iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Amb. Marc Ginsberg

GET UPDATES FROM Amb. Marc Ginsberg
 

Obama's Syrian 'Red Line' Is No Red Light to Hezbollah or Iran

Posted: 08/21/2012 2:40 pm

If there is one Obama foreign policy marked by disappointing diplomatic zigzags, hesitation, and potential danger to U.S strategic interests in the Middle East, it is what has passed as U.S. policy toward the Syrian civil uprising. As the death toll and human suffering reach epic proportions and (as I predicted a few weeks ago in this paper) undeniable evidence surfaces that Syria is fast becoming another al Qaeda staging ground, menacing alarm bells are finally, finally going off in Washington.

Better late than never!

Yet, what finally prompted President Obama to draw the first, credible (albeit high bar) straight line toward potential military intervention in Syria was not the staggering civilian Syrian death toll, nor the de facto collapse into utter lawlessness of the Syrian state outside Damascus, but disturbing intelligence reports that as Assad's predicament becomes more dire, he would deploy Syria's huge stockpile of internationally banned chemical and biological weapons against his opponents in a cataclysmic act of desperation or, worse, delegate the dirty deed (to deny culpability) to his partners-in-crime Hezbollah or the Iranian Revolutionary Guard or its Basij storm-troopers.

The possibility, however remote, that Iranian-backed Basij or Al Quds Revolutionary Guards forces or Hezbollah's terrorist military wing could get their hands on Syria's chemical or biological weapons constitutes a strategic threat not only to Turkey and Israel, but also to the United States and the West, given the growing presence of al Qaeda in Syria as civil authority disintegrates. Who is to say as utter chaos prevails throughout Syria what shady WMD deals would be struck just to keep the Assad regime from collapsing or, worse, to barter WMD for their eventual use in Syria or elsewhere?

From reports coming out of neighboring Lebanon and Turkey Assad has not ruled out such a desperate move, but he may not be calling the shots as his shrinking dictatorship-state disintegrates.

Fleeing high level defectors have indicated to various foreign media and intel sources that Assad's grip on power is rapidly evaporating. Free Syrian Army informants who have talked to western and Turkish intelligence operatives stationed on the other side of Syria's frontiers have stated that Assad's brother-enforcer Maher (who may have lost a leg in the Damascus blast that killed their brother-in-law), recently initialed a secret agreement with Iran and Hezbollah to move more heavily armed elements of their armed forces into Syria to buttress the regime's beleaguered troops and, in addition, to provide "guardianship" oversight over Syria's WMD stockpile to prevent any chemical or biological weapons from being "liberated" by the Free Syrian Army or other regime opponents.

Moreover, given our knowledge of Iran and Hezbollah terrorism strategies against their adversaries, any such pact of convenience Maher may have secretly entered into with Iran and Hezbollah could theoretically authorized either Iran or to Hezbollah to orchestrate a singular WMD attack at a specific target to provide the Assad regime plausible deniability that it was not responsible for using WMD, but rather "rogue" or "armed terrorists" in order to cause his opponents to retreat Saddam-style.

This threat is what prompted such high level presidential concern at the White House.

The president's red line may be real or merely bluff, but the proverbial cat may be out the bag since Assad may have nothing to lose by secretly passing WMD to his allies, and neither Hezbollah nor Iran care one iota about White House threats of military intervention, or so they may brazenly miscalculate.

The witches' brew of Hezbollah, Revolutionary Guards, al Qaeda and WMD should give pause to anyone who once hoped that the Syrian civil war could be brushed aside as an inconvenient but unworthy distraction during a presidential campaign.

 

Follow Amb. Marc Ginsberg on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@ambmcg

FOLLOW WORLD
 
 
  • Comments
  • 15
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
10:53 PM on 08/26/2012
Your source for this "shady WMD deal" wouldn't happen to be code-named "Curveball", perhaps?
02:03 PM on 08/22/2012
You make an interesting point about Syria possibly becoming a campaign issue, but how would it play out? Republicans are currently bashing Obama for intervening (successfully) in Lybia, so it would be strange for the GoP to suddenly claim that Obama should intervene in Syria without Congressional mandate -- and the Republicans (who control the House of Representatives and have sufficient Senators to block upper house action) are all out at their districts campaigning...

Moreover, given the GoP MO, to prevent Obama from doing anything, at nearly any cost, it is hard to believe that they would approve intervention, and allow Obama to actually do something with Congressional approval.

I am interested in your take on HOW Obama could act, given the current domestic pressure not to act with an authorization that is unlikely to come.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
maildarter
12:24 PM on 08/22/2012
But still; it would be fun to see Iran get kicked out. Perhaps we can cut a deal with Assad, press Israel to give back the Golan Heights if Assad abandons Hezbollah and Iran !!??
10:06 AM on 08/27/2012
That was actually a good idea. I use the past tense, because that was feasible until, oh...about 2005. It's too late now.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
maildarter
12:21 PM on 08/22/2012
Probably better to help Assad win; at least its some form of structure.
02:07 PM on 08/22/2012
Why would Assad replace the current patronage and UN cover he is getting from Russia with US support, when the US has recently shown that it will turn on its puppet dictators when convenient or expedient (Mubarak, for example. and the Shah of Iran, Saddam Hussien.... ).
11:50 AM on 08/22/2012
"undeniable evidence surfaces that Syria is fast becoming another al Qaeda staging ground"
REALLY!?!?!?
Just like the 'undeniable evidence' of WMD used to launch a full-scale war by the US to claim a large chunk of the worlds oil in Iraq. I wonder if you can hide Al-Qaeda in 'mobile trucks' like Mr. Colin Powell claimed were in Iraq. Why can't you guys just admit that Al-Qaeda can be non-existent in an Arab uprising? There is no such proof of Al-Qaeda operating in Syria and if it were.......they certainly cannot last for long as the Syrian people will not allow such fanaticism........if Al-Qaeda even exists anymore.....or all all.
photo
notmisaacm
That which is attributed to malice is often explai
10:32 AM on 08/22/2012
As tragic as the civilian deaths are in Syria, it would still be a major mistake to involve US troops there. There is one thing that both sides (or the many sides) in the Syrian civil war agree upon is that they all hate the US. Wait until the Arab world gets a eyeful of images of civilians torn apart by US drones, which would be inevitable since Assad's troops will follow the same strategy as Hamas and Hezbollah in hiding behind civilians to shoot at US troops. The President is showing wisdom by staying out of this disaster.

As for the chemical weapons, I think we should offer to buy them from the Assad clan in return for cash and safe harbor. Anything we spend on them would be much less than the damage they will do if Hezbollah gets their hands on them. I know it sets a bad precedent, but it is the least worst idea I can think of.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jerusalem Palestine
10:28 PM on 08/21/2012
Goes to show that America's interest in Syria is only self interest and that of its stepchild, Israel. They could both care less about the people of Syrian or the viability of the country. Contrary, a weak fractured Syria unable to unify its neighbors by example allows the status quo in Israel to be maintained. This is of course true only if the radicals do not raise their ugly heads to threaten either Israel or America. Such a short sighted approach.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cory Gudwin
examine thyself before blaming the system
07:21 PM on 08/21/2012
Most anti-US militant groups, including the Revolutionary Guards, Hamas, and Hezbollah are hesitating to make statements or be particularly visible until after the US election.
They know an a large visible attack now could aid the Romney campaign.
02:10 PM on 08/22/2012
Its likely that they are aware that being highly visable at this time would give Obama a good chance to again bolster his 'defense' credentials in the run-up to the election. Why would you stick your head out of the ground when there's someone upside with a mallet in his hands just hoping to score points.
06:28 PM on 08/21/2012
Syrian activists in the US have been hopelessly "educating" the administration about it shortsighted strategy of dealing with the Syrian uprising. You are absolutely correct that the administration was and still is only measuring the winds of public sentiments and making globally significant and long lasting international decisions purely based on the prism of election politics. However, the Republican party is equally guilty of the same crime. Romney is still playing the Syrian issue as a cheap poker game so he can attack Obama's current policy on Syria and also attack him if Obama changed direction to an aggressive disposition. Obama ability to maneuver in Syria will be much wider if the Republican leadership takes a position on Syria, any position? But no, they will not? Sad, depressing and considering the atrocities in Syria, criminal?
05:37 PM on 08/21/2012
I still don't understand??

Al-Qaeda says that once it gains control over Syria that it will then try to launch a war against both Israel and Iran:

"One Qaeda operative, a 56-year-old known as Abu Thuha who lives in the Hawija district near Kirkuk in Iraq, spoke to an Iraqi reporter for The New York Times on Tuesday. “We have experience now fighting the Americans, and more experience now with the Syrian revolution,” he said. “Our big hope is to form a Syrian-Iraqi Islamic state for all Muslims, and then announce our war against Iran and Israel, and free Palestine.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/25/world/middleeast/al-qaeda-insinuating-its-way-into-syrias-conflict.html?_r=2

So how is it beneficial to help Al-Qaeda overthrow al-Assad?

Seems to me like it would make a lot more sense (from a practical standpoint, anyway) to keep al-Assad around in order to prevent Al-Qaeda from using captured Syrian resources to launch a war against Israel; doesn't it?
photo
Anybodyseenthepopos
אני כלום בלעדיהם
12:20 PM on 08/22/2012
There are simply no "good guys" in this fight.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
maildarter
12:22 PM on 08/22/2012
Seems so.