Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources/September 01/13

Obama delays Syria strike indefinitely by turning decision over to Congress DEBKAfile Exclusive Report
Obama asks Congress to authorize military action against Syria
US intel report holds Assad gov't responsible for Syria chemical weapons attack
International weapons experts leave Syria, Obama to make statement
UN investigators wrap up chemical probe, leave Damascus
Canada's FM, John Baird Reaction to John Kerry Statement on Syria
In Putin's first comments on Syria, he urges Obama not to rush into a decision
Islamist rebels go into hiding ahead of Syria strikes
Obama backs military action in Syria, but will seek congressional approval
Fears of possible Western strike on Syria ripple across the Middle East
U.S. strike will trigger reactions 'beyond' Syria: Iran
British PM feeling the heat on Syria snub
Polls: Israelis want US, Europe to attack Syria, but against IDF intervention
U.N. rejects suggestion it's pulling out of Syria to allow strikes
Iranian MPs meet Assad, denounce possible U.S. strike
Syria army defectors say US strikes could kill Assad opponents
Iranian Revolutionary Guard chief: US Syria strike will have regional consequences
Assad's son says wants US to attack
Chemical attack: What took you so long
Syria says it expects attack 'at any moment'
Syria army has 'finger on the trigger': PM
Lebanon arrests two over rocket attack into Israel
Berri proposes initiative to end Lebanon crisis
Kuwait evacuates some nationals from Lebanon
Six Lebanese fishermen freed, Syria shells hit n. Lebanon
Egypt Brotherhood leader in good health in jail: ministry
Leader of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood Badie suffers heart attack in jail
Al-Qaida affiliate urges Egyptians to take up arms against army
US: Iran's oil revenues drop 58 percent since 2011 as sanctions bite
Syrian Ambassador Says Damascus Keen to Maintain Stability in Lebanon
Fearing U.S. Missiles, Syrians Escape to Lebanon
Yazigi Blames International Community of Standstill over Archbishops Abduction
Hizbullah-Mustaqbal Hold 'Indirect Contacts' to Preserve Peace
Report: Tripoli Bombings Were Planned Seven Months in Advance

Canada's FM, John Baird Reaction to John Kerry Statement on Syria
August 30, 2013 - Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird today issued the following statement:
“Earlier today, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry publicly outlined details of how they concluded that the Assad regime flagrantly used chemical weapons against its own people, causing wide-scale death and devastation in the suburbs of Damascus on August 21, 2013. “Along with its international partners and allies, Canada has condemned this despicable and abhorrent act.
“As Prime Minister Harper said earlier this week, Canada believes that a firm and unequivocal response is needed to deter any future use of chemical weapons. We also believe that a clear message on the proliferation and use of such weapons must be sent to rogue regimes around the world.
“Although the Prime Minister made very clear yesterday that the Government of Canada has no plans at this time for a Canadian military mission, we fully support our friends and allies in responding to the Assad regime’s horrific attack on its own people. “The Obama administration has shown great resolve and proper due diligence in the past week, and we fully support its efforts going forward.
“Prime Minister Harper and I will continue to keep in close contact with Canada’s allies and partners in the days and weeks ahead.”

Obama delays Syria strike indefinitely by turning decision over to Congress DEBKAfile Exclusive Report
August 31, 2013/Confounding tense expectations worldwide, US President Barack Obama again dodged a decision for a US strike on Syria by referring it to Congress. In a speech to the American people, Saturday, Aug. 31, he said the use of chemical weapons by Bashar Assad must be “confronted not just investigated.” But then went on to say, “We are ready to strike whenever we choose. This operation is not time-sensitive. It could take place tomorrow, next week, or next month. The US House Speaker meanwhile set Sept. 9 as the date for the debate to start.
By these words, the US president chipped away once again at US military plans for Syria - only this time, they looked like vanishing into the blue yonder, leaving Assad and his partners all the time in the world to line up their counter moves, and putting Israel in a tight spot on three counts:
1. The hostile Iran-Syrian-Hizballah bloc comes out strengthened;
2. Tehran can feel free to develop a nuclear bomb without fear of resolute US interference;
3. Hizballah can celebrate its backing for the winning horse in Damascus.
4. Binyamin Netanyahu’s six-year old policy, which was oriented on engendering understanding with Barack Obama, is in ruins, although it was endorsed by Israel’s defense ministers on the assumption that it was in the interests of national security. As we reported earlier, President Obama confirmed Friday night that the forthcoming US military attack on Syria would be “limited” and “narrow” and not open-ended, in a bid to avoid the risk of America being mired in the Syrian civil war.
DEBKA Weekly’s analysts calculated Thursday that by forgoing an air assault and relegating his projected military operation against Syria solely to seaborne Tomahawk cruise missiles - limited to 15 launches - the US president relinquished America’s “penetration and destruction” capabilities – depending of course on his sticking to this plan and not expanding its scope at the last minute.
The Tomahawk cruise missile has a range of 2,500 kms, weighs 450 kilos and can be fired from the five US destroyers and the four US nuclear submarines waiting in the eastern Mediterranean for orders to go.
However powerful, the exclusive use of this type of missile means that Washington has a priori sacrificed the following military objectives:
1. Syria’s chemical weapons stockpiles will remain intact. The Tomahawks can damage surface structures at the bases hosting them, but not penetrate their underground storage sites.
Assad will be left in full possession of his CW arsenal.
2. Neither can Tomahawks alone cripple the Syrian Air Force or shut down its bases. They could damage runways, but only for the hours or days it would take to repair them.
DEBKA Weekly's military sources say that the Syria air force is left with six air bases still operational, out of a total of thirty. A heavier and larger missile onslaught than the limited assault planned could have destroyed them all, given the Syrian rebels a huge advantage and opened the way for a plan to impose no-fly zones over Syrian air space.
But Obama clearly chose to discard those options.
By delaying his go-ahead on military action against Syria, he gave the Assad regime time to tuck most of its air force bombers and attack helicopters away in fortified hangars early this week, safe from attack. As the hours slipped by with US action, the Syrian ruler’s self-confidence mounted.
3. Syrian missiles have likewise been hidden in underground bunkers. They include the Scud C and D missiles capable of carrying chemical warheads.
4. The big Syrian field command centers will also escape unscathed, although DEBKA Weekly’s military sources report that many of them figure as large as strategic assets on the list of targets which the Pentagon and US military chiefs originally put before the president.
Among them were the command and control centers of the Syrian army’s 4th Division and Republican Guard Division, which protect Bashar Assad and bolster his regime's hold on power.
It is not clear if the military command centers of Homs, Hama, Tartus, Latakia, the Aleppo area and Idlib remain on the final list.
Striking those targets would have shut down the Syrian military command system and seriously disrupted its operational capabilities.
A second list of 35 strategic targets was handed to President Obama by Syrian rebel commander Brig. Gen. Salim Idris, according to our sources. Their destruction was described as vital. However, not a single item on the list was approved by the president, the Pentagon on the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Martin Dempsey, reflecting the distrust and disconnect prevailing between the US administration and military, and the Syrian rebel leadership. 5. Our sources say that the US military to-do list for Syria covers army artillery units, some of which participated in the chemical weapons launch of August 21 against eastern Damascus; local command and communications centers; and research institutes involved in the development and upgrade of Syrian chemical weapons.
This heavily pruned US operation, if it goes through, will leave Syrian President Bashar Assad sitting pretty with most of his military resources intact, and his hands free to continue his barbaric war on the Syrian opposition, including the use of chemical weapons, unhindered and undeterred.
It is still possible for President Obama to have second thoughts about his low-key operational plan and decide after all to land a strategic blow on Syria.

Obama asks Congress to authorize military action against Syria
August 31, 2013 /Daily Star/WASHINGTON: U.S. President Barack Obama said Saturday he will ask the US Congress to authorize military action against Syria, lifting the threat of immediate strikes on President Bashar al-Assad's regime. Obama said he had decided he would go ahead and take military action on Syria but he believed it was important for American democracy to win the support of lawmakers.
The decision represents a significant gamble for Obama, who has an estranged relationship with lawmakers, especially Republicans, and he risks suffering the same fate as British Prime Minister David Cameron, who lost his own vote on authorizing military action in parliament. "I will seek authorization for the use of force from the American people's representatives in Congress," Obama said. Obama said that Congressional leaders had agreed to schedule a debate as soon as lawmakers return from their summer break. That is not due to take place until September 9. There was no immediate suggestion that the House of Representatives and the Senate would be called back into session early. There had been growing expectations in Washington that military action could even happen as soon as this weekend, but Obama's decision means that will now not happen.
Nevertheless, the president also said that he had decided that military force should be the price for what the United States says is the "undeniable" use of chemical weapons by Syria. "Our military has positioned assets in the region," Obama said. "We are prepared to strike whenever we choose."

Obama backs military action in Syria, but will seek congressional approval
By The Associated Press | The Canadian Press /WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama says he has decided that the United States should take military action against Syria in response to a deadly chemical weapons attack. But he says he will seek congressional authorization for the use of force. He says congressional leadership plans to hold a debate and a vote as soon as Congress comes back in September. Obama says he has the authority to act on his own, but believes it is important for the country to have a debate. Military action would be in response to a chemical weapons attack the U.S. says Syrian President Bashar Assad's government carried out against civilians. The U.S. says more than 1,400 Syrians were killed in that attack last week.

International weapons experts leave Syria, Obama to make statement
By Erika Solomon | Reuters – BEIRUT (Reuters) - U.N. experts arrived in the Netherlands with evidence gathered in their investigation of a poison gas attack in Syria, as the White House said President Barack Obama would make a statement to the public on Saturday on the Syria crisis that would not be an announcement of an imminent military strike.
Obama was to make the televised statement at 1:15 p.m. EDT after meetings with top national security aides. The security team was also to conduct a conference call with senators later Saturday. The White House is to present classified information to lawmakers on Capitol Hill on Sunday.
On Friday, Obama said the United States, which has five cruise-missile equipped destroyers in the region, was looking at "limited, narrow" military action to punish President Bashar al-Assad for an attack that Washington said killed 1,429 people. France was expected to join the United States, but no broad international coalition has developed.
"We cannot accept a world where women and children and innocent civilians are gassed on a terrible scale," Obama said on Friday after Washington unveiled an intelligence assessment concluding Assad's forces were to blame for the attack.
The August 21 attack - the deadliest single incident of the Syrian civil war and the world's worst use of chemical arms since Iraq's Saddam Hussein gassed thousands of Kurds in 1988 - has galvanized a reluctant Washington to use force after 2-1/2 years on the sidelines.
After laying out the case in a televised speech, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry spoke on Friday to the foreign ministers of European and Gulf allies and the head of the Arab League. He and other top administration officials were due to hold a classified briefing for Democratic and Republican senators on Saturday, the White House said.
"The chemical massacre in Damascus cannot and must not go unpunished. Otherwise we'd run the risk of an escalation that would trivialize the use of these arms and put other countries at risk," French President Francois Hollande said on Friday.
The team of U.N. experts arrived in the Netherlands on Saturday carrying evidence and samples relating to the suspected attack. They had flown from Beirut after crossing the border into Lebanon by road earlier in the day. No Western intervention had been expected as long as they were still on the ground in Syria.
The 20-member team had arrived in Damascus three days before the August 21 attack to investigate earlier accusations. After days holed up in a hotel, they visited the sites several times, taking blood and tissue samples from victims in rebel-held suburbs of Damascus and from soldiers at a government hospital.
Other U.N. agencies have also pulled staff from Syria, and countries have warned citizens away from neighboring Lebanon.
"Most of the mid-level and non-essential staff left on Thursday. The heads of the various agencies have stayed behind, together with a skeleton local staff," a U.N. source said from Damascus on Saturday.
Washington says it need not wait for the inspectors to report, since it is already certain poison gas was used and convinced Assad's forces were behind it. The inspectors mandate is to determine if chemicals were used, not who used them.
Polls show military intervention is unpopular in the United States, France and other Western countries. Obama acknowledged that Americans were "war weary" after 12 years of conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan, the longest wars in American history.
'REBEL PROVOCATION'
Such weariness cost Washington the support of its closest ally: Britain has also backed action but was forced to pull out of the coalition after Prime Minister David Cameron unexpectedly lost a vote over it in parliament on Thursday, straining London's "special relationship" with Washington.
Kerry said Washington must act to protect itself and its allies, including Syria's neighbors Turkey, Jordan and Israel, from future use of banned weapons.
"If we choose to live in the world where a thug and a murderer like Bashar al-Assad can gas thousands of his own people with impunity" it would embolden others, such as Iran, Hezbollah and North Korea, Kerry said.
Syria and its main ally Russia say rebels carried out the gas attack as a provocation. Moscow has repeatedly used its U.N. Security Council veto to block action against Syria and says any attack would be illegal and only inflame the civil war there. "I am convinced that (the chemical attack) is nothing more than a provocation by those who want to drag other countries into the Syrian conflict," President Vladimir Putin said.
Syria's Foreign Ministry repeated its denial that the government had used chemical weapons against its own people. Kerry's accusations were a "desperate attempt" to justify a military strike. "What he said was lies," the ministry said. Washington says the Syrian denials are not credible, and the rebels would not have been able to launch such an attack.
Syria neighbor Turkey backs the use of force. The Arab League, whose members mainly oppose Assad, has said Syria is to blame for the chemical attack but so far stopped short of explicitly endorsing Western military strikes. Arab League foreign ministers are due to meet in Cairo on Sunday.
Iran, Assad's main ally in the region, has condemned plans for strikes and warned of wider war.
RESIDENTS PREPARE FOR STRIKES
In Syria itself, Damascus residents readied for a strike.
A man named Youssef carried a small plastic bag bulging with personal documents. "Do I put them in my parents' home? My in-laws? At work? I don't know which area is safer, I don't know where to hide them," he told a friend. Doctors in the outskirts of the capital said they were training up teams and trying to secure shipments sent in by aid groups of atropine and oxygen to treat poison gas victims.
"We worry about another chemical weapons attack should foreign powers carry out the strike, as some kind of revenge," said Abu Akram, a doctor in the rebel-held suburb of Arbin.
In the province of Homs, a group of militia who support Assad said a limited strike would not hurt. "Those stupid opposition people think a limited strike is going to topple the regime," said a fighter who went by the name Shadi.
Another fighter who declined to be identified added that Assad could be strengthened, saying, "Instead of people accusing Assad of being the criminal who kills his people, he'll be the national hero facing the force of America and imperialism." Rebels said they were planning to take advantage of a strike to launch an offensive. Qassim Saadeddine, a former Syrian army colonel and spokesman for the rebels' Supreme Military Council, said rebel groups had been sent a military plan of action.
"The hope is to take advantage when some areas are weakened by any strikes. We ordered some groups to prepare in each province, to ready their fighters for when the strike happens," he said by Skype.
"They were sent a military plan that includes preparations to attack some of the targets we expect to be hit in foreign strikes, and some others we hope to attack at the same time."
Syria's civil war has killed more than 100,000 people and driven millions from their homes since 2011, when Assad's forces cracked down on street protests and his enemies took up arms.
The war splits the Middle East on its main faultline between Sunni and Shi'ite Muslims and has already spread to neighboring Iraq and Lebanon, threatening to reignite their own civil wars.
Despite demanding that Assad step down, the United States and its Western allies have not provided rebels with arms to unseat him, much less intervened along the lines of NATO air strikes that brought down Libya's Muammar Gaddafi in 2011.
After rebel gains, Syrian government forces returned to the offensive this year with the aid of fighters from Lebanon's Hezbollah Shi'ite militia. Limited strikes of the sort Obama envisions would do little to end the stalemate.
The rebels are mostly majority Sunnis, fighting rule by Assad's Alawite minority sect, an off-shoot of Shi'ite Islam. They are armed by Qatar and Saudi Arabia and train in Turkey and Jordan, all ruled by Sunnis. Assad is armed by Shi'ite Iran. Some of the most successful rebel groups are fiercely anti-Western Sunni Islamists allied to al Qaeda, and the West is wary of arming the opposition for fear of weapons reaching them.
(Additional reporting by Denis Dyomkin in Vladivostok, Khaled Yacoub Oweis in Amman and Roberta Rampton and Steve Holland Washington; Writing by Peter Graff and Jackie Frank; Editing by Jon Boyle and Vicki Allen)

Islamist rebels go into hiding ahead of Syria strikes
BEIRUT (Reuters) - An anticipated U.S.-led strike on Syria has not only put government forces on alert, it has also alarmed rebels, in particular Islamist groups linked to al Qaeda who worry they too are targets.
The United States said on Friday it was planning a limited response to punish Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for a "brutal and flagrant" chemical weapons attack it says killed more than 1,400 people in Damascus two weeks ago. But Islamist rebels are wary, particularly experienced foreign militants who have joined their ranks and may have seen at first-hand U.S. military campaigns and drone strikes on al Qaeda fighters across the region.
Islamist forces have cleared many of their bases of fighters, vehicles and weaponry, according to rebels and sources close to Qaeda-linked fighters.
"Of course we've been moving our fighters and equipment. Do you think we trust the Americans?" said a fighter from the moderate Islamist rebel group called Liwa al-Islam, speaking by Skype from a suburb outside the capital Damascus. "They gave Assad two weeks' notice to clear his bases. We know we're the real target."
Al Qaeda-linked groups such as the Nusra Front and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) appear to be taking even more extensive and secretive measures.
"ISIL has evacuated many of its centers, mainly in northern and eastern Syria. They've increased security for the emirs (leaders), changing their locations and their cars - they fear homing chips could have been placed in the cars," said a source in Lebanon who is close Qaeda-linked groups in Syria.
Charles Lister, an analyst at IHS Jane's Terrorism and Insurgency center, said there was nothing to indicate Western plans for an attack on such groups in Syria right now.
"But they are essentially hedging their bets. There's too much to lose if no precautions are taken," he said. "Syria has provided jihadists with an incredibly valuable opportunity to establish a concrete foothold in the heart of the Middle East."
Syria, which sits on the faultlines of several sectarian and ethnic conflicts in the region, has been mired in 2-1/2 years of conflict that has killed more than 100,000 people.
Foreign powers have been deadlocked over action, and Western forces have grown increasingly hesitant as radical Islamist groups rose to power in an uprising that began as peaceful protests against four decades of Assad family rule.
But U.S. President Barack Obama has said chemical weapons use would cross a "red line" and has vowed to take action.
SHARING TIPS ONLINE
Militants have been trading advice online about going into hiding - from tips about food stockpiling to strategic advice on pre-planning attacks to maintain operations while leaders were in hiding.
Lister said lessons from attacks on militants in Mali, Iraq and Afghanistan were being shared on the Internet.
Abdullah Saqr, linked to the Fateh al-Islam group that has roots in Lebanon, posted some of his advice on Twitter.
"Start changing your locations and finding shelters, do not move in announced or large convoys. Take the mobile phones from all your fighters and distance them from the leadership to maintain a security layer," he wrote.
"My brothers, the situation is serious, it's not a joke. The Americans are being tricky in timing the attacks, which means it will be nothing more than a surprise attack as happened in Afghanistan or Iraq."
The Islamist source close to the Qaeda groups in Syria said fighters had already redeployed in new hideouts "away from prying eyes", but declined to give further details.
Activists in rebel-held parts of the northern city of Aleppo said they saw ISIL fighters leaving their bases in large numbers.
Nusra forces worked more secretly, they said, perhaps better timing their movements at night to avoid attention.
"They cleared out their main headquarters and much of the city. All they left behind were a few guards," said an activist in Aleppo, speaking by Skype.
"The others left behind were their social service and proselytizing groups. These groups cannot abandon the people."
(Editing by William Maclean and Alison Williams)

Fears of possible Western strike on Syria ripple across the Middle East
By Albert Aji And Ryan Lucas, The Associated Press | The Canadian Press – Wed, 28 Aug, 2013..
DAMASCUS, Syria - Fears of a possible U.S. strike against Syria's regime over an alleged chemical weapons attack rippled across the region Wednesday, as about 6,000 Syrians fled to neighbouring Lebanon in a 24-hour period and Israelis scrambled for gas masks in case Damascus retaliates against them.
U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon pleaded for more time for diplomacy and to allow U.N. investigators to complete their work. The experts, wearing flak jackets and helmets, collected blood and urine samples from victims during a visit to at least one of the areas hit in last week's attack.
Seven days after chemical weapons were purportedly unleashed on rebel-held suburbs of the Syrian capital, momentum grew toward Western military action against President Bashar Assad's regime. At the same time, Syria's chief allies, Russia and Iran, warned of dire consequences for the region if any armed intervention is undertaken.
U.S. leaders, including Vice-President Joe Biden, have charged that Assad's government was behind the Aug. 21 attack that Doctors Without Borders says killed at least 355 people. The White House says it's planning a possible military response while seeking support from international partners.
The U.S. has not presented concrete proof of Syrian regime involvement in the attack, and U.N. inspectors have not endorsed the allegations, although the U.N. envoy to Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi, said evidence suggests some kind of "substance" was used that killed hundreds.
Two senior Obama administration officials said U.S. intelligence agencies are drawing up a report laying out the evidence against Assad's government. The classified version would be sent to key members of Congress and a declassified version would be made public.
One of the officials said the administration is considering more than a single set of military strikes and "the options are not limited just to one day" of assault.
"If there is action taken, it must be clearly defined what the objective is and why" and based on "clear facts," the senior administration official said on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to discuss internal deliberations publicly.
President Barack Obama is weighing a limited response that focuses on punishing the Syrian government for violating international agreements that bar the use of chemical weapons. Any U.S. military action, officials say, would not be aimed at toppling the Assad regime or vastly altering the course of Syria's civil war, which has already claimed 100,000 dead.
As the U.S., France and Britain push for military action, the U.N. secretary-general urged restraint to give U.N. inspectors time to finish their investigation, which began Monday.
"Let them conclude ... their work for four days and then we will have to analyze scientifically" their findings and send a report to the U.N. Security Council, Ban said. The U.N. said the analysis would be done "as quickly as possible."
Syria's Ambassador to the U.N., Bashar Ja'afari, said he sent Ban a letter demanding that the inspectors extend their investigation to what he described as three chemical weapons attacks against Syrian soldiers in the Damascus suburbs. He said the attacks occurred on Aug. 22, 24, and 25, and that dozens of Syrian soldiers are current being treated for inhaling nerve gases.
Ja'afari also blamed the rebels for any chemical weapons attack, saying "the Syrian government is innocent of these allegations."
Ban pleaded for more time to give diplomacy another chance to end Syria's conflict. Marking the centenary of a venue for peaceful conflict resolution in The Hague, Netherlands, he said: "Here in the Peace Palace, let us say: Give peace a chance. Give diplomacy a chance. Stop fighting and start talking."
But with many seeing Western intervention no longer a question of if but when, there were signs of growing fears across the wider region.
At least 6,000 Syrians crossed into Lebanon in a 24-hour period through the main Masnaa crossing, including an estimated 4,000 on Wednesday, according to Lebanese security officials in the country's Bekaa Valley near the border. The normal daily influx is 500 to 1,000 refugees, depending on the level of fighting. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity in line with regulations.
Long lines of packed cars — some with suitcases strapped to roofs — were backed up at the frontier post, witnesses said. A security official said about 2,000 also crossed into Syria, but many of them said they were going in to evacuate relatives.
One woman, Um Ahmad, entered Lebanon with her five children, saying she fearing U.S. strikes on Damascus.
"Isn't it enough, all the violence and fighting that we already have in the country, now America wants to bomb us, too?" the 45-year-old said, declining to give her full name for security concerns.
Her husband said they know no one in Lebanon but came anyway because of their children. "What will we do here, where will we go? I don't know, but hopefully we'll be safe," he added.
Nearly 2 million Syrians have fled the country since the crisis began in March 2011, and millions more are displaced inside Syria.
Effects were also evident in Israel, where large crowds lined up at gas-mask distribution centres. Maya Avishai of the Israeli postal service, which oversees gas mask distribution, said demand has tripled in recent days. About 5 million Israelis, roughly 60 per cent of the population, now have gas masks, she said.
The Israeli government ordered a "limited" call-up of reserve units to bolster civil defence preparations and to operate air-defence units near the border. Officials said the call-up is anticipated to bring in hundreds of troops.
While Israeli officials believe the chances of a Syrian strike remain slim, there are concerns that Damascus may respond to any U.S.-led military action by attacking the Jewish state, a close American ally.
On Wednesday, the U.N. inspectors visited the eastern Damascus suburbs of Mleeha and Zamalka, activists said. Amateur video showed a convoy of five cars with U.N. markings, followed by armed rebels in pickups.
The video showed the inspectors visiting a clinic and interviewing a man through a translator. Two inspectors were present as a nurse drew blood from a man on an examination table. One of the experts was heard in the video saying he and his team have collected blood, urine and hair samples.
The videos appeared consistent with other reporting by The Associated Press, including Skype interviews with anti-regime activists.
One activist said the team took hair and skin samples of five suspected victims in Zamalka during a 90-minute visit. He spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of regime reprisals.
At the U.N., the five permanent members of the Security Council failed to reach an agreement on a British-proposed resolution that would authorize the use of military force against Syria.
The draft resolution — were it to be put to a vote — would almost certainly be vetoed by Syria ally Russia as well as China, which have blocked past attempts to sanction the Assad regime. The document was being sent back to governments for consultations, according to a Western diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions were private and he was not authorized to speak to reporters.
Foreign Minister Wang Yi said in a statement that China was deeply concerned about the latest developments in Syria but reiterated China's position that "a political resolution is the only realistic solution."
A French diplomatic official acknowledged that the British resolution has virtually no chance of passing, but is being introduced to show that all diplomatic steps were being exhausted. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not allowed to disclose details of the deliberations.
French President Francois Hollande convened his top defence advisers about Syria, and was to meet Thursday with the head of Syria's main opposition group.
In London, Prime Minister David Cameron held a meeting on Syria and said the military and security chiefs at Britain's National Security Council "unanimously" backed his call for action. Parliament was expected to convene Thursday to discuss the matter and possibly vote on whether Britain would participate.
Jordan, meanwhile, said it will not be used as a launching pad for attacks on Syria and favours a diplomatic solution. A U.S.-led strike would involve cruise missile attacks from the sea, which would not need to cross or make use of Jordanian territory.
The remarks underlined the U.S. ally's efforts to avoid further friction with its larger neighbour for fear that Assad or his Iranian backers could retaliate.
Two of Syria's staunchest backers, Iran and Russia, warned that an attack by U.S. and its allies against Syria would set the region alight.
Such strikes "will lead to the long-term destabilization of the situation in the country and the region," said Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.
Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said attacking Syria would be catastrophic for the entire Middle East.
"Intervention of foreign and extra-regional powers in a country has no result other than sparking fire," Iran's state TV quoted Khamenei as saying. "Waging a war is like a spark in a gunpowder store ... its dimensions and consequences can't be predicted."
**Lucas reported from Beirut. Associated Press writers around the world contributed to this report.

In Putin's first comments on Syria, he urges Obama not to rush into a decision
MOSCOW - Russian President Vladimir Putin urged President Barack Obama on Saturday not to rush into a decision on striking Syria, but to consider whether strikes would help end the violence and be worth the civilian casualties they would inevitably cause.
Speaking for the first time about the suspected chemical weapons attack on Aug. 21, Putin also questioned whether Syrian government troops should be held responsible. He said it would make no sense for them to carry out such a devastating attack while they were on the offensive.
"In such conditions, to give a trump card to those who are calling for foreign military intervention is foolish nonsense," Putin said. "It defies all logic."
The United States said Friday that the attack in a rebel-held suburb of Damascus, the Syrian capital, killed 1,429 people, including more than 400 children.
The Russian leader said he was convinced the suspected chemical attack was a provocation aimed at drawing the U.S. military into Syria's civil war, implying he believed the attack was carried out by the Syrian rebels.
If the Americans have evidence proving the involvement of President Bashar Assad's regime, they should present it to the United Nations inspectors and the U.N. Security Council, he said. "If there is evidence it should be presented," Putin said. "If it is not presented, that means it does not exist."
Putin's foreign policy adviser complained Friday that Russia had not seen the U.S. intelligence that Washington insists proves the Syrian government was responsible for the attack.
On Saturday, the U.S. ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul, met with Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov to provide information backing up the U.S. position, the Foreign Ministry said.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and his deputies have stated repeatedly that Russia opposes any use of force against Syria without U.N. Security Council approval, while also making clear that Russia would vote against such a resolution.
Ryabkov used tougher language on Saturday, warning the U.S. that launching strikes without a Security Council resolution would be "an act of aggression, a flagrant violation of international law."
If Washington goes ahead with the strikes, however, Moscow has appeared to rule out Russian military action. "We're not intending to go to war with anyone," Lavrov said early this week.
A longtime ally of Assad, Russia is a major supplier of weapons to Syria and maintains a naval base in the Syrian port of Tartus.
In addressing Obama, Putin said he was speaking to him not as the U.S. president but as a holder of the Nobel Peace Prize.
"We have to remember what has happened in the last decades, how many times the United States has been the initiator of armed conflict in different regions of the world," Putin told Russian journalists, including from state television, covering his visit to Vladivostok in the Far East. "Did this resolve even one problem?"
He urged Obama to reflect on the results of the U.S. military intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq "before taking a decision to carry out air strikes that will bring casualties, including among the civilian population."
Putin said he hoped to talk to Obama in person when leaders of the Group of 20 meet next week in St. Petersburg. Obama had planned to hold a separate summit with Putin in Moscow ahead of the G-20 meeting, but he cancelled three weeks ago. The White House said Russia's decision to grant asylum to National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden was the last straw, but that a lack of progress on other issues, including on the Syrian civil war, played into the decision. No one-on-one meetings between Putin and Obama are planned during G-20, but both sides have said it is likely that the two leaders will have an opportunity to talk.

U.S. strike will trigger reactions 'beyond' Syria: Iran

August 31, 2013/Daily Star /TEHRAN: The head of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards warned Saturday that a US strike on Syria would trigger reactions beyond the borders of Tehran's key regional ally, ISNA news agency reported. "The fact that the Americans believe that military intervention will be limited to within Syrian borders is an illusion; it will provoke reactions beyond that country," commander Mohammad Ali Jafari was quoted as saying.
"Just as US interventions in the Islamic world (Afghanistan, Iraq) have bolstered extremism, so will an aggression on Syria reinforce extremism and, as in Iraq and Afghanistan, its results will be pain, massacre and the exodus of the innocent population," he added.
US President Barack Obama said on Friday the United States was weighing "limited, narrow" action against Syria, insisting the world had a duty to act after it concluded that the regime of President Bashar al-Assad's had gassed to death more than 1,400 people.
Syria's government has denied using chemical weapons and has pointed the finger at "terrorists" -- its term for anti-Assad rebels.
A delegation of Iranian MPs left Saturday for Syria and Lebanon to examine the situation and "condemn the use of chemical weapons by terrorist groups," a parliamentary official said.
Iran, Damascus's main regional ally, has issued stern warnings against any US-led military action targeting Syria, with supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei saying it would be a "disaster" for the region.
On Friday, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif spoke by telephone with UN special envoy for Syria Lakhdar Brahimi to "warn against any adventurism that will have serious consequences."
Iranian media reported that Zarif also called a dozen European and Arab foreign ministers to "condemn the use of chemical weapons" in Syria, to "criticise the war-mongering (of the US and its allies) and raise concern about the consequences of any military action in the region." Jafari said participation by other countries in a strike on Syria "will trigger crises for the national security of those countries" and "transfer the crisis to the Zionist (Israel) regime".
On Thursday, the British parliament voted against participating in any military intervention and Germany has ruled out joining any strikes, leaving the United States looking for partners to strike Syria.
French President Francois Hollande has said he and Obama "agreed that the international community cannot tolerate the use of chemical weapons, that it should hold the Syrian regime accountable for it and send a strong message."

Syria army has 'finger on the trigger': PM
Daily Star/DAMASCUS: Syria's army is ready for potential foreign strikes against it and has its "finger on the trigger," Prime Minister Wael al-Halqi said in comments carried Saturday on state television.
"The Syrian army is fully ready, its finger on the trigger to face any challenge or scenario that they want to carry out," he said in a written statement aired on television.

Iranian MPs meet Assad, denounce possible U.S. strike

August 31, 2013/Daily Star/TEHRAN: Iranian MPs held talks Saturday in Syria with President Bashar al-Assad and denounced any possible Western attack on that country over chemical weapons allegations, the head of the delegation said. Meanwhile, the head of Iran's powerful Revolutionary Guards warned that a US strike would trigger "reactions beyond" Syria and would bolster extremism.
"As representatives of the Islamic Republic of Iran we declare our hostility for any attack or war against Syria," IRNA news agency quoted Allaeddine Boroujerdi, chairman of parliament's influential foreign policy committee, as saying. US President Barack Obama on Friday said he was weighing "limited, narrow" action against Syria after US intelligence reports said President Bashar al-Assad's regime had gassed to death hundreds of women and children. Boroujerdi said Iran informed the United States that rebels fighting to topple Assad have chemical weapons.
"Unfortunately the United States did not heed our warning," he said after heading a three-member delegation that met Assad.
Diplomatic relations between Iran and the United States have been severed since 1980, and the Swiss embassy in Tehran handles US interests there.
Syria's government has denied using chemical weapons and has pointed the finger of blame at "terrorists" -- its term for rebels seeking to topple Assad.
Boroujerdi said Iran condemns the use of chemical weapons "by terrorist groups against the Syrian population."
Iran, Damascus's main regional ally, has issued stern warnings against any US-led military action targeting Syria, with the latest on Saturday by the head of the elite Revolutionary Guards.
Commander Mohammad Ali Jafari warned that a US strike would trigger "reactions beyond" Syria and would bolster extremism.
"The fact that the Americans believe that military intervention will be limited to within Syrian borders is an illusion; it will provoke reactions beyond that country," Jafari was quoted as saying by ISNA news agency.
"Just as US interventions in the Islamic world (Afghanistan, Iraq) have bolstered extremism, so will an aggression on Syria reinforce extremism and, as in Iraq and Afghanistan, its results will be pain, massacre and the exodus of the innocent population," he added.
Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has said a strike on Syria would be a "disaster" for the region.
And on Friday, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif spoke by telephone with UN special envoy for Syria Lakhdar Brahimi to "warn against any adventurism that will have serious consequences".
Iranian media reported that Zarif also called a dozen European and Arab foreign ministers to "condemn the use of chemical weapons" in Syria, to "criticise the war-mongering (of the US and its allies) and raise concern about the consequences of any military action in the region".

Lebanon arrests two over rocket attack into Israel
August 31, 2013/The Daily Star /BEIRUT: Two suspects have been arrested over the recent rocket attack from Lebanese territory into Israel, the Lebanese Army said Saturday.
In a statement, the Army said the two suspects - Youssef Mohammad Fliti and Omar Abdel-Mawla al-Atrash – confessed they had supplied the four rockets used in the Aug. 22 rocket attack into Israel.
The barrage of rockets into Israel from Tyre, south Lebanon, was met with swift retaliation from the Israeli air force, which on Aug. 23 fired a missile at a base belonging to an armed Palestinian faction south of Lebanese capital.
According to the statement, Fliti and Atrash confessed they had transferred the rockets from the West Bekaa village of Gaza and delivered them to a man in Tyre.
Four wooden launching pads were discovered earlier this month on the outskirts of Hosh village in Tyre.
The Army said the suspects were referred to the judiciary and that efforts are under way to detain others involved in the incident.

Kuwait evacuates some nationals from Lebanon
August 31, 2013/The Daily Star
BEIRUT: Kuwait took measures to evacuate its citizens from Lebanon and the United Kingdom warned against traveling to the country amid a deterioration of the security situation linked to the Syrian uprising against President Bashar Assad.
A Kuwait Airways plane was scheduled to arrive around midnight Friday to evacuate some Kuwaiti nationals from Lebanon, a security source told The Daily Star.
It was expected to evacuate a specific group of Kuwaitis, the source said, adding that the flight was an exceptional one and not part of the Kuwait-Beirut daily route.
Tensions have been simmering in the region after Western powers hinted they would launch a military strike against the Assad regime for its alleged use of chemical weapons last week.
The security situation in Lebanon, linked to the crisis in Syria, has been deteriorating, with a recent spate of car bombings in Beirut’s southern suburbs and the northern city of Tripoli.
Earlier Friday, the U.K. advised its citizens against all but essential travel to Lebanon due to spiking regional tensions and an increase in violence linked to Syria.
“We have taken a tough call to change our advice temporarily and discourage travel to Lebanon,” British Ambassador Tom Fletcher tweeted.
“For Brits intending to travel to Lebanon, this means that you need to assess whether your trip really is essential. For Brits already in Lebanon, you should consider whether it’s essential that you remain for the coming period,” Fletcher wrote in a blog post.
In its travel advisory, the British Embassy also warned of the high threat of terrorism in the area.
“The security situation can deteriorate very quickly. There is potential for further violence, which could restrict departure options,” the warning said.
The official travel advisory also warned against all travel to Tripoli, the Syrian border, parts of the Bekaa Valley and Beirut’s Hezbollah-controlled southern suburbs.
British Airways said its flight schedule to Beirut would remain unchanged, but it would show flexibility if passengers wished to cancel their flights

Berri proposes initiative to end Lebanon crisis
August 31, 2013/By Jana El Hassan The Daily Star
BEIRUT: Speaker Nabih Berri put forward Saturday an initiative to end the ongoing political crisis in Lebanon entailing all-party talks to address some of the country’s thorniest items.
“There is no way out of the Lebanese crisis except through Dialogue ... we call on all parties to engage in an open Dialogue,” said Berri, speaking during a televised speech marking the 35th anniversary of the disappearance of the founder of the Amal Movement, Imam Musa Sadr.
“We propose to President Michel Sleiman a roadmap that can help resolve the accumulated problems in the country,” he said, describing his multi-point initiative.
The initiative calls for the resumption of National Dialogue among rival political parties but unlike previous rounds, the proposed all-party talks would include the participation of Prime Minister-designate Tammam Salam.
The agenda of the talks would focus on both the makeup and ministerial statement of the upcoming government, revive discussions on a new electoral law, take steps to support the military and address a national defense strategy. Berri urged Sleiman to hold the extensive talks over a period of at least five consecutive days until consensus on the divisive items could be reached.
Lebanon’s government resigned in March and opposing demands on Salam have stalled the formation of his government. The March 14 opposition insists on a neutral, non-partisan government, a demand that the March 8 alliance has flat out rejected.
In June, lawmakers also postponed the country’s parliamentary elections until 2014 and extended their mandate after failing to agree on a new electoral law.
The country’s National Dialogue, a platform that had been aimed at resolving the divisive issue of Hezbollah’s arsenal through a national defense strategy, has also been stalled since late 2012. The political crisis gripping Lebanon comes amid growing security concerns linked to the conflict in neighboring Syria.
Berri said the proposed talks should seek to support the military as it grapples with the increasing number of security incidents. One of the items on the agenda, Berri said, should be aimed at supporting the military in “saving Tripoli and the Bekaa [Valley] and the northern border from the chaos of arms and gunmen.”He also said the talks should enable the Army to recruit 5,000 additional soldiers.
Turning to the crisis next door, Berri likened the events in Syria to the Palestinian “Nakba,” when countless Palestinians were forced to flee their homes prior to the formation of the Israeli state in 1948.
“The current situation in Syria is equivalent to the Palestinian Nakba [catastrophe] and we are facing the same Nakba but at a different place and time,” he said.
He also opposed any foreign intervention in Syria, amid the increasing likelihood of U.S.-military action against the regime of President Bashar Assad.
Berri warned that “Lebanon will be the most affected by the risks threatening Syria.”
“We strongly call for the withdrawal of Lebanese and Arab fighters from Syrian and for ending the regional and international intervention in Syrian affairs,” the speaker said. He also said that the “Lebanon was the last country to get involved in the Syria crisis,” in reference to the military involvement of Hezbollah in Syria.
He said that Israel would be the first beneficiary of a possible strike against Syria and called for finding a political solution to the Syrian conflict.
“The solution to the Syrian crisis can only be achieved through negotiations. The use of force will lead nowhere and Israel is the only beneficiary in this case,” he said.
“The sons of Syria, both loyalists to the Syrian regime and the opposition, should accept to go to dialogue under Geneva II to restore the historic role of Syria,” he said.
Berri said a breakthrough in Syria “does not only require an inter-Syrian consensus but will need to be backed by a Russian-American agreement and a Saudi-Iranian understanding on regional affairs.”

Six Lebanese fishermen freed, Syria shells hit n. Lebanon

August 31, 2013/The Daily Star
TRIPOLI, Lebanon: At least six of eight Lebanese fishermen were safely back in Lebanon Saturday evening after they were earlier in the day by the Syrian coast guard and several shells from the Syrian side of the border fell into several north Lebanon villages.
In a statement, the Lebanese Army said Syria’s coast guard detained in the morning eight fishermen off the coast of Arida, north Lebanon, adding that the military was working on securing their release.
Security sources told The Daily Star that a group of fishermen came under fire by a Syrian patrol boat at around 8:00 a.m. and were then led out of Lebanese territory toward a Syrian naval base.
According to the sources, the boat was nearing the Syrian side of the Nahr al-Kabir River which forms the northern border between Syria and Lebanon.
The sources identified five of the detained fishermen as Ali Hussein Merhi, Mohammad Hazem Shtaywi and his two brothers Bilal and Talal, as well as Ghazi Ali Mrashi.
At least six of the fisherman were released later in the day and transferred to Tripoli’s Serail.
The two remaining crew members remain in Syria but are expected to be rejoin their relatives in Lebanon at a later time. Residents had earlier blocked the Aida border crossing between Lebanon and Syria to protest the detention of the Lebanese nationals.
The Syrian coast guard has taken actions against Lebanese fishermen in recent months.
Earlier this year, the Syrian coast guard killed a Lebanese fisherman after opening fire on a fishing trawler carrying a crew of three.
Syrian forces also opened fire on two Lebanese fishing boats in August 2012. There were no casualties.
The families of the two remaining fisherman waited Saturday at the Arida border crossing with Syria for the return of their loved ones.
Also Saturday, at least three shells from the Syrian side of the border fell into the northern villages of Hakr, Jenin and Kishlak.

Who benefits from Assad remaining in power?
By: Hussein Shobokshi/Asharq Alawsat
As recent events have shown us, sectarian bias has no limits in the Arab world. The peoples of the region still view despots and radicals selectively. While sometimes they see Saddam Hussein as a bloody Ba’athist thug, they can then suddenly change their minds and maintain he was a martyr who heroically defended the eastern “front” of the Arab world. This is despite the fact that Saddam invaded and occupied a neighboring country, Kuwait, and killed his own people using chemical weapons, in addition to his other crimes.
However when you try to convince people that Bashar Al-Assad—a brutal Ba’athist thug who killed his own people with chemical weapons and occupied Lebanon—is just another Saddam Hussein, they reject his premise and insist that the comparison does not hold water.
The same selective method is used when they talk about terrorist organizations. There are people who link terrorism and Takfirism to certain groups only, such as Al-Qaeda, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS,) Al-Nusra Front and other Salafist and Jihadist groups, ignoring Hezbollah, the Badr Organization, the Quds Force, and the Mahdi Army. All of these organizations and militias are the same; they are Takfirist and terrorist elements that accuse those who oppose them of apostasy as well as capitalize on and rejoice in killing their opponents.
Any counter-argument is nothing but a miserable and shameful attempt to distort the clear reality on the ground. This is nothing more than promoting a confused and narrow vision.
This is key to the survival of bloody and criminal regimes such as the Assad administration. In fact, there are several forces that have an interest in Assad remaining in power.
Iran spent a long time raising and then subjugating the Assad regime, particularly during the era of Bashar Al-Assad. It also spent large amounts of money on it and diverted it from the nationalist and pan-Arabist slogans it has grown accustomed to using to cover its terrible sectarianism which has now been completely exposed.
The same applies to Hezbollah that views Syria as a country where they can expand their influence and presence in a simple and practical manner.
As for Russia, it views Syria as a foothold for grander plans in the Middle East and the Mediterranean, taking advantage of geopolitical circumstances that might not be repeated in the near future, not to mention the presence of weak and reluctant leadership in the western camp.
The Assad regime constitutes a golden opportunity to Russian and Western intelligence that want to attract all Jihadist forces (pro and anti-Assad ones) to one geographical spot, Syria and thus save themselves the trouble of pursuing these groups. By doing so they achieve what Israel wants; namely, to get rid of all sides by encouraging them to fight and provide them with money, weapons, and information.
On the other hand, Israel will be able to keep an eye on its “hidden ally,” Assad. The reality is that the Assad regime has protected the borders of Israel by ensuring peace and quiet on the Golan Heights. Assad has prevented any sort of disturbance—let alone resistance or military activities—from happening in the area.
Strangely enough, no senior Israeli politician has issued a statement demanding the outright removal of the Assad regime. On the contrary, both the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the chief of Mossad have tacitly said that they would prefer Assad to remain in power as this would guarantee greater security for Israel, particularly given the alternative.

Why did the Assad regime use chemical weapons?
By: Michel Kilo/Asharq Alawsat
So just why did the Assad regime use chemical weapons?
A simple and direct answer to that question is that the Assad regime used chemical weapons because criminality is a core philosophy of this regime, which has ruled Syria over the past five decades according to the equation, “Either we rule you or kill you!” Today, it seems that the Assad regime is no longer able to rule, and so has moved directly to killing. This is a view that cannot be denied by anybody who has kept a close eye on what has been happening in the country over the past 50 years, and who have seen how its leadership refuse to reconsider their pro-security policies. This is an approach that they have continued to follow even after all their policies have been shown to be wrong; this has been shown following the beginning of the Syrian uprising in March 2011. The Syrian elite have upheld the criminal Assad dynasty because it is expressive of their own nature, as shown by the limitless backing they offered Bashar Al-Assad, rather than rising up against him and standing against his homicidal approach. They followed their foolish president without objection or hesitation, and now they continue to follow him towards the edge of the abyss, even though they assumed leading positions in Syria long before he was born and have taken the lead in handling Syria’s problems over the past 50 years.
In addition to this, there is also an indirect answer related to the current state of affairs regarding the struggle against the Assad regime. It is this same regime that three months ago launched its fifth strategic attack against the Syrian people and the Free Syrian Army (FSA). The Syrian media applauded what happened, launching a campaign of lies to claim that what happened represented a pivotal victory for the regime that completely transformed the strategic reality on the ground. This includes claims of the fall of Al-Qusayr, reports of huge troop deployments around the heroic city of Homs, enforcement of a blockade on Jabal Al-Zawiya, and the recapture of Deir Ezzor and Aleppo with the assistance of Hezbollah. However, these claims were false, and the regime’s plans ultimately backfired following defeats at Khan Al-Assal, Ming Airbase and Al-Sahel.
All of this is coupled with the emergence of an unprecedented phenomenon, namely the flight of Syria’s pro-Assad elite—including the military elite—who had remained firm and unyielding over the past two years and more. However, at Khan Al-Assal, Ming and Al-Sahel, it was military officers who escaped, a new phenomenon that perhaps foreshadows a possible sudden collapse of the entire regime.
To confront this possibility, those who undertook the war against the people proposed the idea of carrying out a strike that will completely suppress the protests. For those managing this war, this strike had to be strong enough to prompt an FSA collapse and ensure the regime stays in power for a long period of time, boosting the low morale of its military. This explained the chemical strike’s barbaric nature, with the number of victims standing at 10,000, according to some estimates. According to information leaked from inside the city, the strike exterminated a considerable part of the city in eastern and western Ghouta, something that the regime saw as necessary for the success of any attacks on the FSA. For the regime, that attack was a necessity in order to regain control of eastern Ghouta—a province that had remained steadfastly opposed to the Assad regime for nearly nine months despite the deliberate systematic campaign intended to push it towards famine. The regime also needed to attack Ghouta to “liberate” it from the opposition, whose presence there was deemed a direct threat to the regime.
This criminal attack did not cause the collapse of Ghouta, despite the heavy civilian and FSA causalities, not to mention the causalities among the rescue and medical teams the Russians subsequently accused of being responsible for the attack itself.
The people of Ghouta exhibited amazing cohesion and extraordinary ability to endure pain and loss, while the entire world was astonished by the nature of the suicidal attack that will certainly have dire consequences for the Assad regime. At the very least, this chemical attack will force the opposition to rectify its mistakes that had been benefiting the regime. It will lead the international community to reconsider its calculations and confront Assad’s crimes, which have horrified the entire region and confirmed that it is a danger to the safety and security of the entire world.
The Ghouta chemical weapons attack will not stop the collapse of the Assad regime; in fact, it will only accelerate this. This horrible crime only serves to push Syria closer to the decisive moment of Assad’s fall and the people’s victory. This will be achieved by the hands of the Syrian people themselves, and they are moving closer and closer to this goal.

Opinion: Hassan Rouhani, Victim of a Possible Attack on Syria
By: Shahir Shahid Saless/Asharq Alawsat
While most news agencies report that an attack by the US and its allies on Syria is imminent, new developments have cast doubt upon those predictions. The British Parliament rejected a proposal for military action in Syria by a 285 to 272 margin. The vote was nonbinding, but David Cameron stated that he will not proceed without the Parliament’s approval and that the government “will act accordingly.”
Given the outcome of the US/UK-led invasion on Iraq in 2003, the UK’s decision is sensible. Prior to the 2003 invasion, the British and American governments asserted that Saddam Hussein possessed a large cache of chemical and biological weapons. Those claims proved false, severely damaging the two governments’ credibility. This time, the British appear to be more cautious. If UN experts’ findings conflict with the UK’s claims that the chemical attacks were the work of Bashar Al-Assad’s regime, there would be no grounds for an invasion that many observers believe could result in dangerous and unpredictable consequences. The likely UK exit will impose pressure on President Obama, since he now has to go it alone.
Following a briefing for lawmakers featuring top administration officials on the evening of Thursday, August 29, members of Congress maintained that President Obama still has to gain political support for military strikes against Syria. This is a hurdle that the US administration has to overcome in the coming days.
However, Pentagon officials assert that the US is prepared to act unilaterally and that it has already “passed the point of no return.” They maintain that strikes are likely “within days.”
The US administration seeks to attack Syria for two reasons. First, according to some reports, Jeffrey Feltman, UN Under Secretary-General for Political Affairs, also a former US Assistant Secretary of State and Ambassador to Lebanon, conveyed a message to Tehran during his recent meeting with high-ranking Iranian officials including Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iran’s foreign minister.
According to the reports, “Feltman warned that a successful Geneva II should be preceded by the restoration of a balance of power, and that Iran should understand the importance of this for the greater goal of bringing peace back to Syria.”
Sources in Tehran said that the Iranians perceived that Feltman was calling on them to remain calm if there were strikes on Syria.
The postponement of Geneva 2, the international peace conference for Syria that was scheduled for Wednesday, August 28, in The Hague, corroborates with these reports. In other words, the US government believes that the balance of power in Syria must change before there can be any earnest discussions regarding the fate of Syria.
The other reason that the US seeks to attack Syria is that last year, President Obama proclaimed the use of chemical weapons a “red line” for Syria. Great powers, especially the United States, draw red lines as preventive measures to the formation of destructive wars. Now, with the occurrence of chemical attacks, if the United States does not show any reaction it would call into question the credibility of such “red line” proclamations, rendering them empty and baseless.
Unless clear, compelling and indisputable evidence is reported by the UN inspectors indicating that the Syrian government was not behind the recent chemical attacks, Obama is left with no alternative to military action against the Syrian government.
Meanwhile, Obama has so far drawn two “red lines” for Iran: first against closing the Strait of Hormuz in the Gulf, and second against Iran’s effort to acquire nuclear weapons. If the United States, as a super power, adopts a passive stance against recent developments in Syria, Iran could reasonably question the sincerity and fortitude behind the red lines drawn around it by the US. Such a perception of weakness behind these red lines would have negative consequences on the international level. Any perceived lack of consequence for Syria’s crossing of the chemical attack red line may portray the US more as a paper tiger than a superpower.
Iran’s likely reaction to possible attacks by the US and its allies will depend on their intensity. Iranian officials, such as the commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), Major General Mohammad Ali Jafari, warned the United States government that they risked engagement in a costly and protracted struggle if they intervened in Syria. To take an absolutely pacifist stance will put Iran in the same position as the United States if they did the same. In other words, when it comes Iran’s moment of truth, standing by as a spectator while the US thrashes Syria’s military infrastructure, might manifest the appearance of fearing to confront the US, specifically by the IRGC.
Therefore, if the US attacks Syria, Iran’s government might inconspicuously engage in the confrontation. Their reactions will be primarily focused on missile attacks against US assets.
If the US operations against Syria are limited, Iran probably will not see any reason to escalate the confrontation. However, if the attacks are comprehensive and aim to destroy Assad’s military infrastructure in order to change the balance of power in favor of the opposition, then, as Commander Jafari has warned, Iran and Syria may expand the war theater, drawing Israel in.
There is another threat in this conflict to consider. Even if Iran and Syria’s last resort of engaging Israel does not come to pass, jihadi groups may conduct false flag operations. For example, launching rockets on Israeli cities would ultimately force Israel to take military action against the Syrians.
In any case, regardless of how a US-led military operation shapes up, the outcome of such a manifestation would be the renewal of Iran’s radical foreign policy and the weakening of Rouhani’s newly established, moderate government.
A US attack on Syria would render direct talks between Iran and the US impossible for the foreseeable future. Rhetoric and accusations from both sides would emerge, and the conflict over Iran’s nuclear issue would deepen. As tensions spiral, the US will implement more punitive sanctions on Iran. This will marginalize Rouhani and his foreign policy team led by his moderate and pragmatic foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, whose emergence has created high hopes of ending Iran’s aggressive foreign policies.
In an environment filled with hostility and mistrust between Iran and the US, both sides would likely benefit from a more moderate government in Iran. In practice, however, in the event of a US led engagement with Syria, hardliners would most probably resume control of Iran’s foreign policy. This could be a road to a destructive confrontation between the US and Iran.

Linking Targets to Political Objectives in Syria
Chandler P. Atwood and Michael Knights /Washington Institute
If the United States strikes, it needs to choose targets and weapon systems based on a strategic plan that is well explained to the world.
As Washington moves toward punitive action in Syria, the resultant military operation will presumably take one of two forms: either token strikes aimed at restoring the credibility of U.S. "redline" statements, or a serious attempt to shape the Assad regime's intentions and military capabilities. If the latter unfolds, the target selection process needs to be informed by a rigorous discussion of strategic objectives and intended effects. At minimum, the most likely intended outcome of U.S. and allied action will be to deter future use of chemical weapons (CW). Yet a whole range of broader effects might also be sought while the U.S. military is engaged, such as reducing regime attacks on civilians generally, interdicting support from Iranian-backed Shiite proxies (e.g., Hezbollah), or even halting government offensives and fostering a ceasefire.
STRIKING CW TARGETS ONLY?
There are advantages to maintaining a clean focus on CW-related targets in any strike operation, including the clear linkage between punishment and crime in the eyes of the regime, the international community, and the U.S. public. Yet the ideal option -- taking away the regime's ability to conduct CW attacks by eliminating chemical stockpiles or delivery systems -- is probably not practical outside general war conditions.
For one thing, the regime is likely still carrying out defensive measures such field dispersal and frequent movement of stockpiles, making it extremely difficult to find and target them without a full U.S. air campaign to gain complete freedom of movement for persistent intelligence collection in Syrian airspace. Definitive proof of CW eradication would also require U.S. boots on the ground or unrestricted international inspections. In addition, efforts to destroy most or all of the regime's CW delivery systems would probably be stymied by the vast numbers of artillery pieces, rocket launchers, missiles, and aircraft in Syria, which together constitute a very complex, geographically dispersed target set.
STRIKING MILITARY UNITS
If the United States cannot take away the Assad regime's CW capability, all of the alternative options exist in the murky domain of coercive targeting intended to deter future CW use. For example, Washington could seek to shape the regime's calculus by directly retaliating against the Damascus-based 4th Armored Division, the force responsible for the August 21 CW attack. Specific targets could include the division's headquarters, vehicle parks, and CW delivery systems (missiles, artillery, and rockets).
An attack on such a dispersed target set would be difficult, but still well within U.S. capabilities, and at low-to-medium risk. Syria's air defense network seems robust on paper and would appear to offer a significant degree of protection, but this is not necessarily the case in reality. Over the past few months, Israel launched four airstrikes within Syria that surprised the regime and were effectively unimpeded, including attacks on 4th Armored facilities near Damascus. Although the United States has already lost strategic surprise, its fourth-generation fighter aircraft and other assets are capable of achieving local air superiority, destroying enemy air defenses, and interdicting fielded forces and CW systems in defined areas. These aircraft carry very high-resolution targeting pods and numerous small-diameter satellite-aided bombs that are ideal for "plinking" individual enemy missiles, rocket launchers, vehicles, and bunkers at extended ranges, outside of surface-to-air missile engagement zones. Of course, the possibility of collateral damage and civilian casualties cannot be dismissed given that some 4th Armored elements are stationed in urban settings on the outskirts of Damascus.
Washington could also touch a nerve in the regime by decisively striking one of Assad's most prized units, the 155th Brigade led by his brother Maher, located in the center of Damascus. U.S. resolve would be underlined by a substantial strike on Damascus using manned strike assets rather than just cruise missiles. Such an approach would show the leadership that U.S. forces are willing to "go downtown" into the regime's most heavily defended centers from day one. It could also encourage regime elites to flee the capital, bolster rebel morale, and open new avenues for rebel advances around Damascus.
BROADER TARGETING
If the U.S. government were willing to broaden its target list, it could signal U.S. areas of concern while facilitating follow-on strikes if necessary. Although leadership targeting would likely inflict the greatest shock, it is extremely difficult to do with precision. For example, it could result in accidental (but intentional-looking) decapitation of the leadership or a notable failure that creates a "rally around the flag" effect, making the leadership appear heroic and U.S. strikes seem weak. Elements such as regime propaganda outlets may also be too difficult to suppress, as was the case during Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Allied Force in Kosovo.
Yet some symbolic targets linked to regime attacks on civilians may be worth addressing, notably Air Force Intelligence headquarters, military airbases at Dumair, Saiqal, Tiyas, and Hama, and the new Iran-financed, Hezbollah-trained "People's Army" units. Various air defense systems and secure-communication facilities may also be worth striking in order to make follow-on attacks less risky for U.S. forces.
IMPLICATIONS FOR U.S. POLICY
If a strike is to be more than a token move, U.S. leaders need to approve targeting that sends the most menacing message possible to the Assad regime. Success is more likely if Washington surprises the regime by accepting greater risks than anticipated, or by causing unexpectedly heavy damage that shifts the local balance of power against Assad on a crucial battlefield. A strike would also stand a better chance of influencing the regime's behavior if it opens the way for follow-on operations.
Post-attack information operations will be as important as the strikes. Clearly explaining the rationale for hitting certain targets is crucial if Washington hopes to influence the regime. For instance, by signaling that they want to give Syrian civilians greater protection in general, U.S. officials may convince the regime to regard certain tactics (e.g., chemical attacks) as out of bounds. Evidence of coalition-building for larger follow-on strikes would also be valuable, since a full air campaign -- a key threat to develop -- would require extensive airbase availability from a multitude of allies.
In sum, the Assad regime needs to understand that U.S. attacks may not unfold in a linear or predictable fashion. Put another way, Washington should prevent Assad from concluding that he can selectively trade occasional CW attacks for limited U.S. strikes -- a ratio the regime may be willing to bear. Instead, Assad must be convinced that any U.S. strike is the opening move of a broader campaign that only the regime has the power to arrest by changing its behavior.
Maj. Chandler Atwood, USAF, is a Visiting Military Fellow at The Washington Institute. Michael Knights is a Boston-based Lafer Fellow with the Institute. The conclusions and opinions expressed in this document are those of the authors; they do not reflect the official position of the U.S. government, Department of Defense, U.S. Air Force, or Air University.