THE MIDDLE EAST'S VERSION OF " CHICKEN LITTLE".

If you looked at a trend in the blogs.. Open press and the general public discussions all along the Gulf region, you would find one very common theme; the never ending "rumor" of conflict between Israel and Iran and how soon it may happen.

The difference I see this time comes from those who are talking about the "rumor".

As is the case with most emotional issues, who is involved in a "rumor" is often more important than the rumor itself.

Giving creditability is a key issue and this "rumor" is gaining creditability quickly.

Two classic Middle Eastern indicators may not be the right tools to judge this "rumor" by this time around.

1. The speculative price of a barrel of oil.

Constant rumors of conflict are factored into the market right now....Something physical will need to happen and by that time the event will be underway.

2. The unavoidable buildup, mobilization process that typically takes place not just for US forces, but for Israel and "others".

As an example, Iran's" mobilization process, to some extent, is easily hidden with a series of "War Games".

A tactic we have used in the Middle East as well.

So, what makes this Middle East version of Chicken Little plausible this time around?

Syria and Israel!

Like a broken record I'm going to say it again.

Iran cannot and will not allow Syria to fall out of its sphere of influence.

A Syrian, Sunni controlled government is unacceptable to Iran.

A nuclear Iran is unacceptable to Israel............ I think?

An Arab Spring infection of Iran is unacceptable to the Iranian leadership!

The loss of Hezbollah influence in Lebanon, an Ottoman and GCC goal, is unacceptable to Iran.

For the past 10 yrs we have all sat and listen to the stories of a pending confrontation between Israel and Iran!

I know this region of the world and I know what is important to the average person on the streets of the Middle East and it is not the US economy.

We have all heard the story of the Middle Eastern Chicken Little so many times, I am afraid the public doesn't think it's worth worrying about.

I hope they are right, but I'm more and more convinced they are wrong!

I , like some of you, remember the 67 war!

http://coldansviewpoint.blogspot.com/2011/07/week-ahead-week-ahead-has-one-common.html

KILLING KEY PLAYERS..... DOES IT WORK?

Back in on July 23rd of 2011, I talked about the last Iranian Scientist assassinated and at that time my key question was, " how could Iran let a key player go unguarded?".

Well, it's January of 2012 and once again I am asking the same question.

If Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan was a vital member of the Iranian nuclear program and four of his counterparts have been killed in the past few years, how did someone get to him?

Now, as a former Cop I will be the first one to admit if someone wants someone dead, it's very hard to keep them from achieving their goal.

If someone has the skills, equipment and opportunity to execute a assassination, then the odds are they are going to succeed or at least make the attempt.

The reoccurring question becomes, how could Iran not realize this might happen?

The simple answer is, they did.

Here is potentially their predicament.

The best way to keep people like Mostafa alive is to keep them isolated.

Put them in a secured compound and limit who has access to them until the task they are assigned to is completed.

Simple right???

Wrong!!!

Here's why.

The Iranians know all too well if they sequester their best and brightest nuclear scientist, it will give a clear perception of  a program that is not what they claim it to be.

Simply put, if you want a program to look like a weapon's program, then treat it like one.

Someone has made the conscious decision to let these key players lead what appears to be a normal life, at least in the public eye.

They must have security details assigned to them, but again the decision had to  have been made to make these details as covert as possible.

Again the issue of not painting a picture that would lead others to think you are up to something seems to have outweighed the Threat Assessment.

Ok, so this works for the ' open public', but it doesn't work when put up against state of the art intelligence organizations.

For " someone" to realize the importance of people like Mostafa is not that hard to do.

The interesting point is, those that went after these " Key Members" of Iran's nuclear program can not admit, at least not openly, they knew the individual's real job.

The next logical question people may start to ask is, " how many of these 'key' scientist are there"?

Is the art of killing critical players of a weapons development program going to prevent the objective from being reached?

Must of us know the answer is no.

So, is this a delaying tactic?

Maybe!

Remember one of the key assumptions of Iran's enemies is based upon the Arab Spring taking place in Iran before a conflict is launched.

What does Iran do about these Assassinations?

As is the case with the last four events, the Iranians are gaining ground in the court of public opinion.

Those that realize the alternative to delaying the program is most likely a regional war understand the value of the killings.

Having said that, the Iranian leadership does win the high ground battle.

So what does Iran do about these consistent attacks?

First off I would bet the leader of the Personal Security Detail for the program is about to pull duty in the Streets of the worst hell hole Iranian leadership can dream of.

The fact that Iran's enemies can consistently enter Tehran and kill key people is more than aggravating to it's leadership.

If Iran cannot keep track of who is in Tehran, a city known for being a " locked down location", then that does not bold well when the Arab Spring organizers show up... my guess is they are already there.

The bottom line is Tehran is not the secure site Iran pretends it to be.

Internal Intelligence / Security  in Iran is being embarrassed on a massive scale.

I would not be surprised if Iran rounds up the rest of the key players and does just what I said they could not afford to do.... Sequester the whole group somewhere safe.

They have the excuse to cover the event now.

" We must protect our national assets who are only trying to bring clean safe nuclear energy to the people of Iran".

Yep, I was not sure how many times " others" would get away with this tactic of killing key members with " sticky bombs".

As a matter of fact, I was floored when I heard how this took place AGAIN!!!

As I said back in July, " fool me once shame on you... fool me twice shame on me"!

So, what is the saying for fool me FOUR TIMES????

LIMITED WARFARE WITH LIMITED DAMAGE... WE HOPE!!!! 

The " What If " game is one that is played by every serious government in the  world.

It's the only way they can anticipate with any degree of certainty what actions may have to be taken to mitigate  damage.

So, lets take a look at one possible scenario Iran may execute  in terms of  "limited, Unilateral conflict".

A few basic assumptions:

1.  Iran would want to limit the damage to it's critical infrastructure.

2. The Western powers would have the same objective, allowing  Iran  to continue to provide for it's population....

            Wars of Occupation  are no longer economically practical.

3.  Iran would strike first but would probably fabricate an event that would present them as reacting to a hostile act.

            Critical for keeping the " street population of the Middle East sympathetic.

4. Iran would reach out to Russia and China as soon as the event started, thus allowing a immediate window of opportunity for disengagement.

Ok, here is how I think this could take place.

Iran can limit the damages to it's critical infrastructure by keeping the conflict confined to the waterways.

The people in the streets of Tehran will not lose power or water if Iranian Navel forces are engaged in battle.

Keeping this fight to the waterways will also allow Iran the advantage of saying, " I told you so".

If they were to attack the shipping lanes of the Straits, they would be living up to their word and that would play large to the youth of the Middle East.

The reaction would be immediate but would probably not prevent news coverage showing burning tankers and a violent spike in crude oil prices.  

The first day of the event would probably clearly go to Iran... from a media perspective.

How hard and Iran attacks the targets in the Straits and the duration of the attack would need to be carefully weighed.

A massive attack against multiple ships could lead to a disproportional response and   the classic unintended escalation theory.

Iran would be wise to limit it's Air force support to this operation given the airfields inland would become instant targets and that would go against any concept of keeping the fight out in open waters.

A Falklands scenario is a historical baseline, with the exception of the land actions by the British Marines.

What Iran would have to prepared to accept is the destruction of it's Navel fleet and it's Navel facilities along it's coastline.

The Western Powers could very well limit the destruction to these Navel Facilities yet make them dysfunctional in the conflict.

Iran would need to make it very clear their ballistic facilities were not part of the operation and that would require a preemptive news release stating the Iranian Navy were " currently" the only forces involved in the conflict.

Ok, it its becoming easy to see how fast this event could get completely out of control.

The only factor in favor of keeping the lid on this type of conflict is the desire by all sides to limit the damage.

This is where the planning of careful counter actions become vital.

All parties involved can have the " intention" to limit the damage, but emotion driven events and the law of unintended consequences can quickly come into play.

Conflict has a long history of spiraling out of control!

Let me add one  classic example of what could quickly turn this into a regional war regardless of what Iran or the West intended.

Israel!

Israel gets a vote on how limited the event is.

The US and it's Allies were successful during Desert Storm in convincing Israel to sit on the sidelines...

I am not confident that would happen again.... Times have changed.

A conflict where Israel once again has no real, final outcome with the Iranian issue may simply not be tolerable.

A conflict that leads the Iranian nuclear program intact, would be a very hard sell to the Israeli public.

Iran and the West may wish to keep a conflict ' contained', but Israel will get a vote.

Even if they " vote" to agree and " sit this one out", AGAIN.. I'm not convinced they would live up to it.

In conclusion:

I have made the argument Iran " could" and in my opinion would wish to fight a limited conflict, the odds of it ending up that way are simply not good.

As history has shown us time and time again... a " limited event" could easily turn into a " Regional" nightmare.

The World needs the Arab Spring far sooner in Iran than it is probably going to show up and it needs to show up in their military first.

Could such a thing happen?

Could the Iranian military fracture?

I will talk about that soon!

SO.. DOES IRAN HAVE A PLAN FOR LIMITED WARFARE?

This DEBKA article somewhat address the issue some of us have been wondering about for some time now.

Is Iran really starting to believe they can gain from a limited confrontation with the West.. namely the US and Israel?

One of the first and most logical questions one can ask is, " does Iran have anything to lose by taking such action"?

Well, the obvious answer is yes, but lets look at it from their viewpoint and see if they really could be convincing themselves to give this idea a shot.

First off, who do they really believe will stick with them in  a full scale regional war?

Hamas and Hezbollah?

I don't think so. 

I have said this before, but I will say it again; the Arabs will not destroy their entire region for the sake of the Persians.

Will any Nation state go along with them?

Look at the statement about the Arabs... the same concept applies.

So, if Iran is starting to understand that after the fall of Syria, the clock for the Arab Spring coming to Iran will be ticking down faster and faster and the Arab to include the Arab League and the GCC are not about to support a Persian Regional War, then what option does Iran have?

A limited, unilateral event!!!

Now, the concept the Arabs will not destroy their nation states for the Persians is sound logic, but that doesn't mean  the streets of the Middle East will be peaceful.

Violent unrest given an Israeli conflict in the region might possibly be manipulated into some level of support, but not at the nation state level and that would limit the support.

Now, at this point of the argument it become difficult for me to not see the region sliding into a regional conflict just based on the law on unintended escalation.

Having said that, I am now more and more convinced the West and Israel have begun to figure out how to avoid this unintended escalation.

the more the US and it's Allies begin to believe they can limit the regional impact of this conflict, the more likely they may convince themselves it's possible.

Ok, If Iran can't convince itself it can manage to turn this event into a Regional War, then why do they opt for the unilateral, limited action?

First off the basic concept of survival come to mind.

Just as Iran is growing more and more convinced they can not hold off the collapse of their proxy Syria and thus lose control of Hamas and Hezbollah, they are surly realizing the concept of a full scale, regional war... a Total War.. would mean the end of the current Iranian government.

Ok, right about now, it is obvious how complicated this issue of conflict with Iran truly is.

So, again.. why would Iran vote for a limited, unilateral incident?

Saving face.... distracting the public of Iran without bring about the leadership's downfall.

Sounds like two very logical and very plausible goals.

On top of this, add the fact Iran is confident the US and it's Allies would be desire to limit the conflict at all cost.

The economic impact of such event would be crippling to a struggling word economy.

Wrapping this discussion up let me give my opinion of this limited, unilateral conflict  actually taking place.

In my opinion it's as simple as,  why should it not happen?

What option does Iran have?

No other Nation is going to go along with them, with possibly the exception of North Korea; a topic I will get to in the next few days.

The Arab Spring; now more the Sunni dominance campaign, is going to come to Iran.

Iran will have to do something and they have to have it ready soon...  real soon....

They have run out of friends and nobody is going to burn down everything they have for the sake of the Persians.

On Monday, I will explain how I think this event might take place and why the war of words over the littoral lanes in the Gulf may be the real story.

http://debka.com/article/21620/

ARAB LEAGUE'S CLEVER MANEUVER

I know two nights ago I stated I was going to talk about another scenario for a possible conflict with Iran, but I've not finished doing my homework on the topic, so I will put that post off for a few days yet.

Honestly, when I read the attached news article, I became so enthralled with the AL's actions I couldn't put off working on it.

 In my opinion the concept of getting Hamas to take a message to Al Assad is simply brilliant!

It is and has been no secret the Muslim Brotherhood and the Sunni in general have been working to pull Hamas away from the Shia dominated Syrian / Iranian camp!

When AL Secretary General Elaraby announced Meshaal had been instrumental in convincing Al Assad to work with the AL, with Meshaal standing next to him, the message to the whole Middle East was clear.

Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words and in this case it's even more than that.

What I find interesting is the so called experts in the West not realizing what this even was really all about.

The AL understands all too well it must strip Al Assad of his support and pulling the Hamas organization away from him is a key in the process.

In a crucial moment for the AL, when their reputation is virtually on the line, the tactic of asking Hamas to take " news" back to Al Assad could just the act that buys the AL accreditation time.

When you stop  to think about it, it's a concept that even makes sense to the Israelis.

Hamas is a critical part of the Iranian / Syrian war machine and to complete the task of pulling Hamas back into the Muslim Brotherhood / AL realm is yet another nail in the coffin for Al Assad and Iran.

That gets me back to my initial statement about yet another possible scenario for conflict with Iran..

I suppose I will have to finish my homework this weekend and post my new theory.

Having said that, this act on the part of the Al was the first sign that they really are beginning to understand how to play offense instead of sitting on the sidelines.

Brilliant move!

http://coldansviewpoint.blogspot.com/2012/01/iran-squd-force.html?spref=fb

IRAN'S QUD FORCE.. WHAT THREAT DO WE REALLY FACE?

I have advocated for several years now the West needs to be prepared for Iranian actions world wide if it's nuclear program is attacked.

Some have theorized their reaction would be limited to the region and to  those sites associated with their attackers.

Most have theorized the Iranians would not take a world wide, asymmetric approach because of the logistical requirements.

I completely disagreed then and I disagree even more so now.

For months I have addressed the nearly desperate situation Iran is in with the Arab Spring and the pending fall of Al Assad in Syria.

Limiting their response to an open attack is simply not realistic to me.

Waiting to be attacked is becoming even more unrealistic.

The travels of Iranian operatives is a well known issue and recent agreements with nations such as Venezuela to allow flights from Iran makes the possibility of QUD or Hezbollah forces at the US's backdoor more than likely.

The world is full of key strategic targets, infrastructure not just in the US but all over the world.

Insuring that all of these sites are secure from a highly trained and dedicated force such as the QUD is nearly impossible.

Asymmetric warfare is a concept that exist outside the US and Iran is more than capable of executing Asymmetric actions.

In short, the idea the QUD and " others" are prepared to disrupt Iran's enemies world wide can not be overlooked.

If a war with Iran is coming, key leaders in the military as well as civilian law enforcement need to be thinking " outside the box".

Side Bar:

I've been reading and thinking about another scenario for a conflict with Iran and I will post my thoughts on Friday.

http://www.jpost.com/IranianThreat/News/Article.aspx?id=252458

ARAB LEAGUE MONITORS AND THEN WHAT?

It is very evident the AL is realizing more and more each day what it truly means to be "in charge" of an event.

For years they have dreamed of being the respected agency allowed to deal with " matters" in the Middle East.

Well, as I said a few weeks ago... be careful what you ask for!

The Colonial Powers seem more than willing to let the AL take the lead with the Syrian event.

The AL has discovered it is much easier to hold a press conference than it is to actually achieve an objective.

The next trick they have now encountered is being " played" by the very people they are supposed to be helping.

Yep.. the AL is on the other side of the fence for once. 

It's easy to complain you don't get a chance to take care of your own matters.. it's another to be manipulated once you are given the chance.

Being manipulated  is exactly what many believe the SNC is doing with the AL Observer mission.

There has been more press about the inequalities of the Observers and the lack of real progress by the mission than there has been about the good they are trying to accomplish.

Welcome to the real world AL!!!

When someone is in a position of complaining and protesting.. a little of something is never enough.

So what is the next move?

The FSA leadership is threatening a rapid increase in attacks and I would bet this is about to happen.

If there is one thing the Observer mission allowed, it was giving the opposition time to regroup, move into position  and be ready to go on the attack.

Did the Observer mission buy the opposition time to get ready for the next level of attacks?

Probably so!

Responsibility is what the AL asked for...

I think they may have misunderstood that with responsibility comes accountability!!!

Again.. Welcome to the Big League... Arab League!!!

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/01/20121453922557362.html