About Me

"Talk," she commanded, standing in front of me. "Who, what and why?" "I'm Percy Maguire," I said, as if this name, which I had thought up, explained everything. Dashiell Hammett, "The Big Knockover"

Tuesday, September 12, 2006

Attack on the Embassy

According to media reports, there was an attempted attack on the US Embassy in Damascus, Syria today (12 September). It's getting to the point now where you can't even trust the authoritarian regimes to keep the peace.

Various reports suggest about four attackers -- who have either been killed or captured -- were involved. (If it's the latter, it's only a matter of time before the survivors meet Allah -- undoubtedly on the EZ Pass expressway.) Apparently, the intent was to detonate explosives in a van, in an effort to breach the Embassy's perimeter wall. Then, they were to attack the embassy with small arms fire. File this under poorly executed suicide mission with little chance of success.

This begs the question -- who did it and why -- especially given the hypersensitivity to security in the wake of the 9/11 anniversary. In the immediate aftermath of this attack, no organization has claimed responsibility. We can only speculate (alas I have no covert sources in Damascus) but here is some back of the envelope thoughts --
  • The Assad regime itself. This is not beyond the realm of the possible. In Iraq, while some of the suicide bombers are true believers -- who are rushed into action in the event that they develop second thoughts -- others are forcibly coerced (with hands taped to the steering wheel as the tell-tale sign). Furthermore, one would suspect that explosives would be a highly controlled item in Syria -- who would have access? Given the bungled nature of this operation (and the likely loss of any surviving participants) this was probably meant as a signal that the Assad regime is displeased with the American role in recent events (e.g., the military pull out of Lebanon, the support for Israel in the month-long battle with Syria's terrorist partner, the Hizbollah, and for the subsequent deployment of European forces along the Syrian-Lebanese border). The military deployment, if forcefully executed, could hamper Hizbollah activity in the region, which would diminish Syria's influence. If so, this action has a whiff of desperation about it.


  • Terrorists. The Syrian-run news agency has already declared that the attack was perpetrated by "...a terrorist Takfiri [sectarian Islamic jihadist] group of four gunmen..." If we take Damascus at their word, this does not bode well for Assad. For starters, it doesn't make the regime look good when they cannot control either guns or explosives; authoritarians are disposed to having a monopoly on force. The Takfiri have ties to al-Qaeda and it's possible that they are now focusing their efforts at secularist leaders in the Middle East. (Today's case being a two-fer -- hitting the Great Satan and ensuring a loss of face for the Damascus regime.) If so, you have the strange situation of a terrorist-sponsoring state being attacked by a competing terrorist organization. You'll need a scorecard to keep up. I doubt that Hizbollah would be involved -- why sacrifice the personnel and equipment?

  • Rogue Elements within the Regime. The Assad regime is venal and corrupt -- and palace coup plotters may be setting the conditions. Unlike his father, Hafez, who was an Air Force pilot, Bashar, is an ophthalmologist by training, and the military may be chafing under his leadership. Given recent events, as described above, it's possible that the generals are frustrated by recent events and they may want to put in one of their own. I don't know if Bashar, in the past six years, has been able to install military leaders who are loyal to him or not. Loyalty or not, the military has been taking it on the chin of late. (Not that Hafez was any better a military leaders (e.g. Yom Kippur War) but he was certainly more ruthless.) Furthermore, they would have the werewithal to support this terrorist attack. This is my likely scenario.

In the big scheme of things, today's event is of minor significance. However, it may be a sign of things to come.

Update: A different point of view (i.e., the regime was behind it) can be found here.

No comments: