Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (93851)	4/16/2003 8:28:04 AM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Interesting rundown in an NRO article about three of our "Usual Suspects." Do we want to round them up? Excerpt and a URL. >>>>>> Now consider the candidates for the position of "the next one." They all know how far they can go without risking their existence. Let us begin with Syria, now singled out by part of the U.S. media as " the next one." Throughout the Cold War Syria maintained close ties with the Soviet Union but refused to sign a military pact with it or grant it bases. President Hafez al-Assad also made sure that he met all the American presidents, from Nixon to Clinton. Although Syria's Golan has been under Israeli occupation, not a shot was ever fired against the Jewish state from Syrian territory. Syria organized its occupation of Lebanon as if it were doing a favor to the Lebanese. Unlike Saddam Hussein who just moved into Kuwait, Hafez al-Assad made sure that his troops entered Lebanon as " saviors" with the support of the Arab League, the United Nations and the European powers. Syria has also shown a remarkable tactical good sense in knowing how and when to unleash the Lebanese armed groups it has organized with the help of Iran, against Israel. The Syrian leaders have often gone to the edge, but never beyond it as Saddam Hussein did. Today, there is absolutely no possibility that Syria will allow itself to be pushed into a corner in which the survival of its regime will be at stake. Syria knows how to not to believe its own incendiary slogans, and how to compromise when it has to. Iran is also referred to as a possible "next." But Iran, too, has a mechanism for change. The regime can get rid of a few angry mullahs, replacing them with smiling ones, if and when necessary. Whenever its survival has been seriously threatened, the Khomeinist regime has always backed down. The Khomeinists captured the American hostages but made sure that none of them was harmed. They organized the murder of over 300 Americans, including 241 Marines, in Lebanon but made sure that no Iranian was directly involved. In 1984 when the U.S. Navy sunk half of Iran's navy, the mullahs kept the whole thing quiet and opened secret channels to both Washington and Israel to ease pressure on themselves. The Khomeinists have also cooperated with Washington in Tajikistan and Afghanistan, and remained scrupulously neutral in both wars that pitted the U.S. and its allies against Iraq. Another possible "next" is Libya. But even Colonel Muammar Khadafi, who cultivates his image as a romantic not interested in political power, has never made the foolish mistakes that Saddam Hussein repeatedly made. After the Americans bombed Tripoli in 1986, Khadafi got the message and quickly severed relations with a variety of groups that Washington regarded as terrorist. The colonel later went further by handing over two of his senior intelligence officers to be tried as terrorists in the Lockerbie case. All along the Libyan regime has been wise enough not to believe its own propaganda and thus not to get involved in a struggle in which it has no chance of surviving let alone winning. Now to the second answer: Anyone and everyone could be the next target. The last Gulf War was aimed at restoring a status quo that had been upset by the Iraqi invasion. The current war is to change the status quo. Thus all the regimes in the region would have to change themselves, some more than the others to take into account the realities of a new status quo that will take shape once a new Iraqi regime is established. Those intelligent enough to make change their friend will have a part in shaping the new status quo. Those who regard change as an enemy will be in for rude shocks. Amir Taheri, the Iranian author and journalist, is based in Europe. He's reachable through www.benadorassociates.com. nationalreview.com