Is Syria Arming Lebanon's Hezbollah?

Last week, there was chatter of the "existence of reports" that Damascus transferred Scud missiles to Lebanon’s Hezbollah.

Israeli President Shimon Peres warned, “We will not allow Syria to play this double game. The transfer of weapons reveals Syria's true face.”

Washington was also suspicious. "We have relayed our concerns at the highest levels about weapons that could destabilize the region," said White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.

Middle East Inside Line: End of Saudi Peace Initiative?, Hamas-Israel-Egypt Triangle, Israel’s Fear Industry

However, Syria rejected all allegations. Syria's embassy in Washington dismissed the charge as an Israeli attempt "to divert global attention" from settlement construction, its occupation of Arab land, its assumed nuclear arsenal and its "continuous arming" with US weaponry.


A minister from Hezbollah, Hussein Haj Hassan, said that whether or not they have acquired Scud missiles is none of Israel's business.

In response, a US official said, "We think the [Syrian] intent is there. We believe a transfer of some kind occurred but it is unclear if the rockets themselves have changed hands,” a senior U.S. official said.

Another official said doubts were growing that Syria had delivered the Scuds in full and allowed them to transit to Lebanese territory: "We don't believe it happened."

Middle East Inside Line: End of Saudi Peace Initiative?, Hamas-Israel-Egypt Triangle, Israel's Fear Industry

Jordan's King on Middle East: Talking to the Chicago Tribune on Thursday, Jordan's King Abdullah warned of violence if no progress is made in restarting Palestinian-Israeli peace talks. Abdullah said:

If we hit the summer and there's no active [peace] process, there's a very good chance for conflict, and nobody wins when it comes to that.

Referring to the Saudi peace initiative, in which moderate Arab and Muslim states would normalize relations with Israel in return for West Jerusalem's complete withdrawal from occupied territory, Abdullah said:

We managed to get an extension of the Arab peace proposal, which terminates in July. There will be a committee meeting of Arab countries in July, and for us as moderate countries, we're going to be challenged by everybody else.

Nothing has happened; Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is not interested in peace, so why keep the Arab peace proposal on the table?

As US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that Israel must do more to pursue peace with the Palestinians and to strengthen their institutions or risk empowering militant groups such as Hamas, Abdullah suggested the message to Washington that "Arabs have not played their last card":

I think it's up to us to do a lot of the heavy lifting at this stage.

Why should the burden be solely on Obama and Americans to stick their necks out if both parties are not willing to do enough of the groundwork?

Hamas-Israel-Egypt Triangle: As Hamas ordered the temporary closure of hundreds of smuggling tunnels around the town of Rafah, following Israel’s warning that Hamas was planning to seize tourists in Egypt's Sinai Peninsula), Israel Radio reported on Saturday that Egyptian forces had blown up a smuggling tunnel beneath the border with the Gaza Strip.

Meanwhile, a spokesman for the armed wing of Hamas (the Izz-as-Din al-Qassam brigades), Abu Obeidah, said a prisoner swap was not Hamas' only hope for detainees and that the group had a "strong strategy" for securing their release. He continued:

Useless, absurd peace talks failed to free the prisoners, but our fighters will release them by all means, including armed resistance.

The tension between Israel and Gaza is increasing, especially after Israel Defense Forces shot dead a Palestinian man on Friday. The Israeli army said he was attempting to plant a bomb along the border fence.

Israel's Fear Industry Goes Flat Out: Following an Iranian-hosted international disarmament conference which concluded that “a nuclear weapons-free Middle East requires the Zionist regime to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty," Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu underlined the “importance of the threat”:

Over the years, we have learned that the olive branch of peace will be achieved only if we remain strong, only if we are prepared to defend ourselves in the same way our fallen soldiers did at this site. They attacked from this site and other hills not out of lust for war, but out of belief in the righteousness of the goal of defending the Jewish people's one and only country.

President Shimon Peres filled in details:

We are a nation that yearns for peace, but knows, and will always know, how to defend itself.

Israel's strength springs from the strength of its faith, and its greatness emanates from the heroism of its sons. Today we grieve for their loss and are blessed by their legacy.

There are still those who wish to annihilate us. At their head is the autocratic Iranian regime that seeks to impose its rule on the Middle East, silence it with lethal weapons and launch an anti-Israel incitement campaign to deflect Arab fears.

On Monday, Defense Minister Ehud Barak tactically said that “there is no immediate existential threat from Iran” yet defined the challenge subtly as a “< href="http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1164024.html ">the number one potential existential threat to be stopped”:

I prefer to refrain from speculation about the future. Right now, Iran does not pose an existential threat to Israel. If Iran becomes nuclear, it will spark an arms race in the Middle East. This region is very sensitive because of the oil flow. The region is important to the entire world. The fact that Iran is not an immediate threat, but could evolve into one, means that we can't let ourselves fall asleep.

Barak’s summary last week also deserves consideration:

We have the pilots, the ground crews and the best planes in the world. Our air force is the supporting pillar of our operational capabilities against threats from both near and far.

Iraq and "Collateral Murder": The White House Response

Robert Gibbs, the White House Press Secretary, fields a question about the "collateral murder" video from Iraq in 2007, first appealing to the assembled journalists --- "Many of you know colleagues that have reported from exceedingly dangerous places in the world" --- and then declaring:

Our military will take every precaution necessary to ensure the safety and security of civilians, and in particular those who report in those dangerous places of behalf of news organisations.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGQmhzRTIkM#t=103[/youtube]

UPDATED Iraq: Reactions to the “Collateral Murder” Video
US Military & Iraq’s Civilians: The “Collateral Murder” Video

Afghanistan: Karzai's Middle-Finger Reply to the US

UPDATED 1600 GMT: Some political fun this afternoon over the Karzai statement. Abdullah Abdullah, who lost to Karzai in last year's Presidential election, told reporters, "As a former colleague and doctor, I think this is beyond a normal attitude." White House spokesman Robert Gibbs settled for "genuinely troubling" to describe Karzai's remarks.

The Majlis has a far more pragmatic assessment of why Karzai made his statement.

---

Let's check in with Hamid Karzai, five days after Barack Obama made a 26-hour round trip to give him a 30-minute telling-off about corruption, drugs, and mismanagement. I bet he's behaving himself now!

Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, delivered extraordinarily harsh criticism on Thursday of the Western governments fighting in his country, the United Nations, and the British and American news media, accusing them of perpetrating the fraud that denied him an outright victory in last summer’s presidential elections.

Afghanistan: US Night Raids v. “Hearts and Minds”? (Porter)

What? Are you sure about that?


I mean, after all, the US and NATO followed up their Presidential stick with the carrot of allowing Karzai's brother, a focal point for criticism about financial irregularities, to maintain his authority in Kandahar?

“There is no doubt that the fraud [in last August's Presidential election] was very widespread, but this fraud was not committed by Afghans, it was committed by foreigners,” Mr. Karzai said. “This fraud was committed by Galbraith [Peter Galbraith, the deputy United Nations special representative], this fraud was committed by Morillon [Philippe Morillon, the chief election observer for the European Union], and this fraud was committed by embassies.”

April Fools' Day, right? Any moment now, Karzai was going to turn around, give a smile, and say, "Just funning you, Barack --- thanks to you and America for all your help."

“In this situation there is a thin curtain between invasion and cooperation-assistance,” said Mr. Karzai, adding that if the perception spread that Western forces were invaders and the Afghan government their mercenaries, the insurgency “could become a national resistance.”

Hmm, guess not.

One possible explanation for the speech is that Karzai was trying to give himself public cover as a dedicated nationalist, standing up to Washington, even as he gave way to Obama. That's certainly what The New York Times was hoping: "One motive for the angry speech might be an attempt to protect himself politically, since it is probable that he will have to accede to Western demands that he remove the officials on the election commission who were seen as most complicit in the fraud."

Another explanation, however, is that Karzai has just made it clear that he will not be implementing the US agenda in full. Instead, look for more rounds of political manoeuvre as the Afghan President positions himself amidst not only Washington but also his own supporters, the Afghan insurgency, and other interested outside powers.

A story, in other words, that will run and run. President Obama, you might want to have Air Force One warmed up for another long-distance flight.