Warning: Undefined array key "rbname" in /data/rantburg.com/www/pgrecentorg.php on line 14
Hello !
Recent Appearances... Rantburg

Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Siddiq Says he Owns 7 Tapes that Implicate Top Syrian Officers in Hariri's Murder
2011-01-25
[An Nahar] "False Witness" Mohammed Zuhair Siddiq has unveiled that he holds seven important recordings that implicate top Syrian officers in ex-Premier Rafik Hariri's liquidation.

Siddiq called al-Jadid TV's anchorman George Salibi during his talk show Sunday night and made the revelation. He said he is going to deliver the tapes to the Special Tribunal for Leb at The Hague.

He exposed one of the recordings in which a high-ranking Syrian officer and his subordinate discuss about Abu Adas and how he refuses to execute orders to carry out the liquidation because he only kills infidels (koffar).

The high-ranking officer then asked his subordinate: "You animal, didn't you tell him that Hariri is an infidel?"

Siddiq said many people in the March 8 coalition would recognize the officer which he refused to name. Media reports said the man is Brig. Gen. Rustom Ghazaleh, the former head of Syria's military intelligence in Leb.

The "false witness" told the TV station that he obtained the recordings from Syria's Interior Minister from 2004 to 2005, and long-time head of Syria's security apparatus in Leb, Ghazi Kanaan.

Siddiq then said he had warned Syria's hereditary President Bashar Pencilneck Assad
... who used to be referred to in the Egyptian press as the boy president ...
several times about the Abu Adas issue and Prime Minister Mohammed Naji Otari had sent an envoy to Spain to negotiate with the "false witness."

Asked whether he had met with Caretaker Premier Saad Hariri in Spain, Siddiq confirmed that such a meeting took place at the request of the STL.

He stressed that the talks were his only meeting with Hariri and Col. Wissam Hassan. He said that both were skeptical about him and did not believe him. Siddiq added that he never met them again.

Salibi questioned his motives behind coming up with such information after five years of silence and on the eve of the parliamentary consultations to name a new premier.

Siddiq's revelation also came after broadcasts on al-Jadid of interviews conducted by U.N. Sherlocks and a conversation between Hariri and Siddiq in Spain.
Link


Syria-Lebanon-Iran
March 14 Slams Attack against STL Investigators
2010-10-28
Calls for Avoiding Dragging Lebanon into Reckless Adventures

[An Nahar] The March 14
Those are the good guys, insofar as Leb has good guys...
general secretariat condemned on Wednesday the attack against Special Tribunal for Leb investigators that took place in Dahiyeh today "at the hands of residents affiliated with Hizbullah that assaulted the investigators and stole their files."

It said in a statement after its weekly meeting that the attack was reminiscent of attacks that had targeted the United Nations, aka the Oyster Bay Chowder and Marching Society Interim Force in Leb in the South, "which is an attack against international legitimacy and resolutions."

Furthermore, it criticized the March 8 forces' insistence on eliminating the STL and "substituting it with another cause, which the March 14 forces believe will only lead to unrest and strife."

It reaffirmed its support for the international tribunal, calling on regional powers to stop using Leb as a pawn in their battle with international justice.

Addressing Syrian Prime Minister Mohammed Naji Otari's recent criticism describing the March 14 forces as "carton structures," the secretariat general noted: "While the Syrian premier launched a 'carton' attack against Leb's independence forces, the Syrian President 'assured' us of his commitment to stability."

The March 14 coalition condemned the discrepancy in the positions and the opposition's media outlets' constant warning of a future unrest in Leb, saying: "The blatant provocative behavior will not affect the March 14 forces' determination."

It called on the other team to "return to reason and avoid dragging Leb into reckless adventures."
Link


Syria-Lebanon-Iran
MiGs Will Defend Syria and Iran
2007-06-19
Russia has begun to implement the contract signed by Rosoboronexport with Syria this year for the delivery of five MiG-31E fighter-interceptors. That means that Russia is renewing arms deliveries to the Middle East after a hiatus due to the war in Lebanon. Iran may be the big winner from the deal, since there exists an Iranian-Syrian mutual defense agreement, and Iran is financing Damascus's purchase.
Several sources in the military-industrial complex told Kommersant that OAO Nizhny Novgorod Sokol Plant has begun working on the five MiG-31E aircraft. At the beginning of the year, Rosoboronexport signed a contract with Damascus for them. Since production of the MiG-31 was halted in 1994, Syria is receiving planes from the reserve of the Russian Air Force that are being modified to the purchaser's specifications.

Vladimir Vypryazhkin, deputy general director of the state MiG Russian Aviation Construction Corp. told Kommersant yesterday that “export orders are starting to come in for the MiG-31.” He declined to identify the source of the orders, but noted that “We are offering the MiG-31E on a trade-in basis for countries that have the MiG-25 interceptor.”

Only Libya and Syria have MiG-25 fighter-interceptor and recognizance plane at present. India recently retired its MiG-25s.

Boris Aleshin, chairman of the Federal Industry Agency, confirmed that there is a contract for the MiG-31E. He also declined to identify the purchaser. Kommersant has learned that a lot of MiG-29M/M2 jets was sold to Syria as well. They are being sold abroad for the first time and are similar in their technical specifications to the MiG-35 model Russia is now offering India. The total value of the contract for the MiG-31 and MiG-29M/M2 aircraft is estimated at $1 billion.

Several questions are raised by the deal. First, where Syria got the money for such expensive weapons. In the winter of 2005, Russia wrote off 70 percent of Syria's foreign debt, which was $13.4 billion at the time. Under that agreement, Syria's debt to Russia was reduced to $3.6 billion. Russia renewed military-technical cooperation with Syrian at the same time. Information has arisen regularly since the beginning of 2005 that Syria is in negotiations with Russia for the purchase of new weapons. First Iskander-E missiles were mentioned. Russian President Vladimir Putin even confirmed that Damascus was interested in them, but he supposedly personally blocked the deal. At the beginning of this year, unofficial information emerged that negotiations had been renewed. This time, the items of interest to Syria were Pantsir, Strelets and Igla missiles. Strelets ballistic missiles were delivered to Syria in 2005. Sergey Chemezov, general director of Rosoboronexport, stated in January of this year that “the Syrians want our Igla complex, but we won't give it to them.”

Syrian President Bashar Assad was in Moscow in December of last year for negotiations with Putin, at which Syria's desire to replace its aging MiG-25 planes with new MiG-29 or MiG-31 models.

Western experts think that one of the reasons for Syria's spending spree may be that it is buying weapons for not only for itself, or not for itself at all. Moscow and Damascus concluded a contract last year for the delivery of 36 Pantsir-S1E artillery missile systems. In May of this year, the authoritative British Jane's Defence Weekly reported that at least ten of those Pantsirs would be handed over to Iran by the end of 2008. According to that publication, Iran is the main sponsor of the deal and is paying Syria for its services as intermediary.

There is still no official conformation of the deal described, but the cooperation scheme between Syria and Iran is perfectly believable. Tehran and Damascus are linked by a number of agreements on mutual defense. A Syrian-Iranian strategic alliance was wrought in the 1980s during the Iran-Iraq war. In recent years, Syria and Iran have signed a whole series of agreements on closely coordinated defense activities. In February 2005, for example, almost simultaneously with Russia's forgiveness of much of Syria's debt to it, Syrian Prime Minister Naji Otari and Iranian Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref signed a mutual defense pact and, in July 2006, the defense ministers of the two countries, Hasan Turkmani and Mostafa Mohammad Najar, signed an agreement creating a high defense commission and one on military cooperation that envisaged Iranian financing of Syrian arms deals with Russia, Ukraine and China.

Iran's interest in Russian arms is explained by the conflict developing between it and the United States and the likelihood of armed conflict in the region. In the USSR, the MiG-31 was considered a key element in the defense against a potential attack from the U.S. It was to knock out American cruise missiles flying over the North Pole. The usefulness of that Soviet technology in a potential conflict between the U.S. and Iran is debatable. In the event of a war, Iran's chances of an air victory are negligible, no matter what weapons they buy.

The MiG-31 would do more good for Syria. Head of the Technology and National Security Program at the Holon Institute of Technology and Israeli Air Force Col. (Res.) Shmuel Gordon told Kommersant that “This is the first serious modernization of the Syrian antiaircraft and antimissile system in ten years. It will most likely seriously limit the Israeli Air Force's freedom of action. The appearance of those planes means that the Syrians can take down Israeli planes over the Golan Heights or Lebanon. That is to say this is a quantitative leap in Syria's ability to wage an air war.” Gordon also thought that five planes was but the tip of the iceberg. “It makes little sense to limit oneself to five planes. Where there's five, there will soon be 20, and maybe 24, planes. Maintenance of the planes is very expensive, but it makes no difference whether you maintain five or 20 of them.” Former head of the Israeli Air Force Maj. Gen. Eitan Ben-Eliahu agrees with him. “That can influence the actions of the Israeli Air Force somewhat, but the influence will not be significant. It does not at all change the fact of Israel's absolute air superiority. However, if the number of Syria's planes is increased, that could change the situation. The most dangerous thing for Israel's security is not the delivery of five planes but the renewal of deliveries.”

According to Knesset member and former chairman of the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee Yuval Steinitz, “It cannot be said that a specific deal is a threat to Israel's security, but the main danger is that it is a matter of a whole package of deals that gradually adds up.” Last year, Israel alleged to Moscow in confidential negotiations that some of the arms it sold to Syria fell into the hands of the Hezbollah and being used in the war in Lebanon last summer.

The sale of Russian jets to Syria will undoubtedly have repercussions in the West. Moscow is not likely to be concerned with American criticism at the moment, since the main problem in U.S.-Russian relations is the U.S. missile defense system in Eastern Europe. Now the two issues may be discussed together.

Iran's position on the missile defense system can be considered indirect confirmation that it is deriving some sort of benefit from the present deal. When Putin suggested to U.S. President George W. Bush that they counter the Iranian threat by using the Gabala radar station in Azerbaijan together, Tehran unexpectedly announced that it does not consider Russia's proposal hostile and that it will not affect Russia's good relations with Iran.

What is the MiG-31?

Development of the MiG-31 supersonic fighter-interceptor (Foxhound in NATO classification) was begun by the Mikoyan Experimental Design Bureau in 1968. The first test flights were performed in 1977 and it went into service in 1981.

The airplane was first created to defend the USSR from cruise missile attacks from the Arctic. A number of weapons systems were used for the first time in the USSR in the MiG-31, including the R-33 long-distance (about 120 km.) air-to-air guided missile and the Zaslon radar system, capable of locating its target at a distance of 180 km. and both guide missiles to it and relay the information to other aircraft and ground facilities.

The MiG-31 has a two-man crew. Its combat radius is 720 km. (1400 km. with external fuel tanks), maximum speed 3000 km./hr. and operational ceiling of 20,600 m. It has a flight weight of 41 tons. Besides missiles, the plane is armed with a 23-mm. gun and two or four short- or medium-range missiles. The MiG-31 was produced at the Sokol plant in Nizhny Novgorod until 1994. More than 500 planes were produced. There are about 300 of them in the Russian Air Force at present and about 40 in Kazakhstan.

Several modifications of the plane have been developed, including the MiG-31M (with a new 320-km. radar system) and MiG-31F (capable of striking ground targets). The MiG-31 has not been used in combat and has not been exported. There were media reported in the early 1990s of interest from Syria, Libya and China in acquiring the aircraft, but no contracts for it were signed.

Konstantin Lantratov, Paris; Grigory Asmolov, Jerusalem; Alexandra Gritskova, Mikhail Zygar
Link


Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Turkish PM in Syria for regional talks with Assad
2006-12-07
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan discussed the Iraqi conflict and Lebanon's power struggle with Syrian President Bashar Assad on Wednesday as part of Turkey's effort to play a greater role in regional affairs.

Erdogan, who flew to Syria early Wednesday, was making his second diplomatic initiative in the region in four days after a visit to Iran.

Before leaving Turkey, the prime minister said his talks in Damascus would focus on many of the issues he discussed with the Iranian government, such as the rising tension in Lebanon, the insurgency in Iraq and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

He was met at Damascus airport by Syrian Prime Minister Mohammed Naji Otari and driven to see President Assad.
Link


Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Syria warns 'gates of hell will open' if U.S. attacks
2005-10-12
In the latest official Syrian comment on the increasing pressure on Damascus, Premier Naji Otari said "all the gates of hell will open on the U.S. if it attempts to attack Syria."
Even though that probably implies they're going to unleash their Elite Republican Guard™ on us, it also sounds like they could be in league with Satan. The more reason to demolish them, I'd say...
Otari was replying to a report this week in Newsweek magazine revealing that Washington had debated launching military strikes inside Syria against camps used by insurgents operating in Iraq.
I expect it'll eventually come down to that. Baby Assad can't back down, not after being tossed out of Leb. I'd guess he came close enough to being quietly eliminated when that happened.
Otari also accused Lebanese officials of being unable to make an independent decision, saying they were answerable to the French and U.S. ambassadors to Lebanon. Addressing his Lebanese counterpart Fouad Siniora, the Syrian premier said: "Apparently Siniora forgot all of what we have discussed when he visited Damascus after his recent return from a visit to the U.S."
"I warned him. He can't say I didn't..."
Siniora had held talks with several officials in Damascus to resolve a border dispute between the two countries in June. Pan-Arab daily Al-Hayat reported yesterday Otari had refused to answer repeated phone calls from Siniora on Monday. The paper quoted unidentified "informed Syrian sources in Damascus" as saying the Assad regime believes Siniora has reneged on promises he made to the Syrian president during a visit on July 31. The regime is particularly outraged over Siniora's allegation in a recent interview with The Washington Post that all of Lebanon is convinced that Syria engineered the Hariri murder.
Sounds like the puppet masters are cheesed over losing control. But we knew that.
Link


Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Lebanese Premier Holds Talks in Syria
2005-08-01
Syria and Lebanon pledged Sunday to repair the damage to their relations caused by Syria's forced military withdrawal, but they gave little indication of how they would accomplish their goal. Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora met with Syrian President Bashar Assad in the first visit to Damascus by a senior Lebanese official since Syria pulled its troops from Lebanon in April, ending 29 years of military dominance. At a press conference with Syrian Prime Minister Mohammed Naji Otari, Saniora said both countries would adopt measures aimed at "bolstering the relationship between the two countries based on equality." But, in a sign of changing times, Saniora said the two sides had agreed to re-evaluate past agreements owing to "changes that sometimes require a reconsideration."

Otari said bilateral agreements would be re-evaluated in accordance with the national interests of each country. Saniora said Syria has promised to clear the backlog of hundreds of Lebanese freight trucks that have been stranded for weeks at Syrian border crossings. Many Lebanese have accused Syria of delaying the vehicles as punishment for its humiliating military withdrawal, but Syria has insisted the measures were applied to catch saboteurs and militants. Otari promised a solution "in the very near future." Tension between the two countries has been high since Syria was forced to pull its troops from Lebanon after mass protests and U.S.-led international pressure in the wake of the Feb. 14 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.
Link


Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Jordanian PM holds talks with Syrian leader
2005-05-04
Jordanian Prime Minister Adnan Badran held talks Tuesday with Syrian President Bashar Assad on ways "to boost and develop relations in all fields" and delivered a message from Jordan's king, Syria's official news agency reported. SANA said the talks also covered regional issues, but did not elaborate. It said the message from Jordanian King Abdullah II dealt with consultation and coordination between the two countries. Earlier in Badran's visit, he and Syrian Prime Minister Mohammad Naji Otari signed an agreement on civil defense and protection of civilians.

Badran said his talks with Assad on Tuesday gave a "very strong momentum" to the bilateral ties between the two countries, notably in the setting up of free trade zones. For his part, Otari stressed the need for continued meetings between the two governments.
Link


Syria-Lebanon-Iran
TERRORISTAN: Iran and Syria Form United Front
2005-02-17
Iran and Syria, who both are facing pressure from the United States, said Wednesday they will form a "united front" to confront possible threats against them, state-run television reported.
With the US killing their mortal Wahabi enemies, why wouldn't Assyrian and Persians feel in a position of strength? They are well aware that the recent Iraq election was nothing but a pre-determination circus, the outcome of which was dictated by the Persian terrorists. Teheran now owns a corridor of friendlies, that stretches to Jerusalem, and is legitimated by State Department largesse.
Syrians, not Assyrians. Assyrians today are mostly Christian, and live in Iraq. Syrians are majority Allawite, and live in Syria.
"In view of the special conditions faced by Syria, Iran will transfer its experience, especially concerning sanctions, to Syria," Mohammad Reza Aref, Iran's first vice president, was quoted as saying after meeting Syrian Prime Minister Mohammad Naji Otari. "At this sensitive point, the two countries require a united front due to numerous challenges." Otari concurred, saying, "The challenges we face in Syria and Iran require us to be in one front to confront all the challenges imposed (on us) by others."
This scum should be on their wretched knees, begging for their filthy lives.
But they're not, so it's a problem to be dealt with, without going into hysterics. It's a formalization of a relationship that's existed for awhile: Syria is to Iran as Lebanon is to Syria.
The report did not specifically mention the challenges, but both countries are under U.S. economic sanctions and the targets of intense American pressure.
While the Persian-Assyrian Axis spends profusely to support terror and terror preparations in Iraq and Israel, Condi is tossing rhetoric-bombs, while opposition starves in those tyrannies.
She's using diplomatic tools, which is her job as Secretary of State. Opposition has been starving in those tyrannies for some time. Internal opposition in both countries are tools that can be used, and neither you nor I have a handle on exactly what's being done with them. It's just that the handle you don't have is bigger than the one I don't have.
Iran, which President Bush had labeled an "axis of evil" with North Korea and prewar Iraq, was named an "outpost of tyranny" last month by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
But, only sticks and stones break bones.
That's a truism. Another truism is that you can't do everything at once, even if you'd like to...
The United States has accused Iran of seeking to produce nuclear weapons, while relations with Syria have deteriorated, especially since Monday's assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. Many Lebanese blamed Monday's car bombing in Beirut on Syria, but the Syrian government has denied responsibility. Washington is recalling its ambassador from Syria in apparent response to Hariri's killing.
Finger-pointing is so scary.
Fingerprinting can be even scarier...
Washington also accuses Syria of aiding anti-Israeli militants and supporting insurgents in Iraq. Tehran and Damascus have been strategic allies for years. Syria was the only Arab country that continued its warm relations with Iran during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war.
Assyrians are not "Arabs." Language does not determine ethnicity. And Aramic use is on the rise there, with the widespread local belief that Jesus Christ was an Assyrian.

Fred:
Respectfully, what would be your proposed Plan B. A Pak-Sunni had this to say in the Daily Times, last weekend, "The Bush administration is under the false impression that the elections in Iraq have heralded the era of democracy in Iraq and thus justify the Bush pre-emption doctrine. What, it seems, they cannot see is that the US has just facilitated a major transfer of power in the Arab World — from Sunnis to Shiites. Thanks to the US the Arab Shiites will now control Baghdad — the jewel in the Islamic crown — after a millennium. They did not rule over Baghdad even under the glorious Fatimid dynasty (909-1171) that governed Egypt, North Africa and Syria but had only a tenuous hold over Baghdad, briefly under the Buwayhid tribal confederation, before the Turkic Seljuks invaded and captured the city with help from the Abbasids." Semitic culture is rooted in the Tigris-Euphrates territories. Persian terrorists feel they been delivered an enormous strategic salient. When that sinks in with all Sunnis, they won't be thinking about State Department chiliastic "democracy" but obedience to some self-proclaimed ghazi (warrior-priest) will become an imperative. Inherent-slavery denial (re the Muslimutt ethos) is superceding Holocaust denial, as a force of intellectual depravity. Show me how the Middle East Democratic Intiative can possibly work, and I will get online.
This is the third time you've posted this particular piece. The first one I responded to, the second one I dumped. I'm getting tired of arguing the same point.

Sunnis, both in Iraq and in Pakistan, are rivals to the Shiites. Iranians — both Persians and other ethnic groups within Iran — have also historically been rivals to the Arabs. Today's Semitic culture is not rooted in the Tigris-Euphrates, but in Arabia, specifically the sandy part of Arabia. The Gulf Arabs have historically been more civilized, along with being richer. You'll find there are differences between the Najaf and Qom schools of Shiite thought, just as there are differences within the Sunni schools. The Najaf school has been held down for many years by the Sunni rulers of Iraq, while the Qom school isn't (or historically wasn't) as respected as the Najaf school. Persian dominance of Mesopotamia traditionally hasn't worked well, mainly because of the cultural differences between the Semites and the Medes and Persians. All those are handles for political and diplomatic exploitation.

Relying on military force exclusively is a dumb idea. All jobs aren't hammer jobs; some take screwdrivers, some pliers or wrenches and some take chain saws. Just like diplomacy, military force is a tool of national policy. Diplomacy is a lot cheaper than using military means. The corpse count is usually lower, too.

As I've pointed out before, we use the term "democracy" as shorthand for "liberty" or "personal freedom." There's an entire area of the world where "democracy" is occasionally given some sort of form, but liberty is still viewed as something frightening. That's ingrained in Islam, which attempts to control every aspect of life. We know here all about the illiberal aspects of Islam. We've seen it for three and a half years. The problem is defined, really. Now we're much more concerned with a solution. But solutions are dependent on constraints: we're not going to convert everyone in the area to agnosticism or Buddhism or Cao Dai. There's no tradition of participatory democracy to build on. The neighbors — virtually all of them — are hostile. We, as a civilized people, don't want to simply nuke the entire area, making a desolation and calling it peace. There are also limits to the amount of strain we want to put on our economy as we fight a worldwide war on terror.

The inhabitants of the Middle East are real, actual people. I don't know if you've ever lived in another country, but even weird places like South Waziristan are inhabited by human beings. They're often goofy, their customs aren't the same as ours, they're frightened by the idea of their societies being changed by the great wide world. Killing and maiming real, live people isn't something you want to do lightly. Before it comes to that it is to everyone's advantage to explore all the other avenues that are available. That means we're probably not going to end up with results that are perfectly to our liking. But killing everyone in the area and sowing it with salt isn't a result to our liking, either. Therefore, I'd like to see the diplomatic moves continue, the international political moves continue, the covert operations continue, before we see a major military operation against Iran. Do I think it'll eventually come? Yes. Do I think dismantling Iran militarily will be much harder than taking Iraq apart was? No. But I'd be happy to see it done without a shot being (officially) fired, if that's actually possible.
Link



Warning: Undefined property: stdClass::$T in /data/rantburg.com/www/pgrecentorg.php on line 132
-8 More