Losing the Lebanese Front: “Are We Crazy?”
Posted by editor on 30 October 2008 at 6:49 pm UTC
By Maj. W. Thomas Smith Jr.
In the wake of Sunday’s counterterrorist raid into Syria by U.S. special operations forces, a number of America’s traditional enemies – specifically Iran and the leaders of its regionally based terrorist allies and proxy armies, including Hizballah, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), and others – have sharply condemned the U.S. action.
The PFLP, for instance (as reported in the Teheran Times), states that the strike: “requires a united Arab stance against the policies of the United States in the Middle East, and that this strike comes in order to boost John McCain in his elections campaign.” (So at least we know who the bad guys do not want to be elected in the U.S. next Tuesday.)
PFLP representative Jamil Majdalawi adds, “The U.S. administration and its security agency always spread lies about Iraqi weapons, and now are spreading lies about Syria. … This all falls as part of the lies and manipulation practiced by the U.S. security agency.”
Such rhetoric is not at all surprising.
What may be surprising to many Americans, however, is to hear Lebanese Pres. Michel Sleiman and Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora also condemn the attacks.
Siniora says the raid was “unacceptable.”
Sleiman says it was a “flagrant violation of a sisterly Arab state’s sovereignty,” and he reportedly told Syrian Pres. Bashar Assad that the raid “contradicts international law.”
I must confess I’m not surprised by either Sleiman’s or Siniora’s comments. They have both proven time-and-again that they are not willing to confront Hizballah, a Talibanesque Shia terrorist kingdom operating outside of UN convention and within the sovereign state of Lebanon (Hizballah also has frequently called for the “death of America” and – with the very strong support of Iran and Syria — Hizballah continues to expand its operational scope far beyond Lebanon’s borders).
Sleiman and Siniora also have proven time-and-again that they are nothing less than “puppets” of Hizballah’s primary supporters, Iran and Syria (I have written about this extensively). And both men are clearly smacking up to Iran and Syria despite the fact that both Iran (through Hizballah and elements of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps operating in Lebanon) and Syria (with its army massed on the Lebanese borders, special operators purportedly on the ground at certain times and in certain sectors of Lebanon, and intelligence operatives working throughout Lebanon) pose a clear and present danger to the sovereignty of Lebanon.
And if nothing else, the Lebanese government’s cavalier – perhaps “cowardly” is a better word – acceptance of the Iranian-Syrian-Hizballah axis in Lebanon is slowly (so as not to attract too much international attention) and methodically crushing the life out of the majority, pro-democracy movement in Lebanon.
Yet we – the American taxpayers – may be indirectly supporting this madness.
The Lebanese government is eagerly accepting millions-of-dollars worth of U.S. support for the Lebanese armed forces (Read my analysis on this). And the U.S. government is foolish enough to continue throwing money into this weak, terrorist-infiltrated Lebanese government (a government that refused to fight terrorists killing their own people on their own territory in May and since then) that now condemns our own counterterrorist actions.
Are we crazy? Are they?
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. online at uswriter.com.
An Open Letter to the Beneficiaries of America’s Military Prowess
Posted by editor on 27 October 2008 at 6:13 pm UTC
By Maj. W. Thomas Smith Jr.
Dear reader,
I’m writing this in direct-address fashion because — as we near the 233rd birthday of our Marine Corps (born in a Philadelphia alehouse on Nov. 10, 1775) and Veterans Day (born of the armistice ending World War I, Nov. 11, 1918, exactly 90 years ago) — this is as much an appeal as it is an opinion piece.
I’ve often said, far too many Americans — through no fault of their own — take our military for granted.
Those who have never served in uniform — particularly those who have never slogged through the mud with a rifle nor known what it feels like to be awakened by ‘incoming’ — just sort of assume that America dominates all comers militarily because America has money (yeah, well, at least we used to) and superior technology. And we can be sure that money and technology do count in the successful prosecution of war.
But it’s much more.
America has been winning all of its wars since the colonial era, including Vietnam, which we clearly won militarily, but lost in Washington and on the broader homefront (We’ll save that for another discussion.). But we have been winning — often against great odds — primarily for one reason: AMERICAN MILITARY TRADITION.
Unfortunately, too many of us take military tradition for granted because we incorrectly assume that tradition is “nice,” but largely insignificant.
I don’t condemn those who believe such. Most people simply have no frame of reference to appreciate just how amazingly efficient the American military is despite its being an arm of the far-too-often inefficient federal government.
But trust me, our military prowess — that prowess of the individual soldier, sailor, airman, Marine, and Coast Guardsman who has never failed to keep the wolf away from the door — is a direct result of our military tradition.
U.S. Marines, for instance, crushed the insurgents during the bloody battle of Fallujah (Nov.–Dec. 2004) and they did so in close-quarters fighting — often tooth-to-eyeball — where much of our technological wizardry was unable to be fully brought to bear.
Those young men were able to win against the enemy because they were Marines. They knew they were holding an unmatched reputation in trust. They had to fight and fight well. After all, they were standing on the shoulders of those giants of men who had successfully battled the enemy in places with names like Hue City, Khe Sanh, Chosin, Iwo Jima, Tarawa, Guadalcanal, Belleau Wood, Harper’s Ferry, Chapultepec (the halls of Montezuma), Quallah Batto, the stronghold and shores of Tripoli, and in nearly every other “clime and place” stretching back to the seaborne slugfests of Captain John Paul Jones’ leathernecks during the American Revolution.
So why all this talk of military tradition?
Because the greatest pillars of our military tradition are our Medal of Honor recipients – those combatants from all services who have received our nation’s highest award for bravery in action – and our greatest living pillars are our living recipients of that award. Their average age is now 75 years, and there are now less than 100 of them still with us. Most recipients are killed during the actions for which they receive the award. In fact, all who have received the award for actions since the end of the Vietnam War have died in those actions.
Now to my personal appeal to you, the reader:
The Medal of Honor Society will hold its annual convention — hosted by the S.C. State Guard Foundation and the Citadel — in Charleston, S.C., Sept. 2010, and I urge your support of this convention now as it will serve to promote public awareness of the Medal of Honor, our living recipients, and at-the-same-time infuse our military tradition with the lifeblood so necessary to future battlefield success.
We Americans are the most generous people on earth. We’re also frugal and savvy: We expect a return on investment, which is one of the reasons I know many of you may not yet be sold on the idea of the value of investing in something like military tradition. But I can assure you — as one who has served his country in-and-out of uniform for years — America’s military tradition is not only a priceless commodity and one that appreciates in value; I am convinced it is critical to the continued security of this nation.
That’s why I’m asking you to support our military and our American military tradition through this noble endeavor. Please visit medalofhonorconvention.com for more information and sponsorship opportunities available. You are not only going to be supporting the very foundation of our military prowess, but you will be furthering an awareness of America’s greatest heroes in the purest sense of the word.
Semper Fidelis,
W. Thomas Smith Jr.
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. at uswriter.com.
Phares on the U.S. Raid into Syria
Posted by editor on 27 October 2008 at 12:35 pm UTC
By Maj. W. Thomas Smith Jr.
The U.S. heliborne raid launched from Iraq into Syrian territory on Sunday – reportedly killing eight – has spawned the expected “we’re the victims, you’re the aggressor” response from the Assad regime. Keep in mind, however, since the beginning of the Iraq War, the remote, porous Syrian-Iraqi border has been one of the hottest stretches of the vast Iraqi frontier in terms of weapons smuggling into Iraq, the infiltration and extraction of foreign terrorist-fighters, you name it.
I was there in Al Anbar Province’s Al Qaim sector – not far from where the Sunday raid was carried out – in the summer of 2007. And I can tell you for a fact, the borders were then not only impossible to adequately police, but the Syrians would sometimes fire automatic weapons from Syria into Iraq and over known American outposts. I’ve personally had Syrian tracer rounds popping over my head: Yet it was viewed as only mildly provocative by coalition forces, so we did not return fire.
Upon learning of yesterday’s raid, I spoke with a few Middle East experts including Dr. Walid Phares, director of the Future of Terrorism Project for the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, for analysis.
According to Phares:
“We have to first look at this in a strategic sense: It is not likely that this operation is part of a vast move or some sort of new campaign launched at this stage by the U.S.-led Multi-National Force—Iraq in order to begin penetrating Syrian territory. For if that were the case, there would be a qualitative shift in strategy that would require a Washington reprogramming of the situation on the Iraqi-Syrian border.
“Will the Pentagon – thus the departing Bush Administration – engage in large-scale offensive operations nine days from the election and a few months from a new administration taking office? This leaves us with two possibilities: Either this was an isolated operation carefully calculated to strike at a hot target with strong assurances of success, as are the cases across the Afghan-Pakistani borders (Meaning also there is no real change on the Syrian-Iraqi border, just an opportunity to eliminate Jihadi targets). Or it also may be a Syrian Mukhabarat [military intelligence] maneuver aimed at triggering a U.S. special operation. All depends on who initiated the information about the target. Who fed the intelligence with what data, and how did MNF-I react to it. We will see.”
Also last week (three days prior to the raid), U.S. Marine Maj. Gen. John F. Kelly, commanding general of MNF-West, told reporters: “The Syrian side is, I guess, uncontrolled by their side. … We still have a certain level of foreign fighter movement.”
Phares says:
“Damascus can super-control its borders whenever it wants, or keep them open and uncontrolled whenever it wishes. For example, it is almost impossible for anti-Syrian-regime elements to cross the border or for opposition to flee across any Syrian border. But now suddenly those borders are uncontrolled and unmanageable when it comes to Jihadists traveling from Lebanon to Syria and from Syria to Iraq and back? Any geostrategic analyst will tell you that the Syrian regime has a strong almost remote-control of its borders. Whenever it is about the regime’s security, it is difficult for bees to cross. When the regime wants groups to cross back-and-forth, the border becomes that open frontier they speak of and hard to control.
“Let’s keep in mind that the Anbar Province is perhaps the most strategic piece of land in the region. It is the crossroad linking the Shia areas in Iraq to Syria and the Sunni Triangle to Saudi Arabia and Jordan. Syria’s strategic projection is eventually to have indirect control over the area to insure a corridor inside Iraq. Hence I wouldn’t be surprised that the Syrian Mukhabarat has deployed its Jihadi mercenaries across the land and the borders.
“My question about this operation though is its projection. Assuming it was successful, is it the first and last, or is it a message for the future? Either way this is a new game in the region.”
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. at uswriter.com.
Former CIA Ops Officer on Hizballah
Posted by editor on 22 October 2008 at 3:23 pm UTC
By Maj. W. Thomas Smith Jr.
[Former CIA Operations Officer Clare M. Lopez]
Among my sources for a recent piece, “Are We Funding the Lebanese Army or Hizballah?” (Human Events, Oct. 20, 2008), was my friend and colleague, Clare M. Lopez, who – when I mentioned to her my concerns regarding Hizballah’s having wormed its way into the legitimate Lebanese Defense apparatus as an official component of the army – said to me, “It’s actually the other way around. The army now appears to be part of Hizballah.”
Lopez – a former operations officer with the Central Intelligence Agency who is today a widely sought expert in the interconnected realms of strategic policy, counterintelligence, and counterterrorism – clearly understands the dynamics of Lebanon, its strategic importance in the war on terror, and its increasingly dominant kingdom within the state, Hizballah.
While pulling together information for the piece from additional sources, I spoke with Lopez a couple of times by phone and email. And her analysis for me was so informationally rich that – though I was unable to include all of it in our Human Events piece – I am including it here now.
I’m doing so on the eve of the 25th anniversary of the terrorist bombing of the U.S. Marine Barracks in Beirut. The suicide attack – carried out by fledgling Hizballah on Oct. 23, 1983 – killed 241 America Marines, sailors, and soldiers.
Following is Lopez’s unedited, exclusive analysis regarding Hizballah:
________________________________________________________
“Tom, yes, since May 2008, when Hizballah swiftly and brutally demonstrated its ability to impose military control throughout Lebanon, literally at will, and then with the July formation of the government of national unity (wherein Hizballah wields cabinet veto power), it is clear that Hizballah – and by extension, Iran – owns Lebanon. This means that a radical, revolutionary, and expansionist Shi’a jihad force occupies a foothold on the southeastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea.
“The Lebanese Army stood aside when Hizballah made its move in May: no big surprise to anyone who understands what has been happening demographically in Lebanon these last years: as a Shi’a majority force, the Army’s sympathies are obviously with Hizballah. Other militias and political groups within Lebanon – from Michel Aoun’s Free Patriotic Movement, to Druze leader Walid Jumblatt’s Progressive Socialist Party, to Amal leader Nabi Berri, and now even a clutch of Sunni parties – are lining up to ally themselves with Hizballah.
“Some say that even Saad Hariri’s revered father, Rafiq, may have been killed with Saudi involvement because of his close relationship with [Hizballah Secretary General Hassan] Nasrallah – who can be seen on YouTube, by the way, waxing eloquent about Rafiq in front of millions of cheering Lebanese. The lead UN investigator has also spoken publicly about Saudi involvement in the assassination.
“U.S. Middle East policy is woefully misguided, in my opinion. How could it be otherwise? Thirty-five years of graduates from Saudi-Wahhabi-Salafi-funded Ivy League Middle East Studies programs now occupy top positions throughout our Dept. of State, Intelligence Community, think tanks, media, and academia itself.
“There seems to be little to no comprehension or willingness on the part of the Bush administration to recognize current hard realities in the Levant, primary of which is the massive and nefarious influence of Iran. I don’t know exactly why there is such fear and reluctance to confront Iran, but my own personal suspicions lie with the status of its nuclear warhead development program – and where those warheads may now already be deployed. Iran’s threats, and Hizballah’s ability, to field scores, if not hundreds of suicide bombers to Iraq, Israel, and our own cities in the West may also be a reason why our national leadership seems paralyzed with fear about Iran.
“Thing is, this is not going to improve with time if we don’t do something to confront it….we’ll simply be forced into a position of total submission – dhimmitude–vis-a-vis Iran and the forces of jihad. What this means in the first instance is abandonment of Israel, our foremost ally in the Middle East and the only reliable outpost of liberal democracy in the region. Obama already has promised his support to Muslims and Palestinians, and has indicated he will end the special relationship between the U.S. and Israel – in truth, not a big change from the policies of the Condi Rice State Dept., but now it will be official policy, if he wins the presidency.
“It is Iran that guided and funded and armed the formation of Hizballah in 1982 – and continues to do so. It is Iran that advises, arms, funds, and guides the Palestinian terror organizations sworn to the destruction of the State of Israel: Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Fatah militias (Tanzim, Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade). It is Iran that reportedly has provided Hizballah with something on the order of $3 billion for reconstruction in Lebanon since the summer 2006 war. Not the Lebanese government, not the French or Americans or Europeans or the international community: Iran – which means Nasrallah gets to take credit among [many of] the Lebanese people, who obviously adore the guy. Nasrallah is known as the ‘man who never lies,’ because the promises he makes, he keeps.
“Most dangerous for Israel, it is Iran that has rearmed Hizballah in the aftermath of that war with Fajr 3 and Fajr 5 surface-to-surface missiles, Chinese-made shore-to-sea C-802 missiles, Zelzal-2 and Zelzal-3 missiles (which are capable of delivering CBW munitions a distance of 250 km.), wire-guided TOW missiles, and AT-3 Sagger antitank missiles, antiaircraft cannons, SA-7 anti-aircraft missiles, shoulder-fired Strela-7 and mobile Rapier 2 ground-to-air missiles, Katyusha artillery rockets, sophisticated explosive charges, and small arms.
“Hizballah’s command-and-control system is fully integrated with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in Iran. Its military telecommunications system – the one the Fuad Siniora government made a weak (and ultimately futile) move to bring under central Lebanese government control in May, is world-class and now demonstrably untouchable by the Lebanese government. Its broadcast network – TV, radio, Internet – is modern, sophisticated, and very large.
“Since taking control of Lebanon in May, Hizballah forces have occupied all the key high ground and established layered defenses north of the Litani River, in the southern and central Bekaa Valley, and reinforced their presence in southern Beirut.
“UNIFIL’s 15,000 ground forces in Lebanon have failed utterly to enforce UN Resolution 1701 and instead of preventing Hizballah’s massive rearmament following the summer 2006 war, they have engaged in liaison and pay-off operations with Hizballah for the purpose of force protection.
“So, the U.S. government decision to grant the Lebanese Army millions of dollars worth of military assistance, in full knowledge that those weapons will never be used to confront Hizballah, and more than likely will only add to their arsenal, is foolish in the extreme, in my opinion. After the events of May and July, there can simply be no doubt in any sane person’s mind about who controls Lebanon: it is not the Fuad Siniora government! Hassan Nasrallah controls Lebanon.
“I am not one who believes Hassan Nasrallah dances on a puppeteer’s strings manipulated out of Tehran – I think he uses Iranian and Syrian assistance for his own ends in Lebanon (although he may be more willing to do their bidding abroad) – but their common purpose surely is the destruction of the State of Israel.
“All I can think is that our national security policy is in the hands of those who do not really believe in the defense of liberal democracy – and most especially if that liberal democracy is embodied in a Jewish State of Israel. There is a terrible strain of anti-Semitism that has taken root and grown in the ranks of our State Dept. and CIA in particular – again, perhaps the result of all those years of Saudi-Wahhabi indoctrination in our top universities. But the result is clear: Condi’s readiness to throw Israel under a bus at Annapolis last November [2007]; the Bush administration’s refusal to deal with Iran, despite a lot of soaring rhetoric, and now, a real and perceptible diminishment in the bilateral commitment.
“The naiveté of our government’s dealings with Syria, as well as this military deal with the Lebanese Army, seems incomprehensible to me. The ability to distinguish between friend and foe in the Middle East seems lost and will have disastrous consequences for our own national security objectives in the region and ultimately, at home.”
_____________________________________
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. at uswriter.com.
PHARES: Military Aid to Lebanese Army Means Guns and Ammo for Hezbollah
Posted by editor on 7 October 2008 at 12:50 am UTC
The AP is reporting: “The United States and Lebanon on Monday set up a joint military commission to bolster military cooperation — a move that follows the first visit by the newly elected Lebanese president to Washington. …
“At the time [of Lebanese Pres. Michel Sleiman’s September visit to Washington], U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates was quoted as saying the Lebanese army was given nearly $400 million in military assistance. A further $60 million worth of aid, including helicopters, ammunition and Humvees, is awaiting Congress’ approval.”
Both nations have reportedly “signed three new military contracts worth $63 million” in U.S. grants to the Lebanese Army for “secure communications, ammunition and infantry weapons:” Military aid which will ultimately end up in the hands of Hezbollah, according to Middle East terrorism expert Dr. Walid Phares.
“It is ironic to say it, but Hezbollah ‘authorized’ the creation of a U.S. Lebanese military commission so that eventually the organization would seize the U.S. made ‘secure communications, ammunition and infantry weapons,’” says Phares in a conversation this evening.
Phares adds:
“The unreal equation here is that the U.S. grants $460 million to a Hezbollah-dominated government, thinking this half-billion dollars is going to be part of an effort against terrorism. But Hezbollah which has the upper hand over the political control of the Lebanese Army and has its hands and eyes inside the Lebanese government will be — at the end of the day — the final recipient of American military aid, as strange as it may appear.
“I am surprised that decision makers in the West, including in the U.S. really believe that helicopters, ammunition and Humvees will be used in any fashion against the will and the control of Hezbollah.
“Will the Lebanese Army use these weapons against Sunni Salafi militias in the north? Sure, as scripted by Hezbollah. The shrewd Iranian-controlled organization uses the Lebanese state to get U.S. weapons to be used against some local Sunni bands, while securing the strategic control over the entire country. As the 9/11 Commission puts it, ‘U.S. officials continue to have a failure in imagination.’”
— Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. 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:
"Hunt for the Somali Pirates" airs soon on the National Geographic Channel.
When Somali pirates hijack the Maersk Alabama -- and international headlines -- Navy SEALs launch a sneak attack to rescue the ship's American captain. Pirate Hunters recounts the harrowing five days from hijack to final fatal shots, and reveals sophisticated Navy SEAL training methods that prepare the world's most elite reconnaissance teams for daring missions with no second chances.
J. Peter Pham, Ph.D. : 'Strategic Interests'
Ballots and Bullets: The Tale of the Two Somalias
[06 Jul 10]
Walid Phares, Ph.D.
Iran Global Terrorist Reach
[15 Jul 10]
Abigail R. Esman : 'International Desk'
Islamophobia
Is the rejection of radical Islam "anti-Muslim"?
[27 Jul 10]
Rabbi Daniel M. Zucker
The Roots of Washington's Failures in Dealing with "Rogue Regimes"
[01 Apr 10]
W. Thomas Smith Jr.
'Beyond the DropZone'
Intelligence and Analysis