The Syrian Bear Trap Part 2.

“He has proven instead only his contempt for the United Nations and for all his pledges. By breaking every pledge, by his deceptions and by his cruelties….”

You might be thinking that this is an excerpt from an Obama press conference citing the reasons for a strike against Bashar al Assad’s Syria. Yet, these words were spoken by George W Bush at the United Nations on 13 September 2002, and the above quote ends with…,

“Saddam Hussein has made the case against himself.”

Some things never change.
With the UN weapons inspectors pulling out of Syria with the “possible” evidence of chemical attacks, it seems that the US is hell bent on attacking Syria and “punishing the country for using chemical weapons”. It must be noted that the weapons inspectors would only have evidence concerning the occurrence of chemical attack and not who did it. This leaves the field open for the US to assert its “moral authority” to attack Syria based on its own “reliable” intelligence. The possible US attack on Syria would again throw the region into geopolitical turmoil the likes of which can only be matched by the Iraq invasion disaster.
But the US is not alone. France –fresh and confident from its adventures in Mali and Libya- is ready to assist the US in “punishing” Syria for using chemical weapons. The UK’s parliament has thankfully voted against any intervention.
The American public, in a latest poll, has voted against any intervention in Syria. 53% say that they are against US military intervention in Syria, though it must be acknowledged that the numbers were higher in the previous week (60%).  Even the officers in the US military have doubts regarding the wisdom of attacking Syria when they are already coping with the economic and military battering that the US has received from both Iraq and Afghanistan. The Iranian and Hezbollah threat is always present. Thus, the case against any intervention in Syria is strong.
So why is the American administration hell-bent on engaging in another military adventure which nearly everyone thinks will probably end like another Afghanistan?
The answer can be sought in the preparations that the jihadis in Syria are making for the coming American strike. Many jihadist organisations are shifting bases, evacuating headquarters, moving equipment and even finding safe hiding places in the mountainous terrains. They think that the coming US attack would also be aimed at jihadist organisations that control vast swathes of land in the northern and eastern provinces of Syria. In a statement, the jihadi outfit Fatehul Islam has said that,

“For every US missile that hits a regime target, another will strike a jihadi base.”

The bread and butter of any standard jihadi outfit depends on how well it fights and speaks against US hegemony. This might be a heaven sent opportunity for the jihadis to entangle the US in another war.
It must be asked that who will benefit if the US destroys President Assad’s military strike capability.
The only winner in that case would be Jabahat-al-Nusra and other jihadi outfits who have travelled all across the world to take part in the war. Indeed, it is now becoming increasingly evident that if President Assad falls and when the Syrian civil war is over and done with, Jabahat al Nusra would eventually fall out with Free Syria Army (FSA) (endorsed by the US and NATO and is the official rebel army in Syria) and with seasoned fighters coming from Iraq and other neighbouring battlefields, it would eventually succeed in stopping the FSA from gaining further power and quite possibly open the way for bringing the Syrian war into Iraq against the Shiite government over there, led by Nouri Al Maliki. The Syrian war would spill all over the middle-east and the chemical weapons that Assad allegedly possesses might fall into very wrong hands.
This might be reason as to why the US wants to have a presence in Syria; to stop the jihadists from gaining any further control and chemical attacks were only an excuse. Other than that, we only have the “USA has a moral duty” explanations, and no one in the post-World War II history has ever bought that.
The US might find itself caught in a bear trap that it laid for the Soviets.

This blog of mine was  published on Express Tribune on August 31, 2013. http://blogs.tribune.com.pk/story/18694/the-us-war-on-afghanistan-is-over-syria-is-the-new-project/

Kamra Airbase Attack.Time to End the Double Game

Within hours of the operation to secure the Kamra Minhas Airbase, the elite military commandos had killed all the militants and readily identified them as foreigners. The identification procedure has not been provided. But looking at the pictures it is my proposition that it looks like they belong to the Punjab and southern KPK regions. But that is just a conjecture and nothing else. So let’s leave it.

dead body of the militant at Kamra Airbase. Courtesy Saach.tv

However, one thing about the attackers that caught my eye was their apparent physique. All of them seem well built and their beards wouldn’t have looked out of place in a professional SSG unit. I am not implying that they were rogue SSG commandos but they seem to have this ‘military man’ look about them.

Factor in their brazen but well coordinated attack on the base, their target intentions and you might suspect that it was an inside job. I am just theorizing, nothing else.

Kamra Airbase is an alleged nuclear installation or at least the base where aircraft can be fitted with nuclear devices before such a strike. Also, it is the home to the prized JF-17s and AWACS airplanes and is supposed to be under the maximum security that the military can offer. Yet, the militants attacked the base even after issuing a threat.

Now here one must observe that although the military’s efforts have been lauded and much has been made about their preparedness and the level of security employed, the real intent of the militant strike has been left untouched.

How determined can one’s enemy be when it openly issues a threat that it’s coming at you and then attacks your premier military installation.  The level of determination and the sophistication of the attack needs to be considered by our analysts, because this attack was doomed to fail once the threat to attack a PAF base was made public . But then maybe it was originally planned as a secret operation but after the intelligence report, it was re designed to be that way.  May be it was used to send a message that they know our military installations and they can attack it and breach the security parameter at any time and which is precisely what they did.

The attack also raises some questions about the level of preparedness and the counter intelligence efforts of ISI and the Army. Why wasn’t this group of attackers intercepted and traced before the attack? How did the attackers breach the security parameters, so much, so that they managed to damage one airplane, which the military has not elaborated much on.

Mehran Airbase Attack

Certainly, the military needs to come out open and clean in its explanation but of course, it never will. The Mehran Airbase attack should have opened the military eyes and one might have been led to believe that the military might have learnt lessons from that debacle but it didn’t.

As is now widely held to be extremely plausible by many experts, the Mehran Airbase was an inside job, led by TTP with coordination from disgruntled naval officers. When a journalist ‘Saleem Shehzad’ published an investigative report on the Army Al-Qaida link and the involvement of its own officers with Al-Qaida , he was promptly abducted and tortured to death ‘allegedly’ by ISI.

Even before the Mehran Airbase, the army had convicted five officers for their links with banned Hizb-ut-Tehreer (HT).  This conviction came after the attack on GHQ where a similar breach of security parameters was carried out.

Our military and intelligence agencies should worry about terrorist infiltration within its ranks because quite frankly the Zia era has left our armed forces quite changed with fundamentalist tendencies and terrorist organizations like HT, Al-Qaida, and TTP find eager supporters inside the army camps. The assassination attempt by army officers, with terrorist links, on Musharraf was one of the early signs of internal strife within the army. This strife is directly linked to the Army and Intelligence’s double game in matters of crackdown against terrorist network and their back channel support. They get confused when they are ordered to attack those same people that they were told sometime back were mujahedeen and defenders of Islam.

The army has to come clear and define once and for all, who its enemies are and who its supporters are. Taking Allied Support Funds, propping up the Haqqani Network and now back stabbing them with an operation in North Waziristan would leave many people, including its own soldiers, asking questions. And as an Army Officer, you do not want your soldiers questioning your orders.