Potential Results if Obama Orders Syria as a No-Fly Zone

According to inside the White House officials, President Obama’s White House has asked the Pentagon to draw up plans for a no-fly zone over Syria. The no-fly zone would be enforced by the United States as well as France and Great Britain and other NATO members as the next step in assisting the Syrian rebels against Syrian Dictator Bashir al-Assad. The rebels forces which have presumably been vetted and approved would also receive arms as a part of this new offensive. This was part of the reasoning why Senator John McCain just took an “unscheduled” and “private” trip into Syria to talk with the rebel leaders, the good rebels and not the bad rebels, and get a feeling for level of trust and their needs. There are a few questions which deserve a public debate before such drastic actions are undertaken and perhaps we could start the conversation here.

 

The first item would be to actually enumerate the potential consequences of such an act. We will hear from President Obama as well as Senator McCain and others in his echo chamber how we are allied and have the praise and agreement from the Saudis, Turkey’s leadership, and the members of the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council). We will not hear about the opposition and standing threats which exist and have come from Russia’s President Putin, Hezballah’s Leader Nasrallah and Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Russian President Putin has made his position exquisitely clear stating that Russia fully backs Syrian President al-Assad in his measures taken to put down the revolution being carried out against him by terrorist entities and Russia will back him against any outside interference by any groups or nation. Hezballah’s Nasrallah has promised that his organization has global reach and has in place assets that can be utilized against anybody found to be interfering in the fighting in Syria or who try to influence things against Hezballah in Lebanon. The Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has warned that any country which chooses to assist the rebels in their illegal revolution against their ally al-Assad will have their hand and foot cut off on opposing sides, whatever that actually means. Any way you look at these threats, one can be assured that ramification of enforcing a no-fly zone over Syria could very quickly lead to an escalating situation that could very easily get out of control leading to a much greater conflagration than we are presently witnessing.

 

But what are the likely initial and secondary events which would most likely actually follow the placing of a no-fly zone over Syrian airspace and arming the rebels with light and some crew served weapons but not heavy weapons. Some of the response would depend on how the no-fly zone were implemented and enforced. If the rebels were supplied with MANPAD Systems and Stinger Missiles, they would then be capable of providing their own air defenses. This method would allow for a suitable threat to exist on any Syrian air attacks that Bashir al-Assad very well might be very restrictive on his use of his air strike capabilities. This method would allow for only a minimal response from Russia who would likely provide al-Assad with potentially ARMs (anti-radar missiles) with which to counter the new armaments given the rebels thus returning a semblance of balance to the fields of combat. But if President Obama and his allies decide to take the more direct and conventional means of enforcing a no-fly zone over Syrian, this would generate a completely different response all around. The direct method includes initially flying sorties over all Syrian airfields and bases taking out as many aircraft such as helicopters and fighters as can be struck on the ground and bombing the runways to render them unusable. This is followed up by keeping air resources at the ready twenty-four hours a day in order to scramble and take out any aircraft that take to the skies within Syria and attacking those which have threat capability against the rebel forces. This direct approach could lead to some very serious responses. The Russians could deploy the S-300 and S-300M air defense missile systems in Syria and even man them with Russian troops. These are top of the line and very capable systems which could pose a serious threat to any United States or NATO planes sent over Syria. Putin might even go so far as to dispatch Russian fighter jets with Russian pilots to engage the United States and allied aircraft. Russia already has at least one known missile destroyer sitting just off the coast of Syria in addition to the Russian naval base in Tartus, Syria. This is just two of a myriad of responses the Russians could potentially take as a response to a United States applied no-fly zone over Syria, what about Iran and Hezballah?

 

Iran is a completely different story and much more of an unknown enigma. Much of the Iranian weapons capability comes in the form of missiles and rockets. The majority are ground-to-ground types but they also possess capabilities in ground-to-air and both ground-to-ship and ship-to-ship. Their navy consists mostly of fast attack craft armed with ship-to-ship missiles, torpedoes, and automatic cannons or heavy machineguns. The initial threat the Iranians could apply in response would be the closure of the Straits of Hormuz using various anti-ship mines backed up with land-to-sea-missiles already in place along the coastal region, fast attack craft patrolling the waters, longer range missiles stationed inland, and anti-ship artillery placed along the coastal areas. Simultaneously, the Iranians could mount a mass fast attack craft assault on the United States fleet positions with the targeted intent of taking out any aircraft carriers in the area. Such an attack could be coordinated with missile and artillery support from bases throughout Iran as well as anti-ship batteries along the coasts and on the Iranian owned islands in the gulf. Where such an attack may prove suicidal for many of the attacking Iranian ships, the United States would very likely also take some damage with the possibility that such damages could be quite costly and dear. One American warship sunk would likely be more costly than all the Iranian losses in such a confrontation and there would also be the propaganda victory that Iran would claim and would likely be believed and hailed as a sign from Allah across the Muslim World. There is one other unknown about Iran and that is concerning their nuclear program. The Iranians could very well already have a deliverable nuclear weapon, be it an actual twenty kiloton bomb or a smaller yield EMP styled device. Such a weapon might even be deliverable by a missile and could already be in place on a ship off the coasts of the United States or in Venezuela just waiting for the command. This is a potential about which the United States has only rumors and intelligence from satellites and other countries as it is highly doubtful that the United States has any HUMIT placed within Iran.

 

The final piece of the puzzle is an even greater unknown that Iran, that is Hezballah. It is known that Hezballah has infiltrated and is in league with the Mexican drug cartels. What is unknown is how extensive the Hezballah has positioned assets within the United States. The one truth about Hezballah is that until the 9/11 attack by Osama bin Laden, Hezballah had murdered the most American citizens of any terrorist organization. It was Hezballah who blew up the Marine barracks in Lebanon on October 23, 1983. Where Hezballah is not likely to be a significant threat against American military might, they are extremely capable in dispensing terror in a well-planned and systematic manner which would maximize the effects causing the maximum panic. Their style is to use explosions often to kidnap victims and then either hold them for ransom or simply to kill them one by one over an extended period making sure to make each execution as grizzly and horrid as possible while gaining it word-wide publication using both the old media and the internet. Most of the effect of a Hezballah assault would be mental stress, fear, and intimidation. Hezballah does have the capability to use explosive devices of massive effect and has shown the ability to utilize their assets to maximize their impact. A Hezballah assault would be a steady number of attacks likely spread over a prolonged period with varied lengths of time between attacks and seemingly unpredictable locations. Their initial series of attacks would be dispersed and occur in a swarm and they would repeat the use of swarms of attacks in a short period in order to cause trepidation that there would be a series of bombings or attacks to follow any single attack thus maximizing the public’s fears.

 

The main reason not to enter into the Syrian civil war has little to do with the problems that retaliation by Syria, Russia, Hezballah, or Iran might unleash. The reality is there are no good guys on any side in this war. There are no allies of the United States or Europe. We would be backing the least offensive of the sides but they would still be offensive. The other problem would be Bashir al-Assad’s response to the United States imposing a no-fly zone over Syria. Bashir al-Assad would resort to using his missiles of which he has a rather large supply. He would use these missiles against any United States assets in Iraq that were within his range as well as the fleet in the Mediterranean Sea and then also on Jordan, Turkey and of course Israel. Along with al-Assad striking Israel, we could also count on Hezballah unleashing thousands upon tens of thousands of missiles on Israel. The odds are Israel would strike back at Lebanon and leave Syria to Turkey, the United States and NATO. Israel has proven they have no dog in the Syrian civil war. But in Lebanon Israel has interests which simply put is to remove Hezballah from controlling the Lebanese government. There may even be the possibility that Iran may use some of the Iraqi assets and mount an attack on Saudi Arabia while all this was taking up everybody’s attentions. The basic truth is that there is no happy side to entering into the Syrian imbroglio, only heartache and great amounts of loss and pain. This is one fight where the best manner to employ is not to fight. Plan all President Obama wishes but the Congress should be demanding that the United States take a pass on Syria but instead they are egging the President on to engage in this evil and deceptive involvement. Mr. President, Please, just say no.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Turkey’s Erdogan and Russia’s Putin Ignore Obama’s Requests

The initial repercussions to President Obama dithering and retreating from enforcing his Syrian chemical weapons use “red line” have begun and the ramifications are far more damaging to world peace and security than anything that Syria’s Civil War could ever produce. The initial shot across the bow came from Turkey where Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan stated, “According to my plan, most probably I would be visiting Gaza in June.” Erdogan added referring to his intents to visit both Hamas leadership in Gaza and Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah, “I place a lot of significance on this visit in terms of peace in the Middle East. I’m hoping that that visit will contribute to unity in Palestine.”

 

State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki responded to the news declaring that, “As we’ve said consistently, we oppose engagement with Hamas, a foreign terrorist organization which remains a destabilizing force in Gaza and the region. We urge all parties who share our interest in the creation of a Palestinian state to take steps that promote the resumption of peace talks between the Palestinians and Israel.” Additionally, Secretary of State John Kerry commented during his visit to Turkey that Prime Minister Erdogan’s trip to Gaza would be “better delayed” waiting until the time when the “right circumstances” existed. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan struck back indignantly stating in response to Secretary Kerry’s impositions that “we wish he had not said that.”

 

Now the United States and the Obama Administration are facing a situation of explaining to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu exactly what he gained and where were the promised reconciliations with Turkey that President Obama had implied as a promise should Israel apologize. The Israeli-Turkish relations remain in a deep freeze with the charges and other legal actions by Turkish citizens and government agencies proceeding apace despite the humbling position Netanyahu was forced into taking at the close of President Obama’s visit, the visit where the President had promised there would be no surprises. The result is a slightly weakened Israel who now has been forced into a submissive position with Turkey and appearing weaker to the entire run of nations in the Middle East and the rest of the Muslim World. The full ramifications of President Obama’s miscalculations and consistent demands on Israel along with his weakness showed Syria and his apparent subservience to the Muslim Brotherhood as he supports their rise to power resultant from the Arab Winter, Obama’s Arab Spring.

 

On another front which also has ramifications in Syria and throughout the Middle East comes from Russia. Despite the ramifications presented to Russian President Vladimir Putin by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu on a recent visit in Moscow which advised that the selling of the anti-aircraft S-300 advanced missile systems to Syria thus changing dramatically the balance of power in the Middle East, the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated in an interview with Lebanese-based Al-Mayadeen television, the Russian government “committed to the agreements” signed with Syria regarding the advanced missiles and will “fully carry them out.” Lavrov further explained, “We have no intention of breaking international law. However, we do not want our reputation as reliable suppliers of weapons to be affected.” These statements came two days after Prime Minister Netanyahu’s visit leaving no doubt whether the ramifications and effects on Israel were known and able to be part of the equation.

 

Further comments on what other driving influences were behind the Russian’s decision were recently provided by Russian parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee Alexei Pushkov. His supplementary information paints a troubling picture of the credibility possessed by President Obama and on his ability to influence anything concerning world affairs. Alexei Pushkov was quoted to say, “We’re opposed to no-fly zones, because they are the first step toward aerial attack. Syria asked Russia to help it defend itself from aerial assault.” He also went further in explaining that Russia’s decision to send S-300 missile systems to Syria is, in part, a message to the United States. A more forceful message was also made with the deployment of at least twelve warships to patrol near a Russian Navy base in Syria. This was likely to be a message to all parties including NATO members and Israel not to interfere in Syria as Russia will act to defend their interests.

 

Both of these situations cast strong aspersions on the ability of President Obama to apply pressure or power in any situation anywhere in the world. This is an obvious reaction to President Obama’s timidity concerning the reported use by Syrian troops’ use of chemical weapons. The rules of unintended consequences applies to these actions which were primarily resultant of President Obama’s inept mishandling over the Syrian red line threat yet Israel will also pay a hard price as well. Reinforcing these feelings were also the well documented examples of his slow and tepid response to any military situation. These include but are not limited to President Obama taking months to approve the mission against Osama bin Laden after he was advised that all was prepared and certainty of success was extremely high, his complete lack of concern in addressing the situation in Benghazi where the American Ambassador to Libya Stevens and three others were murdered when had immediate actions been taken or even proper security increased in a timely manner after receiving requests for more readiness, and the President dithering and almost losing the opportunity to interdict Somali pirates holding American hostages. One more item which has the potential to have devastating consequences is the Iranian drive for nuclear weapons. How is it possible for any world leader concerned over the Iranian nuclear program take seriously President Obama’s promise that he will act if such becomes necessary. He did not act in Benghazi, nor did he act after the Syrian use of chemical weapons, he took close to six months to pull the trigger on the Osama bin Laden raid, so how could anyone expect a timely response to prevent the Iranians from attaining not just one nuclear device but tens or even hundreds of such devices before President Obama even begins to consider acting. This threat does not only pose a large problem for Israel as it also has serious ramifications for Saudi Arabia and the other members of the GCC as well as Europe, though the Europeans have blinders on and refuse to even notice any threat. The world is facing the same type of threats that were evident towards the end of President Carter’s term in office with the Iranian Hostage Crisis, a Middle East on fire, and a Soviet threat spreading throughout much of the planet. The main difference is we will have four full years of these ramifications and not just ten to fifteen months as was the case with Jimmy Carter. President Obama will very likely fulfill the prediction some who were at the time dismissed as alarmist pessimists when claiming that he would be another President Carter except on steroids. If even the slightest possibility exists that such may prove true, that should scare the life out of anybody, it sure does many of us here at BTC.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Obama and the Middle East Dilemma

While everyone stares at the ever shifting, ever blurring Syrian Chemical Weapons red line which is now befuddling the White House, the Syrian civil war continues to wind on and on eventually to determine who will prove supreme, bad or worse. There is no good side to choose in this fight. It now comes down to Assad backed by Iran and Hezballah, the Syrian Free Army which is backed largely by the Muslim Brotherhood, and the al Nusra Front which represents al-Qaeda and even should Bashar Assad be toppled there will still be Hezballah allied with the IRGC guerilla forces attempting to preserve the influence of their Iranian masters. As far as the United States is concerned there is no actual good guy for them to back though President Obama has appeared to have a soft spot for the Muslim Brotherhood in the past.

 

The one democratic country which is very concerned over the eventual results and intermediate activities in Syria is, of course, Israel. While the Israelis are not particularly fond of any of the players, their previous knowledge of Assad may make him the least troublesome of the evils for Israel. Do not misunderstand that Assad would make Israeli leaders overjoyed as they have fought three conflicts against his forces; one in the Six Day War in 1967, once again when both Syria and Egypt launched the Yom Kippur War in 1973, and their final conflict was an air war over the Bekaa Valley in 1982 where the Israelis knocked sixty Syrian fighters from the skies in two days of dog fights losing absolutely no planes themselves. For the memory of these defeats Bashar al-Assad might be sufficiently gun shy that would make his remaining in power preferable to having to teach a new leader the perils of engaging the IDF from scratch.

 

Whatever the eventual result of the civil war in Syria the one thing Israel absolutely cannot allow is for Iran or anybody else to funnel new and more dangerous weapon systems to Hezballah in Lebanon. This is what spurred the recent air raids by the Israelis on Damascus and along the Syrian-Lebanon border over the past week. The Israelis were removing transports carrying new weapon systems which would have posed a serious increase in the threat potential of Hezballah. One can only imagine what such systems might have entailed as Hezballah already possesses at a minimum sixty-thousand rockets of various ranges with which to threaten Israel. Despite such a seemingly overwhelming threat potential, Iran has still decided it is worth the possible losses to attempt to further arm Hezballah in order to turn their threat into a certainty that Tel Aviv would be decimated in return for any actions taken against the Iranian nuclear program. Iran has made it very certain that it matters not who attacks their nuclear program, Israel will receive the brunt of the Iranian response through Hezballah and Hamas and Syria providing Syria is still a part of the Iranian Shiite Crescent across the Middle East.

 

Meanwhile, back in Washington DC President Obama is doing a number of pirouettes on the head of a pin trying to avoid being pinned down to his red line should Syria use chemical weapons threat. Syria has, according to Israeli, French, British and even most United States sources, already deployed Sarin nerve agent against the rebel forces and civilians. There have been reports of multiple usages yet President Obama continues to squirm and wrestle with these facts attempting to twist them into a cloud of doubts in order to back away from the precipice and avoid actually being forced to act. The problem President Obama is facing is that he really miscalculated when making a threat he never expected to have to ever face. Now that reality has not only caught up but has swept past his threat of action crossing over his red line, President Obama must now fudge the facts and blow enough smoke that he can claim that his red line was more flexible and has remained inviolate, but with his red line not only crossed but rather obliterated, President Obama has been left appearing completely toothless in all ways concerning Syrian use of chemical weapons.

 

There is one huge problem beyond the simple fact that President Obama has been rendered impotent concerning events in Syria; all of his threats and posturing over the Iranian nuclear program are now mute and meaningless. This can only serve to make the Iranian nuclear weapons threat even more potent as it is now obvious that President Obama never actually intended to ever take action in order to prevent the Iranians from acquiring nuclear weapons. This leaves all of Europe as well as Israel, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the other nations within the GCC, and anyone else who Iran may see as an opponent directly in the crosshairs of a potential nuclear Iran. What makes things even more clouded is that now all of the intelligence information which originated with the United States or was heavily influenced by the United States now cannot be considered to be anything other than a ruse to prevent the appearance of a need to act. This is very likely to cause a complete reevaluation of the entire Iranian situation by Israel at the very least. The backing away from his red line by President Obama has resulted in the entire world now realizing that they are on their own when it comes to the Iranian threats. This can only lead to a more dangerous Middle East, like anybody thought such was even possible.

 

Beyond the Cusp