Who's in charge? How Assad & Syria control the greatest stake in the Middle East

The facts speak for themselves.  If you look at the numbers above, Syria is a global embarrassment into how a country should be allowed to operate.  The tyranny and brutal justice of Bashar Assad are on clear display for the world to see.  

16, 321 killed in 451 days.  (1,226 children, 1,150 women)

65,000 others missing.

212,000 detained.

1,000,000 internally displaced.

200,000 refugees.

1.4 million at risk of famine.

And what is Bashar Assad doing to fix this?  Nothing.  He is too concerned with hanging onto power that he simply does not have.  His ability to govern is nonexistent, and his will to govern has been diverted into handling an uprising that he can not handle without sheer force.

The real question now is how long must we allow this movement to go on without our President, Secretary of State, ambassadors in the region, even uttering a word to honor those who have lost their lives trying to bring a change that this administration welcomed gladly in places like Libya, Tunisia, Egypt even.  The pressure quickly mounted when the U.S. withdrew any support for longtime regional partner Hosni Mubarak, yet an Iranian puppet like Assad does not even gain mention in a White House press briefing.  

This President knows what is at stake if Assad falls.  It may not be pretty, but it is worth a chance to support this potential change.  Without Assad, a TRULY free Lebanon could emerge - dismembering the results of the 2008 civil war which installed a Hezbollah-led Parliament and President - and bring a legitimate government unifying all religions and sects.  A new Lebanon without Hezbollah (which is suffering internal dissent over finance mismanagement and its leadership) and a new Syria led by the people and not governed by an heir to the throne, will change the region.  Iran's largest proxies will have been diminished, no longer giving terror groups like Hezbollah the authority they once held (Hezbollah controlled many social services in the country, generating hundreds of millions in annual revenue for the group capitalizing on everything from garbage collecting to electricity, which sparked the 2008 civil way when the Lebanese government attempted to shut off the group's secure telecommunication network, which was declared an act of war by Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah). 

 All of this means that in order to sustain its ability to defend itself using its proxy network, Iran's estimated $200 million annually given to terror groups may have to increase...and its terror networks regroup.  Safe havens once held in Lebanon will now be free societies, capable of challenging Iranian meddling.  This is exactly what is needed to counter Hezbollah, which many terror experts have labeled for almost a decade as terrorism's "A-team", leading Al-Qaida in expertise.  

Why then have we allowed the people of Lebanon and Syria, approximately 25 million, to be denied an opportunity to create a new future for the youths?  Why must they have to wait another day?  How come we have outsourced any responsibility as a global leader to help resolve the problem to Russia, who has a longstanding partnership with Iran and Syria in military contracts that are probably being used in the daily bloodbaths on the streets of Homs?  Not to sound cynical, but Vladimir Putin knows probably better than anyone else how much money his country has to gain from arming Bashar Assad with Russian arms and military systems, why would he give the bat of an eye to the numbers inside Syria?  

This situation can not and will not be resolved inside the United Nations.  Rather it will be met, similar in World War II, by the dedication and partnership of freedom loving countries who challenge a power hungry menace and protect those who can not protect themselves.  The time to stop this madness is overdue, but it is clear that Assad has enough backing to hold onto whatever power he still yields, which is only through killing any dissenters.

The impact of Egyptian Revolution across the Region: A Risk Assessment

As protesters continue to take to the streets of Egypt, the risk of the revolution becoming something it never intended to be increases with the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood in what the White House says will "irrevocably change" Egypt. Whether that is for the better or worse nobody seems to care about, the only real issue to Pres. Obama is that Mubarak (a U.S. ally and very, very close partner in the War on Terror) seems to be out. From day one, the strategy for handling this situation has been negligent and dumbfounded at best. We were without hesitation ready to jump on board and push President Mubarak out of power, even before understanding who may succeed his reign.


Now, with the Muslim Brotherhood's involvement in this "democratic revolution", we have handed one of our closest partners in the WoT seemingly over to the jihadists. Egypt is now gone, and there is no turning back. We have betrayed not only the Mubarak administration (if they somehow find a way to hold on), but the military institutions and intelligence service contacts (what else is new, we lost that with Wikigate). The level of embarassment brought on by the Obama administrations' mishandling of sensitive material, partnered with its failure to share vital intelligence that could prove useful to our allies, has weakened the United States and forced our hand into the global arena as a puppet and not a superpower.


Egypt is now the Ground Zero for Muslim revolution, it will be the tipping point for Sharia law being implemented throughout the region, and will most assuredly impact major players throughout the region like Saudi Arabia and Jordan. Should the Brotherhood and ElBaradei gain control of the country, the face of the Middle East and the world will change. I do not believe the revolution has so much to do with democratic reform, rather the ousting of a president who has controlled his country for too long and aligned himself with Western influence. This is a bid by radical Islam to topple a necessary ally for the U.S., and force a transformation of Middle East policy.


The issue occurring inside Egypt boils down to one thing - Salafist Islam. Salafist Islam by definition desires to see Islam brought back to its purest roots. Doctrinally, Salafs adhere to a very strict form of Islam that seeks to integrate and praise Allah through all aspects of life. This is what groups like the Muslim Brotherhood seek to perpetuate in broad government reforms that allow violence to be a tool to implement this. Any person who does not believe is wrong to them, there is no other religion in a Salafist state. On the heels of the New Year's Eve bombing of a church in Alexandria, Christians should be alarmed about their religious freedoms. The Brotherhood will advocate, if not utilize, force to crackdown on resistance and alternate religions.


The biggest risk coming from Egypt involves the potential merger between the Salafs and Iran. If you need to see the future of Egypt, just take a look at Mohamed ElBaradei's track record. This man, the presumed post-Mubarak, Brotherhood-partnered, former IAEA director who allowed Iran's undeclared nuclear program to go unchecked under his tenure. ElBaradei will become the new Assad for the Ayatollah, making Egypt an Iranian proxy surrounding Israel and destroying the peace accord. If the Salaf Brotherhood merges with Tehran, the potential is limitless for state-sponsored terrorism to reach unprecedented levels in the region. Terrorism will cross boundaries, governments, terror groups, and it will all flow into a limitless nexus of violence.


This sharing of resources and personnel can empower groups like Hezbollah - which has an arsenal of weapons at least 5x greater than it had with its 2006 war with Israel - to renew violence against Israel and will bring in weakened countries that sat out previously (like Syria) into the mix. The real question now is where is Saudi Arabia? With King Abdullah in a weakened state after receiving back surgery, who will he lend his support to. The last thing the Sunnis want is an Iranian/Shi'a controlled Caliphate. In 2006, with the Israeli/Hezbollah conflict, the Saudis provided weaponry and military assistance secretly to Israel through back channels, so as to not risk an uprising at home for giving the Zionists any support.


Egypt is too great a risk to sit idly on the sidelines and wait for a new government to emerge while we pander to the very forces we have declared war on. The Brotherhood is a violent, deceptive group that ultimately seeks to bring about the Caliphate. If we fail to act, we will lose the Middle East and empower Iran. The time to bring about democratic reform is now, but to hand over any hope of those to an organization wishing to implement shariah is far from democratic.

Crisis in the Middle East: the Emergence of Islamic Revolution

As I type this post, youth are taking to the streets throughout Egypt in unprecedented numbers to protest President Hosni Mubarak and call for his overthrow. The intense rioting has most assuredly caught both the U.S. and Egyptian governments off guard, forcing the U.S. to adopt a neutral stance and simply denounce the use of violence and avoid supporting a side. Right now, as Secretary of State Clinton is speaking denouncing the violence, gunfire is breaking out amid the protesters swarming a military vehicle. This situation is clearly escalating and despite the reports, these protesters are not just protesting about poverty and jobs.


Egypt is the birthplace of radical Islam, with the beginnings of the Muslim Brotherhood began the jihadist struggle to take to government and promote the establishment of a Caliphate (a state governed by Islamic scholars and law). The group, which began in the 1920s, has been banned by President Mubarak but officially announced its support to the protesters. This group is the nexus for jihad that unifies Al-Qaida and other militant Islamic organizations.


In the recent weeks, the region has become a hotbed for revolution - inspired by Islam. This country was the country that President Obama chose to give a speech entitled "A New Beginning" in which he sought to reset the U.S. presence in the Muslim world. Now we have seen how the Brotherhood will exploit this apology and use it to force its way into the seats of government.


There is no doubt that President Mubarak was a difficult U.S. ally who has abused his power and authority, but the violent struggle that has developed will most assuredly display the strength of a new government, operated by the Brotherhood. The U.S. can NOT give any credence to the role the Brotherhood has played or you will see similar acts like the New Year's Eve attack on a coptic church that slaughtered worshipers hoping for a new year. Those who perpetrated the attack will not be caught or punished, rather freedom of religion will be withdrawn.


What we are seeing is no revolution, but seizures of power by Islamic groups. Hezbollah's takeover of the "unity government" established just two years ago was simply an attempt to gain control and avoid recognition by an international investigation into the Valentine's Day 2005 massacre of former PM Rafik Hariri. Hezbollah members and Syria (the primary Iranian proxy) were complicit in the organization of the attack, however Hezbollah's leader, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, has consistently expressed desires to undermine the legitimacy of the investigation.

Islam is taking over in the Middle East, and the youths in the street do not represent anything other than discontent youths who desire a stronger future. The world is in a crisis that has placed many in poverty and without jobs. It is the role of government to address those who it serves, and too many have avoided the voices that now control their fate. Egypt needs a legitimate leader who will serve the people and understands the necessity to secure the country from the jihadist forces seeking to undermine it. Only time will tell who will replace President Mubarak, but God willing it is someone who seeks peace and not to export the Brotherhood.

U.S.-Syrian relations on the horizon?

During a trip this week, former U.S. president Jimmy Carter stated that he believed under the incoming Obama administration "the situation will improve between the United States and Syria after we have a new president." This type of rhetoric remains in line with Syrian President Assad's commitment to pursue talks with the U.S. once a new administration had been set. Now, the Bush administration is in its final month and prepares to hand off to President-elect Obama.


Syria has increasingly expressed interest in Western relations, specifically through French President Sarkozy. As Syria continues to pledge "peace talks" with the West and Israel, it is important to remember the true face of Syrian politics led by President Bashar Assad.


There is the Valentine's Day assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiik Hariri in 2005. Almost four years later, the circumstances of the bombing remain veiled. Just this week, the lead investigator into the incident told investigators that the blast remains solvable. David Bellemare has not gone so far as the first investigator, Detlev Mehlis, who wrote in the commission's first report:

"...there is converging evidence pointing at both Lebanese and Syrian involvement in this terrorist act."

The Mehlis report suggests that figures in both Lebanese and Syrian intelligence had knowledge of the attack. The report called on Syrian cooperation investigating the attack, specifically accusing some of the 400 persons interviewed of giving misleading statements. With answers pending in the probe, it is clear that there still remains a great deal of work in explaining Syria's hand in promoting violence throughout the Middle East.


With Syria playing ally to Iran in the war for Middle East influence against Saudi Arabia and Egypt, it is unlikely that any dramatic concessions will come as Iran will cling to its major backer. Since its conception in 2006, the group Fatah al-Islam in Lebanon has been a topic of major controversy in the region. The group, sympathetic to Al-Qaida objectives, has been subject to major debate as to who backs it. Syria has accused Saudi Arabia of founding the group to counter the Shiite power of Hizbullah. Many reports contradict such a claim, linking Syrian intelligence to the group. This could contribute to the inaction that Syria has taken to combat the group until last month when Fatah al-Islam's leader, Shaker al-Abssi, was declared dead in a gun battle with Syrian forces.


Al-Abbsi had a curious history with Syrian authorities. After being arrested in 2000, al-Abbsi spent three years in a Syrian prison for weapons smuggling charges. He then traveled to Iraq and became an associate of Al-Qaida in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. A Jordanian court had sentenced al-Abbsi to death in 2004 for the killing of U.S. diplomat Laurence Foley in 2002. However, al-Abbsi had remained elusive after the Nahr al-Bared seige in Lebanon that killed more than 200 in the Palestinian refugee camp in 2007. It was not until September, when Syria arrested al-Abbsi's daughter, that efforts began to increase against the leader of Fatah al-Islam.


Only until the September bombing in Damascus did Syria reveal any efforts to pursue members of the group, specifically the group's leader. Such spontaneous action has contributed to speculation that al-Abbsi was no longer in line with Syrian objectives and was taking the group in his own direction. The level of pressure that Syria has placed on the group has previously been nonexistent, begging many questions as to why there has not been a precedent of operations targeting the membership of Fatah al-Islam. When writing about Syrian actions against Fatah al-Islam, Walid Phares wrote:

"Some Terrorism commentators in the West and in the US spoke of an “elusive Fatah al Islam.” Unfamiliar with the Levantine nature of the phenomenon, those commentators still struggle with what they describe as “speculation” over the group’s “real motives,” as if they haven’t captured the equation behind Fatah al Islam. First, they conclude that this group can’t have ties to Damascus because the Syrian regime executed four members of the group. Ironically, the news came from the Syrian intelligence itself, which means that the Assad regime can go as far as killing operatives to intimidate the rest of the group, and on top of it, “sell” the news to the world as an “an anti al Qaeda” activity, which by the way would be bought by US officials."

History is taught because it has a unique way of repeating itself. While attempting dialogue with Syria, the U.S. should recall the consequences of failed alliances in the Middle East. I hope Assad is sincere in his objectives, but he has provided little besides mere talk when it comes to abandoning the Iranian regime and terror ties. Actions speak louder than words, and Syria should continue to combat terrorism inside its own country before looking outward.

The emerging legitimacy of Hizbullah: a doomsday for the Middle East

As the United States is just months away from choosing its 44th President, the world is anxiously watching. Make no mistake, our enemies are awaiting the choice as well. Both candidates talk freely of a vision in the Middle East and the threat from Al-Qaida, but neither will acknowledge that the Middle East of today is still the house of cards it was twenty years ago.

Last week, Israel reaffirmed its position on the list of countries which succumb to terrorist groups' demands. In a prisoner exchange, five Hizbullah militants - including Samir Kantar, whose release had been sought by the group since the 1985 hijacking of the Achille Lauro - were swapped for the bodies of two Israeli soldiers. Both soldiers had been dead since their capture in 2006.

Contrary to the mainstream media, the swap was a universal victory for terrorist groups. The one country that was seen as their main enemy had succumbed to their demands, releasing its most notorious Arab prisoner. Israel's actions that merely recovered two deceased soldiers have compromised the safety of one of its own. Immediately following the successful exchange, Hamas announced that "it proved Israel was no longer able to dictate terms during negotiations" and that Hamas would raise the stakes for Gilad Shalit, who is being held since his capture as well in 2006.

The ultimate dilemma Israel will face is that Lebanon is now unified by Hizbullah thanks to the inaction of the universal community. United Nations Security Council Resolution 1559, passed in 2004, called for Hizbullah's disarmament. The lack of compliance in such a situation proved fatal for Lebanon when the nation's second civil occurred. Triggered by government action banning Hizbullah's communications network (built by Iran) and the removal of the Beirut airport chief (who had allowed the group to place hidden cameras to spy on anti-Syrian politicians' travels, reportedly for assassination surveillance), the group launched its campaign. Disabling the U.S. trained army, the group forced Lebanon's parliament to negotiate before the group waged all-out war against the weak U.S.-trained Lebanese military. At the end of the "unity government" negotiations, Hizbullah walked away with Cabinet posts, an uncontested veto power, and Parliament seats.

Not a bad deal for a group that estimates over the past six months have warned is "rearming at an alarming rate." Reports suggest that the group in May had nearly 45,000 rockets, more than before the onset of the 2006 war with Israel, as well as nearly emptying villages in its southern Lebanese strongholds to send for training in Iran and Syria. The group has collected an estimated $30 billion from Iran and Syria. The group's international fundraising have been thriving in South America and have included cigarette-smuggling rings inside North Carolina. Contributing to the group's powerhouse status is that its leader, Hassan Nasrallah, is routinely celebrated as the most prominent Arab leader (over Ahmadinejad, bin Laden, Mashaal, etc.).

Hizbullah is clearly the model for international terrorism. They have successfully adapted to counter the global efforts against them, becoming an international enterprise. The group is not by any means at a weak state. Unless Israel begins to focus on its northern border, the group will continue to thrive and enjoy its hijacking of the Lebanese government, resulting in a Middle East consisting of the status quo.