Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

We came so close to World War Three that day (More Info)
The Spectator ^ | October 3, 2007 | James Forsyth and Douglas Davis

Posted on 10/04/2007 9:39:34 AM PDT by Parmenio

A meticulously planned, brilliantly executed surgical strike by Israeli jets on a nuclear installation in Syria on 6 September may have saved the world from a devastating threat. The only problem is that no one outside a tight-lipped knot of top Israeli and American officials knows precisely what that threat involved. Even more curious is that far from pushing the Syrians and Israelis to war, both seem determined to put a lid on the affair. One month after the event, the absence of hard information leads inexorably to the conclusion that the implications must have been enormous.

That was confirmed to The Spectator by a very senior British ministerial source: ‘If people had known how close we came to world war three that day there’d have been mass panic. Never mind the floods or foot-and-mouth — Gordon really would have been dealing with the bloody Book of Revelation and Armageddon.’

According to American sources, Israeli intelligence tracked a North Korean vessel carrying a cargo of nuclear material labelled ‘cement’ as it travelled halfway across the world. On 3 September the ship docked at the Syrian port of Tartous and the Israelis continued following the cargo as it was transported to the small town of Dayr as Zawr, near the Turkish border in north-eastern Syria.

The destination was not a complete surprise. It had already been the subject of intense surveillance by an Israeli Ofek spy satellite, and within hours a band of elite Israeli commandos had secretly crossed into Syria and headed for the town. Soil samples and other material they collected there were returned to Israel. Sure enough, they indicated that the cargo was nuclear. Three days after the North Korean consignment arrived, the final phase of Operation Orchard was launched. With prior approval from Washington, Israeli F151 jets were scrambled and, minutes later, the installation and its newly arrived contents were destroyed.

So secret were the operational details of the mission that even the pilots who were assigned to provide air cover for the strike jets had not been briefed on it until they were airborne. In the event, they were not needed: built-in stealth technology and electronic warfare systems were sophisticated enough to ‘blind’ Syria’s Russian-made anti-aircraft systems.

What was in the consignment that led the Israelis to mount an attack which could easily have spiralled into an all-out regional war? It could not have been a transfer of chemical or biological weapons; Syria is already known to possess the most abundant stockpiles in the region. Nor could it have been missile delivery systems; Syria had previously acquired substantial quantities from North Korea. The only possible explanation is that the consignment was nuclear. The scale of the potential threat — and the intelligence methods that were used to follow the transfer — explain the dense mist of official secrecy that shrouds the event. There have been no official briefings, no winks or nudges, from any of the scores of people who must have been involved in the preparation, analysis, decision-making and execution of the operation. Even when Israelis now offer a firm ‘no comment’, it is strictly off the record. The secrecy is itself significant.

Israel is a small country. In some respects, it resembles an extended, if chaotic, family. Word gets around fast. Israelis have lived on the edge for so long they have become addicted to the news. Israel’s media is far too robust and its politicians far too leaky to allow secrets to remain secret for long. Even in the face of an increasingly archaic military censor, Israeli journalists have found ways to publish and, if necessary, be damned.

The only conceivable explanation for this unprecedented silence is that the event was so huge, and the implications for Israeli national security so great, that no one has dared break the rule of omertà. The Arab world has remained conspicuously — and significantly — silent. So, too, have American officials, who might have been expected to ramp up the incident as proof of their warnings about the dangers of rogue states and WMDs. The opposite is true. George Bush stonewalled persistent questions at a press conference last week with the blunt statement: ‘I’m not going to comment on the matter.’ Meanwhile the Americans have carried on dealing with the North Koreans as if nothing has changed.

The Syrian response, when it eventually came, was more forthcoming but no more helpful. First out of the blocks was Syria’s ambassador to the United Nations, Bashar Ja’afari, who happily announced that nothing had been bombed in Syria and nothing had been damaged. One week later, Syria’s Vice-President, Farouk a-Shara, agreed that there had, after all, been an attack — on the Arab Centre for the Studies (sic) of Arid Zones and Dry Lands (ACSAD). Brandishing a photograph of the Arab League-run plant, he declared triumphantly: ‘This is the picture, you can see it, and it proves that everything that was said about this attack was wrong.’ Well, perhaps not everything. The following day, ACSAD issued a statement denying that its centre had been targeted: ‘Leaks in the Zionist media concerning this ACSAD station are total inventions and lies,’ it thundered, adding that a tour of the centre was being organised for the media.

On Monday, Syria’s President, Bashar Assad, offered his first observations of the attack. The target, he told the BBC disingenuously, was an unused military building. And he followed that with vows to retaliate, ‘maybe politically, maybe in other ways’. Meanwhile, the Washington Post noted that the United States had accumulated a growing body of evidence over the past six months — and particularly in the month leading up to the attack — that North Korea was co-operating with Syria on developing a nuclear facility. The evidence, according to the paper, included ‘dramatic satellite imagery that led some US officials to believe the facility could be used to produce material for nuclear weapons’. Even within America’s intelligence community, access to that imagery was restricted to just a handful of individuals on the instructions of America’s National Security Adviser, Stephen Hadley.

Why are all sides so reluctant to clarify the details of this extraordinary event? ‘In the Middle East,’ noted Bret Stephens, a senior editorial executive at the Wall Street Journal and an acute observer of the region, ‘that only happens when the interests of prudence and the demands of shame happen to coincide’. He suggested that the ‘least unlikely’ explanation is a partial reprise of the Israeli air strike which destroyed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981. Another of the ‘least unlikely’ possibilities is that Syria was planning to supply its terrorist clients with ‘dirty’ bombs, which would have threatened major cities through¬out the world. Terrorism is a growth industry in Syria and it is only natural that, emboldened by its Iranian ally, the Syrian regime should seek to remain the market leader by supplying the ultimate weapon to Hezbollah, Hamas and a plethora of Palestinian rejectionist groups who have been given house-room in Damascus.

The Syrians have good reason to up the ante now. The Alawite regime of Bashar Assad is facing a slew of tough questions in the coming months — most particularly over its alleged role in the murder of the former Lebanese leader, Rafiq Hariri, and its active support for the insurgency in Iraq. Either of these issues could threaten the survival of the regime. How tempting, then, to create a counter-threat that might cause Washington and others to pull their horns in — and perhaps even permit a limited Syrian return to Lebanon?

But that does not explain why the consignment was apparently too large to be sent by air. Look deeper and you find an array of other highly plausible explanations. The North Koreans, under intense international pressure, might have chosen to ‘park’ a significant stockpile of nuclear material in Syria in the expectation of retrieving it when the heat was off. They might also have outsourced part of their nuclear development programme — paying the Syrians to enrich their uranium — while an international team of experts continued inspecting and disabling North Korea’s own nuclear facilities. The shipment might even — and this is well within the ‘least unlikely’ explanations — have been intended to assist Syria’s own nuclear weapons programme, which has been on the cards since the mid-1980s.

Apart from averting the threat that was developing at Dayr as Zawr, Israel’s strategic position has been strengthened by the raid. Firstly, it has — as Major General Amos Yadlin, the head of Israel’s military intelligence, noted — ‘restored its deterrence’, which was damaged by its inept handling of the war in the Lebanon last year. Secondly, it has reminded Damascus that Israel knows what it is up to and is capable of striking anywhere within its territory. Equally, Iran has been put on notice that Israel will not tolerate any nuclear threat. Washington, too, has been reminded that Israel’s intelligence is often a better guide than its own in the region, a crucial point given the divisions between the Israeli and American intelligence assessments about the development of the Iranian bomb. Hezbollah, the Iranian/Syrian proxy force, has also been put on notice that the air-defence system it boasted would alter the strategic balance in the region is impotent in the face of Israeli technology.

Meanwhile, a senior Israeli analyst told us this week that the most disturbing aspect of the affair from a global perspective is the willingness of states to share their technologies and their weapons of mass destruction. ‘I do not believe that the former Soviet Union shared its WMD technology,’ he said. ‘And they were careful to limit the range of the Scud missiles they were prepared to sell. Since the end of the Cold War, though, we know the Russians significantly exceeded those limits when selling missile technology to Iran.’

But the floodgates were opened wide by the renegade Pakistan nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, who is revered in Pakistan as the Father of the Islamic Bomb. Khan established a virtual supermarket of nuclear technologies, parts and plans which operated for more than a decade on a global stage. After his operation was shut down in 2004, Khan admitted transferring technology and parts to Iran, Libya and North Korea. Proliferation experts are convinced they know the identities of at least three of his many other clients: Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Syria.

In addition to selling nuclear-related knowhow, the Khan network is also believed to have provided Syria with centrifuges for producing enriched uranium. In 2003, concern about Syria’s nuclear ambitions was heightened when an experimental American electronic eavesdropping device picked up distinctive signals indicating that the Syrians had not only acquired the centrifuges but were actually operating them. If Israel’s military strike on Dayr as Zawr last month was surgical, so, too, was its handling of the aftermath. The only certainty in the fog of cover-up is that something big happened on 6 September — something very big. At the very least, it illustrates that WMD and rogue states pose the single greatest threat to world peace. We may have escaped from this incident without war, but if Iran is allowed to continue down the nuclear path, it is hard to believe that we will be so lucky again.

Douglas Davis is a former senior editor of the Jerusalem Post and James Forsyth is online editor of The Spectator.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Israel; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 090607; airstrikes; nknukes; nuclear; sept6; sept62007; syria; syrianraid; waronterror; wwiii
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340341-351 next last
To: Dog; jeffers; shield
I haven't been able to fit the Minot nukes into my scenario which is taking this shape: There were possibly 5 targets: those three WMD sites on that map I post occasionally, that site on the Euphrates at the Turkish border, and one in Deiz al Zahr. I'm wondering, after the ship stopped in Egypt (to drop off material or pick up scientists?), then landed in Lebanon (ditto?), then unloaded at Tartous, if a Mossad guy wasn't at the dock, helping the unload.

He gave a count of items to the IDF, and trucks started taking the items to one or more sites.

Here's where their (and our) assets are warmed up to hit those five? sites. They start flying, 'jamming' (that's the word everybody's using) Syrian air defense, and one plane goes and drops some tanks at the border in Turkey. Turkey calls Syrian intel, tells them something just fell out of the sky, and Syrian Intel, knowing they're under attack, is confused and disorganized.

Then, 10 or so IDF guys disguised as Syrian military show up in a truck, take one of the items claiming they're taking it to that site on the Turkish border, and instead drive over into Turkey to load the item and themselves up on a plane back to Israel.

When they're at the border the Deiz al Zarh facility gets hit, as does that far Northern facility.

It could happen! :)

321 posted on 10/05/2007 11:29:41 AM PDT by txhurl (Yes there were WMDs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 319 | View Replies]

bookmark


322 posted on 10/05/2007 11:31:12 AM PDT by flutters (God Bless The USA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnotherUnixGeek

The idea that Pakistani nuclear technology, controlled completely and solely by the Pakistani military, could somehow be given away by a single man for over a decade without the support of the Pakistani military at the highest levels is ridiculous.
***Good point


323 posted on 10/05/2007 11:41:44 AM PDT by Kevmo (We should withdraw from Iraq — via Tehran. And Duncan Hunter is just the man to get that job done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: txflake

One day we may know. Your theory sounds very plausible...


324 posted on 10/05/2007 11:50:57 AM PDT by shield (A wise man's heart is at his RIGHT hand;but a fool's heart at his LEFT. Ecc 10:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies]

To: shield

Everybody feel free to blow holes in it :)


325 posted on 10/05/2007 11:52:36 AM PDT by txhurl (Yes there were WMDs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 324 | View Replies]

To: Southack

Mr. Southack, your critique, if you will, Sir.


326 posted on 10/05/2007 12:12:21 PM PDT by txhurl (Yes there were WMDs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies]

To: Parmenio
It's pretty interesting that this incident happened mere days after our military "accidentally" transported some nuclear weapons by plane to a different air base.

Sounds like some pretty high-stakes gamesmanship were indeed going on during that timeframe.

327 posted on 10/05/2007 12:19:54 PM PDT by jpl (Dear Al Gore: it's 3:00 A.M., do you know where your drug addicted son is?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doorgunner69

Beat me to it. Good one. ;-)


328 posted on 10/05/2007 12:56:57 PM PDT by Kevmo (We should withdraw from Iraq — via Tehran. And Duncan Hunter is just the man to get that job done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 277 | View Replies]

To: Farmerbob
If a nuke was "blown to bits" there would be "bits" of plutonium scattered all about for us to detect (someone would have detected it by now).

If a ground penetrating nuke was used it would have been picked up on seismographs.

The logical conclusion I keep coming to (based on the information put forth) is that IDF agents grabbed an ASSEMBLED weapon just before the planes blew up the facility. I'll betcha the "big surprise" is the nuclear bomb that Iran (via NK or Pakistan) was fixin' to cook Tel Aviv with.
329 posted on 10/05/2007 1:15:52 PM PDT by this is my name not yours (Free speech is the escape valve that keeps some people from picking up a rifle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 282 | View Replies]

To: txflake

Oh, you’ve got a good theory. Could be correct.

The problem that I have is that Syria has no compelling reason to possess something that would cause/give-excuse-for the U.S. or Israel to nuke Syria.

Consider that Syria has the largest chemical WMD program in the Mid-East. Nukes offer very little killing power over that arsenal...and both require delivery vehicles.

But if Syria gets a nuke, then Israel and the U.S. have carte blanc to nuke Syria at a whim.

So I lean more toward a major terror leader being the target of the 9/6 raids. Could have just been long range ICBM’s that were finally modified to accept city-killer-sized chemical WMD warheads, too. Next theory in line would be some form of massive currency counterfeiting operation.

but yeah, it could have been a nuke there.

Were ground teams there? Absolutely. Could have been unmanned ground vehicles, SCUBA teams in the river, SpecOps, or a variety of options, but there was an Isreali ground presence there and yes, drop tanks *could* have been planted in Turkey (though I presume it more likely that the drop tanks were real as they were sighted by Syria’s radar).


330 posted on 10/05/2007 1:17:37 PM PDT by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies]

To: Spktyr

That makes the most sense.

Assuming there’s no radiation smoke rising from the site it would be kinda telling. If I had planned the raid, there would be a small nuclear radiation leak with the smoke because the best way to set back the program a couple of decades is to make the area radioactive and they’d have to clean it up, not suspecting the nuke was stolen.


331 posted on 10/05/2007 1:20:40 PM PDT by Kevmo (We should withdraw from Iraq — via Tehran. And Duncan Hunter is just the man to get that job done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

I’ll continue to believe that this was an exercise to show up the Russians’ hottest antiaircraft stuff, and to wipe out a multinational terrorist installation.
***There’s no reason to tip your hand when it’s just an ‘exercise’. You’d risk the fact that the Iranians could figure out how the spoofing was done and you’d be risking thousands of American lives.


332 posted on 10/05/2007 1:22:10 PM PDT by Kevmo (We should withdraw from Iraq — via Tehran. And Duncan Hunter is just the man to get that job done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: Southack
My model has those tanks dropped so the disguised IDF guys with the 'item' have a reason to drive a borrowed Syrian truck over to the border to 'investigate' it amid all the chaos.

And the 'item' could be anything, even a HVT (human) like you suggest.

333 posted on 10/05/2007 1:23:08 PM PDT by txhurl (Yes there were WMDs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 330 | View Replies]

To: jackibutterfly

Me too, la la la I can’t hear you, now pass the gravy ...


334 posted on 10/05/2007 1:27:42 PM PDT by Scythian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
I’ll continue to believe that this was an exercise to show up the Russians’ hottest antiaircraft stuff

It isn't the hottest stuff. It is the export stuff and is dummied down just like ours is. Considering the destination, it was probably maximally dumbed down.

335 posted on 10/05/2007 1:27:47 PM PDT by steve86 (Acerbic by nature, not nurture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 332 | View Replies]

To: databoss
World War III ??? A World War is a catasrophic series of escalating events culminating in massive military mobilizations and subsequent death and destruction. If Syria/Iran were to set off a nuke device in Israel we would wipe their miniscule presence off the face of the earth in a matter of minutes...Game Over - would that be WW III?

That was true once, but no longer, I guarantee you we would not take such an action, no way, no how.
336 posted on 10/05/2007 1:32:13 PM PDT by Scythian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 303 | View Replies]

To: Parmenio
I read this last night...
337 posted on 10/05/2007 1:32:26 PM PDT by BigFinn (Isa 32:8 But the liberal deviseth liberal things; and by liberal things shall he stand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

read later...


338 posted on 10/05/2007 1:34:59 PM PDT by Constitution Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Parmenio
...within hours a band of elite Israeli commandos had secretly crossed into Syria and headed for the town. Soil samples and other material they collected there were returned to Israel. Sure enough, they indicated that the cargo was nuclear.

How did the authors obtain this very important bit of information about the procedure?

339 posted on 10/05/2007 1:35:41 PM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steve86; SunkenCiv

You probably intended that comment for SunkenCiv, freeper extroardinaire.


340 posted on 10/05/2007 1:43:37 PM PDT by Kevmo (We should withdraw from Iraq — via Tehran. And Duncan Hunter is just the man to get that job done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 335 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340341-351 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson