WAR 04-08-2017-to-04-14-2017_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
(262) 03-18-2017-to-03-24-2017_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...24-2017_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

(263) 03-25-2017-to-03-31-2017_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...31-2017_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

(264) 04-01-2017-to-04-07-2017_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...07-2017_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

-----

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-turkey-idUSKBN17A0GW

World News | Sat Apr 8, 2017 | 9:31am EDT

Red Crescent doesn't expect fresh wave of Syrian refugees into Turkey

By Tuvan Gumrukcu and Bulent Usta | CILVEGOZU, Turkey

The Turkish Red Crescent does not expect a fresh wave of Syrian refugees to head for Turkey after the chemical attack in the northwestern province of Idlib earlier this week, the humanitarian organization's head said on Saturday.

Kerem Kinik also told Reuters that a new refugee camp was being prepared in Jarablus, the Syrian border town that Turkey-backed fighters last year took from Islamic State militants.

Turkey is hosting some 3 million Syrian refugees, which Ankara says is the world's largest refugee population. It has also set up refugee camps on the Syrian side of the border, where it is providing aid. Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan has said the West should do more to help Turkey shoulder the humanitarian burden.

"Those who wanted to leave their country have already done so, and others are trying to cling on to life inside," Kinik said in an interview at Turkey's Cilvegozu border gate with Syria, in the southern Hatay province. "At this stage, we are not expecting a new migrant wave. That is not the atmosphere inside."

At least 70 people, including children, were killed in a poison gas attack in rebel-held northwest Syria on Tuesday. Both Washington and Ankara blame the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Syria denies it carried out the attack.

The United States on Friday fired cruise missiles at the base from which it said the chemical weapons attack had been launched, a move Erdogan has called a "positive step", but "not enough".

Kinik said convoys were taking tens of thousands of refugees from an area around Homs in western Syria. A camp in Jarablus was being prepared for around 3,500, he said, without saying where the other refugees would be taken.

"We are providing regular humanitarian aid to 5 million people in addition to the 3 million in Turkey. This is mainly in Syria's northern frontier. Our teams are constantly providing help with border support, camps... food and shelter."

Also In World News
North Korea calls U.S. strikes on Syria 'unforgivable'
Uzbek man arrested over Swedish truck attack that killed four

The Red Crescent was also supplying 50 medical workers inside Syria with gas masks, filters and other protective equipment so they could treat chemical attack victims without injuring themselves, he said.

The organization has plans to train rescue workers and others on how to protect themselves in the event of similar attacks in the future. They would then be expected to train civilians, Kinik said.

"There are one million people living in the Idlib countryside. We don't know where such an attack will take place or who will be affected," he said.

(Writing by David Dolan, editing by David Evans)

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles


Next In World News

Russia warns of serious consequences from U.S. strike in Syria
UNITED NATIONS/MOSCOW/BEIRUT Russia warned on Friday that U.S. cruise missile strikes on a Syrian air base could have "extremely serious" consequences, as President Donald Trump's first major foray into a foreign conflict opened up a rift between Moscow and Washington.

Syrian Observatory says air strike kills at least 15 people near Raqqa
BEIRUT An air strike believed to have been carried out by the U.S.-led coalition against Islamic State killed 15 people including four children in a village west of the jihadists' stronghold of Raqqa on Saturday, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said.

MORE FROM REUTERS
*
Syrian air base suffers major damage due to U.S. strikes: Russia's RIA
Russia notifies intent to suspend communication channel: coalition official
Hillary Clinton calls for U.S. to bomb Syrian air fields
U.S. targeted Syrian aircraft, runways and fuel stations
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-spain-eta-idUSKBN1790YK

World News | Sat Apr 8, 2017 | 10:37am EDT

Basque militants ETA surrender arms in end to decades of conflict

By Claude Canellas, Sonya Dowsett and Isla Binnie | BAYONNE, France/MADRID

Basque militant group ETA effectively ended an armed separatist campaign after almost half a century on Saturday, leading French authorities to the sites where it says its caches of weapons, explosives and ammunition are hidden.

ETA, which killed more than 850 people in its attempt to carve out an independent state in northern Spain and southwest France, declared a ceasefire in 2011 but did not disarm.

Founded in 1959 out of anger among Basques at political and cultural repression under General Francisco Franco, ETA (Euskadi Ta Askatasuna - Basque Country and Freedom) gained notoriety as one of Europe's most intractable separatist groups.

The Spanish government said ETA's handover of weapons in the French city of Bayonne was positive but insufficient and called on the group to formally dissolve and apologize to its victims.

ETA's disarmament ends an era of political violence in Western Europe, but comes as nationalism is stirring across the continent, with Scotland and the Spanish region of Catalonia seeking independence referendums, while Sinn Fein has urged a vote on taking Northern Ireland out of Britain.

ETA said in a letter to the BBC earlier this week it had handed over its weapons and explosives to civilian go-betweens who would deliver them to authorities.

The mediators - known as "The Artisans of Peace" - passed authorities a list with the coordinates for eight sites where ETA had stored its weapons arsenal, their representative, Michel Tubiana, told reporters in Bayonne.

The caches contain 120 firearms, about 3 tonnes of explosives and several thousand rounds of ammunition, he said.

Security forces were now searching the sites to neutralize the explosives and secure the weapons, French Interior Minister Matthias Fekl said at a news conference in Paris. Police were photographed carrying out bags from sites around Bayonne.

A Spanish government source said Madrid did not believe the group would hand over all its arms, while Spain's state prosecutor has asked the High Court to examine those surrendered as possible murder weapons used in hundreds of unresolved cases.

ETA's disarmament entailed no impunity for their crimes and they should not expect any favorable treatment, the government said in a statement.

"The actions carried out today by the terrorist group are nothing more than the result of their definitive defeat," Interior Minister Juan Ignacio Zoido told reporters in Madrid.

Arnaldo Otegi, leader of Basque pro-independence party EH Bildu who has served time in jail for his links with ETA, said in Bayonne that it was a day that would be welcomed by the great majority of Basques, although work was not finished.

"From today we will put on the table all the problems we still have as a society and a nation," he said, adding that the biggest issues were the around 300 ETA members still in Spanish and French prisons and the group's victims.

VIOLENT PAST
ETA's first known victim was a secret police chief in San Sebastian in 1968 and its last a French policemen shot in 2010.

It chose not to disarm when it called its truce, but has been weakened in the past decade after hundreds of its members were arrested and weapons seized in joint Spanish and French operations.

Popular revulsion at the scale of violent attacks carried out by Islamic militants had also played a part, Paddy Woodworth, who has written in depth about ETA, said.

Related Coverage
VIDEO Basque militant separatists ETA say they have disarmed

"It had ceased to be an attractive organization to join."

The group's first revolutionary gesture was to fly the banned 'ikurrina', the red and green Basque flag, before the campaign escalated in the 1960s into violence that was brutally reciprocated by the Franco regime.

In 1973, ETA targeted Franco's heir apparent Luis Carrero Blanco by digging a tunnel under the road that he drove down daily to attend Mass. They packed the tunnel with explosives and blasted Blanco's car over a five-storey building.

The assassination changed the course of Spanish history, as the removal of Franco's successor led to the exiled king reclaiming the throne and a shift to a constitutional monarchy.

Attacks including a 1987 car bomb at a Barcelona supermarket, which killed 21 including a pregnant woman and two children, horrified Spaniards and drew international outrage.

Gorka Landaburu, who lost his thumb and was left blind in one eye after an ETA letter bomb detonated in his home in 2001, welcomed the disarmament and said lessons had been learned.

"This must never happen again in our country," he said, standing by the sea in the Basque resort of San Sebastian. "I hope no one ever picks up pistols and bombs to defend an ideology ever again."

(Additional reporting by Vincent West in Bayonne, Bate Felix in Paris and Robert Hetz in Madrid; Writing by Angus Berwick; Editing by Alexander Smith)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/06/south-korea-shows-kim-jong-un-how-missiles-are-supposed-to-work/

South Korea Shows Kim Jong-Un How Missiles Are Supposed To Work

Ryan Pickrell
China/Asia Pacific Reporter
10:59 AM 04/06/2017

South Korea has successfully tested a new missile capable of striking targets anywhere inside North Korea, South Korean defense sources revealed Thursday.

News of South Korea’s test comes two days after the North launched a ballistic missile of its own. U.S. Pacific Command initially determined that the North Korean missile was a KN-15 (Pukguksong-2), a solid-fueled, road-mobile medium-range ballistic missile the country tested for the first time in February.

However, a senior U.S. defense official told reporters Wednesday that the*missile may have been an older liquid-fueled, extended-range scud missile fired from a fixed location. The missile allegedly*malfunctioned shortly after launching, causing it to spin out of control and crash into the sea.

Tuesday’s test is the second to go wrong in just a few weeks. North Korea attempted to fire an unidentified ballistic missile towards the end of March; however, the missile exploded seconds after launch.

Some observers suspect that North Korean missile failures are the result of a targeted U.S. cyber campaign. Others attribute North Korea’s unsuccessful launches to poor-quality missiles, unreliable equipment, and incompetence. Either way, the North is having trouble getting its missiles in the air.

South Korea, on the other hand, apparently has no trouble launching its missiles.
“There was a test-firing recently of a Hyunmoo-type ballistic missile with a range of nearly 800 km*at the Anheung test site,” inside sources told Yonhap News Agency, adding the launch was assessed as “successful.”

Ministry of National Defense spokesman Moon Sang-gyun claimed the country has been developing a missile with a range of nearly 500 miles and a payload of over 1,100 pounds, without confirming or denying the test. Fired from anywhere in South Korea, the missile could hit any target in the North.

Defense sources reportedly said they expect the new missile to send a “strong warning message to North Korea,” which has continued its provocations despite numerous international restrictions prohibiting the regime from testing ballistic missiles.

Once deployed, the new missile will enhance South Korea’s deterrence capabilities in the face of North Korea’s expanding arsenal of missiles and nuclear weapons, as well as its massive conventional force.

“Our troops maintain a firm posture for an immediate response to any kind of provocation by North Korea,” South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said after North Korea’s latest weapons test, adding that North Korea is on a path towards the end of the regime.

Follow Ryan on Twitter
Send tips to ryan@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/06/s...-missiles-are-supposed-to-work/#ixzz4dfeTHiTX
 

Shacknasty Shagrat

Has No Life - Lives on TB
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/06/south-korea-shows-kim-jong-un-how-missiles-are-supposed-to-work/

South Korea Shows Kim Jong-Un How Missiles Are Supposed To Work

Ryan Pickrell
China/Asia Pacific Reporter
10:59 AM 04/06/2017

South Korea has successfully tested a new missile capable of striking targets anywhere inside North Korea, South Korean defense sources revealed Thursday.

News of South Korea’s test comes two days after the North launched a ballistic missile of its own. U.S. Pacific Command initially determined that the North Korean missile was a KN-15 (Pukguksong-2), a solid-fueled, road-mobile medium-range ballistic missile the country tested for the first time in February.

However, a senior U.S. defense official told reporters Wednesday that the*missile may have been an older liquid-fueled, extended-range scud missile fired from a fixed location. The missile allegedly*malfunctioned shortly after launching, causing it to spin out of control and crash into the sea.

Tuesday’s test is the second to go wrong in just a few weeks. North Korea attempted to fire an unidentified ballistic missile towards the end of March; however, the missile exploded seconds after launch.

Some observers suspect that North Korean missile failures are the result of a targeted U.S. cyber campaign. Others attribute North Korea’s unsuccessful launches to poor-quality missiles, unreliable equipment, and incompetence. Either way, the North is having trouble getting its missiles in the air.

South Korea, on the other hand, apparently has no trouble launching its missiles.
“There was a test-firing recently of a Hyunmoo-type ballistic missile with a range of nearly 800 km*at the Anheung test site,” inside sources told Yonhap News Agency, adding the launch was assessed as “successful.”

Ministry of National Defense spokesman Moon Sang-gyun claimed the country has been developing a missile with a range of nearly 500 miles and a payload of over 1,100 pounds, without confirming or denying the test. Fired from anywhere in South Korea, the missile could hit any target in the North.

Defense sources reportedly said they expect the new missile to send a “strong warning message to North Korea,” which has continued its provocations despite numerous international restrictions prohibiting the regime from testing ballistic missiles.

Once deployed, the new missile will enhance South Korea’s deterrence capabilities in the face of North Korea’s expanding arsenal of missiles and nuclear weapons, as well as its massive conventional force.

“Our troops maintain a firm posture for an immediate response to any kind of provocation by North Korea,” South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said after North Korea’s latest weapons test, adding that North Korea is on a path towards the end of the regime.

Follow Ryan on Twitter
Send tips to ryan@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/06/s...-missiles-are-supposed-to-work/#ixzz4dfeTHiTX

Thanks for all you responsible work,Hc.
So now South Korea has a successful SRBM(800km) missile and President Trump may be considering basing nukes again in South Korea.
I hope the Chinese President can convey his concern that, one morning, North Korea may be tuned into a glowing deep hole in the ocean.
The Chinese President will do all he can to prevent such an event, but he will need many things in return(see previous sentence).

SS
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.spiegel.de/international...guerillas-into-normal-citizens-a-1141991.html

Out of the Jungle

Colombia Tries to Tame FARC Guerillas

For 50 years, the Colombian guerilla group FARC fought for a leftist revolution. Now the group is laying down its weapons and the state is trying to transform the fighters into normal citizens. For many of them, that is more frightening than the war.

By Juan Moreno
April 06, 2017 05:09 PM

Every morning at precisely 10 a.m., the generator rattles to life, bringing internet to the middle of the jungle and to the FARC rebels who have left their rebellion behind. Somebody from the government set up a satellite dish so that these former fighters can be pulled back into the contemporary world, warriors who spent years, decades, cut off from civilization without the web, without telephones, living almost like a tribe of natives. The only difference being the fact that they were constantly under fire and surrounded by booby-traps and minefields.

The small light on the satellite receiver begins blinking, signaling that Wi-Fi has arrived and that Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and other digital treats are now available in the jungle. And of course, the obligatory happens here too: They become immediately addicted. Just one month ago, they were a people's army working in 34-degree Celsius (93-degree Fahrenheit) heat and 100 percent humidity and who didn't know what Google was.

Now that peace has broken out, they are prohibited from carrying out military exercises and lie in their wooden huts, many of them with a mobile phone in their hands - second-hand models that were a recent gift from the state. Cell phones were taboo in their previous lives, for fear that their enemy could track them. Now, they stare at the displays of their new devices and learn how to "like" Rihanna videos and attract new friends on Facebook that they don't even know. Such are the first steps back to the present.

Colombia has embarked upon a unique experiment, a bold mission of peace aimed at leaving its blood-drenched past behind. It is a kind of domestication, a process of turning savage fighters into responsible citizens. To do so, FARC bases across the country are being morphed into re-education camps. This one, in the far south of the country near the border with Ecuador, is roughly the size of a football field and hosts 80 former guerillas - former explosives experts, snipers, reconnaissance experts and torture specialists. They have fought against the government as members of the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia, or FARC, since their childhoods.

Until recently, fighters like Willington Ortíz, Cazika Atahualpa and Edwin Cano were terrorists. Now they present a problem. Can a gang of Marxist-Leninist enemies of the state, a group that has spent their lives being hunted by the government, be turned into well-behaved Colombians?

Potato Cultivation and Contraception

The first step was to send professional aid workers into the jungle. Now the guerilla camp, with its plastic tarps and wooden shacks, is full of doctors, nurses, teachers, psychologists and social workers. The fighters are discovering that peace requires at least as many people as war does.

The doctors examine the men and women in a small, green tent beneath the towering rubber trees, discovering herniated disks, osteoarthritis, rheumatism, typhoid fever, damaged ligaments and malaria. They sometimes find themselves wondering how such wrecks were even able to fight. The psychologists end up with myriad questions of their own. How can a person join a jungle war at 14 and still keep fighting at the age of 50 without completely losing their minds? The guerilleros, in short, are being studied like a previously undiscovered people from the Amazon basin.

The most important part of the project, however, is education. Using machetes and an old chainsaw, a kind of assembly hall with no walls was erected out of felled trees, and furnished with tables and chairs. The curriculum includes the Colombian electoral system, the best way to cultivate potatoes, magazine photography and methods of contraception. And, just as important: What is Netflix?

When they're not surfing the web, the guerilleros sit in the assembly hall. Up front, an agriculture expert with dreadlocks is explaining the fascinating world of land cultivation. "When this here is finished in a few months," she says, " you will turn in your weapons and perhaps start a self-sufficient commune." It sounds like a pie-in-the sky plan from a European environmentalist, but it is the only one Colombia has.

Peace arrived on a sunny day in September of last year. Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos and the leader of FARC, Timoleón Jiménez, stood on a stage in the city of Cartagena, both in white shirts, shook hands and held up a treaty ending a war that had lasted five decades without producing a winner. Santos received the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts. As defense minister, he had spent years dropping bombs on the jungle while his counterpart Jiménez stands accused by state prosecutors of being responsible for more than 100 murders.

The fight between the Colombian state and FARC began in 1966 and ultimately became the longest guerilla war in Latin America, a demoralizing orgy of unrestrained violence. The statistics only hint at the true horror: Over 5 million people displaced from their homes, 200,000 deaths and 10,000 people either disappeared or kidnapped. The conflagration had several parties, including FARC, the military, the right-wing paramilitaries, the competing drug cartels and other criminal groups.

But that is in the past. Now is the time for peace and reconciliation. The peace deal calls for the almost 7,000 FARC fighters to hand in their weapons by June and a few hundred have already done so. President Santos promised generous amnesties, political participation and aid to those wanting to return home. FARC head Jiménez emphasized that "hearts and minds" would also be disarmed. Many other promises were made as well: land reform would soon take place, along with a peace tribunal and a truth commission. FARC was to become a normal, boring political party and the former rebels were to become settled, politically involved and, some of them perhaps, elected members of parliament. And of course, the entire world applauded in approval. Everybody likes a happy ending.

Boris, Too, is Human

Boris Forero, who recently turned 50, has the face and the bald head of a prize fighter. On this spring-like Monday morning in Bogotá, he isn't in the mood for a happy ending. He sits in a loose-fitting black suit as waiters in livery hurry past him. He has been invited to speak at a reception in a luxury hotel held by the Agencia Colombiana para la Reintegración (ACR), the state agency responsible for the resocialization of the former FARC fighters.

Boris used to be a member of FARC, but deserted years ago. He tells the audience about his experiences: "If there is one message I wish to leave you with, then this," he says from the stage. "We are people too."

The audience is made up of representatives from companies and agencies, all dressed formally in suits. They aren't from the top levels of their organization, and were presumably ordered to attend by their bosses. The ACR would like to convince them to provide jobs to former FARC fighters. Colombians are extremely polite people and many of the attendees effusively promise to consider the idea. Later, at the buffet, some of them can be heard wondering how you fire somebody who knows how to assemble a Kalashnikov in their sleep.

Boris spent almost 20 years as a member of FARC, spending extended time in battle and receiving several gunshot wounds. At some point, he realized he no longer knew why he had joined in the first place. Eleven years ago, he returned to civilization and studied psychology. Now, he occasionally speaks with FARC deserters on behalf of the agency, trying to explain to them what freedom is and peace means. He should know if the current transformation is possible, if the savage beasts can be tamed.

"I don't know anything. Except that these poor devils have no idea what is awaiting them here and how damned difficult it will be," he says. "FARC marks you. War is your entire life. Five years passed between the moment when I resolved to leave and the moment when I finally left. FARC is a strange group, but it is the only thing in the life of a guerillero that resembles family."

More than anything, FARC provided a home to all manner of different people. Genuinely staunch warriors fought alongside others who were slowly becoming corrupt and still others who were outright criminals. The majority, though, always consisted of the desperate, the lost souls for whom the rebel life was still the best of many terrible options. People like Edwin Cano.

Edwin Doesn't Get It Yet

Edwin is a shy man. He lies in his shelter sending smileys to the three numbers that he has saved on his phone. When a social worker asked the 30-year-old yesterday what he wanted to be, he said that someone in the assembly hall had spoken about photography and he thought it sounded interesting. "But I'm not the one to decide if I will become a photographer or not. The party decides."

Edwin appears not to have understood the crucial point: The peace plan means that FARC will disappear and the fighters will be free to do as they like. That means that each one of them can decide themselves if they will become a photographer, a floor tiler or a table dancer. And it means that most of them won't care what becomes of Edwin, and neither will the party.

Edwin doesn't get it yet. The guerilla group has taken care of him for his entire life. He was 13 years old when he joined and FARC taught him to read and write. They fed him, gave him clothes and sewed his face back together after it was torn apart by a mine. Edwin's parents were farm workers who sent him away because they couldn't afford to feed him. That's why he's here.

It is shortly before noon and Boris Forero is still sitting in the luxury hotel. The conference has come to an end and he has no further plans for the day and nothing on the agenda for tomorrow either. It is a good moment to talk about his past. "Life in the FARC collective meant that many decisions are made for you. Mistakes have consequences, you know what they are, you endure them and life goes on. There is something soothing about it. It's uncomplicated."

Ever since Boris stopped fighting, he has had nervous tics. He can't keep his hands still, always rubbing a finger or scratching his face. "Everybody has scars. You can see some of them, but others you can't," he says. Boris has both. His arms and back look like someone had cut out bits using a kitchen knife, the result of a fragmentary bomb.

Other Groups Wait to Swoop In

War is like an engine; it needs fuel. Hate is a good one, but it loses strength over time. The only thing that really makes war last is money. The war against FARC may be over, but the drug war will continue for as long as there is demand for cocaine in America and Europe.

FARC may have called themselves freedom fighters and wrapped their consciences in leftist ideals, but in truth, they were one of the largest drug cartels on the planet. They are believed to have controlled around 60 percent of the Colombian drug industry. The EU listed the group as a terror organization, one which made around a billion dollars per year.

If FARC really doesn't want that money anymore, someone else will surely step in. Recently, FARC fighters who aren't interested in a life as a bus driver, an unemployed photographer or a cassava farmer have begun deserting. Mexican cartels are active in Colombia, and they aren't beckoning followers with "The Communist Manifesto." They are waving bundles of cash.

There is also another possible employer in the jungle: the so-called National Liberation Army, or ELN, which stands for Ejército de Liberación. The group is essentially FARC's little sister. The government is also negotiating with ELN, thus far unsuccessfully, because it is clear to all involved that the ELN could occupy the suddenly available FARC territories and that FARC fighters uninterested in a life of legality could find a new home in the group.

The Colombian cocaine industry, in any case, hasn't suffered under the new peace deal. On the contrary, Colombia has never before produced so much of the drug. Experts estimate that supply has climbed by a third since 2015 to 710 tons per year. Fully 188,000 hectares (465,000 acres) of Colombian territory is now covered in coca fields, twice as much as in 2012. It is an area two times as big as the city-state of Berlin.

Willington Understands the Hate

It is shortly after midnight in the jungle camp. The generator has been turned off and a few howler monkeys seem to miss the ruckus and are screeching into the darkness. Beneath the tarps, the mobile phone displays go dark. Willington Ortíz switches on his flashlight and oils his weapon.

He is an officer with FARC and will soon be 50 years old. He is a quiet, sick man with extremely nervous eyes. His back is a disaster and his constant cough is testimony to 30 years spent in the rain forest. A small monkey is jumping around at the foot of his bed, his pet. "You civilians have pets too, don't you?" Willington asks.

Of course things can't continue as they were, Willington says wearily. Of course he hated the bombing raids carried out by the government troops; the helicopters flying above the tree tops as he lay in the mud and waited; the constant marches carrying 60 kilograms (130 pounds) on his back. Part of waging a guerilla war is that the enemy can never know where you are. Willington suffers from his inability to fall into a deep sleep. Then again, good sleepers die young, because they don't hear the danger coming.

"The worst thing is that they are all dead." His comrades, his parents who he last saw when he was 17, his trainers, Fidel Castro, the revolution.

To most Colombians, people like Willington Ortíz are terrorists and murderers. Willington understands that. He shot and killed many soldiers and confiscated their weapons , including the M16 that he cleans every day, on behalf of FARC. The dead soldiers have parents, siblings and children. Willington is aware that many people have good reasons for hating him, but he has long wondered why people like him are called "terrorists" while his old enemies from the army are called "soldiers." Aren't wars waged by the poor always called terrorism? And isn't the terrorism perpetrated by the rich always called war?

Willington Ortíz joined FARC because of a girl. He was 17 at the time and his father's coffee plantation near Cali was waiting for him. His name was Alex Vargas at the time, Willington Ortíz is his nom de guerre, given to him in the jungle. But the girl he had met wasn't interested in coffee. She spoke of class warfare, of a just Colombia and of FARC, a people's army that kidnapped Colombians and helped Pablo Escobar flood America with cocaine to raise money for the revolución.

Willington didn't know much about liberating the people, but he loved the way the young woman's lips pursed when she said revolución. He joined the guerilleros along with her.

That was 33 years ago. Of the 100 recruits who joined alongside Willington - a group that would soon become much more than mere comrades - only he is still alive, he says. Willington's girlfriend was torn to pieces by a bomb just a few weeks after joining. It didn't take long for him to find a good reason for going to war.

Willington angrily slams the laptop shut in front of him. That afternoon, someone had explained to him what Facebook is, but he already hates the internet, after reading several inaccurate reports about FARC. "There are lies there, in this Facebook," he says. His motivation to hand over his M16 hasn't risen since he's been online.

Willington Ortíz is thinking of joining the soon-to-be-formed party, but he isn't the only one who recognizes the dangers of doing so. For years, environmentalists, human-rights activists and farming representatives have been murdered in Colombia. A left-wing agrarian reform of the kind they have been promised, a fairer distribution of land, cannot simply be agreed upon in this country. It must be paid for in blood. Everyone in this camp who is considering going into politics has the same fear: of being shot to death while waiting for a bus or standing behind a speaker's podium.

Cazika Wants to Return to Her Children

Peace does certainly have its positive sides, something the guerilleros recognize as well. In the camp, warm meals are served three times a day and there is music on Sundays. Early in the day, it's revolutionary songs like "The Internationale" or "Hasta Siempre Comandante." Shakira takes over in the afternoons.

Cazika Atahualpa, an attractive woman with dark eyes, is one of the few that is excited about peace. Her husband, Ramiro Durn, is currently the unit's "Secretary for Agitation and Propaganda."

Cazika has two children and when the camp schooling comes to an end, she says, she will be able to return to them. Currently, they are living with Ramiro's parents. Cazika and her husband were just there for a visit not long ago. José is seven and she didn't see him for six years following his birth. Their second child is just a few months old. It was already clear when she became pregnant that FARC wouldn't be around for much longer. In fact, six women in the camp are pregnant.

"You're not allowed to have children when you are a member of the guerilleros, so initially I didn't tell anybody. In my sixth month of pregnancy, I was still attacking military roadblocks. When my comrades noticed, they were extremely angry. They had to bring me to a hospital because it was a premature birth. Three comrades died on the way."

Cazika is lying on a cot as she tells her story. A doctor's examination revealed that she has typhoid and she is receiving an intravenous saline solution through her arm. The IV bag is hanging on a tree branch above her.

Cazika is a practically minded, direct woman. For her, the future is a gift that she never expected to receive. The future is not something that FARC members had to think about. Those destined to die don't plan for tomorrow; only the present matters.

FARC rules held that, if two fighters began developing a relationship, they had to inform their superior, because he had to know where his charges were at all times. You couldn't do anything without his permission, not smoking, not even falling in love. At the beginning, Cazika was only allowed to visit her Ramiro for two hours a night. Later, she asked for the visits to be expanded. Love was possible, but little consideration was given to relationships. Couples that had spent years together in the same unit, Cazika says, could be divided forever by way of a simple relocation order.

Things were handled differently, says Cazika, in an environment where a slight 17-year-old girl could sustain fire with a G3 assault rifle while the men would scatter like chickens. Courage knows no gender - another tidbit of war wisdom.

Cazika doesn't know what the future holds and nothing has prepared her for freedom. She would like to become a nurse. Her husband Ramiro, a lanky, eloquent man, once studied law for four semesters in Bogotá and was part of the youth chapter of the Communist Party before joining FARC in 2001. He is eyeing a career in politics. His parents have a holiday home on the Pacific coast, which he would describe to Cazika when they were under fire.

"I would like to see it," she says.

Once a Traitor, Always a Traitor

Boris Forero in Bogotá is likely to find himself in luxury hotels less often in the future. He has never managed to find a permanent position as a psychologist and the agency no longer needs him as often. His profile no longer matches the requirements. For the deserters who emerged from the jungle in the years before the peace deal, he was the perfect contact person. He had the same past as they did. But the former fighters that are now coming didn't run away and they see Boris as a turncoat. "They won't talk to me," he says, because he deserted. Once a traitor, always a traitor, even after the war has ended.

Boris gets up, wanting to head home to his not-particularly-nice apartment in a not-particularly-nice section of Bogotá. Boris thought peace would be different, not quite so difficult. Here, in freedom, nobody looks after you. You need money to live and a job that you can't get. You need money for food, electricity, gas, rent and clothes. You even have to spend money so that someone picks up your damned garbage.

Ever since Boris has been living in peace, hardly a day goes by that he doesn't think about the war. It's not that he misses the war, but he often thinks about its pleasant simplicity, its clarity. In war, there are certainties, even if they end in death. Black is black, white is white. But peace is gray.

The peace that Boris has experienced thus far has been more unsettled in its own way than the war, more confusing. On some days, says Boris, it has even been more difficult. Peace, too, is a fight. It is no longer a daily matter of life and death, but it's about the kind of life one leads and whether it is a life worth living.

Boris Forero used to carry a weapon; he was important. He wanted to make the world a better place. Today, he is looking for a job to ensure his survival. For many Colombians, he - and all the others that will come - are just freaks from the jungle who don't even know what Siri is. Several thousand guerilleros are now returning to civilization. Savage fighters. They have lost the war, and many of them won't win the peace either.

URL:
http://www.spiegel.de/international...guerillas-into-normal-citizens-a-1141991.html
Related SPIEGEL ONLINE links:
Photo Gallery: FARC Fighters Face a New Future
http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/p...ers-face-a-new-future-fotostrecke-146389.html
The Curaçao Connection: Germany Becomes a Destination for Drug Mules (07/13/2015)
http://www.spiegel.de/international...ation-for-caribbean-drug-mules-a-1043428.html
From the Archive: Interview with Colombian President Santos (05/21/2014)
http://www.spiegel.de/international...an-president-juan-manuel-santos-a-970308.html
From the Archive: The Foreign Face of FARC's Civil War (05/02/2014)
http://www.spiegel.de/international...tch-farc-member-tanja-nijmeijer-a-966813.html
The Colombian Coke Sub: Former Drug Smuggler Tells His Story (12/02/2010)
http://www.spiegel.de/international...r-drug-smuggler-tells-his-story-a-732292.html
A Daugher Seeks Justice: The IRA and the Search for Truth (05/16/2014)
http://www.spiegel.de/international...-gerry-adams-role-in-ira-murder-a-969555.html
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Well the Russians and the Chinese, with the US are now back to playing the "Great Game" in this hemisphere in earnest....:shk:

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...ca1b05c41b8_story.html?utm_term=.01449f8b5c17

The Americas

The Soviet Union fought the Cold War in Nicaragua. Now Putin’s Russia is back.

By Joshua Partlow April 8 at 5:56 PM

MANAGUA, NICARAGUA — On the rim of a volcano with a clear view of the U.S. Embassy, landscapers are applying the final touches to a mysterious new Russian compound.

Behind the concrete walls and barbed wire, a visitor can see red-and-blue buildings, manicured lawns, antennas and globe-shaped devices. The Nicaraguan government says it’s simply a tracking site of the Russian version of a GPS satellite system. But is it also an intelligence base intended to surveil the Americans?

“I have no idea,” said a woman who works for the Nicaraguan telecom agency stationed at the site. “They are Russian, and they speak Russian, and they carry around Russian apparatuses.”

Three decades after this tiny Central American nation became the prize in a Cold War battle with Washington, Russia is once again planting its flag in Nicaragua. Over the past two years, the Russian government has added muscle to its security partnership here, selling tanks and weapons, sending troops, and building facilities intended to train Central American forces to fight drug trafficking.

The Russian surge appears to be part of the Kremlin’s expansionist foreign policy. In other parts of the world, President Vladimir Putin’s administration has deployed fighter planes to help Syria’s war-battered government and stepped up peace efforts in Afghanistan, in addition to annexing the Crimean Peninsula and supporting separatists in Ukraine.

“Clearly there’s been a lot of activity, and it’s on the uptick now,” said a senior U.S. official familiar with Central American affairs, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive situation.

As the Beltway world untangles the Trump camp’s links to Moscow, American officials are also puzzling over Russian intentions in its obscure former stomping ground. Current and former U.S. officials suspect that the new Russian facilities could have “dual use” capabilities, particularly for electronic espionage aimed at the United States. Security analysts see the military moves in Central America as a possible rebuttal to the increased U.S. military presence in Eastern Europe, showing that Russia can also strut in the United States’ back yard.

[If Moscow tried to influence the U.S. election, things aren’t going as planned]

American officials say they are not yet alarmed by the growing Russia presence. But they are vigilant. The State Department named a staffer from its Russia desk to become the desk officer in charge of Nicaragua, in part because of her prior experience. Some American diplomats dispatched to Nicaragua have Russian-language skills and experience in Moscow.

Nicaragua’s president’s office, the foreign and defense ministries, and the police all refused to address questions for this report. The Russian Embassy in Managua also failed to respond to several queries.

Spy games and Washington-Moscow power struggles are old hat for Nicaragua, a country the size of Alabama with a rich Cold War history. The Soviet Union and Cuba provided soldiers and funding to help the government of Daniel Ortega and his leftist Sandinista National Liberation Front after they overthrew the U.S.-backed dictator Anastazio Somoza in 1979. The CIA jumped in to back rebels known as the “contras” fighting the Sandinistas in a war that killed tens of thousands.

The collapse of the Soviet Union brought an end to such Cold War conflicts. But in the past decade, and particularly under Putin’s rule, Russia has sought a bigger world footprint. In Latin America, Russia has sold billions of dollars in weapons to Venezuela. Russian helicopters are used by militaries in Peru, Argentina and Ecuador. While U.S. and Chinese trade in Latin America is far larger, Russia has intensified economic ties with several countries, including Mexico and Brazil.

When Ortega was reelected in 2006, after 16 years out of power, Nicaragua once again became a Russian friend in the region. The new relationship initially had a civilian focus, with Russia donating wheat and sorghum to Nicaragua, one of the poorest countries in the Western Hemisphere. Russia gave hundreds of boxy buses to Ortega’s government and is building a factory to manufacture vaccines.

“The economic cooperation was a facade,” said Roberto Orozco, executive director of the Center for Investigation and Strategic Analysis, a think tank in Managua. “What the Russians really wanted is an active military presence.”

In the past few years, the partnership has been militarized. In 2015, Nicaragua’s parliament, dominated by the Sandinistas, passed a resolution allowing Russian warships to dock in Nicaraguan ports, following earlier agreements to permit patrolling in coastal waters. Russia began supplying armored personnel carriers, aircraft and mobile rocket launchers. It provided 50 T-72 tanks to Nicaragua, which Ortega paraded through Managua, generating criticism from the public. The country’s military leaders already had an affinity with Russia, having used Soviet-supplied equipment fighting the contras and received training in the Soviet Union.

[Nicaragua’s Ortega wins third term amid questions about democracy]

While Venezuela has nearly collapsed economically and Cuba has improved relations with the United States, Ortega’s government has emerged as Russia’s most stable ideological ally in the hemisphere.

“The most fruitful political relationship that Russia has, and where it’s made its greatest advances, has been Nicaragua,” said Evan Ellis, a professor of Latin American studies at the U.S. Army War College. He and two U.S. customs officials were expelled from Nicaragua last year, with the government saying it should have been notified of their presence.

Nicaraguan security experts estimate that Russia has about 250 military personnel in the country.

Jacinto Suarez, president of the Nicaraguan parliament’s foreign affairs committee, and an ally of Ortega’s, said in an interview that the relationship with Russia is the natural outgrowth of the ties the countries developed in the 1980s. He dismissed those worrying about “nonexistent military threats.”

“Look at the commotion with the Russian tanks,” Suarez said. “And nothing happened. They said that war was coming when those tanks arrived.”

Current and former U.S. officials have a variety of theories about Putin’s intentions in Latin America. Some consider Russia’s military actions a response to the Obama administration sending more U.S. troops and weapons to NATO countries in Central and Eastern Europe. Others worry that Russia could be pursuing ambitious spy goals, such as intercepting Internet traffic in the ARCOS 1 fiber-optic cable that runs from Miami down the Caribbean coast of Central America. Speculation is rife that the new Russian satellite site on the lip of the Laguna de Nejapa crater will be a spy facility, even though Nicaraguan officials have said it will be used for GLONASS, Russia’s equivalent of GPS.

Juan Gonzalez, who was deputy assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs during the Obama administration, said he had generally been skeptical about theories that Iran, China and Russia were posing a security threat with their increased activities in Latin America. But he has changed his mind over the past couple of years because of Russia’s activities in Nicaragua and neighboring El Salvador. (The Salvadoran foreign minister visited Moscow last month to discuss trade and investment deals.)

“The United States and countries of the region should be concerned,” Gonzalez said. “Nicaragua offers a beachhead for Russia to expand its intel capabilities and election meddling close to the United States.”

Hugo Torres Jimenez, a retired Nicaraguan brigadier general and a member of the opposition, said Ortega was encouraging the Russia ties because “he has an obsession with the international spotlight, and he sees in Putin’s government the reincarnation of the old Communist Party.”

The Russian buildup in Nicaragua has coincided with deteriorating relations between Washington and Managua. Last summer, Nicaragua’s supreme court and electoral council, both seen as loyal to Ortega, blocked the leading opposition candidate from participating in the November presidential election and forced opposition lawmakers out of the National Assembly. Ortega cruised to victory, winning a third straight term, in an election the State Department described as flawed and undemocratic.

House legislation known as the “Nica Act” was reintroduced this week , an attempt to block funding for Nicaragua from international institutions unless the Ortega government makes democratic reforms. Last year, the Obama administration quietly pressured the Inter-American Development Bank to postpone a $65 million loan to Nicaragua to show displeasure with the election, according to a former U.S. official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

The Russian presence has generated mixed reactions among Nicaraguan citizens. Some consider Moscow a long-standing ally. Others worry that the Nicaraguan government could use the new Russian equipment to spy on its domestic critics.
Nelson Perez, a 53-year-old bus driver, wished that Nicaragua had just received a better brand of bus than the Russian-made KAvZ he was maneuvering through Managua traffic.

“They’re not good for this climate; they overheat,” Perez said. He complained about the narrow passageway, the rattling mirrors, the leaky roof and windows. “These are not comfortable.”

In the upscale neighborhood of Las Colinas, a gleaming four-story Russian-built counternarcotics center appears nearly completed. A security guard at an apartment building next door doubted any good would come from it.

“They say it’s an anti-drug mission, but who knows,” he said. “Poor people have not received any benefit from Russia.”

Ismael Lopez Ocampo in Managua and Gabriela Martinez in Mexico City contributed to this report.


Read more
Fidel may be gone, but his legacy lives on in Latin America
Can a Chinese billionaire build a canal across Nicaragua?
Putin won 2016, but Russia has its limits as a superpower
Today’s coverage from Post correspondents around the world
Like Washington Post World on Facebook and stay updated on foreign news


326 Comments


Joshua Partlow is The Post’s bureau chief in Mexico. He has served previously as the bureau chief in Kabul and as a correspondent in Brazil and Iraq. Follow @partlowj
 
Last edited:

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.realcleardefense.com/art...irstrikes_justify_nuclear_program_111132.html

North Korea: Syrian Airstrikes Justify Nuclear Program

By Eric Talmadge
April 09, 2017

PYONGYANG, North Korea (AP) — North Korea has vowed to bolster its defenses to protect itself against airstrikes like the ones President Donald Trump ordered against an air base in Syria.

The North called the airstrikes "absolutely unpardonable" and said they prove its nuclear weapons are justified to protect the country against Washington's "evermore reckless moves for a war."

The comments were made by a Foreign Ministry official and carried Sunday by North Korea's state-run Korean Central News Agency. The report did not name the official, which is common in KCNA reports.

The airstrikes, announced shortly after Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping wrapped up dinner at a two-day summit in Florida last week, were retaliation against Syrian President Bashar Assad for a chemical weapons attack against civilians caught up in his country's long civil war.

"Some forces are loud-mouthed that the recent U.S. military attack on Syria is an action of warning us but we are not frightened by it," the report said, adding that the North's "tremendous military muscle with a nuclear force as its pivot" will foil any aggression by the U.S.

"We will bolster up in every way our capability for self-defense to cope with the U.S. evermore reckless moves for a war and defend ourselves with our own force," it said.

North Korea has long claimed that the United States is preparing to conduct similar precision strikes against its territory or even launch an all-out invasion. It claims its nuclear weapons are a necessary deterrent to the U.S. military threat.

Washington denies it has any intention of invading the North.

Tensions have been even higher than usual over the past few weeks because annual war games between the U.S. and South Korean militaries are underway. The exercises this year are the biggest ever and have included stealth fighter training and other maneuvers that are particularly sensitive to North Korea.

For its part, the North test-launched a ballistic missile just ahead of the Trump-Xi meeting and has been rumored to be preparing for a possible nuclear test.

The Korean Peninsula remains technically at war since the 1950-53 Korean conflict ended with an armistice, not a formal peace treaty.

North Korea considers Syria an ally. But unlike Syria, experts warn that North Korea has a means of striking back if provoked.

Along with its rapidly advancing nuclear and long-range missile capabilities, the North has its artillery and short-range missiles trained on Seoul, the capital of U.S. ally South Korea and a city of more than 10 million people.
 
Last edited:

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
posted for fair use
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/2017/04/11/0401000000AEN20170411000400315.html

China orders trading firms to return coal imports from N. Korea: report

2017/04/11 04:46


WASHINGTON, April 10 (Yonhap) -- China's government has issued an official directive ordering trading firms to return their coal imports from North Korea after banning coal imports from the communist neighbor for the rest of the year, a news report said Monday.

Reuters cited an unidentified source at Dandong Chengtai Trade Co., the biggest buyer of North Korean coal, as saying that about 2 million tons of North Korean coal are at various ports in China waiting to be returned.

It was unclear when China's customs department issued the return order.

Last Friday, Chinese President Xi Jinping held his first summit talks with U.S. President Donald Trump, a meeting that Trump had repeatedly pledged to use to get Beijing to use more of its leverage over Pyongyang to bring the recalcitrant regime under control.

In late February, China suspended North Korean coal imports through the end of the year in accordance with the latest U.N. Security Council resolution adopted in December to punish Pyongyang for its fifth nuclear test in September.

The resolution centers on putting a significant cap on North Korea's exports of coal -- the country's single biggest export item and source of hard currency. The cap was set at whichever is lower between 7.5 million tons or US$400 million.

The suspension of coal imports also came days after the death of Kim Jong-nam, North Korean leader Kim's half brother, in what is believed to be an assassination by the regime in Pyongyang, which some experts saw as an affront to China as Kim Jong-nam was close to Beijing.

jschang@yna.co.kr

(END)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
several articles at link that I posted today about NK

http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...st-before-launch-of-new-gov-t-in-Seoul-expert

N. Korea may conduct nuke test before launch of new gov't in Seoul: expert

(2ND LEAD) N.K. to hold key parliamentary meeting this week

U.S. senator calls for post-Kim Jong-un plan

U.S. congressman calls for shooting down N.K. ICBM

Thanks for linking those...I've got a lot more threads to link here in this one but not the time this morning to do it and some quick news hounding....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-usa-syria-idUSKBN17C1S3

WORLD NEWS | Mon Apr 10, 2017 | 3:26pm EDT

U.S. bolsters protection of forces in Syria as tensions climb

By Phil Stewart and Idrees Ali | WASHINGTON
The United States has made slight adjustments to its military activities in Syria to strengthen protection of American forces following cruise missile strikes last week on a Syrian air base that heightened tensions, U.S. officials told Reuters on Monday.

The officials, citing the need to safeguard operations in Syria, declined to specify exactly what measures the United States has taken after the strikes, which Damascus, Tehran and Moscow have roundly condemned. They spoke on condition of anonymity.

Asked about the Reuters report, a U.S. military spokesman later told a Pentagon news briefing that the U.S. commander for the campaign has been "calling in the resources that he needs" to protect U.S. forces in the wake of the strikes.

The spokesman, Colonel John Thomas, also said U.S. strikes in Syria had become more defensive and acknowledged the pace had slowed somewhat since last Friday.

"I don't think that is going to last for very long, but that is up to (Lieutenant General Stephen) Townsend," Thomas said, stressing there had been no attempts by Syria or its allies to retaliate against U.S. troops so far.

President Donald Trump ordered the cruise missile strike on Syria's Shayrat air base last week in response to what Washington and its allies say was a poison gas attack by Syria's military in which scores of civilians died.

It was the first time Washington has directly targeted Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's government in six years of civil war, and has pushed Trump's administration into proclaiming that Washington still wants Assad eventually removed from power.

But the volley of Tomahawk missiles has not changed the view held by Damascus and its allies that the United States is no more eager than before to take the sort of strong action needed to defeat him.

White House spokesman Sean Spicer said on Monday the primary U.S. focus remained on defeating Islamic State, which U.S. officials say has used its Syria stronghold of Raqqa as a hub to plot attacks against the West.

Thomas also said the U.S. military's priority was unchanged.

"(Islamic State) continues to be our main focus," Thomas said.

HEAVY TOLL

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said on Monday the cruise missile strikes on Shayrat air base damaged or destroyed a fifth of Syria's operational aircraft, in what he said was a clear warning to Damascus against any repeat chemical attack.

"The Syrian government would be ill-advised ever again to use chemical weapons," Mattis said in a statement.

Damascus denies carrying out the chemical attack in the town of Khan Sheikhoun near the Turkish border, which killed at least 87 people, 31 of them children. Moscow called the strike an act of aggression that violated international law.

A joint command center made up of the forces of Russia, Iran and militias supporting Assad has warned it would respond to any new aggression.

ALSO IN WORLD NEWS

G7 powers seek broad support to isolate Syria's Assad
South Korea warns of North Korea 'provocations', U.S. navy group approaches


Unlike in Iraq, where U.S. forces are battling the Islamic State at the invitation of Iraq's government, Washington is waging air strikes in Syria against the militants without the permission of Damascus. It also has about 1,000 forces on the ground, mainly advising and training local Kurdish and Arab militia to battle Islamic State.

To avoid accidentally clashing with Russian forces, who are fighting in support of Assad, the United States has had an agreement that allows for the two militaries to communicate.

But Russia's Deputy U.N. Ambassador Vladimir Safronkov told the U.N. Security Council on Friday Russia's defense ministry had "stopped its cooperation with the Pentagon" under the agreement.

The U.S. military, which confirmed on Friday morning it believed the line of communications was still active, has since stopped commenting on whether it was operational.

Thomas said the United States was still able to avoid accidentally crossing paths with Russian forces but wouldn't say how, leaving open the possibility such communication could be minimal, perhaps just pilot-to-pilot talks by radio.

"We have continued to deconflict as necessary with the Russians because whenever we are flying we have to use all the available means to make sure that we don't have any mid-air incidents," Thomas said.

(Reporting by Phil Stewart; Additional reporting by Michelle Nichols at the United Nations; Editing by James Dalgleish)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Back to where we came from with the FFG-7 class via the aborted LCS...

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.defensenews.com/articles/us-navy-considers-a-more-powerful-frigate

US Navy considers a more powerful frigate

By: Christopher P. Cavas, April 10, 2017 (Photo Credit: Lockheed Martin)

Switch to an FFG design would add area air defense capability

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Navy is taking a hard look at upgrading its future frigates to protect other ships from anti-air threats in addition to defending against undersea and surface enemies. The move would be a significant enhancement in the effort to develop a frigate from existing littoral combat ship designs.

A study group called the Requirement Evaluation Team, or RET, has been formed to examine how to add a local air defense capability to the frigates to protect Combat Logistics Force ships — the supply and support ships that bring fuel, ammunition, spare parts and food to warships at sea. The frigate design as currently envisioned is armed with anti-missile and anti-aircraft missiles, but only to protect itself.

The goal, according to a draft document, is — at a minimum — to double the load out of Block 2 Evolved Seasparrow Missiles from eight to 16, or incorporate a Mark 41 vertical launch system with at least eight Standard Missile-2s. The SM-2 is one of the primary anti-air weapons carried by the fleet’s Aegis destroyers and cruises.

SM-2 would require a more capable command and control system, and the RET is considering the addition of a variant of the new Enterprise Air Surveillance Radar under development by Raytheon for Ford-class aircraft carriers and big-deck amphibious ships. The ship would also have the Cooperative Engagement Capability, a high-quality networking system that ties together sensors and weapons carried on multiple ships, aircraft or shore installations into an integrated fire control system.

Taken together, the enhanced anti-air capabilities would change the Navy designation for the ships from FF, meaning frigate, to FFG — guided missile frigates able to provide area air defense.

“We see an opportunity to increase our AAW [anti-air warfare] capability — which falls under the category of lethality — within a reasonable trade space for our future frigate,” Sean Stackley, acting secretary of the Navy, told Defense News on April 5.

“We think we have a good, solid baseline in the requirements document” developed for the frigate, he said, “but we are looking at that lethality aspect, which is the AAW component. We’re looking at further increases to survivability, and we’re looking at endurance, pushing the envelope. And as always we’re going to balance that against technical risk and cost. We’re going to do this in a competitive environment.”

Both builders of the littoral combat ship — Lockheed Martin and Austal USA — have developed frigate variants of their LCS designs in anticipation of the Navy issuing a formal request for proposals, which had been expected in the fall. The switch from an FF to an FFG design would likely involve significant redesign of each company’s frigate proposal, which could push back the RFP.

“I don’t want to get pinned down on a date” to issue the RFP, Stackley said. “Obviously we want to get through the requirements first. But we want to get it out this fiscal year,” which ends Sept. 30.

The FFG, according to the draft document, would also have enhanced survivability characteristics “to a level commensurate with the FFG 7 class” — referring to the Oliver Hazard Perry guided-missile frigates developed in the 1970s that joined the fleet throughout the 1970s and 1980s. The last of those ships was decommissioned in 2015.

A number of naval strategists, particularly a group of Republican navalists associated with the 2012 presidential campaign of Mitt Romney, have urged the construction of a new class of frigates based on the FFG 7 design.

Enhanced survivability features of the FFG, Navy officials said, include improved shock hardening, plus propulsion separation — presumably meaning separating propulsion machinery spaces, which are next to each other in current designs. Separating the compartments improves survivability — a single hit is unlikely to disable both compartment if another compartment is between them — but also adds length and, hence, cost.

Other survivability improvements could include deckhouse armor, armor for vital spaces and full propulsion-shock protection features.

The proposed way ahead for the FFG, according to the draft Navy document, would be to “update existing analyses to investigate the feasibility of adding these additional capabilities into the current LCS designs, as well as explore whether other existing hull forms and design concepts might provide a better balance of capabilities at competitive cost points.”

The RET, which in addition to several Navy offices and commands includes the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Pentagon’s Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, is on a fast track to provide FFG recommendations, with a target date of the end of May. As a result of the work, the date to acquire the first frigate would be pushed back from 2019 to 2020 to “allow adequate time to mature the design and thoroughly evaluate design alternatives,” according to the draft document.

The Navy, according to the draft plan, would aim for a “competitive contract award no later than fiscal 2020,” after a “full and open competition … using modifications to existing ship designs, including designs beyond the two current LCS variants.”

With the delay to 2020, another two LCSs would be procured in 2019, according to the draft document.

Stackley sought to put the effort into perspective.

“We’re looking at several things in the context of the Force Structure Assessment,” he said April 5. “What has changed over time is the threat has changed. … So we’re taking a hard look at certain capabilities and characteristics to determine whether we need to increase aspects of lethality, survivability and endurance for the frigate.”

The anti-air warfare capability, Stackley said, falls under increased lethality over the previous baseline frigate requirements for a multimission ship with anti-submarine warfare and anti-surface warfare capability.

He harkened to the report of the Small Surface Combatant Task Force, a 2014 effort that studied multiple concepts to produce a frigate rather than continue LCS production.

“At the point in time, we were going through the Small Surface Combatant Task Force study, looking at all the existing frigate designs and what the trade-offs would be associated with going beyond self-defense AAW capability, the deltas were pretty significant in terms of impact on hull, impact on costs,” Stackley said. “We’re revisiting that with a better base of knowledge because we’ve gone through a cycle of frigate design.”

And the Navy continues to look to its LCS shipbuilders for ways to enhance the frigate. Lockheed and Austal have each conducted numerous studies to upgrade their LCS and frigate designs with more lethality and survivability.

“Industry sees that we’re serious about a frigate,” Stackley said, “so they have been getting more seriously involved, looking at what they can bring to the table in terms of capabilities.”

17 Comments
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.thecipherbrief.com/colu...il&utm_term=0_b02a5f1344-facc7d4a3a-122460921

How Washington Lets Beijing Monopolize Minerals Vital for Phones and Fighter Jets

APRIL 9, 2017 | DOUG WISE

While the topic of supply chains may not be cutting-edge or of high public interest, it is no less important to national security than destroying ISIS or having credible immigration policies. On every laptop, unseen and unnoticed, is a remarkable meshing of engineering from the lightning-fast processors and flash memory to the solid-state drive, the screen, and everything in between. What few pay attention to is the engineering within – none of which would be possible without metals known as rare earth elements (REE). The benefits of REE are shared by all electronics, and these devices’ ability to connect with the outside world depends on REE. An example of a broadly used atomically “heavy” REE is dysprosium, which is used to produce small permanent magnets in computers, servers, engines, etc. These components have become indispensable in today’s modern lifestyle. It turns out that similar components have become equally indispensable to our military. From engines, night-vision devices, radar systems, and missile and weapons guidance systems to communications – the list goes on and on – REE are critical to today’s national defense and even more so for tomorrow’s. A good example is the F-35 aircraft. The estimate of REE in the F-35 is over half a ton, distributed in minute amounts throughout the entire aircraft. Other examples are modern Navy ships, which use about two tons, and submarines, which use nearly four tons of these precious metals.

Given the extreme conductivity and optical characteristics associated with REE metals, they are strategic and critical to our national defense. Our dependence, plus the complexity in extraction and processing of the refined REE metals, is the bad news.

The good news is that REE are hardly “rare,” with significant occurrences close to home in Alaska and Canada. These elements include 17 metals found distributed throughout the world. The global quantity is quite substantial; some geologists even estimate REE metals are as common as copper, zinc or nickel. Therefore, it seems that REE metals are called “rare” not because they are rarely found, but because their concentrations in the earth are so low that they are difficult to “upstream,” or mine, and they are exceptionally difficult to “downstream,” meaning process. Downstream requires more than 28 acid-based washing and floatation steps to remove radioactive uranium and thorium. Thus, REE metals are easy to find, but it is extremely challenging to transform the ore into a traditional and useful metallic form. Both the upstream and downstream processes are expensive and produce by-products toxic to our environment.

It is common sense to conclude that if national security is so critically dependent upon the availability of REE, it would be in the best interests of the United States to have control over an uninterrupted supply. With sufficient quantities of REE within the United States, our supply into the future should be fairly well-guaranteed, right? The answer, unfortunately is a qualified “no.” Before the 1990s, the answer would have been an unqualified “yes.” Several decades ago the United States had large mines in California and Alaska, and had a dominant position in the global REE market.

Today, the United States has no REE mining, and the Chinese control over 97 percent of the global supply. The history of how we arrived to this U.S.-China role inversion is too complicated for this article, but is the consequence of strict environmental controls on the mining industry in contrast with none in China, a lack of concern by the Department of Defense, which believed it could buy REE from allied-nation suppliers or reconstitute the U.S. mining capability, and a concerted effort by the Chinese to underbid the price of REE in order to destroy the U.S. REE mining sector through illegal dumping and price fixing. China’s 30-year strategic material supply-chain security plan has been aimed not only at controlling China’s domestic REE supplies flowing to the United States, Japan and Western markets, but equally important, to the acquisition and control of significant REE deposits around the globe as well. From the Chinese perspective, control of the REE market is not just good business, it’s good national defense.

Hypothetically, there would be more than a modest amount of irony if the United States were to go to war with China, deploying the F-35, in which the majority of that half-ton of REE would have been purchased from the supply chain network of the very adversary it is fighting

While the Pentagon’s senior leadership showed an intentional disinterest in maintaining a credible and uninterruptible REE supply chain, an endless stream of documents flowed from the national security policy community, including think tanks, leading mining engineering universities, the Congressional Research Service, and the Government Accountability Office, all issuing warning after warning that our access to REE was no longer dependable and this had strategic national security consequences. Those warnings fell on deaf ears and thus today, much of the REE in the F-35, and many other systems, has been purchased by way of Pentagon waivers allowing the U.S. defense industry to acquire the REE from foreign and in some cases, generally, prohibited sources.

Issues surrounding REE could also figure prominently in another issue, which is more contemporary but also involves China. Some experts believe North Korea is sitting on REE ore deposits estimated to be over 20 million tons. Should there be regime change in North Korea, China will want to control the future development and processing of these North Korean REE reserves, to keep the West away, and preserve their control of the REE market. There is some evidence to believe China may have already taken the first step when a private equity firm formed a joint venture to develop a multi-billion dollar REE processing plant.

The solution is simple: eliminate U.S. dependency on foreign, especially Chinese, sources of REE. The path to the solution, however, is neither simple nor quick, but experts believe a solution is possible if there is commitment to seeking it. Like any solution, it requires leadership. The Trump Administration and Congress may represent an opportunity to forge a private-academic-public effort to break the several decades-old Chinese lock. The way forward should consist of legislation to trigger the rebuilding of the U.S domestic production capability and leading mining universities and schools to find new deposits for this capability, stockpiling REE, and developing cheaper and more efficient ways to recycle the REE in discarded electronic products. The solution isn’t rocket science, but it does involve using mining and geology science to make the United States safer in the future.

SUPPLY CHAIN

RARE EARTH ELEMENTS
THE AUTHOR IS DOUG WISE
Douglas H. Wise served as Deputy Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency from August 2014 until August 2016. Following 20 years of active duty in the Army where he served as an infantry and special operations officer, he spent the remainder of his career at CIA.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/11/asia/india-pakistan-execution-spy/

Pakistan to execute Indian man accused of spying

By James Griffiths, Sophia Saifi and Sugam Pokharel, CNN
Updated 2:09 AM ET, Tue April 11, 2017

(CNN)Pakistan has sentenced to death an Indian man accused of spying, further raising tensions between the two countries.

India claims the former naval officer was "kidnapped" from Iran and said his execution would be an act of "premeditated murder.
"
Kulbushan Jadhav was arrested in March last year, "for his involvement in espionage and sabotage activities against Pakistan," according to a statement released by the Pakistan armed forces Monday.

The statement said Jadhav confessed that he was tasked by India's foreign intelligence agency, the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), to "plan, coordinate and organize espionage / sabotage activities aiming to destabilize and wage war against Pakistan."

A military court found Jadhav guilty on two counts of espionage and sentenced him to death.

'Kidnapped'
India has vociferously objected to Jadhav's sentencing, saying consular officials were denied access to him during his trial, in defiance of international law.

New Delhi urgently summoned Pakistani diplomats Monday to discuss the case.

"Jadhav was kidnapped last year from Iran and his subsequent presence in Pakistan has never been explained credibly," the Indian foreign ministry said in a statement.

The foreign ministry previously claimed Jadhav, a former naval officer, was operating a business in Iran prior to his arrest in Pakistan.

Monday's statement said there was no "credible evidence" against Jadhav and described his sentence as "farcical."

If the sentence is carried out, the statement said, "the government and people of India will regard it as a case of premeditated murder."

Amnesty International said military courts, which were used in this case, were linked to coerced confessions and unfair trials.

Pakistan executed 87 people last year, making it the world's fifth biggest executioner, according to an Amnesty report on the global death penalty this week.

Jadhav was charged under the Pakistan Army Act 1952 and the Official Secrets Act 1923, both of which provide for the death penalty.

Espionage has long been a tense subject between Pakistan and India. In 2013, Sarabjit Singh, an Indian man sentenced to death for spying, died in a Pakistan jail after being attacked by fellow inmates.

More than 40 alleged Pakistani spies have been arrested in India since 2013, according to the government.

While India does retain the death penalty, and hundreds of people were sentenced last year, only three executions have been carried out since 2007, according to Amnesty.

'Headed for crisis'
Talat Hussain, an Islamabad-based defense analyst said Jadhav's sentence could have "a very major impact" on the India-Pakistan relationship and further aggravate ties.

"I think we are heading for a major crisis," he said. "This will not bode well for both the countries and the region."

Tensions between India and Pakistan have increased in recent months over continued violence in the disputed region of Kashmir, control of which both countries claim.

In November, Pakistan evacuated thousands of people from the parts of Kashmir administered by Islamabad, blaming "Indian shelling." That came after an attack by militants on an Indian army base left 18 soldiers dead.

Last month, Indian Home Minister Rajnath Singh called for the country to completely seal its border with Pakistan on the grounds that terrorists were using it to infiltrate the country.

Sophia Saifi reported from Islamabad, Pakistan; Sugam Pokharel reported from New Delhi, India. James Griffiths reported and wrote from Hong Kong.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Something I brought up in at least one of the Syria threads....HC

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/04/10/north-korea-syria-and-decades-chemical-weapons.html

SYRIA

North Korea, Syria and decades of chemical weapons

By Alex Diaz Published April 10, 2017 FoxNews.com

North Korea and Syria have a long history when it comes to the issue of chemical weapons. Pyongyang helped Syria build chemical weapons factories in the ‘90s, and they’ve been caught multiple times sending Syria items including protective coats and gas masks – the kinds of things that keep people safe when handling chemical agents.

Now, with North Korea responding to what it calls the "reckless" U.S. airstrikes in Syria by vowing to bolster its defenses "in every way," there is a renewed interest in the seemingly cozy relationship between the two rogue nations.

In a recent piece for FoxNews.com, Fox News Contributor Judith Miller and Charles Duelfer, a former deputy chairman of the U.N. weapons inspection agency, suggested that President Trump's decision to launch dozens of Tomahawk cruise missiles into Syria "sends a strong message not only to Syria but to several other states and groups with a stake in the outcome of that country’s brutal civil war.

SYRIA'S ALLIES CLAIM UNITED STATES CROSSED THEIR OWN 'RED LINES' WITH MISSILE STRIKE

"To North Korea, the strike is a warning," they wrote, a warning that suggests "the U.S. will not permit Pyongyang to threaten American security by marrying its small nuclear arsenal with intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of reaching our shores."

The pair added that "North Korea is also believed to possess chemical weapons" that could be used against American forces and their allies in South Korea. And some believe that North Korea could use more than a warning when it comes to the issue.

In a tweet last week, Joshua Stanton, a Washington-based attorney who has advised the House Foreign Affairs Committee on legislation related to North Korea, suggested that if the U.S. wants to "send a message to N. Korea via Syria, hit the N. Koreans in Syria who help Assad use chemical weapons."

RICE CLAIM ON SYRIA CHEMICAL WEAPONS GETS 'FOUR PINOCCHIOS'

Stanton was referring to the long and documented history of North Korea working with Syria to produce both chemical and nuclear weapons. And he isn’t the only one who has been sounding the alarm for years.

Former CIA director James Woolsey, who also served on President Trump's transition team, told the House Foreign Affairs Committee in 2013 that the relationship between the two nations goes back decades. "Aside from Russia, the principal strategic partner of the Iranian and Syrian regimes has been North Korea," Woolsey claimed.

The former CIA chief testified that "in the early 1990’s, the North Koreans helped the Syrian Scientific Studies and Research Center (SSRC) construct missile complexes." The New York Times has described the SSRC as "the country’s main research center for work on biological and chemical weapons." One of those facilities, Woolsey added, was "used for fitting chemical warheads on Scud missiles."

Woolsey says an explosion at the facility in July 2007 revealed that North Korean engineers were actually working on the ground with their Syrian -- and Iranian -- partners. A few months later, North Korean engineers also reportedly were found among the victims after another explosion at a facility in Syria. This time, the blast occurred at a secret nuclear compound that was modeled after one of Pyongyang's own reactors.

As confirmed in a report from the U.N. Security Council, several shipments of clothing designed to protect people from chemical agents were seized on their way from North Korea to Syria in 2009. The materials included upwards of 13,000 protective coats, gas masks and more.

In 2013, authorities in Turkey discovered more gas masks, along with some 1,400 rifles and thousands of bullets, in a vessel that was on its way to Syria from North Korea.

According to data from the non-profit Nuclear Threat Initiative, North Korea is also said to have a specific focus on the production of the nerve agents sarin and VX. Early assessments of last week’s attack in Syria, an attack in which more than 80 people were killed, suggest sarin was most likely one of the compounds that was used. VX is believed to be the chemical agent that was used in the murder of North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un’s estranged half-brother earlier this year.

Just days after last week's deadly attack in Syria, Kim was sending Syrian President Bashar al-Assad a congratulatory message on a seemingly unrelated topic, according to an article from South Korea's Yonhap news agency.

The message was said to mark the 70th anniversary of Assad's political party, and the North Korean leader added that the “two countries' friendly relations will be strengthened and developed, given their fight against imperialism."

After last week's airstrike in Syria, a North Korean official warned that Pyongyang's "tremendous military muscle with a nuclear force as its pivot" would foil any possible future aggression by the U.S.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson suggested over the weekend that "there's a shared view [among President Trump and some foreign leaders]… as to how dangerous the [North Korea] situation has become."

On Saturday, the Pentagon announced that a Navy carrier strike group was on its way to the Korean peninsula "to maintain readiness and [a U.S.] presence" in the region.

President Trump also spoke with his South Korean counterpart over the weekend, with the pair agreeing to stay in close contact about North Korea and other issues.

Fox News' Georeen Tanner contributed to this report.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/ar...gray-zone-winning-big-conflicts-inside-small-

Reclaiming Strategic Initiative in the Not-So-Gray Zone: Winning Big Conflicts Inside Small Ones

by Spencer B. Meredith III
Journal Article | April 10, 2017 - 1:57pm

The Gray Zone is becoming less gray. Not because US adversaries are adhering more to the laws of war, quite the opposite in fact. Nor are they becoming less hostile or less prone to provocative actions under the threat of overt violence. Instead, the Gray Zone is becoming less opaque, less undefined because emerging analytical frameworks are finding their footing in the Department of Defense. The enterprise that is tasked with countering Gray Zone threats from states and non-state actors alike is building a solid knowledge base that taps into a wealth of scholarly research and practitioner experience. The results have been a growing body of realistic assessments of the problems facing the United States and its allies. These then lay the foundation for feasible policy recommendations to address emerging threats, whether from Russian Hybrid Warfare, Chinese Unrestricted Warfare, Iranian influence operations in Latin America, or the likely emergence of ISIS 2.0 after the current iteration fades to the background. At the center of those efforts are two types of initiatives. Both highlight the effectiveness of the Department of Defense’s growing analytical clarity on the Gray Zone, and help the United States reclaim the strategic initiative from rivals across the spectrum of international conflicts.

The first example occurred during a recent US Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) Senior Leader Seminar looking at competition short of armed conflict. Framed as a wargame, this seminar simulated several scenarios where traditional power politics and violent extremism collided. Participants were asked to dig deeply into the underlying causes of threats, and how perceptions shape everything from core interests to immediate grievances. Yet the event did much more than explain why stability is so elusive, and peace even more so. It also raised several key areas where the United States and its partner nations can mutually support each other.

One centrally important area is in building responsive governance. The notion rests on several claims, foremost that nations and the governments that govern them need not homogenize their interests, to say nothing of values, in order to cooperate. This pragmatism stands in contrast to nearly three decades of idealistic foreign policy that claimed the universality of certain collective goods, but which really defined them along a US-centric vision of what they needed to look like, even when the substance was foreign to the nations being “helped”. This idealistic vision took many forms, from economic liberalization that forced developing markets open through IMF austerity measures; to military imposition of democracy in places that had neither centralized governance capacity, nor the social consensus to build it; to more recent social reengineering to fit a narrow vision of Western pluralism. All have run headlong into local values, competing national interests, and ultimately, contending visions of what the global order should look like and what leadership among peer and near-peer rivals can realistically be.

Responsive governance also requires that states establish and defend parameters for public debate. Yet like pragmatism, this does not have to mean democracy in any particular form. NATO partner nations have a range of electoral systems that speak to a variety of cultural, historical, and normative differences about who should govern, how, and under what constraints. By relying on the core concept of responsivity, rather than the vastly over-used “democracy”, the analytical frameworks expressed in the USSOCOM event have traction within solid scholarly research, and equally important, with buy-in from partner nations on whom the United States will continue to rely and give support.

In conjunction with the USSOCOM Seminar, a longer-term initiative has yielded similar successes, but with a broader timeframe and set of issues. Overseen by the Department of Defense’s Joint Staff “Strategic Multilayer Assessment” (SMA) program, several engagements with academic and USG personnel have taken up the “4+1 problem set” (Russia, China, Iran, North Korea and violent extremist non-state actors). One particular example is worthy of note, not because it stands above the others, but rather that its high standard of excellence exemplifies the overall SMA efforts.

Administered for the Joint Staff SMA program, the University of Maryland runs a series of simulations designed to provide short, sharp scenarios that evolve over multiple iterations. Harnessing real-world events and massaging them into realistic near-term future situations, the ICONS project (International Communication & Negotiation Simulations) brings together subject matter experts to play various roles in real-time, web-based engagements. Several lessons emerge from the simulations. The most important are the complexity of the problems each party faces, and the battle for strategic initiative as more ebb and flow than a sole power defending against all comers. These perspectives provide vital reminders for both academia and practitioners with our respective checklists for analyzing the “facts on the ground”. In addition, the potency for non-state spoilers remains incredibly high, higher than a cursory glance of the configuration of forces would otherwise reveal. Much like small parties in coalition political systems that can swing the balance of power either way, non-state proxies can serve as force multipliers for larger states, as much as independent agents seeking their own highest good at the expense of others. The ICONS simulations highlight these challenges, while providing avenues for practical courses of action for the United States and its partners of concern.

Therefore, as noteworthy exemplars of the de-graying of the Gray Zone, both the USSOCOM Senior Leader Seminar and the Joint Staff Strategic Multilayer Assessments show that the goal of reclaiming the strategic initiative must rely on more than the oft-cited “whole of government” and “more interagency cooperation” responses. Both also produce innovative approaches for integrating existing, tried and tested scholarship with hard-won practical wisdom. At their core, the emerging modular analytical frameworks are both grounded and adaptable, while offering more than simply filled out “elements of national power” tables and charts. Doing so allows for discussions with diverse political interests around common goals, like identifying ways to inoculate vulnerable populations from hostile external influence operations, one of the biggest challenges of the Gray Zone.

This growing analytical clarity allows us to understand why the Gray Zone is not solely populated by either rival states or violent non-state groups. As such, the United States and its international partners require more than a return to 19th century realpolitik or Wilsonian-esque liberal utopianism with a GWOT military face. Instead, they must be able to identify commonalities across contexts by first accepting the differences within our own alliances. Doing so will also ensure that the uniqueness of each challenge does not get lost in a rush to resolve it. Only then can feasible policy recommendations arise to reclaim the strategic initiative and put our common adversaries back on shaky ground.

About the Author-

Spencer B. Meredith III
Spencer B. Meredith III, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor in the Joint Special Operations Master of Arts program for the College of International Security Affairs at the National Defense University. After completing his doctorate in Government and Foreign Affairs at the University of Virginia in 2003, he served as a Fulbright Scholar in the Caucasus in 2007 working on conflict resolution, and has focused on related issues in Eastern Ukraine for several years. He has also served as a subject matter expert for several DOS public diplomacy programs in South and East Asia. His areas of expertise include democratization and conflict resolution in Russian, Eastern European and Middle Eastern politics. Most recently, he has been working with USASOC on several projects related to comprehensive deterrence, narratives and resistance typologies, and intellectual motivators in the Gray Zone.

Comments 1
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://news.usni.org/2017/04/10/so...-expanding-influence-in-central-south-america

SOUTHCOM Tidd: Russia, Iran and China Expanding Influence in Central, South America

By: John Grady
April 10, 2017 5:51 PM

Russia, China and Iran are increasing interest in Central and South America, especially Moscow’s renewed focus on Nicaragua, the head of U.S. Southern Command told the Senate.

While it has been primarily directed in economic development, Adm. Kurt Tidd said in a recent Senate Armed Services Committee hearing he sees it also as a way to gain for those three nations to gain influence.

But more concerning is the Russians sale of 3,000 surface-to-air weapons and 50 tanks to Nicaragua and are in discussions with them over fighter aircraft sales. It also plans to carry out joint exercises with the Nicaraguan military, he said.

Another example, China and Russia offer a program similar to the United States’ International Military Education and Training. Moscow has opened a facility in Nicaragua to bring the training directly there.

Former Sandinista leader Daniel Ortega, who was strongly supported by the Soviet Union, is again president of Nicaragua.

At the same time, Russia is carrying on a very aggressive misinformation campaign in Central and South America, saying the United States is withdrawing from the region, Tidd said.

At the same time, the Kremlin is propping up the embattled regime of Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela, a country on the verge of economic collapse. Two years ago, Moscow and Caracas agreed on $15 billion oil and gas deal and the sale of fighter aircraft to the regime.

Maduro, who succeeded Hugo Chavez as president following his death, has consistently taken Russia’s side in disputes involving the separatists in eastern Ukraine and its seizure of Crimea.

At the Senate hearing, Tidd said only about 25 percent of the drugs that law enforcement agencies and Southern Command have identified as bound for the United States are intercepted.

The key reason why so much gets through is a lack of ships and aircraft to stop the trafficking. Tidd said he has “about six ships on a given day” to stop the flow of narcotics, primarily cocaine from Colombia. The stated requirement from several years ago is for 23 surface combatants. “The volume continues to go up” as the demand in the United States continues to rise.

“We are very concerned” about the shortage of ship and aircraft to interdict a cocaine flow of an estimated 450 tons into the United States annually.

Tidd said he would welcome a Littoral Combat Ship working in his command, but “my Navy” continues to be the Coast Guard. “We couldn’t do our job without the Coast Guard.” He singled out the National Security Cutters for special mention in tracking and seizing vessels carrying narcotics.

But he told the committee he realized “Southern Command typically comes in at the bottom of the barrel of resource allocation” among combatant commands.

For counter-narcotics and counter-terrorism in Central and South America, “the focus is on the networks” and “to apply pressure across [their] length and breadth.” It also means working with governments in the region and other U.S. agencies and departments.

In answer to a question, Tidd said Southern Command “would be an ideal region” to test advanced unmanned aerial systems “and provide that feedback to the services” from an operational environment in disrupting the networks.

This a shift away from concentrating on commodity in the counter-narcotics effort of the United States and other nations in the Western Hemisphere.

“These are adaptive threat networks,” and terrorist organizations, such as the Islamic State, could “exploit these pathways into the United States.” The Islamic State has had some success in recruiting foreign fighters from Trinidad and Tobago, but of more concern to Tidd and nations in the command was the radicalization taking place among people who do not leave but intend to carry out terrorist attacks in their home country or against the United States.

Air Force Gen. Lori Robinson, top officer of Northern Command, said she has gone with Mexican military and law enforcement officials to its southern border to see for herself what steps they are taking to stop the flow of narcotics and people fleeing drug cartel in Central America.

Mexican officials “willingness to work with us is very great,” she added.

“Insecurity is a push factor,” causing families to send their children northward, and the numbers are starting to rise again, Tidd added.

Related

Vice Adm. Kurt Tidd Confirmed as Next U.S. SOUTHCOM Commander
December 21, 2015
In "Education Legislation"

SOUTHCOM CO Tidd: Not Enough Ships, Aircraft Available to Fight Drug War
March 10, 2016
In "News & Analysis"

Vice Adm. Kurt Tidd Tapped to Lead U.S. Southern Command
October 30, 2015
In "Budget Industry"
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://taskandpurpose.com/american-troops-helped-repel-brazen-isis-assault-joint-base-syria/

American Troops Helped Repel Brazen ISIS Assault On Joint Base In Syria

By ADAM LINEHAN on April 10, 2017

A group of U.S. troops stationed at a coalition base in southern Syria were instrumental in fending off a vicious assault by ISIS militants on Saturday, April 8, CNN reports.

ISIS initiated the complex attack on the At Tanf Garrison with a vehicle-borne IED, U.S. Central Command announced in a news release Sunday. Between 20 and 30 militants, several outfitted with suicide vests, followed the initial attack with a ground assault.

“Coalition and partnered forces engaged and defended the ISIS attack with direct fire before destroying enemy assault vehicles and the remaining fighters with multiple coalition airstrikes,” Centcom said.

It is unclear how many Americans were involved in the battle or how long it lasted. Three coalition soldiers were killed in the attack, according to Centcom. Their identities and nationalities have not yet been released.

The An Tanf Garrison is located in the Hamad Desert 10 miles north of the Jordanian border and houses around 200 U.S.-supported rebels. The coalition refers to those rebels, who were targeted by Russian airstrikes last year, as “Vetted Syrian Opposition forces,” or VSO. It’s worth noting that the VSO forces are not the same group partnered with the coalition in northern Syria, according to CNN.


“[VSO forces] have been instrumental in countering the ISIS threat in southern Syria and maintaining security along the Syria-Jordan border,” the coalition said.

The attacks come after the U.S. launched 60 Tomahawk cruise missiles at a Syrian regime air base south-east of Homs in retaliation for a chemical weapons attack that killed dozens of civilians.

The strikes were the first direct assault on the government of President Bashar al-Assad, and seemed to signal the Trump administration’s willingness to intensify U.S. military involvement in the six-year-old Syrian Civil War.

Hundreds more American troops have been deployed to Syria since President Donald Trump’s took office. The primary mission of U.S. ground troops deployed to Syria is to assist a patchwork of local rebel groups in the fight against ISIS as the coalition advances toward the stronghold of Raqqa.

The U.S.-led coalition has so far maintained a relatively low casualty rate in Syria.

In November 2016, Senior Chief Petty Officer Scott C. Dayton, a U.S. Navy bomb disposal technician, died after being struck by an IED near Raqqa. Dayton’s death marked the first time an American service member was killed in Syria since U.S. troops began deploying there in 2015.

The assault on the An Tanf Garrison appears to be the first time a coalition base in Syria has come under direct attack from enemy forces.

4 COMMENTS

Adam Linehan is a senior staff writer for Task & Purpose. Between 2006-2012, he served as a combat medic in the U.S. Army, and is a veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan. Follow Adam Linehan on Twitter @adam_linehan
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
Wow, I used to think that Bams did a lot of things to poke and prod leaders a lot....Trump will outdo him. (not necessarily a good thing)

I wonder how much more poking Putin will take?


Steve Herman‏Verified account @W7VOA 7m7 minutes ago

-@POUS signs US instrument of ratification of the Protocol for #Montenegro’s accession to @NATO.


Newscast Pratyaksha‏ @HindiPratyaksha Mar 30

#USSenate backs #Montenegro's bid for #NATO membership, says that it would be an appropriate message to @Russia
 

Be Well

may all be well
Wow, I used to think that Bams did a lot of things to poke and prod leaders a lot....Trump will outdo him. (not necessarily a good thing)

I wonder how much more poking Putin will take?


Steve Herman‏Verified account @W7VOA 7m7 minutes ago

-@POUS signs US instrument of ratification of the Protocol for #Montenegro’s accession to @NATO.


Newscast Pratyaksha‏ @HindiPratyaksha Mar 30

#USSenate backs #Montenegro's bid for #NATO membership, says that it would be an appropriate message to @Russia

I hate this.
 

Warm Wisconsin

Easy as 3.141592653589..
Russia Sends More Warships Toward Syria Following U.S. Tomahawk Strikes

https://news.usni.org/2017/04/10/russia-sends-warships-toward-syria-following-u-s-tomahawk-strikes

A Russian Navy surface action group is headed to the Eastern Mediterranean departing shortly after a U.S. Tomahawk missile strike on a Syrian airfield, a U.S. defense official told USNI News on Monday.

Two Steregushchiy-class corvettes, an ocean tug and a fleet oiler departed from the naval base in the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad on Saturday bound for the Eastern Mediterranean and likely Syria, the official told USNI News.

The ships from the Russian Navy’s Baltic Fleet are set to arrive in the next several days off the coast of Syria.

The Russian SAG will join the guided missile frigate Admiral Grigorovich that sortied from the Black Sea on Friday after a nine-day resupply period.



Steregushchiy-class corvettes are among the more modern Russian ships – constructed in the early 2000s — with some versions of the ship capable of fielding the Russian Kalibir NK long range land attack cruise missiles. The Russians have used the weapon – with similar ranges of U.S. Tomahawks – as part of combined Russian and al-Assad loyal forces campaign against rebels in Aleppo fired from Admiral Grigorovich.

The 2,200-ton guided missile corvettes are, “designed for operations in adjacent maritime zones, fighting enemy surface ships and submarines, as well as to provide naval gunfire support for amphibious landings,” according to a U.S. Office of Naval Intelligence report.


Russian Admiral Grigorovich frigate leaving the Black Sea on April 7, 2017 following US Tomahawk strikes in Syria. Yörük Işık Photo used with permission

The both the SAG and Admiral Grigorovich left their homeports shortly after U.S. guided missile destroyers USS Ross (DDG-71) and USS Porter (DDG-78) launched 59 Tomahawk missiles targeting the al-Shayrat airfield, the alleged base from which Syrian Su-22s conducted an April 4 chemical weapon strike against civilians Khan Sheikhoun. The U.S. determined the strike was conducted by forces loyal to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad.

“The assessment of the Department of Defense is that the strike resulted in the damage or destruction of fuel and ammunition sites, air defense capabilities, and 20 percent of Syria’s operational aircraft,” read a Monday statement from U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis.
”The Syrian government has lost the ability to refuel or rearm aircraft at Shayrat airfield and at this point, use of the runway is of idle military interest. The Syrian government would be ill-advised ever again to use chemical weapons.”

Porter and Ross are part of the U.S. Navy’s four-ship forward deployed destroyer force based in Rota, Spain. While the ships are primarily focused on regional ballistic missile defense, they have also been employed for presence operations in the U.S European Command and U.S. Africa Command.


USS Ross (DDG 71) fires a tomahawk land attack missile April 7, 2017. US Navy Photo

Having the forward deployed assets already in the Mediterranean accelerated the U.S. response to the April 4 attack, Pentagon officials told USNI News last week.

“These platforms provide an option for the leadership for a measured and deliberate strike. That’s their value,” Capt. Paul Stader – former commander of USS Hue City (CG-66) and Ross — told USNI News on Friday.
“[Tomahawks] are very short notice and are capable of executing within a very tight timeline. They’ve evolved over the years that we’ve had them in the inventory and they’re a very capable option for leadership if we want them.”
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Very photo rich article....HC

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://warisboring.com/two-days-inside-the-battle-for-west-mosul/

Two Days Inside the Battle for West Mosul

Narrow streets make for close-quarters combat in the Old City

WIB FRONT April 11, 2017 Matt Cetti-Roberts 0

Inside an old hotel on the edge of West Mosul’s Old City, a Federal Police marksman takes aim with his rifle. A small circle of light beaming in from outside the room reflects off his PSL’s telescopic sight onto his eyeball. He concentrates, staring through a small crack between concrete blocks, wood and an old sheet.

The police officer’s breath slows to a halt as he gradually squeezes the weapon’s trigger.

The report of the rifle’s shot echoes around the room and the ejected cartridge rattles off a concrete block. The marksman pauses for mere seconds to look at the ISIS firing position into which he sent a 7.62x54R round, before pulling back, away from the firing slit.

He sits down on a plastic lawn chair to joke with a colleague as the smell of propellant wafts around them.

Much like the Corniche, the fighting in the southwest of the Old City is slow going. The battle for Mosul is one of the largest urban battles since World War II, and both the Iraqi army and ISIS employ snipers and sharpshooters to target each other throughout a dense warren of buildings.

Close air support is crucial to the continuing Iraqi operations in West Mosul, but is often hampered by seasonal storms. On Tuesday, April 6, 2017, the Iraqi government confirmed that one of its attack helicopters had been shot down over the city, killing two crewmen.

Urban combat is one of the most dangerous kinds of warfare. An enemy can hide in a thousand different places. Spending a mere second or two in the open can be deadly. When on the attack, a defender can more easily spot movement and shadows than in other environments.

The marksmen here say they have to be extremely careful. “We have to be sure when we fire, because each time we do we give away our position,” a police officer says, before adding that the group shot and killed an ISIS fighter last night. Today is April 1.

Officers quickly move past firing positions, and they completely avoid areas within some rooms—places they know to be unsafe—including a thin metal door next to one of the sharpshooters.

One man points up to a wrecked skylight above the door and says, “kinas,” the Arabic word for sniper. There’s no glass left in the window and the divots, caused by ISIS bullets, cover the wall behind.

In a dim room next door, Abbas, a police marksman, studies the scene through a hole knocked in an external wall. He has spotted movement in a building.

Sitting down on an old table, Abbas rests his Russian-made AKM rifle, oddly fitted with AK-103 furniture and muzzle break, on the ledge of the hole and pulls down hard on the trigger—letting loose with fully-automatic fire and emptying the contents of his 30-round magazine.

The officers in the team have seen several ISIS fighters moving around. One officer uses a GPS app on a smartphone to pinpoint their positions.

Outside the room, the fighting begins to escalate. Mixed in with the sound of rifles are long bursts of machine gun fire, the occasional thump of exploding Iraqi mortar shells and the fast-firing 30-millimeter cannon of a Mi-35 Hind helicopter providing overhead support.

A gunner opens up with a PK machine gun from the sniper’s position in the next room, and the boom and concussion of an RPG-7 being fired from the rooftop reverberates throughout the hotel.

The shooting isn’t all going in one direction. After the soldiers pull back from their firing positions, several ISIS bullets hit the hotel’s brickwork, near where the police were shooting from, with a wet slap.

After a short discussion the officers prepare to fire another RPG from the roof. One man, called Ali, his head wrapped in a scarf, grabs one of the team’s rocket launchers and ascends a set of stairs in the corner of the room. He keeps low as he peers around the brick-enclosed stairwell.

The walls surrounding the roof are low, and Ali needs to stay crouched to remain in cover. He discusses the best way to hit the target with a colleague. Downstairs, other officers shout information up at the team.

Ali moves onto the roof, and keeping himself low, he hauls the launcher with its bulbous missile onto his shoulder. Closing his eyes, the policeman steels himself. To fire the weapon, Ali will have to rise above the surrounding wall and expose himself to any watching ISIS snipers—dangerous enough when things are quiet, let alone during the ongoing firefight raging around the hotel.

After taking a deep breath, Ali stands, shouting aggressively. Downstairs, his friends occupy every available firing position and begin laying down a crescendo of covering fire—giving Ali the breathing space to fire the rocket.

He takes one last look down the weapon’s sights before pulling the trigger. With a boom, the rocket launches away from the tube. Ali flinches as the back-blast throws debris all over the rooftop.

Hanging around on the roof is not an option, so Ali runs to the stairwell and quickly descends to the room below. From rising to firing, Ali was exposed for less that two seconds, a lifetime in West Mosul.

Downstairs, the rest of Ali’s team have also pulled back. They carry out the laborious task of reloading the ammunition belt for their PK general-purpose machine gun. Each man dumps the contents of small cardboard ammunition boxes into a backpack, then they grab from the pile and push the rounds them into a black, metal machine-gun belt.

Ali slides another rocket into his RPG-7 launcher.

Satisfied the rocket is seated correctly, he leans it carefully against a wall between two spare warheads—ready for use when the next target appears. He smiles when hearing that the building he hit with the RPG is on fire, because at least it means ISIS is unable to use it for now.

The police stay back from their firing positions as they sit and talk. Ali mimes firing the RPG to his friends. The men laugh as incoming ISIS rounds hit the building.

Several bullets perforate a metal door next to a boarded-up window, and glass falls from a skylight at the top of the room as several rounds crack into the wall behind it. The officers seem unfazed as they chat.

Outside the hotel, a Federal Police officer sprints across a street known to be within view of an ISIS sniper. He, and a group of colleagues, are preparing to move to reinforce another position in a nearby building.

A machine gunner makes last minute adjustments to an ammunition belt draped around his shoulders, ensuring it will stay snug when he moves.

Rain starts to pour from gray clouds above the city. The light is fading and it’s a dangerous time to be on the front line, as Islamic State militants often make use of bad weather to mount attacks, knowing that air support is not possible.

As darkness falls, rolling thunder mixes in with the sound of explosions as the tempo of fighting around Mosul’s Old City intensifies.

Dawn breaks the next day. Overnight, a thick blanket of fog enveloped the city, reducing visibility to no more than 10 meters. But West Mosul is quiet, and despite the fighting during yesterday’s twilight, the Islamic State did not use the rain or the morning’s lack of visibility to launch an attack.

The sun soon starts to burn through the fog, removing any advantage it would have given the militants.

Around a kilometer from the hotel where the Federal Police marksmen were working yesterday, a team of Emergency Response Division soldiers are firing mortar rounds at ISIS positions in the Old City.

The mortar team has two different types of mortars—short, squat and gray 82-millimeter M37s, made in Russia; and American-made 81-millimeter M29s, which are longer, slender and green.

Working as a well-oiled machine, the men remove packaging, strip off the extra propelling charges and place the shells in boxes ready to fire—only the safety pins stay in place. The soldiers take care not to mix the two types, even though there is only a millimeter’s worth of difference between them, as they don’t want to accidentally stick the wrong shell in the wrong tube.

Each time the mortars fire, the team commander receives directions by radio, and he and his assistant dial in corrections to bring the next round onto the required target.

The Emergency Response Division is the Iraqi military’s attacking, room-clearing force. There is no attack planned by the ERD today, but they still have teams on the front line, and the mortar group’s responsibility is to support both static ERD positions and those of the Federal Police, who are responsible for holding any retaken ground.

At the center of the Old City is the Al-Nuri Mosque, where ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi declared the “Islamic State” in 2014. Retaking the mosque would be an obvious symbolic victory for Iraqi forces, but Iraqi commanders are not sure whether ISIS will demolish the 800-year-old building before troops arrive.

The road to the hotel where the Federal Police snipers fought from yesterday is long and wide. It’s not on the front line, but is far from safe. Traveling north along the road is best done in an armored vehicle, as many of the alleys and smaller roads leading toward the Old City are in view of ISIS snipers.

As a reminder, occasional rounds crack down the roads as Iraqi troops sprint between buildings.

The Iraqi defenses here consist of several earthen berms. Each one is an obstacle to any potential ISIS counter-attack.

The Federal Police’s eight-wheeled BTR-94 armored personnel carriers—a Ukrainian modification of the Russian BTR-80—along with M1117 armored security vehicles and even T-72 tanks of the Iraqi 9th Armored Division wait in position to provide support in the area.

Armored Humvees, prolific throughout this conflict, move between positions as their drivers drop off troops and supplies.

In a nearby side alley, a Federal Police officer walks toward the front line. The alley, on the edge of the Old City, is only three meters wide. The passageways deeper inside Mosul’s older districts are even narrower.

The Iraqis use more than just alleyways to maneuver their way to the front line. A rabbit warren of holes, smashed by ISIS militants before the battle, connects many of the buildings.

ISIS has also charged residents an extortionate “hole fee” for the cost of the labor, requiring them to either pay up or leave, according to Al-Monitor. Effectively, the holes function as an above-ground tunnel network.

The Iraqis troops and ISIS are very close to each other in this part of the city. An officer, using a GPS application on his phone, says that the nearest ISIS position is 33 meters away. He corrects himself when the phone receives a better signal. “Actually it’s 19 meters!” he remarks.

In some places the front line is only a thin door, often shot through with bullet holes and shored up with metal and household appliances.

The damage done to the homes in this part of Mosul is extensive—an unavoidable side effect of urban fighting. Retreating militants have caused more damage, according to one Federal Police officer. “ISIS burn positions when they leave,” he adds. “They use the smoke for cover.”

He points to a soot-blackened room that ISIS militants used as a fighting position.

On a rooftop, two Federal Police officers take turns observing Islamic State positions. One of the men, Mohammed, his head wrapped in a scarf, smiles as he exclaims that he is the “number one sniper.”

Empty bullet cartridges litter the rooftop and lie among chipped pieces of concrete and empty plastic water bottles. There are also a large amount of discarded grenade pins. The men on the roof say that, due to the proximity between the opposing forces, both sides often throw grenades at each other between the rooftops.

Since no one is throwing grenades right now, the job of the men on the rooftop is to keep watch and shoot any militants they see. Mohammed calls another policeman to the roof, who brings a PK machine gun with him. As they talk, the second officer shoulders the gun, resting his weapon’s muzzle on the decorative bricks which surround the top of the rooftop wall.

Peering through the bricks, the gunner fires off half a belt of ammunition. An Iraqi mortar, launched from somewhere unseen, lands on a nearby building. A police officer peeks through the bricks to see where it hit. He ducks down again and says “astley” with a grin—an Arabic compliment which literally translates to “original.”

The round landed on a known ISIS position.

The sharp, muffled echo of rifle fire is audible from downstairs as other men in the building shoot from inside rooms.

Rounds fired back by militants crack low over the rooftop. An ISIS mortar round lands around 150 meters away, hitting a building behind the front line, but no one on the rooftop seems to care.

A brief, 30-second lull settles over the battlefield. No one, on either side, fires. The only noise comes from two far-off patrolling attack helicopters and a coalition jet high in the sky.

The lull ends when someone lets loose with hundreds of rounds from a heavy machine gun and the fast-firing cannon of an Mi-35 Hind begins to burp. On cue, the rest of the Iraqi troops and the opposing ISIS militants resume firing.

Two policemen sit on the roof in the mid-afternoon sun. Flies buzz between plates of discarded lunch—the food, in open polystyrene containers, slowly drying out in the heat. Twenty-eight-year-old Mohammed, born in the eastern Iraqi city of Al Kut, intends to get married after the war is over, although he says he’s currently single.

“ISIS are evil to people,” Mohammed says, adding that he feels terrible when he watches local civilians attempting to flee ISIS territory for safety.

Ten minutes later, more Federal Police officers make their way to the roof. Three men start to reload expended ammunition belts for the machine gun, and one officer uses a piece of wood to push the bullets into their final position, ensuring they are correctly seated.

Even more officers pile onto the roof. In all there are eight policemen crouching behind the wall. The extra manpower is necessary because a separate team of police officers are preparing to cross the street into the block where the Islamic State has been shooting at us. The team on the roof will provide suppressing fire to help their colleagues cross safely.

The men move into firing positions on the roof, leaning two RPG launchers against a wall, just in case. One man stares through the scope of a PSL rifle, his eyes narrowed as he scrutinizes known enemy positions for any sign of movement. The officers discuss targets among themselves.

Somewhere below, a man shouts.

The PK gunner starts firing with long bursts, and the marksman with the PSL squeezes off an aimed shot. The rest of the men rise, taking it in turns to shoot. They fire fast single shots, some poking their weapons over the top without showing themselves, keeping as much of their body in cover as possible.

The firing continues for two minutes, ending once their colleagues finish crossing the road. Muffled voices shout from the buildings across the street—the police have made it.

Men in the team crack jokes as they move back into cover. Without realizing it, two ISIS fighters picked the worst moment to cross another part of the street around 100 meters away. The machine gunner and sniper shot both.

The ISIS fighters soon retaliate, flinging a mortar shell which explodes on top of a building 50 meters away, sending masonry tumbling down onto the street below. The dust from the denotation lingers in the still afternoon air. The militants lay down withering fire, targeting the police on the roof.

Rounds slap against the concrete wall, but most pass close by overhead. The fire is ineffective.

Mohammed and a friend descend from the roof, laughing and joking as they talk on a cellphone.

Two officers remain on the roof as the rest of the team heads inside, where they sit and talk, passing time as they wait for the incoming fire to die down.

Back on the rooftop, the two men work together scanning rooftops and windows for any sign of movement, giving the other police officers some much needed rest—a necessary respite in what is the heaviest urban battle, currently, in the world.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...-jong-un-donald-trump-japan-china-south-korea

5 ways the North Korea situation could spiral out of control

“Eventually they’ll go too far, and the situation will unravel.”

Updated by Sean Illing@seanillingsean.illing@vox.com Apr 11, 2017, 8:30am EDT

The New York Times reported on Sunday that the US is redirecting several warships toward the Korean Peninsula as a show of force. The decision is a response to North Korea’s test of yet another intermediate-range missile.

For decades, presidential administrations have tried — and failed — to curb North Korea’s nuclear weapons program. The Trump administration’s approach so far has been both aggressive and confusing.

A week ago, for example, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson released a statement that read: “The United States has spoken enough about North Korea. We have no further comment.” Does that mean negotiations are over? It’s not clear.

Although Tillerson insists that America’s policy remains a denuclearized North Korea, not regime change, dispatching a naval armada to the region suggests we’re inching closer and closer to a potential clash.

Yesterday, moreover, we learned that China was sending 150,000 troops to the North Korean border to prepare for the potential flood of refugees in case the United States launches a preemptive strike. Such a strike remains highly unlikely, but China’s actions are indicative of how dangerous the situation has become.

To understand how close we are to full-scale conflict in North Korea, I reached out to Jeffrey Lewis, director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Program at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies. Lewis focuses on nuclear nonproliferation, international security, and disarmament, and he is the author of Minimum Means of Reprisal: China's Search for Security in the Nuclear Age.

I asked Lewis to lay out some of the worst-case scenarios in North Korea.

Here’s what he told me.

Scenario 1: The North Koreans mistakenly believe that we are going to launch an attack on them, and Kim Jong Un does something crazy.

The big dilemma here is that, in North Korea at least, everything is organized around the fear that they will be invaded, and that Kim Jong Un will end up like Muammar Qaddafi in Libya or Saddam Hussein in Iraq. But unlike Qaddafi or Hussein, Kim has actually acquired nuclear weapons, and if you look at the missile testing they do, a lot of these are tests that have already been conducted. What they're doing, in fact, is practicing hitting airfields or other targets that the US would likely use to sustain an invasion.

As far as we can tell, the North Korean theory is that on the first day of a potential war with America, if they just use a bunch of nuclear weapons — in South Korea, in Japan potentially — the damage will be so severe that we will be deterred from future aggression, or that the costs will be so high that a successful invasion will be impossible. But for this strategy to be effective, it means North Korea has to go nuclear first, to raise the stakes to an impossibly high level right at the beginning.

My worry is that Trump says or does something incautious or imprudent, as he often does, which North Korea interprets as deadly serious and decides to escalate immediately to deter a potential invasion. It’s easy to see how things could get out of hand in a hurry.

Scenario 2: The North Koreans stage yet another provocation, only this time it goes too far and South Korea responds.

This scenario is a little bit Trump goes crazy and a little bit South Korea goes crazy, but I'll focus on South Korea. The North Koreans like to stage provocations. In 2010, for instance, they sank a South Korean ship and they shelled an island. Last year, they put a land mine on the DMZ [demilitarized zone] and blew the legs off a South Korean soldier. And the list goes on and on and on. So they're constantly testing the limits, constantly provoking.

The scenario here is that North Korea goes one provocation too far and South Korea finally responds in kind. It's hard to imagine how this will play out. The South Koreans are increasingly committed to their ability to respond to these provocations, but they're terrified of a nuclear strike. They're developing ballistic and cruise missiles with the express purpose of killing Kim Jong Un. The idea is that they can eliminate [Kim] so that he won't be alive to give the orders to launch nuclear weapons. But if they try and fail to take out Kim, all bets are off.

So my concern here is that North Korea is always staging provocations, but eventually they’ll go too far, and the situation will unravel.

Scenario 3: The Trump administration talks itself into a conflict it can’t contain.

This scenario is like Iraq in 2003, except it's a much bigger fiasco. So imagine Trump being humiliated by North Korea after he insists the situation is under control: He says North Korea is contained, and then they continually defy him with one provocation after another. Eventually, the administration convinces itself that regime change is the only viable option.

So this is a case in which Tillerson's language of not talking to North Korea gets taken literally. Trump decides he's just going to isolate North Korea to the point where we do something similar to what we did in Iraq in 2003: gather forces in the region, round up a few allies, and get some kind of dim authorization from Congress for the use of force. And then, before you know it, we're involved in a major conflict.

What I worry about here is that the Trump administration, like the Bush administration in 2003, talks itself into believing that this will be easy, and gets embroiled in a crisis it can't contain.

Scenario 4: North Korea’s pursuit of nuclear weapons finally spawns an arms race with Japan, which in turn extends to other regional powers.

Right now there's an aggressive cruise missile race in Asia. Not only do the Chinese have cruise missiles but so do the South Koreans and the Taiwanese. The North Koreans have mostly ballistic missiles. The only country so far that hasn't gotten involved in this arms race is Japan. But there are indications that Japanese Prime Minister [Shinzo] Abe wants to buy Tomahawk land-attack missiles from the United States, which would be an enormous enhancement in Japan's offensive capabilities and very alarming to North Korea and the Chinese.

So the question here is: Will the North Korea's aggressive provocations finally push Japan to militarize? This would be a predictable response by Japan to North Korea's microaggressions. But it could dramatically destabilize the region by setting off a chain of destructive consequences.

Scenario 5: The North Korean regime collapses internally, creating a failed state.

If the government started to collapse, we'd likely see a return of the horrific things we saw in the ’90s, with famine and disease spreading over the country. But we'd also have armed factions fighting one another for power, and you can imagine a scenario in which the United States, South Korea, China, and others get sucked in.

If North Korea does collapse, it won't be like East Germany; it'll be closer to Bosnia or Libya or Syria, and that means proxy conflicts and power vacuums. And remember: If the regime does fall, someone will have to go in there and secure those nuclear weapons, and there's no easy way to do that.

This is probably the least likely scenario, but it is certainly possible. This is a very unstable regime, and we definitely can’t rule out a state collapse.
 

energy_wave

Has No Life - Lives on TB
China threatens to 'BOMB North Korea' if tyrant Kim Jong-un crosses THIS 'bottom line'

CHINA may take devastating military action on North Korea if it crosses Beijing’s “bottom line”, it is believed.
By Fraser Moore
PUBLISHED: 03:50, Wed, Apr 12, 2017 | UPDATED: 04:13, Wed, Apr 12, 2017

The Chinese military would react with force if Kim Jong-un’s nuclear activities adversely affected areas of China bordering the hermit nation, according to an editorial in a government-owned newspaper.

The article in the Communist-party affiliated Global Times stressed the North’s nuclear facilities must not put northeastern regions of China in danger.

The editorial said: “China has a bottom line that it will protect at all costs, that is, the security and stability of northeast China.

“If the bottom line is touched, China will employ all means available including the military means to strike back.

“By that time, it is not an issue of discussion whether China acquiesces in the US’ blows, but the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) will launch attacks on North Korean nuclear facilities on its own.”

The Chinese provinces of Liaoning and Jilin border the tiny nuclear-armed dictatorship.

The infamous Punggye-ri nuclear site is located closer to the Chinese border than it is to the North’s capital, Pyongyang.

It added: “If by any chance nuclear leakage or pollution incidents happen, the damage to northeast China’s environment will be catastrophic and irreversible.”

While the editorial is not representative of the views of the Chinese government, it comes amid heightened tensions and war fears on the Korean peninsula.

A US Navy strike group was deployed towards the Korean peninsula soon after the US bombing of a Syrian airbase, which the North Korean government branded “reckless” and “outrageous”.

And now, a fleet of US-allied Japanese vessels is reportedly heading towards North Korean waters as part of a military training exercise.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world...ina-bomb-north-korea-kim-jong-un-nuclear-test
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
China threatens to 'BOMB North Korea' if tyrant Kim Jong-un crosses THIS 'bottom line'

CHINA may take devastating military action on North Korea if it crosses Beijing’s “bottom line”, it is believed.
By Fraser Moore
PUBLISHED: 03:50, Wed, Apr 12, 2017 | UPDATED: 04:13, Wed, Apr 12, 2017

The Chinese military would react with force if Kim Jong-un’s nuclear activities adversely affected areas of China bordering the hermit nation, according to an editorial in a government-owned newspaper.

The article in the Communist-party affiliated Global Times stressed the North’s nuclear facilities must not put northeastern regions of China in danger.

The editorial said: “China has a bottom line that it will protect at all costs, that is, the security and stability of northeast China.

“If the bottom line is touched, China will employ all means available including the military means to strike back.

“By that time, it is not an issue of discussion whether China acquiesces in the US’ blows, but the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) will launch attacks on North Korean nuclear facilities on its own.”

The Chinese provinces of Liaoning and Jilin border the tiny nuclear-armed dictatorship.

The infamous Punggye-ri nuclear site is located closer to the Chinese border than it is to the North’s capital, Pyongyang.

It added: “If by any chance nuclear leakage or pollution incidents happen, the damage to northeast China’s environment will be catastrophic and irreversible.”

While the editorial is not representative of the views of the Chinese government, it comes amid heightened tensions and war fears on the Korean peninsula.

A US Navy strike group was deployed towards the Korean peninsula soon after the US bombing of a Syrian airbase, which the North Korean government branded “reckless” and “outrageous”.

And now, a fleet of US-allied Japanese vessels is reportedly heading towards North Korean waters as part of a military training exercise.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world...ina-bomb-north-korea-kim-jong-un-nuclear-test

Looks like someone in Beijing realized finally that they've got a "mad dog" with nukes and reliable and tested missiles that can hit THEM and their fellow Party members along with the Japanese, South Koreans and anyone else in range...

20160106-NKorea-range.jpg

http://www.grandhaventribune.com/image/2016/01/07/x700_q30/20160106-NKorea-range.jpg

Contending-with-a-Nuclear-North-Korea_Fig3.jpg

http://www.npolicy.org/userfiles/image/Contending-with-a-Nuclear-North-Korea_Fig3.jpg
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.realclearworld.com/artic...eferendum_turkeys_erdogan_spells_trouble.html

Win or Lose on Referendum, Turkey’s Erdogan Spells Trouble

By Mohammed Ayoob
April 10, 2017

Turks head to the polls April 16 to decide in a referendum whether to change their political system into a presidential one or retain the parliamentary system with the president as nominal head of state and the prime minister as chief executive.

If successful, the referendum will change the rules of the domestic political game, allowing Erdoğan to exercise unbridled power possibly for more than a decade. Failure could introduce unprecedented viciousness in the conduct of the country’s politics with Erdoğan lashing out at his opponents, both Turks and Kurds.

Externally, either way the referendum will affect Turkey’s relations with the EU and with the United States. Europeans, highly critical toward Erdoğan’s actions in the referendum’s run-up, will bear the brunt of any anger. Erdoğan does not forget slights easily.

If successful, Erdoğan is likely to become even more assertive in his demands on the US, especially in relation to the Syrian Kurdish issue and the question of a cleric’s extradition to stand trial in Turkey. This may create further complications for the US in its pursuit of war against the Islamic State.

While in theory the referendum is supposed to decide the country’s political restructuring, in fact it is a referendum on Erdoğan’ s desire to become the sole repository of power in Turkey. Since assuming the presidency in 2014, he has subverted the existing system, becoming all but in name the executive president with the prime minister nothing more than his mouthpiece. Contrary to the present constitution, which mandates that the president be non-political and unaffiliated with any party, Erdoğan acts as the head of the AKP in a highly partisan manner.

The proposed amendment, if passed, will allow Erdoğan to continue in the role of the executive president until 2029 assuming he wins the next two elections, not improbable given his popularity. Observers suggest this is a major threat to the fledgling democracy for two reasons: First, unlike the American system, there are few checks on the president’s power as envisaged in the constitutional amendment. Second, since his third election victory in 2011, and especially since the failed coup of last July, Erdoğan’s autocratic personality traits have been very much on display.

Analysts often equate him with the republic’s founder Kemal Atatürk, who also displayed an authoritarian political style, with some dubbing Erdoğan’s approach as “Islamist Kemalism” for combining authoritarianism with a moderate form of Islamism. It’s a major irony of Turkish history that the person most responsible for dismantling Turkey’s Kemalist authoritarian state structure has become the vehicle for its impending restoration in another guise.

Erdoğan’s Justice and Development Party, AKP, garnered the required number of votes in the Turkish Parliament with the help of the ultra-nationalist MHP to bring the constitutional draft to a popular referendum. However, the amendment faces resistance from the main opposition party, CHP, and the predominantly Kurdish HDP. There are also signs of increasing dissatisfaction with Erdoğan’s dictatorial behavior.

The combination of these factors has made Erdoğan and his government nervous to the point of hysteria, and Europe has become a convenient whipping boy for several reasons. The EU and major European countries, such as Germany, have been harshly critical of the unabashed display of Erdoğan’s autocratic tendencies. Also, Erdoğan’s high-handed actions have indefinitely postponed prospects of Turkish EU membership, thus reducing Europe’s significance in Turkish foreign-policy priorities. For historical reasons, Erdoğan finds Europe a convenient target against which he can direct Turkish nationalism to boost his popularity.

Turkey’s relations with the United States, demonstrating signs of considerable strain during the last two years of the Obama presidency, have shown some improvement since Donald Trump’s election to the White House. Unlike Obama, Trump is not much concerned with the violation of human rights in Turkey.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s visit to Turkey in March was one signal of improving relations although differences between Ankara and Washington persist. Tillerson did not meet any opposition leader, an attempt to avoid embroilment in domestic issues ahead of the referendum. His statements in Ankara focused primarily on the war against the ISIS, and he contended that there was “no space” between the United States and Turkey in their determination to fight the common enemy.

Turkey’s differences with Washington, unlike those with the EU, have more to do with concrete policy differences over US support for Kurdish groups fighting ISIS in Syria. Also, Turkey demands extradition of Fethullah Gulen, considered by the Turkish government to have masterminded the abortive July coup from the United States, for trial in Turkey. Trump’s discredited first national security adviser Michael Flynn is alleged to have discussed extradition by extra-legal means.

The extradition issue is, however, more symbolic than real. Erdoğan needs former ally Gulen as the emblematic vicious instigator of the coup plot that left 265 Turkish civilians dead to bolster his own legitimacy and justify the crackdown on public servants, academics and journalists supposedly linked with the Gulen movement in the wake of the coup. Gulen, protected by American law, suits Erdoğan’s purpose better than an aged, ailing cleric standing trial for difficult-to-prove crimes in Turkey.

The Kurds in Syria are a more serious matter. The main Kurdish force in Syria – the YPG, military wing of the leading Syrian Kurdish party, PYD – is a major US ally in its war against the ISIS. However, Turkey considers the YPG an arm of the PKK, engaged in major insurgencies and terrorist acts in the country for the past 30 years or more. Turkey perceives the American-supported YPG presence on its borders a major security threat as it boosts Kurdish nationalist sentiments within Turkey. As the war against the ISIS proceeds, Turkish forces may clash with the YPG militia – they have come close a few times recently – to prevent the latter from extending control over territories held by ISIS near the Turkish border.

So far the United States has balanced relations by supplying arms to the YPG and supporting ground forces with air support while simultaneously assuring Turkey that it won’t sacrifice Turkish interests for the sake of its alliance with the YPG or allow the latter to control territory west of the Euphrates near Turkey’s borders. This intricate balancing act may unravel if ISIS begins to crumble and there is a race for the control of territory primarily populated by Kurds.

Regardless, Turkey is in for turbulent times. If the referendum passes, this is expected to magnify Erodğan’s authoritarian bent and signal to the already restive Kurds that current policies of repression will intensify. Many HDP Kurdish members of parliament are already in jail for opposing Erdoğan. A re-intensified Kurdish insurgency and escalation of terrorist attacks could follow. If the referendum fails, Erdoğan may attack his opponents, both Turks and Kurds, even more viciously, thus leading to increased authoritarianism and possibly domestic unrest in the Turkish heartland itself.

Either outcome could further deteriorate Turkey’s relations with European countries. Win or lose, Erdoğan is likely to lash out at his European critics. Prospects of Turkey’s EU membership will recede even further.

Turkey’s relations with the US continue to hinge, above all, on how Washington manages contrary demands of the PYD/YPG and Ankara in relation to the status of Syrian Kurds. Although in normal times Washington is likely to choose NATO member Turkey over the Syrian Kurds, these are not normal times. Exigencies of the war against ISIS may lead the United States, deliberately or inadvertently, to cross some of the red lines set by Turkey in relation to the Kurdish issue, thus causing extensive damage to relations with Ankara. An abrasive Erdoğan reconfirmed in his power could only add to the risk of escalation.

In the final analysis, the Kurdish question trumps all other considerations both domestically and internationally as far as Turkey is concerned.

Mohammed Ayoob is University Distinguished Professor Emeritus of International Relations, Michigan State University, and a senior fellow with the Center for Global Policy. This article first appeared in Yale Global Online, and has been republished with permission from the MacMillan Center.
 

energy_wave

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Wow, wouldn't it be something if North Korea was really a secret puppet of the US and what is about to happen is the take down of both China and Russia. Then all the world's problems go away.

20160106-NKorea-range.jpg
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
I didn't know where to put this, but it needed to be somewhere...



Lucas Tomlinson‏Verified account @LucasFoxNews 22m22 minutes ago

Russia flew 3 Bear bombers and a spy plane near Japan today, US officials say. Latest provocation comes as Sec. Rex Tillerson visits Moscow


Lucas Tomlinson‏Verified account @LucasFoxNews

Russian bombers took off from E Russia's Ukrainka air base and remained in international airspace near Japan, officials say
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
Trending UK News‏ @UKolizer 25m25 minutes ago

Japanese warships to join US fleet near #NorthKorea as tensions rise #Pyongyang #UnitedStates #CarlVinson



posted for fair use and discussion
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/12/japanese-warships-join-us-fleet-north-korea


Japanese warships to join US fleet near North Korea as tensions rise

Navy destroyers will join USS Carl Vinson for military drills amid fears Pyongyang plans further nuclear and missile tests


Justin McCurry in Tokyo and Benjamin Haas in Hong Kong

Wednesday 12 April 2017 03.36 EDT
Last modified on Wednesday 12 April 2017 06.28 EDT

Japan is preparing to send several warships to join a US aircraft carrier strike group heading for the Korean peninsula, in a show of force designed to deter North Korea from conducting further missile and nuclear tests.

Citing two well-placed sources who spoke on condition of anonymity, Reuters and the Kyodo news agency said several destroyers from Japan’s maritime self-defence forces would join the USS Carl Vinson and its battle group as it enters the East China Sea.

The move comes as the Chinese president called for calm in the region in a phone conversation with Donald Trump.

China “is committed to the goal of denuclearisation on the Korean peninsula, safeguarding peace and stability on the peninsula, and advocates resolving problems through peaceful means,” Xi Jinping said, according to CCTV, the state broadcaster.
Syria strike designed to intimidate North Korea, Chinese state newspaper says
Read more

The call came after a series of tweets in which Trump pressed China to be more active in pressuring North Korea to abandon its nuclear programme.

In a pair of tweets, Trump linked trade deals and the future of the US-China relationship to progress on reining in the regime’s nuclear programme.

The US president wrote:

Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)

North Korea is looking for trouble. If China decides to help, that would be great. If not, we will solve the problem without them! U.S.A.
April 11, 2017

In another tweet, Trump said he had told Xi any trade deal between the two countries would be “far better for them if they solve the North Korean problem”.

The US aircraft carrier was redeployed from a planned visit to Australia and is sailing north from Singapore towards the Korean peninsula, as speculation mounts that Pyongyang is planning more missile launches to coincide with national anniversaries this month.

North Korea watchers believe the regime could conduct missile tests on or around the 105th anniversary of the birth of the state’s founder, Kim Il-sung, on Saturday, or on the 85th anniversary of the ruling Korean People’s Army on 25 April.

China is the North’s only key diplomatic ally and its largest trading partner, providing a lifeline to the reclusive state.

There are signs China is taking steps to squeeze North Korea and its erratic leader, Kim Jong-un. Chinese authorities have ordered trading companies to return North Korean coal shipments and banned all imports in late February.
Donald Trump's first 100 days as president – daily updates
Read more

To bridge the gap, China started importing coal from the US, the first time in two years, a move that is likely to be viewed favourably in Washington.

The sources said Japanese and US ships would take part in joint exercises, including helicopter landings on each other’s vessels and communications drills, as the Carl Vinson passed through waters off Japan.

The planned rendezvous is a further sign of increased cooperation between the US, Japanese and South Korean navies. Last month, Aegis ships from the three countries held a joint drill to improve their ability to detect and track North Korean missiles.

The Carl Vinson is powered by two nuclear reactors and carries almost 100 aircraft. Its strike group also includes guided-missile destroyers and cruisers. A submarine is also expected to join the group.

“Japan wants to dispatch several destroyers as the Carl Vinson enters the East China Sea,” one of the Japanese sources was quoted as saying.

Reuters said one of the unnamed officials had direct knowledge of the plan, while the other had been briefed about it. Japan’s self-defence forces have not commented on the report.

Chinese media warned that the Korean peninsula was closer to war than at any time since the North conducted the first of its five nuclear tests in 2006.

The Global Times, a state-run tabloid, suggested Chinese public opinion was turning against North Korea and said harsher measures could be needed, including restricting oil shipments.

“Pyongyang can continue its tough stance, however, for its own security, it should at least halt provocative nuclear and missile activities,” the paper wrote in an editorial. “Pyongyang should avoid making mistakes at this time.“

A senior Japanese diplomat said the arrival of a US naval strike group off the peninsula was designed to pressure North Korea into agreeing to a diplomatic solution to its ballistic missile and nuclear weapons programmes.

“If you consider overall things such as the fact that the US government has not put out warnings to its citizens in South Korea, I think the risk [of military action) at this point is not high,” the diplomat said.

Some experts in South Korea said an imminent North Korean nuclear test was unlikely. Prof Kim Dong-yub of the Institute for Far Eastern Studies at Kyungnam University, told the Korea Times a ballistic missile launch was the most likely option, adding that the chances of a nuclear detonation were “very low”.

On Tuesday, North Korea warned of “catastrophic consequences” in response to any further provocations by the US, days after the Carl Vinson began its journey towards the Korean peninsula.

“We will hold the US wholly accountable for the catastrophic consequences to be entailed by its outrageous actions,” North Korea’s state-run Korean Central News Agency quoted a foreign ministry spokesman as saying. “[North Korea] is ready to react to any mode of war desired by the US.”

Reuters contributed to this report
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/1203018/the-counterforce-compulsion-in-south-asia/

The Counterforce Compulsion in South Asia

by Michael Krepon | April 12, 2017 | 1 Comment

Quotes of the week:

“There has been literally no chance at all that any sane political authority…would consciously choose to start a nuclear war. This proposition is true for the past, the present, and the foreseeable future. For sane men on both sides the balance of terror is overwhelmingly persuasive… There is no prospect at all that [X] could attack [Y] without incurring an overwhelming risk of destruction vastly greater than anyone but a madman would choose to accept.”

— McGeorge Bundy, “To Cap the Volcano”

“Dreams of ‘disarming first strikes’ leading to the temptation to ‘go first’ and the consequent instability of Small Nuclear Power equations are think-tank myths.”

— General K. Sundarji, “India’s Nuclear Weapons Policy”

Vipin Narang stirred up a tempest at the Carnegie Endowment’s Nukefest by warning that a serious revision of Indian nuclear doctrine may be in the offing – even to the extent of entertaining pre-emptive strikes against Pakistan’s nuclear deterrent. Is New Delhi likely to succumb to the most extreme manifestation of the counterforce compulsion – a damage limiting, nuclear war fighting force posture?

Vipin cites provocative passages in Shivshankar Menon’s new book, Choices: Inside the Making of India’s Foreign Policy, the public musings of former Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar, plus the hawkish advocacy of former Strategic Forces Command Commander in Chief Gen B.S. Nagal, to conclude that,

“There is increasing evidence that India will not allow Pakistan to go first. And that India’s opening salvo may not be conventional strikes trying to pick off just Nasr batteries in the theater, but a full ‘comprehensive counterforce strike’ that attempts to completely disarm Pakistan of its nuclear weapons so that India does not have to engage in iterative tit-for-tat exchanges and expose its own cities to nuclear destruction.”

Before jumping to conclusions, let’s back up a bit. India has always had its share of nuclear hawks. They primarily reside in aviaries of retired military officers. Read, for example, Gurmeet Kanwal’s The New Arthashastra: A Security Strategy for India. A second species consists of scientists associated with India’s defense research establishment. Unlike their military brethren, they usually speak up while on the government payroll, rather than in retirement. A rare breed is the civilian strategist with perches at think tanks, like Bharat Karnad, who has written India’s Nuclear Policy and other books on this topic. These views deserve a close reading, but they have had little influence on Indian nuclear doctrine in the past.

Shivshanker Menon’s views are more consequential, as he served as the National Security Adviser in the previous Congress-led coalition government and is a widely respected strategic thinker. Reports of his hawkish musings have already led some champions of Pakistan’s nuclear deterrent to conclude that their darkest suspicions have been confirmed.

The Strategic Plans Division is already ramping up Pakistan’s counterforce capabilities, presuming the need to compete in this sphere with India. Vipin’s take on Menon’s book will no doubt add impetus to this compulsion. But it’s not too late to avoid reprising the U.S.-Soviet counterforce competition on a regional scale. So before going off to the races, let’s look more closely at Menon’s book.

This chapter is entitled, “Why India Pledges No First Use of Nuclear Weapons.” Not “Why India has Unwisely Pledged No First Use,” “Why India Should Rethink No First Use,” or “Why India Should Revise No First Use.” Menon states that India’s NFU doctrine has “deterred others from attempting nuclear coercion or blackmail against India.” He asserts that “a first-strike doctrine is surely destabilizing, and does not further the primary purpose of our weapons in deterring blackmail, threat, or use of nuclear weapons.” He argues that, “no first use is a useful commitment to make if we are to avoid wasting time and effort on a nuclear arms race,” and that, “Today, India has effective deterrence against both China and Pakistan.” Menon also writes that he is opposed to shifting Indian strategic doctrine to a nuclear war fighting posture (such as by embracing tactical nuclear weapons, like Pakistan) because*“this shift would be reactive and would not increase the effectiveness of deterrence.

Instead it would add one more level of complexity and bring nuclear war closer. Nor would this shift be credible.”

And here is Menon’s bottom line:

“It seems to me that rather than seeking answers in our nuclear weapons to all the threats that India does or may face, it is important that we maintain the fundamentals of our doctrine, treating our nuclear weapons as political instruments to deter nuclear attack and attempts at coercion.”

These passages do not suggest a warm embrace of counterforce targeting, let alone its most extreme form. Instead, they reinforce India’s NFU posture. Now let’s look more closely at the two troublesome passages in Menon’s book that Vipin has rightly focused on:

“Circumstances are conceivable in which India might find it useful to strike first, for instance, against an NWS [nuclear weapon state] that had declared it would certainly use its weapons, and if India were certain that adversary’s launch was imminent.”

And then this:

“If Pakistan were to use tactical nuclear weapons against India, even against Indian forces in Pakistan, it would effectively be opening the door to a massive Indian first strike, having crossed India’s declared red lines. There would be little incentive, once Pakistan had taken hostilities to the nuclear level, for India to limit its response, since that would only invite further escalation by Pakistan… In other words, Pakistani tactical nuclear weapon use would effectively free India to undertake a comprehensive first strike against Pakistan.”

What are we to make of these two passages that suggest the possible embrace by India of the most extreme form of counterforce targeting — pre-emptive damage limitation strikes?

The first passage ends with one additional, cryptic sentence: “India’s present public nuclear doctrine is silent on this scenario.” This is most odd. Is there an additional exception to India’s NFU posture that has not been publically declared – one that permits pre-emptive, damage-limiting strikes? If so, India does not have a NFU posture; it has a first use and first strike posture. Night cannot be day, and day cannot be night. At this point, even a public reaffirmation at the highest level of India’s NFU posture will not be persuasive to Pakistan’s nuclear hawks, but it is still needed. Otherwise, opaqueness and worst-case thinking will add even more fuel to a counterforce competition now in its early stages.

The second passage reads to me as nothing more than a reaffirmation of India’s declared nuclear doctrine: First use by Pakistan, regardless of yield and location, would invite massive retaliation by India. What’s odd here is Menon’s terminology. If Pakistan uses nuclear weapons first, then India’s response is not a “first strike”; it’s a retaliatory strike – pure and simple. Menon has thus regrettably added salt to the open wound that is India’s deeply flawed declaratory policy. The threat of massive retaliation, even in the event of a single demonstration shot, invites the worst of two worlds: it lacks credibility and yet invites uncontrolled escalation.

Parsing Menon’s language is tedious, I know, but necessary because the nuclear competition in South Asia is at an important juncture. Pakistan and India have fulfilled the requirements of counter value targeting, and are moving down the path of counterforce targeting requirements. Warhead totals can grow significantly because MIRVing technology is available and because as counterforce capabilities increase, neither side can afford to be caught with missiles in garrisons. The obvious countermove is to have some missiles out of garrison, even in peacetime. Many more missiles will be flushed in a crisis.*These are some of the operational ramifications of adopting worst-case assessments of Menon’s writing, which Rawalpindi is prone to do.New Delhi is likely to lag behind unless there is an extraordinary shift in India’s strategic culture.*Nuclear dangers will grow alongside counterforce capabilities, because launchers will be maintained at increased readiness levels to deal with reciprocal fears of surprise attack. Sound familiar?

It will be difficult, but still possible, to break this cycle. For a start, it’s worth recalling how the premier strategic thinkers on the subcontinent rejected the counterforce compulsion in favor of stable nuclear deterrence. General Sundarji’s views, as noted above, were anti-counterforce. *K. Subrahmanyam estimated in*India and the Nuclear Challenge,that a minimum deterrence posture could consist of “an arsenal of a few dozen bombs and an aircraft delivery system.” In Nuclear India, Jasjit Singh believed “it is difficult to visualize an arsenal with anything more than a double-digit quantum of warheads. It may be prudent to even plan on the basis of a lower end figure of say 2-3 dozen nuclear warheads by the end of 10-15 years.”

Back then, Pakistani strategic analysts were on the same page. Agha Shahi, Abdul Sattar and Zulfikar Ali Khan wrote of “minimal” requirements for deterrence. They expressed confidence that Pakistan would avoid a futile arms competition with India. They ruled out the need for a nuclear war-fighting posture. When Abdul Sattar joined the Musharraf government as Foreign Minister, he promised Pakistani participation in the Fissile Material Cut-off Negotiations. Early on, the SPD’s Director General Khalid Kidwai discounted the likelihood of nuclear artillery being part of Pakistan’s nuclear plans.

Pakistan and India have come a very long way since these hopeful and sensible declarations. Both have succumbed to the siren song of “credible” deterrence. Rawalpindi now embraces the concept of “full spectrum deterrence,” which will be reinforced by the former Indian National Security Adviser’s thoughts about pre-emption.

Athletes achieve peak performance by slowing down the game. If Indian and Pakistani decision makers do not slow down the counterforce compulsion, they could pay a very steep price.


Filed Under: Uncategorized
Tagged With: B.S. Nagal, Bharat Karnad, Counterforce targeting, Gurmeet Kanwal, Manohar Parrikar, no first use, Strategic Plans Division Shivshankar Menon, Viper Narain

Comments
nit (History)
April 12, 2017 at 4:20 pm

Clearly this has set up quite a fire. Let take Pakistan’s threat of TNW. So it plays out this way. Any Indian conventional attack Pak uses TNW. Indian retaliates with Countervalue, Pakistan fires it’s quota of warheads etc etc..

So then one may ask, why should India wait for Pak to use TNW, when the ultimate outcome according to the declared doctrine .would be.to nuke each completely?

India might as well start off the proceeding with a nuke attack on Pak forces. What difference it makes?

Pak’s threat of TNW was to create a escalation ladder, where in nukes there is no such thing. It wants to do this to prevent use of strategic nukes.

By due to this ho-ha, Pakistan now might reorient it’s thinking towards it’s crown jewels, rather than dabbling around with TNW..

India’s objective is to make Pak understand there is nothing called Tactical nuke war. let Pak spend energy on creating deterrent against “assumed counter-force”.

Regarding Indian first strike, it is obvious the reference is to using conventional means to target Pak nuke warhead and delivery system. Having said that, GOI has not responded on any of these stories.
 

Be Well

may all be well
I didn't know where to put this, but it needed to be somewhere...



Lucas Tomlinson‏Verified account @LucasFoxNews 22m22 minutes ago

Russia flew 3 Bear bombers and a spy plane near Japan today, US officials say. Latest provocation comes as Sec. Rex Tillerson visits Moscow


Lucas Tomlinson‏Verified account @LucasFoxNews

Russian bombers took off from E Russia's Ukrainka air base and remained in international airspace near Japan, officials say

Who would Russia be trying to provoke, and why? They don't side with Nork, do they? That would be mind boggling.
 

Millwright

Knuckle Dragger
_______________
NUCLEAR COUNTDOWN

US officials believe North Korea has placed a nuclear device in a tunnel, which could mean a nuclear test is imminent

Meanwhile foreign journalists visiting North Korea have been told to prepare for a 'big and important event'

A Voice of America journalist tweeted that US government sources believe North Korea had placed a nuclear device in a tunnel and it could be detonated as early as this weekend.

It comes after Washington-based 38 North, a website that monitors North Korea, said satellite images from Saturday showed vehicles and trailers at the Punggye-ri test site and signs that communications cables may have been laid to a test tunnel.

The think tank said water appears to be being pumped out and was draining downhill “presumably to keep the tunnel dry for monitoring or communications equipment”.

Earlier foreign journalists visiting North Korea have been told to prepare for a “big and important event” tomorrow.

About 200 foreign journalists are in Pyongyang as the country marks the 105th birth anniversary of its founding president Kim Il Sung on April 15, North Korea’s biggest national day called “Day of the Sun”.

Officials gave no details as to the nature of the event or where it would take place, and similar announcements in the past have been linked to relatively low-key set pieces.

Tensions are running high, with a U.S. Navy strike group steaming toward the western Pacific in a show of force and North Korea warning of a nuclear attack on the United States at any sign of American aggression.

Meanwhile, US military publication Stars and Stripes reports an USAF aircraft that specialises in detecting radioactive debris after the detonation of a nuclear device has arrived on Okinawa in Japan during the weekend.

The North Korean nuclear test scare comes just a few weeks after Japan began staging mass evacuation drills after Kim Jong-un test fired missiles and conducted rocket engine tests on intercontinental missiles.

The first exercise of its kind saw civilians young and old scrambling for cover as air-raid sirens wailed away.

As previously reported Japanese civil defence officials have published pamphlets outlining emergency measures in the event of nuclear war.

Anti-missile rocket batteries have also been stationed in strategic areas including in the capital, Tokyo.


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3321634/north-korea-nuclear-bomb-test-us-officials-nuke-sniffer/
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://breakingdefense.com/2017/04/will-daesh-3-0-rise-from-mosuls-ashes/

STRATEGY & POLICY

Will Daesh 3.0 Rise From Mosul’s Ashes?

By JAMES KITFIELD
on April 12, 2017 at 6:02 PM
6 Comments

They’re surrounded, targeted by constant bombardments and slowly strangled of supplies and reinforcements for months so fighters for Daesh (aka ISIS) might reasonably have abandoned Mosul and tried to slink off into the night.

That’s what happened last June in the battle to recapture Fallujah, when Daesh fighters were relatively quickly routed, and hundreds were killed by U.S. aircraft when their fleeing convoy was spotted in the dark with infrared targeting systems. Everyone in the anti-Daesh coalition hoped for a similar retreat by demoralized terrorists that would separate them from the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians still cowering in Mosul’s byzantine old city, on the west bank of the Tigris River.

But Daesh’s fighters are not abandoning Mosul, which with the Syrian town of Raqqa, forms the twin-capitals of the self-proclaimed Islamist “caliphate.” They are falling back on defensive positions prepared for two years in the densely congested side streets and alleyways of the old city, gathering Iraqi civilians close as they can as “human shields” and apparently preparing for a last, desperate stand.

The result? “The toughest and most brutal phase of this war, and probably the toughest and most brutal close quarters combat that I have experienced or even read about in my 34-year career,” Army Lt. Gen. Stephen Townsend, commander of Combined Joint Task Force – Operation Inherent Resolve says. A veteran of six combat tours, Townsend calls the fighting in Mosul “the most significant urban combat since World War II.” The tragic byproduct has been an alarming spike in civilian casualties, including a U.S. strike against a reported ISIS truck bomb on March 17 that may have collapsed a nearby building and killed as many as 200 civilians gathered there by Daesh. The U.S. military is still investigating the incident, which drew criticism from the United Nations and Amnesty International.

On a recent trip near the frontlines of the Battle of Mosul, Townsend found a possible explanation for Daesh’s determination to stage an apocalyptic fight to the death in the old city. “Every movement has a well-spring or some home turf where it finds support, and in recently talking to Iraqi and coalition commanders and listening to their intelligence assessments, I heard about neighborhoods supporting ISIS that I remembered from being a brigade commander in Mosul 10 years ago, when those same neighborhoods were sources of support for Al Qaeda in Iraq,” said Townsend, speaking recently to defense reporters by phone from Baghdad. If the Shiite-led Iraqi government fails to reach out to those and other neighborhoods and towns of disenfranchised Sunnis after the fighting stops, he noted, then Daesh’s expulsion from Mosul will likely prove a fleeting victory. “What’s important after ISIS is defeated is that the government of Iraq has to reach out to these groups of people and make sure they feel like they have a future in the Iraqi state,” said Townsend.

A Pivotal Moment

With roughly three-quarters of Mosul recaptured and Daesh finally on the verge of losing its grip on Iraqi territory, the campaign against them is poised at an important inflection point. Counter-insurgency experts have long understood that the actions of the Iraqi government and the various factions involved in the fighting the day after Mosul is recaptured will largely determine whether the group is defeated, or, once again, rises from the ashes of sectarian conflict.

The complex nature of the battlespace, combined with the anti-Daesh coalition’s sprawling nature, promises to complicate the transition from urban combat to whatever comes after. The Shiite-led government of Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi is weak and has struggled to cope with the demands of hundreds of thousands of refugees from the fighting in Mosul. The territorial demands of Kurdish Peshmerga fighters to the north, and possible acts of retribution against Sunni civilians by thousands of Iranian-backed Shiite militiamen to the west of city, cast a dark shadow over the aftermath. A continued spike in civilian deaths by U.S. and coalition air forces could further alienate the overwhelmingly Sunni population of Mosul and surrounding Nineveh Province.

And hanging over the entire anti-Daesh campaign is the question of a continued U.S. presence in Iraq after the group is expelled, and whether that engagement can be leveraged to help achieve the long-sought national reconciliation among Iraq’s feuding Kurdish, Shiite and Sunni factions.

Perhaps no U.S. military officer of his generation better understands this difficult terrain, and the momentous challenges ahead, than retired Gen. David Petraeus, the former top U.S. commander in both Iraq and Afghanistan and at U.S. Central Command. He is widely credited with crafting and executing the counterinsurgency doctrine that pulled Iraq back from the abyss of sectarian civil war in 2007-2008 and decimated Al Qaeda in Iraq. “The military defeat of ISIS is only the first step. The much more challenging task is to use all elements of American and coalition power to help achieve political solutions that will avoid once again creating fertile ground for extremists, and thereby avoid the rise of ISIS 3.0,” Petraeus told me in a recent email. “Our success in that mission will determine whether the U.S. military has to do this all over again in five years.”

Sectarian Civil War

After U.S. and Iraqi military forces and the Sunni tribes of Anbar Province routed Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) beginning in 2006-7, the remnants of the terrorist insurgency eventually went underground, only to rise Phoenix-like from the fires of Syria’s civil war. That brutal conflict pitted a minority regime of Alawites, which is an offshoot of Shiite Islam, against a majority Sunni population. Meanwhile, after the withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Iraq in 2011, the Sunni tribes in western Iraq which had turned against AQI in the “Anbar Awakening” grew restive under the iron-fisted and openly sectarian rule of former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who headed the Shiite-majority government in Baghdad.

A former AQI lieutenant named Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who had spent time in a U.S. detention facility in Iraq, realized that between weak Shiite-led governments in Damascus and Baghdad lay a swath of territory inhabited by millions of rebellious Sunnis. From that strategic insight the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) was born, and in one of the most improbable military offenses in history its terrorist army captured territory in Syria and Iraq and proclaimed a “caliphate” in land stretching between its twin capitals.

When the Obama administration reluctantly deployed aircraft and troops back to Iraq to defend a Baghdad government on the verge of collapse, it wisely used that leverage to help nudge out the sectarian Maliki and encourage the more moderate Abadi. Since then Abadi has promised to lead “national reconciliation” by reaching out to Sunnis liberated from Daesh rule, and draw them back inside the government tent. He has often struggled, however, to control a fractious coalition government with many hardline Shiite politicians with close ties to Shiite Iran.

Kenneth Pollack, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Center for Middle East Policy and former senior Middle Eastern analyst for the CIA, worries about Abadi’s ability to bring the country together. “I think Abadi is a very good man who wants what’s best for Iraq, to include a pluralist government, corruption reforms and democracy. The problem is Abadi is not particularly good at building coalitions, and the Iraqi government is fragmented and paralyzed by this ongoing sectarian civil war,” he says. “Frankly, Nelson Mandela would have a hard time stabilizing Iraq at this point. So the United States needs to leverage the influence it has gained by helping fight ISIS to empower Abadi in his reconciliation efforts. And they must include limiting the activities of the Shiite militias.”

Reining in Militias

The key to Iraq’s future may lie with the Shiite-dominated militias called Popular Mobilization forces. A number of these militias have direct links to Iran and they have been difficult for the Iraqi government to control. According to Human Rights Watch, Shiite militias involved in the battle of Fallujah last summer committed atrocities against Sunni civilians, including torture and summary executions. In the operation to recapture Tikrit they reportedly burned hundreds of homes of Sunni civilians they accused of colluding with Daesh. If something similar happens after Daesh is expelled from the much bigger and more populous city of Mosul, the swamp of Sunni grievance is likely to rise once again.

Sheikh Jamal Al-Dhari is a Sunni tribal leader who has lost more than 70 family members in Iraq’s sectarian wars. “The ‘Anbar Awakening’ showed that the way to defeat Al Qaeda is to work with the Sunni tribes, but our efforts to take part in the anti-ISIS fight have been repeatedly rebuffed by the Baghdad government,” he said in an interview. Now Shiite-dominated Iraqi Security Forces and possibly U.S. airpower have inadvertently killed hundreds if not thousands of Sunni civilians in Mosul, he noted, and thousands of Shiite militiamen have captured Sunni majority villages to the west of the city. “We fear that the use of excessive force will cost the lives of thousands of more civilians, creating hardships and hard feelings that will only set the stage for the next ISIS, or worse.”

To avoid Kurdish or Shiite forces fighting each other and mistreating liberated Sunni civilians, U.S. battle planners created separate corridors into the city. “The U.S. military worked very hard to insure that neither the Peshmerga nor the Popular Mobilization forces would be involved in the close-in fight in Mosul, and that has been mostly successful,” said Michael Knights, an Iraq expert and fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Studies. But the Iraqi Security Forces leading the fight have suffered a lot of casualties and are very tired, he noted, possibly causing them to rely on more firepower to limit their losses. “But the main reason we’ve seen civilian casualties increase is that ISIS is being much more aggressive in using civilians as human shields. Their backs are now against the wall in Mosul’s old city, and they seem to be preparing for a last stand.”

When the dust of battle finally settles over Mosul, the most important decision confronting the Trump administration will be whether or not to keep a residual U.S. force inside Iraq to continue advising and assisting Iraqi Security Forces, and helping coordinate counterterrorism operations. If the U.S. military packs up lock-stock-and-barrel and leaves once again, many experts believe it will only set the stage for “son of ISIS” to fill the vacuum.

“Only if U.S. forces remain in Iraq to secure the peace will we achieve a major military victory over ISIS,” said James Jeffrey, former U.S. ambassador to Iraq. The U.S. can leverage that presence not only to empower Abadi’s national reconciliation agenda, he said, but also to eventually find a political resolution to the Syrian civil war. In “On War” [Carl von] “Clausewitz said that the art of war was using tactical victories to achieve strategic ends,” said Jeffrey. “We need to use the victories in Mosul and Raqqa to achieve the strategic end of a stable Middle East that is not dominated either by ISIS or Iran.”
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Keep an eye on this next "problem"....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-referendum-poll-idUSKBN17F0V3

WORLD NEWS | Thu Apr 13, 2017 | 4:11am EDT

Turkish referendum poll shows 'Yes' vote at 51 percent

A narrow majority of Turks will vote "Yes" in Sunday's referendum on changing the constitution to grant President Tayyip Erdogan sweeping new powers, an opinion poll published on Thursday showed.

The April 16 plebiscite will decide on the biggest change in Turkey's system of governance since the modern republic's foundation almost a century ago, potentially replacing its parliamentary system with an executive presidency.

The survey by pollster Gezici put support for the constitutional change at 51.3 percent, with "No" votes on 48.7 percent after the distribution of undecided voters.

The poll was carried out face-to-face with some 1,400 people in 10 provinces on April 8-9. In its previous survey a week earlier it put the "Yes" vote at 53.3 percent.

Two other surveys on Wednesday showed the "Yes" vote on 51-52 percent. The mean average of eight polls collated by Reuters puts the "Yes" vote on 50.8 percent

The referendum campaign has damaged Turkey's ties with some European allies. Erdogan has described the banning on security grounds of some rallies by Turkish ministers in the Netherlands and Germany as "Nazi-like" tactics.

Voting for Turks living abroad finished on Sunday and Erdogan said this week that those overseas had turned out in greater numbers, a development that pollsters say could benefit him.

(Writing by Daren Butler; Editing by Dominic Evans)

NEXT IN WORLD NEWS

Chemical weapons experts in Turkey to investigate alleged Syrian sarin attack: sources
AMSTERDAM A team of experts from the global chemical weapons watchdog has been sent to Turkey to collect samples as part of an investigation into an alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria last week that killed 87 people.


Islamist arrested over soccer bus attack was IS member in Iraq: German prosecutor
BERLIN German prosecutors have issued an arrest warrant against a 26-year-old Iraqi man who was detained in connection with an attack on a bus carrying players of a top soccer team, saying on Thursday they believe he was a member of Islamic State.
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
Two separate events. One real and one "maybe, but probably not"?


Reuters World‏Verified account @ReutersWorld 9m9 minutes ago

BREAKING: U.S.-led coalition air strike in Syria mistakenly killed 18 Syrian Democratic Forces personnel on April 11 - Pentagon







WarMonitor‏ @TheWarMonitor 3h3 hours ago

WarMonitor Retweeted Reuters World

Reaching...


WarMonitor added,
Reuters WorldVerified account @ReutersWorld
Syrian army says U.S.-led air strike on Wednesday hit IS poison gas depot, killing hundreds http://reut.rs/2nHTJOo



posted for fair use

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-m...=Feed:+Reuters/worldNews+(Reuters+World+News)

Thu Apr 13, 2017 | 9:02am EDT
Syria says U.S. strike hit Islamic State poison gas depot, killed hundreds; U.S. denies

The Syrian army said an air strike late on Wednesday by the U.S.-led coalition hit poison gas supplies belonging to Islamic State, releasing a toxic substance that killed "hundreds", but the coalition denied carrying out raids in the area.

A statement by the army, flashed on Thursday by Syrian state TV, said the incident in the eastern Deir al-Zor province proved that Islamic State and al Qaeda-linked militants "possess chemical weapons".

The report could not immediately be independently verified.


U.S. Air Force Colonel John Dorrian, a spokesman for the coalition, said it had carried out no air strikes in that area at that time.

"The Syrian claim is incorrect and likely intentional misinformation," he said in an email to Reuters.

The United States launched cruise missiles at a Syrian air base last week, in response to a deadly poison gas attack in the west of the country that Washington blamed on President Bashar al-Assad's government.
Related Coverage

Russian army says not aware of people killed in Syria's Deir al-Zor: RIA


Syria and its ally Russia deny Damascus carried out any such chemical attack. Moscow has said the poison gas in that incident belonged to rebels.

The U.S. strike on the Syrian air base was the first time Washington has deliberately and directly targeted the Syrian government. It is separately waging an air campaign against Islamic State in eastern Syria.

(Reporting by John Davison; Editing by Mark Trevelyan)
 
Top