WarSclerotic

Chief of Staff: Next War will be Short and Harsh – Defense/Security – News – Israel National News.

Chief of General Staff, Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz, painted a worrying picture of the military threat to Israel in a speech at the annual Herzliya Conference on Wednesday.

“The threats against Israel have not disappeared,” he said. “What was relevant in the past remains relevant. Eight Syrian military divisions are stationed between the Sea of Galilee and Damascus. These forces are currently inactive, but that may change tomorrow morning.”

“An extraordinary amount of [enemy] ordnance covers every region of Israel,” Gantz said. “Every region in Israel is currently under threat. Our enemies are trying to create a military system that skips over Israel’s defense capabilities and directly targets the strategic depth of the State of Israel.”

The enemy wants to damage Israel’s ability to function in the next war, he explained. They want to “wreak destruction and generate a victory story for the day after. They understand that the campaign will be short and harsh, but they will try and hit us hard to generate these achievements.” All this, he said, is part of the ongoing Arab strategy of “strategic attrition” against Israel, adopted when conventional wars proved unable to defeat the Jewish state.

Gaza and Lebanon are “two of the largest ammunition and weapon ‘storage facilities’ I know,” he said, owned by Hizbullah, Islamic Jihad, and other terror organizations. “The Middle East is currently arming more than any other region in the world, and we are the target of all this ammunition.”

“Our enemies acknowledge the strength of the IDF, they have seen it in the past and they understand what a western force with high-tech weapons is capable of.” Besides conventional military means, he said, they have taken to operating from within urban regions, where they take advantage of innocent civilian populations. “In Lebanon there are buildings that contain both civilian residential apartments and a ‘rocket room ‘– in the same building.”

According to Lt. Gen. Gantz, aside from complex fronts our enemies are also “planning attacks using high-tech rockets, portable systems such as anti-tank missiles, and accurate, target-specific and long-distance missiles. We saw this during the Second Lebanon War. Our Navy forces and strategic posts in the Mediterranean Sea are also under threat.”

The enemy is mainly targeting the Israeli home front and civilian population, “as an attempt to harm our operative capabilities.”

Lt. Gen. Gantz stressed that in the face of the different threats the IDF must continue to develop offensive capabilities, alongside accurate intelligence capabilities and air defenses for defending civilian populations. “It is crucial to ensure our infantry maneuvering capabilities. It must be strong, well-trained and well-equipped, since it will be required to operate in a field more challenging than ever. This is not an anti-tank missile fired from 300 meters we are taking about – this is an anti-tank missile that is accurately fired from six kilometers away.”

Lt. Gen. Gantz said that the IDF has grown much stronger in the past few years but needs to maintain this trend. “We are a powerful nation and if we don’t maintain this strength, we simply will not exist.”

Shalom: Sanctions on Iran Must be Toughened Now – Defense/Security – News – Israel National News.

Vice PM Silvan Shalom

Yoni Kempinski

Deputy Prime Minister Silvan Shalom said on Wednesday that harsher sanctions must be imposed on Iran in order to stop its nuclear program. He made the comments during a panel with government ministers from other countries, which was held as part of the 12^th Annual Herzliya Conference.

“Israel is the sole partner of the West, the only country in the Middle East that the West can trust and if the international community and the West do not want Iran to take over and dominate the oil resources of the entire world, the sanctions must be toughened and broadened,” Shalom said.

He added, “We are very, very close to the deciding point and imposing harsh and widespread sanctions also on Iran’s Central Bank is critical at this time. Sanctions may lead to a change of perception in Iran. Now they think that acquiring nuclear weapons will keep the regime’s survivability, but sanctions will lead to the necessary recognition that only if they abandon the nuclear program will they be able to continue to rule.”

Shalom, who said Israel welcomes the European Union’s decision to slap an embargo on Iranian oil, stressed that Iran wishes to control the oil reserves in the entire Middle East, and as such, sanctions on its Central Bank should be the next step. He added that Russia and China are refusing to impose sanctions on the Islamic Republic because they do not want to allow the Western world to control their oil reserves.

“It is time that the world understands that we are all in this together against the threat of terrorism and the Iranian nuclear program,” said Shalom. “The world should support our position, both on the Iranian issue as well as on the Palestinian issue.”

Also taking part in the discussion was Canada’s Foreign Minister, John Baird, who said the West shares the challenge of terrorism with Israel.

“We see Iran developing nuclear weapons and approaching the moment where they will press the button, we hear what they say and know how far they can reach with their actions and therefore we need to take this seriously,” said Baird. “This is the time to double the sanctions and make them tougher.”

“There is a desire to avoid international crises and China is a very important customer, but they should think if they want the Iranians to put bombs in Egypt and if they want instability in Iran,” added Baird.

The day after Assad – Israel Opinion, Ynetnews.

Op-ed: CNN correspondent Nic Robertson offers a rare look inside turbulent Syria

Nic Robertson

It wasn’t until I left Syria that I found the voice I’d been looking for. I was only hours out of the capital, and it came by surprise, a chance meeting at an airport on my way back to London.

He was a Syrian Christian, a member of one of the country’s larger minorities. They make up about 10% of the population. Many are businessmen; many have benefited from President Bashar al-Assad‘s rule.

His message was clear: We want change, but we don’t want uncertainty. “The opposition needs to reach out to us, tell us their vision of Syria.” Then, he said, they’d have 60% to 70% support: “Everyone in the middle ground, enough to overthrow the president.”

He was speaking out because he could, with no need to fear that al-Assad’s secret police would come knocking on his door. In Damascus and the rest of Syria, it had been different. None of the intellectuals, the businessmen, the others “in the middle” wanting al-Assad’s corrupt regime replaced dared raise the conversation beyond the mildest hint at change of some sort; “but not, of course, the president” is required.

Just one day of covering pro- and anti-government rallies convinced me of how polarized the country has become. People are metaphorically retreating to their confessional bunkers.

Al-Assad’s rallying cry is that only he can protect the country’s minorities: Christians like the man I met at the airport, Alawite like himself, about 15% of the population. He keeps the ethnic Kurds, a little less than 10%, on his side by courting their biggest tribes.

It’s a tactic that’s working. The Kurds don’t back him, but they haven’t turned against him as they did against his father. The Alawites who make up most of the officer corps in the army are still loyal, as are the Christians. But not without reservation.

A source close to the Saudi ruling circle told me Alawite generals threaten to abandon al-Assad if he makes them turn their guns on civilians in the streets of Damascus.

Several Westerners with detailed knowledge of the country expressed their frustration with the opposition, too. Why don’t they reassure the minorities they won’t face retribution once al-Assad is gone? They ask.

One opposition figure had threatened to wipe the Alawites off the map; another group said they would try al-Assad’s top 100 generals for war crimes. So far, according to these Westerners, leading opposition groups have not distanced themselves from the calls that serve only to reinforce al-Assad’s claims.

Blood spilled on both sides

Al-Assad’s track record charts a far different course. He and his father before him have assiduously sold their secular brand of socialism as the panacea for internal conflict. The truth is different, according to the Westerners: Al-Assad has been fermenting sectarian tensions. It is a lie that he is the defender of the minorities, they say.

It’s hard to escape the feeling in Damascus that the moment to reach out is being lost. But it’s easy to see why.

Al-Assad is utterly committed to a security crackdown, and the opposition is getting armed and fighting back. Blood is being spilled on both sides; more families are being affected and attitudes hardened.

It’s rapidly getting to the point where even if opposition leaders did want to reach out to the man or woman in the middle or an army general or two, the base supporters will have no stomach for compromise.

At anti-government rallies, time and again, we saw anger and frustration boiling over, people literally screaming in our faces for fear we didn’t get the desperation of their plight. Al-Assad’s strong-arm tactics denying free speech have ensured that the street voice for reform has metastasized into something far more malevolent.

In places like Homs, the cradle of the uprising, the writing is on the wall for the rest of the country. Some neighborhoods have thrown out the government completely, such as in the Baba Amr district, where the Free Syrian Army has control. Communities have divided on sectarian lines. Many Christians have fled to Damascus.

Garbage is piled high in the streets, electricity is cut, civilian causalities mount, and on the other side of the impromptu front-line barricades, the death toll of government soldiers creeps up as well.

A drive around Homs reveals a medieval-style siege, multiple checkpoints to move between neighborhoods, even a deep new ditch in places rings the city. But the uprising continues.

The opposition in Homs is better organized. A new council has been formed, it has a budget – money, some say, is coming from the Gulf – and runs medical and humanitarian supplies.

But the council is not the only show in town. Salafists are moving in too, Islamic radicals, many with terror tactics honed in neighboring Iraq. Reports abound of infighting both inside and outside Syria, the hard-liners already jockeying for post-al-Assad power.

If war escalates, as it surely seems it will, expect a long and bloody campaign. As the man in the middle I met on my way back to London told me: “We are afraid of the men with guns, afraid the radicals will impose their backwards views on us.”

CNN’s Nic Robertson and crew recently returned from a rare look inside Syria, where the government has been placing restrictions on international journalists and refusing many of them entry at all. While there, Robertson followed Arab League monitors already in the country and talked to the residents.

‘Begin military plans to thwart … JPost – Iranian Threat – News.

US, EU, Arab allies exploring prospects fo… JPost – Middle East.

By REUTERS 02/02/2012 06:45

3 countries willing to take in Syrian leader, including UAE, sources say; “There are significant questions of accountability for the horrible abuses that have been committed,” US official cautions.

By REUTERS/Syrian TV

WASHINGTON – The United States, European governments and Arab states have begun discussing the possibility of exile for Bashar Assad despite skepticism the defiant Syrian president is ready to consider such an offer, Western officials said on Wednesday.

While talks have not progressed far and there is no real sense that Assad’s fall is imminent, one official said as many as three countries were willing to take him as a way to bring an end to Syria’s bloody 10-month-old crisis.

Two sources said no European states were prepared to give Assad sanctuary, but one official said the United Arab Emirates might be among those open to the idea.

Talk of exile has surfaced amid mounting international pressure on Assad and a diplomatic showdown over a proposed Arab League resolution at the United Nations aimed at getting him to transfer power. He has responded by stepping up assaults on opposition strongholds.

With the White House insisting for weeks that Assad’s days in power are numbered, it was unclear whether this marks an attempt to persuade the Syrian leader and his family to grasp the chance of a safe exit instead of risking the fate of Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi, who was hunted and killed by rebels last year.

But with Assad showing he remains in charge of a powerful security apparatus and the Syrian opposition fragmented militarily, it could also be an effort to step up psychological pressure and open new cracks in his inner circle.

The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said neither the United States nor the European Union had taken the lead on the idea, which has been advocated by Arab nations as a way to try to end the violence in Syria.

“We understand that some countries have offered to host him should he choose to leave Syria,” a senior Obama administration official said, without naming any of the countries.

Before that could happen, however, the question of whether Assad would be granted some kind of immunity would have to be tackled — something the Syrian opposition as well as international human rights groups would likely oppose.

“There are significant questions of accountability for the horrible abuses that have been committed against the Syrian people,” the senior US official said.

“Ultimately these issues will be deliberated by the Syrian people in concert with regional and international partners,” the official said. “This is about what Syrians need to end this crisis and begin the process of rebuilding their country.”

While US officials maintained that exile was worth exploring among other options, one European official voiced doubt it would work, saying Assad had given no indication that he might accept a graceful exit.

Officials stressed the discussions of the exile option for Assad were at an early stage and there was no agreed plan on how such an exit might be orchestrated.

A European official said EU members were willing to consider the idea of Assad going into exile but that there was “no way we’d have him in our countries.”

Much could depend on the fate of a European-Arab-drafted resolution in the UN Security Council that would call for Assad to hand powers to his deputy to defuse the uprising against his family’s dynastic rule.

Russia said on Wednesday it would veto any resolution on Syria that it finds unacceptable, after demanding any measure rule out military intervention to halt the bloodshed touched off by protests against Assad.

Gaza terrorists fire rocket salvo into the Sou… JPost – Defense.

Syrian troops battle defectors near Damascus in fresh assault – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News.

Offensive comes as the United Nations Security Council debates draft resolution calling for Bashar Assad to step down.

By The Associated Press 

Syrian troops battled army defectors in a string of towns in the mountains overlooking Damascus on Wednesday in a new assault to crush rebellious areas around the capital, activists said.

The battles in a mountain valley came after regime forces succeeded in largely retaking control of suburbs on the eastern side of the city in an offensive the past week that fueled some of the bloodiest days of the nearly 11-month-old uprising. More than 30 people were killed around the country Wednesday, activists said.

	Syrian soldiers who defected to join the Free Syrian Army are seen in Kafar Batna, near Damascus, January 31, 2012.
	Photo by: Reuters

Activists say President Bashar Assad’s forces have intensified their crackdown in hopes of silencing protesters and the army dissidents who have joined them as the United Nations Security Council debates a draft resolution demanding that Assad step down.

On Tuesday, Western powers and Arab countries at the U.N. sought to overcome Russia’s opposition to the measure. Addressing the Security Council, U.S.Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton tried to allay Moscow’s concerns that the resolution could open the door to eventual military intervention in Syria, as took place in Libya last year.

“I know that some members here may be concerned that the Security Council is headed toward another Libya,” she said. “That is a false analogy.”

“It is time for the international community to put aside our own differences and send a clear message of support to the people of Syria,” Clinton said.

Russia has stood by Assad as he tries to crush an uprising that began last March. In October, Moscow vetoed the first Security Council attempt to condemn Syria’s crackdown and has shown little sign of budging in its rejection of the new measure. The latest resolution would demand Assad carry out an Arab League peace plan by which he would hand his powers to the vice president and allow formation of a unity government to pave the way for elections.

On Wednesday, shelling and machine gun fire rattled in towns along the Wadi Barada, a valley in the mountains a few miles (kilometers) northwest of Damascus near the Lebanese border, according to online video posted by activists.

The valley leads to the mountain resort town of Zabadani, an opposition stronghold that has been under the control of rebel soldiers and protesters for several weeks.

At least 21 civilians were killed as government forces battered Deir Qanoun, Ein al-Fija and other towns in the valley, and six army defectors were killed in fighting, according to the British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

Another activist group, the Local Coordination Committees, put the death toll at 29 civilians in the valley. It said 14 fighters from the Free Syrian Army, made up of army defectors, were killed in fighting around the country. It was impossible to reconcile the two group’s figures.

The fact that rebels made it to the doorstep of Damascus, the seat of Assad’s power, was a dangerous development for the regime. Rebel soldiers had grown bolder, setting up checkpoints and protecting protesters in suburbs surrounding Damascus.

A military offensive largely succeeded in crushing the remaining resistance on the eastern side of the capital by Tuesday.

But those areas were hardly quiet Wednesday: Troops raided homes in several of those suburbs, searching for activists, killing at least two young men. A 3-year-old girl died in the suburb of Arbeen from gunfire as troops stormed neighborhoods, the Observatory said.

In the central city of Homs, one of the biggest flashpoints of the uprising and a scene of daily fighting, government troops shelled buildings and fought defectors in several neighborhoods. At least eight residents were killed, the Observatory said.

Regime troops were also fighting defectors Wednesday in the northeastern region of Idlib and the southern area of Daraa, activists said. A large force of armored vehicles and troops stormed into the town of Khirbet Ghazali, outside Daraa, opening fire and storming homes, the Observatory and LCC reported.

The U.N. estimated several weeks ago that more than 5,400 people have been killed in the Syrian government crackdown, but has not been able to update the figure. The death toll from Monday’s offensive in the suburbs was around 100 people, making it among the bloodiest days since the uprising began, according to the two activist groups.

The UN Security Council resolution would give Assad 15 days to start implementing the Arab peace plan and halt the crackdown, otherwise the Council would consider “further measures.”

That would likely mean economic and other sanctions. But Moscow says it could lay the groundwork for later military intervention. Russia, a longtime ally of Assad, has insisted the crisis can be resolved by negotiations and that UN action thwarts any dialogue.

Arab officials joined Western countries in trying to persuade Russia to back the measure.

Deputy Arab League Secretary-General Ahmed bin Helli said Wednesday the League sought the UN resolution to back its peace plan and boost an Arab solution for the crisis, not to bring in international military action.

The League “is still committed … to solving this crisis in the Arab framework, away from any outside intervention,” he said during a visit to Baghdad.

Moscow’s stance is motivated in part by its strategic and defense ties, including weapons sales, with Syria. Russia also rejects what it sees as a a world order dominated by the U.S.

‘Iran will be able to make nucle… JPost – Iranian Threat – News.

Iranian Websites Publish Threats against U.S. Targets in Gulf.

Paul Heroux: Is Iran’s Nuclear Program Slowly Boiling Us?.

Huffington Post

Tuesday’s revelation by the U.S. that Iran is looking to sponsor terror attacks inside the US comes on the heels of Iran’s threats to close the Strait of Hormuz and curtail oil sales to various member nations of the EU, which also comes on the heels of new U.S. and EU sanctions on Iran. Additionally, the U.S., along with Britain and France, have deployed their navies to the Persian Gulf as a warning to Iran that Iranian threats to the world oil supply will not be tolerated, just as its nuclear program intransigence won’t be tolerated either.

The question we should all have is: where is this standoff going? War? A peaceful resolution? A continued standoff with no end in sight?

One the one hand, after the debacle in Iraq where we believed that Iraq was in possession of WMD and the proof could come in the form of a mushroom cloud has many people throughout the world concerned that this could be Middle East WMD 2.0. On the other hand, the IAEA has said that Iran’s nuclear program seems to be intended for military purposes, a charge that Iran has repeatedly denied.

The red line that the U.S. says that Iran should not cross is to enrich Uranium to 90%, which is weapons grade. Typically anything 20% or lower is for energy purposes. This is where the importance of the IAEA comes in; monitoring Iran’s program and enrichment is essential to knowing Iran’s intentions. As such, another red line that must not be crossed is for Iran to expel the IAEA.

Other Options
Sanctions combined with diplomacy is the most promising way forward. But this won’t likely be successful if done by the U.S., EU and IAEA alone. China, India and Russia are very important to this process. China is the largest consumer of Iranian oil, and India is a large partner as well. Russia does not have the same level of antagonism with Iran as does much of the Western world so it too could be a voice of reason from the point of view of Iran’s leadership.

The benefit of sanctions combined with diplomacy is that it keeps pressure on Iran, which admittedly has not changed Iran’s behavior but it has hurt the credibility of the government within Iran. Iran faces 11.8% inflation, growth of about 1% and unemployment over 12%. Put these factors together and you have an unhappy citizenry. The Green Revolution in 2009 did not go anywhere but with the Arab Spring producing change in other Middle East nations, the people of Iran are likely to put pressure on the government to negotiate over its nuclear program. Iran has the right under international law to a peaceful nuclear program (Iran signed the NPT) but considering that it is a very little step to go from nuclear energy to nuclear weapons has a lot of people worried. This boils down to an issue of trust.

Stopping Iran Through Military Force
Military force must be the last option, but unfortunately an option that should not be taken off the table. When Israel struck Iraq in 1981 and Syria in 2006, respectively, the strikes were effective in that neither country developed a nuclear program. However, had Saddam not invaded Kuwait in 1990, he would likely have had a nuclear weapon capability in 1992. In other words: from this point of view, the world was lucky that Saddam brought about the demise of his own nuclear program by invading Kuwait. So, striking Iran’s nuclear facilities could set it back a long time, which is good but there is some down side, too.

The down side to an attack on Iran’s program is that it would immediately unify Iranian citizens behind the government that the citizens are already angry with. The reason for this: Iran is a very nationalistic country. Moreover, attacking Iran’s nuclear sites could also send the price of oil up to $150 a barrel, which would likely send the world back into a recession. And finally, an attack on Iran would virtually guarantee that once Iran’s nuclear program is back up, it will certainly be for weapon purposes. There is no good option.

A Nuclear Iran
Iran has the ability to produce a nuclear weapon in that the knowledge is there and this knowledge cannot be undone. The next thing we need to ask is: what constitutes a weapon? Is it enrichment to 90%? Is it having all of the parts ready to assemble but not actually assembling a weapon? The line blurs as to what would constitute a ‘weaponized nuclear Iran’.

If Iran did possess a nuclear weapon(s), the argument that it would start a nuclear arms race in the Middle East might not necessarily hold water. Israel already has a nuclear program yet, Saudi Arabia does not. On the other hand, Syria and Iraq did at one time have a program, which could be viewed as an arms race with Israel. But these were already belligerent countries; Saudi Arabia is not. And the future position of Egypt is unknown at this point. Turkey is unlikely to pursue a nuclear program since it is, although not perfect, one of the more responsible and reasonable governments in the Middle East.

If Iran possessed nuclear weapons, such a responsibility might make Iran mature as a responsible international player, but that is unlikely. Iran is likely to continue to have an antagonistic policy towards the West, a stance that is reciprocated towards Iran.

The Way Forward
A combination of diplomacy and sanctions are the best way forward. The economic and political pressure should be kept on Iran until it can be verified that the program is not going to become a weapon program; this is where the importance of the IAEA comes into play. Sanctions are causing its citizens to come to believe that the nuclear program is just not worth it. The leadership may feel different. This is the tension we want.

While the West could be all wrong about Iran’s intentions, the evidence uncovered by the IAEA does not suggest this to be the case.

The worse case scenario is the following — there is a story of the frog in the boiling water. If you throw a frog into boiling water, it will jump out. But if you slowly turn up the heat as the frog is in cool water, it doesn’t even feel that it is slowly boiling and it won’t jump out when the water fully boils. While we should not put frogs in boiling water, the real moral of the story is that we should all be concerned that we are slowly being boiled by Iran.

PAUL HEROUX previously lived and worked in the Middle East and was a senior analyst at the Institute for Defense and Disarment Studies. He has a masters in International Relations from the London School of Economics and a Master’s from the Harvard School of Government. Paul is a candidate for US Congress from Massachusetts’s 4th Congressional District and can be reached at PaulHeroux.MPA@gmail.com.