What Ever Happened To the Mossad?

Lately, it seems like all the attention has been focused on the IDF, and rightly so. Yet I wonder where the good ol Mossad (or Shabak)has dissapeared to? Perhaps this is a welcomed lull in chatter amongst the blogosphere and such for the highly trained and effective intelligence groups.

Well, I have decide to dedicate this post to the Israeli intelligence organizations, since I think they deserve some play.

Today, Israel possesses one of the most successful intelligence operations in the world. It has proved that it has a legitimate past, can learn from its mistakes and the examples of others, and can adapt to the changing times with improvements in structure and operations. Although the tradition, according to many Israelis, they say actually goes back to biblical times when Moses sent 12 “spies” into the land of Canaan to gather intelligence and report back the findings.

Stewart Steven commented that, “From there, they say, a direct line can be drawn to a remarkable Jewish espionage service which operated in Palestine on behalf of the British during the First World War and then through to the activities of the Israeli intelligence services today”.

From the origins of Israel’s’ intelligence community also comes the story of Ezra Danin, a legend in the annals of Zionist and Israeli intelligence work. It is Danin who laid the foundations for the methods of collection, analysis and use of intelligence which set the stage for the community that would follow. Josh Palmon, a close friend of Danin, paid tribute to the “George Washington” of Israel’s intelligence community in a letter describing Danin’s methodology:
Ezra said: ‘We are not confronting the Arabs, but a very specific Arab. We need to know who “he” is…We have to be able to identify him and act against him…We must analyze every fact and every incident, to look at things in depth and not see everything that glitters as gold. Only thus will we be able to distinguish between an ally and an enemy.”

More than a half a century later, the ideas of Danin can still be seen in the intelligence policies of the diverse network of Israel’s current intelligence community. Yet, it is from a combination of the ancient past, the mid-century legend and the more recent requests of Isser Be’eri to David Ben-Gurion in 1948, coupled with demands for intelligence to combat crisis’ which ultimately formed the Intelligence Community in Israel today.

Currently, Israel has a very modern and sophisticated Intelligence Community divided into six main organizations, each with its own jurisdiction, mission, sub-divisions and directorates. The division of Labor within this community includes three main intelligence “arms”, AMAN, Mossad, and Shabak. Their structure is mainly based on geographical boundaries although they have overlapping segments among themselves. The other portions of the community include the National Security Council, the Parliamentary supervisors, Unit 8200 and a Research Department that has found a way to operate independently from the IDF by reporting directly to the Prime Minister, while remaining budgeted under AMAN and listed as a division.

Tracing its modern origins to the conflicts following the First World War and the establishment of a “Jewish” State, the first organization of Israel’s Intelligence Community is the Israeli Defense Forces. The IDF, otherwise known as AMAN, is the supreme military branch of Israel. Much like the United States Department of Defense or DOD, AMAN’s jurisdiction is primarily centered on “military intelligence”. They are responsible for alerting political leadership of the possibility of war, estimating the means of the enemy and identifying prospective targets during a military conflict.

AMAN has six main directorates under its command. These include the: Air Intelligence Directorate responsible for Israeli Air force and intelligence; Naval Intelligence Department including the Israeli Sea Corps; Intelligence Corps which is the main intelligence collection and analysis department for the IDF; Field Intelligence Corps the unit of the GOC Army Intelligence Headquarters or “MAZI” which coordinates and controls ground forces; the Four Regional Command Units separated into the Central, Northern, Southern, and Home front divisions; and finally the Research Department which is the most established section of the IDF, responsible for analysis from all agencies and reports directly to the Prime Minister.

The next organization in Israel’s Intelligence Community is the Israeli Secret Intelligence Service, or more popularly known as “Mossad”. On Dec. 13th 1949, Ben Gurion authorized the establishment of an intelligence “institution” commonly referred to as the Mossad. After the unification process in 1951, the Mossad quickly established itself as a premiere intelligence organization for overseas and foreign intelligence gathering. Their motto, taken from Proverbs XI/14, gives only a glimpse of the wide range of responsibilities and capabilities of Israel’s’ “Counselors”.

The various responsibilities of the Mossad include:
Covert intelligence gathering beyond Israel’s borders, developing and maintaining special diplomatic covert relations, preventing the development of acquisition of non-conventional weapons by hostile countries, preventing terrorist acts against Israeli targets abroad, Bringing Jews home from countries where official Aliya agencies are not allowed, producing strategic political and operational intelligence for parliament, and planning and carrying out special operations beyond the borders.

The Mossad continues to foil attacks against Israel, conduct strategic-political missions, evaluate the stability of regimes, engage in industrial-scientific-technological and nuclear related intelligence as well as combat global terrorism. The Mossad can be best compared to the CIA of the United States. Charged with the same responsibility and jurisdiction, each is involved in foreign intelligence gathering and special operations. Both are notorious and well respected organizations, birthed around the same year and each following almost identical historical paths to reform. One might liken them to brothers from a different land.

The third major organization in the Intelligence Community is Shabak, formerly Shin Bet, known in English as the Israel Security Agency. The Shabak, with their motto that translates as, “Defender who shall not be seen,” is a large internal intelligence and security agency with a very distinct mission. Consisting of nearly 5000 employees, Shabak is responsible for the security of the state of Israel, its citizens and organs against terrorism and internal subversion. Tasked with controlling internal security of Israel and occupied territories, Shabak maintains its own Research and Analysis department and maintains the Israeli Police Intelligence directorate and the Centre for Political Research.

The Israeli police focus on counter terrorism and internal stability, while the Centre for Political Research is within the Intelligence branch of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and analyses intelligence for Shabak. Shabak has many resemblances to the FBI and the Secret Service organizations of the United States, though its functions are much more consolidated and its jurisdiction much more broad.

The next major organization in the Intelligence Community is the National Security Council. The NSC was established by the Prime Ministers office in 1999 under Binyamin Netanyahu who was drawing his lessons learned in the Yom Kippur War and the need for a group to evaluate the overall intelligence picture and implement reforms from commissions for the Intelligence Community. The NSC gained the role of evaluator of global conditions and preparing the national and security responses to changing threats. They also review the suggested reforms from Commissions and develop plans for the implementation of the recommendations. Modeled after our own NSC, the resemblances to the NSC of the United States are very obvious. They function as a governing counsel much like the U.S. NSC and they have many of the same responsibilities.

Next Israel has the Research Department of the Intelligence Community. The Research Department of the Israeli Intelligence Community began under the IDF, but moved away from their control and began to report to the Prime Minister and the Directors of each organization independently. The RD consists of 10 sub-departments that each monitor events, political processes, safeguards and maintains relations with the Diaspora communities, formulates implements and presents the foreign policy of the government of Israel. Recently called to transfer some of their roles to a civilian body such as the NSC, like in the United States, the RD will began to transition into a department that serves all the organizations but is accountable to the governing body of the NSC and Prime Minister. Finally we have the newly proposed SIGINT service of the IIC. Finding its birth in the Commission to Investigate the Intelligence Network following the War in Iraq (2004), the SIGINT service would supply all the other services with SIGINT intelligence and would absorb Unit 8200, the electronics transmissions unit, operating much like the NSA within the United States.

Control over the complex intelligence community of Israel ultimately presides in the Parliamentary Supervision of the Government of Israel. The main difference between the IIC and the U.S. IC is that the IIC is governed by the Subcommittee for Intelligence and Secret Services and a second subcommittee of the Foreign Affair and Defense Committee. The United States on the other hand has 16 agencies and departments, 15 of which are under the executive branch and one that is an independent agency (CIA). The community is lead by the DNI, not a subcommittee. Still similarities exist between the reforms that closely aligned the two communities in structure based primarily from two single acts and documents, the “Magna Carta” for Israel and the “Patriot Act” for the United States.

From Moses scouting the holy land, to the Mossad scouring the world for global intelligence, the IC of Israel has come into full being, establishing itself as a heavy force among the nations, with a likeness to that of the United States, Israel’s IC remains a strategic powerhouse of stability in an otherwise volatile world. Now, next time your in the Middle East, look behind you, I'm sure your being watched...

The best way to destroy Israel

Yet again, we are reminded why Haaretz keeps writers like Bradley Burston around. What a piece.

But now, Hamas is beginning to see something else. At this point, the best way to destroy Israel, is to leave it exactly as it is.

Titrate, adjust the flow of rockets fired at Israeli civilians to a level which is thoroughly acceptable to the rest of the world, but which is also entirely unbearable to Israelis.

Then, sit back and watch demographics and despair work their magic. No wonder Hamas officials who are seen as moderates urge a 50-year truce. By that time, Israeli Arabs will be able to simply vote the Jewish state off the map.

Flatten the place Soviet style or...

Don't ask me why, but all the kids have been asking: "Hey, what's that COIN thing all those grown-ups keep talking about? And what does it do?"

It's a good question. But to me, it is a good question not particularity for what counterinsurgency (COIN) intellectually means, but for what people think it can do. Simply put: The vast majority of American military intellectuals seem to agree that a population-centric doctrine of counterinsurgency will mend our ills in Afghanistan. (Abu G thinks not.)

Many have jumped on board with this strategy because of General Petraeus and his "success" in Iraq. His strategy was based off a smaller model that he, among others, first implemented in Iraqi Kurdistan. They called it "clear, hold and build." The idea was to have our forces get off their bases and live among the civilian population. In this model, the primarily goal was securing the civilian population--something that the "counterinsurgents" currently deem as our most important task in Afghanistan.

So who exactly are these "counterinsurgents?" A few posts ago I lauded Rachel Maddow's for coining the term (as far as I know). These people can be defined as an intellectual-warrior type. They are usually veterans of battle and they often have first-hand experience in leading solders. And now, these counterinsurgents have stitched together a plan for Afghanistan that calls for a significant troop increase, to be followed by a massive investment package that would bring Afghanistan into this century. But, as Maddow's brilliantly questioned, are these counterinsurgents merely focused on calming the insurgency, or finding a acceptable solution that would allow the U.S. to leave a credible regime in Kabul that fought international terrorists?

Most derelicts out in the blogosphere have an idea on what these "modernity projects" entail: schools, roads, bridges etc. But what exactly are these additional troops going to do? Same as Iraq? I mean what exactly is this COIN thing anyways?

The way I see it, we have 2 basic choices:

• The Jominian theory that seeks the destruction of the enemy’s fighting forces above all other considerations. The idea is that if you can take out the arms, the civilian support for the insurgency will be neutralized. Click here to read a little more about the 19-century French General, Henri, baron de Jomini.

• The Clausewitzian theory, largely to the contrary, examines the question of whether or not the insurgent forces served its purpose in advancing their national political aims. Click here to read a little more about the 19-century Prussian General, Carl von Clausewitz.

What theory works best? Or perhaps more to the point: what will happen to the people of Afghanistan when we either A) flatten the place Soviet style; Or B) question whether the Taliban insurgency has actually legitimized their movement among the Afghan people. (And there is a difference between having the consent of the governed and being scared stiff.)

So before we all freak with the prospect of century old COIN mixed with this Central Asian quagmire, I have to say, I feel somewhat relaxed. Mostly because this choice is not mine to make. Some time next week the Obama White House will unveil its much anticipated plan for Afghanistan. Who will President Obama side with: the Prussian pragmatist, or the French crusader?

(And click here to read about a CIA clandestine who advocates the light footprint doctrine.)

Dear Franco,

Ok my man, here is a little Afghanistan post. I am in the minority on this one, but hey, isn't that why I started this blog? I advocated a return to the "light footprint" doctrine in Afghanistan.


As President Obama’s approval rating continues to bob at a convincing 60%, it would seem foolish for a high school dropout–turned–Casbah guerrilla to criticize him over Afghanistan. But what the heck. We've been there seven years and the place is still a nightmare.

So any Newsweek readers? I'm not normally one, but how about that Fareed Zakaria? In his recent article, “A Turnaround Strategy,” he almost perfectly articulates the Obama plan for Afghanistan. “Ahh,” I said while carelessly lounging on my couch last weekend, “relevance.”

Obama and Zakaria agree: Our most important mission this year in Afghanistan is securing the civilian population (population centric COIN). Thus, Obama has decided to send 17,000 more combat solders. Taking a page out of General Petraeus’ Iraq counterinsurgency manual, our troops are now to live, work and support local communities. Obama and Zakaria agree: the Karzai reign in Kabul is corrupt and weak, and therefore we should look to create something like a pre-Soviet environment: “a legitimate central government … with local allies throughout the country.” I mean, who could argue?

Well, me. I’m having a hard time with this strategy because it suggests that our predominantly Western coalition understands a culture that has spent the past thousand years breaking the yoke of foreign invaders.

Unlike Iraq, Afghanistan is mostly rural. Did you know it costs twice as much to resupply a brigade in Afghanistan than it does in Iraq? While I resist the general comparison, another major difference between Iraq and Afghanistan is that Afghanistan has few legal review sources. I almost fell off my couch last weekend when I read Zakari’s “The Kabul government … has virtually no revenue sources other than foreign aid.” Yet last August, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates approved a $20 billion package doubling the size of the Afghan National Security Forces. So the U.S. taxpayers have to pay two armies now?

Looking ahead, it’s important that the U.S. continues to support the Afghan people in both security and development. This, however, doesn’t mean that U.S. taxpayers should be responsible for funding an Afghan police state. Small and sustainable projects that provide basic services can go a long way toward winning “hearts and minds.”

If filling the Afghan countryside with Western troops was the answer, then the Soviets, with more than a half-million troops, would have done it back in the 1980s. Haven’t we learned that sending more troops to any nationalist Muslim country creates more problems than it solves?


(These so-called "counterinsurgents" are making a hell of a case to send more troops... Has anyone besides Rachel Maddow articulated this yet? And are these counterinsurgents really taking into account the "bigger picture," or are they just figuring out a way to win? Stay posted.)

Casbah Redux

Ok guerrilla's, we've changed the template. What do you think? I like how the picture is bigger and more defined. I took it in Nablus, Palestine two years ago.

Like the new blog description?

The attacking Iran dilemma: warplanes v.s. ballistic missiles

Every guerrilla who has spent time in the Casbah knows that we've put a lot of thought into the prospect of an Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. And with hard-line Likud leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, nudging closer to forming what looks to be a ‘very right’ Israeli coalition, an attack on Iran looks all the more likely.

But "the decision" aside, many in the defense community have speculated on the logistics of such an operation. "How will Israel do it? Can they get all of the nuclear sites? How will Iran retaliate: letting its proxies loose, Shahab missiles, oil?" Nobody really knows.

All signs from the Obama White House show that the U.S. is not on board with an Israeli preventive strike on Iran. Thus, "if" Israel were to go forth with surgical strikes, they would most likely do it alone.

So according to a recent report by a Washington think-tank, Israel is now considering using ballistic missiles, instead of piloted jets. According to a Harretz article, the use of ballistic missiles would clear up the "fuel and ordnance ... perils to pilots" problem. The article goes on:

"…the most advanced Jerichos [ballistic missiles] carry 750 kg (1,650 lb) conventional warheads … 42 missiles would be enough to ‘severely damage or demolish’ Iran's core nuclear sites at Natanz, Esfahan and Arak."

Notice the report only talks about the sites at Natanz, Esfahan and Arak. As “certain” as these Israeli intelligence officials seem to be, only the Iranians know how many ‘sister programs’ are hidden beneath the Persian desert. So, my dear Casbah guerrillas', we wait.


(In other news, Defense Secretary Gates "will announce up to a half-dozen major weapons cancellations later this month." Ships, F-22's and combat vehicles? So the sources say. Can Obama chip away at the Military Industrial Complex and keep his approval rating? Stay posted.)

Hip Hop is born in Occupied Territories in Israel and Palestine

I just finished watching the Sundance Award winning film titled, Slingshot Hip Hop, and I must admit I was very pleased with the results. It was a very compelling story of how Hip Hop thrives as an outlet for youths in Palestine and Israel alike. Intertwined in the story is the hardships faced by the Arab youths featured in the film.



Slingshot Hip Hop braids together the stories of young Palestinians living in the West Bank, Gaza and inside Israel as they discover Hip Hop and employ it as a tool to surmount divisions imposed by occupation and poverty. From internal checkpoints and Separation Walls to gender norms and generational differences, this is the story of young people crossing the borders that separate them.


Click Here for the video.


Also, Click Here for a great story ran on the featured artists.


I suggest this video for all the readership, it is great.

Egypt: An Organ Trafficking Hotspot According to WHO

The WHO, or World Health Organization, has identified Egypt as one of the worlds largest organ trafficking hotspots. The trafficking is reportedly high in and around the outskirts of Cairo, a major city in Egypt.
The photo above depicts Egyptians who each sold a kidney for 2,300 each (U.S. dollars), Abdel-Rahman Abdel-Aziz displays a long scar as his wife, Asmaa, looks on at their home at Cairo's outskirts, in the sprawling Muqattam district March 8, 2009.

For years, word has spread among Egypt's destitute that selling a kidney, sometimes for as little as $2,000, can be a quick way out of a debt or to keep from sinking deeper into poverty. At rundown cafes, they are hunted by middlemen working for labs that match donors and recipients, many of whom are foreigners drawn to Egypt's thriving, underground organ trade.

Egypt is one of a half dozen countries identified by the World Health Organization as organ-trafficking hot spots. Under international pressure, other trouble spots like China, Pakistan and the Philippines have outlawed organ sales and barred foreigners from undergoing transplants to stop "transplant tourism."

Egypt, however, has long ignored the problem, experts say. Transplant surgeons working to stop the global trade fear that foreign patients finding it harder to go to Asia could flood into Egypt in search of organs.

At the same time, Egypt's Health Ministry has begun cracking down. In recent months, authorities closed two private medical centers in Cairo and arrested doctors, middlemen and lab workers for violating doctors union rules or other charges, said ministry spokesman Abdel-Rahman Shaheen.

"They work after midnight," he said. "They do these operations in fact in hospitals that have no facilities to do a major operation like this. They were all closed, and they were all arrested."
"We must admit that we do have a problem with organ transplants," Shaheen said.

Many of those looking for kidneys are Saudis paying around $16,000 for a black market transplant, experts say. The donors are plucked from Egypt's poor, often misled about the risks and abandoned after surgery with no follow-up care, said Amr Mostafa, a field researcher for the Coalition for Organ-Failure Solutions, a Washington-based advocacy group that helps donors.

Living in San Diego, this story sounds oddly familiar. For years, there has been an Urban Legend of sorts about stolen organs from unsuspecting tourists who visit Tijuana. Although some cases of waking up in a bathtub of ice with a scar across your belly have actually happened, they are rare. But the truth is you can travel to Mexico and sell your kidney. It now appears that Egypt, specifically Cairo, has become the new Tijuana of the Middle East.

Why Hezbollah is not the answer

My, how it is easy to become enamored by the culture of the Lebanese; enchanted by swimming in the warm, salty Mediterranean. It is an experience that tickles your spine into feeling the rapture of being alive. Yet, as Abu Muqasama says on his blog: "I listen to the rhetoric of Hezbollah, I have no faith the people of southern Lebanon are going to enjoy an extended period of peace -- no matter who is in office in Jerusalem or what Israel does." And I have to say, I agree.

Thats right. It’s time to get a little sour about Lebanese politics. No more sugar coating a situation that simply sucks. Hezbollah is not about representing Islam, Lebanon, the oppressed Shia of the South ETC, it is about power, period. Hezbollah will never willingly give up its arms. That’s just how things work. Some have suggested that Egypt and Saudi Arabia--combine with the clandestine “influence” of the Israeli government--will be able to de-claw this Shia guerrilla group. Please.

And this isn't even the most depressing thing about Hezbollah. To me (and I know I've talked with Abu Danger about this) it's that Hezbollah has a legitimate cause, yet throws it away with its action.

Anyone remember that Hitler mustached Cat named Samir Kuntar? I'll let you read up on him if you’re new to the name. But this guy, simply put, is a baby killer. He was part of small operation that on April 22, 1979 boated from Tyre, Lebanon, down into northern Israel and killed an Israeli family--simply because they were Israeli.

Kuntar spent more time in an Israeli jail than any other member of Hezbollah. And last year he was released in that highly publicized prisoner swap for those two dead Israeli solders (captured at the beginning of the 2006 War). Upon Kuntar's release, Hezbollah held parades for this man. I even heard a few weeks ago that he is going to get married to a very famous "daughter of the resistance" (Whatever the hell that means).

When people like Hassan Nasrallah talk about building a "society of resistance" it goes further than sticking up for the rights of the oppressed Shia. It's about revenge. It's about transforming Hezbollah from not just a guerrilla movement for the peoples defense, reconstruction and political representation, but for a force of brutal domination. So if deeming a sicko-baby-killer like Kuntar is Hezbollah's idea of hero, then count me out.

It's a tragedy that the historically downtrodden Shia of southern Lebanon are stuck with such savage leadership.

State of the Union: A quiet candlelight evening with Hassan Nasrallah

Remember that whole "pre-conditions" thing that those American politicians were talking about in the run-up to the 2009 presidential election? Well, U.S. Sec of State Clinton recently restated one of those preconditions: The U.S. will not diplomatically engage with Hezbollah until it recognizes Israel’s right to exist. Nothing new.

Last Friday Hezbollah's secretary-general Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah responded by theatrically orating that Hezbollah will never recognize Israel’s right to exist. Still, nothing new. (And yes, Nasrallah gave the speech from his usual undisclosed location as to avoid an Israeli attempt on his life. Oh, the drama.)

So what’s the fuss about? Neither the U.S., or Hezbollah said anything new.

Qifa Nabki over at Syria Comment made an interesting observation the other day. Allow me to paraphrase: Nasrallah wasn't talking to the West, but rather, the East. Nasrallah was talking to the Assad regime that has gotten uncomfortably close with the new crew in Washington. Nasrallah was exclaiming that the Syrian-Saudi reconciliation effort and the Syrian-Israeli peace process is not supported by Hezbollah. Hmmmm.....

If you ask me, it's one hell of an an analysis. One of the think-tank talking points of Obama has been bullet-pointed as "driving a wedge between the Iranian-Syrian-Hezbollah axis." So has Clinton's comments--though at a low level--succeeded in rattling this coalition? Maybe just a little?

It's hard to say.... But if there is any truth to this "rattling," particularly towards the Syrian-Hezbollah alliance, I'd keep a close eye on future Israeli PM, Benjamin Netanyahu. Will he be smart enough to capitalize?

Nevertheless, figuring out a way to wedge the Syrian-Hezbollah alliance would sure help all those closeted moderates in the Middle East.


(NOTE: Persian-speaking countries are going to be celebrating NOWRUZ in the northern Afghan city of Mazar Sharif this year. By the way, did you hear that they are all setting up a bank together?)