Britain expands role in Iraq as warplanes monitor Isis positions

Britain is stepping up its military involvement in the fight against jihadi forces from the Islamic State in Iraq after the defence secretary Michael Fallon confirmed that British warplanes are flying deeper into Iraq in a mission that could last "months".

 

As David Cameron declared that Britain should be prepared to deploy its "military prowess" to help defeat the jihadis, Fallon said that Britain's involvement in Iraq is fast expanding beyond the initial humanitarian mission to relieve Yazidi refugees besieged on Mount Sinjar.

 

"This is not simply a humanitarian mission," the defence secretary said as it was confirmed that RAF Tornado jets, which were deployed to the region last week to identify the location of Yazidi refugees, are now monitoring Islamic State (Isis) positions deep into Iraq.

 

The UK move came as the US announced its most concerted bombing campaign yet over northern Iraq to drive Isis forces back, helping Kurdish forces to reclaim Mosul dam.

 

American warplanes and drones carried out more than 20 strikes at the weekend near the crucial dam that Isis forces took earlier this month. More than a dozen Isis vehicles were destroyed, the Pentagon said. The bombing is designed to help Kurdish forces regain the initiative in fighting for territory in northern Iraq that Isis has seized over the past three months.

 

"Mosul Dam was liberated completely," Ali Awni, an official from Iraq's main Kurdish party, told Agence France-Presse, a statement also confirmed by another party official and a Kurdish security forces officer.

 

Britain was encouraged by the progress over the weekend though Downing Street believes that the US, the Kurds and forces of the Iraqi state face a lengthy battle to defeat the Isis jihadis.

Fallon's declaration that British involvement was expanding beyond a humanitarian mission contrasted with the cautious language of Downing Street last week when officials said that the British mission was limited to providing humanitarian relief for Yazidi refugees besieged on Mount Sinjar.

Britain announced towards the end of last week that it would be prepared to arm Kurdish forces fighting the extremists.

 

Fallon said: "We and other countries in Europe are determined to do what we can to help the government of Iraq combat this new and very extreme form of terrorism that Isil [the Islamic State] is promoting."

 

The defence secretary was speaking at RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus as six Tornado fast jets and a spy plane push beyond the Kurdish region in the very north of Iraq – the focus of the humanitarian crisis – into parts of mainland northern Iraq that were taken over by Islamist militants in the past two months.

 

The aircraft are providing footage and other intelligence on displaced families to assist with the humanitarian effort and also on the movement of jihadis on the ground. It is studied by British analysts before being used to help Kurdish and Iraqi security forces.

 

British intelligence is shared directly with the US military, which has been conducting air strikes against Islamic State positions for the past 10 days.

 

"We are helping the Iraqi authorities and the Kurdish forces build up a better picture of where Isis is, where it is likely to strike next," Fallon said in an interview conducted by the defence editor of the Times and pooled on behalf of the major newspapers including the Guardian.

 

This means that British information could be used by the Iraqi military in planning attacks against jihadis – a development that brings Britain closer to a direct combat role, which could cause alarm among some MPs who are concerned about mission creep.

 

The Rivet Joint spy plane, a sophisticated, electronic surveillance aircraft, has been conducting missions since last week. Its information is combined with intelligence from daily patrols conducted by pairs of Tornado fighter jets, kitted with surveillance pods.

 

The RAF is also flying planeloads of ammunition, rifles and machine guns from former Soviet bloc countries in eastern Europe into Irbil in order to strengthen the fighting power of the Iraqi Kurdish security forces who are combatting the jihadis.

 

In addition, the government is looking at what British gear, such as night-vision goggles and body armour, it could send directly to the country to boost the Kurdish Peshmerga fighters.

 

The defence secretary praised a group of about three dozen airmen and soldiers from the various different units at the RAF base for their work in distributing aid. Fallon then signalled an expansion of the mission which could last months when he said: "This mission isn't over. The humanitarian needs are there…There may well now be in the next few weeks and months other ways that we may need to help save life, protect people. We are going to need all of you again and the surveillance you are able to give us."

 

The signals from Fallon of a greater British military involvement, which will stop short of deploying combat troops, came as the prime minister laid the ground for greater British military involvement in confronting Isis.

 

In a Sunday Telegraph article Cameron warned that Isis has declared an "extremist caliphate" that could soon lead to a "terrorist state on the shores of the Mediterranean and bordering a Nato member [Turkey]".

 

The prime minister, who warned of a "generational struggle" against a "poisonous and extremist ideology" that will last for the rest of his political lifetime, wrote: "I agree that we should avoid sending armies to fight or occupy. But we need to recognise that the brighter future we long for requires a long-term plan for our security as well as for our economy.

 

"True security will only be achieved if we use all our resources – aid, diplomacy, our military prowess – to help bring about a more stable world. Today, when every nation is so immediately interconnected, we cannot turn a blind eye and assume that there will not be a cost for us if we do."

The prime minister, who was furious when Ed Miliband blocked his plans to launch military strikes against the regime of the Syrian president Bashar al-Assad last year amid fears of a repeat of the mistakes of the invasion of Iraq in 2003, said that people should make judgments on the world of today.

 

He wrote: "The creation of an extremist caliphate in the heart of Iraq and extending into Syria is not a problem miles away from home. Nor is it a problem that should be defined by a war ten years ago. It is our concern here and now. Because if we do not act to stem the onslaught of this exceptionally dangerous terrorist movement, it will only grow stronger until it can target us on the streets of Britain."

 

Sir Menzies Campbell, the former Liberal Democrat leader, said: "The prime minister is right to emphasise that the effects of any continuing instability in Iraq will not be confined to the region. But it will be necessary to meet the challenge of terrorism by constructing a coalition of allies from both the EU and Nato. A unified approach will be essential with no room for dissent or compromise between countries. The jihadists of IS [the Islamic State] will most certainly test political resolve as well as security challenges."

 

In his interview the defence secretary confirmed that a small number of regular British soldiers were also sent briefly into the semi-autonomous Kurdish north of the country. The troops from 2nd Battalion the Yorkshire Regiment were flown into Arbil, the capital of Iraqi Kurdistan, last week to prepare for a possible deployment of Chinook helicopters on a mission to save families from a little-known religious sect who were stuck on a mountainside.

Afghanistan - Taliban Killing Taliban

Despite Taliban boasts that this year’s Summer Offensive would do great damage to Afghan and foreign forces, the results were quite dismal. For example, last month only 12 foreign troops were killed, less than half the number killed in September 2012. For the year so far, foreign troop deaths are down 58 percent compared to last year. The Taliban effort to kill foreign troops via Afghan troops or Taliban in Afghan uniforms was way down (over 70 percent) this year compared to last. Much of the decline in foreign troop casualties is due to Afghan forces taking over primary responsibility for security in most of the country this year. Last year 10-11 Afghan soldiers or police were killed each day. This year it is more like 15 a day, and at least half are from landmines and roadside bombs.

 

Taliban losses have been higher and the Taliban goal of demoralizing Afghan soldiers and police was not achieved. The Taliban hoped greater use of roadside bombs against Afghan forces would terrorize these troops into staying in their bases and leaving the Taliban and drug gangs to do as they wished. That has not happened. Afghan police and soldiers, using equipment and techniques developed by the Americans, keep contested roads open and kept after the Taliban.

 

Efforts to negotiate terms for remaining U.S. troops (after all other NATO forces have left after 2014) continue to go nowhere. Even the recent visit by the American Secretary of Defense made little difference. The Afghan politicians have been playing hardball with the Americans on this, refusing to agree to continue American immunity from the corrupt Afghan justice system after 2014. The U.S. has told the Afghans that if they don’t get a Status of Forces (immunity) agreement by the end of 2014, then the U.S. will withdraw all their forces. Such “Status Of Forces” agreements are standard practice for foreign troops overseas and, in the case of Afghanistan, are necessary to protect American troops from abuse by corrupt Afghan judges and prosecutors. If the U.S. withdraws completely a lot of the foreign aid might stop coming as well, as well as essential logistical, training, and air support for Afghan security forces. The implication here is that if the Afghans prove unable to govern themselves and the country once more becomes a terrorist haven, the bombers and commandoes will come back and the Afghan leaders responsible will be primary targets. That threat carries more weight since Osama bin laden was finally taken down in 2011. So far this threat has not persuaded the Afghan leaders to compromise. They know they can do that at the last minute, and in the meantime their stubbornness costs them nothing and is, by Afghan standards, entertaining and potentially profitable.

October 15, 2013: In Logar province (southeast of Kabul) the Taliban killed the provincial governor by planting a bomb in a copy of the Koran. The governor was giving a speech in a mosque at the start of a Moslem holy day. The Taliban threatened to kill a lot of senior officials this year but had had few successes. Killing someone in a mosque using a bomb in a Koran will not win the Taliban many new friends in Afghanistan or the Islamic world in general. The dead governor was known to be an honest and particularly effective official, just the sort of man the Taliban want out of the way.

  

October 13, 2013: The Taliban fired several rockets into the Bagram air base but caused no casualties or property damage.

  

October 10, 2013: In the east (Khost province) a Taliban suicide car bomber attacked a NATO convoy but managed to wound four ivilians. None of the foreign troops were hurt. The Taliban later announced heavy NATO casualties but the locals know better because some of them stood around watching the aftermath and noted that the only casualties being taken away were Afghans, and the only fatality was the driver of the car with all the explosives. The roadside bombs, while intended for Afghan and foreign security personnel, tend to mainly hurt civilians and the civilians know it. The Taliban stick with these weapons because fighting the security forces directly is suicidal and makes Taliban recruiting impossible. 

  

October 8, 2013: In the east (Kunar province) Afghan Taliban attacked a Pakistani Taliban camp near the Pakistan border and killed three Pakistani Taliban leaders and several of their followers. Battles like this have been more common since earlier this year. That’s because after years of pleading by Pakistan, Afghanistan (both the government and the Taliban) agreed to go after Pakistani Taliban who have set up camps just inside Afghanistan. From there they raid into Pakistan and then retreat back across the border if facing an intense army or police reaction. But the armed force assembling to go after the Pakistani Taliban camps are not Afghan soldiers or police but Afghan Taliban and tribal militias. This is the result of the Afghan Taliban agreeing to join with the Pakistani Army in an attack on the Pakistani Taliban. There has long been bad blood between the Afghan and Pakistani branches of the Taliban. Part of it is due to the usual feuds between rival Islamic terror organizations. But the basic problem is that each branch wants to take control of the country they are from and that means Pakistani Taliban are welcome (unofficially) in Afghanistan and the Afghan Taliban (officially) in Pakistan. The Afghan Taliban depends on the Pakistani sanctuary it has in and around Quetta, the largest city in Baluchistan (southwest Pakistan). Quetta is safe because Pakistan will not let American UAVs to operate there. Quetta is where the Afghan Taliban leadership has been sheltered since 2002 and is right across the Afghan border from the Taliban heartland in Kandahar and Helmand provinces. Since the Afghan Taliban has not made (or sponsored) terrorist attacks in Pakistan, there has been an unofficial truce with the Pakistani government. For over a year now the Pakistani military has been trying to persuade the Afghan Taliban to help deal with anti-Pakistan Islamic terrorists in Pakistan. Most of these attacks are carried out by the Pakistani Taliban, whose main base area is in North Waziristan, where the pro-Pakistan Haqqani Network also takes shelter. Haqqani is mostly Afghans and only attacks inside Afghanistan. For years the U.S. has been pressuring Pakistan to shut down the North Waziristan sanctuary. Now it appears that Pakistan might possibly sort-of do that but will probably leave Haqqani alone. The Afghan Taliban will help by going after the growing number of Pakistani Taliban camps just across the border in Afghanistan. The Afghan Taliban refuse to admit to this plan and say that they will only carry out attacks outside Pakistan, which is mainly inside Afghanistan.

  

Some Afghan Taliban are still supporting the Pakistani Taliban. Both branches of the Taliban are composed of many factions or, in the case of the Pakistani Taliban, independent groups that joined the Pakistani Taliban coalition. All the Pakistani Taliban can agree on is the need to replace the current elected government of Pakistan with a religious dictatorship. That is not popular with most Pakistanis, which has been a major problem for Pakistan.

  

October 7, 2013: In eastern Afghanistan (Khost province, near the Pakistan border) U.S. troops captured Latif Mehsud, a Pakistani Taliban media official. Mehsud was in charge of arranging meetings between Pakistani Taliban officials and journalists. The Pakistani Taliban waited a few days before admitting Mehsud had been taken. Mehsud was in Afghanistan to negotiate the ransom for some Afghans the Pakistani Taliban had kidnapped. Mehsud apparently felt he would have no problem with Afghan security forces, but he was stopped by American troops. President Karzai was angry over Mehsud being arrested as Karzai is trying to negotiate some kind of peace deal with the Pakistan Taliban. 

  

October 2, 2013: In Tajikistan the parliament approved an extension of the military cooperation treaty with Russia to 2042. This includes Russia continuing to station four-thousand troops there, mainly on the Tajik southern (Afghan) border to help keep out drugs and Islamic terrorists. This involves running three Russian bases in Tajikistan. Russia also continues to train Tajik military personnel (mainly officers) and supply weapons and ammo at low cost or for free. In Afghanistan many Taliban operate to provide security for heroin smuggling. The Central Asian route (via Tajikistan to West Europe and North America) is long but for most of the way you can bribe your way past border security. The Taliban are much more unpopular in northern Afghanistan and are often informed on or even attacked by hostile tribesmen. With Russian help the Tajiks have made their border guards more resistant to Taliban bribes and more likely to prevent smuggling. This can be seen by the numerous seizures of drugs and gun battles with the heavily armed smugglers. A lot of drugs do get through, but for the Russians every ton that is stopped is helpful. Drug addiction is a big problem in Russia.

Making Terrorism Pay

Islamic terrorists cannot operate without supplies. They need weapons, ammo, vehicles, communications, and all manner of other supplies to operate and survive. While terrorist groups will accept contributions of goods, they prefer cash. Thus the most successful terrorist groups are the ones who can get their hands on the most cash. For a long time one of the easiest ways to obtain a lot of cash was to kidnap a Westerner (or anyone from a wealthy family) and hold them for ransom. This only works if the potential victims make themselves available to grab. In countries where law and order are weak, those worth kidnapping tend to take good care of their personal security. Western tourists or workers in Moslem countries used to be good targets, but all it took was a few kidnappings to halt the tourism and put tight security on Westerners who had to be there. Finally, many Western countries enacted “no ransom” policies. While not always enforced, this made it more difficult, sometimes impossible, to get a lot of money for Western hostages.

 

There were all manner of other criminal acts terrorists could, and still do, use to obtain cash. But these all entail the risk of getting killed or captured and the locals come to consider the Islamic radicals just another bunch of bandits, and this hurts recruiting and grassroots support. When desperate, Islamic terrorists will take from whoever they can find in order to survive. But if this means angering the people they depend on for new recruits and popular support, going the bandit route is usually a sign that the group is on its last legs. 

  

The most reliable source of funds is Islamic charities and foreign charities in general. The charity route sometimes involves deception, but often the donors know exactly where their money is going and approve of how it is used. Much of the charitable contributions come from private donations, NGOs, madrasas (Islamic religious schools), and businesses throughout South Asia, the Middle East, and Europe. Most of it tends to come from Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, where many terrorist groups have considerable support not only among local and expatriate Moslems but also patronage of the royal families and other higher ups in both these countries. This allows some terror groups to solicit quite openly. Often in the country where the terrorists are operating they can raise cash from local businessmen, industry leaders, farmers, and others willing to donate freely. These donations are collected throughout the year, sometimes in the name of religion and often, openly, for jihad. 

  

Fund raisers will often issue receipts for donations. To placate Western nations trying to shut down Islamic terrorists the fundraisers often operate through front companies or Islamic charities and are registered as such with the local government. Donations are particularly heavy during the Hajj (the last month of the Moslem calendar when pilgrimages to Mecca are undertaken) and Ramadan (the 9th month of the Moslem calendar, when observant Moslems fast and pray a lot). The Islamic calendar is lunar, meaning it follows the phases of the moon and thus these dates move relative to the fixed calendar used in most of the world. People are much more likely to give during these two months.

  

Over the last decade Saudi Arabia and other Gulf Arab states have been under increasing Western pressure to crack down on this terrorist fundraising. Saudi Arabia, in particular, has cracked down since 2003 (when al Qaeda began making attacks there), after denying that there was a big problem with wealthy, and generous, Islamic conservatives in the kingdom. In the United States several Islamic charities have been successfully prosecuted since September 11, 2001, for sending money to terrorists.

  

Terrorist organization prefer to set up support organizations in Europe and North America, as they can safely stash their families and key operatives there by having them all claim asylum. This, until recently, was something these nations were often quick to offer and were quite tolerant of terrorist activity. But these nations, especially the ones that were subjected to terrorist attacks since 2001, are much less accommodating these days. 

  

The terrorists constantly adapt. Decades of efforts to curb their fund raising have had an impact. It is much harder for terrorists to raise cash now, but they still do so. This has increased the importance of terrorists who specialize in fundraising. These men (and some women) develop lists of known donors, or potential ones, and assign other specialists to travel around and personally visit these donors. By way of introduction these visitors are authenticated by smartphone videos from some prominent cleric or terrorist leader, often in the presence of the visitor, saying that this man is authorized to collect funds for the cause. If a donation is forthcoming this brings into play another specialist who knows how to get the money safely from the donor to the terrorists. Meanwhile, yet another new fundraising specialist has come into play: the media advisor. Terrorists have learned that working the media (Western and in Moslem countries) is crucial for getting attention for specific terrorist groups in need of money. The media advisor recommends what types of attacks to make and what kind of press releases to put out afterward in order to get favorable attention from specific donors or groups of donors. The media advisors keep track of attitudes in countries or expatriate populations that are likely donors to identify individuals or organizations the fund raisers can approach and what types of terrorist actions will make such visits the most lucrative. 

  

Every terrorist organization has specific needs and donor communities most likely to give. Terrorist groups that survive and thrive are the ones that are most successful at raising cash. Western counter-terror operations now concentrate on all these fundraising specialists. These fellows are wanted alive, because of all the valuable things they know. But failing that, a Hellfire missile in their SUV will work too.

Counter-Terrorism ----- Fatal Contradictions

Al Qaeda leader Ayman al Zawahiri recently released an audio message, via the Internet, in which he blamed moderate Moslems for preventing more conservative or radical Moslems from taking control in the wake of the Arab Spring uprisings in 2011. This is a remarkable statement because in the past al Qaeda and other Islamic radical groups called on moderate Moslems to join them in overthrowing oppressive governments and share power once that was done. But Zawahiri correctly noted that whenever that happened the Islamic radicals pushed the more moderate Moslems aside and tried to establish an Islamic (religious) dictatorship. This failed because the moderates were more numerous and unwilling to submit to another dictatorship. At least that’s what happened in Tunisia and Egypt. In Iraq and Afghanistan the Islamic radicals never got to share power because in both those places the radicals revealed themselves as violent thugs early on.

 

Al Qaeda and Zawahiri accuse the moderate Moslems as being bad Moslems for their opposition to using Islamic law (sharia) to govern secular and religious affairs. During the 7^th century, when Islam was founded, the intent was that sharia would apply to all aspects of life for Moslems. But those who had to actually govern found that this did not work in practice, in part because there was no (and still is not) supreme authority to interpret sharia law. Thus the rulers and the clergy were feuding over the true meaning of sharia from the beginning. Naturally, the guys with the weapons won these arguments. This is how al Qaeda justifies the use of weapons and terror to establish the true religious dictatorship they believe Islamic law requires. Unfortunately, even among Islamic fundamentalists there is still no agreement on how to interpret sharia, which is why Islamic radical groups often fight each other. This tendency to drift into constant feuding and violence has been a problem with militant Islamic conservatives for over a thousand years. While modern technology makes this Islamic terrorism more widespread and lethal, the built-in self-destruction of Islamic radicalism remains and most Moslems realize it.

Counter-Terrorism ---- The Downside Of Victory

Even before September 11, 2001 counter-terrorism experts were becoming aware of how crucial money and other forms of material support are to even the most fanatical terrorist organizations. The intense scrutiny of Islamic terror groups in the last two decades revealed some other interesting angles to international terrorism. For example, after the Cold War ended many in the West were surprised to discover the extent to which the Soviet Union had provided support for terrorist groups.

 

There was not only an extensive network of terrorist training schools in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe but also cash subsidies, weapons and specialized equipment as well as technical advisors for terrorists outside the Soviet controlled countries. Western counter-terrorism organizations knew this support existed but not, until the Soviet Union fell in 1991 and their archives were opened for a few years, the extent of that support.

 

Islamic radical terrorists did not get much support from the Soviet Union because these groups considered the Soviets anti-Islam and prime targets for Islamic terrorism. The Soviets managed to keep the Islamic terrorists out of the Soviet Union and cut off from any Soviet support. The Islamic radicals learned to adapt by relying on pious, newly rich, Arabs from countries with lots of oil to export. After the Arab led oil cartel was formed in the 1970s and forced up oil prices there was a lot more Islamic charity for Islamic terrorist groups to tap into.

  

This brings us around to Somali Islamic radical group al Shabaab. Originally the fanatic wing of a more moderate Somali movement trying to impose law and order after more than a decade of chaos, al Shabaab soon became a major law and order problem itself. There are still several thousand armed al Shabaab men in Somalia after several years of fighting and losing to African peacekeepers and Somali troops. Al Shabaab suffered major losses last year and has scattered into smaller groups that hide out in remote parts of Somalia. At the moment al Shabaab is more interested in raising cash as the group is broke following its expulsion from the lucrative cities of Mogadishu and Kismayo over the last two years. There are now fewer opportunities to kidnap foreigners and the pirates, who used to share ransoms with al Shabaab, have not taken a ransomable ship in over a year. In short, al Shabaab needs money.

  

The effort to further weaken (and eventually obliterate) al Shabaab has now shifted to the group’s finances. This is a battle that gets little publicity and is easy to keep out of the news because it is, well, stuff that mostly happens out of public view. Al Shabaab is believed to be seeking cash from wealthy Arabs in Arabia, These are men who like to donate to Islamic charities that support Islamic radicalism. For nearly a decade both oil rich Arab countries and their Western allies have been trying to stop this source of terrorist funding, but have only been able to reduce it. The money still gets through to Islamic terror groups that have lots of media coverage. For that reason it is believed al Shabaab will try to carry out more spectacular attacks outside Somalia. That way al Shabaab can gain more media coverage and easier access to wealthy donors. 

  

This strategy is easier now because a recent power struggle within the organization has left the “Foreign” faction in charge. For years al Shabaab had been divided as the “Somalia” nationalist faction opposed the foreign volunteers who were eager for al Shabaab to carry out more terrorism outside Somalia. The Somalia faction wanted to hold off on this until they had all of Somalia under their control. But the Foreign faction believed that would take too long, especially once the foreign terrorists came to understand how fragmented Somalia was by clan and warlord politics. The foreigners concluded that Somalia would never be united, because it had never been united (for long) in the past. This is something most Somalis do not want to dwell on. Meanwhile in the past year many prominent al Shabaab nationalist (keep operations inside Somalia) faction leaders were killed or driven away from al Shabaab, which now sees itself primarily as an international terrorist organization. Thus the eagerness of American, Israeli, British and other European countries to help destroy al Shabaab in Somalia once and for all. As long as al Shabaab survives in Somalia the organization can reach out to Somali communities in other countries, especially the West, for donations, new recruits and overseas targets.

  

The loss of Kismayo last year was a major blow to al Shabaab finances because that port could be used to smuggle illegal goods (especially ivory) out of the country. Al Shabaab also collected fees on anything leaving or entering via Kismayo. Now al Shabaab has limited, and irregular, access to smaller ports on the coast. The financial loss to al Shabaab has been huge. Al Shabaab charged fees (for protection from al Shabaab retaliation) to businesses in all areas it controlled. This covered an enormous amount of legal and illegal trade via Kismayo. Kismayo alone was worth over $50 million a year to al Shabaab. For every million dollars of income al Shabaab could keep 400-500 armed men in action. Major operations, like suicide car bombings, can cost several thousand dollars (to get the car, build the bomb and train the suicide bomber) and intelligence gathering costs money, if only because bribes are an easy way to find out things but that can be expensive, even in Somalia. 

  

With most of that income gone in the past year, al Shabaab has begun to unravel. The loss of income led to many desertions and the inability to make attacks within Somalia. This is a common pattern in Islamic terror organizations. The less cash they have the fewer senior staff they have. This group includes skilled leadership and technical experts (for building bombs, planning attacks and working the media). These core members usually have families to support and need cash to do their work. Without the spectacular attacks potential recruits and donors won’t know you exist and you will fade away. Counter-terrorism efforts now try to induce this form of natural selection and al Shabaab is one of the primary targets. Al Shabaab is adapting and trying to establish branches in nearby countries with ethnic Somali populations. Thus al Shabaab becomes a more widespread threat and it becomes weaker overall. When the rats abandon a sinking ship the rats show up somewhere else.

Growing Threat To US As Enemies Acquiring More Ballistic Missiles, Senate Told

Senior U.S. defense officials underscored the importance of ballistic missile defense modernization efforts requested in the fiscal 2014 budget proposal citing disturbing trends in Iran, North Korea, Syria and elsewhere around the globe. 

"The threat continues to grow as our potential adversaries are acquiring a greater number of ballistic missiles, increasing their range and making them more complex, survivable, reliable and accurate," Navy Vice Adm. J.D. Syring, Director of the Missile Defense Agency, told the Senate Armed Services Committee during a testimony on Thursday.

"The missile defense mission is becoming more challenging as potential adversaries incorporate [ballistic missile defense] countermeasures," he reported. 

Syring said the Missile Defense Agency "is engaged either bilaterally or multilaterally with nearly two dozen countries and international organizations," including NATO and the Gulf Cooperation Council. He reported "good progress in our work with our international partners."

The budget requests $9.2 billion in fiscal 2014 and $45.7 billion over future years to develop and deploy missile defense capabilities.

Madelyn Creedon, Assistant Secretary of Defense for global strategic affairs, told the panel that these capabilities would both protect the U.S. homeland and strengthen regional missile defenses.

The administration remains committed to developing proven and cost-effective missile defense capabilities through the phased advance approach to regional missile defense, Creedon noted in her written statement.

"This approach puts emphasis on a flexible military toolkit with forces that are mobile and scalable. They underwrite deterrence in peacetime, but can be surged in crisis to meet defense requirements," she said.

Creeden reported on progress on three policy priorities: sustaining a strong homeland defense, strengthening regional missile defense and fostering increased international cooperation and participation.

She emphasized the importance of continually improving the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system in place to protect the U.S. homeland against potential limited intercontinental ballistic missile attacks.

The budget request, she said, supports this effort as well as enhancement of ground-based interceptors and deployment improved sensors, she said. The proposal also includes funding to implement regional missile defense approaches that Creedon said would be tailored to the unique deterrence and defense requirements of Europe, the Middle East and the Asia-Pacific regions.

While promoting these efforts, the United States is striving to build stronger relationships with allies and partners to cooperatively address the ballistic missile threat, and to help build partner capacity to do so, she said.

The fiscal 2014 budget request reflects DoD's goals of retaining the flexibility to adjust and to enhance its defenses as the threat and technologies evolve, Creedon said.

"Our most vital security commitments - the defense of the United States and the protection of our allies and partners and our forces around the world - demand nothing less," she added.

Sorcery In The Islamic World

Mehdi Taeb, a senior cleric in the Iranian government recently addressed some students at an Iranian religious school and explained to them that the major reason so many nations have gone along with the latest round of sanctions against Iran was because Israel had been using magic to persuade the leaders of these nations to back sanctions. Without the Israeli witchcraft, the sanctions would not exist. Taeb explained that the Israelis have used this magic before, as in 2009 against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad when he was running for president. Many Iranians openly opposed Ahmadinejad, who won anyway. This, to Taeb, was proof that devout Moslems could defeat the Jewish magic.

 

What’s interesting with this observation is that two years ago Taeb and his fellow clerics tried to get rid of Ahmadinejad and his zealous (against corrupt clerics) associates. One method used was send the police (which the clergy control) to arrest key Ahmadinejad aides and accuse them of witchcraft and sorcery. This led to street brawls between fans of Ahmadinejad and Islamic hardliners. Clubs, knives and other sharp instruments were used. There was blood in the streets. All because of a witch hunt. 

 

Ahmadinejad is quite popular, because he has gone after corrupt officials, especially the clerics and their families, who feel they are immune from prosecution and can take what they want. In theory, the clerics can get rid of Ahmadinejad by simply declaring that he is not religiously suitable to run for election. That's the kind of power the clerics have. But Ahmadinejad is too popular for that sort of censorship, and Ahmadinejad is not corrupt. His rants against Israel and the Jews, while a bit much for some clerics is also not grounds for being declared "un-Islamic" and ineligible to run for election. Ahmadinejad is quite respectful of Islam and most Moslem clerics, but willing to go after clerics who are dirty. This is also quite popular with most Iranians, and that scares the dirty clerics at the top.

 

So why have the clerics decided to accuse Ahmadinejad cronies of sorcery? That's because in most countries where there is a dominant religion, especially a state approved one, there is usually still a fear that the previous religion (or religions) will try to make a comeback. The former faiths often involved some really old-school stuff, including magic and sometimes animal, or even human, sacrifice. It is not uncommon for there to be civil laws covering those accused to be practicing such sorcery, and severe punishments for those convicted. At the very least, the accused will be driven from any senior government jobs they might hold, and that's what's being done to dozens of Ahmadinejad associates.

 

All cultures have a certain belief in magic and what Westerners call “conspiracy theories” to explain otherwise unexplainable events. In the Islamic world, there is a lot of attention paid to sorcery and magic, and people accused of practicing such things are regularly attacked and sometimes executed. Conspiracy theories are also a popular way to explain away inconvenient facts. 

 

For example, back in 2008 many Pakistanis believed that the then recent Islamic terrorist attack in Mumbai, India was actually the work of the Israeli Mossad or the American CIA and not the Pakistani terrorists who were killed or captured and identified. Such fantasies are a common explanation, in Moslem nations, for Islamic terrorist atrocities. Especially when women and children, and Moslems, are among the victims, other Moslems tend to accept fantastic explanations shifting the blame to infidels (non-Moslems).

 

After the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States, many Moslems again blamed Israel for staging those attacks. A favorite variation of this is that, before the attacks on the World Trade Center, a secret message went out to all Jews in the area to stay away. Another variation has it that the 19 attackers (all of them Arab, 15 from Saudi Arabia) were really not Arabs, but falsely identified as part of the Israeli deception. In the United States, some Americans insist that the attack was the work of the U.S. government, complete with the World Trade Center towers being brought down by prepositioned explosive charges. While few Americans accept this, the CIA and Mossad fantasies are widely accepted in the Moslem world. Even Western educated Arabs, speaking good English, will casually express, and accept, these tales of the Israeli Mossad staging the attacks, to trick the U.S. into attacking Afghanistan and Iraq. Americans are shocked at this, but the Moslems expressing these beliefs just shrug when confronted with contradictory evidence.

 

American troops arriving in Iraq after 2003 went through a real culture shock as they encountered these cultural differences. They also discovered that the cause of this, and many other Arab problems, is the concept of "inshallah" ("If God wills it.") This is a basic tenet of Islam, although some scholars believe the attitude was a cultural trait that preceded Islam. In any event, "inshallah" is deadly when combined with modern technology. For this reason, Arab countries either have poorly maintained infrastructure and equipment (including military stuff), or import a lot of foreigners, possessing the right attitudes, to maintain everything. That minority of Arabs who do have a realistic attitude towards maintenance and personal responsibility are considered odd, but useful.

 

The "inshallah" thing is made worse by a stronger belief in the supernatural, and magic in general. This often extends to technology. Thus many Iraqis believed that American troops wore sunglasses that enabled them to see through clothing, and armor vests that were actually air conditioned. When they first encounter these beliefs, U.S. troops thought the Arabs are putting them on. Then it sinks in that Arabs really believe this stuff. It's a scary moment.

 

However, many troops learn to live with, and even exploit, these odd beliefs. When troops at one base discovered that they weren't being attacked much, because many of the locals believed that the base was surrounded by a force field, the troops would casually make reference to their force field, when they were outside the wire and among the locals. This reinforced the force field myth, and made the base safer. Other troops would invent new fantasies, like a pretending that a handheld bit of military electronics was actually a mind reading device. That often made interrogations go a lot quicker. Not all Arabs believe in this stuff, and those that didn't and worked for the Americans, often as an interpreter, could only shrug their shoulders when asked about it.

 

This easy acceptance of fantasies is exploited by leaders throughout the Middle East, and the Moslem world in general. Leaders who know better, build on these fantasies as a way to maintain their control over the population. The problem is a dirty little secret in the Moslem world, that leaders and academics don't even like to discuss it openly, much less with infidels. But it is real, and you can read all about it in the local media, or overhear it in the coffee shops.

Iranian missiles sent to Palestinians to target Israel, officials admit

 Iran has supplied the Palestinians with Iranian missiles of the Fajr-5 variety, with a range of 80km (50 miles) and the capacity to strike the heart of Israel, several officials from the Islamic Republic have admitted.

“[Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader] Ramadan 'Abdallah [Shalah] said to me: 'We want to strike Tel Aviv with Fajr-5 missiles… we did it, and three million Zionists ran to bomb shelters in fear,” said Ali Akbar Velayati, advisor to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei for international affairs, in an April 16 speech in southern Iran.

In November 2012, Majlis member and former Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps official Javad Karimi said, “We sent the besieged Gaza 50,000 missiles and thousands of anti-tank rockets,” which “attests to a major victory in the conflict over Palestine in favor of the Iranian nation, and allowed Iran to once again prove its strength to the world.”

Iran Backed Mass Murder In Syria

In Syria the Assad government has either listened to its Iranian advisors or is simply returning to the brutal methods of the founding dictator of the Assad government. This can be seen in the new tactics used by government forces. The new drill involves the heavy use of mass murder to terrorize civilians into not giving any support to the rebels. The basic drill is to send in these special troops, accompanied by secret police operatives skilled at sniffing out those who might really be rebels. These Iranian trained troops proceed to round up military age males and kill them, along with any women and children who get in the way. Any of these males who might really be rebels are taken alive for questioning and usually killed later. The Assad forces stay out of pro-rebel villages at night, because that’s when rebel fighters who might be around have an edge. But in the daytime it’s terror time.

 

Such mass murder of real or suspected opponents is an old Assad family tradition. Back in 1982 there was a large scale uprising by Sunni Arabs that was put down with great brutality. That bllodbath was ordered by Hafez Assad, the father of current dictator Basher Assad. The 1982 operation culminated in the town of Hama, where entire neighborhoods were blasted with artillery and infantry sent in to kill the survivors. The result was over 10,000 dead civilians and the end of the uprising. In Syria, this did not, officially, happen. But everyone knows about it, especially those from Hama and surrounding areas. Over time the fear of a repeat subsided and that played a role in the current Sunni rebellion.

The current tactics appear to be the work of Iran, which has used similar tactics on its own people. Preparations began with a growing number of pro-Assad fighters being flown to Iran for training in special urban fighting and irregular warfare tactics. Iran was helping Assad to build a special infantry force of men trained in urban warfare. Iran is also paying for support from the Hezbollah Shia militia of Lebanon, which is supplying Assad with gunmen and supplies. Iran has apparently also encouraged Hezbollah to threaten an open invasion of Syria if the rebels do not give up. Currently the rebels have been shooting across the border at Hezbollah positions in Lebanon and Sunni activists in Lebanon have been attacking and kidnapping Hezbollah members. Hezbollah fighters are increasingly seen on the Syrian border or inside Syria fighting rebels. 

 

Iran tried to broker some kind of peace deal between the Assads and the rebels. This failed, partly because Assad was willing to fight to the death (or at least until he and his family took the last plane out). The rebels were not interested in any deals, believing that this would simply give the Assads and Iran a chance to make a comeback. Iran does not see this escalation as all that risky because they know that the Sunni Islamic radicals have no problem slaughtering and terrorizing Shia (as they did for several years in Iraq and continue to do so at a lower intensity level). For Sunni and Shia radicals fighting like this is not seen as an abomination but God’s Will. When you get that attitude on both sides, things tend to get very ugly. Iran realizes that only a minority of the rebel forces are Sunni radicals (who are immune to this sort of savagery, especially the foreign terrorists who don’t really care how many Syrians are killed as long as they have a shot at turning Syria into a Sunni religious dictatorship.) Situations like this also demonstrate why in the last few decades most Arab victims of organized violence have been killed by other Arabs, not Israelis or foreign troops.