An affordable price is probably the major benefit persuading people to buy drugs at www.americanbestpills.com. The cost of medications in Canadian drugstores is considerably lower than anywhere else simply because the medications here are oriented on international customers. In many cases, you will be able to cut your costs to a great extent and probably even save up a big fortune on your prescription drugs. What's more, pharmacies of Canada offer free-of-charge shipping, which is a convenient addition to all other benefits on offer. Cheap price is especially appealing to those users who are tight on a budget
Service Quality and Reputation
Although some believe that buying online is buying a pig in the poke, it is not. Canadian online pharmacies are excellent sources of information and are open for discussions. There one can read tons of users' feedback, where they share their experience of using a particular pharmacy, say what they like or do not like about the drugs and/or service. Reputable online pharmacy canadianrxon.com take this feedback into consideration and rely on it as a kind of expert advice, which helps them constantly improve they service and ensure that their clients buy safe and effective drugs. Last, but not least is their striving to attract professional doctors. As a result, users can directly contact a qualified doctor and ask whatever questions they have about a particular drug. Most likely, a doctor will ask several questions about the condition, for which the drug is going to be used. Based on this information, he or she will advise to use or not to use this medication.
“I will stand with the Muslims should the politicall winds shift in an ugly direction”, page 261 of his book: The Audacity of Hope
Written by Mike Gallagher, an American radio host and conservative political commentator. He is the host of The Mike Gallagher Show.
Many listeners have asked about the, “Obama: It Was You,” essay that someone sent me. Here it is:
President Obama: This is why you didn’t go to France to show solidarity against the Muslim terrorists:
It was you who spoke these words at an Islamic dinner – “I am one of you.”
It was you who on ABC News referenced – “My Muslim faith.”
It was you who gave $100 million in U.S. taxpayer funds to re-build foreign mosques.
It was you who wrote that in the event of a conflict -“I will stand with the Muslims.”
It was you who assured the Egyptian Foreign Minister that – “I am a Muslim.”
It was you who bowed in submission before the Saudi King.
It was you who sat for 20 years in a Liberation Theology Church condemning Christianity and professing Marxism.
It was you who exempted Muslims from penalties under Obamacare that the rest of us have to pay.
It was you who purposefully omitted – “endowed by our Creator” – from your recitation of The Declaration Of Independence.
It was you who mocked the Bible and Jesus Christ’s Sermon On The Mount while repeatedly referring to the ‘HOLY’ Quran.
It was you who traveled the Islamic world denigrating the United States Of America.
It was you who instantly threw the support of your administration behind the building of the Ground Zero Victory mosque overlooking the hallowed crater of the World Trade Center.
It was you who refused to attend the National Prayer Breakfast, but hastened to host an Islamic prayer breakfast at the WH.
It was you who ordered Georgetown Univ. and Notre Dame to shroud all vestiges of Jesus Christ BEFORE you would agree to go there to speak, but in contrast, you have NEVER requested that the mosques you have visited adjust their decor.
It was you who appointed anti-Christian fanatics to your Czar Corps.
It was you who appointed rabid Islamists to Homeland Security.
It was you who said that NASA’s “foremost mission” was an outreach to Muslim communities.
It was you who as an Illinois Senator was the ONLY individual who would speak in favor of infanticide.
It was you who were the first President not to give a Christmas Greeting from the WH, and went so far as to hang photos of Chairman Mao on the WH tree.
It was you who curtailed the military tribunals of all Islamic terrorists.
It was you who refused to condemn the Ft. Hood killer as an Islamic terrorist.
It is you who has refused to speak-out concerning the horrific executions of women throughout the Muslim culture, but yet, have submitted Arizona to the UN for investigation of hypothetical human-rights abuses.
It was you who when queried in India refused to acknowledge the true extent of radical global Jihadists, and instead profusely praised Islam in a country that is 82% Hindu and the victim of numerous Islamic terrorists assaults.
It was you who funneled $900 Million in U.S. taxpayer dollars to Hamas.
It was you who ordered the USPS to honor the MUSLIM holiday with a new commemorative stamp.
It was you who directed our UK Embassy to conduct outreach to help “empower” the British Muslim community.
It was you who embraced the fanatical Muslim Brotherhood in your quest to overthrow the Egyptian President, Hosni Mubarak.
It was you who funded mandatory Arabic language and culture studies in Grammar schools across our country.
It is you who follows the Muslim custom of not wearing any form of jewelry during Ramadan.
It is you who departs for Hawaii over the Christmas season so as to avoid past criticism for NOT participating in seasonal WH religious events.
It was you who was un-characteristically quick to join the chorus of the Muslim Brotherhood to depose Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak, formerly America’s strongest ally in North Africa; but, remain muted in your non-response to the Brotherhood led slaughter of Egyptian Christians.
It was you who appointed your chief adviser, Valerie Jarrett, an Iranian, who is a member of the Muslim Sisterhood, an off-shoot of the Muslim Brotherhood.
The above provides the basis for virtually everything Obama does. There are more examples, but one deadly fact, the Obama administration called the murders of Nidal Hassan ‘work place violence’ and never uttered a word at the beheading of the woman in Oklahoma by a Muslim.
Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson has designated the visit of Pope Francis to Philadelphia, Washington D.C. and New York as a National Special Security Event (NSSE) which allows for enhanced cooperation of local, state and federal partners in establishing a safe and secure environment.
The U.S. Secret Service serves as the lead federal law enforcement and coordinating agency for developing and implementing a comprehensive security plan for the Papal Visit. Interagency coordination is critical to security planning.
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) components providing security for the Papal Visit include the following:
U.S. Secret Service, in conjunction with federal, state and local partners, will support events with intelligence and counterterrorism assets, explosive device mitigation, dignitary and VIP protection, interagency communications, critical infrastructure, and airspace security.
The Transportation Security Administration will provide operational support including personnel, equipment and communications infrastructure. This includes Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response (VIPR) Teams and Transportation Security Officers across the National Capital Region, New York City and Philadelphia.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency serves as the lead federal agency for emergency and consequence management and will coordinate consequence management activities throughout the events to ensure a quick and coordinated response to protect public health and safety.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection will provide operational support including venue security, non-intrusive inspection, and communications support.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Homeland Security Investigations will provide personnel to support venue security and augment dignitary protection.
The U.S. Coast Guard will provide maritime security 24-hours a day during the 2015 World Meeting of Families and enforce fixed security zones.
The DHS National Protection and Programs Directorate will maintain support 24-hours a day through the National Infrastructure Coordinating Center and National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center as well as provide support through Federal Protective Service personnel.
The DHS Office of Health Affairs will staff the National Biosurveillance Integration Center and through the BioWatch Program Office will provide personnel, equipment and supplies to support field operations.
The DHS Domestic Nuclear Detection Office will provide radiological and nuclear alarm adjudication support as well as detection capability support.
DHS will continue to monitor for threats surrounding the Pope’s visit as well as provide in-person support during events through the Office of Intelligence and Analysis.
The Office of Operations Coordination will maintain situation situational awareness through the National Operations Center, and coordinate federal information sharing and reporting activities with federal, state, local, tribal, and private sector partners across the homeland security enterprise.
The Pope will be addressing a joint session of Congress, so it will be interesting to see who attends the event. Remember Nancy Pelosi has been declared by the Vatican court no longer eligible for communion due to her stance on abortion. But, the Vatican has taken on a forgiveness posture for abortion under Pope Francis, while many Bishops and Cardinals are in revolt. While the White House stands with Planned Parenthood and selling unborn baby parts, will the Pope even address the matter during his U.S. tour?
The White House created their own guest list for the Pope without asking the Vatican and the Vatican is NOT pleased.
DailyCaller: President Barack Obama has attracted attention for planning to meet Pope Francis in the White House with a motley assortment of dissenting Catholics and others opposed to Catholic doctrine. Now, the Vatican is signaling that it isn’t happy.
Pope Francis is scheduled to meet Obama on the South Lawn of the White House next Wednesday, Sept. 23. Among those invited by Obama to meet Francis are Gene Robinson, the first gay Episcopal bishop in the U.S., Mateo Williamson, the transgender head of the LGBT Catholic group Dignity USA, and Sister Simone Campbell, a nun who lobbied for Obamacare’s passage despite the fact that it funds abortions and compels Catholic institutions to provide birth control for employees.
While the Vatican hasn’t publicly complained about the guest lineup, an anonymous Vatican official has told The Wall Street Journal they are not happy. According to the official, the Vatican fears Obama is attempting to lure Francis into a photo op where him being photographed next to these activists will be interpreted as an endorsement of their activities, and a repudiation of longstanding Catholic doctrine. This concern is heightened, the official said, because Obama doesn’t appear to have invited anybody to the White House from the U.S. anti-abortion movement, which has very close ties to the Catholic Church. If Obama really is planning to trap Francis with a photo op, it wouldn’t be the first time it’s happened to Francis. In July, Francis was caught off-guard on a visit to Bolivia when president Evo Morales presented him with a Communist-themed crucifix. Overall, though, the Obama administration has been trying to emphasize the ways it agrees with the Vatican, rather than the social issues like abortion where they diverge sharply. Vice President Joe Biden (who is Catholic) says he’s read all of Francis’s recent encyclical on climate change, and Francis’s visit to a Philadelphia prison could bolster Obama’s own push for criminal justice reform.
But friction may be inevitable, especially if the pope feels put off by Obama’s guest list in the White House. He plans to speak on the topic of religious liberty during his visit to Philadelphia, which may provide an opportunity to condemn Obamacare’s contraception mandate.
White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest has downplayed the importance of individual guests, telling reporters Thursday that there will be “15,000 other people” at the event.
It is expected for Pope Francis to address the migrant crisis not only in Europe but to pressure the United States to take in more, perhaps hundreds of thousands more.
Pope Francis has been very vocal in encouraging the Catholic community to help migrants fleeing the Middle East. It is expected he will take the opportunity to encourage the United States, during his speech in the joint session of the Congress. He is expected to encourage the U.S. to take greater steps in absorbing more migrants from around the world, giving them the benefits from America’s immigration program including food, shelter, medication, education and several other benefits.
“Vatican officials say Pope Francis will focus heavily on immigration during his visit. ‘The Pope obviously has a very soft spot in his heart for immigrants,’ said one Holy See insider. ‘He won’t say, ‘open all borders,’ but there’s no two ways about it, he will say, ‘let’s give our immigrant brothers and sisters a fair chance,'” reported Breitbart.
The United States however has already accepted more migrants than Argentina, the home of the Pope. The U.S. has the highest foreign-born population in all of the largest countries in the world, according to Breitbart.
The population of the U.S. takes up only 5 percent of the World Population. In this 5 percent, a total of 20 percent are migrants from different countries.
The Obama administration should release all of the papers found at Osama Bin Laden’s complex that expose the ongoing ties between Iran and al-Qaeda, The Wall Street Journal urged in an editorial (Google link) Tuesday.
The editorial noted that former Vice President Dick Cheney gave a speech last week in which he quoted Gen. Michael Flynn, the former chief of the Defense Intelligence Agency, as saying that the papers included “letters about Iran’s role, influence and acknowledgment of enabling al-Qaeda operatives to pass through Iran as long as al-Qaeda did its dirty work against the Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan.” Flynn described the contents of the papers as “very telling” and said that Congress should seek the complete collection.
The editorial cited an example from one of the papers that has been made public.
In a memo to bin Laden, an al Qaeda operative talks about another who is ready to travel:
“The destination, in principle, is Iran, and he has with him 6 to 8 brothers that he chose. I told him we are waiting for final complete confirmation from you to move, and agree on this destination (Iran). His plan is: stay around three months in Iran to train the brothers there then start moving them and distributing them in the world for their missions and specialties.”
The editorial observed that while the 9/11 Commission concluded that there was no proof that Iran knew about al-Qaeda’s plan to strike the United States on September 11, 2001, “there is strong evidence that Iran facilitated the transit of al-Qaeda members into and out of Afghanistan before 9/11, and that some of these were future 9/11 hijackers.” A number of the conclusions of the 9/11 Commission about Iran’s cooperation with al-Qaeda were collected here.
The editorial also cited State and Treasury Department reports on the ties between Iran and al-Qaeda during the past four years, and called on President Barack Obama to release all the documents detailing the ties between Iran and al-Qaeda. If he does not, “Congress ought to demand them.”
Many governments and news sources have reported in recent years on ties between Iran and al-Qaeda. The Canadian government said in 2013 that two suspects in a plot to attack a passenger train had been supported by members of al-Qaeda who were based in Iran. A spokesman for the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria said last year that al-Qaeda did not target Iran in order to leave its network inside Iran intact. The pan-Arab newspaper a-Sharq al-Awsatreported in February that Saleh al-Qarawi, a senior member of al-Qaeda who operates in Iran, had been targeting American interests in the Gulf since 2007.
Sky News reported on Sunday that Iran was freeing five senior al-Qaeda members it had been holding. It is thought that they will leave Iran and head to Syria, “prompting fears they will join other terrorists in Syria planning attacks on the West.”
***
Not long after his inauguration in January 2009, President Barack Obama penned a letter to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader of Iran. As a presidential candidate, Obama had promised to conduct “tough, direct diplomacy” with the Iranians. And Obama figured, correctly, that all diplomatic entreaties would end up on Khamenei’s desk. So, the newly elected president decided to write Iran’s ultimate decision-maker directly. And he has written several letters since.
According to the Wall Street Journal, which first reported on the correspondence, Obama sent his latest letter to Khamenei in October of last year. The president was hoping to find common ground with the Iranians in Iraq, where the Islamic State, an offshoot of al Qaeda, has made stunning advances since early 2014. Obama believes that the United States and the Shiite jihadists of Iran have a common interest in pushing back the Sunni jihadists of the Islamic State. If the two sides can just resolve the thorny issue of Iran’s nuclear program, Obama reportedly thinks, that will pave the way for détente, and possibly a de facto alliance against our mutual enemies. Indeed, the president entertains the idea that Iran can be America’s partner in combating Sunni extremism throughout the region.
President Obama’s assumption is grossly mistaken. The president’s own State and Treasury Departments have repeatedly exposed Iran’s ongoing sponsorship of al Qaeda. Moreover, terrorists directly tied to al Qaeda’s Iran-based network have plotted attacks in the West on three occasions since Obama took office.
Most recently, in September, the Obama administration launched missile strikes against al Qaeda’s so-called Khorasan Group in Syria. The administration pointed to intelligence indicating that this cadre of “core” al Qaeda operatives was planning mass killings in the West, and possibly even in the United States. Two of the terrorists who lead the Khorasan Group formerly headed al Qaeda’s operations in Iran. Tellingly, Iran allowed this pair to continue their fight against the West, even as they have battled Iran’s chief allies in Syria.
Obama’s Treasury Department first publicly recognized the relationship between the Iranian regime and al Qaeda on July 28, 2011. Treasury added six al Qaeda operatives to the U.S. government’s list of designated terrorists. The principal terrorist among them is known as Yasin al-Suri, “a prominent Iran-based al Qaeda facilitator” who operates “under an agreement between al Qaeda and the Iranian government.” Treasury described al Qaeda’s presence in Iran as a “core pipeline” and “a critical transit point for funding to support al Qaeda’s activities in Afghanistan and Pakistan.” Treasury made it clear that other high-level al Qaeda members were actively involved in shuttling cash and recruits across Iran.
On December 22, 2011, the State Department announced a reward of up to $10 million for any information leading to Suri’s capture. The reward is one of the largest offered by the U.S. government in its “Rewards for Justice” program, which is designed to help hunt down terrorists. “Operating under an agreement between al Qaeda and the Iranian Government, al-Suri moves money and al Qaeda recruits from the Middle East through Iran and on to Pakistan and Afghanistan,” Foggy Bottom said in its announcement. “Iranian authorities maintain a relationship with al-Suri and have permitted him to operate within Iran’s borders since 2005.”
Just a few months later, on February 16, 2012, Treasury designated the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS) a terror-sponsoring organization. “MOIS has facilitated the movement of al Qaeda operatives in Iran and provided them with documents, identification cards, and passports,” Treasury explained. “MOIS also provided money and weapons to Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) . . . and negotiated prisoner releases of AQI operatives.”
The Islamic State is the successor to Al Qaeda in Iraq and grew out of the organization. Obama, therefore, seeks Iran’s cooperation against an entity the Iranian regime has supported.
The administration’s public scrutiny of the deal between Iran and al Qaeda, especially Suri’s role, likely had an effect, but it hardly ended the collusion. In late 2011, Suri was temporarily replaced as al Qaeda’s chieftain inside Iran. But another veteran terrorist filled in for him.
On October 18, 2012, the Treasury Department announced another designation, saying it “further exposes al Qaeda’s critically important Iran-based funding and facilitation network.” Muhsin al-Fadhli, a Kuwaiti long wanted by the U.S. government, had replaced Suri, Treasury noted. Fadhli “began working with al Qaeda’s Iran-based facilitation network in 2009 and was later arrested by the Iranians.” But the regime “subsequently released” Fadhli in 2011, and he quickly assumed al Qaeda’s top post in the country.
“In addition to providing funding for al Qaeda activities in Afghanistan and Pakistan,” Treasury explained, Fadhli and his al Qaeda comrades in Iran are “working to move fighters and money through Turkey to support al Qaeda-affiliated elements in Syria.” Treasury also named Fadhli’s deputy in Iran, Adel Radi Saqr al-Wahabi al-Harbi, in the designation.
Fadhli’s arrest and release is hardly surprising. This is how the Iranian government makes sure al Qaeda doesn’t step out of line. In its October 2012 designation, Treasury explained how the deal works.
“Under the terms of the agreement between al Qaeda and Iran, al Qaeda must refrain from conducting any operations within Iranian territory and recruiting operatives inside Iran while keeping Iranian authorities informed of their activities,” Treasury revealed. “In return, the Government of Iran gave the Iran-based al Qaeda network freedom of operation and uninhibited ability to travel for extremists and their families. Al Qaeda members who violate these terms run the risk of being detained by Iranian authorities.”
Curiously, the Iranians continue to allow the al Qaeda terrorists operating on their soil to support the Nusra Front, which has been fighting Iranian-backed forces in Syria. The Nusra Front is an official branch of al Qaeda and openly loyal to al Qaeda emir Ayman al Zawahiri.
On February 6, 2014, Treasury designated yet another al Qaeda member working in Iran. “The [al Qaeda] network also uses Iran as a transit point for moving funding and foreign fighters through Turkey to support al Qaeda-affiliated elements in Syria, including the al-Nusrah Front,” Treas-ury said at the time. And there was another new development: Fadhli had relocated to Syria, where he linked up with the Nusra Front.
Ayman al Zawahiri ordered a number of al Qaeda operatives from around the globe to move to Syria in 2013 and 2014. These terrorists, including Fadhli, formed the Khorasan Group, which was instructed to explore different ways to launch mass-casualty attacks in the West. The Khorasan Group is not a separate entity, but instead deeply embedded with the Nusra Front. When the United States launched missile strikes against the Khorasan Group in September 2014, officials pointed to Fadhli, in particular, as a threat to international security. It was rumored that Fadhli had been killed in the airstrikes, but his death was never confirmed, and he may very well have survived.
Another member of al Qaeda’s Khorasan Group in Syria is a senior al Qaeda leader known as Sanafi al-Nasr. He, too, has been designated a terrorist by the Obama administration. Treasury added him to the government’s list of al Qaeda terrorists on August 22, 2014. Prior to working with al Qaeda in Syria, Nasr “served in early 2013 as chief of al Qaeda’s Iran-based extremist and financial facilitation network.” Nasr relocated to Syria, paving the way for Yasin al-Suri to resume his role as al Qaeda’s head man in Iran. Upon his arrival in Syria, Nasr posted multiple tweets on his popular Twitter feed indicating that he could not wait to strike American interests.
The Iranians may or may not have known what al Qaeda’s Khorasan Group was up to in September 2014, when the Obama administration decided military force was necessary to stop them. But the Iranian regime has long worked with the likes of Fadhli and Nasr. They almost certainly would not have been allowed to relocate to Syria in the first place if the Iranians had not blessed the move. And, according to the Obama administration, the Iranians knowingly allow the al Qaeda facilitators inside Iran to funnel support to Al Nusra, which houses the Khorasan operatives.
On at least two other occasions since January 2009, terrorists tied to al Qaeda’s Iran network planned to lash out at the West. As first reported in these pages (“Al Qaeda’s Network in Iran,” April 2, 2012), American and European counterterrorism officials thwarted a Mumbai-style attack in the West in 2010. The international plot, which was likely the last one overseen by Osama bin Laden prior to his death, relied on European recruits who traveled to northern Pakistan for training. The cell traveled through Iran, relying on Yasin al-Suri and his subordinates to coordinate their movements. According to one of the would-be terrorists who was put on trial in Germany, they relied on the Iranian ratlines in order “to not get caught.” After the plot was broken up, some of the cell’s surviving members were given safe haven inside Iran for a time, even as they were hunted by the West.
And on April 22, 2013, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police announced that they had disrupted an al Qaeda plot to derail a passenger train traveling from New York to Toronto. Canadian officials said the plotters received “direction and guidance” from al Qaeda members in Iran. According to Reuters, investigators think that one of the suspects “traveled to Iran on a trip that was directly relevant to the investigation of the alleged plot.” Citing “U.S. national security sources close to the investigation,” Reuters added that the detained operative had met with “low- to middle-level al Qaeda fixers and ‘facilitators’ based in the town of Zahedan, close to Iran’s borders with Afghanistan and Pakistan, that moves money and fighters through Iran to support its activities in South Asia.” That description is entirely consistent with Treasury’s summary of the network headed by Yasin al-Suri, who has maintained a base of operations in Zahedan.
Fortunately, none of these al Qaeda plots against the West has come to fruition. Western counterterrorism and intelligence officials intervened in each case. But a clear pattern emerges: Al Qaeda is using its Iran-based operations to export terrorism around the world. And the Iranians, according to the Obama administration, allow them to do so.
President Obama seeks a nuclear deal with Iran and hopes that this will pave the way for cooperation against our common enemies throughout the Middle East. He fundamentally misunderstands the situation. Even though Iran and its allies are clearly opposed to al Qaeda everywhere from Yemen to Syria, the Iranians still see value in supporting al Qaeda. For Khamenei, the United States is Iran’s chief adversary, not al Qaeda.
The Iranians do not want to work with the United States against the Islamic State either. Khamenei repeatedly, and falsely, blames the United States for the Islamic State’s rise in Iraq and Syria. The supreme leader consistently says the West, not the Islamic State, is the biggest threat to Iranian interests.
More than six years into his presidency, Obama is still seeking a deal with the Iranians. Meanwhile, al Qaeda has had a much easier time coming to an accommodation with Iran.
Thomas Joscelyn is a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
The National Security Council, led by Susan Rice, the State Department and Barack Obama is rudderless….the result is an epic global threat condition level.
TheHill:The Pentagon has no plans yet on how to deconflict airspace with Russia in Syria, despite signs Moscow is establishing a forward air operating base to help bolster the Assad regime, according to U.S. officials. While Defense Department officials say they are concerned about U.S. aircraft operating in Syrian airspace along with potential Russian air operations, they acknowledge there are no plans yet on how to handle it. More here.
One of the chief diplomats involved in negotiations regarding the crisis in Syria has reported that the Russians put an offer on the table back in 2012 which would have involved Bashar al-Assad stepping down and relinquishing power. But at the time the other representatives involved in the negotiations, including the United States, figured Assad was already toast so there was no need to work with the Russians. (The Guardian)
Russia proposed more than three years ago that Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad, could step down as part of a peace deal, according to a senior negotiator involved in back-channel discussions at the time.
Former Finnish president and Nobel peace prize laureate Martti Ahtisaari said western powers failed to seize on the proposal. Since it was made, in 2012, tens of thousands of people have been killed and millions uprooted, causing the world’s gravest refugee crisis since the second world war.
Ahtisaari held talks with envoys from the five permanent members of the UN security council in February 2012. He said that during those discussions, the Russian ambassador, Vitaly Churkin, laid out a three-point plan, which included a proposal for Assad to cede power at some point after peace talks had started between the regime and the opposition.
We’ve debated Syria here more times than I can count and personally I think the pros and cons of Assad are still an open question. There is something of a case to be made that in dangerous, unstable areas, a strongman, be he ever so evil, can at least keep a stopper in the bottle and prevent the region from completely collapsing into chaos. That could be said for Saddam Hussein in Iraq as well, though it’s an ugly concept to contemplate. But then, Assad remained in power and the place has still melted down entirely anyway so the proposal loses a few points there.
Much more to the point, though, is the fact that this story highlights yet again just how powerful the Russians have been in this mess since the very beginning. Putin has been Assad’s only supporter with any power, pledging continued support for his “friend” all along. If it weren’t for Russia Assad probably would have been gone long ago and other possible paths to a solution have been hindered by the shadow Russia casts over the region. That situation is spiraling further downward this month as a new report emerged claiming that the Russians now have tanks at a forward air base in the country. (Yahoo News)
Russia has positioned about a half dozen tanks at an airfield at the center of a military buildup in Syria, two U.S. officials said on Monday, adding that the intentions of Moscow’s latest deployment of heavy military equipment were unclear.
Moscow has come under increased international pressure in recent days to explain its moves in Syria, where the Kremlin has been supporting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in a 4-1/2-year war.
Russia’s end game remains unclear, but it should be fairly obvious by now that they have absolutely zero fear of defying the intentions of the United States and the West in general and are busy with their own agenda there. I know I’ve harped on this in the past, but the Russians are beefing up their military presence in multiple regions and are clearly preparing to project force well beyond their own borders. Just this week we’ve seen yet another report that Putin has been augmenting his air power significantly in terms of both fighter aircraft, drones and missiles. One of our own Air Force generals went so far as to call it “alarming.” (Yahoo News)
General Frank Gorenc, commander of U.S. Air Forces in Europe, told reporters he was concerned about Russia’s moves to increase the quantity and quality of its aircraft and field unmanned aircraft.
“The advantage that we had from the air, I can honestly say, is shrinking,” Gorenc said at the annual Air Force Association conference.
Gorenc called “alarming” both Russia’s investments in modernizing its air force and in building formidable surface-to-air missile defenses.
Thus far most of this expansion seems to be focused around the Crimea region of Ukraine, with other resources being deployed closer to their northwestern border, but there seems to be little doubt that the Russian bear is renewing its aerial warfare capabilities. (Of course, this comes at a time when we’re hearing a lot of doubts about the capabilities of our newest fighter jet.)
What are the Russians up to? And what possible use does Putin see for a base of operations in Syria? It’s not like ISIS is going to love the Russians any more than they do us. I have to wonder if he thinks he can just crush the uprising against Assad through brute military force on the ground and restore the old order. That would be an unexpected development, though it doesn’t seem likely to succeed. But pardon me for saying that no matter what he’s got in mind it’s not going to be in our best interests.
Heritage: As Russia continues its occupation of Crimea and sections of eastern Ukraine, some European countries continue to provide Russia with military support. Most notable among these is Spain, which allows the Russian Navy regular use of Spanish ports. In total, at least 20 Russian Navy vessels have visited Spain to refuel and resupply since Russia invaded and annexed Crimea in March 2014. The most recent visit occurred on August 28, 2015, when a Russian attack submarine resupplied in Ceuta, Spain. This behavior is unbecoming of 21st-century NATO allies. In the same way that there was public outcry in 2014 against France for selling two amphibious-class warships to Russia—France subsequently cancelled the contracts—the U.S. should work with like-minded European partners to apply pressure on Spain to end its military assistance to Russia.
Spain Welcomes the Russian Navy
Spain possesses two sovereign enclaves called Ceuta and Melilla that border Morocco. They are both sizable cities, with populations of 73,000 and 79,000, respectively. They are legally part of Spain, and they are the only two European Union (EU) cities located in mainland Africa. They are also part of the Schengen Agreement and the eurozone.
In 2011, Moscow started to regularly use the port facilities at Ceuta. Since then at least 57 ships of the Russian Navy have called into the Spanish port (as of August 31, 2015),[1] including destroyers, frigates, amphibious assault ships, and even an attack submarine.
Some of the visits by the Russian Navy have curious timing. For example, during the same week in April 2014 that the EU announced a new round of sanctions against Russia, Spain made a mockery out of the sanctions by hosting at Ceuta the Russian destroyer Vice Admiral Kulakov, and two Russian navy tankers, the Dubna and the Sergey Osipov.
The most recent visit was made by the Russian submarine Novorossiysk en route to its base in the Black Sea. The Novorossiysk, commissioned in August 2014, is one of Russia’s newest submarines and one of the quietest diesel-powered submarines in the world.
Proximity to Gibraltar: A Cause for Concern
Russia’s access to Ceuta is of particular concern considering Ceuta’s close proximity to the British Overseas Territory of Gibraltar. From America’s first overseas military intervention in 1801 against the Barbary States to the most recent military interventions in the Middle East and North Africa, the U.S. has often relied on Gibraltar’s military facilities.
This is especially true for the U.S. Navy’s nuclear-powered submarines. Gibraltar is the best place in the Mediterranean Sea to repair and resupply U.S. submarines. Strong U.S.–U.K. military cooperation assists the U.S. in keeping its submarine assets integrated into the European theater. Yet the real threat of Russian submarine activity in the region endangers all of those operations. As the former commander of U.S. forces in Europe, Admiral James Stavridis, once pointed out, “These [submarine] capabilities are increasingly important as the Russian Federation Navy increases the pace, scope, and sophistication of its submarine fleet.”[2]
All maritime vessels entering or leaving the Mediterranean from the Atlantic Ocean must pass through the Strait of Gibraltar. Gibraltar is one of the U.K.’s Permanent Joint Operating Bases and serves as an important forward operating base for the British military, which affords a supply location for aircraft and ships destined for Africa and the Middle East for the U.K. and her allies. The deepwater Port of Gibraltar provides a secure docking area as well as vast amounts of safe anchorage for nuclear-powered submarines. The topography of Gibraltar makes intelligence gathering a core function. Having Russian submarines resupply mere miles away presents a potential intelligence and security problem for the U.S. and its allies.
Spain’s policy of allowing the Russian Navy to use Ceuta is hypocritical in relation to its reluctance to allow NATO to make direct visits between Gibraltar and Spanish ports. Therefore, under certain circumstances, Spain would rather have a Russian ship visit a Spanish port than a NATO ship.
Disunited for Ukraine
Although Russia’s aggression in Eastern Europe is the biggest threat to the continent since the end of the Cold War, there has been division on how to respond. Some countries, such as Germany and Italy, have strong economic ties to Russia. Some Western European countries do not want to station NATO troops in Eastern Europe. The Syriza-led government in Greece, for example, has cozied up to Moscow.
Russia’s main naval base in the Mediterranean Sea is currently located at Tartus, Syria. As the security situation in Syria worsens, Moscow is keeping an eye open for alternatives. Even though Europe and NATO have spent the past 18 months confronting Russian aggression through a series of economic sanctions and modest military deployments, Spain is not alone in providing succor to the Russian Navy.
Since Russia seized Crimea, the Russian warship Vice Admiral Kulakov visited Malta in July 2014[3] and the Yaroslav Mudry visited in February 2015.[4] Although Malta is not a member of NATO, it is a member of the EU. As recently as June 2015, the Russian Navy landing ship Korolev 130 visited Piraeus, Greece.[5] This visit was particularly worrying because Greece is not only a member of NATO and the EU, but also home to a NATO and U.S. naval base on the island of Crete.
Pressure from All Sides
Spanish support of the Russian Navy weakens NATO’s opposition to Russian aggression against Ukraine and projects an image of a divided alliance. The situation requires:
Action from Congress. Congress needs to make it clear that Spanish support to the Russian Navy is unbecoming of a NATO ally.
Leadership from the White House. President Barack Obama should make public his disappointment with Spain’s actions. He should also call for Greece and Malta to cease their support of the Russian Navy while the crisis in Ukraine continues.
Pressure from Foggy Bottom and the Pentagon. Secretary of State John Kerry and Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter should use every opportunity, including NATO ministerial meetings, to raise this issue with their Spanish counterparts.
A coordinated effort with European allies. The Administration should coordinate with like-minded allies in NATO to apply pressure to force a change in policy in Madrid.
Completely Unacceptable
It is irresponsible for Madrid to allow Russian warships—especially some of Russia’s most advanced submarines—to use Spanish ports, especially ports located a short distance from such an important naval base as Gibraltar.
It is unacceptable that a major NATO member would offer support to the Russian Navy at a time when Moscow is actively attempting to dismember Ukraine and is undermining the security of the Baltic States. The U.S. government should make it clear at the highest levels that it views any support of the Russian Navy as completely unacceptable in light of Russian aggression.
Syria is entering year 6 of a civil war and no exact numbers can be posted with regard to those that have fled, have been wounded or have died. There are good numbers of the countless fighting factions there are other statistics including Russian and Iranian supporting Bashir al Assad. Yet there are no consequences for terror in the country, except for a few deadly missile strikes or chemical; weapons use.
So assuming what various organizations report including Human Rights groups and respective militaries, taking a look at the United Nations numbers posted by the New York Times, which are likely skewed, the conditions are disgusting. Remember, entering the 6th year is horrible enough when no world power stepped in to stop or contain the instability or death in the region, including the United States taking a leadership role in any sort.
