Israel & Saudi Arabia Seek the Partition of Syria

Good friends - Israel's Defence Minister Moshe Ya'alon and Prince Turki al-Faisal, former ambassador to the US and the former head of Saudi's intelligence agency

An interesting article in YNet – the on-line version of Israel’s most popular newspaper, Yediot Aharanot, is copied below.

Israel is pushing, with its Turkish and Saudi partners, for the partition of Syria into its confessional components – Sunni, Alawite, Druze and Kurd.  It serves Israel’s  purposes to fragment Syria, the better to control her and to conquer more territory in the future.

Pinhas Lavon, Israel's Defence Minister & Chief of Staff (later Defence & Foreign Minister) Moshe Dayan

I have copied below extensive tracts from Livia Rokach’s Israel’s Sacred Terrorism, which contain extracts from the Diaries of Moshe Sharrett, Israel’s second Prime Minister.  Sharrett, who was felled in 1955 by a combination of the Kasztner trial and the come back of Israel’s first Prime Minister and hawk, David Ben-Gurion, found himself surrounded with plots by his subordinate ministers and the Chief of Staff, Moshe Dayan, to conquer more territory and interfere in the neighbouring countries in order to for example control the water sources that Israel required.

David Ben-Gurion, Israel's first Prime Minister and architect of Expansion and the Expulsion of Palestinians in 1948

The Diaries demolish the myth that is sustained in the West to this day, that Israel was a state looking for peace surrounded by war mongering Arab states.  On the contrary Israel’s leaders looked continually for pretexts for war and sought, through terrorist operations in states like Egypt, where Zionist agents planted bombs and created the appearance of destabilisation, to deliberately manipulate the truth.  The operation in Egypt became known as the Security Mishap or the Lavon Affair, after the Defence Minister who initiated it.  Israel, engaging in the usual hasbara, portrayed itself as the victim in situations where it was the aggressor.

Moshe Sharrett - Israel's second Prime Minister and its only dove

Below we see the attempts to take advantage of the situation in Syria following the fall of its leader Shishlaky.  So the Defence Minister, Lavon, urged an invasion of Syria because he alleged Iraq had ‘practically moved into Syria’.  In fact it had done nothing whatsoever.

What Israel is doing today is to fulfill the dreams of Ben-Gurion, Lavon and Dayan.

Moshe Sharrett and David Ben Gurion -  Israel's first and second  Prime Ministers

Livia Rokach – Israel’s Sacred Terrorism

Chapter 4      "A Historical Opportunity" to Occupy Southern Syria

Pinhas Lavon - Israeli Defence Minister responsible for terrorism in Egypt and Iraq - deposed by Ben Gurion

On January 31, 1954 Moshe Dayan went on to outline his warplans. Sharett's note for that day continues:

The second plan-action against the interference of the Syrians with our fishing in the Lake of Tiberias. . . .The third-if, due to internal problems in Syria, Iraq invades that country we should advance [militarily, into Syria] and realize a series of "faits accomplis." . . . The interesting conclusion to be drawn from all this regards the direction in which the new Chief of Staff is thinking. I am extremely worried. (31 January 1954, 332)

On February 25, 1954, Syrian troops stationed in Aleppo revolted against Adib Shishakly's regime. After lunch Lavon took me aside and started trying to persuade me: This is the right moment to act this is the time to move forward and occupy the Syrian border positions beyond the Demilitarized Zone. Syria is disintegrating. A State with whom we signed an armistice agreement exists no more. Its government is about to fall and there is no other power in view. Moreover, Iraq has practically moved into Syria. This is an historical opportunity, we shouldn't miss it.

… I asked if he suggests to act immediately and I was shocked when I realized that he does. I said that if indeed Iraq will move into Syria with its army it will be a revolutionary turn which will ... justify far reaching conclusions, but for the time being this is only a danger, not a fact. … He repeated that time was precious and we must act so as not to miss an opportunity which otherwise might be lost forever. Again I answered that under the circumstances right now I cannot approve any such action. … I saw that he was extremely displeased by the delay. However, he had no choice but to agree. (25 February 1954, 374)

The next day the Shishakly regime actually fell. The following day, February 27, Sharett was present at a meeting where Lavon and Dayan reported to Ben Gurion that what happened in Syria was - "a typical Iraqi action." The two proposed again that the Israeli army be put on the march. Ben Gurion, "electrified," agreed. Sharett reiterated his opposition, pointing to the certainty of a Security Council condemnation… The three objected that "our entrance [into Syria] is justified in view of the situation in Syria. This is an act of defense of our border area." Sharett closed the discussion by insisting on the need for further discussion in the cabinet meeting, scheduled for the next morning:

Shimon Peres - Labour Prime Minister and later President - Ben Gurion protegy and famous for plotting against all and sundry - Trusted by no-one - responsible for developing Israel's nuclear weapon

Lavon's face wore a depressed expression. He understood this to be the end of the matter. (27 February 1954, 377)  

On Sunday, February 28, the press reported that no Iraqi troops had entered Syria. The situation in Damascus was under the complete control of President Hashem Al Atassi. The cabinet approved Sharett's position and rejected Lavon's vehement appeal not to miss a historical opportunity. Lavon said "The U.S. is about to betray us and ally itself with the Arab world." We should "demonstrate our strength and indicate to the U.S. that our life depends on this so that they will not dare do anything against us." The premier's victory, however, was to be short-lived….  

On December 12, 1954, however, a Syrian civilian plane was hijacked by Israeli war planes shortly after its takeoff, and forced to land at Lydda airport. Passengers and crew were detained and interrogated for two days, until stormy international protests forced the Israelis to release them. Furious, Sharett wrote to Lavon on December 22:  

It must be clear to you that we had no justification whatsoever to seize the plane, and that once forced down we should have immediately released it and not held the passengers under interrogation for 48 hours. I have no reason to doubt the truth of the factual affirmation of the U.S. State Department that our action was without precedent in the history of international practice. ..... What shocks and worries me is the narrow-mindedness and the shortsightedness of our military leaders. They seem to presume that the State of Israel may or even must-behave in the realm of international relations according to the laws of the jungle. (22 December 1954, 607)  

Sharett also protested to Lavon against the scandalous press campaign, which he suspected was inspired by the security establishment and which was aimed at convincing public opinion that the Syrian plane was stopped and forced down because it violated Israeli sovereignty and perhaps endangered its security. "As a result, the public does not understand why such a plane was released and naturally it concludes that we have here an unjustified concession on the part of the government" - (ibid.)  

On December 11 five Israeli soldiers were captured inside Syrian territory while mounting wiretapping installations on the Syrian telephone network. A month later, on January 13, 1955, one of them committed suicide in prison. The official Israeli version is, once again, that the five had been abducted in Israeli territory, taken to Syria, and tortured. The result was a violent emotional upsurge in Israel, all the more so as this news arrived shortly after the condemnation in Cairo of members of an Israeli terrorist ring which had been described to public opinion as an anti-Jewish frame-up. The prime minister confided to his personal diary:  

A young boy has been sacrificed for nothing.... Now they will say that his blood is on my hands. If I hadn't ordered the release of the Syrian plane [we would have had our hostages and] the Syrians could have been forced to free the five. The boy . . . would have been alive ... our soldiers have not been kidnapped in Israeli territory by Syrian invaders as the army spokesman announced .... They penetrated into Syria and not accidentally but in order to take care of a wiretapping installation, connected to a Syrian telephone line ... I have no doubt that the press and the Knesset will cry about torture. On the other hand, it is possible that the boy committed suicide because he broke down during the interrogation and only later he understood what a disaster he has brought upon his comrades and what he did to the state. … Anyway, his conscience probably caused him to take this terrible step. (3 January 1955, 649)  

….It is clear that Dayan's intention ... is to get [Syrian] hostages in order to obtain the release of our prisoners in Damascus. He put it into his head that it is necessary to take hostages, and would not let go. (10 February 1955, 714)  

CHAPTER 7 The Lavon Affair: Terrorism to Coerce the West

To Aharon Barkatt, then secretary general of Mapai, Sharett painted the following picture of Israel's security establishment:

Dayan was ready to hijack planes and kidnap [Arab] officers from trains, but he was shocked by Lavon's suggestion about the Gaza Strip. Maklef [who preceded Dayan as Chief of Staff] demanded a free hand to murder Shishakly but he was shaken when Lavon gave him a crazy order concerning the Syrian DMZ. (25 January 1955, 682)

He [Lavon] inspired and cultivated the negative adventuristic trend in the army

and preached the doctrine that not the Arab countries but the Western Powers

are the enemy, and the only way to deter them from their plots is through direct actions that will terrorize them. (26 January 1955, 685)

Peres shares the same ideology: he wants to frighten the West into supporting Israel's aims.

APPENDIX 5 Israeli Newspaper Reveals Government's Attempt to Stop Publication of Israel's Sacred Terrorism

1.Retaliation activities Quotations from Sharett show that these activities were never carried out in revenge or retaliation, as the were presented to be, but that they were the product of the premeditated policies of David Ben Gurion and Moshe Dayan. These policies aimed at heating the borders, as a preparation for war, and as a pretext to vacate and disperse Palestinian refugees who lived in camps close to the borders. Quotations from Sharett's book also reveal that President Yitzhak Ben Zvi hoped for an Egyptian attack to justify lsrael's occupation of half of Sinai. Sharett reveals, furthermore, that the incidents on the Syrian border were also a result of an Israeli initiative. Sharett details at length the reasons behind the blood-bath committed by the 101 unit, under the command of Arik Sharon, in the village of Kibya, where fifty-six innocent Arab villagers were killed. He also recites how the government decided to publish a false communique, in which this event was portrayed as a partisan action carried out by civilian "settlers."

2.The plan for the occupation of Southern Syria Sharett reveals that Ben Gurion, Dayan and Pinhas Lavon requested in February 1954 to exploit the toppling of the Syrian dictator, Adib Shishakly, by occupying southern Syria and annexing it to Israel. They also requested to buy a Syrian officer who would acquire power in Damascus and establish a pro-Israel puppet government. These things seem more actual today in light of the deteriorating position of Hafez al-Assad and Israeli declarations in this regard.

3.The intention to partition Lebanon Sharett reveals that already in February 1954 Ben Gurion proposed a large Israeli operation to dismember the Lebanese state and to establish a Maronite-Christian state in one of its parts. Extended discussions were held as a result. Ben Gurion explicated the plan at length in a letter to Sharett, and Sharett answered in a long letter in which he opposed the plan vehemently, Ben Gurion was ready to invest large sums in bribing Christian leaders in Lebanon. Sharett also revealed that the chief of staff supported the plan of buying a Lebanese army officer who would be used as a puppet, and who would make it seem that the intervention of the Israeli army would be in response to his call for the liberation of Lebanon from Muslim subjugation. In the eyes of today's reader this plan seems an accurate blueprint for what took place in Lebanon after that- the civil war, the establishment of the Maronite enclave of Major Sa'd Haddad and labeling it "free Lebanon."

5. See Ha'aretz of' 29 June 1979, commenting on a recent wave of terrorist actions in Syria attributed to the Muslim Brothers: "If Syria assumes its Sunni character again, as it was prior to the rise of the Ba'ath and the Alawites to power, new and varied opportunities may open up to Israel, Lebanon and the whole Middle Fast. In view of such a possibility, Israel must keep vigilant and alert: It must not an opportunity which might be unrepeatable". A quarter of a century later, The same formula is being used. In general, a close refilling of the Israeli press through 1979 suggests that Israel is again deploying efforts in various directions to bring about the fall[ of Assad's regime, and to install a Damascus regime which would go along with Israeli policies. "Israel is aiming at installing a Sadat in Damascus," one Israeli political figure told us in September 1979.

Israel skeptical of Syria ceasefire, eyes partition

Israeli officials at Munich conference: Unrealistic to believe Syria can become united anew, partition 'only possible solution'.

Reuters

Published: 02.14.16, 12:29 / Israel News

Israel voiced doubt on Sunday that an international ceasefire plan for Syria would succeed, suggesting a sectarian partition of the country was inevitable and perhaps preferable. [to whom?!]

While formally neutral on the five-year civil war racking its neighbor, Israel has some sway among the world powers that have mounted armed interventions and which on Friday agreed on a "cessation of hostilities" to begin within a week.

Ruins in Homs, Syria, seen from a Russian drone

The deal, clinched at a Munich security conference, is already beset by recriminations between Russia, which backs Syrian President Bashar Assad militarily and wants to see his rule restored, and Western powers that have called for change in Damascus involving select opposition groups.

Addressing the conference after he met European counterparts and Jordan's King Abdullah, Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon said he was "very pessimistic" about the truce's prospects.

"Unfortunately we are going to face chronic instability for a very, very long period of time," he said. 

"And part of any grand strategy is to avoid the past, saying we are going to unify Syria. We know how to make an omelette from an egg. I don't know how to make an egg from an omelette."

Referring to some of the warring sects, Ya'alon added: "We should realize that we are going to see enclaves - 'Alawistan', 'Syrian Kurdistan', 'Syrian Druzistan'. They might cooperate or fight each other."

Damascus (Photo: AFP)

Ram Ben-Barak, director-general of Israel's Intelligence Ministry, described partition as "the only possible solution."

"I think that ultimately Syria should be turned into regions, under the control of whoever is there," he told Army Radio, arguing that Assad's minority Alawite sect had no way to heal its schism with the Sunni Muslim majority.

"I can't see how a situation can be reached where those same 12 percent Alawites go back to ruling the Sunnis, of whom they killed half a million people there. Listen, that's crazy."

Helped by Russian firepower, Syrian government forces and their allies have been encircling rebel-held areas of Aleppo. That would give Assad effective control of western Syria, Ben-Barak said, although much of the east is dominated by Islamic State insurgents.

An Assad victory in Aleppo, Ben-Barak said, "will not solve the problem, because the battles will continue. You have ISIS there and the rebels will not lay down their weapons."

While sharing foreign concerns about Islamic State advances, Israel worries that the common threat from the insurgents has created a de-facto axis between world powers and its arch-foe Iran, which also has troops helping Assad.

"As long as Iran is in Syria, the country will not return to what it was, and it will certainly find it difficult to become stable as a country that is divided into enclaves, because the Sunni forces there will not allow this," Ya'alon said in an earlier statement.

At the conference, Ya'alon also met with Saudi Prince Turki al-Faisal, a former ambassador to the US and the former head of Saudi's intelligence agency, and the two shook hands.

Ya'alon said that Israel had channels of communications with neighboring Sunni Arab countries [i.e. Saudi Arabia and the Gulf statelets]. "Not only Jordan and Egypt. I speak about the Gulf states and North African states too ... For them, Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood are the enemy. They are not shaking hands (with Israelis) in public, but we meet in closed rooms."

Israeli Newspaper Ha'aretz Printed in March an Article Stating the Rebels had Chemical Weapons

Western Leaders are Lying When They Claim to be Certain that Assad Used Chemical Weapons

Medics in Khan al-Assal, Aleppo, treat an injured man

I recommend the Washingtons Blog for much of this information .  There is a wealth of links to reputable sources in an article Yes, the Syrian Rebels DO Have Access to Chemical Weapons
Even the only reputable Israeli Daily Newspaper Ha'aretz has carried an article 'Jihadists, not Assad, apparently behind reported chemical attack in Syria' By Anshel Pfeffer, its Defence Correspondent, on 24.3.13.

'Intelligence reports suggest jihadists among the Syria rebels have technical know-how to produce chemical warheads.'

He asked 'Was the first use of chemical weapons in the Syrian civil war carried out by rebel forces fighting against the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad?'

The mysterious explosion last Tuesday near the city of Aleppo, which killed 26 people and wounded dozens, was swiftly labeled by Western intelligence agencies as a chemical incident perpetrated by forces loyal to Assad.

U.S. President Barack Obama was even asked during a press conference in Israel whether the incident would change his administration's non-intervention policy on Syria. But as more information passes, a different picture is beginning to emerge. The explosion claimed the lives of Syrian Armed Forces soldiers who are apparently loyal to Assad, and the Syrian government was quick to demand an international investigation of the incident.
These two facts would indicate that Assad's forces were not behind the attack.      

In addition, from what has been released of the physical and medical evidence, it seems that some of the injuries were caused by chlorine. While chlorine gas has been used in the past as a weapon, mainly in the First World War, the chemical arsenals of nations developing these weapons have for decades focused mainly on mustard gas and various types of nerve agents, which, had they been used last week, would have caused different symptoms that were not observed.

It appears that the target of the attack was a checkpoint manned by Syrian Armed Forces, which reinforces the theory that rebel forces, probably jihadists known to be operating around Aleppo, were behind it. A report by Britain's Channel Four, based on Syrian military sources, claims that the weapon used in the attack may have been a missile carrying a warhead filled with chlorine mixed into a saline solution. The Syrian source also said that a factory that manufactures chlorine is located nearby.

If these claims are true, it would seem to prove that the jihadists have the technical expertise necessary to insert chlorine gas into a warhead and seal it so that the gas does not leak during launch but only upon impact with the target. Another possibility is that it was a conventional missile that hit a chlorine storage tank, causing leaking gases that resulted in casualties.

Not all intelligence experts share the deep concern over a possible use of chemical weapons by Assad's forces. The large stockpiles of chemical substances held by the Syrian regime are closely guarded by the Air Force Intelligence, a branch extremely close to the Assad family, and, despite losing control of wide swathes of Syrian territory, the regime is making extreme efforts to safeguard these assets. Even though the regime has the capability to launch a chemical attack using artillery shells, warplanes and missiles, they normally store chemical substances separately and it is expected that Western intelligence agencies would identify any attempt by the regime to prepare a large quantity of chemical warheads. In one case, a number of months ago, such a mixing operation was noted and the United States issued stern warnings to the Assad regime to desist.      

According to a number of reports, American and perhaps also British special forces are willing to enter Syria to secure the chemical weapons stockpiles from bases in Jordan and Turkey should there be any sign that they are about to be captured or used by terror organizations. The Sunni-dominated Free Syrian Army, which has among its ranks senior officers who defected from forces loyal to Assad, has also prepared a plan to take over the chemical bases in the case of the regime's sudden collapse.

Of course this blows a gaping hole in the certainty of trigger-happy western leaders.  Because they know what the Saudis have supplied the Al Nusri Front, the main rebel group and Al Queda front, with.  They also know that this includes both chemical weapons and a means of delivery.

There is only one conclusion.  Obama wants to bomb Syria and intervene in the conflict there in order to send a message to Iran and Hizbollah.  Israel of course is fully behind him.

Tony Greenstein

Who was responsible for the chemical attack at Ghouta, Damascus

The Lies the West Tells regarding Chemical Weapons

Evidence given by Kerry of murder by chemical.  In fact these were civilian victims of US bombing in Iraq! 

I make no apologies for returning to the question of the justification given for the attack or explosion in the Ghouta suburbs, Damascus.

Victim of rebel use of  chemical weapons in Damascus

I have already covered in the previous post the strong suggestion by Dale Gavlak of the Michigan Mint Press that the explosion was an accident caused by hamfisted rebels.  Below is an article suggestion that far from not having the capability to deliver chemical weapons, the rebels have already been supplied, by the United States via Saudi Arabia, with just such weapons.

Just as the horrors of the Vietnam War were justified on the basis of a non-existent incident in the Gulf of Tonkin, and just as Blair & Bush lied about WMD, we are now seeing Kerry, Hollande and Cameron also lie about what is really motivating these humanitarians.  Geo-political strategy aimed at the control of the Middle East and the elimination of any independent regimes.

Child  Victim

What should the reaction of socialists and anti-imperialists be?  In my opinion when the Syrian regime under Assad, however brutal and reactionary it is, is under attack by imperialism then it should receive critical support.  Likewise the non-fascist element of the rebels, ie. not the Nusi Al Queda group which would engage in a bloodbath of Shi'ites, Alawaites and Christians, should be supported on condition there is a clear break with the fascists.

One thing is above all ironical.  In no European state or even the USA is there a majority for bombing Syria.  Only Israel supports such an action!   That shows just how skin deep democracy really is in the heart of the beast.

Tony Greenstein

Russia Releases Key Findings on Chemical Attack Near Aleppo Indicating Similarity With Rebel-made Weapons

By RT

September 05, 2013 "Information Clearing House - "RT" -  Probes from Khan al-Assal show chemicals used in the March 19 attack did not belong to standard Syrian army ammunition, and that the shell carrying the substance was similar to those made by a rebel fighter group, the Russian Foreign Ministry stated

Horrific injuries caused by US/Saudi chemical weapons in Iraq

A statement released by the ministry on Wednesday particularly drew attention to the “massive stove-piping of various information aimed at placing the responsibility for the alleged chemical weapons use in Syria on Damascus, even though the results of the UN investigation have not yet been revealed.”  

   

By such means “the way is being paved for military action” against Damascus, the ministry pointed out. 

But the samples taken at the site of the March 19 attack and analyzed by Russian experts indicate that a projectile carrying the deadly nerve agent sarin was most likely fired at Khan al-Assal by the rebels, the ministry statement suggests, outlining the 100-page report handed over to the UN by Russia. 

The key points of the report have been given as follows: 

• the shell used in the incident “does not belong to the standard ammunition of the Syrian army and was crudely according to type and parameters of the rocket-propelled unguided missiles manufactured in the north of Syria by the so-called Bashair al-Nasr brigade”;

• RDX, which is also known as hexogen or cyclonite, was used as the bursting charge for the shell, and it is “not used in standard chemical munitions”;

• soil and shell samples contain “the non-industrially synthesized nerve agent sarin and diisopropylfluorophosphate,” which was “used by Western states for producing chemical weapons during World War II.”
 

The findings of the report are “extremely specific,” as they mostly consist of scientific and technical data from probes’ analysis, the ministry stressed, adding that this data can “substantially aid” the UN investigation of the incident.

While focusing on the Khan al-Assal attack on March 19, in which at least 26 civilians and Syrian army soldiers were killed, and 86 more were injured, the Russian Foreign Ministry also criticized the “flawed selective approach” of certain states in reporting the recent incidents of alleged chemical weapons use in August.

The hype around the alleged attack on the eastern Damascus suburb of Ghouta showed “apparent attempts to cast a veil over the incidents of gas poisoning of Syrian army soldiers on August 22, 24 and 25,” the ministry said, adding that all the respective evidence was handed to the UN by Syria.

The condition of the soldiers who, according to Damascus, suffered poisoning after discovering tanks with traces of sarin, has been examined and documented by the UN inspectors, the ministry pointed out, adding that “any objective investigation of the August 21 incident in eastern Ghouta is impossible without the consideration of all these facts.” 

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday said the UN investigators are set to return to Syria to investigate several other cases of alleged chemical weapons use, including the March 19 incident in Khan al-Assal.