URL not available.

US embassy: Assad allows attack, offer "protection" and aim at confusion
By Walid PHARES

According to well informed Syrian sources, today's Terrorist attack against
the US embassy in Damascus is one of the "Machiavellian" Assad operations.
Let's remind ourselves that the Syrian regime's senior strategists and
intelligence officers were trained by the sophisticated "intox" schools of
the former Soviet's KGB. One of the main tactics of this old school, refined
by Hafez Assad during his rule of Syria is based on the following concept:
If the equation is to your disadvantage, create a new problem, offer to
solve it, obtain recognition; and by that you'd change the equation.

The strategic objective of the Assad regime today is to deter Washington
from further pressures against Syria, in the form of the Hariri
investigation, the US pressure through the Security Council to deploy forces
along the borders with Lebanon and the American ongoing support to the
anti-Syrian Government in Beirut. Tehran-Damascus-Hezbollah axis is in dire
need to "contain" Washington's pressures and gain time, as much possible of
time. Why would they need time? Because they have to rearm Hezbollah,
crumble the Lebanese Government, and face off with UN pressures on the
nuclear. Syria has the marching orders to disorient the United States, and
hence it adopted a twin approach:

a. "Allow" a Jihadist-type terror attack to take place against a US interest
in Damascus. And how can that be possible? The seasoned experts on Syria
knows all too well that the Assad Mukhabarat are in control of, or have
"access" to the overwhelming Terrorist organizations in Syria and Lebanon.
They've had thirty years of deep involvement to accomplish this take over.
In addition to Shia Hezbollah, Syria has a control, a remote-control of, or
an access to Sunni Salafists groups, including networks that connect with al
Qaeda. In short, Syria's intelligence services can prepare the ground to
"persuade" Jihadist's to strike at some point. The Jihadist's have an
ideological and strategic enmity with the US; the Assad regime has the
ability to have the "mob" unleash attacks, in the same way the Baath regime
of Syria has "allowed" thousands of Jihadist's to cross the border to Iraq
to kill US and coalition troops. Assad the father also "allowed" Jihadis to
attack U.S and French interests in Lebanon during the 1980s. More recently,
Assad "allowed' violent demonstrations to attack embassies in Damascus.
Knowing that Syria's State police control the country with an iron hand,
these precedents are too bright to ignore. In today's apparatus two men
dominate the Terror web from their security intelligence positions: Mohammed
Nassif, the director of State Security and Ali Yunis, the assistant of Asaf
Shawkat, the regime's security commander. Nassif and Yunis are the team that
controls and connects with the Jihadist underworld in the Levant. 

b. Stage the "protection": After the operation happens, the regime allows
some of their men to be killed in action against the "Terrorists."
Obviously, this move will be hard to absorb by Western and American public
psychologically. Maybe Hollywood movies writers can. In short (as an
analytical projection) the regime "allowed" the operation to happen, "knew"
it would happen, and let the security guards on the ground sacrifice
themselves in the line of diplomatic duty. 

The Dividends: 

1. Sending a message to the U.S as follow: al Qaeda can strike you in our
midst (Syria and Lebanon) and we can't do much about, except the classical
protection once the "cells" would be about to engage or have already
engaged. In short we are extending the measures under international laws,
not more. 

2. "But, can stop them." Meaning that our "powerful" intelligence and
security agencies can go after these Terrorists (who aren't Syria's friends
to start with) and "offer them to you," as we used to do in the good old
days: We'd send Hezbollah to kill your Marines in Lebanon and allow the
Salafists to kill the Marines again in Iraq, but at the same time we can do
business with you and "protect your" embassies from the Terrorists we are
harboring anyway. Yes a good Levantine maze. 

3. Your public, via international media, "saw" that we are defending your
embassy and have "lost" security guards while defending it. So what are you
going to tell your public? That we, the Syrian regime, "are" the terrorists?
It will look bad when after we sacrificed our men for your diplomats, your
diplomats would call us Terrorists. 

4. Secretary Rice "had" to issue a statement to "thanking" Syria. In Assad's
mind, it would be an embarrassment for the U.S to attack Syria for being a
harbor to Terrorism when Damascus has just being thanked for fighting those
Terrorists. This, basically, would gain some more "time" for Assad. Enough
time needed to:

5. Rearm Hezbollah, prepare attacks against UN and other multinational
forces to come closer to the Syrian borders, and of course to allow the
other pressures to recede.

6. Extra dividend: Unleash the school that supports "dialogue and
friendship" with the Syrian regime in Washington to advance its arguments in
this regard. 

A question has been fusing in the media about Zawahiri's calls for the
Levant Jihadist's, including the Jund al Sham to attack targets in Syria and
Lebanon. Are these video messages coordinated with Syria and Iran? While no
evidence is surfacing yet, but these are two Jihadi wars taking place
against the US and its allies at the same time. In the midst of an Al Qaeda
war and of a Khumeinist-Baathist campaign, both directed against democracies
in the region, overlapping actions aren't impossible. Otherwise, how to
explain that al Qaeda waited so long before it issued a direct
Jihad-guideline on Lebanon and Syria after 14 years of war on the US and
three years' war in Iraq? Why would the no 2 of al Qaeda suddenly develop an
interest in the Lebanese-Syrian battlefield, immediately after the cease
fire was concluded between Hezbollah and Israel? Who needed whom to begin
the next stage in troubles after the issuing of UNSCR 1701? 

Let's call it the quiz of the month: you'd find your answer in Machiavelli's
writings.

Dr Walid PHARES is a Senior Fellow and the director of Future Terrorism
Project at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a visiting fellow
with the European Foundation for Democracy and the author of Future Jihad:
Terrorist Strategies against America








--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to