iran, uranium enrichment in that country is about to be stepped up.

Alluding to Russia’s role in dealing with Bushehr’s enriched uranium, U.S. State department’s Nuland also stated that it, “underscores the point that Iran doesn’t need its own enrichment facilities”. She was referring to Iran’s defiant message in June this year that it would be moving its 20 percent enriched high-grade uranium from its Natanz site to the underground mountain bunker site at Fordow, near the city of Qom. And, just for good measure, Iran announced it would also increase its enriched uranium capacity. Western intelligence only detected the Qom bunker site in September 2009 and concluded, given Iran had kept the site top secret, it provided clear evidence of covert nuclear work.

Nuland further sets the ball of current diplomatic concern rolling, stating: “Iran is now the only country in the world with an operating power reactor that has not ratified the Convention on Nuclear Safety, a fact she finds “quite troubling”.

Enter Yukiya Amano, head of the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) nuclear agency who has announced plans to publish new information backing his “increasing concern” that Iran is in fact working on a nuclear warhead. It seems that before going public, Amano first had to square things with the agency’s 35 board member nations. The IAEA’s next detailed report on Iran’s nuclear developments was formally due in November; the Bushehr launch may, however, force a pre-emptive ‘publication’ strike.

Clearly an increasingly twitchy Israel is weighing its options. Last month former United States Vice President Dick Cheney upped the diplomatic ante in an interview with U.S. Newsmax magazine. Asked about the possibility of an Israeli attack, Cheney said, “Iran represents an existential threat, and the Israelis will do whatever they have to do to guarantee their survival and their security.” Pressed on his source, Cheney maintained he was not quoting any individual Israeli but was summing up conversations he had recently had with “a number of Israeli officials” who “correctly perceive Iran as a basic threat.”

Israel’s nerves are bound to fray further as they await the IAEA’s “new evidence”. But then there’s also the issue of the “bizarre article” on an Iranian Revolutionary Guard website. As Julian Borger’s Global Security Blog at the UK’s Guardian newspaper rightly points out, “Any mention of an Iranian nuclear weapon is taboo in the Islamic Republic”. So why, Borger asks, has an article (in Farsi) appeared on the Gerdab website, a site run by revolutionary guards, that suggests to domestic readers that the impact of an Iranian nuclear weapon test would just amount to another “normal day” in Iran? Borger’s goes on to provide an extensive translation of the article that appears, as Borger suggests, to “have the look of a kite being flown …to get Iranians used to the idea of a nuclear test, and less fearful of international reaction” in its wake. As Borger observes, the article “hammers home the message that an Iranian nuclear test will not lead to disaster” and that “life will go on as before”.

While world leaders continue to be perplexed as to Iran’s ultimate nuclear ambitions, we might wonder why Iran with the world’s second largest natural gas reserves has not develop them and, instead, it has opted for a fast-track a nuclear power program, essentially one that it does not need. As we wait to hear the IAEA’s “concerning” evidence, it seems that it is far from difficult to discern Iran’s real master plan which involves catapulting itself to superpower status, assume technological pre-eminence in the Islamic world and, for good measure, fulfil its openly stated ambition to “wipe Israel off the map”.

The fact is, however the West and Israel play it from here – as last year’s Wiki-leaks releases made abundantly clear – Iran’s Arab neighbors fear Teheran’s regional ambitions every bit as much as Israel does. Anti-Israeli scimitar-rattling apart (purely for domestic consumption), Arab leaders would be just as pleased to see Iran’s nuclear uranium enrichment facilities ‘closed down’. While Iran continues to believe its bunkers to be bomb-proof, U.S. General David Petraeus is already on record countering that assertion that even if it moved below ground, “Washington had developed a contingency plan for dealing with Iran’s contentious nuclear program”.

The mystery surrounding Teheran’s nuclear plotting looks, finally, to be heading for its intriguing denouement.

Once More Into the Swamp: The Attack on Israel’s Embassy Opens A New Era in Middle East History.

The attack and looting of Israel’s embassy in Cairo is an event as significant as the seizure of the U.S. embassy in Iran, in 1979, and the attack on the World Trade Center in 2001.

The first event signaled a change in Iran and the rise of a powerful revolutionary Islamist movement. The results have included an increase in anti-Western politics in the Middle East, an upsurge in terrorism, and three wars in the Persian Gulf (Iran-Iraq, 1980-1988; Kuwait, 1990-1991; Iraq, 2003).

The second event brought the U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq; a major upsurge in terrorism, and big advances for revolutionary Islamism despite the later defeats suffered by al-Qaida itself.

And now the third event, which many will see as far less significant. But it isn’t. While ground center for the first two were, respectively, Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan, this one strikes at the core area of the Arabic-speaking world and the Arab-Israeli issue.

What the attack on the Israeli embassy signifies can be divided into Egyptian and wider implications. Concerning Egypt, the era of Egypt-Israeli peace is over. Egypt will be a hostile country to Israel and the government will make no attempt to stop hysterical incitement and hatred. It is more likely to stop cross-border attacks from Egyptian territory and try to avoid direct war.

Yet even those limits are misleading. Mubarak’s Egypt was aligned — though not allied — with Israel and the United States. Post-Mubarak Egypt is allied with the Muslim Brotherhood, even if that group isn’t in power, and Hamas. It will not cooperate with the United States. The cornerstone, the lynch-pin, the most powerful country, of the Arab world has gone over to the other side.

Within Egypt itself, the riot and the military junta’s permissiveness toward it is a big step toward ending any hope of democracy or moderation within Egypt itself. Recognizing the power of the mob and the potency of its ideas — kill the Jews, wipe Israel off the map, down with America, war, jihad, total victory, a million martyrs! — the military junta stood aside and let the crowd rampage. Egypt’s international image and legitimate commitments are of no consequence in the face of this tidal wave of insane, suicidal hatred.

Not far from the Israeli embassy was a famous statue called Egypt’s Awakening. Anti-Israel demonstrators broke off pieces of the statue in their attack on the embassy. In other words, Egypt’s new “awakening” (the February revolution) is being reinterpreted as the same old determination to destroy Israel. At the same time, that choice is destroying any chance for a real Egyptian awakening, that is one involving democracy, pragmatism, and material progress.

A young Egyptian, describing himself as a “liberal reformer” cheered the use of the statue for this purpose saying that he was glad it had served the cause. Asked by an American whether he feared the revolutionary Islamists taking advantage of this kind of activity, he responded — by twitter, of course — that Israel is his enemy and that the Muslim Brotherhood is “a piece of cake.”

By using such an American slang phrase he showed his cosmopolitan background, with which such sentiments are obviously consistent in Egypt. “Piece of cake” means something dealt with easily. He is saying that the moderates can easily deal with the Brotherhood. That is, of course, ridiculous. The American responded that the moderates are the “piece of cake” and they will end up in the Brotherhood’s stomach.

The April 6 Youth Movement, the left-oriented group that began the revolution back in January, made a surprising statement criticizing the attack. It is especially surprising since that group has a long history of anti-Israel activity and has in the past been in partnership with the Brotherhood. A couple of months ago, at a time when there was no fighting in the Gaza Strip and Israeli sanctions there had already been minimized, one Movement leader said that Israel was committing “genocide” in the Gaza Strip and that Egypt must act. Be careful what you wish for because you might get it.

Now the Movement’s leaders, if not the tweeter mentioned above, are getting scared. They see that the revolution is no longer in their hands and is headed toward a new dictatorship likely to repeat all of the mistakes of Egypt’s past.

Another example of this awakening about the nature of Egypt’s awakening. A CNN television crew covering the attack on the embassy was attacked by some of the demonstrators, who screamed that they were American spies. The CNN people finally escaped.

Afterward, the crew’s producer said that the attackers had acted like “animals.” If she had been a Westerner she would have immediately been fired and no one would ever have employed her again. But since she was herself Egyptian such an expression was considered acceptable. One can well imagine how it feels for an Egyptian to see her neighbors turned once again into a raging mob out for blood and indifferent to the consequences.

Like Iranians in the 1970s, and like Lebanese, Turks, Libyans, and perhaps soon Tunisians, she is witnessing her country run eagerly back into the darkness of a new, even worse situation than the one that had driven them to dream of a stainless brave new world.

The broader, foreign policy, implications of this lynch mob are equally enormous.

First, Egypt will not try to restrain Hamas from attacking Israel. If Hamas does attack Israel from the Gaza Strip, the Egyptian government will not inhibit the flow of arms, money, and volunteer fighters to join the war against Israel from Hamas-held territory. Under such circumstances, Egypt could conceivably be dragged into a war with Israel.

Second, Egypt will seek out a new alliance system. The most likely candidates for its friendship are Hamas, Turkey, and the Muslim Brotherhoods in Jordan and Syria. It will oppose Iran’s Shia-led Islamist bloc and the two sides could clash in various places.

Third, whatever minimal hope remained for any Arab-Israeli or Israeli-Palestinian peace process is now dead, killed not only by the defection of Egypt but also by that of Turkey, by the Palestinian decision to pursue unilateral independence, and by the self-chosen weakening of the United States.

Every gain made in the Middle East since the 1970s is now melting away. What makes this all worse is that the disaster is being cheered in much of the West as something good, or at least has been up until now.

European parliament calls for Assad to go as Syrian activists form ‘national’ council.

Al Arabiya

Thursday, 15 September 2011

A child with his face painted in the colours of the Syrian flag attends a protest march against President Bashar al-Assad organised by the Syrian minority in Bucharest. (Photo by Reuters)

inShare0

‘Warships could be in E… JPost – Arts & Culture – Entertainment.

    ANKARA – Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdoğan said on Thursday Israel could not do whatever it wanted in the Eastern Mediterranean and that Turkish warships could be there at any moment.

“Israel cannot do whatever it wants in the eastern Mediterranean. They will see what our decisions will be on this subject. Our navy attack ships can be there at any moment,” Erdoğan told a news conference on a visit to the Tunisian capital.

Erdoğan was in Tunisia as part of a so-called Arab Spring tour of Egypt, Tunisia, and Libya, three nations that saw their long-time leaders deposed within the last number of months.

Last week, Erdoğan said Turkish warships will escort any Turkish aid vessels to Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.

Erdogan also said that Turkey had taken steps to stop Israel from unilaterally exploiting natural resources from the eastern Mediterranean, according to Al Jazeera’s Arabic translation of excerpts of the interview, which was conducted in Turkish.

Israel has stuck to its policy of restraint despite continued threats from Turkey that it will attack the IDF and amid concern that Erdoğan’s trip to Egypt was aimed at establishing a permanent Turkish naval presence in the Eastern Mediterranean.

Erdoğan visited Egypt on Tuesday for talks with the transitional government as part of a bid to solidify Turkey’s standing in the Arab world. The visit came as media in Turkey reported that its defense industry has developed a new identification system for its F-16 fighter jets that will allow it to attack Israeli planes.

The report on the fighter jet identification system was the latest in a series of threats coming out of Ankara, and followed a report on Monday that Turkey was sending three frigates to the Eastern Mediterranean to protect aid ships trying to break the Israeli-imposed sea blockade on the Gaza Strip.

In an effort to prevent a further deterioration in ties, Israeli government officials declined to comment specifically on the various reports originating in Ankara and said Tuesday that Israel was growing concerned with the threats.

DEBKAfile, Political Analysis, Espionage, Terrorism, Security.

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report September 15, 2011, 10:51 AM (GMT+02:00)

Turkish warplanes

Israel and Greece have invoked the mutual defense pact they signed secretly only 12 days ago in the light of heavy Turkish sea and air movements in the eastern Mediterranean. debkafile‘s sources report that this was decided in a long nocturnal phone conversation Wednesday night Sept. 14 between the Israeli and Greek prime ministers, Binyamin Netanyahu and George Papandreou, and at Israel’s expanded cabinet of eight, which was called into session over the Turkish threat to its off-shore oil and gas rigs.
The Greek Prime Minister added to the information recorded so far on Turkish fleet movements in the Aegean and Mediterranean Seas. He was particularly concerned by the observation flights suddenly increased in the past 48 hours over the Greek island of Kastelorizo in the southeast Mediterranean just two kilometers from the Turkish coast. Those flights are escorted by Turkish combat jets.
Athens fears a Turkish attack on the island, whose population is fewer than 1,000, and an attempt to damage or seize it. Israel suspects that a Turkish attack on the Greek island will be the signal for Turkish military aggression against its oil and gas platforms located in the Mediterranean between Israel and Cyprus. Papandreou said the Turks are capable of surprise attacks on additional Greek islands near the Turkish coast.
Ankara would be acting on the pretext that Israel and Cyprus have no right to mark out and exploit the gas and oil zones of the eastern Mediterranean – a fuel-rich region known as Block 12 – without the consent of Turkish Cyprus (the Turkish Republic of North Cyprus – TRNC). Turkey also backs Lebanon’s complaint that Israel is robbing it of its natural resources. Talks between Lebanon and Cyprus to resolve this issue broke down. Beirut refuses any discussion with Israel.

Neither Jerusalem nor Athens has disclosed in what way they have invoked the new defense pact.

debkafile‘s military sources surmise that in the first stage, Israeli navy and air forces are to be posted at Greek Mediterranean bases. The two intelligence agencies are already sharing input.
Up until now, Israel could only respond to a Turkish threat from its own borders. With a presence at Greek military bases, Israel will be able to operate from the rear of Turkish forces in the event of an attack by those forces in the Mediterranean.
Monday, Sept. 12, Ankara dictated conditions for Israel to obey in order to keep its navy afloat free of Turkish aggression:

1. Israel vessels are prohibited from taking action against Turkish ships heading for the Gaza Strip. Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan has declared “null and void” the UN report confirming the legality of Israel’s blockade of Gaza.

2. Israeli warships crossing the 12-mile line bounding its territorial waters will be challenged by Turkish warships, which are instructed to approach them to within 100 meters and “disable their weapons.”

This threat covers not only shipping bound for Gaza but also Israel’s oil and gas drilling platforms which are more than 60 miles out to sea.
Israel’s political and military spokesmen have been trying hard to downplay the Turkish menace. On Wednesday, Sept. 14, they brushed aside reports of Turkish naval and air movements in the eastern Mediterranean. After the cabinet of eight’s meeting, the official line was that Israel is practicing “restraint in contrast to Turkish wildness” and they should be given time to cool down. In any case, the US and NATO were closely monitoring the crisis Ankara is generating with Israel, Greece and Cyprus, and won’t let it degenerate into Turkish military action.

But both Israel and Greece appear to know better: They decided to invoke their mutual defense pact – not before obtaining a green light from Washington – because they believe the Turkish threats indicated by its military movements are real and tangible.