Syrian Resistance : Strategy and long term implications.

[eklavya]

It annoys me no end that as a nation we are consistently on the wrong side of history. This is what weakens us leaves us in our whiny moralizing piss ant corner. Lack of realism hurts us big time. For once I would like India and Indians to be on the winning side of stuff and show the spine and testicles to exploit the situation for our benefit.

Theo,

Why are you getting so worked up? Frankly, India has no vital interests in the goings on in Syria. Our true partner in that region is Israel, and Israel can and will take care of itself.

Even if Assad is doomed, why should India help Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar with achieving their political / religious goals? What have these countries ever done for India, other than damaging it through the spread of sunni Islamic fundamentalism? The Iranians are also crazy, but do no harm to India.

As far as ethics are concerned, every single one of the actors in this drama are a bunch of murderers, thieves and liars. Don't waste emotion on this conflict ... the government doesn't really care what happens in Syria.

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/270 ... lenge.html

[pentaiah]

The problem is precedents and possible extension of the intervention in other sovereign states affairs in future ...

[eklavya]

Like I said, India is not going to take any sides in this conflict. The Swiss position has its advantages. We need to remain on good terms with the US, Israel, France, UK, Russia, Iran ....

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_sy ... ia_1723931

Syria issue is marked with 'great polarisation' at UN: India

Published: Saturday, Aug 4, 2012, 19:20 IST | Updated: Saturday, Aug 4, 2012, 19:20 IST
Place: New Delhi | Agency: PTI

Abstaining along with 30 other countries in the voting on adoption of a Saudi-drafted resolution on Syria in the UN General Assembly, India today said the decision was taken after it felt that the issue was marked by "great polarisation" at the global organisation.

Asserting that its move to abstain from voting was not to "duck" the issue of escalating violence in Syria, over which New Delhi was "extremely worried and alarmed", the sources in the Ministry of External Affairs said it was also "deeply depressing" that the situation will continue unless there was major UN engagement to resolve the crisis.

The sources also maintained the situation has "slipped out of debating chambers to the battlefield" with the conflict between two "well-equipped and armed" sides showing no signs of abating.

The draft UN General Assembly resolution, which expressed "grave concern" at the escalating violence in Syria, got 133 votes in favour in the 193-member body yesterday.

India abstained from voting after the Saudi-drafted text referred to calls for President Bashar al-Assad to step down and asked UN states to severe diplomatic relations with the troubled nation.

The resolution, which is not legally binding and is of a moral nature, also demanded that the country lockdown its chemical and biological weapons.

Asked if Syrian government has approached India, the sources said their Foreign Minister was in touch with the Indian Ambassador there.

In his explanation of vote on the resolution, India's Permanent Representative to the UN Ambassador Hardeep Singh Puri said the resolution makes specific reference to the July 22 resolution of the League of Arab States which "openly called for President Assad to step down from power and for other UN members to severe diplomatic relations and contacts with Syria."

He said while India does not hold any brief for any particular Syrian leader, it could not welcome the League's resolution.

"It is unfortunate that this element of the present resolution was not removed, and hence we have abstained from the resolution," Puri said.

The resolution also deplored "the failure of the Security Council to agree on measures to ensure the compliance of Syrian authorities with its decisions".

[eklavya]

The problem is precedents and possible extension of the intervention in other sovereign states affairs in future ...

The precedents are well established for 5,000 years: the weak get f***ed by the strong. When it comes to war, there is no law, no judge and no jury.

[Johann]

Nightwatch's numbers and analysis on the force ratios are problematic.

Pre Arab spring estimates were that the Syrian Armed Forces were about 350,000 strong.

Out of those around 220,000 regulars (as opposed to conscripts). Out of these 140-150,000 were estimated to be Alawi - i.e. roughly two thirds.

But never mind that. The real problem is that it treats those numbers as static.

There is a mobilisation of civilians from local communities, both Alawi and Sunni in Shabiha and FSA respectively.

The net result of everything (combat losses, defections, local mobilisations, and what I believe is a non-critical number of foreigners on both sides) that government forces continue to shrink, while FSA forces grow. That is why the government is having such difficulty regaining the initiative.

The Druze, Ismailis and Kurds among conscripts are not going to stick on the bitter end even if they dont join the FSA.

Where can things go even if the government hits the hard bottom of those 150,000 Alawi professional soldiers (minus combat losses)?

The reports are that the Syrian military is facing the prospect of a range of shortages - pay, spares, etc.

Just holding the line is costing Russia and Iran an enormous fortune in terms of hard cash, and a line of credit for fuel, spares, ammunition, etc, and the problem will keep getting worse. Running a conventional fighting force, militias and a government isnt cheap.

The current status quo for the regime is not sustainable in terms of either manpower or money. Trying to be everywhere at once is not possible, and theyre just wearing themselves down. They have two choices - retreat to a more defensible perimeter or create a political masterstroke that splits Sunnis.

[Theo_Fidel]

Johann,

Several commentators have said that 70%+ of the SAA man power base were poor conscripted Sunni's. This does not square with your idea that they are 2/3's. To have 100,000 male Alawi's out of a population of 1.5 Million would mean conscription every single able bodied Male Alawi! This is extremely unlikely.

I doubt the core Alawi 'teeth' are more than 30,000-40,000. Toss in 10,000-20,000 more Shabiha.

I do think that the FSA has atleast 100,000. The key problem for FSA is that the armed experienced cohort likely does not exceed 20,000. Of which about 10,000 are now committed to Aleppo and Damascus. The problem for Assad is that he needs something like 50,000 to 60,000 committed troops just to take Aleppo. It should be remembered that 2,000 badly armed and untrained urban guerrilla's annihilated the 4,000 to 5,000 strong Khamis brigade in Misrata, Libya. Gaddafi's fate was sealed at that point. The key weapon in that battle was the recoilless rifle. Gaddafi forces never developed a response to that weapon. I wonder which weapon the FSA will select in Aleppo.

[rajanb]

^^^ I think the seeds are being sown for a possible far larger conflict which will surface and will encompass nations. And I think the history of anglo-saxon decisions in the region are depressing enough to hint at the possibility that their hitherto wrong intelligence and their lack of understanding of the peoples of this region may actually result in decisions which catalyse this conflict.

I was watching BBC yesterday and though Jordan finally made public the defection of the Syrian PM and his presence in Jordan, the Jordanians seem to think they should remain aloof from the politics of the Syrian uprising, but continue to provide succour to the 140,000 Syrian refugees. Especially in the light of Iran backing the Assad regime.

[James B]

Syria crisis: Rebels lose key district of Aleppo - from Beeb

Rebels are losing it.

[James B]

Same news from al-telegraph

Syria: rebel stronghold in Aleppo falls to Assad's forces

The rebel Free Syrian Army has retreated from the embattled district of Salaheddin in Aleppo on Thursday as Assad's forces advance.

[shyamd]

State-DoD team preparing to contain shoulder-fired missiles in Syria

By Julie Ershadi - 08/08/12 03:53 PM ET

Syria's chemical weapons stockpiles might have caught the world's attention, but the Obama administration is also working behind the scenes to prevent more conventional shoulder-fired missiles from falling into the wrong hands, the State Department's liaison to the Pentagon said Wednesday.

Andrew Shapiro, the assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs, said the State Department-led interagency task force charged with containing man-portable air-defense systems — or MANPADS — was ready for action in Syria after learning the lessons of Libya. Thousands of heat-seeking missiles are believed to have disappeared from Libyan armories during last year's civil war, creating a potential security risk for commercial airliners for decades to come and possibly contributing to the violence in Mali.

“As violence grows in Syria,” Shapiro said in a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, “the MANPADS Task Force is building off its experience in Libya to plan and prepare for possible contingencies in Syria.”

The State Department-led task force was created in 2006 to help countries contain existing stockpiles and properly dispose of missiles no longer necessary for national defense. Shapiro said the task force was among “the types of interagency efforts necessary to effectively address transnational security threats,” including any that may arise from the conflict in Syria.
During the Libyan conflict, a “State Department MANPADS expert” was working on the ground in Benghazi while fighting had not yet subsided, Shapiro added. The department also deployed a “quick reaction force” to advise the Transitional National Council in preventing the proliferation of the weapons

Will Assad go chemical?
Talking to Syrian Major-General Adnan Silou

Michael Weiss, August 9, 2012 share

One of the gravest concerns in the West about Syria is whether or not the Assad regime will deploy chemical weapons either against the civilian population and armed rebels or against a neighboring country. While accurate data is hard to come by in Syria, Western and Middle Eastern intelligence agencies reckon that the regime has as many as 1,000 tons of chemical weapons disbursed in stockpiles throughout 50 cities. And not that it would matter if Syria had signed or ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), which outlaws the manufacture or storage of these arsenals, though the fact that it hasn’t only amplifies fears of just how catastrophic Assad’s end-game might be.

Major General Adnan Silou is the former head of Syria’s chemical weapons program. He left that post three years ago and defected from the Assad regime in June. Silou now resides in the officers’ refugee camp in Antakya, Turkey, which doubles as the Free Syrian Army headquarters. Here’s his defection video.

NOW Lebanon was able to speak briefly with Major-General Silou recently about the worst of all outcomes for Syria.

Will the regime ever use chemical weapons?

Silou: If Assad feels restricted, he may use them. As long as conventional weapons—tanks, artillery, the Air Force—are successful in damaging things from afar, he won’t need to deploy them.

Under what conditions could you see Assad ordering them used?

Silou: If Aleppo falls to the Free Syrian Army, he’ll deploy them because he’s insane.

Deploy them against whom? The rebels or civilians?

Silou: He’d use them against everyone, rebels and civilians. This would be total destruction. These weapons hurt everyone.

Why would Aleppo be the decisive factor?

Silou: Because it’s the industrial and economic city of Syria.

Describe how this would work. How would the orders be delivered to deploy chemical weapons?

Silou: The chain of command is Bashar al-Assad, Ali Mamluk [who, following last month’s assassination of key regime insiders, now oversees the entire security apparatus], Jamil Hassan, the head of Air Force intelligence. But only Bashar only can give the order.

If Assad were killed or if he left the country, who could then take such a decision?

Silou: Constitutionally, it would be Farouq Al-Sharaf, the current Vice President of Syria. But if Assad was still alive but overthrown, he could delegate authority to any other Syrian general.

Would Maher al-Assad, Bashar’s brother and the commander of the Fourth Division, not assume that role?

Silou: He could. The constitution in Syria doesn’t matter, so it’s whatever Bashar decides.

Where are the chemical weapons being kept now? Is it true that they’re scattered throughout 50 cities in Syria?

Silou: I only know of two storage facilities: “417”, which is northeast of Damascus, and “418”, which is in eastern Homs.

What kinds of weapons are kept there?

Silou: Sarin [gas], VX [nerve agent] and mustard agents.

How would these be delivered or fired?

Silou: Through tanks, missiles and aircraft.

You left your position as head of the chemical weapons division three years ago. How sure can you be that the chemical arsenal is the same today as it was then?

Silou: Everything’s the same as I left it. I did everything and managed everything -- I was the chief administrator.

Who’s the head of chemical weapons now?

Silou: Brigadier General Talib Salameh is in charge of training the Syrian troops on how to avoid being affected by chemical weapons. But the responsibility for deploying them belongs to Jamil Hassan.

Were chemical weapons ever used while you were the head of the program?

Silou: No.

There have been reports from other defectors that chemical weapons have already been used in Syria since the uprising began a year and a half ago. Is this true?

Silou: In Rastan, the regime sprayed pesticides. This was done to make the people fear the regime and to disperse the protests.

[pentaiah]

Ok Now Assad has been labelled insane.
So what next?
the script is rolling according to plan

[James B]

Summary of the latest developments
• Free Syrian Army rebels have withdrawn from parts of Aleppo after intense bombardment. The Guardian's Martin Chulov says they have withdrawn all their main fighting units from the Salahedin district.

• Former health minister Wael al-Halki has become Syria's third prime minister in four days. He replaces Omar Ghalawanji who was appointed as caretaker prime minister in the wake of Monday's defection of Riyad Hijab.

• Egyptian Nobel laureate Mohamed ElBaradei is reported to have turned down an offer to replace Kofi Annan as international envoy on Syria.

• In Lebanon, former MP and cabinet minister Michel Samaha – a prominent ally of the Syrian regime – has been arrested over a "sensitive" matter related to "security"

• President Assad's chief of protocol has appeared in a video denying the FSA's claim earlier today that he had defected – though he said he had been in Lebanon receiving medical treatment.

• Indiscriminate air strikes by a Czech-designed jet have been photographed and described in Tel Rifaat north of Aleppo. "Although the pilots seemed to know where the rebel bases were, their fire was often indiscriminate," a Reuters reporter said.

• Syria's allies have been attending talks in Iran. Representatives from Russia and China are believed to be attending.

• A senior figure in the Obama administration has refused to rule out imposing a no-fly zone over Syria. Speaking at the Council on Foreign Relations, John Brennan, Obama's senior counter-terrorism adviser, said: "I don't recall the president ever saying that anything is off the table."


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/middle- ... sfeed=true

[Pranav]

Syria plan from 1957. The more things change ....

Newly discovered documents show how in 1957 Harold Macmillan and President Dwight Eisenhower approved a CIA-MI6 plan to stage fake border incidents as an excuse for an invasion by Syria's pro-western neighbours, and then to "eliminate" the most influential triumvirate in Damascus. ...

Part of the "preferred plan" reads: "In order to facilitate the action of liberative forces, reduce the capabilities of the Syrian regime to organise and direct its military actions, to hold losses and destruction to a minimum, and to bring about desired results in the shortest possible time, a special effort should be made to eliminate certain key individuals. Their removal should be accomplished early in the course of the uprising and intervention and in the light of circumstances existing at the time." ...

For a prime minister who had largely come to power on the back of Anthony Eden's disastrous antics in Suez just a year before, Mr Macmillan was remarkably bellicose. ...

The "preferred plan" adds: "Once a political decision is reached to proceed with internal disturbances in Syria, CIA is prepared, and SIS [MI6] will attempt, to mount minor sabotage and coup de main incidents within Syria, working through contacts with individuals.

"The two services should consult, as appropriate, to avoid any overlapping or interference with each other's activities... Incidents should not be concentrated in Damascus; the operation should not be overdone; and to the extent possible care should be taken to avoid causing key leaders of the Syrian regime to take additional personal protection measures."

Sabotage

The report said that once the necessary degree of fear had been created, frontier incidents and border clashes would be staged to provide a pretext for Iraqi and Jordanian military intervention. Syria had to be "made to appear as the sponsor of plots, sabotage and violence directed against neighbouring governments," the report says. "CIA and SIS should use their capabilities in both the psychological and action fields to augment tension." That meant operations in Jordan, Iraq, and Lebanon, taking the form of "sabotage, national conspiracies and various strong-arm activities" to be blamed on Damascus.

The plan called for funding of a "Free Syria Committee", and the arming of "political factions with paramilitary or other actionist capabilities" within Syria. The CIA and MI6 would instigate internal uprisings, for instance by the Druze in the south, help to free political prisoners held in the Mezze prison, and stir up the Muslim Brotherhood in Damascus.

The planners envisaged replacing the Ba'ath/Communist regime with one that was firmly anti-Soviet, but they conceded that this would not be popular and "would probably need to rely first upon repressive measures and arbitrary exercise of power".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2003 ... /uk.syria1

[Pranav]

Mercenaries being routed in Aleppo -

It began with a few of the rebel units pulling out, sleepless and disoriented after two nights of relentless shelling, fearful that they were being surrounded by regime forces. By mid-morning the departures had turned into a major retreat, with hundreds of fighters pouring out of Salaheddine, many of them then straight out of Aleppo.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 26802.html

[Theo_Fidel]

Interesting read on the Libyan leading the Liwa al-ummah brigade.

The Syrians should NOT be listening to the Tripoli brigade IMHO.

In Libya the Tripoli brigade did very little of the really tough and organized fighting. It showed up at the very end of battles and tended to claim all the credit.

Even at the very end at the Bab Al-Aziza battle the Tripoli brigade promptly bogged down and had no answers to the couple of hundred Gaddafi defenders remaining. It was the Misurata Brigade and the Nafusa Amazigh mountain brigades that knocked down the last strong holds. It was the Nafusa Amazigh that did some of the most desperate desert fighting and liberated Zawiya which then caused the Western flank of Tripoli to collapse. These were the best fighters by far in Libyan campaign. The Tripoli brigade did very little real fighting and always tried to position it self politically. In the elections after the war its ideology was soundly rejected.

It is also interesting that similar to Aleppo, Tripoli never joined the revolt until the very end.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2 ... yan_weapon

The Libyans in the brigade often debate with their Syrian counterparts the differences between the Syrian uprising and the revolution in their own country. "In Libya our revolution was unified under the banner of the National Transitional Council and its head, Mustafa Abdel Jalil," says Harati. "Here there is no face that represents all the branches of the Syrian revolt." Najjair, his brother-in-law, agrees. "There are so many different factions, objectives, and ideologies." Harati nods before sighing: "The complexity of the situation here makes me feel like we were just playing games in Libya last year."

[shyamd]

You know in Jordan, Oman etc there were 'Arab spring' protests too... How did their leadership respond? Both responded by immediately creating a parliament and Became a constitutional monarchy - they provided training for them and some delegations get training here in Indian parliament.

ContRast with Bashar - routine torture, kidnapping and when things got out of control he opened up. No one trusts Bashar and that has been the message right towards the end of 2011 and people chose violence. Even if people went to democracy - people would have wanted answers to investigate the deaths which means one thing Bashar gone either way.

-------------
There are a lot of libyans there. Predominantly paid by Qatar. So many of the Libyans underwent medical treatment in Jordan and turkey and Qatar paid for it, in return they were expected to fight. It's only worth training people with battle experience.

[Theo_Fidel]

In a wild case of whiplash, FSA now claims full control of Salehedinn. Several videos are emerging showing shattered tanks and dead SAA soldiers on the streets.

FSA claims to have captured large armories within Aleppo, and continuing to assault atleast 3 more. Al Guardian reporting that about 6,000 - 8,000 assault weapons and ammo were captured. If true the FSA in Aleppo will now double in size over night. Assad will now be facing 15,000 fighters tomorrow.

In kafranbal, Idlib FSA destroyed 10 tanks+AMC and appears to have captured at least 4 tanks per video. Counted at least 30 dead soldiers. It is hard to believe that a professional army platoon can be so completely shattered by a bunch of villagers. Edit Later. Turns out it was an entire company that was taken apart.

[ramana]

Shyamd< Recall my slideshare ppt on outcomes for dictators when faced with protests!

One post wrt to Syria:

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 2#p1146090

Another:
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 1#p1184001

[shyamd]

Yup!

[shyamd]

New intelligence in. US will setup a full command centre. 20MANPADS deploye inside Syria. Major offensive in another major city before the end of the month.

Turkey is lobbying the Americans saying the FSA have proven themselves by securing the northern areas and some places in the south.

[shyamd]

Another high level defection from deraa and the Jordanian border is on fire. They are targeting all the Sunnis from deraa, only few left now

[chanakyaa]

Sheeria is done!! Finished!! Pathetic Russia's empty support is done. Brilliant planning by the west is going to win. Arabi money to eliminate Arbi regimes to keeps Arabis in check. Just brilliant.

Eeran is next (everything learned in Sheeria will be used in Eeran to throw Khomeini out)

[Johann]

Johann,

Several commentators have said that 70%+ of the SAA man power base were poor conscripted Sunni's. This does not square with your idea that they are 2/3's. To have 100,000 male Alawi's out of a population of 1.5 Million would mean conscription every single able bodied Male Alawi! This is extremely unlikely.

Theo,

Sunnis are 70% of the armed force only when you include the reserves, which have not been mobilised by the government. The Alawi constitute roughly ~44% of the regulars, of which the full time professionals are a smaller cadre of 150,000. So yes, they are ~66% of the professionals in the full-time regular service.

The Alawi population is estimated at 2.1 million.

Syria is a very youthful country with a high birth rate, and security jobs are some of the best so its not that hard to keep up the numbers of Alawi professional soldiers.

[Johann]

^^^ I think the seeds are being sown for a possible far larger conflict which will surface and will encompass nations. And I think the history of anglo-saxon decisions in the region are depressing enough to hint at the possibility that their hitherto wrong intelligence and their lack of understanding of the peoples of this region may actually result in decisions which catalyse this conflict.

Rajan,

The West is not the most important player here.

The most important thing for ME stability that can happen is the easing of Saudi-Iranian competition.

I believe that is actually something that India can play a very important role in addressing.

[eklavya]

The most important thing for ME stability that can happen is the easing of Saudi-Iranian competition.

I believe that is actually something that India can play a very important role in addressing.

Johann, a few questions for you:

1) What do you see as the key points of tension between Saudi Arabia and Iran? Where do their goals and objectives clash?

2) What incentive does either party have for easing tensions?

3) What influence does India have over either party?

4) Does India benefit from or lose from Saudi-Iranian tensions?

Many thanks in advance.

[shyamd]

Clinton meets select Commanders from Syria, military & intelligence officials from Turkey and region. Head of MIT (turkish intel) part of the meeting. HC also announced 'intensive planning group' between the US military, Turkish mil and the FSA.,

Meanwhile there was a gunfight in the parliament area of Damascus.

[shyamd]

Johann, a few questions for you:

1) What do you see as the key points of tension between Saudi Arabia and Iran? Where do their goals and objectives clash?

2) What incentive does either party have for easing tensions?

3) What influence does India have over either party?

4) Does India benefit from or lose from Saudi-Iranian tensions?

Many thanks in advance.

Read : http://ibnlive.in.com/blogs/sauravjha/2 ... durai.html

[brihaspati]

^^^ I think the seeds are being sown for a possible far larger conflict which will surface and will encompass nations. And I think the history of anglo-saxon decisions in the region are depressing enough to hint at the possibility that their hitherto wrong intelligence and their lack of understanding of the peoples of this region may actually result in decisions which catalyse this conflict.

Rajan,

The West is not the most important player here.

The most important thing for ME stability that can happen is the easing of Saudi-Iranian competition.

I believe that is actually something that India can play a very important role in addressing.

Easing of Saudi-Iranain competition is not necessarily beneficial for India. It will be beneficial only if such easing happens with a military defeat of the Saudi state. If they mutually decerease their conforntation, without damage to the nuisance capabilities of KSA - then the entire state+theological combination of KSA retains its full power and expansionist drive, and will turn its attention towards the subcontinent. KSA already has a huge handle in India through the larger Sunni following, Indian state's consistent virtual protection of the theological establishment of the Sunni variety, increasing recent indulgence provided to virulent-in-the-past-before-being-politically-gagged Saudi theologians, and the carrot of infrastructural investments [which already perhaps has those Indians standing to benefit from the financial processing - to cheer everything Saudis have to supposedly offer to India].

As for India's ability to affect reduction of competition, it depends on India's military capacity, and a proven capacity at that in demolishing any neighbourhood power's military capabilities. The Muslim state psyche works on the basis of military capacity - and fear of being eliminated works more powerfully in that psyche than the hand of friendship. India's ability to bring these two together depends on India able to show that it can effectively not only counter, but also roll back the Chinese, and also eliminate or destroy Pakistan.

Trade opportunities or purely financial processing capabilities do not affect Islamic political thinking - which consistently shows underlying calculations of territorial and demographic expansion, and always the calculations of military power equation.


The other long shot is reducing oil dependence. But India is not moving in that zone any time soon.

[shyamd]

New intelligence in. US will setup a full command centre. 20MANPADS deploye inside Syria. Major offensive in another major city before the end of the month.

Turkey is lobbying the Americans saying the FSA have proven themselves by securing the northern areas and some places in the south.

Clinton: Chemical warfare is planned for. Rebels get first anti-air Stingers

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report August 11, 2012, 5:36 PM (GMT+02:00)

Turkey has sent the Syrian rebels fighting in Aleppo their first shipment of shoulder-carried, anti-air FIM-92 Stingers, debkafile’s military sources report. More are on the way to insurgent groups battling government forces around Damascus and other parts of Syria.

In Istanbul, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton held talks Saturday, Aug. 11, with Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan and Syrian opposition figures, after which she announced US and Turkish intelligence services and military would set up a joint working team to plan for “many contingencies including the very horrible scenario of the use of chemical weapons.”
debkafile’s US, Turkish and Israeli intelligence sources are taking into account that Bashar Assad will view the supply of Stingers to the rebels as a game changer that threatens to tip the balance of the war against him and respond with chemical warfare against the rebels, Turkey, Israel and Jordan.
In consideration of this menace, France last week flew a medical field hospital specializing in treating chemical poisoning from its medical base at Istres to northern Jordan and set it up close to the Syrian border.
Our sources also disclose that Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan's decision to put Stingers in Syrian rebel hands came after Assad’s forces shot down a Turkish Air Force F-4 with Russian-made Pantsyr-1 air defense missiles over Latakia on June 22.

He was also paying Bashar Assad back for allowing Turkish Kurdish rebel PKK forces to transfer 2,500 fighters to the Syrian-Turkish border.
Turkey manufactures the Stingers under American license and is obliged by contract to obtain US permission for their transfer to a third party. It was granted by Washington on the quiet. This made it possible for Ankara to supply the rebel Syrian Free Army with the weapon needed to shoot down government assault helicopters, while the Obama administration continued to assert that America was providing the revolt with nothing more than “nonlethal assistance.”
By the same token, British Foreign Secretary William Hague was able to claim Friday, Aug. 10, that his government had granted Syrian rebels $8 million of “non-military support.”

Our military sources report that Washington and Ankara briefed Britain, Saudi Arabia and Qatar on the Stingers delivery after the oil states offered to fund them and also pay for the courses run by American, British and Turkish instructors for training the rebels in their use.
Washington is taking care to keep control over the Stingers’ supplies and make sure they reach the right hands and are used in the right measure.
While the Obama administration wants to see the back of Bashar Assad and his clique, it has no wish to see rebel tactics powerful enough to break the back of the Syrian army and air force, because that would plunge the country into unbridled civil strife and chaos for years to come. The US wants the army preserved as a cohesive operational entity, capable of safeguarding an alternative administration when it takes Assad’s place in Damascus or possibly Aleppo, Syria’s largest city and its commercial hub.
To defeat Assad’s military offensive, debkafile’s military sources estimate the rebels will need 300-400 Stingers. They have received the first 20-30 for tipping the scales of battle in Aleppo. The next shipment will most likely help them assert control over a “corridor” from Aleppo to the Turkish border as a potential future safe haven, another topic highlighted in Clinton’s talks in Istanbul.
Asked about this after those talks, she said it was a possible option.

The missiles are therefore being handed out in careful doses. At the same time, our military sources report that the rebels using the Stingers in Aleppo against Syrian gunships and fighter jets since Tuesday, Aug. 7, have not managed to hit anything. There may be two possible reasons for their consistent misses:

1. Inexperience: They may need more instruction and practice;
2. Assad’s air force may have been equipped by Moscow with decoy devices developed by the Russian arms industry for muddling the American Stingers.

The Stinger is a heat-seeking missile, which sticks to its target in all conditions. The microprocessor in its warhead is designed to ignore decoys and hold it on course. It should take no more than a few days to determine whether the Russians have developed new countermeasures to defeat the Stinger and given them to the Damascus.
The Russians have a long score to settle with the Stinger. It was the weapon in the hands of American-backed Muslim forces in Afghanistan which more than any other forced the Red Army to quit the country in 1985 by knocking out the Russian troops’ air cover.

End is near for Syria's Assad, says German spy chief

(Reuters) - Germany's spy chief said Syria President Bashar al-Assad's government appeared to be in its final phase because its army had been depleted by casualties, deserters and defectors to the opposition.

Gerhard Schindler, head of Germany's BND intelligence agency, said Assad's once 320,000-strong army had lost about 50,000 troops since the uprising against his rule began 17 months ago.

Smaller, flexible rebel units were sapping the strength of the army with guerrilla tactics, he told Die Welt newspaper in an interview published on Saturday.

"There are a lot of indications that the end game for the regime has begun," said the president of the Bundesnachrichtendienst agency.

"That (army losses) includes those who have been wounded, deserted and about 2,000 to 3,000 who have defected to the armed military opposition," he said. "The erosion of the military is continuing."

While Assad's grip on the country has been loosened as the uprising has gathered momentum, his forces have overwhelming firepower advantage against lightly armed rebels.

However, Schindler said small rebel units were offsetting that by using their speed and maneuverability to strike quickly in ambushes.

"Because of their small size, they're not a good target for Assad's army," he said. "The regular army is being confronted by a variety of flexible fighters. The recipe of their success is their guerrilla tactics. They're breaking the army's back."

Assad is fighting to crush a rebellion that aims to end his family's four decades in charge of Syria.

Green light to mobilise and prepare... NATO SOP to scare Asad to leave.. Preparations will be underway (again).

U.S., Turkey to explore imposing Syria no-fly zone

A Free Syrian Army fighter tries to fix his jammed rifle during heavy fighting in Salaheddine neighborhood of central Aleppo August 11, 2012. REUTERS-Goran Tomasevic

By Hadeel Al Shalchi

ALEPPO, Syria | Sat Aug 11, 2012 4:03pm EDT

(Reuters) - The United States and Turkey indicated on Saturday they were studying a range of measures, including a no-fly zone, as battles between Syrian rebels and President Bashar al-Assad's forces shook Aleppo and the heart of Damascus.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said after meeting her Turkish counterpart Ahmet Davutoglu in Istanbul that Washington and Ankara should develop detailed operational planning on ways to assist the rebels fighting to topple Assad.

"Our intelligence services, our military have very important responsibilities and roles to play so we are going to be setting up a working group to do exactly that," she said.

Asked about options such as imposing a no-fly zone over rebel-held territory, Clinton said these were possibilities she and Davutoglu had agreed "need greater in-depth analysis", while indicating that no decisions were necessarily imminent.

"It is one thing to talk about all kinds of potential actions, but you cannot make reasoned decisions without doing intense analysis and operational planning," she said.

Though possible intervention appears to be a distant prospect, her remarks were nevertheless the closest Washington has come to suggesting direct military action in Syria.

No-fly zones imposed by NATO and Arab allies helped Libyan rebels overthrow Muammar Gaddafi last year. Until recently, the West had shunned the idea of repeating any Libya-style action.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar are believed to be arming Syrian rebels, while the United States and Britain have pledged to step up non-lethal assistance to Assad's opponents.

Davutoglu said it was time outside powers took decisive steps to resolve the humanitarian crisis in cities such as Aleppo, where Assad's forces have fought rebels for three weeks.

JETS, TANKS IN ACTION

In the latest battles, tanks and troops pummeled rebels near the shattered district of Salaheddine, a former opposition stronghold that commands the main southern approach to Aleppo.

Tank fire crashed into the adjacent Saif al-Dawla neighborhood as military jets circled over an abandoned police station held by rebels, firing missiles every few minutes.

Insurgents said they had been forced to retreat in the latest twist in relentless, see-saw battles for Salaheddine, part of a swathe of Aleppo seized by rebels last month.

Some rebels, outgunned and low on ammunition in Aleppo, have pleaded for outside military help, arguing that more weapons and a no-fly zone over areas they control near the Turkish border would give them a secure base against Assad's forces.

"The reason we retreated from Salaheddine this week is a lack of weapons," complained Abu Thadet, a rebel commander in Aleppo who said his fighters would regroup and fight back. "We can handle the bombing. It's the snipers that make it hard."

Ten of the 30 fighters in his brigade have been wounded, mostly by snipers lurking even in areas rebels claim to control. His men have broken holes in walls of buildings to try to create safe passages for them to move around in Salaheddine.

In Damascus, where Assad's forces have regained control of districts overrun by rebels last month, a resident reported an explosion near the Central Bank, followed by gunfire.

"The explosion was huge. There has been fighting for the past half-hour along Pakistan Street. I am very close. Can you hear that?" she told Reuters, a bang audible over the telephone.

Syrian state TV said authorities were hunting "terrorists" who had set off a bomb in Merjeh, an area near the central bank, and who were "shooting at random to spark panic among citizens".

The pro-opposition Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said 40 people were killed across Syria on Saturday.

END GAME BEGINS?

Despite their superior firepower, Assad's forces have been stretched by months of warfare against increasingly skilled and organized fighters who have taken them on in every city and in many parts of the countryside at one time or another.

Germany's spy chief said the Syrian army had been depleted by casualties, deserters and defectors.

"There are a lot of indications that the end game for the regime has begun," said Gerhard Schindler, head of the BND intelligence agency, in an interview with Die Welt newspaper.

"The regular army is being confronted by a variety of flexible fighters. The recipe of their success is their guerrilla tactics. They're breaking the army's back."

Syria's torment, however, is far from over and several signs point to how the conflict could spill over into its neighbors.

Jordanian and Syrian forces clashed along the border overnight when Syrian refugees tried to cross into Jordan, a Syrian opposition activist who witnessed the fighting said.

He said armored vehicles were involved in the clash in the Tel Shihab-Turra area, about 80 km (50 miles) north of Jordan's capital, Amman. No deaths were reported on the Jordanian side.

Thousands of Syrians have fled into Jordan, but tensions heightened after Assad's newly installed prime minister, Riad Hijab, defected and escaped across the border this week.

In Lebanon, Michel Samaha, a former information minister and Assad ally, faces military indictment for his alleged part in "terrorist plots" which included transporting explosives from Syria for use in north Lebanon, a Lebanese security source said.

Lebanon, still scarred by its 1975-90 civil war, is nervous about instability spreading from Syria and shattering its own delicate sectarian power-sharing balance between Shi'ite and Sunni Muslims, Christians and other minorities.

Assad's main outside allies are Shi'ite Iran and Lebanon's Shi'ite Hezbollah movement. His ruling system is dominated by members of his Alawite minority, an offshoot of Shi'ite Islam.

His foes are mostly from Syria's Sunni majority, who are backed by Sunni-ruled states such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, which are also regional rivals of Iran.

Arab foreign ministers will meet on Sunday in Jeddah to discuss the Syria crisis and who should replace Kofi Annan, the United Nations-Arab League envoy, a League official said.

U.N. diplomats said veteran Algerian diplomat Lakhdar Brahimi could be named next week as the new envoy for Syria.

Annan quit after his peacemaking efforts proved futile in the face of divisions in the U.N. Security Council, where Russia and China have blocked Western attempts to speed Assad's exit.

Breaking News is that Hillary Clinton refused to meet Manaf Tlass

[eklavya]

Read : http://ibnlive.in.com/blogs/sauravjha/2 ... durai.html

shyamd, many thanks. So, what I gathered from that article and media reports to date:

1) Saudis and Iranians loathe each other. Deep-seated visceral loathing. Even if they agree on many things (keep oil price high, Palestinian rights, allah ho akbar, johnnie walker > chivas regal, etc), they genuinely loathe each other and they and their predecessor "ideological guardians" have done so since AD 680 Battle of Karbala. Now you have Battle of Bahrain, Battle of Aleppo, etc etc

2) Neither Saudis or Iranians would want a war / confrontation of a magnitude that potentially endangers their respective regimes. Short of that, they will constantly jockey for superiority.

3) India's influence. As far as I can tell, its absolutely bugger all! We need Saudi oil, and millions of our citizens work in the GCC countries to earn their livelihoods; these are 'very good things' and worth preserving. We need Iranian oil, and we need access to Iranian ports and roads to be able to trade with Afghanistan; these are also 'very good things' and worth preserving. As far as I can tell the Saudis and Iranians only really need us as a customer for their oil, which we anyway need to buy.

4) Benefits to India of lower Saudi-Iranian tension. Reference to (3) above, anything that keeps oil flowing and oil price affordable (or not too unaffordable), and millions of our fellow citizens gainfully employed, is a benefit.

Having said this, I still don't see what leverage India has over Iran. Even if India refuses to buy any oil from them, they will still not give up their nuke weapons programme. For allah's sake, the Iranian regime attacked an Israeli diplomat (and Israel is our most important friend in the Middle East) in the middle of New Delhi, and what did India do? Absolutely nothing of consequence. Why? Because, we need their oil, their port, and their road to Afghanistan. Truly exposed our weakness.

And what leverage does India have over Saudi? As far as I can tell, ZILCH. The writer you referenced suggests that India exercises its influence over Iran in return for Saudi exercising its influence over Pakistan. What I don't understand is that if Saudis have so much influence over Pakistan, how the hell did the Pakistanis get away with selling uranium enrichment technology to the Iranians?

Like I said earlier, India just doesn't have any leverage to make much of a difference.

At best, India can listen to Iran and Syria, and convey to the US, Saudis and Israelis what the Iranians and Syrians are thinking, and possibly vice versa. But I don't see how India can do anything more than play 'honest broker'. There is no leverage ....

[shyamd]

Hillary aunty shunned all FSA commanders and SNC people. She refused to meet Manaf Tlass. She met only with 4 FSA commanders who turkish intel and pentagon say that proved themselves.

Riyad al asad was asked to stay in his hotel room - couldnt even go out.

The weapons given are not SA-7s from the look of things but FIM92 Stingers from libya.

Hillary came with 2 pentagon advisors and US mil attache to turkey. She met with Mustafa Al sheikh a commander.

US will set up a full command centre to coordinate logistics, intel etc. They are working on how to implement NFZ. She was in the meeting only for 45 mins.

[shyamd]

shyamd, many thanks. So, what I gathered from that article and media reports to date:

1) Saudis and Iranians loathe each other. Deep-seated visceral loathing. Even if they agree on many things (keep oil price high, Palestinian rights, allah ho akbar, johnnie walker > chivas regal, etc), they genuinely loathe each other and they and their predecessor "ideological guardians" have done so since AD 680 Battle of Karbala. Now you have Battle of Bahrain, Battle of Aleppo, etc etc

Hi Eklavya

Yes they dont get along with each other because Iran wants to expand their empire - Iraq, Syria, Lebanon = this is what the GCC says. GCC also says that Iran has rejected every offer for cooperation and are not interested - and also meddle with their shia populations.
Of course Iran will have another view to it.

2) Neither Saudis or Iranians would want a war / confrontation of a magnitude that potentially endangers their respective regimes. Short of that, they will constantly jockey for superiority.

Yup

3) India's influence. As far as I can tell, its absolutely bugger all! We need Saudi oil, and millions of our citizens work in the GCC countries to earn their livelihoods; these are 'very good things' and worth preserving. We need Iranian oil, and we need access to Iranian ports and roads to be able to trade with Afghanistan; these are also 'very good things' and worth preserving. As far as I can tell the Saudis and Iranians only really need us as a customer for their oil, which we anyway need to buy.

The point is we are interested in peace in that region and war is against our interests. India will tell Iranians that we have 6 million people in that region and a stable route of energy for our economy. That is all we are telling them. We don't have leverage over either party per se - we need both.

4) Benefits to India of lower Saudi-Iranian tension. Reference to (3) above, anything that keeps oil flowing and oil price affordable (or not too unaffordable), and millions of our fellow citizens gainfully employed, is a benefit.

Exactly.

Having said this, I still don't see what leverage India has over Iran. Even if India refuses to buy any oil from them, they will still not give up their nuke weapons programme. For allah's sake, the Iranian regime attacked an Israeli diplomat (and Israel is our most important friend in the Middle East) in the middle of New Delhi, and what did India do? Absolutely nothing of consequence. Why? Because, we need their oil, their port, and their road to Afghanistan. Truly exposed our weakness.

Thats not the point though - we are just opening a channel of communication - just conveying messages between both GCC and Iran as a neutral party and we are just hinting we dont want trouble there when we say we want stable energy and our 6 million citizens also shouldnt suffer. That is all.

And what leverage does India have over Saudi? As far as I can tell, ZILCH. The writer you referenced suggests that India exercises its influence over Iran in return for Saudi exercising its influence over Pakistan. What I don't understand is that if Saudis have so much influence over Pakistan, how the hell did the Pakistanis get away with selling uranium enrichment technology to the Iranians?

Exactly.. They caused this crap in the first place. TSP despite bieng a pain in the butt and not trust worthy provide the N umbrella/military support for the GCC against Iran so they are quite useful nation to have on their side - especially at a time when another key pillar of support - Egypt is in deep trouble.. Before 2011, TSP literally had F all support from KSA actually - many requests for cash/cheap oil were denied and TSP was 90 days away from being broke! Then arab spring happened and they needed TSP on their side for various reasons and okayed the deals that were pending.

[Pranav]

Yes they dont get along with each other because Iran wants to expand their empire - Iraq, Syria, Lebanon

Why should GCC get khujli if Iran-Iraq-Syria-Lebanon want to cooperate.

That's what opens the door to neo-colonialism.

[Pranav]

Qatar offered Syrian ambassador $5.8mn for defection - report - http://www.rt.com/news/syria-ambassador ... ction-421/

[shyamd]

Pranav ji, because the Iranians were using those countries to expand and eventually surround the gulf and use it as a base for operations inside the gulf. Iranians weren't cooperating as well and as the Persian expansion continued to grow - GCC got nervous and they felt they were being surrounded and the situation getting worse every day, so this pushed them into action

[eklavya]

Why should GCC get khujli if Iran-Iraq-Syria-Lebanon want to cooperate.

GCC countries are all Sunni-Monarchies. Iran is a quasi-populist Theocracy. The Iranian 'system' (mullah rule, with 'elections' pitting mullah against mullah) is an existential threat to the GCC regimes.

Thanks to George W Bush, Iraq is already 'lost' to the Shia parties, which are also Iran-friendly.

The new front line is Bahrain, because there the Shias are a majority, and any 'popular' form of government would involve getting rid of the Sunni ruling family and will almost certainly be succeeded by an Iran-friendly Shia party.

Hezbollah too is genuinely popular with the Shias in Lebanon, and although a minority in Lebanon, they appear to be stronger militarily than the Lebanese state (due to Syrian-Iranian support).

Syria is the opposite of Bahrain, in that you have a Shia ruling clan (aligned with the Iranian regime) dominating a majority Sunni country. Which is why Saudi and Qatar feel that arming the FSA, etc is legitimate, as it reflects the 'popular will'. Not that the Saudis are democrats (they were dead against the Egyptian revolution that overthrew Mubarak), but they would like to 'exploit' the Sunni majority in Syria to get rid of an Iran-friendly regime.

Personally I think democracy in Syria, with Sunni parties dominating parliament, would be a wonderful development, as it would massively increase the pressure on the GCC Sunni-monarchies and their hangers-on (like the Jordan monarchy) to liberalise their systems.

Jordan, as many of you know, has a Palestinian majority! The reality is that the Palestinians already have a 'state', just that the Hashemite monarchy has hijacked it. If you can have a free and fair elections in Syria, with a powerful elected parliament and government, then why not in Jordan, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, etc?

Interesting days ahead .... power to the people!

[Johann]

The most important thing for ME stability that can happen is the easing of Saudi-Iranian competition.

I believe that is actually something that India can play a very important role in addressing.

Johann, a few questions for you:

1) What do you see as the key points of tension between Saudi Arabia and Iran? Where do their goals and objectives clash?

2) What incentive does either party have for easing tensions?

3) What influence does India have over either party?

4) Does India benefit from or lose from Saudi-Iranian tensions?

Many thanks in advance.

Iran both under the Shah and after is very clear that it wants to be the dominant local power in the Persian Gulf region and the Arabian Sea. This was not a problem for the Americans with the Shah. The Gulf States faced with Western support for Iran had to live with demonstrations of Iranian power such as the seizure of the Tunb islands in 1971, or the Shah's victory in the Shatt al-Arab confrontation. OTOH there was no Arab Shii loyalty to the Persian nationalist Shah.

All of that changed when the relationship between the West and the Iranian government broke down during the embassy hostage crisis.

Most of the GCC states are extremely insecure about their vulnerability to internal and external threats. Some of those vulnerabilities and insecurities are peculiar to the ruling family, and some of them are national, i.e. shared by the majority of the population.

I'll stick to the national ones for now. They know they dont have the manpower or technical base to deal with Iran on their own. Post-Iranian revolution they are also convinced that the Iranians are stirring up Arab Shia against them.

The GCC's response was to prop up both Iraq and Pakistan (flanking Iran, and with predominantly Sunni governments) as their shields, and to stir up Sunni fundamentalism in order to undermine any potential support for Iran as a Muslim power and Islamic state.

The loss of a secular-ish Iraq in 1990-91 made the GCC even more dependent on the eastern flank (i.e. Af-Pak) and Sunni fundamentalism as its bulwark. That reliance -driven by the conflict with Iran- has had an enormous impact on India.

What can India do?

The Gulf states are looking for a regionally based security guarantor. The US has never been enough for their needs.

In fact Qatar has raised such possibilities with India, and the Omanis are open to it. India can and probably will play such a role, which will undermine and reduce GCC reliance on Af-Pak and fundamentalism. That is of enormous value for everyone, especially India.

[RajeshA]

What can India do?

The Gulf states are looking for a regionally based security guarantor. The US has never been enough for their needs.

In fact Qatar has raised such possibilities with India, and the Omanis are open to it. India can and probably will play such a role, which will undermine and reduce GCC reliance on Af-Pak and fundamentalism. That is of enormous value for everyone, especially India.

However India gets nothing out of a relationship, which may want to secure India's support by keeping the internal Indian situation or even Af-Pak boiling as a lever.

If however India gets full-support of GCC in securing Indian control over the Indian Subcontinent and its Islam, then that would be a good deal - India ensures the longevity of the House of Saud, and they give their full support to India to crush Pakistan and they desist from financing anything Islamic in the Indian Subcontinent - directly and indirectly!

[pentaiah]

Rajesh ji

Even Islamic law provides that if we are faced with two difficulties and we have to select one of them, it is always better to choose the lesser trouble.

Musharraf

Double crossing is prescribed in the holy Koran as was cited by mushy
One should be abundantly careful in associating with Islamic alliance last one to take Indian for a ride was Bangladesh and IM is head quartered in Dacca according to last reports

[eklavya]

Johann,

Your arguments above are not at all persuasive. Pakistan is no bulwark for GCC against Iran; this argument of yours is just plainly not supported by the facts. Pakistan gave uranium enrichment technology to Iran. Not one Pakistani division is based on the Iranian border. Pakistan has always been focussed on India and Afghanistan.

Saudi and the GCC states have ALWAYS been breeding ground for militant Sunni fundamentalism. Its nowt to do with the Iranian revolution. That's why Osama Bin Laden and his band of merry jihadis were fighting the Russians in Afghanistan.

For you to suggest that somehow Saudi Arabia will follow the path of moderation only if Iran were less troublesome is just plain wrong. The House of Saud has sold its soul to the Salafists and the Wahabbi clergy in Saudi Arabia, and the price paid is to turn Saudi into a medieval hell-hole (albeit with air conditioning), politically and culturally. Its nowt to do with Iran.

I am sure the Iranians are stirring up the Arab Shias in Saudi Arabis and elsewhere. Hell, why shouldn't they? The Sunni GCC monarchies treat the Shias pretty badly, so the least they can expect is some Iranian inspired trouble.

India has vital interests in Afghanistan, for which we need Iranian logistical support (ports and roads). I think the Americans understand that argument devil. They choose to sup with the Paki devil, India chooses to sup with the Persian one!

The Saudi and Qatari monarchies are planting the seeds of their own doom by stirring up trouble in Syria. One of my absolute favourite laws is the law of unintended consequences.