WarSclerotic

The War between Wars.

Amir Rapaport

1/2/2013

In the past year, the IDF has started to use a new term: the war between wars. The way that things seemed here in the last weekend, the attack in Syria that occurred on Tuesday evening according to foreign sources fits the term, but it has the potential to escalate into a much more significant conflict.

The last bomb has yet to be dropped, and it’s impossible to detach what happened from the broad regional association, which reaches all the way to Iran.
The Cabinet Convenes

Hours after the Israel elections came to an end, Binyamin Netanyahu’s political-security cabinet gathered for a dramatic discussion. The cabinet is a body lacking any formal authority, but is one that is considered to be the most prominent decision-making forum in Israel. The cabinet of the outgoing government was one of the best in recent decades – it had checks and balances, and it usually held very relevant and discreet meetings.

Alongside Prime Minister Netanyahu and Minister of Defense Ehud Barak, who in the past few years were considered as the ones pushing for an attack in Iran, were ministers Benny Begin and Dan Meridor, who firmly opposed the notion. Israel’s Minister of Strategic Affairs, Moshe Ya’alon, supported an attack and also opposed it (according to chancing circumstances), and former head of Shabak Avi Dichter also represented a powerful reinforcement for the group. Other deputy prime ministers, Silvan Shalom and Eli Yishai, also have considerable experience of their own in making fateful defensive decisions.

Netanyahu’s transit government is functioning as any other government. Whatever happened or didn’t happen in Syria is attributed since Wednesday to foreign media, and therefore it is only possible to refer to the following facts: after Wednesday, the cabinet ministers gathered in several more times. The head of Israel’s National-Security Bureau, Maj. Gen. (Res.) Ya’akov Amidror, left for Moscow, while the head of the IDF’s Directorate of Military Intelligence, Maj. Gen. Kochavi met his colleagues in the US (the reports that Israel delivered an early announcement regarding an attack are much more probable).

Minister Shalon was on Israeli radio on Sunday to speak about the cabinet meeting that took place last Wednesday. A “leak” such as this is a standard means of signaling to the other side that ‘we know you are planning to move strategic weapons from Syria to Lebanon’. Sometimes such messages are sufficient, and the message is understood without the need to use military force. However, this is not always the case.

Iran apparently ‘sensed’ something, and issued an unusual message on Saturday, that Iran would view any attack on Syrian soil as though it were a direct attack against it. In the days prior to the attack, there were reports of two Iron Dome missiles that were deployed in the Israeli north (one near Haifa, the other in the area of the city Zephath). NATO also deployed Patriot missile batteries in Turkey, intended to intercept missiles – an old request on Turkey’s part. It is unclear if there is a link between this deployment and the timing of the attack in Syria, as is indicated by foreign media reports.
The Lights are Turned at the Kiriya

The events of the past few days didn’t come out of nowhere. It has been possible to see the lights turned on late at night in the Kiriya base in Tel Aviv for a long time now. 2013 is not an ordinary defense year – the IDF considers it to be a “decisive year” with regards to Iran, even if there is no certainty that things will be determined. All of the fronts are sensitive and volatile, and the dramatic events of the Syrian civil war have kept the people at the Kiriya base up at night, just as in the IDF’s Northern Command.

The main question is what is the target that was attacked, and it is quite possible that there is truth to the Syrian claim that it was the “research center” in the Damascus region, rather than a weapon’s convoy. It is quite possible that all the details concerning the attacked target have yet to be revealed (such as if the “research center” reported by Syria is connected to the Iranian nuclear project – not all of Syria’s nuclear capabilities were destroyed in the attack of the reactor in Dayr az-Zawr in September 2007).

One thing can be determined with certainty: throughout the recent period, there was genuine concern in Israel from Hassan Nasrallah’s intention of getting his hands on a formidable weapons arsenal, and technology usually reserved for military powers, certainly not a guerrilla organization with no state responsibility. Nasrallah’s intent to acquire weapons to damage Israel’s strategic superiority did not come into existence yesterday. In fact, it began a day after the Second Lebanon War came to a conclusion in August 2006. Nasrallah wanted to challenge Israel’s military superiority with weaponry that could seriously harm the IDF and the Israeli homefront. Syria also pursued this desire on its part after the attack on the Syrian reactor in Dayr az-Zawr. A short time after the attack, it began discussions with Russia for acquiring antiaircraft missile systems, including SA-17 missiles, which the IDF views as a very serious challenge.

Israel’s Strike On Syria Is A Smart Move – Business Insider.

Much like the timing of its air campaign against Hamas targets inside the Gaza strip, Israel’s airstrike on targets in Syria looks like a well-timed tactical move—and the confusing media reports regarding the attack may be part of the plan.

The Jerusalem Post reports that a Western diplomatic source told Iraqi daily Azzaman that the attack took place more than 48 hours before it was leaked by Israel.

Furthermore, the source said the reports about a strike on a convoy carrying weapons into Lebanon were probably meant to divert attention away from the operation’s main objective: To use F-16 aircraft to fire at least eight guided missiles at a military research center near Damascus.

On Wednesday American officials — who said they were given forewarning of the strike — told The Wall Street Journal and other outlets that the Israelis were targeting a convoy of trucks allegedly carrying Russian-made SA-17 missiles to Hezbollah.

Syria insisted that the reports about the convoy attack were “baseless,” and that the real target was a military research center in Jamraya, which lies about three miles from Damascus and eight miles from the Lebanese border.

Maj. Gen. Adnan Salo, a former head of the chemical weapons unit in the Syrian Army who defected and is now in Turkey, told The New York Times that the complex produces both conventional and chemical weapons.

The Azzaman source said that the complex is heavily fortified and houses experts from Russia and has been guarded for years by at least three thousand Iranian Revolutionary Guards, adding that the Guards suffered heavy casualties in the strike.

The Syrian rebel commander in the Damascus area told Reuters that rebels attacked the facility with “six 120 millimeter mortars” at about the same time that Israeli planes bombed the convoy.

But there has been no confirmation of the convoy attack besides unnamed diplomatic and rebel sources saying it occurred three miles south of where the main Damascus-Beirut highway crosses the border into Lebanon.

AFP

Nevertheless, both strikes fit Israel’s strategy.

The Associated Press reports that “Israeli military officials appear to have concluded that the risks of attacking Syria are worth taking when compared to the dangers of allowing sophisticated weapons to reach Hezbollah guerrillas.”

Transfer of the missiles “would be a game changer … by challenging the ability of Israel’s air force to carry out daily surveillance flights over southern Lebanon and eastern Lebanon along the border with Syria,” Jonathan Spyer, an analyst at the Interdisciplinary Center in Israel, told USA Today.

The attack comes at a time when Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is too weak to risk opening a new front with Israel by retaliating.

“Syria is in such a bad state right now that an Israeli retaliation to a Syrian action would be harsh and could topple the regime,” Moshe Maoz, a professor emeritus at Hebrew University who specializes in Syria, told AP. “Therefore Syria is not responding.”

Meanwhile Iran is busy propping up Assad. On Thursday U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said there are signs that Iran is sending growing numbers of people and increasingly sophisticated weaponry to Assad since he’s using up his weaponry.

And Israel appears to have the support of the West. On Thursday UK Foreign Secretary William Hague said that rather than condemning the the attack, attention should be focused on addressing ”the root causes” of the Syrian crisis, and the White House warned Syria not to transfer weapons to Hezbollah.

Israeli lawmaker Tzachi Hanegbi told the AP that Israel has no choice but to launch pinpoint strikes on suspected transfers.

“Israel’s preference would be if a Western entity would control these weapons systems,” Hanegbi said. “But because it appears the world is not prepared to do what was done in Libya or other places, then Israel finds itself like it has many times in the past facing a dilemma that only it knows how to respond to.”

Whether one believes that Israel attacked a convoy or the Jamraya facility — or both — matters less than the fact that Israel has dealt a forceful blow to Syria and Iran while sending a stark message to Hezbollah.

The Fallout from the Air Raid on Syria: Why Israel is Concerned | TIME.com.

Israeli warplanes struck several targets inside Syria overnight Tuesday, including a biological weapons research center that was reportedly flattened out of concern that it might fall into the hands of Islamist extremists fighting to topple the government of Syrian president Bashar Assad, Western intelligence officials tell TIME.

So far only two airstrikes have been publicly reported, amid a flurry of conflicting initial reports. Syria officially complained of the destruction of the Scientific Studies and Research Center in Jamarya northwest of Damascus. And a variety of news organizations reported that Israeli jets hit a convoy carrying advanced anti-aircraft defense systems toward Lebanon’s Bakaa Valley, presumably for delivery to Hizballah, the militant Shi’ite group closely allied with the Assad regime. If they had been deployed, those SA-17 ground-to-air missiles would intimidated Israeli pilots who now operate over Lebanese airspace with impunity, forcing them to higher altitudes and other operational precautions.

(PHOTOS: Aleppo’s River of Death)

A Western intelligence official indicated to TIME that at least one to two additional targets were hit the same night, without offering details. Officials also said that Israel had a “green light” from Washington to launch yet more such strikes.

Hizballah is not Israel’s only concern – or perhaps even the most worrying. Details of the Israeli strikes make clear the risk posed by fundamentalist militants sprinkled among the variegated rebel forces fighting to depose Assad.   The jihadists are overwhelmingly home-grown Sunni militants but also include foreigners drawn to the fight from across the Muslim world. Loosely organized into several fighting groups, some fighters embrace the almost nihilist ideology associated with al-Qaeda. But jihadist groups are less vulnerable to the same levers that have proved effective against Syria and other states –  such as threats to its territory — or even the frank interests of an organization like Hizballah, which as a political party plays a major role in Lebanon’s government.

“If we succeeded all these years to deter the Syrians and all the other surrounding countries that possess weapons of mass destruction [from making] use of it, it’s because we knew how to deliver the message, that the price would be very high,” Amnon Sofrin, a retired brigadier and former senior Mossad official, told reporters this week. “What kind of threat can you put in the face of a terror organization?”

In other words, it may be easier to attack the problem from the other side — simply destroy the weapons you’re afraid they’ll get their hands on.   Among the buildings leveled at the military complex at Jamarya, outside Damascus, were warehouses stocked with equipment necessary for the deployment of chemical and biological weapons, relatively complicated systems typically manned by specially trained forces. The lab facilities dedicated to biological warfare were of special concern, given both the damage that can be done by even small amounts of biological agents, and the interest expressed in such weapons by Osama bin Laden’s successor, Ayman al-Zawahiri. No specific armed force was identified as threatening the compound. Intelligence officials said the concern was unconventional weapons “dripping” into control of extremists in the relative chaos of the rebel side.
One Western intelligence official told TIME the U.S. military was poised to carry out similar airstrikes around Aleppo if rebels threaten to take sites associated with weapons of mass destruction in that region.

(PHOTOS: As Bashar Assad Shows His Defiance, Syria Nears Its Existential Cliff)

Sofrin called that logical. “The world should be worried about the possibility that organizations would possess chemical weapons, because we are not the only target in the Middle East,” he told foreign reporters in Jerusalem on Wednesday. “Let’s go back to 1983, the attack in Beirut on the barracks of the U.S. marines. 241 people killed on Lebanese soil, because they were Americans, strangers.”

Though no country has intervened in Syria’s civil war directly, Western governments were tracking the country’s WMD arsenal even before peaceful street protests were transformed by the brutality of Assad’s response into an armed rebellion that has killed an estimated 60,000 people.  But Israel and Washington have worked especially closely from the start, and more visibly in recent weeks.When Israeli warplanes began their attack late Wednesday, Israel’s military intelligence chief, Maj. Gen. Aviv Kochavi  was at the Pentagon on a working visit.

Tensions were already rising. The week began with word that Israel had moved two of its Iron Dome missile defense batteries to protect cities in northern Israel, facing the Lebanese border. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sounded a note of urgency at the weekly meeting of cabinet, the membership of which will be reshaped by a new governing—and yet unformed–coalition following Jan. 22 elections:. “The weapons in Syria are not awaiting the the formation of our government,” Netanyahu said.

After the airstrikes, however, Israeli newspapers brimmed with stories assuring residents that the chances of the attacks being answered militarily were considered low. Assad and Hizballah and Iran, which is closely allied with both, are regarded as too busy trying to save the Syrian regime to open a new front. Israel’s military has been quietly reinforcing its northern front for the last two years.  That may be why Syria’s preliminary reaction was a complaint to the United Nations.  In diplomatic terms, surgical strikes launched in the name of preventing proliferation of weapons of mass destruction tend to be well-tolerated by the international community, especially when the attacks are not publicly acknowledged. Israel still does not officially acknowledge its secret 2007 destruction of a Syrian nuclear reactor.

“I’m not going to give any condemnation of Israel or rush into any criticism,”  British foreign secretary William Hauge told the BBC on Thursday. “There may be many things about it that we don’t know, or the Arab League or Russia don’t know.”

At the same time, Israeli officials raised their guard at embassies and other potential targets overseas, citing Hizballah’s history of seeking retribution through terror attacks. Friday’s suicide bombing at the U.S. embassy in Ankara, Turkey,  was attributed to a Turkish leftist group, but made headlines on Hebrew language with a speed driven in part by a new apprehension.

Protesters clash with police outside Morsi’s palace | The Times of Israel.

Demonstrators against Islamist president in Cairo throw firebombs, security forces respond with teargas and water cannons

February 1, 2013, 4:17 pm Updated: February 1, 2013, 7:04 pm

Egyptian riot police arrest a man during clashes with protesters near Tahrir Square in Cairo, Egypt on January 30, 2013. (AP Photo/Khalil Hamra)

CAIRO (AP) — Thousands of protesters denouncing Egypt’s Islamist president marched on his palace in Cairo on Friday, clashing with security forces firing tear gas and water cannons in the eighth day of the country’s wave of political violence.

Protests were held in cities around the country on Friday after a call for rallies by opponents of President Mohammed Morsi. But some cracks appeared in the ranks of the opposition as some sharply criticized its political leaders for holding their first meeting with the rival Muslim Brotherhood a day earlier.

Around 60 people have been killed in protests, rioting and clashes that engulfed the country the past week in country’s worst crisis since the 2011 fall of autocrat Hosni Mubarak.

Around 6,000 protesters massed outside Morsi’s presidential palace in an upscale district of the capital, banging on the gates and throwing stones and shoes into the grounds in a show of contempt. At least one firebomb was thrown through the gates as crowds chanted, “Leave, leave,” addressing Morsi.

Security forces inside the palace responded by firing water cannons at the crowd, then volleys of tear gas. A tree inside the palace grounds caught fire. Riot police moved in outside the gates, sending the protesters scattering for cover, but then they surged back. “This is all because of Morsi!” one shouted.

Thousands more rallied in central Tahrir Square, while a larger crowd marched through the Suez Canal city of Port Said, which witnessed the worst clashes and highest casualties, pumping their fists in the air and chanting, “Leave, leave, Morsi.”

The wave of protests began around rallies marking the second anniversary of the uprising that toppled Mubarak. The unrest was prompted by public anger that Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood are monopolizing power and have failed to deal with the country’s mounting woes.

But outrage has been further fueled by Morsi’s public backing of what was seen as security forces’ use of excessive force against protesters last weekend, particular in Port Said, where around 40 people were killed.

Amid the escalating tensions the past week, there have been fears of direct clashes between Morsi’s opponents and his Islamist backers. Such battles broke out at the palace in December during an earlier wave of unrest, when Islamists attacked an anti-Morsi sit-in, prompting fighting that left around 10 dead.

A Brotherhood spokesman, Ahmed Arif, underlined on Friday that the group would not call its cadres into the streets. But a young Brotherhood member said the group’s members were ordered to gather in a mosque near the presidential palace, as a “precautionary measure” in case anti-Morsi protests turned violent. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the press.

The government, meanwhile, has increasingly blamed violence on a group of protesters called the Black Bloc, who wear black masks and have vowed to “defend the revolution.” Officials and state media depict them as conspiratorial saboteurs, but the opposition says authorities are using the group as a scapegoat to justify a crackdown.

Nearly 20 masked protesters are among hundreds arrested around the country the past week. Egypt’s official news agency said on Thursday that a member of the Black Bloc was arrested with “Israeli plans” and maps to target vital institutions — recalling past allegations by Mubarak-era security officials that opponents were carrying out Israeli interests.

“There’s a great deal of exaggeration concerning the Black Bloc group,” said Gamal Fahmy, an opposition figure. “It hasn’t been proven that the group has committed violence, these are just calls over the social media.”

“This is an attempt from the Muslim Brotherhood to blackmail the opposition,” by depicting the anti-Morsi movement as violent, he said.

The eruption of violence prompted Morsi last Sunday to declare a state of emergency and curfew in Port Said and two other Suez Canal cities, where angry residents have defied the restrictions with nightly rallies.

Thousands marched on Friday through Port Said, located at the Canal’s Mediterranean end, pumping their fists and chanting, “Leave, leave, Morsi.” They threatened to escalate pressure with civil disobedience and a work stoppage at the vital Suez Canal authority if their demand for punishment of those responsible for protester death is not met.

“The people want the Republic of Port Said,” protesters chanted, voicing a wide sentiment among residents that they are fed up of negligence and mistreatment by central government and that they want to virtual independence.

Buses brought protesters from the two other Suez Canal cities of Suez and Ismailia to join the Port Said rallies.

Friday marked the first anniversary of a mass soccer riot in Port Said that left 74 people dead, mostly fans of Al-Ahly, Egypt’s most popular soccer team, which was playing a local Port Said team, Al-Masry.

The past weekend’s violence in Port Said was sparked when a court convicted 21 people, mostly locals, in the soccer deaths, a verdict residents saw as unjust and political. Over the next few days, around 40 people were killed in the city in unrest that saw security forces firing on a funeral.

Egypt’s main opposition political grouping, the National Salvation Front, called for Friday’s protests in Cairo, demanding Morsi form a national unity government and amend the constitution, moves they say would prevent the Islamist from governing solely in the interest of his Muslim Brotherhood group.

“The policies of the president and the Muslim Brotherhood are pushing the country to the brink,” the opposition said in a statement.

However, the call came a day after the Front held a meeting with Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood under the aegis of Egypt’s premier Islamic institution, Al-Azhar, in their first ever meeting. They and other politicians signed a joint statement denouncing violence.

The meeting appeared to have caused rifts within the opposition, with some saying the Front had handed the Brotherhood the high ground by signing a statement that seemed to focus on protester violence and made no mention of police use of excessive force or explicitly talk of political demands.

“Al-Azhar’s initiative talks too broadly about violence as if it’s the same to kill a person or break a window and makes no difference between defensive violence and aggressive violence, offering a political cover to expand the repression, detention, killing and torture by the hands of police for the authority’s benefit,” read a joint statement by 70 activists, liberal politicians, actors and writers.

“The initiative didn’t represent the core of the problem and didn’t offer solutions but came to give more legitimacy to the existing authority,” it added.

Those who attended the Thursday’s rare meeting between Egypt’s rival political camps defended the anti-violence initiative.

Egypt’s leading pro-democracy advocate Mohammed ElBaradei and a Front leader described allegations that the Front is making political compromises them as “intentional attempt to split the ranks.”

“We toppled down Mubarak regime with a peaceful revolution. We insist on achieving the goals the same way whatever the sacrifices and the barbaric suppression tactics,” the Nobel peace Laureate tweeted.

Ahmed Maher, co-founder of April 6 group which led the anti-Mubarak uprising, said in a tweet: “I am against violence as a solution.” An opposition party leader Ahmed Said said in a statement, “no one can say no to an initiative to stop violence.”

Copyright 2013 The Associated Press.

A GOP filibuster of Chuck Hagel would be unprecedented.

( The spineless Dems did nothing to change the filibuster rule.  If the Republicans use it against Hagel, it might well be the first time it was publicly supported.  Even the most ardent Obama sycophants are saying his testimony was a “disaster.”  I think the filibuster has been abused.  I’m praying that it will redeem itself here. – JW )

A GOP filibuster of Chuck Hagel would be unprecedented

Chuck Hagel did not do well in his confirmation hearing before the Senate Armed Service Committee yesterday. In fact, it was a disaster. He seemed unprepared — inadvertently saying the Obama administration supports “containment” with regards to Iran — and unable to deal with the hostility of his former Republican colleagues. If you judged solely from the hearing, you’d think Hagel, as David Frum said on Twitter this morning, was “poorly prepared, easily pushed around, and prone to saying things he later regrets.”

Even still, odds are good he’ll be confirmed. As Chris Cillizza notes, Democrats are still on Hagel’s side, and unless they abandon the nomination, the only way Hagel will lose confirmation is if “Republicans choose to block his nomination.” This would be an unprecedented move. Most presidential nominees for most positions are confirmed by the Senate, and it takes misdoing or sizable, bipartisan opposition for a president to withdraw a nomination. This is even more true when it comes to the most high-profile cabinet positions — the president has wide discretion on his nominees for State, Defense or the Treasury.

Simply put, the Senate has never filibustered a cabinet nominee, and for good reason: Staffing the executive branch is a key job for the White House, and routine filibusters would make that an extremely difficult task, given the huge number of positions. Moreover, presidents win affirmation for their agenda from a majority of the (voting) public — giving wide leeway for nominations is a justified form of democratic deference.

Since the November elections, Republicans have tried to make up for their losses by heightening their opposition to President Obama. They’ve attacked nominees, pushed bogus scandals (Benghazi), and have tried their hands — again — at legislative hostage taking. If Senate Republicans break tradition and filibuster Hagel, it will be another sign that the GOP has committed itself to another four years of senseless opposition, in which blocking governance as an end in itself — rather than even trying to find common ground to make governing possible — will remain the norm.

Jamelle Bouie is a staff writer at The American Prospect, where he writes a blog.

US Ankara suicide bomber belonged to leftist group suspected of Burgas attack.

( Remember the 1st gulf war?  When the US attacked Iraq, where did Saddam drop his missiles?  The terrorists understand the US/Israel relationship better than Obama.  No point even mentioning Hagel. – JW )

DEBKAfile Special Report February 1, 2013, 6:41 PM (GMT+02:00)

Sucide bombing at US embassy, Ankara

Turkish interior minister Moammer Guler identified the suicide bomber who detonated an explosive Friday, Feb. 1 at the US embassy in Ankara killing a Turkish security guard as Ecevit Sanli, 31, a member of the Revolutionary People’s Liberation Party/Front (DHKP/C), a left-wing terrorist group outlawed in Turkey. He was released from Turkish jail eight months ago. debkafile: The DHKP/C, which is associated with Lebanese terrorist groups and Syrian left-wing factions, was suspected of the attack in Burgas, Bulgaria last July, which left five Israeli tourists dead.
Sanli died detonating his explosive at a side entrance of the US embassy in Ankara Friday, Feb. 1, sending embassy staff diving into fortified shelters as smoke and debris rose in clouds over the fortified compound.

A former broadcast journalist Didem Tuncay was seriously injured in the attack.

Local TV showed damage to a compound wall and a smashed embassy building window. No organization has taken responsibility for the attack.

debkafile’s counter-terror sources estimate that it was the work either of al Qaeda, Syrian intelligence or Hizballah, possibly as part of the payback for Israel’s air strike Wednesday against the Jamraya military complex near Damascus.

That complex served both Hizballah and the Syrian army and Syria has already threatened retribution on the scale of an earthquake. It may also have been retaliation for the stationing of US Patriot missiles on the Turkish Syrian border and the meeting arranged for US Vice President Joe Biden with the Syrian opposition leader Mouaz Alkhatib in Munich, Germany.

Plenty of warnings have issued from Tehran on all these counts.
On Dec. 15, Iran’s armed forces chief Gen. Hassan Firouzabadi warned that the deployment of American anti-missile batteries in Turkey could cause a world war. Last Saturday, Jan. 26, Ali Akbar Velayati, a close aide of the Iranian supreme leader, declared that attacking Syria was tantamount to attacking Iran.
Israel’s air strike may have been the last straw for Tehran, which warned the “Tel Aviv regime” would suffer “grave consequences.”
By targeting the US embassy in Turkey, the Iranians and their allies may have been starting to hit back for all these grievances at the same time:  the Israeli attack, the Patriots and Washington’s support for the Syrian opposition.
If that is so, then the suicide bombing attack on the US embassy in Ankara won’t be the last act of terror planned by Syria, Hizballah and Iran, and it would not be the first time they have hired or enlisted local hit-men or sympathisers for an terrorist operation.

Israel has accused Hizballah of being behind the Burgas attack.

The Iranian-Syrian-Hizballah alliance has targeted US interests in Turkey for terrorist attacks before. On Aug. 21, 2012, seven months ago, a large bomb car blew up in the southern Turkish town of Gaziantep near the Syrian border, killing eight people and injuring at least 66.
No findings were ever released from the investigation of that incident. According to our sources, the bomb car was rigged by a terrorist cell serving Syrian military intelligence in collaboration with Hizballah, like many other political hits carried out in Lebanon over the years. The Gaziantep attack was directed against the command center established in that town for US intelligence and special forces alongside a Free Syrian Army center.

Ankara bomber part of far-left group – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Man who detonated explosive in front of US embassy, killing himself and security guard, believed to be member of organization opposing American influence over Turkish foreign policy. Turkish PM Erdogan calls for global effort against ‘terrorist elements’

( IMHO the Turkish claim that it was a “far left” suicide bomber is absurd on its face.  Suicide bombers are the province of Radical Islam exclusively.  – JW )

Reuters

A suicide bomber from a far-left group killed a Turkish security guard at the US embassy in Ankara on Friday, blowing the door off a side entrance and sending smoke and debris flying into the street.

The attacker blew himself up inside US property, Ankara Governor Alaaddin Yuksel said. The blast sent masonry spewing out of the wall and could be heard a mile away.

Interior Minister Muammer Guler said the bomber was a member of a far-left group. The US State Department said it was working with Turkish police to investigate what it described as “a terrorist blast.”

Islamist radicals, far-left groups, far-right groups and Kurdish separatist militants have all carried out attacks in Turkey in the past. There was no claim of responsibility.

“The suicide bomber was ripped apart and one or two citizens from the special security team passed away,” said Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan, who was attending a ceremony in Istanbul when the blast happened.

“This event shows that we need to fight together everywhere in the world against these terrorist elements,” he said.

Far-left groups in Turkey oppose what they see as US influence over Turkish foreign policy.

Turkey is a key US ally in the Middle East with common interests ranging from energy security to counter-terrorism, and has been one of the leading advocates of foreign intervention to end the conflict in neighboring Syria.

Around 400 US soldiers have arrived in Turkey over the past few weeks to operate Patriot anti-missile batteries meant to defend against any spillover of Syria’s civil war, part of a NATO deployment due to be fully operational in the coming days.

Scene of embassy attack (Photo: EPA)

Bomber blows door off side entrance (Photo: AFP)

Wounded person evacuated by rescue forces (Photo: AP)

US Ambassador Francis Ricciardone emerged through the main gate of the embassy, which is surrounded by high walls, shortly after the explosion to address reporters, flanked by a security detail as a Turkish police helicopter hovered overhead.

“We are very sad of course that we lost one of our Turkish guards at the gate,” Ricciardone said, thanking the Turkish authorities for a prompt response.

A Reuters witness saw one wounded person being lifted into an ambulance as police armed with assault rifles cordoned off the area.

“It was a huge explosion. I was sitting in my shop when it happened. I saw what looked like a body part on the ground,” said travel agent Kamiyar Barnos, whose shop window was shattered around 100 meters away from the blast.

Terrorist organization

State broadcaster TRT said the attacker was thought to be from The Revolutionary People’s Liberation Party-Front (DHKP-C), which wants a socialist state and is vehemently anti-American, according to the US National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC).

The group, deemed a terrorist organization by both the United States and Turkey, was blamed for a suicide attack in 2001 that killed two police officers and a tourist in Istanbul’s central Taksim Square.

Guler said the bomber could have been from the DHKP-C or a similar group.

The DHKP/C has in the past attacked Turkish official targets with bombs, but arrests of some of its members in recent years have weakened its capabilities, according to the NCTC.

The date of the DHKP-C’s most recent attack, on an Istanbul police station, was September 11, 2012, seen as a symbolic strike to coincide with the 11th anniversary of the al Qaeda attacks on the United States.

Despite some strains, Washington and Ankara have long had a strong strategic alliance. US President Barack Obama chose Turkey as his first Muslim nation to visit after he took office five years ago.

Turkish support and bases have helped US forces in Afghanistan, while Turkey hosts a NATO radar system, operated by US forces, in its eastern province of Malatya to help defend against any regional threat from Iran.

More recently, it has led calls for international intervention in neighboring Syria and is hosting hundreds of NATO soldiers who are manning the Patriot missile defense system near the Syrian border, hundreds of kilometers from the capital.

The US consulate in Istanbul warned its citizens to be vigilant and to avoid large gatherings, while the British mission in Istanbul called on British businesses to tighten security after what it called a “suspected terrorist attack”.

The most serious bombings of this kind in Turkey occurred in November 2003, when car bombs shattered two synagogues, killing 30 people and wounding 146. Authorities said the attack bore the hallmarks of al-Qaeda.

Part of the HSBC Bank headquarters was destroyed and the British consulate was damaged in two more explosions that killed a further 32 people a week later.

Biden to Iran: Time for diplomac… JPost – Iranian Threat – News.

Surrounded by Enemies — The Patriot Post.

( Love him or hate him, he KNOWS what he’s talking about. – JW )

JERUSALEM — Until Jan. 30, I was working on a story about reaction here in Israel to the Obama administration’s decision to provide advanced F-16 aircraft to Egypt. All that changed early Wednesday, when I received a call from an Israeli friend who told me: “Last night, the (Israeli air force) carried out a raid on a weapons convoy in Syria.” He said the trucks were en route to Lebanon, making a “delivery of arms to Hezbollah,” and “all aircraft returned safely.” He then added, “Let’s see how long it takes for us to be condemned by the ‘friends of terrorists’ for protecting ourselves.”

Less than two hours after that call, Syria’s government-controlled media announced that “Israeli warplanes have violated international law and attacked a scientific research center in the Jamraya district of Damascus province.” The Assad regime’s state television claimed that “two innocent civilians were killed, and five were injured” in this “breach of Syrian sovereignty.” European and U.S. news agencies speculated that the target may have been chemical weapons being moved out of the grasp of rebels fighting Bashar Assad’s Iranian-supported army.

So what really happened? Was the target a research laboratory in Damascus province or a munitions convoy headed for Hezbollah, Iran’s proxy in Lebanon?

In fairness to my media colleagues, straight answers to such questions are hard to come by. The Syrians routinely lie about anything. They blame “Zionist aggressors” and “occupiers” — meaning Israel — for everything. And unlike the leak-prone, chest-thumping O-Team in Washington, the government of Israel rarely confirms or denies reports of military operations outside the Jewish state’s borders.

“No comment” has become standard operating procedure for the Israeli government. In 2007, after reports surfaced in Western and Mideast media about an Israeli air force attack on a Syrian nuclear reactor, Israeli officials simply refused to talk about the event. In October of last year, Sudan’s radical Islamist government protested an “Israeli air attack” that destroyed an Iranian-operated weapons depot in Khartoum. When asked about the validity of the claim, a spokesman for the Netanyahu government said, “We’re not going to talk about whether that happened or not.” And they didn’t.

Though it’s tough to get official comments about specific actions Israel may take or has taken, there is no doubt that civilians and government officials here are increasingly concerned about the turmoil on their borders. On Tuesday, at an international space conference and just hours before the “event” in Syria, Gen. Amir Eshel, chief of staff of the Israeli air force, said Syria is an example of “the weakening governance in neighboring countries that heralds greater exposure to hostile activity.” He continued: “We work every day in order to lessen the immediate threats and to create better conditions so that we will be victorious in future wars. This is a struggle in which the air force is a central player, from here to thousands of kilometers away.”

To most of us, that sounds like a straightforward message to the Muslim Brotherhood-dominated government in Egypt, radical Islamists in Lebanon, Syria, Sudan and Gaza, and the ayatollahs in Tehran. But that doesn’t mean any of them are necessarily paying attention. On Wednesday, Ali Abdul-Karim Ali, Syria’s ambassador in Lebanon, announced that the Zionist aggression gives Syria “the option and the capacity to surprise in retaliation.” Iranian state TV is threatening that the Israeli attack would have “serious consequences for Tel Aviv.” And the 22-member Arab League, headquartered in Cairo, issued a statement condemning “the cruel aggression in the invasion of Syrian air space.”

My calls to Israeli friends — in and out of government — shed little new light on what really happened in Syria this week. One, a now retired confidant of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s, chuckled when I asked him whether the Israeli air force target was a shipment of Russian-made man-portable surface-to-air missiles. His reply: “Oliver, I’m not going to answer that. But if you really need something, you may quote me as a former Israeli government official: ‘The Obama administration is committed to gun control. We are, too. Denying our sworn enemies a chance to use their weapons against us is our gun control policy.'”

Unwilling to give up, I finally got Mark Regev, Netanyahu’s spokesman, to go on the record. I asked him about the reported air attack inside Syria, the sale of U.S. F-16s to Egypt and rumors of an “accident” at Iran’s Fordow underground nuclear facility. His responses have to be the most creative ways of saying “no comment” that I ever have heard. They can be seen in full at http://www.foxnews.com/hannity.

Here’s the bottom line: Unlike the Obama administration’s self-congratulatory leaks, Israeli government officials aren’t about to risk operational security for future military or covert action by talking about recent events. Nor are they willing to jeopardize U.S. aid and cooperation by raising the ire of the Obama White House. One of my friends put it this way: “Our enemies are your enemies. The jihadists will come for us first because we’re closer. But they will also come for you again. Let us pray they do not come with nuclear weapons. But no matter what, America can count on Israel. I hope we can count on America.”

We all should have that hope.

Israeli silence on Syria is strategic | DefenceWeb.

( As I mentioned earlier, it’s not in Israel’s interest to comment on the Iran sabotage for the same reasons.  The US and the UN also don’t want to back Iran into the corner of having to retaliate.  This is so obvious that I’m amazed just how fatuous the MSM is being on this issue.  That is, unless they received a gag request from the US similar to the one reported on here in Israel  – JW )

Military secrets are not readily divulged anywhere. But in Israel the blanket silence that envelops officials after an event like Wednesday’s mysterious air strike on Syria reflects a deeper strategy involving both deterrence and outreach.

Beyond customary concern to safeguard spies and tactics for a government currently engaged in a graver confrontation with Iran, Israelis see such reticence as allowing their foes to save face and thus reduce the risk of reprisal and escalation.
Keeping silent, and so avoiding accusations of provocatively bragging of its exploits, also smoothes Israel’s discreet cooperation with Muslim neighbours – such as Turkey or Jordan – who might otherwise feel bound to distance themselves, Reuters reports.

Israeli leaders see benefit at home from not trumpeting successes that might give their public, or indeed Western allies, an exaggerated faith in their forces’ capabilities.

And given international complaints that an unprovoked strike on a sovereign power breached international law, admitting the fact could only provide diplomatic complications.

So it was in 2007, when then prime minister Ehud Olmert muzzled his staff after the bombing of a suspected Syrian atomic reactor – a no-comment policy still in effect, though the United States has freely discussed that Israeli sortie and its target.

Olmert “wanted to avoid anything that might back Syria into a corner and force Assad to retaliate,” the U.S. president at the time, George W. Bush, would recall in his memoir.

A former Olmert aide confirmed that account, telling Reuters the premier also feared for close military ties with Turkey, whose territory the Israeli warplanes crossed en route to Syria.

Israelis were then – as now – poised for a threatened war against arch-enemy Iran. Olmert, skeptical about whether Israel had the clout to take on the distant and much larger adversary, did not want to mislead his public by playing up the successful but far smaller-scale sortie against Syria next door.

“We knew the message of what had taken place would be received by the Syrian and Iranian leaderships, and that was enough for us,” the ex-aide said on condition of anonymity.

So if Israel did attack a Syrian arms convoy headed to Lebanon’s Hezbollah guerrillas, or a military complex near Damascus, around dawn on Wednesday, as described by various sources, a similar logic may now be keeping Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his cabinet and defense chiefs quiet.

Tackling the Iranian nuclear program is Israel’s top priority, making it hesitant to lurch into other conflicts – especially with Syria’s Assad government, an old enemy whose menace has faded, in Israeli eyes, with the two-year-old revolt.

Nor does Israel seek a flare-up with Hezbollah, which has mostly held fire since their 2006 war in southern Lebanon.

LINES AND ALLIES

Russia, Damascus’s long-time arms supplier, said any Israeli air strike would amount to unacceptable military interference.

A former Israeli national security adviser, Giora Eiland, agreed. If Israel indeed attacked Syria, he said, eluding legal scrutiny might be a secondary reason for its silence: “The U.N. will never jump to back a military operation – certainly not by Israel,” Eiland told Reuters.

Mindful, perhaps, of the self-imposed silence that would follow any raid, Israeli officials may have taken pains to offer justifications for any intervention in advance.

For months, they had been saying that if Iranian-backed Hezbollah, or Syria’s Islamist rebels, acquired Syrian chemical weapons or advanced Russian missiles as Assad’s grip faltered, that could pose a new order of threat to Israel – a “red line” the Netanyahu government said must not be crossed.

Such warnings came thick and fast early this week, then died out when news surfaced of Wednesday’s strike – albeit some hours after it took place, a lag itself attesting to Israeli stealth and, perhaps, Syrian and Lebanese reluctance to go public.

Israel’s military censors then quickly stepped in, barring media there from reporting anything on it from Israeli sources.

For Israeli media to have given even anonymous commentaries on an attack on Syria from Israeli officials, would only make it harder for the Israeli government to avoid provoking hostility from Turkey, Saudi Arabia and others on whom it is counting for at least quiescence in its struggle with mutual foe Tehran.

The former Olmert aide said Israel’s secrecy policy amounted to “recognizing Middle East manliness” – not adding insult to injury for enemies and friends alike. Control of its own media by the censors reflected the fact that, “in this part of the world, many people see the messaging from a country’s media as synonymous with the messaging from that country’s government”.

So whether Israel wants to avoid provoking Syria, Hezbollah and Iran, or alienating Turkey and the Sunni Arabs, the former aide said, “silence is the best way forward”.