Terrorism & Security
A daily summary of global reports on security issues.
Iran's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) ambassador Ali Asghar Soltanieh arrives at the Iranian Anbassy for a meeting with IAEA officials in Vienna May 14. Two previous rounds of talks in Tehran early this year failed to make any notable progress, especially on the IAEA's request for access to a military site where it believes nuclear weapons-relevant research may have taken place. (Leonhard Foeger/REUTERS)
UN's nuclear agency, Iran begin critical meeting ahead of Baghdad talks
• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.
Iranian officials arrived in Vienna today to meet International Atomic Energy Agency officials in preparation for next week's Baghdad meeting on its nuclear program.
A senior United Nations official told Reuters at the outset of the meeting today that Iran must give IAEA inspectors access to information on its nuclear program and that this meeting will be a test of its "readiness" to discuss concerns about possible military elements of its nuclear program at the critical Baghdad meeting with the group known as P5 + 1 (The United States, Britain, France, Russia, China, and Germany).
Bloomberg reports that the IAEA's request for access to Iran's Parchin military complex – rejected by Iran in February – may top the agenda. In a November 2011 IAEA report, the agency pointed to information from a member state that indicated Iran may have tested elements of a nuclear weapon at the complex. The agency last visited Parchin in 2004.
RELATED: 5 key Iranian nuclear sites
Based on satellite imagery of Parchin from early April, the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) said last week that Iran may be erasing evidence of nuclear weapons work at the facility. Images show "unidentified items lined up outside a rectangular building and what appears to be water flowing out of the structure," according to Bloomberg. Paul Brannan and David Albright of ISIS wrote that the cleanup may be preparation for a requested IAEA visit.
Reuters adds that satellite images from previous months did not show "any similar activity... indicating it is not a regular occurrence."
Tehran rejected the insinuations in the study, Reuters reports. "They are joking with our nation," Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said, as quoted by the Iranian Students' News Agency (ISNA). "It is not possible to 'wash' nuclear activities," he said.
Western diplomats told Reuters they don't expect Tehran to grant their request for access to Parchin. Iran wants a more comprehensive agreement with the IAEA before it allows its inspectors into the site.
Stakes are high for next week's meeting in Baghdad. EU Foreign Policy head Catherine Ashton said on May 11 that she hoped "to achieve 'the beginnings of the end'" at the meeting, The New York Times reports.
British Foreign Secretary William Hague told Reuters that the European Union wants proof that Iran is taking steps to reassure the international community it is not pursuing a military nuclear program and that if it fails to do so, the EU will consider further sanctions. "Now we wait to see some concrete steps and proposals from Iran," Mr. Hague told reporters. "Without that, of course we have sanctions we have imposed. They will not only be enforced but, over time, intensified."
Among other sanctions, Iran faces the July 1 implementation of an EU-wide ban on importing Iranian oil.
Yesterday Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, warned against putting pressure on Iran, saying such actions could scuttle the Baghdad talks. "The era of a pressure strategy is ended. Any strategic miscalculations would endanger success at the Baghdad negotiations," he said, telling Western officials to refrain from making "unconstructive remarks," according to Reuters.
The Christian Science Monitor reported last week that Iran expects an easing of sanctions to accompany each of its concessions. One Iranian official said that Tehran's "minimum expectation" is a lifting of sanctions. But, as the Monitor notes, reversing or easing sanctions is a slow, "conservative" process, and it's unlikely that it could happen ahead of the Baghdad meeting.
Administration officials say that "sanctions relief is not on the table unless and until we see substantial concessions" from Iran, says Suzanne Maloney, an Iran specialist at the Brookings Institution in Washington.
"I don't think there is really any give on the sanctions issue ... in part because in a political year, an election year, with a Congress that is very solidly behind these sanctions, it would be very difficult for the president to appear to be waffling on them at all," says Ms. Maloney.
…
"I do worry that there is a disconnect," says Maloney. "The Iranians from their perspective need something to demonstrate some sense of victory, and to persuade the skeptics within their own camp that there are rewards to be gained from cooperation, not just preventing any further pressure, but actually lifting some of the sense of siege."
Syrian gather in front of a damaged military intelligence building where two bombs exploded, at Qazaz neighborhood in Damascus, Syria, on Thursday, May 10. (Bassem Tellawi/AP)
Damascus bombings prompt warnings of Iraq-style insurgency
• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.
Yesterday's bombing of a Syrian government intelligence compound in Damascus, the largest terrorist attack since the uprising began, has the United Nations, the US, and other backers of the opposition worried that the formerly peaceful protest movement is transforming into an armed insurgency that evokes comparisons to Iraq.
No group has claimed responsibility for the two bombings, which killed 55 people and wounded almost 400, according to The New York Times. The Syrian government blamed terrorists, as it has in most past bombings, while the opposition accused the regime of setting up the bombing to frame it, as it too has done in the past. But as the Monitor and other outlets have reported, there is growing evidence that jihadist groups have infiltrated the country and joined the fight against President Bashar al-Assad and his regime.
The New York Times reports that Syrian members of the opposition have noticed a rise in murmurings about jihad and the number of non-Syrians on the battlefield. Analysts have been tracking the uptick in discussion on jihadi websites about going to fight in Syria, and Iraqi officials say that jihadis in their country have been moving west, toward Syria.
The progression of the uprising is drawing comparisons to the earliest phases of insurgency in Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, and northern Mali – "where a radicalized domestic core of fighters, eventually supplemented by foreigners and veterans of other jihadi conflicts, gradually swelled into a dangerous, anarchic insurgency" – the Times reports
The UN Security Council condemned yesterday's attacks "in the strongest terms" and "reaffirmed that terrorism in all its forms and manifestations constitutes one of the most serious threats to international peace and security, and that any acts of terrorism are criminal and unjustifiable, regardless of their motivation," according to Reuters. The reference to motivation is possibly a warning to the opposition that it will be considered responsible for any violence it perpetrates, even if it is first provoked by the regime.
Bloomberg reports that events like yesterday's bombing pose a challenge to US support for the opposition.
The Syrian opposition has begun adopting the tactics of an armed insurgency such as suicide bombings, which can’t be condoned, said two United Nations diplomats. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to comment. That shift is making it harder for the US and its allies to keep the blame focused on the Assad regime for the violence, which persists despite a UN cease-fire agreed to by both sides in the conflict.
“America is not going to want to have its fingerprints on car bombs in Damascus,” said Joshua Landis, director of the Middle East program at the University of Oklahoma in Norman. “America is very careful about this because they don’t want to end up supporting terrorism, but that’s where we are headed. Insurgencies carry out terrorist acts. You can call it something different, but ultimately you’re blowing things up and trying to kill as many soldiers as you can.”
State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said yesterday that the US still ultimately pins the blame on the Assad regime because by not abiding by the cease-fire, and by turning to violence initially, it pushed the opposition in that direction.
“The degree to which that chaos, that they are leading, also leads to other kinds of chaos, we still put responsibility firmly at their feet,” she said of the regime, according to Bloomberg. “These kinds of tactics are not in keeping with what we’ve seen from the legitimate opposition,” she said of the bombings.
Meanwhile, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey said yesterday that the Pentagon knows there are "extremist elements trying to make inroads in Syria," but that they are "distinct from the opposition."
But US officials are also arguing against the opposition's use of violence because it "erodes the opposition's moral advantage," increases the likelihood of sectarian fighting, and undermines efforts at brokering a diplomatic solution, according to Bloomberg.
The New York Times reports that a recent report from the International Crisis Group backs the US line on where the blame lies:
“The fact is that the regime’s behavior has fueled extremists on both sides and, by allowing the country’s slide into chaos, provided them space to move in and operate,’’ the report said. “The fighting came at a huge cost to civilians and, in its aftermath, security forces engaged in widespread abuse, further radicalizing large swaths of society.’’
Bill Roggio, an analyst on terror and military issues and the managing editor of the Long War Journal blog, told CNN that the attacks were likely carried out by an al Qaeda-linked group called Jabhat al-Nusra, which emerged only recently and has claimed responsibility for some of the past bombings. Jeffrey White, a defense fellow and analyst at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said that yesterday's attacks bore a resemblance to the attacks carried out by Al Qaeda elements in Iraq.
Rather, they feel al-Assad's regime is using "jihadists and al Qaeda types" that it was tied to during the Iraq war. There are people in the Syrian opposition, [Mr. White] said, who call the Al Nusrah Front a Syrian government organization.
"The opposition guys are saying the regime still controls them. When they want them to do something, they order them up," White said.
Noting that the attack "is not typical of Free Syrian Army-type actions such as ambushes, bombings of regime vehicles, targeted killings, and attacks on checkpoints," White said there is no way to know definitively who is responsible. But he said he doubts the government is behind attacking "pillars of the regime."
CNN reports that members of the opposition have accused the regime of working with al-Nusra and other jihadist groups, but the Monitor notes that the government and jihadist groups are "unlikely bedfellows" because of the secular nature of the Syrian regime and its Alawite faith, considered apostate by many jihadis.
Syrians gather in front of the damaged military intelligence building where two bombs exploded, at Qazaz neighborhood in Damascus, Syria, May 10. Two strong explosions ripped through the Syrian capital Thursday, killing or wounding dozens of people and leaving scenes of carnage in the streets in an assault against a center of government power. (Bassem Tellawi/AP)
Two bombings rock Damascus in one of largest attacks since uprising (+video)
• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.
Two explosions targeting a military intelligence facility in Damascus today have left at least 40 dead and at least 170 wounded in what government officials say might have been the largest attack on the capital since the uprising began in March 2011.
Central Damascus is under tight control of government forces, but it has been targeted by several other bombs since December, Associated Press reports. The government has blamed such bombings on Islamist militants using the uprising against President Bashar al-Assad as a cover. An Al Qaeda-inspired group has claimed responsibility for some past attacks and may be behind this one.
What is clear is that the conflict has turned violent on both sides.
Yesterday, United Nations special envoy to Syria Kofi Annan warned the country was on the brink of civil war and that adherence to a cease-fire brokered in April was the only way to step back from the ledge.
AP reports that today's bombings in Damascus were among the deadliest since large-scale attacks began in December and were followed by attacks in Idlib, Aleppo, and other cities. The targeted building is part of a compound housing a "feared section" of Syrian intelligence services, known as the Palestine Branch. The bombs went off as workers were arriving for work.
The opposition Syrian National Council insisted that the Assad regime was behind the bombings, saying it orchestrated them to arouse sympathy for the government, proving that there would be chaos without Assad, and to undermine support for the opposition by portraying them as terrorists, Agence France-Presse reports. "This is the only way for the regime to claim that what is happening in Syria is the work of terrorist gangs and that Al Qaeda is expanding its presence in Syria," said Samir Nashar, a member of the group.
A Syrian activist in Damascus echoed those beliefs in an interview with The Los Angeles Times. “This is the work of the regime,” the man, named Moaz, said. “No one else has the capability for an explosion like this, not the Free Syrian Army [the rebels' armed forces], not anyone. If the Free Syrian Army had this ability it would have freed Syria a long time ago.”
“The message is don’t mess with the regime and all the (UN) monitors don’t matter to me and I will convince the entire world with my point of view that there are terrorists in the country,” Moaz said.
The headline on the statement about the attack on the Syrian Arab News Agency website was "The Reality of Events: Tens of Martyrs and Wounded Civilians in Two Terrorist Explosions in Damascus" (Warning: Graphic photos). Syria's Day Press News reports that Syrian TV said "terrorists" were behind the attacks.
A secretive group called the Al-Nusra Front, likely a group of Salafi jihadists, has claimed responsibility for some of the previous bombings of government targets. The Christian Science Monitor reported last month that there is growing evidence that Syria's uprising has attracted jihadist militants "looking for a new theater of conflict" now that the US has withdrawn from Iraq and NATO operations in Afghanistan are winding down. Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri voiced his support for the Syrian uprising in February, saying Muslims in neighboring countries were compelled to come to the opposition's aid.
The New York Times reports that militant websites have been filled with discussions about whether the Syrian uprising "constituted a legitimate jihad."
United Nations Joint Special Envoy for Syria Kofi Annan delivers a statement to the media after addressing the UN Security Council in New York by videolink, at the European headquarters of the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, Tuesday. (Salvatore Di Nolfi/Keystone/AP)
UN envoy to Syria pins hopes for ending violence on observer mission
• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.
Kofi Annan, the United Nations envoy to Syria, gave a pessimistic assessment yesterday, warning that the country was on the brink of civil war and that the UN observer mission "is the only remaining chance to stabilize the country."
Mr. Annan said that the observer mission, deployed to Syria as part of his peace plan, has managed to tamp down, but not end, the violence.
"There is a profound concern that the country could otherwise descend into full civil war and the implications of that are frightening," Annan told reporters yesterday, according to the Associated Press. A Syrian military truck was targeted with a bomb today when a convoy carrying observers, including the head of the mission, was less than 350 feet away.
Although government troops are still present in cities and towns, they are there in smaller numbers, he said. Hervé Ladsous, the head of United Nations peacekeeping operations, said that the use of heavy weapons and major assaults has decreased but a "quieter crackdown [is] under way, including mass arrests," The New York Times reports. The observers have been able to operate fairly freely, a diplomat who heard the assessment told the NYT.
"The basic conclusion among the envoys was that although the implementation of the plan was clearly flawed, there was no real alternative. Mr. Annan stressed that himself," the Times reports. UN Middle East Envoy Terje Roed-Larsen said yesterday that, across the region, he sees "a dance of death at the brink of the abyss of war," according to BBC.
Col. Riad al-Assad, one of the rebel leaders, warned that he would resume attacks against the government because it has not honored the cease-fire, according to the London-based newspaper Asharq al-Awsat, AP reports.
Annan acknowledged yesterday that his peace plan might still fail, and he has no alternative course of action if it does, according to the The Wall Street Journal. The international community still has no interest in intervention. "I'm waiting for some suggestions as to what else we do," he said. "If there are better ideas, I will be the first to jump on it."
For now, the UN seems to be clinging to the hope that putting more observers on the ground will continue to whittle away at the violence. Only 60 of the 300 observers authorized by the UN Security Council have been deployed so far, according to WSJ. The Syrian National Council, the main coalition of opposition groups, has called for a mission with as many as 3,000 monitors.
Gen. Robert Mood, the head of the mission, said last week that even 10,000 observers "couldn't end the killing if the parties wanted to continue fighting."
The Journal reports that although both the government and the opposition have broken the cease-fire almost every day since it began a month ago, the death toll has slowed. Annan has pinned most of the responsibility for the violence on the government, although he also directed some blame at opposition groups.
China blames the Philippines for South China Sea dispute
• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.
A month-long standoff in the South China Sea between China and the Philippines picked up a notch today, with China accusing the Philippines of "continuous provocation" and warning that it is prepared to respond to any escalations.
The dispute is over what is known internationally as the Scarborough Shoal, a cluster of islands in the South China Sea less than 200 miles from the Philippines. The Philippines insists the shoal is within its exclusive economic zone, but China has staked claim to huge swathes of the South China Sea hundreds of miles from its shore, including this one (known in China as Huangyan Island), bringing it into conflict with several countries in the region.
China has painted the Philippine claim to the land as opportunistic, noting that China first staked a claim in 1935, while the Philippines didn't until 1997. In an Op-Ed for China Daily, Li Jenming, a professor at the Center for Southeast Asia Studies, writes that the "exclusive economic zone" claim "lacks legal basis."
China has continuously portrayed the Philippines as the aggressor in the latest standoff, which began in early April when a Philippine naval ship attempted to arrest Chinese fishermen found fishing in the waters around the shoal. They were blocked by other Chinese ships accompanying the fishing vessels.
Both Chinese and Philippine ships have been hovering in the area since then, BBC reports, and today China's vice foreign minister called on the Philippines to remove its ships. China has rejected requests to resolve the dispute at the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea.
Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Fu Ying said today that her country is prepared to respond to any efforts by the Philippines to escalate the situation. The Philippines has sent ships to the disputed area and made "erroneous" comments that have distorted the view of Filipinos and the international community, she said, according to Xinhua.
"However, it is obvious that the Philippine side has not realized that it is making serious mistakes and, instead, is stepping up efforts to escalate tensions," Ms. Fu said. "Therefore it is hard for us to be optimistic about the situation."
Philippine provocations include, according to China Daily, Manila's renaming of the island, bringing the dispute to an international court unilaterally, and the continued presence of Filipino ships in the Scarborough Shoal area.
Although the US has helped the Philippines boost its maritime defenses, most recently by providing the Philippine navy with its largest ship, it appears to be trying to remain out of the dispute.
Aiding the Philippines is part of the US strategy for keeping China's power in the region in check, which the US has framed as an interest in keeping the South China Sea open to international shipping. However, the US has insisted that it will remain neutral in this standoff – a move that pleased Beijing. The China Daily called US neutrality "helpful to stability."
An Op-Ed in China Daily, headlined "Never compromise," praises the way China has "defended its sovereignty" by dispatching ships to the shoal but refusing to open fire, avoiding a military confrontation, and dissects the US role in the standoff.
If the incident escalates into open military conflict, [the Philippines] wants its most powerful ally, the United States, to back it against China. Even if it does not, the Philippines is hoping to gain the support of the international community by portraying itself as a small, bullied country being threatened by China.
Without doubt, if the Philippines gets support from the US and other countries it will take an even tougher approach in the future.
The Philippines has a very good plan, with only one drawback: neither the US nor any of its other allies are its puppets. Actually, the alliance between the US and the Philippines is typical of an alliance between a big power and a small country, in which the big power fears being dragged into a conflict not of its choosing, while the small country fears being sacrificed in the interests of its powerful ally.
The US wants to make use of China's disputes with its neighbors to contain and balance China, but it does not want to become involved in any direct military conflict with China. Its recent promise of not "taking sides" bears testimony to this policy.
Despite the high tensions over territorial claims, China and the Philippines appear to be moving forward on an oil partnership. Philippines President Benigno Aquino said that he would allow Chinese companies to explore oil and gas resources, keeping the political dispute and the commercial venture on two separate tracks, Bloomberg reports.
“We now have an energy source within the region, not subject to the current turmoil that is being experienced and has to be completed in the Middle East,” Aquino said. “Doesn’t it redound to everybody to get these resources online at the soonest possible time?”
In an image provided by IntelCenter, a still from the video released Sunday by al-Qaeda of American hostage Warren Weinstein. Weinstein said he will be killed unless President Barack Obama agrees to the militant group's demands. (IntelCenter/AP)
US hostage Warren Weinstein makes plea to Obama in Al Qaeda video (+video)
A US citizen kidnapped last August in Pakistan has appeared for the first time in a video statement calling on US officials and President Obama to accept Al Qaeda’s demands in exchange for his release. The video appeared on several Islamic extremist websites on Sunday, but it remains unclear when it was made.
“My life is in your hands, Mr. President,” said hostage Warren Weinstein in the video, as described by the Associated Press. “If you accept the demands, I live; if you don't accept the demands, then I die."
Ayman al-Zawahiri, Al Qaeda’s leader claimed responsibility for the abduction in an audio recording last December. The group’s demands include the release of several Al Qaeda members tied to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and an end to US air strikes in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen.
The latest video further identifies Al Qaeda with the kidnapping of the elderly Mr. Weinstein, a dubious public relations strategy, notes the Monitor's Dan Murphy: "It's going to be very hard to sell the kidnapping of a 70-year-old unarmed man to the jihadi base as striking a glorious blow in a grand, religious cause – and as evidence that Al Qaeda is back in business."
Gunmen broke into Mr. Weinstein’s home on August 13, just days before he was scheduled to leave Pakistan. He had been working for J.E. Austin Associates, an American company that manages many contracts for the US Agency for International Development (USAID). The BBC reports that he had nearly 25 years of development experience. In Pakistan, he helped import high-tech dairy machinery to increase milk yields, and set up scholarships for youth from the tribal areas to study a gemology.
Friends of Weinstein said their kidnapping left them “puzzled.” The veteran aid worker had reportedly gone to great lengths to understand and respect the local culture and learned to speak some Urdu.
“He brings people together. When there’s no compromise between people in a meeting, he brings people to one point,” Ehtesham Ullah Khan, a gemologist who worked with Weinstein, told the Monitor last year. “He wants things to be done practically. He’s not like a paper man who likes reports and keeps [himself buried] in the files.”
There is also some concern over Weinstein’s health in captivity. He suffered from several ailments, reports Agence France-Presse. Prior to his abduction he’d changed his diet and took several medications to deal with his health problems. In his hostage video, he reported that that he had all of the medicine he needed.
Weinstein appears clean and in good health during the three-minute video. He wears traditional Pakistani clothing and sits behind a table with books and food. Throughout the video, he is seen periodically taking bites of food, reports Khaama Press.
Though Weinstein is believed to be held somewhere in the Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa province of Pakistan, local police say they have made some progress in his case. In April, agents from the Crime Investigation Agency (CIA) arrested two men who were said to be involved with the kidnapping, reports the Daily Bhaskar. One of the men, Hafiz Imran, is said by police to have led the abduction operation in Lahore and the other, Saifur Rehman, is accused of sheltering those involved.
Even before Weinstein’s abduction, Pakistan was considered one of the most dangerous places in the world for aid workers. The most recent report on aid worker safety by Humanitarian Outcomes found that Pakistan had the fourth highest rate of security incidents targeting aid workers, following, in order, Afghanistan, Sudan, and Somalia. Local aid workers are most often the victim of these attacks, but on a per capita basis international aid workers face a greater risk of attack.
Late last month British aid worker Khalil Dale was found beheaded in Pakistan about four months after he was abducted. The Taliban claimed responsibility for the kidnapping of the British national, originally of Yemeni origins, who was working with the International Committee of the Red Cross in Pakistan, reports the Dawn. His abductors say the killed him with ICRC failed to pay his ransom.
Taliban suicide bombing in northwestern Pakistan kills at least 19
• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.
At least 19 were killed in Pakistan today when a suicide bomber attacked a security post near the Afghan border. The Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack, saying it was retaliation for the death of Al Qaeda commander Sheik Marwan, who was killed by local security forces there in 2011.
The attack targeted the head and deputy head of a security force made up of local Pashtuns, known as Bajaur Levies, The New York Times reports. The two men were visiting the area – a crossroads in the capital of Bajaur district, Khar, near the market – to check on reports of a possible attack. Some 57 people were wounded. Pakistan's GeoNews puts the death toll at 22.
Agence France-Presse reports that Bajaur has been "one of the toughest battlegrounds" in Pakistan's efforts to dislodge the Taliban from its northwestern provinces. Today's attack was the third bombing in two days in the district, with two yesterday killed pro-government elders and local security personnel.
The whole country has been on a high state of alert since May 1, driven by concerns about retaliatory attacks on the first anniversary of Osama bin Laden's killing, according to AFP.
CBS/Associated Press report that in the batch of documents from Osama bin Laden's compound that were made public yesterday, Mr. bin Laden expressed concern about the number of civilians who were being killed by Pakistani militants.
The Pakistani Taliban, which rarely admits a role in attacks that kill many civilians, often blaming them on the US or Pakistani governments, claimed responsibility in a statement.
In the statement, spokesman Ihsanullah Ihsan said that among the security force targets was one man who had received an award for killing many militants. It was a "warning" to "people who are involved in any type of activity against the Taliban that we are aware of them and they will be treated with iron hands," Mr. Ihsan said.
But while the attack was ostensibly in retaliation for the killing of an Al Qaeda figure, the way it was carried out may not have been pleasing to Osama bin Laden's group. Despite strong links between Al Qaeda and the Pakistani Taliban, recently released papers found at bin Laden's compound "shed light on Al Qaeda’s frustration with the Pakistani Taliban’s indiscriminate attacks on Muslim civilian targets within Pakistan," the Los Angeles Times reports.
One letter, written by two Al Qaeda leaders and sent to Pakistani Taliban chief Hakimullah Mahsud, criticized the Pakistani militant leader for dispatching suicide bombers to “marketplaces, mosques, roads and assembly places….We hope that you will take the necessary action to correct your actions and avoid these grave mistakes.”
The NYT reports that Bajaur has been calm, particularly in comparison to more southern North and South Waziristan, where Taliban and Al Qaeda militants have established havens from which they can stage attacks on NATO troops in Afghanistan. The last major militant attack in Bajaur was in December 2010.
The Pakistani Army has been deployed in the region since 2008 as part of an operation to oust Faqir Muhammad, a former local leader of the Pakistani Taliban who was forced to flee to Afghanistan. He has since been replaced in Bajaur.
The Pakistani government says that more than 30,000 people have been killed in attacks across Pakistan in the past decade – 10 times the almost 3,000 people who perished in Sept.11.
An Israeli worker hangs an election poster for Likud Party leader Benjamin Netanyahu over one of Labor Party leader Ehud Barak in Jerusalem in this file photo. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said in a published comment on May 2 that policy toward Iran will be based solely on strategic interests. (Sebastian Scheiner/AP/File)
Dissent, elections make Israel's next steps on Iran difficult to predict
• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.
Top Israeli political and military figures remain at odds over their opinions on Iran's regime and its nuclear program, making it difficult to guess what Israel's next steps will be. The prime minister's announcement this week that he is open to moving elections up by more than a year only increase the uncertainty.
Today Defense Minister Ehud Barak slammed former prime minister Ehud Olmert, former Mossad chief Meir Dagan, and former Shin Bet chief Yuval Diskin, all of whom have downplayed the threat that Iran poses to Israel and criticized Mr. Barak and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for their hawkish approach.
"Olmert, Dagan, and Diskin are traveling the world and are weakening Israeli leaders' accomplishment of turning the Iranian issue into an important and urgent one – not only to Israel but to the world," Barak said today, according to Haaretz. Of Mr. Diskin, who formerly headed Israel's domestic security agency, Barak said, "it is not even his field of specialization or his responsibility."
Israel's top foreign-policy priority has been convincing the international community, particularly the United States, that Iran is an imminent threat, and the world cannot afford to wait and see if increasingly stringent sanctions will curtail Iran's nuclear program. Iran argues that its program is wholly peaceful, but Israel and others suspect Tehran aims to develop nuclear weapons under cover of its civilian program.
The Jerusalem Post reports that Barak "implied" in the same interview that the Israeli parliament "might need to pass stricter laws to prevent former members of the defense establishment from discussing certain security issues in public."
Diskin said last week that he had no confidence in Barak and Netanyahu's leadership and said their Iran efforts were motivated by a "messianic" drive. There has been dissent for months – often public – among current and former political and security officials, but his unequivocal comments gave the criticism a substantial credibility boost, The Christian Science Monitor's Dan Murphy writes:
Israeli politicians are known for their very public disagreements, but differences between security officials past and present and Israel's sitting government – especially on a topic as critical as this – are rare. Israel's generals have far more sway over policy in Israel than US ones do, at least historically, and in the case of the war posturing over Iran's nuclear program the simple message of their public comments appears to be: Don't.
…
Haaretz columnist Anshel Pfeffer said Diskin's warning that an Israeli strike could harden an Iranian desire for the bomb is striking. "While it is true that many experts have expressed this opinion, this is the first time that a central figure who was so recently within the innermost security circles has said such a thing."
Dahlia Scheindlin, a Tel Aviv public opinion expert and blogger at the left wing blog +972, told the Monitor earlier this week that the only people who can "credibly" criticize Netanyahu's Iran policy are members of the security establishment, such as those Dagan and Diskin.
According to one recent poll for the Jerusalem Post, less than half of Israelis support a unilateral Israeli strike on Iran but an overwhelming majority – 72 percent – would support an international strike. About half agreed with Diskin's criticism, according to a separate poll cited by The New York Times.
With the Knesset beginning to talk about dissolution, it appears likely that the elections will be bumped from their original date in 2013 to this coming September. The Los Angeles Times reports that the change in timing for the elections is "the latest sign that [Israel's] threatened attack against Iran's nuclear facilities is unlikely to take place in the coming months."
Some officials predict the chances of an Israeli airstrike against Iran will decrease because a divisive political campaign would paralyze the government and focus attention on domestic issues.
…
At the same time, Netanyahu is unlikely to risk the comfortable lead most polls give him over his rivals by launching a risky, complicated operation against Iran. A bungled or failed strike is one of the few things that could stand in the way of his reelection, analysts say.
The LA Times also reports that Netanyahu has the strongest security credentials of possible prime minister candidates and would be the one most likely to benefit if a debate on Iran became part of the campaign.
The Associated Press reports that Barak and Deputy Prime Minister Moshe Yaalon said in a statement yesterday that only "strategic interests" will play a role in Israel's policy on Iran, even during an election campaign.
Members of Somalia's Al Shabab militant group patrol on foot on the outskirts of Mogadishu on March 5. (AP/File)
Al Shabab strikes Somali lawmakers
• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.
Al Shabab has claimed responsibility for a suicide bombing in a Somali province yesterday that killed at least two lawmakers visiting from the capital. They were meeting several other lawmakers to discuss establishing a local administration as part of a larger effort to end Somalia's series of transitional governments.
Most reports indicate there were civilian deaths as well.
Although Al Shabab attacks on government and African Union targets are common, they are rare in the city of Dusamareb and the Galgadud region, where the attack took place, Reuters reports. Dusamareb has long been controlled by a pro-government militia named Ahlu Sunna, which receives support from Ethopia.
Al Shabab also claimed responsibility for blowing up a car in Mogadishu, killing one man. The militant group said he was targeted because he worked for the government, according to Reuters.
The two attacks came on the heels of a warning from the United Nations, the African Union mission to the country, and Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), an East African diplomatic organization, that a fledgling agreement to establish a lasting government is endangered, Agence France-Presse reports. A road map for replacing the weak Western-backed Transitional Federal Government (TFG) by August and bringing an end to decades of civil war was agreed to and signed by Somali leaders in September.
The biggest hurdle is determining what kind of government system would best unite the various administrations across the country. A new constitution and parliament are also needed.
"The roadmap continues to be jeopardised by the actions of individuals and groups in and out of Somalia, working to undermine the fragile progress we have collectively made in recent months," the statement from the international organizations read, according to AFP. "We have come too far, and too much is at stake, for us to allow the process to backslide at the exact moment Somalia has its best opportunity for peace in decades."
Al Shabab has been waging a war against the transitional government for years and controlled the capital of Mogadishu for much of that time, but a fierce African Union-backed campaign that began last summer has pushed them out and kept them on their back feet. The original 12,000 AU troops were boosted to 18,000 in October to include Kenyan troops; Kenya has accused Al Shabab of being behind a number of kidnappings in Kenya. The AU troops have expanded their efforts beyond Mogadishu, sometimes working in tandem with Ethiopian troops, BBC reports.
Get daily or weekly updates from CSMonitor.com delivered to your inbox. Sign up today.
United Nations observers travelling in UN vehicles leave the UN office in Damascus, Syria, Tuesday, May 1, as they head to areas where protests against the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad have been taking place. (Khaled al- Hariri /Reuters)
Both sides violating Syria cease-fire. Still worth supporting? (+video)
• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.
United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon issued another call today for all parties in Syria to respect a cease-fire that was violated almost as soon as it began thee weeks ago.
Lacking any alternatives at the moment, the UN and international and regional powers are continuing to focus their efforts on the UN observer mission that is being deployed to Syria and the cease-fire that the observers are meant to be monitoring. At this point, 30 of the 300 intended monitors have been deployed so far.
Meanwhile, fighting continues. Bombing by government forces killed 10 civilians in Idlib today, while suicide bombings of government security buildings – reportedly by opposition forces – killed 20 yesterday, mostly security personnel, Agence France-Presse reports. The Syrian National Council insists the government is behind the bombing of its own buildings in a bid to undermine the opposition.
The New York Times describes the current situation as a "stalemate."
The result is a bloody stalemate, with the West still endorsing a peace plan even while calling it unrealistic, and the Syrian government, if anything, empowered by the paralysis, even more confident it can weather the fractured and diffuse international pressure.
Despite months of fighting, Western and Arab sanctions that have sapped the national treasury and defections that have eroded the unity of the military, the Syrian government is not on the verge of falling nor abandoning its use of lethal force.
The rest of the world, fearing the chaos that further militarizing the conflict might bring, remains reluctant to arm the opposition.
But the opposition appears to be taking care of arms itself. While opposition groups have disputed claims that they are behind the most recent bombings and some that came earlier this year, Reuters reports that their offensive tactics are shifting from "small-scale ambushes on checkpoints and military patrols to audacious assaults on infrastructure and symbols of the Assad state."
"The rebels are getting better at bomb-making – as you know, desperation is the mother of invention," one anti-Assad fighter who claimed to be in command of a militia unit told Reuters in neighbouring Lebanon. "We are starting to get smarter."
A separate Reuters report corroborates such claims. Rebels chalked the shift up to economics – guns are increasingly expensive, while bombs, which can be made, are comparatively inexpensive.
"We are starting to get smarter about tactics and use bombs because people are just too poor and we don't have enough rifles," a rebel fighter from the north of Idlib province said last week as he took a break across the border in Turkey.
"It is just no match for the army," said the man, who spoke on condition of anonymity, "So we are trying to focus on the ways we can fight."
…
However, mindful of Assad's portrayal of those who have opposed him over the past 14 months as "terrorists", and keen to maintain Western and Arab support, several rebel fighters who spoke to Reuters said that, unlike al Qaeda, their bombs were aimed at military, and never civilian, targets.
"We are not targeting civilians. We are strictly going against regime targets," said Haitham Qdemati, spokesman for a rebel group called the Syrian Liberation Army. "We're not killers. We're defending ourselves."
There are a number of theories about who is behind the bombings of the last couple months: the government, trying to discredit the opposition; Al Qaeda-linked Syrian Islamists with experience fighting in Iraq; and the mainstream opposition, despite its denials.
The Monitor reported yesterday that Syria's uprising may be drawing militants looking for new opportunities after Iraq and Afghanistan, although at least some appear to be Syrian nationals; a salafi jihadist group has claimed responsibility for recent suicide bombings, and the names of its leader and one of its martyrs suggests they hailed from Damascus and the Golan Heights. But a prominent Lebanese militant was among those recently killed.
Earlier this year Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri called for Muslims in neighboring countries to assist Syria's opposition. But rebels and opposition figures haven't appeared to welcome the call; they deny they are receiving help from Al Qaeda and insist the uprising is being fueled by domestic forces.
"The only Al Qaeda cells that operate in Syria are those manipulated by Assad's security apparatuses," said Ammar Abdulhamid, a US-based Syrian opposition activist in an online newsletter emailed [Monday]. "The suicide bombings are directly staged or facilitated by them. Issues pertaining to the timing and the real beneficiaries, and everything we know about the Assads' involvement in terror networks, all point in this direction."
Recently, prominent US senators have declared that the UN peace plan for Syria has failed. But such declarations are premature, says Marc Lynch of Georgetown University. In April 25 testimony before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia, posted on his Foreign Policy blog, he said:
"It is time for the Obama Administration to acknowledge what is obvious and indisputable in Syria: the Annan Plan has failed." This declaration by Senators Lieberman, McCain and Graham on April 19, 2012, came only one week after a United Nations-backed ceasefire came into effect, and two days before the passage of a unanimous United Nations Security Council resolution authorizing a 300 member team to monitor the ceasefire. The urgent, and admirable, imperative to do something to help the people of Syria should not rush the United States into a poorly conceived military intervention. The painstakingly constructed international consensus in support of diplomacy and pressure should not be abandoned before it has even had a chance.
…
It is far too soon to give up on a diplomatic process which has just begun. Rather than rush into a risky, costly and potentially counter-productive military intervention, the United States should give the current plan time to work. It should continue to lead international efforts at the United Nations, promote the demilitarization of the conflict, continue to increase the pressure on the Assad regime, build on the efforts underway with the "Friends of Syria" group, support the political development of the Syrian opposition, and prepare the ground for future accountability for war crimes.
Prof. Lynch's full testimony is available here.
Get daily or weekly updates from CSMonitor.com delivered to your inbox. Sign up today.
Previous
Become part of the Monitor community
36K on Facebook | 12K on Twitter | 2,250 on YouTube