Why Foreign Fighters are Joining ISIL (Part 3 of 3)

I invite you to read the conclusion of my three-part series on "Why Foreign Fighters are Joining ISIL", published today by The Huffington Post. Be sure to read Part 1 and read Part 2 first. - R.O.
==========================================================
Why Foreign Fighters are Joining ISIL (Part 3 of 3)
The Huffington Post
By: Robert D. Onley - October 16, 2014

Part 3 of 3 in a series. Read Part 1 and Part 2.

Defeating ISIL and its ideology
For peaceful democratic societies, the challenge is this: how do you stop a destructive force like ISIL, one which cherishes death? How do you convince the globe's Islamic radicals, and ISIL in particular, that life -- for its fighters, supporters, and its persecuted victims -- is in fact far better than death? Or is the only choice for Western and civilized societies one that grants these deranged men their wish, through laser-guided swift deaths which kill as many ISIL fighters as possible? As civilized nations which value the preservation of life, reaching this conclusion is as disturbing as recognizing the stark reality that it is in fact the only option.

Once more in fulfilling its role as the vanguard of global liberty, the United States has led air strikes against ISIL fighters in Iraq and Syria in support of advancing Kurdish Peshmerga soldiers. In spite of President Obama's reticence in doing so, the United States government understands that the only way to stop the physical military advance of ISIL fighters is to use military force in kind. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel is one of the few American leaders to public comment on ISIL's End Times goals, when he acknowledged that:

"[The Islamic State] is an organization that has an apocalyptic, end-of-days strategic vision which will eventually have to be defeated."

Hagel further added that ISIL is:

"...beyond just a terrorist group. They marry ideology, a sophistication of ... military prowess... [that] is beyond anything we've seen."

As world leaders express their horror at ISIL's tactics, unrelenting oppression and brutality toward religious minorities, few leaders or media commentators have assessed why it is that such an evil group can recruit so many new soldiers -- and foreign fighters -- to begin with. Thus the need for a public discussion about Islamic End Times beliefs has never been greater.

Wake up to ISIL's End Times beliefs now
In attempting to understand this global enemy, Western leaders would be wise to consider the role that their governments must play in halting ISIL's End Times goals and in preventing the long-term survival of an "Islamic State."

ISIL fighters are under no illusion about what their ultimate objective is: to usher in the Islamic "End Times". Thus Western leaders and military planners must be equally convicted about their goals. President Obama's overdue assertion that ISIL "will be defeated" was a welcome show of Western resolve. ISIL territory cannot become a national safe haven for terrorists, and moreover the West cannot permit the theological notion that Caliph Ibrahim has in some way fulfilled the Qur'an's prophecies concerning the Islamic End Times. Indeed there is no doubt that the entire global Islamic community is watching to see whether ISIL will be defeated in Syria and Iraq.

It is ISIL's End Times beliefs and the urgency of their battlefield success which has inspired the growth of the terrorist organization. Unless stopped now, the terror group only has the potential to grow larger, fiercer, and more determined in achieving Allah's Judgment Day vision. Western foreign policy commentators must break out of their comfort zones and begin to speak publicly about the genuinely religious nature of the ISIL threat and against the beliefs which drive the movement.

Simply claiming that ISIL's acts are "un-Islamic" does nothing to respond to the deeply prophetic Islamic agenda that ISIL espouses. ISIL is an enemy clearly communicating its aims, blatantly using the Qur'an as its guiding doctrine. Rather than gloss over this fact, the foreign policy world needs its brightest lights to expose this doctrine and overpower its distorted message in response.

Providing proper analysis and with due regard for the sincere religious beliefs of hundreds of millions of Muslims who do not seek to create a revived Islamic Caliphate under the repressive purview of Sharia law, it is possible to initiate global dialogue about the reality of ISIL's End Times goal, with candor, clarity and objectivity. Millions of lives are at stake in a battle that has already claimed countless innocent human beings. After the call from the UN for a humanitarian aid mission in Iraq, the international community has admitted that what was perhaps at first a domestic Iraqi counter-terror operation is now a global religious freedom and a human rights crisis which threatens to envelop more people and draw in ever more militant forces.

With the civil war festering in Syria claiming 200,000 lives, the two-month conflict between Israel and Hamas still smoldering, worsening strife in Libya and Pakistan, and ISIL's rampage across Iraq and Syria, the world is steadily marching toward an Islamist-driven End Times nightmare with global ramifications.

Stop for a moment to consider the intellectual weight of ISIL's extreme belief system: potentially hundreds of thousands of otherwise normal men have become "foreign fighters" who are convinced that a martyr's death in the cause of Allah offers a ticket to Jannah (Islamic heaven), a ticket upon which they are granted permission by their God to perpetrate the most grotesque violence imaginable in order to expedite the Qur'an's prophesied "End Time". President Obama rightly condemned this horror when he stated at the UN General Assembly that "no God condones this terror."

But not since Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf failed at establishing the Third Reich has the earth witnessed the murderous power of a single doctrine to unite tens of thousands of men toward executing terrifying plans of ideological and territorial conquest. It is imperative that the West understands the ideological threat posed by ISIL's End Times theology and knows how to stop both its fighters and the radicalized foreigners ready to join them. Otherwise these will indeed be the End Times for far too many people to come.
-------

My visit to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem - A Tourist's Guide - July 2013

Below is the video I produced based on my visit to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem back in July of this year. I've included comments on all of the major sites on the Temple Mount and some of my thoughts on the experience, and packaged the clips as a tourist's guide. If you've never before been to Jerusalem, join me in the video on a journey to the most contested piece of real estate on earth. Enjoy! - R.O.

Visiting the Temple Mount in Jerusalem - A Tourist's Guide - July 2013

Egyptian President Morsi Ousted in Coup

While the pace of events makes it hard to determine if this qualifies as a classical "military coup", today Egypt's Islamist President Morsi was ousted from power after the Egyptian military announced the suspension of the (increasingly Islamist) Constitution. The chief justice of the constitutional court will take on former President Morsi's powers as the interim head of state. 

These developments follow weeks of intense popular protests by tens of millions of Egyptians, and flashes of violence across Egypt. With an economy in free fall, Egyptians simply had enough.

The significane of this moment cannot be understated. The Muslim Brotherhood, as a global political and religious force present in numerous countries (but headquartered in Egypt), has just been dealt a massive setback. The removal of Morsi will have ramifications across the Middle East.

The Western world's reaction to the ouster of Morsi, particularly after his democratic election last year, will also be intriguing to watch. Already, reports in the Canadian and American media have discussed the potential suspension of aid to Egypt, in the wake of what is quickly being deemed an upheaval of the people's democratic will. I'm not convinced that this is the case. 

Morsi made a number of rash, Islamist-motivated political decisions that quickly backfired, as millions of liberal and secular Egyptians simply rejected these backward moves. Most notably, Morsi forced through a highly controversial Islamist Constitution that did not reflect the will of the people. In response, the people reacted with massive, peaceful protests. 

The secular opposition rose up. The people have spoken; the Army has responded. What happens next is up to the Egyptian people, once again. - R.O. 

Other headlines:

• Washington Post: Egyptian military ousts Morsi, suspends constitution
• New York Times: Army Ousts Egypt’s President; Morsi Decries ‘Complete Military Coup’

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army ousts Egypt's President Morsi - BBC News
3 July 2013 - 4:57pm

Pro-Morsi supporters. (JPost.com)

The head of Egypt's army has given a TV address, announcing that President Mohammed Morsi is no longer in office.

Gen Abdul Fattah al-Sisi said the constitution had been suspended and the chief justice of the constitutional court would take on Mr Morsi's powers.

Flanked by religious and opposition leaders, Gen Sisi said Mr Morsi had "failed to meet the demands of the Egyptian people".

Anti-Morsi protesters in Cairo gave a huge cheer in response to the speech.

The army's move to depose the president follows four days of mass street demonstrations against Mr Morsi, and an ultimatum issued by the military which expired on Wednesday afternoon.

TV stations belonging to Mr Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood went off air at the end of the speech and state news agency Mena said managers at the movement's Misr25 channel had been arrested.

Minutes later, a notice went up on Mr Morsi's Facebook page denouncing the army move as a "military coup".

The statement asked Egyptian citizens - both civilians and military - to "abide by the constitution and the law and not to respond to this coup".

The ousted leader's current whereabouts are unclear. However, earlier reports said security forces had imposed a travel ban on both him and other leading figures in the Muslim Brotherhood.

'Roadmap' for the future
General Sisi said on state TV that the armed forces could not stay silent and blind to the call of the Egyptian masses.

He spoke of a new roadmap for the future, and said that the chief justice of the Supreme Constitutional Court, Adli Mansour, would be given the task of "running the country's affairs during the transitional period until the election of a new president".

After Gen Sisi's address, both Pope Tawadros II - the head of the Coptic Church - and leading opposition figure Mohammed ElBaradei made short televised speeches about the new roadmap for Egypt's future which they had agreed with the army.

Mr ElBaradei said the roadmap aimed for national reconciliation and represented a fresh start to the January 2011 revolution.

"This roadmap has been drafted by honourable people who seek the interests, first and foremost, of the country," added Pope Tawadros.

Fireworks

The army is currently involved in a show of force, fanning out across Cairo and taking control of the capital, BBC correspondent Quentin Sommerville reports.

He described seeing eight armoured personnel carriers heading for Cairo University in Giza, where one of the main pro-Morsi demonstrations was being held.

The tens of thousands of anti-Morsi protesters on the streets of Cairo are now celebrating, with fireworks lighting up the night sky and car drivers honking their horns in excitement.

But Morsi supporters elsewhere in the city are reported to have shouted: "No to military rule.''

Are Israel and Russia on the Same Page?

With reports today that Russia will ship its advanced S-300 anti-aircraft missile defense system to Syria, that and follow-up reports that Israel has threatened to attack Russia's missile shipments to Syria, suddenly Israel's relationship with Russia has come into sharp focus on the international stage. All of which is compounded by leading members of the European Union agreeing to lift their embargo on weapons shipments to the Syrian opposition/rebels. As a result, key questions must be asked:

• What is Russia's long-term objective in propping up the Assad regime, aside from maintaining its naval port at Tartus?
• How would Russia react if Israel indeed attacked shipments of Russian S-300 missiles?
• Is the West incrementally inching toward armed intervention in Syria?
• If Syrian President Assad were assassinated or incapacitated, what role might Iran and Hezbollah play in shaping the regime that replaces or displaces Assad?

Events are rapidly escalating the Syrian crisis. The number of innocent killed is over 80,000, with no end in sight. The major powers are apparently set to significantly increase their armaments to both sides of the civil war. Is this a powder keg about to explode? Sure looks like it. - R.O.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Are Israel and Russia on the Same Page?

by Zalman Shoval

Though the U.S. and Russia have agreed to hold a summit in Geneva to try to diplomatically resolve the conflict in Syria and establish an interim Syrian government, it is highly doubtful that Russia and the U.S. are of one mind as to what the diplomatic resolution should be. Israel, as we all know, does not have a clear preference as to which side winds up on top: It is not indifferent to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's atrocities, but it is also aware that the rebels, or at least some of them, may pose no less of a threat.

The Russians have a direct interest in the events in Syria, and the lightning meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu earlier this month is proof of that. We don't know exactly what was said behind closed doors in Sochi, but we cannot assume that Putin initiated the meeting (and he did in fact initiate it) just to inform Netanyahu that Russia would not cancel its missile deal with the Syrians due to supposed contractual obligations or commercial reputation considerations. A regime change in Syria would jeopardize the strategic, diplomatic and economic interests of Putin's Russia, much like the interests of the Soviet Union before it.

The S-300 anti-aircraft missile system. (BBC)

The Syrian port of Tartus is the home base of the Russian fleet in the Mediterranean Sea. Since Moscow wants to preserve its status (at least in its own view) as a regional superpower in the Middle East, it must carefully consider its conduct on the day after Assad's fall -- and Israel apparently plays into Russia's considerations.

It is possible that the Russians will try to forge ties with whomever rises to power in Damascus after Assad, but they are also considering the possibility that Syria will splinter and a small Alawite state will be established in the northeaster part of the country -- where the port of Tartus is situated. The Americans, unlike the Russians, are still hoping for a unified Syria with a democratic leadership that would cooperate with the West, though they are less confident in the likelihood of this actually happening.

In the past, Soviet policy in the Middle East rested mainly on support for the Arabs, including Arab terror organizations, and hostility toward Israel -- both because Stalin viewed Zionism as the most dangerous enemy of communism and because of Israel's relationship with the U.S. in the context of the Cold War. In this regard, things have changed, and thankfully so.

Currently, Russia isn't entirely in love with Assad either. Russia's support for Assad is a default policy. But much like Israel, Russia is worried that if Assad falls, a fundamentalist-Islamist hub will arise in his place. In this regard, Jerusalem and Moscow share a common future interest (even if it is for different reasons). In the meantime, Israel expects Russia to convince Assad that it has no intention of attacking him as long as he prevents the transfer of advanced weapons to Hezbollah. Israel also wants Russia to make it clear to Assad that if he should violate this expectation, or provoke Israel other ways, there will be a response.

There is currently more than one game being played at the Syrian card table. One player is playing poker while another player is playing bridge. The players and partners are also inconsistent. At this point, it is not yet clear which player is holding the winning card, or even if such a card exists. In any case, Israel has to play its cards close to the chest and refrain from unnecessary chatter. And of course Israel must not forget that specific or temporary interests, as important as they may be, are no substitute for the long-term relationship with the U.S.

Russia's Brinkmanship with US Clashes with Israel's Security

A brief summary of Russia's recent foreign policy moves and how they impact Israel. Does Russia think there won't be consequences for supporting terror states like Iran and Syria? -R.O.

Middle East and Terrorism: Russia's Brinkmanship with US Clashes with Israel's Security

by Yaakov Lappin

"Jerusalem will find Russia's delivery of the S-300 missile system to Syria to be an intolerable development; it is safe to assume that Israel will act to prevent this from happening."

Russia is aggressively squaring off with an indecisive and rather meek West about Syria, and in the process, is also threatening to undermine Israeli efforts to ensure that Iran and Syria do not ship strategic weapons to Hezbollah.

The Syrian civil war has become a dangerous and complex battle of multiple actors and their proxies: Sunni versus Shi'ite, Iran versus the Gulf states, Al-Qaeda versus Hezbollah, and on a global scale, the United States versus Russia.

Moscow is trying to deter a potential US or NATO-led initiative to set up a no-fly zone over areas of Syria, and is seeking to stop Western-led air strikes against chemical weapons sites.
Russia also seems concerned that recent air strikes in Damascus targeting Hezbollah-bound guided Iranian missiles -- strikes attributed by the foreign media to Israel -- will pave the way to such an intervention.

Israel has no interest in getting involved in the Syrian civil war. Rather, it is looking out for the safety of millions of citizens, who already live in the shadow of some 80,000 Hezbollah rockets, and would be threatened further by the transfer of precise, powerful missiles to Hezbollah in Lebanon.

In recent days, Russia unleashed a flurry of moves to establish its support of Syria.

The Russian moves include: Declaring that it will proceed with deliveries of the advanced S-300 air defense system to Assad, mobilizing war ships to the eastern Mediterranean, and selling sophisticated surface-to-sea Yakhont missiles to Assad.

Moscow's recent maneuvers might be more bluster than real -- the S-300 has yet to be delivered, and Russia was in 2010 talked out of selling the formidable air defense system to Iran.

The threat, however, was serious enough for Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to make an unscheduled trip last week to Russia to meet with President Vladimir Putin. The two later held a press conference, repeating their public positions, but it is doubtful that those statements were a complete reflection of their private exchange.

Israel is opposed to Assad receiving the S-300 missile for several reasons: With its sophisticated radars and range of 200 kilometers, the S-300 can hamper Israel Air Force aircraft seeking to monitor Hezbollah in Lebanon. The system can also disrupt future Israeli efforts to intercept the transit of Iranian weapons to Hezbollah through Syria. Finally, Assad can choose to smuggle S-300 batteries to Hezbollah or Iran.

Should the S-300 fall into Iranian hands, the future potential mission of launching a military strike on Iran's developing nuclear program would be more even more complex than it already is. Knowing that the S-300 was in Hezbollah's hands, and could target Israeli aircraft sent to stop it, would only boost the Shi'ite terror organization's confidence to launch cross-border attacks on Israel. For these reasons, Jerusalem will find Russia's delivery of such a system to Syria to be an intolerable development; it is safe to assume that Israel will act to prevent this from happening.

Similarly, the Russian Yakhont missiles already delivered to Syria threaten Israel Navy ships carrying out vital missions in the Mediterranean.

Behind closed-doors, intense diplomacy -- including the sudden visit by CIA Director John Brennan to Israel -- is underway to try and contain these developments, and prevent them from triggering further regional security deterioration.

Yaakov Lappin

Source: http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3722/russia-syria-israel

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Russia vows response against Israel for future Syria strikes

The story below fits as a scenario that could lead to the prophesied war found in the book of Ezekiel, chapters 38 and 39. In that prophecy, Biblical scholars (among them Joel Rosenberg who I interviewed in 2010) generally agree that Gog, a large kingdom from the north of Israel, will join forces against Israel's enemies to destroy Israel in the last days. 

Carefully read Ezekiel's prophecy above in the context of the story below: Russian President Vladimir Putin is allegedly pledging to retaliate against Israel, if Israel conducts another strike on targets inside Syria. 

At the same time, yesterday (May 15, 2013), the Israeli government publicly pledged to "bring down" Syria's President Assad if Assad retaliates against Israel for Israeli air strikes inside Syria on missiles and weapons systems bound for Iran's terrorist proxy militia Hizballah in southern Lebanon. 

The threat posed to Israel by all of these interconnected alliances is compounded by Israel's long-rumoured potential mission to conduct air strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities and missile sites. In short: the Middle East is at the precipice of total conflagration.

The truth and potential fulfillment of the Bible's prophecies in Ezekiel is becoming explicitly clear, and is worthy of critical assessment by believers and non-believers alike. What if the as-yet-unfulfilled prophecies written 2500 years ago are coming true in this lifetime? Christians are commanded to pray for the peace of Jerusalem (Psalm 122:6). In light of the likelihood of massive global war, perhaps non-Christians should be praying that too. 

Even so, come Lord Jesus (Rev. 22:20).

-R.O.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Syrian-Israeli war of words via Putin edges into Syrian-Hizballah war of attrition"

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report May 16, 2013, 10:58 AM (IDT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Prime Minister Netanyahu ended their three-hour meeting in Sochi Tuesday, May 14, at loggerheads on Syria. In fact, Putin warned his guest that Israel and its army, the IDF, were heading for war with Syria in which Russia might well be involved – and not just through the advanced S-300 anti-air missiles supplied to the Assad government.

The case Netanyahu and Military Intelligence chief Maj. Gen. Aviv Kochavi put before Putin and Russian foreign intelligence chief, SVR Director Mikhail Fradkov, fell on deaf ears.

They found the Russian leader further infuriated by the docking that day at Israel’s Red Sea port of Eilat of the USS Kearsarge, carrying 1,800 marines and a consignment of 20 V-22 Osprey helicopters which US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel had promised to supply to Israel during his April visit.

Putin viewed the stationing of US forces in the Gulf of Aqaba just two hours away the Israeli-Syrian border for repelling Syrian-Iranian-Hizballah aggression against Israel or Jordan – signaled by the Kearsage’s arrival - as an act of bad faith by Washington. On the one hand, they want us to cooperate for an international conference to end the bloodshed in Syria, while on the other, they deploy military forces, he complained to Netanyahu.

The Israeli prime minister countered with a warning that Israel would continue to strike advanced weapons in Syria that were destined for Hizballah. And if President Bashar Assad hit back for Israel’s May 5 bombardment of weapons stores on Mount Qassioun near Damascus, Israel would intensify its bombardments of Syrian military targets and weapons until Assad was left to fight off rebel assaults empty-handed.

Putin rejected this threat as implausible.

Neither Putin nor Netanyahu put all their cards on the table, but the conversation ended with the Russian leader fully confident that his capabilities for safeguarding Assad were greater than Israel’s ability to destroy him.

In the end, Netanyahu and his party arrived home Tuesday evening with a bad feeling. They were certain that Moscow had given Assad the green light to go through with his threat to make the Syrian Golan and the Horan of southern Syria “a front for resistance” – i.e. the platforms for embarking on a war of attrition against northern Israel with the help of a flow of advanced weapons to Hizballah.

The Syrian ruler is strongly encouraged to adopt this path by Tehran. Hizballah’s leader Hassan Nasrallah has embraced it. And the radical Palestinian leader, Ahmed Jibril, head of the Assad-satellite Popular Front-General Command, has eagerly offered his services.

And indeed, Wednesday, the day after Netanyahu’s trip to Sochi, Jibril’s group let loose with mortar fire on the Israeli Mt. Hermon ski site, firing from a Syrian army position.

Israeli military sources confirmed later that these were no stray shells from a Syrian-army-rebel battle as in former cases, but a deliberate attack. In Jerusalem, it was taken as a direct consequence of Moscow’s account to Assad of the conversation between the Russian and Israeli leaders. They concluded that Assad took it for granted that he was now at liberty to go on the offensive against Israel.

Wednesday night, Netanyahu’s office reacted to this deterioration with a swift and strong warning.
Israeli media were informed bluntly that if the Assad chose to retaliate for Israel’s air strikes, he would be removed from power.

That same night, “a senior Israeli official” contacted The New York Times with a more detailed warning quoted by the paper: "If Syrian President Assad reacts by attacking Israel, or tries to strike Israel through his terrorist proxies, he will risk forfeiting his regime, for Israel will retaliate."

Within hours, early Thursday morning, May 16, Jerusalem had its answer from Damascus.
A Palestinian group calling itself “Martyrs of the Abdel Qader al-Husseini Brigades” (named for the commander of a Palestinian force fighting Israel in its 1948 War of Independence) claimed responsibility for the "rockets" aimed at an Israeli military observation post in the Golan Heights. They were fired in honor of Nakba Day, said the statement released in Damascus "We are not celebrating but avenging the blood of our martyrs."

A video showing the launch was appended.

Palestinian terrorist groups habitually use made-up names when claiming attacks, a practice often followed by al Qaeda, but this one was easily identified by Israel and taken to mean that Assad had begun using what the Israeli official referred to in The New York Times as "his terrorist proxies."

Depending on the next move decided on by Prime Minister Netanyahu, Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon and Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz, this incident could mark the tipping-point of a slide towards a war confrontation against Israel by Syria, Hizballah and other Assad proxies.

Source URL: http://www.debka.com/article/22970/

Iran closer than ever to nuclear bomb

Will Israel be forced to take unilateral military action to stop Iran's nuclear weapons program? With every passing day, this becomes more likely. The consequences of Israeli action against Iran -- or inaction -- will undoubtedly be global. Count on it. - R.O.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Netanyahu: Iran closer than ever to nuclear bomb

Jerusalem Post - February 22, 2013

IAEA report: 180 centrifuges hooked up at Natanz, Iran's main uranium enrichment plant; PM calls findings "very grave."

Centrifuges unveiled in Natanz. Photo: REUTERS

Iran is closer today than ever before to obtaining the necessary enriched uranium for a nuclear bomb, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said on Thursday evening.

He was reacting to the publication of details of a confidential report by the International Atomic Energy Agency that Iran had begun installing advanced centrifuges at its main uranium enrichment plant.

The Prime Minister’s Office said that preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons would be the first issue on the agenda when US President Barack Obama came to visit in less than a month’s time.Netanyahu termed the report “very grave,” and said it proved that Iran was moving swiftly toward the red line he had set out at the United Nations in September. He said during that address that Iran must be stopped before it crossed the line, something he said at the time could happen as early as the spring.

According to the report, 180 so-called IR-2m centrifuges and empty centrifuge casings had been hooked up at the plant near the central town of Natanz. They were not yet operating.

Such machines could enable Iran to significantly speed up its accumulation of material that could be used to make a nuclear weapon.

It was not clear how many of the new centrifuges Iran aims to install at Natanz, which is designed for tens of thousands.

An IAEA note informing member states late last month about Iran’s plans implied that it could be up to 3,000 or so.

Iran has for years been trying to develop centrifuges more efficient than the erratic 1970s IR-1 model it now uses, but their introduction for full-scale production has been dogged by delays and technical hurdles, experts and diplomats say.

Iran has also started testing two new centrifuge models, the IR-6 and IR6s, at a research and development facility, the IAEA report said. Centrifuges spin at supersonic speed to increase the ratio of the fissile isotope in uranium.

Iran’s defiance is likely to anger world powers ahead of a resumption of talks with Tehran next week. Six world powers and Iran are due to meet for the first time in eight months in Kazakhstan on Tuesday to try again to break the impasse, but analysts expect no real progress toward defusing suspicions that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons capability.

US State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said in Washington Thursday that Iran's installation of new-generation centrifuges would be "yet another provocative step."

White House spokesman Jay Carney warned Iran that it would face further pressure and isolation if it fails to address international concerns about its nuclear program in the Feb. 26 talks with world powers in the Kazakh city of Almaty.

In a more encouraging sign for the powers, however, the IAEA report said Iran in December resumed converting some of its uranium refined to a fissile concentration of 20 percent to powder for the production of reactor fuel.

That helped restrain the growth of Iran’s higher-grade uranium stockpile since the previous report in November, a development that could buy more time for diplomacy and delay possible Israeli military action.

The report said Iran had increased to 167 kg. its stockpile of 20-percent uranium – a level it says it needs to make fuel for a Tehran research reactor but which also takes it much closer to weapons-grade material, which could be obtained if it were processed further.

Israel's Intentional Fog of War Over Syria

By: Robert D. Onley - February 1, 2013

Israeli F-16. (file) Jerusalem Post.

The world will likely never know the exact truth about what Israel bombed in or outside of Syria this week. But as alleged details of the daring mission leak out, the murky story reveals hard truths about Israel's lethal modus operandi.

Reports about Israel's strike on a Syrian ‘military research center’ in Jamraya, near Damascus, suggest that Israel may have in fact killed a large number of Iran's Revolutionary Guardsmen protecting the facility.

If true, not only was Israel unafraid of destroying Syrian military infrastructure, and thus ready to face all potential consequences, the Israeli government in all probability knew that the attack would kill Iranian troops. Israel's action was undoubtedly designed in part to directly test Iran’s willingness to respond.

The air strike also demonstrated Israel's unflinching resolve in the face of Iran's unceasing vitriol. The unfortunate reality for Israel is that Iran long ago declared war against it. Iran behaves as if a state of war exists when its leaders make statements calling for the destruction of Israel, all while it arms its terrorist proxy militia, Hezbollah, in Lebanon to Israel's north.

Facing such enemies, Israel does not have the luxury of assessing its national security situation in the same pensive, morally equivocating way that many Western and European critics of Israel frequently argue on the pages of major newspapers.

No, quite the opposite, earlier this week when Israeli intelligence agents established that there were targets that absolutely had to be destroyed inside Syria -- in this case either a weapons convoy in the border region and/or a weapons lab in Jamraya -- the Israeli government acted immediately to remove these threats.

Israeli F-15's in formation.

It is worth noting reports that Israel gave the United States advance warning of its strike on Syrian soil. This notification highlights the likelihood that the attack was so important, time-sensitive and crucial to the security of Israel and to the stability of the region, the Israeli government was forced to act, partly on behalf of the West.

Launching air strikes against an avowed enemy, Syria, while that enemy is in the midst of a bloody civil war is no small measure. In fact, it's akin to kicking the hornet's nest after it has already fallen from the tree and the hornets are buzzing around angrily.

Amid all of the speculation and conflicting reports about which target was actually attacked in Syria (or Lebanon), it is increasingly evident that the actual truth about military matters in the Middle East will never be revealed to the global public.

Stopping to think about the two competing claims for a moment reveals myriad conflicting end games for both Israel and Syria.

SA-17.

If Western reports are true that a weapons convoy carrying advanced SA-17 missiles headed to Hezbollah was indeed destroyed by Israel, the message to Iran, Syria and Russia is that the West will not tolerate a conflation of regional tensions by drawing in Israel's arch terrorist enemy, Hezbollah. The United States made this much clear in its direct warning to Syria, and implicitly also to Russia.

But if Syrian reports are true -- that there was no weapons convoy attacked, but rather that a military research center was targeted -- then Israel was legally in contravention of the UN Charter and thus the UN Security Council should act to punish Israel. This serves to theoretically kindle sympathy for Syria from the rest of the world.

The problem is that Assad has zero global credibility today; his Russian 'support' is a product of Russian geostrategic self-interest as it seeks to preserve its sole Mediterranean naval port at Tartus.

Moreover what is perplexing is that the Syrian government was forthright about detailing exactly which type of military target Israel hit, plainly calling by its name. The Syrian statement effectively vindicated long held Western and Israeli concerns about Syria's chemical weapons capabilities and simultaneously acknowledged Israel’s reason for attacking the facility.

Such intentional state-sanctioned misdirection is not a new paradigm. Propaganda and disinformation are hard currency in the region, as efforts to confuse and mislead a nation's enemies can create immeasurable dividends in the long-term chess game that is the Middle Eastern conflict.

Israel's next pre-emptive attack is better prepared when it has been successfully obscured by the fog of war surrounding its previous mission. The ultimate truth is known only to an elite circle of leaders on both sides, and those unfortunate souls on the receiving end at ground level. As the region roils, maybe it is better this way.

----------------------------------------------------

Robert D. Onley is the Director of Policy & Development at YouthCan for International Dialogue.

© World Assessor.com, 2013

UK leads calls to 'shape' Syria opposition - Al Jazeera

Very interesting development within hours of Barack Obama's re-election: the UK is now saying it will "deal directly with rebel military leaders" in Syria. Is this the right move for the West? Should Western governments escalate the conflict there? Were Western nations simply waiting for the US election to finish before deciding their next move? 

The answer to the latter question seems obvious, as NATO allies (such as the UK) are now openly advocating for an escalation of support for Syrian rebels. The question is: what is the West's end game in Syria? After Assad is toppled, who will take control? Will they take control? Are the "rebels" people that the West can trust? What about the extremist factions within the Syrian rebellion?

My fear is that, like Iraq, the West will entrench itself in another intractable sectarian conflict, one that this time borders Israel. This is certainly a story to watch. - R.O.

UK leads calls to 'shape' Syria opposition - Al Jazeera

British Prime Minister David Cameron said UK and allies should do more to open direct communication with rebel leaders.

Western efforts to oust Syrian President Bashar Assad have shifted dramatically, with Britain saying it will deal directly with rebel military leaders and Turkey saying NATO members have discussed protecting a safe zone inside Syria with Patriot missiles.

The developments came within hours of President Barack Obama's re-election on Tuesday, which US allies said they have been waiting for before implementing new strategies to end the deadlocked civil war that has killed more than 36,000 people over the past year and a half.

British Prime Minister David Cameron, visiting a camp for Syrian refugees in Jordan, said the US, Britain and other allies should do more to "shape the opposition'' into a coherent force and open channels of communication directly with rebel military commanders.

Previously, Britain and the US have acknowledged contacts only with exile groups and political opposition figures inside Syria.

And a Turkish official said Turkey and allies, including the United States, have discussed the possibility of using Patriot missiles to protect a safe zone inside Syria.

The foreign ministry official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of ministry prohibitions on contacts with the news media, said planning for the safe zone had been put on hold pending the US election.

He said any missile deployment might happen under a "NATO umbrella'', though NATO has insisted it will not intervene without a clear United Nations mandate.

"There is an opportunity for Britain, for America, for Saudi Arabia, Jordan and like-minded allies to come together and try to help shape the opposition, outside Syria and inside Syria,'' Cameron said. "And try to help them achieve their goal, which is our goal of a Syria without Assad.''

International pressure
Cameron is currently on a tour of the Middle East and speaking on Obama's re-election said: "I am hearing appalling stories about what has happened inside Syria so one of the first things I want to talk to Barack about is how we must do more to try and solve this crisis.”

The news comes as the Syrian National Council's (SNC) general assembly of nearly 420 members met on Wednesday to choose two leadership bodies and a president during a conference in the Qatari capital Doha.

Syria's main opposition bloc has succumbed to intense international pressure from critics and begun electing new leaders to appease critics who say the exile-dominated group does not represent those risking their lives on the frontlines to oust the regime.

The SNC, largely made up of exiles, has been criticised as ineffective and out of touch with those trying to topple Assad.

The US has called for a more unified and representative opposition, suggesting an end to the SNC's leadership.

SNC officials say the internal election may not be enough to deflect such criticism and halt US-backed efforts to set up an alternate leadership group.

Al Jazeera's Omar Al Saleh, reporting from Doha, said: "The new leadership will discuss an initiative given by an opposition member who is also a current of the SNC.

"That initiative is backed by the international community, France, US as well as Qatar, KSA and other countries. According to that initiative, a new council might emerge," he said

"The SNC fears that that council might be a replacement to them and this is for the political wrangling and negotiations will be decisive for the fate of the Syrian revolution" he added.