As Obama Accepts More Migrants, Heed the Threat Lessons

Posted on September 17, 2015September 17, 2015 by Denise Simon

Syrian Refugees – Organised Crime’s New Market and Jihadis’ New Cover

TRAC: In an intense propaganda blitz, the Islamic State published eight videos pertaining to refugees and the refugee crisis. The media push by the Islamic State complimented the Caliphate’s recent written propaganda regarding hijrah and refugees fleeing the Middle East in the eleventh issue of Dabiq. Published from a wide cross-section of the Caliphate – Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. The specific Islamic State provinces in the media campaign included:

Wilayat Ninawa
Wilayat al-Barakah
Wilayat Hadramawt
Wilayat Hims
Wilayat al-Khayr
Wilayat al-Furat
Wilayat al-Fallujah
Wilayat al-Janub
Wilayat Salahuddin

For complete access to each video and complete analysis

Introduction

Image: March -May 2015 Maritime and land based migrant routes

Click Image for larger view

Reported Cases of ISIS Migrant Incidents

After years of Syrian civil war, the refugee population en masse has finally reached beyond the borders of Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan to reach the European Union (EU). The media has made much of the Islamic State taking advantage of the migrant community through traveling to Europe in their midst to avoid detection. To date, there are five media-reported incidents of Islamic State (ISIS) trying to infiltrate Europe by hiding among the refugees and two reported Jabhat al-Nusra (JN). (see cases below)

Not an Islamic State Priority Right Now

Islamic State operatives seem to be able to enter and leave Turkey nearly at-will. ISIS cell activity within Turkey is well documented and, until at least recently, was tolerated on some level. Evidence to this point includes pictures on social media posted throughout 2014 of ISIS fighters enjoying meals in popular restaurants and making shopping trips in Turkish cities. While the Islamic State is comfortable within Turkish borders, there will not be much need for hiding among the refugees. However, as soon as pressure becomes too intense to stay and operate within Turkey (i.e travel becomes inhibited or the need for attacking within Europe becomes a priority) the necessity to slip unnoticed into the migrant population will reach urgency for the Islamic State. One Islamic State smuggler claimed that IS was forced to use migrant paths to move people because as the world has gotten better at tracking jihadis returning from Syria, return plane travel from Turkey has just become too dangerous.It cannot be stressed enough that at this point in time the proportions of known Islamic State militants that have “passed” as refugees are minuscule compared to the legitimate number of urgent victims of tyranny. The fear that even a few IS operatives could attack soft targets in EU countries has sounded a great alarm within the right wing movement. So much so that some countries, such as Hungary and Bulgaria, are impeding the flow of immigrants into Western Europe.

Win/Win for ISIS

For the Islamic State hiding among the migrants is a win/win scenario. Either

the ruse will be successful and ISIS will have yet another way to travel into areas where they do not have an operational presence —or—
the few ISIS members who are caught will incite a backlash of popular opinion and a harsh over reaction from EU members which will radicalize more within their own borders.

The far right wing has already seized the opportunity to capitalize on the Islamic State threat within the migrant population and shifted popular opinion in many areas to distrust the group of people who are fleeing war.

Case Studies

Opportunity for Terrorist Organisations

Any terrorist organization, but most especially the Islamic State, will seek to exploit the current situation to their operational benefit. It is already well known that in both Libya and Turkey, ISIS often cooperates with organised criminal elements both on the individual and group level. To date, there are only five media-reported cases of Islamic State infiltrating migrant networks:

Image: September 17, 2015 Unverified photo of Abdel Majid Touil the Bardo Museum planner (Case Study I below) emerges.

Case I : Bardo Museum Planner

May 20, 2015 — Abdel Majid Touil, a Moroccan national and the planner of the attacks on Bardo Museum in Tunisia, utilised sea routes between Libya and Italy in order to reach the EU. He is also thought to be involved in recruitment for ISIS[1]. For More: TRAC Insight: Translation and Commentary on Islamic State: Adopting the Bardo Museum Operation in Islamic Tunisia

Case II : 5 Arrested at Macedonia-Bulgaria Border

September 03, 2015 — Five men linked to ISIS attempted to cross over the Macedonia–Bulgaria border and were promptly arrested after a failed attempt to bribe the border security officer. The five men aged from 20 to 24 years, traveling aboard a car registered in Kosovo, came to the border post Gyueshevo. The guard was suspicious after the group tried to bribe their way past the border with US Dollars. Upon searching their smartphones, beheadings videos as well as Islamic State propaganda material were discovered.[2]

Case III : Moroccan National

September 09, 2015 — An ISIS operative, a Moroccan national with a German passport, was detained by Bulgarian authorities and extradited to Germany. The 21 year old suspect was detained at the Hamzabeyali/Lesovo border between Turkey and Bulgaria, carrying forged documents. It is reported that the suspect insisted on being extradited to Germany where he faces a European Arrest Warrant. [3]

Case IV : Calais, France Refugee Camp

September 11, 2015 — A suspected terror operative is believed to be amongst the migrant camps in Calais, France, prompting a search by French authorities. Residing in one of the largest refugee camps within France, the suspect is believed to have left Syria at the end of August 2015 with the intention of traveling to Britain. To further complicate the search, the camp is also a ‘no-go’ zone for French authorities. [4]

CASE V : Stuttgart, Germany Refugee Center

September 09, 2015 — An ISIS operative was arrested in a refugee center in Stuttgart, Germany in possession of forged Syrian passports. Identified after police linked him to a European arrest warrant issued by the Spanish authorities, he was arrested for attempting to infiltrate under the guise of a refugee seeking asylum. [5]

Case I : JN Already in Germany

September 09, 2015 — Hungarian media outlets reported that a Jabhat al-Nusra (JN) member has also been reported to have made it all the way into the heart of Europe disguised as a refugee. [6]

Case II : JN En Route to Germany

September 9, 2015 An Estonian reporter recognizes an AQ operative whom he interviewed two years ago among refugees en route to Germany. (see image below)

Organized Crime

Image: September 16, 2015 Dutch journalist buys Syrian passport for $825 including picture of PM Mark Rutte.

Counterfeit Passports

The trade for counterfeit Syrian passports is at an all time high. German customs officers have reported seizing boxes containing Syrian passports being smuggled into Europe. Fake Syrian passports are being traded for at least $1,500 USD. Surprisingly many posing as migrants have been found to have multiple passports, which indicate some are not authentic refugees but rather buying their way to “asylum seeker” status.

Lucrative Human Trafficking into EU

From kidnapping refugees stuck at border crossings out of Syria to becoming a part of the human smuggling machine, the Islamic State is notorious for creating and then exploiting refugees, thereby taking full advantage of criminal economic activities.

From the Libyan route, Syrians count for the largest share of migrants taking the journey to Europe. Before the fall of the Gaddafi regime, Libya had drastically limited the migration and trafficking in Europe, but with Gaddafi gone and despite the growing insecurity in Libya, the number of migrants risking the dangers of crossing the Mediterranean has soared. Just about anyone with access to a boat can draw substantial profit by transporting migrants from North African to Southern Europe. This includes the Islamic State.

Bulgaria acts as a predominant transit point of human trafficking within and into the EU. Organised crime syndicates in Eastern Europe and the South Caucasus have established links with Bulgaria at the centre. The routes from the South Caucasus to Bulgaria are sea and land based through the Black Sea and Turkey respectively, connecting the South Caucasus to the EU. Therefore, with Syrian refugees in Turkey, this paves way for organised crime syndicates to move with or define the direction of migration.

The Fixers

In January 2015, BuzzFeed had the rare interview with a self-proclaimed Islamic State human smuggler out of Turkey. His claim of sending small groups of Islamic State fighters hidden inside cargo ships filled with refugees cannot be independently verified by TRAC, but his story is nonetheless useful in understanding the overall mindset of the Islamic State. The unnamed smuggler claimed that the fighters smuggled into Europe were from many locations: some fighters were Syrian, others from various Middle Eastern states, yet others from European nations. He said that a minority claimed to be from the United States. He also claimed that they waited until the ship was filled to capacity (even over capacity) to send the fighters over.

Buzzfeed also interviewed two other “independent” smugglers who claimed to have also helped the Islamic State for a profit. One claimed to have smuggled at least 10 fighters on his ships, then backed out for fear of being caught when the Islamic State wanted him to send more. The other said he’d been sending ISIS fighters for months. The second smuggler claimed that some of the fighters’ intentions were merely to take leave from the battle front to visit their families back home, while others claimed that they were going back to Europe to be ready when the battle begun in the EU. [7]

Narcotics from Bulgaria

In May 2015 Syrian coastal province of Latakia seized about two tons of narcotics near the beach of Cape of Ras al-Bassit believed to have originated in Bulgaria. Nearly six million tablets of Captagon were contained in the seizure and suspected to be headed toward the Islamic State.

Captagon, known by its most active ingredient fenethylline, is a powerful psychotropic known for helping to overcome fear, fatigue and pain. (It is also known for increasing sexual performance). Industrial production in Bulgaria has been active since the communist regime and Bulgarian ‘experts’ have been reported to “travel the Arab world, selling their skills”. Since 2013, Captagon production within Syria has accelerated to such high levels that it has outpaced production in other countries such as Bulgaria. Though Syria started producing Captagon itself, “Bulgarian expertise in the matter persists.” Bulgarian exports are largely consumed by the fighters of the Islamic State and is rumored to be the “drug of choice” among its fighters. The implication is that Syrian and Bulgarian producers stay in touch, and Bulgarian experts not only continue to teach them how to produce a better product but also continue provide the Islamic State Capatgon in the form of small white pills. [8]

Additionally, heroin trafficking syndicates in the South Caucasus region and Turkey have established connections and conduits in Bulgaria which facilitate the movement of consignments into and within the EU. Routes through the Black Sea are often one part of a larger web of routes from Afghanistan through Central Asia and Iran. As with human trafficking, Turkey and the Black Sea act as channels towards the EU.

Images: September 9, 2015 An Estonian reporter recognizes an AQ operative whom he interviewed two years ago among refugees en route to Germany. Although this is not an Islamic State fighter, it should be noted that the threat remains the same.

Rationale

The increased momentum in the exodus of refugees/migrants towards the EU has put the spotlight on the role of organised crime. Organised crime elements would seek to capitalise upon the presence of a new market of Syrian refugees in using their logistical operations to facilitate the travel of migrants. This can also be extended to accommodate the expansion of their operations (drugs, arms and/ or contraband) under the cover of travelling migrants. In the broader scheme of the situation, terrorist organisations would utilise the circumstances of migrant influx into the European Union in order to mask their infiltration, where they will see benefit in cooperating with organised crime elements, defining a nexus. In turn this has put Turkey and Libya at the centre of the issue given its status of permitting the entry of Syrian refugees and access to the European mainland. Further, this sheds light on the possible routes migrants can take where the weighing factors are availability of journeys, financial feasibility, lower mortality risks and shorter travel time or distances. Additionally, this influences the choice of possible routes that can be taken by land, sea or air, discussed in the following section.

Image: Internal and External directional movement of displaced Syrians, January to June 2015

Air, Land & Sea Routes

Sea

Aegean and Mediterranean Sea (Turkey & Libya)

Turkish Coast

Identified routes used by organised crime elements include the Turkish coastal cities of Izmir in the north-west and Mersin in the south-east. Given their geographical proximity to the Aegean Sea, it makes sense that migrants using these boarding points would aim to disembark in Greece. These migrants often make their way to the north- Aegean Greek islands of Limnos, Lesvos, Chios, Ikaria or Samos just off the north-eastern coast of Turkey. After spending an amount of time in a refugee camp, they are transferred to Athens. Often migrants seeking refuge then journey to countries such as Germany or Sweden with relatively liberal asylum laws. However, the weather conditions of the Aegean and Mediterranean make such a journey a risk to safety and security as cases of boats capsizing have been a prominent recurrence. Prices for boat journeys from Izmir are an estimated $5000.

Image: Greek Islands of Limnos, Lesvos, Chios, Samos and Ikaria

Libya: Travel Through Egypt and Sudan

The role of organised crime elements also factor into this where militias and terrorist organisations cooperate with such elements in order to achieve infiltration into the EU. Libya in North Africa is also a prominent origin point for refugees fleeing conflict, to make their journey towards the EU. To reach Libya, Syrian refugees often go through Egypt and Sudan, two of the few countries that still do not require a visa to Syrian citizens. Inputs from a recent interview confirm these routes are also being used to smuggle ISIS operatives into the EU by assigned handlers. Prices for smugglers’ boat trips from Libya to Italy reportedly range from $400-$4000. Additionally, prices from Alexandria to Greece or Italy are $7000 plus.

Image: Routes from Sudan and Egypt to the Libyan ports of Benghazi, Tripoli and Zuwarah

Constantly Changing Port of Origin

In going to and from Syria, the operatives are provided fake Syrian passports to get into Syria or to increase the chances of a successful asylum application in the EU. Additionally, such handlers are required to constantly change their port of origin due to crackdowns by Turkish authorities. Due to this plus joint action from NATO nations in tracking ISIS movements, the use of air travel proves risky as well as land routes. Hence, the use of these routes to move ISIS operatives to and from Syria is paramount to their logistical operations.

Security concerns over the cooperation of terrorist organisations and organised crime syndicates in Libya towards facilitating the infiltration of ISIS operatives have led to increased focus in the region.

Capsizing leads to Alternative Routes

Furthermore, reports of capsizing refugee boats in the Mediterranean and the Aegean would compel would-be asylum seekers to find alternate routes towards Europe. Moreover, with the heightened discourse of the EU permitting asylum to refugees, the safety and economic security of the EU would also prompt refugees to journey towards Turkey; given its borders with the EU, the chances of gaining entry and asylum in the EU are higher.

Black Sea (Turkey to Bulgaria via Georgia)

An Alternative for Refugees

The Black Sea is a relatively unexplored avenue, known to be used for civilian and industrial maritime transport. These would serve as possible mechanisms for Syrian refugees to enter the EU. With a surge of refugees seeking journeys to the EU, the pressure on overland routes, adverse weather conditions in the Aegean and Mediterranean Sea and scarcity of civilian maritime transport journeys in the Black Sea, would present the Black Sea as an alternative transit point towards the EU. Domestic politics in the South Caucasus would also prompt refugees to capitalise upon this alternative if and when required. Organised crime syndicates trafficking heroin and human consignments would recognise these factors and hence, supply the alternative in the creation of a new market, trafficking Syrian refugees to the EU

Civilian Maritime Transport & Regional Politics

Examining the ferry route map below, it is clear that there are many points amongst the different nations along the Black Sea which serve as points for boarding and disembarking. The presence of Syrian refugees in Turkey places civilian maritime transport as a channel for passage into the EU from Turkey via Georgia to Bulgaria. Nations in the South Caucasus like Armenia, Georgia and its seceded breakaway, Abkhazia have all voiced their willingness to accept fleeing Syrians, although with different motives. Abkhazia has shunned ethnic Georgians in the past but wishes to repatriate those with Abkhaz roots to Abkhazia increasing their ethnic population. Therefore, domestic politics fuelled by ethno-nationalism acts as a motivator for Abkhazia to accept Syrian refugees. Georgia and Armenia have also opened their doors to Syrian Christians fleeing violence. Syrian refugees in Turkey if not meeting these criteria, would ideally use forged documents to demonstrate their Christian faith or Abkhaz roots, looking at cases of Syrian refugees’ conversions to Christianity to increase their chances of successful asylum applications in Germany.

Image: Map of UKR Ferry’s routes in the Black Sea

Therefore, the potential for directional movement towards these nations exist, moreover as a transit point towards the EU where desirable. In the Black Sea ferry route map below, it is evident that Batumi is the main port of departure from Georgia for journeys towards Bulgaria and Romania. The price for a passenger ticket using Navbulgar’s ferry service is ‎€100.

Image: Screenshots of UKR Ferry’s ferry routes and schedule details from Batumi, Georgia to Constanta, Romania

Image: Screenshots of Navibulgar’s ferry routes and schedule details from Batumi, Georgia to Varna, Bulgaria

Scarcity: Opportunity for Organised Crime

Although departures to the port of Varna in Bulgaria happen once a week, departures to Constanta in Romania occur just twice a month. Furthermore, some of these route schedules transit through Ukraine. The infrequency of civilian transport in the Black Sea as well as the non-directness of routes overall would prompt migrants to seek alternatives, particularly in the event of unavailable space on the ferry routes.

The presence of organised crime syndicates in the South Caucasus, Turkey and the Balkan Peninsula is not a new occurrence. Human trafficking from Georgia to Turkey and Bulgaria as well as drug trafficking from Georgia to Bulgaria, via the Black Sea are identified routes. This is owing to the high frequency of instances of human trafficking from Batumi, Georgia to Varna, Bulgaria. The number of Georgian nationals revealed in post-trafficking interviews and investigations as well as Armenian, Turkish and EU nationals indicate the presence of a land and maritime based human trafficking infrastructure. Additionally, land and maritime trafficking of drugs from Afghanistan through central Asia and Iran use Batumi, Georgia as a port of transit towards the EU via the Black Sea. Hence, the convergence of human and drug trafficking networks in the Black Sea constitute a concrete trafficking infrastructure. Ranging from the South Caucasus, through West Asia and the Balkan Peninsula, this acts as an alternative route for Syrian refugees.

Image: Map depicting heroin trafficking routes through the Black Sea and other locations

Stable weather conditions at this time of year in the Black Sea compared to the Mediterranean and Aegean reduce the operational risks of travel. Coupled with the finite number of conventional options available, the circumstances of migrants compels them to take advantage of sea based trafficking initiatives by organised crime syndicates, where it is seen as a mutually beneficial venture.

Land Routes

Hamzabeyli/Lesovo Border (Turkey to Bulgaria)

Image: Border between Turkey and Bulgaria at the Hamzabeyli/Lesovo crossing

Border Infrastructure

The land connectivity from Turkey to Greece and Bulgaria present two entry routes to the EU for Syrian refugees. The economic circumstances in Greece makes it a transit point for refugees to the rest of the EU. Bulgaria however, does not have as much a robust land border infrastructure compared to its EU counter-part Greece. This gives incentive for refugees to reach the EU through Bulgaria. Bulgaria’s lack of a robust land border infrastructure can be attributed to its economic factors and internal corruption, particularly in recent cases of Bulgaria’s Interior Ministry where numerous officials have been sacked for involvement in facilitating human and drug trafficking into Bulgaria. Although it is important to note that circumstances have improved since Bulgaria’s entry into the EU in 2007, yet the legacy of these factors are felt on the ground today. Bulgaria is currently mulling strengthening its border security infrastructure with Turkey. Bulgaria is especially eager to do this to demonstrate itself as a responsible stakeholder in the EU, in ensuring border security. This also has much to do with its prospective acceptance into the Schengen Treaty and hence Bulgaria draws upon EU financial resources to implement these infrastructure changes.

Scarcity of Civilian Land Transport

Land travel has its advantage and provides greater flexibility in terms of the availability of alternatives, in the event of a border closing. The routes and the conditions of travel even if inconvenient, have a greater degree of certainty compared to turbulent weather conditions through sea travel in the Mediterranean or Aegean. The use of civilian transport such as buses are limited in capacity.

Organised Crime: Opportunities & Travel Conditions

Organised crime elements would capitalise on a now larger land based clientele, Syrian refugees. However, land based trafficking requires that the vehicle of transport be moving for most of the time in order to evade detection. It also requires refugees if in large numbers, to remain hidden in a concealed manner to achieve this which proves hazardous. Hence, if refugees prefer safety over desperation, movement would be restricted only to a handful of refugees at a time. With favourable weather conditions and compelling circumstances of conflict in the region, incidents of land based trafficking can be expected to rise. Additionally, the strengthening of security at Bulgaria-Turkey border would prompt refugees to take alternative routes through the sea into Varna, Bulgaria, Constanta, Romania or risk a short but dangerous trip across the Aegean. The reported price for land-based smuggling between Turkey to the EU ranges from $7,500-$12,500.

Air Routes

Turkey to the European Union

High Costs

Air travel is a direct route yet expensive and reserved for those Syrian refugees who come from wealthy backgrounds or those who have family in the EU who can sponsor their air travel. This is the most advantageous in terms of directness, safety and security as well as assurance of arriving at the intended destination, assuming stable conditions for air travel in the region. Although, this opportunity is limited due to financial constraints and possible barriers should EU policies turn towards restricting the entry of refugees.

Organised Crime: Facilitators

The role of organised crime syndicates is also limited in this. If not being responsible for the passage of refugees, they can facilitate the procurement of flight tickets for air travel by offering higher prices, factoring in the presumed wealth of their air fare customer base and desperation to reach the EU. Black market air fares for direct flights from Turkey to Germany are reportedly $10,000.

Intra-EU Travel

Image: Info-graph depicting refugee statistics (Source: CNN/UNHCR)

Whilst refugees may travel to certain entry points into the EU, these points may not be their final destination. As seen in recent trends of refugees fleeing to the EU, there are pushes towards those EU states whose policies and perceived attitudes towards refugees are friendlier. Hence, it would prompt travel towards countries such as Sweden and Austria. Although Germany has temporarily reinstate its border controls owing to a massive influx of refugees which can be attributed to Germany’s refugee-friendly policies amongst EU nations.

EU Nations (+Norway & Switzerland) Ranked by Syrian Asylum Applications

Image: Screen shot of Cumulative Syrian Asylum Applications in EU + Norway & Switzerland from April 2011 to August 2015 (Source UNHCR)

Germany: 108,897
Sweden, 64,685
Hungary: 54,125
Austria: 20,946
Netherlands: 15,254
Bulgaria: 15,197
Denmark: 12,277
Switzerland: 8,683
United Kingdom: 7,196
France: 6,895
Belgium: 6,334
Spain: 5,554
Norway: 5,210
Greece: 3,969
Cyprus: 2,622
Romania: 2,332
Italy: 2,143
Malta: 928
Poland: 718
Finland: 656
Croatia: 352
Czech Republic: 304
Luxembourg: 241
Portugal: 188
Slovenia: 187
Ireland: 101
Latvia: 89
Slovakia: 61
Estonia: 42
Lithuania: 28

The number of asylum applications towards individual EU nations act as individual scores of preference amongst refugees and indicate the direction of intra-EU movement. Coupled with attempted crossings from countries like Macedonia into Bulgaria or from Serbia into Hungary to reach refugee- friendly Austria, this indicates an intra-EU movement of the majority refugees from the east towards the north and west of the European Union.

It should be noted that Hungary closed its borders on September 16, 2015. This would prompt movement of refugees towards the EU state of Croatia. However, mortal risks would further alter the directional movement of a significant portion of migrants (See link below).

For More on First Migrants Enter Croatia After Hungary Seals Border

Final Note

The current issue of refugees fleeing to the EU incentivises organised crime elements to capitalise on the presence of a new market, the trafficking of refugees. The convergence of human and drug trafficking networks as a single whole, defines the presence of a vast trafficking infrastructure.

Limited resources and pressure on civilian transport for land routes, prices of air routes and limited availability of civilian maritime routes make organised crime elements a prominent stakeholder in enterprising land and maritime routes as a part of its trafficking infrastructure and facilitating access to air routes. Individuals may be willing to incur such risks; however, those with families may or may not have the emotional capacity to do so. It is also important to note that irrespective of whether refugees reach their final destination or not, the financial outcome for organised crime syndicates remains unaffected. This is even more so due to the interaction between the desperation of refugees and the financial gains for organised crime syndicates.

Terrorist organisations would additionally capitalise and avail the opportunities of infiltration. Under the guise of refugees through the routes discussed above in conjunction with organised crime syndicates, foreign fighters can pass virtually unnoticed. Additionally, the securing of borders opens up alternatives elsewhere, possibly where the terrain is favourable for infiltration, e.g. forests and mountains. This presents mounting challenges for the EU where it is compelled to find the thin line between allowing the entry of refugees whilst weeding out terror operatives or a blanket order of shutting its doors to refugees.

The data in this TRAC insight is deemed reliable although not independently confirmed by TRAC in all cases.

[1] Available at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3089046/Moroccan-believed-taken-gun-massacre-Tunisian-museum-left-21-tourists-dead-arrested-Italy.html (Access Date: September 15, 2015)

[2] Available at http://www.dreuz.info/2015/09/03/arrestation-de-5-combattants-de-letat-islamique-infiltres-parmi-des-migrants/ (Access Date: September 15, 2015)

[3] Available at http://www.novinite.com/articles/170738/Bulgarian+Court+Extradites+Suspected+IS+Affiliate+to+Germany

[4] Available at http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article4553674.ece (Access Date: September 15, 2015)

[5] Available at http://newobserveronline.com/isis-terrorist-arrested-in-stuttgart-refugee-center-boxes-of-fake-syrian-passports-intercepted/ (Access Date: September 15, 2015)

[6] Available at https://www.rt.com/news/314788-hungary-migrants-isis-terrorists/ (Access Date: September 15, 2015)

[7] ISIS Operative: This Is How We Send Jihadis To Europe

[8] Insight: War turns Syria into major amphetamines producer, consumer and Vu de Bulgarie. Aux origines de la potion magique de Daech – View from Bulgaria. The origins of the Islamic State’s magic potion and Bulgaria – Iraq – Syria: Islamic State Would Have Obtained Important Quantities of Captagon From Bulgaria

Obama/Kerry to Announce Iran Deal Czar

Posted on September 17, 2015September 17, 2015 by Denise Simon

Given the diplomatic background of Stephen Mull, there is nothing of any significance that proves he is up to the newly created position. Simply put, this is a very odd choice but more to a puppet position. In fact, as Ambassador to Poland, he was expelled.

US to name coordinator for implementing Iran nuclear deal

Author: Laura Rozen

AlMonitor: With the Iran nuclear deal expected to emerge intact this week from a grueling 60-day congressional review, the Barack Obama administration is preparing to unveil a new office for coordinating its implementation, to be led by outgoing US Ambassador to Poland Stephen Mull.

The announcement of Mull’s appointment as US coordinator for the Iran nuclear deal implementation is expected to be made by Secretary of State John Kerry as early as Sept. 17 — the deadline for Congress to have sent a resolution of disapproval to the president, a move that was blocked by Senate Democrats — or shortly thereafter, US officials said. It is expected to come as the White House also announces the nomination of State Department Counselor Tom Shannon to succeed Wendy Sherman as undersecretary of state for political affairs, as Al-Monitor previously reported.

A veteran foreign service officer, Mull previously served as executive secretary of the State Department (2010-12), ambassador to Lithuania and, most critically, as senior adviser to then-Undersecretary of State William Burns (2008-10) when Burns was the lead US Iran nuclear negotiator and the United States was helping negotiate UN Security Council Resolution 1929 that sanctioned Iran over its nuclear program, among previous relevant assignments. (Mull was described by one former State Department colleague as “Burns’ right arm.”)

Mull, contacted by Al-Monitor, declined to comment on his anticipated new appointment before it is officially announced. His successor as US envoy to Poland, Paul Jones, was sworn in by Kerry at the State Department on Sept. 11.

Mull “is a brilliant choice,” Richard Nephew, former top State Department Iran sanctions official, told Al-Monitor, noting Mull’s experience on the Iran file under Burns from 2009-10 and wide-ranging work with agencies across the government. He may want to bring on as his deputy coordinator somebody who has invested a decade-plus specifically on the Iran file to complement his experience, Nephew said.

Beyond the near-term ribbon-cutting, the office may get off to a somewhat slow start, as Mull gathers his team, meets with all the senior people throughout the government and foreign interlocutors, and brings himself up to speed on every detail of the past two years of negotiations and the 159-page Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, former US officials suggested.

Mull is expected to oversee a small team of up to seven people, based at the State Department, who will coordinate US government implementation of the JCPOA across US government agencies as needed, including the White House, the State Department, the Treasury Department, the Department of Energy and so on.

The team will be “lean … not more than seven” people, and Mull “will have reach” across the entire interagency to convene what he needs, said a US official, speaking not for attribution to discuss the still-fluid plans for the office.

The small team working under Mull will be “coordinating this very large interagency group of people, hundreds of people,” across multiple agencies, including the State and Treasury departments and the labs employing Department of Energy nuclear experts, to ensure that both Iran lives up to its commitments under the JCPOA, and the United States lives up to its commitments, a second US official said, stressing that “the function of the team is a coordinating function.”

On the nuclear and sanctions issues, Mull brings a variety of expertise to the table, including his experience serving as Burns’ senior adviser from 2008 to 2010 when the United States was helping negotiate the critical UN Security Council Resolution 1929, and as executive secretary of the State Department, in which he coordinated lots of people to serve then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, now Democratic presidential candidate.

The coordinating team will be structured with Mull in charge; he will have an assistant coordinator and a handful of deputies responsible for different functions, including congressional reporting, verifying the nuclear piece, sanctions and sanctions relief.

The other members of the P5+1 — the permanent five members of the UN Security Council plus Germany — are also in the process of organizing themselves to implement the JCPOA. The JCPOA mandated that a Joint Commission — comprised of each member of the P5+1, plus the European Union and Iran — be established to meet regularly to coordinate implementation of the landmark Iran nuclear deal and work out any disputes that may arise.

“We are still in process and have not decided yet who will be representing us in the Joint Commission,” a Russian official told Al-Monitor, adding that Russia is likely to be represented on the Joint Commission at the expert level, rather than by its chief Iran nuclear negotiator, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov.

France is likely to be represented on the Joint Commission by its political director and chief Iran nuclear negotiator Nicolas de Riviere, a French official told Al-Monitor.

Who will lead the European Union team on the Joint Commission “is still a work in progress,” an EU official told Al-Monitor on Sept. 15. An Iran task force has been established at the European External Action Service, led by Portuguese diplomat Hugo Sobral. Also mentioned as a possibility is Stephan Klement, the longtime top nonproliferation adviser to European Union Deputy Secretary-General Helga Schmid, who played the central role in over two years of Iran nuclear deal negotiations and the drafting of the final deal, reached July 14 in Vienna.

Iranian officials told Al-Monitor they were still figuring out their representation on the Joint Commission, and they understood the same to be true of some of the other P5+1 governments.

“At this moment, all these questions are under consideration in Iran and even, I assume, by other P5+1 countries, and no definite position has yet been made on them,” a member of the Iranian negotiating team, speaking not for attribution, told Al-Monitor on Sept.16.

Diplomats from Iran and the P5+1 are expected to meet on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly opening session that gets underway in New York later this month. Both US President Obama and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani are scheduled to address the UN General Assembly on the first day, Sept. 28.

The first meeting of the Joint Commission is likely to happen in New York at the political director level. “It’s supposed to be held on the sidelines of the UNGA in New York,” a senior Iranian official, speaking not for attribution, told Al-Monitor on Sept. 15. He added that the date is not finalized yet.

“Adoption day” of the JCPOA is Oct. 18 — 90 days after the UN Security Council unanimously passed a resolution endorsing the deal, US Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz told journalists at a press conference in Vienna on Sept. 14 on the sidelines of an International Atomic Energy Agency general conference.

Barring surprises from Congress, after Sept. 17, “our expectation … is that the agreement will then go forward,” Moniz told journalists in Vienna on Sept. 14. “Certainly our thinking … is [then] on the question of implementation.”

“This is a large task,” Moniz said. “And my view … is that over the next year and a half, the most important thing is in fact implementing well on all sides, and essentially demonstrating the value [of the Iran nuclear deal] so that … next year, what we will see [is that] the Iran nuclear program has been rolled back substantially.”

Kerry’s Iran Deal Destroys Power of Congress, Stalls Business

Posted on September 17, 2015September 17, 2015 by Denise Simon

If John Kerry was still in the Senate, would he have accepted or tolerated this kind of action? Further, what if any government employee or diplomat would hold hostage an entire body of government?

Obama Admin: Iran Deal Limits New Congressional Action on Iran

Limits new sanctions on Iranian terrorism, human rights violations

The recently inked nuclear accord with Iran restricts the United States’ ability to impose new sanctions on the Islamic Republic in response to terror activities, human rights abuses, and ballistic missile development, according to a document provided to Congress by the Obama administration and obtained exclusively by the Washington Free Beacon.

Secretary of State John Kerry writes in the document that although the nuclear accord theoretically allows Congress to impose new non-nuclear sanctions, American lawmakers will be restricted from enacting legislation that Iran could use as an excuse for walking away from the deal, according to the document, which was provided as an on-the-record response to a series of questions from Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.).

Experts who spoke to the Free Beacon raised alarms about the Obama administration’s response, which they claim would give Iran a veto over congressional efforts to respond to Iranian human rights atrocities and global terror activities. Tehran, they say, would claim that such measures are an excuse for re-imposing nuclear sanctions slated to be lifted under the deal.

Iran claimed in a letter sent to the United Nations last July that it would treat any new sanctions efforts—including those not related to its nuclear program—as a violation of the deal, specifically if those sanctions targeted Iranian entities that had once been penalized for illicit nuclear activity.

Iran emphasized in the letter that it would enforce that interpretation “irrespective of whether such new sanctions are introduced on nuclear related or other grounds,” according to a copy of the letter published by Foreign Policy.

Kerry, in his recent letter to Rubio, admitted that the United States will have limited options in sanctioning Iran.

Congress will not have “free rein to simply re-impose tomorrow all of our nuclear-related sanctions under some other pretext,” Kerry wrote. “Iran would obviously see that as bad faith.”

“We do not have free rein to re-impose nuclear-related sanctions without a credible rationale,” Kerry said later in the document.

Insiders told the Free Beacon that the administration’s stance would likely prevent the United States from responding to Iranian aggression and human rights violations.

“You have to understand how crazy backwards this is,” a senior D.C.-based political strategist involved in the fight over Iran sanctions legislation told the Free Beacon. “If you’re an Iranian general who is just involved in terrorism, we may be able to sanction you for that.”

“But let’s say you’re an Iranian general who was involved in the nuclear program, and we designated you for that but now under the deal we’re delisting you,” the strategist said. “If you now switch to being an arch-terrorist, Congress can’t touch you because the Iranians will say we’re doing an end-run around the JCPOA.”

Kerry declined to support new congressional actions against Iran, stating that the administration would “remain vocal about human rights violations in Iran” and would only “continue to enforce existing human rights sanctions.”

The administration’s stance comes amid repeated promises to lawmakers that the administration would double down on the use of sanctions as a means to push back against Iranian non-nuclear aggression.

Meanwhile:

Corporate America stuck on the sidelines in Iran

TheHill: U.S. companies won’t be rushing in to do business in Iran, even once the terms of the landmark nuclear accord go into effect.

Lawmakers have been unable to kill the terms of the agreement on Capitol Hill, but lingering sanctions and the threat of new action will prevent the vast majority of American companies from setting up shop in Iran — even while their foreign competitors race in.

“If you’re a U.S. company, the day after implementation day is going to look a lot like the day before implementation day,” said Richard Nephew, who worked on Iran sanctions within the Obama administration and is now a program director at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy.

“I’m really, really skeptical that any major U.S. companies are going to want to tread in that space until they are pretty sure that they’re not going to get bitten as a result of this.”

“It would be a big mistake,” agreed Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), one of the few Senate Democrats to oppose the deal, “because there’s going to be still a whole host of other sanctions that will still exist for Iran’s non-nuclear transgressions, and it is likely that we will see other sanctions come down the road.”

In fact, except for caviar, carpets and a few other specific areas, the U.S. economic relationship with Iran won’t change much at all.

The nuclear deal lifts sanctions on Iran’s oil and financial sectors in exchange for limits on its ability to build a nuclear bomb.

The vast majority of U.S. sanctions, however, will only be lifted on foreign companies — not American firms.

“We are not removing our trade embargo on Iran,” a senior administration official said in a recent briefing with reporters. “U.S. persons and banks will still be generally prohibited from all dealings with Iranian companies, including investing in Iran [and] facilitating cleared country trade with Iran.”

However, there are a few exceptions.

Once regulators certify that Iran has taken a number of steps to shut down its nuclear program — which won’t happen for a few months — some industries will have a small amount of flexibility.

The most notable is civilian aircraft materials, of which Iran is in desperate need.

The U.S., in return, will allow imports of Iranian carpets and foodstuffs including caviar and pistachios. Those shipments serve a symbolic purpose but aren’t likely to have a transformational effect on the Iranian economy, analysts said.

Some foreign subsidiaries of U.S. companies can also begin doing business in Iran. The Obama administration has yet to signify exactly what types of activities might be allowed, though, so it remains to be seen how overseas subsidiaries will respond.

In any case, corporate America doesn’t appear to be chomping at the bit to rush in to Iran, which may be in part due to the threat of new sanctions from Congress.

Opponents of the Iranian nuclear deal on Capitol Hill have so far failed in their bid to block it and are now turning to other avenues to undermine the agreement.

Meanwhile, as GOP presidential candidates are quick to remind people, the terms of the deal could be abandoned with the stroke of a pen from the next resident of the White House.

Those comments might cause

businesses to be wary of investing heavily in a legal opening that could close in just 16 months.

Europeans, meanwhile, have a different story to tell.

While many American firms will be on the outside looking in at Iran, the deal will lift most United Nations and European Union sanctions on Iran, which could open the floodgates for foreign firms.

“The bottom line is U.S. companies and U.S. persons will be more constrained, because we will have what is essentially a unilateral, U.S.-only embargo,” said William McGlone, a partner at the Latham & Watkins law firm who specializes in export controls and sanctions.

Some jostling has already begun.

“There are huge trade delegations over there,” said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who leads the Senate Armed Services Committee and is strongly opposed to the deal.

“There’s not an empty hotel room in Tehran.”

The main target of that foreign activity is likely to be energy, though the degree to which American firms get in on the game remains a question mark.

Federal analysts say the country has up to 30 million barrels of oil in storage and could grow its production by up to 700,000 barrels a day once sanctions are lifted.

Iran’s oil minister said in May that “we will witness involvement” of American firms once that happens, but even companies bullish on the prospects aren’t moving quickly to confirm their involvement.

Royal Dutch Shell told The Hill in May that the company is “interested in exploring the role Shell can play in developing Iran’s energy potential,” but a spokesman Wednesday said only that that position still stands.

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), a member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said he doesn’t expect many U.S. companies to join the parade to Iran, citing uncertainty about the stability of the country’s legal system and its lax environmental regulations.

But other countries, Cassidy predicted, are ready to move in when they can.

“The Chinese are going to be the ones who benefit the most in terms of trade, and then the Russians and then the Germans,” he said. “I don’t think the American companies would be anywhere close to it.”

“This is an incredible deal — if you’re in another country, starting with Iran.”

No One Can Explain Russia, Even Obama

Posted on September 16, 2015September 16, 2015 by Denise Simon

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.

US has no plans yet for Syrian airspace despite Russian Prescence

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.

Report: we had the chance to get rid of Assad in 2012 but turned it down

HotAir:

From the Things That Might Have Been file.

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.

***

U.S. Should Condemn Spain’s Military Support to the Russian Navy

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.

A Hard Look at Syria, the Exodus and Epic Numbers?

Posted on September 16, 2015September 16, 2015 by Denise Simon

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.

*** New York Times:

Death in Syria

By KAREN YOURISH, K.K. REBECCA LAI and DEREK WATKINS SEPT. 14, 2015

More than 200,000 people have been killed in the four-and-a-half-year Syrian civil war.

The constant violence has forced more than four million to
flee the country, fueling a refugee crisis in the Middle East
and Europe. The country is so dangerous that a definitive tally
of deaths is not possible, but several groups are trying to
document how many Syrians have died, and what killed them.

For the interactive map and full photo essay, go here.

“With each passing day there are fewer safe places in Syria,” Paulo
Sérgio Pinheiro, chairman of the United Nations panel investigating
human rights abuses in Syria, wrote in a recent report. “Everyday
decisions — whether to visit a neighbor, to go out to buy bread
— have become, potentially, decisions about life and death.”

At least 28,277 civilians have died in shootings and mass killings.

Thousands of civilians have been victims of mass shootings and gunfire between government forces and insurgents. In one case documented by the United Nations, more than 100 people, including at least 49 children, were killed in Homs on May 25, 2012. Most were shot at close range.

The U.N. reports that armed opposition groups have also executed children, but lack of access in areas controlled by the Islamic State has prevented systematic documentation. “In places like Raqqa and Deir Ezzor, it’s almost impossible to verify the information,” said Bassam al-Ahmad, spokesman for the Violation Documentation Center in Syria.

At least 27,006 civilians were killed in mortar, artillery and rocket attacks.

Both government and insurgent forces have used “weapons that are guaranteed to cause civilian damage,” said Geoffrey Mock, a Middle East specialist at Amnesty International. Children account for about 20 percent of these deaths.

The Syrian government has repeatedly fired imprecise rockets and unguided bombs, according to the United Nations and other monitoring groups. Insurgent groups have used so-called “hell cannons” — improvised artillery devices fitted with explosive gas canisters that cause widespread damage.

“What we are seeing in Syria is war crime on both sides,” Mr. Mock said.

At least 18,866 civilians were killed in Syrian government air attacks.

Syrian warplanes and helicopters have blasted civilian targets like mosques, schools and shopping markets in insurgent-controlled areas with barrel bombs — large containers filled with explosives and projectiles — and other weapons. As the government lost control of the country, said Mr. Ahmad of the Violations Documentation Center, “they began using new tactics by dropping air bombs.” More than a quarter of the dead are children.

At least 8,871 civilians were killed after being kidnapped, detained and/or tortured.

The United Nations and others have documented rampant use of torture by both government and opposition forces, including crimes against children targeted for appearing to be pro-government. In March, thousands of photos surfaced showing detainees who were said to have died in Syrian prisons. The photos were smuggled out of Syria by a former Syrian military photographer. Secretary of State John Kerry said that the photos showed evidence of torture.

At least 984 civilians were killed by exposure to chemical or toxic substances.

The Syrian government has been accused of using chlorine-filled barrel bombs. An attack in 2013 killed hundreds of people (some estimates were upward of 1,500) in Ghouta, a suburb of Damascus controlled by the opposition, when the area was struck by several rockets containing sarin, a nerve agent known to be part of the Syrian military’s stockpile. There are also reports that the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, has used mustard gas in northern Syria.

At least 654 medical workers were killed in attacks on hospitals.

The United Nations has accused the Syrian government of using attacks on hospitals as a “weapon of war.” Physicians for Human Rights documented nearly 300 attacks on hospitals through July, most of them carried out by pro-Assad forces in opposition-controlled areas.

At least 565 civilians died from starvation, dehydration or lack of basic medical care.

The death toll, documented by the Syrian American Medical Society through January 2015, does not capture the many people — estimates range from 200,000 to more than 600,000 — who have been under siege for more than a year and are at risk of starving to death or dying from other preventable causes. The majority of those besieged are trapped by the Syrian government in the Damascus area, according to Valerie Szybala, the primary author of a report by the Syrian American Medical

An estimated 181 civilians were killed in the American-led air campaign against ISIS.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights has estimated that 181 civilians have been killed in the coalition airstrike campaign against the Islamic State, as of mid-August. Other groups have given higher estimates, and all say that the United States and its allies understate the civilian toll. The United States Central Command says it has confirmed the deaths of only two civilians since the start of the campaign.