Recent Appearances...

Warning: Undefined array key "rbname" in /data/rantburg.com/www/rantburg/pgrecentorg.php on line 14
Hello !
Recent Appearances...

Syria-Lebanon-Iran

Islamic State claims responsibility for attacks in Iran, death toll revised down to 84

2024-01-05

Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited.

Follow up to this story from yesterday, when it was claimed around 200 were killed.

[Regnum] The Islamic Statt claimed responsibility for two terrorist attacks in the Iranian city of Kerman, in which 103 people were killed. This was reported by Reuters, citing a statement from the organization.

"Islamic State claimed responsibility on Thursday for two bombings that killed nearly 100 people and wounded many more at a ceremony in Iran commemorating commander Qasem Soleimani, who was killed by a US drone in 2020," it said.

As reported by Regnum news agency, on January 3, in the Iranian city of Kerman, an explosion occurred on the road leading to the cemetery where General Qasem Soleimani is buried. Ambulances were sent to the scene. The media also reported a second explosion.

The number of victims of a terrorist attack near a cemetery in Iran where Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) General Qassem Soleimani is buried has risen to 211 people. Previously it was reported that 103 were killed and 142 were injured.

According to media reports, Red Crescent employees were among the dead.

Following the terrorist attack, the Iranian government declared January 4 a day of universal mourning.

In turn, Russian President Vladimir Putin on January 3 expressed deep condolences to the leadership of Iran in connection with the tragic consequences of the terrorist attack in Kerman. The President's message was sent to the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ali Khamenei, and the country's President, Ibrahim Raisi.

The Times of Israel adds:

The Islamic State group grabbed credit Thursday for two suicide kabooms targeting a commemoration for an Iranian general slain in a 2020 US dronezap, the worst terror attack to strike Iran
...a theocratic Shiite state divided among the Medes, the Persians, and the (Arab) Elamites. Formerly a fairly civilized nation ruled by a Shah, it became a victim of Islamic revolution in 1979. The nation is today noted for spontaneously taking over other countries' embassies, maintaining whorehouses run by clergymen, involvement in international drug trafficking, and financing sock puppet militias to extend the regime's influence. The word Iran is a cognate form of Aryan. The abbreviation IRGC is the same idea as Stürmabteilung (or SA). The term Supreme Guide is a the modern version form of either Duce or Führer or maybe both. They hate ~~Jews~~ ~~Zionists~~ Jews. Their economy is based on the production of oil and vitriol...
in decades as the wider Middle East remains on edge.

Experts who follow the group confirmed that the statement, circulated online among jihadists, came from the murderous Moslems, who likely hope to take advantage of the chaos gripping the region amid Israel’s war on Hamas
...always the voice of sweet reason...
in the Gazoo
...Hellhole adjunct to Israel and Egypt's Sinai Peninsula, inhabited by Gazooks. The place was acquired in the wake of the 1967 War and then presented to Paleostinian control in 2006 by Ariel Sharon, who had entered his dotage. It is currently ruled with an iron fist by Hamas with about the living conditions you'd expect. It periodically attacks the Hated Zionist Entity whenever Iran needs a ruckus created or the hard boyz get bored, getting thumped by the IDF in return. The ruling turbans then wave the bloody shirt and holler loudly about oppression and disproportionate response...
Strip.

Wednesday’s attack in Kerman killed at least 84 people and maimed another 284. It targeted a ceremony honoring Revolutionary Guard Gen. Qassem Soleimani
, held as an icon by supporters of the country’s theocracy and viewed by the US military as a deadly foe who aided gunnies who killed American troops in Iraq.

The Islamic State
...formerly ISIS or ISIL, depending on your preference. Before that they were al-Qaeda in Iraq, as shaped by Abu Musab Zarqawi. They're really very devout, committing every atrocity they can find in the Koran and inventing a few more. They fling Allah around with every other sentence, but to hear western pols talk they're not really Moslems....
group identified the two attackers as Omar al-Mowahed and Seif-Allah al-Mujahed. The claim said the men carried out the attacks with explosive vests. It also used disparaging language when discussing Shiites, whom the Islamic State group views as heretics.

The statement did not mention which regional arm of the bully boyz carried out the attack, which other claims in the past have had. But Aaron Y. Zelin, a senior fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said that some previous claims have not specified the regional arm, and that the latest claim came directly from an account associated with the group.

The group likely hoped to see Iran strike at Israel, widening its war on Hamas into a regional conflict that Islamic State could potentially take advantage of, Zelin said.

"This falls under the modus operandi of IS, especially since it was such a mass casualty attack," Zelin said. "They are kind of like the Joker. They want to see the world burn. They don’t care how it happens as long as it benefits them."

An earlier report by the state-run IRNA news agency, later aired by state television
... and if you can't believe state television who can you believe?
, quoted an unnamed "informed source" as saying that surveillance footage from the route to the commemoration at Kerman’s Matryrs Cemetery clearly showed a male jacket wallah detonating explosives.

The official said the second blast "probably" came from another suicide bomber, though it hadn’t been determined beyond doubt.

The Iranian state media reports also gave new distances for how far apart the blasts happened, describing them as occurring 1.5 kilometers (about a mile) and 2.7 kilometers (1.68 miles) away from Soleimani’s crypt. The official said the bombers likely chose the locations because they were outside of the security perimeter for the commemoration.

An earlier corpse count of 103 was twice revised lower after officials realized that some names had been repeated on a list of victims and due to the severity of wounds suffered by some of the dead, health authorities said.

Many of the maimed were at death's door, however, so the corpse count could rise.

Link

Arabia

Saudi prince: nukes an option if Iran welches on deal

2016-05-08

Washington -- In a reflection of the change and churn in the Middle East, former high-level officials from Saudi Arabia and Israel -- nations that have no formal diplomatic ties -- spoke publicly about their shared sense of Iran as a threat, their differences on Palestinians and the role the United States plays in their chaotic region.

With so many foreign policy failures to choose from, I think this one is Champ's worst...

Prince Turki al-Faisal, Saudi Arabia's former intelligence chief, and retired Israeli Army Maj. Gen. Yaakov Amidror, a former adviser to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, spoke in Washington Thursday night at a discussion arranged by The Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
Former Saudi Intel Chief: Problem is 'clouded' U.S. policy

Their joint appearance doesn't mean the two countries will be normalizing relations anytime soon, Turki warned.

"We are both exes," he said, referring to their status as former officials and not current representatives of their governments.

Despite that -- and the fact that the Saudi kingdom has never formally acknowledged Israel's existence -- the two nations have been quietly cooperating for years, exchanging intelligence on shared threats and in particular on Iran.

The most obvious bond the two countries share is their strong security relationship with and dependence on the United States -- and the fact that both have had rocky patches with the Obama administration over the past few years. Both opposed the deal on Iran's nuclear program, while Saudi officials spoke about their anger that President Barack Obama didn't follow through on a commitment to punish Syria if it crossed the "red line" of chemical weapons use.

Turki said the "strategic relationship with the U.S. will remain, from the Saudi point of view," but suggested it needed rethinking.

"There needs to be a re-evaluation and recalibration of the relationship," he said.

Amidror said that while the "Palestinian issue" was a major difference between Israel and the United States, there is "no substitute for the United States of America in the Middle East."

Those "who think other countries can do what the United States used to do is a big mistake," he said. And he indicated that he understood the Obama administration's attempts to recalibrate its ties to the Middle East.

Both men made it clear that their countries will take steps if they see any erosion of the Iran deal they so forcefully opposed.

Turki said "all options" would be on the table if Iran moves toward a bomb, "including the acquisitions of nuclear weapons, to face whatever eventuality might come from Iran."

Officials from the kingdom, which is party to the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, have raised that possibility in the past. However, they have more strongly stressed the need for the Middle East to be a "weapons of mass destruction free zone," as Turki did at the event.

Amidror said he expected that Iran will move to build a bomb "toward the end of the agreement," which limits research, development and enrichment over 10 to 15 years, if it doesn't violate it first.

"In principle, the Iranians can go nuclear and from the Israeli point of view, this is a threat to existence," Amidror said. "We will not let this happen."

The two men, sitting side by side on a stage, generally impassive while the other spoke, sparred gently over the long-running Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Arab cooperation with Israel would improve, Turki said, if it could resolve its decadeslong disagreement with the Palestinians.

"Cooperation between Arab countries and Israel in meeting threats, from wherever they come, whether Iran, is better fortified if there is peace between the Arab nations and Israel," he said.

The Saudi prince returned to the issue repeatedly, criticizing Israel's presence in the West Bank and tying it to a wider Mideast peace.

"There has to be a lifting of the occupation," Turki said. "The Palestinians have to have their own country."

But Amidror said it was the Palestinians who were sabotaging the process. He argued it was a mistake for the Arab world to give the Palestinians the "key" to unlocking the relationship with Israel, since that effectively blocked progress.

Arab states, Amidror told Turki, should "cooperate with Israel instead of dictating" to it. He urged regional leaders to "think outside the box" and suggested the Arab world form an "umbrella of cooperation" on Palestinian issue to help move negotiations along.

Link

Syria-Lebanon-Iran

WAPO logic: The Iran nuclear deal is Champ's Iraq troop surge

2015-08-28

[WAPO] The drama is breathtaking. A decisive president makes a crucial decision on the Middle East issue that defines his tenure, a decision that could transform not just the specific situation but regional security. Yet he has just lost both houses of Congress, opinion polls on the decision are heading south, lawmakers are up in arms, and even some in his administration have doubts. But rather than hesitate, he drives ahead.

Barack Obama, 2015, with Iran? No, George W. Bush, 2006-07, with the Iraq troop surge to save his effort in the country he ordered the U.S. military to invade. Both presidents, at the same point in their tenures, pushed major initiatives against very strong domestic opposition. Given the similarities, the fate of Bush's surge could provide insight into the fate of the Joint Comprehensive Program of Action with Iran.

Author: James F. Jeffrey is the Philip Solondz distinguished fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy. He served as U.S. ambassador to Turkey from 2008 to 2010 and Iraq from 2010 to 2012.

Link

China-Japan-Koreas

Europe's BDS And Bonsai Armies: Is The Sun Setting In The West And Rising East In China?

2014-08-15

Interesting because of the writer, and the audience she chose for it. Her other pieces in ToI look to be similarly interesting.

[IsraelTimes] Last week's Newsweek cover story was headlined "Exodus: why Europe's Jews are fleeing once again."

Another Guardian news article warned Europe's rise of anti-Semitism is "in worst times since the Nazis."

While Europeans obsess about Israel and accuse her of "genocide" for fighting terrorism against Hamas, always the voice of sweet reason, and exercising her right to self-defense, they are strangely silent in face of ISIS's genocide and abominations against fellow Christians and non-Moslems in Iraq.

This moral double standard against Israel is perplexing, especially for China with no history of anti-Semitism. Ironically, while the West is turning against Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East and frontline against Islamic jihadism, this rising power in the East is marching across the Silk Road to stand with Jerusalem in the war against terror.

Faced with its worst terror attacks in decades in Xinjiang and elsewhere, China, rather than turning to Europe, is seeking Israeli help in counter-terrorism. Chinese netizens and government also increasingly value Israel as a rock of stability in a sea of Islamic upheaval in the Middle East.

In a sense China has much in common with Israel as a victim of double standards in counter-terrorism. When Beijing faced terrorist attacks in Kunming, western media described it as "violence" rather than "terrorism," which angered Chinese netizens on Weibo and Wechat.

And despite increasing demilitarization and ongoing economic woes, Europe nonetheless is applying BDS against Israel, a dynamic economy based on innovation and high technology. By contrast, China recognizes this asset and is quickly investing in Israeli high-tech sector and human capital via joint ventures and research centers, while Jerusalem looks east to China's lucrative export market as the world's second largest economy.

Interestingly, Turkey shares the Israeli assessment of Europe's economic as well as military decline. In the aftermath of EU's Eurozone crisis and defense austerity measures, some mid-level ranks of the Turkish military are also looking east, with a Turkish naval officer referring to European armies as "bonsai armies" and why Turkey is looking eastward because "China is on the way of great power."

Bonsai is a miniature Japanese tree the size of a potted plant.

In November 2011, Christian Molling of the Berlin-based Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politick (SWP) wrote an article assessing how defense budget cuts will produce European bonsai armies over the next five years, with ever shrinking forces and diminishing capabilities. "In Germany, La Belle France, and Great Britannia there will be miniature versions of armiesâ¦these tiny armies will hardly offer serious military power anymore."

Thus Turkey had turned to China for its NATO
...the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. A cautionary tale of cost-benefit analysis....
missile defense system in September.

In addition to corroding economic and military power, Europe's moral standard also seems to be eroding.

Antisemitism is ranked the highest in La Belle France, Belgium and Hungary—especially La Belle France with increasing exodus of French Jews to Israel in fear for their lives. And despite being a permanent member of the UN Security Council and new NATO member since it rejoined in 2009, Gay Paree is also facing erosion of its moral authority among allies with its recent sale of Mistral warships to Putin.

Gay Paree has not only reaped the condemnation of its NATO allies, especially the outrage of Poland and Baltic states, but also incurred the contempt of Japan that has territorial disputes with Russia over the Kuril Islands—or Northern Territories of Kunashir, Iturup, Shikotan and Habomai in Japanese parlance.

In July Japanese Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera told his French counterpart, Jean-Yves Le Drian, that Japan was strongly concerned about this plan and its impact on East Asia's security situation.

"'Strong concern', in a sense, means we want them to stop the deal," Onedera told news hounds.

U.S. State Department also expressed its displeasure that "We don't think anyone should be providing arms to Russia", and that delivery of French Mistral amphibious assault ships to Russia would be "completely inappropriate." In fact, Russian Admiral Vladimir Vysotsky said if Russia had Mistral ships in its 2008 invasion of Georgia, it would have taken "40 minutes instead of 26 hours."

In face of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and downing of Malaysian flight MH17, French delivery of offensive naval platforms built to support invasions is thus seen as sacrificing fellow NATO democratic allies' security on the altar of commerce with an aggressor.

Thus with Europe's moral compromises, rampant anti-Semitism, BDS movement, economic woes and bonsai armies, Israel and China are turning to each other and forging a new alignment to combat global terrorism. As Chinese ambassador to Israel Gao Yanping penned in a J-post article back in April, bilateral relations are bound to blossom. And as the sun seems to be rising in the East with China enjoying continual blessings and ascendance in global power and prestige, one wonders if this is confirming the Book of Genesis scripture that "I will bless those who bless you [Israel] and I will curse him who curses you."

Dr. Christina Lin is a Fellow at the Center for Transatlantic Relations at SAIS-Johns Hopkins University. She is the author of "The New Silk Road: China's Energy Strategy in the Greater Middle East" (The Washington Institute for Near East Policy), and a former director for China policy at the U.S. Department of Defense.

Link

Iraq

Iraqis prepare as US leaves

2011-12-15

BAGHDAD: After billions of dollars and nearly nine years of training, American troops are leaving behind an Iraqi security force arguably capable of providing internal security but unprepared to defend the nation against foreign threats at a time of rising tensions throughout the Middle East.

Building up an Iraqi military and police able to protect the country became a key goal of the United States and its allies after they defeated and then disbanded the Saddam Hussein-era force in 2003. As Americas role in Iraq fades, the results appear at best incomplete.

By 2012 we thought the Iraqis would do 99% of their own internal security while we spent the next few years teaching them the basics of western-style external security. Looks like we won't have that. Too bad for Iraq.

Iraqi forces currently about 700,000 strong have been largely responsible for security in Baghdad and other cities since 2009, carrying out their own raids and other combat operations against insurgents.

More than 10,000 Iraqi soldiers and police have been killed since the new force was established more than double the number of American military deaths. Few if any military forces in the Arab world have as much combat experience within the ranks.

They can kick a door in and knock out a networks leadership as good as anybody Ive seen, said US Lt. Gen. Robert Caslen, commander of the NATO training mission, which will soon be disbanded. I would say that they have the discipline and the tenacity to fight as well as anybody Ive ever seen.

Nevertheless, Iraqi forces have their work cut out for them. They will be operating in a country which, although quieter than a few years ago, saw more people killed, wounded and kidnapped last year than in Afghanistan, according to US figures. The departure of American forces this month also leaves Iraq vulnerable to threats from its neighbors Iran to the east, Turkey to the north and Syria to the west. A major Arab country of about 30 million people with some of the worlds largest proven petroleum reserves is incapable of defending its borders in one of the most unstable parts of the world.

The Iraqi military chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Babaker Zebari, has said it would take until at least 2020 for Iraq to defend its airspace. Without a well-trained and equipped air force, Iraqi ground forces would be hard-pressed to defend against incursions across borders with few natural barriers and little cover from vegetation.

An army without an air force is exposed, Zebari was quoted as saying in a report last October by the US agency responsible for overseeing Iraqi reconstruction.

Even though a full-scale ground invasion from its neighbors may seem remote, the possibility of incursions from Turkey against Kurdish rebels, or Iranians along disputed border stretches or even from a Syria facing an internal revolt cannot be ruled out, especially at a time when the Arab Spring and the looming showdown between the West and Iran are raising tensions throughout the region.

Question is, if any of those scenarios brewed up would the U.S. come back to help Iraq? President Romney likely would. President Perry certainly would. President Obama? Not a chance in hell.

External defense seemed a low priority in the early years of the Iraq war, when tens of thousands of American troops, tanks, planes and artillery served as a deterrent. During those years, the main threat was posed by extremists, including Al-Qaeda in Iraq, who were battling the Americans and their allies in the streets of Baghdad and other major cities. Iraqi forces were organized and trained primarily to augment the US-led force, using the American military as a rough model.

Soon, Iraqi commanders were giving Powerpoint briefings, and their generals were handing out specially made coins emblazoned with their names and units as souvenirs. Iraqi soldiers at street checkpoints were wearing kneepads slouched down around their ankles, again just like their American counterparts.

But there wasnt enough time to develop the full package logistics, intelligence, medical services and a fully integrated command structure for the Iraqis to operate as effectively without US support. A budget crisis in 2009 and a lengthy political stalemate the following year crippled both the qualitative development of Iraqs forces and its ability to implement its own development plan, wrote analyst Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

The head of Iraqi military intelligence, Hatem Al-Magsousi, said it takes the Iraqis a week to plan and carry out a military operation that they could execute in a day with American help.

Such delays could be costly if Al-Qaeda as expected takes advantage of a security vacuum to reconstitute itself following major defeats on the battlefield in the final years of the war.

Unless the Iraqi security forces continue to put pressure on Al-Qaeda, they could regenerate capability and come back in an even worse way than they have in the past, said a US military spokesman, Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Buchanan.

Another key concern is keeping the security forces free of any political pressure or sectarian interference. For over a year now, Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki has effectively controlled the Ministries of Interior and Defense while conflicts between political blocs have delayed the appointments of permanent ministers. That leaves both key ministries leaderless and without direction at a crucial time.

It also has allowed Al-Maliki to pack some units with members of his tribe and appoint political favorites to command positions with no effective checks and balances.

That means Maliki is making all these senior officer decisions, and thats not a healthy modus operandi for a vibrant democracy, said retired Lt. Gen. James Dubik, who was in charge of training Iraqi forces in 2007 and 2008.

The role of Al-Maliki, who spent years abroad as a leader of the underground resistance to Saddams regime, also threatens to worsen sectarian tensions in the ranks. Those tensions nearly tore the country apart in the dark days of intense communal fighting in 2006 and 2007.

Public trust is further undermined by corruption, including selling fuel for military vehicles on the black market or pocketing the salaries of nonexistent soldiers.

The widespread practice of buying command appointments is particularly destructive because it places corrupt officers at the head of divisions, brigades and battalions. Such commanders then commit theft and fraud to recoup their investment in the job, wrote Iraq analyst Michael Knights in a report this summer for The Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Despite the US military withdrawal, Iraq and the United States will still maintain a security relationship. Gen. Caslen is in charge of a $10 billion weapons sales program that will be run out of the US Embassy next year with nearly 160 military personnel. Hundreds of civilian contractors will train Iraqi troops on equipment theyve bought from American companies, including 18 F-16 fighter jets which Baghdad ordered this year.

That will give Washington some leverage with the Iraqis but hardly to the degree it enjoyed when there were nearly 170,000 US troops on Iraqi soil.

What remains unclear is whether without the Americans, the Iraqi military will continue the transition to a well-oiled professional force, free of political influence and capable of integrating their various weapons systems and units into an effective machine capable of defending the nation.

Left to their own devices, the transition does not occur, Dubik said.

Lt. Gen. Frank Helmick, deputy commander of US Forces-Iraq, told reporters last week that there is a question mark right now for external security, but for the internal security weve done all we can do.

We really dont know whats going to happen, Helmick said.

Link

The Grand Turk

Iranian spies falsified travel documents for Gaza flotilla

2011-06-20

3 Iranian spies reportedly on house arrest after they forged passports in Istanbul; spies have had contact with al-Qaida, German 'Bild' reports.

Iran's suspected connection to the Turkish IHH flotilla is at risk of being exposed, German daily Bild reported on Saturday, citing intelligence sources. Following the Iranian government's concern over the possible revelation, three Iranian spies have reportedly been placed under house arrest after they falsified passports and travel documents in Istanbul for organizers of the IHH flotilla. According to the Bild report, the spies' cover names are "The Broker," "Bit Taxim" and "Hot Chai" and they reportedly have been in contact with al-Qaida and the Iranian al-Quds Brigade.

On Friday, the IHH announced that it will not take part in a Gaza protest flotilla later this month due to repairs needed for the Mavi Marmara, prompting activists to pledge that they will reach the shores of Gaza independently.

Bulent Yildirim, head of the IHH, announced at a news conference that the vessel will not sail for Gaza because of unrepaired damage caused by the IDF raid on the ship which left nine Turkish activists dead in May 2010. "The Mavi Marmara unfortunately suffered so much damage we couldn't get it ready in time," Yildirim said. Speaking to reporters in Istanbul, he denied that Ankara had forced the organization's hand, saying "there is absolutely no obstruction by the government."

Following the IHH's announcement, the Free Gaza Movement posted a message on their website in which they said: "the fact that the Mavi Marmara will not participate in the FF2 [Freedom Flotilla 2], means that the misinformation put forward by the Israeli government and its supporters that the flotilla is a "Turkish" and "Islamist" effort will be exposed.

"Hundreds of people from around the world are sailing to break the blockade on Gaza. FF2 will include more ships than the first flotilla, even without the Mavi Marmara. Moreover, the coalition consists of significantly more member organizations this time -- from all over Europe, North America, the Middle East and North Africa," the message continued.

Earlier this month, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu was quoted in the Turkish newspaper Hurriyet as saying that "Israel should wait for a new Palestinian government to be set up and then lift the blockade on Gaza. The aid flotilla should also wait to see what happens with the Rafah border crossing being opened, and to see how Israel perceives the new government."

Soner Cagaptay, a senior fellow and director of the Turkish Research Program at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said Friday night that he believes Ankara pressured the IHH to pull out of the flotilla, partly out of a desire to avoid seeing the organization designated a terrorist group.

Cagaptay added that while Turkey is a democracy, the power of Erdogan's AKP party is such that the IHH would be hesitant to ignore their concerns. "Their political power everyone feels -- they are the longest ruling party since multi-party democracy began in Turkey," he said. "Any Turkish organization that would cross them would feel their weight."

Cagaptay said that with US-Turkish relations currently in a "happy phase," they may have wanted to prevent the IHH from taking part in order to avoid souring the "vast avenue of cooperation" between the two countries. "I think that Turkish-US policy has entered a positive phase," he said. "The relationship with the US is kind of taking off, and there is now not only a positive area for cooperation, but it's possible to move forward. Perhaps they're saying in Ankara that things are sweetening up with Washington."

Detailing the latest on the lawfare front of the Gaza flotilla issue, Roger Simon has a post in the Pajamas Media "Tatler":

These tactics are bearing fruit. Darshan-Leitner told Poulos that Lloyds has responded to Shurat HaDin's letter by saying it will not insure any boats participating in the flotilla. A French insurance company didn't respond to the group directly, but announced that it will not insure a boat destined for the flotilla that is coming out of Marseille. Inmarsat has said that as the boats are not owned by Hamas, they are under no obligation to withhold satellite communications services; but Darshan-Leitner counters that the US Attorney General recently indicted a group that provided legal advice to the Tamil Tigers, which is a terrorist organization. If Inmarsat goes ahead, it opens itself up to the possibility of huge liability.

Link

Syria-Lebanon-Iran

Iran Inching Closer to Nukes

2010-07-13

In an article reported by Reuters today, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said that Iran is moving closer to possessing the potential which in principle could be used for the creation of nuclear weapons.

The is one of the first times that Russia, who has traditionally been a steadfast ally and supporter of Iran, has publicly criticized the regime and conceded that it is moving closer to obtaining nuclear weapons.

This follows comments made last Friday during a conference held at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, by Reza Kahlili, a former Iranian Revolutionary Guard and defector to the CIA, in which he accused the Obama Administration of naiveté and of betraying the Iranian people in their struggle for freedom by seeking to engage the brutal Iranian regime.

Khalili warned that the Iranian regime was irrational:

Stop dreaming, please. You are not dealing with rational people. Every time you extend a hand, it is not seen as sincerity, but stupidity.

Prophetically, Kahlili said of Iran:

This is a messianic regime. There should be no doubt -- they are going to commit the most horrendous suicide bombing in human history. They will attack Israel, European capitals, and (the) Persian Gulf region at the same time.

In order to stop this 'most horrendous suicide bombing in human history', Khalili called for a pre-emptive strike. "The question is -- is it going to be more destabilizing now or when they have the nukes" he asked. Khalili stressed that any such attack ought to be specifically directed against the Revolutionary Guards and not the Iranian people or the country's infrastructure.

Importantly, Khalili said that any attack must be simultaneously accompanied by a vocal announcement of the support for freedom in Iran "and the people will do the rest". The ultimate goal Khalili proclaimed must be the overthrow of the brutal regime.

Khalili's comments echo those of Yousef Al-Otaiba, the UAE Ambassador to the United States, who -- only days ago -- spoke of the dangers of a nuclear armed Iran and said that the benefits of bombing Iran's nuclear program outweigh the short term costs of such an attack.

The question remains though -- is the world paying attention to these warnings?

Link

Israel-Palestine-Jordan

Washington Think Tank Predicts New Mideast War

2010-04-22

A U.S.-based think tank has issued a report saying that a new Middle East war may be looming on the horizon.

If hostilities do in fact break out, writes David Schenker of The Washington Institute, fighting could take on a regional dimension not seen since 1973.' The prediction comes in response to reports that Syria has supplied the Lebanon-based Hizbullah terrorist organization with advanced Russian-made 9K38 Igla-S anti-aircraft missiles. Transfer of the shoulder-fired ordnance to the terrorist group has previously been marked by Israeli officials as a red line' issue.

Schenker also cited pronouncements posted in late February on the internet by the Lebanon-based Hizbullah terrorist organization hinting the group might renew its aggression against the Jewish State. The statement followed an unprecedented trilateral summit / dinner meeting on February 26 in Damascus between Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Syrian President Bashar Assad and Hizbullah chief Hassan Nasrallah.

Meetings between the Syrian and Iranian presidents have become very common in the past several years; however, Nasrallah's presence at the table marked a new chapter in the development of the Evil Axis. Little was publicized about the discussion, other than what was later posted on the Hizbullah website, said Schenker, noting the account recounted the escalating strategic response of the axis of the confrontationist, rejectionist, and resistance states' to the so-called U.S.-Israeli threat.

Schenker also noted Nasrallah's sabre-rattling earlier in February, during a speech delivered on Hizbullah's Martyred Leaders Day, in which the terrorist laid out the new strategy for reprisals against Israel:

If you [Israel} bomb Rafik Hariri International Airport in Beirut, we will bomb Ben-Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv. If you bomb our docks, we will bomb your docks. If you bomb our oil refineries, we will bomb your oil refineries. If you bomb our factories, we will bomb your factories. And if you bomb our power plants, we will bomb your power plants,' Nasrallah declared.

Recent reports that Syria has provided the terrorist group with Scud missiles capable of reaching deep into Israel's central and southern regions have supported and underscored Nasrallah's threats. The U.S. State Department summoned the Syrian Ambassador, Imad Mustafa, to inform his government about the level of danger if the missiles crossed the border' but did little more.

The Institute has also concluded that Damascus has finally broken the code to Europe, and appears to be on the verge of doing so with the Obama administration as well. Currently, Syria appears to be in a position where it can cultivate its ties with the West without sacrificing its support for terrorism.'

In addition, the report noted IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi's testimony in mid-March before the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that Hizbullah was building up its forces north of the Litani [River].' Ashkenazi reported at the time that the northern border was secure and calm, but that this can change.'

The fact that Hizbullah continues to stockpile weapons in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701, the ceasefire agreement that ended the 2006 Second Lebanon War, and that Iran and Syria continue to provide the group with illegal arms, observed the Institute, has contributed to the deterioration of the security situation in the north.

Hizbullah retaliation against Israel for the 2008 assassination of its military leader Imad Mughniyeh could spark a war,' writes Schenker. So could Hizbullah firing missiles in retribution for an Israeli strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. The transfer of sensitive Syrian technology to [Hizbullah] could also prompt an Israeli strike. Regrettably, even if Israel continues to try and defuse tensions in the north, given the central role Tehran has in determining Hizbullah policy, a third Lebanon war may be inevitable.'
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) is a think tank based in Washington, D.C. focused on United States foreign policy in the Middle East. It was established by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in 1985.

Link

Olde Tyme Religion

One third of Egyptians, Saudi say "religious duty" to support jihad finan

2009-12-19

(UPI) -- More than 35 percent of Egyptians and Saudis interviewed in a recent survey considered it their duty to back regional mujahedin financially, a scholar notes.

Private polling of Egyptian and Saudi citizens reveals trends regarding the public sentiment toward jihadi groups like al-Qaida.

David Pollock, a senior fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said the polling shows more than 35 percent of those interviewed considered it "an Islamic duty" to support Islamic fighters around the world.

Pollock adds that while many of the respondents said they did not support al-Qaida, more than 40 percent said they assumed other Muslim communities
did support the group's militant message.

He notes that while public support for radical Islam is dwindling, the perception that financial assistance is an obligation is troubling.

This, he says, suggests U.S. policymakers should focus their efforts on Arab funding for jihad as a whole.

Granted, in unfree societies interviewees tend to give answers designed to stay within both what is safe and what they think the questioner wants to hear, but even so.

Link

Syria-Lebanon-Iran

CSM: How Iran would retaliate if it comes to war

2008-06-24

Pressure is building on Iran. This week Europe agreed to new sanctions and President Bush again suggested something more serious possible military strikes if the Islamic Republic doesn't bend to the will of the international community on its nuclear program.

But increasingly military analysts are warning of severe consequences if the US begins a shooting war with Iran. While Iranian forces are no match for American technology on a conventional battlefield, Iran has shown that it can bite back in unconventional ways.

Iranian networks in Iraq and Afghanistan could imperil US interests there; American forces throughout the Gulf region could be targeted by asymmetric methods and lethal rocket barrages; and Iranian partners across the region such as Hezbollah in Lebanon could be mobilized to engage in an anti-US fight.

Iran's response could also be global, analysts say, but the scale would depend on the scale of the US attack. "One very important issue from a US intelligence perspective, [the Iranian reaction] is probably more unpredictable than the Al Qaeda threat," says Magnus Ranstorp at the Center for Asymmetric Threat Studies at the Swedish National Defense College in Stockholm.

"I doubt very much our ability to manage some of the consequences," says Mr. Ranstorp, noting that Iranian revenge attacks in the past have been marked by "plausible deniability" and have had global reach.

"If you attack Iran you are unleashing a firestorm of reaction internally that will only strengthen revolutionary forces, and externally in the region," says Ranstorp. "It's a nightmare scenario for any contingency planner, and I think you really enter the twilight zone if you strike Iran."

Though the US military has since early 2007 accused Iran's Qods Force an elite element of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) of providing anti-US militias in Iraq with lethal roadside bombs, and of training and backing "special groups" in actions that the US government alleges have cost "thousands" of lives, US commanders have played down Iran's military capabilities.

Even Admiral William Fallon, who publicly opposed a US strike on Iran before he resigned in April, dismissed Iran as a military threat. "Get serious," Adm. Fallon told Esquire in March. "These guys are ants. When the time comes, you crush them."

But that has not kept Iran from rhetorical chest-beating, with an active military manpower of 540,000 the largest in the Middle East dependent on some of the lowest per capita defense spending in the region. Iran "can deal fatal blows to aggressor America by unpredictable and creative tactical moves," the senior commander Brig. Gen. Gholam Ali Rashid said in late May. "It is meaningless to back down before an enemy who has targeted the roots of our existence."

Iran's supreme religious leader Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei also warned of far-reaching revenge in 2006. "The Americans should know that if they assault Iran, their interests will be harmed anywhere in the world that is possible," he said. "The Iranian nation will respond to any blow with double the intensity."

Analysts say Iran has a number of tools to make good on those threats and take pride in taking on a more powerful enemy. "This is not something they are shying away from," says Alex Vatanka, a Middle East security analyst at Jane's Information Group in Washington.

"They say: 'Conventional warfare is not something we can win against the US, but we have other assets in the toolbox,' " says Mr. Vatanka, noting that the IRGC commander appointed last fall has been "marketed as this genius behind asymmetric warfare doctrine."

"What they are really worried about is the idea of massive aerial attacks on literally thousands of targets inside Iran," says Vatanka, also an adjunct scholar at the Middle East Institute. "Their reading of America's intentions in that scenario would be twofold: One is to obviously dismantle as much as possible the nuclear program; and [the other], indirectly try to weaken the [Islamic] regime."

Any US-Iran conflict would push up oil prices, and though Iran could disrupt shipping lanes in the Persian Gulf, its weak economy depends on oil revenues.

But nearby US forces in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Gulf provide a host of targets. Iran claimed last October that it could rain down 11,000 rockets upon "the enemy" within one minute of an attack and that rate "would continue."

Further afield, Israel is within range of Iran's Shahab-3 ballistic missiles, and Hezbollah claims its rockets enhanced and resupplied by Iran since the 2006 war to an estimated 30,000 can now hit anywhere in the Jewish state, including its nuclear plant at Dimona.

Closer to home, Iran has honed a swarming tactic, in which small and lightly armed speedboats come at far larger warships from different directions. A classified Pentagon war game in 2002 simulated just such an attack and in it the Navy lost 16 major warships, according to a report in The New York Times last January.

"The sheer numbers involved overloaded their ability, both mentally and electronically, to handle the attack," Lt. Gen. K. Van Riper, a retired Marine Corps officer who commanded the swarming force, told the Times. "The whole thing was over in five, maybe 10 minutes."

During the 1990s, Iranian agents were believed to be behind the assassinations of scores of regime opponents in Europe, and German prosecutors issued an arrest warrant for Iran's intelligence minister.

Iran and Hezbollah are alleged to have collaborated in the May 1992 bombing of the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires in revenge for Israel's killing of a Hezbollah leader months before. Argentine prosecutors charge that they jointly struck again in 1994, bombing a Jewish community center in the Argentine capital that killed 85, one month after Israel attacked a Hezbollah base in Lebanon.

With some 30,000 on the payroll by one count, Iranian intelligence "is a superpower in intelligence terms in the region; they have global reach because of their reconnaissance ability and quite sophisticated ways of inflicting pain," says Ranstorp. "They have been expanding their influence. Who would have predicted that Argentina would be the area that Hezbollah and the Iranians collectively would respond?"

Past examples show that "Tehran recognizes that at times its interest are best served by restraint," says a report on consequences of a strike on Iran published this week by Patrick Clawson and Michael Eisenstadt of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

But Iran could target the US, too, depending on the magnitude of any US strike. "Iran's capacity for terror and subversion remains one of its most potent levers in the event of a confrontation with the United States," says the report, adding that "success" in delaying Iran's nuclear programs could backfire.

If "US and world opinion were so angered by the strikes that they refused to support further pressure against Iran's nuclear ambitions, then prevention could paradoxically [eventually ensure] Iran's open pursuit of nuclear weapons," concludes the report.

And the long list of unconventional tactics should not be taken for granted in Tehran, says Vatanka, noting that the Islamic system's top priority is survival.

"So the Iranians have to be careful," says Vatanka. "Just because the US doesn't have the will right now, or the ability to produce the kind of stick that they would fear, doesn't mean the way of confrontation is going to pay off for them in the long run."

Link

Syria-Lebanon-Iran

Lebanon: Political deal will not last without disarmament, say experts

2008-05-23

(AKI) - Lebanon's new political accord will be shortlived without the disarmament of the militant Shia opposition movement, Hezbollah, according to international experts.

David Schenker, a senior fellow from The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told Adnkronos International (AKI) on Thursday that the Shia opposition group posed an "ongoing threat" to the country. "This is a temporary truce or hudna," Schenker told AKI from his office at the Washington think-tank. "The loyalty of Hezbollah is not to the state of Lebanon, but to the Shia spiritual leaders of Iran."

Schenker, a Middle East expert, said despite the accord mediated by the Arab League in Qatar this week, fundamental issues divided Lebanon's political leaders. He said issues such as disarmament , telecommunications and differing views of the world had not been addressed. "The group's weaponry was a top agenda item for the government, but both the Qataris and Hezbollah prevented any serious discussion on the issue," he elaborated in a report.

"In the end, it was agreed that a national dialogue -- chaired by incoming president (General Michel) Suleiman -- would discuss 'weapons of organisations' . This 'solution' suggests that nothing will be done about Hezbollah's weapons anytime soon.

"This is a short-term agreement," he told AKI. "It is not worth the paper it is written on."

Nadim Shehadi from the London think-tank Chatham House said the reputation of Hezbollah had been tarnished by the recent violence in Lebanon. "Hezbollah went berserk, occupied the city (Beirut) and lost a lot of credibility," Shehadi told Adnkronos International (AKI). "They showed an ugly face and they lost the 'halo' they had as the party of god."

Like Schenker, Shehadi said the disarmament of Hezbollah was a crucial issue in the future of Lebanon.

Link

Israel-Palestine-Jordan

Peace pact impossible without Hamas, says expert

2007-11-24

(AKI) - There will be no prospect of peace in the Middle East without the involvement of the Palestinian group Hamas, an international expert has warned. On the eve of Tuesday's US-sponsored summit in Annapolis, Saudi Arabia confirmed that it would attend the talks, while Hamas, which has not been invited, dismissed the conference as a failure.

But Robert Lowe, Middle East expert from the London-based think-tank, Chatham House, told Adnkronos International (AKI) that without Hamas' involvement there would be no progress. "There's a huge stumbling block, it is just not logical to pursue negotiations with only half the Palestinians," said Lowe. "It's hard to see how Annapolis can go very far. Fatah themselves are divided, there is a huge problem of legitimacy and representation. It's not only the Palestinians who cannot present a united front. The Israeli government is also fragile. Who knows when the next election will be?"

While Lowe recognised that it was a good sign that the sides are talking, he also said Israel's restrictions on food and medical supplies to Gaza was making peace a dim prospect and fuelling potential violence.

The Heritage Foundation, a conservative Washington think-tank, also said neither Abbas nor Olmert had enough domestic political support to fulfill any kind of agreement. In a paper entitled "The Annapolis Peace Conference: Cloudy Prospects for Success", expert James Phillips attacked the Palestinians for failing to recognise the legitimacy of the Jewish state in its previous negotiations.

But he attacked Hamas saying it was the greatest obstacle to peace. "Hamas, which continues to rain rockets down on Israeli civilians living near the border with Gaza, is in a position to explode the chances for a genuine peace," Phillips said. "Backed by Iran and Syria, it is fortifying its Gaza stronghold and preparing for war, bolstered by tons of weapons smuggled across the border with Egypt. Sooner or later Israel will be compelled to defend itself by invading Gaza, which will further cloud the prospects of peace. But as long as Hamas retains its stranglehold over Gaza, no stable peace is possible."

The Washington Institute for Near East Policy has accused Hamas of using Annapolis to delegitimise the Palestinian Liberation Organization, of which Fatah comprises the largest faction. "The push for diplomatic progress at Annapolis has already exacerbated the confrontation between Fatah and Hamas, " said Mohammad Yaghi, in a policy paper released by the institute. "Diplomatic prospects have raised the stakes of the debate over who has the political legitimacy to negotiate with Israel."

Link

Warning: Undefined property: stdClass::$T in /data/rantburg.com/www/rantburg/pgrecentorg.php on line 132
-12 More