BEYOND THE DROPZONE
Why Should Christian Lebanese Forces Apologize to Hezbollah Terrorists?
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 3 October 2008 at 10:17 pm UTC
Say it ain’t so, Samir!
NOW Lebanon is reporting:
“[According to sources] nonpolitical meetings were taking place between the Lebanese Forces and Hezbollah, in preparation for broader negotiations that will occur after the Eid al-Fitr vacation. The sources said that the atmosphere of the meetings was positive, and noted that they came after [LF leader Samir Geagea’s] apology for LF abuses committed during the civil war, which, the source said, Hezbollah had accepted.”
Reports of any such meetings have barely registered a blip with Western media — which either doesn’t understand the dynamics or doesn’t care about the criticality of the Lebanese front in the broader war on terror — when in fact any possibility of any reconciliation between the Christian Lebanese Forces and the Shiia terrorist group Hezbollah would be nothing less than disastrous for democracy in Lebanon and Lebanon’s pro-democracy majority (which already is experiencing a systematic usurping of its power and a degradation of its majority status at the hands of the Syrian-Iranian-Hezbollah axis).
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. at uswriter.com.
A Call for UN Observers to North Lebanon
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 1 October 2008 at 3:58 pm UTC
By W. Thomas Smith Jr.
In the wake of reports of Syrian troops massing on the northern border between Syria and Lebanon – within easy striking distance of the turbulent Lebanese city of Tripoli – as well as various confirmed/unconfirmed (depending upon one’s expectation of confirmation) reports of Syrian Army crossings into Lebanon since early September; the International Lebanese Committee for United Nations Security Council Resolution 1559 is calling for UN observers to deploy with the Lebanese Army to the border region.
“We call on the Lebanese President Michel Sleiman after his visit to the United Nations in New York to call on the secretary general of the United Nations to dispatch UN observers … ,” says Tom Harb, secretary general of ILC for UNSCR 1559, in a prepared statement.
Harb gives as his reasons: “The repetitive incidents since the summer of 2007 with terrorists infiltrated from the Syrian side of the borders, and the massing of Syrian troops along the Akkar district.”
He adds, “We oppose the idea of sending so-called Arab monitors to these borders between two members of the Arab League, precisely because the League doesn’t have a permanent security process to dispatch these kinds of forces. In addition, within the Arab League the political divisions are sharp and sending military elements to monitor terrorist infiltration will only enflame the situation.”
In a phone conversation this morning, Harb tells me: “Any Arab initiative outside the UN would be disastrous for Lebanon.”
Indeed, Harb is correct as there is the very real probability that any such initiative would favour the terrorists and Islamist extremists in the north just as we witnessed in the Arab-engineered Doha agreement, which granted the terrorist group Hezbollah all manner of political/military concessions after Hezbollah launched a series of bloody attacks against the Lebanese government and citizenry in May.
“Sleiman must work with the UN before the Syrians gain the upper hand,” says Harb.
Again, Harb is correct. But I’m not holding my breath when it comes to pro-Syria Sleiman, who became president as part of the Doha agreement.
As I’ve reported time-and-again, Sleiman – when he was commander-in-chief of the armed forces – attempted to justify the right of an armed Hezbollah to exist (in a personal conversation with me), and months later he refused to fight Hezbollah when the terrorist group and its allies were killing Lebanese civilians and generally trying to burn down the country.
Then there are Sleiman’s Syrian connections (as I reported on May 25): “First, Sleiman was appointed army commander when the Syrians’ had overt control over Lebanon (I say overt, because Syria certainly has a covert operational hand in Lebanon today). Second, Sleiman has reportedly trained with Syrian military forces in Syria. Third, Sleiman’s brother-in-law, Gebran Kuriyyeh, was press spokesman for the late Syrian President Hafez al-Assad (and a couple sources tell us Kuriyyeh is also a former press officer for Assad’s son, current Syrian Pres. Bashar Assad.).”
Read Harb’s complete statement in Arabic here.
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. at uswriter.com.
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 30 September 2008 at 12:28 am UTC
By W. Thomas Smith Jr.
Hezbollah’s Al Manar TV and other media — both bad guys (like Hezbollah) and good guys — are reporting a statement purportedly uttered by Syrian Pres. Bashar Assad during a recent interview for Hawadeth magazine, which clearly supports Dr. Walid Phares’ analysis (read for background here and here) that Syria may well-be prepping the international community – setting up some justification – for that country’s forthcoming cross-border military operations into Lebanon.
“North Lebanon became a real base for extremism and constitutes a danger for Syria,” Assad said in the interview, slated to be published Friday.
Phares discusses the comment further at Counterterrorism Blog.
Meanwhile, the Daily Star is reporting that parliamentarian Saad Hariri, leader of the Future Movement and son of the assassinated former prime minister Rafik Hariri, said:
“Some agencies were smuggling extremist fighters over the borders ‘in order to spread chaos and commit terrorist acts that target army officers and civilians.’
“He [Hariri] said last week’s deployment of Syrian troops all along Lebanon’s northern borders was carried out under the pretext of preventing smuggling, but was actually intended to frighten the Lebanese.
“Hariri questioned why similar deployments had not occurred on Syria’s borders with Israel and Iraq. The Syrian leadership was looking for any excuse to obstruct the normalization of relations with Lebanon, Hariri said, adding that the people of Lebanon would not accept Assad reassurances, because his actions contained an honest and direct threat to Lebanon’s sovereignty.
“Hariri also warned the international community not to accept any Syrian intervention in Lebanon under the guise of confronting extremists.”
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. online at uswriter.com.
PHARES: Bombings in Lebanon and Syria are part of a Master Campaign
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 29 September 2008 at 1:13 pm UTC
By W. Thomas Smith Jr.
A car-bomb targeting Lebanese soldiers exploded in the northern Lebanese city of Tripoli, this morning. Five people were killed and scores wounded in today’s attack which was carried out less than two months after a similar attack in the same city, and two days following a powerful car-bomb attack in the Syrian capital, Damascus.
The attacks – coinciding with the recent strengthening of Syrian Army forces on the northern Lebanese-Syrian border (and various unconfirmed reports of Syrian special operators who have perhaps been crossing into Lebanon since at least early September) – may well be a coordinated effort fitting into a broader plan for Lebanon on the part of the Syrian-Iranian-Hezbollah axis.
Dr. Walid Phares, director of the Future of Terrorism Project at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, tells us:
“What we are now witnessing is a rapid unfolding of the Syro-Iranian terror campaign aimed at achieving several interconnected goals.
“The explosions in Lebanon are aimed at intimidating the Lebanese Army, the public, the politicians; and pressure all to accept an increasing role for Hezbollah and Syria within the country’s security apparatus. It is interesting to see the back-and-forth between the terror attacks against the Army and the statements made by Hezbollah and pro-Syrian politicians calling for a defense strategy to ‘protect Lebanon’: As if the message is: ‘You will continue to be attacked until we are in charge of security.’
“On the other hand, security related incidents and bomb attacks inside Syria appear to be sending a parallel message. The regime is eager to call itself a ‘target of terrorism.’ Hence, the accusation is now leveled at so-called factions inside Lebanon, meaning the mostly Sunni anti-Syrian politicians. Which leads to Syria’s so-called legitimate action against an enemy based in Lebanon.
“If you look at the two tracks (the attacks and incidents in Lebanon and Syria) you’ll understand that it is all connected in a master campaign aimed at breaking Syria’s isolation on the one hand and then isolating the Lebanese anti-Syrian factions on the other. All of it is accompanied by a systematic media campaign out of Beirut which is heavily backed by Iranian petrodollars.”
Phares has just returned from a European tour where he briefed members of the European Parliament, counterterrorism officials at the European Union, and various international Defense officials.
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. online at uswriter.com.
PHARES: Syrian Mukhabarat Perhaps Responsible for Today’s Car-Bomb Attack
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 27 September 2008 at 4:26 pm UTC
By W. Thomas Smith Jr.
A powerful car-bomb detonated this morning in the Syrian capital, killing at least 17 and wounding scores. Why, who, or what terrorist entity is responsible has since been the subject of much speculation. But Middle East terrorism expert Professor Walid Phares says one “very possible scenario is that the attack was executed by the Syrian Mukhabarat (intelligence service) or one of these agencies as a prelude to attack Sunni strongholds inside Lebanon.”
Speaking by phone from Paris – where he is currently briefing counterterrorism experts, Defense officials, and others at the French Military Academy – Phares says: “When you connect the dots between Syrian President [Bashar] Assad, who calls on Lebanon’s president to send troops to the heavily Sunni-populated areas of north Lebanon, to the massing of Syrian troops along the northern borders, and then to the statements made by Syrian officials on Arab TV – including this morning on al Jazeera – that factions within Lebanon could be behind the explosion, you cannot but see the big picture: The strategic target of the Syrian regime is to control the Sunni areas in northern Lebanon who are fiercely opposing the pro-Assad Alawite militias in Tripoli and the advance of Hezbollah’s special units across the northern Bekaa towards Akkar in northern Lebanon.”
So the question is, would Syrian Intelligence forces actually detonate an explosive device on Syrian soil as a means of enflaming a situation, framing Lebanon, and creating an excuse to launch attacks across Lebanon’s borders?
Experts know there is no question but that they would. And as Phares explains: “The Syrian regime is desperately attempting to establish a perception of itself within the international community that Syria is engaged in combating Al Qaeda and its ilk inside Lebanon. It is within this perception that Syria hopes to gain some legitimacy from the West in order that Damascus may extend its reach and influence back inside its neighbor. The best way for Syria to accomplish this is to project an image of its being a victim to ‘Sunni radical terror.’ If one or more explosions inside Syrian territory will do it, that shouldn’t be a problem for a regime which is trying to save its skin in an ongoing international investigation and indictment in the Rafik Hariri assassination case.”
However, Phares says he does not expect “a direct Syrian intervention across the border into Lebanon; not immediately. The classical Syrian modus operandi is to see the situation deteriorating fully before they offer so-called ‘help.’”
He adds, “Fact is, the Assad regime is waiting to see who will enter the White House before moving to the next step toward Lebanon. For now the Syrian Mukhabarat is scoring point-by-point trying to regain the status of the regime internationally. That is very important for them.”
We asked Phares for his opinion regarding recent analysis proffered by everyone from Western media to consulting groups and think tanks, many of which contend the incident may well-be the result of increasing tension between Hezbollah and Syria.
“Just the opposite,” he says. “Everything is coordinated between Tehran and Damascus. If it were otherwise, we would have witnessed different types of actions between the two camps and additional statements. Iran and Syria are solidly moving forward to score points against the U.S., Europe, Arab moderates and the UN. Those analysts who propose otherwise are being influenced by the sharp and well-funded Syro-Iranian propaganda and the power of the petrodollar.”
Dr. Phares directs the Future of Terrorism Project for the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and is a visiting scholar at the European Foundation for Democracy in Brussels. He is currently on a European tour.
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. online at uswriter.com.
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 27 September 2008 at 2:57 pm UTC
By W. Thomas Smith Jr.
According to sources, at approximately 7:00 p.m. (Eastern), Hajjar was introduced “in a surprise move” to Salloukh at a reception for Lebanese Pres. Michel Sleiman hosted by the Lebanese ambassador at D.C.’s Omni Shoreham Hotel. (Sleiman was in town this week meeting with Pres. Bush and senior administration officials.)
When Salloukh extended his hand, Hajjar refused his; putting his hand in his pocket.
“I will not shake hands with people working for Hezbollah!” Hajjar said.
Salloukh responded, “You should leave here!”
Hajjar replied, “No! you should leave here! I’m an American citizen!”
There was a temporary hush in the immediate area of the reception room. Attendees were reportedly sitting their drinks on tables, anticipating some level of escalation. Both men walked away.
A few hours following the reception, I spoke briefly by phone with Hajjar who confirmed the incident.
“I also said to Salloukh, ‘Are you Lebanese or an Iranian? Choose!’” said Hajjar. “He was stunned, end of conversation. It’s amazing to think that these people believe they can ‘make nice’ at cocktail parties and maybe go to your kids’ weddings, and then the next day they are lobbing bombs or trying to assassinate you.”
Tom Harb, secretary general of the WCCR, later told me: “We must also recognize that many in the Lebanese-American community have been – and are – critical of the fact that a pro-Hezbollah minister accompanied the new president of Lebanon to Washington, D.C. But according to diplomatic protocol, Lebanon’s foreign minister must accompany the president. This means that Iran’s eyes follow President Sleiman wherever he goes. Sleiman should not have brought Salloukh with him to Washington.”
Today, Naharnet is reporting: “Washington has criticized Foreign Minister Fawzi Salloukh for allegedly leaking to the media details on the summit discussion between President George Bush and his Lebanese counterpart Michel Suleiman [Sleiman] at the White House. [More here]”
In an international environment that is increasingly soft-soaping and lending legitimacy to butchers like Hezbollah and their allies – the fact that the likes of Salloukh would even be attending a cocktail party in the nation’s capital (one-month before the 25th anniversary of early Hezbollah’s bombing of the Marine Barracks in Beirut, and less than five months after Hezbollah’s murderous rampage in Lebanon) is beyond reason – I salute Hajjar.
But after all, I’m an old Marine rifleman.
[Photo — Confrontation between WCCR U.S. director John Hajjar (left, facing) and Lebanese Foreign Minister Fawzi Salloukh (center right) caught on camera]
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. online at uswriter.com.
BATAL TO CONGRESS: “Syrian agents and special teams freely operate in Lebanon”
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 25 September 2008 at 1:05 am UTC
By W. Thomas Smith Jr.
Human rights activist Kamal el Batal briefed a U.S. Congressional panel, today, regarding Syria’s ongoing abuses against the Lebanese people in Lebanon and Syria.
Following are highlights of Batal’s address:
-
… Though some may believe that Syrian forces withdrew from Lebanon following UN Security Council Resolution 1559 (which calls for the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Lebanon and the disarmament of all militias), the reality is that Syria’s intelligence agents and special teams freely operate in Lebanon today. They facilitate, train, arm, control, and direct militias and their allies to serve the aims of the Syrian Regime.
-
It is almost certain that the Syrian government masterminded and facilitated the majority of the assassinations in Lebanon …
-
It is no coincidence that all armed groups today are allied to the Syrian regime.
-
Hezbollah and the Iranian Pasdaran (the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps) are creating more groups and cells to destabilize Lebanon.
-
Fatah el Islam for example is a Palestinian group fully trained by Hezbollah, armed by Hezbollah and financed by Hezbollah. Of course, all with the approval of Syria that opened the needed supply routes across its territories and into Lebanon.
-
…weapons are not the only danger in Lebanon. It is neither Hezbollah’s rockets nor the allies of Syria who pose the greatest threat to Lebanon. I invite the U.S. Congress to examine the many schools and boy-scout groups run by Hezbollah with the blessing of Syria. These schools teach children, starting from the age of five-years-old, to hate, to wage war, and to commit themselves to martyrdom. Children are taught to hate America and its Democracy, the rule of law and human rights. We may think it is difficult to disarm Hezbollah and its allies, but let us examine how difficult it is going to be to reeducate an entire generation.
-
The kidnapping, detention and torture of Lebanese people by Syria has created a new lucrative activity for Syria, as parents have been systematically blackmailed, often forced to sell their belongings just to pay for some news of their loved one. Sometimes they were – and are – granted visiting permits only to have their visit denied after the long and painful journey into Syria.
-
As I have stated, we estimate the number of Lebanese detained in Syrian prisons to be a figure in the thousands. The only way to know for sure, and the only way to save the ones who are still alive and to bring back the remains of the ones thrown in mass graves is to pass a new UN Security Council resolution under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, similar to UN Security Council Resolution 1564 passed on 18 September 2004 on Sudan.
-
We hope that the United States and its democratic allies will help Lebanon’s civil society to free itself from the grip of Syrian Baathist and Iranian terror.
-
… today, Syria’s and Iran’s proxy army in Lebanon, Hezbollah, is alive and well, and increasing in both political and strategic power. Iran’s influence in the Lebanese political process has never been greater, as has Syria’s. And various independent sources are reporting that Syrian artillery, tanks, helicopters, and between 8,000 and 10,000 special soldiers are massing on the Syrian side of the north Lebanese border – this does not include the recent reports of Syrian special operations teams on the ground in Lebanon, and the known Syrian intelligence operations which have continued since the Syrian Army officially withdrew in 2005.
Batal’s testimony before the U.S. Congressional Human Rights Caucus comes one day before Lebanese Pres. Michel Sleiman – currently in the U.S. – is scheduled to meet with Pres. Bush.
Sleiman – the pro-Syrian former commander-in-chief of Lebanon’s armed forces – recently returned from Syria. But made no strides toward resolving the issue of Lebanese prisoners in Syria: This, despite the multiple, desperate appeals (to Sleiman) by Lebanese political leaders, NGOs, and the mothers of the missing and imprisoned.
I’ve had personal interaction with the Lebanese president, and have written about him here and elsewhere.
Batal is co-founder and director of Beirut-based MIRSAD (Multi-Initiative on Rights: Search, Assist & Defend), and the director of Human Rights for the World Council of the Cedars Revolution.
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. online at uswriter.com.
Briefing on Syria’s Human Rights Abuses
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 24 September 2008 at 12:50 am UTC
A Lebanese delegation will brief the U.S. Congressional Human Rights Caucus, tomorrow, regarding Syria’s ongoing abuses against the Lebanese people despite the fact that the Syrian Army ostensibly withdrew its forces from Lebanon in 2005.
According to Congress’s official invitation to the delegation (a copy of which we’ve obtained among other documentation), the briefing, entitled, “Syrian human rights policies in Syria and toward Lebanese,” will focus on the countless numbers of Lebanese people who have disappeared from their homeland since the Lebanese Civil War, only to turn up in Syrian prisons or rumored to have been killed at the hands of the Syrian regime.
The abuses continue, and involve not only the kidnapped and imprisoned Lebanese, but the extortion of their families just to keep their loved ones alive or to receive information about them.
The briefing is scheduled for tomorrow (Sept. 24), 2:00 pm, Rayburn House Office Building, and is open to the media and the public.
Additional information will follow the briefing.
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. online at uswriter.com.
UPDATE: Syrian Army Reportedly Massing on Syrian-Lebanese Border
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 22 September 2008 at 1:28 am UTC
Sources tonight are reporting that “Lebanese officials” monitoring the Lebanese-Syrian border (in the Akar region above Tripoli) today witnessed what was determined to be a “heavy” brigade-sized force being positioned on the Syrian side of the border.
Also tonight, Naharnet is reporting:
“Future Television said Syria was reinforcing its troops along its side of Lebanon’s northern borders.”
These reports follow several of our own reports – based on open sources and independent human intelligence sources – since September 7 that Syrian forces (including tanks, helicopters, and artillery pieces) have been observed massing on the northern border, and that Syrian special operations forces have crossed into Lebanon.
The Lebanese Army leadership has officially denied the reports of troops crossing into Lebanon, but sources are telling us the Army’s denials are a deliberate attempt to quash information.
Previous reports here and here.
UPDATE (Sept. 22, 8:30 am Eastern): The Lebanese Army has now confirmed that Syria has in fact “boosted troop numbers along the border,” and that “nearly 10,000 Syrian special forces have been deployed in the Abbudiya region along the border between Lebanon and Syria.”
Lebanese Army officials also report that the Army has asked Damacus why the massive uptick in military activities on the border, and the Syrians responded — and I paraphrase — to crackdown on smuggling and other criminal activity.
What? In other words Syria is saying (and the Lebanese Army is confirming) that tanks, artillery, helicopters, and 10,000 commandos (combined with recent reports and intelligence indicating some of those special operations forces had actually crossed into Lebanon) are simply measures taken to crackdown on crime?
UPDATE (Sept. 22, 9:30 am Eastern): Let’s add three other variables into the mix:
First, what better time for Syria to flex its military muscle than the period in which the U.S. and Europe are preoccupied with both the American presidential campaigns and last-and-this week’s upheaval in the U.S. and world financial markets.
Second, Syria and Russia have been cozying up together recently. Russia is sharing intelligence with Syria (which is in turn sharing that intelligence with Hezbollah and its allies). Additionally, Syria may be taking strategic-military cues from Russia, which recently invaded the former Soviet state of Georgia with virtual impunity.
Third, Syrian Pres. Bashar Assad is doing everything in his power to ensure the results of the spring 2009 parliamentary elections in Lebanon favor the pro-Syrian-Iranian-Hezbollah axis (the March 8 terrorist crowd) as opposed to the pro-democracy majority (the March 14 movement).
Speaking to a delegation from the Syrian Social Nationalist Party (some of Hezbollah’s buddies who also were running around shooting civilians and burning buildings during Hezbollah’s attacks in May), Assad predicted the axis would emerge victorious in 2009, and that their victory “would change the existing state of political affairs.”
Assad added, “The forces that have defeated Israel would defeat their foes in Lebanon.”
Our sources are telling us that Assad would have no qualms about invading north Lebanon — if he could get away with it — to ensure Syria’s political-hand achieves political dominance in Beirut. And he would do so under the pretext of controlling the Salafists (whom Assad has ironically been feeding for some time).
Confusing to say the least. But it is a dangerous series of dynamics that have been coming to pass — and we’ve been warning about for months — which the West must understand if we are to have any chance of regaining our rapidly eroding political leverage (and supporting our pro-democracy allies) in Lebanon.
As I’ve said many times, Lebanon is one of our most critical fronts in the war on terror. Yet our unwillingness to confront the terrorists and their state-sponsors operating in sovereign Lebanon is irreparably eroding that front.
UPDATE (Sept. 22, 12:20 pm Eastern): This would be laughable if it weren’t so serious:
According to Naharnet, Gen. Michel Aoun — leader of the Free Patriotic Movement (a Christian bloc oddly allied to Shiia Hezbollah) – stated today “deployment of Syrian troops in Syria is none of our business.”
Understand: what Aoun is saying is that the recent deployment by Syria of its combat troops on the Syrian side of the Lebanese-Syrian border is none of Lebanon’s business.
AND THIS MAN IS A GENERAL?
Actually, Aoun’s comments have less to do with his military competency, and more to do with his strategic-political allegiances.
UPDATE (Sept. 22, 3:00 pm Eastern): As we’ve reported, it seems highly unlikely that Syria would deploy combat forces — to include tanks, artillery, helicopters, and 10,000 special operations soldiers (commandos) — as a means of taking a bite out of crime.
And according to Deutsche Presse-Agentur:
“Military experts who requested anonymity doubted a country would deploy 8,000 or 10,000 troops just to stop smuggling on its borders.”
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. online at uswriter.com.
The Lebanese Army’s new Hezbollah Corps
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 16 September 2008 at 11:44 pm UTC
By W. Thomas Smith Jr.
In a piece for Human Events in May, I wrote that the lights had gone out in Lebanon, but only temporarily. I was referring of course to the undeserved concessions granted Hezbollah as a means of reigning-in the Shiia terrorist organization, which had launched a series of bloody attacks against the Lebanese government and citizenry that same month.
The situation has devolved since then – the particulars of that devolution often slipping under the radar screen of international understanding – as the Lebanese government (an ally of the United States) continues to appease, kowtow to, and, yes, welcome into the fold perhaps the most dangerous terrorist army on earth.
Today Lebanese Pres. Michel Sleiman, the former commander-in-chief of the armed forces, kicked off his Conference on National Dialogue, which calls on conferees (primarily parliamentarians and party leaders, including Hezbollah and its allies) to adopt a new defense strategy “based on our armed forces and benefiting from the resistance capabilities.”
Resistance is the sugar-coated codeword for Hezbollah.
This statement and previous agreements since May reaffirm Hezbollah’s becoming inextricably wedded to the Lebanese Army. Make no mistake, Hezbollah – funded, operationally supported, and essentially commanded by both Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and Syria – is being repackaged as a special corps of the Lebanese armed forces.
Yet we, the U.S., continue to fund and provide materiel support to the Lebanese armed forces and Interior Security Forces (national police).
Perhaps we need to rethink our support of the army, and refocus our efforts on Lebanon’s international pro-democracy movement and the pro-Western, free-Lebanon resistance organizations in Lebanon.
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. online at uswriter.com.
PHARES ON SYRIAN COMMANDO REPORTS
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 16 September 2008 at 12:56 am UTC
By W. Thomas Smith Jr.
Spoke this evening with Dr. Walid Phares, director of the Future of Terrorism Project for the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, on the subject of the recent reports of Syrian commando (special operations) forces having crossed into north Lebanon, and the Lebanese Army’s dismissing the reports as “untrue.”
Phares, currently on a European tour, is in Brussels tonight where he has been briefing legislators and EU officials on the evolving situation in Lebanon and the broader Middle East.
According to Phares:
“Despite much wishful thinking on the part of the U.S. – and particularly Europe – that Damascus is moving toward a measure of good behavior; the Syrian regime is irreversibly committed to extending its regional dominance back into Lebanon [Syria officially withdrew in 2005, though Syrian intelligence operatives have remained in Lebanon, and Syria continues to provide operational support to Hezbollah]. It is not a question of choice: It is a question of Syrian regime doctrine. The Assad clan hasn’t been able to digest the fact that it was compelled to withdraw its forces from Lebanon in 2005. On the day he delivered the announcement of withdrawal, he activated his second army, his pro-Syrian militias and Hezbollah, which would commit to attacking the Cedars Revolution on every possible front.
“The reports of a possible penetration by Syrian commandos into northern Lebanon do not come as a surprise. Assad already has made public his interest in linking up with the Alawite militias north of Tripoli. Remember what he told Lebanon’s President Michel Sleiman, a couple of weeks ago. He asked Sleiman to redeploy Lebanese troops from the south to the north. And keep in mind that many units of the Army deployed in the south had already been infiltrated by Hezbollah.
“So Assad wants Lebanese Army units – led by officers friendly to the Syrian-Iranian-Hezbollah axis – to be dispatched to the north, a strong anti-Syrian Sunni enclave. Additionally, he [Assad] wants to send-in his own ‘SS,’ in a move in which they would deploy with the Alawite militias in northern Lebanon.“Hence, the reports regarding Syrian commandos being sent across the Syrian-Lebanese border should not surprise observers.
“The bigger picture is that — while Hezbollah is taking control of the heights of Mount Lebanon from Jezzine to the Cedars — the Syrians are filling the void of the remaining sectors escaping their control; that is north of Tripoli.
“Look at it this way: while the theatrics surrounding the so-called dialogue are taking place in Beirut to keep international media busy with photo ops and empty statements, the real action is occurring on the ground. In short, Lebanon is being slowly reoccupied by the Syrian-Iranian axis. And to assume otherwise is sheer naiveté.”
Our previous report with updates may be seen here.
Additional information will follow.
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. online at uswriter.com.
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 14 September 2008 at 11:09 pm UTC
By W. Thomas Smith Jr.
GIANTS OF MEN: That was to be my title until my friend, nationally syndicated columnist Kathleen Parker, beat me to the punch with her title, Giants Among the Lilliputians.
Of course, I played up the bit with her about great minds thinking alike. But I’m not sure it was as much about great minds as it was the great obviousness of whom the guests of honor were at a reception hosted by Kathleen and her husband Woody Cleveland last Tuesday.
The soiree – a gathering of the regional gentry; a string ensemble; bagpipes; ladies escorted by Marines in dress blues, Navy midshipmen, and cadets from the local military academy; plenty of Southern delicacies; wine, whiskey, and what have you – was held at the Cleveland’s 182-year-old antebellum home in Camden, S.C. (just down the road from the site of British Maj. Gen. Sir Charles Cornwallis’ defeat of Continental Army Maj. Gen. Horatio Gates in 1780).
More than a party, it was a celebration of America’s greatest warriors – living and dead – our Medal of Honor (MoH) recipients.
Which brings me to the guests of honor: Four men – Army Col. Charles P. Murray Jr. (awarded the MoH for his actions in World War II as a 1st Lt.), Army Sgt. John F. Baker Jr. (awarded the MoH for his actions in Vietnam as a PFC), Marine Maj. Gen. James E. Livingston (awarded the MoH for his actions in Vietnam as a captain), and Navy SEAL Lt. Michael E. Thornton (awarded the MoH for his actions in Vietnam as a petty officer) – all of whom are recipients of our nation’s highest personal decoration for valor during armed combat. It is the award for which Gen. George S. Patton once proclaimed, “I’d give my immortal soul for that decoration.”
Currently there are 100 living recipients of the MoH (three recipients passed away over the summer): Most of the recipients are usually killed during the action for which their deeds warrant the medal. All recipients since the Battle of Mogadishu have been killed during their individual actions. South Carolina claims six of the living recipients, including the aforementioned four.
As I said in remarks at a Medal of Honor Society luncheon the day before Kathleen and Woody’s party:
“Heroes are those who go to the absolute extremes during moments of terror and the most challenging circumstances – risking life and limb, sometimes running up against the cores of their very souls – to do what’s right … and what no one else will do.
…
”Just because you have been in a combat situation – and many of us in here have been – does not mean you are necessarily heroic for simply having been in that situation. It’s what you do in that situation, individually – the risk, the sacrifice, the performance of an unimaginable task, the negotiation of an obstacle that to even the very best of soldiers would seem insurmountable. It’s doing the thing that would seem physically, mentally and emotionally impossible.”
That is precisely what these men have done. Yet they consider themselves to be ordinary men, and it’s not some public pretense of ordinariness. They truly believe it. And having known and served with men such as these in peace and in war, I’m increasingly coming to the conclusion that their ordinariness is one of the genetically-wired-into-them ingredients – among other things – that predisposes them to great feats of heroism in the first place.
Selfish men, bullies, and braggarts don’t perform well in battle. And those believing in their own extraordinariness rarely if ever accomplish feats worthy of the MoH.
Anyone who has ever known a MoH recipient would have to agree that he is a unique soul. The medal itself is impressive – including the knowledge of what it takes to become a recipient (The recipient will tell you, no one wins the medal) – but the man who wears it is beyond impressive: He is almost impossible to describe because he is a man whose actions have literally transcended heroics, and there is no philosophy or science to adequately explain it.
What we do know about these men is that no matter what kinds of lives they might have been leading before the actions (resulting in their awards); we see in the remainders of their lives, humility, graciousness, restraint, an unmatched sense of responsibility toward their fellow man, and always – I mean, always — putting others above themselves. They are committed to a life of service beyond the military, and this commitment to service has absolutely nothing to do with egocentrism, ambition, or any desire for personal recognition.
It’s simply who and what these men are.
In her column, Kathleen writes: “At a time when Americans bemoan the lack of positive role models, there are at least 103 real heroes living discreet lives in quiet neighborhoods across this nation. We have no paucity of role models. What we have is a failure to notice them.”
Brig. Gen. Eugene Rogers (S.C State Guard) – an attorney, former Marine, and the chairman of the 2010 Medal of Honor convention – agrees, and he is working hard to increase the public’s awareness.
“It is absolutely essential to the moral health and strength of this nation, especially in this time of war, that we increase the awareness of who these men are and why they – not some celebrity or sports star – are the true heroes of America,” Rogers tells me.
Under Rogers’ leadership, the 2010 Medal of Honor convention will be held in Charleston, S.C. The convention will be hosted by the Citadel and the S.C. State Guard.
(Donations in support of the convention may be made to the
South Carolina State Guard Foundation
Post Office Box 100200
Columbia, S.C. 29202)
— W. Thomas Smith Jr. – a former U.S. Marine rifle-squad leader and counterterrorism instructor – is a journalist, author, and military analyst whose work has appeared in the New York Post, USA TODAY, U.S. News & World Report, BusinessWeek, CBS News, and many others. has covered conflict in the Balkans, on the West Bank, in Iraq and Lebanon, and has provided analysis to the U.S. Defense Department. Visit him online at uswriter.com.
BREAKING: Syrian Commandos in Lebanon?
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 14 September 2008 at 11:36 am UTC
By W. Thomas Smith Jr.
Lebanese and Israeli media are reporting at least two Syrian commando (special operations) battalions have crossed the Syrian-Lebanese border into north Lebanon and taken up positions in seven Alawite-controlled villages.
According to Naharnet and DEBKAfile, “the battalions were accompanied by reconnaissance and engineering units.”
EXACTLY ONE WEEK AGO, WE REPORTED: “‘hundreds’ of Syrian commandos, preceded by ‘dozens’ of Syrian intelligence operatives, have crossed into northern Lebanon near the Lebanese village of Hekr el Dahr a few kilometers from the Mediterranean coast.”
We also reported that the incursions reportedly had been taking place since Wednesday-Thursday (Sept. 3-4) of the previous week, and that Syrian helicopters had been observed operating on the Syrian side of the border, and tanks and artillery pieces have been spotted and reported.
If true, the new information reaffirms what we already knew: that is the Iranian-Syrian-Hezbollah axis is manipulating Western media in Lebanon for their own ends. This does not mean to say that all media in Lebanon is corrupt (There are fine journalists in Lebanon doing tremendous work.). What it does mean – and as I have reported since September of 2007 – is there are huge, in-your-face stories of great strategic significance taking place in Lebanon involving Iranian, Syrian, and Hezbollah military/intelligence exercises and operations that are NOT be reported.
This has been proven time-and-again since a handful of Western media (primarily bloggers) said this was not the case months ago. The revelation of Hezbollah’s telecommunications system in May of 2008 (which we first reported in 2007), confirmation by counterterrorism experts of previously UNREPORTED Hezbollah military exercises, exact and accurate predictions of when and how Hezbollah would launch its attacks in May, and the overall strength and activities of Hezbollah nationwide all confirm this.
UPDATE (Sept. 14, 5:30 pm Eastern): LBC in Lebanon reported the DEBKAfile story just after 8:00 pm (Beirut time). But the Lebanese Army quickly issued a statement denying the reports. Keep in mind, the Army general staff and Army intelligence are both closely connected to Syria, as is the former Army commander-in-chief (now president) Michel Sleiman.
UPDATE (Sept. 15, 9:00 am Eastern): Naharnet is reporting that both Lebanese Army and national police forces are denying that two Syrian commando battalions have crossed into north Lebanon and “taken up positions in seven Alawite-controlled villages.”
As we know, the problem of disinformation in Lebanon is legion (and for reasons which I’ve previously mentioned).
Also keep in mind that Lebanese security forces – which proclaimed that all was under control (when it was not) during the first few hours of the Hezbollah offensive May, which has failed to confront Hezbollah, which has failed to arrest Quds fighters and Syrian intelligence operatives in Lebanon, which has failed to determine who precisely is assassinating Lebanese leaders – is losing credibility among the civil society in that country. The Army has issued a statement of denial in this instance regarding Syrian special forces, but, according to sources, has held no press conference permitting questions in the matter.
Independent sources are telling us that there is much more to this than has officially been made public.
We will have more as the information develops and as our sources report.
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. online at uswriter.com.
BREAKING NEWS: Bomb Attack Kills Lebanese Druze Politician
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 11 September 2008 at 2:34 am UTC
By W. Thomas Smith Jr.
Sheik Saleh Aridi, a ranking member of Youth and Sports Minister Talal Arslan’s Lebanese Democratic Party (LDP), was killed today when a bomb planted beneath his (Aridi’s) Mercedes sedan detonated in front of his home in the Druze hills southeast of Beirut.
At least six others were injured in the blast.
According to the AP:
“Police said the charge was stuck under the body of car, below the driver’s seat, and blew up as the car rolled. Officials believe it was triggered either by remote control or by a motion sensor. …
“It was the first political assassination in about a year in Lebanon and came less than a week before planned reconciliation talks among rival Lebanese factions. Prime Minister Fuad Saniora contacted Druse leaders and joined them in calling for calm.”
Receiving the report, I touched base briefly with Middle East terrorism expert Dr. Walid Phares (currently traveling and between flights), who says the assassination is the work of Hezbollah.
“They want to provoke bloodshed among the Druze,” says Phares. “This is designed by Syria and Hezbollah to strike back at Jumblatt.”
In other words, the assassination is an attempt to spark new violence between the two primary rival Druze factions: Arslan’s LDP and parliamentarian Walid Jumblatt’s Progressive Socialist Party.
Additional information will follow.
Remarks by W. Thomas Smith Jr., Medal of Honor Society Luncheon, Columbia, S.C., September 8, 2008
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 8 September 2008 at 8:48 pm UTC
HERO is word that too-often is used to describe those whose work, though noble – and in some cases, brave – is not what (in the purest sense of the word), I would consider to be heroic.Celebrities and sports figures, for instance, are often referred to as heroes. It sounds good, and it’s a lofty superlative for people who often do incredible work sometimes requiring a level of courage. But how many times have we heard the term, “gridiron heroes,” to simply describe star football players?
Trust me: I’m not knocking ballplayers –I am after all a sports fan – I’m also not saying there aren’t celebrities who aren’t individually heroes for whatever reason. There are.But I also believe “hero,” in the absolute definition of the word as I understand it to be, is overused in its description of entire groups of people.
We hear that every soldier, sailor, airman, or Marine who puts on a uniform and deploys to Iraq or Afghanistan is a hero.They are noble and brave patriots to be sure, and no one but the good Lord above knows how much I love and respect each and every one of them.
But is serving one’s country – which is a duty in my opinion – necessarily heroic?
If every soldier is a hero, then how do we describe those soldiers who go far beyond what would ever be expected of any soldier?
Ladies and gentlemen, heroes and heroines are men and women who go to the absolute extremes during moments of terror and the most challenging circumstances – risking life and limb, sometimes running up against the cores of their very souls – to do what’s right … and what no one else will do.
Though they almost-always consider themselves ordinary, they are far from it.
Just because you have been in a combat situation – and many of us in here have been – does not mean you are necessarily heroic for simply having been in that situation. It’s what you do in that situation, individually – the risk, the sacrifice, the performance of an unimaginable task, the negotiation of an obstacle that to even the very best of soldiers would seem insurmountable.
It’s doing the thing that would seem physically, mentally and emotionally impossible.Yet that is the environment of heroes. And there aren’t but a very few who have ever breached the wall of ordinary courage, nobility, and duty to enter that environment.
When we think of Pickett’s charge at Gettysburg, for instance, we often loosely refer to those men – both Confederate and Union – as heroes.
There were heroes there to be sure, but not every one attacking was a hero, nor was every defending soldier.
The soldiers were brave no doubt – and scared – but they were following orders.
They were fulfilling their duty– as both sides believed – to God, country, and Corps, and especially to that man on their left and their right.
And when it became clear that the Confederates were not going to be able to break the Union lines, don’t think for one second if the order had been given for the Confederates to retreat even if they were a mere 100 yards from their objective, that they wouldn’t have followed that order. They would have … because they were soldiers obeying orders.
But the heroes of that battle would have been men like Confederate Gen. Lew Armistead:
- He knew that he was attacking a probably impregnable position. And it was.
- He knew he had a far better chancing of dying than living.
- He knew he had to set the example of courage for his men.
- He knew he had to lead from the front.
- He knew he had to do everything humanly possible to keep his brigade moving forward in the face of what must have been a terrifying hailstorm of lead and jagged pieces of hot metal.
Entire squads, even companies, were disintegrating in the attack. The field was littered with soldiers who had been disemboweled, ripped to pieces, yet were still alive and screaming.But Armistead kept shouting to his boys to keep moving.
And where was he positioned?
In the front of his troops as they advanced toward the enemy’s defenses.
And he knew the enemy could see him out in front, with his sword in hand, held above his head, with his hat on the tip of the sword so that all the men in his brigade might be able to see that their commander was out in front, still alive, and attacking.
That, my friends, is heroic.
Armistead, as we know was mortally wounded. What was left of his brigade did reach the objective, but was quickly overwhelmed.
Ladies and gentlemen, we have heroes like that here among us today in our Medal of Honor recipients.
Now, as a military analyst – whose concerns today are more focused on national security issues and countering global terrorism – some might ask why am I here today talking about heroes.I am because it is all connected.
Folks, we cannot fight terrorists or effectively wage an asymmetrical war against terrorism without heroes. And heroes are born, not only of courage and doing what’s right, but of tradition and a sense of – and an appreciation for – our greatness as a nation of warriors.
Our nation must appreciate and herald heroes above all others. We must remember that our nation exists only because we have always produced men such as these. And we must understand that young men and women now serving our nation on the ends of the earth are the products of these men and what these men have sacrificed, not only for our country, but for our esteemed military tradition.
We cannot take this tradition – including these heroes – for granted if we hope to continue producing the kinds of Americans who will forever take the fight to those who seek to destroy us. There is simply too much at stake. We must support our Medal of Honor recipients – our heroes in the purest sense of the word – and in-so-doing our unique American military tradition and our national greatness.
Thank you.
Syrian Special Forces in Lebanon?
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 8 September 2008 at 2:33 am UTC
By W. Thomas Smith Jr.
Kuwait’s Alseyassah newspaper is reporting: “Syrian Special Forces are entering Lebanese Alawite villages.”
According to the report – which we have yet to independently confirm – “hundreds” of Syrian commandos, preceded by “dozens” of Syrian intelligence operatives, have crossed into northern Lebanon near the Lebanese village of Hekr el Dahr a few kilometers from the Mediterranean coast.
The incursions reportedly have been taking place since Wednesday-Thursday of last week. Syrian helicopters have been observed operating on the Syrian side of the border, and tanks and artillery pieces have been spotted and reported.
“The objective of the Syrian soldiers would be to reach Baal Mhesen, an Alawite sector in Tripoli, under the guise of protecting the Alawites [a Syrian-rooted Islamic offshoot — neither Shiia nor Sunni – but whom are allied with Hezbollah] who have been fighting Sunnis in the north for months,” say our sources.
The border crossings, if the published report proves accurate, “would be the largest Syrian incursion into Lebanon since Syria withdrew its forces in 2005,” say sources.
We also spoke by phone with Tom Harb, secretary general of The International Lebanese Committee for United Nations Security Council Resolution 1559, who says: “If this is true, it is a complete violation of UNSCR 1559, and the UN must send a team to investigate and demand all Syrian forces withdraw immediately.”
The Alseyassah report follows a story yesterday published by the Reform Party of Syria that said, “a secret delegation” of Iran’s Quds (Jerusalem) force arrived in Beirut last week for meetings with senior leaders of Hezbollah. The Quds force is the extranational special-operations arm of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Quds commandos are Iran’s most committed fighters, trained to conduct terrorist operations worldwide.
Our sources have confirmed that both Iranian Quds fighters and Syrian intelligence agents were in Lebanon, operating with Hezbollah forces during the fighting in May.
Additional information will follow.
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. online at uswriter.com.
Qaeda, Hezbollah working together in Africa / Iranian Special Forces in Beirut
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 7 September 2008 at 12:12 am UTC
By W. Thomas Smith Jr.
Sunni Al Qaeda and Shiia Hezbollah are increasingly working together on the African continent, particularly in unstable countries like Sudan and across the remote, lawless regions of North Africa and the Sahel belt.
For instance, in February we learned of a 35-man Jihadi terrorist cell in Morocco, which was quickly shut down. As I’ve written on several occasions since, the size and international scope of that cell and the professional backgrounds of the cell members (businessmen, politicians, a television journalist, and a police official) were disturbing to say the least. But the worst part was that the cell members were found to have been trained by Al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan and funded by Hezbollah in Lebanon. And we know Hezbollah is funded and trained by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
In March, Dr. J. Peter Pham, an Africa expert and a senior fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, told me during an interview for Human Events, “Different groups will coalesce and align against conventional wisdom. What most analysts view as the Shiia-Sunni divide is papered over as militants and extremists will take money from anyone, and build alliances of convenience against their common enemy.”
It’s the adage, “I against my brother, I and my brother against our cousin, my brother and our cousin against the neighbors, all of us against the foreigner.” We have seen increasing evidence of this dynamic in Iraq and Afghanistan. We certainly picked up – from chatter and publicly released statements – information indicating Sunni and Shiia alike were mourning the February assassination of Hezbollah terrorist-mastermind Imad Mughniyeh, and calling for revenge killings worldwide. But nowhere are we seeing greater evidence of this cooperation and coordination of effort (the goal of establishing launching bases for which to strike American and Western interests in the Eastern Hemisphere and beyond) than on the Dark Continent.
Yesterday, an intelligence community source informed us, “That [Moroccan] cell we uncovered in February is just the tip of the iceberg.”
The source added, Sunni and Shiia extremists in Africa “are certainly cooperating with one another.”
IN OTHER NEWS: The Reform Party of Syria has just published the following report:
“A secret delegation of al-Qods Force arrived Beirut last week for high level meetings with Hezbollah’s top brass for the purpose of coordinating collective activities in Lebanon in light of Hezbollah’s de facto take-over of Lebanon. The secret delegation intentionally arrived Beirut as Sarkozy landed in Damascus and while the Syrians were distracted with Sarkozy.”
The Qods (Quds or Jerusalem) force is the extranational special-operations arm of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Quds commandos are Iran’s most committed fighters, trained to conduct terrorist operations worldwide.
Our sources have confirmed that Quds fighters were in Lebanon, operating with Hezbollah forces during the fighting in May.
Additional information will follow.
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. online at uswriter.com.
Mouawad: Lebanon and Hezbollah cannot coexist
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 3 September 2008 at 6:26 pm UTC
By W. Thomas Smith Jr.
The state of Lebanon and Hezbollah cannot coexist, says Lebanese parliamentarian Nayla Mouawad: A courageous declaration on the part of Mrs. Mouawad considering Hezbollah’s increasing, unchecked political/strategic military power in Lebanon and the threats faced by parliamentarians and government officials who take public stands against the Shiia terrorist group.
Earlier today after meeting with Michele Sison, the newly appointed U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon; Mouawad, a Maronite Christian, said:
“It is obvious that we are facing two options: Either the democratic state of Lebanon or the Hezbollah state. … We would not accept the placing of red lines beyond which the Lebanese Army is not permitted, be they at the [Beirut] suburb, Nahr al-Bared, Sujud or in any other location on Lebanese territory.”
The Beirut suburb – al Dahiyeh – Mouawad is referring to is an armed Hezbollah stronghold, off-limits to Lebanese authorities. (Non-Hezbollah Lebanese and Westerners travel there at their own peril unless they are covertly schmoozing with Hezbollah.) Nahr al-Bared, near the northern city of Tripoli, is the site of the Lebanese Army’s bloody three-month battle in 2007 with Sunni Al Qaeda-affiliate Fatah al Islam. And Sujud is where Hezbollah killed a Lebanese Army officer last week.
According to Naharnet:
“Mouawad also rejected a proposal by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri to form a joint committee grouping the Lebanese Army and Hezbollah.”
Gutsy to say the least.
Mouawad added that the “only solution” is to restrict any decision to go to war to the state of Lebanon, which should also be the only entity that possesses military weapons and the only entity managing Lebanon’s defense policy.
“There should be no two armies … and two states in Lebanon,” she said.
Hezbollah — heavily funded (at least $1-billion, annually), trained, and operationally supported by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps with additional backing from Syria – literally exists as a Shiia kingdom within the state of Lebanon. The group – essentially a Talibanesque army – is listed among the U.S. State Department’s designated terrorist organizations. Hezbollah’s operational reach extends far beyond Lebanon’s shores. And in May – following Hezbollah’s armed attacks against the Lebanese government and citizens – U.S. Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff warned that Hezbollah “makes Al Qaeda look like a minor league team.”
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. online at uswriter.com.
TEN QUESTIONS FOR DR. WALID PHARES
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 1 September 2008 at 12:48 am UTC
By W. Thomas Smith Jr.
Less than two weeks from the 7th anniversary of the most horrific terrorist attack on American soil, Middle East terrorism expert Dr. Walid Phares shares his thoughts on recent reports issued by a variety of analysts and think tanks, which are suggesting – among other things – the global war on terror should be prosecuted not as a war, but as an international campaign against criminals: An approach Phares believes is a recipe for failure.
Phares also describes and explains the evolving strategic trends within the Jihadist movement worldwide, as well as the present state of Al Qaeda, the Jihadist ideology, the terror forces that subscribe to that ideology, and the approaches Phares believes may be taken by the next U.S. president.
Director of the Future of Terrorism Project at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, Phares is a visiting scholar at the European Foundation for Democracy and an advisor to the TransAtlantic Legislative Group on Terrorism. He is the author of The Confrontation: Winning the War against Future Jihad, the third book in his series examining international terrorism and the dynamics that fuel it.
Phares has been following and analyzing the rise of the Salafi and Khomeinist movements for nearly 30 years, and has been predicting the strategic rise of Jihadism since the end of the Cold War.
Our Q&A follows:
W. THOMAS SMITH JR.: Over the past two-plus months, analysts and commentators have posited that Al-Qaeda (both the command-and-control nucleus and the – often disconnected elements of the – broader network) has been significantly weakened, perhaps to the point of insignificance. Do we have substantive intelligence indicating such?
DR. WALID PHARES: Al Qaeda has been weakened, but not to the point that it has been defeated or driven from the battlefield. Remember it took only a handful of Al Qaeda terrorists to strike at the heart of New York, Washington, Madrid, and London. Al Qaeda as it presently exists, continues to retain the capacity to conduct these kinds of operations. The organization continues to focus on its ongoing, asymmetric operations such as those in Iraq and Pakistan. Let me be clear as regards Iraq: If American forces were to pull-out abruptly, Al Qaeda would return to the Sunni triangle. And regarding Pakistan, if the Jihadists are able to further penetrate the army and the intelligence services they may be able to shift the ground in Pakistan, and perhaps penetrate the nuclear system of that country.
The analysis and commentary we’ve seen which claims Al Qaeda has been significantly weakened, suggests that the organization has had their objectives denied for the present in Iraq and Afghanistan. But we must remember, all of this is based on the reliance of a strong U.S. and NATO presence. The question remains: would the local governments continue to defeat Al Qaeda after withdrawal, and would they have any chance of defeating it ideologically. In my estimation, no. Not yet. The pre 9/11 Al Qaeda has been weakened to be sure. but the post-9/11 Al Qaeda has mutated into a different type of network which is capable of regrouping more rapidly and re-emerging when the balance of power shifts on the ground.
SMITH: Some – like author and terrorism researcher Marc Sageman – contend the greatest danger comes from young radicalized Muslims with virtually no connection to Al Qaeda and its leadership. Is this an accurate assertion?
DR. PHARES: There is no such thing as a “greatest” or real danger as opposed to a lesser or false danger. There is one global ideological movement: Part of it is Al Qaeda. Other elements of the movement are local Jihadists. In my assessment, there is no such thing as “radicalized Muslims,” but indoctrinated Jihadists among Muslims and those who are opposing them. The term “radicalized Muslims” is used to imply that Jihadism is a reaction to Western policies. In reality, the rise of the Jihadists is produced by a vast ideological indoctrination. Hence the so-called young “radicalized Muslims” as stated by other experts are Jihadists who were indoctrinated by the same ideologues who have fed Al Qaeda with these views of the world. Ideologically, it is the same global Salafist movement. Al Qaeda is a centrally controlled organization, and there are many self-established groups that hope to emulate Al Qaeda or eventually link with it. Those Jihadists who emerge outside Al Qaeda are indeed a great danger. And in the end, they will merge.
SMITH: Professor Bruce Hoffman and others talk about Al Qaeda resurging along the Afghan-Pakistan border as evidence that the central element stills exists, and that it still matters. Others argue that this is a more of a Pashtun fight, not Al Qaeda. Do we fully understand how much of what’s happening there has to do with Al Qaeda?
DR. PHARES: The fight led by the Taliban, Al Qaeda and many Jihadists from around the world is not a local “ethnic” fight for power. For Arabs, Chechens, Europeans, Africans and Asians to be fighting along with the Taliban and Al Qaeda means that the movement is transnational, not local, even though it has vast support among the Pashtun; because it also has support in other parts of the world among other ethnicities.
In short, the combat Jihadi movement is now international, has Al Qaeda as its epicenter, and has affiliated groups around the region and worldwide. But many experts and academics still try to portray it in such a way – and with so many different faces — so that it is not defined as a global movement. For if it is defined as such, there will be policy consequences such as identifying its ideology, that is Salafism and Wahabism. For it is a fact that while Al Qaeda recruits from various pools, the organization is not the one that is creating and feeding those pools ideologically. There are oil-producing regimes that are responsible for the expansion of the ideology. Thus we have been seeing plenty of petrodollars invested in the West to shield the ideology of Jihadism while claiming that al Qaeda is weak, benign, and that we shouldn’t be very worried about it.
SMITH: The recent RAND study by Seth G. Jones and Martin C. Libicki tell as that “terrorists should be perceived and described as criminals, not holy warriors,” and so should be fought through law enforcement and intelligence agencies, not with armies. If so, what should be the strategy? And how is it different from what’s being done?
DR. PHARES: I disagree with the RAND conclusions. This is precisely why the U.S. and the greater West have been surprised and hit by the Jihadists and al Qaeda, as we saw on 9/11. And this is because the academic elite of the 1990s said then that the Jihadists were just criminals and that they did not form a legitimate movement. The intellectual establishment failed Western governments with their wrong advice. And we saw the consequences on 9/11. The argument that terrorists are criminals is not adding to the debate. Of course they are criminals. The statement that the Jihadists aren’t holy warriors has to be made by Islamic religious authorities, not by NGOs and think tanks. In the eyes of their constituencies, the Jihadists are indeed perceived as legitimate. In the same way that in the eyes of many German citizens in the 1930s, leading to – and during – World War II, the Nazis were perceived as nationalist fighters. The Nazis seized power and waged war. The answer to their action was a world campaign, a world war by democracies against them. The argument then wasn’t that Nazism was a good or bad thing, but that the followers of Hitler were criminals! Just the opposite I would argue. The Jihadi terrorists have to be confronted with all means, neither just armies nor just law enforcement or intelligence services. I’ll even argue that the most powerful weapon against the Jihadists is none of the latter. It is the prosecution of a war of ideas, with soft powers.
SMITH: There has been some discussion that the term, “war on terror,” may fall into disuse. Will the next president of the United States continue to use the term to describe the war in which we are clearly involved?
DR. PHARES: There are efforts in Europe to do away with the term, and there are some efforts in the U.S. to follow suit. But the alternatives will be much different. If Obama is the next U.S. president, I believe he will end the war-on-terror doctrine and replace it with a Clinton-like police effort against criminals. If McCain is the next president, I believe he may also abandon the term and replace it with the current term he is using “war with radical Islamic extremism,” or with the much clearer concept of “war with global Jihadists”. The term “war of ideas” was a middle ground between two schools. Soon, one of the two schools will prevail.
SMITH: In the years since 9/11 and the war in Afghanistan, we’ve been talking about Al Qaeda as if it were a global force, with a reach extending from South Asia to the Maghreb and beyond. Then we’ve heard about Al Qaeda “the label” and “Al Qaedism.” From what we now know, how many of the ideologically sympathizing terrorist groups, from the Philippines to Algeria actually have connections to Al Qaeda and its leaders?
DR. PHARES: Again, many experts – unwilling to accept the reality that Jihadism is a global ideology and movement – went in different directions trying to explain the phenomenon away from its real and historic roots. Perhaps the little linguistic and cultural knowledge that was available pushed these analysts to adopt conclusions alien to the essence of Al Qaeda. In the Arab political debate there is not such thing as “Al Qaedism.” There is no such thing as Al Qaeda’s label or branding. The reality is simple: Beyond Al Qaeda and all similar organizations there is a one global ideology called Jihadism. If we compare this with the “Lord of the Rings” tales, Jihadism is the “ring,” a strong force that lords and leaders use in their quest for expansion. These lords such as Osama bin Laden and Ayman al Zawahiri come and go. But the “force” – or ideology — remains and produces more leaders. So, Al Qaeda is a central organization for Jihadists, but there are Jihadi groups around the world, most of whom look at Al Qaeda as the great center. But again, this constellation, if you will, is the product of an ideology and of doctrinaires. If we fail to understand this, we fail to properly analyze the future.
SMITH: Twenty-or-so years after the birth of Al Qaeda, does it make sense to speak of winners? And is Al-Qaeda winning – even if we’re talking in terms of ideology and not pitched battles – or losing?
DR. PHARES: Al Qaeda will win if the West fails to understand what makes Al Qaeda strong and capable of evolving. The West has been able drive Al Qaeda from two major battlefronts, but it has yet to win a war of ideas against Jihadism. The real battle is within the West between those who want to quit the conflict and those who want to press forward until Jihadism, not just Al Qaeda, is defeated. Al Qaeda will lose if we recognize that there is an ideology to defeat it and that the best allies in this confrontation are those anti-Jihadist Muslims. Short of this happening, this is a back-and-forth battle without end.
SMITH: Did the war in Iraq – as did the Jihad in Afghanistan – produce another generation of fighters?
DR. PHARES: It is not the battlefield, but the Jihadi factories that produce the generations of fighters. The attack on Serbia did not produce suicide bombers. The campaign against Haiti’s military didn’t create a generation of Haitian terrorists. And China’s occupation of Tibet is not generating violent armed militias. The point is the Jihadists who are heading towards Iraq or Afghanistan are already followers of Jihadism. They have already been indoctrinated by the Madrassas. If not Iraq, it would be Somalia, Algeria, Chechnya, London or Madrid. They aren’t a reaction to, they are a force “sui generic,” with a world view and strategies. Going to Iraq or not is a different discussion. Iraq didn’t create Jihadism, just the opposite the Jihadists are prolonging the war in Iraq.
SMITH: What about the increasing recruitment of women?
DR. PHARES: This is a new strategic trend. The Jihadists – including Al Qaeda – are innovative, and retooling with all their resources. First, they are trying to use non-Arab Jihadis instead of Arabs. Then more European-looking than Middle Eastern-looking recruits. Also women, as many as they can bring into the fold. This is a war. They know it. And they are trying to use all their resources to develop new weapons to win the war. Again, if we do not thwart them with their most powerful tool – their ideology – we won’t be able to determine from which direction and in what way they will come. But if we do identify this ideology and counter it, their resources will be isolated and their power reversed.
SMITH: There are some signs of dissension within the ranks of Al Qaeda, as well as indications that Al Qaeda and their leaders enjoy lessening-support in Muslim countries. Did the late Abu Musab al Zarqawi’s cruelty and indiscriminate killings contribute?
DR. PHARES: No. The killing of Muslims is not the primary factor weakening Al Qaeda in the eyes of the Jihadists. It is the inability of Al Qaeda to defeat the infidels as they promised. If you read what the dissidents are saying, you’ll understand that they are somewhat the realists who are arguing that the reckless strategies of bin laden have not been in the interest of long-term Jihad. As for Muslim public opinion, it is divided. Those who support Jihadism haven’t changed their minds massively but some are criticizing the management of the effort by bin laden. And those among the Muslims who oppose the Salafists, haven’t changed their mind and are still very much opposed to Al Qaeda. We in the West we try to find signs of weakness in Al Qaeda because many aren’t able to provide answers as to the nature of the ideology and are dodging that hard reality.
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. online at uswriter.com.
Another UN Commander Caters to Terrorists
Posted by W. Thomas Smith Jr. on 26 August 2008 at 2:09 pm UTC
By W. Thomas Smith Jr.
Once again, a foreign military commander leading so-called peacekeeping troops under a United Nations flag in south Lebanon makes a public comment that should surely be condemned as ill-informed, pandering to Hezbollah terrorists, or – should I say it – gutless (not willing to tangle with Hezbollah or simply passing the buck to a higher authority, whoever that may be).
Speaking to a Reuters’ correspondent, Lt. Col. Marc Ollier, commanding officer of UNIFIL’s (United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon) French contingent, says, “I don’t believe Hezbollah’s weapons figure in Resolution 1701.”
According to Reuters, UN Security Council Resolution 1701 “speaks of keeping armed men and illicit weapons out of the UNIFIL zone.”
Ollier says, “So we monitor that, but disarming an armed militia is not in 1701.”
Perhaps Ollier should take the time to read UNSCR 1701 and the earlier UNSCR 1559, both of which declare that all “militias” in Lebanon are to be disarmed. And 1701 specifically states, “all armed groups in Lebanon” are “required” to disarm, and “there will be no weapons or authority in Lebanon other than that of the Lebanese State.”
Simply put, Hezbollah should have been disarmed two years ago according to 1701, four years ago if we look at 1559.
Ollier’s comments, this week, come on the heels of another comment by a UN commander, this month, which Lebanon’s pro-democracy majority deems was also catering to terrorists.
On Aug. 15, Italian Army Major General Claudio Graziano, senior commander of UNIFIL, told the Jerusalem Post that “excellent cooperation” existed between UNIFIL forces and Hezbollah militiamen, and “apart from UN troops, Lebanese soldiers and [local] hunters, no one is armed south of the Litani River.”
Those comments caused the Lebanese people living south of the Litani, and countless counterterrorism experts worldwide to ask what kind of Kool-Aid Gen. Graziano was drinking.
As I wrote on Aug. 16:
“Hezbollah’s refusal to disarm is officially based on its argument that it is a “resistance” force, therefore it should maintain its arms. That’s what Hezbollah, its supporters, and apologists say. Those of us who have been deeply involved in the development of analysis on Hezbollah understand the group’s “clinging to its guns” actually stems from more sinister motives.”
We must also remember, Hezbollah and it allies launched a deadly series of armed-attacks against the Lebanese government and citizenry in May after the government made decisions that didn’t please Hezbollah. In the end, Lebanon’s government caved and Hezbollah was granted all sorts of concessions; including veto power on Lebanese government decisions (meaning Iran and Syria, Hezbollah’s big-money benefactors, now have covert veto power in Lebanon). As if that wasn’t enough, Hezbollah has now “wormed its way” into Lebanon’s Defense Ministry as a sort of “official” element of the legitimate Lebanese armed forces.
In the wake of Graziano’s comments, Tom Harb, secretary general of The International Lebanese Committee for UN Security Council Resolution 1559, sent a letter to the Italian mission at the UN, all UN Security Council members, and Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, a portion of which reads:
“Graziano says, ‘Hezbollah is one of the parties that agree with 1701 and support 1701.’ This is factually untrue as evidenced by Hezbollah’s armed offensive – with impunity –against the Lebanese government and citizenry in May.
“Graziano adds, ‘UNIFIL has no commitment to the disarmament of Hezbollah … We are a peacekeeping force, not peace enforcement.’ This is contradictory to say the least, and proof that UNIFIL is a hollow force in Lebanon.”
According to sources, Lebanese Army Intelligence in the south is not only coordinating with UNIFIL, but sharing intelligence with Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah.
“Hezbollah is also terrorizing Lebanese civilians in south Lebanon often within eyesight and earshot of UNIFIL troops, and UNIFIL never initiates any investigation whatsoever,” says Harb. “For instance, when Hezbollah attacked across the country in May 2008, the organization’s fighters ransacked the offices of the mufti of Tyre and Jabal Amel. UNIFIL did absolutely nothing to either prevent this act or investigate it after the fact.”
So are UNIFIL commanders and troops really as incompetent – perhaps impotent – as evidenced by their words and deeds (or lack thereof)? Let’s not forget the infamous photograph of UNIFIL troops saluting the remains of returning terrorists during the recent “swap” between Israel and Hezbollah.
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. online at uswriter.com.
NOTE: The opinions expressed in these articles are solely those of the author, and do not represent the opinions of World Defense Review and its affiliates. WDR accepts no responsibility whatsoever for the accuracy or inaccuracy of the content of this or any other story published on this website. Copyright and all rights for this story (and all other stories by the author) are held by the author.
Archives:
General Archive Middle East Military/Defense On Terror Previous W. Thomas Smith Jr. story archive
