| Author | Message | | Alpha | | Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 7:28 pm Post subject: Netanyahu confirms IAF carried out raid in Syria |
| http://amconmag.com/2007/2007_10_22/article2.html
Phantoms Over Syria
Eveything Israel wants you to know about its secret airstrike
by Philip Giraldi
On Sept. 6, Israeli F-15s and F-16s attacked a site near Dayr az-Zawr in northern Syria, though the strike wasn’t confirmed for nearly two weeks. The Washington Post reported on Sept. 13 that according to a former Israeli official, “it was an attack against a facility capable of making unconventional weapons.” Two days later, Syria had an accomplice: “Israel had recently provided the United States with evidence—known by the code name ‘Orchard,’” the Post reported, “that North Korea has been cooperating with Syria on a nuclear facility.”
Beyond that, details are sketchy—perhaps deliberately so. On Sept. 19, former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu acknowledged the attack, but said it was “too early to discuss this subject.” Pressed at a White House news conference the following day, President Bush twice refused to comment—though he did warn North Korea about selling nuclear weapons or expertise.
American intelligence has been unable to confirm the existence of any Syrian nuclear program, and the Post admitted, “[M]any outside nuclear experts have expressed skepticism that Syria, which has mostly focused on chemical and biological weapons, would be conducting nuclear trade with North Korea.” But facts may not be prime property in this situation.
In the intelligence community, a disinformation operation is a calculated attempt to convince an audience that falsehoods about an adversary are true, either to discredit him or, in an extreme case, to justify military action. When such a campaign is properly conducted, information is leaked to numerous outlets over a period of time, creating the impression of a media consensus that the story is true, as each new report validates earlier ones.
We’ve been here before: the leaking of unreliable information to New York Times reporter Judith Miller was just one example of disinformation used to make the case for the invasion of Iraq. More recently, Iran has been on the receiving end of what appears to be an officially orchestrated but poorly executed disinformation campaign regarding its involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. Now a new operation—brought to us by the old players—may be unfolding.
A chronology of the case against Syria is revealing, and the role of former UN ambassador and leading neoconservative John Bolton is key. Bolton, now at the American Enterprise Institute, has repeatedly clashed with the intelligence community over the issue of Syrian intentions, most notably in 2002 and 2003 when he was undersecretary of state for arms control. At one point, Bolton was forced to strike from a speech language suggesting that Syria had a nuclear program. On another occasion, Bolton’s judgments on Syria were challenged by Robert Hutchings, director of the National Intelligence Council, who charged that Bolton “took isolated facts and made much more of them … cherry picking … to present the starkest possible case.”
On Aug. 31, one week before the Israeli attack on Syria, Bolton wrote an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal that concluded, “We know that both Iran and Syria have long cooperated with North Korea on ballistic-missile programs, and the prospect of cooperation on nuclear matters is not far-fetched. Whether and to what extent Iran, Syria or others might be ‘safe havens’ for North Korea’s nuclear-weapons development, or may have already benefited from it, must be made clear.” Perhaps this was just good timing. Perhaps it was something more—possibly representing information provided by Bolton’s excellent contacts within the Israeli government.
Comments made by a State Department official on Sept. 14, in the wake of the Israeli attack, bolstered the neoconservative argument that Syria is a serious threat. Andrew Semmel, acting deputy assistant secretary of state for nuclear non-proliferation policy, stated that Syria was on the U.S. nuclear “watch list” and that Damascus “might have” a number of “secret suppliers” from which to obtain nuclear equipment as part of a covert program.
Across the Atlantic, on Sept. 16, the Murdoch-owned Sunday Times of London published an extremely detailed story on the attack that clearly derived from Israeli sources. The piece unambiguously portrayed the bombing as “a successful Israeli raid on nuclear material supplied by North Korea.” A Sept. 23 follow-up claimed that before the site was bombed, an Israeli commando unit had seized nuclear material, which had been tested and confirmed to be of North Korean origin. A second story headlined “Snatched: Israeli commandos ‘nuclear’ raid” also appearing in the Times on the same day, under the same byline, provided additional details, noting that Syria, Iran, and North Korea now constitute a new “axis of evil.” It also quoted David Schenker, of the neocon Washington Institute for Near East Policy, who described Syria as a “client” of Iran.
On Sept. 18, Bolton resurfaced, telling an Israeli journalist that the United States would stand behind any preemptive attack by Tel Aviv on neighboring countries believed to have nuclear-weapons programs. The Wall Street Journal added a piece by editorial board member Bret Stephens asserting that the bombing in Syria was a reprise of the 1981 Israeli attack on Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor.
By Sept. 21, the Washington Post also appeared to be convinced by the story, featuring a front-page headline “Israel, US Shared Data on Suspected Nuclear Site.” The article stated that Israel provided intelligence to President Bush during the summer indicating that North Korean nuclear experts were in Syria. Bush was reportedly “troubled” by the information. The Post added, citing anonymous sources, that “the United States is believed to have provided Israel with some corroboration of the original intelligence before Israel proceeded with the raid,” but then, farther down in the article, the Post conceded, “The quality of the Israeli intelligence, the extent of North Korean assistance and the seriousness of the Syrian effort are uncertain…” To give the story even greater resonance, leading neoconservative Charles Krauthammer, in his column in the same issue, accepted as fact that Damascus was pursuing nuclear capability and warned that Israel will not accept a “nuclear Syria.”
In the days that followed, the New York Times offered a more measured headline: “Israeli Raid on Syria Fuels Debate on Weapons” and referred to allegations about Syria’s weapons program as “Israel’s private claims,” noting, “American officials have been extremely cautious about endorsing the Israeli conclusion.” Other outlets also picked up the story, but even those that were careful left the impression that Syria was seeking to obtain nuclear weapons, and North Korea was suspected of having supplied materials.
The pieces have a common thread: they rely entirely on information provided by Israeli sources without independent corroboration. And the ongoing play they are getting in the international media, without much critical commentary and without direct attribution to Israel, mark them as classic disinformation.
A review of the sources for the various stories and the descriptions of them reveals a great deal of ambiguity in the claims being made. The frequently cited Andrew Semmel’s apparently damning comments are laced with expressions like “possible,” “may have,” and “may have been.” What Semmel is actually saying is that nearly all of the information he has comes from Israel and cannot be verified. The conveniently anonymous sources who claim to the Washington Post that the U.S. is “believed” to have provided corroboration for Israeli intelligence are clearly unable to state whether it did or didn’t, rendering the comment little more than opinion. The Post editor who crafted the headline asserting that there was a “sharing” of information was disturbingly clueless or deliberately misleading as there was no evidence produced in the article or elsewhere to indicate that any American intelligence agency could confirm the Israeli allegations. Any “sharing” went only in one direction: from Israel to Washington.
Also lost in the shuffle is the fact that Syria has vehemently denied having any nuclear-weapons program, and North Korea isn’t known to have ever exported nuclear technology or material. The prevailing consensus is that Syria does not have an economic or technical base that would enable it to develop a nuclear weapon even if someone handed it the fissile material. The feverish imagination of John Bolton aside, even Syria’s enemies concede that there has been no evidence of nuclear-weapons development. It has but a small Chinese-built research reactor that, by one account, is less capable than those in use at a number of American universities.
There are other reasons that depicting Damascus as the latest nuclear aspirant is suspect. Destroying a weapons facility would scatter traces of radioactive material that could be detected, especially since the attack took place close to the Turkish border. No such evidence has been reported. Also notable is the absence of solid intelligence. If Israel knows conclusively that Syria has a nuclear program, surely it would have made its case in the wake of the Sept. 6 raid. Far from doing so, Tel Aviv has kept a security lid on the incident, suggesting that it would prefer to promote the story of a military success against Damascus without being too specific about the details.
Even the Bush White House, generally willing to use any hint of malfeasance to condemn Damascus and Tehran, has been reluctant to confirm the story. It doesn’t need to. Official silence—narrated by a compliant press taking uncorroborated dictation—is cementing a public impression. That’s the way disinformation works. Done right, no one stops to ask where it came from—or who benefits.
__________________________________________
Philip Giraldi, a former CIA Officer, is a partner in Cannistraro Associates, an international security consultancy.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Israel, U.S. shared data on suspected nuclear site: report (Reuters)
Israel, U.S. shared data on suspected nuclear site: report (Reuters)
Fri Sep 21, 1:08 AM ET
Before it decided to strike Syria, Israel shared intelligence with President George W. Bush this summer indicating that its neighbor was getting help from North Korea on a nuclear facility, The Washington Post reported on Friday.
The White House was deeply troubled by Israel's assertion that North Korea was assisting Syria's nuclear ambition, but opted against an immediate response because of concern over negotiations on Pyongyang's nuclear program, the Post reported, citing U.S. government sources.
Ultimately, however, the United States is believed to have given Israel some corroboration of the original intelligence before the air raid on September 6, the Post said, citing the sources.
The Post quoted its sources as saying that Israel hit the Syrian facility in the dead of night to minimize possible casualties.
The U.S. sources would discuss the Israeli intelligence, which included satellite imagery, only on condition of anonymity, and many details about the North Korean-Syrian connection remain unknown, the Post reported.
Bush on Thursday refused to answer repeated questions about reports that Israel conducted air strikes in Syria.
"I'm not going to comment on the matter," Bush said, brushing aside several questions during a White House news conference.
Israel has also refused to talk about the reported raid.
Syrian officials have said that their air defenses forced Israeli jets to flee, dropping bombs harmlessly in the desert and has said it could retaliate for the September 6 violation of its territory.
Damascus has denied reports it may have received North Korean nuclear aid. North Korea has also denied any such cooperation
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/905359.html
Netanyahu confirms IAF carried out raid in Syria
By Haaretz Service
Opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday became the first Israeli official to confirm reports of an Israel Air Force operation in Syria about two weeks ago.
In an interview with Channel 1, Netanyahu said that he had been partner to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's decision to carry out an operation in Syria. Netanyahu said he had not only supported the prime minister's decision but personally praised him for the initiative.
"When the prime minister does things that I see as important and necessary, whenever the government does thing for the security of Israel, I give my support," said Netanyahu.
"I was partner, I must say, to this issue from the first moment and I gave my support," he added.
Israeli officials have remained tight-lipped about the whole affair, which has resulted in a slew of speculations by foreign publications.
According to a report in this week's London-based Sunday Times, an Israeli source said the September 6 strike came in the wake of intelligence reports suggesting Syria was been planning a "devastating surprise" for Israel.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last update - 21:28 11/09/2007
CNN: Israeli gov't 'very happy with success' of IAF strike on Syria
By Yoav Stern and Assaf Uni, Haaretz Correspondents, Haaretz Service and News Agencies
The CNN television network reported Tuesday that Israel is happy with the results of an alleged Israel Air Force strike last week in Syrian territory.
Quoting sources in the United States and the region, CNN said, "The Israeli government is very happy with the success of the operation."
European diplomats quoted Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem as saying Monday that the IAF warplanes that violated Syria's airspace fired missiles at targets on the ground, but did not cause any damage.
Also Tuesday, Syria lodged a formal complaint with the United Nations about an "aggression and violation of sovereignty" over the incident, the country's ambassador to the UN said Tuesday.
Syria's UN ambassador, Bashar al-Jaafari, said Damascus made its complaint in two letters to the UN secretary general and the president of the Security Council. The letters said the IAF action was in violation of the 1974 disengagement agreement that was reached after the 1973 Yom Kippur War.
According to the CNN report, the sources said the IAF indeed carried out a strike on a target in Syria, adding that the operation "may have also involved Israeli ground forces who directed the air strike."
CNN quoted the sources as saying the strike, which possibly targeted an arms transfer from Iran to Hezbollah through Syria, "left a big hole in the desert."
The CNN report said U.S. government and military sources have confirmed the airstrike, and said that "they are happy to have Israel carry the message to both Syria and Iran that they can get in and out and strike when necessary."
Meanwhile on Tuesday, China's Xinhua news agency said North Korea had issued a harsh condemnation of the IAF incursion into Syrian airspace.
According to the report, the Korean Central News Agency quoted a spokesman for North Korea's Foreign Ministry as saying, "This is a very dangerous provocation little short of wantonly violating the sovereignty of Syria and seriously harassing the regional peace and security."
"The DPRK strongly denounces the above-said intrusion and extends full support and solidarity to the Syrian people in their just cause to defend the national security and the regional peace," the spokesman reportedly added.
European diplomats who met with Moallem on Sunday in Damascus quoted him as saying that Israel's decision not to comment on the incident was appropriate, given the circumstances. Moallem reportedly told the Europeans that he expected Israel to apologize "through the usual channels."
In Ankara for an official visit, Moallem went on to reveal the details of the alleged strike, which according to him resulted in no casualties or damage to property. Moallem said that three Israeli planes fired four missiles at targets on the ground in the Dayr al-Zur district in eastern Syria, after entering Syrian airspace from the Mediterranean.
The Syrian foreign minister said the Syrian anti-aircraft radar system detected the planes when they were deep inside Syrian territory. He added the planes released their missiles very shortly after they were detected.
Despite the apparent outrage in Damascus over the incident, European diplomats who met with Moallem told Haaretz that they had received the impression that Syria would not retaliate militarily.
"Moallem did not demand the European Union to condemn the Israeli action, nor did he indicate that Syria would demand the United Nations Security Council hold a discussion on the matter," one European diplomat told Haaretz. "We got the impression that Syria is not interested in seeing this incident escalate."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Syria complains of Israel 'aggression'
By SAM F. GHATTAS, Associated Press Writer1 hour, 17 minutes ago
Syria complained to the United Nations about "aggression and violation of sovereignty" after Israeli warplanes reportedly conducted an airstrike in the country's north, the country's ambassador to the U.N. said Tuesday.
Syria reported the incursion on Thursday, saying Israeli aicraft flew over the northern part of the country and dropped munitions over an empty area after being fired on by Syrian antiaircraft defenses.
A U.S. military official said the Israeli incursion last week was an airstrike "deep into Syria" that hit a target. The offical, who spoke on condition of anonymity because it was an intelligence issue, said he did not know the target.
But the Syrian ambassador, Bashar al-Jaafari, said the Israeli aircraft dropped munitions and fuel tanks to lighten their weight as they fled the anti-aircraft fire.
"They were fleeing and in order to speed up the planes they dropped the munitions," he told The Associated Press from New York.
Syria has called the incursion a "hostile act" but has been largely silent over the details. Israeli officials refuse to comment.
Syria's U.N. ambassador, Bashar al-Jaafari, said his government made its complaint in two letters to the U.N. secretary general and the president of the Security Council. The letters said the Israeli action was in violation of the 1974 disengagement agreement that was reached after the 1973 Mideast war.
The letters warned that "continuing to disregard denunciation of this act could result in consequences that no one knows its limits," according to al-Jaafari. He said Syria awaits a stand from U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon "that would hold Israel responsible and demands that it ceases" such acts.
Al-Jaafari said he had no further details on the incursion, but denied news reports Israeli troops were inside Syria. "This is absolutely not true," saying the reports were an attempt to show that Israel could land troops wherever it wants.
"Israel is seeking military escalation. We are exerting efforts so that we don't fall into this trap. We are dealing with the matter with utmost keenness, precision and responsibility," he added.
CNN reported Tuesday that the incident was an Israeli attack on Iranian weapons being transferred through Syria to the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah.
The report, citing U.S. government sources, said the operation involved warplanes and ground forces that were meant to mark targets or inspect the damage caused by the attack.
Asked whether he could confirm an Israeli strike on an Iranian arms shipment, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said, "No. I think you should talk to the Syrian government or the Israeli government."
___
AP correspondents Pauline Jelinek and Matthew Lee in Washington contributed to this report
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iran: Israel Will Be Responsible For Escalation In Region
Posted by Purveyor on Thu Sep-06-07 07:51 PM
Source: YNet
Iranian Ambassador to Damascus Mohammad Hassan Akhtari on Thursday condemned the alleged violation of the Syrian airspace by Israeli aircraft.
According to a report on the Iranian Broadcasting Authority's website. Akhtari telephoned senior Syrian officials and defined the incident as an "intolerable attempt to create tension in the region."
Akhtari said that "Israel would be responsible for any escalation in the region and it must act reasonably and not cause another war."
Earlier, the Iranian news agency IRNA reported that Akhtari turned to Syrian security sources and told them that "Iran would be ready to offer any assistance needed under the existing circumstances."
Read more: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3446851,00.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Report: Israel spots nuclear installations in Syria
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3448829,00.html
Washington official says Israeli surveillance shows possible Syrian nuclear installation stocked by North Korea, Israeli Arab newspaper claims target of alleged raid last week was Syrian missile base financed by Iran
Ynetnews
Israel believes that North Korea has been supplying Syria and Iran with nuclear materials, a Washington defense official told the New York Times. “The Israelis think North Korea is selling to Iran and Syria what little they have left,” he said.
Threat
Syria warns flyovers will have tragic consequences / Roee Nahmias
Damascus warns that international community's silence on Israel's violation of Syrian airspace will have tragic consequences
Full Story
The official added that recent Israeli reconnaissance flights over Syria revealed possible nuclear installations that Israeli officials estimate might have been supplied with material from North Korea.
Meanwhile on Wednesday the Nazareth-based Israeli Arab newspaper The Assennara cited anonymous Israeli sources as saying that Israeli jets "bombed a Syrian-Iranian missile base in northern Syria that was financed by Iran... It appears that the base was completely destroyed."
According to the Times, American officials confirmed Tuesday that Israeli jets launched an airstrike inside Syria. Sources said that Israel struck at least one target in northeastern Syria, but could not provide more details.
The most likely target was, according to some administration officials, weapon caches sent by Iran to Hizbullah through Syria.
North Korea commented on the incident Tuesday, calling it a "dangerous provocation", Chinese News Agency Xinhua reported on Tuesday.
"This is a very dangerous provocation little short of wantonly violating the sovereignty of Syria and seriously harassing the regional peace and security," a North Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman said.
"The Democratic People's Republic of Korea strongly denounces the above-said intrusion and extends full support and solidarity to the Syrian people in their just cause to defend the national security and the regional peace."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Syria warns flyovers will have tragic consequences
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3448483,00.html
Damascus warns that international community's silence on Israel's violation of Syrian airspace will have tragic consequences
Roee Nahmias
Syria revved up Tuesday its rhetoric on Israel's reported violation of Syrian airspace by warning the United Nations that the international community's silence over the incident could have "tragic consequences."
In a letter sent to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Syria warns Israel that its "outrageous aggression" will have serious consequences.
Syria "insists that the continuing silence of the international community vis-à-vis Israel's illegal act will place the region as well as the peace and security of both countries in the face of uncontrollable tragedies," read the letter.
A copy of the letter was also sent to the Security Council.
"Israel is determined to choose aggression instead of peace and by doing so it reveals its true intentions that it tries to hide using fake claims of seeking peace in the region," the letter said.
The Syrian government said last week that Israeli jets entered Syria's airspace from the Mediterranean Sea and jettisoned fuel tanks near the Turkish border when intercepted by Syrian air-defense systems.
Israel has remained silent on the incident.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
'A Clean Break' (from James Bamford's 'A Pretext for War' book):
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2005/02/11/a-clean-break-from-james-bamford-s-a-pretext-for-war.php
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Israel 'prepared' for conflict after Syria alleges IAF flyover
Yaakov Katz and Herb Keinon , THE JERUSALEM POST Sep. 6, 2007
Israel is "fully prepared" for the possibility of a conflict in the North, defense officials said late Thursday, after Syria alleged it had fired on a pre-dawn IAF flight over the coastal city of Latakia.
The IDF officially refused to comment on reports from Syria that its air defenses fired on a formation of IAF warplanes that entered Syrian airspace from the Mediterranean.
In addition, fears mounted that Hizbullah would use the escalating tensions along the Golan Heights as an excuse to initiate its own conflict with Israel.
Despite these fears, troops and tanks were not massing in the North, and the top defense brass carried on with their regular schedules, attempting to broadcast an air of "business as usual." The IDF's Northern Command released a statement reassuring northern residents that there was "no cause for concern."
Syrian Vice President Farouk Shara, speaking in Italy, said his country was not interested in being drawn into a war with Israel.
Syrian officials reported Thursday afternoon that at around 1 a.m., four or five IAF aircraft broke the sound barrier and dropped fuel tanks over deserted areas in northern Syria, along its border with Turkey. Witnesses said the incident occurred in the Abyad area.
A Syrian military spokesman said that Syrian air defenses then opened fire on the IAF aircraft.
"The Israeli enemy aircraft infiltrated the Arab Syrian territory through the northern border, coming from the Mediterranean, heading toward the eastern region, breaking the sound barrier," the spokesman said. "Air defense units confronted them and forced them to leave. We warn the Israeli enemy government against this flagrant aggressive act, and retain the right to respond in an appropriate way."
The incident came as Syria was pursuing an unprecedented arms buildup and amid growing fears of an impending war. Since the Second Lebanon War, Military Intelligence has warned that while Syria is not really interested in an armed conflict with Israel, a lack of communication between the two countries could cause a war to erupt if a diplomatic resolution were not reached beforehand.
Both the Prime Minister's Office and the Foreign Ministry maintained a complete blackout on any information relating to the incident. Officials declined to answer queries either on or off the record, and would only repeat the IDF Spokesman's Office response on the matter that it was "not accustomed to responding to such reports."
Likud MK Tzahi Hanegbi, chairman of the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, said that the IDF response reflected the reality that Israel had no interest in getting into a confrontation with Syria.
In a Channel 2 interview, Hanegbi said Israel's interest was clear: "To reduce the tension and calm the situation."
Adding to the concern in Israel was an announcement by Syrian Information Minister Mohsen Bilal, who said Syria would "find the way" to respond to the Israeli aerial infiltration.
Bilal said the government was "seriously studying the nature of the response," but refused to indicate in an interview with Al-Jazeera whether the reaction would be on the military or diplomatic level. He would not give any more details about the incident, but said it proved Israel's policies were based on hostility.
"Israel, in fact, does not want peace. It cannot survive without aggression, treachery and military messages," he said.
Counterterrorism expert Boaz Ganor said that if Thursday's flyover did occur, it was possible that Israel was "collecting intelligence on long-range missiles" deployed by Syria in the North.
Imad Fawzi Shoaibi, a Syrian political analyst, speculated that Israel may have been probing Syria's new air defense systems, provided by Russia, at a time when tension was running high between the two countries.
Israel has acknowledged making routine flights over Lebanon, but it is unclear how often the IAF flies over Syria, if at all. At the beginning of the Second Lebanon War last summer, warplanes buzzed the palace of Syrian President Bashar Assad in what analysts called a warning to Damascus. In June of the same year, they also flew over Assad's summer home in Latakia, near the border with Turkey, after Hamas terrorists abducted Cpl. Gilad Schalit in Gaza.
AP contributed to the report.
This article can also be read at http://www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1188392553869&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Syria says Israel bombs territory as Israel silent (Reuters)
Thu Sep 6, 2007 10:22 AM EDT
By Khaled Yacoub Oweis
DAMASCUS (Reuters) - Syria accused Israel of infiltrating its airspace and bombing its territory on Thursday and warned it could respond.
The Israeli military said it would make no comment on the report, which spoke of no casualties or damage being caused.
After months in which talk of reviving long-stalled peace negotiations has mingled with speculation on both sides that the other was preparing a surprise attack, Syrian officials hit out.
"This shows that Israel cannot give up aggression and treachery," Syrian Information Minister Mohsen Bilal told al-Jazeera television.
Another Syrian official said: "They dropped bombs on an empty area while our air defenses were firing heavily at them."
The Israeli military spokesman's office said in a statement: "It is not our custom to respond to these kinds of reports."
The office has typically commented on such reports. But a security source said the government had imposed a news blackout on the issue. A spokeswoman for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert also said there would be no comment beyond the military statement.
A Israeli military source told Reuters the air force has conducted a major exercise this week. Israeli aircraft often train over Turkey, a Muslim nation friendly to the Jewish state.
An Israeli analyst familiar with defense matters said he believed Israel had been probing Syria's air defenses recently.
The Syrian official news agency SANA said Israeli aircraft "infiltrated Syrian airspace through the northern border coming from the direction of the Mediterranean and headed towards northeastern territory, breaking the sound barrier."
"The Syrian Arab Republic warns the government of the Israeli enemy and reserves the right to respond according to what it sees fit," SANA added.
Local residents said they heard the sound of five planes or more above Tal al-Abiad area on Syria's border with Turkey, around 160 km (100 miles) north of the Syrian city of Rakka.
NO HOSTILE INTENTIONS
Tensions between the two neighbors have been high in recent months, with some Israeli intelligence officials suggesting President Bashar al-Assad's administration might be ready to try to take by force parts of the Golan Heights, which Israel captured in the war of 1967.
Syrian officials have said Syria is seeking peaceful means to liberate the territory, although some have also indicated that force remained an option if diplomacy failed.
Olmert, who launched his forces against Syrian-allied Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon a year ago, has been at pains to stress that he has no hostile intentions toward Damascus.
Some Israeli military officials have expressed alarm at what they say are reinforcements of Syrian positions and arms purchases. But Olmert has spoken out against alarmist comments.
He has also said he would like to reopen peace negotiations that have been stalled for seven years. Syrian officials, too, have said they would like peace. But there has been little sign of any concrete steps towards rapprochement.
Syria last said it fired at Israeli warplanes in June 2006, when Israeli aircraft buzzed a Syrian presidential palace.
Israeli officials said at the time the flyover was a message to cease support for Hamas after the Palestinian militant group abducted an Israeli soldier.
Israel has long warned Syria to stop supporting militant Palestinian groups and the Lebanese movement Hezbollah.
Israeli jets bombed an empty Palestinian militant training camp in Syria in October 2003.
(Additional reporting by Jeffrey Heller, Dan Williams and Alastair Macdonald in Jerusalem)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The above would be right in accordance with the 'A Clean Break' if this situation gets worse as such could draw in Iran as well which is exactly what the JINSA/PNAC Neocons would desire with US coming to Israel's aid enflaming the Middle East in the process:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2005/02/11/a-clean-break-from-james-bamford-s-a-pretext-for-war.php
'A Clean Break'(War for Israel) agenda of the Likudnik JINSA/CSP/PNAC Neocons (pages 261-269/318-321 of James Bamford's 'A Pretext for War' book"):
Then Bush addressed the sole items on the agenda for his first high level national security meeting. The topics were not terrorism--a subject he barely mentioned during the campaign --or nervousness over China or Russia, but Israel and Iraq. From the very first moment, the Bush foreign policy would focus on three key objectives: get rid of Saddam, end American involvement in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, and rearrange the dominoes in the Middle East. A key to the policy shift would be the concept of pre-emption.
The Blueprint for the new Bush policy had actually been drawn up five years earlier by three of his top national security advisors. Soon to be appointed to senior administration positions, they were Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and David Wurmser. Ironically the plan was orginally intended not for Bush but for another world leader, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
At the time, the three officials were out of government and working for conservative pro-Israel think tanks. Perle and Feith had previously served in high level Pentagon positions during the presidency of Ronald Reagan. In a very unusual move, the former--and future--senior American officials were acting as a sort of American privy council to the new Israeli Prime Minister. The Perle task force to advise Netanyahu was set up by the Jerusalem based Institute for Advanced Stategic and Political Studies, where Wurmser was working. A key part of the plan was to get the United States to pull out of peace negotiations and simply let Israel take care of the Palestinians as it saw fit. "Israel," said the report, can manage it's own affairs. Such self-reliance will grant Israel greater freedom of action and remove a significant lever of pressure used against it in the past.
But the centerpiece of the recommendations was the removal of Saddam Hussein as the first step in remaking the Middle East into a region friendly, instead of hostile, to Israel. Their plan "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," also signaled a radical departure from the peace-oriented policies of former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who was assassinated by a member of an extreme right-wing Israeli group.
As part of their "grand strategy" they recommended that once Iraq was conquered and Saddam Hussein overthrown, he should be replaced by a puppet leader friendly to Israel. Whoever inherits Iraq, they wrote, dominates the entire Levant strategically. Then they suggested that Syria would be the next country to be invaded. Israel can shape it's strategic environment, they said.
This would be done, they recommended to Netanyahu, by re-establishing the principle of pre-emption and by rolling back it's Arab neighbors. From then on, the principle would be to strike first and expand, a dangerous and provocative change in philosophy. They recommended launching a major unprovoked regional war in the Middle East, attacking Lebanon and Syria and ousting Iraq's Saddam Hussein. Then, to gain the support of the American government and public, a phony pretext would be used as the reason for the original invasion.
The recommendation of Feith, Perle and Wurmser was for Israel to once again invade Lebanon with air strikes. But this time to counter potentially hostile reactions from the American government and public, they suggested using a pretext. They would claim that the purpose of the invasion was to halt Syria's drug-money and counterfeiting infrastructure located there. They were subjects in which Israel had virtually no interest, but they were ones, they said, with which America can sympathize.
Another way to win American support for a pre-emptive war against Syria, they suggested, was by drawing attention to its weapons of mass destruction program. This claim would be that Israel's war was really all about protecting Americans from drugs, counterfeit bills, and WMD--nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons.
It was rather extraordinary for a trio of former, and potentially future, high-ranking American government officials to become advisors to a foreign government. More unsettling still was a fact that they were recommending acts of war in which Americans could be killed, and also ways to masquerade the true purpose of the attacks from the American public.
Once inside Lebanon, Israel could let loose--to begin engaging Hizballah, Syria and Iran, as the principle agents of aggression in Lebanon. Then they would widen the war even further by using proxy forces--Lebanese militia fighters acting on Israel's behalf (as Ariel Sharon had done in the 80's)--to invade Syria from Lebanon. Thus, they noted, they could invade Syria by establishing the precedent that Syrian territory is not immune to attacks emanating from Lebanon by Israeli proxy forces.
As soon as that fighting started, they advised, Israel could begin striking Syrian military targets in Lebanon, and should that prove insufficient, striking at select targets in Syria proper [emphasis in original].
The Perle task force even supplied Nentanyahu with some text for a television address, using the suggested pretext to justify the war. Years later, it would closely resemble speeches to justify their own Middle East wars; Iraq would simply replace Syria and the United Staes would replace Israel: Negotiations with repressive regimes like Syria's require cautious realism. One cannot sensibly assume the other side's good faith. It is dangerous for Israel to deal naively with a regime murderous of its own people, openly aggressive towards its neighbors, criminally involved with international drug traffickers and counterfeiters, and supportive of the most deadly terrorist organizations.
The task force then suggested that Israel open a second front in its expanding war, with a focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq--an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right--as a means of foiling Syria's regional ambitions.
For years the killing of Saddam Hussein had been among the highest, and most secret, priorities of the Israeli government. In one stroke it would pay Saddam Hussein back for launching Scud missiles against Israel, killing several people, during the Gulf War. Redrawing the map of the Middle East would also help isolate Syria, Iraq's ally and Israel's archenemy along its northern border. Thus, in the early 1990's, after the US-led war in the Gulf, a small elite team of Israeli commandos was given the order to train in absolute secrecy for an assassination mission to bring down the Baghdad ruler.
The plan, code-named Bramble Bush, was to first kill a close friend of the Iraqi leader outside the country, someone from Hussein's hometown of Tikrit. Then, after learning the date and time of the funeral to be held in the town, a funeral Hussein was certain to attend, they would have time to covertly infiltrate a team of commandos into the country to carry out the assassination. The murder weapons were to be specially modified "smart" missiles that would be fired at Hussein as he stood in a crowd at the funeral.
But, the plan was finally abandoned after five members of the team were accidently killed during a dry run of the operation. Nevertheless, removing Saddam and converting Iraq from threat to ally had long been at the top of Israel's wish list.
Now Perle, Feith, and Wurmser were suggesting something far more daring--not just an assassination but a bloody war that would get rid of Saddam Hussein and also change the face of Syria and Lebanon. Perle felt their "Clean Break" recommendations were so important that he personally hand-carried the report to Netanyahu.
Wisely, Netanyahu rejected the task force' plan. But now, with the election of a receptive George W. Bush, they dusted off their pre-emptive war strategy and began getting ready to put it to use.
The new Bush policy was an aggressive agenda for any president, but especially for someone who had previously shown little interest in international affairs. We're going to correct the imbalances of the previous administration on the Mideast conflict, Bush told his freshly assembled senior national security team in the Situation Room on January 30, 2001. We're going to tilt it back toward Israel. . . .Anybody here ever met Ariel Sharon? Only Colin Powell raised his hand.
Bush was going to reverse the Clinton policy, which was heavily weighted toward bringing the bloody conflict between Israel and the Palestinians to a peaceful conclusion. There would be no more US interference; he would let Sharon resolve the dispute however he saw fit, with little or no regard for the situation of the Palestinians. The policy change was exactly as recommended by the Perle task force's "Clean Break" report.
I'm not going to go by past reputations when it comes to Sharon, Bush told his newly gathered national security team. I'm going to take him at face value. We'll work on a relationship based on how things go. Then he mentioned a trip he had taken with the Republican Jewish Coalition to Israel. We flew over the Palestinian camps. Looked real bad down there, he said with a frown. Then he said it was time to end America's efforts in the region. I don't see much we can do over there at this point, he said.
Colin Powell, Secretary of State for only a few days, was taken by surprise. The idea that such a complex problem, in which America had long been heavily involved, could be simply brushed away with the sweep of a hand made little sense. Fearing Israeli-led aggression, he quickly objected.
He stressed that a pullback by the United States would unleash Sharon and the Israeli army, recalled Paul O'Neill, who had be sworn in as Secretary of the Treasury by Bush only hours before and seated at the table. Powell told Bush, the consequences of that could be be dire, especially for the Palestinians. But Bush just shrugged. Sometimes a show of strength by one side can really clarify things, he said. Powell seemed startled, said O'Neill.
Over the following months, to the concern of Powell, the Bush-Sharon relationship became extremely tight. This is the best administration for Israel since Harry Truman, said Thomas Neuman, executive director of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs "JINSA" a pro-Israel advocacy group. In an article in the Washington Post titled "Bush and Sharon Nearly Identical on Middle East Policy," Robert G. Kaiser noted the dramatic shift in policy.
For the First time, wrote Kaiser, a US administration and a Likud government in Israel are pursuing nearly identical policies. Earlier US administrations, from Jimmy Carter through Bill Clinton's, held Likud and Sharon at arm's length, distancing the United States from Likud's traditionally tough approach to the Palestinians. Using the Yiddish term for supporters of Sharon's political party to the new relationship between Bush and Sharon, a senior US government official told Kaiser, "The Likudniks are really in charge now."
With America's long struggle to bring peace to the region quickly terminated, George W. Bush could turn his attention to the prime focus of his first National Security Council meeting; ridding Iraq of Saddam Hussein. Condoleezza Rice led off the discussion. But rather than mention anything about threats to the United States or weapons of mass destruction, she noted only that Iraq might be the key to reshaping the entire region. The words were practically lifted from the "Clean Break" report, which had the rather imperial-sounding subtitles: "A New Strategy for Securing the Realm."
Then Rice turned the meeting over to CIA Director George Tenet, who offered a grainy overhead picture of a factory that he said "might" be a plant "that produced either chemical or biological materials for weapons manufacture." There were no missiles or weapons of any kind, just some railroad tracks going to a building; truck activity; and a water tower--things that can be found in virtually any city in the US. Nor were there any human intelligence or signals intelligence reports. There was no confirming intelligence, Tenet said.
It was little more than a shell game. Other photo and charts showed US air activity over the "no fly-zone," but Tenet offered no more intelligence. Nevertheless, in a matter of minutes the talk switched from a discussion about very speculative intelligence to which targets to begin bombing in Iraq.
By the time the meeting was over, Treasury Secretary O'Neill was convinced that "getting Hussein was now the administration's focus, that much was already clear," But, O'Neill believed, the real destabilizing factor in the Middle East was not Saddam Hussein but the Israeli-Palestinian conflict--the issue Bush had just turned his back on. Ten years after the Gulf War, said O'Neill, "Hussein seemed caged and defanged. Clearly, there were many forces destabilizing the region, which we were now abandoning."
The war summit must also have seemed surreal to Colin Powell, who said little during the meeting and had long believed that Iraq had not posed a threat to the United States. As he would tell German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer just a few weeks later, "What we and other allies have been doing in the region, have succeeded in containing Saddam Hussein and his ambitions. . . .Containment has been a successful policy."
In addition to the "Clean Break" recommendations, David Wurmser only weeks before the NSC meeting had further elaborated on the way the United States might go about launching a pre-emptive war throughout the Middle East. America's and Israel's responses must be regional not local, he said. Israel and the United Staes should adopt a coordinated strategy, to regain the initiative and reverse their region-wide strategic retreat. They should broaden the conflict to strike fatally, not merely disarm, the center of radicalism in the region--the regimes of Damascus, Baghdad, Tehran, Tripoli, and Gaza. That would re-establish the recognition that fighting with either the US or Israel is suicidal. Many in the Middle East will then understand the merits of being an American ally and of making peace with Israel.
In the weeks and months following the NSC meeting, Perle, Feith and Wurmser began taking their places in the Bush administration. Perle became chairman of the reinvigorated and powerful Defence Policy Board, packing it with like-minded neoconservative super-hawks anxious for battle. Feith was appointed to the highest policy position in the Pentagon, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy. And Wurmser moved into a top policy position in the State Department before later becoming Cheney's top Middle East expert.
With the Pentagon now under Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz--both of whom had also long believed that Saddam Hussein should have been toppled during the first Gulf War--the war planners were given free reign. What was needed, however, was a pretext--perhaps a major crisis. Crisis can be opportunities, wrote Wurmser im his paper calling for an American-Israeli pre-emptive war throughout the Middle East.
Seeing little reason, or intelligence justification, for war at the close of the inaugural National Security Council meeting, Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill was perplexed. Who, exactly, was pushing this foreign policy? He wondered to himself. And "why Saddam, why now, and why [was] this central to US interests?"
The following includes pages 318-322 from Bamford's 'A Pretext for War' book:
Hadley and Libby were part of another secret office that had been set up within the White House. Known as the White House Iraq Group (WHIG), it was established in August 2002 by Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card, Jr., at the same time the OSP (Office of Special Plans) was established in Feith's office. Made up of high-level administration officials, its job was to sell the war to the general public, largely through televised addresses and by selectively leaking the intelligence to the media.
In June 2002, a leaked computer disk containing a presentation by chief Bush strategist Karl Rove revealed a White House political plan to use the war as a way to "maintain a positive issue environment." But the real pro-war media blitz was scheduled for the fall and the start of the election season "because from a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August," said Card.
At least once a week they would gather around the blonde conference table downstairs in the Situation Room, the same place the war was born on January 30, 2001, ten days into the Bush presidency. Although real intelligence had improved very little in the intervening nineteen months, the manufacturing of it had increased tremendously. In addition to Hadley and Libby, those frequently attending the WHIG meetings included Karl Rove, Condoleezza Rice, communications gurus Karen Hughes, Mary Matalin and James R. Wilkinson; and legislative liaison Nicholas E. Calio.
In addition to ties between Hussein and 9/11, among the most important products the group was looking to sell as Labor Day 2002 approached were frightening images of mushroom clouds, mobile biological weapons labs, and A-bomb plants, all in the hands of a certified "madman." A key piece of evidence that Hussein was building a nuclear weapon turned out to be the discredited Italian documents purchased on a street corner from a con man.
The WHIG began priming its audience in August when Vice President Cheney, on three occasions, sounded a shrill alarm over Saddam Hussein's nuclear threat. There "is no doubt," he declared, that Saddam Hussein "has weapons of mass destruction." Again and again, he hit the same chord. "What we know now, from various sources, is that he . . . continues to pursue a nuclear weapon." And again: "We do know, with absolute certainty, that he is using his procurement system to acquire the equipment he needs in order to enrich uranium to build a nuclear weapon."
Facing network television cameras, Cheney warned, "We now know that Saddam has resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons. . . . Among other sources, we've gotten this from firsthand testimony from defectors, including Saddam's own son-in-law." The relative was Hussein Kamel, who defected to Jordan in 1995 with a great deal of inside information on Iraq's special weapons programs, which he managed. He was later convinced by Saddam to return to Iraq, but executed by the ruler soon after his arrival.
But what Kamel told his interrogators was the exact opposite of what Cheney was claiming he said. After numerous debriefings by officials from the United States, the UN, and Jordan, he said on August 22, 1995, that Saddam had ended all uranium-enrichment programs at the beginning of the Gulf War in 1991 and never restarted them. He also made clear that "all weapons --biological, chemical, missile, nuclear--were destroyed." Investigators were convinced that Kamel was telling the truth, since he supplied them with a great deal of stolen raw data and was later murdered by his father-in-law as a result. But that was not the story Feith's OSP, Bush's WHIG, or Cheney wanted the American public to hear.
At the same time that Cheney began his media blitz, Ariel Sharon's office in Israel, as if perfectly coordinated, began issuing similar dire warnings concerning Hussein and pressing the Bush administration to go to war with Iraq. Like those from Cheney, pronouncements from Sharon's top aide, Ranaan Gissin, included frightening "evidence" --- equally phony --- of nuclear, as well as biological and chemical, threats.
"As evidence of Iraq's weapons building activities, " said an Associated Press report on the briefing, "Israel points to an order Saddam gave to Iraq's Atomic Energy Commission last week to speed up its work, said Sharon aide Ranaan Gissin. 'Saddam's going to be able to reach a point where these weapons will be operational,' he said. . . . Israeli intelligence officials have gathered evidence that Iraq is speeding up efforts to produce biological and chemical weapons, Gissin said."
It was clear, based on the postwar reviews done in Israel, that Israeli intelligence had no such evidence. Instead, the "evidence" was likely cooked up in Sharon's own Office of Special Plans unit, which was coordinating its activities with the Feith/Wurmser/Shulsky Office of Special Plans. The joint get-Saddam media blitz would also explain the many highly secret visits by the Israeli generals to Feith's office during the summer..
"Israel is urging U.S. officials not to delay a military strike against Iraq's Saddam Hussein, an aide to Prime Minister Ariel Minister said Friday," the AP report continued. " "Any postponement of an attack on Iraq at this stage with serve no purpose,' Gissin told the Associated Press. 'It will only give him [Saddam] more of an opportunity to accelerate his program of weapons of mass destruction.'"
As expected. Sharon's callw as widely publicized and increased pressure on Congress, which often bows to Israel's wishes, to vote in favor of the Bush war resolution. "Israel To U.S.: Don't Delay Iraq Attack," said a CBS News headline. "Israel is urging U.S. officials not to delay a military strike against Iraq's Saddam Hussein, an aide to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said Friday," said the report.
The story also made the news in London, where the Guardian newspaper ran the headline: "Israel Puts Pressure on US to Strike Iraq." It went on, "With foreign policy experts in Washington becoming increasingly critical of the wisdom of a military strike, and European governments showing no willingness to support an attack, the Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon, wants to make it clear that he is the US president's most reliable ally."
It was as if the Feith-Wurmser-Perle "Clean Break" plan come full circle. Their plan for Israel to overthrow Saddam Hussein and put a pro-Israel regime in his place had been rejected by former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Now Bush, with Sharon's support, was about to put it into effect.
Across the Atlantic, British Prime Minister Tony Blair also contributed to the war fever by releasing a much-hyped report that reinforced the White House theme that Iraq was an imminent threat not only to the United States but also to Britain. In addition to including a reference to the bogus Iraq-Niger uranium deal, the report -- later dubbed the "doggie dossier"--made another frightening claim. It warned that Iraq could launch a deadly biological or chemical attack with long-range ballistic missiles on British tourists and servicemen in Cyprus with just forty-five minute's notice.
Only after the war would it be publicly revealed that the reference was not to a strategic weapon that could reach Cyprus, but simply to a short-range battlefield weapon that could not come anywhere close to Cyprus. And because all the missiles were disassembled, even to fire on them on the battlefield would take not forty-five minutes but days of assembly and preparation. At least three times prior to the war, Blair was warned by intelligence officials that the report was inaccurate, but he made no public mention of it..
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bamford discusses 'A Clean Break'/war for Israel agenda on MSNBC's 'Countdown with Keith Olbermann':
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2006/08/07/bamford-discusses-a-clean-break-on-msnbc-s-countdown.php
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0385506724/qid%3D1106243696/sr%3D2-1/ref%3Dpd%5Fka%5Fb%5F2%5F1/103-6200440-0847015
Michael Duffy's review of James Bamford's 'A Pretext for War' book can be read via the following URL:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101040614-646366-2,00.html
Ex-producer for ABC World News Tonight:"Iraq war for Israel"
A Pretext for War:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/zeese1.html
http://www.counterpunch.org/zeese05232005.html
http://www.antiwar.com/av/?articleid=3440
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040801/news_lz1v1pretext.html
You can hear JINSA/PNAC Neocon Richard Perle basically lying to Congressman Walter Jones (R-NC) about the 'A Clean Break'/war for Israel agenda which he co-authored via the audio link at the following URL at one hour and fourteen minutes into it:
http://gorillaintheroom.blogspot.com/2005/04/operating-off-different-agenda.html
C-SPAN viewer call for GAO head David Walker which mentioned Walt and Mearsheimer book
http://neoconzionistthreat.blogspot.com/2007/09/israel-lobby-and-us-foreign-policy.html
http://tinyurl.com/2KHCED
Cheney Orders Media To Sell Attack On Iran:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/wake-up-america-your-government-is-hijacked-by-zionism/2007/09/05/cheney-orders-media-to-sell-attack-on-iran.php
Last edited by Alpha on Sat Nov 03, 2007 6:40 am; edited 8 times in total | |  | | Alpha | | Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 9:09 pm Post subject: Syria says it shot at Israeli aircraft |
| Syria says it shot at Israeli aircraft
By ALBERT AJI, Associated Press Writer 24 minutes ago
The Syrian government charged Thursday that Israeli aircraft dropped "munitions" inside Syria overnight and said its air defenses opened fire in a new escalation of tensions between the decades-old foes.
It was unclear what happened. Syria stopped short of accusing Israel of purposely bombing its territory, and an Israeli spokesman said he could not comment on military operations.
Analysts speculated such a foray could have been probing Syria's defenses or monitoring long-range missile bases. The reported path also would have taken the jets near Iran, whose growing power and anti-Israel government worries leaders of the Jewish state.
The incident came after a summer of building tensions that have fed worries of a military conflict erupting between Syria and Israel. Syria accused Israel last month of seeking a pretext for war, and the Israelis are keeping a close watch on Syrian troop movements.
Both sides have insisted they want no conflict along the disputed frontier. But Syria fears it is being squeezed out of a U.S.-brokered Mideast peace conference planned for November and will be left at a disadvantage in the standoff with Israel.
Syria has grown more vocal in pressing its demand that Israel give back the Golan Heights. Israel, in turn, seeks the return of three Israeli soldiers held for more than a year by two Syrian-allied militant groups, Hezbollah in southern Lebanon and Hamas in the Palestinian lands.
The official Syrian Arab News Agency quoted a military official as saying Israeli jets broke the sound barrier flying over northern Syria before dawn Thursday, then "dropped munitions" onto deserted areas after being shot at by Syria's air defenses.
Syria did not claim the aircraft bombed its territory, however. Asked if Israel attacked Syria, Cabinet Minister Buthaina Shaaban said only that the aircraft violated Syrian air space.
"We are a sovereign country. They cannot do that," Shaaban said on Al-Jazeera television's English service.
Syrian officials did not specify the type or quantity of Israeli aircraft that purportedly crossed the border or describe the "munitions" dropped. Pilots sometimes jettison extra fuel tanks when warplanes come under fire to make the craft lighter and easier to maneuver.
Israel's army spokesman declined to comment on the report, saying he could not discuss military operations.
In Washington, the State Department had no specific comment on the incident, citing the lack of details about what happened.
"I'd leave it up to the parties to describe what happened. We'll leave it to them to try and sort this out," deputy spokesman Tom Casey told reporters.
Some officials suggested the Bush administration did not want to stoke tensions further by taking sides between Israel and Syria.
Syrian military and government officials condemned Israel.
"We warn the Israeli enemy government against this flagrant aggressive act, and retain the right to respond in an appropriate way," the Syrian military said.
Information Minister Mohsen Bilal told Al-Jazeera that Syria's government was considering how to respond, but refused to say whether it would opt for diplomatic or military means.
He said the incident showed "Israel in fact does not want peace" and charged that a recent increase in U.S. military aid was fueling aggression by the Jewish state.
The route reportedly flown by the Israeli planes, east from the Mediterranean deep into northern Syria, would have taken the craft to Syria's closest point to Iran, separated only by Iraq's Kurdish region.
Israel is concerned over the growing strength of the Syrian-allied Iran, whose leaders strongly oppose the Jewish state's existence.
The U.S., Israel and other nations fear Iran is using its civilian nuclear program as a cover to produce atomic weapons. Iran denies that, saying the program is solely geared toward generating electricity.
Both Israel and the U.S. have refused to rule out airstrikes on Iran should diplomatic efforts fail to get Tehran to curb its atomic program.
Israeli aircraft fly over Lebanon routinely to monitor Hezbollah guerrillas, but it is unclear how often its planes fly over Syria.
Before and during last summer's war with Hezbollah, Israeli warplanes twice buzzed the residence of Syrian President Bashar Assad in Damascus. Analysts called the flights a warning to Syria to keep out of the fight next door.
In October 2003, Israeli warplanes bombed a Palestinian guerrilla base near Damascus, the first airstrike inside Syria since the 1973 Mideast war. During Syria's three-decade occupation in Lebanon, which ended in 2005, Israeli planes occasionally attacked Syrian military units in that country.
But the last major confrontation took place during Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon, when Israel's air force shot down dozens of Syrian warplanes and ground troops destroyed Syrian armor in central and eastern Lebanon.
___
Associated Press writer Matthew Lee in Washington contributed to this report. | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 5:40 pm Post subject: |
| BGJDAVID (General James David is mentioned on the cover of former Republican Paul Findley's 'They Dare to Speak Out' book and wrote the following):
Israel has a history of provoking Arabs in order to go to war. While trying to play victim, the Israelis will provoke the Arabs to respond to Israeli aggression in order for the Jews to make it appear as if the Arabs were the ones to start the war. This is the way they've done it in all past wars including their latest war with Hezbollah just last summer. Isn't it obvious that Israel's intent is to get Iran to make a move of aggression in order to justify a U.S./Israeli attack on Iran? When it comes to deception, nobody does it better than Israel. Yes, the Israelis know exactly what they're doing. But one really can't blame them. That's the sort of thing that they always have done. What's really disappointing and disturbing is the American people's response to this deception and lies. What's disappointing is our gullibility.
Syria says Israel bombs territory as Israel silent (Reuters)
Thu Sep 6, 2007 10:22 AM EDT
By Khaled Yacoub Oweis
DAMASCUS (Reuters) - Syria accused Israel of infiltrating its airspace and bombing its territory on Thursday and warned it could respond.
The Israeli military said it would make no comment on the report, which spoke of no casualties or damage being caused.
After months in which talk of reviving long-stalled peace negotiations has mingled with speculation on both sides that the other was preparing a surprise attack, Syrian officials hit out.
"This shows that Israel cannot give up aggression and treachery," Syrian Information Minister Mohsen Bilal told al-Jazeera television.
Another Syrian official said: "They dropped bombs on an empty area while our air defenses were firing heavily at them."
The Israeli military spokesman's office said in a statement: "It is not our custom to respond to these kinds of reports."
The office has typically commented on such reports. But a security source said the government had imposed a news blackout on the issue. A spokeswoman for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert also said there would be no comment beyond the military statement.
A Israeli military source told Reuters the air force has conducted a major exercise this week. Israeli aircraft often train over Turkey, a Muslim nation friendly to the Jewish state.
An Israeli analyst familiar with defense matters said he believed Israel had been probing Syria's air defenses recently.
The Syrian official news agency SANA said Israeli aircraft "infiltrated Syrian airspace through the northern border coming from the direction of the Mediterranean and headed towards northeastern territory, breaking the sound barrier."
"The Syrian Arab Republic warns the government of the Israeli enemy and reserves the right to respond according to what it sees fit," SANA added.
Local residents said they heard the sound of five planes or more above Tal al-Abiad area on Syria's border with Turkey, around 160 km (100 miles) north of the Syrian city of Rakka.
NO HOSTILE INTENTIONS
Tensions between the two neighbors have been high in recent months, with some Israeli intelligence officials suggesting President Bashar al-Assad's administration might be ready to try to take by force parts of the Golan Heights, which Israel captured in the war of 1967.
Syrian officials have said Syria is seeking peaceful means to liberate the territory, although some have also indicated that force remained an option if diplomacy failed.
Olmert, who launched his forces against Syrian-allied Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon a year ago, has been at pains to stress that he has no hostile intentions toward Damascus.
Some Israeli military officials have expressed alarm at what they say are reinforcements of Syrian positions and arms purchases. But Olmert has spoken out against alarmist comments.
He has also said he would like to reopen peace negotiations that have been stalled for seven years. Syrian officials, too, have said they would like peace. But there has been little sign of any concrete steps towards rapprochement.
Syria last said it fired at Israeli warplanes in June 2006, when Israeli aircraft buzzed a Syrian presidential palace.
Israeli officials said at the time the flyover was a message to cease support for Hamas after the Palestinian militant group abducted an Israeli soldier.
Israel has long warned Syria to stop supporting militant Palestinian groups and the Lebanese movement Hezbollah.
Israeli jets bombed an empty Palestinian militant training camp in Syria in October 2003.
(Additional reporting by Jeffrey Heller, Dan Williams and Alastair Macdonald in Jerusalem) | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 8:34 pm Post subject: |
| Subject: Minister Shaaban asked "what are they going to do w/$30 M of arms......."
HTML Attachment [ Scan and Save to Computer ]
Buthayaa Shaaban, a Syrian government minister, would only confirm that the Israelis "intervened in our airspace".
She said: "The Israeli aeroplanes went into our airspace at night on our northern borders and this is not really surprising.
What are they going to do with about $30m of armaments except attack neighbouring countries?"
************ ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* ****
And here is their shopping list...courtesy of Dod website....I found this late last night...notice the date of publication!
2007-08: Israel Looks to Replenish Bomb Stocks
07-Aug-2007 19:52 | Permanent Link
Related stories: Americas - USA, Boeing, Middle East - Israel, Bombs - General, Bombs - Smart, General Dynamics, Contracts - Intent
F-15E: 5 targets
(click to view full)
On Aug 3/07, the US DSCA formally announced Israel's request [PDF format] for various US bombs and precision guidance kits.
Requested items include 10,000 live MK-84 2,000-lb. Bombs; 1,500 live MK-82 500-lb. Bombs; 2,000 live BLU-109 2,000-lb. Bombs with penetrator warheads; JDAM tail kits that add GPS/INS guidance to bombs (10,000); Paveway II laser-guidance kits for the 500-lb. MK-82 (2,500), the 1,000-lb. MK-83 (500), and the 2,000 pound MK-84 (1,000) bombs; 10,000 FMU-139 live fuze components; 10,000 FMU-152 live fuze components; and 50 GBU-28 Enhanced Paveway III 5,000-lb. 'bunker buster' laser/GPS guided live bombs. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $465 million.
Israel already has all of these munitions in its inventory, which was depleted during its 2006 war against Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran.
It also produces many similar devices domestically, but can allocate American foreign assistance dollars to pay American firms and so Israel always finds itself balancing domestic capabilities and spending against American industry purchases.
Amidst rumors of a planned attack by Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah in late 2007, rapid replenishment may also be a consideration.
The principal contractors will be:
Boeing subsidiary McDonnell Douglas Corporation in St. Charles, MO (JDAM kits)
Alliant Techsystems Incorporated in Janesville, WI (ATK makes fuzes and explosives)
Alliant Techsystems Incorporated in Clearwater, FL
Lockheed-Martin Aerospace Corporation in Fort Worth, TX (Paveway orders, note trademark dispute with Raytheon)
Northrop Grumman Company in Los Angeles, CA
Honeywell Corporation in Clearwater, FL
General Dynamics in Garland, TX (Mk82 & Mk84 bomb bodies) | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:07 pm Post subject: |
| Israeli jets 'drop ammunition' in sortie over Syria
By Anne Penketh, Diplomatic Editor
Published: 07 September 2007
Syria was considering its response last night after an Israeli warplane violated Syrian air space and was accused of dropping ammunition inside the country. The incident, near the Turkish border on Wednesday, came just after midnight at a time when tensions are running high between the two neighbours. It prompted Syrian air defence units to open fire on the Israeli jets, Syrian officials said.
The Israeli aircraft "infiltrated Syrian air space through the northern border, coming from the direction of the Mediterranean, and headed towards northeastern territory, breaking the sound barrier," said the official Syrian news agency, Sana. "The Syrian Arab Republic warns the government of the Israeli enemy and reserves the right to respond according to what it sees fit."
A Syrian official added: "They dropped bombs on an empty area while our air defences were firing heavily at them." Residents said they heard the sound of five planes or more above the Tal al-Abiad area on Syria's border with Turkey, about 100 miles north of the Syrian city of Rakka.
The Israeli army refused to comment on the incident but no casualties or damage were reported. "We cannot discuss military operations," a spokesman said.
However, it is not the first such incident and there was speculation yesterday that the Israeli planes may have jettisoned their fuel tanks over the deserted area to make them more manoeuvrable, possibly after being targeted by Syrian forces. The Israelis may also have been probing Syria's defences, or could simply have experienced a technical problem during a flight.
In 2003, Israeli jets struck what Israel described as a Palestinian training camp on Syrian soil, in retaliation for a suicide bombing in Haifa on the eve of the Jewish holy day of Yom Kippur. Rime Allaf, a Syrian defence specialist based in Damascus, said yesterday: "The Israeli military sends what it calls 'messages to Syria' in this way."
In June last year, Israeli jets buzzed the summer residence of Bashar Assad, the Syrian President, after the Palestinian militant group Hamas, whose leader is sheltered by Damascus, captured an Israeli soldier in Gaza. Aircraft also broke the sound barrier over his palace in Damascus at the beginning of the Lebanon war, in what was seen as a clear message about Syria's support for the guerrilla group Hizbollah. Mohsen Bilal, the Syrian Information minister, said: "Israel does not want peace. It cannot survive without aggression, treachery and military messages." The recent offer to Israel of $30bn (£14.8bn) in American aid over the next 10 years had encouraged the Israeli government to "such arrogance that it delivered this morning message", he claimed. Mr Bilal added that his government was "seriously studying the nature of the response" but did not say whether it would be military or diplomatic.
In the past, Syria has approached the UN Security Council in response to Israeli violations of Syrian territorial integrity and has not retaliated directly. But the two nations have been sending mixed messages to each other about their peace prospects. Syria has stepped up calls for talks to discuss the return of the strategic Golan Heights, captured by Israel in 1967. But since last summer's 34-day Lebanon war, in which Hizbollah fighters stood up to Israeli forces, a hardline faction in the leadership in Damascus have argued that Syria "should be ready to show it is ready for war if need be", Ms Allaf said.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2938965.ece | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 1:12 am Post subject: |
| Syria threatens Israel over sortie
Published: 09/08/2007
Syria hinted at imminent retaliation for an alleged Israeli violation of its airspace.
Syrian Vice President Farouk Shaara said in an interview published over the weekend that his country was weighing a response to what it described as an incursion by Israeli warplanes Thursday.
"I can't reveal details of the measures," Shaara told Italy's La Repubblica daily. "That's a question of national security.
"I can tell you that at this time, in Damascus, political and military chiefs are studying a series of responses. The results will not be long in coming."
Syria's official state newspaper Tishrin accused the Bush administration of complicity in the flyover.
Israel and the United States have not commented on the incident
http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/breaking/104057.html | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 1:25 am Post subject: |
| 'Turkey furious over alleged IAF foray'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JPost.com Staff , THE JERUSALEM POST Sep. 7, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An unnamed Turkish official demanded explanations from Israel, Saturday, after fuel tanks allegedly dropped by Israel F-151 planes who were conducting a foray into Syrian airspace Wednesday overnight, were found on the Turkish Syrian border.
Syrian claims of the incident remained unconfirmed in Israel, which remained absolutely mum on the incident.
Earlier Saturday, the Syrian government mouthpiece Tishrin accused the US of encouraging Israel by keeping in line with its media silence and refusing to issue its own statement on the issue.
The Turkish paper Hurriyet published blurry photos of what it claimed were detachable fuel tanks of the Israeli planes. The tanks were found near the Turkey-Syria border.
Reportedly Turkey was demanding whether the Israeli planes also passed over its own airspace.
It should be noted that IAF jets regularly practice in Turkish airspace with Turkish consent, and that the Turkish air force conducts joint drills with the IAF and the American Air Force (USAF) on a regular basis.
Earlier Saturday, Tzahi Hanegbi, chairman of the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee told Israel Radio that "Israel and Syria don't have an interest in conflict, and the United States, along with Arab countries, are making sure not to cause unnecessary tension."
Hanegbi also responded to comments made Friday by Science, Culture and Sports Minister Ghaleb Majadle's - comments which marked the first official Israeli response since IAF jets flew over Syria on Thursday. Majadle said that IAF planes enter Syrian airspace on a daily basis, and that he did not believe the latest alleged incident would spark off a war.
"The minister should show more restraint with his words," Hanegbi said, adding that "it was unacceptable to speak to the media on matters unrelated to his office."
Majadle told the Nazareth-based A-Sinara newspaper that while he had no specific information about the latest alleged operation, it was likely that "the planes either entered Syrian airspace to take photographs or in error."
"All sides are interested in calming the situation," Hanegbi continued. "The IDF response was not at all aggressive. The Syrian media has dropped the issue. Russia and Iran responded to the incident out of obligation but didn't take the matter to the [United Nations] Security Council."
Hanegbi went on to say that Israel's silence regarding Thursday's incident was coordinated with the US. He added, however, that "Syria has recently invested unprecedented amounts of money on weapons deals, the likes of which we haven't seen since the fall of the former Soviet Union."
Earlier in the day an anonymous Israeli source reportedly told the Arab daily Al Arabiya that the IAF jets were on a mission to neutralize Russian-made surface-to-air missile (SAM) anti-aircraft batteries recently deployed by Syria along its Mediterranean coast.
According to Army Radio, the Israeli source did not specify the exact type of target, or its exact location.
This latest report surrounding the mysterious incident comes only a day after IDF Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi said that the winner and loser of a future war will have to be made apparent.
"In any future conflict forced upon the state of Israel, there will be a need to ensure that it is known who lost and who won."
Ashkenazi made his comments during a meeting held with high-ranking reserve officers on Friday and made no connection between his statement and the latest fears surrounding a war with Syria.
Meanwhile, Arab countries continued denouncing the yet-unconfirmed IAF flight over Syria as unprovoked. The Arab League announced that the alleged overflight of IAF planes in Syrian airspace was intolerable, Army Radio reported.
Arab League chief Amr Moussa said that "the unbearable move" revealed negative Israeli intentions for the upcoming Middle East peace conference.
Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit said that Israel's so-called aerial violations overnight Wednesday added to the regional tension.
Also Friday, Syria accused Israel of jeopardizing the chances of success in the upcoming US-sponsored Middle East meeting.
Syrian Ambassador to the United Nations Bashar Ja'afari told Al-Jazeera that the alleged IAF operation came only a few hours after Arab League foreign ministers in Cairo had published a message of support for the meeting and had called for Syria to be invited.
A Syrian government newspaper warned that the country "possesses the means to respond ... so that it will deter Israel against proceeding with such unpredictable adventures."
Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki called his Syrian counterpart Walid al-Moallem after the alleged over flight to offer support and condemn Israel's actions, Iran's official IRNA news agency reported Friday.
In Washington, the US State Department had no specific comment on the incident, citing the lack of details about what happened.
"I'd leave it up to the parties to describe what happened. We'll leave it to them to try and sort this out," deputy spokesman Tom Casey told reporters Thursday.
AP contributed to this report. | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 10:49 am Post subject: Are Israel and Syria Edging Toward War? |
| Are Israel and Syria Edging Toward War?
Damascus says Israel has again violated Syrian air space. How the incident could affect a volatile region.
WEB EXCLUSIVE
By Joanna Chen
Newsweek
Updated: 4:20 p.m. CT Sept 7, 2007
Sept. 7, 2007 - Are Israel and Syria edging closer to war? Tensions between the two longtime enemies have ratcheted up still further after Damascus alleged that Israeli Air Force planes had penetrated Syria’s northern air space earlier this week. Syrian reports say that its forces fired anti-aircraft missiles at the Israeli planes after they dropped "munitions" inside the country. Israeli authorities have refused to comment officially, and Syrian Vice President Farouk Shara was quoted in The Jerusalem Post as saying that his country was not interested in being drawn into a war with Israel.
This is not the first time that Israel has invaded Syrian airspace. In June 2006 Israeli warplanes flew over Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's palace in what many saw as a defiant message to the Syrian people. NEWSWEEK's Joanna Chen spoke to professor Eyal Zisser, head of the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies at Tel Aviv University, about the possible impact of the latest developments. Excerpts:
NEWSWEEK: Israel has penetrated Syrian airspace before, but this time the incident is being treated more seriously. What has changed?
Eyal Zisser: The political climate changed in [August] 2006, when President Bashar al-Assad declared a shift in the status quo between Israel and Syria. His speech created a new and more hostile environment, and what happened [Thursday] must be seen against this background.
So what exactly happened?
That's the big question. We have the Syrian report, but so far there has been no Israeli denial. Israel may have been testing Syrian radar detection facilities in the area.
Is a quick military response from the Syrians at all likely?
I don't expect anything dramatic right now. The incident is not something big in itself, and Syrian sources have stated this. Syria isn't interested in any deterioration in relations at this stage and is clearly not interested in war, so any further response to this incident, if any, will be diplomatic. However, I suggest following events closely, since there's clearly rising tension between Israel and Syria and it's not going to go away.
How do you interpret Israel's silence?
The simple thing was [for Israel] to say “We didn't do it. It has nothing to do with us.” So the silence shows Israel has a connection but wants to keep a limited, low profile at this stage. In the past Israeli officials and spokesmen haven't hesitated verbally attacking Syria and emphasizing its weaknesses. Similarly, Syria prefers to keep a relatively low profile and to contain any reaction.
Is it possible that Israel planned this mission to coincide with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's next visit to the Middle East?
I don't believe so, since no one is taking her too seriously in this region. What's the big deal? No one expects her visit to produce anything dramatic.
Some analysts have interpreted the Israeli action as a way of reasserting military prowess lost in last year's Lebanon war, or of distracting attention from Israel's military actions in Gaza.
If this were Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's doing, then maybe. But [Israeli Defense Minister] Ehud Barak, unlike Olmert, is an experienced and calculating general. When Barak was prime minister he was accused of being too careful and was reluctant to use force. I'm giving him credit that if he ordered Israel to fly over Syria he knew what he was doing. He knows how dangerous it is to play with the Syrians right now and would not get involved in a game leading to war only to distract attention or to flex muscles.
What are relations like today between Israel and Syria?
They're not in state of war but not in state of peace, either. Each side is quietly preparing for the possibility of war, and Syria may reach the conclusion that war might not be a bad thing. Let's not forget, for example, that Syria continues to supply [Lebanon's] Hizbullah with advanced missiles.
What will happen next?
For now, this incident is already behind us, but the problem is in the long run. So in the coming year we can expect these seemingly small incidents occurring every now and then to gradually increase tension. We can expect deterioration, more military tension, and eventually someone on one side or the other could decide to lead into war. If you follow Syrian discourse in the media you can feel how hostile it is. Israel has an interest in preserving the status quo due to its hold on the Golan Heights, but Syria is less interested in this and may want to break it.
So far the Bush administration has kept quiet about this.
The United States responded in the same way as Israel. Usually the White House has something to say on matters like this, but this time it was very low-key. Why didn't the U.S. administration criticize Israel? Only time will tell.
Is Israel afraid that Iran may try to topple the delicate balance?
The fear is always there, but Iran was always ready to fight to the last Lebanese and Syrian soldier, so Iran has always stayed at the back and let Syria fight. But there is little Iran can actually do, since it has no [border with Syria or Israel]. Although Iran will always play a negative role, it will always be a limited one.
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20646979/site/newsweek/
Israel is simply a a war procatuer. It has no respect for her Arab neighbors . She reaps her own future destruction.
Majadele: IAF regularly flies over Syria
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3447011,00.html
In first comment by Israeli official on Israel's alleged violation of Syrian airspace Friday, minister says incident not likely to trigger war with Syria
Roee Nahmias
Minister Raleb Majadele said Friday that the Israel Air Force enters Syria's airspace on a daily basis, and estimated that the recent plane incident would not prompt a war with Syria, Nazareth-based al-Sinara newspaper reported.
According to the minister, the Israeli aircraft possibly entered the Syrian airspace by mistake.
On Thursday Syrian. Minister Bussaina Shaaban told al-Jazeera that Israeli aircraft "dropped bombs on an empty area while our air defenses were firing heavily at them.
"They intervened in our airspace... which they should not do -- we are a sovereign country and they should not come into airspace," he said.
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Thursday evening chose to keep silent on the unusual incident with Syria reported earlier in the day.
Olmert delivered a speech at a Kadima ceremony ahead of the Jewish New Year, and many of the attendees had expected him to address the Syrian report that an Israeli aircraft violated its airspace on Wednesday night. Instead, the prime minister referred to other security issues. | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 11:03 pm Post subject: |
| Why Did Israeli Planes Enter Syria?
Monday, Sep. 10, 2007
By Nicholas Blanford/Beirut
A mysterious incident involving Israeli jets over northern Syria last week has revived fears of war between Israel and Syria, just as months of tension between the bitter foes had appeared to be subsiding. The Israeli government is maintaining a rigid — and uncharacteristic —silence over the affair, which has drawn threats of retaliation from Damascus and a vow to take the matter to the U.N. Security Council. Speculation is rife, but facts elusive, over why Israeli warplanes were over above the arid plains of northern Syria early Thursday. Syria's official news agency last week quoted a Syrian military official saying that Israeli jets had entered Syrian airspace from the Mediterranean, and broke the sound barrier before coming under fire from air defenses. The Israelis, according to this account, had "dropped munitions" over deserted areas before departing. The report did not specify whether the Israelis had bombed any targets. The following day, fuel tanks were discovered inside Turkey near the Syrian border. Other jettisoned tanks were reportedly found inside Syria.
"They dropped bombs over Syria and they dropped fuel tanks on Syrian soil," Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem said in Ankara Monday, while briefing Turkish officials on the incident. Turkey, which has strong military and diplomatic ties to Israel, described the overflights as "unacceptable," and has demanded an explanation from the Israeli government.
The Syrians are suggesting that Israel had, albeit discreetly, moved preemptively to reassure Damascus of its intentions before the incident. Muallem told European ambassadors in Damascus at the weekend that last Wednesday — the day before the incursion — he had received a "calming message" from Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, sent via a top EU official, according to the Arabic Al-Hayat newspaper. Israeli officials have lately sought to defuse tensions by making clear Israel has no plan to attack Syria and reducing troop numbers near the border. But Muallem told the diplomats that Olmert's message was a "preparation for the penetration of planes into Syrian skies, just hours later," Al-Hayat reported. Israeli aircraft routinely breach Lebanese airspace, in defiance of U.N. resolutions, mainly to monitor the activities of Hizballah, and on rare occasions, usually connected to tensions in Lebanon or the Palestinian territories, they have also entered Syrian skies.
But northern Syria is a long way from the traditional Arab-Israeli frontline, suggesting that the mission was of sufficient importance to endanger air crews and risk a serious escalation of tensions with Damascus. Mohammed Raad, a senior Hizballah official, suggested that the overflight was an attempt to "identify an aggressive aerial passage" for an air strike against Iran. Analysts long have pondered the potential flight routes Israeli bombers would take in the event of a decision to target Iran's nuclear sites. Given the limitations of aircraft range, one option would be flying directly across Jordan and/or Saudi Arabia and through U.S.-patrolled Iraqi skies. Neither the Saudis and Jordanians would shed tears if Iran's nuclear capability was destroyed in an air strike, but they could not afford to be seen as having granted the Israelis safe passage though their skies.
An alternative would be to follow the Turkish-Syrian border eastward to Iraqi Kurdistan, and then on to Iran. According to John Pike of globalsecurity.org, the many technical and political factors in play make it difficult to predict which route the Israelis might choose. "At this level of technical detail, one starts to get thinking about what sort of weapons would be carried, and what sort of drag this imposes and how that affects combat range," Pike told TIME.
Even if it were not related to a bombing route, the purpose of Israel's unusual air mission last week may yet be related to Iran. In August, Syria reportedly received from Russia the first batch of 50 Pantsyr S1E short-range air defense systems, part of an alleged sale worth almost $1 billion. The deal is said to have been financed by Iran, which reportedly will receive from Syria some of the Pantsyr units and deploy them to protect its nuclear facilities. The recently developed Pantsyr, which its Russian manufacturers claim is immune to jamming, includes surface-to-air missiles and 30mm gatling guns, providing complete defensive coverage for a range of 11 to 12 miles and 6 miles in altitude. Pantsyr batteries could pose a serious challenge to either an Israeli or a U.S. air strike on Iran. So were the Israeli aircraft playing a perilous game of chicken to assess the capabilities of the Pantsyr system in response to their countermeasures? Some in Syria believe so.
"There seems to be a consensus here that the Israelis were testing Syrian air defense systems," Andrew Tabler, Damascus-based editor of Syria Today, told TIME.
Whatever their purpose, the overflights appear to have dashed hopes of cooling Israeli-Syrian tensions. Having absorbed the lessons of Israel's failure to crush Hizballah during last summer's month-long war, Syria has been building up its military capabilities in recent months, purchasing advanced anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles. Veteran Hizballah instructors have been helping train crack Syrian commando units in guerrilla warfare, according to Lebanese intelligence sources. Syria's growing military confidence has been further bolstered by defense agreements with Iran. Some Israelis worry that Syria, sidelined by the U.S. and Washington's Arab allies in regional peacemaking efforts, could launch a lightning strike against Israel in order to push to the top of the diplomatic agenda its ongoing quest to recover territory captured by Israel in 1967.
Hizballah, meanwhile, has spent the past year frenetically restocking its war-depleted arsenal, preparing new lines of defense and recruiting and training hundreds of eager volunteers in anticipation of a second round with Israel. Commentators in Lebanon and Syria believe that Israel's need to restore its battered military deterrence has heightened the prospect of an attack on Syria. Writing in Monday's Syrian state-run Tishreen newspaper, Ezzieddine Darwish said that the Israeli government is seeking to provoke a war with Syria to "wash away the shame of Israel's defeat in Lebanon". Indeed, many Lebanese, Syrians and Israelis are no longer asking if a war will happen, only when and how.
* Find this article at:
* http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1660477,00.html | | | | Alpha | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
