By Dawn's Early Light

Condi's Suprise Return to Iraq

Secretary Condoleezza Rice made another suprise visit to the city of Mosul, Iraq, coming less than 6 months since her last trip in May [See DEL here].  In the May DEL post:

"Her primary goal, it would appear, is to support the legitimacy of the current elected government while encouraging the Kurds and Shiites to be as inclusive as possible with the Sunnis.  Her visit serves two other purposes as well:  to remove the spotlight from the recent bombings and refocus world attention on building a democratic Iraq, thereby reducing the media influence of the militants, and to buttress work being done on an acceptable constitution."

Secretary Rice's goals are similar, to bring about cooperation among the various factions in Iraq to promote Iraq's democracy and to refocus the media attention back to the long-run goals of the Administration.  The Guardian reports on her trip:

"'We do support the principles of democracy and support efforts to bridge the differences among Iraqis,' Rice said following a meeting with Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari.

Divisions 'may be differences of history or tradition, culture or ethnicity, but in a democratic process these differences can be a strength rather than a handicap,'' she said."

To encourage democracy in the Middle East, the State Department has two initiatives.

"[I am] very much looking forward to going to the Forum for the Future in Bahrain. We are going to establish the first two institutions of the Broader Middle East Initiative: the Fund for the Future, which will be a set of equity investments in small businesses and medium size businesses to try and help stimulate private economic development. It is a fund that is anticipated to be at about $100 million. We will also establish the Foundation for the Future, and that foundation will make grants -- it's anticipated to be about a little over $50 million -- anticipated to make grants to democracy organizations, NGOs in the region that want to promote equality for women, that want to promote the development of political parties and free press, and so forth.

And the remarkable thing about this is that we're going to have Arab partners, Middle Eastern partners, in both of these ventures. And so I'm very much looking forward to that."

The dollar amounts however are small, but they are a start.  It will have to be Iraq as a model of democracy that, over time, will inspire change in the Middle East.  That is why winning the war in Iraq is a critical piece in spreading liberty and democracy and reducing instability and the threat of terrorism.

Rumsfeld and UK Defense Secretary Comments

The US-UK special relationship is the cornerstone of American foreign policy in Europe and arguably the Middle East as well.  This past November 7th, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and UK Secretary of State for Defense John Reid gave a joint news briefing (the full text can be found here).

Sec. Rumsfeld thanked the British:

"Throughout much of modern history, the special relationship between the United States and Great Britain has dealt repeated blows to totalitarianism of various stripes.  The world is safer and our countries are safer because of the uncommon steel of the British people.  We're grateful for our partnership and for your friendship, Mr. Secretary."

Considering PM Tony Blair's extreme costly political efforts on behalf of the special relationship, it was the least the Secretary could say, and his words are well true.

Sec. Reid begins his address touching on the same subject while expanding on the threat faced to Western Civilization:

"I'm delighted to be here, and I hope the fact that we are standing together on so many issues -- which we've discussed today, from Iraq through Afghanistan and the many other theatres where we are working together; more importantly, our service men and women continue to work together -- is a symbol of our enduring relationship.

I think the thing which lies at the heart of that is shared values, and the struggle which is going on on the global sphere at present is indeed a battle of our values.  It is at heart an ideological struggle between those of us who adhere to 21st century values and those who are trying to impose seventh century values in large sections of the world.  Though it is ideological at heart, it manifests itself in the worst forms of terrorism -- innocent civilians targeted indiscriminately by people who have no constraints of morality, conventions or legality.  It therefore makes it a very, very difficult battle for the young service men and women who serve both our countries with such distinction, courage and fortitude."

It is important that the discussion of radical Islam be framed as a battle against the West on a "battle of our values".  From an American perspective, this distinction seems often lost on the European press, not to mention a few US publications as well. Sec. Reid goes on to attack those in the Main Stream Media (MSM) and elsewhere who argue that change in Iraq is going too slow, by putting it in a historical context.

"I've had some people say that the failure to achieve absolute unanimity within 18 months was indeed a failure.  Well, coming from a country, the United Kingdom, which has a similar continual discussion about the nationalities within a nation-state, and now in the 837th year of trying to resolve the Irish settlement in Northern Ireland and the 300 years just having settled the Scottish one, I think the Iraqis have done damn well to get where they have in 18 months quite frankly, Secretary Rumsfeld.  And to see 64 percent of the Iraqi population coming out in the elections, a greater turnout, despite the threats to themselves, than there was in our general election and probably your presidential election, is a sign of encouragement."

While the conference was a good opportunity for the two Secretaries to give their continued view and rationale for the direction of the campaign in Iraq, the question-and-answer session hit upon some interesting topics.

Joint Strike Fighter

Regarding the JSF program, which will be the largest ever US military purchase, spanning the AirForce, Navy and Marines with different versions of the JSF along with orders from the British and Japanese governments, the US commitment was called into question.

"[W]e're pretty confident that the United States, in their own interests, not just in ours, will make the sensible decisions on the Joint Strike Fighter.  It is true, it is a huge part of our future planning.  We don't have forces, or for that matter the budget the size of the United States.  But we do, I believe, have forces that are equipped, capable and active in terms of meeting the modern threats.  And part of that is the ability to reach out, to have sustainable reach.  And that is why we've ordered a final perusal of our plans to build two carriers which are three times the size of anything that we've got at present.  And if we have such carriers to sustain a presence a long distance from the United Kingdom over a long period, we need a good airplane to operate off them.  And the airplane we want to get is the Joint Strike Fighter, and I see no reason at the moment to be worried about that."

Iranian and Syrian Involvement in Iraq

On the issue of Iranian and Syrian involvement against coalition forces in Iraq:

"Q: Mr. Minister, the top British general down in Basra last week said that he was concerned and had solid evidence that Iran was moving technology and materials over into Iraq.  Can you elaborate on that and your concerns, especially in southern Iraq, with these explosives coming across the border?

SEC. REID:  Do you mean General Dutton?

Q:     Dutton.  Yeah.

SEC. REID:  Yeah.  Yeah, well, for obvious reasons I don't want to go into the technicalities of it, but it is our belief that the nature of the devices being used against British troops and possibly elsewhere in Iraq in recent months bear the hallmark of groups like Hezbollah and may well be connected with elements within Iran.  We don't have the evidence that says this is being backed by the Iranian government, but it is nevertheless worrying, and we've made representations to Iran, because it would obviously not be right for a country to be publicly supporting democratic self-determination in Iraq at the same time as it was allowing or in any way encouraging the use of terrorism or violence.

So it's as simple as that; we have put that.  And putting it in a wider context, of course, if we have those worries -- along with the duplicity which Iran has been using in the development of its nuclear capability -- as witnessed not by me or Secretary Rumsfeld, but by the International Atomic Energy Authority, and then the sort of statements that we've seen from the Iranian president about wiping off the face of the map another member state of the United Nations, then all of these items come together and they are worrying."

Syria Cornered

The US was moving towards open conflict with Syria recently, especially as US special forces engaged across the border in fighting Islamic militants fighting along the Iraqi border (see Bill Roggio posts regarding here and here).  However, Secretary Rice argued against taking military action against Syria in an October 1st principals meeting, according to Newsweek.

In light of the recently released UN Investigative report on the assassination of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri by German investigator prosecutor Detlev Mehlis that directly implicates several high ranking members of the Syrian government and the Assad family, Rice's decision appears to be the right one.  For a detailed analysis of the UN report, review Publius Pundit's post by Robert Mayer and this Washington Post article.

Secretary Rice's ability to delay military action against Syria (she has publicly stated the US will not rule out an attack on Syria) has created a opportunity for Europe and the Middle East to be united behind a condemnation of Syria.  Even Saudi Arabia and Egypt are likely to put further pressure on Damascus, according to this Arab News article.  The report is so detailed and implicating of Syrian involvement that Syria is in no position to step out of line over Iraq.

The added benefit of going the diplomatic route is putting France and the United States, along with the United Kingdom, firmly in the same camp over condemning Syria and taking strong action (see WaPo article).  This move will likely help go towards repairing the Atlantic alliance.

Operation Spear

Operation Spear began today in Iraq.  I highly recommend Bill Roggio's piece at Winds of Change.  The whole piece is well worth reading to get a good grasp of this important assault near the Syrian border.  However, this portion of his analysis speaks volumes as to how the US and Iraq are progressing in dealing with the insurgent terrorists:

"The operations in Anbar must also be looked at from a political perspective as well. The coalition struck a serious (but not fatal) blow to al Qaeda with the capture of Abu Talha. The terrorists continue to lose their appeal with the Iraqi people. The Iraqi Assembly has successfully completed negotiations with the Sunnis to participate in creating the Constitution, generously ceding 15 seats on the committee to a party that boycotted the elections. Negotiations with Sunni groups at the national level and the local level (particularly in Anbar) are accelerating, as the government attempts to offer the Sunnis an option to end the violence and participate in the government. The Iraqi Army is making the long, uphill climb towards becoming an effective fighting force, and is increasing its participation in combat operations against the insurgency."

This type of summary is often missing in the mainstream media.  There is progress in Iraq.  Operations such as Spear, Matador and New Market are further diminishing the insurgents' ability to kill Iraqis and terrorize the citizens of the cities they corrupt. 

Our prayers and support are with the US and Iraqi forces, who are engaged in an important battle.

Syria Sets a Deadline for Pullout from Lebanon

This just came across the wire desk for the Washington Post.

"Syria plans to pull all its troops and intelligence agents from Lebanon by April 30, and a U.N. team could be dispatched to verify the withdrawal," a U.N. envoy said Sunday after meeting President Bashar Assad.

The full withdrawal will mark the end of Syria's 29-year military presence in Lebanon and will comply with the demands in a U.N. resolution, helping to relieve the international pressure on Damascus.

U.N. envoy Terje Roed-Larsen said Syrian Foreign Minister Farouk al-Sharaa had informed him "all Syrian troops, military assets and the intelligence apparatus will have been withdrawn fully and completely" by April 30, at the latest.

Roed-Larsen said the Syrian commitment implies all its security forces will be withdrawn in line with the 1989 Taif agreement, which paved the way for the end of the Lebanese civil war, and U.N. resolution 1559 that was passed by the Security Council in September. The resolution called for Syria to withdraw its troops and stop interference in Lebanon."

Keep checking PubliusPundit for the latest news and analysis.  Syria has lowered its troops in Lebanon from 14,000 to 8,000 in the eastern portion of the country.  This seems to be good news indeed.   How long until real democracy emerges in Lebanon? Will this reduce the bombings in Christian areas of the country or intesify them?

Lebanon Democracy Protests Bearing Fruit

The massive second round of pro-democracy protesters of 800,000 to one million Christian, Sunnis and Druze in Lebanon are having an impact on Syria (for great coverage on the protests see here and here).

"Syria Begins Packing Up Beirut Intel Office" according to the AP.  Here is my favorite line:

"The agents, protected by Lebanese police, then drove off in the trucks. A short time later, a doorman hoisted two Lebanese flags at the entrance. "

Another good step forward on the "march of freedom".  President Bush met today with the Jordan's King Abdullah at the White House.  In a question and answer session with reporters, they spoke on Lebanon and Hezbollah, Israel and Palestine, and fighting terrorism.  Syria must be feeling increasingly isolated as James Lileks so humorously points out today (remember Assad was trained as an ophthalmologist):

"I tend to think that if Lebanon is freed, history might note a glancing relationship between the Cedar Revolution and the deposition of the occupying government’s fascist twin next door.

And what of Syria then? Assad has been taking pains to assure the world he is not Saddam – which might well mean he’s a dead man. Saddam would have purged things to his liking long ago. Assad, I suspect, may well suffer at the hands of the people in his government who are stronger and more serious. The sort of guys who flip between pictures of him and his dad and ask the old eye-doctor question: Better? Worse? Better? Worse? How about now?"

Now the Lebanese need to completely throw out the Syrians from their country and reform their government.  This is a good sign.

Is Syria Staging a Protest in Lebanon?

I was suspect of this article from the AP linked by Drudge earlier today saying 500,000 pro-Syrian protesters demonstrated in Beirut today.  I trolled around looking for a good blog article this morning giving an explanation.  This afternoon, I found a very good one from Little Red Blog.  He lists 4 different articles, with the last one as reported by UPI through the Washington Times that Syria may be busing in "demonstrators" from Syria!

It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.  Here is what President Bush had to say today on Syria during a speech to the National Defense University:

"History is moving quickly, and leaders in the Middle East have important choices to make. The world community, including Russia and Germany and France and Saudi Arabia and the United States has presented the Syrian government with one of those choices -- to end its nearly 30-year occupation of Lebanon, or become even more isolated from the world. The Lebanese people have heard the speech by the Syrian president. They've seen these delaying tactics and half-measures before. The time has come for Syria to fully implement Security Council Resolution 1559. All Syrian military forces and intelligence personnel must withdraw before the Lebanese elections, for those elections to be free and fair.

The elections in Lebanon must be fully and carefully monitored by international observers. The Lebanese people have the right to determine their future, free from domination by a foreign power. The Lebanese people have the right to choose their own parliament this spring, free of intimidation. And that new government will have the help of the international community in building sound political, economic, and military institutions, so the great nation of Lebanon can move forward in security and freedom.

Today I have a message for the people of Lebanon: All the world is witnessing your great movement of conscience. Lebanon's future belongs in your hands, and by your courage, Lebanon's future will be in your hands. The American people are on your side. Millions across the earth are on your side. The momentum of freedom is on your side, and freedom will prevail in Lebanon.

America and other nations are also aware that the recent terrorist attack in Tel Aviv was conducted by a radical Palestinian group headquartered in Damascus. Syria, as well as Iran, has a long history of supporting terrorist groups determined to sow division and chaos in the Middle East, and there is every possibility they will try this strategy again. The time has come for Syria and Iran to stop using murder as a tool of policy, and to end all support for terrorism."

President Bush is pushing forward his agenda of spreading democracy around the world to friends and foe alike.  Peaceful protests, Orange Revolutions and Cypress Revolutions are the future for people fed up with dictators and autocrats.

Iraqi Elections Making a Diffence in the Middle East

New Sisyphus caught an important opinion article in the Washington Post entitled "Beirut's Berlin Wall" from David Ignatius that I overlooked and has a valuable post regarding it.

Mr. Ignatius met with a Lebanese leader, the Druze Muslim patriarch, Walid Jumblatt.  Mr. Jumblatt is not pro-American and had been a supporter of Syrian occupation of Lebanon until about a year ago. 

"It's strange for me to say it, but this process of change has started because of the American invasion of Iraq," explains Jumblatt. "I was cynical about Iraq. But when I saw the Iraqi people voting three weeks ago, 8 million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world." Jumblatt says this spark of democratic revolt is spreading. "The Syrian people, the Egyptian people, all say that something is changing. The Berlin Wall has fallen. We can see it."

By changing the regime in Iraq, changing an ideology of hate and repression in Afghanistan, supporting a democratically elected leader in Palestine, the internal dialog of religious leaders and opinion makers in the Middle East is loosening the power of the old autocratic regimes and proving Mr. Bush correct, that "freedom is embedded in everybody's soul."

There is good reason to be hopeful for change from the grass roots, from the people living in oppression in the Middle East.  "Freedom is on the march," and the more we do to support it, the safer we will be.

The Red & White Revolution

Lebanese are taking to the streets to demand Syria withdraw its troops from Lebanon, who have been there since 1975.  Chants of "Syria Out" and "We don't want a parliament that acts as a doorkeeper for the Syrians" are reported by the AP (HT: Instapundit).  I still appreciate the "Remove Your Dogs from Beirut" chant myself.

They Lebanese protesters are wearing red and white scarves, the colors of the flag as they protest.  Can this not be a show of solidarity with the hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians with their orange scarves in the streets of Kiev? 

Democracy is contagious.  The old paradigms will not work.  Once the yoke of oppression begins to lift in a region, it is impossible for neighbors not to want the same freedoms. 

The catalyst for this has to be the Iraqi elections and the potential Syrian overreach if they are, in fact, responsible (directly or indirectly) for the assassination of the former Prime Minister of Lebanon.  Even the Baathists of Iraq are reportedly at the bargaining table to move into the political process (see The Adventures of Chester and the Belmont Club with great takes). 

We should show solidarity and support to the Lebanese.  Let us hope and, better yet, apply maximum pressure for Syria to quit Lebanon.  The signs are here.  The people of the Middle East want liberty.

Lebanese Uniting Against Syrian Involvement

A good article in the WP concerning the fallout of the former Lebanese Prime Minister Hariri's assassination by car bomb. 

"Syrian officials say Hariri's assassination has worked against their interests by uniting Lebanon's Christian, Druze and Sunni parties, some of which battled one another during years of sectarian strife. The opposition does not control a majority in Lebanon's parliament, but the fresh surge of anger over Syria's presence has strengthened its position heading into elections scheduled to be held as early as April."

Maybe his death will unite the country in ridding Lebanon of Syrian involvement and further isolate the Baathist regime.  No one knows if Syria was responsible, but this paragraph is troubling:

"As an increasingly important voice against Syrian influence, Hariri threatened Assad's control over Syria's ruling Baath Party, whose senior members have substantial economic and political interests in Lebanon. Many of the officials with the most to lose from a withdrawal belong to Syria's security and intelligence services, which have a history of acting without orders.  An attempt in the 1980s by Syrian intelligence agents to down an Israeli airliner in London was thwarted by Israeli intelligence. The plot was never revealed to Hafez Assad, the current president's father, who died in June 2000."

While we don't know for certain if Mr. Assad ordered the car bombing, or his security people did it on their own, or whether Al-Qaeda organized the murder, we do know what the Lebanese presume.  The Lebanese have good reason to fear Syrian involvement and hopefully their April elections will begin the process of getting Syria out of Lebanon.

Ironically, Syria may be helping bridge the divide between the US and France.  French President Jacque Chirac was a good friend of the slain former Prime Minister.  The US and France are both putting pressure on Syria to quit Lebanon militarily.   

Syria must be in a weak position if it is looking to build an alliance with Iran.  It is isolated on every border it has.