Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research

Emerging Threats

2006-12-11T11:56:00.000-08:00

John Robb over at Global Guerrillas has posted yet another prophetic article detailing out the New Threats that will be faced in the coming decades and how the situation in Iraq is giving us a very descriptive glimpse.
The emerging threats are so closely linked that with this pattern in mind, one can quickly be overwhelmed by the sheer scale of threats that have the ability to quickly consume vast areas of our lives and of the globe itself.

Global guerrillas. Open source warfare and systems disruption. Fragmentation and chaos that can swallow states and regions. In the mid-term: super-empowered actors that can wield bio-weapons.
Peak oil and resource depletion. The acceleration of resource consumption due to the mainlining of China and India at the very point these resources are reaching capacity limits.
Global warming. Not the slow change discussed, but rather a cascading change in weather patterns and ocean flows that drastically change continental climates. Ditto the mainlining of China and India as a driver here too.
Pandemics. Bird flu and other forms of infectious disease that can sweep the world in the matter of days. Have infection, will travel.

As I am a visual person, I decided to have a quick look at the world as of today while overlaying the Four emerging threats upon it.
More on this in future posts....

My intuitions tell me that if you add possible scenarios for future resource depletions due to Abrupt Climate Changes (im not a fan of Al Gorish Global Warming), Overuse by Developing Nations and poor Environmental/Industrial controls, one can quickly view potential hotspots. Take it another step further and overlay these areas with recent or current conflicts and even more by adding Globalization, Terrorism and Economic Freedom indexes and the picture of the future comes into clear view. Note of interest is in plotting the hotspots we have chosen to involve ourselves in over the years. Of present note, Sudan has little obvious Strategic or Resource value. That is except for the fact that it is yet another nation falling under Islamic rule and that the Chinese have recently invested close to $1.6 billion in development there.

This is all nothing new of course. Thomas Barnett, the Coming Anarchy crew, ZenPundit, John Robb and many others have been discussing this for years.

A Future Fitna?

2006-12-10T07:31:00.000-08:00

Fitna (فتنة) is an Arabic word, generally regarded as very difficult to translate. It is often used to refer to civil war, disagreement and division within Islam and specifically alludes to a time involving trials of faith, similar to the Tribulation in Christian eschatology. The word also implies meanings including schism, secession, upheaval and anarchy.

It is becoming increasingly clear that a future Fitna may be developing within the regional boundaries of the Near East. In the past Four Fitna's, Sunni and Shia have lined up against one another in an effort to fight for the very heart and control of Islam, this iteration adds the Arab vs Persian dynamic as well.

In a recent article in the London Telegraph, Nawaf Obaid, a senior government security adviser to the Sunni dominated kingdom of Saudi Arabia has expressed alarm in the funding and training of Shia militias in Iraq and a military buildup by their Gulf neighbors, the Shia/Persian Iran. In order to prevent what they believe will be a wholesale slaughter of their Iraqi brethren, Saudi Arabia is reported to be supplying "anti-US Sunni military leaders with funding, logistical support and even arms". Many have begun to theorize about a coming Sunni-Shia conflict in the Near East, that could quickly spread throughout the region. This is most evident in the bombings of Shia areas in Iraq by Sunni insurgents and the reciprocation by Shia death squads that permeate the Iraqi police forces. If this were to continue to escalate or to spill from the Iraq's borders and into the surrounding moderate regimes of Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Lebanon, a larger conflict could occur.

Now it seems that the situation is escalating even more between the nations of Islam that surround the Gulf, most evident in a news story today is which Arab States Announced Joint Efforts for 'Peaceful' Nukes. This is another example of a growing consensus that a Shia regional hegemon is an unacceptable consequence and one that GCC members, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain and Oman, are unwilling to live with.

So what does this mean for the region as a whole? Something akin to a Battle Royale not only for regional hegemony and control of the economic resources but a struggle for the control of Islam itself. A bit dramatic perhaps but in the coming weeks we will be examining both the rise of Shia Islam throughout the world and the friction points that it will create with classical Sunni Muslims and secular Western nations.

Beginning anew

2006-12-07T08:52:00.000-08:00

As I am preparing some articles dealing with a whole plethora of subjects I wanted to give everyone a chance to read some of ourearlier work. In the beginning, CITAR was more affectionately known as an aggregate portal for threat news and analysis from around the globe. We provided up to date news and events on topics ranging from International Terrorism, WMD proliferation and Global Hotspots.
The original CITAR is since dissolved but we are beginning preliminary studies on a new similar project that will quickly eclipse the original CITAR in scale. For now, enjoy some of our earlier writings included on this blog.

Earlier versions of CITAR (courtesy of the Wayback Machine)
CITAR in 2005
CITAR in 2004

The New MAD

2006-12-07T08:50:00.000-08:00

During the first week of November, Iran decided to pull an old play out of the Cold War playbook and did so decidedly well. Knowing full and well that in any military conflict between the Islamic Republic and the West would result in an eventual defeat, they wanted to make it clear that it would also be just as costly in economic terms to their opponents. By using a veiled threat (no pun intended), hinted by Mr. Hosseini of Iran's Foreign Ministry's that Tehran could close the Strait of Hormuz "depending on the kind of sanctions" leveled against the Islamic Republic and then followed up by this week's expanded military war games, a basic tenant of deterrence was put into place saying, "You may take us out of the picture militarily, but we would make it so costly in terms of US lives and economic damage, that its almost like Mutually Assured Destruction".

The 10-day maneuvers, named "Great Prophet 2," includes hundreds of SRBM and MRBM launches ranging from smaller Scud models to the infamous Shahab-2 and 3's with a rang of 2,000 klicks and the capability of carrying either small-yield tactical nukes or the bomblet cluster munitions. Also, it is reported that in and around the Gulf of Oman there are reports of reconnaissance planes, in the form of pilot planes and drones, Sokho 25 fighters, heavy and light transportation and carrier planes such as the Russian made "Antonev".

These games were also probably a partial response to U.S.-led maneuvers focused on surveillance, in which Australia, Bahrain, Britain, France, Italy also took part in in the past month. The Western war games were centered mainly around surveillance and interdiction of a mock-WMD laden vessel.

So what does this tell us about the current and near future situation in dealing with Iran? In a nutshell, we are hosed. Even with Iran's limited military infrastructure, they are still the most powerful and capable in the region except for of course the US and Israel. The damage they could inflict to so many different regional targets is staggering. Lets take a look at some.

US Bases in Iraq, Bahrain, Qatar, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Turkey. All well within the range of hundreds of Shahab 2s and 3s and each capable of carrying cluster munitions, Bio/Chems and small nukes if they had them ready. Attack on US targets in Saudi and Turkey are unlikely unless Iran is feeling particularly insane that day.
Israel. In a nutshell, the whole state is within range. This would also be a bit of insanity and would lead to a great deal of restraint to NOT nuke Tehran.
US Navy vessels in and around the Gulf would be succeptable to literally hundreds of "Silkworm" anti-ship missiles and other goodies that the Chinese have been selling them for years to take out ships
Gulf Oil shipping could be virtually wiped out with multi-pronged attacks on Gulf oil terminals, the sinking of large tankers in the narrow Strait of Hormuz and mining of Gulf areas.
The Arc of Shi'a that spans throughout Iraq, Syria and Lebanon could be "turned on" which would result in a literal bloodbath for most everyone involved.

Now this of course is about the extent of their abilities but just think of the impact from a psychological and economic dimension? What would our response be? Invasion.... bad bad idea. Airstrikes.... for sure but ultimately ineffective Limited Nuclear Strikes.... could lead to an effective punishment but at what cost.

When you get down to it, the costs for either side are so high, that evokes the imagery of the Cold War MAD scenarios, where it was just lunacy for either side to push a first strike button. But is that the case on the opposing side now? The Iranians or at least the ruling theocracy can hardly be called rational state actors when the majority of them are awaiting the return of the messianic Madhi next year and with it the end of the world. The scenes that I have described are exactly what many in power in Iran want. So will a mini version of MAD work in the region?
Hmm I do not know. I must meditate more on the subject and try to come up with the answer that only 5 people will read and none will take seriously. Is ok, at least in the end I will be able to tell you I told you so :)

New Info, Updated, 11/2/06 1430 est

Widespread Mining in the Persian Gulf
"begin[ing] on Thursday, November 2nd. Reportedly the plan is the widespread planting of under-water mines in the Persian Gulf."

An informed source says: “Testing the discharge capacity of the various kinds of missiles as well as long-range missiles with cluster warheads, shoulder missiles and anti-helicopter Katyushas, and extensive mine planting in the Persian gulf, are the most likely activities planned for said maneuvers. The purpose for these maneuvers is to promote defense readiness and assess the effectiveness of new weapons. The air force, army, navy and Basij forces* will be taking part in these 10-day-long maneuvers."

Internal Security, the Basij
Commandant of the revolutionary guards Rahim Safavi, also made mention of the presence of the Basij forces, as another part of the maneuvers, whose mission, according to him is "defending the streets and urban areas in case of encounter with potential unrest”.
Basij forces are auxiliary mobilization forces created by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini; they are extremely radical and supported by the current supreme leader Ali Khamenei.

Suicide-Bomber forces:
Safavi also made very clear threats of terrorist attacks and explicitly spoke of suicide-bombers who are under his direct command, saying: "Those forces that have been trained in the ‘culture’ of martyrdom-seeking are, among the unique features of the Islamic republic’s armed forces that are comparable to other armies around the world."

and of course, a word from our sponsor (theirs, not mine)
"Our officials’ warnings are serious. Should the U.S. and it’s allies choose confrontation with the Islamic Republic, not a single border restriction will be observed and Americans and their interests as well it’s allies around the world will be stormed." - from the state run newspaper JAVAWN
source-IranPressNews

Well, that sure clarifies things.

"Its the Cool Thing... Everybody's Doin' It"

2006-12-07T08:49:00.000-08:00

Sometimes I feel like a staff writer at the Onion when I begin to formulate ideas about what I should comment on. Depressing really.
So now, everybody (well 30+ countries) is getting the nuclear itch and wants to play too. Most of these countries under the guise of uranium enrichment programs (funny how we immediately equate that now to "building the bomb". Even soccer moms understand the concept behind gas centrifuge cascades). These 30 countries would join the current 9 in the announced "nuclear club" for the following reason given by the head of the IAEA, Mohamed ElBaradei "Unfortunately, the political environment is not a very secure one... there are a lot of temptations (to develop nuclear weapons)," he said.
So basically, if you feel insecure, get a bigger weapon. Ok, I can kinda see that. So lets take a look at these "virtual nuclear states" as he called them.
Iran - duh
Australia, Argentina and South Africa - Uhm the Aussies, ok. Argentina, can they pay their debts first. S. Africa, didnt they have a program and give it up?
Canada, Germany, Sweden, Belgium, Switzerland, Taiwan, Spain, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Lithuania - All of these countries have the capability to do so quickly. Canada? now thats comedy.
Egypt, Bangladesh, Ghana, Indonesia, Jordan, Namibia, Moldova, Nigeria, Poland, Thailand, Turkey, Vietnam and Yemen - All these are considering near term nuclear programs. This is where I begin to save money for the next orbital trip to the ISS. I completely forgot that Moldova was even a country! I for sure thought it was a Starbucks flavor of the month... As for the rest of them, the day that Vietnam, Yemen or Nigeria get the bomb or ANY nuclear capability, I believe its time to elect another Republican President and Congress. And Namibia?? Isnt that where Jolie-Pitt had a baby? this world is imploding and quickly.
Lets see, rounding out the list are Japan, South Korea and Brazil. Now there are three countries that I would not mind seeing have the bomb, hell we should probably help them out. Japan, mainly out of guilt and trust, South Korea because they deserve the chance to make things even (with China not N Korea) and Brazil, well, ive spent sometime in Brazil in the past few years and those people are amazing and should probably rule the world anyway (food, drink, weather, beauty).

So, in closing, in looks like our exclusive club that has been most recently barged in upon by Crazy Kim could get a little less exclusive in the near future. Kind of like when all the degenerates come to sit at the cool kids table. Ya, just like that

The Art of Ambiguity

2006-12-07T08:48:00.001-08:00

China is normally famous for the historic strategms of Sun-Tzu and his Art of War, but the Middle Kingdom is quickly becoming known for its mastery in the Art of Ambiguity.
This has recently risen to the surface in the unfolding of UN negotiations over a draft Security Council resolution to seek "punitive actions" against North Korea for their underground testing of a small "nuclear weapon". Of course this is the first time that China has agreed to anything stronger than a raised eyebrow in the direction of their vertically challenged friend to the east and so took most everyone by a greatly welcomed surprised. Ahhhh but it was not to last. Today, China is looking with a very confused look as they are continuing to water down the UN resolution until it looks something more like... well like all the rest of them.

Is this a new tactic or a just business as usual or is it part of a larger more comprehensive strategy aimed at slowly weakening the geostrategic influence of the United States and her regional allies? Afterall, the Chinese culture is almost entirely predicated on the teachings of some of the greatest and most foundational strategists in history, why would it be so hard to think that there actions are so well thought out that we are merely seeing what it is that they want us to see.

The point being, it is nieve to think that the United States and the rest of the relatively young Western world has the upper hand when it comes to dealing with regional influence and strategy in the Asian sphere and increasingly in the Middle East, Africa and our own back yard, South America. Most of our strategic thought is primarily based on the rudimentary understanding of Chinese stratgems and military treatise that emanate from a culture what is vastly older and cohesive than our own. The advantages that we hold are centered around our technological dominance and the fact that we won the most recent global struggle (Cold War) with our infrastructures and influences intact. These advantages will not contiue forever and there is more than enough evidence to suggest that they have or are being countered ('shashou jiang' or assasins mace).

Hmmm where was I going with this.. Oh yeah. Dont be surprised by China's continual flip-flopping or constant ambiguity, its all part of the plan.

"All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when able to attack, we must seem
unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must
make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe
we are near. Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him."
Sun Tzu - The Art of War

CITAR Hiatus

2005-08-29T09:22:00.000-07:00

The CITAR project in its current phase is coming to a close. Version 2 has been a great success and many thanks go out to those who helped to make it possible and to those many readers and daily viewers from around the world.

This is not the final iteration however and those responsible for CITAR will be hard at work over the coming months to reveal a new and improved version, one that will include many more features and enhancements. In the meantime, feel free to contact us at any time.
Thank You.
Regan Walker
Executive Director

Reports are sketchy... but the Center is in fact alive!

2005-06-16T18:10:00.000-07:00

My profuse apologies to everyone for the recent absence of CITAR commentary and articles. We have not in fact been attacked by radical Islamists or denied Internet access by a wary Chinese cyber-warrior but have fact become victims of work overload.
Not to fear however as the Center will begin to rev back up into full gear this August as I will be returning from a July visit to the Middle East and the Center's second in command Michael Jones will be moving to the DC Area in order to put more dedication into the fall additions at CITAR.
Stay closely tuned as threat news reporting on the main site will continue to go on daily and new features added through the summer and fall
Regan Walker
Executive Director

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

Blogging the Future: PNM style!

2005-06-01T10:21:00.000-07:00

Dr. Thomas Barnett of the Pentagon's New Map concept has a new discussion forum to converse about all things PNM and more. Some of the main topics Include:

The Pentagon's New Map

Discusion space for The Pentagon's New Map

Thomas P.M. Barnett :: weblog

Discussion space for Tom's blog

The Newsletter from Thomas P.M. Barnett

Discussion space for The Newsletter from Thomas P.M. Barnett

Strands of Connectivity

Military-Market Nexus

Department of Everything Else

The discussions promise to be very intense and could help provide the framework for a greater understanding and debate of many of the PNM concepts and theories. I encourage all CITAR visitors to checkout the Blog and Forum often!

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

'Toothless' System Administrators: the State Dept's Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization

2005-03-27T11:22:00.000-08:00

"[W]e are working to strengthen international capacities to address conditions in failed, failing and post-conflict states. . . . President Bush already has charged us at the State Department with coordinating our nation's post-conflict and stabilization efforts." -- Secretary Rice, February 17, 2005

This quote in part sums up the underlying theme behind the newly formed Office for the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization (S/CRS) at the US State Department. Created officially in August 2004 by then Secretary Colin Powell, the basic premise behind the Office is in step with concepts laid out by strategic thinkers such as Dr. Thomas Barnett and Mark of Zenpundit. Their concepts include the formation of a ‘System Administrator’ force to not only react to post-conflict situations, but to proactively prevent or stabilize areas in which civil conflict and strife are inevitable. In essence, the S/CRS hopes to pre-empt any of the difficulties that the United States has encountered in post-war Iraq while planning for and reversing conflict escalation in other trouble spots around the world. In order to do this, the Office would ‘bring together civilian experts in such field as political administration, law enforcement and economics and give them a seat at the table alongside the military during the planning of U.S intervention in troubled states’. This is a big step in the right direction and ensures that the ‘everything else’ in any military conflict is taken into greater consideration. By putting teams of individuals from several government agencies together, as well as from private-sector groups, the head of the S/CRS, Carols Pascual, will attempt to ensure communication and sufficient planning will occur when instabilities are targeted for US intervention and that the areas and states are brought back into a sustainable path of peace, democracy, and a market economy. There is also hope for these teams to serve as an early warning system to help identify nation-states which seem to be failing or show signs of internal conflict. Perhaps some aspects of the Nation-State Failure concept by Robert Rothberg can serve as a set of guideposts in determining the tell-tell signs of a nations failing nature.
As listed on the State Departments website the Core Objectives of the S/CRS are:

-Monitor and Plan

-Mobilize and Deploy

-Prepare Skills and Resources

-Learn from Experience

-Coordinate with International Partners

One thing that appears to be missing is any mention of a security or ‘Protector’ role, either in coordination or in implementation, as Mr Safranski lays out in his Zenpundit blog, “A System Administrator is a protector, mentor and coordinator”. This idea sounds much like the foundation the State Department is attempting to lay, using the S/CRS as its cornerstone, but again lacks the security aspect. Most, if not all, of the situations that the S/CRS will be involved with will be in highly insecure and destabilized areas and the quickest way to fail in such a situation is to come either poorly armed or worse - - not armed at all. In such situations,force will need to be applied immediately and security established fso the inter-agency/private sector teams of the S/CRS can fulfill their mission effectively. For example, the situation of Somali in the early 1990s; the force of thousands of US Marines was applied throughout the city of Mogadishu during the beginning stages of the intervention, and the relief agencies were able to perform their basic tasks in relative safety and accomplish what they set out to do. Upon the removal of the Marine Corps contingent and the establishment of the Army Ranger base at the airport, civil strife began to creep back in and the ensuing Blackhawk Down incident occurred. The point is that while the show of force was in their midst, those that are part of the conflict and strife are able to be controlled or influenced in a way so the rebuilders and re-connectors can accomplish their goals. Once local government functions and security forces have been established and properly trained, then phased pullouts of the SysAdmin security forces can begin.

As written in an earlier post, “State Department Soldiers, the beginning of the SysAdmin”, the Defense Department seems to be moving parallel with the State Department and much can be said for these revolutionary changes. In keeping with the concept of a System Administrator force to deal with pre and post conflict reconstruction and stabilization, it is integral for the US military and specifically the Marine Corps to be intricately involved. The Marine Corps is becoming quite adept in the role of carrying the “big stick” of force projection as well as “walking softly” in the post-conflict to help reconstruct infrastructure and restore basic service. This is evident in the post-war Iraq rebuilding of electricity, water and sewage plants as well as providing basic health and medical services. Truly one cannot think of a better synergy of the two departments of State and Defense than to combine the applied force projection of the United States Marine Corps with the multi-faceted experience in re-building afforded by the S/CRS. With such a combination, a true System Administrator force can begin its seemingly daunting task of prevention, preparation, stabilization and reconstruction of conflict prone and failing nation-states.

New State Dept. Office Aimed at Postwar Aid
Washington Post: March 25, 2005

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

"State Department Soldiers" and the beginnings of a 'SysAdmin' Force?

2005-03-26T16:27:00.000-08:00

A Pentagon in the “Context of Everything Else”

It seems that the Pentagon and the Secretary of Defense himself are beginning to come around to many of the same conclusions that Thomas Barnett has ascertained concerning the Pentagon's role in 'war in the context of everything else'. In a document that outlines a new 'visionary' agenda for the military that will include a larger focus on ‘battling terrorists and insurgents’ (GWOT campaign, Afghanistan, Iraq) ‘over conventional military challenges’ (rising China, resurgent Russia). The new goal is to drive the armed services to design and develop new systems and means of using them against 4 core problems;

-Combat Internal Terrorist Threats in Failed and Collapsed States (The non-integrating Gap), by forming relationships in military training and aid

-Continue to provide a defense of the homeland against terrorist attacks

-Persuade possible future near-peer countries (China, Russia) from aggression

-Stop and rollback WMD proliferation.

The major point of this shift seems to be rooted in the attempt to ‘prevent problems from becoming crises and crises from becoming all-out conflicts.’ So instead of waiting for an Islamist group to launch attacks in a failing state, the Pentagon will seek to equip and train the local government to effectively protect themselves as in the case of many current GWOT deployments in Sub-Saharan Africa. Also when a crisis arises such as what occurred in the Philippines in the past few years with their on-going battle against Abu-Sayyef, increased support has been given including on the ground military advisors. Underlying these concepts in the Pentagon is the belief that the United States is now engaged in a sustained global conflict that warrants a more proactive approach, ‘focused on changing the world instead of just responding to conflicts’.

Although this review will soon be sent to Congress, it does not require any approval and will then be sent to the Bush Administration to help guide future defense spending and engagements. Even though this is the case there will be some heavy political battles in the near future as big ticket defense items and their contracts will be cut and possibly shunted into new technologies and deployments that the review highlights.

“State Department Soldiers, the beginning of the SysAdmin”

One very big component of the SecDef’s review and subsequent revamping of the military is the apparent push for solutions that include the deployment of small ‘culturally savvy’ teams to train indigenous forces (Green Beret Style) as well as the ability to deploy these and other small US military forces to places where conflict is eminent to support the failing governments forces against any guerilla or terrorists groups from turning into a widespread insurgency. Officials behind the review hope to have several of such teams around the world in a proactive attempt to prevent failing and collapsed states from becoming havens for terrorist training and logistical basing.

This is probably one of the most revolutionary changes in the thinking of the Pentagon upper echelon as it puts the focus of the future war not in near-peer adversaries like China or Russia, but in the non-state actors that run rampant through the ‘non-integrating Gap’, using the relative lack of rule-sets and coherent governance to launch attacks on the ‘functioning Core’. Leading to charge to fill this position seems to be the Marine Corps by ‘shifting away from its traditional amphibious assault missions to new units designed to work with foreign troops’. By developing and equipping a force to deal proactively with these type of threats and doing so in a way that allows them to be culturally sensitive and with a goal of restoring order while maintaining the capabilities of an effective fighting force, these soldiers could become the foundation of a future SysAdmin force envisioned by many strategic thinkers.

nods to ZenPundit and strieff at RedState

Pentagon Prepares to Rethink Focus on Conventional Warfare
Washington Post: January 26 2005

Rumsfeld Details Big Military Shift in New Document
Wall Street Journal: March 11 2005

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

From Bad to Worse. Israel Leaks Plans to Attack Iran

2005-03-13T12:16:00.000-08:00

Israel Plans to Hit Iran Nuke Plant-Sunday Times
ABC-Reuters March 13 2004

In the community of international relations it seems that perception is a large part of dealing with your neighbors, your distant relatives and the neighborhood troublemakers. Sometimes you need to give the outward perception of a big, menacing force that can quickly and easily ruin any troublemakers day (i.e. Iraq and Afghanistan). Other times you need to speak forcefully with others in order to help them see the error of their ways and when that doesn’t work; you pull out your wallet portfolio of what can happen (i.e. Iraq and Afghanistan). Still other times you put away the portfolio and the harsh language and instead attempt to reason with and offer positive incentives to those who cause fear and instability, in an attempt to help them realize a rational means of change and reform (i.e. Iran).

In recent weeks the United States has gone from a hard-line stubborn nose approach to dealing with Iran to a more slightly softer, hard-line approach in order to try and prove that it is willing to work with the Islamic Republic with regards to the nuclear enrichment row. Joining with the EU, the US has offered to not block Iran's badly needed ascension into the WTO and allow US made spare part for its aging jetliner fleet to be sold to Iran. Of course, in a classical mullah'move (im trade marking this as a term to define every time in which the ruling clerics/elite, make a move that seems purely propagandist in nature and of no realpolitik substance), they have subsequently rejected any US offer of economic assistance or breaks, saying that it is their right to have and pursue 'peaceful' uses of nuclear technology. In regards to the body of the NPT, they are right and are allowed to perform 'some' enrichments but they are also in breach of about 35% of the treaty and so don’t have too much of a leg to stand on there. Still, the writing is on the wall and here is what it says, “We (Iran) will have nuclear technology and if we choose, nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them." This writing is obvious to many as they look though the history of the Iranian nuclear agreements and negotiations, as a pattern of 'ok give me A, B and C and I will stop enriching Uranium, but not really'. So if the Iranians are hell-bent on obtaining nuclear weapons regardless of pokes, prods, sticks or carrots, what can we do to stop them? That is for another post and an upcoming whitepaper; Re-Connecting Iran, a roadmap for change that will be released very soon. The argument of this author is that military action, unilaterally by the Israelis, with or without American help is the single WORST option available. As good as Israeli and American intelligence is, the intel is murky at best on Iranian nuclear facilities. Learning from the earlier attack in 1981 on the Iraqi Osirik reactor, Iran has spread out its facilities all over the Islamic Republic and most are buried directly under residential neighborhoods. Any Israeli attack would need to be a coordinated ground and air attack in an effort to destroy as many of the facilities as possible and with the least amount of collateral damage. Still in such a scenario, even with a mission success rate of 75-80%, many of the key facilities would be left intact and would no doubt prompt the IRGC to ramp up nuclear weapon production significantly. This is not even the worst part of the entire scenario. By attacking Iran proper itself and not having even a slight idea of the internal infrastructure, collateral damage is an almost certainty. The Iranian people are not Arabs, but are a proud population of Persians that have been invaded and attacked by the surrounding world continuously throughout history and each time their ferocity has increased. An attack on Iran, by whatever outside force will result in the galvanization of the Iranian people (who do not like nor agree with their leaders) to stand solidly behind them and cause the US lose the last best chance for reform in Iran and stability in the region. Even though the United States might sit this one out, it would still be seen by the Iranians that the US 'let' or 'helped' the Israelis and this would undoubtedly be true (Use of US air bases, re-fuelers, intelligence, air space). At this point, diplomacy will truly be dead and future US Military involvement will no doubt be soon to follow. If there are those that believe that the Iraqi insurgency is a nightmare scenario, the images of young soldiers carrying their own coffins to the front lines and the 8 million Iranians that were killed in the Iran-Iraq war should paint a picture of things to come.

Israel no doubt must be allowed to defend herself against all enemies foreign and domestic, but they must also understand the ramifications of acting prematurely. Iran has stated several times throughout its Islamic Revolution period that the Jewish state is a sworn enemy but this is the case more in rhetoric than in truth. Most Persians do not consider themselves to have anything to do with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and are quick to point out that they are not Arabs. If the Israeli military strikes, this will change quickly, willingly and without question.

The Iranian government is not utterly incompetent and in most cases, has shown that they are a very rational political body, worried more about survivability than much of the rhetoric that are spewed at large rallies and protests. While it may be hard to see this from the perspective of a resident of Tel Aviv, well within the range of a nuclear tipped Shahab-3 ballistic missile, it must also be seen that Iran realizes that such an attack would end only in their own demise and as any politician knows, that is a fate worse than Hell.

Israel, do not yet cast our last option in regards to Iran. Do not incite a wave of violence from the Persian and Shi'ia communities that will reach Biblical proportions in its magnitude and severity. While we might yet be forced to use a military option, that time is not yet at hand. Surprise, Intelligence and Will is not with us and so is neither victory.

He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight. He will win who knows how to handle both superior and inferior forces. He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all its ranks. He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared. He will win who has military capacity and is not interfered with by the sovereign.
-Sun Tzu, the Art of War

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

South Korea prepares for Re-connection with the North

2005-03-11T06:11:00.000-08:00

South Korean Aid to North Increases Tensions with U.S.
Wall Street Journal: March 11, 2005

The South it seems is preparing for the sooner rather than later fact that the Northern regime will ultimately collapse and does not want to be left holding the 'bag' of a broken and devastated North Korea. Boasting the world's 10th largest economy, South Korea is deathly afraid of the aftermath of a North Korea collapse rather than the threat of nuclear or conventional weapons raining down on Seoul. So afraid in fact that they are beginning to pour investments, aid and basic materials in the North in an effort to 're-connect' the North's non-existent infrastructure and help ease the pain associated with any future re-unification. Taking the East/West German event as a case study, Seoul is building a large industrial park just over the border and increasing its exchange programs between the two Koreas.

All of this is sparking some concern in DC, where most see this as placating Kim Jong-Il and his despotic regime, further keeping his power afloat. It could also be seen as being counterproductive in the ongoing six-party talks that are attempting to prevent Pyongyang from producing more nuclear arms and stronger ballistic missiles. Not that this concern and tension between South Korea and the US is anything new or to not be expected. Many in the ROK feel that Washington just does not understand the depth at the dangers that they face in either a continued 'whacky' North Korea or even a collapsed regime. In both cases, the people of S. Korea are on the receiving end of a bad deal, one where they are under threat of invasion/massive conventional artillery strikes or severe economic and social damage from integrating a weaker than weak North.

All in all this is the best option for the South as facing the future prospect of a re-unification with a regime as badly damaged and broken as the North's. To move forward without planning and on some level attempting to help raise the level inside their neighbor would be a disaster for not only Seoul but for the region as well, as any major decline in the South's major economy will no doubt have ripple effects through that of Japan and China and at a crucial moment as they struggle to find a common monetary reserve. Although the fact exists that in doing so they may prolong the inevitable collapse of Kim Jong-Il, they will not extend that by much and may just make a transition to a unified Korean pennisula that much more smooth.

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

Sec General Annan says 'UN must accept Hezbollah', is al-Qaeda next?

2005-03-09T19:44:00.000-08:00

UNITED NATIONS -- The United Nations must recognize Hezbollah as a force to be reckoned with in implementing the U.N. resolution calling for the withdrawal of all Syrian forces from Lebanon and the disarmament of the country's militias, Secretary-General Kofi Annan said Tuesday. Source: Seattle Post-Intelligencer

Now when I first saw this headline, I thought surely this is farce piece from the Onion or similar satire news outlet. Surely the head executive for the United Nations and representative of so many great nations did not just publicly endorse or concede that a major transnational terrorist organization with a stated goal of 'the destruction of Israel' should be accepted.... Now I will in admit in the previous post I pointed out that Hezbollah seems to be making overtures that might one day lead to evolving into a legitimate form of political party, but that "some day" is not anytime this week nor in the next 160.

During the questioning from reporters, Annan says:

"But even the Hezbollah - if I read the message on the placards they are using - they are talking about non-interference by outsiders ... which is not entirely at odds with the Security Council resolution, that there should be withdrawal of Syrian troops," Annan told reporters.

"But that having been said, we need to recognize that they are a force in society that one will have to factor in as we implement the resolution," he said.

Yes, Hezbollah is a force within Lebanese society, but they have already been factored in the actual text of the resolution in question, UN Resolution 1559. Resolution 1559 Calls upon all remaining foreign forces to withdraw from Lebanon; (i.e. Syria) and Calls for the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non- Lebanese militias; (i.e. Hezbollah)

So how exactly can the United Nations Security Council, pass a resolution for the removal of something that the head executive of that very same Council (Mr. Annan), says we should 'accept'? My only wonder is that if Secretary General Annan is so easily swayed by one of the world's deadliest producers of terrorist activity, seconded only by al-Qaeda after September 11, how can he be counted as an ally in a Global War against Terrorism(islamist)? Must we remind Mr. Annan and the Europeans that it was Hezbollah that attacked and killed over 300 US Marines and French Peacekeepers in Beirut in 1983 and is date responsible for over 185 terrorist acts, worldwide resulting in over 808 deaths and 987 serious injuries. Possibly mentioning to them that they also support and train Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Hamas and Ansar Allah would help them to change their minds about 'accepting' Hezbollah and their private television station al-Manar.

Bottom line. As of May of last year, Hezbollah was still launching terror attacks on Israelis and Lebanese. This means in all definitions of the word, that they are a functioning terrorist organization and any attempts at legitimizing or accepting without them first declaring cessation of hostilities and denouncement of terror operations, will only be seen as a victory in their eyes over the West. My only hope is that if al-Zawahiri or Zarqawi of al-Qaeda ever "seem" to be an acceptable group in the eyes of the UN Secretary General, that we will quickly, willingly and without question, remove him from office and place him firmly within the genocidal Darfur region of Sudan (Since Annan does not believe genocide took place or that large numbers of 'different' people were slaughtered).

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

Hezbollah: Emerging Viable/Legitimate Actor or Just more of the same?

2005-03-09T13:10:00.000-08:00

The large gathering of people (Lebanese and Syrian) in downtown Beirut today (March 8th) can best be described using 3 key words; massive (estimates of 200,000 to 1 million), peaceful (for one of the most active transnational terrorists groups that is), Hezbollah (the backers, organizers and participants). This harkens so many more questions than answers that I hardly know where to begin let alone what exactly to say. Underpinning this entire day has been the fact that democracy is even more on the march now with the advent of dueling pro and anti-Syrian protests that were largely anti-climatic and involved no bloodshed. In the exact place that until only the last decade was wrecked by constant and devastating civil war and strife, these same opposing parties (minus the Israelis) have waged a different kind of battle using words and influence. That in its self is an amazing feat, never before thought possible, even in the most optimistic of circles. Even looking beyond this and accepting that the Lebanese people are ready for change, you have to look in confused wonder at the large and open display from the world's largest producer of terrorism and before September 11th, the group responsible for killing the greatest number of American Citizens, Hezbollah.

Hezbollah, a Shiite fundamentalist organization sponsored by both Syria and Iran, is infamously know for its heinous attacks on Israeli and American citizens and military personnel as well as enemies of the Iranian and Syrian governments. Boasting a large and well-equipped force in southern Lebanon's Bekka Valley, Hezbollah has been able to continuously harass its enemies and then retreat to the well-guarded areas under Syrian control. Recently however, Hezbollah has begin to shy away from spectacular and frequent attacks on its declared enemies and instead through the direction of its Chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, has been sowing its seeds in more traditional and peaceful ways. Attempting to become a regional power broker and redefine itself as a legitimate political party, Hezbollah now holds a dozen or so seats in the Lebanese parliament and due to its numerous community social programs, it has a powerful sway over the Lebanese Shi'ia community (30% of the population)

So are we witnessing the evolution of a brutal transnational terrorists organization into a viable and most of all, legitimate political and social authority?

Not necessarily. It is quite possible that Hezbollah is positioning itself to take power of a wide swath of Lebanon, left by the supposed vacuum from exiting Syrian forces. They may see an opportunity in which to provide much of the same stabilizing effect but at a much higher cost. Although Hezbollah has evolved in light of September 11th into a much more tame or at least subdued organization, the 'party of God' still carries its violent and rageful hatred of the United States and Israel and will more than likely continue to be support and carry out acts of terrorism. Another possibility includes an ulterior motive of keeping a pillar of Syrian influence and dominance in Lebanon as it is forced under to pressure to pull its forces. This would leave an element behind which could be directly controlled by Damascus and Tehran and could be used in a variety of ways in direct opposition to democratic elections to be held this May.

In either case, Hezbollah is in a continuing state of transition as it evolves from a guerilla group of the brutal Lebanese Civil War to a modern day legitimate regional non-state actor. Considering the current power Hezbollah wields today; 12 members in Lebanese parliament, financial and logistical support from Syria and Iran, a large and quickly dominating Shi'ia population and enough high-tech weaponry that allows them to patrol southern Lebanon with UAVs(unmanned aerial vehicles), they occupy a position the necessitates the consideration in any power changes in Lebanon. It could very well end up that by pressuring Syria out of Lebanon, that Hezbollah could become more of an oppressor and harbringer of destruction. Or it could be the turning point in the history of a declared and heinous transnational terrorists group.

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

Re-Debut of the Weekly CITAR Threat Brief and Newsletter

2005-03-08T15:17:00.000-08:00

After a long deserved hiatus, the weekly threat briefs are back! Every Monday we will release an HTML email complete with the previous weeks threat related news and reporting, recent analysis, whitepapers and news regarding happenings at the Center.

To sign up for the weekly threat brief, you can click on the subscribe link on the top of our main page. To preview this most recent newsletter to see a glimpse of what you will receive, click here.

In the coming months we will be continuously improving the newsletter as well as adding an additional monthly e-journal complete with contributed articles and more in depth analysis. This blog and the main site will keep all apprised of the details as they become available.

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

Read, Review, Repeat... Upcoming review of "Security, Reform, Peace; The three pillars of US Strategy in the Middle East"

2005-03-03T11:20:00.000-08:00

Sorry for the lack of postings lately. I am currently working on a decent sized white-paper on Reconnecting Iran as well as reviewing the Presidential Study Groups' Security, Reform, Peace; The three pillars of US Strategy in the Middle East.

I will be posting both very soon (this weekend perhaps), as well as some news about upcoming updates to the Center.

Stay Tuned and as always

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

China Good, Gap Bad.... Now if we can just effectively communicate that

2005-02-21T09:22:00.000-08:00

China, although semi-communist and lacking in coherent human rights and political/social reform, is not the enemy. The Gap, the reasons behind the Gap and the shadowy figures who lurk in the Gap are the enemy.

But, of course this administration is not the best at communicating effectively both here on the homefront and the world abroad. Right now the last thing we need to be telling the world and China in particular is that we think of them as a large and looming threat and that they should view us in the same way.
China Faces Threat of the U.S. in Three Directions
Donga-ilbo Feb 21 2005

Just looking at the simple and unadulterated facts concerning China, one will begin to see why they are not a 'looming threat', unless of course we want/force them to be.
In 2001, we were spending $396.1 Billion on defense while China was spending just $42 Billion. Now while they are increasing defense spending dramatically(11%), they will in no way come close to even half of our expeditures within 20-30 years. So militarily, we have NO peer nor will we have one anytime soon.
China is important not only us but to globalization as a whole for several reasons one of the most important being the fact that we need their influence both in the Asian-Pacific Region (N.Korea, Russia come to mind) as well as in the Middle East/Central Asian regions. The ME/CA region is of extreme importance due to the fact that they WILL be coming regardless of our actions in a bid to secure their own insatiable need for energy and this presents us with an opportunity to form a strategic security partnership with them. Instability in the region does no one good and it will be in their best interests energy wise to see a safe and stable Iraq, Iran and Saudi Arabia. China already has some extremely lucrative energy contracts with Iran and would stand to lose quite a lot by any military or economic sanctions imposed on the mullahs.

Now, am I saying that China is an American ally on par with the UK and Australia? Not exactly, but they have their place and the right to earn our trust. That said, we have the same obligations. So why all the hushed talk around Pentagon and CCP circles about 'looming threats, encirclement, a New Cold War'? Well, in a strategic sense, look at China from a geo-political overview and you will quickly notice what seems to be a classic encirclement tactic. US ground forces in nearby Afghanistan and other Central Asian countries, B2's and B52's within range at Diego Garcia and Guam, Couple hundred thousand troops in Korea and Japan, Carrier Group 5 floating around and a whole bunch of stuff a few days away in the Persian Gulf region. Plot it on a map and China looks like they close to an invasion. Then add recent statements from the US and Japan on a joint Taiwan Security policy and fears of the EU Arms Embargo being dropped and you might actually see the threat level in China rising.

So what to do.... Communicate

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

Changing the Levant (and the Middle East)..... Bush Style

2005-02-21T07:25:00.000-08:00

Who woulda' thunk that a devastating bombing and assassination of the internationally respected former Prime Minister of Lebanon, Rafik Hariri, would have brought about the uproar, the dialogue and seemingly, the change that is beginning to rise in the Levant (Levant is referred to as the region of Lebanon, Syria, Israel, Jordan, Palestine). Certainly not the perpetrators of the incident, whether they be Islamist terrorists or Syrian agents, they more than likely did not anticipate that thousands of Lebanese protesters would demand that Syria get out of Lebanon or that they Lebanese opposition would declare an 'intifada of independence' and that calls for Syria to release their influence and remove their troops would be echoed loudly by Pres. Bush. I believe it is the loud condemination and effective harsh rhetoric from the Bush administration, backed by the actions of the Iraqi War that helped to effect change in Lebanon/Syria and in time the entire middle east. essentially, Walk Soft, Talk Hard, Remind others of the portfolio of your Big Stick (ie Iraq, Afghanistan, GWOT Operations)

Now of course there is the constant harassment from Syrian/Iranian backed Hezbollah, calling for the Lebanese people to "cool" their anti-Syrian rhetoric or else and the muted attempts at stopping the UN Resolution 1559 calling for the removal of foreign troops and dismantling of Hezbollah.

Then looking back over last week, you have the Iranian government giving public support to their only Arab allies the Syrians and wanting to create a 'united front', only to have the Syrians release an immediate statement that basically says, 'Thanks but we don't want to share the American Crosshairs with you (Iran)'.

Then today, you have the possible culmination of all of these activities in the indication that Syria is indeed going to begin to remove its 16,000+ troops from Lebanese soil. So, lets take a little look at the events basically starting last October with the passing of UN Resolution 1559

Oct 2004 - UN Resolution 1559 passes, calls for removal of foreign troops from Lebanon (Syria) and the subsequent removal of Hezbollah.
Feb 11 2005 - Hezbollah 'curses the UN for its call to lay down its arms'
Feb 14 2005 - Massive, Mysterious explosion devastates downtown Beirut, killing 2 dozen including the lead reformer and opposition member, frm PM Hariri.
Feb 14 2005 - World condemns bombing, US immediately warns of possible 'bad things' to the perpetrators.
Feb 16 2005 - Iran proposes 'United Front', Syria says it does want to unite with anyone against the US
Feb 17 - 2005 - Bush tells Syria point blank, Quit Lebanon
Feb 18 2005 - Lebanese Tourism Minister quits, Syrian Spy Chief sacked
Feb 19 2005 - Hezbollah tells the Lebanese that they should cool it and stop making so much noise
Feb 20 2005 - Lebanese tell Hezbollah where they can stick it and continue massive protests and opposition declares an 'intifada of independence'
Feb 21 2005 - Syria announces that it will begin troop withdrawal

So in a very small amount of time, the situation in the Levant, has changed quite rapidly and it seems for the better.

Lebanon will soon be free of most Syrian troops and eventually influence

Perhaps then they will be able to collectively secure their country from Hezbollah in the south and begin again the process of Re-Connecting their country to globalization

Syria seems to have blinked when it comes to semi-united world condemnation

Why though? I believe it is due simply to the fact that Bush is not to be taken lightly and that his words are mostly backed up with swift actions (ie Iraq)
Syria also shrugged off support from an old time ally, the Iranians. This too I believe was an effort to tell Bush that we are not with those guys.

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

Killing the "Connectors" in Tsunami-stricken Asia

2005-02-19T08:44:00.000-08:00

Australia Warns of Terror Attacks on Aceh Aid Workers
Feb 19 05 VOA News
It seems that certain non-state actors will do almost anything to keep their little niche of the "non-integrating Gap" disconnected from the rest of the World. In the devastated province of Aceh in Indonesia, the Australian government is warning that militant Islamic groups are threatening attacks on the very aid workers that are there to help those who lost so much in the Christmas Tsunami.

This is just another example of how trans-national and ideological terrorists organizations are willing to sacrafrice themselves and their own people for the sake of staying apart from the rest of humanity. Its one thing to try to disconnect a society from the global "Core" and quite another to try to further disconnect and disrupt one that was disconnected in the first place.

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

MAD part deux, Asian Style..

2005-02-16T13:45:00.000-08:00

So, North Korea has finally admitted that they are in fact, in possession of nuclear devices and the ballistic delivery systems capable of deploying them as far away as the west coast of the United States. Not something entirely new to most people with a TV set and an IQ over 80, but the fact that they have publicly admitted their existance means two things.

They have nothing left to bargin with and so needed to play one of their last cards on the table
The tyrannical regime of the DPRK is becoming rather bored (imploding) and like any dying and cornered animal, is lashing out for what may be its final breath.

The first reason is the most likely and the most productive for the DPRK , yielding the best results. They hope to bring the US back to the table as they did in 1992 and obtain more security guraentees, food aid, money, fuel oil and whatever else their hearts desire. In exchange, they will no doubt promise to dismantle their weapons program and make nice with their brethern to the south. In reality we undoubtly be caught once again in the insanity that is the Korean Flashpoint and find ourselves 4 years from now asking why we keep repeating the same thing and expecting different results, i.e. the definition of insanity.

What to do you ask?
MAD. Mutually Assured Destruction. A unpopular strategic nuclear policy put into full practice by Robert McNamara in the 60s, MAD is credited with helping to prevent a nuclear and total great power war by simply allowing both sides to realize that war with nukes is impossible to win (and so they never launch). Largely a Cold-War strategy, I believe with some tinkering that this concept can be employed in both Central Asia and the Asian-Pacific Rim to the benefit of our allies in the region and of course the United States proper.

Have you lost your mind?
Thats beside the point. In response to North Korea's obvious intentions to continually harass us and its neighbors with the threat of ballistic missiles tipped with nuclear warheads, let us instead turn the tables on them and call their bluff. Oh and dont forget China. China stands to lose almost more than anyone if the Korean pennisula turns into a fighting match and yet still stands on the side-lines in a vain effort to use "strong" language when dealing with their ideological counterparts. If we were to, oh I dont know, either allow or give (deploy) nuclear weapons in Japan and/or South Korea and then give some command and control to those respective goverments, we may just see a quick change of heart when it comes to threatenning your neighbors. By allowing an Asian MAD strategy to emerge between S. Korea/Japan vs. N Korea, several things will immediately happen. The most promininently of which will be the entire Chinese Communist Party taking a collective gasp and start a mad(no pun intended) dash to either A) Reposition their relatively small nuclear forces to account for a "threat" in the East or B) March into Pyongyang and quickly, willingly and without question remove the Kim Jong Il dynasty in the name of regional stability and security (this would be my guess and my hopes). By forcing this situation into the very laps of the Chinese, we will ensure that they take responsibility for their own neighborhood or suffer the conseqences of their inaction. I am willing to bet that the situation in North Korea would be very quickly resolved thanks to our sino-counterparts.

Holes I am found..
Unlike most people, I find holes in my own ideas and try to plug them. The first and largest hole in this idea is the simple fact that the Japanese people have such an understandable aversion to nuclear weapons due to being the only population to have experienced their devestation. In order for this plan to work, the Japanese goverment would have to make it publicly known that they have nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. Given the historical public outcry against military expansion of any kind, this is a large stumbling block. Oh and I almost forgot... during one time or another, the Japanese empire has invaded, pilaged and overrun almost all of the nations on the pacific rim and so giving them nuclear capabilities would surely upset many of them.

Asian's MAD?
So is the short term answer to the North Korean situation a MAD policy for the Asian/Pacific comunity? I think it is one of many viable alternatives to this continued prolonged negotiations that we seem to be perpetually stuck in. Overall direct military options are not ideal and we obviously are having trouble with convincing the N Koreans that they should rejoin the human race and the global community, so forcing China to take action through the threat of an Asian Nuke race may be the answer. In this respect, China will be able to coherantly maintain "face" while other Asian nations will be able to exercise their own regional rights and responsibilites. While I do believe that the security and stability situation in that region of the world is vitally important to the interests of teh United States, it is in fact their neighborhood and they are ultimately responsible for policing their block.

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

Re-Disconnecting Lebanon

2005-02-16T06:20:00.000-08:00

Regardless of whether it was Syria or Islamists behind the massive explosion that killed the former Lebanese Prime Minister Hariri, the attack was designed for one purpose alone, to disconnect once again, Lebanon from the emerging globalized world. In a seemingly brilliant strategic move, the assassins targeted not only the single most influential person in economic and political reform in Lebanon, but also succeeded in shaking the foundation of security that the PM Hariri had fought so hard to rebuild.

Disconnection Part I
Prior to the Lebanese Civil War of the 70's and 80's, the capital city of Beirut was remarked as the "Riviera of the Middle East". Boasting a warm Mediterranean climate, beautiful beaches and a vibrant tourism industry, Beirut quickly became an economic powerhouse and the center of regional banking. Following the the two Israeli-Arab wars, hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees flooded the neighbor to the north and within a few short years they became organized and began launching attacks against Israel from their haven in southern Lebanon. What followed was one of the bloodiest and longest civil wars that the region has ever felt. Fed by Syrian and Israeli invasions, Hezbollah recruitment, PLO operations and Maronite Christian militias, the country essentially collapsed upon itself and ceased to be a sovereign nation. Without the presence of a coherent governance and the greater international community shrugging their shoulders at the problem, Lebanon de-evolved into a failed state and hence and incubator for trans-national and state-sponsored terrorists, arms and drug dealers and organized crime. This disconnection from the world is what allowed these groups to succeed for so long and to perpetuate the decades of civil strife and chaos.

Reconnecting to the Global Economy
Much of the civil war damage has now been repaired throughout the country, and foreign investors and tourists have returned. Lebanese civil society generally enjoys significantly more freedoms than elsewhere in the Arab world. Much of this was brought about by the Prime Minister Hariri and his policies of economic reform, ability to gain foreign direct investment, his relations with the west and even his very own money. A multi-billionaire from his lucrative construction contracts and dealings in Saudi Arabia, allowed Hariri to infuse millions into many downtown sections of Beirut, cleaning up after the bloody civil war. Part of the rebuilding involved overhauling the tourists industry and bringing back the banks that were once the cornerstone of the Middle Eastern Riviera. With the Israeli withdrawal from the country in 2000 and the reformed government that allowed for the election of a Christian President, Sunni Prime Minister and a Shi'ite speaker of the legislature, it seemed that there was a perfect balance of representation of the 3 main groups that comprised of Lebanon's citizenry. One important detail that was still unresolved however was the 15,000 + Syrian troops that still occupied the land and their ensuing influence over Lebanese political and social structure.

Pulling the plug on the reconnection
This latest attack in Lebanon was not an act of retribution nor a random killing of a former high level government official. It is likely a concerted and focused effort at destablizing the country for a potential plethora of reasons most of which is this, disconnectedness. Trans-national terrorists entities prey upon disconnected failed states due to their ripeness for discontent and relative freedom to operate in country without impunity. This is most evident in failed states like Somalia, Sudan, Iraq, Chechnya and Afghanistan. Other nation-states seek out instability in neighboring states in order to solidify their hold and influence over them. Syria is doing just this. In an attempt to thwart the actions of the connected "West" and UN Resolution 1559, forcing Syria to withdraw its troops from in-country, Syria is attempting to create further instability to justify its presence there.

In either case, the bombing and killing of former Prime Minister Hariri is an attempt at re-escalation and re-destablization of a country that for so long has yearned for the opposite. I am however optimistic in my beliefs that the Lebanese people no longer want to be used by outside actors and will not allow this re-disconnecting to occur. It is my belief that once you undergo extreme suffering and survive its rigors, you emerge a stronger, more passionate and humble people and that is just what the people of the country of Lebanon have become.

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

Is calling your ambassador home a sign of impending doom?

2005-02-15T11:23:00.000-08:00

In response to yesterdays massive explosion and assassination of a Lebanese former Prime Minister and up and coming Syrian opposition leader, the White House today has recalled the ambassador to the US in order to begin "urgent consultations" and decide the next best course of action in regards to the terrorist attack in Beirut.

Taking a step back from this situation and looking at events that have unfolded in the region and on the international stage in the past 6 months, one can quickly see a pattern emerging. Syria is on the chopping block and they know it. Unlike its Hezbollah co-sponsor Iran, Syria does not enjoy the benefit of deterrence from possible nuclear weapons nor from a friendly Shi'ia majority in neighboring Iraq. Iran has become almost completely immune to international threats for these two reasons irregardless of the heated rhetoric exchanged between Tehran and Washington.

So what does this mean for Syria?
It means that without drastic changes in its policies and international dealings, it is next in line for a democratic overhaul courtesy of the United States of America. It means that Syria may have one last chance to heed UN Security Council Resolution 1559 and remove its troops and support for Hezbollah in Lebanon. It means that continued complacency in allowing Islamists and Jihadi wannabes to stream through the borders into Iraq will begin to have real and tangible consequences. It means that Syria will soon find itself alone, without other Arab allies or friends and quite possibly with many neighboring enemies. It means that the days of the Syrian Baa'thists regime is as numbered as was Sadaams and that clock may have already been started on its demise. but most importantly, it means that another despotic, isolated and disconnected regime may in fact be on its way into the bright shining light of freedom and liberty.

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research

Emerging Threats

A Future Fitna?

Beginning anew

The New MAD

"Its the Cool Thing... Everybody's Doin' It"

The Art of Ambiguity

CITAR Hiatus

Reports are sketchy... but the Center is in fact alive!

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

Blogging the Future: PNM style!

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

'Toothless' System Administrators: the State Dept's Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization

New State Dept. Office Aimed at Postwar AidWashington Post: March 25, 2005

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

"State Department Soldiers" and the beginnings of a 'SysAdmin' Force?

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

From Bad to Worse. Israel Leaks Plans to Attack Iran

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

South Korea prepares for Re-connection with the North

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

Sec General Annan says 'UN must accept Hezbollah', is al-Qaeda next?

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

Hezbollah: Emerging Viable/Legitimate Actor or Just more of the same?

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

Re-Debut of the Weekly CITAR Threat Brief and Newsletter

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

Read, Review, Repeat... Upcoming review of "Security, Reform, Peace; The three pillars of US Strategy in the Middle East"

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

China Good, Gap Bad.... Now if we can just effectively communicate that

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

Changing the Levant (and the Middle East)..... Bush Style

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

Killing the "Connectors" in Tsunami-stricken Asia

For the latest in threat news and research, visit us at the Center for Independent Threat Analysis and Research.

MAD part deux, Asian Style..

Re-Disconnecting Lebanon

Is calling your ambassador home a sign of impending doom?

New State Dept. Office Aimed at Postwar Aid
Washington Post: March 25, 2005