al-qaida chief ayman al-zawahiri the coordinator 2015 part 19-122-caliphate-al-zawahiri-10-17-russia

C de Waart; CdW Intelligence to Rent [email protected] In Confidence

Al-Qaida chief Ayman al-Zawahiri The Coordinator 2015 Part 19-122-Caliphate-al-Zawahiri-10-17-Russia

Recent developments in the Middle East have led to considerable confusion in the United States and the West regarding the nature of the various players in the region. Which are allies and which are enemies? Who are the “good guys” and who are the “bad guys?”The bricks of Russian domination are now almost all in place.

VLADIMIR PUTIN'S imperialist ambitions were laid bare with an announcement that the secretive Russian war machine is planning to build three new military bases in the Arctic - just 300 miles from the US mainland.

Moscow also revealed blueprints for a new army base on the disputed Kurile islands - some of which are situated less than 20 miles from Japan “

We have to be prepared for Russia to be [in Syria] as a factor for a long time,” “Moscow’s permanent, disruptive presence south of the Bosphorus”.

By firing missiles at ISIL-targets in Syria from ships docked in the Caspian Sea, the Russian military showed an unprecedented ability to launch long-range cruise missiles from corvettes and frigates.

Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi granting the Russian Air force the use of a facility 74 km from Baghdad.

Afghanistan's President Ashraf Ghani in Kabul on Oct. 1. His government has asked Moscow to donate military supplies.

The engagement of Moscow and Tehran by the U.S. and Europe exemplifies the shifting balance of power in the region, What happens in Syria will be key to the new Middle Eastern order,”

“Russia has taken full advantage of the paranoia of Iran’s religious leadership toward the West by supplying Iran with second-rate military equipment at astronomical sums sums. In Syria, Iran’s continued support of Assad’s dictatorial regime has been an integral part of Russia’s foreign policy in the Middle East

A big Syrian/Iranian/Russian push has started in northern Syria The big mystery is its goal. If Putin’s offense in Syria succeeds enough to breath the life into Assad’s regime, Syria’s agony will be extended for years. Far from being something Obama can watch from afar, it has the potential to break open NATO’s southern flank like a can-opener and deliver up the Gulf States, including Saudi Arabia, into the hands of America’s mortal enemies.

C: And then there is also: Al-Qaida chief Ayman al-Zawahiri The Coordinator 2015 Part 19-138-Caliphate- The State of al-Qaeda-30- Bab-el-Mandab (Bab-el-Mandeb strait). Al-

Qaida chief Ayman al-Zawahiri The Coordinator 2015 Part 4-1-AQAP-24- Bab-el-Mandab and Al-Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahiri The Coordinator 2015 Part 4-1-Yemen-

25; If the al-Qaeda franchise were to seize control of Yemen's second largest city, such a

The farther back you can look, the farther forward you are likely to see.–Winston Churchill

CdW Intelligence to Rent of 15 03/05/2023

mailto:[email protected]


dangerous development would certainly create new security dilemmas for locals already enduring a grave humanitarian crisis. It could also pose a serious threat to international traders if jihadist terrorist groups were to usurp control of both the Yemeni

and African sides of the narrow Bab-el-Mandab--one of the world's busiest shipping lanes, linking the Indian Ocean to the

Mediterranean Sea -1-.

NATO “Rings Alarm” Over Russia’s Military Might in MediterraneanGlobal Research, October 23, 2015 Sputnik 21 October 2015

NATO military chiefs are raising alarm over what they now view as “a wider strategic plan of Vladimir Putin’s Russia to challenge the west closer to home”; they now fear Russia’s fast-developing arsenal of ship-launched cruise and ballistic missiles is able to restrict the alliance’s “ability to easily deploy military assets” in the Mediterranean. “Russia has not had any sizeable presence in the Mediterranean since the end of the Cold War. And a lack of investment until recently in its decaying Black Sea fleet, based in Crimea, had led many strategic military planners to overlook the entire theatre as a

possible source of concern when it came to Moscow,” reads a recent article in the UK newspaper The Financial Times.However Russia’s recent success in Syria has changed Western rhetoric.“ We have to be prepared for Russia to be [in Syria] as a factor for a long time,” the newspaper quotes Alexander Vershbow, NATO’s deputy secretary-general as saying.He especially noted what he referred

to as “Moscow’s permanent, disruptive presence south of the Bosphorus”. “[We have to] think about the broader consequences of this build up in the Eastern Mediterranean and the capacity of these airbases,” he said. What sparks even more alarm is that “Russia’s renewed presence” apparently “threatens to restrict the freedom of navigation”, which allows NATO “to quickly and easily deploy military assets”. For the US, for example, it

1 Cees remember the al-Suri plan if the AQSL longer-term strategy: Strategic move in Phase VI; DAR AL HARB to start in 2016. As noted and mentioned in AQ master strategist Abu Mus'ab As-Suri his manifesto; The Call to Global Islamic Resistance, So, the most important enemy targets in detail: Third: The straits and the main sea passages: On the Earth there are five (5) important straits, four of them are in the countries of the Arabs and the Muslims. The fifth one is in America, and it is the Panama Canal. These straits are: 1. The Strait of Hormuz, the oil gate in the Arab-Persian Gulf. 2. The Suez Canal in Egypt. 3 . The Bab el Mandib between Yemen and the African continent. 4. The Gibraltar Strait in Morocco. -- Most of the Western world's economy, in terms of trade and oil, passes through these sea passages (for more see the end of this doc)





could complicate its ability to readily project naval power into the Gulf, the newspaper says. “It would have made a NATO decision to intervene in the Libyan conflict in 2011 far more difficult to plan.”With an enlarged fleet so far south, Russia’s recently inked agreement with Cyprus giving its navy berthing rights also presents fresh challenges, the outlet says. “Russian surveillance and electronic warfare assets now have the potential to be legally and regularly brought close to the British Royal Air Force base at Akrotiri, home of one of NATO’s most important listening stations.” “The deployment to support Assad is not the end of the story,” the newspaper quotes Jonathan Eyal, international director at the Royal United Services Institute in London as saying. “This is really a fundamental shift in Russian posture that will be long lasting.” Russia’s Mediterranean fleet bristles with its most powerful anti-aircraft missiles — s300 systems — which have been fitted to all but its smallest ships, the newspaper says. NATO officials are now alarmed that for NATO it creates what military tacticians refer to as an anti-access area-denial problem — a no fly-zone — but one directed against the west. For the first time, NATO thus has to practice without assuming it will have total control of the skies. “It’s something entirely new,” the newspaper quotes Gen Mercier as saying. “We have now a situation where we are exercising in a scenario where NATO does not necessarily have the balance of military power.”

Russia overrides Middle East cyber wavesDEBKAfile Exclusive Report October 26, 2015, 8:36 AM (IDT)

The distance as the crow flies between Russia’s Syrian air base Al-Hmeineem near Latakia and its Iraqi host facility at Al Taqaddum Air base is 824 km (445 nautical miles). From the Latakia base to Israel, the distance is just 288 km or 155 nautical miles, a hop and a skip in aerial terms. Syria’s ruler Bashar Assad first let Moscow in with the use of a base where 30 fighter and bombing jets are now parked. Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi followed suit Saturday, Oct. 24 by granting the Russian Air force the use of a facility 74 km from Baghdad. Their presence in the two bases draws a strong arc of Russian aerial control at the heart of Middle East. By boosting its two extremities with state-of-the-art electronic warfare systems, Moscow has imposed a new reality whereby it will soon be almost impossible for any air or ground force, American or Israeli, to go into military action above or inside Syria or Iraq without prior coordination with the Russians.The bricks of Russian domination are now almost all in place. In the last week of September, two Ilyushin-20 (IL-20 Coot) super-surveillance planes stole into Syrian airspace, to provide a major upgrade for the Russian air fleet of Sukhoi-30 fighter jets, cargo planes and attack helicopters gathering for combat in Syria. This was first revealed





by DEBKA Weekly’s military and intelligence sources on Oct. 2.The IL-20s, the Russian Air Force’s top-line intelligence-gathering aircraft, brought over from the Baltic Sea, have exceptional features as an intelligence platform. Their four turboprop engines enable it to stay airborne for over 12 hours, using its thermal and infrared sensors, antennas, still and video cameras, and side-looking airborne (SLAR) radar to collect a wide range of data from long distances, day or night, in almost any kind of weather. The Coot-20 collates the data gathered and transmits it to intelligence or operational command centers in Moscow or its Latakia air base by powerful jam-resistant communications systems, satellites and other methods. Aloft over Syria, the IL-20 can supply Russian forces and commanders with a complete, detailed picture of the situation on the ground. Its close proximity to Israel, moreover, enables this wonder plane to scoop up a wealth of data from across the border - not just on IDF military movements on the Golan, but also to eavesdrop on electronic activity and conversations in Jerusalem, Military Staff Headquarters in Tel Aviv, Air Force bases in southern Israel and even the nuclear complex in Dimona in the Negev. DEBKAfile’s military sources add that an Il-20 Coot has been sighted in the last few days at the Iraqi Al Taqaddum Air base near Baghdad.

Then, on Oct. 4, our sources reveal, another Russian super-weapon was brought to Syria by Russian cargo ships: Nine MT-LB armored personnel carriers fitted with the Borisoglebsk 2 electronic warfare systems, which are among the most sophisticated of their kind in the world. These APCs were secretly driven aboard tank carriers to Nabi Yunis, which is the highest peak of the Alawite Mountains along the coastal plain of northwest Syria, and stands 1,562 meters (5,125 feet) above sea level. To render the highly complicated Borisoglebsk 2 device system impermeable to attack, our electronic warfare experts describe it as fitted into the interior and walls of the nine APCS, along with receivers that can pick up transmissions on a wide range of frequencies on the electromagnetic spectrum. From their mountain aerie, its antennas and powerful transmitters are designed to intercept and jam almost any radio signal carried by the electromagnetic waves in military or civilian use. Russian strategists posted this top-of-the-line system in Syria to enable the Russian air force to operate unhindered in Middle Eastern skies and, just as importantly, to neutralize US-led coalition special forces operating deep within Syrian territory, and block or disrupt the operations of rebel groups and Islamic State forces. The Borisoglebsk 2 system has only just started rolling off top secret Russian assembly lines. It took five years to plan and manufacture the system, which went into service for the first time at the beginning of this year on the Ukraine battlefield.From its vantage point in Syria, the Russian electronic warfare system could seriously impair the performance of Israeli intelligence and communication networks arrayed across the Golan and along the northern border in the upper and western Galilee. It could run interference against the IDF’s use of unmanned aerial vehicles (unless they were autonomous), the field operations of Israeli Special Operations forces and air and naval networks, which depend on communications networks in their defense of the country’s northern borders.





Receding Arctic ice would enable faster global shipping routes. By 2030, the WSJ notes, the Northern Sea Route will be passable to shipping for nine months a year. The route could cut down travel time between Europe and East Asia by as much as 60% compared to current routes through the Panama or Suez Canals. Russia, Denmark, Norway, Canada, and the US all have partial claims to the Arctic Circle.

Revival of Russia’s Military Might 'Sensation of the Year' in the WestOct 26, Bursts of Russian bombs in the Middle East have seemingly stricken ordinary Americans “explosive waves,” becoming a kind of psychological bomb in the West. There

hasn’t been such a reaction towards Russia since the launch of Sputnik 1 and Yuri Gagarin flight to space, Russian journalist Vladimir Soloviev claimed. The time for discussion about bearded terrorists has irreversibly passed by – now everybody is talking about Russian pilots. And rather than watching propagandistic videos depicting ISIL’s black flags everybody now is fixing their eyes on clips featuring Russian airstrikes against terrorists’ positions in Syria. Public opinion is a volatile substance. And now it’s for new heroes. It’s the thing that was finally noticed in Washington, Vladimir Soloviev wrote. What is more is that unrest across the ocean was caused not only by the growing might of Russian arms and servicemen, but by the real efficiency of the Russian army, journalist explained.





Ben Hodges, the commander of United States Army forces in Europe, has conjured up common fears that trouble people in the West, saying that he was shocked by Moscow’s ability to deploy their army in the Middle East region in a very short period of time. He was perplexed by this revelation, Soloviev notes. But if the military is always sparing in the expression of their emotions, the media is not, the publicist pointed out. For instance, an Italian journalist has issued an article entitled “Russians are too strong.” Putting it short, the author has claimed that “bursts of Russian bombs in Syria had hit ordinary Americans with blast waves,” referring to nervous response of launching of Russia’s operation among ordinary Americans. It’s a kind of “psychological bomb,” Soloviev stressed. At this point it suddenly appears that American soldiers are no longer a symbol of standoff with “joint powers of evil,” the author continued. And Russian troops have rapidly turned from potential aggressors to fighters against radicals and terrorists. No one uses “little green men” term (referring to Russian troops) to scare kids anymore, because all the kids are using them as a role model now, Soloviev believes.However, the loss of “stars-and-stripes prestige,” according to Soloviev, is not the worst thing of all. Americans are more alarmed not with the decreasing of their popularity itself, but with the fact that they had overlooked this process. Washington has joined a game and lost it. “Americans were watching the Kremlin unwinkingly, while the principal tick was performed in the other place. What is more important is that the US has overlooked the resurrection of a superpower,” he concluded.

Brookings Institution: None of NATO’s Members Could Match Russia in the SkyThe Russian Air Force in Syria left many Western military experts surprised, as they didn’t expect that Russia had the capacity to carry out military operations with such efficiency, the Washington-based Brookings Institution said.

In the past, many experts called the Russian military weak, especially when it came to air and naval forces. But the Russian airstrikes in Syria have proved them wrong.The assessments of the Russian military were inaccurate, as often Western analysts seek to discredit Russia's military capabilities. However, with its effective campaign in Syria, Moscow has once again proved these experts wrong, the Brookings Institution said. The New York Times even pointed out that the Russian Air Force conducts as many airstrikes in a typical day as the US-led coalition did in a month. By firing missiles at ISIL-targets in Syria from ships docked in the Caspian Sea, the Russian military showed an unprecedented ability to launch long-range cruise missiles from corvettes and frigates. "Using small-sized, inexpensive, technologically simple, and easily-produced ships, the Russian navy is displaying a unique capability and is highlighting the results of its naval modernization efforts, much of which are unknown," the Brookings Institution report said. The launch of cruise missiles isn't that big of a deal by itself, but it's the combination of this type of guided rocket and small-size armed corvette warships that fired them makes





military experts stand in awe. The fact that surprised many US experts was that Russia armed its Buyan-M class ships, which displace only 950 tons, with firepower comparable to the much larger US Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and Ticonderoga-class missile cruisers. On September 30, Russia launched a multinational aerial campaign aimed at assisting Damascus-led forces in their fight against terrorist groups, which are trying to oust President Bashar al-Assad. The operation was authorized by legitimate Syrian authorities.

Syrian war gives Russia a chance to test weaponsBERLIN – U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter said last week that four Russian cruise missiles fell in Iran rather than in Syria. To Carter, the errant munitions reflect Russia’s “unprofessional behavior.” To the Russians, they may be part of the reason they are in Syria in the first place. Strategically, Russia’s involvement in the Syrian war looks like a terrible idea, or at least a big gamble. “Doubling down” on President Bashar Assad, as Carter put it, could give the Syrian strongman some breathing space, but not necessarily a lease on life. At the same time, Russia is alienating Turkey, where President Vladimir Putin until recently had a comfortable partner in President Recep Erdogan. It also threatens to make enemies in the Sunni Arab world just when relations with Saudi Arabia seemed to be improving.What happens if the land offensive started by Assad’s forces Wednesday with help from Iranian troops and the Iran-backed Hezbollah militia fails to recapture lost territory? Does Russia have a specific goal or at least a time frame? What about an exit strategy?These questions matter only if Russia is in this for the long haul. It has done nothing to suggest that it is, however. The Kremlin only appears to be setting short-term tactical goals for now because it’s not heavily committed to an outcome in Syria. One of these objectives is to battle-test and show off new hardware. Although the U.S. has been involved in several foreign wars since 1991, Russia has only fought on its own territory or within the former Soviet Union. These conflicts provided limited opportunities for a modern army to show what it can do: They consisted of either large-scale police operations or covert, hybrid warfare. Fighting small, agile bands of Chechen guerrillas in the mountains, helping separatist rebels surround Ukrainian units or running through overconfident but tiny Georgia in just four days is no general’s dream. It also is no way to demonstrate new weaponry to potential foreign buyers or test it for Russia’s own armed forces. It might seem absurd to get involved in a war as a training exercise, but in Putin’s Russia, it could make some sense. The country’s defense spending has risen to about 4.5 percent of gross domestic product this year from just 1.5 percent in 2010, and Russia now has one of the world’s 10 most militarized economies. It is also the second-biggest arms





exporter, with 27 percent of the global market. Last year, it exported $15.5 billion worth of weaponry; that was about 5 percent of its non-commodity exports and 2.6 percent of the total.The 3M-14 Caliber missiles launched toward Syria from the Caspian Sea couldn’t have been tested under battle conditions previously because international treaties only allow the export of a modified version with a 300-km range, which Russia has sold to India and China. But the 26 missiles fired at against Syrian targets were long-range, capable of doing damage at 1,500 km and beyond. If four of the 3M-14s fell in Iran — though Russia has denied this and Iran has not confirmed — that wouldn’t be unusual for the first battle use of a new weapon. Even though Russia has exported its Su-30 fighter jets to a dozen countries, it has never used them under battle conditions. Now, there’s a chance to test four of the aircraft. The state-of-the-art Su-34 fighter-bombers were used in a limited way during the Georgia campaign, but they, too, are getting extensively tested in a real war for the first time. Russia has sent six to Syria.One benefit of the real-life “exercises” is that it makes for impressive video and powerful domestic propaganda. As things stand, Putin is getting these benefits without risking much. According to Western estimates, he has about 2,000 troops in Syria and a few dozen aircraft. The 2008 operation in Georgia involved about 9,000 crack troops and hundreds of tanks. At the current scale, the Syrian operation is not much more than an exercise. So far, Putin’s commitment, along with the military, financial and domestic political risk, is minimal. Things may get serious if Assad’s ground operation sputters, which is likely. Then Putin will face a choice between really doubling down and sending ground troops and telling Assad that he could do no more and that it was time to negotiate a power transition. Putin has proved to be a risk taker in Ukraine, and he will be tempted to take the first path. His generals and defense industry managers will be pushing him in that direction: There are plenty more weapons to test and crack troops to try in battle. The risk of a lengthy conflict, casualties and diplomatic losses in the Middle East would, however, be considerably higher than it is now. By comparison, the second path would be painless: Russia would have brought Assad to the negotiating table and helped end the war, which could be sold as a victory both domestically and internationally.At this point, the Russian leader’s options are open. I doubt he has a long-term plan or thinks he needs an exit strategy. That won’t last. Soon, almost certainly before the end of this year, Putin will need to decide whether to commit himself or end the game.Writer Leonid Bershidsky is a Bloomberg View columnist based in Berlin.

VLADIMIR PUTIN'S imperialist ambitions were laid bare with an announcement that the secretive Russian war machine is planning to build three new military bases in the Arctic - just 300 miles from the US mainland. Moscow also revealed blueprints for a new army base on the disputed Kurile islands - some of which are situated less than 20 miles from Japan.





US fears Russian subs near undersea cables may cut off communications – report Published time: 26 Oct, 2015 US military and intelligence officials are anxious about Russian submarines and spy ships operating around undersea global communications cables, The New York Times reported, adding that the main concern is Russia cutting the cables during conflict.The report added that there was no concrete evidence supporting the concerns and was based on increased mistrust of any Russian activity. “I’m worried every day about what the Russians may be doing,” Rear Adm. Frederick J. Roegge, commander of the Navy’s submarine fleet in the Pacific, told the newspaper.The undersea cables are seen as a serious vulnerability because of their importance in US economy and military and the lack of protection against a potential attack. They carry global business worth more than $10 trillion a day and more than 95 percent of daily communications, according to the NYT. But the locations of most of the cables are well-known and can be relatively easily reached without anyone noticing. “The risk here is

that any country could cause damage to the system and do it in a way that is completely covert, without having a warship with a cable-cutting equipment right in the area,” said Michael Sechrist, a former project manager for a Harvard-M.I.T. research project funded in part by the US Defense Department. The Pentagon is monitoring Russian Naval missions in the locations of the cables by spy satellites, ships and planes. One particular concern is the Russian scientific ship Yantar, which is operated by the Navy. It carries two Mir-type submersibles that can dive up to 6,000 meters. Last month, the ship cruised off the US East Coast on its way to Cuba, where a major cable lands near the US military base at Guantanamo Bay. The US itself has a history of tampering with other nations’ cables, although their interest has generally been in espionage. For example, the submarine USS Jimmy Carter is believed to have equipment for the underwater splicing of optical cables.

Afghanistan Looks to Russia for Military Hardware Afghanistan's President Ashraf Ghani in Kabul on Oct. 1. His government has asked Moscow to donate military supplies.





Kremlin’s more-assertive foreign policy raises potential for clash with U.S. By MARGHERITA STANCATI in Kabul and NATHAN HODGE in MoscowOct. 25, 2015Afghanistan, battered by worsening security, is reaching out to an old ally and patron—Russia—just as the Kremlin is seeking to reassert its position as a heavyweight on the world stage. President Ashraf Ghani has asked Moscow for artillery, small arms and Mi-35 helicopter gunships for his country’s struggling military, Afghan and Russian officials say, after the U.S. and its allies pulled most of their troops from Afghanistan and reduced financial aid. The outreach has created another opening for the Kremlin, stepping up the potential for confrontation with Washington. East-West relations are already strained over such issues as Ukraine and Middle Eastern policy.“Russia is seizing the opportunity,” a U.S. official said. Beyond such rivalries, however, the move also reflects Russian concerns that the deterioration of security in Afghanistan could destabilize Central Asia—and bring Islamic extremism closer to its own border. At an Oct. 16 summit in Kazakhstan, Russian President Vladimir Putin said the situation “was becoming close to critical,” with militant groups looking to expand their reach across the region. “It’s important for us to be ready to react in concert to just such a scenario,” he told other Central Asian leaders.Russia launched an air war in Syria last month with the aim, it said, of combating the rise of Islamic State in the region by buttressing its ally, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. It also has forged a new alliance with Iran and Iraq with the same goals.The Kremlin’s muscular new foreign policy has raised hopes among Afghan politicians that Russia will come back to their country as a friendlier ally in the wake of the Western drawdown, which has seen the U.S. troop level drop to about 10,000 this year, from a peak of about 100,000 in 2010-11.On Oct. 15, President Barack Obama announc d he was shelving plans to withdraw most of the remaining U.S. forces by the end of his second term. Washington now anticipates keeping around 5,500 troops after January 2017, in an acknowledgment of the disintegrating security situation.The last Red Army troops withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989. That war was a national trauma on both sides, ending in defeat for Moscow and the eventual collapse of Afghanistan’s communist government. Because of that history, direct intervention in Afghanistan would be a very hard sell for the Russian public.Alexander Mantytskiy, Russia’s ambassador to Afghanistan, said his government is considering the Afghan requests for military assistance, which he said have increased this year following the withdrawal of most U.S. and allied North Atlantic Treaty Organization forces. “We will provide some assistance, but it doesn’t mean that any soldier from the Russian Federation will be here on Afghan soil,” he said. “Why should we carry the burden of a problem that was not solved by the Americans and NATO countries?”The Pentagon in the past purchased Russian-made Mi-17 transport helicopters, and Russia trained Afghan technicians to maintain them. But Moscow’s military intervention in Ukraine in early 2014 prompted the U.S. to end that cooperation.Abdul Rashid Dostum, Afghanistan’s first vice president, has been at the forefront of efforts to reach out to Russia directly. An ethnic Uzbek who rose to prominence as a military commander in Afghanistan’s pro-Soviet government, Mr. Dostum met with Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and other defense officials in Moscow this month





to discuss possible assistance.“Gen. Dostum wanted Russia to pay attention to the situation in Afghanistan,” said his spokesman, Sultan Faizy, who described Russia’s response to the request as positive. “Northern Afghanistan and countries allied to Russia are under threat—that is why Russia is willing to help.” The former warlord also met Ramzan Kadyrov, the pro-Kremlin leader of Russia’s Chechen Republic. Mr. Kadyrov, who is a major presence on Russian social media, posted photos of the two of them together, enthusing about Mr. Dostum’s military prowess. “Kabul needs the support of Russia, just like Syria,” Mr. Kadyrov said on his Vkontakte page. “We expressed assurance that the leadership of Russia will take the appropriate response to this question.” As Kabul seeks new sponsors following the withdrawal of most U.S. and allied troops, a renewed competition between Moscow and Washington is beginning to take shape.In August, longtime U.S. ally Pakistan said it would buy four Mi-35 helicopters from Moscow in a sign of warming relations there.The last batch of Mi-17s was delivered to Afghanistan a year ago, and U.S. lawmakers have prohibited contracting with Rosoboronexport, the Russian arms exporter, except to help maintain the Afghan fleet and supply spare parts. Kabul now wants a separate deal with Rosoboronexport for Mi-35 helicopters. Mr. Ghani’s spokesman, Zafar Hashemi, said Kabul hopes Moscow will donate the equipment. “Should the Russians ask for payment, the Afghan government will purchase limited equipment, but pay for it from its own, domestically generated revenues,” he said. Afghanistan’s tax collections amount to less than $5 billion a year. It depends mostly on international largess to pay the salaries of its army and police and provide fuel and ammunition to keep insurgents at bay.The U.S. is still Afghanistan’s biggest backer: Since the 2001 invasion that toppled the Taliban, Washington has committed more than $109 billion to the country’s reconstruction. The other major donors are Japan and European Union countries.The U.S. is currently looking for other providers to supply Afghanistan with helicopters, according to the U.S. official and others. Afghan forces badly need air support to reverse gains by the Taliban and other insurgent groups, who have put the government on the defensive and encircled major cities. Last month, Taliban fighters briefly captured the northern city of Kunduz, their biggest victory in 14 years of war. There has been heavy fighting elsewhere in the north, including in Faryab, Jowzjan and Badakhshan provinces.Afghanistan’s neighbors—Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan—have recently sent reinforcements to their southern borders in response to heavy fighting in bordering Afghan provinces, Afghan and Russian officials said. Military and diplomatic officials of all three countries declined to comment.Mr. Mantytskiy, the Russian ambassador in Kabul, said Russia has sent additional military hardware to Tajikistan. Some Afghan and foreign officials say Russia is cultivating Afghan power brokers in the north, such as warlords and local politicians, as part of their efforts to contain extremism along the border. Mr. Mantytskiy denied this. During a trip to Russia earlier this month, Nazir Ahmadzai, an Afghan lawmaker, said he confronted Russian officials about their alleged support to individual power brokers. “We consider it illegal,” said Mr. Ahmadzai, who said any outreach should go through the central government. “They defended themselves. They said: ‘We have no choice, because the rise of [Islamic State] in Afghanistan is a big threat to us.” The Russian president said recently that between 5,000 and 7,000 people from former Soviet republics had joined the ranks of Islamic State in the Middle East. Signs of its appearance in Afghanistan are of particular concern.Other militant groups include the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, whose fighters were pushed into Afghanistan as a result of a Pakistani army operation on the other side of the





border. Afghanistan has long been of strategic interest to Russia even after the withdrawal of Soviet troops. Moscow backed the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance in the 1990s, providing weapons and support to jihadist commanders who once fought them.The Russian military maintains a ground force in Tajikistan centered on the 6,000-strong 201st Motorized Rifle Division, which previously served as Tajikistan’s main border force along the frontier with Afghanistan. Col. Yaroslav Roshchupkin, spokesman for that division, said the unit was being reinforced with an aviation element, primarily transport helicopters, at a base in Ayni, outside of Dushanbe. “It’s a return of assets once stationed at the base,” he said.

Oct 21, Big players in the public finance sectors have issued warning that Russia’s economy is in a bullet-speed deterioration. Sanctions from the West are still very much strictly enforced, banning all Russian goods from exports and banning foreign goods from imports. Saudi Arabia dominates the oil market. It does not help that Russian President Vladimir Putin has involved the country in the war against ISIS in Syria, sending expensive missiles and throwing millions of its budget down the drain. According to a report from The Telegraph, financial analysts at the Standard & Poor have repeatedly expressed warnings that Russia’s deficit will be bloated to 4.4pc of GDP this year.

MOSCOW July 2015, — Despite the pressure of Western sanctions, the sharp devaluation of the Russian ruble and runaway inflation at home, Russian defense firms featured in this year's Defense News Top 100 ranking saw surging revenues as exports reached new highs and the government poured money into defense procurement. Russia's largest defense firm, air defense concern Almaz-Antey, saw revenues rise 10 percent to $9.2 billion, up $883.5 million over 2013. The Tactical Missile Corp., maker of air-to-air systems, saw the most drastic increase with a 48.6 percent rise in revenue to $2.8 billion in 2014. Other Russian firms that made the ranking were the United Aircraft Corp., which owns Sukhoi, MiG and Irkut, and saw revenues rise 7 percent to $6.2 billion; Russian Helicopters, which finished at $3.96 billion, up 16 percent over 2013; and the United Engine-building Company, which saw a 25 percent increase over 2013 revenues to $3.3 billion in 2014.Other firms that made the list were tank manufacturer Uralvagonzavod, which reported defense revenues of $1.54 billion in 2014 — a 1 percent rise — and electronics component manufacturer RTI, rising 15 percent to $947 million. Russia's shipbuilding conglomerate, the United Shipbuilding Corp., declined to participate in the ranking. The impressive rise in revenues for Russian defense manufacturers, despite the pressure of Russia's economic crisis and Western sanctions, was likely due to record-setting export revenues and government procurement expenditures as President Vladimir Putin's decade-long $350 billion military rearmament drive kicked into high gear. Export and Procurement Surge Russian firms exported a record $13.2 billion worth of military hardware abroad in 2014, continuing a nearly 10-year year-on-year rise in export revenues for Russia's defense industry. Exports were largely unharmed by sanctions, as Russia's major trading partners are non-Western nations with close political ties to Moscow, such as China, India, Algeria and Venezuela. At the same time, Russian procurement hit a new high, with about 2 trillion rubles (US $33.2 billion) spent on new equipment in 2014, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said in April. This was a large increase over the 2013 state defense order, which Medvedev said was valued at around 1.5 trillion rubles.

According to Dave Majumdar of The National Interest, “Only about a quarter of Russian ground forces are fully staffed, well-trained professional troops,” the author of the article





notes. “Those professional soldiers — who are not quite trained to Western standards — are part of a corps of rapid reaction forces.” “The country fell behind in many crucial technological areas, particularly during the 1990s,” Majumdar noted. “For example, the Russians are well behind on key technologies for building precision weapons, targeting pods and active electronically scanned array radars — which are just a few examples.” While Moscow and Beijing arm themselves for the conflicts to come, modernizing weapons and using their newfound strength to menace America’s allies, the Democrats have opted to go after the U.S. military with a vengeance,” the author noted. A similar trend is seen by the western nations till claiming The Peace Dividend from dacades go, and during the Wales summit agreeing on restoring the 2 pct GDP for defense; but takes ten years to do so.

FBI agent Gregory Monaghan. According to Monaghan, the SVR operates abroad through three classes on foreign agents. The first class of agents the SVR deploys are "sent on 'deep cover' assignments, meaning they are directing to assume false identities, work seemingly normal jobs, and attempt to conceal all of their connections to Russia." The second class of SVR agents sent abroad do not attempt to conceal their connections to Russia. Instead, these agents "often pose as official representatives of the Russian Federation, including in positions as diplomats or trade officials." SVR agents in these positions have an added benefit, as they are "typically entitled to diplomatic immunity from prosecution." The third category of SVR agents operate abroad under "non-official cover — sometimes referred to as 'NOCs.'" NOCs typically pose as private business employees and "typically are subject to less scrutiny by the host government, and, in many cases, are never identified as intelligence agents by the host government." All three types of agent operate fully under the control of the SVR. Despite their differing cover stories, each agent has the same mission of gathering "information for Russia about the foreign country" as well as recruiting "intelligence sources that could assist in influencing the policies of public and private institutions in the foreign country.

More than 100 cargo vessels have reached Syria in the past few weeks, in the biggest buildup in shipping for over a year as Russia steps up its support for ally President Bashar al-Assad. The ships have arrived directly from Russia, Black Sea ports such as Constantza in Romania as well as from Lebanon and Egypt, according to shipping data, maritime intelligence and international trade sources. There were just seven ships arriving at Tartous in late August, but this had jumped to 29 in the week of October 12, according to data collated by UK-headquartered maritime technology company Pole Star. It showed 95 ships arrived at Tartous between mid-September and October 21. In the other main port of Latakia, ship arrivals peaked during September with a total of 34 ship arrivals in the period from mid September to October 21, Pole Star data showed.Separate tracking data on Thomson Reuters Eikon showed that since the middle of September at least 60 ships arrived at





Latakia and Tartous Russia's Northern, Black Sea and Baltic Fleets have also dispatched oil tankers to supply aviation fuel for sorties by Russian air force planes, while a reconnaissance ship had been deployed to monitor communications in Syria and surrounding countries and their territorial waters, Interfax news agency said at the beginning of October, quoting a military source.

Beware of Iran, Russia in fight against ISBy Eytan Gilboa / Director, Center For International Communication At Bar-ilan University, Israel Sunday, October 25th, 2015 at 12:02amRecent developments in the Middle East have led to considerable confusion in the United States and the West regarding the nature of the various players in the region. Which are allies and which are enemies? Who are the “good guys” and who are the “bad guys?”Politicians and officials, eager to sell a controversial negotiation, an agreement or a policy, have contributed to the confusion. The strongest examples of the perplexity that Middle East events have created in the public mind center on the Islamic State, Iran and Russia and their interests and involvement in the civil wars in Syria, Iraq and Yemen. Much of the confusion originates from the fierce confrontation between Sunnis and Shiites and hegemonic aspirations of Iran and Russia.Islamic State has been fighting the regime of Bashar el Assad in Syria, which is responsible for the murder of more than 300,000 people, the injury of hundreds of thousands and the plight of millions who have become homeless and refugees in their own country and around it. The IS is trying to remove Assad from power. So, Assad is “bad” and IS is “good?” Not really. Both are wreaking death and destruction on a massive scale. The IS is the cruelest Sunni terrorist organization in recent history. It systemically murders Shiite Muslims and Christians, conducts genocide against ethnic and religious minorities such as the Yazidis, beheads and burns alive opponents, and destroys precious archaeological and religious sites.Shiite Iran is fighting the IS and has also signed an agreement to refrain from developing nuclear weapons. If the IS is “bad” and Iran is fighting it, and has even become a “peaceful country,” it must be placed on the list of the good guys. Should it not?And if the IS is the enemy of the United States, by the logic of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” Iran is a U.S. ally. This is exactly the impression the Obama administration has been trying to sell the American public during and after the negotiations over the nuclear deal. This perception however, is totally false. While IS represents the worst of Sunni terrorism, Iran represents the worst of Shiite terrorism. Both are the main sources of violence and instability in the Middle East, and the largest exporters of global terrorism.Iran isn’t fighting the IS because of a concern for human rights. It wants to save the Assad regime, and does so in order to protect the supply lines of weapons and equipment from Teheran via Syria to Hezbollah, the Shiite terrorist organization that controls Lebanon.Iran wants to dominate the Muslim world and in order to accomplish this goal seeks to establish and dominate a contiguous strategic axis that includes itself, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. It also wishes to overthrow regimes in pro-Western Arab countries, and convert them to Islamic theocracies like its own. Such has been the case in Yemen, where Iran has been helping the Houthis to win the civil war. Regional domination and the annihilation of Israel are the reasons Iran has sought to acquire nuclear weapons. Even after signing the nuclear deal, Iran’s leaders continue to view the U.S. as an enemy, as the “Great Satan.”Recently, Russia decided to intervene militarily in Syria. Like Iran, it is fighting the IS, and wants to save the Assad regime, but for its own reasons: Putin is exploiting the leadership void created by Obama in the Middle East in order to reassert Russia’s influence, further diminish U.S. power in the region, and balance the negative





repercussions of the crisis in the Ukraine. Russia mainly attacks rebels who are fighting Assad, some of whom have been trained and equipped by the U.S. The IS terrorism is a major threat. The U.S., Assad, Iran and Russia all have an interest in defeating this extreme movement. But a triumph over IS is their only common interest.Iran and Russia have a broader agenda that represents a much greater threat to American global and regional interests. Understanding this agenda is crucial to developing an effective American counterstrategy. Professor Eytan Gilboa is heading a delegation of academic experts to New Mexico, Arizona and Colorado for a speaking tour that has been organized by the Israel Public Diplomacy Forum.

Regards CEES:




al-qaida chief ayman al-zawahiri the coordinator 2015 part 19-122-caliphate-al-zawahiri-10-17-russia

Documents