France names Maxime Hauchard as Islamic State executioner

November 18, 2014

France names Maxime Hauchard as Islamic State executioner in newly released video

PARIS, Nov. 17 (UPI) — Authorities confirmed Monday that French citizen Maxime Hauchard, a 22-year-old from Normandy, is one of the militants shown in a newly released Islamic State execution video.

IS released the video Sunday showing the executions of 18 Syrian captives and American aid worker Peter Kassig, also known as Abdul-Rahman.

In the video, Hauchard is seen marching with other unmasked IS terrorists outside of a town identified as Dabeq in northern Syria. Each jihadi, clad in camouflage and black hat, escorts a Syrian captive to a death squad-style line up. Simultaneously, the jihadis — including Hauchard — undertake a graphic mass execution, depicted in slow motion shots.

French prosecutor Francois Molins confirmed the Normandy native’s identity in the video on Monday at a press conference. Hauchard was first identified in the video by French writer and journalist David Thomson, who tweeted pictures of the jihadi.

Hauchard, who changed his name to Abu Abdallah el-Faransi, has reportedly been on the French intelligence services’ radar since 2011. There is an active arrest warrant for him, issued last month.

In July, Hauchard told BFMTV in an interview that “My personal goal is martyrdom, obviously.”

French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve on Sunday reported a doubling in the number of French citizens joining the Islamic State since January, which he attributed to the ability of terrorists to use the Internet to reach potential recruits in France.

It is unclear how Hauchard was radicalized.

Is the CIA Making An Already Bad Situation in Iraq and Syria Even Worse? One Man’s Opinion

Trevor Timm

November 18, 2014

If you thought the Isis war couldn’t get any worse, just wait for more of the CIA

As the war against the Islamic State in Syria has fallen into even more chaos –partially due to the United States government’s increasing involvement there – the White House’s bright new idea seems to be to ramping up the involvement of the intelligence agency that is notorious for making bad situations worse. As the Washington Post reported late Friday, “The Obama administration has been weighing plans to escalate the CIA’s role in arming and training fighters in Syria, a move aimed at accelerating covert U.S. support to moderate rebel factions while the Pentagon is preparing to establish its own training bases.”

Put aside for a minute that the Central Intelligence Agency has been secretly arming Syrian rebels with automatic rifles, rocket-propelled grenades, ammunition and antitank weapons since at least 2012 – and with almost nothing to show for it. Somehow the Post neglected to cite a front-page New York Times article from just one month ago alerting the public to the existence of a still-classified internal CIA study admitting that arming rebels with weapons has rarely – if ever – worked:

As the Times’ Mark Mazzetti reported:

‘One of the things that Obama wanted to know was: Did this ever work?’ said one former senior administration official who participated in the debate and spoke anonymously because he was discussing a classified report. The C.I.A. report, he said, ‘was pretty dour in its conclusions.’

The Times cited the most well-known of CIA failures, including the botched Bay of Pigs invasion and the arming of the Nicaraguan contra rebels that led to the disastrous Iran-Contra scandal. Even the agency’s most successful mission – slowly bleeding out the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the 1980s by arming the mujahideen – paved the way for the worst terrorist attack on the US in its history.

But as anyone who has read journalist Tim Weiner’s comprehensive and engrossing history of the CIA knows, the agency’s past is a graveyard rife with literally dozens of catastrophic failures involving covert weapons deals to countless war criminals and con artists in an attempt to overthrow governments all over the world. Not only has the CIA failed repeatedly, but oftentimes its plan has completely backfired, solidifying the very power of the actor it sought to remove and leaving the people the agency claimed to be helping in a much, much worse-off spot than before the CIA gun-running mission began.

#BBCtrending: What will Saudis do when the oil runs out?

by Mai Noman

17 ovember 2014 

A 

What will happen to Saudis and Kuwaitis when they run out of oil? An Arabic hashtag expressing that fear has now been used a million times.

Early last week, an Arabic hashtag that translates to 'Your job after oil runs out...' begun to trend mostly in Saudi Arabia but also in neighbouring Kuwait. Citizens of these countries used it to make jokes, but there was also serious contemplation of a future without their once abundant oil wealth. Some Saudis contemplated returning to a simpler life style and perhaps becoming shepherds. Others were a bit more pessimistic about their nation's future. "I'm unemployed and there are another million like me, so how much worse will it get when oil runs out?" one man commented on Twitter. Despite being the largest oil producer in the region, Saudi Arabia has had a longstanding issue with unemployment.

Saudis are feeling insecure because oil prices recently hit a four-year low. That doesn't in itself tell us anything about oil supply - indeed if it was running out the price might be expected to rise - but in 2011 a Citigroup report warned that Saudi might run out of oil to export by 2030. Inside the country, many believe that the kingdom is not ready for a future without oil. One Saudi tweeted: "I fear we will say we wasted our oil in luxury and opulence and didn't make use of it in scientific advances that will benefit us and the coming generations."

Paul Rogers Security Briefing: The evolution of the Islamic State conflict

Paul Rogers

5 November 2014

Source Link

A Kurdish refugee in Mursitpinar in Turkey waits for news about Kobane, October 2014

Summary

Events in Iraq and Syria during October – not least the desperate battle for Kobane and a spate of executions in Iraq’s Anbar province – have demonstrated the limitations of aerial attack by the coalition of Western and Arab states in containing the activities of Islamic State (IS). The coalition is hamstrung by its divisions over the need to oppose Syria’s Assad regime and a lack of strategy to counter the local and global appeal of IS as much as by the paucity of available ground troops. The result is increasingly stalemate, and this may be more to the advantage of IS and its very long game than to its opponents.

Introduction

The last briefing in this series examined the nature and development of Islamic State from 2012 to 2014. Among the significant aspects of its development were: 

The extent to which the paramilitary core of the movement owed much to the background of Iraqis who had direct combat experience against US and UK forces, especially Special Forces, in Iraq in the mid-2000s; 

The unusual ideological context of Islamic State with its eschatological dimension, meaning that its leadership was working to a singularly long time-frame. 

The significance of the antagonism of Sunni clans to the Shi’a-dominated Maliki government (2006-14) and the hope that the Abadi government would be far more inclusive, thereby eroding support for Islamic State in Iraq; 

The policy of the Assad regime in Damascus of concentrating its forces on non-jihadist rebel groups, thereby aiding the self-generated narrative of the regime facing a terrorist threat and implying the need for western support; 

The imperative for Islamic State to gain more recruits from the region and beyond; 

Its skill in communications, especially the use of new social media; and 

Its probable desire for confrontation with the “far enemy” (the West) and the consequent dangers arising from western states satisfying this desire. 

ISIS Restructures Raqqa Under its New Ruling System

Source Link

Residents tell Syria Deeply that ISIS has divided Raqqa and assigned responsibilities to its local leaders, in a systematic bureaucracy of religious rule. 

Ever since ISIS took over the city of Raqqa in eastern Syria, claiming it as the capital of its self-declared Islamic caliphate, the group has reorganized the city and the province around it. 

Residents tell Syria Deeply that ISIS has divided the province and assigned responsibilities to its local leaders, in a systematic bureaucracy of religious rule. Those leaders are then given the authority to make rulings and laws, overseeing all affairs in their areas. 

For example, Tabqa city has a new ISIS-instated legal court, says Abu Mazen, 38, who decided to stay in his hometown under its new leadership. 

"We have ISIS-led administrative offices, educational departments, Islamic guidance and Dawa offices, tax collecting offices ... telephone, electricity and water departments," he said. 

"All these departments and offices are independent in their course of action from the other areas of Raqqa," he added. 

ISIS itself says it has divided Raqqa into sectors and localities in order "to facilitate the administrating of each area ... run and managed by specialized and highly qualified people," according to Abu Qais, one of the group's local leaders. 

He added that ISIS has built out what it considers to be "all the required institutions, offices, departments and sections to be just like any other country in the world." To press the point to a global audience, ISIS announced last week that it would mint its own currency, in the form of gold, silver and copper coins. 

Omar, a 32-year-old resident of Raqqa, has watched the ISIS system take shape. He spoke to Syria Deeply about the new ruling order, sharing what he has seen of its organization and operations. 

A horrifying new report reveals the strategy behind ISIS's brutality

by Zack Beauchamp

November 17, 2014

http://www.vox.com/2014/11/17/7220347/isis-syria-violence 

A Kurdish man sits across the border from Kobane, a town ISIS laid siege to.(Aris Messinis/AFP/Getty Images)

Scattered reports from inside ISIS-controlled territory have painted an awful picture of life under the militant group's rule. But a brand-new UN report, compiled from interviews with 300 people who have lived or currently are living in ISIS-controlled Syria, gives us a systematic look at the militant group's reign.

This isn't just because the behavior documented is terrible, though it is. It's that the UN report documents astrategy, not just random brutality or religious fanaticism. ISIS's ultraviolence is designed to cement its rule by terrifying the population into submission. And it might be working.

Everyday life in ISIS territory is a horror show

Consider this testimony from an anonymous father living in Deir ez Zor, in the eastern part of the country. Walking with his son, he saw two men strung up on a cross. "Both victims' hands were tied to each side of the improvised cross," the man reports. "I went to read the placards. On the first one it read, 'This is the fate of those who fight against us.'"

JOINING AND BETRAYING AL-QAEDA: A HOW-TO GUIDE

Ioannis Mantzikos

November 18, 2014

Morten Storm with Paul Cruickshank & Tim Lister, Agent Storm: My Life Inside Al Qaeda and the CIA (2014)

Agent Storm feels like a James Bond story or one of John Le Carre’s marvelous spy-thrillers. Yet, the story written by CNN’s Paul Cruickshank and Tim Lister is a true account. The journey of Morten Storm provides valuable insights into high-stakes intelligence operations, as well as the social issues surrounding radicalization and extremism. It is a first-rate account of how a troubled young Danish Christian, with a history of petty criminality, incarceration and drug use converted to Islam and entered into its most extremist jihadi circles in Denmark and Britain, ultimately becoming a trusted member of al-Qaeda (AQ). Storm represents the highest level of Western intelligence penetration of AQ’s most dangerous affiliate – al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, or AQAP.

Some may be highly skeptical of Storm’s claims. Indeed, Cruikshank and Lister specialize in international security and terrorism. They acknowledge that Storm’s account will face scrutiny, but stand by his credibility as a witness to the inner-workings of contemporary AQ. They cite audiovisual evidence and records of electronic communications that “both corroborate his story and enrich his account.” Then, the spy-thriller story begins to unveil.

Morten Storm celebrated his 13th birthday by attempting an armed robbery. His life spiraled into “a cycle of drugs, gratuitous violence and hardcore partying.” He went to prison twice. Denmark funds social programs to rehabilitate wayward youth like Storm, but he was incorrigible.

Later in his youth, Storm left for the United Kingdom, where he found refuge in a community of the Islamic faithful after becoming a Muslim. He became a member of radical circles in Birmingham and London, and he made valuable connections to the militant group al-Shabaab in East Africa and AQAP in Yemen. Storm then achieved something unusual: He became a member of Anwar al-Awlaki’s inner circle. Al-Awlaki, one of AQ’s top leaders, had inspired many Western jihadi terrorists, such as Major Nidal Hassan (the November 2009 Fort Hood murderer), Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab (the unsuccessful 2009 Christmas Day airliner bomber) and the Tsarnaev brothers (who conducted the Boston Marathon bombings in mid-April 2013). Storm also befriended other notable jihadist operatives and leaders, including Zacarias Moussaoui, who helped plan the 9/11 attack on the twin towers, and Nasser al-Wuhayshi, the head of AQAP.

What Is the Russian Military Up to In the Eastern Ukraine?

Benny Avni

November 18, 2014

Unmarked military trucks drive along a road in a territory controlled by the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic near the town of Khartsyzk, east of Donetsk, eastern Ukraine, November 15, 2014. International monitors deployed along the Russian border in eastern Ukraine say their drones were shot at and jammed days before new columns of unmarked soldiers and weapons, said by the West to be Russian, were seen in the rebel-held territory. Maxim Zmeyev/Reuters

What is Vladimir Putin’s game in eastern Ukraine? NATO reports that long convoys of unmarked military vehicles transporting heavy artillery and tanks, along with armored personnel carriers and trucks bearing rocket launchers manned by troops dressed in camouflage without identifying livery, have reinforced the pro-Russian separatist positions around the key Ukrainian cities of Donetsk and Luhansk.

Kiev forces confirmed the sightings and, like NATO, accused the Russians of mounting the sort of stealth invasion that proved so successful when Moscow annexed Crimea last winter. The Russians, meanwhile, indignantly deny that any of their forces have crossed the border, just as Russian President Vladimir Putin denied his forces had been sent to occupy Ukraine.

Mikhail Gorbachev, the last Communist leader of the Soviet Union, who presided over the defeat of the long and bloody failed experiment in Marxism-Leninism, thinks what is going on in Ukraine marks the start of a new Cold War. But it could be even worse than that. As the first cold blasts of winter bring the first flakes of snow, it is now a common belief on all sides that the fragile cease-fire in Ukraine will turn before long into a hot and bloody conflict that could drag the whole region—if not the whole world—into war.

Vote on Crucial NSA Reform Legislation Coming Up

November 18, 2014

A Crucial Vote on the Surveillance Bill

The Republican Party is so badly fractured that it is impossible to tell what steps it will take on domestic surveillance once it assumes control of Congress in January. Its rising libertarian wing wants to crack down on abuses of Americans’ privacy, but many of its leaders express full support for any action the intelligence agencies want to take.

That’s why it’s important that the Senate break a filibuster on the USA Freedom Act, which would reduce or end the bulk collection of telephone records, in a vote scheduled for Tuesday afternoon. If the bill doesn’t pass in the current lame-duck session of the Senate, still controlled by Democrats, it may never get past the 60-vote hurdle in the next session of Congress.

The bill, sponsored by Senator Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, would require the National Security Agency to ask phone companies for the records of a specific person or address when it is searching for terrorists, instead of scooping up all the records in an area code or city. It would force the agency to show why it needs those records, and to disclose how much data is being collecting.

The bill would also create a panel of advocates to support privacy rights and civil liberties in arguments before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court; currently, there is no one to offer opposition to government requests before the court. The government would have to issue clear summaries of the court’s most significant rulings.

Not every potential surveillance abuse is addressed in the measure. For example, it leaves open the possibility of “backdoor” searches of American data that investigators come across when searching for the communications of foreigners. It exempts the F.B.I. from transparency on searches. And it is not clear whether the government believes there is some other hidden legal authority for bulk collection other than the one addressed in the USA Freedom Act.

Nonetheless, the bill is a good way to begin restoring individual privacy that has been systematically violated by government spying, revealed through the leaks provided by Edward Snowden. It has been supported by the American Civil Liberties Union, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and other privacy watchdogs. On Sunday, a group of the biggest technology companies — including Google, Microsoft, Facebook and Twitter — endorsed the bill because it allows more disclosure of the demands for information made of them by the government.

In addition to Senate Democrats, the bill is supported by some hard-right Republicans, including Ted Cruz of Texas and Mike Lee of Utah. But Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who will soon be the Senate majority leader, hassupported the N.S.A.’s spying on Americans. That’s a good a reason to pass it before a new Senate can water it down.

Details of Failed U.S. Effort to Recruit Former Alawite Syrian Army Officers Opposed to Assad

Dana Ballout and Adam Entous

November 18, 2014

Outreach to Alawi Officers From Syria Fell Flat

A Syrian man walks near a poster with an image of President Bashar al-Assad in the Saadallah al-Jabiri square on the government-controlled side of Aleppo on Nov. 16, 2014. (Joseph Eid/AFP/Getty Images)

Former Syrian army officers housed in a special camp in southern Turkey aren’t the only Assad regime defectors who feel abandoned by the West. The camp was set up to house Sunni Muslim officers, some with decades of military experience and know-how, as described in a Wall Street Journal article.

Some military officers and government officials from Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s own Alawite sect, along with members of the Ismaili Shia Muslim sect, also fled to Turkey with high hopes for the opposition. Like the Sunnis, they grew disillusioned.

Despite their shared goal of removing Mr. Assad, the groups weren’t housed together because they were too distrustful of each other, officers said. The Sunnis largely remain in the 24-acre Camp Apaydin, complete with a grocery and exercise yard; the Alawis and Ismailis were sent to live in private homes and hotels in southern Turkish towns, and many of them have since moved to Europe and broken off ties with the Syrian opposition.

“We were afraid of the Sunnis there,” said one defector, Ahmad Hallak.

Russian SU-27 Fighter Intercepted Near Latvian Airspace

NATO Jets Intercept Russian Fighter Plane Over Baltic Sea

Ott Ummelas

Bloomberg News, November 17, 2014

NATO fighter jets intercepted a Russian military airplane over the Baltic Seatoday after four such incidents last week as the confrontation over Ukraine between Russia and its Cold War-era foes intensifies.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s F-16 jets based in the Baltic region intercepted a Russian Su-27 fighter plane, Latvia’s army said today on Twitter. The encounter took place over international waters near Latvia’s territorial seas, it said.

Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, former Soviet republics that joined NATO in 2004, won more security guarantees from the 28-nation bloc in September after Russian President Vladimir Putin’s annexation of the Crimean peninsula from Ukraine. Military planes and naval vessels have been increasingly moving in the Baltic Sea between St. Petersburg and Russia’s Kaliningrad exclave, while Estonia and non-aligned Finland have reported increased violations of their airspace.

Putin said in a TV interview with German broadcaster ARD yesterday that Russian planes and ships don’t violate European territory and military exercises take place “exclusively in the international waters and over international airspace.”

Two Dutch F-16 fighter jets on a NATO mission intercepted a Russian Ilyushin transport plane over the Baltic Sea on Nov. 12 after it approached Estonian and Lithuanian airspace, while Eurofighter Typhoons based in the Baltic region intercepted two Russian Su-27 fighter planes on Nov. 15, according to Latvian and Lithuanian authorities.

The Era of U.S.-Russian Nuclear Counter-Proliferation Cooperation Has Come to an End

Jack Caravelli

November 17, 2014

U.S.-Russia Nuclear Cooperation Drawing to a Close

An era of unprecedented nuclear cooperation between the Cold War rivals is drawing to a close. Early this month Sergey Kirienko, who runs Russia’s state nuclear company, announced that in 2015 no new nuclear projects involving U.S. participation are “envisioned.”

What transpired between the United States and Russia in the years between the end of the Cold War and the moment of this decision is the stuff of spy novels. In the aftermath of the 1991 breakup of the Soviet Union and the ensuing political chaos, the outgoing George H.W. Bush administration and incoming Clinton administration shared grave concerns about the security of Russia’s nuclear weapons and fissile materials.

Their concerns were well placed. During that period I was serving at the Central Intelligence Agency, leading a group with responsibility for monitoring dire developments in Russian nuclear security. Security lapses we were able to document included gaping holes in perimeter fences around nuclear facilities, guards who refused to patrol due to lack of adequate winter clothing, and “trusted” insiders who sought to steal or divert nuclear materials for financial gain.

Several succeeded in smuggling small amounts of fissile material across Russian borders and into Europe.

Former Sens. Sam Nunn (D., Ga.) and Richard Lugar (R., Ind.), in a spirit of bipartisanship, sponsored landmark legislation that created what is often referred to as the Nunn Lugar program. This initiative resulted in the Department of Defense (DOD) and then the Department of Energy (DOE) establishing parallel programs to work with Russian counterparts in securing nuclear warheads and vast amounts of at-risk nuclear materials.

I left a posting at the White House National Security Council in 2000 to manage the program at the DOE, overseeing its nuclear material security work as well as companion programs aimed at enhancing the security of Russian borders from nuclear smuggling and secure radioactive materials which could be used to make radioactive dispersal devices or “dirty bombs.”

A Struggle Over Russia's Interior Ministry Could Emerge

November 11, 2014

Russian President Vladimir Putin hands Interior Minister Vladimir Kolokoltsev a flag during a 2013 ceremony. (MIKHAIL KLIMENTYEV/AFP/Getty Images)

Summary

In recent weeks, rumors that Russian Interior Minister Vladimir Kolokoltsev will be replaced have been circulating among Russian media and pundits who watch Moscow. Stratfor has been monitoring the Russian government's coherence and the strength of its leader, President Vladimir Putin, as the country faces a series of crises involving its faltering economy and tensions with the West over Ukraine. Although Kolokoltsev is of little consequence as a personality, the office he holds oversees one of the most powerful tools for anyone seeking political power in Russia: a significant part of the country's internal surveillance apparatus.

Analysis

Rumors that Kolokoltsev has been forced to resign first appeared Oct. 29 on Russia's Dozhd (Rain) television and were picked up by Pravda, RIA Novosti and other Russian media outlets before becoming a topic of chatter for Russian pundits. Dozhd cited sources within the Defense Ministry, though the exact status of Kolokoltsev's position was not made clear. Dozhd is one of the last independent television stations in Russia and has reported such rumors before. But even when the details of Dozhd's reporting have been off, the television station's coverage of leaks from inside the Kremlin have pointed to actual problems.

Presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov acknowledged the rumors but did not confirm or deny them. However, this week Kolokoltsev attended the Interpol General Assembly in Monaco as Russia's interior minister. There, he acted as if his situation were normal, giving interviews on Russia's willingness to help combat various global issues such as cybercrime. After Kolokoltsev's appearance, the Russian media are now speculating that he will resign in the near future, possibly after Russia's Day of Police on Nov. 10 -- a holiday celebrating the country's police, which Kolokoltsev oversees and from whose ranks he was promoted.

Iraq Situation Summary

November 18, 2014

Although Baiji district is not fully cleared by the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) and Iraqi Shi’a militias, it is clear that ISIS has lost a significant part of the area and has decided not to reinforce it from Hawija, an ISIS stronghold located north of Baiji. It is unclear if the ISF and militias intend to capitalize on their momentum in Baiji by attempting to advance north toward Hawija. Nevertheless, the gains achieved by the ISF and militias in Baiji seem to have spurred ISIS to call for enlistment by the youth of Hawija, likely in anticipation of an ISF push from Baiji. The ISF and militias also may decide to launch a major attack on Tikrit, now that it is isolated from Baiji. Either way, it appears that the ISF and militias for now have the opportunity to set the terms of battle by choosing where and when to fight, at least in the area extending from Tikrit through Baiji, and toward Hawija. This is a significant development given that ISIS has had the initiative at least since the fall of Mosul in June of 2014. The attack by ISIS on Baghdadi sub-district today almost certainly was aimed at disrupting the ISF and tribal forces and diverting their resources.

Has Russia Launched a Satellite Killer Into Orbit?

Andrew Griffin

November 18, 2014

Is Russia flying a satellite killer around space? Unidentified Russian satellite prompts space weapon worries

A mysterious Russian object is being tracked by space agencies, giving new life to fears about the increase of space weapons.

The satellite, dubbed Object 2014-28E, has grabbed the interest of official and amateur satellite-watchers because it is taking a confusing path and its purpose has not been identified, reports the Financial Times.

The satellite — which this morning was over the South Pacific Ocean, somewhere between Australasia and South America —can be tracked online. Amateur satellite-trackers have been doing just that and have been watching the path of the satellite.

Some think that it could be collecting space junk, helping to clean up the useless satellites that are floating around space. Or it could be providing fuel or repairs to other satellites. But others fear that the satellite could be used to destroy enemy ones.

“Whatever it is, [Object 2014-28E] looks experimental,” Patricia Lewis, research director at think-tank Chatham House and an expert in space security, told the FT. “It could have a number of functions, some civilian and some military. One possibility is for some kind of grabber bar.

“Another would be kinetic pellets which shoot out at another satellite. Or possibly there could be a satellite-to-satellite cyber attack or jamming.”

The rocket was launched in May, on a rocket that carried three other packages, but the launch of the mysterious satellite was not declared. It was initially thought to be debris, but after it performed complex manoeuvres the US re-classified it as a satellite, and Russia increased the reported amount of satellites that had been launched on the mission.

After some confusing moved between August and October, it moved towards another object last weekend. That could mean that it has finally intercepted its target and its mission has come to an end, according to some watching the satellite.

Anti-satellite weapons began to be developed in the 1950s. Russia developed its Istrebitel Sputnik (fighter satellite) in the early 1960s — the satellite was designed to fly close to other satellites and detonate and detonate a warhead that would bring it down.

Russia has officially called off the programme, though other anti-satellite weapons have been demonstrated by countries including China and the USA. They have mostly been used to destroy satellites that might otherwise have posed a danger if they fell to earth.

Russia may also seek to leave the International Space Station (ISS) project, and instead start building its own station from 2017, according to local news reports. Russia has reportedly said that it is doing so is because the angle at which the ISS is tilted towards the earth means that it sees no more than 5% of Russia, but a new placement will let it see up to 90% of Russia.

USAF Drone Pilot Who Fired Missiles at Osama Bin Laden in 2000 Tells His Story

Scott Swanson 

November 18, 2014 

War Is No Video Game – Not Even Remotely 

The first person to fire a Hellfire missile from a Predator drone in combat and destroy a target writes here about his experience. Scott Swanson has never written about this before. Read on. The Editor.

Flying a Predator drone in combat is nothing like playing a video game. Take it from me, the first person to pull the trigger in a lethal missile strike from a Predator.

As one of the early Air Force pilots to fly that Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, or UAV, I cringe when people make snide comments about the “Chair Force.” No, the pilot of a Remotely Piloted Aircraft can’t hear his plane’s engine, feel its motion, or smell that airplane smell; and yes, he (or she) has a joystick and throttle and a couple of TV screens in front of him. But there the comparison ends. Mentally, the pilot is inside a Predator, though the drone is half a world away. Emotionally, he is at war.

That was exactly how I felt one day in September 2000 when I saw Osama Bin Laden—or UBL, as we knew him—live on our Predator’s video screen. I was sitting in the pilot’s seat in our Ground Control Station (GCS) much of that afternoon. My sensor operator steering the camera was Master Sgt. Jeff Guay. As I orbited our Predator over Tarnak Farms, a dusty jumble of buildings in a mud-walled compound just outside Kandahar, Afghanistan, we spotted a strikingly tall man in white robes being treated deferentially by a group of men. Jeff and I immediately knew we had bin Laden in our sights: the U.S. had been searching for UBL for years and now here he was, exquisitely framed on our screen. As he moved around the compound, we followed. As he entered a building on the farm, we watched. But watch was all we could do—at the time, no Predator was armed.

OFFSET 3.0, OR: HOW I LEARNED TO STOP WORRYING AND LOVE COMMERCIAL TECHNOLOGY

Adam Jay Harrison

November 17, 2014

Editor’s note: This article is part of the Beyond Offset series, a collaborative project between War on the Rocks and theCenter for a New American Security that aims to build a community-of-interest that will address the challenges of maintaining America’s competitive edge in military technology and advance solutions.

America loves technology. As a nation, our cultural predilection for technical ingenuity has created the conditions for economic prosperity, scientific discovery, and military superiority. However, the worldwide proliferation of American free market ideas and liberalism (not to mention technology) has led to the emergence of an increasingly competitive global innovation landscape. According to the World Intellectual Property Organization, the U.S. represented just 26% of world total patents in 2012, down from 40% in 1999. During the same period, the number of patents filed in China increased by some 3,200 percent, growing to roughly 10% of world total patents today.

In a related trend, the technological state of the art is shifting from the advanced militaries of the world to the commercial marketplace. An October 2014 update by the Defense Business Board makes the startling claim that “commercial technology…is more advanced in most areas critical to military capabilities.” To the extent that the commercial marketplace is predicated (more or less) on the free flow of goods and ideas, it is not hard to imagine a world where America’s peer competitors and non-state adversaries achieve technological parity with the U.S. military in many important areas.

During the Cold War, the U.S. relied on qualitatively superior weaponssystems to “offset” Soviet military mass. This imperative led to the emergence of a captive industry servicing the U.S. military’s warfighting needs. The migration from a dual-use defense industrial base in World War II to a defense-specific industrial base created a dependency between public financing and military-relevant technologies. This connection has been an important factor in ensuring America’s military-technology edge; however, there are forces at work that threaten to undermine such a model. The “democratization” and proliferation of advanced technology, the shift in research and development spending to the private sector, and the convergence of commercial, consumer, and defense applications allow nations, organizations, and individuals alike to capitalize on military-grade technologies more quickly and cost effectively than ever before.

New Remote Control Report: Cyberspace: An Assessment of Current Threats, Real Consequences and Potential Solutions

3 November 2014

Source Link

The lack of legal clarity and the highly securitised debate around cyber issues may have destabilising effects, including increased surveillance on citizens and a ‘cyber arms race’ between states, a new report warns today.

Cyberspace: An Assessment of Current Threats, Real Consequences and Potential Solutions, commissioned by the Remote Control project, finds that cyber security is becoming increasingly important to states’ national security strategies. However, the hyperbolic language used to describe the potential consequences of cyber attacks, compounded by a lack of reliable, concrete information on the real risks posed by cyber threats, has contributed to the securitisation of the debate around cyber security issues.

This process can lead to possible dangers being overestimated, and vulnerabilities cast as national security threats of immediate concern. The report highlights that state reactions to these perceived risks may have negative implications, including: 

Increased surveillance on citizens: To ensure greater safety from cyber attacks increased government control over online activities will likely occur, resulting in an increased degree of surveillance on everyday citizens 

Emergence of a ‘cyber arms race’: The idea that other countries routinely engage in cyber espionage and the attribution problems related to cyber attacks means that states will have a stronger incentive to take the initiative which will likely foster a ‘Cool War’ dynamic of continuous attrition and escalation between states 

The report by VERTIC also observes that a number of state related cyber attacks – including Stuxnet, ‘Nashi’ and the ‘cool’ war between the US and China – pose serious accountability concerns due to the technical complexities of cyber attack attribution, as well as the ambiguous relationship between state and non-state actors. The lack of clearly defined legal standards and international legal cooperation also means that often, the attackers will not face consequences.

The report recommends a number of ways to help foster a safer cyber security environment, including: 

Ensuring accurate information is available to help avoid panic brought on by sensational reporting 

Cooperation at the expert level could help spread best practices and lay the groundwork for nascent norms 

Increased cooperation and information sharing at technical and political level could help solve the problem of attribution 

Alberto Muti, co-author of the report says,

Op-Ed: Blackout War - A Revolution in Strategic Imagination

Dr. Peter Vincent Pry

November 18, 2014

The writer gave a briefing based on this article to a recent grid security conference in Israel.

"I am going to talk about a dimension of the cyber threat that is not usually considered a cyber threat in Western doctrine, but is in the playbooks for an Information Warfare Operation of Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran," so testified Ambassador R. James Woolsey, former Director of Central Intelligence, before the U.S. Congress on May 21, 2013, "These potential adversaries in their military doctrines include as a dimension of cyber warfare a wide spectrum of operations beyond computer viruses, including sabotage and kinetic attacks, up to and including nuclear electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack."

A Failure Of Strategic Imagination

Iran, North Korea, China and Russia in their military doctrines advocate using combined attacks by EMP, cyber and sabotage against electric grids and other civilian critical infrastructures as a "Revolution in Military Affairs" that could prove decisive in war, enabling a small power to surprise and humble a great power, much as Nazi Germany nearly conquered the western democracies in World War II by the surprise use of the "Blitzkrieg" ("Lightning War") strategy.

A Defense Science Board study Resilient Military Systems and the Advanced Cyber Threat (January 2013) equates an all-out cyber attack on the United States with the consequences of a nuclear attack, and concludes that a nuclear response is justified to deter or retaliate for cyber warfare: "While the manifestation of a nuclear and cyber attack are very different, in the end, the existential impact to the United States is the same."

The DSB study likewise concludes that cyber warfare is an existential threat not because of computer viruses alone: "...the cyber threat is serious and the United States cannot be confident that our criticalInformation Technology (IT) systems will work under attack from a sophisticated and well resourced opponent utilizing cyber capabilities in combination with all of their military and intelligence capabilities (a 'full spectrum' adversary)."

The Congressional EMP Commission found that the military doctrines ofpotential adversaries for Information Warfare or Cyber Warfare include, not only computer viruses and hacking, but nuclear EMP attack.

Dangerously for the West, U.S. political and military leaders continue to think of cyber threats narrowly, as largely or entirely limited to hacking and computer bugs. This failure of strategic imagination is a major catastrophe in the making. It is akin to the blindness that afflicted nearly everyone in the West, and made possible World War II, from a failure of strategic imagination among most Western elites to foresee and understand Nazi Germany's Blitzkrieg strategy.

The Top 5 Foreign Policy Lessons of the Past 20 Years

BY STEPHEN WALT

NOVEMBER 18, 2014 

Source Link

From Russia to China to the United States, from hubris to ultimatums to power plays, the good, the bad, and the ugly of (recent) world politics. 

Tell me, friend: do you find the current world situation confusing? Are you having trouble sorting through the bewildering array of alarums, provocations, reassurances, and trite nostrums offered up by pundits and politicos? Can't tell if the glass is half-full and rising or half-empty, cracked, and leaking water fast? Not sure if you should go long on precious metals and stock up on fresh water, ammo, and canned goods, or go big into equities and assume that everything will work out in the long run? 

Today's world is filled with conflicting signals. On the one hand, life expectancy and education are up, the level of violent conflict is down, and hundreds of millions of people have been lifted out of poverty over the past several decades. Private businesses are starting to take human rights seriously. And hey, the euro is still alive! On the other hand, Europe's economy is still depressed, Russia is suspending nuclear cooperation with the United States, violent extremists keep multiplying in several regions, the odds of a genuine nuclear deal with Iran still looks like a coin toss, and that much-ballyhooed climate change deal between the United States and China is probably too little too late and already facing right-wing criticisms.

Given all these conflicting signals, what broader lessons might guide policymakers wrestling with all this turbulence? Assuming governments are capable of learning from experience (and please just grant me that one), then what kernels of wisdom should they be drawing on right now? What do the past 20 years or so reveal about contemporary foreign policy issues, and what enduring lessons should we learn from recent experience? 

Foreign PolicyPresented by Chevron SHARE Home Welcome Agitators Decision-Makers Challengers Naturals Innovators Advocates Chroniclers Healers Artists Moguls Statistics A WORLD DISRUPTED: THE LEADING GLOBAL THIN

Source Link

When its history is written, 2014 will be remembered as a year when remarkable individuals smashed the world as we know it—for better and for worse. While some left horrific wreckage in their wake, others showed that a better future demands tearing down foundations and building something entirely new.

Disruption, clearly, is not always a bad thing. 

From the Middle East to Europe to Africa, 2014 was a year of unprecedented geopolitical fracturing. The Islamic State began relentlessly and violently redrawing borders in Syria and Iraq, while Russia aggressively staked new claims in eastern Ukraine and Boko Haram murdered and plundered its way through northern Nigeria. These Global Thinkers—terrorist leaders, ideologues, wily financiers—are the brains behind these splintering operations. In the course of just a few months, they have upended the world as we know it, leaving the future of whole regions and the lives of tens of millions looking dangerously uncertain.

Masterminding a national election in the world’s largest democracy. Steering the West’s response to Russia’s forays into Ukraine. Presenting a plan for reconciliation and accountability in an African country torn along religious lines. Plotting major reforms in one of Europe’s most sluggish economies. These are just a few of the diverse, and unenviable, job descriptions of the men and women in this category. Working to give governance a good name, these decision-makers have taken risks, challenged norms, and demanded change.

Mass protests rocked every corner of the globe in 2014. In Kiev and Bangkok, Hong Kong and Caracas, passionate individuals led movements that defied powerful government institutions in the hope of defining new trajectories for entire countries and populations. Similarly, passionate individuals tested the status quo—and some sacred cows—by pushing for Scottish independence from the United Kingdom, exposing the cracks (and hot air) among Silicon Valley’s elite, and scaring big banks with a tough, expansive vision of 21st-century financial regulations. Although their goals and tactics may not have been universally lauded, these Global Thinkers were indefatigable.

Locating promise amid contradiction is the key to environmental progress for these Global Thinkers, who are showing that it is possible for a large, bustling city to be free of cars, for a small tribe to shield its homeland from powerful energy interests, and for trees—just trees—to protect a country from catastrophe. There is much left to learn, and even more to respect, about the natural world. These individuals serve as constant reminders of what it takes not just to live on Earth, but to thrive.

HERE’S WHY WOMEN IN COMBAT UNITS IS A BAD IDEA

Anna Simons

November 18, 2014 

Three problems plague the debate over whether all combat units should finally be opened to women. (Actually, there are four problems: The fourth and most important being the likelihood that there will be no real debate, something that I hope this article will help to mitigate). Most career soldiers and officers I know believe the integration of women into Special Forces teams, and into SEAL, Ranger and Marine infantry platoons, is already a forgone conclusion. From their perspective, politicians in uniform (namely, top brass) don’t have the intestinal fortitude to brook the vocal minority in Congress – and the country, really – who think mainstreaming women into ground combat units is a good idea.

As for the other three problems, the first is that every sentient adult knows what happens when you mix healthy young men and women together in small groups for extended periods of time. Just look at any workplace. Couples form. At some point, how couples interact – sexually, emotionally, happily and/or unhappily – makes life uncomfortable for those around them. Factor in intense, intimate conditions and you can forget about adults being able to stay professional 24/7. Object lesson for anyone who disagrees: General Petraeus.

Problem number two: Those who favor lifting the combat exclusion ban engage in a clever sleight of hand whenever they equate women serving in combat with women serving in combat units. Given women’s performance over the past decade in Afghanistan and Iraq, who but a misogynist would doubt their capacity for courage, aggressiveness or grace under fire at this point? But battles are like exclamation points. They punctuate long stretches when there are no firefights. Spend time around soldiers when they are coming down from adrenaline highs, or are depressed or upset; they are prone to all sorts of temptations. Alternatively, under Groundhog Day-like conditions, troops invariably grow bored and frustrated. How quickly we forget Charles Graner and Lynndie England, and the dynamic between them that helped fuel the sadism at Abu Ghraib.

(W)ARCHIVES: DISSECTING FLEET ADMIRAL NIMITZ’ GRAD SCHOOL THESIS

Mark Stout

November 14, 2014

Fleet Admiral Chester Nimitz is one of the towering figures of American military history. As Commander-in-Chief, Pacific Ocean Areas, he oversaw some of the most famous battles of Pacific War: Coral Sea, Midway, Leyte Gulf, Iwo Jima, Okinawa. After World War II, he served for two years as Chief of Naval Operations from which position he championed then-Captain Hyman Rickover’s radical ideas about nuclear submarines. Clearly, Chester Nimitz was a man of great ability. But what did his graduate school work look like? Could he write a good research paper?

As it happens, the Naval Historical Collection at the U.S. Naval War College can help us answer that question. Among the treasures there is apaper that 37 year old Commander Nimitz wrote in 1922 on “policy.” In this 25 page paper, Nimitz discusses how policy relates to war and he reviews the history of American foreign policy in the Pacific region. The interesting part is the first third where Nimitz enunciates his understanding of what goes into national power. From this text we can infer that Nimitz thought that Lenin had some important insights. More importantly, Nimitz was clearly a follower of Clausewitz as well as being simultaneously a realist and a liberal. Finally, and not surprisingly, given the time in which he lived, he seems to have had some ideas about race that many people today would consider retrograde.

The echoes of Lenin are brief but interesting. In 1916 Lenin wrote thatimperialism was the “highest stage of capitalism.” Nimitz flirts with these ideas when he discusses the rivalries that can arise that can arise when states compete for “foreign markets to absorb excess food, raw materials and manufactured articles” and provide “land to accommodate increasing populations.” Of course, while Lenin uses these ideas to castigate industrialized countries like the United States, Nimitz is very proud of American foreign policy.

International competition is a subject to which Nimitz devotes a good bit of attention and he does not look at it solely through a Leninist lens. Though the term did not exist then, he displays strong signs of realist thinking. He believes that the world system is characterized by anarchy because “there is no court of international justice whose edicts can be enforced” and that war will be with us “until human nature makes radical changes.” He believes that geography, and the distribution of power over it strongly influence the behavior of states. Without using today’s realist terminology, he discusses how a “nation surrounded by powerful rival states,” must engage in internal balancing by “becom[ing] militaristic and develop[ing] a vigorous foreign policy” or, if too weak to do that must externally balance by “seek[ing] alliances with its least hostile neighbors.”

How Many Flying Hours Does It Take To Kill a Terrorist?

Todd Harrison

November 17, 2014

U.S. MARINE CORPS PHOTO BY SGT. GABRIELA GARCIA

How many flying hours, steaming days or tank miles does it take to kill a terrorist?

Todd Harrison is the Senior Fellow for Defense Budget Studies at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.Full Bio

I sometimes ask this rhetorical question to people in the military to make a point. Training, while essential to preparing our forces for combat, is an intermediary step toward an end goal. The purpose of our military is not to fly aircraft, sail ships or drive around in tanks. The military exists to deter, fight and win the nation’s wars. So when we think about military readiness we should be thinking about how well our forces are able to do their job.

A few months ago I published an article on this subject in Strategic Studies Quarterly entitled “Rethinking Readiness.” One of the main points I make in the article pertains to the importance of distinguishing between readiness inputs (resources) and outputs (performance). My article clearly touched a nerve with some in the military, as is evident in a two-page memo by a Marine Corps officer criticizing it. The author of the memo seems to agree that the military should be measuring outputs but misses the distinction between inputs and outputs, writing that the military already has “an objective readiness output measure (P/R/S/T-levels).” For those who aren’t familiar with this terminology, he is referencing how the military reports readiness on a unit-by-unit basis in four resource categories: P-level for personnel, R-level for equipment condition, S-level for equipment and supplies and T-level for training. But these are not outputs; these are the essential inputs to readiness. And no matter the degree of fidelity with which the P/R/S/T-levels are reported, they are still measures of the resources applied to readiness, not the actual readiness that results.

T-55 Tanks

It is estimated that ISIS has about 30 T-55 tanks, although it is unknown how well the organization can maintain and operate them. The T-55 tank series is a Soviet tank line that was produced from the end of World War II through the 1980s.

Despite the tanks' age, they remain operational in up to 50 armies around the world. The tanks feature heavy armor, along with a 100-mm rifled gun and a secondary 7.62-mm machine gun.