FLASHBACK: LEBANON, MARCH 6, 2006

The following was posted on March 6, 2006

ARAB IRAQ NO MORE: NOTES ON SAUDI ARABIA, EGYPT, AND LEBANON

[...]

LEBANON: GOD BLESS THE STALEMATE

In Lebanon, they are flattered that Empire is paying attention to them, at last. But so were the Iraqis at first. See what happened.

The American proxies in Lebanon are playing a dangerous game. They don’t seem to understand that they are in a stalemate. And that they should be thankful for the stalemate. The alternative would be a civil war where most of the weapons are held by the proxies of Iran and Syria. The Lebanese army? It’s mostly Shia. And neither Empire nor the Europeans have the fighting troops to dispatch to Lebanon.

All really need a lesson in history: That much of Lebanon’s recent misery has been (and is) related to Syria’s nearly-forty-year-long ceaseless quest to regain the Joulan. What makes anyone think that these efforts would cease, with sanctions or whatever else? Do you really think that a Sunni state in Syria would line up with Saudi Arabia and not with the Muslim Brothers and Iran? Hello!

[...]

Saad Hariri doesn’t have the troops... He has the money; but so does Iran; so does Russia. His dad’s biggest mistake was his failure to appreciate that Syria would not let go of Lebanon without assuring the return of the Joulan. The Americans and the French led Rafiq on. Geniuses.

AN (INDIRECT) ISRAELI-SAUDI ALLIANCE NO MORE?UPDATED!

FOURTH DRAFT

“We’re not asking for your hearts nor for your swords; all we’re asking is that you remain neutral.” Hezbollah’s Secretary General to the Arab governments of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Egypt.

INTRODUCTION

The Israeli army’s heroic feats against Lebanon’s civilians are threatening Saudi participation in the Israel-led camp to contain Iran. Bandar bin Sultan, Head of Saudi Arabia’s National Security Council, and Saud al-Faisal, its Foreign Minister, are in Washington to ask the American President to stop the Israeli onslaught on Lebanon’s civilians and its economy–an onslaught that is clearly pushed along by Mr. Bush and Ms. Rice.

That the Saudis would dispatch Mr. Bandar bin Sultan, a personal friend of Mr. Bush and his father, is indication that their patience has been exhausted. The Arab World is looking to them as America’s foremost Arab friend/client to stop Israel’s massacres in Lebanon; and they are disappointing the Arab World; with disappointment, the Arab street should push towards more extremism and further rejection of the United States. Besides, they themselves had not bargained on the slaughter of civilians when they had accepted to join the Israel-led camp to contain-Iran.



SAUDI ARABIA IN THE ISRAEL-LED ARAB CAMP TO CONTAIN IRAN

An indication that the Saudis had been entrenched in that camp and now (possibly) want out could be seen in the progression in Mr. al-Faisal’s statements about Israel’s response to Hezbollah’s attack on its military. Soon after Israel had started to bomb Lebanon’s civilians, Mr. al-Faisal had called Hezbollah’s attack on the Israeli military “irresponsible.” He likely had been playing a scene in the act assigned to the Kingdom in the Israel-led camp to contain Iran. He would later swallow his words, so to speak.

A key-player in the Israel-Arab alliance against Iran, Mr. al-Faisal probably had expected the Israeli operations in Lebanon, sooner or later, in line with the Israeli-American plan to disarm Hezbollah and isolate Syria. Accordingly, Saudi policy continued to be the same a couple of days into the Israeli army’s heroic onslaught on Lebanon’s civilians and its equally heroic avoidance of hurting Syria. In fact, on July 17, Saudi Arabia had intensified its criticism of Hezbollah (and Hamas.) The Saudi cabinet had issued a statement in which it criticized the extremist elements for endangering the safety of the Lebanese and Palestinians. The statement had paralleled yet another one by Saud al-Faisal, condemning once again Hezbollah’s action.

But, in Lebanon, bloodshed had turned into slaughter. Feeling the pressure from the public, and accounting for Shiite-Sunni complications which would be too much to cover here, the Saudis began to wonder whether pleasing Bush by joining the Israel-led camp had been worth it. Al-Faisal and Crown Prince Sultan, both visiting in France, on or about July 20, came out with statements that condemned Israel’s bombing of civilians.

Crown-Prince Sultan said that Israel should not be allowed to continue to wreck the life of Lebanese civilians, and he supported the idea of dispatching a multinational force. Saud al-Faisal went further. He spoke about the arrogance of Israel and described openly its destruction of Lebanon.


WHERE THE SAUDIS MISCALCULATED

(In a nutshell: When they followed the lead of the harmful idiots, instead of leading them.)

The harmful idiots’ scheme to contain Iran for a while had focused on Lebanon. When they succeeded in driving Syrian troops out, the harmful idiots became euphoric and believed they could do more. But, to make a long story short, there was stalemate in Lebanon. Syria and Iran had way too many friends in Lebanon; they were entrenched.

The American-Israeli scheme to weaken Syria and contain Iran involved a distribution of roles, a common characteristic in regional alliances. Israel would be the military bully–the bad cop; Egypt would be the good cop, persuading the Gaza Palestinians of the advantages of obedience, without the formation of a Palestinian state; Jordan would train various functionaries and operatives to bomb, assassinate, and what have you.

A part of the role assigned to Saudi Arabia was to support Saad Hariri and be the good cop with Syria–conflicting roles, by definition. Saudi Arabia’s (silly) leverage was Abdel Halim Khaddam, once the face of Syria’s ugly occupation of Lebanon. Saudi intelligence helped him defect and placed him in a palace in France. It’s unclear whether the Saudis are playing a role in financing the Syrian Muslim Brothers; the Americans almost certainly are.

(Alert: Whoever told the harmful idiots that al Qaeda would not infiltrate the ranks of their sponsored Syrian Muslim Brothers? Or are they really that mediocre–I’m being rhetorical-- to think they can create with money a moderate Muslim Brothers? At any rate, American financing has begotten a couple of operations within Syria, clashes really, the last being in May, 2006, in the Syrian city of Reqqa.)

The Syrian President had more than once contacted King Abdallah directly to complain about Saudi intelligence inciting the Syrian Sunnis against his government, using Abdel Halim Khaddam, a Sunni. In the last contact, Asad sent his foreign minister to deliver a letter to Abdallah. Asad seemed to be aware that Saudi intelligence was side-stepping the King in its anti-Syria campaigns, to meet its obligations pursuant to its assigned role within the Israel-led Arab camp to contain Iran. He would alert King Abdallah and the campaigns would abate.


CAN SAUDI ARABIA AFFORD TO WEAKEN SYRIA?

I’m not privy to the inner circles surrounding the King. But, knowing what I know about him (he’s no Uncle Tom), I would think he had surrounded himself with some who think like him. If he hasn't, he should. Why? The evidence is quite compelling that his intelligence services have been running circles around him, so to speak. They have been unleashing their money against, for instance, Syria; Syria's President would ract by calling the King to complain; then Abdel Halim Khaddam, their stooge, and Al-Hayat, their daily propaganda tool, would refrain. But only until the King turn his attention away.

But, talking strategy, are King Abdallah's closest advisers aware or aren't they that Syria’s strength is important to the Arabs and specifically to Saudi Arabia? Here’s why:

1. Without Syria and Iran, there would be no hope whatsoever to establish a Palestinian state on all of the 1967 lands. Such state, and reparations to the refugees and to Lebanon, are absolute necessities to defuse the most destabilizing issue in the region.

(Iraq is too but, take my word for it, a Palestinian state and reparations to the Palestinians and to Lebanon would help immensely in Iraq. And please don't give a moment's attention to the ideological morons at the American Enterprise Institute who have been recruited to say on National Public Radio that all’s well in Iraq. All’s not-–and will certainly not-–be well for the next 30 to 50 years.)

Without Syria and Iran, there would be no balance to Israel’s power and no Palestinian state–-let alone reparations to the refugees and to Lebanon.

You might say, “What about the Sinai?” Didn’t Israel fully withdraw from the Sinai without any military pressure?

My answer: Israel withdrew from the Sinai after it witnessed the Egyptian army cross the Suez Canal and fight rather well. Even though Egypt eventually lost that war, the crossing of the canal brought home to the Israelis that the Arab armies can get the job done–sooner or later.

In fact, they did. Hezbollah defeated Israel in south Lebanon using new and creative strategies: road-side bombs, suicide bombs, a mix of grassroots work, and high tech knowledge.

(Once Israel absorbs the fact that Hezbollah has now carried the battle inside Israel by dispatching missiles onto Haifa, it should sooner or later come to terms with the fact that it will need to do politics. But, in the meanwhile, it's rained its American machine of death against defenseless civilians and an equally defenseless small country that had never meant harm to any other.)

(Update--7/24/06: The U.S. just granted Lebanon $30 million in humanitarian aid; that, after our bombs had orphaned dozens of children, maimed hundreds if not thousands, and murdered hundreds of civilians--all to carry out a sophomoric plan by the racist and harmful idiots to clip Iran's wings! Not to mention that Lebanon's economic losses are in the billions.)

The advisers to King Abdallah and Crown Prince Sultan should know, shouldn’t they, that the Saudis don’t have the military power to balance Israel’s, or Iran’s. To do away with Syria therefore would invite further abuse of a defenseless Arab region.


2. Syria wants its Joulan Heights back. Any compromise that does not obtain these, fully, see a Palestinian state on all of the 1967 lands, and pay reparations that are acceptable to the refugees and to Lebanon, would spell the end of the Syrian government.

Lebanon is a card in Syria’s hand to achieve the above. Tragic for Lebanon, but it’s stuck. Has been since 1967, ever since the local bullies (Israel and Syria) and the harmful idiots have been waging their wars.

Syria has lots of influence in Lebanon. It has Hezbollah (Arab/Islamic nationalist;) it has the Syrian Social Nationalist Party (pan-Syrian nationalist;) It has Usama Saad (Nasserite–Sidon;) it has Sulayman Franjieh in the north (Christian Maronite;) it has most of Tripoli and the north (Sunni; they vote for Saad Hariri to get cargo, but their heart is with Syria;) and it benefits from the neutrality of General Michel Aoun (Christian Maronite–neutral).

And it has the Palestinian refugees, over 400,000 of them. (According to the Chairman of the Committee on Refugees in the Palestinian Parliament, Mr. Jamil al-Majdalawi, on or about June 6 of this year, 411,000 Palestinian refugees were living in Lebanon.) Should Syria and Hezbollah decide to escalate, they should be able to unleash a Palestinian army in Lebanon. (My guesstimate is that the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon can field a good 50,000 to 80,000 fighters, and more when Syria's Palestinian refugees--also over 400,000--are thrown into the fray.)


Update--7/24/06: The Secretary General of Fateh in Lebanon, Sultan Abu-Aynayn, just gave SaudiPolitics yet another predictive victory. He announced that the Palestinian factions (al-fasael) will fight the Israelis should these come close to the refugee camps. That, my dears, is an escalation, or a pre-escalation--a message to the racist and harmful idiots that Lebanon will slip into wars which their sophomoric plans had not accounted for.


These Palestinian refugees would want nothing less than to face off with the Israelis in a protracted guerrilla war in the south.

Syrian unconventional power therefore is quite impressive.

Saudi Arabia, if it takes an Arab course, could benefit from that power. It can stop working from within the Israel-U.S. scheme to weaken Syria, and work from within a proud Arab scheme with Syria on rebuilding Lebanon while insisting on a general resolution of the Middle East conflict along the lines outlined by then Crown Prince Abdallah in Beirut in 2002.

Saudi Arabia would be shooting itself in the foot if it were to weaken Syria before a Palestinian state is established. Bandar can take pride in his friendhip with Bush and Cheney, both businessmen with interests in Saudi Arabia. But the people around them are ideological operatives who hold a deep-seated hate of Muslims and Arabs, especially the Saudis. These operatives should sooner or later re-float the idea of dismantling the Kingdom--the first opportunity they have.

SaudiPolitics.com predicts that, when the current President and Vice President rejoin their business world to collect oodles of Saudi money, their circles of operatives would rejoin their Israel-centric right wing "think" tanks to push for "reforms" in Saudi Arabia, and will ally themselves to what's left of the Saudi opposition.

Accordingly, ,the Kingdom would do well to bring back Arabs into its government--such as Prince Talal--and ease out some of the more kiss-ass Uncle Toms within its ranks. Words to the wise.

(There's really no other choice, anyway. The harmful idiots are stringing everyone along because their political leadership is--and forever will be--tied down by lobbies.)


CONTAINING IRAN

There’s really no way to contain Iran using an Israel-led Arab alliance.

This is especially true after the endless misery Israel has visited onto Lebanon, most recently in its killing of that Arab country’s civilians and its devastation of Lebanon’s fragile economy. Such will be on the mind of the Arabs for a good while to come. Iran, I suspect, would like nothing more than to invest in spreading the photographs of devastation and testimony about the same across the Islamic and Arab Worlds. An inexpensive investment with plenty of returns.

Saudi Arabia need not cater too much to the harmful idiots. After all, from a balance of power perspective, these have to defend the Gulf conventionally should Iran make a move. Iran knows it. So there’s no need to disturb the Arab street unnecessarily by too chummy an alliance with those who murder Lebanese Arab civilians from the air, using American-supplied tools of death.


HEZBOLLAH OUT-MANEUVERS THE HARMFUL IDIOTS

The harmful idiots' plan for Lebanon and Syria is now dead, and will be for the foreseeable future.

It therefore behooves the Saudis to think smartly, and lead (neutralize) the harmful idiots instead of being led by them. For maybe, just maybe, Hezbollah and Iran are way smarter than most. They seem to have been aware that Olmert’s Israelis would respond like a bunch of murderous killer chimps to Hezbollah’s operation against their military. And maybe, just maybe, they had been aware that Israel's murderous backlash against the civilians would neutralize the harmful idiots’ schemes within the Israel-led Arab camp to contain Iran.

Very impressive reading of Israeli politics by Hezbollah!


CAN MR. BUSH STAND UP TO HIS VICE PRESIDENT? WILL THE PRO-AMERICAN WING WITHING SAUDI ARABIA REMAIN DOMINANT?

The question remains: Should Mr. Bush cave in to the old Bandar friendship and agree to order a stop to the American-supplied slaughter in Lebanon, would he be able to stand up to his Vice-President? And to the Israel-centric cabal of extremists surrounding that (now) strongest of institutions within the White House?

Should Mr Bush fail to stop the slaughter in Lebanon, and disappoint the American Bandar, would the pro-American wing within the Saudi foreign policy establishment pay a price? Would Talal or like elements re-join politics? Would the pro-American wing at the very least cease to be the most dominant?

ISRAEL’S WAR ON LEBANON'S CIVILIANS: THE (UN-INTENDED) CONSEQUENCES.

Revised and Updated Rough Draft--7/16/06.

OR: HEZBOLLAH (EASILY) OUT-MANEUVERS THE IDIOTS.


7/16/06--UPDATE--LEBANON: ISRAEL'S SLAUGHTERHOUSE

First Hezbollah attacks Israeli soldiers; Israel retaliates by murdering Lebanese civililans, wholesale; now Hezbollah in turn is retaliating by murdering Israeli civilians, also wholesale. (NOTE: Disproportionate: Israel has targeted the civilians.) All of this is nursed along by the refusal by the idiots to do politics.

Note the illogic of the Israeli government's policy: That by murdering Lebanese civilians, it can force Lebanon to rein in Hezbollah. It doesn't make sense. Israel's disproportinate retaliation has instead weakened the Lebanese government. This government now is facing total paralysis, and only Hezbollah, the Lebanese Arab Shiites, and the Iran-Syria alliance will be able to bring it out of this paralysis--to fully dominate the little country!

In other words, the fighting and cargo-acquiring (from oil-rich Iran) skills of Hezbollah have set the idiots back years. The longer the murder of Lebanon's and Israel's civilians, the more illogical Mr. Olmert's plan.

The Israeli strategy had been tried and had failed. In the 1970s, the American-sponsored, Jordan-influenced, Lebanese Army intelligence service would explode car bombs in Muslim neighborhoods to place pressure on the Muslims to call for the expulsion of the PLO. Not only did that policy not work; it led to thirty years of misery for the Lebanese--civil war, occupation, economic devastation. This Israeli policy of Let's-massacre-civilians-so-that-they-will-beg-for-us should fail, as it did when the Army Intelligence did it. (See below for the un-intended consequences.)

(The Israelis and their Arab allies, doing the bid for the idiots, don't realize that the idiots now nauseate the American public. Every signal indicates that that public doesn't want anything to do with the Middle East. Too, the American elite is mobilizing to gut the Israel lobby of its huge influence. The next imperial grab, my dears, will have an Arabist cover, not a Jewish extremist one.)

HERE'S WHAT TO EXPECT:

1. AN ENGINEERED RISE IN OIL PRICES

In response to Israel's retaliatory war on Lebanon's civilians, Iran probably is thinking about a version of the following: to reduce the production of its oil by a small amount, with lots of media fanfare to surround the event, as to create yet more oil price speculation. The rise in prices should make up for Iran’s aid to Lebanon.

NOTE: How a crisis helps an oil-producing country:

I'm adding this after discussing this article with my very conservative dad: Let's consider that Iran produces about 3 million barrels per day (bpd)of oil. Let us say that a crisis--short of a moronic and disastrous Iraq-like invasion--raises the price of a barrel by a modest $3. Of this, the producing country pockets $2, let us say. At three million bpds, Iran would pocket an extra $6 million per day, which would add up to around $180 million per month, to over two billion dollars per year. One can conclude therefore that a crisis is beneficial to some oil-producing countries.

Hezballoh's cost, I suspect, is significantly less than $2 billion per year. (The rumored figures are all less than $200 million.) Even taking on projects in Lebanon--to re-build the infrastructure, now that (Arab) Saudi Arabia is washing its hands off Lebanon's defenseless Arab civilians--should keep the Islamic Republic relatively in the black.

With this in mind, one can justifiably wonder whether the Islamic Republic, through Hezbollah's daring attack on Israel's mililtary, is sending Mr. Bush and his pathetic foreign policy circle a message: That bombing Iran, or even placing more sanctions against it, would cost the world economy dearly and plunge the United States--almost certainly--into a deep recession.

Moreover, one wonders whether the Islamic Republic would repeat a like crisis on the eve of our presidential elections. Finally, one wonders whether this "war" had sent yet another message: that Iranian missile/drones can hit ships miles away: Think the Strait of Hormuz.


2. IRAQIS COULD RENEW ATTACKS AGAINST OIL INSTALLATIONS

In response to Israel's war on Lebanon's defenseless civilians, some elements in Iraq could renew the war on oil installations to wreak further havoc in oil prices and place pressure on Israel's sponsor.


3. IRAN'S STAR TO RISE IN LEBANON AS SAUDI ARABIA CHOOSES TO IGNORE THE WAR AGAINST DEFENSELESS LEBANESE ARAB CIVILIANS.


Iran should lend Lebanon a hand in rebuilding its infrastructure, further embedding itself in that country. It’s hard to say no to cargo, especially when (Arab) Saudi Arabia washes its hands off the death of Lebanese civilians and the devastation of Lebanon’s civilian infrastructure.

NOTE: Why the Saudi callousness towards the deadly assault on Lebanon's civilians.

The Saudi government probably is praying that Israel succeed in eradicating Hezbollah, as a way of making obedient the Arab Shiites. It's thinking about the Saudi Arab Shiites, a majority in the Eastern Province, where most of the Kingdom's oil is found. It's miscalculating, of course. (I'm confident of this.) It would do better to stop listening to the idiots who brought the the sectarian genie out of the bottle. Instead, it should highlight that Sunnis and Shiites are all Arab. And act accordingly. Blame Hezbollah if you want; but don't ignore the disproportionate Israeli retaliation (against defenseless fellow Arab civilians!)


4. NEW TRAINED RECRUITS TO FLOOD HEZBOLLAH AS THE LEBANESE GOVERNMENT WEAKENS

Without generous outside support, and plenty of callousness and mediocrity on the part of the United States and Europe, the Lebanese government could begin to trim the ranks of its armed forces, to save money, and unload this military welfare program onto private institutions. Chiefly: The majority of those “riffed” would be Shiite and should be expected to join the Iran-financed Hezbollah military structure to supplement their meager pension. (Call it privatization--call it another Afghanistan.)


5. A GOAL OF SYRIA AND IRAN: USE LEBANON TO FORM A WORKING SUNNI-SHIITE FRONT IN IRAQ

Arab Shiites and Sunnis should draw closer in Iraq, the longer the bombing of Lebanon continues.

NOTE: Iran and Syria retaliate in Lebanon

This, I suspect, was one of the goals of Hezbollah’s recent operation against the Israeli military. The message is meant for the United States and allied Arab intelligence services, Jordan's in particular. The message: If you think you can play the Sunni-Shiite sectarian card ("A Shiite Crescent is evolving"), think again. We can on our end play the Muslim world-Israel card. Better yet: We can keep you so preoccupied in Lebanon that Iraq would look like a promenade in comparison.


6. THE NEED FOR A LESS IDIOTIC FRANCE

France will activate its foreign policy machine to supplement European financial aid to Lebanon to avoid the bankruptcy of the Lebanese government and the concomitant sinking of Lebanon further into the Iranian-Syrian axis. (The Bush people don’t have the smarts to see this. They're harmful idiots.) Nor did the French. But these now have a tad more freedom from Empire's moronic edicts, now that Empire has seen the light in Iraq.


7. HEZBOLLAH TO BUTTRESS ITS RANKS AND POPULARITY: THE CARGO WAR.

As a consequence of the weakening of the current Lebanese government, expect Hezbollah to become more popular, and the Bush/Israel pillars (Jumblatt, Hariri, Gemayyel, and Geagea) to become marginal, especially if this confrontation extends into weeks and months. Not only would the general population eventually see that Hezbollah originally had attacked the Israeli military (and not the Israeli civilians); too, they would see that Israel retaliated against the Lebanese civilians, purposely and murderously.

Expect Hezbollah to widen the provision of services to Lebanese other than Shiites. Popular in fighting; and popular in cargo-acquisition and distribution.

In short, Hezbollah (and Iran and Syria) have scored a huge success since Israel’s disproportionate retaliation against defenseless civilians (one that I’m confident Hezbollah had aimed for) should scuttle the inroads made by the Bush-Israel axis in Lebanon and among the extremist elements of the diasporas in the United States. (The latter: Hilarious if it weren't pathetic.) Such inroads had been meant to clip Hezbollah's wings. Bye bye clipping.

For the record:

My father doesn't agree with this conclusion; he thinks this confrontation will put an end to Hezbollah. His wishful thinking never ceases to amaze me.

Problem: My conservative father has been thinking like this through three decades of near-homelessness, as he had dodged the various phases of Lebanon's wars, always believing that his Christian leaders--assets of the idiots--will defend him and his family. His house had received two missiles; he counted a dozen escapes from Beirut, sleeping at friends' homes in various villages in Mount Lebanon, renting houses when he could find them; waging campaigns to find a kidnapped relative. Still, the man continues to believe in the idiots, even though these have wrecked over one third of his life--and more of mine.

FLASHBACK 2: JANUARY 1, 2003

I posted the following warning on January 1, 2003

A WARNING!

[So, plus ca change...]

The United States, for its part, would do well to recall that adage, too: for Iraq has always balanced Iranian power, in a way the United States couldn't. Iraq has sacrificed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives, and unlimited billions of dollars, to balance Iranian power. Is the United States up to that task? Doubtful. Tampering with Iraqi governance therefore shoud be done with utmost care, not with a zeal adapted from exiled Iraqi generals, who left their home-country with millions of dollars to their name, and who had executed the Iraqi President's policies with faith and dedication.

FLASHBACK: ON THE EVE OF THE INVASION.

I posted the following alert in this newsletter on Saturday, March 01, 2003


SPC ALERT: THE COMING MASSACRES OF CIVILIANS IN IRAQ

If efforts to unseat the Iraqi President fail, expect the following:

As soon as the United States launches its uncertain war on Iraq, the powers that be in that country’s government and secret services, and the Shiite Da’wa party in southern Iraq, should stage bloody massacres against civilians. These massacres will see the civil war rage in Iraq, pitting Sunnis against Shiites, while the United States is conducting its fancy bombing from the sky. So, in effect, two wars will be taking place, both uncivil.

Sensing that the massacres against the Iraqi Shiites are the work of the Sunni powers that be, Iran will be forced into the fray, to assist its co-religionists. It’ll ignore all the secret promises made to it by the United States to buy its neutrality in the American war. It will send armed Iraqi Shiites from the Bader Brigade (currently stationed in Iran) into Iraq. The civil war’s tempo will then reach a higher level, and massacres against civilians will become the call of the day.

With Iran’s help, the Shiites might very well gain the upper hand, and threaten to take over Baghdad, especially if Iraqi Sunni officers heed the American call to defect and join their foreign bank accounts.

Should the Kurds move south, they’ll do it only with Iranian consent. And they could very well join forces with the Shiites in the center of the country. Meanwhile, the massacres by Kurds against Arab Sunnis, and vice versa, would also spread across the country. The Christian minority will hide behind Sunni lines, and their sympathy would be with the once secular regime that gave them equal access to government and the economy.

Most likely, the United States will have to freeze its operations and support the Sunni regime. Any other option would mean that the U.S. will have to accept partnership with Iran in Iraq, where Iran has the upper hand. Unless, of course, the United States widens the war, by bombing Iran.

*******************************************************************************
UPCOMING TOPICS

Here's what I expect the upcoming issues will cover:

1. An update on Saudi foreign policy.

2. The direction of the Arab resistance/opposition. This promises to be a truly exciting direction (non-violent, but not the Mahatma Ghandi way that Saudi Ambassador Turki al-Faysal is calling for) that should confirm the relative independence of the Arab street.

3. The importance of consulting with left analysts about the Arab and Islamic worlds--and avoiding at all cost ideological analysts who suffer from narcissistic personality disorder, are driven by ethnic blind ambition, or a quest for easy security. I

I'm thinking of a study I remember reading a long time ago about Vietnam: That the more predictive perspectives came from state university professors and not from Ivy League or Ivy League wannabes, such as academic and research outfits which were connected to various branches of government and to the intelligence community. (Let's see if I can find that study.)