From the Armed Forces Journal:

I spent last year in Afghanistan, visiting and talking with U.S. troops and their Afghan partners. My duties with the Army’s Rapid Equipping Force took me into every significant area where our soldiers engage the enemy. Over the course of 12 months, I covered more than 9,000 miles and talked, traveled and patrolled with troops in Kandahar, Kunar, Ghazni, Khost, Paktika, Kunduz, Balkh, Nangarhar and other provinces.

What I saw bore no resemblance to rosy official statements by U.S. military leaders about conditions on the ground.

Entering this deployment, I was sincerely hoping to learn that the claims were true: that conditions in Afghanistan were improving, that the local government and military were progressing toward self-sufficiency. I did not need to witness dramatic improvements to be reassured, but merely hoped to see evidence of positive trends, to see companies or battalions produce even minimal but sustainable progress.

Instead, I witnessed the absence of success on virtually every level.

This article titled “Iranian attack on America and allies increasingly likely – intelligence chief” was written by Julian Borger, diplomatic editor, for The Guardian on Tuesday 31st January 2012 20.08 UTC

The head of US intelligence has warned that there is an increasing likelihood that Iran could carry out attacks in America or against US and allied targets around the world.

The warning from the director of national intelligence, James Clapper, reflects rapidly rising tensions over Iran’s nuclear programme after the US and EU announced embargoes on the Iranian oil trade in the past few weeks, Israel leaked details of its preparation for a possible conflict and both the west and Iran boosted their military readiness in the Gulf.

The US plans to send a third aircraft carrier to the region in March, while Iran’s military has threatened to block the entrance to the Gulf in the strait of Hormuz and is planning to hold naval exercises there in the next few weeks involving a host of new weapons.

Presenting his annual “worldwide threat assessment” to Congress, Clapper said an alleged plot to blow up the Saudi ambassador in Washington last year, which the US blamed on the Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, “shows that some Iranian officials – probably including the supreme leader Ali Khamenei – have changed their calculus and are now more willing to conduct an attack in the United States in response to real or perceived US actions that threaten the regime.”

Clapper added: “Iran’s willingness to sponsor future attacks in the US or against our interests abroad probably will be shaped by Tehran’s evaluation of the costs it bears for the plot against the ambassador as well as Iranian leaders’ perceptions of US threats against the regime.”

Western officials say that in the past year there has been a notable increase in activity around the world by suspected members of Iran’s Quds force, the external operations arm of its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which they say could reflect positioning of units capable of carrying out reprisal attacks against western and Israeli targets if Iran was itself attacked. “There have been a lot of reports recently of IRGC activity abroad,” one western official said. “There is a great deal of worry about the IRGC carrying out covert and deniable actions. But they may be overestimating how much they can hide their role. The US and others are very concerned about this.

“In this situation, there is a risk of miscalculation,” the official added, “or of rogue elements operating independently.”

US officials say that the alleged Washington bomb plot showed a new recklessness by an increasingly embattled Iranian regime. An Iranian-American was charged last October with planning to blow up the Saudi ambassador to the US while he ate at his favourite Washington restaurant, potentially killing many Americans at the same time.

The US has claimed authorisation for the attack came from the highest levels of the regime, but Clapper’s remarks marked the first time Washington has openly blamed the supreme leader.

However, a western official cautioned that there was no evidence a final decision had been taken to go ahead with the attack. “Our understanding is that this was at the stage of operational planning. The order was for everything to be put in place. There was not, as far as I know, a green light,” the official said.

In recent days, both the Thai and Azeri governments made a number of arrests of suspects allegedly linked to Iranian intelligence who are accused of planning to kill Israel diplomats and a rabbi. One possibility, western governments believe, is that the plots were intended as reprisals for a string of murders in Tehran of Iranian scientists linked to the country’s nuclear programme. Iran has blamed Mossad for the killings, an accusation that many western officials think is plausible.

After an Iranian threat last month to close the strait of Hormuz in response to oil sanctions, the US has deployed two aircraft carriers, the USS Abraham Lincoln and the USS Carl Vinson, in the region. A thirdis scheduled to head to the Gulf in March.

John Pike, a military analyst and the head of the GlobalSecurity.org thinktank said: “That almost never happens. They seldom even have two.”

He added that a fourth carrier, the USS John Stennis, was sailing away from the area but at a slow pace and could be back within a few days.

Tensions have been stoked further by leaked details of Israeli military preparations and cabinet deliberations on whether to strike Iran in the next few months, in an effort to set back its nuclear programme by a few years. Western officials confess they are unsure to what extent such reports represent an Israeli bluff to force urgent action by the US and its European allies, but say they do take the Israeli threats seriously.

One possibility is that Israel could launch air strikes at the height of the US presidential election campaign, on the grounds that the Obama administration would have to mute any politically risky criticism of a longstanding US ally.

Some observers believe the planned European and US oil embargoes, due to come into effect five months from now with potentially severe implications for the Iranian economy, along with a military build-up in the region, could themselves raise the risk of miscalculation on all sides.

“I don’t think they are playing Iran anything like as well as they think they are,” said Richard Dalton, a former British ambassador to Tehran. “The oil embargo tends to give those elements in Iran who want to have maximal defences, including nuclear defences, added weight to their arguments. Also they are poking Iran with a sharp stick but this is not accompanied by a new negotiating incentives.”

In a strikingly critical report, an influential Israeli thinktank, the Institute for National Security Studies, warned that the Israeli leadership could be rushing into a decision to attack without properly thinking of the implications. The authors said that Israeli society should “not assume that decision makers will automatically make correct choices based on a rational of an attack’s cost effectiveness”.

“Past experience has proven that such an in-depth discussion does not always take place,” the report said. It questioned whether a nuclear Iran was really an existential threat to Israel and warned that unilateral action would alienate the US and other Israeli allies.

“The image – not the first of its kind – will be of an Israel unilaterally violating the rules of the international game and launching a military campaign without legitimacy from the security council. This might increase Israel’s isolation as well contribute to its delegitimisation.”

Iran insists its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes. The west and Israel allege it is intended to give Iran at least the capacity to make a bomb, but Clapper conceded in his remarks : “We do not know, however, if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons.”

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

This article titled “US commando team that killed Bin Laden swoop on Somali pirates” was written by Karen McVeigh in New York, for The Guardian on Wednesday 25th January 2012 19.39 UTC

The special forces commandos who swept into Somalia under cover of darkness to rescue two hostages, an American woman and a Danish man, were part of Seal team six, the same navy unit that killed Osama bin Laden, it has emerged.

The Seals killed nine pirates on Tuesday night before rescuing Jessica Buchanan, 32, and Poul Hagen Thisted, 60. They had been held hostage for three months after their kidnap from Galkayo, in the Galmudug region of Somalia, last October.

President Barack Obama, who authorised the mission two days ago, made no mention of it in his state of the union address to Congress on Tuesday. But he was overheard congratulating the defence secretary, Leon Panetta, on a “good job tonight” as he entered the House of Representatives chamber to give his address.

Minutes after he had finished his speech, the president was on the phone to Buchanan’s father, John, to tell him that his daughter was safe.

Obama said in a predawn statement released by the White House on Wednesday: “Thanks to the extraordinary courage and capabilities of our special operations forces, yesterday Jessica Buchanan was rescued and she is on her way home.

“As commander-in-chief, I could not be prouder of the troops who carried out this mission, and the dedicated professionals who supported their efforts. The US will not tolerate the abduction of our people, and will spare no effort to secure the safety of our citizens and to bring their captors to justice,” he said.

The pair were working for the DGG, a land mine clearance unit of the Danish Refugee Council, which confirmed the hostages were unharmed and “on their way to be reunited with their families”.

A senior administration official who was not authorised to speak publicly told AP that new intelligence over the “deteriorating health” of Buchanan had prompted Obama to direct his security team to develop a rescue plan.

Mary Ann Olsen of the refugee council said Buchanan was “not that ill” and did not have to be hospitalised but did require medicine.

Olsen informed Thisted’s family of the successful military operation and said “they were very happy and incredibly relieved that it is over”. She said the freed hostages were in Djibouti and would soon be moved to a “safe haven”.

Pentagon officials have refused to discuss the details of the raid, which took place near the Somali town of Adado. But according to officials who spoke to AP on condition of anonymity, the rescue team, part of the naval special warfare development group, parachuted into the area before moving in on foot.

They arrived when the guards were asleep. A pirate who gave his name as Bile Hussein told AP the guards had been sleeping off the effects of the stimulant leaf khat, popular in Somalia, which they had been chewing for most of the evening. Hussein said he was not present, but had spoken to others who said that nine people had been killed and three were “taken away”. Officials said that the Seals had intended to capture the kidnappers, but, for reasons that have not been explained, nine were killed.

Following the operation, the rescue team and hostages flew by helicopter to Camp Lemonnier, a US base in Djibouti.

While the commandos were drawn from Seal team six, it is understood they were not the same personnel as those in the Bin Laden operation, and officials stressed that members of the other armed forces were also involved in the rescue.

When the pair were kidnapped, hundreds of Somalis demonstrated against the act in the streets.

“We are really happy with the successful release of the innocents kidnapped by evildoers,” Muhammad Sahal, an elder in Galkayo town, told AP. “They were guests who were treated brutally. That was against Islam and our culture … These men have spoiled our good customs and culture, so Somalis should fight back.”

Several hostages are still being held in Somalia, including a British tourist, two Spanish doctors seized from neighbouring Kenya, and an American journalist who was kidnapped on Saturday.

Negotiations with Somali pirates are notoriously tricky and they typically only release hostages for multimillion-pound ransoms. A British couple, Paul and Rachel Chandler, who were kidnapped from their yacht by Somali pirates in 2009 and held captive for 13 months, were finally freed in November 2010 after an undisclosed sum was paid.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

This article titled “Al-Qaida offshoot hopes to turn Africa’s Sahel region into a ‘new Somalia’” was written by Simon Tisdall, for The Guardian on Thursday 8th December 2011 19.02 UTC

An offshoot of al-Qaida is working to turn the whole of Africa’s Sahel region into a “new Somalia” and terrorist bases there pose a growing threat to European and pan-African security, a panel of experts has warned.

Jerome Spinoza, head of the Africa bureau in the French ministry of defence, said the sub-Saharan Sahel area, up to 1,000km wide and stretching from the Atlantic in the west to the Red Sea in the east, presented challenges that western policymakers ignored at their peril.

“Instability is on the rise,” Spinoza told the Chatham House thinktank in London on Thursday. “Without a meaningful policy, the area could constitute a lasting safe haven for jihadists.”

Robert Fowler, a former UN special envoy to Niger and Canadian diplomat who was kidnapped and held hostage for four months in 2008-9 by al-Qaida in the Maghreb (AQIM), said the 31-strong group of captors was well-disciplined and wholly concentrated on its aim of creating an Islamic caliphate embracing the Muslim lands of Africa and the Middle East.

“These men are highly motivated and totally ascetic,” Fowler said. “These guys have no needs. They are dressed in rags. They have a bag of rice and a belt of ammunition and that’s it. I was held in 23 different locations in about 70 days. They are organised. They can break camp in under four minutes.”

Fowler continued: “This was the most focused group of young men I have ever encountered in my life. They are totally committed to jihad. They said to me, ‘We fight to die, you fight to go home to your wife and kids. Guess who will win?’ Even if it takes 200 years … They want to turn the Sahel into a new Somalia.”

Fowler said the terrorist threat to Europe’s southern flank had risen after advanced weapons were plundered during the collapse of the Gaddafi regime in Libya. “They (AQIM) are now equipped with enormous amounts of Libyan weapons and I mean sophisticated weapons such as 20,000 [shoulder-mounted] SA-24 missiles, heavy mortars, heavy artillery and thousands of anti-tank mines … The UN has demanded they be handed over. Well, good luck with that.”

The Sahel region embraces southern Mauritania, Mali, Burkina Faso, southern Algeria, Niger, northern Nigeria, Chad, South Sudan and Darfur in western Sudan, northern Ethiopia and Eritrea.

Spinoza said a host of critical issues faced the region going beyond terrorism. They included recurring rebellions by nomadic Tuareg tribesmen, some of whom were armed by and fought as mercenaries for Gaddafi in this year’s Libya conflict, cocaine trafficking to Europe from the west African coast, and people and arms smuggling.

The region was also confronted by rapid population growth, weak and ineffective governance, inter-state tensions, poor access to education and employment, and increasingly acute food supply problems exacerbated by climate change and the southward advance of the Sahara desert, he said.

AQIM was exploiting the resulting instability, he suggested, spreading its influence south from Algeria and raising the prospect of transcontinental link-ups with Boko Haram militant Islamists in Nigeria and al-Shabaab in Somalia.

Spinoza called for a joined-up approach by the international community, suggesting interested countries including France, the Netherlands and the US needed to coordinate their policies with regional and local players. “The EU’s strategy for security involves development, rule of law and (non-military) security but the EU needs to be more concrete,” he said.

Speaking this week, Kristalina Georgieva, the EU commissioner for humanitarian aid crisis response, said the Sahel was likely to experience severe food shortages next year because of erratic rainfall and localised dry spells.

Seven million people were already facing shortages in Niger, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Nigeria and Burkina Faso, she said. Current trends pointed to a massive problem of food availability next year.

The European commission last month increased humanitarian funding to the Sahel by €10m (£8.5m) to a total of €55m this year. Niger and Mauritania have already declared a crisis, prepared national action plans, and appealed for international help.

At the eastern end of the Sahel arc, 13 million people remained in need of emergency help and the crisis there was expected to last until the spring and perhaps the summer of 2012, Georgieva said.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

This makes my day.

(H/T Breitbart TV)

This article titled “Obama urged to accept Iranian nuclear offer” was written by Julian Borger, for guardian.co.uk on Monday 10th October 2011 12.13 UTC

There is a growing chorus of approval among US experts for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s offer of a new uranium deal. So far the enthusiasm has failed to catch on inside the Obama administration or among the rest of the six-nation group that handles nuclear negotiations with Iran. But that could change as the months go by and the Iranian government builds up its stockpile of low enriched and medium (20%) enriched uranium.

Ahmadinejad made this latest offer in the press, first with an interview with the Washington Post in mid-September, and then with the New York Times a week or so later. The essence of the deal, the Iranian president told the Times’ Nicholas Kristof, was: “If they give us the 20% enriched uranium this very week, we will cease the domestic enrichment of uranium of up to 20 percent this very week.”

The offer is a variant on a series of proposals and counter-proposals on the supply of fuel for the Tehran Research Reactor (TRR), for the production of medical isotopes. The first version involved Iran shipping out of its low enriched uranium (LEU) in return for the 20% enriched uranium required for the TRR. Ahmadinejad seemed to back the deal but it crashed on the reefs of internal Iranian politics. It resurfaced in May 2010 in a proposal brokered by Turkey and Brazil which was rejected by the West when it became clear that Iran intended to continue making 20% uranium at home. This was crucial as mastery of 20% uranium production is said to be 90% of the way to making weapons-grade (90% enriched) uranium in terms of technical difficulty.

In this latest reincarnation of the proposal, Ahmadinejad is saying Iran will stop 20% production. For that reason, the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security, argued that it would be wise to pursue the deal, on a temporary trial basis:

To test out Ahmadinejad’s offer, the United States could suggest that it would arrange the sale of two-year’s worth of TRR fuel in exchange for a two-year halt to any production of uranium enriched over five percent. TRR targets for medical isotope production could also be offered for sale to increase interest in the deal.

The idea has been seconded by Ali Faez and Charles Ferguson of the Federation of American Scientists, who suggest supplying Iran with 50 kg of fuel for the TRR unconditionally. They argue it would be seen as a humanitarian people-to-people gesture, helping 850,000 Iranian cancer patients receive treatment, with the strategic benefit of removing “Iran’s rationale for refining uranium to more than 3.5 percent”.

Faez and Ferguson wave away the risk that Ahmadinejad might not have the regime’s full backing for this gambit, as proved to be the case two years ago. They say Ahmadinejad has “repeated the offer often enough, and with confirmation from the foreign minister, that it must have the backing of the Iranian political elite, including Khamenei.”

That argument is debatable. Some Ahmadinejad watchers counter that he says lots of things without the Supreme Leader’s backing. The bigger problem is that it easier for academics to take these kind of gambles than leaders. Obama is in election mode and all foreign policy decisions are being subjected to a sniff test by his political advisors. Giving Ahmadinejad the benefit of the doubt once more will not sit well in a presidential debate against his eventual Republican challenger.

The rest of the 5+1 group (the P5 and Germany) have had little to say about the offer, holding fire until there is internal cohesion among the six, but if Iran continues to increase 20% U production at the present rate, and Israel shows signs of contemplating military action once more, desperation may take the upper hand and the Obama administration will be under increasingly heavy international pressure to take the risk.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

The guy who tried to blow up an airplane over Detroit with a bomb in his underwear made a court appearance yesterday. He called America a “cancer” and called for its destruction.

Source: CBS
Federal agents say they’ve stopped a U.S. citizen from Massachusetts who was planning drone attacks against key targets in Washington. Bob Orr reports the alleged terror plot was over before it began.

This article titled “No big deal? US ambassador’s baffling response to Afghan assault” was written by Jeremy Kelly in Kabul, for guardian.co.uk on Wednesday 14th September 2011 17.56 UTC

To Ryan Crocker, the US ambassador to Afghanistan, a 20-hour assault on Kabul from militants firing from a high-rise building on the US embassy and Nato compound while suicide bombers targeted police buildings across the city was “not a very big deal”.

Earlier in the week he had told the Washington Post in an interview that the Afghan capital’s biggest problem was the traffic. The attack that began on Tuesday and concluded Wednesday morning with the killing of the last of seven Taliban fighters armed with rocket-propelled grenades (RPG) and automatic weapons had at least solved that problem.

Streets were relatively scant of vehicles as many Kabulis steered clear out of fear of more attacks, or as Crocker put it, “harassment” in the form of the RPGs.

“That isn’t Tet,” he said, in reference to the offensive in Vietnam. Putting the two wars in the same sentence, even as a contrast, was unlikely to have been approved by his media advisers.

“If that’s the best they can do, you know, I think it’s actually a statement of their weakness and more importantly since Kabul is in the hands of Afghan security it’s a real credit to the Afghan national security forces,” Crocker said.

Later, he released a statement, with a more measured tone, that mourned the civilians, police and foreign forces killed or wounded and praised the security personnel that were “up to the task of thwarting such operations”.

Yet few ordinary Afghans see it that way. They struggle to understand how the attackers could get so close with such an arsenal. They believe the militants have help on the inside of their indigenous security forces. And their trust in their own government is such that many don’t even believe the “official” death tolls following terrorist attacks.

Kabul shopkeeper Mohammad Bashir Suleiman Khil summed up the thoughts of many. “Every 10 days there are attacks in Kabul,” he said. “There is no work, there is no business. People are not coming out of their homes today. We don’t have any hope here.”

The Arabic-speaking Crocker, coaxed out of retirement by President Barack Obama, returned to Afghanistan this year as head of the embassy he reopened in 2002. He has had front-row seats to several attacks on or near US embassies over his long diplomatic career, which might explain his initial take on the 20-hour siege.

He escaped a Beirut truck bomb that killed 60 at the US embassy in 1983, was airlifted from the same location eight years later because of terrorist fears and was bunkered down when protesters attacked the US embassy in Damascus in 1998. On the day he was sworn in as the US’s top man in Iraq in 2007, suicide bombers struck, killing 104 people in the city.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

This article titled “New York on high alert over 9/11 anniversary terror threat” was written by Ed Pilkington in New York, for guardian.co.uk on Friday 9th September 2011 03.20 UTC

New York is to be put into a state of heightened alert over the 9/11 anniversary weekend, with extra bomb sweeps, dog patrols, surveillance of tunnels and bridges and even vehicle check points, following what is being described as “credible but unconfirmed” information that a terrorist attack is being planned on the city or on Washington.

Only sketchy details have been given of the nature of the threat and Michael Bloomberg, New York’s mayor, emphasised in a late-night press conference held at city hall that the intelligence of the threat was uncorroborated. But with the world’s eyes on New York ahead of the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, nobody is taking any chances.

“We know the terrorists regard the anniversary as an opportunity to strike again. We do live in a world where we must take these threats seriously,” Bloomberg said.

Warnings of a plot to launch a vehicle bomb attack on New York or Washington, believed to be in the form of a single piece of intelligence, were first received on Wednesday night. President Obama and key intelligence personnel were briefed from Thursday morning.

ABC news said intelligence agencies received information that three people had entered the US with the intention of launching a “vehicle-borne” attack on the anniversary of September 11.

In a report on its website, ABC said officials believed the suspected attackers began their journey in Afghanistan, and may have passed through Iran.

Janice Fedarcyk, assistant director of the FBI in New York, said that intelligence obtained during the raid that killed Osama Bin Laden at Abbottabad in Pakistan in May had shown that al-Qaida had an interest in important dates and anniversaries such as 9/11. She said she expected more intelligence to come in over the next few days but stressed that “sometimes this reporting is credible and warrants intense focus, other times it lacks credibility and is highly unlikely to relate to real plots that are under way.”

Despite the lack of certainty on the nature or the seriousness of the latest threat, New Yorkers are likely to notice a dramatic beefing up of security at least until Monday. Ray Kelly, the city’s police chief, said he has ordered increased bag checks on the subway, a 30% increase in police patrols and rapid response teams, added deployment of officers specialising in detecting nuclear radiation and extra sweeps at religious and government buildings.

There will also be exercises involving several security agencies at Grand Central, Penn station and Times Square on Friday.

The city is well used to the inconveniences and stresses that frequent scares of this sort have brought over the past 10 years. Bloomberg said that the NYPD was also well prepared, having helped to thwart at least 12 possible terror attacks since 9/11.

He urged people to be vigilant but defiant. “The best thing we can do to fight terror is to refuse to be intimidated by it. For the past 10 years we have not allowed terrorists to intimidate us, we have lived our lives without fear and we will continue to do so.”

The homeland security secretary, Janet Napolitano, told reporters last Thursday there was “a lot of chatter” around the anniversary of the attacks but there was no information about a specific threat.

Security measures around the US, including in New York and Washington, have been enhanced in the weeks leading to the anniversary on Sunday.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010