Romney on Iran’s ‘Route to the Sea’
Why focus on the realities of terror-sponsoring rogue regimes, when you can mock Gov. Mitt Romney instead? After Monday night’s Obama-Romney foreign policy debate, the Washington Post’s Al Kamen is having fun deriding Romney’s description of Syria as Iran’s “route to the sea.” In commentary posted beneath a map of the Middle East, Kamen writes that “the fact-checkers went wild.” He notes, more in derision than in sorrow, that Romney has said this before, and “We had tried ever so hard back in February to get Romney to stop saying that.”
Kamen points out that Iran has direct access to waterways, with its own long coastline along the Persian Gulf and Gulf of Oman, that it doesn’t share a border with Syria, and that Iranians making the overland journey would have to travel through northern Iraq to get to Syria, “and once the Iranians get there, they’ll find Syria has only a measly 111 miles of coastline.”
All correct, as far as it goes. Which isn’t very far. To be fair to Kamen, what Romney might more fastidiously have said is that Syria is Iran’s beachhead on the Mediterranean Sea. Which it is. Syria is right up the short coastline from Hezbollah-infested Lebanon, and the state of Israel, which Iran’s regime would like wiped off the map. But Kamen and his fact-checkers-gone-wild have neglected to mention that, or to note Romney’s additional remarks that Syria has been used by Iran as a “route for them to arm Hezbollah in Lebanon, which threatens, of course, our ally, Israel.”
Yes, it is something of an expedition to shuttle between Iran and Syria, but that has not daunted decades of traffic in weapons and personnel between Iran and the Iranian-spawned, trained, and supported terrorists of Hezbollah in Lebanon, plenty of that traffic running via Syria. Nor, during Syria’s tumult of the past 19 months, has the journey discouraged Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps from hustling to the aid of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad.
Just last month, Reuters reported that according to a Western intelligence report, provided by a United Nations diplomatic source, Iran was “continuing to assist the regime in Damascus by sending trucks overland via Iraq.” According to the same report, Iran has also been making heavy use of those modern contraptions (referenced Monday night by President Obama, while lecturing Romney on the modern world) called airplanes. Reuters quotes further from the leaked intelligence report: “Planes are flying from Iran to Syria on an almost daily basis, carrying IRGC (Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps) personnel and tens of tons of weapons to arm the Syrian security forces and militias… .”
As for Syria’s “measly 111 miles of coastline” — as it happens, the Iranians have already discovered it. Syria’s coastline is home to such fascinating ports as Tartous and Lattakia, which figure, for instance, in a June, 2012 report by the United Nations panel of experts on Iran sanctions, in the context of alleged Iranian-origin maritime weapons shipments to Syria. Tartous is home to a naval base of Iran’s protector-in-proliferation, Russia, and locale for such stories as AlJazeera’s dispatch this past February, citing Iran state media: “Iran warships ‘dock in Syria’s Tartous port.’” And last year, for the first time since Iran’s 1979 Islamic revolution, two Iranian navy ships docked in the Syrian port of Lattakia. Iran’s PressTV provided video of that event, along with footage of Iran’s navy commander visiting Damascus to sign a cooperation agreement with his Syrian counterpart.
Of course, if fact-checkers are desperate for a good chuckle, why deny them their fun over Romney’s locution? Syria is by no means Iran’s only access to the sea, and we can cavil over what distances and means of transport differentiate a “route” from, say, an access point, or a hub. But this comment did not arise in the midst of a detailed geography lesson. Romney made it, arguably as shorthand, during a debate on foreign policy. Even the most mirth-filled fact-checker might reasonably pause for a moment to consider whether it meant the candidate has never seen a map, or whether, having looked at much more than just the map, he was flagging the dangerous and increasingly alarming dealings between Iran and its bedfellow-on-the-Med, Syria.
Ms. Rosett,
As you know the Illiberal press most often resorts to NOT following nor providing background/ backdrop of Conservatives sound bites. Only nonsensical ridicule and derision.
It’s glaringly apparent when reading Ap/ AFP, The Ticket the alphabet networks and other Uhbama boot licking ‘news sources’. These lapdogs glaze over or don’t mention altogether key and essential information that makes the Illiberal’s they faun over look ‘bad’.
Heck, drudge report showcases their mendacity on a constant-basis.. using their very own hyperbole-like ‘news’ of their bias.
As I’d mentioned prior, I can’t fathom why ANYONE would read ANYTHING coming from the biased, public sector union that is the Ap/AFP. Mind-boggling.
paul_unalaska: Instead of ‘Illiberal’ just call it ‘Leftist,’ and instead of press, call it, ‘Ministry of Propaganda and Lies.’ The good news (and the bad news): 40% of the population trusts the Ministry’s stories. The better news: At least two major components of the Ministry, the NYT and the WaPo, are hanging on by a thread. The NYT, without its Mexican benefactor, would probably end up being an Internet site (like Newsweak – not a misspelling) and ditto for the WaPo without Kaplan.
REZKO, OBAMA, AND THE NADHMI AUCHI RAILROAD LINKING CHICAGO, WASHINGTON, AND BAGHDAD (Part 1of 3)
http://illinoispaytoplay.com/2012/10/23/rezko-obama-and-the-nadhmi-auchi-railroad-linking-chicago-washington-and-baghdad-part-1of-3/
The Ministry of Truth
Iran’s Route to the Sea was a dumb phrase. Just accept it and move on.
“To be fair to Kamen, what Romney might more fastidiously have said is that Syria is Iran’s beachhead on the Mediterranean Sea. Which it is. Syria is right up the short coastline from Hezbollah-infested Lebanon, and the state of Israel, which Iran’s regime would like wiped off the map. But Kamen and his fact-checkers-gone-wild have neglected to mention that, or to note Romney’s additional remarks that Syria has been used by Iran as a “route for them to arm Hezbollah in Lebanon, which threatens, of course, our ally, Israel.”
Right, let’s not judge Romney based on what he actually said, but rather on what he should have said, or what I think he meant. Does objective reality exist for you folks anymore? Facepalms all the way down.
Yeah, you’ve got a point Matt. Take him for what he said.
Fifty seven states.
If they bring a knife you bring a gun.
They’re clinging to their guns and religeon.
Get in their faces.
Obama care was “passed by a strong bipartisan” coalition.
The riots were a spontaneous event that occured at a demonstration, caused by a video.
Go find your own reality elsewhere.
It should also be noted that Syria and Iran are both part of the Shiite Crescent – it runs from parts of Afghanistan, through Iran, Iraq (whose majority is Shiite), Syria, and Hezbullah-dominated Lebanon. Iran of course is the dominant core of this Crescent. Only a minority in Syria are Shiite (Alawites have only a vague historic link to Shia), but as Romney pointed out, Syria *is* Iran’s only real ally in the Arab world.
But that’s starting to change. Egypt – part of the larger Sunni Crescent – has turned friendlier to Iran since the Muslim Brotherhood took over. Iranian warships, for example, are once again able to traverse the Suez Canal.
And Obama’s contention that Iran is “more isolated than ever” is laughable. A conference of some 120 “non-aligned” countries recently met in Teheran. The US, despite paying the largest share of the UN’s budget, was unable to persuade UN head Ban Ki Moon not to attend. US ally and NATO member Turkey continues to buy Iranian oil using gold bullion currently routed through (US ally) Dubai. India and South Korea are still buying oil and/or gas from Iran, as is China.
Everybody who isn’t a brain dead liberal knew what Romney meant.
Did this WaPo guy have anything to say about Biden’s comment (in the debate with Ryan) that Libya is a small country relative to Syria ?
In square miles, Libya is about 9x the size of Syria.
Did the WaPo guy have anything derisive to say when Obama remarked in his 2008 campaign that Iran was a “tiny country” ?
And if the remark had been about Russia’s 19th century quest for a warm water port, they would have similarly scoffed and told us that the water was not nearly as warm as that of the Carribean.
I noticed that the msm did not care to talk about Joe Biden’s statement of how libya was five times smaller than Syria when it actually ten times larger. But you know Joe will be Joe and as we all know he is a foreign policy expert!
Exactly as you say.
The traditional “route to the sea” issues were Russia’s access to the Mediterranean, hey they had lots of access to the Artic Ocean but it didn’t help much, and the Baltic Sea, but that was still too icy. Russia also had access to the Black “Sea”, but it was at least potentially choked by NATO country Turkey.
To be honest, it does sound like Romney got a little confused there about issues, players, and geography, or at least phrasing.
The problem is that Romney is a big picture guy who thinks strategically instead of as a reactionary. Most of the LSM talking heads (and most liberals, truth be told) can’t see beyond the end of their nose and can’t find their ass with both hands.
Or Romney just has no idea of geography.
Maybe you are the one who needs to take a close look at a good map.
Where does Iran most want to project its military power? In the Mediterranean. So how does the Iranian Navy currently get to and from the Mediterranean? It is a long voyage that passes through several points where a blockade can be imposed. Most of Iran’s ports are not on the Indian Ocean but rather inside the more confined waters of the Persian Gulf. There they are vulnerable to mines, torpedo boats and land based planes from the other big dog in the region- Saudi Arabia. From the Persian Gulf those ships have to pass through the narrow Strait of Hormuz, an potential blockade point. After traversing the Arabian sea, still within range of land based planes from Saudi Arabia, the ships then have to navigate the extremely narrow and tricky Bab-el-Mandeb -the Gate of Grief only to be in the even more confined waters of the Red Sea. Here they are once again vulnerable to attacks from planes, mines and torpedo boats from Saudi Arabia and planes from Israel. Finally the Iranian Navy has to go through the Suez Canal where they are sitting ducks. That is a purely horrendous round trip for admirals to contemplate undertaking in times of political uncertainty.
No admiral in the world wants to send his fleet on what might far too readily become a one way voyage. Without the guarantee of a friendly port in the Mediterranean that can be used for repairs and resupply the Iranian Navy simply cannot effectively maintain a constant presence in the area it deems most vital to its plans to be a major player in the Islamic world.
What earthly advantage would being on the Med confer to Iran?
It does not get them any closer to their stated enemies. Iran doesn’t give a hoot about Europe – their targets are Saudi Arabia (heartland of the heretics to the Iranian mullahs) and Israel (not that they actually care about Israel – it’s just a convenient scapegoat and foreign enemy to rally their people against – as is America, come to that). It would get them no more trade, since the west by and large isn’t trading with them now, and the people who do get to them via the Persian Gulf. Their navy is a sick joke, and being on the Med won’t improve that, in fact, by exposing it to the European powers’ real navies (not as good as ours, but respectable nonetheless) would simply show it up for the weak little thing it is.
If Iran wants to be a “major player in the Islamic world” (and it has no real reason to, given it considers the rest of the “Islamic World” heretical dogs) the waterway it needs to control is the Persian Gulf. This would give it access routes to Medina and Mecca without going through Iraq, and a stranglehold on oil shipments.
However you look at it, Romney’s statement is either empty rhetoric or ignorance. He’s trying to drum up support by making an “Islamic Threat” that doesn’t really exist. Pity he did such a poor job of it.
Stupid is as stupid does.
Great job PJ Media! You almost make sense out of the nonsensical.
Anyone who reads the geopolitical website Stratfor understands that Iran has made great progress in extending its influence across the Middle East to the Mediterranean Sea. Iraq is no longer a buffer state to Iran’s main ally, Syria, which is supporting the Islamists in Lebanon. That is precisely Iran’s “route to the sea.” If Bashar falls in Syria, Iran suffers a major blow to its ambitions. There is nothing “mock-worthy” in what Governor Romney said.
Did Obama question Romney on this? Or was it left to his supporters?
If the former, we are left to ponder whether he was asleep, or whether he knew the facts and chose not go further into them:- either because he felt that would harm American interests, or because he felt it would harm him.
If the latter that opens the additional possibility that Obama was ignorant.
Never fail to count on plain old stupidity and arrogance, the very coin of the MSM realm.
If they were good at anything, they’d be doing it, not talking about it.
It cracks me up (and or worries me) that you seriously try to defend this one. This was a stupid gaffe by someone who obviously got confused about the map. I think this invalidates you as an intelligent commentator.
Iraq simply isn’t the roadblock the liberal press would infer by making fun of Romney’s comments. It is a direct land route allowing access to Syria and the strategically important Mediterranean sea.
If you actually believe that the Iraqi regime, installed by popular elections enabled by the US, is a US ally, you have been seriously misinformed. Shi’ites are far more loyal to their religious allies than interested in non-Muslim connections. Iraq has been entirely lost to the Irani influence that has been present all through our war there.
Syria IS Iran’s strategic land connection to the Mediterranean sea, Romney is correct, in actual fact Romney has identified a problem that the press doesn’t want you to see, only because it proves Obama really blew the whole Iraqi withdrawal by failing to maintain a presence that would have curtailed this issue.
Go ahead and snark now, liberals, in a few years the reality of what Romney has identified will be apparent to even the brain-dead.
I wouldn’t laugh. He’s right. The Yarmouk Complex near Khartoum was manufacturing Iranian ballistic surface-to-surface Shehab missiles under license of Tehran.
One of the issues is that the liberals are misquoting Romney, and then setting flame to their strawmen. Romney said “route to the sea”, not ONLY route to the sea, as many are misreporting (even those who quote him later in the article!).
Not a word about Saudi Arabia, home to the 250 year old Wahhabi cult (itself cousin-in-law to Taliban, Salafism, al-Qaeda, what have you). Not sure who in their right mind would consider the House of Saud an ally .. unless one’s goal is the destruction of Islam (see also Cromwell/Puritanism and Christianity). Who is bulldozing Islamic heritage sites in Medina and Mecca? The Saudi royals, of course. Saudi Arabia, where the practice of Judaism and Christianity is illegal and Shi’ism is scarcely tolerated. If you want to find that degree of religious oppression in Iran, one has to look at the case of the Baha’i. Jews? Iran has thousands .. but perhaps Persian Jews are not sufficiently human to merit the attention of Washington’s neo-Jacobites, that strange class bent on global revolution with nary a thought given to the outcome.