Terrorism & Security

In this photo, a Chinese airplane flies in Japanese airspace above the islands known as Senkaku in Japanese and Diaoyu in Chinese in southwestern Japan Thursday, Dec. 13. (Japan Coast Guard 11th Regional Coast Guard/AP)

Japan scrambles F-15s after China flies over disputed islands

By Whitney Eulich, Staff writer / 12.13.12

• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.

The territorial standoff between China and Japan over disputed islands in the East China Sea further escalated today after a Chinese plane was spotted in what Tokyo considers its airspace.

Though the Chinese plane was not a military aircraft, its presence is the latest provocation in a dispute that has affected economic relations between the two countries and comes just three days before Japanese elections.

The Chinese state maritime agency said that the marine surveillance plane was sent to patrol the disputed islands – known as Diaoyu in China and Senkaku in Japan – along with four boats, according to China’s Global Times. Japanese boats also patrolling the disputed area were asked to leave immediately, in line with the Chinese government’s stance, the Global Times reports.

Japan’s defense agency dispatched eight F-15 jets in response, but the Chinese plane had already left the area by the time they arrived, according to the Associated Press. The Japanese government also issued an official complaint, however China responded that it was “carrying out a normal operation,” reports AP.

“I want to stress that these activities are completely normal. The Diaoyu and its affiliated islands are China’s inherent territory since ancient times,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said of the plane. “China requires the Japanese side stop illegal activities in the waters and airspace of the Diaoyu islands.”

Osamu Fujimura, Japan's chief cabinet secretary, called the Chinese move “extremely regrettable.”

According to the Wall Street Journal, an airspace violation could take the dispute to the next level.

International law forbids entering another nation's airspace without permission and gives countries the right to expel unauthorized aircraft with force immediately. In contrast, foreign ships are able sail through a nation's territorial waters as long as it is considered "innocent passage."

The incident also puts further pressure on [Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda], whose ruling Democratic Party of Japan is likely to face a decisive defeat in Sunday's elections, according to various national polls. Shinzo Abe, who's likely to take his job away, has criticized Mr. Noda for his handling of the territorial issues, and called for a confrontational approach focused on the use of "physical power," rather than diplomacy.

Mr. Abe is expected to invest more money into the Japanese coast guard and defense, Reuters reports. The coast guard has gained popularity since the confrontation reignited earlier this year, with the most recent escalation taking place after Japan purchased the islands from a private Japanese investor in September. The move inspired anti-Japanese rallies across China, “with people looting and torching Japanese-owned businesses,” according to The Christian Science Monitor.

The New York Times reports that today’s incident was an “embarrassment for the current administration” in Japan because its radar system failed to register the Chinese plane. The alert came from Japanese ships near the islands.

The Japan Daily Press notes that the coast guard has earned fame from the action surrounding the charged island dispute, “causing a surge in job applications and even inspiring a local box-office hit film.” However, the civilian-staffed guard is “being stressed and tested to its limits.”

[I]n order not to escalate the situation, the government isn’t using the military Self Defense Forces. Instead, it has tasked the Coast Guard, composed of civilians and run by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport, and Tourism. Although somewhat on par with their Chinese counterparts, the Coast Guard is being stretched thin. Its crew, used to shifts of at most two weeks, are on duty without time off for months. They are also forced to skip crucial training, in a time when they are expected to be able to ward off and restrain offenders both on sea and on remote islands. Ships also receive only temporary repairs instead of much-needed overhauls.

… The situation has become a rallying and unifying point of many of the political parties and candidates running for election in a few days, with promises of allocating funds and beefing up the Coast Guard to empower it to respond to situations and emergencies that the pacifist nation hasn’t faced in decades.

Today was the first time both countries have used planes in the dispute. Reuters reports that Japanese analysts are concerned over the use of aircraft.

"This is serious ... intrusion into Japan's airspace is a very important step to erode Japan's effective control over the area," said Kazuya Sakamoto, a professor at Osaka University.

"If China sends a military plane as a next step, that would really make Japan's control precarious."

Toshiyuki Shikata, a Teikyo University professor and a retired general, said the use of aircraft by both sides was significant.

"Something accidental is more likely to happen with planes than with ships," he said.

The uptick in interest in the islands is likely linked to the potential for oil and gas in surrounding waters, but “For most of human history,” The Christian Science Monitor’s China bureau chief Peter Ford wrote this fall, “the five rocky islets in the eye of the current diplomatic storm between China and Japan have sat in remote and irrelevant obscurity, lapped by the tropical waters of the East China Sea.”

Japan bases its claim to the islands, which it calls the Senkaku, on a cabinet decision in January 1895 whereby because there was no trace of anyone else controlling them they were deemed "terra nullius," nobody else's, and Tokyo incorporated them into its territory.

China disputes that claim, pointing to 15th-century accounts of sea voyages by Chinese envoys and a 17th-century map of China's sea defenses, among other documents, to show that "the Diaoyu islands were first discovered, named, and exploited by the Chinese," in the words of a Foreign Ministry statement.

A Free Syrian Army fighter takes position as he points his weapon in Aleppo's al-Amereya district Tuesday. (Aaref Hretani/Reuters)

Will US recognition of Syrian opposition group open channels for weapons support? (+video)

By Ariel Zirulnick, Staff writer / 12.12.12

• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.

The United States last night granted long-demanded recognition to a Syrian opposition council as the legitimate representative of Syrians opposing President Bashar al-Assad, but any celebration was short-lived. A spokesman for the opposition council called for "real support" today, meaning weapons and other forms of military aid.

"We've made a decision that the Syrian Opposition Coalition is now inclusive enough, is reflective and representative enough of the Syrian population that we consider them the legitimate representative of the Syrian people in opposition to the Assad regime, and so we will provide them recognition," President Barack Obama said last night, according to the Wall Street Journal. "It's a big step."

Recognition of the opposition coalition, formed last month to replace an earlier, largely ineffective iteration, comes amid substantial rebel military gains and a sense that President Assad is in his most precarious position yet after months of bloody fighting.

“Recognition is nice, but we need real support,” said Walid al-Bunni, a spokesman for the Syrian National Coalition, according to the Associated Press. “I will be happy after the conference if we have something for the Syrian people.”

By real support, Mr. Bunni likely meant weapons – something the Syrian opposition has requested repeatedly and which the US has steadfastly refused because it says it cannot ensure those weapons will not end up with anti-US jihadi groups widely believed to be fighting in Syria alongside Syrian rebels. Britain has also consistently rejected the possibility of military aid. 

AP reports that there were no representatives of the opposition's military wing at today's meeting in Morocco, but Western officials will meet with them in Turkey next week, according to Reuters.

A Western diplomat at the meeting told Reuters that arming the rebels has not been ruled out but that "assurances" about the destination of the weapons would be required first. "No option is ruled out. But there are big issues about the legality of intervening in a civil war. Any support to any group depends on the command control and the discipline on the ground," he said.

The Syrian rebel forces are still a relatively disorganized entity in comparison to standing armies, but they have made major strides in their organization, tactics, and capabilities in the last couple months. In addition to a substantial bloc of territory in northwest Syria stretching from Aleppo west to the border with Turkey, they now hold a similarly contiguous strip of territory from eastern Syria to southwest of Damascus, according to Reuters.  

According to residents in central Syria, where rebels have had a "string of victories," Assad's forces have been unable to regain control. Rebels insist that they can only maintain that momentum if they are provided with heavy weapons that can rival those of the regime forces. 

"The rebels are now much closer to the palace. Bashar is under siege. His end will be like Gaddafi's end. Didn't Bashar say, 'I was born in Syria and will die in Syria'? This is what Gaddafi said as well, and that's it," Syrian Muslim Brotherhood leader Farouq Tayfour said at the meeting in Morocco, according to Reuters.

The US only recently began actively engaging with the opposition, likely spurred on by a combination of rebel military gains that made their success seem more likely and by concerns about the growing influence of Islamist units. It has now inserted itself into the upheaval energetically, leading efforts to build up the second iteration of the opposition coalition, but The New York Times reports "experts and many Syrians, including rebels, say the American move may well be too little, too late" to exercise any real influence over the rebels or to overcome anger at the US for its slow response. 

As the US was taking steps to recognize the opposition coalition, it was also gathering the information needed to formerly sanction one of the most high-profile and successful of the rebel militias, the Jabhat al-Nusra Front, in order to prevent Americans from providing support for the group. The group has declared a string of victories against regime forces and has been perhaps the most successful of the rebel units, but it also has ties to Al Qaeda in Iraq, which played a powerful role in the Sunni insurgency in Iraq.

The Obama administration yesterday connected the group to Al Qaeda in Iraq and said that Jabhat al-Nusra has claimed responsibility for nearly 600 attacks in Syria in the last year. The treasury department classified its efforts as "attempts to hijack the Syrian rebellion, a pro-democracy uprising at its roots that has no connection to global jihadist ideologies."

But Jabhat al-Nusra has curried favor among rebels for taking action, and the blacklisting risks raising their ire, as The New York Times reported earlier this week in an article in which it described the group as one of the uprising's "most effective fighting forces."

The Nusra Front “defends civilians in Syria, whereas America didn’t do anything,” said Mosaab Abu Qatada, a rebel spokesman. “They stand by and watch; they look at the blood and the crimes and brag. Then they say that Nusra Front are terrorists."

…

On Friday, demonstrators in several Syrian cities raised banners with slogans like, “No to American intervention, for we are all Jebhat al-Nusra,” referring to the group’s full name, Ansar al-Jebhat al-Nusra li-Ahl al-Sham, or Supporters of the Front for Victory of the People of Syria. One rebel battalion, the Ahrar, or Free Men, asked on its Facebook page why the United States did not blacklist Mr. Assad’s “terrorist” militias.

Men sit in front of their tents set in Tahrir square in Cairo, Monday, Dec. 10. The Egyptian military on Monday assumed joint responsibility with the police for security and protecting state institutions until the results of a Dec. 15 constitutional referendum are announced. (Petr David Josek/AP)

Will Egypt's military choose to make or break the referendum process? (+video)

By Arthur Bright, Staff writer / 12.11.12

• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.

As Egypt prepares for rival protests today over its upcoming, controversial constitutional referendum, outside observers speculate about what role the Egyptian military – which President Mohamed Morsi empowered this week in a bid to maintain security during the process – will choose to play in the ongoing political crisis.

Egypt's Ahram Online reports that a group of armed men attacked anti-Morsi protesters in Tahrir Square using pellet guns and Molotov cocktails early this morning, injuring 16 people. A physician who set up a clinic in the square, Hassanein Abu El-Hasan, told Ahram Online that injuries were primarily pellet wounds in the arms and feet.

The attacks come at the outset of a day expected to feature demonstrations by both pro- and anti-referendum protesters, reports Agence France-Presse.  A pro-Morsi coalition, including members of Mr. Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood, plan to start the protests near the presidential palace, while members of the opposition National Salvation Front plan to gather later at Tahrir Square to call for a stay on the referendum process, which they say institutionalizes Islamist principles at the expense of human rights, women, and religious minorities.

Each demonstration is expected to draw tens of thousands of people. Should the opposing rallies meet, there is a high risk of violence.

The fresh protests "raise the spectre of 'bloody Wednesday'," the independent newspaper Al-Shuruq headlined, referring to last week's deadly clashes.

The pro-government daily Al-Akhbar said: "My God, save Egypt."

Morsi yesterday granted the military, a dominant force in the country until Morsi stripped it of many of its powers in August, the power to arrest citizens during the referendum process. The move will potentially force the military to choose a side in the debate and gives it substantial influence over the outcome of the vote. When the military tried to take that same power for itself earlier this year, it raised a broad outcry in Egypt. 

Voice of America, the official US international news agency, reports that the military is setting itself up to remain neutral in the crisis. Yezid Sayigh, a Beirut-based Carnegie Middle East Center analyst, told VOA that the generals' call last week for the political crisis to be resolved through dialogue "sent very strong signals to Morsi in particular that the army is not going to act as his proxy or as an ally in his political disagreement with the opposition in Egypt."

"The army also is saying we will not allow (the president) to go too far in imposing his will," Mr. Sayigh said. He added that the military has little interest in direct control of the government, saying "The army as a whole was not at all happy with their political role over the past year-and-a-half after Mubarak's downfall. I believe they are very reluctant to be in that position once again."

Daniel Kurtzer, a former US ambassador to Egypt and current Princeton University professor, told VOA that the military is satisfied with Morsi's rule and the terms of the constitution, as long as the document retains the military's powers and place in Egyptian society.

"If the military is satisfied that the constitution protects its role, I think (the generals) would give a lot of leeway to other forces within society to define the role of Islam and the questions of civil rights and the protection of human rights," he said.

The Monitor's Dan Murphy argues that the constitutional powers granted to the military in the draft constitution makes the military Morsi's ally, not a neutral observer of the conflict.

The Egyptian military hierarchy is often described as hostile to the Brothers, but that case is frequently overstated. What the Egyptian military wants is the ability to conduct its own affairs without civilian meddling, and to continue to expand a sprawling business empire that ranges from refrigerator factories to water-bottling plants to high-end condominium development. Mubarak provided that platform until he fell. Now, if the Muslim Brotherhood is offering a similar deal, who are Egypt's officers to complain?

There have been plenty of efforts to induce the military to cooperate. While two years ago Brotherhood leaders would talk about the baleful role the military played in Egyptian political life and bitterly complain about US backing for the army, the draft constitution includes protections of the military's long-established perks that seem the result of a remarkable detente between the Muslim Brotherhood and the officers. ...

The second sentence of the preamble to the draft hails the military's support for the January 25 revolution – a remarkable piece of historical revisionism for the beginning of a document that's supposed to undergird the building of a democratic political culture in the country. Article 197 of the draft takes control of the military's budget out of the hands of the legislature, and Article 198 says "civilians shall not stand trial before military courts except for crimes that harm the armed forces." That caveat is big enough to drive a truck through.

In his column for The Nation, investigative journalist Robert Dreyfuss makes a similar point, arguing that "a burgeoning alliance between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Egyptian military is threatening to create a new authoritarian regime."

Long ago, in blogging about the Arab Spring in Egypt, I predicted that the Muslim Brotherhood would form an alliance with the generals, not because I had inside information but because it was so obvious. And it is coming to pass. ...

Having claimed vast new powers, designed to ram through a constitutional draft by referendum next week, Morsi is now officially promising to use the military to enforce the vote, despite huge protests from an anti–Muslim Brotherhood coalition. Paranoically blaming “foreigners” for the protests, Morsi has deployed the military’s tanks around his office, adding: “It is my duty to defend the homeland.” Morsi and the government-controlled newspaper Al Ahram used precisely the same language as the generals did in pledging to protect Egypt’s “institutions.”

Read entire post | Comments

Soldiers stand guard by their armored vehicle in front of the presidential palace in Cairo, Egypt, Monday, Dec. 10, 2012. The Egyptian military on Monday assumed joint responsibility with the police for security and protecting state institutions until the results of a Dec. 15 constitutional referendum are announced. (Petr David Josek/AP)

Will Morsi's security request give Army renewed clout? (+video)

By Arthur Bright, Staff writer / 12.10.12

• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.

Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi has called on the military to "preserve security" during the runup to the controversial Dec. 15 constitutional referendum, as opposition critics dismiss his recent reversal of his immunity from oversight as a "nothing" gesture.

Agence France-Presse reports that Mr. Morsi instructed the military to cooperate fully with police "to preserve security and protect vital state institutions for a temporary period, up to the announce of the results from the referendum." The order also allows the military to arrest civilians.

The military has largely been neutral so far in Egypt's political crisis, though it deployed troops on Dec. 6 around the presidential palace to keep the peace amid ongoing opposition protests in the area. The BBC's Jon Leyne in Cairo says the decree will raise fears that the military, which ruled Egypt for decades under former President Hosni Mubarak but was curtailed earlier this year by Morsi, is regaining some of that power.

The president's decree comes on the heels of his annulment of his Nov. 22 power grab, when he declared his power immune to any judicial or legislative review. That order, combined with the Muslim Brotherhood's rush to produce the constitution that will be put to a referendum on Dec. 15, spurred the widespread protests that have wracked Egypt since. 

But while Morsi framed the rescission as a concession to the opposition, protesters say that the damage has already been done, reports Kristen Chick for the Monitor.

"Morsi used the powers of the decree to push his constitution on us, so what does it mean if he cancels it now? It means nothing. He achieved his goal already," says Haitham Mohamed, who has spent much of the last week protesting the president's moves. He noted that if the referendum approves the constitution, Morsi's previous decree, and the powers that came with it, would have been invalidated soon anyway. "We demanded that he delay the referendum, and for a constitution we agree on. He ignored this demand." ...

[Bassem Sabry, a writer who often focuses on Egypt's opposition,] says the new constitutional decree was not a compromise because it did not delay the constitutional referendum. After a contentious process that saw most non-Islamist members of the committee walk out, the committee announced abruptly less than two weeks ago that it would finish the document and put it to a vote.

Sabry says Egyptians need at least a month to mull the document, which rights activists and many opposition members call deeply flawed. Sabry also objects to the president's repeated use of constitutional declarations, the term used here for unilateral amendments, made by the executive, to the temporary constitution.

The Washington Post reports that it remains unclear whether the president's rescission really reversed course. The Post notes that "The new declaration, while voiding the old, contained an article that grants the president the right to make new decrees, free of oversight."

Expanding on his comments to the Monitor, Bassem Sabry writes that "The opposition and others ... do not believe that he has the legal power to issue such declarations," such as the ones issued on Nov. 22 and over the weekend.  Mr. Sabry adds that the president's refusal to delay the constitutional referendum is problematic, as the constitution is too complex to be understood in just a few days, even by those like himself who have been monitoring its evolution closely.

I have followed every document released by the assembly from day one, analysed and written about them, attended formal discussion groups on the documents, have studied relevant academic material in my education, and I – and others like me – are actually still discovering new perspectives about this document till this day! What would a normal citizen do? People need at least a month to study this document and make up their minds in an informed decision. Trying to rush the referendum appears to be an attempt to capitalise on current conditions to secure a yes vote. ...

The referendum has to be delayed, if there is any real desire by the administration for people to actually make some informed opinion of any kind. I have asked tens of current yes and no voters, and many are basing their decisions on things that are either inaccurate or had changed from previous drafts!

Regardless, the rescission satisfied at least one group of protesters: Egypt's judges. Independent Egyptian news site Bikya Masr reports that Egypt's judges, who had been on strike since Morsi's Nov. 22 decree, returned to work today.  Bikya Masr writes that according to Judge Zaghloul al-Balshi, head of judicial inspection, the judges had been angry "because of the constitutional decree and Morsi annulled that yesterday. Therefore there is no need for judges to suspend their work and as of tomorrow they will return to their work as usual.”

Bikya Masr adds that the judges will announce tomorrow whether they will oversee the upcoming constitutional referendum.

Hamas chief Khaled Meshaal (l.) waves as he stands next to senior Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh upon Meshaal's arrival in the Gaza Strip today. Mr. Meshaal's arrival ended 45 years of exile from Palestinian land and underscored the Islamist group's growing confidence following its recent conflict with Israel. (Suhaib Salem/Reuters)

With Hamas's confidence waxing, Khaled Meshaal arrives in Gaza

By Whitney Eulich, Staff writer / 12.07.12

• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.

Exiled Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal is walking on Palestinian territory for the first time in 45 years. He's in town to celebrate his party’s 25th anniversary and the end of a week-long conflagration with Israel last month.

But his visit could also signal growing confidence within the Islamist party – which Israel, the United States, and the European Union consider a terrorist organization – over its position in the tumultuous Middle East.

Mr. Meshaal, who left the West Bank as a boy in 1967 and had not visited Gaza before today, has led Hamas for over 15 years, primarily from the party's offices in Damascus, Syria.  But he was in Egypt late last month for negotiations of the cease-fire that ended the eight-day conflict with Israel. Some 170 Palestinians and six Israelis were killed in the violence, the Telegraph reports, the worst fighting in four years.  The New York Times reports that Hamas' negotiation of “a cease-fire with Israel through the agency of the Egyptians … may represent an important step toward becoming a more recognized international player and representative of at least a portion of the Palestinian people.”

Meshaal has since spoken of the possibility of reaching out to other political factions within the Palestinian territory, including the Fatah party, which was pushed out of Gaza by Hamas in 2007. Al Jazeera reports Hamas invited Fatah officials to a celebration rally in Gaza tomorrow, part of Meshaal’s whirlwind trip.

"There is a new mood that allows us to achieve reconciliation," Meshaal told Al Jazeera.

According to the Times, “The Fatah movement controls the West Bank, which Israel still occupies, and the rivalry between the two groups is the defining principle of Palestinian politics, despite continuing efforts by Egypt to bring about a reconciliation.”

The most recent violence between Israel and Palestine started on Nov. 14 with an exchange of rockets and airstrikes. Since then, the Palestinian Authority gained United Nation’s recognition as a non-member observer state (something that Meshaal thanked Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas for, reports the BBC), and Israel announced the expansion of settlement construction on the West Bank.

Israel says its airstrikes did substantial damage to Hamas in November, killing Ahmed al-Jaabari, its military chief, and diminishing its supply of weapons, reports the Telegraph. But according to The Associated Press, Hamas leaders declared victory in Gaza after the truce was brokered in November.  “While Israel said it inflicted heavy damage on the militants, Gaza's Hamas rulers claimed that Israel's decision not to send ground troops into the territory, as it had four years ago, was a sign of a new Hamas deterrent power.”

A spokesman for Israel’s foreign ministry told Bloomberg today that “it doesn’t matter who they are, Hamas still stands for violence, bloodshed, extremism and racism.”

But the November Israeli-Palestinian face-off highlighted a change in the regional attitude toward Hamas, one that The Christian Science Monitor’s Egypt correspondent writes may be attributed to the aftermath of last year’s Arab uprisings. Political parties such as Hamas now have more support from Arab leaders, and the role Egypt’s Mohamed Morsi, the Turkish prime minister, Qatari emir, and Hamas’ exiled Meshaal played in brokering the cease-fire last month is one example of this.

…[I]n the post-“Arab spring” Middle East, the region looks much different, and Hamas has found a new swell of support as it faces Israel. Mr. Mubarak, ousted in a popular uprising in 2011, has been replaced by an elected president from the Muslim Brotherhood. Instead of a mostly sealed Gaza-Egypt border, it has become difficult to keep track of all the solidarity trips made to Gaza by Arab officials. ...

The uprisings that displaced pro-Western autocrats who toed the US line on Israel have brought to power Islamist governments more friendly to Hamas, as well as more sensitive to public opinion typically supportive of the Palestinian cause. This has reshaped the regional dynamics, leaving Israel increasingly isolated. These new governments, along with Turkey and Qatar, have formed a vocal block of opposition to Israel's assault on Gaza.

“This is a significant change in the Arab reaction,” says Khalil Al Anani, a scholar at Durham University in Britain. The new Arab nations ready to take a stronger stance against Israel could change Israel’s calculations in favor of more restraint.

“It shows that Gaza is not alone. This will put pressure on Israel, and they [Arab states] can move further if they want, by lobbying internationally and putting a spotlight on Israel and its lack of interest in peace," he says. 

“The visit of Mashaal to Gaza is one of the fruits of the victory Hamas has achieved during the eight-day war on Gaza,” Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said, according to Bloomberg. “Gaza is freed now and will receive whoever visitors it wants.”

Hamas was founded Dec. 14, 1987, after the first Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation.  This weekend’s celebrations were moved up to coincide with the first intifada, or uprising, against Israel, reports the Times.

According to the BBC, “Under its charter, Hamas is committed to the destruction of Israel. But the group has also offered a 10-year truce in return for a complete Israeli withdrawal from territories it occupied in 1967.”

Meshaal, who reportedly kissed the ground upon entering Gaza from Egypt, is expected to speak at tomorrow’s rally. He also plans to visit the homes of fallen Hamas members including Mr. Jabari and Hamas’ spiritual leader Sheik Ahmed Yassin.

An Egyptian Army officer detains a man who was attacked by protesters gathering near the presidential palace while the army deploys to secure the site of overnight clashes between supporters and opponents of President Mohammed Morsi, in Cairo, Egypt, Thursday, Dec. 6, 2012. (Nasser Nasser/AP)

Tanks deploy to Egypt's presidential palace amid lull in deadly protests

By Arthur Bright, Staff writer / 12.06.12

• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.

After a night of violent protests across Egypt that left at least five dead and hundreds injured, Egyptian tanks deployed this morning to protect the presidential palace, marking the first time since Mohamed Morsi's power grab that the military has gotten involved.

Reuters reports that at least seven tanks and 10 armored personnel carriers from the Republican Guard, the military unit tasked with protecting the government organs, now surround the palace. The Republican Guard is ordering all demonstrators to leave the palace environs. The unit's commander, Gen. Mohamed Zaki, told the state news agency that "The armed forces, and at the forefront of them the Republican Guard, will not be used as a tool to oppress the demonstrators." 

Reuters notes that small numbers of protesters against and supporters of President Morsi remain in the area around the palace, but have largely been limited to shouting at each other from afar.

The lull stands in sharp contrast to last night, when thousands of Egyptians from both sides took to the streets and engaged in violent clashes, resulting in several deaths – Agence France-Presse reports that five people were killed, while Reuters puts the toll at seven – and hundreds of injuries. The Monitor reported last night that protesters and supporters clashed with rocks, firebombs, and the occasional gun around the palace, in a conflict that both sides see as an extension of the Tahrir Square protests last year that toppled President Hosni Mubarak.

Pavement is broken up into makeshift missiles, Molotov cocktails are thrown, and fireworks are fired horizontally at the other side. At one point, a protester runs through the anti-Morsi crowd shooting in the air with a handgun. The pro-Morsi crowd appears to be firing teargas canisters, something usually reserved for the police forces....

There is nothing uplifting about the mood here tonight, which seems eons away from the jubilant crowds in Tahrir on Feb. 11, 2011, the night Mubarak stepped down. Just before the fighting started, the crowd beat up a salafi passerby (a conservative Muslim), despite his protestations that he was “not with the Brotherhood.” A minivan stuck in traffic was attacked on the suspicion that it was carrying Muslim Brotherhood supporters.

If any comparisons are made with the uprising that brought down Mubarak last year, it is with the infamous “Camel Day,” when Mubarak supporters and police attacked the peaceful pro-democracy protestors in Tahrir Square.

The Monitor noted that Essam al-Arian, head of the Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party, last night on Al Jazeera called the protests “the last battle of the revolution against the counterrevolution.”

A presidential aide told AFP that Morsi would address the current crisis in a speech later today, though no time was given. But as the Monitor's Dan Murphy wrote last night, there have been no indications from Morsi or the Brotherhood that they are backing down from plans to hold a referendum on the rushed, Islamist constitution on Dec. 15.

Egypt's sputtering transition from a military-backed, secular dictatorship to, well, something else, has now hit its rockiest point in the nearly two years since it began. Morsi's spokesman and backers have not offered any specific compromise. His Vice President Mahmoud Makki today addressed the nation, saying a referendum scheduled for Dec. 15 will move forward. Gehad el-Haddad, a senior adviser for the Freedom and Justice Party, the Brotherhood's political wing, summarized Mr. Makki's remarks as "No moving of Referendum date, no cancellation of Constitutional Declaration. Crowds do not dictate course of country, elected bodies do." ...

Michael Hanna at The Century Foundation is worried, and fears that Morsi has been emboldened by his successful role in brokering a ceasefire between Hamas and Israel last month. 

"If approved in a hastily called referendum, that slipshod [constitution] will bound Egypt's political future and institutionalize its crisis. With a significant portion of the country's judges declaring a strike in response to Morsy's declaration and dueling protesters mobilizing on opposing sides, Egypt's flawed transition now risks tipping into outright civil strife and prolonged instability," he writes. "Rather than using his burnished reputation as a regional leader to forge a more consensual and stable transition back home, Morsy capitalized on the favorable international political climate by making an untenable and unjustifiable power grab that has plunged Egypt into crisis."

An anti-Morsi protester holds an Egypt flag as she walks in front of riot police in front of the presidential palace in Cairo Tuesday. Egypt fell by six places in Transparency International’s corruption index to 118th place this year. (Amr Abdallah Dalsh/Reuters)

And the most corrupt nation this year is.... (+video)

By Whitney Eulich, Staff writer / 12.05.12

• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.

Corruption is a major threat across the globe, impacting citizen’s perceptions of their leaders and trust for their government, regardless of the level of development or economic ranking. Corruption can also play a role in political unrest, as seen around the world from the Middle East to China to Greece.

Today, Transparency International released its Corruption Perceptions Index for 2012, measuring perceptions of how corrupt public sectors seem to be based on data sources from independent institutions in each country based on a period of 24 months. Transparency International notes that “levels of bribery, abuse of power and secret dealings are still very high in many countries.” Out of the 176 countries ranked in this year’s index, some two-thirds scored below 50, with zero indicating a perception of high levels of corruption and 100 indicating a perception of openness or clean dealings in the government. The US ranked 19th, up from 24th in 2011.

Worldwide, New Zealand, Denmark, and Finland had the highest scores, aided by strong systems ensuring public access to information and regulations that keep politicians and the political system in check. On the other end of the spectrum, North Korea, Somalia, and Afghanistan brought up the rear, all characterized by a lack of transparent and accountable leaders and public institutions in shambles.

“After a year of focus on corruption, we expect governments to take a tougher stance against the abuse of power…. [S]ocieties continue to pay the high cost of corruption,” said Huguette Labell, chair of Transparency International. The organization notes:

Corruption translates into human suffering, with poor families being extorted for bribes to see doctors or to get access to clean drinking water. It leads to failure in the delivery of basic services like education or healthcare. It derails the building of essential infrastructure, as corrupt leaders skim funds.

Take Greece, for example. The past year has seen endless protests over public leadership, false reporting on financial status, and strict austerity measures. “Greece's global ranking fell from 80th in 2011 to 94th in 2012, reflecting the country's continuing economic turmoil and widespread tax evasion,” reports the BBC, making Greece the European Union country most perceived as corrupt.

And perceptions of corruption in public officials may – inadvertently – encourage corruption in society at large.  Earlier this year on the Greek island of Zakynthos, it was discovered that at least 600 people were suspected of falsely claiming to be blind in order to get disability payments. As The Christian Science Monitor reports, the discovery hit a nerve with many who felt country leadership and a general culture of corruption was to blame.

The scandal has only fueled Greeks’ cynicism towards a political and social system that has brought the country close to ruin.

“I feel very bitter towards our politicians,” says Nikolaos Plessas, sipping thick black coffee in his cafe in a village of pastel-coloured cottages on Zakynthos.

“They have a [darn] cheek to even run for election after what they’ve done. Hard-working people like me fund their extravagant lifestyles. I won’t be voting next month.”

The campaign being waged by the mayor on Zakynthos is a microcosm of the much bigger effort required by Greece’s politicians to curb fraud, corruption, tax evasion and other long-standing abuses in order to put the country’s economic house in order.

Many Greeks say that will require more than legislation – it requires an entire change of culture.

“The whole system is sick,” says Mr. Skiadopoulos, [a] businessman. “Everybody is corrupt in Greece – the lawyers, the doctors, the judicial system, police, customs – everybody. All of us are guilty, all of us are responsible for what has happened.

“We need to change our whole mentality. Our European partners need to come here and be aggressive in pushing us to change. If they still think we are the devil of Europe, then they must throw us out.”

In releasing the 2012 Perceptions of Corruption Index, Transparency International is not only encouraging governments to integrate anticorruption measures into their system of governance, but empowering citizens to do the same. China, for example, was ranked 80th this year on the index, with a score of 39 in terms of perceived corruption. Corruption was a prominent issue in China this year, with the Bo Xilai scandal grabbing headlines and a rare leadership transition with China’s new leader Xi Jinping warning of “political unrest if corruption remains unchecked,” reports the Financial Times.

However, the Monitor’s China bureau chief, Peter Ford, reports that there have been some grassroots measures taken in China – aided by the rise of social media – to keep politicians in check.

Pity the poor Chinese official.

For years he has been able to get away with almost any kind of behavior, unaccountable to the public and rarely held to account by his superiors.

Suddenly, as two mid-ranking bureaucrats are discovering to their chagrin, he practically cannot even hitch up his shirt cuffs in public, let alone throw his weight around, without the public jumping on his case and possibly getting him fired.

Not because Chinese politics have changed, mind you, but because of Sina Weibo, the Twitter-like social media forum that has trained a critical public eye on people in authority across the land.

Just ask Yang Dacai. As head of Shaanxi Province’s Safety Supervision Bureau, he was called to the scene of a ghastly crash 10 days ago that had killed 36 bus passengers. For some reason, he was smiling inanely in a reporter’s photograph of the scene that went viral on Weibo, and which infuriated internauts.

Within a couple of days, he had been identified, and five photographs of him in different circumstances wearing five different luxury watches had been scoured from the Web and posted on Weibo. Where, demanded indignant citizens smelling corruption, had a civil servant earning $1,500 a month found the money to buy $40,000 worth of wristwatches?

Mr. Yang is currently under investigation by the Shaanxi provincial disciplinary body, which is looking into allegations of bribery.

And then there’s the Middle East, which witnessed historic uprisings starting in 2011 in response to repressive and corrupt leadership among other issues of graft, governance, and democratic freedoms. Although some countries, such as Egypt, took promising steps in the aftermath by holding free and fair presidential elections and drafting a new constitution, large-scale protests have taken place over how the constitution-drafting process has played out, as well as President Mohamed Morsi’s decision to call a national referendum on it for Dec. 15. Critics also charge that the draft dodged central issues of concern, as the Monitor’s correspondent in Egypt recently noted:

While focusing on disagreements between Islamists and secularists, the drafters missed an opportunity to address issues like decentralization of power, effectiveness of governance, and corruption.

Others had hoped the constitution would do more to achieve social justice and alter what they say is a state structure that contributes to the growing gap between rich and poor.

Egypt fell by six places in Transparency International’s index to 118th this year, with a score of 32. Other nations that took part in the so-called Arab Spring – which Transparency International sees as tied to public frustration over corruption, reports Reuters – also fell in the ranking, including Tunisia, Morocco, and Syria, which is suffering a civil war. Libya, however, rose in the rankings. (Note: Transparency International made changes to its methodology this year, so the rankings may not be perfect comparisons between 2011 and 2012.)

"We know that frustration about corruption brought people out onto the streets in the Arab world," Christoph Wilcke, Transparency International director for the Middle East and North Africa, told Reuters.

"We've observed that in countries where substantial change occurred they're still struggling to put in place new systems of governance. That's reflected in these scores. The hope hasn't materialized yet in more serious anti-corruption programmes."

A US Predator unmanned drone armed with a missile stands on the tarmac of Kandahar military airport in this 2010 file photo. Iran claims it captured a United States drone in its airspace over the Persian Gulf, which the US denies. (Massoud Hossaini/Reuters/File)

Did Iran just down a US drone by 'spoofing'? (+video)

By Whitney Eulich, Staff writer / 12.04.12

• A daily summary of global reports on security issues.

Iran claims it captured a United States drone in its airspace over the Persian Gulf, and though the US denies the downing of one of its intelligence-gathering drones, the claim highlights the role unmanned surveillance aircraft have played in the tense clandestine conflict between the US and Iran.

The crux of the tension between Iran and the US, as well as a number of European nations and Israel, is Iran’s suspected development of nuclear weapons [See our recent cover story on why Iran's ayatollah distrusts the US and what that means for nuclear talks and the possibility of war with the West]. Iran claims its nuclear goals are focused on civilian nuclear power, but the tensions around its nuclear program are palpable, and have inspired something of a “covert war” between Iran and the West. The Christian Science Monitor reported last year that “[t]he war has already seen assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists, mysterious explosions at Iran’s missile and industrial facilities, and the Stuxnet virus that set back Iran’s nuclear program,” in addition to the targeting of US surveillance drones.

Iranian state television today showed images of a Boeing ScanEagle drone in front of a map of the Persian Gulf, according to the New York Times. In Persian and English the map read “We will trample the U.S. under our feet,” next to an Iranian coat of arms. The Associated Press reports that if Iran’s claims are true, this "would be the third reported incident involving Iran and U.S. drones in the past two years."

Rear Adm. Ali Fadavi, the commander of the Revolutionary Guards Corps naval forces, said that after the drone violated Iranian airspace, his forces “hunted” it down and “forced it to land electronically,” reports the NY Times.

US denies

A spokesman for the US Naval Forces Central Command in Bahrain told Reuters that "The U.S. Navy has fully accounted for all unmanned air vehicles (UAV) operating in the Middle East region. Our operations in the Gulf are confined to internationally recognized water and air space."

The commander added, "We have no record that we have lost any ScanEagles recently."

Though the US denies Iran’s downing of a drone today, last December “Iran gained possession of a US stealth drone spying on a nuclear site. An Iranian engineer told the Monitor that Iran had hijacked the drone by manipulating its global positioning system coordinates, making it land in Iran,” according to The Monitor’s Scott Peterson. The NY Times notes that the US contends the RQ-170 drone crashed in Iranian territory last year.

Mr. Peterson, who broke the story on Iran’s success bringing down last year’s Stealth drone, says that if Iran’s claims today are true, it likely used the same electronic tactics as last time. In December 2011, Peterson described the technique, known as "spoofing":

Using knowledge gleaned from previous downed American drones and a technique proudly claimed by Iranian commanders in September, the Iranian specialists then reconfigured the drone's GPS coordinates to make it land in Iran at what the drone thought was its actual home base in Afghanistan.

"The GPS navigation is the weakest point," the Iranian engineer told the Monitor, giving the most detailed description yet published of Iran's "electronic ambush" of the highly classified US drone. "By putting noise [jamming] on the communications, you force the bird into autopilot. This is where the bird loses its brain."

The “spoofing” technique that the Iranians used – which took into account precise landing altitudes, as well as latitudinal and longitudinal data – made the drone “land on its own where we wanted it to, without having to crack the remote-control signals and communications” from the US control center, says the engineer.

Iran has exaggerated its capabilities in the past, Peterson notes. "But experts say that there is also a history of the US underestimating Iran’s electronic warfare and cyber expertise,” he wrote in a separate Monitor story after Iran claimed to have unlocked data from the drone last year.

"The problem with Iran is they cry wolf a lot, and we never know what to believe, and people get desensitized to real information," says Tyler Rogoway, who publishes the AviationIntel.com website from Portland, Ore.

"But when you have a fairly serious commander that runs their aerospace division, and he goes into these specific details – not these large, overreaching triumphant [declarations] – he's talking about real things ... that's a message to the [US] government, 'Hey, we caught you.’"

Last month Iran complained to the United Nations of eight violations of its airspace by US planes, and on Nov. 8 the Pentagon reported the first known instance of a warplane firing on a US drone after Iran shot at a Predator drone flying over the Gulf two weeks prior.

Other nations use same model

AP reports that Navy Spokesman Cmdr. Jason Salata said operations in the Persian Gulf are "confined to internationally recognized water and airspace," casting doubt on Iranian claims.

Salata also noted that other nations in the area, including the United Arab Emirates, use the same model of ScanEagle drones.

The US has been using “stealth drones” since the 1990s and in combat for the past decade, according to Foreign Policy. The online version of the policy magazine reported yesterday that France recently joined the US as “the second nation in the world to (publicly) fly a stealth [Unmanned Aerial Vehicle].” Though other countries may not be far behind.

The U.S. and France aren't the only countries making stealth drones. U.K.-based BAE Systems is hard at work producing the Taranis, while Russia's MiG is trying to field a stealth UAV called the Skat, seriously. Meanwhile, you can bet China will unveil a stealth UAV in the near future.

Want to know more? Read 'Inside the mind of Iran's Khamenei!'

Goats graze near the Jewish settlement of Maale Adumim near Jerusalem Dec. 1, 2012. Israel announced on Friday it was authorizing 3,000 new settler homes in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. (Baz Ratner/REUTERS)

Has Israel's settlement expansion crossed a 'red line'? (+video)

By Arthur Bright, Staff writer / 12.03.12

Israel's plan to move forward with controversial settlements in eastern Jerusalem – which it took in apparent retaliation for the Palestinian Authority's recent, successful pursuit of recognition as a United Nations nonmember observer state – is prompting an angry response, and likely "real action," from Europe.

Haaretz reports that Britain, France, and Sweden have all summoned Israel's respective ambassadors to their countries to condemn the Israeli plan to build 3,000 new settlement units in the "E1" bloc, a region in eastern Jerusalem, while Germany and Russia both called upon Israel to rethink its plans. And more serious action may be coming, including substantial economic reprisals, Haaretz adds.

“This time it won’t just be a condemnation, there will be real action taken against Israel,” a senior European diplomat said.

Sky News confirmed that the British government was considering severe actions over the matter, quoting sources in the Foreign Office on Monday as saying: "All options are on the table," adding that there was an "appetite for action" within the bureau, and that officials may consider "revisiting" or even suspending EU trade agreements with Israel, based on human rights clauses. ...

[Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu’s decision Friday to move ahead on planning in E1 and to build 3,000 housing units in the settlement blocs and in East Jerusalem, has apparently shocked the foreign ministries and the leaders in London and Paris. Not only do Britain and France view construction in E1 as a “red line,” they are reportedly angry because they view Israel as having responded ungratefully to the support the two countries gave it during the recent Gaza operation.

Haaretz writes that according to three senior European Union diplomats, Britain and France are coordinating their response to Israel, and have discussed recalling their ambassadors, a major diplomatic rebuke and a first for both countries against Israel. A French Foreign Ministry official told Reuters, however, "There are other ways in which we can express our disapproval" than by recalling ambassadors.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's announcement to expand the E1 settlements comes just a day after the UN voted overwhelmingly to recognize the Palestinian Authority (PA) as a state, albeit one with "nonvoting observer status" in the UN. The move passed 138 to 9, with 41 abstentions.  Britain and Germany, both longtime supporters of Israel, abstained from the vote, while France, Russia, and Sweden all supported the PA.  The United States was among the few opposition votes.

Building in the E1 region is particularly sensitive, as it would potentially cut off the West Bank from Jerusalem, which a Palestinian state, sharing with Israel, would use as its capital. The BBC's Jonathan Marcus notes that Israel has told successive US administrations that it would not build in the E1 region, and that such policy change is provocative even to Washington.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's spokesman criticized Israel's E1 expansion as a violation of international law. Mr. Ban's office released a statement Sunday saying he viewed the Israeli move with "grave concern and disappointment."

Settlements are illegal under international law and, should the E-1 settlement be constructed, it would represent an almost fatal blow to remaining chances of securing a two-state solution.

Catherine Ashton, the EU's head of foreign affairs, and French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius also criticized the decision along similar lines, reports The Guardian. Ms. Ashton said the move "may represent a strategic step undermining the prospects of a contiguous and viable Palestine with Jerusalem as the shared capital of both it and Israel," while Mr. Fabius called it a "new area of colonization" that would "sap the necessary confidence in a resumption of talks."