Report: Russia canceled S-300 sale to Syria to get Israel to leave Syria alone
A report in Sunday's Times of London (which I cannot access online) claims that Prime Minister Netanyahu and Russian President Vladimir Putin made a deal last week: Israel would leave Syria alone, and in return
Russia would not sell Syria the S-300 anti-missile defense system.
Given that the report was in the Sunday Times of London, I'd say its source was likely part of the
Fantasyland of Uzi Mahnaimi. And the Israeli government has already
dismissed the report.
This is from the first link.
According to Sunday’s report, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
managed to convince Russian President Vladimir Putin of the risk such a
deal posed to regional stability and Israeli civilians, during a
meeting in the Black Sea resort of Sochi earlier this month, leading to the cancelation of the planned sale of six S-300 batteries to Bashar Assad’s regime.
In their meeting, Netanyahu reportedly warned
Putin that Moscow’s sale of the sophisticated missile defense system to
Assad could push the Middle East into war, and argued that the S-300 had
no relevance to Assad’s civil-war battles against rebel groups.
Netanyahu and his national security adviser, Yaakov Amidror, explained to Putin that planes landing or taking off from Ben Gurion International Airport outside Tel Aviv would be within the 200-kilometer (125-mile) range of the S-300 system, the report said.
“We are very much concerned about this; the large Russian community
in Israel is a major factor in our attitude to Israel, and we will not
let this happen,” the Russian official told The Sunday Times.
In return, the official said, the Russians expected Israel to
refrain from carrying out additional air strikes in Syria, like the two
the IAF reportedly conducted earlier in May, destroying shipments of
advanced Fateh-110 missiles en route via Damascus to the Lebanese terror group Hezbollah.
Deputy Foreign Minister Ze’ev Elkin, who was present at the Netanyahu-Putin meeting as a translator, on Sunday stopped short of confirming the report and refused to provide further details of
the meeting. He said however, that in the wake of the conversation
between the two leaders, he had consistently maintained that “it would
be wrong to classify the meeting as a failure.”
The Ukrainian-born Elkin told Army Radio that
Israel’s sizable population of immigrants from former Soviet Union
states was “clearly” a factor in Russian policy in the region. He noted,
however, that Russian expats in Israel have “not prevented the Russian leadership from taking stands against Israel’s security… [and] supporting Israel’s enemies in the Middle East.”
And this is from the third link.
Israeli government
officials dismissed the report. "This story is detached from reality. A
fairytale. There was no agreement or understanding achieved between
Putin and Netanyahu. That's another piece of fantasizing," one of the
officials told Ynet.
"It's likely there would be a great deal of foot-dragging by the
Russians, who would use it as a bargaining chip without following
through with the deal. Only time will tell," he said.
I don't believe there's any chance that Netanyahu agreed to stand down in the event that Syria is transferring weapons to Hezbullah. But it is possible - maybe even likely - that Syria will never get the S-300.
“It will take months
to manufacture the missiles and to assemble them into an integrated
operating system,” Ruslan Aliev, a Russian weapons researcher, told the
newspaper.
In addition, Syrian troops would have to fly to Russia to train on
the missiles because it would be impractical to send experts into the
Syrian conflict zone, he said.
According to the report, there are also doubts whether Syria,
battered by more than two years of conflict, still has the means to pay.
Heh.
Labels: Bashar al-Assad, Binyamin Netanyahu, Fateh 110, Hezbullah, S-300 missile defense system, Syria, Syrian uprising, Vladimir Putin
Inevitable: Syria accuses Israel of using depleted uranium shells
They have learned how to lie from
Lebanon and the 'Palestinians.' It's always worked for them. And therefore it was likely inevitable that as soon as Israel struck a military target in Damascus, an accusation that Israel used
depleted uranium would follow.
Israel used depleted uranium shells in the alleged strike in Syria on
Sunday, a senior Syrian military source told Russia Today on Monday.
"When
the explosion happened it felt like an earthquake, then a giant golden
mushroom of fire appeared. This tells us that Israel used depleted
uranium shells," the source said.
Depleted uranium is a byproduct of the production of enriched uranium
for use in nuclear reactors. It is 2.5 times as dense as steel, which
allows it to penetrate heavy protection. The material is known to be
toxic, but not dangerously radioactive.
...
The senior official speaking to RT downplayed the strategic importance
of the weapons targeted in the attack, saying the military losses were
"negligible" and that valuable equipment was removed from the site of
attack after a previous strike.
"The target was just an
ordinary weapons warehouse. The bombing is an ultimatum to us – it had
no strategic motivation," he was quoted by RT as saying.
A
Western intelligence source told Reuters the attack targeted "stores of Fateh-110 missiles
that were in transit from Iran to Hezbollah," while a senior Hezbollah source denied to Kuwaiti daily Alrai on Monday that the weapons targeted belonged to his organization.
Another high-ranking Syrian military source told the Times that dozens of elite troops stationed near the presidential palace in Damascus were killed in the Israel strike.
A doctor at the Syrian military’s Tishreen Hospital said there were at
least 100 dead soldiers and many dozens more wounded, the Times reported.
You don't think a senior Syrian military official would lie or something, do you?
Heh.
Labels: Bashar al-Assad, chemical weapons, Damascus, Fateh 110, Hezbullah, lies, Syria, Syrian uprising, uranium
Did Israel just tip the war against Assad?
Did Israel's massive strike on Damascus Saturday night bring about the end of the Assad regime? It may yet.
Over the weekend, Jonathan Spyer wrote a piece in the JPost in which he argued that
Assad is actually winning the war, and seems likely to be around for a long time. The article included the following.
Damascus remains a fearsome prospect for any rebel
force wishing to enter it. The regime has assembled a huge array of artillery
and missile systems on Mount Qassioun, a strategically vital area of high ground
over the city.
The regime has also entrenched its most loyal and able
fighters, including the Republican Guards, the 4th Armored Division, elements of
the Lebanese Hezbollah and the Alawite paramilitaries trained by Iran in the
city. Regime forces last week recaptured Otaiba, a town east of Damascus, which
formed a crucial link for rebels seeking to bring weaponry and ammunition from
the Jordanian border to the eastern suburbs of the capital.
Hezbollah
fighters operating on behalf of the regime in the eastern part of the country
and backed by regime air power have driven the rebels back in the Qusayr area in
central Homs province. In so doing, they have ensured that the vital Damascus-
Homs highway remains open (though with heavy losses, according to
reports).
As of now, the rebel Farouq Brigade has prevented Hezbollah’s
entry into Qusayr City, and the fighting remains intense. But the regime’s
rallying has taken place not only on the battlefields.
Assad has from the
outset possessed a clear narrative of the conflict, according to which his
regime is facing attack from an alliance of jihadi “terrorists.”
The
irony of this version of events is rich, given that the dictatorship in the
not-at-all-distant past made ample use of Sunni jihadi clients, employing them
to destabilize neighboring Iraq – where the regime allowed a steady stream of
foreign jihadis to use Damascus airport as an entry point to the region, on
their way to take part in the Sunni insurgency against the US – and Lebanon,
where the regime sponsored the Fatah al-Islam group as a tool to destabilize the
country in 2007. Nevertheless, no one has ever suspected Assad of having an
excessive sense of shame.
Do any of those names sound familiar from Sunday morning's reports? Here's Connor Simpson with a
damage assessment?
Explosions could be heard late Saturday night and into early Sunday
morning as bombs rained down on the Jamraya research centre in Syria's
capital city. An Israeli intelligence official took credit for the
attack when speaking with the AFP, and western intelligence officials pointed to Israel when speaking with Reuters, too. According to Haaretz's Barak Ravid,
the target of Saturday's attack was a "shipment of Iranian made
Fatah-110 missiles" being delivered to Hezbollah through Syria. Israel's
first attack of the weekend
was directed towards similar missiles heading for Hezbollah.
Considering Israel was targeting a shipment of powerful missiles, maybe
it isn't surprising that the videos that supposedly show the explosions
are this crazy:
Jamraya....
Where would that be?
Heavy explosions shook Damascus overnight. Amateur footage posted
online claimed to show the blasts at the Jamraya research centre, on
Mount Qassioun overlooking Damascus.
Residents told the BBC that military bases in the area had also been hit.
...
Damascus-based journalist Alaa Ebrahim told the BBC it was “the
biggest explosion” the city had seen since the conflict began two years
ago.
He said residents living near Jamraya reported feeling a “mild
earthquake” just before the blast, indicating that the rockets may have
hit an underground facility.
He added that the Syrian army was likely to have suffered major casualties in the attack.
Hmmm... And that might explain why residents of northern Israel don't really fear an attack by Bashar al-Assad
At the site of the Iron Dome battery in the
Haifa area – the exact location cannot be printed for security reasons – a small
crew of soldiers milled around. The site didn’t appear to have become a local
attraction for bystanders, as the Tel Aviv and southern Israel batteries had,
during Operation Pillar of Defense.
“People are not worried up here. They
[the Assad regime] are more worried about the rebels and too worried to go to
war with Israel. It’s not time for us to clean out the bomb shelters,” said Dror
Elmakayes, 38, an employee of a shwarma restaurant in downtown Kiryat Ata, north
of Haifa.
...
A dominant theme in the comments made by residents of the North
was that the Assad regime is weakened and in no position to respond, fully aware
that striking back would invite an Israeli attack that would end its rule in
Syria.
“They can shoot a missile or two at us, but if they do, they know
it will be the end of them.
So did Israel's attack on Damascus signal the beginning of the end of Assad? Hmmm.
Labels: Bashar al-Assad, chemical weapons, Fateh 110, Free Syrian Army, Hezbullah, Syria, Syrian uprising
Syria points missiles at Israel
Is a war with Israel the distraction that Bashar al-Assad needs to stay in power? It seems that he's looking for one. Assad has now pointed missile batteries at Israel and his information minister says that Israeli attacks on the outskirts of Damascus "
open the door to all possibilities."
The minister's comments at a press conference came after an emergency
cabinet meeting organized to respond to what a Western source said was a
new strike on Iranian missiles bound for Lebanon's Hezbollah.
Although
Zoabi did not hint at a concrete course of action, he said it was
Damascus's duty to protect the state from any "domestic or foreign
attack through all available means."
...
Earlier on Sunday, Syria's Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal al Mekdad
told CNN that Israel's air strikes in the country were interpreted as an
Israeli "declaration of war" on the Assad regime.
In an interview with CNN, Faisal said that Syria would respond in a manner of its own time and choosing.
Syria's state television said the strikes were a response to recent military gains by Assad's forces against rebels.
"The
new Israeli attack is an attempt to raise the morale of the terrorist
groups which have been reeling from strikes by our noble army," it said.
That last remark sounds like Ehud Barak's 'we will know how to respond' - a total and complete bluff from a party that knows it cannot or will not do anything.
Hmmm.
Labels: Bashar al-Assad, chemical weapons, Fateh 110, Golan Heights, Hezbullah, Syria, Syrian uprising
Syria explodes
Here's Soccer Dad's Middle East Media Sampler for Sunday, May 5.
Syria Explodes
Legal Insurrection (and many others) has previously reported on two Israeli strikes: one against Hezbollah and one against Syria.
What's going on?
Classic thing about the strike on Damascus is how it will
be spun by Assad. He'll argue it's "PROOF" he's facing a
takfiri-Zionist alliance.
— Phillip Smyth (@PhillipSmyth) May 5, 2013
Almost every free Syrian on my timeline is cheering for #Israel air raids on Assad targets. Anybody else getting a different vibe? #Syria
— Hussain AbdulHussain (@hahussain) May 5, 2013
After the first attack Israel was insistent that it had not entered Syrian airspace. Whatever considerations were in play then, were, apparently, no longer operational by Sunday.
The Washington Post reports Syrian report: Israel bombs outskirts of Damascus for second time in recent days:
The official Syrian Arab News Agency said that a scientific research
facility had been struck by an Israeli missile, and a banner displayed
on state television said the attack was intended to relieve pressure on
rebel forces in the embattled eastern suburbs. The banner was
accompanied by martial music and footage of Syrian soldiers marching,
descending from helicopters and firing rockets, indicating that Syria
may not shrug off the assault, as it has with some Israeli strikes in
the past.
“The Israeli aggression comes at a time when our armed forces are
scoring victories against terrorism and al-Qaeda gangs,” state
television said.
A subsequent video suggested further strikes were taking place in the same location, although the number was unclear.
The New York Times reports Israel Targeted Iranian Missiles In Syria Attack:
If true, it would be the second Israeli airstrike in Syria in two days and the third this year.
The airstrike that Israeli warplanes carried out in Syria overnight on
Thursday was directed at a shipment of advanced surface-to-surface
missiles from Iran that Israel believed was intended for Hezbollah,
American officials said Saturday. That strike was aimed at disrupting
the arms pipeline that runs from Iran via Syria to Hezbollah, the
militant Lebanese organization, and it highlighted the mounting stakes
for Hezbollah and Israel as Syria becomes more chaotic.
Iran and Hezbollah have both backed President Bashar al-Assad in the
Syrian civil war, now in its third year. But as fighting in Syria
escalates, they also have a powerful interest in expediting the delivery
of advanced weapons to Hezbollah in case Mr. Assad loses his grip on
power and Syria ceases to be an effective channel for funneling weapons
from Iran.
Israel has apparently been silent officially except to talk about the strikes in the most general terms.
Everything I'm seeing from Israeli outlets citing foreign
sources. A common line, but also an indication officials are staying
tight-lipped.
— Avi Mayer (@avimayer) May 5, 2013
I have confidence in the State of Israel's power; I am
confident of the Israel Defense Forces; I believe in you, the citizens
of Israel.
— Benjamin Netanyahu (@netanyahu) April 8, 2013
Back in February, Tony Badran reported on the contours of a secret war that Israel was carrying out against Iran.
At a conference in Jerusalem on Monday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu made clear that Israel would not allow “chemical and
strategic” weapons from Syria to reach Hezbollah. Netanyahu’s concern
over strategic weapons in the hands of Israel's enemies is well-founded.
Since the 2006 war, Iran has aggressively moved to bolster the
capabilities of Hezbollah in Lebanon, as well as those of its allies in
Gaza. This effort has centered primarily, though by no means
exclusively, around supplying Tehran’s assets with long-range rockets
and ballistic missiles. The deployment of these weapons in Lebanon and
Gaza would enable Iran, through Hezbollah, Hamas, and Palestinian
Islamic Jihad, to strike at any city in Israel, not to mention its
infrastructure and sensitive facilities, including offshore gas
platforms.
...
According to Hezbollah lore, senior Iranian, Syrian, and Hezbollah
leaders made a decision following the 2006 war to focus on developing
their missile and long-range rocket capabilities. They also decided to
implement these measures in Gaza. As Qassem Qassir chronicled in a story
last year, Hezbollah’s military commander, Imad Mughniyeh was at the
heart of this effort, in partnership with Syrian and Palestinian
military officials. Behind it all, of course, stood Iran.
Once this strategy became apparent to Israeli intelligence, it began
targeting this Iranian network of strategic weapons transfers, assembly
and distribution centers, and the top people running the operation. The
spate of assassinated Iranian, Syrian, Hezbollah, and Hamas commanders
since 2008 were directly involved in the Iranian network supplying
strategic weapons to Tehran's assets in the Levant.
Simon Shapira argues that there's more going on here than a growing threat to Israel. Rather it reflects Iran’s Plans to Take Over Syria. (This article was published May 2, before the Israeli strikes.):
It appears that Hizbullah’s ongoing involvement in Syria, and the extent
of this involvement, formed the main issue on the agenda during
Nasrallah’s visit to Tehran. The more time passes, the more Iran appears
to regard Syria as a lynchpin of its Middle Eastern policy, in general,
and of leading the jihad and the Islamic resistance to Israel, in
particular. Hizbullah’s inclusion in the armed struggle in Syria is
intended first and foremost to serve the Iranian strategy, which has
been setting new goals apart from military assistance to the Syrian
regime. Iran already seems to be looking beyond the regime’s
survivability and preparing for a reality where it will have to operate
in Syria even if Assad falls. Even before recent events in Syria,
observers in the Arab world have been warning for years about growing
evidence of “Iranian expansionism.”5
An important expression of Syria’s centrality in Iranian strategy was
voiced by Mehdi Taaib, who heads Khamenei’s think tank. He recently
stated that “Syria is the 35th district of Iran and it has greater
strategic importance for Iran than Khuzestan [an Arab-populated district
inside Iran]. By preserving Syria we will be able to get back
Khuzestan, but if we lose Syria we will not even be able to keep
Tehran.”6 Significantly, Taaib was drawing a comparison between Syria
and a district that is under full Iranian sovereignty. What was also
clear from his remarks was that Iran cannot afford to lose Syria.
The Tower has a similar take.
U.S. and Israel's national security interests do not
align on Syria. Expect more "unilateral" action when it comes to first
strike weapons.
— Michael Ross (@mrossletters) May 5, 2013
As noted Iranian missiles have been the targets of the Israeli attacks.
Also of concern to Israel are chemical weapons. Apparently Syrian
chemical weapons are of concern too. Elie Lake reports:
The judgment comes from top U.S. military commanders and is supported by
recent intelligence community assessments, according to three U.S.
officials who work closely on Syrian intelligence matters. At the heart
of the concern is that the Syrian military has transferred more and more
of its stock of sarin and mustard gas from storage sites to trucks
where they are being moved around the country. While U.S. intelligence
agencies first saw reports that Syria was moving the weapons last year,
the process has accelerated since December, according to these
officials. Also worrisome, said two of the officials, is intelligence
from late last year that says the Syrian Scientific Research Center—an
entity responsible for Syria’s chemical-weapons stockpile—has begun to
train irregular militias loyal to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in
how to use the chemical munitions.
The assessment that Syria is moving large amounts of its chemical
weapons around the country on trucks means that if Obama wanted to send
in U.S. soldiers to secure Syria’s stockpiles, his top generals and
intelligence analysts doubt such a mission would have much success,
according to the three officials. “We’ve lost track of lots of this
stuff,” one U.S. official told The Daily Beast. “We just don’t know
where a lot of it is.”
The large-scale movement of weapons, if it is in fact occurring, would
violate one of Obama’s earliest declared red lines concerning Syria.
Last August he said, “We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but
also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is, we start
seeing a whole bunch of weapons moving around or being utilized.”
It appears more and more that Syria has crossed President Obama's red
lines without an American response. After the first Israeli strikes, the
New York Times reported in Off-the-Cuff Obama Line Put U.S. in Bind on Syria:
The evolution of the “red line” and the nine months that followed
underscore the improvisational nature of Mr. Obama’s approach to one of
the most vexing crises in the world, all the more striking for a
president who relishes precision. Palpably reluctant to become entangled
in another war in the Middle East, and well aware that most Americans
oppose military action, the president has deliberately not explained
what his “red line” actually is or how it would change his calculus.
“I’m not convinced it was thought through,” said Barry Pavel, a former
defense policy adviser to Mr. Obama who is now at the Atlantic Council.
“I’m worried about the broader damage to U.S. credibility if we make a
statement and then come back with lawyerly language to get around it.”
While Mr. Pavel favors a more active response to the killings in Syria,
others worry that Mr. Obama may have trapped himself into going too far.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, a national security adviser under President Jimmy
Carter, told Bloomberg Television that military involvement in Syria
would risk “a large-scale disaster for the United States.”
Still President Obama supported Israel's right to defend itself. The Tower notes:
President Barack Obama today reiterated support for actions that Israel is taking to maintain its long-established red line
against the transfer of Syrian advanced weapons to terrorist groups.
His statements were in reference to reports that Israel on Friday struck a Syrian missile shipment. They come amid reports that Jerusalem on Sunday conducted additional strikes against Syrian military infrastructure.
The Sunday strikes reportedly targeted Iranian weapons bound for the Iran-backed, Lebanese-based terror group Hezbollah. An American official
told the New York Times that the weapons were Iranian-made
surface-to-surface Fateh-110 missiles. Fateh-110′s are mobile, highly
accurate, solid-fuel missiles that have sufficient range to strike deep
into Israel from southern Lebanon, including into Tel Aviv.
The Israelis have long maintained that Jerusalem would act to prevent
either the transfer of advanced weapons to allies of the embattled
Bashar al-Assad regime or the seizure of those weapons by opposition
groups seeking the regime’s overthrow.
Without commenting on the credibility of reports linking Israel to
Friday’s strikes, Obama emphasized that such strikes are justified.
By the way, there's still a civil war going on in Syria.
Elsewhere in #Syria: 77 reportedly killed in Baniyas, a day after 72 died in al-Bayda. bbc.in/15glmyu
— Jim Roberts (@nycjim) May 5, 2013
In other Syria news, the Syrian Network for Human Rights
puts the toll of the Ras Al-Nabaa killings at 160. Among 291 deaths
today.
— Liz Sly (@LizSly) May 5, 2013
Labels: Bashar al-Assad, chemical weapons, Fateh 110, Free Syrian Army, Golan Heights, Hezbullah, IAF, Iran, Syria, Syrian uprising
As Assad controls chem weapons, Israel attacks Fateh 110 missiles headed for Hezbullah
Both Thursday night's and Saturday night's IAF attacks on Syria targeted Fateh 110 missiles, according to a '
Western intelligence source.' The Fateh 110 has a
range of 200-300 kilometers, and is manufactured in Iran. There are several variations of the Fateh missile. Here is a chart that summarizes them.
In 2006, Israel took out Hezbullah's Fateh 110's during the early part of the Second Lebanon War. 300 kilometers is enough range to reach anywhere in Israel.
Israel has even gone so far as to say that
Hezbullah has no interest in Syria's chemical weapons and that Bashar al-Assad retains control over them. Someone ought to
tell the Obama administration (Hat Tip:
Memeorandum). Israel is after the game-changing Fateh's and not the chemical weapons. This is from the first link in this paragraph:
Defence Ministry strategist Amos Gilad spoke after another Israeli
official said Israel had sent warplanes on Friday to attack a
Hezbollah-bound missile shipment in Syria, where Assad is battling a
more than two-year-old insurgency.
Israel has long made clear it is prepared to resort to force to prevent
advanced Syrian weapons reaching Hezbollah or jihadi rebels. In late
January, regional sources said Israel destroyed a convoy carrying Syrian
anti-aircraft missiles to Hezbollah.
Gilad said Assad had huge quantities of chemical weapons, missiles and
rockets. "The good news is that this is under full control (of the
Syrian government)," he said in a speech.
"Nor is a group like Hezbollah ... keen to take this (chemical)
weaponry. It is keen to take weapon systems, like rockets that can
reach, say, all the way here," added Gilad, who was speaking in the
southern Israeli city of Beersheba.
...
Gilad suggested that Hezbollah, unlike a regular military, may not be equipped to handle chemical weapons.
"There is a problem with chemical weaponry. It can also kill those who
don't know how to use it. It is not a sympathetic thing. So, for now it
is under control. It is very important that it is under control," Gilad
said.
The target of Sunday's attack, according to Syrian media, was the
same Jamraya military research center which was hit by Israel in
January. Jamraya, on the northern approaches to Damascus, is just 15 km
(10 miles) from the Lebanese border.
The Western intelligence
source said Israel carried out the attack and the operation hit
Iranian-supplied missiles which were en route to Hezbollah.
"In
last night's attack, as in the previous one, what was attacked were
stores of Fateh-110 missiles that were in transit from Iran to
Hezbollah," the source said.
...
The British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the scale
of the attack meant it was beyond the military capability of Syrian
rebels, and quoted eyewitnesses in the area as saying they saw jets in
the sky at the time of the blasts.
The Observatory said the blasts
hit Jamraya as well as a nearby ammunition depot. Other activists said a
missile brigade and two Republican Guard battalions may also have been
targeted in the heavily militarised area just north of Damascus.
And you thought Israel would only go after the chemical weapons. We're not as dumb as Obama.
Labels: Bashar al-Assad, chemical weapons, Fateh 110, Free Syrian Army, IAF, Syria
Syria and Hezbullah say they'll compete to hit Tel Aviv first
'In case' of war, Syria and Hezbullah have announced that they will compete to see
who can hit Tel Aviv first.
If war breaks out between Israel, Syria, and Hezbollah, Syrian President Bashar Assad's regime will "play powerful cards" in south Lebanon and will not hesitate to respond, senior security officials in Syria said, according to the Kuwaiti newspaper Al Rai.
According to the officials, in case of war with Israel, Syria and Hezbollah will compete with each other over who will fire the first Scud or Fateh missile at Tel Aviv.
The Syrian officials also warned that the deteriorating security situation in Syria and damage to the country's stability may also have an effect on the situation in Iraq, Jordan, and Lebanon.
I think that the IDF should let its pilots compete over whether Beirut or Damascus will be turned to rubble first. Heh.
Labels: Fateh 110, Hezbullah, scud missiles, Syria
Syria provides ballistic missiles to Hezbullah, Clinton issues stern warning
One of the main things the Wikileaks document dump shows is how the US position in international affairs has deteriorated.
In February of this year, the US discovered that Syria was transferring 'new' ballistic missiles to Hezbullah. Syria agreed to stop doing so, but one week later, the US discovered that the transfers were continuing. The reaction? Secretary of State Clinton issued a stern warning to the Syrians. Smart diplomacy? No.
Totally ineffective diplomacy.
Just a week after President Bashar al-Assad of Syria assured a top State Department official that his government was not sending sophisticated weapons to Hezbollah, the Obama administration lodged a confidential protest accusing Syria of doing precisely what it had denied doing.
“In our meetings last week it was stated that Syria is not transferring any ‘new’ missiles to Lebanese Hizballah,” noted a cable sent by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton in February, using an alternative spelling for the militant group. “We are aware, however, of current Syrian efforts to supply Hizballah with ballistic missiles. I must stress that this activity is of deep concern to my government, and we strongly caution you against such a serious escalation.”
A senior Syrian Foreign Ministry official, a cable from the American Embassy in Damascus reported, flatly denied the allegation. But nine months later, administration officials assert, the flow of arms had continued to Hezbollah. According to a Pentagon official, Hezbollah’s arsenal now includes up to 50,000 rockets and missiles, including some 40 to 50 Fateh-110 missiles capable of reaching Tel Aviv and most of Israel, and 10 Scud-D missiles. The newly fortified Hezbollah has raised fears that any future conflict with Israel could erupt into a full-scale regional war.
...
In February, the White House announced that a new American ambassador would be sent to Syria after a five-year hiatus. The next day, William J. Burns, a State Department under secretary, met with the Syrian leader.
During the session, Mr. Burns repeated American concerns about weapons smuggling to Hezbollah, one dispatch noted. Mr. Assad replied that while he could not be Israel’s policeman, no “new” weapons were being sent to Hezbollah.
Soon after the meeting, though, a cable noted that the Americans received intelligence reports that the Syrians were about to provide Hezbollah with Scud-D missiles, which are based on North Korean technology. (Some recent intelligence reports conclude that the group has about 10 such missiles stored in a Syrian warehouse that Hezbollah uses, according to American officials. The Defense Intelligence Agency believes that two have probably been moved to Lebanon, according to the officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity.) The United States officials also worried about Hezbollah’s vow to avenge the death of Imad Mughniyah, a senior fighter killed in a 2008 car bombing the militant group said was the work of the Israelis.
In a classified cable in February, Mrs. Clinton directed the embassy to deliver a warning to Faisal al-Miqdad, the deputy foreign minister. “I know you are a strategic thinker, which is why I want to underscore for you that, from our perspective, your operational support for Hizballah is a strategic miscalculation that is damaging your long-term national interests.”
The Syrian official’s response was dismissive, according to an American cable. He denied that any weapons had been sent, argued that Hezbollah would not take military action if not provoked and expressed surprise at the stern American protest. The complaint, he said, “shows the U.S. has not come to a mature position (that would enable it) to differentiate between its own interests and Israel’s.”
By the way, the Fateh 110's are considered a major threat because they are quite accurate. But the dismissive manner in which the Syrians treated Clinton's entreaties tell you all you need to know about the Obama administration's 'smart diplomacy.' I can't even call it an epic fail because degrading the United States' military capabilities is something President Obama wanted to do all along.
What could go wrong?
Labels: Barack Obama, degrading US military capabilities, Fateh 110, Hillary Clinton, Syrian engagement, Wikileaks
