Needless to say, the nuclear standoff with Iran lingers on as the West attempts to threaten the Islamic state with more sanctions. Despite its consistent defiance of the obligations listed in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran seems to not be willing to negotiate on many aspects of its "peaceful" nuclear program. As the Bush administration leaves office, it appears Iran will be a situation dealt with by the next U.S. President.
As reports come out that suggest President Bush is willing to give Iran some diplomatic legitimacy by establishing an interests section potentially during his final month in office, one must wonder at what point does a lame duck president sit back and allow his successor to take the reigns. After three years of consistent rhetoric on alienating Iran diplomatically, a sudden reversal of U.S. policy would be detrimental in allowing the next administration to resolve the issue.
While the next administration will likely change the U.S. approach towards Iran, it must continue to declare that an Iranian state that sponsors terrorism and desires to possess a completely unregulated nuclear program is not acceptable. Without Iran providing any reasons to change U.S. policy drastically, preemptively providing a potential incentive to bribe them into coming to the table is not going to be the missing piece to the issue.
The best hope is to potentially pursue paths of alienating Iranian allies such as Syria. By potentially separating an Iranian ally that has historically held an anti-Western approach and providing a new face on U.S. policy in the Mid-East of cooperation with regimes that are willing to change their stance, a new phase of negotiations in this crisis can be achieved. However, if either side too hastily pursues a radical compromise the situation will be exacerbated. The ultimate goal of the U.S. should be to separate state sponsors of terrorism. Without any form of commitment on that regard, U.S. relations should not be pursued with those countries. By removing a strong Iranian ally, the potential to enhance relations could be achieved through Syria's establishment as a comfortable middle-ground and precedent.
Under the new President and his Secretary of State, there is potential for a breakthrough regarding Iran. However, it is necessary that the pressure remains existent on all levels until a reversal of support for international meddling via terror groups is obtained from Iranian leadership. Issues should be addressed one step at a time, and while the U.S. would like to see numerous changes in Tehran, the situation should be dealt with one step at a time. If either side too hastily pursues a radical compromise the situation will be exacerbated. The ultimate goal of the U.S. should be to encourage Iranian participation, not isolation, in international affairs. This issue should be addressed as the primary goal, and could be an issue that if pursued by Iran, could allow easier negotiations on the requirements of its nuclear program.
Only time will tell how Iran will greet the change of American leadership, but it will continue to be a difficult situation so long as each side consistently promotes a division and intolerance for the other. By potentially connecting the cultures in common pursuits, this gap can be overcome. Through forming common partnerships that enhance cooperation in the region, the U.S. can not be seen as an invading force but rather as an ally of the Middle East. The situation is difficult, but there is the hope that doors will open that allow Iran and the West to pursue negotiations and relationships in the future.
9-11-01
Monday, October 20, 2008
Monday, October 13, 2008
If we close our eyes, we can say nothing happened (Pt. III)
This is the third of three parts detailing Iran's growing influence in various regions. From Latin America to Africa to Europe, Iran has undeniably risen from the shadows largely due to its mouthy president who emerged in 2005 and its proxies' expansion. In such a short period of time, the growth of the Khomenist state has extended to nearly every hemisphere, facing little resistance by the West and its allies. As the standoff with Iran continues, it is important to understand the reality of the religious state that many say is now the key to Middle East policy.
After President Ahmadinejad took office in 2005, the Western powers lost any successes obtained in negotiating a resolution to Iran's nuclear pursuits. Ahmadinejad has made it very clear that the nuclear "know-how" is part of a vast religious obligation to utilize his power for the coming of the Mahdi. There was one dilemma. Iran was not capable of independently creating its nuclear program, it needed assistance. Once again, Ahmadinejad set out on his goal of forming a strategic partnership with a country that possessed what the Islamic republic lacked.
The criteria that formed the African and Latin American alliances was the same - a leader who was not willing to bow to Western influence and opposed the increasing American Imperialist movement. With North Korea constantly in talks over its program and Libya's agreement to abandonment, Ahmadinejad found a friend in Russia. Russia offered a partnership that elevated Iran from the shadows of international diplomacy and brought it to new levels. With Russian President Vladimir Putin's repeated criticisms of U.S. policy, Iran now had a major voice in international affairs - as well as a country which possessed the ability to veto any measures drafted in the UN Security Council.
With Russia's increased involvement with Tehran, there are several issues of concern. In 2005, it is reported that trade between the two countries was in excess of $1 billion, making Russia the seventh largest exporter to Iran. Estimates suggest that exports from Russia could grow to $10 billion annually within years. With such an invested stake in Iranian exports, Russian desire to impose increased sanctions has predictably been in opposition. It should be no surprise then that on September 29, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that he saw "no need for urgent measures against Iran." Those comments were made one week after an IAEA report criticized Iran for not allowing the agency to fully investigate certain aspects of the nuclear program.
The chief area of trade that has seen a spike under Ahmadinejad's presidency is arms sales, which has put Russian arms dealers as the chief suppliers to Iran. In 2006 Michael Eisenstadt, director of the Washington's Institute for Near East Policy's Military and Security Studies Program, said that the Islamic Republic was specifically seeking to increase it's air defense capabilities.
Late last year, the announcement came that Russia had agreed to sell Iran its S-300 air defense system, one of the most advanced of its kind. Capable of tracking around 100 targets simultaneously while intercepting up to 12 from a distance of over 100 miles, the reported sale was for deployment specifically around Iranian nuclear sites to dissuade Israel from any air strike on such sites. Now, amid reports that the system could be delivered by late this year, both Russia and Iran refuse to confirm nor deny whether there is such an agreement. The Russian Foreign Ministry has only stated that "we do not intend to deliver those types of arms to countries which are located in troubled regions." However, Russia has deployed the S-300 in Syria and the director for the Russian arms exports agency, Rosoboronexport, was quoted by Russian media on September 17 that his agency was in advanced negotiations to sell S-300 missiles to Iran. The agency later issued a statement denying that it had sold such missiles to Iran, but did not speak to whether or not there were talks for their sale. It is highly probable that Iran will seek to enhance its defenses around facilities such as its Bushehr reactor, which the Russian agency Atomstroyexport has stated should be operational by early to mid 2009.
While the official dealings of the Russian government remain unclear with Tehran, the most frightening component of all remains an ever present force in the Russian economy. Black market arms dealers continue to operate with relative ease in Moscow, creating a dangerous link with the Russian government that could extend into Iran and its proxies such as Hizbullah. To see the cooperation that exists between Russian officials and black market arms dealers, one need not look further than the case of Viktor Bout, the "Lord of War," who was arrested in Thailand in March. After Thai authorities agreed to drop their charges to allow a quicker extradition to the U.S., where he faces several charges related to terrorism, there have been several reports that the Russian Foreign Ministry is attempting to broker military sales with the Thai prime minister in exchange for Bout. According to Douglas Farah, despite a 20o2 Interpol Red Notice requiring Bout's arrest and a Belgian warrant for his arrest for money laundering, Bout resided in Moscow and used at least five Russian passports.
Bout is just one example of how Russia has used the black market to insert itself into the global dynamics, enabling and controlling conflict. Russian weapons were present in the 2006 Israeli-Lebanese conflict, which allowed Hizbullah to use advanced armor-piercing Russian missiles. Farah has stated that "such activities project Russian power, at a time when the Putin government is desperate to project Russian power across the world, as well as provide outlets for the sale of Russian weapons." Reports of late, most recently in September by Vice President Dick Cheney, suggested that Russian weapons sold to Syria were ending up in the hands of Hizbullah forces in Lebanon. The increasing concern should be the shadowy trend of Russian deals, specifically regarding the sales of weapons and the continued blind eye given by the Russian government regarding black market operations inside its country.
A growing problem is the scenario of black market sales regarding nuclear material originating in Russia. The growing trend of smuggling nuclear material from Russia has taken a path through the two territories where the Russian-Georgian crisis began in September - Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Most of the time, sellers attempt to sell off spent material that would prove useless in the construction of a nuclear weapon. However, there have been several arrests made by Georgian authorities that involve Russian individuals attempting to smuggle Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU). Last year, a Russian national was sentenced to eight years in a Georgian jail for attempting to sell 100 g of HEU for $1 million. Experts say that while the quality of the material would be suitable in weapons construction, the quantity remained insufficient. It should be noted that so far in Georgia, there have been publicized arrests in 2003 and 2006 that involved the attempted sale of HEU.
There are substantial implications for the fight against terrorism if the international community can not lure Russia to cooperate in an international effort. While Russia states that it will not do business in "troubled regions," its black market agents are involved in conflicts ranging from Africa to the Mideast to Latin America. The partnership of Russia and Iran brings in the component of a criminal network to Tehran's quest for globalization. The ability by both Iran and Russia to mask their global activities promotes a relationship that is dangerous to international affairs and creates yet another obstacle in resolving the West's standoff regarding Iran's nuclear activities. Through Iran's network of terrorist proxies, as well as Russia's connection to global crime, another dangerous alliance has been formed that compromises international security concerns at a time when the UN has sought to create a comprehensive, global effort to combat terrorism globally.
After President Ahmadinejad took office in 2005, the Western powers lost any successes obtained in negotiating a resolution to Iran's nuclear pursuits. Ahmadinejad has made it very clear that the nuclear "know-how" is part of a vast religious obligation to utilize his power for the coming of the Mahdi. There was one dilemma. Iran was not capable of independently creating its nuclear program, it needed assistance. Once again, Ahmadinejad set out on his goal of forming a strategic partnership with a country that possessed what the Islamic republic lacked.
The criteria that formed the African and Latin American alliances was the same - a leader who was not willing to bow to Western influence and opposed the increasing American Imperialist movement. With North Korea constantly in talks over its program and Libya's agreement to abandonment, Ahmadinejad found a friend in Russia. Russia offered a partnership that elevated Iran from the shadows of international diplomacy and brought it to new levels. With Russian President Vladimir Putin's repeated criticisms of U.S. policy, Iran now had a major voice in international affairs - as well as a country which possessed the ability to veto any measures drafted in the UN Security Council.
With Russia's increased involvement with Tehran, there are several issues of concern. In 2005, it is reported that trade between the two countries was in excess of $1 billion, making Russia the seventh largest exporter to Iran. Estimates suggest that exports from Russia could grow to $10 billion annually within years. With such an invested stake in Iranian exports, Russian desire to impose increased sanctions has predictably been in opposition. It should be no surprise then that on September 29, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that he saw "no need for urgent measures against Iran." Those comments were made one week after an IAEA report criticized Iran for not allowing the agency to fully investigate certain aspects of the nuclear program.
The chief area of trade that has seen a spike under Ahmadinejad's presidency is arms sales, which has put Russian arms dealers as the chief suppliers to Iran. In 2006 Michael Eisenstadt, director of the Washington's Institute for Near East Policy's Military and Security Studies Program, said that the Islamic Republic was specifically seeking to increase it's air defense capabilities.
Late last year, the announcement came that Russia had agreed to sell Iran its S-300 air defense system, one of the most advanced of its kind. Capable of tracking around 100 targets simultaneously while intercepting up to 12 from a distance of over 100 miles, the reported sale was for deployment specifically around Iranian nuclear sites to dissuade Israel from any air strike on such sites. Now, amid reports that the system could be delivered by late this year, both Russia and Iran refuse to confirm nor deny whether there is such an agreement. The Russian Foreign Ministry has only stated that "we do not intend to deliver those types of arms to countries which are located in troubled regions." However, Russia has deployed the S-300 in Syria and the director for the Russian arms exports agency, Rosoboronexport, was quoted by Russian media on September 17 that his agency was in advanced negotiations to sell S-300 missiles to Iran. The agency later issued a statement denying that it had sold such missiles to Iran, but did not speak to whether or not there were talks for their sale. It is highly probable that Iran will seek to enhance its defenses around facilities such as its Bushehr reactor, which the Russian agency Atomstroyexport has stated should be operational by early to mid 2009.
While the official dealings of the Russian government remain unclear with Tehran, the most frightening component of all remains an ever present force in the Russian economy. Black market arms dealers continue to operate with relative ease in Moscow, creating a dangerous link with the Russian government that could extend into Iran and its proxies such as Hizbullah. To see the cooperation that exists between Russian officials and black market arms dealers, one need not look further than the case of Viktor Bout, the "Lord of War," who was arrested in Thailand in March. After Thai authorities agreed to drop their charges to allow a quicker extradition to the U.S., where he faces several charges related to terrorism, there have been several reports that the Russian Foreign Ministry is attempting to broker military sales with the Thai prime minister in exchange for Bout. According to Douglas Farah, despite a 20o2 Interpol Red Notice requiring Bout's arrest and a Belgian warrant for his arrest for money laundering, Bout resided in Moscow and used at least five Russian passports.
Bout is just one example of how Russia has used the black market to insert itself into the global dynamics, enabling and controlling conflict. Russian weapons were present in the 2006 Israeli-Lebanese conflict, which allowed Hizbullah to use advanced armor-piercing Russian missiles. Farah has stated that "such activities project Russian power, at a time when the Putin government is desperate to project Russian power across the world, as well as provide outlets for the sale of Russian weapons." Reports of late, most recently in September by Vice President Dick Cheney, suggested that Russian weapons sold to Syria were ending up in the hands of Hizbullah forces in Lebanon. The increasing concern should be the shadowy trend of Russian deals, specifically regarding the sales of weapons and the continued blind eye given by the Russian government regarding black market operations inside its country.
A growing problem is the scenario of black market sales regarding nuclear material originating in Russia. The growing trend of smuggling nuclear material from Russia has taken a path through the two territories where the Russian-Georgian crisis began in September - Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Most of the time, sellers attempt to sell off spent material that would prove useless in the construction of a nuclear weapon. However, there have been several arrests made by Georgian authorities that involve Russian individuals attempting to smuggle Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU). Last year, a Russian national was sentenced to eight years in a Georgian jail for attempting to sell 100 g of HEU for $1 million. Experts say that while the quality of the material would be suitable in weapons construction, the quantity remained insufficient. It should be noted that so far in Georgia, there have been publicized arrests in 2003 and 2006 that involved the attempted sale of HEU.
There are substantial implications for the fight against terrorism if the international community can not lure Russia to cooperate in an international effort. While Russia states that it will not do business in "troubled regions," its black market agents are involved in conflicts ranging from Africa to the Mideast to Latin America. The partnership of Russia and Iran brings in the component of a criminal network to Tehran's quest for globalization. The ability by both Iran and Russia to mask their global activities promotes a relationship that is dangerous to international affairs and creates yet another obstacle in resolving the West's standoff regarding Iran's nuclear activities. Through Iran's network of terrorist proxies, as well as Russia's connection to global crime, another dangerous alliance has been formed that compromises international security concerns at a time when the UN has sought to create a comprehensive, global effort to combat terrorism globally.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Update on Pt. II of Iran's influence
As I wrote my piece on Iran's influence in Africa last week, details began to come in over an ongoing incident off of Somalia's coast.
On August 21, a team of nearly 40 pirates armed with RPGs and AK-47s blocked the passage of an Iranian cargo ship. The captain of the MV Iran Deyanat was forced to surrender his ship to the Somali pirates, who were banking on another vessel to add to their captured fleet of nearly a dozen vessels.
Immediately, questions should surface over the Deyanat's declared cargo of "minerals" and "industrial products." Both industries that the Revolutionary Guard holds a heavy stake in.
Affirming suspicions, the MV Iran Deyanat is owned and operated by the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL), which is a state-owned company run by the Iranian military and included in a list of companies blacklisted by the U.S. Treasury Dept. on September 10. The official statement explains the extent of IRISL's collusion with Iranian entities.
"Not only does IRISL facilitate the transport of cargo for U.N. designated proliferators, it also falsifies documents and uses deceptive schemes to shroud its involvement in illicit commerce," said Stuart Levey, Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence. "IRISL's actions are part of a broader pattern of deception and fabrication that Iran uses to advance its nuclear and missile programs."
Upon the hijacking of the Deyanat, the crew of 29 was separated from the vessel after the pirates moved it to a fishing village in northeastern Somalia, Eyl. Reportedly within days after the pirates boarded the vessel to search the cargo, several of them fell "gravely ill." Andrew Mwangura, Director of the East African Seafarers' Assistance Program, has confirmed the claim by the pirates of several fatalities. The fatalities have been attributed to individuals who came in contact with the ship's cargo containers. Many of the individuals suffered skin burns and loss of hair (which many have suggested is indicative of radiation or chemical exposure).
After news of the suspicious circumstances surrounding the ship reached the government of the region in Garowe, a delegation was dispatched to negotiate with the pirates. Led by Minister of Minerals and Oil Hassan Allore Osman, the team was sent on September 4. Osman has said during the six days of negotiations with the pirates, the group had members become ill and die. Osman's assessment of the vessel:
"That ship is unusual. It is not carrying a normal shipment."
The pirates reportedly threatened to blow up the ship's cargo hold should the government attempt to force a search of the vessel. The pirates stated that they had been unsuccessful at opening the ship's seven cargo containers due to not possessing the access codes. After the standoff, Osman was able to establish contact with members of the ship's crew and ask questions pertaining to the cargo. The captain and engineer of the Deyanat reportedly shared different answers when asked about what they were transporting. What initially was crude oil then developed into minerals over the questioning.
The tale gets more interesting with the establishment of the ransom by the pirates. Set at $2 million, the Iranian government reportedly had agreed to pay the price and had moved $200,000 to a local broker in hopes of finalizing the release. Then came the September 10 sanctions announcement, which triggered Iran to call off the deal. With an increased U.S. naval presence off the coast, the Iranians could not gain access to the ship. All hopes of moving the ship out of the region without interception were shattered, leaving the ship still off of Eyl. Iranian media has reported the U.S. has offered $7 million for the ship.
The ultimate answer of what is on the MV Iran Deyanat still remains in the ship's cargo containers. Officials in Somalia suggest that the ship was carrying weapons destined for Eritrea, and ultimately Islamist militants fighting in Somalia. At the very least, it is known small arms were destined for the country's jihadist movement. However, due to the circumstances surrounding the Deyanat's seizure, it is highly probable that chemical weapons were destined for the militants as well. Iran has an involvement with the Somali rebels, having sent the Islamic Courts Union anti-aircraft and anti-tank weaponry in 2006. Furthermore, a UN report from the same year states that Iran sent two representatives to negotiate with the ICU for access to Somalia's uranium mines.
As Iran's influence in well-established regions of Africa has soared, it's increased involvement in fresh areas should be of great concern. Whatever is on the Deyanat, it is of interest to a great deal of officials. The ship's links to the Iranian government shows that Tehran's military is still flaunting its abilities to circumvent any actions taken against it. Should Iran be able to secure the ship's release from the pirates, chances are the ship will end up scrubbed in hopes of leaving questions unanswered. It remains pretty clear that there is no intention of moving it so long as the U.S. has Task Force 150 perched off the coast ready to intercept.
On August 21, a team of nearly 40 pirates armed with RPGs and AK-47s blocked the passage of an Iranian cargo ship. The captain of the MV Iran Deyanat was forced to surrender his ship to the Somali pirates, who were banking on another vessel to add to their captured fleet of nearly a dozen vessels.
Immediately, questions should surface over the Deyanat's declared cargo of "minerals" and "industrial products." Both industries that the Revolutionary Guard holds a heavy stake in.
Affirming suspicions, the MV Iran Deyanat is owned and operated by the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL), which is a state-owned company run by the Iranian military and included in a list of companies blacklisted by the U.S. Treasury Dept. on September 10. The official statement explains the extent of IRISL's collusion with Iranian entities.
"Not only does IRISL facilitate the transport of cargo for U.N. designated proliferators, it also falsifies documents and uses deceptive schemes to shroud its involvement in illicit commerce," said Stuart Levey, Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence. "IRISL's actions are part of a broader pattern of deception and fabrication that Iran uses to advance its nuclear and missile programs."
Upon the hijacking of the Deyanat, the crew of 29 was separated from the vessel after the pirates moved it to a fishing village in northeastern Somalia, Eyl. Reportedly within days after the pirates boarded the vessel to search the cargo, several of them fell "gravely ill." Andrew Mwangura, Director of the East African Seafarers' Assistance Program, has confirmed the claim by the pirates of several fatalities. The fatalities have been attributed to individuals who came in contact with the ship's cargo containers. Many of the individuals suffered skin burns and loss of hair (which many have suggested is indicative of radiation or chemical exposure).
After news of the suspicious circumstances surrounding the ship reached the government of the region in Garowe, a delegation was dispatched to negotiate with the pirates. Led by Minister of Minerals and Oil Hassan Allore Osman, the team was sent on September 4. Osman has said during the six days of negotiations with the pirates, the group had members become ill and die. Osman's assessment of the vessel:
"That ship is unusual. It is not carrying a normal shipment."
The pirates reportedly threatened to blow up the ship's cargo hold should the government attempt to force a search of the vessel. The pirates stated that they had been unsuccessful at opening the ship's seven cargo containers due to not possessing the access codes. After the standoff, Osman was able to establish contact with members of the ship's crew and ask questions pertaining to the cargo. The captain and engineer of the Deyanat reportedly shared different answers when asked about what they were transporting. What initially was crude oil then developed into minerals over the questioning.
The tale gets more interesting with the establishment of the ransom by the pirates. Set at $2 million, the Iranian government reportedly had agreed to pay the price and had moved $200,000 to a local broker in hopes of finalizing the release. Then came the September 10 sanctions announcement, which triggered Iran to call off the deal. With an increased U.S. naval presence off the coast, the Iranians could not gain access to the ship. All hopes of moving the ship out of the region without interception were shattered, leaving the ship still off of Eyl. Iranian media has reported the U.S. has offered $7 million for the ship.
The ultimate answer of what is on the MV Iran Deyanat still remains in the ship's cargo containers. Officials in Somalia suggest that the ship was carrying weapons destined for Eritrea, and ultimately Islamist militants fighting in Somalia. At the very least, it is known small arms were destined for the country's jihadist movement. However, due to the circumstances surrounding the Deyanat's seizure, it is highly probable that chemical weapons were destined for the militants as well. Iran has an involvement with the Somali rebels, having sent the Islamic Courts Union anti-aircraft and anti-tank weaponry in 2006. Furthermore, a UN report from the same year states that Iran sent two representatives to negotiate with the ICU for access to Somalia's uranium mines.
As Iran's influence in well-established regions of Africa has soared, it's increased involvement in fresh areas should be of great concern. Whatever is on the Deyanat, it is of interest to a great deal of officials. The ship's links to the Iranian government shows that Tehran's military is still flaunting its abilities to circumvent any actions taken against it. Should Iran be able to secure the ship's release from the pirates, chances are the ship will end up scrubbed in hopes of leaving questions unanswered. It remains pretty clear that there is no intention of moving it so long as the U.S. has Task Force 150 perched off the coast ready to intercept.
Friday, September 26, 2008
If we close our eyes, we can say nothing happened (Pt. II)
This is the second of three parts detailing Iran's growing influence in various regions. From Latin America to Africa to Europe, Iran has undeniably risen from the shadows largely due to its mouthy president who emerged in 2005 and its proxies' expansion. In such a short period of time, the growth of the Khomenist state has extended to nearly every hemisphere, facing little resistance by the West and its allies. As the standoff with Iran continues, it is important to understand the reality of the religious state that many say is now the key to Middle East policy.
Under a new president in 2005, Iran began a push for developing itself as the voice of the Islamic world. One of Ahmadinejad's key principles as the Islamic Republic's president is to take actions that would promote the coming of the Mahdi (the Islamic redeemer who will come and rule the world). Even in his UN General Assembly speech this week, Ahmadinejad threw in references to Islamic rule and the Mahdi.
But Ahmadinejad capitalized on the goodwill of his Islamic beliefs and his "religious obligations," using Islam as a veil to promote Iranian influence among various regions. The most notable of which has been in Africa.
In 2006, President Ahmad Abdallah Sambi was elected president of the Comoros Islands, off Africa's eastern coast. It was then that Iranian influence in the country surged coincidentally. According to a local politician in the country, Iranian elements were given control of President Sambi's security, both inside the island and on his trips abroad. However, Iran also established a presence in other aspects of the Comoros. Since 2006, Iran has created a medical center linked to the Iranian Red Cross, a cultural center, and a center for human aid called the Al-Khomeini Committee for Help in the Comoros Islands.
Iran seems to have capitalized on its investments in the Comoros. It found its link with President Sambi, who studied at religious schools in Iran throughout his youth. The country, which is largely Sunni Arab, has undergone what some see as a Shi'a revolution thanks to Tehran's involvement. Some have accused President Sambi as having become a practicing Shiite, even earning the title of "Ayatollah" (a Shiite religious authority respected for matters of religious law and interpretation).
To illustrate the enhanced partnership between the two countries, just yesterday on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, the headline in Tehran was "Iran, Comoros keen to boost ties". Both presidents agreed at UNGA for the increased cooperation on "energy and development fields."
Now, back to the growth of the Iranian proxies in the same region. In May, pictures emerged of purported Hizbullah rallies and supporters in Nigeria. Not a surprise to many officials who have seen the activities of the group expand over the past few years. Dr. J Peter Pham, an expert on Africa, commented that when analysts have been looking at Africa over the years the trend has been to identify an area as "traditionally one thing or another without accounting for the possibility of dynamic change." This has been precisely where terror groups thrive, by supplying what the governments have failed to provide in the third world countries throughout the region. Their aid fills in gaps, breeding a change in favor of the terror group.
Take for instance the establishment of the Islamic University College of Ghana in 1988 by the Ahlul Bait Foundation, an Iranian organization. It is reported that all the administrators and the president of the College are all Iranian. In fact, the school's most recent president, Dr. Gholamreza Rahmani Miandehi, has five listings of work experience in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The school's website discusses how it is intended to provide an education to families, charging a "low fee" and "being open to all qualified persons, regardless of religion, race, ethnic, or geographical background."
It is the lack of transparency of these Iranian establishments abroad that should be of concern to many. The willingness to conduct illegal activities veiled under the guise of Islamic charities is one that has been seen before, whether it be Saudi charities using their status to export weapons to Bosnia and Afghanistan or the many Palestinian charities used for suicide bomber's families.
It has long been reported that Hizbullah had shady ties to the West African illegal diamond trade, laundering potentially tens of millions of dollars annually from the region for the group's support. In 2003, Union Transport Africaines Flight 141 crashed after take-off from Benin, West Africa. Destined for Beirut, a "foreign relations official of the African branch of the Lebanese Hizballah party and two of his aides" were among those killed. Traveling with the Hizbullah officials was nearly $2 million that the group was moving to Hizbullah headquarters. The accident shed a light as to just how profitable West Africa was to the terror group.
Hizbullah has long held a presence in Sierra Leone, dating back to the 1980s. The group, similar to its presence in Latin America, has used the large Lebanese immigrant communities in the country to conceal its operatives and actions. Furthermore, the potential for corruption and bribery amongst the country's law enforcement permits the group to avoid confrontation.
In 2004, two individuals were arrested for suspected ties to terrorist groups and moving weapons and diamonds illegally. Paddy McKay and Khalil Lakish used fraudulent papers to register four aircraft in the country. McKay, a British national with suspected Al-Qaida links, and Lakish, a Lebanese descendant residing in Sierra Leone with reported Hizbullah ties, reportedly used the planes to transport illicit diamonds and weapons to the Middle East and the Horn of Africa. By 2005, the story from the Ministry for Transportation and Communication had changed to “McKay enjoys a normal and professional business relationship with the department of Civil Aviation and the Government of Sierra Leone… all airline operators are properly registered and do not have any terrorist connections.” African corruption at its finest.
In 2004, the UN special envoy estimated that out of the official number of $130 million worth of diamonds exported from Sierra Leone, the real figure laid around $300-500 million. A slight discrepancy in an issue that has provided funds for groups like Al-Qaida and Hizbullah. With the aid of smugglers like McKay and Lakish, groups will always have an ability to move their funds.
Ahmadinejad saw that Iran filled the void where Saudi Arabia had once dominated. Where Saudi charities and Sunni Islamic values had once ruled, Iran was beginning to replace them with Shiite "goodwill missions." Through offering health care, education, and jobs in countries where governments had failed, Iran was able to become a powerful force throughout the struggling African countries. Iranian proxies continued with their well-established presence in certain areas, but sought to expand to vulnerable areas as well. By capitalizing on the weaknesses of a continent, Iran was yet again able to spread its message of anti-Imperialism and its opposition to the Western powers with no resistance. Once again, the U.S. and its allies sat idle as Iran continued its development as a global power.
Under a new president in 2005, Iran began a push for developing itself as the voice of the Islamic world. One of Ahmadinejad's key principles as the Islamic Republic's president is to take actions that would promote the coming of the Mahdi (the Islamic redeemer who will come and rule the world). Even in his UN General Assembly speech this week, Ahmadinejad threw in references to Islamic rule and the Mahdi.
But Ahmadinejad capitalized on the goodwill of his Islamic beliefs and his "religious obligations," using Islam as a veil to promote Iranian influence among various regions. The most notable of which has been in Africa.
In 2006, President Ahmad Abdallah Sambi was elected president of the Comoros Islands, off Africa's eastern coast. It was then that Iranian influence in the country surged coincidentally. According to a local politician in the country, Iranian elements were given control of President Sambi's security, both inside the island and on his trips abroad. However, Iran also established a presence in other aspects of the Comoros. Since 2006, Iran has created a medical center linked to the Iranian Red Cross, a cultural center, and a center for human aid called the Al-Khomeini Committee for Help in the Comoros Islands.
Iran seems to have capitalized on its investments in the Comoros. It found its link with President Sambi, who studied at religious schools in Iran throughout his youth. The country, which is largely Sunni Arab, has undergone what some see as a Shi'a revolution thanks to Tehran's involvement. Some have accused President Sambi as having become a practicing Shiite, even earning the title of "Ayatollah" (a Shiite religious authority respected for matters of religious law and interpretation).
To illustrate the enhanced partnership between the two countries, just yesterday on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, the headline in Tehran was "Iran, Comoros keen to boost ties". Both presidents agreed at UNGA for the increased cooperation on "energy and development fields."
Now, back to the growth of the Iranian proxies in the same region. In May, pictures emerged of purported Hizbullah rallies and supporters in Nigeria. Not a surprise to many officials who have seen the activities of the group expand over the past few years. Dr. J Peter Pham, an expert on Africa, commented that when analysts have been looking at Africa over the years the trend has been to identify an area as "traditionally one thing or another without accounting for the possibility of dynamic change." This has been precisely where terror groups thrive, by supplying what the governments have failed to provide in the third world countries throughout the region. Their aid fills in gaps, breeding a change in favor of the terror group.
Take for instance the establishment of the Islamic University College of Ghana in 1988 by the Ahlul Bait Foundation, an Iranian organization. It is reported that all the administrators and the president of the College are all Iranian. In fact, the school's most recent president, Dr. Gholamreza Rahmani Miandehi, has five listings of work experience in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The school's website discusses how it is intended to provide an education to families, charging a "low fee" and "being open to all qualified persons, regardless of religion, race, ethnic, or geographical background."
It is the lack of transparency of these Iranian establishments abroad that should be of concern to many. The willingness to conduct illegal activities veiled under the guise of Islamic charities is one that has been seen before, whether it be Saudi charities using their status to export weapons to Bosnia and Afghanistan or the many Palestinian charities used for suicide bomber's families.
It has long been reported that Hizbullah had shady ties to the West African illegal diamond trade, laundering potentially tens of millions of dollars annually from the region for the group's support. In 2003, Union Transport Africaines Flight 141 crashed after take-off from Benin, West Africa. Destined for Beirut, a "foreign relations official of the African branch of the Lebanese Hizballah party and two of his aides" were among those killed. Traveling with the Hizbullah officials was nearly $2 million that the group was moving to Hizbullah headquarters. The accident shed a light as to just how profitable West Africa was to the terror group.
Hizbullah has long held a presence in Sierra Leone, dating back to the 1980s. The group, similar to its presence in Latin America, has used the large Lebanese immigrant communities in the country to conceal its operatives and actions. Furthermore, the potential for corruption and bribery amongst the country's law enforcement permits the group to avoid confrontation.
In 2004, two individuals were arrested for suspected ties to terrorist groups and moving weapons and diamonds illegally. Paddy McKay and Khalil Lakish used fraudulent papers to register four aircraft in the country. McKay, a British national with suspected Al-Qaida links, and Lakish, a Lebanese descendant residing in Sierra Leone with reported Hizbullah ties, reportedly used the planes to transport illicit diamonds and weapons to the Middle East and the Horn of Africa. By 2005, the story from the Ministry for Transportation and Communication had changed to “McKay enjoys a normal and professional business relationship with the department of Civil Aviation and the Government of Sierra Leone… all airline operators are properly registered and do not have any terrorist connections.” African corruption at its finest.
In 2004, the UN special envoy estimated that out of the official number of $130 million worth of diamonds exported from Sierra Leone, the real figure laid around $300-500 million. A slight discrepancy in an issue that has provided funds for groups like Al-Qaida and Hizbullah. With the aid of smugglers like McKay and Lakish, groups will always have an ability to move their funds.
Ahmadinejad saw that Iran filled the void where Saudi Arabia had once dominated. Where Saudi charities and Sunni Islamic values had once ruled, Iran was beginning to replace them with Shiite "goodwill missions." Through offering health care, education, and jobs in countries where governments had failed, Iran was able to become a powerful force throughout the struggling African countries. Iranian proxies continued with their well-established presence in certain areas, but sought to expand to vulnerable areas as well. By capitalizing on the weaknesses of a continent, Iran was yet again able to spread its message of anti-Imperialism and its opposition to the Western powers with no resistance. Once again, the U.S. and its allies sat idle as Iran continued its development as a global power.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
If we close our eyes, we can say nothing happened (Pt. I)
This is the first of three parts detailing Iran's growing influence in various regions. From Latin America to Africa to Europe, Iran has undeniably risen from the shadows largely due to its mouthy president who emerged in 2005 and its proxies' expansion. In such a short period of time, the growth of the Khomenist state has extended to nearly every hemisphere, facing little resistance by the West and its allies. As the standoff with Iran continues, it is important to understand the reality of the religious state that many say is now the key to Middle East policy.
As a new administration begins to take office and will undoubtedly adopt some policy against Iran that has not been working for over a decade, let's talk about the real threats posed by Iran. For too long, U.S. policymakers have closed their eyes to the growing Iranian influence that is allowing it to take such a hold on the international scale. From Latin America, to Europe, to Africa, Iran quickly began to develop allies in virtually every region of the world while the U.S. did nothing.
In case you haven't noticed, U.S. policy should have changed in 2005, but the U.S. had no plan to confront a changing Iran. Now don't get me wrong, the U.S. did do something, but according to former Treasury Dept. official Matt Levitt, it has been the same thing that it did throughout the 1990s - more sanctions. Levitt says:
"In dealing with Iran sanctions have a large role but this is only one piece of the process. Sanctions are meant to levy diplomatic leverage. Like sanctions, neither diplomacy nor military force will work alone. A coherent combination of these strategies must be applied. We cannot simply engage Iran for the sake of engaging."
As Ahmadinejad won the presidency, the Iran that once lurked in the shadows of the almighty Ayatollah suddenly began - surprise - the process of globalization. The process that the West had pioneered and championed came back to bite it, and Ahmadinejad became a household name within days for championing ludicrous statements about Jews and Israel.
One has to wonder why some Marxist like Hugo Chavez in Venezuela would partner with the religiously motivated Ahmadinejad of Iran. However, Ahmadinejad extended his hand and then gained more influence in the Latin American region than his country had a decade prior to his taking office. Iran soon had ties to Chavez allies in Ecuador, Nicaragua, Bolivia, and most recently an embassy being established in U.S. friendly Colombia.
The Iranian-Latin American cooperation has surged since its establishment under Ahmadinejad. The partnership of Ahmadinejad and Chavez has been one of the strongest alliances to develop over a short period of time, with the sole basis of "anti-Imperialism" as its cornerstone.
In a region where Hizbullah has operated for decades, primarily for fundraising but still having been involved in attacks on Jewish targets during the 1990s, the group found a government willing to turn a blind eye to its activities thanks to Ahmadinejad.
Conveniently, one of the steps that was taken in May by the two co-conspirators was to partner in a joint banking venture between Tehran and Caracas. Hizbullah and Tehran, both impacted by Western sanctions repeatedly, now had the ability to move and launder money throughout the world without having any system of reporting. Furthermore, how much money was being moved would remain a mystery without having to use any expansive network of banks. But this move was not the first one made that would clearly benefit the Iranian terror network.
In March 2007, the two countries took a huge step. IranAir began weekly flights from Caracas to Tehran, with a stop conveniently in Damascus. In this year's State Department Assessment for Global Terrorism, it was noted that Venezuelan border officials frequently failed to record the information of arriving passengers from Iran and neglected to stamp their passports. It's been reported that the issue has now been corrected.
However, why would you not record who is entering your country at all? It's probably not VIPs traveling into the region through Venezuela, but rather Hizbullah and Iranian terror operatives.
Sure enough, the warning was issued by Shin Bet and Mossad to Israeli citizens internationally a couple weeks ago, advising them to return to Israel if possible. The agencies apparently became increasingly concerned of what they viewed as an active kidnapping threat by Hizbullah cells globally to Israeli businesspeople, specifically over the group's increased claims for spectacular operations in response to the February assassination of its security chief, Imad Mughniyeh. The threat specifically noted Latin America as a primary hot zone for such action.
Intelligence officials have stated that Hizbullah operatives, in coordination with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, created a specific group designed for such action in the Latin American region. The aim to kidnap the individuals and then quickly send them off to Hizbullah's fortress in Lebanon. A difficult maneuver for most terror groups, moving a group of hostages across the world, but one that is undeniably easier when you have your own direct airline.
It was reported that Venezuelan airport employees had been recruited to conduct surveillance on Jewish targets travels. It should be noted that in May, it was discovered that the head of security at Beirut's Rafic Hariri Intl. Airport was a Hizbullah informant and had allowed the group to place cameras throughout the airport, conducting surveillance on Syrian opposition leaders travels. The group has a history of making sure that its operatives can remain distant from the operation until it actually occurs, so such a report is not farstretched. Especially since it is well-documented that Venezuelan military and airport officials are profiting already from the cocaine trade.
Your own airline and your own bank? If terror groups had wish lists, those two items would most assuredly be at the top. But in the realm of state-sponsored terror, Iran can fulfill any fantasy that its Shi'a partners desire.
On a final note of the growing Iranian proxies continued growth throughout the Latin American region, the amount of Colombian cocaine moving through heavy regions of Hizbullah support is on the rise. Doug Farah, who has followed the region for decades, cautions that group's like Colombia's FARC rebels - who, after 40 years, are finally suffering greatly- may begin to form an alliance with Hizbullah. Such an action would create an unprecedented and very dangerous link between the most prolific narco-terrorists and the most expansive Islamic terrorist organization. However as evidenced by the Latin America-Iran connection, two worlds can come together pretty easily.
As a new administration begins to take office and will undoubtedly adopt some policy against Iran that has not been working for over a decade, let's talk about the real threats posed by Iran. For too long, U.S. policymakers have closed their eyes to the growing Iranian influence that is allowing it to take such a hold on the international scale. From Latin America, to Europe, to Africa, Iran quickly began to develop allies in virtually every region of the world while the U.S. did nothing.
In case you haven't noticed, U.S. policy should have changed in 2005, but the U.S. had no plan to confront a changing Iran. Now don't get me wrong, the U.S. did do something, but according to former Treasury Dept. official Matt Levitt, it has been the same thing that it did throughout the 1990s - more sanctions. Levitt says:
"In dealing with Iran sanctions have a large role but this is only one piece of the process. Sanctions are meant to levy diplomatic leverage. Like sanctions, neither diplomacy nor military force will work alone. A coherent combination of these strategies must be applied. We cannot simply engage Iran for the sake of engaging."
As Ahmadinejad won the presidency, the Iran that once lurked in the shadows of the almighty Ayatollah suddenly began - surprise - the process of globalization. The process that the West had pioneered and championed came back to bite it, and Ahmadinejad became a household name within days for championing ludicrous statements about Jews and Israel.
One has to wonder why some Marxist like Hugo Chavez in Venezuela would partner with the religiously motivated Ahmadinejad of Iran. However, Ahmadinejad extended his hand and then gained more influence in the Latin American region than his country had a decade prior to his taking office. Iran soon had ties to Chavez allies in Ecuador, Nicaragua, Bolivia, and most recently an embassy being established in U.S. friendly Colombia.
The Iranian-Latin American cooperation has surged since its establishment under Ahmadinejad. The partnership of Ahmadinejad and Chavez has been one of the strongest alliances to develop over a short period of time, with the sole basis of "anti-Imperialism" as its cornerstone.
In a region where Hizbullah has operated for decades, primarily for fundraising but still having been involved in attacks on Jewish targets during the 1990s, the group found a government willing to turn a blind eye to its activities thanks to Ahmadinejad.
Conveniently, one of the steps that was taken in May by the two co-conspirators was to partner in a joint banking venture between Tehran and Caracas. Hizbullah and Tehran, both impacted by Western sanctions repeatedly, now had the ability to move and launder money throughout the world without having any system of reporting. Furthermore, how much money was being moved would remain a mystery without having to use any expansive network of banks. But this move was not the first one made that would clearly benefit the Iranian terror network.
In March 2007, the two countries took a huge step. IranAir began weekly flights from Caracas to Tehran, with a stop conveniently in Damascus. In this year's State Department Assessment for Global Terrorism, it was noted that Venezuelan border officials frequently failed to record the information of arriving passengers from Iran and neglected to stamp their passports. It's been reported that the issue has now been corrected.
However, why would you not record who is entering your country at all? It's probably not VIPs traveling into the region through Venezuela, but rather Hizbullah and Iranian terror operatives.
Sure enough, the warning was issued by Shin Bet and Mossad to Israeli citizens internationally a couple weeks ago, advising them to return to Israel if possible. The agencies apparently became increasingly concerned of what they viewed as an active kidnapping threat by Hizbullah cells globally to Israeli businesspeople, specifically over the group's increased claims for spectacular operations in response to the February assassination of its security chief, Imad Mughniyeh. The threat specifically noted Latin America as a primary hot zone for such action.
Intelligence officials have stated that Hizbullah operatives, in coordination with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, created a specific group designed for such action in the Latin American region. The aim to kidnap the individuals and then quickly send them off to Hizbullah's fortress in Lebanon. A difficult maneuver for most terror groups, moving a group of hostages across the world, but one that is undeniably easier when you have your own direct airline.
It was reported that Venezuelan airport employees had been recruited to conduct surveillance on Jewish targets travels. It should be noted that in May, it was discovered that the head of security at Beirut's Rafic Hariri Intl. Airport was a Hizbullah informant and had allowed the group to place cameras throughout the airport, conducting surveillance on Syrian opposition leaders travels. The group has a history of making sure that its operatives can remain distant from the operation until it actually occurs, so such a report is not farstretched. Especially since it is well-documented that Venezuelan military and airport officials are profiting already from the cocaine trade.
Your own airline and your own bank? If terror groups had wish lists, those two items would most assuredly be at the top. But in the realm of state-sponsored terror, Iran can fulfill any fantasy that its Shi'a partners desire.
On a final note of the growing Iranian proxies continued growth throughout the Latin American region, the amount of Colombian cocaine moving through heavy regions of Hizbullah support is on the rise. Doug Farah, who has followed the region for decades, cautions that group's like Colombia's FARC rebels - who, after 40 years, are finally suffering greatly- may begin to form an alliance with Hizbullah. Such an action would create an unprecedented and very dangerous link between the most prolific narco-terrorists and the most expansive Islamic terrorist organization. However as evidenced by the Latin America-Iran connection, two worlds can come together pretty easily.
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Letting the next bin Laden go
Word comes out today that Pakistan is accusing the U.S. of a “missed opportunity” to eliminate Tehrik-e-Taliban (the Pakistani wing of the Taliban) commander Baitullah Mehsud. Pakistan suggests that they passed on “actionable intelligence” that on May 24, Mehsud would be traveling via Toyota Landcruiser to his Taliban stronghold in South Waziristan. Apparently, the information was disregarded and the CIA Hellfires that could have fired missiles on the target sat idle.
This claim is almost comical, considering the timing. As reports circulate that the ISI (Pakistan’s intelligence agency) is full of corrupt Taliban sympathizers, the country has sought to accuse the U.S. of not fighting the War On Terror for Pakistan - despite that Prime Minister Gilani said last week while in Washington that the War On Terror was his country’s “own war” and the repeated public claims that U.S. forces had no right to violate Pakistani territory. That’s right, despite the nearly $10 billion that Pakistan has received since the War’s beginning in 2001 (only topped by Israel and Egypt as the top recipient of U.S. aid), Pakistan wants the U.S. to go after it’s high value targets - such as the alleged mastermind of Benazir Bhutto’s assasination.
The intelligence that was passed on is in reality, almost laughable. The reason Mehsud, who doesn’t sleep in the same bed each night and is virtually paranoid, would emerge on that date was for none other than a press conference. Mehsud called nearly 30 journalists to his stronghold to discuss his group’s policies publicly. It is well-known that Mehsud’s tribe is spending substantial amounts (to the tune of $45 million, the NWFP governor declared) on fleets of Toyota and Nissan trucks, which Mehsud uses for convoy travel with an estimated 2-3 dozen armed guards. To place Mehsud in a Toyota in the middle of a region that spans the size of New Jersey is worthless. Without an asset on the ground to confirm Mehsud’s presence, the credibility of such claims would be questioned.
The real question that this whole blame game raises is a very important one. Where is that money going?
Money intended for strengthening the Frontier Corps and Pakistani army troops apparently isn’t doing anything, if they are too afraid to act independently against a terrorist wanted in their own country for the assassination of one of it’s most revered politicians. Perhaps Prime Minister Gilani should remind his ISI and its minions that Mehsud had a warrant issued for his arrest on April 17. The majority of that month was spent with Mehsud’s fighters and the government brokering ceasefires. If Pakistan wants Mehsud’s head on a platter, let U.S. forces enter the region and allow full authorization for air strikes. Otherwise, how about diverting some of those billions in aid to North African countries, who could actually use it?
Just to give you a brief idea of what Mehsud’s organization has been responsible for in Pakistan’s policy evolution, here’s a short list:
-assassinated over 200 tribal elders in region
-abduction of over 200 Pakistani soldiers in 2007, as well as several police attacks (one of which he is charged in the warrant for)
-attempted Oct. assassination of Bhutto, successful attack in Dec.
-group has expressed links to AQ Khan nuclear smuggling network
-has free border access to Afghanistan, where group is orchestrating attacks
This claim is almost comical, considering the timing. As reports circulate that the ISI (Pakistan’s intelligence agency) is full of corrupt Taliban sympathizers, the country has sought to accuse the U.S. of not fighting the War On Terror for Pakistan - despite that Prime Minister Gilani said last week while in Washington that the War On Terror was his country’s “own war” and the repeated public claims that U.S. forces had no right to violate Pakistani territory. That’s right, despite the nearly $10 billion that Pakistan has received since the War’s beginning in 2001 (only topped by Israel and Egypt as the top recipient of U.S. aid), Pakistan wants the U.S. to go after it’s high value targets - such as the alleged mastermind of Benazir Bhutto’s assasination.
The intelligence that was passed on is in reality, almost laughable. The reason Mehsud, who doesn’t sleep in the same bed each night and is virtually paranoid, would emerge on that date was for none other than a press conference. Mehsud called nearly 30 journalists to his stronghold to discuss his group’s policies publicly. It is well-known that Mehsud’s tribe is spending substantial amounts (to the tune of $45 million, the NWFP governor declared) on fleets of Toyota and Nissan trucks, which Mehsud uses for convoy travel with an estimated 2-3 dozen armed guards. To place Mehsud in a Toyota in the middle of a region that spans the size of New Jersey is worthless. Without an asset on the ground to confirm Mehsud’s presence, the credibility of such claims would be questioned.
The real question that this whole blame game raises is a very important one. Where is that money going?
Money intended for strengthening the Frontier Corps and Pakistani army troops apparently isn’t doing anything, if they are too afraid to act independently against a terrorist wanted in their own country for the assassination of one of it’s most revered politicians. Perhaps Prime Minister Gilani should remind his ISI and its minions that Mehsud had a warrant issued for his arrest on April 17. The majority of that month was spent with Mehsud’s fighters and the government brokering ceasefires. If Pakistan wants Mehsud’s head on a platter, let U.S. forces enter the region and allow full authorization for air strikes. Otherwise, how about diverting some of those billions in aid to North African countries, who could actually use it?
Just to give you a brief idea of what Mehsud’s organization has been responsible for in Pakistan’s policy evolution, here’s a short list:
-assassinated over 200 tribal elders in region
-abduction of over 200 Pakistani soldiers in 2007, as well as several police attacks (one of which he is charged in the warrant for)
-attempted Oct. assassination of Bhutto, successful attack in Dec.
-group has expressed links to AQ Khan nuclear smuggling network
-has free border access to Afghanistan, where group is orchestrating attacks
Sunday, August 3, 2008
Lessons from a mujahid
"If you see your enemy modest, you must make it arrogant. You must appear weak in front of your enemy for some time to make it become arrogant."
These were the words remembered by Al-Qaida in honor of one of their great military planners, Shaykh Yousef al-Ayyirri. The commander of Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula until his death in 2003, al-Ayyirri had begun his career in the ranks of the Afghan mujahideen of the 1980s against the Soviets. Following the mujahideen's success, he began what would be a lifelong career that began in those ranks at the age of 18.
Five years after his death by Saudi security forces, al-Ayyirri's words should caution the U.S. about the situations in Afghanistan and Iraq. As global leaders clamor in unison for a declaration of successes in Iraq, Afghanistan falls deeper into a state of turmoil.
Last week, Al-Qaida in Iraq (AQI) was officially declared as defeated by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The number of foreign fighters entering the country plummeted from the 110 at this time last year to about 20. The factor overlooked by many, is that the number of foreign fighters moving into Afghanistan and the tribal regions of Pakistan has spiked over the past 2-3 months. New recruits who would have gone to AQI are now moving into these regions, from either their native countries or departing Iraq. Does this mean such a success in Iraq is permanent? By all means no.
Based on how many times the blame has been pinned on Iran for insurgent activity in Iraq, saying that they are responsible for a situation in Afghanistan as well seems like a played-out card. The truth is, part of the blame does lie on lax border security along the border, but Afghanistan and President Hamid Karzai bear an equal share of blame. President Karzai has allowed his policies to be framed solely on domestic affairs, alienating the involvement of the neighbors to the east and west in particular. Karzai has not pushed through any security agreements mandating strict border enforcement and cooperation between his country and Pakistan and Iran in particular.
What does any of this have to do with Yousef al-Ayyirri?
Based on the report this week that even AQI commanders are fleeing Iraq for Afghanistan, the potential for the tides to change in Afghanistan and/or Iraq will remain vulnerable so long as the Iran-Afghanistan borders remain unchecked. The passage can ferry foreign fighters from either front to the other so long as there is foreign fighters to move. To declare AQI dead is by all means a baseless claim. Abu Ayyub al-Masri, the group's leader following the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in 2006, is by no means an al-Ayyirri. His experience with Al-Qaida did not begin with the Afghan mujahideen against the Soviets, but rather in 1999.
If al-Masri has indeed fled with his commanders to Afghanistan, chances are he is no longer isolated from the Al-Qaida hierarchy consisting of experienced Soviet-era mujahideen commanders, but rather a puppet for such a group. Remember Zawahiri and bin Laden didn't favor Zarqawi for his inexperience and his conventional terror tactics. Perhaps Prime Min. Maliki should reconsider his arrogance and consider who he would rather battle - a wannabe mujahid al-Masri or an al-Ayyirri, who is worshiped as the hero for the mujahideen.
These were the words remembered by Al-Qaida in honor of one of their great military planners, Shaykh Yousef al-Ayyirri. The commander of Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula until his death in 2003, al-Ayyirri had begun his career in the ranks of the Afghan mujahideen of the 1980s against the Soviets. Following the mujahideen's success, he began what would be a lifelong career that began in those ranks at the age of 18.
Five years after his death by Saudi security forces, al-Ayyirri's words should caution the U.S. about the situations in Afghanistan and Iraq. As global leaders clamor in unison for a declaration of successes in Iraq, Afghanistan falls deeper into a state of turmoil.
Last week, Al-Qaida in Iraq (AQI) was officially declared as defeated by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The number of foreign fighters entering the country plummeted from the 110 at this time last year to about 20. The factor overlooked by many, is that the number of foreign fighters moving into Afghanistan and the tribal regions of Pakistan has spiked over the past 2-3 months. New recruits who would have gone to AQI are now moving into these regions, from either their native countries or departing Iraq. Does this mean such a success in Iraq is permanent? By all means no.
Based on how many times the blame has been pinned on Iran for insurgent activity in Iraq, saying that they are responsible for a situation in Afghanistan as well seems like a played-out card. The truth is, part of the blame does lie on lax border security along the border, but Afghanistan and President Hamid Karzai bear an equal share of blame. President Karzai has allowed his policies to be framed solely on domestic affairs, alienating the involvement of the neighbors to the east and west in particular. Karzai has not pushed through any security agreements mandating strict border enforcement and cooperation between his country and Pakistan and Iran in particular.
What does any of this have to do with Yousef al-Ayyirri?
Based on the report this week that even AQI commanders are fleeing Iraq for Afghanistan, the potential for the tides to change in Afghanistan and/or Iraq will remain vulnerable so long as the Iran-Afghanistan borders remain unchecked. The passage can ferry foreign fighters from either front to the other so long as there is foreign fighters to move. To declare AQI dead is by all means a baseless claim. Abu Ayyub al-Masri, the group's leader following the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in 2006, is by no means an al-Ayyirri. His experience with Al-Qaida did not begin with the Afghan mujahideen against the Soviets, but rather in 1999.
If al-Masri has indeed fled with his commanders to Afghanistan, chances are he is no longer isolated from the Al-Qaida hierarchy consisting of experienced Soviet-era mujahideen commanders, but rather a puppet for such a group. Remember Zawahiri and bin Laden didn't favor Zarqawi for his inexperience and his conventional terror tactics. Perhaps Prime Min. Maliki should reconsider his arrogance and consider who he would rather battle - a wannabe mujahid al-Masri or an al-Ayyirri, who is worshiped as the hero for the mujahideen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)