Israel Archives [kokhaviv publications]

PFLP Spokesman Explains Refusal To Join New Coalition Government

2007-02-26T22:14:00.000+01:00

www.maannews.net/ en/index.php?opr= ShowDetails&ID=19864

Gaza - Ma'an - The spokesman of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) has said that they appreciated the announcements of a number of factions, forces and personalities that proclaimed the necessity of the participation of the PFLP in the forthcoming coalition government.

The spokesman said in a statement for Ma'an that "the PFLP have declined to participate in the government for political reasons and their disagreement with the letter of assignment, which commanded the respect of the signed agreements between the Palestine Liberation Organisation and Israel. The agreements included official recognition of Israel and the cessation of resistance action, and maintained the roots of internal conflict between the presidency and the government and between the Fatah and Hamas movements. It constituted a fall in the national common program, as represented in the prisoners' document or the national accord document that got the unanimous and signed consent of all Palestinian social and political groups."

The 'Prisoners' Document' was drawn up by five Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails. They were members of Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the PFLP and the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP). The document advocates the setting up of a Palestinian state on the territories occupied after the 1967 war.

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Report: 3 Gulf States Agree To IAF Overflights En Route To Iran

2007-02-25T22:26:00.000+01:00

Yoav Stern and Yossi Melman, Haaretz Correspondents

www.haaretz.com/hasen/ spages/830309.html

Three Arab states in the Persian Gulf would be willing to allow the Israel Air force to enter their airspace in order to reach Iran in case of an attack on its nuclear facilities, the Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Siyasa reported on Sunday.

According to the report, a diplomat from one of the gulf states visiting Washington on Saturday said the three states, Qatar, Oman and the United Arab Emirates, have told the United States that they would not object to Israel using their airspace, despite their fear of an Iranian response.

Al-Siyasa further reported that NATO leaders are urging Turkey to open its airspace for an Attack on Iran as well and to also open its airports and borders in case of a ground attack.

According to a British diplomat who spoke to an Al-Siyasa correspondent, Turkey will not repeat the mistake it made in 2003, when it refused to open its airspace to U.S. Air Force overflights en route to attacking Iraq.

British newspaper The Daily Telegraph reported Saturday that Israel is negotiating with the U.S. over permission for an "air corridor" over Iraq, should an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities become necessary.

Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh on Saturday denied the reports and said Israel has no such plans.

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Egypt Rejects Conditions On Palestinian Government

2007-02-25T22:23:00.000+01:00

Alaa Shahine

Reuters

www.alertnet.org/ thenews/newsdesk/ L25503367.htm

CAIRO, Feb 25 (Reuters) - Egypt rejected on Sunday imposing any conditions on the new Palestinian unity government and said it was up to the Palestinians to convince key international mediators to end the U.S.-led financial sanctions.

Jordan's King Abdullah has said there was common Arab ground that the unity government must adhere to the demands of the Quartet of Middle East mediators: recognise Israel, renounce violence and accept interim peace deals.

The king's remarks in an interview broadcast on Saturday cast doubts on the willingness of major Arab donors to sidestep a U.S.-led embargo of the Hamas-led government.

But Egyptian presidential spokesman Suuleiman Awad said: "There is always consultation between Egypt and Jordan but the Egyptian position is that ... we cannot set preconditions." He was speaking after talks in Cairo between Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and King Abdullah.

"The policies that the new government will adopt is an internal Palestinian affair and Egypt has not and will not interfere to impose stances," he told a news conference.

Western diplomats have said the agreement this month in Mecca, Saudi Arabia, between Hamas and Abbas's Fatah group has widened the divisions in the Quartet -- the United States, the United Nations, the European Union and Russia -- on how to deal with the new government.

The United States insists on maintaining the boycott, while some European countries and Russia favour a softer line. Awad said the onus was on the Palestinians to take their case to the world with a "united voice" to lift the sanctions, which have pushed the Palestinian Authority to the brink of financial collapse.

"Lifting the economic and political embargo will not happen by appeals ... It depends on the ability of the Palestinian side to put the interests of the Palestinians above those of the factions and to speak with a united voice," he said.

The letter from Abbas reappointing Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh as prime minister called on the government to respect old agreements signed with Israel by the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), which recognises the Jewish state.

Hamas officials have said they do not object to the PLO negotiating with Israel but that any deal would have to be approved by the Palestinian parliament, where the Islamist group maintains a majority.

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Iranian DM: Ground Laid To Manufacture Integration Of Battle Space And Space Navigation Systems

2007-02-25T22:21:00.000+01:00

Sanctions Help Iran's Air Industry Grow (Fars News Agency)

www.sokhangoo.net/en/ index.php?option= com_content& task=view&id=169

[Iranian government spokesman's website]

Defense Minister Brigadier General Mustafa Mohammad Najjar said that enemies' sanctions on his country have helped to the growth of Iran's aerospace and electronic industries.

Addressing the 6th conference of Iran's Aerospace Association here in Tehran on Saturday, Najjar stressed the significance of aerospace industry, and said, "At present, the aerospace industry has turned into a scene of competition in terms of science and technology."

"Enemies' sanction on Iran's aerospace and electronics industries made our experts more decisive to continue the path of progress and reach the peaks of glory and honor in these fields," he said, adding, "Following the stage of research and development, we have come to the stage of mass production to provide for the needs of our armed forces."

Najjar said some of Iran's products in these fields include manufacture of 'Iran-140' passenger plane, 'Azarakhsh' fighter, multipurpose and flying targets, 16 varieties of helicopters, flying boats, and various types of long and medium-range, anti-armor and Cruise missiles and torpedoes.

He said acquisition of the aerospace technology serves as a lever helping reduce enemies' power of threat, and is viewed as a source of national pride and a symbol of technological growth.

The General said that his ministry has laid the needed grounds for the manufacture of modern aerospace systems guiding movement of vessels, armors and helicopters, rapid and precise missile launching systems, integration of the battle space and space navigation systems.

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Damascus Close To Multi-Million Dollar Deal To Buy Modern Anti-Tank Missiles From Russia

2007-02-22T22:16:00.000+01:00

Amos Harel and Aluf Benn

Haaretz

www.haaretz.com/hasen/ spages/828930.html

Damascus is close to concluding a large deal with Russia to procure thousands of advanced anti-tank missiles for the Syrian army, according to information received in Israel recently. Such a development suggests that Israel's diplomatic efforts to block the sale have failed.

According to various estimates the deal is worth several hundred million dollars and involves several thousand advanced anti-tank missiles.

For years Syria secured anti-tank missiles from the Soviet Union and later from Russia. During the war in Lebanon last summer Israel found proof that Syria had transferred to Hezbollah advanced Russian-made anti-tank missiles from its arsenal.

Evidence of the existence of these advanced missiles, the Kornet AT-14 and Metis AT-13, came in the form of crates discovered in the villages of Ghandurya and Farun, close to the Saluki River. The shipment documents showed that they had been procured by the Syrian army and transferred to Hezbollah.

Until Israel was able to produce such evidence the authorities in Moscow refused to acknowledge that advanced Russian-made weapons were being transferred to Hezbollah.

But after the war, an Israeli delegation that included members of the National Security Council and the Foreign Ministry presented the evidence to senior Russian officials.

The Russians promised to reevaluate some of the planned arms deals with Syria to ensure that advanced weaponry would not make its way to terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah.

However, there are now concerns in Israel that Russia will not keep its promise and that the deal with Damascus for the anti-tank missiles is near being finalized.

Syria stepped up its efforts to convince Russia to make the sale following the lessons it reached from the war in Lebanon. The fact that Hezbollah succeeded in delaying an Israeli armored column at the battle near the Saluki River with accurate fire from anti-tank missiles was noted favorably in Arab armies.

In retrospect, and following an IDF study, the number of tanks that were actually damaged during fighting in the war did not exceed several dozen, and in some of them the damage suffered was very minimal. But missile types like the Kornet and the Metis proved their destructive abilities and in some cases even penetrated the armor of the Merkava Mark IV, which is considered to be the best protected tank in the world.

The IDF found it difficult to counter this threat, particularly since the weapons could be fired accurately from distances of five kilometers.

One of the lessons of the war for Syria was that it needed to improve areas in which it had a relative advantage against the IDF, like the anti-tank missile, and surface-to-surface missiles that can threaten Israel's home front.

In addition, Palestinian militant groups have intensified their efforts to smuggle anti-tank missiles from Sinai to the Gaza Strip.

Armor and infantry units in the IDF are now undergoing training in tactical maneuvers that will enable them to counter anti-tank missiles. In addition, there are efforts to upgrade the anti-tank missiles in Israel's arsenal.

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Shell Faces Dilemma Over Proposed Investment In Iran Gas Field

2007-02-02T22:41:00.000+01:00

Reuters

www.gulfinthemedia.com/ index.php?id=282099 &news_type=Economy&lang=en

Royal Dutch Shell said yesterday it faces a dilemma over its proposed multibillion dollar investment in a gas field in Iran, which is under US pressure for its atomic work and alleged interference in Iraq.

The Anglo-Dutch company and Spain's Repsol have signed a preliminary deal to develop part of Iran's giant South Pars gasfield, despite Washington urging its allies not to invest in the country. Tehran values the deal at $ 10 billion.

Shell Chief Executive Jeroen van der Veer said politics would be taken into account when a final investment decision is taken in about a year.

"I would like to emphasise that we have here quite a dilemma. This is Iran. They are the number two in oil and gas reserves in the world," he told a conference call following Shell's fourth quarter results.

"But we have all the short-term political concerns."

There are strong commercial considerations. Shell and Repsol are both seeking access to big sources of oil and gas reserves after meeting limited success in finding new supplies in recent years.

Iran is one of the few major energy resource holders open to foreign investors. Saudi Arabia, home to the world's biggest oil reserves, keeps its oilfields closed to international firms.

If the United States gets its way, the ambitious project might not materialise.

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

PA Security Forces Arrest 7 Iranians In Gaza Strip Raid

2007-02-01T22:43:00.000+01:00

AP and Jpost.com staff, The Jerusalem Post

www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite? cid=1167467868941&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Palestinian security forces arrested seven Iranian citizens during a raid Thursday night at the Islamic University, a Hamas stronghold in Gaza City, a security official said.

According to reports, another Iranian citizen committed suicide during the raid.

The raid came during a large-scale assault by Fatah-affiliated gunmen on the university, which followed a day of gunfights between Hamas and Fatah gunmen throughtout the Gaza Strip.

The new wave of street battles killed at least six people, one of them a security officer, wounded dozens, and effectively destroyed a three-day-old truce that brought a brief period of quiet to the volatile area.

The violence broke out in the central Gaza town of Bureij on Thursday afternoon after Hamas gunmen hijacked a convoy delivering supplies to the Fatah-allied security forces, security officials said.

Security reinforcements were seen flooding into the town.

Soon after, separate gun battles broke out in Gaza City and in northern Gaza outside a military intelligence post. Security officials said Hamas gunmen fired a rocket was fired at the post.

A Fatah member was kidnapped in northern Gaza during the clashes, security officials said.

Col. Burhan Hamad, the head of the Egyptian security team in Gaza that negotiated the truce, denounced the attack on the convoy as "unjustified" and angrily blamed Hamas. He appealed to the warring factions to stop the new clashes. The Islamic Jihad, in the role of peacemaker, called for convening an urgent meeting to discuss resumption of the truce.

Also in Gaza, unknown gunmen opened fire early Thursday at Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum as he drove with three bodyguards in his white sedan toward an impromptu checkpoint near Gaza City, Hamas said. There were no casualties. A Hamas announcement blamed "coup-seekers," meaning gunmen from the rival Fatah party.

Later Thursday, gunmen in a car shot at Islam Shahwan, a spokesman for a Hamas militia, Shahwan said, blaming the shooting on Fatah-affiliated security officers. One Hamas member was wounded, he said.

Other sporadic shooting attacks were reported Thursday, including one that wounded a Hamas member.

The early incidents didn't unravel the cease-fire, but on Thursday afternoon Hamas gunmen ambushed an official convoy guarded by the presidential guard and hijacked two trucks filled with tents, medical kits and toilets, security officials said. The attack sparked the new fighting.

"How can they attack the presidential guards like that when there is a cease-fire?" asked Wael Dahab, a presidential guard spokesman.

In the wake of the fighting, security officials reestablished roadblocks near Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas's official residence in Gaza City. Masked security officers took up positions throughout the streets.

Masked Hamas gunmen also carjacked a police jeep near the United Nations headquarters in Gaza City, stealing the weapons of those in the vehicle, security officials said.

The truce was declared early Tuesday by leaders of Fatah and Hamas and was meant to bring an end to internal fighting that has left more than 60 Palestinians dead since early December, though it did not resolve the underlying animosity between the groups.

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Ruling In Anti-Israeli Terrorism Lawsuit In U.S.

2007-01-30T22:37:00.000+01:00

The following is a major ruling in the Eastern District Court of New York in anti-Israeli terrorism case:

Contact: David White (202/607-0766) Michael Elsner (843/216-9250)

January 30, 2007

Israeli Terrorism Victims Win Major Victory In Landmark Arab Bank Case

Case Expected to Proceed to Trial After Judge Rejects Defendants' Motion to Dismiss

NEW YORK, January 30 - In a stunning victory for more than 1,600 survivors and family members of those killed by terrorism in Israel, U.S. District Judge Nina Gershon issued a major ruling that is expected to lead to a trial for their landmark civil action against Arab Bank.

Judge Gershon rejected the bulk of a defense motion to dismiss the case, ruling instead that suicide bombing attacks and other forms of violence directed against civilians in Israel violate customary international law, that "plaintiffs have successfully stated claims for genocide and crimes against humanity," and that plaintiffs have established a cause of action under the Alien Tort Claims Act and the Antiterrorism Act. She found that the plaintiffs had pled sufficient evidence that "Arab Bank's provision of banking services facilitated money laundering and also facilitated the payments from [a Saudi Arabian] Committee to the suicide bombers' beneficiaries," creating "an incentive for suicide bombings."

"This is a great victory for everyone - not just those of us who have had our loved ones savagely murdered in acts of terrorism, but for everyone who loves and wants peace," said Iris Almog Schwartz, an Israeli citizen who lost her mother, father, brother and two nephews in the suicide bombing of Restaurant Maxim in Haifa on October 4, 2003.

"Judge Gershon's ruling shows great wisdom in finding that the terrorists' campaign of mass murder of innocent civilians qualifies as genocide and crimes against humanity, and in holding the financiers of these atrocities accountable," Schwarz said. "We eagerly look forward to having our day in court."

"I am deeply grateful," Schwarz added," that the United States Courts remain a beacon to people of all nations who yearn for a world free from terror where justice prevails."

"This is a remarkable, precedent-setting ruling that makes clear that no matter where they are located, any organization or individual that aids and abets genocide and crimes against humanity cannot evade accountability in the U.S. Courts," said Ron Motley, lead counsel for the plaintiffs. "It not only means that our clients will have the opportunity to win justice; it also strikes a major blow against the financial networks that make terrorism possible."

The civil action, Almog, et al. v. Arab Bank, PLC, was brought in U.S. Court for the Eastern District of New York under two civil laws. The Alien Tort Claims Act of 1789 gives non-U.S. citizens access to the U.S. Courts to seek justice for violations of "the law of nations," such as genocide, crimes against humanity and terrorism, no matter where they occur. The Antiterrorism Act of 1990 gives U.S. citizens who have been injured or whose loved ones have been killed by acts of terrorism the right to seek justice from those who financed these atrocities.

In her ruling, Judge Gershon wrote that plaintiffs "adequately allege Arab Bank's knowledge that its assistance would facilitate the terrorist organizations in accomplishing the underlying violations of the law of nations and that its provision of banking and administrative services substantially assisted the perpetration of those violations. Arab Bank provided practical assistance to the organizations sponsoring the suicide bombings and helped them further their goal of encouraging bombers to serve as 'martyrs.'"

"[P]laintiffs have sufficiently alleged facts giving rise to Arab Bank's liability for aiding and abetting the violations of the law of nations alleged here," she concluded.

The plaintiffs in Almog and a companion case, Afriat-Kurtzer v. Arab Bank, either lost loved ones or were injured as a result of suicide bombings and other atrocities perpetrated by Hamas and other terrorist groups against Israel. They include 30 citizens of the United States, as well as citizens of Israel, Russia, France, Poland, Romania, Argentina, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Moldova and Afghanistan. With approximately 3,000 plaintiffs joining the case since the defendants' motion to dismiss was first filed, they now number 4,657.

Arab Bank is headquartered in Amman, Jordan, and is one of the largest financial institutions in the Middle East, with a global network of more than 400 branches and offices in 25 countries, including the United States. Arab Bank has 22 local branches throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

The plaintiffs are represented by Motley Rice LLC, of Mt. Pleasant, S.C., and other leading international, finance and anti-terrorism attorneys in the United States, Israel and the United Kingdom.

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Mofaz Urges Renewal Of Targeted Killings

2006-12-24T12:58:00.000+01:00

JPost.com Staff, The Jerusalem Post

www.jpost.com/servlet/ Satellite?cid=1164881963461& pagename=JPost%2FJP Article%2FShowFull

Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz called on Sunday to renew the policy of targeted assassinations against heads of terrorist organizations.

According to Mofaz, the assassination of certain key figures had caused a drop in terrorism and urged the Palestinians to request a cease-fire.

Olmert agrees to release $100m. to PA

In an interview to Channel 1, Mofaz said that it was also vital that the cabinet decide on a tactical approach to the Kassam threat.

Earlier Sunday, cabinet ministers unanimously approved a decision reached by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas to release $100 million in tax revenue to the PA.

Defense Minister Amir Peretz, meanwhile, addressed the ongoing Kassam rocket fire, saying that it was uncertain that preventing the IDF from operating against the Kassams was actually "working to the benefit of the moderates."

Later Sunday, a Kassam rocket hit an apartment building in Sderot, causing several people to suffer from shock and damaging a building. A power outage was also reported in the street where the Kassam landed.

An hour previously, a rocket landed in open territory outside Sderot. No damage or wounded were reported. Three rockets landed in the western Negev on Sunday afternoon, Channel 2 reported.

Peretz also expressed support for freeing security prisoners with the approach of the Christmas holiday.

The issue of a prisoner swap was raised at Olmert's meeting with Abbas, but no agreement was reached on the subject. At the opening of Sunday's weekly cabinet meeting, Olmert updated the ministers on his Saturday meeting with Abbas, saying it was very positive and that he hoped it was the first of many.

"It was a very good meeting," the prime minister said. "It is my intention to have a continuous dialogue in order to promote our political agenda, and this is what we've wanted to do since the beginning of this government."

Olmert also updated the cabinet on the agreements reached during the meeting.

"We plan to release 100 million dollars of tax money for the purpose of humanitarian aid to the Palestinians, who have suffered from the failed management of Hamas, an organization which has decided not to be part of the international community," Olmert said.

The prime minister also addressed concerns about the money potentially falling into Hamas' hands.

"It is my intention to act to ease the way of life and the quality of life of the residents in Judea and Samaria," Olmert said. "I have consulted with [Defense Minister Amir Peretz] on this subject, and the appropriate instructions have been given to the IDF."

Before the cabinet meeting, Olmert held a phone conversation with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, during which the prime minister updated his Egyptian counterpart on Saturday's meeting with Abbas.

Olmert told Mubarak that the meeting was "very good" and that "it could create an opening for a better future."

Mubarak told Olmert that he considered the meeting and its immediate results "significantly important," and the two agreed to meet soon.

Hamas officials, however, did not share their enthusiasm over the meeting with Abbas.

On Sunday morning, Hamas sources called the meeting "a waste of time" and said that "no results were achieved in discussions with Israel."

Hamas government spokesman Ghazi Hamad said Sunday that "Olmert is ignoring the big problem of the Palestinian people, which is that all of us are suffering from the activities of [the Israeli] army, both in Gaza and in Judea and Samaria."

He added that "we want an independent Palestinian state with the '67 borders."

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Syria Building "Death Trap" Villages

2006-12-21T13:00:00.000+01:00

Yaakov Katz

The Jerusalem Post

www.jpost.com/servlet/ Satellite?cid=1164881949707& pagename=JPost%2FJP Article%2FShowFull

Warning that Israel may face a "Syrian intifada," a high-ranking officer in Northern Command has told The Jerusalem Post that villages recently built by Syria along the border are planned to be used as "death traps" for IDF troops in Hizbullah-inspired attacks.

Since this summer's war in Lebanon, Syria, the officer revealed, has invested large amounts of money in replicating Hizbullah military tactics, particularly in establishing additional commando units and fortifying its short- and long-range missile array. The idea is to draw Israel into an asymmetric war, the officer said, like the warfare the IDF encounters in combat against the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip as well as against Hizbullah in Lebanon.

Over the past two years, Syria has built a number of villages along the border with Israel, some inhabited and some not. At first, the IDF was not sure of their purpose. But now, following the war, the officer said, it was understood.

"Syria drew motivation from Hizbullah's surprise success this summer," the high-ranking officer said. "They now want to copy that type of guerrilla warfare."

While for years it was assumed that Israel had a major edge against Syria's military with regard to a conventional war - tank versus tank, jet versus jet - in an urban setting, the Syrian military would be able, the officer said, to wreak havoc against IDF infantry and armored units like Hizbullah did.

According to the officer, Syria has drawn three major lessons from the war and has begun to implement them. The first is that rockets - 4,000 struck northern Israel during the 33-days of fighting - can paralyze the home front. The second is that antitank missiles can penetrate the Merkava tank and force infantry units to abandon armored personnel carriers and trek into enemy territory by foot. And the third is that in villages and cities the Israeli Air Force's abilities are limited and IDF ground forces can be defeated.

During the war, the IDF fell into several deadly ambushes in southern Lebanese villages; one in Bint Jbail killed eight soldiers from Battalion 51 of the Golani Brigade.

The Syrian military, the officer said, was conducting urban warfare exercises in preparation for the possibility of a war with Israel. The IDF has also dramatically increased its training regiments and has, at all times, between two-to-three brigades training in the Golan Heights.

Lacking clear intelligence regarding Syrian intelligence, the officer said that the Northern Command's "working assumption" was that there was a possibility of war and there was a need to prepare accordingly.

While defense officials have crisscrossed in recent weeks concerning the sincerity of Syrian President Bashar Assad's offer of peace, the top officer said that, according to "all the signs," Syria was preparing for war with Israel. The Syrian military has beefed-up forces along the Golan Heights and Israel has done the same. In the Hermon, for instance, the IDF has doubled the number of troops.

"The feeling is unfortunately that another round is needed before we will be able to engage in a dialogue or peace talks with Syria," the officer said. "It is like with the Egyptians. The war in 1973 was what made it partially possible for [Egyptian president Anwar] Sadat to come to Israel."

Syria, the officer said, has since the war ended, transferred truckloads of weapons and missiles to Hizbullah. Due to the convoys, Hizbullah, he said, was almost back at its full strength where it was before the war with Israel.

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Carter's Arab Financiers

2006-12-21T12:55:00.000+01:00

Rachel Ehrenfeld

Op Ed in The Washington Times

www.washtimes.com/ functions/print.php? StoryID=20061220- 092736-3365r

To understand what feeds former president Jimmy Carter's anti-Israeli frenzy, look at his early links to Arab business.

Between 1976-1977, the Carter family peanut business received a bailout in the form of a $4.6 million, "poorly managed" and highly irregular loan from the National Bank of Georgia (NBG). According to a July 29, 1980 Jack Anderson expose in The Washington Post, the bank's biggest borrower was Mr. Carter, and its chairman at that time was Mr. Carter's confidant, and later his director of the Office of Management and Budget, Bert Lance.

At that time, Mr. Lance's mismanagement of the NBG got him and the bank into trouble. Agha Hasan Abedi, the Pakistani founder of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI), known as the bank "which would bribe God," came to Mr. Lance's rescue making him a $100,000-a-year consultant. Abedi then declared: "we would never talk about exploiting his relationship with the president." Next, he introduced Mr. Lance to Saudi billionaire Gaith Pharaon, who fronted for BCCI and the Saudi royal family. In January 1978, Abedi paid off Mr. Lance's $3.5 million debt to the NBG, and Pharaon secretly gained control over the bank.

Mr. Anderson wrote: "Of course, the Saudis remained discretely silent... kept quiet about Carter's irregularities... [and] renegotiated the loan to Carter's advantage."

There is no evidence that the former president received direct payment from the Saudis. But "according to... the bank files, [it] renegotiated the repayment terms... savings... $60,000 for the Carter family... The President owned 62% of the business and therefore was the largest beneficiary." Pharaon later contributed generously to the former president's library and center.

When Mr. Lance introduced Mr. Carter to Abedi, the latter gave $500,000 to help the former president establish his center at Emory University. Later, Abedi contributed more than $10 million to Mr. Carter's different projects. Even after BCCI was indicted - and convicted -- for drug money laundering, Mr. Carter accepted $1.5 million from Abedi, his "good friend."

A quick survey of the major contributors to the Carter Center reveals hundreds of millions of dollars from Saudi and Gulf contributors. But it was BCCI that helped Mr. Carter established his center.

BCCI's origins were primarily ideological. Abedi wanted the bank to reflect the supra-national Muslim credo and "the best bridge to help the world of Islam, and the best way to fight the evil influence of the Zionists."

Shortly after assuming office, in March 1977, Mr. Carter made his first public statement regarding a Palestinian "homeland." Since then, he has devoted much of his time to denouncing Israel's self-defense against Palestinian terrorism, which he claims is not only "abominable oppression and persecution" of the Palestinians, but also damages U.S. interests in the region.

By the time BCCI was shut down in July1991, it operated in 73 countries with a deficit of $12 billion, which it had managed to hide with wealthy Arab shareholders and Western luminaries. Among them Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan al-Nahayan of Abu Dhabi, who gave hundreds of millions of dollars to Yasser Arafat and Palestinian terrorist groups, and who branded the United States: "our enemy number one"; Former head of Saudi foreign intelligence service, and King Faisal's brother-in-law, Kamal Adham - who with another Saudi, the banker of the royal family, Khaled bin Mahfouz, staged BCCI's attempt to illegally purchase the Washington-based First American bank, in the early 1980s.

True to its agenda, BCCI assisted in spreading and strengthening the Islamic message; they enabled Pakistan's nuclear ambitions, and helped the Palestinian leadership to amass a $10 billion-plus fortune, used to further terrorist activities and to buy more influence in the West.

BCCI founders also supported the Islamic fundamentalist opposition to the Shah of Iran, and saw it as an opportunity to undermine Western influence in the Gulf. They assisted the revolution financially, reinforcing their position within the leadership of the Iranian revolution. Ironically, the success of that revolution cost Mr. Carter his presidency.

BCCI's money also facilitated the Saudi agenda to force Israel to recognize Palestinians "rights," convincing Egyptian president Anwar Sadat to sign the Camp David Accords in September 1978. Since then, Mr. Carter repeatedly provided legitimacy to Arafat's corrupt regime, and now, like the Saudis, he even sides with homicidal Hamas as the "legitimate" representative of the Palestinian people.

In a recent interview with the Los Angeles Times, Mr. Carter again laid responsibility for U.S. bias against the destitute, depressed and (consequently) violent Palestinians on American policy makers' helplessness, over the last 30 years, against the menacing tactics of the powerful American-Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC).

However, it seems that AIPAC's real fault was its failure to outdo the Saudi's purchases of the former president's loyalty. "There has not been any nation in the world that has been more cooperative than Saudi Arabia," the New York Times quoted Mr. Carter June 1977, thus making the Saudis a major factor in U. S. foreign policy.

Evidently, the millions in Arab petrodollars feeding Mr. Carter's global endeavors, often in conflict with U.S. government policies, also ensure his loyalty.

Rachel Ehrenfeld is the director of the American Center for Democracy.
www.public-integrity.org

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Time Magazine: Syria In Bush's Cross Hairs

2006-12-19T13:07:00.000+01:00

Exclusive: A classified document suggests the Administration is considering a plan to fund political opposition to the Damascus government. Some critics say it would be an unwarranted covert action

Adam Zagorin, Washington

Time Magazine

www.time.com/time/ world/article/0, 8599,1571751,00.html

The Bush Administration has been quietly nurturing individuals and parties opposed to the Syrian government in an effort to undermine the regime of President Bashar Assad. Parts of the scheme are outlined in a classified, two-page document which says that the U.S. already is "supporting regular meetings of internal and diaspora Syrian activists" in Europe. The document bluntly expresses the hope that "these meetings will facilitate a more coherent strategy and plan of actions for all anti-Assad activists."

The document says that Syria's legislative elections, scheduled for March 2007, "provide a potentially galvanizing issue for... critics of the Assad regime." To capitalize on that opportunity, the document proposes a secret "election monitoring" scheme, in which "internet accessible materials will be available for printing and dissemination by activists inside the country [Syria] and neighboring countries." The proposal also calls for surreptitiously giving money to at least one Syrian politician who, according to the document, intends to run in the election. The effort would also include "voter education campaigns" and public opinion polling, with the first poll "tentatively scheduled in early 2007."

American officials say the U.S. government has had extensive contacts with a range of anti-Assad groups in Washington, Europe and inside Syria. To give momemtum to that opposition, the U.S. is giving serious consideration to the election- monitoring scheme proposed in the document, according to several officials. The proposal has not yet been approved, in part because of questions over whether the Syrian elections will be delayed or even cancelled. But one U.S. official familiar with the proposal said: "You are forced to wonder whether we are now trying to destabilize the Syrian government."

Some critics in Congress and the Administration say that such a plan, meant to secretly influence a foreign government, should be legally deemed a "covert action," which by law would then require that the White House inform the intelligence committees on Capitol Hill. Some in Congress would undoubtedly raise objections to this secret use of publicly appropriated funds to promote democracy.

The proposal says part of the effort would be run through a foundation operated by Amar Abdulhamid, a Washington-based member of a Syrian umbrella opposition group known as the National Salvation Front (NSF). The Front includes the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist organization that for decades supported the violent overthrow the Syrian government, but now says it seeks peaceful, democratic reform. (In Syria, however, membership in the Brotherhood is still punishable by death.)

Another member of the NSF is Abdul Halim Khaddam, a former high-ranking Syrian official and Assad family loyalist who recently went into exile after a political clash with the regime. Representatives of the National Salvation Front, including Abdulhamid, were accorded at least two meetings earlier this year at the White House, which described the sessions as exploratory. Since then, the National Salvation Front has said it intends to open an office in Washington in the near future. "Democracy promotion" has been a focus of both Democratic and Republican administrations, but the Bush White House has been a particular booster since 9/11. Iran contra figure Elliott Abrams was put in charge of the effort at the National Security Council. Until recently, Elizabeth Cheney, daughter of the Vice President, oversaw such work at the State Department. In the past, the U.S. has used support for "democracy building" to topple unfriendly dictators, including Serbia's Slobodan Milosevic and Ukraine's Vladimir Kuchma.

However, in order to make the "election monitoring" plan for Syria effective, the proposal makes clear that the U.S. effort will have to be concealed: "Any information regarding funding for domestic [Syrian] politicians for elections monitoring would have to be protected from public dissemination," the document says. But American experts on "democracy promotion" consulted by TIME say it would be unwise to give financial support to a specific candidate in the election, because of the perceived conflict of interest. More ominously, an official familiar with the document explained that secrecy is necessary in part because Syria's government might retaliate against anyone inside the country who was seen as supporting the U.S.-backed election effort. The official added that because the Syrian government fields a broad network of internal spies, it would almost certainly find out about the U.S. effort, if it hasn't already. That could lead to the imprisonment of still more opposition figures.

Any American-orchestrated attempt to conduct such an election-monitoring effort could make a dialogue between Washington and Damascus - as proposed by the Iraq Study Group and several U.S. allies - difficult or impossible. The entire proposal could also be a waste of effort; Edward P. Djerejian, a former U.S. ambassador to Syria who worked on the Iraq Study Group report, says that Syria's opposition is so fractured and weak that there is little to be gained by such a venture. "To fund opposition parties on the margins is a distraction at best," he told TIME. "It will only impede the better option of engaging Syria on much more important, fundamental issues like Iraq, peace with Israel, and the dangerous situation in Lebanon."

Others detect another goal for the proposed policy. "Ever since the U.S. invasion of Iraq, which Syria opposed, the Bush Administration has been looking for ways to squeeze the government in Damascus," notes Joshua Landis, a Syria expert who is co-director of the Center for Peace Studies at the University of Oklahoma. "Syria has appeared to be next on the Administration's agenda to reform the greater Middle East." Landis adds: "This is apparently an effort to gin up the Syrian opposition under the rubric of 'democracy promotion' and 'election monitoring,' but it's really just an attempt to pressure the Syrian government" into doing what the U.S. wants. That would include blocking Syria's border with Iraq so insurgents do not cross into Iraq to kill U.S. troops; ending funding of Hizballah and interference in Lebanese politics; and cooperating with the U.N. in the investigation of the assassination of Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri. Senior Syrian government officials are considered prime suspects in Hariri case.

Money for the election-monitoring proposal would be channeled through a State Department program known as the Middle East Partnership Initiative, or MEPI. According to MEPI's website, the program passes out funds ranging between $100,000 and $1 million to promote education and women's empowerment, as well as economic and political reform, part of a total allocation of $5 million for Syria that Congress supported earlier this year.

MEPI helps funnel millions of dollars every year to groups around the Middle East intent on promoting reforms. In the vast majority of cases, beneficiaries are publicly identified, as financial support is distributed through channels including the National Democratic Institute, a non-profit affiliated with the Democratic Party, and the International Republican Institute (IRI), which is linked to the GOP. In the Syrian case, the election-monitoring proposal identifies IRI as a "partner" - although the IRI website, replete with information about its democracy promotion elsewhere in the world, does not mention Syria. A spokesperson for IRI had no comment on what the organization might have planned or underway in Syria, describing the subject as "sensitive."

U.S. foreign policy experts familiar with the proposal say it was developed by a "democracy and public diplomacy" working group that meets weekly at the State department to discuss Iran and Syria. Along with related working groups, it prepares proposals for the higher-level Iran Syria Operations Group, or ISOG, an inter-agency body that, several officials said, has had input from Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns, deputy National Security Council advisor Elliott Abrams and representatives from the Pentagon, Treasury and U.S. intelligence. The State Department's deputy spokesman, Thomas Casey, said the election-monitoring proposal had already been through several classified drafts, but that "the basic concept is very much still valid."

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Gov't Launches Indonesian Web Site To Spur Dialog With Muslims

2006-12-18T20:55:00.000+01:00

The Associated Press

www.haaretz.com/ hasen/spages/ 802447.html

The Foreign Ministry on Monday launched a Web site in the Indonesian language in an effort to promote dialogue with citizens of the world's most populous Muslim country.

The site includes news articles as well as information on the Israeli economy, culture and religion.

The Indonesian site is part of continuing efforts by Israel to engage Muslim nations. Indonesia and Malaysia, the two Southeast Asian countries with predominantly Muslim populations have refused to consider diplomatic relations with Israel.

"Although we are living in the information age, there is a lack of basic information about Israel in the Muslim world," Ilan Ben Dov, Israel's ambassador to Singapore, said in a statement about the launch of the Web site.

"Following talks that I have conducted with Indonesians from all walks of life, I have learned that there exists a great thirst for knowledge about Israel and its democratic, pluralistic, vibrant and multicultural society."

Ben Dov has previously said Israel would like a dialogue with Indonesia and Malaysia in order to work together on problems in the Middle East.

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Saudis Report Shi'ite "State" Inside Of Iraq

2006-12-18T20:54:00.000+01:00

Sharon Behn

The Washington Times

http://washingtontimes.com/ world/20061218- 121346-2567r.htm

Iran has effectively created a Shi'ite "state within a state" in neighboring Iraq, defying both Iraqi Sunnis and neighboring Sunni nations, according to a Saudi security report.

Iranian military forces are providing Shi'ite militias with weapons and training, Iranian charities are pouring funds into schools and hospitals, and Tehran is actively supporting pro-Iranian Iraqi politicians, the report said.

"Where the Americans have failed, the Iranians have stepped in," said the report by the Saudi National Security Assessment Project, a Riyadh-based consultancy commissioned by the Saudi government to provide security and intelligence assessments.

The report, submitted to the Saudi government in March, has not been publicly distributed.

Citing interviews with intelligence and military officials in Iraq and surrounding region, the report states that the Sunni insurgency numbers about 77,000, while the Shi'ite militia forces total about 35,000.

According to the report, Iran also is infiltrating Iraq through its al Quds forces -- the special command division of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) -- which specialize in intelligence operations in unconventional warfare.

RAND Corp. senior defense analyst Ed O'Connell said the Iranian intelligence was trying to counter Saddam Hussein's former formidable spy network, Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS), or the Mukhabarat. Under Saddam's regime, he said, roughly one of every six Iraqi adults was a paid or unpaid informant -- a network that did not disappear with the arrival of the U.S.-led coalition.

"The real story in Iraq is this below-the-surface 'unconventional war' between the old IIS, which could become a more overt Saudi proxy -- and the al Quds special directorate intelligence-counterintelligence," Mr. O'Connell said.

The Saudi security report was directed by Nawaf Obaid -- who recently was fired for writing an article in The Washington Post warning that Saudi Arabia would not stand idly by and allow Iraq's Shi'ites to destroy its Sunni population.

Washington diplomats and analysts say Mr. Obaid's dismissal was more window-dressing than a real punitive action.

The report states that the Iranian levers of influence in Iraq include a broad network of informants, military and logistical support of armed groups, and social welfare campaigns.

It adds that Tehran has "sought to influence Iraq's political process by giving support to new various parties, in particular, to the SCIRI," or Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, the leading Shi'ite party.

Analysts say some Saudi citizens are raising funds for Sunni insurgents.

"I have heard them say it is not hard to line up a couple hundred thousand dollars and send it to the insurgents across the border," said Isobel Coleman, a senior fellow at the Council for Foreign Relations.

Despite claims by SCIRI leader that the party's private militia, the Iran-backed Badr Organization, formerly known as the Badr Brigade, has surrendered its weapons, gun-toting Badr members are still visible on the streets of Baghdad.

The Saudi study says the Badr Organization is still about 25,000-strong, and the party has roughly 3 million supporters. Anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's militia, the Mahdi Army, is thought to number just under 10,000, while his party has the support of about 1.5 million Shi'ites.

"Each of these groups is beholden in some way to Iran and has ties to its intelligence and security services," the report says.

It adds: "Recent intelligence indicates that IRGC officers are currently operating in Iraq certain Shi'ite militias and actual army and police units."

U.S. officials have acknowledged that Shi'ite militias have infiltrated the police, but stopped short of saying that there is direct Iranian involvement in the security forces.

Mrs. Coleman cautions that the report, while not necessarily inaccurate, is not impartial.

"It is alarmist about the Iranians, and Mr. Obaid comes with a bias. Not that it is wrong, but it is not unbiased," she said.

The Saudi study was the result of five months of cooperation with Iraq and neighboring countries and dozens of interviews with current military and intelligence officials in the region, Mr. Obaid wrote in the preface to the 40-page report.

"Ordinary police and military officers now have a stronger allegiance to the Badr Organization or the Mahdi Army than to their own units," the report says, adding that the Badr Organization is the "key vehicle Iran is using to achieve its military, security and intelligence aims."

The study also provides details on the Sunni insurgency. It cites Iraqi tribal leaders as saying that the insurgency is run mainly by former commanders and high-level military officers of the Ba'athist regime. Only a smaller group is religiously inspired and includes foreign fighters.

Of the 77,000 active members of the insurgency, the "jihadis" number about 17,000, of which some 5,000 are from North Africa, Sudan, Yemen, Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

The remaining 60,000 are members of the former military or Saddam's paramilitary Fedayeen forces. The officer corps of the insurgency has "command and control facilities in Syria as well as bases in strategic locations, where Sunnis constitute the majority of the urban population."

Given the centuries-old tribal, familial and religious ties between Iraq's Sunnis and Saudi Arabia, the assessment concludes that "Saudi Arabia has a special responsibility to ensure the continued welfare and security of Sunnis in Iraq."

Its recommendations to the Saudi government included a comprehensive strategy that would include overt and covert components to deal with the worst-case scenario of full-blown civil war.

It also calls on the government to communicate the assessment to the United States; make it clear to Iran that if its covert activities did not stop the Saudi leadership would counter them; and extend an invitation to the highest Iraqi Shi'ite leader, Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, to reassure the Shi'ite community.

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Ultra-Orthodox In Software Outsourcing -- Talpiot Spearheads Mini-Social Revolution In Israel

2006-12-17T21:01:00.000+01:00

India and China have long monopolized the outsourcing markets, particularly in software development, leaving other competing countries in the dust.

Now however, for the first time, an unlikely source is offering an alternative to these outsourcing giants: the ultra-Orthodox community in Israel.

Talpiot www.talpiot-it.co.il is a new Israeli technology group composed of hundreds of strictly religiously observant Jews who produce US-standard, professional, top quality work at a fraction of the cost. As the offshore division of Matrix, the leading information technology company in Israel, Talpiot is providing a competitive economic alternative for American-based businesses searching for cost-efficient, reliable services.

Located in Modi'in Illit, an ultra-Orthodox town in the center of Israel, Talpiot's 250 employees work for some 30 clients from the United States and Israel (and that number is growing steadily) including Motorola, Amdocs and Hewlett-Packard.

The company provides a unique work environment that takes into account the special needs of the religiously-observant community. Offices are set up with the traditional population in mind and Orthodox Jews, particularly women, have flocked to the company.

The arrangement is a win-win situation. Talpiot's clients enjoy professional, top quality, yet cost-efficient service. At the same time, members of the ultra-Orthodox community are able to significantly increase their family income without compromising their ideals or lifestyle. Indeed many of the women involved feel empowered by becoming profitable and productive members of their communities.

"This is not only a great way for American companies to slash their development costs," explained Joseph Rosenholtz, Talpiot's representative in the U.S., "but it is also a serious opportunity for them to assist Israel in a long term and meaningful way."

Talpiot's winning formula has proven effective. The company's clients receive top of the line work from intelligent, highly-educated, Orthodox workers. And the religious employees earn significant wages while maintaining their traditional lifestyles.

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Bahais Lose Egypt Recognition Fight

2006-12-17T20:59:00.000+01:00

The Egyptian constitution promotes freedom of belief for Islam, Christianity and Judaism only.

http://english.aljazeera.net/ NR/exeres/B50CF277- 126D-403B-A7F4- 887DF082C862.htm

An Egyptian court has denied Bahais the right to state their religion on official documents and described them as pro-Israeli apostates, in a landmark case condemned by human rights organisations.

The case, seen as a test of religious freedom in Egypt, left the country's 2,000-strong Bahai community suspended in a constitutional vacuum.

Sayed Nofal, the judge in the case, said: "The constitution promotes freedom of belief for the three recognised heavenly religions and they are Islam, Christianity and Judaism.

"As for the Bahais, Islamic jurists have all agreed that the Bahai faith is not one of the three recognised religions."

The supreme administrative court ruled against the right of Hossam Ezzat Mussa and his wife, Rania Enayat, to state their religion on official documents.

Apostates

The couple had filed their case in 2004 and a lower court ruled in their favour in April this year. In May, however, the decision was suspended by the supreme administrative court pending an appeal by the interior ministry, and the couple's identity cards were confiscated.

Enayat said: "Those who belong to this religion are apostates of Islam, because the faith's principles contradict the Islamic religion and all other religions."

Saturday's verdict throws the status of Egypt's Bahai community into limbo, in a country where carrying identity papers at all times is required by law and essential for access to employment, education, medical and financial services.

Without official identity cards, Bahais cannot apply for jobs, buy property, open bank accounts or register their children in schools.

Regrettable decision

Human rights organisations condemned the court's decision. Hossam Bahgat, director of the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights, who has closely monitored the case, said: "It's a regrettable decision, but it's a crisis for the government more than for the Bahais.

"Now the government is forced to find a solution for the hundreds of citizens who have no papers."

Bahgat said the judge did not respond to any of the legal arguments but instead discussed the tenets of the Bahai faith, which fell outside the scope of the lawsuit.

Bani Dugal, who represents the Bahai community at the UN, condemned the decision as a violation of human rights. He said: "The court's decision threatens to make non-citizens of an entire religious community, solely on the basis of religious belief.

"Our hope now is that the public debate over this issue will cause the Egyptian government to rectify its discriminatory policies."

Israeli "collaboration"

Despite the fact that Bahais have been in Egypt for as long as the religion has existed, 163 years, most Egyptians had not heard of the religion until the April ruling.

Under Gamal Abdel Nasser, Egypt's late president, Bahais were suspected of collaborating with Israel because the faith's highest governing institution is based in Haifa.

In 1960, Bahai assemblies and institutions were dissolved. The judge in Saturday's hearings reiterated the accusation. He said: "One of the first goals of the Bahai movement is to maintain their relationship with the occupying powers, which embraces them and protects them."

Principles

Of the faith's 12 principles, which include the unity of mankind, the elimination of all forms of prejudice, gender equality and independent investigation of truth, it is obedience to government that is most highlighted in Egypt.

Egyptian Bahais do not join political parties, take part in demonstrations or hold elections for their spiritual assemblies.

Labib Hanna, professor of engineering at Cairo University, recently said: "We don't want to cause problems. We just want to exercise our rights as Egyptian citizens."

Source: Agencies

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Text: Turkish-Israeli Multi-Pipeline Agreement To Be Drafted

2006-12-16T21:02:00.000+01:00

Agreed Minutes Of The Meeting Between The Minister Of Energy And Natural Resources Of The Republic Of Turkey H.E. Hilmiguler And The Minister Of National Infrastructures Of The State Of Israel H.E. Binyamin Ben Eliezer

With reference to the results of the Turkey-Israel energy working group which were held on 10th October, 2005 in Ankara and on 12th March, 2006 in Jerusalem, the parties reiterated their joint determination to build an energy corridor between Turkey and Israel which would be composed of pipelines for crude oil, natural gas, fresh water as well as electricity lines.

The Parties expressed their firm belief that this project would not only serve the bilateral relations of Turkey and Israel, but will at the same time have a positive impact on their immediate region by way of creating new incentives and fostering a new climate for a lasting peace and prosperity for all of the region. They also emphasize the fact that such an energy corridor will contribute greatly to enhancing global energy security and supply stability.

The Parties welcome the willingness of The European Commission to support cooperation on the energy corridor, as expressed in its communication following the Euro-Mediterranean Forum which took place in Brussels on 21st October,2006. In this context the Parties call on The European Commission to materialize its support in the near future.

Further, the Parties view with importance the extension of the work on this corridor that has already commenced by the private sectors. In this context, the Parties seek the construction of an off-shore multi-pipeline project (oil, natural gas, water and electricity) in connection with the aforementioned Turkish-Israeli energy corridor, and thereby also connecting the Samsun-Ceyhan crude oil pipeline to the Israeli outlets and establishing a physical link between the Ceyhan energy terminal of Turkey and Israel. The Parties further agree that this linkage will be done by a decision of the Turkish Government. The Parties welcome this initiative and request the completion of the feasibility studies on it as soon as possible.

The Parties therefore agreed to instruct their relevant authorities to take concrete steps in order to prepare the draft for an Inter-Governmental Agreement between Turkey and Israel which would constitute the legal framework for the realization of this project.

Dr. Mehmet Hilmi Guler
Minister of Energy and Natural Resources
The Republic of Turkey

Binyamin (Fouad) Ben Eliezer
Minister of National Infrastructures
The State of Israel

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Saudi Ex-Ambassador Urged No Us Talks With Iran

2006-12-15T21:04:00.000+01:00

Agence France-Presse

www.gulfinthemedia.com/ index.php?id=269861& news_type=Top&lang=en

The US State Department said Saudi Arabia's former ambassador here recently visited Washington, adding spice to reports he was involved in a power struggle which caused his successor to quit.

Prince Bandar bin Sultan, was the kingdom's top envoy to the United States for 22 years until 2004. The Washington Post reported Thursday he was in the US capital recently to counsel top officials against heeding mounting calls for talks with Iran or Syria.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack reluctantly confirmed Prince Bandar met Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, when pressed by reporters, but refused to divulge the substance of their conversation.

"I can't tell you the last time that he and the secretary met," McCormack said. "I'm sure that it's been within the past several weeks, but I can't tell you exactly when."

The Post quoted diplomats as saying many Saudis believed Syria had betrayed the Arab world by leaning closer to Iran in recent months.

Saudi Arabia has shown increasing signs of concern over Tehran's growing influence with Iraqi Shiite leaders, and its nuclear showdown with the West.

Interestingly, the mission of Prince Bandar, current Saudi national security advisor, seems to directly conflict, on Iran, at least, with recent statements on Tehran by his successor as ambassador Prince Turki al-Faisal.

Prince Turki set off a diplomatic mystery on Monday by suddenly resigning and leaving the United States for what were a Saudi official said were "personal reasons."

Among several theories about his departure, was a report that he was locked in a political feud with Bandar.

Signs of differences over Iran may hint at some of the reasons behind any clash, as Prince Turki has publicly urged the United States to enter into dialogue with Iran.

"Saudi Arabia talks to Iran frequently and frankly," Prince Turki said during an an appearance at the Center for Strategic and International Studies on October 4.

"I think for the United States not to talk to Iran is a mistake. We've found in our experience that when we did not talk to Iran -- our relations were broken for a period of a few years in the '90s -- we had more troubles with each other.

"But since then, our relationship has improved dramatically and beneficially for both our countries. So we think that negotiation and talking to people is more important than shutting the doors on them."

The United States is at loggerheads with the Islamic Republic over a series of issues, including Tehran's nuclear program, and also claims Tehran is deliberately fanning extremism in Iraq and the wider Middle East.

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

$500 Million Project On Jordanian Dead Sea Coast

2006-12-14T21:09:00.000+01:00

Emaar unveils $500m Jordan development

Khaleej Times

www.gulfinthemedia.com/ index.php?id=269574& news_type=Economy &lang=en

Emaar Properties has announced that the development value of its master-planned residential community along the Dead Sea coast is $ 500 million.

Emaar Jordan, the wholly-owned subsidiary of Emaar Properties, is finalising the master plan for the project, which will encompass luxury residences, commercial establishments and leisure and entertainment facilities.

Emaar Jordan has already joined hands with a number of regional and Jordanian investors to form The Dead Sea Company, which will undertake the project in line with the growth plans outlined for the country by the King Abdullah II Fund for Development.

"With a development value of $ 500 million, the Dead Sea project by Emaar is one of the largest undertakings in Jordan's property sector recently," said Issam Galadari, Managing Director, Emaar International - Middle East and North Africa.

"We are confident of Jordan's prospects as an emerging market in the Middle East and North Africa region, and with the current project, we are extending our proven strength of developing master-planned residences."

Emaar Properties is the pioneer of developing gated communities in the UAE and has to date handed over more than 14,500 homes in Dubai.

"By integrating commercial and leisure elements in a residential community, we are contributing to the growth of the local economy by creating a self-sustained neighbourhood and offering job opportunities for the local residents," added Galadari.

Emaar Jordan's Dead Sea project aims to boost tourism - one of the key drivers of the national economy.

"The government has undertaken specific measures to boost tourism and information technology in the country," said Galadari. "Special economic zones (SEZ) are being developed to encourage foreign direct investment. These are encouraging signals for Emaar Properties, currently expanding internationally with a special focus on emerging markets."

The Dead Sea project by Emaar Jordan will also have retail facilities and a full-fledged golf course and clubhouse.

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Syrian Guerillas "To Launch Resistance Within Months"

2006-12-11T21:12:00.000+01:00

Baath official says new terror organization ready to attack if Israel doesn't vacate strategic Golan Heights.

Aaron Klein, WND

www.ynetnews.com/ articles/0,7340,L- 3338590,00.html

If Israel does not vacate the Golan Heights within months, a guerilla organization allegedly formed in Syria will soon launch "resistance operations" against Israeli positions and Jewish communities in the Golan, an official from Syrian President Bashar Assad's Baath party told WND in an exclusive interview.

"If in the coming months an agreement is not forged between Israel and Syria (for an Israeli withdrawal from the Golan), the Committees will begin attacks," said the official, who spoke on condition his name be withheld during an in-person interview with WND and with the G. Gordon Liddy national American radio show.

The official was referring to the Committees for the Liberation of the Golan Heights, a Hizbullah -like guerrilla organization Baath party sources claim was formed in Syria to attack Israeli positions in the Golan.

"Attacks to be launched from Syrian side of border"

The Baath official told WND Syria learned from Hizbullah's military campaign against Israel that "fighting" is more effective than peace negotiations with regard to gaining territory.

The Baath official told WND Syria's new Committees for the Liberation of the Golan Heights was formed this past June and that the group consists of Syrian volunteers, many from the Syrian border with Turkey and from Palestinian refugee camps near Damascus. He said Syria held registration for volunteers to join the Committees in June.

The official said attacks by the Committees may include the infiltration of Jewish communities in the Golan, rocket attacks against Israeli positions or raids of Golan-based Israeli military installations. He said all attacks would be launched from the Syrian side of the border.

WND first reported in June on the alleged formation of the Front for the Liberation of the Golan. One month later, a man identified as the leader of the Front gave an interview to state-run Iranian television.

Reprinted with permission of WorldNetDaily

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

France Deploys UAVs To Ostensibly Repace IAF Flights

2006-12-10T21:20:00.000+01:00

Yaakov Katz, The Jerusalem Post

www.jpost.com/servlet/ Satellite?cid=1164881864424 &pagename=JPost%2FJP Article%2FShowFull

In an effort to put a stop to Israeli overflights in Lebanon, the French Armed Forces has deployed an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) squadron in southern Lebanon to conduct intelligence-gathering missions in place of the IDF.

France, a member of UNIFIL, has expressed adamant opposition to IAF overflights in Lebanon. Last month, OC Planning Division Maj.-Gen. Ido Nehushtan traveled to Paris for meetings with senior military officials during which he tried to explain Israel's operational needs. The flights, the IDF claims, are necessary for gathering intelligence and keeping an eye on the Lebanese-Syrian border through which weapons are smuggled to the Hizbullah.

Angered however from an incident in October during which French soldiers almost opened fire at an IAF fighter jet, military sources in Paris told The Jerusalem Post following Nehushtan's visit that they were still opposed to the overflights and that French soldiers stationed in Lebanon were given the authority to open fire at Israeli jets if they felt threatened by the flights. According to Israeli defense sources, the French initiative is also meant to prove the operational capabilities of its UAVs so they can compete against Israeli defense industries on the global UAV market.

While welcoming the use of UAVs as part of UNIFIL operations in Lebanon, a high-ranking officer said Sunday that the IDF would not stop flying over Lebanon.

"We need to allow UNIFIL all of the means it finds essential to perform its missions," the officer said. "But at the same time, until Hizbullah fulfills its part of UN resolution 1701 and returns the kidnapped soldiers [Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser Y.K.] there is no reason for us to completely fulfill our part of the agreement and stop the overflights."

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Hamas Head Reminds World That Israel -- Not Palestinians -- Is David In David:Goliath Equation

2006-12-10T21:13:00.000+01:00

Haniyeh in Tehran: Iran gives us "strategic depth"

Avi Issacharoff, Haaretz

www.haaretz.com/ hasen/spages/ 798778.html

Iran constitutes the Palestinians' strategic depth, Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh declared on a visit to Tehran this weekend.

He also reiterated that Hamas would never recognize Israel or accept past Israeli-Palestinian agreements.

Speaking to thousands of students at the University of Tehran on Friday, Haniyeh said: "The braggart of the world [the United States] and the Zionists ... want us to accept the theft of Palestinian lands, stop the jihad and the resistance and accept the agreements signed with the Zionist enemy. We will never recognize the Zionist government. We will continue the jihad until Jerusalem is liberated."

He also said that Iran provides the Palestinians with "strategic depth" in their fight against Israel.

Then, last night, he met with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Following the meeting, Ahmadinejad said that Iran would stand shoulder to shoulder with the Palestinians until Jerusalem was liberated and urged: "The Palestinian government must not give in to international pressure; it must continue to fight the Jewish state."

Haniyeh thanked Ahmadinejad for his support and replied: "My government has no intention of recognizing the occupation government. We support the Palestinian people's right to resistance [the standard Palestinian term for terror attacks] and its right to cancel the cruel agreements that were signed in the past with the occupation regime."

He added that his government would never accept the three conditions set by the Quartet (the U.S., European Union, United Nations and Russia): recognizing Israel, accepting previous Israeli-Palestinian agreements and abjuring violence.

Khaled Meshal, who heads Hamas' political bureau, took a slightly different tack over the weekend, saying that "if Israel and the U.S. want to end the bloodshed in the region, they must accede to the Palestinians' demands." Specifically, he said, Israel must withdraw to the pre-1967 armistice lines, release all Palestinian prisoners, accept a "right of return" for Palestinian refugees and dismantle all settlements. Otherwise, Hamas will wage open war against it, he warned.

Meshal, who was speaking in a Palestinian refugee camp near Damascus, said that all the Palestinian factions agree that a Palestinian state must be established based on the pre-1967 borders, and on this there can be no compromise. However, he added, "our long-term goal is the liberation of Palestine. Israel and the U.S. are deluding themselves if they think that we are not capable of doing this."

Meanwhile, the Palestine Liberation Organization's executive committee recommended yesterday that Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas call early elections, thereby further escalating the Fatah-Hamas confrontation.

The recommendation is not binding; it merely authorizes Abbas, whose Fatah faction dominates the PLO, to call new elections if and when he so desires. Senior PLO officials said Abbas would address the Palestinian public later this week and announce his decision on whether to continue efforts to form a unity government with Hamas.

However, he may not announce new elections in this speech: Many Palestinian analysts view yesterday's decision as merely another stage in the ongoing Fatah-Hamas feud.

In Gaza yesterday, Fatah-affiliated members of the PA security services demonstrated against the nonpayment of their salaries, resulting in exchanges of fire between Hamas and Fatah gunmen that wounded one policeman. The day before, thousands of Hamas supporters demonstrated in Gaza to urge Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh not to resign.

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Security And Defense: Weathermap 2007 -- Strong Winds Of War

2006-12-08T21:27:00.000+01:00

Yaakov Katz, The Jerusalem Post

www.jpost.com/servlet/ Satellite?cid=1164881846902 &pagename=JPost%2FJP Article%2FShowFull

Wearing chemical warfare suits and masks, the soldiers ran into the building and started to evacuate those wounded in a non-conventional Syrian missile attack.

The "attack" was a simulation, put on Tuesday for Defense Minister Amir Peretz and Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Dan Halutz at the Home Front Command's training center on the Tzrifin military base near Rishon Lezion.

Following the exercise, Peretz turned to one of the soldiers and asked: "When there is a real incident, do you feel you will know what to do? Are you sure you won't go into shock?"

His concern is not baseless. Four months after the war in Lebanon - during which 4,000 rockets slammed into the North - Military Intelligence is predicting that Israel is on a collision course toward a new round with Hizbullah and possibly even war with Syria.

Peretz's visit to the HFC's training base was not a coincidence, but rather a desire to see first-hand how the IDF is preparing for the looming threats. It was not by chance he warned of non-conventional and chemical threats when speaking to reporters following the exercise. With Iran racing to obtain nuclear weapons, Peretz also wanted to ensure that Israel would be ready to deal with the aftermath of such an attack.

According to Military Intelligence's assessments, obtained exclusively by The Jerusalem Post, Israel is headed toward at least two major military conflicts in 2007 - one against the Hamas army being built up despite the cease-fire in the Gaza Strip, and the other against Hizbullah, which is also rebuilding its military wing and has begun receiving shipments of long-range, Iranian-made missiles smuggled into Lebanon by Syria.

Senior officers who spoke with the Post this week referred to the possibility of a renewed conflict with Hizbullah in the coming months. MI does not believe that the cease-fire in Gaza will last more than a few weeks and feels that the continued daily smuggling of high-grade explosives and weaponry into Gaza from the Sinai will force Israel to deal with the Palestinian terror factions.

THE IDF followed this week's events in Lebanon with extreme concern. The Hizbullah protests in Beirut, defense officials warned, have the potential to topple the US-backed government of Prime Minister Fuad Saniora. If that happens, these officials predicted, UNIFIL could be expelled from southern Lebanon and Hizbullah would be able to return to its border outposts, just like before the war.

Since the war ended with a UN-brokered cease-fire on August 14, Hizbullah has been receiving weapon shipments - including anti-tank missiles and long-range rockets - supplied by Damascus and transported into Lebanon through the Syrian border late at night.

Hizbullah "nature reserves" - camouflaged underground systems of tunnels and bunkers - are still operating in southern Lebanon, despite the beefed-up presence of UNIFIL. These areas are designated as "closed military zones" for UNIFIL and are used as training centers for Hizbullah and storehouses for its weapons caches.

The Lebanese political crisis, MI believes, may create a "proxy war" between Hizbullah and Saniora's government. MI saw this clash coming and predicted that following Israel's war in Lebanon, Hizbullah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah would feel the need to show in one way or another that his guerrilla group had survived the IDF offensive.

In addition to the protests, MI believes Hizbullah will also resume attacks against Israel in the coming weeks. The group won't necessarily launch Katyushas, but at least will fire anti-aircraft missiles at IAF aircraft flying over Lebanon. This, MI believes, will not be condemned by the international community, since countries like France, Germany and Italy - members of UNIFIL - have repeatedly slammed Israel for not stopping the overflights.

More importantly, MI does not believe UNIFIL poses an obstacle to Hizbullah and that it is only a matter of time before the group returns to its former strength.

SYRIA HAS been directly contributing to the tension in Lebanon. According to MI, Damascus is the leading suspect in the assassination of Pierre Gemayel two weeks ago, possibly an attempt by President Bashar Assad to extract revenge for Saniora's decision to back the establishment of an international tribunal to try those responsible for the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese president Rafik Hariri.

MI does not foresee a Syrian attack in the near future, although the outcome of the war in Lebanon has created a new and dangerous reality on the Syrian front. The Syrian military has been on high alert since the war ended, and Assad has said on several occasions that military action is one way to recover the Golan Heights.

Due to the slight risk of a war, OC Military Intelligence Maj.-Gen. Amos Yadlin has suggested to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that he examine the possibility of "engaging" Syria in a dialogue. Unlike Iran, Syria has previously held talks with Israel and has ties with the West MI believes it would like to retain.

According to MI's assessment, if Israel offered to renew the dialogue, Assad would accept. If Israel does not make any diplomatic overtures to Syria, as Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has said it wouldn't, the chance of war will only increase.

BY THE end of 2007, MI expects Iran to have mastered the necessary technology to proceed independently with its nuclear program. By the end of the decade, it predicts, Iran will have a nuclear bomb - unless it is stopped before then.

As things look now, according to several high-ranking defense officials, the US will not attack Iran's nuclear sites. In addition, the Baker-Hamilton report that came out Wednesday and called on US President George W. Bush to engage Iran in a dialogue could lead to Washington's turning a blind eye to Teheran's nuclear program in exchange for help in stabilizing the situation in Iraq.

Even if sanctions were imposed on Iran, the assessment is that they will not be effective. But other officials say that if the world stopped supplying Iran with refined fuel, the regime would need to consider suspending its enrichment of uranium.

For Israel, 2007 is the critical year. Unlike the US, which sees the point of no return only when Iran has a nuclear bomb, Israel has been warning that the point is actually when the Iranians master the technology.

At the moment, Israel is confronting Iran on two fronts - diplomatically and militarily. While Israeli leaders are pushing the world to take action to stop Iran's nuclear program, the IDF is also drawing up plans for the possibility that Israel will be left with no choice but a preemptive strike.

THE CEASE-FIRE in Gaza will enter its third week on Sunday, despite IDF predictions that it would not last more than a few days. The question now is where does this lead? One option is to give in to Palestinian demands and extend the cease-fire to the West Bank. The National Security Council is currently drawing up a recommendation on the issue, with officials predicting that if Gaza remains quiet, Olmert will be willing to begin implementing the truce in the West Bank.

The other option is to observe the cease-fire in Gaza and wait for the Palestinians to either return to firing Kassam rockets or establish a national unity government, one that accepts the three conditions of the Quartet - a cessation of terror, recognition of Israel's right to exist and honoring previous agreements between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

If the cease-fire falls apart, the IDF believes it will be headed toward a major conflict in Gaza. Despite the cease-fire, the Palestinians are smuggling high-grade explosives and advanced weaponry into the Strip.

Hamas has set up a 10,000-strong military, consisting of four brigades corresponding to four sections of the Gaza Strip. This army is believed to be armed with advanced anti-tank missiles, Grad-type Katyusha rockets and anti-aircraft missiles, possibly shoulder-fired, Soviet-made SA-7s.

MI's assumption is that the cease-fire will last another few weeks at most. The major problem is that unlike the cease-fire before the unilateral disengagement, this time the Palestinians do not have an incentive to enforce it.

OC Southern Command Maj.-Gen. Yoav Galant and Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) chief Yuval Diskin have been calling for a massive operation in the Gaza Strip for months, claiming that otherwise Gaza would turn into southern Lebanon. The end of the cease-fire could see the beginning of that operation.

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

Haaretz's Avraham Tal On Israeli Arab Demands: This Means War

2006-12-08T21:23:00.000+01:00

Avraham Tal, Haaretz

www.haaretz.com/ hasen/spages/ 798478.html

One after another lately, various Israeli-Arab organizations have been publishing papers dealing with the future of the Arab public in Israel and its relations with the state authorities. The papers present the problems encountered by Israeli Arabs in their contact with Israeli law, with the state authorities and state institutions, and call for a fundamental change in the relationship between the Jewish majority and the Arab minority.

What led to this recent flurry of efforts to spell out "visions" of problems and solutions for the Arab public? The standard explanation: The worsening breakdown of trust between this public and the state institutions in wake of the events of October 2000. Yet there can be no ignoring the fact that these visions are blossoming just when Israel has come out of a difficult war in Lebanon, is still facing a possible war in the North, is in a fragile state of cease-fire in the Gaza Strip, is dealing daily with terror cells in the West Bank, and has an existential threat from Iran hovering over it.

This week, the leaders of the Arab minority in Israel declared war in their own way on the Jewish national state in the Land of Israel.

Some of the demands presented in the "visions" are new, such as the outrageous calls for granting veto power to the Arab minority on decisions of national import, and for separate representation at international institutions, and more in that vein. There are also calls for changing the flag and the national anthem, for a return to abandoned villages and equality in immigration rights to Israel.

Equality in immigration rights means the annulment of the Law of Return, or the legislation of a Law of Return for Arabs; in other words, opening the country's gates to hundreds of thousands of descendents of residents of 1948 Palestine, so that the country will have a Palestinian majority. A return to abandoned villages means situating a quarter of a million Israeli Arabs (as one "vision" estimates) in hundreds of rebuilt villages, something that would alter Israel's demography, create hundreds of new friction points and foster ongoing internal intra-ethnic conflict even after the external conflict is resolved. Changing the flag and the national anthem, to make them express the national uniqueness of the Arab minority, would abolish - on the symbolic level - Israel as the Jewish national state; the next stage would have to be changing the name of the state.

Every Arab knows that the Jewish majority in Israel could never consent to any one of these demands (or several others not cited here). If they nonetheless go on raising them with increasing vehemence, the intention is clear: to bolster the Palestinian narrative whose origins lie in the Nakba (catastrophe) of 1948 and to ensure that the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians does not abate even after peace agreements are signed and an independent Palestinian state arises alongside the State of Israel.

Even if Israel one day arrives at an understanding with the leaders of the Palestinian Authority and all of the Arab states about taking the demand for the right of return off the agenda, the demands of Israeli Arab citizens for a right of return for descendants of the uprooted to their forefathers' villages and their other nationalistic demands will ensure that the flames of the conflict are not extinguished. The tension between the Jewish population and the Arab population within Israel would only continue and even worsen over the years in the wake of demographic developments, until the aim of the elimination of the Jewish state is finally achieved.

It cannot be repeated often enough: In 1947-48, the Arabs were given an opportunity to establish an independent state on part of the territory of Palestine. Their leaders passed up this opportunity and instead tried to drown the Jewish state in blood and fire. The leaders of the descendants of the 1948 refugees who are scattered in the Arab states and elsewhere, and of the Arabs who remained and became Israeli citizens, are trying to repeat in a different way the failed attempt of the 1948 generation, with terror from outside and by nurturing a separatist Palestinian narrative from within.

The result will be a deepening of the rift and a heightening of the hostility between Jews and Arabs in Israel. The leadership and the liberal Jewish public accept Israeli Arabs as citizens with equal rights, with the exception of certain areas that touch on Israel's essence as a Jewish state (such as the Law of Return and the Law of Citizenship). All would agree that, over the years, the Arab minority has suffered discrimination in certain areas and that this must be remedied. But the leaders of the Arabs in Israel are trying to show that their loyalty is not given to the State of Israel in its present incarnation, but only to a binational Jewish-Arab state on the territory of Israel, or to a Palestinian state on all the territory of the Land of Israel.

It's no wonder, then, that Israeli readiness to undo the discriminations of the past is not that strong. All these "visions" herald a much bleaker future for relations between Jews and Arabs in Israel.

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis

No Way To Win A War -- Iran Study Group Report

2006-12-07T21:24:00.000+01:00

Eliot A. Cohen

Wall Street Journal

www.aei.org/publications/ pubID.25250,filter.all/ pub_detail.asp

The theory of the thing is very peculiar indeed. You are in the middle of a war--a hard war, a war that is going badly. If the government has bogged down, if the people inside have gone stale, you would say that the sound thing, the Churchillian or Lincolnian or Rooseveltian thing, would be, first, to fire a bunch of officials (generals as well as top civilians), promote or bring in fresh talent, and put together a small group of people to take a new and unillusioned look. Those people would report back in secrecy to the president and his most senior advisers and aides.

They would consist of experienced soldiers and civilians in whom the president (who, after all, has to make the strategic decisions, and is the accountable executive) has trust. There would not be many of them, a half dozen or so, and they would have to be hardy enough to visit the war zone for several weeks, talking not just to politicians and generals but to captains and sergeants. They would go see things for themselves. They would visit a forward operating base near Tikrit; they would spend some time with Iraqi soldiers in Taji; they would take their chances in a convoy to al Asad, or even a patrol in Tal Afar.

They--not their staff of a few soldiers and secretaries--would do the probing, digging, thinking, discussing and, above all, the writing. The chairman of the group would insist that they air their disagreements candidly and thoroughly in front of the president, engaging in a debate that might last a day, perhaps longer. The rest of us would not find out about the panel until months, or even years, after it reported back; maybe not until the war was over.

The administration's congressional critics (including those of its own party) came up with a different solution: the Iraq Study Group (ISG), which has now produced a document that consists of 50 pages of recommendations, preceded by a 40-page thumbnail sketch of the current situation in Iraq and 50 pages of maps, lists of people, and full-length biographies of the commissioners. This is a group composed, for the most part, of retired eminent public officials, most with limited or no expertise in the waging or study of war. It consists of individuals carefully selected with an eye to diverse partisan and other irrelevant personal characteristics. These worthies, with not one chairman but two (for balance, of course), turned to several score experts known to disagree vehemently with one another about the best course of action to be pursued in Iraq.

Some of the commission members and their advisers cordially detest the president and his administration and opposed him and his war from the outset; others were equally passionate in their defense of both the man and the conflict. And yet this diverse group had an overwhelming mandate, from the beginning, to produce a consensus document. The commission members spent four days in Iraq, and with the exception of a one-day foray by former Marine Chuck Robb, they stayed in the Green Zone, that bubble of palaces and residences that has little to do with the real Iraq of Basra, Kirkuk, Ramadi, Baquba and Mosul. At the end, they had breakfast with the president and a few hours later posted their conclusions on the Internet for all the world to ponder. There is something of farce in all this, an invocation of wisdom from a cohesive Washington elite that does not exist, a desperate wish to believe in the gravitas and the statecraft of grave men (and women) who can sort out the mess in which the country finds itself.

A fatuous process yields, necessarily, fatuous results. "Iraq's neighbors are not doing enough to help Iraq achieve stability"--a statement only somewhat ameliorated by the admission that some are even "undercutting stability," which sounds as though Syria and Iran were being downright rude, rather than providing indispensable assistance to those who have filled the burn wards of Walter Reed, the morgue in Baghdad, and the cemetery at Arlington. The selected remedy is, first and foremost, rather like the ISG's credo for its own functioning, consensus. "The United States should immediately launch a new diplomatic offensive to build an international consensus for stability in Iraq and the region," as if our chief failure with Bashar Assad or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad lies with the hitherto unnoticed laziness or rhetorical ineptitude of our diplomats, or as though Europe, Saudi Arabia and Israel have not yet figured out that stability in Iraq is a good thing. "Syria should control its border" and "Iran should respect Iraq's sovereignty."

No kidding--but who is going to make them? That perennial solution, "resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict," makes its appearance, including direct negotiations between Israel and Palestinians, but only with "those who accept Israel's right to exist." The report conveniently forgets that the elected leaders of Palestine do not, in fact, accept Israel's right to exist. And it also neglects the grim reality that one of the most terrible things about Gaza, and possibly the West Bank as well, is that no one, not even Hamas, is really in charge.

Part of Iran's price for easing up on us in Iraq is pretty clearly taking the heat off its nuclear program; the ISG recommends that that issue "should continue to be dealt with by the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council plus Germany." Well, what deal should the U.S. be willing to cut on Iranian nuclear weapons? Do we think the Iranians would deliver? And what are the long-term consequences?

War, and warlike statecraft, is a hard business, and though this is supposed to be a report dominated by "realists," there is nothing realistic in failing to spell out the bloody deeds, grim probabilities and dismal consequences associated with even the best course of action. Indeed, some parts of the report read as sheer fantasy--Recommendation 15, for example, which provides that part of the American deal with Syria should include the latter's full cooperation in investigating the Hariri assassination, verifiable cessation of Syrian aid to Hezbollah, and its support for persuading Hamas to recognize Israel.

The prescriptions for internal processes in Iraq are only somewhat better. The ISG argues that American forces should shift to developing Iraqi security forces and backing them up, which is more or less the course we are on now. It talks of milestones for Iraqi performance, as if Iraqi benchmarking were more a problem than Iraqi will, and Iraqi will more the problem than Iraqi capability. It suggests announcing our own planned redeployments without considering the most obvious consequence, which is that Iraqis of many political hues will decide that the Americans are leaving, and the time has come to cut deals with Jaish al Mahdi, or the Badr organization, or al Qaeda in Iraq, or any of the other cutthroat outfits infesting that bleeding country.

Quite apart from the psychological impact of our actions, there is the sober fact that the Iraqi army is small, 138,000-strong (and that number probably overstated), and that building effective security forces takes time. The 188,000-man police forces are corrupt, riddled with militia influence, and in need of a thorough overhaul. We cannot build the Iraqi security forces without a substantial combat presence. Nor is the problem merely one of training, as Iraqi corporals driving around in pickup trucks without functional radios might have sourly pointed out, had they had the chance to talk to a Study Group member.

At least the ISG has given considerable thought to preparing us for future conflict. Consider Recommendations 47 and 48. Congress, they declare, should allocate money to repair the clapped-out equipment the Army and Marines will bring back from Iraq. This is no doubt better than, say, heaving Bradley infantry fighting vehicles overboard on the way back to American ports in order to provide a home for new coral reefs. "As [American] redeployment proceeds, military leaders should emphasize training and education of forces that have returned to the United States in order to restore the force to full combat capability." Pentagon planners would do well to pursue this plan rather than give the troops six months of leave and then having them paint the sorely neglected rocks outside the sergeant major's office.

The great war leaders, in their private deliberations, shied away from vagueness. Haziness about ends and means, about what to do and how to do it, is a mark of strategic ineptitude; in war it gets people killed. But a Churchill could only call the flattening of German cities "terror bombing" in private.

Thus, unsurprisingly, in a public document of this kind, euphemism and imprecision abound. The U.S. needs to give "disincentives" to Syria and Iran: But the real question has always been whether we are willing to use a variety of overt and covert means--from bombing insurgent safe houses to sabotaging refineries, from mining harbors to supporting their own insurgents--to do so. And, in fact, the report mentions no means for squeezing either country.

True, as James Baker irritably noted at the press conference releasing the report, the U.S. talked to the Soviet Union during the Cold War. But as the U.S. did so it also bankrupted the U.S.S.R. in an arms race, undermined its client governments in Eastern Europe by supporting Polish labor unions, and killed its soldiers by providing surface-to-air missiles to Afghan guerrillas. Real pain, and not merely tough talk sweetened by a bucket of goodies, paves the way for successful negotiations with brutal opponents.

What we need in Iraq is not a New Diplomatic Offensive (capitals in the original) so much as energy and competence in fighting the fight. From the outset of the Iraq war much of our difficulty has stemmed not so much from failures to find the right strategy, as from an astounding and depressing inability to implement the strategic and operational choices we have nominally made.

This inability has come from things as personal as picking the wrong people for key positions, in the apparent belief that generals are interchangeable cogs in a counterinsurgency machine. It has come from an unwillingness or inability to grab the bureaucracy by the throat and make it act--which is why, three years after the insurgency began, we still send soldiers out to risk roadside bomb attacks in overweight Humvees when there are half a dozen commercially available armored vehicles designed to minimize the effects of such blasts. It is why--although the government has declared long before the ISG issued its report that training the Iraqis is Job One--we still embed fewer than a dozen American advisers in an Iraqi battalion when the right number is three to five times that many.

We have not come up to the brink of failure because we did not know how important it is to employ young Iraqi men or to keep detained insurgents out of circulation or to prevent militia penetration of the security forces by vetting the commanders of those forces. We have known these things--but we have not done these things.

The creation of the Iraq Study Group reflects the vain hope that well-meaning, senior, former public officials can find ideas that have not already occurred to people inside government; that those new ideas can redeem incompetent execution and insufficient resources; that salvation can come from a Washington establishment whose wisdom was exaggerated in its heyday, and which has in any event succumbed to a kind of political-intellectual entropy since the 1960s; that a public commission can do the work of oversight that Congress has shirked for five years in the misguided belief that it would thus support an administration struggling to do its best in a difficult situation. This is no way to run a war, and most definitely, no way to win it.

Eliot A. Cohen is a member of AEI's Council of Academic Advisers and the Robert E. Osgood Professor of Strategic Studies at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies.

Source: IMRA – Independent Media Review and Analysis