Archive for May 2013

Syrian troops take full control of strategic town

May 13, 2013

Syrian troops take full control of strategic town – Alarabiya.net English | Front Page.

Monday, 13 May 2013
A Syrian rebel fighter from the Al-Ezz bin Abdul Salam Brigade takes part in a training session. (AFP)
The Associated Press, Beirut –

Syrian troops have taken full control of a town near the highway linking the capital Damascus with Jordan, a new advance in the regime’s campaign to drive rebels from the strategic south, an activist group said Monday.

Rebels seeking to topple Syrian President Bashar Assad are trying to carve a pathway from the Jordanian border through the southern province of Daraa, in what is seen as their best shot at capturing Damascus.

A few weeks ago, they scored significant gains, but have since suffered setbacks in a regime counteroffensive.

In recent days, regime troops and rebel fighters battled over Khirbet Ghazaleh, a town near the Damascus-Jordan highway.

Regime forces retook Khirbet Ghazaleh on Sunday and rebels withdrew from the area, said Rami Abdul-Rahman, head of the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

Troops reopened the highway, restoring the supply line between Damascus and the contested provincial capital of Daraa, he said. Regime forces were carrying out raids and searching homes in Khirbet Ghazaleh on Monday.

Damascus, still overwhelmingly under regime control, is the ultimate prize in a largely deadlocked civil war.

Rebels control large parts of the countryside in northern Syria, but those areas are further away from the capital than the Jordanian border.

Arab officials and Western military experts have said Mideast powers opposed to Assad have stepped up weapons supplies to Syrian rebels, with Jordan opening up as a new route.

The uprising against Assad erupted in March 2011 and escalated into a civil war. Over the weekend, the Observatory issued a new death toll, estimating that more than 80,000 Syrians have been killed, almost half civilians. In February, the U.N. said at least 70,000 Syrians were killed.

Western leaders are facing growing pressure to find a way to end the conflict – both because of the rising death toll and fears that neighboring Israel or Turkey could inadvertently get pulled deeper into it.

Turkey has blamed the Assad regime for twin car bombs Saturday that killed 46 people and wounded scores in a Turkish border town that serves as a hub for Syrian refugees and rebels.

Turkey signaled restraint Sunday, saying it won’t be dragged into the quagmire, but tensions between the former rivals are running high.

Earlier this month, Israel attacked suspected shipments of advanced Iranian missiles in Syria with back-to-back airstrikes. Israeli officials signaled there would be more such attacks unless Syria refrains from trying to deliver such “game-changing” missiles to ally Hezbollah, an anti-Israel militia in Lebanon.

For now, the West is placing its hopes on a diplomatic plan that ran aground in the past but now appears to have stronger Russian backing.

Last week, the U.S. and Russia agreed to revive the idea of negotiations between Syria’s political opposition and members of the regime on a transitional government, accompanied by an open-ended cease-fire.

Through the conflict, Russia sided with Assad, sending him weapons and shielding him against Western attempts to impose international sanctions.

However, British Prime Minister David Cameron suggested en route to a White House meeting with President Barack Obama that Russia is ready to find common ground with the West. Cameron met last week with Russian President Vladimir Putin to discuss the new Syria initiative.

“While it is no secret that Britain and Russia have taken a different approach to Syria I was very struck in my conversations with President Putin that there is a recognition that it would be in all our interests to secure a safe and secure Syria with a democratic and pluralist future, and end the regional instability,” Cameron said late Sunday. “We have got a long way to go, but they were good talks.”

Charles Krauthammer: Pink line over Damascus

May 13, 2013

Charles Krauthammer: Pink line over Damascus – Hornell, NY – Hornell Evening Tribune.

You know you’re in trouble when you can’t even get your walk-back story straight. Stung by the worldwide derision that met President Obama’s fudging and fumbling of his chemical-weapons red line in Syria, the White House leaked to The New York Times that Obama’s initial statement had been unprepared, unscripted and therefore unserious.

The next day Jay Carney said precisely the opposite: “Red line” was intended and deliberate.

Which is it? Who knows? Perhaps Obama used the term last August to look tough, sound like a real world leader, never expecting that Syria would do something so crazy. He would have it both ways: sound decisive but never have to deliver.

Or perhaps he thought that Syria might actually use chemical weapons one day, at which point he would think of something.

So far he’s thought of nothing. Instead he’s backed himself into a corner: Be forced into a war he is firmly resolved to avoid, or lose credibility, which for a superpower on whose word relies the safety of a dozen allies is not just embarrassing but dangerous.

In his rambling news conference, Obama said that he needed certainty about the crossing of the red line to keep the “international community” behind him. This is absurd. The “international community” is a fiction, especially in Syria. Russia, Iran and Hezbollah are calling the shots.

Nor, he averred, could he act until he could be sure of everything down to the “chain of custody” of the sarin gas.

What is this? “CSI: Damascus”? It’s a savage civil war. The antagonists don’t exactly stand down for forensic sampling.

Some countries have real red lines. Israel has no real friends on either side of this regional Sunni-Shiite conflict, but it will not permit the alteration of its strategic military balance with Hezbollah, already brimming with 60,000 rockets aimed at Israel.

Everyone in the region knows that the transfer of chemical weapons to Hezbollah or the acquisition of the Fateh-110, with the accuracy and range to hit the heart of Tel Aviv, is a red line. Hence the punishing Israeli airstrikes around Damascus on advanced weaponry making its way to Hezbollah.

The risk to Israel is less a counterattack from Damascus than from Hezbollah. Bashar al-Assad doesn’t need a new front with Israel. Syria remembers not just its thorough defeat at the hands of Israel in 1967 and 1973 but also its humiliation in the skies over the Bekaa Valley in 1982 when it challenged Israeli air dominance. In a two-day dogfight, Israel shot down 60 Syrian planes and lost none.

Israel’s real concern is a Hezbollah attack. But Hezbollah has already stretched itself in by sending fighters into Syria to save Assad. And it knows that war with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would be far more devastating than its 2006 war with the tepid and tentative Ehud Olmert.

Most important, Iran, Hezbollah’s master, wants to keep Hezbollah’s missile arsenal intact and in reserve for retaliation against — and thus deterrence of — a possible Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear program.

These are complicated, inherently risky calculations. But living in the midst of this cauldron, Israel has no choice. It must act.

America does have a choice. It can afford to stay out. And at this late date, it probably will.

Early in the war, before the rise of the jihadists to dominance within the Syrian opposition, intervention might have brought down Assad and produced a decent successor government friendly to the U.S. and non-belligerent to its neighbors.

Today our only hope seems to be supporting and arming Salim Idriss, the one rebel commander who speaks in moderate, tolerant tones. But he could easily turn, or could be overwhelmed by the jihadists. As they say in the Middle East, you don’t buy allies here. It’s strictly a rental.

Israel’s successful strikes around Damascus show that a Western no-fly zone would not require a massive Libyan-style campaign to take out all Syrian air defenses. Syrian helicopters and planes could be grounded more simply with attacks on runways, depots and idle combat aircraft alone, carried out, if not by fighters, by cruise missile and other standoff weaponry.

But even that may be too much for a president who has assured his country that the tide of war is receding. At this late date, supporting proxies may be the only reasonable option left. It’s perversely self-vindicating. Wait long enough, and all other options disappear. As do red lines.

Charles Krauthammer’s email address is letters@charleskrauthammer.com.

The Washington Post Writers Group

Turkey blames world’s ‘silence’ on Syria for attacks

May 12, 2013

Turkey blames world’s ‘silence’ on Syria for attacks – Alarabiya.net English | Front Page.

( “World” = US. – JW )

Sunday, 12 May 2013
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu speaks during a joint news conference with his Jordanian counterpart Nasser Judeh in Amman May 10, 2013. (Reuters)
AFP, Berlin –

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu on Sunday blamed the world’s inaction on the Syrian conflict for the “barbarian act of terrorism” that claimed dozens of lives near the border.

“The latest attack shows how a spark transforms into a fire when the international community remains silent and the U.N. Security Council fails to act,” he said during a Berlin visit.

“It’s unacceptable for the Syrian and Turkish people to pay the price for this.”

Saturday’s twin bomb attack, which left at least 46 people dead and 100 wounded near the Syrian border, was the deadliest in Turkey in recent years.

The minister called it a breach of Turkey’s “red line” and said that “it’s time for the international community to display a common stance against the regime … immediately and without delay”.

He called for an “urgent, result-oriented diplomatic initiative” to find a solution to the Syrian crisis and added that “Turkey has the right to take any kind of measure” in response to the killings.

Davutoglu was meeting German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, who expressed his condolences for the victims of the “barbaric act of terrorism” and pledged Germany’s support for Turkey.

The Turkish minister blamed the attack on “a former Marxist organization directly connected with the regime” of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Davutoglu also said the investigation was looking at “connections between the Banias massacre … and the latest terror attack” in Turkey.

Rights groups say at least 62 civilians were killed this month in an assault on a Sunni district of Banias, a Mediterranean city in Syria, after at least 50 people were killed in the nearby village of Bayda.

Syrian conflict nears Turkey, threatening to spark ethnic upheaval

May 12, 2013

Syrian conflict nears Turkey, threatening to spark ethnic upheaval – Diplomacy & Defense – Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper.

The explosions near the Syrian border that claimed 46 lives exacerbated tensions between between locals and Syrian refugees – and among Hatay Province’s ethnic groups.

By | May.12, 2013 | 6:08 PM
Turkey Hatay Province

A woman cries during the funerals of victims of twin car bombings in the town of Reyhanli of Hatay province near the Turkish-Syrian border May 12, 2013. Photo by Reuters

Ethnic tensions among Turkey’s ethnic groups and between Turkish citizens and Syrian refugees came to a head after twin car bombings killed 46 people and wounded more than 100 in the Turkish border city of Reyhanli Saturday. The bombings occurred days before Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s planned trip to Washington Thursday to discuss with United States President Barack Obama how to prevent the Syrian civil war from undermining stability in the entire region.

Turkish citizens in Reyhanli shouted at Syrian refugees gathered to aid those wounded in the inferno of the bomb blasts Saturday, telling them to get out of town. Syrian doctors who work in the local hospital were asked to hastily return to their homes and drivers who arrived in the city with cars from Syria were asked to remove their Syrian license plates. The lethal twin blasts quickly drew hundreds of Turkish soldiers and police to the city, which straddles the Turkish-Syrian border, fearing not only an outbreak of violence against thousands of Syrian refugees, but also the eruption a sectarian war in Turkey’s Hatay Province.

The province is home to a mosaic of different ethnic groups and languages. Arabic-speaking Turkish citizens live there – both Sunni Muslims and Alawites (who are not identical to Syrian Alawites) – along with Kurds and other minorities. Together, they have lived routine lives for decades, even though some of them view the region as a “stolen” part of Syria, which Turkey annexed in 1939.

Thousands of Syrians have joined the region’s local population in the past two years, adding to the 300,000 to 350,000 Syrian refugees now living in Turkey. Local residents have claimed in Turkish media that the refugees have begun to act as if they control the area, instead of like guests. “They have eaten in restaurants without paying,” residents told Turkish media. “They have received medical care at the expense of area residents while Turkish citizens have been forced to wait and they have brought with them the social ills of Syrian society including prostitution and drug trafficking.”

The tension between the refugees and residents has thickened as Turkish citizens have accused the refugees, who have unrestricted freedom of movement, of theft and robbery, harassing women and, more fundamentally, upsetting the demographic balance of the province. Most of the refugees are Sunni Muslims, while a large portion of the province’s Turkish residents are Alawite, who in contrast with the Turkish government, support the Assad regime and have even held several demonstrations in support of the Syrian regime. Sunni Turkish citizens have claimed that the Assad regime is trying to recruit Turkish Alawites to the Syrian civil war or at least as intelligence agents to report on the movement of Syrian refugees. The result is that the tension and suspicion that characterize relations between the refugees and Turkish citizens have begun affecting relations between Turkish Alawites and Sunnis, contributing to several violent brawls between the two Turkish groups.

The Turkish reconciliation initiative with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, known by its initials as the PKK, has been recently added to this volatile brew. The plan has provoked opposition among nationalistic Turkish elements as well as Kurdish extremists. In line with the plan, armed Kurds began leaving the country, and when the process ends, negotiations will begin regarding the package of rights Turkey’s Kurds will receive to strengthen their cultural identity. This plan is perceived by nationalist groups as a Turkish surrender to terror and as “abandoning the blood that was spilled.” They do not believe it will bring peace and tranquility to the country. Within Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party, many believe these groups have an interest in undermining the country’s stability, as evidenced by the continuing terror activities. Even before Erdogan singled out “Syrian elements” or Syria’s intelligence agency, the Mukhabarat, he said someone wanted to undermine the reconciliation process and this person was responsible for the terror attacks.

In the meantime, one of Erdogan’s deputies, Besir Atalay, reported that Turkish intelligence already knows who carried out the terror attacks and that they were Turkish citizens not Syrians. This contrasts with a statement by Erdogan’s other deputy prime minister, Bulent Arınc, who stated that the identity of the attackers is still being ascertained. But it is not the identity of those who carried out the attack that is important, but who planned the attacks and why.  The finger of blame is pointed toward Syria as the party with a direct interest in exporting its own war to its neighbors, particularly Turkey and Jordan, to prove Assad’s claim that without him the entire region will go up in flames. But even if this hypothesis is correct, there are more than a few Turkish figures who want to utilize the terror attacks to promote their own political agendas. This is what concerns Erdogan, who is preparing for his trip to Washington Thursday, where he will meet with U.S. Presidents Barack Obama.

Erdogan will try to persuade Obama to expand American involvement in Syria and announce the establishment of no-fly zones on Syrian territory to aid in the creation of sanctuary areas for Syrian refugees. Only in this way, Erdogan thinks, will it be possible to return Syrian refugees from neighboring states and cool off the volcano that is about to blow in Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan. It appears that this time Erdogan will succeed in persuading Obama, given that the American administration has already recognized the need to provide military aid to the Syrian opposition and that the odds are low that an international conference will be convened to solve the crisis, as was jointly proposed by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.

Turkey says it won’t be drawn into Syria conflict

May 12, 2013

Turkey says it won’t be drawn into Syria conflict – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Erdogan insists Syria is trying to drag Turkey into conflict; vows his country will not take part in ‘bloody quagmire,’ but clarifies that ‘those who attack Turkey will be held to account’

News agencies

Published: 05.12.13, 17:43 / Israel News

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Sunday that Turkey will not fall for a “dirty scenario” and be dragged into the conflict with Syria.

Erdogan was speaking a day after twin car bombs ripped through the Turkish border town of Reyhanli, killing 46 people – an attack that Turkish officials blamed on fighters with links to Assad’s administration.

The Turkish prime minister added “we have to maintain our extreme cool-bloodedness in the face of efforts and provocations to drag us into the bloody quagmire in Syria.”
דבוטאולו. "הגיע הזמן שהעולם יפעל" (צילום: AFP)

Davutoglu (Photo: AFP)

“Those who attack Turkey will be held to account sooner or later,” he added.

According to officials, nine Turkish citizens believed to be linked to the Syrian intelligence agency, have been detained in connection with the bombings

Earlier Sunday, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said it was time for the international community to take action against Syrian President Bashar Assad, with the security risks in Turkey and Syria’s other neighbors mounting.

Syria on rejected Turkey’s allegations that it was behind two car bombs in Turkey.

 

Russia staffs Mediterranean fleet. Turkey weighs payback for Syrian bombings

May 12, 2013

Russia staffs Mediterranean fleet. Turkey weighs payback for Syrian bombings.

DEBKAfile Special Report May 12, 2013, 7:19 PM (IDT)
Russian nuclear submarine

Russian nuclear submarine

Russian Navy Admiral Viktor Chirkov said Sunday, May 12, that the process is underway for creating a permanent staff to run Russian fleet operations in the Mediterranean Sea.  Speaking at Sevastopol, the Black Sea fleet’s home port, Adm. Chirkov said a staff of 20 officers was already in place. And the Mediterranean deployment would comprise five to six warships and their service vessels as well possibly as nuclear submarines which, say our military sources, are armed with nuclear ballistic missiles.

debkafiles military sources: The new permanent deployment is the next Russian step for safeguarding Bashar Assad’s regime in Damascus and deterring military attacks on his Hizballah allies and Iranian interests in their three-way bloc.
Moscow is also announcing loud and clear that Russia is finally restoring its military presence to the Middle East in 2013 after the last Soviet squadron exited the Mediterranean in 1992.

The Russian naval step came 24 hours after two car bombs reduced to rubble the center of the Turkish town of Reyhanli near the Syrian border, killing 46 people and injuring scores. Turkish ministers at the scene Sunday openly blamed Syrian military intelligence for the attack’s planning and execution.

This raised concerns in Moscow that Ankara was preparing to deliver a serious reprisal, possibly in the form of an aerial or missile assault, on Syrian military targets.

Russian tacticians reckoned that, after Israel’s two air strikes against Assad regime targets, the Tayyip Erdogan’s government could hardly avoid direct action without appearing to be failing in courage in the eyes of the Turkish public.
Some action is doubly pressing as Prime Minister Erdogan prepares to travel to Washington to meet President Barack Obama on May 16 and present him with evidence that Assad has used chemical weapons in his war on Syrian rebels.

The Reyhanli bombings and Turkey’s potential retaliation sent a fresh wave of alarm across the Syrian neighborhood. Once again, Israeli Air Force warplanes thundered Sunday across South Lebanon and over Hizballah strongholds in the eastern Beqaa Valley near the Syrian border.
Given all these circumstances, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s chances are virtually nil of getting anywhere in his trip to the Black Sea resort of Sochi to persuade President Vladimir Putin to hold back advanced S-300 anti-air missiles from Syria. He can expect to find the Russian president driving full speed for arms deals – not just with Syria, but also with Iraq, Yemen and Sudan.
Putin clearly regards Obama’s decision to keep the US clear of military involvement in the Syrian conflict as an open gateway for a Russian military comeback to the Middle East after a 21-year absence, armed with a cornucopia of weapons for winning clients. For now, there is no stopping him, not even if Turkey or Israel were to embark themselves on military intervention.

Lebanese sources: Intense Israeli air, ground activity

May 12, 2013

DEBKAfile May 12, 2013, 4:16 PM (GMT+02:00)

( Is this the shit hitting the fan? – JW )

Various Lebanese sources report intense Israeli military activity Sunday along the Israeli-Syrian and Lebanese borders. Witnesses describe Israeli warplanes as making aerial passes over south Lebanon, ground forces moving along the Golan border with Syria and attack helicopters flying over Mts Hermon and Dov and the Shaaba Farms.

via Lebanese sources: Intense Israeli air, ground activity.

After the Damascus Attack: Ten Points to Consider

May 12, 2013

After the Damascus Attack: Ten Points to Consider – Defense Update – Military Technology & Defense News.

One week has passed since the attacks near Damascus, which according to American sources destroyed advanced Fateh-110 surface-to-surface missiles making their way from Iran to Hizbollah in Lebanon. Now that the dust has settled and it seems as if the strike was contained – there was no immediate response either from Syria or Hizbollah – one can point to some initial conclusions. Maj. General (Ret) Amos Yadlin, INSSAt the same time, it is entirely possible that we are in the midst of a greater crisis, both in terms of a belated reprisal and especially in terms of the probability that more red lines will be crossed and that further attacks could lead to an escalation on the northern border. This essay assumes, as reported in foreign sources, that the Damascus attack was carried out by Israel.

    1. For the first time in a decade Israel took action against the weapons supply route operated by Iran and Syria to Hizbollah. Until 2000, President Hafez al-Assad limited the supply of arms to Hizbollah; the most potent weapons he supplied – or allowed the Iranians to supply – were short range Katyushas. His son Bashar Assad, on the other hand, has provided Hizbollah with every form of advanced modern arms. The financing, knowledge, and training almost all hail from Tehran; some of the weapon systems are Iranian-made, others are manufactured in Syria (such as various rockets and the M-600 missiles, the Syrian version of the Fateh-110), and still others come from Russia. The weapons transported from Iran arrive by air to the Damascus international airport, and from there are shipped to Lebanon. Despite the legitimacy for Israeli action bestowed by Security Council Resolution 1701 in 2006, prohibiting the supply of weapons to Lebanon to any body other than the Lebanese government, Israel has never taken action against such shipments, apparently because of cost-benefit considerations and the understanding that the chances for escalation vis-à-vis Syria (with which Israel has shared a calm border for decades) and Hizbollah are high and do not justify the possible benefit. Still, when late in the last decade it became clear that Bashar Assad had broken every arms supply rule in the book, Israel identified four weapon systems that it sought to prevent reaching Hizbollah, even at the risk of escalation: advanced aerial defense systems, long range surface-to-surface missiles, the Yakhont shore-to-sea missile, and chemical weapons.
    2. The Israeli operation demanded impressive intelligence and operational capabilities: intelligence penetration of Iran and Hizbollah secrets and an attack on a sector protected by some of the densest and most advanced aerial defense systems in the world. At the moment it seems that Israel’s intelligence and strategic assessments about the enemy’s response were correct. The calculated risk Israel took has proved itself. It seems that Israel’s assumption that its deterrence is very strong vis-à-vis all the players, given a situation in which the Syrians, Hizbollah, and Iran have different priorities and therefore will not risk an immediate military confrontation, proved correct. Israel has also adopted the method that proved itself in 2007-8 and did not claim responsibility for the attack, leaving the Syrians plausible deniability. In addition, the targets were not Syrian assets, making it easier for the Syrians to contain the damage, and the attack did not occur on either Iranian or Lebanese territory, allowing these two actors – the weapon systems supplier and the customer – free of obligation for an immediate response.
    3. Each of these three enemies of Israel is preoccupied with more important challenges than responding to an Israeli attack. The Syrian regime is fighting for its life against the internal opposition, already in control of 50 percent of Syrian territory. In the past month, the regime has made some strides against the rebels and is managing to keep the conflict internal, in which the army has a built-in advantage over the insurgents; the regime is eager to maintain this success. External intervention and a confrontation with Israel are a danger to the regime, bearing the potential for toppling it. Hizbollah too prefers survival of the Syrian regime, which serves as a bridge to Iran and as a strategic rear. Its soldiers are fighting in Syria; opening another front with Israel is not desirable and would damage its legitimacy in Lebanon, which has suffered due to its involvement in the Hariri murder and because it dragged Lebanon into the war with Israel in 2006 and is now actively supporting Assad’s regime. Iran too will find it hard to respond, as it has never admitted supplying advanced weapons to Hizbollah. Furthermore, the survival of Assad’s regime is very important. Above all, Iran’s supreme interest is to protect its military nuclear program and maintain Hizbollah as its forward arm to respond to an attack on the nuclear facilities.
    4. Yet even if there is no immediate massive response, Hizbollah, Iran, and at times even Syria sometimes display patience, keep their account ledgers open, and choose a delayed response, preferably far from the local arena where they risk escalation and Israel has good defensive capabilities. Another type of response is deploying small terrorist organizations or executing a limited operation in the Israeli-Lebanese-Syrian sector without assuming responsibility. Israel can contain such operations and avoid a response because the Israeli action that started the cycle of retaliation was highly successful – provided the response doesn’t take a toll requiring further escalation.
    5. The Israeli attack enjoys a relatively high degree of legitimacy, from Western recognition of the move as one of self-defense (President Obama) to the Sunni world’s pleasure at the distress of the Syrian and Iranian regimes and Hizbollah. The satisfaction with the attack in the Gulf and Saudi Arabia was hard to hide, and even Egypt and Jordan sufficed themselves with pro forma denunciations and diplomatic lip service. An attack on the radical axis, no matter which component – an axis currently butchering tens of thousands of Syrian citizens – is now more legitimate than ever. Nonetheless, it is important to note that Israel has not intervened in the civil war and even indicated to Syria that it has no intention of aligning itself with the opposition to the regime. Israel did not directly damage Syrian assets, only Hizbollah and Iranian assets that pose a risk to Israel’s security.
  • The American angle: Israel did not ask for a green light from the United States before the attack. Still, the level of coordination and the strategic understandings between the two nations are profound, and there is no doubt that that each side has defined its critical interests to the other and described the causes that will require action, the limits of the action, and its own limitations. While some claim that the action was Israel’s attempt to maneuver the United States into intervening in Syria, this is without foundation. Israel acted against Iranian and Hizbollah elements in Syria posing a direct danger to Israel’s security. There is also no verification of reports that dozens of the regime’s commandos were killed or injured. Still, critics of President Obama can point to the Israeli operation as an example of an appropriate response to a red line being crossed and the weakness of the claim made by NATO and the Pentagon that the Syrian aerial defenses are significantly stronger than those of Libya or Iraq
  • The Russian angle: The Russians, not the Iranians, are the suppliers of two of the four systems defined as red lines: advanced aerial defense systems such as the SA-17 and the advanced Yakhont shore-to-sea missile. If these Russian systems, supplied to Syria on condition they would not be transferred to another end user, were to have been attacked on the Lebanese side, the Russians would have been placed in a very embarrassing position. Among the risks of attacking in Syria is the possibility that the Russians, who took an unfavorable view of the operation, will release long range aerial defenses such as the S-300 for export to Syria.
  • One objection to the recent attack is that some of the weapon systems constituting a red line are apparently already in Hizbollah hands. However, quantities matter. Hizbollah certainly does not have tens of thousands, or even thousands, of long range missiles. If at issue are several dozen or even a few hundred missiles, there is importance in reducing the number of enemy missiles to a minimum. As in Operation Pillar of Defense in Gaza, many enemy missiles are destroyed before they are launched and others are shot down by anti-missile defense systems. A large number of missiles in enemy hands allows saturation of anti-missile defense systems in Israel and provides Hizbollah more breathing room. What was destroyed in Syria will make a more extensive future confrontation with Hizbollah easier to manage. Also, the future costs of reviving the smuggling route will represent a logistical, operational, and intelligence burden for Iran and Hizbollah, thereby slowing the pace of Hizbollah force construction.
  • What is the impact on the conflict with Iran? There are two strategic schools of thought: One says “Iran first” and that all priorities and resources should be directed at this effort, including the willingness to pay strategic costs in other arenas, whereas another says “Syria and Hizbollah first,” based on the recognition that it is possible to deter Iran and demonstrate Israel’s resolve and capabilities when it comes to crossing red lines and weaken Iran’s ability to respond by attacking its allies and first line of fire. It is unclear if these broader strategic considerations were examined before the attack, but in practice, results suggest that the second school of thought has proven itself. It remains to be seen whether Iran has internalized the message of Israel’s resolve on the one hand and the weakness of its allies on the other.
  • Finally, the episode is likely not yet over, neither tactically nor strategically. In the short term, a high level of vigilance is required to watch for a closing of accounts by a limited and/or delayed response, both locally in the northern sector and abroad. Strategically, Israel’s decision makers will have to decide whether to continue taking action against Hizbollah’s acquisition of advanced critical weapon systems. When Israel considers its next operation, it will have to ask whether the strategic circumstances still allow freedom of action with little risk to Israel, or the cumulative incidents will necessarily lead to unwanted escalation. The assumption of relative freedom of action is an illusion, because freedom of action is a consumable asset. An inductive assumption – if there was no response to two incidents there will likewise be no response to future incidents – is liable to prove erroneous. There is cumulative pressure on the leaders of the other side to react. This pressure might generate a breaking point and an extended response, followed by dangerous escalation.

Reports: IAF jets fly low over southern Lebanon

May 12, 2013

Reports: IAF jets fly low over southern Lebanon – Israel News, Ynetnews.

Lebanese channel also says Israeli helicopters, patrols are observed in the area

Roi Kais

Published: 05.12.13, 14:14 / Israel News

Lebanese media reported Israeli Air Force warplanes were hovering since Sunday noon over southern Lebanon and conducting mock attacks at a low altitude. The report comes one week after Israel allegedly launched a series of airstrikes at military research facilities around Damascus from Lebanese territory.

According to the report by Lebanese news channel Al-Nashra, four F-16 jets circled low over the Lebanon-controlled territories of the Hermon Mountain, the towns of Marjeyoun and Khiam in southern Lebanon, and the western Beqaa Valley of Lebanon. It was also reported that Israeli helicopters flew over the Shebaa Farms and the Golan Heights, and that IDF patrols were also observed in the border area.

A Western intelligence source said last week that the alleged Israeli strike against several critical military facilities targeted Iranian-supplied missiles to Hezbollah.

Earlier on Sunday Syria‘s Information Minister Omran al-Zoubi has rejected Turkey’s allegations that his country was behind two car bombs that killed 43 people in Turkey and wounded dozens more. The minister told a news conference Sunday that “no one has the right to make false accusations.”

From Moscow to Damascus

May 12, 2013

Israel Hayom | From Moscow to Damascus.

Boaz Bismuth

The crisis in Syria is not going to be solved by diplomacy. In places such as Syria or Iran, diplomacy is used by unenlightened regimes as a stall tactic and as a means to enhance their survivability.

The latest understanding between Washington and Moscow, struck by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on his visit to Russia last week, should sound alarm bells among rebel groups.

While everyone agrees that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad crossed the red line a long time ago, Washington has effectively let the Russians pull Assad up precisely when he was about to rebound. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s upcoming visit to Moscow is directly related to what has been taking place in Syria. For the umpteenth time, Israel is going to try to postpone the delivery of the S-300 surface-to-air missile systems to a country that could unravel overnight. What it looks like in the aftermath of the conflict is anyone’s guess. Russia’s interests are not necessarily the West’s. Russia wants to sell military equipment as fast as possible and as much as possible.

Russia likes good customers such as Syria. This is not going to be easy for Netanyahu. Russia has been zealously protecting the Syrian regime, not only because it is its only remaining ally in the Middle East. The USSR may be gone but the crisis in Syria has reminded Russians of their past glory. This nostalgia is what has led President Vladimir Putin to pursue a Cold War foreign policy agenda when it comes to Syria. The Obama administration is not wired for war, and that is why the upcoming conference in Geneva is very likely to have zero impact, like past summits on Syria. Assad is adept at reading the tea leaves.

Had the geo-political reality been different Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan could have been instrumental by joining Netanyahu on his visit to Russia. The bombings in Hatay province in southern Turkey over the weekend have only made Ankara more angry at Assad and it is now more determined to see him go.

As mentioned, the international community is intent on holding a conference in Geneva even though the one in June 2012 was a failure and the agreed-upon political transition was never implemented. When it comes to crisis resolution, the effectiveness of military operations has historically exceeded that of international conferences many times over, despite the media hype and prestige associated with the latter. But the Russians have successfully steered the Syrian crisis to its current juncture. If it was up to Moscow, the 1999 Kosovo crisis would have been dealt with through negotiations. There is no doubt that then Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic would have approved. But ultimately war broke out and the conflict was resolved.

What’s sad about all this, besides the 80,000 that have been killed in Syria, is that both Russia and the U.S. want to give diplomacy another chance by holding this conference. Obama wants to be remembered as someone who ended wars. As such, the most he is willing to do militarily is to approve drone missions and authorize targeted killings from a base in Nevada.

The path to a resolution in Syria passes through Moscow. Policy makers in Jerusalem have realized that a long time ago. There has been an uninterrupted flow of arms from Russia to Syria all through the fighting. Moscow has also torpedoed the passage of U.N. Security Council resolutions aimed at ending the conflict. Moscow has recently noted that Assad had crossed a red line and that someone in Syria has been in overdrive mode as of late. That is why it has decided to intervene. Not because it wants Assad out, but because it wants to make sure he stays.

That is why it should not come as a surprise that Damascus has welcomed the newly struck understanding between Moscow and Washington. Assad has bought some time, and so has Iran.