WarSclerotic

‘IDF More Advanced And Accurate Than Ever’ – Israel National News.

Army source reveals airstrike preparation time since 2006 dropped from half hour to two minutes, ground maneuvers key despite budget cuts.

By Kobi Finkler, Ari Yashar
First Publish: 3/25/2014, 6:49 PM

A senior IDF source discussed the encouraging advancements as well as the budget constraints of the army on Tuesday, exactly a week after an IAF airstrike hit Syrian army posts in response to an explosive placed on Israel’s border.”All of the national infrastructure is in the IDF’s scopes,” reported the source. “The army is preparing for the threats of the enemy, and for all scenarios demanding an immediate attack without time to prepare.”

Speaking about the IDF’s capabilities, the source noted “we are armed today with the most effective, advanced and, most importantly, precise weapons, that are much faster than in the past.”

“If in the (2006) Second Lebanon War a time frame of half an hour was needed to conduct an air strike to take out an immediate threat, today that time frame stands at a mere two minutes,” revealed the source.

IDF acquisitions ensure that the army will only continue to improve, according to the source.

“We are about to acquire a new cannon, which not only fires at a rate four times faster than previous cannons, but also its precision and destructive power allow the army to respond immediately to threats, and also to drastically minimize the number of fighters in the cannon battery and unit,” emphasized the IDF source.

“We’re a very effective army,” acknowledged the official. “You can compare the number of fighters under the Israeli air force’s brigadier general as opposed to the same general in Western armies to understand how effective we are.”

Despite budget cuts, ground maneuvers remain key

The senior captain subtly criticized IDF budget cuts, noting “the budget sword raised against the army forces us constantly to make creative technological solutions that can make operational activities cheaper while conserving human resources, such as in the new cannon. We’re losing every fifth person in the standing army, and that isn’t easy.”

While efforts are being made to streamline the IDF and its chain of command, the source emphasized the importance of a strong presence on the ground.

“It’s true there is accurate fire, and quality information,” noted the IDF official, “but still it’s clear that the topic of ground maneuvers was and remains the greatest preparation need in the army.”

Without controlling the ground the IDF will never win a war, reports the source. “Without the exposed chest of the regiment commander standing opposite the terrorist and killing him, we won’t be able to finish the fighting, and therefore the need for ground maneuvers is essential.”

In closing, the source noted “we need to reach a situation where the amount of time fighting is reduced to minimize the damage to the home front as much as possible. That’s our mission and we are preparing for it intensively, even in these days of resource cuts and reserve duty day cuts.”

Off Topic: Kerry to meet Abbas in Amman in last ditch effort to salvage talks – Jerusalem Post.

Abbas tells Arab League Israel would “bury” Kerry framework document; Israeli officials regret Abbas not seeking Arab world support for compromise.

By HERB KEINON, KHALED ABU TOAMEH 03/25/2014 22:29

US Secretary of State John Kerry will meet Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in Amman on Wednesday, hours after Abbas – speaking to the Arab league — dismissed as unnecessary the framework document Kerry has been toiling on for months.

Abbas, addressing a meeting of Arab heads of state in Kuwait, said in reference to Kerry’s document that was envisioned as a basis for continuing talks beyond the April 29 deadline, that the Palestinians did not need new agreements that would be “buried” by Israel through reservations and pre-conditions.

Kerry’s efforts come just days before Israel is scheduled to release on Saturday night the final batch of 26 Palestinian security prisoners it agreed to set free as part of the package enabling the nine-month talks to begin last July. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has not given any indication whether he plans to go through with that release. Some in his cabinet are calling on him not to do so until Abbas commits to continuing the talks.

Abbas claimed that the Israeli government was now trying to avoid carrying out the release, and the PA government in the West Bank accused Israel of “political blackmail” in linking the issue with extending the negotiations.

State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said Kerry, currently in Europe accompanying US President Barack Obama on a trip there, will meet Abbas to “continue to narrow the gaps between the parties.”

Israeli officials said at this stage they knew nothing of a possible Kerry meeting in Jerusalem with Netanyahu, and Psaki said only that the two men would be in touch “over the phone or video conference.”

According to Israeli officials, there have been ongoing discussions in recent days to salvage the process, and US envoy Martin Indyk has been in the area since the weekend meeting with both sides.

In his speech to the Arab leaders, however, Abbas showed no sign that he was on the verge of showing flexibility, reiterating his refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state and stating that the Palestinians want an independent state on “all the territories that were occupied in 1967.” He said that such a state should have full control on the ground, airspace, borders, water and natural resources.

He accused Israel both of foiling the US efforts to achieve peace in the Middle East, and of seeking to “perpetuate its occupation.” He also called for a just and agreed solution to the issue of Palestinian refugees.
Abbas told the Arab summit that Israel was trying to “divide” the Aksa Mosque between Muslims and Jews as is the case with the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron. He said that the Palestinians were strongly opposed to any attempt to divide the holy site. He also accused Israel of stepping up its campaign to “scrap the Arab, Islamic and Christian identity of Jerusalem.”

Abbas’ words fell on fertile ears, with the Arab League expected to draft a resolution at the end of the two day summit categorically refusing to recognize Israel as nation state of the Jewish people, and rejecting pressure on the Palestinian leadership to do so.

Arab League Secretary-General Nabil Elarabi blasted Israel as as an “apartheid system” and a final bastion of colonialism. Saudi Prince Salman bin Abdel-Aziz said Israel was working against peace with its settlement policies, as well as with its demand to recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

One Israeli government official noted the irony that, while the Arab leaders were blasting Israel publicly, “behind the scenes there is almost an unprecedented willingness among leaders in the Arab world to engage with us.”

Unwilling to give examples, the official said that among many in the region Israel is seen not as the enemy, but rather as an ally against the common enemy of Iran and radical Shia.

None of this is expressed in the Arab league, he said, partly because it is a “vehicle for consensus politics, which often needs to play to the lowest common denominator.”

The official said that among senior leaders in the Arab world there is a willingness for fair compromises by the Palestinians with Israel. “If Abbas was interested in getting cover for compromises, he would get that cover,” the official said. By the same token, he said, Abbas is interested in getting Arab League support for his inflexible positions.

Meanwhile, Economy Minister Naftali Bennett slammed the Arab League’s refusal to recognize Israel as the Jewish state and compared Abbas to former Syrian president Hafez Assad.

During a tour of the Golan Heights, the Bayit Yehudi faction head said “the Arab League today returned to the the days of Khartoum, when they ruled out peace with us. Today they are denying our right to exist in a Jewish state.”

“As I stand here at the Quneitra observation post on the Golan Heights, I can only wonder what would happen if al-Qaida terrorists were here, threatening our children,” Bennett said.

“Unfortunately, security experts who explained to us why we need to leave the Golan Heights are the same experts that tell us today to relinquish our assets for a piece of paper from the Arab League and Abu Mazen [Abbas],” he added.

“This did not happen in the Golan, and it will not happen in any part of the Land of Israel,” he vowed.

In a reference to talks Israel held with Syria in 1999, in which then-prime minister Ehud Barak discussed the possibility of an Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights in exchange for peace, Bennett referred to Abbas as “a more extreme version of the 1999 model of Assad.”

Jpost staff contributed to this report

Draft Russia-Sanctions Bill May Also Tighten Iran Penalties – Global Security Newswire.

March 25, 2014
By Diane Barnes
Global Security Newswire

A pro-Russian protester takes down a Ukrainian flag as activists storm a Ukrainian air base in western Crimea on Saturday. The House Foreign Affairs Committee on Tuesday approved a Russia-sanctions bill with language that may lead to tightened penalties against Iran’s supporters. (Dmitry Serebryakov/AFP/Getty Images)

A U.S. congressional panel on Tuesday approved a Russia-sanctions bill with language that may lead to tightened penalties against Iran’s supporters.

The House Foreign Affairs Committee passed legislation by voice vote that would aim to punish Russia’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea region, in part by tightening enforcement of a 2005 law targeting suspected proliferators to Iran, North Korea and Syria. The 2005 measure authorizes Obama to penalize foreign individuals and groups suspected of supplying any of the three nations with sensitive materials covered by one of several export-control regimes.

“Russian companies have been sanctioned in the past for proliferation to Syria and Iran,” but the State Department “has been delinquent in implementing” the 2005 legislation, says a committee summary of the bill passed on Tuesday.

The Ukraine Support Act draft would give President Obama 30 days to develop “a plan to fully implement the Iran, North Korea, and Syria Nonproliferation Act, including sanctions against Russian companies,” according to the report on the bill, introduced by panel Chairman Ed Royce (R-Calif.) and Ranking Member Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.).

A House Foreign Relations Committee spokesman did not respond to requests for details on the bill’s intended targets. But the legislation text specifically identifies Rosoboronexport, a sanctioned Russian firm accused of supplying Iran with possible components for its missile program.

Congressional efforts to ramp up Iran sanctions have taken on particular sensitivity amid multilateral negotiations on the Middle Eastern nation’s nuclear program. The United States and five other governments are seeking to address fears that Tehran’s nuclear program is geared toward arms development, and Iran has threatened to pull out of discussions in response to new sanctions in coming months.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee decided earlier in March against including a separate Iran-sanctions proposal in a Ukraine aid bill it was considering.

Obama: I’m Concerned About a Loose Nuke Being Detonated in Manhattan – The Weekly Standard.

(Oh My God. I can’t bear it any longer.
After he threatened Russia with consequences what did Putin do?
That’s right. He gave him the middle finger and went ahead.
What is the clown’s answer?
“Russia is a regional power that is threatening some of its immediate neigbors, not out of strength, but out weakness.”
I guess if someone detonates a nuke in Manhattan, it will also because that someone is weak.
What is Mr. Hope and Change  doing to prevent Iran from aquiring nukes?
Yep, killing potential sanctions, killing the Tomahawk and Hellfire missile programs and hoping that Putin is a nice boy and that he does not sabotage his negtiations with Iran.
Well, clown in chief, what if Putin because of his ‘weakness’ does exactly that?
It’s unbelievable how much this guy lives in lala land.
– Artaxes)

Romney still wrong about Russia, says Obama.

11:56 AM, Mar 25, 2014 • By DANIEL HALPER

Speaking at a brief news conference in the Hague, President Obama said he’s more worried about a loose nuke being detonated in Manhattan than he is about Russia:
 

“With respect to Mr. Romney’s assertion that Russia is our number one geopolitical foe, the truth of the matter is that America has a whole lot of challenges,” said the president.

“Russia is a regional power that is threatening some of its immediate neigbors, not out of strength, but out weakness.

“Ukraine has been a country which Russia had enormous influence for decades, since the break-up of the Soviet Union, and we have considerable influence on our neighbors, we generally don’t need to invade them in order to have a strong cooperative relationship with them. The fact that Russia felt compelled to go in militarily and laid bear these violations of internationl law indicates less influence not more.

“So my response then continues to be what I believe today, which is: Russia’s actions are a problem. They don’t pose the number one national security threat to the United States. I continue to be much more concerned when it comes to our security with the prospect of a nuclear weapon going off in Manhattan,” said Obama.

Daniel Halper is online editor of The Weekly Standard and author of the forthcoming book Clinton, Inc.: The Audacious Rebuilding of a Political Machine.

Report: Former head of al Qaeda’s network in Iran now operates in Syria – The Long War Journal.
By Thomas Joscelyn          March 25, 2014

Muhsin al Fadhli, a senior al Qaeda leader who once headed the organization’s network in Iran, relocated to Syria in mid-2013, according to a report in The Arab Times on March 21. Citing anonymous sources, the publication reports that al Fadhli has joined the Al Nusrah Front, al Qaeda’s official branch in Syria. He was apparently sent to the country after a dispute broke out between Al Nusrah and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Sham (ISIS).

Al Fadhli was one of the trusted operatives who reported back to Ayman al Zawahiri on the dispute, according to the Arab Times, and he influenced al Qaeda’s decision to eventually disown ISIS.

Today, al Fadhli reportedly recruits European Muslims to join the jihad in Syria and “trains them on how to execute terror operations in the western countries, focusing mostly on means of public transportation such as trains and airplanes.”

The Arab Times account does not identify its sources and parts of it do not ring true. For example, al Fadhli’s “four main targets” inside Syria are supposedly Bashar al Assad’s forces, the Free Syrian Army, the Islamic Front, and ISIS. However, only two of these targets make sense in the current operational environment. The Al Nusrah Front is closely cooperating with the Islamic Front, which is a coalition of several jihadist and Islamist rebel groups, and also works with the Free Syrian Army.

Still, the story makes sense in the context of other known aspects of al Qaeda’s operations.

Al Fadhli became the leader of al Qaeda’s network inside Iran after a senior al Qaeda leader known as Yasin al Suri was detained by Iranian authorities. In July 2011, the US Treasury Department identified al Suri as the head of the network, which it said operates under an agreement between the Iranian regime and al Qaeda. Several months later, in December 2011, the State Department announced a reward of $10 million for information leading to al Suri’s arrest.

This put pressure on the Iranians to shelve al Suri for a time. In February 2012, press reporting indicated that al Fadhli had replaced al Suri as al Qaeda’s chief inside Iran. And in October 2012 the Treasury Department confirmed that al Fadhli had indeed filled in for al Suri.

But earlier this year, the US government announced that al Suri had assumed his leadership role inside Iran once again. In late January, Treasury and State Department officials spoke with Al Jazeera, saying that al Suri was supporting the Al Nusrah Front from Iranian soil despite the fact that Al Nusrah is currently fighting Iran’s ally and proxies in Syria. In early February, the Treasury Department officially confirmed that al Suri has “resumed leadership of al Qaeda’s Iran-based network after being temporarily detained there in late 2011.”

With al Suri back in the game, al Qaeda had the operational freedom to deploy al Fadhli to Syria. Al Qaeda’s senior leaders dispatched trusted operatives to Syria once the dispute between Al Nusrah and ISIS became heated. Therefore, al Fadhli’s reported presence inside Syria makes sense in the context of al Qaeda’s decision to reshuffle its personnel.

The Arab Times report draws from Kuwaiti sources, who have an interest in tracking al Fadhli since he is a native of their country. In 2009, the publication accurately reported that al Fadhli was then living along the Iran-Afghanistan border.

And according to the US government, al Qaeda’s Iran-based network relies on Kuwait-based donors and facilitators, who support the Al Nusrah Front and other parts of al Qaeda’s operations. This provides even more reasons for Kuwaiti authorities to keep close tabs on al Fadhli’s movements.

Connected to high-profile terrorist plots against Western interests

If al Fadhli is indeed inside Syria and training recruits to attack the West, then this is a significant cause for concern among counterterrorism authorities.

Al Fadhli was first designated as a terrorist by the US Treasury Department in 2005. Treasury noted at the time that his dossier was extensive.

Al Fadhli has long been an elite member of al Qaeda. In early September 2001, Treasury explained, he “possibly received forewarning that US interests would be struck.” The Sept. 11 operation was compartmentalized and only select members of the network received advance notice.

The Kuwaiti al Qaeda operative has been tied to the Oct. 6, 2002 attack on the French ship MV Limburg and the Oct. 8, 2002 attack against US Marines stationed on Kuwait’s Faylaka Island. One Marine was killed during the Faylaka Island shootout. He may have also been involved in the bombing of the USS Cole on Oct. 12, 2000.

He went on to support Abu Musab al Zarqawi’s operations inside Iraq.

An al Qaeda cell responsible for the 2009 plot against Camp Arifjan, a US military installation in Kuwait, had ties to al Fadhli. That cell was broken up by Kuwaiti authorities before it could launch an attack.

And Egyptian officials have alleged that still another plot, targeting the US Embassy in Cairo and other Western interests, involved al Qaeda’s Iran-based network. The May 2013 plot was tied to a terrorist known as Dawud al Asadi, who had been in contact with the cell responsible in the months beforehand.

Dawud al Asadi is one of the aliases used by Muhsin al Fadhli, but Egyptian officials have not publicly confirmed al Asadi’s real identity. Al Asadi reportedly put members of the cell in contact with Muhammad Jamal al Kashef, a longtime subordinate to al Qaeda emir Ayman al Zawahiri, as well as with other members of Jamal’s network.

Today we Greeks celebrate our independence day.
On March 17, 1821 the Maniots (the descendants of the Spartans) were the very first to rise up in rebellion and on March 25, 1821 the revolution to liberate Greece from the Ottoman yoke was proclaimed.
Following a bloody war of independence under the motto “Liberty or death”, in 1829 Greece was the first country of the Ottoman Empire to gain its independence.
I always found inspiration in the fact that my people after almost 400 years of oppression finally fought and gained its freedom.
This story is as inspiring as the story of the return of the Jewish people to its homeland after 2000 years of exile.

To all the Greeks out there: Happy independence day.
To all the others: May this day be an inspiration in your struggle for freedom and in the defense of your liberty.

Artaxes

Saudi Arabia Moves to Confront Regional Rivals – The Weekly Standard.

Disarray in the Persian Gulf reflects White House Middle East policy.

11:49 AM, Mar 24, 2014 • By HUSSAIN ABDUL-HUSSAIN

Kuwait City
The Gulf Cooperation Council, consisting of Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, and led by Persian Gulf superpower Saudi Arabia, has fallen into disarray. After the Saudis, Emiratis, and Bahrainis withdrew their ambassadors from Qatar two weeks ago, they are planning to turn the heat up further on this GCC spoiler. In addition, they’ve also decided to raise the stakes on Iran by backing forces, like the Yemeni military and the Syrian rebels, squared off against Iranian proxies.

The view here from Kuwait City, which is hosting the 25th Annual Arab summit this week, is that without a turnaround in the White House’s Iran policy, there’s not much anyone can do to change the equation. Kuwait has tried its hand at GCC reconciliation, but the emirate often referred to as “everybody’s friend” has had little success. Saudi Arabia believes it is under existential threat with uprisings across the region threatening the status quo order and Qatar is helping to undermine it. And most dauntingly, Riyadh sees the United States reaching out to Iran for a deal that the Saudis fear will come at their expense.

If Gulf watchers believed that the appointment of 33-year-old Sheikh Tamim Al-Thani to replace his father Hamad as the emir of Qatar last June would moderate Doha’s adventurist foreign policy, those assessments have been proven wrong. Saudi Arabia is furious with Qatar for continuing to fund Islamist groups in Syria, Egypt and elsewhere since the Saudis consider the Islamists a threat to their own rule. Further, Qatar’s infamous Al-Jazeera TV has raised Saudi ire with its bombastic broadcasts and “revolutionary” overtones. Perhaps most dangerously, Qatar had tried to seek its own advantage by playing Saudi Arabia and Iran against each other. In Syria, for example, Qatar has stood with Saudi Arabia by demanding that Bashar al-Assad step down. Yet at the same time, Qatar has sponsored radical Islamists, who in turn have fought the more moderate Saudi-sponsored factions. As the U.S. designation last month of an Iranian al-Qaeda network showed, many of the al-Qaeda elements fighting in Syria have come via Iran, and many Gulf officials believe that their brutality has alienated many Syrians and reinforced the regime’s narrative depicting all rebels as terrorists. 

After several warnings to Qatar, Saudi Arabia was moving to take more aggressive steps against Doha when Kuwait intervened and attempted to mediate. In November, the emir of Kuwait, Sheikh Sabah Al-Sabah, took Sheikh Tamim Al-Thani to meet the King of Saudi Arabia Abdullah bin Abdul-Aziz Al-Saud in Riyadh, where the new Qatari emir promised the elder Saudi sovereign that Doha would fall in line behind the GCC leader. 

At first, Kuwaiti efforts bore fruit. In December, Kuwait hosted the annual GCC summit where the Saudis had hoped that the council would announce steps toward GCC unity that would bar the Iranians from encroaching on Gulf affairs. Two of the key concerns were Bahrain, where the Iranians are believed to be sponsoring the violent part of political unrest, and Yemen, where Tehran funds and trains the rebellious Houthis in the north.

Another issue was Oman, which the Obama administration had been using as a back channel to negotiate with Iran. From Riyadh’s perspective, the role that Tehran and the White House had carved out for Oman undermined Gulf unity. Kuwait’s 84-year old sovereign counseled patience and compelled Qatar’s Prince Tamim to keep his promises, which they now believe he has broken. According to sources involved in the Kuwaiti reconciliation effort, UAE’s Vice President Sheikh Mohamed bin Rashed Al-Maktoum is angered that Tamim “lied” to him.

Amidst the internal squabbling, the raging civil war in Syria, the turbulence in Egypt, Iraq, Yemen and Lebanon, and Iran’s march toward to nuclear weapons program, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Bahrain drew a line in the sand. They decided not only to cut off Qatar but also to confront Iran. The Yemeni army will receive substantial support to beat the Houthis, and so will Syria’s rebels. If the rebels cannot topple Assad, they will at least bog down his forces and strain Iranian resources in an endless war of attrition. Sympathizers with Iran or Hezbollah will lose their high-paying jobs and will be ejected from Saudi Arabia and the UAE. 

Kuwait again tried its hand with mediation as it prepared to host the Arab Summit. But this time Saudi leaders told their Kuwaiti counterparts that while they value their friendship, they were not in the mood for reconciliation with Qatar, Oman or Iraq, effectively under Iranian tutelage now thanks to the divisive sectarian policies of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki.

Therefore, Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Salman, who came to Kuwait City in December for the Gulf summit, will likely be skipping the Arab summit. UAE’s Sheikh Mohamed and Bahrain’s King Hamad bin Issa, who both participated in December, have already announced their decision not to attend. 

To avoid offending the host country and keep the Kuwaitis from losing face, the Saudis leaked through their official media that Gulf mediation would resume after the summit. However, according to sources here, there will be no rapprochement between the Saudis and the Qataris. Moreover, Riyadh is planning to further escalate against Doha by closing airspace to Qatari overflights and outbidding the Qataris in Syria and Egypt in order to shut down the Islamists—and Qatar’s adventurist regional policy.

It is against this background of internal GCC dissension that Obama will arrive in Riyadh later this week to meet King Abdullah. Sources on both sides explain that Obama will “assure” the Saudis that the alliance between the two countries remains strong, and that the administration is committed to the security of Saudi Arabia against any foreign aggression and that Riyadh should not fear that US-Iranian negotiations will come at Saudi’s expense.

Legendary Marine General James Mattis: Here’s What Happens If Iran Gets A Nuke – Business Insider.

Paul Szoldra
Mar. 20, 2014, 4:51 PM

BERKELEY, Calif. — Responding to questions following a lecture at the University of California-Berkeley on Wednesday, retired Marine Gen. James Mattis said that if Iran eventually builds a nuclear weapon, there would be “bleak options” in response, no matter who happens to be in the White House.

While Israel has long opposed an Iranian nuclear program, touting a “red line” that cannot be crossed, Mattis also offered his opinion of whether Israel would indeed launch an attack.

“Of course that’s the $64,000 question,” Mattis said. ” … Do I think Israel will act in its own best interest? Yes. Will they automatically attack? No, it’ll be a calculated decision if they do.”

If there is a diplomatic agreement reached between the U.S. and Iran, but it does not include limits to the number of nuclear centrifuges and allow U.N. the freedom to inspect the sites, then “we’ve got a problem,” Mattis said.

“To get a deal like that, you’ve got a bad deal, and that’s worse.”

In addition to the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran, the former commander of Central Command reasoned that other Arab states such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and U.A.E. would build their own nuclear weapons programs in response.

“If the Iranians come away from this with a nuclear program intact, I think there are very bleak options.”

“Americans certainly have no appetite for attack,” Mattis said, then paraphrasing Winston Churchill’s opinion of how the U.S. responds to challenges, “‘[But] once the Americans exhaust all possible alternatives, they’ll do the right thing.”

Although, he said, “Another war in that part of the world would be terrible.”

Cautious about “forecasting” exactly what would occur, the general said that economic sanctions and diplomacy can help avoid a war, “but something’s got to happen.”

Off Topic: Obama to Kill Tomahawk, Hellfire Missile Programs – The Washington Free Beacon.

(What the hell is this f..ing moron doing. At this particular point in time, when US credibility is at an alltime low, this should be the last thing the US should do. How reassuring for the US allies in the mideast. How threatening for Iran. If there was any doubt in anyone’s  mind that “all options are on the table” is a bad joke this decision should remove it. – Artaxes)

Cornerstone of U.S. Naval power eliminated under Obama budget

BY: Adam Kredo
March 24, 2014 1:23

President Barack Obama is seeking to abolish two highly successful missile programs that experts say has helped the U.S. Navy maintain military superiority for the past several decades.

The Tomahawk missile program—known as “the world’s most advanced cruise missile”—is set to be cut by $128 million under Obama’s fiscal year 2015 budget proposal and completely eliminated by fiscal year 2016, according to budget documents released by the Navy.

In addition to the monetary cuts to the program, the number of actual Tomahawk missiles acquired by the United States would drop significantly—from 196 last year to just 100 in 2015. The number will then drop to zero in 2016.

The Navy will also be forced to cancel its acquisition of the well-regarded and highly effective Hellfire missiles in 2015, according to Obama’s proposal.

The proposed elimination of these missile programs came as a shock to lawmakers and military experts, who warned ending cutting these missiles would significantly erode America’s ability to deter enemy forces.

“The administration’s proposed budget dramatically under-resources our investments in munitions and leaves the Defense Department with dangerous gaps in key areas, like Tomahawk and Hellfire missiles,” said Rep. Randy Forbes (R., Va.), a member of House Armed Services Committee.

“Increasing our investment in munitions and retaining our technological edge in research and development should be a key component of any serious defense strategy,” he said.

The U.S. Navy relied heavily on them during the 2011 military incursion into Libya, where some 220 Tomahawks were used during the fight.

Nearly 100 of these missiles are used each year on average, meaning that the sharp cuts will cause the Tomahawk stock to be completely depleted by around 2018. This is particularly concerning to defense experts because the Pentagon does not have a replacement missile ready to take the Tomahawk’s place.

“It doesn’t make sense,” said Seth Cropsey, director of the Hudson Institute’s Center for American Seapower. “This really moves the U.S. away from a position of influence and military dominance.”

Cropsey said that if someone were trying to “reduce the U.S. ability to shape events” in the world, “they couldn’t find a better way than depriving the U.S. fleet of Tomahawks. It’s breathtaking.”

The Navy has used various incarnations of the Tomahawk with great success over the past 30 years, employing them during Desert Storm and its battle zones from Iraq and Afghanistan to the Balkans.

While the military as a whole is seeing its budgets reduced and equipment scaled back, the Tomahawk cuts do not appear to be due to a lack of funds.

The administration seems to be taking the millions typically spent on the Tomahawk program and investing it in an experimental missile program that experts say will not be battle ready for at least 10 years.

“It is definitely short-sighted given the value of the Tomahawk as a workhorse,” said Mackenzie Eaglen, a former Pentagon staffer who analyzes military readiness. “The opening days of the U.S. lead-from-behind, ‘no-fly zone’ operation over Libya showcased how important this inventory of weapons is still today.”

Overall, the Navy has essentially cut in half its weapons procurement plan, impacting a wide range of tactical weapons and missiles.

Navy experts and retired officials fear that the elimination of the Tomahawk and Hellfire systems—and the lack of a battle-ready replacement—will jeopardize the U.S. Navy’s supremacy as it faces increasingly advanced militaries from North Korea to the Middle East.

The cuts are “like running a white flag up on a very tall flag pole and saying, ‘We are ready to be walked on,’” Cropsey said.

Retired Army Lt. Col. Steve Russell called the cuts to the Tomahawk program devastating for multiple reasons.

“We run a huge risk because so much of our national policy for immediate response is contingent on our national security team threatening with Tomahawk missiles,” said Russell, who is currently running for Congress.

“The very instrument we will often use and cite, we’re now cutting the program,” Russell said. “There was a finite number [of Tomahawk’s] made and they’re not being replenished.”

“If our national policy is contingent on an immediate response with these missile and we’re not replacing them, then what are we going do?” Russell asked.

North Korea, for instance, has successfully tested multi-stage rockets and other ballistic missiles in recent months. Experts say this is a sign that the Navy’s defensive capabilities will become all the more important in the Pacific in the years to come.

Meanwhile, the experimental anti-ship cruise missile meant to replace the Tomahawk program will not be battle ready for at least 10 years, according to some experts.

The Long Range Anti Ship Missile has suffered from extremely expensive development costs and has underperformed when tested.

“You have to ask yourself: An anti-ship missile is not going to be something we can drive into a cave in Tora Bora,” Russell said. “To replace it with something not needed as badly, and invest in something not even capable of passing basic tests, that causes real concern.”

The Pentagon did not return requests for comment.

In Syria: Assad may now be the greater evil – The Times of Israel.

March 23, 2014, 3:56 pm

By Ely Karmon

The U.S., European democracies, and Israel, see the Sunni jihadist in Syria as significant and immediate threat to the future of Syria as a potential basis for al-Qaeda and global jihadists. The West’s hesitation to earnestly support the rebel forces and the U.S.-Russian deal for the dismantling of the Syrian chemical arsenal, has actually given the Assad regime a free hand to quell the disunited opposition forces. At the same time, the West tends to ignore or minimize the Syrian regime’s historical record of support for terrorist forces in the region and beyond. In addition, they ignore the potential threat of the various Shia forces involved in the conflict alongside the Assad regime and strong support offered by Iran.

On March 18, four Israeli soldiers were wounded, one seriously, by a bomb that hit their jeep in the Golan Heights along the Syrian border. This major attack, the most serious since the eruption of the Syrian uprising three years ago, comes after several other similar incidents for which the Lebanese Hezbollah organization was responsible: On March 14 an explosive charge detonated near Har Dov in the vicinity of the Israel-Lebanon border (IDF tanks fired at a Hezbollah position near the border); ten days earlier, on March 4, Israeli army forces spotted several individuals attempting to plant an explosive charge near the border fence with Syria (IDF forces fired artillery shells and bullet rounds in response).

Tensions have risen in the north since the February 24 airstrike targeting a Hezbollah weapons convoy in Lebanon. Foreign reports have attributed the strike to the Israeli Air Force. Hezbollah threatened to attack Israel in retaliation.

Israeli forces responded to the March 18 blast with artillery fire and hours later by retaliatory air strikes against Syrian military sites near the city of Quneitra (an army training facility, a military headquarters and artillery batteries). The Israeli strikes killed one soldier and injured seven, according to Syrian sources. Damascus warned the strikes could further destabilize the region and warned Israel against escalating the situation.

In this author’s opinion, the latest events on the Golan border are not simply the result of Hezbollah’s desire to retaliate for the recent Israeli attacks against the convoys of Syrian strategic weapons transferred to Lebanon, but rather the consequence of the latest military successes of the Assad regime, with the critical support of Iran and its Shia proxies.

First the numbers: according to Israeli sources Shia foreign fighters operating in support of the Assad regime number at least 7,000-8,000, while Western sources evaluate them at perhaps 10,000.

The main celebrated Shia force is represented by several thousand elite Hezbollah fighters, whose numbers change from time to time. Hezbollah has probably already lost more than 500 fighters, including senior commanders.

The second important element is the Iraqi Shia units which began arriving in Syria from spring 2012 onward. Shia leaders claimed last summer there are between 3,800 and 4,700 Iraqi fighters in Syria. Their declared goal is to defend Sayyida Zaynab’s Holy Shrine (the daughter of Ali and Fatimah and the granddaughter of the Prophet Mohammed) near Damascus. This was at the beginning the pretext and cover of the Hezbollah intervention in the Syrian civil war too.

As of today there are some 14 Iraqi Shi’ite brigades (Liwa’as or Katiba’s) involved in the conflict, the most prominent of which is the Liwa’a Abu Fadl al-Abbas. Contrary to the initial allegations, some of the groups, like Liwa’a ‘Ammar Ibn Yasir (LAIY), are already operating in the Aleppo area. A second important group is Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq (League of the Righteous), formed in 2008 from a breakaway group of Muqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army, whose stated objective is “to promote the religious and political principles of the Iranian Revolution inside and beyond Iraq.” Its expeditionary force in Syria, Liwa’a Kafeel Zaynab, is closely cooperating with the Lebanese Hezbollah.

(For more detailed information on this subject see the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT) Report by K. Gilbert, The Rise of Shiʿite Militias and the Post-Arab Spring Sectarian Threat.)

In July 2013, the Badr Organization (BO) announced it had sent 1,500 fighters to Syria in the framework of an Expeditionary Force, Quwet al-Shahid Muhammed Baqir al-Sadr. The BO was originally a brigade developed with Iranian assistance in the 1980s to fight Saddam Hussein’s regime, and for a long time its leaders were based in exile in Iran. The organization has close links with the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and it has been reported that one of its senior figures has been acting on behalf of Iran to coordinate and liaise between Assad’s government and the various Iraqi militant groups operating in Syria.

The number of Iraqi volunteers could see a rise since Iran-based Grand Ayatollah Kazim al-Haeri issued a fatwa in December permitting Iraqi Shias to fight in support of Bashar al-Assad.

Iran has encouraged Iraqi Shia to fight in Syria and has played a key role in the formation, training and financing of Iraqi volunteer groups. They have been taught how to move from the insurgent tactics used in Iraq (roadside bombs, hit-and-run rocket attacks, assassinations) to the urban street-fighting required for regime operations in Syria.

In addition to the hardcore Hezbollah and Iraqi Shia fighters, there are several hundred foreign fighters from the Shia communities in Bahrain, Yemen (some 200 Houthi rebels), Kuwait (a hundred or more), Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and even some from Azerbaijan.

The vital support of Hezbollah in the capture of the strategic town of al-Qusayr on the Lebanese border in June 2013 has permitted the continuation of the fight for the control of the strategic road that links Damascus to the Alawite Coast, to Homs and Aleppo through the Qalamoun Mountains. This sustained offensive has led recently to the occupation of Yabroud, last stronghold of the rebels in the region, and the encirclement of the important Sunni town of Arsal in Lebanon, the supplier of fighters and weapons to the opposition forces in the region.

The Iraqi forces have helped the Syrian army to reoccupy much of Damascus’ southern suburbs and ease the siege on the capital. Syrian military sources announced that the army is planning to launch a new phase of military operations in a strategic area in the Damascus countryside.

At the same time, the anticipated rebel spring offensive by the new Islamic Front alliance and the FSA in southern Syria, planned by the U.S. and Saudi Arabia after the collapse of the peace talks in Geneva last month, has not materialized. Nor have the promised supplies of strategic weapons from the foreign backers arrived.

The lack of reaction by the U.S. and Europe in the face of the fierce bombings of the Syrian big cities, the advances of the regime army, as well as the perceived Western weakness during the Ukraine crisis and the success of Syria’s Russian ally, have no doubt emboldened Assad, Iran and Hezbollah.

On the political level, the Geneva II talks in mid-February failed to generate meaningful discussion of a political resolution to the conflict or to improve humanitarian conditions, as Assad’s delegation refused to discuss opposition’s transition plan. Assad has even stepped up preparations for presidential elections due to be held in June under the terms of the current constitution.

On the military level, the warming of the Golan border with Israel by using Hezbollah fighters and possibly other proxies is also a sign of the degree of self-confidence the Damascus regime and its allies have reached.

From Iran’s point of view, after achieving a strong grip on Iraq, the Damascus regime now becomes a vassal that will better serve the strategic needs of its patron. Iran thus achieves a presence on the Mediterranean coast and a direct border with Israel.

The new situation allows Iran and Hezbollah to expand to the Golan the strategy they have used in Lebanon and Gaza. As the latest attempt to transfer by ship strategic missiles to Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad has failed, the Syrian front is more suitable for this kind of war of attrition.

The new Syrian strategic set-up also serves Russia in a period where it is managing successfully, for the moment at least, the Crimean and Ukrainian crisis. The presence of the Russian fleet in Tartous seems now secure and Russian officials have recently expressed the view that Assad has practically won the war.

Syria is likely the best strategic card in the hands of the U.S. if it wants to seriously challenge President Putin’s move in Crimea.

On March 18 the U.S. suspended the operations of Syria’s embassy including its consular services and asked for the pullout of Syrian diplomats. Moscow called the move “worrying and disappointing” and the Russian Foreign Ministry suggested Washington’s actions were aimed at “regime change”.

It remains to be seen see if Washington will be able to play this card as cleverly as Moscow.

The Israeli government and military now have the difficult task of devising a strategy that deters Syria and Hezbollah from attacking the Golan and at the same time makes sure that the Syrian jihadist forces do not take control of the zone close to the border.

Israel could finally decide that the Assad regime and its alliance with Iran and Hezbollah is indeed the greater evil, and act accordingly.