During a briefing with U.S. administration officials, General David Petraeus stated the next two weeks are critical to determining whether the Pakistani government will survive.
Sidebar: Back in December of 2008 I was asked to give an assessment on the viability of the Pakistani government. At that time I stated that if current trends continue the Pakistani government would collapse before the end of 2009. Former advisor to the US Central Command (CENTCOM), David Kilcullen, also made a similar prediction at the end of March 2009 that the government would only last for another 6 months. This would put the failure of the government in about the same time frame. Also, the Joint Forces Command stated in a 2008 report that Pakistan and Mexico are on the verge of becoming failed states.
This is a stunning disclosure by the head of CENTCOM, and not one that would be made lightly. Before we get to the implications of this statement we need to understand the position of the individual who made the comments. First and foremost Gen. Petraeus is a member of the military. He is not a politician, but an individual subject to the wants and needs of the current administration. In other words, Petraeus would not be allowed to make such comments (especially something that would be leaked to the press) without the approval of someone in the administration. This is a statement that the Obama administration wanted out in the open.
When considering this statement it is apparent that things on the ground in Pakistan are worse than thought, or intelligence indicates that the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), also known as the Pakistani Taliban, may make a direct move against the government. The TTP is not a homogenous movement, however, but more of an umbrella organization that encompasses several different Taliban movements active in Pakistan. Some members of the TTP have declared their loyalty to Afghan Taliban leader Mullah Omar so the recent movements by the TTP could be a signal of organizational consolidation. Currently, the TTP has managed to seize most of the Northwest Frontier Province and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas which encompasses about 26 million of Pakistan’s 166 million people. The TTP has also increased its presence in Sindh province, especially around Karachi, and have moved within 60 miles of Islamabad – Pakistan’s capital.
The reason for Petraeus giving two weeks as a timeline is unknown. It is doubtful that this is a finite span in which certain actions must come to pass, but it is revealing as to the administration’s view of the precarious situation in Pakistan. It is possible that this is a carefully orchestrated attempt by the administration to put pressure on the Pakistani government to take stronger action against the Taliban. In fact, Petraeus’s statement that "The Pakistanis have run out of excuses," for not dealing with the Taliban would seem to bolster this possibility.
The sources of the statements made by Petraeus went on to say the Pakistani Army under Gen. Ashfaq Kayani is more capable than the civilian government of President Asif Ali Zardari which could mean that this disclosure is describing certain activities already in play. Such an admission by administration officials could create serious diplomatic problems between the U.S. and Pakistan under normal circumstances, but if the U.S. administration believes that the civilian government will not survive much longer, the U.S. could be positioning itself to support a new Pakistani government in the event of a military coup.
Right now far too many unanswered questions exist. What is certain is the U.S. administration has lost all faith in Pakistan’s civilian government regardless of what intelligence they might possess as too the intentions of the TTP. Furthermore, the recent demand by Western governments and the acquiescence of Islamabad for an inspection of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is telling. All things considered it does not appear as if the fall of the Pakistani government is going to happen within the next two weeks, but if current trends continue the fall of Islamabad could be on the horizon.
Addendum: Some time ago I wrote that the U.S. has a plan to safeguard Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal in the event of a state collapse. The demand for an inspection may have been an attempt by the U.S. to ensure that this plan is still viable. The U.S. would not do this unless they expect things to get ugly.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Monday, April 27, 2009
Hezbollah in the Sinai
Egyptian security forces have arrested 26 people that may have been a part of a Hezbollah cell in the Sinai Peninsula placed to launch terrorist attacks against tourists and smuggle weapons into the Gaza Strip. The Egyptian government claims that this is only half of the cell and continues security operations in an attempt to apprehend the rest of the group. Hassan Nasrallah – Hezbollah Secretary General – claimed that the cell only numbered ten and was put in place for the sole purpose of smuggling weapons into Gaza. This situation, while meant to boost Hezbollah’s standing prior to Lebanese election and in the Arab world at large, could have the opposite effect. Egypt has seen itself as the leader of the Arab world since the fall of the Ottoman Empire and is looking to reassert itself in the Arab world and stop the spread of Iran’s influence. Right now Tehran’s militant proxy is in the sights of Cairo.
During Operation Cast Lead, Iran was rather vocal in condemning not only Israel, but also the Arab nations (Egypt especially) for not intervening. This behavior is, of course, all by design. By supporting Hamas and Hezbollah, Iran has usurped the role of supporting the Palestinian fight against Israel. Most of the Arab nations have come to rely solely on rhetoric to support the Palestinian cause while privately doing everything they can to avoid the issue. As far as many Arab nations are concerned the Israeli-Palestinian issue is bad for business. The continued Syrian support for Hezbollah and Hamas and the alliance with Iran further exacerbates the issue.
As there usually is in the Great Game more is at play. Europe has become so dependent on Russia for its natural gas that the energy rich nations of North Africa and the Eastern Mediterranean are looking for ways to cheaply transport natural gas and oil to the Europeans. The big problem right now is Syria. As such, Turkey, which is looking to become a hub for energy transport, is pressing Syria hard for a peace agreement with Israel.
This is where Egypt comes into play. This recent conflict between Egypt and Hezbollah will put additional strain on Syria. Syria has long been a backer of Hezbollah, but is looking for options in the face of economic stagnation due to declining oil production and low petrol prices. This leaves Syria with two choices – put renewed effort into peace talks with Israel in the hopes of luring western investment at the expense of regime stability or maintain the current course of allying with Iran and Hezbollah to prevent the Sunni majority from challenging the Bashir al-Assad’s Alawite rule. Both choices are fraught with risk and can seriously undermine the status quo.
Syria is currently entertaining a peace deal with Israel as it is the better option. Egypt and Turkey, two heavyweights in the Middle East, have been using what political capital they have to pull Syria away from its alliance with Iran. If energy pipelines were constructed to transit Syria, such a move would serve to boost the Syrian economy, but could expose the regime to risks posed by more fundamental movements within the country who want to continue supporting the Palestinian cause.
Syria’s current ally – Iran – is becoming more isolated internationally because of its nuclear program leaving Damascus wondering if Tehran can continue to provide the support it so desperately needs. By maintaining the status quo, Syria can continue to champion the Palestinian cause which would serve to keep the fundamentalists at bay, but the continued economic instability will also challenge the continuity of the regime. As I have stated before, Syria’s last good strategic option is forging a peace deal with Israel. It may not be what Damascus really wants, but far too many powers – many which share a border with Syria – are aligned against them.
Which brings us back to Hezbollah’s presence in the Sinai. Iran has been trying to smuggle weapons into the Gaza Strip using Hezbollah and the Sudanese government, but have been foiled every step of the way. An angry Egypt was hardly part of the equation for Tehran, and this move may serve to undermine their interest in the Palestinian territories. What is clear now is Egypt’s interest in prying the Syrian’s away from Iran has been reignited. While many are focused on the deteriorating situation in Pakistan, more than a few eyes are watching the unfolding situation among the Arab nations and how they will respond to Iran. Right now that focus is centered squarely on Damascus.
During Operation Cast Lead, Iran was rather vocal in condemning not only Israel, but also the Arab nations (Egypt especially) for not intervening. This behavior is, of course, all by design. By supporting Hamas and Hezbollah, Iran has usurped the role of supporting the Palestinian fight against Israel. Most of the Arab nations have come to rely solely on rhetoric to support the Palestinian cause while privately doing everything they can to avoid the issue. As far as many Arab nations are concerned the Israeli-Palestinian issue is bad for business. The continued Syrian support for Hezbollah and Hamas and the alliance with Iran further exacerbates the issue.
As there usually is in the Great Game more is at play. Europe has become so dependent on Russia for its natural gas that the energy rich nations of North Africa and the Eastern Mediterranean are looking for ways to cheaply transport natural gas and oil to the Europeans. The big problem right now is Syria. As such, Turkey, which is looking to become a hub for energy transport, is pressing Syria hard for a peace agreement with Israel.
This is where Egypt comes into play. This recent conflict between Egypt and Hezbollah will put additional strain on Syria. Syria has long been a backer of Hezbollah, but is looking for options in the face of economic stagnation due to declining oil production and low petrol prices. This leaves Syria with two choices – put renewed effort into peace talks with Israel in the hopes of luring western investment at the expense of regime stability or maintain the current course of allying with Iran and Hezbollah to prevent the Sunni majority from challenging the Bashir al-Assad’s Alawite rule. Both choices are fraught with risk and can seriously undermine the status quo.
Syria is currently entertaining a peace deal with Israel as it is the better option. Egypt and Turkey, two heavyweights in the Middle East, have been using what political capital they have to pull Syria away from its alliance with Iran. If energy pipelines were constructed to transit Syria, such a move would serve to boost the Syrian economy, but could expose the regime to risks posed by more fundamental movements within the country who want to continue supporting the Palestinian cause.
Syria’s current ally – Iran – is becoming more isolated internationally because of its nuclear program leaving Damascus wondering if Tehran can continue to provide the support it so desperately needs. By maintaining the status quo, Syria can continue to champion the Palestinian cause which would serve to keep the fundamentalists at bay, but the continued economic instability will also challenge the continuity of the regime. As I have stated before, Syria’s last good strategic option is forging a peace deal with Israel. It may not be what Damascus really wants, but far too many powers – many which share a border with Syria – are aligned against them.
Which brings us back to Hezbollah’s presence in the Sinai. Iran has been trying to smuggle weapons into the Gaza Strip using Hezbollah and the Sudanese government, but have been foiled every step of the way. An angry Egypt was hardly part of the equation for Tehran, and this move may serve to undermine their interest in the Palestinian territories. What is clear now is Egypt’s interest in prying the Syrian’s away from Iran has been reignited. While many are focused on the deteriorating situation in Pakistan, more than a few eyes are watching the unfolding situation among the Arab nations and how they will respond to Iran. Right now that focus is centered squarely on Damascus.
Sunday, April 5, 2009
The Binghamton Massacre and the need for an Active Shooter Program
In the last several weeks lone gunman have struck in Oakland, Pittsburg and Binghamton, NY. All of these attacks may not have been identical, but they do show a need for businesses, schools, churches, and civic centers to ensure that they have an active shooter program in place. Of course these styles of attacks are not new as we all can remember the Columbine and Virginia Tech attacks, but when these attacks do occur it is important to review our plans and ensure that they are still adequate.
The Department of Homeland Security defines an active shooter as, “an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a confined and populated area; in most cases, active shooters use firearms(s) and there is no pattern or method to their selection of victims.” Furthermore DHS states:
It may seem that the prevention of a shooting situation is only avoidable by the use of security personnel and metal detectors. Not only is this unfeasible for small businesses or other, but it also runs counter to the very purpose of most public meeting places – for physical interaction. It is indeed possible for public meeting places to institute measures to protect people within a facility. Not all facilities are the same, so if anybody out there has any questions or would like help developing a plan please contact me. The following links have good information regarding the development of an active shooter program.
DHS Training Materials on Active Shooters
Training Book
Pocket Guide
Poster
Utah Schools Emergency Response Plan. This plan is one of the best templates I've seen for emergency planning for schools.
The Department of Homeland Security defines an active shooter as, “an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a confined and populated area; in most cases, active shooters use firearms(s) and there is no pattern or method to their selection of victims.” Furthermore DHS states:
Active shooter situations are unpredictable and evolve quickly. Typically, the immediate deployment of law enforcement is required to stop the shooting and mitigate harm to victims. Because active shooter situations are often over within 10 to 15 minutes, before law enforcement arrives on the scene, individuals must be prepared both mentally and physically to deal with an active shooter situation.
It may seem that the prevention of a shooting situation is only avoidable by the use of security personnel and metal detectors. Not only is this unfeasible for small businesses or other, but it also runs counter to the very purpose of most public meeting places – for physical interaction. It is indeed possible for public meeting places to institute measures to protect people within a facility. Not all facilities are the same, so if anybody out there has any questions or would like help developing a plan please contact me. The following links have good information regarding the development of an active shooter program.
DHS Training Materials on Active Shooters
Training Book
Pocket Guide
Poster
Utah Schools Emergency Response Plan. This plan is one of the best templates I've seen for emergency planning for schools.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Yemen Terror Plot Foiled
Earlier I made reference to the possibility of renewed terrorist activity in the Arabian Peninsula because of the merger between the al-Qaeda affiliates in Saudi Arabia and Yemen. The release of a new most wanted list from Saudi Arabia and subsequent release of an Interpol orange notice for these men led me to believe that terrorist activity in Saudi Arabia or Yemen was imminent. It now turns out that this was indeed the case.
Reading media reports from Middle East outlets is akin to watching a monkey try to swallow a hand grenade – you know its going to be ugly, but you can’t look away. This was certainly the case on February 17. According to press reports, Yemeni authorities claimed to have disrupted a terrorist plot to destroy oil fields and tourist spots by the newly resurrected al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. Furthermore, the media also reported that former Guantanamo Bay inmate Mohammed al-Awfi, aka Abu Harith, surrendered to Yemeni authorities two weeks after issuing a video tape claiming he had rejoined al-Qaeda.
Al-Awfi’s surrender is rather curious. First, the man leaves Saudi Arabia to rejoin al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula after his release from Guantanamo and the Saudi deradicalization program, and second he surrenders a mere two weeks after having rejoined al-Qaeda. This action begs the question, did al-Awfi’s surrender lead to the disruption of the plot or did he surrender because of its discovery?
It is possible that al-Awfi was planted by Saudi intelligence upon receiving intel that al-Qaeda was attempting a comeback in Riyadh’s backyard. In fact, Yemeni foreign minister Aby Bakr al-Qirbi publicly stated that al-Qaeda was under control in Yemen. Al-Qirbi would further state that al-Qaeda was, “under security control and censorship” leading one to believe that al-Awfi’s surrender was indeed part of a plan to infiltrate al-Qaeda.
When discussing Yemen it is important to understand that the government has used jihadists in the past to adversaries of the ruing regime. In this case, long time President Ali Abdullah Saleh has used jihadists to target his adversaries in the al-Zaydi tribe in Northern Yemen. What may have happened in this case is the government of Yemen grew worried since the militants that they (sometimes) employ were planning on targeting the lifeblood of Yemen - oil. Regardless of the surrender of a top militant the dynamics of the Arabian Peninsula remain the same. Thus far the Saudis have only brought seven of their list of 85 home. What we have seen in the past month is only the tip of the iceberg.
Reading media reports from Middle East outlets is akin to watching a monkey try to swallow a hand grenade – you know its going to be ugly, but you can’t look away. This was certainly the case on February 17. According to press reports, Yemeni authorities claimed to have disrupted a terrorist plot to destroy oil fields and tourist spots by the newly resurrected al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. Furthermore, the media also reported that former Guantanamo Bay inmate Mohammed al-Awfi, aka Abu Harith, surrendered to Yemeni authorities two weeks after issuing a video tape claiming he had rejoined al-Qaeda.
Al-Awfi’s surrender is rather curious. First, the man leaves Saudi Arabia to rejoin al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula after his release from Guantanamo and the Saudi deradicalization program, and second he surrenders a mere two weeks after having rejoined al-Qaeda. This action begs the question, did al-Awfi’s surrender lead to the disruption of the plot or did he surrender because of its discovery?
It is possible that al-Awfi was planted by Saudi intelligence upon receiving intel that al-Qaeda was attempting a comeback in Riyadh’s backyard. In fact, Yemeni foreign minister Aby Bakr al-Qirbi publicly stated that al-Qaeda was under control in Yemen. Al-Qirbi would further state that al-Qaeda was, “under security control and censorship” leading one to believe that al-Awfi’s surrender was indeed part of a plan to infiltrate al-Qaeda.
When discussing Yemen it is important to understand that the government has used jihadists in the past to adversaries of the ruing regime. In this case, long time President Ali Abdullah Saleh has used jihadists to target his adversaries in the al-Zaydi tribe in Northern Yemen. What may have happened in this case is the government of Yemen grew worried since the militants that they (sometimes) employ were planning on targeting the lifeblood of Yemen - oil. Regardless of the surrender of a top militant the dynamics of the Arabian Peninsula remain the same. Thus far the Saudis have only brought seven of their list of 85 home. What we have seen in the past month is only the tip of the iceberg.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Urgent: Something is cooking in Riyadh
On February 3, 2009, Saudi Arabia issued a list of 83 individuals wanted for terrorist activities. This was followed by Interpol issuing an orange notice for these individuals on February 10th. This is an unprecedented security alert and should be taken quite seriously. It is not typical for a nation to issue a list of 83 wanted individuals all at once unless Riyadh has intelligence that a terrorist attack is imminent. It appears as if the Kingdom issued this list because the intelligence they possess is sketchy, yet reliable, and the Saudis are hoping to get lucky by nabbing a few of these individuals and gleaning more actionable intelligence.
Back in April of 2008 I warned that al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula would work with the al-Qaeda affiliate in Yemen in an attempt to move weapons and personnel across the border for future terrorist attacks when the opportunity presented itself. The recent news of two former Guantanamo inmates rejoining al-Qaeda in Yemen coming on the heels of all this activity cannot be coincidental. It’s time we all watch Saudi Arabia very closely in the coming days and weeks.
Back in April of 2008 I warned that al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula would work with the al-Qaeda affiliate in Yemen in an attempt to move weapons and personnel across the border for future terrorist attacks when the opportunity presented itself. The recent news of two former Guantanamo inmates rejoining al-Qaeda in Yemen coming on the heels of all this activity cannot be coincidental. It’s time we all watch Saudi Arabia very closely in the coming days and weeks.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
2009: Predictions and Possibilities
The following is based upon trends that are I expect to take place in the coming year. I will discuss possible outcomes of current trends and offer a few predictions. Most topics will be discussed by country located in the Middle East, but not every country or movement will be covered.
Middle East
Israel-Palestine
Since the Israeli air raids on Gaza are dominating the headlines we can start with the Eastern Mediterranean. Israel has had a temporary cease fire with Hamas controlled Gaza for the last 16 months; however rocket attacks originating from Gaza has forced the Israeli government to respond. In contrast to the 2006 Israeli-Hezbollah-Hamas war, Israel only has one front to deal with and thus little incentive to stop the current operation. Although Israel engaged in a ground invasion of the Gaza Strip, the goals of the operation have not been clearly and thus success cannot be determined. The likely outcome is that Hamas will be hurt but not completely destroyed. In the West Bank we can expect to see the Fatah movement gain strength at the expense of Hamas. Hamas is a terrorist group without any experience governing and it shows in this current crisis. Israel will continue along the status quo with a few interventions by western politicians trying to bring peace. The wildcard for Israel in 2009 will be Hezbollah; it is very possible another war with the Lebanese terror group could breakout.
Syria-Lebanon
Syria has been working with the Europeans and Turkey to hammer out a peace deal with Israel. As I have argued before, Syria has lost its most recent patron – Iran – and now must look to other avenues for economic growth. For this to work Syria must drop the rogue regime act, recognize Lebanon as an independent nation, and reign in terrorist groups (i.e. Hezbollah) that operate under Syria’s watch. Once this is accomplished a peace deal with Israel is a very real possibility in the next two to three years.
The biggest challenge for Syria is Hezbollah. Hezbollah has grown significantly and has proven it can intimidate the Lebanese government and threaten Israel conventionally. The onus is on Damascus to weaken Hezbollah to the point that is cannot threaten the Lebanese government or Israel. In the middle of all this is Lebanon. Lebanon is a country fractured by warfare from a variety of sectarian groups and only knows order when a third party intervenes. Previously that third party had been the Syrians, but that changed with the March 14th democratic movement. Unfortunately, the existence of Hezbollah and the devastation that resulted from the 2006 war with Israel has brought nothing but trouble for this experiment in democracy. For Lebanon to become a stable nation it will take the dismantling of Hezbollah and substantial outside assistance. Since this is unlikely to happen in the coming year Lebanon will be forced to continue limping along. Syria’s fortunes on the other hand are completely dependent upon third party diplomacy and the resolution of the Israeli political mess.
Turkey
Since the removal of Saddam Hussein, Turkey has managed to spread its influence in Iraq, Syria, and even Iran. Turkey has also opened the door towards reconciliation with Albania – a very sensitive topic as the U.S. congress recently found out. The reasoning behind Turkey’s diplomatic initiatives are two-fold, one is looking for alternative oil and natural gas avenues for supplying Europe to break the Russian monopoly on hydrocarbons, and two Turkey looks for any way it can to piss off the Russians despite the two nations being trading partners. Look for Turkey to come out of the global financial crisis stronger and more relevant in the Middle East and Europe.
Iraq
Throughout history the one factor that has started more wars than other is simple geography. Therefore it is no coincidence that Iraq, considered the birthplace of civilization, will be a powerful nation. In the past, wars over this piece of real estate came down to simple location. Iraq was a source of water and all major trade routes went through this area. Today water is still an important resource, but coupled with large oil reserves and other natural resources Iraq stands poised to once again become the regional power player in the ME.
The last five years in Iraq have seen shifting political loyalties with the numerous tribes throwing their lot in with whoever had the most money or guns. But as the U.S. surge went on the Iraqi government has managed to consolidate power through numerous backroom deals. The Iraqi security forces have also gained from the political progress and have become largely self reliant. Perhaps the issue that is most pressing in the U.S. – Iraqi relationship is the future role that the U.S. military will play. On the ground the Iraqis are steady improving militarily, but are still lacking a meaningful air force and have only recently begun training for casualty evacuation. What does look promising is the potential sales of the M-1 Abrams main battle tank to the Iraqi military. If the U.S. is not directly involved in security operations the sales of equipment may prove to be the decisive factor for the central government of Iraq to hold the country together.
Iraq has seen great improvement both on the economic and security fronts, but still has room for improvement. Unemployment is high and security operations are still ongoing in parts of the nation. While al-Qaeda has had its presence in Iraq diminished significantly, the organization still poses a threat. But these challenges can be overcome. The high price of oil this summer together with the increased production out of Iraq has helped boost the popularity of the government. The Prime Minister has personally walked around Baghdad handing out money on several occasions. Gestures such as this will only help to solidify the position of the government. The high price of oil may have been a positive for Iraq but the country still must meet the challenge of diversifying its economy and fostering foreign investment if it is to live up to the countries potential of being a regional powerhouse.
Iran
Iran is in bad shape economically. Inflation is around 20 percent, unemployment is in the double digits, and 18 percent of the population lives in extreme poverty. The Iranian nuclear program has increased these problems by bringing international sanctions against Iranian banks and its wealthiest citizens. Additional problems include government sponsored gas subsidies in the face of high oil prices. Now that oil prices have fallen, Iran has been forced to rewrite its budget for 2009. Iran may be a top exporter of petroleum, but is also a major importer of refined products such as gasoline. In other words, Iran is increasingly vulnerable to international pressure and possibly revolution.
With Iran as isolated as it is and with international sanctions steadily increasing over the nuclear program one would think that military action is inevitable when in fact the opposite is true. Israel has made statements that it will not allow Iran to construct a nuclear weapon and will use force to stop it, but it lacks the military capability to do so. A U.S. led operation is really the only possibility should a military confrontation with Iran take place. The Pentagon has stated that it could destroy the Iranian military in three days, but the U.S. does not see Iran as much of a threat and thus will not make a move in the near future. Even without military action taken against it and new elections coming in the spring, 2009 will be a very bad year for Tehran.
Saudi Arabia
The rapid increase and subsequent decrease in oil prices has not hurt the Saudi Kingdom. In fact, the low oil prices are working to keep Saudi Arabia’s main rival – Iran – weak. Currently the Saudi’s have a cash reserve of about one trillion U.S. dollars and is looking to put that money to use in areas such as expanding oil production or supporting Chechen rebels against Russia. If the Saudi’s are able to expand their proven oil reserves and construct new storage facilities the country will have the ability to cut oil prices overnight to hurt Iran. The biggest challenge for Riyadh in the coming year is to keep Russian adventures in the Middle East in check. The House of Saud enjoys their current situation and don’t want the Russians mucking things up. All in all expect Saudi Arabia to have a good 2009.
Arab Gulf States (sans Saudi Arabia)
The Arab Gulf States are comprised of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, U.A.E., Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. Saudi Arabia was considered separate because of the size of its economy and importance globally. In the case of the remaining states all have small populations and large incomes thanks to large petroleum reserves and a steady stream of foreign investment. It is unlikely that any major changes will take place in any of these nations and should continue to be safe for business development and other investment.
Yemen
The country of Yemen is in trouble. Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula has made a return thanks to the release of members from Guantanamo. Because of the complexity of Yemen a full analysis will follow.
Middle East
Israel-Palestine
Since the Israeli air raids on Gaza are dominating the headlines we can start with the Eastern Mediterranean. Israel has had a temporary cease fire with Hamas controlled Gaza for the last 16 months; however rocket attacks originating from Gaza has forced the Israeli government to respond. In contrast to the 2006 Israeli-Hezbollah-Hamas war, Israel only has one front to deal with and thus little incentive to stop the current operation. Although Israel engaged in a ground invasion of the Gaza Strip, the goals of the operation have not been clearly and thus success cannot be determined. The likely outcome is that Hamas will be hurt but not completely destroyed. In the West Bank we can expect to see the Fatah movement gain strength at the expense of Hamas. Hamas is a terrorist group without any experience governing and it shows in this current crisis. Israel will continue along the status quo with a few interventions by western politicians trying to bring peace. The wildcard for Israel in 2009 will be Hezbollah; it is very possible another war with the Lebanese terror group could breakout.
Syria-Lebanon
Syria has been working with the Europeans and Turkey to hammer out a peace deal with Israel. As I have argued before, Syria has lost its most recent patron – Iran – and now must look to other avenues for economic growth. For this to work Syria must drop the rogue regime act, recognize Lebanon as an independent nation, and reign in terrorist groups (i.e. Hezbollah) that operate under Syria’s watch. Once this is accomplished a peace deal with Israel is a very real possibility in the next two to three years.
The biggest challenge for Syria is Hezbollah. Hezbollah has grown significantly and has proven it can intimidate the Lebanese government and threaten Israel conventionally. The onus is on Damascus to weaken Hezbollah to the point that is cannot threaten the Lebanese government or Israel. In the middle of all this is Lebanon. Lebanon is a country fractured by warfare from a variety of sectarian groups and only knows order when a third party intervenes. Previously that third party had been the Syrians, but that changed with the March 14th democratic movement. Unfortunately, the existence of Hezbollah and the devastation that resulted from the 2006 war with Israel has brought nothing but trouble for this experiment in democracy. For Lebanon to become a stable nation it will take the dismantling of Hezbollah and substantial outside assistance. Since this is unlikely to happen in the coming year Lebanon will be forced to continue limping along. Syria’s fortunes on the other hand are completely dependent upon third party diplomacy and the resolution of the Israeli political mess.
Turkey
Since the removal of Saddam Hussein, Turkey has managed to spread its influence in Iraq, Syria, and even Iran. Turkey has also opened the door towards reconciliation with Albania – a very sensitive topic as the U.S. congress recently found out. The reasoning behind Turkey’s diplomatic initiatives are two-fold, one is looking for alternative oil and natural gas avenues for supplying Europe to break the Russian monopoly on hydrocarbons, and two Turkey looks for any way it can to piss off the Russians despite the two nations being trading partners. Look for Turkey to come out of the global financial crisis stronger and more relevant in the Middle East and Europe.
Iraq
Throughout history the one factor that has started more wars than other is simple geography. Therefore it is no coincidence that Iraq, considered the birthplace of civilization, will be a powerful nation. In the past, wars over this piece of real estate came down to simple location. Iraq was a source of water and all major trade routes went through this area. Today water is still an important resource, but coupled with large oil reserves and other natural resources Iraq stands poised to once again become the regional power player in the ME.
The last five years in Iraq have seen shifting political loyalties with the numerous tribes throwing their lot in with whoever had the most money or guns. But as the U.S. surge went on the Iraqi government has managed to consolidate power through numerous backroom deals. The Iraqi security forces have also gained from the political progress and have become largely self reliant. Perhaps the issue that is most pressing in the U.S. – Iraqi relationship is the future role that the U.S. military will play. On the ground the Iraqis are steady improving militarily, but are still lacking a meaningful air force and have only recently begun training for casualty evacuation. What does look promising is the potential sales of the M-1 Abrams main battle tank to the Iraqi military. If the U.S. is not directly involved in security operations the sales of equipment may prove to be the decisive factor for the central government of Iraq to hold the country together.
Iraq has seen great improvement both on the economic and security fronts, but still has room for improvement. Unemployment is high and security operations are still ongoing in parts of the nation. While al-Qaeda has had its presence in Iraq diminished significantly, the organization still poses a threat. But these challenges can be overcome. The high price of oil this summer together with the increased production out of Iraq has helped boost the popularity of the government. The Prime Minister has personally walked around Baghdad handing out money on several occasions. Gestures such as this will only help to solidify the position of the government. The high price of oil may have been a positive for Iraq but the country still must meet the challenge of diversifying its economy and fostering foreign investment if it is to live up to the countries potential of being a regional powerhouse.
Iran
Iran is in bad shape economically. Inflation is around 20 percent, unemployment is in the double digits, and 18 percent of the population lives in extreme poverty. The Iranian nuclear program has increased these problems by bringing international sanctions against Iranian banks and its wealthiest citizens. Additional problems include government sponsored gas subsidies in the face of high oil prices. Now that oil prices have fallen, Iran has been forced to rewrite its budget for 2009. Iran may be a top exporter of petroleum, but is also a major importer of refined products such as gasoline. In other words, Iran is increasingly vulnerable to international pressure and possibly revolution.
With Iran as isolated as it is and with international sanctions steadily increasing over the nuclear program one would think that military action is inevitable when in fact the opposite is true. Israel has made statements that it will not allow Iran to construct a nuclear weapon and will use force to stop it, but it lacks the military capability to do so. A U.S. led operation is really the only possibility should a military confrontation with Iran take place. The Pentagon has stated that it could destroy the Iranian military in three days, but the U.S. does not see Iran as much of a threat and thus will not make a move in the near future. Even without military action taken against it and new elections coming in the spring, 2009 will be a very bad year for Tehran.
Saudi Arabia
The rapid increase and subsequent decrease in oil prices has not hurt the Saudi Kingdom. In fact, the low oil prices are working to keep Saudi Arabia’s main rival – Iran – weak. Currently the Saudi’s have a cash reserve of about one trillion U.S. dollars and is looking to put that money to use in areas such as expanding oil production or supporting Chechen rebels against Russia. If the Saudi’s are able to expand their proven oil reserves and construct new storage facilities the country will have the ability to cut oil prices overnight to hurt Iran. The biggest challenge for Riyadh in the coming year is to keep Russian adventures in the Middle East in check. The House of Saud enjoys their current situation and don’t want the Russians mucking things up. All in all expect Saudi Arabia to have a good 2009.
Arab Gulf States (sans Saudi Arabia)
The Arab Gulf States are comprised of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, U.A.E., Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. Saudi Arabia was considered separate because of the size of its economy and importance globally. In the case of the remaining states all have small populations and large incomes thanks to large petroleum reserves and a steady stream of foreign investment. It is unlikely that any major changes will take place in any of these nations and should continue to be safe for business development and other investment.
Yemen
The country of Yemen is in trouble. Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula has made a return thanks to the release of members from Guantanamo. Because of the complexity of Yemen a full analysis will follow.
Friday, January 2, 2009
The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam: A Primer
The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, or LTTE for short, is a separatist group based in Sri Lanka that has been fighting the majority Buddhist Sinhalese Government of the island nation since 1983. While the group was founded in 1976, it is the LTTE ambush of a military patrol that killed 13 in 1983 that is seen as the first battle of the civil war in Sri Lanka. In 2002, the LTTE and the government signed a cease-fire agreement that temporarily ended the violence only to see tensions erupt again in 2006 over the distribution of international aid that poured into the country after the 2004 tsunami. It is true that the LTTE have participated in peace talks; however their deliberate targeting of civilians and oppressive rule in the areas that group controls is what earns the Tigers the moniker of international terrorist organization. A 1999 estimate of deaths resulting from the fighting between the government and the LTTE came to about 60,000.
Leadership in the group is broken down into two tiers which include a military wing and a political wing that is subordinate. The leader and founder of the LTTE, Velupillai Prabhakaran, heads the central governing committee that oversees both wings. According to the South Asia Terrorism Portal, the central governing committee is also responsible for directing and controlling several specific subdivisions, including, an amphibious group (the Sea Tigers), an airborne group, (known as the Air Tigers), an elite fighting wing (known as the Charles Anthony Regiment), a suicide commando unit (the Black Tigers), a highly secretive intelligence group and a political office headed by Thamilselvam and Anton Balasingham, widely regarded to be the political advisor and ideologue of the LTTE. Additionally, the central governing committee has an international wing which runs the group’s global infrastructure. In all, the group is comprised of about 16,000 people according to the Sri Lankan government. Children soldiers are often forcibly recruited into the group to keep the number of members high.
The LTTE are unique among terrorist groups for several reasons among which are: The ability to govern provinces in the north and east of their home nation, the existence of an air force and navy (these elements are small but very effective), and the tactical capabilities to directly engage government troops. Perhaps the most startling revelation about the group is their invention of the suicide bomber vest and belt. In fact, while we often link suicide bombing to Palestinian terrorist groups it was the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) that dispatched several members to Sri Lanka in the 1980’s to learn this tactic for use against Israel. This tactic pioneered in the remote jungles of Sri Lanka has now become a nearly universally adopted weapon employed by terrorists around the world.
The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam have also proven to be quite adept in the art of assassination. For instance, the LTTE assassinated Indian Premier Rajiv Gandhi when peace keepers from India arrived in Sri Lanka to offer counterinsurgency aid to the local military. The LTTE also managed to kill Sri Lankan President Ranasinghe Premadasa in 1993. Others assassinated by the LTTE include:
In recent months the Sri Lankan government has managed to cause significant damage to the group via military and financial means. Since the beginning of the U.S. led War on Terror, terrorist groups that are designated as such by the U.S. State Department will be targeted financially through new legislation in countries allied with the U.S. and through the U.N. While these measures have hurt the group in countries where it used to operate freely, the LTTE has used illicit means, such as drug running, to augment their income. These measures have aided the Sri Lankan government greatly in their twenty plus war with the group. It should be noted however, that the LTTE has managed to survive international pressure and infighting throughout its 32 year history and will not go away quietly.
Today, government forces have managed to capture the de facto capital of the Tamal separatists in the northern part of the country. This is a significant blow to the terrorist organization, but a political solution is still needed to bring peace to a country that has been in a perpetual state of war for nearly forty years.
Leadership in the group is broken down into two tiers which include a military wing and a political wing that is subordinate. The leader and founder of the LTTE, Velupillai Prabhakaran, heads the central governing committee that oversees both wings. According to the South Asia Terrorism Portal, the central governing committee is also responsible for directing and controlling several specific subdivisions, including, an amphibious group (the Sea Tigers), an airborne group, (known as the Air Tigers), an elite fighting wing (known as the Charles Anthony Regiment), a suicide commando unit (the Black Tigers), a highly secretive intelligence group and a political office headed by Thamilselvam and Anton Balasingham, widely regarded to be the political advisor and ideologue of the LTTE. Additionally, the central governing committee has an international wing which runs the group’s global infrastructure. In all, the group is comprised of about 16,000 people according to the Sri Lankan government. Children soldiers are often forcibly recruited into the group to keep the number of members high.
The LTTE are unique among terrorist groups for several reasons among which are: The ability to govern provinces in the north and east of their home nation, the existence of an air force and navy (these elements are small but very effective), and the tactical capabilities to directly engage government troops. Perhaps the most startling revelation about the group is their invention of the suicide bomber vest and belt. In fact, while we often link suicide bombing to Palestinian terrorist groups it was the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) that dispatched several members to Sri Lanka in the 1980’s to learn this tactic for use against Israel. This tactic pioneered in the remote jungles of Sri Lanka has now become a nearly universally adopted weapon employed by terrorists around the world.
The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam have also proven to be quite adept in the art of assassination. For instance, the LTTE assassinated Indian Premier Rajiv Gandhi when peace keepers from India arrived in Sri Lanka to offer counterinsurgency aid to the local military. The LTTE also managed to kill Sri Lankan President Ranasinghe Premadasa in 1993. Others assassinated by the LTTE include:
Alfred Duraiyappah, mayor of Jaffna in the attack that brought them to prominence in 1975
Ranjan Wijeratne, Sri Lankan cabinet minister, former general, and the Minister of Defense
Lalith Athulathmudali, Sri Lankan cabinet minister
Gamini Dissanayake, Sri Lankan presidential candidate
Major Gen. Parami Kulatunga, third-highest ranking officer in the Sri Lankan Army
Lakshman Kadirgamar, Sri Lankan foreign minister, lawyer and international humanitarian
In recent months the Sri Lankan government has managed to cause significant damage to the group via military and financial means. Since the beginning of the U.S. led War on Terror, terrorist groups that are designated as such by the U.S. State Department will be targeted financially through new legislation in countries allied with the U.S. and through the U.N. While these measures have hurt the group in countries where it used to operate freely, the LTTE has used illicit means, such as drug running, to augment their income. These measures have aided the Sri Lankan government greatly in their twenty plus war with the group. It should be noted however, that the LTTE has managed to survive international pressure and infighting throughout its 32 year history and will not go away quietly.
Today, government forces have managed to capture the de facto capital of the Tamal separatists in the northern part of the country. This is a significant blow to the terrorist organization, but a political solution is still needed to bring peace to a country that has been in a perpetual state of war for nearly forty years.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
