Israel, Syria, and Lebanon Prepare the "Home Fronts"

 http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8733

Beating the Drums of a Broader Middle East War

Israel, Syria, and Lebanon Prepare the "Home Fronts"

Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Global Research, 7 May 2008

[8733.jpg]

The Levant could be the starting point of a major international conflict
with global ramifications and which could quickly spin out of control. Such
a conflict could even involve the use of Israeli or American nuclear weapons
against Iran and Syria. Syria has additionally declared that it is preparing
for an inevitable war with Israel despite the fact that it believes that the
chances of a war in 2008 are slim.

In the scenario of a war against Iran, the reaction of Syria will be
pivotal. Damascus plays a central role and how it acts and reacts will have
a definitive impact on Israeli military strategy in regards to Iran. It is
in this context that Israel, the U.S. and the E.U., with the help of Saudi
Arabia, Jordan and Egypt, have been attempting to undermine and ultimately
destroy the alliance between Syria and Iran. This is part of a geo-strategic
stride to foreclose the possibility of a Mediterranean battle-front that
might emerge in the Levant as a result of an attack on Iran.

The casus belli for an Israeli attack or a joint Israeli-U.S. attack,
possibly involving NATO, against Syria or against both Syria and Iran could
use the pretext of any form of retaliation by Hezbollah against Israel for
the assassination in Damascus of one of its leaders, Imad Fayez Mughniyeh.

Hezbollah has joined Iranian officials in saying that the U.S. military is
incapable of starting another war in the Middle East by launching attacks on
Iran and Syria. [1] Israeli officials have also renewed calls for peace by
openly mentioning that Tel Aviv is willing to return the Golan Heights back
to the Syrians, while there have been strong political noises against the
move in Israel. [2]

Tel Aviv is simultaneously part of a U.S. endeavour that claims Syria has a
secret nuclear program aided by North Korea. [3] Strategic efforts, with
strong links to war preparations, have also started with the aim of bringing
temporary calm to the Palestinian Territories as part of the same track of
events in the Levant.


Redrawing the Arab-Israeli Conflict as an Iranian-Israeli Conflict to
justify War

Momentum is being built up against Iran in a list of growing, and more
frequent, accusations against Tehran.

Iran is portrayed as the main threat against Israel. It is also accused of
intervening in occupied Iraq and Afghanistan. In this sense, the
Israeli-U.S. war plans in the Levant have been tied to Iran, as well as
Syria. The investigative journalist Seymour M. Hersh, a Pulitzer Prize
winner, reported in 2006 that the Israeli war against Lebanon was part of
this Israeli-U.S. military roadmap to ultimately target Iran.

The accusations against Tehran and Damascus are part of a calculated effort
to justify attacks against Iran and Syria as the only means to achieve peace
in the Levant between Israel and the Arabs. They are also upheld as
justification to ensure the security and success of occupation forces, for
Anglo-American and NATO forces respectively in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In this regard, the Gaza Strip, alongside Lebanon, is now being described by
Tel Aviv as an "Iranian base" against Israel. Israel is pointing the finger
more and more towards Tehran as the source of its problems.

This argument is fabricated. It is in blatant contradiction with the history
of the Palestinian struggle. The inner causes and history of the
Arab-Israeli Conflict are now being brushed aside and ignored. The
Arab-Israeli Conflict is now being redefined as a mere existential conflict
between Israel and a few irrational and violent Arab organizations
controlled by Tehran.

All players, state or non-state, have rational interests and motives. All
actions are also based on these interests and motives. Any analysis without
the mention of these interests seeks to sidestep specific issues. By
portraying the Arabs as inherently violent, the truth is being sidestepped
without explaining the full rationale for their attacks against Israel.

This brushing aside of motives is part of a disinformation campaign, which
is used to camouflage the truth. The historical facts of the Arab-Israeli
Conflict are being redrawn with a view to presenting Tehran as having always
been in the picture as a spoiler and a source of the Arab-Israeli Conflict.
The motives for this agenda are to justify the outbreak of a conflict with
Iran.

The Arab-Israeli Conflict is being redrawn as an Iranian-Israeli Conflict,
where the Arabs are portrayed as Iran's foot soldiers against Tel Aviv.

[Middle-East-map.gif]


Turning the Tide of the Arab-Israeli Conflict: Iranian Arms Shipments to the
Levant

Although there have been reports of Iranian arm shipments to the
Palestinians and Lebanon since the downfall of the Iranian monarchy, these
reports had new value given to them after 2001.

The first such report to note came on January 3, 2002 when the Karine-A was
intercepted en route in the Red Sea by Israeli naval commandos. Sceptics
questioned how an undeclared arms shipment could pass through the heavily
U.S. and NATO patrolled waters of the Red Sea. The Israeli capture made
international headlines in 2002 as the Israelis revealed that the ship was
carrying a major weapons cache headed for the Gaza Strip. A whole set of
indicting links were made between the ship and the Palestinian Liberation
Organization (PLO), the Palestinian Authority (PA), and Iran. The Israelis
maintained that the ships cargo came from an Iranian sea port in the Persian
Gulf. The event was used not only to draw attention to Tehran as a problem
in the Levant, but also by Tel Aviv as a part of the effort underway to
portray Yasser Arafat as not being a genuine partner for peace.

Hezbollah and Syria have also been armed and supplied by Iran for years.
Although neither the Lebanese nor Syria would attack Israel unless attacked,
invaded, or occupied.

Aside from what it already possesses, Israel can no longer annex Arab
territory any more than it has. Nor can Israel project itself as it once
did. This is a major problem for establishing a new regional order. Iranian
arms shipments and military aid have upset both strategic Anglo-American and
Israeli interests in the Middle East. Arguably this has necessitated even
more active involvement by America and Britain militarily in the Middle
East.

After 2005 the Israeli claims about Iranian arms supplies to the
Palestinians increased even more with the establishment of a Hamas-led
government in the Palestinian Territories. After 2006, the reports
concerning Iranian arms shipments to Hezbollah started carrying a sense of
urgency that they never had before. The upgrades being made to the Syrian
military were also looked upon at as provocative and inappropriate, even
though the Israeli military had further upgraded and modernized its military
arsenal.

In 2007 and 2008, the Israelis reported that Iran has increased its weapons
shipments to the Palestinians. The Jerusalem Post made one such claim on
April 17, 2008: "In recent months, the IDF has noticed an increase in
Iranian-made weaponry in the Gaza Strip, including rockets and mortars.
Terror groups [meaning the Palestinian Resistance] in Gaza recently were
equipped by [Tehran] with two different types of mortar shells made in Iran
-- one 120 mm with a range of 10 kilometers like a Kassam rocket and another
with a range of six kilometers." [4] The same report also continued to state
that thousands of Iranian mortars were also imported by the Gaza Strip,
which Israel has defined as a "Hostile Entity." [5]

[israel_lebanon_map.jpg]


The National Emergency Authority of Israel and its War Preparations

The National Emergency Authority (NEA) of Israel was created to administer
and manage Israel, the "Home Front," under a "mass-casualty" scenario
resulting from a major war. Israel's NEA was established in 2007 in the
aftermath of the 2006 Israeli attack on Lebanon and the rocket
counter-attacks on Israel from Lebanon. The creation of the National
Emergency Authority is an integral part of Israeli war preparations.

The new organization planned five-day emergency exercises (April 6-11, 2008)
that were linked to both Israeli military preparations and the preparation
of Israeli civilians. These emergency exercises were the largest in the
history of Israel. Strategically and as part of the bigger picture, the
primary purpose of the emergency exercises were to prepare Israel for --
using Condoleezza Rice's often mentioned words -- "the birth pangs of a new
Middle East" or a new regional order. This process, according to Tel Aviv,
will be "painful for Israel." A regional war against Syria, Iran, and their
allies has been presented to Israeli public opinion as a prerequisite to
bringing about this new regional order and even for the very survival of
Israel.

The Israeli exercises simulated mass evacuations from "hit zones" and large
patient build-ups in crowded Israeli hospitals. [6] In the event of the
conflict exercised for the Knesset, government offices, power stations,
bridges, military facilities, and state buildings are also expected to be
attacked, damaged, and destroyed. This is why respective entities in Israel
such as the Knesset and Israeli government offices all participated in the
drills.

Drills involving preparations for chemical and biological weapons were also
executed. Israel has also maintained that Syria with the help of Iran has
been upgrading its chemical weaponry. Reports of an incident involving
Syrian and Iranian military specialists and engineers were also used as
justification by Israel in regards to preparations against Syrian chemical
and biological weapons during the exercises. [7]

Segments of the emergency exercises took place beforehand. Starting on March
18, 2008 the Barzilai Hospital held full-scale emergency exercises that
simulated direct rocket and missile hits on the hospital in the city of
Ashkelon. [8] The city of Ashkelon, adjacent to the Gaza Strip, is an
important Israeli maritime and commercial port and is the entrance point for
energy supplies from Egyptian natural gas fields in the Mediterranean Sea.


Tel Aviv keeps the Public in the Dark: Omitting Iran from a War Scenario

In 2007, a media propaganda campaign was launched to influence international
public opinion in the event of an Israeli war against Lebanon, Syria, and
Iran. Israeli sources have claimed Iran is also preparing its journalists
for an Israeli war against Lebanon and Syria. [9] 2008 has seen an even
higher stage of Israeli war preparations.

In 2007, Aharon Ze'evi-Farkash, the former commander of Israeli military
intelligence, communicated his fear that a war with Iran, launched by
Israel's American ally, could start before the "Home Front" in Israel was
prepared.

In this context the aims of the Israeli emergency exercises were to
condition Israelis for such a war. Under the war scenario played out by
Israeli officials, the whole of Israel was part of a simulated battle-front
in which missiles and rockets would be launched from the Palestinian
Territories, Lebanon, and Syria. Under the scenario, some 400 to 500
projectiles were expected to hit Israel on a daily basis.

A key and very notable aspect of the emergency drills was that Iranian
involvement was excluded from the scenario. In the event of a war with Iran,
Tehran has credibly maintained that it can launch over 11, 000 missiles and
rockets in a minute. [10]

In this regard, a two-sided approach was taken by Israeli officials in
regards to their emergency preparations. War preparations and scenario
layouts had two dimensions, one for the Israeli public and an accurate one
kept for the scrutiny of Israeli officials that was withheld from the
Israeli public.

The rationale for the two-set approach by officials in Tel Aviv was to hide
the real scope and magnitude of a regional war on Israel and to reduce fear,
panic, and any anti-war sentiment amongst Israelis that would develop if
they realized the immense harms they would face if their government launched
a regional war involving Syria and Iran.

Additionally, days after the nationwide Israeli emergency exercises were
completed the Israeli military tested an imitation of an Iranian ballistic
missile in isolation, away from the public. [11] If not central, Iran is
clearly a real and major part of Tel Aviv's war preparations.


The Emergency War Scenario: An Israeli Omission of War Plans?

The first day of the emergency exercises were characterised by the formation
of an Israeli war cabinet scenario in response to a major "enemy attack."
[12] This war cabinet would respond to the "enemy." Although, it should be
noted that all Israeli responses have been calculated and predetermined and
include the use of a nuclear strike option against Iran and Syria. [13] Such
an act would have apocalyptic ramifications in the Middle East and
worldwide.

The war scenario envisioned and simulated by Israeli planners during the
national emergency exercise in Israel foresaw massive damage and casualties
through missile and rocket attacks by "Arab enemies." The scenario excluded
the significantly larger Iranian arsenal. This accounts for the lower number
of missile and rocket hits; 400 to 500 per day.

The Israeli scenario, however, also projects a smaller amount of strikes by
the rockets and missiles of the "Arab enemies" on the initial day of the
war. In other words, strikes in realistic numbers against Israel were
missing on the initial day of the war scenario and this makes very little
sense in regard to a hypothetical Arab offensive against Israel.

Hezbollah alone has over 13, 000 rockets according to Israel itself. In
addition, Hezbollah's arsenal is nothing compared to the capabilities and
size of the Syrian one. Under the Israeli scenario the hypothetical war only
lasted for about a week; the math does not tally up unless the scenario is
not what Israeli officials maintain.

The Israeli simulation is an omission in regards to who plans on starting
the war and who will attack in retaliation. Under these circumstance, Helmi
Musa a columnist for As-Safir, a major Lebanese newspaper, pointed out that
"this Israeli exercise has signalled, for the first time, to `whom starts
and to whom retaliates.' If the Arabs are to start this battle, it would see
an intensive rocket strike on the first day with thousands of rockets
launched [and not the few hundred that Israeli strategists predict]."
Unknown to the Israeli public the scenario being simulated was one where the
"Arab enemies" were reacting to an Israeli attack and probably fighting
Israeli incursions too. This would account for the low number of strikes. If
they, the Arab players outlined by the drills, were to have attacked Israel
first it is fair to assume that the number of strikes on Israel would have
been their largest on the initial day of the scenario.


Syrian National Emergency Exercises: A counter-measure to Israeli War Drills

Syria has repeatedly maintained since 2007 that it has made a strategic
decision to pursue peace with Israel, but is also prepared to protect itself
if attacked. [14] At the start of April 2008, the Syrian Deputy-Foreign
Minister, Fisal Al-Mekdad, in an interview with Al-Thawra, a
government-owned newspaper in Syria, acknowledged that Damascus was ready
for a clash with Tel Aviv. He told Al-Thawra that Israeli war preparations
were forcing Syrian strategists to draw their own contingency plans for a
conflict in advance. "If Syria is the target of all of this [meaning the
Israeli emergency drills], know that we are following the drill and are also
developing our capabilities and our plans to face the Israeli [manoeuvres],"
the Syrian Deputy-Foreign Minister told Al-Thawra. [15]

True enough, in response to Israeli war preparations, the Syrians also
announced two days after the start of the Israeli exercises that Damascus
planned to hold national emergency exercises too. Al-Thawra reported that
the nationwide exercises in Syria were announced during a cabinet meeting of
Syrian ministers. The military, the police, security forces, and civil
institutes were all said to have roles in what was termed as a part of
"general preparations for natural disasters and crises" by the Syrian
government.

In reality the emergency preparations were part of Syria's preparation to
repel any Israeli attack that could occur directly or as a result of an
Israeli war with Lebanon that would by extension include Syria.

What is crucial in understanding the evolving Middle Eastern war theater is
that the movements taking place in both Syria and Israel are unprecedented.
Along with the growing Israeli-U.S. threats directed against Iran, including
statements of support for military action from the E.U. and NATO, there is
justifiable reason for apprehension and concern.


2008: The Year of an Israeli Invasion of Syria?

The Syrian border with Israel has been peaceful for decades and is one of
Israel's most peaceful frontiers. Yet, tensions have been rising. In 2006
Israel created a new series of military units specifically for a war with
Syria, amongst them was the Kfir infantry brigade, the largest military unit
in Israel. In addition, the Israeli military predicted in 2007 that a war
would breakout between Syria and Israel in 2008 if no settlement were
reached between Tel Aviv and Damascus. [16]

Since the 2006 Israeli failure in Lebanon, the Israeli military has been
routinely performing simulations of an Israeli invasion of Syria. A great
deal of Israeli manpower has been dedicated to an invasion force that would
attack Syria. Major-General Eyal Ben-Reuven, a reservist general, declared
in 2007 that Israel is "preparing itself for an all-out war." [17]
Major-General Eyal Ben-Reuven also stated that Israel must invade Syria to
Israeli troops. He first stated that "the IDF's mission will be very focused
and will have to be quick, in order to neutralize as quickly as possible the
strategic areas threatening Israel's soft underbelly, thus preventing Syria
[from] reaching its coveted goals." Eyal Ben-Reuven also gave some depiction
about the shape of a war against Syria. Ben-Reuven stated "that in order to
carry out such missions successfully, an extensive ground operation will be
needed," meaning a land invasion of Syria, which would most probably swiftly
target Damascus and the Syrian southern governorates.

This strategic aim also explains the well reported Israeli invasion
exercises of model Syrian villages and Israeli military exercises in the
Golan Heights. [18] Israel and the U.S. have also held strategy meetings to
formulate a course of military actions to be taken in Lebanon and against
both Syria and Iran. According to a report from Qatar by Al-Watan a senior
Syrian officials indicated that the Israeli emergency exercises were
surveyed by an American general and also involved military operations on the
borders of Syria. [19]


Syrian mobilization on the Lebanese border in preparation for Israeli
Attacks

Ehud Barak, in the capacity of an Israeli defence minister, on April 2, 2008
renewed Israeli threats of war against Hezbollah, Lebanon, and Syria.
According to Israeli sources the Syrians believe that Israel will launch
another military invasion of Lebanon on the pretext of addressing Hezbollah
in a pre-emptive war. In this context since 2006 Tel Aviv has been calling
Hezbollah "the growing threat in Lebanon" or "the growing threat in the
`Northern Front.'" In light of this, Israeli and other Middle Eastern
sources have reported that Syria started reinforcing its military presence
on the Lebanese-Syrian border before the start of April, 2008 and had placed
all its forces on high alert.

The Syrians were also reported to believe that the Beirut-Damascus Highway
would be targeted with greater ferociousness by Tel Aviv than in the summer
of 2006 to prevent logistical support from reaching Hezbollah and Lebanon.
Israeli sources also maintain that the Syrians also started mobilizing their
reserve forces on the Lebanese-Syrian boarder. In addition, the Syrians were
reported to have deployed three armoured divisions, nine divisions of
mechanized infantry, and special forces units opposite the Bekaa Valley of
Lebanon. [20] In line with this Israeli sources additionally insisted that
Palestinian fighters were also amassing in the Bekaa Valley in coordination
with Syria and Hezbollah.

Hours after the original report about the mobilization of the Syrian
military was released by Al-Quds Al-Arabi, a London-based Arabic newspaper,
the top brass of Israel came out to respond. Major-General Dan Harel
indirectly gave a message to Damascus. The Deputy Chief of Staff for the
Israeli military told reporters gathered for a press briefing that "anyone
who tries to harm Israel must remember that it is the strongest country in
the region, and retaliation will be powerful and painful." [21] Syria was
being told to look out.

In the days following this statement emanating from the Israeli military,
Syrian officials gave mixed responses about Syrian war preparations.
Damascus denied reports that Syrian troops were amassing on the
Lebanese-Syrian border. Syrian officials responded that despite the fact
that the Israelis were making war preparations against Syria, Damascus was
not increasing the troop presence on the Lebanese-Syrian border.

During an interview with Al-Arabiya, Mohammed Habash, an important Syrian
parliamentarian, refuted the reports about the mobilization of Syrian
reserves on the border with Lebanon in preparation for an Israeli attack.
The Syrian parliamentarian, who is the chairman of the Syrian Parliament's
strategically important Syrian-Iranian Committee, also pointed the finger at
Tel Aviv for escalating tensions in the Levant: "Syria is ready to defend
itself but is not striving for war -- it is the Israeli side that is taking
steps to bring about an escalation." [22]

In the same timeframe as the reports of Syrian mobilization on the
unfortified Lebanese-Syrian border, there was also an increase of Israeli
military air traffic near the Syrian and Lebanese borders. The Israeli
military also acknowledged that additional Israeli warplanes were displaced
to Israel's northern borders and in a state of high alert.


Internationalizing "Hezbollah" as a Menace: Pretext for NATO intrusions in
Lebanon?

On April 8, 2008 Bernard Kouchner, France's top diplomat and head of the
French Foreign Ministry, revealed that Mohammed Zuhair Siddiq the individual
who was a star witness in the Hariri Assassination and a source for claims
of Syrian involvement in the event had disappeared while he was under French
protection. Even more significant, Bernard Kouchner also proclaimed that
"Hezbollah" was no longer "a domestic issue for Lebanon." The implications
of this statement carry significant indications.

Monsieur Kouchner additionally announced that the weapons that Hezbollah
carried were also a serious international concern. The ground was being
paved for NATO's active involvement in Lebanon. Hezbollah was being targeted
through the internationalization of concerns over its arms. What was being
implied in Paris was that international action should be taken against
Hezbollah.

The statements of U.S. and Coalition representatives in Iraq, such as
General Petraeus, about the involvement of Hezbollah in attacks against U.S.
and Coalition troops and claims that Hezbollah is training Iraqi militias
inside Iran also serve this purpose. [23]

Just a few days after the statements by Bernard Kouchner the head of the
disputed Lebanese government, Fouad Siniora, asserted in close proximity to
Israeli and Syrian war preparations and the renewed American pressure on
Iran that the time for internal dialogue was over in Lebanon. Foud Siniora
made the announcement while the Parliamentary Speaker of Lebanon, Nabih
Berri, was in Damascus meeting with Syrian officials as part of a diplomatic
tour of Arab capitals to get Arab League support for new intra-Lebanese
political dialogue.

The Third Expanded Ministerial Conference of the Neighbouring Countries of
Iraq, which was held in Kuwait, was also related to Lebanon. The
international conference hosted by the Kuwaitis on April 22, 2008 involved
much more international players than just the neighbours of Iraq and its
scope included the whole Middle East.

The U.S., Saudi Arabia, France, Britain, and several other Arab states all
pushed ahead with an agenda to internationalize the political deadlock in
Lebanon and to present Hezbollah as an international concern too. In league
with these efforts to internationalize Hezbollah as a global problem the
U.N. Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, also released a report claiming that
Hezbollah was an international problem. All these events were part of the
brinkmanship for internationalizing Hezbollah as a threat and eventually
justifying U.S. and NATO intervention in Lebanon.

The efforts to internationalize Hezbollah as a menace also entered a new
phase in Lebanon too. The Hariri-led March 14 Alliance, which effectively
forms the Lebanese government, declared that it would take legal action in
May, 2008 against Hezbollah because of a camera network monitoring Lebanon's
main airport and a vital parallel security telecommunications network setup
by the group. These internal efforts against Hezbollah were executed through
the coordination of the March 14 Alliance with U.S. and Saudi Arabian
diplomats in Beirut.


Lebanon prepares for Israeli Attacks

The Syrian border with Israel is heavily fortified, unlike the
Lebanese-Syrian border. This is why the Israeli military was desperately
pushing to get to the banks of the Litani River before the Syrians could
fully prepare in 2006. A quick Israeli land assault against Damascus, which
is seated close to the Lebanese-Syrian border, would have to go through
Lebanon and not through the Golan Heights or the Israeli frontier with
Syria. Any invasion of Syria through the Israeli-Syrian border would be
secondary in nature. For this reason amongst several others, Lebanon is tied
to Israeli war plans against Syria. To invade Lebanon a pretext is needed
and Hezbollah is that pretext.

After the assassination of Imad Mughniyeh, the U.S. Navy deployed a
contingent of warships to the Eastern Mediterranean and the Lebanese coast
on February 28, 2008. The White House claimed that the rationale for the
deployment was to establish stability in Lebanon and to help democracy in
Lebanon.

In a case of bitter irony the naval deployment had a reverse effect. It
contributed to elevating tensions in Beirut and the entire country. The U.S.
move was made without the permission of Lebanon and the Lebanese government
was forced to denounce it. The majority of Lebanese citizens also felt
threatened and were outraged about the U.S. deployment in their waters.
Because of public opinion in Lebanon the Lebanese government and the March
14 Alliance denied any ties or advanced knowledge about the U.S. naval
deployment off the coast of Lebanon.

In connection to the U.S. naval build-up, news broke out of an alleged U.S.
conspiracy against the Free Patriotic Movement, Lebanon's largest Christian
political party and a member of the Lebanese National Opposition.

Michel Aoun, the former commander of the Lebanese military and the leader of
the Free Patriotic Movement, and other Christian Lebanese leaders opposed to
the interests of the U.S., Israel, and France in Lebanon have been
systematically targeted. On August 2, 2007 the White House even passed an
executive order to freeze the financial assets of any individual or group
deemed to oppose Fouad Siniora and the March 14 Alliance. The mass protests
by Lebanese citizens against the March 14 Alliance, which were peaceful acts
of political and democratic expression, were even called "undemocratic" and
"destabilizing" acts by President George Bush Jr. and the White House.

What this signifies, aside from U.S. meddling in the domestic affairs and
politics of Lebanon, is that the political opposition to the Lebanese
government was being targeted in the name of democracy and governance.

Since 2006, the Free Patriotic Movement and several other Christian
political parties have been staunch political allies of Hezbollah. They are
consequently at odds with the U.S. and France and have refused to bend to
foreign pressure. They firmly oppose Israel and have protested U.S. and
French meddling in Lebanon's internal affairs. Hezbollah, the Free Patriotic
Movement, and these Christian political parties are also allied to several
other political parties that represent Lebanon's Druze, ethnic Armenian
(which are Christian), and Sunni Muslim communities.

Several key political figures in the March 14 Alliance, such as Walid
Jumblatt and Samir Geagea, have been working hand in glove with the White
House and Tel Aviv against the political alliance between the Free Patriotic
Movement and Hezbollah. These individuals have had regular meetings with
U.S., Saudi, French, and Israeli officials. This includes meetings with Ehud
Barak where attacks and tactics against Hezbollah, the Free Patriotic
Movement, Syria, and Iran were discussed.

Along with the Hariri family, these Lebanese figures are being used to open
an internal front against Hezbollah and its political allies in Lebanon.
After the 2006 defeat of Israel, these Lebanese figures and their parties
also slowly started being armed by the U.S., Saudi Arabia, and others.
Pentagon weapons shipments that were intended for use in Anglo-American
occupied Iraq were also covertly making their way into the hands of these
Lebanese factions. The U.S. has also been cooperating with them in
preparations being made on the Lebanese-Syrian border and in efforts to make
parallel chains of command in the Lebanese military that could be used
against Hezbollah and the Lebanese National Opposition.

Moving forward, days before the Israeli emergency exercise, the Siniora
government ordered the Lebanese military to be on full alert for "Israeli
violations." In Lebanon the March 14 Alliance and the Lebanese National
Opposition in concurrence comprehended the possibility of conflict. Both the
Lebanese government and Hezbollah made it clear that they were watching
Israeli forces and that both were prepared for the serious possibility of
another conflict between Lebanon and Israel. [24] In addition, the U.S.
State Department official responsible for American relations with Lebanon,
C. David Welch, also promised a "hot summer" in Lebanon if the Lebanese
National Opposition did not capitulate.

According to Israeli sources citing Fars News Agency (FNA) and the Syrian
newspaper Al-Hakikah, Hezbollah warned Israel that if it launched another
war against Lebanon that Hezbollah would carry the war into Israel. In
Israel this information was claimed to mean by xenophobic and ultra-Zionist
elements that Israeli Arabs (Palestinians with Israeli citizenships who did
not leave their homeland) would act as fifth columnists for Iran and
Lebanon. An unnamed senior Hezbollah official was quoted as saying, "In the
next war, we will run the battle for the first time since 1948 inside
Palestine. They will be more surprised than ever before, as they will see
our fighters fighting them not only in Lebanon, as they did till now, but
also inside their homes and settlements." [25] The same Hezbollah official
is quoted as also saying "The next war, if it breaks out, will be an
offensive war on our part. This doesn't mean we will initiate the war, but
that every war they launch in the future will become what the organized
armies in the world refer to as a counteroffensive on our part. They will
see our fighters behind their lines, not just in front of them." [26]

The Independent, one of Britain's most respected newspapers, has reported
that Hezbollah has also been sending trainees to Iran: "Yet it is an open
secret south of the Litani [River] that thousands of young men have been
leaving their villages for military training in Iran. Up to 300 men are
taken to Beirut en route to Tehran each month and the operation has been
running since November of 2006; in all, as many as 4,500 [Hezbollah] members
have been sent for three-month sessions of live-fire ammunition and rocket
exercises to create a nucleus of Iranian-trained guerrillas for the `next'
[Israeli attack against Lebanon]." [27]

Another British source, The Observer, has also reported about war
preparations in Lebanon: "But an Observer investigation [by Mitchell
Prothero] has discovered that [Hezbollah] is quietly but steadily replacing
its dead and redoubling its recruitment efforts in anticipation of a new,
and even more brutal, conflict. [Hezbollah] has embarked on a major
expansion of its fighting capability and is now sending hundreds, if not
thousands, of young men into intensive training camps in Lebanon, Syria and
Iran to ready itself for war with Israel. `It's not a matter of if,' says
one [member of Hezbollah]. `It's a matter of when Sayed [Hassan] Nasrallah
[{Hezbollah's political} chief] commands us.'" [28]

It light of the preparations in Lebanon for an Israeli attack, the number of
Israeli violations of Lebanese airspace also increased starting in March,
2008. The Israelis openly violated Lebanese airspace and conducted military
flights over Beirut and elsewhere in Lebanon in April and May, 2008. In
April, 2008 the Lebanese military even acknowledged that Israeli warplanes
had been performing military reconnaissance missions over Lebanon and that
these missions were linked to Israeli war preparations. [29]

The Independent has also gone on to pronounce, with the context of aerial
war in mind, that in the next war against Lebanon that Israeli supremacy in
the air would be challenged by the Lebanese because of Iranian military
technology and hardware: "For months, Sayed Hassan Nasrallah, the
[Hezbollah] leader, has been warning Israel that his organisation has a
`surprise' new weapon in its armoury and there are few in Lebanon who do not
suspect that this is a new Iranian-developed ground-to-air missile --
rockets which may at last challenge Israel's air supremacy over Lebanon."
[30]


The Brzezinski and Carter visits to Damascus

Tel Aviv and Washington, D.C. have not given up their efforts to prevent the
emergence of a Mediterranean battle-front in a war against Iran. With the
rise of regional tensions in the Middle East it was announced that former
U.S. President James E. Carter Jr. had flown to Egypt and the Levant for a
fact-finding mission with a view to promoting peace. To some, the
announcement sounded like a breath of fresh air. The former U.S. president,
met with leaders and officials in Egypt, Israel, the West Bank, and Syria.

It should be noted that Jimmy Carter met with President Basher Al-Assad in
Syria just months after Zbigniew Brzezinski headed a RAND Corporation
delegation to Damascus on February 12, 2008. [31] The sequence of these
meetings is not coincidental. Brzezinski was a U.S. national security
advisor under the Carter Administration. Both men could also have been
involved in talks with Iranian diplomats and officials in Damascus.

What really highlighted Carter's trip to the Middle East were his meetings
in Damascus with the leader-in-exile of Hamas, Khaled Meshaal, on April 18
and 19, 2008. [32] The controversy behind the meetings with Hamas was that
they had been portrayed as diplomatic taboo in an effort to isolate the
Palestinian organization in the Middle East and global arena.

Before the meetings in Damascus, Carter had prior meetings with
representatives of Hamas in Cairo. [33] From the start of the talks between
the political leadership of Hamas and Jimmy Carter, the media reported that
Israel and the U.S. were fiercely opposed to these meetings. [34] In
reality, the Bush Jr. Administration and Israel were supportive of these
meetings.


Engaging Hamas: An Attempt to Deactivate the Opening of a Palestinian Front?

Despite the claims of Condoleezza Rice, the Carter Center even released a
statement from its headquarters in Atlanta saying that the U.S. State
Department made no objections about Carter's meetings with Hamas officials
and the Syrians. In the past, the White House secretly supported Nancy
Pelosi's 2007 visit to Damascus with a bipartisan U.S. delegation. It was in
the same timeframe as Nancy Pelosi's visit to Syria that a Bush Jr.
Administration official arrived in Damascus to talk about "Iraqi refugees"
and that Condoleezza Rice went on to hold talks with the Syrian Foreign
Minister in Egypt. In this case Jimmy Carter was part of concerted efforts
by the U.S. and Israeli governments to disengage the fighting between the
Palestinians and Israel in the Gaza Strip through a truce.

While public opinion was led to believe that Israel was opposed to the
Hamas-Carter talks, the former U.S. president was in fact negotiating
directly with Hamas on behalf of Israeli officials.

While the Israeli government reaffirmed that Hamas could not be a "partner
for peace", Jimmy Carter was passing on messages from the Israeli government
to both Hamas and Syria. According to Carter's own words, he was acting in
the Middle East as a communicator and intermediary between the parties.

A closer examination of what transpired between Hamas and Carter reveals the
true nature and purpose of the Carter mission.

The deputy prime minister of Israel is Eli Yishai, who is also responsible
for the Israeli Ministry of Industry. Eli Yishai's office acknowledged on
April 18, 2008 that the second highest ranking official in the Israeli
government had asked Jimmy Carter to arrange meetings between Hamas and Eli
Yishai. The pretext and justification was to discuss a possible prisoner
exchange for Gilad Shalit, an Israeli corporal captured by Hamas and two
other Palestinian groups. [35] Officially, it was claimed that Eli Yishai,
the leader of the Shas Party, had defied government policy with his request.

In actuality, Israel has been negotiating a ceasefire with Hamas. Ehud
Olmert's comments to Yedioth Ahronoth, an Israeli newspaper, spell out the
real reasons why Carter was reported not to have met with Israeli leaders
prior to his visit to Syria: "Were Jimmy Carter to have met with me, and two
days later with Khaled Meshaal, it could have created a facade of
negotiations between us and Hamas." [36] Ehud Olmert's public rebuff of
Jimmy Carter was also announced as not being personal by Yohanan Plesner, a
member of Ehud Olmert's Kadima Party, during meetings with Carter in
Jerusalem. [37] Undoubtedly, the meeting between Carter and Plesner would
not have happened without Olmert's okay. Ehud Olmert's messages were being
passed to Carter through his Kadima subordinate.

Adding context to the mission by Carter is crucial. His visit came at a
junction in time when war was being openly talked about not just against
Lebanon and Syria, but against Iran.

On April 20, 2008, the Syrian President announced that messages had been
exchanged between Israel and Syria through an unnamed third party, to
explore the possibility of resuming Israeli-Syrian peace talks. [38] This
was merely days after Carter's visit to Damascus.

Two days later, on April 23, 2008, it was reported worldwide that the
Israeli government had notified Damascus on April 22, 2008 through Turkish
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the third party, that Israel was ready
to return the Golan Heights to Syria. [39] The Turkish government had served
as a go between since 2006, exchanging messages between Israel and Syria.
The Israelis also insisted, again, that Syria knew what the conditions for
peace were: the dissociation of Damascus from Iran and the Resistance Bloc.
[40]

The American role in these overtures to Hamas and Syria is also a major
factor. Syria was even reported to have requested U.S. involvement in peace
talks with Israeli officials. In fact, a few days after the end of the
Carter mission and the Israeli messages sent via Turkey, the Syrian Foreign
Minister travelled to Tehran to discuss the Israeli and U.S. proposals with
Iranian officials. It is clear that Syria will not end its alliance with
Iran. While in Tehran, the Syrian Foreign Minister stated that Israel should
withdraw to the international boundary of 1967 and not just withdraw from
the Golan Heights alone. [41]


The Palestinian-Syrian-Iranian United Front

Ten different Palestinian organizations opposing Israel are hosted by Syria,
and thus called the "Palestinian Damascus Ten," whereas many other capitals
in the Arab World have rejected hosting them. While some of these
Palestinian organizations are Syrian surrogates, they are considered as
"rejectionists," because they adamantly oppose the one-sided
Palestinian-Israeli agreements dictated by the White House and accepted by
the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO). Amongst the rejectionists are
Hamas, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP),
Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of
Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC), and the Palestinian Popular Struggle
Front (PPSF or PSF).

Hamas along with the Damascus-based Palestinian groups are aligned to both
Tehran and Damascus. It is on this basis that ties linking the Palestinians,
Syria, and Iran have developed.

The Palestinian Prime Minister, Ismail Haniyeh, while visiting Tehran in
2006 referred to Iran as the "strategic depth" of the Palestinian people in
their struggle against Israel. [42] Syrian, Libyan, Lebanese, Algerian, and
Iraqi officals, amongst many others in the Arab World, have also called Iran
the "strategic depth" of the Arabs against Israel. In relationship to these
ties, Khaleed Meshaal announced in 2005 during high-level meetings in Tehran
that Hamas and the Palestinians would support their important ally Iran in a
regional war. [43] This factor is of immense importance in the case of an
Israeli-U.S. war directed against Syria and Iran.

Alongside Hamas, most of these Palestinian organizations and their
supporters, including those in Egypt and Jordon, have also made it clear,
through announcements in 2005, 2006, and 2007 that they would lead the
Palestinians in battle as part of a united front in the case of an all
encompassing conflict in the Middle East. This is another dimension of the
Mediterranean battle-front that would emerge in a war against Iran.

The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordon could be sucked into any regional war
involving the Palestinians as allies of Syria and Iran. There are more
Palestinians and Iraqis in Jordon than there are Jordanian Arabs. Jordon
could also face simultaneous civil war and regime change in Amman, where a
new republican government could take over and ally itself with Syria and
Iran. This would have major ramifications against the U.S. and Israel. Other
Arab regimes are also vulnerable too.

In this regard, the leaders in Cairo have been pushing for a truce between
Israel and the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. Omar Sueiman, an Egyptian
cabinet minister working in the capacity of the chief of Egyptian
intelligence, was also sent to Tel Aviv several times by his government, to
assist Israel in neutralizing a potential Palestinian front from emerging in
the context of a regional war scenario.

Furthermore, if a regional war were to break out, Palestinian fighters would
confront Israeli forces, with the help of Syria and Iran. At this particular
juncture, the dialogue with Hamas is part of an effort to silence or
disengage the "Palestinian Front" by establishing a truce between Hamas and
Israel, prior to the commencement of a war with Iran.


The March to War in the Levant and its relationship to a Broader War
involving Iran

Despite the Israeli-Syrian peace talks, the two sides are involved in war
preparations.

Zalman Shoval, a former Israeli diplomat and politician describes this
evolving situation as follows: "The message I received in Washington about
two weeks ago [in the start of April, 2008] was clear and included a trace
of displeasure: Why do you have people [in Israel], and ministers in
particular, who continue to amuse themselves with the baseless notion that
conditions for peace between Israel and Syria have been created?" [44]

In the eyes of both those controlling the U.S. and Israeli governments, the
terms of a so-called peace must be dictated by the victors, those with the
upper hand. According to the Fox News Network the Bush Jr. Administration
also signed a secretive, unprecedented, and broad directive in March, 2008
to target Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, and those in Lebanon that are opposed to
America's agenda for establishing a new regional order.


The Levant is on a serious war footing.

All major players in the Levant have been continuously talking about war.

Tel Aviv's leaders have insisted that they are not seeking war with Syria.
Tel Aviv has maintained that it wants peace with Syria, even on the eve of
the largest emergency exercise in the history of Israel, which included open
war preparations by the Israeli military on the Syrian border. These
exercises included simulations of an Israeli invasion of Syria.

The Israeli government insisted that Israel was not making war preparations
against Syria despite the fact that the scenarios played out in Israel for
over a year, identified Syria, Lebanon and the Palestinian Territories as
the enemies. [45]

Moreover, Israeli officials have continuously threatened to retaliate with a
heavy hand against any attempts against Israel.

Al-Watan has also revealed that defensive preparations are being made by
Syria against Israeli attacks expected to be launched in the summer months
of 2008 in close coordination with U.S. military planners, just as they were
against Lebanon in 2006. [46] May and June, 2008, are expected to be
possible windows of time for an Israeli offensive against Syria.

On the other hand, Al-Watan reported (April 3, 2008) that the Israeli
government would in 2009 distribute gas masks to its citizens, in
anticipation of attacks using chemical and biological weapons. This report
could be an indication that there will be no war in 2008.

Several reports from the Middle East maintain that all the players involved
in the Levant are preparing for a scenario where Israel is awaiting
retaliation by Hezbollah for the Mughniyeh Assassination. This scenario of
expected retaliation could be used by Israel to draw Syria into the
conflict. The situation would then escalate as Iran intervenes militarily
against Israel to protect its allies. In turn, the United States and NATO
would intervene to protect Israel.

Other analysts suggest, on the other hand, that Israeli-U.S. strikes against
Lebanon, Syria, and Iran would be implemented almost simultaneously. Still
others believe that Iran will be attacked first and then a front in the
Levant will be opened.

Other plausible reports suggest that secret negotiations have been ongoing
between all parties and that war will be avoided either because of a
weakened U.S. military, which has forced America to negotiate with Iran or
because of emerging common interests between Iran and America.

Another outlook is that Tel Aviv has no intention of striking Iran, which
has advanced military capabilities of retaliation against Israel. But Israel
still intends to attack Lebanon.

Whatever the scenario, the United States and Israel are making joint
preparations and intend to confront the same players including Iran, Syria,
Hezbollah, and Hamas.

General Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker, the top U.S. civilian
official in Iraq, have told the U.S. Senate that Syria and Iran are using a
"Lebanization strategy" in Iraq. A "Lebanization strategy" according to
Ambassador Crocker is a political strategy where local forces are committed
to alignments with Syria and Iran. This is being painted as the reason
behind Anglo-American failure in Iraq. As mentioned earlier Hezbollah and
Iran, along with Syria, are also being blamed for U.S. and Coalition deaths
in Iraq.

Since 2003, Israel and the U.S. have been looking for ways to force Syria
into surrendering or for waging an isolated war against Damascus without
involving Tehran.

The window of time for an isolated war against Syria, apart from one with
Iran, appears to have vanished and a war against Syria seems to be planned
alongside the conflict with Iran. Moreover, Russia has also initiated a
naval presence in the Eastern Mediterranean and off the Syrian coast to
protect Syria and to challenge the U.S. and its NATO allies. [47] Both
Russia and Iran have also been arming Syria and cooperating together.

The march to war in the Levant is linked to the stride towards conflict with
Iran.

Syria has long been a target of Israel and America. At this point it is
fitting to refer back to an incisive British report from 2006 by The Sunday
Times: "`The challenge from Iran and Syria is now top of the Israeli defence
agenda, higher than the Palestinian one,' said an Israeli defence source.
Shortly before the war in Lebanon Major-General Eliezer Shkedi, the
commander of the air force, was placed in charge of the `Iranian front', a
new position in the Israeli Defence Forces. His job will be to command any
future strikes on Iran and Syria." [48]

This account from The Sunday Times indicates that the war against Lebanon in
2006 was part of a broader war agenda in the Middle East. Moreover, an
Israeli command post against Iran was established prior to the 2006 war. The
article also illustrates the intricate link between a war against Iran and
war plans against Lebanon and Syria. Further details are also given in
regards to Israeli preparations for Syria in 2006: "`In the past we prepared
for a possible military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities,' said one
insider, `but Iran's growing confidence after the war in Lebanon means we
have to prepare for a full-scale war, in which Syria will be an important
player.' A new infantry brigade has been formed named Kfir (lion cub), which
will be the largest in the Israeli army [and responsible for an invasion of
Syria]. `It is a partial solution for the challenge of the Syrian commando
brigades, which are considered better [trained and equipped] than
Hezbollah's [militia],' a military source said." [49]

Eric S. Margolis, one of Canada's most respected columnists has also linked
war preparations against Lebanon and Syria as part of a broader war scenario
directed against Iran: "Israel, backed by the [White House], certainly has
been using the carrot of a return of [the] Golan to entice Syria away from
Iran. But there is also a big stick: Ever-stronger threats of a U.S.-Israeli
attack on Syria. Israel's September [2007] attack on Syria was a clear
warning. Cheney and fellow militarists are pushing hard for attacks on
Syria, Lebanon and Iran before President George W. Bush leaves office.
Neocons have flocked to [Senator] John McCain's banner -- in spite of
Hillary Clinton's vow to `obliterate' Iran if it attacked Israel with
nuclear weapons. They believe U.S. attacks on Arab states and/or Iran would
prove decisive in winning the presidency for McCain this November. A U.S.
attack on Syria could well be the first step of a broader air war against
Lebanon and Iran." [50]

In a regional war scenario, Israel will deal mainly with Lebanon and Syria
while the U.S. and Britain will deal mainly with Iran. [51] The help of
Turkey and NATO will definitely be needed by Israel, America, and Britain in
such a war. Ankara and NATO will also be involved in both fronts. [52]

NATO has already built a presence on the western borders of Syria and
Lebanon and inside Afghanistan on the eastern borders of Iran with forward
positions. Israeli officials such as Shaul Mofaz have also stated, in no
uncertain terms, that if they launch an attack on Iran, the U.S. and NATO
will come to the aid of Tel Aviv.

Only time will tell what happens. In the words of Robert Fisk, "Whether this
frightening conflict takes place will depend on President Bush's behaviour.
If America -- or its proxy, Israel -- bombs Iran, the response is likely to
be swift..." [53]

Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is a writer and geopolitical analyst based in Ottawa
who specializes on the Middle East. He is currently Research Associate at
the Centre for Research on Globalization.

Also see:

The March to War: Israel Prepares for War against Lebanon and Syria
[ http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8727]

The March to War: Syria Preparing for US-Israeli Attacks
[www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=NAZ20070525&articl
eId=5748]

NATO and Israel: Instruments of America' s Wars in the Middle East
[ http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7837]


NOTES

[1] US Incapable of Attacking Iran, Syria, _Fars_ _News Agency_ (FNA), April
24, 2008 [ http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8702030491].

[2] Israel pullout risks Iran foothold on Golan: minister, _Agence_
_France-Presse_ (AFP), April 29, 2008; Mu Xuequan, Opposition leader: Golan
Heights must remain in Israel's hands, _Xinhua_ _News Agency_, April 28,
2008 [ http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-04/28/content_8061462.htm];
Amnon Meranda, Peace with Syria suicidal, MKs say, _Yedioth_ _Ahronoth,_
April 23, 2008 [www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3535019,00.html]; Herb
Keinon, `Syria must cut ties with terror,' _The Jerusalem Post_, April 23,
2008
[www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1208870471523&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/
ShowFull]; Zalman Shoval, Don't rush to Damascus, _Yedioth_ _Ahronoth,_
April 22, 2008 [www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3534104,00.html].

[3] Damien McElroy, CIA: North Korea `helped Syria build nuclear reactor,'
_The Telegraph_ (U.K.), April 24, 2008
[www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/24/wkorea224.xml]; N
Korea `linked to Syria reactor,' _British Broadcasting Corporation News_
(BBC News), April 24, 2008
[ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7364269.stm].

[4] Yakkov Katz and Herb Keion, `Iran smuggling arms into Gaza by sea,' _The
Jerusalem Post_, April 18, 2008
[www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1208422633228&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticl
e%2FShowFull].

[5] _Ibid.__
_
[6] Yaakov Katz and Judy Siegel, Israel to hold massive emergency drill,
_The Jerusalem Post_, March 17, 2008
[www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1205420704459&pagename=JPos
t%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull].

[7] Syria blast `linked to chemical weapons': report, _Agence_
_France-Presse_ (AFP), September 19, 2007.

[8] _Ibid._

[9] Iran training media for Israel-Syria war, _The Media Line News Agency_,
April 17, 2008
[www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1208422630622&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticl
e%2FShowFull].

[10] Iran to fire `11,000 rockets in minute' if attacked, _Agence_
_France-Presse_ (AFP), October 20, 2007.

[11] Israeli military tests imitation Iranian missile - radio, _Russian News
and Information Agency_ (RIA Novosti) April 15, 2008
[ http://en.rian.ru/world/20080415/105149693.html].

[12] Katz and Siegel, Israel to hold, _Op. cit._

[13] Norman Podhoretz, Stopping Iran: Why the Case for Military Action Still
Stands, _Commentary Magazine_, vol. 125, no. 2, (February, 2008): pp.11-19.

[14] Roee Nahmias, Syrian foreign minister: We're ready to defend ourselves,
_Yedioth_ _Ahronoth_, April 4, 2008 [www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,
L-3527528,00.html].

[15] Syrian official: We're prepared for war, _The Jerusalem Post_, April 8,
2008
[www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1207486219711&pagename=JPos
t%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull].

[16] Yakkov Katz, War with Syria, _Op. cit._

[17] Haman Greenberg, `IDF preparing for all-out war,' _Yedioth_ _Ahronoth_,
July 16, 2007 [www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3426132,00.html].

[18] Sheera Claire Frenkel Yaakov Katz, IDF holds simulation of war with
Syria, _The Jerusalem Post_, June 6, 2007
[www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1180960616827&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticl
e%2FShowFull].

[19] Roee Nahmias, Report: Syria bracing for Israeli attack, _Yedioth_
_Ahronoth_, April 14, 2008 [www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,
L-3531622,00.html].

[20] Roee Nahmias, Report: Syrian reservists called up for fear of Israeli
strike, _Yedioth_ _Ahronoth_, April 2, 2008
[www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3526578,00.html].

[21] Yoav Stern, IDF Deputy Chief vows `painful' response to any attack on
Israel, _Haaretz_, April 2, 2008 [www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/971030.html].

[22] Syrian MP denies escalation with Israel, _The Jerusalem Post_, April 3,
2008
[www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1207209967235&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticl
e%2FShowFull].

[23] Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, The March to War: Israel Prepares for War
against Lebanon and Syria, _Centre for Research on Globalization_ (CRG),
April 19, 2008 [ http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8727],
n.48; Peter Cooney and Dean Yates, Hezbollah training Iraqis in Iran: U.S.
military, ed. Richard Meares, _Reuters_, May 5, 2008
[www.reuters.com/article/gc05/idUSL0540478820080505?pageNumber=1&virtualBran
dChannel=0].

[24] Israel seeks to reassure neighbours over missile drill, _Agence_
_France-Presse_ (AFP), April 6, 2008.

[25] Roee Nahmias, Hizbullah says kidnapped Mugniyah's body, _Yedioth_
_Ahronoth_, April 14, 2008 [www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,
L-3531598,00.html].

[26] _Ibid._

[27] Robert Fisk, Hizbollah turns to Iran for new weapons to wage war on
Israel, _The Independent _(U.K.), April 8, 2008
[www.independent.co.uk/news/fisk/hizbollah-turns-to-iran-for-new-weapons-to-
wage-war-on-israel-805763.html].

[28] Mitchell Prothero, Hizbollah builds up covert army for a new assault
against Israel, _The Observer_ (U.K.), April 27, 2008
[www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/apr/27/israelandthepalestinians.lebanon].

[29] Lebanon: 12 IAF jets fly over Beirut, _Associated Press_ (AP), April
28, 2008
[www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1208870516030&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticl
e%2FShowFull].

[30] Robert Fisk, Hizbullah turns to Iran, _Op. cit._

[31] Eli Lake, Obama Adviser Leads Delegation to Damascus, _The New York
Sun_, February 12, 2008 [www2.nysun.com/article/71123]; The RAND Corp.
(Research and Development Corporation) is an American non-profit
non-government organization and think-tank on international relations and
foreign policy that was originally established to give advice to the
Pentagon in the global arena.

[32] Carter in Syria to see Hamas political leader, _Associated Press_ (AP),
April 18, 2008; Carter meets Hamas chief despite US objections, _Agence_
_France-Presse_ (AFP), April 18, 2008; Bassem Mroue, Carter meets Hamas
chief over Israeli, US objections, _Associated Press_ (AP), April 18, 2008;
Carter holds second meeting with Hamas chief, _Agence_ _France-Presse_
(AFP), April 19, 2008; Jim Muir, Carter wraps up visit to Damascus, _British
Broadcasting Corporation News_ (BBC News), April 19, 2008
[ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7356370.stm].

[33] Hamas says Carter will meet 2 of its leaders, _Reuters_, April 16, 2008
[www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3532496,00.html].

[34] _Ibid_.; Gil Hoffman, Gov't against Carter, Mashaal meeting, _The
Jerusalem Post_, April 10, 2008
[www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1207649985972&pagename=JPos
t%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull]; Ian Black and Rory McCarthy, Fury as Carter meets
leader of Hamas, _The Guardian_ (U.K.), April 19, 2008
[www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/apr/19/israelandthepalestinians.usa].

[35] Akiva Eldar, Yishai to Carter: Tell Meshal that I want to discuss
prisoner swap, _Haaretz_, April 18, 2008
[www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/976137.html]; Griff Witt, Carter Meets With
Hamas Chief In Exile, Defying Israel and U.S., _The Washington Post_, April
19, 2008, p.A09
[www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/18/AR2008041801256.ht
ml?hpid=topnews].

[36] _Ibid._; Daniel Williams, Israeli minister tells Carter he would meet
Hamas, ed. Mattew Jones, _Reuters_, April 18, 2008
[ http://africa.reuters.com/wire/news/usnL18657967.html].

[37] Tovah Lazaroff, Kadima MK: Olmert's rebuff of Carter wasn't personal,
_The Jerusalem Post_, April 16, 2008
[www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1208356966602&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticl
e%2FShowFull].

[38] Albert Aji, Report: Syria, Israel trade messages on possible peace
talks, _Associated Press_ (AP), April 20, 2008.

[39] Israel `ready to return Golan,' _British Broadcasting Corporation News_
(BBC News), April 23, 2008
[ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7362937.stm]; Israel says ready to
swap Golan Heights for peace with Syria, _Russian News and Information
Agency_ (RIA Novosti), April 23, 2008
[ http://en.rian.ru/world/20080423/105745773.html].

[40] Israel to Syria: Stab Iran to Get Golan, _Fars News Agency_ (FNA),
April 27, 2008 [www.farsnews.com/English/newstext.php?nn=8702080694]; Whbee:
Syria must detach itself from the axis of evil, _The Jerusalem Post_, April
24, 2008
[www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1208870486326&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticl
e%2FShowFull]; Barak Ravid, Official: PM wrote to Assad to test desire for
peace, _Haaretz_, March 30, 2008 [www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/969641.html];
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, The March to War: Israel, _Op. cit.__
_
[41] Shahar Ilan and Yoav Stern, Officials: U.S. vital to relaunching Syria
talks, _Haaretz_, April 24, 2008 [www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/977332.html].

[42] Avi Issacharoff, Haniyeh in Tehran: Iran gives us `strategic depth,'
_Haartz_, December 10, 2006 [www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/798778.html];
Strategic Depth is a strategic and military term used to identify an area
where the hub of strength for a combatant lies, away from the battle-front.

[43] Hamas springs to Iran's defence, _Agence_ _France-Presse_ (AFP),
December 17, 2005.

[44] Shoval, Don't rush to Damascus, _Op. cit. _

[45] Israel stages 5-day civil defence exercise, _Reuters_, April 6, 2008
[ http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-32878120080406]; Jon
Brain, Israel calms fears, _Op. cit._

[46] Nahmias, Report: Syria bracing, _Op. cit._

[47] Alexander Kogan, Analysis: Russia uses Syrian port to demonstrate its
power in the Med, _The Jerusalem Post_, August 31, 2007
[www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1188392502811&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticl
e%2FShowFull].

[48] Sarah Baxter and Uzi Mahnaimi, Israel plans for war with Iran and
Syria, _The Sunday Times_ (U.K.), September 3, 2006
[www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article626630.ece].

[49] _Ibid._

[50] Eric S. Margolis, The neoconning of a nation, _The Ottawa Sun_, April
27, 2008, p.23.

[51] Aluf Ben, Israel seeks to reassure Syria: No summer attack, _Haaretz_,
April 3, 2007 [www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/844730.html].

[52] Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, NATO and Israel: Instruments of America's Wars
in the Middle East, _Centre for Research on Globalization_ (CRG), January
29, 2008 [www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7837].

[53] Robert Fisk, Hizbullah turns to Iran, _Op. cit._