http://news.antiwar.com/2013/08/16/us-officials-syria-war-fueling-al-qaeda-in-iraq-resurgence/
Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) has always been a problem for the Maliki government, and US officials say that easy access to Sunni Islamist fighters in Syria have fueled the resurgence, claiming AQI is sending a lot of them into Iraq.
The group that claimed credit, the Brigades of Aisha, said it was retaliation for Hezbollah’s involvement in the Syrian Civil War. The attack targeted a Shi’ite neighborhood full of Hezbollah supporters, and has those supporters calling for revenge.
And even if the attacks used the “threat” of imminent attack as an excuse, officials concede that the strikes weren’t really retaliatory against those attackers and did nothing to prevent the “threat.”
US Officials: Syria War Fueling al-Qaeda in Iraq Resurgence
Iraqi Govt Seeks US Surveillance Drones Amid Growing Threat
by Jason Ditz, August 16, 2013
July was the deadliest month for Iraq in years, and August looks to be no better. Iraq’s central government is desperate to get support from anywhere they can on security, and apparently having no better ideas has sought EU support as well as floating the idea of US surveillance drones.
Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) has always been a problem for the Maliki government, and US officials say that easy access to Sunni Islamist fighters in Syria have fueled the resurgence, claiming AQI is sending a lot of them into Iraq.
The case could be made on either side, however. AQI has clearly benefited from a higher regional profile, but the group has sent a lot of fighters into Syria from Iraq, likely more than they got from Syria. The US is trying to present Syrian instability as the core of the problem for Iraq, but one could as easily say Iraq’s ongoing instability has played a big role in Syria’s war as well.
If anything, UN Envoy Martin Kobler was perhaps the most accurate in his assessment last month, saying that the Syrian War and the Iraq War are increasingly merging into a bigger regional war. Since the US is unconditionally behind the Maliki government and against the Assad government, however, and the two are both fighting the same enemy, America’s own role is extremely complicated.
http://news.antiwar.com/2013/08/16/hezbollah-vows-revenge-against-syria-rebels-after-beirut-bombing/
Hezbollah Vows Revenge Against Syria Rebels After Beirut Bombing
Nasrallah Says More Fighters Will Be Sent to Syria
by Jason Ditz, August 16, 2013
With at least 24 people dead and hundreds wounded, southern Beirut is still reeling from a car bombing that is the biggest single strike the city has seen since the mid-1980s.
The group that claimed credit, the Brigades of Aisha, said it was retaliation for Hezbollah’s involvement in the Syrian Civil War. The attack targeted a Shi’ite neighborhood full of Hezbollah supporters, and has those supporters calling for revenge.
That seems to be the working plan for leader Hassan Nasrallah as well, as in a speech today he promised to double the number of fighters in Syria. Without clarifying how many are there now, he declared “if we have a thousand fighters they will become 2,000, and if we have 5,000 fighters they will become 10,000.”
The decision to go into Syria was initially very controversial among Hezbollah supporters, but after the killings there seems to be a lot more appetite for intervention across the border. Nasrallah insisted he was prepared to send every single Hezbollah fighter to Syria, and even go himself if necessary.
The second part got a lot of focus, but is no doubt rhetorical, as the 52-year-old Nasrallah is a religious leader, not a fighter, and would be too high value a target to put at risk of capture or killing by al-Qaeda-linked rebels. Rather, his statement promises escalation and points to the likely accurate view that he can get away with sending a lot more fighters now, something that would’ve been all but impossible a few weeks ago.
http://news.antiwar.com/2013/08/16/us-drone-strikes-against-yemen-didnt-eliminate-threat-officials-admit/
US Drone Strikes Against Yemen Didn’t Eliminate ‘Threat,’ Officials Admit
Obama Scrapped Rules Designed to Limit Civilian Casualties
by Jason Ditz, August 16, 2013
Two weeks, 12 drone strikes, and 49 people killed. That’s the late July-early August count for US attacks in Yemen, and while officials say “at least 14” of the slain were probably militants, none of them were named.
And even if the attacks used the “threat” of imminent attack as an excuse, officials concede that the strikes weren’t really retaliatory against those attackers and did nothing to prevent the “threat.”
Rather, the administration had put in place a number of “limits” on such strikes in the months ahead of the period, mostly aimed at reducing the number of civilian casualties. Scandalously enough, officials say the limits were simply removed because of the threat, leading to the massive increase in attacks.
But an awful lot of those attacks hit things not remotely related to militants, blowing up a clinic and a school in Jaar, killing a number of civilians, and fueling anti-US sentiment across the nation.
http://www.juancole.com/2013/08/democracy-washington-reluctant.html
It’s not about Democracy: Top Ten Reasons Washington is Reluctant to cut off Egypt Aid
Posted on 08/17/2013 by Juan Cole
another 80 people died in violence in Egypt on Friday, as Muslim Brotherhood crowds protested the military crackdown on their sit-ins that cost hundreds of lives this week. Some of the violence resulted fro police heavy-handedness, some from an armed Brotherhood attack on a police station. The continued unrest upped the pressure on the Obama administration to cut off military aid to Egypt. It is the only legal and ethical thing to do, but here are some reasons it has been difficult for Washington to take that step.
1. The US doesn’t give much aid to the Egyptian people per se. Only $250 mn a year out of $1.55 bn is civilian. The aid is to cement a relationship between the Egyptian officer corps and the Pentagon.
2. The military aid, $1.3 billion a year, is mostly in-kind, a grant of weaponry . It must be spent on US weapons manufacturers. It is US arms manufacturers like Lockheed-Martin and General Dynamics (and their employees) who would suffer if it were cut off.
3. The Congress gave the Egyptian Generals a credit card to buy weapons, and they’ve run up $3 billion on it for F-16s and M1A1 tanks. If the US cancelled aid, the US government would still have to pick up that bill.
4. Even most of the civilian aid is required to be spent on US goods and materiel. It is corporate welfare for the US
5. The aid was given as a bribe to the Egyptian elite to make nice with Israel. Given the chaos in Sinai, and Egypt’s instability, Congress is more worried about that issue than at any time in 40 years.
6. The Israelis asked the US not to suspend the aid.
7. Congress even structured the economic aid to require some of it help joint Israeli-Egyptian enterprises in Egypt, so some of the aid to Egypt actually goes to . . . Israel.
8. It is not generally recognized, but the Egyptian military provides a security umbrella to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the UAE against Iran (and sometimes Iraq). The Gulf oil states also have powerful Washington lobbies and want Egypt to continue as a Gurkha force. Children, can you say oil?
9. Many in Congress don’t actually disagree with the generals’ actions in overthrowing the Muslim Brotherhood-backed Freedom and Justice Party and driving it underground, since they agree it is a terrorist organization
10. Behind the scenes Egyptian military intelligence has helped the US track down Muslim extremists and in the Mubarak era ran black sites where they tortured suspected al-Qaeda for Washington. The US deep state would like to ramp that relationship back up.
No comments:
Post a Comment