WAR 06-25-2016-to-07-01-2016_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

[Housecarl]

And people wonder why the Israelis have a case of the jaws against the Palestinians and "peace" has been so elusive....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-36671991

Israeli girl stabbed to death by Palestinian inside bedroom

5 minutes ago
From the section Middle East

A teenage Israeli girl has been stabbed to death in an attack at a Jewish settlement in the occupied West Bank.

Thirteen-year-old Hallel Yaffa Ariel was attacked while she slept inside her bedroom in Kiryat Arba.

A security guard who responded to the incident was wounded before the attacker was shot dead by other guards.

The Palestinian health ministry identified the assailant as 19-year-old Mohammed Tarayreh, 19, from the nearby village of Bani Naim.

Thirty-four Israelis have now been killed in a wave of knife, gun and car-ramming attacks since October. More than 200 Palestinians - mostly attackers, Israel says - have also been killed in that period.

The assailants who have been killed have been shot either by their victims or by security forces as they carried out attacks. Some attackers have been arrested.

In Thursday's incident, the attacker infiltrated Kiryat Arba before entering Hallel Ariel's home, which is next to a fence surrounding the settlement.

Israeli media reported that the girl was repeatedly stabbed in the upper body.

She was taken in a critical condition to the Shaare Zedek Medical Centre in Jerusalem, where she died shortly after arriving, hospital officials said.

The security guard, believed to be a 30-year-old man, reportedly suffered multiple stab and gunshot wounds when he confronted the attacker. He is in a serious condition at the Hadassah Medical Centre in Ein Karem.

Kiryat Arba is located on the outskirts of the flashpoint city of Hebron, where many of the recent wave of attacks have taken place.

 

[Housecarl]

Stand by folks, this is about to get "dumb and loud".....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.stripes.com/news/chinese...-ruling-over-south-china-sea-dispute-1.416934

Chinese statement rejects any ruling over South China Sea dispute

By Erik Slavin
Stars and Stripes
Published: June 30, 2016

YOKOSUKA NAVAL BASE, Japan — China has delivered a new statement rejecting any ruling by an international court over its actions in the South China Sea, potentially putting Beijing at odds with the United States and Asia-Pacific nations.

In a post on China’s Foreign Ministry website Thursday, Beijing argued that the Philippines’ case against it to the Permanent Court of Arbitration “breaches international law” because its disputes aren’t being resolved bilaterally.

A Philippine win on some of the 15 claims in the case, which will be ruled upon July 12, would bolster U.S. arguments that some of China’s actions, which include building up and militarizing artificial islands, have no standing under international law.

U.S. Navy ships and aircraft have repeatedly transited near the islands occupied by China, in areas which Washington considers part of the global commons under the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea.

China has labeled such operations a violation of its sovereignty.

The new statement delivered by Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei argues that the PCA, a 121-nation dispute resolution body, has no jurisdiction over the case.

“With regard to territorial issues and maritime delimitation disputes, China does not accept any means of third-party dispute settlement or any solution imposed on China,” Hong said.

The court agrees to an extent; it doesn’t make rulings on who rightfully owns any of the islands in the South China Sea, which are claimed by China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines.

However, in an earlier motion, the court ruled that it did have jurisdiction to hear several Philippine arguments.

Perhaps the most controversial argument would declare China’s “nine-dash line” in conflict with the Law of the Sea convention.

China has never clarified what the line means on its maps; however, it has inferred that the line covering 90 percent of the sea is a territorial boundary.

That line also cuts through the 200-mile exclusive economic zones of multiple nations, including the Philippines.

Chinese and Philippine ships have engaged in low-level showdowns at sea over territory and fishing rights. Such actions concern the U.S., which is allied to the Philippines under a defense treaty.

It remains unclear how the court will rule on the nine-dash line, but other aspects appear to be in the Philippines’ favor, Paul Gewirtz, constitutional law professor and director of the Paul Tsai China Center at Yale, wrote in a Brookings report in May.

One such argument is that Fiery Cross Reef, an artificial island where China has built a military-grade airfield and added self-propelled artillery, doesn’t gain some of the economic and territorial benefits associated with islands and continental shelves.


Gewirtz dismissed Beijing’s assertion that the disputes could only be settled privately between it and Manila.

“The agreements with the Philippines that China has invoked are vague political statements,” he said. “The arbitration tribunal has already rejected China’s arguments based on this exception, and properly so.”

Although China hasn’t agreed to participate in the case, it has issued public position papers the court has considered in its deliberations.

China reiterated Thursday it would not consider any ruling from the court as valid. The U.S., which the court considers a member state, disagrees.

Defense Secretary Ash Carter noted during his talks with Singaporean leaders on June 4 that the “ruling on the Philippines-China claims will be binding on both parties,” Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook said in a statement.

 

[Housecarl]

Hummm.....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2016/06/667_208261.html

Posted : 2016-06-30 10:52
Updated : 2016-06-30 13:41

Give North Korea what it wants

By Oh Young-jin

It's high time for a change in tactics on North Korea. Instead of trying to prevent the North ¨D more specifically its leader ¨D from getting what it wants, why not give it exactly this as a horse with a Trojan streak or a chalice lined with poison.


For this strategy, above all, it is important to see what Pyongyang wants.

First, it wants to be recognized by the world as a nuclear weapon state. What does this mean?

The North wants this recognition so badly that it has been written into its constitution.

Striking a different path from his father and grandfather, the 33-year-old leader Kim Jong-un, has worked his state propaganda machine overtime and frequently played the lead role himself in bragging about the latest developments in its missile and nuclear development.

By now, it is clear that Kim has a purpose for trying to get credit for the progress in his country's programs for weapons of mass destruction.

It is a kind of reputation-building effort by Kim, who only has his "royal" pedigree to claim to be dictator-for-life in the gulag state. His father, Kim Jong-il, allegedly stage-managed a series of terrorist attacks and provocations against the South. His grandfather, Kim Il-sung, was the one who led an invasion against the South as a proxy of the now defunct Soviet Union.

The current one doesn't have anything to claim to be his. He obviously dreams of riding on the success of WMD programs, giving himself the legitimacy he lacks.

Now, what would we, the rest of the world, get or pay in return for allowing Kim to claim that he has made the North a nuclear state?

First of all, we could simply let the North rot by not paying attention to it. The North is a country of limited resources ¨D a fact that can't change just because it has outlived pundits' expectations. Hopefully, it would be a slow-motion death for being dragged into its expensive weapons programs.

Or we can invite Kim, elated over the global recognition, out of his cocoon state, give him a party, hoping he inadvertently lets in the wind of change. The end result is the demise of the North as we know it.

There are two kinds of recognition ¨D five nuclear states that are recognized by the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) and those outside it such as Pakistan and India. Israel is presumed to be nuclear capable, although it remains ambiguous on its possession.

The North is too open to be treated like Israel. If it is put together with Pakistan and India, we may ask the North to return to the NPT, which will allow a peek into what it really has. Also this status wouldn't give the North much except for recognition of its ownership of nuclear weapons and missiles. Last time it was checked, Pakistan and India were having a hard time in joining the Nuclear Suppliers' Group, empowering them to trade related materials.

There are bound to be complex issues entailing whatever recognition may be given to the North. First, it could be taken as a bad example by which a rogue state is rewarded for egregious behavior, encouraging other rogues to follow the example.

This could lead to the breakdown of the current NPT order, likely triggering a nuclear arms race in Northeast Asia.

Then, the North may threaten its neighbors and extort them by brandishing its nuclear weapons.

The very assumption that time is not on the North's side on these new tactics may be fundamentally flawed. But we can't expect what U.S. President Obama called a "moral revolution" to replace the "logic of fear" in the North anytime soon.

This necessitates the adoption of a new approach because the current approach has not worked. Neither ignoring the North nor slapping sanctions on it has worked.

Giving the North a sense of recognition and bringing it out for dialogue in one big waiting game may be a kind of constructive engagement that we need.

Just recalling what has taken place recently would make it not so bad a deal.

Here is the account.

The world has been reduced to the spectator watching North Korea's missile test as if it is a holiday firework. Last week, the North claimed a success in its testing of intermediate range ballistic missile, so far known as Musudan, and now renamed Hwangsong-2.

As Pyongyang boasted of progress made in re-entry technology, pivotal to striking the U.S. base in Guam, Seoul, Tokyo and Washington as well as the United Nations went through what has now become routine in the case of d¨¦j¨¤ vu. Seoul repeated its pledge not to accept a nuclear North Korea and threatened to retaliate against any provocations. Japan monitored the trajectory before calling it off, while the U.S. and the U.N. issued condemnation. North Korea praised its young dictator and gave him a pat on its back for going mano-a-mano with the U.S.

It's time to stop shaking our fists to the sky every time the North launched Taepodong or Musudan missiles.

Oh Young-jin is The Korea Times' chief editorial writer. Contact him at foolsdie5@ktimes.com or foolsdie@gmail.com.

foolsdie@koreatimes.co.kr

Kim Jong-un tightens grip on power with new title
N. Korea pledges to bolster nuke deterrence against U.S.
N. Korea vows to improve people's livelihood

 

[Housecarl]

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.buzzfeed.com/borzoudara...dle-easts-wars?utm_term=.uyoWJKv6V#.xgaBk16VN

Turkey Has Become The Hub Of All The Middle East’s Wars

The attack on Istanbul’s Ataturk airport shows how the country has gone from a destination for international commerce and tourism to becoming a magnet for terrorist violence.

posted on Jun. 29, 2016, at 10:19 a.m.

Borzou Daragahi
BuzzFeed News Middle East Correspondent

Mitch Prothero
Michael Hastings Fellow

Reporting From Istanbul, Turkey

ISTANBUL — It was a dream gig for a young guy from an economically depressed part of southwest Iran: Live in cosmopolitan Istanbul and guide tourists from busy Ataturk airport to their hotels. Just before 10 p.m. on Tuesday night, Radmehr Sepantan was standing outside the arrivals hall waiting for another routine batch of arrivals from Tehran. That’s when the first bomb struck.

“It exploded outside the exit door,” said Radmehr Sepantan, a 31-year-old from the Iranian city of Abadan. “I went toward it because I saw some people covered in blood and wanted to help.”

It was an impulse that might have saved his life during an attack that involved three suicide bombers and plunged Europe’s third busiest airport into a night of death, chaos and terror.

As the blood stains were washed away from the floors and broken glass and debris hauled off in the morning hours, the human toll rose to at least 41 killed and 239 injured.

For Turkey, the attack marked a new watershed for violence in a year that has turned a country once known for its thriving economy into a logistics hub and battlefield of all the Middle East’s wars — driven by politics, tinged with sectarian and ethnic animosities — as well as a magnet for terrorism. In the last year, at least 671 people were killed and 1,719 people were wounded in 434 terrorist attacks by Kurdish separatist and Islamist extremists, according to statistics compiled by Verisk Maplecroft, a risk management consultancy.

No one has claimed responsibility for the airport attack yet. But Turkish officials and security experts said it bore all the hallmarks of ISIS, which is fighting a U.S.-led coalition that includes Turks to hold onto its self-proclaimed caliphate straddling northern Syria and Iraq. The high-profile attack puts Turkey under increased pressure at a time when it grapples with multiple threats and also demonstrated what many officials and security experts consider ISIS’s continued potency even as it loses operatives to arrests and territory to the U.S.-led coalition.

“It’s probably true that it was committed by ISIS,” said Menderes Cinar, a political scientist at Istanbul’s Baskent University. “We notice a shift. Before, they were targeting Kurds. Now since the government has finally turned on ISIS, they target the state and the Turks.”

Sepantan and the large collegial crowd of tour guides, travel agents and drivers who make their living off off the passengers at the arrivals lounge of Ataturk rushed to help those hurt in the bombing outside the terminal. “We were dragging the bodies one by one, wounded, dead,” he said.

That’s when the second bomb hit, this time inside the terminal. “It was very terrifying,” he recalled.

Elsewhere in the gleaming terminal, a third suicide bomber had somehow entered, firing off an assault rifle at passengers before he was shot by one or more security officials, according to a video posted online. The extraordinary sequence, captured on closed-circuit television, showed him lying on the ground, his weapon fallen from his hands as a security official approached him, shot him several times and scampered off before he blew himself up. Turkish officials say the heroic security official survived the attack.

Iraqi journalist Steve Nabil and his wife were transiting through Istanbul on their honeymoon when the attack took place.

“My wife was sitting at Nero cafe while I went to the third floor to get food from Sbarro,” he wrote in an account on Twitter. “Heard shots. Ran fast toward her. Came down the stairs to see the court empty and the terrorist firing toward us.”

The two managed to break into a hair salon and find shelter inside a closet. “The screams of the victims and the blood everywhere didn’t allow us to sleep,” he wrote. “This child stared at the blood in shock. Longest 45 minutes ever.”

Other passengers, including a Western diplomat who had arrived in the city from the capital, Ankara, described panic as they were hustled from one section of the massive airport to another by confused Turkish security officials.

“Everything was OK, and then all of a sudden there was an explosion and everyone panicked, and then there was another explosion and then everyone really panicked,” said Trice, 36, a businessman from the Democratic Republic of Congo traveling to Istanbul with his brother. “We didn’t know which way to go because we were afraid there would be more explosions.”

In recent years, Ataturk has become a symbol of Turkey’s global ambitions, hosting one of the fastest-growing airlines in the world with connections spanning Europe, Africa, Asia and North America. Named after the secular founder of Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, who dissolved the caliphate in 1924, the airport must have made an enticing target for ISIS. Last August ISIS released a video calling on Turks to rise up against President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and help conquer Istanbul.

“The Islamic State is at war with the Turkish state,” said Anthony Skinner, a Turkey specialist at Verisk Maplecroft. “The Turkish government and Istanbul, the former capital of the Ottoman Empire, have immense symbolic value to the fanatical armed group.”

Ataturk is one of the most well-guarded airports in the world. Passengers and visitors are searched and their bags scanned by x-rays even before entering either the arrivals or departures halls. As the U.S. experience in Iraq has shown, adding layers of security guards and checkpoints does little to protect civilians from terrorists determined to inflict maximum harm.

“The Istanbul Ataturk airport attack could have been far more lethal had it not been for existent security measures and the response of airport security,” said Skinner. “No security apparatus would be able to effectively contain and neutralize the threat faced by Turkey today.”

But security experts pointed to broader intelligence and political failures that may have contributed to the security threats now engulfing the country. On Wednesday, Turkey announced it had shelled 15 ISIS positions in Syria a day earlier. But Turkey originally turned a blind eye to foreign fighters transiting through the country to join rebel groups fighting Bashar Assad’s regime in Syria. Some of those fighters later joined what became ISIS.

“These attacks, they are a failure of Turkish policy,” said Cinar. “At the beginning, they focused on other issues instead of focusing on ISIS.”

Turkey finds itself in a uniquely vulnerable geographic and strategic position. This week, faced with multiple threats, it announced resolutions to a longstanding dispute with Israel and appeared to make amends with Russia over the downing of a plane in Syria last year. Turkish officials described the moves as part of an effort to signal to the world that Ankara was seeking to minimize tensions with other countries.

“There was an assessment that the regional situation was going to continue to be dire,” said Sinan Ulgen, a Turkey specialist at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “For the foreseeable future, the region is going to continue to generate instability and insecurity. So Turkey could little continue to have these damaged relations.”

Some analysts suggested the attack was linked to the recent Turkish-Israeli diplomatic rapprochement after years of tension over the deaths of nine Turkish activists on a humanitarian mission to Gaza in 2010. Likelier, it was the other way around: The deal with Israel was probably spurred by Turkey’s need for friends during dire times.

What’s more, ISIS likely spent weeks or more planning the airport operation. It required identifying and training three bombers to complete the mission, establishing multiple safe houses for the bombers and logistical supporters, procuring or manufacturing explosives and the automatic weapons used in the attack, as well as transporting both the bombers and the equipment to Istanbul.

Once the pieces are in place, the cell would have to manufacture the bombs and suicide devices — consistent and effective bomb-making requires substantial skills and effort as well as a safe place that’s generally separate from the bombers themselves.

Scholars have puzzled over ISIS’s refusal to take credit for attacks in Turkey while it constantly boasts of other operations across the globe, even dubiously taking credit for killings in which it likely had no operational role. Aymenn al Tamimi, a blogger and a leading expert on ISIS said the group likely wants to punish Ankara for its role in the anti-ISIS coalition, but without forcing the government to pursue a widespread crackdown on the significant assets the group appears to still have inside Turkey.

“They don’t want to provoke a more direct Turkish intervention by taking credit for such large-scale attacks,” he said in an interview. But the group still conducts a number of attacks in order to “stir up paranoia and fear in Turkey.”
.

Borzou Daragahi is a Middle East correspondent for BuzzFeed News and is based in Istanbul.

Contact Borzou Daragahi at borzou.daragahi@buzzfeed.com.


Mitch Prothero is the 2016-2017 Michael Hastings National Security Fellow. Contact this reporter at mitch.prothero@buzzfeed.com PGP 0252 B66A 2C6F DD42 E42F 43BB DCF2 65ED 9F62 A830

Contact Mitch Prothero at mitch.prothero@buzzfeed.com.

 

[China Connection]

I think this upcoming world war will see countries sent back to the stone age quickly.

America I see as a push over in a modern war. Just target the farmers. Starve the cities.

////////////////////////////////////////////////////


The United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has estimated that 11.4 million unauthorized immigrants lived in the United States in January 2012. According to DHS estimates, "the number of illegal immigrants peaked around 12 million in 2007 and has gradually declined to closer to 11 million."
Illegal immigration to the United States - Wikipedia, the free ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_to_the_United_States

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Officials said an average of 4,986,000 people lived on farms in 1987, or 2 percent of the United States population of 243.4 million. That compared with 5,226,000 in 1986, or 2.2 percent of the national population of 241.1 million.

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/07/20/us/farm-population-lowest-since-1850-s.html

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Agriculture is a major industry in the United States, which is a net exporter of food. As of the 2007 census of agriculture, there were 2.2 million farms, covering an area of 922 million acres (3,730,000 km2), an average of 418 acres (1.69 km2) per farm.
Agriculture in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_the_United_States

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

One night of planned killings and what do you have. Kill and throw a few matches.?

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////

China has about half its population on small farms.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Employment in agriculture and forestry remained relatively constant in recent years. Agriculture and forestry employment accounted for about 14 percent of total employment in 1999, about the same level as a decade earlier. Russia comprises roughly three-quarters of the territory of the former Soviet Union, but only a small amount of this vast area is suited for agriculture because of its arid climate and inconsistent rainfall. Nevertheless, with 133 million hectares of arable land, a large agrarian workforce (14 percent of the total), and 146 million inhabitants to feed, Russia is a major regional and global agricultural producer and consumer. The Russian fishing industry is the world's fourth-largest, behind Japan, the United States, and China. Russia accounts for one-quarter of the world's production of fresh and frozen fish and about one-third of world output of canned fish. Russia has a major forestry industry, possessing one-quarter of the world's forests.

Read more: http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/economies/Europe/Russia-AGRICULTURE.html#ixzz4D3g9jNua

 

[Housecarl]

Hummm.......

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/30/politics/syria-us-russia-assad/

U.S. eyes military cooperation with Russia in Syria

CNN Digital Expansion DC Elise Labott
By Elise Labott, CNN
Updated 10:30 PM ET, Thu June 30, 2016


Washington (CNN) — The Obama administration is considering a plan to coordinate strikes against terrorist groups in Syria with Russia if Moscow agrees to use its leverage with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to stop bombing U.S.-backed rebels, U.S. officials said Thursday.

The possible cooperation comes even as top administration officials publicly criticize Moscow's own military actions in the country.

Under the proposed plan, the U.S. military and Russian Air Force would expand joint airstrikes against the al Qaeda-linked Jabhat al-Nusra, which is primarily fighting regime forces.

In exchange for deepening the military cooperation, Russia would halt its attacks on U.S.-backed rebels and other groups the U.S. does not consider terrorists, and agree to pressure Assad -- a close Russian ally -- to stop them as well.

Several U.S. officials familiar with the deliberations were highly skeptical Moscow would end up making good on such a deal, however.


The proposed plan, first reported by The Washington Post, has been the product of intense interagency debate, the officials said. The Post reported a text has been sent to Moscow, but two other senior officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said no final decisions have been made.

While he declined to discuss specific details of the proposed partnership, State Department spokesman John Kirby on Thursday acknowledged the effort to coordinate more closely with Russia

"We have been clear about Russia's obligations to ensure regime compliance with the cessation of hostilities," Kirby said. "We have also been clear about the danger posed by al Qaeda in Syria to our own national security. We are looking at a number of measures to address both of these issues."

While officials said the plan has the support of Secretary of State John Kerry, other top administration officials, including Defense Secretary Ash Carter, are said to be wary of deepening cooperation with Russia.

On Thursday, Carter spoke about Russia's unhelpful presence in Syria but said there was the potential for cooperation if Moscow stepped up its strikes against ISIS and helped move the political process for resolving the Syrian civil war forward.

"If the Russians would do the right thing in Syria -- and that's an important condition -- as in all cases with Russia, we're willing to work with them," Carter said.

An agreement with Russia to stop targeting moderate opposition forces could prove useful as the U.S. helps a coalition of Syrian Arab and Kurdish rebels to advance on ISIS self-proclaimed capital of Raqqa, something Carter said Washington was "very eager" to see happen "as soon as possible."

"Those are the forces that we are going to position to ... envelop and collapse ISIL's control of Raqqa," Carter said, using another acronym for the terror group.

Moscow has justified its airstrikes against moderate opposition forces by saying they have been entangled with al-Nursa and are not identifiable. The U.S. has pledged to try and separate the moderate rebels from al-Nusra fighters, but has often been unable to do so.

Russia's Defense Ministry hinted at the problem and the prospect of cooperation between Washington and Moscow earlier this month, saying Russia had suggested "compiling a joint map with actual information about location of forces active in Syria," but that no progress had been made toward that end.

The decision to deepen military cooperation is surprising, given the Obama administration's public criticism of Russia's role in Syria as both a cessation of hostilities negotiated in February and efforts to reach a political settlement in the war-torn country are on the verge of collapse.

Russia insists it has been targeting ISIS forces, but the majority of its airstrikes have been against U.S.-backed rebels battling Assad's forces, according to the U.S.

Kerry recently threatened a "Plan B" to increase arms to Syrian rebels if Russia and Assad did not change tactics and stop targeting moderate opposition groups supported by the U.S. and its European and Arab partners.

Earlier this month in Oslo, a visibly frustrated Kerry complained that Russia and the Assad regime were violating the February ceasefire agreement and stonewalling the delivery of desperately needed humanitarian aid.

"Russia needs to understand that our patience is not infinite," Kerry said. "In fact, it is very limited with whether or not Assad is going to be held accountable."

Troubled by the lack of leverage over both Russia and Assad, 51 U.S. diplomats sent a dissent memo to the State Department earlier this month calling for military action against Assad. The memo argued that neither Assad nor Russia have taken past ceasefires and negotiations seriously and suggested a more robust military approach was needed to force political change in Syria.

Kerry himself has advocated a more muscular U.S. military posture in Syria to put pressure on Russia and force Assad to negotiate a political settlement.

But even as it debates deeper military cooperation, the administration seems to be hedging its bets. Several senior administration officials told CNN earlier this week the administration was discussing possibly declaring the cessation of hostilities over and ending its cooperation with Russia if Moscow continued to violate the ceasefire and block the flow humanitarian aid.

But, at least for now, senior administration officials say the White House has concluded there is no alternative in Syria to trying to work with Russia, while attempting to keep the violence to a minimum.

On Wednesday, CIA Director John Brennan told an audience at the Council on Foreign Relations that Russia was violating the cessation of hostilities and that Assad was in a stronger position than a year ago because of Moscow's help. But he said he believed Russia was determined to "crush" terrorist groups like Jabhat al-Nusra.

And he acknowledged there was "no way forward on the political front without active Russian cooperation."

 

[Housecarl]

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2016/06/30/editorials/musudan-missile-launches/#.V3XuF4-cHIV

Editorials

Musudan missile launches

Jun 30, 2016
Article history

With its latest ballistic missile launch tests, North Korea has continued to defy repeated international condemnations and resolutions by the United Nations Security Council. North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, who hailed the tests last week as a success, should realize that his regime’s nuclear weapons and missiles development programs will only deepen the country’s international isolation and economic woes. Kim’s nuclear weapons policy could eventually lead to a collapse of his regime instead of making it stronger.

Pyongyang launched two Musudan intermediate-range ballistic missiles on June 22, which landed in the Sea of Japan. The first launch is regarded as a failure as it flew only 150 km before disintegrating. But the launch of the second missile, which flew some 400 km, is largely seen as a success. The second missile reached an altitude of more than 1,000 km — with the state-run Korean Central New Agency claiming 1, 413.6 km — before impacting the sea.

Prior to the June 22 launches, North Korea carried out five ballistic missile tests in April and May. For a country that can’t feed its own people to conduct so many ballistic missile launch tests in such a short span of time is abnormal. As the Security Council pointed out in its press statement after last week’s launches, North Korea “is diverting resources to the pursuit of ballistic missiles while” its “citizens have great unmet needs.”

In its first party congress in 36 years held in May, the Workers’ Party of Korea — whose power is supreme and even outranks the constitution — named Kim to the newly created post of chairman of the ruling party and upheld the policy of simultaneously pursuing development of nuclear weapons and economic development. This is the wrong path for North Korea to take if it wishes to become a prosperous country. It should take the criticism in the Security Council statement seriously and abandon its nuclear weapons and missiles programs.

Given Pyongyang’s position and its repeated missile tests, the United Nations will have no other choice but to have its member states strictly implement economic sanctions against the North. Kim should consider the long-term impact the sanctions will have on his country and its people. Pyongyang would be making a misjudgment if it thinks that it has ways to circumvent the sanctions and successfully pursue economic development. Kim must realize that the more destitute a county’s people are, the weaker the state’s foundation becomes. This is what happened when Eastern European states in the Soviet bloc collapsed in the early 1990s.

Assessing North Korea’s latest tests, the Defense Ministry said that the Musudan missile has “a certain degree of functions” as an intermediate-range ballistic missile and that the North’s missiles pose a serious concern to Japan’s security. John Schilling, a U.S. aerospace engineer and analyst of North Korea’s missile program, says the latest test “finally demonstrated the full performance of the missile’s propulsion system and at least a minimally functional guidance system” although “the trajectory was not representative of an operational launch and so leaves open questions about the performance of the re-entry vehicle.” If the Musudan missile becomes operational, it is expected to be capable of flying about 3,500 km, putting the United States’ Andersen Air Force Base on Guam — and its B-52 strategic bombers — within range.

In view of North Korea’s moves, the Japanese government’s National Security Council has decided to push the production and deployment of the SM-3 Block II A missile, a new sea-launched missile to counter ballistic missiles that use a high altitude trajectory. But the program will take several years before it becomes operational. Another option would be to introduce a ground-based Terminal High Altitude Area Defense missile (THAAD). Both projects, however, may face budgetary problems.

The U.S., meanwhile, is planning to introduce the THAAD system in South Korea. North Korea’s continued development of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles together with the pursuit of missile defense systems by the U.S., Japan and South Korea, and China’s naval buildup, increases the risk of an arms race in Northeast Asia. Leaders of the governments concerned as well as the U.N. Security Council need to make serious efforts to reduce regional tensions.

It is possible that international sanctions and coordinated actions by the U.S., Japan and South Korea will only persuade North Korea to step up its provocative acts. The countries concerned should continue to emphasize to Pyongyang that only by abandoning its nuclear weapons and missile programs will North Korea be able to enjoy stability and prosperity.

The Security Council statement says that its members “expressed their commitment to a peaceful, diplomatic and political solution to the situation.” The U.S. and China — the sole ally of Pyongyang — must play a leading role in these efforts.

-----

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2016/07/485_208375.html

Posted : 2016-07-01 13:05
Updated : 2016-07-01 13:05

Seoul rebukes N. Korea for sticking to claim on nuclear state

South Korea on Friday condemned North Korea for making nuclear threats, warning that Pyongyang will face deeper isolation if it does not give up its illusion that it is a nuclear power state.

Seoul's reaction came a day after the North's state committee on inter-Korean affairs claimed that Pyongyang is a nuclear weapons state equipped with smaller, lighter and diversified nuclear warheads.

A spokesman at the Committee for the Peaceful Reunification warned the United States and South Korea that the more desperately they resort to sanctions and pressure, the more accurately the North will target them with its ultra-modern strike means.

Seoul's unification ministry called North Korea's insistence on calling itself a nuke state sophistry, urging Pyongyang to give up its nuclear weapons program.

"North Korea should awaken from the illusion that it is a nuclear state and take actions to show the commitment to denuclearization," ministry spokesman Jeong Joon-hee said in a regular press briefing.

He warned that if the North sticks to its nuclear arsenal, it will face deeper international isolation.

The North's committee issued its first statement on Thursday after it was elevated to a state-level organization at the country's parliamentary meeting held the day before.

Since the party congress ended in May, the North has proposed holding military talks with South Korea on several occasions.

But Seoul has rejected the North's dialogue offer as a propaganda ploy, saying that denuclearization steps should be prioritized as a precondition for dialogue. (Yonhap)

 

[China Connection]

Act 2 – Israel at War — Against her Arab neighbors, possibly Palestine. A Palestinian State will be established, so that all Israelis will be fully separated from Palestinians (listen out for mention of a 7-year treaty to be confirmed by a World Leader – probably Bush), only for Israel to viciously attack Palestine shortly thereafter.
Act 3 – Far East — “Hair-raising nuclear confrontation that threatens mankind’s existence” – Peter Lemesurier, author of The Armageddon Script, p. 223, written in 1981. Includes China invading Taiwan and a nuclear eruption on the Korean Peninsula.
Act 4 – Erosion of Confidence in ‘The System’ so severe citizens will be panicked into giving up liberties and Constitutional form of government. The plan calls for the dissolution of the US Constitution, triggered by a significant enough ‘terrorist’ attack. The ultimate intent is to introduce a global government and one-world religion.
Act 5 – The collapse of the US, and other Western economies and morals.
Act 6 – Significant population reduction using natural and man-made disasters.

http://threeworldwars.com/blog/posts/9

 

[China Connection]

Vatican to Recognize Palestinian State in New Treaty

By JODI RUDOREN and DIAA HADIDMAY 13, 2015

Photo
Pope Francis at the Vatican in 2014 with Presidents Shimon Peres of Israel, left, and Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority. Credit Franco Origlia/Getty Images

JERUSALEM — The Vatican announced Wednesday that it would soon sign a treaty that includes recognition of the “state of Palestine,” lending significant symbolic weight to an intensifying Palestinian push for international support for sovereignty that bypasses the paralyzed negotiations with Israel.

Palestinian leaders celebrated the Holy See’s endorsement as particularly important, given the international stature of Pope Francis. For Israelis, it was an emotional blow, since Francis has deep relationships with Jews dating back decades, and Christians are critical backers of their enterprise.

“The Vatican is not just a state. The Vatican represents hundreds of millions of Christians worldwide, including Palestinians, and has vast moral significance,” said Husam Zomlot, a senior Palestinian foreign-affairs official.

Israel’s Foreign Ministry said it was “disappointed” by the Vatican’s decision, and that the recognition would “not advance the peace process.” That echoed similar statements after a wave of European Parliamentary resolutions on Palestinian statehood last fall, but some Israeli analysts said the Vatican’s step hurt more.

“Even this philo-Semitic pope, this pope who cares about the Jews, even he doesn’t get it,” said David Horovitz, editor of The Times of Israel news site. “Every time something like this happens, there’s this sense of anguish. Why don’t you understand? We want to separate from the Palestinians, but on terms that don’t threaten our security.”

The Vatican announcement came as Israel’s new, more conservative government published its official guidelines, which promised to “advance the peace process” and “make an effort to reach a peace agreement with the Palestinians” but did not use the term “Palestinian state.”

While the language followed that of past coalition agreements, it caught attention because some world leaders have lately been questioning Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s commitment to the two-state solution of the long-running conflict.
Continue reading the main story

Mr. Netanyahu said on the eve of the March 17 elections that no Palestinian state would be established on his watch, then after his victory, said that he still supported the idea, but saw it as impossible under current conditions.

President Obama said then that he would “reassess” Washington’s longstanding policy of defending Israel in international forums. On Wednesday, in an interview with the pan-Arab news outlet Asharq al-Awsat, Mr. Obama said he was looking “to the new Israeli government and the Palestinians to demonstrate, through policies and actions, a genuine commitment to a two-state solution.”

In another sign of mounting European frustration with the situation, The Guardian published a letter on Wednesday from prominent former politicians and diplomats to European foreign ministers. In it they say that Mr. Netanyahu’s re-election and the new coalition required “urgent action” to pressure Israel regarding its occupation of the West Bank.

The letter further urged reconsideration of European relations with both Israelis and Palestinians, arguing that Mr. Netanyahu “has little intention of negotiating seriously for a two-state solution” and expressing “low confidence that the U.S. government will be in a position to take a lead on fresh negotiations.”

Since the breakdown of American-brokered peace talks 13 months ago, the Palestinians have been on a diplomatic campaign to leverage the nonmember, observer-state status they won in the United Nations in 2012 and create pressure on Israel.

Most of the 135 nations that have recognized a state of Palestine did so in 1988, after the Palestine Liberation Organization declared it; Sweden was the last, in October. The British, French, Spanish and Irish Parliaments have in recent months passed resolutions urging their governments to follow suit.

The Vatican has functionally dealt with Palestine as a state, welcoming its ambassador, since the 2012 United Nations vote. Francis made a grand gesture in that direction last spring when he flew directly to the West Bank from Amman, Jordan, rather than first landing in Israel, as his predecessors had. But the treaty, which had been under negotiation for a year and used “Palestine Liberation Organization” rather than “State of Palestine” in earlier drafts, formalizes the recognition.

The announcement coincides with the church’s canonization of two Palestinian nuns in a Mass Sunday that President Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority is to attend.

Hanna Amireh, a presidential aide on church affairs, said the treaty concerned the Vatican’s vast interests in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza, including the standing of church courts and taxes on church institutions and lands.

The Vatican’s endorsement of statehood, he said, counters images of Palestinians as terrorists and “is recognition of the Palestinian character that has a clear message for coexistence and peace.”

Jamal Khader, rector of the Latin Patriarchate Seminary in Jerusalem, said Pope Francis and his secretary of state, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, want “to create a new reality here.”

“The wider Arab world often thinks that it’s a Christian West against a Muslim East,” Father Khader said, “so this is an important step from the Catholic Church to show that, no, it is standing with the rights of Palestinians and with the right to a state of Palestine.”

But Rabbi David Rosen, international director of interreligious affairs for the American Jewish Committee, said he did not think the treaty “was meant to be something dramatic.” He said there had been intense wrangling between the church and the Palestinians over freedom of religion for the 60,000 Christians living in Palestinian territory among millions of Muslims.

“From the Vatican’s point of view, there is a new nomenclatural reality,” said Rabbi Rosen, “but in substance, I don’t think anyone is going to conclude that Pope Francis is any less committed to Israel’s security, welfare and flourishing.”

Daniel Levy, Middle East director of the European Council on Foreign Relations, said the Vatican treaty “is significant in terms of moral weight” but would have “no practical implication.”

“The challenge for the Palestinians for an awfully long time now has been translating a moral situation and translating sympathy and also translating Israel’s vulnerabilities, translating those into meaningful consequences,” Mr. Levy said. “The question is what happens the morning after recognition? Do those who recognize Palestine in any way have to recalibrate their bilateral relations with Israel? So far that has not been the case, and I don’t think that will be the case with the Vatican either.”

Still, for some Israelis, it had a special sting.

Yossi Klein Halevi, a senior fellow at the Shalom Hartman Institute, said he wished the Vatican could at least have waited until after the celebrations of the 50th anniversary of the Nostra Aetate, a church declaration that, among other things, absolved Jews of guilt for Jesus’ death.

“Why not let us all savor that spiritual achievement? Why muck it up with politics?” asked Mr. Halevi. “On the one hand, the Catholic Church has made profound progress in its theology toward the Jewish people and toward the Jewish return home. On the other hand, there’s this deep insensitivity here to the fears of Israelis that a solution will be imposed on us that could undermine our ability to defend ourselves in a radically unstable Middle East.”
Correction: May 19, 2015

An article on Thursday about the Vatican’s announcement that it would sign a treaty that includes recognition of the “state of Palestine” erroneously attributed a distinction to two nuns who were canonized just days after the announcement. Other speakers of Arabic have been canonized before; the nuns are not the first Arabic-speaking saints. The article also misstated, in some editions, part of the name of the body that gave the Palestinians nonmember observer status in 2012. It is the United Nations General Assembly, not the United States General Assembly.

Jodi Rudoren reported from Jerusalem, and Diaa Hadid from Ramallah, West Bank. Gaia Pianigiani contributed reporting from Rome, Rick Gladstone from New York and Irit Pazner Garshowitz from Jerusalem.


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/14/w...ize-palestinian-state-in-new-treaty.html?_r=0

 

[China Connection]

Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld


////////////////////////////////////////////////////////


United Nations - U.N. Agenda 21 depopulation of 95% of world by year 2030 is now underway,signed and approved by 200 world leaders at the Rio,Brazil Earth Summit in 1992
////////// About Me
Government Funded Soviet Gangstalking Harrassment Police State IS NOW HERE
http://www.surviveunagenda21depopulation.com/388778402
I have been government GANGSTALKED since year 2000
___________________________________________________________________________________

Evidence is happening everywhere that there is a definate austerity,de-industrialisation,DEPOPULATION AGENDA
that i have compiled on my website where an Orwellian police state dictatorship One World Government is being installed year by year and world population is being reduced from 7 billion to 500 million people to destroy the Old World Order USING ANY MEANS NECESSARY to make way for the NWO New World Order which will be a scientificaly high tech advanced world with free energy devices,anti-gravity,teleportation,faster than speed of light space travel and normal marriage will not be allowed because scientists and doctors will give people permission to reproduce children,it will be a highly controled world where all existing problems,social,moral,economic will no longer exist WHICH I PARTLY AGREE WITH in a lot of ways but what i dont agree with is the brutal mass murder genocide of over 6 billion people to achieve this i want to live out my life in a natural way like most people do.
____________________________________________________________________________

Ronald Reagan signed an agreement with Gorbachev to merge the soviet communist system with the democratic system,America is now the American Soviet and the European
Union is the European Soviet
http://www.surviveunagenda21depopulation.com/388778403
Charlotte Iserbyt worked as head of policy for education when Ronald Reagan was president


http://www.surviveunagenda21depopulation.com/

 

[Housecarl]

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.stratfor.com/geopolitical-diary/grand-bargain-syria

A Grand Bargain on Syria

Geopolitical Diary
July 1, 2016 | 02:16 GMT

The U.S. government appears to have struck a new and groundbreaking agreement on closer cooperation with Russia in Syria. The deal, reported by the Washington Post on Thursday, was allegedly made June 27 amid other major U.S. diplomatic efforts to contain the crisis in Syria after peace talks failed. Some sources even indicated that Washington facilitated the recent moves to normalize ties between Russia and Turkey, a fraught relationship that has been a source of instability for over a year.

This proposal would reportedly see U.S. forces share information on targets with Russian forces and launch a joint bombing campaign against Jabhat al-Nusra in exchange for an end to Russian bombings of moderate rebel forces. If confirmed, this would be one of the biggest shifts in strategy since the start of the Syrian civil war. The risks of a wider clash with Russia would significantly diminish, and the rebel movement would be weakened. Most important, Moscow would have an opening to both secure its interests in Syria and break its geopolitical isolation.

Washington's top priority in Syria has always been to defeat the Islamic State — this is why the U.S.-led coalition was formed in 2014. That objective remains the primary focus. The U.S. government, however, sees ending the Syrian civil war itself as crucial to achieving this goal and maintaining stability. And Washington sees the government of Syrian President Bashar al Assad as the root of Syria's problems and of the war that has fostered extremism. This was the motivation behind backing more moderate rebel forces: to coerce the Syrian government and its Russian backers to accept a transition that maintains the Syrian state institutions and ends most fighting.

For several months, Washington has pushed negotiations in Geneva, yielding numerous cease-fires. The United States also warned the Syrian government to negotiate seriously, threatening a "Plan B" of increased weapons supplies to rebel forces if the negotiations failed. The talks did eventually fail, but with the Russians ramping up their military efforts and targeting of U.S.-backed rebel forces, the United States hesitated to go to Plan B. It feared stymying future peace efforts and risking a direct clash with Russia.

The June 27 proposal is Washington's attempt to redraw the parameters in Syria and avoid further escalation. The proposal offers several concessions to Russia. The first is to actively cooperate with the Russian military, even sharing data on targeting. Moscow has clamored for this measure for some time because it would break Russia's isolation and force a conversation with Washington. U.S. Secretary of Defense Ash Carter reportedly opposed the proposal because of this concession, fearing a gradual weakening of the U.S. and allied pressure on Russia over events in Ukraine and elsewhere. The agreement also offers to set up a joint and expanded bombing campaign by U.S. and Russian forces against Jabhat al-Nusra, al Qaeda's branch in Syria, which is a principal fighting force in the wider rebellion. This, too, is a major concession to the Russians, who have been pushing the United States hard on the fact that extremist elements are a significant part of the rebel landscape.

In return, the United States has asked Russia to stop bombing moderate rebel forces and to pressure the Syrian government to do the same. Unwilling to trust the Russians with the exact locations of the rebels it supports, the United States has proposed setting up specific geographic non-bombing zones where moderate rebels are active.

Moscow is likely to be pleased with the U.S. proposal, although much depends on the zones chosen for exemption from bombing. Russia and its loyalist allies will indeed need to curtail their targeting of more moderate rebel factions. This will be balanced out, however, as they step up efforts against Jabhat al-Nusra and other jihadist groups, some of the strongest components of the rebel movement. This proposal is a golden opportunity for Russia to carry out its divide-and-conquer strategy, defeating rebel groups piecemeal. The defeat of the jihadists would mean a strengthened loyalist position relative to the remaining rebels. From such a position, the Syrian government would have little reason to make concessions to its opponents.

In addition to these built-in advantages, the plan also presents numerous loopholes for Russia to exploit. While Russia is likely to cease bombing in the designated zones, there is no guarantee that loyalist forces will halt their strikes; occasional violations can be expected. Furthermore, Jabhat al-Nusra and other jihadist groups are so deeply embedded among other rebel groups that it will be difficult to find many areas where non-bombing zones can be set up without a jihadist presence. Jabhat al-Nusra and other jihadist groups have proved to be the most effective anti-al Assad forces on the battlefield. When they have been asked to move away from other rebel partners, those partners have quickly crumbled and requested that they return. Without the help of jihadist groups, the so-called moderate opposition will sustain heavy losses. For this reason, it will be difficult for them to disentangle themselves from the jihadists. Finally, there is no assurance that Jabhat al-Nusra will not simply move its forces into the designated zones to avoid the bombing.

The pitfalls in the proposal reportedly divided the White House and necessitated weeks of deliberation. Nevertheless, the shift in strategy is in line with the Obama administration's strategy. Washington's focus has been on the Islamic State, and it has worked to deconflict with the Russians and end the Syrian civil war as part of the overall objective of maintaining stability in Syria. From the administration's point of view, although the overthrow of al Assad is desirable, it is not worth the risk of a wider conflict with Russia. Such a clash would only distract from efforts to defeat the Islamic State.

But the U.S. move will anger regional allies that have been preparing to increase support for the rebel forces. The Gulf states, principally Saudi Arabia and Qatar, will likely see the move as an outright betrayal. Already suspicious of U.S. motives, the Saudis and Qataris may abandon their recent combined effort with Washington in Syria to provide their own weaponry independently, potentially extending to delivery of man-portable air defense systems. In spite of its support for rebel groups, Turkey may be more willing to accommodate the shift given its desire to repair links with Russia and primary focus on containing the Kurdish People's Protection Units.

If the reports of the proposal prove to be accurate, the strategic landscape in Syria is set to shift significantly. With closer U.S.-Russia coordination and a weakened rebel movement, the chances of significant concessions by Russia and the Syrian government will diminish. But by eliminating the risk of escalation with Russia, the deal would give Washington greater latitude in reaching its primary goal: the defeat of the Islamic State.

 

[Housecarl]

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-kenya-attacks-idUSKCN0ZH49A

World | Fri Jul 1, 2016 5:22am EDT
Related: World, Africa

Six killed in gun attack on two buses in Kenya's Mandera


At least six people were killed when gunmen sprayed two buses with bullets on Friday in Kenya's Mandera county on the border with Somalia, a regional official said.

Mandera County Commissioner Fredrick Shisia told Reuters the attack happened at 9:30 a.m. as the buses were traveling to Mandera town from the capital Nairobi.

"So far we are talking of six dead," he said, noting that the attack had happened on the road between Wargadud and Elwak.

The United States on Thursday warned its citizens against traveling to areas near the border with Somalia because of threats from Somali militant group al Shabaab.

Shisia said it was not yet clear who was behind the attack. Mandera has been the scene of frequent al Shabaab attacks in which dozens of civilians and security personnel have been killed.


(Reporting by Duncan Miriri; Editing by Andrew Heavens and Louise Ireland)

 

[vestige]

Peres looks like someone just ran over his pup.

bump

 

[Housecarl]

http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...desh-restaurant-Gunmen-and-police-in-shootout

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.news.com.au/world/asia/d...t/news-story/e7e81640fc0c305065ccfff1be9a752d

Dhaka firefight in Bangladesh restaurant: Gunmen and police in shootout

July 2, 20164:26am


UP to nine gunmen have taken about 20 people hostage in an upmarket restaurant in Bangladesh’s capital Dhaka after exchanging fire with police.

“Unknown number of people are still inside but we cannot confirm whether they are held hostage,” Gulshan area police officer Sayedur Rahman said.

Assailants entered Holey Artisan Bakery restaurant on Road 79 in the Gulshan area and opened fire at around 9:20pm (11:20pm Friday AEST).

Several foreigners are believed to be among those still inside the restaurant.

Sumon Reza, a kitchen worker who escaped the attack at the Holey Artisan Bakery, told reporters the attackers were armed with firearms and bombs as they entered the restaurant.

Jamuna Television, quoting Reza, said the attackers chanted “Allahu Akbar” (God is Great) as they launched the attack.

A huge contingent of security guards cordoned off the area around the restaurant, trading gunfire with the attackers who set off bombs and exchanged gunfire with the security officials.

Benazir Ahmed, director general of the elite anti-crime force Rapid Action Battalion, told reporters security forces were working to save the lives of the people trapped inside.

“Some derailed youths have entered the restaurant and launched the attack. We have talked to some of the people who fled the restaurant after the attack. We want to resolve this peacefully. We are trying to talk to the attackers, we want to listen to them about what they want,” Mr Ahmed said. “Some of our people have been injured. Our first priority is to save the lives of the people trapped inside.”

Two police officers were seriously injured in the gunfight, private television station Channel 24 said.

The US Embassy in Dhaka said on its Twitter feed there were “reports of shooting and hostage situation”.

It warned people in the area to “please shelter in place and monitor news”.

In Washington, State Department spokesman John Kirby told reporters: “We are aware of reports of what appears to a hostage situation in the Gulshan neighbourhood of Dhaka.”

U.S. Embassy Dhaka ‎@usembassydhaka

Reports of shooting and hostage situation in Gulshan 2, Dhaka. Please shelter in place and monitor news.

9:54 AM - 1 Jul 2016

535 535 Retweets
126 126 likes

He said the department is aware that local security forces are on the scene, responding, and the US Embassy is in constant touch with Bangladeshi authorities concerning what is a “very fluid, very live situation”.

Mr Kirby said the embassy has accounted for 100 per cent of American citizens that are under the authority of the diplomatic chief of mission in Dhaka.

He said it was too early to say who was involved in the assault and their motivation.

Bangladesh has been reeling from a wave of murders of religious minorities and secular activists by suspected Islamist militants.

Earlier on Friday a Hindu temple worker was hacked to death in western Bangladesh.

 

[Housecarl]

More maritime distractions coming soon....recall "SCUD in a Bucket"?....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/ori...-deployment-atlantic-ocean.html#ixzz4DB3XVWJR

Iran forges ahead with Atlantic ambitions

Author Abbas Qaidaari
Posted June 30, 2016

TEHRAN, Iran — Iranian Navy commander Rear Adm. Habibollah Sayyari announced June 14 that Iran is planning to establish a naval presence in the Atlantic Ocean. In conjunction with this statement, he said, “We have yet to determine which country will assist us regarding the presence of our naval fleet. When the name of the chosen country is confirmed and announced, our strategic naval forces will deploy a training and military flotilla to the Atlantic Ocean.”

Sayyari also made announcements about new developments related to the “Mowj” (“Wave”) project, saying that Mowj frigates 3 and 4 have yet to be named but are 80% complete in terms of their construction, and thus in operation. His most important announcement, however, was about the fifth frigate in this series, which according to Sayyari is 90% complete. This vessel, which is slated to be launched in 2017, has been named Sahand. According to Sayyari, the Sahand, which is the latest type of Iranian-made frigate, has 30% greater stealth capabilities compared to earlier models and is equipped with newer weapons.

Although Sayyari did not specify the type of weapons that are to be placed on it, it is likely that this frigate will be equipped with the “Valfajr” torpedo system, surface-to-surface missiles with a greater range as well as close-in defense systems such as the Phalanx and Kashtan 3-M. Of note, an Iraqi Osa-class vessel came into Iran’s possession during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War, and Iran has ever since unsuccessfully tried to reverse-engineer its close-in defense system.

This is not the first time that an Iranian navy commander has brought up the matter of an Iranian presence in the Atlantic Ocean. Indeed, the Islamic Republic has been preparing its naval fleet to be present in the Atlantic Ocean for the past three years. Iran faces three main issues in this regard.

First, the Iranian naval fleet is inefficient. When discussing the Iranian navy and its possible presence in the Atlantic Ocean, one can obviously not compare this with the presence of strong naval fleets such as that of Russia, China or Britain. For the most part, Iran’s navy is made up of older combat and logistics ships, haulers as well as old tankers that were purchased during the reign of the shah. These vessels are designed based on the Italian and British warship platforms of the 1950s and 1960s.

Of course, there have been some modernization efforts to the extent possible with the resources available inside the country. However, compared to the modern naval fleets of Western countries, Iran still lacks combat capabilities. The most important points of weakness in Iran’s current fleet include lack of stealth capabilities, lack of vertical missile launch technology — which greatly reduces the number of rockets fired — as well as lack of efficient carrier defense systems, with 23 mm autocannons and standard missiles (Sayyad 2) mainly in use. Other weaknesses include the extent of worn-out engines and bodies in addition to the relatively low quality of the technology used in electronic and missile combat systems.

Second, there is the lack of potential host countries. Though Iran has friends in South America, it has thus far been unable to find a host country for a potential presence in the Atlantic Ocean. It appears, however, that the problem is about to be solved. In this vein, countries such as Venezuela and Cuba would be likely hosts.

Third, both the United Kingdom and the United States have strong naval presences in the Atlantic Ocean; one in the east and the other in the west. Considering that Iran does not enjoy warm political relations with either of these countries, it is likely that they will react harshly toward Iran’s presence in the Atlantic Ocean.

In spite of these difficulties, however, Iran is likely to deploy a flotilla to the Atlantic Ocean. It has already deployed ships to the South China Sea, the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait, the Gulf of Aden, the Indian Ocean, the Mediterranean Sea, the Suez Canal and the Strait of Malacca.

To be clear, aspects related to psychological warfare are more important than the military aspect of the planned Atlantic Ocean deployment. Iran’s limited fleet is incapable of facing possible threats of much stronger naval fleets. However, the presence of a middle power such as Iran in the Atlantic Ocean could have a major psychological impact on its rivals, especially the United States. It thus appears that Iran, just as is the case with its missile program, is trying to use its navy to achieve the goals of its broader gunboat diplomacy. In other words, rather than passively seeking to decrease tension caused by the presence of foreign fleets in the Persian Gulf, it is trying to kick the ball in the other side’s court through these kinds of measures.

As soon as Iran further enters critical regions such as the eastern Mediterranean, the Suez Canal, the Gulf of Aden, the South China Sea and, in the future, the Atlantic Ocean, the media and politicians will start paying attention. This attention could in turn lessen the pressure caused by temporary tensions between Iranian and other fleets in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz. Of note, Iran is also trying to increase its combat experience by conducting joint naval exercises with countries such as India, Pakistan, Russia and China. Of course, at home, Iran’s navy has to deal with expanding threats from rivals such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Israel.

Lastly, Iran has an inherent desire to behave like a grand power — a desire that has its roots in the country’s long history. In spite of four decades of restrictions on procuring equipment, Iran’s navy has so far been deployed on important missions. It is not clear yet whether the removal of the UN arms embargo under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action by 2020 — and the possibility of Iran receiving newer and larger ships and submarines from its allies — will increase the number of such missions.

What is clear, however, is that Iran has an ambitious plan to expand its naval fleet to play a key role in all parts of the world. In this vein, Iran’s policy of designing and manufacturing heavy nuclear submarines and advanced destroyers, as well as development of surface-to-surface missiles and naval ports, shows that the country is aiming to become a naval power in the future — just as has been put forth as a goal of Iran’s defense programs by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.


Abbas Qaidaari
Contributor, Iran Pulse

Abbas Qaidaari is an Iranian international security and defense policy analyst. On Twitter: @abbasqaidaari

_________

ETA: Ignoring the usual poorly done/over the top propaganda, all Iran needs to do is buy a couple of older Panamax cargo ships, fit them out as fleet auxiliaries like their old UK built oiler/stores ship, paint them navy grey, run up the Iranian Navy ensign and send them out with one or two of these light frigates/corvettes to go play games off in the Atlantic or Pacific. All they'd have to do is figure a way to quietly arm them with a couple of their new solid fueled MRBMs or cruise missiles and they've got a "second strike force" against the US on the relative cheap, even if they're vulnerable as all get go.