WAR 10-17-2015-to-10-23-2015_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
(185) 09-26-2015-to-10-02-2015_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...02-2015_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

(186) 10-03-2015-to-10-09-2015_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...09-2015_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

(187) 10-10-2015-to-10-16-2015_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...16-2015_____****THE****WINDS****of****WAR****

___

John Batchelor Show
Friday 16 October 2015
Air Date: October 16, 2015

Discussion with Michael Vlahos regarding Progressive vs Neocon foreign policy and a comparison and contrast with British "enlightened" imperialist foreign policy during the time of the "Great Game" and how since "the natives" have co-opted and dulled our technological edge things won't be that way again....

Hour Two
Friday 16 October 2015 / Hour 2, Block A: Michael Vlahos, Naval War College, in re: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Omdurman ; http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/oct/15/obama-ignores-generals-on-troop-levels-for-unprece/ ; Hillary Clinton Defends Hawkish Record in First Democratic Debate
Friday 16 October 2015 / Hour 2, Block B: Michael Vlahos, Naval War College, in re: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Omdurman ; http://www.kare11.com/story/news/lo...o-lure-business-talent-to-minnesota/73900686/

October 16, 2015 - Second Hour
http://johnbatchelorshow.com/podcas...os-johns-hopkins-gene-marks-washingtonpostcom
 
Last edited:

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/mexico-drug-lord-guzman-evades-capture-hurts-self-040846031.html

Mexico drug lord "El Chapo" Guzman hurt eluding capture
AFPBy Laurent Thomet | AFP – 1 hour 18 minutes ago.

Fugitive drug kingpin Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman eluded an operation to recapture him in northwestern Mexico in recent days, injuring his leg and face, authorities said, as the manhunt heats up.

Authorities said Friday that efforts to nab Guzman, who embarrassed President Enrique Pena Nieto with his brazen July jailbreak, have focused on the northwest region in the past few weeks after foreign governments shared intelligence.

"Due to these actions and to avoid his arrest, the fugitive escaped in a hurry (in recent days), which according to the information that was collected, caused him injuries to his leg and face," the government said in a statement.

"It is important to specify that these injuries were not the product of a direct clash," it said, without specifying the extent of the injuries or how authorities know he was hurt.

Authorities also did not say exactly where and when the operation took place, but raids have reportedly occurred in the neighboring states of Durango and Sinaloa.

The government said it was continuing operations to capture the Sinaloa drug cartel boss, who has been captured and escaped prison twice, most recently on July 11 by crawling down a hole in his cell's shower that led to a huge tunnel.

The governor of Sinaloa said Wednesday that special forces had conducted raids in Tamazula, Durango.

US Drug Enforcement Administration officials have told AFP that they believe Guzman fled to the rugged mountain region of his home state stronghold of Sinaloa following his jailbreak.

The states of Durango, Sinaloa and Chihuahua meet in a drug-producing region known as the Gold Triangle, a bastion of Guzman's drug cartel.

US law enforcement officials say Guzman, 58, likely fled there because he enjoys the support of the local population. American authorities have been working with Mexican security forces in the hope of extraditing him to the United States.

- Ranch raid -

US network NBC News reported that Mexican marines closed in on Guzman last week after US drug agents intercepted cellphone signals suggesting he was hiding at a ranch near Cosala, Sinaloa state, in the Sierra Madre mountains.

Citing three sources with knowledge of the operation, NBC said the marines raided the ranch in helicopters, but turned back after taking fire from Guzman's gunmen.

The marines later went in on foot and found cellphones, medication and two-way radios. Guzman and his henchmen are believed to have fled in all-terrain vehicles, the network said.

But a week after the raid, officials are "losing hope" that the infamous drug lord will be caught imminently, it reported.

- US extradition bid -

Guzman fled the Altiplano maximum-security prison near Mexico City just 17 months after US-backed marines captured him in the Sinaloa Pacific resort of Mazatlan following a 13-year manhunt.

He escaped through a 1.5-kilometer (one mile) tunnel with a redesigned motorcycle on special tracks, emerging in a house outside the prison.

A new video of his escape was leaked to the Televisa channel this week, showing that loud hammering could be heard in his cell moments before he descended down the hole.

It took guards nearly 40 minutes to go inside his cell after he escaped.

More than a dozen prison officials have been detained over charges they helped him flee.

Pena Nieto had refused to hand Guzman over to the United States, but authorities have now secured an arrest warrant to extradite him if he is captured again.

Guzman was first arrested in 1993 in Guatemala, but he escaped from a prison in western Mexico in 2001 by hiding in a laundry cart.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
:dot5:

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/cologne-mayoral-candidate-wounded-stabbing-083617931.html

Cologne mayoral candidate wounded in knife attack

Associated PressAssociated Press – 15 minutes ago.

BERLIN (AP) — A leading candidate to be mayor of Cologne was wounded in a knife attack as she campaigned on Saturday, officials said, a day before an election in the western German city.

Henriette Reker — an independent candidate supported by Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservatives and two other parties — was stabbed in the neck in the attack at a market on Saturday morning, the city government said in a statement. It said her life was not in danger, as did Reker's campaign team.

Four other people were wounded, one of them seriously, in a scuffle as they tried to overwhelm the suspected attacker, who was then arrested. There was no immediate word on the 44-year-old man's possible motive.

The attack happened as Reker was visiting a campaign stand set up by Merkel's Christian Democrats ahead of Sunday's election. Reker, 58, has been the head of the city's social affairs and integration department since 2010.

Outgoing mayor Juergen Roters said he was "deeply shocked" by the attack. Center-left Social Democrat Jochen Ott, Reker's main rival in the election, suspended his campaign.

City officials said the election would go ahead as planned.

Attacks on politicians are rare in Germany but there have been prominent cases.

Then-Interior Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble was shot by a deranged man while campaigning in October 1990, an attack that left him using a wheelchair. A few months earlier, a mentally disturbed woman stabbed Oskar Lafontaine, then a prominent member of Germany's main opposition party, while he was campaigning in Cologne.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20151017/as--india-naval_exercises-f82586d279.html

India, US and Japan hold naval exercises under China's gaze

Oct 17, 9:03 AM (ET)
By NIRMALA GEORGE

(AP) The USS Normandy sails in the Bay of Bengal as U.S. Navy fighter aircrafts are...
Full Image

NEW DELHI (AP) — Naval warships, aircraft carriers and submarines from the U.S., India and Japan steamed into the Bay of Bengal on Saturday as they took part in joint military exercises off India's east coast, signaling the growing strategic ties between the three countries as they face up to a rising China.

The sea drills, part of the six-day-long Malabar exercises, will cover the full spectrum of naval maneuvers, including military-to-military coordination and anti-submarine warfare, according to a joint statement.

The first, or "harbor," phase of the exercises was conducted in the southern Indian port city of Chennai and ended Friday.

The U.S. has deployed the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt, a missile cruiser and a nuclear-powered submarine for the exercises, which end Monday.

(AP) U.S. Navy officials signal to a aircraft before it takes off from the aircraft...
Full Image

"India and Japan both are fantastic partners of the United States," Capt. Craig Clapperton, commanding officer of the USS Theodore Roosevelt, told reporters on board the ship. "We share a great deal in common, and we certainly have very strong economic, military and political relationships and friendships with India and Japan."

However, a Chinese state-run newspaper cautioned India to guard against being drawn into an anti-China alliance.

"The China-India relationship is on a sound track, and healthy ties are beneficial to both countries," the Global Times said. "India should be vigilant to any intentions of roping it into an anti-China camp."

Almost simultaneously, China's People's Liberation Army and the Indian army are conducting joint counterterrorism exercises in Kunming in southwestern China.

China has been wary of joint maritime exercises by India and the United States, especially when Beijing is involved in a host of disputes with Japan, South Korea and several of its Southeast Asian neighbors in the South China Sea.

This year's Malabar exercises are being held against the backdrop of expectations that the U.S. might directly challenge Chinese claims in the South China Sea by sailing a Navy ship inside the 12-nautical-mile (21-kilometer) territorial limit surrounding an artificial island built by China.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
This is one to watch.....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20151017/ml--egypt-parliament-salafis-ede2d3aaa3.html

In Egypt vote, ultraconservative Islamists try balancing act

Oct 17, 9:19 AM (ET)
By BRIAN ROHAN

(AP) In this Wednesday, Oct. 14, 2015 photo, Salafi volunteers direct voters to their...
Full Image

ALEXANDRIA, Egypt (AP) — Beards without moustaches, the trademark of ultraconservative Islamists, were all the rage at this campaign rally, among both speakers and the men in the audience, while women wearing full-face veils sat on a separate side of a multicolored tent.

Yet the parliament candidates from Egypt's Al-Nour Party giving speeches at the rally hardly referred to religion, a dramatic change for a party that was once one of the strongest advocates for a greater role of Islam in government and society.

In Egypt's first democratic elections in 2012, held after its Arab Spring uprising, Al-Nour won the second largest number of parliamentary seats after the more mainstream Muslim Brotherhood, and for a while it was its close ally. But in 2013, the party backed the army's overthrow of the Brotherhood's Mohammed Morsi, an Islamist who was the country's first freely elected president.

Now, for parliamentary elections that begin this weekend, Al-Nour is attempting a delicate balancing act.

(AP) In this Saturday, Oct. 10 2015 photo, Egyptian women attend a campaign rally for the...
Full Image

It has to maintain its appeal to its ultraconservative base, which still wants to see greater implementation of Islamic Shariah law but is disillusioned with politics after Morsi's ouster or is disgusted with the party's actions. At the same time, it's trying to reach out to the political center, where anti-Islamist sentiment is high, with promises to unify and rebuild a polarized country.

"Progress, education, development, health care," was the message that echoed from the campaign rally packed with some 200 people, held in a tent set up the street of the Raml district in the Mediterranean coastal city of Alexandria Wednesday night.

The 2014 constitution bans religion-based political parties. Al-Nour insists it is not a religious party but rather one with a religious background that focuses on economic and social priorities like fighting endemic unemployment. Its campaign slogan is "Clarity and Ambition," and none of the 17 points in the program it distributed at the rally mentioned religion.

With memories of Morsi's ouster and the bloody crackdown on his supporters still fresh, Al-Nour is viewed as a traitor by the Brotherhood, which just a few years ago was the country's most organized political force.

Now the Brotherhood is banned from public life and declared a terrorist organization. And while Al-Nour may have alienated much of its base, it will be able to compete in parliamentary elections held in the coming weeks because of its support for President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi, the former general who led Morsi's overthrow.

(AP) In this Wednesday, Oct. 14, 2015 photo, Amr Mekky, left, and Ashraf Thabet,...
Full Image

"We're not talking about a democratic context where we can really judge popular sentiment based on how parties do in elections," said Shadi Hamid, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution's Center for Middle East Policy.

"I'm not necessarily talking about wide-scale fraud, but it's also in the lead-up to the election, how much media exposure they are allowed," he said. "How does the party get their message out to a larger audience? There aren't really clear avenues for that. So that's a kind of built-in limit to how well they can do and I think the regime will modulate that depending on what they're comfortable with in terms of Nour's share of the seats."

The government is heralding the elections, which take place in stages lasting through December, as the next step toward democracy, but critics and analysts say the legislature will be little more than a rubber stamp for el-Sissi. Independent monitors will be few, and turnout is expected to be much lower than for votes in recent years.

Founded after the 2011 uprising that toppled longtime autocrat Hosni Mubarak, Al-Nour won about a quarter of the vote in the country's first parliamentary election held later that year. It later broke with the Islamist group, however, accusing it of monopolizing power. Al-Nour's success in 2011 was in part due to its access to a flourishing free media that no longer exists.

Now, media heavyweights, commentators and petitioners have called for a ban on Al-Nour over its religious roots, accusing it of being a Brotherhood front.

(AP) In this Wednesday, Oct. 14, 2015 photo, a Salafi volunteer stands alert during...
Full Image

Amr Mekky, an Al-Nour candidate for the 700,000 voters of Raml district in Alexandria — a city long considered a Salafi stronghold — says such critics are "misguided" and that there's been no official pressure on the party.

"We are above all being attacked by the Brotherhood, who are urging a boycott. Just look at social media," he said at the rally, referring to a slew of Facebook posts describing Al-Nour as stooges of el-Sissi and facilitators of his crackdown on political Islam.

"We want an end to the polarization, and are calling for Egyptians to build the country together, with all parties, youth, women and minorities represented in the next parliament for the security and stability of the country," he said.

Analysts say the party may be overextending itself and seeking to please too disparate an electorate.

The contradictions were on display at the rally. At one point, supporters chanted "Egypt is an Islamic country," although the party remains officially open to Christians and says it has some among its ranks. Later, prominent party supporters led a chant of "Long Live Egypt," el-Sissi's own campaign slogan when he won the presidency last year.

(AP) In this Tuesday, Oct. 6, 2015 photo, an Egyptian woman attends a campaign rally for...
Full Image

The party, which at one time sought to boost the role of Shariah — Islamic law — in Egypt, now says it is content with the country's current constitution, which it backed last year.

The multiple messages could prove perplexing to voters.

"The only people who are going to vote for them are people so committed to the Salafi (movement) and the specific individuals involved — and I don't think there are many of them," said Jonathan Brown, a scholar of Islam at Georgetown University. "The others who will vote for them are people who want to support the local pro-Sissi candidate, basically Sissi supporters who happen to have beards, and that's not the original constituency of the party."

For core supporters like 36-year-old Alaa Ghenim, meanwhile, the party's appeal remains clear: "Islamic Shariah law."

---

Follow Brian Rohan on Twitter at www.twitter.com/brian_rohan

______


For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20151017/ml--egypt-691acf99da.html

Voting begins in Egypt's parliamentary election

Oct 17, 6:19 AM (ET)
By MERRIT KENNEDY

(AP) An Egyptian walks in front of posters of a parliamentary candidate in Giza, just...
Full Image

CAIRO (AP) — Egyptians residing abroad began casting votes Saturday in the country's first parliamentary election since the 2013 military overthrow of Islamist President Mohammed Morsi.

Egypt's state-run news wire MENA said embassies and consulates in 139 countries will be open for two days of voting.

The vote is staggered, with polling in half of Egypt's governorates set to start Sunday. The election will take place in two phases, concluding in early December.

President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi called on Egyptians to vote in a televised speech Saturday.

(AP) Egyptian soldiers carry boxes of ballots at the Giza courthouse in Cairo, Egypt,...
Full Image

"Line up in front of polling stations and plant with your votes the hope for a bright tomorrow for our new Egypt," he said.

Voting will go forward in Egypt under heavy security, in light of regular militant attacks since Morsi's ouster. At least 185,000 military troops will secure the election in the first phase, MENA reported. Interior Ministry spokesman Abu Bakr Abdel-Karim says they will be joined by 180,000 police.

Few candidates have broad recognition or clear platforms, and most have a pro-government bent.

The vote will mark the final step in what has been billed as a transition to democracy. But critics say the next legislature is likely to be a rubber-stamp body that further solidifies the power of el-Sissi, a former general who led Morsi's overthrow.

The vote is also taking place in an atmosphere in which public criticism of the government is strongly discouraged. Virtually the entire media is supportive of el-Sissi and regularly berates critics as traitors or supporters of Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood, which is now officially branded a terrorist group.

Egypt has been without a parliament since it was dissolved by a court ruling in 2012.

The 2011 election, held after the uprising that toppled longtime autocrat Hosni Mubarak, saw candidates from across the political spectrum, from ultra-conservative Islamists to left-wing youths, vying for seats. Egyptians stood in line for hours to cast their votes — many for the first time in their lives — and the Muslim Brotherhood won the largest bloc.

None of the key liberal figures that helped fuel the 2011 uprising, like Nobel Peace laureate Mohamed ElBaradei or former presidential candidate Hamdeen Sabahi, are running in the current elections.

In the face of the government's crackdown and curbed freedoms, lesser known pro-democracy activists who burst onto the political scene in 2011 have either sought exile abroad, withdrawn from public politics or been jailed.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
:dot5:

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://thediplomat.com/2015/10/how-the-west-underestimated-russias-military-power/

How The West Underestimated Russia’s Military Power

Focusing on shortcomings in equipment made Western military analysts underestimate Moscow’s military capacity.

By Franz-Stefan Gady
October 17, 2015

498 Shares
5 Comments

Russia’s military reforms have been misunderstood and its capabilities underestimated by the United States and Europe. That’s the conclusion of a new report by the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR).

The Russian military’s tactical and operational weaknesses became most blatantly apparent to the Kremlin during the 2008 Russo-Georgian War, when the U.S.-trained Georgian forces proved a much more agile and motivated adversary than expected.

As a consequence, Russia initiated the most far-reaching military (the “new look”) reforms since the 1930s divided up into three distinct phases, according to the ECFR study:

First, increasing professionalism by overhauling the education of personnel and cutting the number of conscripts; second, improving combat-readiness with a streamlined command structure and additional training exercises; and third, rearming and updating equipment.

The United States and Europe primarily focused on the third and still mostly incomplete aspect of these reforms, neglecting the substantial progress that was made in the first and second phases.

Almost unnoticed by observers, the Russian military addressed one of the biggest organizational weaknesses dating back to the Soviet and Czarist eras and introduced a new professionally trained non-commissioned officers (NCOs) corps dissolving the existing warrant officers system.

“For the first time, the Russian army had a pyramid structure, with few decision-makers at the top and more officers servicing the troops,” the study reads. Furthermore, officer salaries were increased five-fold and more modern management methods introduced. These reforms also resulted in substantial savings which were used to increase the percentage of professional soldiers within the Russian Armed Forces:

This allowed the troops to use more high-tech equipment (conscripts serve too short a period to be effectively trained on complex weapons systems) and increased the combat-readiness of elite forces (paratroopers, naval infantry, and special forces).

The military education system was also reformed – partially based on the systems of Switzerland and Austria—with the aim of introducing “state of-the-art (Western) leadership techniques.” Moreover, new uniforms and personal equipment were introduced boosting overall moral and confidence.

The second part of the reforms dealt with streamlining command structures and re-organizing the Russian Armed Forces into smaller more agile units by reducing the nominal size of the military by 43 percent—out of 23 old divisions 40 “new look” brigades were formed.

The old Soviet-era practice of mobilization—calling up reservists to achieve combat strengths—was abolished and unnecessary administrative commands scrapped. “The [new] military districts were transformed into joint forces commands, and their number was reduced. This cut the levels of hierarchy as the military districts now have access to all land, air, and naval forces in their zone,” according to the ECFR paper.

Furthermore, the number of military drills was substantially increased and large-scale “snatch exercises” conducted continuously, testing the combat-readiness of airborne units and “new look” brigades. (New units should be able to deploy within 24 hours.)

“While such high readiness levels have not yet been achieved, one has to bear in mind that before the reforms some Russian divisions needed about a year of preparation before deploying to Chechnya,” the study notes.

The result of these reforms was that Russia was capable of maintaining a force of 40,000 and 150,000 men in full combat-ready formations along the Russian-Ukrainian border for months, while conducting military drills involving around 80,000 troops in other parts of the country.

The report does not note that the three phases of the grand military reform are far from complete—in particular the last phase dealing with the introduction of new equipment.

It is when analyzing the last phase that Western observes made the mistake of overemphasizing the difficulties of the Russian defense industry in delivering new military hardware and inferring a general failure of the reforms. “However, this is a misunderstanding of the nature of the reforms. The initial stages were not designed to create a new army in terms of equipment, but to ensure that existing equipment was ready to use, and to make the organization that uses it more effective and professional,” according to the ECFR paper.

This led to Western military analysts underestimating Russian military capabilities and neglecting new operational concepts such as Russia’s unique approach of merging conventional with unconventional warfighting methods, among other things.

Discussing Vladimir Putin’s military adventure in Syria, the report notes that it does not “not draw on the core strengths of the armed forces, or on Moscow’s military vision.” The report furthermore states that due to the limited logistical capabilities of the Russian military outside Europe and the post-Soviet periphery, operations –particularly those involving heavy Russian land platforms–would be fairly limited and cannot be sustained for a prolonged amount of time.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
:dot5: Definite demographics hit, the same as the number of Russian college educated women that were leaving Russia in search of better "opportunities"....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://news.yahoo.com/more-young-french-saying-au-revoir-homeland-103419881.html

More young French saying 'au revoir' to their homeland

AFP
By Fran Blandy and Charlotte Plantive
3 hours ago

Paris (AFP) - Jessica caught the travel bug and never came back, Frederic wanted a bigger market for his start-up and Nicolas was just tired of the vexing daily grind in France that was eating away at his joie de vivre.

So they left to Australia, New York or Canada, becoming part of the growing wave of young French citizens seeking a future elsewhere.

The official statistics agency INSEE said this week that between 2006 and 2013, the number of French emigrating jumped from 140,000 a year to 200,000, 80 percent of them between 18 and 29 years old.

In a globalised world the French have been slow to jump on the expat train that has long seen thousands of young Australians or Brits flit across continents and put down roots abroad.

But "a greater openness to the world, better language skills and more international study options" have lured more French to explore the globe, said Jean-Christophe Dumont, head of international migration at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

France's stagnating economy, high taxes and soaring unemployment have also been cited as factors.

"It is curiosity and the desire to explore that pushed me to leave," said Jessica Viven-Wilkisch, 31, who studied in Ireland and Germany before settling in Australia as a law professor where she met her husband.

She tried to return to France in 2008 but at the peak of the financial crisis there were no jobs, and now she does not plan on leaving Australia with its "quality of life (and) give-it-a-go attitude".

- 'Country of irritation' -

The conservative opposition has seized on the rising number of departures as proof that Socialist government policies, such as high taxes, are forcing people to flee.

A parliamentary inquiry launched by the centre-right party The Republicans last year sparked a furore just over its title, "The Exile of France's Lifeblood", leading the Socialists to accuse them of "French-bashing".

Nicolas Poirier, 32, a legal consultant, is an example of the opposition's concerns, running away from "stifling taxes" and "administrative hell".

"I only saw France as a country of constraints and irritation, and elsewhere I saw joie de vivre and above all, freedom," added Poirier.

He said he adopted a "scorched-earth policy", selling everything and never looking back when he left for Montreal four years ago.

The parliamentary report found that there are at least two million French living abroad.

However Dumont said this is a relatively small diaspora, with 2.6 percent of the French population living abroad, compared to 4.6 percent for Germany and 6.7 percent for Britain.

- 'Catch-up phenomenon' -

He said that France was experiencing a similar increase in emigration to the United States, while departures have slowed from Germany and Britain in recent years.

France is expected to grow at just 1.1 percent in 2015, and unemployment is hovering at 10 percent, though Dumont said it was not in the same situation as Italy, Spain or Greece which has seen much higher levels of departures linked to the economic crisis.

"Instead, we are seeing a catch-up phenomenon compared to the history of French emigration which has always been very weak."

Frederic Montagnon, 38, an entrepreneur who has created several start-ups and now lives in New York, is one of those kicking back against the attitude that France is a sinking ship.

Montagnon says he moved to New York for a "personal adventure" and to access a much bigger market. "If you don't have access to a wider area when you develop technology you lose out to your competitors who do," he said.

However, he keeps his technical teams in France and remains very positive about his homeland, saying he is one of a large community of French entrepreneurs in New York taking advantage of globalisation to grow their businesses.

And Montagnon maintains it is "really much easier to start a company in France" than in New York, and that he pays much higher taxes in the Big Apple.

"The cost of living here is much higher. Here nothing is free -- education, healthcare -- and it is very expensive," he told AFP.

He sees the growing French diaspora as a positive thing.

"Having a presence elsewhere, that is when you can really talk about an influential culture," he said.


View Comments (6) .
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://news.yahoo.com/us-conduct-boko-haram-surveillance-ops-nigeria-sources-164145685.html

US to conduct counter-Boko Haram ops in Nigeria

AFP
By Andrew Beatty
17 hours ago


Washington (AFP) - The United States will conduct surveillance and intelligence operations against Boko Haram inside Nigeria, sources familiar with the plan told AFP Friday, a significant escalation of Washington's role in combatting the Islamist group.

Related Stories


1. U.S. Sends Troops To Fight Boko Haram In Cameroon Huffington Post
2. US steps up intelligence aid to fight against Boko Haram AFP
3. Amnesty: At least 1,600 killed in Boko Haram violence since June AFP
4. 11 Chadian soldiers killed in Boko Haram attack: army AFP
5. At least 36 killed in suicide attacks in Nigeria's northeast: medics Reuters
ðÁ

The operations will be carried out as part of the recently announced deployment of up to 300 US military personnel to neighboring Cameroon, officials said.

"This is going to be part of our Boko Haram efforts that will be operating throughout the region," one of the sources said on condition of anonymity.

It will not include boots on the ground or offensive combat, but will see US military operations against Boko Haram in Africa's most populous country for the first time.

"It's surveillance and intelligence gathering, not anything offensive," said the same source.

US President Barack Obama on Wednesday announced he would send up to 300 military personnel to Cameroon. Approximately 145 have already arrived in the country.

The White House has been at pains to stress that personnel would be armed only for self-defense.

Nigeria greeted that announcement as a "welcome development."

President Muhammadu Buhari took office in May vowing to end the violence that has killed scores and spooked much-needed investors in Africa's largest economy and foremost oil producer.

The former general has replaced many of the military top brass and set an end-of-year deadline to nix a six-year insurgency featuring suicide attacks and mass kidnappings that have shocked the world.

On Thursday 30 people died in a double bombing on a mosque in northeast Nigeria, underscoring the scale of that challenge and, experts say, the need for outside help.

But US efforts to give him military assistance have been hampered by concerns about human rights abuses carried out by the country's military.

And until now, Washington has largely shied away from engaging its own vast military assets to combat Boko Haram, with policymakers wary of fueling militant recruitment or fusing the group's ties with Middle Eastern Islamists.

The group's leaders have allied themselves with the Islamic State group, but experts doubt the scale and scope of collaboration.

However, there are growing fears that a once regional Muslim anti-colonial movement is now metastasizing into a regional jihadist threat.

The US moves come as Boko Haram steadily expands operations beyond its traditional base in northern Nigeria, conducting attacks in Cameroon and Chad that have killed dozens.

An uptick in violence is expected in the coming weeks with the end of the rainy season and amid growing resistance to a nascent multi-national joint task force bringing together countries in the region to fight Boko Haram.

According to Pentagon officials, the US Department of Defense also has approximately 250 personnel in Niger and 85 in Chad conducting training and surveyance missions.


View Comments (31) .
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
This doesn't just apply to the Egyptians......

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://news.yahoo.com/one-us-militant-egypts-army-fears-most-105148589.html

One of us: the militant Egypt's army fears most

Reuters
By Ahmed Hassan
October 16, 2015 6:51 AM

CAIRO, (Reuters) - As a special forces officer in the Egyptian Army, Hisham al-Ashmawy trained in the desert, learning camouflage and survival techniques and how to hunt the enemy in rough terrain. Now he has turned militant, and uses that training to another purpose: helping fellow jihadists fight Egypt’s government.

Ashmawy’s background makes him a potent figure among Islamist fighters, who President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi say pose an existential threat to Egypt. “Ashmawy is the most dangerous terrorist we face,” an Egyptian National Security official told Reuters. “He is the mastermind and executor.”

Security officials say the former military man, whose allegiance has switched from Islamic State to Al Qaeda, has carried out some of the most high-profile attacks in Egypt. These include the attempted assassination of former Interior Minister Mohamed Ibrahim in May 2013, and the killing in June this year of Egypt's top public prosecutor in a car bomb.

As Egypt heads to parliamentary elections on Oct. 18, Ashmawy's story illustrates the complexities of the security challenge facing the country. Egypt has struggled with Islamist sympathizers in the military since 1981, when army officers assassinated President Anwar Sadat. Today the government, run by a former military man, hopes the elections will help bring stability. People like Ashmawy challenge that.

Ashmawy has spent the past decade using what he knows about the security forces against them. He moved to the Libyan town of Derna, a hotbed of Islamist radicalism near the border with Egypt, about a year ago, arriving in a truck surrounded by gunmen, according to local resident Ehab Senousi.

In Derna, out of reach of Egyptian law enforcement, he runs an Al Qaeda cell, say several Egyptian security officials. So far, despite the toughest crackdown on militancy in the country's history, he has managed to evade capture. His path from the military to Egypt’s most wanted man – described by former colleagues, relatives and Egyptian security officials – shows that many of the country's problems are homemade.

A senior military officer in the Sinai, where Ashmawy joined Islamic State's Egypt affiliate, said: "We are not intimidated by any of them - neither Ashmawy or anyone else ... He will fall soon.

"The problem is he is outside the country, specifically in Libya, and this makes it more difficult to arrest him. We are on the right path. We need a little bit of time to eliminate terrorism in Egypt."

Ashmawy could not be reached for comment.

SOCCER PLAYER

Born in 1978, Ashmawy is a fitness fanatic whose political views were slow to emerge, according to relatives. He joined a special forces unit called Sa'aika (Thunderbolt) in 1996, giving no sign of opposition to then President Hosni Mubarak, said relatives and associates.

"He used to cheer soccer teams with us on television. He was not extreme in any way," said an army officer who knew him. "He was a good soccer player."

After about a year, Ashmawy started to become more pious, people who knew him said. He was caught handing out Islamist literature and pamphlets to other officers. Saeed Ismail, a former army officer who knew Ashmawy for nearly two years, said Ashmawy was punished but still organized gatherings after morning prayers.

.. View gallery
File photo of burnt cars at the site of a car bomb …
People stand around burnt cars at the site of a car bomb attack on the convoy of Egyptian public pro …

"He talked with us about the need to have our own personalities and not to accept orders without being convinced of them," said Ismail.

Ashmawy began to fast regularly and would often criticize the government. One day, Ismail recalls, Ashmawy yelled at two conscripts, "Victory will only come through force."

After four years in Thunderbolt, Ashmawy was transferred to an administrative post where the authorities thought he would be less of a threat. But he met other officers, discussed political Islam, and kept handing out banned books.

TORTURE

Relatives say a tipping point came in 2006. A close friend of Ashmawy's was detained by state security agents, they say, adding that they believe the man was tortured and died in custody. After that, they noticed a sharp shift in Ashmawy's temperament.

"Before this incident he was religious like any other Egyptian but he did not hate the men from state security or the army and he had many friends in the police," said his nephew, Osama Mohamed, who said he was close to his uncle. "After this incident he cut all of them off except for two."

In 2007, a military court expelled Ashmawy from the army. He started an import-export business in Cairo, trading clothes and auto parts. And he kept on meeting other former military officers in a mosque beneath his father's apartment.

In the chaos that ended three decades of rule by Mubarak in 2011, Ashmawy dropped off the radar of military intelligence, security officials said.

Islamist President Mohamed Mursi took over. When Sisi toppled Mursi in 2013, militants based in the Sinai launched an insurgency. In particular, fighters with a group called Ansar Beyt al-Maqdis stepped up attacks on Egyptian soldiers and police.

Ashmawy had joined Ansar in 2012. A year later, he emerged as a key operative, according to security officials, heading a cell that taught fighters how to carry out suicide bombing missions, assemble roadside bombs and shoot soldiers.

DEEP KNOWLEDGE

In 2013, one week after the former interior minister survived an assassination attempt, security forces raided Ashmawy's house. Instead of Ashmawy, they found extensive exercise equipment including climbing ropes hanging from a ceiling.

Police also raided the gym in Cairo where Ashmawy used to work out for three hours every Friday.

"He never spoke with anyone else,” the gym manager said. “When the call to prayer came he prayed inside the gym. He didn't like to talk about politics."

One Egyptian security official tracking Ashmawy told Reuters Ashmawy is highly effective because he knows how the security and military officers who are after him think. "He has managed to make daring escapes when we had him surrounded."

In late 2013, security officials surrounded Ashmawy and other militants for 24 hours in a desert area near Ain al-Sukhna near the Red Sea. Five men were shot dead, but Ashmawy and one other escaped, according to the officials.

"How this happened I don't know," said a special forces officer. The security official tracking Ashmawy said he had deep knowledge of desert escape routes and checkpoints. Sometimes he dresses like a Bedouin; other times in a cap and jeans.

In July this year, the security forces may have come closer than ever to capturing Ashmawy when he led a machinegun and rocket-propelled grenade attack on a checkpoint on the Farafra Oasis Road near Libya that killed 22 border guards.

Ashmawy was wounded, they say. But he got away.

DERNA

It was then that Ashmawy headed to Libya, taking advantage of the chaos that has gripped the country since Muammar Gaddafi fell.

It is difficult for Egypt to track him in Libya. Though Egyptian jets bombed Islamic State targets in Derna in February, the military is hesitant about seeking out Ashmawy in a neighboring country. There is scant intelligence to go on, say several security officials.

In November 2014, Ashwamy’s Sinai-based militant group pledged allegiance to Islamic State. Ashwamy split with them, security sources believe. He has been joined in Derna by three former army officers and two ex-policemen, they say.

In July this year, security officials recognized Ashmawy’s voice in an audio message that condemned Sisi and called for a holy war against his government.

"All of you must come together to confront your enemy,” said the message, carried by U.S.-based monitoring group SITE. “Do not fear them,” Ashmawy said, “but fear Allah if you are truly believers."

(Writing by Mike Georgy; Edited by Sara Ledwith)

View Comments (47) .
 

Housecarl

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

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://news.yahoo.com/north-korea-rejects-more-nuclear-talks-demands-peace-152618446.html

North Korea rejects more nuclear talks, demands peace treaty with U.S.

Reuters
1 hour ago

SEOUL (Reuters) - North Korea on Saturday rejected the idea of resuming talks to end its nuclear program, saying previous such attempts ended in failure, and reiterated its demand that Washington come to the table to negotiate a peace treaty.

The statement by the North's foreign ministry came a day after U.S. President Barack Obama and South Korean President Park Geun-hye said in Washington they were open to talks with North Korea on sanctions but that Pyongyang needs to show it was serious about abandoning its nuclear ambition.

"If the United States insists on taking a different path, the Korean peninsula will only see our unlimited nuclear deterrent being strengthened further," the North's foreign ministry said in a statement.

North and South Korea remain technically at war under a truce it signed in 1953 with the United States, which led U.N. forces backing the South, and China, which fought for the North.

North Korea walked away from the so-called six-party talks involving the United States and four other countries in 2008 and went on to conduct two more nuclear tests.

It said only a peace treaty with Washington can permanently resolve the conflict on the Korean peninsula.

Obama said the United States was open to negotiations that could ease sanctions imposed on the North, just as it had done with Iran, which reached a deal in July with major powers.

"We haven't even gotten to that point yet, because there has been no indication on the part of the North Koreans as there was with the Iranians that they could foresee a future in which they did not possess or were not pursuing nuclear weapons," he said.

(Reporting by Jack Kim; Editing by Ros Russell)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20151017/us-united-states-israel-dunford-0c3207d46f.html

US military chairman in Israel for meetings, amid violence

Oct 17, 11:27 AM (ET)
By LOLITA C. BALDOR

(AP) In this July 9, 2015, file photo, Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Joseph...
Full Image

JERUSALEM (AP) — The new chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is in Jerusalem for talks with senior Israeli leaders, as violence spikes around the country.

This is U.S. Marine Gen. Joseph Dunford's first overseas trip since taking the job Oct. 1. He will meet with Lt. Gen. Gadi Eizenkot, the commander-in-chief of the Israel Defense Forces and others.

Navy Capt. Greg Hicks says the latest violence may come up in meetings, but Dunford's visit was long-planned and his goal is to meet his Israeli counterparts and reaffirm America's commitment to Israel. He also will visit other countries in the region.

The violence has been fueled in part by Palestinian fears that Israel is trying to expand its presence at a major Muslim-run shrine in Jerusalem. Israel denies that claim.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Hummm.....More evidence that the Saudis alone can't handle this.....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20151017/ml--yemen-c711be46b7.html

Hundreds of Sudanese troops arrive in Yemen's Aden

Oct 17, 3:43 PM (ET)
By AHMED AL-HAJ

SANAA, Yemen (AP) — Hundreds of Sudanese troops arrived in Yemen's southern port city of Aden on Saturday, the first batch of an expected 10,000 reinforcements for the Saudi-led coalition fighting the country's Shiite Houthi rebels, security officials said.

The troops' mission is to secure Aden, which has seen an uptick in drive-by shootings of pro-government troop leaders and officials as extremists became more entrenched in the city in recent weeks, the pro-government security officials said.

Yemen's fighting pits the Houthis and allied army units against forces loyal to the coalition-backed internationally recognized government as well as southern separatists and other militants.

The latest assassination was of an Emirati officer in Aden's Mansoura neighborhood on Friday, killed by gunmen on a motorcycle, officials said. The United Arab Emirates is part of the Saudi-led coalition, which has been pounding rebel positions since March.

Although the attack, like several others, went unclaimed, the officials said they suspect Sunni extremists, who they say have made land grabs, exploiting the chaos engulfing the Arab world's poorest country. Yemen's al-Qaida, viewed by Washington as the terror network's most dangerous affiliate, is known to have used motorcycles in previous assassinations.

Earlier Saturday, al-Qaida militants set up security checkpoints and began enforcing sex segregation at the sole college in Zinjibar, the provincial capital of Abyan, neutral and pro-government security officials there said.

"First they took Mukalla and then Zinjibar. We are all worried Aden may be next," one pro-government security official told The Associated Press.

Yemen's al-Qaida branch overran Mukalla, the capital of sprawling Hadramawt province, in April. They have since gender-segregated public spaces there and publicly killed and flogged people, including on charges of "witchcraft," Mukalla residents told The Associated Press last week.

Also Saturday, airstrikes from the Saudi-led coalition targeting Houthi rebels mistakenly struck a pro-government military encampment, killing at least 20 fighters and wounding another 20 in the latest instance of friendly fire in the anti-rebel camp, security officials said.

The fighters had just wrested the encampment from the Houthis in the southern Taiz province when airstrikes hit them, pro-government security officials said.

"They thought the Houthis were still there," one pro-government security official told The Associated Press.

Ground commanders have repeatedly complained of slow communication with military leadership in Riyadh, the officials added.

Meanwhile in the massive desert province of Jawf, Saudi airstrikes killed 13 Houthis, neutral security officials there said. The strikes are part of a plan to seize the northern province in order to advance on the Houthi heartland of Sadaa, pro-government officials said.

All officials and witnesses spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to brief reporters or fear reprisals.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://zerohedge.whotrades.com/blog/43935496974

Zero Hedge
13 hours ago

US Shocked To Find Russian Machine Gun With Iranian Ammo Attached To Abrams Tank

Needless to say, what’s happening in Syria is a nightmare for those who have been forced by circumstance to bear witness to the intractable violence. The plight of the hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing the country is unfathomable and the situation facing those who remain is even worse.

For military and political strategists in Washington, Syria’s civil war represents a different kind of nightmare. The Russia-Iran nexus is just about the worst possible outcome for the US, whose status as global hegemon was already fading in the face of an ascendant China.

Put simply, the partnership between Washington’s two worst geopolitical enemies represents a kind of “sum of all fears” scenario and to make matters worse, the alliance between Tehran and Moscow looks as though it will apply to Iraq as well, raising the spectre of the US being kicked out of the country it “liberated” after 9/11.

And while there’s nothing funny about the plight of the Syrian people, there’s quite a bit to laugh at when it comes to this latest (and perhaps greatest) US foreign policy blunder which is why we found the following bit from Defense News particularly amusing. Apparently, the Iran-backed (and US supported) Shiite militias battling ISIS in Iraq aren’t getting the kind of logistical support they need from Washington and so they have begun attaching Russian guns to Abrams tanks and firing Iran-stamped ammo. Here’s more:

Earlier this month, Shia militiamen in Iraq dropped off an American-supplied Abrams tank at a US-supported repair facility where workers were surprised to find an attached Russian machine gun plus Iranian ammo, Defense News has learned.


The MIA1 main battle tank — one of 146 frontline tanks the US sold to Baghdad — was transported through the Green Zone to a US-supported Iraqi service facility at al-Muthanna that was established as part of the Pentagon’s Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program.

The tank was equipped with a Russian .50-caliber machine gun and Iranian-stamped 12.75-mm ammunition, according to a source at the facility.

“Once all the ammo was removed, as per procedure, by Iraqi personnel, we noticed Iranian markings on the back of the shell casings. Seems they put a Russian machine gun with Iranian ammunition on an Abrams tank.”

As Washington scrambles to adapt to the myriad, Iranian-backed Shiite militias fighting alongside its US-trained and -supplied partners in Iraq, new manifestations of shifting alliances may threaten the relevance of US end-use monitoring in that war-torn country.

The US-Russian tank hybrid could constitute twin violations of Iraq’s FMS agreements with Washington, due to unauthorized use by Shiite militias and the unsanctioned addition of the Russian gun and Iranian ammo, Pentagon officials say.


“Any time you do a foreign military sale, there’s a requirement that you do end-use monitoring, and it’s a violation if you do alterations,” Vice Adm. Joseph Rixey, director of the Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) told Defense News.


Interviewed in Washington this week at the annual Association of the US Army conference, neither Rixey, the Pentagon’s FMS chief, nor Maj. Gen. Mark McDonald, chief of the US Army Security Assistance Command, had knowledge of the event recounted to Defense News. However, both men suggested that their Iraqi customers had an obligation to report such occurrences in a timely and accurate manner.


“If they brought it into the maintenance facility, then that should be reported to our US folks there, and then we can have a discussion about how, ‘This is not what we’re going to do,’” McDonald said.


McDonald was deputy commander at the time the Iraqi tank deal was concluded, and noted that the FMS contract includes a maintenance package that covers the facility in question. “We eventually got them to buy the maintenance and training package, so I do know there is an ongoing maintenance effort going on over there under our FMS contract, with a US company doing the maintenance.”

The in-country source noted that it was the first time he had encountered the hybridization of the Abrams to accommodate the Russian gun and Iranian ammo.


“It could be an isolated event or it could mark the beginning of something worrisome. It’s too early to tell … but given the strange bedfellows over there in the Amber Zone, you never know.”

Yes, “you never know”, but what appears to have happened here is that because the Iran-backed Shiite militias are more adept than the Iraqi army on the battlefield, they’re the ones driving the tanks.

As a reminder, here’s their assessment of America’s role in providing support for the ground campaign against ISIS in Iraq (via Reuters):

Allied Iranian-backed Shi'ite militias who are leading the fight against Islamic State in Iraq, say the United States lacks the decisiveness and the readiness to supply weapons needed to eliminate militancy in the region.

And so, because of this “lack of decisiveness and readiness”, the militiamen improvised and slapped a Russian machine gun on a US-supplied tank and loaded it up with Iranian ammo.

As noted above, these soldiers aren’t really supposed to be driving these things which makes the following description of what unfolded when they dropped it off for service down right hilarious:


“They brought it in through Iraqi checkpoints, back-rolled it off the trailer and then drove away.”

___

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.defensenews.com/story/de...n-iranian-ammo-found-us-origin-tank/73999398/

Iraqi Forces Add Russian Guns to US Tanks for ISIL Fight

By Barbara Opall-Rome, Joe Gould and Awad Mustafa 6:50 p.m. EDT October 16, 2015

New Alliances Breed Hybrid Hardware, Challenge US End-Use Monitoring
Regime

Comments 8

TEL AVIV, Israel — Earlier this month, Shia militiamen in Iraq dropped off an American-supplied Abrams tank at a US-supported repair facility where workers were surprised to find an attached Russian machine gun plus Iranian ammo, Defense News has learned.

The MIA1 main battle tank — one of 146 frontline tanks the US sold to Baghdad — was transported through the Green Zone to a US-supported Iraqi service facility at al-Muthanna that was established as part of the Pentagon’s Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program.

The tank was equipped with a Russian .50-caliber machine gun and Iranian-stamped 12.75-mm ammunition, according to a source at the facility.

“They brought it in through Iraqi checkpoints, back-rolled it off the trailer and then drove away,” recounted the source.

“Once all the ammo was removed, as per procedure, by Iraqi personnel, we noticed Iranian markings on the back of the shell casings. Seems they put a Russian machine gun with Iranian ammunition on an Abrams tank.”

As Washington scrambles to adapt to the myriad, Iranian-backed Shiite militias fighting alongside its US-trained and -supplied partners in Iraq, new manifestations of shifting alliances may threaten the relevance of US end-use monitoring in that war-torn country.

After US-led coalition airstrikes were forced to destroy about 10 M1A1 Abrams main battle tanks (MBTs) seized from the Iraqi Army by the Islamic State group, often called ISIL or ISIS, Washington is now grappling with the phenomenon of their voluntary transfer to Shiite forces battling in concert with Baghdad against the fanatical Sunni Caliphate.

Foreign Military Sales violation?

The US-Russian tank hybrid could constitute twin violations of Iraq’s FMS agreements with Washington, due to unauthorized use by Shiite militias and the unsanctioned addition of the Russian gun and Iranian ammo, Pentagon officials say.

“Any time you do a foreign military sale, there’s a requirement that you do end-use monitoring, and it’s a violation if you do alterations,” Vice Adm. Joseph Rixey, director of the Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) told Defense News.

The presence of hybrid M1 Abrams tanks was confirmed to Defense News by Dr. Wathaq al-Hashimi, director of the Iraqi Group for Strategic Studies. "Iraq has been dependent on a number of different weapons suppliers, therefore they have integrated these weapons onto different platforms to achieve effectiveness."

Al-Hashimi said this isn’t the first time Iraqi forces — looking for more firepower to battle ISIL — have integrated Russian weapons systems onto American platforms.

"Russian systems were placed on American M1 Abrams tanks specially with armor-piercing rocket systems to be used against ISIL explosive cars used in their attacks," he said. "In Beiji [in Northern Iraq], there were 28 explosive cars used in one day and in Ramadi 15 cars were blown on another day."

Iraqi forces need to integrate different systems as they receive weapons from American, Russian, Iranian and European sources, al-Hashimi said.

"This integration may very well lead to a problem between the US and Iraq due to the purchase agreements,” he said. “However, there was a real problem and threat from the ISIS-armored explosive cars which led the prime minister to travel to Moscow with the minister of defense to acquire these rocket systems which were placed on the tanks.”

Iraq has a long history and experience in weapons and hybridization, al-Hashimi said, noting that Iraqi military experts may have acquired assistance from some of the estimated 5,000 to 6,000 international consultants present in the country from many countries including Russia, the US, Iran and France.

With Thursday being a national holiday, Iraq's Ministry of Defense could not be reached for comment.

‘This Is Not What We’re Going to Do’

Interviewed in Washington this week at the annual Association of the US Army conference, neither Rixey, the Pentagon’s FMS chief, nor Maj. Gen. Mark McDonald, chief of the US Army Security Assistance Command, had knowledge of the event recounted to Defense News. However, both men suggested that their Iraqi customers had an obligation to report such occurrences in a timely and accurate manner.

“If they brought it into the maintenance facility, then that should be reported to our US folks there, and then we can have a discussion about how, ‘This is not what we’re going to do,’” McDonald said.

McDonald was deputy commander at the time the Iraqi tank deal was concluded, and noted that the FMS contract includes a maintenance package that covers the facility in question. “We eventually got them to buy the maintenance and training package, so I do know there is an ongoing maintenance effort going on over there under our FMS contract, with a US company doing the maintenance.”

The in-country source noted that it was the first time he had encountered the hybridization of the Abrams to accommodate the Russian gun and Iranian ammo.

“It could be an isolated event or it could mark the beginning of something worrisome. It’s too early to tell … but given the strange bedfellows over there in the Amber Zone, you never know.”

He was referring to the area adjacent to Baghdad’s US-dominated Green Zone, where, since the Iraqi Army’s stinging string of defeats at the hands of ISIL, sovereign Iraqi forces are cooperating — and often interoperating — with Iranian-backed Shiite militias against their common enemy.

The area designated as Amber Zone is now home to two regiments of Iraq’s 9th Armored Divison, each with 35 Abrams MBTs, a contingent from the Iranian Quds Force, Hezbollah, the Asa’ib al-Haq (AAH) and at least one other Shia militia loosely organized under the so-called Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), which is ostensibly under the command and control of the government in Baghdad.

US and Israeli intelligence sources note that Iran has flooded the Iraqi theater with billions of dollars worth of weaponry and ammunition since the Baghdad-sanctioned formation of the PMF in June 2014.

Washington also continues to send US State Department-approved and congressionally notified weaponry to Iraq on condition that US materiel remains under the strict command and control of Iraqi Security Forces (ISF).

But a video posted in January, in which a convoy of US vehicles, including an Abrams MBT, was shown flying the Hezbollah flag as they passed through the Iraqi desert offered circumstantial evidence that Iranian-controlled forces under the PMF umbrella have gained access to US-origin hardware.

Video

At the time, Iraqi officials sought to assure their US counterparts that the convoy in the video was still under ISF control, and that the Hezbollah banner was simply displayed in solidarity for the Shiite militia sacrificing on their behalf.

Similarly, when told about the latest development, a source in Washington speculated that the hybrid tank could have been delivered to the facility by militiamen acting as drivers or subcontractors to the ISF. “It doesn’t necessarily mean that the tank was in direct control of the militias. We simply don’t know,” he said.

Yet another source suggested that the overabundance of Iranian ammunition and the preference many Iraqi soldiers still have for Russian-origin machine guns may have triggered an ad hoc rigging of the US tank for purposes of convenience.

US Central Command headquarters in Tampa, Florida, declined comment on the reported hybrid Abrams MBT or on the constitution of forces in the Amber Zone, referring all queries to the Combined Joint Task Force at Camp Arifjan in Kuwait.

There, US Sgt. Vanessa Kilmer referred Defense News to CJTF’s Media Ops Center, where, after 24 hours, detailed questions submitted to Sgt. First Class Eric Rodriguez were returned with “no additional information on this subject” and a recommendation to contact the Iraqi Ministry of Defense.

A US State Department official said he would need more information to determine whether Iraq could or should be held accountable for any end-use violations.

“We have made clear that the coalition will only support Iraqi efforts against ISIL that are under clear ISF command and control. We have received assurances from the government of Iraq and the Iraqi Security Forces that they will use US equipment in accordance with US law and our bilateral agreements,” the official said.

Section 40A of the US Arms Export Control Act mandates two forms of end use monitoring (EUM): the Blue Lantern program managed by the State Department and the Golden Sentry program delegated to the Pentagon’s Defense Security and Cooperation Agency.

The former focuses on pre-checks before an export license is granted and post-checks to determine that the designated materiel has reached intended end users. The latter, managed by primarily by the Pentagon’s in-country security assistance officers aims to ensure that recipients are using the equipment properly as stipulated in various government-to-government agreements.

“Our mandate to conduct assessments in-country and to visit military installations is agreed upon by the Letter of Offer and Acceptance (LOA), which have notes and provisos that commit the recipients to proper end-use assurances,” a Pentagon official told Defense News in an interview two years ago.

At the time, the Pentagon official said DSCA works in concert with the State Department “in order to try to bring a united front from a US government perspective.”

Retired Israel Air Force Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin, a former head of Israeli military intelligence, said he would not be surprised if Hezbollah forces in Iraq or even Syria had access to frontline American MBTs. “It’s not surprising, because the Iraqi Army and the Shia militias and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Quds Force and some American Special Forces are now fighting against the same enemy,” Yadlin said.

When asked if Abrams tanks in the hands of Hezbollah or other Iranian-controlled militias posed a concern to Israel, the former fighter pilot replied: “The dream of every Israeli helicopter pilot is to see this kind of vehicle against the background of the bare desert.”

Joe Gould reported from Washington and Awad Mustafa reported from Dubai.

Email: bopallrome@defensenews.com, jgould@defensenews.com, amustafa@defensenews.com
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
:dot5:

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20151018/eu--switzerland-election-db4f33581d.html

Swiss voters elect parliament; polls predict rightward tilt

Oct 18, 3:50 AM (ET)

GENEVA (AP) — Swiss voters are casting ballots to elect their parliament and polls show a nationalist party could advance amid widespread concerns about the recent influx of migrants into Europe.

Under Switzerland's arcane, multiparty system that favors stability, the election to two houses of parliament is unlikely to dramatically shift the current broad coalition government policy — even if the nationalist Swiss People's Party advances.

The latest poll by gfs.bern agency for the national broadcaster suggested the People's Party would win about 28 percent, the Social Democrats some 19 percent and the conservative Free Democrats just under 17 percent.

Despite early-voting and mail-in balloting options, polls suggest only about half of registered voters will cast ballots. They already have an important say in government policy because Switzerland regularly holds referendums.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Begs the question of how many they've missed.......

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20151018/eu-turkey-islamic-state-daaecc6429.html

Turkey detains some 50 Syria and Iraq-bound IS suspects

Oct 18, 4:56 AM (ET)

ANKARA, Turkey (AP) — Turkey's state-run news agency says police have conducted pre-dawn raids on 17 locations in Istanbul and detained some 50 people suspected of being linked to the Islamic State group.

Anadolu Agency said those detained Sunday were all foreign nationals and planned to travel to conflict zones in Syria and Iraq. It did not provide information on their nationalities but said they had arrived in Turkey recently and were being monitored.

Last week, two suicide bombings targeting a peace rally in the capital Ankara killed 102 people. Unconfirmed reports say the attacks were carried out by a Turkish cell of the IS group.

Under pressure from its allies, Turkey has been tightening security at its 910-kilometer (570-mile) long border with Syria to prevent IS militants crossing in and out of Syria.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
I wonder how much the PRC can undercut the Russians on price and delivery times....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://thediplomat.com/2015/10/china-wants-to-deepen-military-ties-with-iran/

China Wants To Deepen Military Ties With Iran

A senior Chinese admiral met with Iran’s defense minister in Tehran

By Franz-Stefan Gady
October 17, 2015

1.5k Shares
14 Comments

On October 15, deputy chief of staff of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), Admiral Sun Jianguo, met with Iranian Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan in Tehran to discuss deepening military cooperation between the two countries Reuters reports.

“The aim of this delegation’s visit is to further promote friendship, deepen cooperation and exchange views with Iran on bilateral military ties and issues of mutual concern,” the Chinese admiral said. The visit will furthermore “promote the preservation of international and regional peace and stability,” he added.

According to China Military Online, Admiral Sun Jianguo also met with his Iranian counterpart, chief of staff of the Iranian Armed Forces, Hassan Firouzabadi, discussing means to “deepen pragmatic cooperation in the military field and promote bilateral military relations to a higher level.”

China and Iran maintained close military-to-military contacts throughout the 1980s and 1990s. Among other things, China helped Iran boost its anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) capabilities by selling tactical ballistic and anti-ship cruise missiles (e.g., HY-2 “Silkworm” anti-ship missiles), advanced anti-ship mines, and Houdong fast-attack boats (equipped with anti-ship missiles) to the Islamic Republic.

China also provided technical expertise to Iran by, for example, helping develop Tehran’s indigenous Nasr anti-ship cruise missile. “Chinese design and technology can be seen in many Iranian missile series, from the short-range Oghab and Nazeat missiles to the long-range Shahab 3,” a 2012 RAND study explains.

Beijing moreover offered assistance to Iran’s nuclear program by training Iranian nuclear engineers and helped Iranian master uranium exploration and mining. Between 2000 and 2002, China also delivered a number of C-14 catamaran missile boats, but, as a Jamestown Foundation briefing notes, “the arms relationship essentially ended by 2005.”

Bilateral military-to-military ties continued to decline after 2005 until the early 2010s when a number of symbolic bilateral visits began to reverse the trend.

For example, in March 2013, the Iranian destroyer Sabalan and the helicopter carrier Kharg paid a port visit to Zhangjiagang port in Jiangsu province in China–a visit reciprocated in September 2014 by a visit of two People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) ships, the destroyer Changchun and the frigate Changzhou, to the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas, located in the Strait of Hormuz.

In addition, in October 2014, a first ever visit of an Iranian Navy chief to China occurred discussing anti-piracy cooperation and humanitarian assistance/disaster relief operations among other things.

Thus, the recent visit of Admiral Sun Jianguo has to be put into this wider context of improving Sino-Iranian bilateral military-to-military cooperation. For now, these re-emerging ties still appear to be limited to symbolic gestures and talk. However, since both countries boast significant A2/AD capabilities, any exchanges of military know-how could pose risks for the U.S. military and will, in all likelihood, be watched very carefully by the Pentagon.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
:dot5:

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairw/articles/20151018.aspx

Air Weapons: Poland Demands JASSM Sooner Rather Than On Schedule

October 18, 2015: Poland says it needs 40 AGM-158A JASSM (Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles) it ordered in 2014 immediately and the U.S. is apparently speeding up delivery, especially the training missiles, test and maintenance equipment and special equipment for the Polish F-16s that will use JASSM. The Poles are paying $500 million for the JASSMs and accessories. This order was confirmed in late 2014 and even then there were concerns about Russia. Then as now Poland needs JASSM to deal with modern air defenses Russia is building. Russia is the only real enemy Poland has in the region and Poland wants to be prepared for the worst. Apparently Poland believes the worst is more likely now than in 2014 and the United States agrees. As a member of NATO Poland expects back up if the Russians come after them and JASSM provides a way to discourage or at least slow down Russian aggression.

Australia was the first (in 1999) foreign customer for JASSM but had to wait a while. Such delays are no longer a problem because JASSM finally proved it would work. JASSM was expected to enter production by 2002 but that was delayed frequently by development problems. From 2006 to 2009 the U.S. Department of Defense was on the verge of cancelling the $6 billion JASSM program several times. Lobbying, pleading, large orders from Australia and South Korea, and the growing possibility that the missile would be useful against Iranian, Chinese or North Korean air defense systems, gave the program a few more lives.

The only problem JASSM had was that, well, it often didn't work. Until 2009 the tests had been mostly failures. But the manufacturer was able to identify all the problems, and convinced the government that these were the result of poor manufacturing not some fundamental design flaws. The manufacturing issues, the builder promised, were fixed. Fortunately tests in late 2009 were over 90 percent successful. That kind of good news arrived just in time and JASSM finally entered service. Although the U.S. Air Force ordered the JASSM into full production in early 2004 only a few were produced because of test failures. Air force purchasing plans were cut way back because of the reliability problems, and this delayed shipment of the missiles to combat units until 2011. To help this along the U.S. Air Force ordered 160 JASSM in 2010 at a cost of about $1.5 million each.

JASSM is the third family of GPS guided smart bombs to be developed and is the most expensive. The original JDAM bomb kit (added to 500, 1,000 and 2,000 pound bombs), cost $26,000 each. The longer range JSOW (JDAM with wings and more powerful guidance system), cost $460,000 each. The even longer range JASSM cost over half a million dollars (the 400 kilometer version) to over a million dollars (the 900 kilometer JASSM ER) each. Then there is the SDB (Small Diameter Bomb), a 250 pound JDAM that can also punch through concrete bunkers and other structures. These cost $75,000 each. All these are basically GPS guided smart bombs.

JASSM missiles are 1,045 kg (2,300 pound) weapons that are basically 455 kg (1,000 pound) JDAMS (GPS guided bombs) with a motor added. JASSM was designed to go after enemy air defense systems or targets deep in heavily defended (against air attack) enemy territory. The original reason for buying these was to have something to deal with air defenses of a nation like China. The air force and navy planned to buy over 5,000 JASSM, but there has been opposition in the military and in Congress. The missiles are ten times more expensive than a JADM bomb of the same weight. But the aviators make the argument that many aircraft and pilots would be lost if the air defenses of a nation like, perhaps China, were attacked without using JASSM.

JASSM is stealthy and uses GPS and terminal (infrared) guidance to zero in on heavily defended targets (like air defense sites.) The terminal guidance enables the missile to land within three meters (ten feet) of the aiming point. If there were a war with North Korea, for example, JASSM would be essential to taking out enemy air defenses, or any other targets that have to be hit early in a war (before air defenses can be shut down.) This capability is apparently what attracted the South Koreans, who now have F-15K aircraft that can carry JASSM. It also caught the attention of Poland when Russian began making threatening noises.

JASSM was designed to handle the most modern Russian surface to air missiles, which are also being sold to China. North Korea has older stuff, and can't afford the newer Russian SAMs. But even these older air defenses can be dangerous, and are best addressed with long range missiles. So there is a need for a missile like JASSM, at least one that works. With Russian warplanes and air defense systems now operating in Syria JASSM may be needed there before in East Europe.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
And the FUBAR continues to roll along......

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/18/us-iran-nuclear-usa-idUSKCN0SC0CH20151018

World | Sun Oct 18, 2015 6:25am EDT
Related: World

Iran deal closer to reality as U.S. prepares sanctions waivers

NEW YORK | By Louis Charbonneau

The United States was set to issue conditional sanctions waivers for Iran on Sunday, though it cautioned they will not take effect until Tehran has curbed its nuclear program as required under a historic nuclear deal reached in Vienna on July 14.

Several senior U.S. officials, who spoke to reporters on condition of anonymity, said that despite Washington's move on Sunday, actual implementation of the deal was likely several months away. That means the sanctions relief Tehran is looking forward to is unlikely to come this year.

They said the timing of nuclear-related sanctions relief will depend on the speed at which Iran takes the steps needed to enable the U.N. nuclear watchdog to confirm Tehran's compliance.

"We cannot imagine it taking less than two months," one of the U.S. officials said.

Sunday was so-called "adoption day" for the deal, which came 90 days after Iran, the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China reached an agreement under which most sanctions on Iran would be lifted in exchange for limits on Tehran's nuclear activities.

In addition to Washington's conditional orders to suspend U.S. nuclear-related sanctions, the officials said the United States, China and Iran would release a joint statement on Sunday committing themselves to the redesign and reconstruction of the Arak research reactor so that it does not produce plutonium.

The fate of the Arak reactor was one of the toughest sticking points in the nearly two years of negotiations that led to the July agreement.

Related Coverage
› Germany sees Iran sanctions in place until January at least

Other steps Iran must take to meet the requirements of the deal include reducing the number of uranium-enrichment centrifuges it has in operation, cutting its enriched uranium stocks and answering U.N. questions about past nuclear activities the West suspects were tied to weapons work.

One U.S. official noted that the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency said Iran already has met its obligation to provide answers and access to the agency. The official suggested the quality of answers Iran might have provided to the IAEA was not relevant when it came to deciding whether to press forward with sanctions relief.

Tehran denies allegations from Western powers and their allies that its nuclear program was aimed at developing the capability to produce atomic weapons.

Unilateral U.S. sanctions against Iran not tied to its atomic program, such as those related to human rights, will remain even after the nuclear deal is implemented.

The U.S. officials were asked about Iran's decision to test a ballistic missile a week ago in violation of a U.N. ban that will remain in effect for almost a decade. The United States has said the missile was capable of delivering a nuclear warhead.

The officials reiterated the launch was not a violation of the nuclear deal.

"This is not, unfortunately, something new," a U.S. official said, adding that the missile test should not be seen as an indicator of Iran's willingness to comply with the nuclear deal.

"There is a long pattern of Iran ignoring U.N. Security Council resolutions on ballistic missiles," the official said.

Washington has said it would seek Security Council action against Iran over the missile test.

Once the deal is implemented, Iran will still be "called upon" to refrain from undertaking any work on ballistic missiles designed to deliver nuclear weapons for a period of up to eight years, according to a Security Council resolution adopted in July.

Countries would be allowed to transfer missile technology and heavy weapons to Iran on a case-by-case basis with council approval. However, in July a U.S. official called this provision meaningless and said the United States would veto any suggested transfer of ballistic missile technology to Iran.


(Reporting by Louis Charbonneau; Editing by Paul Simao)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
This is one to watch.....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20151017/ml--egypt-parliament-salafis-ede2d3aaa3.html

In Egypt vote, ultraconservative Islamists try balancing act

Oct 17, 9:19 AM (ET)
By BRIAN ROHAN

(AP) In this Wednesday, Oct. 14, 2015 photo, Salafi volunteers direct voters to their...
Full Image

ALEXANDRIA, Egypt (AP) — Beards without moustaches, the trademark of ultraconservative Islamists, were all the rage at this campaign rally, among both speakers and the men in the audience, while women wearing full-face veils sat on a separate side of a multicolored tent.

Yet the parliament candidates from Egypt's Al-Nour Party giving speeches at the rally hardly referred to religion, a dramatic change for a party that was once one of the strongest advocates for a greater role of Islam in government and society.

In Egypt's first democratic elections in 2012, held after its Arab Spring uprising, Al-Nour won the second largest number of parliamentary seats after the more mainstream Muslim Brotherhood, and for a while it was its close ally. But in 2013, the party backed the army's overthrow of the Brotherhood's Mohammed Morsi, an Islamist who was the country's first freely elected president.

Now, for parliamentary elections that begin this weekend, Al-Nour is attempting a delicate balancing act.

(AP) In this Saturday, Oct. 10 2015 photo, Egyptian women attend a campaign rally for the...
Full Image

It has to maintain its appeal to its ultraconservative base, which still wants to see greater implementation of Islamic Shariah law but is disillusioned with politics after Morsi's ouster or is disgusted with the party's actions. At the same time, it's trying to reach out to the political center, where anti-Islamist sentiment is high, with promises to unify and rebuild a polarized country.

"Progress, education, development, health care," was the message that echoed from the campaign rally packed with some 200 people, held in a tent set up the street of the Raml district in the Mediterranean coastal city of Alexandria Wednesday night.

The 2014 constitution bans religion-based political parties. Al-Nour insists it is not a religious party but rather one with a religious background that focuses on economic and social priorities like fighting endemic unemployment. Its campaign slogan is "Clarity and Ambition," and none of the 17 points in the program it distributed at the rally mentioned religion.

With memories of Morsi's ouster and the bloody crackdown on his supporters still fresh, Al-Nour is viewed as a traitor by the Brotherhood, which just a few years ago was the country's most organized political force.

Now the Brotherhood is banned from public life and declared a terrorist organization. And while Al-Nour may have alienated much of its base, it will be able to compete in parliamentary elections held in the coming weeks because of its support for President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi, the former general who led Morsi's overthrow.

(AP) In this Wednesday, Oct. 14, 2015 photo, Amr Mekky, left, and Ashraf Thabet,...
Full Image

"We're not talking about a democratic context where we can really judge popular sentiment based on how parties do in elections," said Shadi Hamid, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution's Center for Middle East Policy.

"I'm not necessarily talking about wide-scale fraud, but it's also in the lead-up to the election, how much media exposure they are allowed," he said. "How does the party get their message out to a larger audience? There aren't really clear avenues for that. So that's a kind of built-in limit to how well they can do and I think the regime will modulate that depending on what they're comfortable with in terms of Nour's share of the seats."

The government is heralding the elections, which take place in stages lasting through December, as the next step toward democracy, but critics and analysts say the legislature will be little more than a rubber stamp for el-Sissi. Independent monitors will be few, and turnout is expected to be much lower than for votes in recent years.

Founded after the 2011 uprising that toppled longtime autocrat Hosni Mubarak, Al-Nour won about a quarter of the vote in the country's first parliamentary election held later that year. It later broke with the Islamist group, however, accusing it of monopolizing power. Al-Nour's success in 2011 was in part due to its access to a flourishing free media that no longer exists.

Now, media heavyweights, commentators and petitioners have called for a ban on Al-Nour over its religious roots, accusing it of being a Brotherhood front.

(AP) In this Wednesday, Oct. 14, 2015 photo, a Salafi volunteer stands alert during...
Full Image

Amr Mekky, an Al-Nour candidate for the 700,000 voters of Raml district in Alexandria — a city long considered a Salafi stronghold — says such critics are "misguided" and that there's been no official pressure on the party.

"We are above all being attacked by the Brotherhood, who are urging a boycott. Just look at social media," he said at the rally, referring to a slew of Facebook posts describing Al-Nour as stooges of el-Sissi and facilitators of his crackdown on political Islam.

"We want an end to the polarization, and are calling for Egyptians to build the country together, with all parties, youth, women and minorities represented in the next parliament for the security and stability of the country," he said.

Analysts say the party may be overextending itself and seeking to please too disparate an electorate.

The contradictions were on display at the rally. At one point, supporters chanted "Egypt is an Islamic country," although the party remains officially open to Christians and says it has some among its ranks. Later, prominent party supporters led a chant of "Long Live Egypt," el-Sissi's own campaign slogan when he won the presidency last year.

(AP) In this Tuesday, Oct. 6, 2015 photo, an Egyptian woman attends a campaign rally for...
Full Image

The party, which at one time sought to boost the role of Shariah — Islamic law — in Egypt, now says it is content with the country's current constitution, which it backed last year.

The multiple messages could prove perplexing to voters.

"The only people who are going to vote for them are people so committed to the Salafi (movement) and the specific individuals involved — and I don't think there are many of them," said Jonathan Brown, a scholar of Islam at Georgetown University. "The others who will vote for them are people who want to support the local pro-Sissi candidate, basically Sissi supporters who happen to have beards, and that's not the original constituency of the party."

For core supporters like 36-year-old Alaa Ghenim, meanwhile, the party's appeal remains clear: "Islamic Shariah law."

---

Follow Brian Rohan on Twitter at www.twitter.com/brian_rohan

______


For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20151017/ml--egypt-691acf99da.html

Voting begins in Egypt's parliamentary election

Oct 17, 6:19 AM (ET)
By MERRIT KENNEDY

(AP) An Egyptian walks in front of posters of a parliamentary candidate in Giza, just...
Full Image

CAIRO (AP) — Egyptians residing abroad began casting votes Saturday in the country's first parliamentary election since the 2013 military overthrow of Islamist President Mohammed Morsi.

Egypt's state-run news wire MENA said embassies and consulates in 139 countries will be open for two days of voting.

The vote is staggered, with polling in half of Egypt's governorates set to start Sunday. The election will take place in two phases, concluding in early December.

President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi called on Egyptians to vote in a televised speech Saturday.

(AP) Egyptian soldiers carry boxes of ballots at the Giza courthouse in Cairo, Egypt,...
Full Image

"Line up in front of polling stations and plant with your votes the hope for a bright tomorrow for our new Egypt," he said.

Voting will go forward in Egypt under heavy security, in light of regular militant attacks since Morsi's ouster. At least 185,000 military troops will secure the election in the first phase, MENA reported. Interior Ministry spokesman Abu Bakr Abdel-Karim says they will be joined by 180,000 police.

Few candidates have broad recognition or clear platforms, and most have a pro-government bent.

The vote will mark the final step in what has been billed as a transition to democracy. But critics say the next legislature is likely to be a rubber-stamp body that further solidifies the power of el-Sissi, a former general who led Morsi's overthrow.

The vote is also taking place in an atmosphere in which public criticism of the government is strongly discouraged. Virtually the entire media is supportive of el-Sissi and regularly berates critics as traitors or supporters of Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood, which is now officially branded a terrorist group.

Egypt has been without a parliament since it was dissolved by a court ruling in 2012.

The 2011 election, held after the uprising that toppled longtime autocrat Hosni Mubarak, saw candidates from across the political spectrum, from ultra-conservative Islamists to left-wing youths, vying for seats. Egyptians stood in line for hours to cast their votes — many for the first time in their lives — and the Muslim Brotherhood won the largest bloc.

None of the key liberal figures that helped fuel the 2011 uprising, like Nobel Peace laureate Mohamed ElBaradei or former presidential candidate Hamdeen Sabahi, are running in the current elections.

In the face of the government's crackdown and curbed freedoms, lesser known pro-democracy activists who burst onto the political scene in 2011 have either sought exile abroad, withdrawn from public politics or been jailed.

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/16/us-egypt-sisi-business-idUSKCN0SA1FZ20151016

World | Fri Oct 16, 2015 8:04am EDT
Related: World, Egypt

Sisi walks fine line between Egypt's tycoons and generals

CAIRO | By Eric Knecht and Asma Alsharif

When Egyptian general-turned-president Abdel Fattah al-Sisi removed the unpopular Muslim Brotherhood from power in 2013, billionaire Naguib Sawiris promised to invest in his country like never before. Two years on he has no desire to spend.

As Egyptians begin voting on Sunday in parliamentary elections meant to help bring prosperity, this reluctance illustrates the strained relations between Sisi and the top businessmen who so strongly supported his rise to power.

Sisi has ruled by decree in the absence of an elected parliament, doing what successive governments were too scared to do. He has cut energy subsidies that threatened to bankrupt the state and restored some kind of economic stability after the Brotherhood's turbulent year at the helm.

But business leaders worry that the pace of reform has slowed since the president's election last year. They say Sisi seems suspicious of the private sector, instead using the military to oversee infrastructure mega-projects that his critics say will do little to spur long-term economic growth.

Sawiris said in March he would add infrastructure and energy projects to his core telecoms business, but admitted last month that none of the $500 million he pledged had yet been spent.

"We're still sitting on the same cash," he told Reuters. "As I pledged this money for Egypt it will not go out of Egypt... But I’m not a guy who will accept this slowness."

Sisi has been compared with Gamal Abdel Nasser, the army officer who overthrew the monarchy in 1952 and embarked on state projects such as the Aswan High Dam on the Nile which swelled nationalist pride but failed to build a robust economy.

Sisi built an extension to the Suez Canal in just a year and has announced ambitious plans for a new administrative capital.

While reluctant to criticize such ventures, business leaders grumble that his government has failed to deal decisively with more pressing problems, including crippling shortages of energy and foreign currency, discouraging local and foreign investors.

"The general feeling in the business community right now is that the economic vision is non-existent," Tamer Badreddine, chairman of El Badr Plastic Co, a packaging company based in the coastal city of Alexandria, told Reuters.


NEW ORDER

Businessmen complain they are no longer able to influence government policies, unlike in the past.

Life used to be cozy for Egyptian tycoons, especially under former President Hosni Mubarak, an ex-airforce chief who opened up the economy during his final decade in power.

Mubarak's son Gamal, a former investment banker, gave big business access to the upper levels of government, and was widely expected to succeed his father. But all that ended with Mubarak senior's overthrow in a 2011 popular uprising.

Gamal's rise, tainted by allegations of corruption and crony capitalism, had antagonized the generals. They wanted another military man to succeed Mubarak. After the brief period of Islamist rule, they got what they wanted in Sisi.

The military controls vast areas of the economy, overseeing roads and infrastructure construction, and producing everything from bottled water to pasta. The value of this business empire is a secret. Some estimates put it at as much as 40 percent of the economy; Sisi says it is no more than 2 percent.

Many analysts believe the threat to the military's interests led it to allow Mubarak's downfall, even though he was one of one of their own. So Sisi must tread cautiously, making reforms to win over foreign investors without alienating the generals.

"They (big business) were briefly rule makers during the time of Gamal Mubarak, but it didn't last for long," said Amr Adly, a nonresident scholar at the Carnegie Middle East Center. "You have mainly the military, the intelligence and security forces ruling the country directly and indirectly."

As they try to regain their influence, businessmen are campaigning in the polls. Like Mubarak-era officials and provincial notables, they are likely to do well under an electoral system that favors those with cash and connections.

Sawiris, who founded the Free Egyptians Party in 2011, has said his party will use its presence in parliament to hold Sisi to the economic reform pledges made when he was elected.

"Our party has an economic plan. They will push it through the parliament and any government that will not react will be accountable, finally," said Sawiris.

Sisi has made some progress on the economy. It is projected to grow 5 percent in 2015/2016, roughly the same as in 2009/2010 under Mubarak. Unemployment is 12.8 percent but has fallen a little and credit ratings agencies are generally positive on Egypt.

Still, businessmen believe Sisi needs to accelerate reforms, and they want a say in decision-making. Energy subsidy cuts, the introduction of a value-added tax and labor reforms that could trim stifling bureaucracy have faced repeated delays. Changes to the investment code have proven more modest than expected.


WEAK PARLIAMENT

Representation in parliament alone is unlikely to satisfy the business community.

"Decision making is all with the government and the business sector is very far from decision-making," said Hisham Tawfiq, former chairman of Arabia Online Brokerage Company.

To get something done, says Tawfiq, "you must convince someone who has connections to the presidency. By the time that happens, and the president is in a good mood to listen and be convinced, nothing happens".

Some businessmen expect the new lawmakers to be ineffectual. "It's really the government that will put the policies and they will just rubber stamp it," said Gamal Moharam, CEO of MGM Banking and Financial Consultants.

Sisi's government says the mega-projects aim to boost the private sector, with the military merely providing oversight. "The government will only be injecting the infrastructure portions and the rest is for private sector and international developers," Investment Minister Ashraf Salman told businessmen this week.

Sameh Seif Elyazal, a former general who knows Sisi well and heads the largest loyalist coalition running in the election, acknowledges tensions between business and the military.

But he says the army complements the private sector by accelerating the pace of major projects. "We try to reduce costs as our economy is weak and is still suffering a lot. We are talking about saving money so we can use it for other projects," he told Reuters.

"And projects that are with the army take one year (but they) take private companies two and three years. In the end it won't always be this way. That's for sure."


(Additional reporting by Ehab Farouk; Editing by Lin Noueihed, Michael Georgy and David Stamp)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/18/us-indonesia-aceh-violence-idUSKCN0SC0AC20151018

World | Sun Oct 18, 2015 5:13am EDT
Related: World, Indonesia

Hardline Indonesian Muslims call for church closures in Aceh

ACEH SINGKIL, Indonesia


ACEH SINGKIL, Indonesia (Reuters)- - Hardline Muslims in Indonesia's conservative Aceh province on Sunday demanded the local government close 10 Christian churches, just days after a mob burnt down a church, leaving one person dead and several injured.

Tensions are high amongst the ethnically and religiously diverse population of Aceh Singkil district, raising the risk of further religious violence in Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation.

The vast majority of Indonesians practice a moderate form of Islam, but Aceh is the only province that adheres to Islamic Sharia law, putting it at odds with the rest of the country.

"Ten churches have been identified as not having proper permits and should be closed," said Hambali Sinaga, head of the local chapter of the hardline group Islamic Defenders Front, adding that the government had until Oct. 19 to take action.

"We hope there will be no violence again tomorrow," he said.

A mob of hundreds of people burnt down a small church in Aceh Singkil last week, citing a lack of building permits, and forced thousands of Christians to flee to neighboring villages.

One Muslim member of the mob was killed, authorities said last week, adding that at least 10 people had been detained on suspicion of inciting violence.

The government has since deployed over 1,300 police and military personnel, with hundreds more on standby, to patrol the streets and stand guard outside other churches that dot the small palm oil plantations in the district.

"At the moment things are calm but we are on standby for any further incidents," said Saladin spokesman for Aceh police, adding that evacuees had since returned to their homes.

Christian residents of the run-down district attended a service on Sunday right next to the charred remains of their church, under the guard of about a dozen armed security personnel.

Local government officials and religious figures, including from the Christian community, are scheduled to discuss the church closures on Sunday. They were not immediately available for comment.


(Editing by Michael Perry)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/10/pakistan-india-in-naval-and-nuclear.html

October 17, 2015

Pakistan, India in a naval and nuclear arms race

Comments 22
asia, china, future weapons, india, military, navy, nuclear, pakistan, submarines


Pakistan has finalized its long-negotiated submarine deal with China, with four to be built in China and four in Pakistan. Analysts believe the submarines will go a long way toward maintaining a credible conventional deterrent against India, and also largely secure the sea-based arm of Pakistan's nuclear triad.

India is making a credible nuclear strategic triad capability. India’s first ballistic nuclear submarine (SSBN), the INS Arihant (which means destroyer of enemies), has been moved out of harbor for sea trials. The Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) recently tested a 3,000 km range submarine launched ballistic missile (SLBM) named K-4, from a pontoon submerged 30 feet deep, off the coast of Visakhapatnam located on the eastern coast.

China completed a credible nuclear triad in 2014 and China is extending its global reach.

A nuclear triad refers to the nuclear weapons delivery of a strategic nuclear arsenal which consists of three components, traditionally strategic bombers, intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), and

submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs).

Construction of the Pakistan submarines could begin as early as mid-2016.

These submarines have been linked by analysts to securing the sea-based arm of Pakistan's nuclear triad. However, according to recent Chinese media reports, Pakistan's access to the military grade Chinese Beidou-II (BDS-2) satellite navigation network is perhaps of equal importance.

Pakistan has had its land based nuclear missiles. Pakistan has some older bombers and is looking to acquire improved fighter bombers from China and Russia.

There is a Carnegie Endowment for Peace report on Nuclear Dynamics in the Indian Ocean.

* India’s pursuit of a sea-based nuclear strike force is the next logical step in its quest for an assured retaliatory capability.

* To enjoy an effective sea-based deterrent vis-à-vis China, India’s other prospective nuclear adversary, New Delhi has to develop larger SSBNs with greater missile carriage capacity and more powerful nuclear reactors.
* Pakistan’s naval nuclear ambitions are fueled primarily by the sense of a growing conventional, rather than strategic, imbalance between New Delhi and Islamabad.

* By dispersing low-yield nuclear weapons across a variety of naval platforms, Islamabad aims to acquire escalation dominance and greater strategic depth and to reduce the incentives for a preemptive strike on its nuclear assets.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://forexreportdaily.com/2015/10...nuclear-concerns-at-sharif-meeting-next-week/

White House To Raise Nuclear Concerns At Sharif Meeting Next Week

October 18, 2015 By Alex Crown —0 Comments

The newspaper said USA officials were concerned that smaller, short-range nuclear weapons Pakistan created to use against any Indian invasion were easier to steal and to use if they should fall into the wrong hands.

Pakistan’s prime minister Nawaz Sharif will be in Washington, D.C., next week, but the Times reports government officials aren’t optimistic that Pakistan would agree to a deal, especially since it sees the nuclear program as its main defense against India. “And I would anticipate that dialogue would include conversations between the leaders of our two countries”.

New York Times stated that Pakistan’s nuclear programme is the fastest growing in the world and thus is important for the United States to address.

The central factor of the proposal, in accordance to officers and out of doors specialists cited by the Times, can be a rest of the strict controls imposed on Pakistan by the Nuclear Suppliers Group. In this it has been aided by sundry Western non-proliferation experts who believe that the United States could have struck a harder nuclear bargain with India, and not having done that, a compensatory move would be a nuclear deal with Pakistan.

The United States has until now differentiated India ” s case from that of Pakistan, declaring at various times that Pakistan was not eligible for an India-like deal. India has long argued that its nuclear capability gave Pakistan a sense of immunity in conducting terrorist acts against us, without the USA taking cognisance of this fact and acting to curb Pakistan ” s nuclear arsenal and its irresponsible nuclear threats, not as a gesture to us but in pursuance of its own nonproliferation commitments.

It remains unclear what types of guarantees the Pakistanis might provide in exchange for USA support in entering the NSG, the official said.

Those concerns were fed by the revelation a decade ago that one of the founders of Pakistan’s nuclear program was shopping the nuclear technology on the global black market to nations like Iran, North Korea, and Libya.

American officials have told Congress they are increasingly convinced that most of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is under good safeguards, with warheads separated from delivery vehicles and a series of measures in place to guard against unauthorised use. While India made its claim for a waiver from the Nuclear Suppliers Group on the basis of its spotless non-proliferation record, Pakistan’s candidature, ironically, stems from its abysmal record. The risibly titled report, A Normal Nuclear Pakistan, highlighted that with the current rate of fissile material production, Pakistan can, in the next five to 10 years, become the nation with the third largest nuclear arsenal in the world, overtaking China, the United Kingdom and France. It is that problem that Lavoy and others are trying to forestall, along with preventing Pakistan from deploying a few long-range missiles that could reach well beyond India. Pakistan is considered unlikely to accept limits on its program knowing that India has secured a deal without limits, experts said. Moreover, India should insist that Pakistan, as part of the deal, should be asked to negotiate nuclear confidence building measures (CBMs) with India without linking them to conventional arms control. “I know there’s been a lot of public speculation about this (a civilian nuclear deal with Pakistan)”.

Adam Entous and Saeed Shah contributed to this article.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
:dot5:

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://forexreportdaily.com/2015/10...wmaker-we-have-a-right-to-enrich-uranium-too/

UAE to United States lawmaker: We have a right to enrich uranium, too

October 18, 2015 By Tony Alberts —Leave a Comment

Tensions between the UAE and Iran – trade partners and strategic rivals – have risen in recent months after the UAE, home to hundreds of thousands of Iranian expatriates, sent troops to Yemen to bolster the government against the Iranian-allied Houthi group.

In a 2009 agreement with the U.S., the UAE promised not to engage in uranium enrichment or the reprocessing of spent fuel to extract plutonium.

The UAE says it has not formally changed its commitments on its nuclear agreement with the United States.

Nine Iranian teachers, who were arrested on October 7 by the UAE police due to problems with their visas, have been released, says an Iranian official.

According to Al Jazeera, the Sunni Arab Gulf States perceived the nuclear deal with Shiite Iran, as a security threat for the region.

The diplomatic development comes against the backdrop of the detention of nine Iranian teachers in the UAE.

Emirati officials claimed that the teachers did not have a work permit for employment in al-Ain.

Deputy Foreign Minister Hasan Qashqavi is quoted by IRNA Friday as saying that the teachers, who were detained in Al Ain, were released but provided no further details.

“Similarly, the committees require the administration to provide any other information it might have concerning the intentions of allies with respect to their civil nuclear capabilities”, the letter said.

Iran on Sunday had summoned the charge d’affaires of the United Arab Emirates in Tehran to protest at the arrests.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.ndtv.com/world-news/paki...ules-for-civil-n-deal-with-us-experts-1233593

Pakistan Unlikely to Play by Rules for Civil N-Deal with US: Experts

World | Press Trust of India | Updated: October 18, 2015 16:23 IST

Washington: Strongly of the view that Pakistan must restrain the development of its growing nuclear arsenal, eminent experts at top American think-tanks believe that given the country's past record it is unlikely to "play by any rules" to agree to a civil nuclear deal with the US.

"I simply don't believe that Pakistan will be willing to play by any rules or with any transparency on nuclear issues, since it has not done so to date," Alyssa Ayres of American think tank Council on Foreign Relations told PTI.

Ayres, however, said it would be in "everyone's interest to see Pakistan restrain the development of its nuclear weapons."

C Christine Fair, Associate Professor at the Georgetown University, said some years ago she had proposed a civilian nuclear deal that also dealt with Pakistan's use of terrorists as a tool of its foreign policy.

"My argument then was that Pakistan would benefit from such a deal (far more limited than that received by India) only when it met all of the (conditions). I had no illusion it would never meet those conditions while noting that any marginal improvement would be good," Ms Fair said.

"However, by putting this on the table publicly the US would have to acknowledge that if Pakistan is unwilling to give up these behaviours, there is nothing else the US government can do and would have to prepare for a more coercive strategy to manage Pakistan's rogue behaviours, which include nuclear coercion and terrorism as central features of its foreign policy," she said.

Fair said after proposing this concept, she learned that her proposal was raised in Pakistan.

"I was told by a senior Pakistani official that the concept was floated by (former Director General ISI Lt Gen Ahmed Shuja) Pasha and he rejected it. Unfortunately, this has not been made public. So I have complete confidence that Pakistan will never make satisfactory progress on the brackets," Fair said.

Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif is scheduled to visit the US from October 20, and hold talks with President Barack Obama during which the two leaders are expected to discuss the security of Pakistan's nuclear weapons.

Lisa Curtis from The Heritage Foundation, agreed with MS Fair.

"It would be a mistake for the Obama administration to separate the nuclear and counter-terrorism issues in its discussions with Pakistan," she said.

Story First Published: October 18, 2015 16:23 IST
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.lcsun-news.com/story/opi...-iran-deal-nuclear-powers-play-nice/74162700/

After Iran deal, will nuclear powers play nice?

Lawrence S. Wittner, For the Sun-News 9:53 p.m. MDT October 17, 2015

When all is said and done, what the recently approved Iran nuclear agreement is all about is ensuring that Iran honors its commitment under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) not to develop nuclear weapons.

But the NPT — which was ratified in 1968 and which went into force in 1970 — has two kinds of provisions. The first is that non-nuclear powers forswear developing a nuclear weapons capability. The second is that nuclear-armed nations divest themselves of their own nuclear weapons.

Article VI of the treaty is quite explicit on this second point, stating: “Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control.”

What has been the record of the nuclear powers when it comes to compliance with the NPT?

The good news is that there has been some compliance. Thanks to a variety of nuclear arms control and disarmament agreements negotiated among the major nuclear powers, plus some unilateral action, the world’s total nuclear weapons stockpile has been reduced by more than two- thirds.

On the other hand, 45 years after the NPT went into effect, nine nations continue to cling to about 16,000 nuclear weapons, thousands of which remain on hair-trigger alert. These nations not only include the United States and Russia (which together possess more than 90 percent of them), but Britain, France, China, Israel, India, Pakistan, and North Korea. If their quarrels — of which there are many — ever get out of hand, there is nothing to prevent these nations from using their nuclear weapons to lay waste to the world on a scale unprecedented in human history.

Equally dangerous, from the standpoint of the future, is that these nations have recently abandoned negotiating incremental nuclear disarmament agreements and have plunged, instead, into programs of nuclear weapons “modernization.” In the United States, this modernization —which is projected to cost $1 trillion over the next 30 years — will include everything from ballistic missiles to bombers, warheads to naval vessels, cruise missiles to nuclear weapons factories. In Russia, the government is in the process of replacing all of its Soviet era nuclear weapons systems with new, upgraded versions. As for Britain, the government has committed itself to building a new nuclear-armed submarine fleet called Successor, thereby continuing the nation’s nuclear status into the second half of the twenty-first century. Meanwhile, as the Arms Control Association recently reported, China, India, and Pakistan “are all pursuing new ballistic missile, cruise missile, and sea-based delivery systems.”

Thus, despite the insistence of the nuclear powers that Iran comply with the NPT, it is pretty clear that these nuclear-armed countries do not consider themselves bound to comply with this landmark agreement, signed by 189 nations. Some of the nuclear powers, in fact, have been quite brazen in rejecting it. Israel, India and Pakistan have long defied the NPT — first by refusing to sign it and, later, by going ahead and building their own nuclear weapons. North Korea, once a signatory to the treaty, has withdrawn from it.

In the aftermath of the Iranian government’s agreement to comply with the treaty, would it not be an appropriate time to demand that the nuclear-armed nations do so?

At the least, the nuclear nations should agree to halt nuclear weapons “modernization” and to begin negotiating the long-delayed treaty to scrap the 16,000 nuclear weapons remaining in their arsenals. Having arranged for strict verification procedures to ensure that Iran does not develop nuclear weapons, they should be familiar with procedures for verification of their own nuclear disarmament.

After all, isn’t sauce for the goose also sauce for the gander?

Dr. Lawrence Wittner, syndicated by PeaceVoice, is professor of history emeritus at SUNY-Albany.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://thefederalist.com/2015/10/15...ur-greatest-national-security-threat/?ref=yfp

National Security

No, Seth MacFarlane, Climate Change Is Not Our Greatest National Security Threat

This is getting out of hand. Do Democrats even understand national security?

By Mollie Hemingway
October 15, 2015


Last night, Hollywood celebrity Seth MacFarlane introduced Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) at a fundraiser. He explained his support of the spry 74-year-old democratic socialist who is giving Hillary Clinton a run for her money in early primary states:



“I wanna tell you the moment when for me Bernie Sanders won last night’s debate. [applause] The question was asked, ‘What is the greatest national security threat to the United States?’ The other candidates gave answers like the crisis in the Middle East, nuclear Iran, ISIS, cyber-warfare, and offensive tweets — all legitimate threats, to be sure. But Sen. Sanders was only person on that stage who gave the correct answer: climate change.

Of all of our biggest challenges, from social inequality to health care, this is the one that must go immediately to the front of the line. Because it is the only one with a non-negotiable timetable.”


MacFarlane went on to sound, in both nuance and substance, much like an antagonistic character out of an Ayn Rand novel, but with far better jokes. At one point he suggested that energy companies be forced “almost overnight” from producing fossil fuels into wind and solar production and that this would simply require “arm twisting” and a smidge of diplomacy. He said that if Franklin Delano Roosevelt could force auto companies into war production overnight, it would be no less necessary for President Sanders to do the same with regard to our new “enemy,” which is climate change.


In terms of discussion of current national security threats during the debate, not much time was allotted. Literally, not much time:


ANDERSON COOPER: Very quickly, 30 seconds for each of you. Governor Chafee, who or what is the greatest national security threat to the United States? I want to go down the line.

Thirty seconds! It sounded like a joke, almost.

Lincoln Chafee said the chaos in the Middle East, which he believes, interestingly enough “started” with the Iraq invasion. Martin O’Malley’s biggest threat was a three-parter: nuclear Iran, ISIL and … climate change. Clinton said the spread of nuclear weapons. Webb said that our greatest long-term threat is China, our greatest short-term security threat is cyber warfare, and our greatest military-operational threat is resolving problems in the Middle East. Here is what Sanders said:


SANDERS: The scientific community is telling us that if we do not address the global crisis of climate change, transform our energy system away from fossil fuel to sustainable energy, the planet that we’re going to be leaving our kids and our grandchildren may well not be habitable. That is a major crisis.


OK, so let’s quickly note the silliness of saying the planet will be uninhabitable for either our kids or our grandchildren. Uninhabitable is a word with a meaning and that meaning is “not capable of being lived in.” I don’t know if Sanders’ son has any kids but he was born in the 1960s. This planet is not uninhabitable, obviously. If it truly would be uninhabitable for our grandkids, or even great-great-great-grandkids that would mean that things were so obviously far gone that nothing we could do would stop it. This far-fetched alarmism is one reason why so many have trouble taking claims of climate change seriously.


And while global warming predictions abound — here’s 2009 footage of former Vice President Al Gore predicting, based on computer models, that the entire northern polar ice caps would very likely be ice free in 5-7 years (spoiler: nope, of course) — most climate change activists are into longer-term predictions. Just yesterday the Natural Resources Defense Council published this interactive map that claimed to show “what kind of sea-level rise we’re in for under different emissions scenarios.” And in the notes section it gives a pretty staggering disparity for when we might reach those predicted levels. One article said it could be 200 years or so and another said 2,000 years. Two millennia.


As the NRDC note to the map itself said, “It is easier to estimate how much ice will eventually melt from a certain amount of warming, than how quickly it will melt, which involves more unknowns.” You don’t say! Whether or not you believe that the science is settled (heck, whether or not you believe it is possible for science to be “settled”), the fact is that when it comes to predicting the actual results of climate change, the uncertainty is extremely high. The uncertainty of various computer model predictions is so dramatic that it’s almost funny, in fact. And nobody has any idea whether any of the policy proposals would have any effect, much less any sizable effect, on the problems predicted by many regarding climate change.


But I know that people get very upset about climate change, and they cling to their beliefs about it. Fine. Can we just acknowledge that it’s not an appropriate answer to a question about national security?


Listen, something can be important and not be an appropriate response to a question about national security:


National security is a corporate term covering both national defense and foreign relations of the U.S. It refers to the protection of a nation from attack or other danger by holding adequate armed forces and guarding state secrets. The term national security encompasses within it economic security, monetary security, energy security, environmental security, military security, political security and security of energy and natural resources.

Specifically, national security means a circumstance that exists as a result of a military or defense advantage over any foreign nation or group of nations, or a friendly foreign relations position, or a defense position capable of successfully protesting hostile or destructive action. In Cole v. Young, 351 U.S. 536 (U.S. 1956), the court observed that ‘the term “national security’ in the Summary Suspension Act (64 Stat 476), authorizing the heads of specified federal agencies to summarily dismiss federal employees upon a determination that dismissal is necessary or advisable in the interest of the ‘national security,’ is used in a definite and limited sense and relates only to those activities which are directly concerned with the nation’s safety, as distinguished from the general welfare.


Armed forces. State secrets. A military or defense advantage over any foreign nation.


People who are very worried about a given problem may like to refer to it as “the enemy,” but that is a figure of speech. Just like when Lyndon Baines Johnson referred to poverty as an “enemy” that we had to raise armies to fight against. And every bit of presidential rhetoric likes to cast policy goals in terms of heroes, enemies, and victims. So I get referring to climate change in similar language — it’s a tried and true rhetorical device.


But there’s a difference between saying that poverty, climate change, high abortion rates, mass shootings, educational ignorance, racial conflict, moral turpitude, growth of the administrative state, intolerance of religious differences, heroin, obesity, and whatever other pet issue you have are bad, real bad, and saying that they are our biggest national security threat.


Each of these things might even have a component dealing with national security, some bigger than others. Some contractors know there’s money to be made in them thar climate change hills and are pushing our military industrial complex to spend lots of cash on adaptation to climate changes that might show up in 100 years or so. Some contractors know there’s money to be made elsewhere in the military-industrial complex. That’s what they do. And, heck, who knows, maybe they’re right. And also maybe our military spends way too much time on things that have nothing to do with their actual national security mission. OK, not maybe, but certainly.


And yes, I know that various military officials sometimes rattle on about climate change. It’s not just under Obama. There was a report that the Pentagon, under President George W. Bush, believed that “major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a ‘Siberian’ climate by 2020,” during which time, “Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.” This is the type of prediction that sounded ever-so-marginally less stupid in 2004 than it does in 2015 and makes Al Gore’s polar ice caps prediction seem downright sensible. Or, again, maybe the climate alarmism is totally reasonable and things are going to go seriously and apocalyptically ass over teakettle for European cities sometime in the next four years. Go to Oktoberfest in Munich while you can!


Anyway, when you’re asked a question about national security, keep it in the real national security world.

Revisit MacFarlane’s comment. He listed two other challenges that climate change was more important than: social inequality and health care. Why? Because, he said, the timeline on climate change was more important. Let’s leave aside the wisdom of viewing the centralized state as the solution to any of these problems and simply acknowledge that social inequality, health care, and climate change aren’t national security issues! Social inequality may be super important to MacFarlane, who has a net worth of $150 million and is #86 on Forbes magazine’s list of the wealthiest 100 celebrities. It may be one of the things he thinks is really quite problematic. But his list is a list of either domestic problems or global problems that are not warehoused in the national security complex.


Because when we want to know what a candidate thinks about national security, that’s a cue to talk about armed forces, spy networks, and diplomacy. Talking about climate change, as Sanders and Obama have done in recent days when asked about it, comes off like an attempt to pretend that an unsafe world is safe.


And unless MacFarlane, Sanders, and their friends want to use armed forces and spies and whatnot against the billions of people on this planet who benefit from fossil fuels, they need to stop talking about it as a national security threat. And now that I’ve written it that way, I’m scared that this is precisely the progressive dream of the future.


But in the real world, with real problems in and with regard to China, North Korea, Russia, Iran, and elsewhere, we need our political leaders to be serious and sober about when and whether to engage and how best to protect our country. Wishcasting these real national security threats away in favor of any other problem doesn’t actually make them go away. Conflating national security with climate change is detrimental to both issues.


Mollie Ziegler Hemingway is a senior editor at The Federalist. Follow her on Twitter at @mzhemingway
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/15/us-russia-saudi-oil-idUSKCN0S92F120151015

Landing | Thu Oct 15, 2015 2:01pm EDT

Saudi Arabia targets Russia in battle for European oil market

LONDON/MOSCOW | By Dmitry Zhdannikov, Gleb Gorodyankin and Reem Shamseddine


From global majors such as Shell and Total to more modest Polish energy firms, oil refiners in Europe are cutting their longstanding use of Russian crude in favor of Saudi grades as the world's top exporters fight for market share.

Russia has for years been muscling in on Asian markets where Saudi Arabia was once the unchallenged dominant supplier. But now Riyadh is retaliating in Moscow's backyard of Europe with aggressive price discounting.

This has nothing to do with Western sanctions imposed on Russia over Ukraine, which apply to energy industry equipment but not to oil or gas itself. Instead it is a commercial battle for customers as both exporters ramp up their output despite weak world oil prices.

This is likely to complicate further a dialogue between Moscow and the OPEC exporters' group on tackling the global oil glut, with joint production cuts already looking elusive.

Trading sources told Reuters that majors such as Exxon, Shell, Total and Eni have been all buying more Saudi oil for their refineries in Western Europe and the Mediterranean in the past few months at the expense of Russian oil.

"I'm buying less and less Russian crude for my refineries in Europe simply because Saudi barrels are looking more attractive. It is a no brainer for me as Saudi crude is just cheaper," said a trading source with one major, who asked not to be named because he is not allowed to speak to the media.

Riyadh traditionally focused on the U.S. and Asian markets, leaving Moscow as a major supplier to Europe, especially the eastern countries that were once part of the Soviet bloc.

But Russia's most powerful oil executive, Rosneft chief Igor Sechin, said on Tuesday that Saudi Arabia had started supplying ex-communist Poland at "dumping" prices. Then on Wednesday, Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak described the Saudi entry into eastern European markets was the "toughest competition".

Trading sources said at least one cargo reached the Polish port of Gdansk in September and two more could come in October, to be processed by refiners PKN Orlen and Lotos.

Two trading sources said Saudi Arabia was looking at storing crude in Gdansk so that it can supply eastern European customers more quickly, just as it has done for years for western European clients from ports in the Netherlands or Belgium.

One trader said supplies from Gdansk could be sent to Germany to compete with Russian crude sent down the Soviet-built Druzhba (Friendship) pipeline.

The Baltic state of Lithuania, once a Soviet republic, is also looking to diversify its energy supplies. Lithuanian energy minister Rokas Masiulis told Reuters on Wednesday that the country is in talks with U.S. liquefied natural gas company Cheniere Energy Inc over possible imports as it tries to cut its dependence on Russian supplier Gazprom.


LOCKING MARKET SHARE

The battle may raise suspicions in Moscow that Riyadh is trying to punish the Kremlin for supporting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, an enemy of Saudi Arabia, most recently with Russian air strikes on rebel groups.

In fact, Moscow and Riyadh were already locked in another battle for market share in Asia long before Syria slid into civil war after 2011 or the West imposed the sanctions on Russia last year.

Over the past decade, Russia has diverted as much as a third of its oil exports to Asia by building gigantic pipelines into mainland China and its Pacific coast.

"There is a perception that because Russia has been pushed from the West, they have been turning to the East. In fact, Russia has been actively locking market share in Asia for a long time," said Seth Kleinman, the head of energy research at Citigroup.

Kleinman said the competition has become so intense in Asian markets in recent months that Saudi Arabia had to reduce supplies there in the face of growing deliveries from rivals such as Russia, Kuwait and Angola.

Meanwhile, the low oil prices have spurred demand in Europe after years of lackluster performance.

"For the first time in many years the European market looks more interesting than the Asian market. So Middle Eastern producers are looking to take that opportunity," a senior Iraqi oil source told Reuters.

The competition is likely to intensify in the next few months as Iran, which supplied between five and 10 percent of Europe's crude before 2012, is set to return with large volumes if and when Western sanctions on Tehran are lifted.

"The Saudis want to secure the market share before Iran comes back," said a trading source with an oil major.


(Additional reporting by Olesya Astakhova, Writing by Dmitry Zhdannikov; editing by David Stamp)
 

vestige

Deceased
so much for nuclear non proliferation ideas

looks rosy if you are deep in your shelter and a gas tank away from the closest town

(obligatory bump)
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
10/18/2015 - Iran Nuclear Deal Formally Adopted by Obama Administration
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...Deal-Formally-Adopted-by-Obama-Administration

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.turkishweekly.net/2015/10/19/news/iran-p5-1-announce-implementation-of-nuclear-deal/

Iran, P5+1 announce implementation of nuclear deal

Middle East
October 19, 2015

Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammad-Javad Zarif andEuropean Union (EU) foreign affairs chief Federica Mogherini issued a joint statement on Sunday, announcing the start of the implementation of the nuclear deal reached between Iran and the six world powers in July, according to Iran's Foreign Ministry website.

Now, Iran will start implementing its obligations pertaining to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), and the UN nuclear watchdog will prepare the means to monitor Iran's measures, the statement read. The report did not specify where the statement was released.

According to the nuclear agreement between Iran and the world powers reached on July 14 in the Austrian capital of Vienna, Iran would improve the transparency of its nuclear plan, downsize its capacity for uranium enrichment and do changes in the structure of its heavy water reactor in exchange for international and Western sanctions relief.

Based on the agreement, the nuclear deal should have gone into effect on Oct. 18, or the so-called the Adoption Day, 90 days for the UN Security Council endorsed the Iranian deal.

Alson on Sunday, Iran notified Yukiya Amano, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), that it will provisionally apply the Additional Protocol to its Safeguards Agreement when the nuclear deal comes into effect, the IAEA announced in a statement.

In Washington, U.S. President Barack Obama on Sunday ordered his administration to take steps to lift sanctions on Iran, part of the nuclear agreement.

"I hereby direct you to take all necessary steps to give effect to the U.S. commitments with respect to sanctions" on Iran, Obama said in a memorandum to U.S. secretaries of state, energy, commerce and the treasury.

The steps will take effect upon confirmation by the Secretary of State that Iran has met its commitments under the JCPOA, Obama said in the memorandum issued by the White House.

But the sanction on Iran will not be lifted immediately on the Adoption Day, and theUnited States said that no relief from the sanctions will take place until the IAEA verifies that Iran has fully complied with the terms of the agreement.

On July 14, Iran reached the JCPOA with P5+1 over its controversial nuclear program after more than 18 months of marathon talks.

Under the deal, all of the nuclear-related sanctions imposed on Iran will be lifted if the Islamic republic is proved to abide by the deal over the next 10 years step-by-step.

Source: Xinhua
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20151019/as--china-economy-ae49adbf1d.html

China's economic growth declines to 6-year low

Oct 19, 2:50 AM (ET)
By JOE McDONALD

(AP) In this Oct. 6, 2015 file photo, a worker tosses boards onto the back of a...
Full Image

BEIJING (AP) — China's economy decelerated in the latest quarter but stronger spending by consumers who are emerging as an important pillar of growth helped to avert a deeper downturn.

The world's second-largest economy grew by 6.9 percent in the three months ended in September, the slowest since early 2009 in the aftermath of the global financial crisis, data showed Monday. That was down from the previous quarter's 7 percent.

Weakening trade and manufacturing have fueled concern about possible job losses and unrest. The communist government has cut interest rates five times since last November in an effort to shore up growth.

The latest data highlight the two-speed nature of China's economy in the midst of a marathon effort by the Communist Party to nurture self-sustaining growth based on domestic consumption and reduce reliance on trade and investment. Manufacturers are shrinking and shedding millions of jobs while consumer-oriented businesses expand.

(AP) In this Oct. 11, 2015 photo, a woman works with equipment in a factory manufacturing...
Full Image

In September, growth in factory output slowed to 5.7 percent from August's 6.1 percent. At the same time, retail sales growth rose to 10.9 percent from July's 10.5 percent. E-commerce spending leaped ahead, rising 36 percent in the third quarter over a year earlier.

"Continued downward pressures from real estate and exports caused GDP growth to drop," said Louis Kuijs of Oxford Economics in a report. "But robust consumption and infrastructure prevented a sharper slowdown."

The decline in Chinese heavy industry and construction has depressed demand for oil, iron ore and other commodities, dragging on growth in Australia, Brazil and other supplier countries.

At the same time, rising Chinese incomes are propelling demand for European wines, wheat and fresh fruit from Australia and the United States, medical technology and other imports.

Private sector forecasters have cut their outlook for China's growth this year to between 6.5 and 7 percent. That still would be the second-strongest of any major country, surpassed only by India, where the International Monetary Fund expects 7.5 percent. It would be more than double the 3.1 percent growth forecast by the IMF for the United States.

Much of China's 5-year-old slowdown has been self-imposed but an unexpectedly sharp decline over the past year, due in part to weak demand for Chinese exports, prompted concern the downturn might be deepening too sharply. Forecasters expect Beijing to cut interest rates further and take other steps to shore up growth.

The IMF expects growth to slow to 6.3 percent next year and 6 percent in 2017.

"We think there is further slowing to go," said Wei Li of Commonwealth Bank of Australia in a report. "Although we do not foresee China falling into a crisis, the economic growth rate is set to stay lower for longer."

Communist leaders set an official growth target of "about 7 percent" for this year but have tried to discourage investors and the public from focusing on that figure. The top economic official, Premier Li Keqiang, said in September he would accept growth below that level so long as the economy keeps creating enough new jobs.

"In order to restructure, the economy will face some downward pressure," said Sheng Laiyun, a spokesman for the Chinese statistics agency.

"China does not lack growth momentum," said Sheng at a news conference. "Despite a slowdown in the industrial sector, China's services sector is growing rapidly."

Already, e-commerce, restaurants and other services for China's own consumers account for 41.7 percent of the country's employment, well ahead of manufacturing's 34.7 percent share, according to government data.

The economy's latest performance was slightly better than forecast, defying expectations the collapse of a stock market boom the previous quarter would drag down consumer spending.

September imports plunged in dollar value but analysts said that was due to lower prices for oil and other commodities. They noted the volume of imports of iron ore, oil and some other raw materials increased slightly, suggesting construction and manufacturing might be accelerating.

Exports in the first nine months of the year were down 1.9 percent from a year earlier, threatening the health of manufacturers that employ millions of workers. Weak global demand makes it unlikely Beijing can meet its trade growth target of 6 percent for this year.

Some forecasters suggest Beijing overstates growth and the true rate might be as low as 5 percent.

"Today's data suggest that while the official GDP figures continue to overstate the actual pace of growth in China by a significant margin, underlying conditions are subdued but stable," said Julian Evans-Pritchard of Capital Economics in a report.

---

National Bureau of Statistics of China (in Chinese): www.stats.gov.cn
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20151019/ml-egypt-election-70e70885dc.html

Egypt attempts to boost election turnout with a half-day off

Oct 19, 5:29 AM (ET)

(AP) An Egyptian woman marks her ballot as her child peeks from the booth inside a...
Full Image

CAIRO (AP) — Egyptian authorities granted government workers a half-day off on Monday in an attempt to bolster low turnout in the country's election for the first legislature since the last one was dissolved in 2012.

Monday is the second day of voting in 14 provinces, including Cairo's twin city of Giza and the Mediterranean port city of Alexandria. Voting in Egypt's other 13 provinces, including the capital Cairo, will take place next month.

Final results are expected in December and the 596-seat chamber is expected to hold its inaugural session later in the month.

The government has not released turnout figures for voting on Sunday. State media, however, acknowledged that turnout was generally weak, but again gave no figures. Associated Press reporters who toured polling centers on Sunday in several districts of Giza said there were no long voters' lines such as there were in the multiple elections held since in the 2011 ouster of longtime autocrat Hosni Mubarak. They said women and elderly people dominated those who cast their ballots.

(AP) An Egyptian woman casts her vote during the first round of the parliamentary...
Full Image

The decision to give government workers a half-day off on Monday reflected deep concern over the turnout, which analysts and observers have said would not exceed 10 percent. The state-owned Al-Ahram daily said the government appealed to private businesses to ensure that employees are able to get off work and vote.

The low turnout continued on Monday morning. Private broadcaster CBC aired simultaneous live footage from 16 polling centers from various parts of the country that were mostly empty. The channel played advertisements between segments appealing to Egyptians to go out and vote.

In the Giza district of Dokki, there were no lines and only a slow trickle of voters by late Monday morning at one polling center.

"We were expecting more than this. This is our country, and we have to stand by it," said retiree Fatima Salam. "Unfortunately the youth aren't coming out. Us, old people, are."

The next parliament is widely expected to support, rather than challenge, the policies of President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi who is struggling to revive the economy, crush an Islamist insurgency and play an assertive political and military role in a turbulent Middle East. Such a chamber would harken back to the Mubarak-era, when election after election during his 29-year rule were rigged or manipulated to give his National Democratic Party an overwhelming majority in what amounted to rubberstamp legislatures.

Ibrahim Eissa, a prominent columnist who supported the 2013 ouster of Islamist President Mohammed Morsi by el-Sissi, then military chief, lamented in an article Monday that little has changed in Egypt since Mubarak's ouster by the January 2011 uprising, arguing that the "absence of politics" in the public sphere has left el-Sissi in sole charge of just about everything in the country.

The low turnout, he argued, underlined the political apathy among Egyptians.

"We are back to the old, pre-January (2011) scene, when people saw no point in elections, parliament or democracy," he wrote on the front page of the daily Al-Maqal. "This will take us to where it took the old (Mubarak) regime. Anyone who cannot see that is, without an iota of hesitation, blind."
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
:dot5:

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20151018/eu--switzerland-election-db4f33581d.html

Swiss voters elect parliament; polls predict rightward tilt

Oct 18, 3:50 AM (ET)

GENEVA (AP) — Swiss voters are casting ballots to elect their parliament and polls show a nationalist party could advance amid widespread concerns about the recent influx of migrants into Europe.

Under Switzerland's arcane, multiparty system that favors stability, the election to two houses of parliament is unlikely to dramatically shift the current broad coalition government policy — even if the nationalist Swiss People's Party advances.

The latest poll by gfs.bern agency for the national broadcaster suggested the People's Party would win about 28 percent, the Social Democrats some 19 percent and the conservative Free Democrats just under 17 percent.

Despite early-voting and mail-in balloting options, polls suggest only about half of registered voters will cast ballots. They already have an important say in government policy because Switzerland regularly holds referendums.

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...nister-s-seat-in-question-on-svp-election-win

Swiss Finance Minister’s Seat in Doubt on SVP Election Gains

by Catherine Bosley
t cbSwiss

October 18, 2015 — 12:24 PM PDT
Updated on October 19, 2015 — 2:00 AM PDT

Anti-immigrant SVP got biggest vote share in parliament ballot

Blue Arrow
Multi-party government to be decided by parliament on Dec. 9

The tenure of Finance Minister Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf is hanging in the balance after the anti-immigrant Swiss People’s Party, from which she acrimoniously split nearly a decade ago, increased its share of the vote in Switzerland’s parliamentary election.

The SVP, which has spearheaded referendums to ban construction of mosque minarets and reduce immigration, won a record number of lower house seats in Sunday’s ballot and is claiming the second post in government it lost in 2008 when Widmer-Schlumpf left the party.

As a minister, the 59-year-old played a key role in the bailout of bank UBS Group AG and in the U.S. dispute over offshore bank accounts. She also made international headlines in 2010 for her decision not to extradite Oscar-winning film-maker Roman Polanski. Yet her Bourgeois Democratic Party, or BDP, saw its share of the vote slip to 4.1 percent from 5.4 percent in 2011, giving ammunition to critics who contend it is too small to deserve to be in government.

“The pressure now is huge on Widmer-Schlumpf, it’ll be a nail biter,” said Michael Hermann, a political scientist who heads Zurich-based research institute Sotomo, adding that there were a lot of moving parts.

‘Tactical Games’

The multi-party government, which operates on the basis of consensus with dissenters not voicing their views in public, will be voted upon by parliament in secret balloting on Dec. 9. Membership in the body is determined on the basis of proportionality, as well as strategic deals among parties.

“The tactical games must now stop,” SVP President Toni Brunner told television SRF. “I urgently demand that the three biggest parties each have two representatives, with the fourth biggest getting one.”

The SVP said it would decide on a candidate on Nov. 20. Names touted for a ministerial role include lawmakers Hansjoerg Knecht, Thomas de Courten, Guy Parmelin, Heinz Brand and Hannes Germann, according to NZZ am Sonntag. Heinz Taennler and Albert Roesti may also be in the running, AWP reported on Monday. SVP Defense Minister Ueli Maurer has said he wants to remain in the executive body.

Still, the SVP’s bid could get thwarted by the Christian Democrats, or CVP, also looking to obtain a second seat, or by a coalition among parties to keep Widmer-Schlumpf in power and stymie the SVP’s advance. That happened in 2011, when the BDP won fewer votes than the Green Party and Widmer-Schlumpf managed to stay on in government.

No Reason

Alternatively, the SVP could try to take one of two seas of the pro-business Free Democrats, currently held by Foreign Minister Didier Burkhalter and Economy Minister Johann Schneider-Ammann. The Social Democrats could back this scenario because it would appease the SVP in its complaint of being underrepresented while the government as a whole wouldn’t have a more conservative bent.

“I see absolutely no reason to vote a minister out of office who has done very well, who has moved Switzerland forward, who has worked well with others,” SP President Christian Levrat, told SRF television.

According to a survey conducted for SRF after polling stations closed on Sunday, 38 percent -- a plurality --- favor the status quo with Widmer-Schlumpf retaining her seat. Twenty-six percent want the BDP’s seat going to the SVP, with the remainder of respondents backing still other constellations.

Widmer-Schlumpf had already made a decision about her future in government before Sunday’s elections, newspaper Schweiz am Sonntag reported, citing people close to the finance minister. It didn’t specify what decision she made.

“The big question will be whether Widmer-Schlumpf stands for reelection -- if she does she stands a good chance of being chosen again, though it’s certainly gotten tight,” said Georg Lutz, professor of political science at the University of Lausanne. “Also, the legitimacy problem has gotten bigger, since her party lost.”

‘Very Difficult’

Who gets what ministry will be determined after the Dec. 9 parliamentary vote. In the past members of the government have switched ministries. Widmer-Schlumpf initially was justice minister, while CVP’s Doris Leuthard was economy minister before overseeing infrastructure and transportation.

Still, because Switzerland’s government is consensus based, a new finance minister wouldn’t necessarily translate into a new course of action. Additionally, the Swiss system of popular initiatives, which allows voters to have a direct say on topics from taxation to immigration to executive pay, means that the government stance regularly is determined by plebiscites.

In the next four years there may be referendums on domestic banking secrecy, tax privileges for billionaires, basic income and on expelling foreigners who have committed a crime. Additionally, the new government needs to find a way of implementing a 2014 plebiscite -- spearheaded by the SVP -- to limit immigration from the European Union without nullifying a treaty package with the bloc that covers a host of topics ranging from air traffic to agriculture.

“I think it will be very, very difficult for Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf to be reelected,” said said Thomas Schaeubli, a political risk analyst at Wellershoff & Partners Ltd. in Zurich. “But this governmental vote is such a black box, it’s hard to say.”


Blue Dots
Read this next
Blue Arrow
Anti-Immigrant SVP Soars in Swiss Vote on Foreigner Anxiety

Blue Arrow
Swiss Go to Polls in Parliament Vote as Immigration Tops Agenda

Blue Arrow
Switzerland's National Elections: Everything You Need to Know



Read More Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf,
Democrats,
Switzerland,
Heinz Taennler,
Immigration,
UBS Group AG,
Democratic Party,
Michael Hermann,
Ueli Maurer,
Green Party

_____


For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.usnews.com/news/world/ar...ion-results-confirm-nationalist-party-victory

Official results in Swiss legislative election confirm victory by nationalists

Associated Press
Oct. 19, 2015 | 6:24 a.m. EDT

GENEVA (AP) — The Swiss federal government has confirmed a dominant performance in legislative elections by a nationalist party that seized on widespread concerns about mass migration in Europe, marking a shift to the political right.

Official results released Monday showed that the anti-immigration Swiss People's Party collected 29.4 percent of the vote, an increase of nearly 3 percentage points from the previous election to the lower house of parliament, the National Council, in 2011.

The Social Democrats were a distant second, virtually unchanged at 18.8 percent. The pro-business Free Democrats increased by 1.3 percentage points to 16.4 percent.

Turnout was 48.4 percent. Analysts cited voter fatigue for that relatively low figure.


The result was likely to weigh heavily on National Council voting for the seven-member executive Federal Council on Dec. 9.
 
Last edited:

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Well no surprise there......

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...mpanies-persist-despite-leader-pledge-report/

National Security

Chinese hack attacks against US companies persist despite leader's pledge, report says

Published October 19, 2015
·Associated Press

WASHINGTON – Chinese hacking attempts on American corporate intellectual property have occurred with regularity over the past three weeks, suggesting that China almost immediately began violating its newly minted cyberagreement with the United States, according to a newly published analysis by a cybersecurity company with close ties to the U.S. government.

The Irvine, California-based company, CrowdStrike, says it documented seven Chinese cyberattacks against U.S. technology and pharmaceuticals companies "where the primary benefit of the intrusions seems clearly aligned to facilitate theft of intellectual property and trade secrets, rather than to conduct traditional national security-related intelligence collection."

"We've seen no change in behavior," said Dmitri Alperovich, a founder of CrowdStrike who wrote one of the first public accounts of commercial cyberespionage linked to China in 2011.

One attack came on Sept. 26, CrowdStrike says, the day after President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping announced their deal in the White House Rose Garden. CrowdStrike, which employs former FBI and National Security Agency cyberexperts, did not name the corporate victims, citing client confidentiality. And the company says it detected and thwarted the attacks before any corporate secrets were stolen.

A senior Obama administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not allowed to discuss the matter publicly, said officials are aware of the report but would not comment on its conclusions. The official did not dispute them, however.

The U.S. will continue to directly raise concerns regarding cybersecurity with the Chinese, monitor the country's cyberactivities closely and press China to abide by all of its commitments, the official added.


The U.S.-China agreement forged last month does not prohibit cyberspying for national security purposes, but it bans economic espionage designed to steal trade secrets for the benefit of competitors. That is something the U.S. says it doesn't do, but Western intelligence agencies have documented such attacks by China on a massive scale for years.

China denies engaging in such behavior, but threats of U.S. sanctions led Chinese officials to conduct a flurry of last-minute negotiations which led to the deal.

CrowdStrike on Monday released a timeline of recent intrusions linked to China that it says it documented against "commercial entities that fit squarely within the hacking prohibitions covered under the cyberagreement."

The intrusion attempts are continuing, the company says, "with many of the China-affiliated actors persistently attempting to regain access to victim networks even in the face of repeated failures."

CrowdStrike did not explain in detail how it attributes the intrusions to China, an omission that is likely to draw criticism, given the ability of hackers to disguise their origins. But the company has a long track record of gathering intelligence on Chinese hacking groups, and U.S. intelligence officials have often pointed to the company's work.

"We assess with a high degree of confidence that these intrusions were undertaken by a variety of different Chinese actors, including Deep Panda, which CrowdStrike has tracked for many years breaking into national security targets of strategic importance to China," Alperovich wrote in a blog posting that laid out his findings.

The hacking group known as Deep Panda, which has been linked to the Chinese military, is believed by many researchers to have carried out the attack on insurer Anthem Health earlier this year.

CrowdStrike and other companies have tracked Deep Panda back to China based on the malware and techniques it uses, its working hours and other intelligence.

In 2013, another cybersecurity company, Mandiant, published a report exposing what it said was a hacking unit linked to China's People's Liberation Army, including identifying the building housing the unit in Beijing. Those findings were later validated by American intelligence officials.
 

China Connection

TB Fanatic
"China's economic growth declines to 6-year low"

This is the same as saying that they are in the same boat as when millions lost their jobs after the 2008 bank problem in the U.S. due to a crash in exports.
 

Housecarl

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

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.realcleardefense.com/art...rous_strategy_of_nuclear_coercion_108586.html

October 19, 2015

Russia's Dangerous Strategy of Nuclear Coercion

By Harrison Menke

This included a statement last month by Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov who proclaimed Russia will be forced to respond. “This could alter the balance of power in Europe…And without a doubt it would demand that Russia take necessary countermeasures to restore the strategic balance and parity." Russian observers noted the likely response would be a threat to relocate nuclear capable Iskander missiles to the Kaliningrad enclave, despite the fact that the Kremlin already planned to move Iskanders to Kaliningrad since May.

Brandishing veiled nuclear threats like Peskov’s has become a reoccurring tactic used by both senior Russian officials and generals since 2007. They fall within an increasingly frequent Russian strategy of using nuclear weapons well beyond means of sustaining mutual nuclear deterrence. Unlike the West, where nuclear weapons’ role are strictly to deter existential threats, Russian nuclear weapons are multifaceted instruments used to attain state goals.

This posture has three broad yet overlapping objectives.

The first is to deter. During Russia’s recent military action in the Crimea and eastern Ukraine a key function of the nuclear forces was to dissuade direct military support or intervention on behalf of the victims of Russian aggression. For example, during operations in the Donbass, Russian nuclear forces have visibly flexed their muscles by putting on massive military exercises and wargames. Putin even went so far as to say he considered putting the strategic forces on alert to discourage others from interfering in his seizure of Crimea. Reports of similar moves occurred during hostilities in South Ossetia and Abkhazia in 2008, and many Russians believe their nuclear deterrent prevented US involvement. In all instances, the signal was unmistakable: stay out of Russian affairs.

The second is to intimidate. Russia has felt the need to send grim reminders that its nukes can easily target anyone thinking of enacting undesirable policies. Nuclear threats have been used to bully those considering hosting missile defense assets, such as Poland, the Czech Republic, Denmark, and Ukraine, and provocative long-rang bomber flights recklessly buzz states’ airspace. Moreover, the Kremlin regularly threatens to forward deploy nuclear capable systems along its western borders as negative incentives to rebuff NATO policies. According to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, such actions could “fundamentally change the balance of security in Europe.”

Finally, the most acute and precarious motive is to coerce. This was most salient during Russia’s annexation of Crimea. In order to prevent any attempt to retake the peninsula, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov issued statements implying nuclear weapons could be used to defend the conquered territory. Reported plans to station nuclear-capable aircraft and construct nuclear weapons handling facilities further solidified this threat.

By linking nuclear weapons use to its illegally acquired territory, Russia has assured the world that any attempt to reclaim the peninsula could be met with a nuclear response. This sets a dangerous precedent. As Sir Adrian Bradshaw warned, “the threat of escalation might be used to prevent re-establishment of territorial integrity.” Should Russia swallow up another neighbor, Moscow could consolidate its gains by threatening nuclear reprisals to anyone who dares to interfere. Simply put, the aggrieved party and/or its allies would be forced to choose between conciliation or nuclear war.

Taken together, these three objectives amount to an apparent acceptance of a new and more aggressive nuclear posture: one of nuclear coercion.

Mr. Putin is taking Russia down a dangerous path as the leadership appears willing to play the nuclear card at the drop of a hat, convinced the lopsidedness of the stakes and adversaries’ unwillingness to risk nuclear hostility is enough to force capitulation. Backed by the policy of limited nuclear strikes to “de-escalate” a conflict and an increasingly modernized arsenal, Russia is undeniably “playing with fire,” as Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert Work and then Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral James Winnefeld recently observed.

Alone, Russia’s nuclear threats could appear erratic and absurd, and are often chalked up to nothing more than bluster or reckless attempts to vex NATO. But nuclear coercion fits neatly into a larger and more complex web of intermingled components used to advance the Kremlin’s agenda. From cyber-attacks to gas wars, information warfare to military operations, Moscow skillfully employs these seemingly disconnected activities to form one coherent strategy. Its goals? To weaken Transatlantic solidarity, reassert itself as a major power, and ultimately establish recognition of Moscow’s right to a sphere of interest, something every Russian president has insisted upon.

It is in this light one must examine Russia’s threats against US modernization

For Russia, the tactical nuclear weapon issue has never been about stability. Rather, the “balance” Russia hopes to preserve is nothing short of maintaining Moscow’s current overwhelming imbalance of tactical nuclear weapons and their delivery vehicles (around a 10 to 1 difference), a key enabler of Russia’s nuclear coercion. Indeed, Russian exercises continue to prominently feature tactical systems, while defense firms pump out new weapons that can threaten large swaths of European territory. Given Moscow’s near monopoly on tactical nuclear weapons, US policymaker’s response options would be significantly restricted during a crisis, weakening deterrence.

As such, the political and military significance of nuclear modernization, along with participation from our European partners, is growing in importance for bolstering both deterrence and assurance. In order to maintain a credible deterrent to offset Russian nuclear coercion, the US must stay ahead of developing threats by improving our forces.

To be sure, our regional nuclear options are just one piece of the deterrence puzzle. The US and NATO should continue to examine how best to enhance forces across the entire spectrum of deterrence. But given Russian and other countries interest in exploiting the threat (or actual use) of nuclear strikes, nuclear modernization is becoming an increasingly critical component.

Secretary Robert Work and Admiral James Winnefeld highlighted this need in their recent testimony. They noted today’s evolving security environment requires a safe, secure, but most importantly an effective nuclear force. Russia’s apparent outright rejection of stability in favor of a policy of nuclear coercion only confirms their assessment.

Harrison Menke is currently a wargaming analyst at SAIC and a recent graduate of Missouri State Defense and Strategic Studies program headed by Dr. Keith Payne. Harrison's studies focused on nuclear deterrence and Russian nuclear strategy. His thesis examined Russian nuclear posture with regard to Europe and earned Thesis with Distinction honors. Harrison's writings have appeared in US News & World Report, Defense News, and the Missile Defense Review. His views are his own and do not represent those of organizations' he is affiliated with.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/16/world/russia-drone-program/index.html

Russia's resurgent drone program

By Michael Pearson, CNN
Updated 3:04 PM ET, Fri October 16, 2015

(CNN)—Russia's drone program, for years dormant and lagging behind the West, has resurfaced in a big way recently, with widespread use in Syria punctuated Friday by the downing inside Turkey of an unmanned vehicle that could belong to Moscow.

Russia began fielding drones in Syria in September as part of the military buildup that preceded airstrikes on behalf of its ally, the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Russian drones are also reportedly in use in Ukraine.

All told, Russian military and security forces have an inventory of about 800 drones, all believed unarmed and primarily used for intelligence and reconnaissance purposes, an analyst with HIS Jane's told CNN Friday.

It is not clear that the drone downed Friday by a Turkish warplane inside of Turkey -- which borders Syria -- is Russian. Moscow has denied the reports, although two U.S. defense officials say they believe the drone is Russian.

But it is clear that after years with little in the way of drone technology, Moscow has ramped up its emphasis on unmanned aerial vehicles in recent years, said Douglas Barrie, senior fellow for Military Aerospace at the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

"In the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union UAV R&D was neglected, and it is only in the past decade or so that Russia has re-focused attention on this area of military capability," he said.

In the last five years or so, Russia has relied significantly on models from Israeli defense contractors, some of which it has licensed to produce in Russia, said Derrick Maple, principle analyst for unmanned Systems at IHS Jane's.

But Russia has pledged to spend nearly $10 billion over the next decade to further develop its drone fleet, including muscular armed drones similar to some fielded by the United States, Maple said.

For instance, Russia has been developing an armed drone called Skat since at least 2005, according to IHS Jane's. The drone could be capable of carrying multiple anti-ship or radar missiles, guided bombs or conventional bombs.

Here's a look at some of Russia's existing UAV fleet:


Mini UAVs

Inventory: About 500

Examples: Variants of the Zala 421 and the Israeli-made Bird Eye 400a and Orbiter 2.

These very small fixed-wing or rotary aircraft are often hand-launched, have a short range and are used primarily for frontline reconnaissance.

Small Tactical UAVs

Inventory: About 200

Example: Orlan-10

This UAV, built by the Special Technological Center in Saint Petersburg, Russia, can fly for 15 hours as high as 23,000 feet and has a range of 600 km (372 miles), Maple said. It carries a high-resolution still camera, a video camera and an infrared imager, according to Janes.


Medium Tactical UAVs

Inventory: About 100

Example: Aerostar UAV

Built by Israeli defense contractor Aeronautics Defence Systems, the Aerostar can fly up to 18,000 feet and stay aloft up to 14 hours, according to IHS Jane's. The Israel Defense Forces have used Aerostars for surveillance and anti-smuggling missions.


Medium-altitude long-endurance (MALE) UAVs

Inventory: Maybe a handful

Example: Heron

The Heron can stay aloft for more than 40 hours, according to its manufacturer, Israel Aerospace Industries at a top altitude of 30,000 feet. It can be configured for use in intelligence, maritime and surveillance roles, the company says. Russia and Israel signed an agreement in 2010 to establish production of Heron UAVs in Russia, but it's unclear if that has happened, Maple said.

Why is Russia pressing the 'accelerate' pedal in Syria?
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2015/1018/How-the-Iran-deal-might-change-the-Middle-East

Cover Story

How the Iran deal might change the Middle East

What the calculations are behind the nuclear pact and where it could lead.

By Andrew J. Bacevich, Contributor October 18, 2015

Andrew J. Bacevich is professor emeritus of history and international relations at Boston University. His new book, 'America's War for the Greater Middle East: A Military History,' will appear next year.

Boston — The nuclear deal hat the United States and five other world powers signed with Iran is a means to an end, not the end in itself. In that regard, the pact, scheduled for formal adoption on Oct. 19, necessarily rates as a high-risk proposition. If the agreement succeeds, it may mark a first step toward restoring some semblance of stability to the Greater Middle East, thereby allowing the US to lower its profile there. If it fails, the current disorder may in retrospect seem tame.

When he inherited the Oval Office, Barack Obama inherited that disorder. However naively, many Americans – and many others across the globe – expected this charismatic new president to make short work of such untidiness. My personal collection of Obama-era memorabilia includes a special issue of Newsweek from December 2008 featuring a cover story on “How to Fix the World: A Guide for the Next President.” As a foreign-policy novice, Mr. Obama himself seemed to entertain such exalted expectations, for example, promising a “new beginning between the US and Muslims around the world.” As Obama prepares to retire from office, now considerably grayer than he appeared on that Newsweek cover, no such new beginning has occurred and the world as a whole remains stubbornly unfixed.

That said, Obama may yet leave a foreign-policy legacy of real consequence. Whether that legacy is positive or negative may take years to determine, however. Ultimately, his reputation as a statesman is likely to hinge on how the Iran nuclear pact plays out.

Recommended: How much do you know about Iran? Take our quiz to find out.

Partisan attacks on the deal – comparing Iran to Nazi Germany, likening Obama to Neville Chamberlain, and foreseeing compliant Israelis marched off to death camps – have been predictable and absurd. Even while failing to derail the agreement, those attacks have inadvertently obscured its larger strategic context, thereby hiding from view both its actual risks and its potential benefits.

Indeed, shorthand references to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), as it is formally known, as a nuclear deal serve to mask its larger implications. Nominally, the agreement lifts economic sanctions imposed on Iran in exchange for that country accepting limits on its nuclear program. Implicitly, however, it represents an invitation for Iran to come in from the cold. How Iranians respond to that invitation is the question on which Obama’s reputation as a statesman is likely to turn.

• • •

Obama was a teenager when the Islamic Revolution of 1979 and ensuing hostage crisis turned Iran into an international pariah, excluded from playing a meaningful role in regional politics. Yet excluding the troublemaker served mostly to incite more trouble.

During the 1980s, the US saw Iran as a threat to stability. US policy sought to contain the Islamic Republic, a presumed imperative that found the US aligning itself with Saddam Hussein in the brutal Iran-Iraq War that Mr. Hussein himself had recklessly initiated. In the 1990s, with Iraq now joining Iran on Washington’s enemies list, the US adopted a strategy of “dual containment.” Necessitating a substantial US military presence in the region, this approach incited blowback that ultimately found expression in the 9/11 attacks. Abandoning containment, the George W. Bush administration responded by embracing preventive war. Under the banner of its “freedom agenda,” it set out to remake the region, starting with Iraq but with expectations of soon moving on to neighboring countries, including Iran. The application of US military power in a big way was going to yield very large benefits.

Alas, it hasn’t worked out that way. The American military project in Iraq miscarried and the “freedom agenda” went nowhere. Worse, even with all the thousands of lives lost or shattered, all the hundreds of billions of dollars wasted, US military efforts have actually made conditions in the Greater Middle East markedly worse. An enterprise intended to foster stability, spread democracy, and further the cause of human rights has instead produced something akin to chaos, while fueling violent radicalism.

By invading Iraq, the Bush administration seemingly affirmed Osama bin Laden’s charges of US imperialism and antipathy toward Islam. In Baghdad, meanwhile, the political order resulting from several years of American “nation-building” manifests a combination of ineptitude and sectarian bias that has left Iraq virtually ungovernable. For radical Islamists generally, American intervention in Iraq has been the gift that keeps on giving.

Evidence? Look no further than Islamic State, the successor to Al Qaeda that has declared itself the basis of a new caliphate while carving up large swaths of Iraq and Syria and winning adherents further afield. However loath Americans may be to acknowledge their collective paternity, Islamic State is the bastard child of ill-advised US military interventionism.

No longer the foreign-policy neophyte, Obama today seems to grasp (even if not saying so outright) that US military involvement in the Greater Middle East, dating as far back as the abortive peacekeeping mission in Lebanon during the early 1980s, has been counterproductive. Whether in Iraq or Libya, Somalia or Afghanistan, it has never produced the results promised or expected.

Obama’s acceptance of the risks inherent in the JCPOA constitutes a de facto admission that the attempt to impose order on this region through the application of hard power has failed. Period. Full stop.

Simply trying harder – more bombs or more boots on the ground – won’t produce a more favorable outcome. In effect, the verdict is in: The militarization of US policy in the Islamic world has reached a dead end.

• • •

So without fully exposing his hand, Obama is opting for something different. With his Iran initiative, he is attempting to reverse course. In this sense, the JCPOA represents merely a preliminary step in a complex undertaking fraught with hazards.

The ultimate objective of that undertaking is twofold: first, to extricate the US military from what has become a war without end; second, to hand off responsibility for maintaining regional stability to those with the most to lose if the ongoing meltdown continues – the nations inhabiting the neighborhood.

Inherent in this gambit is a heretical proposition to which few politicians – certainly none of the declared presidential candidates – will openly subscribe: that there are certain tasks that exceed the capabilities of even the world’s sole superpower and that should therefore be left to others. Managing the Greater Middle East is one of those things.

Prominent among those “others” who share an interest in preventing further regional disintegration are Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, and Iraq (if it ever manages to get its act together). While the regimes controlling these several nations disagree about many things, they are all fundamentally committed to the status quo. That is, unlike Islamic State, Al Qaeda, or any of their offshoots, they are committed to preserving rather than destroying the existing system of nation-states within (more or less) their existing borders.

Obama is betting that Iran also qualifies as a status quo nation – or, if it is not presently, that it can be coaxed into becoming one. The impetus behind the bet is quite clear. Only by restoring Iran to its rightful place among regional heavyweights – as a player, not simply as a spoiler – will it be possible for a stable equilibrium of power to emerge. Putting it another way, to persist in excluding Iran is to guarantee continuing upheaval, with the US therefore unable to escape from the quagmire in which it now finds itself.

Those persuaded that only the concerted exercise of US military might will restore order to this part of the world – neoconservatives and hawkish right-wingers, for example – might welcome such a prospect. Sensible Americans will not.

Yet sensible Americans would do well to appreciate the uncertainties involved. Iran today remains a theocracy in which some top leaders identify the US as the Great Satan. Longstanding Iranian support for organizations on the US terrorist list such as Hezbollah is well documented. Prior to 9/11, Iran may have had a hand in terrorist attacks against US servicemen in Lebanon and Saudi Arabia. During the US occupation of Iraq, Iran certainly provided Iraqi militants with weaponry employed to kill American soldiers. Its seniormost authorities eagerly look forward to the day when Israel will cease to exist. In no respect whatsoever does Iran qualify as a “friend” of the US.

On the other hand, US behavior toward Iran over the years has not exactly invited friendship. Even setting aside the 1953 Anglo-American coup that overthrew Iran’s first democratically elected government – an event that the US treats as ancient history – there remain other episodes with which Iranians might reasonably take umbrage.

Washington’s support for Hussein during the Iran-Iraq War is one. The US Navy’s unprovoked shooting down of an Iranian Airbus transiting the Persian Gulf in 1988, killing 290 civilians, is a second. Washington’s inclusion of Iran in the so-called Axis of Evil, despite Tehran signaling a willingness to help after 9/11, is a third. More recently, US collaboration with Israel in unleashing the Stuxnet computer virus to disable an Iranian nuclear research facility – in effect, a state-sponsored cyberattack – offers another.

So Iran has no more reason to trust the US than the US has to trust Iran.

• • •

Yet the case to be made for the JCPOA relies on neither friendship nor trust. Instead, it posits a convergence of interests. In an immediate sense, that convergence translates into a concrete and specific quid pro quo: Iran gets escape from economic strangulation; the US gets a suspension of putative Iranian attempts to acquire the bomb. More broadly and more speculatively, the JCPOA may – there are no guarantees – lay the basis for a collaboration against the antistatist violent radicalism threatening to envelop much of the Islamic world.

Obama’s critics dismiss the possibility of such a collaboration as hooey. Those who govern Iran, they argue, are hate-filled crazies committed to a revolutionary agenda.

That’s one view. Another interprets Iranian hate speech, which is real, as akin to hate speech in American politics – intended chiefly for domestic consumption. To some observers, the chants of “death to America” heard in Tehran seem increasingly pro forma, of no more real significance than the Islamophobia and anti-immigrant rants routinely heard on Fox News.

More significantly, the charge of irrationality just doesn’t stick – nothing in their recent behavior suggests that Iran’s rulers have a death wish or are willing to trade Tehran for Tel Aviv. Ruthless and calculating they may be, but not suicidal. As for the Islamic Revolution itself, it appears in many respects to be a spent force, retaining about as much fervor as the Bolshevik Revolution by the 1970s or the Cuban Revolution today.

Notably in evidence, however, is the undisguised fervor of younger Iranians not to overthrow secular modernity but to embrace it. Arguably, they, not the ayatollahs, represent the future of politics in Iran. Removing sanctions and reintegrating Iran into the global economy will further empower this rising generation of Iranians, who are avidly pro-American. Ayatollahs refusing to accommodate their demands for change will do so at their peril.

So, at least, the Obama administration has persuaded itself – an expectation that more than any other factor explains why the administration believes it is possible for the US and Iran on a selective basis to inch toward making common cause. In that regard, the current de facto US-Iranian collaboration against Islamic State may serve as a precursor of sorts. If not friends, the two nations may in time overcome the reflexive compulsion to be at each other’s throats.

Should the government of Israel sign on to Obama’s bet? Should the Saudi royal family or Sunni Arabs more generally?

Their reluctance to do so is understandable. Should that bet fail, they could well find themselves in the line of fire, facing an empowered Iran with grudges to settle. Among the unwelcome scenarios that could plausibly unfold are these: a region-wide nuclear arms race, an escalation of anti-
Zionism among nations competing to demonstrate their fealty to Islam, or preemptive military action by an Israel that perceives itself to be facing an existential threat. None of these can be dismissed out of hand.

For Israel and other US allies in the Middle East, therefore, the appeal of a Pax Americana – US troops permanently on station to keep order and police the recalcitrant in the region – is self-evident. The problem is that Washington’s efforts at policing the Greater Middle East have definitively and irrevocably gone off the rails. The Pax Americana may have worked elsewhere on other occasions, but in this instance it’s surely not working for the US. Persisting in this ill-advised effort will undermine rather than enhance US security and will further erode America’s standing in the world.

Sooner or later, circumstances will oblige even die-hard devotees of American exceptionalism to come to terms with the very real limits of US power. Sooner or later, US allies in the Greater Middle East, including Israel, will do likewise, which may yet open the door to a process, however halting and incremental, of mutual accommodation between Jews and Muslims, Sunnis and Shiites, Arabs and Persians.

Or it may not. In that case, the opposing sides in these several disputes may choose once more to take up their cudgels against one another even as the US opts out. At the end of the day, sovereign states will exercise their sovereignty.

If Obama’s bet pays off – and it may well take a decade or more to determine the outcome – what will it yield? Even in the best case, with Iran choosing to become a responsible stakeholder while abjuring terrorism and perpetuating its pledge not to develop nuclear weapons, don’t expect an epidemic of peace and harmony to break out. The causes of dysfunction roiling the Greater Middle East are too numerous and varied to be settled by any one diplomatic breakthrough, however welcome.

Yet it may just be that concentrating the minds of the parties involved will enable them to do a better job of fixing their part of the world than the US has managed. If nothing else, at least the pointless depletion of American power and influence will have been abated. We, too, must exercise our sovereignty.


Related Stories

Test your knowledge
How much do you know about Iran? Take our quiz to find out.
◾ Decoder Iran nuclear deal: why White House rules foreign policy
◾ Upfront Blog Where new cooperation could lead
◾ Iranian-American journalist convicted: Post condemns 'grievous wrong'
◾ Iran is open for business, but sanctions and political risk remain
◾ Israeli PM Netanyahu blasts Iran deal in UN speech
◾ Praying about the Iran deal and the need for diplomacy
 

Housecarl

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

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.project-syndicate.org/c...-philippe-legrain-2015-10#POgRZRa9Awm3Q6kx.99


Philippe Legrain

Philippe Legrain, a former economic adviser to the president of the European Commission, is a visiting senior fellow at the London School of Economics’ European Institute and the author of European Spring: Why Our Economies and Politics are in a Mess – and How to Put Them Right.


OCT 19, 2015
Comments 14

The Disintegration of Europe

LONDON – If a clear signal was needed that the European Union is falling apart at an alarming rate, Hungary’s construction of razor-wire fences along the border with its fellow EU member Croatia is it. The crisis in the eurozone has, of course, fragmented financial flows, caused economies to diverge, eroded political support for EU institutions, and set Europeans against one another. Now, as governments erect barriers and reinstate border controls, the refugee crisis is disrupting flows of people and gumming up trade. And, as the EU unravels, the risk of Britain voting to leave is rising.

It is often argued that the EU progresses through crises, because they focus minds on the overwhelming need for further integration. But such breakthroughs require at least four ingredients: a correct shared understanding of the problem, agreement on an effective way forward, willingness to pool more sovereignty, and political leaders able to drive change forward. All four are now lacking.

EU leaders are weak, divided, and seemingly incapable of setting out a credible vision of the future benefits that European integration could provide, without which they cannot rally popular support and convince recalcitrant governments to bear their fair share of current costs. In the absence of an effective, common response, Europe’s crises fester, feed on each other, and foment unilateralism.

The eurozone and refugee crises have common features that make them tricky to resolve. Both involve disputes about sharing costs, complicated by a clash of values, at the center of which lies a newly dominant Germany.

The EU is hopeless at burden sharing. Rather than agree on a fair division of costs, whether of the financial crisis or of welcoming refugees, governments try to minimize their obligations and shift them onto others – thereby increasing the collective costs. A banking crisis that could have been resolved through a fair and decisive restructuring of unsustainable debts has ballooned into a much greater economic and political crisis that pits creditors against debtors, both within and among countries.

Likewise, EU rules stipulating that refugees should be granted asylum in the first member country they reach have proved both unworkable and unfair; because asylum-seekers mostly arrive in southern Europe and want to head north, Greece and Italy ignore the rules and facilitate their passage. Transit countries such as Hungary try to divert refugees elsewhere. Resettling the almost 750,000 people who have sought asylum in the EU this year – still only 0.14% of the EU population – has thus become an existential crisis.

Part of the problem is blinkered decision-making. EU leaders focus narrowly on limiting short-term financial and political costs, rather than thinking strategically about broader longer-term consequences.

Restructuring Greek debt in 2010 would have implied a financial hit for French and German banks (and the governments that stood behind them), but a much smaller loss than that implied by the mushrooming costs of an enduring crisis. Likewise, whereas welcoming refugees requires an initial investment of public funds, it can pay dividends as soon as the newcomers start working. A graying continent needs dynamic young workers to do jobs that locals spurn (or for which they lack the skills), pay for and care for the old, start businesses, and pursue spark new ideas that boost economic growth.

The clash of values also impedes compromise. Germans insist that debtors have a moral obligation to pay what they owe and atone for their sinful profligacy. A Slovak prime minister who rejects refugees on the grounds that “Slovakia is built for Slovaks, not for minorities” is hard to buy off. Even though the EU’s plan to resettle refugees would remove unwanted newcomers from Hungary, Viktor Orbán, the country’s authoritarian and nationalist leader, objects to it in principle, accusing Germany of “moral imperialism” in trying to foist its generous attitude toward refugees on its neighbors.

Until recently, German policymakers sought to atone for the country’s Nazi past by seeking a more European Germany and bankrolling the EU, thus helping to smooth over many disputes. But, with Germany’s position as creditor-in-chief having thrust it into the driver’s seat, Chancellor Angela Merkel’s administration now seeks to create a more Germanic Europe.

Germany refuses to accept that its beggar-thy-neighbor economic policies – reflected in its massive current-account surpluses – are both a cause of the eurozone crisis and a major impediment to resolving it. Instead, it bullies others to get its way, wrongly identifying its narrow interests as a creditor with those of the system as a whole.

View comment on this paragraphMerkel has played a much more positive role in the refugee crisis. Germany unilaterally suspended application of the EU’s asylum rules and pledged to accept all arriving Syrian refugees. But Merkel’s failure to offer those refugees safe passage has exacerbated the chaos. Subsequently reimposing border controls within the supposedly border-free Schengen Area set a terrible precedent, prompting Germany’s neighbors to do likewise.

Meanwhile, with the EU increasingly viewed as a source of economic crisis, political turmoil, and unwanted migrants, the risk that Britons will vote to leave in a referendum due before the end of 2017 is rising. Britain is already semi-detached – outside of Schengen and with opt-outs from the euro and many home-affairs matters (including asylum policy). With the government now seeking to negotiate even looser membership terms, Britain will end up more estranged from the EU even if it remains a member.

Polls are finely balanced and referendums unpredictable. At a time of anti-establishment rage and political upheaval, anti-EU campaigners can peddle three fantasies of a post-EU future: a free-market, foreigner-free, or socialist Utopia. The pro-EU camp, by contrast, has to sell the reality of the EU as it is, warts and all.

Until recently, EU integration seemed inevitable. It might stall, but it would never go into reverse. Countries joined; none left. But with the EU already crumbling, Brexit could turn that dynamic on its head. That is all the more reason to fix the EU before it is too late.
 

Housecarl

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

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2015/10/19/the_geopolitics_of_bavaria_111511.html

https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/geopolitics-bavaria

October 19, 2015
The Geopolitics of Bavaria
By Stratfor

Bavaria is one of those rare places where the monumental and the austere coexist, where tradition is strong but so is the desire for innovation. It is a place where villagers gather to continue the folk practice of erecting tall wooden poles to dance around them, and also where massive companies such as BMW and Siemens were born. It is a region where a nostalgic king built the most impressive castle in Europe and decorated each room with themes taken from the works of composer Richard Wagner, but it is also a devout Catholic region where frugality is seen as a virtue.

For foreigners, Bavaria is the pinnacle of the German identity - an Alpine wonderland where people wear lederhosen, drink gallons of beer and eat strange dishes. What many do not realize is that Bavaria is just one of Germany's many federal states, and some of its customs and dialects are alien to many Germans. More important, while Bavaria's history is deeply intertwined with Germany's, the region has traditionally fought for its autonomy, if not independence.


Bavaria is making headlines these days as thousands of asylum seekers enter Germany through its southern border. This is raising concerns in the region, because voters and politicians worry about the economic, social and political impact of the constant arrival of foreigners. The Bavarian government recently asked Berlin to toughen its position on refugees, and regional president Horst Seehofer threatened to impose unspecified "self-defense" measures if the German government does not reverse course on immigration. On the surface, these actions might seem surprising, but they are connected to Bavaria's history and geography.

The Struggle for Self-Governance

Bavaria's behavior is shaped by its geographic position. To the south, it is protected by the Alps, a natural border with Austria. To the east, it is sheltered by the Bavarian Forest, a less impressive barrier that nevertheless separates it from the Czech Republic. This distinguishes Bavaria from most Central European regions, which have historically been vulnerable to invasion. It also makes Bavaria a coherent political entity that throughout its history has enjoyed different degrees of self-governance. Bavaria's position in Central Europe have also made it a significant trading center, while two major rivers, the Danube and the Main (which is a part of the Rhine system) connect it with northern and southeastern Europe.

This geography explains Bavaria's wealth and impressive dynastic continuity. Members of the Wittelsbach family ruled as dukes, electors and kings of Bavaria between 1180 and 1918 - an impressive record that surpasses even that of the Habsburg family in Austria. At different times in history Bavaria became a significant political player in Europe; two members of the Wittelsbach family became Holy Roman Emperors, and others became kings in places as diverse as Norway and Greece.

However, Bavaria's geography has also put it in the path of larger military forces, and the region was never completely insulated from political developments in Central Europe. Bavaria was first a Merovingian and then a Carolingian vassal state before joining the Holy Roman Empire. When Prussia rose to power in the 18th century, Bavaria was forced to play rivals Prussia and Austria against each other, only to join the German Empire after Austria's defeat in the Austro-Prussian war. This highlights Bavaria's main geopolitical imperative: to be part of larger institutional frameworks for protection, while also trying to maintain as much autonomy as possible.

Because of this imperative, Bavaria has traditionally had a complex relationship with its Germanic neighbors. A German-speaking region, Bavaria has a very strong connection with the rest of Germany. The need for protection explains its membership in the German Empire, though it joined only after it was promised that it would control its own army, railways and postal service.

The desire for autonomy explains Bavaria's decision not to ratify the Constitution of West Germany in 1949, mostly because it felt the law did not give enough powers to the country's regions. Bavaria only agreed to enforce the German Constitution after the rest of the German regions ratified it. Bavaria's official name, Free State of Bavaria, is purely symbolic because the German Constitution does not distinguish between states and free states, though the name acknowledges the region's aspirations for self-rule.

As Germany's second richest region in terms of GDP, Bavaria has repeatedly questioned the country's complex transfer system, under which resources are transferred from wealthier to poorer regions in an attempt to secure similar standards of living for all Germans. Bavarian governments have described the system as unfair and criticized regions in eastern Germany for not being fiscally responsible - much as Germany has criticized other eurozone countries such as Greece.

But Bavaria is also very close to a fellow Catholic entity; Austria. Bavaria's landscape, architecture and language are closely connected with those of Austria, especially in the bordering Tyrol area. When Bavaria joined the German Empire in 1871, Bavarian nationalists were against the idea of being ruled by protestant Prussia and demanded independence. After Germany's defeat in World War I, some Bavarian nationalists proposed that Bavaria join Austria.

A Laboratory for Extreme Political Ideas

Bavaria has often been a center for new political experiments in Germany. In times of deep social upheaval, this involved embracing extreme positions. In the tumultuous months that followed the collapse of the German Empire after World War I, an independent Bavarian Soviet Republic was proclaimed. With its capital in Munich, the republic's goal was to establish a communist regime that would be independent from the also recently proclaimed Weimar Republic. The experiment only lasted for only few months and in May 1919 the rebel government was deposed by remaining loyal elements of the German army.

These events contributed to the emergence of Bavaria's next extremist experiment, Nazism. In the early 1920s, the region was a hotbed of right-wing nationalist opposition to the Weimar Republic, and a natural place for a failed Austrian painter and former soldier to find a receptive audience for his new political ideas.

Munich was both the founding city and the spiritual center of the National Socialists, who held their first meetings in the city's beer halls. In 1923 Munich was the stage of Adolf Hitler's first attempt to seize power, in the so-called Beer Hall Putsch. The city had a special place in the Nazi pantheon, and in 1935 Hitler declared it "the capital of the (Nazi) movement." Interestingly enough, Hitler had to rely on the support from other German regions in his rise to power, as a large segment of the Catholic electorate in Bavaria remained loyal to moderate parties.


Conservative and Slightly Euroskeptical

Bavaria's political exceptionalism is also represented by the fact it is the only part of Germany where Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservative Christian Democratic Union is not present. Instead, a sister party, the Christian Social Union, represents Merkel's party in Bavaria. The two parties are closely connected and form a common faction in the Bundestag, but formally they are separate entities. The Christian Social Union has governed Bavaria uninterrupted since the late 1950s, in another case of impressive political continuity.

The two forces are ideologically close, but the Christian Social Union tends to be more conservative regarding social issues. It is also slightly Euroskeptical and more interested in protecting regional rights. This creates friction every time a Christian Democratic Union federal government moves to the political center or makes decisions on big EU issues.

Christian Social Union lawmakers are not afraid of defending their ideological independence and challenging the central government in Berlin. In August, several Christian Social Union parliamentarians voted against the third Greek bailout, and in October a parliament member from the Bavarian party went so far as to say that Merkel could face a no-confidence vote if she did not change her position on asylum seekers. A core element of the Christian Social Union strategy is to prevent the emergence of any political movements to its right. This involves toughening its own position if it has to. For example, since the beginning of the refugee crisis, Bavarian politicians have demanded that Germany close its southern border and automatically deport migrants who do not qualify for asylum.

Because of its size, the Christian Democratic Union is more influential than its sister party when appointing electoral candidates and proposing policy at the federal level. However, this does not mean the Christian Social Union readily accepts its subordinate role in the alliance. In 2002, former Bavarian president and Christian Social Union leader Edmund Stoiber successfully challenged Christian Democratic Union leader Merkel and became the conservative candidate for the general elections. The strategy did not work in the long run, however, and the alliance lost the 2002 election to the center-left. Merkel would have a rematch only three years later, when she won the election and became German chancellor.

Just as Bavaria is unwilling or unable to sever its ties with Germany, the Christian Social Union is interested in preserving its alliance with the Christian Democratic Union, although it remains willing to challenge the federal government whenever it feels its interests are at stake. This will continue to constrain the administration in Berlin, especially as the European Union's long list of recurring problems continues expanding.

Bavaria is a fascinating example of a territory that is powerful enough to demand special treatment from its neighbors, but not strong enough to completely control its destiny. As British historian Simon Winder put it, "Bavaria ... is one of those strange semi-kingdoms that has throughout its history come close to being a real and independent state but has always been subsumed or subverted." Because of its proud history and powerful sense of identity, Bavaria will continue to be a strong-willed force in Germany and beyond.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-is-right-about-the-middle-east-a6698171.html

Donald Trump is much derided – but he is right about the Middle East

World View: The candidate is demoised as an exotic celebrity but he knows more about Iraq and Syria than his critics

Patrick Cockburn |@indyworld |Sunday 18 October 2015|76 comments

In 1989 I met Donald Trump several times in Palm Beach in Florida where he was trying to stop jets from a newly expanded Palm Beach International Airport from roaring over his enormous mansion. This was Mar-a-Lago, a magnificent house with 58 bedrooms and 33 bathrooms which Trump had bought four years earlier without realising it was under the flight path.

I learned about Trump’s problem because I knew a Canadian paper and pulp magnate who had bought a house near Mar-a-Lago and was also suffering from the airport noise. He was bitter that the people who had arranged for him to visit his new home prior to purchase had carefully chosen a brief moment when there were no planes passing overhead. The two multi-millionaires had set up an organisation that aimed to unite the less well-off people living in West Palm Beach and the plutocrats of Palm Beach, who were not natural allies, in order to get something done about the planes. There was plenty to complain of because, after an airport expansion the year before, there were 200 planes taking off every day.

I had mentioned what was happening in Palm Beach to a friend on a magazine in New York who promptly asked me to write a piece about it. I suspect that the idea was that I would produce a knock-about account of the farcical failure of Trump’s self-serving efforts to unite mansion owners, who lived there irregularly, and the less well-heeled but permanent population. In the event, the article was never published, possibly because I wrote that Trump’s campaign to reduce the noise level, involving a curfew on night-time flying, a ban on the noisier aircraft and the enforcement of existing airport noise restrictions, seemed perfectly sensible.

In the long term, the agitation combined with the threat of legal action by Trump and my Canadian friend must have worked, since I noticed a year later that Palm Beach airport had just become the first airport in the American South to limit and possibly ban the noisiest planes. But all was evidently not entirely well, because in January this year, a quarter of a century after I had been in Palm Beach, Trump was suing Palm Beach County for $100m (£65m) alleging that officials had pressured the Federal Aviation Authority into a “deliberate and malicious” act by routing planes from the airport over Mar-a-Lago.

I remembered Trump and his anti-noise campaign when watching him in recent weeks being repeatedly interviewed as presidential candidate about the Middle East. The interviewers for television and newspapers were generally hostile, or at least patronising and incredulous, when Trump spoke positively about Russian intervention in Syria, the need to combat Isis and the disastrous state of Iraq and Libya. Most of what he was saying was common sense, but it is a measure of the degree to which propaganda slogans have replaced realistic discussion of these problems that his remarks were immediately dismissed or derided by politicians and the media.

Asked by an NBC news presenter if Iraq and Libya had been better off when Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi were in power, a question most politicians would have dodged, Trump said: “Iraq is a disaster … Libya is not even a country. You can make the case, if you look at Libya, look at what we did there – it’s a mess. If you look at Saddam Hussein with Iraq, look what we did there – it’s a mess.”

This should not be controversial stuff. Many Iraqis and Libyans are glad to have got rid of the old dictators, but they have no doubt about the calamities that have befallen their countries since the change of regime. But how often in the British general election was David Cameron challenged for his part in reducing Libya to primal anarchy?

Speaking about the White House’s policy of supporting the Syrian armed opposition, Trump truthfully said the administration “doesn’t know who they are. They could be Isis. Assad is bad. Maybe these other people are worse.” He said he was bothered by “the concept of backing people they have absolutely no idea who they are”. Again, US officials admit that they have armed opposition fighters who, on entering Syria promptly handed their weapons over to Jabhat al-Nusra, the local representatives of al-Qaeda. Trump added: “I was talking to a general two days ago. He said: ‘We have no idea who these people are.’”

What is striking about these interviews is the self-confidence with which the American and British interviewers regurgitated gobbets of government propaganda and expressed surprise when Trump disagreed with them. The journalists questioning Trump appear to have accepted, without much thought and against all the evidence, the rebranding of al-Nusra and Ahrar al-Sham, which is extremist Islamist and close to the Muslim Brotherhood, as anti-Assad “moderates” from the moment they were attacked by Russian aircraft and missiles.

Trump discounts the widespread belief that Putin wants to destroy these mythical moderates and for some unexplained reason will not attack Isis. He has objected strongly to long discredited nostrums such as “nation-building”, suggesting in another interview that it is wrong “to tell people who have [had] dictatorships or worse for centuries how to run their own countries”.

It is worth viewing or reading these interviews with Trump and taking them seriously, because in Britain and much of the United States, Trump is demonised as an exotic celebrity with no understanding of what is happening in the world. Also noticeable is the depressing degree to which the interviewers parrot an acritical establishment line on developments in Iraq, Libya and Syria. This media blindness compounds government misjudgements and prevents lessons being learned from previous disasters.

It is not that Trump shows any great clairvoyance, but his words resonate because there is such a vacuum of clear thinking in Washington and Western Europe about the wars that are sweeping the Middle East and North Africa. Most politicians are afraid of being pilloried as unpatriotic if they stray far from the official line. In Britain, debate on possible use of British aircraft in bombing Isis in Syria ignores the real political and military landscape in which there is a shortage of warplanes to drop bombs and allies on the ground able to identify targets.

It should by now be clear that defeating Isis and bringing an end to the Syrian and Iraqi civil wars can only be brought about by agreement between the five main outside powers involved in the war: the US, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iran and Turkey. They alone have influence over allies and proxies inside Syria and Iraq to force them to negotiate seriously. This is very unlikely to happen while all sides inside and outside Syria believe that war still gives them the best chance to survive and to win. It is a measure of the failure of Western leaders to understand the crisis in the Middle East that, in speaking of it, none of them show the same clarity of mind as Donald Trump.
 
Top