Today has seen the final of the 2015 Rugby Union World Cup between New Zealand and Australia.
Given the intense rivalry between these two rugby mad nations I was really expecting a lot of banter in the run up to the game. After all the tournament began with an argument over whether the more deserving winner would be a nation that banned US popstar Chris Brown for life or one that was prepared to let him.
As far as I can tell it actually turned out to be rather subdued. There was a of course the #AirlineWager that played out online between Qantas the Australian national carrier and Air New Zealand the New Zealand national carrier.
This started out with New Zealand challenging Qantas to paint one of their aircraft in the famous All Black colours of the New Zealand rugby team if New Zealand won. Qantas agreed but only if New Zealand painted one of their aircraft in the Green & Gold of the Wallabies if Australia won.
Sadly by the time the Chairmen of both companies had got involved and the online argument had been stopped this was downgraded to flight crews of the losing team wearing the jerseys of the winning team tomorrow.
Unfortunately I don't think anyone in the airline industry is in a laughing mood at the moment.
Then on Wednesday (28/10/15) a lesbian couple from Auckland, New Zealand took to Facebook to find a man to father their children. The UK of course kidnapped my lesbian wife in a failed effort to force her into a gay marriage to produce little lesbian babies.
Although I prefer not to be reminded of that because I still think of it as a story unfinished these seemed like an attempt to get on the good side of referee Nigel Evans. Just this afternoon I discovered that not only is he Welsh he's from the same bit of Wales as my grandmother.
As the clear favourites I don't think New Zealand really needed to appeal to the referee. Taking a leaf out of South Africa's book Australia tried to break up New Zealand's play by tackling them at every opportunity. The problem was that Australia's discipline in the breakdown was nowhere near as good as South Africa's so they ended up conceding more penalties then they won.
Evans did make an uncharacteristic mistake in the first half. With New Zealand just 6-3 in the lead they put in a forward pass. However the referee awarded a penalty which New Zealand scored for the Australian tackle that ended what was - at that point - an illegal move. This though seemed to be the result of genuine human error rather then anything more sinister.
Having added a Milner-Skudder try which was converted by Carter New Zealand went in at half-time leading 16-3. Early in the second half the All Blacks looked like establishing their overwhelming rhythm when Nonu ran in another try. Although Carter missed the conversion this gave New Zealand a massive 21-3 lead.
Australia looked they'd been handed a life-line back into the match when Ben Smith prevented an Australian try by tackling Mitchell off his feet and tipping him over the horizontal. However as this was rightly ruled to be a tip-tackle rather then a full on spear-tackle Smith avoided a red card but received a yellow card and sent to the sin bin for 10 minutes. This is the first time a player has been sin binned in a World Cup final.
With the man advantage Pocock was able to score an Australian try which was converted by Foley. Despite Smith coming back on Kuridrani scored another Australian try which was converted by Foley. By making the score 24-17 this put Australia within in one converted try of levelling the match.
However just as the All Blacks were looking rattled Carter stepped up to settle their nerves with an impressive 40 yard/metre drop goal. This extended their lead to 27-17 and Barret ended the match with a try that was converted by Carter giving New Zealand a 34-17 victory.
As a result New Zealand become the first team in history to win back-to-back World Cups and the first team in history to win three World Cups.
However I should point out that I was recently excited to discover that the first Rugby World Cup I vaguely remember - in 1987 - was in fact the first Rugby World Cup.
In a further effort to completely knock the shine off of New Zealand's fully deserved achievement I have to say that as a neutral I found the predictability of it to be a little disappointing.
On day one of the tournament it was like; "New Zealand are going to win the World Cup." Now on the final day of the tournament it's like; "New Zealand have won the World Cup."
Last night saw the Bronze Medal Match between South Africa and Argentina. Prior to the semi-finals South African rugby coach Heyneke Meyer called for this game to be scrapped from future tournaments because it was demeaning and pointless. As a result no-one was really that bothered.
The match was really a succession of South African players celebrating their final top-flight game while we all waited to see if their star winger Bryan Habana could score his 16 World Cup try moving ahead of All Black legend Jonah Lomu.
Once Habana had been taken off without scoring we all waited to see if Argentina could score a try. Displaying the sportsmanship that's common place in rugby when Orlandi did finally did get Argentina's try the South African players were amongst the first to congratulate him.
South Africa won the match 24-13 but I doubt many will remember. If I'm being totally honest I only watched about an hour of it after wandering off mid-way through.
Strangely though the Americans seemed super into last night's game.
That's because in an effort to win the 2014 mid-term elections US President Barack Obama started the racially divisive Black Lives Matter (BLM) protest movement. Listening to BLM speak you would think they were protesting against something like segregation in the US in the 1960's or apartheid in South Africa rather then something that exists mainly in their heads.
The stupidity of the BLM protesters along with Obama's desire to over-look every law to support them has led to comparisons with Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe and Julius Melema in South Africa. This has completely destroyed Obama's reputation as a local community organiser let alone President of supposedly the most powerful nation on earth.
Despite Obama's attempts to blame everything on racism a big problem facing America's black community is a complete lack of discipline. For example Micheal Brown who started the BLM movement died simply because he didn't think the laws against stealing from shops and attacking people in the street applied to him.
However beyond the lack of following the laws there also seems to be a complete lack of the sort of self-discipline needed to get up and go to work every morning or study to pass exams. This is a particular problem amongst black school children who experience extremely low rates of high school graduation.
The semi-final between South Africa and the All Blacks was all about self-discipline. In fact if the Blacks hadn't dramatically improved their self-discipline in the second half it would have been South Africa playing Australia in today's final.
So on Monday (26/10/15) a video emerged from Spring Valley High School in South Carolina, US that showed a white police officer tipping a black female student out of her chair and handcuffing her. South Carolina is of course the state where the Charleston shooting took place.
Although inspired by apartheid-era South Africa and Rhodesia as Zimbabwe used to be known the shooters actions may well be legally justified by the way BLM used terrorist tactics force State authorities to disregard the law in their - what is effectively at this point a kidnapping - of police officer Micheal Slager over the death of Walter Scott.
While I think even the worst rugby referee would question the presence of a desk and chair on the field the move used to remove the disruptive pupil from the classroom was similar to the sort of tip-tackle that saw Ben Smith sin binned today. Therefore you could certainly have got the impression that this was a test to see if Obama had learnt his lesson.
One thing that has bugged me about the BLM campaign is that the rest of the World sees all Americans as overly loud, aggressive and disruptive it seems that most Americans see black Americans as particularly loud, aggressive and disruptive. As we've seen in incidents like the McKinney pool party black Americans claim that they should be allowed to behave like this because it's part of their 'African heritage.'
This really annoys me because I don't think the amount of melanin in your skin determines your ability to moderate your behaviour based on the social situation. If you think it does then you're saying that segregation and apartheid are not only good ideas but completely essential ideas.
It also annoys me because unlike many of black Americans I've actually got to know people from Africa - both black and white - rather then some make believe slave ancestor. As a result I know that schools in many African nations are very big into corporal punishment.
For example I used to work with an apartheid-era South African policeman who would tell stories that could take the enamel off your teeth. One day he was talking about using a weapon called a Sjambok to break up riots in one of the townships. A sjambok is whip made from rhino tail. Where a baton is designed to bruise the skin and a knife is designed to cut the skin the sjambok is designed to tear the skin causing immense pain.
It was a this point a Nigerian guy chimed in and went; "Yeah our black teachers used those on us at school."
Therefore I find it hypocritical that black Americans demand that one aspect of their 'African culture' is respected while denying the very existence of another aspect.
As I've said there are severe problems of under achievement amongst black students in America. A large part of this problem is generations of black high school dropouts having children who go to school with no sense of self-discipline. Those children then either dropout or are expelled before having children of their own in between spells in prison.
This has become known as "The Prison Pipeline" and it needs to stop. Obviously according to Obama though it's all the result of a racist conspiracy and nothing to do with a lack of classroom discipline.
Although liberals will hate me saying so it could be worth considering introducing corporal punishment back into America's schools. Regardless of race when you're 13/14 you know nothing of the adult world so you don't understand the consequences of being expelled, being unemployable and ending up in prison.
However you do understand the immediate pain and shame of having your ass whupped in front of everyone.
So as if looking for answers from last night's Bronze Medal Match we had Hillary Clinton attending a campaign event for black voters that was disrupted by BLM protesters.
Suggesting that Obama may have failed the test with the firing of the police officer Spring Valley students held a protest in support of the officer while a video emerged from Allentown, Pennsylvania showing four police officers being injured breaking up a violent fight between two black female high school students.
Presumably they were just celebrating their heritage.
22:10 on 31/10/15 (UK date).
Saturday, 31 October 2015
Truce Under Threat.
Long term readers will know that I've been on the receiving end of some pretty rough treatment by the UK state.
Back in 2006 there was the kidnapping of my lesbian wife in what became known as the Bristol Abuse Case (BAC) although that ultimately failed.
Then following the principle of harming people I care about there was the multi-year abuse of my grandmother.
This involved denying her medical treatment forcing her to walk around on a dislocated hip for two years. It also featured unnecessary medical treatment with drugs that were known to cause balance and psychological problems.The main part of the campaign though involved repeated home invasion robberies, burglaries and low level harassment behaviour such as aggravated trespass.
The cumulative effect of this caused her to lose her mind. However rather then performing a psychological assessment which is a legal requirement for deprivation of liberty she was arbitrarily diagnosed with an unspecified form of dementia. This meant that she had to pay for her own care in what was hoped would force her to sell her home to local property developers.
Unfortunately for them she died of natural causes in late 2012 before that could happen.
However the campaign against me continued. For example there was that malicious prosecution for criminal damage which lasted throughout much of Rihanna's 2013 Diamonds World Tour.
The fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) though has led to something of an uneasy truce between the UK and I.
Yesterday (30/10/15) morning I discovered that half a brick we use as a door stop for an out building had gone missing in an event that was largely forgotten. However this morning my father discovered that brick had been used to smash two windows on my grandmother's property in an attempt to gain entry. As the windows in question had been nailed shut in response to a previous burglary that attempt was unsuccessful.
Obviously this isn't a serious incident but it does represent a violation of the truce. It has been reported to the UK authorities. I assume there will be a full spectrum response.
Rather highlighting why this sort of thing is a problem when I woke up this morning I was debating whether I was going to cover today's air crash in Egypt or the Rugby Union World Cup final. As it turns out I'm here doing this instead and I didn't really get the opportunity to concentrate on the rugby. Although the police did have the decency to turn up 20 minutes beforehand and leave at kick-off.
On a completely unrelated matter while I'm here I should probably point out that a citizen of an EU member state - say Romania - has the right to seek work in the UK. They certainly don't have the right to find it though.
18:15 on 31/10/15 (UK date).
Back in 2006 there was the kidnapping of my lesbian wife in what became known as the Bristol Abuse Case (BAC) although that ultimately failed.
Then following the principle of harming people I care about there was the multi-year abuse of my grandmother.
This involved denying her medical treatment forcing her to walk around on a dislocated hip for two years. It also featured unnecessary medical treatment with drugs that were known to cause balance and psychological problems.The main part of the campaign though involved repeated home invasion robberies, burglaries and low level harassment behaviour such as aggravated trespass.
The cumulative effect of this caused her to lose her mind. However rather then performing a psychological assessment which is a legal requirement for deprivation of liberty she was arbitrarily diagnosed with an unspecified form of dementia. This meant that she had to pay for her own care in what was hoped would force her to sell her home to local property developers.
Unfortunately for them she died of natural causes in late 2012 before that could happen.
However the campaign against me continued. For example there was that malicious prosecution for criminal damage which lasted throughout much of Rihanna's 2013 Diamonds World Tour.
The fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) though has led to something of an uneasy truce between the UK and I.
Yesterday (30/10/15) morning I discovered that half a brick we use as a door stop for an out building had gone missing in an event that was largely forgotten. However this morning my father discovered that brick had been used to smash two windows on my grandmother's property in an attempt to gain entry. As the windows in question had been nailed shut in response to a previous burglary that attempt was unsuccessful.
Obviously this isn't a serious incident but it does represent a violation of the truce. It has been reported to the UK authorities. I assume there will be a full spectrum response.
Rather highlighting why this sort of thing is a problem when I woke up this morning I was debating whether I was going to cover today's air crash in Egypt or the Rugby Union World Cup final. As it turns out I'm here doing this instead and I didn't really get the opportunity to concentrate on the rugby. Although the police did have the decency to turn up 20 minutes beforehand and leave at kick-off.
On a completely unrelated matter while I'm here I should probably point out that a citizen of an EU member state - say Romania - has the right to seek work in the UK. They certainly don't have the right to find it though.
18:15 on 31/10/15 (UK date).
Friday, 30 October 2015
Operation Featherweight: Month 16, Week 1, Day 3.
Away from the fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in Syria and Iraq there is still there is still the crisis of the refugees fleeing from the group.
Back on September 22nd (22/9/15) the European Union (EU) passed a package of measures to respond to the crisis. Unusually for the EU this measures were passed by majority vote with 23 nations voting in favour and four - Romania, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary - voting against. Normally the EU likes to reach decisions through consensus between the member states.
These measures can be read in full here; http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-is-new/news/news/2015/20150923_1_en.htm
However the main points are;
1. Relocate 160,000 refugees amongst the EU member states using a quota system. This will involve deploying "Migration Management Support Teams" made up of officials form the EU's FRONTEX border agency, the European Asylum Support Office (EASO), the EU police agency (EUROPOL) and the EU justice agency (EUROJUST) to designated "Hotspot" nations such as Greece, Italy and Hungary.
2. Activating the EU Civil Protection Mechanism. This allows personnel such as police officers and border guards along with humanitarian equipment (excluding food aid) to be shared between member states. This will allow for the deployment of Rapid Border Intervention Teams (RABIT's) to areas where national border controls are being overwhelmed.
Both of these measures are to be funded through the EU's Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) and the Internal Security Fund (ISF). The hope being that this will allow for the border controls implemented between EU member states to be lifted.
3. Co-ordinate diplomatically with nations outside of the EU to help them better accommodate refugees themselves. This is primarily aimed at non-EU members states such as Serbia and Macedonia that sit between EU member states but are not themselves members.
However following the long established principle that refugees are best cared for as close as possible to the place they are seeking refuge from this will also see the EU work with Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon along with the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) to improve conditions in local camps by boosting funding to E1bn (USD1.11bn).
Unfortunately these measures will take time to implement. The EU has set itself the target of 6 months (April 2016) for full implementation although some of the easier steps are already being taken. For example on Wednesday (28/10/15) German police and border guards were deployed to Slovenia under the RABIT scheme.
The delay in implementation though continues to be the four EU members who voted against the measures and in particular Hungary.
Even before this current crisis Hungary's Prime Minister Viktor Orban had crafted out a reputation for himself as a nasty little bigot. He has made it quite clear that he doesn't like Muslims, he doesn't like Jews, he doesn't like homosexuals, he doesn't like people with dark skin and he's not a big fan of women either.
So despite the measures being adopted as EU policy Hungary is continuing to refuse to implement them until the EU secures it's border like Hungary has done by building kilometres of fencing.
The problem with this is that the EU's main border is Greece which is a country made up of thousands of islands with 13,676km (8,498 miles) of coastline - the 11th largest in the World. As a result it is completely impossible to seal a border of that size without draining the sea.
Unfortunately rather then challenging Orban on his madness perhaps by getting him to explain how he intends to seal Greece's border or reminding him of the consequences of failing to implement EU policy the EU has decided to indulge him by getting Turkey to stop the flow of refugees out of it's country.
This has very serious implications for core objective of solving the problem at source by defeating ISIL. In order to achieve that aim the EU needs to be putting pressure on Turkey to end it's attacks on anti-ISIL forces in Syria and Iraq, dismantle the protective air dome it has established over ISIL's heartlands around Raqqa in Syria and stop the flow of fighters and supplies between ISIL and Turkey.
Just today two refugees from Raqqa were found beheaded in the Turkish city of Sanliurfa. This suggests that either despite all the assurances to the contrary ISIL are still being granted to freedom to cross Turkey's border at will or the Turkish state is actually operating on their behalf.
While the EU is being forced to seek Turkey's co-operation over the refugee crisis it is unable to exert that pressure on Turkey and in fact seems to be willing to make concessions to Turkey. For example at a October 15th (15/10/15) summit with Turkey the EU ended up giving away E3bn (USD3.3bn) along with visa free travel between Turkey and the EU and a promise to re-start Turkey's accession to the EU which has long stalled.
With ISIL seeming to continue to operate freely across Turkey's borders the idea of lifting border controls on visitors from Turkey to the EU seems a particularly bad idea.
Turkish President/Prime Minister/Emperor Recep Tayyip Erdogan has clearly decided that the plight of the refugees is something that he can exploit in his never ending quest for absolute power.
So on October 21st (21/10/15) 114 refugees arrived by boat on Royal Air Force (RAF) base Akrotiri in Cyprus which is considered British sovereign territory and from where the UK is conducting it's anti-ISIL air operations.
With this being a never before used refugee route it struck me as Turkey sending the UK the message that the refugee crisis can get better or it can get worse depending on Turkey getting what it wants. After all Turkey's continued military occupation of northern Cyprus - an EU member state - is one of the main reasons why Turkey's EU membership continues to be delayed.
Erdogan then made the threat much more explicit by warning that Russian military intervention in Syria would lead to millions more refugees heading to the EU.
This is inconsistent with the situation in Syria where the advance of the Army of Conquest/Jaish al-Fatah (JAF) has prompted millions of Syrians flee into Syrian government controlled areas around the capital Damascus. Now JAF are being pushed back with Russia help the areas they are leaving are being found to be completely empty.
The message from Erdogan though seems to be that if the EU doesn't do more to protect JAF and ISIL more refugees will simply be sent to the EU from camps in Turkey.
Despite the EU's overtures to Turkey Orban and Hungary still seem to be standing firm in their refusal to implement the common refugee policy. Sadly this has forced other EU nations to follow Hungary's example by temporarily closing their borders because Hungary can't be granted an opt out from the policy by refusing to implement it and forcing other EU members to pick up the slack.
On a slightly different note in my post on Wednesday (28/10/15) I commented on how Russia is no knocking on the door of the protective dome that the US-led coalition - Combined Joint Task Force: Operation Inherent Resolve (CJTFOIR) - has created over ISIL's heartland around Raqqa. I also commented on how Russia is now reaching out to the Kurdish dominated Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) who are located to the north of that area.
Today the US has announced that it is sending 50 Special Forces operators to assist the SDF with logistics and co-ordinating with CJTFOIR air-strikes.
If you are part of the US domestic audience this is supposed to sound as though the US is moving forward with plans to supply the SDF directly from Iraq despite Turkish opposition. However if you are part of the Turkish governmental audience it is supposed to sound as though the US is strengthening the protective dome over Raqqa by preventing Russian air-strikes against ISIL and Russia supplying the SDF.
In reality it strikes me as yet another stalling tactic intended to buy US President Barack Obama time while he decides what to do next.
This is unfortunate because I don't think Russia wants to swoop in a steal the glory of defeating ISIL from the US. However if delaying tactics are all Obama has to offer then it is going to become inevitable.
17:10 on 30/10/15 (UK date).
Back on September 22nd (22/9/15) the European Union (EU) passed a package of measures to respond to the crisis. Unusually for the EU this measures were passed by majority vote with 23 nations voting in favour and four - Romania, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary - voting against. Normally the EU likes to reach decisions through consensus between the member states.
These measures can be read in full here; http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-is-new/news/news/2015/20150923_1_en.htm
However the main points are;
1. Relocate 160,000 refugees amongst the EU member states using a quota system. This will involve deploying "Migration Management Support Teams" made up of officials form the EU's FRONTEX border agency, the European Asylum Support Office (EASO), the EU police agency (EUROPOL) and the EU justice agency (EUROJUST) to designated "Hotspot" nations such as Greece, Italy and Hungary.
2. Activating the EU Civil Protection Mechanism. This allows personnel such as police officers and border guards along with humanitarian equipment (excluding food aid) to be shared between member states. This will allow for the deployment of Rapid Border Intervention Teams (RABIT's) to areas where national border controls are being overwhelmed.
Both of these measures are to be funded through the EU's Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) and the Internal Security Fund (ISF). The hope being that this will allow for the border controls implemented between EU member states to be lifted.
3. Co-ordinate diplomatically with nations outside of the EU to help them better accommodate refugees themselves. This is primarily aimed at non-EU members states such as Serbia and Macedonia that sit between EU member states but are not themselves members.
However following the long established principle that refugees are best cared for as close as possible to the place they are seeking refuge from this will also see the EU work with Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon along with the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) to improve conditions in local camps by boosting funding to E1bn (USD1.11bn).
Unfortunately these measures will take time to implement. The EU has set itself the target of 6 months (April 2016) for full implementation although some of the easier steps are already being taken. For example on Wednesday (28/10/15) German police and border guards were deployed to Slovenia under the RABIT scheme.
The delay in implementation though continues to be the four EU members who voted against the measures and in particular Hungary.
Even before this current crisis Hungary's Prime Minister Viktor Orban had crafted out a reputation for himself as a nasty little bigot. He has made it quite clear that he doesn't like Muslims, he doesn't like Jews, he doesn't like homosexuals, he doesn't like people with dark skin and he's not a big fan of women either.
So despite the measures being adopted as EU policy Hungary is continuing to refuse to implement them until the EU secures it's border like Hungary has done by building kilometres of fencing.
The problem with this is that the EU's main border is Greece which is a country made up of thousands of islands with 13,676km (8,498 miles) of coastline - the 11th largest in the World. As a result it is completely impossible to seal a border of that size without draining the sea.
Unfortunately rather then challenging Orban on his madness perhaps by getting him to explain how he intends to seal Greece's border or reminding him of the consequences of failing to implement EU policy the EU has decided to indulge him by getting Turkey to stop the flow of refugees out of it's country.
This has very serious implications for core objective of solving the problem at source by defeating ISIL. In order to achieve that aim the EU needs to be putting pressure on Turkey to end it's attacks on anti-ISIL forces in Syria and Iraq, dismantle the protective air dome it has established over ISIL's heartlands around Raqqa in Syria and stop the flow of fighters and supplies between ISIL and Turkey.
Just today two refugees from Raqqa were found beheaded in the Turkish city of Sanliurfa. This suggests that either despite all the assurances to the contrary ISIL are still being granted to freedom to cross Turkey's border at will or the Turkish state is actually operating on their behalf.
While the EU is being forced to seek Turkey's co-operation over the refugee crisis it is unable to exert that pressure on Turkey and in fact seems to be willing to make concessions to Turkey. For example at a October 15th (15/10/15) summit with Turkey the EU ended up giving away E3bn (USD3.3bn) along with visa free travel between Turkey and the EU and a promise to re-start Turkey's accession to the EU which has long stalled.
With ISIL seeming to continue to operate freely across Turkey's borders the idea of lifting border controls on visitors from Turkey to the EU seems a particularly bad idea.
Turkish President/Prime Minister/Emperor Recep Tayyip Erdogan has clearly decided that the plight of the refugees is something that he can exploit in his never ending quest for absolute power.
So on October 21st (21/10/15) 114 refugees arrived by boat on Royal Air Force (RAF) base Akrotiri in Cyprus which is considered British sovereign territory and from where the UK is conducting it's anti-ISIL air operations.
With this being a never before used refugee route it struck me as Turkey sending the UK the message that the refugee crisis can get better or it can get worse depending on Turkey getting what it wants. After all Turkey's continued military occupation of northern Cyprus - an EU member state - is one of the main reasons why Turkey's EU membership continues to be delayed.
Erdogan then made the threat much more explicit by warning that Russian military intervention in Syria would lead to millions more refugees heading to the EU.
This is inconsistent with the situation in Syria where the advance of the Army of Conquest/Jaish al-Fatah (JAF) has prompted millions of Syrians flee into Syrian government controlled areas around the capital Damascus. Now JAF are being pushed back with Russia help the areas they are leaving are being found to be completely empty.
The message from Erdogan though seems to be that if the EU doesn't do more to protect JAF and ISIL more refugees will simply be sent to the EU from camps in Turkey.
Despite the EU's overtures to Turkey Orban and Hungary still seem to be standing firm in their refusal to implement the common refugee policy. Sadly this has forced other EU nations to follow Hungary's example by temporarily closing their borders because Hungary can't be granted an opt out from the policy by refusing to implement it and forcing other EU members to pick up the slack.
On a slightly different note in my post on Wednesday (28/10/15) I commented on how Russia is no knocking on the door of the protective dome that the US-led coalition - Combined Joint Task Force: Operation Inherent Resolve (CJTFOIR) - has created over ISIL's heartland around Raqqa. I also commented on how Russia is now reaching out to the Kurdish dominated Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) who are located to the north of that area.
Today the US has announced that it is sending 50 Special Forces operators to assist the SDF with logistics and co-ordinating with CJTFOIR air-strikes.
If you are part of the US domestic audience this is supposed to sound as though the US is moving forward with plans to supply the SDF directly from Iraq despite Turkish opposition. However if you are part of the Turkish governmental audience it is supposed to sound as though the US is strengthening the protective dome over Raqqa by preventing Russian air-strikes against ISIL and Russia supplying the SDF.
In reality it strikes me as yet another stalling tactic intended to buy US President Barack Obama time while he decides what to do next.
This is unfortunate because I don't think Russia wants to swoop in a steal the glory of defeating ISIL from the US. However if delaying tactics are all Obama has to offer then it is going to become inevitable.
17:10 on 30/10/15 (UK date).
Thursday, 29 October 2015
Operation Featherweight: Month 16, Week 1, Day 2.
In my post yesterday I commented on the situation in Syria and how Russia's involvement there has created an urgent need for the US-led coalition - Combined Joint Task Force: Operation Inherent Resolve (CJTFOIR) - to accelerate it's efforts to expel the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) from Iraq before they are expelled from Syria.
Quite apart from the strategic need to the US not to be squeezed out of the geo-politically important middle-east region there is an existing urgency for ISIL to be removed from Iraq.
Parts of Iraq have been under ISIL occupation since December 2013 - some 9 months before the US took any action against them. In this time the Iraqi government's efforts have been focused on stopping ISIL's advance and liberating the country. As a result all the things that a government does normally such as managing infrastructure have taken a back seat and after some 22 months of neglect cracks are starting to appear.
Apart from the fight against ISIL life in Iraq this summer has been dominated by anti-government protests attended by people who are angry about falling living standards and electricity shortages leading to blackouts. Policing this type of mass protest when ISIL want to send suicide bombers to attack the protesters is an absolute nightmare which places yet another huge burden on the Iraqi government.
The US' response to ISIL's invasion of Iraq seems to have been to use it as an opportunity to settle old scores with the Iraqi government. For example US President Barack Obama has frequently claimed that ISIL are simply disgruntled Sunni-Arabs who have been forced to take up arms against the oppressive Shia-Arab governments of Syria and then Iraq.
Putting aside the fact that very few ISIL members actually come from either Syria or Iraq Obama has used this excuse first to demand that the Iraqi President steps down and then that Iraq creates a Sunni-Arab state within a state before the US gives it permission to fight ISIL.
Obama's support for a sectarian agenda that he clearly doesn't understand seems to have worsened the tensions within the Iraqi government rather then making the situation any better.
A major fracture point that has arisen is between the Arab central government of Iraq and the Kurdish Regional Government in the north. Fuelled by fears that the Kurdish region could break away the Iraqi central has suspended payments to the KRG.
Starved of cash by the central government the KRG has been unable to pay its public sector workers. Fanned by opposition parties these disgruntled workers have taken to the streets in protest against the KRG. Quite apart from the increased security risk of these protests being attacked by ISIL the protests themselves have occasionally turned violent.
A particularly serious example of this occurred on October 10th (10/10/15) in the Sulaimaniyah province which is a stronghold of the Movement for Change (Gorran) party. Here protesters attacked numerous buildings including the local offices of the governing Kurdistan Democrat Party (KDP) killing at 4 people including 2 KDP MP's.
In response Gorran MP's including the Parliamentary Speaker were suspended from the KRG leading to tense scenes as the Kurdish security forces were called in to stop Gorran from storming the Parliament in defiance of the ban.
In the UK Parliament - sometimes referred to as "The Mother of Parliaments" - an MP can be suspended for using what is considered "Unparliamentary Language." There was actually an example of this just on Wednesday (27/10/15) when a Labour MP described a Conservative MP as a "Hypocrite." He was forced to immediately retract the comment or face being suspended for several days.
As such I think that banning an entire party for a minimum of three months for organising riots in which two MP's were killed is entirely reasonable. I would even go so far as to say that Gorran being allowed to return to the KRG was dependent on them rejecting such tactics in the future by apologising for the incident and assisting the authorities in making sure that any party members involved in the violence are brought to justice.
It is against this backdrop that the KRG and their armed force the Peshmerga requested US assistance to rescue 70 hostages from ISIL held Hawija on October 22nd (22/10/15) amid fears that they were about to be executed.
Although now they're not westerners it doesn't get reported on as much ISIL have in no way lost their passion for murdering hostages.
Two days after the Hawija raid on October 24th (24/10/15) ISIL released a video in which they killed a Syrian soldier they'd taken hostage by running him over with a tank. On Sunday (25/10/15) ISIL tied three hostages to the ancient columns in Palmyra and killed them by blowing up the columns. Today reports are emerging that ISIL have beheaded four Peshmerga hostages at the site of the Hawija raid.
As a result I have little doubt that there was a credible threat that ISIL were about to kill the hostages rescued from Hawija because, well, every day there is a credible threat that ISIL are about to murder hostages. However I think what provided the urgency to this particular instance was a desire by the KRG to remind the US that Hawija is still under ISIL occupation.
In March of 2015 - amid fierce opposition from the US - the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) launched a partially successful operation to liberate Saladin Province including the provincial capital Tikrit which sits around 140km (85 miles) north-west of the Iraqi capital Baghdad.
Although the ISF did eventually succeed in liberating Tikrit and the oil refinery town of Baiji which sits around 50km (30miles) to the north they failed to link up with the Peshmerga controlled city of Kirkuk which sits around 95km (58 miles) north-east of Baiji and around 120km (70 miles) north-east of Tikrit. This left ISIL in control of Hawija from where they have repeatedly attacked both Baiji and Kirkuk with the battle of Baiji oil refinery raging almost continually.
At around 18:15 on 29/10/15 (UK date) I'll pick this up after dinner.
Edited at around 19:50 on 29/10/15 (UK date) to add;
So beyond the rescue of the hostages the KRG seemed to trying to start a conversation about the US using it's superior experience to help a coalition of the Peshmerga and the ISF to devise a battle plan to liberate cities such as Mosul, Ramadi and Hawija in order to completely expel ISIL from Iraq.
Obviously in carrying out such a plan CJTFOIR would be expected to provide tactical air support to the ground forces in the from of AH-64 Apache-type helicopter gunships and A-10 Thunderbolt-type ground-attack jets to destroy ISIL tanks, armed vehicles, firing positions etc.
This would of course be a marked departure from CJTFOIR's current approach of using fast, multi-role jets in largely ineffective strategic strikes.
If I was drawing up a plan I would recommend starting with small targets that produce quick victories. This would help build up momentum and an air of inevitability about ISIL's defeat. This would do a lot to weaken ISIL - particularly amongst it's Internet fanboys that are increasing the terror threat globally.
If the US was aware that it was involved in such a discussion it's suggestion that all of Iraq's forces form up behind a single commander didn't get them off to a good start.
This would be a good idea for the ISF which is made up of the Iraqi army and the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF) because the lack of co-ordinated leadership within the ISF has caused a lot a problems. For example it was really the PMF that decided to charge off into Anbar province before the Tikrit offensive had been completed. This forced the Iraqi Army to follow them into a battle that ultimately ISIL won with the fall of Ramadi.
Therefore placing the Iraqi army and the PMF under a single commander would certainly make the ISF more unified and effective. As for integrating the Sunni National Guard that the US are insisting on I've always viewed that as a delaying tactic designed to hamper the fight against ISIL so I think it should be abandoned entirely.
However the Kurdish region is considered semi-autonomous from the rest of Iraq and it's fighting force the Peshmerga has proved itself to be the most effective anti-ISIL force in Iraq. I am concerned that plunging them into the arguments between the Iraqi army, the PMF and the Sunni National Guard would undermine their effectiveness.
It should though be possible to set up a command cell in which all forces are represented but with an Iraqi Supreme Commander. The Peshmerga would be given special autonomy in how it carries out that commander's orders. Perhaps in the role of deputy commander.
However by Tuesday's (27/10/15) meeting of the US Senate Armed Forces Committee the US Defence Secretary was doing a much better job of laying out Obama's options;
He can follow the KRG's advice and put together a plan to quickly expel ISIL from Iraq and then provide the resources the Iraqis need to execute that plan. Alternatively Obama can continue to delay by using the spectre of US groundforces being killed in Iraq and it's legal/political implications in an effort to scare the US off the idea of defeating ISIL.
On whether the Hawija raid counts as US troops being used in combat despite Obama's assurances I should point out they were special forces. Special Force units were really developed to operating in exactly this sort of gray area where conventional forces cannot.
However I don't see any need to increase the number of US Special Forces operating in Iraq particularly as no-one is request them. The Iraqis simply need better air-support.
Whatever Obama decides he will have to decide quickly because Russia, Iran and Iraq are already operating a co-ordination cell in Baghdad.
That cell has already given Russian aircraft permission to attack ISIL supply conveys from Syria. Something that CJTFOIR is curiously still refusing to do.
20:40 on 29/10/15 (UK date).
Quite apart from the strategic need to the US not to be squeezed out of the geo-politically important middle-east region there is an existing urgency for ISIL to be removed from Iraq.
Parts of Iraq have been under ISIL occupation since December 2013 - some 9 months before the US took any action against them. In this time the Iraqi government's efforts have been focused on stopping ISIL's advance and liberating the country. As a result all the things that a government does normally such as managing infrastructure have taken a back seat and after some 22 months of neglect cracks are starting to appear.
Apart from the fight against ISIL life in Iraq this summer has been dominated by anti-government protests attended by people who are angry about falling living standards and electricity shortages leading to blackouts. Policing this type of mass protest when ISIL want to send suicide bombers to attack the protesters is an absolute nightmare which places yet another huge burden on the Iraqi government.
The US' response to ISIL's invasion of Iraq seems to have been to use it as an opportunity to settle old scores with the Iraqi government. For example US President Barack Obama has frequently claimed that ISIL are simply disgruntled Sunni-Arabs who have been forced to take up arms against the oppressive Shia-Arab governments of Syria and then Iraq.
Putting aside the fact that very few ISIL members actually come from either Syria or Iraq Obama has used this excuse first to demand that the Iraqi President steps down and then that Iraq creates a Sunni-Arab state within a state before the US gives it permission to fight ISIL.
Obama's support for a sectarian agenda that he clearly doesn't understand seems to have worsened the tensions within the Iraqi government rather then making the situation any better.
A major fracture point that has arisen is between the Arab central government of Iraq and the Kurdish Regional Government in the north. Fuelled by fears that the Kurdish region could break away the Iraqi central has suspended payments to the KRG.
Starved of cash by the central government the KRG has been unable to pay its public sector workers. Fanned by opposition parties these disgruntled workers have taken to the streets in protest against the KRG. Quite apart from the increased security risk of these protests being attacked by ISIL the protests themselves have occasionally turned violent.
A particularly serious example of this occurred on October 10th (10/10/15) in the Sulaimaniyah province which is a stronghold of the Movement for Change (Gorran) party. Here protesters attacked numerous buildings including the local offices of the governing Kurdistan Democrat Party (KDP) killing at 4 people including 2 KDP MP's.
In response Gorran MP's including the Parliamentary Speaker were suspended from the KRG leading to tense scenes as the Kurdish security forces were called in to stop Gorran from storming the Parliament in defiance of the ban.
In the UK Parliament - sometimes referred to as "The Mother of Parliaments" - an MP can be suspended for using what is considered "Unparliamentary Language." There was actually an example of this just on Wednesday (27/10/15) when a Labour MP described a Conservative MP as a "Hypocrite." He was forced to immediately retract the comment or face being suspended for several days.
As such I think that banning an entire party for a minimum of three months for organising riots in which two MP's were killed is entirely reasonable. I would even go so far as to say that Gorran being allowed to return to the KRG was dependent on them rejecting such tactics in the future by apologising for the incident and assisting the authorities in making sure that any party members involved in the violence are brought to justice.
It is against this backdrop that the KRG and their armed force the Peshmerga requested US assistance to rescue 70 hostages from ISIL held Hawija on October 22nd (22/10/15) amid fears that they were about to be executed.
Although now they're not westerners it doesn't get reported on as much ISIL have in no way lost their passion for murdering hostages.
Two days after the Hawija raid on October 24th (24/10/15) ISIL released a video in which they killed a Syrian soldier they'd taken hostage by running him over with a tank. On Sunday (25/10/15) ISIL tied three hostages to the ancient columns in Palmyra and killed them by blowing up the columns. Today reports are emerging that ISIL have beheaded four Peshmerga hostages at the site of the Hawija raid.
As a result I have little doubt that there was a credible threat that ISIL were about to kill the hostages rescued from Hawija because, well, every day there is a credible threat that ISIL are about to murder hostages. However I think what provided the urgency to this particular instance was a desire by the KRG to remind the US that Hawija is still under ISIL occupation.
In March of 2015 - amid fierce opposition from the US - the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) launched a partially successful operation to liberate Saladin Province including the provincial capital Tikrit which sits around 140km (85 miles) north-west of the Iraqi capital Baghdad.
Although the ISF did eventually succeed in liberating Tikrit and the oil refinery town of Baiji which sits around 50km (30miles) to the north they failed to link up with the Peshmerga controlled city of Kirkuk which sits around 95km (58 miles) north-east of Baiji and around 120km (70 miles) north-east of Tikrit. This left ISIL in control of Hawija from where they have repeatedly attacked both Baiji and Kirkuk with the battle of Baiji oil refinery raging almost continually.
At around 18:15 on 29/10/15 (UK date) I'll pick this up after dinner.
Edited at around 19:50 on 29/10/15 (UK date) to add;
So beyond the rescue of the hostages the KRG seemed to trying to start a conversation about the US using it's superior experience to help a coalition of the Peshmerga and the ISF to devise a battle plan to liberate cities such as Mosul, Ramadi and Hawija in order to completely expel ISIL from Iraq.
Obviously in carrying out such a plan CJTFOIR would be expected to provide tactical air support to the ground forces in the from of AH-64 Apache-type helicopter gunships and A-10 Thunderbolt-type ground-attack jets to destroy ISIL tanks, armed vehicles, firing positions etc.
This would of course be a marked departure from CJTFOIR's current approach of using fast, multi-role jets in largely ineffective strategic strikes.
If I was drawing up a plan I would recommend starting with small targets that produce quick victories. This would help build up momentum and an air of inevitability about ISIL's defeat. This would do a lot to weaken ISIL - particularly amongst it's Internet fanboys that are increasing the terror threat globally.
If the US was aware that it was involved in such a discussion it's suggestion that all of Iraq's forces form up behind a single commander didn't get them off to a good start.
This would be a good idea for the ISF which is made up of the Iraqi army and the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF) because the lack of co-ordinated leadership within the ISF has caused a lot a problems. For example it was really the PMF that decided to charge off into Anbar province before the Tikrit offensive had been completed. This forced the Iraqi Army to follow them into a battle that ultimately ISIL won with the fall of Ramadi.
Therefore placing the Iraqi army and the PMF under a single commander would certainly make the ISF more unified and effective. As for integrating the Sunni National Guard that the US are insisting on I've always viewed that as a delaying tactic designed to hamper the fight against ISIL so I think it should be abandoned entirely.
However the Kurdish region is considered semi-autonomous from the rest of Iraq and it's fighting force the Peshmerga has proved itself to be the most effective anti-ISIL force in Iraq. I am concerned that plunging them into the arguments between the Iraqi army, the PMF and the Sunni National Guard would undermine their effectiveness.
It should though be possible to set up a command cell in which all forces are represented but with an Iraqi Supreme Commander. The Peshmerga would be given special autonomy in how it carries out that commander's orders. Perhaps in the role of deputy commander.
However by Tuesday's (27/10/15) meeting of the US Senate Armed Forces Committee the US Defence Secretary was doing a much better job of laying out Obama's options;
He can follow the KRG's advice and put together a plan to quickly expel ISIL from Iraq and then provide the resources the Iraqis need to execute that plan. Alternatively Obama can continue to delay by using the spectre of US groundforces being killed in Iraq and it's legal/political implications in an effort to scare the US off the idea of defeating ISIL.
On whether the Hawija raid counts as US troops being used in combat despite Obama's assurances I should point out they were special forces. Special Force units were really developed to operating in exactly this sort of gray area where conventional forces cannot.
However I don't see any need to increase the number of US Special Forces operating in Iraq particularly as no-one is request them. The Iraqis simply need better air-support.
Whatever Obama decides he will have to decide quickly because Russia, Iran and Iraq are already operating a co-ordination cell in Baghdad.
That cell has already given Russian aircraft permission to attack ISIL supply conveys from Syria. Something that CJTFOIR is curiously still refusing to do.
20:40 on 29/10/15 (UK date).
Wednesday, 28 October 2015
Operation Featherweight: Month 16, Week 1, Day 1.
On October 16th (16/10/15) Kurdish, Arab and Assyrian/Syriac forces in the north-east of Syria formalised their Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) coalition.
This is of course made up of the Kurdish People's Protection Forces (YPG/J), Euphrates Volcano/Burkan al-Furat (BAF) and the Revolutionary Army/Jaish al-Thuwar (JAT) fragments of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) along with the Syriac Military Council (MSF) and the Arab tribal force - Al-Sanadid Forces/Jaish al-Sanadid (JAS).
Despite having called for this type of coalition for almost a year now Turkey responded to this by opening fire on the SDF positions on the town of Tel Abyad/Gire Spi. On Saturday (24/10/15) SDF positions in the town came under Turkish mortar and artillery fire. These artillery strikes continued on Sunday (25/10/15), Monday (26/10/15) Tuesday (27/10/15) and today.
SDF positions on the banks of the Euphrates River at the western edge of the SDF controlled buffer-zone also came under Turkish artillery fire on Sunday (25/10/15) and again on Monday (26/10/15). Sunday's attack in which 2 civilians were wounded coincided with a fresh offensive by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) which was fortunately quickly resisted.
You may remember that Tel Abyad is a strategically important town that sits directly on the border with Turkey. It also sits mid-way between the central area that is known as the Kobane Canton and the area to the east which is known as the Cizire Canton.
It was the capture to Tel Abyad by the YPG and BAF in July that united the two cantons establishing the buffer-zone across northern-eastern Syria and Iraq. It also cut off ISIL main supply route between Turkey and their de facto capital of Raqqa around 90km (50 miles) to the south.
As such the purpose of these Turkish attacks seems to be to support ISIL in recapturing Tel Abyad both destroying the buffer-zone and allowing the re-establishment of the the ISIL supply route with Turkey.
The Turkish attacks have been accompanied by renewed ISIL attacks across the buffer-zone's border with a particular focus on the western edge around the town of Sarrin and the southern village of Ain Issa which sits on that supply route between Raqqa and Tel Abyad.
Turkey's official explanation for its actions have been surreal to say the least. According to the office of President/Prime Minister/Emperor Recep Tayyip Erdogan ISIL, the Syrian government and now the SDF are all secretly in league with each other. The years that these groups have spent fighting each other were all part of an elaborate ruse to hide this vast conspiracy's true purpose of invading Turkey.
These latest attacks on the SDF are apparently necessary because at the end of June this ISIL/SDF/Syrian government held a meeting at which they secretly agreed to hand the area to the north of the Euphrates to the Kurdish dominated SDF.
Putting aside the sheer insanity of the conspiracy theory the problem with this is that the area north of the Euphrates has been predominately Kurdish since the nations of Turkey and Syria were formed nearly a hundred years. The only point at which this looked like changing was during ISIL's offensive into the area at the end of 2014 that was brought to a halt with the Battle of Kobane.
Kurdish forces do not operate to the south of the Euphrates and ISIL are actually located between them and the northern banks of the Euphrates.
It is this utter detachment with reality that is likely driving Erdogan's attempts to silence any critical voices within Turkey.
Just today Turkish security forces carried out raids against TV news channels operated by Koza Ipek taking them off air just three days before Turkey's November 1st (1/11/15) election. Apparently these stations are controlled by Fethullah Gulen who along with ISIL, Syria, the Kurds, the US and the EU is part of this vast anti-Erdogan conspiracy.
The reason why Erdogan feels comfortable about carrying out these attacks against the SDF is that US President Barack Obama - as the Commander-in-Chief of the US-led coalition, Combined Joint Task Force: Operation Inherent Resolve - has still not made clear that the SDF controlled buffer-zone is a reality that Erdogan is going to have to learn to accept at least until ISIL are defeated. As a result Erdogan still thinks that the matter is up for discussion.
The US doesn't even seem to be participating in this discussion particularly effectively, Although CJTFOIR continue to block me on Twitter from other sources I know that between Thursday (22/10/15) and Tuesday (27/10/15) CJTFOIR did not carry out a single air-strike anywhere is Syria.
The single air-strike they carried out on Tuesday (27/10/15) was against an ISIL mortar position close to the town of Marea which is around 95km (60 miles) west of Sarrin on the Euphrates and around 25km (15 miles) north of the city of Aleppo. If CJTFOIR can strike ISIL mortar positions there the question is why haven't they been striking the ISIL mortar positions that have been firing on Sarrin.
While CJTFOIR is continuing to fly operations in protection of ISIL in Syria Russia has moved to expand it's operations against ISIL's heartlands around Raqqa. Over the weekend Russia offered to work with the FSA to fight ISIL.
In the first instance this seemed to be an attempt to highlight to CJTFOIR the massive flaw in their support for the FSA by asking them if they could identify any FSA units that are currently fighting ISIL rather then being allied with them. After all Russia has always indicated that it is prepared to work with any anti-ISIL force - there just seems to be a bit of a shortage of them.
Beyond that though it seemed to be Russia indicating that it is prepared to work with the SDF whom CJTFOIR continues to refuse to support at Erdogan's insistence.
With Russian air-support the Syrian government continues to make steady progress against the Al Qaeda led Army of Conquest/Jaish al-Fatah (JAF) coalition. On an almost daily basis small villages in Latakia, Idlib, Homs and Hama provinces are being liberated from JAF. There is also a lot of speculation that the Syrian government is on the verge of launching either an operation to liberate the ancient city of Palmyra from ISIL or the city of Aleppo from ISIL and JAF.
This creates an almost air of inevitability that over the coming months the Syrian government will have rolled both ISIL and JAF back the the starting positions when the CJTFOIR began it's operations 14 months ago.
If CJTFOIR is still not in a position to push ISIL out of Iraq back into northern Syria by then there will be a lot of pressure on Russia to force ISIL out of Syria entirely and chase them into Syria. This would make Russia the hero and effectively end US influence in the oil rich region.
So the US really needs to step up it's efforts in Iraq or risk losing the race entirely. Due to the pressures of time I'll deal with that sseparately tomorrow.
18:15 on 28/10/15 (UK date).
This is of course made up of the Kurdish People's Protection Forces (YPG/J), Euphrates Volcano/Burkan al-Furat (BAF) and the Revolutionary Army/Jaish al-Thuwar (JAT) fragments of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) along with the Syriac Military Council (MSF) and the Arab tribal force - Al-Sanadid Forces/Jaish al-Sanadid (JAS).
Despite having called for this type of coalition for almost a year now Turkey responded to this by opening fire on the SDF positions on the town of Tel Abyad/Gire Spi. On Saturday (24/10/15) SDF positions in the town came under Turkish mortar and artillery fire. These artillery strikes continued on Sunday (25/10/15), Monday (26/10/15) Tuesday (27/10/15) and today.
SDF positions on the banks of the Euphrates River at the western edge of the SDF controlled buffer-zone also came under Turkish artillery fire on Sunday (25/10/15) and again on Monday (26/10/15). Sunday's attack in which 2 civilians were wounded coincided with a fresh offensive by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) which was fortunately quickly resisted.
You may remember that Tel Abyad is a strategically important town that sits directly on the border with Turkey. It also sits mid-way between the central area that is known as the Kobane Canton and the area to the east which is known as the Cizire Canton.
It was the capture to Tel Abyad by the YPG and BAF in July that united the two cantons establishing the buffer-zone across northern-eastern Syria and Iraq. It also cut off ISIL main supply route between Turkey and their de facto capital of Raqqa around 90km (50 miles) to the south.
As such the purpose of these Turkish attacks seems to be to support ISIL in recapturing Tel Abyad both destroying the buffer-zone and allowing the re-establishment of the the ISIL supply route with Turkey.
The Turkish attacks have been accompanied by renewed ISIL attacks across the buffer-zone's border with a particular focus on the western edge around the town of Sarrin and the southern village of Ain Issa which sits on that supply route between Raqqa and Tel Abyad.
Turkey's official explanation for its actions have been surreal to say the least. According to the office of President/Prime Minister/Emperor Recep Tayyip Erdogan ISIL, the Syrian government and now the SDF are all secretly in league with each other. The years that these groups have spent fighting each other were all part of an elaborate ruse to hide this vast conspiracy's true purpose of invading Turkey.
These latest attacks on the SDF are apparently necessary because at the end of June this ISIL/SDF/Syrian government held a meeting at which they secretly agreed to hand the area to the north of the Euphrates to the Kurdish dominated SDF.
Putting aside the sheer insanity of the conspiracy theory the problem with this is that the area north of the Euphrates has been predominately Kurdish since the nations of Turkey and Syria were formed nearly a hundred years. The only point at which this looked like changing was during ISIL's offensive into the area at the end of 2014 that was brought to a halt with the Battle of Kobane.
Kurdish forces do not operate to the south of the Euphrates and ISIL are actually located between them and the northern banks of the Euphrates.
It is this utter detachment with reality that is likely driving Erdogan's attempts to silence any critical voices within Turkey.
Just today Turkish security forces carried out raids against TV news channels operated by Koza Ipek taking them off air just three days before Turkey's November 1st (1/11/15) election. Apparently these stations are controlled by Fethullah Gulen who along with ISIL, Syria, the Kurds, the US and the EU is part of this vast anti-Erdogan conspiracy.
The reason why Erdogan feels comfortable about carrying out these attacks against the SDF is that US President Barack Obama - as the Commander-in-Chief of the US-led coalition, Combined Joint Task Force: Operation Inherent Resolve - has still not made clear that the SDF controlled buffer-zone is a reality that Erdogan is going to have to learn to accept at least until ISIL are defeated. As a result Erdogan still thinks that the matter is up for discussion.
The US doesn't even seem to be participating in this discussion particularly effectively, Although CJTFOIR continue to block me on Twitter from other sources I know that between Thursday (22/10/15) and Tuesday (27/10/15) CJTFOIR did not carry out a single air-strike anywhere is Syria.
The single air-strike they carried out on Tuesday (27/10/15) was against an ISIL mortar position close to the town of Marea which is around 95km (60 miles) west of Sarrin on the Euphrates and around 25km (15 miles) north of the city of Aleppo. If CJTFOIR can strike ISIL mortar positions there the question is why haven't they been striking the ISIL mortar positions that have been firing on Sarrin.
While CJTFOIR is continuing to fly operations in protection of ISIL in Syria Russia has moved to expand it's operations against ISIL's heartlands around Raqqa. Over the weekend Russia offered to work with the FSA to fight ISIL.
In the first instance this seemed to be an attempt to highlight to CJTFOIR the massive flaw in their support for the FSA by asking them if they could identify any FSA units that are currently fighting ISIL rather then being allied with them. After all Russia has always indicated that it is prepared to work with any anti-ISIL force - there just seems to be a bit of a shortage of them.
Beyond that though it seemed to be Russia indicating that it is prepared to work with the SDF whom CJTFOIR continues to refuse to support at Erdogan's insistence.
With Russian air-support the Syrian government continues to make steady progress against the Al Qaeda led Army of Conquest/Jaish al-Fatah (JAF) coalition. On an almost daily basis small villages in Latakia, Idlib, Homs and Hama provinces are being liberated from JAF. There is also a lot of speculation that the Syrian government is on the verge of launching either an operation to liberate the ancient city of Palmyra from ISIL or the city of Aleppo from ISIL and JAF.
This creates an almost air of inevitability that over the coming months the Syrian government will have rolled both ISIL and JAF back the the starting positions when the CJTFOIR began it's operations 14 months ago.
If CJTFOIR is still not in a position to push ISIL out of Iraq back into northern Syria by then there will be a lot of pressure on Russia to force ISIL out of Syria entirely and chase them into Syria. This would make Russia the hero and effectively end US influence in the oil rich region.
So the US really needs to step up it's efforts in Iraq or risk losing the race entirely. Due to the pressures of time I'll deal with that sseparately tomorrow.
18:15 on 28/10/15 (UK date).
Tuesday, 27 October 2015
The UNFCCC October Meeting.
Between Monday October 19th (19/10/15) and Friday October 23rd (23/10/15) parties to the United Nations Framework Agreement on Climate Change (UNFCCC) held their quarterly meeting at their headquarters in Bonn, Germany.
This was the last such meeting before the 21st Conference of Parties (COP21) opens on November 30th (30/11/15) in Paris, France. It is at COP21 that a new global climate change deal to replace the Kyoto Protocol (KP) is scheduled to be finalised and signed.
Unfortunately the more time I have to reflect on the October meeting the more convinced I am that it was an utterly wasted opportunity.
For example the work stream covering mitigation actions spent much of the week challenging the core principle that has stood for the last 25 years that any agreement would tackle climate change by curbing the emission of Green House Gases (GHG's).
Instead certain parties wished to discuss undefined "Climate Forcers." This seemed to be nothing more then a device by nations that had no mitigation obligations under KP to rail against what they see as the former Annex I parties to force them into taking mitigation actions.
I will be charitable and assume that this is a result of those nations failing to understand the fundamental difference between this new agreement and the KP rather then being a deliberate attempt to shirk their shared responsibility.
At the core of this new agreement there is the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC). Although there is a shared responsibility to be as ambitious as possible this format allows nations to determine themselves what action they will be taking and set their own reduction targets.
As a result there is no element of coercion within this agreement and nobody is being forced to do anything.
Elsewhere the Arab states tried to hijack the meeting entirely by turning it into a discussion on the Israel/Palestine conflict by demanding to know what protections would be afforded to "peoples under occupation."
This is a completely irrelevant issue because the protections under this agreement would be the exactly the same as the protections under the Geneva Conventions which cover war and military occupation.
If the Palestinians feel that the Israelis are not fulfilling its obligations under the relevant conventions there's not really much an agreement on climate change can do about that.
In fact despite my experience of both issues I wouldn't even know where to begin adapting the agreement to combine both topics.
However the diversion into such a controversial and intractable area does serve to disrupt the negotiations and reduce the chances of any agreement which of course is the primary objection of the oil rich Gulf states.
And sadly that's all the Palestinian cause is at the moment. A pawn in someone else's wider game.
The meeting ended with a decision that there will be no new negotiating text and the existing text will be carried forward as the basis for negotiation at COP21.
This is extremely alarming because the non-paper introduced at the start of the meeting is so vague as to be completely insufficient to form the basis of any agreement. I
t merely identifies areas such as "Mitigation," "Adaptation," "Finance," "Technology" and "Capacity Building" that may have some relevance to tackling climate change.
However with the section of Loss & Damage running to just 22 words it contains absolutely none of the detail required to determine how nations will act individually and collectively to address these areas as part of a functioning agreement.
The July text which grew out of the 2014 non-paper is significantly better.
However it still needs to be significantly reduced by replacing numerous options with agreed, coherent text. At the same time it needs to be expanded to include a section enshrining the peer review process and the compliance process.
This insistence that there will be no new text seems to have been borne out of a frustration by the Secretariat at the way that many nations have handled the negotiating process.
Rather then having been prepared to debate and compromise over the core concepts of the agreement many nations have simply been demanding that the Secretariat takes on board all of their slightly mad and often contradictory positions before returning with a 'miracle' text that will solve all of the problems.
Ironically many of these nations are the same ones complaining about having an agreement forced upon them.
The hope seems to be then that by making clear that there will be no new text nations will be forced to work with what they've got by deciding on options within the July text and combining them with the procedural elements from the recent non-paper.
I am far from convinced that this approach will work though because although the Mitigation, Adaptation and Loss & Damage sections of the July text are salvageable as are the procedural elements from the October non-paper key sections like the peer review and compliance processes still need to be written.
I do not understand how this will happen during the course of COP21.
As such I am becoming increasingly convinced that it is time to think the unthinkable and delay the signing of any new agreement until COP22 when hopefully the required work will have been completed.
If we are delaying the new agreement then perhaps we also need to consider whether existing climate finance arrangements can continue without a new agreement being signed.
18:00 on 27/10/15 (UK date).
This was the last such meeting before the 21st Conference of Parties (COP21) opens on November 30th (30/11/15) in Paris, France. It is at COP21 that a new global climate change deal to replace the Kyoto Protocol (KP) is scheduled to be finalised and signed.
Unfortunately the more time I have to reflect on the October meeting the more convinced I am that it was an utterly wasted opportunity.
For example the work stream covering mitigation actions spent much of the week challenging the core principle that has stood for the last 25 years that any agreement would tackle climate change by curbing the emission of Green House Gases (GHG's).
Instead certain parties wished to discuss undefined "Climate Forcers." This seemed to be nothing more then a device by nations that had no mitigation obligations under KP to rail against what they see as the former Annex I parties to force them into taking mitigation actions.
I will be charitable and assume that this is a result of those nations failing to understand the fundamental difference between this new agreement and the KP rather then being a deliberate attempt to shirk their shared responsibility.
At the core of this new agreement there is the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC). Although there is a shared responsibility to be as ambitious as possible this format allows nations to determine themselves what action they will be taking and set their own reduction targets.
As a result there is no element of coercion within this agreement and nobody is being forced to do anything.
Elsewhere the Arab states tried to hijack the meeting entirely by turning it into a discussion on the Israel/Palestine conflict by demanding to know what protections would be afforded to "peoples under occupation."
This is a completely irrelevant issue because the protections under this agreement would be the exactly the same as the protections under the Geneva Conventions which cover war and military occupation.
If the Palestinians feel that the Israelis are not fulfilling its obligations under the relevant conventions there's not really much an agreement on climate change can do about that.
In fact despite my experience of both issues I wouldn't even know where to begin adapting the agreement to combine both topics.
However the diversion into such a controversial and intractable area does serve to disrupt the negotiations and reduce the chances of any agreement which of course is the primary objection of the oil rich Gulf states.
And sadly that's all the Palestinian cause is at the moment. A pawn in someone else's wider game.
The meeting ended with a decision that there will be no new negotiating text and the existing text will be carried forward as the basis for negotiation at COP21.
This is extremely alarming because the non-paper introduced at the start of the meeting is so vague as to be completely insufficient to form the basis of any agreement. I
t merely identifies areas such as "Mitigation," "Adaptation," "Finance," "Technology" and "Capacity Building" that may have some relevance to tackling climate change.
However with the section of Loss & Damage running to just 22 words it contains absolutely none of the detail required to determine how nations will act individually and collectively to address these areas as part of a functioning agreement.
The July text which grew out of the 2014 non-paper is significantly better.
However it still needs to be significantly reduced by replacing numerous options with agreed, coherent text. At the same time it needs to be expanded to include a section enshrining the peer review process and the compliance process.
This insistence that there will be no new text seems to have been borne out of a frustration by the Secretariat at the way that many nations have handled the negotiating process.
Rather then having been prepared to debate and compromise over the core concepts of the agreement many nations have simply been demanding that the Secretariat takes on board all of their slightly mad and often contradictory positions before returning with a 'miracle' text that will solve all of the problems.
Ironically many of these nations are the same ones complaining about having an agreement forced upon them.
The hope seems to be then that by making clear that there will be no new text nations will be forced to work with what they've got by deciding on options within the July text and combining them with the procedural elements from the recent non-paper.
I am far from convinced that this approach will work though because although the Mitigation, Adaptation and Loss & Damage sections of the July text are salvageable as are the procedural elements from the October non-paper key sections like the peer review and compliance processes still need to be written.
I do not understand how this will happen during the course of COP21.
As such I am becoming increasingly convinced that it is time to think the unthinkable and delay the signing of any new agreement until COP22 when hopefully the required work will have been completed.
If we are delaying the new agreement then perhaps we also need to consider whether existing climate finance arrangements can continue without a new agreement being signed.
18:00 on 27/10/15 (UK date).
Sunday, 25 October 2015
Everyone Ready for the Big Brown Bash.
Today saw the second Rugby Union World Cup semi-final between the "Pumas" of Argentina and the "Wallabies" of Australia. After yesterday's political intensity between South Africa and New Zealand this was pretty much just a rugby match.
Inspired by Aussie Rules Football the Wallabies had a lot of Ireland's pass and dance about them. However they brought with them a level of muscle the Irish clearly lacked.
So when the Puma's went in for their chop tackles the Australians just sort of carried on trying to work out why there was a little Argentinian clamped to their ankles. Likewise when the Pumas made their attack the Australian defence simply cut them down.
What really undid the match though was Australia's Simmons intercepting an early pass from Argentina's Sanchez and running through a converted try to give the Aussies a 7 point lead after just 90 seconds.
Although Sanchez tried to redeem himself with a 3 point penalty Ashely-Cooper quickly ran in another unconverted try. Along with another converted Ashley-Cooper try and two Puma's penalties this gave Australia a 19-9 half-time lead and plenty of excuse to take their foot off the gas in the second half.
While a further two Sanchez penalties took Argentina within a converted try of a draw Ashley-Carter became only the second player in history to score a semi-final hat-trick of tries giving Australia a 29-15 victory.
The only real issue was the performance of the English referee Wayne Barnes.
Having utterly humiliated himself in last Saturday's (17/10/15) quarter-final between South Africa and Wales Barnes seemed an odd choice to referee at this level. After all on election day any questionable decision by an Englishman against the Argentinians is likely to raise hell about the Falklands/Malvinas.
For the most part Barnes seemed to be attempting to dispel any allegations of anti-Welsh bias by demonstrating that he was an utterly incompetent referee. So there was poor decision after poor decision benefiting no team in particular.
There was an interesting moment when Argentina's Levani tackled low on Australia's Folau. Failing to use his arms to grab and taking Folau over the horizontal this was somewhere between a penalty and a yellow card.
However as it clearly wasn't a spear-tackle I would have erred towards penalty in an incident that was similar to Lydiate's tackle that prompted Mike Brown's tantrum in the England v Wales game.
Initially Barnes was happy to give the penalty. However the Television Match Official (TMO) put him on the spot and enquired as to whether with the quarter-final he was following the letter or the spirit of the law. Under pressure Barnes decided he was again following the letter of the law and sent Levani to the sin-bin for a harsh yellow card.
The big incident came late on with Ashley-Carter's final try. If Barnes had gone to the TMO and we'd all got our protractors out eventually we would have concluded that this was technically the result of a forward pass. However with both players running forward, the ball not being taken out of the way of a defender and it being a fine margin watching it live I think it was a spirited try.
Plus while the Argentinians will continue to dream of what might have been in the dying minutes it was really the difference between them losing 22-15 and them losing 29-15.
Anyway Australia now go on to meet New Zealand in Saturday's (31/10/15) final.
Although never in history have rugby fans rioted like football fans this is likely to be a grudge match between two rugby mad rivals driven largely by decades of New Zealanders being forced to say; "No actually I'm from New Zealand."
It's likely to be spiced up slightly by growing political tensions between the two nations. Due to a mutual visa free travel arrangement during Rihanna's 2013 Diamonds World Tour I temporarily designated Auckland, New Zealand as an Australian city.
However former Australian Prime Minister Abbott's anti-immigration policies have seen large numbers of New Zealander's deported after being released from prison. This has prompted the New Zealand government to sort of respond by going; "Oi, We're white, this sh*t isn't meant to apply to us. Plus you're Australian, most of you are f*cking criminals!"
Then there is the Chris Brown issue. In what I understand is now a final decision Australia banned him over his domestic violence convictions. However in an attempt to show loyalty to the English hosts of the tournament New Zealand then welcomed him with open arms.
We look forward to the matter being settled once and for all.
21:45 on 25/10/15 (UK date).
Inspired by Aussie Rules Football the Wallabies had a lot of Ireland's pass and dance about them. However they brought with them a level of muscle the Irish clearly lacked.
So when the Puma's went in for their chop tackles the Australians just sort of carried on trying to work out why there was a little Argentinian clamped to their ankles. Likewise when the Pumas made their attack the Australian defence simply cut them down.
What really undid the match though was Australia's Simmons intercepting an early pass from Argentina's Sanchez and running through a converted try to give the Aussies a 7 point lead after just 90 seconds.
Although Sanchez tried to redeem himself with a 3 point penalty Ashely-Cooper quickly ran in another unconverted try. Along with another converted Ashley-Cooper try and two Puma's penalties this gave Australia a 19-9 half-time lead and plenty of excuse to take their foot off the gas in the second half.
While a further two Sanchez penalties took Argentina within a converted try of a draw Ashley-Carter became only the second player in history to score a semi-final hat-trick of tries giving Australia a 29-15 victory.
The only real issue was the performance of the English referee Wayne Barnes.
Having utterly humiliated himself in last Saturday's (17/10/15) quarter-final between South Africa and Wales Barnes seemed an odd choice to referee at this level. After all on election day any questionable decision by an Englishman against the Argentinians is likely to raise hell about the Falklands/Malvinas.
For the most part Barnes seemed to be attempting to dispel any allegations of anti-Welsh bias by demonstrating that he was an utterly incompetent referee. So there was poor decision after poor decision benefiting no team in particular.
There was an interesting moment when Argentina's Levani tackled low on Australia's Folau. Failing to use his arms to grab and taking Folau over the horizontal this was somewhere between a penalty and a yellow card.
However as it clearly wasn't a spear-tackle I would have erred towards penalty in an incident that was similar to Lydiate's tackle that prompted Mike Brown's tantrum in the England v Wales game.
Initially Barnes was happy to give the penalty. However the Television Match Official (TMO) put him on the spot and enquired as to whether with the quarter-final he was following the letter or the spirit of the law. Under pressure Barnes decided he was again following the letter of the law and sent Levani to the sin-bin for a harsh yellow card.
The big incident came late on with Ashley-Carter's final try. If Barnes had gone to the TMO and we'd all got our protractors out eventually we would have concluded that this was technically the result of a forward pass. However with both players running forward, the ball not being taken out of the way of a defender and it being a fine margin watching it live I think it was a spirited try.
Plus while the Argentinians will continue to dream of what might have been in the dying minutes it was really the difference between them losing 22-15 and them losing 29-15.
Anyway Australia now go on to meet New Zealand in Saturday's (31/10/15) final.
Although never in history have rugby fans rioted like football fans this is likely to be a grudge match between two rugby mad rivals driven largely by decades of New Zealanders being forced to say; "No actually I'm from New Zealand."
It's likely to be spiced up slightly by growing political tensions between the two nations. Due to a mutual visa free travel arrangement during Rihanna's 2013 Diamonds World Tour I temporarily designated Auckland, New Zealand as an Australian city.
However former Australian Prime Minister Abbott's anti-immigration policies have seen large numbers of New Zealander's deported after being released from prison. This has prompted the New Zealand government to sort of respond by going; "Oi, We're white, this sh*t isn't meant to apply to us. Plus you're Australian, most of you are f*cking criminals!"
Then there is the Chris Brown issue. In what I understand is now a final decision Australia banned him over his domestic violence convictions. However in an attempt to show loyalty to the English hosts of the tournament New Zealand then welcomed him with open arms.
We look forward to the matter being settled once and for all.
21:45 on 25/10/15 (UK date).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
