Terrorism & Security
A daily roundup of global reports on security issues
A senior leader of the Haqqani network, a US-designated terrorist group linked to Al Qaeda and the Taliban, was killed in Pakistan this week, raising concern over rifts in militant groups and implications for the governments in both Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Nasiruddin Haqqani, son of founder Jalaluddin Haqqani, and who served as the head fundraiser for the network, was shot on the outskirts of Islamabad, according to Pakistani Taliban and Pakistan’s intelligence unit, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). No one has claimed responsibility for the shooting.
RECOMMENDED: How well do you know Afghanistan? Take our quiz.
"Nasiruddin Haqqani was killed in Islamabad while travelling in a car with a few other unidentified people," a Taliban source told Reuters. Pakistan’s Express Tribune reports he was shot by a gunman on a motorcycle as he was returning home from prayers.
The Haqqani network is allied with the Taliban in Afghanistan, and has been referred to as “the most formidable foe” to US troops in Afghanistan. The group has a stronghold in the tribal areas of Pakistan on the border with Afghanistan.
CBS reports that Nasiruddin’s death “represents a significant blow to” the Haqqani network and its allies.
The murder of Nasiruddin “will pile pressure on the Pakistani government,” reports The BBC, since the death took place on its soil.
The US has long accused Pakistan’s ISI of supporting the Haqqani network, “as a key proxy in the Afghan war,” reports the Associated Press. It’s an accusation Pakistani officials have denied.
Nasiruddin represented the Haqqani network in the Taliban’s effort to set up a political office in Doha earlier this year for peace talks with the US, and he was expected to play a role in peace negotiations between the Afghan government and Taliban.
“Afghan authorities will be angry that someone who had been working to facilitate peace moves with the Afghan Taliban has been removed from the picture,” reports the BBC.
Nasiruddin was added to a US Treasury list of global terrorists in 2010, and the Haqqani network was added as a terror group in September 2012, due to its links to Al Qaeda.
According to CBS, a source from the Pakistani Taliban (TTP) said there was friction between them and the Haqqani network. TTP leader, Hakimullah Mehsud, who was killed in a US drone strike earlier this month, had previously referred to “the Haqqani brothers as ‘puppets’ of the country’s intelligence agency….”
Just last week, The New York Times reported on emerging fractures in the Haqqani network at home in Afghanistan.
…[M]urmurs of discontent have broken out on the Haqqanis’ home turf. As the Haqqanis themselves — Jalaluddin and Sirajuddin, his son, who now leads the group — shelter across the border in Pakistan, support has turned to resentment in some corners.
Most startlingly, leaders of Mr. Haqqani’s native Zadran tribe in Khost Province say they have formally broken with the feared militant network.
“The tribe now understands who Mr. Haqqani works for,” said Faisal Rahim, a former Haqqani commander and head of the Zadran Tribal Council, referring to Pakistan’s support for the network. “His war is not a holy war. It’s a war for dollars, for Pakistani rupees and for power.”
By all accounts, the Haqqani network remains a potent source of concern for American military commanders and counterterrorism experts. It has kept up its barrage of attacks on Kabul and its global fund-raising campaign. But the changing attitudes among some in Afghanistan show how much the years of war have changed the social landscape — and, particularly, how deep the distrust of foreign influence runs among Afghans, even when it comes to favorite sons.
The shift has come gradually over the past few years, as fighters loyal to the Haqqanis have killed an increasing number of the tribe’s elders for refusing to afford them food and shelter, according to tribal authorities, former Haqqani commanders and Afghan officials. In September, an insurgent killed another Zadran elder as he prayed in a mosque in Khost City.
The Haqqani network is currently run by Nasiruddin’s brother, Sirajuddin Haqqani. Jalaluddin, their father, was a revered fighter against the Soviets in Afghanistan dating back to 1979.
RECOMMENDED: How well do you know Afghanistan? Take our quiz.
A daily roundup of global reports on security issues
The Pakistan Taliban – after electing a hardline leader yesterday – has issued new threats against the Pakistani government and denounced peace talks in the latest domestic snarl to emerge after a US drone strike killed the previous Pakistan Taliban leader last week.
A spokesman for the Pakistan Taliban (TTP) said they would launch revenge attacks against Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his government in retaliation for the death of former leader Hakimullah Mehsud.
“All areas will come under attack, but Punjab [Pakistan’s most populous province] will come first,” TTP member Asmatullah Shaheen told CNN. Mr. Shaheen also told the broadcaster that Mr. Sharif had turned Pakistan into a “colony” of the United States.
Shaheen said that proposed peace talks with the government are now off the table. There were never truly talks between the two sides, he said, and there never will be.
Mullah Fazlullah, the TTP’s new leader, has yet to make a public statement since his election Thursday. A cleric and former radio show host, Mr. Fazlullah is known for staging dramatic publicity stunts and for his leadership of the Taliban faction responsible for shooting schoolgirl Malala Yousafzai.
The election of Fazlullah – who is widely believed to have been hiding in Afghanistan and to have ties to Afghan militants – and the furious response from domestic politicians to the drone strike threaten to complicate already thorny relations between US, Pakistan, and Afghanistan ahead of the US withdrawal from Afghanistan next year.
Daniel Markey, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and the author of “No Exit from Pakistan: America’s Tortured Relationship with Islamabad” wrote in The Washington Post yesterday that the decision to eliminate Mehsud represents "a possible turning point," but only if it is carefully managed:
In fact, the political and strategic circumstances of Mehsud’s killing are a lot more complicated. His death is a possible turning point. Yet it is not clear that Washington will use it to advance greater U.S. purposes in Pakistan. Handled poorly, this narrow counterterrorism success will come at a cost in bilateral relations, regional counterterrorism operations and the endgame of U.S. military operations in Afghanistan.
Arif Rafiq asked in Foreign Policy whether the killing of Mehsud was “A bad time to kill a bad man” because it has made the civilian government “already under severe criticism for its handling of the economy and terrorism, look impotent.”
The Christian Science Monitor's correspondent Saba Imtiaz reported from Pakistan last week on how much rhetoric has changed in Pakistan over the past few years:
When the Pakistani Taliban head Baitullah Mehsud was killed in a drone strike in 2009, Pakistan’s influential Dawn newspaper headlined the story as "Good riddance, killed Baitullah." But much has changed in the years since.
The Pakistani Taliban's insurgency in the country's northwest has claimed tens of thousands of lives and Pakistan's military has battled the group in places like North Waziristan and the Swat Valley for years. But a nationalist backlash against the US involvement in killing Taliban figures has been building and the government has said it wants to come to an accord with the movement.
The rhetoric emanating from Islamabad in the wake of Hakimullah Mehsud’s death shows how much has changed. Rather than trumpeting the death of a man whose movement has waged a brutal campaign against the government (including the 2007 assassination of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto), complaints instead are made that the US has derailed peace talks with the TTP.
Yet, as Ms. Imtiaz explains, the process for peace talks was never clear to begin with.
But there has been little clarity on the process of negotiating with the TTP. Earlier this week Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif told British Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg that Pakistan had started peace talks, but there appears to be no actual work on the ground. It is also unclear what the terms for the talks are, which of the many militant groups under the TTP’s umbrella the government plans to talk to, and what it is prepared to compromise on.
A key player to watch will be the Pakistani Army, who was never entirely on board with peace talks, according to Foreign Policy:
The military has chafed at the prospect of peace talks with the TTP, and for much of this year the Pakistani army has, in fact, expressed its discomfort with the conciliatory, if not apologetic, approach of center-right and Islamist politicians toward the TTP. ...
In August, [the now-outgoing army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani,] had said that "bowing down" to militants is no solution to terrorism. And in September, after the TTP killed a major general and threatened to kill Kayani next, the army chief said that, though giving the dialogue process with militants a chance was "understandable," there should be no "misgivings that we would let terrorists coerce us into accepting their terms."
The man who will be the Pakistani Taliban’s next leader is not one to shy away from recklessly bold statements – from riding defiantly by his enemies on a white horse to plotting last year’s assassination attempt on Pakistani schoolgirl Malala Yousafzai.
On Thursday, the Pakistani Taliban announced that they have chosen Maualana Fazlullah to replace Hakimullah Mehsud, who was killed in a US drone strike last week.
Mr. Fazlullah – a hard-line cleric whose power has been growing since 2007 – has been thought to be in hiding in Afghanistan after the Pakistani military ran his Swat Valley-based Taliban faction out of the region.
By some accounts, Fazlullah is a surprise choice, since the previous leaders of the Pakistani Taliban were both from the Mehsud family. But his influence within the Pakistani Taliban – a loose organization of militant groups that is affiliated with but distinct from the Afghanistan Taliban – has been evident for years. He now has strong ties to Afghan militants, too.
In 2007, Christian Science Monitor correspondent David Montero traveled to the Swat Valley to profile “the rise of a powerful cleric” who “exposes economic and political failures in a government-administered area.” That person? Maualana Fazlullah.
Mr. Montero documented Fazlullah’s first dramatic show of his power, two years before his forces took over the Swat Valley:
In this valley of orchards near Afghanistan, 90 police hid along the banks of a riverbed in March, preparing to arrest the powerful Pakistani cleric Maualana Fazlullah. Informants said the target, charged with terrorism, would soon appear with a modest contingent of followers. Instead, Mr. Fazlullah rode into sight on a white horse, surrounded by hundreds of people.
When the officers advanced, brandishing tear gas and batons, word flew through the town. Thousands more supporters turned out to further protect Fazlullah. The officers backed off in an incident that shocked the country, exposing as it did the state's powerlessness to apprehend a wanted terrorist.
The rise of Fazlullah “signals a dangerous tipping point,” Montero wrote at the time.
Allow him to persist, many observers say, and others will be emboldened to roll back the state's policies of moderation – small but symbolically important gains in women's empowerment, girls' education, and religious tolerance.
"My opinion is, if you take him out today, there will be a reaction," says Asfandiar Amir Zeb, a former mayor of the district of Swat. "Leave it for a month, there will be a bigger reaction. If you leave it for six months, you won't be able to catch him."
Fazlullah’s influence did indeed grow. His Taliban forces overtook the Swat Valley in 2007, but were defeated two years later by Pakistani Army forces. In 2012, Fazlullah helped orchestrate from afar the shooting of activist Malala Yousafzai, a resident of the Swat Valley, on her way to school – and his spokesman said she would be shot again if she returned.
Back in 2007, as Montero’s reporting shows, Fazlullah was sowing the seeds of his message against girls’ education:
Since he began preaching two years ago, Fazlullah has drawn more than 15,000 weekly to his Friday prayers. His vision of militant Islam reaches thousands more in the valley by way of his illegal radio station, which he used until recently to warn parents not to send their girls to school.
"Tell me, what wrong have I done? I am preaching religion, and religion is not terrorism," Fazlullah says in a brick room on the site of his new madrassah, surrounded by bearded aides.
The timing couldn't be worse.
After nine years of suspicion and rival investigations intended to resolve whether Yasser Arafat, the iconic former leader of the Palestinian cause, was poisoned by radioactive polonium, a Swiss report say it's possible.
This is a day after US Secretary of State John Kerry arrived in Israel on a visit that, as The Christian Science Monitor wrote, “is widely acknowledged to be about preventing Israeli-Palestinian negotiations from seizing up entirely.”
It is unclear whether the Swiss report, first reported in Al Jazeera Wednesday, will definitively resolve the mystery surrounding Mr. Arafat's death in 2004; investigators report that their findings “moderately support the proposition” that Arafat was poisoned by polonium. But many Palestinians have claimed for years that his death was murder perpetrated by Israel, and the impact of relations between the two might be what is most at stake this week.
The explosive conclusions of Swiss scientists, who conducted tests on samples taken from Arafat's exhumed corpse last November, will reignite accusations against Israel and deepen the widespread conviction among Palestinians that a man they saw as a revolutionary hero was murdered. They are likely to worsen the already corrosive atmosphere of the faltering peace negotiations and fuel popular demands that the Palestinian leadership walk out.
The Irish Times adds today:
Yesterday’s findings could be politically embarrassing with Israeli and Palestinian negotiators engaged in US-sponsored peace talks aimed at clinching a peace deal next year.
The details of Arafat's death will become a bigger story in the days ahead, especially after Swiss scientists give a press conference this afternoon, local time, on their findings, reports Reuters.
Professors Patrice Mangin, director of Lausanne University Hospital's forensics center, and Francois Bochud, director of its Institute of Radiation Physics, will "answer questions related to their report handed over on Tuesday to representatives of Madame Suha Arafat and the Palestinian Authority," according to a statement.
Many people have already drawn their own conclusions. "We are revealing a real crime, a political assassination," Arafat's widow, Suha, told Reuters in Paris after receiving the report.
Wasel Abu Yousef, member of the executive committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization, said in a statement: "President Arafat passed away as a victim of an organized terrorist assassination perpetrated by a state, that is Israel, which was looking to get rid of him.”
From the Israeli side, Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said: "This is more soap opera than science, it is the latest episode in the soap in which Suha opposes Arafat's successors."
The issue exploded Wednesday, after the publication of a report in Al Jazeera that included, the paper said, the Swiss team's 108-page report, based on tests after Arafat's exhumation last year. Swiss, Russian, and French investigators have been testing Arafat's remains to put to rest questions about how he died.
As The New York Times notes, the teams have not yet come up with a unifying answer, with a Russian expert saying last month his team found no traces of polonium (and officials later denying any statement was made), and the French yet to release findings.
Even if it's conclusively confirmed that Arafat was poisoned many other questions remain, The New York Times notes:
Ghassan al-Shaka’a, a member of the Palestine Liberation Organization’s Executive Committee from Nablus, in the West Bank, said that it was now confirmed that Mr. Arafat was poisoned but that “we need to know who planned, who instigated, who implemented” the alleged killing. He said the Palestinian Authority had decided to postpone revealing the test results for a few months for “political reasons.”
Answers are not likely any time soon, at least by the mainstream media dealing with the “gray areas” surrounding Arafat's life and death, argue Matthew Kalman and Matt Rees, coauthors of "The Murder of Yasser Arafat," in an opinion piece in Haaretz last month.
“Unless someone comes right out and admits responsibility for killing Arafat, or until a respected authority proves beyond doubt that no one killed him,” the two wrote, “readers of traditional journalism will remain in the dark.”
A daily roundup of global reports on security issues
US Secretary of State John Kerry arrived in Israel Tuesday on a visit that is widely acknowledged to be about preventing Israeli-Palestinian negotiations from seizing up entirely. Recent headlines have doomed the peace talks to the same outcome as past efforts.
"He is trying to give a push,” a senior US official told The New York Times, explaining that the talks have been floundering “both because of short-term irritants and slowness at getting at fundamental issues.”
Israeli and Palestinian leaders are hurling accusations of duplicity and insincerity and seem to have abandoned the agreement to keep the parameters of negotiations secret. Israeli media carried reports with details this week, while leaders on both sides began making public comments on the talks.
"The Palestinians are not conducting the talks in good faith," Gideon Sa'ar, the Israeli interior minister, told Army Radio, according to Reuters. "(The Palestinians) are locked in their positions and are showing no flexibility on their starting positions." Meanwhile, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said Monday that "After all the rounds of negotiations there is nothing on the ground."
"I am concerned about the progress because I see the Palestinians continuing with incitement, continuing to create artificial crises, continuing to avoid, run away from the historic decisions that are needed to make a genuine peace," Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told reporters today, according to a separate Reuters report.
Israeli Ynet News disclosed on Tuesday the two sides' starting points on borders, as well disagreements between the negotiators. In the Israeli proposal, the border would roughly follow the path of the separation wall between Israel and the West Bank, while the Palestinian team has proposed a border roughly following 1967 lines with land swaps to compensate for Israeli settlements in the West Bank that would be very difficult to remove.
Further fanning cynicism is Israel's announcement this week that it would go ahead with its plans to build 3,500 more homes in the West Bank. The move, which coincided with Israel's release of 26 Palestinian prisoners, is considered a sop to hardliners in Mr. Netanyahu's government.
Nabil Abu Rdeineh, an Abbas spokesman, condemned the settlement campaign but said Palestinians remained committed to the negotiations.
"What's required is a firm American position on Israel's provocations. Israel is continuing its policy of putting obstacles in front of the peace process - every time Kerry comes to the region they announce more settlements."
Netanyahu accused the Palestinians of reneging on what he said was an agreed prisoners-settlements link.
"If they can't even ... stand beside and behind the agreements that we had, that we release prisoners but we continue building, then how can I see that they'll actually stand by the larger issues?" he said in an interview with the Israel-based i24 television news channel.
Abbas, speaking to his Fatah party on Sunday, voiced opposition to any such linkage, cautioning that "this equation could blow up the talks" and "there could be tensions soon."
A report from The Washington Post details the Israeli right's growing support for a one-state solution, illustrating what Netanyahu is struggling to hold off with one hand while his other reaches out to Palestinians, however begrudgingly.
Leaders of his governing coalition, including those in his party, Likud, "are in revolt against the international community’s long-held consensus that there should be two states between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. In the process, they are seeking to overturn the commitments of every US president since Bill Clinton and at least four Israeli prime ministers, including the current one," the Post reports.
Instead of a sovereign Palestinian nation arising in the West Bank and Gaza, with East Jerusalem as its capital — which has been the focus of on-again, off-again peace negotiations since the Oslo Accords in 1993 — the two-state opponents envision Israel annexing large swaths of the West Bank.
As for the Palestinians living in the West Bank, depending on the ideas under discussion, the annexationists suggest that they be offered Israeli citizenship or residency or be made the responsibility of Jordan.
“I think we should no longer think of Jewish settlements in the West Bank, but Palestinian settlements in Israel,” Danny Danon, deputy defense minister, said in an interview.
Danon, recently elected to head the central committee of the Likud party, imagines an archipelago of Palestinian cities — Jenin, Nablus, Ramallah and Hebron — as Arab islands in an Israeli sea.
Deputy Foreign Minister Zeev Elkin said last year that “regardless of the world’s opposition, it’s time to do in Judea and Samaria what we did in [East] Jerusalem and the Golan.”
A daily roundup of global reports on security issues
Nearly five years after border security forces in Bangladesh mutinied against their commanding officers in Dhaka, killing scores of people and raising concern a new civilian government could fall, a special court sentenced more than 150 soldiers to death.
The drawn-out legal process has been criticized by human rights organizations. Today's verdicts also come against the backdrop of nationwide strikes aimed at forcing Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, who was in power at the time of the mutiny, to resign before upcoming national elections.
Roughly 850 people were accused of involvement in the bloody two-day capital uprising in 2009, which was sparked by dissatisfaction with unequal pay and poor treatment. The charges included arson, murder, and torture in the deaths of 74 people – 57 of whom were top Army officers. At least 400 soldiers were sentenced to prison, with terms ranging from three years to life.
The trial began in January 2011 and lasted through October this year. Some 654 witnesses testified for the prosecution, Agence France-Presse (AFP) reports.
"The court announced the death sentence to them for the heinous killing of the country's brave sons," prosecutor Mosharraf Hossain Kajol told Reuters.
"The atrocities were so heinous that even the dead bodies were not given their rights," Judge Mohammad Akhtaruzzaman said while reading the verdicts to a packed room. Many of the dead were found in shallow mass graves or stuffed into manholes, their bodies showing signs of torture, reports the Associated Press (AP).
Reactions in the courtroom today were frantic, with those acquitted (about 250 men) praising God, while others threatened the judge or begged for a death sentence over life in prison, AFP reports.
Nearly 4,000 other soldiers and a handful of civilians have already been found guilty of involvement in the 33-hour uprising in special courts and sentenced to up to seven years in prison, reports Reuters.
According to The Christian Science Monitor’s coverage at the time, thousands of border patrol members, then known as Bangladesh Rifles (BDR), gathered at an annual conference in Dhaka on the day of the incident.
Among them were 168 officers. Suddenly, shots were fired by junior personnel, who were allegedly aggrieved over poor pay scales and untimely promotions. The mutiny appeared to spread in subsequent days as BDR soldiers in several districts abandoned their barracks. But it was quickly reined in when Prime Minister Hasina, under pressure to de-escalate the situation, promised a general amnesty.
Still, the facts themselves … served only to deepen the public's sense that the mutiny was well planned and, perhaps, connected to a larger plot to destabilize the country....
According to the AP, the incident “exposed deep tensions between the government and the military. The military was furious with Prime Minister Hasina for negotiating with the mutineers instead of allowing the army to attack.”
“Many of the country's brightest military leaders” were killed in one strike, “their death rendering a serious blow to the country's security apparatus while feeding fears that more violence may follow,” the Monitor wrote at the time.
In February 2009, when the mutiny occurred, Bangladesh’s civilian government had been in power for only a few months after two years of military rule.
Today, Bangladesh is reeling from a political crisis, with the opposition holding its second day of nationwide strikes. The opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party says a neutral caretaker government must be established three months before national elections, which are set to take place in January.
There have been deadly clashes between police and activists from both sides of the political spectrum, leaving at least 20 people dead, according to a second AFP report.
RECOMMENDED: Think you know Asia? Take our geography quiz.
A daily roundup of global reports on security issues
The trial of former Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi opened today and quickly adjourned until January. Protests both inside and outside the courtroom highlighted the tensions that have wracked the country since the military removed Morsi from office in July.
The judge overseeing the trial of Mr. Morsi and 14 other members of the Muslim Brotherhood announced the trial would adjourn until Jan. 8, reports France24. Reuters reports that Morsi, during his court appearance where he refused to wear the orange jumpsuit issued to state prisoners, "appeared angry and interrupted the session repeatedly" with chants of "Down with military rule." Morsi said he was still the country's "legitimate" president.
Mursi, dressed in a blue suit and held in a cage, made a Brotherhood hand gesture to express his disgust at a crackdown on a protest camp that was razed by security forces in August.
"This trial is illegitimate," said Mursi, prompting the judge to adjourn the session.
The defendants are being tried on charges of inciting the murder of protesters in clashes between police and anti-Morsi protesters last December. At least 10 people died and hundreds more were injured in the ensuing violence. But The New York Times adds "rights advocates say the charges are selective at best."
The Times recounts the events of Dec. 5:
As increasingly aggressive protesters began encircling the [presidential] palace the previous night — even throwing Molotov cocktails over its walls — police refused to protect it. So on Dec. 5, leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood publicly called for the president’s Islamist supporters to do the job themselves, by force if necessary.
Hundreds of Islamists arrived that afternoon and forcibly evicted a small tent camp the protesters had set up near the palace and by nightfall thousands of Islamists were gathered to defend it. Thousands of Mr. Morsi’s opponents began to attack the Islamists and a night of deadly street fighting ensued, with rocks, Molotov cocktails and gunshots coming from both sides.
By morning at least 11 people were dead, including at least eight supporters of the president and at least three non-Islamists, according to news reports. Prosecutors have not charged anyone with responsibility for the Islamists’ deaths, and the charges against Mr. Morsi accuse him of inciting the murder of three non-Islamists.
The Times adds that Morsi's supporters went on to beat and detain anti-Morsi protesters, and turned them over to prosecutors to be charged. But the prosecutors immediately released the detainees, who were not charged. The Times notes that no charges have been brought against Morsi over the detentions.
Bloomberg writes that the military and its installed government are using the trial to justify the coup that toppled Morsi in July.
“The interim authorities -- the army and the interim government -- are counting on Mursi’s trial to seem more legitimate” and to “further demonize the image of Mursi’s administration,” said Ziad Akl, a senior researcher at the Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies in Cairo. “Putting Mohamed Mursi in a dock in a courtroom completely defies the idea that this man may still be the president.”
But the trial is a risk for the military, as Morsi still enjoys broad support among the Brotherhood, Egypt's largest and best organized political force. Bloomberg notes that the government rolled out massive security for the trial, including some 20,000 personnel across the country, and moved the court to a police academy over security concerns. But protests outside the trial proved relatively modest, with several dozen pro-Morsi supporters making an appearance at the security barriers blocking access to the court.
A daily roundup of global reports on security issues
China’s government said it is "severely concerned about the reports and demands a clarification and explanation," according to foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying.
That sentiment, which resonated across Europe last week as claims of widespread surveillance in France, Germany, and Spain were leaked, is now echoing across Asia, with leaders in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand making similar remarks.
The US has been under continual fire as allegations surface. US Secretary of State John Kerry conceded today that the US had overstepped boundaries, the Guardian reports. "In some cases, some of these actions have reached too far and we are going to try to make sure it doesn't happen in the future," he said.
In a statement, Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa said: "[The government] cannot accept and strongly protests the news of the existence of wiretapping facilities at the US embassy in Jakarta."
"If confirmed, such action is not only a breach of security, but also a serious breach of diplomatic norms and ethics," Mr. Natalegawa said.
"The reported activities absolutely do not reflect the spirit of a close and friendly relationship between the two neighbors and are considered unacceptable by the government of Indonesia," Natalegawa said.
He added on Friday to reporters in Australia, where he is at a conference: “Countries may have capacities, technical capacities, to intercept and to carry out the activity that’s been reported, and information may have been gathered,” he said, according to the Associated Press. “But the cost — in terms of trust, in terms of the damage — that may be resulting, is something that we must all reflect on.”
Fresh anger was unleashed after two new reports, first in the German magazine Der Spiegel, and then in the Sydney Morning Herald, named cities in Asia in which the “Five Eyes” group – the US, UK, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand – have allegedly worked together to gather intelligence. The cities include Jakarta, Bangkok, Hanoi, Beijing, and Kuala Lumpur.
As the Sydney Morning Herald reports:
Australian embassies are being secretly used to intercept phone calls and data across Asia as part of a US-led global spying network, according to whistleblower Edward Snowden and a former Australian intelligence officer.
The top secret Defense Signals Directorate operates the clandestine surveillance facilities at embassies without the knowledge of most Australian diplomats.
The signals program at issue is called Stateroom, and involves radio, telecommunications, and Internet traffic inception, in US, British, Australian, and Canadian diplomatic missions. In all, surveillance equipment was allegedly installed in about 80 embassies and consulates around the world, according to the Sydney Morning Herald.
The document on which the paper bases its report notes that the surveillance facilities "are small in size and in number of personnel staffing them."
"They are covert, and their true mission is not known by the majority of the diplomatic staff at the facility where they are assigned," the document says. "For example antennas are sometimes hidden in false architectural features or roof maintenance sheds."
A former intelligence officer from Australia told the Herald:
The Australian Embassy in Jakarta played an important role in collecting intelligence on terrorist threats and people-smuggling, "but the main focus is political, diplomatic and economic intelligence,” he said. "The huge growth of mobile phone networks has been a great boon and Jakarta's political elite are a loquacious bunch; even when they think their own intelligence services are listening they just keep talking," the source said. He said the Australian Consulate in Denpasar, Bali, has also been used for signals intelligence collection.
Australia defended itself after the report was published in the country's daily. Prime Minister Tony Abbott said: "Every Australian governmental agency, every Australian official... operates in accordance with the law."
This week, Japanese media reported that the NSA had asked the Japanese government in 2011 for permission to tap fiber-optic cables in Japan, which carries much traffic throughout East Asia, as a way to collect surveillance on China. But the Japanese government refused, citing legal hurdles and lack of manpower.
A daily roundup of global reports on security issues
Syria has destroyed its declared chemical weapons production and mixing facilities – meeting a crucial deadline – the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons said Thursday.
The Netherlands-based OPCW, winner of the Nobel Peace prize this month, wrote in a statement that it had inspected all but two of the production sites and facilities declared by Syria this month:
“The Joint OPCW-UN mission has inspected 21 of the 23 sites declared by Syria, and 39 of the 41 facilities located at those sites. The two remaining sites were not visited due to safety and security concerns. But Syria declared those sites as abandoned and that the chemical weapons program items they contained were moved to other declared sites, which were inspected,” the statement said.
“The joint mission is now satisfied that it has verified — and seen destroyed — all of Syria’s declared critical production and mixing/filling equipment.”
Syria agreed to destroy its chemical weapons arsenal by mid-2014 after the US threatened retaliation for a nerve agent attack in a Damascus suburb on Aug. 21 that killed hundreds.
Both the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and rebel forces – entrenched in a 2.5-year civil war that has left more than 100,000 dead – deny responsibility for the attack.
Ralf Trapp, an independent chemical weapons disarmament specialist, told Reuters that Thursday’s announcement was “a major milestone in the effort to eliminate Syria's chemical weapons program,” but also issued a warning. "It’s important to ensure that the remaining facilities can be inspected and their equipment and weapons inventoried and prepared for destruction as soon as possible,” he said.
Yet the OPCW now faces the more challenging task of destroying Syria’s chemical weapons stockpile – thought to include more than 1,000 tons of mustard gas, the nerve agent sarin, and other prohibited chemicals.
The international community has struggled to come to agreement on where and how the chemical weapons will be destroyed.
As The Christian Science Monitor reported earlier this week Norwegian Foreign Minister Børge Brende said that the country was forced to drop a US request to destroy the chemicals in Norway due to “time constraints” and “technical and legal restrictions.”
“We don’t have a hydrolysis facility, full capacity for burning the organic waste, nor found an area or port,” Mr. Brende told a news conference. “There is a short time frame here and the Americans have concluded that it is not possible with all these uncertainties."
The Christian Science Monitor’s Nicholas Blanford described the technical challenges of chemical weapons destruction:
Once the arsenal has been logged and secured, the OPCW will have to decide on the best means of destroying the weapons. In the past, chemical weapons were often simply tossed into the sea. In 1947, Britain and the Soviet Union disposed of an estimated 65,000 tons of German chemical weapons by dumping them into the Baltic Sea, where today the corroding containers pose a health risk to surrounding nations.
The adoption of the CWC in 1997 effectively ended such haphazard practices. Today, the favored destruction methods are incineration, hydrolyzation, and detonation with explosives.
Incineration requires the chemical agent to be drained from the weapon, such as a rocket or artillery shell, and incinerated at temperatures around 2,000 degrees F. Any explosive elements in the shell or missile, as well as the contaminated metal components, are burned in separate furnaces. The released gases are scrubbed with both wet and dry filters before the end product is released into the atmosphere.
Hydrolyzation involves the addition of hot water and caustic agents such as sodium hydroxide, which destroy the toxicity of the chemical agent. The neutralized agent can be burned in an incinerator or treated, similar to sewage water.
In explosive destruction, the chemical-bearing munitions are placed in a reactor and detonated or neutralized with chemical treatment.
A daily roundup of global reports on security issues
Egyptian authorities arrested senior Muslim Brotherhood leader Essam el-Erian today, adding another big name to the list of Brotherhood leaders – including deposed President Mohamed Morsi – who are expected to stand trial next week on charges of inciting violence.
The group, which had functioned semi-underground in Egypt for decades before the revolution that overthrew former President Hosni Mubarak, rode a wave of popular support into the presidency and to the top of a governing coalition in the legislature. But Mr. Morsi and the Brotherhood alienated many Egyptians with their political style and lost the support of the military, which ousted them in a July coup.
Now the group is facing one of the darkest moments in its history, outright banned by an Egyptian court in September and with its leaders who haven't yet been arrested in hiding. Mr. Erian was the vice president of the Freedom and Justice Party, the Brotherhood's political arm, and one of its last leaders still at large, according to Egypt's Al Ahram, a state-owned newspaper.
Many leaders have been arrested on similar "inciting violence" charges since July. At least 1,000 people were killed in the ensuing violence, as pro-Morsi protest camps were overrun by police. But the charges against Brotherhood leaders stem from an incident last December, when clashes erupted outside the presidential palace after Morsi issued a decree expanding his powers, Reuters reports.
Al Ahram reports that Erian pre-recorded several video messages that have now been broadcast on Al Jazeera.
The most notable of these messages was directed at the country’s interim government or what El-Erian described as ‘coup leaders,' demanding they recognize their "mistakes" and “confess that they’ve sided with one particular faction against another.”
With court proceedings against Erian, Morsi, and other leaders scheduled to begin next week, tensions are high. On Monday Morsi's supporters said that the former president wouldn't recognize the legitimacy of the military-backed government that replaced him and that he would not use a lawyer in court, "because to do so would imply that he accepted the legitimacy of the court and its proceedings," according to The Los Angeles Times.
On Tuesday the judges presiding over a parallel trial of Brotherhood Supreme Guide Mohammed Badie and deputy Khairat El Shater, stepped down, forcing that trial to be abandoned. The judges cited "unease" over the proceedings, the LA Times reports.
The US has tried and failed to exert influence over the military-backed government since Morsi's July ouster. It announced a partial suspension of its $1.6 billion aid package to Egypt earlier this year – it had no choice, given a law that bars the US from providing aid to "governments that come to power through force," according to The Washington Post – but the move garnered little reaction in Cairo because a $12 billion aid package from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Kuwait has made US funds superfluous.
The US now appears to be seeking ways to backtrack on the aid suspension to try to halt the erosion of its influence.
The Obama administration has charged Congress with finding a "legislative work-around" to keep the money on track, insisting the money is essential to ensuring US interests in the Middle East. According to the Post, most lawmakers at a House foreign affairs committee hearing Tuesday were in favor, considering it "the best of bad options."
“While we would like a democratic partner for our many security interests in the region, we need a partner,” said Rep. Edward R. Royce (R-Calif.), the committee chairman. “We should push and pull with what influence we have.”
Rep. Eliot L. Engel (NY), the ranking Democrat on the panel, said the military’s removal of Morsi, an Islamist criticized as failing to govern inclusively, “replaced one autocratic government with another.” But he argued that a partial suspension of military aid would not encourage democratic reforms in Cairo.
“In fact, I think it’s more than likely to have the opposite effect,” he said. “That military cooperation is important. We’ve spent billions of dollars. We’ve cemented relationships. Let’s use them. Let’s not destroy them. Let’s use them.”
An unnamed congressional appropriator told the Post that the US has continued sending military equipment and funding for civilian programs using money set aside before the July coup, but when it runs out in a couple months, the US cannot continue sending money without breaking its own law – or changing it. The US also halted the scheduled delivery of F-16 fighter planes, Abrams tanks, Apache helicopters and Harpoon missiles in a bid to encourage the Egyptian government to hold promised elections soon. But as the Post notes, "there is little evidence that the strategy is bearing fruit."