Syria tells IAEA: Israeli nukes sparking arms race Haaretz, By Yossi Melman

Syria's ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency said Thursday that Israel's nuclear capabilities were sparking an arms race in the region.

"The fact that UN and IAEA decisions regarding Israel's nuclear capability are not implemented increases the frustration of the Arab states and threatens to expand the arms race that could threaten the peace and security of the region and entire world," said Ibrahim Othman at IAEA's annual conference….

[Israel] has nuclear weapons and nuclear capabilities, that are not under international supervision," Othman continued. "It is a legitimate concern to ask Israel to join the nuclear non-proliferation treaty."

The atomic watchdog yesterday targeted Israel's undeclared nuclear arsenal by calling for all Mideast nations to renounce atomic weapons.

Israel, U.S. Shared Data On Suspected Nuclear Site
Bush Was Told of North Korean Presence in Syria, Sources Say
By Glenn Kessler and Robin Wright
Washington Post, Friday, September 21, 2007; A01

Israel's decision to attack Syria on Sept. 6, bombing a suspected nuclear site set up in apparent collaboration with North Korea, came after Israel shared intelligence with President Bush this summer indicating that North Korean nuclear personnel were in Syria, U.S. government sources said.

The Bush administration has not commented on the Israeli raid or the underlying intelligence. Although the administration was deeply troubled by Israel's assertion that North Korea was assisting the nuclear ambitions of a country closely linked with Iran, sources said, the White House opted against an immediate response because of concerns it would undermine long-running negotiations aimed at persuading North Korea to abandon its nuclear program.

Ultimately, however, the United States is believed to have provided Israel with some corroboration of the original intelligence before Israel proceeded with the raid, which hit the Syrian facility in the dead of night to minimize possible casualties, the sources said.

The target of Israel's attack was said to be in northern Syria, near the Turkish border. A Middle East expert who interviewed one of the pilots involved said they operated under such strict operational security that the airmen flying air cover for the attack aircraft did not know the details of the mission. The pilots who conducted the attack were briefed only after they were in the air, he said. Syrian authorities said there were no casualties.

U.S. sources would discuss the Israeli intelligence, which included satellite imagery, only on condition of anonymity, and many details about the North Korean-Syrian connection remain unknown. The quality of the Israeli intelligence, the extent of North Korean assistance and the seriousness of the Syrian effort are uncertain, raising the possibility that North Korea was merely unloading items it no longer needed. Syria has actively pursued chemical weapons in the past but not nuclear arms — leaving some proliferation experts skeptical of the intelligence that prompted Israel's attack.

Syria and North Korea both denied this week that they were cooperating on a nuclear program. Bush refused to comment yesterday on the attack, but he issued a blunt warning to North Korea that "the exportation of information and/or materials" would affect negotiations under which North Korea would give up its nuclear programs in exchanges for energy aid and diplomatic recognition.

"To the extent that they are proliferating, we expect them to stop that proliferation, if they want the six-party talks to be successful," he said at a news conference, referring to negotiations that also include China, Japan, South Korea and Russia.

Unlike its destruction of an Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1981, Israel made no announcement of the recent raid and imposed strict censorship on reporting by the Israeli media. Syria made only muted protests, and Arab leaders have remained silent. As a result, a daring and apparently successful attack to eliminate a potential nuclear threat has been shrouded in mystery.

"There is no question it was a major raid. It was an extremely important target," said Bruce Riedel, a former intelligence officer at Brookings Institution's Saban Center for Middle East Policy. "It came at a time the Israelis were very concerned about war with Syria and wanted to dampen down the prospects of war. The decision was taken despite their concerns it could produce a war. That decision reflects how important this target was to Israeli military planners."

Israel has long known about Syria's interest in chemical and even biological weapons, but "if Syria decided to go beyond that, Israel would think that was a real red line," Riedel said.

Edward Djerejian, a former U.S. ambassador to Syria and founding director of Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy, said that when he was in Israel this summer he noticed "a great deal of concern in official Israeli circles about the situation in the north," in particular whether Syria's young ruler, Bashar al-Assad, "had the same sensitivity to red lines that his father had." Bashar succeeded his Hafez al-Assad as president of Syria in 2000.

The Israeli attack came just three days after a North Korean ship docked at the Syrian port of Tartus, carrying a cargo that was officially listed as cement.

The ship's role remains obscure. Israeli sources have suggested it carried nuclear equipment. Others have maintained that it contained only missile parts, and some have said the ship's arrival and the attack are merely coincidental. One source suggested that Israel's attack was prompted by a fear of media leaks on the intelligence.

The Bush administration's wariness when presented with the Israeli intelligence contrasts with its reaction in 2002, when U.S. officials believed they had caught North Korea building a clandestine nuclear program in violation of a nuclear-freeze deal arranged by the Clinton administration.

After the Bush administration's accusation, the Clinton deal collapsed and North Korea restarted a nuclear reactor, stockpiled plutonium and eventually conducted a nuclear test. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice convinced Bush this year to accept a deal with North Korea to shut down the reactor, infuriating conservatives inside and outside the administration.

But for years, Bush has also warned North Korea against engaging in nuclear proliferation, specifically making that a red line that could not be crossed after North Korea tested a nuclear device last year. The Israeli intelligence therefore suggested North Korea was both undermining the agreement and crossing that line.

Conservative critics of the administration's recent diplomacy with North Korea have seized on reports of the Israeli intelligence as evidence that the White House is misguided if it thinks it can ever strike a lasting deal with Pyongyang. "However bad it might be for the six-party talks, U.S. security requires taking this sort of thing seriously," said John R. Bolton, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations who was a top arms control official in Bush's first term.

But advocates of engagement have accused critics of trying to sabotage the talks. China on Monday abruptly postponed a round of six-party talks scheduled to begin this week, but U.S. officials now say the talks should start again Thursday.

Some North Korean experts said they are puzzled why, if the reports are true, Pyongyang would jeopardize the hard-won deal with the United States and the other four countries. "It does not make any sense at all in the context of the last nine months," said Charles "Jack" Pritchard, a former U.S. negotiator with North Korea and now president of the Korea Economic Institute.

Shots in the dark over Syria's skies
By Sami Moubayed, Asia Times 

DAMASCUS – Israeli opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu, while becoming the first official of that country to admit that it did conduct an air raid into Syria on September 6, sheds no further light on the escapade, thus adding to the mountain of speculation that already exists on the incident.

Netanyahu said on Thursday that he had given Prime Minister Ehud Olmert his support for "an attack", and promptly drew a rebuke from the premier for speaking out of turn.

Israel has imposed a media blackout on the events of the night of September 6, when Syria claimed its airspace in the northern province of Raqqa had been violated and that its defenses forced Israeli F-15 jets to flee, dropping "munitions" and fuel tanks in the desert near the Turkish border.

The US media insist, however, that the Israelis hit something major. The latest reports, attributed to "US government sources", say that Israel, with tacit assistance and support from the US, bombed a facility at which nuclear weapons were being developed with assistance from North Korea.

Both Syria and North Korea have denied that they are cooperating in nuclear technology, and Pyongyang issued a harsh condemnation of the Israeli intrusion into Syrian airspace.

The two countries insist that the accusations have been fabricated by the US for political reasons – mainly targeting North Korea. Hawks, notably former US ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, are concerned by the peaceful direction in which the six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear program are going, preferring confrontation.

Joshua Landis, a professor at Oklahoma University who is an expert on Syrian affairs and runs Syriacomment.com, said: "Bolton represents the crowd that is very distressed that the US has declared defeat in North Korea by trusting the North Koreans. They would like to scuttle that agreement."

A diplomat associated with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was quoted saying that the organization didn't know anything about any nuclear facility in Syria.

Buthaina Shaaban, Syria's minister of expatriate affairs, commented to Al-Manar TV, "All this rubbish is not true. I don't know how their imagination has reached such creativity." She added, "Regretfully, the international press is busy justifying an aggression on a sovereign state, and the world should be busy condemning it instead of inventing reasons and aims of this aggression."

The North Korea-Syria story started when Andrew Semmel of the US State Department claimed that Syria "might have" obtained nuclear equipment from "secret suppliers", adding that "there are North Korean people there [in Syria]. There is no question about that."

He repeated claims, made as early as 2004, that a network run by Abdul Qadeer Khan, the now-disgraced Pakistani nuclear scientist who is believed to have supplied gas centrifuges and uranium hexaflouride to North Korea, operated from Syria. But there is no evidence whatsoever – otherwise it would have surfaced – of the Khan network operating from Syrian territory.

Journalists in the US took it from there, saying that North Korean leader Kim Jong-il might be hiding material in Syria, while pretending to rid his country of nuclear weapons to improve relations with the US.

There were reports that three days before the Israeli attack, a ship carrying North Korean material labeled as "cement" unloaded its cargo in Syria. That material, the reports said, was believed to be nuclear equipment.

The reports have not gone unchallenged. Joseph Cirincione, author of Bomb Scare: The History and Future of Nuclear Weapons and a senior fellow and director for nuclear policy at the Center for American Progress, said, "This story is nonsense."

As mentioned above, the North Korea story is not new. It started in 2004 when Bolton, then under secretary for arms control, accused Syria of harboring nuclear ambitions. This was part of the stream of accusations against Syria after the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

First it was that cronies of Saddam Hussein had fled to Damascus. When they were arrested one after the other within Iraq, the story was changed: Saddam's weapons of mass destruction were hidden in Syria. When that proved false, Bolton came out with his thundering accusation.

This prompted the IAEA to investigate, after which it said there was no evidence to back the claims. IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei commented on June 26, 2004, "We haven't gotten any piece of information on why we should be concerned about Syria."
David Albright, a former United Nations weapons inspector to Iraq, says that IAEA found Bolton's claims on Syria "unsubstantiated"….

Sami Moubayed is a Syrian political analyst.

Climate of fear after killing of Lebanon MP
Hugh Macleod in Tripoli
Friday September 21, 2007
The Guardian

Surrounded by bodyguards, monitored by security cameras and protected by blast doors, Mosbah Ahdab, an MP in Lebanon's parliament, sits in the darkened flat in Tripoli he has rarely left over the past three months .

"My constituents call me simply 'the one who dares'," he told the Guardian with a grin that could not quite mask the seriousness of the subject. For Mr Ahdab believes he is a wanted man, a name on the hit-list of Lebanon's assassins, who work, say leading politicians, to the orders of the regime in Syria.

"There is a threat. We are hunted, one after the other," said Mr Ahdab, who was one of the few MPs in the western-backed March 14 coalition that swept into government opposing the influence of Damascus not to flee the country this summer.

The assassination on Wednesday of an MP, Antoine Ghanem, two days after he returned to Beirut to join the process of electing a new president has pitched a divided Lebanon further into turmoil.

President Emile Lahoud is due to step down by November 24 from a position reserved under Lebanon's constitutional system for a Maronite Christian. However, the government and opposition have yet to agree on a compromise candidate ahead of the reopening of parliament next Tuesday for the first time since Hizbullah withdrew its ministers from cabinet last November, raising fears of two rival governments emerging, or of a military interim head of state.

Speaking after a meeting with the prime minister, Fouad Siniora, yesterday, the information minister, Ghazi Aridi, pledged to press ahead with Tuesday's vote. "We are determined to hold the election on time," he said, adding that the ruling majority "keeps its hand extended to everybody," in an apparent reference to the opposition. "We have to save Lebanon."

Yet the murder of Mr Ghanem, the sixth anti-Syrian figure to be assassinated since a truck bomb killed former prime minister Rafik Hariri in February 2005, has reduced the ruling coalition's majority to three.

"Last year I had many calls from Syria – I could see the number -telling me I was going to be killed if I continued defending my position. Now I just get daily threats by letter," said Ahmed Fatfat, a March 14 (in reference to the date of protests against Syria's role in the country) cabinet minister. Since the killing of former cabinet colleague Pierre Gemayel last November, Mr Fatfat has lived a reclusive life in his offices in the government building in central Beirut, protected by troops.

For Mr Ahdab the watershed came in June with the car bomb that killed MP Waleed Aido, days after the government appointed judges to the UN court set up to try suspects in the assassination of Hariri, whose death triggered protests against Damascus and the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon.

A UN investigation into Hariri's murder has found evidence of the involvement of Syrian and Lebanese intelligence officials, a charge denied by Damascus.

"There is a political context to these assassinations you can't avoid," said Mr Ahdab. "The Syrian president has openly linked instability in Lebanon to the Hariri tribunal."

"If no president is elected on time there could be another war in Lebanon," said Rita Akeekee, a bank worker who yesterday observed an official day of mourning for Ghanem. "These assassins want to kill the message of a new Lebanon of peace and co- existence."

Mr Ahdab is taking no chances. He has sent his wife and children to Cyprus and hired six bodyguards. There is a roof over his driveway to hide his cars from assassins. When he has to travel he only tells his driver where they are going once on the road, having first removed the battery from his phone, so as not to be tracked.

Fury as Netanyahu confirms Syria strike
By Donald Macintyre in Jerusalem 21 September 2007 THE INDEPENDENT

Benjamin Netanyahu, leader of the right-wing opposition party Likud, was chacteristically at the centre of a controversy yesterday after appearing to be the first Israeli politician to confirm an air strike against Syria two weeks ago.

With reporting in Israel covoered by military censorship, Mr Netanyahu startled television viewers – and reportedly shocked the office of the Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert – by answering a question about the supposed air strike in an interview.

Mr Netanyahu, a former prime minister, infuriated some of his political opponents by telling Channel One television that he was "party" to the operation on which he had personally congratulated Olmert. He declared " When the Prime Minister takes action in important and necessary matters, and generally when the government is doing things for the security of Israel, I give it my endorsement. I was party to this matter, I must say, from the first minute and I gave it my backing, but it is still too early to discuss this subject." Israel's government has maintained a studious, and unusual, silence since Syria first complained about an incursion into its airspace.

The row came as US President George Bush – while refusing to confirm what US officials have been anonymously briefing for more than a week was a strike on a suspected nuclear facility built with North Korean help – warned against nuclear prolifetration by North Korea.

Eitan Cabel, secretary general of the Labour Party, told Army Radio that Mr Netanyahu had been guilty of "an outburst that is severe, stupid and irresponsible". Mr Cabel, whose party leader, Ehud Barak, is seen by his supporters as the main rival to Mr Netanyahu for the future premiership, declared: "Bibi [Mr Netanyahu's nickname] is the same Bibi. I haven no idea if it is foolishness, stupidity, the desire to jump on the bandwagon, the desire to be a partner, to steal credit – or something else. It is simply very dangerous. The man simply does not deserve to lead."

An anonymous official said to be close to Mr Olmert was quoted in the Haaretz newspaper as saying: "Bibi's slip of the tongue borders on national irresponsibility. Once again Netanyahu couldn't restrain himself and he ran to tell the guys."

The political row – fuelled by party divisions – followed a declaration by Shimon Peres, the Israeli President, on Tuesday that the tensions caused by the incident were "over" and the government was prepared for talks with Syria aimed at ending the 40 years of emnity between the two countries since Israel captured the Golan heights in the Six Day War in 1967.

Some right- wing politicians went to Mr Netanyahu's defence, with the Likud Knesset member Yuval Steinitz saying: "Netanyahu's statements were unfortunate, but they caused no harm. This is a tempest in a tea cup."

Ehud Barak – who has refrained from any comment either on the supposed Israeli operation or on Mr Netanyahu's comments, said: "It is a pity that the aides of the worst prime minister in the history of the state seek out every opportunity to incite against Netanyahu, and permit themselves to use language that is lowly and contemptible, albeit typical."

Meanwhile the European Union is calling on Israel to consider tighter sanctions on Gaza by cutting power and fuel in response to Qassam rocket attacks. Javier Solana, the EU foreign affairs chief, said: "We join the call by the secretary general of the United Nations for the Israeli government to reconsider its decision."

The European Commission, which helped coordinate emergency aid to Palestinians after the election victory of the militant Islamist group Hamas prompted the West to suspend direct aid to the territories, also urged Israel to reconsider. "The Commission hopes that Israel will not find it necessary to implement the measures for which the decisions set the framework yesterday," a spokeswoman for the EU executive said. The United Nations secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, urged Israel on Wednesday to reconsider its decision to declare the Gaza Strip a hostile territory, warning that any cut-off of vital services would violate international law and punish the already suffering civilian population. Mr Ban said he was very concerned at the Israeli government's "announced intent to interrupt essential services such as electricity and fuel to the civilian population".

In Mideast, Web of Careful Phrases Can't Match Pointed Words
By HELENE COOPER, September 21, 2007 NEW YORK TIMES

RAMALLAH, West Bank, Sept. 20 — In the diplomatic world, words can mean everything — or nothing.

With two lines in an otherwise routine news conference, the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, cut to the heart of the divide between Israel and the Palestinian Authority as the Bush administration struggled to come up with a plan for peace negotiations in the Middle East.

The big peace conference that President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice are planning for mid-November, Mr. Abbas said, must tackle the politically sensitive "final status" issues that have bedeviled peace negotiators since 1979. Dispensing with all the diplomatic niceties that American officials have been using to try to calm the fears of skittish Israelis who are uneasy about tackling the big issues, Mr. Abbas spelled out the Palestinian, and in many ways American, aims for the meeting.

Mr. Abbas called for discussions on "borders, Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, water and security." With Ms. Rice, her demeanor bland, standing next to him in a cavernous room in Yasir Arafat's old Muqata compound, Mr. Abbas said, "We believe that the time is ripe for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, with East Jerusalem as its capital, and for living side by side in security and tranquillity with the State of Israel."

He chided American officials for being too ambiguous, and explained that part of the reason that Arab countries had not rushed to endorse the conference — with the United States expected to be host at a site yet to be determined — was because no one had promised in plain English that the conference would tackle final status issues. "I believe there is a need for clarification," he said. "That's the duty of the inviting party to the conference."

His blunt words were a far cry from the purposely ambiguous diplo-speak that Ms. Rice has been engaging in as she has sought to drag Israel to the table for meaningful talks. She has discussed finding "a common set of principles" toward a "political horizon," to "support and advance the negotiations" along the "bilateral track."

"Because after all," she told reporters, in a phrase that left most scratching their heads, "the bilateral track has to be at the center of any resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict."

Israeli officials are wary of committing to negotiating final status issues before their security concerns are met. While Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has grown more comfortable in his talks with Mr. Abbas, the Israeli public remains highly skeptical that the Palestinians, who elected the rejectionist Hamas Party, are serious about coexistence.

Despite Israel's withdrawal of all its troops and settlers from Gaza in 2005, Qassam rockets are shot routinely into the country from Gaza. As a result, Israeli leaders are loath to discuss at the conference the removal of West Bank settlements. And forget about Jerusalem, which both sides seek as their capital; Israeli officials are not eager to put the status of Jerusalem on the table at a big conference attended by everybody from Saudi Arabia to Britain to Russia, either.

The closest the Israeli foreign minister, Tzipi Livni , would come this week was to express the need for finding "commonalities" between Israelis and Palestinians. "Of course we would like to end the conflict right away," Ms. Livni said. But, she added, "It's important to find what is the common denominator."

After a meeting on Thursday with Ms. Rice in Tel Aviv, Mr. Olmert offered similar assurances. He told Ms. Rice that Israel "wanted to make a positive contribution to a successful meeting and was eager that the meeting be attended by many moderate Arab states," said a spokesman for Mr. Olmert, David Baker.

American officials say that it is not that the Israelis don't want to tackle the hard stuff. It's more that Israeli officials, in particular former Prime Minister Ehud Barak, who is now defense minister, remember President Clinton's push for a comprehensive peace accord in 2000 between Mr. Barak and Mr. Arafat. That push failed and led, many Israelis believe, to the second Palestinian intifada. Israelis now are reluctant to make another big peace push without the assurance that it will yield results.

Both sides are working on some kind of document to bridge the gap, and Ms. Rice said she would be heading back to the region in a few weeks to prod some more. And then probably again before the November conference.

Aboard her flight back to Washington, she reflected on the six visits she has made this year to Israel to get a peace plan going, including the evolution of the language she has used to describe what she is up to.

Back in February, she noted, she began using "the very carefully guided phrase 'political horizon.' "

"I know there was some skepticism about the term 'political horizon' and what it meant," she said. "But it gave an umbrella where they could discuss issues they hadn't discussed in six years."

"Now," she said, the two sides are "openly saying they'll discuss 'core issues.' "

Israel Ends West Bank Operation

In Nablus, in the West Bank, Israeli forces yesterday concluded a three-day operation in a large refugee camp, Ein Beit Ilma, capturing three men who the Israeli Army said were "Hamas terrorists planning a suicide bombing."

The men were said to be part of a cell that also included members of Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. An army spokesman, Capt. Benjamin Rutland, said the three men "admitted to planning a terrorist attack" and included a potential suicide bomber.

Since Tuesday, more than 35 Palestinians have been arrested and the camp has been under curfew.

In central Gaza, Israeli troops operating against rocket-launching teams killed a 17-year-old Palestinian, Mahmoud Kasasi, who was hit by shrapnel from a tank shell and then run over by an army bulldozer, according to the Gazan Health Ministry. Three other Palestinians were killed in the operation, Reuters reported.

Steven Erlanger contributed reporting from Jerusalem.

40 March 14 MPs have returned to Beirut and are currently residing at the Phoenicia Hotel under extremely tight security measures.

Revue de presse : Politique extérieure, 20 septembre 2007
Selon Damas : « On a besoin d’une personnalité qui tient le dossier des relations bilatérales, 19 septembre 2007 (V.P. Sharaa stated that Syria is in favor of a Lebanese understanding that would lead to the election of a new president. He said that Syria does not interfere in Lebanese affairs, especially in the choice of a president, but let it be understood that proper relations between the two countries requires a personality who can deal with with all aspects of the relationship. He warned against the US striking Iran.)

A Damas, lors de l’audience accordée à une délégation des partis libanais, M. Farouk CHARAA, Vice-président syrien, a affirmé l’attachement de la Syrie à une entente libanaise qui conduirait à la facilitation de l’élection d’un nouveau Président de la République. Il a affirmé que Damas ne s’ingérait pas dans les affaires libanaises, notamment dans l’échéance présidentielle, mais il a laissé entendre que l’organisation des relations entre les deux pays exige une personnalité qui tient les dossiers des relations sous tous leurs aspects.

M. CHARAA a estimé que les deux prochains mois seront difficiles pour la région, car il n’y a pas d’indices sur des compromis ou des solutions sur les dossiers brûlants. Il a également indiqué que tout coup qui sera porté à l’Iran renversera toutes les équations dans la région. Si l’Administration américaine et Israël, en accord avec l’Europe, frappent l’Iran, toute la région sera embrasée. (As-Safir)

La Syrie attend une réponse des Etats-Unis et de l’Arabie Saoudite à l’initiative du Président du Parlement libanais, 18 septembre 2007 (Syria is waiting for a US and Saudi response to Berri’s initiative.)

Sur le plan des positions politiques, des sources diplomatiques ont révélé hier à Al-Hayat une position marquante selon laquelle un certain nombre de hauts responsables syriens que l’Ambassadeur de France à Damas M. Michel DUCLOS avait rencontré, ont signalé à ce dernier que l’initiative de BERRY au sujet de l’échéance présidentielle au Liban s’inscrivait dans le cadre des efforts déployés par la Syrie pour répondre favorablement à la demande française de jouer un rôle positif dans cette échéance.

Revue de presse: Relations France Syrie (Kourchner said he does not exclude a visit to Syria if Damascus abstains from all meddling in Lebanon.)

Le Ministre français des Affaires étrangères, M. Bernard KOUCHNER, a indiqué hier qu’il n’excluait pas de visiter la Syrie et de faire preuve d’une ouverture plus grande envers ce pays, si Damas s’abstenait de toute ingérence au Liban. suite

Le Ministre français des Affaires étrangères, M. Bernard KOUCHNER, a indiqué hier qu’il n’excluait pas de visiter la Syrie et de faire preuve d’une ouverture plus grande envers ce pays, si Damas s’abstenait de toute ingérence au Liban. suite

Le Ministre français des Affaires étrangères, M. Bernard KOUCHNER, a indiqué hier qu’il n’excluait pas de visiter la Syrie et de faire preuve d’une ouverture plus grande envers ce pays, si Damas s’abstenait de toute ingérence au Liban. suite

Al-Safadi: we won’t take part in electing a president with half+1 quorum (Translation thanks to Mideastwire.com)

Tha’ir Abbas of Asharq Al Awsat, an independent Saudi owned newspaper, wrote on September 19: “The Lebanese public works minister Muhammad Al-Safadi, the head of the parliamentary Tripoli Coalition which is part of the March14 bloc, settled the issue of his coalition over the issue of the quorum necessary to elect the next president with his announcement to Asharq Al Awsat in Beirut yesterday that he will not accept to participate in electing a president with the half+1 quorum and that he will not recognize the legitimacy of any president elected solely by the March 14 team of which his coalition, which includes four MPs, is part. Al-Safadi warned strongly against electing the president with a half+1 quorum and considered that doing so “will expose the country to a risk of civil war”.

CNN reports that another U.S. official said he has seen satellite imagery of that attack that shows a hole in the center of a building’s roof with the walls still largely intact.

That would strongly indicate a laser guided bomb was used with a fused warhead that exploded after the bomb entered the building roof. The photo is highly classified and not expected to be publicly released.

A Pentagon official could not confirm several recent news reports that nuclear material from North Korea has arrived in Syria and was the potential target of a recent Israeli airstrike there.

In fact, he said none of the information he had reviewed as part of his job indicated any nuclear material was involved

SYRIA URGED TO HONOR FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION —

More than two-dozen human rights groups from around the world called on Syria Sept. 10 to honor the country’s constitutional guarantee of free expression and to release prisoners of conscience.

The groups, in an effort spearheaded by the Cairo-based Egyptian Organization for Human Rights, called on Syria to “work on strengthening freedom of expression and to put an end to all repressive practices against journalists and activists, including harassment, torture and arbitrary detention” in a letter to President Bashar al-Assad.

In the letter, signatories specifically called for the release of prominent human rights lawyer Anwar al-Bunni, journalist Michael Kilo and political activist Kamal al-Labwani. Groups from Russia, Bahrain, Tunisia and Lebanon signed the letter alongside international organizations like the International Federation of Journalists and Freedom House.

(NY Times Sept. 21) Calls for a Breakup Grow Ever Louder in Belgium….more than three months after a general election, Belgium has failed to create a government, producing a crisis so profound that it has led to a flood of warnings, predictions, even promises that the country is about to disappear.

“We are two different nations, an artificial state created as a buffer between big powers, and we have nothing in common except a king, chocolate and beer,” said Filip Dewinter, the leader of Vlaams Belang, or Flemish Bloc…. 

Anti-Syrian MP wounded in Beirut car bomb: sources

Mallat's criticism of the Brammertz investigation into Hariri's killing is well put. He writes:

I have criticized investigator Serge Brammertz, and would continue if elected. After two years of reports, the Lebanese and Syrian publics, and the world, are entitled to know more. Either the investigator has no evidence of the involvement of the Syrian leadership and its Lebanese allies – in which case Mehlis and the initial UN investigator of the case, Peter Fitzgerald, were wrong, and Brammertz should say so publicly (after all four people, at least, have been sitting in prison without trial for over two years now); or Brammertz thinks the conclusions of his predecessors were correct, and he must say so publicly.

The policy of any new Lebanese president has, therefore, been made excruciatingly difficult by the fog created by the investigator's performance over the past two years. If no evidence is forthcoming of the Syrian leadership's involvement, we should accept this and mend the political rift the murder has so dramatically occasioned. If we have cause to believe that Syria was involved, then any new president's attitude must depend on the level and role of the accused, and the reaction of the Syrian regime to it. The bottom line is that any accused should stand trial, however high in the governing system – in Lebanon or Syria. Any other result will deepen the mistrust between the two countries, and the risk of open military confrontation. Hence my continued hope that Bashar Assad was not involved in Hariri's assassination and other crimes.

Syria reopens 2 border crossings with northern Lebanon closed in May after a Lebanese Delegation meets with Farouk al-Sharaa

The Syrio-Lebanese socio-economic issues are very much entangled. The effects of any internal Syrian policy on Lebanon is grave, more so than Lebanese M14 politicians want to admit.

A couple of weeks ago I was in Beirut for a conference. When the taxi driver from the airport knew I’m Syrian, he expressed his anxiety about the Syrian government decision to remove subsidies on oil and its plan on introducing VAT. I was astonished. Here was a Sunni Beiruti Lebanese telling me how my government’s internal economic decision is going to affect him negatively. He went on and on on how his family and extended family buy their yearly “mooneh” from Syria and how the economies of Lebanese villages on the Syrian border will be devastated with the decision of introducing VAT in Syria or removal of government subsidies on oil, diesel or gas.

The decision to reopen the border crossing with Lebanon will not affect many Syrians (maybe only those who are used to clubbing in Beirut), but people on the Lebanese side of the border will definitely be jubilant.

Policy makers asking for curbing on Lebanese-Syrian border will definitely face much resistance from hundreds of thousands of Lebanese citizens who strongly depend on the subsidized neighboring Syrian market for their day to day livelihood.

The taxi driver asked if there is anyway that pressure can be made on the Syrian government to reverse its decision and keep the subsidies.. I smiled!

LEBANON: Presidency crisis risks two governments
Wednesday, September 12 2007
Oxford Analytica 2007

Such outcomes are widely expected to lead to either side declaring their own government, citing their conflicting interpretations of Article 49. Lebanon witnessed a similar scenario of two governments in 1988 when Amin Gemayel, the president at that time, named then army commander General Michel Aoun to a head a military government in conflict with the existing cabinet.

Impasse. So far, both sides have been uncompromising. The 'March 14' government coalition demands a new president who will:

• commit Lebanon to the UN tribunal to try the killers of former Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri;
• ensure that Syria does not return to its previous position of power broker in Lebanese affairs; and
• respect UN resolutions 1559 and 1701 which call for Hizbollah to disarm.

For its part, the Hizbollah-led opposition stresses that a new president should:

• resist US attempts to act as protector of Lebanon;
• respect Hizbollah's status as a liberation force in southern Lebanon; and
• implement policies to counter nepotism and corruption in public life, which they blame the current government for exacerbating.

Hizbollah's bid for power, which started after last year's war, is a key factor in this impasse. Its flat refusal of any president from the March 14 group who is likely to pursue UN resolutions 1559 and 1701 dictates the opposition's stance and leaves little room for manoeuvre.

Divided counsels. The March 14 group have divergent priorities:

• Saad al-Hariri's Sunni bloc is mainly concerned with securing a president who will support the UN trial of his father's killers.
• Walid Jumblatt and Samir Geagea have made opposition to Syrian influence, the disarmament of Hizbollah, and concern over what they call the "Hizbollah state" within the Lebanese state, their first priorities.

Neither of these stances accommodates the opposition's standpoint.

Berri's compromise. Berri last week proposed to relinquish the opposition's claim for a unity government in return for agreement on a consensus candidate. This proposal reflects a changed situation after the UN Security Council on May 30 passed Resolution 1757 authorising an international tribunal for the trial of Hariri's killers. A unity government is no longer necessary to block a vote for such a tribunal, and the main focus for the opposition forces is now to avoid Emile Lahoud being replaced by a president beyond their influence.

The proposal has been positively received by the diplomatic corps, and also met with some approval among some March 14 leaders, including Prime Minister Fouad Siniora. Others like Jumblatt and Geagea see the proposal as an ultimatum, because the opposition could fail to show up at the parliamentary session unless the March 14 group agrees to find a consensus candidate.

The following story has yet to be picked up by the MSP and perhaps that is for good reason. Nevertheless, what do we know?

Iranians and Syrians Killed in Chemical Warhead Experiment in Syria

(Thanks to Israeliguy)
Margot Dudkevitch
Infolive.tv, 09/18/07

Dozens of Iranian engineers and 15 Syrian officers were killed in an explosion while attempting to mount a chemical warhead on a Scud missile in Syria on July 23. The blast spread lethal chemicals including the sarin nerve gas as well as VX gas. The Syrians and Iranian kept the incident under wraps, in an attempt to hide from the world their increasing cooperation to manufacture weapons of mass destruction.

Details of the incident that appeared in the Jane's Magazine were reported by Channel 10 on Tuesday night. According to the report, the facility where the explosion occurred had been created specifically to facilitate the altering of ballistic missiles to carry chemical payloads. While reports of the accident were mentioned in Syria, the authorities prevented details from being released.

A new military alliance between Iran and Syria is in the making, such an alliance can be perceived as the first signs that a regional war is in the making….

Regime Change Arab Style
Stephen Glain
24 September 2007
Newsweek International

No Bush policy has been more unpopular with Arab leaders than “regime change”—at least till now. Local potentates may have feared Saddam Hussein, but they feared his fate even more. At an Arab summit last March, Saudi King Abdullah warned fellow despots to “never allow … banners to be raised in Arab lands other than those of Arabism, brothers.”

Appeals for solidarity have been a pillar of Arab relations for many years. So it was striking when a subsequent war of words climaxed in what Arab analysts see as a stealthy Saudi call for regime change in Syria. After Syrian Foreign Minister Farooq Al Shaara suggested last month that they were U.S. lackies, the Saudis blasted Shaara for “discarding the traditions … governing relations between the brotherly Arab nations.” A few days later, Jamal Khashoggi, a newspaper editor and former top Saudi adviser, hinted in a TV interview that the Saudis might be working to depose Syrian President Bashar. “I think we’re moving in the direction of regime change,” said Khashoggi.

Such talk is the latest sign of the growing split between two rival Middle East factions—one allied with Washington, the other with Tehran. …

Syria accuses U.S. of spreading false reports of nuclear activity, bias toward Israel
By ALBERT AJI. AP
18 September 2007

DAMASCUS, Syria (AP) – Syria and North Korea denied Tuesday they are cooperating on a Syrian nuclear program, and they accused U.S. officials of spreading the allegations for political reasons — either to back Israel or to block progress on a deal between Washington and Pyongyang.

A front-page editorial in the government newspaper Tishrin also was critical of the United States for failing to condemn a Sept. 6 Israeli incursion, which it called a violation of international law.

Details of the incursion remain unclear. U.S. officials have said Israeli warplanes struck a target. A senior U.S. nonproliferation official said last week that North Korean personnel were in Syria helping its nuclear program, raising speculation that the Israelis were targeting a nuclear installation.

Syria has said only that warplanes entered its airspace, came under fire from anti-aircraft defenses, and dropped munitions and fuel tanks to lighten their loads while they fled….

Israel has clamped a news blackout on the raid.
North Korea strongly denied it secretly helped Syria develop a nuclear program, maintaining the charge was fabricated by U.S. hard-liners to block progress in the North's relations with the United States.

A Syrian Cabinet minister ridiculed the speculation about any cooperation with North Korea. "All this rubbish is not true. I don't know how their imagination has reached such creativity," Bouthaina Shaaban said.

"Regretfully, the international press is busy justifying an aggression on a sovereign state and the world should be busy condemning it instead of inventing reasons and aims of this aggression," he told Lebanon's Hezbollah TV station Al-Manar.

Syria's nuclear program has long been considered minimal, and the country is known to have only a small research reactor. In Vienna, officials for the International Atomic Energy Agency declined comment. But a diplomat associated with the agency said the IAEA "didn't know anything about any nuclear facility in Syria, and if there is something there, we should know."

Syria was the subject of IAEA investigation in 2004 on suspicions it could have been a customer of the nuclear black market run by the Khan network — the same operation that supplied Iran and Libya with materials for their clandestine atomic projects. But the diplomat, who demanded anonymity for discussing confidential information, said the IAEA found no concrete evidence of such activity.

The issue also was raised Tuesday at U.N. headquarters in New York, where Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told reporters he was awaiting clarification on the "intrusion of Israeli air force into Syrian airspace." Ban said he read North Korea's report denying involvement but did not have any independent information.

The editorial in Tishrin, which reflects Syrian government thinking in a country where the media is tightly controlled, said the U.S. accusations show Washington's pro-Israel bias and have no credibility.

It said Washington was "busy on behalf of Israel circulating claims" that the incursion involved "possible nuclear facilities supplied by (North) Korea."

"The strange thing is that the Americans are talking on behalf of Israel and are providing excuses and concocting new false spins such as talking about presumed Syrian nuclear activity and completely turning a blind eye about the Israeli nuclear danger," the Syrian editorial said…..

Despite mystery, neocons are quick to tie North Korea, Syria 

by Khody Akhavi, IPS, Via Leftlink

"The focus on North Korea comes as the U.S. prepares to implement a deal to end the country's nuclear weapons programme, a diplomatic approach that has drawn the ire of policy hawks like Bolton." …

Neoconservatives appear to be re-igniting a political narrative that fits neatly with the infamous cast of the "axis of evil"…. "They want to torpedo the North Korea deal, they have clung doggedly to making sure that there is no cooperation in Syria, and they're the same people who got us into this mess in the Middle East in the first place," said Daniel Levy, a former Israeli peace negotiator and senior fellow at the Washington-based New America Foundation.

The focus on North Korea comes as the U.S. prepares to implement a deal to end the country's nuclear weapons programme, a diplomatic approach that has drawn the ire of policy hawks like Bolton.

"Bolton represents the crowd that is very distressed that the U.S. has declared defeat in North Korea by trusting the North Koreans. They would like to scuttle that agreement," wrote Syria expert Josh Landis, on his widely-read blog, www.syriacomment.com.

"While doing it, anything they can dredge up to boost the notion of weapons transfers between Korea and Syria and Iran will be icing on the cake. Israeli planes were trying to get the goods," he wrote.

Some U.S. analysts have been very dubious of an actual Syrian nuclear threat, describing the speculation surrounding the incident as a manufactured stunt aimed at advancing a neoconservative agenda.

"This story is nonsense. The Washington Post story should have been headlined 'White House Officials Try to Push North Korea-Syria Connection.' This is a political story, not a threat story," said Joseph Cirincione, director for nuclear policy at the Washington-based Centre for American Progress, according to an interview with Foreign Policy….

We can rely on friends like the United States: Our faithful ally has once again come to our assistance. Were it not for the American media, we would know nothing whatsoever about that mysterious night….

There are serious doubts here. At the helm of the decision-making process in Israel today stand the prime minister, who has a proven military failure chalked up to him, and the defense minister, who has an innate tendency toward military adventurism. There is no one we can rely on with our eyes closed – certainly not on Ehud Olmert or Ehud Barak. One wants to wipe away the stains of his failure in Lebanon and the other wants to prove he is better than his predecessor. To this must be added a battered army, which is likewise trying to get people to forget its failure. And what about us? We are expected to support them and their actions with our eyes shut…

Iran's state-run news agency made an angry attack on the French government today after the French foreign minister said the world should brace for war against Iran over its nuclear program, although he did not believe war was imminent.

This interesting JP story, The secretive Syrian-N. Korean alliance, gives a good overview of Syria's efforts to purchase and develop scud missile technology. It brings Russia into the picture as well.

ABC News has a good roundup of the Israeli strike:

"Speculation Centers on Fears of Missiles and Nuclear Weapons."

Olmert’s ratings rise after Syrian raid: poll .

And don't miss: Olmert: “We respect Assad and Syria’s policies”

Fewer Foreigners Crossing Into Iraq From Syria to Fight
Drop Parallels Dip in Al-Qaeda Attacks

By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, September 16, 2007; A19

The number of foreign fighters entering Iraq from Syria has decreased noticeably in recent months, corresponding to a similar decrease in suicide bombings and other attacks by the group al-Qaeda in Iraq, according to U.S. military and intelligence officials.

"There is an early indication of a trend," said Gen. David H. Petraeus, the U.S. commander in Iraq, in an interview. Border crossings from Syria that averaged 80 to 90 a month have fallen to "half or two-thirds of that over the last two or three months," Petraeus said.

An intelligence official said that "the Syrians do appear to be mounting a crackdown on some of the most hardened terrorists transiting through the country, particularly al-Qaeda-affiliated foreign fighters." The official, who was not authorized to speak on the record, said there is also evidence that the Syrians have been stopping return crossings by foreign fighters leaving Iraq.

Other administration officials, while confirming the decrease in border crossings, said they are not yet prepared to attribute it to Syrian action, instead citing increased U.S. operations against al-Qaeda inside Iraq and stepped-up cooperation by terrorist "source" countries, such as Saudi Arabia, in prohibiting travel to Damascus. U.S. intelligence has said Saudis form the biggest group of foreigners fighting with al-Qaeda in Iraq. Petraeus also said his command is uncertain of the reason for the decrease, adding that "we're watching it on the ground."

A National Intelligence Estimate last month attributed an apparent crackdown in Syria to that government's concern about the threat al-Qaeda posed to its own stability. The NIE also assessed that Syria had stepped up its support to non-al-Qaeda groups to bolster their influence — and that of Damascus — in Iraq. Several Iraqi Sunni extremist groups opposed to the United States and al-Qaeda in Iraq are present in Damascus.

…The al-Qaeda in Iraq organization, which largely consists of Iraqi Sunnis, is said to be led by foreigners whose primary route into Iraq is through Syria. Syria is also believed by U.S. officials to be the primary route for foreign terrorists moving out of Iraq to return to their home countries in Arab countries, Europe and North Africa.

Nascent U.S. diplomatic dialogues with Damascus and Tehran, begun last spring after demands by war critics and the Iraqi government, have been judged unproductive by the White House….

Rice plans to attend a second neighbors conference at the end of October in Istanbul, but U.S. policymakers have made no decision on whether they would seek or agree to another high-level meeting with Syria. "We haven't ruled it out yet," an administration official said. "I could speculate that if the end of October came and the numbers of suicide bombers had really dropped significantly and people . . . came to the conclusion there really had been a change in [Syrian] policy, that would give us every reason to have a meeting."

Just as it does with Iran, which the United States alleges is working toward production of a nuclear weapon, U.S. policy toward Syria is to separate Iraq-related issues from other points of contention.

Israeli Official Muzzled on Syria Attack
By AMY TEIBEL
The Associated Press
Sunday, September 16, 2007; 8:52 PM

JERUSALEM — Israel's chief of military intelligence was ordered Sunday not to discuss an alleged air raid on Syria before a powerful parliamentary panel, tightening the veil of secrecy the government has thrown around the issue….

In a statement some participants saw as an oblique reference to the alleged Syria raid, Yadlin told the meeting, "Israel's deterrence has been rehabilitated since the Lebanon war, and it affects the entire regional system, including Iran and Syria," according to a lawmaker who was present.

Idaf, a Syrian reader of S.C. living in the Gulf, had this to say of the Israeli strike:

It was only about the image and perception of who’s boss. All other things are making less and less sense!

The only thing that is making sense is the following:

For a year, Israeli army was feeling desperately insecure, the perception of its deterrence capabilities reduced to a low level not seen before in the eyes of its public and neighboring Arabs. On the other hand, Syria’s military confidence after the war last summer increased to a level where Israel, the US and its Arab allies were feeling really uncomfortable.

The Israeli army badly needed a PR stunt. My hunch is that there was no strike. Only a brief infiltration of airspace and all parties (Israel, US and Arab allies) are trying to milk this to the absolute last drop. It is a media strike rather than an actual military one. In short this was a publicity stunt that won’t cost Israel much but would have great impact on moral and image.

The 4 Israeli messages here were:

To the Israeli military: We are still superior. Pick your selves up and leave this state of low moral reached since the ware last summer.

To the Israeli public: The Israeli government is not as week as you think. Give us some more popularity points please! Oh and by the way, please return the investments and stop leaving Israel to your original countries of origin in Europe and the US.

To the Syrian people: Time’s up for your overconfidence after the war last summer. Go back to the pre July war moral. Stop feeling capable of regaining the Golan by force. Oh and how about you support Bashar less from now on after this humiliation?

To the Syrian government: OK, now that we humiliated you publicly, it’s time to talk peace. No way we were going to go back to negotiation when you were feeling confident militarily.

Just look at the PR campaign raged by the Israeli military in the last few days:

Mystery airstrike on Syria boosts Israeli military – Scotsman

Yadlin: Israeli deterrence restored – J Post

MI Chief: Israel has restored its deterrence capabilities – Haaretz

“Israeli deterrence impacting region” – J Post

Israeli deterrence reinstated, Military Intelligence chief says – Ynetnews

Now, will Syria return the slap? Many believe that the real question here is the following: How will Syria return the slap?

As Imad Moustapha said: “[not responding] would not serve our national interests. That would be detrimental to our national interests, because it would encourage Israel to repeat the same intrusions and operations. As I have said, every reaction creates a reaction. If Israel calculates that they can do what they want, they’re making a big mistake, just as they made a mistake last summer [in 2006, by waging war against Hizbullah in Lebanon].”

Richard Silverstein on his blog Tikun Olam translates a Hebrew language story which casts doubt on the U.S.-Israeli version of what happened in Syria:

The doubters of the U.S.-Israel story that the IAF attacked a Syrian-North Korean nuclear facility in Syria last weak are few and far between inside Israel. So it is worth noting a story published in Hebrew by Israeli Channel 10 correspondent, Yigal Laviv, which warns us to suspend belief until the facts are more fully known……

Trish Schuh is the only Western journalist to actually go to Deir al-Zur, the area where Israeli plans are said to have attacked a missile depot.  

SYRIA'S SMOKING GUN
by Trish Schuh
Sept. 17, 2007
Written for "Syria Comment"

DEIR EZ ZOR, Syria-   On a bridge over the Euphrates River at sundown, neighboring mosques weave a chorus calling Muslims to prayer. This destitute, ramshackle oil town on Iraq's desert frontier seems calm, despite Israel's recent raid on a military base outside the city to destroy "Syria's nuclear program.

The Qamishli-Deir Ez Zor highway, alleged by Israel to be a weapons route for Iraqi insurgents, was also quiet, and there were no heavy construction machinery or building cranes visible in the opposite direction on the road from Deir Ez Zor to Iraq. 

The Century Foundation, a paper by David Lesch, (.pdf) here (Via FLC)

Lesch "concludes that there have been a number of missed opportunities—spurned opportunities, in the case of the Bush administration—for dialogue and cooperation with Syria on suppressing Islamic terrorism, making peace with Israel, and creating political space in Lebanon. He blames neoconservative ideological hardliners in the administration and their allies in Congress for the sharp turn from constructive engagement to a complete disengagement. He says that while there have been hints of a possible softening of this policy in recent months, there is little evidence for thinking that there will be dramatic change in policy under the current administration"

Dr. Omri Nir: The strengthening Shi'a community in Lebanon is not merely a matter of political mood or tactics, but also reflects the country's real situation. Given the demographic shift, I believe this is a kind of slow social and political revolution, which will eventually make the Shi'a the leading community in Lebanon. Neither the West or Israel is likely to have any influence on this process, though the Syrians could. Equally, it does not seem likely that there will be a serious alternative Shi'a leadership to Hizballah in the near future…

The strengthening Shi'a community in Lebanon is not merely a matter of political mood or tactics, but also reflects the country's real situation. Given the demographic shift, I believe this is a kind of slow social and political revolution, which will eventually make the Shi'a the leading community in Lebanon. Neither the West or Israel is likely to have any influence on this process, though the Syrians could. Equally, it does not seem likely that there will be a serious alternative Shi'a leadership to Hizballah in the near future…

Prof. Barry Rubin: I hope, though, that no one underestimates the forces opposed to Hizballah within Lebanon. Clearly, the government coalition was not deterred by assassinations or other attacks, and the fact is that this side could well represent 60 to 65 percent of the population. They are not going to give up and may well be able to resist a Hizballah takeover or letting that group have veto power. This will be especially true if the Lebanon government gets a sufficient amount of external help…

Dr. Omri Nir: Regarding the situation in Shi'a politics, there are some new opposition voices to Hizballah. But these rivals don't have mass popular support. The only potential alternative is AMAL, which seems will continue to be weak in the short term. Still, AMAL controls 15 seats in the Lebanese parliament while Hizballah controls only 14. In south Lebanon, AMAL controls 84 village councils while Hizballah controls 87, which isn't much more.

The question is, what is preventing AMAL's leader Nabih Berri from being the alternative? There are reasons for such. The current political crisis is actually helping Hizballah. It prevented the possibility of the government, which had traditionally identified with AMAL, from leading a reconstruction effort, and thus left all projects to Hizballah and its Iranian funding. In contrast, Hizballah is the second largest employer in Lebanon after the government. More than 35,000 families receive salaries directly from Hizballah.

The other reason is that Berri has taken on a role as a mediator among factions, a situation that Hizballah accepts as benefiting itself. This is both his power and his weakness.

Lee Smith: A majority in Lebanon has stood up to Hizballah and seems willing to do so even at the risk of civil war. … Lebanon is an extremely important example of how we can help a Middle East state behave like a state. A parallel–or contrast–should be drawn between the Lebanese government and the failed Fatah rule, through the Palestinian Authority, over Gaza.

Dr. Paul A. Jureidini: As for the Lebanese army, it held together in recent years, because everybody in Lebanon wanted it to. The minute a Lebanese party like Hizballah decides it doesn't care about whether the Lebanese army unravels, the Lebanese army will unravel. It's as simple as that….

The Shi'a community as a whole has no great respect for Nabih Berri. In contrast, the Syrians have full trust in Nabih Berri, because he is their man. They created him, they continue to support him…. The Shi'a community as a whole looks at Hizballah as a religious link with Iran. It has that kind of legitimacy.

Posted by Alex

Addendum: See Gideon Lichfield's new blog, http://fugitivepeace.com, for good analysis of both the Sunday Times and Newsweek articles copied below. He is the Jerusalem correspondent for the Economist.

Israelis ‘blew apart Syrian nuclear cache’
Secret raid on Korean shipment

THE SUNDAY TIMES 

Uzi Mahnaimi in Tel Aviv, Sarah Baxter in Washington and Michael Sheridan

IT was just after midnight when the 69th Squadron of Israeli F15Is crossed the Syrian coast-line. On the ground, Syria’s formidable air defences went dead. An audacious raid on a Syrian target 50 miles from the Iraqi border was under way.

At a rendezvous point on the ground, a Shaldag air force commando team was waiting to direct their laser beams at the target for the approaching jets. The team had arrived a day earlier, taking up position near a large underground depot. Soon the bunkers were in flames.

Ten days after the jets reached home, their mission was the focus of intense speculation this weekend amid claims that Israel believed it had destroyed a cache of nuclear materials from North Korea.

The Israeli government was not saying. “The security sources and IDF [Israeli Defence Forces] soldiers are demonstrating unusual courage,” said Ehud Olmert, the prime minister. “We naturally cannot always show the public our cards.”

The Syrians were also keeping mum. “I cannot reveal the details,” said Farouk al-Sharaa, the vice-president. “All I can say is the military and political echelon is looking into a series of responses as we speak. Results are forthcoming.” The official story that the target comprised weapons destined for Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Lebanese Shi’ite group, appeared to be crumbling in the face of widespread scepticism.

Andrew Semmel, a senior US State Department official, said Syria might have obtained nuclear equipment from “secret suppliers”, and added that there were a “number of foreign technicians” in the country.

Asked if they could be North Korean, he replied: “There are North Korean people there. There’s no question about that.” He said a network run by AQ Khan, the disgraced creator of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, could be involved.

But why would nuclear material be in Syria? Known to have chemical weapons, was it seeking to bolster its arsenal with something even more deadly?

Alternatively, could it be hiding equipment for North Korea, enabling Kim Jong-il to pretend to be giving up his nuclear programme in exchange for economic aid? Or was the material bound for Iran, as some authorities in America suggest?

According to Israeli sources, preparations for the attack had been going on since late spring, when Meir Dagan, the head of Mossad, presented Olmert with evidence that Syria was seeking to buy a nuclear device from North Korea.

The Israeli spy chief apparently feared such a device could eventually be installed on North-Korean-made Scud-C missiles.

“This was supposed to be a devastating Syrian surprise for Israel,” said an Israeli source. “We’ve known for a long time that Syria has deadly chemical warheads on its Scuds, but Israel can’t live with a nuclear warhead.”

An expert on the Middle East, who has spoken to Israeli participants in the raid, told yesterday’s Washington Post that the timing of the raid on September 6 appeared to be linked to the arrival three days earlier of a ship carrying North Korean material labelled as cement but suspected of concealing nuclear equipment.

The target was identified as a northern Syrian facility that purported to be an agricultural research centre on the Euphrates river. Israel had been monitoring it for some time, concerned that it was being used to extract uranium from phosphates.

According to an Israeli air force source, the Israeli satellite Ofek 7, launched in June, was diverted from Iran to Syria. It sent out high-quality images of a northeastern area every 90 minutes, making it easy for air force specialists to spot the facility.

Early in the summer Ehud Barak, the defence minister, had given the order to double Israeli forces on its Golan Heights border with Syria in anticipation of possible retaliation by Damascus in the event of air strikes.

Sergei Kirpichenko, the Russian ambassador to Syria, warned President Bashar al-Assad last month that Israel was planning an attack, but suggested the target was the Golan Heights.

Israeli military intelligence sources claim Syrian special forces moved towards the Israeli outpost of Mount Hermon on the Golan Heights. Tension rose, but nobody knew why.

At this point, Barak feared events could spiral out of control. The decision was taken to reduce the number of Israeli troops on the Golan Heights and tell Damascus the tension was over. Syria relaxed its guard shortly before the Israeli Defence Forces struck.

Only three Israeli cabinet ministers are said to have been in the know – Olmert, Barak and Tzipi Livni, the foreign minister. America was also consulted. According to Israeli sources, American air force codes were given to the Israeli air force attaché in Washington to ensure Israel’s F15Is would not mistakenly attack their US counterparts.

Once the mission was under way, Israel imposed draconian military censorship and no news of the operation emerged until Syria complained that Israeli aircraft had violated its airspace. Syria claimed its air defences had engaged the planes, forcing them to drop fuel tanks to lighten their loads as they fled.

But intelligence sources suggested it was a highly successful Israeli raid on nuclear material supplied by North Korea.

Washington was rife with speculation last week about the precise nature of the operation. One source said the air strikes were a diversion for a daring Israeli commando raid, in which nuclear materials were intercepted en route to Iran and hauled to Israel. Others claimed they were destroyed in the attack.

There is no doubt, however, that North Korea is accused of nuclear cooperation with Syria, helped by AQ Khan’s network. John Bolton, who was undersecretary for arms control at the State Department, told the United Nations in 2004 the Pakistani nuclear scientist had “several other” customers besides Iran, Libya and North Korea.

Some of his evidence came from the CIA, which had reported to Congress that it viewed “Syrian nuclear intentions with growing concern”.

“I’ve been worried for some time about North Korea and Iran outsourcing their nuclear programmes,” Bolton said last week. Syria, he added, was a member of a “junior axis of evil”, with a well-established ambition to develop weapons of mass destruction.

The links between Syria and North Korea date back to the rule of Kim Il-sung and President Hafez al-Assad in the last century. In recent months, their sons have quietly ordered an increase in military and technical cooperation.

Foreign diplomats who follow North Korean affairs are taking note. There were reports of Syrian passengers on flights from Beijing to Pyongyang and sightings of Middle Eastern businessmen from sources who watch the trains from North Korea to China.

On August 14, Rim Kyong Man, the North Korean foreign trade minister, was in Syria to sign a protocol on “cooperation in trade and science and technology”. No details were released, but it caught Israel’s attention.

Syria possesses between 60 and 120 Scud-C missiles, which it has bought from North Korea over the past 15 years. Diplomats believe North Korean engineers have been working on extending their 300-mile range. It means they can be used in the deserts of northeastern Syria – the area of the Israeli strike.

The triangular relationship between North Korea, Syria and Iran continues to perplex intelligence analysts. Syria served as a conduit for the transport to Iran of an estimated £50m of missile components and technology sent by sea from North Korea. The same route may be in use for nuclear equipment.

But North Korea is at a sensitive stage of negotiations to end its nuclear programme in exchange for security guarantees and aid, leading some diplomats to cast doubt on the likelihood that Kim would cross America’s “red line” forbidding the proliferation of nuclear materials.

Christopher Hill, the State Department official representing America in the talks, said on Friday he could not confirm “intelligence-type things”, but the reports underscored the need “to make sure the North Koreans get out of the nuclear business”.

By its actions, Israel showed it is not interested in waiting for diplomacy to work where nuclear weapons are at stake.

As a bonus, the Israelis proved they could penetrate the Syrian air defence system, which is stronger than the one protecting Iranian nuclear sites.

This weekend President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran sent Ali Akbar Mehrabian, his nephew, to Syria to assess the damage. The new “axis of evil” may have lost one of its spokes.

Israel’s Syria Raid: A Message for Iran
Israel sends Iran a signal with a stealth raid into Syria.
By Dan Ephron and Mark Hosenball
Newsweek

Sept. 24, 2007 issue – Few things motivate arab spokesmen more than the chance to condemn Israel. Yet they were subdued when Israeli warplanes flew deep into Syrian airspace earlier this month. The Arab League called the incursion "unacceptable," but most Mideast governments kept quiet. Their lack of support for Damascus has much to do with Syria's close relationship to Iran, whose rising power they fear. But some Israeli officials and analysts are reading it optimistically, perhaps dangerously so. "You can learn something from it as to how the Arab world might react to an Israeli or American attack against strategic targets in Iran," says Yossi Alpher, a former Israeli intelligence official.

Whatever the Israeli planes were doing in Syria, Iran's nuclear program—which Tehran says is peaceful—couldn't help but loom over their mission. "It's a tacit reminder to Europe and to Washington that if they don't take a tougher action against Iran, Israel may have to do it alone," says Avner Cohen, a nuclear expert and a senior fellow at the United States Institute for Peace. Details of the Israeli operation remain hazy. Syria's ambassador to the United States told NEWSWEEK the Israeli warplanes dropped munitions in the open desert near Dayr az Zawr before fleeing; he promised his country would retaliate in a manner and at a time of its choosing. "Israel will not be permitted to do whatever it does without paying a price," says Imad Moustapha. But the unparalleled censorship Israel clamped on the operation has fueled speculation that the target could have been a missile factory or nuclear technology from North Korea. (Some U.S. intelligence sources say the latter claim is shaky.) The story of the Israeli operation appears to have begun with aerial photographs shot from a spy plane or satellite. A former U.S. official, who asked for anonymity to discuss sensitive matters, told NEWSWEEK that Israel showed the images of a site in northern Syria to a very small group of officials in Washington last month, suggesting it was part of a nuclear project underway with North Korean involvement. Bush administration neocons have long contended that Damascus was trying to buy nuclear material and that Pyongyang, alleged to have been selling missiles to Syria and Iran since the 1990s, could be a potential supplier. When North Korea issued an unusually loud condemnation of Israel last week, hard-liners like former U.N. ambassador John Bolton read it as possible evidence of Pyongyang's involvement in the matter.

But current and former U.S. intelligence officials, willing to speak only if they were not named, say they've seen no credible evidence yet of nuclear ties between North Korea and Syria, whether before or since the Israeli operation. David Albright, a former weapons inspector in Iraq, says allegations raised by Bolton prompted the International Atomic Energy Agency to inspect Syria's small nuclear research reactor and other sites in 2003. He says the agency found the claims to be "unsubstantiated." Even Bolton, who served as the State Department's under secretary for arms control and international security, acknowledged to NEWSWEEK that while in government, he never saw proof North Korea was sharing nuclear technology with Syria.

For Israel, the possibility of a nuclear-armed adversary might have been enough to warrant the operation. Officially in a state of war with Syria—and Iran—Israel has vowed to let neither country obtain nukes (though Israel itself is believed to have built at least 200 nuclear bombs in its secret Dimona plant). Earlier this year, according to a well-placed Israeli source, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert asked President Bush for assurances that if economic and political sanctions failed to get Iran to shut down its nuclear facilities, Bush would order the U.S. military to destroy them before he leaves office. Bush has yet to provide the assurances, according to the source, who refused to be quoted because he is not authorized to speak for the government. The source says the Israeli government believes the Iranians will reach the point of no return in their nuclear-enrichment program sometime next year.

U.S. intelligence agencies, by contrast, believe Iran is still two to eight years away from mastering the technology to build a bomb. Some officials warn that attacking Iran would mire U.S. forces in another messy war and might prove ineffective, since the Iranian facilities are believed to be scattered across the country and buried deep underground. Still, from Israel's perspective, there might never be a more supportive White House. "It makes sense that if Israel has to do it alone, it would want to do it on Bush's watch and not wait to see what the political attitude of the next administration will be," says Alpher. That Arab states, and the world, will look away next time might be too much to assume.

With Jeffrey Bartholet in Washington