Tag Archives: Assad

A Risky Alliance: The Danger of Arming Syrian Rebels

Posted on by
Reply

830_largeby Frank Spano:

Time and time again, the United States has set itself up for long-term failure in the interest of preserving short-term face. American forces fighting in Afghanistan have faced threats from training and munitions provided to the Afghan fighters in the 1980s that led to the Taliban’s rise to power. In that instance, the United States chose to arm a rebel force in an effort to defeat a Soviet invasion of a country with limited strategic importance, in order to maintain its position in the “cause du jour” of stamping out communism wherever it may exist.

Today, though the cause has changed slightly, we find ourselves ready to jump headlong into supporting the underdog in a fight to establish “a just and democratic state” in Syria. Though the long-term negative ramifications of arming the Afghan Mujahedeen were not immediately apparent, the present-day question of dumping arms into the Syrian civil war could pose immediate negative results for the United States and its interests abroad.

U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., introduced the Syria Stabilization Act of 2013 last week, calling for sanctions against supporters of the al-Assad regime, humanitarian relief for refugees, and the arming of Syrian rebel forces. Menendez, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the steps were necessary amid indications Assad used chemical weapons and because “[t]he greatest humanitarian crisis is unfolding in and around Syria.”

Assad’s forces have killed 80,000 people and displaced nearly 3 million more during the two-year-old uprising. There is growing concern he might lose control of his chemical weapons stockpiles. Those weapons likely were used against Syrian civilians. Meanwhile, the “security vacuum” within Syria has provided an unobstructed operating environment for Shia and Sunni extremists who “could in the future threaten the security of the United States and its partners.”

One group, Jhabat al-Nusra, is an immediate threat. The group, otherwise known as the Al-Nusra Front, is a primarily Sunni terrorist group with sworn allegiance to Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri. A Quilliam Foundation report on Al-Nusra indicates the group’s main objectives were decided during meetings in later 2011 and include:

1. “to establish a group including many existing jihadists, linking them together into one coherent entity,

2. To reinforce and strengthen the consciousness of the Islamist nature of the conflict,

3. To build military capacity for the group, seizing opportunities to collect weapons and train recruits, and to create safe havens by controlling physical places upon which to exercise their power,

4. To create an Islamist state in Syria, and
5. To establish a ‘Caliphate’ in Bilad al-Sham (the Levant).”

While Menendez’s proposed legislation limits American support only to opposition forces which “have been properly vetted and share common values and interests with the United States” senior members of the somewhat more conventional Free Syrian Army (FSA) describe al-Nusra as “[t]he strongest military force in the area.” Younger FSA members look to the group with reverence due to its efficiency and prowess in battle against the Syrian Army, while some even called the group “the special forces of Aleppo.” From the FSA’s perspective, al-Nusra is well-positioned to influence any successive government. Most assuredly, if al-Nusra has its way, such a government will be dominated by Shariah law and far from the democracy the United States and its allies hope to establish.

Read more at IPT

 

Why Is America Midwiving a Muslim Brotherhood-Ruled Syria?

Posted on by
4

By Andrew Bostom

Following significant military successes and diplomatic gains by Syria’s anti-Bashar Assad Sunni Muslim insurgency over recent weeks, Moscow, a key Assad regime ally, announced Tuesday 12/18/12 its preparations for an evacuation of Russian citizens living in Syria.

While the Assad regime’s ruling Alawite minority sect retained a firm hold on their indigenous base in the coastal Syrian provinces, the predominantly Sunni Muslim Syrian rebels have seized the northern and eastern border zones, near Turkey and Iraq, respectively, and dominate wide swathes of rural Syria. The continued rebel assault is even advancing on Assad’s seat of power, Damascus, near the western frontier of Lebanon, having just seized the pro-Assad Palestinian refugee camp of Yarmouk, on the southern edge of the Syrian capital.

By Wednesday, the rebels had reportedly captured at least six towns in the central Hama governorate (Latamneh, Helfaya, Kfar Naboudah, Hasraya, Tibat al-Imn, and Kfar Zita), with skirmishes erupting in the city of Hama itself. As of Friday, the Sunni insurgents were besieging Morek, an Alawite stronghold in Hama governorate, a province which contains dozens of Alawite and Christian villages among Sunni towns, igniting fears of increased sectarian violence.

During an interview with Barbara Walters on December 11, President Obama announced the U.S. would formally recognize the recently established Syrian National Coalition of Revolution and Opposition Forces (SNCROF), an umbrella group seeking to depose Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad. Mr. Obama extolled the SNCROF for its inclusiveness, allegedly being open to various ethnic and religious groups, and bonds to local councils participating in the fight against Assad’s security forces.  He opined:

At this point we have a well-organized-enough coalition — opposition coalition that is representative — that we can recognize them as the legitimate representative of Syrian people.

SNCROF

Independent analysts sympathetic to the anti-Assad forces, have concluded that the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood remains the dominant force in SNCROF, as it had been in the earlier Syrian National Council opposition front. London-based Syrian journalist Malik Al-Abdeh noted:

The Muslim Brotherhood seems to be in the dominant position … However, the West feels compelled now to legitimize the Syrian opposition in whatever guise it may take, simply because of the fast pace of events on the ground in Syria.

Andrew Tabler, cofounder and former editor-in-chief of Syria Today, maintained: “The [Muslim Brotherhood-dominated] SNC [Syrian National Council] is still a major player.” Tabler also expressed this ominous concern:

And that’s just the civil end. The armed groups within the country are not included in this coalition directly. How is that going to work?

Apropos to Tabler’s worry and concurrent with President Obama’s recognition of SNCROF on December 11, the U.S. State Department designated the Syrian jihadist group Jabhat al-Nusra a terrorist organization, amending the 2004 designation of al-Qaeda affiliate Islamic State of Iraq (AQISI), and declaring there was “sufficient factual basis” to conclude AQISI, under the guise of Jabhat al-Nusra, was operating in Syria. Justifying the designation, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland stated the group had claimed responsibility for almost 600 attacks in several cities during the past year, including homicide bombings, which had caused the deaths of “numerous innocent Syrians.” She added:

[Al Nusra] has sought to portray itself as part of the legitimate Syrian opposition while it is, in fact, an attempt by AQI [i.e., AQISI, Al-Qaeda affiliate Islamic State of Iraq] to hijack the struggles of the Syrian people for its own malign purposes.

Public Syrian denunciations of the State Department’s formal labeling of Jabhat al-Nusra as a terrorist group were swift and often fierce, running the gamut from the Syrian opposition website Sooryoon.net, and the mass vox populi demonstrations of anti-Assad Syrian civilian populations,  to the SNCROF leadership itself (including comments by SNCROF’s anti-Western, antisemitic, titular leader, Sheikh Ahmed Moaz al-Khatib).

Anticipating the State Department’s 12/11/12 designation of Jabhat al-Nusra as terrorists, Sooryoon.net had posted articles (on December 6 and 7, 2012) which recognized Jabhat Al-Nusra’s efforts in damaging Assad’s regime, while objecting to the motives of the (then) looming U.S. action. Sooryoon.net claimed the U.S. sought to blunt the burgeoning support and gratitude Jabhat Al-Nusra has garnered among the Syrians. Moreover, regarding Jabhat Al-Nusra’s avowed goal of establishing a strictly Sharia-compliant Islamic state following removal of the Assad regime, the Syrian opposition website insisted there was “nothing wrong” with this openly proclaimed aspiration, acknowledging it was shared by multitudes of Syrians, especially members of the Free Syrian Army (FSA). Sooryoon.net also warned the SNC/SNCROF leadership not to accept Jabhat Al-Nusra’s terrorist designation, while urging vigorous opposition to the U.S. action, and encouraging FSA leaders and members, and all Syrians, to declare their solidarity with Jabhat Al-Nusra. By December 11, Sooryoon.net cautioned the U.S. against intensifying its hostility toward Jabhat Al-Nusra, adding such measures would be counterproductive at any rate, and would swell the jihadist group’s popularity among the Syrian Muslim masses. The website further chastised the U.S. for allegedly missing opportunities to be effectively involved in Syria, and even forewarning that any direct U.S. commitment now would transform the country into an American graveyard.

*******

Conclusion

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her subordinate State Department advisers and minions have recklessly eschewed Wafa Sultan’s June 2005 wise, experience-based tocsin of looming calamity. The Clinton State Department also apparently never learned, or chose to ignore, the frank, unchanged truths conveyed in the State Department’s own December, 1947 assessment of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood. Ms. Clinton’s likely replacement as Secretary of State, Senator John Kerry, judging from his own uninformed statements about the parent Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, will not change America’s delusive and dangerous empowerment of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood as “policy.” Tragically, America seems hell bent on midwiving a post-Assad Muslim Botherhood-ruled Syria.

Read more at PJ Media

Andrew G.  Bostom is the author of The  Legacy of Jihad (Prometheus, 2005) and The  Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism ”  (Prometheus, November, 2008)

You can contact Dr. Bostom at info[@]andrewbostom.org

Related articles

Benghazi: Behind the scenes (Part II)

Posted on by
1

By Doug Hagmann

Author’s note: This is part two of a multi-part interview with a government insider intimately familiar with the events that took place in Benghazi. It is important to note that the information contained in this series was developed from interviews that spanned over 100 hours. In this part, the insider provides information about the events of the attack and the continuation of the cover-up at the highest levels of our government. (For Part I, please click here).

We’ve heard different accounts and different timelines concerning the attack at Benghazi. What exactly happened?

First, people must understand that the compound that was attacked was situated in a somewhat rural area and was not a consulate, but a rented villa, or a residential structure. The residence was the primary building, and what has been referred to as the annex was located about 1800 feet away as the crow flies, but just over a mile to travel by road. And again, visible security was not present as the compound was the headquarters for a covert operation. No one wanted to draw attention to what was taking place at this location.

The first indications of problems there began at least twelve-(12) hours before the first shot was even fired. One of the men at the compound observed a policeman or Libyan security officer taking photographs outside of the villa. Keep in mind that Ambassador Stevens, the point man in this Obama-sanctioned weapons running operation, was hastily scheduled to meet with the Turkish consul general at this location. The meeting was deliberately planned for dinner time, toward evening, when the events that happened next could be performed under the cover of darkness.

It’s also important to consider the location of this meeting. Tripoli is the seat of power in Libya, and a genuine diplomatic meeting could more safely have been conducted there, at the embassy. Also, what most people don’t know is that Libya is split, much like East and West Germany before the wall. The eastern part is more closely aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood, the same group that controls Egypt. The Turkish consul general had to meet there, not just with Stevens but with other factions involved in this covert operation.

Now I’ll digress for a moment. It is reasonable to ask whether the Turkish consul general was setting Stevens up for a hit, like a classic mob-style hit. First, there is no dispute that there was surveillance done at 6:30 a.m. and intermittently throughout the day. Next, consider that three hours before the first shot was fired, about 6:30 p.m. local time, some strange things were observed taking place near the compound. Military type vehicles began closing of the streets with trucks that had 50 caliber guns mounted on them. Checkpoints on the streets and at intersections were being quietly closed off around the compound. Nearby residents began going inside their homes. Anyone walking in the area got off the streets, like a scene from a movie in the Godfather series. It was obvious that the stage was being set for a strike against the compound. This alone reveals preplanning and coordination.

It’s also noteworthy to point out that the Turkish counsel general most likely passed through one or more of these checkpoints, or at least would have noticed that things were not right in the area. You must remember that just as Stevens was previously CIA working under diplomatic cover, the Turkish counsel general was his counterpart. It’s typical spy versus spy stuff.

Also consider this. One of the men stationed at the compound, a British national, left the compound at about 9:20 p.m., reportedly to get more phone cards. That’s right, phone cards, like you would buy at Walmart. Why? Because the men at the compound ran out of minutes. Just who do you think they were talking to that day to burn through the minutes, and why do you think they needed them at that exact time?

They were using the phones as a last and perhaps only line of communications to provide assessments of the strange things going on earlier. They knew that something was being planned and they were conveying that information – their observations to those who could assist them, in Tripoli and DC.

Based on these activities, it is clear that the men at the compound suspected that they were in trouble long before the first shot was ever fired. They were calling anyone who would listen, or who should have listened. We knew trouble was brewing and no one responded in any meaningful way.

Could the man who left to buy more phone cards have known what was about to take place?

Well, it’s possible, but there is no indication of that.

Was the Turkish counsel general in on this, to set Stevens up?

Well, what have we heard from our government? Has anyone even bothered to interview him? What did he say? Don’t forget, this administration decided to handle this attack as a crime and not a terrorist attack. How long did it take for the FBI to be able to access the ‘crime scene’ after the attack? More importantly, what was left at the ‘crime scene’ to examine by the FBI due to this delay? Do you think the delay was accidental?

Do you know what was discussed, or the reason for the meeting between Stevens and the Turkish consul general?

Yes, I know some key points. First, keep in mind what this arms running operation was all about. It was to topple Assad and replace him with a Muslim Brotherhood leader. It was to destabilize Syria to advance the agenda of Saudi Arabia. They were using U.S. and NATO forces to do exactly that.

However, Assad is no Gaddafi, and there is no comparison between Assad’s army and the Libyan army. It would take much more than rebels inside Syria to topple Assad. There is no way on earth that the Syrian rebels, or Free Syrian Army, has the capability to accomplish this objective alone. It required U.S. assistance, arms and training.

Now, Turkey is a NATO ally. They were assisting the Obama-Clinton-Saudi plan to funnel weapons ultimately to Syria, but the primary staging areas for these weapons were in Turkey near the Syrian border. Visual surveillance by Russia, using satellites and other means amassed photographic documentation of the U.S. assisting the ‘anti-Assad rebels’ inside Turkey. They developed evidence of the U.S. training these rebels and assisting them into Syria to fight against Assad.

Think about this. What if surveillance images observed anti-Assad rebels being trained to handle and mount chemical weapons – gas shells – onto rockets? The process would be apparent and would obviously be detected by a number of visual indicators. Obviously, Syria wanted this to stop. By extension, so did Russia.

One aspect of the weapons plan was to set up a false flag operation to make it appear that Assad used chemical weapons against his own people. Imagine the outcry from the civilized world to the news that Assad ‘gassed’ his own people. That would be an invitation to NATO and the West to openly intervene. Don’t forget about the timing of all of this. Two months before the elections, and time was running out. The job of taking out Assad was not yet complete. Such an event would quickly advance this agenda. By this time, however, being caught and placed in a rather unenviable position between Russia and the U.S., the Turkish consul general was in a ‘CYA, clean-up’ mode, assuring that none of the chemical weapons that might have still been in Libya were headed for Turkey.

It is also important to understand that the covert weapons running operation was just about finished. An estimated 40 million pounds of weapons were already shipped from Libya, and things were winding down.

There was another issue as well, a very important and telling one. Seven members of the Iranian Red Crescent had been kidnapped or snatched from the streets of Benghazi on or about July 31, 2012. Again you must understand that virtually anyone walking on the streets of Benghazi not indigenous to the area are spies. Covert operatives, operating under various covers. From all nations.

Along with the message that the weapons running operation was compromised, the Iranians had good reason to suspect that the ‘Red Crescent workers’ were snatched by the CIA or with their assistance. Iran wanted them back. They were spies, and countries want their spies back! So part of the meeting was to address this, as there was pressure by Russia against a wavering Turkey to switch sides. Anyway, you’ll see how this ties in to the way the actual attack was executed.

Read more at CFP

Douglas Hagmann is founder & director  of the Northeast Intelligence Network, and a multi-state licensed private investigative agency. Doug began using his investigative skills and training to fight terrorism and increase public awareness through his website

Related articles

Fire Wars: Arson as Terror Tactic

Posted on by
Reply

Syria’s ‘Operation Villagio Blaze’ revealed

By Kerry Patton at the Examiner:

Arson is one of the oldest tactics used by terrorists. It is a tactic often executed by less life threatening terrorist such as animal rights and environmentalists groups.  Rarely do we see the terror tactic of arson conducted by state sponsored terror groups, until today.

There are three basic forms of terror support—state sponsored, state supported, and non-state supported. Some government institutions claim terrorism is either state supported or non-state supported missing the fact that some groups have been formed and directed by countries like Iran and Syria which make them state sponsored.

The majority of domestic terrorist groups such as the Animal Liberation Front are non-state supported. They receive virtually nothing from any nation state—no support or very little support of any worth.

Groups like Al Qaeda weren’t necessarily created by a nation state nor are they necessarily directed to conduct operations per the instructions by a nation state but they often obtain support through intelligence, safe haven, or logistics which would make Al Qaeda a state supported terror group.

In today’s day and age, and with the ongoing threat of Iran and the continued bloodshed coming out of Syria, it is critical to accept that some terrorist groups are not just receiving support by nation states, but many are becoming state sponsored groups.

A state sponsored terrorist group is similar to a state supported terrorist organization merely in the fact that they receive support by a nation state. The difference though is the fact that state sponsored groups are at times created by a nation state and are often directed by a nation supporting them to conduct specific operations. Hezbollah, a Lebanese based terrorist group with global reach is in fact a state sponsored terrorist organization.

Hezbollah was created by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corp. Through Hezbollah’s charter, it is known that their supreme leader is the Ayatollah of Iran—even Hassan Nasrallah, Hezbollah’s leader, must answer to the Ayatollah.

Groups like Al Qaeda and their Shi’ite counterpart, Hezbollah, have enough support to conduct large scale operations which are often highly sophisticated and complex. They have the support needed by a nation state to procure military grade explosives, sound and executable intelligence, etc.

There are times when nation states perform clandestine operations and those operations are construed as a form of terror. Remember, “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.” When this happens, the act or tactic would still be construed as state sponsored terror. Syria is indeed a state sponsor of terrorism even though they didn’t necessarily create a known terrorist group.

In May, Doha experienced a terrorist attack which left 19 persons dead. The attack incorporated one of the most elementary yet highly successful tactics—arson. Doha’s Villagio Mall was set ablaze killing 13 children, four school teachers, and two firemen.

Al Arabiya was able to obtain highly classified cables proving the incident in Doha was actually not an accident. It was a state sponsored attack on a civilian target conducted by the Syrian regime. While this may be construed as a clandestine operation, the fact remains that it was still terrorism by all definitions.

In one of the cables obtained by Al Arabiya, Syrian Major General Dhu al-Himma Shaleesh, head of the president’s Special Security Force, named the operation “Villagio Blaze.”

It is apparent that the Syrian regime has capabilities to conduct terrorist operations throughout the Middle East far beyond their own borders. “Villagio Blaze” was an operation of retaliation and more importantly, it was an operation crossing over multiple nation borders far away from Syria.

Qatar assisted the Free Syrian Army through multiple measures which includes their financing. Through support of the Free Syrian Army, Assad and his regime targeted Qatar’s capital. If the US supported Assad’s opposition, could Assad direct similar operations inside our own homeland?

Kerry Patton, a combat disabled veteran, is the author of ‘Sociocultural Intelligence: The New Discipline of Intelligence Studies’ and the children’s book ‘American Patriotism’. You can follow him on Facebook or at kerry-patton.com/.

 

Economic Warfare Super Panel – William Scott Fire Wars: Arson as Terror Tactic

 

See also:

KAHLILI: Iran admits giving WMDs to terrorists

Posted on by
2

By Reza Kahlili:

Israel will be obliterated by chemical, microbial and nuclear bombs, Iran is warning, but those weapons of mass destruction will be used first on Tel Aviv by Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad at the start of a decades-old Muslim dream of destroying the Jewish state.

An alarming commentary last week in Mashregh, the media outlet of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, confirmed that the Islamic regime not only has WMDs but has armed its terrorist proxies with them. Mashregh speaks for the regime.

It warned Israel that if the fighting in Syria does not stop, an all-out attack on the Jewish state will be launched and that at zero hour, Tel Aviv will be the first city to be destroyed.

“The threat to retaliate against Israel with weapons of mass destruction is credible,” said Dr. Peter Vincent Pry, executive director of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security, who previously served on the House Armed Services Committee and with the CIA. “A highly credible source in 2005 warned that a decision had been made at the highest level of the Iranian government to arm numerous ballistic missiles with chemical and biological warheads to retaliate against Israel if Iran’s vital interests were endangered. The fall of [Syrian President Bashar] Assad would constitute endangerment of Iran’s vital interest.”

The commentary said that for 18 months, Israel, with all its power, has tried to reshape Islamic movements that have targeted the “Zionists” into a conflict between Muslims, with Syria at the center of its efforts.

The Mashregh column charged that Israel is behind the Syrian crisis in order to strategically change the geopolitics of the region and defeat one of the main players in the Islamic world’s “resistance front.” It warned Israel that with the direction it has chosen, “There is a dead end, and the threat of mass killing awaits.”

The commentary recalled the doctrine of the founder of the Islamic revolution, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini: “If they stand against our religion, we will stand against their world.  If all this bloodshed is to provide a better future for Israel, we will destroy their world.”

The lengthy analysis claimed that several forces are involved on both the diplomatic and military fronts to break the Syrian “resistance front.”

It cited Turkish forces on Syria’s border with that NATO country but also claimed there are American forces along the Golan Heights and in Jordan, and Saudi, Qatar and French forces at the Syrian border with Lebanon.

“Their defeat from the fronts within [Syria] and the movement of their forces on the borders are signs that the world’s Zionists have lost hope on the capability of [anti-Assad] terrorists against Syrian forces and now are looking for an opportunity to get the armed forces of others involved,” the commentary said.

A strategic look at the situation in Syria, it said, shows that in order to safeguard Damascus and Bashar Assad’s regime, it is necessary to destroy “the center responsible for these destructions, which will force the enemy to retreat.” To that end, Iran will break “the security of Israel by targeting Tel Aviv.”

The commentary, citing the weak economies in America and Europe, said that in an all-out confrontation between the “resistance front” and Israel, the West will stay out of it, not wanting to fight Syria with a military of 220,000 military personnel and 240,000 reserves, Iran’s massive forces and Hezbollah.

Should Israel and its allies succeed in unraveling Syria so the legitimate Assad regime loses control, the commentary said, there are but two scenarios:

“Groups armed with weapons of mass destruction (chemical, microbial and nuclear bombs), which have been obtained on the black market, will surely target Tel Aviv.

“Other countries with different motivations from revenge to a change in the balance of power in the region looking for the elimination of Israel from the world’s map will use the chaos created without accepting any responsibility.” (Right below this point, Mashregh put up a picture of an atomic blast.)

Read more at Washington Times

Reza Kahlili is a pseudonym for a former CIA operative in Iran’s Revolutionary Guards and author of “A Time to Betray” (Simon & Schuster, 2010). He is a fellow with EMPact America and serves on the Task Force on National and Homeland Security.

 

 

Syria According to the U.S.: Good Jihadists, Bad Jihadists

Posted on by
1

Al Qaeda in Syria

By Clare Lopez:

The Syrian revolt—and the U.S. role in it—just seem to get more confusing by the day.

The Muslim Brotherhood is fighting to oust the minority Alawite regime of the Bashar al-Assad clan. HAMAS, the Muslim Brotherhood’s terrorist off-shoot that rules Gaza, joined the fight to topple Assad. And now it is reported that Al-Qaeda fighters are bolstering the ranks of the rebellion as well.

Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey are all Sunni majority countries, and so it is understandable that they support the Muslim Brotherhood’s battle to oust what many consider a bunch of heretics (the Alawites) from Damascus. Besides, Assad is allied with the Shi’ite mullahs’ regime in Tehran that is perceived as a growing menace across the region. Al-Qaeda Fighters in Syriaand HAMAS are also Sunni outfits (even though both have acted in the past as Iranian terror allies). Sunni or Shi’a though, they all supportjihad in the way of Allah to spread Islam, destroy Israel and enforce Islamic law (sharia). They just have different ideas about who should be in charge. When they fight each other like this, in civil strife within Islam, as Sunnis and Shi’ites have for centuries, it is called fitna. So far, so good. This much is clear.

Things begin to get murky, however, when trying to understand official U.S. policy towards these not-so-very-different players: Al-Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood and Syria.

The U.S. Department of State released its 2011 Country Reports on Terrorism on July 28, 2012, and as in years past, declared Iran the leading state sponsor of terrorism and Al-Qaeda a leading terror threat to U.S. national security. Ambassador Daniel Benjamin, head of the Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism, noted with some concern at a press conference that day that, although Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is no more, Al-Qaeda affiliates have “increased their overall operational ability,” including in places like Syria.

In fact, some of the Al-Qaeda fighters now joining the Syrian uprising are the same ones their former sponsor in Damascus supported against the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq a few years ago.

Benjamin was quick to add, though, that “We believe that the number of Al-Qaeda fighters [and]  Al-Qaeda-related fighters who are in Syria is relatively small…” (Does this remind anyone of the “flickers of Al-Qaeda” in Libya in early 2011? Of course, in the end, it was precisely Al-Qaeda and its jihadist allies who toppled Muammar Qaddafi and took over the country.)

In any case, Benjamin told reporters  that “We’ve spoken with the Syrian opposition groups and warned them against allowing such fighters to infiltrate their organizations. They’ve assured us that they are being vigilant and want nothing to do with AQ or with violent extremists. And I should add that the Free Syrian Army has issued several statements urging foreign fighters to leave Syria.” OK, so that ought to take care of Al-Qaeda in Syria. They’re bad actors, but the “good” rebels have the situation under control.

Except that the ranks of the anti-Assad rebels favored by the Obama administration, many of them organized under the Turkey-based Syrian National Council (SNC), are dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood. And the Muslim Brotherhood is fighting for the same thing Al-Qaeda is: To spread Islam, destroy Israel and enforce sharia. For instance, the Muslim Brotherhood Supreme Guide, Muhammad Badi’, actually declared war (jihad) against the U.S., Israel and Arab rulers in a late September 2010 sermon.

Upon his election, the new Muslim Brotherhood president of Egypt, Mohammed Morsi, wasted no time vowing to “liberate” Jerusalem, establish ties with Iran, and recite the Brotherhood motto:

“Allah is our Objective

Muhammad is our Prophet

The Quran is our Law 

Jihad is our Way

And dying in the way of Allah is our highest aspiration”

He also promised to free Omar Abdel Rahman (the “Blind Sheikh”), who is serving a life sentence in U.S. federal prison for his role in Islamic terror plots against the World Trade Center and New York City landmarks.

But in spite of the obvious overlap between Al-Qaeda and Brotherhood objectives, the Obama administration is increasing aid to “the rebels,” providing communications training and equipment plus “some intelligence support” “to help improve … [rebel] combat effectiveness.”

The New York Times reported in July 2012 that CIA operatives were in southern Turkey to help channel weapons across the border to Syrian opposition fighters, ostensibly to “help keep weapons out of the hands of fighters allied with Al-Qaeda or other terrorist groups.” But how to tell them apart?

The Muslim Brotherhood, already closely identified with the Syrian National Council (SNC), openly announced at the beginning of this month the formation of a new militia called “The Armed Men of the Muslim Brotherhood,” whose stated objective is to “raise awareness for Islam and for jihad.”

Read more at Radical Islam

Hopeless But Not Syri-us

Posted on by
Reply

David P. Goldman aka Spengler

By  David P. Goldman

For all the blatulating out of the Obama administration and such Republican establishment figures as Sen. John McCain, Syria will remain a miserable, bloody stalemate — hopeless, but not Syri-us. And that’s as good as it’s going to get. In June, I quoted Daniel Pipes’ pronouncement that “protracted conflict in Syria offers some geopolitical advantages”:

 

It lessens the chances of Damascus starting a war with Israel or reoccupying Lebanon.

 

It increases the chances that Iranians, living under the thumb of the mullahs who are Assad’s key ally, will draw inspiration from the Syrian uprising and likewise rebel against their rulers.

 

It inspires greater Sunni Arab anger at Tehran, especially as the Islamic Republic of Iran has been providing arms, finance and technology to help repress Syrians.

 

It relieves the pressure on non-Muslims. Indicative of the new thinking, Jordanian Salafi leader Abou Mohamad Tahawi recently stated, “The Alawi and Shia coalition is currently the biggest threat to Sunnis, even more than the Israelis.”

 

It foments Middle Eastern rage at Moscow and Beijing for supporting the Assad regime. Western interests suggest staying out of the Syrian morass.

 

No-one is going to push Basher Assad out of power, at least not out of his enclave, not while he’s got Russian support and chemical weapons.

The Russians aren’t going to give up on Assad, and give NATO a chance to attempt another Libyan-style intervention.

The Iranians aren’t going to go in, because the Turks won’t let them.

The Turks aren’t going to go in, because there is massive domestic opposition to going in, and because the Turkish army doesn’t want to expose its weaknesses, and because going into Syria would open up the whole Kurdish can of worms (and also because the Saudis don’t want Turkey to go in, and Saudi Arabia is financing Turkey’s massive balance of payments deficit).

The Sunnis aren’t going to get together because they hate each other too much and are financed by different people.

In a nutshell: Nobody is going to give ground, but no-one is going to take too great a risk to conquer the other fellow’s ground. So the civil war will go on indefinitely. And that’s not the worst thing that can happen as far as American security interests are concerned.

Read more at PJMedia

Why Assad Can’t Win

Posted on by
Reply

By Ryan Mauro:

The fighting in Damascus and now Aleppo means Syrian dictator Bashar Assad can no longer hope to reclaim his country. The best he can hope for is to barricade himself inside a stronghold in the mountainous areas of the northwest and along the Mediterranean Coast.

An army defector says that 60% of the country is now under the control of the rebels called the Free Syria Army. They have captured all four border crossings on the Iraqi border and one on the Turkish border. The fighting in the capital of Damascus is nearing the Presidential Palace and it is escalating in Aleppo, the upscale city that has been one of the few areas relatively stable since the revolution began.

“Aleppo is to Syria what New York City is to the U.S.—a key financial hub, and a key crossroads for international trade,” writes James Miller. His assessment is that, “If Aleppo falls, this war is over,” because the rebels will then control Idlib Province and then take Hama and Homs.

Assad’s forces are over-stretched and over-used. Their offensives are able to defeat the rebels in battles–Damascus’ Midan District has been recaptured by the regime—but then the fight moves elsewhere. The regime simply doesn’t have the means to squash the revolution.

The military looks strong on paper with about 550,000 soldiers in total but three-fourths were confined to their barracks in order to prevent defections in February. Two-thirds of the reservists didn’t show up for duty. That was six months ago. The rebels estimate that about 50,000 of 280,000 deployed troops have defected and the regime loyalists suffer from “rampant mismanagement in the command structure.” In 2007, defense expert Anthony Cordesman stated, “Syria’s conventional forces are the impoverished stepchild of the region.” There’s no evidence they’ve been significantly upgraded in the subsequent five years.

Syrian Brigadier-General Manaf Tlas

The regime is suffering a high loss rate while rebel strength is increasing. About 150 of the regime’s troops are killed and wounded every single day. The rebels are getting new shipments of ammunition, machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades and Syrian Brigadier-General Manaf Tlas the pace of defections to their side is increasing. The most significant defection is that of Brigadier-General Manaf Tlas, a childhood friend of Assad that served in the elite Republican Guards. He is from the second-most famous Sunni family in the country and his father was part of Hafez Assad’s innermost circle.

The rebels easily have the upper hand in morale and momentum. Operation Damascus Volcano has exceeded the rebels’ expectations. The bombing of a secret meeting that killed four top regime officials, including the Defense Minister and Assef Shawkat, one of the most hated regime insiders, shook the government to its core. The fighting in Aleppo is increasing rebel morale exponentially.

Another reason that Assad cannot defeat the rebels is that Iran and Hezbollah cannot make up for the foreign aid given to the rebels by Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the U.S. and others. The Iranian regime is financially strapped due to the European oil embargo and had to cut its funding to Hezbollah by 40% in 2010, long before these latest sanctions were even agreed upon. The U.S. has convinced Iraq to stop flights to Syria from Iran which were delivering assistance and has had some success in blocking Iranian ships transiting the Suez Canal.

While it is true that Russia is assisting Assad, it is uncertain how far the Russians are willing to go. Russia cancelled its $100 million sale of the S-300 air defense system to Syria following a meeting with the Israeli Prime Minister and is now saying that Assad needs a way to leave the country in a “civilized” way.

Even if Assad were to launch a successful counter-attack that pushed the rebels back, he wouldn’t be able to eliminate them because of Turkey’s protection. Following Syria’s downing of a Turkish jet, the Turks changed their rules of engagement to consider any Syrian military asset approaching the border to be a threat that can be fired upon. Turkey just sent more anti-aircraft missiles to the border, and Syrian helicopters aren’t coming within three miles of the border. This means that Turkey has essentially created a no-go zone for the rebels that they can retreat to if necessary.

The regime has, for the first time, admitted that it possesses chemical weapons, and we know it’s a frightening amount. It says it will only use them against a foreign intervening enemy, but it’s not hard to image them being used against the rebels and the regime arguing that outside support for the rebels qualified as foreign intervention. Or it can just claim that their stocks were looted and used by terrorists. Blaming civilian casualties on the rebels is what the regime does anyway. At any rate, orders to use chemical weapons would create irresistible political pressure for an international coalition to immediately intervene and finish Assad off.

Read more at Radical Islam

Syrian Muslim Brotherhood To Form Political Party

Posted on by
2

GMBDR:

Global media is reporting that the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood intends to form a political party. According to an AFP report:

AFP Published:  07.20.12, Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood, a key opponent of President Bashar Assad’s regime, announced plans Friday to launch an Islamist political party, saying it was ready for the post-Assad era.   ‘The decision has been taken to create an Islamic party,’ the head of the Brotherhood’s political wing, Ali Beyanouni, told journalists after the group completed a four-day conference in Istanbul.   Related articels: Syria denies Assad ready to step down Rebels: Assad will be next Blast kills members of Assad’s inner circle   The new party would be ‘open to all Syrians’ and will promote a ‘democratic and pluralist’ vision of the state based on the equality of all citizens, Beyanouni said.   ‘We are ready for the post-Assad era, we have plans for the economy, the courts, politics,’ said Mulhem al-Droubi, the Brotherhood’s spokesman.   The Muslim Brotherhood is an Islamist political movement founded in Egypt in 1928 and has branches and affiliates around the world.   The Syrian Muslim Brotherhood was banned there in 1963. Many of its members fled Syria following a revolt that was violently suppressed in 1982, leaving nearly 20,000 people dead according to estimates.   Spokesman al-Droubi acknowledged the group’s current reach was limited.   ‘My opinion is that in case of free elections the Muslim Brothers wouldn’t have more than 25% of the votes,’ he said.   But the group’s leader, Mohammad Riad al-Shakfa, said the Brotherhood was still ‘present everywhere in Syria’.   The Brotherhood plays a key role in the Syrian National Council, the opposition coalition opposing Assad.

A post from last week reported that the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood had begun a two-day meeting near Istanbul to discuss how to support the Syrian uprising against the Assad government. A post from late June reported that CIA officers were operating inside Turkey using a network that includes the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood to funnel arms to the opposition. In May, a Lebanese newspaper traced the dominant role of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood in the opposition to the Assad regime. Also in May, writer and analyst John Rosenthal’s summarized the cooperation between the Obama Administration and the Syrian opposition focusing on the role of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood.

Previous posts have noted that the SNC includes at least two known members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood- Louay Safi, a leader in the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and Najib Ghadbian, a board member of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID). The relationship between the SNC and Global Muslim Brotherhood leader Youssef Qaradawi should also be noted.

In 2007, the Wall Street Journal reported on moves by the U.S. Government to reach closer relations with the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood.

For a comprehensive account of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood in 2006, go here.

UN Spins In Circles While Syria Spins Out of Control

Posted on by
Reply

Following yesterday’s attack, the location of Bashar al-Assad remains uncertain. (Ramzi Haidar – AFP/Getty Images)

By Joseph Klein

Since the uprising against President Bashar al-Assad began some 16 months ago more than 10,000 people, mostly civilians, have been killed in Syria and tens of thousands have been displaced, according to United Nations estimates.  The International Red Cross has now formally declared the conflict a civil war, which may have legal implications under the Geneva Accords for determining whether war crimes might have been committed.  However, the reality is that the conflict has been a civil war for some time between the Assad loyalists and the armed opposition.

To date, the opposition has been outgunned and splintered.  But they have now taken their fight to the heart of the Syrian capital of Damascus, with a devastating blow against the central command of the Assad regime’s repression machine.

An explosion was set off on July 18th in a national security building in Damascus, during a meeting of the government’s top security chiefs to discuss how to crush the uprising. The bombing took the lives of  President Assad’s brother-in-law, Assef Shawkat, and Gen Dawoud Rajha, the defense minister, who was the most senior Christian government official in Syria. Hassan Turkmani, a former minister of defense who headed the regime’s crisis management cell, was also killed. Others were wounded.

Liwa al-Islam (translated as “The Brigade of Islam”), a rebel group, has claimed responsibility. Another group called the Free Syrian Army, according to a report in the Washington Post, said that its loyalists had planted bombs inside a room where the top-level meeting was being held. The Free Syrian Army is made up of defected Syrian armed forces personnel, which is an expanding number.

Col. Malik Kurdi, the Free Syrian Army’s deputy commander, explained the reason for the attack:

The Free Syrian Army carried out this attack in retaliation for the massacres committed by the regime and because of the international silence.We promised that we are going to hit the regime in its most sensitive axis. This was necessary for us.

On the very same day of this attack, and shortly before the United Nations observer mandate in Syria is due to expire on July 20th, the feckless United Nations Security Council was preparing to vote on a resolution offered by the United Kingdom that was supposedly designed to up the ante to deal with the Syrian crisis. The vote was postponed for a day at the urging of UN-Arab League envoy to Syria Kofi Annan, the former UN Secretary General.

The British resolution – which in its present form is virtually certain to be vetoed by Russia and most likely by China – contains authorization for economic sanctions against the Syrian regime under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.

Russia has offered its own competing resolution that condemns all sides for the violence, repeats calls for the parties to comply with Kofi Annan’s six-point peace plan, including a cease fire and steps towards a transitional government acceptable to the Syrian people, and extends the UN observer mandate in Syria. It pointedly stays clear of any Chapter VII enforcement measures such as sanctions.

The United States, United Kingdom and France all, not surprisingly, rejected the Russian draft as insufficient.  U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice went so far as to say that it would be wrong to keep any UN observers in Syria if the Security Council will not have their back by demonstrating a willingness to take more effective action against the Assad regime such as sanctions.

This squabbling among the permanent members of the Security Council all took place before the bombing incident in Damascus that killed Assad’s brother-in-law and Syria’s current and former defense ministers. That incident is now being used as a pretext by different permanent members of the Security Council to advance their respective agendas.

The United Kingdom’s foreign minister William Hague, for example, said: “This incident, which we condemn, confirms the urgent need for a Chapter VII resolution of the UN Security Council on Syria.”

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov declared, “Adopting a resolution against this backdrop would amount to a direct support for the revolutionary movement. If we are talking about a revolution then the U.N. Security Council has no place in this.”  He also accused the West of inciting the Syrian opposition, which may well be true.

The Chinese UN Ambassador was quoted as telling the investigative blog Inner City Press that what happened in Damascus was nothing less than a “terrorist” act.

Read more at Front Page

Update: Russia, China Veto Syria Resolution at U.N. (WSJ)

Assad reportedly directs troops from tribal heartland as rebels flood capital (MSNBC)