More Small Steps on Viktor Bout

By Douglas Farah

Today the U.S. Treasury Department took another step to crimp the style of Russian weapons trafficker Viktor Bout.

The OFAC freezing action of seven companies and three individuals in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) followed yesterday's similar action by the United Nations Security Council and is aimed in part and restricting Bout's ability to continue to illicitly move weapons to African war zones.

The OFAC statement said that "Three of the designated firms have been found to be owned or controlled by, or acting for or on behalf of, Viktor Bout, an international arms dealer and war profiteer... This designation continues OFAC's efforts to disrupt the involvement of the Bout network, one of the largest illicit arms-trafficking networks in the world, in conflicts in the DRC and elsewhere."

OFAC has previously publicly noted Bout's role in supplying the Taliban and his support of Liberian warlord Charles Taylor. A small plug-I, along with my co-author Steve Braun, have a book on Bout and the weapons trade coming out in August, titled "Merchant of Death." My full blog is here.

Border Insecurity As America Faces WMD Terror

By Bill West

A few days ago, a rickety wooden sailboat overloaded with some 100 illegal Haitians penetrated our nation's coastal defenses in south Florida. The Haitians made landfall just north of Miami near a fire station along the beach and, thanks to observant citizens, authorities did manage to capture what were by then compliant but dehydrated and voyage weary wannabe refugees, one of whom unfortunately died in the effort to reach American shores. This is yet another sad chapter in the ongoing sad saga of the poor and porous border security we have in the United States. If 100+ hapless Haitian refugees on a decrepit wooden sailboat can evade detection by the best efforts of the US military and law enforcement to secure our borders from such intrusion, can we truly expect that a sophisticated and well funded terrorist organization, or hostile foreign intelligence service, will have any trouble penetrating those border defenses?

My Congressional Testimony at Ellis Island on Future of Immigration

By Michael Cutler

I testified today before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law on the subject, "Past, Present, and Future: A Historic and Personal Reflection on American Immigration." The hearing was held at Ellis Island, through which my mother first set foot on American soil a few short years before my grandmother and millions of others died in the Holocaust. Here is a segment of my testimony, and you can read all of it here in a file.

"Ellis Island was a facility that provided immigration inspectors, public health officials and others the opportunity to screen those aliens who were seeking to enter the United States to enjoy a far better way of life than was possible in their native countries. Simply arriving here was no guarantee of being admitted to the United States. Ellis Island was, in effect, America’s waiting room. If there was a doubt that the arriving alien might harbor a dangerous communicable disease, that person was kept here as long as necessary, until public health officials could determine if that applicant for admission posed a health risk to our citizens. Similarly, Ellis Island provided law enforcement officials with adequate time to identify those who might be fleeing criminal prosecution in their homelands. In those days there were no computers that could assist with this vital issue.

Today when aliens run our nation’s borders without being inspected, the potential exists that these aliens may carry diseases. These aliens may be fugitives from justice in their home countries who have extensive criminal backgrounds. In this perilous era, the potential also exists that these aliens may be involved directly or indirectly with terrorism. This is not a matter of xenophobia; it is a matter of commonsense. Our nation needs to know who is entering or seeking to enter our country. At present it has been estimated that there are from 12 million to twenty million illegal aliens in our country whose true identities are unknown and ultimately unknowable. Because they are undocumented, we can not be certain of when they entered the United States and in fact, we cannot even be certain as to their true nationalities. The President has called for legalizing illegal aliens which would require our beleaguered adjudications officers at USCIS to suddenly have to confront many millions of applications for amnesty filed by aliens whose identities can not be verified. I fear that terrorists and criminals would seize this opportunity to acquire official identity documents in fictitious names in conjunction with such a guest worker amnesty program and use those documents as breeder documents to create new identities for themselves, obtaining driver’s licenses, Social Security cards and other such documents. They could then use these officially issued documents to embed themselves in our country and also circumvent the various terror watch lists and so-called no fly lists."

Michael Jacobson in the Baltimore Sun: Keep terror-fighting tools, but explain them better

By Matthew Levitt

Michael Jacobson's latest op-ed about the FBI's counterterror tools and the Patriot Act appeared in today's Baltimore Sun.

From the Baltimore Sun
Keep terror-fighting tools, but explain them better

By Michael Jacobson

March 30, 2007

In response to recent revelations about the FBI's misuse of national security letters - administrative subpoenas issued by the FBI without having to go through a judge, a longtime FBI tool enhanced by the Patriot Act - some members of Congress are threatening to scale back the FBI's authority to issue such letters. These damaging reports have also sparked broader calls for a re-examination of other Patriot Act tools. FBI officials have acknowledged that there were significant problems and have pledged to impose tighter controls to ensure national security letters are used appropriately and their use is adequately tracked.

Although the FBI's response is reassuring and necessary, this will address only one part of the problem. The other issue driving reaction by Congress and the public is that neither has a good understanding of how these tools are used and why they are so valuable. As a result, when there are reports of abuse, Congress and the public are unable to put this in any type of broader context. The FBI is running the risk that Congress - feeling pressure to restrict the FBI's reach - may end up revoking one of its most desperately needed powers.

Morocco Under Fire

By Olivier Guitta

I just wrote a piece for The Weekly Standard on the explosive situation in Morocco.

Here is an excerpt:

On March 11, three years to the day after the Madrid bombings, a cybercafe in Casablanca was hit. Two terrorists carrying explosive belts entered the cybercafe to surf the web. They were trying to connect to a terrorism-related site, and the manager wanted to prevent them from doing so. When he approached one of the two terrorists, the suicide bomber decided to activate his bomb, killing himself and injuring four. His accomplice fled but was later arrested by Moroccan police. The most credible explanation is that the two terrorists wanted to consult the website in order to receive their orders for an attack against some other target, most likely the police headquarters or some Western interests. But there's no doubt now: Morocco is under attack.

In their new book "Quand le Maroc sera islamiste" (When Morocco will be Islamist), journalists Nicolas Beau and Catherine Graciet paint a very bleak albeit realistic picture of the Kingdom. Indeed, one of the top French anti-terrorism officials, cited by Beau and Graciet, recently stated that Morocco is by far the most worrying country in North Africa. The official's comparison: "today, Morocco is 1916 Russia." Also, according to Spanish anti-terror judge Baltazar Garzon: "Morocco is the worst terrorist threat for Europe." He estimated that the al Qaeda-linked cells number more than 100 and that at least 1,000 terrorists are now being actively sought by Moroccan authorities.

To read the rest, please click here.

Bangladesh Executes JMB Militants Ahead of Schedule

By Animesh Roul

After months of speculation, Bangladesh authority has reportedly executed six Jama’atul Mujaheedin Bangladesh (JMB) militants in the early hours of March 30 (Friday). The six militants - Shaikh Abdur Rahman, Siddiqul Islam, Abdul Awal, Khaled Saifullah, Ataur Rahman Sunny and Iftekhar Hasan Al-Mamun were executed in four separate prisons in Bangladesh.

One of the convicted militants, Asadul Islam alias Arif, is still at large.

While Siddiqul Islam (notorious as Bangla Bhai) and Abdul Awal were reportedly executed at Mymensingh Central Jail, Shaikh Abdur Rahman and Khaled Siafullah were executed at Comilla district jail and at Pabna jail respectively. The other two, Ataur Rahman Sunny and Iftekhar Hasan Mamun executed at Kashimpur jail. (The Daily Star, March 30, 2007.)

They were sentenced to death for their role in the November 2005 suicide attack on two judges in Jhalakathi.

As per the Prison rule, the jail authority has to reschedule the date of execution within 21- 28 days of the receipt of the rejection of mercy petition letter from Presidential office. Not surprisingly, the execution took place well ahead of the (circulated) scheduled time to deceive militants who have been planning major attacks on jails to ensure the release of the jailed terror kingpins. The role of media in this regard was immense as they circulated probable dates to mislead JMB operatives.

What's going on in Syria?

By Olivier Guitta

Syria is at the crossroads. A perfect storm is gathering above Damascus.
For proof from The Croissant come 2 interesting stories from usually well-informed Kuwaiti Al Seyassah :

1- Syria’s plan to avoid indictment for Hariri’s assassination

There is an opportunity for Syria to execute Ghazalé [Who is Rustom Ghazalé? Was the Syrian ruler of Lebanon from 2002 to 2005. Is allegedly implicated in the assassination of Rafic Hariri, on Damascus’ order] and thus stop the international investigation in the assassination of Rafic Hariri.

The Arab press has been talking for the past few days about a solution “a la Lockerbie,” i.e. as Colonel Kadhafi did after a 10 year embargo on Libya: Damascus sacrifices officers having served in Lebanon, in order to escape the International Court.

To read the rest, please click here.

2-The Shiite Iranian Revolution comes to Syria

Bashar Al Assad fears for the stability of his regime. Therefore he replaced his close guards and the presidential guard by Iranian elements of Pasdarans [Revolutionary Guards], trusted and faithful Hezbollah men.

More than 100,000 Iranians settled in Syria during the last 4 years with the complicity of the Alawite minority [sect of the Assad family]. They are mercenaries; they work for the regime.

For the rest, please click here.

Saudi Money Funding Islamists' Recent Efforts in Kurdish Iraq & Bangladesh

By Andrew Cochran

As a follow-up to Douglas Farah's post today on the move by the Saudi royals away from the U.S., I can add news provided today by British journalist James Brandon at a Jamestown Foundation forum. Brandon's recent travels through Kurdish Iraq exposed him to new Islamist TV stations in the region, funded according to him by money from Saudi Arabia, with most of it by foundations there. The stations spew the typical Wahabi propaganda in favor of strict sharia and sexual segregation and against the U.S., Israel, and Western-style democracy. The stations are trying to pull Kurds away from moderate Islamic parties in the region.

This comes on top of Animesh Roul's March 21 post, in which he reported disclosures by a top ranking military commander of the Jama'atul Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB), Mostafizur Rahman Shahin, that the money for about 5,000 JMB operatives in there "comes from Bangladeshi expatriates settled in foreign countries, including the United States and Saudi Arabia."

Reminds me of one of Doug's posts last month titled, "The More Things Change..."

U.N. Still Not Acting to Protect Human Rights of British Hostages (updated)

By Andrew Cochran

UPDATE, 6:13 pm ET: In a press statement, which is the weakest form of statement possible, the Security Council has expressed "grave concern" for the hostages and called for an early resolution of the problem, including the hostages' release. The Council also appealed to the Iranian Government to allow consular access to the hostages, something I called for the U.N. to do two days ago (see U.N. press release). But a British attempt at a stronger statement calling for their immediate freedom failed, apparently due to Russian opposition. The AP story on the UN press statement also refers to Turkish efforts (unsuccessful so far) to meet with the hostages and mediate the crisis, as I reported here yesterday.
-------------------
Two days ago I posted on the silence of the U.N. to that point on the British hostages held by Iran. Now the U.N. has issued a statement on a discussion between Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Motaki about the hostages (and Iran's nuclear issue), saying that Ki-moon “expressed his wish to see an early resolution.” WOW, that's really going out on a limb in support of human rights for prisoners! The Secretary-General should have asserted that international law mandates that (a) the Iranians allow the hostages to see representatives of the British government, and (2) the Iranians cease their illegal taping of humiliations and obviously forced "confessions" of the hostages.

But the Secretary-General isn't the only U.N. official to ignore the hostages' human rights; he's just following a hypocritical pattern set long ago by U.N. human rights "experts" who have slammed numerous countries, including the U.S. and Israel, for so-called "abuses," but are next to useless when it comes to state sponsors of terrorism. Here are links to relevant press releases by Ki-moon and the "experts" about other countries:

Myanmar: UN human rights expert calls for release of prize-winning journalist and poet

Zimbabwe: Ban Ki-moon condemns reported police beating of opposition leaders

UN expert to visit US to discuss respect for human rights in war on terrorism

UN human rights expert reports on ‘appalling’ conditions for ordinary Palestinians

UPDATE: Victor Comras reminds me of a draft UN General Assembly Resolution against Hostage Taking which was approved by the General Assembly's Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) in November 2006. The resolution is still awaiting adoption by the full General Assembly. "By the terms of the draft, the General Assembly would reaffirm that hostage-taking was a serious and unjustifiable crime aimed at destroying human rights, and would condemn all acts of hostage-taking, anywhere in the world. It would demand that all hostages be released immediately and unconditionally."

Saudis Edging Away from the United States in Counterterror Efforts

By Douglas Farah

Ties are seriously fraying between the Saudi royals and the Bush administration, largely because the Saudis appear to have abandoned any pretext of confronting terrorism and instead have returned full bore to the long-held tradition of co-opting or buying opponents.

One would hope, albeit in vain, that recent developments would end the happy talk of our Saudi allies in fighting Islamist terrorism and terrorist ideologies and theologies.

As the Washington Post's Jim Hoagland noted, the most obvious sign of the change of heart, which many of us argued was at best skin deep, was King Abdullah's decision to cancel his scheduled April 17 state dinner. Explanations have been vague as to why.

Then yesterday the king lashed out at the U.S. occupation of Iraq, for the first time calling it "illegitimate." While there are many who believe that to be true, the timing of the statement, after several years of saying nothing nearly as strong, is indicative of the change. It is also noteworthy that the king chose to make the attack at a meeting of Arab heads of state, not just to his own people or in a lesser forum, but in forum that would garner the maximum media exposure. My full blog is here.

Interviews with Karim al-Mejjati and Participant in Abqaiq Refinery Attack

By Evan Kohlmann

Al-Qaida's Committee in the Arabian Peninsula (Saudi Arabia) has recently released the first new issue of its official magazine, Sawt al-Jihad ("Voice of Jihad"), in nearly two years. Among other articles, the magazine contains lengthy interviews with Badr al-Humaydi (one of the Al-Qaida operatives who participated in last year's terrorist attack on the Abqaiq oil refinery in eastern Saudi Arabia) and Karim al-Mejjati (a.k.a. Abu Elyas al-Maghrebi), a most wanted Moroccan Al-Qaida commander who was killed in a clash with Saudi security forces in April 2005. During the interview conducted shortly prior to his death, al-Mejjati discusses at great length his experiences fighting with mujahideen in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and salutes various military commanders from Afghanistan whom he credits as being his chief instructors--including Ibn Shaykh al-Liby, Abu Zubaydah al-Falastini, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and the current leader of Al-Qaida's ground forces in southern Afghanistan Abu Laith al-Liby.

Click to view Sawt al-Jihad #30 - "Interview with Badr al-Humaydi"
Click to view Sawt al-Jihad #30 - "Interview with Karim al-Mejjati"

See also:
- Al-Qaida in Saudi: "Bin Laden and the Oil Weapon"
- Al-Qaida in Saudi Arabia Issues Rules on Attacking Oil Facilities (February 2006)
- Al-Qaida claims Abqaiq (Buqayq) operation by "Brigade of Shaykh Usama Bin Laden" (February 2006)
- Al-Qaida names Abqaiq "martyrs" from the "Bin Laden Brigade" (February 2006)
- Al-Qaida statement on recent events in Saudi Arabia (July 2006)
- [NEFA Foundation]: "Al-Qaida in Saudi Arabia: 2002-2003"

Iran Refusing Offers to Mediate Hostage Crisis

By Andrew Cochran

Highly reliable sources report that officials in the government of a Scandinavian country have offered to mediate the Iran hostage crisis, but the offers have been refused thus far by the Iranians. Also, a well-placed journalist in Washington and a knowledgeable source in Istanbul cannot confirm press reports of a possible meeting between Turkish officials and the British hostages.

The Turkish government is trying at every level to persuade the Iranians to release the hostages. Turkish military officials are petrified that they will be dragged, kicking and screaming, into a military fight on the US/UK side because of their NATO obligations, which could be triggered by this act of war.

You can see the British Royal Navy's description of the H.M.S. Cornwall, and you can read the official British Ministry of Defense statement with charts of the Cornwall's position in Iraqi waters and the Iranians' position.

Preventing Bio-terror Threat: India Moves A Step Ahead Cautiously

By Animesh Roul

Of late, Indian government wakes up to biological weapon related threats and approves a model of standard operating procedures (SOPs) to thwart any bio-terror attacks. Although the discourse on public health and infectious disease gained ground in the region especially after series of epidemic outbreaks in the region and received a boost following the Anthrax letter incidents in the US in late 2001, New Delhi took ample time to initiate something substantial on the ground.

As per the report published in Financial Express (March 28, 2007), a high-level meeting of the National Crisis Management Committee (NCMC) headed by the cabinet secretary BK Chaturvedi gave a go ahead to the SOPs, endorsing the recommendation that a mechanism must be in place at the earliest to deal with any terror event involving biological pathogen.

The crux of the story goes like this:

The SOP model to be implemented initially in New Delhi under the auspices of the Union Home Ministry. Then it would be replicated in other vital cities subsequently. The report also says that at least four battalions of central paramilitary forces, which will function as the national disaster response force (NDRF), are currently being trained and equipped to respond to nuclear, radiological and biological emergencies. The MHA will lay down the command, control and preparedness measures and post-attack response mechanism. The National Security Coordination Secretariat (NSCS) in consultation with Defence Research Development Organisation (DRDO) and secretary, security MHA would constitute a team to do the groundwork, while IB and RAW will finance the initiative. The Ministry of Health is also a part of the initiative, with its role essentially to identify appropriate laboratories, development of appropriate protocol for validation or certification, strategy for procuring, producing and stockpiling of the necessary vaccines and drugs, contamination testing at source of water supply and formulation of effective Rapid Response Teams (RRTs) at the district level.

Al Qaeda in The Maghreb: a reality to reckon

By Olivier Guitta

I have been reporting on the emergence of an Al Qaeda branch in the Maghreb since November 2005.
It seems now that it's becoming a reality more and more each day.
The Croissant summarized and translated this article from the Lebanese L'Orient le Jour:

An Islamist Maghrebi “terrorist arc” threatens Europe

Just a few months ago, the Algerian terrorist group Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC) became Al Qaeda in the Maghreb (AQITM)

According to French antiterrorist judge Jean-Louis Bruguière:
· The name AQITM is a clear signal of the ex-GSPC’s expansion in the region
· The ex-GSPC wants to integrate all the Maghrebi radical movements: the Libyan GICL, the Moroccan GICM and the Tunisian GICT
· This forms an “islamist arc”
· AQITM also has expansion plans in the Sahel
· This new development is a major source of concern for France and a direct threat to the country

In Algeria, AQITM recently attacked international targets:
· On December 10: a bus transporting employees of the US company Halliburton was attacked (1 killed, 8 wounded)
· On March 3: vehicles transporting 21 Russian workers were bombed (4 killed, including 1 Russian)

for the rest please click here.

Italy: the strange Islamist/Communist alliance

By Lorenzo Vidino

In June 2005 David Kaplan reported on US News about Ten Euros for the Resistance/Iraq Libero, a campaign led by an odd collection of European (mostly Italian, German and Austrian) “Marxists and Maoists, sprinkled with an array of Arab emigres and aging, old-school fascists,” to raise money for the “Iraqi resistance.” While never raising big sums, the informal network was active in organizing meetings and setting up stands in various European cities. The story generated quite a bit of attention and in the following weeks 44 members of Congress sent a letter to Italy's ambassador to the United States, expressing "concern" about the Ten Euros campaign. Moreover the network’s main website was shut down and a few addresses in Italy were raided.

Almost two years later, the Iraq Libero network is more than active and last weekend it organized a conference in Chianciano, a charming Tuscan town. The main organizers are the Committees for the Support of the Resistance for Communism (CARC), whose website shows various anti-American initiatives. In the communiqué announcing the Chianciano conference, the CARC express “our determination to support, with the resources at our disposal, the resistance of the popular masses in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and Lebanon against the aggressions of the imperialists of the USA and of any other country.”

Among the speakers in Chianciano, beside self-proclaimed leaders of the Iraqi resistance, we find Hamza Piccardo, the Secretary General of the UCOII (Unione delle Comunità e Organizzazioni Islamiche in Italia), the Italian branch of the international Muslim Brotherhood network. Addressing an audience filled with Communist militants, Piccardo gave a powerful and telling speech. “The young Muslims of Europe,” said the 55-year-old UCOII leader in a speech broadcasted by Italian TV, “can be companions of street and of struggle and we saw it in a remarkable way in France, two years ago. Those that set on fire 36.000 cars in a few days. This is a strength that immigrant communities have in them, their demographic strength, their courage. With this strength, with these youths, we must interact. Anti-Imperialism is in them.”

Piccardo’s speech seems that of a Communist leader, rather than that of the leader of one of Italy’s most important Muslim organization. An explanation can be found in Piccardo’s past involvement in the militant Communist underworld. Before his conversion to Islam in 1975, Piccardo had been a member of Autonomia Operaia, one of Italy’s most radical leftist formations during the 1970s. Piccardo, like other UCOII members that come from the radical left, dreams of a fusion of Communist and Islamist ideologies, with anti-capitalism, anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism as the glues for this odd marriage. The UCOII case is not an isolated example of the alliance between far left and radical Islam in Europe. Another notorious example is Respect, the unlikely political formation borne out of the alliance between the Brotherhood-linked Muslim Association of Britain (MAB) and fringe leftist groups headed by George Galloway. The phenomenon needs to be monitored, as the repercussions for both the security and the social cohesion of Europe can be serious.

Ongoing Counter-terrorism Raids in Indonesia

By Kenneth Conboy

The Indonesian police are on a roll with continued raids against suspected militants in East Java earlier this week--and more expected over the coming days. Readers will recall that the police counter-terrorist unit, Detachment 88, conducted an initial raid on 19 March (local time) against a Jemaah Islamiyah safe house in Jogjakarta. Although a senior JI member apparently escaped, seven of his colleagues were detained, and all subsequent raids have been a result of information they revealed during interrogations.

On 21 March, two separate follow-on operations in Central Java resulted in the discovery of a major explosives/arms cache, along with the arrest of a militant who had been linked to communal violence in the province of Central Sulawesi.

On 26 March, raids in Surabaya, East Java, resulted in the discovery of another cache in Indonesia's second largest city, this with more than 12 kilos of explosive.

Several officials have stated that the explosives and weaponry appear to have been destined for Central Sulawesi, where JI has been trying (with minimal success) to re-ignite a jihad as of late. There is as yet no clear evidence that JI was preparing to use the material for an operation against foreign nationals in Jakarta or Bali.

Understanding and Simplifying Terrorist Financing

By Dennis Lormel

In the most basic sense, terrorist groups require funding to achieve their goals. They must have effective financial infrastructures to include:

• Sources of funds
• The means to launder funds
• The availability of funding

This is a pretty simple concept. If only the detection, disruption or prevention of this process could be as simple. In reality, dealing with terrorist financing is extremely challenging. Terrorist financiers have had many years to quietly hone their skills and perfect their methodologies. It wasn’t until 9/11, that law enforcement, the regulators, intelligence agencies or the financial sector focused specifically on terrorist financing. In essence, this enabled terrorists to develop mechanisms and infrastructures, both legal and illegal, which have become well insulated and adept at avoiding detection.

U.N. Should Demand Immediate Access to the British Hostages in Iran

By Andrew Cochran

Yesterday, the U.N.'s Deputy Spokesperson for the Secretary-General was asked whether the Secretary General had any statement to make about the British hostages held in Iran, and the spokesman said there is no comment. When a reporter then asked if the lack of comment should be interpreted as “he does not wish to comment because of delicate ongoing negotiations,” the Deputy Spokesperson agreed with that characterization. Following on the heels of a historically weak sanctions resolution (see Victor Comras' post on Sunday), the lack of action or statements to date is not encouraging. Victor suggests that we wait for the British to come to the U.N., which he assumes will happen within a very few days if Iran doesn't release the hostages. He noted to me that British Ambassador Jones-Parry made no comment about the seizure in his statement in the Security Council after the Iran sanctions vote, and Jones-Parry devoted his remarks solely to the sanctions resolution and the need to get Iran to respect IAEA norms. Fair enough.

But even if the Iranian seizure were legal under international law, the lack of access by British embassy officials to the hostages is not. That issue should be the subject of an immediate statement by the new U.N. Secretary-General during this, the first international crisis which started on his watch. After all, another spokesperson said today that the U.N. has asked the Saudi government to grant a visa to all reporters traveling with the Secretary-General, including a French-Israeli journalist whose visa has been denied thus far (which says a lot about the Saudis' continued intolerance of all things Israeli). The Secretary-General could have addressed the lack of access in an off-the-cuff press conference after a meeting yesterday on the Israeli-Palestinian issue, but didn't use that opportunity.

So the U.N. stands up for reporters' visas but not for the hostages' right to meet with their embassy. The least the Secretary-General could do is demand that the Iranians allow a U.N. representative to meet with the hostages. On top of the weak resolution, the silence indicates to me that we shouldn't expect much statesmanship from the U.N. or the new Secretary-General at any point in this affair.

The Globalization of Martyrdom

By Assaf Moghadam

In today’s edition of the New York Sun, Hillel Halkin wonders whatever happened to Robert Pape, the University of Chicago professor who authored Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism. In his book, Pape argues that the connection between suicide attacks and religion is exaggerated, and that suicide terrorism is “mainly a response to foreign occupation.” Halkin argues that Pape’s thesis hardly stands the test of reality, citing newspaper headlines from Iraq that report about scores of victims of suicide bombings aimed mainly at Shiites, which are hardly the source of the occupation in Iraq.

Already in 2005, I suggested in an op-ed published in the International Herald Tribune that the link between suicide terrorism and occupation is weakening as the tactic of suicide attacks is becoming increasingly globalized—a phenomenon I termed the “globalization of martyrdom.” I suggested that suicide attacks carried out by Palestinians and Tamils, as well as by the PKK and Hizballah were part of a traditional pattern of suicide attacks occurring mostly in the context of geographically localized conflicts—employing mostly local recruits and conducting attacks locally.

Since the mid-1990s, that traditional, localized pattern of suicide attacks has been accompanied by a globalized variant. This “globalization of martyrdom” implies that suicide bombers increasingly cross geographic boundaries—as evidenced, for example, by the high ratio of foreigners among suicide bombers in Iraq. Unlike traditional groups, the organizations responsible for globalized suicide attacks are transnational in nature and aspirations, and hence carry out their attacks outside of the traditional conflict zone.

While traditionally, suicide attacks have been perpetrated by both religious and secular organizations, the globalized variant of suicide attacks are planned and executed mostly by Salafi-Jihadist organizations, i.e. Al Qaeda and associated movements.

In an extensive critique of Dying to Win, I also challenged Pape’s contention that suicide terrorism “works.” In contrast to his argument that organizations perpetrating suicide attacks achieved their objectives in over fifty percent of the cases, I showed that at best, the objectives were achieved in only a quarter of all the campaigns. In addition, in that article I argued that Pape all but ignores the religious goals of Al Qaeda and other Salafi-Jihadist groups.

The Sudan Crisis and the Muslim Brotherhood

By Douglas Farah

Last weekend, as today's Washington Post editorial reminds us, the EU again huffed and puffed about doing something about Darfur. The situation is "intolerable" Mr. Blair said, adding that the actions of the Sudanese government were "completely unacceptable." Ms. Merkel chimed in on the need for stronger sanctions. And then they all walked away.

The Bush administration has done much the same thing. Remember "phase two" sanctions that were to go into effect on the first of the year if the government didn't halt the slaughter (and blah blah blah).

The toll remains staggering and the situation is not improving. Some 200,000 dead (on the very low end of estimates), 2 million driven from their homes, etc. etc. etc.

Why? Because the government of Omar Hassan al-Bashir, which is made up primarily of members of the Muslim Brotherhood (of which Bashir and Hassan al Turabi, among others, are prominent members) allow it. Turabi may be out of power, but not because of his ties to the Brotherhood, but due to internal rivalries that do not touch the heart of the Brotherhood project there. My full blog is here.

Combating Terrorist Financing in Europe: Gradual Progress

By Matthew Levitt

Michael Jacobson joined the Washington Institute last week from the U.S. Department of Treasury, where he served as senior advisor in the Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence. Jacobson was previously a counsel for the 9/11 Commission and the 9/11 Congressional investigation. He published the following piece yesterday on ongoing European efforts to combat terrorist financing.

PolicyWatch #1213
Combating Terrorist Financing in Europe: Gradual Progress

By Michael Jacobson
March 26, 2007

In the wake of the July 2005 terrorist subway and bus attacks in London and the disrupted terrorist plot to blow up U.S.-bound planes flying from Heathrow airport in August 2006, the British government recently launched a new strategy to combat terrorism financing. Ed Balls, Britain's economic secretary to Her Majesty's Treasury (HMT), said the strategy was designed to address "an enduring and continually changing terrorist menace to the [United Kingdom]." In Balls's view, financing is the "lifeblood" supporting the growing terrorist threat. Britain's ambitious and timely initiative is an important step forward. But broader European efforts to tackle terrorist financing -- particularly the efforts of the European Union (EU) -- still lack consistency and effect. Bureaucratic obstacles limit European efforts to designate terrorist entities and freeze their assets.

British Policy Efforts

On February 28, 2007, Economic Secretary Balls and Home Office Minister Tony McNulty unveiled the British government's comprehensive strategy to combat terrorist financing and money laundering, titled "The Financial Challenge to Crime and Terrorism." The government clearly recognized that, to succeed in this arena, HMT had to play a far greater role in counterterrorism efforts. Chancellor of the Exchequer Gordon Brown -- Balls's immediate superior -- said in a speech several weeks earlier, "I have found that an increasingly important part of the role of a Finance Minister is to address issues of international terrorism. . . . In effect the Treasury itself had to become a department of security."

The strategy includes a number of measures designed to crack down effectively on terrorist financing in the UK. Of greatest significance: (1) the "Terrorist Asset Freezing Unit," a specialized team within HMT, will work closely with British law enforcement and intelligence agencies; (2) for the first time, permission will be granted to HMT to use classified information to freeze assets in certain cases; (3) steps will be taken to improve information sharing among the public and private sectors.

Al Qaeda settles in Lebanon

By Olivier Guitta

In the past few weeks, lots of press has been given to a Lebanon-based terror group loosely affiliated with Al Qaeda.
Its name: Fatah Al Islam.
Last week, Lebanese law enforcement officials said they arrested 4 Syrians members of FAI in Beirut and other Lebanese cities and were charging them with the February bombing of 2 commuter buses carrying Lebanese Christians.
It might be a good time to have an overview of this group.
The Croissant summarized and translated a piece from Libération on that topic:

Since the end of November, Fatah Al Islam (FAI) settled in the Palestinian camp of Nahr el-Bared, in the north of Lebanon

Who is FAI ?
· The emerging of FAI coincided with Ayman Al Zawahiri, Al Qaeda #2, calling for the mujahedeen “to carry the jihad at the borders of Palestine”
· Nevertheless FAI denies any linkage: “This message does not concern us. Al Qaeda has its strategy. We have ours.”
· Organization of more than 150 Islamists close to Al Qaeda
· Composed of local Palestinians from Fatah Intifada, a Palestinian organization based in Damascus
· Composed also according to Lebanese authorities, of other Arab countries nationals who came from Iraq in July 2006
· Has practical experience from their time in Iraq
· Also has financial means
· Owns about 30 computers, weapons and elements strongly aligned with Al Qaeda

To read the rest, please click here.

Now Available: Globalterroralert.com Video Cybercast #2

By Evan Kohlmann

The second edition of the Globalterroralert.com Video Cybercast is now available for download from Yahoo! Video, Google Video, and the Internet Archive. The cybercast covers an array of critical issues, including: Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri's blistering attack on the Palestinian Hamas movement, Al-Qaida's continuing wave of violence in Algeria, the recent suicide bombing at a Moroccan cybercafe, legal charges filed against a Missouri-based terror financing front, the arrest of a jihadi webmaster in Spain, and a full update on the state of the Sunni insurgency in Iraq.

- View Globalterroralert.com Cybercast on Yahoo! Video
- View Globalterroralert.com Cybercast on Google Video
- View Globalterroralert.com Cybercast on the Internet Archive

English-language transcript of Globalterroralert Video Cybercast #2

The David Hicks Case Riles the Australians

By Michael Kraft

The dispute over David Hicks, the Australian one-time kangaroo skinner who pleaded guilty in Guantanamo today on charges of providing material support to Al Qaeda, is a good example of two friends looking at each other through the different ends of the telescope.

And it raises caution flags over how the unintended consequences of the U.S. Government’s treatment of terrorists suspects rounded up in Afghanistan can strain relationships with even our best allies.

I recently returned from Australia where I found that the Hicks case loomed large this year in the Australian consciousness and political scene, especially as the five year mark approached that Hicks was held without trial. It was a major topic of conversation and fuel for anti-American feeling and letters to the editors claiming that the U.S. ignored the principles of fair justice.

In downtown Melbourne, a large banner “Justice for David Hicks” draped a landmark church. Australian Prime Minister Howard, already under attack for his commitment of Australian military forces to Iraq and Afghanistan, was on the defensive for allegedly not doing enough for Hicks despite his close relationship with President Bush. Nearly half of the members of the Australian Parliament signed letters to the U.S. Congress on behalf of Hicks, 31-year old convert to Islam from a checkered personal background.
.
Hicks is believed the only Australian believed to be currently among the several hundred prisoners held in Guantanamo and the first terrorist suspect to face prosecution under the new Military Commission rules established by the Bush Administration after the Supreme Court ruled that the other procedures for dealing with captured terrorist suspects were unconstitutional.

He pleaded guilty Monday amid reports that he would go for a plea bargaining arrangement that would reduce his sentence and allow him to serve out his term in Australia.

According to press reports the judge ordered the prosecutors and defense lawyers to draw up a plea agreement, which is expected to spell out his sentence.There had been growing speculation before the commission hearing that Hicks may agree to a deal to plead guilty to a charge of providing material support to terrorism in exchange for a reduced sentence.

While the case has aroused Australian emotions and letters to the editor accusing the U.S. of acting arrogant, it has aroused relatively little attention in the United States. The claims by Hicks that he was abused and beaten while under custody, and the turmoil in the court today over who should be his lawyers, added fuel to the controversy Down Under.

It is another example of how issues, such as trade disputes over lamb or timber exports often loom large in the view of our close allies such as Australia, New Zealand and Canada but are virtually unknown to Americans. Their end of the telescope makes U.S. actions look large. We barely see the impact on our best friends.

This is not to pass judgment on the merits of the Hicks case. I do not profess to have any insights into the evidence that prompted the U.S. Government to detain and charge him. However some of my Australian friends, even those critical of the long detention, say that by going to Afghanistan and linking up with Al Qaeda, he was not on the typical innocent “walkabout” that many young Australians and New Zealanders undertake for a bit of overseas experience before settling down.

The length of the Hicks case, his lack of access to counsel of his choice and questions raised by holding prisoners for so long without a trial of any kind or constitutional protections was, however, an irritant in the usually good relations with one of our best allies. It is an example of how what is perceived as lack of due process hurts the U.S. image.

The fact that Hicks pleaded guilty, presumably for a lighter sentence, will not undo the damage with our best friends -- let alone our antagonists -- caused by the long delays in trials, accesses to lawyers, and developing a better procedure for dealing with terrorist suspects in the post-9/11 environment. It is another example of the difficulties caused by not thinking through the long term implications of the short term methods used in the “War on Terrorism.”

If there is any good outcome to this case, it will be if the legal community, the Executive Branch and Congress come together to develop better procedures – ones that are seen to be more fair -- than the existing civil or military processes used for dealing with terrorist suspects captured in a military situation.

Weak Sanctions On Iran Simply Won't Work

By Victor Comras

A number of my colleagues have suggested that I discuss further my concerns with the latest UN Security Council Sanctions Resolution on Iran. Many in the news media are characterizing the new round of UN Security Council Sanctions on Iran as “tough” and “stringent,” and my previous blog seems well out of step with these perceptions. Those assigning such positive attributes to Resolution 1747 are apparently relying, in part, on statements made by various world leaders that the Security Council’s unanimous support for Resolution 1747 demonstrates the international community's commitment to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons. I wish that were the case, but I strongly doubt it. The new sanction measures, in my view, represent, at best, a very weak international response to Iran. They demonstrate a continuing strong reluctance on the part of key members of the international community to take any meaningful action to dissuade Iran from developing nuclear weapons. And that may well signal to Iran that there will be only light penalties to pay down the road if they continue to move ahead on uranium enrichment. The suggestion that the Security Council means business and that tighter sanctions may follow must carry little weight with Iran’s leaders at this late stage after so many similar empty warnings over the last 18 months.

I am deeply concerned also with the way the Security Council is now formulating and using sanctions resolutions. They are simply setting the sanctions bar too low - both in terms of its impact and its enforcement - to have any effect. The Security Council should always avoid adopting measures that they already know, in advance, are unlikely to achieve any of the stated objectives. Such action serve only as an “empty gesture” or "excuse" for non-action on the part of the Security Council, and by others who are using the Security Council measures merely as an excuse for not taking any action themselves. This serves only to diminish the credibility of the Security Council and the effectiveness of sanctions as an effective foreign policy tool. The use of new terminology merely "calling" on states to "exercise vigilance and restraint" when it comes to halting the flow of heavy arms and military equipment, including missiles to Iran, or to restricting the travel of key nuclear and military personnel, is particularly ludicrous and disturbing. Why not ban such trade and travel outright? Hopefully, such provisions will not become standard fare when it comes to future sanctions resolutions.

I invite readers to compare the measures in Resolution 1747 to the kinds of sanctions measures imposed by the Security Council in previous times discussed below.

The weakness of the Resolution 1747 (2007) speaks for itself. It adopts 5 specific new measures to pressure Iran to comply with its call to abandon its unregulated uranium enrichment program. These include:

(1) A very limited asset freeze directed at an additional 28 Iranian military entities and military leaders, presumably few, if any of which, still maintain significant bank accounts or assets overseas. Of note, however, is the addition of Iran's Bank Sepah to the list of entities whose assets must now be frozen.

(2) A ban on Iranian sales and exports of arms and military equipment. Iran now sells arms to only a few countries in the Mideast and Africa, including Sudan. Hezbollah, also, is a major recipient of Iranian arms, but that covert supply route is unlikely to be affected by the new resolution. It is also unclear if the resolution applies to current arms purchase contracts.

(3) A non-obligatory suggestion that countries “exercise vigiliance and restraint,” when it comes to providing heavy military arms and equipment to Iran, including “battle tanks, armoured combat vehicles, large calibre artillery systems, combat aircraft, attack helicopters, warships, missiles or missile systems.”

(4) A non-obligatory suggestion that all countries “exercise vigilance and restraint" when it comes to allowing specified Iranian military officers and nuclear scientists and engineers visit their countries; and

(5) A non-obligatory suggestion that all countries and international financial institutions not engage in new commitments for grants, financial assistance, and concessional loans, to the government of Iran, except if they are to be used for humanitarian or developmental purposes. But there is no suggestion that countries should also refrain from otherwise undertaking normal business transactions or commercial investments with the Iranian government, including investment in Iran’s key energy sector.

Now, who can really expect that any of these measures will deter Iran from its present course of action?

Let’s compare these measures to the severity of previous UN Security Council Sanctions resolutions. The most comprehensive and severe UN sanctions program were directed against Serbia and Iraq.