By George Friedman

A former head of Mossad, Meir Dagan, has publicly criticized the current Israeli government for a lack of flexibility, judgment and foresight, calling it “reckless and irresponsible” in the handling of Israel’s foreign and security policies. In various recent interviews and speeches, he has made it clear that he regards the decision to ignore the 2002 Saudi proposal for a peace settlement on the pre-1967 lines as a mistake and the focus on Iran as a diversion from the real issue — the likely recognition of an independent Palestinian state by a large segment of the international community, something Dagan considers a greater threat.

What is important in Dagan’s statements is that, having been head of Mossad from 2002 to 2010, he is not considered in any way to be ideologically inclined toward accommodation. When Dagan was selected by Ariel Sharon to be head of Mossad, Sharon told him that he wanted a Mossad with “a knife between its teeth.” There were charges that he was too aggressive, but rarely were there charges that he was too soft. Dagan was as much a member of the Israeli governing establishment as anyone. Therefore, his statements, and the statements of some other senior figures, represent a split not so much within Israel but within the Israeli national security establishment, which has been seen as being as hard-line as the Likud.

In addition, when pro-Palestinian demonstrators in the Golan Heights tried to force their way into Israeli-held territory, Israeli troops opened fire. Eleven protesters were killed in the Golan, and six were killed in a separate but similar protest in the West Bank. The demonstrations, like the Nakba-day protests, were clearly intended by the Syrians to redirect anti-government protests to some other issue. They were also meant to be a provocation, and the government in Damascus undoubtedly hoped that the Israelis would open fire. Dagan’s statements seem to point at this paradox.

There are two factions that want an extremely aggressive Israeli security policy: the Israeli right and countries and militant proxies like Hamas that are actively hostile to Israel. The issue is which benefits more.

3 Strategic Phases

Previously we discussed Israeli strategy. Now I want us to consider Palestinian strategy and to try to understand how the Palestinians will respond to the current situation.

Read more...

By Nick Watts, Great North News Services

The latest briefing on progress in Afghanistan was given by senior ISAF commanders yesterday (Thursday 9th June). Lt. Gen David Rodriguez, Commander ISAF Joint Command and his British deputy Maj Gen Tim Evans gave their views on how operations were progressing. The overall tenor of the brief was that matters are proceeding according to plan. Ever mindful of Gen Petreaus' mantra that progress is not yet irreversible, there was a note of caution. The view from ISAF is that Taliban inspired violence may even increase during the coming summer season. 

The ISAF plan is to continue developing three strands of activity. These are based on the overarching need to destroy the Taliban and to build up the Afghan National Army (ANA). The three strands are: holding key population and commerce centres and keeping main commerce routes open; building a sense of security and enabling development work to proceed, finally to ensure that good local governance is established, bearing down on corruption to ensure the support of the local populace.

Operations are conducted under the banner of the Afghan word OMID meaning hope. The areas of Helmand and Kandahar are seen as being decisive; meaning ISAF must succeed in its aims here to be able to hand over the management of security to the local Afghan forces. The ISAF commanders reminded the audience that the draw down of NATO forces was conditions based. While seven areas are being "handed over" to Afghan control in July, this does not mean that ISAF would be going away.

Increasingly Afghan forces from the ANA and the police forces (ANP) were taking the lead in planning and executing operations. The cumulative effect of the Omid operations has been an increasing level of support from the Afghan populace. This has resulted in weapons and explosives caches being revealed to ISAF and Afghan forces. The local populace does not support the Taliban and takes the chance to inform on their movements. The other side of this coin is the Taliban fighters who just quietly put their weapons away and go back to their earlier lives, because the economic situation has improved locally.

It is too early to tell if the death of Osama Bin Laden has had any effect on the morale of the Taliban senior commanders, but it is understood that there are negotiations going on with various groupings around the country, with a view to either re-integrating fighters or encouraging them to lay down their weapons. ISAF has 2,000 people in a re-integration programme with a similar number waiting. Meanwhile efforts are increasing to degrade the level of traffic in narcotics. There may eventually be a manageable level of narcotics traffic, but ISAF does not see the end of the poppy trade just yet.

In the meantime the priority for the British in Helmand is to maintain the momentum of operations begun by 16 Brigade. Operations under the banner of OMID Haf (hope seven) have seen British forces coming up against Taliban fighters and sustaining 4 fatalities recently. It may well be that Helmand is the last place that ISAF declares to be ready for handover to the ANA, so there is work still to do for the British task force there.