Category: Intl Security

Afghanistan: Recognition Technology

Marines Return To Afghan Village, Hope To Keep It (New York Times)…Carlotta Gall, June 9, 2008

United States marines pushed the Taliban out of this village and the surrounding district in southern Helmand Province so quickly in recent weeks that they called the operation a “catastrophic success.”

…. When on patrol, the marines carry a small gadget the size of an old Polaroid camera that takes fingerprints, photos and an iris scan of people they meet. It is used to build a database of the residents so they can easily spot strangers, the marines say. The Afghans accepted the imposition without protest.

Observation on the ground, information from the populace and control of key commerce and transportation routes are all ways to prevent the Taliban from seeping back into the area, Col. Peter Petronzio, commander of the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit, said in an interview.

“You need physically to be there,” he said. “You need to continue to move about the population, let your presence be known, but do it in a way so that you are not smothering and overwhelming. You have got to let life go on.”

Pakistan – FATA

Note To The Next President: Watch Pakistan
(Philadelphia Inquirer)…Trudy Rubin, June 11, 2008

The most urgent foreign policy problem that the next U.S. president will face won’t be Iraq. Nor will it be Iran. The next terrorist attack on America is likely to originate, according to the top U.S. military commander, Adm. Mike Mullen, in a place you’ve probably never heard of: the FATA. That’s the acronym for the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of northern Pakistan.

Iran: Finesse and Leverage

POST: Obama and McCain spar on Iran

No talks between us and Iran prevent the reach for the bomb
Why do we get so wobbly over Iran? We have met this package (nation-state/failed revolutionary power talking trash and sporting new nukes) twice before and finessed it nicely (and frankly, both the USSR and PRC were far more successful).

We learn to accept our lack of leverage here or we’re going to be consistently flabbergasted at our lack of success–as in, more of the same old, same old.

Our problem remains the same: we are unable to see the strategic reality for what it is and we’re

This posting in contrast with the article:  Prepare to Attack, (USA Today)…Daniel Pipes, June 11, 2008 , Pg. 10

Daniel Pipes (www.DanielPipes.org) is director of the Middle East Forum think tank and a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution.

…Only by convincing Tehran that it will never be allowed to have nuclear weapons can Washington persuade it to terminate its program, avoiding the need for a military campaign. This can yet be attained, but it requires a basic shift in U.S. policy.

First, the Bush administration must prepare for a possible attack on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and, second, signal this publicly. (Israeli leaders should do likewise, as some have done already.) Third, the administration must weather the inevitable tsunami of criticism. Fourth, it should encourage those governments most opposed to such an attack — including the European Union, Russia and China — to lean on Tehran to end its nuclear program.

If George W. Bush’s term ends with a McCain victory, Bush will likely punt, allowing McCain to decide on the next steps. But Obama’s intention to continue with current failed policies suggests that, if he wins, and despite the tradition of outgoing presidents not undertaking major initiatives, Bush might initiate military action against Iran.

Daniel Pipes (www.DanielPipes.org) is director of the Middle East Forum think tank and a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution.

Iran: Watch and Wait

At The Tip Of Iran’s Spear, (Washington Post)…David  Ignatius, June 8, 2008; Page B07

Let’s try for a moment to put ourselves in the mind of Brig. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the commander of the Quds Force of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard. For it is the soft-spoken Soleimani, not Iran’s bombastic president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who plays a decisive role in his nation’s confrontation with the United States.

…  So imagine that you are Qassem Soleimani, commander of a covert Iranian army deployed across the Middle East: You doubt the Bush administration would run the risk of a military strike against Iran, but you can’t be sure. You think America can’t afford to play chicken in an election year, but you can’t be certain of that, either.  So you watch and wait. 

… After a particularly heavy day of shelling, Gen. David Petraeus sent Soleimani a message — “Stop shooting at the Green Zone.” The message was conveyed verbally by Iraqi President Jalal Talabani. The Quds Force commander didn’t react immediately. But the heavy mortar fire on the Green Zone soon tapered off. Iran had flexed its muscles and demonstrated America’s vulnerability, and then opted for a tactical retreat.

Terrorism: Two Opposing Viewpoints

A Not Very Private Feud Over Terrorism, (New York Times)…Elaine Sciolino and Eric Schmitt, June 8, 2008

A bitter personal struggle between two powerful figures in the world of terrorism has broken out, forcing their followers to choose sides. This battle is not being fought in the rugged no man’s land on the Pakistan-Afghan border. It is a contest reverberating inside the Beltway between two of America’s leading theorists on terrorism and how to fight it, two men who hold opposing views on the very nature of the threat.

On one side is Bruce Hoffman, a cerebral 53-year-old Georgetown University historian and author of the highly respected 1998 book “Inside Terrorism.” He argues that Al Qaeda is alive, well, resurgent and more dangerous than it has been in several years. In his corner, he said, is a battalion of mainstream academics and a National Intelligence Estimate issued last summer warning that Al Qaeda had reconstituted in Pakistan.

On the other side is Marc Sageman, an iconoclastic 55-year-old Polish-born psychiatrist, sociologist, former C.I.A. case officer and scholar-in-residence with the New York Police Department. His new book, “Leaderless Jihad,” argues that the main threat no longer comes from the organization called Al Qaeda, but from the bottom up — from radicalized individuals and groups who meet and plot in their neighborhoods and on the Internet. In his camp, he said, are agents and analysts in highly classified positions at the Central Intelligence Agency and Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Officials from the White House to the C.I.A. acknowledge the importance of the debate of the two men as the government assesses the nature of the threat. Looking forward, it is certain to be used to win bureaucratic turf wars over what programs will be emphasized in the next administration.

Lost Leverage: Oil

New Forces Fraying U.S.-Saudi Oil Ties. (Los Angeles Times)…Paul Richter, June 8, 2008, Pg. 1

…The weakening of the economic relationship comes when the vital U.S.-Saudi security relationship also has been fraying.

As gasoline prices have risen, the White House has unsuccessfully exhorted the Saudis to step up production, and Congress has threatened retaliation. But the situation now is a far cry from the days when the U.S. economy dominated the direction of the petroleum market.

“That gave us leverage,” said Greg Priddy, an oil analyst at the Eurasia Group, a New York-based risk assessment firm. “There’s certainly a perception that the power equation has changed.”

China and other Asian nations now use about 17 million barrels a day. That’s up more than 20% since 2003, and booming growth is expected to continue.

By the end of 2007, it was also apparent that the Saudis no longer believed they could substantially affect prices by increasing production.

Now, Saudi oil experts believe that the price run-up is due to such factors as investor speculation, the weak dollar and limited output from such key producers as Iraq, Iran and Venezuela.

In mid-May, President Bush went to Saudi Arabia for the second time this year to seek increased oil production, but officials in Riyadh, the Saudi capital, said no large increases were planned. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) criticized Bush in her presidential campaign appearances, saying she found it embarrassing that a sitting president was “begging” the Saudis.

Army and NFL – Reducing Head Injuries

Head Injuries, (CBS)…Kimberly Dozier, June 9, 2008 , 6:30 PM

Now to a health concern involving American troops in Iraq. Head injuries from roadside bombs are among the biggest threats to frontline soldiers. But Pentagon officials may have found a better way to provide protection. Technology used on the football field could soon be adapted for the battlefield.

It was one of those eureka moments. Army doctors home from Iraq and Afghanistan were watching NFL players pound it out and thought, that’s what our soldiers need, helmets like that. Because believe it or not, the effects on the brain of this can be a lot like this – blasts strong enough to shake and even bruise the brain often leading to traumatic brain injury known as TBI. Today an estimated 30 percent of troops who’ve served in combat suffer from TBI after repeated exposures to blasts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The army has sent out a call to NFL helmet makers like Riddell telling them apply their technology to combat helmets and we’ll buy hundreds of thousands of them.

They’ve done it before. Founder John Riddell invented World War II’s classic web suspension helmet. A different war means different challenges.

We’re looking for a pad system that is compatible with the advanced combat helmet. We’re looking for pads that can meet our requirements of sustaining blunt trauma at 10 feet per second.

Star Wars: Progress

Proving Missile Defense, (Washington Times)…John E. Carey, June 9, 2008  Pg. 25

…Today, Navy ships have shown they can reach targets on the edge of space, almost anywhere within the atmosphere, and down close to the ground. These ships equipped with the Aegis ballistic missile defense system have shown they could destroy a North Korean ballistic missile headed for Japan, the United States or any number of targets in the Pacific region.

The Navy’s Ballistic Missile Defense Program grew from decades of Navy missile defense and guided missile ship development and President Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative. SDI, once derisively dubbed “star wars” by critics and most of the media, has evolved from a space-based concept into a more realistic sea and land-based “system of systems.”

Today the at sea effort by the U.S. Navy and Japan’s Navy is one of the more demanding and successful elements of the ballistic missile defense effort. Japan’s Navy already deploys this capability aboard its four Kongo class Aegis guided missile destroyers.