AHMADINEJAD BIG ANOUNCEMENT ???

Ok, a couple of interesting issues with this speech of a pending, " big announcement" in the next few days and to interesting side notes about Hezbollah and Hamas.

First off, on the surface it seems logical Ahmadinejad would make such a bold statement on the anniversary of the ouster  of the Shah; notice I didn't say,  anniversary of the Islamic revolution because that is not what it was.

Some may wonder why Ahmadinejad would be given the opportunity to reinforce his position given he has been summed to account for his actions by the Iranian parliament.

If Khamenei wants Ahmadinejad minimize, then why allow him to take credit for such a pending " Big Anouncement"?

Perhaps Khamenei didn't sanction Ahmadinejad making such a bold statement?

My opinion is Khamenei did sanction the stunt and here is why I believe this to be true.

A picture is worth a thousand words and look who is in the picture with Ahmadinejad... Haniyeh!!!

Why would Khamenei permit Ahmadinejad the clout of being seen as the rep to Hamas if Ahmadinejad was on the outs with Khamenei?

Why give him the prestige when his prestige and power is what Khamenei is reportably  worried about?

Next, lets look at the statement made by Nasrallah, Hezbollah's mouthpiece!

A comment about not doing just what Iran tells them to do if Israel attacks Iran is interesting.

He basically states Hezbollah will  do what is right for Hezbollah and Lebanon; they still act as if they own Lebanon,

Now, in the never ending world of " words inside of words" for the Arab world, this is an interesting message at the same time Hamas is visiting Iran.

Where the two comments by Hamas and Hezbollah coordinated?

You would be a fool to not think so.

So, as you can see, the conversations and rhetoric continues to grow in intensity and pace.

What is Iran about to announce and why would a leader who is reported to be on the " outs" with the Ayatollah Khamenei be allowed to have the glory of a nuclear announcement?

Why would Hezbollah and Hamas give what appears, on the surface, to be somewhat confusing messages?

Yes.. the Middle East continues to be a very complex situation and it seems the complexity is getting worse.

Lets see what the announcement is and see if that gives us a clue as to what the next move may be.

http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=256899

http://www.worldbulletin.net/?aType=haber&ArticleID=85652

TURKEY LOOKING OUT FOR TURKEY.

This "Three Stage Strategy" Davutoglu talks of  is a little confusing.

I find it interesting how he paints a picture of Turkey leading the way for the Arab League's approach to the UN.

I'm not convinced the Arab League really did anything close to consulting with Turkey before heading to the UN, but it does make Turkey look important; perceptions... considering he was addressing a college student body.

His announcement of new consultations with the AL and then a follow on with the US Secretary of State, again paints the picture of Turkey taking a leading role in the Syrian crisis and in fact they probably are and should be.

My problem is, it seems the Turks are more interested in showing the world they are a regional leader, much like the AL tried desperately tried to do, than they are concerned about the people in Syria.

Davutoglu's real information theme of " Turkey is the new leader", is enforced by the somewhat confusing transition to the topic of  old Cold War structures for the region.

Besides a possible swipe at Russia and China, but mostly Russia, for the veto vote, he again sets out to show how the future for the region is an issue for Turkey to impact and not the Cold War powerhouses.  Classic ..  " Be careful what you ask for"!

It's also interesting that he attempts to make the point the issues of the region are not sectarian; " new dynamic powers of the society".

I'm not sure what the "new dynamic powers of the society means?  ( Words inside the words again.. Talking more like an Arab than a Ottoman..  )

One thing is certain, the events of Syria are proving to be a monumental test of Turkey's new "we can lead" mentality for the region.

Syria's crisis proved far more than the AL could handle, thus forcing the Arabs back into the world they know best... backdoor deals and denying overt involvement.

The AL learned you cannot inter the Major Leagues by trying to show up at the World Series.

As Turkey continues to struggle with the Syrian event, it will become more and more obvious to Turkish leaders that when you strive to be a leader, words are often simply not enough. 

Sacrifice is a cornerstone of leadership!

What is Turkey willing to sacrifice?

http://www.worldbulletin.net/?aType=haber&ArticleID=85611

SANCTIONS  AND THE  TURK'S  VIEWPOINT

Turkey's message to the UN is worthy of real review by the West.

Far too often the concept of sanctions and embargos become the quick and easy response by leaders who have no stomach for conflict.

What makes this concept even more complex is the reality that sanctions often have the opposite impact they were intended to produce.

The Turk's point that sanctions will only hurt the ones that they are intended to help is a valid statement.

The Turks are also correct in their estimate of the Syrian Middle Class fearing what comes after Al Assad.

So, if Turkey is correct and sanctions are not the right option for Syria, then what is?

Sitting back and waiting for the next worthless Arab League meeting, even if it does have UN participation, will not stop the rockets from raining in on the resistance.

Blaming Russia and China for vetoing the UN resolution, one that would have had no real impact on Al Assad, will not stop the violence.

By the way; Putin's interest in the events in Syria have nothing to do with the welfare of the Syrian people.

Syria is just another opportunity for Putin to show the West, the US, that Russia must be consulted on worldly issues.

Rumors of Turkey establishing a " safe zone" in Syria are still nothing more than rumors!

The Arab League calling for a " Peace Keeping" force going into Syria is code for " let someone else go into Syria and we will pay for it".

Personally I would love to see any one of the GCC states attempt to deploy a " Peace Keeping Force" outside of the GCC... That would be a first!!!

If Turkey has a point about sanctions, and I believe they do to some extent, then what is it that Turkey proposes be done?

If the Ottomans want to be leaders in the region, then now is the time to lead.

Talking is not leading...

The GCC found out how hard it is to become a leader.

What will Turkey do?

http://www.worldbulletin.net/?aType=haber&ArticleID=85595

FETWA FROM THE SUNNI SCHOLARS.. WHAT DOES IT MEAN?

 I found this article in an Arab newspaper this morning.

This Act  is key to defections in the Syrian military.

The act of Sunni scholars issuing on open fetwa against Al Assad, will allow the flood gates of  defections in the regular ranks, more than they already are, and more importantly, key leadership positions inside the Al Assad government.

This is terrible news for the Iranian leadership and they must be hard at work figuring out a way to react.

How Iran reacts to this announcement is critical.

They cannot blame the declaration  on Western influence and they know it.

They might place the blame on Saudi or other Arab states, but that will not impact the results on the Sunni population of Syria.

Guidence to Al Assad on the issue must be well thought out.

Iran's reaction to this event could very well solidify the growing fear of a  sectarian war in Syria.

Islamic scholars issue fetwa against Syria's Assad They said that being subject to al-Assad regime was unacceptable and people should give up being loyal to al-Assad regime.

Islamic scholars defined on Tuesday killings of Syrian people as

unacceptable.

Around 107 Islamic scholars released a declaration on Tuesday evening. They

said that being subject to al-Assad regime was unacceptable and people should

give up being loyal to al-Assad regime.

The scholars including Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the head of International Union

of Muslim Scholars, Saudi intellectual Salman al-Ouda and Egyptian mufti Dr.

Ali Juma, sent their declaration to Anadolu Agency (AA).

In the declaration, the intellectuals said free Syrian army and

revolutionists should be supported, embassies should withdraw from Syria, and

countries should send protest messages to Russia and China as they were

backing the Syrian administration.

Islamic scholars said bloodshed and massacre in Syria could not be forgotten,

and developments in Syria were a shame for those who remained indifferent and

silent to what was going on and as well as those who were a part of the

developments.

The declaration said massacre of people by the army and security forces was

unacceptable, and army and security forces should object to the order to kill

people.

In the declaration, the intellectuals backed people, who wanted to leave the

army, and welcomed their participation in the Free Syrian Army.

The intellectuals said Free Syrian Army should stay away from revenge and

protect civilian people.

The declaration said committees should be set up across Syria to support the

revolution initiative, adding that such committees should also be established

in Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon in order to provide Syrian people with food and

other humanitarian aid.

AHMADINEJAD AND KHAMENEI CLASH AGAIN. WHY NOW?

Glad to be back.. Was out most of last week with an illness in the family.

It's interesting to see the issue of Ahmadinejad being called to answer questions in front of the Iranian Parliament rising back to the forefront of Iranian politics, especially now.

With the events in Syria being as they are and the rhetoric coming out of Israel almost on a daily basses now, one has to wonder why this topic would come up now.

I have speculated that both Ahmadinejad and Khamenei may be looking at options of surviving an Arab Spring event in Iran, and doing so by blaming the other for the countries woes.

The speculations on just how much of an impact the sanctions are having in Iran are receiving mixed reviews.

Some say Iran is sanction proof given China and India's desire for oil, yet others comment constantly on the day to day challenges of life in Iran.

I'm not sold on the sanction impact theory, but I am more and more convinced both Iranian leaders are looking to the future and don't see the other in the crystal ball.  

Two egomaniacs in one country is not a recipe for success.

So, I go back to the original question; why now?

The future of Syria is in serious doubt and a non unified front from Iran is not the answer to the problem.

The Qod and Hezbollah have been the backdoor helpers to Al Assad in Syria and that means Ahmadinejad has had less of a role in the process than the West thinks.

Could Khamenei be setting Ahmadinejad up as the fall guy for losing Syria?

I don't think so.

The more I think about this announcement, the more I must confess how I'm puzzled by it.

I will watch what comes of this announcement of the next few days and how the Arab states spin the issue.

That might give me a clues as to what is really going on.

It's worth paying attention to!!!!

Something is up in Iran..

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia/2012/02/20122722326300746.html

WHY ARE THE SYRIAN RESISTANCE FIGHTERS HOLDING GROUND?

The reports of Douma being partially held by the resistance fighters, along with other "strongholds", needs to be studied carefully.

Does Al Assad own  the military force to crush these resistance pockets?

Absolutely.... well.. it depends on how we define " own".

As has been the case throughout history, a Leader's power is based upon the loyalty of the people he or she leads!

A vast majority of Syrian's military is Sunni and this has been Al Assad's problem from the beginning of events in Syria.

Owning the equipment that can overwhelm a inferior enemy is not in question.

Having the people assigned to those units who will carry out such orders continues to be Al Assad's weak link.

From the very beginning of the uprising, he and his Brother understood the importance of not forcing Sunni majority units  to attack Sunni majority towns.

His problem has become, a larger proportion of the Sunni population inside the military is no longer willing to take orders.

In fact, the numbers of defections is growing at an alarming level... alarming for Al Assad that is.

As I have stated before, the type of limited operations Al Assad must execute, not utilizing fixed wing and ballistic weapons, has limited the impact his forces can have on entrenched locations.

Remember the rule of combat... it takes a ratio  of  4 to 1... four assault troops for ever defender, to win a fixed engagement.

This rule is changed if air power is incorporated, but Al Assad can't take that step... at least not yet.

A few key things to watch for that may indicate he is finally contemplating a true Civil War.... thus utilizing all assets at his disposal.  ( Some we don't even want to think about.)

1.   The world media, to include the " You Tube" reporters, giving the perception the resistance is actually taking ground and holding it. 

The Attached articles speak to that.

2.  If the Syrian military dissertation numbers continue to grow to the point that  organic units turn on Syria.

3.  China and Russia beginning  to hint they may side with a non NATO lead, UN resolution for Peace Keeping Operations.  I think we are a ways off from that, but China and Russia will be hard pressed to resist the Arab League if they head to the UN for help.... something they are about to do.

Finally and probably, in my opinion the biggest indicator Al Assad may not hold back, if Senior Syrian Commanders and supporting political members jump ship.

 At that point in time,we will  have to wonder who would be commanding the Syrian special units?

 Look for the Iranian Quds, behind the scene control. 

The outcry for a ' No Fly Zone' will take on a whole new meaning if Al Assad begins to employ all of his assets. 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9042615/Syrian-security-forces-launch-all-out-assault-on-Douma.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16753500

SANCTIONS..... WHAT DO THEY REALLY DO?

The attached articles address two interesting schools of thought.

The idea that Iran can be forced into compliance with sanctions is based upon two assumptions.

1.  The governments of the EU and the US and Britain have enough economic clout left to force change on Iran.

            This theory is more and more being called into question with the rise of the BRIC and the influence of Turkey.

            The bottom line becomes, can the "West" economically change the course of direction of Iran?

            I think the answer is growing more and more questionable.

2.  Economic hardship in Iran will lead to Regime change?

            I have real concerns with this concept, not from the perspective that hardship will impact the Iranian leaders, but the thought they will not

strike back       before this could happen........ that is what bothers me.

Will they just sit back and let it take place?

            What I do agree with in the second article is the concept of the Arab Spring bringing about disruption and even change in Iran.

            Avoiding attacking Iran, thus unifying the population, is a key concept to this theory.

            Realizing the Iranian leadership understands the value of being attacked is the issue.

            As I have said for months, if Iran see the Arab Spring showing up in Tehran, it will not wait for the fighting to take place at the street level

between Iranian          citizens.

            If Iran believes economic sanctions might bring about social disorder, again they will not wait for that day to come.

            More importantly, if the Chinese and the Russians believe the only way to avoid a regional war is to insure the economic sanctions do not

jeopardize the Iran      public's confidence, then they will insure the Iran

receives the " support" they need.

Who wants change?

Who wants cheap oil?

Who wants to avoid the Arab Spring?

Who wants to avoid a regional War?

Who wants to avoid a nuclear, Persian power in the Middle East?

It seems all the players want something and very few want the same thing.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/25/us-iran-economy-rates-idUSTRE80O0V5

20120125

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/01/24/president-obama-please-use-option-c

-to-defeat-iran/