Israel Cannot Be Touched; It Must Remain A Nuclear Power. ~UN Attempts to Say

In the build-up to the final agreement for Syria to hand over its chemical weapons and place them under international control, embattled President Bashar al Assad attempted to mull what the world knows can never be possible; that Israel should destroy its own stockpile of chemical weapons too. It was another good try anyway. Assad knows better (but was trying to render his own voice so as not to appear weakened) that Israel is the only country in the world that can do whatever it likes without anybody holding it culpable.

The United States does not need to bark or roar before the majority of the UN member states know what to do as regards any resolution presented against Israel on the floor of the UN General Assembly or any of the the UN-affiliated bodies. The UN Security Council is simply a no-go area. Israel equals veto. An Arab-backed resolution targeting the Jewish state for criticism over its clandestine nuclear weapons arsenal was voted down by member states of the UN nuclear agency. Fifty-one countries voted against the so-called ‘Israeli Nuclear Capabilities’ measure and 43 states voted for it.

The indefinite postponement last year of an international conference on banning atomic arms in the region led to the frustration of the Arab states; hence, proposed the rejected measure at the annual member state gathering of the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The US had pushed for the Israel’s neighbours not to present the text of the resolution. The US knows full well that it will die a natural death as always.

If the text had been adopted, Israel would have been compelled to join the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and place its nuclear facilities under IAEA monitoring.  Diplomats had expected a close vote. The United States said the move would endanger broader diplomatic efforts to create a Middle Zone free of weapons of mass destruction. Israel said it would severely undermine efforts to hold regional security talks.

Despite the warnings, Ambassador Ramzy Ezzeldin Ramzy, head of the Arab League group at the IAEA, earlier said the draft resolution would go ahead. "The world has to know that Israel is not playing a constructive role, that Israel has a [nuclear] capability," Ramzy told Reuters. Iran for its part said this week Israel's nuclear activities "seriously threaten regional peace and security."

World powers agreed in 2010 to an Egyptian plan intended to lay the groundwork for establishing a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction. The US, who co-sponsored the meeting, said it would not take place as scheduled last December and did not forward a new date. Arab diplomats said they had held back on proposing the resolution over the last two years in a failed bid to buoy chances for the Middle East conference.

"We have engaged seriously and constructively in the preparations [for the conference]. The Israelis have been playing for time, delaying. We have never seen enough seriousness on their part," Ramzy said. Israel's atomic energy chief, Shaul Chorev, said that Arab states were using this week’s IAEA meeting as a platform for "repeatedly bashing" his country. The Arab-backed resolution only deepens "existing distrust" among the region's countries, he said.

Israel is believed to possess anywhere from 75 to as many as 400 nuclear weapons, including thermonuclear weapons in the megaton range. Israel has never confirmed or denied being in possession of the arms. In the most recent US report on the Israeli arsenal, published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, nuclear weapon proliferation experts Robert S. Norris and Hans M. Kristensen assess that Israel stopped producing nuclear warheads back in 2004 once it reached around 80 munitions, RT reported.

However, the country can easily double its arsenal since it has enough fissile material to build at least another 115 bombs, the experts say. Russian President Vladimir Putin said that Israel’s assumed nuclear weapons stockpile made the country “a target” and “create foreign policy problems,” AFP reported.

Putin said “the technical advantage of Israel – we need to say this directly – is such that it doesn’t need nuclear weapons. Israel is already in a technical military sense several heads above the countries in the region.” He added that Syria had developed chemical weapons “as an alternative to the nuclear weapons of Israel.”

Despite the glaring tactical and strategic advantages of Israel over all countries in the Arab World, it still continues to roar profusely over the Iranian nuclear programme which Tehran had reiterated countless number of times that it is for peaceful purposes. Israel's stance has made Western powers slam numerous biting sanctions on Iran. Ayatollah Khamanei released a Fatwa in 2004 that nuclear weapons are not endorsed by Islam and was re-echoed recently by President Rouhani. However, Netanyahu continues to claim they are all lies.

The same Netanyahu was confirmed by former French President, Nicholas Sarkozy, as a foremost liar while President Obama confirmed him as being deceptive. They were unknowingly overheard by some reporters. The world only understands propaganda. It is a case of he who controls the media or has the most formidable influence on the media controls the minds and thought processes of many in the world.

This is why a McCain will always and maybe will forever be furious that a Putin is taking the [media] war to their doorstep by writing a masterpiece and an evergreen speech to the American people in the New York Times, where Putin lectured the 'most democratic' nation on earth on how to respect international law which would prevent the escalation of wars and to stop relying on brute force like Adolf Hitler. John McCain retorted with a vainglorious trash; neglecting virtually all the issues raised while attacking solely the personality of Putin and lectured Russians on how to be gays.

Russia Warns of Nuclear Disaster in Syria ahead of America's Military Push

A military strike on Syria could lead to a nuclear catastrophe if a missile were to hit a reactor containing radioactive uranium, a Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman warned. The remark comes as the US continues to push for a military strike on Syria. "If a warhead, by design or by chance, were to hit the Miniature Neutron Source Reactor (MNSR) near Damascus, the consequences could be catastrophic," Aleksandr Lukashevich said in a Wednesday statement.

Russia’s Foreign Ministry urged the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to complete a risk evaluation as the US continues to seek support for military action. It asked the agency to “react swiftly” and carry out “an analysis of the risks linked to possible American strikes on the MNSR and other facilities in Syria.” Lukashevich stated that the region could be at risk of “contamination by highly enriched uranium and it would no longer be possible to account for nuclear material, its safety and control.” He added that such material could fall into the wrong hands.

The IAEA said that it is aware of the statement, but it is waiting for a formal request asking the agency to complete a risk evaluation. “We will consider the questions raised if we receive such a request," Reuters quoted an IAEA spokesperson as saying. The agency said in a report to member states last week that Syria had declared there was a “small amount of nuclear material” at the MNSR, a type of research reactor usually fuelled by highly enriched uranium.

Although this type of a reactor would not contain a lot of nuclear material, it would be enough to cause "a serious local radiation hazard" if the reactor was hit, nuclear expert Mark Hibbs from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace told Reuters. The United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted on Wednesday to approve President Obama's plan to strike Syria in retaliation against the alleged use of chemical weapons by President Bashar Assad’s regime.

Should Congress move to approve the president’s request, the US could soon initiate a limited strike on Syria. On the other hand, Moscow needs convincing proof – not rumours - from UN experts that chemical weapons were used in Syria, Russian President Vladimir Putin said in an interview with AP and Channel 1 on Tuesday.

“We believe that at the very least we should wait for the results of the UN inspection commission in Syria,” Putin said. He added that so far there is no information regarding exactly which chemical agent was used in the attack in the Damascus suburb, or who was behind it.

RT

Al Qaeda-linked Rebels Unleashed Mayhem on a Christian Village in Syria as the United States Plans to Attack

The United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations passed the Syria Authorization endorsing military action against Syria. The resolution will now be transferred to the full house of the Senate for debate and vote.

Meanwhile, Washington's new found friend, al Nusra, previously labelled a terrorist group by the State Department but became a rebel group because it is fighting Assad, Russia's last ally in the Middle East is busy unleashing its beastly acts after killing both Christian and Alawite clerics and its member even ate the heart of a captured soldier.

The Al-Qaeda-linked group attacked a predominantly Christian village sympathetic to the Assad regime in western Syria while rebel and government forces clashed in Damascus.

RT reports that the attack began at dawn when a Jabhat al-Nusra fighter blew himself up at a government checkpoint near the entrance to Maaloula – a village of 2,000 residents - according to a Syrian official and the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which collects information from anti-regime activists.

Following the suicide bombing, al-Nusra rebels and government forces traded fire, with the rebels eventually seizing the checkpoint and taking over a hotel on a mountain overlooking the village, according the Observatory and a local nun.

Rebels also disabled two tanks and an armoured personnel carrier and killed eight regime soldiers during the fighting. From the mountaintop hotel, rebels fired shells into the village, forcing around 80 people to take refuge in a convent, the nun said.

A Syrian government official has confirmed the attack, AP reported. Rebel mortar fire hit a sports hall in Damascus, killing Mohammed Ali Neimeh, a member of the national taekwondo team, state news agency SANA reported.

American Public Rejects War in Syria; Obama Urges Restraint, Iran Warns of Consequences

The American public has expressed real unwillingness to get involved in another costly conflict in the Middle East, a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll suggests. Only 9 percent of the surveyed believe President Barack Obama should take action on Syria, while some 60 percent of Americans said the United States should not intervene in Syria's bloody civil war.

According to the poll taken on August 19-23, 25 percent of Americans would back intervention if it is proven that the forces of Syrian President Bashar Assad used chemical weapons against civilians, while almost double that number – 46 percent – would still oppose such a move. Iran has also lent its voice against any intervention in Syria.

Obama has discussed the latest developments in Syria with British PM David Cameron and both expressed grave concern over the alleged chemical attack. "They reiterated that significant use of chemical weapons would merit a serious response from the international community and both have tasked officials to examine all the options." President Obama has received the awaiting intelligence report with no specific details of the options but the emphasis on responses in the event of confirmation of chemical attacks.

US Secretary of Defence, Chuck Hagel, while speaking at a conference in Malaysia indicated that the US military is ready to exercise options on Syria, should Obama choose military action. “President Obama has asked the Defence Department to prepare options for all contingencies. We have done that and we are prepared to exercise whatever option - if he decides to employ one of those options," Hagel told reporters.

President Obama himself, however, has been cautious about intervention in Syria. In an interview with CNN, the president said the United States should be wary of “being drawn into very expensive, difficult, costly interventions that actually breed more resentment in the region.”

Doctors Without Borders (MSF) has said that nearly 3,600 patients with neurotoxic symptoms were treated in three Damascus hospitals on the day a toxic gas attack was reported, while 355 patients were reportedly pronounced dead. Moscow has commented that it was monitoring events surrounding the alleged attack. “We’re getting more new evidence that this criminal act was of a provocative nature,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman, Aleksandr Lukashevich, said in a statement.

“In particular, there are reports circulating on the Internet that the materials of the incident and accusations against government troops had been posted for several hours before the so-called attack. Thus, it was a pre-planned action,” he said.

The revelation by MSF happened within a week of a UN investigative team entering the country to examine three different sites of alleged chemical weapons usage. It was also just hours after UN disarmament chief, Angela Kane, arrived in the Syrian capital of Damascus to apply pressure on the Syrian government to grant access to the site of the reported attack in the Damascus suburbs.

Professor of International Law at Georgetown University, Daoud Khairallah, told RT that the US would not act without verifiable evidence.

“The US can’t take any action without verifiable evidence about who is the party who is responsible. If it turns out that it was the rebels that used this poisonous material, the US will be embarrassed because it will be the allies of US, the opposition the US has been supporting and claiming that these are people who are seeking democracy and rule of law in Syria.”

“The US would like to prove that it was the regime who has done this, but it has not been independently proved or verified and without independent verification I doubt that Obama will act. Obama did say that ‘we need to be sure who has used these weapons, evaluate the costs to the US both financially and morally, we need international approval.’”

Next Theatre of War: China Flexes Muscle in East Asia as Washington Boosts Military Presence

As the United States prepares to boost its military presence in East Asia by expanding her troops' strength in the Philippines, China shows off her military might; probably telling Washington, 'this is not the Middle East or Africa'. China has been embroiled in series of conflicts with her neighbours over land issues, mostly bothering on sea routes and maritime endowments. It is based on the skirmishes with some East Asian countries that Washington feels it has to contain China in her territory not elsewhere.

What comes easily to mind is how Washington denounced any interference in her own 'sphere of influence' during the Cold War to the extent of 'risking' a nuclear holocaust with the Soviet Union. Washington also rebuffed the International Court of Justice when it was to rule between her and Mexico on land dispute. She said she will not accept any arbitration in her 'sphere of influence'.

Apparently, the United States has succeeded to a good extent in destabilizing the Middle East as the region is really boiling now from Damascus to Cairo and among major countries that mattered most; notably, Saudi Arabia and Iran. Africa is already under her grip militarily and in all other facets. Africa is a perfect stooge, continually under her tutelage and seems to notoriously nauseously love to genuflect for her. Now it is time to go Asia and China is simply waiting.

As reported by RT, China has launched four days of live-fire naval exercises in the East China Sea that coincide with the anniversary of Japan’s defeat in WWII. The exercises come after Japanese Cabinet ministers visited Tokyo’s most controversial war shrine.

China and South Korea, which both suffered under Japan’s militarist expansion in the 1930s and 40s, have expressed concern at Japanese Cabinet ministers’ visit to the Tokyo Yasukuni Shrine as glorification of the country's militaristic past and aggression. Established in 1869 and funded by the Imperial Japanese government until 1945, the shrine has been dedicated to the nation's 2.5 million war dead, including – controversially – 1,000 convicted war criminals.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry summoned Japan's envoy and issued a statement condemning the visits by nearly 100 Japanese lawmakers, saying they "fundamentally attempt to deny and gloss over Japan's history of invasion." According to the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post, the East China Sea drills will be conducted off the coast of Zhejiang province by the East Sea Fleet, which oversees the waters around the disputed Diaoyu Islands.

Earlier this month, on August 8, four Chinese coast guard vessels stayed a record 28 hours in waters near islands claimed by Japan and China. Japan summoned the Chinese envoy in Tokyo to lodge a formal protest. The latest intrusion into Japanese territorial waters near the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea by Chinese ships was twice as long as the last one, on February 4. Chinese ships have been entering the disputed area regularly since last September, when the Japanese government bought the islands.

China and Japan have long struggled for the ownership of supposedly oil-rich islands located in the East China Sea. The islands are known as the Diaoyu to the Chinese, and Senkaku to the Japanese. The dispute over the islands and the maritime boundaries around them has continued for years. The Senkaku Islands have been controlled by Japan since 1895, but China insists that it has historic rights to them dating back to the 16th century.

The standoff escalated after Tokyo announced the purchase of three of the islands from a private Japanese owner in September of last year. After that, China witnessed mass anti-Japanese demonstrations. A diplomatic scandal led to problems in bilateral economic relations, with Japanese businesses withdrawing investment. Several Japanese companies in China suspended their work for security reasons, and Chinese Customs’ clearance of goods slowed from Japan.

The tiny archipelago of islands, which is halfway between both countries, are currently uninhabited, but the ground below could house significant mineral resources.

"It is expected that there will be more drills in the East China Sea to build up the combat capabilities of the Chinese Army," Ni Lexiong , director of the Sea Power and Defence Policy Research Institute at the Shanghai University of Political Science and Law, told the South China Morning Post. "It is also possible that China's aircraft carrier will participate in some of these drills."

China News Service reported that Liaoning, the country's first aircraft carrier, which it refitted after buying a Soviet-era vessel from Ukraine, has also been dispatched from its home port of Qingdao, in Shandong province, for training of ship-borne aircraft in the East China Sea. The ship is reportedly sailing to the northern Bohai Sea, off Liaoning province, where a separate round of military exercises was launched.

Asia as the New Theatre of War?: United States boosts Military Presence in the Philippines

If  the theory of 'imperial overstretch' means anything in the historical analysis of international relations, then the United States will have to and must definitely watch her acts. She has been putting her talons on many lands; overtly and covertly and has been the bane of many agonies. Though she does all for her survival but the pains and repercussions are felt mostly among innocents; the poor people. The Middle East is almost gone, the Shia'a-Sunni divide now has become an institutionalised phenomenon. Thanks to Washington's gunboat diplomacy.

Africa is already a tool in her hand as always since the 60s and centrally since the demise of the Soviet Union. The Obama administration once opined that America will now concentrate her efforts in the Asia-Pacific. Which means she will bolster her military presence as wars in the Mideast are becoming queasy, nauseous and tiresome. Now, the United States after holding on firmly to South Korea and Japan wants to really prove her commitment to choking China.

US forces are set for an “increased rotational presence” in the Philippines, following negotiations in Manila. The two countries aim to counter China’s growing ambitions in the region. The Pentagon currently conducts a regular joint exercise and has a rotating force of 500 troops in the Southern Philippines, but may send more soldiers and advanced equipment, or upgrade local facilities.  Officials say that no specifics have been laid out in the first round of a four-stage negotiation.

“There should be a focus on high-impact, high-value training exercises and activities that would focus on maritime security, maritime domain awareness and our perennial problem with disasters,” said Defence Undersecretary Pio Batino, who was present at the discussion. The Philippines was a US colony between 1898 and 1946, and the presence of American troops remains a controversial issue. The US abandoned its last base in the South Asian country in 1992.

But tensions in the region have escalated as in the past decade Beijing began to lay forceful claims to almost the entirety of the South China Sea (which the Philippines calls West Philippine Sea), that rounds the coastlines of most of the states in the region. As disputes over potentially lucrative sea lanes and underground mineral resources have grown more bitter, Manila has made diplomatic appeals to the UN over what it calls “excessive claims”, and has sought greater assistance from the United States.

After years of being bogged down in Afghanistan and Iraq, Washington has also re-directed its foreign policy towards Asia, signing a docking agreement for its warships with Singapore, and bolstering its troop numbers in Australia. Officials say that even when finalized, the new agreement will not specify exact troop numbers, and those will have to be negotiated on an annual basis.

Philippine officials have also sought to reassure the domestic audience that the increased presence will only be allowed with strict stipulations. Foreign Affairs Assistant Secretary Carlos Sorreta, who led the talks on his country’s side, told Reuters that the specific areas where the US troops will be stationed were to be listed, as well as their the activities and exercises. “But not the number of troops, not the operational details," he added.

Sorreta emphasized that no US facilities could be off-limits to Philippine officials (some have previously been denied access), and insisted that the country will not host nuclear weapons, and will not be used as a platform for “acts of aggression”. Not everyone is placated. Some politicians have objected both to the substance of the agreement, and the fact that it is likely to be signed only by the executive branch, without any input from lawmakers.

“Any policy that the government wants to implement as regards our security or military should undergo close scrutiny,” said Senator Gregorio Honasan. “It poses a lot of danger now that military troops and their equipment will soon arrive in the country.  It might create an impression of hostility and just add to the on-going tensions in our troubled waters.” A heightened US military presence in the region to offset Chinese influence will only increase tensions, argues author and journalist Afshin Rattansi.

“The idea that the United States is protecting the interests of the world against Chinese influence is clearly absurd,” Rattansi told RT. “All the United States is doing is ratcheting up military tension and pressure at a time when the world doesn’t need it.” Several dozen anti-American supporters also staged a protest outside the main army base where the talks took place. The next round of negotiations will take place in Washington before the end of the month.

Al Qaeda is Expanding and France is its most Significant Foe

Al-Qaeda’s resilience, ideological strength and expansion in the midst of escalating sectarian struggle has increased the threat it poses - and it will take decades to win the ideological struggle against it, according to a new report.

“There has been a net expansion in the number and geographic scope of al-Qaeda affiliates and allies over the past decade, indicating that al-Qaeda and its brand are far from defeated,” said author of the study and RAND corporation analyst, Seth Jones.

Jones noted that what was once a highly organized group with a strong base in Afghanistan has now reaped affiliates, allied groups, and inspired networks of groups harboring a “hatred of the West” and its allied regimes across the Middle  East.

Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the suspected ringleader of the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings, was given as an example of an “inspired” individual who was not a member of al-Qaeda.

The core group itself has seen a general ascendance in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), for which a number of possible reasons were given. Four separate subsectors or groups of the militant block were identified: Central al-Qaeda, al-Qaeda allies, al-Qaeda affiliates, and al-Qaeda ideological sympathizers.

The Arab uprisings, which have “weakened regimes” in the region, were given as a primary cause for al-Qaeda’s spread. According to the report, the uprisings created an “opportunity” for al-Qaeda affiliates and allies to consolidate a footing in the regions.

Increasing sectarian struggles in the same areas means that resources available to Sunni Islamic militant groups have also grown, allowing weaponry to spread and be more accessible to militants. Meanwhile, the movement has become “more diffuse and decentralized” as a result of the expansion, Jones stated in a testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee last week.

Al-Qaeda members “largely run their operations autonomously, though they still communicate with core leadership in Pakistan and may seek strategic advice.”

Because of this diffusion and lack of solid organizational structure to the militant movement, the study found that despite an increasing availability of weapons, the group as a unit is becoming less of a threat to the US. However, ideologically, it is still growing stronger.

“The growth in social media and the terrorist use of chat rooms, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and other sites has facilitated radicalization inside the United States,” the study says, outlining how the increased dissemination of ‘propaganda’ information and instructions on how to create bombs has played a key role.

Despite being less of a threat to the US on its home territory, affiliates and allies of the group continue to threaten US and foreign outposts overseas, such as those in Tunisia in 2012.

“Jabhat al-Nusrah’s access to foreign fighters, external network in Europe and other areas, and bomb-making expertise suggest that it may already have the capability to plan and support attacks against the West,” wrote Jones, adding that there seems to be a “growing contingent of foreign fighters – perhaps several thousand – traveling to Syria to fight in the war.”

Most pressing Al-Qaeda threats

Although posing a certain ideological threat to the US, it materialized that the most pressing concerns of the group were considerably more localized than any international ‘end-game,’ the report claimed.

“Most Al-Qaeda leaders are not interested in establishing a global caliphate and do not seek to overthrow regimes in much of the world,” Jones wrote, adding that “they tend to have rather more parochial goals,” focusing predominantly on countries or regions rather than a global jihad.

The study found that their primary international target was, surprisingly, France. “France, rather than the United States, is the most significant foreign enemy,” the report stated.

For al-Qaeda’s current leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, both a “near enemy” and a “far enemy” are identifiable.  For him, “the primary goal is broader: to overthrow regimes in key Muslim countries,” while attacking far-off countries is seen as a means to an end rather than an end in its own right.

However, the document goes on to advise the US on how to counter any direct threats. It encourages the country to implement a “light footprint strategy that focuses on covert intelligence, law enforcement, and Special Operations Forces,” adding that the US should withdraw Afghan forces and instead focus on conducting low-intensity operations in the area as they do in Colombia.

A double-pronged approach would be most effective, combining the ground strategy with an undermining of al-Qaeda’s ideology, the report said, adding that today the US plays no lead role in attempting to do so.

“The struggle against the al-Qaeda movement will be long – measured in decades, not months or years. Much like the Cold War, it is also predominantly an ideological struggle,” Jones concluded.

Russia Today

United States braces up for Military Action in Syria

President Barack Obama is considering using military force in Syria, and the Pentagon has prepared various scenarios for possible United States intervention. Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the Obama administration is deliberating whether or not it should use the brute of the US military in Syria during a Thursday morning Senate hearing.

Gen. Dempsey said the administration was considering using “kinetic strikes” in Syria and said "issue is under deliberation inside of our agencies of government,” the Associated Press reported from Washington.

Dempsey, 61, is the highest ranking officer in the US military and has been nominated by Pres. Obama to serve a second term in that role. The Senate Armed Services Committee questioned him Thursday morning as part of the nominating process when Dempsey briefly discussed the situation in Syria.

Last month, the Obama administration concluded that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons during the ongoing battles. Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications Ben Rhodes said, “The intelligence community estimates that 100 to 150 people have died from detected chemical weapons attacks in Syria to date; however, casualty data is likely incomplete.”

Pres. Obama said previously that the use of chemical weapons would cross a “red line” and likely trigger American intervention. When the White House concluded Assad had relied on chemical warfare, Rhodes said, “both the political and the military opposition . . . is and will be receiving US assistance."

That claim was met with skepticism, though. The Syrian Foreign Ministry called Obama’s claims a “caravan of lies.” Vitaly Churkin, Russia’s ambassador to the United Nations, later presented to the UN evidence supplied to his government that suggested the Syrian opposition fighters used chemical weapons.

With regards to foreign intervention, UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon said, “Providing arms to either side would not address this current situation.” Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) and his father, former congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) have also cautioned the White House against aiding Syrian rebels.

“You will be funding today the allies of al Qaeda” by aiding Syrian rebels, Sen. Paul said in May.

On his part, the retired lawmaker from Texas insisted that the administration’s lead up to possible intervention is “identical to the massive deception campaign that led us into the Iraq War.”

That isn’t to say the GOP is entirely opposed to taking any action. Although directly using the American military — either through boots-on-the-ground or unmanned aircraft — has been rarely discussed in public, Sens. John McCain (R-Arizona) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC), two long-time leaders within the Republican party, have been relentless with efforts to equip opposition fighters.

"I don't care what it takes," Graham told Foreign Policy’s The Cable earlier this year. "If the choice is to send in troops to secure the weapons sites versus allowing chemical weapons to get in the hands of some of the most violent people in the world, I vote to cut this off before it becomes a problem."

Other US officials have previously said Washington is considering implementing a no-fly zone above Syria, and last month the Pentagon left a fleet of F-16 fighter planes and its Patriot anti-missile system on the border of neighboring Jordan following a routine military drill.

Russia Today

The Model Continues: Tunisia frees former regime members from jail

The Arab Spring has known today began in Tunisia after the hero of the Spring, Mohammed Bouazizi's self-immolation. He was a cigarette seller who out of frustration of unemployment, despite being a graduate took to selling cigarette to keep body and soul together.

The Tunisian street vendor set himself on fire on 17 December 2010, in protest of the confiscation of his wares and the harassment and humiliation that he reported was inflicted on him by a municipal official and her aides.

The public's anger and violence intensified following Bouazizi's death, leading then-President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali to step down on 14 January 2011, after 23 years in power. The success of the Tunisian protests inspired protests in several other Arab countries, plus several non-Arab countries.

Soon, Hosni Mubarak of Egypt fell. Yemeni President, Abdullah Saleh fell too and Maummar Gaddafi was killed. Syria is still battling its own and Bahrain is yet to have a bearing.

Egypt among others that followed Tunisia is still inconclusive. Egyptian President, Mohammed Morsi was recently ousted through popular uprising concluded by the military to save the country. Since then, the situation has deteriorated with the Muslim Brotherhood, the party backing President Morsi defiant on any negotiation and vow to continue mass protests.

Though the former Prime Minister of Tunisia, Hamadi Jebali resigned too but it has largely avoided the resultant effects noticeable elsewhere in Egypt, Yemen, Libya and in Syria, probably because it was the origin of the spring and a model others must watch out for.

The authorities on Thursday released from jail,  two former figures from the toppled regime who were arrested following the 2011 uprising for abuse of power, according to the justice ministry. Mohammed Ghariani, ex secretary-general of the Rally for Constitutional Democracy party and former interior minister of now ousted dictator Zine El Adidine Addallah Kallel were freed by a Tunisian Appeals Court.

In 2012 a military court sentenced Kallel to two years in jail for the arrest and torture of army officers who were accused in 1991 of trying to topple Ben Ali, while Ghariani was arrested in April 2011 for abuse of power and embezzlement.

Tunisia is quietly charting its future, at least in a peaceful fashion though fighting al Qaeda-linked militants in the mountainous region. It is recording successes which if compared to others who took the spring can be regarded as giant strides towards a dynamic future if all things remain the same and go on with the present panache.

All Personnel Withdrawn from Russian Navy Base in Syria

Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister says all personnel had been evacuated from the navy resupply base in Tartus, Syria, adding that not a single Russian military serviceman remained in the country.

Mikhail Bogdanov made the announcement in an interview with the Al-Hayat newspaper. “Presently, the Russian Defence Ministry has not a single person stationed in Syria. The base does not have any strategic military importance,” the newspaper quoted the Russian official as saying.

Russian media have verified the statement and the business daily Vedomosti quoted an unnamed source in the Defence Ministry as saying that this was true as all military and civilian personnel had been evacuated from the Tartus base and there were no Russian military instructors working with the Syrian military forces.

The source added that the withdrawal was prompted not only by the increased risks caused by the ongoing military conflict, but also by the fact that in the current conditions any incident involving Russian servicemen would likely have some unfavourable reaction from the international community.

Russia currently has a 16-ship flotilla in the Mediterranean Sea but none of them has called at the port of Tartus in recent months and there were no reports of such plans.

Mikhail Bogdanov is also Russian President’s plenipotentiary for Middle East issues and he headed the Russian delegation at this week’s talks between Russia, US and UN on preparations of the major international conference on Syria, dubbed Geneva-2.

Following the Tuesday round of talks another Russian diplomat – Deputy Foreign Minister Gennadiy Gatilov – told reporters that the sides failed to agree on a number of questions and the terms of the future conference were not yet agreed. In particular, the participants of the talks varied on Iran’s possible role in the future conference.

Moscow supports Tehran’s participation in talks as it would make a positive contribution to the possible political settlement in Syria, the Russian official noted.

Besides, the participation of some of the Syrian opposition groups remains under question though the US side said they were working on this, Gatilov added.

The Russian diplomat said that the supplies of weapons to the Syrian opposition were not discussed at Tuesday's talks, though he noted that this issue “was not creating positive political environment for the start of the political process.”

Gatilov said that Russia still hoped the plan to call the international conference would end in success. In particular, the issue will be discussed at the forthcoming meeting between Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and US State Secretary John Kerry, due soon within the framework of the ASEAN conference in Brunei.

Courtesy: Russia Today

'West fighting al Qaeda in Mali and Supporting same in Syria. Syria needs Reforms’ ~Putin

Speaking about the conflict in Syria, President Vladimir Putin said it was possible to avoid the civilian war by conducting reforms in due time.

“Syria as a country was rife for some kind of change. And the government of Syria should have felt that in due time and should have undertaken some reform,” Putin said. “Had they done that, what we’re seeing in Syria today would have never happened.”

However, he added, one should take into account that the entire Middle East is currently finding itself in a state of uncertainty and conflict – and it’s wrong to try and interfere from outside.

"From the outside some people think that if you bring the entire region in compliance with someone’s specific idea of democracy, things will settle down, and everything will be all right in that region. But that’s not true. Considering that region’s background history, culture, religion – you cannot interfere with it from the outside.”

Putin pointed out that the West is supporting some certain organizations that are fighting Assad in Syria, and they are countering "those very same groups" in Mali.


“Where is the logic in that?” he said. “Our Western counterparts often tell us that the Al-Nusra is one of the key organizations in the Syrian military opposition. But it has been dubbed terrorist by the US Department of State, and it doesn’t even hide its links to Al-Qaeda. So will you let this organization join the future government of Syria? Our Western counterparts say no. Are you going to just make them go away once you have victory in Syria? They don’t know. It’s totally unclear.”

Putin reminded that the quality of life in Libya was one of the highest in the region before the regime change.

“What do you have there now? There is a war of everybody against everybody among various tribes, there is war for resources, and, I’m afraid, if we go the same way in Syria, there will be same havoc in Syria that we’re now witnessing in Libya,” he concluded. “Isn’t that enough from what we’re seeing in Pakistan and Afghanistan right now, where there’re terrorists that are not controlled by anyone, except for terrorists?”

Speaking about mass demonstrations, the president stressed that the government should control protesters, “put them put them in the legislative field,” if they “violate the law.”

“This is what happening both in the US and in Russia,” Putin said.

“Russia doesn’t try to influence Occupy activists, yet foreign agents try to do this in Russia,” he said, referring to the Occupy movement that initially started from protests in New York and then spread worldwide.

Middle East Dilemma: Washington calls on France and Britain to arm Rebels; Iran to send troops to Assad

The Middle East is edging closer to a more precarious situation with the recent turn of events. The announcement by Washington to arm Syrian rebels and the recent meeting of Sunnis in Cairo have all added fuel to the Syrian crisis. The Sunnis vow to end the regime of Bashar al Assad.

The prompt result of this was the severing of diplomatic and political ties by the Egyptian President, Mohammed Morsi, with President Assad. President Morsi said there is 'no space or place for Hezbollah is Syria'. He made it resoundingly clear that Hezbollah must leave Syria. Morsi went further to demand a no-fly zone be imposed over Syria.

All this events happening barely 24 hours before the Iranian election (that of Washington) and within 24 hours after the election (that of President Morsi). Within 24 hours after Morsi's declaration, reports came out from Iran that the Islamic Republic will be sending 4,000 soldiers to Syria to help Assad.

Russia too is to go ahead in supplying his S-300 missile batteries to Assad. The US also calls on France and Britain to supply weapons to Syrian rebels thus creating a cold-war-like conflict in Syria. Syria definitely represents one of the last bastions of Cold War alongside North Korea and Cuba.

Hezbollah's involvement and its seemingly rising power after the Qusayr victory seems to have 'alarmed' Israel and its powerful lobby group in Washington. Hassan Nasrallah has vowed that Hezbollah will not leave Syria because it cannot afford it falling into the hands of Israel, the US and al Qaeda.

Washington upon the imposition of a Shi'ite regime in Iraq saw it bolstered Iran, hence, roughly calculates to counter-balance the trend by supporting rebels (Sunni and al Qaeda-linked rebels in Syria) while overlooking the brutality in Bahrain for fear of losing it to another Shi'ite group. Saudi, Bahrain and 'Syria' together will be a great buffer zone to cage Iran for the benefits of oil and Israel.

In now looks as if the main targets of the US and Israel are now becoming full participants; Iran and Hezbollah. This will definitely be a bad, catastrophic and colossal precedent for the Middle East as Washington and Israel have 'effectively' used the Sunni-Shi'ite divide well to their advantage. Arabs are the epitome of their own failure, instability and regional chaos with so-called Sunni-Shi'ite divide.

Their wall has cracked beyond repair to the advantage of Israel and Washington. Palestine is on its own once Iran is taken off the radar. Other Arab nations will only make much noise and Washington cum Tel Aviv can easily pocket them. Iran has been a kind of 'rational' player Israel finds hard to 'effectively' get off the table and the Syrian war looks pretty good for the job to be done. In all these calculations, it is the people that will get to suffer.

Nightmare over Hezbollah's rising power is the basis of US involvement in Syria

Indications are pointing to the US decisions to arm rebels in Syria as a resultant effect of Hezbollah’s involvement in the conflict, with Washington and Jerusalem seeing it as a chance to counter anti-Israeli actions, author and historian Gerald Horne has told RT.

US President Barack Obama has given the green light to military support for the Syrian opposition after his administration concluded that Assad’s regime had used chemical weapons against rebels numerous times over the last year. Allegations which are still unsubstantiated.

However, Horne, from the University of Houston, does not believe that the US will be able to produce evidence of the use of chemical agent sarin by regime troops, saying that he doubts such evidence exists.

Gerald Horne said they are under enormous pressure. Former US President Bill Clinton has released a statement criticizing the Obama administration for not intervening more deeply into the Syrian morass. Obama’s former election rival, Senator John McCain of Arizona, just took to the floor of the US Senate saying that arming the rebels is not enough.

Presumably, he has called for airstrikes to create a so-called no-fly zone. It seems this is a very dangerous and ominous moment, Horne said. Particularly since the Sunni clerics have just met in Cairo, Egypt and called for a Holy War against the Assad regime and Damascus. Instead of trying to calm things down, it seems that the Obama administration is about to throw fuel on the fire according to Horne.

The UN has suggested that everyone is on board for this Geneva conference, except the Syrians. The opposition, the rebels have made clear that they have no interest in negotiating with Assad. As they see it, they will win this conflict on the battlefield, and the Europeans; particularly the British and French will be sending them more weapons sooner rather than later. And, as they see it, they can win.

It is in contradiction with Washington's allegations, bearing in mind also that, just a few weeks ago, Turkish authorities found that some rebels residing in Turkey had sarin weapons. It is difficult to say whether these weapons were used, and if so, who used them?  For example, what was the chain of custody that allowed the Obama administration to conclude that it was Damascus and not the rebels?

How did those samples get from the battlefield to Washington? How do we know that a renegade soldier in the Syrian military used these weapons precisely to invite an intervention to Washington? There are so many questions. Horne revealed he is looking forward to seeing the evidence, though he doubts the administration will be able to provide any.

Horne said one reason the Obama administration is edging towards more direct intervention in Syria is that Assad’s forces are triumphing on the battlefield, not least because of the assistance they are receiving from Hezbollah forces in neighbouring Lebanon. This assistance has outraged the Israelis and the Israeli lobby in Washington. As they see it, they would like to see Hezbollah degraded on the battlefield of Syria and, therefore, the new call from Washington for military intervention in Syria in the views of Horne.

The American people are totally against this intervention in Syria. They see no advantage in arming Al-Qaeda forces, who are the tip of the spear of the rebels. It thus seems that US politicians do not have the best of this argument. Arming Syrian rebels is also a de facto message to Iran, coming officially the day she was having her presidential election. Fight Hezbollah through Syrian rebels and wait for Iran's reactions.

Hassan Nasrallah has vowed that Hezbollah will not leave Syria to prevent the regime from falling into the hands of Washington, Tel Aviv and most importantly al Qaeda, which will definitely target Lebanon after such a victory.

Changing Syria: US to decide whether to arm Syrian rebels

The Syrian war has largely been ongoing with Washington taking serious caution, probably because it is an Obama not a Bush. The intervention in Libya which led to massive NATO bombardment in the guise of protecting civilians has also not helped matters.

The Libyan no-fly zone turned to songs of regime change barely some weeks after it was endorsed by the UN and France launched its first strike. In the case of Syria, Britain has been the front-runner in likely decisions to arm the rebels. Just as France was able to mount pressure on Washington in Libya, the pressure of Britain could soon play out to her favour too.

Washington may decide as early as this week on whether to arm Syrian rebels, a US official said on Monday. The question of whether to arm the rebels is on the agenda for White House meetings for the early part of this week, Reuters reported. US Secretary of State John Kerry reportedly delayed a planned trip to the Middle East in order to attend the meetings in Washington. This is coming at a time when the Syrian government is coasting closer to victory; first by winning Qusayr and now pounding Aleppo to wrestle it from the control of rebels.

Obama had earlier said the use of chemical weapons in Syria will amount to crossing the 'red line'. After this was fervently tied around his neck for him to act when allegations of such weapons' usage were leveled against the government of Assad, Obama said allegations must be corroborated by pure evidence and facts must be duly established.

Russia has acted to prove another Libya will not be possible. It is consistently ready to bolster the military capabilities of Bashar al Assad's Syria with the latest move being the shipment of S-300 missile batteries which Moscow says is to prevent 'hotheads' from entering into conflict and deter those who want to escalate the crisis.

One Dead, Several Others Injured in anti-Hezbollah Protest in Lebanon

As activists gathered to protest the involvement of the Islamist group in Syria, violence broke out. At least one person has been killed and several others injured in gunfire during an anti-Hezbollah protest outside the Iranian Embassy in Beirut. .

Men in black shirts began to scuffle with protesters as they arrived in front of the Embassy in preparation for the demonstration, reports Lebanese publication the Daily Star. They also fired gunshots into the air to disperse the activists.

Lebanese state news reported that the army quickly restored calm and cordoned off the area following the outbreak of violence.

Hezbollah helped Syrian government forces to expel armed rebels from the strategic region of Qusayr on Saturday, a move that was criticised by Washington.

"Hezbollah and Iran should immediately withdraw their fighters from Syria," State Department spokesperson Jay Carney said, accusing the two of aiding the Syrian government in its battle for Qusayr. The US regards Hezbollah as a terrorist organization.

The head of Hezbollah, Hasan Nasrallah, has justified the group’s involvement in the Syrian conflict, maintaining they are defending Lebanese-inhabited border villages inside Syria and Shiite holy sites.

Hezbollah has vowed never to allow Syria fall into the hands of Israel and the United States. It says it is ready to defend Syria and avoid the planting of a stooge of the two countries in Damascus.

Iran and Syria blast the United States for Declaring Support for Syrian Rebels

 The Syrian foreign minister, Walid al-Moualem, left, and his Iranian counterpart, Ali Akbar Salehi, in Tehran. Photograph: Atta Kenare/AFP/Getty Images

Iran and Syria are blasted the United States for providing funds, food and medical supplies to rebels fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Secretary of State John Kerry had announced in the week that, for the first time, the United States would provide non-lethal aid directly to anti-Assad forces. The linkage between non-lethal aid and sophisticated weapons transfer in such scenario is very thin, hence the condemnation by Iran and Syria.

At a joint press conference in Tehran, the Syrian and Iranian foreign ministers called the policy a "double-standard."

"If you really feel sorry about the ongoing situation in Syria you should force the opposition to sit at the [negotiating] table with the Syrian government and put an end to bloodshed," said the Iranian official, Ali Akbar Salehi. "Why do you encourage the opposition to continue these acts of violence?"

"I do not understand how the United States can give support to groups that kill the Syrian people," Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem said. "This is nothing but a double-standard policy ... One who seeks a political solution does not punish the Syrian people."

The first US aid is designed to boost the rebels and pave the way for a peaceful political transition. It includes $60 million for opposition groups.

Bashar al Assad has been defiant since the uprising began and he is enjoying the support of Russia mostly and in a way China. Russia continues to call for diplomacy and negotiation to end the crisis. The war has also got to the Iraqi border in a province called Yaarabiya. The Syrian civil war has killed 70,000 since it began in 2011.

"No power can stop Iran if it wants Nuclear Weapons' -Ayatollah Khamenei

Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said his country was not seeking nuclear weapons but added that if Iran ever decided to build them, no “world power” could alter the trend.

The supreme leader whose 2005 edict banning nuclear weapons is regarded as binding in Iran, told a group of visitors to his home in Tehran, the capital, that Iran is in favour of the worldwide elimination of nuclear weapons.

“We believe that nuclear weapons must be eliminated,” Ayatollah Khamenei said. “We don’t want to build atomic weapons. But if we didn’t believe so and intended to possess nuclear weapons, no power could stop us.” His comments were posted on his Web site, Khamenei.ir.

American officials say they believe that Ayatollah Khamenei exercises full control over Iran’s nuclear programme. He had earlier rejected direct talks with the United States when he said Washington was “pointing a gun at Iran”.

He called on the United States to show “logic” while talking to Iran. He and other Iranian leaders have often emphasized that before any talks can take place, Western sanctions must be lifted and the West must respect what they say is Iran’s right to a nuclear programme monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

“This is the only way to interact with the Islamic republic of Iran, and in that case the US administration would receive a proper response” from Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei said.

He pointed to American-devised sanctions, to which a new set of measures was added this month, as the prime example of why negotiations between Iran and the United States would fail.

“They seek the surrender of the Iranian nation,” Ayatollah Khamenei said of the United States. If negotiations are a sign of good will, he asked how talks could occur in the face of the current sanctions. He said the sanctions do not show goodwill, hence, Iran will not bow.

“They naïvely think that the nation has been exhausted by the sanctions and will therefore yearn for negotiations with the US,” Ayatollah Khamenei said.

In a separate part of his speech, he sharply criticized President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the speaker of Iran’s Parliament, Ali Larijani, who recently traded accusations during a public session of Parliament. Mr. Ahmadinejad caused an uproar by releasing a video of what he said were secret business dealings involving Mr. Larijani’s brother Fazel. During the same session, Mr. Larijani led the parliamentary effort to impeach one of Mr. Ahmadinejad’s ministers.

“People want psychological and moral peace, and I explicitly say that the event was not fitting to Islamic republic’s code of conduct,” Ayatollah Khamenei said, condemning both the release of the video and the impeachment effort.

“This event made me feel sad,” said the ayatollah. He has been Iran’s supreme leader since 1989 with much power and influence.

Israel Condemns Diplomacy with Iran

                

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu heads the weekly cabinet meeting in his office in Jerusalem.

A powerful partner of Israel's prime minister says sanctions and negotiations will not stop Iran from pursuing its disputed nuclear programme.

Former Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman says North Korea's nuclear test was an "obvious example" of diplomacy failing to curb a nuclear programme.

Lieberman told Army Radio on Wednesday that "anyone who thinks sanctions or negotiations will stop Iran is wrong."

Iran, like North Korea, is under stiff sanctions and negotiations with the West over its nuclear program have stalled.

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu often hints about a possible strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.

Lieberman stepped down from his post two months ago after he was indicted for breach of trust in a fraud and money-laundering case. But he remains a powerful lawmaker and Netanyahu's top political ally.

Lieberman has also reiterated that there can never be any peace accord with Palestinians since the last one signed in 1993. Lieberman is a complete hardliner.

President Obama is set to visit Israel. His visit will surely focus on Iran, peace with Palestine and the Syrian crisis.

No Peace Accord for Israel and Palestine -Lieberman

Israel has no chance of signing a permanent peace accord with the Palestinians and should instead seek a long-term interim deal, the most powerful political partner of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Saturday.

Avigdor Lieberman, an ultranationalist whose joint party list with Netanyahu narrowly won a January 22 election while centrist challengers made surprise gains, seemed designed to dampen expectations at home and abroad of fresh peacemaking with the remarks.

In a television interview, ex-foreign minister Lieberman linked the more than two-year-old impasse to pan-Arab political upheaval that has boosted Islamists hostile to the Jewish state.

These include Hamas, rivals of U.S.-backed Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who control the Gaza Strip and spurn coexistence with Israel though they have mooted extended truces.

"Anyone who thinks that in the center of this socio-diplomatic ocean, this tsunami which is jarring the Arab world, it is possible to arrive at the magic solution of a comprehensive peace with the Palestinians does not understand," Lieberman told Israel's Channel Two.

"This is impossible. It is not possible to solve the conflict here. The conflict can be managed and it is important to manage the conflict ... to negotiate on a long-term interim agreement."

Abbas broke off talks in late 2010 in protest at Israel's settlement of the occupied West Bank. He angered Israel and the United States in November by securing a UN status upgrade that implicitly recognized Palestinian independence in all the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza.

Israel insists it will keep East Jerusalem and swathes of West Bank settlements under any eventual peace deal. Most world powers consider the settlements illegal because they take up land seized in the 1967 Middle East war.

Lieberman, himself a West Bank settler, said the ball was "in Abu Mazen's (Abbas') court" to revive diplomacy.

Abbas has demanded Israel first freeze all settlement constructions. With two decades gone since Palestinians signed their first interim deal with Israel, he has ruled out any new negotiations that do not solemnize Palestinian statehood.

Netanyahu's spokesman Mark Regev noted that Lieberman, in the Channel Two interview, had said he was expressing his own opinion.

Asked how Netanyahu saw peace prospects for an accord with the Palestinians, Regev referred to a speech on Tuesday in which the conservative prime minister said that Israel, while addressing threats by its enemies, "must also pursue secure, stable and realistic peace with our neighbors".

Netanyahu has previously spoken in favour of a Palestinian state, though he has been cagey on its borders and whether he would be prepared to dismantle Israeli settlements.

Lieberman's role in the next coalition government is unclear as he faces trial for corruption. If convicted, he could be barred from the cabinet. Lieberman denies wrongdoing and has said he would like to regain the foreign portfolio, which he surrendered after his indictment was announced last year.

The Changing Arab World: Ahmadinejad to visit Egypt

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is set to visit Cairo, making him the first Iranian president to visit Egypt since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Ahmadinejad will head Iran's delegation to a summit of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation in Cairo, Reuters reports.

Tehran broke off relations with Cairo in 1980 following Egypt's peace agreement with Israel during the time of Anwar Saddat. Ahmadinejad hopes the two states can reestablish full diplomatic ties. Last year the two countries mutually agreed to reopen official embassies following a visit to Iran by Egypt’s Islamist President Mohammed Morsi.

The Arab Spring has rekindled a kind of Arab solidarity long lost after the demise of Gamel Abdel Nasser of Egypt. Arab nations including Turkey are finding a common ground among each other to counter Israel's strength. Israel with the assistance of the US is wielding the divide-and-rule baton well.