Middle East Press on: Iran, Syria, Netanyahu, War, Churchill, Tehran, Assad, Palestine: New Age Islam's Selection, 18 December 2024
By New Age Islam Edit Desk
19 December 2024
Unmeasured Words, whether from Officials or Loved Ones, Risk Complicating a Deal
Iran's Declining Power Opens Door for US, Israel to Support Iranian People Seeking Change
Israel Faces a Once-In-A-Lifetime Chance in Syria - It Would Be a Shame to Miss It
Israel's Pre-emptive Actions in Syria: Lessons from Churchill's World War II Strategy
Action Over Inaction: Netanyahu's War Decisions Support Churchill's Ethos
Iran's Revolutionary Guards Extend Control Over Tehran's Oil Exports, Sources Say
Syrian Exodus Reveals Fears of Some Behind the Joy of Many
Outside Interference in Post-Assad Syria Is Inevitable
The Need to Recognize the State of Palestine Now
------
Unmeasured Words, whether from Officials or Loved Ones, Risk Complicating a Deal
By Jpost Editorial
December 19, 2024
‘To everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven,” reads Ecclesiastes. “A time to keep silence, and a time to speak.’
When it comes to the hostages and the possibility of a deal to bring home at least some of the 100 people held by Hamas for 440 days, this is the time for silence.
Amid intense speculation about how close the sides are to a deal, about how it is just a matter of days and how it will materialize before US President-elect Donald Trump takes office on January 20, everyone involved should just not speak.
Neither American officials should speak publicly about the issue, nor Israelis. Not White House National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby nor Defense Minister Israel Katz.
Their saying the deal is as close as ever may be well-intentioned – it may want to give some comfort to the family members of the hostages – but it could have the opposite effect: raising false hopes and expectations.
On January 24, this was the headline of a New York Times article: “Negotiators Close In on Hostage Deal That Would Halt Fighting in Gaza for Weeks.”
On May 7, Reuters ran this as its headline: “US Believes Israel, Hamas Can Close Gaps on Hostage Deal.” And on August 17, the BBC ran this headline: “Israel-Gaza ceasefire deal closer than ever, Biden says.”
Each time, however, the hopes failed to materialize. There have been numerous times during this heartbreaking saga when various officials have said that a deal was just around the corner, only for that corner to suddenly disappear.
It's not over until it's over
This is a textbook case of something not being over until it is over. And until it is over, everyone should be quiet. Irresponsible chatter doesn’t help the negotiations and only misguides the public and cultivates false hopes.
In negotiations such as these, excessive publicity can undermine talks in a delicate stage. Public declarations can embolden Hamas to demand more or – again – withdraw entirely, knowing the government is facing mounting pressure to deliver. Silence, in this context, is not weakness; it is good strategy.
That rule of silence does not apply to the family of the hostages, who need to speak out to keep the issue on the agenda, ensure it remains a top priority, and make sure the fate of their loved ones is not the same as that of Ron Arad. Arad was the airman whose plane exploded over Lebanon in 1986, was taken prisoner, and never heard from again – with the government telling the family that staying quiet would be the best way to expedite his release.
Nevertheless, even the words of the family members of the hostages need to be weighed carefully. There is an understandable tendency to give the families wide berth to say whatever they want, and in whatever tone they deem fit, about the country and its leaders. It is right not to sit in judgment of those in whose shoes we do not walk.
Nevertheless, some of the recent comments by some relatives of the hostages, such as saying the government is abandoning the hostages or these words yelled at MK Ze’ev Elkin in the Knesset – “If my son comes back in a body bag or as body parts, I won’t bring you to trial, I will take the law into my own hands” – are counterproductive.
The families’ voices are vital, but so is discretion. Reckless accusations risk alienating potential allies in the government and the public, whose support is essential to keeping the hostages’ plight at the forefront of the national consciousness.
First of all, the state has been fighting a war for more than 14 months in an effort to free the hostages. Hundreds of soldiers have died and thousands have been wounded in the effort. So to say the state has abandoned the hostages is off-key.
Secondly, the super-strident rhetoric distances people from this very just cause rather than bringing them closer to it.
The families’ anguish is undeniable, and their voices must remain part of the national conversation. But unnecessary or unmeasured words, whether from officials or loved ones, risk complicating an already very delicate and precarious process.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-834042
-----
Iran's Declining Power Opens Door for Us, Israel to Support Iranian People Seeking Change
By Farhad Rezaei
December 19, 2024
The collapse of Bashar Assad’s regime, Iran’s longstanding ally in Syria, has sparked debate among observers. Some argue that Iran’s loss of faith in Assad contributed to his downfall. Yet, this view ignores the strategic logic underpinning the Islamic Republic’s alliance with Assad and its involvement in Syria. For the Islamists in Iran, Syria was not merely an ally; it was the Islamic Republic’s “strategic depth,” its “golden ring of resistance,” and even considered “more valuable than Iran’s Khuzestan Province.” Abandoning Assad would have meant abandoning Iran’s broader ambition of dominating the Middle East, a project reliant on Assad’s continued rule in Syria.
After seizing power in 1979, the Khomeinists aimed to export their Islamic Revolution and dominate the Middle East, despite limited resources. They adopted the low-cost strategy of creating proxy groups in countries with significant Shiite populations. They created a network of 19 terrorist organizations, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon, as well as 16 other terror groups in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen. They called this network, “the axis of resistance.”
Regime leaders recognized that sustaining the axis of resistance required incorporating Syria into the alliance as a vital conduit for transferring arms and resources to their proxies, particularly Hezbollah. They reached out to Hafez Assad, the Syrian dictator, father of Bashar, and he readily embraced the opportunity. Although Hafez Assad famously described Syria as the “beating heart of Arabism,” his economically struggling nation stood to benefit from alignment with the oil-rich regime in Tehran. Furthermore, as an Alawite leader – a minority sect within a predominantly Sunni population – Hafez Assad found it more pragmatic to collaborate with his unpopular Shiite neighbor.
Syria became central to Iran’s regional strategy, offering a land corridor to Beirut and safe havens for Hezbollah’s training and weapons. This land corridor enabled the movement of personnel, arms, and supplies to reach Hezbollah, significantly enhancing Iran’s capacity to project power and maintain influence across the Levant.
Syria was even regarded as Iran’s “35th province.” Hujjat al-Islam Mahdi Taeb, the head of the Ammar Strategic Base – an organization established to promote “soft war tools” – and an adviser to the supreme leader, declared that Syria’s strategic importance exceeds that of Khuzestan province in southern Iran.
Ali Akbar Velayati, Khamenei’s foreign policy aide, asserted that “Syria is a golden ring of resistance to Zionism. Iran supports it, because if Syria falls and its government collapses... the axis of resistance will collapse.”
QASSEM SOLEIMANI, the former head of the IRGC-Quds Force, called Syria “Iran’s strategic depth.”
Syria’s importance for Iran became unmistakable when, in 2011, widespread protests against Bashar Assad erupted. The IRGC Quds Force acted swiftly to intervene and ensure his survival. On the advice of Qassem Suleimani, Assad responded with considerable violence. With so much at stake, the Quds Force increased its presence in Syria and supplied “coercive means” to Assad to help the Syrian police and paramilitary units disperse the protesters.
The IRGC leaders were confident that the Basij militia, which had crushed the Iranian Green Movement in 2009, would be able to put down the rebellion in Syria. Iran sent several Quds Force high-ranking commanders who, together with the feared Syrian Shabiha (“ghosts”), brutalized protestors. By 2012, there were reportedly 1,200-2,000 Quds Force personnel providing intellectual and advisory help, backed up by some 7,000-10,000 fighters from Lebanese Hezbollah stationed at Damascus Airport, Aleppo, Hama, and Latakia.
By 2015, despite Iran’s efforts, Assad was losing control. Suleimani convinced Putin to intervene while Iran formed Shia militias such as Zainebiyoun Brigade, Fatemiyoun Brigade, Kataib Hezbollah, and Liwa Zulfiqar, turning the war in Assad’s favor.
IRGC historically rescued Assad from total collapse
The IRGC ultimately rescued Assad and the axis of resistance from total collapse, but this intervention came at a significant cost. According to some estimates, Iran spent approximately $50 billion in military aid and financial support, including $11 billion worth of oil supplied between 2012 and 2021. The human cost has also been substantial. From January 2013 to March 2017, the IRGC reported significant casualties, including 418 ranking officers – some of them generals – over 2,100 soldiers, and 7,000 wounded.
The regime disregarded the high costs because the investment yielded substantial returns, including securing Quds Force military bases, land routes, airports, and port facilities – critical assets for sustaining operations against common adversaries, particularly Israel.
FOR NEARLY a decade, Israel has launched weekly strikes on IRGC Quds Force bases in Syria to limit Iran’s influence, disrupt Hezbollah’s supply lines, and weaken the axis of resistance, with limited success. While these strikes inflicted significant damage, the strategic advantages Iran derived from maintaining a foothold in Syria and keeping it firmly aligned with the axis consistently outweighed the costs. From the Iranian regime’s perspective, “disconnecting Syria from the axis represented a significant strategic threat to the Islamic Republic.”
A major turning point came on October 7, 2023, when Hamas launched a brutal assault on Israel, killing 1,200 civilians and taking over 250 Israelis and others hostage. When Israel responded to Hamas’s attack, Iran directed Hezbollah to join the conflict to support Hamas. However, Israel countered Hezbollah with overwhelming force, inflicting heavy losses on its political and military leadership and infrastructure, significantly degrading its operational capacity. Simultaneously, intensified Israeli military operations against Quds Force positions in Syria resulted in considerable losses to its leadership and infrastructure. The bombing of IRGC-Quds Force bases, coupled with the weakening of Hezbollah, has severely undermined Iran’s influence in Syria and across the region.
While Iran’s regional influence diminishes, the regime is also grappling with serious internal crises. Its economy is in a severe downturn, marked by high inflation, rising unemployment, and widespread poverty. Mismanagement and corruption have compounded these challenges, leading to a significant decline in the living standards of the Iranian people. Economic hardships have fueled social discontent, resulting in widespread protests and civil unrest. The regime’s repressive responses have only deepened public dissatisfaction, further undermining its legitimacy.
The Iranian people have repeatedly voiced their dissatisfaction with the regime’s regional policies, particularly its involvement in Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq, and Syria.
During protests, slogans such as “Forget about Syria, think about us” and “Neither Gaza nor Lebanon, I sacrifice my life for Iran” have echoed public frustration over the regime’s focus on regional ambitions instead of addressing pressing domestic issues. Widespread discontent with social restrictions, economic collapse, and environmental mismanagement has further eroded public trust, creating a crisis of legitimacy for the regime.
The domestic and regional setbacks have collectively weakened the regime’s power and influence, rendering it incapable of preventing the collapse of the golden ring of the axis. In other words, the regime’s failure to save Assad was not due to a loss of faith in him but rather its lack of capacity.
As Khamenei admitted in his recent speech, they sought to assist Assad, but their efforts were thwarted by Israel and the United States, both on the ground and in the air.
Assad’s fall, along with the destruction of Hamas and Hezbollah, would mark the end of Iran’s regional hegemony project, severely limiting its ability to project power, rebuild proxy groups, and supply them with arms.
The US and Israel should seize this opportunity to try to change the regime by supporting the Iranian people who seek change, a critical step toward achieving lasting peace and stability in the region.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-834020
-----
Israel Faces a Once-In-A-Lifetime Chance In Syria - It Would Be A Shame To Miss It
By Harley Lippman
December 19, 2024
Within hours of the disintegration of Syria as we know it, it became clear that Israel was already taking concrete steps to adjust to the new reality. Less than 24 hours after Syrian Prime Minister Mohammed Ghazi conceded that Assad’s regime had fallen to the insurgent opposition and rebel forces, the IDF announced it had moved troops into the buffer zone that had been separating the countries since the 1974 armistice; captured strategic military positions along the border; and Syrian reports indicated that multiple bombing runs had been carried out by Israel’s air force, destroying Syrian and Iranian caches and facilities before they would have been taken by one of Syria’s armed opposition factions.
All of these actions make sense. Most are logical, short-term precautions and the bombing of military infrastructure is an opportunity well seized. However, while they are all immediate military steps, none of them are groundbreaking strategic moves. Syria’s current collapse also presents Israel with a strategic opportunity as the region is being reshaped for years to come.
True, it is easy to write ideas that are deemed worthless as reality unfolds. Only weeks ago it seemed extremely unlikely the Syrian opposition would manage to topple Assad’s regime within days, after failing to do so for almost a decade. But while caution is necessary and healthy skepticism welcomed, here are three areas Israel’s decision makers should be looking at to see how they can best serve Israel’s interests.
First, disrupting Iran’s supply routes to Israel’s borders. For years, Tehran had armed its proxies there and in the region, resulting in the still ongoing war the Jewish state has been fighting on multiple fronts. In many ways, Syria was a central part of this effort, acting as a staging ground for Iranian logistical and military efforts in the region.
With Syria’s collapse, Israel must strive to sever the supply routes established from Tehran to Beirut, by land or by sea, as well as force out any “advisors” from Tehran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps who happen to still be in the area.
SECOND IS the question of Syria’s internationally recognized borders. Until now, the country was treated as a single state based on the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement, even after the central government lost control over many parts to the rebel and opposition factions. The collapse of Assad’s regime has the potential of changing what Syria is as a country.
For Israel, this could present an opportunity to improve its position along the border with Syria, as the IDF is already doing, but in a more permanent manner. Additionally, such a scenario could reintroduce the question of an independent Kurdish region to the world – with the Kurds in eastern Syria already receiving significant military backing from the US.
Who will shape Syria in the coming years?
The third and largest question is: What are the powers that will play a role in shaping Syria? Currently, one US dollar is worth some 13,000 Syrian pounds. Whoever rules in Damascus will need a lot of economic aid to restore Syria as an independent country with a future for its people.
For years, Iran and Russia pulled the strings behind the scenes of Assad’s presidential palace. This won’t necessarily be the case in a month, a year or five years from now. Turkey is obviously highly invested, actively supporting Syrian factions in the north of the country, near its own border. European countries who will see an opportunity to send millions of Syrian refugees home will throw their hat into the mix. While a peace treaty between Jerusalem and Damascus might not be in the works now, it is in Israel’s interest to back-channel and work with those who finance Syria’s rebuilding.
The events of the past week aren’t merely dramatic – they are historic. December 2024 marks the end of the Assad family’s terrorizing rule over Syria, which started in November 1970 when Gen. Hafez al-Assad led a coup d’état and made himself president. But it would be foolish to only look at these days as the end of one era; they are also the start of a new page for Syria and its people.
Israel has a 100-kilometer border with Syria. The actions taken by the IDF in recent days show that Jerusalem is determined to safeguard that border and its people from any spillover of the internal fighting in Syria. At the same time, Israel’s leadership must see what strategic gains are to be made over the next months and years, as Syria emerges from the fighting to a new dawn, and an extremely pro-Israel US president and administration enter the White House. An opportunity like this comes once in a lifetime – it would be a shame to miss it.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-834009
------
Israel's Pre-emptive Actions in Syria: Lessons from Churchill's World War Ii Strategy
By Shlomo Slonim
December 19, 2024
The moment word went forth that Bashar al-Assad had fled Syria and that the country was without any government, Israel took immediate steps to prevent instruments of war from falling into enemy hands. This instantaneous response was intended to protect Israeli, with Israeli air force planes striking various military targets in order to prevent them from falling into enemy hands and endangering the State of Israel. Even though Assad is gone, his replacement is not necessarily a friend of Israel; the militants in Syria have threatened to strike “Jerusalem next.” We don’t know where this is headed and these weapons could have eventually fallen into unfriendly hands.
The IDF announced that it had “destroyed Syria’s navy.” The Jerusalem Post noted that Israel “had neutralized an entire enemy naval force, along with much of its air force.” The Israeli Navy struck both the Latakia and Al-Bayda ports, where 15 Syrian Navy vessels were docked. This was in addition to Israeli jets destroying vast storage facilities and deposits of Syrian weapons from one part of the country to the next, including rockets, specifically anti-aircraft missiles. The IDF “highlighted that the operation was conducted to stop the fleet’s assets from falling into the hands of hostile elements.”
By disabling significant parts of the Syrian Air Force and Navy as well as the Syrian systems for both offense and defense, Israel’s swift action has prevented Syria from becoming a wholesale distributor of weapons of war that could serve to threaten Israel’s security either immediately or be carted off for use at a later date. Israel’s quick action helped to save it from additional peril, near or far, sooner or later.
UN's condemnation of Israel's preemptive strikes
Naturally enough, Arab sources and their representatives in the United Nations condemned the Israeli action. The Arab spokesmen at the UN attempted to show that Israel’s action was a violation of international law, with the UN Special Envoy to Syria saying, “We are continuing to see Israeli movements and bombardments into Syrian territory. This needs to stop” and UN Secretary-General Guterres criticizing Israel’s bombardment, saying he was “particularly concerned” by them.
These critics would do well to take note of recent history.
Israel’s stand is reminiscent of British prime minister Winston Churchill’s actions during World War II in ordering the British Navy to destroy the French Naval Fleet that was docked in North African ports. In September 1939, France joined Britain in declaring war on Germany. In June 1940, however, France surrendered to Germany. Britain accepted the French retreat but demanded that the French naval fleet come immediately into British ports. When France delayed complying with this order, the danger was that the French Fleet, one of the largest in the world, would fall into German hands and be used in military action against Britain. In order to prevent this, Churchill ordered the British Fleet to destroy French warships situated in North African ports. Among the French vessels that were destroyed were two battleships, light cruisers, some submarines, eight destroyers, and approximately 200 smaller vessels such as minesweepers. This resulted in heavy loss of life among the French Navy personnel, with 1,700 French sailors killed.
The similarity between Britain’s conduct then, in the Battle of Britain, and Israel’s actions in the current crisis with the Arab world, are patently clear. Israel will undoubtedly continue to destroy material that might be employed in an attack on Israel. Those who criticize Israel for this pre-emptive act could derive an understanding of the situation from Churchill’s statement in Parliament explaining why he gave the order for the destruction of the French fleet in July 1940. The statesman said that he regretted the necessity of this action, which he explained was imperative in order to prevent these ships from falling into German hands and threatening British mastery of the seas, especially the English Channel.
Churchill noted, “We are moving through a period of extreme danger and of splendid hope, when every virtue of our[s] will be tested and all that we have and honour will be at stake. It is no time for doubts. This is the supreme hour.”
Israel can proclaim the same conviction.
In concluding his speech to Parliament, Churchill said, “I leave the judgment of our action with confidence to Parliament. I leave it to the nation. I leave it to the United States. I leave it to the world and history.”
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-834001
------
Action Over Inaction: Netanyahu's War Decisions Support Churchill's Ethos
By Uri Kaufman
December 19, 2024
On April 1, 1941, a group of Iraqi generals toppled a pro-British government in Baghdad and offered to turn valuable oil resources over to the Nazis. This alarming news arrived in London during the darkest days of World War II, when a battered Britain stood alone against the Axis onslaught.
Gen. Archibald Wavell cabled from Egypt that “no assistance could be given to Iraq,” and warned “in the gravest terms” of what would occur if the British Army even attempted to wrest control back from the enemy. Fortunately, prime minister Winston Churchill would have none of it. He overruled his generals, ordered a counterattack, and quickly returned Iraq to British hands. Churchill noted with wry understatement that one should generally avoid biting off more than one could chew, “but this principle, like others in life and war, has its exceptions.”
I have been reminded of this story many times since October 7, 2023, when Hamas terrorists murdered 1,200 Israelis, took over 250 others hostage, and triggered a multi-front war. In the immediate aftermath, President Joe Biden called for restraint, as did a group of American generals sent to Israel to offer advice. There were plenty of similar voices in Israel. And there was a popular movement that took to the streets, demanding that the government cave to the demands of the terrorists.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would have none of it.
He declared that Israel would enter Gaza, remove Hamas from power, and bring back the hostages. These lofty goals were met with ridicule. His own defense minister testified before the Knesset that Netanyahu’s talk of “total victory” was “nonsense.” A retired Israeli general warned that the IDF was unprepared for war and that entering Gaza would end in disaster.
Both were wrong. The IDF was well prepared. And the ground campaign that Netanyahu ordered in northern Gaza yielded the exact result he predicted. Hamas’s leadership was quickly surrounded. To save itself, it entered into a hostage deal that, together with rescue operations, has so far returned almost two-thirds of Israeli hostages.
Attention then turned to southern Gaza. Netanyahu insisted on conquering the city of Rafah and the surrounding border area, to block military supplies smuggled into Gaza from Egypt. US Vice President Kamala Harris warned of a humanitarian catastrophe because she “studied the maps, and there’s nowhere for those folks [Rafah civilians] to go.” On May 6, the Israeli Army entered Rafah and 800,000 Palestinian civilians relocated peacefully, just as Netanyahu predicted. The network of tunnels discovered between Gaza and Sinai – one big enough to drive a truck through – convinced even Netanyahu’s worst critics of the need to hold the border.
All of this success was tempered by an unavoidable problem: The mighty Israeli Army was running out of ammunition. Four thousand desperately needed bombs were held up by the Biden Administration because of the Rafah operation. On June 18, 2024, Netanyahu went public with this dispute, releasing a film in which he said that it was “inconceivable that in the last few months, the administration has been withholding weapons and ammunition to Israel.” The public showdown caused the Biden Administration to blink. The hold on ammunition was lifted.
Netanyahu stood alone
You would have expected to see the Israeli defense minister, the army chief of staff, and others in the film, standing behind Netanyahu in solidarity. Netanyahu stood alone. Far from supporting their prime minister, Israeli generals leaked on July 3 that they wanted a ceasefire “even if it keeps Hamas in power for the time being.” Netanyahu ignored them. The IDF went on to kill Yahya Sinwar, the mastermind of the October 7 attack, and practically all of Hamas’s senior leadership.
At last, Israel could turn its attention to Hezbollah, which had been shelling northern Israel since the beginning of the war. We now know that the Israelis had a long-prepared plan to set off explosives planted in Hezbollah pagers. But this operation was placed at risk by a senior Israeli general who warned that the government was planning an “impulsive act” that risked widening the war.
Netanyahu authorized setting off the pagers. Then he ordered an airstrike in the Beirut neighbourhood of Dahiyeh that wiped out Hezbollah’s senior leadership. These actions indeed widened the war. But only to the extent that they opened the door for Syrian rebels to rid the region of Bashar Assad’s brutal regime.
Iran’s proxy army has collapsed. Hamas is surrounded in a tiny part of Gaza, trying to negotiate a hostage deal. Its fondest ambition is to survive.
Netanyahu’s performance supports Churchill’s observation that one should never worry about action, but only inaction. It also supports the idea that history is made not just by great forces, but also by great men.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-833999
-----
Iran's Revolutionary Guards Extend Control Over Tehran's Oil Exports, Sources Say
December 18, 2024
Iran’s Revolutionary Guards have tightened their grip on the country’s oil industry and control up to half the exports that generate most of Tehran’s revenue and fund its proxies across the Middle East, according to Western officials, security sources and Iranian insiders.
All aspects of the oil business have come under the growing influence of the Guards, from the shadow fleet of tankers that secretively ship sanctioned crude, to logistics and the front companies selling the oil, mostly to China, according to more than a dozen people interviewed by Reuters.
The extent of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ (IRGC) control over oil exports has not previously been reported.
Despite tough Western sanctions designed to choke Iran’s energy industry, reimposed by former US President Donald Trump in 2018, Iran generates more than $50 billion a year in oil revenue, by far its largest source of foreign currency and its principal connection to the global economy.
Six specialists – Western officials and security experts as well as Iranian and trading sources – said the Guards control up to 50 per cent of Iran’s oil exports, a sharp increase from about 20 per cent three years ago. The sources declined to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter.
Three of the estimates were based on intelligence documents about Iranian shipping while others derived their figures from monitoring shipping activity by tankers and companies linked to the IRGC. Reuters was unable to determine the exact extent of the IRGC’s control.
The IRGC’s growing domination of the oil industry adds to its influence in all areas of Iran’s economy and also makes it harder for Western sanctions to hit home – given the Guards are already designated as a terrorist organisation by Washington.
Trump’s return to the White House in January, however, could mean tougher enforcement of sanctions on Iran’s oil industry. The country’s Oil Minister said Tehran is putting measures in place to deal with any restrictions, without giving details.
As part of their expansion in the industry, the Guards have muscled in on the territory of state institutions such as the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) and its NICO oil trading subsidiary, according to four of the sources.
When sanctions hit Iran’s oil exports years ago, the people running NIOC and the wider industry were specialised in oil rather than how to evade sanctions, added Richard Nephew, a former deputy special envoy for Iran at the US State Department.
“The IRGC guys were much, much better at smuggling, just terrible at oil field management, so they began to get a larger control of oil exports,” said Nephew, who is now a researcher at Columbia University.
The IRGC, NIOC, NICO and Iran’s Foreign Ministry did not respond to requests for comment.
Risk appetite
The IRGC is a powerful political, military and economic force with close ties to Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
The Guards exert influence in the Middle East through their overseas operations arm, the Quds Force, by providing money, weapons, technology and training to allies Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, Yemen’s Houthis and militias in Iraq.
While Israel has killed a number of senior IRGC commanders over the past year, the oil specialists in its ranks have been able to continue their operations, two Western and two Iranian sources said.
The Iranian government began allotting oil, instead of cash, to the IRGC and Quds Force around 2013, according to Nephew.
The government was under budgetary pressure then because it was struggling to export oil due to Western sanctions imposed over Iran’s nuclear programme.
The IRGC proved adept at finding ways to sell oil even under sanctions pressure, said Nephew, who was actively involved in tracking Iranian oil activities then.
Iranian oil revenues hit $53 billion in 2023 compared with $54 billion in 2022, $37 billion in 2021 and $16 billion in 2020, according to estimates from the US government’s Energy Information Administration.
This year, Tehran’s oil output has topped 3.3 million barrels per day, the highest since 2018, according to OPEC figures, despite the Western sanctions.
China is Iran’s biggest buyer of oil, with most going to independent refineries, and the IRGC has created front companies to facilitate trade with buyers there, all the sources said.
Oil export revenues are split roughly evenly between the IRGC and NICO, said one source involved in Iranian oil sales to China. The IRGC sells oil at a $1-$2 barrel discount to prices offered by NICO because buyers take a bigger risk buying from the Guards, the person said.
“It depends on a buyer’s risk appetite, the higher ones will go for the IRGC, which the US designates as a terrorist group.”
Two Western sources estimated that the IRGC offered an even bigger discount, saying it was $5 per barrel on average but could be as much as $8.
The oil is allocated directly by the government to the IRGC and Quds Force. It is then up to them to market and ship the oil – and work out a mechanism for disbursing the revenue, according to the sources and intelligence documents seen by Reuters.
NIOC gets a separate allocation.
Chinese front
One of the front companies used is China-based Haokun. Operated by former Chinese military officials, it remains an active conduit for IRGC oil sales into China, despite Washington hitting it with sanctions in 2022, two of the sources said.
The US Treasury said China Haokun Energy had bought millions of barrels of oil from the IRGC-Quds Force and was sanctioned for having “materially assisted, sponsored or provided financial, material or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of, the IRGC-QF”.
In one oil transaction dated 16 March, 2021 involving Haokun and parties including Turkish company, Baslam Nakliyat – which is under US sanctions for its trading links to the IRGC – a payment was processed via US bank, JP Morgan, and Turkish lender, Vakif Katilim, according to the intelligence documents.
The transaction took place before the companies were sanctioned. Reuters has no indication JP Morgan or Vakif Katilim were aware of the Iranian connection – highlighting the risks of companies getting inadvertently caught up in the shadow trade.
JP Morgan declined to comment. Vakif Katilim said in a statement: “Our bank performs its activities within the framework of national and international banking rules.”
Haokun declined to comment. Baslam did not respond to a request for comment.
‘Ghost fleet’
Quds Force Commander, Qassem Soleimani, who was killed in a US strike in Baghdad in 2020, had set up a clandestine headquarters and inaugurated that year for the unit’s oil smuggling activities, initially staffed by former oil minister, Rostam Ghasemi, according to the intelligence documents.
Reuters could not determine where all the oil money funnelled through the IRGC goes. The IRGC headquarters and day-to-day operations have an annual budget of around $1 billion, according to assessments from two security sources tracking IRGC activities.
They estimated that the IRGC budget for Hezbollah was another $700 million a year.
“Exact figures remain undisclosed, as Hezbollah conceals the funds it receives. However, estimates are that its annual budget is approximately $700 million to $1 billion. Around 70 per cent-80 per cent of this funding comes directly from Iran,” Shlomit Wagman, former director general of Israel’s Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing Prohibition Authority, said separately.
Hezbollah did not respond to a request for comment.
The former Secretary-General of Hezbollah, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, who was killed in an Israeli air strike, said Iran provided the group’s budget, including for salaries and weapons.
Iran’s main tanker operator, NITC, which previously played a key role in exports, also now provides services to the IRGC.
It executes ship-to-ship transfers of Iranian oil onto vessels operated by the IRGC to ship crude into China, according to sources and ship-tracking data. Such transfers are common practice to help disguise the origin of the oil tankers carry.
NITC did not respond to a request for comment.
In August, Israel’s National Bureau for Counter Terror Financing, part of the country’s defence ministry, imposed sanctions on 18 tankers it said were involved in transporting oil belonging to the Quds Force.
In October, the US Treasury slapped sanctions on 17 separate tankers it said formed part of Iran’s “ghost fleet”, outside of NITC vessels. It followed up with sanctions on a further 18 tankers on 3 December.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20241218-irans-revolutionary-guards-extend-control-over-tehrans-oil-exports-sources-say/
-----
Syrian Exodus Reveals Fears of Some Behind the Joy of Many
By Thomson Reuters Foundation
December 18, 2024
The exhausted-looking man stood on the Lebanese side of the Masnaa border crossing and turned his back on Syria as he scanned cars parked along the hilly road that marks the most direct route from Beirut to the Syrian capital, Damascus.
He had left his home in Damascus with his family because they are Shia Muslims and they feared the Sunni Muslim Islamists, who had toppled former President Bashar Al-Assad just days before, would eventually turn on members of his community.
“It is chaos,” the man said, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation. “It was not safe for us; the streets are filled with children carrying weapons.”
Although international attention has mostly focused on the millions of Syrian refugees who might return to their home country now that more than 50 years of brutal Assad family rule is over, not everyone feels welcome in the new Syria.
Tens of thousands of mainly Shia Muslims have fled to Lebanon since rebel forces ousted Assad on 8 December, according to a senior Lebanese security official quoted by Reuters.
And this despite the fact that Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS) – the Sunni Islamist group which has emerged as the dominant rebel force – has promised protection to minority faiths.
Syria’s nearly 14-year civil war became sectarian as Assad, from the minority Alawite faith, mobilised regional Shia allies, including Lebanese, Iraqi and Iranian forces, to help him fight mostly Sunni rebels.
HTS was an Al-Qaeda affiliate until it severed ties with the jihadist network in 2016, and its leader, Ahmed Al-Sharaa, has spent years trying to soften its image.
But while thousands in Syria are delighted by the fall of Assad – with people thronging the streets, dancing and chanting after Friday prayers last week – others are more reticent and wonder what the future holds.
Shias make up around a tenth of the population, which stood at 23 million before the war began.
Some Shias fled Damascus after receiving threats, both in person and on social media, according to Reuters.
Other Syrians at the Masnaa crossing said they were leaving because of the dire state of the economy and services after years of war. Gross domestic product more than halved between 2010 and 2020, according to the World Bank.
Today, as well as hundreds of thousands of lives taken by the war, around 12 million have been displaced and 16.7 million need help just to survive. Schools and hospitals have been destroyed and the land scarred by conflict and climate change.
‘Used to being estranged’
Majed Mazinco, who was waiting for transport at the border, said he was going back to his home in the countryside outside Damascus for the first time in 15 years.
But the 31-year-old labourer was also worried about economic conditions. He had saved $200 to fund his return but was not sure how long that would last if he could not find a job.
“I don’t care much for Bashar or anyone else,” he said. “I just want to live, and to sleep at peace. I do not want any problems.”
If he does not find a job before his money is spent, he plans to come back to Lebanon.
“We are used to being estranged,” he said.
Hasan Nawas was also waiting for transport. He stood with his friend, who was fuming because their driver had just taken off with their luggage, he said.
But Nawas did not seem to mind – he was on his way to fulfil his childhood dream of returning to his home country for the first time in his life.
Born in Lebanon, the 19-year-old Syrian had long dreamt of praying at the famed Umayyad Mosque in Damascus, and now he was finally going to do it, he said.
He planned to join his parents and siblings in the capital, and with one dream conquered, his sights would then be firmly set on another.
“I am going to open a furniture shop in Damascus,” he said, before running to the taxi that would take him home, all thoughts of his lost luggage evaporating in his excitement.
But coming the other way was 23-year-old Sahar Assad, a Syrian mother-of-two, who has already seen much upheaval.
Assad left Syria during its civil war, but then fled her new home in Beirut’s southern suburbs seven months ago to escape the Israel-Hezbollah war and returned to her hometown, Damascus.
Now, with the conflict in Lebanon winding down, she said it was time to get her children, who were sitting next to her, back into school.
“There are no schools there,” she said, pointing to Syria.
She is also worried about her husband. He stayed in Beirut, despite the bombs rather than risk being conscripted into Assad’s army. They have no immediate plans to return full-time to Syria.
“For now, we wait (to see) what happens.”
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20241218-syrian-exodus-reveals-fears-of-some-behind-the-joy-of-many/
------
Outside Interference in Post-Assad Syria Is Inevitable
Christopher Phillips
December 18, 2024
After the sudden collapse of Bashar Assad’s dictatorship, many people have understandably urged foreign powers not to meddle in Syria’s affairs. “Syria’s future must be determined by Syrians, not outside powers,” wrote the Hagop Kevorkian Center’s Mohamad Bazzi for The Guardian, while International Crisis Group declared that outside powers “need to avoid destabilizing interference.” These sentiments are laudable.
Ever since protests erupted against Assad in 2011, outsiders have sought to bend the ensuing civil war in a favorable direction. And Syria would almost certainly benefit from the same forces leaving the country alone as it transitions away from Baathist rule. However, while Syrians should be the ones who determine the shape of their country, it is unrealistic to expect outside powers to suddenly cease their interference. Foreign involvement is a reality Syria’s new government must deal with and manage as best it can.
Syria’s strategic location has long meant it attracted outside meddling. In the 1950s, rivals Egypt and Iraq backed different factions, as did Britain, the US and USSR. This pattern resurfaced after 2011, when Russia and Iran supported Assad in the civil war while Turkiye, Qatar and others backed the rebels. The US sponsored a selection of rebel groups but mostly the Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces to fight Daesh. Meanwhile, Israel, though not backing a faction, took advantage of the chaos to launch airstrikes on Iran-linked targets. Nor was it only state governments involved, nonstate actors like Daesh and the PKK weighed in to further their interests.
As a result, Syrians hoping to rebuild after Assad face a devastated, war-torn state. But they also face a country that has been deeply penetrated by outside interests. Some foreign actors are willing to act with little or no regard for Damascus. Already in the week since Assad’s fall, Turkiye, Israel and the US have launched military operations on Syrian territory. Turkiye has continued its attacks on the SDF, which it regards as a terrorist entity, Israel has occupied more land surrounding the occupied Golan Heights and destroyed Syrian military assets fearing they will fall into hostile hands, while the US has hit Daesh in the east.
But alongside a willingness to use their own forces unilaterally, the years of civil war have seen multiple outsiders develop new networks across Syrian society. Some are overt, such as the Syrian National Army, which is sponsored by Turkiye, and the SDF, with its links to the US. Others are more covert or not currently active. Iran and Russia, for example, will still have ties with some former Assad loyalists, after years of collaboration. The Gulf states likewise built relationships with various oppositionists early in the war that might be reactivated in the future. Daesh, similarly, retains cells across Syria. As well as having the military tools to directly infringe on Syrian sovereignty, these networks and relationships give outsiders further opportunities to interfere.
It seems unlikely that the outside actors that have meddled for years will suddenly discover a benevolent side, check their involvement and put Syrians’ long-term interests over their short-term needs. Instead, it will more likely fall on Syria’s new rulers to carefully navigate a perilous geopolitical situation to ensure that foreign interference remains peripheral and does not undermine transition efforts. While there are numerous things Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham and the new government can do to mitigate the risks, two stand out.
The first is to rapidly develop diplomatic skill and capacity. HTS, when it ruled Idlib, showed a surprising talent for managing external actors, whether the UN, Turkiye or aid providers. It has also made positive efforts to reach out to Turkiye, Arab and European governments since taking Damascus. It will hope to swiftly upscale this, perhaps drawing in other talents from the diaspora and former officials to give Syria a stronger voice internationally.
Damascus already faces a chorus of outsiders making demands of the new government, including renouncing terrorism and chemical weapons, protecting minority and women’s rights and calling elections. It will take considerable diplomatic skill from Ahmad Al-Sharaa, or whomever ultimately leads the government, to appease enough of these to win sufficient foreign acceptance, all the while maximizing Syria’s independence.
The second is to minimize the chances that Syrians become disaffected with the post-Assad government, making them susceptible to outsiders wanting to use their networks to pursue their interests. For now, it seems that most Syrians have welcomed the fall of Assad and are willing to give the transitional government a chance, especially after HTS made positive noises about tolerance. However, this support could dissipate, especially if HTS does not go ahead with religious freedom, imposes excessive personal restrictions on society, refuses to share power and/or fails to deliver economic recovery. In such circumstances, it is plausible that disaffected elements become more open to either outside forces nudging them toward a more disruptive path or seeking out foreign support themselves.
It is far from clear whether Al-Sharaa, HTS and the new transitional government will be able to manage this. They have achieved a huge amount in a very short time, but navigating the harsh geopolitical environment post-Assad Syria finds itself in is a wholly new challenge. In an ideal world, meddling outside actors would leave Syrians alone to work through their new domestic reality unimpeded. But we do not live in such a world and Damascus should not be blinded to the realities it faces. Whether Syria’s new rulers have sufficient skill and foresight to minimize the damage of inevitable foreign interference remains to be seen.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/2583520
-----
The Need To Recognize The State Of Palestine Now
Daoud Kuttab
December 18, 2024
Wars are waged with the goal of attaining a political resolution. Israel’s wars are an exception. The war on Gaza following the Oct. 7, 2023, cross-border attack by Hamas has focused on the near-impossible goal of annihilating an idea. Palestinian resistance takes different forms and sometimes fails to apply the laws of war. But international law clearly affirms that occupiers have no right to self-defense, while the occupied people have a right to resist illegal occupations, as repeatedly stated by tireless Italian lawyer and UN Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories Francesca Albanese.
Israel’s war on Palestinians, which has also included the West Bank and assassinations of Palestinian leaders in Iran and Lebanon, has exposed the rejection of the leaders of the state of Israel from articulating a political solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
Stemming from the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion of July, the UN General Assembly in September voted overwhelmingly to adopt a resolution that demands Israel “brings to an end without delay its unlawful presence” in the Occupied Territories.
This decades-long occupation of Palestinian lands has made the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza subservient and dependent on the Israeli occupiers. Therefore, the first order of business is to begin decoupling from the occupation to allow Palestinians to live in a truly independent and contiguous state. Consecutive US officials have supported the two-state solution but there has been no effort to ensure the end of this illegal Israeli occupation.
The international community must press Israel, as the International Court of Justice has recommended, to freeze the building of new illegal settlements that have been proven to violate international law, specifically the Fourth Geneva Convention.
The Israeli occupation’s stranglehold over the Palestinian economy is manifested in military orders, restricted economic accords with the Palestine Liberation Organization and actual practices on the ground that have resulted in a deformed Palestinian economy.
If Palestinians take control of their resources and the barriers to internal and external trade are removed, the Palestinian economy will grow by at least 35 percent (excluding income from oil and gas) and government revenues would be enough to sustain the Palestinian economy without foreign aid.
At present, Israel militarily controls the Occupied Territories and this must stop. A multinational force must guard the borders. Palestinians should be able to travel to Jordan and back using their own vehicles. Imports and exports from and to Palestine must be ensured without the control of Israel, except for security checks, which must be restricted only to international standards of security.
The ball is now in the international community’s court. The International Court of Justice has called on the UNGA and the UN Security Council to ensure Israeli compliance. Recognizing and supporting an independent state at the UNSC can go a long way in helping Palestine decouple from its occupiers and begin the process of implementing its inalienable right of self-determination, leading to an independent and democratic state alongside a safe and secure state of Israel, in fulfillment of the second half of the preamble of UNSC Resolution 242, which calls for “the need to work for a just and lasting peace in the Middle East.”
If Europe genuinely wants to drive progress toward peace, it must show courage and conviction. That means recognizing the state of Palestine along the pre-1967 borders, thereby helping to balance the scales in negotiations and clarifying the framework for peace.
The Palestinian president has been resolute and consistent in rejecting all forms of violence against Israelis, but his hands have been tied by successive hawkish right-wing Israeli governments that have literally been stealing money collected on behalf of Palestinians because they dare to care for their prisoners and the families of those who died in fighting for a free Palestine.
Once the end goal of an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel is clear, the UN has many mechanisms to help move the peace process along, including the defunct but never dissolved 1947 UN Special Commission on Palestine.
The US can make a major contribution to peace by living up to its own words regarding the two-state solution and agreeing not to stand against the arc of history. Palestinians have a right to self-determination and they have decided, along with the entire world, including the current government in Israel, that such a right come to fruition through two states — Palestine and Israel. The US was the first country to recognize Israel back in 1948 and it is high time that the US administration listened to the calls of Palestinians yearning to be free and recognized the other half of the two-state solution that is repeated ad nauseam by American officials.
There is so much that needs to be done before a truly independent and democratic Palestinian state is realized. A total revamp of the Palestinian political process and personnel is needed, including the absolute necessity to involve Palestinians in the diaspora, especially those in the Levant and the Gulf. Such a process of true democratization, which must be independent with impartial international support, is needed for Palestinian unity of purpose and direction. This will also rebuff the unfair Israeli and Zionist excuse for denying Palestinians their inalienable right of self-determination and statehood. The road to statehood will require some hard decisions.
Ever since the Balfour Declaration in 1917, foreign powers have been involved and have taken sides, largely against the Palestinian people. The time for a solution is now. Recognizing Palestine on the June 4, 1967, borders and allowing the genuine representatives of the state of Palestine to negotiate all outstanding issues with the Israelis’ representatives is the way out of this century-old war. It all starts with the need for the recognition of the state of Palestine now.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/2583493
----
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism