Saudi Executes 47, Including Iranian Cleric

Posted on January 2, 2016January 2, 2016 by Denise Simon

And so it begins Iran versus Saudi Arabia, a matter to be watched closely.

Earlier today: A flight left Tehran heading to possibly Riyadh to evacuate Iranians or collect those that Saudi Arabia is expelling.

Embedded image permalink

Fury in Iran and Iraq as Saudis execute top Shiite cleric

Tehran warns Riyadh will ‘pay high price’ for killing Nimr al-Nimr, accused of role in al-Qaeda attacks; 46 others also put to death

Saudi Arabia on Saturday executed a prominent Shiite cleric behind anti-government protests along with 46 other men, drawing angry condemnation from Iran and Iraq.

A list published by the official Saudi Press Agency included Sunni Muslims convicted of involvement in al-Qaeda attacks that killed Saudi and foreigners in the kingdom in 2003 and 2004.

One of those executed was Fares al-Shuwail, described by Saudi media as al-Qaeda’s top religious leader in the kingdom. He was arrested in 2004.

Mohammed al-Nimr, the father of Ali al-Nimr, a Saudi youth facing execution for taking part in pro-reform protests speaks to AFP in the Saudi capital, Riyadh, on September 23, 2015. (STR/AFP)

Notably absent from the list, however, was Nimr’s nephew, Ali al-Nimr, whose arrest at the age of 17 and alleged torture during detention sparked condemnation from rights watchdogs and the United States. More here from TimesofIsrael.

WashingtonInst.: Iran’s history of targeting Saudi Arabia: On April 27, the head of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Maj. Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari, lashed out at Saudi Arabia and its recent military intervention in Yemen, accusing the “treacherous Saudis” of “following in Israel’s footsteps” by “shamelessly and disgracefully bombing and mass killing” the Yemeni people. The increased Saudi aggression in the region, he contended, demands a tougher response from Tehran. Similarly, Hezbollah deputy secretary-general Naim Qassem warned in an April 13 interview with the Associated Press that the kingdom will “incur very serious losses” and “pay a heavy price” as a result of its Yemen campaign. Given historical precedent — not to mention numerous other angry statements from Tehran of late (see PolicyWatch 2423, “Yemen’s War Heats Up Iran’s Anti-Saudi Rhetoric”) — Riyadh should take such threats at face value.

TRACK RECORD OF TARGETING SAUDI INTERESTS

Iran has a long history of plotting attacks against its Saudi rivals in response to transgressions real and perceived. These plots, carried out by Iranian agents and Hezbollah proxies, have targeted Saudi interests in the Middle East and elsewhere. One of the most recent — traced back to IRGC Qods Force commander Qasem Soleimani and other senior Iranian decisionmakers — was the failed October 2011 plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington by bombing a restaurant he frequented. Yet Tehran’s earliest anti-Saudi schemes stretch back nearly to the regime’s founding.

WashingtonInst.: Hassan Rouhani’s victory in Iran’s presidential election has been widely heralded as a protest vote against the hardliners and a window of opportunity for diplomatic breakthrough with Western powers. But such assumptions beg the question: just how much moderation should be expected from a “moderate” Iranian president, particularly with regard to state sponsorship of terrorism? Past precedent suggests that expectations should be tempered.

RAFSANJANI’S TERRORISM REPORT CARD

Rouhani is not the first Iranian “moderate” to win the presidency. Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, elected in 1989, was frequently described as a moderate as well. According to U.S. intelligence, however, he oversaw a long string of terrorist plots during his eight years in office.

The CIA linked Rafsanjani to terrorist plots as early as 1985, when he was serving as speaker of parliament. In a February 15, 1985, memo, the agency assessed that “Iranian-sponsored terrorism is the greatest threat to US personnel and facilities in the Middle East…Iranian-backed attacks increased by 30 percent in 1984, and the numbers killed in Iranian-sponsored attacks outpace fatalities in strikes by all other terrorist sponsors. Senior Iranian leaders such as Ayatollah Montazeri,…Prime Minister [Mir Hossein Mousavi], and Consultative Assembly speaker Rafsanjani are implicated in Iranian terrorism.”

In September of 2015: WashingtonInst.: Two weeks ago, according to several media reports, Ahmed al-Mughassil, the military chief of Saudi Hezbollah (Hezbollah al-Hijaz) and the principal architect of the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing, was apprehended in Beirut — where it was believed he lived under Lebanese Hezbollah protection — and was transferred to the custody of Saudi Arabia. A physically small man, standing at five feet four inches and weighing 145 pounds, Mughassil is accused of orchestrating and then personally executing one of the most spectacular terrorist attacks carried out by Iran and its proxies against the United States.

The circumstances of Mughassil’s capture are still unknown, but the timing raises multiple questions. How did a man who evaded capture for almost 20 years suddenly get caught? And what does it mean that the arrest comes against the background of the Iran nuclear deal and in the context of rising tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia and between their respective allies in Lebanon?

Officials in Beirut, Riyadh, and Washington have yet to confirm Mughassil’s capture, but it is no secret that both Saudi and American investigators have been keen to apprehend him for years. Mughassil was indicted in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia for the bombing, and the U.S. State Department’s Rewards for Justice Program offers $5 million for information leading to his capture. More reading here from Matthew Levitt, at Washington Institute.

How Saudi fought al Qaida:

A documentary series aired on the Al Arabiya News Channel reveals never-seen-before footage of al-Qaeda’s operations in Saudi Arabia and the subsequent raids and crackdowns on the group by authorities.

In 2003 the then security chief Prince Mohammed bin Nayef launched a counter attack that would see a three-year security crackdown on the group, with thousands of its members thrown into prison.

More than ten years on, the Al Arabiya News Channel is airing TV series on the attacks, promising an inside look into al-Qaeda, after hours of footage from cameras and mobile phones were recovered and released by Saudi security officials.

The documentary series, split into three episodes, was produced for the Al Arabiya News Channel by OR Media, a London-based independent production company. The three videos listed below will play in your video player.

http://saic.alarabiya.net/program/15/12/04/20151204-terrorinksa-002.mp4 Part 1
http://saic.alarabiya.net/program/15/12/05/20151205-terrorinksa-001.mp4 Part 2
http://saic.alarabiya.net/program/15/12/04/20151204-terrorinksa-003.mp4 Part 3

Iran to Increase Power of Destructive Missiles

Posted on January 2, 2016January 2, 2016 by Denise Simon

For additional reference on Iran’s compliance and sanction money, the International Monetary Fund releases are here.

TEHRAN (FNA)- The destruction power and precision of Iran’s missiles will increase, Defense Minister Brigadier General Hossein Dehqan said Saturday following the recent presidential decree that required the defense ministry to speed up development of Iran’s missile capability.

“Following o the president’s letter, we held numerous meetings with the executive officials, commanders and officials in the missile sector and decided work out appropriate plans as soon as possible to enhance the defensive power and capability as well as the effective deterrence power of our missiles contrary to the will of the hegemonic system which seeks to restrict the Islamic Republic militarily,” Dehqan told reporters in Tehran on Saturday.

He also underscored the country’s serious intention to further develop its missile power.

Stressing that the defense ministry seeks to optimize its ballistic missiles in different aspect, Dehqan said, “Increasing the precision-striking, destructive and blast power of our missiles… are among the defense ministry’s plans in the missile field.”

In his letter on Thursday, President Rouhani noted the United States’

“hostile policies and illegal and illegitimate meddling against Iran’s right to develop its defensive power”, and ordered the defense minister to accelerate production of various types of missiles needed by the Iranian Armed Forces more powerfully.

“As the United States seems to plan to include the names of new individuals and firms in its previous list of cruel sanctions in line with its hostile policies and illegitimate and illegal meddling in the Islamic Republic of Iran’s right to reinvigorate its defense power, the program for the production of the Armed Forces’ needed missiles is required to continue more speedily and seriously,” President Rouhani’s written order to the Defense Minister read.

President Rouhani’s decree came in reaction to the US Treasury Department’s announcement that it is preparing sanctions on two Iran-linked networks helping develop the missile program.

The presidential decree also required the defense ministry to think of new missile production programs at a much wider scale in case Washington continues its sanctions policy against Iran’s defense industries.

“In case such wrong and interventionist measures are repeated by the United States, the Defense Ministry will be duty-bound to make use of all possibilities to bring up new planning to develop the country’s missile capability,” it stressed.

The president further described Iran’s defense capabilities as a contributor to regional stability and security, and not a threat to any other state or party. Rather it is a means to “safeguard the country’s sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity and to combat the evil phenomenon of terrorism and extremism in line with common regional and global interests”.

President Rouhani further reminded that Tehran has time and again underlined all throughout the nuclear negotiations with the six world powers – that ended up in the nuclear deal in Vienna in July – that it would “never negotiate with anyone about its defense power, including the missile program, and would never accept any restriction in this field, emphasizing its entitlement to the legitimate right of defense”.

“It is crystal-clear that Iran’s missile program is not at all a part of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – also known as the nuclear deal – and this is acknowledged by the US officials as well,” said the decree, and added, “As repeatedly stated, nuclear weapons have no room in Iran’s defense doctrine, and therefore, the development and production of Iran’s ballistic missiles which have never been designed to carry nuclear warheads, will continue powerfully and firmly as a crucial and conventional tool for defending the country.”

According to Washington officials, the US is preparing sanctions against firms and individuals in Iran, Hong Kong and the United Arab Emirates over alleged links to Iran’s ballistic missile program, a move seen by many in and outside Iran as a major blow to the nuclear deal between Tehran and the

5+1 group of powers that include the US, Russia, China, France and 5+Britain plus Germany.

Under the planned restrictions, the US or foreign nationals would be barred from doing business with the firms and people in the networks. US banks would also freeze any US-held assets.

The Washington’s antagonistic move comes after Iran took the first two major steps under the nuclear deal – that included reducing the number of its operating centrifuge machines from around 10,000 to 6,000 and sending its over 8.5 tons of low-enriched uranium stockpile to Russia.

Once Iran takes out the heart of its Heavy Water Reactor in Arak and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirms implementation of these three steps in coming weeks, Iran will be through with fulfilling its undertakings, and it will be the United States’ turn to hold up its end of the bargain and remove all the sanctions against Iran, according to the deal.

But now with the US intensifying sanctions against Iran, those who stood against the deal in Tehran are rallying increasing support for their pessimistic views about Washington’s loyalty to the deal.

After Iran reduced its centrifuges to around 6,000 last month, the US imposed a new sanction against Iran through changes in its Visa Waiver Program.

The US senate passed a bill related to the Visa Waiver Program (VWP) which allows citizens of 38 countries — namely European states, Australia, Japan and South Korea — to travel to the United States without having to obtain a visa but excludes from this program all dual nationals from Iran, Iraq, Syria and Sudan, and anyone else who has traveled to those countries in the past five years.

The bill is seen by the EU as a serious effort to deter expansion of economic and tourism ties between Europe and Iran after the removal of the sanctions against Tehran. Senior EU officials have voiced strong protest at the US for its biased action against the block and are running debates with counterparts in Washington to drop the bill.

Putin Announces U.S. as a Threat to Security

Posted on January 2, 2016January 2, 2016 by Denise Simon

Heh….Obama is no threat to anyone except Christians,legal gun owners and to taxpayers. But in case you are inclined to do some copying and pasting, here is the document. The United States under Barack Obama has refused to remain on a global stage and work to find peace through diplomacy or even militarily. Putin continues to challenge NATO and Putin will continue to be aggressive towards NATO members.

The document outlines the national interests and strategic priorities of the nation. Putin signed the executive order Thursday, establishing a new posture toward the NATO bloc, which has seen its relationship with Russia deteriorate since the crisis in Ukraine, which began in 2014.

Russian news agency Tass quotes the strategy, which cites a NATO military buildup, and “the alliance’s approach to Russia’s borders,” as a threat to Russia’s national security. The document says the organization is illegally extending its reach.

Putin Names US As Threat To Russian National Security In New Strategy Document

Durden/Zerohedge: It’s no secret that relations between Moscow and the West have deteriorated the post-Cold War lows.

The annexation of Crimea and the conflict in Ukraine have pushed the two sides to the brink of a Baltic battle while Russia’s intervention in Syria changed the West’s calculus when it comes to pushing for regime change in the Mid-East.

Earlier this year, in a hilariously accurate assessment of US foreign policy, Vladimir Putin’s Security Council issued a statement entitled “About The US National Security Strategy“. Here are some notable excerpts (translated):

The armed forces are considered as the basis of US national security and military superiority is considered a major factor in the American world leadership. While maintaining the continuity of the plants to use military force unilaterally and anywhere in the world, as well as to maintain a military presence abroad…

Significant efforts by the US and its allies will be directed to the formation of anti-Russian policy states, with which Russia has established partnership relations, as well as to reduce Russian influence in the former Soviet Union.

Continue the policy of preserving the global dominance of the United States, increasing the combat capabilities of NATO, as well as to strengthen the US military presence in the Asia-Tihokeanskom region. Military force will continue to be considered as the primary means of ensuring national security and interests of the United States.

Becoming more widespread to eliminate unwanted US political regimes acquire advanced technology “color revolutions” with a high probability of their application in relation to Russia.

Thus, the strategy was developed on the basis of American exceptionalism, the right to take unilateral action to protect and promote the interests of the United States in the world and bears the active anti-Russian charge.

In other words, Moscow views US foreign policy as decidedly Russophobic and The Kremlin pretty clearly sees Washington as a threat to Russia’s security. Well on New Year’s Eve, Vladimir Putin made it official by signing a new appraisal of his country’s national security which, for the first time, lists the US as a threat. Here’s Reuters:

The document, “About the Strategy of National Security of Russian Federation”, was signed by President Vladimir Putin on New Year’s Eve. It replaces a 2009 version, endorsed by then- President Dmitry Medvedev, the current prime minister, which mentioned neither the United States not NATO.

It says Russia has managed to heighten its role in solving global problems and international conflicts. That heightened role has caused a reaction by the West.

“The strengthening of Russia happens against the background of new threats to the national security, which has complex and interrelated nature,” the document goes on to note.

Conducting an independent policy, “both international and domestic” has caused “counteraction from the USA and its allies, which are striving to retain their dominance in global affairs.”

That in turn is likely to lead to “political, economical, military and informational pressure on Russia.”

The document also implicates Washington in staging “anti-constitutional coup d’etat in Ukraine”, which is of course true. The result: a protracted civil war and a US puppet government that is less popular than its Russia-backed predecessor.

The document also reiterates Russia’s concerns about the expansion and strengthening of NATO. Here’s an excerpt:

The buildup of the military potential of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and vesting it with global functions implemented in violations of norms of international law, boosting military activity of the bloc’s countries, further expansion of the alliance, the approach of its military infrastructure to Russian borders create a threat to the national security.”

The references are to the multiple war games and snap drills NATO has conducted near Russia’s borders over the past nine months and to the inclusion of Montenegro in the alliance (documented here).

Of course one doesn’t necessarily have to interpret the document in the way the Western media has. Compare and contrast the following two headlines, the first from Reuters and the second from Sputnik:

Those two pieces refer to the very same document although you wouldn’t know it by what’s implied. Here are some excerpts from the Sputnik piece:

The strategy defines main venues of Russia-US partnership on the global arena as the improvement of mechanisms of arms controls, the strengthening of mutual trust measures, joint efforts in the area of WMD non-proliferation, expanded cooperation in the fight against terrorism as well as in the resolution of regional conflicts.

“Russia supports the strengthening of mutually-beneficial cooperation with the European countries, the European Union…with the goal of developing a transparent system of collective security in the Euro-Atlantic region based on clearly-defined legal agreements,” the text of the document, posted on Thursday on the government’s legal information portal, says.

According to the document, Russia continues to view NATO expansion and military activities near Russian borders as a major threat to its security and a violation of international laws, but is ready to develop relations with the Alliance in the interests of the European security.

The takeaway here probably isn’t whether or not the US is listed as a “threat” to Russia’s national security but rather that The Kremlin if officially recognizing Russia’s role in a kind of new world order wherein all matters of geopolitical significance are no longer decided in Washington.

In other words, the era of unipolarity and US hegemony (which has lasted nearly a quarter century) has come to an end and Russia’s discussion of the backlash from the US and NATO isn’t so much an effort to cast aspersions (i.e. to call this country or that country “a threat”) as it is to outline and assess the new reality.

Muslim Brotherhood in U.S. Gets Millions in Grants

Posted on December 30, 2015December 30, 2015 by Denise Simon

The Muslim Brotherhood in the United States document is here.

The House Intelligence Committee Testimony on the Muslim Brotherhood is here.

Mosque Linked To Muslim Brotherhood Has Received Millions In Federal Grants

DailyCaller: A Kansas City mosque owned by an Islamic umbrella organization with deep ties to the U.S. arm of the Muslim Brotherhood has received millions of dollars in federal grants over the past several years, according to a federal spending database.

The Islamic Center of Greater Kansas City has received $2,739,891 from the Department of Agriculture since 2010, a Daily Caller analysis has found. The money largely went to the mosque’s Crescent Clinic to provide services through the Women, Infant and Children nutrition program, known as WIC.

The most recent federal payment — in the amount of $327,436 — was handed out Oct. 1.

Property records show the mosque is owned by the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), which acts as a financial holding company for Islamic organizations. It offers sharia-compliant financial products to Muslim investors, operates Islamic schools and owns more than 300 other mosques throughout the U.S.

Founded in 1973 as an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood-backed Muslim Students Association, NAIT’s most controversial connection is to the 2007 and 2008 Holy Land Foundation terror financing cases. Along with other Muslim Brotherhood-linked organizations like the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), NAIT was named a co-conspirator in the federal case but was not indicted.

At the Holy Land Foundation trial, evidence was presented that ISNA diverted funds from the accounts it held with NAIT to institutions linked to Hamas and to Mousa Abu Marzook, a senior Hamas leader.

Federal prosecutors introduced evidence in the case that “established that ISNA and NAIT were among those organizations created by the U.S.-Muslim Brotherhood.” Hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of checks drawn from ISNA’s account and deposited in the Holy Land Foundation’s account with NAIT were made payable to “the Palestinian Mujahadeen,” which is the original name for Hamas’ military wing.

While Hamas was designated as a foreign terrorist organization by the U.S. government in 1997 and is considered the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, the larger Muslim Brotherhood is not itself designated as a terrorist group.

NAIT has other ties to the Holy Land Foundation case. Its newly-appointed executive director, Salah Obeidallah, was a founding member and former president of the Islamic Center of Passaic County in Paterson, N.J.

In the 1990s, the imam at that mosque was Mohammad El-Mezain, a founding member of the Holy Land Foundation who was sentenced to 15 years in prison for helping fund Hamas. Obeidallah has said that he was not aware of El-Mezain’s terror funding activities.

In being owned by NAIT, the Kansas City organization is in company with numerous mosques with ties to known terrorists, terror sympathizers and fundamentalist Islamists.

Purportedly backed by money from Saudi Arabia and supporting a fundamentalist branch of Sunni Islam known as Wahhabism, NAIT holds the deed to the Islamic Society of Boston, which operates the mosque attended by Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the so-called Boston Marathon bombers.

It also controls the Islamic Center of San Diego, which was attended by Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, two al-Qaeda members who helped fly American Flight 77 into the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.

According to a 2002 Newsweek investigation, members of the San Diego mosque helped the two terrorists obtain housing, driver’s licences and social security numbers. They claimed not to have known about the men’s terror plans.

NAIT also owns the Dar Al-Hijrah mosque in Fairfax Co., Va. — a known hotbed of terrorist activity. Al-Qaeda recruiter Anwar al-Awlaki served as imam at that location in 2001 and 2002. He was killed by an American drone in Yemen in 2011.

The Islamic Center of Greater Kansas City has its own loose links to terrorist activities. The mosque made news earlier this year when it held the funeral for Nadir Soofi, one of the two jihadis who attempted to pull off a terrorist attack in Garland, Tex. Soofi, who was 34, and his accomplice, 30-year-old Elton Simpson, opened fire outside of an art exhibit featuring cartoons of Muhammad, but were killed by a security guard.

Both Soofi and Simpson attended the Islamic Community Center in Phoenix, which land deeds show is owned by NAIT.

That particular mosque posted $100,000 bond for Simpson following his 2010 arrest for lying to FBI agents about his plans to travel to Somalia to join a terrorist group. Simpson was given three years probation in that case.

The Islamic Center of Greater Kansas City has also hosted Imam Khalid Yasin, an American-born convert to Islam, who has publicly supported sharia law and claimed that homosexuals should receive the death penalty.

As a May 2010 Yahoo! message board post shows, Yasin visited the Islamic Center of Greater Kansas City and other area mosques that month to hold a series of lectures and workshops about Islam.

That was nearly two years after Yasin touted the virtues of sharia law and capital punishment in a speech at a British mosque. Full article here.

Afghanistan is a Growing Festering War, Again

Posted on December 30, 2015December 30, 2015 by Denise Simon

WASHINGTON —Afghanistan’s security situation is so tenuous that the top U.S. commander there wants to keep as many U.S. troops there as possible through 2016 to boost beleaguered Afghan soldiers and may seek additional American forces to assist them.

Army Gen. John Campbell said in an interview with USA TODAY that maintaining the current force of 9,800 U.S. troops to train Afghan forces and conduct counter-terrorism raids is vital, and that the scheduled reduction to 5,500 by Jan. 1, 2017, should be put off as long as possible.

“My intent would be to keep as much as I could for as long as I could,” Campbell said by telephone from Kabul. “At some point it becomes physics. I’m going to have to get them out.”

News from Afghanistan in 2015, when American troops ended their daily combat mission after 14 years, has been grim. Taliban insurgents stormed the northern provincial capital of Kunduz in October and were pushed out after fierce fighting that included an inadvertent attack by a U.S. warplane on hospital that killed 42 civilians. In the south, Taliban insurgents have battered Afghan troops in Helmand province; an al-Qaeda training camp was also discovered there and destroyed. Islamic State fighters have set up outposts in the east. Last week, six U.S. airmen were killed by a suicide bomber outside Bagram Air Base.

The Pentagon’s own quarterly assessment of security in Afghanistan this month noted that in “the second half of 2015, the overall security situation in Afghanistan deteriorated with an increase in effective insurgent attacks and higher (Afghan security force) and Taliban casualties.”

Campbell will be Washington soon to brief senior leaders on the security situation in Afghanistan and troop levels required for their missions. He declined to offer specifics on his recommendations, saying they were classified. More here from USAToday.

Report: Russia Signals Readiness to Ease UN Sanctions Against Taliban

A senior Russian diplomat reportedly said Moscow is ready “to show flexibility” on possibly easing United Nations Security Council sanctions imposed on Afghanistan’s Taliban, which has intensified attacks against U.S. service members and American-trained Afghan security forces.

Breitbart: The Taliban recently claimed responsibility for killing six U.S. troops, and the group has been behind a record number of casualties incurred by the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces (ANDSF), which includes army, police, and militia units.

“He appeared to be suggesting that major powers should consider an accommodation with the Taliban to stop the spread of rival Islamic State [ISIS/ISIL] militants, deemed a much bigger, international menace by the West,” Reuters reports, referring to Zamir Kabulov, a department chief at Russia’s Foreign Ministry and President Vladimir Putin’s special envoy on Afghanistan.

“We are ready to approach in a flexible way the issues of a possible easing of the regime of sanctions under Security Council Resolution 1988 on the Taliban, if this does not contradict Afghanistan’s national interests,” the Tass news agency quoted Kabulov as saying, according to Reuters.

“No one is talking today about achieving a victory by military means over the Taliban, while the implementation of the national reconciliation policy would in practice mean their return to power,” he added.

Kabulov noted that Russia supports the U.S.-backed Afghanistan government police aimed at achieving national reconciliation.

In 2011, the UN Security Council Resolution 1988 was passed, designating the Taliban insurgency as a threat to international peace and imposing a freezing of assets, bans on travel, and other restrictions on individuals deemed to be associated with the terrorist group.

Although the Taliban branch in Pakistan—Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan (TTP)—is listed as a foreign terrorist organization by the United States, the Afghan Taliban is not. TTP is also known to carry out attacks on the Afghanistan side of the country’s border with Pakistan.

ISIS terrorists, which have seized swaths of Iraq and Syria, have established a presence in eastern Afghanistan and have been engaged in turf battles with the Taliban, which has labeled ISIS as “barbaric” in the Afghan territory it has captured.

Last week, Kabulov said that Russian interests in Afghanistan “objectively coincide” with those of the Taliban movement in the fight against ISIS.

He noted that Russia had established communication channels to exchange information on ISIS with the Taliban.

“Moscow, currently conducting a bombing campaign in Syria it says is aimed at Islamic State forces, has been concerned about the possible spread of Islamic State from Afghanistan into neighboring ex-Soviet states like Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan,” points out Reuters.

U.S. Gen. John Campbell, the top commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, and the Pentagon have acknowledged that ISIS is growing in Afghanistan.

“Groups associated with Islamic State have made growing inroads in Afghanistan, attracting fighters and support away from disenchanted members of the Taliban,” reports Reuters.

“They have been battling government forces and the Taliban in a challenge for supremacy of the Islamist insurgency, and its rise has caused alarm outside Afghanistan, with U.S. commanders citing the movement as a reason to delay troop withdrawals,” it adds.

Militants from the ethnic Uzbek minority in Afghanistan have been linked to the Islamic State.

Russian is reportedly helping to strengthen the Afghan security forces.

In September, a United Nations report revealed that ISIS is actively recruiting supporters in nearly three-quarters (25) of the country’s 34 provinces.

Kabulov estimated in October that there were nearly 3,500 ISIS-linked jihadists in Afghanistan, adding that the number was growing.

Gen. Campbell recently said that between 1,000 to 3,000 ISIS-linked militants were operating in Afghanistan.