The Middle East - Awash in Violence or The Beginning of the End of Terrorism
What does the current crisis (war) in the Middle East mean. Is the whole Middle East going to erupt in war, does this represent a last ditched effort by terrorists, or something in between.
Lets start with Iraq. While a violent insurgency continues in Iraq, it is clear that the Iraqi government is able to defend itself against internal threats. With a 268,000 Army/Police Force, Iraqis everyday are striking significant blows to terrorist organizations in Iraq. For all the visual effects that VBIED and suicide bombers have on TV, the fact is that Iraq has a large, well trained Army and Police Force capable of defending their democratic government. The backing of 127,000 American Troops assures that this democracy will prevail and succeed. It also ensures there will not be direct attacks from neighboring countries. Like the young United States in 1776, American Troops on the ground in Iraq are acting like the buffer of the Atlantic Ocean for early America.
Moving to Palestine, an Hamas led government infiltrates Israel, kills several of its Soldiers and kidnaps Cpl Shalit and then demands a release of Palestinian prisoners for the release of Cpl Shalit. Why would Hamas do this when Israel has withdrawn from Gaza for over one year and Olmert and Abbas were in the midst of working out the very same prisoner release? The answer lies in the polls. 33% of Palestinians stated they would vote for Fatah if elections were held in June 2006, compared to 31% for Hamas. This is a drop in popularity for Hamas of about 11% since February 2006 and for the first time since being voted into power puts Hamas behind Fatah in the polls. In addition, Abbas was leading a charge for the recognition of Israel and release of Palestinian prisoners. This would further undermine Hamas' popularity if it succeeded. Therefore, Hamas needed to increase its popularity while simultaneously diminishing Fatah's popularity. A way to do this is to do a brazen act that would ensure Israel would stop negotiations and attack Gaza; hence the kidnapping of one of its Soldiers.
Moving to Lebanon, one would have to ask the same question. Why would Lebanon, in the heighth of its tourism quarter knowing what is curently happening in Gaza, cross the border and kidnap two Israeli Soldiers-the same modis operandi as the Palestinians? It is the same answer, the polls. Since its partial freedom from Syria, Lebanon has returned to its Middle Eastern tourist roll. Faced with a weak government that would undoubtedly be strengthed by employment from a vibrant tourist trade and UN Resolution 1559 demanding Hezbollah disarm, it saw no choice to retain its power except to open old wounds to regain support. Therefore, while Hezbollah is seeing Israel pound Hamas in Gaza, they do exactly the same thing to ensure they too are at war with Israel.
Why would Syria, home of Hamas' militant leader Khaled Meshal and still tacitly in control of Lebanon, approve the use of violence against Israel by Hamas and Hezbollah? Again, it is the polls. Bashar was extremely weakened by the Hariri assassination. The UN for awhile was putting alot of pressure on Bashar. However, recently, this pressure has wained and Bashar, looking for a way to enhance his prestige at home, therefore goes on the attack. And why not? A UN report directly links him to Hariri's murder. It appears that he will either be censured by the UN or dethowned by his own people only to miraculously survive the ordeal. He literally got away with murder, but was severely weakened. Now, to increase his popularity and to shore up his base, he authorizes attacks against Israel to take pressure off himself and to build unity in his government.
Moving to Iran. Why would they, in the height of a nuclear standoff with the UN, go on the offensive since they directly control Hezbollah. Agian, its the polls. Much internal unrest is occurring in Iran. Many do not believe Iran should be pursuing and pumping so much money into nuclear research when Iran cannot even produce its own gasoline and has instituted gasoline rationing. It is not lost to the Iranians that the US dethrowned governments to its east and west in a little over one month each. Both of these governments fell due to its citizens not putting up a fight. Their citizens fled battle and as a result their governments fell. When faced with an attack, the best defense is to attack at the time of your chosing and to preferably attack on somebody else's soil. This is exactly what Iran has done. By letting Hamas attack and instigating Hezbollah to attack, Iran has taken the offensive so it can hope to prevent an attack on its soil and give itself clout in the UN during nuclear negotiations.
So what does all this mean? Where do we go from here?
The insurgency in Iraq is fueled by the Baath party in Syria on the Sunni side and Sadr's allegiance to Iran on the Shiite side. Likewise, Hamas' militants are controlled by Syria and Hezbollah by Iran. Therefore, we must not only let, but indirectly assist Israel in defeating these entities. Defeat of these terrorists groups will strike a severe blow to Syria and Iran. The US should press the UN to continue it diplomatic assault on Syria. The US should continue to press Iran in the UN. Taking out these players will forever change the face of the Middle East. It will result in peace in Iraq, Israel, and Lebanon. It may result in regime change without direct US intervention in Syria and quite possibly Iran. It will undoubtedly result in free elections in Egypt if it sees the Muslim Brotherhood significantly weakened and no longer a threat.
While many are fearful of the crisis in the Middle East, this crisis is what is needed to put an end to the 50+ year crisis that has plagued the Middle East. Middle East heavyweight, Saudi Arabia, helped dramatically when it put the blame of this crisis on Hezbollah. This is a good start and if fought correctly, will lead to peace in the Middle East.
For its part, Israel is not only bombing Hamas facilities Gaza, but is only speaking and negotiating with Abbas. This will heighten Fatah's standing. Fatah's leadership is re-examining its roll after its beating it took in the recent elections which led to Hamas' victory. This will forever change Fatah. It will change from a party of elitists to a party that will help its people.
By the same token, Israel is not negotiating with Hezbollah, it is negotiating with Lebanon's government, sidelining Syria, in an effort to diminish Hezbollah's stature. It is calling on the UN to force Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah in accordance with UN Resolution 1559. The future may very well hold an Israeli airstrike in Syria. This strike would go a long way to diminishing Bashar's already reduced popularity. If Syria choses to directly involve itself, Israel can then directly attack it. Bashar may have no other choice to boost his status in Syria. However, this act will result in his untimely demise from power.
A nail in the coffin for Iran, and by extension Syria, would be the strategic bombing of nuclear sites in Iran. While it would undoubted not destroy all of Iran's nuclear capability, it may very well rouse Iranian groups to be more vocal in their distaste for the current Iranian regime. While it would in the short-term raise gas prices, it would in the long-term significantly stabilize the Middle East.
Yes, the Middle East is awash in violence, but it is also the beginning of the end of terrorism. It started in the Middle East and it will end in the Middle East. Without striking Al Qaeda directly, the US and Israel can kill its movement by taking out Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas in one blow now that these forces have publicly joined the battle.
The question is now, do we have it in us to finish the battle?
Lets start with Iraq. While a violent insurgency continues in Iraq, it is clear that the Iraqi government is able to defend itself against internal threats. With a 268,000 Army/Police Force, Iraqis everyday are striking significant blows to terrorist organizations in Iraq. For all the visual effects that VBIED and suicide bombers have on TV, the fact is that Iraq has a large, well trained Army and Police Force capable of defending their democratic government. The backing of 127,000 American Troops assures that this democracy will prevail and succeed. It also ensures there will not be direct attacks from neighboring countries. Like the young United States in 1776, American Troops on the ground in Iraq are acting like the buffer of the Atlantic Ocean for early America.
Moving to Palestine, an Hamas led government infiltrates Israel, kills several of its Soldiers and kidnaps Cpl Shalit and then demands a release of Palestinian prisoners for the release of Cpl Shalit. Why would Hamas do this when Israel has withdrawn from Gaza for over one year and Olmert and Abbas were in the midst of working out the very same prisoner release? The answer lies in the polls. 33% of Palestinians stated they would vote for Fatah if elections were held in June 2006, compared to 31% for Hamas. This is a drop in popularity for Hamas of about 11% since February 2006 and for the first time since being voted into power puts Hamas behind Fatah in the polls. In addition, Abbas was leading a charge for the recognition of Israel and release of Palestinian prisoners. This would further undermine Hamas' popularity if it succeeded. Therefore, Hamas needed to increase its popularity while simultaneously diminishing Fatah's popularity. A way to do this is to do a brazen act that would ensure Israel would stop negotiations and attack Gaza; hence the kidnapping of one of its Soldiers.
Moving to Lebanon, one would have to ask the same question. Why would Lebanon, in the heighth of its tourism quarter knowing what is curently happening in Gaza, cross the border and kidnap two Israeli Soldiers-the same modis operandi as the Palestinians? It is the same answer, the polls. Since its partial freedom from Syria, Lebanon has returned to its Middle Eastern tourist roll. Faced with a weak government that would undoubtedly be strengthed by employment from a vibrant tourist trade and UN Resolution 1559 demanding Hezbollah disarm, it saw no choice to retain its power except to open old wounds to regain support. Therefore, while Hezbollah is seeing Israel pound Hamas in Gaza, they do exactly the same thing to ensure they too are at war with Israel.
Why would Syria, home of Hamas' militant leader Khaled Meshal and still tacitly in control of Lebanon, approve the use of violence against Israel by Hamas and Hezbollah? Again, it is the polls. Bashar was extremely weakened by the Hariri assassination. The UN for awhile was putting alot of pressure on Bashar. However, recently, this pressure has wained and Bashar, looking for a way to enhance his prestige at home, therefore goes on the attack. And why not? A UN report directly links him to Hariri's murder. It appears that he will either be censured by the UN or dethowned by his own people only to miraculously survive the ordeal. He literally got away with murder, but was severely weakened. Now, to increase his popularity and to shore up his base, he authorizes attacks against Israel to take pressure off himself and to build unity in his government.
Moving to Iran. Why would they, in the height of a nuclear standoff with the UN, go on the offensive since they directly control Hezbollah. Agian, its the polls. Much internal unrest is occurring in Iran. Many do not believe Iran should be pursuing and pumping so much money into nuclear research when Iran cannot even produce its own gasoline and has instituted gasoline rationing. It is not lost to the Iranians that the US dethrowned governments to its east and west in a little over one month each. Both of these governments fell due to its citizens not putting up a fight. Their citizens fled battle and as a result their governments fell. When faced with an attack, the best defense is to attack at the time of your chosing and to preferably attack on somebody else's soil. This is exactly what Iran has done. By letting Hamas attack and instigating Hezbollah to attack, Iran has taken the offensive so it can hope to prevent an attack on its soil and give itself clout in the UN during nuclear negotiations.
So what does all this mean? Where do we go from here?
The insurgency in Iraq is fueled by the Baath party in Syria on the Sunni side and Sadr's allegiance to Iran on the Shiite side. Likewise, Hamas' militants are controlled by Syria and Hezbollah by Iran. Therefore, we must not only let, but indirectly assist Israel in defeating these entities. Defeat of these terrorists groups will strike a severe blow to Syria and Iran. The US should press the UN to continue it diplomatic assault on Syria. The US should continue to press Iran in the UN. Taking out these players will forever change the face of the Middle East. It will result in peace in Iraq, Israel, and Lebanon. It may result in regime change without direct US intervention in Syria and quite possibly Iran. It will undoubtedly result in free elections in Egypt if it sees the Muslim Brotherhood significantly weakened and no longer a threat.
While many are fearful of the crisis in the Middle East, this crisis is what is needed to put an end to the 50+ year crisis that has plagued the Middle East. Middle East heavyweight, Saudi Arabia, helped dramatically when it put the blame of this crisis on Hezbollah. This is a good start and if fought correctly, will lead to peace in the Middle East.
For its part, Israel is not only bombing Hamas facilities Gaza, but is only speaking and negotiating with Abbas. This will heighten Fatah's standing. Fatah's leadership is re-examining its roll after its beating it took in the recent elections which led to Hamas' victory. This will forever change Fatah. It will change from a party of elitists to a party that will help its people.
By the same token, Israel is not negotiating with Hezbollah, it is negotiating with Lebanon's government, sidelining Syria, in an effort to diminish Hezbollah's stature. It is calling on the UN to force Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah in accordance with UN Resolution 1559. The future may very well hold an Israeli airstrike in Syria. This strike would go a long way to diminishing Bashar's already reduced popularity. If Syria choses to directly involve itself, Israel can then directly attack it. Bashar may have no other choice to boost his status in Syria. However, this act will result in his untimely demise from power.
A nail in the coffin for Iran, and by extension Syria, would be the strategic bombing of nuclear sites in Iran. While it would undoubted not destroy all of Iran's nuclear capability, it may very well rouse Iranian groups to be more vocal in their distaste for the current Iranian regime. While it would in the short-term raise gas prices, it would in the long-term significantly stabilize the Middle East.
Yes, the Middle East is awash in violence, but it is also the beginning of the end of terrorism. It started in the Middle East and it will end in the Middle East. Without striking Al Qaeda directly, the US and Israel can kill its movement by taking out Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas in one blow now that these forces have publicly joined the battle.
The question is now, do we have it in us to finish the battle?
posted by Lieutenant Colonel Caveman at Saturday, July 15, 2006
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home