Category Archives: Insurgency

What Now For Cuba

Posted on by

Cuba’s economic freedom score is 29.6, making its economy one of the world’s least free. Its overall score is 0.9 point higher than last year, with a slight deterioration in monetary freedom outweighed by improvements in three of the 10 economic freedoms, including trade freedom, fiscal freedom, and freedom from corruption. Cuba is ranked least free of 29 countries in the South and Central America/Caribbean region, and its overall score is significantly lower than the regional average.

In recent years, the government has made measured concessions to encourage more entrepreneurship and private-sector growth. Communist Party–endorsed reforms to cut government payrolls and expand approved professions have not been broad enough to ensure any meaningful advancement in overall economic freedom. The state continues to interfere in most economic activity. Price controls are pervasive, and the two-tiered exchange rate regime continues to distort prices.

Despite membership in the World Trade Organization, the economy remains relatively cut off from the international marketplace. Only state enterprises are allowed to engage in international trade and investment. The state uses an oppressive regulatory environment to suppress entrepreneurial activity and controls most means of production. Shallow credit markets impede access to credit for business activities.

Cuba is demanding the return of Guantanamo Base, stating it is illegally occupied. The military base goes far beyond being a detention center since 1907. It should be noted that many Cubans not only work at Base Guantanamo but live there as well, under the American flag.

U.S. Cuba Policy: Where Things Stand Now

WSJ:

President Barack Obama announced in December that the U.S. was moving to normalize relations with Cuba after over 50 years of Cold War enmity. That moment was both symbolic and practical, as he took steps to begin removing restrictions on travel and trade. On Wednesday, Mr. Obama announced that the U.S. will formally restore diplomatic ties and reopen its embassy in Havana.

What exactly has changed since December and where are we now? The Wall Street Journal explains:

Can I travel to Cuba now?

That depends. Traveling to Cuba from the U.S. as a tourist is still illegal. But 12 categories of people, including close relatives of Cubans, academics, journalists, people participating in educational programs, and people on humanitarian or religious missions can go to the island provided they say their trip falls within one of those categories. Airlines can fly to Cuba without obtaining special licenses, but flights to Cuba are charters—not yet commercial flights. Several U.S. ferry companies have received licenses to operate routes between ports in Florida and Cuba, but the proposed ferry services must receive Havana’s approval.

Can U.S. companies do business there?

Mr. Obama also took steps to loosen financial restrictions, but most trade remains illegal and will require congressional action before changing. Mr. Obama eased some rules to permit increased exports of U.S. telecommunications and other technological goods to the island, as well as building materials. Mr. Obama also made it easier for exports of agricultural and medical supplies and goods to Cuba’s nascent private sector.

U.S. banks are allowed to establish correspondent accounts in Cuba, and U.S. citizens now can use credit and debit cards there. But activity under Mr. Obama’s measures are slow-going, in part due to a lack of clarity about the regulations. U.S. officials have said they’re likely to be updated as more people try to use them.

What have been the big milestones so far?

The first big moments, of course, were the announcements by Mr. Obama and Cuban President Raul Castro in December that the former Cold War foes would renew relations, the culmination of 18 months of secret talks.

Then, in January, loosened travel and trade regulations went into effect, and the U.S. and Cuba began negotiating reopening embassies and restoring diplomatic ties.

In April, Messrs. Obama and Castro met at the Summit of the Americas, the first substantive discussion between U.S. and Cuban presidents since 1956.

In May, the Obama administration lifted Cuba’s designation as a state sponsor of terrorism. That was a critical step toward restoring diplomatic relations, but didn’t have much practical effect, as Congressional sanctions still ban Cuba from arms exports and sales, from receiving U.S. economic assistance and from conducting most trade.

Wednesday’s announcement that the two countries are formally restoring diplomatic ties was another big step.

The next milestones will be reopening ceremonies for embassies in both countries. Cuba announced it would host its event in Washington on July 20 and its delegation will be led by Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez. The U.S. hasn’t set a date for its flag raising, but said Secretary of State John Kerry will be there to do the honors.

Now what?

The U.S. and Cuba will begin lots of bilateral talks and efforts to cooperate in areas including law enforcement, development, human rights, counterterrorism and antinarcotics. Talks will also begin on property claims and the Cuban government’s claims against the U.S. The U.S. has also said Cuba has agreed to talks about extraditing fugitives, though it’s unclear what will happen with some of the higher-profile ones, including JoAnne Chesimard, now known as Assata Shakur, who is on the FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorists list for killing a New Jersey state trooper in 1973. Cuba granted her asylum after she escaped from prison in 1979.

The spotlight moves to Congress now, where lawmakers must act to lift bans on travel and trade. Church groups, agricultural groups, business groups and others are supportive of lifting the ban. The White House is counting on these independent stakeholders to pressure Congress to act. It’s likely to be a long battle, with supporters of normalization taking a piecemeal approach to chipping away at the embargo.

The White House backs that strategy, and a move to lift the travel ban is likely to be the first step in the process.

 

Obama’s Middle East Policy is IN This Book

Posted on by

2003:

At Khalidi’s 2003 farewell party, for example, a young Palestinian American recited a poem accusing the Israeli government of terrorism in its treatment of Palestinians and sharply criticizing U.S. support of Israel. If Palestinians cannot secure their own land, she said, “then you will never see a day of peace.”

One speaker likened “Zionist settlers on the West Bank” to Osama bin Laden, saying both had been “blinded by ideology.”

2004

Rashid Khalidi wrote a book. Fittingly the title is ‘Resurrecting Empire’. Released in 2004, Khalidi cherry picked facts to build his case against any Western intervention into the Middle East and wrote often about early colonization and occupation by Britain and France with the aid of the United States. How many times have we heard the words colonization and occupation out of this White House?

2008

CHICAGO — It was a celebration of Palestinian culture — a night of music, dancing and a dash of politics. Local Arab Americans were bidding farewell to Rashid Khalidi, an internationally known scholar, critic of Israel and advocate for Palestinian rights, who was leaving town for a job in New York.

A special tribute came from Khalidi’s friend and frequent dinner companion, the young state Sen. Barack Obama. Speaking to the crowd, Obama reminisced about meals prepared by Khalidi’s wife, Mona, and conversations that had challenged his thinking. Obama also calls for the U.S. to talk to such declared enemies as Iran, Syria and Cuba. But he argues that the Palestinian militant organization Hamas, which governs the Gaza Strip, is an exception, calling it a terrorist group that should renounce violence and recognize Israel’s right to exist before dialogue begins. That viewpoint, which also matches current U.S. policy, clashes with that of many Palestinian advocates who urge the United States and Israel to treat Hamas as a partner in negotiations.

2010

From Politico: An Arab-American activist who attended an outreach session at the White House complex in April had his Chicago home raided by the FBI last week and appears to be a focus of an unfolding federal terrorism-support investigation.

Hatem Abudayyeh, who serves as executive director of the Arab-American Action Network, took part in a meeting for Arab-American leaders held in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on April 22, according to appointment data posted on the White House website.

FBI agents executed a search warrant at Abudayyeh’s Chicago home as part of a coordinated series of raids involving at least one other Chicago site, along with the homes of anti-war activists in Minnesota. A copy posted on the web of a grand jury subpoena served on one target of the raids in Minneapolis demands “all records of any payment provided directly or indirectly to Hatem Abudayyeh, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (“PFLP”) or the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (“FARC”).”

A search warrant served on a Minneapolis anti-war activist, Michael Kelly, ordered agents to seize records relating to Kelly’s travels to “Palestine, Colombia, and … within the United States.” It also mentions possible connections to Hezbollah.

The warrant and subpoena suggest the probe, which is being run by U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald in Chicago, is focusing on illegal support for terrorist organizations, particularly by a Minnesota-based group called the Freedom Road Socialist Organization. PFLP, FARC and Hezbollah are designated as terrorist groups by the U.S. government. A spokesman for Fitzgerald’s office declined to comment on the probe.

In a 2006 interview with Fight Back News, an outlet run by Minneapolis activist Kelly, Abudayyeh seemed to disagree rather strenuously with at least some of the U.S. government’s use of the “terrorist” label.

“The U.S. and Israel will continue to describe Hamas, Hezbollah and the other Palestinian and Lebanese resistance organizations as ‘terrorists,’ but the real terrorists are the governments and military forces of the U.S. and Israel,” Abudayyeh said. “The vast majority of the world sees and understands this, and are in full support of Lebanese, Palestinian and worldwide resistance to Israel and the U.S.’s naked aggression, war, imperialism and occupation.”

2011

In part from TWS:

Barack Obama and Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi both taught at the University of Chicago in the ’90s, and at a farewell dinner for Khalidi in 2003, Obama warmly praised Khalidi’s advice, which took the form of “consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases.” Since the Los Angeles Times never released its videotape of the event, we may never know Obama’s blind spots or the enlightenment on offer from his friend and colleague Khalidi​—​a PLO spokesman in Beirut during the Lebanese civil wars.

Khalidi has denied his role with the PLO, but Martin Kramer, the Wexler-Fromer fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, has him dead to rights. On his website, www.martinkramer.org, Kramer explains that between 1976 and 1982 Khalidi was consistently identified​—​by, among others, the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times​—​as a PLO spokesman, without once demanding a correction. Still, all Khalidi will admit today is that he was “deeply involved in politics in Beirut.”

Perhaps it’s understandable that Khalidi won’t come clean about his role in the civil wars, for everyone came out of the conflict dripping with blood, not just the Christians and Israelis, but the Palestinians, too. Why the Christians are typically censured for their brutality while the PLO seems to get a pass from so many U.S. analysts, journalists, and even former government employees like Pillar is strange, especially since PLO chairman Yasser Arafat showed that, unlike the Lebanese Forces, he was willing to kill Americans as well.

In summary, is can be stated that the basis of Barack Obama’s policy on Israel and the rest of the Middle East is grounded in the book, authored by Khalidi. From the word ‘resurrection’ in the title, to relations with Israel, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon and even Cuba, now Venezuela is on the near horizon.

Fits like a globe….

 

 

 

The Truth About a Mexican Border Town

Posted on by

In April of 2015, Mexican authorities arrested the head of the Juarez Cartel, one of Mexico’s leader of the dark underworld of the country. Jesus Salas Aquayo was on the DEA most wanted list.

 Jesus Salas

Now for the Great Trial and perhaps some truth about Mexico, right at our southern border.

Juarez’s Missing Girls Were Sex Slaves—And Everyone Knew It

From the Daily Beast:

Hundreds of women have been murdered or simply disappeared in the city in the last five years. This case is about only 11 of them, but it’s a beginning.
In the Juárez media, it is being called the Great Trial, the first in 20 years to tackle the issue of femicides—a term for the hundreds of unsolved murders and forcible disappearances of women in the city that sits just across the Rio Grande from El Paso.

 

The news magazine Proceso reports 727 such disappearances between 2010 and 2014, and many more such crimes date at least as far back as the early 1990s.

Altogether 158 witnesses have testified in this case so far. Only six men are in the dock, accused of sex trafficking and the kidnapping and murder of 11 young women in Ciudad Juárez, but the institutions of Mexican law and order are on trial as well.

“The hypothesis of corruption and collusion, the complicity of police, is sustained by witnesses,” Santiago González, a lawyer with the Women’s Roundtable of Juárez, which represents the families of three of the victims, told The Daily Beast. “Organized crime always has to operate with the collusion or participation of the authorities.”

The tendency in hundreds of prior cases was for investigators to treat the disappearances as isolated instances, rather than the work of organized crime. Then in January 2012 the remains of 21 young women between the ages of 15 and 21 were found discarded in a dry stream bed called Arroyo del Navajo, 80 miles southeast of the city in the Juárez Valley.

The site where the remains were found is so rugged the detectives had to use all-terrain vehicles to reach it. DNA analysis showed a match with genetic material from the mothers of 11 of the young women who had disappeared in downtown Juárez in 2009 and 2010.

The six defendants on trial are being identified as members of Los Aztecas, a street gang linked to the Juárez cartel. Numerous witnesses have testified the defendants operated a kidnapping ring in plain sight in downtown Juárez from 2008 to at least 2011. They are accused of terrorizing girls between the ages of 15 and 21 born to humble families, coercing them into prostitution, and disposing of them as they pleased.

Implicit in the trial proceedings, which began in April, is the question of how organized crime could operate so brazenly for years in the busiest part of the city. The question looms even more starkly when one considers the period in question was when some 6,800 Mexican soldiers and 2,300 Federal Police were deployed to the area to combat organized crime as part of the “Joint Operation Chihuahua” decreed by then-Mexican President Felipe Calderón.

On June 1, a protected witness who is an admitted member of Los Aztecas testified he was responsible for paying the police to turn a blind eye to the group’s business of kidnapping and forced prostitution. The protected witness, identified by the initials LJRL, told the court that the Federal Police and Mexican Army occasionally accepted sex with the underage prostitutes in lieu of cash (some soldiers in the Army, for example, “asked to keep the girls a day or two for pleasure.”)

“Sometimes it was my job to pay the city, state, and federal police,” he continued, “besides that we were always in radio contact with them and they would tell us what was going on, how ‘hot’ things were in The Valley, what the ‘doubles’ [nickname for the Artist Assassins, an enemy gang] were up to, what they were doing, because we had to stay on our toes and be ready for when things got hot.”

LJRL, who for reasons of security testified in a separate room adjoining the court, said two high-ranking leaders of Los Aztecas ran the gang’s sex-trafficking operation from inside the walls of two prisons in Juárez. The gang leaders in question—Jesús Damián Pérez Ortega (alias El Patachú), and Pedro Payán Gloria (alias El Pifas)—were free to enter and exit the state prison “to cool off when things got hot.”

He said “El Pifas” was also the gang’s intermediary with Mexican soldiers stationed beyond the city limits:

Q. To clarify, why did this man you call El Pifas, why was he in communication with soldiers?

A. Because it was another point where women were kidnapped from, sometimes they asked to keep them a day or two for pleasure, if you will, or to hold the girls, it was also a point where the women were held en route to being transported to the United States or wherever it was they were being taken to.

The homicide rate in Juárez from 2008 to 2010 rose to be among the very highest in the world. Overlooked at times amid the all-encompassing violence were the unexplained disappearances of hundreds of young women, and it’s now obvious that the sex-trafficking operation brought to light at trial was hidden in plain sight. The 11 victims whose remains were identified had been kidnapped in broad daylight in the busy market area in downtown, a block or two from the Spanish cathedral in the main square.

Perla Ivonne Aguirre Gonzalez, 15, was abducted not long after the end of her shift at a fast-food restaurant downtown. Deysí Ramírez Muñoz, 16, was dismissed from her factory job without warning at 8 a.m. Her family suspects she was kidnapped on her return home, while changing buses downtown. Jazmín Salazar Ponce, 17, went to ask for a job at a shoe store downtown and disappeared.

State prosecutor Jorge González said some of the defendants were passing themselves off as small-business owners in the busy area of Reforma Market downtown. Witnesses described a grocery store with no merchandise, a shoe store with no customers, a modeling agency with no furniture. They were business fronts set up so the criminal could talk to the young women and ask questions to see if they had a network of support in place.

A protected witness identified in court by the initials KDM was a female employee of the grocery store. She said while she was employed there she frequently saw municipal and federal police enter through a side entrance.

“On public transportation, in jails, hotels, businesses—how could this be happening downtown and not be seen?” asked Imelda Marrufo, a lawyer and the director of the Women’s Roundtable of Ciudad Juárez, in an interview with The Daily Beast.

Referring to the overwhelming presence of Federal Police and Mexican soldiers in Juárez at the time, she said “Military checkpoints were part of the fabric of the city. With so much vigilance they must have seen the girls being transported around the city, and out of the city. The mothers want answers for why nothing was done to stop it.”

What’s more, according to numerous witnesses at trial, many of the young women who were murdered had been prostituted at a brothel no more than a few blocks from a police precinct headquarters. The brothel, called the Hotel Verde, is also near the Santa Fe International Bridge that links Juárez to El Paso, Texas. The Hotel Verde was a three-story headquarters for Los Aztecas, with prostitution on the first and second floors, and a drug warehouse on the third.

Two Federal Police officers were murdered at the Hotel Verde under unexplained circumstances in 2010.

LJRL testified that after the women were kidnapped downtown, they were transported to a neighborhood close by, and held at a safe house located eight blocks from a municipal police station. The safe house functioned as a hub for shuttling the kidnap victims to one of several locations in the city, and some out of state.

The sex trafficking was widespread enough that brothel owners advertised to sex traffickers like Los Aztecas in the classified section of the newspaper PM.

“What [LJRL] is saying is not an exclusive,” said the lawyer Santiago González. “He is only corroborating what many other witnesses have said.”

Asked why no police or soldiers had been indicted as part of the proceedings against Los Aztecas, González said the evidence is only being heard for the first time.

“It’s up to the authorities what they’re going to do with that information,” he said.

“The case won’t be closed. It is a very important step, but only the first step.”

This is the first case of sex trafficking prosecuted by the office of the state’s special counsel for crimes against women, which was formed back in 2012. At this one trial, some 300 witness eventually are expected to testify.

Iran Gets GOLD

Posted on by

An Iran nuclear czar? Zarif and Kerry today, Friday said a deal was never closer.

Iran has had 13 tons of their gold stored in South Africa for at least 2 years and due to lifted sanctions, the gold has been released and delivery in a handful of shipments under high security is complete. The gold was delivered to the central bank.

Since 2013 under the Obama White House agreement, Iran has received $4.2 billion in unfrozen assets and was awarded another $2.8 billion by Obama just to stay at the table and committing to continued talks.

Iran Violations:

Iran has been found in non-compliance with its International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards agreement, and accordingly is in non-compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).1 Iran is continuing its uranium enrichment program and heavy water-related activities in defiance of Security Council resolutions calling for their suspension. The IAEA is trying to resolve a number of matters indicating a possible military dimension to Iran’s nuclear program, but Iran is not cooperating with the IAEA’s investigations. There are well-founded concerns that the Iranian enrichment and heavy water programs have a military objective – to give Iran the capability to produce nuclear weapons if it decides to do so. What is not clear is how far Iran intends to proceed down this path – will it cross the nuclear weapon threshold, or if not, how far short will it stop?

Amongst other issues, this paper addresses the commonly held belief that Iran is entitled to undertake uranium enrichment, and the closely related question whether nuclear hedging – establishing a nuclear weapon break-out capability in the guise of a civilian program – is a legitimate activity under the NPT. If a negotiated solution with Iran is achieved that allows for continued enrichment, this must also adequately address international concerns that Iran’s nuclear program has a military purpose. A “solution” that allows continued development of a military dimension would be pointless. Many more details in this report.

Going back a decade, it has been well known that Iran has been using the black market to skirt sanctions.  The audio discussion on the black market and violations is here. Additionally, you would be stunned at who does business with Iran and the value of that commerce.

What about the secret low enriched uranium? Glad you asked.

The controversy over the status of Iran’s newly produced low enriched uranium (LEU) hexafluoride under the Joint Plan of Action (JPA) initially surprised us at ISIS. We have been monitoring the various provisions of the JPA since its inception, including Iran’s pledge to convert its newly produced LEU hexafluoride stocks into uranium dioxide form during the JPA term and its extensions. We would have expected the public controversy to center on other issues, including the near 20 percent LEU stocks in Iran. These stocks are far too large, and if left in place, will undermine the administration’s central case that Iran would need 12 months to break out, if it reneged on a long term deal. Yet, upon reflection, this issue of the newly produced LEU is a microcosm of the legal, technical, and political challenges in the on-going negotiations with Iran. It is also another indication that U.S. secrecy is excessive and contributing to problems on its own. Finally, it is necessary to state that this case is a lesson in how difficult it is to understand all the issues in these negotiations, even for those of us who spend enormous amount of time following and assessing provisions in these negotiations.

Concessions

From CNN:

Concessions checklist

So what has the U.S. ceded so far? And what has it gotten in return? Supporters and opponents of the Iran talks are both keeping their checklists ready. They’re tallying the wins and losses and keeping a close eye on the remaining sticking points.

Breakout time

Breakout time is the amount of time it takes to amass enough weapons-grade uranium for one nuclear bomb. In the event of a final deal, if Iran were to dash toward weaponization, it would take 12 months to build a nuclear bomb, according to U.S. calculations.

That figure is a considerable improvement over the two- to three-month breakout time that Iran currently has.

Some worry, however, that one year is not enough to guarantee the U.S. and other countries could actually prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon should Iran decide to race toward one, given the number of diplomatic and verification steps that would precede the use of military force.

Centrifuges

Iran will be allowed to keep 6,104 centrifuges, and just over 5,000 of those will continue enriching uranium, based on the preliminary agreement.

That’s a far ways from where American officials initially said they wanted to end up, first demanding Iran cut its centrifuges to between 500 and 1,500 and then floating 4,000.

The agreement still cuts down most of the nearly 19,000 currently installed — about 10,000 of which are now used for enrichment — but even the additional centrifuges won’t be scrapped entirely. They’ll remain in Iran under the control of the UN’s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, and will be freed up at the end of the period of constraints on its program.

Enrichment activity

Under the framework for negotiations, Iran has already significantly reduced the level to which it enriches uranium, capping those levels far below what is needed for a nuclear weapon.

Iran has agreed to restrict all of its enrichment activity to one reactor site — Natanz. This is reassuring to the U.S. and Israel because it would be easier for them to take effective military action to degrade Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

Furthermore, Iran will only use its first-generation centrifuges, which are slow to enrich uranium and are unreliable.

Duration of the deal

The restrictions that will keep Iran to a one-year breakout time will expire after 10 years.

President Barack Obama has conceded that “in year 13, 14, 15 … the breakout times would have shrunk almost down to zero.”

After the 10th year, Iran would be able to start upping its uranium enrichment. And after 15 years, the program would be completely unbridled.

There was always going to be a sunset — it’s inconceivable that Iran would accept restrictions and inspections on its nuclear program indefinitely — but the Obama administration’s starting ask was for restrictions lasting 20 to 25 years.

Even if political change doesn’t come to Iran in that period — which he hopes it will — Obama insisted this spring that the U.S. will have “much more insight into their capabilities” as a result of the rigorous inspections, and 10 to 15 years improves considerably upon the status quo.

But the sunset provision has experts like Mark Dubowitz of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies worried that Iran will simply “go back to what they were doing before” — and without the limitations of sanctions.

“We think 10 to 15 years is a long time,” he said. “They think it’s a blip in history.”

Revealing past Iranian military activities

For years the United States and the rest of the international community has demanded that Iran come clean about suspected past efforts to militarize its nuclear program.

Tehran even pledged to the IAEA in 2007 that it would do so, and the fact that it hasn’t raises questions about the reliability of its commitments.

When Kerry was asked by PBS in April about Iran’s obligation to answer such questions, he said bluntly, “They have to do it. It will be done. If there’s going to be a deal, it will be done.”

Kerry, though, recently indicated such a “confession” was no longer essential to a deal.

“We’re not fixated on Iran specifically accounting for what they did at one point in time or another. We know what they did,” Kerry said last month.

Underground nuclear sites

Under an eventual deal, Iran would stop enriching uranium at Fordow, its fortified, underground nuclear site, for 15 years and only use the facility for research with some inactive centrifuges remaining onsite. It also won’t be able to store any fissile material at the site.

Though the West had originally called for Fordow to be shut down entirely, cutting off enrichment at the site is a relief not just for the U.S. but also for Israel, which was concerned its military arsenal would not be able to reach the site — buried deep in the side of a mountain.

The U.S. has a more powerful bunker-busting bomb than Israel, one that may be able to penetrate the site, though not with total certainty.

Heavy water reactor

Iran will significantly modify its heavy water reactor so it can no longer produce weapons-grade plutonium, a possible component for a nuclear bomb.

Iran has already begun redesigning the reactor to limit its capacity — a key change for a country that has repeatedly defended the reactor’s medical and scientific applications.

Israel had previously called for the reactor’s total dismantlement, but serious modifications have quelled many concerns about Iran’s ability to use the reactor for non-peaceful purposes.

Outstanding issues

Officials still have to determine whether Iran will dilute or export its eight-ton stockpile of highly enriched uranium and determine the parameters for Iran to use more highly enriched uranium for scientific research purposes.

But it’s the two other remaining issues that are the most contentious, and will ultimately determine for most experts whether they have confidence that the deal will keep Iran from getting a nuclear bomb.

Inspections

The West is insisting that Iran give inspectors unfettered access to any site they suspect of nuclear activity — military sites included. Without that, officials fear that Iran could try to sneak its way to a bomb by using a secret facility, especially given its history of cheating and concealing its nuclear work.

“The most likely form of cheating would be at undeclared or secret facilities, and so you’ve got to have strong inspections,” said Gary Samore, who previously served as Obama’s top arms control adviser.

Iranian officials, though, have insisted that they won’t relent on that point, certainly not when it comes to military facilities.

Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken insisted Thursday on CNN that the U.S. will “walk away” if Iran doesn’t agree to the rigorous inspections and verification regime the U.S. is seeking.

Negotiators have floated the idea of a commission of countries that would hear Iran’s objections to inspections requests. But if Iran still refuses to allow inspections at the site, international sanctions would be reimposed.

Ilan Berman, a skeptic of the deal, said that type of “managed access” could give the Iranians the chance to scrub evidence from a site while they stall for time.

“You want to do snap inspections, not ones where they can move things around,” said Berman, vice president of the American Foreign Policy Council.

Sanctions relief

Western officials have insisted that sanctions won’t be removed until Iran holds up its end of the bargain by reining in its nuclear activity as agreed.

Iran, on the other hand, at first demanded sanctions be lifted as soon as a final agreement is signed and sealed. Iranian officials now appear to be relenting somewhat and agreeing that sanctions could fall at a later date, after they make the necessary changes to their nuclear program.

Negotiators are now looking to iron out the details of the sequence for the removal of those sanctions.

But once those sanctions come off, it’s unclear how effectively the international community could snap them back into place — if it’s even willing to. While Iran’s economy has suffered because of the restrictions, so have many companies based in the countries that have imposed them.

 

 

ISIS New Targets Include Sphinx and Pyramids

Posted on by

ISIS has been destroying antiquities for more than a year. Some were more than 2000 years old. They include Palmyra, the Mosul Museum and Nineveh, the site of Nimrud.

Just this week, did ISIS launch a deadly attack in the Sinai. Islamic State is on the move and Egypt is in their sights for destruction.

For security measures in place and some historical perspective, click here.

Islamic State threatens pyramids, sphinx, as it begins attack on Egypt

ISLAMIC State has launched a bold new attack — this time in Sinai against Egypt. Are the Pryamids and Great Sphinx — along with countless other treasures — next on their hit list?

“When Egypt comes under the auspices of the Khalifa (Caliphate), there will be no more Pyramids, no more Sphinx, no more idolatry. This will be just”.

These are the chilling words recently spoken to presenter Dan Cruickshank by British Muslim activist Anjem Choudary.

Just days after his show, Civilisation Under Attack, went to air in the UK, Islamic State has taken steps to turn them into reality.

Egyptian warplanes are launching air strikes and troops going house-to-house in the troubled Sinai Peninsula as the jihadist militants conduct an unprecedented, coordinated attack.

It’s just the latest action in a chain of events that threatens to topple the cradle of civilisation into internal chaos on a scale similar to that of Syria and Iraq.

And Islamic State is ready to seize the moment.

New wave of unrest

The combat in Sinai, described as “war” by Egyptian media and officials, has heightened tensions across the country.

Since the popular “Arab Spring” uprising against the 30-year rule of President Hosni Mubarak, Egypt has gradually been sliding towards chaos.

Today the troubled nation marks the second anniversary of the military’s overthrow of democratically elected Islamist President Mohammed Morsi.

It was a move that fanned dissent throughout Egypt and the insurgency in north Sinai.

It also follows the dramatic assassination this week of the country’s chief prosecutor in a car bombing in Cairo, prompting general-turned-politician President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi to press for even harsher anti-terrorism laws targeting Islamic militants.

A special forces raid yesterday on a Cairo apartment killed nine members of Morsi’s outlawed Muslim Brotherhood.

The Brotherhood responded by calling for a “rebellion.”

It’s fertile ground for the Islamic State. It’s attempting to initiate exactly that.

The coordinated assault by scores of extremists on Wednesday focused on the town of Sheikh Zuweid. It included suicide bombings and an attack on its main police station, which also was shelled by mortars and rocket-propelled grenades in a firefight with police that lasted most of the day, the officials said.

The army said 17 troops and more than 100 militants were killed in the fighting.

It expects it to be just the start of a new military campaign.

Enormous heritage at stake

Islamic State has already telegraphed its attitude to Egypt’s rich cultural heritage.

They should be destroyed.

The dogma is simple: No object should be the subject of idolisation or worship.

According to a statement by preacher Ibrahim Al Kandari, as reported in the Egyptian Al-Watan daily, it is irrelevant that most of Egypt’s ancient monuments are cultural, not religious.

“The fact that early Muslims who were among prophet Mohammed’s followers did not destroy the pharaohs’ monuments upon entering Egypt does not mean that we shouldn’t do it now,” Al Kandari told the paper earlier this year.

Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has reportedly stated the demolition of historic monuments is a “religious duty”.

The jihadist extremists have already demonstrated its attitude towards relics of cultures other than its own. They point to Islamic prohibitions against depicting “living beings”: They are supposed to promote idolatry.

It has smashed statues in the museum of Mosul. It has brutally demolished the ancient cities of Hatra and Nimrud, and looted the city of Dur Sharrukin. It’s an extremist philospy reflected in the destruction of the enormous Bamiyan Buddhas in 2001 by Afghanistan’s Taliban.

But Islamic State recently moderated its stance, promising to protect the Roman ruins of the city of Palmyra. It has since blown up several medieval mausoleums in the area.

It’s not the first time Egypt’s Great Pyramids and Sphinx have been threatened.

While often attributed Napoleon, the destruction of the Great Sphinx’s nose is believed by many to have been caused by Muhammad Sa’im al-Dahar in the 14th century. He believed local peasants may have been worshipping the ancient monument.

In 2012 a cleric of Egypt’s radical Salafi movement declared a fatwa against the World Heritage site — citing the Prophet Mohammed’s destruction of idols in Mecca as precedent.

Egypt’s tourism industry was akin to “prostitution and debauchery”, he said.

Egypt’s military response

Air raids yesterday killed 23 extremists just south of Rafah, a key Sinai border town near the Gaza strip, Sinai Egyptian security officials said.

They added that the army was searching for militants in the town of Sheikh Zuweid, where a string of army checkpoints were attacked a day earlier.

Soldiers were de-mining roads in and around the area that had been booby trapped with mines and improvised explosive devices, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorised to talk to the media.

The army also raided a house in Rafah, killing six armed Isanuc State militants wearing military uniforms, the officials said, adding that it had cleared the area around the Sheikh Zuweid police station of mines and IEDs.

A newspaper close to the Egyptian government said Thursday the militants behind the Sinai attacks used sophisticated weaponry, including Russian-made Kornet antitank missiles. The el-Watan daily also said they also used mortars, anti-aircraft guns and other guided missiles.

The main insurgent organisation operating in Sinai, which calls itself the Sinai Province of the Islamic State group, claimed its fighters struck 15 army and police positions and staged three suicide bombings, two against checkpoints and one that hit an officers’ club in nearby el-Arish, the area’s largest city. The authenticity of the claim could not be immediately verified but it was posted on a Facebook page associated with the group.

Militants in northern Sinai have battled security forces for years, but they stepped up their attacks after Morsi’s ouster on July 3, 2013, which followed mass demonstrations against his rule. El-Sissi led the ouster and was elected president last year.

Political opposition blamed

Egyptian authorities and pro-government media have blamed much of the recent violence on the Muslim Brotherhood, which has been branded a terrorist group.

The Brotherhood denies involvement, although it and other President Morsi supporters have faced a sweeping crackdown that has led to thousands of arrests, mass convictions and death sentences.

The democratically elected Preisdent is among those condemned to die, but he has appealed.

The Brotherhood has called for a “rebellion” and described the special forces killings as “a turning point that will have its own repercussions.”

“It will not be possible to control the anger of the oppressed,” the Brotherhood said in a statement.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned of the growing threat to the region from Islamic State militants and expressed condolences to Egypt over the deadly IS-linked attacks in Sinai.

“We see in front of our eyes IS acting with extraordinary cruelty both in our northern border and at our southern border,” he said. “Our hearts are with the Egyptian people, we send our condolences to the Egyptian government and the families of those who were killed in battle with the cruel terror.”