Afghanistan Conditions with Taliban/al Qaeda

Has anyone talked to Ashraf Ghani about the Taliban or the 5 detainees released from Guantanamo and handed over to Qatar? What is the near future for Afghanistan with the Talibans’ recent terror attacks? There is and remains a military stalemate between the Taliban and the government of Afghanistan. Perhaps the agreement signed with Afghanistan is a clue.

       We conclude that the security environment in Afghanistan will become more challenging after the drawdown of most international forces in 2014, and that the Taliban insurgency will become a greater threat to tan’s stability in the 2015–2018 timeframe than it is now.

The insurgency has been considerably weakened since the surge of U.S. and NATO forces in 2009, but it remains a viable threat to the government of Afghanistan. The coalition’s drawdown will result in a considerable reduction in counterinsurgency and counterterrorism operations by Afghan, U.S., and NATO forces. History suggests that the Taliban will use sanctuaries in Pakistan to regenerate their capabilities as military pressure on the movement declines. In the 2015– 2016 timeframe, we assess that the Taliban are likely to try to keep military pressure on the ANSF in rural areas, expand their control and influence in areas vacated by coalition forces, encircle key cities, conduct high-profile attacks in Kabul and other urban areas, and gain leverage for reconciliation negotiations. In 2016–2018, once the insurgency has had time to recover from the last several years of U.S. and NATO operations, a larger and more intense military effort will become increasingly likely.
We conclude that a small group of al Qaeda members, many of whom have intermarried with local clans and forged ties with Afghan and Pakistani insurgents, remains active in the remote valleys of northeastern Afghanistan.  However, as a result of sustained U.S. and Afghan counterterrorism operations, this group of al Qaeda members does not currently pose an imminent threat to the U.S. and Western nations. Further, so long as adequate pressure is maintained via U.S. and Afghan counterterrorism operations, the group is unlikely to regenerate the capability to become a substantial threat in the 2015–2018 timeframe.
We conclude that, in the likely 2015–2018 security environment, the ANSF will require a total security force of about 373,400 personnel in order to pro- vide basic security for the country, and cope with the Taliban insurgency and low-level al Qaeda threat.
***
The United Nations provided a report in December of 2014 that in part reads:  The present report provides an update on the situation since the fourth report of the Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team was submitted to the Committee on 30 April 2014 (S/2014/402). The inauguration of the new President of Afghanistan on 29 September marked the first democratic and peaceful transition of executive authority in the history of Afghanistan. This was achieved despite intensive efforts by the Taliban to disrupt the second round of the presidential elections on 14 June 2014. The Taliban also exploited the political uncertainty following the elections until a government of national unity was formed in September 2014. Consequently, 2014 saw a significantly elevated number of Taliban attacks across Afghanistan, marking an increase in their activity.
Although the current fighting season has not yet concluded, the prospects of the Taliban breaking the strategic stalemate look slim despite the almost complete withdrawal of international combat troops. The most intensive military onslaught of the Taliban during the 2014 fighting season resulted in several district centres in the south and the east being overrun, but only briefly, as the government forces proved resilient and were able to recapture them within days. Meanwhile, an intensive Taliban effort to take control of Sangin district in Helmand Province failed.
On the political front, the Taliban leadership remains largely opposed to reconciliation, despite some elements that argue in favour. Hardliners from the “Da Fidayano Mahaz”1 (not listed), the “Tora Bora Mahaz” (not listed) and other affiliates push for renewed military efforts and argue that a campaign of attrition will wear out government forces and institutions over a period of several years. Meanwhile, the pragmatists associated with the Mu’tasim Group argue for a negotiated settlem   ent, which they believe could be to the Taliban’s advantage.
Stability in Afghanistan in 2015 and beyond will depend on two essential factors: the sustainability of external economic assistance, which is crucial to supporting the Government of Afghanistan and the national security forces and their continued development, and the persistence of Afghan confidence in government institutions and security forces, which is crucial to maintaining morale.
Regrettably, the Monitoring Team continues to receive a steady — albeit officially unconfirmed — flow of media reports indicating that some listed individuals have become increasingly adept at circumventing the sanctions measures, the travel ban in particular. Continuing to raise awareness with all stakeholders of the central role of the sanctions measures and their implementation as part of the wider political strategy of the international community remains one of the key tasks of the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1988 (2011) and the Team. *** Al-Qaida associates
There was a distinct increase in the activities and the visibility of Al-Qaida- affiliated entities in Afghanistan in 2014 (see annex II for an overview of the various Al-Qaida entities active in the Afghanistan/Pakistan border region and of how they relate to one another). Although geographically removed from Afghanistan, the recent events in Iraq and the Syrian Arab Republic, specifically the success of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), currently listed as Al-Qaida in Iraq (QE.J.115.04), present a challenge to the Taliban as a movement. In January 2014, the Afghan security forces seized propaganda material originating from an Iraq-based Al-Qaida affiliate in north-eastern Afghanistan. According to official information provided by Afghan officials to the Team, in mid-2014 the Taliban leadership was concerned that the success of ISIL in parts of northern Iraq would draw young people who were potential Taliban recruits to join ISIL in Iraq.
Although this did not happen, apparently because of how difficult it is to travel to Iraq, the Monitoring Team has received a steady stream of as yet unconfirmed reports and press articles pointing to the existence of direct contacts between individuals associated with the Taliban and individuals associated with ISIL. For example, it has been reported in several Afghan media articles that the current ISIL leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, listed as Ibrahim Awwad Ibrahim Ali al-Badri al-Samarrai (QI.A.299.11), lived in Kabul during the Taliban regime and cooperated closely with Al-Qaida groups in Afghanistan at the time.28 In addition, Taliban splinter groups such as the Da Fidayano Mahaz and the Tora Bora Mahaz continue to regularly report on and glorify ISIL activities on their websites.29 The Team will continue to monitor this situation and report to the Committee once it is able to present an official confirmation.
Currently, two prominent supporters of ISIL from the Afghan Taliban — Mawlavi Abdul Rahim Muslimdost (not listed), who is a leader of the “Jama’at al Da’wa ila al-Qur’an wa Ahl al-Hadith” (not listed) in Kunar Province, and Mawlavi Abdul Qahir (not listed) — have endorsed the leader of ISIL, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.30 Most other leaders of the Jama’at al Da’wa ila al-Qur’an wa Ahl al-Hadith had sworn allegiance to Mullah Omar’s “Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan” in 2010.31
The Tora Bora Mahaz is a militant group operating in Nangarhar Province, Afghanistan, that is reportedly under the operational control of the Taliban and its leader Anwar al-Haqq Mujahid (not listed), son of Yunus Khalis (not listed), who served as a Taliban shadow provincial governor. The group has primarily been attacking government forces in Nangarhar Province (see S/2014/402, para. 21). It publishes a magazine, Tora Bora, and maintains a website, on which it regularly cross-posts videos produced by ISIL.
At the individual level, some Arab nationals affiliated with Al-Qaida in the Afghanistan/Pakistan border area remain in touch with those who left for Iraq and the Syrian Arab Republic. When in July a drone strike killed six Al-Qaida-affiliated individuals in North Waziristan, Abdul Mohsen Abdallah Ibrahim al Charekh (QI.A.324.14) — currently serving with the Al-Nusrah Front for the People of the Levant (QE.A.137.14) — expressed grief over the loss of his friends.
A militant group calling itself “Al-Tawhid Battalion in Khorasan” (not listed) pledged allegiance to ISIL. The Abtalul Islam Media Foundation posted a statement from the group using its Twitter account on 21 September 2014. In the message, the leader of the Al-Tawhid Battalion, Abu Bakr al-Kabuli (not listed), pledged loyalty to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and asked him if the group should fight in Khorasan or wait to join the ranks of ISIL, whether in Iraq, the Syrian Arab Republic, Afghanistan or Pakistan.33  The position of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar (QI.H.88.03), the leader of the Hizb-I- Islami Gulbuddin, concerning the political situation in Afghanistan remains contradictory. On the one hand, he is seeking an enhanced political role for Hizb-I- Islami Gulbuddin in post-NATO Afghanistan. Some leading members of his party are involved in intense negotiations with the President, Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai, and with Abdullah Abdullah to explore options for future cooperation that include the possibility of joining the new Government.34 Hekmatyar has also supported the holding of an intra-Afghan dialogue without foreign interference.35 On the other hand, Hekmatyar has criticized the signing by Afghanistan of a bilateral security agreement with the United States and claimed that a continued foreign presence means nothing but war. He has also lashed out at Iran (Islamic Republic of) and Pakistan for supporting the deal.

NSC Silent on Russian History of Terror

There was Crimea and now there is Ukraine. But going back decades there was al Qaeda. There are countless Russians that are being silenced but others do speak out on matters of Ukraine hostilities as they relate to Soviet Loyalists.  There are few in media that report Russian activities after having performed comprehensive and investigative research. For this reason the National Security Council rarely addresses Russian/Putin objectives, connections and operations. Below are two items referring to Ukraine and al Qaeda.

Russian activist charged with treason after phoning Ukrainian embassy 

(Reuters) – Nine months after Russian activist Svetlana Davydova called the Ukrainian embassy in Moscow to warn that Russian soldiers were making their way to Ukraine, an investigator with an order for her arrest showed up at her door.

Her husband, Anatoly Gorlov, said the investigator from the Federal Security Service (FSB), the successor to the Soviet KGB, detained Davydova, a mother of seven living in the western Russian city of Vyazma, on suspicion of treason.

“They… didn’t ask for permission, they just threw themselves on me and rushed into the apartment yelling ‘Quiet!’,” Gorlov told Reuters in his small apartment.

“A man in civilian clothes identified himself as an investigator from the FSB. They asked Sveta ‘Are you Davydova? We are taking you right now!’,” he said.

Ukraine and Western governments accuse Moscow of sending weapons and troops to support a pro-Russian insurgency in eastern Ukraine. Russia denies this. More than 5,000 people have been killed since last April in the conflict, which has worsened sharply this month.

Russian activists, and relatives of soldiers sent to the front lines in Ukraine, are often hesitant to speak out. Soldiers’ rights campaigner Ella Polyakova was declared a ‘foreign agent’ after she gave an interview to Reuters last year about the deaths of Russian soldiers in eastern Ukraine.

Gorlov said papers for his wife’s arrest on Jan. 21 showed she called Ukrainian diplomats after overhearing a soldier’s conversation about troops from a nearby military base being sent to Moscow and from there to Ukraine, where they were being told to wear civilian clothing.

If convicted, she could face between 12 and 20 years in prison.

The Ukrainian embassy in Moscow was unavailable for comment. The FSB and the lawyer assigned to Davydova declined to comment on the case.

Speaking in his green-wallpapered apartment lined with children’s drawings, Gorlov said his wife, who had been active in the Communist Party and was an environmental campaigner, was no spy.

“It’s not a secret,” Gorlov said of the presence of Russian troops in east Ukraine. He has not seen his wife since she was detained.

“I don’t know why they took her away,” he said.

“She possibly might have considered that by calling the Ukrainian embassy, fewer people would die… I know she was not led by any harmful intentions.”

***  Then we must also go back further and consider other historical items as they relate to al Qaeda. There is no denial that Soviet sympathizers maintain an art of propaganda, infiltration, nefarious missions and terror.

Russian FSB and Al-Qaida as Teamwork

Here are some materials which show Russian FSB connections with al-Qaeda.

1. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6163502.stm

He (Aleksander Litvinenko) has told that al-Qaeda number two (now nr 1- CC) Ayman al-Zawahiri was trained by the FSB in Dagestan in the years before the 9/11 attacks.

Litvinenko also denounced the war in Chechnya as a crime, called for Russian troops to be withdrawn, and said compensation should be paid to Chechens.

One of his friends – and one of a number of Russian exiles now settled in Britain – is Akhmed Zakayev, a former Chechen commander living under asylum in London.The two men lived on the same street in London, it has been reported.

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Litvinenko
Support of terrorism worldwide by the KGB and FSB

Litvinenko stated that “all the bloodiest terrorists of the world” were connected to FSB-KGB, including Carlos “The Jackal” Ramírez, Yassir Arafat, Saddam Hussein, Abdullah Öcalan, Wadie Haddad of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, George Hawi who led the Communist Party of Lebanon, Ezekias Papaioannou from Cyprus, Sean Garland from Ireland and many others. He said that all of them were trained, funded, and provided with weapons, explosives and counterfeit documents in order to carry out terrorist attacks worldwide and that each act of terrorism made by these people was carried out according to the task and under the rigid control of the KGB of the USSR.[61] Litvinenko said that “the center of global terrorism is not in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan or the Chechen Republic. The terrorism infection creeps away worldwide from the cabinets of the Lubyanka Square and the Kremlin”.[62][63]

Alleged Russia-al-Qaeda connection

In a July 2005 interview with the Polish newspaper Rzeczpospolita, Litvinenko alleged that Ayman al-Zawahiri, a prominent leader of al-Qaeda, was trained for half a year by the FSB in Dagestan in 1997 and called him “an old agent of the FSB”.[61][64] Litvinenko said that after this training, al-Zawahiri “was transferred to Afghanistan, where he had never been before and where, following the recommendation of his Lubyanka chiefs, he at once … penetrated the milieu of Osama bin Laden and soon became his assistant in Al Qaeda.”[65] Former KGB officer and writer Konstantin Preobrazhenskiy supported this claim and said that Litvinenko “was responsible for securing the secrecy of Al-Zawahiri’s arrival in Russia; he was trained by FSB instructors in Dagestan, Northern Caucasus, in 1996–1997.”.[66 http://www.cicentre.com/404.asp?404;http://cicentre.com:8200/Documents/russia_islam_not_separate.html]
He said: “At that time, Litvinenko was the Head of the Subdivision for Internationally Wanted Terrorists of the First Department of the Operative-Inquiry Directorate of the FSB Anti-Terrorist Department. He was ordered to undertake the delicate mission of securing Al-Zawahiri from unintentional disclosure by the Russian police. Though Al-Zawahiri had been brought to Russia by the FSB using a false passport, it was still possible for the police to learn about his arrival and report to Moscow for verification. Such a process could disclose Al-Zawahiri as an FSB collaborator. In order to prevent this, Litvinenko visited a group of highly placed police officers to notify them in advance.” According to FSB spokesman Sergei Ignatchenko, al-Zawahiri was arrested by Russian authorities in Dagestan in December 1996 and released in May 1997.[67]

On 1 September 2005, al-Zawahiri and Mohammad Sidique Khan claimed responsibility for the attacks for Al Qaeda on a videotape which aired on al-Jazeera.[68]

3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayman_al-Zawahiri
Assassinated former FSB agent Alexander Litvinenko alleged, among other things, that during this time, al-Zawahiri was indeed being trained by the FSB,[83] and that he was not the only link between al-Qaeda and the FSB.[84] Former KGB officer and writer Konstantin Preobrazhenskiy supported Litvinenko’s claim and said that Litvinenko “was responsible for securing the secrecy of Al-Zawahiri’s arrival in Russia, who was trained by FSB instructors in Dagestan, Northern Caucasus, in 1996–1997.”[85]

4. http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/london/2005/07/318875.html
Chechenpress , the Department of interviews, 11.07.05

The correspondent: Alexander, who, in your opinion, is the originator of this terrorist attack?

A. Litvinenko: You know, I have spoken about it earlier and I shall say now, that I know only one organization, which has made terrorism the main tool of solving of political problems. It is the Russian special services. The KGB was engaged in terrorism for many years, and, in mass terrorism. At the special department of the KGB they trained terrorists practically from all countries of the world; these courses lasted, as a rule, for a half-year. Specially trained and prepared agents of the KGB organized murders and explosions, including explosions of tankers, captures of passenger air liners, strikes on the diplomatic, state and commercial organizations practically worldwide

A. Litvinenko: The bloodiest terrorists of the world were or are agents of the KGB-FSB. These are and well-known Carlos Ilyich Ramiros, the nickname “Jackal” (he is condemned for terrorism in France), deceased Yassir Arafat, Saddam Hussein, Adjalan (he is condemned in Turkey), Vadi Haddad, the head of the service of external operations of the Popular front of releasing of Palestine, Hauyi, the head of the communist party of Lebanon, mister Papaionnu from the Cyprus, Sean Garland from Ireland and many others. All of them were trained in the KGB, received money from there, weapon and explosive, counterfeit documents and a communication facility necessary for carrying out of acts of terrorism practically worldwide. The correspondent: You can be objected, that each of the listed figures and the forces, supporting them, were engaged in solving of their own political problems …
A. Litvinenko: Certainly, all these figures and movements headed by them operated under their own slogans, however thus none of them hid especially their “intimate” (we shall say so) communications with the Kremlin and Lubyanka. There is a simple question: whether Russian special services would train and finance those people and those groupings, which were not supervised by Lubyanka and did not serve to the interests of the Kremlin? You understand perfectly, they would not. Each act of terrorism made by these people was carried out according to the task and under the rigid control of the KGB of the USSR . And it is not casual after the disintegration of the USSR and disorder of the KGB terrorism in the world practically came to naught. But this calm lasted only till the time, until security officers seized power in Russia and then everything began anew. After Putin’s assignment to the post of the head of the FSB, in this special service political investigation was revived and those, who in days of the KGB had been engaged in terrorism, were are returned to the service.

The correspondent: Everyone, whom you have named, is “the old staff” of the KGB. Could you bring a fresher example?
A. Litvinenko: Certainly, here it is. The second person in the terrorist organization “Al Qa’eda”, about whom they speak as about the organizer of the series of explosions in London , Aiman al-Zavahiri, is an old agent of the FSB. Being sentenced to death penalty in Egypt for terrorism and searched by the Interpol, Aiman al-Zavahiri in 1998 was in the territory of Dagestan , where for half a year was trained a special preparation at one of the educational bases of the FSB. After the preparation he was transferred to Afghanistan , in which he had never been before and where, following the recommendation of his Lubyanka chiefs, he at once after the arrival penetrated into the surrounding of Ben Laden and soon became his assistant in the “Al Qa’eda”.

The correspondent: Could you hint at least, where from do you have such data?

Litvinenko: I can. During my service in one of the most confidential departments of the FSB, those heads from the UFSB of Dagestan, who directly had worked with Aiman al-Zavahiri, after his successful terrorist preparation and transferring to Afghanistan , were called to Moscow and received high posts.

The correspondent: What can you say concerning the acts of terrorism in London ? From what region and with what forces was this impact directed?

A. Litvinenko: In reply to this question I can declare perfectly definitely, that the center of the global terrorism is not in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan or the Chechen Republic. The terrorism infection creeps away worldwide from the cabinets of the Lubyanka Square and the Kremlin. And until the Russian special services are forbidden, dispersed and condemned, the terrorism will never stop: bombs will blow up, and blood will be shed. Terrorism has no limitation period and those, who were engaged in it, should be found and punished, until they are alive, instead of to award them with the Nobel Prize of the world and not to set up monuments for them. I would like to repeat, that all the terrorists, whom I have named, were supported by the heads of the Soviet and Russian special services – Yury Andropov, Vladimir Putin, Nikolay Patrushev and others. These people are the main terrorists, and their place is not among the heads of the civilized countries, but on a dock. And until we condemn them, the same as in due time they condemned fascist Gestapo, the terrorism on the earth

Judge Declares DoJ Committed Fraud Upon the Court

Remember the Fast and Furious Case? The DoJ’s collusion and obstruction has been identified by a Judge in the case of ATF whistleblower Jay Dobyn’s case.

On August 25, 2014, the court issued an opinion in the above case. On August 28, 2014, a judgment was rendered under RCFC 58. On October 24, 2014, defendant filed a notice of appeal. On October 27, 2014, plaintiff filed a notice of cross-appeal. On October 29, 2014, the court, invoking RCFC 60(b) and other provisions,1
issued an order voiding the prior judgment  based upon indications that defendant, through its counsel, had committed fraud on the court. On November 6, 2014, defendant filed a motion seeking to vacate this order. On November 12, 2014, plaintiff filed an opposition to defendant’s motion. On November 13, 2014, the court granted defendant’s motion to vacate the order voiding the judgment in this case.    

Federal judge blasts DOJ lawyers in case of ATF whistle-blower 

A federal judge angrily accused Justice Department attorneys in newly unsealed documents of “fraud upon the court” by intimidating a witness in a case involving a former Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent who alleges the agency trashed his reputation.

Judge Francis Allegra, who was appointed to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims in 1998 by President Bill Clinton, is presiding over a suit brought by former ATF agent Jay Dobyns against the government agency, which he claims retaliated against him and damaged his reputation. Dobyns infiltrated Hell’s Angels and worked on cases involving the Aryan Brotherhood and MS-13 during his law enforcement career.
In a newly unsealed, Dec. 1, 2014, court ruling that legal experts said was highly unusual, Allegra accused seven Justice Department lawyers of “fraud upon the court, banned them from making any further filings in the case and took the unusual step of directly notifying Attorney General Eric Holder.

“In 40 years of legal practice, government and private, I’ve never seen that done,” said David Hardy, a constitutional law expert who formerly worked in the U.S. Solicitor General’s Office.

” … a federal judge is basically questioning your candor with your court — it’s exceedingly serious.”- Thomas Dupree, former DOJ official
Allegra said the government attorneys may have intimidated a witness and charged that seven of them may have kept illegal behavior secret from the court.

The controversy began after someone burned down the home of Dobyns. Dobyns claimed the ATF failed to protect his family, but the agency claimed Dobyns burned down his own home, a charge he denied. Dobyns then sued the ATF in U.S. Federal Claims Court for damaging his reputation and retaliation.

That’s when Justice Department lawyers got involved. In the ruling from last month, Allegra found a key witness in the trial said he was threatened by another ATF agent – and that ATF lawyers told the threatened agent not to tell the judge about it.

“[ATF lawyers] ordered the agent in question not to communicate the threat to the court and stated that there would be repercussions if the agent did not follow counsel’s instructions,” Judge Allegra said in his ruling.

The judge also noted that a tape recording indicates that multiple DOJ lawyers knew about misconduct and did not inform the judge.

“It’s a huge issue. Look, a lawyer’s stock and trade is his or her integrity, and to have a situation where a federal judge is basically questioning your candor with your court — it’s exceedingly serious,” Thomas Dupree, a partner at the prestigious law firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher and a former DOJ official from 2007 to 2009, told FoxNews.com.

Allegra’s ruling also documents other alleged wrongdoing. When Tom Atteberry, new ATF Agent in Charge of the Phoenix office, tried to reopen Dobyns’ arson case, Justice Department attorney Valerie Baker told him not to because it would damage her defense against Dobyns. Atteberry was a witnesses in the case, but the judge didn’t hear about the DOJ effort to silence him until trial. Allegra ruled that the DOJ action may amount to ‘fraud upon the court.”

“It’s very, very serious,” said Dupree. “Judges don’t make allegations like this cavalierly. It’s only after they have looked at the evidence and they have deep concerns that something that is not quite right. This is not by any means a run-of-the-mill, routine order.”

Last summer, Judge Allegra awarded Dobyns $173,000 in damages and rebuked the ATF for failing to adequately protect Dobyns and his family. The Justice Department appealed that ruling, but in another highly unusual move, Allegra successfully had the case remanded to his court, so he can pursue the seven government lawyers for concealing evidence. Recently unsealed documents obtained by FoxNews.com show that the DOJ disagrees with Allegra’s decision to keep the lawyers out of his court.

“[The order] limits the attorney general’s authority to select counsel to represent the United States,” a legal filing by Acting Assistant Attorney General Joyce R. Branda from Jan. 5 reads.

She added: “We are prepared to move forward with the… proceedings at the Court’s convenience.”

The judge also sent evidence of the alleged malpractice to the DOJ’s Office of Professional Responsibility, which initially opened an investigation. However, legal filings show that the agency soon suspended its investigation, saying it would wait to hear what Judge Allegra finds.

Dobyns’ lawyer said that seemed odd given that Judge Allegra had specifically asked DOJ to investigate.

“He asked OPR to investigate these matters,” James Reed, Dobyns’ attorney, told FoxNews.com. “In nearly a quarter-century practicing law I’ve never come close to seeing anything like this,” he said.

 

 

Others, such as former ATF agents, said they were not surprised given their experience with the agency.

“It is atrocious. If they can do this to a highly decorated federal agent, imagine what they can do to the average Joe,” said Vince Cefalu, a former agent who helped expose the Operation Fast and Furious scandal and who successfully sued the ATF for retaliating against him.

The ATF declined to comment on the case. Fox News also asked Attorney General Eric Holder if the lawyers involved had been disciplined. The Department of Justice declined to comment.

Blogger David Codrea, one of the first to discover the unsealed documents, said it shows “a pattern of institutional corruption and arrogance that gets its tone set from the top.”

 

No Battle Plan to Defeat Boko Haram?

No battle plan for Boko Haram?  In November of 2013, Boko Haram got a terrorist designation by the State Department. It has proven ties to AQIM. Not only has Boko Harem been responsible and claimed responsibility for killing thousands of civilians but, they have killed countless construction workers and continue to kidnap girls for sex slaves. Boko Haram continues to bring a brutal and deadly campaign against the Nigerian government but also has done the same with a United Nations building as well as Western targets in country. So this begs the question, why has there been no authorization for a battle plan to terminate this terror group in Nigeria such as AFRICOM is begging for one to defeat Boko Haram?

AFRICOM Commander Wants Full Counterinsurgency Plan for Boko Haram  The top commander of U.S. troops in Africa said he would like the U.S. military to do more to fight the terrorist group Boko Haram, but that it’s up to Nigerian and U.S. policy officials to decide how much they’re willing to change the trajectory of that group’s violent stronghold on the region.

U.S. Africa Command’s Gen. David Rodriguez, who previously served as the No. 2-ranking commander of the Afghanistan war, said he believes to turn the tide against Boko Haram would require a full-scale counterinsurgency plan across four countries.

The group now controls a vast territory of northeast Nigeria, Cameroon, Chad and Niger. Two weeks ago, Boko Haram fighters killed roughly 2,000 people in one attack in the region. The episode drew delayed Western media attention and relatively muted responses from Western leaders. Critics at the time complained that Washington and allied leaders paid disproportionate attention to the terrorist attack in Paris against the satirical periodical Charlie Hebdo, which occurred the same week.

Rodriguez said he felt the international community was amply aware of Nigeria’s crisis and was taking steps to fight the terrorist threat. “But I totally agree that it has to be much more effective all the way around to change what’s going on there, the negative impact on the people, the number of people displaced is just staggering,” he said, at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank.

“I think it’s going to take a huge international and multinational effort there to change the trajectory of that … I think the Nigerian leadership and Nigerian militaries are really going to have to really improve their capacities to be able to handle that. … I hope that they let us help them more and more,” Rodriguez said.

Rodriguez answered critics of the international response to the terrorist groups by saying it was ultimately Nigeria’s responsibility to request additional U.S. help, which the general was eager to provide.

“We continue to look for a way to constructively support the Nigerian military efforts,” Rodriguez said, “and continue to work will all the nations around there.” But Nigeria has cancelled exercises with U.S. forces. “We hope that that gets better and we hope we are able to train and equip more and more,” he said.

Next month, Nigeria will hold its presidential elections as President Goodluck Jonathan faces increasing criticism that his government has downplayed the crisis and proven inept in its response. Secretary of State John Kerry just returned from Nigeria, where he urged calm amid concern that the security situation could threaten the elections and spark additional violence.

“What has come together is a ‘perfect storm’ of security threats,” said Peter Pham, director of the Atlantic Council’s Africa Center, testifying Tuesday before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. Pham listed Boko Haram’s continuing insurgency and terrorist attacks to neighboring countries beyond Nigeria, the possibly millions displaced by the conflict, and the economic pressure created by the falling price of oil.

“It’s Boko Haram version 3.0,” Pham told Defense One. “It’s a group that’s gone from being a violent extremist group, to a terrorist group carrying out attacks, suicide bombings and other acts of violence, to full-fledged insurgency, occupying territory, trying to set up a mini-government, a mini-caliphate of its own.”

Emmanuel Ogebe, manager for the Peaceful Polls 2015 Project promoting fair elections in Nigeria, said that while Boko Haram killed roughly 2,000 people in 2012, they have exceeded that in the first week of 2015.

“Boko Haram has led ISIS the last three years in atrocities,” he said. “It puzzles me to this day that Boko Haram does not get the attention that ISIS has … Paris got way more attention than the people of Baga ever did, even though the destruction of Baga was an extinction-level event.”

“I want to say that black lives matter when it comes to global terrorism as well,” he said.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker, R-Tenn., said while much of the attention in the counterterrorism fight has been on other regions, over time, he’s going to make Africa more of a priority in the committee. “Certainly, [Boko Haram] have turned out to be an incredibly disruptive force, and much of our focus has been on what’s happening in Syria,” Corker told Defense One. “We need to be paying attention to what’s happening in Nigeria as well.”

Robert Jackson, principal deputy assistant secretary of State for African Affairs, said that the U.S. government supports the idea of a joint task force and wants the U.S. to continue training vetted Nigerian soldiers. But he added, “Peaceful and credible elections is a condition for greater [U.S.] engagement, and we want to get through that step first.”

“I think there’s a tremendous effort to combat Boko Haram,” Rodriguez said, referring to the military multinational task force, in all four nations. “In Nigeria, we have continued to build their naval security apparatus, it’s going very, very well, and we have expended our intelligence sharing efforts with them.” But much more is needed, he said.

Part of the complication of this training, Pham noted, are accusations that the Nigerian government and military have committed human rights abuses. By law, the U.S. cannot provide training or equipment to individuals or units that are implicated in human rights violations. While the Defense Department can grant exceptions for equipment and assistance necessary for disaster relief, national emergencies, or “extraordinary circumstances,” as determined by the secretary of defense, Pham said, no exception has ever been made in Africa to his knowledge. “Not every member or unit of the Nigerian military are human rights abusers,” he said. “To say it is all corrupt, inefficient, and violates human rights is painting with a very broad brush.”

Earlier this year, one round of a program by which U.S. Army instructors trained a battalion of Nigerian “rangers” was paused due to a lack of equipment, according to Pham. By a memorandum of understanding, the Nigerian government had agreed to buy the equipment its forces would need.

The Nigerian government spends roughly $5.8 to $6 billion of its budget on security, while its total economy is roughly half a trillion dollars, according to Pham. Its military is made up of some 90,000 active duty and 20-25,000 reserve components – “For a country of 180 million people, that’s disproportionately small,” he said.

When civilian rule was restored to Nigeria after a series of military takeovers in the 80s and 90s, the government essentially starved the military in order to protect against another coup. Now, Nigerian forces badly need the training the U.S. can uniquely provide, Pham said – but it will take time.

“To fight a group like [Boko Haram], you have to be not only a war-fighting Army, but one trained in counterinsurgency,” he said, echoing Rodriguez’ comments made hours earlier across Washington.

Rodriguez would not say whether the U.S. could to more to stop Boko Haram, short of full scale counterinsurgency, only that whatever level of U.S. military intervention he is tasked to provide is “a policy decision” that is not his to make.

Chechens in Syria, Joining Islamic State

Battle-hardened fighters are on the move from Chechnya to the Middle East. This is not a recent development however a new dynamic is underway. First there was Syria, now there is Islamic State and Abu Bakr al Baghdadi is happy to have new fighters.     

 

***  There may, in fact, be as many as four separate categories of Chechens in Syria — or even five, if an unconfirmed recent report that a detachment of the Chechen security forces is fighting in Aleppo on the side of Assad is indeed true.

The first category are the battle-hardened veterans of the North Caucasus insurgency. It has been suggested, but not proven, that Qatar and Saudi Arabia financed the recruitment of those experienced former insurgents because “the Chechens are regarded as the best of the jihadist fighters.” 

“The Guardian” profiled in September 2012 a brigade of fighters that included Chechens, together with fighters from Libya, Tajikistan, Turkey, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. The author of that article described the Chechen fighters as “older, taller, and stronger” than their comrades in arms, many of whom clearly lacked any previous combat experience. He further noted that the Chechens “carried their weapons with confidence and distanced themselves from the rest, moving around in a tight-knit unit-within-a-unit,” suggesting that many have been members of the North Caucasus insurgency.

The second category is Kists — members of Georgia’s Chechen minority from the Pankisi Gorge close to the Georgian-Chechen border. Two of the Chechen commanders in Syria, Abu Omar al-Chechen (the commander of the brigade profiled by “The Guardian”) and Saifullah, are reportedly from Pankisi.

One of those fighters from Pankisi, who gave his name as Abu Hamza, told a Western journalist two months ago that he was motivated to travel to Syria and join the opposition by video footage on the Internet of Syrian government forces killing innocent women and children. The Georgian-Russian border is so tightly controlled that it is far easier for the Kists to travel to Syria than to enter Chechnya to join the North Caucasus insurgency.

The third category is young Chechens from among the estimated 250,000 who left Chechnya since the beginning of the first war in 1994 and settled in Europe and elsewhere. Abu Hamza said most of the Chechens he encountered during the several months he spent in Syria were from this category.

Pro-Moscow Chechen Republic head Ramzan Kadyrov has confirmed that young Chechens from Europe are fighting in Syria. He claims some of them, from low-income families, were attracted by the prospect of “violence and looting,” while others were victims of a concerted effort by Western intelligence services to recruit fighters by means of jihadist websites. Last summer, Kadyrov had affirmed that if young Chechen refugees in Europe wanted to take up arms they would travel to the North Caucasus to join the insurgency.

The fourth category is young Chechens from the Chechen Republic who either abandoned their studies at Middle Eastern universities to fight in Syria or managed to leave Chechnya with the explicit aim of joining the Syrian opposition forces.  Kadyrov categorically denied last summer that any “Russian citizens from the Chechen Republic” were fighting in Syria. But over the past two months he has admitted on several occasions that Chechens from both Chechnya and the émigré community in Europe and Turkey had traveled to Syria to fight.

On May 6, Kadyrov implied that the latter category far outnumber the former: he said “a few” Chechens from Chechnya were fighting in Syria, and that “hundreds” from Europe and Turkey had been killed. Two weeks later, however, Kadyrov said “just a few” Chechens from Europe had been killed in the fighting.

The exodus of young men from Chechnya intent on fighting in Syria was discussed at a session of Chechnya’s Economic and Social Security Council on June 6. The website Kavkaz-Uzel quoted an unnamed member of that body as saying 29 Chechens have left Chechnya for Syria, seven of whom have been killed. That source did not specify a time frame. He did say, however, that those who left were mostly aged between 25 and 30, which contradicts Kadyrov’s repeated claims that the men in question are immature adolescents seduced by recruitment videos posted on the Internet.

The true number of Chechens who have headed to Syria to fight may be even larger. Kavkaz-Uzel quoted a representative of a local NGO as saying he knows of some 30 who have left, while an unnamed cleric suggested the true figure could run into dozens, or even hundreds. Predictably, the Chechen authorities are reportedly exerting pressure on the parents of those young men to persuade them to return to Chechnya.

Federal Security Service head Aleksandr Bortnikov told journalists earlier this month that some 200 militants from the Russian Federation are fighting on the side of the “terrorists” in Syria. He did not, unfortunately, give any indication how many are from which republic.

Last fall, the insurgency website Kavkaz Center reported that there were 150 fighters from the “Caucasus Emirate” in Syria, divided into four brigades. One of those brigades is from Kabardino-Balkaria. *** Shock Waves From Insurgency Commanders’ Defection To IS Felt Beyond North Caucasus    The decision late last year by several prominent North Caucasus insurgency commanders to retract their oath of allegiance to Caucasus Emirate leader Aliaskhab Kebekov (Sheikh Ali Abu-Mukhammad) and pledge loyalty to Islamic State (IS) leader Abu-Bakr al-Baghdadi has apparently engendered confusion and discord not only across the North Caucasus but within the Chechen diaspora community.

That at least is the message conveyed by Akhmad Umarov (nom de guerre Abu Khamza), the brother of Caucasus Emirate (IK) founder and leader Doku Umarov and the IK’s official representative abroad, in a 15-minute video address posted last week on Checheninfo.com, the website of the Chechen wing of the North Caucasus insurgency.

In that video footage, Umarov requests a statement of moral support from Kebekov and Emir Khamzat (Aslan Byutukayev), the commander of the Chechen insurgency wing, in response to what he terms the “groundless accusations” dreamed up against him by the pro-IS faction and the latter’s “childish” attempts to justify their actions.

He says it is “unacceptable” that those who do not obey Shari’a law “are trying to obstruct us in our work and spread discord,” and insists that those persons who do so, whether unwittingly, or at the behest of “enemies of Islam,” or in the hope of securing a comfortable post within the IS leadership, should be held responsible under Shari’a law, and will answer for their actions on Judgment Day.

Umarov appeals to Kebekov and Khamzat to explain why Chechen commanders are violating their oath of loyalty to Kebekov and their theological arguments for doing so. He says failure to clarify their arguments will only deepen the split between the two factions.

Umarov then presents his superiors with a choice: either to issue a statement of support for the stance adopted by the IK representation abroad with regard to the defections to IS that would make clear to all fighters from Chechnya and Daghestan that they should “abide by all demands that do not contradict the Koran and Sunna,” meaning remain loyal to Kebekov. Or, “if you have doubts about what we are saying and our sincerity, then we ask you to appoint new people to replace us and dismiss us from our posts. If you have faith and confidence in us, then we ask you to grant us additional powers to restore order and establish a strict and functional system in accordance with Shari’a law to address urgent questions which it is imperative to resolve — questions concerning religion, politics, and social, financial, and informational issues.”

Umarov then addresses Chechen fighters both in the Caucasus and beyond “who are trying to help the cause and to defend our religion and honor,” urging them to take a clear stance against the renegade faction. He says he can provide an explanation for what that faction “is saying behind our backs,” but does not say what those criticisms are.

With regard to Syria (he does not use the toponym “Sham” favored by the Chechens fighting there), Umarov affirms unequivocally that “any fighter who travels to Syria to take part in jihad there should understand that he will have to answer for that on Judgment Day. We appeal to you, especially to the young people of the Vilayat Nokhchiicho [Chechnya], to stay where you are. Your holy duty today is jihad in the Caucasus…to defend our land, the territory of the Caucasus Emirate,” from the “primary foe” in the person of the Kremlin regime and its apostate collaborators, meaning the pro-Moscow Chechen leadership.

Given that Umarov speaks in very general terms, it is impossible to assess the extent of support among IK fighters for IS and the magnitude of the threat that faction poses to the cohesion of the insurgency ranks. But his request for “additional powers” suggests he faces a serious challenge.

Since the statements of support for Baghdadi by six Chechen and Daghestani commanders last month, several insurgency commanders from Chechnya and Ingushetia who for reasons they do not specify are no longer in the Caucasus have reaffirmed their loyalty to Kebekov. So too has Emir Salim (Zalim Shebzukhov), commander of the Kabardino-Balkar-Karachai insurgency wing.