BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Israeli attack on Syria

 
  

Page: (1)23

 
 
unheimlich manoeuvre
10:28 / 05.10.03
Israel hits Palestinian 'camp' in Syria

Israel says it may attack Syria (again)

IAF warplanes strike deep in Syria

...

Israel's first attack on Syrian soil in more than two decades. Is this an escalation of the current conflict?
 
 
sleazenation
12:27 / 05.10.03
I suppose this answers the question what happens when there aren't any Palestinian structures in Palestine left to bomb in retaliation to suicide bombings...
 
 
kowalski
17:00 / 05.10.03
Jane's Defense Weekly projected a couple weeks ago that Israel would launch a major military operation in the Gaza Strip after this month's holidays have concluded. It would involve at least 50,000 reservists and its first target would be liquidating the Gaza structure of Hamas.

The Sharon government has painted themselves into a foreign policy corner. At this point, anything other than a continued pursuit of violent confrontation is perceived as a show of weakness, and as a result their future direction is now completely in the hands of the far-right hawks. It is quite likely that we'll see Arafat killed in the next couple of weeks (Sharon always regretted letting him become an exile the last time round - it's very unlikely he would allow him that high ground again). The move against Gaza that Janes says is coming may very well have larger goals than eliminating Hamas. The Sharon government may pursue an extended occupation with the aim of dislocating much of the population of the strip, in order to end its role as a rocket platform and leadership citadel for the militants. Liquidating the strip would also free up IDF units to man the new (and very illegal) West Bank fortifications currently under construction.

The attack on the target in Syria serves several purposes:

1) It offers another reminder to everyone in the Arab world that Israel can act when and where it chooses. The hawks believe that Israel must always be perceived as massively superior on all fronts in order to survive, when in reality the ever-present feeling of inferiority these actions produce on the Arab street is exactly what propels successive tides of Islamic fundamentalism and militancy.

2) In anticipation of large-scale offensive action in Gaza and the West Bank later this month, it may have been aimed at discouraging Syria from interfering. However, the Syrian regime has to keep the anger of its' own citizens below a certain threshold in order to maintain legitimacy. Actions such as this one threaten to destabilize the relatively moderate governments of Syria and Jordan.

3) It provided an immediate vent for the outrage spawned by the latest suicide bombing, and props up the collective Israeli dreamwish that the Sharon government is actually doing something concrete to protect its citizens from terror.

That's the basic analysis. That is, unless the Sharon government really wants to fight another regional war. Regardless, this month will be a month of blood. I wish it all would stop.
 
 
kowalski
17:09 / 05.10.03
addendum to purpose #3:

Inside a government where action as spectacle has become more and more central to its battle against terror, striking a militant's car and demolishing the bomber's house may no longer be seen as a sufficiently credible response to present to a public that, at this point, largely supports such a hard-handed (and -headed) campaign.
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
13:25 / 06.10.03
UN split on Israel's attack on Syria:

Despite Syrian demands for immediate condemnation of an Israeli air strike near Damascus, the UN security council adjourned last night without a vote.
The meeting broke up after the US objected that the Syrian resolution failed to condemn Palestinian terrorism.

At an emergency meeting called at Syria's request yesterday, most security council diplomats spoke out against the Israeli attack on a purported terrorist training camp near the Syrian capital. The diplomats also condemned the suicide bombing in the Israeli port city of Haifa that killed 19 people and prompted Israel's retaliation.

...

However, the US ambassador to the UN, John Negroponte, focused his condemnation on the Haifa attack, while blaming Syria for harbouring terrorists.

"The United States believes that Syria is on the wrong side of the war on terrorism," he said. "We believe it is in Syria's interest, and in the broader interest of Middle East peace, for Syria to stop harbouring and supporting the groups that perpetrate acts such as the one that occurred yesterday" in Haifa.
 
 
kowalski
14:04 / 06.10.03
I don't think anybody ever suggested that US/UK-tabled motions regarding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq contain equal condemnation of U.S. possession of said weapons.

Israel has been on the wrong side of UN resolutions for a half-century, and every time one comes up the U.S. uses its veto or threatens to use it on the purported stance that the resolution is biased, does not condemn Palestinian terror, etcetera. This is such a tired tactic that the American Ambassador to the UN probably has a template on his computer of the speech he uses when threatening to veto, with form fields where he fills in the relevant details of the current incident. It probably hasn't been substantially modified in thirty years.

The idea that the Palestinian Authority has any way at the moment of ending the attacks, even if it had a competent leadership, is a fallacy. Three years of Israeli military incursions have been designed to destroy the tools of the Palestinian pseudo-state that was created at Oslo. The police and security structures have been all but destroyed. Public records have been liquidated. Health care and food distribution is now mostly taken care of by Hamas and the other violent groups, because the Authority no longer has the means to provide them. If the Authority was to make a serious attempt to crack down on the terror groups, there would be civil war, and it would be the Authority that would quickly lose. For the hawks in the Sharon government, such a scenario is probably a wet dream.

We can condemn terror by the Palestinian militant groups all we want, but it won't change their behaviour. A half-century of repression and repeated attempts to destroy them has replaced an initially secular Palestian activist leadership with a largely fundamentalist, violent one. This is what always happens in radical political and independence movements subjected to violent repression over the long-term: the moderates are killed, imprisoned, or driven into exile; and the violent sociopaths are the ones who survive and rise to the top positions of leadership. Nothing the international community says or does can change the current behaviour of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the others.

Israel, however, is a democratic state that must at least pay marginal attention to international law and the opinions of the international community. All power to change the current zero-sum conflict and find a positive outcome rests in its hands. The only way to end this war is to strip the terror groups of legitimacy in the eyes of their support base, the Palestinians. Most Palestinians hate these groups and hate their activities. Yet they are the only groups providing serious social structure and facilities to much of the West Bank and Gaza. And as long as people's houses keep getting torn down and their family members shot or blasted to bits, a few people are going to continue to be susceptible to the terrorists' call for volunteers.

The result of Israel's own deployments of spectacular terror - the tearing down of houses, firing missiles into militants' (and civilians') cars as they drive on city streets, blockading Arafat's compound, etc. - is to harden the grip and feed the power of the terror groups. Only when there is a strong Palestinian state capable of effectively guaranteeing the security of its own citizens will the terror groups lose their legitimacy and support base. It is Israel's position to effect a change in the current stalemate, and it is to them that the international community should address itself, and to them only. Giving a condemnation of Palestinian terror acts equal weight with condemnation of Israeli terror acts in another resolution simply invites further inertia in which Sharon's government can continue to play their deadly game of attrition.
 
 
illmatic
14:44 / 06.10.03
Well said, K.
 
 
Baz Auckland
16:06 / 06.10.03
...please, don't escalate....

Israelis Fire Across Lebanese Border

Israeli soldiers fired automatic rifles across the Lebanese-Israeli border Monday, hitting two Lebanese cars but causing no injuries, Lebanese security officials said. Several bullets also hit a house on the Lebanese side of the border in the southern village of Kfar Kila, but no residents were harmed, the security officials added on condition of anonymity.

The reported incident comes amid heightened tensions between Israel and Syria, Lebanon's close ally, following Israel's air raid Sunday on what the Jewish state said was a Palestinian militant base.

Shootings on the edge of this border town, some 100 kilometers (60 miles) southeast of Beirut, have been rare since Israeli troops withdrew from south Lebanon in 2000 following their 18-year occupation. The area is generally calm, unlike the contested Chebaa Farms to the east were shootouts between Israeli border guards and Hezbollah guerrillas occasionally flare into artillery and rocket exchanges, sometimes prompting Israeli air strikes.
 
 
Not Here Still
19:01 / 06.10.03
yeah, more props here Kowalski - some good posts there.

I've been banging on in another thread of having a bad feeling over Syria and thinking something was going to happen, although I was looking more at the United States as the attacker rather than Israel.

There's an analysis on the BBC here which matches some of my thoughts over the past 24 hours, with the most worrying - because it's likely to be true - bit this:

The attack means that Israel has all but given up on the so-called roadmap to Middle East peace, which now lies trampled on the floor.
The roadmap has gone the way of the Oslo agreement, which also withered under the impact of suicide bombs.

The prospect now is the long haul of a "low intensity" war, but which could from time to time take on the features of major conflict.



Provisional text of the security council resolution, also from BBC:


The Security Council,

Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions on the situation in the Middle East, including 242 (1967), 338 (1973) and 350 (1974),
Expressing its grave concern with the escalating situation in the Middle East,
Having considered the contents of the letter dated 5 October 2003 from the minister of foreign affairs of the Syrian Arab Republic (S/2003/939, annex),

1. Strongly condemns the military aggression carried out by Israel against the sovereignty and territory of the Syrian Arab Republic on 5 October 2003, in violation of the Charter of the United Nations, the rules and principles of international law, and relevant Security Council resolutions;

2. Considers that these acts constitute a clear violation of the agreement on disengagement between Israeli and Syrian forces of 31 May 1974;

3. Demands that Israel desist from any such acts or threats which might lead to a dangerous deterioration that threatens regional and international peace and security, and exposes the already deteriorating situation in the region to dire consequences;

4. Requests the secretary general to report to the Security Council on Israel's compliance with this resolution within one month of the date of its adoption;

5. Decides to remain seized of the matter.


In response to the topic abstract - 'is this an escalation of the current conflict?' I'd say, sadly, that it's a resounding yes.
 
 
Ganesh
21:50 / 06.10.03
Isn't Israel technically still at war with Syria?
 
 
w1rebaby
23:38 / 06.10.03
Missile strike or bomb or... something explosive... in Lebanon, kills boy
 
 
GreenMann
08:24 / 07.10.03
Just shows the gaping double standards the US has towards Israel and Palestine.

To illustrate this, imagine, just for a moment, Bush asserting Occupied Palestine's right to self defence if one of its resistance groups attacked the enemy's training camp inside Israel or any other another foreign country?

Hard, isn't it?

US and Israeli policy is now pretty much identical, probably even written by the same author!
 
 
unheimlich manoeuvre
10:03 / 07.10.03
yeah well said Kowalski

...

US Gave Israel Greenlight for Attack
Raid on Syria is a Lethal Step Towards War


same article here

Yom Kippur War continues

Israeli pilot rebels accused of mutiny

i also remember reading somewhere that the IDF is wargaming for a large scale invasion of Gaza with the reservists. anyone else heard of this?
 
 
Tryphena Absent
10:50 / 07.10.03
There's always a small window of hope isn't there. Yay to those pilots and Major General Amos Lapidot.
 
 
kowalski
10:56 / 07.10.03
i also remember reading somewhere that the IDF is wargaming for a large scale invasion of Gaza with the reservists. anyone else heard of this?

Yes, I made mention of it at the beginning of my first post. Janes Defense Weekly reported it.
 
 
GreenMann
14:06 / 07.10.03
The attack on Syria is no surprise - Sharon is a law unto himself. The UN, too, refuses to take him on for his criminal misdeeds. He belongs in the dock, next to Slobodan Milosevic, at The Hague, standing trial for War Crimes he has committed in Jordan, the occupied territories and Lebanon. Instead, he is invited to the White House for a photo op and tea."

Like an absolute monarch, Ariel Sharon does what he wants, when he wants to, and with full impunity, too. He also doesn’t give a good hoot what the White House, the Arab World or the UN think of his demented conduct.

Sharon, the personification of hubris, is the Prime Minister of Zionist Israel. His death squad operate 24/7 in the occupied territories. He also continues to steal the land of the Palestinians, while regularly humiliating his supposed American allies by building more illegal settlements (604 new units are on the way):

http://world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/1284/?PHPSESSID=5c0aee6bfd8a8b54b292d31f13a06224
 
 
Not Here Still
17:19 / 07.10.03
Ganesh - yes, they are still technically at war. I think it's mentioned in my BBC link.

Scarily, this is second highest if you put [syria technically war israel] into Google:

This is a speculative scenario, based on Bible prophecy and an observation of current situations and trends. One thing is certain, however: war with Syria, and the destruction of Damascus, is inevitable, because the prophets of God have foretold it. Lebanon, which is a puppet state of Syria, figures largely in the situation, as do Jordan, Iraq, and the Palestinians.

It's a freaked out religious website, for sure - but it's also the second most popular choice for people looking for those terms...

Syrian President Bashar Assad has used his first interview post-attack to state what seems to be obvious -

"The government of Ariel Sharon wants to drag Syria and the rest of the region into war"
 
 
Not Here Still
17:34 / 07.10.03
OK. Wow. This is from Google News; I was actually searching for something else (reports about the FBI giving Hamas money) and this "opinion piece" on the Syria attack popped up.

Apparently Google see this as a legitimate news site. I don't. I just find it, frankly, offensive:

Once, in ancient times, the Hebrew tribes led by Abraham, Isaac, Joseph and Moses were instructed by G-d to wipe out the pagan tribes who practiced human sacrifice. Their instructions in G-d’s Torah were clear: Leave none alive for they will come back as a plague. So they did. It wasn’t just Saddam Hussein, Gamal Abdul Nasser, Hafez al Assad, Amin al Husseini (Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and Hitler’s friend) - or even Yassir Arafat. It is the entire population who hates Jews, enjoys killing - who believe that all non-Muslims can and must be either converted to Islam or killed.
 
 
pachinko droog
18:36 / 07.10.03
With 30th annivesary of Yom Kippur War upon us, I suppose these recent actions shouldn't come as a surprise. See, a friend of mine who recently immigrated from Israel to the US (last year) told me that the reason she left was because she feared an all-out Arab-Israeli war was inevitable (Mind you, her family is part of the Arab Christian minority--their village is near Bethlehem).

She said that many Palestinians were openly weeping the day Rabin was assassinated, because they knew it was only a matter of time until the region would be enveloped in war again. She said that that's when she began planning to get out of there ASAP. And who can blame her?

Thing is, the restaraunt that got bombed was jointly owned by a Jewish family and an Arab family. I find that rather telling. Sharon's crowd isn't too keen on Jews and Palestinians cooperating or establishing any kind of dialogue, and its been suggested in the past that the Mossad isn't above pulling a terrorist act of its own and framing another party for it.

In fact, just before 9/11, there was a report out of the Army War College on global security risks (well, risks to the US geopolitical plans) that called Mossad a "Wild Card. Ruthless and cunning. Capable of staging a terrorist attack and making it appear to be the work of Arab terrorists". Rather chilling in light of 9/11 and the allegations of a Mossad front operation being in the vicinity (recall the news story of a witness describing a white van and men filming the towers collapse and then celebrating?); not to mention what has been going on in Israel since the fall of 2000...I don't like to jump into conspiracy theorizing, but its really shaping up to be a frightening scenario.

Also, my friend pointed out that just before the 2000 Israeli elections, Ariel Sharon was about to be implicated in some sort of financial fraud crime, something akin to insider trading and money laundering, and then it all just vanished from the Israeli media once Sharon staged his fall 2000 appearance on the Temple Mount. That appearance was the catalyst that set the wheels in motion. His appearance there was the justification for a huge security detail that claimed, out of necessity, the need to close off access to the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa mosque while he was there, for his protection.

The Palestinians protested in anger over both the need to close off their houses of worship, and the fact that here was this war criminal(who had allowed the Christian Phlangist militia in Lebanon to massacre women and children at the Sabra and Shatilla refugee camps in 1982) staging a photo op at their expense. So in other words, Sharon directly provoked the Palestinians into rioting, then ran on a "law and order" ticket and promised the Israelis that he would put the kibosh on Palestinian violence, all the while encouraging new settlements to be built in Palestinian territory.

Flash forward to the present. 30th anniversary of the Yom Kippur War, a conflict that (secretly) brought the world closer than its ever been to a real nuclear war. Most people have no idea how close we really came that year to WWIII. The Israelis were prepared to nuke Cairo and Damascus if they lost, and if not for Nixon arranging for the transport of US equipment out of South Vietnam (tanks and helicopters, mostly) in the nick of time, the Israelis would have lost. Tanks were rushed to the front still in their jungle camoflage, that's how fast they were pressed into service. When the tide of battle turned and Israel gained the upper hand, they were prepared to invade Syria and lay siege to Damascus. The USSR threatened intervention at that point, and they had planeloads of troops and squadrons of Migs and bombers in Kazakhstan on the tarmac, with engines running. Supposedly, Nixon got on the phone with Brezhnev at that point and let him know in no uncertain terms that if so much as one Soviet paratrooper landed on Israeli soil, he would give the green light to the Strategic Air Command...The USSR backed down, as did the Israelis. That's how close we came.

And now, 30 years later, without the constraints of the Cold War to keep in things in check, another major Arab-Israeli war looks inevitable. Add to the geopolitical factors the "Armageddon scenario" that is desired by fundamentalist Jews and Christians alike, and its starting to look really, really bad.

I mean, I fear the news from overseas now like never before. I keep getting this overwhelming sense of dread with each new report of escalating violence in the region. This isn't like past conflicts, this is very different, and by that I mean not only what is going on in Israel/Palestine, but also Iraq and this whole "War on Terror" scenario. Its shaping up to be all part of a greater whole, and the big picture scares the crap out of me.

I think the only thing that will defuse the situation somewhat is if enough Israelis can get Sharon out of office, preferably putting him behind bars where he belongs. A long shot, maybe, but still, their peace movement is growing. Hopefully their momentum will outpace that of the hardline right wing religious extremists who want all-out war no matter the cost in human life.
 
 
unheimlich manoeuvre
23:30 / 07.10.03
kowalski wrote- Jane's Defense Weekly projected a couple weeks ago that Israel would launch a major military operation in the Gaza Strip after this month's holidays have concluded. It would involve at least 50,000 reservists and its first target would be liquidating the Gaza structure of Hamas.

Mofaz paves way for reservist call up

The IDF is also expected to ratchet up pressure on Gaza, launching more short raids on Palestinian towns and refugee camps.

Israeli Defense Minister approves limited reserve call-up as Army releases map of homes of Palestinian leaders in Syria

...

and news just in, Turkey is sending 10,000 troops into Iraq. The US backed Iraqi interim government is trying to block this...
 
 
w1rebaby
00:37 / 08.10.03
Okay, not only are Israel threatening further attacks, but the Whitehouse is signalling that it's okay:

A bill to impose new economic sanctions on Syria will begin its passage through the US Congress today after the Bush administration gave the measures a green light to signal its frustration with Damascus.

I am concerned that things are going to shit here.
 
 
GreenMann
09:26 / 08.10.03
Despite following MidEast events closely, I'm still at a complete loss as to WHY the increasingly reactionary US government and its censored media (http://www.mideastfacts.com/index_media.html) give such blind support to the long-held Israeli desire to violently overthrow the neighbouring Baathist government in Syria, in addition to the $9 billion in loan guarantees Bush has recently 'rewarded' the racist state.

It throws up basic questions never raised in the US or even UK media such as what exactly is the point in violently changing a stable, non-threathening and relatively docile regime? Such a regime-change would surely create further conflict in the region further threathening US interests and making US citizens greater targets for terrorists.

Is there something I'm missing here?
 
 
kowalski
13:35 / 08.10.03
Well if you like the oil-oilworks angle, there's been a lot of talk in Israel, and some in Washington, about the opportunity to rebuild the old pipeline from Iraq to Haifa, which passes through Syria.

If you're like me, and put a lot of stock in differential accumulation theory, the answer is that Iraq didn't have the long-term positive effect on inflation. While low-intensity conflict and social instability continue to plague Iraq, oil prices have come down a bit. Big Petroleum is not profiting the way it was 10-12 months ago, and they have yet to make any progress in building an inflation buffer against the massive threat of U.S. deflation (higher oil prices = higher factor prices for manufacturing/distribution = higher retail prices = easier for corporations to service their debt loads. deflation = lowered retail prices cause by low sales/high inventories = harder for corporations to service their debt loads = more corporate failures). The answer for them then is to light another fire, and hope that this one not only gives them a chance for short-term profittaking, but also gets inflation moving. Bush and the other frontmen of the administration probably don't have a clue about this, but their backers undoubtedly understand it.

For a good read on this subject, and especially on Israel's place within it, check out Jonathan Nitzan and Shimshon Bichler, The Global Political Economy of Israel (2002).
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
15:23 / 08.10.03
There's also the religious angle, which, as much as the oil angle does, explains a lot of US foreign policy in the region recently... Armageddon=self-fulfilling prophecy, anyone?

I was thinking that Syria'd be safe for the time being... it's obviously on Bush's hitlist, but he can't afford it right now, either economically or logistically. Seems Israel's gonna do it for him.

Probably gonna get me flamed, but it's just struck me that Israel and the US are very similar in that they are both states set up with the best of intentions, which have now gone rogue. Off-topic, but I thought I'd post it before I forgot it.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
15:30 / 08.10.03
Seems Israel's gonna do it for him.

That's precisely my take on the whole situation and it scares the hell out of me. Getting support is one thing but another nation doing the dirty... and you know this means they've struck an agreement of some kind that probably involves the UN in some way. I dread to think what it is.
 
 
GreenMann
15:57 / 08.10.03
Thanx Chairman Maominstoat (who isn't Canadian despite what you may think)and kowalski, oil and religion...I thought those 2 would pop up somewhere.

But I'm sure Assad would have provided pipeline access if asked nicely, besides every Arab country is sh*t scared of Israel right now; Mossad just make it up as they go along and pass so-called 'inteligence' to CIA, MI6 etc...Assad would have co-operated just like when he backed Gulf War 1, the US and Israel know it too!
 
 
kowalski
16:19 / 08.10.03
[quote]I'm sure Assad would have provided pipeline access if asked nicely, besides every Arab country is sh*t scared of Israel right now;[/quote]

As proven almost weekly in Iraq, it doesn't matter whether the authorities want a pipeline, it matters how the people living around the pipeline treat it.

You could give Assad all the money in the world to agree to a pipeline. A) He probably wouldn't, because it would lead to his ouster (don't underestimate how strong the Syrian street is). B) Even if he did allow construction and held onto power, the pipeline would be bombed/sabotaged/etcetera. Repeatedly. It would be symbolic of Israel's domination of the Arab world. The only way such a pipeline could proceed would be under American/Israeli occupation. And even then, we know how effective the Americans have been in protecting the pipelines in Iraq.

But seriously, I don't think all this sabre-ratting against Syria is really about a pipeline. It's about inflation and profit-taking. I know its a more obtuse argument to grasp, but it's seriously a lot more realistic than the "it's all about controlling oil" argument.
 
 
kowalski
16:31 / 08.10.03
Sorry for a second post, but there is another way a pipeline through Syria could proceed: Long-term peace and stability, with a stable, viable Palestinian state, improved economic development throughout the Arab world, and a move by the authoritarian Arab governments towards democracy. Again, it all starts with Israel. If a Palestinian state was created, if Jerusalem was put under shared control, if Israel turned away from policies of confrontation and aggression, then progressive social, economic and political developments throughout the rest of the Arab world would be possible.
 
 
pachinko droog
16:43 / 08.10.03
Partially, I think it has to do with oil, but also, it has to do with control over water resources. Those settlements use up A LOT of water no doubt. Israel, Syria and Jordan have had long-standing disputes over water rights for some time now.
 
 
Not Here Still
17:26 / 08.10.03
People, let's not argue - surely it is all these things, together?

They are not mutually exclusive, after all; this is a situation which could be explained with a Venn diagram combining all of them.

There's oil, religion, economics, water... and of course, our old friend the military-industrial complex.

As some people have suggested, Israel wants to prove its military superiority over Arab states such as Syria; the incident quoted by Jonathon Freedland in today's Guardian just takes the piss, really:

With a regional superpower's disregard for borders, it simply rained its missiles on a site just a few miles from the Syrian capital.

A few weeks ago the Israeli air force staged a similar display of chutzpah, flying its supersonic jets low over the family home of President Bashar Assad in the port city of Latakia.

Both these air shows sent a message to Damascus: Gulliver can crush his Lilliputian neighbours whenever and wherever he chooses.


America, of course, helps to build hardware and equip the Israeli military - so the more that military is used, the more America profits.

I've just read a Chomsky book, Power and Terror, whoich compiles some of his talks and interviews.

Asked in one talk about the Palestinian peace process, he says this:

Remember, when you read Israeli tanks and Israeli helicopters, you should translate it in your mind as US tanks and US planes, which are sent to Israel with the certain knowledge that they are going to get used for this purpose.

I sometimes feel Chomsky pushes things a little far with some of his suggestions - but on this one, I think he is pretty much bang on.
 
 
kowalski
23:14 / 08.10.03
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=451362:

"Israel has cut short leave for three army battalions, cancelled army training courses, and is reportedly considering calling up reservists. The deployment of troops who were on leave or training courses has reportedly tripled the army's strength in some areas."

"Israeli air force jets violated Lebanese airspace in a show of force yesterday, flying as far north as Tripoli, and breaking the sound barrier over Beirut..."

"There is concern in the Gaza Strip as well, which the Israeli army has divided into four small enclaves, cutting sections out of the coastal road linking them and preventing Palestinians from travelling from one section to another. There are fears that this could signal deep Israeli incursions into parts of the Gaza Strip or even the full-scale invasion and reoccupation that Israel has been talking about for more than a year."

My analysis continues to be that the strike inside Syria and yesterday's air show over Lebanon are preventive acts of intimidation designed to discourage those two countries from interfering with a forthcoming reoccupation of Gaza. If Israel moves against Gaza, which I believe will happen in the next two weeks, there will be costly street battles as an attempt is made to liquidate the militant leadership. Gaza as it exists now will be impossible to seriously occupy in the long-term, and the Israeli civilian and military leadership knows this. They will do everything to convince and force people to leave. Whole neighbourhoods will be dismantled, the populations of the refugee camps will swell, and then the IDF will step in relocate people, either to the West Bank or to Egypt.

[Aside: Gaza is prime real estate. In the years of optimism after Oslo, Israelis invested heavily in resort development along the coast of the strip.]

I still can't tell what they are planning to do regarding Arafat. There is a standing cabinet resolution to remove him, but the cabinet and the surrounding authority structure keeps sending so many mixed signals it's really not clear what's going to happen. On the one hand, I lean towards them acting strongly and conclusively in Ramallah if they really roll the ball in Gaza, because of the image consequences of keeping him a prisoner in Ramallah as they reoccupy Gaza. Sharon would almost assuredly rather have him a martyr than give him another opportunity to play the confined victim. On the other hand, Israel is built on land gained through a century-long process of stripping its previous Arab residents of the will to fight. Keeping Arafat an awkward prisoner is an act of emasculation that, while stoking the anger, reminds the Palestinians of their weakness. Killing him makes him a rallying point, a new vengeance-filled position of strength. The current crop in the succession of image-makers who've been guiding Zionist strategy since the reign of terror of the 1920s and 1930s must realize this. So I'm really not sure what's going to happen on that front.

Back to Gaza: does anyone have any evidence of recent Israeli signals to Egypt? The biggest weakness in my current analysis is that I've seen nothing that would indicate any attempt to coerce Egypt in anticipation of a forthcoming assault on Gaza.
 
 
Not Here Still
18:58 / 09.10.03
A Cairo Times analysis suggests Egypt is being sidelined from a role it has often tried to play - that of mediator between the Arab world and Israel - this year.

For instance, WRT the 'peace talks' earlier in the year, Israel vetoed talks at Sharm el Sheikh:

A high-ranking Israeli official, quoted by the Agence France-Presse, said that Egypt’s "hostile position with Israel" made it an unsuitable venue. (Not sure on the date on that one, Google News dates it 10 hours ago; the page itself seems to be dated June and mentions Abbas as Palestinian PM. Still, an indication whatever)

Things, IIRC, went a bit frosty after the start of the current intifada, when Egypt withdrew its ambassador in protest.

The Israeli Defence Force website reports that, as they call them terrorists fired an anti-tank missile at IDF forces along the Israel-Egypt border, near Rafah. yesterday - which, as we know, means that a rocket strike is called for to answer back...

A group called the International Crisis Group (Who seem OK - anyone know any more about them?) has just released a report, in which they note: The U.S. administration should take seriously the evidence of political damage that American-Egyptian relations have sustained as a consequence of its regional policies, notably its perceived bias in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, its decision to topple the regime in Iraq, and its heavy-handed admonitions to Egypt and other Arab countries to reform.

...Significantly, there is far greater anger directed at President Mubarak for supporting the U.S. than there is at the U.S.



WRT Arafat: surely they're just waiting for his health health gives out (and yes, I know the heart attack has been disputed...)
 
 
pachinko droog
16:57 / 10.10.03
When Arafat dies, who is slated to replace him?

(Incidentally, I saw some footage of him the other night, and if I didn't know any better, I'd swear that the man had had a stroke.)
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
13:48 / 12.10.03
Doesn't he have Parkinson's? Which, yeah, is not too dissimilar to a stroke in terms of visible effects.

Either way, he's not well. Recent heart attack...

Don't get me wrong, I have no brief for the guy, but what happens after him is a REAL fucking big deal, as p droog said. It's also an unknown quantity. Which is the scariest part of all.
 
 
unheimlich manoeuvre
15:27 / 12.10.03
Israel warned over separation fence as Syria threatens revenge

"The war of words between Syria and Israel after an Israeli air strike near Damascus intensified yesterday, with Syria threatening retaliation and Israel declaring it considered Syria a "legitimate target".

Israel hails Gaza raid a success

Israel spars with Syria

"Syria and Israel stepped up the rhetoric over possible clashes as a U.S. report said Israel was now able to launch nuclear warheads at sea and Palestinian militants vowed revenge for a raid in Gaza."

In Drive to Aid Israel, Lobby May Be Shifting Out of Neutral

The powerful pro-Israel lobby, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, has a long tradition of partisan neutrality. So some eyebrows were raised on Capitol Hill last week when Roll Call published an article titled "GOP Turns to Israeli Lobby to Boost Iraq Support."
 
  

Page: (1)23

 
  
Add Your Reply