Monday, October 22, 2012

A Technological Fix for Safely Arming Syria's Rebels By Anthony Cordesman
On the other hand, the situation will often be little better if the United States does not intervene.Such equalizers could greatly reduce the need to directly project U.S. power in some contingencies and give our Special Forces and covert operators a whole new range of tools. They could alter the structure of proxy warfare and our ability to work with allies who directly transfer such weapons, without giving up final U.S. protections and controls. They could give friendly and moderate local forces a major advantage over extremists. Many of these choices will center on politics, regional stability, and the need for civil and humanitarian forms of aid. It seems almost certain, however, that the United States will repeatedly face the same security dilemmas it faced in Libya and now faces in Syria: either finding some way to intervene with military force, or standing by-both with unpredictable and highly negative potential consequences.Whether myth or reality, the Colt Arms Company is reported to have advertised that "God made man, but Samuel Colt made them equal." Light "smart weapons" can have much the same effect, as can limited transfers of short-range artillery devices and bomb-making materials. The U.S. problem with mortars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Israeli problem with rockets, and the growing challenge of bombs and improved explosive devices (IEDs) are all cases in point.This helps explain why countries like Saudi Arabia and Qatar have talked to the United States about giving the Syrian Liberation Army (SLA) and other "moderate" Syrian forces such weapons. A dictator-controlled military force like Bashar al-Assad's will still have the advantage in more advanced weapons, but it would face massive problems in using such force against a better-armed mass popular uprising.A popular insurgency could then inflict far more serious casualties with far less risk of collateral damage and losses on its own side, as well as have far more motivation to persist. It will be able to create its own safe zones, take advantage of "no fly" or "no move" zones enforced with limited uses of U.S. or allied force, and be able to quickly become far more effective with limited training by U.S. or other Special Forces.In some cases, even the threat of such transfers-coming from a U.S.-supplied allied or friendly state-could force an authoritarian regime to compromise or leave, knowing it could not win the resulting war of attrition. The transfer of "equalizers" could be as much a negotiating tool and deterrent as a method of combat. It also could bring a quicker end to long popular struggles and do so before they were polarized on ethnic or sectarian lines and gave growing power to the most extreme elements. At the same time, the very fact the United States obviously has such weapons could tilt the balance toward political settlement in some cases, and actually deploying them would make a critical difference in others. Counterterrorism and counterinsurgency do not have to be "classic" and involve the large-scale U.S. deployments as is the past. Such equalizers could reverse the present pattern of asymmetric warfare where cheap, relatively low-cost systems increasingly offset the U.S. advantage in advanced weapons and technology.
Anthony H. Cordesman holds the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.
[ed notes:im just citing few excerpts click link for whole piece.this think tank is of course funded by worlds biggest criminal corporations in west.It also played a role in supporting rationale for supporting Contras in Nicaragua.The aim of this paper is to cover all bases,continue aiding opposition with weapons,and create a system of new pipelines sending newer more effective weapons to facilitate regime change in Syria...these would include mechanisms wich could be shut off whenever the proxy insurgents decide to go astray,not follow west script,or no longer serve their purpose(excatly in same way as mujahid in afghanistan were turned into new enemy after defeating russia there)..from a  neocolonial strategists perspective,its like shooting two,three birds with one stone.this is also a way to protect themselves,since they are channeling weapons into all these terrorist groups,thru saudi arabia and qatar,many of wich are openly seen and known to be alqaeda groups,us can then use the excuse it wasn't or tried to give them weapons that could not be turned against us interests in future.....some backround on csis A brief history Program directors, chairs and resident senior advisers Corporate officers Board of Trustees and Counselors
... Counselors Zbigniew Brzezinski Henry A. Kissinger James R. Schlesinger Brent Scowcroft Trustees David M. Rubenstein -- Cofounder and Managing Director, The Carlyle Group Frederick B. Whittemore -- Advisory Director, Morgan Stanley Richard Armitage -- President, Armitage International William S. Cohen -- Chairman & CEO, The Cohen Group Muhtar Kent -- President, Chairman and CEO, The Coca-Cola Company  ...In November 2003, a CSIS released a report on Iraq authored by Dr. Anthony Cordesman. It was "based on briefings by Paul Bremer, the US de facto governor of Iraq; military commanders, unnamed intelligence officers and David Kay, the American who leads the hunt for Saddam's alleged weapons of mass destruction," reported The IndependentHistory.Originally CSIS sprung out from Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service, and many of principals were also faculty members at the university. For some time CSIS had an office on the Georgetown campus. Several of the principals were "Cold Warriors" and made a little industry out of finding "communist influence" around the world. During the war against Nicaragua, For many years, CSIS was also seen as a think tank where right-wing "officials-in-waiting" could wait until their next appointment in government.

 [ed notes:More on the author from CSIS.. Cordesman served as national security assistant to Senator John McCain of the Senate Armed Services Committee and as civilian assistant to the Deputy Secretary of Defense. He is also a former director of intelligence assessment in the Office of the Secretary of Defense
Cordesman points out improvements in the capability of the Israeli Defense Forces since the fighting against Hezbollah in 2006. He believes the military used "decisive force" against legitimate military objectives, in spite of their very real humanitarian cost [ed note:unfortunatly for the zionist fraud cordesman,israhell ended up admitting the illegal invasion of lebanon was based on lies.. see..  Israel Admits War Causes Were Fabricated   Cordesman's analysis also claimed that Israel did not violate the laws of war Lebanon: UN Rights Council report condemns flagrant Israeli  ...more on cordesman... Cordesman also served in other government positions, including at the United States Department of State, Department of Energy, and director of International Staff at NATO. TURNS OUT HE WAS ALSO A PARTICIPANT IN THE ISRAELI PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE CONFERENCE,AND ONTO THE INTERVIEW ... 

An Interview with Anthony CordesmanIsraeli Presidential - YouTube 19, 2012 - 5 min - Uploaded by PresidentialConf

No comments: