Everything to Lose: Who's in Charge in the Middle East?

Everything to Lose: Who's in Charge in the Middle East?
By Susan Morrison – August 11, 2008

There is one belligerent nation in the Middle East. Exactly one.
Stretching from Saudi Arabia to Pakistan there is only one nation in
which nearly a century has dared infringe upon a neighbor, save for
colonial powers. Israel. I make exception here for Hafez al-Assad and
Anwar Sedot's ill-fated gamble to regain lost territory from Israel in
1973. It was a good gamble, a two-pronged assault which may have
regained lost territory, the Golan Heights for Syria and the Sinai
Peninsula, in whole, for Egypt. But it was the master of statescraft,
Henry Kissinger, and Sedot's betrayal of Assad which cut those desires
short. Egypt maintained a portion of the Sinai, but Syria and Lebanon
suffered many losses and came up short. Israel has repeatedly attacked
Egypt, Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, and Syria in its fanatical quest
to not only drive Palestinians out of Israel, but to seek them out
wherever they live through war. In 1947, 1948, and 1967 Israel was
driven by its quest to control the whole of what was Palestine, and
deny Palestinians a home. In 1973 Israel responded to an attack on
their "sovereignty": occupying other nations' land. In 1976 and 1982,
Isarel bombed and invaded Lebanon again, killing those who resisted,
and slaughtering all who remained in Palestinian refugee camps.
Periodic bombing campaigns never did cease, and Israel did not
withdraw its troops from southern Lebanon until 2000.

When Gilad Shalit was captured in 2006 by Hamas in Gaza, it was the
pretext Israel had been waiting for to bomb and invade Lebanon once
again. Something, with tensions escalating from the near daily
bombardment and border skirmishes, was going to give. The
disproportionate amount of bombing which ensued, along with the
Israeli invasion up to the Litani River, is stunning. Every industry,
highway, port, airport, and communications system along with the rest
of the nation was obliterated. From Tripoli to the Bakaa Valley to
Sidon the nation was bombarded with legal and illegal ordinance. Much
of it remains; collateral damage as a reminder of what has always been
and what is to come. The entire infrastructure of Lebanon was
destroyed. The Lebanese army held its positions to the best of its
ability, but without reinforcements from Syria it did little good.
Remember, nobody cheered in rainbow colored celebrations when Syria
withdrew its troops from Lebanon on international demand prior to the
invasion. It was Hezbollah, with Sheik Nasrallah rallying the nation,
a surrogate for the Lebanese army in disarray and much dysfunctional
after the wars of the 1980s and 90s, who struck back in a gallant but
largely ineffective manner. Lebanon holds little chance to rebuild
while the bombing campaign periodically continues and Israel occupies
the south. There is only one reason to annihilate Lebanon in such a
manner: incapacitate them as a prelude to an all-out war for political
ends. Israel finally knew, for all the talk of Iran as Lebanon's
master, just how much this tiny nation, enemy of none, could respond
to an attack.

This not satisfying Israel, in May 2007 they lay siege to one of the
largest Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon, Nahr al Bared, on the
outskirts of Tripoli. International relief workers were bombed when
they attempted to gain access to the camp, just as they had been
denied access to Jenin in the West Bank when Israel invaded, detained,
and killed 100's of Palestinians at the beginning of the second
intifada. The Lebanese army surrounded Nahr al Bared, and everyone who
wanted to escape the bombardment was allowed to leave and did.
Conspicuously missing from all news reports, however, is the Lebanese
army ever entering the Palestinian refugee camp. They never did.
Lebanon had no reason or need to attack the Palestinians, or anyone
else in Lebanon for that matter, and don't have the capacity to bomb
anyone. It was an Israeli bombing campaign, and no one knows exactly
what took place inside. Out of the 30,000 inhabitants, an estimated
500 Palestinians didn't make it out alive. General Suleiman sadly
declared after the standoff that Lebanon had "achieved what no
superpower has ever achieved." They forced the Israelis out without
conceding to their demand of denying Palestinians the right to return
to their homeland.

Syria, as well, was not spared a bombing campaign; a warning to
another friend of Iran, having a sizable Palestinian population, that
they were next. The pretext was a potential nuclear facility which
reports debunked after the fact. Indeed, the feasibility of Syria
possessing nuclear material, let alone a nuclear facility, is near
zero. The great gamble was set in motion again. A two-pronged assault:
this time with Lebanon and Syria, and those Palestinians who just
won't disappear, in the squeeze. True enough, with regime change on
the minds of Israel and the U.S., the UN is still pursuing the
languishing investigation of Rafiq Hariri's murder while waiting to
see how far the war will go this time. It was Defense Minister Barak
who said it was Syria which was of primary concern to Israel, not
Lebanon, which is easily managed. Lebanon and Syria don't require
Palestinians to become citizens, which would legitimize the annexation
of Palestinian territory, and have held out on Israel's demand not to
allow Palestinians the right to return. The right to return, Al Awda,
is still on the books with the Arab League and is a matter of
International Law, as is withdrawing to 1967's borders. Israel intends
to control the final status of Palestinian refugees, through war if
necessary.

Over the past couple years tidbits from the news stand out. There was
a man in the West Bank, who for want of some food for his family had
obtained a job with Israel. An extraordinary feat which ended when
travel restrictions were tightened in the apartheid prison, and he
lost his visa into Israel. He winded up picking through trash heaps in
one of the ghettos for anything to sell or eat. Neighbors mercilessly
taunted him. He said, "I just wanted to live a dignified life." There
were the three main Palestinian populated areas in Jordon Valley,
primarily farmers working the land. Travel restrictions again were
imposed when they became containment zones, walled off from the world
like Gaza. No word from them to date. There was the mad scramble for
homes on the Isareli side of the West Bank wall which cut off East
Jerusalem, Palestinian territory, from the Palestinians and the West
Bank. Jerusalem became the sole territory of Israel, with talk of
future Arab containment zones within. After the invasion and
subsequent occupation of Gaza in 2006 the New York Times ran a front
page photo of two Gaza schoolgirls crying. They couldn't have been
more than twelve years old. Their teacher had been shot for being a
"militant." International journalists were harassed and beaten inside
Gaza, and declared they didn't know what they could write anymore.
There were no more rules. Those journalists who could get out did. The
fate of others is unknown; Amnesty International poster children of
the future. In 2007, when the West Bank's walls completed the
apartheid prison system, Israeli Holocaust survivors staged a protest.
Prime Minister Olmert was forced to compensate them to stave off the
political embarrassment. One young Quaker boy at a meeting of American
political activists, asked, "Who will bear witness?"

At stake is the future of Israel. In 2006, Prime Minister Olmert
finally let it be known that Israel was going to declare borders. At
long last this borderless nation was going to make it official. Israel
would incorporate the West Bank, Gaza, and the Golan Heights into
Israel, with Palestinian prisons dotting the land. By 2007, talks
between Olmert and Prime Minister Abbas had degenerated to security
and communications. Not a word to the starvation diet of Israeli
controlled rations. In the much lauded talks in Annapolis, MD, Saudi
Arabia insisted on the inclusion of the Arab League's language of
preserving Palestinians' right to return. This was left out of the
final negotiations for relations between Israel and the Palestinians.
Israel has no intention of allowing Palestinians to live in the
upcoming state of Israel. In 2008, Israel divested from the few
remaining Palestinian industries in Gaza, gutting the economy, and
leaving them with nothing but international handouts Israel deemed
benefit the territory. Prime Minister Olmert had embraced a policy of
disengagement. At the so-called 60th Anniversary of the State of
Israel in 2008, which was actually in 2007 according to International
Law, heads of state declared "it added insult to injury" when in
visiting Prime Minister Olmert in Israel for the affair, for lack of a
more presentable place to go, they had to visit Prime Minister Abbas
in Egypt. No tours of the apartheid prisons. The Palestinians of Gaza
and the West Bank, stateless and imprisoned, at the mercy of Israel,
now share the same rations behind walls with watchtowers and locked
gates. Starve them off so they don't know they're dying until they're
dead. Potential genocide. "Who will bear witness?"

Thus, with the future status of Palestinians in limbo, Lebanon and
Syria are preparing for war; but all I read about these days is Israel
and the Bush Administration's trumpet of the Iranian nuclear threat to
the region. The hype grows everyday, and whether our guns are pointed
their way or not, regardless, Israel has threatened to bomb Iran's
nuclear facilities. Recently Israel carried out a mission with
hundreds of fighter jets over the Mediterranean for just this possible
eventuality. Despite their nuclear capabilities, Israel declared they
cannot allow Iran to possess "the bomb." Iran retaliated by testing
their missiles, with a promise of more to come. All declare war is
imminent. Iran does possess the capability to enrich Uranium, but it
is a nascent program not yet capable of nuclear energy let alone
nuclear bombs. It is also under the watchful eyes of the IAEA, unlike
Israel's nuclear program. The future of Iran, in so far as nuclear
material, lays in the energy of the future: nuclear energy. It would
most likely extend west into Turkey, and north into the Caucasus of
the Russian Federation and thus, Europe, consolidating and stabilizing
the two regions. When President Bush was asked about Israel's
provocative remarks regarding Syria and the increasingly vitriol
remarks regarding Iran's nuclear program, with the timing of war on
the mind President Bush said, "Don't surprise us." We're ready. An
estimated 50,000 U.S. troops are stationed on the border of Iraq and
Syria, and border skirmishes have not ceased since the Iraq War began.

President Ahmadinejad has in turn made increasingly belligerent
remarks to Israel and the U.S. regarding their stance towards Iran's
nuclear program. It is not surprising given the war talk he hears
daily. The United Nations' resolutions are toothless, and when a new
round of unilateral sanctions from the U.S. began, Iran changed
currencies where needed and diverted all revenue into secure financial
institutions. They are also oil and gas rich, have the largest
untapped reserves in the world next to Russia, and recently reached an
agreement with India to deliver gas through the Iran-Pakistan-India
pipeline. After years of negotiations, the deal has been finalized.
Further, relations with Turkey are sound, with the future of energy on
everyone's mind. They have never been so well off over the past 200
years; the benefit of good leadership and independence. Yet subsidies
for the poor have been slashed, and oil is being rationed. All
available revenue and oil is being diverted to defense. Russia has
reinforced Iran's fighting capabilities with missile defense systems,
radars, fighter jets, and promises to invest in their nuclear program
further in the future. Iran is not afraid of being attacked by the
U.S. or Israel, knowing retaliatory strikes further destabilizing Iraq
and potentially involving Turkey is the last thing the U.S. needs
right now. To the contrary, Iran is gearing up for war because of our
intentions of invading and bombing Syria at the behest of Israel.

Look at the map. Iran is a strong, independent nation with a seemingly
endless border looming over Iraq. They are not much of a threat to
Israel, but they are a threat to the U.S. while we are at war with
Afghanistan and Pakistan in the east, and occupy Iraq to the west. The
U.S. would not preemptively strike and provoke a strong nation on the
border of Iraq right now, needlessly becoming involved in a costly,
bloody war for all. This would potentially undermine our intention of
controlling and occupying Iraq, at least northern Iraq, into the
distant future, and cut us out of future investment in the region
stretching north through Turkey, Georgia, and the Caucasus. But Israel
is intent on controlling Lebanon and Syria, and we appear poised to
help them out from the Iraqi border and maybe the skies. Thus, the
saber-rattling regarding potential, but non-existent Iranian nukes. It
is actually a warning for Iran not to attack us. The fate of the
Palestinians, future stability, and energy relations in the region is
up for grabs. If the U.S. bombs Syria, or Israel bombs Iran, Iran has
the pretext it needs to bomb Iraq. The threat is real, and the U.S. is
paying attention. For the first time since 1979 U.S. officials have
actually made official overtures and some effort to speak with Iran.
Ahmadinejad might come through for the Palestinians for his own
nation's future, which may give Iraqi's the impetus they need to
regain control of their nation. The U.S. is preparing for just such a
scenario.

When General Patraeus unveiled the Counterinsurgency Field Manual, FM
3-24, in 2007, two things stood out. The escalation and reorganization
would increase troops stationed along the Syrian Border and
surrounding Baghdad. The U.S. increased its troop strength along the
Syrian border to about 50,000, and added an additional 30,000 troops
to surround Baghdad, boosting the 20,000 existing troops within. The
model for resisting an uprising also stationed 20,000 troops at each
major metropolis in Iraq. That would be 20-30,000 troops in each
regional city, surrounded by communities of 300-400,000 Iraqis. The
added 30,000 troops around Baghdad are primarily stationed in
mini-bases to the East staring at Iran's border, and the South in hope
of preserving communications down to Basra. But do the math, even if
all the bombs don't get us, Iraqis will. The implode factor. Iraq is a
potential graveyard for all.

The Awakening in restive Al Anbar province furthered this line of
thinking for defense. The region's big families were induced to secure
the huge expanse to the west of Baghdad in exchange for weapons and a
paycheck. Security leading to the Syrian border seemed possible. The
thought was to buy Iraqis' loyalty. Assassinations were soon on the
rise, however, every potential leader vying for money and power; and
deserters to their forces continue, taking their new weapons with
them. Further, mass amounts of weapons were stolen from their
so-called secure locations; the Pentagon thought it serious enough to
investigate. So much for buying them off. Attempting to control
Baghdad doesn't accomplish much when you are unable to pacify a
nation. One thing becomes clear from this picture, however, the U.S.
is attacking Iran and its' nuclear program not because we may attack
them, with "everything on the table," but because we are preparing for
war with Iran when we invade and bomb Syria which may spur Iraqis into
an uprising against our colonial intentions.

Northern Iraq, as well, has been the site of on-going political
disputes and violence from the oil hub of Kirkuk up north to Mosul.
Largely controlling Georgia, the U.S. enlisted 3,000 Georgian troops
to fight in northern Iraq, and the government recently approved an
initiative to enlarge their armed forces by 5,000. The severe
instability which ensued threw relations with Turkey into a crisis.
Congress, seemingly unaware of the diplomatic furor taking place,
further threatened Turkey with a resolution condemning the Armenian
genocide of World War I. Turkey lodged a formal protest. The bombing
in northern Iraq escalated to such an extent that Defense Secretary
Gates had to step in to tell Congress to back off. The resolution was
killed. Additionally, Secretary Rice had to pay a visit to northern
Iraq, much to the chagrin of Jalal Talabani, to tell everyone to cool
it; and the final status of Kirkuk is on hold for the foreseeable
future. The violence has since dramatically declined, and ceases to be
more than a power struggle. This had sparked, however, a chain of
events in Turkey. President Abdullah Gul's "Islamic" political party
was challenged in court as being unconstitutional; and bombs have been
exploding across the nation. Approximately 100 military and government
personnel were arrested, staving off a potential coup, and the courts
ruled in favor of a pluralistic democracy, upholding the rights of all
political parties. President Gul, as he proved in rallying the nation
to his side, is extremely popular. The nation and government isn't
going to dissolve anytime soon. Further, Turkey has played host to
both Iran and Syria regarding the threat which looms on the horizon.
Turkey has the strongest hand in the region now and into the future,
and perhaps Washington won't talk with them, but with relations on
edge and sharing a long border with Syria, Turkey will.

Further, the hope of siphoning off oil and gas from the Caspian Sea,
through Azerbaijian, Georgia, and Turkey, has not come to fruition.
The United States had unleashed a mini-war in the Caucasus of the
Russian Federation, and it came back to haunt us. While the U.S. was
hoping to control Georgia, the Caucasus, and Ukraine with oil diverted
to Turkey, the Muslim separatists we had sponsored in attacking
Russia, with many Georgians in their midst, turned the table on us and
have repeatedly attacked the pipeline. It is still not on-line.
Classic blowback. Caspian oil to Turkey, and thus potentially Israel,
and any hope of controlling energy in the future is on hold.
Additionally, Georgian troops and bombs have infiltrated South Ossetia
and Abkhazia of the Russian Caucasus, giving Russia cause to increase
their troops on the borders; fly over Georgian airspace with a message
of their own; and boycott Georgian red wine and mineral water. The
Georgian Ambassador to Russia was recalled to Georgia for this
response to the U.S.'s proxy wars. The United Nations, however, is
considering a resolution to demand Georgia respect others'
sovereignty. Annexing Russian territory has not gone well.

The war in the Caucasus also repeatedly spilled over to Ukraine,
souring relations with the U.S. and Europe. As a result, Yushchenko
took a beating in the elections, and Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko
has the votes needed in parliament between the Yanukovich and
Communist blocs, to keep NATO out of the nation and strengthen energy
relations with Russia and Iran. Iran, Russia, and Ukraine are counting
on each other for oil, gas, and nuclear energy. In turn, Europe relies
on Russia and invests in Iran for the same, as does Turkey and Syria.
Regional stability and energy relations could be strengthened to the
benefit of all. But our predatory troops and oil companies are in the
way. Iran's future lies largely with Turkey and through the north, and
we're undermining their future along with many others while occupying
Iraq and clinging to Georgia. Turkey may provide the key vote. Turkey
may deny business relations with Israel if any more bombs go off in
northern Iraq or neighboring Syria, which jeopardizes their
sovereignty, or if Iran, the Russian Caucasus, and Ukraine are
subjected to more of the same. In the end, nobody will have it; and
for those who will, good luck with relations. Bad business.

Yet Israel and the U.S. continue down the road of regime change in
Lebanon and Syria. Two nations whose only crime is being a home to
roughly two million Palestinian refugees. Thus, daily we hear the
threats of war with Iran from Israel and the U.S. The threats emanate
from Iran's right to enrich Uranium, but hedges on the future of the
Palestinians. We're threatening Iran, because Iran is a threat to us.
We're begging for it. If Israel and the U.S. attack Lebanon and Syria,
Iran will attack us for the Palestinians and Iran's future needs. The
Lebanese and Syrians are dug in for the fight. Turkey may become
involved. No matter how you spin it, the U.S. will take a beating in
Iraq. More unnecessary bloodshed. We're vulnerable and surrounded by
many hostile peoples and nations; we're not wanted in the
neighborhood. With the announced resignation of Prime Minister Olmert,
the Prime Minister of the "defeat" with Lebanon, think of the war
escalating after the U.S. and Israeli elections, when the usual
stronger, more capable Prime Minister is in place who can proclaim
"victory." Of course we could negotiate with Iran, and decide not to
be a party to genocidal wars for Israel. Escalating the war for
Israeli nationalists will unleash Iranian missiles and the Iraqi
people, and seriously undermine our future across the region. Future
investment, energy from the Caucasus, and relations with Turkey are on
the line. Again, all because the Palestinians still exist, albeit in
two other nations, and Israel is going to declare borders. A done
deal.

Susan Morrison is an Independent Contractor and freelance writer for
non-profits living in San Francisco.