It would seem that the allegations that Syria is attempting to set up some sort of nuclear weapons program is buncombe. So says Joseph Cirincione in the Foreign Policy, below. But what other evidence is their that Bolton is shooting from the hip.

1. Bolton accused Syria of hiding Iraq's nuclear program even after the other spinners had given up on this claim.

2. Cyprus stopped a ship on its way from North Korea to Syria believing that it would contain evidence of nuclear cooperation, but the ship was carrying perfectly legal defensive missiles that Syria could use to protect itself from foreign attack.

3. Bolton accused Syria of buying nuclear technology from Pakistan through the Khan network. Baradei disproved this allegation and claimed it was nonsense.

4. Now Bolton is claiming Syria is importing nuclear technology again. His track record would suggest he is blowing hot air again.

Perhaps this raid was really about Lebanon after all, as some S.C. readers have suggested. A shot across the bow before the presidential elections. The US wants a pro-America president to be elected, which cannot happen unless the Lebanese opposition give up all the claims of increased representation. It is very unlikely they will do this. Syria probably does not have the power to pressure them to do this. Nevertheless, Washington is acting as if it believes that Damascus can order them to allow for a pro-US president.

Here are the remarks by Cirincione:

North Korea-Syria nuclear ties: déjà vu all over again?
Foreign Policy – Passport (Thanks to t-desco)
Blake Hounshell, 09/14/2007

Something didn’t smell quite right in Glenn Kessler’s recent story in the Washington Post about a possible nuclear link between North Korea and Syria. It looked to me like déjà vu all over again. So I asked Joseph Cirincione, senior fellow and director for nuclear policy at the Center for American Progress, author of Bomb Scare: The History and Future of Nuclear Weapons, and a frequent FP contributor, to weigh in. Here’s his take:

“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. The mainstream media seems to have learned nothing from the run-up to war in Iraq. It is a sad commentary on how selective leaks from administration officials who have repeatedly misled the press are still treated as if they were absolute truth.

Once again, this appears to be the work of a small group of officials leaking cherry-picked, unvetted “intelligence” to key reporters in order to promote a preexisting political agenda. If this sounds like the run-up to the war in Iraq, it should. This time it appears aimed at derailing the U.S.-North Korean agreement that administration hardliners think is appeasement. Some Israelis want to thwart any dialogue between the U.S. and Syria.

Few reporters appear to have done even basic investigation of the miniscule Syrian nuclear program (though this seems to be filtering into some stories running Friday). There is a reason that Syria is not included in most proliferation studies, including mine: It doesn’t amount to much. Begun almost 40 years ago, the Syrian program is a rudimentary research program built around a tiny 30-kilowatt research reactor that produces isotopes and neutrons. It is nowhere near a program for nuclear weapons or nuclear fuel. Over a dozen countries have aided the program including Belgium, Germany, Russia, China, and the United States (where several Syrian scientists trained) as well as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). If North Korea gave them anything short of nuclear weapons it is of little consequence. Syria does not have the financial, technical or industrial base to develop a serious nuclear program anytime in the foreseeable future.

Nor is there anything new about Syria being on the U.S. “watch list”; it has been for years. Unfortunately, this misleading story will now enter the lexicon of the far right. For months we will hear pundits citing the “Syrian-Iranian-Korean nuclear axis” and complaining that attempts to negotiate an end to North Korea’s program are bound fail in the face of such duplicity, etc., etc.

The real story is how quickly the New York Times and the Washington Post snapped up the bait and ran exactly the story the officials wanted, thereby feeding a mini-media frenzy. It appears that nothing, not even a disastrous and unnecessary war, can break this Pavlovian response to an “intelligence scoop.”

For information on the Syrian nuclear program that any reporter should have read, see the Web site of the Nuclear Threat Initiative.”

UPDATE: Washington Post diplomatic correspondent Glenn Kessler responds via e-mail:

“I think the world of Joe Cirincione. So I obviously take his concerns seriously.

All I can say in response is that I (and a number of uncredited colleagues) spent more than week knocking on doors of many agencies, seeking answers. No one tried to wave us off the story, including people who normally I thought would have tried their best to prevent us from printing it. I did note a number of caveats and explained that Syria never had much of a nuclear program. There appears to be a connection to the Israeli raid, which is now the subject of some of the tightest censorship in years. We will keep pursuing the story in hopes of providing greater clarity for our readers–and especially experts like Joe.”
FP Passport

Greenspan in his new book even goes as far as blasting Bush's war on Iraq, saying: "I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil."

It is worth reviewing Syria's nuclear record to try to sort out spin from fact and speculation from firm evidence.

Three years ago, John Bolton made a number of allegations about Syria establishing a nuclear plant and being part of the Khan nuclear ring.

His allegations were strenuously pooh-poohed by IAEA chief Mohamed El-Baradei at the time. Khan was long ago shut down. We have been given absolutely no new evidence to suggest that the re-animation of these old allegations is not re-fried beans and attendant hot air.

Here is what al-Baradei said on June 26, 2004. Taken from an old SC post, here

Syria says UN nuclear inspectors welcome

"The Syrians told me they would be happy if we go and verify whatever we need to verify," International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohamed ElBaradei told reporters on Saturday during a flight to Moscow for a four-day official visit. "But we haven't gotten any piece of information on why we should be concerned about Syria."

Last week, diplomats told Reuters that the IAEA considered Damascus a top candidate for being the fourth customer of the nuclear black market that supplied uranium enrichment technology to Iran, North Korea and Libya.

But ElBaradei said no country had provided any hard evidence that would implicate Syria as a customer in the black market set up by Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan's atomic weapons programme. "This is something I read in the paper. Nobody came to us with any information (about Syria)," ElBaradei said. The IAEA, along with governments and intelligence agencies, has been investigating the details of Khan's network so that it can be dismantled. The results of the investigation are classified.

Syria, which has called for the creation of a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction, has denied any interest in nuclear weapons.

Last month, diplomats and nuclear experts told Reuters that an experimental high-tech intelligence technique developed by the United States had detected what appear to be operating uranium-enrichment centrifuges in Syria. Diplomats said the centrifuges, which spin at supersonic speeds to purify uranium for use as fuel for power plants or weapons, could only have come from Khan's network. But some U.S. officials — as well as ElBaradei — are skeptical about the centrifuges.

"We don't have super high-tech detectors, and if somebody detected something they'd better come to us. We are the ones who can clarify fact from fiction," ElBaradei said.

ROME — A senior U.S. nuclear official said Friday that North Koreans were in Syria and that Damascus may have had contacts with "secret suppliers" to obtain nuclear equipment.

Andrew Semmel, acting deputy assistant secretary of state for nuclear nonproliferation policy, did not identify the suppliers, but said North Koreans were in the country and that he could not exclude that the network run by the disgraced Pakistan nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan may have been involved.

He said it was not known if the contacts had produced any results. "Whether anything transpired remains to be seen," he said.

Syria has never commented publicly on its nuclear program. It has a small research nuclear reactor, as do several other countries in the region, including Egypt. While Israel and the U.S. have expressed concerns in the past, Damascus has not been known to make a serious push to develop a nuclear energy or weapons program.

In Washington, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack declined to comment on Semmel's remarks but noted that the United States had longstanding concerns about North Korea and nuclear proliferation.

"We've also expressed, over time, our concerns about North Korea's activities in terms of dealing with A.Q. Khan and others around the globe," he told reporters.

McCormack said he was not aware of any specific link between North Korea and Syria.

ISRAEL/SYRIA: Rumours of war reflect tensions
Friday, September 14 2007
Oxford Analytica

EVENT: Damascus on September 11 complained to the UN Security Council over the Israeli air force incursion deep into Syrian territory on September 4.

SIGNIFICANCE: The incident follows months of speculation about a looming military confrontation, amid conflicting declarations from both sides. The charged atmosphere, coupled with unresolved tensions left from last year's Lebanon war and Israel's continuing war of attrition with Hamas in the south, could lead to escalatiion.

ANALYSIS: Syria and Israel have enjoyed an uneasy if quiet relationship since the signing of disengagement understandings after the 1973 war; since then the Golan Heights have remained the calmest conflict border in the region. War by proxy has occasionally erupted, in addition to direct confrontation between air forces during Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon and Israeli air strikes inside Syria in 2003.

• The loss of Soviet client status meant that access to high-tech weaponry came with prohibitive prices.

Al-Hayat explains the French Foreign Minister Kochner will NOT visit Damascus. (Sorry for the original mistake! Too much haste.)

?????: ????? ?????? ???? ?????? ??? ???????

"Accusation of Nuclear Development are a new "bida'" or innovation." Completely untrue that Syria is cooperating with North Korea in a nuclear agreement, says Syrian Minister of information. "This is a "cover" for Israel.

????? ??????: ?????? ??????? ??? ???????? ?????? ????? ??????

????: ????? ????????
??? ???? ??????? ?????? ???? ???? ????? ??????? ???????? ???????? ????? ????? ?????? ????? ????? ????? ?????? ?? ???? ????? ???? ??? ??????? ???? «???? ????? ??????? ??????? ??? ?????? ??????????» ??? ?????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ???? ????? ????? ????? ??? ????? «?????????» ??????. ??? ??????? ??? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ???? ??????? ??????? ???? ????? ??? ??? ??????? «????? ??????» ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ?????? ??????????? ?????? «?????? ???? ?? ?????? ???????… ???? ???????????» 

Jonathan Marcus, BBC, “Israel’s Syria ‘raid’ remains a mystery” MSK writes, "Everyone else should learn from Jonathan Marcus how to report on something without relying on rumors or spin-doctors."

b writes in the comment section:

Note how this “intelligence” was stovepiped.

The usual CIA analysts are “unaware” about it. From Israel to Bolton/Abrahms to Cheney/Hadley to the WaPo. We have seen that before.

How would one identify anything nuclear but a reactor encasing on an aerial picture? Impossible – and Syria is certainly not building a reactor (10-15 years, 1-2 billion).

This is “The Building of a Nuclear Syria Meme” written by Moon of Alabama – from RPS/Ghadry through Bolton/Abrams to Cheney/Hadley.

“Justification” for an Israeli attack on Syria.

Official Syrian Source: Our answer will be painful and Israel will pay dearly

Turkish intelligence assisted IDF in attack on Syria – report

Kuwaiti newspaper says Turkish intelligence provided Israel with information on targets Air Force allegedly attacked last week without Turkish government’s authorization

An Opposition Leader Sees a Way Out for Lebanon By MICHAEL SLACKMAN, NY Times

Lebanon’s speaker of Parliament on Wednesday pressed for agreement on his plan to restart negotiations between the Hezbollah-led opposition and the American-backed government.

Amal Saad-Ghorayeb kindly supplied the following Notes:

Syrian FM's visit to Jeddah cancelled: Al Mustaqbal, Naharnet and other Lebanese dailies:

Saudi Arabia announced Tuesday that a scheduled visit by Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Mouallem to the kingdom for apparent rapprochement talks has been cancelled. 

A Saudi official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said "the scheduled visit has been cancelled." He did not disclose further details.

The visit would have been the first by a Syrian official to Saudi Arabia since a public row between the two countries in mid-August.

Observers believe that using the word "cancelled" reflects extent of the deterioration in Saudi-Syrian relations.

An Arab diplomat familiar with Saudi thinking told Naharnet: "The Saudi official could have said the visit has been postponed, or even indefinitely postponed."

But by saying it has been cancelled the Saudi official "slammed the door in the face of Syrian rapprochement efforts. It is a way of expressing the kingdom's dismay," the diplomat said.

On its part, SANA said there was no scheduled Syrian visit to Saudi Arabia in the first place.

Syrian source denies US report on Israel targeting Hizbullah arms shipment

N. Korea, Syria May Be at Work on Nuclear Facility By Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 13, 2007; Page A12

North Korea may be cooperating with Syria on some sort of nuclear facility in Syria, according to new intelligence the United States has gathered over the past six months, sources said. The evidence, said to come primarily from Israel, includes dramatic satellite imagery that led some U.S. officials to believe that the facility could be used to produce material for nuclear weapons.

The new information, particularly images received in the past 30 days, has been restricted to a few senior officials under the instructions of national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley, leaving many in the intelligence community unaware of it or uncertain of its significance, said the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. Some cautioned that initial reports of suspicious activity are frequently reevaluated over time and were skeptical that North Korea and Syria, which have cooperated on missile technology, would have a joint venture in the nuclear arena.

A White House spokesman and the Israeli Embassy declined to comment yesterday after several days of inquiries. A Syrian Embassy spokesman said he could not immediately provide a statement.

The new intelligence comes at an awkward moment for the Bush administration, which since the beginning of the year has pursued an agreement with North Korea on ending its nuclear weapons programs. U.S. and North Korean officials held talks last month in Geneva on the steps needed to normalize relations, and this week a delegation of U.S., Russian and Chinese experts visited North Korea's Yongbyon nuclear facility to consider ways to disable it. The New York Times first reported on the intelligence linking North Korea and Syria yesterday.

At the Geneva talks, North Korea indicated a willingness to satisfy U.S. questions about an alleged uranium-enrichment program that started the crisis over its nuclear ambitions, the sources said. U.S. officials have said that North Korean officials acknowledged the program in 2002, but Pyongyang subsequently denied doing so. In the meantime, it restarted a plutonium facility at Yongbyon and harvested enough weapons-grade material for as many as 10 nuclear weapons. In October, it tested a nuclear device.

In talks in Beijing in March 2003, a North Korean official pulled aside his American counterpart and threatened to "transfer" nuclear material to other countries. President Bush has said that passing North Korean nuclear technology to other parties would cross the line.

Israel conducted a mysterious raid last week against targets in Syria. The Israeli government has refused to divulge any details, but a former Israeli official said he had been told that it was an attack against a facility capable of making unconventional weapons.

Others have speculated that Israel was testing Syria's air defenses in preparation for a raid on Iran or that Israel was targeting weapons destined for Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Bashar Jaafari, the Syrian ambassador to the United Nations, told reporters that the idea of a Hezbollah connection was ridiculous.

Syria has signed the nuclear nonproliferation treaty but has not agreed to an additional protocol that would allow for enhanced inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency. GlobalSecurity.org, which offers information on weapons of mass destruction, said that "although Syria has long been cited as posing a nuclear proliferation risk, the country seems to have been too strapped for cash to get far."

Syria has a Chinese-supplied "miniature" research reactor at Dayr al-Hajar, but has been unable to obtain larger reactors because of international pressure on potential sellers.

John R. Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and a critic of the administration's dealings with North Korea, said that given North Korea's trade in missiles with Syria, it is "legitimate to ask questions about whether that cooperation extends on the nuclear side as well."

GENEVA (AFP) — New Syrian visa requirements on Iraqis have come into force, virtually halting the flow of Iraqi refugees through the main crossing between the two countries, the UN refugee agency said Tuesday.

"For the first time in months, if not years, UNHCR field workers visiting the Syrian-Iraq border yesterday found the crossing point virtually empty," Ron Redmond, a spokesman for the UN High Commissioner for Refugees said.

"The regulations effectively mean there is no longer a safe place outside for Iraqis fleeing persecution and violence," he told journalists.

"An estimated 2,000 Iraqis flee their homes daily inside the country, so we are increasingly concerned about their fate as their options for safety are reduced," Redmond added.

??? ???? ?????? ???????? ??????? ?????? ?? ???????? ??? ?????? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ??????? ????????? ?? ????? «?????? ???????» ????? ???????? ???? ???? ?? ???? ?????? ??? ?? ???????? ??????? ??????? ??????? ?????????? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ???????? ???????????? ????? ?????? ?? ?????? ??????. ????? ??????? ??? ???? ????????? ?????????? ?? ???? ???????? ???????? ?????? ??? «????? ?????? ???? ?????????? ??? ????? ??????? ?? ????? ??? ?????? ?????????»? ?????? ????? ????? ???? ???? «??????? ?????? ?? ??????». ???? ??? ?? ???? ????? ???? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? «???? ????? ??» ?«???? ????? ??»? ????? ?? ???? «????? ??? ?????? ????? ?? ????? ????????? ?? ????? ???????? ??????? ??????? ?? ??????????».

Here is the rough content in English: (Ronin Broughman sp. ?), editor of Israel's Yediot Acharonot, indidcated that the strike was against chemical weapons and missile production in the north of Syria – Scud C and B. Nuclear weapons are not a Syrian concern because they have chemical weapons with which to respond to Israel. Even though they have received ready made scuds from Korea, Syria has begun production of its own with the help of Iran.

This is Ynet's story: Report: Israel spots nuclear installations in Syria 09/12/2007

Washington official says Israeli surveillance shows possible Syrian nuclear installation stocked by North Korea, Israeli Arab newspaper claims target of alleged raid last week was Syrian missile base financed by Iran.

Meanwhile on Wednesday the Nazareth-based Israeli Arab newspaper The Assennara cited anonymous Israeli sources as saying that Israeli jets "bombed a Syrian-Iranian missile base in northern Syria that was financed by Iran… It appears that the base was completely destroyed."

Syria has formally complained to UN. (AFP)

Although Syria lodged a formal complaint, it did not propose a resolution to censure Israel. It left it up to others to do it. On this I.C. comments:

The syrians have complained to the UNSC but have not requested any action against Israel. Here is the article though its in arabic:

Syria has always preferred to force the Americans to veto than to let it slide. At least that way the bias to Israel would be reinforced in the public’s eye ( a symbolic, though futile victory). I would have expected them to resort to the UNSC for action especially in the case of a blatant and unprovoked breach as Damascus claims. It’s this reservation that makes me wonder.

Soloman adds a legal perspective:

Under UNSC 1701 clause 15, states may use their flag ships and aircraft to interdict weapons shipments to Hezbollah, even if it isn’t on their territory.

No state needs permission from Lebanon or Israel to do this because clause 15 is specifically worded to supersede Chapter 6 restrictions (”Decides further -”). No consent from a third-party state like Syria appears to be required under the resolution for a strike on its territory for this purpose.

idaf writes of the Gulf reaction (He is a Syrian who works in the Gulf):

The firm order to keep everyone’s mouth shut on this even after it took place seems to have come from the US to its allies in the region. The synchronized silence by Saudi, Jordan, the gulf and Egypt and the fact that they did not utter a word of condemnation, solidarity, regret or even concern is indicative, but the most alerting issue here is the absolute silence of Saudi financed media in the region (ie. the majority of the Arab media). Take for example, Alarabiya, Al-Sharq Alawsat and even Future TV. Usually, these media outlets are the first to jump on any incident related to Syria and spin it in a way that Syria appears the guilty side. When it comes to incidents relates to Syria and Israel, these outlets tend to host an influx of analysts and talk shows gloating on how Syria is week and too close to Iran. This time, not a word!

Given the coordinated Israeli-American-Saudi media black out, I’m reading this as a joint attempt to hide something that can be perceived by the Arab public as a failure on the US and moderate Arab side and might strengthen the Syrian (or Iranian) image. It can also be something that can cause an embarrassment to Arab “moderates”.

The news of Israel's strike against Syria is beginning to come out fairly quickly now that the story has broken. CNN's reporting is confirming much of what has been rumored and what sources had suggested to me several days ago – that the operation was a military strike on arms and not a test of radar or road to Iran. We are still not sure what exactly was hit, but it does seem like missiles. Whether they were being transported or the site was a factory has yet to be cleared up.

Addendum: The CNN story still smells. So now we are told, through unnamed sources, that it was Iranian weapons heading to Hizbullah and clinching the evil axis of Iran-Syria-Hizbullah. 

But why would Iran be flying to the Lieberman-Damascus International airport only to be transported back to Deir al-Zur and then toted back to Lebanon? Or, Why would Iran be flying to Deir? It doesn't make sense.

The real reason this doesn't make sense is that if Israel had intelligence that Syria was violating UNCR 1701 and acted on it, they would have trumpeted the happy news to the world, rather than sit on it for a week.

Where are the family pictures? CNN would be treating us to endless loops of the camera footage from strike aircraft. They play it all the time when they WANT us to see what they hit.

There is still a final chapter here.

CNN: U.S. pleased by Israel's Syria flyover, Published: 09/11/2007

The United States reportedly is pleased by Israel's alleged incursion of Syria last week.

The report followed Syria's charge that Israeli warplanes invaded its airspace Sept. 6 and dropped ordnance — an allegation that Israeli and U.S. officials declined to confirm or deny.

According to CNN, the Americans believe that the operation may have involved Israeli ground troops as well as aircraft, and that the incursion may have targeted weapons supplied by Iran and passing through Syria en route to Hezbollah in Lebanon.

CNN quoted a U.S. source as saying the Israeli airstrike "left a big hole in the desert" in Syria.

Syria denies that IDF ground troops participated in overflight op. Jerusalem Post

CNN: writes:

Sources in the U.S. government and military confirmed to CNN's Barbara Starr that the airstrike did happen, and that they are happy to have Israel carry the message to both Syria and Iran that they can get in and out and strike when necessary.

Right now, diplomats in the region are trying to ensure the incident does not escalate.

The European Union's foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, is serving as a conduit between Israeli and Syrian foreign ministers, urging both sides to allow cooler heads to prevail, Solana's office said.

Story Highlights

Syria calls incursion a "breach of airspace" in letter to U.N. — France, the current president of the Security Council, said it had received no letter from Syria.

Israeli airstrike last week may have targeted weapons stores, sources tell CNN

Operation may also have involved ground forces, U.S. and regional sources say

Israel Defense Forces has made no comment

The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) on Tuesday lashed out at Israel for intruding Syria's territorial air space last Thursday, the official news agency reported.

The Best article by an Israeli is by Larry Derfner in the Jerusalem Post, copied below

For once, Israelis seem to believe that Syria is telling the truth – that Israeli jets invaded Syria's airspace last Thursday, and that Syria fired at our jets but missed.

The reason Israelis believe the Syrian story is because if it wasn't true, Israel would deny it. Why would Israel deny it? Because countries aren't supposed to fly their jets into another country's airspace without permission. It's considered an invasion. An act of aggression. It gives the invaded country a casus belli – a justification to strike back.

In short, it's wrong. It's the sort of thing that starts wars, and countries are supposed to try to avoid wars, not start them.

So Israeli leaders have nothing to say about the Syrian reports. This is the diplomatic equivalent of a wink. Everyone understands.

What's hard to understand, though, is how the Israeli media can be so docile, so obedient, in the face of such a reckless Israeli act. I was watching Channel 2 Thursday night, and I couldn't believe what I was hearing, or rather not hearing.

None of the journalists, who clearly assumed that this incident had really taken place, thought it worth mentioning that Israel had just risked starting a war with Syria. None of them challenged Israeli officials on the wisdom of this. All they talked about was what Syria might do now, whether Syria would go to war. That Israel had just provoked Syria, had just escalated the conflict, was the elephant in the newsroom that they pretended not to see.

This has been the tenor of the coverage ever since – lots of speculation on what Israel was trying to achieve and how Syria might react, hardly a hint about the incredible risk Israel took, about the morality of tossing a lighted match in a dry forest as this country's leaders just did.

It's almost surrealistic. It's like there's a conspiracy of silence. The people who are supposed to ask questions act as if they've been lobotomized. I feel a little bit like I'm living in a police state.

What would have happened if Syria had shot down one of our jets? We would have been at war with a country on our northern border that has biological and chemical weapons as well as lots of missiles – and Israel would be guilty of having provoked the war.

FOR MONTHS now, Israeli political and military leaders have been saying the danger on the border is not that Syria will invade, but that Syria is afraid we will invade, and that one thing will lead to another and a war will break out due to one side "miscalculating" the other's intentions. Implicit in this was that Israel would never invade Syria because Israel doesn't want war, Israel doesn't do things like that, so the real danger was Syria's paranoia.

Evidently, Syria wasn't so paranoid.

Since Thursday, spokesmen for this country have been trying to calm everyone down, assuring everyone that Israel doesn't want war.

What a joke. If Israel wanted to calm things down with Syria, why did it fly its jets into Syrian airspace at a time like this? If Israel doesn't want war, why did it risk war?

While I'm surprised the Israeli media are just falling quietly into line behind the government and the army, I'm not surprised the Israeli public is doing so. When it's Israel vs. the Arabs, there is no policy too belligerent or too dangerous for a majority of Israelis to support.

They will accept any official explanation or non-explanation without question, they will put their children's lives at risk with trepidation but without protest – anything rather than wonder aloud whether Israel might be in the wrong this time and the Arab enemy in the right. As was the case on Thursday.

IT TURNS OUT that nothing has changed since last summer's war in Lebanon. With rare exceptions, the Israeli media didn't ask any questions then, and they aren't asking any questions now. Same with the public. In fact, the situation seems to have gotten worse. Last summer's war was started, after all, by Hizbullah, so even Meretz, even I supported it at first. The failure by the media and the public came later, when they didn't ask what purpose Israel had in continuing the fighting indefinitely. Now we've got a situation where the country has gone mum after its leaders behaved recklessly not in self-defense, as in Lebanon, but in aggression.

We've set up a strict double standard for ourselves and the Arabs. We believe Israel is entitled to breach Syrian airspace, or Lebanese airspace, because – well, because they're bad and we're good. But if they breach ours? If Syrian jets dared fly over Israeli territory, everybody knows what would happen – we'd shoot them down without a moment's hesitation. And afterward we'd complain to the whole world, we'd say, "You see? The Arabs are trying to kill us all, just like the Nazis." Yet if, on the other hand, Israeli jets fly over Syria – and get away with it? Wink, wink. The little country with the big heart has done it again. Damn, we're good.

DESPITE WHAT some readers think, I'm not one of those people who blame Israel for all of the Middle East's troubles, who think the Arabs would leave Israel alone if we'd only leave them alone. That's a ridiculous idea. But it's no less ridiculous to claim that Israel wants peace with its whole being and it's only the Arabs who are preventing it. I think Thursday's incident showed otherwise.

No, I'm one of those people who believe the Middle East is a bloody mess because both the Arabs and the Israelis are oriented to war. I like to think the Arabs are the bigger part of the problem, but even if that's true, we are no small part of it.

By Larry Derfner

CCN is confirming that Israel carried out an air strike against Syria. 

Israeli aircraft carried out an airstrike inside Syria last week, possibly targeting weapons that were destined for Hezbollah militants, according to sources in the region and in the United States.

Israeli soldiers deployed in the Golan Heights look toward Syria on September 7.

Syria reported that its aircraft fired on Israeli "enemy aircraft" that flew into northern Syria early Thursday. The Israel Defense Forces had no comment on the report, and have refused to comment further on the new revelations.

But the sources told CNN the military operation, which happened Wednesday into Thursday, may have also involved Israeli ground forces who directed the airstrike which "left a big hole in the desert" in Syria.

The strike may have targeted Hezbollah weapons coming into Syria or transiting through the country from Iran — a pattern over the past three or four years which has occurred without any retaliation or action taken against it — the sources said.

The Israeli government is very happy with the success of the operation, the sources said.

Sources in the U.S. government and military confirmed to CNN's Barbara Starr that the airstrike did happen, and that they are happy to have Israel carry the message to both Syria and Iran that they can get in and out and strike when necessary.

Right now, diplomats are rushing around the region trying to ensure the incident does not escalate

Syria and Israel flirt with war," By Sami Moubayed in Asia Times, Sep 12, 2007

DAMASCUS – During the Suez Crisis of 1956, Israel developed a regular habit of violating Syrian airspace to deter the Syrians from supporting the Egyptian army. The Syrians did not have radar at the time, so air force commander Wadih al-Muqabari developed a scheme

….Coming together under the banner of a "peace delegation to Syria", the group has recently returned from a trip to the Syrian embassy in Amman, Jordan, where they applied for entry visas, in the hope of becoming the first Israelis to set foot legally on Syrian soil. Sitting in a local cafe and swigging from bottles of malt beer, the foursome grew more and more animated as they enthused about their mission for rapprochement between the "ordinary folk" on both sides of the divide….

Another member of the group, Ari Libsker, had to overcome resistance from closer to home. "When my father saw us on TV and realised how serious we were, he told me 'you're not my son anymore'," laughed Ari. "But he soon came to terms with it, even comparing me to the legendary Abey Natan."

The Natan comparison is not one that the group take lightly. Natan was an Israeli pilot who made a clandestine flight to Egypt to meet with President Nasser, long before the peace deal between the two countries. His two sorties to Cairo airport met with all kinds of hostility from his fellow countrymen, but he later became viewed as one of the most important peace pioneers of his day. As their eyes blazed with righteous zeal at the thought of becoming modern-day Natans themselves, it was clear that these four trailblazers see their quest as just as essential for peace to occur.

And, given the current state of play on a diplomatic level between the two nations, the timing of their message of conciliation could not be better. "War is being pushed every day in the media," said Nimrod Kramer, "so we want to go as soon as possible – it's the most patriotic thing we can do for our country."

The group are less than enamoured with the Israeli leadership's sabre-rattling of late. "Look at Barak's campaign slogan, that he's the best equipped to lead the country to war," complained Chicky. "We don't need leaders like that; we need them to say they're the best equipped to lead the country to peace." According to Ari: "It should have been a good thing we lost the war last summer, because it forces us to come to the negotiating table rather than rely on military might." However, it appears that the still-smarting IDF top brass are now looking for any excuse to flex their military muscle once more and prove their critics wrong, regardless of whether they are acting with the backing of the public.

"Securing Lebanon from the Threat of Salafist Jihadism." by Saab and Ranstorp, Brookings Institute.

Lebanese ruling elites have a tendency…to play down the threat of Sunni radicalism in their country or to blame its militancy on Syria. But by burying their heads in the sand, Lebanon’s ruling factions are missing an important opportunity to contain the threat of Sunni extremism at a relatively early stage in its development. It is no doubt that salafist jihadism in Lebanon, partly caused by extreme living conditions and fueled by a violent regional environment is gradually but surely growing.

I have tried to collect the latest views on the Israeli operation into Syria:

Yoav Stern in Haaretz

Syrian parliament member Muhammad Habash, who often expresses a hardline stance about Israel under the direction of the Syrian regime, said Sunday that the Israeli operation in Syria failed.

"What happened was an attempted attack, but it definitely failed and that is what led to the contradictions in Israeli declarations," he said.

Habash said that if Israel had succeeded, it would have rushed to announce the operation to the world, as Israel did immediately after bombing an Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1981.

IAF planes dropped live ammunition on Syria during flyover by Barak Ravid and Yoav Stern, Haaretz Correspondents, and the Associated Press

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem said Monday that Israel Air Force warplanes dropped live ammunition during an alleged violation of Syrian airspace in the early hours of Thursday.

Muallem, who was addressing a press conference in Ankara along with his Turkish counterpart Ali Babacan, was quoted Monday as accusing Israel of having carried out an intentional and hostile act.

Meanwhile, former MK Azmi Bishara said Monday he believes Israel carried out an operation in Syira. "Without getting carried away in speculation, this was an aerial operation, not an [airspace] violation in order to send a message," he wrote in an article published on the Syrian Web site Sham-Press.

Bishara wrote that the operation was extremely serious, and that it could become a pretext for certain Lebanese or Syrian officials to go to war.

The Balad chairman added that that Israel's silence on the issue is unusual. "Israel has wrapped itself in silence and imposed this path on even the most talkative politicians, as the quiet after the storm could become the quiet before the storm," he wrote.

Bishara listed several potential targets for the operation: arms smuggling, anti-aircraft systems, or missile systems. Alternatively, Bishara wrote, Israel may have been testing Syrian air defenses in order to map out a route for an air strike on Iran.

Why Did Israeli Planes Enter Syria? Time Magazine concentrates on the Iran bombing exercise hypothesis.

Al-Muallem informs European ambassadors of details of Israeli operation," by Ibrahim Hamidi, al-Hayat, Sept. 10, 2007. (Translation thanks to mideastwire.com)

Ibrahim Humaydi of Al Hayat, an independent Saudi owned newspaper, wrote on September 10: “The Syrian foreign minister Walid Al-Muallem revealed yesterday that the Israeli violation of Syrian airspace last Thursday came hours after the foreign affairs commissioner in the European Union Javier Solana told him that the Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert will start decreasing the number of troops deployed in the occupied Golan Heights because of the tension between the two countries. Western diplomatic sources announced to Al Hayat that Al-Muallem informed the ambassadors in Damascus of the details of the Israeli “aggression” and the path followed by the aircraft and showed them pictures of the ammunition that they dropped in the north eastern part of the country.

“Al-Muallem also told the ambassadors in his meeting with them before his visit to Turkey that Solana informed him in a “quick meeting” on the margins of the Arab ministerial conference held in Cairo last Wednesday that Olmert will start decreasing the number of troops and will withdraw all the troops deployed following the recent escalation last summer “while the Israelis were preparing all along for the aerial violations mere hours later”. It was learned that Al-Muallem called Solana last Thursday and informed him of the details of the Israeli information and that what happened contradicts what Olmert told him and what Israel is announcing about its desire for peace. Diplomatic sources announced to Al Hayat that Solana promises to call Damascus back.

Radio Times with Marty Moss-Coane, WHYY (Philadelphia's NPR Station.) Monday, September 10

50 minutes
Should the US seek better relations with Syria? Some Middle East analysts say Syria is in a key position to help the US on both Iraq and the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Other say, Syria can't be trusted and diplomatic isolation is the more prudent approach. We'll debate this with JOSHUA LANDIS, an assistant professor of Middle Eastern Studies at Oklahoma University and TONY BADRAN a research fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. Listen to this show via Real Audio | mp3