Regarding the US propaganda about Pakistan, may I paste in something I wrote as a comment to an item on Ignatius and Zakaria’s PostGlobal site at
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/postglobal/needtoknow/2008/04/alqaeda_readies_in_pakistan_wh.html

The claim that a region described a few sentences earlier as “desperately poor, undereducated and underdeveloped, with a per-capita income of less than seventy cents per day” contains a mystery master-terrorist who is “using the Pakistani safe haven to put the last element necessary to launch another attack against America into place” is no more plausible than any of the other claims the USA has used to attack defenseless starving third world populations almost all over the world. The real reason for this agitation is that, thanks to its incompetent and traitor-ridden “counter-proliferation policy,” the USA has now lost all influence over the nuclear weapons policy of Pakistan, and so the USA is trying to concoct a suitably James Bond style pretext for invading Pakistan, bit by bit. The Pakistanis, incidentally, know this, and even say it, in their own press. One can only thank one’s lucky stars that the dollar is collapsing at an ever-increasing rate.

Bilal Saab’s Article:

Some Key points:

“Washington should craft its policy to support the Lebanese state, not to promote partisanship and political parties.”

Lets be clear on this point, The Bush policy has been Pscyzophrenic to say the least here. By not acting to solve this issue in a non partisan way, their argument for Democracy building are hollow.

“Washington should continue to provide technical and military assistance to Lebanon in its pursuit of democracy consolidation and military modernization, such as by building up the Lebanese Armed Forces”

I disagree here, the emphasis should be on building the civil institutions first, The judiciary and the constitution should be the starting parameters , the rest will all follow.

The war of attrition as Saab notes hands the initiative to Syria

“the current U.S. stance is a policy of denial, denying Lebanon to Syria but with little hope of promoting a resolution to Lebanon’s internal crisis. The danger of such a policy is that it hands the political initiative to Syria and its allies in Lebanon who can win by waging a gradual war of attrition……

And we know that Waging a war of attrition is what the Arabs are expert at, with the Bush era entering its last phase, the attrition war has only 10 months to go. The US policy has clearly failed in regards to Lebanon, this policy of denial and inaction on the part of the US, can mean only one thing, The Lebanese need look no further than their own borders for an end to the crisis. It is the settling of their own internal problems can the political crisis be resolved. Rather than blaming the US, Syria, Saudi, Iran, France etc, Lebanese Politicians must be mature enough to solve their own problems internally with out outside help or arbitration.

This however is a big ask!

Many believe that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will be soon submitting an inspection request to the Syrian authorities. If Syria complies, that would give the US and Israel an access to its military secrets. If it refuses, the case will go to the Security Council and we will be then facing another Iraqi scenario.

Not really … I am convinced that if some smart strategists in the current administration (and in Israel) are planning to cross some new lines in making life difficult for Syria (after exhausting all the classic tactics), political leaders who are advised by those strategists should be prepared to be busy 24 hours a day trying to deal with a chaotic Middle East like they have never seen before.

If they want to steer the Hariri tribunal away from normal legal process and towards a planned pressure campaign against Syria, and if they want to use the Nuclear story in a way that allows them to spy on Syria’s military capabilities on the ground and to humiliate Syria the way they humiliated Iraq … then I have no doubt that everything will go wrong in Iraq, in Lebanon, in Palestine … and maybe even between Iran and its Arab neighbors who are supporting this anti-Syria strategy.

Given how the first stage of pressuring Syria worked (2003-2008) I don’t think it takes a genius to conclude the above! … Sometimes one wonders if those strategists still imagine that “the axis of evil” will sit down and watch as the geniuses of the Iraq war and the Mehlis/Seddiq investigation try their latest tricks.

Basically I am repeating what Eyal Zisser wrote last week … if the current administration wants to weaken Syria … only a massive invasion will do.

Otherwise, they are only messing up the whole Middle East.

Alex,
This is also what you answered to the alarm I voiced when all this first broke out a few days ago, but this time your argument contains its own refutation in your own words…: “smart strategists”,….”I don’t think it takes a genius to conclude”,…etc. Where have you seen any evidence of “smart strategy”, “genius”, or of anybody in this administration concluding anything from their past mistakes…!! It has been the sheer lunacy and ineptitude of these flunkies, wielding unimaginable power and impunity, that has had the entire human race on the edge of a nervous breakdown for the past 7 years…!!

Also, when have you seen these criminally irresponsible kooks give a damn about “a chaotic Middle East”, or about whether or not “everything will go wrong in Iraq, in Lebanon, in Palestine”… hasn’t it already…??! After all, they have God on their side and it will all turn out for the best, somehow… What does a weak delusional flunky at the end of his political life (e.g. Bush, Olmert, Abdalla, Mubarak, et al) have to lose anyway…?!

“Otherwise, they are only messing up the whole Middle East.” Haven’t they, already…??! Do they seem overly concerned to you…?!

Until a new set of actors are on the scene, worry…!

https://joshualandis.com/blog/?p=690#comment-136841
https://joshualandis.com/blog/?p=690#comment-136858
https://joshualandis.com/blog/?p=690#comment-136986
and https://joshualandis.com/blog/?p=690#comment-136855 !!

Faking an interest in Syrian-Israeli peace prospects
Thursday, May 1, 2008, 21:46

Many people have been hopeful that negotiations could resume between Syria and Israel, but those who know me will not be surprised by my cynicism. Olmert just promised Syria the entire Golan, my oh my, and suddenly we’re all excited, as if this was supposed to be a fringe benefit.

I don’t buy Israel’s sudden peaceful disposition; I think they’re faking it.

Faking It

Rime Allaf

Facts have rarely gotten in the Bush administration’s way when demonizing a political opponent, even when that opponent has actually tried to accommodate multiple American demands. Accused of enemy complicity in most places where the US or its allies are involved, Syria has nevertheless regularly offered concrete help in the “war on terror” (including in the infamous extraordinary renditions) and in policing and sealing the Iraqi border.

A last minute invitation to Annapolis, in November 2007, was merely a reluctant move by US President George W. Bush to pretend he was serious about reaching a comprehensive peace in the Middle East. Under no circumstance should Syria have imagined this meant American pressure would stabilize, or even decrease, especially after the Israeli raid on a mysterious Syrian target in September 2007, which was clearly blessed by Bush.

Seven months after that raid, the US suddenly divulged that Israel had destroyed a nuclear reactor, built with North Korean help, which would have produced enough plutonium for one or two weapons within a year of becoming operational. The allegations were supported by “proof” presented in a series of graphs and photographs of “North Korean faces”, nuclear equipment and satellite images of buildings, which were promptly discredited by some experts while used as evidence by others.

The IAEA was understandably outraged that this information was not produced for its inspection, before the Israeli raid and in the months following it. While some have chosen to believe that the current disclosure was meant to pressure North Korea, Bush offered several reasons for this delay. In particular, he explained, the US wanted to prevent confrontation and conflict in the region (raid notwithstanding, apparently) and was concerned that Syria would feel pressured to retaliate against Israel if the nuclear intelligence was made public, a reasoning that is difficult to take seriously. Clearly, the US is somehow convinced that Syria’s urge to defend itself has now passed.

Even by the low standards of the Bush administration and its record of manufactured intelligence and fabricated liberations, the allegations about the timing are implausible and have other aims: since his arrival at the White House, Bush has done everything to thwart a potential peace deal between Syria and Israel, regardless of the fluctuating positions of the latter.

Indeed, even when taking into account the invitation to Annapolis, US behavior toward Syria has at least been consistent throughout the tenure of the Bush administration, with political pressure steadily increasing over the years and sanctions imposed. In contrast, Israel’s demeanor vis-a-vis Syria has been erratic, sending mixed messages and failing to adopt a solid position.

It is odd that a prime minister raiding a site on enemy ground, supposedly knowing it is a nuclear facility, should praise that same enemy leader ten days later, declaring his respect. It is also strange that a massive war drill should subsequently be choreographed, groundlessly fueling war speculations. At the same time, Israeli officials have repeatedly confirmed that Syria poses no military threat, an acknowledgement that not only lays to rest looming war fears from its side, but also annuls the security factor in the Golan withdrawal equation.

The sudden emergence of peace talk rumors is confusing in the midst of such conflicting messages. Divulged by Syria, uncharacteristically, an initiative by Turkey has put negotiations back on the agenda. Most importantly, Ehud Olmert, the Israeli prime minister, confirmed to his Turkish mediators that Israel would return the entire Golan in exchange for peace with Syria. Normally, such statements are unnecessary, given that UNSC Resolution 242 already obliges Israel to return to its June 4, 1967 position. Furthermore, the Rabin Deposit, since the early 1990s, had already pledged Israel’s full withdrawal from occupied Syrian land. In the current regional balance, however, Olmert’s unexpected statement would have been music to Syrian ears.

Lest there be too much enthusiasm that an immediate deal is imminent, however, the Syrian president was quick to clarify that this would not be possible before 2009, when a more reasonable US administration, one assumes, is in place. Syria seems to be discounting the possibility of a McCain presidency, or else ignorant of the latter’s own visions, and it seems to expect that whoever Bush’s successor is, he or she will be a more willing and honest broker. Even if Syria and Israel warm to each other under the matchmaking talents of their common friend Turkey, all parties know that an eventual wedding can only be officiated by an American minister. It would thus be premature to interpret the current messages as signs of seriousness or of a breakthrough.

Damascus has often been accused of wanting to engage for engagement’s sake, but its position has not changed over the years as it called repeatedly for a return to negotiations. In contrast, Israel continuously found excuses to procrastinate while claiming it doubted Syria’s intentions. Obviously, Israel knows a peace deal means a complete withdrawal from the Golan, to which Israelis seem to have gotten rather attached over the years, and whose return to Syria will cost the latter a lot more than just “peace” according to the blueprints developed in track two talks. Israel is clearly in no hurry to reach this stage, making the timing of Olmert’s declaration suspect as well, especially when considering his domestic political struggles and his attempt to avoid “painful concessions” on the Palestinian track.

It seems rather unfortunate that the public acknowledgement of Israel’s full withdrawal from the Golan should coincide with the “revelation” of Syria’s amazing nuclear capacities. What remains to be determined is whether Bush was helping Olmert retract, whether Olmert was helping Bush attack, or whether both were simply, as usual, simultaneously scratching each other’s backs.
– Published 1/5/2008 © bitterlemons-international.org

Rime Allaf is associate fellow at London’s Chatham House.
http://www.rimeallaf.com/mosaics/index.php?entry=entry080501-164604

The guy from the Saban Center is not surprisingly framing the whole issue in terms of a false set of alternatives, carefully phrased to exclude the positive and natural solution, which is to get out the f***ing way and let relations between ‘Lebanon’ and ‘Syria’ find their own natural balance. To prevent the reader from conceptualising this outcome, he presents the false dilemma of either propping up [x] and [y] or subverting them to give [z]. This conceptual pre-emption is a very common technique, which is why I express it in general, algebraic terms.

Alex said:
“Basically I am repeating what Eyal Zisser wrote last week … if the current administration wants to weaken Syria … only a massive invasion will do.”

Yes, Alex, that is also what I was suggesting… they have tried everything else…!! However, I am interpreting the signs as being for a massive attempt to defang and humiliate Syria/Iran by a “shock and awe” campaign to cripple HA, Hamas, and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and their proxies in Iraq. They just do not have the wherewithal for a “massive invasion” of Syria (or Lebanon, or Gaza, or Iran), and that is why they are trying to keep Syria out of direct involvement in the fighting, should it commence.

If the war scenario is not pulled off, then at least they would have engineered enough entanglements, inspections, and tribunals to keep Syria busy well into the next administration, and to inhibit the next administration and the Europeans from freely engaging Syria in a meaningful dialogue… They would have already dictated the agenda for any such future dialogue…!

They already know that Syria will not cave in to such pressures, unless it has a profitable alternative (that is what Syria has been saying, anyway), which is why, I believe, they have been dangling that fake carrot of a “peace process”, return of the Golan, PPP, and lately even a piece of the Lebanese pie…

Executions Could Strain Syrian-Saudi Relations Print

Friday , 02 May 2008

The recent executions of three Syrians convicted of drug trafficking in Saudi Arabia may mark a downturn in the already frosty relationship between the two countries.

Syrian national Ibrahim al-Jarkh was beheaded on April 25, eight days after the execution of two other men, Feras al-Aghbar and Feras al-Maktabi. All three were executed in Tabuk in northwestern Saudi Arabia.

Dozens of people with relatives detained in Saudi Arabia staged protests in Damascus following the executions. At protests outside the Saudi embassy and Syrian interior ministry, participants held signs aloft calling on President Bashar al-Assad to “save our families and brothers from Saudi Arabia’s unpredictable verdicts.”

State-run television reported the demonstration in some detail, and other media gave broad coverage to news of the executions.

As a local human rights activist pointed out, “It’s well known that no demonstrations are allowed in Syria unless they have a green light from the authorities. This appears to be a move against the Saudi government.”

The activist said political tensions over the executions could further complicate the cases of Syrian prisoners currently held in Saudi Arabia.

Several Syrian media outlets last week reported that as many as 1,200 Syrian nationals were being held in Saudi prisons, and 300 of them were awaiting execution.

There are no official statistics on this from either government, and these figures could not be independently verified.

The Syrian embassy in Riyadh sent a letter to the Saudi foreign ministry condemning the executions.

Under the Saudis’ strict interpretation of Islamic law, convicted drug traffickers are liable to be executed. But a source in the Syria’s Riyadh embassy told the pro-government website Syria News that the Saudis normally hand down seven-year sentences for the offence, and release prisoners early if they learn the Koran.

The embassy source also said that Syrian diplomats had not been notified about the two earlier executions, which took place on April 17.

The pro-government Al-Watan newspaper took a similarly critical line, questioning whether Syrian nationals imprisoned in the kingdom received fair and independent trials, “particularly in view of the Saudis’ hostile political attitude toward Syria”.

Relations have soured in recent months over the role Damascus plays in Lebanon, which has not elected a president since November due to strong opposition from Syrian-backed parties in parliament.

In a press conference earlier this week, Saudi justice minister Abdullah al-Sheikh denied that politics played any role when capital punishment was used on convicted Syrians.

Iran’s official news agency IRNA reported on April 27 that Tehran – an ally of Damascus – was prepared to “help Syria and Saudi Arabia resolve their dispute”.

A Syrian writer and intellectual noted that while the Saudis carried out many executions, media and human rights groups were politicising the recent cases because of the strained relationship between the countries.

“The hostility has moved from the two regimes to the two people. That’s crazy,” he said.

Meanwhile, the human rights activist, who opposes the death penalty, said the Syrian government was “using human rights for political reasons”.

She noted that several prisoners were executed in Syria last year after being convicted in special military court, in which no attorneys are present.

Syria executed at least seven prisoners in 2007, according to Amnesty International.

Amnesty says Saudi Arabia executed at least 143 prisoners in 2007, giving it the highest number of executions per capita of any country.

(Syria News Briefing, a weekly news analysis service, draws on information and opinion from a network of IWPR-trained Syrian journalists based in the country, whose identities cannot be revealed for security reasons.)

May 2, 2008

http://www.iwpr.net

Rowan,

There is no such thing as a “natural” balance in Lebanon that can be arrived at by subtracting U.S. influence. Syria is not sitting idly by in Lebanon, and neither are Iran, KSA, France, the Arab League, etc.

Letting the chips fall where they may will mean that they will almost certainly fall in Syria’s lap again.

Many Lebanese are against such an eventuality.

OK, I can see that, really, sorry. The layers of effects of colonial and neocolonial influence need removing in stages, in the correct order.

Can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic.

But ok.

The following is a summary from Global Security Newswire on the 2008 report on global terrorism dated 1 May:

Terrorists Continue to Seek WMD, U.S. State Department Study Finds

“Guerrilla” terrorists, particularly al-Qaeda, continue to seek weapons of mass destruction for a major attack, according to a U.S. State Department review released yesterday (see GSN, May 1, 2007).

The finding came in an annual department report on terrorism that also featured North Korea as one of five state sponsors of terrorism, a designation that has played a role in six-nation talks to denuclearize the Stalinist state (see related GSN story, today).

The interest in WMD capabilities corresponded to a trend from “expeditionary” terrorism to “guerrilla” terrorism, says Country Reports on Terrorism 2007. In its expeditionary form, al-Qaeda would select and train terrorists in one country and then deploy them to a target nation. Under the guerrilla model, the organization tries to recruit and train local residents to conduct terrorist attacks in their home countries.

Last year “witnessed the continuation of the transition from expeditionary to guerrilla terrorism,” the report says. “These ‘guerrilla’ terrorist groups harbor ambitions of a spectacular attack, including acquisition and use of weapons of mass destruction.”

Indeed, “the nexus of weapons of mass destruction and terrorism poses one of the gravest potential risks to the national security of the United States and its global partners,” says the report’s chapter on WMD challenges. “A successful major WMD terrorist attack could result in mass casualty events and produce far-reaching economic and political consequences that would affect all members of the international community.”

The chapter expresses particular concern over al-Qaeda’s interest in biological weapons.

“Among present-day terrorist organizations, al-Qaeda is believed to have made the greatest effort to acquire and develop a bioterrorism program. U.S. forces discovered a partially built biological weapons laboratory near Kandahar after expelling the Taliban from Afghanistan. Although it was not conclusive that [al-Qaeda] succeeded in obtaining a biological weapon, the discovery demonstrated a concerted effort to acquire a biological weapons capability,” the report says.

Furthermore, “the required scientific capabilities are not beyond the expertise of motivated biologists with basic university-level training. And, unlike other types of WMD, the materials required to produce a weapon are widely available — some are even found in nature,” the report finds.

The report identifies five nations — Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan and Syria — as sponsors of terrorist activity, the same list as in last year’s report. However, it highlights nonstate support as an expanding concern.

“Nonstate facilitators have emerged as a growing WMD proliferation threat in recent years, and could eventually provide terrorists with conduits to materials and expertise that are particularly hard to acquire,” the report says.

No, I wasn’t being sarcastic. You’d know if I was. Understatement is not one of my gifts.

QN,

How many counties are there in Lebanon and are they the same as the Syrian counties , made up of multiple cities with one major one.

Yesterday Michael Hayden did give a speech that was reported by the WashPost on line about the fact that the world is essentially no longer a unipolar world. In very polite terms he essentially said that the US has lost its leverage in all spheres of influence in all areas of the world. In Latin America the countries are even more independent than the Europeans. In Europe, the Eurozone is under strain with the Southern half and France concerned about the Euro not being a panacea for all issues. I would add that Richard Hass wrote in the Daily Star about the danger of the new non polar world as a transition to the next phase of a multi polar world. The interview with Newt Gingrich in Newsweek this week also confirmed the weakening of the US on the global stage when he said that as long as oil is being traded in dollars the value of the dollar in exchange rates does not matter. Should the OPEC or the GCC ask for trading in non dollars, then a new ball game is in order.
All indications with the latest impasse in Iraq as fighting does not seem to be achieving its goal of dislodging Sadr forces either political or military will force the US to negotiate with Iran. Iran is accumulating more cards in its hands both in Iraq and in other parts of the Indian Ocean. It has positioned itself as a major source of energy to China, an answer to the energy thirst of India, and quite effectively a stability factor in the Gulf.
All of this and despite the US navy presence, means that the US and Iran will come to some deal together otherwise Iran will continue to slowly deprive the US of its assets in the region without provoking a full confrontation.
Expect the following:
Tying down of the US in Iraq until after the inauguration of the next President

Multi lateral deals with local powers to break the isolation be it financial or energetic or economic

A resolution of the Lebanese crisis to the satisfaction of HA

A shrinking role of the KSA

A growing role for Egypt as it moves away from the US orbit

I think everyone in the region has seen the writing on the wall and are already positioning themselves for a post unipolar world. Evne the Israelis are inching towards this realization but alas the tribes and families that make up the Arab League are still in denial. They thought that the Iraq invasion will cow the people for ever and they will be left hanging in there to dry by themselves.

Here is some reading for you today
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JE03Ak03.html

I read that Kaveh L Afrasiabi thing too, but after working my way through this by Muriel Mirak-Weissbach :
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8868
it seemed uselesss and unhelpful by comparison. I edited Muriel Mirak-Weissbach down for my blog, as I always do, and got it down to about half length.

Norman

Not sure how many qada’s there are. I’ll find out for you. (Yes, they are usually centered on a city).