Beyond the Cusp

May 19, 2013

Who Gets to Pick the Winner in Syria?

As the civil war continues to murder innocents with the latest estimate approaching one-hundred-thousand murdered civilians and over one and a half million refugees fled to neighboring Turkey and Jordan there is a group of nations attempting to influence who wins. The problem is that many of these outsiders are backing different forces which serve to extend the fighting possibly endlessly producing no winners, just increasing casualties in an endless procession. First we need to define the disparate groups and then find who is backing whom. The supposed home team definition would likely have to go the current President for life Bashir al-Assad and the Alawite tribe from which he comes. There are two sets that are considered rebel forces which sometimes cooperate and at other periods work either independently or actually impede each other. One rebel group consists mostly of members from the Muslim Brotherhood while the other consists of forces aligned with Jabhat al-Nusra which is the al-Qaeda terror group. Then there are two other groups which currently support Syrian President Bashir Assad but actually represent the Iranian interests and are likely to continue to engage in the war even after Assad collapses or is killed. These two groups are Hezballah, the terrorist group whose political wing currently leads the ruling coalition in Lebanon, and the IRGC, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, a group of fighters which make up a second military force roughly equivalent in size, equipment, training and capabilities to the Iranian Armed Forces used mostly to assist in foreign interventions, terrorist training internationally and domestically as required, and any other clandestine operations which may be assigned by the leadership of Iran. So, generally speaking there exist five groups vying to take control over all of Syria.

 

Oddly enough getting the teams all figured out who are operating within Syria is difficult enough, but trying to untangle the external interests and influences is far more complicated especially when dissecting their various motives. Let us first address the most up front, above board and obvious of the external influences. The most obvious is Turkey who is steadily supplying arms to both rebel forces for the most selfish of reasons, assuring their continued preeminence as the only stable rout for oil and gas pipelines. There is a further reason driving Turkey in providing arms for the rebel groups which is that there is no love lost between Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Syria President Bashir Assad as both view themselves as a leader in some future Muslim Caliphate, Assad as leader of the Arab nations in an Iranian Caliphate and Erdogan as leader of a reborn Ottoman Caliphate. Add to this that as long as there exists some sustained level of violence which would discourage construction of new oil and gas routes through Syria then Turkey, with its already existent pipelines, would remain the uncontested and sole route of pipelines for oil and gas from the Arabian Peninsula and related reserves.

 

Another supplier of arms to one of the rebel forces is Saudi Arabia who is backing the Muslim Brotherhood aligned rebels. The Saudi interest is the opposite of Turkey as the Saudis would very much like to have an additional player supplying pipelines to the Mediterranean Sea and into Europe as competition would result in lower prices for them in transporting their oil and gas. Furthermore, the Saudis are rivals of the Iranians and thus would love to see Bashir Assad removed from ruling Syria thus breaking the Iranian crescent in which Syria is a vital link connecting Iran and Iraq through to Lebanon and the ports of the Mediterranean Sea. The Saudi Arabians are supported by the rest of the members of the GCC, Gulf Cooperation Council; whose members are of far less military capabilities thus the Saudis make all the decisions. The Saudis are also counting on support by the United States but they may run into some surprises in that relationship which we will cover later.

 

Then there are those exterior forces supporting the Syrian military and Syrian President Bashir Assad and at the same time defending the Iranian interests. These two groups are the IRGC and the Hezballah terror group. Should Bashir Assad fall either by fearing being taken by the rebel groups who would likely give him treatment similar to that used to dispatch Libyan Dictator Muammar Gaddafi, a rather unpleasant death, these two groups would simply continue the fight in support of their true masters, the Iranians. To either of these forces the continuance of Bashir Assad as the President of Syria is simply something that makes their presence in the fight more readily explainable. Remove Assad and their real motivations are revealed and Iran would be uncovered as the true force behind Assad remaining in power. Another nation supporting Bashir Assad, even if in a somewhat limited manner, is Russia and its President Vladimir Putin. Russia has thus far limited their support to continuing to fill all past weapons orders they have agreed to with Syria and are preventing any overt support for the rebels such as interventions or establishment of a no-fly zone by the United States or NATO. The most disturbing participation by the Russians is their intent to follow through with the sale and supply of their S-300 Anti-Aircraft Missile Systems which would make any Israeli strikes to prevent chemical weapons or other game-changing weapons from being transferred to the Hezballah forces in Lebanon for use against Israel in the future more hazardous. There is one potential future situation which would prove most intriguing, if President Assad should be killed or otherwise removed from the situation, would Russia continue their support giving the future weapons shipments to the IRGC and Hezballah or would their interest in the situation in Syria be terminated.

 

And then there is the most troubling foreign influence, and that is the United States and President Obama. The obvious interpretation of the United States interests is that they are aligned with Saudi Arabia and supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and against the entirety of other forces. This façade also has another participant, Turkey, who also appears to work with the Saudis while also passing weapons to their intended recipient without question. Some of these weapons are intended for Jabhat al-Nusra as they are supplied from the al-Qaeda forces and influences who were involved in Libya. There have been rumors that the truth behind the catastrophe in Benghazi may have been related to attempts to prevent powerful and game-changing weapons, possibly stinger missiles, from being sent from Libya to undesirable recipients. Even if such a proposition were true, that is one truth that will never see the light of day. As is said, some secrets are secrets for a very good reason and as such must remain nothing more than a rumor, a whisper in the tempest and nothing more.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

April 28, 2013

Empty Threats

President Obama has managed to take the full might and power of the United States of America and make it as impotent as a child who threatens to hold their breath until they turn blue. Once again this week President Obama stepped up and reiterated his willingness to act should Bashir Assad or either rebel group utilize any of Syria’s extensive stores of chemical weapons. His actions were necessitated by reports of possible use of said chemical weapons as reported by the intelligence agencies of France and Britain. These reports coincided with a more strongly worded statement from the head of Israeli military intelligence that President Bashir Assad had indeed used his chemical weapons. The Israeli communicated that they had proof that Syrian troops had released Sarin nerve agent on two occasions and not just military grade tear gas whose use had been reported earlier. This was likely stressed as President Obama had discounted the use of the military grade tear gas as not being sufficient to cross President Obama’s red line on chemical weapon use. The Israeli report was initially confirmed by United States Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel who later retreated from his position claiming to have been surprised by the Israeli claim as they had not informed him while he had been visiting Israel earlier on the week. So, where does that leave things?

 

The thing about the Israeli claim is it was backed up by the Syrian rebel forces which are currently receiving nonlethal supplies from Western powers when they admitted to knowledge that Israeli agents were working within Syria and would quite likely have first-hand evidence of any chemical weapons use. For the rebels to actually admit to the presence of Israelis inside Syria is a rather bold statement that would not be issued lightly. Despite the mounting evidence that Bashir Assad has resorted to using his chemical weapons, President Obama has chosen inaction and a simple restatement of his initial threat that any use of chemical weapons by either side would result in immediate action by the United States. When the initial reports of potential use of chemical weapons was issued by Britain and France President Obama requested clarification as to which chemicals were known to have been released. When it was then reported that there were suspicions of possible caustic chemicals as well as the aforementioned tear gas, President Obama dismissed the rumored use of caustic agents dismissing them as equally possible industrial chemicals such as chlorine being accidentally released as a result of the use of explosive munitions. When President Obama backed off these initial reports it might have been understandable that the American threshold to qualify as chemical weapons use was higher than that of their European allies and Israel. But with the reports of Sarin gas being released on the battlefields of Syria one might expect a reaction from the United States at least somewhat stronger than words, especially a stale repetition of the President’s original warnings. Does President Obama really believe that setting a red line and then when it is violated, simply resetting the red line will gain respect from the likes of Bashir Assad, a treacherous dictator who has already murdered tens of thousands of his own countrymen and sent millions into exile will recoil in fear from mere words that President Obama has given indication he never intended to back with actual actions?

 

And Bashir Assad is far from the only world leader watching to see if President Obama is a credible leader who backs his words with actions. There is always North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Un, another one who likes to hear himself threaten. The one thing absolutely necessary to keep the likes of Kim Jong-Un impotent is to mean action when one threatens to use it. If Kim Jong-Un expects for a minute that any threat of action by the United States is not going to be actually executed, then he is very likely to act on his threats in the belief that there would be no real consequences. And Kim Jong-Un is not the most dangerous of threats on the international stage. There is Iran and the Ayatollahs with their nuclear project which thus far words have proven to be less than useless, yet here too President Obama appears to be satisfied to talk until a nuclear Iran is a verified fact and a half a dozen cities around the world lie as smoldering ruins. With new leadership in Mainland China there is a need for the words of the President of the United States to have great weight, not great doubts. It is for exactly such reasons that President Obama must not allow his word to become a matter for questions rather than being taken at face value and his every word heeded. It is for reasons of credibility that President Obama may find necessity requiring him to act against the Syrian chemical weapons threat. It is not necessary for United States military forces to put boots on the ground as all that is required to fulfill President Obama’s warnings against the use of chemical weapons would be to destroy the chemical weapon storage facilities. My bet would be that should President Obama decide to commit a couple of B-2 stealth bombers, as he did in a show of strength to Kim Jong-Un, to actually bomb the Syrian chemical weapon stores, Israel would be more than agreeable to provide accurate coordinates and might even offer to turn off the Syrian radar grid, though such would not be really necessary with stealth bombers. The old children’s rhyme, “Sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never harm me,” does not apply in the realm of world politics where words can do one great harm, even break more than bones.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

April 12, 2013

How North Korea with Nukes Defines Iran with Nukes

A good number of world leaders are currently sweating nervously while hanging on every threat that the new North Korean Dear Leader Kim Jong-Un utters with their nerves fraying even more each time the satellites or other intelligence sources report any activities taking place anywhere near missile sites or nuclear instillations. Even China, the one who usually is called upon to calm situations emanating from North Korea, has placed additional troops on their border with North Korea and appears to be just as concerned as anybody else. Russia has made statements which could be seen as indicating that they are also in the dark as to what this new, young and untested North Korean leader is likely to do. The concerns are spread throughout the whole gambit of possibilities. Will he launch a middle-range missile or two or many more? Will he launch the reported untested long-range missile? Will the missiles be armed with active warheads? Would he honestly choose to place a nuclear weapon atop one of the missiles and if so where the nuclear warhead would be aimed? Everything is very much unknown largely due to no clear intelligence on North Korea and absolutely no history or even inklings of information about the new leader of North Korea. The entire world is in the dark forced to take guesses and attempt to be ready for any and every possibility. And as unclear everything is concerning this confrontation that has thus far been simply words and false moves without any actual belligerent acts, the world does have the one calming hope that all of this will result in simply meeting some demands for easing sanctions and some other mostly political compromises and food aid or other trade items as this has been the scenario in the past when his predecessors, his father and grandfather, had taken similar actions of saber rattling and boisterous threats. The level of trepidation which seems to have gripped our leaders where they have taken precautionary measures but at the same time are tip-toeing so carefully around the problem refusing to stand up against the threats coming from North Korea as if they are quiet enough things will calm down on their own. Such a timid approach only emboldens Kim Jong-Un and allows him to appear far more powerful than he actually is which is exactly what he desires. Where part of this strutting and bellowing out threats is done for intimidation and effect in order to have his demands met once they are stated, the other part is for propaganda on the home front where Kim Jong-Un will have reports for the foreseeable future regaling how the world was hanging on his every word and willing to grant him whatever he demanded and their sacrifices have not been in vain as North Korea is so powerful they can virtually stop the world from spinning. Maybe things would end quicker and Kim Jong-Un could be denied the endless ranting under the spotlight if he was confronted and somebody demanded him to simply state what this was all about and after he makes some demands instruct Kim Jong-Un that he will accept exactly what the rest of the world is willing to give him until he compromises and allows some freedoms and begins to serve his people instead of his ego. But the world does not seem to work like that which is why people like Kim Jong-Un and his fathers before him can get away with such antics.

Now look down the road about three or four years, or maybe by the end of this year depending on which report is correct on the Iranian nuclear weapons program and imagine how the world will react to the Iranian President, whomever wins the election this June to replace Ahmadinejad, along with whatever supporting role the Supreme Leader Grand Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Hosseini Khamenei decides to play making demands of the world. Imagine, if you can, Iran and the IRGC (Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps) along with their terrorist branches the world over, like Hezballah, threatening to detonate nuclear devices in multiple capital cities around the globe if their demands are not met. How would the world react if Iran decided to annex Iraq claiming they were simply reforming their rightful lands as the inheritors of the lands that belonged to Persia? They could then annex Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan all with the same claim. At what point would the world leaders decide it was too much and take a hard stand? Would it take having them attack a NATO country such as Turkey? Would the Europeans even flinch if they attacked Greece or would the Europeans see that as good a way as any to rid themselves of a problem? What if Iraq, Syria and Lebanon simply announced that they desired to form a confederation under Iranian rule with their retaining some amount of autonomy but falling under the protection of the Iranian nuclear umbrella? If the world is apoplectically paralyzed by North Korea when they presumably do not possess ballistic missiles capable of striking anywhere on the globe, what would be the reaction to Iran who by then will almost certainly possess such missiles? Would the United States go to war over Israel or would Israel become literally the Czechoslovakia of World War III? How about over Kuwait or Saudi Arabia? Would the world rise up to protect any of the Sunni Islamic countries if they began to fall under Shiite Iranian hegemony? After Iran crept across North Africa, would we then rise if they laid claim to Andalusia which is what the Islamic powers called Spain when they held much of it until 1492 when King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella marshaled the Spanish people and threw off the Islamic rulers. What if there were to be a modern battle of Tours in southern France. Iran is not a poor and economically desperate nation despite the effects that the sanctions have had on them. The Iranians are still managing to trade some of their oil and other goods and as the Western nations fall deeper into their own economic troubles we might very well see a resurgent Iran with many Asian and other nations discarding the sanctions and resuming trade with what would appear to be an Iran with a brighter future than the debt ridden Western nations. We need to remember that North Korea has a controlling power on its northern border and China would not allow the situation over North Korea threaten to bring a nuclear exchange to her southeastern border. Russia also would have something to say about such a possibility. North Korea also is far smaller and does not possess the natural resources that Iran does. Iran with nuclear weapons is a completely different and extremely dangerous threat which really cannot be compared to North Korea. If the nations of the world are unable to squelch the protestations and threats of Kim Jong-Un out of North Korea, then we will be in even worse position should Iran start to make similar noises backed by nuclear weapons. That is something to consider but not too close to bedtime if one wishes to sleep free of nightmares.

Beyond the Cusp

Next Page »

Theme: Rubric. Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: