MILNET Brief
  The Middle East:  Threat From Syria, 3/8/2005, Updated 5/31/2005

"...attempts to separate and distinguish shades and aims of Islamic terror are quickly losing their relevance..."

- Israeli Mosad head Efrayim Halevi at meeting of NATO Council in Brussels on 06/22/2002.

MILNET Background Brief:  Syria    Axis of Evil Weapons Trade

Skip to Latest Update in this Briefing

What is Terrorism?

Where once "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" was used to excuse the acts of desperate patriots, civilized society has, in modern times, attempted to somehow distinguish between guerrilla warfare, insurgency, low-intensity conflict and acts against the innocent or what is generally known as non-combatants.  Indeed the very definition of terrorism, as defined by the western world has undergone subtle changes over time.  Currently most western nations have agreed on the defintion now codified in U.S. law, title 22.

For instance, the bombing of a major European city during World War II could easily be views as an attack on innocents and therefore terrorism under the guise of "civilized" war.  And while allied nations typically bombed industrial targets and always attempted to limit collateral damage to the best of their abilities, the same cannot be said for those nations allied nations have faced.  For example, the raid on Polesti attacked oil and fuel manufacturing facilities, while the Nazi raids on London were specifically aimed at the civilian populations with unguided missiles fired in the general direction of and intended to land randomly in London, England.  On the other hand the nuclear weapons dropped on Japan at the conclusion of the War in the Pacific were a known quanitity, they could do nothing less than target non-combatants.  And while they may have saved hundreds of thousands of lives would the war gave gone on, clearly the bombs set a turning point for civilized warfare -- their use against a city today would be considered a most heinous act.

The modern defintion for terrorism uses words like "attacks against non-combatants" and
"kidnapping, hostage-taking, bomb-attack on innocents, and hijacking".

- the Bonn Summit in 1978
This conundrum for world leaders is that which separates them for anti-war or pacifist idealists.  It is far easier to say "no war" then to parse out what is defensible as necessary violence or split hairs about attempts to reduce collateral damage or random attacks directed at non-combatants.  If one does not draw the line at any violence, then where does one decide to place the boundary on civilized behavior?

As adroitly pointed out by Alan Simpson in 2001, the definition created by the Bonn Summit and modified ever so slightly over time can be interpreted to mean that any country, at some point in its history, is a terrorist nation.  However, nations evolve and eventually the rule of law replaces the struggle for independence and then those nations must apply their energies to living in a world of more gentle competition between nations.  In fact, one of the definitions for a state's emergence is that it no longer threatens its neighbors and does not sponsor terrorism.

The real conundrum then is to decide which nations continue to practice terror, condone terror, and/or support terror.  Any one of these would be enough for most nations to declare a neighbor as a terrorist state.  When a nation makes a practice of qualifying in all three areas, it moves to a higher level of condemnation, and becomes a threat to the world at large.


One of The Worst of the Terror Nations

Arguably, several nations immediately come to mind.  In the list, steadfastly found over more than three decades, are Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Sudan, and Syria.  This analysis will focus on Syria.

To pursue this analysis we turn back to Efrayim Halevi's statement before NATO:
"Terror has served as a tool for attaining political objectives for many years. History knows many cases in which terror was a very powerful and potent tool for achieving national liberation. This has recently resulted in an attempt to define and draw distinctions between various categories and nuances of terrorism: for example, the ten Palestinian groups operating from Damascus have been defined as quasi-legitimate movements acting for the liberation of Palestine. We saw an attempt, which continued for a long time, to avoid a confrontation with the true reality of this phenomenon, for the sake of the interests of "realpolitik."

Thus, Syria, which provides cover for these groups, was permitted to win a seat as a respected member of the Security Council, and this month its representative is even serving as the council's chairman, and this has happened at a time when the Palestinian Islamic Jihad sent a suicide bomber to blow up a bus in northern Israel, causing the deaths of some twenty people. The leader of this organization, Ramadan Shallah, took responsibility publicly for this attack as he sat in his headquarters in Damascus being interviewed by the Al-Jazirah television network, which is watched by millions across the Arab and Muslim World.

My argument to you here today is that attempts to separate and distinguish shades and aims of Islamic terror are quickly losing their relevance. Why? First and foremost because of the scale and intensity of these terrorist acts. They are no longer being restricted to specific regions in the world. Hamburg, Milan, Brussels, London, Miami, Kuala Lumpur -- this is just a random list of big cities where terrorists have lived, worked out their plans, and prepared to carry out their operations. Second, the use of suicide terrorists in New York, Washington, or Jerusalem is the fulfillment of a modus operandi motivated not only by its professional utility, but no less by its ideological and religious probity. The method has taken on a transcendental, supernatural significance." 

- Israeli Mosad head Efrayim Halevi at meeting of NATO Council in Brussels on 06/22/2002
Clearly Director Halevi has a finely tuned focus on Syria, and we chose his speech to introduce our threat assessment for a specific purpose.  No one nation feels the threat from Syria more than Israel.  Over its history it has looked at its mid 20th century beginnings and stared past its borders to the likes of Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon -- all of whom were eager to grind the people of Israel into the dust of the land granted them by the United Nations.  Indeed, the Israelis have withstood numerous attempts to do just that and from each of those directions, save perhaps, Jordan.

And Israel did not take any blessing from the fact that Iraq and Iran lie beyond the borders of Jordan and Saudi Arabia.  And in the 21st century, the porous buffers that surround Israel are useless against long range rockets in the hands of Iraq and Iran.  While Iraq appears for the moment to not be a threat to Israel, the certain knowledge that Iran is developing nuclear weapons and already possess both long range missiles and biological and nuclear weapons cannot be comforting.  Thus it is no surprise that Israel has a focus on those nations surrounding it.


Syria and Lebanon

Syria's involvement with Israel does not stop at its own border.  The second area of concern with Syria is actually the most key in the current picture. 

 Another direct threat against Israel is from Syria is from its subjugated and conquered puppet nation, Lebanon.   Syria has essentially "conquered" Lebanon, occupying that country since the violence in Beirut two decades ago. Lebanon shares borders with both Syria and Israel, and thus is an excellent staging ground for anyone seeking to do harm to Israel.  Not surprisingly, Lebanon is the home of Hezbollah and frequently turns a blind eye to Hamas, Egyptian Islamic Jihad and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.  The result is a sort of "terrorist central", with all the major virulent anti-Israeli strains living and loosely cooperating there.  Of course both Lebanon and Syria deny this, however there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Recently, the U.S. has stepped up the pressure on Syria to stop meddling in the Palestinian problem, opting to use the Middle East Process as the new lever to create a change in behavior of Syria.  Early in September 2004, the U.S. pushed through a vote in the U.N. to admonish Syria for its role in Lebanon, demanding all foreign military out of that country, which not coincidentally would mean removal of Syria's military forces there.  Next will undoubtedly come the calls for Lebanon to eject Hamas and Hezbollah, and when that demand is refused, possible military action to enforce the demand.

From Syria's viewpoint, these developments are extremely troublesome.  If Lebanon is freed from its grasp, Syria may wind up with a backlash of Lebanese fervor that would place it between the tongs of Israel at the southwest, and Lebanon at the west. Especially of concern would be a democratic nation of any sort lodged in Lebanon, creating a vacuum for the disenchanted in Syria.

A free and democratic Lebanon, perhaps in a multi-secular government like that envisioned in Iraq, would provide for an exodus from Israel of Palestinians impatient and fed up with Arafat's lack of performance against huge promises.  Indeed, Israel and the United States might fund such an exodus to take pressure off of Israel, and undercut the power base of Arafat.  Once Arafat loses enough power, the chances are that a new Palestinian leadership can take control and finally enable a true effort at creating a Palestinian homeland -- perhaps dividing up much of the Palestinian refugees between Jordan and Lebanon. 

This is an interesting concept for two reasons -- Many of the Palestinian refugees living on the Israeli side came from Lebanon in the first place.  It is also believed that if the Lebanese becomes a desirous place to migrate to, then the members of  Hamas and Hezbollah strapping bombs onto young Arab men and women will find many of their cannon fodder leaving them to face the Israelis alone.

After many months of pressure, the Syrian Army was seen to leave Lebanon, only to be replaced by an extremely strong Hezbollah faction in a makeshift government.  As a result, many Western analysts believe that the changes mean only that Hezbollah has finally shown its true face, a wet works and political faction of the Syrian government, intent on the destruction of Israel.


Terrorist and Political Groups Active in Syria and Lebanon

The following table summarizes the political organizations and terrorist groups active in Syria and Lebanon


Religious or Political Group/Name
Acronym
Baathist Party (Ruling party in Syria, formerly in Iraq)
  
Druze  
  • Progressive Socialist Party
    		•
    PSP
    Manonites  
    • National Liberal Party
    • Phalangist Party
    • Tiger Militia
    • Lebanese Forces
    NLP

    LF
    Palestinians  
    • Palestinian Liberation Organization a.k.a. Fatah, terrorist group led by Yasser Arafat
    • Progressive Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command, terrorist group headed by Ahmad Jibril (Damascus, Syria and various sites in Lebanon)
    • Hamas - Led by Sheik Ahmed Yassin - committed to interfering, dramatically with the Middle East peace process, opposses Oslo peace accords (1993). Hamas only recently (supposedly) has become a political and non-action oriented organization. The supposed change occurred as Arafat moved for legitimization of the Palestinian Authority under the Oslo Accords in 1993.
    • Fatah Revolutionary Council, terrorist gropu headed by Abu Nidal (Nidal was reportedly killed in Iraq in 2002)
    • Fatah-Intifada (Syria),  terrorist group headed by Colonel Abu Moussa
    • Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (Syria), terrorist group opposed to PLO
    • Usbat a-Ansar (League of Followers) (Lebanon), led by Abu Mahjan
    • Palestinian Islamic Jihad - . The PIJ is committed to the creation of an Islamic Palestinian state and the destruction of Israel through holy war.
    PLO

    PFLP-GC



    HAMAS







    FRC


    FI
     
    DFLP

    USBAT


    PIJ
    Shi'i  
    • Amal (Syria)
    • Hizbollah (Party of God) (Iran) (a.k.a. Hezbollah)
    Hizbollah
    Sunni  
    • Mouabioun Militia
    • Al-Ahbash - non violent religous pro-Syrian
    • Jama al-Islamiya 
    • People's Lebanese Congress, anti-Syrian
    • Lebanese Movement for Islamic Unity 
      
     

    LMIU
    Other  
    • Southern Lebanese Army, about 3000 man force in southern Lebanon allied with Israel, made up of Christians, Sunni and Shi'i Moslems, and the Druze
    SLA



    A Strategic Look at Syria

    What do we know about Syria?  The U.S. Intelligence Community and the United Nations have agreed for more than a decade that Syria is well into the development of biological and chemical weapons.  The U.S. report, Proliferation:  Threat and Response (PDF 4.9MB), produced by the Department of Defense annually until its last issue in 2001, clearly states the public view of Syria's WMD programs:
    "...Syria has increasingly relied on a strategic deterrent based on ballistic missiles and chemical warfare capabilities, as the ultimate guarantor of regime survival against potential regional adversaries.  Syria also likely sees the development of these weapons as a cheaper alternative than trying to achieve conventional parity with Israel.  As a result, Damascus has continued to develop and expand its ballistic missile and chemical weapons capabilities, and, to lesser extent, biological weapons capabilities.  Syria is likely to maintain and improve these capabilities over the long term.

    "...The new regime of Bashir al Asad likely will maintain and improve Syrian missile and chemical and biological warfare capabilities." 2
    The following table from the report illustrates the U.S. Intelligence Community and Department of Defense perception of Syria's WMD threat circa 2001.

      2

      2

    One of the major concerns is that the development of chemical and biological warheads on missiles, while dicey technology, is nearly within reach of Syrian industry. A secret project could have produced such warheads in numbers over the last eight years.  Thus while no one had publicly claimed NBC warheads on any of the Syrian rockets, the concern remains that the region will not learn of their successes until they actually use it or a defector brings evidence out of Syria or they sell them to a terrorist organization -- and of course, by then it will be too late to do much about it.  This fear is aggravated by the fact Syria is already suspected of providing missiles to the terrorists firing them into Israeli settlements.

    Let's be clear about this.  Like with any rogue regime, there is the risk that Syria's terrorist friends, Hamas, Hezbollah, Egyptian Islamic Jihad or Palestinian Islamic Jihad will become customers of any of their NBC technologies, including using nuclear waste material from reactors as the basis for building dirty bombs (Radioactive Material Dispersal Weapons -- RMDW).

    In December of 2000, the annual report to Congress from the CIA contained the following paragraphs related to Syria:
    "Syria sought CW-related precursors and expertise from foreign sources during the reporting period. Damascus already has a stockpile of the nerve agent sarin, and it would appear that Syria is trying to develop more toxic and persistent nerve agents. Syria remains dependent on foreign sources for key elements of its CW program, including precursor chemicals and key production equipment. It is highly probable that Syria also is developing an offensive BW capability.

    We will continue to monitor the potential for Syria’s nuclear R&D program to expand.

    During the second half of 2000, Damascus continued work on establishing a solid-propellant rocket motor development and production capability with help from outside countries. Foreign equipment and assistance to its liquid-propellant missile program—primarily from North Korean entities, but also from firms in Russia—have been and will continue to be essential for Syria’s effort. Damascus also continued its efforts to assemble—probably with considerable North Korean assistance—liquid-fueled Scud C missiles.

    Syria continues to acquire ACW—mainly from Russia and other FSU suppliers—although at a reduced level from the early 1990s. During the past few years, Syria has received Kornet-E (AT-14), Metis-M (AT-13), Konkurs (AT-5), and Bastion-M (AT-10B) antitank guided missiles, RPG-29 rocket launchers, and small arms. Damascus has expressed interest in acquiring Russian Su-27 and MiG-29 fighters and air defense systems, but its outstanding debt to Moscow and inability to fund large purchases have hampered negotiations "  11
    Contrasted to the report released covering the period of January through June of 2003, the U.S. intelligence agency has added a concern for Syria's nuclear research, and confinues to confrim in no uncertain terms that chemical and biological weapons programs are in production phases, and that ballistic missile and advanced conventional weapons development and acquisition have not abated in the least.
    "Nuclear.  Syria—an NPT signatory with full-scope IAEA safeguards—has a nuclear research center at Dayr Al Hajar.  Russia and Syria have continued their long-standing agreements on cooperation regarding nuclear energy, although specific assistance has not yet materialized.  Broader access to foreign expertise provides opportunities to expand its indigenous capabilities and we are looking at Syrian nuclear intentions with growing concern.

    Ballistic Missile.  During the first half of 2003, Damascus continued to seek help from abroad to establish a solid-propellant rocket motor development and production capability.  Syria's liquid-propellant missile program continued to depend on essential foreign equipment and assistance—primarily from North Korean entities.  Damascus also continued to manufacture liquid-propellant Scud missiles.  In addition, Syria was developing longer-range missile programs such as a Scud D and possibly other variants with assistance from North Korea and Iran. 

    Chemical and Biological.  Syria continued to seek CW-related expertise from foreign sources during the reporting period.  Damascus already held a stockpile of the nerve agent sarin, but apparently tried to develop more toxic and persistent nerve agents.  Syria remained dependent on foreign sources for key elements of its CW program, including precursor chemicals and key production equipment.  It is highly probable that Syria also continued to develop an offensive BW capability.

    Advanced Conventional Weapons.  Syria continued to acquire limited quantities of ACW, mainly from Russia.  Damascus's Soviet-era debt to Moscow and inability to fund large purchases continued to hamper efforts to purchase the large quantity of equipment Syria requires to replace its aging weapons inventory." 12

    MILNET suggests the reader to note that the nuclear research facility provides adequate nuclear waste material to build numerous so called dirty bombs, certainly enough to lob dirty bomb warheads into any of the neighbors on the missile threat map shown earlier in this report.

    Recently, the Arms Control Association presented an article by Robert J. Einhorn in which he stated,
    "Syria has come under strong pressure from the United States since the invasion of Iraq. In some areas, such as preventing the movement of foreign fighters through Syria to Iraq, Syria seems to be trying to accommodate U.S. demands.  Nevertheless, on the question of abandoning its WMD capabilities, especially chemical and missile programs, Syria has so far given no indication that it is prepared to follow Gaddafi's lead [Libya recently admitted to WMD programs including nuclear waepons and has since began to fully cooperate with nonproliferation measures -- MILNET].

    Syria sees its nonconventional weapons capabilities as a counter to Israel. If it is prepared to put those capabilities on the negotiating table at all, it would probably do so only in the context of a peace settlement with Israel. Even then, Syria might argue that it needs to hold on to those capabilities as long as Israel retains nuclear weapons." 13  

    The report also gave a brief bio of mister Einhorn:

    "Robert J. Einhorn is a senior adviser in the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) International Security Program. Before coming to CSIS, he was assistant secretary of state for nonproliferation. This article is adapted from a speech he delivered January 28, 2004, at the Paul C. Warnke Conference on the Past, Present, and Future of Arms Control, which was co-sponsored by the Arms Control Association."  13


    Direct Israeli Confrontation

    While the strategic importance of Syria's involvement in WMD is troubling, some feel it's more important negative contribution to the region is its effects on the Middle East Peace Process -- read that as its involvement in conflicts between Palestinians and Israel.  There are two very convincing rationales for that concern.

     First, Syria has its own problems directly with Israel - The Golan Heights.  Israel rolled back its border with Syria during one of its strategic pushes to create a buffer zone to prevent invasion, angering the entire Arab world.  Then under pressure from the world's leaders, Israel reluctantly gave back much of the so called "land grab".  The Golan Heights remains as a Palestinian community occupied by Israeli settlers hoping to find lower cost housing.  The result is one of the major Palestinian-Israeli trouble areas, with rockets, car bombs, and suicide bombers regularly killing off Israelis, and Israeli retribution from the air as well as with tanks. 

    While the Gaza Strip is much more violent and active, it is clear that the Syrian border sections are part of the overall problem. 

    Syria's military strength is simply not at parity with Israel.  And few doubt that Israel has nuclear weapons in their arsenal, something that Syria can only aspire to at present.  However, Syria's missiles allow it some deterrent force, and perhaps Damascus feels this prevents Israel from attacking them in a "proactive defensive maneuver".


    . 
    The Fleeing Iraqi Theory

    Before the U.S. led coalition's attack on Baghdad, the U.S. accused Syria of taking in fleeing Baathist party members as well as WMD plans, precursor materials, and scientists.  While Syria denied the claims, U.S. and its allies maintained overhead intelligence throughout the period and sources indicate they have the evidence of the movement of individuals in caravans and the like, but do not have the evidence of the cargos.

    And while Syria did not receive much in the way of heavy armor or even rusting hulks of aircraft, it is also reported that the secrets of the Iraqi regime moved into Syria with the Baathists from Saddam's regime.  While Saddam may have forged a meaningful independence from his Baathist brothers, this is not so true of his henchmen, who flocked to Syria using whatever they could steal as bargaining chips to gain entry into Syria. The result is a somewhat tepid series of accusations from the U.S.

    To summarize the intelligence interpretation, there is overhead and on the ground intelligence that Syria was the happy recipient of wealth and population that consisted of the Baathist regime fleeing Iraq during the days before the invasion of Iraq by the U.S. led coalition in Gulf War II.  This is quite controversial -- for instance, the Baathists in Syria had been at loggerheads with the Baathists in Iraq.  The relationship has been characterized as brothers in a bitter fight over relatively minor infractions.

    A Lebanese Activist website 6 proports to have recieved information smuggled out of Syria to indicate actual locations of WMD sites in Syria, complete with maps and overhead recon photos.  The information is impressive and may influence many to believe the Fleeing Iraqi Theory.

    If the claims of Baathist and secret movement from Iraq is true, it only makes Syria more dangerous. If it is false, then Syria's previous threat level remains more than large enough to merit not only worldwide attention.  Direct action may become necessary should Syria continue to provide sanctuary for terrorists in Syria and Lebanon, as well as their own direct threat at the border of Israel.

    With the U.S. participating in a very active and direct involvement period in the Middle East, having lost its desire for seeming isolation due to the attacks of 9/11, Syria will continue to feel the pressure as the face of the Middle East changes.  It is a relic of the cold war Soviet client states, and slowly its so called friends in the region are changing while they have not.  This means, in MILNET's estimation, a clear path to conflict with its neighbors and the United States led anti-terror coalition.

    Former Bush Administration offical John Shaw claims that he saw direct evidence that Iraqi WMD moved into Lebanon's Bekka Valley, with the help of Russian Special Forces (Spetsnaz) and others supporting his claim say they are now guarded there by Syrian secret police and special forces.  This would be especially troubling if it were true, since Bekka Valley is also the home for several terrorist groups, putting them far too close to a rich source of knowledge, as well as perhaps to precursors that could be made into weapons.



    Updates:

    5/31/2005:  A landmark election in Lebanon elected the son of Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri who was assassinated, the event that sparked the current rebellion against the Syrians. The election makes way for the son who is virulently anti-Syrian to form a new government thereby ending the Syrian involvment in Lebanon.  Whether the nation can then fight off Hezbollah and Hamas insurgency (which is highly likely to flare up) is another matter.

    4/19/2005:      Lebanese officials formed a new intermim government in preparation for next month's elections.  - Lebanese prime minister-designate Najib Mikati claimed, "“The 14-member government is made up of political figures who will not run in the forthcoming elections" which are set for May 31, 2005.

    3/23/2005:      European Union leaders made a call for faster and complete Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon on the heels of two separate blasts in an anti-Syrian stronghold in Bierut, Lebanon.  The EU leaders reiterated the need for a detailed timetable that can be used to judge the progress of complete withdrawal.  On the 22nd, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan claimed to have received a committment for a timetable from Syrian President Bashar Assad at an Arab meeting.

    3/12/2005:      Syrian President Bashar Assad is said to have received a timetable from his military to complete a full withdrawal of Syrian troops and officials from Lebanon including intelligence agents. Syrian envoy to the U.N. Terje Roed-Larson (via a spokesperson) said  that  the timetable will be presented to the U.N. in the following week.  Syrian troops began arriving in Syria in long convoys from Syria.  There is no intelligence confirmation from U.S. or European sources as of yet, however Associated Press reporters are reporting the movements and arrivals in Syria.

    3/11/2005:  Syria began pulling troops out of Northern Lebanon,.  yrian troops began pulliing back to the eastern side of the Bekka Valley. Some 14,000 troops are said to be on the move. This is in response to European and U.S. calls to completely remove troops rather thanwithdraw to the western side of the Bekka Valley which is still in Lebanon.  Some intelligence officers in nine offices were to remain.  President George Bush reiterated that all Syrian officials including intelligence officers must leave.

    3/8/2005:      Hezbollah, the Syrian supported Terrorist group staged a rally in Lebanon, and its leader declared the people of Lebanon did not want Syria to be kicked out of the country.  Analysts the world over believe that if an election were held in Lebanon today, Hezbollah's support for the Syrian Baathists in Lebanon would not help that faction reach office, and this is why Hezbollah is using the "street" to deliver its message.  U.S. President George Bush said that Syria must withdraw all its troops and intelligence agents before the May elections in Lebanon.  Some analysts believe that Lebanon is on the verge of a civil war, the Shia Baathists and Syrian Hezbollah versus the majority of everyone else in Lebanon.  The President called on Syria to comply with the February 2004 U.N. Resolution 1559 which calls for the complete withdrawl of all foreign forces (Syria and terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah) from Lebanon.

    3/6/2005:  Syria announced (for about the fifth time in months) that they will initiate a full withdrawal out of Lebanon.  Then in the same statement they say they will pull back to the Bekka Valley, which of course is still in Lebanon. 

    3/3/2005:      MSNBC reported that Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Abdullah told Syria's President Bashar Assad that it's time for Syria to leave Lebanon.  In addition, European leaders and U.S. President George Bush reiterated for yet another day that Syria must comply with the U.S. resolution for Syria to pull out its miliary forces and intelligence apparatus from the Syrian held nation.  And European and U.S. leaders are consulting on the next steps, assuming non-compliance by Syria.

    3/1/2005:      Following the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri, Lebansse took to the streets. On March 1, 2005, the Syrian appointed governmet resigned en-masse, and it appears a new government will be formed.  Meanwhile local opposition groups are calling for Syria to leave, echoing that of the U.S. and others calling for a complete withdrawl of Syrian military and intelligene forces from Lebanon.  The Syrian appointed President has not stepped down however and the situation remains unstable.

    2/18/2005:  President George Bush and his Secretary of State Condeleza Rice responded to a defiant announcement from Syria and Iran that they are forming an alliance to defend against a common threat.  Bush and Rice both stated that the U.S. believes that a diplomatic solution remains their preferred choice and assured that there are no military plans although that option always "remains on the table".

    2/16/2005:  Iran's Vice President announced that Iran and Syria are working together to from an alliance to protect against the common threat of U.S. aggression. The two nations, according to numerous sources are only confirming publicly what has been going on for decades, the intelligence services of the two countries cooperating with their support, direction, and sanctuary for Hamas and Hezbollah, as well as other terrorists, using Lebanon and Syria as sanctuaries while those terrorists continually attack Israel.


    Sources:
    1. Israel: Mosad Chief on Nuclear Threat From Iran, Iraq, Syria; Terror Threat,  Tel Aviv Yedi'ot Aharonot in Hebrew,  Hebrew-language paper, 6/28/2002, as found on the Federation of American Scientists
    2. Proliferation:  Threat and Response, U.S. Department of Defense, January 2001
    3. The Threat From Syria, MissileThreat.COM, undated
    4. Syria Defiant Amid Threat, Axis of Logic online, 5/12/2004, also found at the DailyStar of Lebanon
    5. Syria and the Middle East Peace Process, Palestine Center, September 1999
    6. Syria WMD Locations, 2LA Lebanon Associates, cited from GlobalSecurity.com's files.
    7. Syria Missle Overview, NTI, updated May 2004
    8. Adherance and Compliance with Arms Control and Nonproliferation Agreements and Commitments, December  1, 2000, through December 31, 2001, U.S. Department of State Bureau of Verification and Compliance
    9. Weapons of Mass Destruction in the Middle East - Syria, CNS (Monterey Institute for International Studies), May 1998
    10. Syria Removed From Nuclear Proliferation List, The Journal for International Security Affairs, November 1993
    11. CIA Unclassified Report to Congress on Acquisition of Technology Related to WMD, December 2000, Federation of American Scientists
    12. Unclassified Report to Congress on the Acquisition of Technology Relating to Weapons of Mass Destruction, January to June 2003 The CIA
    13. Curbing Nuclear Prolirferation in the Middle East, Robert J. Einhorn, Arms Control Association, March 2004
    14. Iran, Syria Partnership Raises Eyebrows, Lize Porteus, Fox News Online, 2/17/2005
    15. Bush:  No Plans For War on Iran, A.P., Fox News Online, 2/18/2005
    16. Lebanese Government Resigns Amidst Protests, A.P., Fox News Online, 3/1/2005
    17. U.S., Saudis Turn Up Heat on Syria, MSNBC, 3/3/2005
    18. Moscow Moved WMD to Syria and Lebanon, Charles Smith, NewsMax.com, 3/3/2005
    19. Pro-Syrian Protestors Rally in Beirut, Fox News, 3/8/2005
    20. Bush:  Democracies Will Combat Terrorism, Fox News, 3/8/2005
    21. United Nations Security Council Resolution SCR1559, United Nations, 2/9/2004
    22. Syrian Troops Leave North Lebanon, A.P., Fox News Online, 3/11/2005
    23. U.N. Gets Timetable for Syrian Withdrawal, A.P., Fox News, 3/12/2005
    24. EU Leaders Call for Quick Syrian Withdrawal, A.P., Fox News, 3/23/2005
    25. Lebanon Froms New Government, ISN Security Watch, 4/19/2005

    Also Of Interest From MILNET:


    -  Copyright ©, 2004, 2005, Michael G. Crawford for MILNET