WAR 07-02-2016-to-07-08-2016_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

[Housecarl]

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/0...gainst-resurgent-taliban-us-general-says.html

Afghanistan

Troop reductions no impact on mission against 'resurgent' Taliban, US general says

By Lucas Tomlinson · Published July 08, 2016 · FoxNews.com
Comments 18

KABUL – Gen. Joseph Votel, head of U.S. Central Command, arrived in Kabul Friday to meet with his commanders to discuss a “resurgent” Taliban two days after President Obama announced he would keep thousands of additional troops in Afghanistan when he leaves office in January, reversing a previous decision.

“We see close ties between the Taliban, Al Qaeda, Haqqani (and) a variety of organizations in Afghanistan,” Gen. Votel told reporters from four media outlets traveling with him, including Fox News.

“They have been resurgent. They have developed stronger alliances…and that’s a concern for us,” said Votel.

Until Wednesday, the administration had planned to cut nearly half the 10,000 troops in Afghanistan by the end of the year. The new plans call for 8,448 to remain following the president’s announcement Wednesday.

Despite the planned troop reductions and Taliban gains, Gen. Votel says the military will be able to continue its counterterrorism and training of Afghan forces unabated.

“I don’t think the reductions that we are taking are going to impact the principle missions that we are doing,” he said.

This is Gen. Votel’s fifth trip to the region since assuming command on March 31. As head of Central Command, Votel is responsible for military operations stretching from Egypt to Pakistan, including the war against ISIS in Iraq and Syria.

Votel previously headed U.S. Special Operations Command, and has a long history of service in Afghanistan.

As commander of the elite 75th Ranger Regiment, he led a parachute jump into Afghanistan on October 19, 2001 to establish the first American base on the ground.

As deputy commander of the 82nd Airborne Division, he helped lead operations in eastern Afghanistan for 15 months beginning in 2007. He led Joint Special Operations Command based at Ft. Bragg beginning in June 2011, one month after the Bin Laden raid.

It was the second time since October that President Obama slowed a planned troop reduction in Afghanistan. After declaring major combat operations over at the end of 2014, the president’s original plan called for an embassy only presence of 1,000 troops in Kabul by the time he left office.

Now a force more than eight times that number will remain largely on three bases in different parts of the country.

When asked how long American forces would stay in Afghanistan, Votel would not offer a timeline.

“We’ve made a commitment here. My personal opinion is I think we do have to see this through, whether that is for decades or however long that takes,” he said.

Votel is concerned the Taliban have become stronger in the past few years resulting in a greater number of Afghan civilians and soldiers being killed.

Votel says the Taliban have taken advantage of “perceived weaknesses” of the Afghan forces, who, despite more than $68 billion earmarked by Congress since 2002, continue to suffer significant number of battlefield casualties in the past year since taking a leading role in the right against the Taliban.

Gen. Votel said President Obama’s announcement ahead of a major NATO summit in Warsaw Friday and Saturday will give American allies a clearer picture going forward.

“It was very important to make the announcement now, I think it sends the right message to our partners, certainly sends a very positive message to Afghanistan,” he said.

At the height of President Obama’s troop buildup in Afghanistan, nearly 100,000 US troops were scattered on bases throughout the country, up from nearly 40,000 when he took office in 2009.

Last month, the president authorized the U.S. military to strike the Taliban under new authorities. Previously, the U.S. military was only allowed to attack in self-defense, in support of Afghan forces in danger of being overrun and against ISIS-affiliated groups and Al Qaeda.

“Whenever (the Taliban) have been able to pull a variety of organizations together, they have become stronger…(and) that’s what we’ve seen,” he added.


Lucas Tomlinson is the Pentagon and State Department producer for Fox News Channel. You can follow him on Twitter: @LucasFoxNews

 

[Housecarl]

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.voanews.com/content/ap-u...-ruling-presents-choice-for-asia/3409018.html

News / Asia

US: South China Sea Tribunal Ruling Presents Choice for Asia

Associated Press
July 08, 2016 3:29 AM

WASHINGTON— An international tribunal ruling next week on a challenge to China's expansive claims in the South China Sea could determine whether the region is ruled by law or “raw calculations of power,” U.S. officials said Thursday.

But the officials testifying at a congressional hearing declined to say whether any move by China to militarize more disputed land features would prompt a U.S. military response.

The Permanent Court of Arbitration will rule next Tuesday in the case brought by the Philippines, a U.S. ally. China is boycotting the case in The Hague-based court and says it will not accept the verdict.

Abraham Denmark, deputy assistant secretary of defense for East Asia, urged both parties to comply with the ruling.

Denmark said it would be chance to determine “whether the Asia-Pacific's future will be defined by adherence to international laws and norms that have enabled it to prosper, or whether the region's future will be determined by raw calculations of power.”

Rep. Randy Forbes, the Virginia Republican who chairs the House subcommittee on sea power, said the world is watching whether China behaves like a responsible stakeholder in the international system, and, if not, to see how America responds.

“What we do - or don't do - to support our allies and the rules-based international system in the weeks ahead will have echoes across the region and in other corners of the globe,” Forbes said.

China claims most of the South China Sea, including islands far from its mainland, where the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia, Taiwan and Vietnam also have claims. China asserts it has historic rights of sovereignty and that the tribunal lacks jurisdiction as it did not consent to arbitration. It also says that the U.S. has no business intervening as it is not party to the disputes.

The U.S., however, says it has a stake in ensuring freedom of navigation and commerce in seas that carry more than half the world's merchant fleet tonnage. Senior State Department official Colin Willett told the hearing that the U.S. will not hesitate to defend its national security interests and honor commitments to Asia-Pacific allies and partners.

Some experts have speculated that China might militarize a reef off the Philippine coast, the Scarborough Shoal, where a standoff with China prompted the Philippines to initiate the legal case in 2013. In the past two years, China has constructed artificial islands and placed military facilities on disputed features elsewhere in the South China Sea.

Willett said the ruling in the case would not resolve sovereignty issues, but could potentially narrow down the areas that are legitimately subject to dispute.

Denmark declined to comment on whether militarization of Scarborough Shoal by China would hurt U.S. national security interests, or invoke a U.S.-Philippine treaty, which calls for the allies to help defend each other if there is an armed attack on their armed forces, public vessels, aircraft or island territories under their jurisdiction in the Pacific.

“Scarborough Reef is a disputed feature that we don't recognize any countries sovereignty over. That said our treaty commitment to the Philippines is absolutely ironclad,” said Willett, adding that occupying a currently unoccupied land feature or militarizing an occupied feature would be very dangerous and destabilizing.

Related Articles

China Paper Warns US of 'Price' to Pay in South China Sea
China Launches Military Drills Before Tribunal Ruling
Philippines Set to Talk to China After South China Sea Ruling

 

[Housecarl]

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-36742581

Iraq violence: Dozens killed in Shia shrine suicide attack

1 hour ago
From the section Middle East

Suicide bombers and gunmen have killed at least 35 people and injured some 50 others in an attack at a Shia shrine in the Iraqi town of Balad, officials say.

At least one bomber blew himself up outside the mausoleum of Sayid Mohammed bin Ali al-Hadi, which was then stormed by gunmen, reports say.

Another bomber is said to have blown himself up among fleeing worshippers.

Meanwhile the death toll from Sunday's suicide bombing in Baghdad has again been raised, from 281 to 292.

Initial reports said so-called Islamic State (IS) group had said it had carried out the attack in Balad, but IS has not confirmed this.

IS supporters online have welcomed the attack, which the group is suspected of perpetrating.

Islamic State: The full story

Worshippers were marking the Eid al-Fitr festival, celebrating the end of the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, when the site came under mortar fire.

The first bomber then struck a market at the entrance to the shrine.

A third bomber was shot dead before he was able to detonate his explosive vest, reports say.

About 50 people were wounded in the attack, police and medical sources say.

It came four days after IS carried out the deadliest bombing in Baghdad, 45 miles (70km) south of Balad, since the 2003 US-led invasion.

That attack target a shopping complex in the mainly Shia Muslim Karrada district of the city.

The militant group follows an extreme form of Sunni Islam and often targets Shias, who it regards as apostates.

IS militants overran large parts of northern and western Iraq two years ago, but government forces have since regained much of the territory.

In response to the battlefield setbacks, including the recent loss of the western city of Falluja, the militants have stepped up their attacks on civilians.

The Iraqi government has been accused of not doing enough to protect its citizens and has stepped-up security in Baghdad in response to the latest violence.

 

[Housecarl]

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://next.ft.com/content/9739d5c0-4449-11e6-9b66-0712b3873ae1

German agency accuses Iran of trying to buy nuclear technology after 2015 deal

Intelligence report tracks last year’s activity before and after July atomic accord

yesterday
by: Guy Chazan in Berlin

Iran has attempted to acquire nuclear technology in Germany even after the atomic accord it reached with western powers in Vienna last July, according to the German domestic intelligence agency.

The annual report of the Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz (BfV) said that illegal Iranian attempts to procure technology “continued on a quantitatively high level by international standards” in Germany in 2015.

“This was particularly the case for merchandise that could be deployed in the field of nuclear technology,” the report said. There was also an increase in Iranian efforts to buy parts for missiles that could be fitted with nuclear warheads, it added.

In last year’s landmark agreement, Iran agreed to roll back its nuclear programme in exchange for the lifting of western economic sanctions, ending a 12-year stand-off with the west. So far, the signs are that Iran has kept up its side of the bargain, shipping thousands of pounds of enriched uranium — almost all of its stockpile — to Russia and deactivating its heavy water reactor at Arak.

In January, the UN nuclear watchdog certified that Iran had fulfilled its initial commitments under the agreement and some sanctions were lifted as a result — although Tehran has complained that it has not received the economic benefits it was initially promised.

Tehran has always insisted that its nuclear programme was for peaceful civilian means. Iranian officials could not be contacted for comment on Thursday, a public holiday in the Islamic Republic.

The disclosures by the BfV will be welcomed by opponents of the nuclear deal, such as Israel, which says Iran cannot be trusted to give up its ambition of building an atomic bomb.

A more detailed assessment of Iran’s activities in Germany was contained in the annual report of the BfV in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany’s most populous state, which was published on Monday.

It said that counter-intelligence agents had recorded 141 attempts to acquire technology for “proliferation” purposes in 2015 — nearly twice as many as in the previous year. Two-thirds of these — or nearly 100 — were traced to Iranian entities.

But the report said Iran’s main focus was to procure parts for its missile programme, rather than for nuclear purposes. German officials have used that detail to stress that Iran is not necessarily in violation of last year’s nuclear accord.

“The agreement with Iran was about nuclear capabilities,” said one. “It has nothing to do with the ballistic missiles that Iran is in possession of.”

Neither report gives a breakdown of how much of the 2015 activity took place before or after the summer deal, but they make clear that some attempts to acquire equipment were made after July.

A UN resolution agreed as part of the July deal called upon Iran not to carry out work on missiles designed to deliver nuclear weapons. In March, Iran provoked Israeli protests after its Revolutionary Guard conducted a new round of ballistic missiles tests.

The BfV in North Rhine-Westphalia said Iran often targeted so-called “dual-use” technology that could be used for both civilian and military purposes. It said Iranians, as well as other “proliferation” states such as Pakistan, were acquiring merchandise under the pretext of “deploying it in civilian research, or in the oil, gas and steel industries”, and were often using “forged end-use certificates, or other seemingly official documents”.

The BfV also said that Iranian agents often used front companies in countries such as the United Arab Emirates, Turkey and China to conceal the final destination of the merchandise.

Volker Beck, a German MP from the opposition Green party who is also chairman of the German-Israeli Parliamentary Group, said the BfV reports were disturbing. “If we can ensure that Iran is not trying to obtain nuclear weapons, then last year’s deal with Tehran is a success,” he said. “But if the agreement is not working then that presents a big danger for the security of the region, of Israel, and of Germany.”

Additional reporting by Stefan Wagstyl

 

[Housecarl]

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://gulfnews.com/news/mena/iran/...sistent-with-nuclear-deal-spirit-un-1.1859041

Iran missile test inconsistent with nuclear deal spirit: UN

Letter by US, Britain, France and Germany says missiles used in the launches were ‘inherently capable of delivering nuclear weapons’

Published: 13:58 July 8, 2016 Gulf News
Reuters

United Nations: Iran’s ballistic missile launches “are not consistent with the constructive spirit” of a nuclear deal between Tehran and world powers, but it is up to the United Nations (UN) Security Council to decide if they violated a resolution, UN chief Ban Ki-moon said in a confidential report seen by Reuters on Thursday.

Ban’s reluctance to state whether the March missile launches flouted the council resolution, which was adopted a year ago as part of the deal to curb Iran’s nuclear work, further weakens the case for new sanctions that hinged on the interpretation of ambiguous language in the resolution.

Most UN sanctions on Iran were lifted in January when the UN nuclear watchdog confirmed that Tehran fulfilled commitments under its nuclear deal with Britain, France, Germany, China, Russia and the US. But Iran is still subject to a UN arms embargo and other restrictions.

Under the UN resolution, Iran is “called upon” to refrain from work on ballistic missiles designed to deliver nuclear weapons for up to eight years. Critics of the deal have said the language does not make it obligatory.

“I call upon Iran to refrain from conducting such ballistic missile launches since they have the potential to increase tensions in the region,” Ban wrote in his first bi-annual report to the 15-member Security Council on the implementation of remaining sanctions and restrictions.

“While it is for the Security Council to interpret its own resolutions, I am concerned that those ballistic missile launches are not consistent with the constructive spirit demonstrated by the signing of the [Iran nuclear deal],” he said. The council is due to discuss Ban’s report on July 18.

The US, Britain, France and Germany wrote to Ban in March about the missile tests, which they said were ”inconsistent with” and “in defiance of” the council resolution.

The letter said the missiles used in the launches were “inherently capable of delivering nuclear weapons” and also asked that the Security Council discuss “appropriate responses” to Tehran’s failure to comply with its obligations.

Ban’s report simply references the letter and does not state if the missiles were capable of delivering nuclear weapons. Ban said Iran had stressed that it had not undertaken “any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons.” Ban also said he was concerned by the seizure of weapons by the US in the Gulf of Oman in March.

“The United States concluded that the arms had originated in Iran and were likely bound for Yemen. Iran has informed the [UN] Secretariat that it never engaged in such delivery,” he said.

Ban said in the report the United Nations was still reviewing information provided by the US and Iran, and would provide an update on the arms seizure to the Security Council in due course.

 

[Housecarl]

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.americanthinker.com/arti..._obama_to_abandon_the_iranian_resistance.html

July 8, 2016

How the Iran Nuclear Deal Enabled Obama to Abandon the Iranian Resistance

By Kevin Jackson
Comments 2

July 14 marks the one-year anniversary of the end of nuclear negotiations with the Islamic Republic of Iran. The deal was an abject failure in that it did nothing to alleviate concerns in America and abroad about Iran’s prospective path to a nuclear arsenal, nor discourage Iran’s aggressive and destabilizing behavior.

Nevertheless, in January, Congress still went forward with this deal. And if that wasn’t bad enough, the Obama administration went further and encouraged European investment in Iran.

Iran’s behavior both in the run-up to the agreement -- known as JCPOA -- and in the aftermath has been blatant. Only Obama would not recognize what Iran did as total disdain for him and America.

For example, Iran has performed several test-launches of nuclear capable ballistic missiles, in clear violation of the agreement. Next was the seizure of 10 American sailors in January, an act for which America was made to apologize.

Since President Obama’s vanishing red line on Syria, Iran has grown its Revolutionary Guards and Hezb’allah forces in Syria. As if that weren’t enough of an affront to the Obama ultimatum, direct statements by Iranian officials suggest that the Islamic Republic is ready, willing, and able to engage in open conflict with the US and its allies.

One can only wonder if Obama still believes that Iran is “tiny,” a comment he made in underscoring their ability to be a military threat.

Iran’s domestic behavior has followed the same trajectory. International human rights observers have determined that the rate of executions is the worst it has been in 27 years. Iranian authorities continue their crackdown on political dissidents, artists, activists, and anyone who appears sympathetic to Western or secular views. This has led to a number of high profile arrests, along with untold many others that have failed to make international headlines. With the exception of the JCPOA itself, virtually every news story that has emerged from the Islamic Republic over the last year has been further confirmation of Iran’s continued foreign aggression and domestic repression.

In spite of this, however, the White House’s emphasis on the “success” of the nuclear agreement has made the past year yet another year of lackluster Iran policy, what will undoubtedly be one of the embarrassing legacies of Obama. The Iran nuclear agreement appears to have been done solely so the administration can justify its refusal to confront Iranian abuses and provocations. Further, the agreement has helped to justify the refusal to take any proactive steps regarding the broader Middle East, which can only be described as a disaster of (former Secretary of State) “Clintonian” proportions.

As recently as last week, Secretary of State John Kerry suggested that Iran’s influence in the fight against ISIS has been a net positive. With 65+ million refugees on the run, mostly from Muslim countries, and ISIS committing atrocities routinely, Kerry’s comments can only be seen as a misinformation campaign. Iran’s intervention has escalated sectarian tensions, and driven recruitment to both Sunni and Shiite militant groups.

Iran’s participation has but one contribution: the deaths of innocent people, including many from noted US allies. Iran’s influence in Iraq has encouraged an ongoing blockade and several attacks – using Iranian weapons – against the former US military base of Camp Liberty, a territory near the Baghdad airport that is now occupied by members of the Iranian resistance group the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI or MEK). This group was relocated to that area under an agreement with the US, the UN, and Iraq, as the area was established to facilitate speedy relocation of the PMOI members to foreign territory.

Four years later, dozens more Camp Liberty residents have been killed as their need for refuge has been largely neglected. It seems the Obama administration has little regard that its lack of protection violates the Protected Persons Status given to these residents by the US during the Iraq War. This atrocity alone showcases the shocking betrayal of American values that Obama references so often: “That’s not who we are.”

The US government is making no serious efforts to relocate members of the PMOI, but that’s not the worst part. Far worse is the fact that the United States government is now actively cooperating with a regime that attacks Iranian expatriates on foreign territory and prevents them from returning to their Persian homeland.

Not everyone in US government has neglected the plight of the PMOI, however. Some congressmen have been constant advocates for the Iranian resistance. Other politicians and advocates have shown their earnest support each summer in Paris, when the PMOI’s parent coalition, the National Council of Resistance of Iran holds its Iran Freedom rally.

This year’s event is scheduled for July 9, and its participants will certainly make an effort to more definitively undermine the Obama administration’s narrative of Iranian moderation.

The purpose of the event and ongoing efforts is to provide a clear understanding of why the JCPOA has had no impact on the Iranian people’s prospects for freedom from a repressive, theocratic regime. The NCRI leadership will outline the reasons why Obama’s successor must take proactive steps to put renewed pressure on Tehran.

The next president of the United States must exert this pressure. This pressure should not be singularly focused on the still-unresolved nuclear issue. The next president must also deal with Iran’s extraordinary human rights abuses, include its world-leading misuse of the death penalty, its aggressive censorship of media and the internet, and its dangerous interventions in places like Iraq and Syria.

The next president of the United States should take the bolder and even more essential move of endorsing the National Council of Resistance of Iran, a group that is much like the Tea Party movement in America. NCRI wants to change the government of Iran, and give it back to the people.

The July 9 gathering, expected to attract upwards of 100,000 people, will go a long way toward highlighting the grassroots appeal that the resistance enjoys both internationally and inside the Islamic Republic. This event is evidence that the opportunity exists for regime change to be facilitated by the Iranian people themselves, through a larger repeat of the 2009 uprising.

There is no risk to the United States, no risk to American lives or American wealth in the proposal of the NCRI. The question is why does the Obama administration cooperate and negotiate with such a Iran, and wholly neglect the wishes of the people? The answer likely lies in how Obama views the Tea Party Community in America. For Obama, government is the answer, no matter how tyrannical.

 

[northern watch]

Maurice Schleepen‏ @MauriceSchleepe · 24m24 minutes ago

Breaking #Greek coast guard opens fire at #Turkish cargo ship in the #AegeanSea..

 

[northern watch]

Hürriyet Daily News‏Verified account @HDNER · 11m11 minutes ago

One assault boat, two coast guard boats sent to scene after Greek coastguards fired at cargo ship:

 

[northern watch]

Hürriyet Daily News‏Verified account @HDNER · 1h1 hour ago

UPDATE: Two Turkish coast guard boats reach scene after Greek coast guard fires shots on Turkish ship