ISIS Eying Europe to Acquire Nuclear Material

 

By Shahzad Masood Roomi

Pakistan is often sighted by many western analysts as potential source of supply of nuclear material for international nuclear terrorism. India has used these fear for her own geopolitical reasons. For instance, in May 2015, India "warns" the world that ISIS could obtain nuclear weapon from Pakistan.

Defence Minister Rao Inderjit Singh, while speaking on the sidelines of the Shangri-La regional security conference in Singapore, claimed "With the rise of Isis in West Asia, one is afraid to an extent that perhaps they might get access to a nuclear arsenal from states like Pakistan." 

To corroborate his claim he just had a statement issued by ISIS last year just days before Rao's speech in Singapore. Despite the lack of any proof, the statement of Indian minister got attention of wider western populace. But today, UK based news service, The Guardian, has exposed chilling details about ISIS's original plan to acquire nuclear material (for possible purpose of making a dirty bomb) and according to the news, ISIS is actually eying Germany for acquisition of nuclear material.  

According to the Guardian, Salah Abdeslam, a prime suspect in the Paris attacks, possessed documents about a nuclear research centre in Germany. The news outlet cited German newspaper reports as source of this disclosure.

The Juelich centre near the Belgium-Germany border is used for the storage of atomic waste. Thoguh German media is trying to downplaying the incident by saying "that there was no indication of any danger and that Juelich was in contact with security authorities and nuclear supervisors." But question remains, how an ISIS fighter was able to get its hands on such information.

As per Guardian's report, German media, however, confirmed that Abdeslam had photos of the Juelich chairman, Wolfgang Marquardt, in his apartment in the Molenbeek area of Brussels. This is serious development. Kidnapping of such officials at any nuclear facility could lead to far serious security dilemma. This revelations must also put the entire debate on nuclear security into a completely new perspective based on objectivity and transparency rather than geopolitical maneuvering by any nation state against anyone. 

  

Understanding Russian Withdrawal From Syria

By Shahzad Masood Roomi

 What forced Putin to announce a withdrawal of Russian forces from Syria? This is perhaps the most debated issue, currently, in global strategic community.

Considering Putin's seemingly abrupt announcement of intervention in Syria in September 2015 and even more abrupt announcement of withdrawal, which in reality is a major draw down, leaves no doubt that Putin wants to keep his cards hidden till the very last. This is good strategy towards denying other players the ability to anticipate his next move. Once again, he has succeeded in retaining the element of strategic surprise to himself. 

Burgeoning Security Turmoil in Turkey

Just days after a deadly suicide bombing in Istanbul, Kurdish separatists wrecked havoc on a police complex in southeastern Turkey. The deadly attack left at least six people dead and dozens other wounded. Turkish officials have declared the attack "the most sophisticated" one since violence flared up between insurgents and the Turkish state in July, last year.

Why Saudi Led Military Alliance Is Not a Good Idea, Strategically!

By Shahzad Masood Roomi  

Though the contours of recently formed 34-nation strong military alliance by Saudi Arabia are not clear so far, but the way it has been announced and the way US and UK are reacting on it is something which gives rise to some critical questions;

1. What will be mandate of this alliance as far as territorial integrity of member states are concerned?

2. What will be the formula of sharing the troops in its operations?

3. How the alliance members would decide to conduct an operation or against it if there is a dead lock between the member states?

4. Who will bear the expenses of operations of this alliance?

5. Why this alliance has a clear sectarian overtone in its formation? Why Iran and Syria are not part of it?

6. How this alliance would overcome the impression of being a Sunni alliance especially in Iran and Syria?

7. Which terrorist outfits apart from ISIS this alliance has identified as threat and with which criteria?

8. How can Saudi Arabia unilaterally include or exclude countries in this alliance? Has Saudi monarchy given that mandate by rest of the Muslim World?

9. Adel al-Jubeir, the Saudi foreign minister, said the coalition would share intelligence and deploy troops if necessary. If that is the case, why there was no meeting of all military or intelligence chiefs from member states? How this understanding was reached (if there is an understanding at all)?

10. The way US and UK have welcomed the announcement of this alliance, it implies that now ‘troops on ground’, in Syria, would be from Muslim nations. Who they will be fighting against and under what mandate?

These questions are critical. Each and every one of them and needs to be answered honestly and urgently. This requires an in-depth analysis of this Saudi idea of forming a Sunni military alliance and possible strategic repercussions it can have for Muslim World and for Saudi Arabia itself.

ANALYSIS:

Saudi Foreign minister, while talking to media in Paris, also sighted “the threat of terrorism and state failure on the rise, and a growing leadership vacuum in the Arab and Islamic world” as primary drivers behind Riyadh’s announcement of this military alliance. Question remains, if Riyadh is so concerned about these things within Muslim world, why no initiative has been taken by Saudi government to form a body to seek the root causes of these threats and to contemplate strategies to mitigate the threats by developing solutions for long term instead of trying to play leader by an attempt to “institutionalizing cooperation in combatting terrorism”?

As it is evident that there are too many questions which need to be addressed and answered else this military alliance would fail even before its very first operation. Furthermore, the impression that Saudis are forming this military alliance on the behest of US and the West must be eradicated through transparent announcement of scope, goal and rationale of this alliance.

Ironically, Pakistan has announced to be part of this alliance but at the same time has also said that the quantum of its participation will be determined later on when more details about the objectives of this alliance would be available. Clearly, by blindly accepting to be part of this military alliance, Pakistan has made a desperate attempt to not to disturb Saudis this time like it did to them on Yemen issue.

But question remains is it a wise strategy? Not at All!

Pakistan is venturing into a military alliance whose actions in Middle East could have serious sectarian backlash at home and then there is our own precarious security profile which already presents a bleak law and order and security situation where the state is struggling to grapple with its own internal and external security challenges. With a restive Afghan border in the west, a belligerent India on the east, Baluch insurgency in the southwest and urban law and order break down in Karachi in the South, it is very difficult to fathom that how Pakistan will manage to help this military alliance expect intelligence and knowledge sharing.

Strangely enough, UN is not even concerned and this leads to a bigger question that why an issue like terrorism is not being debated at the global forum like UN? There is no definition of terrorism. There is no consensus over the root causes of global terrorism. There is no classification about types of terrorism (like state-terrorism, Non state actor-terrorism, financial-terrorism etc.) so that, in order to find its solution, policymakers and academics can understand what lies within these definitions and categorization. It is my firm belief that unless and until this debate is not initiated in the UN, global terrorism will prevail. Muslim world is the most affected part by terrorism and yet the silence and inaction, within Muslim comity of nations, on taking the issue of global terrorism to the UN is complete and total. Completely ironic!  

“The Saudis feel they are under attack from the media suggesting they are responsible for Daesh (Isis),” said Mustafa Alani of the Gulf Research Centre, which often reflects thinking in Riyadh. “They felt a need to answer this not by counter propaganda but by a realistic project.”

And then there is an equally important question is of terrorists’ ideology which is not being addressed or even debated anywhere in the world not even within Muslim World. And among other factors, this is yet another reason why this military alliance by Saudi Arabia is not a very good idea to combat ISIS. What Saudi strategic community (if there is one) is not realizing is that in modern incarnation of warfare (4^th and 5^th generation warfare) the ‘narrative’ is the ultimate weapon which lies at the heart of any effective response strategy against organizations like ISIS who harvest its power from distortion and misinterpreting of the Islamic political ideals like Caliphate. But it seems that even after witnessing the failure of military-oriented strategies of the US and West in the Middle East, Saudi intelligentsia is advising for a similar military-oriented response strategy.

The Guardian’s Middle East editor, Ian Black has quoted Mustafa Alani of the Gulf Research Center, which often reflects thinking in Riyadh, saying, “The Saudis feel they are under attack from the media suggesting they are responsible for Daesh (Isis). They felt a need to answer this not by counter propaganda but by a realistic project.”

 “The nature of terrorism is changing. It is not only hit-and-run. It is not only suicide bombings. Its objective now is state-building. If you want to fight Daesh in Iraq you can’t send police or security people. You need to send real military forces.”

If Gulf Research Center is really that influential as being claimed by Ian Black, then it is evident that major flaw is within Saudi strategic community who is not addressing the core issue of ideology and propaganda but is suggesting a more kinetic approach to handle terrorism; a failed strategy to start with!

Actually this military alliance is an attempt by Saudi Arabia to position itself in the Middle East as a leader against growing influence of Iran and to dispel the impression that Saudis have a role in rise of ISIS. If Saudis will try to achieve these geopolitical goals through this military alliance it is again a plan destined to be doomed sooner than later. Saudis should have learned from Russia how to deploy the media to counter the propaganda and present their own narrative across the globe. There is no scarcity of resources to Saudi government. But it seems that Saudis are more interested in power display to both Iran and to strengthen its authority among ‘Sunni Muslim states’ after it is diminishing within ‘Muslim World’.

Last but not the least, if at any point in near future, this alliance decides to send forces to Syria there would always be a high probability that the entire Muslim world will indulge into a grand sectarian war where Iran, Syria, Iraq will be on one side and this Saudi military alliance on the other. Zionist forces will be more than happy to push the regional scenario in that direction as well because this will make their plans to redraw the map of Middle East much easier.

These are distressing times for Muslims. There is a complete and total collapse of leadership in Ummah due to which it is heading towards an implosion which will only result in formation of many smaller and weak countries based on ethnic, sectarian and linguistic divide and a very powerful Israel!

It is a very realistic near future scenario for the entire Muslim World, Pakistan must initiate aggressive military-diplomacy in order to warn Riyadh about its dangerous miscalculations on strategic issues. So far, Pakistan has done good to not to say a straight no to Saudis in order to prevent a more aggressive response from Arab world like we saw from Abu Dubai after Pakistan refused to send troops to Yemen but no way Pakistan can afford to let Riyadh go with this self-destruct strategy of forming a Sunni only military-alliance to counter Iran under the pretext of fighting terrorism. This is a dangerous trap set for the every noticeable Muslim nation. Time to act is Now!

Syrian Conflict Enters In Disturbing New Phase

By Shahzad Masood Roomi

Just days after the fateful incident of Russian SU-24, Syrian conflict is taking a rather uglier turn as more disturbing events are unfolding. 

In the latest developments, Syrian government has accused US led coalition warplanes of attacking a Syrian Army Camp in Deir ez Zor province. The incident is first of its kind which has taken place amid ongoing allegations and counter-allegations between Turkey and Russia triggered in the aftermath of SU-24 downing row and can very easily trigger a new round of more kinetic confrontation between US and Russian led alliances.

The Syrian government has said that 3 people were dead while 13 got injured and number of military vehicles were destroyed. According to Syrian government, the coalition jets fired nine missiles at an army camp in the Deir ez Zor province, which remains mostly under the control of Islamic State. 

The Syrian Foreign Ministry has filed an official protest with the UN Security Council regarding the US-led coalition’s airstrikes on Syrian troops, Syria’s SANA official news agency reported Monday.

“Syria strongly condemns the act of aggression by the US-led coalition that contradicts the UN Charter on goals and principles. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has sent letters to the UN Secretary General and the UN Security Council,” SANA quoted the foreign ministry as saying.

US and Coalition Rejects Allegations:

The US and allied nations’ coalition has denied the Syrian claims.

Brett McGurk, Obama’s envoy to Syria, on his Twitter account, said that there had been no coalition strikes anywhere within 55 kilometers (35 miles) of the said camp.

"Reports of coalition involvement are false," he wrote in his tweet.

Apart from him, the coalition spokesman Colonel Steve Warren also commented on Syrian allegations saying, ”We’ve seen those Syrian reports but we did not conduct any strikes in that part of Deir ez Zor yesterday. So we see no evidence,” 

The Deir ez Zor province is situated in eastern Syria, and is largely controlled by Islamic State (IS). The region is of significant strategic importance to the terrorist group, as it contains a number of oilfields, which are a major source of revenue for IS.

Syrian government is declaring the US led coalition bombing in Syria against ISIS as illegal. According to some unconfirmed reports, President Putin has reportedly already declared the Syrian crisis a beginning of World War III and forces have been ordered to prepare for a global scale conflict. 

In another related development, Iraq has given Turkey an ultimatum of 48 hours to leave Iraqi territory while Turkey has said that it has right to protect its soldiers. This ultimatum comes after Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu's letter of his Iraqi counterpart Haider Al Abadi in which it is promised and assured that there will be no deployment of Turkish forces in Iraq until Baghdad's concerns are addressed. 

ANALYSIS:

If this string of events prolongs it can easily get out of control and no one will be able to prevent a regional conflict at much larger scale. The region is slowly drifting towards a larger conflict. with UN clearly finding itself irrelevant. These are perilous trends for peace and security. Any regional conflict triggered from Syria, would not only jeopardize global peace but would also destroy UN as global conflict resolution body.

It seems all the major stakeholders fighting against a common threat of IS have a complete diplomatic breakdown and events like Su-24 downing and alleged US coalition strike on an Syrian camp can easily send wrong signals regarding the intentions of opposite alliance. It is time that countries like Pakistan or China who are not involved in this mess take some initiative to salvage the prospects of peace. Any forum can be utilized for such an diplomatic incentive but whatever has to be done it must be done on war footings. Trends in Syria are obviously turning disturbing it not alarming!

Russia Puts Sanctions on Turkey, Blamed It for Protect ISIS Oil Trade: What Next?

By Shahzad Masood Roomi

Crisis in Syria is engulfing neighboring states as Russia and Turkey has exchanged accusations and counter-accusations. Russia has claimed that Turkey shot down its SU-24 to protect illegal oil trade of ISIS. Turkey has strongly challenged these allegations and has demanded proofs from Russia for the same. As the temperature is rising over this row of allegations and counter allegations, the world leaders are visibly panicked.  President Obama has urged both Russia and Turkey to reduce tension. 

Two days back, Turkey-Russia bilateral relations hit yet another low as Russia retaliated against Turkey again by imposing economic sanctions on Ankara after severing the military ties over downing of a Russian Su-24 bomber fighter near Syrian border. Russian President has signed the decree.

Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov had earlier announced that Turks will have to apply for visas to visit Russia. 

Russia has described the sanctions “aimed at ensuring national security and that of Russian citizens” and included a ban on charter flights between the two countries and on Russian businesses hiring any new Turkish nationals as well as import restrictions on certain Turkish goods, according to a text of the decree released by the Kremlin.

On its part, Turkish leadership has begun to realize the gravity of situation as Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan earlier expressed “sadness” over the incident which has severely strained relations, saying that “we wish it had never happened.”

After this statement of Turkish President,  it was hoped that the tensions will be lowered but Russia now has accused Turkey to protect illegal oil smuggling by ISIS and has blamed that SU-24 was downed to cover this oil trade of terrorist group. Reacting to this latest allegation, Turkish president Erdogan says ready to resign if claims about Turkey's buying oil from IS are confirmed.  

ANALYSIS:

Stakes are getting higher on both sides with every passing day. Turkey has made it clear that it will not apologies and it seems Russia would not accept anything less. Is it making of a new conflict in the region? Might be and might be not. But certainly this incident is going to play a significant role in shaping future geopolitics in the region. 

Turkey is almost in similar position Pakistan was in 1980's. Pakistan's then strategic mindset was outcome of firm belief that Soviets will continue there southward march towards the hot waters of Arabian Sea. Once they captured Afghanistan, Pakistan will be their natural target. With India as their main ally, there matrix for Pakistan's national security would be complicated further. So, stopping Soviets in Afghan gorges were considered vital national security interest. Pakistan decided to fight against Soviets in Afghanistan. Americans came to help in 1982 when they saw initial success of Pakistan backed elements. It was afterwards of 1983 when Pakistan began to made strategic miscalculations about the intentions of CIA who was there just to defeat oldest global enemy of Uncle Sam. CIA won the war and left the region in late 1980s after turning Afghanistan into a strategic black hole. (World came to know about the reality of Operation Cyclone of CIA in 1998 when former US national security adviser to President Carter, Brzezinski disclosed that it was all along CIA's plan to lure Soviets in Afghanistan. Pakistan has been playing the price of letting CIA run "Jihad" in Afghanistan since that time.

The most ironic aspect of this entire episode is that why Islamabad didn't engage Moscow on diplomatic levels to assess their plans? Global balance of power was disturbed after Soviet collapse.

Today, Turkey is NATO ally just like Pakistan was in 1980's. Russia is in its neighbor, just like it was in Pakistan's neighbor in 1980's. Pakistan was told by the US to prepare its defenses as Soviets will be targeting Pakistan next. Turkey, is also being encouraged to defend itself against Russia.

It is a good sign that Turkish President has expressed his sadness on this issue. Turkish diplomacy must engage Russia constructively. Formation of a join investigation team to prob Su-24 destruction can be proposed as a first measure to clam down enraged Putin. 

Any more aggression from Turkey, even on diplomatic level, would only complicate things for Turkey. Based on its own past experience, Pakistan must also advice the Ankara in this regard. Otherwise, just like World War 1, some 100 years ago, the region is drifting towards a larger conflict or a new Cold War.

Paris Attacks: What will be French Response : Justice or Retribution?

By Shahzad Masood Roomi

French President Francois Hollande has promised a merciless response to ISIS who has claimed the responsibility of the wave of terror strikes by gunmen and bombers that killed at least 129 people at six different places in Paris on Friday (Saturday morning in Pakistan). 87 people were killed by terrorist at Bataclan concert hall where, according to reports, 3 suicide bombers blew themselves before French anti-terrorism force stormed the hall and rescued many survivors. More than 40 people were killed at five other locations including double suicide bombing outside the Stade de France national stadium, where Mr Hollande and the German foreign minister were watching a friendly soccer international between the two countries.

The attack is being described as the most brutal incident since World War II. “The terrorists, the murderers, raked several cafe terraces with machine-gun fire before entering (the concert hall). There were many victims in terrible, atrocious conditions in several places,” police prefect Michel Cadot told reporters.

French government has announced three days of national mourning.

President Hollande described the assault as “an act of war” against France. He made his reaction as well. “France will be merciless towards these barbarians from Daesh,” he said, using the Arabic acronym for IS.

French leader also said that the attack was planned on a foreign soil.

It must be remembered that France is already at war with ISIS in Syria and is one of the most active participant of US led alliance against the terror organization. 

Former president Nicolas Sarkozy has called for a total war against ISIS. “The war we must wage should be total.”, said Mr. Sarkozy in a statement.

The intensity of this incident has forced the entire Europe to tighten the border security. Germany, Italy, Russia, Belgium, Hungary and the Netherlands also tightened security measures after the incident.

How France is going to respond to this attack is pretty much clear but is this a right strategy keeping in mind the two unfinished wars of the US in Afghanistan and Iraq? and more important question is, will a military-oriented strategy by France will ensure the security of its people and prevention of any next 13/11? Seeking answers of these key questions are challenge and opportunity at the same time. 

ANALYSIS:

The sole purpose of any national security policy or response strategy is to secure the nation by making sure that no security incident takes place and if one occurs the policy or strategy must ensure prevention of such incident in future. Such policy making demands a multi-pronged mindset which encompasses all the dynamics of any particular incident like identifying elements behind it, tactics and more importantly the root causes. 

13/11 was outcome of the policy of 'execution of terrorists' instead of 'prosecution of terrorists' without spending any time on ascertaining the terrorists mindset and their causes. This strategy was adopted by the US after 9/11. This strategy was flawed as it took away the entire process of justice. The US and allies began to label individuals, factions, organizations and even states as terrorists and began execution process all by themselves without any trials like it was done in 2003 when Iraq was invaded by US/UK to remove Saddam Hussain under the false pretext of WMDs.

Now the question is, what France is going to do with/in Syria to hunt 13/11 perpetrators and masterminds belonging to ISIS?

Actually there is not much France can do right now militarily as it is already part of the US coalition in Syria against ISIS if Paris has decided to opt for a more aggressive military-oriented kinetic strategy, as is being hinted by the French leadership. Under any such strategy, France will intensify its military campaign against ISIS. But doing so without complete investigations would not only complicate the Middle East crisis and Syrian civil war but would also help the co conspirators hiding within EU to escape the justice and the EU's security would remain at peril. 

It is necessary for global peace that these accomplices of attackers are brought to justice. In order to achieve this, an intelligence based surgical approach will guarantee far higher probability of success as compared to waging a prolonged war in Syria. France must avoid indulging into a prolonged conflict in ME as this might be the real strategic plan of these ISIS terrorists. 

France must keep the lessons learned from failed and unfinished US wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. French response must not be based on sheer sense of retribution like the US response was after 9/11. Last 14 years of WoT have exposed the vulnerabilities of this revenge-oriented strategic mindset.

A complete investigation of 13/11 terror attacks, finding its masterminds, facilitators, financiers and accomplices is critical for strengthening of international justice system. 

A senseless military response by the US after 9/11 only strengthened Al-Qaeda, ISIS and countless other violent entities in and around Middle East. This strategy has compromised the role of UN in global conflicts even further and as a consequence the world has become a less safer place.

Geopolitical Angle:

ISIS has claimed the responsibility of Paris attacks and has also made clear that these attacks are response to the French airstrikes in Syria against ISIS.

Looking at the initial French reaction over Paris terrorist attacks new concerns are becoming apparent on the geopolitical axis as well. The most important of these is prospects of a perpetuation of this war between ISIS and France. If France goes after ISIS without purging it completely from its own soil, there is a greater probability of another similar attack in France or elsewhere in EU. 

Another concern is new possible strategic alignment which might take place in Syria in fight against ISIS where Russia and the US alliance are not on the same page despite both claiming to fight against ISIS. Russian intervention in Syria is being considered as hindrance by the West in their plan to overthrow Asad's regime in Damascus. If the US along with France, under any military-oriented response strategy, decide to rearm Syrian rebels, which are being attacked by Russia, against both ISIS and Asad or send ground troops, Russia can response this move by putting more of its own military hardware in Syria to support Syrian army. Iran will also follow the line and most probably will amplify her involvement in Syria. This can easily lead to a dangerous stand off between the two Cold War rivals.

As both the US and Russia don't believe on each other's narratives yet both these global powers are involved in Syria without any UN mandate. In reality, this is beginning of a next cold war which does not look that cold considering the regional geopolitical dynamics where UN has no role. This has been proven in case of Middle East where first Iraq and then Syria were invaded by foreign forces unilaterally and the entire region is paying for this flawed approach and now Europe is also facing the heat.

The fate of ISIS, in Syria, remains uncertain but only certain certain fact is that, without proper investigations, trials and convictions, any decision of use force would push Syria in yet another brutal phase of violence and Syrian population will not be the only casualty in this chaos. Global peace, international institutions like UN, international law and justice will also become victim of this imbroglio. 

ISIS will continue to prevail because despite severe bombing from all the modern air powers its oil wells, refineries and export terminals which constitute the financial engine of ISIS, will stay protected like they have been so far and just to give excuses to both the US and Russia to keep their respective military forces in the region.
ISIS, Russia, US alliance and their proxies will continue to fight for many years to come creating more vacuums for more militant and violent terror groups in case these geopolitical considerations remains overlooked!

This is why it is critical for France to adopt a more robust and comprehensive response strategy than the current chaotic approach introduced by Washington after 9/11. This strategy must incorporate both kinetic and non-kinetic responses to ensure address the root causes of global terrorism.

Conclusion:

Terrorism can only be defeated by justice. Use of force as revenge as a strategy has failed already and is bound to be doomed in future as well. France must learn from failure of US policy on global terrorism. This incident is awful indeed but at the same time, it is also an opportunity for world leaders to sit together and contemplate an international framework to prosecute terrorists under the same law.