Posted tagged ‘Assad’

Iran’s New Terror Base against Israel

January 22, 2015

Iran’s New Terror Base against Israel, The Gatestone InstituteYaakov Lappin, January 22, 2015

The new base in Syria gives Hezbollah the option of attacking Israel and drawing Israel’s return fire away from Lebanon, where its most precious assets are hidden: well over 100,000 rockets and missiles that might be saved for a future battle over Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

Hezbollah, exploiting its presence in Syria, has been attempting to open a new front against Israel.

Over the past 18 months, Hezbollah and its enablers from the Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps [IRGC] have begun launching a series of attacks on Israel from their new center of operations in southern Syria.

After Sunday’s air strike (attributed by the media to the Israel Air Force) that killed 12 high-ranking Hezbollah and IRGC operatives near Quneitra, Syria, along the Israeli border, Israel is bracing for the possibility of an attack by Hezbollah and Iran.

Although Israel has not officially taken responsibility for the strike, it would make sense to view the action as a preemptive move designed to remove a clear and present danger arising on Israel’s border with Syria. The danger is the formation of a second Hezbollah terrorism base, in addition to Hezbollah’s home base already in Lebanon.

The IRGC and Hezbollah have begun playing a dual role in the geographical area once known as the Syrian Arab Republic, a country that no longer exists as it appears on world maps. Iran and Hezbollah are acting as the life support machine for the shrunken but still functional Assad regime, now in control of just Damascus, Aleppo, and the Syrian Mediterranean coastline.

Since moving into Syria to rescue the regime of Bashar Al-Assad, Hezbollah, acting on orders from Iran, has expanded its presence in several areas of Syria. Iran too has boosted its presence in Syria, primarily though the presence of members of its Revolutionary Guards.

At the same time, the IRGC and Hezbollah have begun building a terrorism base in Syria that is directed against Israel, in addition to the Iranian-backed Hezbollah semi-state entity in southern Lebanon.

The new base in Syria, at Israel’s northeast border, gives Hezbollah the option of attacking Israel and drawing Israel’s return fire away from Lebanon, where its most precious assets are hidden: well over 100,000 rockets and missiles that might be saved for a future battle over Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

Hezbollah is also under domestic Lebanese pressure not to drag Lebanon into a new devastating conflict with Israel.

The Hezbollah and IRGC operatives that were targeted in Sunday’s airstrike were in the midst of significantly stepping up these attacks. Their plans included rockets and cross-border raids by terror cells. These attack plans were seriously larger in scale than past assaults.

It is in this context that Sunday’s air strike occurred.

Now, all eyes are on northern Israel to see whether Hezbollah and Iran retaliate there. The leader of the IRGC, Major General Mohammad Ali Jafari, on Tuesday threatened Israel with “devastating thunderbolts” — threats Israel cannot afford to take lightly.

896Israeli soldiers take part in a training exercise near the border with Syria, December 2013. (Image source: IDF)

It would be safe to assume, however, that Hezbollah wishes to avert the outbreak of an all-out conflict. Such a war would expose Lebanon to unprecedented Israeli firepower, and would also expose Israel to unprecedented Hezbollah rocket attacks and cross-border infiltrations by land, air and sea.

If such a conflict were to break out, many parts of southern Lebanon could lie in ruins, and Hezbollah’s many Sunni enemies in next-door Syria could seize on the weakness of their Shi’ite foes and pounce, dragging Lebanon into the Syrian war.

That kind of outcome would not benefit Hezbollah or Iran in any way. But in the Middle East, miscalculations have led to costly errors in the past, and events can take on a life of their own.

Obama’s White Flag On Assad a Gift for Iran

January 21, 2015

Obama’s White Flag On Assad a Gift for Iran, Commentary Magazine, January 21, 2015

[T]he American white flag acknowledging his continued reign of terror is more than merely an admission that he can’t be pushed out of Damascus. It must now be understood as part of a comprehensive policy that is aimed at appeasing Iran. That presents a danger not only to the oppressed people of Syria but to every other nation in the region, including both moderate Arabs and Israel, who are targets of Iran’s predatory ambition.

************************

As anyone who has heard President Obama discuss his opposition to more sanctions being placed on Iran knows, the White House is deeply disturbed at the notion of the United States doing anything to disturb those who run the Islamist regime. Thus, the news that the United States is signaling what may be the formal end of its opposition to Bashar Assad’s rule over Syria must be seen in the context of a general American push for détente with that dictator’s allies in Tehran. This is bad news for the people of Syria who are seeking an alternative to Assad’s murderous rule–other, that is, than the ISIS terrorists. But it is very good news for the Iranians who are pleased about the way the rise of ISIS has led to a de facto alliance on the ground between the U.S. and Iran’s allies Assad and Hezbollah in the effort to fight ISIS. This has led not only to a tacit green light for Assad to go on killing Syrians but also for negotiations that seemed fated to grant a Western seal of approval for Iran’s aspiration to become a threshold nuclear power.

It must be acknowledged that at this point the United States has no good options open to it on Syria. If the U.S. had acted swiftly to aid moderate opponents to the Assad regime after the Arab Spring protests began, it might have been possible to topple Assad, something that would have been a telling blow to Iran’s ambitions for regional hegemony. But President Obama was characteristically unable to make a decision about what to do about it for years despite continually running his mouth about how Assad had to go. By the time he was ready to strike—after Assad crossed a “red line” enunciated by the president about his use of chemical weapons against his own people—the moderate option looked less attractive. The president quickly backed down and punted the task of cleaning up the chemical weapons to Assad’s Russian ally.

Even worse, after Obama’s precipitate withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq and inaction on Syria led to the rise of ISIS terrorists, Washington seemed more interested in using this crisis as an excuse to make common cause with Iran than in actually fighting the Islamist group. Thus, while U.S. air attacks on ISIS have barely made a dent in the terrorists’ grip on control of much of Syria and Iraq, the administration is signaling enthusiasm for Russian and United Nations-sponsored diplomatic events that will effectively doom a framework agreed to by the West last year in Geneva by which Assad would be forced to yield power.

The administration will defend this switch as something that will aid the effort to end a war that has killed hundreds of thousands. They also justify the tacit alliance with Iran, Assad, and Hezbollah on the Syrian battlefield as the only possible option available to those who wish to combat ISIS. At this point with non-Islamist Syrian rebels effectively marginalized and the battlefield dominated by the Iran/Hezbollah/Assad alliance and their ISIS foes, forcing Assad out may no longer be an option.

But the chain of events that led to this American move to allow Assad to survive despite his crimes must now be viewed from a different perspective than merely one of Obama’s Hamlet routine on difficult issues.

The decision to gradually back away from the president’s campaign pledge to dismantle the Iranian nuclear program and to engage in negotiations aimed at granting Tehran absolution for its ambitions will, if it results in an agreement, at best make Iran a threshold nuclear power. A weak nuclear deal will further buttress Iran’s hopes for regional hegemony by which it will further threaten moderate regimes and strengthen its Hezbollah and Hamas terrorist allies.

It’s not clear yet whether the Iranians will ever sign a nuclear agreement with the U.S. or if, instead, it will continue to run out the clock on the talks. That’s something that the president’s zeal for a deal may permit because he refuses to admit failure or pressure the Iranians as Congress would like him to do by toughening sanctions in the event the talks collapse.

But what we do know now is that this administration’s Syria policy must now be viewed through the prism of its infatuation with the idea of, as the president put it last month, letting “Iran get right with the world.”

Options for getting rid of the butcher Assad may be few these days. But the American white flag acknowledging his continued reign of terror is more than merely an admission that he can’t be pushed out of Damascus. It must now be understood as part of a comprehensive policy that is aimed at appeasing Iran. That presents a danger not only to the oppressed people of Syria but to every other nation in the region, including both moderate Arabs and Israel, who are targets of Iran’s predatory ambition.

Iran denies aiding Assad in alleged nuclear project

January 12, 2015

Iran denies aiding Assad in alleged nuclear projectForeign minister says ‘ridiculous’ Der Speigel report aimed to discredit the Islamic Republic’s own program

By Marissa Newman and AFP January 12, 2015, 9:52 am

via Iran denies aiding Assad in alleged nuclear project | The Times of Israel.

 

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif speaks at a press conference in Tehran on August 31, 2014. (photo credit: AFP/Atta Kenare)

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif speaks at a press conference in Tehran on August 31, 2014. (photo credit: AFP/Atta Kenare)

 

ran on Sunday dismissed as “ridiculous” a report that it had supported Syrian President Bashar Assad in alleged efforts to construct a secret underground nuclear plant.

Germany’s Der Spiegel news magazine had reported on Friday that Assad was seeking nuclear weapons, adding that the Lebanese terror group Hezbollah, which has provided military support to Assad’s regime in the bloody conflict in Syria, has been guarding the secret project. The report said North Korean and Iranian experts were involved in the project development.

Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif rejected the report, which he said aimed to discredit the Islamic Republic’s own contested nuclear program.

“The magazine’s allegation is one of the attempts made by those circles whose life has been based on violence and fear to cloud the international community with illusion and create imaginary concerns about the Islamic Republic, and this is a ridiculous claim,” Zarif was quoted by the semi-official Fars news agency as saying.

The foreign minister also insisted, based on an Islamic edict issued by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, that “we believe that all nuclear weapons should be dismantled.”

Citing information made available by unidentified intelligence sources, Der Spiegel reported Friday that the Syrian plant was located in an inaccessible mountain region in the west of the war-ravaged country, two kilometers (1.2 miles) from the Lebanese border.

It is deep underground, near the town of Qusayr and has access to electricity and water supplies, the magazine said in a pre-released version of the story made available ahead of Saturday’s publication.

It said it had had access to “exclusive documents,” satellite photographs and intercepted conversations thanks to intelligence sources.

Western experts suspect, based on the documents, that a reactor or an enrichment plant could be the aim of the project, whose codename is “Zamzam,” Der Spiegel said.

The Syrian regime has transferred 8,000 fuel rods to the plant that had been planned for a facility at Al-Kibar, it added.

In 2007, a bombing raid on an undeclared Syrian nuclear facility at al-Kibar was widely understood to have been an Israeli strike, but it was never acknowledged by the Jewish state.

Der Spiegel said North Korean and Iranian experts are thought to be part of the “Zamzam” project.

Is Obama ready for an about-face to recognize Assad? Will Syria provide the strike force against ISIS?

December 14, 2014

Is Obama ready for an about-face to recognize Assad? Will Syria provide the strike force against ISIS?, DEBKAfile, December 14, 2014

bashar_al_assad_12.14Bashar Assad gets a new lease of life

Netanyahu will ask Washington to exercise its veto against the Palestinian motion. But the Obama administration would rather not, since it supports the Palestinians in principle.

Israel may therefore find itself this time ranged against a united US-Russian front on the Palestinian issue, Moscow’s reward for Washington lining up behind its plan for Syria.

Netanyahu told a cabinet meeting in Jerusalem Sunday, Dec. 14, that Israel would “rebuff any UN moves to set a timetable for withdrawal from territory.” He said Israel now faced a possible diplomatic offensive “to force upon us” such a withdrawal within two years.

*****************

High expectations based on unconfirmed reports swirled around Arab capitals Sunday, Dec. 14, that US President Barack Obama, in league with Moscow and Tehran, had turned his longstanding anti-Assad policy on its head. He was said to be willing to accept Bashar Assad’s rule and deem the Syrian army the backbone of the coalition force battling the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant.

If these expectations are borne out by the Obama administration, the Middle East would face another strategic upheaval: The US and Russia would be on the same side, a step toward mending the fences between them after the profound rupture over Ukraine, and the Washington-Tehran rapprochement would be expanded.

The Lebanese Hizballah and its leader, Hassan Nasrallah would be vindicated in the key role they played in buttressing President Assad in power.

But for Saudi Arabia and Israel, an Obama turnaround on Assad would be a smack in the face.

The Saudis along with most of the Gulf emirates staked massive monetary and intelligence resources in the revolution to topple the Syrian ruler.

Israel never went all-out in its support for the Syrian uprising, but focused on creating a military buffer zone under rebel rule in southern Syria, in order to keep the hostile Syrian army, Hizballah and elements of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps fighting for Assad at a distance from its northern borders with Syria and Lebanon.

If Obama goes through with accepting the Assad regime, Israel will have to write off most of its military investment in Syria. In any case, Israel’s intelligence agencies misjudged the Syrian situation from the first; until a year ago, they kept on insisting that Assad’s days were numbered.

DEBKAfile’s Arab sources single out major pointers to the approach of a reversal of Syrian policy in Washington:

1.  The resignation of Chuck Hagel as defense secretary last month. Hagel was adamant in advocating Assad’s ouster.

2.  No more than one sentence was devoted to the Syrian conflict in the Gulf Cooperation Council’s (GCC) summit’s resolutions in Doha last week, despite its centrality to inter-Arab affairs: the summit called for “a political solution” of the Syrian issue that would “ensure Syria’s security, stability and territorial integrity.”

Not a word on Assad’s removal from power.

3.  DEBKAfile’s Washington and Moscow sources report that the Syrian issue was destined to figure large in the Rome talks between US Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov Sunday, Dec. 14.

The Kremlin is making US acceptance of its plan for ending the Syrian conflict the condition for joining the US-European line on the Palestinian demand that next week’s UN Security Council session set a two-year deadline for Palestinian statehood within 1967 border. The text calls for Israeli “occupation of Palestinian territory captured in the 1967 war” to end by November 2016.

France, Britain and Germany are in efforts to draft a resolution of their own.

So any deal Kerry and Lavrov are able to finalize for a tradeoff between the Palestinian and Syria issues will be put before Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu when he meets the US secretary in Rome Monday, Dec. 15.

Netanyahu will ask Washington to exercise its veto against the Palestinian motion. But the Obama administration would rather not, since it supports the Palestinians in principle.

Israel may therefore find itself this time ranged against a united US-Russian front on the Palestinian issue, Moscow’s reward for Washington lining up behind its plan for Syria.

Moscow proposes that the Syrian opposition throw in the towel and both sides accept a truce – especially in the long battle for Aleppo – for the re-convening of the Geneva 2 peace conference in Moscow, with America’s support and participation. Provincial elections would then take place in Syria to bring the Assad government and opposition elements into collaborating in the various ruling institutions.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov spent two days in Damascus last week to work on the details of this blueprint with Bashar Assad, after which he commented tellingly that he was “in contact with our American partners.”

Russian officials then elaborated on their plan before Hizballah and opposition representatives in Turkey.

Even the US Senate bill calling for fresh sanctions against Moscow and the supply of $350 million worth of military aid to Ukraine under the Ukraine Freedom Support Act is unlikely to rock the Kerry-Lavrov Middle East boat.

President Obama is unlikely to affix his signature to the bill and President Vladimir Putin will take it in his stride if he sees progress in reaching an agreement with the United States on Syria.

Even the American threat to station medium-range nuclear missiles in Europe following Moscow’s refusal to endorse the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty failed to cast a cloud over the Kerry-Lavrov encounter.

The two top diplomats have a solid history of progress in forging diplomatic accords on thorny international issues (e.g. Iran’s nuclear program and Syria’s chemical weapons).

If they fail this time, Netanyahu’s talks with Kerry will be lighter and smoother. But if a Syria-Palestinian tradeoff is forged between the two powers, Israel may for the first time find itself on a collision course with a joint US-Russian front on the Palestinian issue.

Netanyahu told a cabinet meeting in Jerusalem Sunday, Dec. 14, that Israel would “rebuff any UN moves to set a timetable for withdrawal from territory.” He said Israel now faced a possible diplomatic offensive “to force upon us” such a withdrawal within two years.

Therefore, the Israeli air strikes against a shipment of Russian missiles for Syria for Hizballah last Monday, Dec. 8, may be seen as an act of defiance against this nascent big-power partnership. Our sources reveal that Moscow was not alone in demanding “explanations” for Israel’s “aggressive” – so too did Washington.