Bleeding Hezbollah

Bleeding Hezbollah

  The increasing involvement of Hezbollah fighters in the Syrian civil war adds a new dimension to an already cancerous conflict. Hezbollah has a vested interest in keeping Assad in power but they must consider what a prolonged conflict would do to them as a force. Hezbollah has been in a cold war (most of the time) with Israel since the 2006 conflict. By siphoning fighters off to fight in Syria there is the risk they may become weaker over time.

  The Lebanon Factor

  The chaos in Syria has had the effect of heightening simmering tension in neighboring Lebanon. With Hezbollah fighters crossing the border the lines may blur even further. There have already been cross border clashes. Hezbollah’s involvement may exacerbate the situation. The very nature of the Syrian conflict is sectarian and has done nothing to alleviate the Sunni Shia divide in the region.  During Lebanon’s civil war (1975-1990) the country became a proxy war ground for Shia Iran and other Sunni state. Ironically this is what gave rise to Hezbollah in the first place. The situation in Syria is similar but on a grand scale. Lebanon risks being thrown into this conflict and in doing so, opening up the sectarian passions that never really calmed since the end of its civil war. Lebanon’s government and armed forces are no match for Hezbollah and its Iranian backers.

   Although the Hezbollah fighters are crossing into Syria this may be a sign of the escalating spillover to come.

Assad is up the creek

Assad is up the creek

  The recent Israeli airstrikes and Syria’s claim that they are a “Declaration of war” expose several weaknesses in the Assad regime and its viability. First and foremost is the exposure of a weak and almost nonexistent air defense system. Since Russia withheld the sale of the S-300 system in 2012 the remaining inventory of weaponry is of the old Soviet ilk.  The apparent ease with which the IAF conducted the strikes also calls into question the feasibility of a no fly zone should it be imposed. The Obama administration, for good reason, has been reluctant to use military intervention but these events may have an effect on the more hawkish elements in the U.S. Government.

  Second, is the question of what Syria can do, or more to the point, what they can’t do? Syria’s best bet at retaliation towards Israel up to this point has been Hezbollah. While they are a formidable force the fact they are helping Assad fight the insurgents means they can only expend so much energy in either direction. The prudent course would be to have Hezbollah launch rockets at Israel but with the iron dome system in place and proven, and the threat of Israeli intervention in southern Lebanon it is still a poor choice.

 What all this means is that the Assad regime runs the risk of talking and doing nothing or acting and exacerbating an already violent situation. The cliché of a rock and a hard place is the only way to explain where they are.

Russian Flotilla

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

 The prospect of a Russia evacuating its citizens from Syria presents an interesting showcase for military observers. They have not carried out an operation like this in a long time and their performance could shed insights into their military preparedness, their equipment and their ability to carry out humanitarian operations overseas.  It will also be a chance to observe their latest amphibious ships, their logistical capabilities and communication.

 The evacuation if it does take place would also be a clear signal that Assad’s time is up. The earlier declaration by the Russians that he may fall may have been a precursor to such an operation. While it will not be the end of fighting in the region it will be a turning point.

Beyond Assad

Looking past Assad, peace may be hard to come by for Syria. Even if a legitimate transitional government is established there are too many external players. As with any civil war there will be sore loser with an axe to grind and people willing to give them support. What Syria runs the risk of becoming is an inverted Iraq. Shia militants being funded by Iran fighting a Sunni transitional government instead of the other way around would be a likely and bloody scenario.  There is also the factor of Sunni insurgents who are in opposition to a transitional government. Regardless of what path Syria heads down, the fall of the Assad regime is just the beginning of a long struggle for stability.

 

The Economy Might be Morsi’s Biggest Foe

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

 With the situation in Egypt continuing to evolve at a rapid pace and not seeming to abate it looks like Muhammad Morsi, as unpopular as he has become, may be around for a little longer. The one thing that may lead to the breaking point is Egypt’s flagging economy. While it has been a subplot in western media it is a major factor in Morsi’s survival.  The support he has gotten in Egypt has come not only from his Muslim Brotherhood base but from Egyptians simply wanting an end to economic stagnation brought on by the revolution and political turmoil. The numbers from the referendum vote are closer than he would like and only look in his favor marginally. This is due to the demographic that wants economic stability. If they feel he is not making any positive changes he will lose that slight edge.  They are in essence the swing voters of Egypt.

  In order to get the economy moving again he is looking at raising taxes and implementing austerity measure. If this does not fly with voters who are fed up he may face trouble in the next election or sooner.  The undecided can and most often do make up their minds when it comes to their livelihood. That is a given fact regardless of country, religion or anything else.  It is not unrealistic to imagine a onetime dissident with no political experience fumbling the economy. He needs more than charisma at this point. Though the opposition might not be fare better than him, he is the one in the hot seat at the moment.

A Call from Turkey

Monday, December 17, 2012

 This past Thursday I had the pleasure of attending a luncheon hosted by the World Affairs Council of Seattle. The keynote speaker was Turkish ambassador to the U.S. Namik Tan. Early on it became apparent that his goal was to emphasize the desire of Turkey to have stronger relations with the U.S. The desire must be strong because he even fielded a question about Cypress and turned it into a call for stronger ties with the U.S.

 I have been an advocate of his position on U.S. Turkish relations and it was encouraging to see they have the same desire. Now it is up to our government to follow through. With the turmoil in Egypt showing no signs of abating anytime soon a shift towards Turkey is even more appealing than before. This is not to say we should abandon Egypt by any means, but a stable strong Islamic nation that is secular and friendly to us is something that should not be passed up. The Obama administration has advocated hands off approach to world leadership and stronger ties with Turkey could be beneficial in that part of the world. Ironically, Turkey is exactly the kind of nation the Bush white house claimed they wanted to see though out the region. Of course we saw that you cannot force things along as we tried in Iraq.

 Mr. Tan was obviously a salesman for his country but can we afford to not buy the product?

Another Wake up Call for Pakistan

Monday, December 17, 2012

 The two terrorist attacks in Pakistan over the past 48hrs once again raises questions regarding the direction the Pakistani government should or will take. The same militants that the ISI seems to protect are the same who are willing to conduct attacks on fellow Pakistanis.  These latest attacks also underscore the point that Pakistan is essentially several countries within one common border. Pashtuns, Baluchis, and Punjabis all live in Pakistan yet historically they are different people of different nations, each with their own history and sense of pride. Although Islamic fundamentalism is considered a cause for the violence, it would not be a hard stretch of the imagination to suggest we are witnessing nationalism/tribalism wrapped in the cloak of Islam. On an international front this obscures the real problem. While these groups are hostile to the international community, and the U.S. in particular what is their real agenda in Pakistan. We know the Pakistani Taliban crosses the border to fight ISAF in Afghanistan but what significance will that be once the U.S. draws down?

 In regards to the U.S. drawdown in Afghanistan, Pakistan will run the risk of having even more militants in the northwest of the country looking for something to do. No doubt the ISI will try to use some of them to influence a post-NATO Afghanistan but this runs the risk of future blowback as well. As that time looms closer and the militants become more active in Pakistan it will be interesting to see how the government reacts. They tend to decry any over U.S. involvement but turn a blind eye when a U.S. drone takes out someone they would like to see eliminated. This fence sitting might have to come to an end if things get worse.

Which Way for Egypt’s Army?

Wednesday, December 12, 2012

Over the past 48 hours the pace of events in Egypt has picked up and in doing so there remains the question of Egypt’s Army and what choices it may be forced to make. So far, the Army has tried to be a neutral force in the midst of the political polarization sweeping the country. The army sponsored, and then called off, unity talks between Morsi and the opposition. President Morsi authorized the army to make arrests yet, they have yet to crack down on the protestors. The majority of those killed have been Muslim Brotherhood/Government supporters. This tells us two things. First of all, the army is still a major force in the country regardless of losing control of the government. The army in Egypt is an institution with a great deal of wealth via business. Second, it shows that the army while obeying the government is reluctant to take the strong arm role against the people especially the original protestors that ousted Mubarak.

 The opposition as called for a no vote on the referendum, the outcome of which may raise more problems than expected. If the vote is not in favor of Morsi’s plans will his supporters accept it? If he gets his way will it be fair? Both sides are dead set on getting their way and army support could be the key to the wellbeing of the country over the next few months. But this leaves the army in a bind. Playing any part in politics brings back the specter of the old regime which ran everything. Playing into the government’s hands runs the risk of further discrediting them. So far the army has done its best to remain neutral and call for unity. With events moving so rapidly and in such a charged atmosphere it might not be able to stay neutral for long. On one hand they have to obey the legally elected government. On the other hand that government is made up of people it has been hunting and imprisoning for close to sixty years.

 The Egyptian army is between a rock and a hard place and they may have to make hard choices soon.