Archive for June 2012

Aviation Week: Obama may use Assad’s fall to disguise Iran strike

June 30, 2012

Aviation Week: Obama may use Assad’s fall to disguise Iran strike.

DEBKAfile Special Report June 30, 2012, 10:30 AM (GMT+02:00)

US B-2 heavy stealth bomber – key aircraft for Iran strike

The new Aviation Week reports: “Evidence is mounting that the US defense community and the Obama administration view 2013 as the likely window for a bombing attack on Iran’s nuclear and missile facilities. It could be earlier, timed to use the chaos of the Syrian government’s fall to disguise such an attack…”
According to the journal, “Iran’s intransigence over shutting down its uranium-enrichment program will not buy it much more time… The tools for such an attack are all operational” and the US is coming around to suspect that Iran has already conducted its first nuclear test in North Korea.
Aviation Week’s report appeared after a failed attempt Friday, June 29, to bridge US-Russian differences on Syria was made by US Secretary of State and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in St. Petersburg. Moscow refuses to accept any solution that would entail Bashar Assad’s removal or foreign intervention in Damascus.

UN-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan is to present a proposal for a transitional unity government to the new Action Group on Syria meeting in Geneva Saturday. According to his plan, the government would include opposition representation but (without mentioning Assad) exclude figures complicit in the 15-month bloody suppression of dissent.
He had hoped that the presence at the meeting of all five UN Security Council veto-wielders, Arab League members and Turkey would make it possible to gain international endorsement of an agreed road map for the transition of power in Damascus without resorting to the Security Council again. However, after the failed St. Petersburg encounter, its chances of taking off are slim. Asked about this, a senior US official commented: “We may get there, we may not.”
In the Middle East, the military alert declared by Saudi King Abdullah Thursday was still in effect Saturday. Saudi forces continue to stream to the Jordanian and Iraqi borders and Jordanian, Turkish and Syrian army units are on the move, as debkafile reported Friday:

The Syrian crisis was Friday, June 29, on a knife edge between a Western-Arab-Turkish military offensive in the next 48 hours and a big power accord to ward it off.

debkafile’s military sources report heavy Saudi troop movements toward the Jordanian and Iraqi borders Thursday overnight and up until Friday morning, June 29, after King Abdullah put the Saudi military on high alert for joining an anti-Assad offensive in Syria. The Saudi units are poised with tanks, missiles, special forces and anti-air batteries to enter Jordan in two heads:
One will safeguard Jordan’s King Abdullah against potential Syrian or Iranian reprisals from Syria or Iraq.

The second will cut north through Jordan to enter southeastern Syriam, where a security zone will be established around the towns of Deraa, Deir al-Zour and Abu Kemal – all centers of the anti-Assad rebellion. The region is also the home terrain of the Shammar tribe, brethren of the Shammars of the Saudi Nejd province.
The Saudi units deployed on the Iraqi border are there to defend the kingdom against potential incursions by Iraqi Shiite militias crossing into the kingdom for reprisals. The Iraqi militias are well trained and armed and serve under officers of the Iranian Al-Qods Brigades, the Revolutionary Guards’ external arm.
Western Gulf sources report that Jordan too is on war alert.
Following the downing of a Turkish plane by Syria a week ago, Turkey continues to build up its Syrian border units with anti-aircraft guns, tanks and missiles towed by long convoys of trucks.

A Free Syria Army officer, Gen. Mustafa al-Sheikh, reported Friday that 170 Syrian army tanks of the 17th Mechanized Division were massed near the village of Musalmieh northeast of Aleppo, 30 km from the Turkish border.  He said they stood ready to attack any Turkish forces crossing into Syria.
As these war preparations advanced, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrived in St. Petersburg Friday for crucial talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.  They meet the day before the new UN-sponsored Action Group convenes in Geneva to discuss UN-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan’s latest transition proposal for Syria. He hopes for a political settlement that will ward off military intervention.
Invited to the meeting are the five veto-wielding UN Security Council members plus Turkey and Arab League envoys from Qatar, Kuwait and Iraq.

Annan proposes forming a transitional national unity government in Damascus that includes the opposition and excludes unacceptable regime members.
It was widely reported Thursday that Russia had agreed to this formula, even though it entailed evicting Bashar Assad from power. However, Lavrov stepped in to correct the record, stressing in reference to the Annan proposal that Moscow would not lend its support to “any outside interference or imposition of recipes in Syria.”
This position is doubly aimed at the intensive military movements afoot around Syria.
Clinton and Lavrov are therefore expected to go at the Syrian issue hammer and tongs. The outcome of their meeting will not only determine the course of the Action Group’s discussions but, more importantly, whether the Western-Arab-Turkish alliance goes forward with its military operation against Syria.

US-Russian concurrence on a plan for Assad’s removal could avert the operation. The failure of their talks would spell a worsening of the Syrian crisis and precipitate Western-Arab military intervention, which according to military sources in the Gulf is scheduled for launch Saturday, June 30.

Iran: Sanctions could lead to standoff at ‘critical point’ of nuke talks

June 30, 2012

Iran: Sanctions could lead to standoff at ‘critical point’ of nuke talks | The Times of Israel.

Ambassador to UN says some nations ‘are not serious enough’ to find solutions, says penalties won’t have much impact

 

June 29, 2012, 11:20 pm Updated: June 30, 2012, 5:52 am 0

 

Iran's Chief Nuclear Negotiator Saeed Jalili, pictured at the day-long talks with six world powers in Istanbul, on April 14, 2012. (photo credit: AP/Burhan Ozbilici)

Iran’s Chief Nuclear Negotiator Saeed Jalili, pictured at the day-long talks with six world powers in Istanbul, on April 14, 2012. (photo credit: AP/Burhan Ozbilici)

 

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — Iran’s ambassador to the U.N. said Friday some of the parties to talks on his country’s nuclear program are not serious enough to find a solution to the impasse.

 

Ambassador Mohammad Khazaee said recent sanctions against Iran by the U.S. and some European countries indicate that they are not willing to engage in meaningful dialogue for political reasons, which could lead to another standoff in talks.

 

“It is clear to us that some members of the 5+1 for whatever reasons, obviously political reasons are not forthcoming and serious enough for finding a solution. If the talks do not proceed as it should be, we are going to have another standoff in the talks,” he said referring to the five permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany.

 

“Therefore, we can say we are at a critical point in our talks,” he said.

 

The West suspects that Iran intends to produce nuclear weapons. Iran insists its nuclear development program is peaceful.

 

The United States recently required international banks to stop processing petroleum transaction with Tehran or face U.S. penalties — although the U.S. did grant a waiver to several countries on this point.

 

European penalties coming into effect next week will further raise the economic pressure.

 

Iran’s oil exports are down about 40 percent, while its currency has fallen sharply as a result of sanctions.

 

Saying the talks were “at a critical point,” Khazaee denied the sanctions would have much impact on Iran and said that the West merely was isolating an important player in the region.

 

“Iranians have learned how to deal with pressure in the past, in our history, everybody knows that the Iranian nation do(es) not accept any pressure or sanctions. Sanctions may be intended to harm the Iranian nation but they will not bring Iranian to their knees to accept illegitimate, I should say, expectations from the other side,” Khazaee said.

 

He said the main sticking point was the issue of Iran’s right to enrich uranium, which he said was permitted under the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

 

On Thursday Iran’s state TV said that Iran has warned that “illegitimate measures” could damage prospects of nuclear talks between Tehran and the west.

 

The report said Iran’s top nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, made the warning in a letter to Catherine Ashton, the European Union’s foreign policy chief.

 

The letter is seen a reflection of Iran’s concern about an EU ban on buying Iranian oil, set to go into effect July 1.

 

In the letter, Jalili said the West should work on confidence-building steps instead of “illegitimate measures” that could harm the talks.

World powers meet in desperate bid to halt Syria’s crisis

June 30, 2012

World powers meet in desperate bid to halt Syria’s crisis.

A boy holds a sign that reads, “I am a child from Syria, the taste of gunpowder made me forget the taste of ice cream. Stop killing” during a protest against Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad after Friday prayers in Habeet, near Idlib. (Reuters)

A boy holds a sign that reads, “I am a child from Syria, the taste of gunpowder made me forget the taste of ice cream. Stop killing” during a protest against Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad after Friday prayers in Habeet, near Idlib. (Reuters)

World powers meet Saturday in a desperate bid to salvage international envoy Kofi Annan’s peace plan for Syria to end 16 months of bloodshed and agree on a transition plan for the strife-hit country.

A crunch meeting hours ahead of the talks between U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov led Moscow to issue an upbeat outlook for the conference, saying a deal was likely.

But Washington took a more cautious line, warning of persistent differences between the U.S.’ and Russia’s approach and dampening hopes of crucial progress needed to stop the crisis that according to rights monitors has left 15,800 dead since March last year.

Annan had announced the meeting on Tuesday, inviting Clinton, Lavrov, and the foreign ministers of Britain, China, France, Iraq, Qatar, Turkey and Kuwait to the talks, and conspicuously leaving Iran and Saudi Arabia out.

Meanwhile, Iran’s U.N. ambassador said on Friday that Iran could be a “heavyweight champion” of efforts to bring peace to Syria. Ambassador Mohammed Khazaee hit out at the Western powers, “particularly the United States,” for ignoring “the power and the influence of Iran.”

The United States and European nations opposed the presence of Iran, a long time ally of Assad. Diplomats said Russia opposed Saudi Arabia because of its support for the Syrian opposition.

Syrians ignore Annan’s plan

Annan circulated a proposal on a “Syrian-led transition” that could help save his peace process that has been largely ignored by both the ruling regime and opposition since it came in force on April 12.

Fighting has only intensified in recent weeks and rights monitors said more than 230 people — most of them civilians — had been killed across the strategic Middle East country since Thursday.

But doubts grew over the fate of Saturday’s meeting as it drew nearer, due to Russian opposition to Annan’s proposal on the composition of an interim Syrian government.

Annan’s draft, seen by AFP, sees power handed to an interim Syrian team without those “whose continued presence and participation would undermine the credibility of the transition and jeopardize stability and reconciliation.”

The wording appears to imply — without saying so directly — that President Assad would have to relinquish his grip on the presidency for the idea to succeed.

Russia angrily rejected the suggestion, while Western powers warned there was no point meeting in Geneva if there was no prior agreement on the issue.

But after Friday evening’s talks with Clinton, Lavrov said he “detected a shift” in Washington’s approach to ending the bloodshed that no longer involved a specific demand for Assad to leave.

“There were no ultimatums. Not a word was said about the document now being discussed in Geneva being completely untouchable,” Lavrov told reporters in reference to wording that suggest no future role for Assad.

“I can confidently say that we have a very good chance tomorrow in Geneva to find a common denominator and mark a path forward,” Lavrov added.

“We agreed to find a consensus that rests on a clear understanding… that the Syrian sides must be stimulated toward dialogue, but that the decision to what the state looks like and who occupies which posts can only be decided by the Syrians themselves.”

A conflicting message came from Lavrov’s deputy, Gennady Gatilov, who tweeted early on Saturday that experts in Geneva had thus far failed to agree to the wording of a final document on Syria because “the Western partners want to determine the political process themselves.”

The U.S. account of the Lavrov-Clinton meeting was also more measured and appeared to suggest little agreement on the future of Assad.

A senior U.S. State Department official noted some progress while conceding that “there were still areas of difficulty and difference” between the approaches of Russia and the United States.

“But out of respect to Kofi Annan, they agreed we should all go to Geneva tomorrow to try to produce a result,” said the official.

Bombardment of rebellious suburb

Syrian troops bombarded a rebellious suburb of the nation’s capital with tank and artillery shells Friday, killing dozens of people during a particularly bloody few days across the country, activists said.

The violence is part of a fierce government offensive aimed at regaining control of parts of Damascus suburbs where rebels operate. Major world powers were to meet Saturday in Geneva to hash out a political transition plan for Syria, which has been convulsed by more than 15 months of violence.

It’s difficult to get an accurate death toll in tightly controlled Syria, where journalists and human rights groups are either banned or severely restricted. But two opposition groups that compile and document casualties reported the death of more than 125 civilians in fighting across the country on Thursday alone.

Death tolls often take several days to compile because of the restrictions and chaos in the country.

The British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said Thursday’s toll included more than 60 soldiers. If confirmed, it would be one of the highest death tolls on a single day since the start of the uprising against President Assad in March 2011.

Activists said at least 43 people were killed in more than two days of shelling in the sprawling Damascus suburb of Douma, which has been a hotbed of dissent and has put up strong resistance to the Assad regime. The dead included three children and five members of a single family.

A local activist who spoke on condition of anonymity to Reuters for security reasons said the shelling was “relentless” throughout Thursday, and exploding shells killed people in their homes.

UN: Iran arming Syria despite ban

June 30, 2012

UN publishes report on Iran arms trade with Syria – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Security Council report says Tehran continues to defy international community through illegal arms shipments; claims sanctions slowing Iran’s nuclear program

Reuters

Published: 06.30.12, 09:13 / Israel News

A UN Security Council committee has published a report on Iranian sanctions violations, including shipments of weapons to Syria in breach of a UN ban on weapons exports by the Islamic Republic.

The Security Council has imposed four rounds of sanctions on Iran for refusing to halt its nuclear enrichment program, which the United States, European Union and their allies suspect is at the heart of a weapons program. Iranrejects the allegation and refuses to halt what it says is a peaceful energy program.

Related articles:

 

  • Iran, Syria, Russia, China plan naval drill in Mediterranean

 

The report appeared on the committee website on Thursday, diplomats told Reuters on Friday. The report, which Reuters reported on last month, said that Syria remains the top destination for Iranian arms shipments.

Iran, like Russia, is one of Syria’s few allies as it presses ahead with a 16-month-old assault on opposition forces determined to oust Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Western diplomats said they were pleased the report was made public. Initially they said they feared Russia would block it as it did last year’s report on Iran, which has yet to be made public due to Russian objections.

Syrian rebels in Idlib (Photo: AP)
Syrian rebels in Idlib (Photo: AP)

Publication of the report, the diplomats said, will likely add to the pressure on Iran to comply with UN demands about curbing sensitive nuclear activities as major powers press ahead with negotiations with the Islamic Republic aimed at convincing it that defiance of international sanctions will be too costly.

The new report, submitted by a panel of sanctions-monitoring experts to the Security Council’s Iran sanctions committee, said the group investigated three large illegal shipments of Iranian weapons over the past year.

“Iran has continued to defy the international community through illegal arms shipments,” it stated.

“Two of these cases involved (Syria), as were the majority of cases inspected by the Panel during its previous mandate, underscoring that Syria continues to be the central party to illicit Iranian arms transfers,” the report said.

The third shipment involved rockets that Britainsaid last year were headed for Taliban fighters in Afghanistan.

The kinds of arms that Iran was attempting to send to Syria before the shipments were seized by Turkish authorities included assault rifles, machineguns, explosives, detonators, 60mm and 120mm mortal shells and other items, the panel said.

The most recent incident described in the report was an arms shipment discovered in a truck that Turkey seized on its border with Syria in February. Turkeyannounced last year that it was imposing an arms embargo on Syria.

The expert panel recommended adding three firms to a UN blacklist of companies that have aided Iran’s nuclear or missile programs, or have helped it evade UN sanctions.

The three firms recommended for blacklisting are airline Yas Air, SAD Import Export Company, and Chemical Industries and Development of Materials group. The report said Yas Air has been involved in illicit arms shipments to Syria.

It was not clear when the Iran sanctions committee would make a decision on whether or not to add the three Iranian companies to the list of entities facing an international asset freeze and banishment from doing business worldwide.

Earlier this year the US Treasury Department imposed US sanctions on Yas Air, which is an Iranian cargo airline, along with three Iranian military officials and a Nigerian shipping agent for supporting illegal arms shipments to the Middle East and Africa.

The 67-page report also discusses Iran’s attempts to circumvent sanctions on its nuclear program but notes that the four rounds of punitive measures the 15-nation council imposed on Iran between 2006 and 2010 are having an impact.

“Sanctions are slowing Iran’s procurement of some critical items required for its prohibited nuclear program,” it said. “At the same time prohibited activities continue, including uranium enrichment.”

A similar UN report on North Korean sanctions violations was also made public on Friday.

For Israel, military showdown with Iran remains an option

June 30, 2012

David Ignatius: For Israel, military showdown with Iran remains an option – The Washington Post.

JERUSALEM

A popular new slogan making the rounds among government ministers here is that in dealing with Iran, Israel faces a decision between “bombing or the bomb.” In other words, if Israel doesn’t attack, Iran will eventually obtain nuclear weapons.

This stark choice sums up the mood among top officials of the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: It’s clear that Israel’s military option is still very much on the table, despite the success of economic sanctions in forcing Iran into negotiations.

“It’s not a bluff, they’re serious about it,” says Efraim Halevy, a former head of the Mossad, Israel’s intelligence service. A half-dozen other experts and officials made the same point in interviews last week: The world shouldn’t relax and assume that a showdown with Iran has been postponed until next year. Here, the alarm light is still flashing red.

Israeli leaders have been warning the Obama administration that the heat isn’t off for 2012. When a senior Israeli politician visited Washington recently and was advised that the mood was calmer than in the spring, the Israeli cautioned that the Netanyahu government hadn’t changed its position “one iota.”

The negotiations with Iran by the group of leading nations known as the “P5+1,” rather than easing Israel’s anxieties, may actually have deepened them. That’s not just because Netanyahu thinks the Iranians are stalling. He fears that even if negotiators won their demand that Iran stop enriching uranium to 20 percent and export its stockpile of fuel already enriched to that level, this would still leave more than 6,000 kilograms of low-enriched uranium that, within a year or less, could be augmented to bomb-grade material.

Netanyahu wants to turn back the Iranian nuclear clock, by shipping out all the enriched uranium. And if negotiations can’t achieve this, he may be ready to try by military means.

The numbers game on enrichment reveals a deeper difference: For President Obama, the trigger for military action would be a “breakout” decision by Iran’s supreme leader to go for a bomb, something he hasn’t yet done. For Netanyahu, the red line is preventing Iran from ever reaching “threshold” capability where it could contemplate a breakout. He isn’t comfortable with letting Tehran have the enrichment capability that could be used to make a bomb, even under a nominally peaceful program.

Netanyahu sees his country’s very existence at stake, and he’s prepared for Israel to go it alone because he’s unwilling to entrust the survival of the Jewish state to others. But some Israeli experts, including several key supporters of his government, don’t like this “existential” rhetoric warning of another Holocaust, arguing that it nullifies Israel’s defense capabilities and deterrence.

Though most members of Netanyahu’s government would probably support him, there are some subtle nuances of opinion. U.S. officials say Defense Minister Ehud Barak’s focus is stopping Iran before it enters a “zone of immunity” when it begins full operation of centrifuges buried under a mountain near Qom. Iran probably will enter this zone sometime later this year. As Israeli officials have put it, the deadline for action “is not a matter of weeks, but it’s not a matter of years, either.”

American officials think Barak may also be more willing than Netanyahu to accept a deal in which Iran retains some modest enrichment capability — and can save face by saying it hasn’t compromised its rights as a signatory of the non-proliferation treaty — but can’t accumulate enough material to make a bomb.

Some Israeli experts are skeptical about the “zone of immunity” timeline. They believe that no facility, even the hardened site at Qom, is invulnerable to a clever attack: Iran will have immunity only with an actual nuclear-weapons umbrella.

While I understand Netanyahu’s concerns, I think an Israeli attack could be counterproductive. It would shatter the international coalition against Iran, collapse the sanctions program when it is starting to bite and trigger consequences that cannot be predicted, especially during a time of sweeping change in the Middle East.

Before he rolls the dice, Netanyahu should recall the shattering experience of Menachem Begin, a prime minister no less devoted to Israel, who was haunted in his final days in office by the sense that his invasion of Lebanon in 1982, intended to protect Israel’s security, had been a mistake. The potential costs and benefits of an attack on Iran are unknowable, but for better or worse, it would be, as Halevy says, “an event that would affect the course of this century.”

davidignatius@washpost.com

U.S. sends message to Israel, Iran, schedules joint military exercise with IDF

June 30, 2012

U.S. sends message to Israel, Iran, schedules joint military exercise with IDF – Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper.

Senate votes for greater military support of Israel including what could be seen as direct support for an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear program.

By Natasha Mozgovaya and Reuters | Jun.30, 2012 | 2:25 AM
A joint U.S.-Israeli military exercise in 2006.
n an apparent attempt to signal to Israel and Iran that the United States means business with regards to Israel’s security, a top U.S. military officer said on Friday that the United States and Israel are expected to hold a delayed, joint military exercise sometime around October or November, after postponing it earlier this year.In addition to the military exercise, the U.S. Senate voted for a bill affirming U.S. commitment to Israel as well as calling for an array of further actions to be taken to this end, some of which could be seen as direct support for an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear program in case the diplomatic negotiations currently taking place fail to get Iran to cooperate with the west.

Army General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said he wasn’t sure what the final decision was on timing after high-level talks in Israel this week.

“We rescheduled it for October-November time frame,” Dempsey said. “I really don’t know what the final decision was, but it is our expectation that that’s when the event will occur.”

The air-defense drill, named “Austere Challenge 12,” was scheduled for the spring and had been expected to be the largest exercise between the two allies, who regularly hold joint military maneuvers.

Following the vote on similar bill in the U.S. House of Representatives in early May, the U.S. Senate passed the United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012 (S. 2165). The bill, introduced by Senators Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Johnny Isakson (R-GA), with total of 69 co-sponsors, lists several possibilities for strengthen the strategic cooperation between Israel and the U.S..

The act mentions a “rapid change” in the Middle East that will lead not only to hope but also a “great challenges to the national security of the U.S.” and its regional allies, especially Israel, that is “facing a fundamentally altered strategic environment.”

The act charts the existing U.S. policies designed to meet these challenges; reaffirming the “unwavering commitment to the security of the State of Israel as a Jewish State” and the commitment to help Israel preserve its qualitative military edge, to veto anti-Israeli resolutions at the UN Security Council and “to support Israel’s inherent right to self-defense,” as well as, offering several suggestion to how to augment cooperation between the two nations.

Although the act leaves space for interpretation on what specific kind of munitions the U.S. might be ready to provide to Israel – last week, the topic was discussed in length at the hearing of the House Armed Services Committee.

The bill calls for the U.S. “to enhance the capabilities of the U.S. and Israel to address emerging common threats, increase security cooperation and expand joint military exercises” and “provide the government of Israel with such support as may be necessary to increase development and production of joint missile defense systems.” The “Iron dome” anti-missile system is specifically stressed – but what is more interesting in light of the renewed debate over a possible attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities if negotiations fail is a clause discussing providing Israel “defense articles and defense services through such mechanisms as appropriate – to include air fueling tankers, missile defense capabilities, and specialized munitions,” raising speculation it’s the bunker-buster bombs that the Israeli government asked for during the last administration only to be refused by the President George W. Bush.

Another point to pay attention to, especially in light of the recent tensions caused by the decision not to invite Israel to NATO’s most recent meetings – reportedly, because of Turkey’s objections – though U.S. officials insisted there were no intentions of inviting Israel in the first place. The bill calls for the U.S. government to “work to encourage an expanded role for Israel with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, including an enhanced presence at NATO headquarters and exercises.” And, of course, the bill also calls for the U.S. to “expand already-close intelligence cooperation, including satellite intelligence, with Israel.”

Senator Barbara Boxer said: “I am so pleased that the Senate moved quickly to pass this important bill, which reaffirms the important bond between the United States and Israel and helps ensure that Israel has the necessary tools to defend itself in this time of dynamic change in the Middle East.” Her co-sponsor, Senator Isakson, added the unanimous vote demonstrated “the United States’ strong, unwavering commitment to Israel and its security and self-defense.”

AIPAC applauded passage of the bill and called on Congress “to reconcile expeditiously these two bills to bolster the ties between the United States and Israel.” For Israeli Minister of Defense Ehud Barak, who landed Friday in New-York, it was a good start to his four-day visit to the U.S. that will include meetings with UN and the U.S. officials and a conference in Colorado.

There isn’t much dissent among Congress on the issue of security cooperation with Israel, these days, but in May, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) was one of two congressmen to vote against the bill, expressed harsh criticism of it. According to Paul the bill was “another piece of one-sided and counter-productive foreign policy legislation. This bill’s real intent seems to be more saber-rattling against Iran and Syria, and it undermines U.S. diplomatic efforts by making clear that the U.S. is not an honest broker seeking peace for the Middle East. The bill calls for the United States to significantly increase our provision of sophisticated weaponry to Israel, and states that it is to be U.S. policy to ‘help Israel preserve its qualitative military edge’ in the region. While I absolutely believe that Israel – and any other nation – should be free to determine for itself what is necessary for its national security, I do not believe that those decisions should be underwritten by U.S. taxpayers and backed up by the U.S. military.”

Paul went on to argue that the bill “will not help the United States, it will not help Israel, and it will not help the Middle East. It will implicitly authorize much more US interventionism in the region at a time when we cannot afford the foreign commitments we already have. It more likely will lead to war against Syria, Iran, or both.”

US, Russia fail to bridge gaps on Syria

June 30, 2012

The Associated Press: US, Russia fail to bridge gaps on Syria.

GENEVA (AP) — The United States and Russia failed on Friday to bridge differences over a plan to ease Syrian President Bashar Assad out of power, end violence and create a new government. That set the stage for the potential collapse of a key multinational conference that was to have endorsed the proposal.

On the eve of Saturday’s conference, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov met one-on-one for about an hour in St. Petersburg, Russia, but could not reach agreement on key elements of U.N. envoy Kofi Annan’s proposed plan for a Syrian political transition, officials said.

A senior U.S. official traveling with Clinton said areas of “difference and difficulty” remain and was not optimistic that the gathering in Geneva would produce agreement. “We may get there tomorrow, we may not,” the official told reporters as Clinton left Russia for Switzerland, where she arrived early Saturday morning.

The official said Clinton and Lavrov would try to resolve differences in Geneva out of respect for Annan, the former U.N. chief whose efforts to end the Syrian crisis have thus far fallen short.

The inconclusive results of the Clinton-Lavrov meeting may presage the unraveling of Annan’s plan to end 16 months of brutal violence in Syria by creating a national unity government to oversee the drafting of a new constitution and elections.

The United States and its allies attending the conference are adamant that the plan will not allow Assad to remain in power as part of the transitional government, but Russia insists that outsiders cannot dictate the composition of the interim administration or the ultimate solution to the crisis.

“(We) agreed to look for an agreement that will bring us closer based on a clear understanding of what’s written in the Annan plan that (all) sides in Syria need an incentive for a national dialogue,” Lavrov said after meeting Clinton, according to the Interfax news agency.

“But it’s only up to the Syrians to make agreements on what the Syrian state will be like, who will hold (government) jobs and positions,” he said. Lavrov predicted the meeting had a “good chance” of finding a way forward. “But I am not saying that we will agree on every dot.”

But failing to agree on every dot may well be the plan’s undoing, particularly if Russia refuses to except the implicit demand that Assad leave power.

Annan on Friday laid out his expectations for the conference in an op-ed in The Washington Post that tracked very closely to the draft of his proposed plan, according to diplomats familiar with it.

.The future government in Syria, he said, “must include a government of national unity that would exercise full executive powers.”

This government could include members of the present government and the opposition and other groups, but those whose continued presence and participation would undermine the credibility of the transition and jeopardize stability and reconciliation would be excluded,” Annan said.

Such a proposal does not explicitly bar Assad, but the U.S. and other Western powers that will participate in the conference said that is obvious and that the Syrian opposition will not sign on to the plan unless it excludes Assad.

The senior official said Clinton and Lavrov also discussed the real danger for the region if the uprising in Syria that has killed some 14,000 people doesn’t end peacefully. Already, Syria has shot down a Turkish warplane and Turkey has responded by setting up anti-aircraft guns on its border with Syria. They also discussed the “serious risk” of destabilizing Jordan and the potential impact on Israel.

On Friday, Syrian troops shelled a suburb of Damascus, killing an estimated 125 civilians and 60 soldiers..

Russia is Syria’s most important ally, protector and supplier of arms. Diplomatic hopes have rested on persuading Russia to agree to a plan that would end the Assad family dynasty, which has ruled Syria for more than four decades.

Associated Press writer Mansur Mirovalev in Moscow contributed to this report.

Annan optimistic on Syria crisis talks, despite Assad’s dismissal

June 29, 2012

Annan optimistic on Syria crisis talks, despite Assad’s dismissal.

International mediator Kofi Annan hopes for an acceptable result to the Syria crisis talks in Geneva on Saturday. (Reuters)

International mediator Kofi Annan hopes for an acceptable result to the Syria crisis talks in Geneva on Saturday. (Reuters)

International mediator Kofi Annan said on Friday he was “optimistic” that ministerial crisis talks on Syria’s conflict being held on Saturday would produce a good outcome, despite Syrian President al-Assad dismissing the notion of any outside solution to the 16-month-old uprising against his rule.

“I think we are going to have a good meeting tomorrow (Saturday). I am optimistic,” Annan told Reuters Television in Geneva as he arrived for preparatory discussions due to begin at 0900 GMT.

The talks being held by foreign ministers of major powers and regional players in the Swiss city will end “with an acceptable result,” he said, without giving details.

Russia proposed changes on Thursday to his plan for a national unity government in Syria, despite initially supporting it, but the United States, Britain and France rejected the amendments, Western diplomats said.

The suggested changes are related to Moscow’s refusal to support Assad’s ouster, diplomats in New York told AFP news agency on condition of anonymity.

Annan’s spokesman Ahmad Fawzi told Reuters: “The talks are on course and the preparatory meeting is going ahead this morning (Friday).”

Western and Arab diplomats said that the preparatory meeting of senior officials would be key to paving the way to consensus on the prickly issue of political transition in Syria.

But Assad on Thursday said: “We will not accept any non-Syrian, non-national model, whether it comes from big countries or friendly countries. No one knows how to solve Syria’s problems as well as we do,” Assad said.

Meanwhile, senior officials were making last-minute preparations in Geneva on Friday ahead of the crucial meeting,

Representatives from countries and groups on the guest list of the so-called Action Group drawn up by peace envoy Kofi Annan were meeting on the eve of the talks aimed at halting the bloodshed and promoting a political transition.

Western governments have also told Annan that there is no point in going ahead with Saturday’s meeting unless prior agreement can be reached on his proposals for such a political transition.

They say the fate of the conference could remain in the balance until a 1730 GMT meeting in Saint Petersburg between U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.

Russia, one of the last major allies of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, has objected to a proposal which could limit membership of a transitional unity government in Syria, diplomats said.

Annan’s plan, obtained by AFP, said the interim government could include Assad officials and the opposition “but would exclude from government those whose continued presence and participation would undermine the credibility of the transition and jeopardize stability and reconciliation”.

Diplomats have said this means that Assad could be ruled out of the government but did not automatically exclude his participation. Opposition figures could also be kept out under the same formula.

Lavrov insisted on Thursday that Assad’s fate “must be decided within the framework of a Syrian dialogue by the Syrian people themselves.”

Speaking in Latvia before her departure for Saint Petersburg, Clinton rejected any suggestion that Annan was proposing a transition imposed from outside.

“In his transition document it is a Syrian-led transition, but you have to have a transition that complies with international standards on human rights, accountable governance, the rule of law,” she said.

Clinton also insisted that by agreeing to attend the Geneva conference, Russia had implicitly signed up to Annan’s proposals.

The Action Group conference was due to be attended by Clinton, Lavrov and the foreign ministers of fellow permanent Security Council members Britain, China, France as well as Kuwait, Qatar and Turkey.

Syria’s ally Iran has been excluded from the meeting, a decision Russia said was a mistake.

Clinton arrives in Russia for Syria showdown

June 29, 2012

Clinton arrives in Russia for Syria showdown | The Times of Israel.

US secretary of state to meet with her Russian counterpart ahead of weekend’s crucial talks in Geneva

June 29, 2012, 10:56 am 1US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton waves before boarding a plane in Riga, Latvia on Thursday. (photo credit: AP/Haraz N. Ghanbari)

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton waves before boarding a plane in Riga, Latvia on Thursday. (photo credit: AP/Haraz N. Ghanbari)

ST. PETERSBURG, Russia (AP) — US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov were heading for a face-to-face showdown over Syria on Friday as major powers prepared for a weekend conference to hash out a political transition plan for the country.

On the eve of Saturday’s conference aimed at ending 16 months of brutal violence in Syria, Clinton and Lavrov were to meet in St. Petersburg in a bid to iron out deep differences over the transition plan being pushed by UN envoy Kofi Annan that calls for the formation of a national unity government that would oversee the drafting of a new constitution and elections.

US officials are adamant that the plan will not allow Syrian President Bashar Assad to remain in power at the top of the transitional government, but Russia insists that outsiders cannot dictate the ultimate solution or the composition of the interim administration.

Annan’s plan would allow some members of the current regime to stay in place but would exclude those deemed to be counterproductive or destructive to the transition process, which would be Syrian led, according to diplomats familiar with the proposal. It does not explicitly bar Assad, but the US and other western powers who will participate in the conference in Geneva say that is implicit.

The difference in interpretation could prove its unraveling and Clinton hopes to press Lavrov on the point at their meeting and over dinner following a gathering of Asia-Pacific foreign ministers that Lavrov is hosting in St. Petersburg.

On Thursday, Lavrov acknowledged that a transition period is necessary to end the violence in Syria, but said Russia had not agreed to all elements of Annan’s plan, in particular any suggestion that Assad would be required to leave.

“We are not supporting and will not support any external meddling,” Lavrov said. “External players must not dictate … to Syrians, but, first of all, must commit to influencing all the sides in Syria to stop the violence.”

He also said the Annan plan was still a work in progress.

But, Clinton, speaking Thursday in Riga, Latvia, said it was “very clear” that all participants in the Geneva meeting — including Russia — were on board with the transition plan. She told reporters that the invitations said made clear that representatives “were coming on the basis of (Annan’s) transition plan.”

She said she expects the meeting “to provide an opportunity to make real progress” on that plan.

Diplomatic hopes have rested on Russia — Syria’s most important ally, protector and supplier of arms — to agree to a plan that would end the Assad family dynasty, which has ruled Syria for more than four decades.

Turkey will not hesitate to avenge Assad’s aggression

June 29, 2012

Israel Hayom | Turkey will not hesitate to avenge Assad’s aggression.

The international community will meet once again in Geneva on Saturday for another “performance” focusing on the Syrian crisis. Representatives of dozens of countries, including the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, will attend the gathering together with Syrian opposition leaders.

Similar to talks between Western powers and Iran over the Islamic republic’s nuclear program, talks concerning the situation in Syria appear as nothing more than a carnival, the real purpose of which is to postpone military intervention in the country. For now, this carnival is bringing down cities, not regimes.

Moscow succeeded in ruining the meeting on Saturday even before it begins. Special U.N. and Arab League envoy Kofi Annan is promoting a new plan to establish a transitional government in Syria consisting of representatives of both the current regime, minus Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and the opposition. But “Russia cannot support a proposal that is dictated by an external body,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Thursday.

Moscow prefers the same approach with Syria as it does with Iran: negotiations instead of tears. But Lavrov is disappointed in Tehran for not participating in talks regarding Syria.

Moscow’s approach received support from NATO General Knud Bartels in Tallinn, Estonia on Thursday. The general said that the northern alliance would not attack Syria or Iran as long as all diplomatic avenues have not yet been exhausted. If anyone is wondering why Assad and his wife have not yet packed their bags, the general’s statement provides a serious clue.

Even if Geneva, despite its wonderful Swiss watches, does not provide a date for Assad’s departure, he will eventually be forced to step down. The question is when and at what price. Turkey may not be banging the war drums yet, but since Syria shot down one of its Phantom planes, it has toughened its stance and will not hesitate to avenge the loss of the plane at the first opportunity.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar continue to arm Syrian opposition forces, but the problem is that they are dealing with two different opposition groups that are hostile to each other. Both groups however, together with Turkey, may in the end deliver the salvation the Syrian opposition is hoping for. Neither Geneva nor pre-election Washington will provide that salvation, especially since the U.S. is busy celebrating the victory of democracy in Egypt.

In the meantime, 69 additional people were added to the list of victims ahead of the Geneva talks. Perhaps the fine Swiss chocolate can serve as a consolation for the delegations, enabling them to feel their attendance at the meeting was not totally in vain after all.