FPI Overnight Brief: April 23, 2010

FPI Overnight Brief

April 23, 2010
________________________________________
Iraq

Iraqi officials said Thursday that they have detained the mastermind behind a string of bombings last year that targeted key government facilities in the capital. The disclosure of the March 11 arrest of Manaf Abdul Raheem al-Rawi, the alleged Baghdad leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, came a day after U.S. military officials said the organization's top leader in the volatile northern city of Mosul, Ahmad Ali Abbas Dahir al-Ubayd, had been killed in a raid. The news of Rawi's arrest and Ubayd's slaying are the latest blows to the Sunni insurgent group. Al-Qaeda in Iraq's top two national leaders were killed last weekend in a U.S. airstrike in the north. Rawi coordinated the bombings of the Foreign, Justice, Finance and other ministries in August and October, Iraqi officials said Thursday. In Mosul, Ubayd allegedly oversaw kidnapping and bribery rings that al-Qaeda in Iraq operated to finance attacks. Maj. Gen. Stephen Lanza, the top U.S. military spokesman in Iraq, said the recent operations against the network have peeled off some of its most dogmatic leaders. The military says "ideologues" are the backbone of the organization and characterizes its other members as "opportunists" and "nationalists." "This really does degrade their abilities at the ideologue level," Lanza said in an interview. He said U.S. and Iraqi intelligence officers are sifting through evidence collected after the weekend airstrike on the outskirts of Tikrit that killed Abu Ayyub al-Masri, who was also known as Abu Hamza al-Muhajer but whose real name was Yusif al-Dardiri, and Abu Omar al-Baghdadi. – Washington Post
________________________________________
Iran

U.S. Vice President Joe Biden said on Thursday he expects new sanctions on Iran by May as Tehran began lobbying the U.N. Security Council to oppose new steps against the Islamic Republic over its atomic plans. Biden issued the latest U.S. warning to Iran, locked in a standoff with the West over a nuclear program Tehran insists is entirely peaceful, in an appearance on ABC television's "The View" talk show. "Everyone from the Israeli prime minister straight through to the British prime minister to the president of Russia, everyone agrees the next step we should take is the U.N. sanction route," Biden said. "I believe you will see a sanction regime coming out by the end of this month, beginning of next month," he said. Asked if Israel might attack Iran's nuclear facilities without consulting Washington, Biden said Israel had agreed to wait and see what the impact of new U.N. sanctions would be. - Reuters

Iran has said that it will allow U.N. nuclear officials better monitoring and access to a site where it started enriching uranium to higher levels over two months ago, diplomats said. The move should have happened earlier, diplomats said, as Iran started higher enrichment in February, before inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) could improve surveillance. Suspecting that Iran aims to develop atomic weapon, Western powers have said the switch to higher enrichment was "provocative" and warranted sanctions. In meetings with IAEA officials earlier this month, Tehran agreed "in principle" to allow them to strengthen monitoring and containment measures to improve chances of detecting any diversion of nuclear material for military use, diplomats said. "Now an agreement has been reached for enhanced surveillance measures. But we have to see if and when they are put in place," a senior Western diplomat said. - Reuters

Josh Rogin reports: The House finally appointed conferees to meld the two already passed versions of the Iran sanctions bill and Congress is not waiting for the Obama administration to finish up with the UN track. "We have waited long enough for diplomacy to work," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-NV, said in a response to a question from The Cable at Thursday's press conference on financial reform, adding, "Iran is a festering sore in the world." The House had not appointed conferees until just recently. They were accused of holding up the conference until the UN track had been exhausted, a charge chairman Howard Berman's office has denied. Berman announced the House conferees [yesterday]. "Today marks a major step towards preventing Iran from acquiring the ability to produce nuclear weapons. Iran's intentions are clear, and now is the time to implement crippling sanctions on this reckless regime," he said in a statement, "We are moving forward to ensure that legislation enabling tough sanctions is on President Obama's desk for his signature." The administration had been hoping that Congress would hold off on passing the conference report until it was able to get a new UN security council resolution authorizing new sanctions. The deadline for the UN track has slipped repeatedly and Reid was clear that he was no longer waiting for that process to play out. Reid said he would bring the bill to the floor as soon as it comes out of conference and that he wants to see the conference finish up work "as soon as they can." – The Cable

Ali Akbar Mousavi writes: The Iranian government has no justification to seek membership in the newly formed UN Human Rights Council. It clearly is seeking membership in a blatant effort to deflect attention away from its actions, and to escape being held accountable to the Iranian people for its abuses. Electing this Iranian government to the Human Rights Council after its brutal crackdown since the presidential elections would be a complete mockery of those who have suffered at its hands. I refer to the families who lost loved ones during the protests; to the victims of torture and rape; and to all those whose rights have been violated, particularly the millions of people who have participated in protests during the past few months to object to this very same government. The international community, especially the Islamic countries, should refuse to acknowledge Iran’s request. Instead, they should work to limit the reach of this government that continues to violate the rights of its own people in the name of Islam. – Daily Star

The Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) announced that two new fellows with expertise on Iran have joined its team. Dr. Emanuele Ottolenghi, based in Brussels, and Benjamin Weinthal, based in Berlin, will support FDD's work on sanctions on Iran's energy sector to target the regime's illegal nuclear weapons program, support for terrorism, and human rights abuses. FDD also launched a new website, IranEnergyProject.org, that will serve as a resource on the companies involved in Iran's energy sector, the status of sanctions legislation, and news and analysis.- Foundation for Defense of Democracies

Saba Farzan writes: As the international community works on new sanctions against Iran, a small revolution is happening in Germany. Members of the Free Democratic Party have drafted a motion urging the government to classify the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organization. The proposal has already won near unanimous support at a regional FDP meeting in Berlin. If approved at the party's federal convention this weekend, the motion could mark the beginning of a new Iran policy in Germany—one that is seriously focused on preventing Tehran from getting the nuclear bomb…If even the pro-business FDP were to declare the Revolutionary Guard a terror organization, it would send a strong message to those German foreign-policy advisers who still think that business with the Islamic Republic should continue as usual or even be increased. It's obvious that the lobbyists of the Islamic Republic don't want this debate in Germany. It's important to note that sanctions would yield foreign-policy benefits beyond the nuclear issue. Many of the roadside bombs that have killed and maimed scores of NATO troops in Afghanistan are of Iranian design. It has been widely reported that the Revolutionary Guard is even training and equipping Taliban fighters. Within the past three weeks alone, seven German soldiers have lost their lives in Afghanistan. Sanctioning the Revolutionary Guard would finally send a message to Tehran that there is price to pay for killing our soldiers and destabilizing Afghanistan. An FDP-led move by the German government targeting the Revolutionary Guard could also send an important signal to the international community. Such determined action coming from a party and a country that has for so long preferred engagement over sanctions might make it more difficult for countries such as Russia and China to hold out on effective sanctions. – Wall Street Journal (subscription required)
________________________________________
Afghanistan

The Afghan parliament, long a bastion of dysfunction and docility, has emerged this spring as a robust check on President Hamid Karzai's power, giving the United States an unlikely ally as it tries to persuade the government here to clean up its act. Although the United States and the parliament do not appear to be directly coordinating their strategies, their interests coincide. Both are pushing the increasingly erratic Karzai to become more accountable, to allow fair elections, and to reduce the corruption that has withered support for the government, feeding the Taliban's rise. But unlike the United States, which had to retreat this month after public rebukes of Karzai backfired, many members of parliament say that openly defying the president makes for good election-year politics. In recent months, the parliament has rejected Karzai's budget, much of his cabinet and, most important, his proposal to overhaul the nation's election law. Karzai's proposed changes would have, among other things, given him control of a commission assigned to investigate fraud allegations. The United States, the United Nations and many Afghans viewed the proposal as an attempted power grab and were relieved when the lower house of parliament voted overwhelmingly against it. Even Karzai's staunch supporters defied him, waving red cards to signify their opposition to the president's maneuver. "We were all surprised at the unanimity of opinion in the lower house," said one Western diplomat. "It's really unprecedented." – Washington Post

Faced with solid pubic opposition against the war in Afghanistan, Chancellor Angela Merkel told legislators Thursday that German troops were not yet going to withdraw from the country, but would remain there to prevent the spread of international terrorism. “We cannot expect our soldiers to be brave if we lack the courage to do what we decided,” Mrs. Merkel said in a speech to Parliament, which was followed by a long debate about why German troops were serving there. If Germany withdrew its troops now, it would be “irresponsible,” she said, and Afghanistan would sink into chaos and anarchy. “Our mission is not to be there permanently, but to be reliable,” said Mrs. Merkel, adding that Germany’s goal was to hand over security to the Afghan police and army. She did not say when the 4,500 troops would leave the country. – New York Times
Two of the Taleban’s most senior military commanders are involved in a bitter power struggle, which insiders claim has split the insurgents’ leadership council and could turn violent in parts of southern Afghanistan. The commanders are vying for military control of the insurgency, district elders and mid-level Taleban commanders have told The Times. Mullah Abdul Qayyum Zakir and Mullah Akhtar Mohammad Mansoor were both named as the successors to Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the Taleban’s second in command, who was arrested in Pakistan in February. Mullah Zakir, according to reports at the time, was given responsibility for military operations, while his rival was put in charge of logistics. District elders in Helmand said that Mullah Mansoor was disappointed not to get his former leader’s operational role, referred to as the Taleban’s defence minister. “When Mullah Baradar was arrested, Mullah Mansoor thought he would be his replacement,” the elder with links to the insurgency said. “When Zakir was introduced as the defence minister, [Mansoor] was disappointed.” Tensions are reportedly highest in central Helmand, where British troops are based and where fighters loyal to both men massed before Operation Moshtarak, the US, British and Afghan offensive to clear the insurgents out…Both men have supporters in Helmand, but sources said that Mullah Mansoor was trying to flood the province with fighters from his own tribe to wrest control from his rival. “He sent his soldiers to every district,” one said. “There wasn’t any fighting but it created tension.” – Times of London

U.S. military commanders and senior diplomats are locked in a dispute over the best way to bring more electricity to Afghanistan's second-largest city, complicating a major campaign to win over the population of Kandahar and push out the Taliban. The standoff has reached the top two U.S. officials in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal and Ambassador Karl W. Eikenberry, illuminating the sometimes-sharp differences between the military and civilian officials over how to stabilize this nation. Convinced that expanding the electricity supply will build popular support for the Afghan government and sap the Taliban's influence, some officers want to spend $200 million over the next few months to buy more generators and millions of gallons of diesel fuel. Although they acknowledge that the project will be costly and inefficient, they say President Obama's pledge to begin withdrawing troops by July 2011 has increased pressure to demonstrate rapid results in their counterinsurgency efforts, even if it means embracing less-than-ideal solutions to provide basic public services. "This is not about development -- it's about counterinsurgency," said a U.S military official at the NATO headquarters in Kandahar, advocating rapid action to help Afghan officials boost the power supply. "If we don't give them more fuel, we'll lose a very narrow window of opportunity." U.S. diplomats and reconstruction specialists, who do not face the same looming drawdown, have opposed the military's plan because of concerns that the Afghan government will not be able to afford the fuel to sustain the generators. Mindful of several troubled development programs over the past eight years, they want the United States to focus on initiatives that Afghans can maintain over the long term. – Washington Post
________________________________________
China

Bill Gertz reports: The Pentagon is nearly two months late in releasing its 2010 report on China's military buildup, and defense officials say the White House is holding up the release. According to the officials, National Security Council aides are opposed to publishing new details on China's decade-long buildup of new strategic and conventional missiles, aircraft, warships and other high-tech weapons that the White House deems "provocative." Instead, NSC aides are insisting on inserting language into the annual "Military Power of the People's Republic of China" report to highlight U.S.-China military "cooperation." Making U.S.-China military cooperation look good in the report is a tough sell, the officials said. China severed military ties with the United States twice in the past two years, first in October 2008 and again earlier this year, to protest U.S. arms sales to Taiwan…China's government for years issued diplomatic protests on the annual reports to Congress, complaining they unfairly portray the Chinese military buildup as a threat to U.S. and allied interests. In response, the Obama administration is working to remove significant details from the report, such as declassified intelligence on China's testing of the DF-21 aircraft carrier-killing, anti-ship ballistic missile. Instead, those new developments will be included in the classified version. The public version, when it is finally released, is expected to be a watered-down, more diplomatic version of past reports, the defense officials said. – Inside the Ring

Gordon Chang writes: It's unlikely the consequences of rapid population decline will be good for the Chinese state. The economy will, in all probability, shrink. The country's finances will be strained as the government struggles to care for the growing ranks of the elderly. The nation's ambitions will eventually narrow. The abnormal sex ratio will create societal tensions difficult to resolve. As virtually every Chinese demographer will tell you in private, the one-child policy has long outlived its usefulness. Beijing will keep the policy in place, however. Why? The country's already shaky one-party state is unwilling to give up the control that the population-planning apparatus makes possible. A state that maintains the ability to sterilize wayward parents in Puning can do just about anything it wants. As long as the Communist Party enforces the policy, it is essentially guaranteeing the decline of China. Even if the state changes course now--unlikely--the demographic dividends will not be evident for at least two decades, perhaps longer. So is this China's century? The one-child policy, by itself, ensures the answer is "no." - Forbes
________________________________________
Nuclear Weapons/Defense

Fresh from signing a strategic nuclear arms agreement with Russia, the United States is parrying a push by several NATO allies to withdraw its aging stockpile of tactical nuclear weapons from Europe. Speaking Thursday at a meeting of NATO foreign ministers here, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said the Obama administration was not opposed to cuts in these battlefield weapons, mostly bombs and short-range missiles locked in underground vaults on air bases in five NATO countries. But Mrs. Clinton ruled out removing these weapons unless Russia agreed to cuts in its arsenal, which is at least 10 times the size of the American one. And she also appeared to make reductions in the American stockpile contingent on Russia’s being more transparent about its weapons and willing to move them away from the borders of NATO countries. “We should recognize that as long as nuclear weapons exist, NATO will remain a nuclear alliance,” Mrs. Clinton said. “As a nuclear alliance, sharing nuclear risks and responsibilities widely is fundamental. – New York Times

In coming years, President Obama will decide whether to deploy a new class of weapons capable of reaching any corner of the earth from the United States in under an hour and with such accuracy and force that they would greatly diminish America’s reliance on its nuclear arsenal. Yet even now, concerns about the technology are so strong that the Obama administration has acceded to a demand by Russia that the United States decommission one nuclear missile for every one of these conventional weapons fielded by the Pentagon. That provision, the White House said, is buried deep inside the New Start treaty that Mr. Obama and President Dmitri A. Medvedev signed in Prague two weeks ago. Called Prompt Global Strike, the new weapon is designed to carry out tasks like picking off Osama bin Laden in a cave, if the right one could be found; taking out a North Korean missile while it is being rolled to the launch pad; or destroying an Iranian nuclear site — all without crossing the nuclear threshold. In theory, the weapon will hurl a conventional warhead of enormous weight at high speed and with pinpoint accuracy, generating the localized destructive power of a nuclear warhead. – New York Times
________________________________________
NATO

NATO foreign ministers meeting in Tallinn, Estonia for a second day are expected today to grapple with differences over efforts in Afghanistan in talks conducted together with non-NATO nations contributing forces to the alliance's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). The ministers will also discuss relations with Russia -- albeit with no Russian officials in attendance…Much of the debate will feed into NATO's new strategic concept, its blueprint for action over the next decade and beyond. The document is expected to be adopted at a summit in Lisbon in November. NATO remains "indispensable during a time of uncertainty," and "strong solidarity among nations with shared values is still the right answer," Rasmussen said to sum up the debate at the close of the first day. A task force led by former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright is currently drawing up a first draft of the concept. Rasmussen outlined a number of its basic premises. Most importantly, he said, NATO's goals and purpose must be shaped in a fashion which strengthens the bond between the United States and its European allies. "First, it must reaffirm NATO's essential and enduring foundations, the political bond between Europe and North America, and the commitment to defend each other against an attack," Rasmussen said. "So you might say that NATO's DNA won't change." Rasmussen also underscored that NATO's "theory must be brought into line with its practice" -- meaning the strategic concept must provide guidance on modern challenges such as international terrorism, the spread of weapons of mass destruction, cyber threats, and energy security. – Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty

NATO ministers agreed on Thursday to grant a Membership Action Plan (MAP) for Bosnia that could see it join the alliance in coming years, but attached conditions to its implementation. "MAP has been granted to Bosnia-Herzegovina today, but with clear conditions attached on implementation," NATO spokesman James Appathurai told a news briefing after talks among NATO foreign ministers in the Estonian capital Tallinn. Appathurai said NATO would accept Bosnia's first annual reform plan under the program, only when defense property, such as bases, was registered as belonging to the state and for use of the defense ministry. A Membership Action Plan is a multi-stage process of political dialogue and military reform to bring a country in line with NATO standards and to eventual membership. The process can take several years. Bosnia applied for the membership plan for the 28-nation NATO in October, but the alliance declined this in December on the grounds it still needed to carry out more reforms. Appathurai said the ministers noted that since December Bosnia had made "significant" progress on reform and they had welcomed its decision to destroy surplus ammunition and arms and to contribute troops to the NATO mission in Afghanistan. - Reuters
________________________________________
Ideas

Robert Gates writes: In the decades to come, the most lethal threats to the United States' safety and security -- a city poisoned or reduced to rubble by a terrorist attack -- are likely to emanate from states that cannot adequately govern themselves or secure their own territory. Dealing with such fractured or failing states is, in many ways, the main security challenge of our time. For the Defense Department and the entire U.S. government, it is also a complex institutional challenge. The United States is unlikely to repeat a mission on the scale of those in Afghanistan or Iraq anytime soon -- that is, forced regime change followed by nation building under fire. But as the Pentagon's Quadrennial Defense Review recently concluded, the United States is still likely to face scenarios requiring a familiar tool kit of capabilities, albeit on a smaller scale. In these situations, the effectiveness and credibility of the United States will only be as good as the effectiveness, credibility, and sustainability of its local partners. This strategic reality demands that the U.S. government get better at what is called "building partner capacity": helping other countries defend themselves or, if necessary, fight alongside U.S. forces by providing them with equipment, training, or other forms of security assistance. This is something that the United States has been doing in various ways for nearly three-quarters of a century. It dates back to the period before the United States entered World War II, when Winston Churchill famously said, "Give us the tools, and we will finish the job." – Foreign Affairs (subscription required)

Jeffrey Gedmin writes: Social media — texting, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube — have been transforming the way we think about many things, especially political power and protest. Enthusiasts speak of Twitter revolutions. Small countries have had these: Moldova in 2009, Kyrgyzstan this year. Is Iran or perhaps China next? You cannot stop the people anymore, says the conventional wisdom. Well, not so fast. It's true that authoritarians can no longer maintain a monopoly on information. Social media are empowering large segments of society like never before. "Fence-sitters" are emboldened by friends and like-minded souls to join social movements and political protests. But our thinking about social media and democracy movements needs a reset…Don't be surprised either if some of the utopianism about social media starts to fade. That's not a bad thing, but rather a call to action. Promoting democracy is an American interest, and the U.S. needs to make adequate resources available to match the commitments made by authoritarians. The private sector must hold up its end of the bargain, too. Google's new approach to China is encouraging. We need patience and, above all, must assure that we're as long on substance as we are on the gadgetry. – USA Today
________________________________________
Middle East

Hamas, the Palestinian faction viewed by many in the West as a nest of terrorists and Islamic hard-liners, is battling a curious new epithet: moderate. Fifteen months after a punishing Israeli offensive failed to dislodge Hamas from power in the Gaza Strip, rival resistance groups and some former supporters say the organization has become too political, too secular and too soft. "People in the street say Hamas has changed," said Abu Ahmed, spokesman for the military wing of Islamic Jihad, a Palestinian armed group in Gaza that complained recently that Hamas had arrested four of its militants as they tried to attack Israeli soldiers near the border. "They're paying a price for that. People need to know that Hamas is still committed to the resistance." As it struggles with tensions between its political and military wings, Hamas faces the classic juggling act of an armed resistance group that suddenly finds itself running a government rather than fighting to overthrow one. Some see a window for the West to reach out to Hamas moderates. But as it follows political and military paths at the same time, critics say Hamas is doing neither one particularly well. – Los Angeles Times

A White House envoy trying Friday to get Israelis and Palestinians talking again faced a second challenge — navigating the rocky relations between Israel and the U.S. Senator and veteran negotiator George Mitchell's most important meeting, scheduled for Friday afternoon, was to be with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has rejected Washington's calls for a halt to Israeli construction in east Jerusalem and has seen tensions with Israel's most important ally rise dramatically on his watch. Netanyahu said in a televised interview Thursday that there would be no construction freeze in Jerusalem, repeating a position that has brought him into conflict with President Barack Obama. Nonetheless, Israeli government officials said Friday they were optimistic that indirect negotiations between the sides would be announced during Mitchell's visit, allowing Israelis and Palestinians to begin negotiating again for the first time since late 2008. They spoke on condition of anonymity because the government made no official statement on what the talks with Mitchell were expected to cover. The Palestinians have said they will not hold direct negotiations with Israel as long as construction continues in Israel's West Bank settlements, including east Jerusalem. The indirect talks, in which Mitchell is expected to shuttle between the sides as a mediator, are designed to allow the Palestinians to resume negotiations without officially dropping their demands. – Associated Press
________________________________________
Venezuela

In some of Latin America's largest slums ringing the Venezuelan capital, Cuban doctors vaccinate children, monitor pregnant women and conduct free eye tests where no medical services existed before. Along with literacy and education programs and subsidized food, the clinics were part of an oil-for-doctors deal with Cuba's communist government that helped President Hugo Chavez win a second term with a landslide four years ago. High oil prices meant the former soldier turned leftist revolutionary could drive down poverty to below 50 percent in South America's top crude exporter. But many feel Chavez has not done enough during 11 years in power to change life in the teeming shantytowns where more than a million people live in red-brick tin-roof houses clinging precariously to the hills. "Nothing has changed. All governments have been the same," said Felicia Blanco, 63, a resident of the eastern Caracas slum of Petare who is scared to leave her home. Facing a test in September legislative elections, Chavez risks losing ground in his main bastions of support where garbage piles up, sewers leak and running water becomes scarce higher up the hillsides. - Reuters

Michael Magan writes: Chavez's ALBA was created to provide an alternative to the goal of a Free Trade Area of The Americas (FTAA). Although previous negotiations failed to eliminate hemispheric trade barriers and the FTAA didn't come to fruition, the Bush administration still made substantial free trade progress with a series of bilateral trade deals with Peru, Colombia, and CAFTA-DR. Chavez has objected stating that "if the FTAA takes effect, we will be opening the way for more terrible inequalities that would fill our societies with violence." ALBA is nothing more than PetroCaribe, Chavez's vehicle for providing Venezuelan oil at below market prices to his cronies in exchange for goods and services aimed at poverty alleviation. Since ALBA is mainly financed by Chavez's subsidized oil exports, its sustainability will be severely undermined should Venezuela's oil revenue suffer a hit. The future of ALBA is dependent on a stable Venezuelan economy. However, with Venezuela's inflation the highest in the region, the country recently becoming indebted to China by 20 billion dollars, and nation-wide power outages increasing domestic demand for oil, the future looks at best unsustainable. – Shadow Government
________________________________________
Thailand

Five grenades exploded in the heart of Bangkok’s business district on Thursday evening, killing at least one person and wounding 75 as rival groups of protesters demonstrated and shouted insults at one another across a makeshift barricade. The explosions, several of which took place on the platform of an elevated train, scattered shrapnel through crowds that included foreign tourists, sending people fleeing in panic into shops and restaurants. The attacks threatened to ignite wider violence after more than six weeks of protests that seek to bring down the government and force a new election. Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban, speaking on television, blamed the antigovernment protesters known as the red shirts, who have paralyzed parts of Bangkok. He said that rocket-propelled grenades had been fired from within an area the red shirts occupied. Although he said three people had been killed, the government’s Erawan Medical Center confirmed only one death. It was the worst violence since April 10, when 25 people were killed in a clash between the military and the red shirts, and it raised fears that confrontations between rival groups of protesters could spread. – New York Times

ENDS

© Scoop Media