Syria emerges as prime suspect in Lebanon assassination

Share:

Damascus has emerged the prime suspect in the assassination of Lebanon’s anti-Syrian police intelligence chief but his death is unlikely to plunge the country into chaos, analysts said on Saturday.

They said the murder of General Wissam al-Hassan in a Beirut car bombing on Friday appeared to show that even in its weakened state Lebanon’s neighbour and former occupier Syria could still take action on the ground.

“Hassan was targeted daily by pro-Syrian newspapers in Lebanon and Damascus accused him of aiding rebels hostile to (President) Bashar al-Assad,” said Ghassan al-Azzi, a politics professor at Beirut’s Lebanese University.

“Damascus detested him above all for catching red-handed with explosives Lebanon’s former information minister Michel Samaha, the most pro-Syrian of Syria’s allies,” he added.

Hassan arrested Samaha at his home in August and police found explosives which investigators alleged were to be used in a series of attacks in northern Lebanon to spark unrest in the country.

A series of deadly sectarian clashes between pro- and anti-Damascus gunmen in the northern city of Tripoli in the summer raised fears that the Syrian conflict was spilling over into Lebanon.

The meticulousness with which Hassan’s assassination was planned and carried out has led to suspicions that his killers were professionals belonging to a state security apparatus.

“It’s a war between the (Lebanese and Syrian) security services,” said Fadia Kiwane, director of political science at Saint Joseph University in Beirut.

“Hassan had spearheaded the confrontation with the Syrian regime since the assassination of prime minister Rafiq Hariri” who was killed in 2005 in a car bombing also blamed on Syria despite its repeated denials.

“The Syrian regime remained in Lebanon for 35 years, it infiltrated all levels of the administration, and is present in all local governments,” she added, referring to Syria’s political and military domination of its neighbour.

The Syrian army withdrew from Lebanon in 2005 after an almost 30-year occupation.

General Ashraf Rifi, head of Lebanon’s Internal Security Forces (ISF), said that Hassan had only arrived back in the country the evening before his assassination.

“No one, not even me, knew when he was getting back from Paris,” he told journalists. “I never asked about his movements for security reasons.”

Hassan was travelling in an unmarked car and his assassins would have had to be well-informed of his plans to wait for him and detonate the car bomb in a narrow street.

According to Azzi, “the Syrians know all the ins and outs of the (Lebanese) state, so there are many suspicions against them, even if we can’t rule out Israel” as responsible for the attack.

“He dismantled several spy rings of the Jewish state and put their agents in prison,” Azzi added.

However, Fabrice Balanche, an expert on Syria, also saw Damascus as suspect number one.

He said Syrian intelligence services “in this way showed their ability to cause a nuisance abroad, particularly in Lebanon. When fighting against an uprising, you have to show you can eliminate your opponents abroad.

“Assad wants to gain respect by frightening his enemies,” added the director of the Group for Research and Study of the Mediterranean and Middle East, based in Lyon, France.

However, the analysts predicted that Lebanon would not slide into chaos following the attack.

“The country will continue to live under the strain of the Syrian revolution,” Azzi said. “Neither (pro-Syrian) Hezbollah … nor Damascus’s enemies have any desire or interest to plunge the country into civil war.”

Kiwane agreed: “The various Lebanese protagonists are acutely aware of the gravity of the situation and will find a political solution to the assassination since no one wants a new civil war.”

afp

Share:

Comments

44 responses to “Syria emerges as prime suspect in Lebanon assassination”

  1. again why cant israel be considered involved since he broke several israeli spy netwroks?

    1. Because Israelis never use car bombs or suicide attacks in any case against anyone. The last cases of Israeli Jewish car boms happened more than 60 years ago (Mainly King David hotel), and even than most of the Jewish leadership and public was outraged and opposed such methods.

      I think that even Hizbullah, Hamas or Jihad would admit that Israel goes way beyond any other nation in the world to try to target the specific person. If Israel was using Assad’s tactics in 2006 – The whole Shiite south could have been wiped out with tens of thousands of civilian casualties. 

      Anyway Israel is not an enemy of Lebanon, just enemy of Hizbullah. 

      1. Cathy812 Avatar

        oh right Israel has morals lol thats why so many of its soldiers desert the IDF for moral reasons because they can’t go on with the senseless killing of thousands…please, they are not stupid, they are not gonna go kill one person and make it look that professional…they are gonna do what the lebanese have been used to for many years: car bombs

        1. Pure rubbish. Most Israeli Jews,Druze and Muslim Cherkes serve in the IDF, and so are many muslim Beduins. Many Arab-Christians started to enlist to the IDF or civil-service, and even some of the Muslim Palestinians with Israeli ID.

          Assad (father & son), Iran & Hizbullah were behind dozens, if not hundreds of car bombs all over the world – In Lebanon against so many Lebanese anti-Syrian/ Hizbullah politicians and against UN peace keepers, and even in Argentina against ordinary Jewish-Argentinian citizens. It seems those people are born with a bomb in their hand. 

        2. jim dandy Avatar

           are you deaf or just dumb

  2. again why cant israel be considered involved since he broke several israeli spy netwroks?

    1. Because Israelis never use car bombs or suicide attacks in any case against anyone. The last cases of Israeli Jewish car boms happened more than 60 years ago (Mainly King David hotel), and even than most of the Jewish leadership and public was outraged and opposed such methods.

      I think that even Hizbullah, Hamas or Jihad would admit that Israel goes way beyond any other nation in the world to try to target the specific person. If Israel was using Assad’s tactics in 2006 – The whole Shiite south could have been wiped out with tens of thousands of civilian casualties. 

      Anyway Israel is not an enemy of Lebanon, just enemy of Hizbullah. 

      1. Cathy812 Avatar

        oh right Israel has morals lol thats why so many of its soldiers desert the IDF for moral reasons because they can’t go on with the senseless killing of thousands…please, they are not stupid, they are not gonna go kill one person and make it look that professional…they are gonna do what the lebanese have been used to for many years: car bombs

        1. Pure rubbish. Most Israeli Jews,Druze and Muslim Cherkes serve in the IDF, and so are many muslim Beduins. Many Arab-Christians started to enlist to the IDF or civil-service, and even some of the Muslim Palestinians with Israeli ID.

          Assad (father & son), Iran & Hizbullah were behind dozens, if not hundreds of car bombs all over the world – In Lebanon against so many Lebanese anti-Syrian/ Hizbullah politicians and against UN peace keepers, and even in Argentina against ordinary Jewish-Argentinian citizens. It seems those people are born with a bomb in their hand. 

        2. jim dandy Avatar

           are you deaf or just dumb

  3. cs. the Israelis would kill the the guy without blowing up the whole neighborhood, remember Mabruok in Dubai.

    1. Hannibal Avatar

      so true…

      1. Lebanon10452 Avatar
        Lebanon10452

        brother
        i know you are good intentionned thus why i consider you as my younger brother
        Dont get blurred by what israel tries to show, i used to believe like you actually even more; but the more you know them the more you realise how malicious treacherous fozxy and criminal they are; actually they are much more terrorist than these jihadis with one major difference: they are more cowards and they hide their crimes much better while the jihadis attribute to allah even crimes they did not commit or even crimes commited by the mossad

        1. jim dandy Avatar

           the stupid criminals hez and others   get caught every time .if you believe in a cause you don’t hide your actions or hide in a hole . nasralla says we’re scared of death but him and his brave friends worship death .thats the difference  but then he hides in a hole.only the devil stirs shit up than hides .if he straps a bomb on his own ass then i will believe in him.  but cowards wont sacrifice themselves  lol

    2. Lebanon10452 Avatar
      Lebanon10452

      i remember the bomb at the marines in beirut years ago i think 1984; executed by Hizbollah but designed, masterminded and orchestrated by mossad 

  4. cs. the Israelis would kill the the guy without blowing up the whole neighborhood, remember Mabruok in Dubai.

    1. Hannibal Avatar

      so true…

      1. Lebanon10452 Avatar
        Lebanon10452

        brother
        i know you are good intentionned thus why i consider you as my younger brother
        Dont get blurred by what israel tries to show, i used to believe like you actually even more; but the more you know them the more you realise how malicious treacherous fozxy and criminal they are; actually they are much more terrorist than these jihadis with one major difference: they are more cowards and they hide their crimes much better while the jihadis attribute to allah even crimes they did not commit or even crimes commited by the mossad

        1. jim dandy Avatar

           the stupid criminals hez and others   get caught every time .if you believe in a cause you don’t hide your actions or hide in a hole . nasralla says we’re scared of death but him and his brave friends worship death .thats the difference  but then he hides in a hole.only the devil stirs shit up than hides .if he straps a bomb on his own ass then i will believe in him.  but cowards wont sacrifice themselves  lol

    2. Lebanon10452 Avatar
      Lebanon10452

      i remember the bomb at the marines in beirut years ago i think 1984; executed by Hizbollah but designed, masterminded and orchestrated by mossad 

  5. executed by Hizbollah but designed, masterminded and orchestrated by mossad 
    yes, blame everything on da jooooos is a great idea and an easy solution.
    Thinking is much more difficult.

    1. Lebanon10452 Avatar
      Lebanon10452

      mr i am not thinking anything, i know this for a fact; ok mr; again please do not attach to the joooooos more importance than what they deserve namely terrorism; this is the only arena you excel in. Please do not tell me about sciences and art, whatever israel has  in these domains is acquired from america and american dollars nothing less and nothing more

  6. executed by Hizbollah but designed, masterminded and orchestrated by mossad 
    yes, blame everything on da jooooos is a great idea and an easy solution.
    Thinking is much more difficult.

    1. Lebanon10452 Avatar
      Lebanon10452

      mr i am not thinking anything, i know this for a fact; ok mr; again please do not attach to the joooooos more importance than what they deserve namely terrorism; this is the only arena you excel in. Please do not tell me about sciences and art, whatever israel has  in these domains is acquired from america and american dollars nothing less and nothing more

  7. We condemn Israel. So whythe silence on Syria?
    When Israelis kill Arabs there is outrage. But Assad’s brutal campaign has cost 30,000 lives and there’ve been no protests
    We know the government hopes to do nothing, but what about the rest of us?Exactly one year after the death of Muammar Gaddafi, the chances of another round of Libya-style western military intervention, this time for Syria, hover close to zero. Even the hawkish Mitt Romney promises no such thing. Few politicians speak even of non-military options – of which there are many – let alone taking up arms.They say nothing because there is no pressure on them to say anything. Here and abroad, there is virtual silence, save for the desperate pleas of a few Syrian expats and yesterday’s cry for humanitarian help from the Turkish foreign minister. We know the facts, and we know what Bashar al-Assad has done since demonstrators took to the streets to protest against his rule 19 months ago. He and his forces have pursued a campaign of the most chilling brutality, using fighter planes to bomb civilian neighbourhoods, capturing, starving and torturing children as young as six,according to Save the Children, and racking up an estimated death toll of 30,000 victims.People know all this but stay mute. Not that they should be demanding immediate military action. After Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, people are justifiably both weary and wary, with many regarding action in Syria as a practical impossibility. I understand that. But what I can’t comprehend is the lack of public pressure on those doing the actual killing – starting with the Assad regime. Instead, public opinion seems utterly disengaged, unbothered by the slaughter under way in Aleppo, Homs and Damascus.There are no mass demonstrations outside the Syrian embassy in London. The story is rarely on the front page or on the TV bulletins. Even when there is a shocking atrocity, such as the Daraya massacre of up to 400 people in August, it makes only a fleeting impact. There is no Disaster Emergency Committee appeal. At the Labour party conference, there were fringe meetings on every possible subject, from teenage spending habits to domestic pets. But there was not a single session focused solely on Syria – and this in the party that calls itself internationalist.It’s not as if this is par for the course, that we never get exercised by the loss of innocent life in the Middle East. We do. Nearly four years ago Israel launched Operation Cast Lead, designed to halt Hamas rocket fire from Gaza. It resulted in some 1,400 Palestinian deaths. For nearly a month that story was never off the front page, and it often led the TV news, here and around the world. There were large and loud public demonstrations. The DEC set up a fund and sought to air a televised appeal,famously refused by the BBC.There is no such clamour now. The Stop the War Coalition is not summoning thousands to central London to demand an end to the fighting, as it did then. On the contrary, its statements are content simply to oppose western intervention – of which there is next to no prospect – while politely refusing to condemn Assad’s war on his own people. Caryl Churchill has not written a new play, Seven Syrian Children, exploring the curious mindset of the Alawite people that makes them capable of such horrors, the way she rushed to the stageto probe the Jewish psyche in 2009. The slaughter in Syria has similarly failed to move the poet Tom Paulin to pick up his pen. Apparently, these Syrian deaths are not worthy of artistic note. The contrast has struck Robert Fisk, no defender of Israel. He puts it baldly: “[T]he message that goes out is simple: we demand justice and the right to life for Arabs if they are butchered by the west and its Israeli allies, but not when they are being butchered by their fellow Arabs.”Plenty resist that explanation. Some say the lethargy of both the public and anti-war left is due to the fact that Syria is now locked in a civil conflict, making it hard to tell good guys from bad guys. Yet NGOs were swamped with cash donations during the Kosovo crisis: the public did not write that off as a mere internal Balkan problem. Besides, though it’s a civil war now, with both sides armed, for several months it was much more straightforward: peaceful demonstrators killed in cold blood. Yet few rallied to the Syrian people’s cause then either.Others wonder if Gaza in 2008-9 stirred greater outrage because it was such an intense episode, unfolding in a matter of weeks, while Syria has been a drip-drip horror story played out over nearly two years. But this hardly stacks up. Awful to speak in such terms, but the killing rate has been more, not less, intense in Syria: witness that massacre of 400 in a single day.Anxious for answers, I called Lindsey German of Stop the War, who told me the organisation was not active on Syria because that “isn’t Stop the War’s job”. Its focus is on what “Britain and the US are doing”. Why, then, was it so vocal on Gaza? Because the west “was very much in support of the Israelis, so it was very different”. (In fact, Britain did not support Operation Cast Lead but called for a ceasefire.) She adds that the Palestinian question “has its own dynamic, which isn’t true of any other country”.The trouble is, such thinking surely leads to a very parochial form of internationalism – turning a blind eye to all those areas of the globe where one’s own government is not involved. And that’s if such a rule were applied consistently – which it is not.The last argument is a variation on the civil war one: Syria is now mired in a viciously sectarian conflict, Alawites and their allies against Sunnis and the rest, which makes it impossible for outsiders to take sides. But such logic rapidly falls into the moral hole identified by Fisk, in which a Muslim death matters less when the killer is a fellow Muslim.Of course we reserve a special kind of outrage for the targeting of one ethnic group by another. Yet there is a risk here. It’s not simply a bias against Jews that regards an Arab or Muslim death as only deserving condemnation when Israel is responsible. It is demeaning of Arabs and Muslims themselves – implying that when members of those groups kill each other it somehow carries little moral weight. Such a view is not defensible, especially among those who would consider themselves to be enlightened or progressive. Every life has equal worth, no matter who’s doing the dying – or who’s doing the killing.

    1. Lebanon10452 Avatar
      Lebanon10452

      assad is defending his country from israeli motivated and propulsed salafi terrorists; he is killing nobody, many went to syria believing dying in jihad against the kaffir assad will guarantee them a duplex in djinnah with 72 houris; israel kills arabs, well i never argued that, please do kill more of them and as many as you like however, i believe you are now supporting them rather than killing them; i personally do not believe any single war you lead against the arabs was a genuine war; only theatre to support the leaders who were presented as anti israelis for the show. Hollywood gave you a lot of insight into movies and theatres….look at 5th drawer, a pure bred yahoodyya who starts to argue from the tip of her lips with some of the jews to make us believe she is not jew; what a piece of theatre

      1. jim dandy Avatar

         fukoff hez lover

    2. jim dandy Avatar

       even if u r rite u talk too much

      1. 5thDrawer Avatar

        In the ‘land of dialogues’, JIm, they need more of that kind of talk.

  8. We condemn Israel. So whythe silence on Syria?
    When Israelis kill Arabs there is outrage. But Assad’s brutal campaign has cost 30,000 lives and there’ve been no protests
    We know the government hopes to do nothing, but what about the rest of us?Exactly one year after the death of Muammar Gaddafi, the chances of another round of Libya-style western military intervention, this time for Syria, hover close to zero. Even the hawkish Mitt Romney promises no such thing. Few politicians speak even of non-military options – of which there are many – let alone taking up arms.They say nothing because there is no pressure on them to say anything. Here and abroad, there is virtual silence, save for the desperate pleas of a few Syrian expats and yesterday’s cry for humanitarian help from the Turkish foreign minister. We know the facts, and we know what Bashar al-Assad has done since demonstrators took to the streets to protest against his rule 19 months ago. He and his forces have pursued a campaign of the most chilling brutality, using fighter planes to bomb civilian neighbourhoods, capturing, starving and torturing children as young as six,according to Save the Children, and racking up an estimated death toll of 30,000 victims.People know all this but stay mute. Not that they should be demanding immediate military action. After Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, people are justifiably both weary and wary, with many regarding action in Syria as a practical impossibility. I understand that. But what I can’t comprehend is the lack of public pressure on those doing the actual killing – starting with the Assad regime. Instead, public opinion seems utterly disengaged, unbothered by the slaughter under way in Aleppo, Homs and Damascus.There are no mass demonstrations outside the Syrian embassy in London. The story is rarely on the front page or on the TV bulletins. Even when there is a shocking atrocity, such as the Daraya massacre of up to 400 people in August, it makes only a fleeting impact. There is no Disaster Emergency Committee appeal. At the Labour party conference, there were fringe meetings on every possible subject, from teenage spending habits to domestic pets. But there was not a single session focused solely on Syria – and this in the party that calls itself internationalist.It’s not as if this is par for the course, that we never get exercised by the loss of innocent life in the Middle East. We do. Nearly four years ago Israel launched Operation Cast Lead, designed to halt Hamas rocket fire from Gaza. It resulted in some 1,400 Palestinian deaths. For nearly a month that story was never off the front page, and it often led the TV news, here and around the world. There were large and loud public demonstrations. The DEC set up a fund and sought to air a televised appeal,famously refused by the BBC.There is no such clamour now. The Stop the War Coalition is not summoning thousands to central London to demand an end to the fighting, as it did then. On the contrary, its statements are content simply to oppose western intervention – of which there is next to no prospect – while politely refusing to condemn Assad’s war on his own people. Caryl Churchill has not written a new play, Seven Syrian Children, exploring the curious mindset of the Alawite people that makes them capable of such horrors, the way she rushed to the stageto probe the Jewish psyche in 2009. The slaughter in Syria has similarly failed to move the poet Tom Paulin to pick up his pen. Apparently, these Syrian deaths are not worthy of artistic note. The contrast has struck Robert Fisk, no defender of Israel. He puts it baldly: “[T]he message that goes out is simple: we demand justice and the right to life for Arabs if they are butchered by the west and its Israeli allies, but not when they are being butchered by their fellow Arabs.”Plenty resist that explanation. Some say the lethargy of both the public and anti-war left is due to the fact that Syria is now locked in a civil conflict, making it hard to tell good guys from bad guys. Yet NGOs were swamped with cash donations during the Kosovo crisis: the public did not write that off as a mere internal Balkan problem. Besides, though it’s a civil war now, with both sides armed, for several months it was much more straightforward: peaceful demonstrators killed in cold blood. Yet few rallied to the Syrian people’s cause then either.Others wonder if Gaza in 2008-9 stirred greater outrage because it was such an intense episode, unfolding in a matter of weeks, while Syria has been a drip-drip horror story played out over nearly two years. But this hardly stacks up. Awful to speak in such terms, but the killing rate has been more, not less, intense in Syria: witness that massacre of 400 in a single day.Anxious for answers, I called Lindsey German of Stop the War, who told me the organisation was not active on Syria because that “isn’t Stop the War’s job”. Its focus is on what “Britain and the US are doing”. Why, then, was it so vocal on Gaza? Because the west “was very much in support of the Israelis, so it was very different”. (In fact, Britain did not support Operation Cast Lead but called for a ceasefire.) She adds that the Palestinian question “has its own dynamic, which isn’t true of any other country”.The trouble is, such thinking surely leads to a very parochial form of internationalism – turning a blind eye to all those areas of the globe where one’s own government is not involved. And that’s if such a rule were applied consistently – which it is not.The last argument is a variation on the civil war one: Syria is now mired in a viciously sectarian conflict, Alawites and their allies against Sunnis and the rest, which makes it impossible for outsiders to take sides. But such logic rapidly falls into the moral hole identified by Fisk, in which a Muslim death matters less when the killer is a fellow Muslim.Of course we reserve a special kind of outrage for the targeting of one ethnic group by another. Yet there is a risk here. It’s not simply a bias against Jews that regards an Arab or Muslim death as only deserving condemnation when Israel is responsible. It is demeaning of Arabs and Muslims themselves – implying that when members of those groups kill each other it somehow carries little moral weight. Such a view is not defensible, especially among those who would consider themselves to be enlightened or progressive. Every life has equal worth, no matter who’s doing the dying – or who’s doing the killing.

    1. Lebanon10452 Avatar
      Lebanon10452

      assad is defending his country from israeli motivated and propulsed salafi terrorists; he is killing nobody, many went to syria believing dying in jihad against the kaffir assad will guarantee them a duplex in djinnah with 72 houris; israel kills arabs, well i never argued that, please do kill more of them and as many as you like however, i believe you are now supporting them rather than killing them; i personally do not believe any single war you lead against the arabs was a genuine war; only theatre to support the leaders who were presented as anti israelis for the show. Hollywood gave you a lot of insight into movies and theatres….look at 5th drawer, a pure bred yahoodyya who starts to argue from the tip of her lips with some of the jews to make us believe she is not jew; what a piece of theatre

      1. jim dandy Avatar

         fukoff hez lover

    2. jim dandy Avatar

       even if u r rite u talk too much

      1. 5thDrawer Avatar

        In the ‘land of dialogues’, JIm, they need more of that kind of talk.

  9. your are wrong, who kept 40 yrs of peace in the Golan ? The Assads !     The israeli interest is the maintenance of Assad, not to be repalced by some uncontrollable revolutionaries like in Libya. Weather you like or dislike the jews of of no importance whatsoever.

    1. Lebanon10452 Avatar
      Lebanon10452

      i never said my like or dislike was of any importance sir; i used to like them yet their despicable horrendous attitudes sickened me and i have to admit that most people dislike them nowadays; some stupid believers in prophecies still like them but again these are blinded by a stupid faith. I never said that the interest of israel was not with assad however, as you know much better than me, israel is lost nowadays: you do not know to which saint you vow yourself…. saoudi arabia paid some money to support the salafis and you are doing it. Exactly like the war against hizbollah few years ago, rejected by ariel sharon yet after saoudi arabia bribed his stupid successor, israel did it; all against its interests because i do not think hizbollah was or will ever be a threat to israel, nevertheless, chicken as you are, you are exhibiting hizbollah phobia and this is what i like: the terrorist (israel) terrorised; lol; i am having a good laugh at it; it is like when the witchcraft returns against the witch lol; i can also guarantee you that, whether you like it or you dislike it, the start of the end of israel is also coming soon and that this witchcraft you believe you are playing with is certainly going to return against you and your fate will be like syrias fate and this is something you are not grasping yet

    2. jim dandy Avatar

       oppressors have to go .those days are over maybe we’ll  get lucky and get a better govt in syria

  10. your are wrong, who kept 40 yrs of peace in the Golan ? The Assads !     The israeli interest is the maintenance of Assad, not to be repalced by some uncontrollable revolutionaries like in Libya. Weather you like or dislike the jews of of no importance whatsoever.

    1. Lebanon10452 Avatar
      Lebanon10452

      i never said my like or dislike was of any importance sir; i used to like them yet their despicable horrendous attitudes sickened me and i have to admit that most people dislike them nowadays; some stupid believers in prophecies still like them but again these are blinded by a stupid faith. I never said that the interest of israel was not with assad however, as you know much better than me, israel is lost nowadays: you do not know to which saint you vow yourself…. saoudi arabia paid some money to support the salafis and you are doing it. Exactly like the war against hizbollah few years ago, rejected by ariel sharon yet after saoudi arabia bribed his stupid successor, israel did it; all against its interests because i do not think hizbollah was or will ever be a threat to israel, nevertheless, chicken as you are, you are exhibiting hizbollah phobia and this is what i like: the terrorist (israel) terrorised; lol; i am having a good laugh at it; it is like when the witchcraft returns against the witch lol; i can also guarantee you that, whether you like it or you dislike it, the start of the end of israel is also coming soon and that this witchcraft you believe you are playing with is certainly going to return against you and your fate will be like syrias fate and this is something you are not grasping yet

    2. jim dandy Avatar

       oppressors have to go .those days are over maybe we’ll  get lucky and get a better govt in syria

  11. well, the war is already in full swing, we will see the results. Arik Sharon was a fat despicable fool who brought much misery to jews and arabs alike, you must not quote this one as a reference.

  12. well, the war is already in full swing, we will see the results. Arik Sharon was a fat despicable fool who brought much misery to jews and arabs alike, you must not quote this one as a reference.

  13. Why is the Turkish government acting so aggressively against the Assad regime in Syria?
    Perhaps Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan hopes that lobbing artillery shells into Syria will help bring a satellite government to power in Damascus. Maybe he expects that sending a Turkish war plane into Syrian air space or forcing down a Syrian civilian plane en route from Russia will win him favor in the West and bring in NATO to intervene. Conceivably, it’s all a grand diversion from an imminent economic crisis due to borrowing too much.
    Erdogan’s actions fit into a context going back a half-century. During the Cold War, Ankara stood with Washington as a member of NATO while Damascus served as the Cuba of the Middle East, a highly reliable client state for Moscow. Bad Turkish-Syrian relations also have local sources, including a border dispute, disagreement over water resources, and Syrian backing of the PKK, a Kurdish terrorist group. The two states reached the brink of war in 1998, but the Assad government’s timely capitulation averted armed conflict.
    A new era began in November 2002 when Erdogan’s AKP, a clever Islamist party that avoids terrorism and global-caliphate rants, replaced the center-right and -left parties that long had dominated Ankara. Governing competently and overseeing an unprecedented economic boom, the AKP saw its share of the electorate grow from one-third in 2002 to one-half in 2011. It was on track to achieving Erdogan’s presumed goal of undoing the Ataturk revolution and bringing sharia to Turkey.
    Feeling its oats, the AKP abandoned Washington’s protective umbrella and struck out on an independent neo-Ottoman course, aiming to be a regional power as in centuries past. With regard to Syria, this meant ending decades-old hostilities and winning influence through good trade and other relations, symbolized by joint military exercises, Erdogan and Bashar Assad vacationing together, and a bevy of their ministers literally raising the barrier that had closed their mutual border.
    These plans started unraveling in January 2011 when the Syrian people woke from 40 years of Assad despotism and agitated, at first nonviolently, then violently, for the overthrow of their tyrant. Erdogan initially offered constructive political advice to Assad, which the latter rebuffed in favor of violent repression. In response, the Sunni Erdogan emotionally denounced the Alawi Assad and began assisting the largely Sunni rebel forces. As the conflict became more ruthless, sectarian, and Islamist, effectively becoming a Sunni–Alawi civil war, with 30,000 dead, many times that number injured, and even more displaced, Turkish refuge and aid became indispensable to the rebels.
    It is now clear that initially seemed like a masterstroke was in fact Erdogan’s first major misstep. His jailing of much of the Turkish military leadership on the basis of outlandish conspiracy theories has left him with a less-than-effective fighting force. Unwelcome Syrian refugees have crowded into Turkish border towns and beyond. Turks overwhelmingly oppose the war policy vis-à-vis Syria, with especially powerful opposition coming from the Alevis, a religious community making up 15 to 20 percent of Turkey’s population, distinct from Syria’s Alawis but sharing a Shiite heritage with them. Assad took revenge by reviving support for the PKK, whose escalating violence creates a major domestic problem for Erdogan. Indeed, Kurds — who missed their chance when the Middle East was carved up after World War I — may be the major winners from the current hostilities; for the first time, the outlines of a Kurdish state with Turkish, Syrian, Iraqi, and even Iranian components can be imagined.
    Damascus still has a great patron in Moscow, where the government of Vladimir Putin offers its assistance via armaments and United Nations vetoes. Plus, Assad benefits from unstinting, brutal Iranian aid, which continues despite the mullah regime’s deep economic problems. In contrast, Ankara may still belong, formally, to NATO and enjoy the theoretical privilege of its famous Article 5, which promises that a military attack on one member country will lead to “such action as . . . necessary, including the use of armed force,” but NATO heavyweights show no intention of intervening in Syria.
    A decade of success went to Erdogan’s head, tempting him into a Syrian misadventure that could undermine his popularity. He might yet learn from his mistakes and backtrack, but for now the padishah of Ankara is doubling down on his jihad against the Assad regime, driving hard for its collapse and his salvation.
    To answer my opening question: Turkish bellicosity results primarily from one man’s ambition and ego. Western states should stay completely away and let him be hoist with his own petard

  14. Why is the Turkish government acting so aggressively against the Assad regime in Syria?
    Perhaps Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan hopes that lobbing artillery shells into Syria will help bring a satellite government to power in Damascus. Maybe he expects that sending a Turkish war plane into Syrian air space or forcing down a Syrian civilian plane en route from Russia will win him favor in the West and bring in NATO to intervene. Conceivably, it’s all a grand diversion from an imminent economic crisis due to borrowing too much.
    Erdogan’s actions fit into a context going back a half-century. During the Cold War, Ankara stood with Washington as a member of NATO while Damascus served as the Cuba of the Middle East, a highly reliable client state for Moscow. Bad Turkish-Syrian relations also have local sources, including a border dispute, disagreement over water resources, and Syrian backing of the PKK, a Kurdish terrorist group. The two states reached the brink of war in 1998, but the Assad government’s timely capitulation averted armed conflict.
    A new era began in November 2002 when Erdogan’s AKP, a clever Islamist party that avoids terrorism and global-caliphate rants, replaced the center-right and -left parties that long had dominated Ankara. Governing competently and overseeing an unprecedented economic boom, the AKP saw its share of the electorate grow from one-third in 2002 to one-half in 2011. It was on track to achieving Erdogan’s presumed goal of undoing the Ataturk revolution and bringing sharia to Turkey.
    Feeling its oats, the AKP abandoned Washington’s protective umbrella and struck out on an independent neo-Ottoman course, aiming to be a regional power as in centuries past. With regard to Syria, this meant ending decades-old hostilities and winning influence through good trade and other relations, symbolized by joint military exercises, Erdogan and Bashar Assad vacationing together, and a bevy of their ministers literally raising the barrier that had closed their mutual border.
    These plans started unraveling in January 2011 when the Syrian people woke from 40 years of Assad despotism and agitated, at first nonviolently, then violently, for the overthrow of their tyrant. Erdogan initially offered constructive political advice to Assad, which the latter rebuffed in favor of violent repression. In response, the Sunni Erdogan emotionally denounced the Alawi Assad and began assisting the largely Sunni rebel forces. As the conflict became more ruthless, sectarian, and Islamist, effectively becoming a Sunni–Alawi civil war, with 30,000 dead, many times that number injured, and even more displaced, Turkish refuge and aid became indispensable to the rebels.
    It is now clear that initially seemed like a masterstroke was in fact Erdogan’s first major misstep. His jailing of much of the Turkish military leadership on the basis of outlandish conspiracy theories has left him with a less-than-effective fighting force. Unwelcome Syrian refugees have crowded into Turkish border towns and beyond. Turks overwhelmingly oppose the war policy vis-à-vis Syria, with especially powerful opposition coming from the Alevis, a religious community making up 15 to 20 percent of Turkey’s population, distinct from Syria’s Alawis but sharing a Shiite heritage with them. Assad took revenge by reviving support for the PKK, whose escalating violence creates a major domestic problem for Erdogan. Indeed, Kurds — who missed their chance when the Middle East was carved up after World War I — may be the major winners from the current hostilities; for the first time, the outlines of a Kurdish state with Turkish, Syrian, Iraqi, and even Iranian components can be imagined.
    Damascus still has a great patron in Moscow, where the government of Vladimir Putin offers its assistance via armaments and United Nations vetoes. Plus, Assad benefits from unstinting, brutal Iranian aid, which continues despite the mullah regime’s deep economic problems. In contrast, Ankara may still belong, formally, to NATO and enjoy the theoretical privilege of its famous Article 5, which promises that a military attack on one member country will lead to “such action as . . . necessary, including the use of armed force,” but NATO heavyweights show no intention of intervening in Syria.
    A decade of success went to Erdogan’s head, tempting him into a Syrian misadventure that could undermine his popularity. He might yet learn from his mistakes and backtrack, but for now the padishah of Ankara is doubling down on his jihad against the Assad regime, driving hard for its collapse and his salvation.
    To answer my opening question: Turkish bellicosity results primarily from one man’s ambition and ego. Western states should stay completely away and let him be hoist with his own petard

Leave a Reply