Intelligence Agencies
secretly supplying weapons to Islamic State in Afghanistan & Syria
(1) Mysterious
Helicopters supply weapons to Taliban & Islamic State in Afghanistan
(2) Daesh (ISIS) in
Syria Supplied with Arms by Foreign Agencies
(3) UN report:
20,000-30,000 ISIS fighters in Iraq & Syria
(4) White Helmets
plan another False-Flag Chemical Attack in Northwestern Syria
(5) Daesh (Islamic
State) beheads Taliban Commander in Afghanistan
(6) Saudi Arabia to
fund continued US military force in Syria
(7) Israeli Think
Tank: Destruction of Islamic State is a Strategic Mistake
(8) Jerusalem Post
article calls for a "weak but functioning Islamic State"
(9) Salon: Israeli
think tank says ISIS serves a "strategic purpose" in the West's
interests
(10) Don’t Destroy
ISIS; It’s A “Useful Tool” Against Iran, Hezbollah, Syria
(1) Mysterious
Helicopters supply weapons to Taliban & Islamic State in Afghanistan
Russia records
unidentified helicopters delivering weapons to Taliban, IS in
Afghanistan
Military & Defense August 23, 17:37 UTC+3
Russia has recorded flights of mysterious helicopters
supplying weapons to units of the
Taliban and the Islamic State active in
Afghanistan
MOSCOW, August 23. /TASS/. Russia has recorded flights of
unidentified helicopters delivering
weapons to the Taliban (a movement outlawed in Russia) and the Islamic State (a
terror group outlawed in Russia)
units active in Afghanistan, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said at a briefing on
Thursday.
"We would like to once again point to the flights of
unidentified helicopters in northern
Afghanistan, which deliver weapons and
ammunition to local ISIL [the former name of the Islamic State group - TASS] units and Taliban members
cooperating with the group. In
particular, the Afghan media and local residents say that such helicopters were seen in the Sar-e Pol
Province," the Russian diplomat
said.
"This is happening in
close proximity to the borders of Central Asian states, while many of the IS
militants active in Afghanistan come from those countries," Zakharova pointed
out.
The Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman also said that the
Afghan security agencies, as well as
the Command of US and NATO
troops in Afghanistan, did not react to those helicopter flights.
"In this regard, question arise -
who is behind these flights, who provides weapons to terrorists and secretly
creates springboards for them near
the southern borders of the CIS and why is it happening at all, given NATO’s actual control of Afghanistan’s
airspace," Zakharova said.
Zakharova said militants from Islamic State and Jabhat
al-Nusra (terrorist groups outlawed
in Russia) are hiding in Rukban refugee
camp on the border with Jordan, using refugees as a human shield, with the knowledge of US military.
"The Syrian authorities and UN staff still have no access to
Rukban, the biggest camp for
internally displaced persons close to the Jordanian border," she said.
"Several hundred IS militants as well as al-Nusra
militants, possessing heavy
weaponry, are hiding among civilians who have found themselves hostages, and are using
them as a human shield," she went on
to say.
"Unfortunately, all this happens, and we have information
confirming this, with the knowledge
of the US military who control the
55-kilometer zone around their illegal base in Al-Tanf on the Syrian territory," she added.
The diplomat said Syria’s northeast remains in practice under
the control of US military, who "continue pandering to local military units, in particular, buying their
loyalty with weapons supplies".
"Thus, the process of setting up pseudo-state structures that
are not envisaged by the Syrian
legislation is in full swing in the
Trans-Euphrates region," she stated.
According to Zakharova, Washington has practically started
plundering Syria’s’ national wealth.
"The US, that last week said it would stop financing some programs on
stabilization of Syria, within the
framework of which the activity of anti-government structures was financed in practice, has shifted
responsibility to its allies," she
said.
"Now they engage in restoring and updating the oil producing
infrastructure in the northeast of Syria and in practice have started plundering the Syrian national wealth,
this time not with their own means,
but with the money received from other participants in the so-called US-led coalition, namely
Europeans and Arabs.
(2) Daesh (ISIS) in
Syria Supplied with Arms by Foreign Agencies
Daesh in Syria Supplied with Arms by Foreign Agencies –
Russian Envoy to UN © Sputnik /
MORAD SAEED
02:05 24.08.2018
UNITED NATIONS (Sputnik) - Russia has proof that the Islamic
State terror group* has been receiving weapons from other countries with
the help of foreign security agencies, Russian envoy to the UN Vassily Nebenzia said.
"We have amassed evidence that weapons are being smuggled [to
Syria] from outside, including
through semi-legal organizations or even under protection of security agencies from
other countries," he told the United
Nations on Thursday.
Reported Daesh Attack Kills Two, Injures One in Paris Suburb
- Police Nebenzia said Russia
planned to discuss ways of putting an end to weapon deliveries to Daesh at an
international conference on combating
illicit arms trafficking, scheduled in Moscow on September 3-4. The diplomat waned that Islamic
militants were about to step up
inroads into government-controlled territories, primarily near the northwestern city of Idlib. He added
Daesh did not shy away from using
children to stage terror attacks.
Nebenzia also said Russian armed forces had helped free over
1,400 towns and villages in Syria
and bring over 96 percent of its territory back under government control,
securing the return of over 1.5 million
Syrian refugees.
Nebenzia noted that Al Qaeda* can fill the vacuum in Syria
left by retreating Daesh fighters
and become a major obstacle to the ongoing peace process.
"Our assessment is that Al Qaeda and its allies make take
the initiative, becoming an obstacle
to a peaceful settlement in Syria, as
Daesh continues to crumble," he said.
*The Islamic State (also known as Daesh, ISIS, ISIL or IS)
and Al Qaeda are terror
organizations, banned in US, Russia and many other countries.
(3) UN report:
20,000-30,000 ISIS fighters in Iraq & Syria
UN report: 20,000-30,000 ISIL fighters left in Iraq and
Syria
Report by UN sanctions monitors says up to 30,000 ISIL
fighters still remain despite the
armed group's defeat.
14 Aug 2018
Between 20,000 and 30,000 members of the Islamic State of
Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, also
known as ISIS) group, remain in Iraq and Syria despite its defeat and a halt in the
flow of foreigners joining its
ranks, according to a new United Nations report.
Released on Monday, the report by UN sanctions monitors
estimates that between 3,000 and
4,000 ISIL fighters were based in Libya, while some of the key operatives in the armed
group were being relocated to
Afghanistan.
Member-states told the monitors that the total membership in
Iraq and Syria was "between 20,000
and 30,000 individuals, roughly equally
distributed between the two countries".
"Among these is still a significant component of the many
thousands of active foreign
terrorist fighters," said the report.
The sanctions monitoring team submits independent reports
every six months to the Security
Council on ISIL, also known as ISIS, and
al-Qaeda.
ISIL's initial aim was to create a so-called caliphate across
Iraq, Syria and beyond.
In early 2014, it took over the Syrian city of Raqqa and
declared it its capital. A few months later, the group conquered the
Iraqi city of Mosul, where its
leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi declared a caliphate in June 2014.
Within a year, ISIL took control of most of eastern Syria and
about one-third of Iraq's
territory.
In the same year, an international coalition of 77 countries
was formed with the aim to "degrade
and ultimately defeat ISIL".
By 2017, the group was militarily defeated and largely driven
out of all major cities, including
its capital.
By January 2018, ISIL was confined to small pockets of
territory in Syria, although the new
report said the group "showed greater
resilience" in eastern Syria.
In Syria, ISIL "is still able to mount attacks. It does not
fully control any territory in Iraq,
but it remains active through sleeper
cells" of agents hiding out in the desert and elsewhere, the report added.
Foreign fighters
The flow of foreigners leaving ISIL "remains lower than
expected" and no other arena has
emerged as a favourite destination for foreign fighters, although "significant
numbers have made their way to
Afghanistan", said the report.
There are an estimated 3,500 - 4,500 fighters in Afghanistan
and those numbers are increasing,
according to the report.
The flow of foreign fighters towards the group "has
essentially come to a halt," it
added.
ISIL finances are drying up, with one member-state estimating
that its total reserves were "in the
low hundreds of millions" of US dollars.
Some revenue from oil fields in northeastern Syria continues to flow to the group.
ISIL commands only 250 to 500 members in Yemen, compared to
between 6,000 and 7,000 al-Qaeda
fighters.
In the Sahel, the group is active mostly at the border
between Mali and Niger.
SOURCE: AL JAZEERA AND NEWS AGENCIES
(4) White Helmets
plan another False-Flag Chemical Attack in Northwestern Syria
Thu Aug 23, 2018 4:11
White Helmets, Tahrir
Al-Sham Plan to Stage Another False-Flag Chemical Attack in
Northwestern Syria
TEHRAN (FNA)- Tahrir al-Sham Hay'at (the Levant Liberation
Board or the Al-Nusra Front) and the
pro-militant White Helmets Organization
are planning to carry out a fake chemical attack in Lattakia to later accuse the Syrian Army of the incident
ahead of the government forces'
upcoming operation, media reports said.
The Arabic-language website of Sputnik quoted several local
sources as reporting that the White
Helmets have sent 8 truck vans carrying
chemicals stored in a local Chlorine Recycling Company near the town of al-Tamah at the border with Turkey
to Jisr al-Shughour in Northeastern
Lattakia which is under the control of Tahrir al-Sham under tight security measures.
It went on to say that the Chemicals would go through Ariha
town under tight security measures
of Tahrir al-Sham. The White Helmets were also called for help by Tahrir al-Sham in
several regions of Idlib concurrent
with the arrival of chemicals in Jisr al-Shughour.
In a relevant development earlier this month, the White
Helmets had sent chemicals for
Turkistani Islamic Party in Jisr al-Shughour in Northeastern Idlib.
Irregular movements by the White Helmets have been recently
spotted in a large triangular region
from the Turkish borderline to Jisr
al-Shughour and the borders with Lattakia in West, the media outlet reported, adding that Tahrir al-Sham
and White Helmets are preparing to
launch a fake chemical attack in Idlib to later accuse the Damascus forces.
Media sources reported earlier this month that the Turkish
army sent several trucks carrying
chlorine to the Ankara-backed terrorists' stronghold in Idlib, adding that a
number of commanders of militant
groups left the region.
The Arabic-language website of Sputnik news agency quoted
local sources in Idlib province as
saying that a Turkish military convoy,
consisting of tens of trucks, and accompanied by Tahrir al-Sham terrorists, entered Syria through Kafr
Lousin passageway in Northern Idlib
and were transferred to the region under the supervision of Turkey in Jisr al-Shughour in Western
Idlib and Northwestern Hama.
They added that 8 trucks carrying plastic barrels containing
fluid Chlorine were unloaded in one
of the bases of Turkistani terrorist
group in the village of Halouz in Western Jisr al-Shughour.
Also, 18 other trucks, carrying prefabricated residential
boxes, cement walls and other
technical equipment, communication systems and electronic sniper guns, were
transferred to Jabal Ishtabraq region.
The sources also said that 3 trucks moved towards Turkey at
night under heavy security measures
of Tahrir al-Sham Hay'at, raising the
speculations that they had transferred the foreign terrorist commanders of Tahrir al-Sham to
Turkey.
Meantime, the Turkish forces stopped activities of
al-Barqoum checkpoint which was the
biggest Tahrir al-Sham checkpoint in
Aleppo-Damascus highway.
(5) Daesh (Islamic
State) beheads Taliban Commander in Afghanistan
In a first, Daesh beheads senior Afghan Taliban Commander in
Afghanistan
19 Jul, 2018
*KABUL - Local officials say a senior Taliban commander has
been beheaded by the Islamic State
(IS) militants in northern Jawzjan
province of Afghanistan . *
READ MORE:COAS General Bajwa holds important meeting with
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad Bin
Salman Confirming the incident, the
provincial governor’s spokesman Mohammad
Reza Ghafoori said that the Taliban commander was identified as Mulla Burjan also known as Al Khabis.
Mulla Burjan alongside his colleague had come under the
captivity of IS in Darzab district
of the province and was beheaded by the militant group on Tuesday, the official
said.
Ghafoori added that at least 70 Taliban fighters and 52 IS
militants were killed, following
days of fierce clashes between the two militant groups in three villages of Darzab
district.
According to the provincial governor’s spokesman, currently,
the clashes ongoing between the
Taliban and IS militants with both sides
using light and heavy weapons.
Expressing concerns in this regard, the local residents
called on the government to launch a
clearance operation in the district.
(6) Saudi Arabia to
fund continued US military force in Syria
Tue Aug 21, 2018 5:41
Russian Media: S.
Arabia Spending Billions of Dollars to Keep US in Syria
TEHRAN (FNA)- A leading Russian newspaper reported that the
US was on the verge of a pull-out
from Syria but continued to keep its military build-up in the country after Saudi
Arabia undertook to finance their
stay with multibillion-dollar budget.
The Russian-language Svobodnaya Pressa daily said Riyadh
and Washington have not yet worked
out the timeline for the budgeting, but
Saudi Arabia has, though unwillinglly, taken up to provide for the multibillion dollar financing.
The report said Saudi Arabia was unwilling to make the
spending despite Washington's
warnings about its pullout, but it conceded after Trump used its options to pressure
Saudi Arabia that include Riyadh's fears
of the collapse of anti-Assad coalition after a US withdrawal.
According to the report, the Saudi spending might entail deployment of
thousands of US troops in Syria.
Last week, US President Donald Trump praised Washington's
cancellation of $230mln in funding
for stabilization in war-torn Syria, stating that let "other rich countries" pay
it, while the US spends its money on
its military and allies.
The US officially ended support for stabilization projects in
Syria on Friday. The $230mln worth
of funding had been frozen for months before that however, after House forbid any
funding for government-controlled
territories in Syria.
"The United States has ended the ridiculous 230 Million
Dollar yearly development payment to
Syria. Saudi Arabia and other rich countries in the Middle East will start making
payments instead of the US. I want
to develop the US, our military and countries that help us!" Trump wrote on Twitter.
Trump has long been promising the US would leave Syria "like
very soon", but so far the
stabilization money is the only thing that's been withdrawn. American military
presence and support for
anti-government fighters remains, and, according to diplomat Brett McGurk, is gearing up to a "final
phase" of the offensive against
Daesh (ISIS or ISIL).
(7) Israeli Think
Tank: Destruction of Islamic State is a Strategic Mistake
The Destruction of Islamic State is a Strategic Mistake
By Prof. Efraim Inbar
August 2, 2016
The West should seek the further weakening of Islamic State,
but not its destruction. A weak but
functioning IS can undermine the appeal of the caliphate among radical
Muslims; keep bad actors focused on one another rather than on Western targets;
and hamper Iran’s quest for regional
hegemony.
BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 353, August 2, 2016
Hebrew version of this article
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The West should seek the further weakening
of Islamic State, but not its destruction. A weak but functioning IS can
undermine the appeal of the caliphate among radical Muslims; keep bad actors
focused on one another rather than on Western targets; and hamper Iran’s quest
for regional hegemony.
US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter recently gathered defense
ministers from allied nations to plan what officials hope will be the decisive
stage in the campaign to eradicate the Islamic State (IS) organization. This is
a strategic mistake.
IS, a radical Islamist group, has killed thousands of people
since it declared an Islamic caliphate in June 2014, with the Syrian city of
Raqqa as its de facto capital. It captured tremendous international attention by
swiftly conquering large swaths of land and by releasing gruesome pictures of
beheadings and other means of execution.
But IS is primarily successful where there is a political
void. Although the offensives in Syria and Iraq showed IS’s tactical
capabilities, they were directed against failed states with weakened militaries.
On occasions when the poorly trained IS troops have met well-organized
opposition, even that of non-state entities like the Kurdish militias, the
group’s performance has been less convincing. When greater military pressure was
applied and Turkish support dwindled, IS went into retreat.
It is true that IS has ignited immense passion among many
young and frustrated Muslims all over the world, and the caliphate idea holds
great appeal among believers. But the relevant question is what can IS do,
particularly in its current situation? The terrorist activities for which it
recently took responsibility were perpetrated mostly by lone wolves who declared
their allegiance to IS; they were not directed from Raqqa. On its own, IS is
capable of only limited damage.
A weak IS is, counterintuitively, preferable to a destroyed
IS. IS is a magnet for radicalized Muslims in countries throughout the world.
These volunteers are easier targets to identify, saving intelligence work. They
acquire destructive skills in the fields of Syria and Iraq that are of undoubted
concern if they return home, but some of them acquire shaheed status while still
away – a blessing for their home countries. If IS is fully defeated, more of
these people are likely to come home and cause trouble.
If IS loses control over its territory, the energies that
went into protecting and governing a state will be directed toward organizing
more terrorist attacks beyond its borders. The collapse of IS will produce a
terrorist diaspora that might further radicalize Muslim immigrants in the West.
Most counter-terrorism agencies understand this danger. Prolonging the life of
IS probably assures the deaths of more Muslim extremists at the hands of other
bad guys in the Middle East, and is likely to spare the West several terrorist
attacks.
Moreover, a weak and lingering IS could undermine the
attraction of the caliphate idea. A dysfunctional and embattled political entity
is more conducive to the disillusionment of Muslim adherents of a caliphate in
our times than an IS destroyed by a mighty America-led coalition. The latter
scenario perfectly fits the narrative of continuous and perfidious efforts on
the part of the West to destroy Islam, which feeds radical Muslim hatred for
everything the West stands for.
The continuing existence of IS serves a strategic purpose.
Why help the brutal Assad regime win the Syrian civil war? Many radical
Islamists in the opposition forces, i.e., Al Nusra and its offshoots, might find
other arenas in which to operate closer to Paris and Berlin. Is it in the West’s
interests to strengthen the Russian grip on Syria and bolster its influence in
the Middle East? Is enhancing Iranian control of Iraq congruent with American
objectives in that country? Only the strategic folly that currently prevails in
Washington can consider it a positive to enhance the power of the
Moscow-Tehran-Damascus axis by cooperating with Russia against IS.
Furthermore, Hizballah – a radical Shiite anti-Western
organization subservient to Iran – is being seriously taxed by the fight against
IS, a state of affairs that suits Western interests. A Hizballah no longer
involved in the Syrian civil war might engage once again in the taking of
western hostages and other terrorist acts in Europe.
The Western distaste for IS brutality and immorality should
not obfuscate strategic clarity. IS are truly bad guys, but few of their
opponents are much better. Allowing bad guys to kill bad guys sounds very
cynical, but it is useful and even moral to do so if it keeps the bad guys busy
and less able to harm the good guys. The Hobbesian reality of the Middle East
does not always present a neat moral choice.
The West yearns for stability, and holds out a naive hope
that the military defeat of IS will be instrumental in reaching that goal. But
stability is not a value in and of itself. It is desirable only if it serves our
interests. The defeat of IS would encourage Iranian hegemony in the region,
buttress Russia’s role, and prolong Assad’s tyranny. Tehran, Moscow, and
Damascus do not share our democratic values and have little inclination to help
America and the West.
Moreover, instability and crises sometimes contain portents
of positive change. Unfortunately, the Obama administration fails to see that
its main enemy is Iran. The Obama administration has inflated the threat from IS
in order to legitimize Iran as a “responsible” actor that will, supposedly,
fight IS in the Middle East. This was part of the Obama administration’s
rationale for its nuclear deal with Iran and central to its “legacy,” which is
likely to be ill-remembered.
The American administration does not appear capable of
recognizing the fact that IS can be a useful tool in undermining Tehran’s
ambitious plan for domination of the Middle East.
Efraim Inbar, director of the Begin-Sadat Center for
Strategic Studies, is professor emeritus of political studies at Bar-Ilan
University and a fellow at the Middle East Forum.
BESA Center Perspectives Papers are published through the
generosity of the Greg Rosshandler Family
(8) Jerusalem Post
article calls for a "weak but functioning Islamic State"
Comment: The Destruction Of Islamic State Is A Strategic
Mistake
By Efraim Inbar
Jerusalem Post, August 3, 2016 12:51
A weak but functioning IS can undermine the appeal of the
caliphate among radical Muslims, keep bad actors focused on one another and
hamper Iran’s quest for regional hegemony.
US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter recently gathered defense
ministers from allied nations to plan what officials hope will be the decisive
stage in the campaign to eradicate the Islamic State (IS) organization. This is
a strategic mistake.
IS, a radical Islamist group, has killed thousands of people
since it declared an Islamic caliphate in June 2014, with the Syrian city of
Raqqa as its de facto capital. It captured tremendous international attention by
swiftly conquering large swaths of land and by releasing gruesome pictures of
beheadings and other means of execution.
But IS is primarily successful where there is a political
void. Although the offensives in Syria and Iraq showed IS’s tactical
capabilities, they were directed against failed states with weakened militaries.
On occasions when the poorly trained IS troops have met well-organized
opposition, even that of non-state entities like the Kurdish militias, the
group’s performance has been less convincing. When greater military pressure was
applied and Turkish support dwindled, IS went into retreat.
It is true that IS has ignited immense passion among many
young and frustrated Muslims all over the world, and the caliphate idea holds
great appeal among believers. But the relevant question is what can IS do,
particularly in its current situation? The terrorist activities for which it
recently took responsibility were perpetrated mostly by lone wolves who declared
their allegiance to IS; they were not directed from Raqqa. On its own, IS is
capable of only limited damage.
A weak IS is, counterintuitively, preferable to a destroyed
IS. IS is a magnet for radicalized Muslims in countries throughout the world.
These volunteers are easier targets to identify, saving intelligence work. They
acquire destructive skills in the fields of Syria and Iraq that are of undoubted
concern if they return home, but some of them acquire shaheed status while still
away - a blessing for their home countries. If IS is fully defeated, more of
these people are likely to come home and cause trouble.
If IS loses control over its territory, the energies that
went into protecting and governing a state will be directed toward organizing
more terrorist attacks beyond its borders. The collapse of IS will produce a
terrorist diaspora that might further radicalize Muslim immigrants in the West.
Most counter-terrorism agencies understand this danger. Prolonging the life of
IS probably assures the deaths of more Muslim extremists at the hands of other
bad guys in the Middle East, and is likely to spare the West several terrorist
attacks.
Moreover, a weak and lingering IS could undermine the
attraction of the caliphate idea. A dysfunctional and embattled political entity
is more conducive to the disillusionment of Muslim adherents of a caliphate in
our times than an IS destroyed by a mighty America-led coalition. The latter
scenario perfectly fits the narrative of continuous and perfidious efforts on
the part of the West to destroy Islam, which feeds radical Muslim hatred for
everything the West stands for.
The continuing existence of IS serves a strategic purpose.
Why help the brutal Assad regime win the Syrian civil war? Many radical
Islamists in the opposition forces, i.e., Al Nusra and its offshoots, might find
other arenas in which to operate closer to Paris and Berlin. Is it in the West’s
interests to strengthen the Russian grip on Syria and bolster its influence in
the Middle East? Is enhancing Iranian control of Iraq congruent with American
objectives in that country? Only the strategic folly that currently prevails in
Washington can consider it a positive to enhance the power of the
Moscow-Tehran-Damascus axis by cooperating with Russia against IS.
Furthermore, Hezbollah – a radical Shiite anti-Western
organization subservient to Iran – is being seriously taxed by the fight against
IS, a state of affairs that suits Western interests. A Hezbollah no longer
involved in the Syrian civil war might engage once again in the taking of
western hostages and other terrorist acts in Europe.
The Western distaste for IS brutality and immorality should
not obfuscate strategic clarity. IS are truly bad guys, but few of their
opponents are much better. Allowing bad guys to kill bad guys sounds very
cynical, but it is useful and even moral to do so if it keeps the bad guys busy
and less able to harm the good guys. The Hobbesian reality of the Middle East
does not always present a neat moral choice.
The West yearns for stability, and holds out a naive hope
that the military defeat of IS will be instrumental in reaching that goal. But
stability is not a value in and of itself. It is desirable only if it serves our
interests. The defeat of IS would encourage Iranian hegemony in the region,
buttress Russia’s role, and prolong Assad’s tyranny. Tehran, Moscow, and
Damascus do not share our democratic values and have little inclination to help
America and the West.
Moreover, instability and crises sometimes contain portents
of positive change. Unfortunately, the Obama administration fails to see that
its main enemy is Iran. The Obama administration has inflated the threat from IS
in order to legitimize Iran as a “responsible” actor that will, supposedly,
fight IS in the Middle East. This was part of the Obama administration’s
rationale for its nuclear deal with Iran and central to its “legacy,” which is
likely to be ill-remembered.
The American administration does not appear capable of
recognizing the fact that IS can be a useful tool in undermining Tehran’s
ambitious plan for domination of the Middle East.
Efraim Inbar, director of the Begin-Sadat Center for
Strategic Studies, is professor emeritus of political studies at Bar-Ilan
University and a fellow at the Middle East Forum.
This article was originally published by the Begin-Sadat
Center for Strategic Studies
(9) Salon: Israeli
think tank says ISIS serves a "strategic purpose" in the West's
interests
WEDNESDAY, AUG 24, 2016 06:00 AM AEST
Israeli think tank: Don’t destroy ISIS; it’s a “useful tool”
against Iran, Hezbollah, Syria
Head of a right-wing think tank says the existence of ISIS
serves a "strategic purpose" in the West's interests
Ben Norton
According to a think tank that does contract work for NATO
and the Israeli government, the West should not destroy ISIS, the fascist
Islamist extremist group that is committing genocide and ethnically cleansing
minority groups in Syria and Iraq.
Why? The so-called Islamic State “can be a useful tool in
undermining” Iran, Hezbollah, Syria and Russia, argues the think tank’s
director.
“The continuing existence of IS serves a strategic purpose,”
wrote Efraim Inbar in “The Destruction of Islamic State Is a Strategic Mistake,”
a paper published on Aug. 2.
By cooperating with Russia to fight the genocidal extremist
group, the United States is committing a “strategic folly” that will “enhance
the power of the Moscow-Tehran-Damascus axis,” Inbar argued, implying that
Russia, Iran and Syria are forming a strategic alliance to dominate the Middle
East.
“The West should seek the further weakening of Islamic State,
but not its destruction,” he added. “A weak IS is, counterintuitively,
preferable to a destroyed IS.”
Inbar, an influential Israeli scholar, is the director of the
Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, a think tank that says its mission is
to advance “a realist, conservative, and Zionist agenda in the search for
security and peace for Israel.”
The think tank, known by its acronym BESA, is affiliated with
Israel’s Bar Ilan University and has been supported by the Israeli government,
the NATO Mediterranean Initiative, the U.S. embassy in Israel and the Carnegie
Council for Ethics in International Affairs.
BESA also says it “conducts specialized research on contract
to the Israeli foreign affairs and defense establishment, and for NATO.”
In his paper, Inbar suggested that it would be a good idea to
prolong the war in Syria, which has destroyed the country, killing hundreds of
thousands of people and displacing more than half the population.
As for the argument that defeating ISIS would make the Middle
East more stable, Inbar maintained: “Stability is not a value in and of itself.
It is desirable only if it serves our interests.”
“Instability and crises sometimes contain portents of
positive change,” he added.
Inbar stressed that the West’s “main enemy” is not the
self-declared Islamic State; it is Iran. He accused the Obama administration of
“inflat[ing] the threat from IS in order to legitimize Iran as a ‘responsible’
actor that will, supposedly, fight IS in the Middle East.”
Despite Inbar’s claims, Iran is a mortal enemy of ISIS,
particularly because the Iranian government is founded on Shia Islam, a branch
that the Sunni extremists of ISIS consider a form of apostasy. ISIS and its
affiliates have massacred and ethnically cleansed Shia Muslims in Syria, Iraq
and elsewhere.
Inbar noted that ISIS threatens the regime of Syrian
President Bashar al-Assad. If the Syrian government survives, Inbar argued,
“Many radical Islamists in the opposition forces, i.e., Al Nusra and its
offshoots, might find other arenas in which to operate closer to Paris and
Berlin.” Jabhat al-Nusra is Syria’s al-Qaida affiliate, and one of the most
powerful rebel groups in the country. (It recently changed its name to Jabhat
Fatah al-Sham.)
Hezbollah, the Lebanese-based militia that receives weapons
and support from Iran, is also “being seriously taxed by the fight against IS, a
state of affairs that suits Western interests,” Inbar wrote.
“Allowing bad guys to kill bad guys sounds very cynical, but
it is useful and even moral to do so if it keeps the bad guys busy and less able
to harm the good guys,” Inbar explained.
Several days after Inbar’s paper was published, David M.
Weinberg, director of public affairs at the BESA Center, wrote a
similarly-themed op-ed titled “Should ISIS be wiped out?” in Israel Hayom, a
free and widely read right-wing newspaper funded by conservative billionaire
Sheldon Adelson that strongly favors the agenda of Israel’s right-wing Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
In the piece, Weinberg defended his colleague’s argument and
referred to ISIS as a “useful idiot.” He called the U.S. nuclear deal with Iran
“rotten” and argued that Iran and Russia pose a “far greater threat than the
terrorist nuisance of Islamic State.”
Weinberg also described the BESA Center as “a place of
intellectual ferment and policy creativity,” without disclosing that he is that
think tank’s director of public affairs.
After citing responses from two other associates of his think
tank who disagree with their colleague,
Weinberg concluded by writing: “The only certain thing is that Ayatollah
Khamenei is watching this quintessentially Western open debate with
amusement.”
On his website, Weinberg includes BESA in a list of resources
for “hasbara,” or pro-Israel propaganda. It is joined by the ostensible civil
rights organization the Anti-Defamation League and other pro-Israel think tanks,
such as the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) and the Washington
Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP).
Weinberg has worked extensively with the Israeli government
and served as a spokesman for Bar Ilan University. He also identifies himself on
his website as a “columnist and lobbyist who is a sharp critic of Israel’s
detractors and of post-Zionist trends in Israel.”
Inbar boasts an array of accolades. He was a member of the
political strategic committee for Israel’s National Planning Council, a member
of the academic committee of the Israeli military’s history department and the
chair of the committee for the national security curriculum at the Ministry of
Education.
He also has a prestigious academic record, having taught at
Johns Hopkins and Georgetown and lectured at Harvard, MIT, Columbia, Oxford and
Yale. Inbar served as a scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for
Scholars and was appointed as a Manfred Wörner NATO fellow.
The strategy Inbar and Weinberg have proposed, that of
indirectly allowing a fascist Islamist group to continue fighting Western
enemies, is not necessarily a new one in American and Israeli foreign policy
circles. It is reminiscent of the U.S. Cold War policy of supporting far-right
Islamist extremists in order to fight communists and left-wing nationalists.
In the war in Afghanistan in the 1980s, the CIA and U.S.
allies Pakistan and Saudi Arabia armed, trained and funded Islamic
fundamentalists in their fight against the Soviet Union and Afghanistan’s
Soviet-backed socialist government. These U.S.-backed rebels, known as the
mujahideen, were the predecessors of al-Qaida and the Taliban.
In the 1980s, Israel adopted a similar policy. It supported
right-wing Islamist groups like Hamas in order to undermine the Palestine
Liberation Organization, or PLO, a coalition of various left-wing nationalist
and communist political parties.
“Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel’s creation,” Avner
Cohen, a retired Israeli official who worked in Gaza for more than 20 years,
told The Wall Street Journal.
As far back as 1957, President Dwight Eisenhower insisted to
the CIA that, in order to fight leftist movements in the Middle East, “We should
do everything possible to stress the ‘holy war’ aspect.”
Ben Norton is a politics reporter and staff writer at
AlterNet. You can find him on Twitter at @BenjaminNorton.
(10) Don’t Destroy
ISIS; It’s A “Useful Tool” Against Iran, Hezbollah, Syria
August 30, 2016 4:08 pm
An Israeli think-tank
wrote a paper entitled “The Destruction of Islamic State Is a Strategic
Mistake,” believes that ISIS is a useful tool to undermine Iran, Russia, and
Assad.
Efraim Inbar, director of Begin-Sadat center for strategic
studies(BESA) said in his august second paper that the west cooperating with
Russia against Assad is a “strategic folly”. Inbar said that if the US
participated in the fight against ISIS with Russia will further enhance the
“Tehran-Moscow-Damascus Axis”. In other words, Inbar sees Syria a way to fight
Israel enemies by proxy forces.
When talk of defeating ISIS to make a more stable middle
east, Inbar maintained: “Stability is not a value in and of itself. It is
desirable only if it serves our interests”. Israel is not our ally nor is it a
friend. It is certainly friends with “our” enemies because it benefits them
directly.
Inbar also warns that ISIS is not the real threat that Iran
is.This is a redundant theme in Israeli politics and academics. Iran is the
enemy of Israel so that mean Iran is the enemy of the world. In the paper Inbar
accuses Obama of “inflat[ing] the threat from IS in order to legitimize Iran as
a ‘responsible’ actor that will, supposedly, fight IS in the Middle East.”
Contrary to Inbar’s sentiments Iran has been fighting IS because Iran is a
Shiite nation a group specifically targeted by IS.
David Weinberg, BESA’s director of public affair published an
op-ed piece a few day later ambiguously titled, “The destruction of Islamic
State is a Mistake”.
In this piece, Weinberg refers to IS as a “Useful Idiot” and
argued that Russia and Iran pose a “far greater threat than the terrorist
nuisance of Islamic State”. I think the thousands killed by IS would seriously
disagree.
Israel has had some history with this “Useful Idiot” in the
Golan Heights.The Yarmouk Valley is run by ISIS – and left alone by Israel.
September 2014 Israel shot down a Syrian Air Force fighter jet for straying into
Golan airspace: Israel has shown during the Syrian civil war that it is willing
to attack those who threaten its territorial integrity – but not ISIS.
Remember the Golan Heights is Israeli-occupied territory that
once belonged to Syria but allows ISIS to operate uninhibited. Israel is not our
ally nor is it a friend. It is certainly friends with “our” enemies because it
benefits them directly.
Israel is an ally only to itself. Israel embodies the
sociopathic tendencies the nation-state engenders. Israel looks out for no one
but Israel and it will use the US until is no longer useful.
Israel’s alliance with the US is only for the benefit of
Israel. Because of that alliance is the reason they get away with their crimes.
If the US took away that protection then Israel would cease to commit
crimes.
But with the most powerful nation on earth by your side,
Israel can do what Israel wants.
Allowing Israel to get away with crimes against humanity has
to stop but that’s only going to work if Americans know what Israel has
done.
(Article by Jafari Tishomingo)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.