Wednesday, June 15, 2005

War on the Horizon

Yes, I know we are already at war, but something big is pinging on the horizon and I think it may pop relatively soon. This comes mostly from two stories that haven't been either in the news or around the blogosphere much lately. They are the shakiness of the Syrian regime and Israel's planned pull out of Gaza.

First, to Syria. Syria actually has been in the news a bunch lately because they were forced out of Lebanon, although they still have intelligence operatives there, and because we've been playing Whack-A-Terrorist on the Syrian border for the past couple of months. Syria is actually a very poor country with very few natural resources. Poverty, the loss of a major trading partner in Baathist Iraq, and the loss of rich territory to exploit in Lebanon lead to a dissatisfied populace. Then throw on an army that isn't doing much and the importation of a bunch of Iraqi Baathist who now don't have too much to do. All this leads to lots of opportunities for someone in the military or an Iraqi Baathist to think that he can do a better job running the country and *poof* coup. The best way for a dictator to avoid that fate is to start a war and encourage rampant nationalism.

This is where the Israeli pullout of Gaza comes in. Israel is scheduled to dismantled a whole bunch of settlements in Gaza and a couple in the West Bank and turn the governing of these territories over to the Palestinians. Except that the settlers who live there are mostly very religious, to the point of militism. They have promised to fight the government tooth and nail rather than leave their homes. This could actually evolve into a serious climate of potential civil war. With the Israeli government distracted Hamas, now emerging as a major party in Palestinian politics, calls for armed resistance to drive out the settlers who won't leave. The Israeli government then balks at having its citizens attacked, in the wrong or not, and fights back. Syria then seizes the initiative and sends in the army from the north to relieve their Muslim brothers in need. Whether or not Jordan and Egypt get involved is questionable. The Egyptian government needs a distraction but they still remember the spanking they got in 1967. Jordan's king is fairly pro-West, but a huge offense on his border might force him to side against Israel, at least in name.

So, would Syria and the other Arabs do this while the US is in the region? Possibly. We're tied up pretty well in Iraq and if AQ flares something in Iraq, or Iran threatens to move its armies through Iraq to aid its ally Syria, we could be pinned down completely and unable to respond. Iran could need to distract its populace as well depending on how the scheduled elections are turning out.

Possible? Maybe not immediately, but all the potentials are there. All it takes is one critical flash point, like the death of Abbas or something else which would allow Hamas to seize the microphone.

And the result? Victory for Israel, but at a nasty cost. Israel's nose got bloodied in 1973 and I think this could be even worse. Desperation house to house fighting, suicide attacks coupled with legitimate army maneuvers. Complete occupation of the West Bank and even the possible destruction of Damascus may be involved. Unfortunately that leaves another war on the horizon. The Arabs pull back and lick their wounds while Israel holds a territorial neutral zone around it, much like the Warsaw Pact nations were between the Soviet Union and NATO.

Maybe it won't happen and I'm reading too much into things. But I think I see buzzards on the horizon.

Wednesday, June 01, 2005

Deep Throat Unmasked

So, after all these years, we finally know who Deep Throat is. I find it rather amusing that he actually ended up looking like the actor who played him in All the President’s Men. As an aside, the movie wasn’t that great, but I think I was looking for more details about what happened after the story broke ala Oliver Stone’s Nixon.

Anyway, this revelation comes in a very haphazard manner and with very interesting timing. Deep Throat, and the whole Watergate mythology that has grown up over the years, has immortalized the “inside anonymous source.” Recently with the whole Newsweek Koran flushing retraction, the sanctity of the anonymous source has taken quite a beating. In fact, the blogosphere in general has been forcing mainstream media to shy away from the insider with an axe to grind.

For the most part, I suspect the rest of the week will be a reveling by the mainstream media of the Watergate era. It’s a reminder of when they were kings and had complete control of the establishment. Their ego has taken a severe beating in the past few years with the combination of scandals that have been unearthed, from the Eason Jordan incident to the Dan Rather memo incident.

The great irony in this whole thing is that Deep Throat didn’t actually give Woodward and Bernstein anything. He confirmed facts the duo already had, gave them encouragement when they were unsure, and nudged them down helpful avenues. Yet he has been built up as this great mythological figure that everyone reporter feels he must have. Woodward and Bernstein actually uncovered the story with good old-fashioned hard-nosed investigative journalism. A talent that has been noticeably lost on reporters of today who are too obsessed with the quick story that brings down the house.

It’s also amusing to note that if Nixon had simply promoted Mr. Felt to FBI Director, as most of the FBI insiders thought he should be, we would probably never have heard of Deep Throat. As a result, Woodward and Bernstein might have been much slower about breaking their story, or completely done in by a couple of mistakes they made along the way. Either way, Nixon might have been allowed to stay in office to complete his full term that would have meant that Ford wasn’t carrying the Nixon pardon baggage. Relieved of this burden, Ford might have had enough in him to defeat Carter in the 1976 election. Without the baggage, Reagan might have decided to work with Ford rather than oppose him. Ford would probably have snapped Reagan up to lock in California’s electoral votes and would have pushed him over the top against Carter. Most people forget that Carter only narrowly beat Ford by a couple of states. From then on we take a number of different avenues. Of course, this also assumes that Nixon would have chosen Ford to replace the disgraced Spiro Agnew. If he wasn’t worried about his own image as much, Nixon might have opted for someone other than the squeaky-clean Ford. So many avenues, so little time.