#1
anticipating Obama doing the same, they reward a terrorist state
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/22/2008 16:27 Comments ||
Top||
#2
We already have diplomatic relations with Syria.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/22/2008 16:33 Comments ||
Top||
#3
It is doubtful that we are going to get an accurate picture of what is really going on. At least not from any news outlet.
Say, for example, that Syria has been cooperating in ways that have been kept quiet. There was a recent raid by US forces into Syria that the Syrian government apparently approved although they had to say the required things for domestic consumption lest they look like they are kissing our butts.
Say, for the sake of argument, that this hasn't been the only such raid, but the only one where a lot of shooting has been involved. Lets say that several "snatch" operations have been allowed across the border and the Syrians have been playing along.
We would probably also assume that anything we get from the Syrians is likely to be crap but that isn't important. What is important is that if we establish ties at that level and we inform them of various goings on, there is no possible way they can claim they didn't know.
I don't think we are so much interested in getting information from them as much as we are in getting certain information to them so that if they fail to act on it, we can hold them responsible.
Just a thought, I would have no idea what the reality is and neither would anyone else outside of those having a need to know.
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/22/2008 17:08 Comments ||
Top||
#5
There is a big difference between allowing some violent foreigners to be killed and having your secret nuclear bomb facility bombed to rubble against your will.
#6
The bombing of the nuclear facility showed Syria that they can be touched anywhere at any time and there really isn't a whole heck of a lot they can do about it. There is the implied message that whatever they have now, they retain it only because they are allowed to retain it.
They most certainly should be asking themselves in a strategic sense which course would provide better long term security for Syria. They could continue to be Iran's proxy in the ME but what protection can Iran offer, particularly with oil prices at today's levels. We could wipe out Iran at this point with no more pain in the oil markets than we already suffered this past spring.
Syria now has a stabilizing US ally between her and her "master" in Persia. What protection would Iran be able to offer in the long term? What threat or deterrent can Iran play to dissuade reaction from a Syrian adventure into Lebanon or Israel? Iran has growing internal dissatisfaction with the economy and policies of her President. Iran is becoming increasingly a "paper tiger" in the region. While wild statements come from the mouth of the President, one has to wonder how much support he actually has.
But Syria must move gradually in order to save face. I believe they have switched sides but aren't being public with that yet. It certainly would be in her interest to do so. A relationship with Iran appears at this point to have diminishing return potential over time.
Syria's dwindling resources are often cited by analysts as one of the main reasons the country needs to end its international isolation, a process that has now started with improved ties with Europe. David Miliband, UK foreign secretary, was in Damascus this week in the latest sign of a thaw in ties between the west and Syria.
While fighting off pressure from the US and other western states in recent years over alleged interference in Iraq, Lebanon and the Palestinian territories, Syria has also struggled for economic survival.
The energy sector comprises a large chunk of the country's economy, and oil revenues have funded a quarter of the expenditure in the nation's huge public sector. Five years ago oil comprised more than half of Syria's $29bn in income, but last year it contributed only $3.8bn to revenues totalling $22bn (17.5bn, £14.6bn).
Being in an axis with Iran may not be to Syria's long term economic advantage.
#8
Also, I remembered that Syria was overpumping its oilfields, against the recommendations of oil experts, so they screwed themselves of their reserves in the ground.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
11/22/2008 21:04 Comments ||
Top||
Months after offering Russia to deploy long-range ballistic missiles in his country, Syrian President Bashar Assad was informed this week that Moscow will not sell Iskander missiles to foreign clients due to production delays.
According to a report by the Russian news agency Novosti, the state arms exporter Rosoboronexport has decided that despite interest from a number of countries - including Syria, the United Arab Emirates and India - Moscow will not export the Iskander missile until the Russian Armed Forces are fully equipped with the system.
The Iskander missile - also known as the SS-26 Stone - is a long-range, solid fuel- propelled, theater quasi-ballistic missile system.
Ankara and Tehran signed an accord strengthening agreements on developing Iran's gas fields and transporting Iranian gas to Europe. With the agreement, Turkey secures the operation rights for three offshore gas fields in Iran's South Pars region, off the southern gulf port of Assaluyeh. Under the accord, Turkey will produce some 46 million cubic meters of gas per day and may use half of that amount itself. It is estimated that Turkey will spend $12 billion on developing the project, which envisages the joint construction of a 1,850-kilometer (1,200-mile) pipeline from Assaluyeh to the Bazargan border area with Turkey in northwestern Iran (Hurriyet Daily News, November 20).
When asked to comment on the accord, U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said that the Iranian Government liked to sign such agreements but they did not really came to anything (www.state.gov, November 19).
The question is, would Turkey jeopardize its relations with the United States by bowing to Iranian pressure to initiate such project? If not, why then is Turkey maneuvering to sign these accords with Iran? It is in the interest of Turkey to build a pipeline from Iran to Europe, but Turkish policy-makers know that the U.S is opposed to such a project and Ankara would not want to put its relations with the United States at risk for the Iranian gas pipeline. The Turkish motivation for signing the accords might have two aims.
Continued on Page 47
#1
Well, Turkey bowed to outside pressure to prevent the 4ID from going through to Iraq. Why not cut a deal with Iran?
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
11/22/2008 14:49 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Outside influence? Fascinating.
I recall Turkey being the target of U.S. State Department's machinations to sabotage the effort. Specifically that they were asking for large amounts of additional aid as an "incentive", when it actually that the aid was being negotiated separately and un-related to the 4th Infantry's entrance.
Syria's nuclear energy chief said on Friday a U.N. watchdog report on an alleged secret Syrian nuclear site bombed by Israel proved nothing and the investigation should be closed. Ibrahim Othman said he expected Syria would stick by a written agreement with U.N. inspectors that permitted only one visit to the al-Kibar site -- which took place last June -- and "we will not allow another visit".
An International Atomic Energy Agency report issued on Wednesday said a Syrian complex destroyed in a 2007 Israeli air strike bore a number of characteristics resembling those of a nuclear reactor and U.N. inspectors had found a significant number of uranium traces in desert sands there.
The findings, based on satellite pictures and soil and water samples taken by U.N. investigators, were not enough to conclude a reactor was there but the findings were serious and warranted more investigation and Syrian transparency, the IAEA said.
No other country would allow any person to visit a restricted military site, "just because he would like to see it," Othman said, after IAEA inspectors briefed members about a probe into Syria's alleged illicit nuclear activities. It was up to Syria's military authorities to decide whether to allow IAEA inspectors into the site, he said.
Continued on Page 47
Posted by: Fred ||
11/22/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11137 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Syria
#1
and they are right. the IAEA report was intentionally evasive so they can continue to 'monitor' the situation and prevaricate at a future date provided that the accommodations are up to snuff.
Posted by: Abu do you love ||
11/22/2008 0:51 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
