WAR 05-07-2016-to-05-13-2016_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
(214) 04-16-2016-to-04-22-2016_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...22-2016_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

(215) 04-23-2016-to-04-29-2016_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...29-2016_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

(216) 04-30-2016-to-05-06-2016_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...06-2016_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****
_____

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.ibtimes.com/israeli-jets-strike-gaza-strip-after-rocket-fire-2365568

World

Israeli Jets Strike Gaza Strip After Rocket Fire

By Eric Linton On 05/06/16 AT 10:25 PM

The Israeli air force said it struck two Hamas targets in the southern Gaza Strip early Saturday in response to the firing of a projectile into Israeli territory, the Jerusalem Post reported Saturday morning, following several days of border incidents.

“The IDF will not tolerate terrorists opening fire onto Israeli territory and will continue to act severely against any attempt to disturb the peace of communities," the military said. Israel has a policy of holding Hamas solely responsible for all aggression originating from Gaza, even if carried out by Palestinian splinter groups.

Earlier Saturday morning, Palestinians launched a projectile that fell in an uninhabited area of southern Israel, setting off a siren. No injuries or damage were initially reported.

Tensions on the Israel-Gaza border have escalated over the past week, with numerous cross-border hostilities. Mortars were fired from the Gaza Strip at Israeli soldiers Friday morning, causing no injuries in what the army said was the 12th incident in three days, the Times of Israel reported. The soldiers were operating near the southern edge of the coastal enclave, according to the army. Israeli jets subsequently targeted a Hamas site in southern Gaza.

Palestinian media reported Friday afternoon that Israel and Hamas reached a truce, brokered by Egypt, that would take effect immediately. But Israel's coordinator of government activities in the occupied territories, Maj. Gen. Yoav Mordechai, denied that any such agreement had been reached.

“The army intends to maintain its activities against Hamas as it continues to breach Israeli sovereignty and build tunnels,” he said.

Friday was the fourth day in a row in which Israeli troops on the border came under mortar fire, as they unearthed cross-border underground passages from the Gaza Strip. On Thursday, a Palestinian woman was killed when Israeli tank shells hit her home east of Khan Younis, according to the southern city’s Nasser Hospital.

The Hamas leader in Gaza, Ismail Haniyeh, said Friday that the Palestinian group was not seeking a new war with Israel, i24 News reported. Speaking at a mosque Friday before prayers, he said, "We are not calling for a new war, but we will not allow incursions or imposing facts on the ground by Israel in Gaza."

Haniyeh said the Palestinians objected the Israeli prohibition on Palestinian traffic in the "perimeter," a 300-meter buffer zone inside the strip and bordering the frontier. Israeli security officials agree that Hamas is not looking for a major escalation currently, Ynet News reported, but nervousness in Gaza raises the chances of a mistake that could lead to more extensive fighting.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/20...s-nuclear-progress-rare-party-congress-opens/

North Korea leader hails nuclear progress as rare party congress opens

AFP-JIJI, Bloomberg
May 7, 2016

PYONGYANG/SEOUL – Kim Jong Un on Friday opened North Korea’s first ruling party congress for nearly 40 years with a defiant defence of the “magnificent” strides made in the country’s nuclear weapons program.

Hailing the historic test of what North Korea claims was a hydrogen bomb in January, the isolated state’s young leader said it had shown the world it would not be cowed by sanctions or outside pressure.

Dressed in a Western-style suit and tie, Kim’s speech was delivered to thousands of party delegates who had gathered in Pyongyang for the once-in-a-generation conclave.

In particular, he praised the country’s scientists for “creating milestone miracles with the magnificent and exhilarating sound of the first H-bomb of our republic.”

The test and successful long-range rocket launch a month later “clearly demonstrated to the whole world our undefeatable spirit and endless power … in defiance of malicious pressure and sanctions by enemy forces,” he said.

His speech, shown late Friday on state TV, was frequently interrupted by thunderous applause and at last one standing ovation.

Most experts have questioned the North’s H-bomb claim, saying the detected yield from the January test was far too low for a full-fledged thermonuclear device.

There has been widespread speculation that the North might have prepared another nuclear test to coincide with the congress, as a defiant gesture to underscore its nuclear power status.

Washington later urged North Korea to “come out of the wilderness” by “renouncing nuclear weapons and demonstrating a clear commitment to ending their provocative actions and denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula.”

The White House warned “the international community is serious about holding North Korea to account for their destabilizing and provocative behavior”.

The 33-year-old Kim, who was not even born when the last Workers’ Party Congress was held in 1980, said the party conclave would prove to be a “new milestone” that would lay out the future direction “of our revolutionary march.”

It is still unclear how many days the congress will last, but the speeches and delegate reports will be scrutinized for any sign of a substantive policy shift, especially on the economic front.

Analysts will be watching for personnel changes as Kim looks to bring in a younger generation of leaders hand-picked for their loyalty.

The state TV announcer said the congress had also discussed the operations of its powerful central military committee, revisions of party rules and elections to central party organs.

Around 130 foreign journalists had been invited to cover the event, but were not allowed inside the congress venue.

The 1980 congress was staged to crown Kim’s father Kim Jong Il as heir apparent to his own father, the North’s founding leader, Kim Il Sung.

The 2016 version was held inside the imposing April 25 Palace in Pyongyang — its stone facade adorned with huge portraits of the two late leaders, along with giant red and gold party banners.

While the agenda had been kept secret, analysts said it amounted to a formal “coronation” of Kim Jong Un as supreme leader and the legitimate inheritor of the Kim family’s dynastic rule which spans almost seven decades.

It was also expected to enshrine as formal party doctrine Kim’s “byungjin” policy of pursuing nuclear weapons in tandem with economic development.

The North Korean capital was immaculately primped and primed for the congress, with national and Workers’ Party flags lining the streets, along with banners carrying slogans such as “Great comrades Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il will always be with us”.

Preparation had involved mobilizing the entire country in a 70-day campaign that New York-based Human Rights Watch denounced as a mass exercise in forced labor.

In his speech, Kim described the campaign as an “extraordinary feat” that had helped the country meet its economic target for the first half of the year.

In the speech, aired in a special broadcast on North Korean state television at 10 p.m. local time, Kim said North Korea has made “the biggest achievements and highest leaps” in all sectors of its economy thanks to a nationwide campaign to boost production this year.

But he offered few details of his economic program and no indication of whether he would continue his state economy’s tiptoeing into the realm of private enterprise.

“He’s implemented some reforms that have paid off and he now feels he has to recalibrate the country’s principle ideology to explain those changes,” Koh Yu Hwan, a professor of North Korean studies at Seoul’s Dongguk University, said before the speech. “But drastically changing course won’t be easy because no matter how good change is, you don’t want to make it if it threatens your third-generation dynasty.”

“The unofficial economy, known as “jangmadang,” has shared the burden of feeding the population of 25 million. Kim has allowed greater private investment and let farmers take away more surplus production, according to analysts with contacts in the country.

Having pledged to never let his people “tighten the belts again,” Kim nonetheless shares the paranoia of prior North Korean leaders that markets may be a conduit for outside information and help sow doubts among locals on the legitimacy of his rule.

“At the end of the day, what really matters is to maintain that grip on power,” said Lee Ji Sue, a professor of North Korean studies at Seoul’s Myongji University. “Power in North Korea is private property because it’s been inherited and Kim doesn’t want to risk losing it.”

Since Kim took power after the death of his father in December 2011, North Korea has carried out two nuclear tests and two successful space rocket launches that were widely seen as disguised ballistic missile tests.

Even as the international community responded with tougher sanctions, he pressed ahead with a single-minded drive for a credible nuclear deterrent with additional missile and technical tests.

He also demonstrated a ruthless streak, purging the party, government and powerful military of those seen as disloyal, and ordering the execution of his powerful uncle, and one-time political mentor, Jang Song Thaek.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
:dot5:

Well this could get "interesting".....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.wsj.com/articles/russias-valdimir-putin-japans-shinzo-abe-discuss-cooperation-1462570446

Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Japan’s Shinzo Abe Discuss Cooperation

Japanese premier sees possibility for progress on issues separating countries, including long-absent peace accord

By Thomas Grove and Peter Landers
Updated May 6, 2016 7:58 p.m. ET
3 COMMENTS

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said he hoped to achieve a breakthrough in a territorial dispute with Russia after meeting for more than three hours Friday with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The two leaders, meeting in the Russian city of Sochi, also discussed economic cooperation at a time when Moscow is struggling with low oil prices and Western sanctions.

Mr. Abe said the discussion led him to believe that “we can make a breakthrough and resolve the stalemate that has existed regarding the peace treaty.” The two countries never signed a formal peace treaty after World War II owing to a dispute over islands off northern Japan seized by Soviet troops in the closing days of the war.

Russia defends its annexation of the islands, saying it did so with the blessing of the U.S. under the 1945 Yalta accord. Japan calls the annexation illegal.

Mr. Abe said, without giving details, that the two leaders agreed to take a new approach to settling the territorial dispute.

Mr. Abe’s meeting with his Russian counterpart comes at a particularly sensitive time ahead of his hosting of U.S. President Barack Obama for the Group of Seven this month in Ise-Shima, Japan. Russia was previously part of the Group of Eight before it was disinvited two years ago.

Nodding to U.S. concerns, Mr. Abe called on Mr. Putin to observe last year’s Minsk agreement on a cease-fire and peace in Ukraine, Japanese foreign ministry spokesman Yasuhisa Kawamura said. Mr. Putin responded that all sides needed to abide by the deal, Mr. Kawamura said.

The two leaders also promised to boost ties in agriculture, energy and trade, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said following the meeting.

Japan has turned toward cultivating ties with Russia to balance its relationship with rising China. Mr. Abe has long hoped to invite Mr. Putin to Japan. The two leaders agreed to continue discussing the timing of a visit but didn’t decide on a specific date, Mr. Kawamura said.

Write to Thomas Grove at thomas.grove@wsj.com and Peter Landers at peter.landers@wsj.com


Related Reading

U.S. Ally Japan Pursues Russian Friendship (May 4)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/20...ral-talks-isle-row-peace-treaty/#.Vy1pDaT5PIV

Abe meets Putin, agrees to ‘new approach’ in bid to resolve territorial dispute

Kyodo
May 7, 2016

SOCHI, RUSSIA – Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed Friday to seek to resolve the decades-old territorial row that has barred the two countries from signing a postwar peace treaty, renewing efforts via frequent dialogues and closer economic cooperation.

“I have a sense that we are moving toward a breakthrough in the stalled peace treaty negotiations,” Abe told reporters after his three-hour meeting with Putin in the Black Sea resort of Sochi. The talks included a 30-minute session where the leaders talked one-on-one, according to a Japanese official.

“We agreed to resolve the peace treaty issue by ourselves as we seek to build a future-oriented relationship. We will proceed with the negotiations with a new approach, free of any past ideas,” Abe said, although he did not offer any specifics regarding the path ahead.

The Japanese official said the “new approach” did not mean a change in Japan’s stance to seek resolution on the ownership of the disputed islands — Etorofu, Kunashiri and Shikotan, as well as the Habomai group of islets off Japan’s Hokkaido Prefecture.

The disputed islands, called the Northern Territories in Japan and the Southern Kurils in Russia, were seized by the Soviet Union following Japan’s surrender in August 1945.

As Japan believes only talks between the nations’ leaders can move the territorial issue forward, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Abe and Putin have discussed in their talks concrete dates for Putin’s visit to Japan.

A plan in 2014 for the Russian president to visit Japan was put off after Moscow annexed Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula in March that year, souring Russia’s relations with Western countries and Japan.

Abe and Putin also agreed to hold a meeting of senior officials on the territorial dispute in June, Lavrov told reporters following the Abe-Putin talks.

In the meeting, Putin invited Abe to participate in the Eastern Economic Forum to be held in Vladivostok in September, which will bring together business and government representatives to discuss the economic potential and investment opportunities of Russia’s Far East and the Asia-Pacific region.

Abe showed willingness to participate, saying the Japan-Russia cooperation in the Russian Far East is important, according to the Japanese official.

In addition to their meeting in Vladivostok, Abe said he also looks forward to a possibility of meeting Putin in July on the fringes of the Asia-Europe summit in Mongolia, as well as in September at the time of the Group of 20 summit in China and in October during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit, the official said.

The Japanese leader, with the hope that economic incentives will have a positive effect on the territorial talks, presented to Putin an eight-point plan to forge closer ties, including in areas such as oil and gas production, development of the Russian Far East and construction of medical centers.

The Russian Far East and Siberian regions are areas rich in energy resources that Putin has attached great importance on developing. Japan is interested in energy development with Russia as it looks to reduce its heavy dependence on oil imports from the Middle East.

Aside from the territorial issue and bilateral cooperation, Abe and Putin also exchanged views on North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile development programs. They agreed not to accept Pyongyang’s possessing of nuclear capabilities and to seek denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, according to the official.

The Abe-Putin meeting was held just weeks before Abe hosts the Group of Seven summit in Mie Prefecture at the end of May. Abe apparently wants to avoid any negative impact from his softening stance toward Russia on Japan’s relations with its G-7 peers, with whom in lockstep it imposed economic sanctions on Russia and condemned Moscow for annexing the Crimea.

U.S. President Barack Obama had also urged Abe in February not to meet with Putin under current circumstances, sources close to Japan-Russia relations said, citing differences between Moscow and Washington over the handling of the Ukrainian and Syrian issues.

The summit will bring together the leaders of Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United States as well as of the European Union. Russia’s membership in the group was suspended in response to the annexation, which the West views as illegal.

Over the Ukrainian crisis, Abe told Putin that Japan strongly hopes all related parties of the cease-fire agreement struck in Minsk, Belarus in February 2015, including Russia, will fully implement the deal, the official said.

Abe expressed hope that Russia will rigorously exercise its influence in the conflict between Ukrainian government forces and pro-Russian rebels in eastern Ukraine and contribute to improving the situation.

Putin, in response, said Russia is waiting for Ukraine to implement domestic reforms in accordance with the Minsk agreement, the official said.

Abe also requested Russia’s further constructive involvement in the Syrian crisis, welcoming Moscow’s cooperation with Washington in seeking a cease-fire in the Middle Eastern country, according to the official.

Abe’s visit to Sochi was the last leg of his seven-day tour which began Sunday and also included stops in Italy, France, Belgium, Germany and Britain for talks with their leaders.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
:dot5::dot5::dot5::siren::siren::siren::dot5::dot5::dot5:

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.wptz.com/politics/saudi-prince-getting-nuclear-weapons-possible/39420576

Saudi prince: Getting nuclear weapons possible

Published 5:37 PM EDT May 06, 2016
By Nicole Gaouette

WASHINGTON (CNN) —In a reflection of the change and churn in the Middle East, former high-level officials from Saudi Arabia and Israel -- nations that have no formal diplomatic ties -- spoke publicly about their shared sense of Iran as a threat, their differences on Palestinians and the role the United States plays in their chaotic region.

Prince Turki al-Faisal, Saudi Arabia's former intelligence chief, and retired Israeli Army Maj. Gen. Yaakov Amidror, a former adviser to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, spoke in Washington Thursday night at a discussion arranged by The Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Their joint appearance doesn't mean the two countries will be normalizing relations anytime soon, Turki warned.

"We are both exes," he said, referring to their status as former officials and not current representatives of their governments. Despite that -- and the fact that the Saudi kingdom has never formally acknowledged Israel's existence -- the two nations have been quietly cooperating for years, exchanging intelligence on shared threats and in particular on Iran.

The most obvious bond the two countries share is their strong security relationship with and dependence on the United States -- and the fact that both have had rocky patches with the Obama administration over the past few years.

Both opposed the deal on Iran's nuclear program, while Saudi officials spoke about their anger that President Barack Obama didn't follow through on a commitment to punish Syria if it crossed the "red line" of chemical weapons use.

Turki said the "strategic relationship with the U.S. will remain, from the Saudi point of view," but suggested it needed rethinking.

"There needs to be a re-evaluation and recalibration of the relationship," he said.

Amidror said that while the "Palestinian issue" was a major difference between Israel and the United States, there is "no substitute for the United States of America in the Middle East."

Those "who think other countries can do what the United States used to do is a big mistake," he said. And he indicated that he understood the Obama administration's attempts to recalibrate its ties to the Middle East.

Both men made it clear that their countries will take steps if they see any erosion of the Iran deal they so forcefully opposed.

Turki said "all options" would be on the table if Iran moves toward a bomb, "including the acquisitions of nuclear weapons, to face whatever eventuality might come from Iran."

Officials from the kingdom, which is party to the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, have raised that possibility in the past. However, they have more strongly stressed the need for the Middle East to be a "weapons of mass destruction free zone," as Turki did at the event.

Amidror said he expected that Iran will move to build a bomb "toward the end of the agreement," which limits research, development and enrichment over 10 to 15 years, if it doesn't violate it first

"In principle, the Iranians can go nuclear and from the Israeli point of view, this is a threat to existence," Amidror said. "We will not let this happen."

The two men, sitting side by side on a stage, generally impassive while the other spoke, sparred gently over the long-running Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Arab cooperation with Israel would improve, Turki said, if it could resolve its decadeslong disagreement with the Palestinians.

"Cooperation between Arab countries and Israel in meeting threats, from wherever they come, whether Iran, is better fortified if there is peace between the Arab nations and Israel," he said

The Saudi prince returned to the issue repeatedly, criticizing Israel's presence in the West Bank and tying it to a wider Mideast peace.

"There has to be a lifting of the occupation," Turki said. "The Palestinians have to have their own country."

But Amidror said it was the Palestinians who were sabotaging the process. He argued it was a mistake for the Arab world to give the Palestinians the "key" to unlocking the relationship with Israel, since that effectively blocked progress.

Arab states, Amidror told Turki, should "cooperate with Israel instead of dictating" to it. He urged regional leaders to "think outside the box" and suggested the Arab world form an "umbrella of cooperation" on Palestinian issue to help move negotiations along.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-brazil-politics-idUSKCN0XX1FK

World | Fri May 6, 2016 2:50pm EDT
Related: World

Brazil Senate committee votes for Rousseff to stand trial

BRASILIA | By Maria Carolina Marcello and Anthony Boadle


A Senate committee recommended on Friday that Brazil's President Dilma Rousseff be put on trial by the full chamber for breaking budget laws, moving a step closer to the likely suspension of the leftist leader from office next week.

Despite renewed promised by Rousseff on Friday to resist her removal, her chances for staying in office are dimming. Her departure would come at a time when a majority of Brazilians are against Rousseff because of an economic recession and a massive corruption scandal that has exposed wrongdoing by ruling party officials.

The full Senate is expected to vote to put her on trial on Wednesday, which would immediately suspend Rousseff for the duration of a trial that could last six months. During that period, Vice President Michel Temer would replace her as acting president.

The upper house committee voted 15-5 to accept the charges against Rousseff, which involve budget irregularities that critics say masked budget problems while she ran for re-election in 2014, and her opponents are certain to muster the simple majority needed to begin a trial.

"I will resist until the last day," Rousseff said at an event where she announced the delivery of low-cost housing. The president said she would not resign because she committed no crime, and called her looming ouster a "coup d'etat."

If the Senate convicts Rousseff, by a two-thirds majority vote to oust her, Temer would serve out the remainder of Rousseff's second term through 2018.

Local newspaper surveys say the opposition has 50 of the 54 votes needed, with many of the 10 undecided senators likely to favor her ouster.

Rousseff has struggled to survive politically in the face of Brazil's biggest ever corruption scandal and its worst recession since the 1930s. Her removal would mark an end to 13 years of leftist rule by the Workers Party that began in 2003 under her mentor, former President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

While Rousseff is not directly accused of corruption, Brazil's top prosecutor has asked for her to be investigated for obstructing justice in the kickback scandal that has engulfed state-run oil company Petroleo Brasileiro SA (PETR4.SA) and fueled Brazil's political crisis.

In a separate initiative launched by the opposition, Rousseff's 2014 re-election campaign is being investigated by an electoral court for alleged funding with bribe money.

At Rousseff's presidential palace Friday, officials had glum faces and appeared resigned to the end of her administration.

One aide denied they were packing up already, but added: "No doubt, we have to start organizing things."

Echoing the sense of an administration that has run out of time, no reporters showed up for a news conference called by Women Affairs Secretary Eleonora Menicucci, a close Rousseff aide. She ended up speaking only to a government television camera.

Rousseff's supporters on the Senate committee have called for annulment of the impeachment proceedings because the man who launched them last year, lower house speaker Eduardo Cunha, was himself removed from office on Thursday by the Supreme Court for obstructing the investigation of corruption accusations against him.

The top court has so far dismissed all government requests to halt the impeachment proceedings.

Workers Party Senator Lindbergh Farias said the ouster of Rousseff was aimed at undoing Lula's work to help the poor, and at rolling back workers' benefits, privatizing state companies and aligning Brazil's foreign policy closer to the United States.


(Reporting by Anthony Boadle and Maria Carolina Marcello; Editing by Daniel Flynn and Frances Kerry)
 

Be Well

may all be well
Brazilians were crazy to vote for that commie B.O.D in the first place, wasn't she a guerrilla or something before? And somehow "Saudi Arabia" and "nukes" just seem like a bad, bad idea.
 

mzkitty

I give up.
More yapping from the fat ugly little chihuahua.


18m
More: Kim Jong-un says North Korea willing to normalize ties with states that had been hostile towards it, state media reports - Reuters

19m
North Korea won't use nuclear weapons unless sovereignty infringed on by others with nuclear arms, leader Kim Jong-un says - Reuters

:screw:
 

Attachments

  • kim 3.jpg
    kim 3.jpg
    10.3 KB · Views: 45
  • kim 2.jpg
    kim 2.jpg
    15.3 KB · Views: 47

mzkitty

I give up.
23m
8 police officers killed near Cairo in armed attack on police car, Egyptian Interior Ministry says - Reuters


Sat May 7, 2016 9:14pm EDT

CAIRO (Reuters) - Unidentified gunmen killed eight policemen including an officer in an attack on a police vehicle in Helwan, south of Cairo, the Egyptian Interior Ministry said in a statement on Sunday.

http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNews/idCAKCN0XZ00U
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/2016/05/06/us-reveals-boots-ground-yemen/84024498/

U.S. reveals troops on the ground in Yemen

Andrew Tilghman, Military Times 7:01 p.m. EDT May 6, 2016
Comments 1

A “small number” of U.S troops are deployed on the ground in Yemen to help fight the al-Qaida affiliate there that was controlling a major port city, a defense official said Friday.

A Pentagon spokesman declined to say how many U.S. troops are there supporting operations led by the Yemeni military and the United Arab Emirates around the port city of Mukalla.

“We have a small number of people who have been providing intelligence support,” the spokesman, Navy Capt. Jeff Davis, told reporters Friday.

The U.S. troops deployed about two weeks ago and are at a “fixed location” providing intelligence support as well as “airborne [intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance], advice and assistance with operational planning, maritime interdiction and security operations, medical support and aerial refueling,” Davis said.


MILITARYTIMES
Yemeni officials say drone strike kills 3 al-Qaida leaders


Militants with al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula seized the port city last year amid the chaos of Yemen’s civil war. With looted bank money and oil exports, AQAP transformed Yemen's southern coastline into a wealthy ministate.

“We view this as short term,” Davis said of the deployments, noting that AQAP has mostly withdrawn from the city after an attack in late April by about 2,000 Yemeni and Emirati troops.

“This is specifically about routing AQAP from Mukalla, and that has largely occurred,” Davis said.

The deployment marks the first time the Pentagon has publicly disclosed deployment of U.S. troops to Yemen in more than a year. In March 2015, the U.S. evacuated about 125 special operations troops amid the expanding civil war between government loyalists backed by a Sunni Arab coalition and Houthi rebels supported by Iran.

Additional U.S. support for the Mukalla operations is provided by the amphibious assault ship Boxer, which is staged off the coast of Yemen with about 4,500 Marines from the 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit. The ship is providing medical support to the Emirate troops, Davis said.


AIR FORCE TIMES
Remember the war in Yemen? The U.S. Air Force is there


The deployment of U.S. troops to Makalla is one of three operations the U.S. military has been conducting in Yemen.

In a separate operation, the U.S. military is providing support for a Saudi-led coalition that is backing the Yemeni government troops in the civil war against Iranian-backed rebels, specifically offering the Saudis intelligence, airborne fuel tankers and thousands of advanced munitions.

At the same time, U.S. aircraft continue to conduct occasional, unilateral “counterterrorism strikes” against specific AQAP militants who pose a potential threat to the Untied States. Since April 23, U.S. aircraft have launched four strikes on AQAP militants in Yemen, killing 10, Davis said.

AQAP was using the Yemeni port city as a “safe haven to plan future attacks against the United States and its interests,” Davis said. “They do remain a significant threat to the region and the United States.”

Davis said the mission in Yemen is not an “advise and assist” mission like those underway in Iraq and Syria. Instead it would “fall into the category of intelligence support.”

“This is really about the liaison to us for information,” Davis said.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://geopoliticalfutures.com/ballistic-missile-defense-and-reality/

Ballistic Missile Defense and Reality

May 6, 2016 The system protects Eastern Europe from a very improbable threat.

By George Friedman

A U.S. ballistic missile defense (BMD) system site in Romania became operational yesterday. The system is intended to defend against attacks by one or a few missiles. The system has been under consideration and construction for several years – it came online in December, but had to be integrated into NATO’s larger BMD framework before it could become operational. Missile defense in Europe has become as much a political symbol as a weapon. I would argue that if political symbols matter, then it has served a purpose, because it is hard to envision the military purpose of the system.

The system is designed to block one or a few (the precise number is likely unknown) missiles targeted toward a large area. This would be ineffective against Russia, should it wish to launch a nuclear strike against Europe, because the system would be easily saturated by a relatively small number of missiles and would be completely irrelevant if the Russians launched a massive strike, which is certainly something they could do. If some other nuclear power decided to launch an attack, it would likely have fewer missiles to launch, so the system could be effective.

The problem with this is that it is unclear why a country with relatively few missiles would launch a strike at all, and totally unclear why their target would be Europe. Nuclear weapons were developed by the United States in World War II as a substitute for massed bombing attacks. World War II bombers were so inaccurate that the destruction of a single factory required thousands of bombs. Inevitably, since most factories needed workers and were in cities, the destruction of a few factories required the destruction of a city.

Over 100,000 people were killed in Tokyo over the course of three days in massed air raids. A comparable number died in Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The size of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima was not necessary for mass destruction. It was primarily needed for efficient mass destruction. It was precisely that efficiency that stunned people. They had gotten used to casualties between 1914 and 1945, but the idea of a single weapon killing so many people turned nuclear bombs from weapons to the embodiment of hell. Hiroshima is remembered around the world. The Bombing of Tokyo not so much.

Nuclear weapons became reasonably associated with the apocalyptic end of the world. Novels were written on it. I recall three: “Alas, Babylon,” “On the Beach” and “Fail-Safe.” Each was about catastrophic nuclear war, but none attempted to explain the political origins of the war. The decision-making that led to the war was left out. “Fail-Safe” postulated a technical glitch that led to war. “On the Beach” had some vague mention of Albania (of all places), but no discussion of why the missiles were launched. “Alas, Babylon” had a navy fighter fire a missile at a Soviet plane over Syria that went awry and hit a warehouse that had nuclear weapons stored there. One exploded leaving the Soviets to launch an all-out nuclear attack on the United States.

The origins of the war were left murky because while everyone could imagine a nuclear war, no one could imagine a coherent line of reasoning that would lead a country to launch a war against another nuclear power. This was simply because there was no rational reason. The military reason – destroying targets in cities through mass destruction – was obviated with advanced precision weapons. The battlefield use of the weapons depended on the generosity of the enemy in massing forces and the indifference to one’s own forces. As for annihilating cities, that was not where the enemy forces were, and doing so would achieve nothing. In the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, Israel, under heavy pressure, contemplated the use of nuclear weapons. It chose not to for several reasons, but mainly because it would achieve nothing militarily. It could have destroyed Damascus, but the Syrian army and its field commanders were not there. Attacking the forces on the Golan would have killed both sides’ forces.

The political calculation that obviated nuclear war was rationality. Therefore, those terrified by nuclear war, turned to another explanation: madness. “Dr. Strangelove” assumed that a U.S. Air Force general lost his mind and sent his B-52s to attack the Soviet Union. However, to make this work, the bomber pilot had to be mad as a hatter, the Russian ambassador to the United States was nuts, and Dr. Strangelove, who appeared to the National Security Advisor, was completely insane. Everyone in the room was crazy.

During the 1950s, it was assumed that once China had gotten nuclear weapons, world holocaust would follow. Mao was known to be insane. One of his comments was that losing a few hundred million people in a nuclear exchange would not be a problem for China. Mao was not squeamish about death on a massive scale, but he was not that crazy. More important, the other people in the room were not that crazy. Absent a psychosis as widespread as we find in “Dr. Strangelove,” somebody in the room loves their family enough to kill the loon.

The madman scenario is the only coherent explanation for starting a nuclear war, but it confronts a hard reality. Since World War II, no nation has used nuclear weapons for any purpose. For the U.S. in Vietnam and the Soviets in Afghanistan, nuclear weapons had no utility. Even if they had, both countries would have accepted defeat rather than use them. The empirical reality is that of all the nations that have nuclear capability, and wish ill toward their neighbor, none have used it. You would have to be crazy to use it. It is always posited that the current enemy doesn’t value human life as we do. Thus, Iran and North Korea might launch attacks. Kim Jong Un is clearly enjoying playing God too much to spoil that. In Iran, the sheer corruption is comforting. People who love accumulating money are rarely suicidal. The madman theory doesn’t work.

Wars are of course waged by helicopters, armored fighting vehicles and well-trained infantry firing wire-guided missiles at tanks. This is the substance of war. The problem with BMD is that the money spent to build it could have been spent preparing Romania, Poland and the Baltics for war. But the United States has a fixation with complex weapons designed to handle improbable threats, and Poland and Romania regard building this system as a symbol of American commitment to defending them. All this defends them against is a threat that is improbable for two reasons. First, nuclear attacks are unlikely. Second, a European city is unlikely to be a target over cities like Tel Aviv, Mumbai or Karachi.

Nuclear weapons are not trivial. A nuclear attack would be terrible, and however unlikely, it is a threat that must be negated. To assert otherwise is to be casual with the fate of humanity. Ideally, we would destroy nuclear weapons, but nuclear weapons do not live in silos. They live in the minds of people who know how to build them. Destroying the weapons will not destroy the knowledge. But whatever the risk, it is essential to be rational in assessing risk. The threat of a nuclear strike is extremely low. The probability of conventional war is much higher. Ballistic missile defense addresses an apocalypse for which even great novelists could not imagine a convincing origin. But conventional wars have been waged many times since World War II. The money spent on BMD should have been spent on far more probable threats.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
REPORT: Germany ‘Annexing’ Dutch Military As Secretive EU Army Begins To Take Shape
Started by Intestinal Fortitude‎, 04-21-2016 10:03 AM
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...ary-As-Secretive-EU-Army-Begins-To-Take-Shape


The comments are very interesting.....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.breitbart.com/london/201...eveals-true-scale-germanys-eu-army-ambitions/

Secret German White Paper Reveals True Scale of Germany’s EU Army Ambitions

By Donna Rachel Edmunds
4 May 2016
Comments 105

A secret German defence white paper calling for the acceleration of the formation of a joint European Union Army has been leaked, revealing German ambitions to side-line NATO by creating a pan-EU force.

The paper had seen its release date pushed back until after the British referendum on EU membership, apparently over fears that it would play into the hands of those advocating a Leave vote. But a copy has been handed to the Financial Times, revealing the scale of Germany’s ambition for a pan-EU Army – led by Germany.

Germany has already taken steps to merge its military forces with those of the Netherlands, with a number of Dutch units already under German control. But the paper outlines steps to broaden this initiative, bringing the disparate national forces within EU member states under one umbrella – with Germany in charge.

“German security policy has relevance — also far beyond our country,” the paper states. “Germany is willing to join early, decisively and substantially as a driving force in international debates … to take responsibility and assume leadership”.

It argues that the EU’s defence industry is currently “organised nationally and seriously fragmented,” raising costs, preventing it from competing internationally, and making it difficult to mount joint operations.

“It is therefore necessary that military capabilities are jointly planned, developed, managed, procured and deployed to raise the interoperability of Europe’s defence forces and to further improve Europe’s capacity to act,” the paper states.

At the European level, Germany’s ministry of defence therefore wants to see joint civil-military headquarters for EU operations, a council of defence ministers, and co-ordinated production and sharing of military equipment.

However, it stresses that the changes will not threaten Germany’s “own technological sovereignty.”

The paper also takes a stance on the current debate within Germany on whether a ban on deploying the army domestically, instituted following the Nazi era, should be lifted. German troops are currently able to assist in civil emergencies such as floods, and have taken part in policing the migrant crisis, but are not allowed to deal with violence or threats of violence.

The paper argues the domestic ban should be lifted, given “the character and dynamic of current and future security-political threats”.

The thrust of the paper therefore displays a newfound confidence in German defence policy, and a new drive to take the lead on military matters within Europe.

Jan Techau, a former defence official at Carnegie Europe, said: “This is the time of a new Germany. This is probably the first time a German defence white paper is something like important.”

The paper makes no bones about Germany’s underlying mission to wrestle military power away from NATO – and more specifically from America – saying: “The more we Europeans are ready to take on a greater share of the common burden and the more our American partner is prepared to go along the road of common decision-making, the further the transatlantic security partnership will develop greater intensity and richer results.”

But critics have warned that this is merely a “dangerous fantasy” unless and until European powers are willing to put their money on the table for defence. Among the current European member states in 2015, only Britain, Poland, Greece and Estonia actually allocated the required minimum of two percent of GDP to defence spending, as stipulated in the NATO agreements.

Former UK defence secretary Liam Fox said: “many in the European project see NATO as an impediment to ever closer union.

“Their every instinct is to move towards European defence co-operation. The problem is that while they are unwilling to spend money, it is a dangerous fantasy that diverts money away from NATO.”

The white paper has been blasted by the UK Independence Party’s defence spokesman, Mike Hookem MEP, who warned that Britain would not avoid having her military sucked into the joint EU force if the British people voted to remain within the EU in June.

Speaking from Brussels, Mr Hookem said, “When you look at the command structures, logistics and forces already under EU command, it comes as no shock the EU commission has bowed to German demands for a combined EU army.”

“While we have had the EU High Command, and many other staff structures for many years, we have seen a determined push towards real assets coming directly under EU command since Jean-Claude Junker became president.”

“You only have to look at how slowly and quietly the armed forces of the Netherland’s have been subsumed by the German armed forces to see the creeping reality of how the EU aim to take over military and security structures throughout Europe.”

“It is typical of the EU to make these sovereignty threatening decisions behind closed doors, and then to gradually implement them before finally presenting the desired outcome as a fait accomplice to the people of Europe.”

“And don’t for one second think that the UK will have an opt out on this issue, as David Cameron and the traditional parties have neither the political will nor clout in Europe to defend our armed forces from becoming one part of a far-reaching European military structure.”

“However, I find it totally duplicitous and cowardly that David Cameron and the EU don’t have the guts to tell the British people of their true intentions before the referendum on 23rd June. This is an issue that not only affects our way of life but the very core of UK sovereignty.

“The only way to stop this disastrous amalgamation is for the British people to vote leave.”

His comments have been echoed by Col Richard Kemp, former commander of the British Forces in Afghanistan who, in a letter to The Times, said: “If Britain remains in the EU we will sign up to a European army no matter what our political leaders tell us today.

“The referendum will be seen as a mandate for the ever-closer union that so many are working towards.”
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.economist.com/news/europ...key-migrant-deal-forced-out-no-room-moderates

Turkey’s prime minister

No room for moderates

Ahmet Davutoglu, architect of the EU-Turkey migrant deal, is forced out

May 7th 2016 | ISTANBUL

FOR Turkey’s prime minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, May 4th began on a good note. In the morning the European Commission, the European Union’s executive arm, endorsed a proposal to lift visa restrictions for Turks travelling to the bloc’s Schengen zone as of June. For Mr Davutoglu, who had made visa-free travel a key condition for enlisting Turkish help in stemming illegal migration to Europe, the relief was short-lived. By the evening, it was clear the prime minister was out of a job.

The man who pulled the carpet from under his feet was the same one who appointed him less than two years ago: Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Tensions between the increasingly authoritarian Mr Erdogan and his prime minister have simmered for months. The two disagreed over the future of peace talks with Kurdish insurgents, and over Mr Erdogan’s plans to change the constitution to give the presidency executive powers, cementing his grip on government and his own Justice and Development (AK) party.

They also clashed over the management of the economy, and Mr Erdogan’s crackdown on critics. (Its latest victims, two journalists, were sentenced to two years in jail last week for republishing a drawing from Charlie Hebdo, a French weekly, featuring a weeping Prophet Muhammad.) Mr Erdogan has accused his prime minister of stealing the spotlight. “During my time as prime minister it was announced that Schengen travel would come into force in October 2016,” he said recently, referring to the visa talks. “I cannot understand why bringing it forward by four months is presented as a triumph.”

Signs that Mr Davutoglu was fighting for his political life emerged last Friday when AK’s executive body stripped him of the right to appoint provincial party officials. Over the weekend, an anonymous blogger believed to be a member of Mr Erdogan’s inner circle suggested that the prime minister had reached his expiry date. Mr Davutoglu, the blogger alleged on a website named “The Pelican Brief”, had crossed his boss by criticising the arrests of academics and journalists and by declining to drum up support for Mr Erdogan’s executive presidency—and by giving an interview to The Economist last year.

On May 5th, a day after the two men met in Mr Erdogan’s 1,100-room palace, AK’s executive council gathered to settle the prime minister’s fate. It was not clear at press time whether he would resign immediately. But in the coming weeks, AK is expected to hold an extraordinary congress to elect Mr Davutoglu’s successor as party leader. Likely candidates include Binali Yildirim, the transport minister, and Berat Albayrak, the energy minister (who also happens to be Mr Erdogan’s son-in-law).

The bookish Mr Davutoglu, a former foreign minister, may have quietly sparred with Mr Erdogan on occasion, but generally tried to play down divisions. His ouster suggests there is no tolerance left for opposition to the president inside his party. It also reveals the price that Mr Erdogan is willing to pay to pursue his agenda. Within hours of his meeting with the prime minister, the Turkish lira plummeted by almost 4% against the dollar, the biggest such drop since 2008. Fears spread that the EU, which had found in Mr Davutoglu a sensible interlocutor and a channel to bypass his abrasive boss, would lose its appetite for engaging with Turkey.

Mr Erdogan appears not to care. No groundwork has been laid for Mr Davutoglu’s departure. To many AK supporters, who saw their prime minister propel the party to a thumping win in elections last autumn, his abrupt ouster seems puzzling. Ozer Sencar, the chairman of Metropoll, a polling company, said it shows Mr Erdogan wants a referendum on his executive presidency this year: “(Mr Davutoglu) presented an obstacle. He had to go.”
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/07/asia/north-korea-nuclear-use-sovereignty/

Kim Jong Un: We'll only use nuclear weapons if sovereignty threatened

By Euan McKirdy and K.J. Kwon, CNN
Updated 11:48 PM ET, Sat May 7, 2016

Seoul, South Korea (CNN) — North Korean leader Kim Jong Un said the country would not use a nuclear weapon unless its sovereignty is encroached by "invasive hostile forces with nuclear weapons," according to the country's state news agency KCNA.

He made the remarks Saturday at the ruling Workers' Party of Korea's Seventh Congress in Pyongyang, which began the day before.

Kim also reportedly said North Korea will faithfully fulfill its nuclear nonproliferation obligations and make an effort to realize global denuclearization.

In his 15-minute opening speech Friday, Kim touted the country's weapons development, saying they had "elevated our respect to the world and enemies."

In January, Pyongyang announced that it had successfully tested a thermonuclear device, which, if true, would mark a significant advance in its nuclear capabilities.

It has since made a number of public demonstrations of its nuclear program's advancement, including rocket and submarine-based missile tests. It also announced it had miniaturized a warhead in early March.


Why Kim Jong Un is now advertising his arsenal


North Korea's 'golden age?'

Kim also said during his opening remarks that the congress would review the party's "brilliant successes" and put together tasks to "keep ushering in a great golden age of socialist construction."

The country's provocative nuclear stance has triggered some of the harshest U.N. sanctions imposed against North Korea and irritated his most powerful ally, China.

The sole remaining symbol of cooperation with South Korea -- the Kaesong Industrial Complex near the demilitarized zone -- has also shut down during his tenure.

No Chinese officials were invited to the party congress, according to Chinese state media.

Kim appears determined to project the image of self-reliance as his impoverished country defies international condemnation by chasing its nuclear ambitions.

At the same time, Kim has promised to take measures to improve the living standards of North Koreans, the other element of his two-prong, so-called "Byongjin" policy of economic and nuclear advancement.

To outside observers, the two goals seem contradictory and implausible.

Can Kim fix North Korea's economy?

The congress is the first in the country for 36 years. Friday saw around 3,000 party members and more than 100 international media outlets pour in for this once-in-a-generation political gathering, officials told CNN.

Details of the gathering had been kept secret from the foreign press and the North Korean public until a Friday evening news bulletin.

The previous one, in 1980, marked the naming of Kim's father, Kim Jong Il, as successor to his own father, North Korea's founder Kim Il Sung, as leader of the reclusive nation.

CNN's Will Ripley in Pyongyang, North Korea contributed to this report
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-border-brenner-idUSKCN0XY07Y

World | Sat May 7, 2016 3:30pm EDT
Related: World, Italy

Italian police, demonstrators clash in protest against Austrian fence

A demonstration against a plan to restrict access through the Brenner Pass between Italy and Austria turned violent on Saturday, with Italian police firing teargas at hundreds of protesters throwing stones and firecrackers.

Austria has said it plans to erect a fence at the Alpine crossing it shares with Italy to "channel" people. Part of Europe's borderless Schengen zone, Brenner is one of the routes that migrants use as they head towards wealthy northern Europe.

Two police officers were injured in the clashes, the head of a local Italian police union, Fulvio Coslovi, told Reuters. He said around 10 demonstrators were being held by police.

Local police in Tyrol, Austria said over 600 protesters showed up to the third violent demonstration at the Brenner Pass in just over a month, meeting at the Brenner station in Italy.

TV footage showed clouds of smoke filling the Brenner railway station as groups of protesters, their faces masked against the fumes, hurled stones and smoke bombs as they faced off against lines of police in riot gear. Estimates on the number of demonstrators varied between 250 and 600.

Around 300 Austrian police officers were deployed but had not yet had to intervene, a spokesman said, since the protest had taken place exclusively on the Italian side of the border so far.

Italian newspaper Corriera della Sera reported earlier this week that the protest had been organized by an anarchist group from Trentino, northern Italy, and was expected to attract demonstrators from abroad.

Austrian Interior Minister Wolfgang Sobotka said in Rome last month that as many as a million migrants were poised to cross the Mediterranean from Libya this year. Italy says the figure is much lower, though calm summer seas may well bring a surge.

Italy and Germany are utterly opposed to Austria's plan to build a fence at its border with Italy, Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi said on Thursday after talks with German Chancellor Angela Merkel.


(Reporting by Brenna Hughes Neghaiwi, Silvia Aloisi and Dominic Ebenbichler; Editing by Toby Chopra)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://news.vice.com/article/hundr...th-riot-police-on-the-austrian-italian-border

Europe

Hundreds of Masked Protesters Clashed with Riot Police on the Austrian-Italian Border

By VICE News
May 7, 2016 | 2:00 pm
Comments 15

Hundreds of masked protesters assembled on the Italian-Austrian border on Saturday and clashed violently with authorities during a demonstration against the Austrian government's plans to erect a fence at the Brenner Crossing to "channel" people — asylum seekers — many of who arrived on Italian shores by boat from Libya.

The types of images that emerged on Saturday — heavily armed riot police making their way through clouds of smoke from the teargas they fired, clashing with angry protesters who were throwing stones and firecrackers, in an idyllic, snowcapped Alpine setting — are becoming commonplace as anger over immigration and border issues continues to heat up across Europe, fueled by the ongoing refugee crisis and Islamophobia.

Both Italy and Austria are countries within Europe's borderless Schengen zone. The Brenner crossing is a popular route that refugees and migrants have taken on their journeys to northern Europe.

Video footage filmed by bystanders shows riot police in heavy gear making their way through clouds of smoke at the Brenner railway station, with the Alps in the background.

Two Italian police officers were injured on Saturday, the head of the local Italian police union, Fulvio Coslovi, told Reuters. Coslovi said that about 10 demonstrators were in custody. Austrian police estimated that there were as many as 600 protesters present.

It was the third violent demonstration to take place at the Brenner Pass in just over a month.

According to Corriera della Sera, an Italian newspaper, the protest was organized by an anarchist group in northern Italy that was calling on demonstrators to join them from other countries.

Wolfgang Sokota, the Austrian Interior Minister, says he expects as many as a million migrants to cross the Mediterranean from Libya this year. Italian estimates are lower.

Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi has taken the side of German Chancellor Angela Merkel by sharply criticizing Austria's plan to erect a border fence.

Meanwhile, thousands of far-right protesters assembled in Berlin under the slogan "Merkel must go," demanding the German chancellor's resignation for her "open-door policy" which has allowed for more than a million refugees fleeing war and conflict to settle in Germany in the last year. Protesters gathered outside Berlin's main train station, waving anti-Islamic posters and chanting "Wir sind das Volk" — which means "We are the people" — a slogan which was originally associated with the reunification of Germany and later appropriated by the Islamaphobic Pegida movement.

The protesters were reportedly hugely outnumbered by counter protesters. There were about 1,800 right wing protest participants, and reportedly around 7,500 left wing counter protesters. A police spokesman told the Guardian that scuffles broke out between the two groups, and riot police had deployed tear gas.

In Poland, an estimated quarter of a million people marched through Warsaw to voice their support for the European Union and express their opposition to the new anti-immigration, "Euro-skeptical" government which came to power last October.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-idUSKCN0XY0JV

World | Sat May 7, 2016 2:48pm EDT
Related: World, Syria

Iran suffers losses in Syria, Aleppo truce extended

DUBAI | By Bozorgmehr Sharafedin


Thirteen Iranian soldiers were killed in a battle with Islamist militants over a village near the Syrian city of Aleppo, Tehran said on Saturday, in one of Iran's biggest single-day losses since it sent forces to support President Bashar al-Assad.

Russia meanwhile said that a truce in Aleppo itself had been extended until Monday.

Islamist forces seized Khan Touman village, about 15 km (9 miles) southwest of Aleppo, on Friday and dozens of people were reported to have been killed in the fighting.

The attack was launched by an alliance of Islamist insurgents known as Jaish al-Fatah, including the al Qaeda-linked Nusra Front.

Iran's Fars news agency quoted a Revolutionary Guards official as saying that 13 Iranian military advisors had been killed and 21 wounded.

The British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said it had confirmed from its sources on the ground the death of 20 Iranians, including 13 advisors.

The monitor said that among the Iranian-backed militia fighters involved in the battles, six from Lebanon's Hezbollah Shi'ite movement and 15 Afghan Shi'ite fighters were also killed.

Jaish al-Fatah and affiliates posted videos and photos on social media of what appeared to be the bodies of Iranians or Shi'ite militiamen who were killed in Khan Touman. They included footage of wallets, personal documents and Iranian currency.

Iran, along with Russia, has been a principle ally of Assad in the five-year-old civil war, while Gulf Arab states and the West have supported various rebel factions.

A senior advisor to Iran's Supreme Leader on Saturday reiterated Tehran's continued support of Assad in a meeting with the president in Damascus.

"Iran will use all its means to fight against terrorists who are committing crimes in the region," Ali Akbar Velayati, Ayatollah Khamenei's adviser on international affairs, was quoted as saying by Fars.

Iranian proxies, including Afghans and Iraqis as well as Lebanese, have been involved in Syria from as early as 2012.

While Tehran previously said its support was limited to advisors, it has been more open about the extent of its role since Russia intervened on Assad's side last year.

Iran has been particularly involved in campaigns around Aleppo in northwest Syria, which was the country's commercial and industrial centre before the war and is now divided between government and rebel forces.

Fighting in the countryside to the south of Aleppo has escalated in recent days despite a ceasefire in city itself since Wednesday.

The Russian defence ministry said a "regime of calm" truce in Aleppo and parts of Latakia province had been extended for 72 hours beginning at 1 a.m. on Saturday (2200 GMT on Friday), Syrian state news agency SANA reported.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a British-based monitoring organisation, said Syrian and Russian warplanes had intensified their bombing of insurgent positions near Khan Touman.

In northern Syria, U.S.-led coalition airstrikes killed 48 Islamic State fighters on Saturday, Turkey's state-run Anadolu Agency said, quoting the Turkish military.

The strikes were in response to increasingly frequent Islamic State attacks against opposition forces in the area, Turkisk security sources told Andadolu.

The Turkish border town of Kilis, which lies just across the frontier from Islamic State-controlled territory of Syria, has been hit by regular rocket fire in recent weeks.

The war in Syria has killed more than 250,000 people though, with tens of thousands unaccounted for, some say the death toll may be as high as 400,000.



(Editing by Angus MacSwan)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://in.reuters.com/article/afghanistan-shooting-idINKCN0XY0LI

World | Sun May 8, 2016 7:53am IST
Related: World, South Asia

Two Romanian soldiers killed in Afghan insider attack


Two members of the Romanian special forces in Afghanistan were killed and a third was wounded on Saturday when two members of a local police unit they were training opened fire on them before themselves being killed, officials said.

A statement from the Romanian defence ministry said the incident took place while the men were training Afghan police in the southern city of Kandahar.

So-called "green-on-blue" insider attacks by Afghan troops on international service members have occurred periodically over the years but have become much less frequent as a result of improved security measures.

The attack came as NATO commander General John Nicholson reviews plans to cut the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan by next year almost in half, a move that officials say would see the training mission severely reduced.

However, a statement from the NATO-led international coalition in Afghanistan said the shooting would not threaten its training and advisory mission with Afghan forces.

"We continue to train, advise and assist the ANDSF, and do not view this incident as representative of the positive relationship between our forces," it said.

Romania contributes almost 600 soldiers to the nearly 12,500-strong Resolute Support mission in Afghanistan.

Samim Khpalwak, a spokesman for the Kandahar provincial governor, confirmed the shooting and said one Afghan policeman had been arrested and was being questioned.

Under current plans, U.S troop numbers are due to drop to from 9,800 to 5,500 by the start of 2017 but there has been growing speculation that Nicholson could recommend delaying the drawdown in order to keep the training mission going.


(Reporting by James Mackenzie in Kabul, Ismail Sameem in Kandahar and Luiza Ilie in Bucharest; Editing by Kevin Liffey and Digby Lidstone)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.wsj.com/article_email/ja...-nuclear-1462738914-lMyQjAxMTE2MTAzOTIwMjk2Wj

Opinion | Commentary

Japan and South Korea May Soon Go Nuclear

The longtime status quo is crumbling and plutonium stockpiles are rising.

By Henry Sokolski
May 8, 2016 4:21 p.m. ET
66 COMMENTS

On Friday North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un praised his country’s recent hydrogen bomb test and satellite launch as “unprecedented” achievements that will “bring the final victory of the revolution.” Such rhetoric is nothing new, but North Korea’s nuclear-weapons program and a growing sense that security arrangements with the U.S. aren’t sufficient has eroded the Japanese taboo against nuclear weapons. On April 1, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s cabinet announced that Japan’s constitution did not ban his country from having or using nuclear arms.

Meanwhile, South Korea’s ruling-party leaders have urged President Park Geun-hye to stockpile “peaceful” plutonium as a military hedge against its neighbors. A Feb. 19 article in Seoul’s leading conservative daily, the Chosun Ilbo, went so far as to detail how South Korea could use its existing civilian nuclear facilities to build a bomb in 18 months.

Japan and South Korea are party to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and Tokyo’s antinuclear-weapons stance dates to 1945 and the nuclear devastation the U.S. wreaked on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But that won’t necessarily stop either country from joining the nuclear club—or at least positioning themselves to do so quickly—if they feel the U.S. “nuclear umbrella” is folding.

Japan already has stockpiled 11 tons of plutonium, separated from fuel used in its nuclear-power reactors. A bomb requires roughly five kilograms (or 1/200th of a ton). The old shibboleth, popular with the nuclear industry, that such “reactor-grade” plutonium is unsuitable for weapons, is essentially irrelevant for a technologically advanced country. Japan also has built—but not operated—a large reprocessing plant of French design that can separate about eight tons of plutonium a year.

The shutdown of Japan’s power reactors following the 2011 Fukushima disaster means there are no reactors online that can use this plutonium. But Japan says it will proceed with reprocessing anyway, putatively to keep open the distant possibility of fueling a new generation of so-called fast-breeder reactors. Japan’s nuclear cooperation agreement with Washington allows it to do this with U.S.-origin fuel. South Korea’s agreement prohibits this without U.S. approval, something Seoul chafes at. It sees itself the equal of Japan. Should Japan operate Rokkasho, as it plans to do late in 2018, it will be impossible politically to restrain South Korea from following suit.

China, meanwhile, is negotiating with France to build a reprocessing plant similar to Japan’s. One might discount the security significance of this; Beijing already has nuclear weapons. But a large reprocessing plant would allow it to expand its nuclear arsenal far beyond its present size. The Chinese are clearly aware of the military significance of nominally civilian plutonium. Consider their loud and repeated complaints about Japan’s plutonium stocks.

The Asian goal of stockpiling plutonium to launch a new generation of plutonium-fueled fast-breeder reactors is one shared with nuclear enthusiasts in the West. But fast reactors are so much more expensive than conventional uranium-burning reactors that they, and the reprocessing of spent fuel they require, have never made economic sense. In Tokyo, Seoul and Beijing there are government officials and advisers who understand this and the security risks of commercializing plutonium. But their concerns have been trumped by nationalistic demands not to fall behind in plutonium technology.

The obvious fix, which would be economically beneficial for Japan, South Korea and China, is a collective pause in the rush toward civil plutonium. For the U.S. to credibly broker this, Capitol Hill needs to support the Energy Department’s February decision to terminate the construction in South Carolina of a plutonium plant designed to fuel U.S. power reactors that is billions over budget and years behind schedule.

An Asian-U.S. plutonium pause has support within the administration and Congress. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz recently told the Journal’s Beijing office: “We don’t support large-scale reprocessing.” He said a large commercial Chinese reprocessing plant “certainly isn’t a positive in terms of nonproliferation.”

At a March hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sens. Bob Corker (R., Tenn.) and Ed Markey (D., Mass.), both backed a “time out” on East Asian plutonium recycling. Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Countryman agreed: “I would be very happy to see all countries get out of the plutonium reprocessing business.” In the House a plutonium timeout has been championed by Reps. Brad Sherman (D., Calif.), Jeff Fortenberry (R., Neb.) and Adam Schiff (D., Calif.).

They understand that a collective plutonium timeout would calm East Asia and save our Asian allies, China and the U.S. hundreds of billions of dollars. President Obama, with less than a year in office to make a lasting contribution to nuclear nonproliferation, should feel comfortable backing this proposal.

Mr. Sokolski is the executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center and the author of “Underestimated: Our Not So Peaceful Nuclear Future” (Strategic Studies Institute, 2016).
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/07/world/asia/us-admiral-harry-harris.html?_r=1

Asia Pacific

A U.S. Admiral’s Bluntness Rattles China, and Washington

The Saturday Profile
By JANE PERLEZ
MAY 6, 2016

HONOLULU — He has called China “provocative and expansionist,” accusing it of “creating a Great Wall of sand” and “clearly militarizing” the disputed waters of the Western Pacific. “You’d have to believe in a flat earth to think otherwise,” he said in one appearance before Congress.

These are the words of the American commander in charge of military operations in the Asia-Pacific region, Adm. Harry B. Harris Jr., who has turned heads — and caused headaches — in Beijing as well as in Washington with language starker than any coming from his commander in chief, President Obama.

Admiral Harris makes no apologies for his candor, which has unsettled a more cautious White House. As China builds militarily fortified islands in the South China Sea, a strategic waterway long dominated by the United States, it is his job, he says, to talk to Congress, the American public and allies abroad about the threat.

“There is a natural tension between elements of the government and the chain of command, and I think it’s a healthy tension,” he said during an interview in his office, perched high above Pearl Harbor. “I’ve voiced my views in private meetings with our national command authorities. Some of my views are taken in; some are not.”

For the Chinese, Admiral Harris, 59, is not only a tough talker. He was born in Japan, the son of a Japanese mother and an American father who was a chief petty officer in the American Navy. The Chinese have zeroed in on his ethnicity as a mode of attack.

“Some may say an overemphasis on the Japanese background about an American general is a bit unkind,” Xinhua, the official Chinese news agency, wrote. “But to understand the American’s sudden upgraded offensive in the South China Sea, it is simply impossible to ignore Admiral Harris’s blood, background, political inclination and values.”

The derogatory comments had two goals, the admiral said. First, they were meant to show that the Pacific Command was “disconnected from the rest of government,” an idea that was “completely untrue.”

Second, they seemed intended to tarnish him. “You know when I am described as a Japanese admiral it’s not true. I am not sure why they have to have an adjective in front of admiral.”

When his family moved back to rural Tennessee, his mother refused to teach him Japanese, insisting that her son was 100 percent American. In that vein, the admiral does not make much of the fact that he is the first Asian-American to be appointed a combatant commander.

That insistence on his American identity makes the Chinese comments particularly galling to him. “In some respects, they try to demonize me, and that’s really ugly,” he said. “I think in a lot of ways the communications that come out of the Chinese public affairs organ, they are tone deaf and insulting.”

Interactive Feature

What China Has Been Building in the South China Sea

China has been feverishly piling sand onto reefs in the South China Sea, creating seven new islets in the region and straining already taut geopolitical tensions.

OPEN Interactive Feature

A United Nations tribunal in The Hague is expected to rule soon on a case brought by the Philippines that could make China’s recent fortifications on islands in the South China Sea illegal. The panel could declare Beijing’s claim over most of the South China Sea, which stretches from the coast of China to the beaches of Southeast Asian nations, invalid.

The decision is widely expected to be unfavorable for Beijing, with potentially sharp consequences for the increasingly brittle relationship between China and the United States.

How boldly China reacts to the ruling is a major concern for Admiral Harris, whose task is to recommend military options should China push forward, either in the short or longer term, with its efforts to control a waterway through which trillions of dollars in trade, including oil and gas, passes every year.

Chinese military commentators have said China plans to make the Scarborough Shoal, an atoll Beijing grabbed from the Philippines four years ago, into a fortress. Only 120 miles from the Philippine coast, it would be a potential threat to an American ally. Beijing could also declare an air defense zone over parts of the South China Sea, forcing civilian airliners to make long and expensive detours to avoid risking encounters with the Chinese Air Force.

The stakes are so high that Mr. Obama warned the Chinese leader, Xi Jinping, during their recent meeting in Washington not to move on the Scarborough Shoal or invoke an air defense zone, said an American official who was briefed on the details of the encounter and spoke anonymously because of the diplomatic sensitivities.

Neither side wants conflict over specks in the sea. But the possibility has to be considered, and Scarborough Shoal is now the place Pentagon officials say the United States might take a stand.

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., recently asked Admiral Harris just that question. In a conversation overheard by a reporter while the two men chatted at the Pentagon, the admiral’s answer was indistinct.

Asked later — war or not over the Scarborough Shoal — the admiral chuckled.

“It is good that my voice is low,” he said, popping a Coca-Cola as he sat on a couch in his expansive office. “I will say I’m a military guy. I look through the lenses darkly, and that’s what I’m paid to do.”

To defend American interests, he said, “I have to do it with the tools I have, and they are military tools, and they are great tools.”

“In the China piece, we just have to be ready for all outcomes from a position of strength,” Admiral Harris said, “all outcomes whether it is Scarborough, South China Sea in general, or some cyberattack.”

He said he was worried not so much about miscalculations in the South China Sea between the Chinese military and the forces of other countries. “I view them as a professional military.” The bigger risk, he said, is a clash caused by China’s paramilitary ships that could bring American forces to bear in defense of American allies.

The job of a United States combatant commander — there are nine across the globe — is to serve as soldier, diplomat and an advocate of his theater to just two bosses, the president and the defense secretary.

The admiral has added another facet to his job: communicator, an unusual objective for a military leader. In his “commander’s intent,” a document he drew up last year describing his goals, he wrote, “We must communicate clearly with key audiences, including allies, partners and potential adversaries.”

Wherever he goes, he points out that his responsibilities cover not just China but also North Korea, a pressing current danger, and beyond. “From Bollywood to Hollywood, from polar bears to penguins,” is how he puts it.

He recently carried his message to New York City, speaking to 30 members of the Council on Foreign Relations. He met with Henry A. Kissinger (and whipped out a first edition of Mr. Kissinger’s “Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy” for an autograph).

Then it was on to Malaysia to fly in an American P-8 spy plane with Malaysian defense officials, a trip intended to persuade that country to align more closely in the South China Sea dispute with the United States over its chief economic benefactor, China.

After graduation from the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis, Md., Admiral Harris trained as a naval flight officer. In 1991, he flew over the Persian Gulf during a naval war in which the United States sank the Iraqi Navy in 48 hours.

Although most of the admiral’s assignments have been in Asia, he has made some detours.

About a decade ago, he served as the commander at Guantánamo Bay. He studied the ethics of war at Oxford. Then came a posting as the military adviser to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, when he monitored the “road map” for the final status accord between Israel and the Palestinians.

“Harry — Thanks for traveling the world with me — Hillary” reads a handwritten note on a photograph of the two of them that hangs on a wall in his office.

A wall map of the South China Sea sprinkled with islands hangs to the left of his desk. Black circles show the three artificial islands in the Spratly archipelago where the Chinese have built military-capable airstrips and other assets. Admiral Harris refers to those islands as Chinese bases.

Behind his desk, bookshelves are stacked with accounts of world affairs. “In reading history, it is those countries with militaries who are prepared and ready that fare much better than countries that have no militaries and aren’t,” he said.

The admiral talks about how his forces must be ready “to fight tonight.” One of his recent reads, “This Kind of War,” by T. R. Fehrenbach, about the Korean War, drove that point home. “He says the United States was not ready,” he said. “It is really a powerful book.”


Correction: May 6, 2016

An earlier version of this article misquoted Adm. Harry B. Harris Jr., who leads the United States Pacific Command. He said, “In the China piece, we just have to be ready for all outcomes from a position of strength,” not “from a position of strategy.”


Follow Jane Perlez on Twitter @JanePerlez.

Related Coverage

U.S. and Philippines Bolster Air and Sea Patrols in South China Sea
APRIL 14, 2016

Patrolling Disputed Waters, U.S. and China Jockey for Dominance
MARCH 30, 2016

U.S. Proposes Reviving Naval Coalition to Balance China’s Expansion
MARCH 2, 2016

U.S. Challenges China’s Claim of Islands With Maritime Operation
JAN. 30, 2016
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Hummm....That would definitely not be a pretty mess.....


For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/china-will-probably-implode-16088

China Will Probably Implode

From politics to the economy to the environment, the end may be near.

Peter Navarro
May 7, 2016
Comments 369

In July of 2001, Gordon Chang predicted an inevitable meltdown of the Chinese Communist Party in his best-selling book The Coming Collapse of China. Since then, China’s economy has increased by more than eightfold, to surpass even the United States on a purchasing parity power basis. Oops?

In Chang’s defense, he could not have anticipated the colossal blunder of President Bill Clinton and a Republican Congress in paving China’s ruthlessly mercantilist way into the World Trade Organization just five months after his book was published. That mother of all unfair trade deals—a well-deserved target of both the Sanders and Trump presidential campaigns—kept China’s Great Walls of Protectionism largely intact. However, it also opened U.S. markets to a flood of illegally subsidized Chinese imports, and catalyzed the offshoring of millions of American manufacturing jobs.

Since China’s entry into the WTO in 2001, the center of the world’s manufacturing base has seismically shifted as the People’s Republic of Unfair Trade Practices has used a dizzying array of illegal export subsidies, currency manipulation, intellectual-property theft, sweatshop labor and pollution havens to seize market share from both Europe and North America. To date, more than seventy thousand American factories have closed, over twenty million Americans have been put out of work and Chinese Communist Party leaders have laughed at Gordon Chang—all the way to their Swiss, Panamanian and Caymanian bank accounts.

China’s mercantilist WTO windfall notwithstanding, there are nonetheless growing signs that the collapse of China as Gordon Chang once predicted, and David Shambaugh is now intimating, may soon be at hand. As Exhibit A of the signs of China’s troubles I offer, in the remainder of this missive, an email correspondence directly from the Chinese mainland. It’s from an American citizen living and working with his Chinese wife and son in the PRC.

I will let you decide whether the views of this observer (name withheld to keep him out of a Chinese prison or shallow grave) is an accurate one or overly pessimistic. If it’s the former, it could well be the harbinger of Gordon’s Chang’s crystal-ball revenge.

“From what I can see, and my Chinese wife can see, China will probably soon implode. Just what the catalyst will be is uncertain. Just before that time, or as a result of that implosion, the [Communist Party] will probably try to get the population to focus outside the country, probably through conflicts in the South China Sea or Taiwan.

For more than two decades, I have been telling people that the first thing China would do before trying to take Taiwan would be to take the Spratly Islands. If the world simply ignored that, then Taiwan would be next.

Hong Kong is a bitter, poison pill left by Britain for China. There will be no peaceful resolution of that problem.

The biggest problems in China right now are poisoned food, water, and air. Nobody trusts anybody, which is the reason why there is huge capital flight out of the country.

China has a national debt in excess of $28 trillion. But anybody knowing anything about Chinese accounting practices knows that number is probably just a very conservative number. Add some of the data and stuff Caixin [an online newspaper] is telling us about in terms of city and provincial accounting practices, and the numbers are horrible.

China wants its currency to become an international currency, but nobody knows its value. The only effective taxation going on here in China is [protectionist] for imports. The taxation system of businesses and income tax is completely broken and non-functional. There is no transparency in the financial system here. That is quite different from that of the Euro or the dollar. The fact is, the government is printing money like crazy here.

People are buying houses around here, but nobody is living in them. They don't trust potential renters. Homes are unaffordable for most people unless they use corruption to get the money needed. People have been investing in houses only because that is the only relatively secure form of asset management. Yet home purchases are at best leases since the government can come in at any time and requisition the land for other purposes.

Construction quality of housing here is horrible. If [province name withheld] had a big quake, the dead would be in the millions. China would almost immediately collapse.

The education system wherein I work is horrible. People in the West look at high math and science scores, but they don't realize that most of the students, like my son, cannot apply what they learn to similar math or science problems.

Students are completely unable and unwilling to ask questions. Professors and instructors don't have offices, let alone office hours, so questions on content the students don't understand are never answered. Of course, if a student fails a course, the teacher loses face, so every student passes.

If the university has a graduation rate at the end of four years of less than 97%, the university president loses face. Add on top of that the fact that around 2000, there were about 1 million college graduates. Compared to now, with over 7 million graduates, one has to ask: Where did they get all the qualified teachers?

My wife teaches in a public elementary school. The CPC is putting pressure on everybody to conform. Fun, considering the fact that the school would collapse overnight if its corruption were rooted out.

Real inflation in China is considerably higher than what the government figures reveal. For example, my wife reports that nearly all the food here in this Tier 2 city has doubled in price over the past three years.

While food prices typically go up about two weeks before Chinese New Year, they also normally go back down to pre-holiday prices. This year, food prices went up about 20% and have not gone back down.

My wife reports that middlemen in the food chain are mostly responsible for the food price increases. The farmers have not increased their prices because many prices are set by local government. However, because the middlemen have increased prices, demand for certain types of fresh foods has gone down. That means that while people in the cities are not buying because of increased food prices, the farmers have food rotting, unable to sell it.

I went to a farm not too long ago. What struck me was that in the apple orchards, as well as in the surrounding fields, even though the food was at that time being harvested, there were no bugs. I never saw that problem in the States, since there are mandated pesticide non-application times before harvest.

In most American markets, there will still be some food sold with insect marks on it. Most Americans don't realize what that really means. It means the pesticides are nearly, if not completely, gone from that food [because, unlike in China, they can’t be used during harvest time].

I have about 300 papers from my composition students about their lives to grade, many of which confirm some of the things I said above.

Have a great day.”

Have a great day indeed!

Peter Navarro is a professor at the University of California-Irvine. He is the author Crouching Tiger: What China’s Militarism Means for the World (Prometheus Books). His Netflix documentary film Death By China documents China’s entry into the World Trade Organization and its impact on America.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.janes.com/article/60063/russia-orders-new-project-23550-arctic-corvettes

Sea Platforms

Russia orders new Project 23550 Arctic corvettes

Nicholas de Larrinaga, London - IHS Jane's Defence Weekly
06 May 2016
Comments 7

Russia has ordered two Project 23550 ice-class armed patrol boats, the Russian Ministry of Defence (MoD) has announced.

The class is described (in Russian) by the MoD as being "without analogues in the world", and combining "the qualities of tug, ice-breaker, and patrol boat".

The two vessels ordered will be built by Admiralty Shipyards in St Petersburg and are scheduled to be delivered to the Russian Navy by 2020.

The MoD specifies the Project 23550 class as being able to break ice up to 1.5 m thick. A concept image released by the MoD showed the vessel armed with a medium-calibre main gun on the foredeck (likely an A-190 100 mm naval gun), a helicopter deck and hangar, and two aft payload bays each fitted with a containerised missile launch system (akin to the Club-K system offered for export) armed with four erectable launch tubes - presumably for either Club anti-ship or Kalibr-NK land-attack missiles. Although billed as patrol boats, this level of armament makes them better armed than many corvettes.

Want to read more? For analysis on this article and access to all our insight content, please enquire about our subscription options ihs.com/contact


To read the full article, Client Login

(194 of 320 words)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.bellingcat.com/news/res...rst-look-vietnam-can-ranh-bay-imagery-update/

Rest of World
South China Sea
Vietnam

First Look: Vietnam Can Ranh Bay Imagery Update

May 8, 2016
By Chris Biggers

The latest imagery update available in Google Earth shows some new developments at Vietnam’s deep-water port of Cam Ranh Bay. For starters, we get a clear view of the new international port facility that was inaugurated back in March. Space snapshots acquired by DigitalGlobe show extensive berthing areas including a 640 meter finger pier and a 500 meter quay wall. Several new administrative and support buildings were also visible since the previous update.

Hanoi has been telegraphing the construction of this facility for some time in anticipation to draw foreign civilian and military ships. Upon opening, the Vietnamese press put emphasis on aircraft carriers up to 110,000 DWT (deadweight tonnage) and cruise ships weighing up to 100,000 GRT (gross tonnage). The mention of the former, of course, hints at how far U.S.-Vietnam relations have come.

And certainly some sizable vessels have made their way to the Southeast Asian port. The first vessel from the Republic of Singapore, the lead Endurance Class (207) LST, set sail from Changi naval base and arrived on 17 March for a five day port call. Satellite imagery even captured the 141 meter long vessel berthed at the new finger pier (above).

Subsequently, two Japanese guided-missile destroyers made their way to the port the following month in a move meant to boost defense ties and reify Japan’s support for regional security. Unsurprisingly, the Japanese Defence Minister Gen Nakatani told the press at the time that Japan would work with the United States to ensure regional peace and stability in the South China Sea.

Beyond regional vessels, the first reported western boat also arrived earlier this month. On 02 May, the French Mistral-class (LHD) amphibious assault ship arrived for a four day port call. The latest vessel and by far the largest, the French ship was loaded with naval cadets which signaled “the desire to increase cooperation between the armed forces and governments,” according to a press release from the French embassy in Hanoi.

CSBiggers Cam Ranh Bay Phase II Annotated
Additional space snapshots showed Phase II still under construction at the time of capture. The imagery confirms press reporting that the international port facility will feature ship maintenance and repair services.

Located to the north of Phase I, imagery acquired in March shows the ship repair facility with four covered halls, a transverse table, and a synchrolift (or ship elevator), all in various states of build. New administrative and support buildings were also visible. In addition, a 890 sq meter cleared section of land was noted behind the covered halls. This could support the staging of ship plates and modules for new vessel construction. In that case, the maintenance facility would also double as a fabrication shop.

We await future imagery for more insight.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.realcleardefense.com/art...nce_iraqis_it_doesnt_support_isis_109343.html

May 8, 2016

U.S. Struggles to Convince Iraqis it Doesn't Support ISIS

By Sinan Salaheddin & Susannah George

BAGHDAD (AP) — For nearly two years, U.S. airstrikes, military advisers and weapons shipments have helped Iraqi forces roll back the Islamic State group. The U.S.-led coalition has carried out more than 5,000 airstrikes against IS targets in Iraq at a total cost of $7 billion since August 2014, including operations in Syria. On Tuesday a U.S. Navy SEAL was the third serviceman to die fighting IS in Iraq.

But many Iraqis still aren't convinced the Americans are on their side.

Government-allied Shiite militiamen on the front-lines post videos of U.S. supplies purportedly seized from IS militants or found in areas liberated from the extremist group. Newspapers and TV networks repeat conspiracy theories that the U.S. created the jihadi group to sow chaos in the region in order to seize its oil.

Despite spending more than $10 million on public outreach in Iraq last year, the U.S. government appears to have made little headway in dispelling such rumors. An unscientific survey by the State Department of Iraqi residents last year found that 40 percent believe that U.S. policy is working to "destabilize Iraq and control its natural resources," and a third believe America "supports terrorism in general and (IS) specifically."

Skepticism about U.S. motives is deeply rooted in Iraq, where many still blame the chaos after the 2003 invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein on American malice rather than incompetence. The conspiracy theories are also stoked by neighboring Iran, which backs powerful militias and political parties with active media operations.

Among the most vocal critics is al-Ahad TV — a 24-hour satellite channel funded by Asaib Ahl al-Haq, an Iranian-backed militia allied with the Iraqi government. The channel airs front-line reports and political talk shows where the allegedly harmful role of the U.S. government frequently comes up.

The U.S. "aims at weakening Iraq and the Arab world as well as the Shiites," al-Ahad's spokesman Atheer al-Tariq said. "They spare no efforts to destabilize Iraq and neighboring countries in order to continue selling weapons and strengthening their presence in the region through establishing more military bases," he added.

While supervising the channel's war reporting last year, he claimed to have witnessed incidents when U.S. forces helped IS. As Iraqi security forces prepared to enter the city of Tikrit in April, he said two U.S. helicopters evacuated senior militants. A few months later, during an operation to retake the Beiji oil refinery, crates of weapons, ammunition and food were dropped over militant-held territory, he said.

"Is it logical to believe that America, the source of technology and science, could fire a rocket or drop aid materials in a mistaken way?" he asked.

Videos uploaded to social media by front-line militiamen purport to tell a similar story. One shows U.S. military MREs, "meals, ready-to-eat," as well as uniforms and weapons said to have been found in an area held by IS. Another shows the interrogation of a captured IS militant. "Check out his boots, they are from the U.S. army," a fighter says. Another fighter points to a pile of rocket-propelled grenades he says were made in the U.S. and shipped to IS.

There are more plausible explanations for U.S. supplies being found in the hands of the extremists.

When IS swept across northern and western Iraq in the summer of 2014 it captured armored vehicles, heavy weapons and other U.S. equipment that had been provided to Iraqi security forces at a cost of billions of dollars. And despite the U.S. military's technical sophistication, it's not unheard of for airdrops or strikes to miss their mark in the heat of battle.

The U.S. Embassy and the U.S.-led coalition have invested considerable time and resources in refuting the allegations.

Both run Twitter feeds, Facebook pages and hold regular press conferences, and U.S. officials frequently appear as guests on Iraqi TV networks. With a budget of $10.67 million for the 2015 fiscal year, the public diplomacy section for Iraq is the third largest in the world, according to a 2015 report by the State Department's Special Inspector General.

"There are a lot of players out here on this information and media battle space," said U.S. Army Col. Steve Warren, the spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition.

"The Iranians have something to say every day, the Russian have something to say every day, ISIL has something to say every single day, so we need to make sure that this coalition and this Iraqi government is also saying something every day," he said, using an alternative acronym for IS.

"This coalition is here to fight ISIL," he said, "not provide them MREs."

But if there is a media war underway, the U.S. appears to be losing it. In December 2014, 38 percent of Iraqis had a favorable view of the U.S., but by August 2015 that had dropped to just 18 percent, according to the State Department's unscientific survey.

A group of Iraqi men smoking cigarettes and sipping tea outside a Baghdad shop selling books and newspapers said their skepticism extends beyond U.S. officials. They say Iraqis are well aware that most media outlets are run by political parties furthering their own agendas.

"Iraqi media isn't professional, it's all just ideology," Abu Muhammed said, asking that his full name not be used for fear of reprisals.

But he said the accusations of U.S. support for IS are hard to ignore because of America's confusing tangle of regional alliances. "The U.S. is always fighting groups on one side that they also support on the other side," he said. He pointed to Syria, where the U.S. supports Syrian Kurdish fighters who are considered terrorists by NATO ally Turkey.

Others simply can't understand how the world's most powerful military hasn't been able to defeat the extremists.

"They took out Saddam in two weeks, but they can't finish IS in two years?" asked Falih, another Iraqi who asked that his last name not be used out of security concerns. "It just doesn't make sense."

___


Associated Press writer Ali Hameed contributed to this report.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeremymaxie/2016/05/09/russias-south-china-sea-conundrum/#2374ae954fc6

Jeremy Maxie
Contributor

I write about energy geopolitics, energy security and political risk.
Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
Energy 5/09/2016 @ 6:00AM 621 views

Russia's South China Sea Conundrum

On April 29, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov held a joint press conference in Beijing during which they strongly opposed the deployment of a THAAD anti-missile defense system in South Korea by the United States as well as outside interference by non-claimants in the South China Sea (SCS) territorial dispute. The Russian foreign minister commented on security developments in the Korean Peninsula, while deferring to his Chinese counterpart on the SCS. Lavrov spoke of a “unified position” on North Korea; however, there is no unified position on the SCS.

Lavrov’s comments in Beijing were constrained and offered little insights into Russia’s position toward the SCS. More illustrative were previous statements in Ulan-Bator on April 14, where Lavrov asserted the Kremlin’s opposition to “interference from third parties” and “attempts to internationalize” the dispute while insisting that “only parties to the conflict can resolve the dispute through direct talks.” However, Lavrov also stipulated that Russia was “not a party to the conflict” and “won’t interfere” in negotiations—indicating a cautious and hands-off approach should the dispute continue to escalate.

Rather than unconditionally backing Beijing’s unilateral revision of the status quo, Lavrov pointed to ongoing talks between China and ASEAN members based on the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)—which he described as a fundamental document. He also approvingly referenced the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea in 2002 (DOC) that the parties have signed and the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea (COC) that has languished under negotiations. It is notable that Lavrov referred to UNCLOS as well as multilateral and institutional frameworks rather than China’s so-called “nine-dash line.”

Lavrov’s ambiguous statements leave a multitude of unanswered questions. What is the nature and scope of Russia’s support? How will Russia implement and exercise such support? Does Russia support China’s opposition to UNCLOS as the legal framework for resolving the dispute? What is Russia’s position toward China’s efforts to restrict freedom of navigation and overflights in the SCS? If China establishes an Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in the SCS, will Russia comply or ignore? How will Russia balance its strategic relations with China and Vietnam? To what extent will Russia support China diplomatically if events continue to escalate? Would Russia intervene in a military clash between China or Vietnam or between China’s and the United States?

By contextualizing Lavrov’s comments, insights can be drawn which suggest that Russia will provide only limited diplomatic support to Beijing and avoid entanglements in any potential military clashes. In the meantime, Russia will maneuver to hedge against China in Southeast Asia by deepening its strategic relationship with Vietnam while expanding military and trade ties throughout the region on a bilateral basis as well as multilaterally with ASEAN.

Arctic Linkages And Naval Ambitions

Lavrov’s comments in Ulan-Bator were offered in response to a question about Russia’s position on the pending arbitration at the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA). Manila initiated this legal action against China in the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) in January 2013 which appointed arbitrators in the PCA. A ruling is expected in May or June that will determine, among other issues, whether China’s territorial claims must comply with UNCLOS. An affirmative decision would invalidate much of China’s claims based on the so-called “nine-dash line.” In 2015, the PCA ruled that it had jurisdiction over the matter.

Not surprisingly, China denies that the PCA has jurisdiction since the Philippines previously agreed to resolve the dispute on the basis of bilateral negotiations. Beijing opposes the use of UNCLOS to frame the debate over territorial claims in the SCS. China also argues that its territorial sovereignty in the SCS is based on historic rights that are independent and antecedent to UNCLOS. The Chinese Foreign Ministry has made it clear that China “will neither accept nor participate in the arbitration.”

It is noteworthy that Lavrov didn’t answer this question, particularly since Russia denied that the ITLOS held jurisdiction in the “Arctic Sunrise” case (Netherlands v. Russia) in 2013 and refused to participant in subsequent proceedings. In 2015, the PCA ruled that Russia had violated UNCLOS when the Russian Coast Guard seized a Greenpeace vessel and held its crew that were protesting against Gazprom’s offshore Prirazlomnaya oil platform in the Pechora Sea located within Russia’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and on Russia’s continental shelf. The PCA also ordered Russia to pay compensation to the Dutch government under which the vessel was flagged. In response, the Kremlin continues to deny that the PCA holds proper jurisdiction based a Russian declaration at the time of ratification in 1997 that it would not accept binding decisions involving “disputes concerning law-enforcement activities in regard to the exercise of sovereign rights or jurisdiction.”

While the fact set in “Arctic Sunrise” case is easily distinguishable from the SCS dispute, Beijing seems to have taken a page from Moscow’s playbook by refusing to recognize the PCA’s jurisdiction or participate in the arbitration proceedings. China’s intransigence risks undermining UNCLOS’ compulsory dispute settlement jurisdiction as a mechanism for peacefully resolving maritime territorial disputes. China’s refusal to adhere to an adverse arbitration settlement will likely trigger an escalation of events in the SCS.

Lavrov specifically referred to the UNCLOS as a “fundamental document” in context of the SCS dispute. This is because Russia is a signatory to UNCLOS and relies on the treaty to advance its own maritime claims in the Arctic and Caspian Sea. In 2001, Russia initially submitted a claim to the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) claiming the Lomonosov Ridge in the Arctic based on UNCLOS. Russia resubmitted its claim in 2015 to include the Mendeleyev Elevation and again in 2016 to include the Chukchi high plain. Russia’s expansive Arctic territorial claims hinge on legal claims under UNCLOS. The CLCS will hear Russia’s Arctic claims during its upcoming session between July 11- August 26.

Russia has also relied on UNCLOS to resolve its maritime territorial disputes with Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan in the northern Caspian Sea. By legally defining the Caspian Sea as a “sea” under UNCLOS, each of the three littoral states received a greater share than if the Caspian Sea were legally defined as an “inland lake” in which case each of the five claimants would receive an equal 20% share. Iran is opposed to UNCLOS in determining Caspian Sea territorial claims, since it would receive less than the 20% share it would be entitled to if treated as “inland lake”. As a result, south Caspian Sea territorial claims remained unresolved.

The Kremlin may be tempted to support Beijing’s challenges to UNCLOS, including freedom of navigation and overflights, since it may attempt to impose its own restrictions along the Northern Sea Route (NSR) or elsewhere in Russia’s EEZ. However, Russia faces a legal and strategic conundrum since it relies on UNCLOS for its own maritime territorial claims in the Arctic as well as the right freedom of navigation and overflights as it expands its naval operations in the SCS and beyond.

Hedging Against A Junior Partnership

By denouncing “interference from third parties” and “attempts to internationalize” the SCS–a thinly veiled reference to Washington and Tokyo—Moscow is promoting its shared vision with Beijing for a multipolar international order that restrains and binds perceived U.S. global hegemony. What Lavrov did not mention is that Moscow’s and Beijing’s vision for a new Asia-Pacific security order is not perfectly aligned. Russia sees itself as a traditional “Eurasian power” that is reasserting its rightful place in the Asia-Pacific sphere of influence. Moscow seeks a regional security order based on equality with Beijing and Washington, rather than just trading one hegemon for another with Russia playing junior partner to China.

As Russian Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov said on April 25, Moscow advocates “the creation of a collective, equal and undivided security system in the [Asia-Pacific] region.” Although the Asia-Pacific region is of secondary importance compared to the Atlantic and Mediterranean operational theaters, Moscow is building up its Pacific Fleet as part of its global naval ambitions. For the first time, Russia’s Pacific Fleet will participate in the ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting Plus (ADMM-Plus) Maritime Security and Counterterrorism Exercise on May 1-9 hosted by Singapore and Brunei that will take place in the SCS. In April, Russia’s Pacific Fleet participated in the multilateral Komodo Exercise 2016 hosted by Indonesia.

Lavrov’s references to the DOC and COC indicate that Moscow supports ASEAN’s collective engagement with China on the SCS dispute. In contrast, Beijing prefers to negotiate bilaterally with each claimant and intentionally divide ASEAN to prevent a unified ASEAN position adverse to Chinese interests. For example, China recently reached an agreement with Cambodia, Laos, and Brunei that the SCS dispute would not impair China-ASEAN relations. Beijing has successfully pressured ASEAN members in the past, particularly states that are not claimants, to block unified statements on the SCS.

The Kremlin sees ASEAN as a potential hedge against unrestricted Chinese power and influence. As Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu has stated “expanding military ties in the Russia-ASEAN framework is in line with the interests of not only our countries but also of the whole Asia-Pacific Region.” On May 19-20, Russia will host a Russia-ASEAN Summit in Sochi where the Kremlin will likely remain silent on the SCS issue while focusing on expanding trade ties and securing contracts for Russian defense, nuclear and energy industries. In May 2015, Russia concluded an FTA between Vietnam and the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). Russia seeks similar agreements that link ASEAN to the EAEU and Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in response to expanding China’s “One Belt, One Road” initiative that threatens to encroach upon Russia’s perceived spheres of influence in its “near abroad.”

China’s unilateral attempts to alter the status quo in the SCS, along with its naval strategy to restrict U.S. freedom of movement and freedom of action within the first island chain through anti-access and area denial (A2/AD), is a double-edged sword for Russia. If China is successful in exerting de facto control over much of the SCS, China may then move to restrict Russia’s freedom of navigation, undermine Russia’s strategic relationship with Vietnam and block Russia from further expanding military ties with ASEAN.

Old Friends Reunited

When it comes to the SCS dispute, Moscow is faced with the difficult challenge of balancing its relationship with Beijing and Hanoi. As Russian foreign policy and defense expert Stephen Blank has written, Russia is pursuing a hedging strategy in Southeast Asia. So far, this hedging strategy has limited success beyond Vietnam which is Russia strategic foothold in the region. Russia’s military posture in Southeast Asia is largely tied to access to Cam Ranh Bay naval base. After pulling out of the naval base in 2002, Moscow and Hanoi signed an agreement in 2013 that gave prioritized (but not exclusive) access for Russian ships in exchange for Russian assistance in maintaining and upgrading facilities as well as building a submarine base. Russia has also used the Cam Ranh Bay to stage tanker aircraft to refuel its TU-95 long-range strategic bombers operating in the Pacific.

Further cementing bilateral military ties is Russia’s role as Vietnam’s primary arms supplier. According to Ian Storey, an expert in Southeast Asian security issues, Russia provides about 90% of Vietnam’s arms purchases including: six improved Kilo-class (Project 636 Varshavyank) submarines, six Gepard-class frigates, six Tarantul-class corvettes, six Svetlyak-class patrol vessels, 32 SU-30 fighter jets and air defense missile systems. Russian arms sales to Vietnam are more than just transactional and are critical to Vietnam’s deterrent capabilities vis-a-vis China. Russia is looking to expand its arms sales in Southeast Asia, particularly in Indonesia.

Russia also plays an important role in Vietnamese energy security. Rosatom, Russia’s state nuclear energy company, won a bid in 2012 to build Vietnam’s first two nuclear reactors to be completed in 2023-2024. Rosatom is looking for more deals in Southeast Asia. Several Russian companies are also involved in exploration and production in Vietnam’s offshore–including waters claimed by China. However, no Russian companies bid for any of the nine offshore blocks offered by CNOOC in June 2012 that overlapped with Vietnamese blocks 128-132 and 145-156. Russia’s decision to partner with PetroVietnam rather than with Chinese companies in exploring disputed waters is revealing. Gazprom and PetroVietnam set up joint venture Gazpromviet in 2008, which is conducting exploration in Blocks 112 (Tonkin Gulf) and 129-132, which overlap with areas claimed by China. Rosneft currently produces gas condensate in Block 06.1 acquired in the purchase of TNK-BP in 2013.

On April 20, Russian Deputy Energy Minister Yury Sentyurin and Vietnamese Industry and Trade Minister Tran Tuan Anh signed inter-governmental agreement to expand bilateral energy development through Russia’s Zarubezhneft and Vietnam’s state oil company PetroVietnam. The two companies operate through two joint ventures, Vietsovpetro established in 1981 and Rusvietpetro set up in 2008. Vietsovpetro began producing oil from the country’s main Bach Ho oil field in offshore Block 09-1 in 1986. Rusvietpetro is involved in upstream development in the Nenets Autonomous Area in Russia, while Zarubezhneft is active in several offshore blocks in Vietnam.

Abstention, Not Intervention

Despite a shared interest in rolling back U.S. power and influence in the Asia-Pacific, Moscow’s support for Beijing’s unilateral attempt to change the status quo in the SCS will remain limited and cautious–particularly if events continue to escalate. Russia’s apparent support for China in the SCS territorial dispute presents Moscow with a legal, diplomatic, and strategic conundrum. Beijing’s disregard for UNCLOS as a means to peacefully resolve maritime disputes, as well as attempts to restrict freedom of navigation and overflights, create long-term strategic risks for Moscow.

However, Russia is certain to provide China with diplomatic cover in the UN Security Council (UNSC) by abstaining from voting (rather than vetoing on any potential future resolutions against China in the event of a military confrontation or other escalating behavior. Beijing followed a similar approach in abstaining from two UN votes relating to Crimea: a UNSC resolution on March 15, 2014 declaring invalid the referendum in Crimea that paved the way for Russian annexation and a UN General Assembly resolution on March 27, 2014 that discouraged international recognition of changes in Crimea’s legal status.

Russia has no incentive to intervene militarily in the SCS considering the region’s limited strategic importance and that it would distract from priority military engagements in Ukraine and Syria. In a worst-case scenario involving a military clash between China and Vietnam, Russia would likely offer to mediate given its strategic relationships with each party. In a clash between China and the Philippines, Russia would remain on the sidelines since vital U.S. strategic interests would be at stake. Russia is even less likely to get involved in a direct military clash between the U.S. and China.

One key development to watch is the anticipated ruling this summer on Russia’ Arctic claims by the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. An unfavorable ruling on its Arctic claims could encourage Moscow to close ranks with Beijing in attempting to forcibly rewrite the rules on maritime sovereignty by asymmetrically changing the operational landscape. However, the Kremlin will take a wait-and-see approach as it assess the correlation of forces before making any consequential moves in the SCS or Arctic.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.yahoo.com/news/iran-touts-newly-tested-long-range-missile-113403619.html

Iran touts newly tested long-range missile

AFP
May 9, 2016

Tehran (AFP) - Iran launched a new long-range missile late last month, a general announced on Monday, trumpeting the accuracy of the latest such weapon to be test-fired in defiance of the West.

"A missile with a 2,000-kilometre range was tested two weeks ago," said General Ali Abdolahi, adding that it has a negligible margin of error of just eight metres (yards).

"We can guide this ballistic missile. It leaves the Earth's atmosphere, re-enters it and hits the target without error," the armed forces deputy chief-of-staff said, quoted by the website of state broadcaster IRINN.

In early March, Iran carried out several short-, medium- and long-range (300 to 2,000 kilometres) precision missile tests across its territory, mostly from underground bases.

The series of tests have come in for criticism from the United State, Britain, France and Germany.

They say the tests violate United Nations resolutions, and they have called on the Security Council to address them.

Opponents of the programme say the weapons are capable of carrying nuclear warheads, an argument categorically denied Tehran's political and military authorities.

Tehran's ballistic missile tests in late 2015 brought new sanctions by the US against Iran on January 17.

The punitive measures were announced a day after international sanctions were lifted following the entry into force of a July 2015 nuclear agreement.

Iran's parliament, whose mandate expires at the end of May, passed new legislation this month that raises the country's ballistic capability.

President Hassan Rouhani and senior Iranian military officials have also said in recent months that ballistic missiles must be enhanced in order to boost Iran's deterrent power.

View Comments (1)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
So how is that supposed to work?........

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.yahoo.com/news/france-create-regional-radicalisation-centres-102936973.html?nhp=1

France to create regional 'de-radicalisation' centres: PM

AFP
May 9, 2016

Paris (AFP) - France will create centres in each region of the country to de-radicalise people or prevent them becoming involved in jihadist groups, the prime minister said Monday as he laid out new anti-terror measures.

"The fight against jihadism is without doubt the big challenge of our generation," Manuel Valls said, flanked by the interior and justice ministers.

The plan, which will cost an additional 40 million euros ($45.5 million) by 2018 on top of the current funding, aims to double existing efforts to try to help people already in jihadist networks or those likely to join such groups.

Valls said the first de-radicalisation centre could be set up by this summer.

The measures are a response to the deaths of 147 people in jihadist attacks in France last year.

Jihadist gunmen stormed the Paris offices of Charlie Hebdo satirical newspaper and a Jewish supermarket in January 2015, killing 17 people, and then 130 people were killed in coordinated attacks on the capital claimed by the Islamic State group last November.

Both sets of attacks were carried out mainly by French citizens who had become radicalised and fought abroad alongside jihadist groups.

The authorities consider nearly 10,000 people in France to be radicalised and capable of violent actions, according to Le Parisien newspaper.

View Comments (4)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
:siren:

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.yahoo.com/news/top-china-paper-warns-crisis-risk-over-debt-061204578.html?nhp=1

Top China paper warns of crisis risk over debt

May 9, 2016

Beijing (AFP) - China must turn off the taps of credit-driven growth to avoid a financial system crisis in the face of rising bad loans and other risks, the Communist Party's official mouthpiece newspaper said on Monday, citing an unnamed "authoritative" source.

The prominent article, in question-and-answer format, started on the front of the broadsheet paper and took up the entirety of page two.

China's Communist authorities are trying to retool the economy away from the investment and export-led growth of the past to one more led by consumer demand, and reform lumbering, loss-making state-owned enterprises to make the sector more efficient.

But the transition is proving bumpy, raising fears of a hard landing, and global markets have been alarmed by slowing expansion in the world's second-largest economy.

Attempts to address the slowdown in the first quarter of this year -- when growth slid to 6.7 percent -- were largely driven by investment, the People's Daily quoted the source as saying, putting more financial pressure on some local governments.

Analysts said the comments could be a signal that Beijing is to rein in monetary stimulus efforts.

"A tree cannot grow in the air," said the source, arguing against raising debt further.

"Further leverage must not be added to push up growth, nor does it need to be," the interviewee added, warning of a possible crisis as high debts "will definitely bring about high risks".

"A system financial crisis could be triggered if no good controls are implemented, leading the economy to contract and even household savings to evaporate."

It is the third time in less than a year that the People's Daily has cited "an authoritative person" to discuss top-level economic policies.

Chinese news portal Sina has previously said that such an "authoritative source" in similar People's Daily articles could be a high-ranking government official, such as the head of the top economic planning agency the National Development and Reform Commission, or a respected scholar who participated in major economic policymaking.

"While the anonymity has been protected, the views expressed in these articles did have a large impact in China," Nomura economists said in a note.

The report implied that future monetary easing "may be more cautious and that the government may try to hasten the pace of reforms", they said, evidence that China's "debt-fuelled rebound in investment growth will be short-lived".

China's growth will continue to slow, the source said, as sluggish demand and overcapacity are "unlikely to turn around fundamentally in several years".

Boosts from credit expansions have declined and the government must "completely abandon the delusion" of trying to stimulate growth by loosening money supply, added the source.

Instead authorities should accelerate reforms, stop lending to "zombie companies" to reduce overcapacity, allow migrant workers to settle in cities to expand demand, and further cut taxes.

View Comments (21)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
:siren: Interesting the crickets aren't even singing on this....Yet....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-afghanistan-military-idUSKCN0Y00G0

World | Mon May 9, 2016 2:11am EDT
Related: World, Afghanistan

Pentagon report reveals confusion among U.S. troops over Afghan mission

KABUL | By Josh Smith


Amid fierce fighting after the Taliban captured the northern Afghan city of Kunduz last year, U.S. special forces advisers repeatedly asked their commanders how far they were allowed to go to help local troops retake the city.

They got no answer, according to witnesses interviewed in a recently declassified, heavily redacted Pentagon report that lays bare the confusion over rules of engagement governing the mission in Afghanistan.

AFGHANISTAN-TALIBAN-CONTROL.jpg

http://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/rngs/1/492/626/AFGHANISTAN-TALIBAN-CONTROL.jpg

As the Taliban insurgency gathers strength, avoiding enemy fire has become increasingly difficult for advisers, who have been acting as consultants rather than combatants since NATO forces formally ceased fighting at the end of 2014.

In the heat of the battle, lines can be blurred, and the problem is not exclusive to Afghanistan: questions have arisen over the role of U.S. troops in Iraq after a U.S. Navy SEAL was killed by Islamic State this month.

"'How far do you want to go?' is not a proper response to 'How far do you want us to go?'" one special forces member told investigators in a report into the U.S. air strikes on a hospital in Kunduz that killed 42 medical staff, patients and caretakers.

That incident was the biggest single tragedy of the brief capitulation of Kunduz to Taliban militants, and there is no suggestion that the mistake was the result of a lack of clarity over the rules of engagement.

But the 700-page report, much of it blacked out for security reasons, sheds light on how the rules are not fully understood, even by some troops on the ground, compromising the mission to stabilize the nation and defeat a worsening Islamist insurgency.

The issues exposed in the report are likely to be considered by the new U.S. commander in Afghanistan, General John Nicholson, as he prepares to makes recommendations in the coming weeks that may clarify or expand the level of combat support the U.S.-led training mission can provide.

"It's not a strategy and, in fact, it's a recipe for disaster in that kind of kinetic environment," said the soldier, who, like others in the report, was not identified.

He added that his unit, whose role was to advise and assist Afghan forces without engaging in combat, asked three times for commanders to clarify the rules governing their mission.

"Sadly, the only sounds audible were the sounds of crickets ... though those were hard to hear over the gunfire."


U.S. MISSION UNDER REVIEW

While acknowledging a lingering "lack of understanding in the West" about the U.S. and NATO role in Afghanistan, U.S. military spokesman Brigadier General Charles Cleveland denied there was confusion among troops over the broader mission.

More than 9,000 U.S. soldiers were "retrained" on the rules of engagement following missteps in Kunduz, in an effort to reduce future misunderstandings, he said.

Critics say the confusion comes from political expediency, because U.S. leaders are keen to portray the Afghan operation as designed mainly to help local forces fight for themselves.

"The rules of engagement are trapped in the jaws of political confusion about the mission," a senior Western official told Reuters.

"Nobody in Western capitals seems willing to admit that Afghanistan is a worsening war zone and ... that their troops are still battling out a combat mission on a daily basis," added the official, who declined to be named.

Until the end of 2014, when their combat role officially ended, NATO forces in Afghanistan peaked at more than 130,000 troops, most of them American. NATO's presence today is a fraction of the size.


DIFFERENT OPERATIONS CAN MERGE

Around 10,000 U.S. troops are divided between the NATO train-and-assist mission called Resolute Support and a U.S.-only counter-terrorism operation against militant groups that include al Qaeda and Islamic State but not the Taliban.

Under publicly declared rules of engagement, U.S. advisers in Resolute Support generally cannot attack Taliban targets except in self defense.

As government forces have struggled, however, the definition of "self defense" has appeared less sharply defined, with some U.S. air strikes conducted to defend partnered Afghan units.

The Kunduz report indicates at least some U.S. troops have been sent into battle with questions unanswered.

The Green Beret complained that failure to provide clear guidance represented "moral cowardice", and that political leaders intentionally keep the mission vague.

That allows them to "reap the rewards of success without facing the responsibility of failure," he added.

Soldiers pleaded for "clearer guidance" and more clarification of overly complicated rules, according to investigators.

The Pentagon has not fully publicized rules governing the use of force by U.S. troops, who may be called upon to act under either type of mission, sometimes in the same battle.

In the four days leading up to the hospital attack, U.S. special forces called in nine close air support strikes under the authority of counter-terrorism, and 13 under Resolute Support, according to the report.

As part of self-defense, coalition troops have "some latitude" in calling air strikes on militant targets that may not be directly attacking them, but could soon pose a threat, Cleveland said.

Last year the Pentagon announced that Afghan forces could be helped under extreme conditions.

Additionally, under a "Person with Designated Special Status" classification, Afghan units operating closely with international advisers can be protected by air strikes as if they were coalition forces, according to Cleveland.


WHO IS THE ENEMY?

Further complicating matters are counter-terrorism rules that allow strikes against al Qaeda, as well as militants linked to Islamic State which did not exist when the U.S. military intervened in Afghanistan in 2001, but not the Taliban.

In recent weeks U.S. commanders in Afghanistan have reported that al Qaeda and the Taliban are working more closely together, signaling that the dominant Taliban group could once again be attacked by more air strikes.

Calling the authorities in Afghanistan "exceptionally complex," previous training had failed to prevent confusion, the Kunduz report found.

Prior to deploying to Afghanistan, commanders made clear that "combat operations was mostly a thing of the past," another special forces soldier said in the report.

On the ground, however, things were more complicated.

The second officer said he went into the Kunduz operation unsure of which authorities his unit would be operating under.

The lack of explicit instructions led the officer to choose his "default" of Resolute Support authorities, which he described as "just the safe bet."


(Editing by Mike Collett-White)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-greece-reforms-vote-idUSKCN0XZ0U3

World | Mon May 9, 2016 8:38am EDT
Related: World, Greece

Greece passes painful fiscal reforms, heeding EU

ATHENS | By George Georgiopoulos and Renee Maltezou


Greek lawmakers passed unpopular pension and tax reforms on Monday that a European official said marked a major advance in negotiations towards unlocking more rescue funds from the country's creditors.

Euro zone finance ministers will hold talks on Greece's progress on economic and fiscal reforms later in the day, and assess if it has met terms of its multi-billion euro bailout.

A positive sign-off on the review will unlock more than 5 billion euros ($5.7 billion) to ease Greece's squeezed finances and cover debt repayments maturing in June and July.

Greece also hopes the sign-off will launch discussions on debt relief, and euro zone officials in Brussels said the finance ministers would discuss how to reprofile its debt to make future servicing costs manageable.

"We have an important opportunity before us for the country to break this vicious cycle, and enter a virtuous cycle," Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras earlier told parliament during a debate on the reforms, which opposition lawmakers voted against.

While markets welcomed the vote, thousands of demonstrators protested outside parliament. Police used teargas when isolated groups hurled petrol bombs in a central Athens square.

Under the measures passed early on Monday, a combination of social security reform and additional taxation aims to ensure Greece will attain savings to meet an agreed 3.5 percent budget surplus target before interest payments in 2018, helping it to regain bond market access and make its debt load sustainable.

Greece's 10-year bond yield hit its lowest level in four months on Monday, and European Commission Deputy President Jyrki Katainen said the package was "a major step forward".


Related Coverage
› Euro zone ministers to start Greek debt reprofiling talks: officials
› Greek reforms must be reviewed before any debt restructure: Germany

Eurogroup finance ministers would probably not release more funds right away but further discussions on debt relief would come before a new tranche was released, he told Finnish broadcaster YLE.


'TOMBSTONE FOR GROWTH'

During the debate, opposition parties argued pension cuts and tax hikes would prove recessionary, dealing another blow to a population fatigued by years of austerity.

"The measures will be a tombstone for growth prospects," said Kyriakos Mitsotakis, leader of the conservative New Democracy party which leads in opinion polls.

Tsipras was re-elected in September on promises to ease the pain of austerity for the poor and protect pensions after he was forced to sign up to a new bailout in July to keep the country in the euro zone.

Monday's reforms are part of a package that aims to generate savings equivalent to 3 percent of GDP, raising income tax for high earners and lowering tax-free thresholds.

It increases a 'solidarity tax' and introduces a national pension, while phasing out benefits for poor pensioners.


Related Coverage
› EU's Katainen says Greek reforms a major step forward
› Fact box: Greece legislates tax and pension reforms

Greeks could face a new bout of taxes within weeks.

Athens has been in talks with lenders over increasing value added tax, introducing additional taxes on fuel and tobacco, hotel overnight stays and internet use, officials said.

Finance Minister Euclid Tsakalotos said the reforms would affect the rich and not the poor. Greece had done what was expected of it and deserved debt relief, he said.

"Our word is a contract. We have done what we promised and hence the IMF and Germany must provide a solution that is feasible, a solution for the debt that will open a clear horizon for investors," Tsakalotos told lawmakers.

In Berlin, German government spokesman Steffen Seibert said the finance ministers needed to review the economic reforms before any additional debt relief could be decided on.


(Reporting by George Georgiopoulos and Renee Maltezou; Editing by Mary Milliken and Clarence Fernandez; editing by John Stonestreet)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-congress-reporter-idUSKCN0Y00BF

World | Mon May 9, 2016 8:39am EDT
Related: World, North Korea

BBC correspondent expelled from North Korea over reporting

PYONGYANG | By James Pearson


North Korea expelled a BBC journalist on Monday over his reporting, the broadcaster and a North Korean official said, as a large group of foreign media members visited the isolated country to cover a rare ruling party congress.

Rupert Wingfield-Hayes was detained on Friday as he was about to leave the country and taken away for eight hours of questioning and "made to sign a statement", the network reported.

The British journalist, accompanied by a BBC producer and cameraman, arrived in Beijing on Monday evening after a flight from Pyongyang, the North Korean capital.

"We're obviously very glad to be out. We're going to go and talk to our bosses now. But just relieved to be out," Wingfield-Hayes told reporters at the airport before being driven off in a car, along with his colleagues.

Wingfield-Hayes had "distorted facts and realities" in his coverage, North Korean official O Ryong Il said in announcing that the reporter, who is based in Tokyo, was being expelled and would never be let in again.

"They were speaking very ill of the system, the leadership of the country," O, who is secretary general of a National Peace Committee, told reporters in Pyongyang, according to a video clip published by the Associated Press.

Another BBC correspondent in Pyongyang, John Sudworth, said in a broadcast report there was "disagreement, a concern over the content of Rupert's reporting", including questioning the authenticity of a hospital.

In his report of a visit to the children's hospital in Pyongyang, Wingfield-Hayes said the patients looked "remarkably well" and there was not a real doctor on duty.

"Everything we see looks like a set-up" he said.

In another report, Wingfield-Hayes noted that his official minders were "rather upset with us" over trying to do a report in front of a statute of founding leader Kim Il Sung.

"They clearly felt we said stuff that was not respectful," of Kim, he said in his report.

"Now, we are in trouble," he said, adding that the BBC team had been told to delete its footage.

Sudworth said in his report Wingfield-Hayes had been prevented from leaving on Friday and taken away.

"(He) was separated from the rest of his team, prevented from boarding that flight, taken to a hotel and interrogated by the security bureau here in Pyongyang before being made to sign a statement and then released, eventually allowed to rejoin us here in this hotel," Sudworth said.


CLOSELY WATCHED

A BBC spokesman said four BBC staff remained in the country and he expected they would be allowed to stay.

"We are very disappointed that our reporter Rupert Wingfield-Hayes and his team have been deported from North Korea after the government took offense at material he had filed," the spokesman said.

The eight-hour interrogation was conducted by a man who introduced himself to Wingfield-Hayes as the person who prosecuted Kenneth Bae, an American missionary who had been held by the North for two years for crimes against the state, said another BBC correspondent in Pyongyang, Stephen Evans.

Bae was released in November 2014.

North Korea granted visas to an unusually large group of 128 journalists from 12 countries to coincide with the Workers' Party congress.

Their movements are closely managed and their only access to the proceedings of the congress, which began on Friday, was on Monday, when a group of about 30 was let into the venue for a brief visit, following nearly three hours of security checks.

Otherwise, they were taken to showcase sites, such as a maternity hospital, an electric cable plant and a children's center.

On Monday, visiting media were taken to a textile factory named after Kim Jong Suk, the grandmother of the country's young leader.

The North Korean government, which owns and operates all domestic news media organizations, maintains tight control over foreign reporters, with government "minders" accompanying visiting journalists as they report.

Wingfield-Hayes had been in town ahead of the congress to cover the visit of a group of Nobel laureates.

North Korea said it would strengthen self-defensive nuclear weapons capability in a decision adopted at the congress, its KCNA news agency reported on Monday, in defiance of U.N. resolutions.


(Additional reporting by Ju-min Park and Jack Kim in Seoul, Ben Blanchard in Beijing and Guy Faulconbridge in London; Editing by Tony Munroe and Clarence Fernandez)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Hummm......

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/ne...ronghold-region-is-less-secure-official-says/

'El Chapo's' new prison in cartel stronghold region is less secure, official says

Published May 09, 2016/Fox News Latino

A Mexican security official has acknowledged that the sudden transfer of drug load Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman was to a less-secure prison in a region that is one of his cartel’s strongholds.

The unidentified official said that the Cefereso No. 9 prison on the outskirts of Ciudad Juarez – across the border from El Paso, Texas – is not as impregnable as the maximum-security Altiplano facility near Mexico City where he had been held after his recapture earlier this year.

However, Guzman is being held in maximum-security wing where the same protocols are being enforced as in Altiplano, including 24-hour monitoring via a camera in his cell, said the official, who wasn’t authorized to discuss Guzman’s case publically and agreed to do so only if not quoted by name.

Mexico’s surprising move has prompted questions on both sides of the border, including for Michael Vigil, the former head of international operations for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, who wondered at the logic of sending Guzman to a lesser lockup in territory firmly controlled by his Sinaloa cartel underlings.

"It just doesn't make any sense," Vigil said. "He has that part of his empire, he has the infrastructure there and he has people who would assist him in terms of engineering him another escape."

Officials have not said why they chose Cefereso No. 9 over the 19 other options in the federal penitentiary system for Guzman's surprise, pre-dawn transfer in a high-security operation Saturday.

Some Mexican media have speculated it was a prelude to imminent extradition to the U.S., where he faces drug charges in seven jurisdictions. But authorities denied that.

The security official said Guzman is still in the middle of the extradition process. The Foreign Relations Department has the final say, and Guzman's lawyers still have opportunities to appeal.

A lawyer for Guzman confirmed Saturday that his defense continues to fight the drug lord being sent to the U.S., and officials have said it could take up to a year to reach a final ruling.

Multiple analysts told The Associated Press that there was no sign of a link between the prison switch and extradition.

"In the past, when they're going to extradite people, they just put them on a plane and they just fly them into the United States," Vigil said. "They don't pre-position people. ... He was not pre-positioned in Juarez to get kicked across the border.

Altiplano is considered the country's highest-security prison, and many had thought it to be unescapable. That belief was shattered in July 2015 when Guzman fled the facility through a sophisticated, mile-long tunnel that accomplices dug to the shower in his cell, complete with a motorcycle modified to run on rails laid down in the passage.

Cefereso No. 9 is just off the Pan-American highway about 14 miles south of downtown Juarez, in the middle of the barren, scorching Chihuahuan Desert. Other than a university campus about 2 miles to the east, there is hardly anything else for miles in any direction.

Gov. Cesar Duarte of Chihuahua state, where Juarez is, bragged about the facility's ability to hold Guzman, saying at a news conference that the transfer posed no risk for his state and was a sign of its improvements on security matters.

"There will be no escape," Duarte told local media. "If he was brought here from Altiplano it's because the security conditions are way above those of Altiplano, that's what the federal government settled on."

Authorities said the move was due to security upgrades at Altiplano and also part of a routine policy to rotate inmates for security reasons. Analysts said officials may also have wanted to shake up his confinement to thwart any escape plans that could have been in the works.

Vigil said it would be a mistake to try to hold Guzman in the Juarez prison for long.

"If they keep him there for a prolonged period of time, the Mexican government certainly is risking that he escapes," Vigil said. "And if he escapes, it would just completely decimate the credibility of the Mexican government."

According to a 2015 report by the governmental National Human Rights Commission, Cefereso No. 9 got the lowest overall quality rating for any of Mexico's 21 federal prisons at 6.63 on a scale of 0 to 10. Altiplano was the 10th best, with a rating of 7.32.

Cefereso No. 9 got low marks for guaranteeing a "dignified" stay and for handling inmates with special requirements. It got middling scores for guaranteeing prisoners' safety and well-being, and for rehabilitation.

It was also listed as somewhat overcrowded, with 1,012 inmates living in a facility designed to hold 848. Authorities acknowledge overcrowding is a widespread problem throughout Mexico's penitentiary system.

Overall, Cefereso No. 9 got a "yellow" evaluation for 2015 on the report's stoplight-style rating system. That was improved from "red" in 2014, even if its numerical score was still the country's lowest.

"Governability" was the only area where the prison received a "green," or good, rating. Altiplano also got a "green" rating for the category.

"El Chapo" first broke out of prison in 2001 and spent more than a decade on the run, becoming one of the world's most-wanted fugitives. He was recaptured in 2014, only to escape the following year. Mexican marines re-arrested him in the western state of Sinaloa in January, after he fled a safe house through a storm drain.

Guzman was returned to Altiplano, where officials beefed up his security regimen. He was placed under constant observation from a ceiling camera with no blind spots, and the floors of top-security cells were reinforced with metal bars and a 16-inch (40-centimeter) layer of concrete. Prison authorities also restricted his visits.

Based on reporting by the Associated Press.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-N...mned-religious-extremism-slain/5931462739566/

Pakistani activist who condemned religious extremism slain

By Allen Cone | Updated May 9, 2016 at 6:50 AM

KARACHI, Pakistan, May 8 (UPI) -- A prominent human rights activist who denounced Islamic extremists in his homeland, was gunned down late Saturday night at a restaurant in Karachi.

Four suspects opened fired on Zaki, 40, while he was at a restaurant, a police official said. He was killed in the attack that also injured a friend a bystander.

Police don't know who was behind the attack but the Hakimullah faction of the Pakistani Taliban claimed responsibility.

"Our four friends in Karachi riding on two motorcycles targeted Khurram Zaki successfully," faction spokesman Qari Saifullah said.

Zaki was the editor of the website and Facebook page Let Us Build Pakistan with a goal to "spread liberal religious views and condemn extremism in all forms."

Staff at the website paid tribute to their colleague and vowed to continue opposing militants.

Zaki opposed Maulana Abdul Aziz, a prominent leader of the Lal Masjid in Islamabad who refused to condemn the Taliban attack on the Army Public School in Peshawar that killed 146 people.

Fellow activist and lawyer Jibran Nasir said Zaki told him that he was getting threats from unknown sources.

Related UPI Stories
•14 arrested in burning honor killing of Pakistani teen
•Sufi Muslim leader latest killed in Bangladesh hacking deaths
•Al-Qaida affiliate claims responsibility for killing of LGBT editor in Bangladesh
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.spiegel.de/international...he-new-middle-eastern-cold-war-a-1090725.html

Saudia Arabia and Iran: The Cold War of Islam

The archenemies Iran and Saudi Arabia are battling for supremacy in the Middle East and are carrying out their struggle in proxy wars in Yemen, Syria and Iraq. Domestically, though, the two countries are facing remarkably similar problems.

By Susanne Koelbl, Samiha Shafy and Bernhard Zand
May 09, 2016 – 10:20 AM

No previous US president had been made to suffer such an indignity when visiting America's supposedly closest ally in the Arab world: When Barack Obama touched down at the airport in Riyadh in mid-April, King Salman opted to remain in his palace. The most powerful man in the world was received by the governor of Riyadh instead. There was no pomp or ceremonial reception and state-controlled television declined to broadcast the arrival. Obama seemed slightly at a loss on the tarmac before trying to cover up the affront with a broad smile.

The message was clear: Saudi Arabia feels as though it has been left in the lurch by America and is not afraid to show that it isn't happy.

The story of the failed reception is more than just an anecdote from the international diplomatic stage. It serves to illustrate the massive geo-political shift and the growing conflict that has gripped the entire Middle East. It has become the Cold War of our era, pitting Saudi Arabia against Iran, the two rivals that are striving for supremacy in the region. And it is not entirely clear which side the US is on.

Uncertainty and Rapid Change

The Middle East as we have long known it is changing dramatically. And no matter where one looks, Tehran and Riyadh are standing behind at least one of the parties involved in the conflict. The kingdom of Saudi Arabia, host and protector of the holy sites in Mecca and Medina, sees itself as the home of Sunni Islam, to which the majority of the world's Muslims belong. The Islamic Republic of Iran, a Shiite theocracy, claims leadership of the Shiites, which make up roughly 13 percent of Muslims worldwide. For both regimes, religion is an important tool of power.

Today's bloodiest civil war, the conflict in Syria, is entering its sixth year and has thus far cost the lives of more than 250,000 people -- and the cease-fire that has been in place for the last two months doesn't look as though it will last much longer. In Syria, and also in the conflicts in Iraq and in Yemen, the fighting fronts run primarily along confessional lines: Sunnis against Shiites. A fragile peace holds in Lebanon and Bahrain, but it is one that could be shattered at any time by confessional unrest.

All of these proxy wars and confessional conflicts have unleashed a wave of migration among those who have been displaced: more than 6 million people from Syria and Iraq along with almost 3 million from Yemen. And out of the rubble of the Middle East, hydra-headed monster has risen that seeks to terrorize Brussels, Paris, Istanbul and the rest of the world: Islamic State. In an irony of history, the Sunni terror militia sees both Iran and Saudi Arabia as its enemies.

At its essence, the escalation in the Middle East also has to do with America and its changing role in the world. After decades of enmity with Iran, US President Barack Obama wanted to restart a dialogue with the country and he negotiated a nuclear treaty with Tehran. The hope is that the deal will limit Iran's ability to pursue a nuclear weapon while making it possible for the country to do business with the West in return.

At the same time, though, the US would prefer to withdraw from this complicated, crisis-plagued region of the world. Current developments are also a product of this trend.

Iran, meanwhile, following decades of isolation, would like to revert to its former position of regional importance. The more Middle Eastern countries there are under the control of Shiites, the stronger Iran feels -- and the more hard-pressed Saudi Arabia feels, a country whose rulers once rose to power by way of a pact with Sunni fundamentalists, the Wahhabis.

This new Cold War affects the entire world, making it vital to search out its causes and to scrutinize what is pushing Saudi Arabia and Iran to continue on the path of escalation. A team of SPIEGEL reporters went to both countries to investigate and spoke with politicians, religious leaders, activists, intellectuals and normal people on the streets.

The Saudi Shiite-Paranoia

Awamia is a dusty town on the shores of a body of water one side calls the Arabian Gulf and the other the Persian Gulf. In Awamia, it looks as though Saudi Arabia itself were involved in a civil war. A checkpoint marked by high protective walls marks the entrance to the town and an armored vehicle is parked in front of it. At night, spotlights illuminate the checkpoint.

Thick concrete walls are also to be found on the main square of Awamia surrounding the police station, the electrical substation and the municipal office. The walls are covered with graffiti:

"They're killing us because we're Shiite!" "Go to hell you cheats!" "We'll never give up!" "We'll never forget you, Nimr!" "Our Nimr hasn't died!"

On the night of Jan. 1, Saudi Arabia had the cleric and preacher Nimr al-Nimr, who was based in Awamia, executed -- along with 46 other prisoners, most of whom had been convicted of terrorism. It was the largest wave of executions the country had seen in more than three decades.

Saudi Arabia too has a Shiite minority, making up more than 10 percent of the country's population, and Nimr was one of the minority's most prominent representatives. He was a fierce opponent of the royal House of Saud, accusing the country's rulers of systematically oppressing the Shiites. The government rejected the accusations and accused Nimr of being a terrorist controlled by Iran. They said he had been responsible for the deaths of Saudi Arabian security personnel.

Following Nimr's execution, a furious -- yet seemingly organized -- mob stormed the Saudi Arabian Embassy in Tehran, resulting in Riyadh breaking off diplomatic relations with Iran. Tehran withdrew its diplomats as well and since then, an icy silence has reigned between the two regional powers.

The brother of the dead Shiite cleric is sitting in his office in a courtyard on the outskirts of Awamia. Mohammed al-Nimr, 52, is a tall, elegant man with a gray moustache and beard. He is wearing traditional white robes with a red-and-white keffiyeh. "The execution of the other 46 prisoners was merely a pretext to kill my brother," he says. Mohammed al-Nimr doesn't sound angry or distraught, but rather restrained. "The other prisoners had been sentenced to death long before," he continues. "Sheikh Nimr was an inspiration to us, particularly to the younger people. He was revered here."

The cleric had been arrested often during his life, most recently in the summer of 2012. Just prior to that arrest, Crown Prince Nayef bin Abdul Aziz had died, an event Nimr had commented on by saying: "The worms will eat him and he will suffer hellish agony in his grave. The man who forced us to live in fear and suffering -- should we not be happy about his death?"

The words his brother uttered "are one thing," says Mohammed al-Nimr. "But terrorism is something different." He speaks with a raised index finger in slow, clearly articulated Arabic. Indeed, he too could have made for an effective preacher. But he is a businessman and he weighs every word carefully. He condemns the attack on the embassy and says: "I am a person who loves his country."

Five months before his brother was arrested, Mohammad al-Nimr's then-17-year-old son had likewise been taken into custody. During the Arab Spring, his son had taken part in protests and was sentenced to death as a consequence. Ali al-Nimr is to be beheaded and crucified. "What should I say about that?," the father asks. "My son was a child when he was arrested." Ali, he says, is clever and ambitious and had enrolled in university. "Now, he has been sitting in prison for the last five years."

The execution of the Shiite cleric and the barbaric sentence handed down to the cleric's nephew triggered dismay across the globe. But the episode serves to show that Saudi Arabia is feeling pressured by Iran -- and is provoking a confessional conflict in response, even in its own country. The royal house has chosen a dangerous rejoinder.

Recently, the country has also embarked on foreign policy adventures: In Saudi Arabia's southern neighbor of Yemen, Riyadh launched a military initiative against the Shiite Houthi rebels. Yet despite months of bombing, the operation has been a failure, with the images of destroyed cities and dead civilians primarily helping Iran.

Incompatible Points of View

Ali Akbar Velayati, Iran's former foreign minister, is sitting in his Tehran practice in a dark blue suit, an ascetically haggard diplomat who is once again working as a pediatrician. It is shortly after 9 p.m. and the last patient, a seven-year-old with an earache, has just left.

Velayati is foreign policy advisor to Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader of Iran, making him part of the innermost circle. Just in February, Velayati traveled to Moscow to talk with Russian President Vladimir Putin about the way forward in Syria. And now, in his practice, he wants to talk about foreign policy. He speaks of the "2,000-year-old Iranian-Yemeni friendship" and notes that 1,500 years ago, Iran sent troops to the southern end of the Arabian Peninsula to fight against the Ethiopian occupation of Yemen. The "invaders" were triumphantly beaten back, he says.

Just like the Ethiopians then, the Saudis today would suffer "complete defeat" in Yemen: "They are in the swamp up to their necks," he says. The fact that the incumbent president of Yemen, Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi, isn't just supported by Saudi Arabia, but is also recognized by the international community, is of little interest to Velayati. The government there, he says, is "illegal" and will soon be "removed."

He leans back contentedly into his armchair. After all, what are a couple decades of Western sanctions or the not quite 100 years of rule by an Arab family in Riyadh against the more than 4,000-year history of the Persian Empire?

Adel al-Jubeir, Saudi Arabia's foreign minister, likewise has a clear take on events in the region. "The war in Yemen is not a war that we wanted," he told SPIEGEL in February, "We had no other option -- there was a radical (Shiite) militia allied with Iran and Hezbollah that took over the country" -- the Houtis. Al-Jubeir's interview took place during the Munich Security Conference in February. The evening prior, he had met with his Iranian counterpart Mohammad Javad Zarif to discuss a cease-fire Syria for the first time since the two countries had broken off diplomatic relations.

Until that point, the two had preferred to cast aspersions at each other from afar, by way of op-ed contributions to the New York Times. Saudi Arabia's "active sponsorship of violent extremism," Zarif wrote, is "the real global threat." He argued that "the Saudi strategy" is to "perpetuate -- and even exacerbate -- tension in the region." Saudi Foreign Minister al-Jubeir countered by claiming that it wasn't Saudi Arabia that supported terrorism, but Iran: "the single-most-belligerent actor in the region."

From the perspective of Riyadh, the situation looks like this: Iran -- which, with almost 80 million residents, is more than three times the size of Saudi Arabia -- wants to become the predominant power in the Middle East. The old hegemon, the US, is withdrawing. Thus, it is up to Saudi Arabia to restore the balance of power in the region.

That is the core of Saudi Arabia's new, offensive-minded foreign policy. For a country that had for decades been considered by the West to be a "strategic partner," a reliable oil supplier and defensive-minded military actor, it is a radical break from the past with incalculable consequences.

The Roots of Enmity

The two powers have not always faced each other with such hostility: There have also been periods of understanding and even cooperation. Their rulers generally got along quite well during the phase starting in the mid-20th century when they both became rich supplying oil to the West. They also had a common ally: the US.

Indeed, relations were so good at the end of the 1960s that the Iranian shah and King Faisal of Saudi Arabia even wrote letters back and forth to each other. In an example related by the Prince Bandar Ibn Sultan, the former Saudi ambassador to the US, the Shah advised the king to follow his lead by opening up his country's society and, for instance, allowing girls and boys to go to school together. The king answered by writing: "May I remind you that you aren't the Shah of France? Your population is up to 90 percent Muslim. Don't forget that."

The dark prophecy was fulfilled in 1979, a year that has repercussions in the Middle East to the present day. The radical Shiite leader Ruhollah Khomeini toppled the regime of the pro-Western Shah, students stormed the US Embassy and the country that soon would be renamed the Islamic Republic of Iran descended into a bloody power struggle. Not long later, the war against Saddam Hussein-led Iraq followed.

Saudi Arabia backed the Sunni Saddam Hussein and the US, which had until then maintained good relations with both Riyadh and Tehran, leaned toward Saudi Arabia.

So was 1979 a good year for the Saudis? Not exactly. On Nov. 20, Sunni terrorists seized the Grand Mosque in Mecca and took thousands of pilgrims hostage. Their leader came from the heart of Saudi Arabia and claimed to be the Mahdi, or redeemer -- and he called for the overthrow of the king. The royal family saw little choice but to call for assistance from French special forces -- infidels -- to liberate the mosque.

The House of Saud was humiliated, particularly in front of its own religious establishment and the princes sought to cleanse themselves by beginning to send billions in oil money to radical preachers -- preachers who then carried Wahhabism, the most strict and unforgiving form of Islam, around the world.

As such, 1979 didn't just mark the year when the export of the "Islamic Revolution" began, as urged by revolutionary leader Ayatollah Khomeini. It was also when Saudi Arabia began planting the seeds of Sunni extremism, the bitter fruits of which are still being harvested today in the lawless valleys of Pakistan, in Raqqa, the capital of Islamic State, and also in the West, in the heads of confused young men. And in the kingdom itself: Now, Sunni extremism is even threatening the country where it was once spawned.

Eight years after the momentous events of 1979, there was a devastating clash between Iranian demonstrators and security personnel during which 400 people lost their lives. Prince Nayef, the brother of the present-day king, blamed the Iranians. Like other "heretics" before them, he said, they had attempted to desecrate the Grand Mosque.

Ayatollah Khomeini was furious and called for the overthrow of the Saudi rulers, calling them "detestable and godless Wahhabis" and "a pack of heretics." It was a clear indication that modern-day Iran and Saudi Arabia were destined to continue the centuries-old conflict between the Sunni Arabs and the Shiite Persians.

It was the beginning of the 16th century when the Persian rulers introduced Shiite Islam as the state religion. Meanwhile, the preacher Muhammad Bin Abd al-Wahhab, who was born in 1703 not far from present-day Riyadh, belonged to the much larger Sunni branch of Islam. He founded Wahhabism, and he disdained -- indeed hated -- the Shiites. In the mid-18th century, the Saud clan -- the present-day royal family -- allied themselves with the preacher and Wahhabism became state doctrine.

In both countries, the confessional determination is an instrument of power politics and it binds the people to their ruler. Still today, the rulers of each country use religion to exert control over their subjects -- and in each country, there is an ongoing struggle between reformers and conservatives. A look at the societies in the two countries shows that, despite their official enmity, the two face astonishingly similar challenges.

Two Theocracies

On Feb. 26, the day of the Assembly of Experts election and first round of parliamentary elections, Iranian political VIPs appeared at a polling station in northern Tehran. It is a place where Ayatollah Khomeini often received visitors when he was still alive. Today, a huge photo of the revolutionary leader hangs on the wall.

The first voter on that morning was Foreign Minister Zarif. It is said that Zarif was never allowed to watch television as a child to prevent his exposure to toxic Western influences. After him, dressed in the robes of a cleric, came former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. The wealthiest man in Iran, he is considered a powerful influencer behind the government of President Hassan Rohani. It is said that the government has been charged with implementing Rafsanjani's ideal vision of economic freedom combined with religious control.

After him came Hassan Khomeini, the grandson of the revolutionary leader, and former President Mohammad Khatami, a man many Iranians still hold in high regard as a reformer. The regime has banned him from the public limelight and has prohibited him from giving interviews, but he appeared at the polling station nonetheless. Despite their differences, after all, Iran's elite all agree on one point: The revolution made them what they are today.

Supreme Leader Khamenei presides over everything. He makes the decisions, but he also takes into consideration the various centers of power when doing so, especially the Revolutionary Guard. The paramilitary organization is a state within a state, more powerful than all the other institutions. With its informers placed everywhere, it has a hand in controlling not only the security organs, but also large parts of the economy.

It's the dictatorship of a theocratic power apparatus, but -- in contrast to the absolutist Saudi Arabian monarchy -- it still allows the people a degree of participation. The Iranian revolutionary leaders refer to their system as "Islamic Democracy," and there are elections, too, even if the approved candidates have been handpicked. It's a system in which diverse bodies adjudicate who is "Islamic" enough to participate. The others are shut out, as was the case with most of the so-called reform candidates in this year's election. True reformers who advocate greater freedom of expression and an independent judiciary land in jail.

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, for its part, doesn't even claim to be a democracy. "If democracy is the medicine, then we're not sick," says Jamal Khashoggi, one of the country's most influential political commentators.

Until the death of King Abdullah in early 2015, the monarchy's power structures tended to be static, but they have since undergone a drastic transformation. His successor and half brother Salman bin Abdulaziz, 80, fired his most important advisors only days after assuming office and then changed the line of succession, naming Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, 56, the experienced interior minister, as his crown prince. He subsequently appointed his own son, 30-year-old Mohammad bin Salman as deputy crown prince and defense minister.

The range of offices the aged king furnished his son with leaves no doubt about who he would like to see has his successor: In addition to being responsible for the military, Mohammad bin Salman also oversees the country's oil reserves as chair of the Council for Economic and Development Affairs.

"Theoretically, this team could have full governing power," says Khashoggi. So far, though, the new government has been cautious. It is constantly making sure it has the backing of the powerful tribes and the even more powerful clerics. Khashoggi says that's good for cohesion. "But it is also holding us back."

On the issue of how to proceed with Iran, for example, even Khashoggi, himself a patriotic man, is willing to admit how dangerous the conflict is. "Iran and us are like fire and dynamite. We are the rowdies who could bring the whole house down. Perhaps you shouldn't just leave the Middle East to us." His tone is ironic, but he means this seriously. "Put the Middle East at the top of your priority list. From my perspective, you could even hold another Yalta conference with us! Do something."

The New Role of Women

Despite the clerics, princes and moral police, modernity is creeping under cover into both of these antagonistic states. That's especially clear when it comes to the changing role women play in society.

The woman in Iran who has risen to the top is President Rohani's deputy Shahindokht Molaverdi, 50. A lawyer by training, Molaverdi is an attractive woman, but she is also careful to conceal that in the chador that covers part of her face. She is sitting in the conference room of her official office in Teheran, surrounded by the insignias of the theocracy: flags and photos of the supreme leader.

It took a purposeful provocation for her to secure the post. When the president introduced his government in summer 2013, she criticized him publicly. "Why is the women's share in a 33-person-strong list zero?" she asked. "Why does he not trust women?" Two months later, she got appointed as one of several deputies to Rohani.

As vice president for women and family affairs, Molaverdi holds a position equivalent to family minister in Iran, even if the current conservative parliament would never officially confirm her as such. Molaverdi is considered to be a progressive feminist. She would never openly criticize the system but it has been reported that she would like to reform inheritance and penal laws in the country that discriminate against women. Witness testimony by a woman in Iran, for example, officially carries only half the weight of testimony provided by a man. And daughters are only able to inherit a fraction of what sons get. At the same time, 60 percent of university students are female.

Pioneering Women

When women in Saudi Arabia want to rise in society, it can help in some circumstances to keep the men out. At Huda al-Jeraisys' company, a sign on the door notes that men aren't allowed in. Inside the orange building in central Riyadh, it looks like a normal office, minus the Y chromosomes. Women can be seen sitting at computers wearing jeans and blouses, their hair well-coiffed and makeup applied. They organize training and language courses for other women.

If men were allowed to enter into the office, the women would then be required to stay in separate rooms with separate entrances and wear a black abaya robe and cover their hair. Many would also veil their faces. This, after all, is Saudi Arabia, the country with the world's strictest gender division.

"Feel free to take off the headscarf and the abaya too," al-Jeraisy says, smiling. "It is important for us to be able to feel comfortable here." But when the boss leaves the office, the only thing still visible between all the black cloth covering her are her eyes.

This is not to say she's invisible. Far from it. Al-Jeraisy is a pioneer, one of around 20 women in the kingdom who won seats in December elections for local and municipal councils. It was the first time women in Saudi Arabia were allowed to run as candidates for political office. It was also the first time women were allowed to vote in any election in the country.

It was a pinch of democracy, even though city councilors don't have much of a say in a system oriented around the king's absolute rule. Instead of a parliament, the country is only home to a Majlis al-Shura, a consultative council that advises the rulers.

Of the Riyadh city council's 30 members, 10 are appointed -- all men -- and 20 can be elected. In addition to Al-Jeraisy, two other women also landed seats. She says it's interesting that the other two also completely veil their faces. "I have determined that we, as women, can achieve our goals more easily if we cover ourselves. The men are more likely to listen to us and trust us."

During city council meetings, the women sit in a separate room and are connected to their male colleagues through a loudspeaker system. Al-Jeraisy claims this doesn't bother them. "You need time for change." The things that are possible today, she says -- female city councilors, women in the shura, women who work as businesspeople, surgeons or lawyers -- "all that," she says, "would have led to civil war 20 years ago."

Women in Saudi Arabia are still banned from driving, requiring them to have a chauffeur. Worse yet, they are also required to have a legal guardian, without whose permission they are prohibited from traveling. But as in Iran, they already tend to be better educated than men, advancing today in professional careers from which they were excluded only a short time ago. Only 15 percent of women in the country are currently employed, but that figure is growing rapidly, in part out of economic necessity.

Dependence on Oil

A building is growing into the sky just outside the gates of the Saudi Arabian port city of Jeddah, a skyscraper that will likely be famous in a few years' time. The Jeddah Tower will be the world's first skyscraper that is over 1,000 meters (3,281 feet) tall. The groundbreaking ceremony was held three years ago and the tower already stretches 150 meters into the sky. Freight elevators make gnashing noises, cement mixers hum. The structure is to be completed within four years.

"Altitude is pride," says engineer Talal al-Maiman. "The skyscraper is a symbol of the kingdom's place in the world." The project's leader and initiator is Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, the king's nephew and the wealthiest man in the Middle East. Al-Maiman is responsible for the prince's real estate business. The kingdom has every reason to be to be self-confident, he boasts: "We have Mecca and Medina. We have oil. The world envies us."

Saudi Arabia can still live from the billions in oil revenues it earned during the decades-long oil boom. But the boom has ended for now and the price of oil has collapsed. Meanwhile, the country is involved in a costly military intervention in Yemen that is siphoning money away from other areas where it could be used. Saudi Arabia is also deliberately producing excess oil to keep prices low and damage the Iranian economy. This isn't cheap for Saudi Arabia, either: The kingdom had a 2015 budget deficit of around $100 billion. If the situation doesn't change, the country is expected to deplete its currency reserves within five years. Some of the country's ambitious construction plans -- an "Economic City" on the Red Sea, for example, and a futuristic financial district in Riyadh -- are only moving forward at a snail's pace.

The Next Step: Diversifying Economies

But even if the oil price does start to climb again, Saudi Arabia's reserves are just as finite as those of its rival Iran. Both countries are fully aware that their dependence on mineral resources is a problem.

Both countries have very similar problems: unbalanced, ossified economies and young populations that are demanding openness, flexibility, as well as social and political reforms from its aging leadership. The Arab Spring showed that the dissatisfied masses can topple even the most hardline dictatorships in the Middle East -- a recognition that alarmed Saudi and Iranian rulers alike.

In response, Deputy Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman has announced drastic changes. Oil production is Saudi Arabia's life blood, but the goal now is to diversify the country's economy. Efforts to that end include a modernization program that includes initiatives in the administrative apparatus, the state-run economy and even a partial sale of Saudi oil giant Aramco. Last week, the reform program was introduced under the title "Vision 2030." As part of the shakeup, Saudi Arabia announced the ouster of long-serving oil minister Ali al-Naimi on Saturday.

Who builds taller and more quickly? Who is more modern? Even construction in the two countries feels like a competitive race. In northern Tehran, entrepreneur Ebrahim Pourfaraj is currently building Iran's biggest hotel on the stone slopes of the Alborz Mountains. To begin construction, workers had to dig a monstrous, almost 75-meter-deep hole in the rock, with their colorful steel-container offices dramatically hanging from the concrete walls, reachable by catwalks.

Some 125 new four- and five-star hotels are currently being planned. For the moment, it's still an international pariah state inhabited by bad guys, but Iran, with its mosques, gardens and fire temples is now suddenly considered by many as a romantic adventure destination. The government is estimating 400 percent growth in tourism between now and 2025, at which time 20 million visitors are expected to come each year, spending up to $40 billion in the country annually.

Everything is slated for renewal: the automobile industry, the shipyards, the airports. At least $100 billion in annual investment will be needed for the restoration of natural gas and oil production plants alone.

The years of isolation may be over, but not the long-term consequences. The Revolutionary Guard has built up a massive business empire. They stepped in to fill the gaps when the international companies left the country and it will be difficult to circumvent them in the future.

The unstable economic situation in both countries, their ambition and their courting of international investors will at first provide an opportunity for the West. Countries like Germany, which has maintained business relations with Saudi Arabia and will now commence them with Iran, will have a ready-made lever for exerting influence. Political conditions could be tied to attractive business deals.

It also provides the West with the opportunity to do some things that could help to stop the destruction in the Middle East and the spread of Islamist terror in the world.

Two Difficult Partners

Listening to the radicals on both sides might lead one to believe that the conflict represents an epochal wrestling match between two powers with a sectarian and political wedge driven right through the middle of them -- one in which there can ultimately only be one winner and one loser. But this impression is deceptive. Neither of the two countries represents the caricature of the rogue state that agitators on each opposing side are trying to sketch.

Saudi Arabia is a young, powerful country and, as a commodity giant and ally of the West, also well-networked around the world. With the nuclear deal now in place, Iran, which is a similarly youthful and dynamic, can now become integrated into global markets to the degree Saudi Arabia has long enjoyed.

The West has gotten used to viewing the Middle East as a perpetual crisis zone in global politics, one in which fanaticism and paranoia triumph over compromise and reason. But the conflict between Saudi Arabia and Iran isn't just comprised of fanatics: There are, of course, also more critical and level-headed voices, ones the West could strengthen rather than simply retreat from the region.

Nor must the West choose between these countries on the search for a single partner. After all, neither Saudi Arabia nor Iran is an ideal partner: Both are home to torture prisons for dissidents and brutal punishments for petty crimes.

The United States has long profited from the oil it procures from the Middle East and it has influenced politics in the region. If, after the failed missions in Afghanistan and Iraq, Washington would now prefer to leave the region to its own devices, it would be making a mistake, because it would leave behind the kind of vacuum that Russia recently took advantage of in Syria.

It is imperative that Washington move quickly to repair its rocky relationship with Saudi Arabia. And the previous reflex, that of automatically blaming Iran for everything bad happening in the region, must not now be directed toward Saudi Arabia.

To solve problems like the Syria conflict, the West needs to promote direct negotiations between Iran and Saudi Arabia. In order to apply pressure on the elites of both countries, Europe has two powerful tools at its disposal: the 500 million consumers who live in the EU and the possibility of imposing stricter controls on defense exports.

So are there any signs of hope?

The flag of the Islamic Republic still flies today over the shuddered windows of the abandoned Iranian Embassy in Riyadh. In Tehran, the Saudi Arabian Embassy is blocked by steel barricades. Smoke stains from Molotov cocktails, hurled at the building in January by protesters, can still be seen on the white façade. City officials have renamed the street leading to the embassy: It is now called Martyr al-Nimr Street.

Neither Saudi Arabia nor Iran appears prepared at the moment to make any overtures to the other side, and Switzerland is now expected to step in to mediate. After 30 years spent carrying messages back and forth between the United States and Iran, Swiss diplomats are to play the same role between Riyadh and Tehran.

Following the nuclear deal, it appeared for a short time as though the Swiss in Tehran had already fulfilled their most important task. Now they may be needed more than ever before.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Expect another test in the very near future.....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-36253681

North Korea holds rally to mark end of party congress

1 hour ago

Hundreds of thousands of North Koreans have joined a rally marking the end of the Workers' Party Congress, the first in 36 years.

The congress cemented the position of leader Kim Jong-un, elevating him to the role of party chairman.

On Tuesday, state media announced that Mr Kim' sister, Kim Yo-jong, had been elected to the ruling committee.

The Congress also endorsed the national policy of building nuclear capability alongside economic development.

On Monday, three BBC journalists were expelled from the country for reporting which had angered the authorities.

Correspondent Rupert Wingfield-Hayes was detained on Friday and interrogated for eight hours, before being made to sign a statement of apology. He and his colleagues left on Monday.

The BBC said it was disappointed by North Korea's decision.

At the rally in Pyongyang on Tuesday, Mr Kim was seen waving to the crowds and chatting with military and party officials.

Hundreds of thousands of people marched through the square waving pink paper flowers, coloured balloons and red party flags. Floats were also moved through the square, some of them carrying mock-ups of missiles.


At the scene: Stephen Evans, BBC News, Pyongyang

Numbers at the rally are hard to estimate but I counted blocks of marchers 50 people wide and 50-plus people long passing for an hour, some goose-stepping holding red banners.

There were tightly choreographed displays of flag waving. Others were in civilian clothes, the women in traditional Korean dress and the men in suits with a collar and tie.

These did not march but leapt and bounded along the square, cheering ecstatically and gazing up at the balcony behind which Kim Jong-un sat or stood.

We asked them why they were so ecstatic. The answer invariably was that they were so happy to see the elevation of Marshal Kim Jong-un to the chairmanship of the Workers Party.

It's very hard to know what people think. It may be a mixture. I watched unobtrusively the faces of some North Koreans I know and their ecstasy seemed genuine. But that doesn't mean the people aren't also oppressed: numerous accounts by defectors and the absence of meaningful elections indicate they are.

The confirmation of a new title for Mr Kim's sister had been widely expected. .

She is already influential as vice-director of the Propaganda and Agitation Department, but her elevation to the central committee is seen as a further consolidation of power around her brother.

More than 100 foreign reporters have been granted visas to cover the congress, although only a few were, briefly, allowed in to watch the meeting.

The congress, which began on Friday, also launched a new five-year plan for the economy, which has been hit by some of its strongest sanctions yet after the country's recent nuclear and rocket tests.

Mr Kim also used a speech to say the North would not use its nuclear weapons unless its sovereignty was threatened.

China has sent a message of congratulations to the North Korean leader on his new position, though it declined to send a representative to the gathering.

Analysts suggested this may be because of unhappiness with recent indications Pyongyang is preparing to conduct its fifth nuclear test.



More on this story

Video Inside North Korea Congress after BBC reporter expelled
9 May 2016

What we learned in North Korea this week
6 May 2016

North Korea Congress: Kim Jong-un and the Workers Party
30 April 2016

Profile: Kim Jong-un, North Korea's supreme commander
6 January 2016

North Korea country profile
6 May 2016
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...east-4-people-at-Munich-train-station-witness

Well let's see how the Merkel government spins this one.....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/0...le-at-munich-train-station-witnesses-say.html

Europe

Assailant shouting 'Allahu Akbar' stabs at least 4 people at Munich train station, witnesses say

Published May 10, 2016
· FoxNews.com

DEVELOPING: At least four people were injured Tuesday morning when a knife-wielding man attacked people indiscriminately at a commuter rail station outside Munich, Germany.

Investigators told the Suddeutsche Zeiting newspaper that witnesses had reported that the unidentified attacker had shouted "Allahu Akbar!", the Arabic phrase meaning "God is Great!" during the assault. However, authorities said they had not yet confirmed those witness statements.

The incident happened in Grafing, east of Munich, shortly before 5 a.m. (11 p.m. ET Monday). Police spokeswoman Michaela Grob told the Associated Press a man was arrested and authorities are working to identify him.

The Suddeutsche Zeitung reported that the victims were all men, one of whom was seriously hurt. The main entrance to the station was closed while the investigation was ongoing and significant delays were expected.

The broadcaster Bayerische Rundfunk reported that the suspect had no prior criminal history. Munich's Merkur newspaper reported that the suspect was from an immigrant background.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.dw.com/en/bavarian-media-one-dead-after-stabbing-near-munich/a-19246270

Bavarian media: One dead after stabbing near Munich

Regional media are reporting that a knife attack has left one person dead and three injured near Munich. Police are investigating claims that the suspect yelled 'Allahu Akbar' during the attack.

Date 10.05.2016
Author Matt Zuvela

Regional broadcaster Bayrischer Rundfunk (BR) is reporting that a knife attack at a train station outside of Munich in the early hours of Tuesday morning has claimed the life of one victim. Three additional people were injured.

BR reports that a young German man with no previous police record attacked passengers at an S-Bahn overground train station in Grafing, a town east of Munich. The attack occurred around 5 a.m. local time.

Police are investigating witness statements that the man yelled "Allahu Akbar" – an Islamic saying meaning 'Allah is great' – before carrying out the attack. There are conflicting reports regarding what, if anything, the assailant said.

The suspect was overpowered by police and is now in custody.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-southchinasea-usa-china-idUSKCN0Y10DM

World | Tue May 10, 2016 3:26am EDT
Related: World, China, South China Sea

U.S. sails warship near Chinese-claimed reef in South China Sea

By David Brunnstrom and Greg Torode


A U.S. navy warship sailed close to a disputed reef in the South China Sea on Tuesday, a U.S. Department of Defense official said, days after China warned criticism of its claims in the crucial waterway would rebound like a coiled spring.

The freedom of navigation operation by the USS William P. Lawrence, traveling within 12 nautical miles of Chinese-occupied Fiery Cross Reef, was to "challenge excessive maritime claims of some claimants in the South China Sea", Defense Department spokesman Bill Urban said.

"These excessive maritime claims are inconsistent with international law as reflected in the Law of the Sea Convention in that they purport to restrict the navigation rights that the United States and all states are entitled to exercise," Urban said in an emailed statement.

Facilities on Fiery Cross Reef include a 3,000-metre (10,000-foot) runway and Washington is concerned China will use it to press its extensive territorial claims at the expense of weaker rivals.

U.S. naval officials also believe China has plans to start reclamation and construction activities on Scarborough Shoal, which sits further north of the Spratlys within the Philippines claimed 200 nautical mile (370 km) exclusive economic zone.

China claims most of the South China Sea, through which $5 trillion in ship-borne trade passes every year. The Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Taiwan and Brunei also have overlapping claims.


Related Coverage
› China angered by U.S. navy patrol in South China Sea

The Pentagon last month called on China to reaffirm it has no plans to deploy military aircraft in the disputed Spratly Islands after Beijing used a military plane to evacuate sick workers from Fiery Cross.

"Fiery Cross is sensitive because it is presumed to be the future hub of Chinese military operations in the South China Sea, given its already extensive infrastructure, including its large and deep port and 3000-metre runway," said Ian Storey, a South China Sea expert at Singapore's ISEAS Yusof Ishak Institute.

"The timing is interesting, too. It is a show of U.S. determination ahead of President Obama's trip to Vietnam later this month," Storey added.

Speaking in Hanoi ahead of Obama's visit, Daniel Russel, the Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and the Pacific, said freedom of navigation operations were important for smaller nations.

"If the world's most powerful navy cannot sail where international law permits, then what happens to the ships of navy of smaller countries?," Russel told reporters in Hanoi before news of the operation was made public.

"If our warships can't exercise its legitimate rights under international law at sea, then what about the fishermen, what about the cargo ships? How will they prevent themselves from being blocked by stronger nations?"

The move also comes as tough-talking city mayor Rodrigo Duterte looks set to take the Philippines' presidency. He has proposed multilateral talks on the South China Sea.

China has reacted with anger to previous U.S. freedom of navigation operations, and says that there has never been a problem with freedom of navigation or overflight in the South China Sea.

The U.S. flew fighter planes near the disputed Scarborough Shoal last month, drawing protests from China. Last November, two U.S. B-52 long-range bombers flew near to Chinese facilities under construction on Cuarteron Reef in the Spratlys.

Criticism of China over the South China Sea will rebound like a coiled spring, a Chinese diplomat said on Friday, as a U.S. warship visited Shanghai against a backdrop of rising tension in the region.


(Additional reporting by My Pham in Hanoi; Writing by Ben Blanchard; Editing by Nick Macfie and Lincoln Feast)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/turkey-energy-crossroads-sliding-towards-212700876.html

Turkey, At Energy Crossroads, Sliding Towards Authoritarianism

Oilprice.com
By Irina Slav
10 hours ago

Last week’s resignation of Turkey’s Prime Minister Ahmed Davutoglu has marked one more stepping stone in President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s path to authoritarian rule. Erdogan has followed this path for a while now, envisioning a “New Turkey,” restored to the glory of its predecessor, the Ottoman Empire, at its heyday.

Interestingly, despite numerous warnings from scholars and observers, Erdogan has been left to do more or less whatever he wants. His persecution of the Kurdish minority has been merciless, in spite of calls from human rights groups to stop the violence. Turkey is also squarely at odds with the U.S., which is providing weapons to Kurdish fighters in Iraq.

Terrorist attacks are a frequent occurrence in Turkey these days as the destruction of the Syrian civil war spreads across the region. This unfortunate fact adds kindling to the fire Erdogan has stoked since he came into power: Turkey is surrounded by enemies but it can overcome them under his presidency and regain its grandeur - though, only if no one interferes with his rule. Hence the crushing of anti-government protests. The latest instance of this came on May 1, when 200 people were arrested.

The Turkish president hopes to consolidate power even further with his initiative to change the country’s system from a parliamentary to a presidential republic.

In a recent interview with Sputnik, former Secretary-General of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), Ertu?rul Yalç?nbay?r, said: “In my view, May 5 [the day Davutoglu announced that he would not run for the post of chairman of the ruling AKP] should be considered as the date of the actual structural transition of Turkey to the presidential system.”

Erdogan is not happy with opponents at home and he is not happy with Turkey’s international partners, most notably the EU. In the latest show of strength, Erdogan refused to amend Turkey’s anti-terrorist laws in line with the EU’s in order to win a visa-free regime for Turkish citizens.

In the face of the increasingly undemocratic rule of President Erdogan, one may wonder why the EU is courting Turkey so insistently. One answer is the migrant crisis, which has been partially resolved with the EU-Turkey agreement that has seen migrants being taken back to Turkey in exchange for cash. Another reasons comes down to oil and natural gas: Turkey is a major hub for Middle Eastern and Central Asian hydrocarbons and its importance for the energy security of Europe will only grow, as evidenced by the map of existing and planned pipelines below.

The EU needs an amicable Turkey and it’s unclear how much Europe is ready to swallow in order to ensure Turkey’s cooperation.

Related: It’s Not Looking Good For Canadian LNG

Apparently, it can swallow a lot. There have been reports that Erdogan’s regime supports ISIS, despite the fact that the country’s military has taken part in airstrikes against ISIS targets in Syria. And while much of this news can be considered Russian propaganda, no one is quite sure exactly how much. Turkey is reportedly one of the channels for ISIS oil, and Erdogan’s own son is purported to have benefitted from that. One Turkish MP was quoted as saying that the President uses ISIS to deal with the Kurds.

In short, the political developments in Turkey should give its European neighbors cause for concern. After all, Turkey is preparing to become an EU member.

It seems, however, that membership in the EU is not as high on the agenda in Ankara. Complete control over the country is, however. And Erdogan is not exactly concerned about European opinion right now – Europe needs Turkey more than Turkey needs Europe and, moreover, one of Erdogan’s stated aims is to make Turkey independent from the West. How realistic this is is another question; but the fact remains that Turkey is firmly on the path to an authoritarian regime, with all the grim but predictable consequences from such a development.

By Irina Slav of Oilprice.com

Related: Germany About To Make Big Changes To Its Renewables Policy
Related: World’s Largest Shipping Company Preparing For Another Oil Price Crash

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:
•A Glimpse Into What Saudi Arabia’s New Oil Policy Will Look Like
•Saudi Arabia To List Aramco Shares In New York, London, Hong Kong
•Influential Saudi Oil Minister Dismissed
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Well this will sure stir the regional pot....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.voanews.com/content/un-kenya-plan-close-refugee-camps/3322254.html

UN Urges Kenya to Reconsider Plan to Close Refugee Camps

VOA News
May 09, 2016 4:30 PM

The United Nations refugee agency is calling on Kenya to reconsider its plans to close the country's two main refugee camps, saying the move would have "devastating consequences" for hundreds of thousands of people.

UNHCR said in a statement Monday that it viewed the plans by Kenya's government with "profound concern." It urged the government to "avoid taking any action that might be at odds with its international obligations" and said the safety of hundreds of thousands of refugees hinges on Kenya's generosity.

Kenya announced Friday that it would close the Dadaab and Kakuma refugee camps "within the shortest time possible," citing security concerns, particularly from al-Shabab, a Somali-backed Islamist group that has carried out several mass attacks in Kenya. It said that hosting the refugees, who are mostly from Somalia, posed "immense security challenges."

The two-page statement stopped short of saying refugees would be expelled. However, it said the government has disbanded its Department of Refugee Affairs as a first step, and is working on a mechanism to close the camps.

Dadaab, in northeast Kenya, is considered the world's largest refugee camp and currently houses nearly 330,000 people, mostly Somalis. Kakuma, in northwestern Kenya, is home to another 55,000.

Kenya's government Friday acknowledged its decision will cause harm to the refugees and said the international community must take steps to minimize their pain and suffering.

The country hosts about 600,000 refugees in all. About three-fourths are from Somalia, with most of the others coming from South Sudan.

Kenya's government has threatened to close the refugee camps in the past, but never followed through.

Al-Shabab has carried out several major attacks on Kenyan territory, most notably the 2013 attack on Nairobi's Westgate Mall that killed 67 people and the 2015 attack on a college in the town of Garissa that killed 148.

Al-Shabab began launching attacks in Kenya after Kenyan troops entered Somalia to fight the militant group in 2011.
 
Top