Atak na Syrie

[Gość: zbalansowany]

Jak bylo do przewidzenia jastrzebie waszyngtonskie pra do nastepnego
konfliktu na BW. Tym razem ma to byc Syria.
Nie ustaja codzienne ataki dyplomatyczne na ten kraj. Oskarza sie go o
wszystko, od popierania "terroryzmu" do ukrywania broni Hussaina skonczywszy.
Typowa prasowa nagonka zorganizowana .... no wlasnie przez kogo?

Artykul Guardiana




Syria could be next, warns Washington

Ed Vulliamy in Washington
Sunday April 13, 2003
The Observer

The United States has pledged to tackle the Syrian-backed Hizbollah group in
the next phase of its 'war on terror' in a move which could threaten military
action against President Bashar Assad's regime in Damascus.
The move is part of Washington's efforts to persuade Israel to support a new
peace settlement with the Palestinians. Washington has promised Israel that
it will take 'all effective action' to cut off Syria's support for Hizbollah -
implying a military strike if necessary, sources in the Bush administration
have told The Observer .

Hizbollah is a Shia Muslim organisation based in Lebanon, whose fighters have
attacked northern Israeli settlements and harassed occupying Israeli troops
to the point of forcing an Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon three
years ago.

The new US undertaking to Israel to deal with Hizbollah via its Syrian
sponsors has been made over recent days during meetings between
administration officials and Israeli diplomats in Washington, and Americans
talking to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in Jerusalem. It would be part
of a deal designed to entice Israel into the so-called road map to peace
package that would involve the Jewish state pulling out of the Palestinian
West Bank, occupied since 1967.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has so far rejected the road map initiative -
charted by the US with its ally, Britain - which also calls for mutual
recognition between Israel and a new Palestinian state, structured according
to US-backed reforms. The American guarantee would be to take armed action if
necessary to cut off Syrian support for Hizbollah, and stop further
sponsorship for the group by Iran.

'If you control Iraq, you can affect the Syrian and Iranian sponsorship of
Hizbollah, both geographically and politically,' says Ivo Daalder of the
Brookings Institution think-tank in Washington.

'The United States will make it very clear, quietly and publicly, that
Baathist Syria may come to an end if it does not stop its support of
Hizbollah.'

The undertaking dovetails conveniently into 'phase three' of what President
George Bush calls the 'war on terror' and his pledge to go after all
countries accused of harbouring terrorists.

It also fits into calls by hawks inside and aligned to the administration who
believe that war in Iraq was first stage in a wider war for American control
of the region. Threats against Syria come daily out of Washington.

Hawks in and close to the Bush White House have prepared the ground for an
attack on Syria, raising the spectre of Hizbollah, of alleged Syrian plans to
wel come refugees from Saddam Hussein's fallen regime, and of what the
administration insists is Syrian support for Iraq during the war.

Deputy Defence Secretary Paul Wolfowitz - regarded as the real architect of
the Iraqi war and its aftermath - said on Thursday that 'the Syrians have
been shipping killers into Iraq to try and kill Americans', adding: 'We need
to think about what our policy is towards a country that harbours terrorists
or harbours war criminals.

'There will have to be change in Syria, plainly,' said Wolfowitz.

Washingtom intelligence sources claim that weapons of mass destruction that
Saddam was alleged to have possessed were shipped to Syria after inspectors
were sent by the United Nations to find them.

One of the chief ideologists behind the war, Richard Perle, yesterday warned
that the US would be compelled to act against Syria if it emerged that
weapons of mass destruction had been moved there by Saddam's fallen Iraqi
regime.

[Gość: zbalansowany]

Analysis / Washington turns its sights on Damascus

By Ze'ev Schiff



Why is the volume of rebuke leveled by the U.S. administration against Damascus
getting higher while the war in Iraq is actually coming to a close? Two reasons
seem to underly America's rage, which was quite evident first in the statements
of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and then of President George W. Bush.
One is that Washington has learned that Damascus has decided to "turn Iraq into
a new Lebanon," and the second is the suspicion, which is probably based on
reliable intelligence, that Damascus is ready to shelter fleeing Iraqi leaders
and let them pass through to other hiding places worldwide.

Hardly a day has gone by recently without Washington lashing out against Syria.
The headquarters of U.S. forces in Qatar concured, saying that during the
fighting in Iraq, volunteer Syrian soldiers opened fired on American troops;
the Syrians also fired anti-tank missiles and old Strela missiles against U.S.
aircraft. Since these are weapons that individuals usually do not own, the
Syrian volunteers must have received them before crossing into Iraq.

In his comments yesterday, Rumsfeld distinguished between the Syrian people on
the one hand and its leadership, which supports terror, on the other. He
stressed the link between Syria and Hezbollah, which the U.S. has recognized as
a terror organization. Rumsfeld did not threaten military retaliation, but
wondered who would invest in a country like Syria. And for the first time, Bush
yesterday demanded that Syria dispose of its chemical weapons.

These statements indicate a turnaround in Washington's approach to Damascus.
The previous policy of quiet operations was led by the CIA, which apparently
got intoxicated by information that the Syrians had provided at some stage
about Al-Qaida's operations in various countries, including Germany.
Washington, therefore, was reluctant to publicly censor Syria when it learned
that the Syrians were acquiring equipment and arms for Iraq in various
countries in Eastern Europe. The Americans approached Syria with this
information, but Damascus did not stop the acquisitions. Syria continued to
broker Iraqi arms deals until the fighting began.

Next, Syria allowed Palestinian and Syrian volunteers to cross the border into
Iraq. American pressure on Syria mounted, but Damascus did not make any real
effort to seal the border. This was not a matter of slow response but of
deliberate disregard to America's requests, which would not have happened
without President Bashar Assad's approval. He seems to be drawing courage from
recent talks with the French, who are still encouraging anti-American
activities.

America grew even angrier when it discovered that even after Saddam Hussein's
defeat, the Syrians, in coordination with Hezbollah's leader, continued to
determine how to hurt the Americans in Iraq and disrupt their progress. The
leading concept in Syria today is that Iraq should be to the Americans what
Lebanon was for Israel - namely, to cause terror attacks and suicide bombers
and generate as many American casualties as possible. It is yet unknown whether
Syria or Hezbollah has any operational plans to back up these professed
policies.

However, Washington seems to have solid information about different Iraqi
leaders who have escaped to Syria; all these fugitives have been defined by the
U.S. as criminals of war. These men are probably not part of Saddam's closest
circle and most likely include leading figures in Iraq's military industry. It
won't be long before Washington demands the extradition of the wanted Iraqi
leaders.

Traditionally, Syria has pointed a finger at Israel, accusing it of inciting
Washington against it. In truth, Israel is doing its best to keep a low profile
in the Iraqi affair in which Assad got himself entangled, but it, too, will
have to reevaluate its policy vis-a-vis Syria under the rule of Assad Junior.