The Latest from Iran (17 February): Psst, Want to See Something Important?

2250 GMT: Cyber-Warfare. Looks like someone wants to stop the latest Karroubi surge. The "Sun Army" took down Karroubi's website Saham News. The Saham staff have control of the site again but a message indicates that it is "under construction".

2230 GMT:It is reported that Parisa Kakaee of the Committee of Human Rights Reporters Maziar Samei of the One Million Signatures Campaign, Bahar Tarakameh, and Nazanin Hassania have been released from prison. 26 other political prisoners are also reported to have been freed.

1830 GMT: I'm on an evening break which happily involves dinner at Birmingham's best Iranian restaurant.

1820 GMT: More Importantly (Rafsanjani Front Continued). Hashemi Rafsanjani, manoeuvring against the pressure on him, has issued another statement declaring his loyalty to the Supreme Leader:

Certain people inside Iran are fanning divisions that never existed and do not exist, and foreigners looking for propaganda feed themselves some tasty morsels....Why should we have differences? Even now we sit together every two weeks and discuss every issue in the country. These are meetings where we speak without restrictions because they are not recorded.

NEW Iran Analysis: Ahmadinejad Stumbles; “Karroubi Wave” Surges
NEW Iran Nuke Shocker: Clinton/White House "Tehran Not Building Weapons"
NEW Iran Document: Fatemeh Karroubi “My Family Will Continue to Stand for the People’s Rights”
Iran Special: Live-Blogging Ahmadinejad Press Conference (16 February)
Iran: Why The Beating of Mehdi Karroubi’s Son Matters
Iran Document: The 10-Demand Declaration of 4 Labour Unions
Iran Document: Shadi Sadr at the UN on Abuse, Justice, and Rights (12 February)
The Latest from Iran (16 February): Un-Diplomatic Declarations

1815 GMT: For What It's Worth. Some outlets are giving lots of play to the Supreme Leader's use of Hillary Clinton's "dictatorship" statement to issue his own challenges to the "West".

You can get notable extracts in that coverage --- frankly, I know this script and I can't be bothered to post any more of it.


1810 GMT: Shahabeddin Tabatabei, of the reformist Islamic Iran Participation Front, has been released on $500,000 bail after eight months in detention.

1800 GMT: And the Karroubi Front. Following up our analysis of the renewed Karroubi challenge to Ahmadinejad and the text of the interview of Mehdi Karroubi's wife Fatemeh, some more news:

The mother-in-law of Ali Karroubi, the son of Mehdi who was beaten on 22 Bahman, has followed Fatemeh Karroubi’s letter to the Supreme Leader with one of her own: "As a mother of three martyrs of Iran-Iraq War, I ask you to listen to people’s voices and help them and punish those who hurt protesters." Like Fatemeh Karroubi, she said that her letter was not only for Ali but for any innocent person who has been jailed, beaten, or run over by cars as in the Ashura demonstrations.

The children of Hashemi Rafsanjani and the grandson of Ayatollah Khomeini have visited Ali Karroubi and condemned the attack on him.

1755 GMT: On the Rafsanjani Front. Mehdi Hashemi, the son of Hashemi Rafsanjani, has responded to the jibe of Fars News that he has "settled" in London. Hashemi said in a letter, "I am doing my Ph.D. abroad just like any other Iranian. I have not become the refugee of any country. And I will return to Iran when the time comes."

1750 GMT: The Challenge on the Economy. Speaker of Parliament Ali Larijani did not wait long to respond to the President's press conference. He made 15 points against the proposed budget and said that he had mentioned his dissatisfaction in a meeting with the Supreme Leader.

The pro-Larijani Khabar Online is also featuring the statement of an MP that, if Parliament did not have to follow procedure, it would have questioned Ahmadinejad over his illegal actions.

1740 GMT: From the blog of Shadi Sadr, via Pedestrian, referring to journalist Ahmad Zeidabadi, who has been sentenced to six years in prison:

An hour ago, I walked out of the post office and was hurriedly walking towards the metro when I saw a man on the sidewalk with two bags of fruit in his hand. I first saw the tangerines in one of the bags, and then I saw his face, as he was passing by me. He looked so much like Ahmad Zeydabadi! My heart sank. I thought: there were certainly days when Ahmad Zeydabadi too would buy fruit on his way home … those simple days of the past seem like so long ago!

I did not know Ahmad Zeydabadi personally. But I have a distinct memory of him in mind. A few years ago when the Committee of Human Rights Reporters had a press meeting to speak against the controversial family laws, Zeydabadi went to the podium, and instead of talking in difficult, muddled terms, like the politicians who spoke before him, he only spoke of his personal experience, growing up in a family of two wives. And through that, he spoke about how in a family where there are multiple wives, not only do the wives endure pain, but so do the children. His were some of the most honest words I’d ever heard, and I will never forget them. The day after, when I went through the news, no matter how much I looked, I did not see any of Zeydabadi’s words anywhere. Even those friends of mine who were filming the meeting, had not thought anything of Zeydabadi’s speech and had not filmed it! That’s when I realized how much our own culture is still resistant to men who want to break stereotypes.

I can write about Zeydabadi, because I did not know him personally. But I can’t write of my own friends who are in prison, because I’m afraid of what their interrogators will do. I’m afraid that they might put my friends under even more pressure. I can only say this: it has been a good while now that I know that every morning when I wake up and turn on the computer and read the news, a long list of my friends, acquaintances, colleagues, someone I used to know, will be in the list of new prisoners. Every day, familiar names are added behind the walls of Evin Prison, and everyday I ask myself: where did they go, those simple days? …

1735 GMT: Economics 101. Iran's Deputy Energy Minister, Mohammad Behzad, says 20 power plants will be privatised in the first half of the next Iranian year, ending 20 September.

Q. Given the problems in Iran's electricity industry, with the Government owing millions and up to 900,000 workers facing layoffs, who would want to purchase a power plant?

A. Maybe an up-and-coming firm with absolutely no connection whatsoever with the Islamic Revolution GuardsCorps?

1640 GMT: Changing the Numbers. EA readers may have noted our scepticism over some of the President's economic claims in his Tuesday press conference. Jahan-e San'at shares the view, criticising Ahmaninejad for citing data from 2007/8 as the figures for 2008/9.

1635 GMT: The reformist Mojahedin of Islamic Revolution party has thanked all those who participated in the 22 Bahman rally despite threats and intimidations, and it has condemned "hard-line" propaganda for claiming that all those who participated in the rally were supporting "the coup government".

1630 GMT: Tabriz Lockdown? The speech of reformist member of Parliament Mohsen Armin, scheduled for today, has been cancelled. The cancellation follows the claimed halt of an appearance by Mir Hossein Mousavi in the same city on 22 Bahman.

1625 GMT: Iran v. Coma Countries. Quote of the day goes to Brigadier-General Seyyed Massoud Jazayeri, "The West has gone into a coma after mounting a propaganda campaign to sway the public opinion over Iran's nuclear issue."

1600 GMT: Labour Pessimism. Back from a break to find an analysis by two Iran-based journalists, "Opposition Fails to Organize Strikes". Javoo Akbar and Nivoo Sarvi (pseudonyms) conclude:

The absence of an independent workers’ union and the lack of interaction between their different associations across the country has resulted in low levels of political consciousness. That and the fact that so many of the weapons are in the hands of the authorities, means there is no prospect of either the opposition or organised labour initiating widespread workers’ strikes to back Mousavi or any other opposition figure.

1320 GMT: Putting Hashemi in His Box (cont.). More on yesterday's update about renewed attacks against former President Hashemi Rafsanjani ahead of next week's meeting of the Assembly of Experts, which Rafsanjani chairs.

Kalameh reports that Hamzeh Karami, manager of the Jomhouriyat website, which was active during the elections, has been sentenced to 16 years in prison and payment of six billion tooman (just over $6 million).

The link to Rafsanjani? In the Tehran trials last August, Karami gave a high-profile "confession" that implicated Mehdi Hashemi, Rafsanjani's son, in corruption and diversion of election funds to undermine Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

1225 GMT: How that "Regime Change" Thing Works. First, a couple of US Congressmen, John Cronyn and Sam Brownback, introduce an "Iran Democratic Transition Act" committing the US Government "to fully and publicly support efforts of the Iranian people to oppose and remove the current regime and transition to a freely elected, open, and democratic government in Iran".

Then Press TV gets hold of the bill, which is more a bit of political posing than likely legislation, to drive home the "foreigners" v. "good Iranian nation" theme:

Two Republican senators have once again introduced a draft bill in the US Congress seeking full support for the Iranian opposition and the overthrow of the Islamic Republic government in Iran. Senators John Cornyn and Sam Brownback introduced the so-called “Iran Democratic Transition Act” bill on February 11, coinciding with the anniversary of the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, in which unprecedented tens of millions of Iranians poured into the streets to rally and celebrate the 31st anniversary.

An 'extraordinarily' high number of people marched across different cities in the country, throwing their lot with a revolution which toppled a US-backed monarchy in Iran.

The bill repeats the old rhetoric about human rights violations in Iran, its nuclear energy program, and alleged support for terrorism, fully advocating a “regime change” in the country.

1215 GMT: The Clinton Charade. The theatre continues today, with the Supreme Leader using Hillary Clinton's "dictatorship" remark to strike a pose. Khamenei accused her of spreading "lies" and said, "Those who have turned the Persian Gulf into an arms depot in order to milk regional countries for money have now dispatched their official to go around the Persian Gulf and spread lies against Iran."

1115 GMT: For What It's Worth. CNN has posted the video of its interview with Iran's top "human rights" official, Mohammad Javad Larijani: "Iran is the greatest, the only democracy in the Middle East."

1055 GMT: Alireza Beheshti, Mir Hossein Mousavi's chief advisor, has resumed teaching at Tarbiat Modarres University. Beheshti was recently released after several weeks in detention.

1030 GMT: A Buffet of Analyses. We've got Sharmine Narwani taking apart the US Government's conflicting signals on Iran's nuclear programmes, an analysis of Ahmadinejad's stumble and the "Karroubi wave", and the English text of Fatemeh Karroubi's interview with Rooz Online.

0855 GMT: More on the Economic Front. Ali Asghar Yousef-Nejad, a member of the Parliament's Industries Commission, has declared that budget details are unclear and asserted that the Minister of Economy has projected only 3% growth, instead of the 8% envisaged in the budget. (Yesterday the President simply made up a figure for Iran's 2009/10 growth.)

0825 GMT: Not That Close to the US. More fencing on the nuclear issue and "America": Haghighat News, linked to the President, has denied that Ahmadinejad's chief of staff Esfandiar Rahim Mashai met with US officials in Qatar. His trip, which coincided with the stay of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her delegation, "was simply aimed to observe the condition of Iranians residing in the Persian Gulf Arabian country".

0815 GMT: In Rah-e-Sabz, Farid Modaresi offers a lengthy analysis on the relationship between Qom's clerics and the Government. Amidst its interesting insights is a meeting between Ayatollah Nouri-Hamedani and the head of Bonyade Shahid, the charitable trust for war veterans and their families. Nouri-Hamedani requested that this message be passed the President: "If you want to stay in power, eliminate problems like high prices (from which 70% of the population suffers), unemployment, discrimination. Eliminate also housing problems."

0750 GMT: Want to See an EA Analysis in Action? Here's a big clue pointing both to the economic Achilles' heel of the Ahmadinejad Government (see 0645 GMT) and the hope that it will just go away. Press TV headlines its summary of the President's press conference, "Ahmadinejad says Iran to install advanced centrifuges."

Number of paragraphs devoted to the nuclear issue? 11
Number of words devoted to the economic questions that dominated the conference? 0

0745 GMT: Evaluating the Movement. Ali Farhadzadeh offers a lengthy critique of the origins and development of the post-election opposition:

No one can deny the role of a leader in bringing protesters together in the freedom movements of modern history, such as the role Gandhi, Mandela and Martin Luther King played in the progress and triumph of the movements of India, South Africa and African Americans in the United States. However, in the Green Movement the lack of leadership is somehow compensated by virtual social networks.

0735 GMT: American Postures. Another shot at Tehran from a US official, although this may be just a specific statement from the American military linked to Iraq's internal development rather than part of a wider get-tough strategy:

The top American commander in Iraq says the U.S. has "direct intelligence" that two senior Iraqi officials in charge of keeping Saddam Hussein loyalists out of the Baghdad government have ties to Iran. Gen. Raymond Odierno says Ali al-Lami and Ahmed Chalabi "are clearly influenced by Iran" and have attended senior-level meetings with members of the hardline Shiite regime there.

0730 GMT: We've posted Tricia Sutherland's human rights special this morning, summarising developments between 7 and 14 February.

0725 GMT: Closing Iran's Movies. The first time EA has taken a story from Hollywood's newspaper, Variety:

Iranian helmer Jafar Panahi has been denied permission by local authorities to travel to Berlin.
Panahi, whose "Offside" was awarded the fest's jury grand prize in 2006, was scheduled to participate in a panel discussion on Iranian cinema during the fest's World Cinema Fund Day today.

The Berlinale sent out a press release Tuesday announcing that Panahi would not be attending the fest, where he was an honorary guest.

"We are surprised and deeply regret that a director who has won so many international prizes has been denied the possibility to take part in our anniversary festival and to speak about his cinematic visions," said fest director Dieter Kosslick.

Iran Nuke Shocker: Clinton/White House "Tehran Not Building Weapons"

Sharmine Narwani writes for The Huffington Post:

Secretary of State Hilary Clinton and White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs have been on a roll since Friday defending Iran's assertions that it is not pursuing a nuclear weapons program.

You heard right.

In response to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's recent claims that Iran had enriched uranium to the 20% level required for medical isotopes at the Natanz enrichment facility, Gibbs declared: "The Iranian nuclear program has undergone a series of problems throughout the year. We do not believe they have the capability to enrich to the degree to which they now say they are enriching."

Latest from Iran (17 February): Psst, Want to See Something Important?

If that is the case, then how on God's earth can the Iranians enrich uranium to the 90% level required for a nuclear bomb?



Natanz, where the alleged enrichment took place --- or according to US officials, didn't --- is the site that Israel most threatens to bomb. The Jewish state claims that Iran is on the verge of producing a nuclear weapon. Or maybe not. Last June, Israel's Mossad Chief Meir Dagan extended the date for when Iran could produce weapons grade uranium or have "breakout capacity" to 2014.

While the US media rallied to cover Ahmadinejad's declaration on Thursday that Iran was now a "nuclear state", Gibbs dismissed those assertions, responding that "Iran has made a series of statements that are far more political than they are. They're based on politics, not on physics."

So which is it? Is Iran working on a nuclear bomb or not? Let's look at the evidence most recently cited by US officials. Speaking on Sunday at a US-Islamic World Forum in Doha, Qatar where the US secretary of state is conducting a three-day tour --- in part to persuade Persian Gulf allies to support Obama's initiatives to contain a nuclear Iran --- Clinton said there was mounting evidence that the Islamic Republic was pursuing a nuclear weapon: "The evidence is accumulating that that's exactly what they are trying to do...Iran has consistently failed to live up to its responsibilities. It has refused to demonstrate to the international community that its nuclear program is entirely peaceful."

When asked to point to evidence of a nuclear program, US State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley was quoted by Al Jazeera as saying: "Given the current trajectory that Iran is on - the fact that it still has centrifuges spinning, and the fact that it is unwilling to constructively engage the international community - we have to assume that Iran is pursuing a nuclear programme."

He continued: "Given all the steps that Iran has taken and all the actions that Iran refuses to take, we can only begin to draw the conclusion that Iran's intentions are less than peaceful."

If that is the basis on which the US is assembling a multi-national alliance to apply economic sanctions on the Iranian government, then it is deeply flawed premise. For one, it is virtually impossible to assess "intentions" when there is no real communication with the Islamic Republic, and therefore no way to anticipate or know its psyche.

A hostile stance toward US foreign policy is not a compelling barometer for assessing a country's preparedness to engage in risky belligerent actions --- neither is negative rhetoric or political posturing as Gibbs suggests. If that were the case, we would need to act on the perceived "intentions" of half the world's nations.

Secondly, for every one of the handful of allies who have bought in to our "intentions" theory, there are ten nations who do not see an Iran of harmful intentions. And it isn't just China and Russia that are hesitant. It is Brazil, Turkey, India, Qatar - important US allies - and the vast majority of the 118-nation Non-Aligned Movement.

A RAND report commissioned by the U.S. Air Force Directorate of Operational Plans and Joint Matters to take a fresh look at Iran's military, economic and religious strengths and limitations, last spring cautioned the administration to differentiate between Iran's rhetoric and its actions, an important factor in assessing intentions:

"Its revolutionary ideology has certainly featured prominently in the rhetoric of its officials," the report says. "However, the record of Iranian actions suggests that these views should be more accurately regarded as the vocabulary of Iranian foreign policy rather than its determinant."

The Report concludes that, in spite of its rhetoric and the concerns of neighboring states, Tehran does not seek territorial expansion or ideological exportation of its Islamic revolution. Instead, the report cautions that "the ideology and bravado of Iran's President Ahmadinejad and its religious leader Ayatollah Khamenei mask a preference for opportunism and realpolitik -- the qualities that define 'normal' state behavior."

The reading of events in the world is a major driver of US foreign policy formulation. Which is why these determinations should be taken out of the hands of elected officials and political appointees and placed squarely in the laps of area specialists of the non-ideological variety. There could be no better example of this than the Iraq WMD debacle, where American political ideologues pursued an agenda based on their "perceptions" and skewed world view rather than on reality and accumulated intelligence data.

And now we face more of the same erroneous logic regarding Iran's nuclear program, where "evidence" is based on perceived "intentions" rather than on indisputable fact. Which is why the number of nations willing to participate in rigorous sanctions against the Islamic Republic is miniscule compared to those against.

Worse yet, Gibbs' statement last Friday reveal that we know there is no real evidence of a growing Iranian nuclear capability. If they can't even enrich uranium to 20%, then they can't make a bomb --- period.

Israel: A Loose Cannon for a Middle East Conflict?

Sharmine Narwani writes in The Huffington Post:

Another war is looming in the Middle East, say the pundits. It is hard to ignore the whispers -- now louder -- when they are regularly punctuated by hostile statements from various officials in the region, leading further credence to a possible conflagration.

The likely site of the newest regional battle is the Levant. Funnily enough, nobody can pinpoint exactly where, although it is clear that Israel will be involved. Which should tell us something right there.

Middle East Inside Line: Hamas in Russia, Iran FM on “Crazy Israel”, Palestine Talks
Israel, Hamas, and Russia: Who is in Bed with the Bear?

Since the Jewish state's military attack on Lebanon in 2006, it has been itching for a "do-over." Why? Because for the first time in its history, Israel did not win a war. The month-long bombardment of Lebanon resulted in a stalemate -- an intolerable outcome by the standards of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).

To add to the indignity, it was a mere few thousand men -- not even a national army -- that took the IDF by surprise.

The cornerstone of Israel's military strategy is deterrence -- whether though brandishing a nuclear arsenal to warn off threatening nation-states, or by Gaza-style intensive attacks that send a strong message to a weaker party. This is a highly militarized state that has lived under the legacy of conflict its entire existence. Loss -- or even perceived loss -- is not an option.


So instead of self-examination, Israel's conflicted, and increasingly right-wing political body unleashed a belligerent tone -- angry, defiant, threatening, unfocused like a petulant and wounded child. Diversionary tactics came into play to focus domestic and international attention elsewhere and fill the frustrating void -- Hamas in Gaza, the potential nuclear aspirations of Iran, Palestinian intransigence on peace talks, Hezbollah's weapons, Syria, Turkey, anti-Semitism, the Goldstone Report.

In recent weeks, Israeli officials have made inflammatory statements about conflicts on half a dozen fronts.

SYRIA:

"When there is another war, you will not just lose it, but you and your family will lose power," right-wing Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman challenged Syrian President Bashar al-Assad last Thursday, after Assad claimed that Israel is "driving the region towards war, not peace."

Lieberman went further and hit at the heart of any future Israeli-Syrian rapprochement: "We must bring Syria to realize that...it will have to give up on its ultimate demand for the Golan Heights." Israeli leaders have in the past accepted in principle that the Syrian Golan Heights, captured and occupied by Israel in 1967, would necessarily be part of any bilateral peace deal.

GAZA:

In January -- one year after Israel's Operation Cast Lead in Gaza that lead to the deaths of 1,400 Palestinians -- Major General Yom Tov Samia, former head of the IDF's Southern Command, told the Jerusalem Post: "We are before another round in Gaza... another war with Hamas is inevitable." And Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak warned Gaza's leaders to "watch their step, and not to cry crocodile tears if they force [us] to take action."

The hue and cry about Hamas' rockets hitting Israeli towns was Tel Aviv and Washington's driving narrative in defense of Israel's military actions in Gaza. Still is. But just this week, the Jewish State announced that a new $200 million rocket defense system called the "Iron Dome" will not be deployed against Gaza as promised. Too expensive for Gaza, says the military, explaining that it will be deployed elsewhere where there is more of an "imminent" threat.

And this comes after months of Israeli insistence that Hamas has significantly boosted its military capabilities and has obtained long-range rockets, mostly from Iran. So which is it -- either they do or don't have weapons, either they do or don't pose a threat?

LEBANON:

No two other parties have been more relentlessly subjected to Israeli threats than Iran and Hezbollah. Last summer, after it was clear that the Lebanese resistance group Hezbollah would likely participate at the cabinet level in any unity government formed following Lebanon's June elections, Israeli leaders fell over themselves in their rush to issue warnings. Netanyahu, Barak and Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon all threatened that any border attacks would be blamed on the Lebanese central government -- with repercussions.

Just last month, Israeli Minister Yossi Peled opined, "Without a doubt we are heading for another round (of battle) in the North. No one knows when, but it's clear that it will happen."

And so both Hezbollah and Israel have moved weapons systems closer to their mutual borders.

IRAN:

Iran, in turn, has been the recipient of non-stop bombing threats from Israel over its civilian nuclear program, which the Jewish State claims is really a clandestine plan to build nuclear weapons and delivery systems. Never mind that some two dozen International Atomic Energy Agency reports over six years show no diversion of materials to weaponization. Or that Israeli military intelligence has been extending the date for a finished Iranian nuclear warhead since the 1990s. Last June, Mossad Chief Meir Dagan declared the new date for the first Iranian nuke would be in 2014. But Israel's war drums have kept beating as though these weapons were already sitting on launch pads, ready to go.

TURKEY:

Relatively new on the scene in the game of belligerent words is Turkey. A rare Israeli ally in the Middle East both in political and military terms, Turkey has drawn away from the alliance since Israel's widely-criticized Gaza attacks last year, when Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan lashed out at the particularly brutal IDF campaign.

Things have gone from bad to worse since, culminating a month ago in the now-infamous Ayalon row when the Israeli deputy foreign minister publicly and deliberately humiliated Turkey's ambassador in front of cameras. Israel has called Turkey anti-Semitic and very recently slammed the Turkish prime minister again when he drew attention to the continuing Israeli blockade of Gaza and its daily violations of Lebanese airspace.

**********

Some Israeli critics suggest that the destabilizing escalation in rhetoric may not just be as a result of Israel's psychological loss in 2006, but more recently, because of an increased paranoia about international isolation -- the result of war crimes allegations documented against Israel in the UN's Goldstone Report about the Gaza war, and the country's ongoing occupation of Palestinian lands.

In a stunning attack on his government two weeks ago, Israeli writer Gideon Levy wrote a commentary piece in Haaretz in which he takes to task their "cynical" use of Holocaust Remembrance Day to propagandize toward political ends:

"An Israeli public relations drive like this hasn't been seen for ages. The timing of the unusual effort - never have so many ministers deployed across the globe - is not coincidental: When the world is talking Goldstone, we talk Holocaust, as if out to blur the impression. When the world talks occupation, we'll talk Iran as if we wanted them to forget."

But the escalation of rhetoric from Israel's right-wing government is not being viewed as simple political posturing -- more, like a promise of battle. As concerned as the Jewish State may be about conflict on its borders, its neighbors -- having been on the receiving end of superior Israeli weapons, and having suffered far larger numbers of civilian casualties -- are taking these words very seriously.

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem, at a joint press conference with Spain's Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos on Thursday pointed to this verbal escalation of hostilities by calling on Israel to "desist from making threats against Gaza, southern Lebanon, Iran and now Syria."

Because rhetoric after all creates a perception. And perception is 100% of politics -- not to be played with when standing on a tinderbox. The Levant has always been rife with small-scale border skirmishes -- that is the way of an area re-mapped by foreigners, with unnatural, artificial borders. But it is only Israel that has, since 1973, launched full-on military battles from these skirmishes. And without a doubt it is gearing up for a fight. Where, is anyone's guess.