Patrick Lang, Author at Progress Pond

A New Palestinian Legislature

by Patrick Lang

The latest surveys show HAMAS, which obtained major success in the local elections against the group, al-Fatah, lead by President Mahmoud Abbas, will get more than one third of the votes in this election and become an important political power.

According to the latest public survey conducted by Ramallah-based Palestine Politics and Research Center, 42 percent of voters intend to vote for the Fatah and 35 percent for HAMAS.

It is also claimed the Islamic Resistance Movement emerge victorious in the elections.

Authorities said the election is like a test that forces the Movement, a body that has previously supported the use of force against Israel, to make a choice between “politics and weapons.” Zaman Online

“Something Wicked This Way Comes” was the title of an earlier post on the rise to political power of Islamist groups across the Middle East. Today we see another instance of this coming to pass. Hizballah in Lebanon was said to be in a “state of transition” from armed struggle to political participation… Well, they have effectively walked away from their role in Lebanon’s government rather than even discuss seriously the idea of giving up their weapons. They stand on the sidelines of the US “Greater Middle East” project ensuring that Syria and Iran know that they have friends and allies in south Lebanon backing up their decisions.

Tomorrow the Palestinians will elect a legislature. There will be a large role in that body for HAMAS. Will Israel deal directly with HAMAS cabinet ministers? They say no, they will not. Will HAMAS government officials deal sirectly with Israeli government officials? They say no, but they might communicate with them through intermediaries.

Not very promising. — Pat Lang
Additional Ref: Hamas/Wikipedia

Col. Patrick W. Lang (Ret.), a highly decorated retired senior officer of U.S. Military Intelligence and U.S. Army Special Forces, served as “Defense Intelligence Officer for the Middle East, South Asia and Terrorism” for the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and was later the first Director of the Defense Humint Service. Col. Lang was the first Professor of the Arabic Language at the United States Military Academy at West Point. For his service in the DIA, he was awarded the “Presidential Rank of Distinguished Executive.” He is a frequent commentator on television and radio, including MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann (interview), CNN and Wolf Blitzer’s Situation Room (interview), PBS’s Newshour, NPR’s “All Things Considered,” (interview), and more .

Personal Blog: Sic Semper Tyrannis 2005 || Bio || CV
Recommended Books || More BooTrib Posts

Novel: The Butcher’s Cleaver (download free by chapter, PDF format)

“Drinking the Kool-Aid,” Middle East Policy Council Journal, Vol. XI, Summer 2004, No. 2

Lebanon, the Perpetual Pawn

by Patrick Lang (bio below)

“No consensus exists on a vision for Lebanon. Hizballah’s strategic alliances with Syria and, more significantly, Iran make improbable a serious dialogue on disarmament, which the party’s leaders consider an existential threat. Nor does Hizballah feel an urge to compromise, since it retains support among Shiites. The Hariri-Jumblatt tandem, in turn, controls a slight majority in parliament, but suffers from the physical absence of Saad Hariri, who lives outside Lebanon, fearing assassination. Moreover, Hariri is said to be under pressure from the Saudis to be more conciliatory with Syria, since Riyadh does not want events in Lebanon to destabilize the Syrian regime. The sectarian contours of the Hariri-Hizballah rivalry are sharpening, and while violence remains unlikely, the fight for Lebanon’s soul will continue for some time to come.” Michael Young

“Riyadh does not want events in Lebanon to destabilize the Syrian regime.” Sound familiar? (See earlier post on this subject) Lebanon is now an even bigger political mess than it usually is. … continued below …
Riyadh does not want Syria destabilized since Saudi Arabia believes it is close to achieving a dominant role in Syrian policy, but the neocons and their Lebanese and Israeli political allies DO want to see regime change in Damascus in the belief that general change in the political culture of the “Greater Middle East” would be good for the “natives” and GREAT for Israel. There is a certain tension among these groups. Caught in the middle are the career officials of the State Department under the idealistic leadership of “Miss America” herself, the CIA, and the armed forces.

This should go well.

A Truce? – Unlikely

“As for similar operations taking place in America, it’s only a matter of time. They are in the planning stages and you will see them in the heart of your land as soon as the planning is complete.”

But it also says, “we do not mind offering you a truce that is fair and long term … so we can build Iraq and Afghanistan … There is no shame in this solution because it prevents wasting of billions of dollars … to merchants of war,” the Associated Press reported.

The conditions for such a truce were not made clear.” – CBC

————————————-

In the Arab context an expressed interest in negotiations or a truce usually indicates that the interested party needs to get the fighting to stop. Because of this, my first reaction to the statement concerning a truce in the latest putative Bin Laden tape was to think that it meant that the Jihadis see their war effort as not going well at present.

But, after listening to the larger message of the tape, I am inclined to think that the “truce talk” is intended for the Muslim audience as assurance that the Jihadis do care about the welfare if the Islamic masses, especially in Afghanistan and Iraq, and to deliver the message that it is the Kuffar (infidels) who are responsible for the continuation of the misery of war.

This tape is basically a pep talk for the Faithful, wherever they may be. For us, in the West, it means nothing. Did we think they had “gone away?”

Pat Lang

Iran’s Countermove

by Patrick Lang (bio below)

In my previous post, “And the Winner is – Saudi Arabia,” I argued that Saudi Arabia has recently made a successful effort to “acquire” Syria as a state operating within the sphere of influence of “the Kingdom.”

Syria has been for many years an ally of Iran. In this time of renewed Iranian assertiveness as a major power in the Middle East intent on achieving a dominant status it is not surprising that President Ahmededinajad is in Damascus offering a “basket” of “goodies” presumably as inducement to a continuation and solidification of the old relationship between the two countries.

Will the Iranian effort to “recapture” Syria succeed? It is not at all certain that this will happen. The Kingdom will not want this to happen and will “throw” additional inducements, either positive or negative in nature into the competition.

The Alawi rulers of Syria have a difficult time in having themselves taken seriously as “real” Muslims. They like to think of themselves as a Shia sect. Not many Shia think of them that way, but the Alawi treasure the idea and it inclines them toward the Iranians and Hizballah. At the same time they have a good grasp of the attitude toward them of the Sunni, Wahhabi government of Saudi Arabia.

How will all this “balance out” in the context of the hostility of the American and French friends of the Saudis? Only time will tell.

Pat Lang

Reference: The Guardian

Iranian Conference on the Holocaust

by Patrick Lang (bio below)

“Last month, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in a speech, “They have invented a myth that Jews were massacred, and place this above God, religions and the prophets.”

He added, “The West has given more significance to the myth of the genocide of the Jews.”

He argued that the “myth” of the Holocaust served as Europe’s pretext for the existence of Israel.” CNN

It will probably surprise a lot of people that the notion that the West invented the story of the Holocaust as an excuse for the creation and continuing support of Israel is believed by many in the Arab and Islamic Worlds. There are also many in those parts who think that the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” is a historical document which somehow “leaked” from within Jewish circles.

The president of Iran is not universally thought of as a “nut” in the Middle East. Many think he is merely indiscreet. It should be instructive to those who think that the West’s problem with the Islamic World is about communication that while this head of state can comfortably spout such tripe, to say the same thing is a felony crime in many European countries. My father was in the government of occupied Germany and I was taken to see the camp at Dachau at the age of eight. Ahmadinejad is wrong. What would cause people to deny a historical catastrophe of this magnitude?

Many people in “the region” see life as essentially an us versus them, zero sum game in which the “other” is felt to be altogether alien, enemy and hostile. Not all people feel that way, but many do. For folk with that mentality the actions of the other must always be seen as motivated from the same kind of exclusivist hostility that they feel themselves. This is mirror imaging with a vengeance.

The creation of Israel by the Zionist movement with British collusion is seen by such people as a hostile, anti-Arab, anti-Islamic plot carried out with malevolent intent. The idea that such a thing could have happened as a product of serendipitous circumstance is discounted as absurd in such a world view. The West says continuously that the impetus for the independence of Israel after WWII was the Holocaust, therefore this statement must be a lie and part of the plot.

Don’t believe me? Wait and see what the judgment of the conference will be…

Pat Lang

On A Nuclear Iran

by Patrick Lang (bio below)

“We won’t be intimidated … You don’t even want us to do some research,” said Ahmadinejad. “That’s not fair. Even if you bring in the international community, we’re still not going to listen to you the way you want. You are just tricking us, and this is not fair. You’re not going to stop our research.”

He accused the Western nations of using the threat of referral to the U.N. Security Council as a “stick” to threaten Iran. “Every day, they bring in a stick and tell us either we have to listen to them and do what they want or be referred to the Security Council … You are using it as a stick, you are threatening us with it.” Yahoo News

“And I’ll huff and I’ll puff and I’ll blow your house down…” (wolf to little pigs) It appears that the Iranian government (the one that Michael Rubin et al say is unpopular in spite of its recent election) has decided that our bark is worse than our bite. They are probably correct. There is a lot of “action” just now in the blogosphere concerning Western “plans” to raise hell with the Iranian “nucular” program with commandos or a massive air campaign. Forget the commando thing. Iran is a large, hostile country. There are literally millions of people there just waiting for an opportunity to help the “authorities” hunt down a commando force. You could get in, but how would you get out? The complex itself is composed of a large number of facilities, some of them hardened against attack. This is not a suitable target set for special operations forces. Could a US air campaign set back the Iranian program enough to be worth considering? Yes, but a fruitful result would require a maximum effort on the part of US Air Force and US Navy world-wide. We are talking about something in the nature of a thousand strike sorties of aircraft and cruise missiles using platforms deployed from all over the planet. One could do this with nuclear weapons at a fraction of the effort and cost, but the rational among us know that this will not happen.

The Israelis? With what set of imaginary assets could the Israelis do anything more than anger the Iranians? Their smallish air force lacks the strength, range, tanker capability, targeting capability, etc. The target set would require numerous waves of re-strikes after bomb damage assessments were made. The Izzies would have to overfly Jordan, Iraq, the Gulf States, Saudi Arabia. All of these countries would object loudly. They are all allies of the United States. Think about it! Would the Shia run government of Iraq give its assent to overflight or, better yet, to use of Iraqi air bases by Israel? Ignore them? Hey! They are the SOVEREIGN government of Iraq. We made them that, and they become more entrenched in government by the day. A talking head host observed last evening that the Israelis have “THE ARROW…” Say what? The Arrow is an anti-ballistic missile weapon with an engagement slant range of about 100 km. Arrow-Iran strike? Duh!

Oh yeah, Osirak. That always comes up in a discussion of Israel and the Iranian program. It is true that Israel struck the Iraqi nuclear facility at Osirak long ago. The facility was one single set of undefended above ground buildings and the Israelis struck it with half a dozen planes. Not the same thing at all.

So, what is going to happen? … continued below …

Probably not much. We and the Europeans will eventually go to the UN for sanctions against Iran. The Iranians will continue with their program and eventually weaponize. The Iranians will seek reprisals against us all in Iraq and elsewhere. With nuclear weapons in hand Iran will become the dominant local power in the Gulf. They will have no pressing need to use these weapons because their mere possession will ensure that everyone in the region, including Israel, will have to deal with them as a major power.

What do I think of that? I think that an Iran armed with such weapons will be a major rallying point and supply source for jihadi forces everywhere. The possession of such power by Iran will greatly undercut the goals of modernism and democracy which the United States has embraced (for good or ill) in the Islamic World. The probability of a major war in the region will have been greatly increased. What will be the posture of the United States if the Iranians have nuclear weapons and we still have forces in the Gulf and in Iraq? Should Europe feel safe? They should contemplate the ranges of ballistic missiles which the Chinese have previously sold to Middle Eastern countries (Saudi Arabia for example). Who knows what China will sell in the future and to whom.

People will ask if it is not “just” that Iran should have nuclear weapons. I don’t care if it is “just” or not. A nuclear Iran is too dangerous to be tolerated.

Pat Lang

Refs: Yahoo News and CNN

“An Incendiary Threat in Iraq”

by Patrick Lang (bio below)

“Iraq’s most powerful Shiite politician has just dealt a huge blow to American-backed efforts to avoid civil war through the creation of a new, nationally inclusive constitutional order. That leader, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, leader of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, has turned his back on the crucial pledge, made before last October’s constitutional referendum, that the new charter would be open to substantial amendment by the newly elected Parliament. Instead, Mr. Hakim, who runs the dominant, Iranian-supported fundamentalist party, now says no broad changes should be made. In particular, he defends the current provisions allowing substantial autonomy for the oil-rich Shiite southeast.

The vote count from last month’s parliamentary election is not yet complete. But it is already certain that the Shiite religious alliance, in which Mr. Hakim is the most important leader, will hold enough seats to block any constitutional changes it doesn’t like. The only recourse is to persuade Mr. Hakim to respect that earlier pledge.

Mr. Hakim’s latest position is
a prescription for a national breakup and an endless civil war. It is also a provocative challenge to
Washington, which helped broker the original promise of significant constitutional changes.
On the basis of that promise, Sunni voters turned out in large numbers, both for the constitutional referendum and for last month’s parliamentary vote. Drawing Sunni voters into democratic politics is vital to creating the stable, peaceful Iraq that President Bush has declared to be the precondition for an American military withdrawal. The most unacceptable defect of the new constitution for Sunnis is its
provision for radically decentralizing national political and economic power, dispersing it to separate regions.

In a quirk of geology, most of Iraq’s known oil deposits lie under provinces dominated by Shiites or Kurds, while the Sunni provinces of the west and north are resource-poor and landlocked. Iraq as a whole is rich enough to support all of its people relatively comfortably. But a radically decentralized Iraq would leave the Sunnis impoverished, aggrieved and desperate, driving them into the arms of radical Sunni groups in neighboring lands.

Although Sunnis are a minority in Iraq, they are an overwhelming majority in the Arab world. An irreconcilable split between Iraq’s Shiites and Sunnis would leave the Shiites even more dependent than they are now on Iran and American troops.

Constitutional changes are needed in other areas as well, especially in regard to women’s rights and the overly broad prohibitions against former members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath Party. But decentralization is the most dangerously explosive issue right now. Mr. Hakim seems perversely determined to inflame it.” NY Times

———————

It was sadly obvious from the time of the First Gulf War that intervention in the internal affairs of Iraq would lead to this point.

A systematic de-stabilization of a major country at the heart of the Arab World in which a minority (Shia) in the rest of the Arab World is a majority locally could only lead to civil war. Is it surprising that the Shia Arabs of Iraq, having been empowered by us should now insist on retaining that power? Is it surprising that this minority majority looks to its coreligionists to the east for support? Not surprising.

The New York Times now perceives the threat of an Iraqi/Iranian bloc at the the head of the Gulf. Who wrote the editorial? Surely it was not David Brooks.

Pat Lang

And The Winner Is … Saudi Arabia!

by Patrick Lang (bio below)

Syrian President Bashar Assad made surprise journeys to Saudi Arabia and Egypt on Sunday for talks on finding a face-saving solution to a UN request to interview him about the murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. At a summit with Assad in the Red Sea city of Jeddah, Saudi King Abdullah called for an improvement to crisis-stricken relations between Damascus and Beirut in the name of regional security.

Abdullah “asserted the need to consolidate and strengthen Syrian-Lebanese relations,” said a joint Saudi-Syrian statement issued after the summit.

Lebanese-Syrian relations should be improved “in all sectors in order to protect the interests of the two brotherly countries and the security of the region,” said the statement read on Saudi state television.

The statement said the two parties agreed on “activating the joint Saudi-Syrian committee, and to intensify the communication between them in order to serve the Arab and Islamic issues.”

Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal came to Damascus earlier Sunday and met with Assad and Foreign Minister Farouk al-Sharaa. He said he had traveled to Syria to prepare for Assad’s “important” Saudi visit, but refused to give any details.” Beirut Daily Star

We really are laughable from the Arab point of view. For many years now Saudi Arabia has labored and schemed discretely to reclaim Lebanon and Syria from the clutches of various Christian and heretical Muslim groups and to return these countries to the bosom of the Umma (Sunni dominated, of course). Rafik Hariri was an instrument of that policy for a decade or more. His murder prevented a return to power in Lebanon in which he would clearly have been a continuing asset of his former homeland, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Abd al-Halim Khaddam, now bleating of “reform” Paris was one of Hariri’s principal allies in Damascus and as a Sunni member of the Syrian Baath oligarchy one of the larger recipients of Hariri “channeled” largess.

The US, France have played a very useful role from the Saudi point of view. They have pressured Bashar Assad to the point that he believes in his own vulnerability. He knows where the pressure really has come from. This has been a pressure exerted in Washington and Paris, but influenced by regional politics and so he has gone to “Canossa” to make his peace with King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. He has gone to accept Saudi hegemony in the Levant.

The side trip to Egypt is insignificant, a face saving gesture for all concerned.

Now, Washington will have to deal with the Kingdom. If the “kowtow” was convincing, Abdullah et al will not want their “satellite” disturbed much more.

It should be interesting to watch.

Pat Lang

Bombing at the Interior Ministry

by Patrick Lang (bio below)

The two suicide bombers managed to enter the Interior Ministry compound in east Baghdad, as dignitaries including the U.S. ambassador were at a nearby parade to mark National Police Day.

One was wearing the uniform of an Iraqi police major while the other was dressed as a lieutenant-colonel. Both had security passes that enabled them to go through the compound’s main checkpoint and would have admitted them to the ministry itself.

“We’re dying to know how they got hold of these badges to enter the building,” one police source told Reuters. “This is a disaster. We can’t understand how they managed to get inside without being searched.”

Once inside the checkpoint, guards became suspicious of one of the attackers because of his bulk and shot at him, detonating his explosive belt. The second bomber then blew himself up, causing more carnage. Besides the 28 dead, 25 people were injured.

“Two brothers…got through nine checkpoints that the infidels set up around the building, then one of them piled into dozens of ministry officers,” Al Qaeda said in a statement posted on a Web site generally used by insurgents.

“After fear spread among the apostates, the second brother blew up his belt, bringing great misfortune upon them,” read the statement, whose authenticity could not be verified.” Reuters

“We’re dying to know how they got hold of these badges to enter the building,” one police source told Reuters. “This is a disaster. We can’t understand how they managed to get inside without being searched.”

Really!! You are penetrated, idiot! That’s how! The Iraqi government (with US assistance) has been hiring and promoting policemen on the basis of standardized tests provided by an American industrial psychology company that specializes in testing people for employment in public sector jobs that require quality and reliability screening. The tests were built on models used in other cultural contexts and were further adapted for the Iraq environment.

This company was warned by people familiar with Iraq and the Arab World that the tests would not be predictive of behavior or loyalty. i.e., the candidates will lie either to get a job or to infiltrate the police.

This advice was ignored. Is there a connection between that means of choosing people and today’s events? You figure it out.

There have been enough close calls now for Khalilzad that HE should have “figured out” that eventually….

Pat Lang

In Memoriam – CPT Christopher Petty FA

by Patrick Lang (bio below)

My friend Paul Petty wrote last night to tell us that his son, Captain Christopher Petty was killed in action yesterday in Iraq.

“Greater love hath no man than this, that he give up his life for his friends.”

Early this morning In Iraq, Chris and four of his soldiers were killed by a so-called “improvised explosive devise” implanted along the route they were taking between Baghdad and Najaf, to the South. Details, at this point, are sketchy but we know that the explosion was powerful enough to kill all five occupants of the armored HUMVEE in which they were traveling. He had been in Iraq only a few weeks. This we know for certain. Chris was in harm’s way out of dedication to his comrades and soldiers. He loved his family deeply. But he also loved his troops and, after he took command of the Headquarters Battery, despite his frustrations with the army and a full awareness of what was right and wrong about Iraq, there was absolutely no question in his mind that he had to go back with his soldiers for the second deployment. He would never expect them to do anything that he wouldn’t do himself. He was a professional in every sense of the word, as were his men. Their dedication to their mission and to each other was unswerving. Those of us who have never been in combat do not know of the kind of bonds which develop among fellow soldiers. And though my heart ached to see him go for a second time, I could never bring myself to pressure him not to do what he did. I know his wife feels the same way. It was his choice as it is the choice of all of our soldiers. The level of dedication and selflessness among them is unequaled and almost unfathomable in our society.

Chris is the first member of our family to die in combat since W.W.II. He is survived by a Grandfather who served in that war and an Uncle who served in Vietnam. We grieve! Oh, how we grieve for him! And for his wife, Deb, his 3 year old son, Oliver, and his less than three month old son, Owen, who will never know his sweet Daddy. God rest his soul.

Chris asked to be buried in Arlington, should the worst happen. He liked the dignity of military ceremony and took the rituals seriously. I am sure he thought they would comfort us and in some small way demonstrate the appreciation of the nation to his grieving family and friends. We will do our best to see that his wishes are honored and to honor his memory in our lives.

Yours, Paul

… Continued below with Alan Farrell’s thoughts on this sacrifice:

It is the sad business of this kind of thing that we thin the gene pool by its best and most able, aggressive, and dedicated representatives.

It was, seemed to me in Vietnam, the best of my buds who stood up under fire, went over the ridge first, stayed at the site of contact last. It fell to guys like me follow them… and, sadly, to survive them out here where I bear the double shame of not being their worthy and of living among those who neither went out, nor went after. Now I see my best students go out, then come back bearing that same shame over outliving their bros and returning to this anthill of weaker citizens, “blinding and pinching and fucking,” as I think T.E. Lawrence said in his “Mint”; “filching their lucre and gulping their stale beer,” as I think Conrad says on last page of “Heart.” So it goes…” AFF

“Pro Patria.”

Pat Lang