Stunned Arab nations ask: who’s next?

The Sunday Times ^ | April 13, 2003 | Tony Allen-Mills and Colin Smith

[MadIvan]

A JOKE circulating in the Arab world last week concerned Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf, the missing Iraqi information minister whose vain boasts of glorious victories against the American infidels proved tragically wide of the mark.

When Sahaf dies they send him 63 angels, the joke begins. Three ask the usual questions about how he had behaved while alive. The other 60 are needed to stop him denying he is dead.

Sahaf’s antics apart, the demolition of the Iraqi regime is proving no laughing matter for governments across the region. From the Gulf to the Mediterranean, the collapse of Saddam Hussein’s rule has been greeted by rage, shame, despair and bewilderment.

One Tunisian wondered why the Iraqis had “crumbled like a biscuit”. Stunned Arabs puzzled over the crushing defeat of Saddam’s Republican Guard. Where were the promised rings of steel? Where was the street fighting supposed to turn Baghdad into a 21st-century Stalingrad?

Most pressing was the question that most troubles Saddam’s neighbours: which of us is next?

Barely able to conceal their glee at the transformation of their much-criticised march on Baghdad, the conservative masterminds of the US victory last week turned their sights on Damascus. A barrage of threats against Syria signalled a volatile new phase in George Bush’s plan to redraw the map of the Middle East.

When Bush first issued his warning that state sponsorship of terrorism “will not be tolerated”, he specified Iraq, Iran and North Korea as his “axis of evil”.

Yet since the Iraqi conflict began, Syria has emerged as the most likely target of any extension of the war. “There’s got to be a change in Syria,” said Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy US defence secretary who is the administration’s most fervent apostle of Middle Eastern transformation.

Despite subsequent assurances by Colin Powell, the secretary of state, that no US attack was planned on any other country, Washington has continued to accuse Damascus of harbouring high-ranking Iraqi fugitives and producing weapons of mass destruction. “Syria is a good case where I hope they will conclude that the chemical weapons programme and the biological weapons programme they have been pursuing are things they should give up,” said John Bolton, a US under-secretary of state allied with Wolfowitz.

On Friday, Bush stepped up the pressure by demanding that Syria hand over any Ba’ath party members or relatives of Saddam who might seek refuge. President Bashar al-Assad “needs to know we expect full co-operation”, the president said.

Behind the threats lies a conviction in US circles that Syria’s support for Hamas, Hezbollah and other radical Islamic groups is one of the main obstacles to a Middle East peace plan that would produce a Palestinian state.

“It is clear that the Pentagon’s policy group is intent on eliminating the Syrian government as a factor in the Arab- Israeli dispute,” said Walter Lang, a former Defence Intelligence Agency specialist.

Iraq’s collapse paves the way for renewed negotiations over Bush’s “road map” for peace. Tony Blair has long been pressing for increased American commitment as a means of defusing Arab anger over the attack on Iraq.

Yet doubts remain that Bush will be prepared to lean hard enough on Ariel Sharon, the hardline Israeli prime minister, to secure concessions on Jewish settlements and other key issues that are crucial to a Palestinian deal. Saddam’s demise has done little to encourage Arab optimism of an imminent breakthrough.

Most Arabs see their 20th-century story as a chapter of disaster and betrayal. It starts in the 1920s with Britain’s failure to curb Zionist immigration to Palestine despite the Anglo-Arab alliance of the first world war. It continues through three lost wars — in 1948, 1967 and 1973 — against Israeli forces armed to the teeth by the Americans. The last time an Arab capital was invaded was in 1982, when the Israelis entered Beirut.

By the end of the first week of the war in Iraq, Arabs had a feeling that this time it might be different. The idea began to take root that Saddam might be able to hold the allies until there was a ceasefire and perhaps a return to United Nations inspections.

Many Arabs cheered when Sahaf boasted of the Americans: “God is grilling their stomachs in hell.” They badly wanted to believe his windy rhetoric, just as in 1967 they wanted to believe the Egyptian commentator who assured them Israeli planes were being swatted like flies.

Undoubtedly the most disillusioned of Arabs last week were the Palestinians who looked up to Saddam as an Arab leader who supported them. “This is a tragedy and a bloody comedy,” said Walid Salem, a shopkeeper in Ramallah. “The Iraqis have given up Baghdad without a fight.”

Yet the Palestinians could emerge in a better position than many seem to realise. Last weekend Silvan Shalom, the Israeli foreign minister, returned from Washington in no doubt that Bush was not paying lip service to Blair on a Middle East peace plan.

British officials appear satisfied that the White House’s determination to try and heal wounded Arab pride is genuine. Shalom is said to have been particularly troubled by his meetings with Powell and Condoleezza Rice, Bush’s national security adviser. Both continue to insist that all illegal settlements be weeded out of the occupied territories.

Progress on a Palestinian deal might also clear the path for a more aggressive US approach to other Middle East autocracies. If Israel is seen to be bowing under pressure to create a Palestinian state, some US officials believe that regional anger may turn away from America.

At the heart of Washington’s Middle East strategy is the doctrine of pre-emption, inspired by September 11 and designed to ensure that terrorist groups are denied the support of hostile states.

The strategy document warned that America would “not hesitate to act alone” by “convincing or compelling states” not to aid terrorists. Senior sources in Washington said last week the administration hoped that Damascus, Tehran and other hostile capitals would learn from Saddam’s demise.

But the same Wolfowitz allies who argued so forcibly for war against Iraq are beginning to speak in far harsher terms about Syria. James Woolsey, the former CIA director, last week described Syria as a “fascist” regime that has to be replaced.

It may not be long before the Pentagon announces that wanted Iraqi fugitives have been granted sanctuary in Damascus, or that US intelligence has detected supplies of chemical weapons. Next time Washington may not bother to wait for the UN to tie itself in knots.

[MadIvan]

I agree with the Americans - take out Syria. Syria supplied weapons and suicide bombers to harm our troops - that is not the stance of a neutral nation, that is the stance of an enemy. As such, destroy them.

I doubt trying to win the affections of the Arabs will do little good. Building friendly states like Free Iraq will. Killing our enemies and frightening the hell out of the rest will suffice.

Regards, Ivan

[MadIvan]

Bump!

[Support Free Republic]

Just 17 cents per day

Click The Logo To Donate

[Revolting cat!]

Agreed! Redraw the freaking map of the Middle East! Kurdistan now!

[Happygal]

When Sahaf dies they send him 63 angels, the joke begins. Three ask the usual questions about how he had behaved while alive. The other 60 are needed to stop him denying he is dead.

That is funny! Who would ahve thought that the Arab world had a sense of humour? ;-)

[backhoe]

I doubt trying to win the affections of the Arabs will do little good. Building friendly states like Free Iraq will. Killing our enemies and frightening the hell out of the rest will suffice.

I agree, Ivan.

-30-

backhoe

[moneyrunner]

We've shut off their Iraqi oil. Next their water from Turkey. It's not a bad start.

[Dog]

It may not be long before the Pentagon announces that wanted Iraqi fugitives have been granted sanctuary in Damascus, or that US intelligence has detected supplies of chemical weapons. Next time Washington may not bother to wait for the UN to tie itself in knots.

No going to the UN on this one..

[samtheman]

Barely able to conceal their glee at the transformation of their much-criticised march on Baghdad, the conservative masterminds of the US victory last week turned their sights on Damascus. A barrage of threats against Syria signalled a volatile new phase in George Bush’s plan to redraw the map of the Middle East.

First they laugh at Sahaf and then they engage in Sahaf-sized exaggerations. I've watched all the news conferences. There is no "glee", but rather sober reminders that much work remains. And there is no "barrage of threats", just a prudent reminder to Syria that we are aware of it's actions. And there's no redrawing of maps. Iraq's territorial integrity will be maintained and US soldiers will hand a free Iraq over to a freely chosen Iraqi government.

Most journalists are Sahaf's at heart.

[C210N]

I wonder, though, if the there is more support for the
Syrian Baathist regime among the Syrians than there was
of Iraqis for the Iraqi Baathist regime. Not that many Syrians wouldn't like to see regime change there, but its not to the
same extent as in Brutal Iraq. There are many
areas where Syria is a tougher sell... they don't have the nuclear programs that existed in Iraq, havn't gassed anybody
as happened with the Kurds, and havn't invaded their neighbors, as happened in Kuwait.

[snopercod]

Cuba

[Consort]

We need to think regionally and not be limited by national boundaries when we go after our enemies. Our forces should seek out and destroy the enemy where ever they flee to no matter what borders they cross. That will send an important message.

[Princeliberty]

I was not in favor of American Invasion of
Iraq. I supported an Afghanistan typed operation
were we backed rebels and had the rebels overthrow
Saddam. Once the war started of course we
had win it totality regardless whether is
was the best policy or not.

Syria is a different matter Syria has
backed terrorists who have killed hundreds
of Americans and they have never apologized
or turned the terrorists but in fact
continue to support said terrorists.
The links between Bin Landen and Syria
are much more substantial than the ones
between Saddam and Bin Landen.

I say have the Army simply mass up on the Syrian
border after finished off the pockets than
remain in Iraq and then tell little Assad
than him and Junta of Thugs have 48 hours to
get of the country or will come and get them
and if they then leave the country we will
hunt them down but if they leave now
and never mess with us then they can live
out their lives in exile.

If they stay on to Damascus!

However, no more of this keep the borders
of Iraq and Syria no matter what.
Both are artificial countries let them
break into their different parts.

Our job is not to nation build our only
job is to kill our enemies!

[justshutupandtakeit]

I don't think we will have to go to full scale war to deal with Syria. Assad got a huge wake up call. Between that and cutting off the oil from Iraq Syria will likely change.
Even the N Korans have intimated rationality.

Blair is going to be on The Simpsons I hear. LoL.

Was he ever in the military do you know?

[Gamecock]

Stunned Arab nations ask: who’s next?

Oh, I knd of like surprises, but that's just the kid in me!

[Free ThinkerNY]

All the of the Middle-East dictators must be losing sleep. A free Iraq is their worst nightmare. How will they be able to control and suppress their own people's desire to be free?

[MadIvan]

From The Nuclear Threat Initiative:

Chemical:
According to open sources, Syria has one of the most extensive chemical weapons (CW) capabilities in the Middle East and among developing countries worldwide. Syria allegedly received initial chemical warfare assistance and supplies, including chemical agents, from Egypt prior to the October War against Israel in 1973. Analysts claim that the country now has an indigenous capability to produce and weaponize nerve (e.g., sarin and VX) and blister (e.g., mustard) agents. There are some allegations that Syria received Russian assistance in developing these agents, and that it acquired dual-use technology and equipment from various European countries and India. Syria possesses Scud-B and Scud-C ballistic missiles capable of being fitted with chemical warheads, and in 1999 it allegedly tested a Scud-B carrying a warhead designed to disperse VX. Open sources assert that there are at least three Syrian facilities currently engaged in producing CW, located near Damascus, Hama, and Safira village (in the Aleppo area). Damascus ratified the Geneva Protocol in 1968, but so far has declined to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC).

Missile:
Syria’s missile program began in the early 1970s as a means to counter Israel’s superior conventional military capabilities; since that time, the missile program has grown in tandem with the development of chemical weapons (CW). Syria now has one of the largest arsenals of ballistic missiles in the region, made up of hundreds of Scud-derived missile systems. In the 1970s and 1980s, Syria relied on Soviet technology and support for its missile program and imported the Soviet FROG-7, Scud-Bs, and the solid-fueled Scarab SS-21 missiles. In the 1990s, Syria looked to other states to supply it with missile technology and found willing partners in Iran and North Korea. Iran provided Syria with technical assistance for solid-fueled rocket motor production, while North Korea supplied it with equipment and technical assistance for liquid-fueled missile production. Syria, however, has had difficulty creating an indigenous production capability and has had to rely on continued imports from countries such as North Korea and China. Syria reportedly purchased 150 Scud-C missiles from North Korea in 1991. In September 2000, Syria tested a North Korean, 700 km-range Scud-D, revealing its commitment to expanding its missile capability. Syria is not a member of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR).

That plus helping Saddam means there ought to be a rope with Assad's name on it.

Regards, Ivan

[Clara Lou]

If they continue to lose face and the US continues to dominate politically and/or militarily, Islamists are liable to begin cursing Usama bin Ladin for stirring up the US hornet nest.

[BunnySlippers]

Bookmarking and bumping ...

[ExSES]

How will they be able to control and suppress their own people's desire to be free?

Hey, just have they always have..., through a state controlled media!

[RWG]

Most pressing was the question that most troubles Saddam's neighbours: which of us is next?...the arab version of thought after 9/11.

[Anamensis]

Most pressing was the question that most troubles Saddam’s neighbours: which of us is next?

Let 'em stew in their juices for a little while...

and then.....

WHAM!!! Syria gets a steel-toed flight boot deep, deep in the butt.

[Princeliberty]

Absolutey will should tell Turkey to drop dead!
They are no ally! Freed Krudistan and if
they start to support their enslaved brothers
in Turkey trying to be free good for them!
We should cut off aid to Turkey.
They are a horrible regime.
Kurdistan could be a true ally.
And Syria is a mix of many different groups
we should destroy the regime and the nation
of Syria disappear form the map!
And of course set Lebanon free form Syrian control
it too could be a stable democracy once the
Syrians and the various terrorists groups
are driven out.

And cut off aid to Arafat! We give him money?!

[Princeliberty]

We don't have to redraw anything we simply
should not force Iraq to stay together.
If allowed to chose the Kurds will certainly
be there own nation and the South
would probably wish to its own nation as well.

[Bonaparte]

"It continues through three lost wars — in 1948, 1967 and 1973 — against Israeli forces armed to the teeth by the Americans."

After the Arabs were armed to the teeth by the Russians.

[Starrgaizr]

Syria has no oil. Syria makes East Berlin look like Bermuda. Syria's value to France, Russia is only as a customer of weapons, but Syria has no economy to support massive purchases. Conventional wisdom would have Bush digest Iraq and slowly withdraw. Destablize Iran if possible to achieve a Free Iran. Carriers and bombers are coming home, so that is most likely course. A bolder course is a sudden massive thrust to Damascus. Free Syria. Free Lebanon.

Those who hate and condemn us can't do much more than they already have. It would have enormous long-term benefits.

What are the odds?

[Principled]

Yes Clara Lou. I have been waiting for this for a long time. Of course, what media will report it???

[MadIvan]

Syria needs to be punished as a lesson to those who would supply our enemies. We need to make it clear - you help the enemies of the Allies, and you die. Send suicide bombers? You die. Send supplies to Saddam? You die. Harbour war criminals? Your dear leader can expect a tomahawk missile fired right up his anal orifice.

That means Assad has to go. I am enraged that he actively assisted Iraq in trying to kill our soldiers.

Regards, Ivan

[Inyokern]

It continues through three lost wars — in 1948, 1967 and 1973 — against Israeli forces armed to the teeth by the Americans.

That is simply not true. Only in 1973 was Israel armed by the United States.

[Principled]

You're right, Mad one. The assistance provided by Syria CANNOT go unpunished. Like dogs, they don't learn unless you whack them.

What about a cruise missile directly into the window of Assad? Would that be adequate on the heels of Iraq?

[ninonitti]

I concur.

The 4th Infantry should be on the Syrian border now with their engines running. Move aircraft to western Iraqi airbases.

One wrong answer and they roll.

[stripes1776]

I agree with the Americans - take out Syria. Syria supplied weapons and suicide bombers to harm our troops - that is not the stance of a neutral nation, that is the stance of an enemy. As such, destroy them.

Sounds like a plan to me.

[pubmom]

Thursday night, the Syrian Deputy Ambassador to the US granted Greta Van Sustern an interview on her program. He dismissed her charges of Syria aiding Iraq and attempted to make her appear uninformed. He answered Donald Rumsfeld's accusations by stating he is misinformed, and it is Israel supplying the misinformation. Ugh!

Syria is in it up to their eyeballs. With all the nervous types in the mid-east right now, it may be an opportune time to buy stock in the disposible undergarment industry.

Transcript Here

[steve-b]

Stunned Arab nations ask: who’s next?

If you'd like to avoid having it come to that, then I recommend cleaning up the assorted terrorist and terrorist-support vipers' nests in your countries. Admittedly, this will require and end to the policy of blaming the Joooos for everything that goes wrong, which in turn will require you to start some reforms that will actually fix the underlying dysfunctions -- but that's your problem, not ours.

Otherwise... well, like the lottery commercial says, "It Could Be You".

[Green Knight]

I'd like to say that's what we should do (Seeing as how my parents came from there and I still have family trapped in that hellhole), but in all honesty, you just can't go after every tin-pot dictator on the planet. Where do we stop? If we go after Cuba, then why not a bigger fish like China?

If we go after a country, it ought to be because they pose a threat to US interests. Being a tyrannical government can't be enough.

Though I DO think the US should be in the business of fomenting rebellions within said tyrannies. Arming, equipping, and training rebels, and possibly even providing them air support. Think "The Bay of Pigs", only done right. THAT is what the US should be doing in the case of tyrannies which don't pose a direct threat to the US.

[Starrgaizr]

Punish them. They have been a cancer on the world for a generation.

[lowbridge]

Stunned Arab nations ask: who’s next?

Eeny meeny miney mo..
catch a terrorist by the toe...
if he hollers....

...blow him away.

[Green Knight]

Thought this might interest you. With Saddam and Syria out of the picture, what do you think are the chances that Palestinian terror might take a big enough hit that it'll die down a good bit? IMO, if we can cut off support for Palestinian terrorist groups, we WOULD be doing them a favor. No terrorism on their part = increased chances of them having a Palestinian state. Of course, for those of them who're looking to wipe Israel out of existence, it won't be a happy prospect.

[Restorer]

It continues through three lost wars — in 1948, 1967 and 1973 — against Israeli forces armed to the teeth by the Americans.

Israel receoved few arms from American till after the 1967 war. Prior to that they were mostly supplied by (who else) France.

[Maynerd]

Long. But it's nice to dream.

[McGavin999]

Well, it's all going to depend on whether Assad wants to remain the ruler of Syria. If he wants to retain his crown, he'd best hustle to get those fanatics under control and hand over any Iraqi war criminals.

[fish hawk]

If we go after Syria (I hope) we wont have to worry about using Turkey. We have the Mediterranean on one side and the New Iraq on the other. Let them flee West....the Israelis will give them a fine welcome.LOL

[eleni121]

Syria of course. But I would love to see the Sudan government wiped out. What a liberation that would be for millions of Christians living in horror. Egypt is a horror as well for Christians. And Mauritania and ...and...and

[Sonny M]

Stunned Arab nations ask: who’s next?

To quote Bill Goldberg. "Your Next".

To be honest, I don't care of the arab world likes us or not, or if the arab street hates, us, what I want, is for them to fear us. Put the boot to there necks, and let them live in fear of America and her awesome power. Fear will keep them in line, fear is what they understand, and terror will keep them from supporting terrorists in there bid to harm our nation and its people. Fear us.

[uncbob]

Bush's father failed to finish the job in 91 and I fear his son will fail to finish the job in 2003

He will lose because of the economy in 2004 just like his father in 1992

THe boob democrats will screw up the foreign policy even worse

I hope I am wrong bud I have a bad feeling

[LibKill]

I agree with the Americans - take out Syria. Syria supplied weapons and suicide bombers to harm our troops - that is not the stance of a neutral nation, that is the stance of an enemy. As such, destroy them.

Sir, I agree with you. We have the worlds biggest flamethrower in place. We may as well burn out that other rat-nest (Syria) while we are there.

If we don't do it now, we will have to do it later, at extra cost.

[jennyp]

Most pressing was the question that most troubles Saddam’s neighbours: which of us is next?

It's so simple: Who wants to be next?

[laz17]

Most pressing was the question that most troubles Saddam’s neighbours: which of us is next?

That's up to them. Assad seems eager to accept the honor.

[Alas Babylon!]

Ivan, is this a news story or a news analysis? If the Sunday Times is trying to sell this as news, they're crazy! This is a blatantly biased piece of Arab propaganda. Israel wasn't armed to the teeth by the Americans until the Nixon era. And for all the words they type, not one word on the horrors of the Saddam regime on his own people. Not one word on the joy of the Iraqis to be liberated by the Coalition. And Jews didn't flood the Holy Land starting in the 1920's but have always been there, at least in a few cities, while at the same time very few Arabs lived in Palestine and only started migrating there from Egypt, Syria, and Iraq (amoung other places) AFTER the Jews started making something of the fetid marshes and desert wastes there. Now they call themselves Palestinians, of course.

Anyway, Arabs/Muslim states that don't harbor terrorist-murderers against us or use weapons of mass destruction against others or their own people have NOTHING to fear from the USA and Britain. Surely the Sunday Times knows this?

[laz17]

Next time Washington may not bother to wait for the UN to tie itself in knots.

Gee, ya think? How much chance is there we'll go back to the Security Council and ask for a resolution against, say, Syria, and watch as Chirac reprises his surrender monkey wrench act? Absolutely none, I'd say.