General Norman Schwarzkopf (1934-2012)

General Norman Schwarzkopf and Major Rick Francona - Riyadh, Saudi Arabia , 1991

I received word yesterday that one of the military heroes of our time, and my one-time boss, General Norman Schwarzkopf, had died. I served as his personal Arabic interpreter during Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq. He was 78 years old.

I first met General Schwarzkopf at the Pentagon as he was on his way to his new position as the commander of the United States Central Command (CENTCOM), headquartered at MacDill Air Force Base, Florida. I was assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), serving as the Assistant Defense Intelligence Officer for the Middle East.

As part of his orientation to his new command, my boss and I briefed the general on our recent support to Saddam Husayn and the Iraqi military in their eight year war with Iran. As part of that effort, I spent much of 1988 in Baghdad as a liaison officer to the Iraqi armed forces Directorate of Military Intelligence. It was though our provision of intelligence that Saddam's forces were able to defeat the Iranians on the battlefield.

When the Iraqis invaded Kuwait in August 1990, President George H.W. Bush declared that the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait "will not stand." A few days later, the President ordered General Schwarzkopf to begin the deployment of American combat forces to Saudi Arabia to defend the kingdom against a possible Iraqi attack. Almost immediately, the general himself moved to a forward headquarters in Saudi Arabia.

General Schwarzkopf was in need of an Arabic interpreter to help him deal with his Arabic-speaking allies as well as his Arabic-speaking enemies. I received a call at home from a senior officer (and friend) at the Central Command headquarters, asking me if I was interested in being General Schwarzkopf's personal Arabic interpreter - I jumped at the chance, but was concerned that DIA might object. I was wrong - DIA was happy to provide my expertise, or as they put it, "supporting the warfighter." I also learned later that Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Colin Powell had put out the word: "when CENTCOM calls for support, the answer is yes." I was on the ground at CENTCOM Forward in Saudi Arabia in two days.

General Schwarzkopf was interested not only in my Arabic language skills, but my previous experience in Iraq with the Iraqi army and air force. While in Baghdad in 1988, I had worked with several of the same officers that were now facing us in Kuwait and southern Iraq. One of these officers was Major General Wafiq al-Samarra'i, the Director of Military Intelligence (DMI) for the Iraqi armed forces.

In 1988, Wafiq (then a brigadier and deputy DMI) was the officer I worked with in providing intelligence information on Iranian targets. By virtue of the information we had provided, he had gleaned some insight to our intelligence capabilities, and would be using this information in his assessments and analysis for Saddam Husayn. Likewise, I had gained an appreciation for Iraqi intelligence and military capabilities through not only working with intelligence officers in Baghdad, but by traveling to the battlefields and observing the Iraqi army and air force in their operations.

Soon after I began my duties at CENTCOM, I was called to meet with the general. He asked me if I could teach him to speak Arabic. I replied - with all due respect - that I could teach him some basic conversational things, but learning Arabic is not a part-time endeavor. After I tried to get him through some basic greetings, the press of preparing to invade Kuwait and Iraq ended, thankfully, the language training.

I felt privileged to sit in on what I knew was going to be history. I, too, was a Vietnam veteran (I was previously a Vietnamese linguist) and was a small part of the rebuilding of the American armed forces into the most lethal and effective killing machine in history. The Iraqis may have been able to defeat the Iranians (with our intelligence assistance), but they were not going to be a match for the best-trained and best-equipped military in the world. The result was a foregone conclusion - the only question was how much American blood it would cost.

It was easily one of the highlights of my career. I wrote a book about my experiences in Iraq in 1988 and my later service as General Schwarzkopf's interpreter and advisor. The book can be found in libraries or online.

Years later, I was hired by NBC News to appear on their family of networks as a military analyst providing my insights into the 2003 American invasion of Iraq. One of my fellow military analysts was none other than retired General Norman Schwarzkopf. We appeared on camera together a few times. I will always remember his kind words, "As you well remember, Rick, when we took on Saddam...."

Right, general. You and me.

It was an honor and privilege to have served as his interpreter. It has, at times to my dismay, defined my military career. No matter what I did before or after that - and I like to think I have made some real contributions - I am best remembered as "Rick Francona, he was General Schwarzkopf's interpreter."

Syrian prisoners confirm Scud use

Four Syrian army soldiers captured by the opposition Free Syrian Army (FSA) confirm that the Syrians have launched Scud missiles at opposition targets in the country. This video was posted on YouTube by the Free Syrian Army unit calling itself the al-Qalamun Volcano (burkan al-qalamun) Brigade.



The FSA captured these four soldiers of the Syrian army 51st [Missile] Battalion of the 155th [Missile] Brigade. The 155th Brigade is headquartered near the city of al-Quyafah, located at 33°44'23"N 36°35'53"E. There are large missile garrison areas just southwest of the city.

The soldiers gave their names when asked. When the interviewer asks who is responsible for missile operations, the prisoner second from the left provides the information. He responds with the name Staff Colonel 'Ali Yusif Hamudi, commander of the 51st Battalion, and brigade commander Ahmad Ghanam. When asked who else, the prisoner responded with the name Staff Colonel Dhahir Hadad, commander of the 78th [Missile] Battalion.

At time code 1:01, the prisoner said that they had fired seven missiles, five during the day and two at night. He confirmed that he had witnessed the launches, and that they were launched at Darat 'Azah (36°16'47"N 36°51'36"E) in the Aleppo Governorate.

Comment: Darat 'Azah has been the scene of intense fighting over the last week. It is adjacent to the garrison of the Syrian army's 111th Regiment at 36°15'35"N 36°53'38"E that was seized by elements of the FSA last week.

ADDENDUM - Syria about to use chemical weapons on its own people?

This is an addendum to my earlier article, Syria about to use chemical weapons on its own people?

This Syrian opposition video shows chemical warfare protective equipment seized following a battle between the opposition and the Syrian army on the road between Damascus and the Damascus International Airport. That area has seen some of the heaviest fighting and regime air strikes over the last month. During the past few days, the opposition has surrounded the airport in hopes of shutting it down. Several airlines have canceled flights to Damascus.

According to new reports citing "U.S. officials" as the source, the Syrians have prepared some of their chemical weapons for use. It is one thing to prepare the weapons, but there is another, equally important factor in the employment of chemical weapons - you must protect your own troops who have to operate in the chemical environment. In the intelligence business, the deployment of chemical warfare protective gear is a key indicator of potential chemical warfare use.

This video indicates that the Syrian army is issuing protective gear to its combat units.



I have gisted the Arabic narration on the video, keyed to the time code.

0:01-1:10. This materiel was seized by the Free Syrian Army (FSA) during a battle with regime forces on the [Damascus International] airport road. It consists of chemical warfare protective equipment carried in ZIL-131 vehicles. There are suits, coveralls, overshoes, filters, boxes of combat chemical protective suits.

1:10-1:33. This is decontamination equipment found in the ZIL-131 trucks. You can see the hoses, brushes, decontamination fluid and other materials.

1:34-1:50. This is poisonous material to be used by the regime in air attacks.*

1:50-2:00. These are Russian chemical warfare protective filters.

2:05-2:40. This is how the suits are worn. This gear is now in the hands of the FSA, and will be used to protect ourselves in case of a chemical attack by the regime.
_______________
* I am not sure this is accurate. Since all of the other gear appears to be defensive, I suspect it is more decontamination fluid.

Pretty sobering. If the Syrians are not planning to use chemical weapons, there is no need to issue this protective gear.

Syria about to use chemical weapons on its own people?

Halabjah, Iraq - 1988

Is Syrian President Bashar al-Asad about to order his armed forces to use chemical weapons on their own people? According to media outlets citing "U.S. officials," the Syrian military has mixed the chemical components that make up the nerve agent Sarin (GB). Sarin has been used in the past in neighboring Iraq - in 1988, Iraqi Air Force fighters dropped Sarin-filled bombs on the Kurdish town of Halabjah in northern Iraq, killing over 5,000 people. Later that year, Iraqi forces used chemical weapons against Iranian troops during four major battles, making Iraq the only country to have used nerve agents on a battlefield.

Syria's chemical weapons are no secret. The Director of National Intelligence, in an unclassified report to Congress in 2006, provided this assessment of Syria's chemical and biological weapons, and the ballistic missiles that can be used to deliver them. It does not address Syrian air force fighter-bombers that can also carry chemical weapons. (See my earlier article, Syria's chemical weapons and the uprising.)
_________
Unclassified Report to Congress on the Acquisition of Technology Relating to Weapons of Mass Destruction and Advanced Conventional Munitions, 1 January to 31 December 2006. (Read the entire report).

UNCLASSIFIED
Chemical and Biological. Syria continued to seek dual-use technology from foreign sources during the reporting period. Syria has had a chemical weapons program for many years and already has a stockpile of the nerve agent sarin, which can be delivered by aircraft or ballistic missile. In addition, Syria is developing the more toxic and persistent nerve agent VX. We assess that Syria remains dependent on foreign sources for key elements of its CW program, including precursor chemicals.

Syria's biotechnical infrastructure is capable of supporting limited biological agent development. We do not assess the Syrians have achieved a capability to put biological agents into effective weapons, however.

Ballistic Missile. Syria's ballistic missile program is a key component to its strategy to deter external threats and is a priority in defense planning and spending. Syria possesses one of the largest ballistic missile forces in the Middle East—composed of Scud-class liquid propellant short-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs), including Soviet—and North Korean—origin Scud missiles. Additionally, Syria fields the SS-21 Mod 2 SRBM. We judge that Syria's operational missile force can employ chemical as well as conventional warheads. Syria is developing a version of its Scud-D missile with greater accuracy and that is more difficult to intercept.
__________

The Obama Administration has reacted with its usual vapid rhetoric.

"Today I want to make it absolutely clear to Asad and those under his command: The world is watching. The use of chemical weapons is and would be totally unacceptable. If you make the tragic mistake of using these weapons, there will be consequences and you will be held accountable."

If Bashar al-Asad thought there would really be serious consequences, he would not have given the order to his armed forces to ready the chemical weapons. Just like al-Asad's primary sponsor and supporter - Iran - the Syrian president does not take American threats seriously.

I hope Bashar is making a serious miscalculation. I hope that I have underestimated Barack Obama's understanding of the situation in the Middle East. I have been to Halabjah - I have seen the results of nerve gas attacks on defenseless civilians. I have been to the Iraqi battlefields in 1988 - I have seen the results of nerve gas attacks on Iranian troops.

Perhaps this is a gamble on al-Asad's part - "Someone grant me asylum or I'll go out with a bang."

If Bashar al-Asad descends to the level of Saddam Husayn and does use chemical weaspons, he needs to suffer the same fate as his Ba'thi cousin - delivered by either the Syrian people or an American missile. Unfortunately, our record of holding people "accountable" is pretty weak.

Obama Administration opposes tougher Iran sanctions?

The Obama Administration's rhetoric, usually delivered by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, maintains that the United States will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon, and that this Administration has imposed crippling sanctions on Iran. Despite that, the President has threatened to veto a bill imposing even tougher sanctions on the Islamic Republic. That does not seem consistent.

For those of you who do not follow the Middle East sections of the media, here's what is happening. In an unusual bipartisan move, the U.S. Senate voted 94 to zero to amend the defense authorization bill with sanctions further restricting trade with Iran. The new sanctions would apply to precious metals, graphite, aluminum and steel, metallurgical coal and software used for integrating industrial processes. These are the types of materials that can be used in a nuclear weapons program. This amendment ups the ante in American efforts to cripple those sectors in Iran - this will get the attention of the decision makers in Tehran and not just an impose further economic hardships on the Iranian people.

So why does the Obama Administration oppose this step, a step that might actually have an impact on the recalcitrant regime in Tehran? You would think the President would welcome sanctions that would help him achieve his commitment to prevent the fundamentalist Shi'a regime from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability. Despite the Administration's previous efforts - these "crippling sanctions" Mrs. Clinton keeps touting (mostly forced on it by the legislative branch), the Iranian nuclear program continues virtually unhindered.

According to chief of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Yukiya Amano, the current international sanctions protocols have not had any effect on Iran's nuclear activities - the Islamic Republic continues to enrich uranium at a steady pace, and shows no signs of changing their policy. Sanctions have had an effect on the Iranian economy - inflation is rampant and the value of the Iranian rial has virtually collapsed. While that has hurt the average Iranian, it has done nothing to hinder progress towards the development of nuclear weapon.

There is another policy that has not hindered Iran's nuclear program. It is the Obama Administration's repeated efforts to negotiate a resolution to this crisis - efforts which began as soon as Barack Obama took office in 2009 and have periodically resurfaced each time the Iranians offer to talk yet again. The Iranians, much more skilled in Middle East bargaining than the seemingly naive Barack Obama, have never agreed to anything except to meet again for more talks.

There has been no positive result whatsoever from the Obama policy of "engagement." While the Iranians agree to talk about talks, the centrifuges at multiple facilities continue to enrich uranium. The only chance of a peaceful resolution to this crisis is to force the Iranians to negotiate. Thus far, the sanctions and offers of "engagement" have only worked to Tehran's advantage. Unless the United States, the United Nations or the rest of the world can impose truly draconian sanctions that get the attention of the regime, negotiations will fail.

If negotiations fail, there will be one of two outcomes. Either the Iranians will be successful in acquiring nuclear weapons, or the Israelis will assess that the Iranians are close to such capability and mount an attack on the facilities. Either outcome is problematic, to say the least.

That said, if sanctions are going to be effective, they have to be strong. The Senate amendment is a start. The President needs to accept the fact - quietly so that he does not have to admit failure - that the Iranians are not going to fall victim to his wit and charm. Go for the sanctions.

Quoted in an article - Syrian helicopter deliveries

Over the past few weeks, I have been assisting ProPublica in its reporting of Syrian transport aircraft activity. I was quoted in their latest article - here it is in its entirety, my comment in bold.

To Retrieve Attack Helicopters from Russia, Syria Asks Iraq for Help, Documents Show

Syrian attack helicopters (SANA, via Agence France-Presse, Getty Images)

by Michael Grabell, Dafna Linzer, and Jeff Larson, Nov. 29, 2012, 5:17 p.m.

In late October, Syria asked Iraqi authorities to grant air access for a cargo plane transporting refurbished attack helicopters from Russia, according to flight records obtained by ProPublica. With Turkish and European airspace off limits to Syrian arms shipments, the regime of Bashar al-Assad needs Iraq’s air corridor to get the helicopters home, where the government is struggling to suppress an uprising.

Iraq regained control of its airspace from the U.S. military just a year ago and has been under intense diplomatic pressure from the United States to isolate the Syrian regime. Turkey says it has closed its airspace to Syrian flights, and if Iraq did so, Syria would be virtually cut off from transporting military equipment by plane. European Union sanctions have already constricted arms transport by sea and air.

But it is unclear whether Iraq permitted the fly-overs described in the documents. The Syrian cargo plane scheduled to pick up the helicopters did not land or take off from Moscow at the appointed times this month, suggesting that those flights did not happen.

Some of the flight request documents have been posted by hackers associated with the online collective Anonymous and formed the basis of a Time story Thursday. Other documents were obtained separately by ProPublica, which reported Monday that Syria appears to have flown 240 tons of bank notes from Moscow this summer. The authenticity of the documents in either cache could not be independently verified.

But taken together, the documents appear to contain new information. They show that Baghdad has requested several times to inspect other Syrian flights that were going to pass over Iraq from Iran and Russia, something that U.S. officials confirmed to ProPublica.

According to a cargo manifest dated Oct. 30, the helicopter the Syrians were going to pick up is an Mi-25, a Russian-made gunship that experts liken to a cross between an Apache and a Black Hawk helicopter because it can fire from the air and transport troops.

“Mi-25s are very important to the Syrian Air Force effort against the rebels,” said Jeffrey White, former chief of the Middle East intelligence division for the Defense Intelligence Agency and now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “It’s a heavily armored military helicopter, which makes it very difficult for the rebels to shoot down.”

Videos have been posted online that appear to show Syrian Mi-25s attacking rebels, and Syria has reportedly been struggling to maintain the helicopters.
Still, the documents leave many questions unanswered. Crucially, it is not known whether the overflights actually happened.

A U.S. diplomatic official told ProPublica that the United States has been working with the Iraqi government to stop such flights. “We have urged them directly to insist that the inspection of those flights occur or deny overflight rights,” the official said. “We have raised this concern and they have taken a couple steps in the right direction — either denying overflight rights if they believe arms are being shipped to Syria or insisting on an inspection.”

But, State Department and Pentagon officials have not provided information on the particular request made in the documents. Iraqi and Russian officials did not respond to questions.

The first two flights were scheduled for Nov. 21 and Nov. 28, but a photographer hired by ProPublica did not observe the cargo plane at the Moscow airport where it was supposed to land and then take off just three hours later. Nor could the flights be confirmed with international tracking services that have recorded the plane’s movements in the past.

Two more flights are scheduled for Dec. 3 and Dec. 6 , according to the records.

The Assad regime has been trying to suppress a popular uprising for almost two years. Tens of thousands of people have reportedly died in the fighting. On Thursday, dispatches described intense clashes on the main road to the Damascus International Airport, and at least one airline was reported to have canceled flights. Most of the Internet in the country was shut down as well.

Russia’s prime minister, Dmitri Medvedev, said this week in an interview with the French newspaper Le Figaro that arms shipments are part of a longstanding contract with the Syrian military to repair equipment for “defense against an external aggression.”

“We must fulfill the obligations connected to our contracts,” Medvedev said, noting that Russia has faced a legal conflict after suspending some arms deliveries to Iran.

Syria has found it increasingly difficult to transport helicopters. In June, a ship carrying three Mi-25 helicopters from Russia to Syria was forced to turn back after the ship’s insurer withdrew coverage in response to sanctions. A month later, a second attempt to deliver the helicopters by sea was aborted.

The newly obtained flight documents show that Syria planned to use its Ilyushin IL-76 cargo plan to pick up helicopters at Ramenskoye Airport, also known as Zhukovsky Airport, near Moscow. The manifest describes the cargo as an “old helicopter after overhaulling [sic].” A second document, sent to the Syrian embassy in Baghdad, identifies the helicopters as Mi-25s.

Officials at Russian Helicopters, which makes the Mi-25, and Ilyushin, which makes the IL-76, said one Mi-25 with its blades removed would fit into an IL-76. Such helicopters have been shipped this way all over the world, they said.

Rick Francona, who was the U.S. air attaché in Damascus in the 1990s, said that using a cargo plane instead of a ship suggested the Assad regime was getting desperate.

“If they’re willing to use an IL-76 to bring one or two helicopters back, that tells me they need these right now,” he said. “Rather than getting it there in 10 days, it gets there in five hours. You can pull it out, reattach the blades and have in the air the next day.”

U.S. officials have expressed particular frustration with Russia over the Syrian conflict, which began in March 2011.

“I think we’ve been very clear, both publicly and privately, how we feel about any country, Russia included, supporting the Assad regime in any way,” State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said Wednesday. “And it doesn’t simply go to the question of military support; it also goes for any kind of economic or political support.”

In June, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Russian aid with Syria’s attack helicopters would escalate the civil war “quite dramatically.” But a week later, a Pentagon spokesman declined to answer whether the Defense Department would try to stop future helicopter shipments.

The records obtained by ProPublica list the Russian 150 Aircraft Repair Plant as the charterer of the flights to pick up the helicopters. The documents show the firm was operating under a contract dated Nov. 27, 2005. The address listed for the charterer is in Kaliningrad, a Russian territory between Poland and Lithuania that contains large Russian military installations.

As with the currency shipments, the flight records show the Syrian cargo plane would take a circuitous route back from Moscow, flying over Azerbaijan and Iran before crossing Iraq.

Iraqi airspace has largely been controlled by the U.S. Air Force since the American-led invasion in 2003. Indeed, the overflight request form used by Syria for the helicopters was created by the U.S. Air Force and still bears the old contact information for the regional air command, which is no longer in charge.

Last year, the United States began transferring air traffic control responsibilities to the Iraq Civil Aviation Authority. The Iraqis assumed control of the last sector, over Baghdad, in October 2011.

Syrian opposition ups the ante with SAMs

The Free Syrian Army (FSA) has demonstrated the capability to take air defense to more than just the artillery level. There are videos showing FSA fighters holding the SA-7, captured stocks of SA-16 and SA-24 missiles, but this is the first recorded success against a Syrian Air Force aircraft using a missile.

Thus far in the almost two-year long civil war, the FSA has been able to down over 100 aircraft - about half of them helicopters - using anti-aircraft artillery, especially the ZPU-1 14.5mm gun. The ability to extend their range to over 10,000 feet complicates the regime's air strategy.

I am surprised that this pilot was operating within the envelope of the Sa-7/16/24 - the Syrian Air Force fixed wing (MiG-23, Su-22, Su-24, L-39) pilots have been popping flares, and flying at the outside edge of the shoulder-fired weapons' employment envelopes at high altitudes. They know the FSA has these missiles at their disposal.

One can only hope that the western intelligence services - the American CIA, British SIS and French DGSE are supplying and/or training the FSA on the use of these weapons. I hearken back to an earlier day in my career and the use of the Stinger missile in Afghanistan.

Video of a surface-to-air missile hitting a Syrian Air Force Mi-8 (HIP) helicopter about 12 miles west of Aleppo, November 27, 2012. On the audio track at 0:03, someone says, "Missile, missile." At 0:08, after the cheers, we hear, "It hit a military aircraft." In the background, another says, "It's catching on fire." At 0:22, the photographer says, "Helicopter [down] in the west Aleppo suburbs."

A still taken from the above video of as the heat-seeking missile homes in on the engine exhaust. Note the corkscrew smoke pattern typical of Russian-made shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles.

This still shows the detonation of the missile warhead. The warheads of these portable air defense weapons is relatively small, about 2.5 pounds of high explosive material. While it appears to be a catastrophic hit, the pilot was able to maintain flight for a few seconds as he attempted to get to the ground safely. I am not sure if that was a survivable landing, but it did exhibit good airmanship. Whether you agree with the pilot's politics, you have to recognize his piloting skills.

The regime's most potent weapon against the opposition - the FSA - is air power. Unless the opposition can neutralize the Syrian Air Force's total domination of the air space over the battlefield, at some point they will not be able to continue the fight. When the FSA leadership is asked about their main concern, it is the Syrian Air Force.

Despite the Syrian Air Force's limited capabilities - almost half of its pilots are grounded for political security reasons - it still remains as the key threat to the success of the revolution. Note the single-ship attacks, the limited use of advance aircraft - this is by no means a reliable asset of the government. More shoot downs like today will only undermine that capability.

Just like in Afghanistan in the 1980's, it's about air power, and the ability to deny it to the enemy.

Israel-Hamas ceasefire - too soon to have lasting effects

Gaza (Hamas) Prime Minister Isma'il Haniyah celebrates ceasefire in Gaza
(Photo: Reuters)

The loud and boisterous celebrations in Gaza area hailing not a ceasefire with Israel, but a victory over Israel. It does not matter that the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip endured eight days of devastating air strikes, it does not matter that 161 Palestinians, including 71 civilians, died while their "forces," a terrorist organization funded and equipped by Iran, were only able to kill six Israelis (two soldiers and four civilians) - in their minds, they won.

Look at the photos of the revelry in the streets of Gaza. This is not merely a perception of "victory" crafted by the Hamas public relations effort - the Gazans honestly believe that they have humbled the Jewish state.

In a way, they have.

As I wrote last week when this latest round between Hamas and Israel began (read the entire article at Israel and Gaza - here we go again:

"We seem to go through this drill every few years. The Israelis endure as many attacks as they are willing to tolerate, then conduct a punitive operation against Islamist elements in Gaza. Predictably, there will be a huge public outcry of the disproportionate nature of the response, the United Nations will call for a cessation of the violence (that's code for demanding Israel stop, but not so much the Palestinians), and Israel will stop short of destroying HAMAS's ability to fire more rockets. Here we go again."

And here we are again - Israel again has stopped short of destroying Hamas's ability to fire more rockets. Actually, it is even worse this time - they have emboldened the Palestinian militants. Whether it is true or not, the fighters of the military wing of Hamas - the 'Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigade - believe that their rockets deterred the Israelis from launching a ground incursion into Gaza to locate and destroy the groups weapons and kill as many of the group that they could.

Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu and the author in Jerusalem

I wonder why the Israelis, specifically Prime Minister Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak chose not to invade. The air assault on Gaza was beginning to show dividends, and Israel's Iron Dome anti-rocket defense system was surprisingly effective against Hamas's Iranian rockets aimed at civilian areas. Of course, world public opinion had labeled the Israelis as the aggressors, but that was nothing new - what do you expect from a basically anti-Semitic Europe and United Nations?

What other factors influenced the Israeli leadership to stop when it did? After the mobilization of thousands of reservists and deployment of the best combat units in the Israel Defense Forces to the Gaza border, after a punishing air campaign to prepare the battlefield for the impending combined arms thrust into Gaza on multiple axes, the Israelis agree to a ceasefire when the objectives of the operation have not been met. That assumes the objective was to eliminate or reduce Hamas's capabilities to fire rockets into Israel's population centers (that's Israeli domestic code for Tel Aviv and Jerusalem). I just do not believe Netanyahu's upbeat assessment that "the offensive's aims of halting Gaza rocket fire and weakening Hamas were achieved."

If you subscribe to some of the conspiracy theories being put forth, you might believe that the Israelis decided to accede to an American request to end the Gaza operation in exchange for increased support for Israel against a more lethal threat - that of a nuclear-armed Iran.

I am not sure if this is the case, but in my opinion, this is a dangerous move for the Israelis. As in the past when there have been these ceasefire deals, what always happens is the three R's - rearm, refit and recruit. The Iranians are standing by to provide the money and weapons to replace all the materiel lost in the week of fighting. The perceived "victory" by the 'Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigade will swell their ranks as young men eagerly join the ranks of the terrorist organization.

Meanwhile, the Israelis have agreed to talk about easing the blockade on the Gaza Strip, in effect making it easier for Hamas to resupply and rearm. In return, the United States (in the person of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton) pledged to help curb arms shipments to Gaza. What a joke. I suppose we will put as much effort into this as we and the United Nations did to stop the resupply of Hizballah following the Israel-Hizballah conflict of 2006 (they are fully and more capably rearmed) and Hamas in 2009. Does anyone believe this?

For whatever reason that I cannot fathom, Israel has agreed to stop short of achieving any of its objectives in Gaza. Just as Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said, "Israel in the long run won't be able to live with an Iranian proxy on its border. As long as Hamas continues to incite against Israel and talk about destroying Israel they are not a neighbor that we can suffer in the long run. But everything in its time."

Everything in its time? Was there a deal between Washington and Tel Aviv over Iran? It just does not make sense. Hamas has no intention of living in peace with Israel. I said last week, "Here we go again." I suspect that in a few short years, I will be saying that yet again.

Syria - After the U.S. election, an opportunity for action?

US Army Patriot air defense missile battery

Now that the U.S. presidential election is over - الحمد لله - perhaps we can move to address the problems that had been allowed to fester as the Obama Administration focused on remaining in office. One of the most pressing issues - and there are others, to be sure - is Syria. Reliable figures of how many people have died in the civil war are hard to come by, but conservative estimates place the death toll at over 36,000.

Skeptics will shortsightedly argue that what happens in Syria is not a threat to the national interests of the United States. The "Syria issue" is just not about Syria. You cannot view this in isolation - events in Syria affect what happens in neighboring Lebanon, including the future of Hizballah, and impact on the west's dealings with Iran over the Islamic Republic's nuclear weapons program.

Let's start by looking at what can be done to stop to the killing in Syria. There are calls by many inside and outside Syria for a no-fly zone, citing as an example the no-fly zone imposed on Libya last year. Syria is not Libya - the country is much more populated, the population centers are much further from the coast, and the country is protected by state-of-the-art, very capable Russian air defense systems.

The Turks have proposed a safety zone inside Syria, protected by U.S. and NATO Patriot air defense missile batteries inside Turkey, deployed along the Syrian border. The Patriot system can reach out as far as 100 miles, placing aircraft flying over the entire governorates of Aleppo and Idlib in range. These two areas have seen some of the most brutal air attacks over the course of the civil war. Syrian jet fighters and attack helicopters are the most feared weapon that the Syrian regime possesses.

The Free Syrian Army, the rebels, have been able to down around 75 aircraft, about half of them helicopters. They have done this with captured air defense artillery systems and shoulder-fired missiles, but the Syrians have been quick to adapt their tactics to the threat. Over the last month, Syrian air force pilots fly their aircraft at high speed and high altitudes while dropping flares to decoy heat-seeking missiles.

Airpower is the regime's most potent weapon. Even the opposition fighters acknowledge that for the most part, they are defenseless. While they have downed over 70 regime fighters and helicopters, that is a small percentage of the number of sorties launched by the Syrian air force. Each aircraft carries multiple weapons - they range from the conventional high-explosive general purpose bombs, normally about 500 pounds, to cluster munitions with hundreds of smaller sub-munitions, each capable of destroying a 60-ton tank, or the fuel-air explosive weapons that have the concussive effects just short of nuclear weapons. Add the locally-developed "barrel bomb," a crude home-made canister filled with explosives and nails, ball bearings, etc. See my description of this weapon, The Syrian "barrel bomb" - a terror weapon.

About all the Free Syrian Army can do is harass the pilots into flying out of anti-aircraft artillery range and the relatively outdated SA-7 shoulder-fired heat-seeking missile, but the effect of the bombing is the same - utter devastation of Syria's cities, the division of the country into sectarian groups and animosities that will last for generations.

What can we do?

The proposed safe zone protected by Patriot missiles could be a start, but it will not be as effective as a no-fly zone patrolled by U.S. and NATO aircraft. To impose a true no-fly zone, the Syrian air defenses would have to be attacked. Syria's air defense system is much more advanced and robust than Libya, so it will take some time to neutralize the weapons systems, their radars and the command and control system.

We also need to engage the Syrian opposition, now united in a loose coalition, even to the point of affording the Syrian National Coalition for Opposition and Revolutionary Forces some level of diplomatic recognition. There are concerns over the number of Muslin Brotherhood and other Islamist groups members in the coalition, but ignoring the coalition will not solve the issue.

If the United States hopes to exercise any influence over the course of events in Syria, it must be in the game. When the Syrian regime falls, we need to be ready to assist the follow-on government to resist the establishment of an Islamic state - the goal of many in the opposition. We need to be in a position to convince a new government to break away from Iran and re-enter the Middle East peace process.

We cannot afford to "lead from behind" - we need be out in front of this one. It is past time to do something.

Iraq sides with Iran against U.S. in release of Hizballah terrorist

In an unfortunate move that was easily predictable, the Iraqi government released Hizballah fighter 'Ali Musa Daqduq. Daqduq immediately returned to the safety of Beirut where he is considered a hero by his Hizballah colleagues.

Daqduq was accused by American forces of organizing an attack in the Iraqi holy city of Karbala' in January 2007 - that attack resulted in the death of five U.S. Army soldiers. Daqduq was in Iraq at the behest of the Hizballah's primary sponsor, the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps' Qods Force. Daqduq's mission was to train Iraqi Shi'a militias in Hizballah tactics. Many military analysts consider Hizballah to be among the most effective guerrilla forces in the world.

Daqduq was captured by British forces in the southern port city of al-Basrah a few months after the Karbala' attack, and turned over to U.S. forces. At this point, internal American politics came into play. The Obama Administration, in its misguided interpretation that terrorist or insurgent attacks are crimes, wanted to bring Daqduq to the United States for trial in a civilian court. Other officials wanted to transfer Daqduq to the detention facility at Guantanamo. I side with that latter group.

The Obama Administration refused the transfer to Guantanamo, citing its desire to close the facility. Thus, no action was taken for over four years. In its rush for the exits in December 2011, the Administration transferred Daqduq to Iraqi custody. Although Iraqi officials assured the U.S. they would prosecute Daqduq, I don't know of anyone who thought that would ever happen.

It didn't. In May 2012, an Iraqi court ruled that there was insufficient evidence against Daqduq and ordered that he be released. Although the Iraqis continued to detain him during a sham appeals process, they upheld the initial ruling, refused an American request for extradition, and set him free.

This is what happens when you quit a war and fail to maintain any position of influence. I lay this at the feet of the President. Had he taken advantage of the provisions in the 2008 Status of Forces Agreement, we could have maintained a presence that might have stopped this travesty from happening. Quitting a war never wins it, never ends it. All the President did was hand a victory to neighboring Iran.

That is the clear result. Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki had a choice. Listen to the United States (in the persons of the vice president and U.S. Ambassador) and engineer a way to hand Daqduq over to the Americans, or follow the counsel of the Iranians - his fellow Shi'a and political masters - and release a member of their primary proxy terrorist organization, Hizballah.

Given the fact that Daqduq is in Beirut, we see who wields influence in Iraq.

The timing of Iraq's release of this Hizballah terrorist is also telling. The Iraqis chose to delay the order of the Iraqi court until after the U.S. presidential election. They wanted to make sure it did not negatively impact the re-election chances of what both the Iraqis and Iranians perceive as a weak American president. Senior Iranian leaders stated earlier that an Obama re-election was in the interests of the Islamic Republic.

I guess we now know how much sway we have in Baghdad. Thank you, Mr. President.