(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 http://tass.com/defense/1018368 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 suchhelicopters 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 inAfghanistan, 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 theJordanian 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 stopfinancing 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 https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201808241067428514-daesh-syria-foreign-supplied-arms/ Daesh in Syria Supplied with Arms by Foreign Agencies – Russian Envoy to UN © Sputnik / MORAD SAEED 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 underprotection 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, andal-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 greaterresilience" 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 sleepercells" 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 foreignfighters, 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 http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13970601000327 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 townof 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 outletreported, 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-Shamterrorists, 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 terroristcommanders 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 MohammadReza 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 http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13970530000931 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 themultibillion 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 http://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/destruction-islamic-state-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 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)
-- Peter Myerswebsite: http://mailstar.net/index.html |
Archives >