(NSI News Source Info) December 29, 2008: Israeli army takes position near the northern Israeli-Gaza Strip border on December 28, 2008. Israel warned today it could send ground troops into Gaza as its warplanes continued pounding Hamas targets inside the enclave where more than 280 Palestinians have been killed in just 24 hours.
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Israeli Army At Gaza Border
Israeli Army At Gaza Border
Israeli army special forces are deployed on December 28, 2008 at the Gaza Israel border. Israel launched a massive wave of air strikes on Hamas targets in Gaza yesterday, killing at least 155 Palestinians and wounding hundreds more
Arabs Should Contribute Forces Or Funds To Isolate Somali/Aden Pirates Being In their Neighborhood / Bordering Countries
Arabs Should Contribute Forces Or Funds To Isolate Somali/Aden Pirates Being In their Neighborhood / Bordering Countries
(NSI News Source Info) December 29, 2008: On December 25th, a German frigate off the coast of Somalia, sent its helicopter to interrupt a pirate attack on an Egyptian merchant ship. One member of the Egyptian crew had already been wounded by gunfire, but the German helicopter stopped the attack. German sailors then captured and disarmed six of the pirates. The pirates were then set free. This is because German law only allows the prosecution of pirates who are attacking Germans (or German property.) The Egyptian ship was carrying a cargo of wheat from Ukraine to South Korea.
Since World War II, national and international laws for dealing with pirates (which used to mean trying and executing the pirates on the spot) have been discarded. But nothing took the place of those procedures, because it was believed that piracy was no longer a problem.
Germany is not the only country having problems with prosecuting pirates. Since all this happening in international waters, there is a problem with finding a country that will accept, and prosecute, the pirates. Kenya has agreed to accept, and prosecute, pirates arrested off the coast of Somalia. The pirates will be tried under Kenyan law, but foreign countries will provide money to help pay for the proceedings.
Some nations working the anti-piracy patrol, have signed deals with Kenya, which sends pirates captured off the Somali coast, to Kenyan courts for prosecution. These deals provide cash to help defer the costs of prosecution and incarceration, which would otherwise be a burden for a poor nation like Kenya.
Meanwhile, Chinese warships have just arrived off the Somali coast, and a Russian warship already there has not caught any pirates yet. Everyone is watching what will happen to pirates caught by Russian or Chinese warships. These two nations are known to be very ruthless when it comes to law and order issues. Most other nations are more politically correct. The Chinese are rather more blunt. Most of the criminals executed worldwide each year, are killed in China.
Russia 'Have Or Have Not Supplied' S-300 To Iran. Your Guess Is As Good As Mine!!
Russia 'Have Or Have Not Supplied' S-300 To Iran. Your Guess Is As Good As Mine!!
(NSI News Source Info) December 29, 2008: A senior Russian diplomat Thursday denied the claim by a prominent Iranian lawmaker that Moscow had started delivering components of its S0-300 anti-aircraft and anti-ballistic missile defense system to Tehran.
"I am very surprised by the fuss this story has caused recently. I think this is due to a lack of interesting international news in the run-up to the holidays that many of our Western neighbors are celebrating. This causes an influx of interest in information, which has nothing to do with anything that is going on or will happen," Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told reporters in Moscow, according to a report from RIA Novosti.
As previously reported in UPI's BMD Focus column, Esmaeil Kosari, deputy chairman of the parliamentary commission on national security and foreign policy, told Iran's official Islamic Republic News Agency Sunday that Russia was already sending components for its formidable S-300PMU-1 system -- NATO designation SA-20 Gargoyle -- to the Islamic republic. In Washington, the outgoing Bush administration quizzed Russia about the report. U.S. officials indicated they also had intelligence information to support Kosari's claim.
However, Russian officials have lined up to deny the claim. Ryabkov insisted that while Russia's weapons and nuclear trading with Iran was continuing, it was all above board and complied with international law.
RIA Novosti also noted that on Monday the Russian federal service for military cooperation also issued a denial of Kosari's claim. "Reports on deliveries of S-300 systems are untrue," it announced in a statement.
Meanwhile, the Iranian government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has remained silent on the controversy, neither confirming nor denying Kosari's claim.
RIA Novosti also reported an Israeli Foreign Ministry statement that the Kremlin had also sent a message to the government of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that it had not begun to send the S-300s to Iran.
Russian military commentator Ilya Kramnik wrote for RIA Novosti on Dec. 19 that selling five battalions of S-300PMUs to Iran would comprise "up to 20 systems -- 60 launchers -- depending on the makeup of a battalion. Each of the launchers carries four 48N6E missiles -- 48N6E2s with the PMU-2 mobile launchers -- with a range of 150 kilometers -- 90 miles -- up to 200 kilometers -- 120 miles -- for the 48N6E2s."
"Each launch system consists of three launchers and is capable of engaging six targets at the same time, aiming 12 missiles at them. One battalion consisting of four systems is, therefore, capable of dealing with 24 aircraft simultaneously. After changing position and replenishing ammunition, it can be quickly redeployed for repulsing a repeat raid," Kramnik wrote.
Russia also sent to Iran 29 Tor-M1 air defense missile systems worth $700 million under a deal closed in late 2005. RIA Novosti confirmed that Russian technicians had taught Iranian engineers and technicians how to operate the Tor-M1, including the radar systems that guide it.
The issue of whether Russia has in fact already sent components of the S-300 system to Iran is still open. The Israelis appear more ready to accept Russian assurances that they have not than the U.S. government.
Pakistan, India Can't Afford War: Analysts
Pakistan, India Can't Afford War: Analysts
(NSI News Source Info) Islamabad - December 29, 2008: The risk of war between nuclear-armed India and Pakistan has increased with the redeployment of troops along the common border, but neither can afford the cost of such a conflict, analysts say.
The two sides have raised tensions by whipping up war hype for domestic reasons since the Mumbai attacks last month, but must step back from the brink to focus on more pressing issues such as the spread of militancy, they say. A war is even less likely as the United States, a key ally of both Islamabad and New Delhi, would suffer as a result, the experts warn.
"The risk of war has increased with troop mobilisation," Hasan Askari, a political analyst and former head of the political science department at the University of Punjab, told AFP.
"However this does not necessarily mean that the two countries will go to war. There are a number of considerations which impel the two sides not to cross the red line."
Senior Pakistani security and defence officials said Friday the military had moved a "limited number" of troops fighting Taliban militants in the tribal areas near Afghanistan to the Indian border as a "minimum security" measure.
This followed intelligence intercepts indicating that India had put its forces on notice to move to the border and cancelled all leave, they said. An Indian army spokesman however told AFP that no troops had been moved.
Retired Pakistani general Talat Masood said: "While the political and military leadership in both countries don't want war to happen, this action-and-reaction phenomenon is promoting escalation."
Both sides say they do not want war but would respond if attacked.
Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee has said that "all options" are open since the Mumbai attacks, which New Delhi has blamed on Pakistan-based militants. The attacks left 172 people dead.
"By declaring all options are on the table, New Delhi has pushed Pakistan toward a limited war scenario -- something which Islamabad was reluctant to contemplate a couple of weeks ago," defence analyst Riffat Hussain told AFP.
Hussain, the head of strategic studies at Islamabad's Quaid-e-Azam University, said any escalation could lead to a catastrophic point of no return that no one could envision.
"As nuclear-armed adversaries, India and Pakistan cannot afford any kind of shooting war between them," he said.
Analysts say while tensions in South Asia may persist for some time, they will eventually be defused because of international interest in the region, especially in Washington.
Askari said US and Western interests in Afghanistan would be "threatened" if Pakistan were to pull significant numbers of troops out of the tribal areas, as it would expose foreign forces to more cross-border militant attacks.
Such a withdrawal would also endanger the flow of supplies to NATO and US forces in Afghanistan, as the roads through northwest Pakistan would not be secure, he said.
Masood agreed, saying: "Pakistan should be focusing more on the tribal territories to fight Al-Qaeda and control Talibanisation. Any diversion will be disastrous for the country, for the region and for international peace."
New Delhi-based security expert C. Uday Bhaskar said Pakistani troop movements "seem to be part of the army's strategy to obfuscate the real issue of the (Mumbai) attacks."
"It is a signal to the Americans that they should not push the Pakistani army beyond a point. Although it seems like an India-Pakistan issue, the operative part is Pakistan-US ties," Bhaskar told AFP.
Hussain warned that India's tough stance would backfire if maintained, as it would embolden the forces of extremism in Pakistan -- a price neither country could afford to pay.
"That would not only imperil the internal security of Pakistan but also permanently damage prospects of a lasting peace between the two states," he said.
The New Balkans?
Russia 'Extremely Concerned' Over India-Pakistan Tensions
Russia on Saturday said it was "extremely concerned" about the build-up of troops on the India-Pakistan border, warning that tensions between the two nuclear foes had reached a dangerous level.
"Russia is extremely concerned by the news that on both sides of the border there is a build-up of troops and military equipment," the foreign ministry said in a statement. "The tension in this region has reached a dangerous level. There are worrying reports that New Delhi and Islamabad are not ruling out the use of force against each other," it added.
"Russia calls on India and Pakistan to show the maximum restraint and not allow the situation on the border to develop into one of force," it added, saying that negotiations were the only way out of the crisis.
Pakistan on Friday said the military had moved troops from the tribal areas near Afghanistan, where they are fighting Taliban and Al-Qaeda militants, to the eastern border with India as a "minimum security" measure. Senior Pakistani security and defence officials described the troop movements as "limited" but Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh summoned his military chiefs for a strategy session.
India also advised its nationals to avoid travel to Pakistan, saying it was unsafe for them to be in the country. India and Pakistan have fought three major wars since their 1947 independence from British rule.
Afghanistan: Is There Any Silver Lining In Sight?
Afghanistan: Is There Any Silver Lining In Sight?
(NSI News Source Info) December 28, 2008: U.S. plans to increase its Afghan troop strength are in flux. The most recent plans are to basically double U.S. strength there (from 32,000 to 60-65,000.)
This would mean five or six combat brigades, an aviation brigade and lots more intelligence and Special Forces troops.
This would mean about a dozen more battalions of U.S. infantry, as the new brigade structure has reduced the number of battalions from three to two. But each battalion now has four combat companies, instead of three. The aviation brigade has about a hundred helicopters (half transport, half combat).
The new brigades also have more support troops (all trained to fight) attached. It would take about 18 months to get all the new forces to Afghanistan. That would then result in a Western force of about 100,000 troops (62,000 U.S. and 40,000 NATO). In that time, the Afghans are expected to expand their own security forces (police and army), arm and train some tribal militias, to produce a total force of nearly 300,000 local and foreign troops and police.
Canada, and some other NATO members, object to the U.S. plan to provide weapons and training to form more reliable anti-Taliban militias. The U.S. and Britain believe these militias are an acceptable risk. All the dozens of tribes (and many more major clans) in Afghanistan have militias.
These are usually very much "come as you are" operations, with men armed with their personal weapons, and leaders providing (if they are flush enough) vehicles, communications (radios, walkie-talkies, satellite phones, whatever) and other essentials (food, medical care.) Quality varies enormously.
Those tribes or clans that are into the drug business are much better equipped (including protective vests, night vision devices and plenty of ammo.) The pro-Taliban tribes are not quite as well off, obtaining additional money from drug lords (for helping keep the police away from the drug operations) and Islamic charities (whose money is supposed to go for non-combat improvements, but often doesn't.)
Many NATO nations are appalled at the amount of corruption in Afghanistan, with tribal leaders often keeping most of the aid provided to their tribe, for themselves. These nations prefer to put more effort into cleaning up the government, police (which are notoriously inept and corrupt) and improving the army (which is pretty good, but small).
But the Americans and British have worked with these tricky tribal situations often in the past. As the Brits like to put it, "who dares, wins." The Americans have decades of experience with the tribes, having been there since the 1980s, during the Russian invasion of Afghanistan. Europeans don't always trust American combat experience, it being an article of faith in Europe that the U.S. invasion of Iraq was a mistake, and winning that war was a fluke. Those lucky, but ignorant, Americans! The anti-militia crowd will lose this argument, but you'll see a lot about it in the media.
Allies squabbling, whether real or imagined, makes for exciting news. But the basic American strategy is to play the game the Afghan way. The tribes are in it for the long haul, and will change sides if they sense they are losing. The Americans and Brits want to use superior firepower, mobility and cash reserves to flip as many tribes as possible, as quickly as possible, to hand the Taliban a very obvious, and well publicized "defeat."
The tribal militia strategy means getting involved with the many disputes between tribes. The Americans recognize that you cannot avoid these disputes. If you are in the area, the local tribes consider you a player. So the Americans want to play with a plan, and a strong hand. Many Europeans are aghast at this approach, but the Americans point out that this is what is.
Wishing Afghanistan were less chaotic and easier to deal with will not accomplish anything. It's a nasty and unpredictable corner of the world, and if you want to win, you have to play by local rules. It would take generations to "civilize" the rural population to a European standard. A victory of sorts can be obtained much more quickly. The U.S. is sending thousands of additional intelligence and Special Forces troops, along with new equipment that makes it easier to watch the ground below, and pick up enemy transmissions.
U.S. intel forces have become quite adept at sorting out tribal politics. While the tribes of Iraq and Afghanistan are quite different, they share many similarities, and numerous American intel officers, with lots of Iraq experience, have already done tours in Afghanistan. The Americans believe they have the knowledge, and experience, to play the Afghan tribes. In most cases, the enhanced tribal militias will mainly be for gathering better intelligence. The Western troops are still much better and (more importantly) reliable fighters. Afghan tribal leaders are notorious for looking out for their own best interests, and not digging in for suicidal last stands.
The U.S. sees the Taliban as a tribal confederation dedicated to opposing the central government. This has been a popular tribal activity for centuries. In the past, it was often the goal of the tribal coalition to capture Kabul (long seen as the national capital), and become the new central government.
The Taliban have a problem in that they did this in the mid-1990s, and the government they established had, by the late 1990s, become very unpopular. Tribal leaders have memories, and are willing to use the Taliban (to keep the government from interfering with drug running, smuggling or whatever), but not be ruled by them. The Taliban try to collect a "tax" (about ten percent) in areas where they are strong enough to keep the police and army at bay. The Taliban also elect loyal locals as government officials, but play down the return of the Taliban controlling the central government.
This is practical, because the majority of Afghans are hostile to the Taliban, and have recent experience to explain why. If ties to the Taliban become a liability, tribal leaders will cut them. This has been happening regularly for the last six years, and the Afghan government has a department dedicated to making and maintaining such arrangements. The new U.S. forces will be put to work giving these bureaucrats lots more work.
Taiwan's Military On Exercise Mission
Taiwan's Military On Exercise Mission
(NSI News Source Info) December 28, 2008: Taiwan soldiers run between several AAV7 Amphibious Armored Personnel Carrier during the LienYung 97-11 Live Ammunition drill, Wednesday, Dec. 24, 2008, in Pingtung county, South of Taiwan.Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou presided over an elaborate military exercise, saying the island needs a strong defense despite its growing ties with rival China.
Japan Seen Ready To Drop Bid To Buy F-22s
Japan Seen Ready To Drop Bid To Buy F-22s
(NSI News Source Info) TOKYO - December 28, 2008: Japan is likely to drop its attempts to buy state-of-the-art US F-22 Raptor stealth fighter planes since it expects the United States to stop producing them, a newspaper reported on Sunday.
The Japanese government had been trying to persuade the United States to sell it F-22 Raptors to replace its own aging F-15 fleet, despite Washington's reluctance. Tokyo, however, is now abandoning the plan amid signs that US President-elect Barack Obama's new administration may halt production of the aircraft, the Daily Yomiuri said, quoting government sources. "We have a firm impression that its production likely would be halted," a high-ranking official at the defence ministry was quoted by the daily as saying.
US Defense Secretary Robert Gates, reappointed to stay in the post under Obama, has said publicly that he favours halting production of the F-22. Washington is also said to be skeptical about continuing production of the expensive planes due to the financial crisis and declining tax revenues.
US law prohibits export of Raptors as Congress remains anxious over the possible leaking of details of the Raptor's state-of-the-art technology. They are built to evade radar detection at supersonic speeds.
Japan's possible alternatives are the Eurofighter Typhoon, jointly developed by NATO members Britain, Italy, Spain and Germany, said the English version of the Yomiuri Shimbun. Among other candidates are the US fighter F-15FX and the F-35 Lightning II, produced by the United States, Britain and other countries, it reported.
Some ministry officials favor the F-35, a high-performance fighter with sophisticated bombing capabilities, but this plane has not even been deployed so far by US forces, the daily said.
Japan has been officially pacifist since its defeat in World War II but has one of the world's largest defence budgets and is gradually expanding its military role.
Sri Lankan Navy Sinks Tamil Rebel Boat
Sri Lankan Navy Sinks Tamil Rebel Boat
(NSI News Source Info) COLOMBO, Sri Lanka - December 28, 2008: A pro-rebel Web site says Tamil fighters have killed at least 50 government troops in Sri Lanka's embattled north.
The TamilNet Web site reported Sunday that the soldiers were killed in fighting in the rebel stronghold of Mullaitivu on Saturday.
The rebels also found 16 bodies of soldiers and 15 rifles, said the Web site, citing unidentified rebel officials.
Military spokesman Brig. Udaya Nanayakkara dismissed the TamilNet account and said only nine soldiers were killed in that area.
Both sides routinely exaggerate enemy casualties while underreporting their own.
It is not possible to get independent accounts of the clashes because the war zone is restricted to journalists.
North Korea: Kim Jong Il's Health In Order
North Korea: Kim Jong Il's House & Health To Be In Order
(NSI News Source Info) December 28, 2008: This undated picture, released from Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) on December 28, 2008 shows North Korean leader Kim Jong Il inspecting Air Force Unit 1017 of the Korean People's Army. North Korean leader Kim Jong-Il has inspected military units, state media said, in the latest reported public appearance by the communist leader, who is said to be recovering from illness.The official Korean Central News Agency said in separate dispatches that Kim, accompanied by military leaders, visited an Air Force unit and an Army unit. The dispatches, dated on December 27, did not say when he made the trips.
Has Pakistan's Swat fallen to Taliban?
Has Pakistan's Swat fallen to Taliban?
(NSI News Source Info) Islamabad - December 28, 2008: Has Swat, the principal city of the restive South Waziristan region in Pakistan's northwest, fallen to the Taliban? It would seem so from an editorial in a leading English daily Saturday.
'There has been no official announcement, no victory parades or televised addresses by the victorious party, no cheering crowds welcoming the liberators - but Swat, to all intents and purposes, has fallen to the Taliban,' The News said in an editorial headlined 'The fall of Swat'.
'It is the announcement that all girls education in the valley will cease from January 15 that is the tipping point,' the editorial added. A Pakistan army soldier stands alert at a bazaar in Mingora, the main town of Pakistan's troubled Swat Valley, Saturday, Dec. 27, 2008. Pakistan moved thousands of troops from the Afghan border toward India, officials and a witness said, raising tensions between the nuclear-armed neighbors Saturday and possibly undermining the U.S.-backed campaign against al-Qaida and the Taliban
All schools that teach girls have been ordered by the Taliban to close by that date or face the inevitable consequences - being blown up being the most usual of these. They have already blown up well over a hundred girls schools, principally those operated by the government, but have moved in recent weeks to blowing up private institutions as well.
'Female education has virtually ceased anyway, and the Taliban announcement merely puts the seal on what is a manifest reality - the government has lost the battle for Swat and the Taliban have won,' the editorial said.
'They operate at will, go where they like, issue orders and proclamations that a terrified public are unable to ignore and broadcast their message of obscurantism on the radio for all to hear - and obey,' it added.
Noting that the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) government had called for assistance, the editorial said: 'But little seems to be forthcoming.
'Refugees stream out of the valley, the operators of private schools try to fight a rearguard action, the tourist trade is dead and buried long ago and the beautiful valley of Swat now enters a time of darkness.'
President Asif Ali Zardari's Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) is a junior partner in the NWFP ruling coalition that is led by the Awami National Party of Chief Minister Asfandar Wali Khan, grandson of the legendary Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan - better known as the Frontier Gandhi.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)