FDD

Film at 11? (CM)

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay during the war on terror have attacked their military guards hundreds of times, turning broken toilet parts, utensils, radios and even a bloody lizard tail into makeshift weapons, Pentagon reports say.

Incident reports reviewed by The Associated Press indicate Military Police guards are routinely head-butted, spat upon and doused by "cocktails" of feces, urine, vomit and sperm collected in meal cups by the prisoners.

They've been repeatedly grabbed, punched or assaulted by prisoners who reach through the small "bean holes" used to deliver food and blankets through cell doors, the reports say. Serious assaults requiring medical attention, however, are rare, the reports indicate.

The detainee "reached under the face mask of an IRF (Initial Reaction Force) team member's helmet and scratched his face, attempting to gouge his eyes," states a May 27, 2005, report on an effort to remove a recalcitrantprisoner from his cell.

More here. But will the network news organizations and big newspapers seriously cover this story? Let us know what you see (or don't).

Also hat tip and congratulations to Mark Levin and the attorneys who work with him at Landmark Legal Foundation for tenaciously pursuing "the untold story of the systematic abuse of American MPs by the al-Qaeda terrorists at Guantanamo Bay.  It took us a full year to bring this stunning information to light, but the truth is now out.  Thanks to Pete Hutchison, Mike O'Neill, Matt Forys, and Eric Christensen."

More here.

Managing Savagery (CM)

"The Management of Savagery" is a book written by Abu Bakr Naji, a high-level Al Qaeda strategist.

Naji argues that the jihadis failed in the past to establish an Islamic state because they were focused on toppling local regimes. These efforts were fruitless, he argues, because jihadis were seen as fighting their own people, which alienated the masses. Moreover, the local governments proved impervious to revolution as long as they were supported by the U.S. Based on his understanding of power politics, Naji says that the jihadis had to provoke the United States to invade a country in the Middle East.

This would 1.) turn the Muslims against local governments allied with the U.S.; 2.) destroy the U.S. aura of invincibility, which it maintains through the media, and 3.) create sympathy for the jihadis, who would be viewed as standing up to Crusader aggression. Moreover, the invasion would bleed the U.S. economy and sap its military power, leading to social unrest at home and its ultimate withdrawal from the Middle East.

Naji had hoped that Afghanistan would play out in this manner for the U.S., as it did for the Soviets. Now, Naji places his hopes on Iraq. Once the U.S. withdraws from Iraq, he contends, the jihadis must quickly move to invade neighboring countries.

Some countries are particularly ripe for jihadi incursion: Jordan, Nigeria, Pakistan and Yemen, as well as North West Africa and the Arabian Peninsula. These areas were selected by Al Qaeda because of each region's geographic features, weak central governments, the receptivity of the people and the proliferation of weapons and jihadi propaganda. The plan, according to Naji, is to conduct small- to medium-scale attacks on crucial infrastructure (like oil or tourism), which will cause the government to draw in its security forces. Chaos or "savagery" will erupt in the unpoliced areas.

Then, the jihadis will move into these security vacuums and provide basic services to people, who will welcome an end to the instability. The final goal is to establish a single global state ruled by a pious Muslim dictator, the caliph, who will implement a strict interpretation of Islamic law.

Drawing on the experience of jihadis in Egypt and Algeria, Naji cautions his readers that no plan will succeed unless the jihadis learn how to respond to public opinion and manipulate the media.

More here.

Disproportionate? (CM)

Charles Krauthammer writes:

In perhaps the most blatant terror campaign from the air since the London Blitz, Hezbollah is raining rockets on Israeli cities and villages. These rockets are packed with ball bearings that can penetrate automobiles and shred human flesh. They are meant to kill and maim. And they do.

But it is a dual campaign. Israeli innocents must die in order for Israel to be terrorized. But Lebanese  innocents must also die in order for Israel to be demonized, which is why Hezbollah hides its fighters, its rockets, its launchers, its entire infrastructure among civilians. Creating human shields is a war crime. It is also a Hezbollah specialty.

More here.

The Folly of Talking to Syria [TB]

Over at Across the Bay, I discuss the folly of the calls to "engage" Syria over the Lebanon crisis.

I particularly note the positions of people who have dealt with Bashar Assad in the past and went away with a bitter taste in their mouth, and a decision never to trust him or work with him again. One such person is French President Chirac, who talked to Le Monde about this issue. He said that he "realized that nothing would come out of it [dialogue with Assad]. [I realized] that the regime embodied by Bashar al-Assad appeared to me hardly compatible with security and peace." Chirac also thinks, as I have argued before, that Syria is actually a secondary player in this case. The real player is Iran. Syria is just trying to get as many scraps off Iran's table as it can. We should not fall for its bluff.

Martin Indyk, another person who has dealt with Bashar and regretted it, is also against talking to Syria about the current crisis.  He also had a similar reaction to Chirac's: Bashar is unreliable. Furthermore, Indyk added, "[t]he idea that Syria or Iran should become the arbiters of Lebanon's fate is basically to reward the arsonists by giving them control of the place where the fire's burning." That would also be a betrayal of the hundreds of thousands of Lebanese who took to the street in order to rid themselves of Syrian hegemony, Indyk said.

Finally, Indyk noted that the Bashar Assad's relationship with Hezbollah is very different from the one his father had: "[Bashar] is dependent on Hezbollah to maintain Syrian influence in Lebanon because he no longer has the troop presence that gave him control of Lebanon. He is dependent on Hezbollah to defend against an Israeli ground attack through Lebanon's Bekaa Valley into Syria. And therefore, his ability to curb Hezbollah is much more limited, if it's there at all."

Michael Young also wonders whether the people peddling the Syrian option have any memory at all: "it was under Syria that Hezbollah became a military power, and what the Syrians will demand, or maneuver to achieve, in exchange for "helping" would be onerous. They will want the international investigation of Rafiq Hariri's murder to be dropped, to save their regime that ordered the crime; and they will want oversight power over Lebanese affairs, which, with an armed Hezbollah as Praetorian Guard, would effectively mean they would again rule the country."

Finally, with regards to the rather laughable notion of "weaning Syria away from Iran and back into the Sunni Arab fold" -- a baseless, historically malinformed notion -- I translate the remarks of a dissident Syrian analyst, Fayez Sarah, who correctly reminds everyone that the entire last year was wasted on Arab states trying to convince Syria to drop its relations with Iran. They failed miserably. And we're being asked to try that failed effort once more, because, in the words of Tom Friedman, it's "worth a shot." That's called folly.

Danger Zone Available for Podcast

July 23rd's episode is available for download.

Al-Qaeda Moves to Africa

J. Peter Pham argues that, over the long term, a terrorist foothold in Africa may be an even greater threat to Western interests than those in the current arenas of conflict.

Global Terrorism Monitor

The latest Global Terrorism Monitor, covering the ongoing conflicts in Lebanon/Gaza/Israel, new operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and much more, is now available. 

Also, a quick programming note: The Global Terrorism Monitor will be on hiatus for the next three weeks.

Main Current Israeli Targets in Lebanon (WP)

From an analysis of the observation of Israel's air campaign in Lebanon and its limited incursions in the south at this stage, and based on reporting from Lebanon's military and security sources and analysts, it appears that the strategic targets of Israel's action are as follows:

1. Shelling and bombarding Hezbollah's positions and infrastructures in southern Beirut, the south and the Bekaa, so that the entire Hezbollah-land in Lebanon would be under pressure and no area of re-gathering or stability can serve as a strategic depth. (See map, zones in orange)

2. Concentrating on the Dahiya, Beirut's southern suburb aim at dismantling the so-called murabba'a amni (security square) which comprises the main headquarters, communications systems, bunkers and tunnels of Hezbollah. If the Israeli air strikes continue with no cease fire to interrupt them, the "square" will be non-operational for Hezbollah's leadership, which would lead to one of the following options: 1) moving the Hezbollah's leadership structure deeper in greater Beirut or into the Lebanese army perimeter. Which would lead to engage the Army in the conflict. or 2) moving the leadership to the Bekaa, knowing that the south of the country is insecure for such resettlement. According to experts in Lebanon, the Bekaa option seems to be the most logical for Hezbollah, but according to other analysts, Hezbollah cannot afford leaving Beirut for political reasons.

3. Hence, Nasrallah's organization may recourse to dramatic measures to deter Israeli air raids over Beirut's so that the southern suburb remains a basis for the group. The nature of the "new" measures is unknown: Nasrallah has promised "surprises" a week ago.

4. This Israeli process will shape up the essence of Syro-Iranian, Arab, international and even Lebanese responses to the solution. The location of Hezbollah's leadership and infrastructure will be one of the influential elements in the outcome of negotiations There is a difference as to where is this leadership, inside or outside the capital. Both Israel and Hezbollah knows it.

Media Roundup

Claudia Rosett discusses the U.N.'s reaction to the crisis in the Middle East.

Andy McCarthy argues that Israel's war is part of America's 'war on terror.'

Krauss & Pham argue that the current U.N. peacekeeping mission in Lebanon,Tte U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon (UNFIL), has turned into a very convenient and high-profile human shield for terrorists.

Cliff's weekly notes & comments are in this week's e-newsletter.

Walid Jumblatt Criticizes Nasrallah [TB]

Lebanese Druze MP Walid Jumblatt strongly criticized Hezbollah's chief Hassan Nasrallah in an interview  published on Sunday in the pan-Arab Asharq al-Awsat. Here's a translation of what he said:

"The priority now is to stop the offensive, and then we gather the state together and go back to where we stopped at the national dialogue to discuss the subject of the defense strategy [i.e., Hezbollah's weapons]. At the same time we are saying that there should be no weapons outside the control of the state. We must send the Army to the south, and the decision to go to war should be in the hands of the state, not in the hands of one party, who, in the name of the umma or what have you, throws Lebanon into the unknown." He added, "what took place throws Lebanon into the struggle between two axes: Iranian-Syrian on one side and American-Israeli on the other."

Commenting on Nasrallah's recent interview on al-Jazeera, Jumblatt said:

"I could not find a Lebanese element anywhere in his talk. He reminds me of Arafat's experience in the siege of Beirut in 1982. In the end, Arafat left Beirut, but things are different here."

He added, "Iran has decided to fight the US by launching a war against Israel, which is an American [client] state of sorts, in response to the conflict over the nuclear issue. As for Syria, it wants to escape the international tribunal [for its role in the Hariri assassination.]" He asked, "Does Hassan Nasrallah have any Lebanese part when he talks about having friends in Damascus and Tehran? This insults our intelligence. As for his saying that whoever supports me deserves praise and whoever does not will be held accountable, that is a message. We received the message."

Jumblatt warned of a project "to reconsider the Taef Accord and the political direction, the reconstruction and the reconciliation [efforts] of Rafik Hariri."

As for what could be done to end the crisis, he said, "the matter is out of our hands. The decision is his in the end. He is mistaken when he says that he is relying on the cabinet statement, because no one commissioned him to fight in order to restore the Shebaa Farms and the prisoners. The Farms are liberated through [border] delineation [with Syria], and then through a request at the UN. The prisoners' case is solved through finding the body of Ron Arad." He warned, "the Lebanese public opinion is not convinced of the method and the price we are paying to bring back the prisoners, Hassan Nasrallah's way."

The solution in Jumblatt's opinion is for Hezbollah to "hand over its decision and its arms to the Lebanese state according to the mechanism of the [national] dialogue." He mentioned that "PM Fouad Seniora said in the last session of the dialogue that the summer was promising tourism-wise, and that one and a half million tourists were expected in Lebanon. Nasrallah replied then, 'you see Mr. Prime Minister, the weapons of the resistance do not scare off tourists.' But what happened did scare them off and has turned thousands of Lebanese into refugees."

He then asked Nasrallah, "where do you stand with respect to Lebanon and the Lebanese state? If you are a target, then now the entire country is a target." He denied having any contacts with Hezbollah in order to find a solution to the crisis, saying, "we have commissioned PM Seniora to negotiate in order to find solutions." He added, "there is great hope pinned on Speaker Nabih Berri, who was one of the pillars of the Taef Accord, along with [former] PM Hariri, for the sake of the future of the Shiite community in Lebanon, for a large community and a partner in the country should not feel as if it was dealt a blow after this storm passes."

Iran's Vision for the Middle East [TB]

Yesterday, Andy posted on a piece in the Sunday Times about Iran's strategic goals in the region and quoted this passage:

Why has Tehran decided to play its Lebanese card now? Part of the answer lies in Washington’s decision last May to reverse its policy towards Iran by offering large concessions on its nuclear programme. Tehran interpreted that as a sign of weakness. Ahmadinejad believes that his strategy to drive the “infidel” out of the Islamic heartland cannot succeed unless Arabs accept Iran’s leadership. The problem is that since the Iranian regime is Shi’ite it would not be easy to sell it to most Arabs, who are Sunni. To overcome that hurdle, it is necessary to persuade the Arabs that only Iran is sincere in its desire and capacity to wipe Israel off the map. Once that claim is sold to the Arabs, so Ahmadinejad hopes, they would rally behind his vision of the Middle East instead of the “American vision.”

Following up on that, here's a quote by Hezbollah's representative in Tehran, Hossein Safieddin, that appeared in a piece in the Washington Post today:

"We are going to make Israel not safe for Israelis. There will be no place they are safe," Safiadeen told a conference that included the Tehran-based representative of the Palestinian group Hamas and the ambassadors from Lebanon, Syria and the Palestinian Authority.

"You will see a new Middle East in the way of Hezbollah and Islam, not in the way of Rice and Israel," he said, according to AP.

The original AP story is here.

Syria Threatens to Attack International Force in Lebanon [TB]

If this is not a threat, I don't know what is:

One Syrian official issued a strong warning against a proposal that was gaining momentum on Sunday for an international force to guard the Lebanon-Israel border. Deploying such a force without the cooperation of Syrian and Hezbollah, the official said, will risk repeating 1983. That was a pointed reference to the 241 United States service members and 58 French soldiers killed in attacks on military installations by suicide bombers. It has long been considered likely that Hezbollah sent the bombers with Syria’s blessing.

Confirm Bolton (CM)

The National Review editorializes:

John Bolton "is an ambassador who has been capable both of using the U.N. to advance America’s priorities and of standing firm when the U.N. seeks to thwart those priorities. If such a record isn’t grounds for  confirmation, we don’t know what is... This is no time to silence the voice of American diplomacy —  particularly when that voice is as articulate, principled, and effective as John Bolton’s.

More here.

Hezbollah's Iranian War in Lebanon (WP)

When Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, secretary general of Hezbollah held his press conference to declare his new victory over his enemy, Israel, he was triggering –probably without knowing- a new era in the history of Lebanon and the region. “We will continue in faithfulness to our line,” he declared, in legitimizing his cross border attack on an Israeli patrol, killing soldiers and kidnapping two. But the real “fidelity” Nasrallah was referring to wasn’t to his captured men in Israeli jails, but to the regimes decision-makers in Tehran and Damascus. The “operation of July” came as a tipping point in a larger conflict, which superseded Hezbollah’s detainee, the Shebaa farms, borders skirmishes and Israeli tactical responses. Beyond and above the events of that day, Hezbollah was triggering the first Iranian war on Lebanon’s soil: A Syrian-supported offensive, even at the height of the Assad II regime. Bringing fire and smoke to the Lebanese-Israeli borders, and week before to the Gaza-Israel demarcation lines, is not simply two local disputes, one over unilateral Israeli withdrawal in Gaza and the other over real estate on the western slopes of Mount Hermon. Nasrallah (as well as his counterpart of Hamas) has calculated perfectly how to conduct a hit and run with the Israelis ordered by regional regime who have miscalculated their strategies. Pressured by the new regional realities and world concerns about nuclear threats and Terrorism, Iran and Syria wanted to throw their allies into the greatest uncertainties of survival.

Victor Davis Hanson on a Strange War (CM)

Sum up the declarations of Hezbollah’s leaders, Syrian diplomats, Iranian nuts, West Bank terrorists, and Arab commentators — and this latest Middle East war seems one of the strangest in a long history of strange  conflicts. For example, have we ever witnessed a conflict in which one of the belligerents — Iran — that  shipped thousands of rockets into Lebanon, and promises that it will soon destroy Israel, vehemently denies  that its own missile technicians are on the ground in the Bekka Valley. Wouldn’t it wish to brag of such  solidarity?

Or why, after boasting of the new targets that his lethal missiles will hit in Israel, does Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah (“We are ready for it — war, war on every level”) now harp that Israel is hitting too deep into Lebanon? Don’t enemies expect one another to hit deep? Isn’t that what “war on every level” is all about? ...

What should the United States do? If it really cares about human life and future peace, then we should talk ad nauseam about “restraint” and “proportionality” while privately assuring Israel the leeway to smash both Hamas and Hezbollah — and humiliate Syria and Iran, who may well come off very poorly from their longed-for but bizarre war.

Only then will Israel restore some semblance of deterrence and strengthen nascent democratic movements in both Lebanon and even the West Bank. This is the truth that everyone from London to Cairo knows, but dares not speak. So for now, let us pray that the brave pilots and ground commanders of the IDF can teach these  primordial tribesmen a lesson that they will not soon forget — and thus do civilization’s dirty work on the  other side of the proverbial Rhine.

More here.

Michael Ledeeen on Iran (CM)

Testifying on Capitol Hill:

The bottom line is that the Islamic Republic of Iran has been at war with us for twenty-seven years, and we  have yet to respond. Fanatical Iranians overran the American Embassy in Tehran in 1979 and subjected diplomats to four hundred forty-four days of confinement and humiliation. Our policy was to negotiate a deal, which was consummated in the last hour of the Carter Administration. In the mid-1980s, Iranian-supported terrorists from Hizbollah killed hundreds of Americans in our Beirut Embassy, and, six months later, killed two hundred forty- one Marines in their barracks there. A couple of years after that, Hizbollah took other Americans hostage, from the CIA station chief in Beirut to Christian priests to a distinguished military man, Colonel Higgins, who had served as General Colin Powell’s military assistant in the Pentagon. The priests were eventually ransomed; Higgins and Buckley were tortured and murdered.

No one should have been surprised that the Islamic Republic waged war against us from its first days in power.  After all, the founder of the Iranian clerical fascist state, the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, declared America “the great Satan,” an existential threat to the Islamic Republic as to all true Muslims.

They have waged an unholy proxy war against us ever since. They created Hizbollah and Islamic Jihad, and they support most all the others, from Hamas and al Qaeda to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command. Iran’s proxies range from Shi’ites to Sunnis to Marxists, all cannon fodder for the overriding objective to dominate or destroy us.

More here.

The Lebanon Evacuation Window (WP)

As I have witnessed previous evacuations in Lebanon for about two decades, and as I am monitoring the ongoing evacuations of Western and American citizens by US and European military, I was able to establish a security map through which the evacuation is taking place. In short it is happening in a very dangerous geopolitical context, more than many believed it would be.

South of Beirut and Bekaa

As shown on the map, evacuating persons from Hizbollah-controlled areas faces significant dangers. The confrontations between the Israeli Air Force and Hizbollah's militia can impede transportation in these areas and would endanger the ships coming closer to the shores just south of Beirut. Hence, the entire coastal area south of the capital is off any landing zone. In addition all areas shown in yellow, under Hizbollah control, are also off staging areas for helicopter evacuations. In addition, helicopter landings in the south and the Bekaa plateau are not possible on security grounds.

The North

Areas in the extreme north including in Tripoli's port and the districts surrounding are also dangerous for evacuation operations as pro-Syrian elements are omnipresent.

Al Qaida Factor

In addition to Hizbollah's risk, which most likely won't develop at this stage because of the need of the organization to appear as legitimate worldwide, another high danger is potential: al Qaida. Surfacing from underneath Hizbollah, al Qaida allied cells are present in the Palestinian bases along the southern coast and in the far north as of Tripoli. Even against the will of Hizbollah, al Qaida operatives can -if they decide so- launch attacks against US and other Western units coming close to the shores in these areas. These targets would be ideal to al Qaida as they fulfill their desire to attack US military and citizens.

Forgotten no More?

FDD Adjunct Fellow J. Peter Pham has been sounding the alarm about Africa's overlooked role -- what he calls the "forgotten front" -- in the war on terror.  He writes:

Incidentally, after warning about this “forgotten front” for some time, it is gratifying to me that some of the major media have finally caught on. U.S. News & World Report senior legal correspondent Chitra Ragavan has an excellent story in the current issue (dated July 24) of that magazine on federal efforts to direct counterterrorism resources to forgotten corners of the globe, including Sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia. The article mentions the specific case of Somalia and quotes yours truly twice.  The text of the article, “A Troubling Sense of Déjà vu,” is available online here:

In his latest World Defense Review column, Peter revisits U.S. policy toward Somalia.  It's here.

Ethiopia moves to stabilize Somalia [AV]

Ethiopia, which realizes that an Islamist takeover of Somalia will seriously harm its coastal access, has always supported the democrats in Somalia. This week has been no exception.

As the world's attention shifted from the Islamists in Mogadishu to the Bombay bombings and now Israel's war with Hezbollah, Ethiopia has realized that it needs to take control of the rapidly deteriorating situation in Somalia.

This is why it is excellent news that Ethiopia has sent troops into Somalia to protect the Somali transitional government in Baidoa from the Islamists in Mogadishu.

A twin strategy of improving links with the northern statelet of Somaliland, and of propping up the democrats in Baidoa, is our best hope for preventing Somalia from falling under Islamist control.

Ceasefire Should Not Be at the Expense of the State [TB]

LBCI News quoted Lebanese Druze leader Walid Jumblatt as calling on Egyptian TV for a ceasefire "within the framework of a resolution that protects Lebanon and does not come at the expense of the state." He stressed that the need is to safeguard the Taef Accord and the armistice agreement with Israel, so that war does not erupt again under whatever pretext.

He was also quoted in AKI as saying, "southern Lebanon needs international protection and not a [Hezbollah-Israeli] ceasefire at the country's expense."

Jumblatt rejected the latest address by Hezbollah's Hassan Nasrallah, especially the part where Nasrallah said that Lebanon was in a war "whether it wants to or not." Jumblatt said nobody can singlehandedly hijack the decision of war and peace, and the solution is for the Lebanese state to exert its control over all its territories, adding: "no one can play around with the security of the south and the security of Lebanon."

The Druze leader also criticized the bombastic rhetoric of the Iranian president who "does not care for the Lebanese people," and who has bigger non-Lebanese calculations, as well as the talk of the Syrian regime and of presidents Bashar Assad and Emile Lahoud, who hold a "vengeful hatred towards the state of independence in Lebanon."

Jumblatt called for a passageway for humanitarian purposes, but said that it should not be via Damascus, "whose regime is assassinating [former PM] Rafik Hariri for a second time." He added, "we say to this regime that our patience is long, and one day the truth will be revealed." He pointed out that since the war broke out, the Syrian regime has been trying to escalate in order to escape the international tribunal, as it is the only court that could hold it accountable. He assured that "no matter how many bombs fall on us, we must not forget the issue of the international tribunal, no matter the price."

Silent Majority? (CM)

Youssef Ibrahim (once my colleague at The New York Times) writing in the New York Sun:

Yes, world, there is a silent Arab majority that believes that seventh-century Islam is not fit for 21st-century challenges. That women do not have to look like walking black tents. That men do not have to wear beards and robes, act like lunatics, and run around blowing themselves up in order to enjoy 72 virgins in paradise. And that secular laws, not Islamic Sharia, should rule our day-to-day lives. We, the silent Arab majority, do not believe that writers should be killed or banned for expressing their views. Or that the rest of our creative elite - from moviemakers to playwrights, actors, painters, sculptors, and fashion models - should be vetted by Neanderthal Muslim imams who have never read a book in their dim, miserable lives.
   
The leader of Hizballah, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, received a resounding "no" to pulling 350 million Arabs into a war with Israel at the Arab League's meeting of 22 foreign ministers in Cairo on Saturday, and from pundits and ordinary people across the Arab world. All in all, it seems that when Israel decided to go to war against the priestly mafia of Hamas and Hizballah, it opened a whole new chapter in the Greater Middle East discourse. And Israel is finding, to its surprise, that a vast, not-so-silent majority of Arabs agrees that enough is enough.

More here.

Anti-Hezbollah Saudis (CM)

Eli Lake writes:

One of Saudi Arabia's leading Wahhabi sheiks, Abdullah bin Jabreen has issued a strongly worded religious edict, or fatwa, declaring it unlawful to support, join or pray for Hezbollah, the Shiite militias lobbing missiles into northern Israel.

More here.

Global Terrorism Monitor

The latest Global Terrorism Monitor is now available.  This week's issue tracks events taking place in Israel, Gaza, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and more.

hezbollah Kills Israeli Arab Children (JS)

The latest Hezbollah missile strike on Israel hit the Arab city of Nazareth, killing two Israeli Arab brothers, ages 3 and 9.  According to witnesses, the two children were playing in the street when the missile hit them directly. 

Israeli Arabs are citizens of the State of Israel and are suffering alongside their Jewish brethren.  It's worth remembering this attack when Hezbollah and Hamas supporters speak about how these "resistance groups" are protecting the rights of Arabs that are under attack by the "Zionists and Crusaders."

Inside a War Zone Hospital (CM)

“Since last Thursday, more than 100 local residents have come through the front door, some with severe physical injuries, others suffering from severe emotional trauma.”

Joel Mowbray has more here.

Required Reading (CM)

Andy McCarthy:

“Israel's war against Hezbollah is a watershed in the war on terror. As long as we understand that it's not just Israel's war.”

His column is here.

Charles Krauthammer:

“The road to a solution is therefore clear: Israel liberates south Lebanon and gives it back to the Lebanese.”

His column is here.   

Alan Dershowitz:

“While Israel does everything reasonable to minimize civilian casualties -- not always with success -- Hezbollah and Hamas want to maximize civilian casualties on both sides. Islamic terrorists, a diplomat commented years ago, ‘have mastered the harsh arithmetic of pain. . . . Palestinian casualties play in their favor and Israeli casualties play in their favor.’"

His oped is here.   

Jed Babbin:

“A cease-fire would benefit Hezbollah and threaten Israel. It would protect both Hezbollah and the nations that support it--Syria and Iran--as well as the Lebanese who have accepted the terrorist organization as a legitimate part of their government. A cease-fire would allow Hezbollah to rebuild its power base and enable it to resume its attacks whenever Damascus and Tehran desired. For Israel, a U.N. force would create no security whatever against future attacks.

“The U.N.'s years-long record on the Israel-Lebanon border makes mockery of the term "peacekeeping." … the U.N. presence [in southern Lebanon] serves as a shield against Israeli strikes against the terrorists. … For the first time, Israel has acted in accordance with what used to be President Bush's theory: that a government that contains, supports or harbors terrorists is responsible for their actions. Israel is now demonstrating that there is a price to be exacted from nations who collaborate with terrorists.”

His op-ed is here.      

Michael Rubin:

"’Lebanon . . . is not willing to be the spearhead of the Arab-Israeli conflict,’ former President Amin Gemayel said. ‘Hezbollah will have to explain itself to the Lebanese,’ Druze leader Walid Jumblatt told Le Figaro. The independent Beirut daily Al-Mustaqbal quoted Lebanese Communications Minister Marwan Hamada saying, ‘Syrian Vice President Faruq al-Shara gives the commands, Hezbollah carries them out, and Lebanon is the hostage. … Ahmed al-Jarallah, editor of Kuwait's Arab Times, condemned both Hezbollah and Hamas in an editorial that same day, writing, ‘Unfortunately we must admit that in such a war the only way to get rid of 'these irregular phenomena' is what Israel is doing.’"

His op-ed is here.

Whither the Bush Doctrine?

In today's NRO, Andy McCarthy questions why the administration would choose to reward Iran's heinous behavior with a seat at the nuclear negotiating table. 

Inside Lebanon (CM)

“It is clear that the overwhelming majority of Lebanese want to see Hezbollah disarmed so that the country can have a single army under government control. So, what better tactic for Hezbollah than inventing a new war with Israel to remind the Lebanese that they still need the militia as their ‘national resistance’?

”Inside Lebanon, Hezbollah has failed to enlist the support even of its formal allies, including Nabih Berri, leader of the more moderate Shi'ite Amal Movement, and Gen. Michel Aoun, the Maronite politician who had signed an alliance with Nasrallah. … 

“Most Arabs refuse to be dragged into a bigger war in the shaping of which they had no say. Moreover, most Lebanese do not see why they should risk the destruction of their country solely to allow the Hezbollah to remain a state within the state.”

The insightful Amir Taheri has more here.

Weapons Shipment from Syria [TB]

The Lebanese station LBCI is reporting that the IDF has struck four trucks carrying weapons to Hezbollah coming from Syria. The station's news ticker is reporting that the IDF is now conducting strikes and air raids in the Bekaa region, in eastern Lebanon, and near the border with Syria.

Update: The "News Flash" section on the Lebanese news site Naharnet reads:

"The Israeli army says aircraft destroyed four trucks traveling from Syria with weapons and munitions destined for Hizbullah in the Bekaa."

"Israeli planes raid the Deir al Ahmar bridge that links north Lebanon to the Bekaa Valley."

Can The Lebanese Government Be Trusted?

In today's Family Security Matters, J. Peter Pham questions the role of the Lebanese government in the current conflict in the Middle East and whether a government that includes Hezbollah can even be a responsible interlocutor, much less partner, in resolving the crisis.

Danger Zone Available for Podcast

July 16th's episode is available for download.

Course Correction

Andrew McCarthy’s latest piece in NRO argues that Israel’s war with Hezbollah is part of a much larger war that Iran has been waging against the U.S., Israel, and the West.

Where Does This Conflict Leave Prospects for a Palestinian State? (CM)

The Hudson Institute’s Mey Wurmser writes:

We are witnessing the collapse not only of the Road Map and the Disengagement and Convergence concepts but of a paradigm which emerged in 1994 during the Oslo process. That paradigm was grounded in the idea that the best solution to the Palestinian problem was the creation of a third state along with Israel and Jordan within the League of Nations mandatory borders of interwar Palestine. Until Oslo, Jordan, Israel and the United States all publicly repeated that an independent Palestinian state was dangerous to their national interests.

From September 1970 until September 1993, it was universally understood in Jordan, in Israel and in the West that the local Palestinian issue was best subsumed under a Jordanian-Israeli condominium to isolate the issue from being exploited by broader regional forces that sought to trigger Arab-Israeli wars that were convenient diversions or vehicles for imperial ambition.

Since 1994, rather than focus on creating out of the territories a system of increasing personal freedoms and stability, Israel sought to wash its hands of the Palestinian problem by creating an independent Palestinian status. That emerging entity has again become the vehicle for regional despots and extremists. ..

[T]he goal of a Palestinian independent state should be either put on hold or even surrendered until the region's politics enter a calmer phase. The goal should now be the construction of Palestinian political structures. These should not be independent but instead operate under a Jordanian-Israeli condominium and be anchored to personal freedom and liberal values. This was implicit in the President's June 24 speech, where he conditioned his offer to the Palestinians to support their enterprise only if it exorcised the demons of terror and corruption. The sooner the illusion of independence at this stage is abandoned, the faster will the Palestinian issue cease being a constant source of regional violence.

More here.

For more notes & comments see this week's e-newsletter.

Nexus of hate [AV]

I have two backgrounders up.

The first chronicles the support Syria provides Hezbollah, and why it must bear considerable responsibility for the havoc Hezbollah's occupation of Southern Lebanon has wrought in Lebanon and Israel.

The second explores the deeds and words of Hezbollah's current leader Hassan Nasrallah, explaining how his war isn't just against Israel, nor even against the United States, but against the entire civilized world.

Syria and Iran's Bid for Regional Dominance [TB]

Over at Across the Bay, I pick up on an article by Michael Oren in TNR today that makes a case for Israel striking Syria.

Oren revisits the 1967 war and Syria's role back then and explains, "By 1967, ten years after the Sinai Campaign, the Arab-Israeli dispute had settled into an uneasy status quo... But one Arab state did not want peace. Syria, then as now under the rule of the belligerent Baath Party, wanted war." Then as now, Syria used proxies based in Lebanon.

Oren suggests the following, "The answer lies in delivering an unequivocal blow to Syrian ground forces deployed near the Lebanese border. By eliminating 500 Syrian tanks--tanks that Syrian President Bashar Al Assad needs to preserve his regime--Israel could signal its refusal to return to the status quo in Lebanon."

I argue that the inter-Arab dynamics that Oren touches on are relevant today as well. What Bashar Assad is doing, as Iran's client, is nothing short of a coup; changing the balance of powers in the region in favor of the Iran-Syria-Hezbollah-Hamas axis. Therefore, a main target of this war by proxy that Iran and Syria are launching is the undermining of the Sunni Arab regional players, namely Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan. This is exactly how these states are reading the current conflict. Robin Wright quotes an anonymous senior US official as saying: "What is out there is concern among conservative Arab allies that there is a hegemonic Persian threat [running] through Damascus, through the southern suburbs of Beirut and to the Palestinians in Hamas."

By controlling the trigger, Assad and Iran want to demonstrate that they hold the keys to the stability of the region, something the Arab states, as well as Israel and the US, do not want to see. Already, the Syrian regime's cheerleaders in the US and in Syria are betting that Israel and the US will acknowledge their victory and come knocking for a deal that would recognize the new balance of powers in the region.

That is why Oren concludes, "[I]f the past is any guide, and if the Six Day War presents a paradigm of an unwanted war that might have been averted with an early, well-placed strike at Syria, then Israel's current strategy in Lebanon deserves to be rethought. If Syria escapes unscathed and Iran undeterred, Israel will remain insecure."

The US Should Stay In Iraq (CM)

The NYT reports on what might be called a neo-Sunni position:

"[M]any Sunni Arab political and religious leaders once staunchly opposed to the American presence here are now saying they need American troops to protect them from the rampages of Shiite militias and Shiite-run government forces.

"The pleas from the Sunni Arab leaders have been growing in intensity since an eruption of sectarian bloodletting in February, but they have reached a new pitch in recent days as Shiite militiamen have brazenly shot dead groups of Sunni civilians in broad daylight in Baghdad and other mixed areas of central Iraq.

"The Sunnis also view the Americans as a 'bulwark against Iranian actions here,' a senior American diplomat said. Sunni politicians have made their viewpoints known to the Americans through informal discussions in recent weeks."

More here.

Watching al-Manar

Mark Dubowitz argues that Hezbollah’s al-Manar television is a terrorist communications system that incites attacks, recruits suicide bombers, and sends messages to fighters in the field.  Despite claims by media advocates, Israel's attacks against al-Manar’s headquarters in Beirut and its broadcasting infrastructure in the Bekaa Valley were justified to protect innocent lives.

Is Israel's response disproportionate? [AV]

The French government condemned Israel's response to the kidnapping of its soldiers as "a disproportionate act of war."

Disproportionate relative to what?

The French, in calling Israel's response disproportionate, are almost certainly measuring it against the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers. Bad as kidnapping Israeli soldiers is, the French reason, Israel's response is far more severe and, hence, disproportionate.

Except, this is the wrong standard. When speaking of proportionality, we shouldn't measure Israel's response against the initial wrong; instead, we should measure it against what it will take to stop that harm.

It is self-evidently true that if Israel were to kidnap three Hezbollah members - a par excellence proportionate response by French standards - this won't in any way reduce the threat it faces from Hezbollah.

This is why Israel is trying to disable the entire Hezbollah infrastructure in Lebanon, because only this, Israel calculates, will end the threat. This is also why Israel's response is proportionate - measured not just against the threat it faces but against what it will take to end that threat.

Israel's Strategy (CM)

"Israel's strategy is twofold. The immediate goal is to remove Hezbollah's acute threat by crippling its military capabilities and driving their troops from the border zone. Attacks on Lebanese infrastructure are designed to prevent the resupply of Hezbollah and to pressure the Lebanese government to establish full sovereignty over the country. It is Lebanon, not Israel, that is in violation of international law as Beirut still has not implemented U.N. resolution 1559, which demands that Hezbollah be disarmed.

"At the same time, and this is Israel's medium-term goal, going forcefully after Iran's prodigy in Lebanon sends a powerful message to Tehran. It restores Israel's deterrence capability, a crucial move in preventing future confrontations with Iran on a much larger scale. But many idealistic European policy makers cannot see that a small war stopped prematurely now may only pave the way for a much larger war later. In order to understand Israel's military actions, it is imperative to consider the two powers standing behind Hezbollah. The larger strategic threat to Israel is the Damascus-Tehran axis. To view Israel's actions in Beirut and Gaza as "disproportionate" means ignoring the radical Islamic regime in Tehran, which threatens to destroy Israel and is bent on acquiring the weapons to actually carry out its threat.

"At the same time, Europe -- particularly France -- has invested heavily in the reconstruction of Lebanon and the international isolation of the Syrian regime. From this perspective, the damage to Beirut's airport and infrastructure and the strain on the Lebanese government are justifiably worrying.

"But if European leaders are serious about preventing instability and promoting their own economic and security interests, they will also have to share the costs of containing terror groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas."

Gerald Steinberg in the Wall Street Journal. More here.

The War Against the Free World? (CM)

That’s what many of us at FDD have called this conflict for the past few years.

Now Bill Kristol writes: “What's happening is an Islamist-Israeli war. You might even say this is part of the Islamist war on the West--but is India part of the West? Better to say that what's under attack is liberal democratic civilization, whose leading representative right now happens to be the United States.”

His insightful column is here.

Con Coughlin Points a Finger at Iran (CM)

[T]he Iranians have been directly involved in helping to develop the impressive network of control towers and monitoring stations along Israel's border that enabled Hizbollah to mount its audacious kidnap plan in the first place. The real danger of any escalation in the current outbreak of violence in Lebanon lies not in Beirut but in Teheran. ...

It is also well known in both Beirut and Jerusalem that Hizbollah does not act without first consulting its paymasters in Teheran, whether it is to seize British hostages such as Terry Waite and John McCarthy, as it did in the mid-1980s, or Israeli soldiers today.

Nor can it be coincidence that the Israelis' abduction in southern Lebanon happened to occur the day after a meeting between Ali Larijani, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, and the EU over Iran's nuclear programme broke up in Brussels without agreement.

Iran's intransigence over its uranium-enrichment programme, which many experts believe is part of a clandestine effort to develop nuclear weapons, has even resulted in the Chinese and Russians finally agreeing to back Washington's long-standing demand to refer Teheran to the UN Security Council.

For the ayatollahs in Teheran trying to find a way out of their nuclear difficulties, what better way to divert the world's attention from their nuclear-enrichment programme than to provoke a fresh Middle East crisis between Israel and its neighbours?

More here.

Rambo III it ain't, but... [AV]

There is something uplifting about the idea of an Iraq Short Film Festival, especially after the suppression ofIraq's historically colorful (and very bohemian) artistic and cultural community under Saddam Hussein.

Last September, Nizar al-Rawi put together the first post-Saddam Film Festival and, judging from the review in the Times of London, it was a smashing success. Many of the films described seem to echo what V.S. Naipaul "the humor and pity of things."

If secure funding can be obtained, is set to become an annual tradition.

Walid Phares in al Muharrer: "Hizbollah's war ordered by Iran and Syria"

Interviewed by al Muharrer weekly magazine, FDD's Senior Fellow Walid Phares underlined that the operation launched by Hizbollah across the borders with Israel has been ordered by Iran with Syrian support to "trigger a regional confrontation, deflecting attention from Iran's nuclear crisis, Syria's Hariri problem and Hezbollah's disarmament challenge." Another objective of the Hezbollah war is to crumble the Lebanese Government and replace it with a pro-Syrian cabinet. "To those who claim that Hezbollah has a number of MIPS in the parliament, and is therefore a political reality in the country, we say that once the weapons are withdrawn and Iranian money cut off, then we would know the real representation of the organization." On Lebanon's current Government, Phrase said "it has failed to disarm Hizbollah, deploy the Army and committed a mistake by including this group in the Government before it neutralizes it." Read the text in Arabic. Download phares_14706.pdf

Syria's Nexus of Terror

Alykhan Velshi's latest backgrounder outlines Syria's role in supporting terrorism and its history of facilitating attacks against Israel and U.S. forces in Iraq.

Middle East Round Up, Cont...

National Review editorializes:

The Hamas leader, Khalid Mashaal, has headquarters in Damascus, protected by the thugocracy of Bashar al-Assad, himself protected by Iran. The overpowering of Hezbollah might lead Hamas’s sponsors around the Middle East to conclude that they can’t engage in a proxy war against Israel with impunity. If not, the targeted killings of Mashaal and his lieutenants in Syria would be appropriate, and other targets there might beckon as well. It is right to eliminate terror masters, and beyond that, the weakening and humiliation of its wretched Syrian stooge would be a suitable reward to Iran for its mischief-making.

In the New York Sun, Youssef Ibrahim explains how "The Road to Beirut Leads Straight to Damascus."

Middle East Media Round Up

CNN continues to update the situation in the Middle East here.  Reuters offers its own take on the situation here.

Charles Krauthammer tackles the question "Why They Fight" in today's Washington Post:

In 1948 Israel acquired life. The fighting raging now in 2006 -- between Israel and the "genocidal Islamism" (to quote the writer Yossi Klein Halevi) of Hamas and Hezbollah and Iran behind them -- is about whether that life should and will continue to exist.

Also in the Post, Michael Oren explains why Israel's only option in the current crisis is to confront state sponsors of terror:

By eliminating the terrorist leaderships in Gaza and southern Lebanon and deterring Syria and Iran from prodding their proxies to war, Israel can restore a reasonable level of security to its citizens.

The Bull Moose comments on the crisis here.

Littlegreenfootballs comments on the Vatican's condemnation of Israel here.

Michael Rubin argues that the U.S.' fight for spread of democracy is the Mideast is faltering in the Philadelphia Inquirer.

Update - Iranian Involvement (JS)

CNN has just reported that "Israeli military sources say they believe the longer-range missiles fired yesterday at Haifa, Israel, were made in Iran."

This is a confirmation of information first posted here yesterday.

STRATFOR has more insight here.

Revolutionary Guards Trapped in Lebanon? [AV]

Michael Ledeen, writing on NRO, points out that "[t]he Lebanese Tourism Ministry’s Research Center announced an amazing statistic in early July: in the first six months of the year, 60,888 Iranian tourists visited Lebanon."

That's a lot of Revolutionary Guardsmen "vacationing" in Antelias

Interestingly enough, doesn't the disabling of Lebanon's transportation infrastructure mean that these Iranian agents are now trapped in Southern Lebanon?

Bolton Rejecting Draft Security Council Resolution (CM)

We call upon Syria and Iran to end their role as state sponsors of terror and unequivocally condemn the actions of Hamas, including this kidnapping.  We yet again call upon Syria to arrest the Hamas ringleader, Khaled Meshal, who currently resides in Damascus.  We stress again our condemnation of Syrian and Iranian support of Hizballah, which has claimed responsibility for the other kidnappings along the Blue Line between Israel and Lebanon.

We further call on the Palestinian Authority government to stop all acts of violence and terror and comply with the principles enunciated by the Quartet:  renounce terror, recognize Israel, and accept previous obligations and agreements, including the Roadmap.  The failure of the Palestinian Authority government to take these steps hurts the Palestinian people.

More here.

Iranian Involvement (JS)

The US and Israel have repeatedly, and correctly, stressed that Iran and Syria are directly behind Hezbollah's recent actions.

The clearest sign of this was the rocket attack on Haifa.  Ha'aretz reports that the missiles were of the Fajar model.  What the article fails to mention is that the Fajar is an Iranian built rocket with a range of 45-75 kilometers.  More info on the rocket here (the article entitled:  albawaba.com: Israel Fears Hizbullah Rockets) and here.

Hezbollah's Al-Manar Television Station Legitimate Target of Israeli Response

Washington, D.C. (July 13, 2006) – FDD’s Coalition Against Terrorist Media (CATM) today said that Hezbollah’s al-Manar television station is a legitimate communications target in Israel’s response to an act of war.

“Hezbollah uses al-Manar to recruit terrorists, incite violent attacks, conduct operational surveillance, raise funding and communicate with its forces,” said Mark Dubowitz, chief operating officer of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.  “Israel has every right to defend itself.   This attack was meant to cripple Hezbollah’s communications at a time when it holds two Israeli soldiers hostage and is indiscriminately attacking Israeli civilians.”

Dubowitz noted that earlier this year, the U.S. Treasury Department named al-Manar as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) organization.  Al-Manar is the only media outlet to be included on the Treasury Department’s terrorist sanctions list.

Global Terrorism Monitor

This week's Global Terrorism Monitor is now available.  Stories include the bombings in India, the Russians killing most wanted terrorist Shamil Basayev, changes to the US policy regarding Gitmo detainees, and much more.

Syria Monitor [AV]

This week's Syria Monitor is now available. In it, Tony Badran, a Research Fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, provides an update on the latest news affecting Syria's opposition and dissident movements.

This week's S

This week's Syria Monitor is now available. In it, Tony Badran, a Research Fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, provides an update on the latest news affecting Syria's opposition and dissident movements.

This week's S

This week's Syria Monitor is now available. In it, Tony Badran, a Research Fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, provides an update on the latest news affecting Syria's opposition and dissident movements.

This week's S

This week's Syria Monitor is now available. In it, Tony Badran, a Research Fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, provides an update on the latest news affecting Syria's opposition and dissident movements.

This week's S