Source: Syria Hires N. Korea to Reverse Engineer, Manufacture Russian Missiles
A source who has proved reliable in the past e-mails me to pass along that the Syrian Scientific Study Research Center has made a deal with North Korea’s Korea Overseas Mining and Development, a/k/a KOMID. Both entities are notorious proliferators, and both CERS and KOMID have been sanctioned by the Treasury Department repeatedly.
The missile we speak of is not a ballistic missile. Instead, it’s the 9M133 “Kornet” missile, an advanced antitank missile known to NATO as the AT-14 Spriggan. The Kornet has a range of 5,000 meters and multiple charges designed to defeat reactive armor. They’re said to have knocked out Israeli Merkava tanks in the hands of the Hezbollah, and are also rumored to have taken out one or two M-1 Abrams tanks in Iraq. Here’s a Russian demo video:
After the Israelis captured several Kornets from the Hezb, still stamped with shipping labels to the Syrian Ministry of Defense, they leaned on the Russians to stop selling Kornets to Syria. Apparently, the Syrians want more than the Russians are willing to sell them. And because Syria has supplied them to Hezbollah, it’s safe to assume that Iran is financing the deal.
The outline of the deal is as follows: the Syrians sent eight examples of the Kornet to the North Koreans, who will reverse engineer the missiles and manufacture more to sell back to the Syrians. The quantity is apparently sufficient to have been very helpful to North Korea in continuing its WMD development despite the loss of South Korean aid.
So, can we finally put that “axis of evil” nonsense to rest, once and for all?
Gentleman’s wager: the Obama administration will bury and dismiss the importance of this.
Not that I defend any of this at all, but in fairness it’s not like the United States is above making use of the brutal Syrians (ie. rendition) when it suits them, is it?
Not that I defend us having any dealings with the Syrian regime, but how is that relevant to the point here? I understand that France, Russia, and Iraq have normal trade relations with Syria. And? My point here is that this transaction appears to have advanced international proliferation, WMD financing by sponsors of terrorism, and flagrant violations of UNSCR 1718 (not that anything the UN says really matters). Those would seem to be fairly grave international security risks, no?
I’m not so sure, nkmatters. So far, the Obama Administration’s reaction has been a lot more sober and steady than what we got used to seeing from Bush on this issue. Gates, in particular, has emerged as a competent adult, even as the State Department pretty much just does its irrelevant old thing. It may be a little early to induct them into the neocon cabal and issue pinkie rings and monogrammed smoking jackets, but I’m open to giving them a fair chance.
Daniel, when did the US render anyone to Syria? You may not have noticed but during the Bush era Syria and the US were not best-ist buds. Maybe you are confusing Bush with Pelosi and Kerry?
Danny: Maher Arar’s case is a tragic example, well known in Canada.
Sorry Joshua, I don’t mean to further derail the discussion here, I just felt a need to be fair. I don’t agree with Daniel’s point, for what it’s worth.
http://www.maherarar.ca/mahers%20story.php
Please. I’m familiar with the case — trust me. It’s irrelevant and off-topic.
Of course, I realise it was a little off-topic; and, to be sure, I’m aware of and alarmed at the threat posed to human lives by proliferation of this kind. What I take issue with, however, is the ‘axis of evil’ (and, indeed, ‘state sponsor of terrorism’) kind of rhetoric in the post. Obviously I won’t go into the age-old arguments about western and democratic states’ dealings with human rights abusers – with which I am sure you’re more than familiar – I just think that that kind of thing is unnecessary, and the blogs (which are otherwise hugely insightful) suffer for it.
[p.s. forgive me if I’ve posted this twice, I’m having rather confusing WiFi trouble here]
NK Unwise, Unhelpful, But Not a Terrorist (Daily NK)
“To list a country on the terrorism list, there’s a legal requirement… And what we’ve seen so far, I don’t think meets that legal test,†he concluded.
I may be entirely wrong, but this lends fuel to the thought that the current administration will dismiss or bury the significance of missile technology cooperation between CERS and KOMID.
You know…all part of an effort to avoid “state sponsors of terrorism” rhetoric.