Subnational Activity in Syria?

by CKR

I have persuaded my colleague MC to expound on why that site in Syria might not have been run by the Syrian government. There is an additional point to be made, as well.

It seems to me that the publicly available facts on the site and on the Israeli raid are as consistent with this hypothesis as with the hypothesis that the site was run by the Syrian government; perhaps more so in places. As I noted about the ISIS report, alternative hypotheses need to be considered in interpreting overhead photos, and, indeed, what informants may provide.

So let’s assume that the installation was a reactor or somesuch producer of dangerous materials. But let’s consider that those constructing it were from a subnational group. Here are my colleague’s reasons, with one of mine thrown in with her permission.

Syria did not anticipate the attack. Syria did not condemn the attack. Syria has not come up with a story line to explain what was going on at al Kibar. A government most likely would have a cover story ready in case the enterprise was discovered. Some in the Syrian government may have known about it or even participated in it, but most likely not in an official capacity.

There seems to have been little or no tracking of this area by satellite. One of the signatures that would draw attention would have been movement of Syrian government traffic. Apparently there was little such movement.

A subnational group would spend and implement the minimal amount needed to get to their goal. They would not spend on security because it would be less added-value and more added-headaches in terms of bringing more people (who might be tracked, who might leak) into a top secret venture. They would not spend a huge amount of money burying a facility underground if their goal was to create enough nuclear material for a handful of weapons.

There is little concern in the facility design for the health of their workers (by having a shorter stack, for one example) which may indicate that the builders didn’t plan to be there long.

A government behaves in certain predictable ways, including putting up fences and guard stations to protect from the curious and for simple bureaucratic routine. How far outside its routine and bureaucratic comfort zone can a government go, even to protect against detection?

Being unaware of such an enterprise would be a major embarrassment to any government. That embarrassment, along with the desire to make the site unavailable to other free-lancers, would account for the rapid and complete clearing of the site by the Syrian government.

I think that this hypothesis is also persuasive with regard to the way the incident has played out internationally. I’ll try to post on that later.

Comments

[James]

I find this theory very hard to believe. It would certainly be a historical novelty. Small arms, explosives, even chemical weapons...all of these can plausibly be produced by do-it-yourselfers, but a nuclear plant?

My first objection would be that there are specialized controls and materials-handling equipment that are required for a nuclear plant to useful. Some of it can be made, of course, but this in itself would require an advanced machine shop.

Second is that construction went on for a very long period of time. A terrorist group would have to have a reasonable confidence that they would be in a position to reap the benefits of a hugely expensive investment ten or more years down the road.

Enough about the plant; what about the fuel? The organization in question would not only have to build a nuclear plant in secret but have a source of fuel.

Finally, there is the simple fact that Syria is hardly what you would call a "failed state." The State is well-organized and quite serious about protecting its authority. There are terrorist organizations that target Syria and the Syrians are hardly complacent about the activities of non-state organizations. Not that any government is really as efficient as it claims to be, but the idea that someone could engage in large-scale construction for years on end without a building inspector showing up stretches the imagination.

If this was an active construction site there would be a lot of people working on it. Most Syrians are patriots who would not engage in something like this without the blessing of their government. No non-state organization could sift through its ranks and find all the skills necessary to build a nuclear plant. They would have to go outside the group and roll the dice on technicians whose primary loyalties lay elsewhere.

I don't yet buy into the North Korea-Syrian Bomb Plot Narrative but it seems much more plausible than the al Qaeda-Home Depot Bomb Plot Narrative, if only because it's more familiar.

[mc]

Good points James. Without knowing whether it was a nuclear reactor makes it that much more challenging to figure out what resources and level of effort and time it would take to pull off creating something nuclear-related. Was it really anything nuclear-related? If it wasn't, what was it for and who was benefiting from the investment?

I still think that there could be something very non-governmental about the whole scenario. It is far easier than in any point in history to put money, people, and common objectives together sans borders in order to accomplish goals that in the past demanded governmental support. Looking at what the illegal drug industry is able to pull off under the noses of even the most authoritative governments in the world is astonishing. I didn't equate "subnational" to al Qaeda, but to special interests that could be more business than religious or government-oriented. I think of al Qaeda as more of an end-customer than a manufacturer or investor type when thinking of a business cycle. While 90 percent of Syria’s population is Arab, it is home to a wide array of ethnic groups living within who have history and connections inside and outside of the region.

Who knows? I find the whole thing fascinating that in this day and age where one country's leadership will react with immediate vociferous condemnation against another country's political rant, another country's leadership will be victim to a bombing on its territory by its nemesis and say nothing. Where's Paul Harvey when you need the rest of the story?