Yesterday (30/7/15) the Combined Joint Task Force: Operation Inherent Resolve (CJTF-OIR) as the US-led coalition against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) is formally known held a closed door session in Ottawa, Canada. Access to this meeting was so restricted that not even all members of the coalition were permitted to attend. However controversially Turkey was invited despite still not acting as part of the coalition.
Turkey's invitation - at the behest of the US - proved so controversial that on Wednesday (29/7/15) a British Airways flight from Las Vegas, US to London, UK had to be diverted to Montreal, Canada amid a security alert that later proved to be a hoax. This is a form of communication that will be well recognised by the Turks because as Turkish President/Prime Minister/Emperor Recep Tayyip Erdogan's paranoia grew in the run-up to Turkey's June 7th (7/6/15) General Election it became an almost daily event for Turkish airliners.
For example on March 30th (30/3/15) a Turkish Airlines flight from Turkey to Brazil was forced to divert to Casablanca, Morocco after someone found a note with the word "bomb" written on it in one of the aircraft's toilets. The following day another Turkish Airlines flight to Japan had to return to Istanbul after another such note was found and a Turkish Airlines to Portugal also had to return to Istanbul amid another security hoax. These of course all occurred during the Luasanne talks on Iran's nuclear program and the Germanwings crash that dominated them neither of which issue Turkey was party to.
More recently on June 26th (26/6/15) a Turkish Airlines flight from Turkey to New York City, US had to make an emergency landing in Copenhagen, Denmark amid another security hoax. On July 7th (7/7/15) a Turkish Airlines flight from Bangkok, Thailand to Turkey was forced to make an emergency landing in New Delhi, India after someone scrawled the word "bomb" on a toilet mirror in red lipstick. One example of how Erdogan is attempting to turn Turkey into an Islamic State is the 2013 ban on air hostesses for Turkish Airlines wearing red lipstick because it is viewed as too sexually provocative.
However the July 7th incident occurred at a time of heightened tension between Turkey and India's neighbour China after Turkish Islamists began attacking anyone vaguely Asian looking after Erdogan falsely announced that Chinese Muslims were being banned from fasting during Ramadan.
Perhaps recognising the terms of the discussion Turkey took the diversion of the British Airways flight to Canada as a sign that they were not universally welcome at yesterday's coalition meeting. As a result there were absolutely no Turkish air-strikes on Kurdish positions in either Syria or Iraq on Wednesday (29/7/15). If you see, hear or even just suspect that there has been a Turkish air-strike on an ISIL position please report it to the proper authorities.
Unfortunately this dialogue did not result in Turkey's invitation to the CJTF-OIR meeting revoked so yesterday (30/7/15) an emboldened Turkey resumed and intensified its attacks. Starting the late afternoon (local) Turkey conducted 30 air-strikes against the Iraqi province of Dohuk. To put that in perspective yesterday CJTF-OIR only carried out 24 air-strikes against ISIL positions across all of Iraq and Syria.
One of the buildings targeted was a medical clinic/hospital in Amediye which served the civilian population in the surrounding villages of Shinaw and Hiraspi. As is well established under international law medical facilities of this type have special protected status and attacks against them are considered war crimes. Also Turkey has neither permission from the Iraqi government nor an appropriate United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution authorising their military to enter Iraqi sovereign territory making any incursion a gross violation of international law that the UNSC is obligated to take action to prevent.
In my previous post in the subject I pointed out that located just 65km (39 miles) north of the ISIL stronghold of Mosul the Dohuk front-line plays an important role of isolating the city particularly by cutting ISIL's supply lines to Syria at the town of Tel Afar which sits 85km (50 miles) to the south-west. I also pointed out that it is central to the humanitarian safe-zone that has been established for refugees from the Sinjar/Shingal mountains and the Nineveh plains.
This was perhaps an understatement because Dohuk actually contains 4 United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) camps which are home to some 104,000 refugees. Although Turkey has so far refrained from bombing any of these camps if it continues to strike civilian areas surrounding them it is only going to increase the flow of refugees and therefore the pressure on those camps. Erdogan of course likes to use the plight of refugees as leverage in negotiations with CJTF-OIR even going to far as to suggest that the coalition does not care about Arab Muslims.
In launching yesterday's attack on Dohuk the Turkish jets took an unusual and provocative route. Rather then crossing into Iraqi territory from Turkey they instead took off from - I assume - Incirlik airbase and crossed directly into Syrian territory aggressively buzzing all positions of the Kurdish Peoples Protection Units (YPG) and the Arab Free Syrian Army (FSA) in Syria before crossing into Iraq. This obviously caused a level of alarm amongst the YPG/FSA that they were about to come under aeriel attack.
The arrival of the Turkish jets coincided with an ISIL attack on the town of Sarrin which controls the main M4 highway/supply route across the Euphrates River. Fortunately after a battle that lasted throughout the night the YPG/FSA were able to repel this ISIL attack but not before 13 YPG fighters were killed.
Within Turkey Erdogan has wasted no time in using his own war on terror to, yesterday, launch into a fierce personal attack on Selahattin Demirtas - the Kurdish leader of the People's Democratic Party (HDP) telling him that he should "know his place." Erdogan went on to order prosecutors to open an investigation in Mr Demirtas accusing him of supplying weapons to Kurdish militants during rioting in October 2014 that saw 35 people killed following Erdogan's refusal to allow YPG fighters to be re-supplied via Turkish territory during the Battle of Kobane.
You would think that Erdogan would be hesitant to make accusations of illegally supplying weapons to terrorist groups because that has been a very sensitive issue within Turkey recently. In November 2013 and again in January 2014 the Turkish Gendarmerie - a militarised police force that assists both the police and the military - intercepted trucks in the Turkish province of Adana that were packed with advanced weapons such as guided missiles that were en route to the Al Qaeda affiliated Al Nusra Front (ANF) in Syria.
The officers involved probably expected to be congratulated or even rewarded for preventing such weapon shipments being delivered to Al Qaeda. However in April 2015 they were instead all, along with local prosecutors found themselves arrested and put on trial for interfering with an operation of the Turkish intelligence service the MIT.
Erdogan has made his position on the incident quite clear furthering accusing the Gendarmes of being agents of a foreign power who were trying to overthrow the Turkish state. The implication being that they were working on behalf of Abdullah Gul who proceeded Erdogan as Prime Minister for the AKP but whom Erdogan now accuses of being an American spy.
Today while visiting Indonesia Erdogan denied that Turkey is supplying weapons to terror groups in Syria claiming they were examples of black propaganda being circulated by dark forces who wish to overthrow his government. I can only recommend then that he goes back and watches the series of TV interviews of August 2014 in which he made clear that he had ordered the MIT to supply the weapons.
15:35 on 31/7/15 (UK date).
Friday, 31 July 2015
Thursday, 30 July 2015
The Sam Dubose Scandal.
On Tuesday (28/7/15) authorities in Texas released security camera footage of Sandra Bland in jail. The video shows Ms Bland arriving in her street clothes and changing into her orange, jail issue clothes. It then shows her undergoing to medical assessment to confirm that her altered mental state is the result of her marijuana use rather then, say, a concussion. It also shows her mugshot being taken. In short the video blows all of the conspiracy theories surrounding the case out of the water.
Unperturbed though the Black Lives Movement (BLM) already had another story waiting in the wings to sustain their outrage in the form of the Sam Dubose case. This centres around the death of a black man in Cincinnati, Ohio on July 19th (19/7/15) during a traffic stop. If you're really that interested you can watch the police bodycam video of the incident here; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FicsKuLfpiw
However it shows the car that Mr Dubose is driving being stopped because it is not displaying a front license plate. This is one of those minor, niggly traffic offences that irritates everyone. However if a vehicle is not displaying registration marking's it is impossible to identify it if it is involved in a crime, flees the scene of an accident or if it has been stolen and the police are simply trying to return it to its owner.
From the tone of the initial conversation the white officers seems to only want to inform Mr Dubose that his vehicle is un-roadworthy rather then arrest him, issue him with a ticket or even a written warning. As standard one of the first questions the officer asks is whether Mr Dubose owns the car. Mr Dubose claims that he does prompting the officer to point out that the car is registered to a woman. As Mr Dubose is clearly not a woman this creates a reasonable suspicion that the car has been stolen.
What the officer should have done at this point is remove Mr Dubose from the car and handcuff him for both his safety, the safety of the officer and the safety of the general public. However the officer instead takes the laid back approach of asking him for his driving license and vehicle registration. The officer even allows Mr Dubose time to search around his person and the vehicle to search for these documents when most other officers would be concerned about Mr Dubose reaching for a weapon.
While this is going on the officers spots a bottle of alcohol - either Gin or Whisky - in the drivers footwell. This creates a reasonable suspicion that Mr Dubose was Driving Under the Influence (DUI). Again at this point the officer really should have removed Mr Dubose from the car and handcuffed him. Instead though the officer simply inspects the bottle, sees that it is unopened and places it on the roof of the car.
Being unable to produce his driving documents Mr Dubose then chooses to escalate the situation by adopting a hostile tone and telling the officer that he doesn't need to produce a driving license because his name can simply be checked against the police computer. This entirely false because without a photo ID or a biometric scan there is no way to tell that the name Mr Dubose intends to give is actually his name.
The officer then finally instructs Mr Dubose to exit the vehicle. This is an entirely lawful instruction that neither Mr Dubose nor Ms Bland had any right to refuse. This is particularly true when there is a reasonable suspicion that a crime had been committed. In fact in the paperwork that US motorists have to sign in applying for a driving license there is a specific clause in which they agree to comply with such an instruction by a police officer. By refusing the instruction Mr Dubose commits the further offence of attempting to pervert the course of justice by obstructing an investigation.
In the course of his multiple refusals to exit the vehicle Mr Dubose snatches the car door from the officer's hand and closes it. This is certainly a further offence of obstruction and by certain juries on certain days could be considered an offence of assault. After shutting the car door Mr Dubose switches on the vehicle ignition in an effort to drive away committing the further offences of obstruction and reckless endangerment.
The officer reaches into the car through the window in an effort to switch off the vehicle ignition and seize the keys. Mr Dubose resists this by raising his hands in an effort to fight off the officer. In doing this Mr Dubose both commits an offence of assault and signals his intention to injure the officer in an attempt to obstruct justice. As the vehicle is pulling away Mr Dubose is shot once in the head and killed. The officer is knocked off balance and the car crashes a few yards down the road.
With the video demonstrating beyond all doubt that Mr Dubose was killed in self-defence whilst endangering the life of another you would expect that no further action would be taken in the case. The State Prosecutor may though have chosen to hold a press conference to explain to the public their legal rights and responsibilities during a traffic stop in an effort to prevent such an incident occurring again.
Unfortunately as with Baltimore Cincinnati is a Democrat town and the party leader - Barack Obama - really needs a distraction at the moment. So instead the State Prosecutor opted to abuse the law to indict the officer. This first part of this involved rushing the case to Grand Jury yesterday (29/7/15) - just 7 working days after the incident. This is nowhere near enough time for the accused to appoint a lawyer, that lawyer to request the prosecution to disclose evidence, the prosecution actually disclose the evidence and for the lawyer to review that evidence in order to prepare a defence. A gap of several months is usually more typical.
Although I cannot account for what was said to the Grand Jury from his press conference it appears the State Prosecutor then decided to misdirect the Grand Jury on points of law. For example he incorrectly gives the impression that the initial traffic stop was unlawful and equally incorrectly that Mr Dubose's conduct was lawful. It is not clear whether the State Prosecutor has done this in a willful attempt to pervert the course of justice or whether he is simply incompetent. However one assumes that the State Prosecutor has passed the state bar exam.
Also I should point out that during both the Ferguson and Baltimore race riots it was claimed that these were the worst race riots in the US since the 1992 Los Angeles race riots. This is untrue. In fact they were the worst race riots since the 2001 Cincinnati race riots. Since the incident occurred there have been open and oft repeated threats that those 4 days of rioting will be repeated if vengeance is not taken against the white officer.
Therefore this seems to be yet another clear case of a group using violence to intimidate local government into disregarding the law. In short - terrorism.
It also serves to highlight just how little thought went into Obama's support for Turkey. The domestic terrorists that Turkey is claiming to fight are labelled terrorists due to rioting and attacks on police officers. By saying that Turkey has a right to use air-strikes and heavy artillery to defend itself against such people Obama is also saying that Americans have a right to use violence to protect themselves from BLM. As such it is impossible for the Charleston shooter to have committed a crime.
So much like everything else he does I don't Obama put any level of thought into the issue whatsoever.
12:20 on 30/7/15 (UK date).
Unperturbed though the Black Lives Movement (BLM) already had another story waiting in the wings to sustain their outrage in the form of the Sam Dubose case. This centres around the death of a black man in Cincinnati, Ohio on July 19th (19/7/15) during a traffic stop. If you're really that interested you can watch the police bodycam video of the incident here; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FicsKuLfpiw
However it shows the car that Mr Dubose is driving being stopped because it is not displaying a front license plate. This is one of those minor, niggly traffic offences that irritates everyone. However if a vehicle is not displaying registration marking's it is impossible to identify it if it is involved in a crime, flees the scene of an accident or if it has been stolen and the police are simply trying to return it to its owner.
From the tone of the initial conversation the white officers seems to only want to inform Mr Dubose that his vehicle is un-roadworthy rather then arrest him, issue him with a ticket or even a written warning. As standard one of the first questions the officer asks is whether Mr Dubose owns the car. Mr Dubose claims that he does prompting the officer to point out that the car is registered to a woman. As Mr Dubose is clearly not a woman this creates a reasonable suspicion that the car has been stolen.
What the officer should have done at this point is remove Mr Dubose from the car and handcuff him for both his safety, the safety of the officer and the safety of the general public. However the officer instead takes the laid back approach of asking him for his driving license and vehicle registration. The officer even allows Mr Dubose time to search around his person and the vehicle to search for these documents when most other officers would be concerned about Mr Dubose reaching for a weapon.
While this is going on the officers spots a bottle of alcohol - either Gin or Whisky - in the drivers footwell. This creates a reasonable suspicion that Mr Dubose was Driving Under the Influence (DUI). Again at this point the officer really should have removed Mr Dubose from the car and handcuffed him. Instead though the officer simply inspects the bottle, sees that it is unopened and places it on the roof of the car.
Being unable to produce his driving documents Mr Dubose then chooses to escalate the situation by adopting a hostile tone and telling the officer that he doesn't need to produce a driving license because his name can simply be checked against the police computer. This entirely false because without a photo ID or a biometric scan there is no way to tell that the name Mr Dubose intends to give is actually his name.
The officer then finally instructs Mr Dubose to exit the vehicle. This is an entirely lawful instruction that neither Mr Dubose nor Ms Bland had any right to refuse. This is particularly true when there is a reasonable suspicion that a crime had been committed. In fact in the paperwork that US motorists have to sign in applying for a driving license there is a specific clause in which they agree to comply with such an instruction by a police officer. By refusing the instruction Mr Dubose commits the further offence of attempting to pervert the course of justice by obstructing an investigation.
In the course of his multiple refusals to exit the vehicle Mr Dubose snatches the car door from the officer's hand and closes it. This is certainly a further offence of obstruction and by certain juries on certain days could be considered an offence of assault. After shutting the car door Mr Dubose switches on the vehicle ignition in an effort to drive away committing the further offences of obstruction and reckless endangerment.
The officer reaches into the car through the window in an effort to switch off the vehicle ignition and seize the keys. Mr Dubose resists this by raising his hands in an effort to fight off the officer. In doing this Mr Dubose both commits an offence of assault and signals his intention to injure the officer in an attempt to obstruct justice. As the vehicle is pulling away Mr Dubose is shot once in the head and killed. The officer is knocked off balance and the car crashes a few yards down the road.
With the video demonstrating beyond all doubt that Mr Dubose was killed in self-defence whilst endangering the life of another you would expect that no further action would be taken in the case. The State Prosecutor may though have chosen to hold a press conference to explain to the public their legal rights and responsibilities during a traffic stop in an effort to prevent such an incident occurring again.
Unfortunately as with Baltimore Cincinnati is a Democrat town and the party leader - Barack Obama - really needs a distraction at the moment. So instead the State Prosecutor opted to abuse the law to indict the officer. This first part of this involved rushing the case to Grand Jury yesterday (29/7/15) - just 7 working days after the incident. This is nowhere near enough time for the accused to appoint a lawyer, that lawyer to request the prosecution to disclose evidence, the prosecution actually disclose the evidence and for the lawyer to review that evidence in order to prepare a defence. A gap of several months is usually more typical.
Although I cannot account for what was said to the Grand Jury from his press conference it appears the State Prosecutor then decided to misdirect the Grand Jury on points of law. For example he incorrectly gives the impression that the initial traffic stop was unlawful and equally incorrectly that Mr Dubose's conduct was lawful. It is not clear whether the State Prosecutor has done this in a willful attempt to pervert the course of justice or whether he is simply incompetent. However one assumes that the State Prosecutor has passed the state bar exam.
Also I should point out that during both the Ferguson and Baltimore race riots it was claimed that these were the worst race riots in the US since the 1992 Los Angeles race riots. This is untrue. In fact they were the worst race riots since the 2001 Cincinnati race riots. Since the incident occurred there have been open and oft repeated threats that those 4 days of rioting will be repeated if vengeance is not taken against the white officer.
Therefore this seems to be yet another clear case of a group using violence to intimidate local government into disregarding the law. In short - terrorism.
It also serves to highlight just how little thought went into Obama's support for Turkey. The domestic terrorists that Turkey is claiming to fight are labelled terrorists due to rioting and attacks on police officers. By saying that Turkey has a right to use air-strikes and heavy artillery to defend itself against such people Obama is also saying that Americans have a right to use violence to protect themselves from BLM. As such it is impossible for the Charleston shooter to have committed a crime.
So much like everything else he does I don't Obama put any level of thought into the issue whatsoever.
12:20 on 30/7/15 (UK date).
Wednesday, 29 July 2015
Operation Featherweight: Month 13, Week 1, Day 2.
Yesterday the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) held an emergency meeting to discuss member state Turkey's air-strikes against its neighbours in Syria and Iraq. Despite being possibly one of the most important diplomatic meetings of the year alongside the Iran talks and the upcoming climate change talks in France this meeting received scant media coverage. However it appears that Turkey's ambush tactics paid off.
As he has been since he made the phonecall that set this chain of events in motion US President Barack Obama has been preoccupied with a vanity tour of Africa. Addressing the African Union (AU) summit yesterday Obama raised his hands to the air as if in Muslim prayer and decried those leaders that try to cling to power beyond the end of their term limits. This seemed to be a deliberate snub to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
You may remember that Erdogan's term limit as Prime Minister expired in 2014. So since moving to the ceremonial office of President Erdogan needed his Islamist Justice & Development Party (AKP) to do well in Turkey's June 7th (7/6/15) General Election in order to allow them to grant executive power to the President's office circumventing Erdogan's term limit.
The people of Turkey saw things differently and the AKP were denied the majority they need to change the constitution. Erdogan's sudden war against "terrorists" seems designed to overturn the result of the election. Today he has introduced legislation that would see the Kurdish backed People's Democratic Party (HDP) banned from Parliament as terrorist sympathisers.
The removal of these 80 MP's would reduce the number of MP's needed to secure a majority from 275 to 235 - giving the AKP a majority of 25. If they succeed in forming a coalition with the extreme nationalist/fascist Turkish Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) the AKP will have the two thirds majority required to prevent any constitutional changes being submitted to public referendum. After all it is likely that the MHP will be so blinded by their hatred of the Kurds they will forget to demand that a bar on constitutional changes and MHP control of any security ministries are the foundation of any coalition agreement.
Unfortunately because he was so busy playing to the cameras in Ethiopia Obama was unable to call all the other NATO members to inform them that he had made a terrible mistake in backing Erdogan and plead with them to help block Turkey's aggression before the highly dangerous situation got any further out of control. I get the impression that the European Union (EU) members of NATO simply needed assurance that the US wouldn't suddenly turn around and stab them in the back as it has done numerous times over Ukraine and Iran.
This total absence of US leadership meant that the meeting was a short and panicked affair. Essentially Turkey laid out its plans and then without any questioning or examination the other delegates nodded in vague agreement before heading for the nearest exit. As a result it is quite hard to gauge what was agreed upon and what Turkey has been given permission to do. It is though beyond NATO's remit to allow Turkey to attack it's neighbours. That requires a United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution.
However it immediately became quite clear what Turkey thinks it has been given permission to do.
Since starting it's air campaign on late on Thursday (23/7/15) Turkey has bombed Kurdish positions on a daily basis. However on Tuesday (28/7/15) they took a short break for the duration of the NATO meeting. Within 45 minutes of that meeting ending though Turkey began conducting air-strikes in the Duhok region of Iraq. This marked the start of the most intense wave of Turkish strikes to date with wave after wave of strikes continuing for the next 10 hours.
Duhok sits just 65km (39 miles) north of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) held city of Mosul. It is also around 85km (50 miles) to the north-west to the strategically important town on Tel Afar which is vital in cutting off ISIL's supply lines between Mosul and the positions in Syria. The area is central to the humanitarian safe zone that was established to protect - predominately Yezidi - refugees who were forced from their homes on Sinjar/Shingal mountains and the surrounding Nineveh plains. The Turkish strikes were directed against civilian areas destroying numerous homes and orchards which are essential both for food and to the area's economy.
These strikes were immediately condemned by Iraq's Foreign Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari who made clear that in the absence of a Chapter 7 UNSC resolution in order to conduct any military operation in Iraq Turkey must first secure the permission and co-operation of the Iraqi government.
Despite conducting air-strikes against ISIL positions in Syria in the first wave of strikes on Thursday (23/7/14) Turkey did not conduct any further anti-ISIL strikes on Friday (24/7/15), Saturday (25/7/15), Sunday (26/7/15) or Monday (27/7/15). Turkey has claimed that it following the NATO meeting it did conduct strikes against ISIL positions in Syria on Tuesday (28/7/15) afternoon. However with Turkey not operating under the command and control structure of the US-led coalition I am unable to tell where or what type of targets were engaged. In fact from my sources on the ground I cannot even confirm that any such strikes took place.
What Turkey has certainly been doing since Thursday is continually shelling positions inside Syria from its side of the border. These positions are held by the Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) who are supported by the Euphrates Volcano unit of the Free Syrian Army (FSA). One of the most surreal demands that Erdogan has made of the YPG is that they agree to work more closely with the FSA. The only functioning unit of the FSA left in Syria is the Euphrates Volcano who are attached to the YPG.
The focus of Tuesday's Turkish shelling was YPG/FSA positions in the town of Tel Abyad/Gire Spi. I have talked about this border town a lot because it is of massive strategic importance in the fight against ISIL. It's liberation from ISIL on June 16th (16/6/15) cut off ISIL's last supply route with Turkey in the east and allowed the establishment of a 33,000km^2 (20,000mile^2) buffer zone between ISIL and Turkey that stretches all the way from the Euphrates River to Iraq's border with Iran. The nearest ISIL positions to Tel Abyad sit more then 40km (25 miles) to the south beyond the village of Ain Issa.
Therefore the only explanation for Turkey shelling Tel Abyad is that they are trying to dislodge the YPG/FSA in order to break apart the buffer zone and allow ISIL to re-establish this vital supply line between Turkey and their de facto capital of Raqqa.
Along with the air-strikes against Duhok in the eastern part of the buffer zone the artillery strikes on Tel Abyad present a very serious problem for US President Obama. On August 7th 2014 (7/8/14) Obama addressed the nation to announce that he was sending the US military to attack ISIL in Iraq. This designated ISIL as an enemy of the US - a designation that was rapidly supported by a UNSC resolution. By giving Turkey permission to attack anti-ISIL forces in both Syria and Iraq Obama is clearly giving aid and comfort to ISIL.
Under title 18 section 2381 of the US federal code anyone who gives aid or comfort to an enemy of the US either within the US or abroad has committed an act of treason against the US. The minimum punishment is five years in prison while the maximum punishment is death. Anyone who has committed such an act is automatically rendered incapable of holding any office in the US - particularly the office of President.
However I'm sure that as with the Chattanooga shooting Obama will rely on his ally Donald Trump to put on another song and dance number to distract the public and give CNN an excuse not to report on it.
15:35 on 29/7/15 (UK date).
As he has been since he made the phonecall that set this chain of events in motion US President Barack Obama has been preoccupied with a vanity tour of Africa. Addressing the African Union (AU) summit yesterday Obama raised his hands to the air as if in Muslim prayer and decried those leaders that try to cling to power beyond the end of their term limits. This seemed to be a deliberate snub to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
You may remember that Erdogan's term limit as Prime Minister expired in 2014. So since moving to the ceremonial office of President Erdogan needed his Islamist Justice & Development Party (AKP) to do well in Turkey's June 7th (7/6/15) General Election in order to allow them to grant executive power to the President's office circumventing Erdogan's term limit.
The people of Turkey saw things differently and the AKP were denied the majority they need to change the constitution. Erdogan's sudden war against "terrorists" seems designed to overturn the result of the election. Today he has introduced legislation that would see the Kurdish backed People's Democratic Party (HDP) banned from Parliament as terrorist sympathisers.
The removal of these 80 MP's would reduce the number of MP's needed to secure a majority from 275 to 235 - giving the AKP a majority of 25. If they succeed in forming a coalition with the extreme nationalist/fascist Turkish Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) the AKP will have the two thirds majority required to prevent any constitutional changes being submitted to public referendum. After all it is likely that the MHP will be so blinded by their hatred of the Kurds they will forget to demand that a bar on constitutional changes and MHP control of any security ministries are the foundation of any coalition agreement.
Unfortunately because he was so busy playing to the cameras in Ethiopia Obama was unable to call all the other NATO members to inform them that he had made a terrible mistake in backing Erdogan and plead with them to help block Turkey's aggression before the highly dangerous situation got any further out of control. I get the impression that the European Union (EU) members of NATO simply needed assurance that the US wouldn't suddenly turn around and stab them in the back as it has done numerous times over Ukraine and Iran.
This total absence of US leadership meant that the meeting was a short and panicked affair. Essentially Turkey laid out its plans and then without any questioning or examination the other delegates nodded in vague agreement before heading for the nearest exit. As a result it is quite hard to gauge what was agreed upon and what Turkey has been given permission to do. It is though beyond NATO's remit to allow Turkey to attack it's neighbours. That requires a United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution.
However it immediately became quite clear what Turkey thinks it has been given permission to do.
Since starting it's air campaign on late on Thursday (23/7/15) Turkey has bombed Kurdish positions on a daily basis. However on Tuesday (28/7/15) they took a short break for the duration of the NATO meeting. Within 45 minutes of that meeting ending though Turkey began conducting air-strikes in the Duhok region of Iraq. This marked the start of the most intense wave of Turkish strikes to date with wave after wave of strikes continuing for the next 10 hours.
Duhok sits just 65km (39 miles) north of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) held city of Mosul. It is also around 85km (50 miles) to the north-west to the strategically important town on Tel Afar which is vital in cutting off ISIL's supply lines between Mosul and the positions in Syria. The area is central to the humanitarian safe zone that was established to protect - predominately Yezidi - refugees who were forced from their homes on Sinjar/Shingal mountains and the surrounding Nineveh plains. The Turkish strikes were directed against civilian areas destroying numerous homes and orchards which are essential both for food and to the area's economy.
These strikes were immediately condemned by Iraq's Foreign Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari who made clear that in the absence of a Chapter 7 UNSC resolution in order to conduct any military operation in Iraq Turkey must first secure the permission and co-operation of the Iraqi government.
Despite conducting air-strikes against ISIL positions in Syria in the first wave of strikes on Thursday (23/7/14) Turkey did not conduct any further anti-ISIL strikes on Friday (24/7/15), Saturday (25/7/15), Sunday (26/7/15) or Monday (27/7/15). Turkey has claimed that it following the NATO meeting it did conduct strikes against ISIL positions in Syria on Tuesday (28/7/15) afternoon. However with Turkey not operating under the command and control structure of the US-led coalition I am unable to tell where or what type of targets were engaged. In fact from my sources on the ground I cannot even confirm that any such strikes took place.
What Turkey has certainly been doing since Thursday is continually shelling positions inside Syria from its side of the border. These positions are held by the Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) who are supported by the Euphrates Volcano unit of the Free Syrian Army (FSA). One of the most surreal demands that Erdogan has made of the YPG is that they agree to work more closely with the FSA. The only functioning unit of the FSA left in Syria is the Euphrates Volcano who are attached to the YPG.
The focus of Tuesday's Turkish shelling was YPG/FSA positions in the town of Tel Abyad/Gire Spi. I have talked about this border town a lot because it is of massive strategic importance in the fight against ISIL. It's liberation from ISIL on June 16th (16/6/15) cut off ISIL's last supply route with Turkey in the east and allowed the establishment of a 33,000km^2 (20,000mile^2) buffer zone between ISIL and Turkey that stretches all the way from the Euphrates River to Iraq's border with Iran. The nearest ISIL positions to Tel Abyad sit more then 40km (25 miles) to the south beyond the village of Ain Issa.
Therefore the only explanation for Turkey shelling Tel Abyad is that they are trying to dislodge the YPG/FSA in order to break apart the buffer zone and allow ISIL to re-establish this vital supply line between Turkey and their de facto capital of Raqqa.
Along with the air-strikes against Duhok in the eastern part of the buffer zone the artillery strikes on Tel Abyad present a very serious problem for US President Obama. On August 7th 2014 (7/8/14) Obama addressed the nation to announce that he was sending the US military to attack ISIL in Iraq. This designated ISIL as an enemy of the US - a designation that was rapidly supported by a UNSC resolution. By giving Turkey permission to attack anti-ISIL forces in both Syria and Iraq Obama is clearly giving aid and comfort to ISIL.
Under title 18 section 2381 of the US federal code anyone who gives aid or comfort to an enemy of the US either within the US or abroad has committed an act of treason against the US. The minimum punishment is five years in prison while the maximum punishment is death. Anyone who has committed such an act is automatically rendered incapable of holding any office in the US - particularly the office of President.
However I'm sure that as with the Chattanooga shooting Obama will rely on his ally Donald Trump to put on another song and dance number to distract the public and give CNN an excuse not to report on it.
15:35 on 29/7/15 (UK date).
Monday, 27 July 2015
Operation Featherweight: Month 12, Week 5, Day 2.
In recent days the Iraqi Security Force's (ISF) Anbar offensive has been making slow and steady progress in dislodging the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) for Iraq's south-western province. For example just yesterday the ISF secured Anbar University which is a vast, sprawling complex on the south-western outskirts of the city of Ramadi. Obviously I would like to be covering those gains in more detail.
However it appears that once again US President Barack Obama has completely lost his sh*t and decided to plunge the entire war into chaos.
Throughout the fight against ISIL and over the years in which the group grew to the point they could no longer be ignored one of the main problems has been Turkish Prime Minister/President/Emperor Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Since taking up office in 2003 Erdogan's mission has been to turn Turkey from a modern, western-style secular democracy into a Sunni Islamic State. Not only that but he wants Turkey to lead a group of Sunni Islamic States that stretches down through Syria and Israel and across through Egypt, Libya and Tunisia. In short Erdogan wants to re-establish the Ottoman Empire with himself as Emperor.
There is an absolute mountain of evidence showing both Erdogan's intent and his action. For example ISIL have been given permission to operate what is in effect a diplomatic consulate within the Turkish city of Istanbul. Then there is Erdogan's desire to have ancient (Ottoman) Turkish taught as a compulsory subject in schools and his campaign to have a Mosque built on every Turkish university campus in violation of the secular separation of Church /Mosque and State that has existed in Turkey since the fall of the Ottoman Empire.
That is before even making mention of the tens if not hundreds of thousands of ISIL recruits that have travelled to Syria through Turkey on what has become dubbed "Glasgow bin Lorry's Garbage Truck Express." So vast and open has this practice been that if they were to think about it many of my British readers could probably name several dozen high profile cases without me having to prompt them.
Erdogan's support for ISIL though was probably at it's most naked and spiteful during the Battle of Kobane. As you may remember in September 2014 ISIL began their advance on the city of Kobane/Ayn al-Arab which sits directly on the border with Turkey roughly in the centre of Syria's north. ISIL's objectives for the operation were to exterminate the Kurdish ethnic group - the majority of whom are Sunni Muslims - and establish yet another supply route from Turkey linking their de facto capital of Raqqa - some 120km (72 miles) to the south-east - with the contested city of Aleppo - some 145km (85 miles) to the south-west.
Throughout the early stages of the battle Erdogan became ISIL's main cheerleader providing daily updates reassuring his supporters that ISIL would be victorious and Kobane would fall within hours or days. Erdogan then defied Turkey's obligations as a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) by refusing to allow Turkish territory to be used to re-supply the defenders of Kobane. In the end the coalition was forced to rely on air supply drops which are always the second choice.
With the battle turning against ISIL towards the end of November Turkey allowed it's territory - specifically an industrial site owned and operated by the Turkish Grain Board (TMO) - to be used by ISIL to launch an attack on Kobane from the north. Even as recently as June 25th 2015 (25/6/15) Turkey was again allowing ISIL to use its territory to mount attacks on Kobane. This time in the form of Vehicle Borne Improvised Explosive Devices (VBIED's) and disguised fighters crossing in through the Mursitpinar border crossing.
As we approach the first anniversary of the start of the war against ISIL you would think that the US-led coalition would have dedicated a lot of its efforts towards making sure that Turkey ends its support for ISIL and fulfils its obligations as both a member of NATO and of the United Nations (UN). After all with support for ISIL being strictly forbidden by a Chapter 7 UN Security Council (UNSC) resolution there is certainly a lot that can be done on the diplomatic front.
Obviously the Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) who defended Kobane haven't had the luxury of waiting for that diplomatic work to be completed if in fact it was even undertaken. So over the past seven months they've set to work establishing a buffer-zone across northern Syria. Once this zone has become secured it can be used as both a humanitarian safe zone for refugees and a staging area to take the fight to ISIL within Syria. However its main purpose is to cut off ISIL positions in places like Raqqa from the group's main supply routes in Turkey.
Having won the 134 day Battle of Kobane on January 26th 2015 (26/1/15) the YPG have pushed out to secure the wider Kobane Canton while resisting continuous ISIL attacks on the eastern Cizire Canton. The big breakthrough came on June 16th (16/6/15) when the YPG succeeded in liberating the border town Tel Abyad/Gire Spi. This closed the last supply route between Raqqa and Turkey and linked up the Kobane and Cizire Cantons. Along with the territory held by the Iraqi Kurdish Peshmerga in Iraq's northern Kurdish region this has created a 33,000km^2 (20,000mile^2) buffer zone between ISIL and Turkey.
You may remember that the YPG's advance on Tel Abyad was proceeded by Erdogan repeating entirely false claims by the Al Qaeda affiliate Al Nusra Front (ANF) led Islamist Army of Conquest (JAF) coalition that the YPG were engaging in the ethnic cleansing of Arabs and Turkmen. This was a transparent effort to get Tel Abyad's Arab and Turkmen population to side with ISIL against the YPG. Fortunately it failed and the Arabs and Turkmen were quickly able to return to their homes in the newly liberated city.
Since liberating Tel Abyad the YPG have been slowly and methodically working to isolate and then eradicate ISIL positions within the city of Hasakah which effectively marks the southern border of the buffer-zone. They have also been moving to strengthen the western border of the buffer-zone where it meets the Euphrates. Today the YPG have managed to secure the town of Sarrin which controls the river crossing on the M4 highway which is the main supply road between Raqqa and ISIL positions in Aleppo. I gather that at least one former US Navy SEAL has played a key role in this effort.
Obama's response to all this has been completely unfathomable. On Wednesday (22/7/15) Obama broke with all diplomatic protocol and the result of Turkey's recent General Election to telephone Erdogan to discuss Turkey's role in the conflict. As always when an administration cannot justify it's actions to the public the White House is remaining tight-lipped about what exactly what was said. However from events it is clear that in return for Turkey finally fulfilling it's NATO obligation to make Incirlik air-base available for use the US has given Turkey permission to conduct air-strikes against Kurdish positions in both Iraq and Syria.
Since late on Thursday (23/7/15) Turkish strikes against northern Iraq have become a daily event killing and injuring both fighters and civilians. On Friday (24/7/14) YPG positions on the west of the Kobane Canton came under Turkish artillery fire in what appears to have been an attempt to stop the YPG securing Sarrin from ISIL.
Turkey has also claimed and the US has confirmed that the two nations are at an advanced stage of negotiations to allow Turkey to invade and occupy the northern buffer-zone. This will eradicate the only non-government anti-ISIL force in Syria - despite Turkish and US backing JAF have shown no interest fighting them. It will also not only re-establish ISIL's supply routes with Turkey but also substantially shorten them.
On Sunday (26/7/15) Germany urged Turkey to re-commit to its ceasefire with the Kurds which is a diplomatic way of pointing out that Turkey does not currently enjoy Germany's support. Having spent much of the previous week using the Cyprus issue to warn about Turkey on Saturday (25/7/15) the European Union (EU) which represents 20 of NATO's 28 members also urged Turkey to recommit to its ceasefire.
On Sunday evening Turkey called an emergency meeting of NATO to be held tomorrow (28/7/15). This strikes me as an attempt by Turkey to pre-empt a NATO meeting that would have been called to condemn Turkey's actions. It seems to be scheduled to coincide with Obama's African tour in order to prevent other NATO members advising him of both the severity of the situation and the stupidity of his actions prior to that meeting.
15:45 on 27/7/15 (UK date).
However it appears that once again US President Barack Obama has completely lost his sh*t and decided to plunge the entire war into chaos.
Throughout the fight against ISIL and over the years in which the group grew to the point they could no longer be ignored one of the main problems has been Turkish Prime Minister/President/Emperor Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Since taking up office in 2003 Erdogan's mission has been to turn Turkey from a modern, western-style secular democracy into a Sunni Islamic State. Not only that but he wants Turkey to lead a group of Sunni Islamic States that stretches down through Syria and Israel and across through Egypt, Libya and Tunisia. In short Erdogan wants to re-establish the Ottoman Empire with himself as Emperor.
There is an absolute mountain of evidence showing both Erdogan's intent and his action. For example ISIL have been given permission to operate what is in effect a diplomatic consulate within the Turkish city of Istanbul. Then there is Erdogan's desire to have ancient (Ottoman) Turkish taught as a compulsory subject in schools and his campaign to have a Mosque built on every Turkish university campus in violation of the secular separation of Church /Mosque and State that has existed in Turkey since the fall of the Ottoman Empire.
That is before even making mention of the tens if not hundreds of thousands of ISIL recruits that have travelled to Syria through Turkey on what has become dubbed "Glasgow bin Lorry's Garbage Truck Express." So vast and open has this practice been that if they were to think about it many of my British readers could probably name several dozen high profile cases without me having to prompt them.
Erdogan's support for ISIL though was probably at it's most naked and spiteful during the Battle of Kobane. As you may remember in September 2014 ISIL began their advance on the city of Kobane/Ayn al-Arab which sits directly on the border with Turkey roughly in the centre of Syria's north. ISIL's objectives for the operation were to exterminate the Kurdish ethnic group - the majority of whom are Sunni Muslims - and establish yet another supply route from Turkey linking their de facto capital of Raqqa - some 120km (72 miles) to the south-east - with the contested city of Aleppo - some 145km (85 miles) to the south-west.
Throughout the early stages of the battle Erdogan became ISIL's main cheerleader providing daily updates reassuring his supporters that ISIL would be victorious and Kobane would fall within hours or days. Erdogan then defied Turkey's obligations as a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) by refusing to allow Turkish territory to be used to re-supply the defenders of Kobane. In the end the coalition was forced to rely on air supply drops which are always the second choice.
With the battle turning against ISIL towards the end of November Turkey allowed it's territory - specifically an industrial site owned and operated by the Turkish Grain Board (TMO) - to be used by ISIL to launch an attack on Kobane from the north. Even as recently as June 25th 2015 (25/6/15) Turkey was again allowing ISIL to use its territory to mount attacks on Kobane. This time in the form of Vehicle Borne Improvised Explosive Devices (VBIED's) and disguised fighters crossing in through the Mursitpinar border crossing.
As we approach the first anniversary of the start of the war against ISIL you would think that the US-led coalition would have dedicated a lot of its efforts towards making sure that Turkey ends its support for ISIL and fulfils its obligations as both a member of NATO and of the United Nations (UN). After all with support for ISIL being strictly forbidden by a Chapter 7 UN Security Council (UNSC) resolution there is certainly a lot that can be done on the diplomatic front.
Obviously the Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) who defended Kobane haven't had the luxury of waiting for that diplomatic work to be completed if in fact it was even undertaken. So over the past seven months they've set to work establishing a buffer-zone across northern Syria. Once this zone has become secured it can be used as both a humanitarian safe zone for refugees and a staging area to take the fight to ISIL within Syria. However its main purpose is to cut off ISIL positions in places like Raqqa from the group's main supply routes in Turkey.
Having won the 134 day Battle of Kobane on January 26th 2015 (26/1/15) the YPG have pushed out to secure the wider Kobane Canton while resisting continuous ISIL attacks on the eastern Cizire Canton. The big breakthrough came on June 16th (16/6/15) when the YPG succeeded in liberating the border town Tel Abyad/Gire Spi. This closed the last supply route between Raqqa and Turkey and linked up the Kobane and Cizire Cantons. Along with the territory held by the Iraqi Kurdish Peshmerga in Iraq's northern Kurdish region this has created a 33,000km^2 (20,000mile^2) buffer zone between ISIL and Turkey.
You may remember that the YPG's advance on Tel Abyad was proceeded by Erdogan repeating entirely false claims by the Al Qaeda affiliate Al Nusra Front (ANF) led Islamist Army of Conquest (JAF) coalition that the YPG were engaging in the ethnic cleansing of Arabs and Turkmen. This was a transparent effort to get Tel Abyad's Arab and Turkmen population to side with ISIL against the YPG. Fortunately it failed and the Arabs and Turkmen were quickly able to return to their homes in the newly liberated city.
Since liberating Tel Abyad the YPG have been slowly and methodically working to isolate and then eradicate ISIL positions within the city of Hasakah which effectively marks the southern border of the buffer-zone. They have also been moving to strengthen the western border of the buffer-zone where it meets the Euphrates. Today the YPG have managed to secure the town of Sarrin which controls the river crossing on the M4 highway which is the main supply road between Raqqa and ISIL positions in Aleppo. I gather that at least one former US Navy SEAL has played a key role in this effort.
Obama's response to all this has been completely unfathomable. On Wednesday (22/7/15) Obama broke with all diplomatic protocol and the result of Turkey's recent General Election to telephone Erdogan to discuss Turkey's role in the conflict. As always when an administration cannot justify it's actions to the public the White House is remaining tight-lipped about what exactly what was said. However from events it is clear that in return for Turkey finally fulfilling it's NATO obligation to make Incirlik air-base available for use the US has given Turkey permission to conduct air-strikes against Kurdish positions in both Iraq and Syria.
Since late on Thursday (23/7/15) Turkish strikes against northern Iraq have become a daily event killing and injuring both fighters and civilians. On Friday (24/7/14) YPG positions on the west of the Kobane Canton came under Turkish artillery fire in what appears to have been an attempt to stop the YPG securing Sarrin from ISIL.
Turkey has also claimed and the US has confirmed that the two nations are at an advanced stage of negotiations to allow Turkey to invade and occupy the northern buffer-zone. This will eradicate the only non-government anti-ISIL force in Syria - despite Turkish and US backing JAF have shown no interest fighting them. It will also not only re-establish ISIL's supply routes with Turkey but also substantially shorten them.
On Sunday (26/7/15) Germany urged Turkey to re-commit to its ceasefire with the Kurds which is a diplomatic way of pointing out that Turkey does not currently enjoy Germany's support. Having spent much of the previous week using the Cyprus issue to warn about Turkey on Saturday (25/7/15) the European Union (EU) which represents 20 of NATO's 28 members also urged Turkey to recommit to its ceasefire.
On Sunday evening Turkey called an emergency meeting of NATO to be held tomorrow (28/7/15). This strikes me as an attempt by Turkey to pre-empt a NATO meeting that would have been called to condemn Turkey's actions. It seems to be scheduled to coincide with Obama's African tour in order to prevent other NATO members advising him of both the severity of the situation and the stupidity of his actions prior to that meeting.
15:45 on 27/7/15 (UK date).
Saturday, 25 July 2015
Operation Featherweight: Month 12, Week 4, Day 7.
On Monday (20/7/15) the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) carried out a suicide bombing in the Turkish border city of Suruc. As I explained at the time this attack was a response to a recent Turkish crackdown on ISIL activity within the country. As I also explained that crackdown has been made possible by the ongoing negotiations between the Islamist Justice & Democracy Party (AKP) and the extreme nationalist/fascist Nationalist Movement Party (MHP).
Since 2003 Turkey has been ruled by AKP which was founded as a vehicle for Recep Tayyip Erdogan in 2001. In his role as Prime Minister Erdogan has been one of the main architects and sponsors of ISIL. His intention has been to use them to help form a Sunni-Islamic state that stretches from Turkey's border with Bulgaria, across the middle-east and into Egypt. The idea being to re-create the Ottoman Empire that represented the last Sunni-Islamic Caliphate until it's fall in the 1920's.
So for example Erdogan decided to 'celebrate' the inauguration of Sunni-Islamist Mohamed Morsi as Egypt's President in June 2012 by sending an F-4 Phantom jet into Syria. The idea being that when the Turkish jet was inevitably shot down it would provide a pre-text for Turkey to invade Syria. Since Morsi was removed from power in Egypt by popular uprising in 2013 Erdogan has been backing Islamist terrorist groups to carry out attacks on the Egyptian state in order to destabilise the nation and have Morsi re-installed as President against the will of the people.
At the start of 2014 Erdogan hit a problem in the form of Turkey's constitutional term limits which prevented him from continuing in the role of Prime Minister. He attempted to get around this by taking up the office of President in January 2015. However in Turkey the role of President is a ceremonial rather then an executive one meaning that it holds no real power. Therefore AKP's main objective at June's Turkish General Election was to secure either a two thirds majority that would allow them to change the constitution to grant the President executive power without holding a national referendum or a simple majority that would require a referendum on constitutional changes.
The AKP failed on both of these fronts falling 17 seats short of a majority with 40% of the vote. With the Kemalist Republican People's Party (CHP) nor the Kurdish People's Democratic Party (HDP) being prepared to work with the AKP on account of Erdogan this led this led them into torturous negotiations with the MHP.
The MHP were formed by NATO as part of the "Gladio Organisation" in 1965. Rather like the School of the Americas in South America Gladio was a network of European fascist paramilitary groups funded by NATO to counter the influence of communist paramilitary groups funded by the USSR. As such the MHP share many of Erdogan's imperialist designs having been behind the 1974 Turkish invasion of northern Cyprus. However they are very opposed to his Islamist agenda and have an almost visceral hatred of Turkey's Kurdish population.
While AKP and MHP have been trying to work through these ideological differences in order to form a governing coalition the day to day running of Turkey has been left in the hands of the Turkish establishment which is sometimes referred to as the "Deep State." Having an aggressively secular agenda that dates back to Turkey's founder Mustafa Kemal Ataturk they do not share Erdogan's love affair with ISIL and have been quietly moving to disrupt the group's activities. This is one of those things that everybody sees but no-one comments on because it is only able to happen due to the vacuum created by the coalition negotiation so would become much more difficult if it was made a factor in those negotiations.
Monday's (20/7/15) ISIL bombing was an attempt to draw attention to the security crackdown in order to make it a factor within the coalition negotiations and to intimidate Turkey into bringing it to an end. Obviously it is not my role to point out ISIL's mistakes to them but my first reaction to the Suruc bombing was to pat them on the back and give them a round of applause.
However as always seems to be the case these days US President Barack Obama was on hand to sweep in and try to tidy up after ISIL's mistakes. On Wednesday (22/7/15) Obama contacted Turkey to offer his condolences on the Suruc bombing.
His first mistake was that he telephoned President Erdogan. As with the UK, Israel, Japan and all other Parliamentary democracies it is Turkey's Prime Minister who is considered the head of government and therefore the person protocol dictates this type of communication is with. Therefore it is hard to understand why Obama would break with protocol to contact Erdogan particularly when around 60% of the Turkish population appear to have voted to make sure that Erdogan has no future role in such discussions.
Obama's second mistake was to amplify ISIL's desire for the Suruc bombing to play a role in Turkey's coalition negotiations by taking the opportunity to formally discuss Turkey's role in the fight against ISIL. As always with things they cannot justify the US are keeping the details of these discussions secret. However it appears that in return for the use of Incirlik airbase the US has given Turkey carte blanche to do whatever it likes in Syria and Iraq including conducting an independent air campaign and the invasion and occupation of Syrian territory. As this is a NATO operation the notion that concessions would have to be made to Turkey in return for it fulfilling its obligation to make Incirlik available is just insane.
Putting aside the fact that AKP simply cannot be trusted not to go back to supporting ISIL once the coalition negotiations have ended Monday's bombing targeted Turkish Kurds. Over the past 40 odd years the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) have presented themselves as the protectors of Turkey's Kurdish population. Therefore in response to an attack on Turkish Kurds they had to carry out an attack in retaliation. This exactly what they did on Wednesday killing two Turkish police officers who the PKK claim had been assisting ISIL. On Thursday the PKK executed an ISIL fighter that they say they had tracked from Syria into Turkey where he had been given medical treatment and sanctuary.
The MHP were formed specifically to counter the PKK so any PKK activity is going to have them baying for blood and demanding retaliation. With Obama having given Turkey free reign to respond in anyway it likes on Friday (24/7/15) Turkey carried out air-strikes in the Kurdish regions of northern Iraq and Syria. These of course are the areas that have been leading the resistance to ISIL over the past year. In response to these strikes the PKK have declared that the ceasefire with Turkey is over and have escalated their activities in southern Turkey including the kidnapping of police officers. This is no doubt going to lead to the MHP calling for more strikes against the Kurds.
Although I hope the situation will calm down this is likely to be future of the AKP/MHP negotiations and of any government it forms. The MHP will demand tougher action against the Kurds in return for ignoring the AKP's support for ISIL and the AKP will be happy to give it because it allows them to wipe out the only anti-ISIL force - except the Syrian government - in Syria. With the anti-ISIL coalition at war with itself the use of Incirlik or not isn't going to make much difference.
So in the space of a single phonecall Obama has managed to set back the fight against ISIL by about 7 months. I can't imagine that he'll be able to continue as Commander-in-Chief
15:50 on 25/7/15 (UK date).
Since 2003 Turkey has been ruled by AKP which was founded as a vehicle for Recep Tayyip Erdogan in 2001. In his role as Prime Minister Erdogan has been one of the main architects and sponsors of ISIL. His intention has been to use them to help form a Sunni-Islamic state that stretches from Turkey's border with Bulgaria, across the middle-east and into Egypt. The idea being to re-create the Ottoman Empire that represented the last Sunni-Islamic Caliphate until it's fall in the 1920's.
So for example Erdogan decided to 'celebrate' the inauguration of Sunni-Islamist Mohamed Morsi as Egypt's President in June 2012 by sending an F-4 Phantom jet into Syria. The idea being that when the Turkish jet was inevitably shot down it would provide a pre-text for Turkey to invade Syria. Since Morsi was removed from power in Egypt by popular uprising in 2013 Erdogan has been backing Islamist terrorist groups to carry out attacks on the Egyptian state in order to destabilise the nation and have Morsi re-installed as President against the will of the people.
At the start of 2014 Erdogan hit a problem in the form of Turkey's constitutional term limits which prevented him from continuing in the role of Prime Minister. He attempted to get around this by taking up the office of President in January 2015. However in Turkey the role of President is a ceremonial rather then an executive one meaning that it holds no real power. Therefore AKP's main objective at June's Turkish General Election was to secure either a two thirds majority that would allow them to change the constitution to grant the President executive power without holding a national referendum or a simple majority that would require a referendum on constitutional changes.
The AKP failed on both of these fronts falling 17 seats short of a majority with 40% of the vote. With the Kemalist Republican People's Party (CHP) nor the Kurdish People's Democratic Party (HDP) being prepared to work with the AKP on account of Erdogan this led this led them into torturous negotiations with the MHP.
The MHP were formed by NATO as part of the "Gladio Organisation" in 1965. Rather like the School of the Americas in South America Gladio was a network of European fascist paramilitary groups funded by NATO to counter the influence of communist paramilitary groups funded by the USSR. As such the MHP share many of Erdogan's imperialist designs having been behind the 1974 Turkish invasion of northern Cyprus. However they are very opposed to his Islamist agenda and have an almost visceral hatred of Turkey's Kurdish population.
While AKP and MHP have been trying to work through these ideological differences in order to form a governing coalition the day to day running of Turkey has been left in the hands of the Turkish establishment which is sometimes referred to as the "Deep State." Having an aggressively secular agenda that dates back to Turkey's founder Mustafa Kemal Ataturk they do not share Erdogan's love affair with ISIL and have been quietly moving to disrupt the group's activities. This is one of those things that everybody sees but no-one comments on because it is only able to happen due to the vacuum created by the coalition negotiation so would become much more difficult if it was made a factor in those negotiations.
Monday's (20/7/15) ISIL bombing was an attempt to draw attention to the security crackdown in order to make it a factor within the coalition negotiations and to intimidate Turkey into bringing it to an end. Obviously it is not my role to point out ISIL's mistakes to them but my first reaction to the Suruc bombing was to pat them on the back and give them a round of applause.
However as always seems to be the case these days US President Barack Obama was on hand to sweep in and try to tidy up after ISIL's mistakes. On Wednesday (22/7/15) Obama contacted Turkey to offer his condolences on the Suruc bombing.
His first mistake was that he telephoned President Erdogan. As with the UK, Israel, Japan and all other Parliamentary democracies it is Turkey's Prime Minister who is considered the head of government and therefore the person protocol dictates this type of communication is with. Therefore it is hard to understand why Obama would break with protocol to contact Erdogan particularly when around 60% of the Turkish population appear to have voted to make sure that Erdogan has no future role in such discussions.
Obama's second mistake was to amplify ISIL's desire for the Suruc bombing to play a role in Turkey's coalition negotiations by taking the opportunity to formally discuss Turkey's role in the fight against ISIL. As always with things they cannot justify the US are keeping the details of these discussions secret. However it appears that in return for the use of Incirlik airbase the US has given Turkey carte blanche to do whatever it likes in Syria and Iraq including conducting an independent air campaign and the invasion and occupation of Syrian territory. As this is a NATO operation the notion that concessions would have to be made to Turkey in return for it fulfilling its obligation to make Incirlik available is just insane.
Putting aside the fact that AKP simply cannot be trusted not to go back to supporting ISIL once the coalition negotiations have ended Monday's bombing targeted Turkish Kurds. Over the past 40 odd years the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) have presented themselves as the protectors of Turkey's Kurdish population. Therefore in response to an attack on Turkish Kurds they had to carry out an attack in retaliation. This exactly what they did on Wednesday killing two Turkish police officers who the PKK claim had been assisting ISIL. On Thursday the PKK executed an ISIL fighter that they say they had tracked from Syria into Turkey where he had been given medical treatment and sanctuary.
The MHP were formed specifically to counter the PKK so any PKK activity is going to have them baying for blood and demanding retaliation. With Obama having given Turkey free reign to respond in anyway it likes on Friday (24/7/15) Turkey carried out air-strikes in the Kurdish regions of northern Iraq and Syria. These of course are the areas that have been leading the resistance to ISIL over the past year. In response to these strikes the PKK have declared that the ceasefire with Turkey is over and have escalated their activities in southern Turkey including the kidnapping of police officers. This is no doubt going to lead to the MHP calling for more strikes against the Kurds.
Although I hope the situation will calm down this is likely to be future of the AKP/MHP negotiations and of any government it forms. The MHP will demand tougher action against the Kurds in return for ignoring the AKP's support for ISIL and the AKP will be happy to give it because it allows them to wipe out the only anti-ISIL force - except the Syrian government - in Syria. With the anti-ISIL coalition at war with itself the use of Incirlik or not isn't going to make much difference.
So in the space of a single phonecall Obama has managed to set back the fight against ISIL by about 7 months. I can't imagine that he'll be able to continue as Commander-in-Chief
15:50 on 25/7/15 (UK date).
Friday, 24 July 2015
The Sandra Bland Bullsh*t.
Almost as if they need a constant supply of outrage to sustain themselves the US "Black Lives Matter (BLM)" have already moved onto a new cause in the form of Sandra Bland.
A heavy marijuana user on July 10th (10/7/15) Ms Bland was driving in the centre lane of a highway in Prairie View, Texas when a police patrol car drew up behind her. In her paranoid state Ms Bland swerved into the inside lane in the hope the police car would pass her without really noticing her. Unfortunately being distracted Ms Bland forgot to signal. This drew further attention to the suspicious move and the officer no doubt ran a vehicle check that established Ms Bland had numerous previous convictions for Driving Under the Influence (DUI), marijuana possession and, I believe, theft. As a result the officer decided to stop Ms Bland.
However rather then issuing her with a ticket the officer instead decided to issue Ms Bland with a written warning about the state of her driving. It was during this conversation the officer noticed that Ms Bland's speech was slurred and there was something just a bit off about her reaction times. He then asked Ms Bland to step out of her vehicle for the purposes of a field sobriety test. Ms Bland refused thus committing a criminal offence authorising her arrest.
Not only did Ms Bland refuse to exit her vehicle she also started to move around within the vehicle which could have been an attempt to reach for a weapon or dispose of evidence such as swallowing her marijuana stash. At this point the officer drew his Taser and told Ms Bland that he would "Light her up." This threat of force was effective and Ms Bland exited the vehicle. As is standard practise both for the safety of Ms Bland and of the officer she was then walked out of the road onto the sidewalk and handcuffed. Ms Bland resisted this attempt to handcuff her and kicked out at the officer before being bundled to the ground, handcuffed and held in a prone position until other officers arrived to transport her to jail.
Having been taken into custody Ms Bland was charged with the more serious offence of assaulting a public official but in an act of charity the lesser charge of DUI/refusal was dropped. With her family being unwilling/unable to pay the 10%, USD500 deposit on her USD5000 bail Ms Bland was remanded in custody. Three days later on July 13th 2015 (13/7/15) she was found dead in her cell having hung herself from a rail in the cell's shower.
The thing about marijuana is that it functions by separating a persons thought process from their wider emotional response. In small doses this isn't really an issue and can actually be quite beneficial. However the problem arises in heavy, daily users of the drug who can go many weeks or even months without experiencing a proper emotion. When users of this type begin to withdraw from the drug after a couple of days without use all those stored up emotions come flooding back and they become overwhelmed. This well known effect was actually how the US planned for the popstar Rihanna to suffer a mental breakdown in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) during her 2013 Diamonds World Tour. The idea being that the UAE's strict anti-drug laws would bring about withdrawal triggering a crash.
A jail cell is probably amongst the worst places to experience this type of crash because it's not like you can go for a walk to clear your head. Ms Bland was particularly susceptible because she had a long history of a depressive disorder that led her to attempt suicide and self-harm on numerous occasions and apparently develop a mild form of Munchhausen's syndrome that saw her falsely claim to suffer from other disorders such as PTSD for attention. With previous convictions Ms Bland was also likely to be looking at an extended stay in jail which would likely cost her the new job she was travelling to at the time of her arrest. Ms Bland had previously been long term unemployed.
Therefore this is probably one of the clearest open and shut cases of suicide that you will see. However with Ms Bland being a key organiser within BLM for the movement to accept this they would have to accept that their movement has a tenuous relationship with reality. So instead they've gone into full 9/11 conspiracy theorist mode making things up and trying to twist every detail into evidence of some grand conspiracy.
For example much is being made of the fact that while Ms Bland is around 6ft tall the shower rail stands only 5ft off the ground. Although it is largely kept as a trade secret to avoid further suicides it is entirely false that your feet have to be off the ground in order to hang yourself. The celebrity case is that of Micheal Hutchence although here in the UK there is actually a written rule that you do not report on the specific, technical details of a suicide.
Then there is the mugshot that the police initially released to the media. In the actual mugshot Ms Bland looked a mess. She was dishevelled, her eyes were rolled back in her head and she was slumped against a wall. In short she was just as stoned as the toxicology tests established. However in order to avoid causing the family further distress the picture was cleaned up before being released to the press. Now the actual photograph has been released BLM claim that it was taken after her death.
Ignoring the fact that if the photograph had been taken after her death it would show ligature marks around her neck BLM are pointing to as 'evidence' the fact that Ms Bland was dressed in orange prison clothes which according to the conspiracy theory prisoners do not wear. Just last week we were going through the jail mugshots of Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez - the Chattanooga shooter - from his DUI arrest. He was wearing orange prison clothes.
The most alarming part of the case is that the US Federal government appear to be continuing to indulge BLM and the FBI are investigating the case. Imagine what would have happened if the 9/11 Truth movement were allowed to dictate the US' response to 9/11.
12:10 on 24/7/15 (UK date).
A heavy marijuana user on July 10th (10/7/15) Ms Bland was driving in the centre lane of a highway in Prairie View, Texas when a police patrol car drew up behind her. In her paranoid state Ms Bland swerved into the inside lane in the hope the police car would pass her without really noticing her. Unfortunately being distracted Ms Bland forgot to signal. This drew further attention to the suspicious move and the officer no doubt ran a vehicle check that established Ms Bland had numerous previous convictions for Driving Under the Influence (DUI), marijuana possession and, I believe, theft. As a result the officer decided to stop Ms Bland.
However rather then issuing her with a ticket the officer instead decided to issue Ms Bland with a written warning about the state of her driving. It was during this conversation the officer noticed that Ms Bland's speech was slurred and there was something just a bit off about her reaction times. He then asked Ms Bland to step out of her vehicle for the purposes of a field sobriety test. Ms Bland refused thus committing a criminal offence authorising her arrest.
Not only did Ms Bland refuse to exit her vehicle she also started to move around within the vehicle which could have been an attempt to reach for a weapon or dispose of evidence such as swallowing her marijuana stash. At this point the officer drew his Taser and told Ms Bland that he would "Light her up." This threat of force was effective and Ms Bland exited the vehicle. As is standard practise both for the safety of Ms Bland and of the officer she was then walked out of the road onto the sidewalk and handcuffed. Ms Bland resisted this attempt to handcuff her and kicked out at the officer before being bundled to the ground, handcuffed and held in a prone position until other officers arrived to transport her to jail.
Having been taken into custody Ms Bland was charged with the more serious offence of assaulting a public official but in an act of charity the lesser charge of DUI/refusal was dropped. With her family being unwilling/unable to pay the 10%, USD500 deposit on her USD5000 bail Ms Bland was remanded in custody. Three days later on July 13th 2015 (13/7/15) she was found dead in her cell having hung herself from a rail in the cell's shower.
The thing about marijuana is that it functions by separating a persons thought process from their wider emotional response. In small doses this isn't really an issue and can actually be quite beneficial. However the problem arises in heavy, daily users of the drug who can go many weeks or even months without experiencing a proper emotion. When users of this type begin to withdraw from the drug after a couple of days without use all those stored up emotions come flooding back and they become overwhelmed. This well known effect was actually how the US planned for the popstar Rihanna to suffer a mental breakdown in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) during her 2013 Diamonds World Tour. The idea being that the UAE's strict anti-drug laws would bring about withdrawal triggering a crash.
A jail cell is probably amongst the worst places to experience this type of crash because it's not like you can go for a walk to clear your head. Ms Bland was particularly susceptible because she had a long history of a depressive disorder that led her to attempt suicide and self-harm on numerous occasions and apparently develop a mild form of Munchhausen's syndrome that saw her falsely claim to suffer from other disorders such as PTSD for attention. With previous convictions Ms Bland was also likely to be looking at an extended stay in jail which would likely cost her the new job she was travelling to at the time of her arrest. Ms Bland had previously been long term unemployed.
Therefore this is probably one of the clearest open and shut cases of suicide that you will see. However with Ms Bland being a key organiser within BLM for the movement to accept this they would have to accept that their movement has a tenuous relationship with reality. So instead they've gone into full 9/11 conspiracy theorist mode making things up and trying to twist every detail into evidence of some grand conspiracy.
For example much is being made of the fact that while Ms Bland is around 6ft tall the shower rail stands only 5ft off the ground. Although it is largely kept as a trade secret to avoid further suicides it is entirely false that your feet have to be off the ground in order to hang yourself. The celebrity case is that of Micheal Hutchence although here in the UK there is actually a written rule that you do not report on the specific, technical details of a suicide.
Then there is the mugshot that the police initially released to the media. In the actual mugshot Ms Bland looked a mess. She was dishevelled, her eyes were rolled back in her head and she was slumped against a wall. In short she was just as stoned as the toxicology tests established. However in order to avoid causing the family further distress the picture was cleaned up before being released to the press. Now the actual photograph has been released BLM claim that it was taken after her death.
Ignoring the fact that if the photograph had been taken after her death it would show ligature marks around her neck BLM are pointing to as 'evidence' the fact that Ms Bland was dressed in orange prison clothes which according to the conspiracy theory prisoners do not wear. Just last week we were going through the jail mugshots of Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez - the Chattanooga shooter - from his DUI arrest. He was wearing orange prison clothes.
The most alarming part of the case is that the US Federal government appear to be continuing to indulge BLM and the FBI are investigating the case. Imagine what would have happened if the 9/11 Truth movement were allowed to dictate the US' response to 9/11.
12:10 on 24/7/15 (UK date).
Wednesday, 22 July 2015
ADP Text 11/6/15 Revision: Section D Mitigation Text.
http://watchitdie.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/adp-mitigation-section-general-thoughts.html
Two weeks ago I published the post that can hopefully be read above laying out my view of the general concepts of how mitigation should function within the agreement. However that still left open the question of the actual text that would appear within the final agreement.
At the time I said that the latest 11/6/15 revision had become unreadable let alone unworkable. So instead I went back to the original non-paper and the 9/2/15 revision. I found this to provide a reasonable framework for a final text although it requires some modification and a lot of simplification.
Section D: Mitigation (9/2/15):
P13.1 - Here I think Option 1 is more then sufficient without the bracketed sections. While it acknowledges CBDR and sustainable development it makes clear that all parties have to take action to keep global temperatures below 2/1.5C.
P13.2 - I would simplify this entirely by merging the various options to read;
"Parties' efforts to take the form of a long-term zero emissions sustainable development pathway consistent with science and the findings of the / Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (e.g. 40–70 per cent below 2010 levels by 2050)."
This further clarifies that in order to achieve the goal laid out in P13.1 all parties must undertake mitigation actions consistent with the scientific/IPCC assessment of what is required. The fact that it acknowledges sustainable development again allows for developing nations to continue to develop while working towards that goal.
P14 - I consider this to be fine as is because it provides further reassurance to all nations - but particularly developing ones - that they won't be bullied into taking action if it means - for example - forcing their population to starve.
P15 - Here I consider Option 1 to be fine in the form;
"In accordance with Article 4 of the Convention, all Parties to progressively enhance the level of ambition of their mitigation commitments / contributions / actions such that each commitment / contribution / action is of a type, scope, scale and coverage more / no less ambitious than those previously undertaken under this agreement or the Convention or its Kyoto Protocol"
Having established in P13.1 and P13.2 the long term goal parties are trying to achieve there's no need to re-state it here. You merely need to prevent parties from backsliding from previous commitments. This wording achieves that.
P16 - I would massively simplify this by merging many of the numerous options into a paragraph reading;
"In accordance with the principles of the Convention and its Article 4, each Party to prepare, communicate and implement successive nationally determined mitigation commitments / contributions / actions, which are to be quantified or quantifiable, which can be aggregated, and which are transparent, comparable and/or verifiable. To this end they must be submitted in the form laid out in technical annex (X)"
http://i414.photobucket.com/albums/pp226/Sovereign16/MitigationAnnex_zpsojfgg40t.jpg
The above link should show you a very rough example of what I expect this technical annex to look like. However if what is turning out to be the most complicated IT task in the world has failed it is simply a table with the sections that need to be included in a nation's submission such as; Type, Scope, Coverage, Baseline etc alongside the rules governing what information is included in each section. So for example;
P17 - This simply duplicates obligations laid out in other parts of the section and as such is needless and needs to be removed.
P18 - Here Option 1 is fine as is because it simply establishes that nation's submissions will be subjected to a peer review process but leaves the details of that process to be dealt with by a separate, dedicated section of the agreement.
P19 - I consider this to be covered by the section of the technical annex that allows for a Conditional/Additional action so I'm not strictly sure this paragraph is needed. However I can certainly see no harm in enshrining the concept of co-operation between nations separately within the agreement in order to encourage it.
P20 - This is an area I hope to cover more fully in the section dealing with the review process. However it is clear that these mitigation submissions will include information that nations consider sensitive to national security such as the functioning of nuclear power plants or those hydroelectric dams that the Iraqis and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) seem to be fighting over constantly at the moment.
Therefore what I envisage is there for to be three levels of technical detail to be submitted. The first of these sees the form laid out in the technical annex to function almost of an index card that will be publicly available to people such as me. After all there is a lot of difference between saying that a nation intends to reduce emissions by improving the function of a dam and saying exactly how they intend to do improve a dam's function. The second level of detail will be kept private amongst accredited parties as part of the peer review process which possibly could take place online as part of a secure network. Whether a nation has provided enough detail at this level is something that can be argued over during the peer review process. Finally there is the highly detailed, proprietary information that isn't considered part of the process but which nations can choose to share amongst their close friends and allies if they so wish.
To my mind Option 3 here allows for that scenario.
At around 18:25 on 22/7/15 (UK date) it should be obvious to all that I've got at least four more paragraphs to cover. However having wasted a good hour swearing at computers I'll be back to finish up tomorrow.
Edited at around 16:25 on 23/7/15 (UK date) to add;
P21 - This is unnecessary and should be removed because the rest of the section not only establishes that nations should draw up low emissions strategies but offers detailed guidance on how to go about it.
P22 - Many forests do cross national borders so this is required and fine as is without the bracketed text about providing an alternative.
P23 - As I mentioned in discussing the general concepts for this section the rules governing market based mechanisms are not as advanced as they need to be. Therefore I think the specifics are best dealt with in the technical annex rather then being set in stone in the agreement text. However there does need to be reference to them in the text to ensure that they are included in any future version of the annex. To that end I think that Options 2&5 are not specific enough while Options 3&4 are too specific to the point of restricting further development in the area. For example Option 4 defines market based mechanisms as only the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) or any for of of carbon credit trading scheme.
Therefore I support Option 1 with only a few minor changes;
P23 - Reading as; "In meeting their commitments /contributions /actions parties may make use of market mechanisms and actions including in the land-use sector in accordance with rules and provisions adopted by the governing body of this Protocol in order to ensure environmental integrity by ensuring that:
P23.2 - I consider this fine as is without the reference to a cap so it reads; "The use of market mechanisms shall be supplementary to domestic action. Domestic action shall account for the majority of the emission reductions required to fulfil each Party’s commitment."
23.3 - I consider this fine as is.
23.4 - I consider this fine as is because the intention is that market based mechanism supplement direct funding such as through the Green Climate Fund (GCF).
23.5 - I consider this fine as is.
23.6 - I consider this fine as is.
P24 - Here I support Option 3 because it requires all parties to give consideration, in their submissions, to the needs of less capable nations. This is essential to establishing a capacity building element to the peer review process. The wording also places an obligation on the COP to strengthen existing mechanisms and develop new mechanisms to aid with this capacity building. However it stops short of being too prescriptive because the answer may well be something that we've not thought of yet. I would though exclude the sentence about poverty eradication being the first and overriding priority because CBDR is already well established particularly in P14. However that particular phrase seems to provide an opt out for developing nations.
17:00 on 23/7/15 (UK date).
Two weeks ago I published the post that can hopefully be read above laying out my view of the general concepts of how mitigation should function within the agreement. However that still left open the question of the actual text that would appear within the final agreement.
At the time I said that the latest 11/6/15 revision had become unreadable let alone unworkable. So instead I went back to the original non-paper and the 9/2/15 revision. I found this to provide a reasonable framework for a final text although it requires some modification and a lot of simplification.
Section D: Mitigation (9/2/15):
P13.1 - Here I think Option 1 is more then sufficient without the bracketed sections. While it acknowledges CBDR and sustainable development it makes clear that all parties have to take action to keep global temperatures below 2/1.5C.
P13.2 - I would simplify this entirely by merging the various options to read;
"Parties' efforts to take the form of a long-term zero emissions sustainable development pathway consistent with science and the findings of the / Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (e.g. 40–70 per cent below 2010 levels by 2050)."
This further clarifies that in order to achieve the goal laid out in P13.1 all parties must undertake mitigation actions consistent with the scientific/IPCC assessment of what is required. The fact that it acknowledges sustainable development again allows for developing nations to continue to develop while working towards that goal.
P14 - I consider this to be fine as is because it provides further reassurance to all nations - but particularly developing ones - that they won't be bullied into taking action if it means - for example - forcing their population to starve.
P15 - Here I consider Option 1 to be fine in the form;
"In accordance with Article 4 of the Convention, all Parties to progressively enhance the level of ambition of their mitigation commitments / contributions / actions such that each commitment / contribution / action is of a type, scope, scale and coverage more / no less ambitious than those previously undertaken under this agreement or the Convention or its Kyoto Protocol"
Having established in P13.1 and P13.2 the long term goal parties are trying to achieve there's no need to re-state it here. You merely need to prevent parties from backsliding from previous commitments. This wording achieves that.
P16 - I would massively simplify this by merging many of the numerous options into a paragraph reading;
"In accordance with the principles of the Convention and its Article 4, each Party to prepare, communicate and implement successive nationally determined mitigation commitments / contributions / actions, which are to be quantified or quantifiable, which can be aggregated, and which are transparent, comparable and/or verifiable. To this end they must be submitted in the form laid out in technical annex (X)"
http://i414.photobucket.com/albums/pp226/Sovereign16/MitigationAnnex_zpsojfgg40t.jpg
The above link should show you a very rough example of what I expect this technical annex to look like. However if what is turning out to be the most complicated IT task in the world has failed it is simply a table with the sections that need to be included in a nation's submission such as; Type, Scope, Coverage, Baseline etc alongside the rules governing what information is included in each section. So for example;
- Type - "Parties are to submit either an absolute reduction or an intensity reduction in line with their CBDR."
P17 - This simply duplicates obligations laid out in other parts of the section and as such is needless and needs to be removed.
P18 - Here Option 1 is fine as is because it simply establishes that nation's submissions will be subjected to a peer review process but leaves the details of that process to be dealt with by a separate, dedicated section of the agreement.
P19 - I consider this to be covered by the section of the technical annex that allows for a Conditional/Additional action so I'm not strictly sure this paragraph is needed. However I can certainly see no harm in enshrining the concept of co-operation between nations separately within the agreement in order to encourage it.
P20 - This is an area I hope to cover more fully in the section dealing with the review process. However it is clear that these mitigation submissions will include information that nations consider sensitive to national security such as the functioning of nuclear power plants or those hydroelectric dams that the Iraqis and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) seem to be fighting over constantly at the moment.
Therefore what I envisage is there for to be three levels of technical detail to be submitted. The first of these sees the form laid out in the technical annex to function almost of an index card that will be publicly available to people such as me. After all there is a lot of difference between saying that a nation intends to reduce emissions by improving the function of a dam and saying exactly how they intend to do improve a dam's function. The second level of detail will be kept private amongst accredited parties as part of the peer review process which possibly could take place online as part of a secure network. Whether a nation has provided enough detail at this level is something that can be argued over during the peer review process. Finally there is the highly detailed, proprietary information that isn't considered part of the process but which nations can choose to share amongst their close friends and allies if they so wish.
To my mind Option 3 here allows for that scenario.
At around 18:25 on 22/7/15 (UK date) it should be obvious to all that I've got at least four more paragraphs to cover. However having wasted a good hour swearing at computers I'll be back to finish up tomorrow.
Edited at around 16:25 on 23/7/15 (UK date) to add;
P21 - This is unnecessary and should be removed because the rest of the section not only establishes that nations should draw up low emissions strategies but offers detailed guidance on how to go about it.
P22 - Many forests do cross national borders so this is required and fine as is without the bracketed text about providing an alternative.
P23 - As I mentioned in discussing the general concepts for this section the rules governing market based mechanisms are not as advanced as they need to be. Therefore I think the specifics are best dealt with in the technical annex rather then being set in stone in the agreement text. However there does need to be reference to them in the text to ensure that they are included in any future version of the annex. To that end I think that Options 2&5 are not specific enough while Options 3&4 are too specific to the point of restricting further development in the area. For example Option 4 defines market based mechanisms as only the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) or any for of of carbon credit trading scheme.
Therefore I support Option 1 with only a few minor changes;
P23 - Reading as; "In meeting their commitments /contributions /actions parties may make use of market mechanisms and actions including in the land-use sector in accordance with rules and provisions adopted by the governing body of this Protocol in order to ensure environmental integrity by ensuring that:
- Transfers of mitigation outcomes or units between Parties can be used to meet their contributions/commitments/actions under the new agreement.
- Units emanating from UNFCCC-approved mechanisms, including REDD-plus mechanisms will be transferable and can be used to meet contributions/commitments/actions of Parties under the new agreement.
- Mitigation outcomes and units emanating from mechanisms outside the UNFCCC can be used to meet contributions/commitments/actions of Parties under the new agreement provided that they meet conformity requirements established by the COP."
P23.2 - I consider this fine as is without the reference to a cap so it reads; "The use of market mechanisms shall be supplementary to domestic action. Domestic action shall account for the majority of the emission reductions required to fulfil each Party’s commitment."
23.3 - I consider this fine as is.
23.4 - I consider this fine as is because the intention is that market based mechanism supplement direct funding such as through the Green Climate Fund (GCF).
23.5 - I consider this fine as is.
23.6 - I consider this fine as is.
P24 - Here I support Option 3 because it requires all parties to give consideration, in their submissions, to the needs of less capable nations. This is essential to establishing a capacity building element to the peer review process. The wording also places an obligation on the COP to strengthen existing mechanisms and develop new mechanisms to aid with this capacity building. However it stops short of being too prescriptive because the answer may well be something that we've not thought of yet. I would though exclude the sentence about poverty eradication being the first and overriding priority because CBDR is already well established particularly in P14. However that particular phrase seems to provide an opt out for developing nations.
17:00 on 23/7/15 (UK date).
Monday, 20 July 2015
Operation Featherweight: Month 12, Week 4, Day 2.
As I mentioned in my recent posts the main battleground between the Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) is currently the city of Hasakah. This sits at the heart of Syria's north-eastern Hasakah province and forms part of the southern border of the Kurdish Cizire Canton.
In order to give you a blow-by-blow account of how this fight is going I will have to learn every street and every district within the city. In the meantime though I gather that recently this battle has started to go rather badly for ISIL.
Today a suicide bomb exploded at a Kurdish community centre in the Turkish city of Suruc which sits right on the border with the Syrian Kurdish Kobane Canton. In fact the 30 killed and 100 wounded were all Kurdish activists who were preparing to visit the city of Kobane in order to help rebuild it following the long battle with ISIL that ended in January. Although there have been two confirmed ISIL attacks on Kobane that have been launched from Turkey this appears to be the first ISIL attack on Kurds inside of Turkey.
On June 7th 2015 (7/6/15) Turkey held a general election. The main objective for Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Islamist Justice & Development Party (AKP) was to secure a two thirds Parliamentary majority. This would have allowed them to make changes to the nation's constitution without having to put those changes to public referendum. No doubt the first change AKP wanted to make was to grant executive powers to the largely symbolic President's office allowing Erdogan to continue to run the country even though he'd completed his term limits as Prime Minister. Failing that AKP wanted to secure a simple Parliamentary majority that would allow them to put constitutional changes to a public referendum.
As it turns out AKP failed to achieve either of these objectives and only succeed in emerging as the largest party in Parliament with 258 MP's - 17 short of a majority. Neither the Republican People's Party (CHP) who came second with 132 MP's nor the Kurdish People's Democratic Party (HDP) who came joint third with 80 MP's are prepared to work with AKP because of Erdogan. However in order to form a government CHP and HDP would have to work with the Turkish Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) who refuse to work with HDP. Since then AKP and MHP have been struggling to form a coalition. My suspicion is that AKP are actually trying to force a fresh election in the hope of doing better next time.
In the meantime Turkey is effectively being run by the civil service. Despite Erdogan launching numerous purges such as the "Sledgehammer" case in order to pack the Turkish establishment with Islamists the majority of them still swear allegiance to uphold the nation's constitution and the aggressively secular ideals of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. Needless to say they have been much less tolerant of ISIL. Although I've not been keeping a running tally since the start of July Turkey has managed to arrest around 80 ISIL members operating in the country significantly restricting the flow of ISIL fighters into Syria.
As such I think ISIL's main motive behind today's attack was to intimidate Turkey into ending it's crackdown. They may even be trying to collapse coalition talks between AKP and MHP in the hope of scaring Turks into voting for AKP and security in a future election.
Plus I think they're still a bit sore about the Battle of Kobane.
19:50 on 20/7/15 (UK date).
In order to give you a blow-by-blow account of how this fight is going I will have to learn every street and every district within the city. In the meantime though I gather that recently this battle has started to go rather badly for ISIL.
Today a suicide bomb exploded at a Kurdish community centre in the Turkish city of Suruc which sits right on the border with the Syrian Kurdish Kobane Canton. In fact the 30 killed and 100 wounded were all Kurdish activists who were preparing to visit the city of Kobane in order to help rebuild it following the long battle with ISIL that ended in January. Although there have been two confirmed ISIL attacks on Kobane that have been launched from Turkey this appears to be the first ISIL attack on Kurds inside of Turkey.
On June 7th 2015 (7/6/15) Turkey held a general election. The main objective for Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Islamist Justice & Development Party (AKP) was to secure a two thirds Parliamentary majority. This would have allowed them to make changes to the nation's constitution without having to put those changes to public referendum. No doubt the first change AKP wanted to make was to grant executive powers to the largely symbolic President's office allowing Erdogan to continue to run the country even though he'd completed his term limits as Prime Minister. Failing that AKP wanted to secure a simple Parliamentary majority that would allow them to put constitutional changes to a public referendum.
As it turns out AKP failed to achieve either of these objectives and only succeed in emerging as the largest party in Parliament with 258 MP's - 17 short of a majority. Neither the Republican People's Party (CHP) who came second with 132 MP's nor the Kurdish People's Democratic Party (HDP) who came joint third with 80 MP's are prepared to work with AKP because of Erdogan. However in order to form a government CHP and HDP would have to work with the Turkish Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) who refuse to work with HDP. Since then AKP and MHP have been struggling to form a coalition. My suspicion is that AKP are actually trying to force a fresh election in the hope of doing better next time.
In the meantime Turkey is effectively being run by the civil service. Despite Erdogan launching numerous purges such as the "Sledgehammer" case in order to pack the Turkish establishment with Islamists the majority of them still swear allegiance to uphold the nation's constitution and the aggressively secular ideals of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. Needless to say they have been much less tolerant of ISIL. Although I've not been keeping a running tally since the start of July Turkey has managed to arrest around 80 ISIL members operating in the country significantly restricting the flow of ISIL fighters into Syria.
As such I think ISIL's main motive behind today's attack was to intimidate Turkey into ending it's crackdown. They may even be trying to collapse coalition talks between AKP and MHP in the hope of scaring Turks into voting for AKP and security in a future election.
Plus I think they're still a bit sore about the Battle of Kobane.
19:50 on 20/7/15 (UK date).
The Chattanooga, still apparently, Shooting.
On Thursday (16/7/15) a lone gunman opened fire on US military recruiting offices in a strip mall in Chattanooga, Tennessee. He then drove around 11km (7 miles) to a US Navy reserve barracks where he opened fire again. The gunman was shot and killed at the scene but not before he had killed 5 US servicemen along with wounding another and a civilian police officer.
The US government's response to this was really one of blind panic. Initially they ruled out any connection to Islamist terrorism but then did an almost immediate U-turn and announced they were investigating it as a possible act of domestic terrorism. In the meantime it was announced that the jury had reached a verdict in the trial of James Holmes for the killing of 12 people at a cinema in Aurora, Colorado. However that verdict would not be announced for another five hours which suggested to me the jury were being told they were being given five hours to reach a verdict in what was really an open and shut case.
Although I long ago took the editorial decision to ignore him the Colorado shooter has become something of a cause celbre for America's extremely vocal "Black Lives Matter (BLM)" movement. Their main demand - illustrated by a poor cartoon widely circulated on Twitter - is that why when an Muslim carries out a mass shooting of this type it is labelled "Terrorism" and when a black person carries out this type of mass shooting it is labelled "Gang Violence" but when a white person does it their actions are labelled the result of mental health problems.
In the Aurora case the answer is quite simple. This particular white man had no connections to any criminal gang or indeed any history of criminal behaviour. Nor did his actions against civilians have any political dimension to them. However he did have a history of mental illness and prior to the shooting had been asked to leave his university due erratic behaviour.
Therefore I think it was entirely right that he was allowed to argue an insanity defence but I would have been very surprised if a properly instructed jury would have decided that his mental health problems were severe enough to pass the very strict M'naghten test of criminal responsibility.
I've always thought that the Colorado shooter was motivated mainly by ego and vanity and throughout his trial he seemed happy to revel in his status as a celebrity of BLM. To this end he grew a Salafi-style thick beard that he wore throughout the trial. The intention being to pose the question of whether we would have viewed his actions any differently if he'd been wearing that beard at the time of the shooting?
Despite the US attempts to cover up the shootings in Chattanooga the deceased shooter was quickly identified as Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez - a Muslim. The first photograph of him that became available was a police mugshot of him from an arrest in April 2015 which was a matter of public record. In that photograph Abdulazeez was sporting a Salafi-style thick beard and due to his intense stare and orange custody issue jumpsuit very closely resembled pictures of the Aurora gunman.
The fact that Abdulazeez was arrested for Driving Under the Influence (DUI) of either alcohol or recreational drugs would - to a casual observer - seem to cast doubt on whether he was a devout follower of a religion that bans the use of these things. However to people who are better versed in the subject matter this actually poses deeper questions about the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).
When I say that ISIL are not Islamic I am not being politically correct. I mean that there is Islam and then almost completely separate from that there is what ISIL are doing. One particular area where ISIL differ widely from Islam is in the use of mind altering substances such as alcohol that inhibit a persons ability to communicate with God and resist the temptation of sin. Muslims are dead against this whereas ISIL fighters make wide use of mind altering substances - particularly amphetamines and cocaine.
One possibly explanation for this difference for this is that the overwhelming majority of ISIL fighters do not come from Islamic societies such as Syria and Iraq. Instead they come from secular, western societies particularly European nations such as the UK. These children and grand-children of immigrants from places like Pakistan do culturally identify as Muslim and can recite the Shahada but don't really practise the religion. So for example they'll happily tell you about their duty to go and fight for ISIL but they will do so in a bar while drinking vodka and smoking a joint.
At his arrest Abdulazeez admitted to being under the influence of alcohol and marijuana. However he also had a white, powdery residue his nostrils. The police believed this to be either cocaine or amphetamine but Abdulazeez claimed it was legal caffeine pills that he had crushed up and snorted. With the amount of residue being so small and with it not being relevant to proving the DUI offence the police decided not to have the substance tested. I am however somewhat familiar with all the substances mentioned in the police report. In fact that is a little bit of a game - particularly in climate change circles - of guessing which one I'm under the influence of at any particular time. The most recent answer is of course caffeine. Lots and lots of caffeine. So much caffeine in fact it made me a little ill.
Details of Abdulazeez's background also began to quickly emerge and they very closely resemble those of Mohammed Emwazi - a naturalised British citizens who found limited infamy as ISIL executioner-in-chief under the name "Jihadi John." While the Emwazi family had initially emigrated to Kuwait from Iraq the Abdulazeez family had emigrated there from Jordan. However both Mohammed Emwazi and Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez were both born in Kuwait before both families were kicked out for engaging in extremist activity in the early 1990's with the Emwazis ending up the in UK and the Abdulazeezs ending up in the US.
When he was publicly identified a supposedly mainstream Muslim protest group by the name of Cage UK immediately leaped to Emwazi's defence claiming that he was just a troubled young man who had been radicalised by the British government's racist persecution of Muslims. The Abdulazeez family have since come out with a remarkably similar story of Muhammad Youssef being an all-American boy who suffered terribly at the hands of an abusive father. Fitting in neatly with the Aurora shooting story it is also claimed that he suffered with mental health problems.
Amid rumours that the Adbulazeez family may have to come Jordan as refugees from Palestine much of the initial investigation has focused on frequent and recent trips he made back to Jordan. This seems to be a reference to the recent scandal over the April 30th 2003 (30/4/03) suicide bombing of Mike's Place Cafe in Tel Aviv, Israel. This was carried out by two British Muslims who went down in history as the first British Muslims to kill themselves in a suicide bombing.
In the run-up to the recent 10th anniversary of the July 7th 2005 (7/7/05) bombings in London, UK it emerged that one of the suicide bombers - Mohammed Sidique Kahn - had travelled to Jordan and Israel just prior to the Mike's Place bombing. The Israelis suspected him of playing a role in that attack - specifically scouting a border crossing between Jordan and Israel that the bombers used. This information was passed to the British authorities. However no action was taken.
Obviously this could be an indication that that UK security services are so badly under-resourced that they were unable to follow up on the Israeli lead. Alternatively though - as you may have noticed from the rise of ISIL - western intelligence agencies do have a tendancy to find Islamist terrorism highly amusing. When it's happening to someone else.
In his then role of Foreign Minister the current Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netenyahu was in London on 7/7/05. The fact he avoided the bombings by delaying departure from his hotel has spawned millions of conspiracy theories about the attacks being a Zionist plot some of which are just plain wrong while others are intentionally anti-semitic. As a result the entire episode remains extremely contentious.
Despite it being an attack against the US state - specifically the branch of the state dealing with war, the most extreme form of political dispute - with BLM having poisoned the debate of the past year there has been a long delay in declaring Adbulazeez's actions a terrorist attack. One thing that investigators are looking at is a text sent by Adbulazeez containing the segment of the Hadith 38 which reads; ""Whosoever acts with enmity towards a friend [wali] of Mine, I will indeed declare war against him."
Again this is highly contentious issue in discussions over Islamist terrorism. Although it's not as bad as Farsi Arabic is quite a flowery and metaphorical language. As a result the Qu'ran and the Hadith are both open to very wild interpretation. As a recent example the Egyptian government has published a style guide for journalists covering that nation's fight against ISIL. On thing that it recommends is that terrorists are not referred to as "Jihadists."
That is because under the mainstream interpretation of Islam "Jihad" is an internal struggle against sin. So for example you may want to drink, smoke and engage in casual sex rather then praying five times a day but it is your duty to wage Jihad against those impulses. However groups such as ISIL frequently try and use the concept of Jihad as an excuse to commit acts of violence against people who simply don't agree with them. Therefore by referring to ISIL and their ilk as "Jihadists" you help legitimise their interpretation of Islam. So I think the Egyptian government actually make an extremely valid point and I will endeavour to do better. However writing largely for a western audience I must surely be allowed the occasional rhetorical flourish.
This interpretation of Islamic texts issue is a nightmare for those trying to prosecute terrorists. That's because every time someone who is blatantly engaged in terrorist activity uses Islamic text as a code all the mainstream Muslims will line up behind groups such as Cage UK to argue that rather then using a term like "War" to mean war they were instead using it as a metaphor and accuse the prosecutors of racism. If this is a road BLM want to continue down they're really going to have to raise their game.
Despite there being no possibility of a trial to prejudice US President Barack Obama has still not found himself able to come out publicly to comment on this terrorist attack. As Obama did see fit to comment on both the Chapel Hill shootings and the Charleston shootings I find this extremely worrying and a symptom of his complete lack of leadership.
16:25 on 20/7/15 (UK date).
The US government's response to this was really one of blind panic. Initially they ruled out any connection to Islamist terrorism but then did an almost immediate U-turn and announced they were investigating it as a possible act of domestic terrorism. In the meantime it was announced that the jury had reached a verdict in the trial of James Holmes for the killing of 12 people at a cinema in Aurora, Colorado. However that verdict would not be announced for another five hours which suggested to me the jury were being told they were being given five hours to reach a verdict in what was really an open and shut case.
Although I long ago took the editorial decision to ignore him the Colorado shooter has become something of a cause celbre for America's extremely vocal "Black Lives Matter (BLM)" movement. Their main demand - illustrated by a poor cartoon widely circulated on Twitter - is that why when an Muslim carries out a mass shooting of this type it is labelled "Terrorism" and when a black person carries out this type of mass shooting it is labelled "Gang Violence" but when a white person does it their actions are labelled the result of mental health problems.
In the Aurora case the answer is quite simple. This particular white man had no connections to any criminal gang or indeed any history of criminal behaviour. Nor did his actions against civilians have any political dimension to them. However he did have a history of mental illness and prior to the shooting had been asked to leave his university due erratic behaviour.
Therefore I think it was entirely right that he was allowed to argue an insanity defence but I would have been very surprised if a properly instructed jury would have decided that his mental health problems were severe enough to pass the very strict M'naghten test of criminal responsibility.
I've always thought that the Colorado shooter was motivated mainly by ego and vanity and throughout his trial he seemed happy to revel in his status as a celebrity of BLM. To this end he grew a Salafi-style thick beard that he wore throughout the trial. The intention being to pose the question of whether we would have viewed his actions any differently if he'd been wearing that beard at the time of the shooting?
Despite the US attempts to cover up the shootings in Chattanooga the deceased shooter was quickly identified as Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez - a Muslim. The first photograph of him that became available was a police mugshot of him from an arrest in April 2015 which was a matter of public record. In that photograph Abdulazeez was sporting a Salafi-style thick beard and due to his intense stare and orange custody issue jumpsuit very closely resembled pictures of the Aurora gunman.
The fact that Abdulazeez was arrested for Driving Under the Influence (DUI) of either alcohol or recreational drugs would - to a casual observer - seem to cast doubt on whether he was a devout follower of a religion that bans the use of these things. However to people who are better versed in the subject matter this actually poses deeper questions about the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).
When I say that ISIL are not Islamic I am not being politically correct. I mean that there is Islam and then almost completely separate from that there is what ISIL are doing. One particular area where ISIL differ widely from Islam is in the use of mind altering substances such as alcohol that inhibit a persons ability to communicate with God and resist the temptation of sin. Muslims are dead against this whereas ISIL fighters make wide use of mind altering substances - particularly amphetamines and cocaine.
One possibly explanation for this difference for this is that the overwhelming majority of ISIL fighters do not come from Islamic societies such as Syria and Iraq. Instead they come from secular, western societies particularly European nations such as the UK. These children and grand-children of immigrants from places like Pakistan do culturally identify as Muslim and can recite the Shahada but don't really practise the religion. So for example they'll happily tell you about their duty to go and fight for ISIL but they will do so in a bar while drinking vodka and smoking a joint.
At his arrest Abdulazeez admitted to being under the influence of alcohol and marijuana. However he also had a white, powdery residue his nostrils. The police believed this to be either cocaine or amphetamine but Abdulazeez claimed it was legal caffeine pills that he had crushed up and snorted. With the amount of residue being so small and with it not being relevant to proving the DUI offence the police decided not to have the substance tested. I am however somewhat familiar with all the substances mentioned in the police report. In fact that is a little bit of a game - particularly in climate change circles - of guessing which one I'm under the influence of at any particular time. The most recent answer is of course caffeine. Lots and lots of caffeine. So much caffeine in fact it made me a little ill.
Details of Abdulazeez's background also began to quickly emerge and they very closely resemble those of Mohammed Emwazi - a naturalised British citizens who found limited infamy as ISIL executioner-in-chief under the name "Jihadi John." While the Emwazi family had initially emigrated to Kuwait from Iraq the Abdulazeez family had emigrated there from Jordan. However both Mohammed Emwazi and Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez were both born in Kuwait before both families were kicked out for engaging in extremist activity in the early 1990's with the Emwazis ending up the in UK and the Abdulazeezs ending up in the US.
When he was publicly identified a supposedly mainstream Muslim protest group by the name of Cage UK immediately leaped to Emwazi's defence claiming that he was just a troubled young man who had been radicalised by the British government's racist persecution of Muslims. The Abdulazeez family have since come out with a remarkably similar story of Muhammad Youssef being an all-American boy who suffered terribly at the hands of an abusive father. Fitting in neatly with the Aurora shooting story it is also claimed that he suffered with mental health problems.
Amid rumours that the Adbulazeez family may have to come Jordan as refugees from Palestine much of the initial investigation has focused on frequent and recent trips he made back to Jordan. This seems to be a reference to the recent scandal over the April 30th 2003 (30/4/03) suicide bombing of Mike's Place Cafe in Tel Aviv, Israel. This was carried out by two British Muslims who went down in history as the first British Muslims to kill themselves in a suicide bombing.
In the run-up to the recent 10th anniversary of the July 7th 2005 (7/7/05) bombings in London, UK it emerged that one of the suicide bombers - Mohammed Sidique Kahn - had travelled to Jordan and Israel just prior to the Mike's Place bombing. The Israelis suspected him of playing a role in that attack - specifically scouting a border crossing between Jordan and Israel that the bombers used. This information was passed to the British authorities. However no action was taken.
Obviously this could be an indication that that UK security services are so badly under-resourced that they were unable to follow up on the Israeli lead. Alternatively though - as you may have noticed from the rise of ISIL - western intelligence agencies do have a tendancy to find Islamist terrorism highly amusing. When it's happening to someone else.
In his then role of Foreign Minister the current Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netenyahu was in London on 7/7/05. The fact he avoided the bombings by delaying departure from his hotel has spawned millions of conspiracy theories about the attacks being a Zionist plot some of which are just plain wrong while others are intentionally anti-semitic. As a result the entire episode remains extremely contentious.
Despite it being an attack against the US state - specifically the branch of the state dealing with war, the most extreme form of political dispute - with BLM having poisoned the debate of the past year there has been a long delay in declaring Adbulazeez's actions a terrorist attack. One thing that investigators are looking at is a text sent by Adbulazeez containing the segment of the Hadith 38 which reads; ""Whosoever acts with enmity towards a friend [wali] of Mine, I will indeed declare war against him."
Again this is highly contentious issue in discussions over Islamist terrorism. Although it's not as bad as Farsi Arabic is quite a flowery and metaphorical language. As a result the Qu'ran and the Hadith are both open to very wild interpretation. As a recent example the Egyptian government has published a style guide for journalists covering that nation's fight against ISIL. On thing that it recommends is that terrorists are not referred to as "Jihadists."
That is because under the mainstream interpretation of Islam "Jihad" is an internal struggle against sin. So for example you may want to drink, smoke and engage in casual sex rather then praying five times a day but it is your duty to wage Jihad against those impulses. However groups such as ISIL frequently try and use the concept of Jihad as an excuse to commit acts of violence against people who simply don't agree with them. Therefore by referring to ISIL and their ilk as "Jihadists" you help legitimise their interpretation of Islam. So I think the Egyptian government actually make an extremely valid point and I will endeavour to do better. However writing largely for a western audience I must surely be allowed the occasional rhetorical flourish.
This interpretation of Islamic texts issue is a nightmare for those trying to prosecute terrorists. That's because every time someone who is blatantly engaged in terrorist activity uses Islamic text as a code all the mainstream Muslims will line up behind groups such as Cage UK to argue that rather then using a term like "War" to mean war they were instead using it as a metaphor and accuse the prosecutors of racism. If this is a road BLM want to continue down they're really going to have to raise their game.
Despite there being no possibility of a trial to prejudice US President Barack Obama has still not found himself able to come out publicly to comment on this terrorist attack. As Obama did see fit to comment on both the Chapel Hill shootings and the Charleston shootings I find this extremely worrying and a symptom of his complete lack of leadership.
16:25 on 20/7/15 (UK date).
Sunday, 19 July 2015
Homer's Odyssey.
A couple of weeks back I announced on Twitter that I was going to start watching this US TV Show called "Odyssey." Mainly this was because I'd reached the point in the evening when I just really liked the sound of my own voice.
However the show's central character "Odelle Ballard" is played by Anna Friel. Ever since her 1994 debut in the UK soap opera "Brookside" Friel has had a reputation in UK circles for only being involved in projects of a certain quality. As such I have no problem admitting that I was a little bit excited at the prospect of watching this show. However when they trailed it in the UK it was billed only as; "Coming Soon." I assumed that BBC2 would broadcast it in the Thursday night 9PM which has a reputation for being used for this type of show.
I was a bit disappointed then to discover that the BBC had decided to bury it in an awkward 9:15PM Sunday night slot. This put it up against a Channel 4 show called "Humans" which is aimed at a similar audience and not only began its season a week previously its episodes begin 15 minutes earlier at the top of the hour. If I didn't know better I would think that the BBC were deliberately running down the show's ratings in the hope of forcing the US distributor to sell the show at a lower price. Thursday night TV remains an utter wasteland.
Very much in the style of "Homeland" Odyssey sets out to examine why all these Islamist insurgencies have a habit of popping up in either resource rich or geopolitically important locations. The device it uses to do this is the Ballard character discovering that a US mining company has paid millions of dollars to an Al Qaeda leader that her special forces team have been sent to kill in Mali. Shadowy forces in the US Establishment then send private military contractors (PMC's) to kill Ballard's team. She survives and then - with the help of the Tuaregs - begins a sort of Odyssey to make this information public.
The show also takes a massive swipe at the "Occupy Wall Street (OWS)" protest movement that has recently morphed into the "Black Lives Matter (BLM)" movement. Although the spoilt rich kids who make up the movement initially get wind of this massive scandal they soon lose interest in favour of an almost religious worship of a Greek finance minister's bonkers economic policies.
Since I mentioned the show I've noticed that there has been a slight uptick in activity in the actual Mali. This could just be a renewed interest in the country leading to an increase in reporting or it could be a sign that people in Mali are getting a little paranoid that people are gossipping about them behind their backs. If it is the latter I feel I should reassure them that the show is far more about American society then anything to do with Mali. In fact in the US it's broadcast under the name "American Odyssey" to highlight this point.
As an example everyone in Mali knows that although they're not defined by skin colour Tuaregs tend to be properly, hardcore black. However in the show all the Tuaregs are portrayed as Arabs. This could be a mistake or intentionally done to allow the viewer to mistake the show's Islamist terrorists with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).
Also the show features Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje who is no doubt sick of being reminded that he played "Simon Adebisi" in that much talked about show "Oz." While Oz is deliberately vague about exactly where in west Africa Adebisi is from in one blink and you'll miss it moment it's confirmed that he's from Nigeria. Akinnuoye-Agbaje's role in Odyssey could certainly then be interpreted as a reference to the way that Boko Haram suddenly exploded in Nigeria just after the Islamist insurgency in Mali was brought to an end.
Sadly I think Odyssey will end up posing more questions then it answers because I gather that it's already been cancelled after just one series. So perhaps it's more "Icarus" then "Odyssey."
17:15 on 19/7/15 (UK date).
However the show's central character "Odelle Ballard" is played by Anna Friel. Ever since her 1994 debut in the UK soap opera "Brookside" Friel has had a reputation in UK circles for only being involved in projects of a certain quality. As such I have no problem admitting that I was a little bit excited at the prospect of watching this show. However when they trailed it in the UK it was billed only as; "Coming Soon." I assumed that BBC2 would broadcast it in the Thursday night 9PM which has a reputation for being used for this type of show.
I was a bit disappointed then to discover that the BBC had decided to bury it in an awkward 9:15PM Sunday night slot. This put it up against a Channel 4 show called "Humans" which is aimed at a similar audience and not only began its season a week previously its episodes begin 15 minutes earlier at the top of the hour. If I didn't know better I would think that the BBC were deliberately running down the show's ratings in the hope of forcing the US distributor to sell the show at a lower price. Thursday night TV remains an utter wasteland.
Very much in the style of "Homeland" Odyssey sets out to examine why all these Islamist insurgencies have a habit of popping up in either resource rich or geopolitically important locations. The device it uses to do this is the Ballard character discovering that a US mining company has paid millions of dollars to an Al Qaeda leader that her special forces team have been sent to kill in Mali. Shadowy forces in the US Establishment then send private military contractors (PMC's) to kill Ballard's team. She survives and then - with the help of the Tuaregs - begins a sort of Odyssey to make this information public.
The show also takes a massive swipe at the "Occupy Wall Street (OWS)" protest movement that has recently morphed into the "Black Lives Matter (BLM)" movement. Although the spoilt rich kids who make up the movement initially get wind of this massive scandal they soon lose interest in favour of an almost religious worship of a Greek finance minister's bonkers economic policies.
Since I mentioned the show I've noticed that there has been a slight uptick in activity in the actual Mali. This could just be a renewed interest in the country leading to an increase in reporting or it could be a sign that people in Mali are getting a little paranoid that people are gossipping about them behind their backs. If it is the latter I feel I should reassure them that the show is far more about American society then anything to do with Mali. In fact in the US it's broadcast under the name "American Odyssey" to highlight this point.
As an example everyone in Mali knows that although they're not defined by skin colour Tuaregs tend to be properly, hardcore black. However in the show all the Tuaregs are portrayed as Arabs. This could be a mistake or intentionally done to allow the viewer to mistake the show's Islamist terrorists with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).
Also the show features Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje who is no doubt sick of being reminded that he played "Simon Adebisi" in that much talked about show "Oz." While Oz is deliberately vague about exactly where in west Africa Adebisi is from in one blink and you'll miss it moment it's confirmed that he's from Nigeria. Akinnuoye-Agbaje's role in Odyssey could certainly then be interpreted as a reference to the way that Boko Haram suddenly exploded in Nigeria just after the Islamist insurgency in Mali was brought to an end.
Sadly I think Odyssey will end up posing more questions then it answers because I gather that it's already been cancelled after just one series. So perhaps it's more "Icarus" then "Odyssey."
17:15 on 19/7/15 (UK date).
Saturday, 18 July 2015
Operation Featherweight: Month 12, Week 3, Day 7.
In my post yesterday I wrote about how the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) had shifted their focus in northern Syria away from fighting the Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) towards capturing sections of the city of Hasakah - which sits at the southern border of the Kurdish Cizire Canton - from Syrian government forces. Having established a presence in the city ISIL would then move to attack the YPG held sections of Hasakah and the wider canton.
What I perhaps failed to make clear is that this shift began in mid-June and since then there has been often quite complex battles within Hasakah between ISIL and Syrian government and ISIL and the YPG. One particularly troubling confrontation occurred on June 28th (28/6/15) when ISIL fired shells into the heavily populated Salahya neighbourhood which was and remains under YPG control. On the same day ISIL also shelled YPG positions in the town of Tel Brak which sits around 25km (15 miles) north-east of Hasakah.
On both of these occasions when the shells exploded they released a cloud of yellowish gas and a greenish liquid both of which smelled heavily of sulphur. Those exposed to either the liquid or the gas immediately began to experience a burning sensation to their eyes, nose and throat along with headaches and mild neurological impairment. Those who were exposed for a greater length of time also began to vomit. Fortunately all those exposed were immediately admitted to hospital and their symptoms passed without loss of life or significant, immediate injury.
ISIL's use of chemical weapons in Syria and Iraq is both common and widespread. In writing about the liberation of the Iraqi city of Tikrit and the Shingal/Sinjar region of Iraq's Kurdish north I've often wrote about how progress has been slowed by the need to defuse a large number of Improvised Explosive Devices (IED's). What has further complicated the effort is that a significant proportion of these IED's have been constructed to release a cloud of Chlorine gas when detonated. This of course makes it extremely risky to defuse these IED's by using a controlled detonation.
However what we appear to have seen in Hasakah and in Kobane City towards the end of 2014 is the use by ISIL of some variant of Sulphur Mustard Gas. Unlike Chlorine which is classed as an irritant like tear gas rather then a poison and is widely used in swimming pools and homes Mustard Gas compounds are considered Schedule 1 Chemical Weapons - the most serious - under the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention and their use is classed as a war crime and strictly forbidden under the Geneva Conventions.
To their credit because they lack the resources to fully identify the exact chemical agent used the YPG have yet to formally accuse ISIL of using Mustard Gas. However they are continuing to work with organisations such as Conflict Armament Research (CAR) the identify the agent used and have captured industrial gas masks and other protective equipment for ISIL forces in the area which would suggest co-ordinated preparations to engage in chemical warfare. It is not year clear if the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) who are been very active in Syria are currently investigating the incident.
Having been extremely busy with things that I'd been putting off for far too long you may have noticed that it's been quite some time since I gave a proper update on the situation in Iraq. The main reason why I've felt comfortable in doing this is that there has actually been very little going on.
In mid-June the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) including the Shia militias known as the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF) halted offensive operations in Anbar province particularly around the city of Ramadi which sits around 100km (60 miles) to the west of the Iraqi capital Baghdad. On July 2nd (2/7/15) the ISF claimed that the town of Baiji which sits around 280km (170 miles) north of Baghdad and around 50km (30 miles) north of the city of Tikrit had been liberated from ISIL. However reports of clashes with pockets of resistance continue. The ISF has so far not been able to liberate the major oil refinery which sits just outside Baiji.
The main reason behind this lack of progress is that the US-led coalition continues to delay, disrupt and thwart any attempt by the ISF to liberate their territory from ISIL. The most overt element of these attempts to hinder the ISF has been the delays over the delivery of 36 F-16 multi-role fighter aircraft that Iraq ordered from the US way back in 2011.
Obviously you don't just buy a fleet of F-16's off the shelf. Instead normally a deposit is paid when the order is placed and the contract lays out a timetable where future payments are made in accordance with progress in building the aircraft. Almost from the moment the order was placed the US have used the aircraft as a largely unsuccessful way to blackmail the Iraqi government into doing as it is told. As a result the contract hasn't progressed anywhere near as far as it should so I can't strictly say that Iraq has paid for the aircraft but the delay is certainly on the US side rather then Iraq's inability to pay.
You would think that with ISIL overrunning large sections of Iraq in the summer of 2014 and the US being forced to deploy its own F-16's and pilots to Iraq in an effort to stop them the US would perhaps stop delaying delivery. However the US has done the complete opposite started delaying delivery even further. For the most part the reason given for refusing to hand over the aircraft was a concern that the situation on the ground was not secure enough to prevent them falling into the hands of ISIL. This is while US aircraft continue to operate from bases within Iraq. However at one point the US even delayed the contract on the grounds that the aircraft may be used against opposition groups within Iraq. Such as ISIL.
Part of this particular contract sees Iraqi pilots being trained how to operate F-16's within the US. This is what was happening on June 25th (26/6/15) when an F-16 crashed in Arizona, US. The pilot - an Iraqi General - was killed. This type of training accident is normally the sort of thing that sees the entire production contract suspended until it can be determined whether the pilot or the aircraft was at fault. The fact the crash occurred closed to a natural gas transit pipeline seemed to be a reference to Iraq's Kurdish Regional Government's (KRG) sale of natural gas via Turkey in a further effort to infuriate the Iraqi government.
Then on July 7th (7/7/15) another F-16 this time operated entirely by the US Air Force (USAF) collided with a Cessna C150 near Charleston, South Carolina killing the two civilians in the Cessna. Hidden amongst all the controversy of the Charleston shooting that occurred little more then two weeks previously this seemed to be a reference to the fact that with the US refusing to deliver the F-16's as ordered the Iraqis have been forced to rely on aircraft such as Cessna's which are in no way suitable for the task.
I suppose then we should all be extremely grateful that the US finally allowed the delivery of 4 of the 36 F-16's on Tuesday (14/7/15).
The other most significant and perhaps most dangerous delaying tactic the US has deployed in the fight against ISIL in Iraq has been US President Obama's desire to establish a Sunni National Guard Force. Obviously creating such a force creates a delay of at least six months to a year before anyone is permitted to do any actual fighting. However it also increases sectarian tension creating the sort of political chaos that prevents Iraq from putting together a united front to defeat ISIL.
Although I really do need to find the time to learn more about Anbar's specific Sunni tribes and the people who lead them rather then clumsily tarring them all with the same brush a significant part of the reason why ISIL was able to advance so far into Anbar so fast is that many of the Sunni tribes sided with ISIL over the Shia dominated country and it's national government.
In much the same way that the Tuaregs in Mali initially sided with Islamist groups such Ansar Dine and the Movement for Oneness and Jihad in West Africa (MOJWA) Anbar's Sunni tribes saw an allegiance with ISIL as a way to pressure the Iraqi government into meeting their demands - mainly for increased autonomy and direct payments. Again as with the Tuaregs in Mali the Sunni tribes quickly discovered that ISIL had no interest in sharing power or furthering any cause but their own. As a result almost all of Anbar's Sunni tribes have now shifted their allegiance back to the Iraqi government and share it's desire to defeat ISIL.
Obviously I think that those Sunni tribes who have realised the truth of what ISIL are about should be provided with a route back into mainstream Iraqi society. However it should be clear to all that there are significant trust issues between Iraq's Shia majority and the Sunni tribes that sided with ISIL and it will take time for that trust to be restored.
Obama's plan will see effectively see a Sunni army being created within Iraq's western province. The Iraqi government is obviously entitled to be a little concerned that this army will start to act as a state within a state and either attempt to blackmail the rest of the country by threatening civil war or breakaway entirely. As such it is possibly the worst thing to do at a time when there is a clear need to build trust and with it cohesion within Iraqi society.
The fear that Obama is building up a Sunni force in a clumsy effort to break Iraq apart into the much talked about Sunni-stan, Shia-stan and Kurdi-stan is likely what prompted the PMF to force the wider ISF into - on Monday (13/7/15) - launching an operation to liberate both Ramadi and Fallujah which sits roughly halfway between Ramadi and Baghdad.
As I've said on numerous occasions fighting and liberating large urban areas such as cities is one of the toughest thing a military force will do with the fighting often being extremely slow and extremely close up. The thought of trying to liberate two cities at the same time is almost unfathomable and it failed back in September 2014 and failed again in May this year leading to the ISF being forced completely from Ramadi. At the same time I do not consider the Tikrit operation to be fully complete until Baiji and it's refinery have been liberated and linked up with Kirkuk. As such while now it has started I am under an obligation to support this Anbar operation I think it would have made more sense for the ISF to focus on completing the Tikrit operation before taking on such a large new challenge.
The US-led coalition though has had no qualms in supporting the Anbar offensive and if anything seem to be encouraging the ISF by providing them with all the air-support they could possibly need. In the meantime ISIL have continued to stage attacks against both Kirkuk and Baiji.
ISIL's immediate response to this new Anbar offensive has been to carry out large and frequent suicide bombings in Shia neighbourhoods in and around Baghdad. The most significant of these occurred yesterday on the first day of Eid in the town of Kahn Bani Saad which sits around 25km (15 miles) north of Baghdad's infamous Sadr City district. It appears that a truck purporting to sell ice drove into a market full of people shopping to celebrate the end of the fasting month of Ramadan. Once it had gathered a large crowd with it's promises of low prices the truck bomb was detonated killing 120 civilians and injuring over 400 more.
The purpose of these gruesome ISIL attacks on Iraq's Shia's is to provoke the PMF to retaliate by intensifying the Anbar operation. With Sunnis in Ramadi and Fallujah with ISIL guns to their heads already being forced to issue false and exaggerated claims of deaths and injuries from air-strikes the intention being to make Sunnis in Iraq and Syria so afraid of ISIL enemies that they will side with ISIL making it much harder to defeat the group.
21:45 on 18/7/15 (UK date).
What I perhaps failed to make clear is that this shift began in mid-June and since then there has been often quite complex battles within Hasakah between ISIL and Syrian government and ISIL and the YPG. One particularly troubling confrontation occurred on June 28th (28/6/15) when ISIL fired shells into the heavily populated Salahya neighbourhood which was and remains under YPG control. On the same day ISIL also shelled YPG positions in the town of Tel Brak which sits around 25km (15 miles) north-east of Hasakah.
On both of these occasions when the shells exploded they released a cloud of yellowish gas and a greenish liquid both of which smelled heavily of sulphur. Those exposed to either the liquid or the gas immediately began to experience a burning sensation to their eyes, nose and throat along with headaches and mild neurological impairment. Those who were exposed for a greater length of time also began to vomit. Fortunately all those exposed were immediately admitted to hospital and their symptoms passed without loss of life or significant, immediate injury.
ISIL's use of chemical weapons in Syria and Iraq is both common and widespread. In writing about the liberation of the Iraqi city of Tikrit and the Shingal/Sinjar region of Iraq's Kurdish north I've often wrote about how progress has been slowed by the need to defuse a large number of Improvised Explosive Devices (IED's). What has further complicated the effort is that a significant proportion of these IED's have been constructed to release a cloud of Chlorine gas when detonated. This of course makes it extremely risky to defuse these IED's by using a controlled detonation.
However what we appear to have seen in Hasakah and in Kobane City towards the end of 2014 is the use by ISIL of some variant of Sulphur Mustard Gas. Unlike Chlorine which is classed as an irritant like tear gas rather then a poison and is widely used in swimming pools and homes Mustard Gas compounds are considered Schedule 1 Chemical Weapons - the most serious - under the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention and their use is classed as a war crime and strictly forbidden under the Geneva Conventions.
To their credit because they lack the resources to fully identify the exact chemical agent used the YPG have yet to formally accuse ISIL of using Mustard Gas. However they are continuing to work with organisations such as Conflict Armament Research (CAR) the identify the agent used and have captured industrial gas masks and other protective equipment for ISIL forces in the area which would suggest co-ordinated preparations to engage in chemical warfare. It is not year clear if the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) who are been very active in Syria are currently investigating the incident.
Having been extremely busy with things that I'd been putting off for far too long you may have noticed that it's been quite some time since I gave a proper update on the situation in Iraq. The main reason why I've felt comfortable in doing this is that there has actually been very little going on.
In mid-June the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) including the Shia militias known as the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF) halted offensive operations in Anbar province particularly around the city of Ramadi which sits around 100km (60 miles) to the west of the Iraqi capital Baghdad. On July 2nd (2/7/15) the ISF claimed that the town of Baiji which sits around 280km (170 miles) north of Baghdad and around 50km (30 miles) north of the city of Tikrit had been liberated from ISIL. However reports of clashes with pockets of resistance continue. The ISF has so far not been able to liberate the major oil refinery which sits just outside Baiji.
The main reason behind this lack of progress is that the US-led coalition continues to delay, disrupt and thwart any attempt by the ISF to liberate their territory from ISIL. The most overt element of these attempts to hinder the ISF has been the delays over the delivery of 36 F-16 multi-role fighter aircraft that Iraq ordered from the US way back in 2011.
Obviously you don't just buy a fleet of F-16's off the shelf. Instead normally a deposit is paid when the order is placed and the contract lays out a timetable where future payments are made in accordance with progress in building the aircraft. Almost from the moment the order was placed the US have used the aircraft as a largely unsuccessful way to blackmail the Iraqi government into doing as it is told. As a result the contract hasn't progressed anywhere near as far as it should so I can't strictly say that Iraq has paid for the aircraft but the delay is certainly on the US side rather then Iraq's inability to pay.
You would think that with ISIL overrunning large sections of Iraq in the summer of 2014 and the US being forced to deploy its own F-16's and pilots to Iraq in an effort to stop them the US would perhaps stop delaying delivery. However the US has done the complete opposite started delaying delivery even further. For the most part the reason given for refusing to hand over the aircraft was a concern that the situation on the ground was not secure enough to prevent them falling into the hands of ISIL. This is while US aircraft continue to operate from bases within Iraq. However at one point the US even delayed the contract on the grounds that the aircraft may be used against opposition groups within Iraq. Such as ISIL.
Part of this particular contract sees Iraqi pilots being trained how to operate F-16's within the US. This is what was happening on June 25th (26/6/15) when an F-16 crashed in Arizona, US. The pilot - an Iraqi General - was killed. This type of training accident is normally the sort of thing that sees the entire production contract suspended until it can be determined whether the pilot or the aircraft was at fault. The fact the crash occurred closed to a natural gas transit pipeline seemed to be a reference to Iraq's Kurdish Regional Government's (KRG) sale of natural gas via Turkey in a further effort to infuriate the Iraqi government.
Then on July 7th (7/7/15) another F-16 this time operated entirely by the US Air Force (USAF) collided with a Cessna C150 near Charleston, South Carolina killing the two civilians in the Cessna. Hidden amongst all the controversy of the Charleston shooting that occurred little more then two weeks previously this seemed to be a reference to the fact that with the US refusing to deliver the F-16's as ordered the Iraqis have been forced to rely on aircraft such as Cessna's which are in no way suitable for the task.
I suppose then we should all be extremely grateful that the US finally allowed the delivery of 4 of the 36 F-16's on Tuesday (14/7/15).
The other most significant and perhaps most dangerous delaying tactic the US has deployed in the fight against ISIL in Iraq has been US President Obama's desire to establish a Sunni National Guard Force. Obviously creating such a force creates a delay of at least six months to a year before anyone is permitted to do any actual fighting. However it also increases sectarian tension creating the sort of political chaos that prevents Iraq from putting together a united front to defeat ISIL.
Although I really do need to find the time to learn more about Anbar's specific Sunni tribes and the people who lead them rather then clumsily tarring them all with the same brush a significant part of the reason why ISIL was able to advance so far into Anbar so fast is that many of the Sunni tribes sided with ISIL over the Shia dominated country and it's national government.
In much the same way that the Tuaregs in Mali initially sided with Islamist groups such Ansar Dine and the Movement for Oneness and Jihad in West Africa (MOJWA) Anbar's Sunni tribes saw an allegiance with ISIL as a way to pressure the Iraqi government into meeting their demands - mainly for increased autonomy and direct payments. Again as with the Tuaregs in Mali the Sunni tribes quickly discovered that ISIL had no interest in sharing power or furthering any cause but their own. As a result almost all of Anbar's Sunni tribes have now shifted their allegiance back to the Iraqi government and share it's desire to defeat ISIL.
Obviously I think that those Sunni tribes who have realised the truth of what ISIL are about should be provided with a route back into mainstream Iraqi society. However it should be clear to all that there are significant trust issues between Iraq's Shia majority and the Sunni tribes that sided with ISIL and it will take time for that trust to be restored.
Obama's plan will see effectively see a Sunni army being created within Iraq's western province. The Iraqi government is obviously entitled to be a little concerned that this army will start to act as a state within a state and either attempt to blackmail the rest of the country by threatening civil war or breakaway entirely. As such it is possibly the worst thing to do at a time when there is a clear need to build trust and with it cohesion within Iraqi society.
The fear that Obama is building up a Sunni force in a clumsy effort to break Iraq apart into the much talked about Sunni-stan, Shia-stan and Kurdi-stan is likely what prompted the PMF to force the wider ISF into - on Monday (13/7/15) - launching an operation to liberate both Ramadi and Fallujah which sits roughly halfway between Ramadi and Baghdad.
As I've said on numerous occasions fighting and liberating large urban areas such as cities is one of the toughest thing a military force will do with the fighting often being extremely slow and extremely close up. The thought of trying to liberate two cities at the same time is almost unfathomable and it failed back in September 2014 and failed again in May this year leading to the ISF being forced completely from Ramadi. At the same time I do not consider the Tikrit operation to be fully complete until Baiji and it's refinery have been liberated and linked up with Kirkuk. As such while now it has started I am under an obligation to support this Anbar operation I think it would have made more sense for the ISF to focus on completing the Tikrit operation before taking on such a large new challenge.
The US-led coalition though has had no qualms in supporting the Anbar offensive and if anything seem to be encouraging the ISF by providing them with all the air-support they could possibly need. In the meantime ISIL have continued to stage attacks against both Kirkuk and Baiji.
ISIL's immediate response to this new Anbar offensive has been to carry out large and frequent suicide bombings in Shia neighbourhoods in and around Baghdad. The most significant of these occurred yesterday on the first day of Eid in the town of Kahn Bani Saad which sits around 25km (15 miles) north of Baghdad's infamous Sadr City district. It appears that a truck purporting to sell ice drove into a market full of people shopping to celebrate the end of the fasting month of Ramadan. Once it had gathered a large crowd with it's promises of low prices the truck bomb was detonated killing 120 civilians and injuring over 400 more.
The purpose of these gruesome ISIL attacks on Iraq's Shia's is to provoke the PMF to retaliate by intensifying the Anbar operation. With Sunnis in Ramadi and Fallujah with ISIL guns to their heads already being forced to issue false and exaggerated claims of deaths and injuries from air-strikes the intention being to make Sunnis in Iraq and Syria so afraid of ISIL enemies that they will side with ISIL making it much harder to defeat the group.
21:45 on 18/7/15 (UK date).
Friday, 17 July 2015
Operation Featherweight: Month 12, Week 3, Day 6
At the time of my previous post 10 days ago the US-led coalition had just carried out an intense series of air-strikes against Raqqa the de facto capital of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in Syria. With 16 of the 17 strikes destroying roads and bridges in and around the city the purpose of the operation seemed to be to showcase the power of the US' strategic bombing campaign in the hope of getting the UK and other coalition partners to join in with the controversial air operation in Syria.
However all they succeeded in doing was demonstrating the folly of the US' strategic bombing campaign. In the weeks prior to the strikes the Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) had unilaterally moved to liberate the village of Ayn Issa which sits just 50km (30 miles) to the north of Raqqa. ISIL clearly took the intensification of US air-strikes on Raqqa as a sign that the city would soon come under attack. Therefore in response to the strikes they launched a pre-emptive strike that forced the YPG from Ayn Issa.
Fortunately the YPG were able to quickly recover from this setback and on July 8th (8/7/15) they were again able to liberate Ayn Issa just two days after ISIL had re-taken control. Since then clashes between the YPG and ISIL have continued in the villages surrounding Ayn Issa but these seem to be contacts between rival patrols rather then the product of any significant offensive. The main focus in the area now seems to be in and around Hasakah City - the capital of Hasakah Province - which sits around 165km (100 miles) north-east of Raqqa at the southern border of the Kurdish Cizire Canton.
For many months Hasakah City has been divided between the YPG and Syrian government forces. With the YPG fighting ISIL in places like Kobane and the Syrian government fighting various insurgent groups all across the country its been in neither sides interests to attack each other in Hasakah so a stand-off has ensued. ISIL though have been keen to capture the city and since early March have been trying to achieve this by trapping YPG fighters in the city by cutting off their supply route at the village of Tel Tamr. After more then two months of trying and failing to capture Tel Tamr ISIL changed focus and started to attack the Syrian government forces in Hasakah directly.
Obviously if ISIL were to capture sections of Hasakah from the Syrian government they would then go on to attack YPG positions in the city and elsewhere in the canton. This has created a difficult situation for the YPG whereby they have to defend Syrian government forces in Hasakah in order to keep ISIL out of the city in order to protect the integrity of the canton. This is clearly part of the thinking behind ISIL's shift in focus with the hope being that they can point at Hasakah and use it to claim that the YPG are allied with the Syrian government and are therefore a threat to Syria's Sunni-Arabs who should rise up to support ISIL against the YPG.
Unfortunately there's not really a lot the YPG can do about ISIL's propaganda efforts because they have to fight as if Hasakah was entirely under their control. That is exactly what they have been doing and on Wednesday (15/7/15) the YPG completed a successful operation to cut one of ISIL's main supply routes between Raqqa and Hasakah. Having weakened ISIL fighters in Hasakah by cutting them off from re-supply the YPG are now trying to press home their advantage by attempting to capture ISIL held positions within the city. If this is successful it will see territory within Hasakah switching from Syrian government control to ISIL control and then to YPG control where hopefully it will remain at least until ISIL have been defeated.
In the week to ten days that this has been going on there has been a noticeable improvement in the US-led air operation in Syria. Although they have maintained the intensity of strikes seen over Raqqa the US-led coalition seems to have shifted their focus away from strategic targets to more tactical targets. Put simply strategic strikes will target the oil refineries that fuel a tank or the bridge a tank uses to cross a river while tactical strikes will simply blow up the tank.
The coalition is now engaging this type of target across ISIL held territory particularly on the front-lines where they are coming into direct contact with opposing forces. This includes in and around Aleppo City which may well be a sign that the US is no longer prepared to tolerate the unspoken allegiance between ISIL and the Army of Conquest/Jaish al-Fatah (JAF) against Syrian government forces. While they are waiting for a new coalition government to be formed Turkey also seems more interested in stopping ISIL recruits crossing their border into this area.
Today it has been revealed that UK pilots seconded to unnamed allies have been engaging in combat operations over Syria. Although it would be nice to claim that it is this that has driven the improvement in operations it is likely something that has been going on since early February when France extended its operations to include Syria or early April when Canada announced that it was going to do the same.
It does though present a serious problem for the UK because the authorisation for military action against ISIL in Iraq was quite clear that it would require a separate authorisation by Parliament for UK military personnel to conduct combat operations in Syria. Therefore Parliament must address the issue to determine whether the Prime Minister has acted in contempt of Parliament in authorising these operations because it is exactly the type of mission creep that needs to be avoided.
I appreciate that it makes little military sense for UK aircraft to fly from Cyprus across Syria to bomb targets in Iraq before flying back over Syria to Cyprus but not to bomb targets in Syria. However politically there is a lot to be gained by making it clear that the NATO partners won't be joining US President Obama down this particular rabbit hole until he comes up with a coherent strategy to defeat ISIL by partnering with a ground force to swiftly remove them from the territory they hold. The first step of course would be Obama accepting that ISIL are an enemy and that they need to be defeated.
Although it doesn't relate directly to Iraq or Syria I should point out that yesterday (16/7/15) that the ISIL affiliated group Ansar Bait al-Maqdis (ABM) in Egypt succeeded in destroying an Egyptian Navy vessel in the Mediterranean Sea. In itself this is not too alarming because we've known that ABM have had access to the type of advanced laser guided missile used since they used a similar weapon in an attack in the Sinai at the start of the month.
What is alarming is that this type of "Kornet" missile is not known to be used by either the Egyptian or the Libyan military. So although Hamas have a limited stockpile it must have made it's way from Syria where ISIL have been known to capture them from the Syrian military. This would suggest that the allegiance between ISIL and ABM has progressed from simple pledges of allegiance and the electronic transfer of things like ideas and money to the physical transfer or military hardware.
15:20 on 17/7/15 (UK date).
However all they succeeded in doing was demonstrating the folly of the US' strategic bombing campaign. In the weeks prior to the strikes the Kurdish People's Protection Units (YPG) had unilaterally moved to liberate the village of Ayn Issa which sits just 50km (30 miles) to the north of Raqqa. ISIL clearly took the intensification of US air-strikes on Raqqa as a sign that the city would soon come under attack. Therefore in response to the strikes they launched a pre-emptive strike that forced the YPG from Ayn Issa.
Fortunately the YPG were able to quickly recover from this setback and on July 8th (8/7/15) they were again able to liberate Ayn Issa just two days after ISIL had re-taken control. Since then clashes between the YPG and ISIL have continued in the villages surrounding Ayn Issa but these seem to be contacts between rival patrols rather then the product of any significant offensive. The main focus in the area now seems to be in and around Hasakah City - the capital of Hasakah Province - which sits around 165km (100 miles) north-east of Raqqa at the southern border of the Kurdish Cizire Canton.
For many months Hasakah City has been divided between the YPG and Syrian government forces. With the YPG fighting ISIL in places like Kobane and the Syrian government fighting various insurgent groups all across the country its been in neither sides interests to attack each other in Hasakah so a stand-off has ensued. ISIL though have been keen to capture the city and since early March have been trying to achieve this by trapping YPG fighters in the city by cutting off their supply route at the village of Tel Tamr. After more then two months of trying and failing to capture Tel Tamr ISIL changed focus and started to attack the Syrian government forces in Hasakah directly.
Obviously if ISIL were to capture sections of Hasakah from the Syrian government they would then go on to attack YPG positions in the city and elsewhere in the canton. This has created a difficult situation for the YPG whereby they have to defend Syrian government forces in Hasakah in order to keep ISIL out of the city in order to protect the integrity of the canton. This is clearly part of the thinking behind ISIL's shift in focus with the hope being that they can point at Hasakah and use it to claim that the YPG are allied with the Syrian government and are therefore a threat to Syria's Sunni-Arabs who should rise up to support ISIL against the YPG.
Unfortunately there's not really a lot the YPG can do about ISIL's propaganda efforts because they have to fight as if Hasakah was entirely under their control. That is exactly what they have been doing and on Wednesday (15/7/15) the YPG completed a successful operation to cut one of ISIL's main supply routes between Raqqa and Hasakah. Having weakened ISIL fighters in Hasakah by cutting them off from re-supply the YPG are now trying to press home their advantage by attempting to capture ISIL held positions within the city. If this is successful it will see territory within Hasakah switching from Syrian government control to ISIL control and then to YPG control where hopefully it will remain at least until ISIL have been defeated.
In the week to ten days that this has been going on there has been a noticeable improvement in the US-led air operation in Syria. Although they have maintained the intensity of strikes seen over Raqqa the US-led coalition seems to have shifted their focus away from strategic targets to more tactical targets. Put simply strategic strikes will target the oil refineries that fuel a tank or the bridge a tank uses to cross a river while tactical strikes will simply blow up the tank.
The coalition is now engaging this type of target across ISIL held territory particularly on the front-lines where they are coming into direct contact with opposing forces. This includes in and around Aleppo City which may well be a sign that the US is no longer prepared to tolerate the unspoken allegiance between ISIL and the Army of Conquest/Jaish al-Fatah (JAF) against Syrian government forces. While they are waiting for a new coalition government to be formed Turkey also seems more interested in stopping ISIL recruits crossing their border into this area.
Today it has been revealed that UK pilots seconded to unnamed allies have been engaging in combat operations over Syria. Although it would be nice to claim that it is this that has driven the improvement in operations it is likely something that has been going on since early February when France extended its operations to include Syria or early April when Canada announced that it was going to do the same.
It does though present a serious problem for the UK because the authorisation for military action against ISIL in Iraq was quite clear that it would require a separate authorisation by Parliament for UK military personnel to conduct combat operations in Syria. Therefore Parliament must address the issue to determine whether the Prime Minister has acted in contempt of Parliament in authorising these operations because it is exactly the type of mission creep that needs to be avoided.
I appreciate that it makes little military sense for UK aircraft to fly from Cyprus across Syria to bomb targets in Iraq before flying back over Syria to Cyprus but not to bomb targets in Syria. However politically there is a lot to be gained by making it clear that the NATO partners won't be joining US President Obama down this particular rabbit hole until he comes up with a coherent strategy to defeat ISIL by partnering with a ground force to swiftly remove them from the territory they hold. The first step of course would be Obama accepting that ISIL are an enemy and that they need to be defeated.
Although it doesn't relate directly to Iraq or Syria I should point out that yesterday (16/7/15) that the ISIL affiliated group Ansar Bait al-Maqdis (ABM) in Egypt succeeded in destroying an Egyptian Navy vessel in the Mediterranean Sea. In itself this is not too alarming because we've known that ABM have had access to the type of advanced laser guided missile used since they used a similar weapon in an attack in the Sinai at the start of the month.
What is alarming is that this type of "Kornet" missile is not known to be used by either the Egyptian or the Libyan military. So although Hamas have a limited stockpile it must have made it's way from Syria where ISIL have been known to capture them from the Syrian military. This would suggest that the allegiance between ISIL and ABM has progressed from simple pledges of allegiance and the electronic transfer of things like ideas and money to the physical transfer or military hardware.
15:20 on 17/7/15 (UK date).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)