WAR 07-30-2016-to-08-05-2016_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
(226) 07-09-2016-to-07-15-2016_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...15-2016_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

(227) 07-16-2016-to-07-22-2016_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...22-2016_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

(228) 07-23-2016-to-07-29-2016_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...29-2016_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

-----

JOHN BATCHELOR SHOW
Friday 29 July 2016
Air Date: July 29, 2016

Hour Two
Friday 29 July 2016 / Hour 2, Block A: Michael E Vlahos, Johns Hopkins, in re: If the Republican candidate for president can be “bait[ed] with a tweet,” as Clinton so memorably put it—if that disqualifies him from handling nuclear weapons, as she said—then the risk of World War III should be an issue in the 2016 campaign. Beyond his manifestly unsuitable temperament, Donald Trump will “endanger the world as we know it,” as Sen. Cory Booker put it. If you bust up the architecture of the postwar world—as Trump is threatening to do, either intentionally or out of ignorance—the war-and-peace conversation is not only fair, but necessary.

In that sense, this election may be a bit like 1964, when President Lyndon Johnson ran an ad against Republican challenger Barry Goldwater of a little girl picking a daisy while a mushroom cloud explodes in the background. It was a harsh attack, and only ran once, but it reflected deep unease about Goldwater undermining the structure of global relationships that kept the peace. “These are the stakes,” LBJ intones, as a nuclear weapon detonates. (1 of 2)

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/07/29/hillary-clinton-is-righ...
Friday 29 July 2016 / Hour 2, Block B: Michael E Vlahos, Johns Hopkins, in re: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...ght-donald-trump-threatens-world-war-iii.html (2 of 2)
http://johnbatchelorshow.com/schedules/friday-29-july-2016

Podcast: https://audioboom.com/boos/4877937-...e-michael-vlahos-johns-hopkins-jhuworldcrisis

1964 “Daisy Girl” in 2016. Russia Back in the Election Game. Michael Vlahos, Johns Hopkins, @jhuworldcrisis.

07-29-2016

(Photo: "Daisy Girl" Rare 1964 Lyndon Johnson Political Ad -aired only once- 9/7/64)

http://JohnBatchelorShow.com/contact

http://JohnBatchelorShow.com/schedules

http://johnbatchelorshow.com/blog

Twitter: @batchelorshow

1964 “Daisy Girl” in 2016. Russia Back in the Election Game. Michael Vlahos, Johns Hopkins, @jhuworldcrisis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Id_r6pNsus

____________

“…If the Republican candidate for president can be “bait[ed] with a tweet,” as Clinton so memorably put it—if that disqualifies him from handling nuclear weapons, as she said—then the risk of World War III should be an issue in the 2016 campaign. Beyond his manifestly unsuitable temperament, Donald Trump will “endanger the world as we know it,” as Sen. Cory Booker put it. If you bust up the architecture of the postwar world—as Trump is threatening to do, either intentionally or out of ignorance—the war-and-peace conversation is not only fair, but necessary.

In that sense, this election may be a bit like 1964, when President Lyndon Johnson ran an ad against Republican challenger Barry Goldwater of a little girl picking a daisy while a mushroom cloud explodes in the background. It was a harsh attack, and only ran once, but it reflected deep unease about Goldwater undermining the structure of global relationships that kept the peace. “These are the stakes,” LBJ intones, as a nuclear weapon detonates.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...ght-donald-trump-threatens-world-war-iii.html
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.businessinsider.com/us-counter-terror-strategy-unequivocally-failed-2016-7

After 15 years, the US's counter-terror strategy has 'unequivocally failed'

Daniel L. Davis, Contributor
10 Hours Ago
Comments 10

Daniel L. Davis retired from the US Army as a Lt. Col. after 21 years of active service and serves as a foreign policy fellow and military expert at Defense Priorities. He gave us permission to run this op-ed.

Apple and Google, two of the country’s biggest employers, don’t mess around with failure. Leaders either produce or they’re gone. Major League Baseball and National Football League teams have one standard for their leaders: get us into the playoffs or you’re fired.

The government’s foreign policy elites, however, don’t have to succeed to keep their jobs. Unlike the rest of America, when U.S. leaders in foreign policy fail, they are rewarded or promoted, while the 330 million Americans living outside the Washington beltway foot the bill.

For a business, it’s easy to quantify success or failure by looking at the company’s financials. NFL and NBA teams either make the playoffs or they don’t. It is more difficult to assess success or failure in the foreign policy arena because results are often hidden from public view – but sometimes the failure is so spectacular that it’s impossible to hide. That’s presently the case with United States foreign policy.

In the aftermath of 9/11 Americans understandably feared for their safety from hostile groups worldwide and demanded that the government take action to protect them. Success in that mission wouldn’t be hard to define: a reduction in the terrorist threat. No one expects perfection from the government. Americans expect their leaders to provide effective security. Instead, Washington has implemented policies that have arguable made us less safe.

Consider the following:

On September 10, 2001, al-Qaeda represented a marginal but real terrorist threat to the U.S. The country was at war with no nation and the threat of conventional war was limited to distant possibilities such as North Korea or Iran. The chances of war against either Russia or China were less than negligible. What is the strategic environment America faces today?

• al-Qaeda has rebuilt most of its strength and might be stronger today than prior to 9/11. The Daily Beast reported that U.S. intelligence and defense officials “are worried that the intense focus on defeating ISIS has blinded the U.S. to the resurgence of al Qaeda, whose growing potency has become more apparent.”

• As the Islamic State has suffered significant territorial losses in Iraq and Syria, they have decentralized, expanded into new locations around the globe, and have perpetrated major terrorist strikes in over 20 countries killing thousands. Their leadership is already preparing for the next phase of the fight.

• While the U.S. has been focused on ISIS in Syria and Iraq, Jabhat al-Nusra, al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria, has risen and might now be the most potent of all rebel groups on the ground there, representing a serious and growing terrorist threat to U.S. interests.

• In Afghanistan, the Taliban is stronger and holds more territory than at any time since 2001 and continues to increase in strength at the expense of the Afghan troops. Additionally, not only has al-Qaeda rebuilt much of its strength there, a number of new terrorist organizations now operate there.

It is difficult to overstate the staggering degree to which the strategy of attacking ISIS on the ground throughout the Middle East has failed. The only result of the strategy’s implementation has thus far been to expand the number and effectiveness of terrorist organizations around the world, increasing the terror threat to the American homeland. If this spiraling dynamic isn’t checked, the threat will continue to rise. Recent events, however, make it appear likely the spiral will continue.

At the NATO Summit last month, all treaty nations vowed in the summit’s communique to increase the alliance’s support and involvement in the anti-ISIS fight. Secretary of Defense Ash Carter last Wednesday hosted the defense ministers of 30 nations in a confab designed to refine the military action plan against ISIS. The next day, Secretary of State John Kerry hosted dozens of foreign ministers to discuss increasing diplomatic cooperation among allied nations. The effect of all this diplomatic and military activity is to essentially do everything we’ve been doing, but attempting to do it harder, stronger, and better.


The anti-terror strategy the U.S. has implemented over the past 15 years has unequivocally failed to accomplish national objectives. Applying it more energetically will most likely deepen the failure. What Washington ought to do is first step back and conduct an honest, sober, and thorough analysis of the outcomes its strategy has produced. The key is to identify which major components of the strategy have backfired and worsened security. Those tactics must then be immediately jettisoned in favor of new ideas that have a chance to increase the security of the nation.

Fighting against global terrorist groups that seek to kill Americans and harm U.S. interests is an extremely complex and challenging task. There are no simple solutions. But that task is made infinitely more difficult when we fail to acknowledge when good-faith efforts have failed.

Even the best businesses and sports teams experience failure. What separates the champions from the also-rans is champions are willing to admit when strategies have failed, and are willing to find new leaders who will implement fresh, inventive plans. We can only hope that the next Administration is willing to demonstrate championship-caliber leadership.


SEE ALSO: FBI director: The terrorism threat out of Syria is 'an order of magnitude greater than anything we’ve seen before' »

NOW WATCH: GREEN BERET: Why our strategy against terrorism is making things worse
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=2417671&CategoryId=12395

Caracas, Saturday July 30,2016

Analysts: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Pushed Al-Nusra Front to Break with Al-Qaeda

BEIRUT – The jihadist group known as the Al-Nusra Front, until recently the Syrian branch of Al-Qaeda, has severed its ties to the latter due to pressures from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, several experts told EFE on Friday.

The two Gulf countries are looking to avoid accusations of financing terrorism, according to the same experts.

“They have distanced themselves from Al-Qaeda due to high pressure exerted by their financers, Saudi Arabia and Qatar,” said Abdel Bari Atwan, the editor-in-chief of international Arabic newspaper “Al Rai al-Youm” (“Today’s Opinion”).

Atwan said the two Middle Eastern states wanted to protect themselves from being accused of backing Al-Qaeda.

In his opinion, Al-Nusra’s leader, Abu Mohammad al-Julani, has been forced to concede to the Arabic countries’ demands.

Al-Julani announced on Thursday that he was disassociating his group from Al-Qaeda and renaming it Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, or “Front for the Conquest of the Levant.”

Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri had previously told Al-Nusra it would be allowed to break ties with its parent organization if it were deemed beneficial for the unity of combatants fighting in Syria.

Atwan, who in 1996 interviewed the late Osama bin Laden, speculated that many Al-Nusra fighters may leave to join its rival in Syria, the self-styled Islamic State.

However, the decision to separate and change name has come too late, Atwan said.

He added that there was a possibility that Al-Nusra could merge with a new group called Ahrar al-Sham (Islamic Movement of the Free Men of the Levant), a Salafist brigade that has already cooperated with and fought alongside the Al-Nusra Front.

According to Hisham Yaber, a retired Lebanese general and now a Middle East analyst, al-Julani’s decision comes on the heels of Russia and the United States including the group in their foreign terrorist organizations lists.

He said Al-Nusra, unlike the IS, has since its creation in 2012 chosen to ally itself with other groups fighting Bashar al-Assad’s Ba’athist regime, such as Ahrar al-Sham.

Yaber included a third country – Turkey – as having influenced the Al-Nusra Front’s decision.

According to him, it “decided to change under the auspices of three countries: Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, who do not want to be associated with terrorists.”

All three states are members of the U.S.-led international coalition to fight against the IS in Iraq and Syria.

According to Yaber, al-Julani’s announcement is simply a “name change to take the Al-Nusra Front off the terrorist organizations list.”

He said he did not believe the U.S. would accept this first step, and added the Al-Nusra Front “needs to prove they are not real terrorists.”

General Jaled Haius, a commander in the moderate, U.S.-backed Free Syrian Army (FSA), also expressed caution.

“As drivers of the Syrian revolution, we do not like this measure; we fear its consequences,” Haius said of the Al-Nusra Front’s change.

He added that the Al-Nusra Front is a radical – but not Islamist – organization with plans for the country’s future that “are not accepted by the Syrian people.”

The group, in its first statement following the break with Al-Qaeda, had called for the unity of combatants in Syria and claimed it was fighting for the establishment of Sharia (Islamic) law.

Haius said the majority of the group’s principles were alien to Syrians.

The FSA leader suggested that Al-Nusra’s revamp could have come as a response to a petition by the Syrian regime’s intelligence services.

He also said Iran could have requested it.

“They want us to associate ourselves with the Al-Nusra Front so they can accuse us of being allied with terrorists and attack us,” he said.

Haius also said he doubted al-Julani’s group would merge with Ahrar al-Sham, since the latter “have a national vision of Syria and are Syrian nationals, unlike the Al-Nusra Front.”
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.thenational.ae/world/mid...l-qaeda-marks-change-of-strategy-not-ideology

Al Nusra split from Al Qaeda marks change of strategy, not ideology

Josh Wood
July 29, 2016 Updated: July 29, 2016 11:30 PM

BEIRUT // Showing his face publicly for the first time, the founder of Syria’s Al Qaeda branch Jabhat Al Nusra laid out a quite simple idea in a video statement on Thursday night.

International powers led by the United States and Russia, Abu Mohamed Al Jolani said, use Al Nusra’s affiliation with Al Qaeda to bomb the Syrian people. To strip the international community of this justification – and to help promote unification among groups fighting the Syrian government – Al Nusra would now be called Jabhat Fatah Al Sham and operate with "no affiliation to any external entity". In short, Al Nusra would no longer be affiliated with Al Qaeda.

If Jolani truly thinks that the rebranding effort can avert air strikes, he is naive: the US has already said it still considered Al Nusra a target despite the name change, and given that Russia attacks mainstream rebel groups that fight the Syrian government, even a fully reformed Al Nusra would remain in its sights.

The bigger significance of the move lies in attempts by the group to bring itself into the rebel fold at a time when Syrian government forces have besieged Aleppo, Syria’s largest city before the war. In his video statement, Jolani said Al Nusra was striving to "bridge the gaps between the groups of mujaheddin and ourselves".

Over the course of the war, Syrian rebel groups have remained divided over Al Nusra’s role despite its successes against Syrian regime forces.

Many view Al Nusra as an integral part of the revolution and are thankful for its battlefield contributions. Rebel factions such as Ahrar Al Sham have remained allies with Al Nusra, cooperating closely with the group. While ISIL is seen by members of the Syrian opposition as a group dominated by outsiders and with more interest in building its caliphate than defeating the Syrian government, Al Nusra is considered by many to be a group focused firmly on unseating Syrian president Bashar Al Assad.

Others in the opposition, however, see no place for Al Nusra in Syria. The group’s Al Qaeda affiliation, its extremist ideology, heavy-handed rule of captured areas and atrocities make it unpalatable.

The rebranding could draw some factions in Syria closer to Al Nusra, particularly if its Al Qaeda affiliation was the main hang-up preventing a deeper relationship.

As the noose tightens around besieged Aleppo, even rebel factions that oppose Al Nusra could come under increasing pressure to work with the strong, well-equipped group to stave off defeat.

For rebel groups in northern Syria, there is the growing feeling that if the battle for Aleppo is lost, the war could be lost as well. For Al Nusra’s detractors, animosity could turn to into cooperation when their survival is at stake.

In distancing itself from Al Qaeda, Al Nusra appears to be trying to break down the barriers between itself and opposition groups at a time when Syria’s rebels need all the help they can get. The move appears to be a power play designed to bring other factions closer to Al Nusra and deepen the opposition’s dependence on the group.

Groups that merge with or unite under Al Nusra could now find themselves the targets of the US-led coalition. With Al Nusra trying to break down the barriers that separate it from the opposition, relationships could become murkier and forces deployed on the battlefield could become even more interspersed.

Claims that Al Nusra – or Jabhat Fatah Al Sham as they now call themselves – has split from Al Qaeda should be taken lightly.

Al Nusra was not a wayward rebel group that found itself adopted by Al Qaeda. Rather, their creation was ordered by Al Qaeda. The only ideology the group has ever had has been that of Al Qaeda.

In the video statement announcing the split, Jolani appeared wearing a camouflage jacket and a white turban, its excess cloth hanging down over his chest. His style clearly mimicked that of Al Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden.

When he spoke, he thanked his "brothers" in Al Qaeda’s leadership for allowing Al Nusra to split. And he went on to quote Bin Laden.

The rebranding does not signify a shift in ideology for the extremist group, but rather an attempt to force rebel groups to welcome them into the mainstream.

jwood@thenational.ae

-----

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.globalresearch.ca/al-nus...s-henceforth-they-are-moderate-rebels/5538419

Al Nusra Rebranding: They are No Longer Al Qaeda Affiliated Terrorists, Henceforth They are “Moderate Rebels”

By South Front
Global Research, July 29, 2016
South Front 27 July 2015

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said on July 25 details of a “U.S. plan” for military cooperation and intelligence sharing with Russia on Syria were expected to be announced in early August. Kerry’s statement followed the meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on the sidelines of a meeting of Southeast Asian nations in Laos.

According to the plan, Russia and the U.S. will share intelligence to coordinate air strikes against the Syrian Al Qaeda branch “Jabhat Al Nusra” and prohibit the Russian and Syrian air powers from attacking the so-called “moderate rebels.”

However, the ongoing progress on the ground remains questionable. Al Nusra is the most powerful “opposition group” in Syria, excluding ISIS. According to the group’s statements, Al Nusra currently stands at 60,000 fighters, although this number is impossible to verify. The group’s units are able to conduct a classic warfare with usage of artillery, battle tanks and other equipment, including drones, as well as they conduct guerrilla warfare and terror attacks of suicide bombers.

Video

According to intelligence information, Al Nusra has been receiving direct support from Turkey and Saudi Arabia and indirect support through the U.S. programs aimed to train “moderate rebels” in Syria. In other words, if Washington agrees to coordinate its efforts against the terrorist group with Russia, the US-backed Syrian opposition will lose its main striking power.

Entirely by accident, the very same day with Kerry’s statement, Abu Mohammad Al Golani, leader of Al Nusra, made a public statement announcing that Jabhat Al Nusra has separated from Al Qaeda, organizationally and taken a new name, Jabhat Fateh Al Sham (Sham Liberation Front).

This move signifies the start of full-scale rebranding campaign, clearly aimed to evade the effects of Russian-U.S. deal to coordinate efforts against the terrorist group. Al Nusra is aiming to depict itself as a “moderate opposition group,” adjusting to the constant pressure from Russians that had pushed Washington to accept the deal. It’s easy to expect a series of reports in the Western media that will depict Al Nusra’s rebranding as an important step on the way to better “democratic” Syria. Because, now, when the group changed its name, nobody has to doubt that it remains a terrorist organization. These reports will likely call the group “rebels” and hide the original source of “opposition fighters” from Jabhat Fateh Al Sham. Indeed, they have never avoided doing this.

It’s possible to expect that Al Nusra’s rebranding will allow the U.S. to avoid any significant actions under the long-awaited deal with Russia, claiming that there is no such entity as Jabhat Al Nusra at the battlefield. Moreover, Jabhat Fateh Al Sham units will likely further shuffle with vestiges of the so-called “moderate opposition.” Strategically, it could create a foothold for the groups’ foreign sponsors to push the terrorist group as a part of the Vienna talks and post-war Syria consensus.


The original source of this article is South Front

Copyright © South Front, South Front, 2016
 
Last edited:

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.lawfareblog.com/todays-headlines-and-commentary-1114

Today's Headlines and Commentary

By Rishabh Bhandari
Friday, July 29, 2016, 1:24 PM „J
„K
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has officially accepted the Democratic Party¡¦s nomination for the presidency, becoming the first woman to become a major party nominee in the United States. Clinton portrayed herself as the safe and reliable alternative to her Republican opponent Donald Trump, pledging to unite the country in the face of troubles at home and abroad. The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal have more.

The Washington Post reports that hackers associated with the Russian government have been accused of breaching the computers of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. The intrusion appeared to be carried out by the same Russian intelligence service that hacked the Democratic National Committee earlier this year, leading one cybersecurity expert to warn that the hack is, ¡§definitely part of a much, much broader campaign that is yet to fully be publicly revealed.¡¨ There is a growing consensus that Kremlin may be attempting to meddle in the U.S. electoral process to an unprecedented degree.

But Director of National Intelligence James Clapper cautioned that, while U.S. intelligence services are in some ¡§version of war¡¨ with their Russian counterparts, it is too soon to blame the Kremlin for hacking the DNC¡¦s emails. Clapper was at the Aspen Security Forum when he said that the intelligence community was not ready to make a call on attribution. He added that ¡§We don't know enough to ascribe motivation regardless of who it might have been.¡¨

After weeks of buildup, Al Qaeda¡¦s Syrian franchise Jabhat al Nusra announced on Thursday that it is finally severing its ties with the global jihadist network. In the first known video statement ever to show his face, the leader of the Nusra Front, Mohamad al-Golani, declared that the group would relaunch under a new name, with "no ties with any foreign party." The move was being made "to remove the excuse used by the international community¡Xspearheaded by America and Russia¡Xto bombard and displace Muslims in the Levant: that they are targeting the Nusra Front which is associated with al Qaeda," he said. The group will now be called Jabhat Fatah al-Sham. Reuters has more.

Jabhat al Nusra¡¦s split with al Qaeda comes as a blow to the United States¡¦ efforts to build closer ties with Russia in Syria, Reuters writes. Although one U.S. official called the split "a change in name only," the move complicates an American proposal to limit the Russians and Syrians to targeting only Nusra and ISIS, rather than Syrian rebel groups supported by Washington and its allies.

NBC News reports that Washington¡¦s efforts to build a partnership with Moscow have taken another hit from the Syrian regime¡¦s ongoing siege of Aleppo. With Syrian forces having closed off all the major roads leading into Aleppo and called for all residents to leave the city, the siege poses a brewing humanitarian crisis. State Department spokesman Admiral John Kirby said the United States was ¡§deeply concerned¡¨ by this development and had not been consulted on the operation, adding that any offensive operation would be "inconsistent with the spirit and the letter" of U.N. resolutions and with Washington's understanding with the Russians.

The U.S. military acknowledged on Thursday night that another round of coalition airstrikes in Manbij, an Islamic State stronghold in northern Syria, may have led to even more civilian casualties. Coalition airstrikes reportedly killed at least 73 civilians in Manbij last week in an incident that is now under formal investigation by the US military. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported that at least 28 civilians were killed in the latest strike, along with 13 other people who may have been ISIS fighters.

Al Jazeera examines a proposal by Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al Abadi to integrate the Popular Mobilization Forces¡Xor Shia militias¡Xinto Iraq¡¦s armed forces. Though the units have become an integral component of the Iraqi government¡¦s strategy against the Islamic State, they have been tainted by accusations of widespread human rights abuse. This initiative would require the militia to be subject to military rule and delinked from any political cause.

The New York Times profiles the powerful stabilizing role Turkey¡¦s military has historically played in the country, examining how this institution¡¦s legitimacy and unity has crumbled in the aftermath of the botched coup attempt on July 15. The military is expected to undergo major reforms as hundreds of top officials¡Xmany of whom are suspected of being part of a movement associated with the cleric Fetullah Gulen¡Xare being replaced. Analysts and critics of the government worry that Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan will replace these officers with sycophants. The Wall Street Journal has more on how Erdogan plans to consolidate power and tighten his leash over the military.

Turkey¡¦s foreign and justice ministers are slated to travel to the United States to demand the extradition of Gulen, the alleged mastermind behind the abortive coup attempt. Turkish officials say they regard the evidence of Gulen¡¦s complicity as overwhelming, and that any failure by the US to cooperate with the extradition will have long-term consequences for Turkish-US diplomatic relations. American officials have remained skeptical about evidence of Gulen¡¦s involvement. The Guardian has more.

General John Nicholson, the senior U.S. commander in Afghanistan, announced that five U.S. soldiers have been injured in the fight against the Islamic State in eastern Afghanistan. This appears to be the first reported instance of US troops being wounded in fighting ISIS in Afghanistan. The casualties occurred during a counter-terrorism operation in which Afghan forces have recaptured ground previously held by the Islamic State, following US airstrikes.

But despite enhanced U.S. military support over the past month, Afghan security forces are still struggling against a resilient Taliban. Though the Afghan forces have been more effective in defending territory this year after a disastrous 2015, they have struggled to reverse the insurgents¡¦ gains. According to NBC News, General Nicholson said the number of Afghan soldiers and police killed this year is roughly 20 percent higher than at the same time last year. The New York Times has more.

The Associated Press reports that the United Nations is suspending aid to dangerous areas of Nigeria's northeastern Borno state, where a half million people are starving, following a Boko Haram ambush of a humanitarian convoy. According to Nigerian and UN officials, three humanitarian workers and two soldiers were wounded.

The AP also broadcasts a pledge by Japanese foreign minister Fumio Kishida to spend $120 million to strengthen counter-terrorism efforts in Africa. He told the U.N. Security Council that the money from Tokyo will be used to strengthen information and data collection in Africa, enhance border controls with cutting-edge technology, and strengthen criminal justice enforcement among other things.

The Israeli government¡¦s plans to build new units in Jewish settlements in the West Bank, along with a spate of home demolitions in Palestinian areas over the past week, have drawn sharp criticism from the Obama administration, the Washington Post reports. The State Department issued a pointed statement lambasting Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu¡¦s right-wing government at a time when Israeli and U.S. diplomats are in the midst of re-negotiating a multibillion-dollar military aid package for Israel.

The Post also tells us that German Chancellor Angela Merkel has insisted that Berlin continue to fulfill its moral duty of providing sanctuary for refugees in need. Merkel¡¦s statement comes after a series of high-profile terrorist strikes that have rocked the nation. But in her first major address since the tragedies of the past few weeks, Merkel also called for an enhanced Internet surveillance program and an evaluation of the country¡¦s screening process to filter would-be terrorists more effectively.

In an interview with Le Monde, French Prime Minister Manuel Valls suggested that he was ¡§open¡¨ to a temporary ban on foreign funding of French mosques in the wake of a string of terror attacks across Europe. He went on to say that France ¡§needs to invent a new relationship with Islam.¡¨ Politico has more.

A US citizen was among the nine suspected militants killed in a gun battle with Bangladeshi police in Dhaka this Tuesday, the Post reports. Shazad Rouf, a Bangladeshi-American student, had gone missing in February. His father stated that ¡§we never got any indication¡¨ that Rouf had become sympathetic to extremism before his disappearance.

A former Guantanamo detainee who was resettled in Uruguay, only to disappear last month, has finally resurfaced in Venezuela. The AP updates us on the story of Abu Wa¡¦el Dhiab, a Syrian who arrived in Uruguay in 2014. Officials at the Syrian consulate in Caracas, where Dhiab reappeared, refused to provide information on his whereabouts over the past month.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.aerotechnews.com/blog/20...n-nuclear-triad-topics-at-deterrence-meeting/

July 29, 2016

Cyber, space, Middle East, join nuclear triad topics at deterrence meeting

Cheryl Pellerin
DOD News

The nuclear triad still is seen as a critical deterrent against aggression by U.S. adversaries, but all speakers during a U.S. Strategic Command meeting panel July 27 also discussed the need for deterrence in the cyber and space domains, and the Middle East.

STRATCOM commander Navy Adm. Cecil D. Haney introduced the panel on Building Deterrence and Assurance Capacity in a Changing Political Landscape in La Vista, Nev., at the STRATCOM 2016 Deterrence Symposium.

Panel speakers included Army Gen. Curtis M. Scaparrotti, commander, U.S. European Command, Brian McKeon, acting undersecretary of defense for policy, and Army Gen. Joseph L. Votel, commander of U.S. Central Command.

In his remarks, Haney, who said deterring strategic attack on the United States and assuring its allies is his top priority, spoke about the challenging strategic landscape and the importance of maintaining strategic stability in the 21st century. But he also discussed Stratcom’s attention to space and cyber.

“Our nation’s strategic nuclear deterrent force remains safe, secure and effective and ready, and we’re working hard to improve resiliency and flexibility in space and cyberspace,” he told the audience.

“In response to increased threats we are strengthening our cyber defenses and increasing options available in case of strategic attack,” he added.
About Eucom, Scaparrotti also noted that deterrence is multidomain.

“In the cyber domain Eucom stood up the Joint Cyber Center,” he said, “and following the U.S. lead, NATO has recognized cyberspace as an operational domain. Allies have pledged to strengthen their networks and integrate cyber defense operations into operations and planning.”

Deterrence challenge
In his remarks McKeon said DOD is renewing its focus on integrating conventional and nuclear planning and operations because of “recent developments in how we see potential adversaries preparing for conflict.”

Today the department faces a deterrence challenge in what is sometimes called the gray zone at the low end of the conflict spectrum, he said.

Gray zone confrontations occur just below the level of armed conflict but involve military-backed coercion. Groups in the gray zone can use individually small steps in aggression “such that an open confrontation against one act may seem out of proportion but taking no action will yield an unacceptable outcome,” McKeon said.

Having credible conventional capabilities is a key requirement for taking effective action, he added.

“We are safest and our military most effective when we can credibly establish a deterrent force across the entire spectrum of possible military operations in all domains. We must also consider how to assure stable and effective deterrence in the face of increased competition in space and cyber,” the undersecretary said.

Space, cyber
Space has played a role in U.S. deterrence since the dawn of the space age, and today’s space systems continue to support strategic missions while enabling military forces to project power globally, McKeon said.

Space capability has multiplied the speed, effectiveness and impact of a conventional response that allows the nation to respond swiftly and decisively to aggression without using nuclear weapons, underpinning the U.S. conventional deterrence posture, McKeon added.

“We can raise the cost against any potential attacker by a variety of means, including combining our space forces with those of our allies, and increasing military costs by creating space systems that force an adversary up the escalatory ladder — a ladder he may not wish to climb,” he said.

In the face of this threat the department is transforming its space architectures and operations to assure the use of space capabilities and services, McKeon said.

In the cyber domain the department confronts a range of state and non-state actors. Traditional deterrence theory does not always apply to non-state actors and attributing cyberattacks can be difficult, McKeon said.

“As in space we depend on this domain for operations [but] we are still learning our way around this domain both in strengthening our defenses and in building up the cyber mission forces that will provide the backbone for the future,” he said, noting that the department is making investments now in funding, manpower, training and thought work to prepare for the future.

Deterrence in the Middle East
In his remarks, Votel described what deterrence does for Centcom.

It prevents situations and confrontations from elevating into open conflict, the general said. It helps influence and change behavior and decision making, helps assure allies in the region and other partners who have vital interests there, helps provide a mechanism for deescalating in the region, and it helps contribute to stability, he added.

Deterrence plays a critical role in the combatant command’s comprehensive approach to security and stability across the area of responsibility, Votel added.

There are “three ways I think about deterrence and how we are working to achieve the effects of deterrence in conjunction with a variety of other things that we have going on in this region,” Votel said.

One is through posture and presence, including long-term relationships with countries like Egypt; efforts to formalize basing with countries like Kuwait, Qatar and Bahrain; and a continued focus on agreements in place for access, bases and oversight with countries in the region, he said.

Two is by building partner capacity and capability, the general said, for example in working with coalition and indigenous partners on the ground, through exercises, through the U.S. Foreign Military Sales program and through professionalism and institution building with partners in the region.
Three, he said, is through fostering long-term relationships, including military-to-military relationships, throughout the region.

“Deterrence is a key aspect that’s built into a lot of how we approach this very complex and oftentimes troublesome region of 20 countries,” Votel said. “It plays a critical role in what we do.”
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2016...exican-mayors-executed-drug-cartels-13-years/

GRAPHIC: Nearly 50 Mexican Mayors Executed by Drug Cartels in 13 Years

by Cartel Chronicles
29 Jul 2016
Comments 5

MONTERREY, Nuevo Leon — In the last 13 years, 47 Mexican mayors have been murdered in Mexico. Most of those executions were under orders of the various drug cartels that operate in the country.
Winning a municipal election and becoming a mayor in Mexico has become a painful experience similar to those seen in high risk jobs like police officers or judges tasked with facing off cartel bosses.

Information released by the National Association of Mayors (ANAC) in Mexico revealed that since 2003, there have been 47 mayors murdered. Most of the executions were carried under orders of drug cartels and firearms were used in the crimes. The statistics include the weekend murders of two mayors from Guerrero and Chiapas, as Breitbart Texas previously reported.

Video: Pope heads to Ecatepec, one of Mexico's poorest cities.

In total there have been 79 criminal investigations opened by state and federal authorities in connection with the murders of politicians, the figures from ANAC revealed. The risks that come with being a mayor are not lessened by geographic region since the executions can take place in the northern border states or in the southern parts of Mexico. In each of those areas, drug cartels are looking to place “individuals of trust” in key government positions to use them as spies and allies.

The states that ANAC considers as being the most dangerous for mayors include Chihuahua, Mexico State, Guerrero, Nuevo Leon, Tabasco and Tamaulipas. In the northern part of Mexico, Los Zetas have used bribery and threats to reach out to elected officials with the phrase “Silver or Lead” in order to get control of local police, transit police and the office tasked with providing liquor licenses. Drug cartels tend to use bars are a front for money laundering, prostitution and street level drug trafficking.

“A large number of police officers and transit cops have become ‘hawks’ for Mexican narcos, that is why society lost faith in mayors and have shied away from reporting robberies, extortion and kidnappings; they fear being a victim of something worse,” said a Mexican federal official tasked with corruption investigation identified only as Carlos during an interview with Breitbart Texas.

One of the most dramatic cases in recent history is the murder of Maria Gorrostieta, the mayor of the town of Tiquicheo, Michoacan, at the hands of cartel members. In 2009 and 2010, the 36-year-old mayor survived two assassination attempts, but her husband perished in one of them.

Gorrostieta gained notoriety in Mexico in 2011 after recovering from the second attempt when she published various photographs revealing various scars throughout her body from the attacks.

Murdered Mayor 1

“My mutilated body speaks for itself,” Gorrostieta said months before she was kidnapped and murdered.

Murdered mayor 2

Another of the executions that shocked Mexico was the cruel murder of Edelmiro Cavazos Leal, the mayor of Santiago, Nuevo Leon. The man was murdered by the Los Zetas cartel.

Murdered mayor 3

In August 2010, Cavazos was kidnapped by a group of hitmen dressed as police officers. A security video shows the convoy of pseudo-cops arrive in five police patrols to kidnap the mayor.


Three days later, the tortured body of the 38-year-old mayor was discovered with two gunshot wounds to the head and one to the midsection. The brutal torture and execution was carried out under orders from a Zeta boss known as “El Caballo.”

Mexican authorities tried to hide the fact that Cavazos had been tortured before being murdered. Citizen journalists on social media and the website Blog Del Narco published photographs that revealed that the mayor had been tortured by Los Zetas.

murdered mayor 4

Authorities then revealed that Cavazos was not working for any drug cartel. The murder appears to be tied to him having suspended various transit police officers believed to be working for cartels and deducting $40 per paycheck from police officers under investigation. The actions by the mayor were enough to present an obstacle to Los Zetas and earn their wrath.

Editor’s Note: Breitbart Texas traveled to the Mexican States of Tamaulipas, Coahuila and Nuevo León to recruit citizen journalists willing to risk their lives and expose the cartels silencing their communities. The writers would face certain death at the hands of the various cartels that operate in those areas including the Gulf Cartel and Los Zetas if a pseudonym were not used. Breitbart Texas’ Cartel Chronicles are published in both English and in their original Spanish. This article was written by “Tony Aranda” from Monterrey, Nuevo Leon.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.foreignbrief.com/nuclear-dimensions-south-china-sea/

Roman Madaus, Jul 26, 2016

Nuclear Dimensions Of The South China Sea

To keep pace with the US’ improving anti-submarine capabilities and its ballistic missile defence program, China will seek to better protect its submarines in the South China Sea.

Nuclear security is not very fashionable at the moment – hybrid warfare, rogue states, historical revisionism, and counterinsurgency are the leading concerns of the day. Yet nuclear dynamics are hardly a hangover from the Cold War – concepts like assured retaliation and credible deterrence are still the ultimate guarantors of the security of great power states. Nor are nuclear politics static. In fact, the nuclear component of the 21st century’s most important bilateral relationship – that between the US and China – is slowly changing. This trend normally fades into the background of international relations. Even amidst the recent turmoil in the South China Sea – which Beijing would prefer to use as a bastion for its nuclear-armed submarines – the issue of nuclear politics has rarely surfaced in popular discourse.

From the end of the Cold War until 2002, the future of nuclear security looked bright. In that year, the United States withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which had prevented a destabilising arms race in missile defence systems between the US and the Soviet Union. The American withdrawal from the treaty prompted China (and others) to modernise their nuclear forces in order to compensate for the unencumbered and expanded American ballistic missile defence program. In particular, China began to better protect its land-based intercontinental missiles and also improved their range and effectiveness. In 2006, Beijing began to deploy its current generation of SSBN (ballistic nuclear missile submarines), the Type 094. Since then both the US and China have continued to steadily improve their strategic forces. China has been compelled to upgrade its nuclear missiles in order to maintain its strategy of ‘first strike uncertainty,’ which is designed to make any opponent unsure of being able to completely neutralise China’s nuclear weapons in a surprise attack.

An important part of this strategy involves improving China’s nuclear-armed submarines. China currently fields four Type 094 SSBNs, but they are noisy and therefore vulnerable to detection and attack. The boats also lack operational experience in the wider Pacific – they tend to stay close to their base in Hainan, which means that their nuclear missiles cannot reach the continental United States. In order to get within striking distance in a conflict scenario, these submarines would have to secretly escape the South China Sea through chokepoints dominated by the US Navy and its allies, which is somewhat unlikely given that they are about forty years behind American submarines in terms of stealth technology.

In most other countries’ nuclear arsenals, nuclear-armed submarines are the ultimate insurance against a surprise nuclear strike. They are hidden and protected by the vastness of the ocean and can patrol relatively close to an adversary’s coastline. Beijing is therefore seeking to increase the strike range of its SSBNs and to increase their stealthiness, which would allow them to venture further from the Chinese mainland.

China intends to achieve this with the next generation of nuclear-armed submarines and their ballistic missiles. These weapons – the Type 096 and the JL-3, respectively – are slated to be deployed sometime in the next decade. This generation of submarines will be more silent and is intended to have missiles capable of reaching the continental United States from China’s near seas. If this objective is met, Beijing would then be able to rebase its submarines in the heavily-defended Bohai Gulf or Yellow Sea, which it would use as a bastion, or safe zone, for its seaborne nuclear deterrent. Until their missile range improves enough to target the continental United States, China’s nuclear-capable submarines are more useful in the South China Sea, where they can at least target India and Russia.

To keep pace with steadily improving US anti-submarine warfare technology and the American ballistic missile defence program, China will need to better protect its submarines in the South China Sea. This is where Beijing’s recent island-building spree becomes relevant.

It appears that Beijing has already built underwater sound surveillance networks around its submarine base at Hainan; increased control over the Paracel and Spratly Islands would allow it to expand this network and improve its ability to track US attack submarines that could threaten Chinese nuclear-armed submarines.

In fact, late last year the blueprints for a potential “Underwater Great Wall Project” were made public. This system of undersea sensors would likely link China’s new artificial island bases with the mainland. Such a system would work in tandem with surveillance planes and radar facilities on the reclaimed islands, which together could radically improve tracking of US anti-submarine ships and aircraft. The new islands could also host communications infrastructure to better link China’s seaborne nuclear deterrent to its military command structure. While Beijing is currently far from being able to turn the sea into a submarine bastion – to do this it would have to evict the US Navy – it may be slowly building up a foundation for such a bastion in the future. In the meantime, enhanced sensory capability in the South China Sea would aid noisy Chinese SSBNs in escaping the sea into the wider Pacific during a conflict scenario, which would render them less vulnerable.

Sino-American nuclear dynamics have the feel of a slow-moving arms race. China has never felt the need to achieve nuclear parity with its rivals, but it does need to convince them that it could slip a few warheads through their missile shields in the event of nuclear war. With Washington continually strengthening its integrated missile defence shield with improved radar facilities, ground-based THAAD interceptors, and the seaborne Aegis ballistic missile defence system, Beijing will continue to defend and improve its nuclear forces. Since South China Sea-based SSBNs comprise an increasingly important component of China’s nuclear deterrence strategy, this drive towards nuclear security will be an additional motivator for Beijing to extend its control over the South China Sea.

As long as China retains first strike uncertainty and the US maintains nuclear superiority — the status quo – the world’s most worrying rivalry should remain largely unaffected by nuclear dynamics. If, however, one country leaps ahead of the other technologically, expect to see far more tension in the relationship — and perhaps more strife in the South China Sea.


Special thanks to H.I. Sutton for providing subject matter expertise on Chinese submarines.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Hummm....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://about.bgov.com/blog/next-president-must-make-tough-choices-future-u-s-military/

Defense, Politics, Voices

Next president must make ‘tough choices’ on future of U.S. military

July 29, 2016
Vivienne Machi


The next president of the United States will face difficult national security decisions as crises flare up around the world and military budgets are squeezed, experts said July 26.

Both a Clinton or Trump administration would face the same challenge confronted by the current president: The resources simply are not available to address every threat to global security.

The mismatch between resources and commitments will require “unbelievably hard choices,” said Jim Thomas, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. “We’re coming up on some really big, fundamental questions and I don’t think that either candidate so far has even begun to address them,” he said.

Thomas and other experts spoke at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C. CSIS adviser Mark Cancian released a new report that outlines five defense strategies the United States could pursue under spending restrictions set by the 2011 Budget Control Act.

The report, “Alternative Defense Strategies in a Cost-Capped Environment,” offers alternative paths the country could pursue that would address current threats — such as China or Islamic extremists — and challenges such as the proliferation of precision munitions and cyber threats.

The Pentagon cannot continue to “do more with less,” the report said, and suggested exploring areas to ease fiscal pressure with deep cuts like reducing infrastructure and overhead, expanding the role of battlefield contractors and slowing compensation growth, but acknowledged the lack of political will to touch those areas.

The panelists also discussed what a future military strategy could look like under either a Hillary Clinton or a Donald Trump presidency. Alex Ward, associate director at the Atlantic Council’s Brent Scowcroft Center on International Security, pointed out the vast differences between the candidates. “Trump will have the political backing and desire to increase military spending for a military that he doesn’t want to use, and Clinton is going to have the desire as well to increase the military spending, but won’t have the political backing for a military she definitely will use,” he said.

Clinton would likely push to continue the global engagement strategy she promoted as secretary of state, while Trump would move toward an isolationist posture that relies more on dominating through trade negotiations and increasing technological competitiveness and nuclear deterrence forces, rather than maintaining a global U.S. presence, he said.

But the United States cannot retreat from its superpower role, Thomas argued. There needs to be a better division of labor between the United States and its allies so that the responsibilities are more balanced, he said.

“Over the past 25 years, the United States has spent a lot of time encouraging all of its allies … to go on out-of-area expeditionary operations with us because we needed political legitimacy; they played very minor roles. … My argument would be, we don’t have very much to show for that.”

U.S. allies need to develop their own defense systems, particularly in anti-access/area denial and coastal defenses, Thomas said. “We’re the global surveillance and strike guys … so that’s our differentiator as a superpower and one, I think, we want to keep,” he said.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.realcleardefense.com/art...-south_korea_war_games_to_proceed_109648.html

July 31, 2016

U.S. Army Secretary Says U.S.-South Korea War Games to Proceed

By Associated Press

JOHOR BAHRU, Malaysia — U.S. Army Secretary Eric Fanning said Saturday that annual military drills between the United States and South Korea would go ahead next month, despite North Korea's warning of a "vicious" showdown if the war games proceed.

On Thursday, North Korea's top diplomat for U.S. affairs said that the nature of the maneuvers has become openly aggressive, and that Pyongyang is ready for war. The United States and South Korea regularly conduct joint military exercises south of the Demilitarized Zone dividing the two Koreas, and Pyongyang typically responds to them with tough talk and threats of retaliation.

Fanning, who was in Malaysia as part of a regional tour, said that the U.S. has conducted military drills with South Korea for decades, and that "these exercises contribute to stability, they don't compete with stability."

"The games are currently to continue as planned," he told The Associated Press. "We have been conducting exercises with South Korea and with many other militaries in the region for decades. That's partly what had provided stability that we have seen since World War II."

The drill is a "routine and defense-oriented exercise designed to enhance readiness, protect the region and maintain stability on the Korean Peninsula," Maj. Chris Ophardt, Fanning's public affairs officer, said in an email.

Last year's Ulchi Freedom Guardian exercises involved 30,000 American and 50,000 South Korean troops and followed a period of heightened animosity between the rival Koreas sparked by land mine explosions that maimed two South Korean soldiers. The exercises escalated tensions and rhetoric, but concluded with no major incidents.

Despite plans to scale down the size of the army, Fanning said the U.S. has increased its presence in Asia-Pacific, reflecting its commitment to the region. The number of U.S. soldiers and civilian Army workers in the Pacific region has shot up to more than 100,000, from 70,000 just four years ago, he said.

"The types of relationships that we have with armies across the Pacific are really what helps, I think, keep things stable in this part of the world," he said. "We find these exercises to be very important, very fruitful and build relationships that last generations."

In an interview with the AP on Thursday, Han Song Ryol, director-general of the U.S. affairs department at North Korea's Foreign Ministry, said the U.S. move to put North Korean leader King Jong Un on its list of sanctioned individuals and other recent actions have put the situation on the Korean Peninsula on a war footing.

Han said that U.S.-South Korea military exercises conducted this spring were unprecedented in scale, and that the U.S. has deployed the USS Mississippi and USS Ohio nuclear-powered submarines to South Korean ports, deployed the B-52 strategic bomber around South Korea and is planning to set up the world's most advanced missile defense system, known by its acronym THAAD, in the South, a move that has also angered China.

Han said North Korea believes the drills reportedly now include training designed to prepare troops for the invasion of the North's capital and "decapitation strikes" aimed at killing its top leadership.

"Nobody can predict what kind of influence this kind of vicious confrontation between the DPRK and the United States will have upon the situation on the Korean Peninsula," he said, using the acronym for North Korea's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. "By doing these kinds of vicious and hostile acts toward the DPRK, the U.S. has already declared war against the DPRK. So it is our self-defensive right and justifiable action to respond in a very hard way."

"We are all prepared for war, and we are all prepared for peace," he said. "If the United States forces those kinds of large-scale exercises in August, then the situation caused by that will be the responsibility of the United States."

Fanning, who was appointed to his post in May, was in Malaysia to observe an annual joint army drill. He had earlier visited Hawaii and Guam. He flew to Japan late Saturday and will then travel to South Korea.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-security-idUSKCN10B0H5

World | Sun Jul 31, 2016 8:07am EDT
Related: World

London police chief warns terror attack a case of 'when, not if'

Britain cannot be fully protected against terrorism and an attack similar to those seen recently in mainland Europe is a question of "when, not if," London's police chief said on Sunday.

The warning by Metropolitan Police Commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe reflects Britain's current "severe" threat level for international terrorism and follows a string of attacks in Germany and France, some of which have been linked to Islamic militants.

Hogan-Howe acknowledged that people in Britain were becoming increasingly worried they could be next.

"I feel and understand that fear, and as the police officer in charge of preventing such an attack, know that you want me to reassure you. I am afraid I cannot do that entirely," he said in a blog posted online on Sunday and printed in the Mail on Sunday newspaper.

"Our threat level has been at "severe" for two years -- it remains there. It means an attack is highly likely -- you could say it is a case of when, not if."

Britain's newly-appointed security minister Ben Wallace said he had met owners and operators of the country's biggest shopping centers to discuss their security plans.

"In light of events in Germany and France, the government is keen to ensure that shopping centers and sports stadiums where there are large crowds are getting the support they require," he told the Sunday Times newspaper.


(Reporting by William James; Editing by Andrew Heavens and Helen Popper)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/31/middleeast/iraq-isis-oil-field-attack/

Militants killed, hostages freed after ISIS attack on oil field near Kirkuk, Iraq

By Schams Elwazer, Mohammed Tawfeeq and Tim Hume, CNN
Updated 8:12 AM ET, Sun July 31, 2016

(CNN) — An ISIS hostage-taking at an oil field near the northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk has ended with the attackers killed and their captives safely freed, a senior security source in the city told CNN.

Four hostages -- employees of the Iraqi North Oil Company -- were taken captive after four attackers, believed to be wearing suicide vests, stormed the Bai Hassan oil field northwest of Kirkuk on Sunday, the source said.

One of the attackers blew himself up when security forces responded. The other attackers were later killed by security forces.

The ISIS-affiliated Amaq news agency released a statement claiming responsibility for the attack, which was widely circulated by the terror group's supporters on social media networks.

The standoff was the second armed attack on an energy facility in the Kirkuk region Sunday, following an earlier deadly attack on a nearby gas compression facility owned by the same company.

4 killed in earlier attack

Four staff were killed and another was injured during that attack on the gas facility, known as AB, in the Bajwan area in northwestern Kirkuk, police Gen. Sarhad Qader said.

The attackers fled to an unknown location after being pushed back by security forces, but planted several bombs near the facility before they left, Qader said.

No one has claimed responsibility for that attack.

ISIS has previously coordinated attacks on energy facilities in the oil-rich region.

Kirkuk is one of Iraq's disputed areas, claimed by both the central government in Baghdad and the Kurdistan Regional Government.

Production at Bai Hassan, which pumps crude via a pipeline to the Turkish port city of Ceyhan, remains temporarily halted in the wake of the attack, the security source said.

CNN's Lauren Said-Moorhouse contributed to this report.
 

vestige

Deceased
#11:

Britain's newly-appointed security minister Ben Wallace said he had met owners and operators of the country's biggest shopping centers to discuss their security plans.


....and just WTH would security plans consist of????

issuing every employee a heavy teapot?

They have their asses in the wind and they know it.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://in.reuters.com/article/mideast-crisis-iraq-shirqat-idINKCN10B0AX

World | Sun Jul 31, 2016 1:55pm IST Related: WORLD, IRAQ

Iraqi forces eye Shirqat, one of the last steps before Mosul

HAJJAJ, IRAQ | BY FADHIL AL-SAMARRAIE

Thousands are fleeing a northern Iraqi town controlled by Islamic State before a planned government assault there that would be a major step towards retaking the militant stronghold of Mosul, 100 km (60 miles) further north.

Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi has pledged to recapture Mosul, the ultra-hardline group's de facto Iraqi capital and the largest city anywhere in its self-proclaimed caliphate, by the end of 2016, more than two years after it fell to the jihadists.

Recent gains against the militants have brought that target into focus , though critics still question whether the military is ready and what might happen to the city if Islamic State is ousted.

More than 33,000 people have fled south from Shirqat town over the past two months, according to the United Nations refugee agency UNHCR and local security officials.

Controlling Shirqat and the nearby town of Qayara is critical to protect the recently recaptured Qayara airbase from mortar and rocket attacks so that U.S.-backed Iraqi forces can use it as a logistics hub for the Mosul operation.

About 560 U.S. troops will help repair the base, which was damaged by fighting and Islamic State sabotage, to let thousands more Iraqi forces can join the main push on Mosul, which could begin by late September.

Shi'ite militia fighters on the side of the government moved to Shirqat's outskirts last week but then withdrew, militia sources said.

Iraq's elite counter-terrorism service, which has spearheaded recent battles against Islamic State, will take the lead in assaulting Shirqat, according to security sources.

Military officials declined to discuss the timing of the operation, beyond saying it would happen "soon".

In a television interview on Sunday, Defence Minister Khaled al-Obeidi would not specify whether the operation would precede the Mosul battle but said recent advances have isolated Shirqat and Hawija, further east, from the rest of Islamic State territory.

The militants, who seized a third of Iraq's territory in 2014, have been kicked out of at least half that land by army, police and Shi'ite militias over the past two years.

Government forces are also encircling Hawija, which military officials say is less strategically important for the Mosul battle.

DWINDLING RESOURCES, HARSH PUNISHMENTS

Officials have warned of a looming humanitarian disaster as locals struggle to get food and basic services.

In addition to those displaced from Shirqat, thousands of people in nearby areas are trapped between Islamic State and security forces, said a police commander in Salahuddin province, where Shirqat is located.

Civilians have been brought to a government-run camp near Hajjaj, around 80 km (50 miles) south of Shirqat, where tents have been erected in the desert with men separated from women and children for security screening.

They join more than 3.4 million people displaced across Iraq. The authorities say several hundred thousand people have returned home to areas recovered from Islamic State.

The United Nations says the main assault on Mosul could displace at least another million people, compounding pressure on a government already facing a budget deficit caused by lower oil prices.

Evacuees from Shirqat, standing in scorching summer heat last week in Hajjaj, told Reuters about inflated prices and shortages of basic supplies under Islamic State rule.

"Children died due to lack of milk," said Fayadh Dhirgham. "There was no drinking water. We had to drink water from the river and it was filthy."

Others described how the jihadists had imposed their strict interpretation of Islamic law on residents.

"You couldn't leave your house. Your dishdasha (robe) has to be short and your beard must be long," said Omar Ahmed, waiting to enter security screening. "You couldn't smoke cigarettes. For each cigarette, you would be lashed 50 times."

(Additional reporting by Saif Hameed and Kareem Raheem in Baghdad; Editing by Stephen Kalin and Andrew Heavens)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-manbij-idUSKCN10B0TG

World | Sun Jul 31, 2016 4:26pm EDT Related: WORLD, SYRIA

U.S.-backed forces win control of most of Syria's Manbij from Islamic State: spokesman

BEIRUT | BY SULEIMAN AL-KHALIDI

U.S.-backed forces have now seized control of almost 70 percent of Manbij in northern Syria from Islamic State after making rapid advances over the past two days, a spokesman said on Sunday.

Syria Democratic Forces (SDF) have pushed back the ultra hardline Sunni militants into the old quarter after seizing most of the western, eastern and southern sectors of the city, Sharfan Darwish of the SDF-allied Manbij military council told Reuters in Beirut by telephone.

"They are now mainly in the old quarter of the city and parts of the north-eastern part of the city," Darwish added.

The SDF, which includes the powerful Kurdish YPG militia and Arab fighters, launched the campaign nearly two months ago with the backing of U.S. special forces to drive Islamic State from its last stretch of the Syrian-Turkish frontier.

Though at least 2,300 civilians have been able to escape from Manbij, thousands of residents are still trapped inside. The presence of civilians, who the militants were trying to stop from leaving, was hampering U.S. air attacks, Kurdish sources said.

Progress in storming the city had also been slowed by militants using snipers and planting mines, the Kurdish sources said.

Manbij's loss would be a huge blow to the militants since it is a vital conduit for the transit of foreign jihadists and provisions from the Turkish border.

"The military initiative is in our hands and the campaign is now being undertaken to liberate what is left of the city and progress is continuing until this moment," Darwish said.

Earlier the British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the SDF, with the support of air strikes, had seized much of the eastern part of the besieged city after slower advances in recent weeks mainly in the western sector.

The monitor said they had captured a clinic, school and a roundabout in the heart of eastern Manbij after heavy fighting. There were no confirmed reports of casualties.

Darwish estimated at least 40,000 to 50,000 civilian residents have escaped since the campaign began.

Activists and residents say dozens of civilians have been killed this month in air strikes in the city and to the north, and rights watchdog Amnesty International said the U.S.-led coalition must do more to prevent civilian deaths.

Manbij is in the northern province of Aleppo, which forms a theater for several separate battles between multiple warring sides in Syria's five-year-old conflict.

(Reporting by Suleiman Al-Khalidi; Editing by Richard Balmforth)
 

Housecarl

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


For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-attacks-germany-memorial-idUSKCN10B0RN

World | Sun Jul 31, 2016 2:32pm EDT Related: WORLD, GERMANY

After attacks, German president says absolute security impossible

No government can guarantee its citizens full security from terror strikes, Germany's president said on Sunday, calling for national unity as the best defense after attacks in the past two weeks left 15 people dead.

"Nowhere on earth are there politicians who can make such a guarantee," Joachim Gauck, a former Christian pastor in communist East Germany, told a memorial ceremony for the attack victims in Munich.

"What we can do, however, is something we need to work on again - that is the alliance of government bodies and an alert and active civil society. This is the best possible cover against the rise of the cynical calculus of violent attackers."

Five separate attacks between July 18 and July 26, two of them claimed by Islamic State, also left dozens wounded and have burst any illusions in Germany that the country is immune to attacks like those also claimed by Islamic State in neighboring France.

Munich was the scene of the bloodiest of the German attacks, on July 22, in which an 18-year-old German-Iranian gunman killed nine people. The gunman's father told the Bild am Sonntag weekly newspaper that he and his wife had since received death threats: "Our life in Munich is done," he said.

Two of the assailants in the other attacks, a Syrian asylum seeker who blew himself up in Ansbach and a refugee from either Pakistan or Afghanistan who attacked people on a train in Bavaria, had links to Islamist militancy, officials say. The Munich gunman did not.

Critics of Chancellor Angela Merkel have blamed the attacks on her open-door refugee policy, under which over a million migrants, many fleeing war in Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq, entered Germany in the past year.

Merkel, who attended Sunday's memorial but has faced media criticism for not visiting the attack scenes, set out a nine-point plan on Thursday to respond to the attacks, including an early warning system for the radicalization of refugees.

Gauck said he understood why many Germans were shaken after the attacks, but Germany would not submit to the assailants.

"They won't compel us to hate, like they hate," he said. "They won't hold us in the confinement of perpetual fear. We will remain what we are: a considerate, supportive society."

(Writing by Paul Carrel; Editing by Susan Fenton)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
I'm adding this to the WoW thread due to the potential of what it represents as a source of "instability" in the Gulf as well as the whole employment and social situation in those countries...HC

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-36936666

'Food crisis' hits 10,000 laid-off Indians in Saudi Arabia

6 hours ago
From the section Middle East

More than 10,000 Indian nationals laid off in Saudi Arabia are facing a "food crisis", India's foreign minister says.

Sushma Swaraj said "large numbers" of Indians had lost their jobs in the kingdom, leaving them with not enough money to buy food.

The Indian community in Jeddah, with the government's help, has distributed food to those in need at the weekend.

Growth has slowed in Saudi Arabia as the country suffers the effect of lower oil prices.

Ms Swaraj appealed on Twitter for the three-million-strong Indian community in the country to "help your fellow brothers and sisters".

"I assure you that no Indian worker rendered unemployed in Saudi Arabia will go without food," she wrote.

A government minister is travelling to Saudi Arabia, Ms Swaraj said. He is expected to help with arrange an airlift of laid-off Indians who are unable to afford the air fare home.


Indian worker’s tearful plea to leave Saudi Arabia


The Indian consulate in Jeddah said it had distributed more than 15,000kg (34,000lb) of food on Saturday alone, with the help of Indian nationals in the city.
The embassy in Riyadh was asked to distribute as much food as they could to those in need.

Reports in India on Saturday said 800 Indian workers had lost their jobs at Saudi Oger, a large Saudi-Lebanese construction company.

The Saudi-based Arab News website reported on Sunday that hundreds of Saudi Oger's employees, who said they had not been paid in seven months, had led protests in Jeddah.

The Saudi government has not commented on the situation of the Indian workers.
In the past, Human Rights Watch has criticised Saudi Arabia for "rampant employer abuses of migrant workers, including forcing them to work against their will or on exploitative terms".

A visa system that ties workers' residency to employment "grants employers excessive power over workers and facilitates abuse", the group said.

Workers laid off in Kuwait were also suffering food shortages, Ms Swaraj said, but the situation there was more manageable, she added.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/30/europe/turkey-post-coup-releases/

Post-coup, Turkish government releases hundreds of soldiers

By Euan McKirdy, Schams Elwazer and Lauren Said-Moorhouse, CNN
Updated 12:39 PM ET, Sun July 31, 2016

Video

(CNN)Hundreds of soldiers detained in the fallout of the July 15 coup attempt have been released, Turkish state media reported.

As many as 758 of the 10,012 soldiers held after that failed power grab were freed Saturday on the recommendation of a judge in Istanbul after the soldiers provided testimony on their involvement in the execution of the plot to oust President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

The judge called the detention of the soldiers, including military students, unnecessary.

Suspects can be detained for up to 30 days without charge under a new presidential decree issued in the wake of the foiled revolution. The directive also allows the government to listen in on all conversations suspects have with their lawyers. A state of emergency has also been sanctioned.

In addition, 1,389 military personnel suspected of being allied with the movement of U.S.-based cleric Fethullah Gulen have been expelled from the Turkish armed forces, state-run Anadolu reported on Sunday. Gulen, who is in self-imposed exile, has denied any involvement in the coup.

This is how many people Turkey has arrested post-coup

Wholesale changes
The government Sunday issued decrees to change the military's organizational structure, bringing the armed forces under tighter government control.
Following the attempted takeover the military has been the subject of some of the widest-ranging purges.

Fate of soldiers unknown in wake of Turkey coup attempt

Fate of soldiers unknown in wake of Turkey coup attempt 02:38
Under the new decrees, the army, navy and air force will directly be answerable to the Defense Ministry, instead of the military's Chief of General Staff.

In addition, all existing military schools and academies have been shut down and a new National Defense University has been established under the control of the Defense Ministry, Anadolu reports. Military hospitals are now under the remit of the Health Ministry.

Erdogan has also explored the possibility of having the military and National Intelligence Agency directly answerable to the presidency, but conceded that such a change -- which would require altering the constitution -- would need to be explored in cross-party talks.

On Sunday, Erdogan was prevented from addressing an anti-coup rally in the German city of Cologne after Germany's highest court upheld a ban on him speaking to the crowd via video link.

Turkey's EU minister and chief negotiator, Omer Çelik, said on Twitter that the German court's decision went "against democratic values," describing it as an "utter backsliding in freedom of speech and democracy."

It was a "shame," he wrote, to see the EU failing to show "solidarity with a candidate country in the face of a coup threat."

Turkey is a candidate to join the European Union. There are almost three million Turks in Germany, making them the country's largest ethnic minority.

Related: How people in Turkey feel about failed coup

Swift retribution
Turkey is slowly returning to some degree of normalcy following the attempted coup, which claimed the lives of 246 people and 24 coup plotters. As the government reasserted its authority, it wasted little time in its response.

The country's Prime Minister Binali Yildirim quickly made public addresses denouncing the failed military uprising, while Erdogan vowed to seek revenge for "a clear crime of treason" in an exclusive interview with CNN.

The reassertion of power has been swift with mass arrests, detentions and dismissals of suspected coup plotters.

The purge of those alleged to have been involved in the coup has been wide and sweeping. A total of 15,846 people have been detained in connection to the failed coup earlier this month, according to Efkan Ala, the country's interior minister, state broadcaster TRT reported.

The majority of the detentions have been military -- 10,012 people, including 178 generals. In addition to the large number of detentions, TRT reported the interior minister has said 8,113 individuals have been arrested.

Yildirim has also told state-run news agency Anadolu of its intentions to disband Turkey's elite presidential guard unit.

Opinion: Why West must embrace Turkey

Erdogan drops lawsuits

The president said that he would be dropping several pending lawsuits against people he deemed to have insulted him, he said at a ceremony in Ankara.

"As a milestone, I hereby withdraw all the cases filed for insulting me and forgive all the offenders," he said in a speech marking Martyrs' Memorial Day at the presidential complex in Ankara, commemorating the victims of the failed coup, according to state media outlet Anadolu.

He insisted that his regime had abided by the rule of law during the coup and its aftermath.

"Even during the coup attempt process, we have not made the slightest compromise with the law. Every step we have taken, every decision we have made, every implementation we have launched, it has been under the constitution (and the country's) laws."

Related: Could NATO unravel next?
Arrest warrants for journalists

Turkish authorities have also issued 47 new arrest warrants for journalists, managers and former staff of the Zaman newspaper, the government said Wednesday. An official from Erdogan's office called the newspaper "the Gulen Movement's flagship media organization."

CNN has reached out to Zaman for comment but they had not responded by time of publishing.

This is the latest crackdown on individuals suspected of having ties to alleged coup plotters including Gulen, whom Erdogan has repeated cited as the mastermind behind the coup attempt on July 15.

"The prosecutors aren't interested in what individual columnists wrote or said. At this point, the reasoning is that prominent employees of Zaman are likely to have intimate knowledge of the Gulen network and as such could benefit the investigation," the official said.

Turkey has closed more than 2,000 institutions they say are linked to Gulen.

Previously, 42 warrants were issued on similar grounds earlier last week. A total of 89 warrants have been issued for journalists in the country to date. Meanwhile, Turkey's broadcasting authority has revoked licenses for 24 radio and television companies believed to have links to Gulen, Anadolu has reported.

In addition to mass arrests, Turkish authorities have fired or suspended at least 60,000 people from various institutions, including some from state-run organizations, according to Andalou.

CNN's Vasco Cotovio, Frederik Pleitgen, Gul Tuysuz and Hamdi Alkhshali, and journalists Isil Sariyuce and Nimet Kirac contributed to this piece.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.strategypage.com/qnd/iraq/articles/20160731.aspx

Iraq: ISIL Should Know Better

July 31, 2016: Driving ISIL (Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant) out of Mosul is now a matter of when, not if. More ISIL personnel and their families are leaving the city (with or without permission). The coalition air raids are becoming more frequent and increasingly effective. This is because more target information is coming from inside the city and nothing ISIL does seems to reverse this process. A growing number of ISIL personnel and operations in the city are being moved from captured government and military compounds to residential areas in an effort to avoid air attack. Worse these attacks are largely against specific targets, like ISIL leaders and key technical experts. Weapons and critical equipment (like communications and military vehicles) are also more vulnerable. This is not a new problem, a lot of ISIL artillery and armored vehicles were ordered to leave Mosul for Syria in June. But the coalition keeps finding essential ISIL vehicles and destroying them. ISIL leaders appear to be getting more key people (leaders, tech experts, most reliable fighters) out of the city and back to Syria. Thus when Iraqi troops move into the city there will probably be less than 5,000 ISIL fighters (plus lots of mines, booby traps and roadside bombs) and few (but still over 100,000) civilians to deal with.

The government is urging all civilians to get out but they know from recent experience in Ramadi and Fallujah that does not work. In part this is because some civilians refuse to abandon homes and businesses to looting and destruction. But many civilians are forces to remain by ISIL so they can act as human shields. Again, based on the experience in Ramadi and Fallujah, the human shields are not as effective as they used to be. If Iraqi ground forces are involved the ISIL target will be bombed despite the presence of civilians. That’s another incentive for civilians to leave but it is unrealistic to expect all of them to be gone.

The Iraqis have put together a force of over 30,000 troops for the final assault. This includes 24,000 recently trained (by the Americans) and certified as combat ready (at least by Iraqi standards). There are also over 5,000 Kurds and other (like Christian) groups that the Americans have experience with and consider reliable and effective. Iraq has also relented and allowed the Americans to use a dozen or more AH-64 helicopter gunships and about as many HIMARS rocket launchers to support Iraqi combat operations around Mosul. Iraqi politicians, mainly the pro-Iranian ones, had opposed the use of HIMARS and AH-64s in western Iraq (Anbar province) to retake Ramadi and Fallujah. But Mosul is a much larger operation and the need for success is more urgent. Survival outranks political preferences. The Kurds and Iraqi troops with pre-2011 combat experience know and appreciate the usefulness of the AH-64 and the GPS guided rockets fired by HIMARS. The question of how many Shia militia will be involved in the liberations is still unclear. The Shia militias insist they will lead the way. American and Iraqi generals say that will hurt more than help.

Then there is the air support, which is expected to be substantial during the final assault on Mosul. The U.S. led air coalition over Iraq and Syria has been averaging about a hundred attacks (using either a guided missile or smart bomb) a day in June and July. About a third of that is in Syria but more will be switched to Iraq when the fighting is heavy inside Mosul. The Americans have brought in more ground controller teams to operate with Iraqi forces and provide timely air strikes. At its peak there will probably be several hundred guided missiles and smart bombs a day used in Mosul. Iran-backed Shia militia refuse to use American air support.

It did not go unnoticed by anyone that in the last few months many of the ISIL defenders in Ramadi and Fallujah were not willing to fight to the death, or even fight at all. This despite ISIL commanders ready to shoot on the spot any subordinate who faltered. The upcoming offensive to liberate Mosul is taking weakening ISIL morale into account and low level combat commanders have been told what to look for (a true morale collapse and not just a feint) and take advantage of it to quickly advance. This information is often delivered by NCOs and junior officers who experienced this sort of thing in Ramadi and Fallujah, so their advice has more impact on men who are going to risk death to act on this in combat.

What worries ISIL leaders the most is the growing network of informers, who pass on to Kurdish, American or Iraqi government spymasters’ information on the location and movement of ISIL leaders and other key personnel (technical experts and the like). These key people are dying from smart bomb or guided missile attack with increasing frequency. Worse, there informers are assumed to be passing on details of new ISIL defenses inside the city. This is causing a growing number of ISIL personnel at all levels to lost confidence in their cause. The people they have “liberated” soon come to hate ISIL and few major Islamic clerics or scholars support what ISIL is trying to do (conquer the world for Islam).

As ISIL tries to organize an effective defense of Mosul it is encountering more active and better organized armed resistance by the population. While only a few of the half million or so people still in Mosul are actually using weapons (usually guns or explosives) a much larger number are helping, often by not admitting, even under pressure or torture, that they have seen anything. Also encouraging are first-hand accounts from refugees about Mosul residents who would independently go after some ISIL man who was particularly hated and kill him with whatever was available, which was sometimes a knife, club or axe. Other civilians use one of the many weapons that became available after Saddam was overthrown in 2003 (like a pistol or hand grenade) and kill an isolated ISIL man. The battle for Mosul will not be just a military conflict but also a test of wills and morale.

There Is Good News And Bad News

On the bright side several hundred thousand civilians have returned home in western Iraq (Anbar province) after they were assured that ISIL fighters and bombs had been cleared out of their recently liberated towns, villages and neighborhoods in cities like Ramadi, Fallujah, Hit (or “Heet”) and others recently fought over. Iraqi soldiers and Shia militia continue to drive ISIL out of towns and villages in Anbar, where ISIL is trying to maintain a presence if only to support terror attacks in Shia population centers (especially Baghdad) to the east.

ISIL commanders are apparently under orders to carry out successful attacks at every opportunity, especially against security forces and the Kurds. The attacks against the Kurds almost always fail but the Iraqi Arabs are often easier targets because they are more prone to making mistakes (in maintaining security) or accepting bribes (to let a suicide car bomber past a checkpoint). But even in this area there is some good news; the government has finally admitted that police are using a notoriously ineffective explosive detector device (the ADE 651) and all will be removed from service. This is a major shift in Iraqi policy. Despite the 2013 prosecution and conviction (in Britain) of those responsible for manufacturing and selling phony bomb detectors, particularly to Iraq, the government continued to tolerate the use of the ADE 651. This was an issue back in 2014 when it was found that ADE 651 devices were still being used by some Iraqi police. At the time government officials, including very senior ones, insisted that “some of them (the ADE 651) work.” Iraqi police have been using the ADE 651 bomb detector since 2008 despite clear evidence that the device is a total fraud. In early 2010 the Iraqi government agreed to investigate the purchase of $85 million worth of ADE 651s. Iraqi officials had bought thousands of these hand held devices, for up to $60,000 each. But even then the British manufacturer was being prosecuted in Britain for fraud purchases continued. The device contains useless components, and repeated tests showed that it could not detect anything. Apparently a large chunk of the money Iraq paid for the ADE 651 was kicked back to the Iraqi officials who approved the sale. In 2011, an Iraqi general was arrested for taking bribes to approve the purchase of this device, but not much else happened. The ADE 651 is very cheap to make, and the manufacturer made a huge profit even after paying large bribes. Some of the Iraqi officials who received the millions in bribes are still in power and not willing to prosecute themselves. What really did in the ADE 651 was the news that several recent ISIL suicide car bomb attacks, which left over a thousand people (mostly Shia civilians) dead or wounded, were made possible because of continued dependence on the ADE 651.

More Budget Blues

The need to deal with ISIL plus the falling price of oil has produced a growing problem with the Iraqi government budget. The additional expenses to fight ISIL plus the lower price of oil has meant more deficits. Because Iraq has a lousy credit history there are not a lot of lenders available and the government has been forces to cut the budget. Thus the 2016 budget of $90 billion is fifteen percent lower than the 2015 one and $20 billion must be borrowed. This is more troublesome because some 70 percent of the budget goes to pay salaries of government employees, many of them unneeded. But these additional civil servants are how the implacably corrupt government survives. Hire enough people in an economy crippled by massive corruption and you have some control over the victims of the corruption. This has long been a common practice in the region and became easier to implement with the arrival of the oil business nearly a century ago. One of the things that attracts young men to ISIL is the promise to eliminate the corruption. Of course Moslem radicals have been making that promise for centuries and getting away with it but that’s another matter. The continued low oil prices has done even more damage to ISIL finances. That plus more air strikes on ISIL controlled oil fields.

July 30, 2016: Shia cleric Ayatollah Muqtada al Sadr has called off the regular Friday anti-corruption demonstrations in Baghdad for 30 days because he has been told that the government is going to finally respond to demands for more decisive anti-corruption measures. Since late July 2015 thousands of pro-reform Iraqis have been demonstrating in Baghdad and other cities every Friday to encourage the government to take more action against corruption. Among the more obvious changes demanded was eliminating thousands of senior level positions in the government that existed mainly to enable politicians to steal. Sadr also wanted the government to start enforcing existing laws against corruption. At first the government responded by making some minor changes. The people demanded more of this, and less corruption in general. So far all the government has not done enough and that inaction keeps the demonstrators coming. What makes these demonstrations so effective is that they have the support of the two top Shia clerics; Grand Ayatollah Sistani and the younger, more radical and pro-Iran Ayatollah Sadr. This clerical support makes the demonstrations impossible to ignore but so many top officials are corrupt that it is difficult to get enough of them removed or persuaded to act with more integrity to make a difference.

July 29, 2016: In the west (Anbar province) an air strike near the Syrian border destroyed an ISIL bomb making facility and killed 13 ISIL members. This included several leaders attending a meeting in the same compound. Among the ISIL dead was Ahmed Hassan Abu Kheir, the brother-in-law of ISIL leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and a member of the ISIL inner circle. At least eleven more ISIL men were badly wounded but got away before Iraqi ground forces arrived.

In Mosul ISIL publicly executed twenty civilians suspected of spying for the enemy (the U.S., Iraq, Iran or whatever as details are always murky). Families of those killed were forced to witness the executions. A lot more civilians are arrested and never heard from again. ISIL personnel spend more and more time patrolling “unfriendly neighborhoods” and raiding homes and businesses suspected of harboring spies and other traitors. A lot of innocents are picked up, and some of them killed (by public execution or from torture) and ISIL feels this will inspire more people to behave. ISIL should know better.

July 28, 2016: The government has agreed to incorporate 80,000 members of Iran-backed Shia militias into the armed forces. This will include paying the militiamen monthly salaries comparable to what soldiers get allowing the militiamen the use of military bases. It is hoped that this will restore confidence in the Iraqi military. Since 2015 most men the army wanted to recruit preferred to join one of the Shia militias organized and trained by Iranians. It was all a matter of trust. Potential Shia recruits (in a country where Shia are over 60 percent of the population) did not believe the Iraqi Army could be reformed and rebuilt and felt the paramilitary Shia militias would be better led and more effective even though the Iraqi Army had better weapons and was more likely to get American air support. American military leaders were disappointed, but not surprised. Unfortunately many of the Shia militias are led by men known to have been members of pro-Iran militias that, before 2008, attacked American troops as well as Sunni Islamic terrorists. These militias were disbanded by 2010 but after 2014 were allowed to reform again. This alone was considered a great victory for Iran. What triggered the current American training effort in Iraq was the ISIL offensive in mid-2014 that took control of most of western Iraq (Anbar province) and the northwestern city of Mosul, the second largest city in Iraq. By the end of 2014 Iraq had asked the United States to help rebuild the Iraqi armed forces and called in Iran to revive the Shia militias. Then came the rapid and unexpected loss of Ramadi (the capital of Anbar province) in May 2015 to a much smaller ISIL force. Government troops outnumbered nearby ISIL gunmen by ten to one. After that it became increasingly difficult to get Shia Iraqis to join the army.....
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Well this if true could get really "interesting"....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2016/07/485_210763.html

Posted : 2016-07-31 16:59
Updated : 2016-07-31 19:08

N. Korean general 'defects with $45 million'

By Lee Han-soo

A North Korean General allegedly fled the repressive state in mid-July with more than $40 million (45 billion won), a Korean TV broadcaster announced Friday.

According to KBS, the unidentified defector was in charge of Section 39 inside the North Korean Workers' Party.

Section 39 oversees foreign currency earnings by the country's workers in Southeast Asia and China.

The general is in China with two family members, but wishes to defect to a different country that has not been specified, according to the KBS report.

How the general managed to defect with the massive amount of money is unknown.

Experts believe that the defection of a high-ranking military official could lead to a mass defection among Pyongyang's elite.

South Korean authorities said they cannot verify the report.

corea022@ktimes.com
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Hummm.....


For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/opinon/2016/08/162_210784.html

Opinion

Posted : 2016-07-31 17:49
Updated : 2016-07-31 17:49

China and North Korea's missiles

By Liang Tuang Nah

The progress of the North Korean ballistic missile program seems inexorable. In his quest to build a credible ability to threaten U.S. Pacific territories like Guam with a nuclear strike, DPRK leader Kim Jong-un has pushed his missile program through five unsuccessful tests of the Hwasong-10 IRBM on April 15, 2016, April 28 (two on the same day), May 31 and June 22 respectively, before a successful sixth test on the same day as the fifth failure.

On July 9, Kim's missile program attempted to test a Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile (SLBM), a Bukguekseong-1 SLBM, which exploded shortly after launch. However, if history is any guide, this failure should not be dismissed as the North Koreans are known to disregard surrender as an option, striving for a successful test over the long run. Excluding this launch, the KN-11 has already been tested nine times since October 2014. While Korea's national intelligence agency has predicted that Pyongyang could deploy an operational SLBM by 2019, it would not be surprising if this goal is reached much earlier.

If the deployment of effective North Korean IRBMs and SLBMs is inevitable, it would only make sense for the U.S.-ROK alliance to deploy the U.S. made Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile system on South Korean soil in order to intercept any North Korea missiles. However, the range of the THAAD radar and interceptor missiles will enable this system to intercept missiles fired from China, eroding the efficacy of the PRC's strategic deterrence. Hence, Beijing bitterly opposes Washington's and Seoul's joint decision taken on July 8 to deploy THAAD.

However, Beijing cannot have its cake and eat it too. In all previous Pyongyang instigated nuclear or missile crises, China has always insisted that North Korea be negotiated with, while concurrently persuading the U.S. and ROK from implementing punitive measures, and refusing to apply any economic sanctions that would seriously pressure the DPRK. Cynically, it can be argued that the PRC's leadership wants both Washington and Seoul to maintain a policy of strategic patience, and treat North Korea with "kid gloves" while respecting Chinese deterrence sensitivities.

It can be seen that the Kim regime is all too willing to use nuclear and missile aggrandizement as part of a coercive negotiation to obtain aid from the U.S. and/or South Korea. Hence, since carrots do not work in bringing about any lasting positive change in North Korean behavior, it is reasonable to resort to the stick.

Additionally, since the DPRK can, given sufficient time, develop successful IRBMs, SLBMs and possibly Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles, action must be taken to limit Pyongyang's strategic missile arsenal to the low dozens or even less. Considering that previous United Nations Security Council Resolutions have already prohibited all North Korean missile tests, China as the DPRK's only significant global conduit, must strictly prohibit all rocket fuel or fuel production chemical exports, along with any materials components that might be useful for missile production to the latter.

Lastly, it would be hypocritical of Beijing to object to THAAD deployment while refusing to apply coercive economic leverage against Pyongyang to influence the Kim regime. If Kim chooses to consistently thumb his nose at Beijing using nuclear and missile shenanigans, perhaps a two week closure of all land crossings and sea ports to North Korean commercial traffic would remind young Marshall Kim that as his grandfather and father could not ignore the strategic interests and dictates of the PRC, neither can he.

Liang Tuang Nah, Ph.D., is a fellow at the Institute of Defense and Strategic Studies at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University. Write to isltnah@ntu.edu.sg.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://thediplomat.com/2016/07/the-future-of-chinas-diplomacy-in-the-middle-east/

The Future of China's Diplomacy in the Middle East

Despite its rising power, China should resist the temptation to become militarily involved in the Middle East.

By Xue Li and Zheng Yuwen
July 26, 2016

President Xi Jinping made his first overseas visit in 2016 to Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Iran, which implied that China is considering bringing its “One Belt and One Road” strategy (OBOR) to the Middle East and regards this region as a critical area of neighborhood diplomacy. So what kind of diplomacy should China conduct in the Middle East? Is it the time for China to become militarily involved — for example, to send an army to Syria? Also, given that China issued an “Arab Policy Paper” right before the visit, does this mean that China-Arab relations will cover Chinese-Iranian relations as well? To answer those questions, we need to figure out three things: the main characteristic of the Middle East, China’s comparative advantages, and China’s interests in this region.

Besides its importance in geopolitics and geography, the Middle East is rich in energy resources (according to the BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2015, the region accounts for 47.7 percent and 42.7 percent of the world’s proven oil and natural gas reserves, respectively) and human resources (with a population of about 500 million, youthful demographics, and a high growth rate), and is in the process of industrialization and urbanization. All Middle Eastern states except Israel are developing countries.

However, the region is also famous as a home to various conflicts. Religious conflicts, national conflicts, and economic conflicts mingle together, which has even caused several local wars. This region has become a hotbed of terrorism and religious extremism. Because of the lack of a dominant power, the regional powers — Turkey, Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, even Iraq — vie with with each other over the leadership of Middle East. The conflicts between small and middle powers frequently result in intervention from regional powers and outside powers. Outside powers often support different countries, religions, or religious sects to secure their own benefits.

Enjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access. Just $5 a month.
China could gain economic profits in this region through the petrochemical industry (including oil and gas exploration and exploitation), investment, and infrastructure construction. The Middle East also provides China with a market for manufactured products and access to vital sea lines of communication (SLOCs).

For Middle Eastern nations, China’s comparative economic advantage could lead to opportunities in many fields, such as FDI, infrastructure, nuclear power, and new energy technology. In addition, the oil producers in Middle East are much attracted to China’s market.

However, Israel, Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq are all American allies. Compared to China, the United States has closer relations with all states in Middle East except for Iran.

Strategy in the Coming Decade

The Middle East is a complex brew of conflicts: between different religions (Palestine and Israel), different religious sects (Sunni and Shia), different ethnic groups (Kurd and Turks), and even between moderates and radicals (the Palestine Liberation Organization and Hamas). It is beyond any great power to solve the Middle East’s problems. Outside powers often deal with these issues in three ways: adopting a hands-off posture, supporting one side over another, or reaping benefits from stirring up troubles.

In next decade, the prospect of China’s relations with Middle Eastern states mainly lies in the potential for economic cooperation. For China, it will be difficult to to transform cultural exchanges (which have considerable potential) to practical influence in the region. On the one hand, China wants to play a more significant role in security issues in the Middle East, to show its responsibilities and capabilities as a rising power. On the other hand, China also hopes to get economic and cultural profits from its interactions with the Middle East. For China, a hands-off policy is out. It is also inappropriate for China to benefit from inciting conflicts (as European powers historically did) because doing so will harm China’s interests. Similarly, playing off one side against the other, which Russia and the United States prefer, is not a feasible approach, since the oppressed side — either the administration or the opposition — may adopt retaliatory measures, and then China will suffer economic damages, or even terrorist attacks. China is neither a party to the disputes in the Middle East or responsible for these conflicts; nor is it a direct neighboring country of Middle Eastern states. China’s critical task is still developing its domestic economy and society; thus, it is inappropriate for China to undertake too many international responsibilities and obligations that might interfere with its internal progress.

Past empires and today’s great powers have all proven incapable of completely solving the Middle East’s issues — let alone China, a late comer to the nation-state system. The only measure that China could adopt is helping disputing parties in the region to reach a temporary compromise, which is different from the tactics of the European Union, Russia and the United States. In other words, China would choose a powerful but constructive and peaceful strategy, easily accepted by directly disputing parties, and meanwhile allowing China to avoid censure from extra-regional powers. In terms of concrete measures, China could continue to use its existing special envoy mechanism to mediate, while providing material and financial assistance to the region, coordinating with other great powers, and strengthening policy dynamics.

Though it is difficult, China needs to focus more on designing compromising and cooperative schemes as available options for directly disputing parties. Over time, based on some cases carried out successfully, the “China Scheme” will come to possess a reputation for neutrality and impartiality — like the Nordic countries, but more powerful. China has already played a part in trying to solve the Syria crisis through inviting both sides — the Syrian government and the opposition faction — to visit China.

China’s limit, though, should be never directly intervening in local armed conflict. Chinese diplomatic strategy in the Middle East should be positive and enterprising, but lay more emphasis on strategic prudence and action based on capabilities — in particular, China should by all means avoid being eager to flex its muscles.

Despite this, China could still strengthen its military presence in Middle East. China has decided to build a logistical base for its navy in Djibouti. If the opportunity arises, China could build similar bases in Middle East in the future — Oman, Cyprus, Lebanon, Israel, and Iran are suitable choices, based on geography alone – but that possibility does not exist yet.

Xi Jinping’s Middle East Visit and China’s Middle East Diplomacy

China has to craft corresponding diplomatic strategies toward the four forces in Middle East: the Arab states, Turkey, Iran, and Israel. The Arab states are the majority and while China always keeps good relations with these countries, China needs to pay more attention to these relationships. China needed a document to clarify its diplomacy toward Arabian countries and to implement OBOR. Thus China’s Arab Policy Paper was released, timed to coincide with the 60th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and Egypt. And Xi started his first trip to the Middle East in Saudi Arabia and Egypt, the major representatives of Arab states.

Of course this is by no means a sign that China puts its diplomacy toward Iran under the same framework as its “Arab Policy.” Iran has the potential to become a pivot country for OBOR and attaches great importance to relations with China. As a consequence, China and Iran have built a comprehensive strategic partnership, making China is the first country to have that level of relationship with Iran.

Given the complexity of Syria crisis and the roles that Iran and Saudi Arabia each play, China knows that the summit mediation will be particularly helpful for resolving the conflict. However, it would be absolutely inappropriate for the president of the People’s Republic of China to take a direct flight from Riyadh to Tehran. Three reasons made Egypt a suitable transfer place. First, Egypt is a traditional leader of Arab world. Second, Egypt has adopted a moderate stance and keeps normal relations with both Iran and Saudi Arabia. Last but not least, China hopes that Egypt will become a pivot country for OBOR, according to Xi’s speech in Cairo.

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Iran also represent three great civilizations, which endowed Xi’s visit with cultural implications. He stressed repeatedly that, in the implementation of OBOR, China will improve not only economic cooperation but also the dialogue among civilizations. The numerous relevant cultural activities included Xi’s schedule fully proved his words.

Indeed, China’s interest in the Middle East in the coming decade will mainly focus on economy and culture. China’s diplomacy toward the Middle East should aim at those two fields. International responsibility should be given a secondary place and fulfilled by pursuing the image of a positive actor and strong peacekeeper in the Middle East.

Dr. Xue Li is Director of the Department of International Strategy at the Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Zheng Yuwen is a master’s degree student at China Foreign Affairs University.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/...r-strikes-sirte-libya-islamic-state/87909908/

U.S. conducts new round of airstrikes against ISIS in Libya

Andrew Tilghman, Christopher P. Cavas, Jeff Schogol, David Larter and Oriana Pawlyk 2:42 p.m. EDT August 1, 2016
Comments 6

This story was originally published Aug. 1, 2016, at 11:10 a.m. EST.

U.S. warplanes on Monday launched a new round of airstrikes against Islamic State militants in Libya, a campaign that is expected to last at least the next several days, the Pentagon has confirmed.

"Today, at the request of the Libyan Government of National Accord (GNA), the United States military conducted precision airstrikes against ISIL targets in Sirte, Libya, to support GNA-affiliated forces seeking to defeat ISIL in its primary stronghold in Libya," Pentagon Press Secretary Peter Cook said in a statement, which references one of the Islamic State group's acronyms.

Map

Monday's two strikes, which hit an ISIS tank and two vehicles, were conducted by a combination of manned and unmanned aircraft, defense officials said. They were the first to target the ISIS outpost in Sirte, located along the Libyan coast. The ISIS force of fewer than 1,000 militants continues to control the city center, official said.

Two prior U.S. airstrikes hit ISIS militants in other parts of Libya, most recently in February. Since then, however, U.S. officials have been reluctant to authorize more until a cohesive government emerged from the country's chaotic civil war.

Monday's strikes were the first to be requested by the Libyan GNA and may signal the start of a U.S. broader mission to support the fledgling Libyan government.


MILITARYTIMES
In Libya, the U.S. opens a fourth front in war on ISIS


Defense officials will not say whether there are any U.S. forces on the ground in Libya.

For months U.S. forces have conducted discreet ground operations, as small teams of special operations troops have moved in and out of Libya, making contact with rebel factions and gathering intelligence about the political and military situations there. Those personnel may continue to operate in Libya, but they are not involved in the current operation.

“With regard to this particular operation in Sirte, we do not expect U.S. [ground] forces to be part of this specific operation. I’m not going to speak to other us forces with regard to Libya overall,” Cook said. "We have indicated in the past that we have had forces on the ground getting a picture there, and that has been helpful and successful. But that is separate and apart from this operation.”

U.S. activity is limited to airstrikes and intelligence support, and does not include any weapons sales or nonlethal aid, Cook said. He called the attack "consistent with our approach to combating ISIL by working with capable and motivated local forces. GNA-aligned forces have had success in recapturing territory from ISIL thus far around Sirte, and additional U.S. strikes will continue to target ISIL in Sirte in order to enable the GNA to make a decisive, strategic advance."

The attack Monday was authorized by President Obama on the recommendation of Defense Secretary Ash Carter and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford, Cook said.

The head of U.S. Africa Command, Marine Corps Gen. Thomas D. Waldhauser, has been given authority to approve future strikes in Sirte, Cook said.

Col. Mark Cheadle, a spokesman for AFRICOM, told Military Times: "We are employing a variety of platforms to provide key information to the GNA-aligned forces. As well, we have the ability to conduct manned and unmanned airstrikes against [ISIS] targets in Sirte to help enable the GNA-aligned forces to make a decisive and strategic advance."

The U.S. amphibious assault ship Wasp, carrying an element of the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit, is standing by in the vicinity of Libya, sources said. That includes AV-8B Harrier attack jets. The Wasp is not accompanied, sources said, by the other two ships of its amphibious ready group.

Monday's attack was part of a comprehensive series of operations planned and controlled by AFRICOM. The first element of this three-phase plan is Operation Odyssey Resolve, consisting of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance flights designed to counter violent extremism in Libya.

The second phase, Operation Junction Serpent, provided targeting information. The third element, Operation Odyssey Lightning, includes strike aircraft hitting those targets. That operation reportedly began over the weekend, Pentagon sources said.

In February, U.S. intelligence officials raised their estimate for ISIS fighters in Libya to between 5,000 to 6,000, up from previous estimates of 2,000 to 3,000.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Interesting article considering the source is out of the UAE and written by a Jerusalem based writer....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.thenational.ae/opinion/comment/who-profits-as-the-eu-militarises-its-borders

Who profits as the EU militarises its borders?

Antony Loewenstein
August 1, 2016 Updated: August 1, 2016 03:47 PM

The defence industry has never been happier. With sales at unprecedented levels – US$65 billion (Dh 238bn) in 2015, according to the Global Defence Trade Report – France, the United States, Canada and Britain have become global leaders in arms exports. The Middle East is the largest importing region and weapons companies such as Raytheon, Oshkosh, Thales, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin are benefiting from continuing conflicts in Syria, Iraq and beyond.

These economic advantages are now expanding further afield. The refugee crisis engulfing Europe over the past 18 months has caused untold misery, with thousands drowning in the Mediterranean, racist attacks against Arab arrivals and restive populations increasingly turning against migrants fleeing Syria, Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq and Africa.

But largely ignored in the commentary and reporting from European countries struggling to cope has been the financial beneficiaries of huge migration: the arms manufacturers, private security corporations, and intelligence and surveillance multinationals. For them, Europe’s desperate desire to militarise and monitor its borders has led to a huge surge in profits.

After the attacks in Paris last November, share prices in some of these defence firms rose strongly. Lockheed Martin executive vice president Bruce Tanner told a Credit Suisse conference in West Palm Beach in the US in December that there were "indirect benefits" from the war in Syria. There was "an intangible lift because of the dynamics of that environment and our products in theatre", such as F-22s and F-35 jets.

A recent report from NGOs Stop Wapenhandel, Transnational Institute and Border Wars, provides comprehensive evidence of Europe’s zeal to outsource its border security and explains the direct link between wars in the Middle East and profits from European policies.

The European Commission wants to reform its border security agency Frontex into a more influential European Border and Coastguard Agency. This will mean even greater windfalls for defence multinationals. The report explains that the European border security industry was estimated at €15 billion (Dh61.6bn) in 2015 and is predicted to rise to more than €29 billion annually by 2022. The budget of Frontex increased 3,688 per cent between 2005 and 2016 from €6.3m to €238.7m and European states are obliged to strengthen their borders as a condition of membership.

"There is one group of interests that have only benefited from the refugee crisis, and in particular from the European Union's investment in ‘securing its borders’," the Border Wars report finds. "They are the military and security companies that provide the equipment to border guards, the surveillance technology to monitor frontiers, and the IT infrastructure to track population movements."

Crucially, the report shows that "far from being passive beneficiaries of EU largesse, these corporations are actively encouraging a growing securitisation of Europe's borders, and willing to provide ever more draconian technologies to do this". The large defence players in Europe include Airbus, Finmeccanica, Thales, Safran and Indra.

Finmecannica, Thales and Airbus are key lobbyists with the privately run European Organisation for Security and they push for tighter border security. Many of their suggestions, including the establishment of a cross-border security agency, have been adopted by the EU.

These companies are also three of the top four European arms traders selling weapons to nations in the Middle East and Africa that are experiencing the greatest unrest and fuelling refugees fleeing for their lives. In other words, these companies are making money from both selling weapons to repressive regimes and benefiting from the human fallout in Europe.

It’s a convenient convergence of interests and has generated virtually no public outcry. This is because populations across Europe are increasingly voting for political parties that believe in tight border controls and express little sympathy for outsiders trying to get in. The recent Brexit vote in Britain was won largely on a small majority of citizens wanting to "take back control of our borders". The fact that this can only be achieved by privatising the border security network – states don’t have the technology or expertise to do it themselves – is either unknown or seen as a necessary evil.

Israeli firms are the only non-European receivers of research grants for border security under a 1996 agreement between Europe and Tel Aviv. This has already led to Hungary and Bulgaria expressing serious interest in 2015 of establishing high fences reminiscent of the barrier separating Israel and Egypt and Israel’s separation barrier through the occupied West Bank. Israel’s decades of experience controlling millions of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, through drones, fences, walls, weapons and surveillance, is the perfect experience Europe craves during its current crisis.

Writer and activist Jeff Halper calls this the "global pacification industry", parlaying years of occupation and battle-tested technology in the service of controlling borders and people. For example, Israel Aerospace Industries has worked with Airbus to create a surveillance drone, used in Gaza, to track refugees in Europe.

The privatisation of Europe’s borders is accelerating even as the number of refugees arriving on the continent has fallen this year. The EU has a long-term plan to militarise its borders and be prepared for any further influx of unwanted migrants. Defence firms making a fortune from migration flows should make us question the morality of the world’s obsession with the outsourcing culture.


Antony Loewenstein is a Jerusalem-based independent journalist and author

On Twitter: @antloewenstein
 

Housecarl

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

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://praguemonitor.com/2016/08/01/czech-company-denies-arms-deals-saudis

Czech company denies arms deals with Saudis

ÈTK | 1 August 2016

Prague, July 29 (CTK) - The company Excalibur Army denied Friday the allegation that it was implicated in arms deals with Saudi Arabia, as claimed by a team of reporters who said that eastern European countries, including the Czech Republic, silently approved arms to the Middle East in the past 4 years.

The Middle Eastern countries then shipped the arms for over one billion euros to Syria, the team said.

The statement by Excalibur Army agent Josef Tymel was sent by its media representative Daniel Potocky to CTK Friday.

On Wednesday, the British daily Guardian wrote, referring to reporters from the Balkan Investigative Reporting Network (BIRN) and the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), in which the Czech Investigative Journalism Centre (CCIZ) took part, that the eight countries silently approved the arms sales.

During a one-year investigation, the journalists studied information on arms exports, U.N. reports, weapons contracts as well as the movements of planes.

While doing this, they exposed the way in which the military equipment from Bosnia, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia and Slovakia are supplied to the Middle East.

It wrote that thousands of assault rifles such as the AK-47s, rocket launchers, mortar grenades, anti-tank weapons and machine guns were sent across the Balkans to the countries close to Syria.

CCIZ wrote on its website that Saudi Arabia has signed a contract on arms supplies with the Serbian firm CPR Impex of arms dealer Petar Crnogorac.

"According to the documents we have at our disposal, the Czech firm Excalibur Army also signed contracts with CPR Impex," CCIZ wrote.

Excalibur Army has denied this.

It said in its press release that all of its deals were always legal.

Tymel said his company had been trading with CPR Impex between 2008 and 2010, when it was importing arms, ammunition and spare parts for the T-55 tanks.

"The only export contract was signed between Excalibur Army and CPR Impex DOO in 2013. We asked subsequently for an export licence which we withdrew shortly afterwords due to the cancellation of the contract. The deal has never materialised," Tymel said.

Tymel said in the past years neither Excalibur Army nor Real Trade Praha had exported any military materiel do Saudi Arabia, in "which the territory was mentioned as the final user."

---

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-europe-middle-east-revealed-arms-trade-syria

Arms trade

Revealed: the £1bn of weapons flowing from Europe to Middle East

AK-47s, machine guns, explosives and more travel along new arms pipeline from Balkans to countries known to supply Syria

Ivan Angelovski in Belgrade, Miranda Patrucic in Sarajevo and Lawrence Marzouk in London
Wednesday 27 July 2016 06.00 EDT

Eastern European countries have approved the discreet sale of more than €1bn of weapons in the past four years to Middle Eastern countries that are known to ship arms to Syria, an investigation has found.


Thousands of assault rifles such as AK-47s, mortar shells, rocket launchers, anti-tank weapons and heavy machine guns are being routed through a new arms pipeline from the Balkans to the Arabian peninsula and countries bordering Syria.

The suspicion is that much of the weaponry is being sent into Syria, fuelling the five-year civil war, according to a team of reporters from the Balkan Investigative Reporting Network (BIRN) and the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP).

Arms export data, UN reports, plane tracking, and weapons contracts examined during a year-long investigation reveal how the munitions were sent east from Bosnia, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Montenegro, Slovakia, Serbia and Romania.


Rights groups condemn removal of Saudi Arabia from UN blacklist
Read more


Since the escalation of the Syrian conflict in 2012, the eight countries have approved €1.2bn (£1bn) of weapons and ammunition exports to Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates and Turkey – key arms markets for Syria and Yemen.

In the past, the region had virtually no track record of buying from central and eastern Europe. But purchases appear to be escalating, with some of the biggest deals approved in 2015.

Arms export licences were granted despite fears from experts and within governments that the weapons could end up with the Syrian armed opposition, arguably in breach of national, EU and other international agreements.

Eastern and central European weapons and ammunition, identified from videos and photos posted on social media, are now being used by western-backed Free Syrian Army units, but are also in the hands of fighters from Islamist groups such as Ansar al-Sham, the al Qaeda-affiliated Jabhat al-Nusra, Islamic State, factions fighting for the Syrian president, Bashar-al-Assad, and by Sunni forces in Yemen.

Markings on some of the ammunition identifying the origin and date of manufacture reveal significant quantities have come off production lines as recently as 2015.

Responding to the findings of the investigation, Patrick Wilcken, an arms control researcher at Amnesty International, and Bodil Valero, the European parliament’s rapporteur on arms, said at least some of the transfers probably breached EU, international and national laws on arms exports.

“The evidence points towards systematic diversion of weapons to armed groups accused of committing serious Human Rights Violations,” said Wilcken. “If this is the case, the transfers are illegal under … international law and should cease immediately.”

Origins of the trade route

The weapons pipeline opened in the winter of 2012, when dozens of cargo planes, loaded with Saudi-purchased Yugoslav-era weapons and ammunition, began leaving Zagreb bound for Jordan. Soon after, the first footage of Croatian weapons emerged from Syria.

Croatia’s government has consistently denied any part in shipping weapons to Syria, but Robert Stephen Ford, the US ambassador to Syria between 2011 and 2014, said Zagreb had concluded a deal in 2012 that the Saudis bankrolled.

This was just the beginning. Arms dealers in eastern Europe procured assets from their own countries and brokered the sale of ammunition from Ukraine and Belarus, even attempting to secure Soviet-made anti-tank systems bought from the UK.

Since 2012, BIRN and OCCRP say, €806m worth of weapons and ammunition exports were approved by the eastern European countries to Saudi Arabia, citing national and EU arms export reports and government sources.

Jordan secured €155m worth of export licences in this period, the investigators say, while the UAE acquired €135m and Turkey €87m, bringing the total for those four years to just under €1.2bn.

In a confidential document obtained by BIRN and OCCRP from November 2013, a senior official at Serbia’s defence ministry revealed concerns that deliveries to Saudi Arabia would be diverted to Syria.

Jeremy Binnie, the Middle East arms expert for the publication Jane’s Defence Weekly, said: “The militaries of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and the UAE and Turkey use western infantry weapons and ammunition, rather than Soviet-designed counterparts. It consequently seems likely that large shipments of such materiel being acquired by – or sent to – those countries are destined for their allies in Syria, Yemen and Libya.”

The weapons are delivered by air and by sea. By tracking the movement of aircraft and ships, BIRN and OCCRP were able to follow the flow of arms in real time.

Detailed analysis of airport timetables, cargo carrier history, flight tracking data and air traffic control sources helped pinpoint almost 70 flights that very likely carried weapons to Middle Eastern conflicts in the past year.

Cargo flights identified as likely carrying arms from the Balkans to Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the UAE
Image

Belgrade, Sofia and Bratislava emerged as the main hubs for the airlift. Serbia’s aviation authority confirmed that 49 of the flights were transporting weapons in a response to a freedom of information request.

EU flight statistics provide further evidence of the scale of the operation. They reveal that planes from Bulgaria and Slovakia have delivered thousands of tonnes of unidentified cargo since the summer of 2014 to the same military bases in Saudi Arabia and the UAE pinpointed by BIRN and OCCRP.

Arms bought by the Saudis, Turks, Jordanians and the UAE for Syria are routed through two secret command hubs – called military operation centres (MOCs) – in Jordan and Turkey, according to Ford.

The weapons are then transported by road to the Syrian border or airdropped by military planes. The Saudis are also known to have airdropped materiel, including what appeared to be Serbia-made assault rifles, to their allies in Yemen.


Middle East states almost double small-arms imports
Read more


“Each of the countries involved in helping the armed opposition retained final decision-making authority about which groups in Syria received assistance,” Ford said.

The Saudis and Turks are also known to have provided weapons directly to Islamist groups not supported by the US and who, in some cases, are fighting MOC-backed factions.

Washington has also bought and delivered large quantities of military materiel from central and eastern Europe for the Syrian opposition in an attempt to counter the spread of Isis.

Since December 2015, three cargo ships commissioned by the US military’s Special Operations Command (Socom), in charge of the covert supply of weapons to Syria, have left Black Sea ports in the Balkans for the Middle East, according to American procurement documents and ship tracking data.

Some 4,700 tonnes of Warsaw Pact weaponry – including heavy machine guns, rocket launchers and anti-tank weapons, as well as bullets, mortars, grenades, rockets and other explosives – have been delivered from Bulgaria and Romania to military facilities in Jordan and Turkey, according to procurement documents and ship tracking data. The latest US-chartered ship left Bulgaria on 21 June carrying about 1,700 tonnes of the same materiel to an unidentified Red Sea port.

SOCOM said in a statement the “munitions are to support Special Operations and its missions worldwide.

“We will not confirm types of equipment which may be used for training and equipping partnered foreign forces in support of Special Operations missions.”

Two weeks after a March 2016 delivery, Kurdish groups published on Twitter and Facebook a photo of a warehouse piled with ammunition boxes in northern Syria, claiming to have received a supply of US-brokered weapons.

Reading the fine print

End-user certificates – official documents drawn up when receiving an export licence – issued by the Saudi defence ministry to a Serbian arms dealer, as well as a cache of contracts obtained by BIRN and OCCRP, revealed the scope of the buy-up for Syrian beneficiaries.

It ranged from hundreds of ageing T-55 and T-72 tanks to millions of rounds of ammunition, multi-launch missile systems and rocket launchers, although it is not clear what was delivered. Weapons and ammunition listed include materiel from the former Yugoslavia, Belarus, Ukraine and Czech Republic, much of which is present in large quantities in Syria.

An export licence issued to a Slovakian company in January 2015 granted it the right to transport thousands of rocket-propelled grenade launchers, heavy machine guns and almost a million bullets worth €32m. The materiel was, again, produced across eastern Europe.

The Serbian prime minister, Aleksandar Vuèiã, said at a press conference in June that his country could increase production fivefold and still not meet the demand for arms. “Unfortunately in some parts of the world they are at war more than ever and everything you produce, on any side of the world you can sell it,” he said.

Secrecy surrounding arms deals and a dearth of publicly available data means that the exact items being delivered to the Middle East are often unknown, but evidence collected, including UN and national arms export reports and weapons contracts, reveals that much of it is Cold War-era weaponry not in use by the militaries of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, UAE or Turkey.

BIRN and OCCRP’s analysis of social media shows Czechoslovak, Yugoslav, Serbian, Croatian and Bulgarian weapons being used in training and on the battlefields of Syria, Yemen and Libya.

A Free Syrian Army commander from Aleppo, who asked to remain anonymous to protect his safety, told BIRN and OCCRP that weapons from central and eastern Europe were distributed from centrally controlled headquarters. “We don’t care about the country of the origin we just know it is from eastern Europe,” he said.

He said groups fighting pro-Assad forces rather than Isis were struggling to access arms. “If you say that you are fighting Isis you will get whatever you want but if you say that you are fighting against the regime no one cares about you.”

Arms trade experts have told BIRN and OCCRP that sales of weapons to Saudi Arabia and other countries supplying Syrian rebels are likely to be in breach of national and EU law, as well as the international Arms Trade Treaty. But no clear sanctions mechanism exists to punish countries that do not meet these legally binding agreements.

Valero told BIRN and OCCRP that countries exporting weapons to Saudi Arabia from eastern Europe should feel ashamed.

She said EU member states – such as Czech Republic, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Romania and Croatia – are bound by the union’s common position on arms exports, while candidate countries also must align with the rules. This requires governments to carry out risk assessments on the likelihood of weapons being diverted to conflict zones and non-state actors.

“Countries selling arms to Saudi Arabia or the Middle East region are not carrying out good risk assessments and as a result are in breach of EU and national law,” she said. “I think these countries could be taken to the European Court of Justice.”

Darko Kihalic, the head of the Croatia’s arms licensing department at the Ministry of Economy, told BIRN and OCCRP that Zagreb follows the legally binding EU Common Position on arms exports and other international treaties.

Kihalic dismissed media reports that showed Croatian weapons were ending up in war zones saying it did not constitute proof. But asked whether he was aware that Croatian weapons bought by Saudi Arabia were turning up in Syria, he said: “There is nothing more for us to check as the document says that their ministry of defence or police forces will use it [the weapon] and that they won’t resell it or export it.”

Saudi Arabia is not a “blacklisted” country, he said. “Are there misuses? There probably are.”

Valero and Wilcken, from Amnesty International, strongly opposed this view.

“All these states do have clear, legally binding responsibilities to stop the transfer of arms where there is a risk that they will be used for serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law, and to take mitigating measures to prevent diversion to unauthorised end users,” said Wilcken.

In March, the Netherlands became the first EU country to stop arms exports to Saudi Arabia, citing mass execution and civilian deaths in Yemen.

Additional reporting by Lindita Cela, Jelena Cosic, Jelena Svircic, Atanas Tchobanov, Dusica Tomovic and Pavla Holcova.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
:dot5:

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://praguemonitor.com/2016/08/02/experts-oppose-zemans-call-people-arm-themselves

Experts oppose Zeman's call on people to arm themselves

ÈTK | 2 August 2016

Prague, Aug 1 (CTK) - Most Czech security experts whom CTK addressed yesterday do not like President Milos Zeman's call on common people to arm themselves in order to help fight the terrorist threat, but they agreed that Czech citizens should be more prepared for crisis situations.

People should carry arms so that they can use them if there is an attack by terrorists, Zeman told the Internet television channel of the tabloid daily Blesk on Sunday. Zeman said he had been against an increase in the number of legal arms among people, but that he changed his opinion due to the terror threat.

Ondrej Ditrych, an analysis focusing on terrorism, said if such a call is made by the president, it may undermine trust in the security forces, in the ability of the state bodies to guarantee security of the inhabitants.

He pointed out that the Czech arms legislation is very liberal, including the conditions under which people may carry hidden arms.

According to Ditrych, it has not been proved that more firearms among people would help prevent terrorist attacks.

He also said the divide between those who should arm and defend themselves ("us") and the dangerous "others" is artificial and it may divide society.

Security expert Frantisek Sulc said he does not consider it a problem if more people owned arms legally, but he said this alone is not a solution. "People do not just need to have a pistol at hand, but they also must be capable of using it adequately," he told CTK.

If people are not trained in using arms, they may do more harm than good, Sulc said.

It is primarily the security forces that must deal with defence against terrorism, he added.

Military officer Otakar Foltyn, one of the authors of a book on security affairs, shares this view. "Generally, the calls on people to arm themselves are only the most extreme measure in a situation of a huge threat," he said.

Foltyn said the state should make its armed bodies more effective, markedly strengthen their reserves and give more support for military sports and the preparation of people for crisis situations.

In the recent history, the Algerian government repeatedly resorted to the armament of civilians against Islamists after more than 100,000 people died during an Islamist uprising, he said.

"Luckily, the Czech Republic definitely is not in such a situation," Foltyn said.

Political analyst Josef Kraus, from Masaryk University, supported Zeman's call. He said a bad guy with a gun can only be stopped by a good guy with a gun. Policemen often are not immediately available, he said.

Kraus said many civilians in Israel carried arms and they underwent courses on how to proceed in crisis situations.

Foltyn disagreed with this interpretation, however. He said the number of armed civilians in the Czech Republic is two times higher than in Israel. "And Israel primarily relies on strong state armed forces and only secondarily on civilians who are rather well prepared," he said.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/1/china-wants-bloody-nose-us-south-china-sea/

China wants to ‘bloody nose’ of U.S. in South China Sea

Obama’s last months as president to be dangerous

By L. Todd Wood - - Monday, August 1, 2016
Comments 37

Elements of the People’s Liberation Army of China pressed Chinese President Xi Xinping for a stronger, military response to the ruling of The Hague tribunal on the South China Sea which said that China’s claims to the islands were baseless.

“Some elements within China’s increasingly confident military are pushing for a stronger - potentially armed - response aimed at the United States and its regional allies,” according to interviews with four sources with close military and leadership ties. “The People’s Liberation Army is ready. We should go in and give them a bloody nose like Deng Xiaoping did to Vietnam in 1979,” a source said, referring to China’s brief invasion of Vietnam to punish Hanoi for forcing Beijing’s ally the Khmer Rouge from power in Cambodia,” reports Reuters.

“The United States will do what it has to do. We will do what we have to do,” the source said. “The entire military side has been hardened. It was a huge loss of face,” he said, declining further comment.

“The Chinese military will step up and fight hard and China will never submit to any country on matters of sovereignty, Liang Fang, a professor at the military-run National Defence University, wrote on his Weibo microblog about the ruling.

It seems the last six months of the Obama presidency will be very dangerous indeed as elements within dictatorships worldwide will see the opportunity to take advantage of American weakness slipping away with the arrival of a new administration.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Hummm....(Just an observation but the use of chemical weapons by all sides in Syria has been from what I'm getting out of the reports at best limited or ineffectual and incompetent at worse in terms of battlefield results...HC)

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-idlib-idUSKCN10D0OZ

World | Tue Aug 2, 2016 5:49pm EDT
Related: World, Russia, United Nations, Syria

Rescuers say toxic gas dropped on Syrian town where Russian helicopter shot down

BEIRUT | By Lisa Barrington


A Syrian rescue service operating in rebel-held territory said on Tuesday a helicopter dropped containers of toxic gas overnight on a town close to where a Russian military helicopter had been shot down hours earlier.

The opposition Syrian National Coalition (SNC) accused President Bashar al-Assad of being behind the attack. Assad has denied previous accusations of using chemical weapons.

A spokesman for the Syria Civil Defence said 33 people, mostly women and children, were affected by the gas, which they suspect was chlorine, in Saraqeb, in rebel-held Idlib province.

The group, which describes itself as a neutral band of search and rescue volunteers, posted a video on YouTube apparently showing a number of men struggling to breathe and being given oxygen masks by people in civil defense uniforms.

"Medium-sized barrels fell containing toxic gases. The Syrian Civil Defence was not able to determine the type of the gas," said the spokesman.

The Syrian government and its Russian allies were not immediately available for comment.

Later, state news agency SANA said rebels had fired rockets armed with toxic gas on the government-held old quarter of Aleppo city, killing five people and causing eight breathing difficulties. It gave no further details. Rebels have denied previous accusations of using chemical weapons.

The SNC said of the reported use of poison gas in Saraqeb: "After shelling, besieging and killing civilians and perpetrating war crimes on them, the Assad regime has resorted once again, and in breach of UN resolutions 2118 and 2235, to using chemical substances and toxic gases.


Related Coverage
› U.S. says looking into reports of toxic gas dropped on Syrian town

"The daily reality confirms that all the international agreements and previous security council decisions, be they about chemical weapons or otherwise, are meaningless for the Assad regime."

The Civil Defence spokesman said it was the second time Saraqeb had been hit by toxic gas. The group was aware of around nine suspected chlorine gas incidents across Idlib province since the conflict began, he said.

The U.S. State Department said it was looking into the reported use of chemical weapons in Saraqeb.

"I’m not in a position to confirm the veracity of (the reports)," said spokesman John Kirby. “Certainly, if it’s true, it would be extremely serious.”

Monitors at the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which tracks violence on all sides in the civil war, said barrel bombs fell on Saraqeb late on Monday, wounding a large number of citizens.


Related Video

Video
U.S. says it's looking into reports of toxic gas dropped on Syrian town


Russia's defense ministry said a Russian helicopter was shot down near Saraqeb during the day on Monday, killing all five people on board, in the biggest officially acknowledged loss of life for Russian forces since they started operations in Syria.


DENIALS

The helicopter came down roughly mid-way between Aleppo and Russia's main air base at Hmeimim in the western province of Latakia, near the Mediterranean coast.

Russian air power began supporting Syrian President Bashar al Assad late last year, an intervention which tipped the balance of the war in Assad's favor, eroding gains the rebels had made that year.

No group has claimed responsibility for downing the Mi-8 military transport helicopter.

Government and opposition forces have both denied using chemical weapons during the five-year-old civil war. Western powers say the government has been responsible for chlorine and other chemical attacks. The government and Russia have accused rebels of using poison gas.

U.N. investigators established that sarin gas was used in Eastern Ghouta in 2013. The United States accused Damascus of that attack, which it estimates killed 1,429 people, including at least 426 children. Damascus denied responsibility, and blamed rebels.

Later that year the United Nations and the Syrian government agreed to destroy the state's declared stockpile of chemical weapons, a process completed in January 2016.

The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons confirmed in late 2015 that sulfur mustard, commonly known as mustard gas, had been used for the first time in the conflict, without saying which party in the many sided conflict it thought had used it.


(Additional reporting by Lesley Wroughton in Washington; Editing by Samia Nakhoul and Robin Pomeroy)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/ori...-coup-attempt-major-purge-of-armed-force.html

After massive purge, what’s next for Turkish Armed Forces?

Author: Metin Gurcan
Posted August 1, 2016
Translator: Timur Göksel

On July 27, 1,684 ranking officers of the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) were dismissed for constituting a threat to national security and for their affiliation with the Fethullah Gulen Terror Organization (FETO). This unprecedented purge of officers was carried out using a simple state of emergency decree with the power of law issued by the council of ministers.

The purge ruling, which cannot be appealed, covered 2% of 40,000 officers in the TSK and 1% of approximately 90,000 noncommissioned officers. The ranks most affected were generals and admirals. Of the 325 generals in Turkey's army, air and naval forces, 149 (45.8%) were discharged on July 27, including two four-star generals, seven lieutenant generals, 27 major generals/vice admirals (12 army, 11 air force and four navy) and 126 brigadier generals/rear admirals.

Before the purge was made public, Land Forces Chief of Staff Gen. Ihsan Uyar, the No. 2 name of that major command, and Gen. Kamil Basoglu, commander of Training and Doctrine of the army, submitted their resignations.

Defense Minister Fikri Isik said the dismissals and resignations were not all linked to FETO and included those who did not perform their duties on the night of July 15 or those who did not oppose the coup attempt.

When asked on July 24 whether resignations of Chief of General Staff Gen. Hulusi Akar and head of the National Intelligence Organization (MIT) Hakan Fidan should be expected, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan replied, "You don't switch horses when crossing a river."

That answer meant Erdogan decided to continue with the current command structure without changes at a critical period of major developments in foreign policy and TSK's direct involvement in combat against the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), the Islamic State and reinforcing border security. This is why Akar and army, air and navy commanders retained their posts. With the Supreme Military Council's (SMC) decision to promote 99 colonels, the number of generals/admirals in the TSK rose to 227, which is 98 less than the pre-coup attempt level of 325.

The rising stars of the TSK — Gen. Umit Dundar, who was appointed as the deputy chief of General Staff; Gen. Metin Temel appointed as the commander of the second army that is responsible for combating the PKK and ensuring border security; and the head of Special Forces Zekai Aksakalli, who was promoted to lieutenant general — are likely to have strong bearings on the future of the TSK.

So why didn't the SMC change the positions of the chief of General Staff and branch commander as was widely expected in Turkey?

Erdogan has already said the chief of General Staff and MIT should be directly attached to the presidency and that such a move would require structural reforms in Turkey's security. But because of a lack of support from opposition parties for such a radical change, a constitutional amendment will be needed to make those changes.

Erdogan needs the support of Akar to persuade the opposition parties. The new security sector design aspires to generate inter-service rivalry under civilian control by instituting a chief of general staff that will be under the president and whose mission will be one of coordination. Army, air and naval commanders will be under the minister of defense, and gendarmerie, police and coast guard will be under the Ministry of Interior.

The July 27 purge and resignations of two four-star generals indicate a compromise between Erdogan and the current TSK command. For the president to have a decisive say on the fate of the commanders means a significant boost of his control over the TSK. Also, to retain a known entity like Akar for the time being may make it easier to control any grumbling from the TSK ranks.

Ten colonels who were earlier sentenced to prison terms in the Sledgehammer-Ergenekon mass trials were promoted to brigadier general/rear admiral ranks by the SMC. This group, known to be anti-US/NATO and more inclined to nonaligned and Eurasian perspectives, are likely to influence the strategic culture of the TSK. A perusal of the list of generals discharged indicates that many of them were "Atlanticists" who were keen on relations with the United States, Europe and NATO.

Justice and Development Party (AKP) elites and victims of the Sledgehammer-Ergenekon cases, whose influence over the TSK will most likely increase after the SMC meeting, agree on the creation of a national and indigenous army. These two currents are in accord to design a military that is more independent, more anti-US, anti-NATO and anti-West. They believe that the TSK can play a major role to orient Turkish foreign policy to more nonaligned and Eurasian-oriented outlooks. It is therefore possible that the strategic culture of TSK henceforth will be less Atlanticist and more Eurasian.

But those two camps cannot agree on the army's secularist stance. While the Sledgehammer-Ergenekon camp defend the return of the military to its "factory settings" of hard-line secularist Kemalism, the prevailing trend in the AKP is to entrust the military to more religious cadres, thus undermining its coup inclinations. In short, for the Sledgehammer-Ergenekon camp, the biggest danger is Islamizing of the military, while the AKP see Islamization of the military as the only way to thwart further coup attempts.

Because of this split between the two camps, it is likely that we will be witnessing more debates on bans on headscarves and beards, prayers in the TSK, fasting, status of female personnel in the military and allowing religious seminary graduates to become officers and noncommissioned officers in the TSK.

It is becoming clear that the TSK will be encountering problems not only from its loss of personnel, but also from its loss of morale and motivation and its plummeting public prestige.

It is almost assured that the institutional identity of the TSK will be less Atlanticist but more of a Eurasian character. But the real tension will be the sustained and hard ideological debates between strong secularists who want TSK's return to its factory settings and those who advocate more Islamization.

(With another decree issued on July 31, a second purge of 1,389 more military personnel were discharged from the TSK.)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...w-Ideology-of-the-New-Cold-War-NY-Times-Op-Ed

Hummm.....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/02/o...new-cold-war.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=1

The Opinion Pages | Contributing Op-Ed Writer

The New Ideology of the New Cold War

Jochen Bittner AUG. 1, 2016


HAMBURG, Germany — In its heyday, Communism claimed that capitalism had betrayed the worker. So what should we make of Moscow’s new battle cry, that democracy has betrayed the voter?

It’s a worldview that has become increasingly clear through the era of Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin, via a mosaic of public political statements, off-the-record conversations with academics and intelligence insights. Let’s call it “orderism.”

Orderism has started to challenge democracy in many parts of the world — Turkey, Poland, the Philippines. But Mr. Putin’s Russia believes it holds the copyright on this formula, and sees it as the sharp end of the wedge it is trying to drive among the nations of the West.

The ideology’s basic political premise is that liberal democracy and international law have not lived up to their promise. Instead of creating stability, they have produced inequality and chaos. The secular religion worshiped in the Western parliaments was globalization (or, in the European Union’s case, Europeanization). These beliefs, according to the orderists, overlooked the downsides.

The most obvious downside, according to orderism, is that open borders and global trade have led to vanishing jobs and mass migration. At the same time, a mental borderlessness has shaken liberal societies: With potentially every traditional value now up for negotiation, no habit, custom or institution is sacred. The same leniency that allows for the free sale of marijuana, same-sex marriages and the crowning of a bearded drag queen named Conchita Wurst as the winner of the 2014 Eurovision song contest also tolerates militant Islamism within Western borders.

It is the same moral weakness and decadence, orderism warns, that preceded the fall of previous empires. Like Nero, the establishment is fiddling in its palaces while Rome burns.

Orderism also claims that, on the global stage, international law is beaten into submission by the rules of the strongest, with terrible outcomes. Even the West, orderists claim, adheres to the global rule of law only when it suits its interests. When it doesn’t, the United States and its allies ignore or circumvent United Nations provisions. Orderists believe that events in Ukraine in 2014 are Exhibit A for Western hypocrisy: The United States encouraged and financed a coup in Kiev, they say, and installed obedient politicians afterward. The rule of law and liberal multilateralism, they insist, are just Trojan horses, carrying the West closer and closer to their borders.

Thus it is an act of self-defense for Russia, in the orderist worldview, to secure the Crimean Peninsula, with its sprawling Russian Navy port; to increase military spending; and to hold frequent military exercises along the Russian-NATO borders. Just as the West contained an aggressive East in the 20th century, orderism believes the East must now contain a megalomaniac and arrogant West to prevent the spread of even more chaos.

Orderism prioritizes stability over democracy and offers an alternative to the moral abyss of laissez-faire societies. Russia stands as a model for this new social contract. This contract is built on patriotism, traditional gender roles, Orthodox Christianity, military strength and, at the top, a benevolent czar who will promise only as much as he can deliver (provided the public gives him sufficient support, he can deliver a lot). Orderism may not yet boast the same economic performance as liberalism, but its adherents insist that the cohesion and the common spirit of an orderly nation will allow it to outlive the inevitable downturn of the disorderly West.

It’s easy to see why, especially for those who have suffered dislocation and anomie under liberal democracy, orderism is appealing. But just as the utopian promises of Communism were merely a fig leaf for tyranny, the official face of orderism hides something much darker. Order is attractive only until it stifles, and then represses. Unchecked autocrats turn on the weakest and most vulnerable as scapegoats, and lash out in foreign misadventures to divert attention from problems at home. Society breaks down; fear reigns. Orderism ultimately fails to deliver on its own promises.

What is striking, though, is how compatible orderism is with the attitudes of many voters in the United States and Europe. Donald J. Trump’s campaign boils down to a promise of tough order. And the decision of British voters to leave the European Union, catalyzed by the promise of the U.K. Independence Party and others of an orderly, independent England, was nothing but an attempt to stop the frightening and discomfiting effects of globalization. Part of the difficulty in dealing with orderism is that it is ideological without being an ideology. It is mercurial, pragmatic and cynical; its meaning and values change to fit the circumstances.

Yet, in tackling today’s orderism, there is one lesson the West can draw from yesterday’s fight against Communism. Western leaders must respond to criticisms of liberal democracy, not simply reject them as the product of an insidious, anti-liberal worldview. If Franklin D. Roosevelt and Western Europe’s postwar leaders had dismissed calls for stronger welfare states as Communist-inspired, they would have invited revolution. Instead, they built progressive state institutions that drained the appeal of anti-liberalism.

If jobs are lost and terrorist attacks are mounting, democratic politicians have to have the steady nerves and fresh ideas to carry out the necessary repair work. In this new clash of worldviews, we need a new generation of Roosevelts, Adenauers and Monnets, leaders who will take on orderism’s challenge without lashing out at its adherents. A calm adversarial spirit is what can make democracy great again.


Jochen Bittner is a political editor for the weekly newspaper Die Zeit and a contributing opinion writer.
 
Last edited:

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/...r-strikes-sirte-libya-islamic-state/87909908/

U.S. conducts new round of airstrikes against ISIS in Libya

Andrew Tilghman, Christopher P. Cavas, Jeff Schogol, David Larter and Oriana Pawlyk 2:42 p.m. EDT August 1, 2016
Comments 6

This story was originally published Aug. 1, 2016, at 11:10 a.m. EST.

U.S. warplanes on Monday launched a new round of airstrikes against Islamic State militants in Libya, a campaign that is expected to last at least the next several days, the Pentagon has confirmed.

"Today, at the request of the Libyan Government of National Accord (GNA), the United States military conducted precision airstrikes against ISIL targets in Sirte, Libya, to support GNA-affiliated forces seeking to defeat ISIL in its primary stronghold in Libya," Pentagon Press Secretary Peter Cook said in a statement, which references one of the Islamic State group's acronyms.

Map

Monday's two strikes, which hit an ISIS tank and two vehicles, were conducted by a combination of manned and unmanned aircraft, defense officials said. They were the first to target the ISIS outpost in Sirte, located along the Libyan coast. The ISIS force of fewer than 1,000 militants continues to control the city center, official said.

Two prior U.S. airstrikes hit ISIS militants in other parts of Libya, most recently in February. Since then, however, U.S. officials have been reluctant to authorize more until a cohesive government emerged from the country's chaotic civil war.

Monday's strikes were the first to be requested by the Libyan GNA and may signal the start of a U.S. broader mission to support the fledgling Libyan government.


MILITARYTIMES
In Libya, the U.S. opens a fourth front in war on ISIS


Defense officials will not say whether there are any U.S. forces on the ground in Libya.

For months U.S. forces have conducted discreet ground operations, as small teams of special operations troops have moved in and out of Libya, making contact with rebel factions and gathering intelligence about the political and military situations there. Those personnel may continue to operate in Libya, but they are not involved in the current operation.

“With regard to this particular operation in Sirte, we do not expect U.S. [ground] forces to be part of this specific operation. I’m not going to speak to other us forces with regard to Libya overall,” Cook said. "We have indicated in the past that we have had forces on the ground getting a picture there, and that has been helpful and successful. But that is separate and apart from this operation.”

U.S. activity is limited to airstrikes and intelligence support, and does not include any weapons sales or nonlethal aid, Cook said. He called the attack "consistent with our approach to combating ISIL by working with capable and motivated local forces. GNA-aligned forces have had success in recapturing territory from ISIL thus far around Sirte, and additional U.S. strikes will continue to target ISIL in Sirte in order to enable the GNA to make a decisive, strategic advance."

The attack Monday was authorized by President Obama on the recommendation of Defense Secretary Ash Carter and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford, Cook said.

The head of U.S. Africa Command, Marine Corps Gen. Thomas D. Waldhauser, has been given authority to approve future strikes in Sirte, Cook said.

Col. Mark Cheadle, a spokesman for AFRICOM, told Military Times: "We are employing a variety of platforms to provide key information to the GNA-aligned forces. As well, we have the ability to conduct manned and unmanned airstrikes against [ISIS] targets in Sirte to help enable the GNA-aligned forces to make a decisive and strategic advance."

The U.S. amphibious assault ship Wasp, carrying an element of the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit, is standing by in the vicinity of Libya, sources said. That includes AV-8B Harrier attack jets. The Wasp is not accompanied, sources said, by the other two ships of its amphibious ready group.

Monday's attack was part of a comprehensive series of operations planned and controlled by AFRICOM. The first element of this three-phase plan is Operation Odyssey Resolve, consisting of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance flights designed to counter violent extremism in Libya.

The second phase, Operation Junction Serpent, provided targeting information. The third element, Operation Odyssey Lightning, includes strike aircraft hitting those targets. That operation reportedly began over the weekend, Pentagon sources said.

In February, U.S. intelligence officials raised their estimate for ISIS fighters in Libya to between 5,000 to 6,000, up from previous estimates of 2,000 to 3,000.

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-libya-usa-obama-idUSKCN10D1Q7?il=0

World | Tue Aug 2, 2016 6:15pm EDT
Related: U.S., World, United Nations, Libya

Obama says supporting Libya's fight with Islamic State is in U.S. interest

President Barack Obama said on Tuesday it is in the U.S. national security interest to support Libya's emerging government's fight against Islamic State, a day after his administration said it launched air strikes there.

The move marks the opening of a new front by the U.S. administration in the war against Islamic State, which, under added pressure in its Syria and Iraq strongholds, is increasingly resorting to planning attacks abroad.

Obama said the air strikes were undertaken to make sure that Libyan forces were able to finish the job of fighting the radical militant group and to increase stability there.

The United States, Europe and countries around the world "have a great interest in seeing stability in Libya because the absence of stability has helped to fuel some of the challenges that we’ve seen in terms of the migration crisis in Europe and some of the humanitarian tragedies that we’ve seen in the open seas between Libya and Europe," Obama told reporters.

Islamic State has struggled to win local support in Libya but has exploited the chaos that followed the ouster of dictator Muammar Gaddafi. Its presence in Sirte has been reduced to a few hundred fighters who once controlled what was Gaddafi's hometown.

A U.S. government source familiar with American intentions said the U.S. military's plan was to pulverize Islamic State militants through aerial bombardment to deny them the safe haven of Sirte, even though such a strategy risks dispersing the group's forces to neighboring countries and beyond, where they may carry out attacks to show they are still "a force to be reckoned with."

The U.S. administration's tactics in Libya, two American officials said, were largely a product of the administration's use of manned and unmanned aircraft against Islamic State, and intended to avoid committing "any meaningful level of ground support."

There is little public or political support for sending U.S. ground troops to Libya, which remains deeply divided.

The United Nations-backed government, struggling to assert its authority over the fractured country, has hesitated to call for U.S. support until now for fear of a public backlash.

However, the U.S. officials said that if Islamic State’s growing external operations branch manages to mount a major terrorist attack in the West, "the administration may end up paying a higher price for this tactic than it would if it had decided to send the support that’s needed to encircle places like Sirte and Mosul (in Iraq) without turning to other groups."

U.S. warplanes so far have conducted strikes on seven targets in and around Sirte over the past two days, Pentagon spokesman Captain Jeff Davis said at a news briefing on Tuesday.

The targets included two tanks, an Islamic State fighting position, construction vehicles, military vehicles, a rocket launcher and an excavator.

The strikes already have helped Libyan forces gain ground against Islamic State, Davis said.

"That had really proved to be a menacing problem for the GNA," he said, referring to Libya's United Nations-backed Government of National Accord. "It was something they (Islamic State) had used repeatedly to beat back advances."

The strikes are being carried out by both crewed planes and drones, Davis said, declining to give further details on where the aircraft were based. Some Islamic State fighters have been killed in the strikes, he said, though he declined to give a number.


(Reporting by Timothy Gardner, Ayesha Rascoe, Yeganeh Torbati, Mark Hosenball, John Walcott and Jonathan Landay in Washington; Editing by Yara Bayoumy, James Dalgleish and Jonathan Oatis)
 

Housecarl

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

That the Japanese are saying this officially pretty much puts the icing on the cake....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-N...an-miniaturize-nuclear-weapons/3861470143693/

Tokyo: North Korea can miniaturize nuclear weapons

By Elizabeth Shim Contact the Author | Aug. 2, 2016 at 9:40 AM
Comments 2

SEOUL, Aug. 2 (UPI) -- Japan is raising concerns about North Korea's nuclear warhead miniaturization capabilities.

In its annual Defense White Paper published Tuesday, Tokyo stated there is a possibility North Korea has mastered long-range ballistic missile technology and has developed nuclear warheads that weigh under a ton.

The long-range missiles in question are probably capable of reaching more than 6,200 miles, the white paper read.

That distance is sufficient to place U.S. cities, including Los Angeles, San Francisco and even Denver, within striking distance of North Korea missiles, South Korean news agency Yonhap reported.

The Japanese analysis also stated the ballistic missile North Korea fired on Feb. 7 in the course of a "peaceful" satellite launch was an improved model with similar specifications as the Taepodong-2, a three-stage ballistic missile.

The white paper pointed out it is possible North Korea already has the capacity to miniaturize nuclear weapons, based on the past experience of other countries.

The United States, the former Soviet Union, Britain, France and China had each conducted four nuclear tests before mastering the capability to develop nuclear warheads small enough to fit on ballistic missiles, the report stated.

But Yonhap reported it is not likely North Korea has mastered the re-entry technology of its intercontinental ballistic missiles, or ICBMs.

There is also evidence Pyongyang is not yet capable of miniaturizing a nuclear warhead that weighs less than a ton, according to South Korea press.

The Japanese report stated North Korea's weapons development "absolutely cannot be tolerated."

North Korea is believed to retain 1,000 ballistic missiles in its arsenal.

Related UPI Stories
•North Korea mandating strip searches at China border
•North Korean defectors rising in number, Seoul says
•North Korea's powerful Choe Ryong Hae to attend Rio Olympic Games

-----

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.the-japan-news.com/news/article/0003121104

Defense white paper looks at N. Korea missiles, China intrusions

10:25 pm, August 02, 2016
The Yomiuri Shimbun

Musudan medium-range ballistic missiles of the type that North Korea launched in June have a range of about 2,500 kilometers to 4,000 kilometers if fired on a normal trajectory, according to Japan’s defense white paper for 2016.

The white paper, which was approved at a Cabinet meeting on Tuesday, also concluded that a long-range ballistic missile that North Korea launched in February is a three-stage missile, derived from a Taepodong-2 long-range ballistic missile.

It is the first time that the white paper has disclosed the results of analysis on North Korea’s recently launched missiles.

The white paper warned that Pyongyang’s “entire missile development [program] is progressing further.”

The second of the two Musudan missiles North Korea launched in June reached an altitude of more than 1,000 kilometers before plunging into the Sea of Japan about 400 kilometers from its launch site.

The white paper said the Musudan missile was launched on a lofted trajectory, in which a missile is fired to an altitude higher than a normal trajectory and travels a relatively short ground distance.

The white paper noted that the Musudan missile recently launched proved it had “a certain function” as a medium-range missile. With a range of 4,000 kilometers, the Musudan missile could reach the U.S. island territory of Guam, where U.S. forces have been strengthening bases.

Based on the results of the analysis on the altitude and speed of a long-rage ballistic missile North Korea fired in February, the white paper judged that the missile is a three-stage missile derived from a Taepodong-2 long-range ballistic missile and the same as the one launched in December 2012.

According to the white paper, the range of this long-range ballistic missile “may be as far as more than 10,000 kilometers,” which is the same as the one launched in 2012, meaning it could strike the Midwest of the United States.

The white paper expressed a sense of alarm, saying North Korea may have already completed the miniaturization of nuclear weapons to make nuclear warheads.

Meanwhile, the white paper harshly criticized China’s maritime advances as “coercive.” The white paper expressed strong concern over China’s moves, saying Chinese military vessels “are unilaterally escalating” their actions in waters surrounding Japan, including an area around the Senkaku Islands in Okinawa Prefecture.

The white paper noted incidents, including the sailing of a Chinese military vessel into the contiguous zone around the Senkaku Islands and the sailing of a Chinese military vessel into Japanese waters off Kagoshima Prefecture, both in June.

The white paper expressed “strong concern” over those actions by China in place of the “concern” used in last year’s white paper, underscoring that the situation has become more serious. Regarding Chinese government vessels, the white paper pointed out that China has made their intrusions into Japanese waters routine operations since October 2013.
 
Last edited:

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.scmp.com/news/asia/east-...ay-not-shinzo-abes-choice-japans-next-defence

Legacy of war in Asia

Why China may not like Shinzo Abe�fs choice for Japan�fs next defence minister

Tomomi Inada is known for holding views similar to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on security and foreign policy issues, and has made regular visits to Tokyo�fs Yasukuni Shrine, which is seen by China and South Korea as a symbol of Japan�fs militarist past

PUBLISHED : Tuesday, 02 August, 2016, 3:35pm
UPDATED : Tuesday, 02 August, 2016, 10:25pm

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is likely to pick ruling party policy chief Tomomi Inada as defence minister in a new cabinet, the Asahi newspaper and sources said on Tuesday, which could upset China and South Korea given her conservative views on wartime history.

Abe is set to reshuffle his cabinet on Wednesday, retaining several key ministers and picking a veteran lawmaker who favours big spending as ruling party number two.

Politicians accused of extremism after photos with Japanese far-right leader(

Inada, 57, is a close ally of Abe and shares his goal of revising the post-war, pacifist constitution, seen by some conservatives as a humiliating symbol of Japan�fs second world war defeat. She regularly visits Tokyo�fs Yasukuni Shrine, which honours war dead and is seen in China and South Korea as a symbol of Japan�fs past militarism.

Inada is also among those who deny that the Japanese army forced women from across Asia into sexual slavery in the early decades of the last century.

Japan�fs relations with both Beijing and Seoul have often been frayed by the legacy of Japan�fs military aggression before and during the second world war.

Rogue won: Tokyo�fs first female governor says defying party secured her historic win(

Inada served as minister for administrative reform in an earlier Abe cabinet before being appointed as the ruling Liberal Democratic Party�fs (LDP) policy chief in 2014.

If selected as defence minister, Inada would be the second woman in the post after Yuriko Koike, newly elected as Tokyo governor, briefly held the portfolio in 2007.

The reshuffle comes as Abe tries to rev up economic growth, handle multiple diplomatic challenges and eyes the possibility of staying in office after his term as ruling LDP president ends in 2018.

Abe is expected to travel to China in early September for a Group of 20 summit, where he may have a meeting with President Xi Jinping.

China slams Abe for �eevasive�f WW2 anniversary remarks; Japan's emperor goes off-script to express war remorse(

Sino-Japanese ties have also been strained by a dispute over tiny isles in the East China Sea and China�fs growing military assertiveness in the South China Sea.

On Tuesday Japan�fs latest annual defence review expressed �gdeep concern�h over what it sees as China�fs coercion as a more assertive Beijing flouts international rules when dealing with other nations.

Japan�fs Defence White Paper comes amid heightened tension in Asia less than a month after an arbitration court in the Hague invalidated China�fs sweeping claims in the disputed South China Sea, in a case brought by the Philippines.

Japan's defence paper to show wariness over China's muscle-flexing(

China has refused to recognise the ruling. Japan called on China to adhere to the verdict, which it said was binding. Beijing retorted by warning Tokyo not to interfere.

In the defence review approved by Abe�fs government, Japan warned that �gunintended consequences�h could result from Beijing�fs assertive disregard of international rules.

�gChina is poised to fulfil its unilateral demands without compromise,�h the government said in the review.

China claims most of the 3.5-million-square-km South China Sea, with Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam also staking claims.

Japan has no territorial claims there, but it fears that Chinese military bases will bolster Beijing�fs influence over a region through which $5 trillion in trade passes every year, much of it to and from Japanese ports.

Bomb threats at Japanese universities in row over 'comfort women' issue(

Rather than confront China directly by sailing warships past its man-made island bases in the sea, Japan is providing equipment and training to the Southeast Asian nations, including the Philippines and Vietnam, which are most opposed to China�fs territorial ambitions.

Beijing�fs most powerful adversary in Asia is the United States, with its Seventh Fleet operating from bases in Japan and South Korea. Japan has Asia�fs second-biggest indigenous navy.. The defence review noted China�fs growing capability to threaten naval vessels with its growing armoury of anti-ship missiles.

At 484 pages, Japan�fs document is more than a tenth longer than last year�fs report, and lays out other security concerns, such as the threat from neighbouring North Korea�fs ballistic missile and nuclear bomb programmes and a revival of Russian military strength in the Far East.

It takes 50 pages to outline Japan�fs deepening alliance with the United States, as Tokyo takes a step back from its war-renouncing constitution by easing curbs on overseas operations for its Self Defence Forces.

�œ The South Korean Foreign Ministry on Tuesday summoned a senior Japanese Embassy official to protest Japan�fs renewed claim over South Korea-controlled islets in the Sea of Japan (East Sea) in its annual defence white paper.

The ministry issued a statement in which it made it clear that the islets, known as Takeshima in Japan and Dokdo in South Korea, are South Korean territory and expressed its strong protest with Japan�fs �gunjust claim of territorial sovereignty�h.

Additional reporting by Kyodo
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/02/asia/north-korea-missile/

North Korea fires 2 ballistic missiles, South Korea and U.S. say

By K.J. Kwon and Joshua Berlinger, CNN
Updated 2:56 AM ET, Wed August 3, 2016

Seoul (CNN) — North Korea fired two ballistic missiles Wednesday morning local time, U.S. and South Korean authorities said.

U.S. Strategic Command issued a statement saying it detected what it believes was the simultaneous launch of two presumed No Dong intermediate range ballistic missiles.

The missiles were fired from the western city of Hwangju in the country's North Hwanghae province, STRATCOM said, adding one exploded after launch and the other was tracked over North Korea and into the Sea of Japan.

However, the South Korean Joint Chiefs of Staff said the missiles were launched from an area in North Korea's South Hwanghae province, some 37 to 43 miles (60 to 70 km) from Hwangju.

The missile that did not explode flew about 621 miles (1,000 kilometers) across the peninsula into the sea in the east.

An official with the South Korean Defense Ministry told CNN that it is assumed a Rodong missile -- a different spelling of the No Dong missile -- was fired.

"North Korea, by firing of ballistic missile which can equip nuclear warhead, is openly showing its direct and obvious intention of provocation and ambition that it can target our country, including our ports and airports, as well as neighbor countries," the official said.

North Korea is prohibited from carrying out such missile launches under a March U.N. Security Council resolution.

"North Korea, whose provocative acts are threatening the peace and stability of the Korean peninsula and the international community, will be faced with more powerful and thorough sanctions and pressure from the international community and our country."

Previous launches

On July 19, North Korea fired three ballistic missiles off its eastern coast.

Those were believed to be short-range, Scud or Rodong type and flew 300 to 380 miles (500 to 600 kilometers), said Jeon Ha-gyu, spokesman for the South Korean Joint Chiefs of Staff.

North Korean state media said Kim Jong Un, the country's leader, personally "provided field guidance" for that drill.

Missile tests have become more frequent under Kim Jong Un's reign. The more tests the reclusive nation carries out, the more it can fix its mistakes, refining and improving its missile technology, experts say.

The South Korean defense official said North Korea has launched more than 30 missiles since Kim took power.

Though the country has continued to improve its nuclear and missile capabilities, it has yet to successfully pair the two.

Last month, South Korea announced it will deploy the advanced U.S THAAD missile defense system in Seongju County, about 155 miles (250 kilometers) southeast of Seoul.

What is THAAD?

When active, the system should be able to defend two-thirds of South Korea from an attack by its northern neighbor.

North Korea's military viewed the THAAD deployment as a provocation and said the United States and South Korea would "suffer from the nightmare extreme uneasiness and terror" in response.

CNN's Ben Westcott, Andreena Narayan and Paula Hancocks contributed to this report.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-missile-idUSKCN10D2Q8

Business | Wed Aug 3, 2016 4:11am EDT
Related: World, United Nations, Japan, North Korea

Latest North Korea missile launch lands near Japan waters, alarms Tokyo

SEOUL | By Ju-min Park and James Pearson


North Korea launched a ballistic missile on Wednesday that landed in or near Japanese-controlled waters for the first time, the latest in a series of launches by the isolated country in defiance of United Nations Security Council resolutions.

The main body of the missile landed in Japan's economic exclusion zone, a Japanese defence official said, escalating regional tensions that were already high after a series of missile launches this year and the decision by the United States to place a sophisticated anti-missile system in South Korea.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe described the launch as a "grave threat" to Japan and said Tokyo "strongly protested". Japan also said its self-defence force would remain on alert in case of further launches.

A U.S. State Department spokesman condemned the launch, and said it would "only increase the international community's resolve to counter" North Korea's actions.

The U.S. Strategic Command said it had detected two missiles, one of which it said exploded immediately after launch.

The missile that landed in the Sea of Japan was launched at about 7:50 a.m. Seoul time (2250 GMT Tuesday) from a region in South Hwanghae province to the southwest of North Korea's capital, Pyongyang, South Korea's Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said in a statement.

The launch showed North Korea's ambition to "directly and broadly attack neighbouring countries and target several places in the Republic of Korea such as ports and airfields", the South Korean office said, referring to South Korea by its official title.


Related Coverage
› Japan PM Abe: North Korean missile launch a grave threat to Japan's security
› U.S. State Department strongly condemns North Korean missile tests

The missile appeared to be a Rodong-type medium-range missile that flew about 1,000 km (620 miles), it said.


TENSIONS HIGH

The United States will begin large-scale annual drills with its ally South Korea later this month that it bills as defensive in nature and not provocative. North Korea typically protests against the drills, which it says are a rehearsal for invasion.

"The North Koreans seem to have been timing their recent short-range and medium-range missile tests to the weeks ahead of U.S.-South Korean joint exercises," said Joshua Pollack, editor of the U.S.-based Nonproliferation Review.

"If the allies can exercise their armed forces, so can the North," he said.

On July 19, North Korea fired three ballistic missiles that flew between 500 km and 600 km (300-360 miles) into the sea off its east coast.


Related Coverage
› Japan defense minister: North Korea missile launch 'serious threat' to Japan's security
› Missile launch shows North Korea has ambition to attack others: South Korea

The North later said the launches were part of an exercise simulating preemptive strikes against South Korean ports and airfields used by the U.S. military.

The latest launches follow an agreement last month between South Korea and the United States to deploy an advanced Terminal High Altitude Area Defence anti-missile system in the South.

North Korea had threatened a "physical response" against the deployment decision.

The North came under the latest round of U.N. Security Council sanctions in March after its fourth nuclear test in January and the launch of a long-range rocket the following month.

Tensions have been high on the Korean peninsula since the January nuclear test. The two Koreas remain technically at war under a truce that ended fighting in the 1950-53 Korean War.


(Additional reporting by Jack Kim in Seoul and Nobuhiro Kubo in Tokyo; Editing by Tony Munroe and Paul Tait)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.scout.com/military/warrior/story/1691822-us-multi-object-interceptor-hits-icbm-decoys

Pentagon Advances Multi-Object Kill Vehicle to Destroy Enemy ICBMs & Decoys Simultaneously

Kris Osborn
Yesterday at 10:01 AM

The Pentagon's emerging Multi-Object Kill Vehicle can simultaneously destroy ICBMs and decoys with a single interceptor; production is slated for the early 2020s.

The Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency is now reviewing industry proposals to engineer a next-generation “Star Wars”-type technology able to knock multiple incoming enemy targets out of space with a single interceptor, officials said.

The new system, called Multi-Object Kill Vehicle, or MOKV, is designed to release from a Ground Based Interceptor and destroy approaching Inter Continental Ballistic Missiles, or ICBMs -- and also take out decoys traveling alongside the incoming missile threat.

"The multi-object kill vehicle program will enable the warfighter to counter more numerous and complex threats to the homeland by establishing the capacity to engage multiple objects from a single ground-based interceptor. This approach has the potential to shift the cost curve of missile defense by reducing the number of interceptors required to defeat the enemy," Missile Defense Agency Spokeswoman Leah Garton told Scout Warrior.

Command and Control testing of the emerging technology is slated for next year and initial production is expected some time in the early 2020s. In 2015, the MDA awarded three contracts with industry to define concepts for deploying multiple kill vehicles from a single booster, she added. The contracts were awarded to Boeing, Lockheed and Raytheon.

"In fiscal 2016, industry delivered their MOKV concepts. The agency reviewed them and in June the agency released requests for proposals for industry to reduce the risk of these critical technologies," Garton explained.

Decoys or countermeasures are missile-like structures, objects or technologies designed to throw off or confuse the targeting and guidance systems of an approaching interceptor in order to increase the probability that the actual missile can travel through to its target.

If the seeker or guidance systems of a “kill vehicle” technology on a Ground Base Interceptor, or GBI, cannot discern an actual nuclear-armed ICBM from a decoy – the dangerous missile is more likely to pass through and avoid being destroyed. MOKV is being developed to address this threat scenario.

Steve Nicholls, Director of Advanced Air & Missile Defense Systems for Raytheon, told Scout Warrior the MOKV is being developed to provide the MDA with “a key capability for its Ballistic Missile Defense System - to discriminate lethal objects from countermeasures and debris. The kill vehicle, launched from the ground-based interceptor extends the ground-based discrimination capability with onboard sensors and processing to ensure the real threat is eliminated.”

MOKV could well be described as a new technological step in the ongoing maturation of what was originally conceived of in the Reagan era as “Star Wars” – the idea of using an interceptor missile to knock out or destroy an incoming enemy nuclear missile in space. This concept was originally greeted with skepticism and hesitation as something that was not technologically feasible.

Not only has this technology come to fruition in many respects, but the capability continues to evolve with systems like MOKV. MOKV, to begin formal product development by 2022, is being engineered with a host of innovations to include new sensors, signal processors, communications technologies and robotic manufacturing automation for high-rate tactical weapons systems, Nicholls explained.

The trajectory of an enemy ICBM includes an initial “boost” phase where it launches from the surface up into space, a “midcourse” phase where it travels in space above the earth’s atmosphere and a “terminal” phase wherein it re-enters the earth’s atmosphere and descends to its target. MOKV is engineered to destroy threats in the “midcourse” phase while the missile is traveling through space.

An ability to destroy decoys as well as actual ICBMs is increasingly vital in today’s fast-changing technological landscape because potential adversaries continue to develop more sophisticated missiles, countermeasures and decoy systems designed to make it much harder for interceptor missile to distinguish a decoy from an actual missile.

As a result, a single intercept able to destroy multiple targets massively increases the likelihood that the incoming ICBM threat will actually be destroyed more quickly without needing to fire another Ground Based Interceptor.

Raytheon describes its developmental approach as one that hinges upon what’s called “open-architecture,” a strategy designed to engineer systems with the ability to easily embrace and integrate new technologies as they emerge. This strategy will allow the MOKV platform to better adjust to fast-changing threats, Nicholls said.

The MDA development plan includes the current concept definition phase, followed by risk reduction and proof of concept phases leading to a full development program, notionally beginning in fiscal year 2022, Nicholls explained.

“This highly advanced and highly technical kill vehicle takes a true dedication of time and expertise to properly mature. It is essential to leverage advancements from other members of the Raytheon kill vehicle family, including the Redesigned Kill Vehicle,” Nicholls said.

While the initial development of MOKV is aimed at configuring the “kill vehicle” for a GBI, there is early thinking about integrating the technology onto a Standard Missile-3, or SM-3, an interceptor missile also able to knock incoming ICBMs out of space.The SM-3 is also an exo-atmopheric "kill vehicle," meaning it can destroy short and intermediate range incoming targets; its "kill vehilce" has no explosives but rather uses kinetic energy to collide with and obliterate its target. The resulting impact is the equivalent to a 10-ton truck traveling at 600 mph, Raytheon statements said.

“Ultimately, these Multi-Object Kill Vehicles will revolutionize our missile defense architecture, substantially reducing the interceptor inventory required to defeat an evolving and more capable threat to the homeland,” MDA officials said.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Hummm....."Great Game 2.0" I guess....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.realcleardefense.com/art..._ceding_ground_to_china_in_africa_109658.html

August 2, 2016

U.S. Focus on South China Sea Risks Ceding Ground to China in Africa

By James D. Durso

International tensions continue to mount in the wake of The Hague ruling on July 12 that China’s claims to the South China Sea have no legal basis. Considering what’s at stake, it shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone. U.S. trade accounts for $1.2 trillion of the $5.3 trillion of trade that passes through the South China Sea each year. As the Council on Foreign Relations recently noted, a crisis in the South China Sea would seriously impact both regional economies, as well as our own, increasing insurance rates and necessitating longer transits from port to port. That the South China Sea may, by Chinese estimates, yield 130 billion barrels of oil (more than any area of the globe except Saudi Arabia), only compounds the importance of a peaceful resolution. However, as U.S. focus intensifies in one area of the globe, it wanes in another. It means that, even if we get our way in the South China Sea, we risk losing big in the game of globalization. While the U.S. is busy leading complicated diplomatic processes in Asia, China continues expanding its influence elsewhere, specifically, in the very regions that have moved down the list of U.S. foreign policy priorities.

Nowhere is this phenomenon more prevalent than in Djibouti, a country situated on the northeast coast of Africa described by U.S. Ambassador Tom Kelly as “at the forefront of [U.S.] national security policy” but one that few Americans understand in terms of strategic value. Though small in size, Djibouti plays a vital role in U.S. national security. It houses our only permanent military base on the African continent and positions us within striking distance of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQIP) and al-Shabaab, in Somalia.

Similar to the South China Sea, Djibouti is also a critical trade route. Positioned at the choke point between the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, the Port of Djibouti is the nucleus of one of the busiest shipping routes in the world, connecting Europe, the Far East, the Horn of Africa and the Persian Gulf.

Yet despite its importance, the country has been overshadowed by other American foreign policy priorities, like the geopolitical chess match in the South China Sea. Earlier this year, the U.S. sent the USS John C. Stennis carrier strike group (CSG) to the disputed waters as a show of force. To put that in terms of financial commitment, the acquisition cost of a CSG is roughly $13 billion, and it costs $6.5 million a day to simply operate a CSG. We gave under $5.5 mn dollars in aid to Djibouti in all of 2015, less than the cost of operating our carrier strike group in the South China Sea for just one day. When Djibouti – a country led by an increasingly authoritarian leader – held elections last year, the U.S. gave $7,914 for “Elections and Political Processes” and $4,486 for “Political Parties” via USAID. No American election monitors were present. Not surprisingly, incumbent President Omar Guelleh emerged victorious, earning 87% of a vote which activists claim was preceded by political repression, police brutality, and biased national media.

While the U.S. turns away from Djibouti, China is leaning in, investing billions in infrastructure projects that only extend its influence there. And it’s working. Nearly one year ago today, China and Djibouti came to terms on what is China’s first overseas military base. It will soon give China the largest military presence in the country and a major stake on one of the most strategic waterways in the world.

The South China Sea is just one investment in China’s increasingly diversified portfolio. For China, the most likely worst-case scenario is they are allowed to save face after The Hague ruling, paving the way for a successful G-20 meeting in Hangzhou and the IMF’s expected acceptance of the Chinese yuan to its globally recognized basked of reserve currencies. Not a bad worst-case scenario. The best case could include the above, along with China maintaining some sort of military presence in the South China Sea. If so, the country is, as one senior western diplomat warned, one step closer to developing a “web of bases” that give them “control over strategic waterways all the way into the Med[iterranean Sea].”

It’s clear China is playing the long game, actively investing in strategic influence around the globe. As the United States works towards a peaceful conclusion in the South China Sea, we must also remain focused on nurturing critical diplomatic relationships elsewhere. Making our influence felt in the South China Sea is important, but far less so if it dissolves our position in countries like Djibouti.


James D. Durso is the Managing Director of Corsair LLC, a supply chain consultancy. He was a professional staff member at the 2005 Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission and the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan. Mr. Durso served as a U.S. Navy officer for 20 years. His overseas postings were as a Foreign Military Sales advisor in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, and in Iraq as a civilian transport advisor with the Coalition Provisional Authority.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.realcleardefense.com/art...olvement_in_the_battle_for_aleppo_109672.html

August 4, 2016

Iranian Military Involvement in The Battle for Aleppo

By Amir Toumaj

The jihadist-led Jaish al Fatah launched a major offensive in southwestern Aleppo on July 31 to break the siege of the rebel-held part of the city. The offensive comes after the last supply route north of Aleppo was severed on July 28 by pro-regime forces encompassing the Syrian Arab Army, Shia militias backed by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), and the US-backed Kurdish People’s Defense Units (YPG). Iran has acknowledged casualties corresponding with the uptick in battles.

During the latest offensive in southwestern Aleppo, officials have thus far announced the deaths of five Iranian soldiers. Statements say fighters are killed in Aleppo by “takfiri terrorists” (A “takfiri” is a Muslim who accuses another Muslim of apostasy. The Iranian regime uses this label for all Sunni rebels and opposition, not just jihadists). Iranian officials continue to say that combatants are killed during their mission.

The death of an IRGC Basij medic was announced on Aug. 3. An IRGC commander on the same dayannounced the death of a commander in the Afghan Fatemiyoun Division. Officials announced the deathof a veteran of the Iran-Iraq War from Ardebil who was a member of the IRGC paramilitary Basij on Aug. 1. Social media posts on pro-IRGC online circles reportedly show a welcoming ceremony held on Aug. 1 for a wounded IRGC major who commands the 102nd Imam Hossein Battalion of Harand in Isfahan province. A member of the IRGC’s Alborz province unit was killed on July 31, and his death announced the following day.

Army Third Lieutenant Mohammad Moradi was also killed in Aleppo on August 1. There has been heavy fighting for control of the Aleppo Artillery School southwest of the city. Prior to deploying to Syria, Moradi had served in the 22nd Artillery Group of Shahreza County in Isfahan province. The death of the Iranian Army artillery officer suggests that elements of the regular Army continue rotating into Syria as part of the IRGC-led expeditionary force. Army commanders publicly confirmed in April the deployment of special forces, following weeks of hints and announcements offering their services for the Islamic Republic in Syria. Special forces were defeated in one of their first major battles in Aleppo at the hands of the battle-hardened Jabhat al Nusrah, al Qaeda’s Syrian branch, which is now called Jabhat al Fatah al Sham. Iran has acknowledged the deaths of seven Army commandos, all in April.

With the backing of Russian airpower, the IRGC, Iranian-backed militias, and allies succeeded in encircling Aleppo last week. In early July, pro-regime forces launched the operation to link forces from the north and west of the city at Castello Road, the last rebel supply route to the city. The Guard confirmed five fatalities during the course of the operation, including two majors on July 13. At least 42 Afghan and Pakistani militiamen were killed last month, with dozens killed before July 21. Syrian Arab Army, YPG, and Russia dealt the finishing blows last week, completing the encirclement of Aleppo..

The Guard was furthermore instrumental in laying the groundwork of Aleppo’s siege in February, cutting off rebel supply route to Turkey with the assistance of YPG, Russia, and Iranian-backed militias including Lebanese Hezbollah, Iraqi Shia militias, the Afghan Fatemiyoun Division, and Syrian National Defense Forces. The IRGC put far more of its own ground forces in that operation, losing more than 40 soldiers including brigadier generals.

The IRGC prefers to rely on foreign proxies as foot soldiers in Syria with Guard officers advising and leading operations, though the top command has not hesitated to inject its own regular ground forces if necessary.

Iran’s military involvement in Aleppo underscores the strategic importance of the city to the Tehran. The potential success of Jaish al Fatah in breaking the city’s siege would be a setback, but Iran and its allies are committed to victory in Aleppo, or at least achieving a political solution through military means.


This article originally appeared at The Long War Institute.
 
Top