Second Round of Negotiations Postponed Amid Leon’s Efforts

La seconda fase dei negoziati “sponsorizzati” dalle Nazioni Unite tra blocchi rivali in Libia, in programma per Martedì 9 dicembre, è stata genericamente rinviata alla prossima settimana’. La comunicazione, di quelli che alcuni media hanno già ribattezzato come ‘Ghadames II’, nonostante la mancanza di annunci ufficiali su dove si terranno i negoziati, è stata rilasciata dopo un incontro a Tripoli tra l’inviato di UNSMIL, Bernardino Leon, e l’ex presidente GNC Nuri Busahmein.  

Questa mossa rappresenta chiaramente un tentativo dell’ultimo minuto di UNSMIL, e dei suoi sostenitori occidentali, per mantenere la possibilità di dialogo fra le parti, nonostante la notevole distanza ancora esistente tra i due schieramenti.

On one side, the Libya Dawn camp appears to be mesmerized and still trying to come to terms with the lack of positive developments following the Supreme Court ruling of November 6th. What on paper seemed to be a strike out for the Tripoli-based establishment, actually, in light of the hesitant and tepid reaction of the international community to the ruling, further emboldened the Tobruk-based establishment and its military campaign.

In hindsight, the nebulous Supreme Court ruling mining the internal legitimacy of the HoR without reinstating the GNC represented an opportunity for Libya’s international partners to force rival parties into dialogue and restart the political transition with a somewhat clean institutional sheet. Instead, after a month of hesitation, we are now facing a possibly even more polarized crisis and crystalized camps.

On the other side, the HoR-led camp has shown every passing day less and less willingness to compromise with its tactics and statements. Firstly, since last week Haftar’s forces actively expanded the scope of Operation Dignity’s military campaign in Western Libya to virtually all areas under control of Libya Dawn with multiple airstrikes carried out over all of Zwarah, Ras Jdeir, Gharyan and Qaser Ben Gashir.

Secondly, both the HoR and Operation Dignity’s HQ have put out a number of non-negotiable requests and conditions to participate to the dialogue initiative which include the recognition of the HoR as the sole legitimate representative of the Libyan people and the rejection of negotiations with armed groups other than the ‘Libyan National Army’. At the same time, one cannot help but wonder how much of a free hand the HoR has in deciding its negotiating stance towards the Libya Dawn camp, and how much it might even be an hostage of its national patrons and protectors: federalists groups controlling ports and oil-related infrastructure in the East, and the Operation Dignity troops whose air force and ruthless methods have been instrumental in avoiding a complete loss of Benghazi to the Benghazi’s Revolutionaries Shoura Council umbrella group.

To be sure, radical elements are present on both sides and appear to hold sway in dictating the blocks’ stances towards negotiations. As a matter of fact, Libya Dawn also presented a list of non-negotiable conditions to participate to the talks which included: the dissolution of the HoR in compliance with the ruling of Libya’s Supreme Court; the recognition of the GNC and of the al-Hassi government as legitimate; the reconfirmation of the highly controversial Political Isolation Law as an element underpinning and fortyfing the 17th February Revolution; and the appointment of Libya Dawn aligned militias as the core members of the new Libyan Army.

With all of the above in mind, and taking into consideration the hysteric and paranoid Libyan environment, it seems then highly unlikely that either side will cave in and join dialogue with a honest will to do reach a compromise in little more than a week time.We are thus left wondering when and if Libya’s Western partners will start employing the sticks at their disposal to pressure radical national actors and external third parties meddling into Libyan affairs to stop dirsuptive policies and avoid the closure of the last window of opportunity for a dialogue-based solution to this crisis.

On Monday, December 8, Tunisian media reported that a special security unit arrested a Libyan leader from the Fajr Libya group which controls the capital Tripoli. The Interior Ministry did not deny the reports.

The militia leader’s presence in Tunisia and his success in infiltrating the borders validate Tunisia’s concerns over the possibility that the militants – who are fighting the forces of General Khalifa Haftar in Libya – would enter the country.

This concern is related particularly to the elements controlling the key border crossing of Ras Jdir, where Haftar’s forces have been engaged in bloody battles since the end of last week to liberate it from outlawed armed groups, as they are referred to in “Operation Dignity” statements led by Haftar.

Since the Mahdi Juma government took power in the country last February, Tunisia has tried to stay neutral regarding the situation in Libya. The Foreign Ministry, under Monji al-Hamdi, has managed to maintain Tunisia’s independence, unlike the first two Troika governments, which supported the Islamists against their opponents in an unprecedented move in the history of Tunisian diplomacy.

Al-Hamdi said that Tunisia “remains faithful to its diplomatic traditions, rejects foreign intervention in Libya, and insists on dialogue between all parties.”

Tunisia played an active role in this direction through meetings held in Algeria, Egypt, and Sudan. However, the developments in Libya; the edging of the armed conflict towards the Tunisian borders (around 20 kilometers away); successive explosions, and gunfire heard in towns and villages along the border created a state of fear within Tunisia’s border strip, despite the assurances of Prime Minister Juma. The latter said in a press conference that “the state is capable of protecting Tunisians and is ready for all possibilities, including the worst scenarios.”

Despite its significance, Jumaa’s statement was not enough to reassure Tunisians, given the fragile situation in their country. Since the fall of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi’s regime, Libya has been hosting large numbers of Tunisian militants, who are planning criminal and retaliatory operations against Tunisia, according to the Interior Ministry. Also, Libya is a main source for smuggling arms and ammunition, and harbors the most infamous Tunisian terrorists implicated in assassinations and terrorist operations, such as Abu Ayyad and most leaders of the banned Ansar al-Sharia group, which includes suspects in the assassination of Mohammed Brahimi and Chokri Belaid.

Libya is a “convenient ground” for hundreds of young Tunisian men to train on weapons and explosives. The Interior Ministry uncovered last week a cell specialized in sending young men to Turkey and Syria through Libya after training them on the use of weapons, and drug smuggling.

The collapse of the Libyan state and the weak government headed by Abdullah al-Thani, which derives its legitimacy from the Libyan parliament, are the primary threat to the security of the Tunisian people. While Libya embodied the hope that could save Tunisia from its economic crisis by regaining its position as a job and trade market that would revive the Tunisian economy, it has now become a real “nightmare” due to the collapse of the state and the absence of a strong negotiating partner.

Tunisian authorities and public opinion remain neutral to the conflict in Libya between the parliament, al-Karama Forces, and the al-Thani government on one hand, and the National Conference, Libyan Dawn (Fajr Libya) forces, and the al-Hasi government on the other. However, Tunisia needs to keep a watchful eye on the developments in Libya to avert a possible flood.

Several Tunisian parties have accused interim President Moncef Marzouki, who is biased towards the National Conference, of seeking to postpone the presidential elections in the hope that he would be “saved” by the deteriorating situation in Libya, and the chaos that may result if Islamist militants raid the Tunisian border, which is very possible given the absence of the Libyan state.

Marzouki: Willing to cooperate with the government of Nidaa Tunis
In an exclusive interview with Anadolu news agency, Moncef Marzouki – incumbent Tunisian president and candidate in the second round of the presidential election – expressed willingness to cooperate with the government to be formed by Nidaa Tunis party, which won in the latest legislative elections, and whose leader Beji Caid Essebsi he will run against in the second round of the presidential election on December 21.

Marzouki expressed regret over Essebsi’s refusal to face him in a debate, noting that he has the support of the “social left” in the upcoming presidential election, while the “ideological left” supports his competitor.
“For all Tunisians, the current conflict is between the old system, which is returning with all its power and former mechanisms, and the slowly-advancing new democratic system,” Marzouki said.

On the external front, he spoke about Syria. “Some believe that it was a diplomatic mistake (to cut off relations), but I do not see it as such. I believe it was our people who started the Arab Spring. The Syrian revolution followed the Tunisian revolution, not in imitation but as a continuation of it. I am truly surprised by those who oppose corruption, dictatorship, and killing people, but still find it normal for Tunisia – the cradle of the Arab revolution – to turn a blind eye to a corrupt dictator, a family dictator who displaced a third of his people and killed 200,000 of them under the pretext of a non-existent rejectionism. This is a position I will not change.”

Source:  al-akhbar.com

Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abbadi’s campaign to purge the country’s security forces of corrupt commanders and “ghost soldiers” should have a positive impact on the performance of Iraqi troops fighting the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), security officials and lawmakers say.

Iraq’s security institutions, moulded by the Americans after the 2003 US-led invasion of the country, suffer from inefficiency, a lack of professionalism, and financial and administrative corruption, according to security officials and lawmakers.

In an effort to address the situation, Abbadi last month ordered 10 senior military officers into retirement and dismissed another 26, including the general director of intelligence and security and the air force chief of staff.

Abbadi also dismissed two dozen senior interior ministry officials, including the commander of border forces, the commander of the federal police and the commander of Iraq’s intelligence department.

In addition, Abbadi revealed last week that there were 50,000 “ghost soldiers” – people who receive a paycheque without showing up for work – on the payroll of four military divisions.

“The most dangerous kind of corruption is that [which] exists in the security establishment,” Abbadi said in a televised parliament session. “I feel sorry for what happened – the soldiers are fighting and being killed and others are receiving salaries.”
Security officials said the number cited by Abbadi includes deserters and missing troops whose cases have been under investigation since June, but whose commanders had not removed their names from the payroll.

“We had four military divisions in northern and western Iraq, which means 350,000 soldiers and federal policemen before the fall of Mosul [to ISIL], but after the June events, the number was no more than 300,000,” a senior military officer who serves at the defence ministry in Baghdad, told Al Jazeera on condition of anonymity.

“Most of the 50,000 troops are still missing because they either [got stuck in] the towns and the villages of the Sunni areas that now under the control of ISIL or were executed [en masse] by the militants.”
In June, ISIL fighters overran Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, without any real resistance from Iraqi forces who abandoned their positions and weapons. Days later, ISIL seized the nearby province of Salahaddin and several areas of Kirkuk.

Although ISIL combatants have executed hundreds of Iraqi troops in recent months, Iraqi authorities have only registered them as missing due to a lack of records.

Bahaa al-Aaraji, Abbadi’s deputy, said cancelling the salaries of these “ghost” soldiers has saved more than 120 billion Iraqi dinars ($104m), which had been going into the pockets of corrupt security commanders.

The swift collapse of Iraqi forces in the face of ISIL fighters highlighted the deep-rooted corruption in the structure of Iraq’s security services, sources told Al Jazeera.

“On paper, the number of soldiers of any battalion is 750 troops, but actually, on the ground, there are no more than 200 soldiers and the rest are either ghost soldiers, deserters or missing,” a senior military officer told Al Jazeera on condition of anonymity.

“The commanders did not report the real numbers to keep getting the [ghost soldiers’] salaries, so no one could do anything to stop the collapsing of troops at that time.”

Several military officers said the significant lack of boots on the ground as a result of the ghost soldiers has deeply impacted the performance of Iraqi troops in Mosul, Salahaddin and Anbar.

“The battalion or brigade has to have at least two-thirds of its boots on the ground to attack … but because of the corrupted commanders, the fighting capability of the Iraqi troops was no more than 20 percent,” the senior officer said.
Shia militias and volunteers, responding to the call of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the most revered Shia cleric in Iraq, have played a critical role in supporting Iraqi troops to help stop ISIL’s advance towards the capital.

Since Abbadi’s announcement, Iraqi lawmakers say it is too early to notice significant improvements in the performance of Iraqi troops, but the news of reforms has already raised morale on the battlefield.

“We will not be able to reach the required level of performance in this short time, but this is seen as preliminary steps to rebuild a professional army,” Hamid al-Mutlaq, a member of the parliamentary defence and security committee, told Al Jazeera.

“For sure, [these reforms] have raised the morale of the troops on the fields, and it will be soon reflected on the performance of the troops,” Mutlaq added.

Source: Al Jazeera

E’ tutto confermato, con i preparativi dell’esercito iracheno che si fanno sempre più febbrili in vista della grande offensiva per riprendere la capitale provinciale di Mosul, da giugno in mano ai jihadisti.

Baghdad ha infatti trasferito la sua prima spedizione di armi alle forze che combattono lo Stato islamico nella provincia settentrionale del Paese.

A riferirlo è il Consiglio provinciale di Ninive che ieri, tramite uno dei membri, ha confermato come più di 60 veicoli blindati, oltre a diversi container di armi leggere abbiano già raggiunto l’Erbil International Airport.

“Le armi saranno distribuite alle forze che parteciperanno alla liberazione di Mosul, in coordinamento con le forze peshmerga e l’approvazione del Ministero Curdo”.

Nei commenti ai media arabi, il membro del Consiglio ha poi spiegato come “i preparativi sono stati velocizzati, in particolare dopo che il generale Riyad Jalal Tawfiq è stato nominato a capo del Comando delle Operazioni su Ninive dal Primo Ministro Al-Abadi Haider”.

Tawfiq è un membro di spicco della tribù Obeidi, ed ha già servito in un certo numero di posizioni di rilievo all’interno delle forze armate irachene, tra cui il comando delle forze di terra. Egli è noto per avere un buon rapporto sia con gli sciiti che con i curdi, e parteciperà anch’egli all’offensiva militare per riconquistare Mosul.

Il Consiglio Provinciale di Ninive ha inoltre confermato come le forze regolari irachene, le forze peshmerga curde, le forze di polizia di Ninive, e combattenti tribali locali collaboreranno nell’offensiva.

Le autorità irachene avrebbero anche elaborato piani di sicurezza per Mosul dopo la liberazione della città, che dovrà essere divisa in diverse aree sotto la protezione delle varie “forze comunitarie” (virgolettato dell’autore).

Source:  Osservatorio Mashrek

The US Secretary of State , John Kerry has demanded in front of the Foreign Relations Committee of the US Congress to ask for a new authorization to use military force against ISIS – by sending soldiers on the ground – for a period of three years, subjected to renewal .

The US administration is currently using the mandate granted by Congress of former US President George W. Bush in the wake of the September 11, 2011 attacks in raids on the organization .

Kerry said in his testimony before the committee that US President , Barack Obama was clear in his intention not to send military forces to Iraq, “but that does not mean he should restrict the chief of staff or field commanders in their dealings with contingency plans and scenarios that are impossible to foresee .”

Kerry pointed out that the new mandate will be limited on ISIS and the forces associated with it, stressing the need not be linked to a specific geographic boundaries .

He said that he do not believe that US troops may have to undertake military operations outside Iraq or Syria, “but do not want to not be able to use appropriate force in case of threat to our interests in other places.

Source:  shafaaq.com

The gradual but ongoing escalation of tension in the Middle East in general, and on Israel’s northern front with Syria and Lebanon in particular, does not delay events on the ground: On Dec. 7, it was again reported (in foreign media) that the Israeli air force allegedly attacked two targets in Syrian territory.

One was on the outskirts of Damascus, evidently in the environs of the international airport. This time, the Syrians — who usually remain silent when faced with events such as this one — officially announced that they were attacked by Israel. A Syrian official who was interviewed by the Arab-Israeli newspaper al-Sinara said that the Syrian response will arrive at a time and place chosen by Syria. Israel officially abstains from responding to these statements.

According to one of the reports, Israel attacked a convoy that was en route from Syria to the Hezbollah in Lebanon; the convoy purportedly contained advanced short-range surface-to-air missiles. Missiles of this sort could limit Israel’s absolute aerial command of the arena. This report also lacks confirmation from any other source.

At the beginning of October 2014, Hezbollah carried out a series of terror attacks against Israel in the Mount Dov sector, and Israeli sources are convinced that Hezbollah will continue adhering to the new rules of the game it adopted vis-à-vis Israel: a response to every Israeli attack, in Israeli territory, and at any price. Israeli army elements are gearing up for such a response that is likely, according to assessments, to be in the form of a terror attack near a border fence in one of the zones of friction with Israel: the Lebanon border, Mount Dov, the Golan Heights (with Syrian encouragement), etc.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not refer to the attack, but he canceled a planned live video broadcast the evening of Dec. 7 with the Saban Forum in Washington, limiting himself to a short, prerecorded speech due to “events in Jerusalem.”

A high-echelon Israeli security official compared the situation in the northern sector to a giant pressure cooker that bubbles over a small fire. The heat rises, the pressure inside the pot increases, and the pot slightly erupts from time to time to dissipate the accumulating pressure. But it is clear to everyone that until the fire is put out, the danger of a major explosion still remains. At the moment, says the official, the fire has not been extinguished; on the contrary, it has been fanned. A possible explosion is more imminent than ever.

Last week, the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University conducted a war game simulation. Israel frequently holds these kinds of simulations in which decision-makers are trained to react in real time to scenarios involving chain reactions of events. This kind of diplomatic-security simulation is attended by fictional representatives of all the players in the field: Israel, countries of the Shiite-axis bloc (Iran and Syria), Hezbollah, the Palestinians, Russia and the United States. Additional groupings represented in the drill include global jihad, the international media, Israeli Arabs and others.

The drill that was held last week was led by Col. (res.) Gabi Siboni, director of the Military and Strategic Affairs Program at the institute, who is also in charge of the cyber field at the Institute for National Security Studies. He created a scenario that opened with a double terror attack of Hezbollah against Israel: one in the northern Golan Heights, one in the Mount Dov zone. The attacks were carried out simultaneously: Israel suffered a number of fatalities, several persons were wounded, and one went missing. Thus, on one fine morning when two such attacks take place, the dubious stability of the entire area is undermined and all the players are likely to find themselves in a comprehensive war within a matter of hours.

In reality, Israel decided (in the course of the simulation game) to respond to the Hezbollah attacks by attacking three “quality” targets in the Bekaa Valley of Lebanon. The targets were attacked and destroyed in the course of the night after the attacks. Hezbollah, on its part, responded with short-range rockets but limited itself to the localities near the northern fence and the northern town of Kiryat Shmona. In Middle East jargon, this is considered a proportionate response, perhaps even a restrained one. Hezbollah is capable of striking almost everywhere in Israel with precise, lethal rockets, but it preferred a proportionate response. Israel, on its part, decided to conduct an aerial operation against Hezbollah’s long-range missile capabilities.

One can recall how the Second Lebanon War in 2006 opened with a deadly Israeli airstrike that eliminated within a few hours the entire repository of long-range Fajar-5 rockets that Hezbollah had amassed and stored in southern Lebanon. The missiles were hidden in residential homes, storehouses, parking lots, and almost all were destroyed in a surgical airstrike carried out by the Israeli air force. The attack relied on high-quality and precise intelligence.

This time, in the course of last week’s simulation, Israel limited itself to a sample strike: It attacked a few missile repositories, but did not expand further the target scope. Here, too, the response was proportionate.

After this chain of events, it was evident that both sides wanted a cease-fire. International involvement encouraged this desire and turned it into reality. A comprehensive war was averted. Even Iran tried not to stir the pot and restrained Hezbollah. Israel absorbed two painful attacks and restrained itself. Hezbollah absorbed several attacks on its territory, and everyone returned to their bases without achieving their goals, but they returned relatively unscathed.

In the course of this role-playing game in Israel, one fact was clear: Israel as well as Hezbollah are not interested in an escalation. Neither side wants to be dragged into a comprehensive war and prefers a policy of containing the events, not escalating them. With regards to Israel, this is almost self-understood. As a democratic country with an open society and a developed economy which is sensitive to fluctuations, Israel is addicted to peace and quiet at almost any price.

But with regard to Hezbollah, this is a bit more surprising. True, the organization is severely overextended on numerous front lines: It is fighting in Syria, it is fighting in north Lebanon, it is fighting several jihadi organizations, mainly the Islamic State, and it can’t really afford another front with Israel. However, the prevailing assessment of the IDF is that the effective Israeli deterrence, the one that kept Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah in his bunker for eight years, preventing him from really acting against Israel, is dissipating.

Why did Hezbollah avoid a damaging and comprehensive response, which would have forced Israel to remove its kid gloves and cause a lethal chain reaction? The answer is, probably, in Tehran’s hands. If a final nuclear agreement had been reached in November between Iran and the super powers, we might be facing a different reality. But such an agreement was not reached, instead the negotiations were extended and now, the Iranians are playing for time. They prefer not to “waste” their strategic card against Israel — Hezbollah — prematurely.

Source: Al Monitor

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) Cabinet issued a list of 85 organizations and institutions it labeled as “terrorist.”

Islamic organizations, as well as relief bodies that are operating in Western countries, have found themselves on the same list as al-Qaeda, the Islamic State and Boko Haram.

The listed organizations operating in Europe include the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe (FIOE) — which is the largest group of Islamic institutions in Europe and consists of 28 central institutions spread across Europe — the Islamic Society of Germany, the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB) and many others across Europe.

Canon Andrew White, pastor of Baghdad diocese confirmed that the terrorist organization ISIS is continuing its hunt for Christians in Iraq, noting that it beheaded children of Iraqi Christians for refusing to convert into Islam.

According to the British newspaper ‘Mirror’, White said, “ISIS killings of Christians in Iraq is still ongoing, even after they (Christians) escaped to Nineveh, thinking it was a safe haven, they were tracked down and killed.”

He explained that a large numbers of Christians had been killed for refusing to convert to Islam. The most dangerous situation was when ISIS elements tried to put pressure on a Christian, and threatened to kill his children if he wouldn’t convert to Islam. He was forced to say the words that proved his religious conversion.

White revealed another incident of 4 children, all of which less than 15 years old, were under tremendous pressure to convert into Islam, and beheaded for refusing.

Source:  iraqinews

Two suicide bowers rammed their explosives-laden cars into headquarters of the First Military Command in Seyoun area of Hadhramaut Governorate, eastern Yemen, military source said here on Tuesday.

The suicide bombers belong to Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), which is active in eastern Yemen, he said.

The first booby-trapped car attacked the headquarters’ gate, while the other exploded inside the military area, close of the command’s headquarters, killing and injuring a number of soldiers, he added.

Source:  kuna.net.kw