The Golan Heights- remain a vital strategic asset for Israel

David Eshel's Weekly Outlook


The Golan Heights- remain a vital strategic asset for Israel

Only a number of days after the UN passed a resolution calling Israel’s sovereignty over Jerusalem illegal, former US secretary of state James Baker demands Israel leave the Golan Heights. It appears, from the report, that the Golan Heights are being used by the Iraq Study Group as an inducement to obtain cooperative Syrian behavior on Iraq. As predicted, Syrian Foreign Minister Farouk a-Shara immediately expressed his country’s willingness to enter into peace negotiations with Israel, stating such a move is welcome. A-Shara stated Damascus is willing to reach an agreement with Israel with the understanding the Golan Heights must be returned to Syria to the last centimeter, as part of such an agreement. For Israel, such a move would spell strategic disaster. This assessment will deal ONLY with the military aspects of the Golan question, raised by the Baker-Hamilton report and intentionally ignore all political considerations pertaining to this critical issue.

The Geostrategic Status of the Golan Heights

Above the Sea of Galilee rises n escarpment, its height ranging from 800 to 100 meters altitude known as the Golan Heights, towering over the Jordan rift valley to its west. It covers a total area of some 900 square kilometers. These ancient hills were created by volcanic activity, pouring out from craters, covering the high plateau with layers of basalt, making cross-country movement difficult. The highest point is Mount Hermon, a multi-peaked mountain rising to 2814 meters at its peak, which dominates observation over the entire region up to the Damascus Basin to the east- only some 60 kilometers away. he so-called "Purple Line" established after the ceasefire of June 10th, 1967 provided an excellent line of defense for Israel, located mostly along the watershed and enabling long range observation posts from a line of volcanic hills, on which the IDF established strategic electronic surveillance stations. On the other hand, from pure strategic view, the same Golan Heights contribute almost nothing to the defense of Syria's capital Damascus. A glimpse at the map indicates that due to topographical features to its west, Damascus can best be defended along the Awaj River near Sasa and the two stony deserts to the south, both impassable to military traffic. Any defense further west, including the Golan Heights can be outflanked, as the IDF did during the latter stages of the 1973 Yom Kippur War.

The Golan heights- Israel's strategic Bulwark
Due to its geo-strategic topography, Israel's northern border poses some serious anomalies to its defensive posture: What is known as the "Galilee Panhandle", an area which pokes like a finger from the Hula valley northward up to the Lebanese border, is a curious geographical phenomenon, created as result of hasty, shortsighted decisions made by the French and British following their victory over the Ottoman empire after WW1. The facts of this political fiasco, are apparent to even the most impartial observer. On its west, the Panhandle leans on a mountain range, only partially under Israeli sovereignty, the rest is Lebanon. (Over this very ground was fought last summer's Second Lebanon War, with disastrous consequences, partly due to topographical constraints) Only a mere 5000 to 7000 meters in width along its northern part, the Panhandle is dominated on its east by the towering Golan Heights, from which, pre-1967 Israeli settlements were constantly bombarded by Syrian artillery located on the overlooking slopes.

Under the present circumstances prevailing in this region, should Israel deprive itself of its most important strategic asset for a mere piece of paper, signed by a single leader, would be a strategic mistake, having serious consequences to any future negative change in Middle Eastern affairs. In fact, Syria's national interests are focused not only on the Golan Heights, which represent only an insignificant part of its entire territory. Syria's long-term strategic aims are to exert its hegemony over Lebanon and Israel's northern territory and even part of northern Jordan, which it considers part of their strategic aspirations over a "Greater Syria" predominance.

One of the options being proposed by the Baker-Hamilton report is to place US forces to mentor a future Syria-Israel peace deal over the Golan Heights, following Israel's withdrawal. Part of this would be US experts taking charge of the IDF monitoring stations on Mount Hermon and the overlooking border hills. As real-time intelligence in modern warfare is regarded imperative in early warning relinquishing these highly strategic assets, even under a friendly monitored replacement could become a crucial matter of national security. For example, During Operation Desert Storm, US intelligence on Iraqi Scud launch zones in western Iraq, vital to Israel, was denied even when Saddam's missiles impacted on Tel Aviv. But there are other reasons for Israel's reluctance to place US forces on the Golan. The presence of US forces in harms way to guard Israel against hostile infiltrations and subsequent preventive counter-guerrilla operations by the IDF could lead to unnecessary tension between the two allied nations.

In conclusion, the Golan Heights represents a vital strategic asset for Israel's security, especially in view of the current political developments in the region. The danger of the so-called Shiite Crescent engulfing Israel from its north and north-eastern border, with a Hezbollah dominated and Iranian-backed Lebanese Government, places Israel, should it cede the Golan Heights to Syria, before a strategic disaster. Being defensive in its nature, the Golan Heights not only safeguards Israel's north, but deters, by the IDF long range reach into the Damascus basin, from any offensive options, which Bashar Assad may consider to regain the Heights by force under an Iranian umbrella.

The Golan Heights- remain a vital strategic asset for Israel

David Eshel's Weekly Outlook


The Golan Heights- remain a vital strategic asset for Israel

Only a number of days after the UN passed a resolution calling Israel’s sovereignty over Jerusalem illegal, former US secretary of state James Baker demands Israel leave the Golan Heights. It appears, from the report, that the Golan Heights are being used by the Iraq Study Group as an inducement to obtain cooperative Syrian behavior on Iraq. As predicted, Syrian Foreign Minister Farouk a-Shara immediately expressed his country’s willingness to enter into peace negotiations with Israel, stating such a move is welcome. A-Shara stated Damascus is willing to reach an agreement with Israel with the understanding the Golan Heights must be returned to Syria to the last centimeter, as part of such an agreement. For Israel, such a move would spell strategic disaster. This assessment will deal ONLY with the military aspects of the Golan question, raised by the Baker-Hamilton report and intentionally ignore all political considerations pertaining to this critical issue.

The Geostrategic Status of the Golan Heights

Above the Sea of Galilee rises n escarpment, its height ranging from 800 to 100 meters altitude known as the Golan Heights, towering over the Jordan rift valley to its west. It covers a total area of some 900 square kilometers. These ancient hills were created by volcanic activity, pouring out from craters, covering the high plateau with layers of basalt, making cross-country movement difficult. The highest point is Mount Hermon, a multi-peaked mountain rising to 2814 meters at its peak, which dominates observation over the entire region up to the Damascus Basin to the east- only some 60 kilometers away. he so-called "Purple Line" established after the ceasefire of June 10th, 1967 provided an excellent line of defense for Israel, located mostly along the watershed and enabling long range observation posts from a line of volcanic hills, on which the IDF established strategic electronic surveillance stations. On the other hand, from pure strategic view, the same Golan Heights contribute almost nothing to the defense of Syria's capital Damascus. A glimpse at the map indicates that due to topographical features to its west, Damascus can best be defended along the Awaj River near Sasa and the two stony deserts to the south, both impassable to military traffic. Any defense further west, including the Golan Heights can be outflanked, as the IDF did during the latter stages of the 1973 Yom Kippur War.

The Golan heights- Israel's strategic Bulwark
Due to its geo-strategic topography, Israel's northern border poses some serious anomalies to its defensive posture: What is known as the "Galilee Panhandle", an area which pokes like a finger from the Hula valley northward up to the Lebanese border, is a curious geographical phenomenon, created as result of hasty, shortsighted decisions made by the French and British following their victory over the Ottoman empire after WW1. The facts of this political fiasco, are apparent to even the most impartial observer. On its west, the Panhandle leans on a mountain range, only partially under Israeli sovereignty, the rest is Lebanon. (Over this very ground was fought last summer's Second Lebanon War, with disastrous consequences, partly due to topographical constraints) Only a mere 5000 to 7000 meters in width along its northern part, the Panhandle is dominated on its east by the towering Golan Heights, from which, pre-1967 Israeli settlements were constantly bombarded by Syrian artillery located on the overlooking slopes.

Under the present circumstances prevailing in this region, should Israel deprive itself of its most important strategic asset for a mere piece of paper, signed by a single leader, would be a strategic mistake, having serious consequences to any future negative change in Middle Eastern affairs. In fact, Syria's national interests are focused not only on the Golan Heights, which represent only an insignificant part of its entire territory. Syria's long-term strategic aims are to exert its hegemony over Lebanon and Israel's northern territory and even part of northern Jordan, which it considers part of their strategic aspirations over a "Greater Syria" predominance.

One of the options being proposed by the Baker-Hamilton report is to place US forces to mentor a future Syria-Israel peace deal over the Golan Heights, following Israel's withdrawal. Part of this would be US experts taking charge of the IDF monitoring stations on Mount Hermon and the overlooking border hills. As real-time intelligence in modern warfare is regarded imperative in early warning relinquishing these highly strategic assets, even under a friendly monitored replacement could become a crucial matter of national security. For example, During Operation Desert Storm, US intelligence on Iraqi Scud launch zones in western Iraq, vital to Israel, was denied even when Saddam's missiles impacted on Tel Aviv. But there are other reasons for Israel's reluctance to place US forces on the Golan. The presence of US forces in harms way to guard Israel against hostile infiltrations and subsequent preventive counter-guerrilla operations by the IDF could lead to unnecessary tension between the two allied nations.

In conclusion, the Golan Heights represents a vital strategic asset for Israel's security, especially in view of the current political developments in the region. The danger of the so-called Shiite Crescent engulfing Israel from its north and north-eastern border, with a Hezbollah dominated and Iranian-backed Lebanese Government, places Israel, should it cede the Golan Heights to Syria, before a strategic disaster. Being defensive in its nature, the Golan Heights not only safeguards Israel's north, but deters, by the IDF long range reach into the Damascus basin, from any offensive options, which Bashar Assad may consider to regain the Heights by force under an Iranian umbrella.

The Golan Heights- remain a vital strategic asset for Israel

David Eshel's Weekly Outlook


The Golan Heights- remain a vital strategic asset for Israel

Only a number of days after the UN passed a resolution calling Israel’s sovereignty over Jerusalem illegal, former US secretary of state James Baker demands Israel leave the Golan Heights. It appears, from the report, that the Golan Heights are being used by the Iraq Study Group as an inducement to obtain cooperative Syrian behavior on Iraq. As predicted, Syrian Foreign Minister Farouk a-Shara immediately expressed his country’s willingness to enter into peace negotiations with Israel, stating such a move is welcome. A-Shara stated Damascus is willing to reach an agreement with Israel with the understanding the Golan Heights must be returned to Syria to the last centimeter, as part of such an agreement. For Israel, such a move would spell strategic disaster. This assessment will deal ONLY with the military aspects of the Golan question, raised by the Baker-Hamilton report and intentionally ignore all political considerations pertaining to this critical issue.

The Geostrategic Status of the Golan Heights

Above the Sea of Galilee rises n escarpment, its height ranging from 800 to 100 meters altitude known as the Golan Heights, towering over the Jordan rift valley to its west. It covers a total area of some 900 square kilometers. These ancient hills were created by volcanic activity, pouring out from craters, covering the high plateau with layers of basalt, making cross-country movement difficult. The highest point is Mount Hermon, a multi-peaked mountain rising to 2814 meters at its peak, which dominates observation over the entire region up to the Damascus Basin to the east- only some 60 kilometers away. he so-called "Purple Line" established after the ceasefire of June 10th, 1967 provided an excellent line of defense for Israel, located mostly along the watershed and enabling long range observation posts from a line of volcanic hills, on which the IDF established strategic electronic surveillance stations. On the other hand, from pure strategic view, the same Golan Heights contribute almost nothing to the defense of Syria's capital Damascus. A glimpse at the map indicates that due to topographical features to its west, Damascus can best be defended along the Awaj River near Sasa and the two stony deserts to the south, both impassable to military traffic. Any defense further west, including the Golan Heights can be outflanked, as the IDF did during the latter stages of the 1973 Yom Kippur War.

The Golan heights- Israel's strategic Bulwark
Due to its geo-strategic topography, Israel's northern border poses some serious anomalies to its defensive posture: What is known as the "Galilee Panhandle", an area which pokes like a finger from the Hula valley northward up to the Lebanese border, is a curious geographical phenomenon, created as result of hasty, shortsighted decisions made by the French and British following their victory over the Ottoman empire after WW1. The facts of this political fiasco, are apparent to even the most impartial observer. On its west, the Panhandle leans on a mountain range, only partially under Israeli sovereignty, the rest is Lebanon. (Over this very ground was fought last summer's Second Lebanon War, with disasrous consequences, partly due to topographical constraints) Only a mere 5000 to 7000 meters in width along its northern part, the Panhandle is dominated on its east by the towering Golan Heights, from which, pre-1967 Israeli settlements were constantly bombarded by Syrian artillery located on the overlooking slopes.

Under the present circumstances prevailing in this region, should Israel deprive itself of its most important strategic asset for a mere piece of paper, signed by a single leader, would be a strategic mistake, having serious consequences to any future negative change in Middle Eastern affairs. In fact, Syria's national interests are focused not only on the Golan Heights, which represent only an insignifcent part of its entire territory. Syria's long-term strategic aims are to excert its hegemony over Lebanon and Israel's northern territory and even part of northern Jordan, which it considers part of their strategic aspirations over a "Greater Syria" predominance.
One of the options being proposed by the Baker-Hamilton report is to place US forces to mintor a future Syria-Israel peace deal over the Golan Heights, following Israel's withdrawal. Part of this would be US experts taking charge of the IDF monitoring stations on Mount Hermon and the overlooking border hills. As real-time intelligence in modern warfare is regarded imperative in early warning relinquishing these highly strategic assets, even under a friendly monitored replacement could become a crucial matter of national security. For example, During Operation Desert Storm, US intelligence on Iraqi Scud launch zones in western Iraq, vital to Israel, was denied even when Saddam's missiles impacted on Tel Aviv. But there are other reasons for Israel's reluctance to place US forces on the Golan. The presence of US forces in harms way to guard Israel against hostile infiltrations and subsequent preventive counter-guerilla operations by the IDF could lead to unneccessary tension between the two allied nations.

In conclusion, the Golan Heights represents a vital strategic asset for Israel's security, especially in view of the current political developments in the region. The danger of the so-called Shiite Crescent engulfing Israel from its north and nort-eastern border, with a Hezbollah dominated and Iranian-backed Lebanese Government, places Israel, should it cede the golan Heights to Syria, before a strategic disaster. Being defensive in its nature, the Golan Heights not only safeguards Israel's north, but deters, by the IDF long range reach into the Damascus basin, from any offensive options, which Bashar Assad may consider to regain the Heights by force under an Iranian umbrella.

Will Ahmadinejad's term be cut short?

The Iranian parliament voted last sunday to unite the presidential elections with the upcoming parliamentary ones, this according to the official Iranian news agency. The proposal, which passed with a surprising 80 percent majority, may cut the term of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad by 18 months. The bill must still be ratified by the Iranian constitutional committee, which is headed by former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Ahmadinejad's arch-rival, a fact which many see as indicative that the bill will indeed be authorized. Parliament approved a draft bill upon which the parliamentary and presidential elections would be held simultaneously in the first quarter of 2008.

Although Iran's parliament is dominated by the ultraconservative Abadgaran (Development) Party of which the president is a senior member, there is already growing disconcerting evidence among the religious clerics to Ahmadinejad's messianic rhetoric. In a sign of divisions at the top of the clerical establishment, even the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has until now supported Mr Ahmadinejad, said "irregularities" in the government's behaviour would not be tolerated. Older, traditionalist conservatives, are worried that Ahmadinejad is trying to instigate a new Iranian revolution this time within the existing structure of the state. They fear he wants to bring younger extremists from the Revolutionary Guard into top positions of power, ousting the older clerics who have previously held sway and embarking on a new cultural revolution that could unsettle their rule.

Still, the hard-line president has a strong power base, backed by his own spiritual adviser, Ayatollah Taqi Mesbah-Yazdi, who recently suggested that future elections were superfluous because a true Islamic government had arisen. But the most remarkable aspect of Mr Ahmadinejad's piety is his insinuation to the "Hidden Imam", or Mahdi, the Messiah-like figure of Shia Islam. The 49-year-old Mr Ahmadinejad, who was surprisingly elected over his arch rival Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, sees his main mission, as he recounted in a speech in Tehran, as to "pave the path for the glorious reappearance of Imam Mahdi, may Allah hasten his reappearance." According to Shiites, the 12th imam disappeared as a child in the year 941. When he returns, they believe, he will reign on earth for seven years, before bringing about a final judgment and the end of the world. According to his adversaries in the clerical establishment, Ahmadinejad's messianic obsession crossed the line where the domestic audience is concerned is, when he said a "green aura was coming out of his head" during his speech to the United Nations. As result, the main rift is no longer between "reformists" and "hardliners", but between the clerical establishment and Mr Ahmadinejad's brand of revolutionary populism and superstition. Iranian President Mahmoud's Ahmadinejad's mystical pre-occupation with the coming of a Shiite Islamic messiah figure – the Mahdi.

Hashemi Rafsanjani himself is still considered one of the most powerful politicians in Iran and is currently running for a position in the Assembly of Experts, an 86-strong body of ayatollahs who monitor the Iranian Supreme Leader (a position currently held by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei). The Assembly has the power to dismiss the Supreme Leader. Already existing tensions have heightened between Ahmadinejad and Rafsanjani as the latter is pitted directly against Ahmadinejad's spiritual mentor Masbah Yazdi who is also vying for a spot on the Assembly of Experts.

Even below surface all is not well in Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's tenure. Major opposition is already being reported from the pragmatist camp in Iran, who despite their belief that Iran has a right to obtain nuclear energy for civilian use, feel that the Ahmadinejad camp is not being flexible enough in its dealings with the European Union. This camp, headed by Ayatollahs Rafsanjani and Karrubi, has also expressed major concern regarding Iran's economic capability to effectively withstand economic sanctions. However, Iran's economic wellbeing aside, Ayatollah Rafsanjani most notably stands to lose millions of dollars worth of business if the West imposes economic sanctions on Iran, as Rafsanjani-owned companies are heavily involved in international trade. It is also reported that Rafsanjani has numerous international investments, stretching from Thailand to Canada.

A little known event, which happened last January, proved most concerting to the president, when Rafsanjani met secretly with Iran's supreme leader and old revolutionary comrade Ayatollah Khamenei. It is a known fact that Khamenei has already tried to reduce his former protege's influence by giving Rafsanjani senior political positions such as the presidency of the Expediency Council. Furthermore, during that same month, Rafsanjani went on a trip to the heart of Iran's religious establishment in the city of Qom, where he met 11 of Iran's 14 grand ayatollahs. This is a clear sign that Rafsanjani is looking for consensus for a major policy change.

Not only his political status may be jeopardised by the upcoming elections. There is also much more violent unrest in store. On Dec. 15, 2005 gunmen ambushed Ahmadinejad's motorcade, was attacked on the Zabol- Saravan highway in Baluchistan where Sunni Baluchis have been fighting for autonomy from Iran's Shiite theocratic government. Similar incidents happened in other Arab Shiite provinces, such as oil rich Kuzestan, one of the most strategic regions of Iran, bordering with Arab Shiite southern Iraq.

The Price of the Intifada

The Second Lebanon War provided a wake up call for the IDF. After six years of low intensive conflict it was forced to face realities, long forgotten by its senior leadership. Cynics can even predict, that if the Hezbolla/ Iraq war would not have happened last summer, it should have been invented, for the sake of Israel's security and even survival in this turbulent neighbouhood.

Six years of Intifada fighting have already shown how irrelevant have been traditional warfare scenarios. Employing the most sophisticated weapons in IDF disposal, against a known enemy in full scale warfare, proved in most cases useless and even counter-productive, in the daily struggle against the Palestinian street violence in Gaza and the West Bank Kasbahs. Most Israeli senior commanders have for many years detested this kind of confrontation, termed euphemistically by the gurus of the American military discipline as ‘low intensity conflict (LIC)'. It was too low to their taste- in fact, the few veterans remaining in service, which have been blooded in full scale battles during the 1973 Yom Kippur War- are the only one's that have seen a major military action.

The long frustrating years of the ‘low intensity conflict’ in the West Bank and Gaza, that has sent Israel’s best and fiercest soldiers to chase Palestinian terrorists in the alleys of Nablus or Hebron, have stamped their mark on the lack of professional military performance during the latest Lebanon conflict, which was fought with modern weapons, fielded by a highly trained and motivated force.

The new report by the state comptroller, blaming the lack of training of the senior commanders of the Israel Defense Forces, maybe one of the most critical and troubling ever made public. However, to those privy to IDF senior officer training procedures, for a long time- it came as little surprise.

The IDF officer corps has for decades preferred "doers" instead of "brainers" into its senior ranks. The art of war was negated as superflous in counter-terrorist low intensity warfare, in which tactical command was supreme. For years, senior officers neglected in-depth studies of their military profession- preferring "action" to theory- active command to staff assignment- all being the speedy track for promotion to senior rank.

Unfortunately under the constant high intensity of operational service in field ranks little time was available for long-term study courses to prepare those younger field officers, with huge combat experience in low intensive warfare, to command higher formations, such as brigades and even divisions in high intensive warfare.

The six years of Intifada had even more bearing on the senior officer ranks: The usual term for young Lt colonels commanding a combat battalion is two years- and in most cases, extremely grueling. The same goes for a colonel commanding a brigade. Normally following tactical command officers would undergo at least one year in military studies either local or abroad and then serve on the staff to get acquainted with a wider scope of the military and especially the inter-service co-operation procedures, essential for a modern high-intensity warfare scenario. However, over the last years, this routine, critical for the development of a professional senior commander, was ignored, due to the constant need for qualified combat commanders in LIC operations. As those operations are fought "round-the-clock" for months on end, this leaves senior officers little time for anything but duty, not to mention in-depth study of their profession.

In sheer statistics- a young Lt Colonel commanding a combat battalion, in his early thirties, would in many cases be commanding a combat brigade after a mere four or five years since taking command of his first battalion and would be promoted to one star general commanding a division about four or five years later. The resulting inadequate professional standards of senior officers in high intensive combat operations, should therefore not be surprising- being the price tag of grueling abrasion in the six years of Intifada- in which the IDF fought to a large extent- police action, not suitable for a military force.

The IDF had identified the need for professionalism before. After the hard fought and hard won Yom Kippur War of 1973, its military leadership was looking for new approaches to train its officers. The Talpiot program was established as the Israel Defense Forces elite brainpower summit, tasked with changing the language of technological warfare. Moreover, recognizing that its officer corps required significant overhaul, the IDF had begun to imitate some-not all-features of the American approach to officer development and compensation. Existing programs for educating more senior officers were considered clearly inadequate. Already under consideration were proposals to convert the command and staff school to a two-year course, and perhaps to create a military academy that would confer academic degrees. Unfortunately, things dis not develop according to these ambitious plans. By 2003, nearly 21 classes of more than 440 soldiers have called themselves elite Talpiot alumni but only a handful of Talpiot graduates have become military career officers. There are only 2 colonels, 14 lieutenant colonels, and 1 brigadier general remaining of this alumni.

It is to be hoped, that the IDF top brass will heed to this latest wake-up call and take the necessary steps to redress the situation and create a professional senior officer corps- which Israel's military urgently needs in time to meet the looming challenges to its security.

Crisis in Lebanon on Verge of Explosion

As crisis in Lebanon shows no sign of easing, violent clashes broke out Sunday between Shiite and Sunni Muslims in the capital, leaving one man dead from gunshot wounds. Identified by police as Ahmed Ali Mahmoud, a 20-year-old Shiite Muslim, he was shot during the clash in the Tarik Jdideh neighborhood. Although both sides still adhere to some sort of high tension restraint, it is surprising that sofar the violence has not spread into total chaos in the streets of Beirut.

Of special interest is that on the mass rallies, orchestrated by Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, the total absence of Hezbollah's disticint yellow banners was strangely conspicuous. Another surprise the mass rally provided over the weekend was the identity of the key speaker, not as expected Nasrallah in person, but – Maronite General Michel Aoun: In the distant past Aoun was a sworn enemy of the Syrians in Lebanon but he is now their ally. He has become Nasrallah's devoted partner and hopes to pave his way to the presidential palace at Baabda through his support of Nasrallah.

But there are other players, already working behind the scene, which may well turn the sofar controlled uprising into turmoil. Apart from Iran and Syria poking their fingers constantly into Lebanese affairs, Al Qaeda was said to have expanded its presence in Lebanon over the last few months. According to Lebanese security officials, Al Qaeda has gained control at least over over one Palestinian Islamist group in northern Lebanon.

The Beirut-based An Nahar reported that an Al Qaeda cell named Fatah Al Islam took over the pro-Syrian Fatah Al Intifada in the Palestinian refugee camp of Naher Al Bared in northern Lebanon. Lebanese sources said Fatah Al Intifada has been used by the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad to destabilize the government of Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Siniora. They said operatives from Fatah Al Intifada were directed to kill senior Lebanese officials. On Nov. 29, the Lebanese daily Al Mustaqbal reported that Lebanese authorities arrested two Fatah Al Intifada operatives. The newspaper said the two were identified as Syrian agents ordered to assassinate senior Lebanese officials. Syria was said to have sent undercover operatives to the Palestinian refugee camps of Badawi and Burj Al Barajneh in Lebanon in order to raise suitable candidates for its operations.

Israel and several Arab states, including Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan, are increasingly concerned that Siniora's government will fall, resulting in a Hezbollah takeover that would turn the country into what an Israeli government source termed "the first Arab state to become an Iranian protectorate."Former chief of Israel Defense Forces Army Intelligence Corps, Major General (res.) Aharon Ze'evi Farkash, said Sunday the chances of another war in Lebanon would increase should Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora choose to resign. If Siniora's government falls, he warned, the Sunni leader will be forced to make concessions in favor of Syria and its allies, and possibly undermine the sole major achievement of Israel in the second Lebanon war - namely, the new security arrangements made along the border.

The stability of Security Council Resolution 1701 will certainly be in question. If Hezbollah determines who will form the next government in Lebanon, and even if Siniora emerges from this standoff as a weaker prime minister, the extent of cooperation between the government in Beirut and the UN peacekeeping force, UNIFIL, will be undermined. It is hard to imagine the European troops deployed in southern Lebanon staying there if Hassan Nasrallah signals that Hezbollah intends to target them, as it did French and American forces in 1983.

Last Thursday, the day before the anti-Siniora Hezbollah sponsored rallies started in downtown Beirut, a little mentioned incident happened on a remote crossing on the Syrian border, when border guards at the Jdeidet Yabous frontier post, questioned a suspected person, trying to cross into Lebanon with faked documents. Attempting to escape, the guards gave chase and the man detonated his hidden explosive belt, killing himself and wounding two members of the guards. Intelligence agents identified the body as 28 year old Omar Abdullah ( aka Omaer Hamra), a wanted leader of the Tawhid Wal Jihad Islamic group. Lebanese security officials told the local paper Ya Libnan, that "obviously Omar Hamra was not traveling to Lebanon as a tourist…he was heading here for trouble".

Tawhid Wal Jihad is an Islamic group founded by the late Sheikh Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and is believed to count several hundreds of Syrian members. The same group was blamed by Egypt's intelligence having perpetrated the recent bomb attacks in Sinai Jihad and three men of the group have been sentenced to death for organizing the attacks. Last Sunday's manhunt in Sinai after four Palestinians suspected of planning attacks on Israeli tourists is believed to be affiliated to this militant group.
Defense Update has investigated the origins of Jama'at Al-Tawhid wa Al-Jihad, being its official name. The clandestine Sunni organization released a statement claiming it had officially joined the Al-Qaeda terrorist network, on Al-Arabiyah televisionon in October 2004, under the leadership of the notorious Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who was killed by US forces in Iraq last June. Jama'at al-Tawhid Wa'al-Jihad justifies its actions by the Wahabbi interpretation of Islamic Law, which legimatizes brutal methods of Jihad against infidels or their Arab stalwarts.
No doubt, Al Qaeda and its affiliates will continue to shower sparks over the Lebanese powder-keg- if its succeeds in inciting another civil war, perhaps Syria will try another comeback to revive the Taif Agreement, which held them fast in Lebanon's politics for nearly two decades.

Lebanon is already caught in a dynamic of crisis and even if there is a temporary easing of tensions because the rival factions manage to work out a compromise, this will only buy them time until the next flare-up. As for Israel, Siniora’s ability to implement UN Resolution 1701 will be further constrained by ongoing instability, and if he is overthrown and replaced by a unity government in which the "March 14 movement" ( kown after the day on which Christians, Sunnis and Druze rallied in downtown Beirut to demand the withdrawal of Syrian forces), will have even less influence. 1701 will become a dead letter. If that happens, the outbreak of another Israel-Hizbullah war will just be a matter of time.

Western Iraq- becoming Al Qaeda's Safe Haven?

On his way to his summit meeting between Iraqi PM Nouri Maliki and King Abdallah II in Amman, last week, President Bush declined to classify the Iraq crisis as a civil war and blamed Al Qaeda for the deterioration. The following day, US media reported a virtual bombshell, aired by ABC News that Pentagon officials are considering a major strategic shift in Iraq, to move U.S. forces out of the dangerous Sunni-dominated al-Anbar province and join the fight to secure Baghdad.

The Al Anbar province in western Iraq is a vast, sparsely populated area that stretches from the Euphrates River Valley to the Syrian border. Agriculture is the number one economy, and water is the most important resource. It's 30,000 square miles of desert, dotted by farmland, with numerous small cities and towns, some of them 3000 years old.

US analysts and Israeli military sources immediately interpreted this step as more than acceptance for the first time of an American military defeat in the embattled province; it also paves the way for the creation of an Al Qaeda terrorist -Sunni insurgent base in western Iraq, a direct menace to neighboring Jordan and Israel, as well as Lebanon, which is already in dangerous turmoil. Although the US president stressed Al Qaeda would not be allowed to maintain a territorial haven in Iraq- analysts consider his plan as totally irrelevant to what is actually going on in that region. If Bush's plan appears to be to hand Anbar over to the indigenous Sunni tribal confederation which will fight Al Qaeda- intelligence experts regard this as dangerously "wishful thinking".

Recent developments in Western Iraq which engulfs over 1.25 million, mostly Sunni population, concentrated in Fallujah, Haditha, Hit, al Qaim and Ramadi area named Al Anbar province have indicated, that the U.S. military is no longer able to defeat the growing power of Al Qaeda led insurgency in this highly strategic area. A major operational transit area for " outside" insurgents infiltrating from Syria along the Euphrates River valley, into the interior of Iraq, the small town of Hi't has become a critical focal point for intensive fighting between insurgents and US forces.

In recent months, Al Qaeda's propularity has been rising dramatically among the Sunni majority of the region and has virtually become the organisation's "safe haven" in Iraq. According to a classified US Marine Corps intelligence report, leaked surprisingly to a US newspaper the author of this document, Colonel Peter Devlin, who was attached to the Marine Expeditionary Force in Anbar, described Iraq’s Sunni minority as "embroiled in a daily fight for survival, fearful of pogroms by the Shiite majority" and becoming increasingly dependent on Al Qaeda as its only hope against growing Iranian Shiite dominance of Baghdad. Colonel Devlin claimed that Al Qaeda has already become the dominant organization of influence in Anbar Province, surpassing all other groups, including the central Baghdad government and US troops in the region.

To emphasize the seriouseness of the situation, that the US Army is finding itself in Western Iraq these days it suffizes to pint out that between Al-Qaeda's violence, Iran's influence and an expected U.S. drawdown, "the social and political situation has deteriorated to a point" that U.S. and Iraqi troops "are no longer capable of militarily defeating the insurgency in al-Anbar," the assessments stated. In Anbar province alone, at least 90 U.S. troops have died due to insurgency attacks since Sept. 1. Indeed, classified US intelligence estimates that between 600 and 700 Al Qaeda fighters are already permantly present in Iraq. This figure does not count the 600 to 800 Ansar al Islam fighters and smaller groups of locals and foreigners linked to Al Qaeda or identifying with its aims. All in all, Al Qaeda can field 1,800-2,000 fighters, which could swell into many thousands once Al Qaeda takes over the region entirely.

But matters can become much worse, once US forces are withdrawn out of this volatile region. An American withdrawal from Anbar will lay one-third of Iraq’s area bare to Al Qaeda and Sunni insurgent control. Once US troops are gone, no one can guarantee who will end up on top.
Strangely enough, the Pentagon only last year had authorized substantial funding to pull back their troops from Iraq's towns and cities and redeploy them in four giant bases in Western Iraq, a strategy they said would be a planned prelude to eventual withdrawal. A dangerous move by Al Qaeda, following the planned withdrawal, could be to cripple the strategic airbases around the western city of Al Rutbah near the border with Jordan and put out of commission squadrons deployed at the H2 airbase and at the three airfields and landing pads at H3 along Iraq’s border with Syria and Jordan. This theater of operation also includes the problematic Al Qaim region, where weapons that include surface-to-air missiles are still being smuggled in from Syria more than three years after the US-led invasion. It also covers the meeting-point of the Iraqi, Jordanian and Saudi frontiers.

Basrah First Stop in "Shiite Crescent"

Middle East Intelligence analysts have noticed the latest trend of hostile activities in southern Iraq, showing a marked increase in attacks on British forces. These culminated last May with the high-profile downing of the RAF Lynx helicopter in downtown Basrah city and especially the incited riots following shortly after the crash. British officers have expressed serious concern about the increasing influence and control of the Mahdi Army on Basra's streets.last September, when troops were set on fire as they escaped from burning Warrior armoured vehicles attacked by petrol bombs.

The chief of the British Army General Sir Richard Dannatt has called for a pullout of British troops from Iraq "sometime soon". Sir Richard might be issuing a "very public warning" to the next prime minister. In a sign that public opinion is hardening against Britain's military presence in Iraq, 61% of voters say they want British troops to leave. In fact, there are already indications, that British "Operation Telic" contingent forces are re-deploying from down-town Basrah to more defensive positions around the perimeter, which may signal first preparations for a phased withdrawal early next year. The highly strategic Basrah region is not only the logistical vital supply gate for coalition forces in Iraq, but due to its strategic location, close to the Shat-al Arab waterway, could clear the way for an Iranian foray into the void.

Iran's first objective implementing its aim would be controlling the strategic Shat-al-Arab waterway and Al Basrah province, which not only dominates all access routes in that region, but would place the US led coalition forces in Iraq in dangerous jeopardy, by virtually threatening their vital logistical supply life-line into central Iraq. Sofar, the only military force still preventing such a threat depended on the relatively limited military British contingent in Basrah. Fortunately, probably with some foresight, the south-central weak links that were the Ukrainian and Bulgarian contingents have recently been replaced by elements of the US 4th Infantry Division, forming up on the overall border region, preventing outflanking of British army positions north of Basrah. But any reduction, or even early withdrawal of the British contingent, would place these forces under severe pressure to stem a growing threat from Iranian-backed insurgency forces in that highly critical region. In order to achieve a strategic land-link to the Iraqi Shi'ite south, Iran must not only destabilise the Al Basrah region, but, first dominate the entire province with loyal elements, which will secure this vital land bridge for Iran's ultimate aims.

In a recent restricted intelligence report, experts estimated that, while world attention is focusing on Iran's nuclear ambitions and Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's fierce rhetoric, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps is quietly destablising southern Iraq, and unhinging British military control of Al-Basrah being its first objective. There are already indications, that Telic forces are re-deploying from down-town Basrah to more defensive positions around the perimeter, which may even signal first preparations for a phased withdrawal early next year.

Iranian influence in Iraq has significantly increased over the last year, but has become most pervasive in the Shiite south, where local militia, backed by IRGC have virtually consolidated their control over Al Basrah province and now dominate police, governate council, security apparatuses and even humanitarian organisations. These militias in the city have virtually eliminated nearly all the local opposition. In fact, it is well known to western intelligence community that Iranian revolutionary guard units are sponsors of the Mahdi Army of Moqtada al Sadr and the Badr Brigades of the Supreme Council for the Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI). They are the principal militias of the Shia communities of the south, and are now among the top three or four most powerful private armies in Iraq.

Although Shi'ite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr has repeatedly denied any relationship with the Iranian regime, he was reported visiting Iran in June 2003, where he met with high-level Iranian officials. More important, however is that Al-Sadr visited Iran again last January 2006, meeting with Supreme National Security Council Secretary Ali Larijani. Since that time, it appears relations have deepened, and some U.S. and Iraqi officials have alleged that Iran is now funding al-Sadr's Imam Al-Mahdi Army.

Iraq's leading Shi'ite political party, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), was based in Iran for some 20 years prior to the downfall of the Saddam Hussein regime. SCIRI's armed wing, the Badr Corps (now known as the Badr Organization) was trained by Iran's Al-Quds Force, a special-operations unit of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps. The Cairo-based weekly "Al-Ahram" claimed in 2005 that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad played a role in the formation of the Badr Corps and hence wields considerable influence over the organization in its present activities.

Sources quoting from Israeli intelligence reports indicate that during the last months large shipments of advanced weapons have been smuggled into Iraq from Iran. Already last October London's "Sunday Telegraph" reported that the notorious IRGC Al-Quds Force had established three main smuggling routes into Iraq through Al-Basrah and Al-Amarah from a base near Ahvaz, in Iranian Khuzestan. Officials estimate these latest deliveries including large numbers of Iran-modified SA-7 Strela ground-to-air missiles. One of such, could have been involved in shooting down the British helicopter over Basrah city.

During a recent closed conference held in Israel, oriental scholars and intelligence experts contemplated the new Iranian strategy over Iraq and its regional repercussions. Among the topics raised was the escalation of violence in southern Iraq and especially in the Al Basrah province, being one of the most strategic environments in the US led coalition campaign.
Last August, the newsweekly "Time" reported that the Iranian clerical regime began planning its infiltration to Iraq already late 2002, setting up strong military forces along the Iran-Iraq border. The newspaper said that thousands of people entered Iraq from Iran in the early days after the U.S-led invasion, including many agents of the Iranian security services.

Now over four years on, Iran appears to have entrenched its intelligence and paramilitary forces in Iraq, especially in the Shiite south, where, experts estimate, Iranian strategic goals are now focusing on the regional aims, to forward the so-called " Shiite Crescent" strategy, which Jordan's King Abdallah II mentioned last January. Analysts warn that among the possible Iranian goals in Iraq that have been propagated recently are, apart from preventing the formation of a pro-Arab, pro-U.S secularist regime; and driving U.S. forces from Iraq, their most important aim is to establish a secure strategic Iranian-controlled land route linking Iran to Syria, increasing leverage in Iran's support of the Palestinian Hamas regime as well as their Shiite proxy, Hezbollah in Lebanon. Although the latter has been severly battered in the Second Lebanon war, its political prestige has grown substantially, threatening Fouad Siniora's, western oriented grovernment with aim to establish a pro-Iranian, Shi'ite dominated Lebanon. Such a move would give the Tehran Ayathollas new impetus to realise their sofar unaccomplished ambition to propagate the Islamic dominance over the secular Middle East.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's strange letter to US president Bush, last Fall, should give analysts ample thought. The theological connotations, especially his closing phrase Vasalam Ala Man Ataba'al hoda ( "Peace only unto those who follow true path"), seems to signal, not only a sinister threat, but stern warning in writing, reminding orientalists of ancient historical idioms, not voiced by any Islamic leader since the capture of Constantinople in May 1453!
But what could become even more intriguing developments, at present, are still unconfirmed reports over a clandestine military operation under which Iranian Revolutionary Guard forces were quietly airlifted, early May, into Sudan, following a secret meeting between Omar Al-Bashir and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

It needs little imagination, glancing at the Middle East map, to indentify Iran's latest strategic moves in this region: having creating 'Hezbollahland' in Lebanon South and the Beka'a Valley, increasing Iranian activity in the Palestinian West Bank and Gaza's 'Hamastan' , active support to al Qaeda's forward base in Sinai and now, if confirmed, establishing a military presence in east Africa within range of the strategic Red Sea shipping lanes.