Al-Qaeda Regrouping and Implications for Pakistan

By Tariq Niaz

The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. This Sun Tzu philosophy should have been the key to take on the combined Arab Afghan tribal militancy instead after 9/11 US led allies preferred use of lethal force. It is almost five years now that Osama Bin Laden was killed in a US raid in Abbottabad. In its immediate aftermath there have been many more killings of Al-Qaeda’s key field commander considered number three and four in the ranking i.e. Abu Yahya Al-Libi and Attiya Abdur Rahman al Libi. After Osama, Dr. Ayman Al Zawahiri the then number two came up as an obvious choice to lead Al-Qaeda which also initiated its transition from Arab to an Egyptian Akhwan dominated one. This change of leadership had drastic political and financial impact on the organization which was once flag bearer of militancy in the region.      

Osama trusted lieutenants used to be from Libya, Yemen Syria or Iraq and very few from Egypt. This Arab dominance was instrumental in creating massive appeal for funding and recruitment amongst tribal Arabs. Due to his Egyptian background, Dr Zawahiri failed to maintain this support base. Gradual loosening of command and control provided space to Abu Bakr al Baghdadi’s Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) which not only moved the center of struggle from Khorasan to the valley of two rivers but also took over effective control of flow of funds emanating from private sources in the entire Arab world. ISIS kept pace with emerging requirements of Sunni Salfi ideology and focused its war on near enemy against Al-Qaeda approach of far enemy first. Due to Pakistan Army operation in the lawless FATA and US sustained drone campaign in both Afghanistan and Pakistan strength of Pakistani Taliban was decimated. During 2014, Zawahiri announced formation of another franchise Al-Qaeda in Indian subcontinent (AQIS), an effort to spread militancy in Pakistan, India and beyond from the port city of Karachi. 

Formation of this new franchise raised many questions. Was Al-Qaeda shifting its focus from Afghanistan and Iran to Pakistan, India and beyond thus leaving its Afghan stronghold to ISIS? Had it purposely or under duress surrendered Khorasan to the ISIS thus facilitating encirclement of Iran? Was Al-Qaeda trying to establish itself in settled areas where availability of organized militant networks can be more useful to its future global designs? All question aside, the latest Al-Qaeda move of concentrating in mega city like Karachi can have dreadful implications for the entire South Asia in general and Karachi in particular.  

Al-Qaeda appeal to youth was centered on its ideology of following pious ancestors (Salaf) and establishing Islamic Caliphate to enforce Sharia. That seems intact especially in settled areas of Pakistan where it targets educated youths to fill its ranks. The two terror incidents of Parade Lane at Rawalpindi and Safoora Goth in Karachi in which the facilitators were mostly from educated families vindicate the assertion. The facilitator network in Islamabad and Karachi played an effective role for the foot soldiers brought from FATA to conduct the killings. Karachi, due to ineffective policing, governance issues, political rivalries and social division on ethnic, linguistic and sectarian lines has turned into a lawless paradise for criminals. AQIS is fast gaining grounds in Karachi thanks largely to its vast network of Madrassas and sympathizers. Local Al-Qaeda leadership is not to be seen in prominence but foot soldiers of their affiliate are active in target killings, abduction and ransom crimes. AQIS ranks will soon be battle hardened to undertake larger Trans frontier operations.  Where Al-Qaeda would strike next and what it aims to do in South Asia especially in the backdrop of worsening Pak-India relations is a question likely to bring nightmares to the counter-terrorism experts. 

Can Al-Qaeda do this alone or it will team up with local militant organizations like Lashkar e Jhangvi or Urban Taliban networks will be interesting to watch in the near future. Urban Karachi provide  wide choice to Al-Qaeda to penetrate nontraditional recruitment grounds including Mohajir, Bengali and other immigrants communities to fight for the enforcement of sharia. AQIS presence is like an umbrella and its alliance with the local militant groups is evident from the rising intensity in target killing, abduction and ransom crimes in Karachi. AQIS major operation in the city was its attempted hijacking of Pakistani Navy vessel from the port of Karachi in September 2014. Recent upsurge in target killing, abduction and ransom crimes indicate that Al-Qaeda alliance with the local militant organization and criminal gangs is complete. AQIS is likely raise crimes intensity systematically and a particular sectarian group will be targeted in Karachi to draw both Sunni and Shia against each other. This is start of a bigger terror campaign with possible targets outside Pakistani borders in the near future to destroy the regional peace and harmony.
About Author:

Author is a freelance writer. He gained firsthand experience in security and counterterrorism and is expert in this domain with years of professional experience. He mostly writes about security issues and counter terrorism challenges posed to the state of Pakistan.  He can be reached at niaz_tariq@yahoo.com

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. 

  

Pakistan Seeks Iranian Help to Stop RAW's Ingress in Baluchistan

BY News Desk

ISLAMABAD: According to ISRP (media wing of Pakistan military), the involvement of India’s top spy agency in Balochistan was discussed in a meeting between Chief of Army Staff General Raheel Sharif and Iranian President Hassan Rowhani.

Lt. Gen. Asim Bajwa tweeted following messages after the meeting.

Carnage in Brussels: Isn't It Time to Ask Tough Questons?

By Shahzad Masood Roomi

Multiple explosions have rattled Brussels airport and the metro station leaving more than 20 dead.

Two blasts tore through the departures area of Zaventem airport shortly after 08:00 local time (07:00 GMT).

An hour later, an explosion hit Maalbeek metro station, close to the EU institutions. The airport and whole metro system have been closed.

Pakistan Army Will Pay Every Price To Make CPEC Reality: Gen Raheel

By Shahzad Masood Roomi
“We are aware of all the campaigns against CPEC and I vow that the security forces are ready to pay any price to turn this long cherished dream into reality,”

This was stated by Chief of Army Staff General Raheel Sharif on Friday while he visited the HQ of newly raised Special Security Division (SSD) in Pakistan Army which has been given charge of security responsibilities of CPEC projects.

COAS was given a detailed briefing over raising of the force and the security threats faced by the CPEC project. Gen Raheel, after briefing, instructed SSD to take all possible measures to make all CPEC related projects secure including the security of work force involved in the projects.

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!

Analysis - Resignation of Afghan Intelligence Chief Rehmatullah Nabil

By Shahzad Masood Roomi

Afghan intelligence chief, Rahmatullah Nabil, resigned on 10th December 2015. Differences with President Ashraf Ghani on his efforts to forge closer ties with Pakistan is described the reason for his resignation.

Prior to his resignation, he was staunch opponent of the idea of any kind of diplomatic ties of Kabul with Pakistan. He consistently blamed Pakistan for every law and order or security related incident in Afghanistan. His opposition to engagement with Pakistan is said to be the main cause behind Afghan government's decision to shelve a key intelligence sharing agreement between Pakistan's ISI and Afghan NDS. Both organizations signed a MoU for close cooperation in May earlier this year. It is being reported that Rehmatullah Nabil and many of his deputies in NDS were against any such arrangements.

Under the authority of Rehmatullah Nabil, NDS released the news of death of Mullah Omar just before the start of second phase of Afghan peace process between Kabul and Afghan Taliban earlier in July this year. This news not only derailed the talks but also created serious frictions within the Afghan Taliban. Combat commanders began to ask why such critical information was kept hidden from them and they began doubting the loyalty of their superiors with them and to the movement. Afghan Taliban divided to a considerable extent on the question of nominating new 'Ameer' (chieftain) as well. NDS presented these developments as major successes to President Ghani who then started to get cold footed about his own initiatives to engage with Pakistan on diplomatic level in order to find a political solution to the Afghan crisis. Afghan media began Pakistan bashing on the behest of NDS at the same time. Actually, it was believed that that charisma of Mullah Omar was the sole factor behind the cohesion of Taliban as resistance force and once the news of his demise will be made public, Taliban will wither away easily. Seriously, this proved to be a dangerous strategic miscalculation on the part of Afghan intelligence and political leadership.

Revelation of two years old death of Mullah Omar in Pakistan and it being kept from combat commanders created serious problem for senior Afghan Taliban leadership. In order to prove their cohesion as a well-organized resistance force, Taliban not only appointed a new Ameer quickly but also began what can easily be categorized as the most daring assaults and attacks on Afghan/NATO bases. They were able to capture the Kunduz city in October, earlier this year as well, from where they retreated later on as part of their war strategy. All of this was happening amid an extremely volatile security environment where ISIS/Daesh was also making its presence felt. Some Afghan Taliban joined the ISIS in Afghanistan. Majority of them were those who didn’t like the appointment of Mullah Akhtar Mansoor as new leader. TTP had already announced its allegiance to Daesh in Afghanistan and their sympathizers in Pakistan also began threatening the expansion of IS in Pakistan. This threat was not taken lightly in Pakistan and COAS Gen. Raheel Sharif had to issue statement with a commitment that Pakistan Army will not allow Daesh even to cast its shadow on Pakistan. This threat still persists.  

Afghan Taliban attacks on NATO/ANA bases continue to grow and NDS’s analysis was blown in their faces. Not only Taliban were able to keep its cohesion but it also become more secretive in its planning and communications and result was one assault after another. This string of attacks still continues. It has been reported that after these attacks, President Ashraf Ghani asked Rehmatullah Nabil to resign and made it clear that he will continue to pursue his earlier plans to engage Pakistan in order to find a political settlement with Taliban (though it will always remain a tough job for both Pakistan and Afghanistan to make Taliban compromise on some of their demands like complete withdrawal of foreign forces).

From the hindsight, resignation of Rehmatullah Nabil puts turbulent bilateral relations during the last year or so into a perspective which vindicates the assertion that NDS was not happy with President Ashraf Ghani's outreach to Pakistan, ISI and NDS mutual intelligence sharing agreement and peace process with Taliban and Pakistan’s role in it. But the ultimate question remains that who was gaining from this growing disaffection between Pakistan and Afghanistan on diplomatic and operational levels?

US and China were also backing the Afghan peace process so it is prudent to think that both these stakeholders were happy with the direction of developments in Afghanistan. In fact, White House spokesperson Josh Earnest called the meeting between Taliban and Kabul representatives in Pakistan “an important step toward advancing prospect for a credible peace.” As it has been said earlier, this breakage of dialogue only complicated the threat matrix for Pakistan. But, India was the only state where the breakage of Pakistan led Afghan peace process was taken as victory of Modi’s diplomacy to isolate Pakistan.  

Regardless to the fate of Afghan peace process, the agreement of mutual intelligence sharing between NDS and ISI is something which can pave the way forward for a durable peace in Afghanistan, FATA and to keep Indian intervention in Pakistan through Afghanistan in check. Resignation of Rehmatullah has already begun proving this true.

“Killing of a key TTP commander, Saeed Daur alias Aryana, in a gun battle with Afghan special task force at Pak-Afghan border the day the Afghan president agreed to renew the efforts to jointly counter terrorism, can be called the first informal sign from Kabul to hunt down Pakistan’s wanted terror targets,” wrote The Nation’s columnist Jawad R Awan while quoting the security services sources.

It was also reported that Duar who was killed in Paktia province of Afghanistan, was a close confidant of former TTP chief Hakimullah Mehsud. He managed to cross over to Afghanistan when the operation Zarb-e-Azb reached Mir Ali tehsil of North Waziristan. 

Such developments can ensure a lasting working relationship between ISI and NDS despite all the political impedances during the coming weeks and months. This partnership is crucial for regional stability as through this professional arrangement the secret services of both the nations would understand each other better and would also able to devise common strategies to secure the respective sides of Pak-Afghan border. Previously, Pakistani intelligence and Army was used to be viewed through Indian lens which caused serious trust deficit between the two neighbors.

   

Big War Lurks Over Syria As France Invokes EU Treaty's Mutual Defense Clause

Paris - France has invoked The EU treaty's 'mutual defence clause' formally on 17 November during a meeting of EU defence ministers. The decision was taken in reaction to the multiple terrorist attacks on 13 November against the French capital. Bilateral talks will take place immediately between France and its 27 EU partners to map out the assistance the latter will provide, said French defence minister Jean-Yves Le Drian. 

It is the first time the clause has been activated.

The clause, Article 42.7 of the Lisbon Treaty, spells out that if an EU country is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, the other member states "shall have towards it an obligation of aid and assistance by all the means in their power, in accordance with Article 51 of the United Nations Charter".

"This is a very strong act," Le Drian told reporters in Brussels at a joint press conference with Federica Mogherini, the EU's foreign and security policy chief, during the ministers' meeting. 

By the statements of Le Drian, it is evident that France is asking the European allies to join the war in Syria. He said France will seek pooled capabilities, support for French intervention in Syria and Iraq, or other efforts to help free up French forces committed elsewhere across the globe or on its home territory.

 "Support for our other operations would lighten our load," he said. "We can't be in the Sahel [Mali], in the Central African Republic, in Lebanon, or [protecting] all our national territory at the same time. Thus, we will discuss what each partner could contribute - either on our territory or elsewhere."

"There are many types of assistance possible, whether in the Middle Eastern arena or elsewhere. I am confident that everyone will step up to the plate quickly; otherwise it makes no sense."

It was also hinted by Le that actually France wants some of European states to take load off of France by taking responsibilities in some of the global hotspots where French forces are engaged so that France can fully focus on Syria.

Le Drian said the article's invocation "will enable us to have the necessary bilateral support and co-operation among us to translate the commitment of the Defence Council [of EU defence ministers] into action".

COMMENT:

A big war in Syria is in making where it is not certain who will prevail in the end because it is not a war two clear opponents would fight, Syria has become a strategic blackhole in Middle East where all major powers are being sucked in. Russia and the US are already there while China has also vowed to avenge the killings of Chinese nationals at hands of ISIS. Though there is very less probability that China will join US led campaign in Syria, the news proves that China is also among the victim nations of ISIS many of which want to go to Syria to crush ISIS. Security & Threat Matrix has done an analysis on what possibly can go wrong if France choose retribution over justice as response strategy against ISIS for 13/11 terror attacks. 

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.