Syria Superthread [merged]

[CougarKing]

A US Senator wants more than a no-fly zone for Syria; he wants the US military to essentially be the close air support for the Syrian rebels.

Defense News link

Key White House Ally Wants 'Targeted' Strikes in Syria

WASHINGTON — The United States should press Syria and Russia to enter into talks to end the Syrian civil war, including “targeted” strikes on Bashar al-Assad’s military forces, a White House ally said Tuesday.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Sen. Carl Levin, an influential Obama administration ally on Capitol Hill, is calling for America and its allies to conduct “limited, targeted strikes at Assad’s apparatus of terror, including airplanes, helicopters, missiles, tanks and artillery.”

Such strikes should be “coordinated with the actions of the Syrian opposition on the ground,” the Michigan Democrat said in a joint statement with fellow SASC member Angus King, I-Maine.

“Such strikes could degrade Assad’s military capabilities, bring some relief to the embattled Syrian people, show we are serious,” said Levin and King.

The duo just returned from a swing through the Middle East, where they huddled with several anti-Assad leaders.

Levin and King would like to see the establishment of a “broad international coalition” that would pressure Assad and his forces. They believe a coalition would “boost the morale of the Free Syrian Army, and hopefully bring the Assad regime to the negotiating table.”

In the statement, the senators note that the White House’s previously announced plans to train and equip “properly-vetted members of the Syrian opposition are underway.”

“We believe that these efforts should be expanded to help the Syrian people succeed in doing what only they can do — freeing their country from Assad’s brutal regime,” said Levin and King.

But, they say, more is needed.

“The asymmetric insurgent tactics of the opposition may not be sufficient to convince Assad that he cannot prevail,” the US lawmakers say, “even with the more lethal weapons which are now coming into the opposition’s possession.”

By stating he supports US military strikes in Syria, the typically measured Levin is joining Washington interventionists like Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who has long called for American military action to end the bloody civil conflict.

But, like McCain and others, Levin and King oppose putting American troops on the ground to tip the balance toward opposition forces.

“We are not calling for American boots on the ground, but rather for supporting the Syrian people’s struggle by helping to train and equip them and by forming a broad international coalition to increase the military pressure on the Assad regime,” the senators said.

“That is the best way to promote a negotiated transition to a Syria with a constitutional, legitimate government that protects its people instead of attacking them,” Levin and King said.

The two lawmakers made clear Washington should do more to end the fighting, which some independent groups say has claimed over 100,000 lives. Levin and King on Tuesday called for the US to take the lead in an international effort.

“We call upon the Administration to convene a meeting of the political, military and intelligence leaders of countries committed to the end of the Assad regime,” they said. “The objective of this summit should be to develop specific options and plans for a range of contingencies and to enlist firm commitments from our friends and allies, so that the Assad regime and its supporters will understand the seriousness of purpose of this joint effort.”

If a US-led coalition were to force the embattled Assad from power, Levin and King want diplomats from across the region and globe to craft a plan to ensure the country avoids political chaos, and does not become an al-Qaida base.

Experts say both would deliver a major blow to American interests in the Middle East.

“Unless there is a planned transition to an inclusive political and military structure to provide a secure and stable follow-on to Assad, a longer civil war could replace the current conflict,” Levin and King said.

“Such a war would bring unspeakable suffering to the Syrian people, could spread through the region, and could create safe havens from which al-Qaida and other terrorist organizations could again bring suffering and terror to the United States and our friends and allies,” the senators said. “The best way to prevent this is a negotiated end to the current hostilities.”

Any US military involvement in the kinds of “targeted strikes” called for by Levin and King would come with a hefty price.

As America learned with the Libya intervention, even modern-day aerial bombardments from aircraft and naval vessels are extremely costly. The cost of the Libya mission was around $1 billion, according to Pentagon data released in 2011.

Congressional sources are mixed about whether a new 2013 emergency spending measure tailored specifically for a Syrian effort would be needed. Some say it would depend on the shape and duration — as well as the level of direct US military involvement — of such a mission.

 

[tomahawk6]

Unless Syria was going to use chemical or biological weapons,I would not favor airstrikes in support of the anti-Assad forces. I don't care for the islamist involvement in the revolution.Should they drive Assad out,Israel will have another radical regime on its border to deal with.

 

[CougarKing]

Seems like the interventionists like Levin won't rest till they get what they want...

Yikes!

Defense News link

US Senator Calls for Multinational Summit To Craft Syrian Strike Options


WASHINGTON — A prominent US senator on Wednesday called for a multinational summit of military and intelligence officials to draw up plans for “limited actions” in Syria.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., just returned from meetings with Turkish and Jordanian leaders. Those talks led the veteran senator to conclude that military strikes by the United States and its Middle Eastern allies are “the only way” to bring an end to the years-old Syrian civil war.

“Increased military pressure on Assad is the only way to achieve a negotiated settlement in Syria, which in turn is needed to restore stability to a region that certainly doesn’t need any more instability,” Levin said during a morning speech at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a think tank here.

For that reason, Levin is pushing the Obama administration to huddle with Washington’s allies in the Middle East to begin crafting options for military strikes against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s forces.

The administration should “begin this process by convening a meeting of the political, military and intelligence leaders of countries committed to the end of the Assad regime,” Levin said.

“The objective would be to develop specific options and plans for a range of contingencies and to enlist commitments from our coalition partners, so that the Assad regime and its supporters will understand the seriousness of purpose of this joint effort,” the SASC chairman and Senate Intelligence Committee member said.

Levin told a packed room that he supports reported Obama administration plans to arm rebel forces. Several media reports this week indicate members of the House and Senate Intelligence committees are blocking those plans due to a list of concerns.

“The United States should join with other members of the so-called ‘London 11,’ including a number of Arab countries in the region who openly oppose the Assad regime, to comprehensively plan additional steps to up the military pressure on the Assad regime,” Levin said.


(...)

 

[a_majoor]

I suspect there won't be many takers.

Even if there is a response, the Turks might decide that striking the Kurdish rump is much more pressing than striking the Assad regime, while the Gulf States will be pressing support to their co religionists (who are generally the radicals as well), leaving Jordan and the United States to weild a big stick for a very small fraction of the opposition.

Better to seal the borders and walk away....

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Not so sure about that. I am thinking the Kurds are awakening to the fact that Turkey is worth more as an ally than an enemy. The pieces are forming to allow a "Greater Kurdistan" to form out of Syria and Iraq. For it to be viable, they will need Turkey to be an reliable economic link. The withdrawal of the PPK from Turkey went fairly well and if the moderates and long term thinkers on the Kurdish side can keep them under control, then Turkey has no immediate cause to attack the Kurds. the key issue will be if the Kurds can convince the Turks that the creation of a Greater Kurdistan will not threaten to cleave off chunks of Turkey with it. Hopefully the Kurds can do that and are smart enough to go with the birds in the hand rather than the whole bush. I see Kurdistan as a likely positive in the region, they will not be interested in undermining anyone other than Iran (in regards to the Kurds there) and will quietly support Israel, the west and Turkey. 

 

[GR66]

I'll eat my hat if Turkey ever willingly accepts the creation of a "Greater Kurdistan" regardless of any and all claims by Kurds that they have no intentions to include the Kurdish areas of Turkey.  It would in one stroke both give Kurdish separatists a clear goal for their struggle and also undermine Turkish objections to Kurdish separatism (since they would have already shown their support for the idea of an independent Kurdish state).

That being said I also don't see any great incentive for Turkey to act aggressively against the Kurds either.  The Kurds are in a pretty strong political position right now and are getting international support by not looking like bad guys making trouble in Turkey.  If the Turks start bombing them they will look like aggressors at the same time as they are facing international pressure over their own internal unrest.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

True there is are lot's of ways for this train to derail, but a Kurdistan would likely also be a sanctuary for a lot of the other minorities in the region and if it's economy picks up enough, Turkey is going to engage because it would be well positioned to make money off of them. I suspect that what will happen is within a decade, the 2 autonomous zones in Syria and Iraq slowly melding together with a border between in name only, followed by an "referendum"  and an announcement that they will become independent. I suspect they will make quiet gestures to the West and Russia beforehand to get the politically, financial and some military support they will need. At that point neither Iraq or Syria will be in a position to contest the outcome.
I suspect Iraq will be to busy suppressing it's Sunni's and won't be able to fight on two fronts. The other wild car is Iran, who would fear it's own Kurds will get idea's and they might try to derail everything. However they might be to busy with the Baluch in the south who seeing Kurdish success will want the same. That's where a good chunk of Iran's oil/gas comes from as I recall and might force them to use their resource to hold that, weakening their ability to suppress the Kurds.   

 

[CougarKing]

Is it just me or isn't there a parallel with this to the time Al Qaeda assassinated Ahmad Shah Massoud, the leader of the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, just before 9/11? 

New front opens in Syria as rebels say al Qaeda attack means war

BEIRUT (Reuters) - The assassination of a top Free Syrian Army commander by militants linked to al Qaeda is tantamount to a declaration of war, FSA rebels on Friday, opening a new front between Western-backed forces and Islamists in Syria's civil war.

The announcement is the latest sign of disarray in the armed opposition to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who has regained the upper hand more than two years into an insurgency that grew out of Arab Spring-inspired pro-democracy protests.

It follows growing rivalries between the FSA and the Islamists, who have sometimes joined forces on the battlefield, and coincides with attempts by the Western and Arab-backed FSA to allay fears any U.S.-supplied arms might reach al Qaeda.

read more: link

 

[OldSolduer]

Is it just me or isn't there a parallel with this to the time Al Qaeda assassinated Ahmad Shah Massoud, the leader of the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, just before 9/11? 

Good point, I didn't know that.

Syria was a mess already.......this makes it worse IMO.

 

[sean m]

@ Mr.SMA and others,

If these recent event is tied to that of Shah Massoud and the Taliban.  Can anyone here possibly reason why the jiihadis in Syria maybe  following the same path as those wo fought in Afghanistan? Why are Syrian jihadists possibly opening a second confrontation with the FSA when they are alteady facing Assads forces with support from Hezbollah and Iran.Why now when it might be possible to assume that the battle is far from over?

 

[a_majoor]

The short answer is the Jihadis have a much different end state in mind than either Assad and the Ba'athists or the secular/Sunni moderate majority.

The other answer might be that they seek to eliminate Western influence in Syria, and since the conduit for Western aid is the FSA, cutting the head of the FSA off may well prevent the FSA from being an effective force, and causing the Western powers to lose the ability to influence events. This is probably much more true today than in 2002, the Afghan Northern Alliance was much stronger and more cohesive than the FSA, and had the wherewithal to operate as the ground troops for the American campaign (backed with 250 SF and SoF operators and an armada of aircraft).

Even if the West was willing to commit that level of resources to the Syrian civil war, the FSA could not provide the manpower and fighting power to take the role of the Northern Alliance, and the Jihadis will see to it that this will not happen.

Destruction of the FSA and a devolution of the Civil War into a grinding WWI style fight isn't considered a "bug" in the plans of the Jihadis, they may see it as a feature to bleed the Apostate Shia's, provide opportunities to glory in Martyrdom and reshape the rest of the ME towards their desired end state.

 

[UnwiseCritic]

If anyone is as bored as I am

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecuTPOZSx4I

Educational, yet entertaining

 

[sean m]

@ Mr. Thucydides,

Thank you for your response. If the jihadis are seeking to eliminate the FSA due to the possible belief that the FSA may be support ed by the West. Does abyone here believe that these extremists have the manpower to support such a conflict with both FSA and Assad forces? What of the Kurds, does anyone have an idea how they may react to the Jabhat Al Nusra, if the jihadis gain the upper hand?

 

[sean m]

Here is a report from the Long War Journal concerning the killing Kamal Hamami by Jabhat Al Nusra. The FSA is demanding the Al Qaeda in Iraq leader,  to face justice, the leader is Abu al Baghdadi.

Here is their report.

"Several days ago, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIL, the rogue al Qaeda affiliate in Syria, murdered Kamal Hamami, a Free Syria Army military commander who also was a member of the US-backed Supreme Military Council. From Al Jazeera:

Kamal Hamami, a member of the FSA's Supreme Military Council, known as Abu Basir, was killed in the Turkmen mountains near the northern city of Latakia, spokesman Louay Meqdad told Al Jazeera on Friday.
Meqdad said the commander was killed after a heated debate with a local leader of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant in which the leader called the FSA "infidels".

Hamami's brother, who was travelling in the car with him, was also killed, the spokesman said. The brothers and a third man had been on a surveillance mission before a planned attack on government forces, Meqdad said.

A third man was allowed to leave to report the killings.

Another FSA spokesman, Qassem Saadeddine, said the group phoned him to admit the killing.

"[They said] that they will kill all of the Supreme Military Council," Saadeddine said from Syria.

The Free Syrian Army issued an ultimatum to the ISIL: turn over Abu Ayman al Baghdadi, the al Qaeda emir in the Latakia region who executed the FSA commander, or face "justice." The FSA spokesman interviewed by Al Jazeera in the video above makes some bold threats, and then predictably makes a plea to the "international community" to arm the rebels.

"We demand that the international community supply us with arms to get rid of this disease," he says at the end of the interview.

The ISIL was given 24 hours to hand over Abu Ayman al Baghdadi. That deadline has now passed.

It is unlikely that the FSA will turn its guns on the ISIL given the latter's strengths, and the lack of a coherent command structure in the FSA, a hodgepodge of various brigades, many of which are quite friendly to the ISIL and al Qaeda's official affiliate, the Al Nusrah Front. FSA units often fight alongside the Al Nusrah Front against the Syrian military, and some top FSA leaders are sympathetic to or downright supportive of al Qaeda. Also, in the unlikely event of an all-out clash with the FSA, the ISIL will be able to call on other nonaligned Syrian Islamist brigades, and would probably receive support from the Al Nusrah Front, if the FSA decided to make good on its threat.

Additionally, the killing of commanders and fighters by rival rebel groups is nothing new in Syria. Islamists have killed FSA commanders in the past, and vice versa. These incidents often occur due to local rivalries and competition for resources, not for ideological reasons. In this recent killing of an FSA commander, the issue wasn't ideology, but access to a checkpoint in order to deploy forces."

 

[CougarKing]

Seems the Israeli Navy got their money's worth for those German-made Dolphin class subs which can launch land-attack SSMS. A test-run for a future strike against Iran?

Report: Israeli submarine strike hits Syrian arms depot
Jerusalem Post link
07/14/2013 09:20

<snipped>

Quote:

Three unnamed US officials told CNN the IAF had targeted Russian-made Yakhont anti-ship missiles that could pose a threat to Israel.

(snipped)

Quote:

Qassem Saadeddine, spokesman for the Free Syrian Army’s Supreme Military Council, said the pre-dawn attack hit Syrian Navy barracks at Safira, near the port of Latakia. The rebel forces’ intelligence network had identified newly supplied Yakhont missiles being stored there, he said.

“It was not the FSA that targeted this,” Saadeddine told Reuters. “It is not an attack that was carried out by rebels. This attack was either by air raid or long-range missiles fired from boats in the Mediterranean.”

 

[a_majoor]

Maybe, but sailing up the Persian Gulf has a few particular dangers for submariners, including heavy ship traffic and the water being shallow enough that the sub might actually be visually spotted lurking under the surface.

Still, having options is always good, and havibg more options is even better.

 

[tomahawk6]

Israel has to act on its own where their security is concerned.With a civil war going on in Syria and a military takeover in Egypt there has to be concern in Tel Aviv.

 

[UnwiseCritic]

Israel has to act on its own where their security is concerned.With a civil war going on in Syria and a military takeover in Egypt there has to be concern in Tel Aviv.

I'm sure there is some degree of concer. But the more unrest in those countries the better for Isreal. Unless of course new hard liners come to power. I think the real concern for Isreal is Iran. Hopefully Iran doesn't become a member the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. Otherwise, IMO Isreal will have a less consequence free ability to act.

 

[CougarKing]

A repost: the Pakistani Taliban join the war against Assad, and add to the ranks of the radical Islamist rebel factions. 

Pakistan Taliban set up camps in Syria, join anti-Assad war
alarabiya.net
14 July 2013
<snipped>


Quote

Taliban commanders in Pakistan said they had also decided to join the cause, saying hundreds of fighters had gone to Syria to fight alongside their “Mujahedeen friends.”

“When our brothers needed our help, we sent hundreds of fighters along with our Arab friends,” one senior commander told Reuters, adding that the group would soon issue videos of what he described as their victories in Syria.

 

[tomahawk6]

Now where are the Chechens ?