Turkey’s Despicable Betrayal – But Who Leaked the Story?

 In the murky world of international espionage and covert operations, there are certain rules that are “carved in stone”. 

The cardinal rule is that you do not betray confidential and sensitive information to your ally’s enemy. 
   In 2011 Turkey broke that rule in a way that caused serious damage to Israeli and American intelligence operations in the Middle East, cost the lives of at least ten Mossad agents in Iran and badly damaged Turkey’s worldwide reputation as a reliable ally.
   Background: In 1949, Secular Turkey was the first Muslim country to recognize Israel and establish full diplomatic relations with the Jewish State. Strong military, strategic, and economic relations developed over the next six decades. 
   By 1999, trade and tourism were booming, the Israeli Air Force trained in Turkish airspace, joint military exercises were the norm, Turkey purchased drones from Israel and the Israelis upgraded Turkish combat jets and tanks. There was high-tech cooperation on numerous projects, as well as plans for regional water sharing.
   A unique intelligence alliance started with a secret meeting in Ankara in 1958 between Prime Minister David Ben Gurion and Turkish PM Adnan Menderes. “The concrete result was a formal but top-secret agreement for comprehensive cooperation” between the Mossad and Turkish intelligence, wrote Dan Raviv and Yossi Melman in their 2012 book, “Spies Against Armageddon.”
   As noted in a well-researched expose by David Ignatius published on October 16 in the Washington Post [1]: “The groundwork had been laid secretly by Reuven Shiloah, the founding director of the Mossad, as part of what he called a ‘peripheral alliance strategy’. Through that partnership, Israel provided training in espionage to the Turks...” and Turkey facilitated Israeli intelligence and military operations in Syria, Iraq and, after 1979 – Iran.
   Relations cooled after Islamist Recep Tayyip Erdogan became Prime Minister in 2003. Though Erdogan paid an official visit to Israel in 2005, his strong anti-Israeli rhetoric and close relations with the Moslem Brotherhood (MB) indicated an intentional shift of Turkish alignment from a secular, Israel-oriented position to an Islamist, pro-MB one. 
   While relations got worse after the 2010 flotilla incident, military and intelligence cooperation continued quietly, with crucial, actionable information on Iran being shared with the US and NATO.  
   With the revelation last week by David Ignatius of Turkey’s responsibility for the capture of the Israeli spies in Iran, relations have hit a new low.
   In his article, Ignatius says: “The Turkish-Israeli relationship became so poisonous early last year that the Turkish government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is said to have disclosed to Iranian intelligence the identities of up to ten Iranians who had been meeting inside Turkey with their Mossad case officers.” 
   According to Iranian sources these suspects, all Iranian Kurds, were arrested, “interrogated” until they confessed, tried in secret and executed. Sources in the US describe the Turkish action as a “significant” loss of intelligence. The Israelis call it a despicable, wicked betrayal.
   The intriguing question is: Why did this story come out only now…and who leaked it?  
   Four countries know exactly what happened: Iran, Turkey, Israel and the US. Does one of them have a motive to ruin Turkey’s standing in the world of international diplomacy and espionage, at this delicate time?

• Iran? – No. Why “burn” a highly prolific “fifth column” in NATO.
• Turkey? – No. The exposure caused huge embarrassment and loss of face and trust throughout the world.
• Israel? – No. Maintains a good relation with the Turkish army (though NOT with Turkey’s equivalent of the CIA).
• The US? No. Why disgrace a US ally, NATO member and close friend of the administration? 

But maybe that’s just the point…:  
   According to Israeli analysts, the leak about Turkey’s “betrayal” and the fingering of Hakan Fidan, Turkey’s all powerful spy chief and close confidant of Erdogan, as the person who has been passing highly sensitive information to Iran for years, actually came from high level US sources, but not from the White House.
   These analysts argue that in the US government there are those who are uncomfortable with the current Middle East Policies. By leaking facts to discredit Turkey and its spy-chief, they hope to throw a proverbial monkey-wrench into a key component of that policy, thus forcing the administration to rethink what’s best for America, Egypt…and Israel.  As of now, and in the absence of more details, I find it hard to dispute their logic.
   Agree or disagree, that’s my opinion.

[1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/david-ignatius-turkey-blows-israels-cover-for-iranian-spy-ring/2013/10/16/7d9c1eb2-3686-11e3-be86-6aeaa439845b_story.html

Egypt – America’s Ill-advised policy

   A popular axiom of Mid-East experts is: “As Egypt goes – so goes the Arab World.”  Modern history bears that out. 

   When Egypt attacked Israel in 1948, so did Syria, Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon. When Egypt aligned with the Soviet Union in the 50’s and 60’s, so did many other Arab countries. 
   And when Egypt signed a formal peace treaty with Israel in 1979, so did Jordan, and within a short time Saudi Arabia, Morocco, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and other Arab states established informal ties with the Jewish State.
   Egypt, with over 80 million citizens and the strongest Arab military, is the natural leader of the Sunni Arab countries. The Egyptian military is the most respected organization in the Arab world.
   Egypt also owns, secures and operates the Suez Canal – one of the major strategic and commercial waterways in the world and where the US currently enjoys special privileges no other country has.
   The American brokered peace treaty between Israel and Egypt is a cornerstone of US Middle East policy. 
   Since 9/11 Egypt, has been a staunch ally of the US in the war against Islamist terrorism. For months the Egyptian army has been fighting a war in Sinai to eradicate a Muslim Brotherhood (MB) inspired base of jihadist terrorist groups, including those with American blood on their hands. 
   So it’s ill-advised that, with the Egyptian military playing an important role in fighting America’s enemies, the US announced that it was suspending military and economic aid. The justification was that: a. the military overthrew a democratically elected president, and b. the military used “excessive force.” against demonstrations by MB supporters. 
   Both arguments don’t stand up to scrutiny:

1. While Muhammad Morsi, ranked #3 in the MB hierarchy, may have been elected democratically, he immediately took the undemocratic (and illegal) steps of nullifying the Egyptian Constitution and writing a strictly Sharia based one, gave himself the power to legislate, and issued very undemocratic orders that he and his edicts were above the law and the courts. 
2. With the majority of Egyptians fed up with Morsi’s extreme Islamism, the deteriorating economy, and the fact that he allowed the establishment of an MB controlled terrorist base in Sinai, millions took to the streets throughout Egypt to peacefully demand Morsi’s resignation and new elections.
3. When the army refused Morsi’s order to use force against the demonstrators, he and the MB leadership sent in their armed thugs, resulting in many casualties.
4. After Morsi and the rest of the MB leadership were arrested on charges of incitement to violence and murder, the Chief of Staff immediately appointed a civilian acting president, who set up a civilian government that is writing a new constitution. Elections for the presidency and parliament are planned for early spring. So much for the “military coup” argument.
5. Last month’s pro Morsi demonstrations were violent. Government buildings were attacked with firebombs and live ammunition. Though 54 demonstrators were killed, the army used reasonable force in defending itself. Many of the pro-MB demonstrators wore green headbands proclaiming their intended martyrdom for Islam.  

   While conflicting US statements about the arms freeze were nuanced, the reaction in the Arab world was anything but.
   Anti-American sentiments in Egypt and other countries were whipped up by the usually pro-Western media claiming that the arms freeze was accompanied by a demand to release Morsi and the other MB leaders, and that the MB be included in the interim government (it was invited but refused to join). There are now calls to revoke America’s special privileges in the Suez Canal.
   Saudi Arabia, angered by the American move, immediately transferred another $2 billion to the Egyptian interim government, and promised to finance or supply any military equipment needed.
   Justified or not, the perception today is that America supports the anti-west Muslim Brotherhood, one of the most undemocratic and oppressive organizations in the world. And in the Middle East – perception is everything. 
   Sometimes you have to be smart…in addition to being right. Remember the axiom…
   Agree or disagree, that’s my opinion.

Then Bibi Arrived

   Last week, this column discussed the “charm offensive” launched in the US by Iranian president Hassan Rouhani. As pointed out, anyone who just scratches the smiling front Rouhani presents will find beneath it a smart, ruthless, calculating, extreme Islamist cleric who has spent the last thirty five years faithfully serving the Ayatollah regimes in Iran and their obsessive quest for nuclear weapons.

   Let me make this as clear as I can – The current Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, understood that with  sanctions taking a punishing toll on Iran’s economy while the US and Israel threaten military action against his precious nuclear bomb program…it was not in his interest to have another divisive “Ahmadinejad” type as president. Nor, he suspected, would the people elect one.
   So he hand-picked his trusted smiling minion, Rouhani, and marketed him (especially through social media) as a “moderate” and “reformer” compared to the other five scowling candidates. 
   Khamenei made sure to hide inconvenient fly-specs in Rouhani’s past, like the fact that he oversaw Iran’s nuclear weapons project for sixteen years (“he was just a negotiator”), or the fact that his son committed suicide in protest and disgust over his father’s blind obedience to the Supreme Leader (left an unambiguous suicide note). Few in Iran were surprised that Rouhani won by a landslide.      In NY, war weary delegates at the UN, as well as star struck media personalities and politicians hung on to his every word.
   "Nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction have no place in Iran's security and defense doctrine, and contradict our fundamental religious and ethical convictions," he said to a gullible world.
  He said that he listened carefully to president Obama's speech, and hoped that the United States "will refrain from following the short-sighted interests of warmongering pressure groups" so that the two nations "can arrive at a framework to manage our differences." 
       Back in Iran Rouhani boasted that the Americans had literally begged his people five different times to arrange a handshake or short meeting with President Obama – and that he refused because “it would not have been appropriate”.
   Only after lengthy negotiations between Secretary of State John Kerry and Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif (and at what price?) did he reluctantly agree to accept a short phone call.
    Much of the media and a few politicians fell right into the Iranian honey-pot trap. After all, he said in front of every camera that Iran is not building nuclear weapons. He’s the President of Iran and a devout cleric – surely he must be telling the truth. Just look at that smile...
   
And then Prime Minister Netanyahu arrived in the US…and the honey (hopefully) turned to vinegar. 
   With no cartoon gimmicks and no flashy presentations this time, Bibi gave a simple and laser-sharp message to President Obama, the UN General Assembly and as many TV cameras and radio microphones he could get in front of.    
   He said that he did not believe Iran's claims that its nuclear program was intended for research purposes; That Rouhani is a ‘wolf in sheep’s clothing’; That only the Supreme leader decides regarding Iran’s nuclear program and that "The world mustn’t fall for the Iranian ploy and alleviate the sanctions as long as the Iranians do not dismantle their nuclear program."
   Bibi made it clear that any lifting of sanctions as part of negotiations must come AFTER, not before:

1. A total and verified cessation of all Uranium enrichment
2. Dismantling the unfinished Heavy Water nuclear reactor at Arak (which could produce Plutonium) 
3. Removal from Iran of all enriched Uranium.
4. Removal from Iran of enrichment equipment including centrifuges and conversion facilities. 

 Speaking to the Iranians directly on BBC’s Persian station, Netanyahu warned them that Israel was dead serious about using the military option if sanctions and real negotiations do not succeed, and in a short time.
   In his meetings and interviews last week, Bibi made it clear that Israel can, and will, stop Iran from reaching nuclear break-out, even if it has to it alone.
  Was Bibi more convincing than Rouhani? I hope so, because for the US, the Iranian nuclear issue is part of a multi-player global chess game.  For Israel, it’s a question of national survival. And I mean that in the broadest Jewish perspective.

Agree or disagree, that’s my opinion.

President Rouhani’s Honeypot Trap

   Last week Iran launched an assault on the United States. Not a military attack, but a full scale, all-out, charm attack. 

The assaulting force was President Hassan Rouhani. He gave media interviews in Farsi (despite the fact that he’s fluent in English); joked with UN delegates; met world leaders while shunning President Obama; gave a long speech at the General Assembly; tweeted; texted; updated his facebook page, published an op-ed in the Washington Post, etc.
   
   Rouhani was laser-focused on the two messages he wanted to get across to the American voters:
1. Iran has “no interest in nuclear weapons”; therefore there is no justification for the economic sanctions, which are “only hurting the innocent civilians and not the leadership”.
2. Iran has every legal and moral right to enrich Uranium for ‘peaceful’ purposes, though he didn’t specify  to what level.
3. Iran is ready to take “confidence building measures” to convince the West of its peaceful intentions.

   Since Rouhani can only parrot the policies of Iranian Supreme Leader Aly Khamenei, there are two possible reasons for this sudden apparent about-face by the latter:
1. The sanctions are, in fact, crippling Iran’s economy and potentially endangering the regime.
2. Iran is now within weeks of building one or more nuclear weapons, or has already done so.

   Though Rouhani could not find time to meet with President Obama, one of his behind-closed-doors meetings last week was with a group of top US and European business leaders and investors. The opportunities he offered were tantalizing and highly profitable…providing the sanctions are lifted.
  
   In the meantime Secretary of State John Kerry and G5 +1 team, which has been negotiating for years with Iran on stopping its nuclear weapons program, met with the Iranian foreign minister in what was described as a constructive and positive meeting. They reportedly, agreed to continue negotiations “over the next year”, though there was no mention of Iran stopping enrichment or handing over existing stockpiles in the interim. 

   It looks like the US is preparing to stand down the F-16s and B-2s; close the cruise-missile hatches and send the carriers, assault ships and destroyers home. It looks like US military action against Iran is all but off the table for at least a year.  And all because a smiling, amicable, highly sophisticated Shiite cleric lied through his teeth and set a honeypot trap that worked! The Israelis are very concerned.

Just who is Hassan Rouhani?  
   Defined as the “ultimate insider” Rouhani, 64, has been part of the Islamist Revolution in Iran from the start.
• He joined Grand Ayatollah Khomeini in exile in Paris, and returned with him to Iran in 1979.
• Upon Khomeini’s death in 1989, Rouhani swore allegiance to the new and current Supreme Leader.
• He is a high ranking Shiite cleric (Mujtahid) and lawyer, with a PhD. from Caledonian University in Glasgow
• Some of his positions over the past 30 years:

• 5 Term member of the Iranian parliament. Chair of the powerful Defense Committee.
• Deputy Commander of the War during the Iran-Iraq conflict.
• Commander of the Air Defense Forces.
• National Security Advisor to two presidents
• Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council for 16 years – responsible for overseeing development and expansion of the nuclear weapons program.
• Head of the Center for Strategic Research

   Rouhani is a brilliant negotiator who brags that he succeeded in dragging out talks with the G5+1 over years while Iran continued to build nuclear enrichment and weaponization facilities. 

   Deeply involved in the Iranian nuclear weapons program at the highest levels for almost 20 years, Rouhani will not compromise Iran and the Shiite world’s best chance, after 700 years of persecution and humiliation, at respect, honor and regional dominance. Besides, Khamenei and the Revolutionary Guard Corps commanders won’t let him. 
   
And yet the honeypot trap worked…for the time being.
   
   Agree or disagree, that’s my opinion.

Syria, Egypt, and the UN General Assembly

While we celebrated the holidays, the Middle East continued to generate news and speculation. 
Syria:
According to the Russian “deal” Assad had until Sept 21 to provide the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) a full disclosure of all his chemical weapons, as well as all research and production facilities. As of the deadline the Syrians have delivered only a partial list. The OPCW is busy translating the report while still waiting for the rest.
2. The US and Russia have not yet agreed on the wording of the UN Security Council (UNSC) resolution, due to be voted on next week. The US insists on a binding non-compliance consequence clause, Russia disagrees. Russia wants the military threat completely removed, the US disagrees.
3. There are difficulties in recruiting the international inspectors. So far only Germany has agreed to send a handful.
4. Vladimir Putin said last week that he “could not be sure” that Bashar al-Assad would fulfill the requirement to identify and destroy his chemical weapons stocks. 
5. In the meantime, the Syrian civil war has evolved into a three way conflict. Last week saw intense fighting within the rebel forces – mainly between jihadist al-Qaeda affiliates and the supposedly pro-west Free Syrian Army (FSA). 
6. In the past few weeks several large units of the FSA have switched sides and joined the jihadists. 
Egypt:
1. Defense minister General Assisi continues with an all-out campaign to weaken and destabilize the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), whose leadership, together with thousands of its members and supporters are in jail awaiting trial. Street demonstrations have all but ceased following the military’s harsh policy for dealing with any unrest.
2. In the meantime a new, secular Constitution is almost complete, and is expected to be put to a national referendum within 4-6 weeks, followed by general elections.
3. The military campaign in Sinai against the jihadist fighters is gaining momentum. Both sides are keeping up the pressure, while suffering heavy casualties. Egyptian helicopter gunships and artillery pound jihadist forces daily, while the latter use car bombs with devastating effect against the military.
4. The army has now closed all tunnels between Gaza and Egypt, preventing jihadist reinforcements, weapons and money from getting through.
5. At Egypt’s request, Israel has extended the hours at the crossing points into Gaza, and is allowing construction material through for private projects.
New York 
   The UN General Assembly opens this week in New York.  Without Ahmadinejad, it will be interesting to see who, among the participating kings, princes, presidents, prime ministers, etc. will be this year’s clown. Whose speech will inspire the delegates? Who will be totally forgettable…or worse?
  Regarding the Middle East this year, tantalizing “promos” and “teasers” have simultaneously raised high expectations and deep concerns, not to mention some serious questions:

1. Will the scheduled September 30 meeting between President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu in DC be warm, cordial or chilly? What will they really discuss?
2. Will there be an Obama-Netanyahu-Abbas summit…or is Abbas planning another bid for UN recognition of “Palestine”?
3. Will there be a linkage between a UNSC resolution on Syria’s chemical weapons and Israel’s rumored nuclear arsenal?
4. Will President Obama meet with Iranian President Rowhani of Iran? And which Rowhani will show up at the UN – the aggressive long-time Iranian nuke champion, or the disarmingly likable “let’s-lie-through-our-teeth-until-we-have-the-bomb” negotiator? 

   As we know from past UN General Assemblies, the real news is generated during behind closed doors meetings in NY and DC, as well as with ongoing developments in the region.

   Agree or disagree, that’s my opinion.

Syria and the "Russian Deal"

   Last week President Obama addressed the nation on Syria. He gave a compelling argument for an American missile strike in response to the Sarin gas killing of over 1,400 civilians in Damascus, leaving no doubt that the Assad regime had committed this atrocity. He was convincing as to why Congress should vote to support the attack. But then the president said that he had asked Congress to delay voting because “…the Russian government has indicated a willingness to join with the international community in pushing Assad to give up his chemical weapons.” 

   Russian president Vladimir Putin had come up with a “deal”. Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, agreed on the framework of the deal.
   
   With the threat of a US missile attack hanging over, Putin apparently convinced Assad to give up a massive arsenal of over 1,000 metric tons (about 2.3 million lbs.) of weapon-grade chemical agents, together with some 30,000 warheads, at various stages of operational readiness, and numerous delivery systems. All had been accumulated over thirty years, and earmarked to deter Israel’s perceived nuclear capability in a future war.
   
   The agreed outline of the “deal” is:
1. By Sept 21 Assad must provide a full disclosure of all his chemical weapons (CW) including names, types, quantities, warheads and locations, as well as all research and production facilities.
2. In November, inspectors from the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (UNSC), arrive for preliminary confirmation of the report. Assad must provide them immediate and unrestricted access to every location, at any time.
3. By June 2014 all CW, precursors, warheads and related equipment must be destroyed or removed from Syria.
  
    But as always – the devil is in the details. Here are just some of the problems:

• Assad recently moved much of his CW to over 40 sites around the country, including residential areas, locations of ongoing fighting and the formidable Southeastern mountain and desert region.
• He has also reportedly moved CW to Lebanon and Iraq.
• The inventory provided this week will also be suspicious as analysts believe that Syria’s elite 4th Division, commanded by Assad’s brother Maher, has had plenty of time to squirrel away CW and equipment for future use. These troops are highly trained in CW and have used them at least 13 times in the past two years, including in last month’s attack in Damascus. 
• The international inspectors will be under constant danger from both rebel and regime forces as they visit the numerous sites, especially in the combat zones.
• Once sites have been inspected and confirmed they will have to be monitored and secured by an international force of about 75,000 to prevent the CW from falling in the hands of the rebels, regime forces or unscrupulous Bedouin smugglers. However both the US and Russia have declared “no boots on the ground” policies.
• Destruction of CW is very complex, dangerous and time consuming. The eight month time frame is unrealistic.

   In my opinion, even with thousands (from where?) of foreign or contract security personnel on the ground, this “deal” will take years to reach completion, if at all. There are too many political, diplomatic and technical obstacles along the way, including (despite the smiles in Geneva), the cooling US-Russia relations. 

   So regardless of guarded optimism here and in Israel, it is way premature to determine if the “deal” has a chance of success or, as we say in Texas “that dog won’t hunt”. Let’s see how the next few weeks play out.    
   
   Agree or disagree – that’s my opinion.

Is it really just about Syria?

Last week we celebrated the new Jewish year, 5774. In Israel it was almost surrealistic. Faced with the distinct specter of yet another war of “annihilation-by-missiles”, this time promised by Iran and Syria in retaliation to an expected US attack, the Israelis called up a few reserve units, beefed up anti-missile defenses in the North and  then did what they do best on “Rosh Hashana” – New Year’s day – they thronged, en masse, to the beaches and parks, set up tables and chairs and broke out the grills. By noon highways were jammed, beaches were packed, parks were crowded (including in the Upper Galilee and the Golan Heights) and the smell of grilled lamb chops, steaks, hamburgers and hot dogs drifted over the country.

I’m sure that the warring factions in Syria paused to get a whiff, wishing at that moment that they too were picnicking in the cool Tal Forest Park, where the only smoke was from the “Mangal” (grill) and the only concern was if there is enough Hummus and Pitas, not when and where the US attack will come.

As of this writing the administration is trying to get Congress to support a limited US attack on Syria. Limited in scope – yet painful enough to send a clear message to Assad not to dare use chemical weapons again. The question right now is if Congress will go along.

Also, President Obama is currently in Russia at the G-20 meeting, trying to get other countries to join, or at least support the US position on Syria. Britain is out and France is wavering. Italy sent a frigate to the Eastern Mediterranean, but most countries, at this stage, prefer to take a wait and see position. Russia and Iran support Assad, both diplomatically and militarily.

Both the US and Russia have significantly increased their naval forces in the area, and more missile, assault, electronic warfare and support ships are on their way. 

But is this really about the Sarin gas attack last week that killed over 1,400 civilians or is there a bigger picture involved?  In my opinion, based on current activity in Israel and the disproportionate deployment of US and Russian assets, it’s the latter.

Here’s a possible scenario: American missiles are launched against targets in Syria. True to their word, the Iranians order their forces in Lebanon to fire missiles at Israel and attack American ships and interests in the Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf.

Israel reacts with massive force to destroy Iran’s and Hezbollah’s missile capabilities and military infrastructures in Lebanon. The US, having been attacked by Iran or its proxies, does not now need Congressional approval to retaliate…and at the same time, since “new intelligence” will show that Iran has crossed not only Israel’s but America’s nuclear “red line”, destroy Iran’s nuclear program sites…which many analysts believe is what this is really all about.

Why would the Iranians launch such a suicidal attack on Israel and the US, knowing exactly what the results would be? For the same reason President Obama now feels compelled to attack Syria – because they said they would. And in the Middle East a word is a word, a promise is a promise, and honor is sacred. 

I may be wrong, or things may not go as expected. But if they do then the year 5774 May turn out to be the beginning of a whole new, hopefully peaceful, era for Israel, The US, and the Middle East.

Agree or disagree – that’s my opinion.
G’mar Chatima Tova.