The Israeli Bombing Run in Syria

by emptywheel

Glenn Kessler and Robin Wright have the most comprehensive story, to date, on the mysterious bombing run Israel did in Syria on September 6. They confirm the story that had been floating around--that Israel's target was a suspected nuclear site, supplied by North Korea. The story is interesting mostly for the exchange of intelligence it portrays. The Israelis first came with intelligence, yet Bush was chill to the attack.

Israel's decision to attack Syria on Sept. 6, bombing a suspected nuclear site set up in apparent collaboration with North Korea, came after Israel shared intelligence with President Bush this summer indicating that North Korean nuclear personnel were in Syria, U.S. government sources said.

The Bush administration has not commented on the Israeli raid or the underlying intelligence. Although the administration was deeply troubled by Israel's assertion that North Korea was assisting the nuclear ambitions of a country closely linked with Iran, sources said, the White House opted against an immediate response because of concerns it would undermine long-running negotiations aimed at persuading North Korea to abandon its nuclear program.

But then the US corroborated the Israeli intelligence, and the attack went forward.

Ultimately, however, the United States is believed to have provided Israel with some corroboration of the original intelligence before Israel proceeded with the raid, which hit the Syrian facility in the dead of night to minimize possible casualties, the sources said.

The article raises doubts about the quality of the Israeli intelligence (and who knows whether our intelligence--supposedly used to corroborate the Israeli intelligence--has gotten any better since the Iraq debacle).

The quality of the Israeli intelligence, the extent of North Korean assistance and the seriousness of the Syrian effort are uncertain, raising the possibility that North Korea was merely unloading items it no longer needed.

Something's still stinky about this raid. The creepy silence on all parts suggests there was some there there--but perhaps not what Israel claimed it was. I'm actually wondering whether it doesn't involve a fifth player--perhaps China--that no one is talking about.

 

Update: Catching up with Arms Control Wonk, I just want to note this passage from an early Kessler story, one of the first to float the nukes story:

The evidence, said to come primarily from Israel, includes dramatic satellite imagery that led some U.S. officials to believe that the facility could be used to produce material for nuclear weapons.

The new information, particularly images received in the past 30 days, has been restricted to a few senior officials under the instructions of national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley, leaving many in the intelligence community unaware of it or uncertain of its significance, said the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

By "restricted to a few senior officials under the instructions of national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley," I assume Kessler meant that "few outside of Elliott Abrams' immediate colleagues saw the intelligence." This Administration pulled this approach several times leading up to the Iraq debacle, for example when they refused to share the actual specs of the aluminum tubes with those who could debunk those specs.

So I have to assume this is the same. Some warmongers trumped up a reason to go after Syria, as an Iran surrogate, and the reason they're unwilling to share their data is because it stinks to high hell.

After all, why in god's name would we need satellite intel from the Israelis anyway? You think we're not watching the airspace neighboring Iraq closely??? The Israelis gave us trumped up satellite data back in the old UNSCOM days. And no doubt this is more of the same.

No wonder Bush won't tell us what it was. We would start fact-checking him.

Comments

[radiofreewill]

In addition to what the intelligence flow suggests (Bush 'blessed' the attack,) how about the 'revival' of the old timey tradition of Rudely Bombing another Country without global, public debate?

This is an ominous event, whatever the 'content' of the Intel was/is.

It has a strong 'This Could be You' written-in-craters feeling about it.

Gee, I wonder what they were thinking?

[Cernig]

Hi EW,

Arms Control Wonk is sure it wasn't nukes, just spare parts for missiles.

http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/1646/ah-they-were-scuds

So why now and why the nuke hype? Here's a hint:

"Arab and other Islamic nations, targeting Israel's undeclared nuclear arsenal, pushed through a U.N. atomic watchdog resolution on Thursday calling on all Middle East nations to renounce atomic weapons.

...The decision was non-binding but symbolised tensions over Israel's presumed nuclear might and shunning of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and it frayed the traditional consensus culture of the Vienna-based IAEA.

Israel is widely assumed to have the Middle East's only nuclear arsenal, though it has never confirmed or denied it.

A similar resolution urging all Middle East nations to adopt IAEA safeguards on nuclear work passed overwhelmingly at last year's IAEA general assembly, with only Israel and top ally the United States opposed, as they were again on Thursday."

http://uk.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUKL2018267420070920

The resolution had been known about months in advance by all parties - plenty of time to set up the counterstrike.

A nice convergence of an Israeli wish for a smoke and mirrors misdirection and a neocon wish to demonize the remaining "Axis of Evil" members in search of further war means the message machine was rolled out to push the "nuke" meme.

Regards, C

[lizard]

This is battlefield prep, count on it. Were it a strike on an actual nuclear site, it would have already been leaked and spun into the war-promotion. Israel is taking out something that is relevant not as much to Syria as to Iran. The Israeli government sees a war on Iran in the near term, fought by the U.S. if possible and Israel if necessary, and this strike was in preperation for that war. I wonder what sort of anti-aircraft stuff Syria has in cooperation with Iran in that general area.

[casual observer]

lizard, there's some wiki info on air defense for both syria and Iran. Syria's stuff appears very dated, fwiw.

[leveymg]

If I were going to try to manipulate an adversary to place their missile forces on a Launch On Warning release (hairtrigger status), this is how I would do it.

Next time, all it will take is an incursion by unidentified aircraft into Iranian airspace.

Someone desperately wants Iran to be the first to launch.

This is about as dangerous as it gets. Why is no one else pointing out the obvious?

[orionATL]

it makes absolutely no sense to me that,

with israel as a next-door neighbor and with israeli's history re hussein's nuclear plant,

syria would even think of creating a nuclear bomb making or delivering facility.

in addition to the informative comments by cernig and lizard, i would suggest the conjoint possibility of israeli cooperation with the u.s. in psy ops to raise american public fears about nuclear this-and-that in the middle east,

in preparation for an american attack on iran.

relevant or not, five nuclear weapons were transferred "accidentally" to the american air base in louisiana which is a shipping point for the middle east conflict.

larry johnson had comments on this.

i almost cannot imagine that the u.s. would dare use nuclear weapons anywhere in the world, but....

[leveymg]

orionATL - I agree about the psyops angle, but I think the primary target of such a stratefy of tension isn't the American public -- this story has been practically buried, and until now, no really reliable source has carried it. No, I think this is part of a longer-term escalating program to try to provoke Iran into shooting first.

The British Frigate incident last year was also an attempt to provoke the Iranians, particularly the Revoltionary Guards, to do something stupid. Same thing with the kidnappings of diplomats in Iraq and al Quuds commanders before that.

Let's hope that the Iranian brass continue to exercise restraint and discipline. This is only going to get worse.

[JohnLopresti]

o'AT: likely OT but complementary: There was a fairly elaborate article at Federation of American ScientistsBlog September 5, 2007 re August 8 transfer of nuclearToys from Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota to Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana on August 30.

[emptywheel]

leveymg

That's what I'm inclined to believe. Though given Syria's silence, I do wonder if there isn't another wrinkle we're not seeing.

[orionATL]

leveymg-

good point. and thanks for the informative background.

johnL -

thanks for the cite, i could not remember "minot".

[Indie Voter]

Yes, I too believe this has something to do with the Minot/Barksdale nuke "incident." I don't believe it had anything to do with N. Korea and everything to do with Iran. A certain poster in FDL late night has some interesting insight into why Syria was not the actual target, but that Israel was going for Iran's nuke sites, with U.S. blessings of course, but that something happened to spook the Israeli pilot and they dumped in Syria instead. It makes sense as there is no way Syria would be building a nuke site that close to the Turkish border. It's not a practical location at all. Considering the lack of news on both incidents, something smells very fishy.

[2strange]

I thought Syria is predominantly Sunni and Iran, Shia. Are they really "closely linked"?

[orionATL]

steve bennen at t the carpetbagger has a post on "israel, the u.s., and the attack on syria"

several commenters made points complementary to those e'wheel and commenters here have made:

dennis-sgmm (9:57a)

zeitgeist (10:55a)

calD (11:30a).

the last, cald, wrote that north korea is pretty good at making accurate medium range missiles (conventional) that could reach israeli cities.

[radiofreewill]

The ruling clique in Syria is Shia, even though the Shia are 15% compared to the Sunni's 74%.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article688836.ece

"Recent months have seen the crystallisation of an anti-Western alliance linking Iran, under the hardline President Ahmadinejad, some Shia factions in Iraq, Syria — which is ruled by the Alawites, a Shia splinter group — Hezbollah and the Damascus branch of the Hamas movement."

(end)

A possible inference of the bombing in Syria being: Bush isn't just signalling to Iran that he's unhappy about their "Nuclear Activities," he's signalling that he's fighting a Holy War against Shia Islam - the Islamo-Fascists.

And, he has the support of Israel, because the Islamo-Fascists want to 'exterminate' Israel, and the Jews, all over again.

This is how Ideologues 'make' Armageddon happen.

[joanneleon]

leveymg, I agree that the most likely reason is provocation. All the talk about Iran supplying weapons that are killing our troops is a back up position for their war plans, but their preferable situation is for Iran to be provoked into striking first. I believe that Cheney and Bush think they can evoke strong feelings of retaliation in this country again, a la 9/12.

Marcy, can you expand on your hunch about another player, e.g. China? There is definitely something strange about the silence on this. One can't exactly bomb another country in secret. So why the silence? Did something go seriously wrong in this mission? Has someone else jumped into the middle to try and prevent escalation? It's strange.

[Rayne]

indie voter may have read the same FDL poster's comments about the Hunt pipeline project...the plan for which is believed to run from Turkish border of Iraq to port of Haifa, and might easily targeted along its length by Syrian-based weaponry.

Perhaps the whining about Iran is a shiny object, designed to explain why the pipeline doesn't run north-south to an Iraqi or Kuwaiti port (very close to Iran) rather than running to Israel.

I actually think the mystery party is Russia, although China could have their own piece of this puzzle.

[emptywheel]

joanneleon

I think I'm thinking along the same lines as you:

1) NK and Syria would have to be incredibly stupid to do this.
2) If Irsael had succeeded in taking out a nuclear site--or if it had real evidence of NK involvement it would be trumpeting that.
3) If Israel made a completely unprovoked attack on Syria, Syria would be trumpeting it.

So there must be some there there, but it probably doesn't have to do, primarily, with NK. I say China (though it could be Russia) because both have interests in making sure the US/Israel don't take out Syrian/Iran, yet both would want to hide they were there. It's really a WAG though.

[Dismayed]

Something's fishy for sure. Are there any on the ground reports? A nuke doesn't make sense and would be put out to support the culture of fear.

Anyone considered a human target, perhaps a foriegn advisor?

[Rayne]

I need to ask the source what that northern pipeline is, depicted here.

And what impact this might have had on that pipeline.

[PB]

It's not even like US Intelligence is particularly good on these matters! What would make our stuff "corroborrate" anything?

This is really still very stinky.

[kathleen]

Marcy you are right this stinks to high heaven. David Gregory asked Bush questions about this issue two times during the press conference yesterday. "NO Comment" "no Comment" was Bush's reply.

Imagine if Syria, Iran or any other country in that neighborhood attacked Israel or flew into Israeli airspace. All hell would break lose.

Folks in that neighborhood have had it with the double standards.

marcy you might be interested in the interview with Kathleen and Bill Christison (both retired CIA analyst, whose articles are often at counterpunch)at Electronic Intifada about the middle east. Bill thinks the Bush administration is definitely going to Iran.

[sailmaker]

Here is a map of (known) Iranian nuclear installations
http://ccablog.blogspot.com/2006/02/nuclear-map-of-iran.html

Here is a map of the route the "supersonic bombers'" allegedly took,
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1284716,00.html?f=rss

The Israelies have supersonic bombers (with nuclear capabilites but that is tangental right now) bought from France
http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=314

The route map indicates that Turkey 'let' the Israelies into their airspace for a long time. Would this really happen? Would Turkey let Israel bomb either Syria or Iran? Maybe Turkey gave Syria a heads up as the Israelies were enroute to Iran?

My guess (and only a guess) is that Israel was going to provoke and/or bomb Iran, Turkey gave Syria a heads up, and Syria scared off the attackers. /guess

[orionATL]

well, sailmaker turns things on their heads. very interesting.

several commenters at "political animal" (kevin drum, "the syria-north korea nuclear connection") provided info i found interesting,

in particular the observations of "flyonthewall" (at 12:02p and 12:23p).

[Jodi]

We do what we must.

[Hugh]

What is stinky about this is that it flies in the face of reality. What kind of a nuclear facility was this supposed to be exactly? No one says. I have said this before but a nuclear weapons program is not something you can run out of your garage. Our own Manhattan Project was one of the biggest industrial undertakings in our history. It had several components and most of them involved large industrial complexes. If the Syrians had a nuclear program, they too would need multiple sites and we would know about them. Yet even if they had such a program, would the Israelis really be content to lob a few bombs at one site and not go after the others? The obvious answer is they did not because there were no others. This rather implies that Syria did not have a significant nuclear program and certainly not a nuclear weapons program.

Perhaps the North Koreans were helping the Syrians build a small research reactor but there are problems with this scenario too. It is only a first step and a small one on the road to a nuclear weapon and by itself represented no nuclear threat at all. The Israelis could have struck it before it was loaded with nuclear material. This would explain why there were no reports of any radiation release associated with the Israeli bombing. If nuclear materials had been present, then there should have been a release of radioactivity and this should have been easily detectable by out of country monitors. But this rather begs an important question. Where were the Syrians expecting to get that nuclear material? Home grown, the North Koreans, the Iranians, the Pakistanis, or someone else? If home grown, they would need a plant for this, and so there would be two sites not just one for the Israelis to attack

This brings me to another scenario (and one for which I have very little information). It could be that the Syrians were interested in building a plant to extract uranium from local mineral deposits not primarily for themselves but for the Iranians. I have not heard that Syrian uranium sources have the same mineral contamination problems that most Iranian uranium ores seem to have. It might be that building such a plant was what sparked the Israeli raid. The North Koreans may have been delivering some equipment which would have helped in the processing and the Israelis struck before the plant became operational.