Notwithstanding the never-ending stream of all those based-on-reliable-intelligence-sources analyses, it is doubtful whether these same analysts would be willing to bet whatever is left of their 401K retirement accounts on their predictions that Israel will — or will not — attack Iranian nuclear sites this year.

And while research institutions have conducted interesting exercises to try to figure out the military, diplomatic and economic repercussions of a confrontation between Israel and Iran, the dictum that no military plan survives the contact with the enemy applies also here — in addition to the unintended consequences, blowbacks and the proverbial ‘black swans’ that are bound to show up even in the unlikely scenario under which Israel achieves all or most of its military goals.

If I can put my ten cents worth of strategic thinking, it seems to me that the ousting of Saddam Hussein and the American fiasco in Iraq helped tip the balance of power in the Persian Gulf and the Levant in the direction of Iran and its allies. And that made it more likely that Israel and other Sunni Arab players that regard the Islamic Republic as a threat to their core national interests would use all their available resources to deprive Iran from having access to a military instrument that would allow it to formalize the new regional balance of power.

In his magisterial study of the 1812-1814 military campaigns in Europe, Russia Against Napoleon, historian Dominic Lieven suggests that while Tsar Alexander recognized that France would never be able to control Europe, he also concluded that the price of adhering to Napoleon’s Continental System would have undermined Russia’s position as a great power and that the Russians had no choice but to use the full power of their military to prevent that from happening.

My guess is that Israel, as well the Saudis and their Arab-Sunni allies, know that it would be possible to contain a nuclear Iran — in the same way that Russia could have embraced a cost-effective strategy to contain Napoleon’s France. But as long as Israeli leaders believe that they have a realistic option of blocking Iran’s nuclear program — and by extension, of setting major constraints on its ability to assert its position as a regional power — they will probably use their military capacity. The Saudis and their Gulf partners would probably cheer them behind close doors while publicly condemning them.

But as quite a few Israeli and American military experts have warned, a military strike on Iranian facilities would not achieve the declared Israeli goal of ending Iran’s alleged nuclear military program and the expected costs in terms of Israeli casualties could be very high.
Moreover, if Iran gives the green light to its Shiite Hezbollah allies in Lebanon to attack Israel and mobilize the Shiites in Iraq and the Persian Gulf to retaliate against American and Saudi targets, Tehran would be in a position to strengthen its regional power. The ayatollahs would also be able to exploit an Israeli attack to ignite Iranian nationalism and win support even from those Iranians who actually oppose the ruling clerics and would like to see them removed from power.

And while the Obama administration insists that it wants to apply peaceful means to get Iran to freeze its nuclear enrichment program, it is not clear that Washington and its Europeans allies would succeed in coming up with a diplomatic formula that would be acceptable to Iran and to Israel (and its supporters in Washington) or that the Americans would be able to prevent Israel from taking military action against Iran. Those of us who believe that an Israeli military attack would not serve American and Israeli interests and may actually help consolidate the power of Iran in the Middle East and that of the clerics in Teheran should also recognize that President Barack Obama — who probably agrees with these assumptions — is not in a position for a diplomatic confrontation with Israel during a presidential election year.

In fact, even in a non-election year, there will be very little incentive for Mr Obama to launch a creative diplomatic opening to Iran at a time when the Iranian leadership does not have the power to make a deal with Washington and is facing strong opposition at home from liberal and conservative forces alike (who, despite their differences, want Iran to acquire nuclear military capacity).

And at a time when the Middle East is going through the political turmoil of the Arab Spring and the US is engaged in a steady drawdown from its military occupation of Iraq, the shaky balance of power in the region would make it difficult for Washington to try to reach a ‘grand bargain’ with Iran. Such a move, coming in the aftermath of the collapse of the pro-American regimes in Egypt and Tunisia, would be perceived by the Saudis and other Arab-Sunni governments as another sign of US weakness.

If Israel decides to attack Iran, expect the Obama administration to provide it with logistical and other support, including by vetoing a UN Security Council resolution condemning Israel (unlike the Reagan administration which did join the Security Council’s censure of the Israeli attack on the Iraq nuclear reactor in Osirak in 1981).

Leaf from History

Yet, in the same way that the outcome of the 1973 Middle East War provided the then Nixon administration with an opportunity to protect and even strengthen its position in the Middle East, by renewing diplomatic relations with Egypt and working to bring peace between the Egyptians and the Israelis, the Obama administration could find itself in a position to advance its interests in the aftermath of an Israel-Iran military confrontation and an ensuing Middle Eastern war. A potential leading player in such a post-war scenario would be Turkey which until now has played a clever diplomatic game vis-a-vis Iran. In the most significant act of military cooperation between Washington and Ankara since 2003, Turkey agreed last year to station sophisticated American radars, part of a US-led system to defend Europe against a potential Iranian missile attack, and has expressed strong opposition against any move by Iran to acquire nuclear military weapons.

At the same time, the Turks have also been in the forefront of the diplomatic opposition against a military strike against Iran and, working with Brazil, it proposed a diplomatic deal to freeze Iranian uranium enrichment in exchange for ending the US-led sanctions against Iran.
And while Turkey is a member of NATO and remains a close military ally of Washington, its recent diplomatic assertiveness and its tensions with Israel coupled with its strong support for democratic activists in the Arab World, has strengthened its status in the Middle East and could allow it to play the role of grand mediator between the US and Iran in a post-war scenario.

Indeed, working with Turkey and Saudi Arabia and the Arab League, as well with the permanent members of the UN Security Council and the European Union, the Obama administration could propose the convening of a Middle East Conference chaired by Turkey that would bring together all the Arab states, Iran and Israel and that would set the stage for the establishment of a nuclear-free zone in the region (which would apply also to Iran as well as to Israel’s nuclear arsenal) and to a series of diplomatic initiatives to help stabilize Iraq, Syria and Lebanon and revitalize the Israeli-Palestinian peace process along the lines of the old Arab League proposal.

In that context, the US and Iran could also start repairing their diplomatic ties and Teheran would be encouraged to support any resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that is agreed on both sides. Not for the first time in history, the end of a war could help create the conditions for stability, cooperation and peace. It could be worth the try.

The terminal, which is scheduled to pump 87.25 billion cubic feet of imported gas into Israel’s energy network annually, is intended as a stopgap until the Jewish state’s new fields go on-stream in 2013 at the earliest.

The new fields, Leviathan and the smaller Tamar field, hold an estimated 25 trillion cubic feet of gas. Major new strikes are expected as Noble Energy Co., which has its headquarters in Texas, and its Israelis partners, extend exploration.

The U.S. Geological Survey reported that the Levant Basin, which covers Israel, Syria, Lebanon, Cyprus and the Gaza Strip, contains around 122 tcf of gas and at least 1.7 billion barrels of oil.

Israel’s big finds, which are likely to extend into Cypriot and Lebanese waters, significantly alter the strategic energy picture in the eastern Mediterranean.

Given the region’s history of war — the Arab-Israeli conflict and the historical Greece-Turkey rivalry which resulted in the 1974 division of Cyprus — there are fears this abundance of energy wealth could trigger new battles.

Lebanon, with which Israel is technically at war — they clashed in a 34-day war in the summer of 2006 — claims Israel’s Leviathan field extends into Lebanese waters.

Israel’s plans to defend its gas fields reflects its concerns that they are highly vulnerable to attack by terrorists using anti-ship missiles, frogmen or suicide bombers in boats packed with explosives.

In this regard, the main worry is the Iranian-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon, which Israel’s military says possess 42,000 missiles and rockets, including Chinese-designed C-802 anti-ship missiles that seriously damaged an Israeli corvette in the 2006 fighting.

Syria recently took delivery of 72 supersonic Russian-built P-800 Yakhont anti-ship missiles with a range of 190 miles and powerful enough to sink a large ship. Israeli leaders say they fears these could possibly be passed on to Hezbollah for use against the Israeli gas production platforms.

On top of that, in 2011 the Israeli navy seized an Iranian arms shipment, including six Nasr-1 radar-guided anti-ship missiles it claimed was bound for the Palestinian Hamas organization in Gaza.

Military commanders say the production platforms and associated installations will be prime targets if a new Middle East war erupts between Iran and the West currently confronting each other in the Persian Gulf.

Concerns have been heightened by a recent foray into the eastern Mediterranean by the Iranian navy. Two vessels transited the Suez Canal to visit the Syrian port of Tartus in Iran’s first naval mission into those waters since the Islamic Revolution of 1979.

Tehran has said it plans to deploy warships in the Mediterranean on a more regular basis. Most of the Israeli navy is deployed in those waters.

The strategic importance of the gas fields, which are expected to transform Israel’s economy and earn it billions of dollars in energy exports, is underlined by the plan to strengthen the navy at a time when the hard-pressed government is slashing the defense budget.

No details of the cost of the naval program have been disclosed. But The Jerusalem Post said some of it will be underwritten by state-owned companies tasked with constructing and operating the sea-based LNG facility several miles off the northern city of Hadera.

Up to now, Israel has been importing gas from neighboring Egypt, with which it signed a landmark peace treaty in 1979, supplementing gas from Israel’s only working gas field that’s nearly depleted.

The Egyptian gas supplies are problematical. The gas pipeline across the Sinai Peninsula has been attacked 12 times since the uprising in Egypt that erupted in January 2011. The latest bombing Sunday ruptured the line again.

Israel imported 43 percent of its gas from Egypt and that’s now been largely cut off. But that’s just half the problem.

The interim government in Cairo, installed after President Hosni Mubarak was driven from office Feb. 11, 2011, claims the fees for the gas were far too low. It wants hefty increases.

Israel’s reluctant to agree to that even though the Tamar field isn’t expected to begin production until 2013 at the earliest.
upi

The remaining advocates of Bashar Assad are working overtime to portray a vision of a completely chaotic Middle East if and when the Alawite regime finally collapses. To predict chaos in the Middle East is a safe bet, so what’s really new in this case? The threat of chaos is almost automatically linked to another round of Arab-Israeli war, this time a Shi’ite-led Iranian-Hezbollah-Alawite desperate attack on Israel. Well, while the Israelis may naturally take the proper precautionary steps to deal with the day after Assad, they are far from showing any sign of undue worry or panic.

There is concern about the arsenal of chemical warheads that is in Syrian hands, some of it was transferred to Syria from Iraq on the eve of the American invasion of March 2003. The fear is that these warheads may find their way to Hezbollah and Iran. Surely not a pleasant prospect, but not one that cannot be dealt with. Even Hezbollah and the Iranians know that any attempt to use these weapons against Israel will be calamitous to them. The thought that either of the two will risk their very existence [in the case of Hezbollah], or most vital national interests [in the case of Iran], in support of the Alawite dictatorship is good for psychological warfare, but not in the real world. The same applies to the possibility of Iranian closure of the straits of Hormuz in support of Assad. Really? Not really…

They will not do that. All this is relevant to the Syrian situation and its implications, not to the much talked-about scenario of an Israeli or American attack against the Iranian nuclear program. This is clearly a totally different opera. The connection between a final collapse of the Assad regime and the Israeli and/or American calculus regarding Iran is possible but not inevitable. Sure, a Syrian participation in an Iranian retaliation against a strike is not something cherished by Israeli and American planners and policy makers, but this is becoming a remote possibility since the Syrian Army is in a stage of disintegration. General Mustafa Al-Sheikh, the highest ranking Syrian defector, predicted some days ago that the Syrian Army will disintegrate until the end of February. This may be wishful thinking in terms of the timing, but not the process, which is very obvious, leading in the not distant future to that exact outcome. So, if we move away from the Israeli angle of the situation, what else can happen affecting neighboring countries and overall regional stability? First, we can expect a massive refugee problem, Alawites trying to cross to Lebanon and Turkey. Also, possible mass flight out of Ba’athi functionaries, not just Alawites. Chaos in Syria will inevitably take its toll of neighboring Lebanon.

Tripoli, a Sunni city with a sizable Alawite minority, is likely to explode, and that will be part of a bigger issue in Lebanon, as the traditional anti-Assad forces there, mainly the Sunnis and some Christian Maronite factions, will find the new circumstances conducive to put pressure on Hezbollah, demanding it dismantle its arms. The not so old wounds created by the assassination of former PM Rafiq Hariri will reopen with ferocity. Whether all that will lead Lebanon towards chaos is not clear, though it’s likely. Sheikh Nasrallah, however, will find himself and Hezbollah engaged in a conflict with the majority of the Lebanese people. So, under these circumstances, a war initiated by him against Israel may seem a good diversionary exercise, but still is highly unlikely. The Sheikh will fight for his own survival inside Lebanon as his first priority.

Another country that will feel the brunt of the Assad collapse will be Iraq, where the current Sunni-Shi’i tension may be greatly exacerbated, as the former will be much encouraged by the rise of a new regime in Syria, most likely Sunni-dominated. Not for nothing, the Maliki government in Iraq is the most pro-Assad Arab government. They know why.

Then there is Turkey. But for the expected Alawite flight across the northwestern border, the Turks should be greatly preoccupied by the fallout of a collapse in Damascus on the northeast border, where over 2 million Syrian Kurds live, just waiting to rid themselves of the Assad yoke. An unruly Kurdish population on the Syrian side of the border will not be good news to the Turkish government and military having to deal with their own unruly Kurdish population.

The Turks may gain, however, many political dividends from their support to the Sunni Syrian rebels. A Sunni-dominated regime in Damascus is likely to be friendly to Ankara, and so Turkey’s overall regional standing may be significantly enhanced. Such a regime in Damascus will also be friendly to the Saudis, and a Turkish-Saudi rivalry over influence in Damascus of the future is highly likely. The big losers will be Iranians. They cannot expect a friendly Syrian government in the near future. The overall regional Sunni-Shi’i schism will be in display in the most dramatic way. But even that is not really new, as this schism has been a feature of Middle East Islamic reality since the killing of Imam Hussein in 680 A.D.

The downfall of Bashar Assad is behind the door. No Armageddon, but still a significant challenge to regional stability.

*Adjunct Professor, University of South Carolina
Huffington Post

Turkey is seen as one of the main threats.

The move follows the announcement Sunday by the Noble Energy Co., of Houston and its Israeli partner the Delek Group, that they had made a new discovery off the Israeli coast that could contain 1.2 trillion-1.3 trillion cubic feet of gas.

Israel is already preparing to launch a major security operation to protect the offshore fields and the attendant facilities in its waters.

This will involve missile-armed patrol vessels, round-the-clock aerial surveillance by unmanned drones and other naval detachments, primarily to defend the energy zones against attack by Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed force in neighboring Lebanon.

Israel’s main gas zones, discovered by Noble in 2009-10, are the Leviathan field holding an estimated 16 tcf and the nearby Tamar field with 8 tcf. These are part of the Levant Basin which the U.S. Geological Survey reported in 2010 contains an estimated 122 tcf of natural gas and around 1.7 billion barrels of oil.

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is expected to ask the Cypriot government, which controls the southern two-thirds of the war-divided Mediterranean island, to allow Israeli air force combat jets to use the Andreas Papandreou air base outside the southwestern resort city of Paphos.

“It is unclear if the request will be to station a permanent presence on the island or to establish a base that could provide logistical support for the (air force) during operations in the region,” The Jerusalem Post’s military analyst Yaakov Katz reported.

Cyprus’ Famagusta Gazette newspaper said Tuesday that discussions about providing facilities for the Israeli air force are at “an exploratory stage.”

But Katz surmised that Israel’s objective is “to be able to more effectively protect the growing number of gas fields it is discovering in the Mediterranean.”

The prospect of the air force getting access to the Paphos base was heightened in December when Cypriot Defense Minister Demetris Eliades signed two military cooperation agreements with his Israeli counterpart, Ehud Barak, during a visit to Tel Aviv.

The Greek Cypriot government in Nicosia has no air force and only a miniscule naval force that’s heavily outgunned by the military might of Turkey, its longtime adversary to the north.

Eliades has made it clear the Israelis have approval “in advance” to operate in Cypriot air space and waters. Actually basing Israeli aircraft in southern Cyprus is guaranteed to rile the Turks.

Cyprus has launched its own gas exploration program in waters off its southern coast that abut the northern extremity of Israel’s Leviathan field.

Initial results, with Noble Energy handling the drilling, indicate the Greek Cypriots are sitting on an energy bonanza of their own.

Cyprus has been divided since Turkey invaded in 1974 after a short-lived coup by supporters of union with Greece. The Turks seized the northern third of the island and proclaimed it the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. It is recognized only by Ankara.

Israel and Cyprus plan to pool resources and jointly export their gas through an underwater pipeline to the European Union via Greece.

Turkey says the Cypriots have no right to do that unilaterally, threatening a possible flare-up of the historic rivalry between the Turks and Greeks.

Ankara has dispatched warships and at least one seismic survey ship into the disputed zone and in 2011 stationed a squadron of F-16 fighter jets at a TRNC airbase.

Turkey is also at odds with Israel, its onetime strategic ally. It reversed the alliance in 2010 after the Israeli Navy killed nine Turks when intercepting a Turkish-run flotilla carrying humanitarian aid to the Israeli-blockaded Gaza Strip.

In recent weeks, Barak has pledged to upgrade Israel’s defense links with Greece as well.

Debt-ridden Greece, which is staring economic collapse in the face, is only too happy to hook up with a war-seasoned military power like the Israel to confound the Turks.

The Israeli air force has had joint exercises with the Greek air force in recent months.

Israel also faces threats from neighboring Lebanon, which also seeks to benefit from the energy boom. Beirut claims Israel is poaching on its territorial zone, which has yet to be demarcated by treaty.
UPI

Dozens more were killed during the day, according to the opposition, drawing comparison with the plight of Benghazi which triggered Western attacks on Libya last year and accelerating a global diplomatic showdown whose outcome is far from clear.

“I’ve seen whole families killed this week,” an activist called Ahmed told Reuters from Homs, the scene of one of the bloodiest government onslaughts in the 11-month-old revolt against Assad. “Now I feel like I’m just waiting to be the next to die,” added the accountant aged 28.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu told Reuters before flying to Washington for talks on Syria that Turkey, which once saw Assad as a valuable ally but now wants him out, could no longer stand and watch and wanted to host an international meeting to agree ways to end the killing and provide aid.

“It is not enough being an observer,” he said. “It is time now to send a strong message to the Syrian people that we are with them,” he added, while refusing to be drawn on what kind of action Turkey or its allies would be prepared to consider.

Syrian army tanks and artillery pounded areas of Homs where revolt had flourished, demolishing buildings where people were living, short of water, food and medical supplies and pinned down by sharpshooters on rooftops.

Syrian state media blamed foreign-backed “terrorists” for killing 30 security personnel on Tuesday and causing an explosion that set a refinery ablaze.

“All the international community should work together to help,” Davutoglu said. “Especially those who cannot even go from one street to another in Homs. You have pictures of children running from one house to another house while under artillery attack … They cannot continue these methods of oppression.”

Syria’s position at the heart of the Middle East, allied to Iran and home to a powder-keg religious and ethnic mix, means Assad’s opponents have strenuously ruled out the kind of military action they took against the isolated Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.

Some form of corridors for aid and evacuation, or ceasefire accords inside Syria, may be the most achievable demands.

RUSSIAN WRATH

Russia and China, which let the United Nations support the air campaign in Libya, provoked strong condemnation from the United States, European powers and other Arab governments when they vetoed a much less interventionist resolution in the Security Council last week that called on Assad to step down.

While Moscow sees him as a buyer of arms and host to a Soviet-era naval base, for both Russia and China Syria is also a test case for efforts to resist U.N. encroachment on sovereign governments’ freedom to deal with rebels as they see fit.

Campaigning for next month’s presidential election that he is certain to win, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, who first won the presidency after storming the rebel Russian city of Grozny, said: “A cult of violence has been coming to the fore in international affairs … This cannot fail to cause concern.

“We of course condemn all violence regardless of its source, but one cannot act like an elephant in a china shop.

“Help them, advise them, limit, for instance, their ability to use weapons but not interfere under any circumstances.”

It is unclear what Turkey, a NATO member and rising Muslim, democratic force in the Middle East, could do to bring Moscow into any international initiative alongside those regional and world powers which have sided with the rebels against Assad.

“Now it is still time for diplomatic efforts, and we are using all diplomatic means,” Davutoglu told Reuters when asked when Turkey, which has taken in refugees and rebel commanders, might envisage sending its own forces across the border.

Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan, who had described the Russian and Chinese veto at the U.N. as a “fiasco”, telephoned outgoing Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on Wednesday and afterward issued a statement repeating that Assad had lost “legitimacy”.

The Kremlin said Medvedev told Erdogan that the search for a solution should continue, including in the Security Council, but that foreign interference was not an option. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, who visited Assad in Damascus on Tuesday, said the president’s opponents should sit down and talk with him.

Medvedev also spoke with French President Nicolas Sarkozy asking him and other Western countries to avoid “hasty, unilateral moves” towards Syria and said that the position of the international community should be “balanced and objective”, the Kremlin said.

As the diplomatic gears turned, the military offensive in Homs and elsewhere showed no sign of let up. Activists in the city also accused militiamen of slaughtering three families in their homes – the sort of incident that is fuelling fears of a descent into more widespread, Iraq-style sectarian killing.

The day’s death toll stood at over 100, activists said, offering figures that could not be independently verified.

U.N. APPALLED

The United Nations’ top human rights official called on Wednesday for urgent international action. Navi Pillay, High Commissioner for Human Rights, said: “I am appalled by the Syrian government’s willful assault on the city of Homs, and its use of artillery and other heavy weaponry in what appear to be indiscriminate attacks on civilian areas in the city.”

Speaking by satellite phone from the beleaguered Bab Amro neighbourhood, activist Hussein Nader said that the bombardment has lessened on the district by dusk but that tanks had moved closer to the besieged district, where 30,000 inhabitants have been without water, electric or telephone lines days.

He said bombardments has killed 42 civilians on Wednesday with many others wounded: “There are neighbourhoods on the eastern side of Bab Amro that are disaster zones from heavy shelling apparently designed to open the way for tanks.

“Dozens of people are under the rubble with no way to get to them because they are firing at anyone who moves in the street.”

He said activists were trying to distribute water in bottles but that bandages and antiseptics had run out.

Asked about resistance in the district, Nader said the Free Syrian Army was outgunned and that fighters were laying low, awaiting an impending tank infantry onslaught on the district.

The onslaught on Homs has not relented despite a promise to end the bloodshed that the Syrian leader gave to Russia.

French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe dismissed Syrian pledges of peace as deceit, “and we’re not going to fall for it”.

A group known as the Syrian Revolution General Commission called in a statement in the afternoon for outside humanitarian protection and that the day’s death toll stood at 100 – similar to the figure distributed by activists for Tuesday.

OPPOSITION DEFIANT

Syrian opposition figures, who said Lavrov had brought no new initiative, spurn Assad’s promises of reform as meaningless while his troops are killing civilians and say he must go.

Walid al-Bunni, a senior member of the opposition Syrian National Council (SNC), dismissed Lavrov’s dialogue proposal.

“The Arab initiative is clear. Assad must step down and Syrians will then be ready to sit together at a table with whoever succeeds him to discuss a democratic transition,” the head of the SNC’s foreign policy committee told Reuters.

Among other points of pressure, a senior EU diplomat said European Union governments had reached an agreement in principle to impose sanctions on the Syrian central bank this month as part of new measures intended to force Assad out.

In Cairo, a representative of a Gulf Arab state to the Arab League told Reuters that military intervention, such as that backed by Qatar and other Arab states in Libya, should be an option: “There are many alternatives and among them is sending peacekeeping troops whether Arab or international.

“The mission of such forces in case they were sent would be to create safe zones to protect civilians and prevent the Syrian army from entering them,” the Arab diplomat said, adding that an arms embargo should also be considered.

“We should think about a clear mechanism to restrain the Syrian army,” he said. “The Syrians have taken the Russian and Chinese veto as a licence to kill.”

Separately, eleven kidnapped Iranians in Syria have been released but 18 others are still being held hostage, Iran’s deputy foreign minister said.

Hossein Amir Abdollahian said the kidnappers wanted to pressure Tehran to abandon its support of the Syrian government, but Iran would not change its position.

Reuters

Photo: Homs

Gunmen kidnapped 11 Iranian pilgrims heading to the Syrian capital from Turkey last Wednesday. The group of 35 pilgrims was traveling on a bus outside the central city of Hama when armed men ambushed the group.

The gunmen took 11 men, leaving behind women, children and elderly men, after taking the group’s money and mobile phones from them. The pilgrims had been on their way to visit Shiite shrines in Syria, he said.

A statement released by the Free Syrian Army said on Monday that the rebel army released the 11 Iranians for humanitarian reasons after Turkey’s mediation. The rebel army alleged that the Iranians were actually sharpshooters firing on protesters and linked to the Iranian Revolutionary Guards.

The Syrian Free Army added that they have nothing against the Iranian people, but are against the Iranian regime, which supports the regime in Damascus. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, a close ally of Iran, is under mounting international pressure to end a military crackdown on an 11-month-old popular uprising, which has escalated into an armed insurgency in some regions.

Syrians opposed to Assad come mainly from the country’s Sunni Muslim majority, while Assad and his ruling coterie belong to the minority Alawite sect, an offshoot of Shiite Islam. Iran is the Middle East’s Shiite power.

Five Iranian technicians were also kidnapped in the Syrian city of Homs in December and Tehran has demanded their immediate release. Iran has also condemned what it calls foreign interference in Syrian affairs and has praised reforms Assad pledged to undertake; however, it has tempered its rhetoric on Syria as the uprising drags on and the bloodshed worsens. At first Tehran wholeheartedly supported Assad’s stance in the face of public opposition, but has now begun encouraging reforms on account of popular grievances.

The UN says more than 5,000 people have been killed in Assad’s crackdown on protests. Syria says more than 2,000 security force members have been killed by militants.

The Free Syrian Army also praised Turkey’s position on Syria and thanked Turkey for its support for the rebel army and Syrian people.

Todayszaman

Tunisian Prime Minister Hamadi Jebali said Moscow and Beijing’s actions showed the veto system of the Security Council was flawed and the two countries had “misused” their right to block the resolution against Syria.

“Undoubtedly the international community has to reconsider this mechanism of decision taking,” said Jebali.

Turkey’s foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, said that “Cold War” logic had prevailed in the Security Council and that Russia and China “did not vote on existing realities”.

On Saturday, Russia and China employed their veto to block a UN resolution against Syria that aimed to end violence there after one of the bloodiest weekends since the uprising against President Bashar al-Assad erupted about 11 months ago.

Militants said more than 230 civilians perished under bombardment by Syrian forces in the city of Homs overnight Friday.

Egypt’s foreign minister, Mohamed Amr, said the Arab League would convene in Cairo on Saturday and “evaluate” the situation following the Security Council vote.

“Bloodshed has to stop. This is a tragedy that cannot be allowed to continue in our midst,” he said.

The criticism was not limited to politicians, with the director of Human Rights Watch, Kenneth Roth, saying the veto had rendered the United Nations “irrelevant”.

Jebali said that in the absence of strong UN action, countries should take their own action by cutting all diplomatic ties with Damascus, as Tunisia has already done.

“We have to expel Syrian ambassadors from Arab and other countries,” the prime minister said.

“The Syrian people do not expect from us today long statements … they are expecting deeds, they are expecting concrete measures … the very least we can do is to cut all relations to the Syria regime,” he added.

Qatari minister of state for foreign affairs, Khalid Mohamed al-Attiyah, described Saturday as a “sad day”.

He said Russia and China’s move was a “bad signal to Assad that gives a license to kill, full stop”.

Speaking at the same event, Yemeni Nobel peace laureate Tawakkul Karman also called on the international community to expel Syrian ambassadors from their countries and recall diplomats in the wake of the violence there.

“I urge you in the name of the peaceful rebels to expel Syrian ambassadors from your countries and I urge you to call back your ambassadors in Damascus,” Karman said.

With their veto, China and Russia “bear the moral and human responsibility for these massacres”, she said.

US independent Senator Joe Lieberman said that with their actions, China and Russia were “on the wrong side of history” and they could find themselves as isolated as Assad if they refused to budge.

The United States should look at providing weapons and other aid to Syrian rebels if Russia and China refuse to reconsider, said Lieberman.

“We have a range of support we can give them,” he told the panel.

“Some of it is non-lethal, including medical supplies … and then ultimately it is providing them with weapons,” said the senator

news.com.au

The bill makes it a crime to deny that the killings of some 1.5 Armenians by Ottoman Turks in 1915 constituted genocide. Turkey, which says there was no systematic campaign against Armenians, is strongly opposed to the bill and says relations with France will suffer as a result.

Both houses of French parliament passed the bill in recent weeks. On Tuesday, the Constitutional Council said legislators have submitted a formal request that the body rule on its constitutionality.

Turkish officials welcomed the move. President Abdullah Gul said, “I hope the French court makes the right decision.”

HP

The foreign ministers of the six Gulf Arab states and Turkey, in a final declaration, said no significant progress was made on the Arab League peace plan “mostly due to the intransigent attitude displayed by the Syrian administration.”

The ministers “strongly urged the Syrian administration to fulfill without delay all of its commitments and obligations under the Arab League peace initiative.”
Saudi Arabia is the largest member of the Gulf Co-operation Council (GCC) and other members include Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.
“We hope Syria seriously evaluates the decisions of the Arab League, puts an end to repression against its people and start a reform process in line with the demands of the people,” Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said after the meeting.
Turkey, once a close ally of Syria, has been at the forefront of international criticism over the Damascus regime’s crackdown on protests and has also become a haven for Syrian opposition activists.
The Istanbul meeting comes amid a new Arab and European quest to secure UN action over Syria’s crackdown, which is opposed by Russia.
The UN Security Council has been deadlocked for months on Syria. Russia and China vetoed a previous European resolution in October, accusing the West of seeking regime change.
In the final declaration, the ministers also agreed that international efforts should be focused on bringing the bloodshed in Syria to an “immediate end” and paving the way for the initiation of a political transition process in line with “legitimate demands of the people.”
International pressure on the Syrian regime has been mounting, as more than 5,400 people have been killed since anti-government protests broke out last March, according to UN figures.
gazette

“We are in close consultation with the Arab League, but if regional initiatives cannot bring about an end to the bloodshed in Syria, then it is only natural the issue become a humanitarian one that needs international attention and the attention of the UN,” Davutoğlu added in what appears to be a signal that the Syrian unrest may soon evolve beyond the reach of the league and a UN intervention could be necessary.

Davutoğlu also stated that Turkey is ready to work with the UN if the humanitarian tragedy prompts the UN to intervene, adding that Turkey hopes a solution for the unrest will be found by regional actors and that the bloodshed caused by the Syrian regime will be stopped by the Syrian administration.

Davutoğlu is scheduled to travel to Russia, one of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, on Tuesday, to discuss the next steps to be taken with regards to Syria.

Turkish officials have expressed were against foreign intervention in Syria , but, their disillusionment regarding any possibility of homegrown reforms in Syria has caused the country to opt for a UN role in solving the crisis.

Although the Syrian regime pledged to Turkey and the Arab League that the loss of life would be stopped in Syria and that free elections would be held soon, the Syrian regime has reneged on its words and the death toll continues to escalate on a daily basis