Finally, after a long period, I managed to update the site transefered on Blogspot. The content will be the same, but I hope the new look is a bit more appealing. Unfortunately, returning home after their college experience, I no longer have the ability to access the fiber I had in Bologna and I'll have to settle for 56k. The possibility that previously had to roam between different sites, today I blocked, but I'll try to write something anyway.
Obviously I could not comment on what has happened recently in Syria and Lebanon, with the two terrorist attacks by Islamic groups. To analyze the problem I trusted all ' analysis that Omayma Abdel Latif has done for the Carnegie Endowment in Lebanon on Salafism (which I strongly suggest you read if you are interested in the subject).
What seems increasingly clear at this time is that the two attacks were considered by the Syrian regime as interconnected. The government news agency said it that the vehicle exploded in Damascus came from a neighboring Arab country. In light of what is happening at this moment it seems clear that Assad considers the north of Lebanon, particularly the area around Tripoli as "responsible" or at least "somewhat involved" rsispetto what happened in Damascus last week.
In that part of the country it seems that the Islamic movements have in fact found fertile ground to grow and prosper in some way after the expulsion of the Syrians after the death of Hariri (2005). In this area, as reported by Latif, has established a tacit alliance between Mustaqbal (the movement of Hariri's son) and the movements most conservative of the Sunni community. Beyond the role of the Jamaa Islamiyya , members of the Muslim Brotherhood, some of origin Salafist movements, far more radical than the Brotherhood, appear to be active in that area. According to Latif Sunni Islamist movement is still very diverse, as well as divided, and little respect framed the traditional rule. A part, as Al Ahbash , is very close to Syria. Another part, however was close to Hezbollah after the Lebanon war of 2006, which gave some men for their fight against Israel.
After this brief introduction I think the questions to be answered after the last day may be the following.
1) If the matrix of the attacks in Lebanon and Syria is the same, what these people want? I'm really allied to Al Qaeda or are they independent?
2) What impact will the move to deploy 10,000 troops to the Syrian border with Lebanon over the peace process with Israel?
3) Really Syria at a time of difficulty and the plots of power within it are likely to bring down the regime? Why Damascus has now become a place of attacks, whereas in the past was not?
4) What are the consequences of these attacks? We expect that Syria return to Lebanon and that the policy of the country of the Cedars take a step backwards compared to pre Doha agreement?
My answers are:
1) The Salafis attacking soldiers in Lebanon in retaliation probably because it was the same army to end the existence of Fatah Al Islam some time ago. Hitting Syria is instead a more complex issue. It could be a warning on its new policy against Israel. If Syria decides to switch sides and stop being the leading country of the Arab side would be the consequences of refusing the return of Islamic terrorism inside. Some even argued that it is a revenge by terrorist groups sponsored by the regime in Iraq, which now affect the hand of those who protected them.
b) The role of Al Qaeda seems to have been marginal so far and there is no real reason to believe that things have changed. The thrust of the beginning of Al Qaeda has now exhausted. The Afghan diaspora is over. Probably the terrorists of today are the people who made the war in Iraq, but no one can say with certainty.
2) The warning Assad did have to Lebanon is very clear. The Alawite regime considers the Tripoli area important for its national security. The need to continue the peace process with Israel, however, make it impossible for me to Syria direct intervention in the country. E 'is also clear that the process of dissociation from the Evil Axis of Syria, culminating with its recent inclusion in the Union for the Mediterranean to Sarkozy, would be cleared by his new occupation of the land of the cedars. Unless of course a possible "green light" from the United States. Remain on the table other forms of intervention by the Syrian secret services or intervention of friendly forces against Syrian movements Salafis.
3) today I do not think Syria has become an unstable country on the Iraqi model. Secret services are a powerful body and hard to beat. The rumors of coup Shawkat a few months ago have been put about by opponents of the regime and remain without any effective response. It is clear that Syria's Bashar Assad is no longer that of his father Hafez. The recent peace talks with Israel revealed that Damascus does not assume that more radical stance of confrontation with the Jewish country, which followed in the 70 - 80, but appears to be more pragmatic and more willing to end the long conflict with the IDF. The consequences for those among the Arabs make peace with Israel, however, may prove really insidious. I remain of the view that the recent bombing in Damascus is a warning to that effect.
4) Do not think so. The main consequences might be for the movement of Hariri. Mustaqbal it will face pressure to cut final links with the Salafi movement, ahead of elections next year. Hariri will decide whether to provide a blanket policy of these extremists surely someone in Damascus will not be happy.
What seems increasingly clear at this time is that the two attacks were considered by the Syrian regime as interconnected. The government news agency said it that the vehicle exploded in Damascus came from a neighboring Arab country. In light of what is happening at this moment it seems clear that Assad considers the north of Lebanon, particularly the area around Tripoli as "responsible" or at least "somewhat involved" rsispetto what happened in Damascus last week.
In that part of the country it seems that the Islamic movements have in fact found fertile ground to grow and prosper in some way after the expulsion of the Syrians after the death of Hariri (2005). In this area, as reported by Latif, has established a tacit alliance between Mustaqbal (the movement of Hariri's son) and the movements most conservative of the Sunni community. Beyond the role of the Jamaa Islamiyya , members of the Muslim Brotherhood, some of origin Salafist movements, far more radical than the Brotherhood, appear to be active in that area. According to Latif Sunni Islamist movement is still very diverse, as well as divided, and little respect framed the traditional rule. A part, as Al Ahbash , is very close to Syria. Another part, however was close to Hezbollah after the Lebanon war of 2006, which gave some men for their fight against Israel.
After this brief introduction I think the questions to be answered after the last day may be the following.
1) If the matrix of the attacks in Lebanon and Syria is the same, what these people want? I'm really allied to Al Qaeda or are they independent?
2) What impact will the move to deploy 10,000 troops to the Syrian border with Lebanon over the peace process with Israel?
3) Really Syria at a time of difficulty and the plots of power within it are likely to bring down the regime? Why Damascus has now become a place of attacks, whereas in the past was not?
4) What are the consequences of these attacks? We expect that Syria return to Lebanon and that the policy of the country of the Cedars take a step backwards compared to pre Doha agreement?
My answers are:
1) The Salafis attacking soldiers in Lebanon in retaliation probably because it was the same army to end the existence of Fatah Al Islam some time ago. Hitting Syria is instead a more complex issue. It could be a warning on its new policy against Israel. If Syria decides to switch sides and stop being the leading country of the Arab side would be the consequences of refusing the return of Islamic terrorism inside. Some even argued that it is a revenge by terrorist groups sponsored by the regime in Iraq, which now affect the hand of those who protected them.
b) The role of Al Qaeda seems to have been marginal so far and there is no real reason to believe that things have changed. The thrust of the beginning of Al Qaeda has now exhausted. The Afghan diaspora is over. Probably the terrorists of today are the people who made the war in Iraq, but no one can say with certainty.
2) The warning Assad did have to Lebanon is very clear. The Alawite regime considers the Tripoli area important for its national security. The need to continue the peace process with Israel, however, make it impossible for me to Syria direct intervention in the country. E 'is also clear that the process of dissociation from the Evil Axis of Syria, culminating with its recent inclusion in the Union for the Mediterranean to Sarkozy, would be cleared by his new occupation of the land of the cedars. Unless of course a possible "green light" from the United States. Remain on the table other forms of intervention by the Syrian secret services or intervention of friendly forces against Syrian movements Salafis.
3) today I do not think Syria has become an unstable country on the Iraqi model. Secret services are a powerful body and hard to beat. The rumors of coup Shawkat a few months ago have been put about by opponents of the regime and remain without any effective response. It is clear that Syria's Bashar Assad is no longer that of his father Hafez. The recent peace talks with Israel revealed that Damascus does not assume that more radical stance of confrontation with the Jewish country, which followed in the 70 - 80, but appears to be more pragmatic and more willing to end the long conflict with the IDF. The consequences for those among the Arabs make peace with Israel, however, may prove really insidious. I remain of the view that the recent bombing in Damascus is a warning to that effect.
4) Do not think so. The main consequences might be for the movement of Hariri. Mustaqbal it will face pressure to cut final links with the Salafi movement, ahead of elections next year. Hariri will decide whether to provide a blanket policy of these extremists surely someone in Damascus will not be happy.
