NEFA Foundation: Biography of “Martyred” East African Al-Qaida Operative Saleh Ali Nabhan

By Evan Kohlmann

The NEFA Foundation has obtained and translated a biography, posted on a jihadist website, of a key suspect allegedly behind the 1998 East Africa Embassy bombings, Saleh Ali Nabhan, who was killed in a U.S. helicopter strike south of Mogadishu in September 2009. According to the document, Nabhan traveled to Afghanistan, where he attended the Khalden and Al Farouq training camps. There “he mastered various military skills. He then was chosen to be a trainer, and he survived the American raid on the al-Farouq camp…he was the guard of the camp gate at the time of the raid." Most notably, he purportedly “participated in training the 19 [martyrs] chosen to change the course of history; heroes of Manhattan Battle: Muhammad Atta and his companions. He mastered the art of forgery very well, and he told me that he assisted in forging documents for the 19 brothers." Upon returning to Kenya, “they planned the Paradise Hotel operation.” (NEFA previously published a statement from Shabaab al-Mujahideen celebrating Nabhan’s “martyrdom.”)

An English translation of Nabhan's biography can be accessed via the NEFA Foundation website.

Israel as an Al-Qa`ida Target: Sorting Rhetoric From Reality

By Matthew Levitt

A variety of groups in the Palestinian Territories claim to be affiliated with or inspired by al-Qa`ida. None of these groups, however, have been welcomed into the al-Qa`ida franchise. Moreover, this bottom up phenomenon where local Palestinian groups reach out to al-Qa`ida is not matched by a top down effort by al-Qa`ida’s core leadership or even its established affiliates to create an official al-Qa`ida faction in the Palestinian Territories. Nevertheless, in nearly all of al-Qa`ida’s public statements, the liberation of Palestine is a goal and Israel is denounced as an enemy. Al-Qa`ida’s extensive anti-Israel rhetoric, however, is not matched with the parallel operational focus on targeting Israel.

Instead, it appears that Palestine is employed as a useful lightening rod through which al-Qa`ida can tap into the emotional attachment of Muslims and Arabs worldwide. The place of Palestine and Israel in al-Qa`ida’s speeches and operations is shaped by its need to construct narratives, often focused on specific populations and conflicts, that support its radical and violent agenda. To do this, it must place conflicts throughout the world that involve Muslims into a singular, radical narrative in which Islam in general and Muslims in particular must defend themselves from Western aggression. For al-Qa`ida, the Palestinian cause is a paradigmatic example of this phenomenon. Since the Israel-Palestine conflict is perhaps the single most animating regional conflict for many Arabs and Muslims, its resonanceprovides al-Qa`ida with a powerful rhetorical tool for radicalization, recruitment, and fundraising.

In an article that appears in the latest volume of CTC Sentinel, the online journal of the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point (where I am an associate fellow), I demonstrate that while al-Qa`ida has always been interested in the Palestinian issue there is a remarkable gap between al-Qa`ida’s rhetoric and its operations targeting Israel. Those few attacks that al-Qa`ida has conducted against Israeli and Jewish targets have been small-scale and half-hearted.

The full article is available here.

Bin Laden Vid Cameo? Bugs Key to Squashing His Minions?

By James Gordon Meek

A new tape produced by Al Qaeda’s propaganda blowhards, As Sahab (“The Clouds”), is raising questions about the whereabouts of top leaders in the terror network, including Osama Bin Laden.

The video posted on jihadi websites stars Al Qaeda cleric Abu Yahya al-Libi delivering a sermon for the Muslim holiday Eid, which recently ended. It is a typical al-Libi (“The Libyan”) Armageddon-laced sermon, in which he blasts President Obama as a “black crow” unworthy of the accolades heaped upon him.

“Can a human please Obama and please Allah the Great and Almighty?” al-Libi asks.

The video is sure to receive careful analysis at CIA headquarters given the visuals and al-Libi's woodsy environment, which includes singing cicadas.

He is videotaped outdoors speaking before an audience including an intentionally blurred-out figure who bears a striking resemblance to Osama Bin Laden, though “his identity cannot be confirmed,” the SITE Intelligence Group concluded.

“If this is Osama Bin Laden, it would be the first time video of him has been released since 2007 and then before that 2004,” a statement by another private terrorism research group, IntelCenter, said.

U.S. intelligence officials are highly skeptical Bin Laden attended al-Libi’s sermon.

Please see my full post on the New York Daily News' Mouth of the Potomac Blog.

Joint Congressional Hearing on Iran in Latin America

By Douglas Farah

On Tuesday I testified before three Subcommittees of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on the issue of Iran's involvement in Latin America. My oral testimony is a bit more detailed on Iranian banks in Ecuador, which I am including here.

The general consensus of those testifying (links to the the testimonies of all the witnesses can be found here under the hearing notice) was that Iran's penetration presents a strategic and under appreciated threat to both the democratic institutions of the region and the United States.

Iran's sponsorship of Hezbollah and Chávez's sponsorship of the FARC, and the history of both terrorist groups in reaching out to other non-state organizations for learning and cross-training is of particularly troublesome.

One of the factors that I think is important to point out in all this discussion is that the leaders of Bolivarian Revolution, and Chávez in particular, are not efficient in what they do or particularly coherent and consistent in how they behave. That is to say, Chávez does not necessarily have the broad control over all aspects of Venezuelan political life, nor does his government execute very well.

Venezuela has one of the highest murder rates in the world, and an oil-rich nation is suffering from both crippling electrical blackouts and water shortages in its main cities.

One of the factors that the Iranians and Cubans bring to the Boliviarian nations is a different sense of discipline and structure, making certain elements of the government far more accomplished at what they do. This is particularly true in the area of internal security and the suppression of dissent and control of the media. My full blog is here.

NEFA Foundation: Al-Qaida's "Islamic State of Iraq" (ISI) Claims Baghdad Bombings

By Evan Kohlmann

The NEFA Foundation has obtained and translated a new communiqué from the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) claiming responsibility for the suicide car bombings that left more than 160 dead and injured nearly 500. According to the statement, “One of the selected targets that was chosen this time was the ministry of evil and exploitation, the ‘ministry of justice’, and the other one was Baghdad's provincial council, the ‘legislative council of the local government of Baghdad’…[the mujahideen] pulled away the curtain on the criminals of this beautiful area, and ended the numerous lies…”

The complete English translation of the message from the ISI can be accessed via the NEFA Foundation website.

The Taliban Response to Afghanistan's Runoff Elections

By Evan Kohlmann

The NEFA Foundation has obtained a communication from the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (the Taliban) titled “Regarding the Runoff Elections,” which noted that runoff elections are being held again to “keep the attention of our countrymen and the public of the world diverted in order to hide their defeat at the military field." The Taliban instructed their countrymen to “avoid participating in the deceitful and foreign-made electoral process. On the command of your belief and the Afghani conscience, you should completely boycott the elections on the basis of the rule of Sharia." Further, “All Mujahideen should make efforts to foil this wicked process; should carry out operations against their centers; prevent people from participating in the elections and block all roads and paths for all public and government vehicles one day before the day of the polling and inform people about this. Similarly, with the help of religious scholars, clerics and elders, educate people about the clandestine motives behind the elections. Create awareness among people regarding the conspiracies of the enemy." According to the statement, “The Mujahideen of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan have worked out programs to foil and prevent this process. They closely monitor all workers, officials and voters…”

The complete English-language text of the Taliban response can be accessed via the NEFA Foundation website.

Peacebuilding amid Terrorism: Fragile Gains in Somalia

By Matthew Levitt

The Washington Institute published Part 2 of Professor Andre Le Sage's analyis of jihadism in Somalia today. The first part focused on the country's growing insurgency, while this one addresses peacebuilding efforts in the context of terrorism in Somalia.

Here is an excerpt:

On September 14, 2009, U.S. special forces killed Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan, a senior leader of al-Qaeda's East Africa cell, near the town of Barawe on the coast of southern Somalia. Although the death of Nabhan will seriously disrupt and degrade the capabilities of al-Qaeda and its support groups, without political progress and peacebuilding in Somalia, targeting the terrorist group's leadership will have a short-lived strategic impact.

Training Camps and Foreign Fighters

With leadership support from Harakat al-Shabab and Hizb al-Islamiyah -- two Somali Islamist movements -- al-Qaeda's East Africa cell has long used Somalia as a safehaven. Al-Qaeda perpetrated the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the simultaneous attacks in 2002 on Kenya's coast against the Paradise Hotel and a failed effort to shoot down an Israeli charter airliner full of tourists, and the failed attempt in 2003 to attack the new U.S. embassy in Nairobi.

The relationship between al-Shabab, Hizb al-Islamiyah, and al-Qaeda's East Africa cell is close but complicated. On many occasions, the groups appear united and fight side by side against the transitional federal government (TFG). Despite rumors, however, a merger between al-Shabab and al-Qaeda has not yet occurred. Nonetheless, al-Qaeda is able to benefit from al-Shabab's gains, which increase al-Qaeda's space to maneuver and prepare for new attacks. Prevalent rumors suggest that Hizb al-Islamiyah leader Hassan Dahir Aweis is attempting to reinvent himself as a political leader, and may be willing to break his alliance with al-Shabab by negotiating a power-sharing deal with the TFG. While such talks would further isolate the insurgency, it is unknown how realistic Aweis's demands would be. Moreover, granting him any senior TFG position would not be welcomed by either Ethiopia or the United States -- two countries that consider Aweis a terrorist.

The full article is available here.

Militias and Insurgency in Somalia

By Michael Jacobson

This afternoon, the Washington Institute published part 1 of a 2 part series by Professor Andre Lesage at the National Defense University discussing trends in Somalia. The first part focuses on the country's growing insurgency, while the second part will address peacebuilding efforts and Somalia's ties to terrorism.

Here is an excerpt:

During her recent tour of Africa, U.S. secretary of state Hillary Clinton held a press conference with Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed, president of Somalia's transitional federal government (TFG). Her statements mark a major public commitment by the Obama administration to support Sharif's flagging government against the country's armed opposition groups, some of which are tied to al-Qaeda and threaten security across the greater Horn of Africa.

Transitional Federal Government

The TFG was created by an internationally supported peace process in Kenya in 2004. Before the TFG could negotiate its arrival in Mogadishu, a civil society-supported amalgam of various Islamic and tribal interests united to form the Islamic Courts Union (ICU). After fifteen years of rule by unpopular, clan-based warlords, the ICU temporarily brought security and hope to the war-ravaged capital city. The ICU, however, was an unwieldy creation. Under the influence of hardline Islamists, ICU militia extended control over most of southern Somalia, surrounded the TFG's rear base in Baidoa, and threatened to extend its holy war to Ethiopia. In response, Ethiopian forces invaded southern Somalia in December 2006, defeated the ICU, and installed the TFG in Mogadishu. This dispersed, but did not destroy, ICU forces across southern Somalia. They reemerged in many forms, notably the Hizb al-Islamiyah and Harakat al-Shabab groups, which slowly reinfiltrated Mogadishu in piecemeal fashion. The militias engaged in classic guerilla tactics to intimidate, harass, and wear down their opponents. Over time, they imported sophisticated attack methods into Somalia, including the use of improvised explosive devices and suicide bombings.

Even with Ethiopia's military support, the TFG was unable to defeat the insurgents and became hampered by leadership conflicts and clan-based schisms over power-sharing. In January 2009, the first TFG president, Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed, was replaced by Sheikh Sharif -- a more moderate Islamist leader of the ICU -- in a move to split opposition forces and dilute the armed opposition. Nonetheless, the TFG remains a paper tiger. The parliament rarely meets, and many of its members have fled Mogadishu out of fear for personal security. TFG is unable to deliver desperately needed social services and has no civil service to speak of -- cabinet ministers are often the only TFG ministry staff. Force protection for the TFG is provided primarily by 5,000 Ugandan and Burundian troops that are in Mogadishu as part of the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM).

The TFG was almost pushed out of Mogadishu in June 2009 by a concerted insurgent offensive. The TFG controls only a fraction of the capital and has influence in other parts of southern Somalia through loose alliances with clan-based political leaders and militias. Even in Mogadishu, the TFG has extremely weak command and control over the militia forces that support it, including strongmen in the security services and Ahlu Sunna wa Jamaah, a Sufist movement that recently spawned several armed militias. These groups function with almost complete independence, are constituted by different and competing sub-clans, and control their own patches of Somali territory -- much as the country's warlord-based factions did in the 1990s.

To read the rest of the piece, click here

NEFA Foundation: “Target: America” The September 2009 Arrest of Najibullah Zazi and the Ongoing Investigation into his Terror Plot

By Madeleine Gruen

Najibullah Zazi emigrated with his family from Afghanistan as a child and grew up in Flushing, Queens. He shared the same interests as other typical American teens, including a love of video games and the latest fashions. He dropped out of high school, then started operating a coffee cart in Lower Manhattan. In 2006, he married a cousin in Pakistan. He visited her and their children in Pakistan regularly--Then his behavior and his outward appearance began to change. Once he was friendly to customers, but then he grew cold and combative. He had always been religiously observant, but became even more doctrinal. After his most recent trip to Pakistan, Zazi abruptly moved to Aurora, Colorado. He was arrested there in September 2009 on charges of plotting to attack targets in the U.S. using TATP-based explosives, the ingredients for which he and his co-conspirators purchased in beauty supply shops.

This NEFA Target: America report provides details leading up to Zazi's arrest and sheds light on why this case is considered by many experts to be the most significant terrorist plot to take place on U.S. soil since 9/11. Zazi, and the yet-to-be-named co-conspirators in this case, received training at an al-Qaida camp in Pakistan, and returned back to the United States driven in their effort to acquire the materials needed to fabricated TATP-based explosive devices, which, the evidence suggests, they planned to use on a target, or multiple targets, in New York City.

The full report can be read here.

The Ban on Hizb ut-Tahrir in Bangladesh May Provide Western Countries with an Opportunity to Evaluate Their Own Strategies to Combat Extremist Groups

By Madeleine Gruen

Hizb ut-Tahrir in Bangladesh was banned by the government of Bangladesh on Thursday, October 22 for 'anti-state', 'anti-government', 'anti-people' and 'anti-democratic' activities in the country. However, as Animesh Roul pointed out in his CT Blog entry on the topic, the ban, thus far, appears to have done nothing to stop the branch from its anti-government, anti-democratic activities. In fact, Hizb ut-Tahrir in Bangladesh is now absolute in defining its enemies, and has issued press releases faster in the past three days than it has in its entire previous public lifetime.

In an October 24th press release, Hizb ut-Tahrir in Bangladesh declared, "America bans Hizb ut-Tahrir in Bangladesh; her aim is to remove the obstacle in the way of her evil plans to subjugate the Muslims of Bangladesh."

While Hizb ut-Tahrir in Bangladesh has just assigned itself more thought than any American has ever given it, its amplified ferocity in the wake of the ban does raise an ideal opportunity for Western governments to factor any lessons learned into their own debates over banning Hizb ut-Tahrir branches, particularly what the ideal timing for instituting such a ban might be.

When considering a ban of Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT) in a Western country, the essence of the debate should center on how effective HT could be as a radicalizing influence on domestic communities, not if HT actually has the potential to establish a unified Islamic State. HT establishes branches in Western countries in order to contribute to the group's overall objectives. It is not their objective to overthrow a western government in order to replace it with an Islamic government; at least, not at this point. For example, Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain (HTB) originates leaflets for distribution in Muslim countries, and its members recruit foreign students studying in the UK to prepare them for active membership when they return to their home countries. HTB operates freely and openly. While a ban has been debated seriously by the UK government, it has yet to be enacted. Some involved in the UK debate argue that to ban the group at this point is useless because it has gotten too large, too well established, and too powerful for a proscription to be enforced on consistent enough a basis to make that course of action effective.

In the case of Pakistan, and now Bangladesh, the governments decided to ban their HT branches after they had already reached a sustainable level of operations: they were comfortably in Phase II of HT’s three-tiered development scheme. (See here for background on HT’s method of operation). This means that by the time they were banned, the branches in Pakistan and Bangladesh already had a loyal and committed membership base, with members well positioned in the government and in educational institutions. They had methods for disseminating propaganda and for attracting supporters to their public demonstrations. Their operating systems are established, and the believers in HT’s system are driven, and are therefore unlikely to cease operations when faced with opposing pressure.

Perhaps the opportunity for Western countries (particularly the United States) to enact effective legislation is while the HT branches operating in their countries are still small and relatively quiet; before the branch has had an opportunity to establish a stronghold and cause adverse effects.

Bangladesh Proscribes Hizb ut-Tahrir

By Animesh Roul

The Bangladesh government has finally imposed proscription on the transnational Islamic religious-political organization Hizbut-Tahrir’s country chapter on Oct 22, for its 'anti-state', 'anti-government', 'anti-people' and 'anti-democratic' activities in the country. The government however, ruled out the possibility of charging Hizb ut-Tahrir- Bangladesh (HT-B) activists for their past offences in the country, but warned them of grim action if they continue their anti-state activities further.

Despite the ban, the HT-B’ website which is still active and operational criticized the present government in these following words:

"The oppressive Awami League government, agents of US-India-Britain banned Hizb ut-Tahrir due to the party’s stance on the side of the defence forces of the country and leading the work for re-establishing the Khilafah (Caliphate)."

HT-B has been under scanner for quite some time for its involvement with proscribed Jama'atul Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB) and Hizb-ut Towhid and other Islamic terror organizations.

Hizb ut-Tahrir, a transnational Islamic movement was founded in Jerusalem in 1953 by Tokiuddin Al Nakhani. HT believes in Ummatic concept (global Muslim brotherhood, not the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood (MB) movement). The website openly declares that :

"It aims to revive the Islamic Ummah from the severe decline that it had reached, and to liberate it from the thoughts, systems and laws of Kufr, as well as the domination and influence of the Kufr states. It also aims to restore the Islamic Khilafah State so that the ruling by what Allah revealed returns."

The Dhaka Unversity professor Mohiuddin Ahmed who is the chief of HT-B denied the allegations brought against the organisation in a statement realsed by the outft. It claimed that the outft will continue with its movement for a Muslim Ummah. According to Mohiuddin Ahmed's revelation, HT-B has units at all divisional headquarters and have around 10,000 members across the country.

On the line of fire:

HT-B became the fifth militant outfit to be outlawed in Bangladesh following Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami, Jama'atul Mujahideen Bangladesh, Jagrata Muslim Janata Bangladesh and Shahadat-e Al Hikma.

There are other overground Islamic organizations in Bangladesh which have been carrying out subversive activities or suspected for supporting terrorism in the country. The government plans to impose ban on them as well in due course.

They are: Islamic Democratic Party, Hizb-ut Towhid, Allahr Dal, Islami Samaj, Al-Harat al-Islamia, Jama'atul Faliya, Towhidi Janata, Bishwa Islami Front, Juma'atul al Sadat, Shahadat-e-Nobuwat, Jama'at-e Yahia al Turat, Joyshe Mostafa Bangladesh, al Jihad Bangladesh, Woarat Islamic Front, Jamaat-as-Sadat, al Khidmat, Harkat-e-Islam al Jihad, Hizbullah Islami Samaj, Muslim Millat Shariah Council, World Islamic Front for Jihad, Joysh-e Mohammad, Hizbul Mahadi, Kalemar Dawat, Islami Dawati Kafela, al Islam Martyrs Brigade, Dawat-e Islam, Tanjim, Hizb e Abu Omar, and Jadid al-Qaeda Bangladesh.

Iran's Expanding Latin American Reach

By Douglas Farah

I have touched on the topic before, but from spending time on the ground in the region in recent months it is clear that Iran is making significant inroads into the Latin America financial services sector and other areas.

In Ecuador, as I have noted before, Iran has set up a way for its central bank to deposit money directly into the Ecuadoran central bank. The stated purpose is to allow $120 million in credit to flow to importers and exporters in both countries to facilitate trade.

The only catch is that there is virtually no trade between the countries. In recent years (2006 and 2007, the latest available) Ecuador reported zero exports to Iran and imports of less than $500,000 each year. Like the Iranian financial institutions in Venezuela, the economics of the case simply make no sense.

According to the "Protocol of Cooperation" between the Central Bank of Ecuador and the Export Development Bank of Iran (EDBI), which is under Treasury Department sanctions for supporting Hezbollah and the Quds Force, Iran was also willing to take an unusual step.

Point 6 of the agreement, which I have, states that:

EDBI manifests its readiness to establish a branch of Banco Internacional de Desarrollo (BID) in the Republic of Ecuador.

This is interesting because the BID is reportedly a Venezuelan bank, which the EDBI would have no over, including where it opened branches. But as I wrote earlier, the BID is wholly owned (all 40,000 shares) by Bank Saderat, an Iranian bank under U.S. and UN sanction. My full blog is here.

NEFA Foundation: "Migrating from the Arabian Peninsula to Somalia"

By Evan Kohlmann

The NEFA Foundation has obtained and translated a new message posted on an Al-Qaida web forum, wherein a jihadist recounts his journey from Saudi Arabia to join the Shabaab al-Mujahideen Movement in Somalia--in the process providing valuable insight into the radicalization process and the logistics involved in waging jihad in a foreign land. Identifying the impetus that pushed him to leave Saudi Arabia, he explained, “I was watching a European educational program about the American occupation of Iraq, and the program had gained a recorded video by the Americans about ugly sexual harassment against Iraqi girls under the age of 12…And, the program continued, until the broadcaster said that they acquired another video that shows an Iraqi lady being raped…American soldiers invading one of the houses…an Iraqi lady awakes frightened from her sleep because the invasion was at night time…one of the dogs pulled the lady to her room and raped her as she screamed calling the Muslims…and, another soldier pointed a weapon in her face asking her to be silent…I wasn’t able to finish watching the video…I felt at the moment the sweat pouring from the back of my head down to my back…and I began shivering…and anger filled my joints…until I stood up from my desk and went to one of the brothers…"

The full English translation is now available on the NEFA Foundation website.

Counterterrorism and Crime Fighting in Los Angeles

By Michael Jacobson

This morning, Michael Downing, the Deputy Commissioner of the Los Angeles Police Department and the Commander of its Counterterrorism Bureau addressed a special Washington Institute event in Los Angeles. This event was a part of the speaker series the Institute has been running since December 2007, with senior counterterrorism officials. Commissioner Downing was the second speaker from the local law enforcement ranks, following Richard Falkenrath, the Deputy Commissioner for the NYPD, who spoke at the Institute earlier this year.

In his speech, Commissioner Downing gave a comprehensive overview of the threat, and outlined the LAPD's expanding capabilities in the counterterrorism arena. He also commented on a number of the LAPD's new initiatives in this area, and explained how the LAPD coordinates its efforts with those of the federal government. Commissioner Downing also provided a number of examples from their counterterrorism investigations to highlight both the threat and the LAPD's response.

To read Commissioner Downing's prepared remarks, click here

WMD: Commission” More Needs To Be Done to Counter Bio Threat

By Michael B. Kraft

To help counter the threat of bioterrorism attacks, a special Congressional Commission is advocating stronger NSC leadership, better funding and reform of the fragmented Congressional oversight.

These were among the recommendations in an interim “The Clock is Ticking” report issued at a briefing yesterday, Oct. 21, by the Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism, chaired by former Senators Bob Graham, a Florida Democrat, and Jim Talent, a Missouri Republican.

The report is a follow-up to the one released in December which warned that it is more likely than not that a weapon of mass destruction will be used in a terrorist attack somewhere in the world by the end of 2013.” The Commission 2008 report also said that it “believes that terrorists are more likely to obtain and use a biological weapon than a nuclear weapon. (see my December 3, 2008 posting.)

In releasing its new report, the WMD commission said that although progress had been made since its December report, “the nation’s level of preparedness for dealing with the threat of bioterrorism remains far lower than that of the nuclear threat.”
“The clock is ticking…the United States is better off than it was previously but the problem is that our adversaries have made even more progress,” Senator Graham said. The former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee apparently was referring to published reports that that Al Qaeda and its some of its supporters were continuing to show interest in using biological weapons for mass attacks.

Senator Talent said “it is only getting easier and cheaper and faster to develop and use biological weapons—and our best response is to mitigate the effects through faster. safer vaccines and therapeutics. It’s essential that the US government move more aggressively on this issue.”

The October report stated that “Central to U.S biosecurity strategy should be the recognition that biological weapons are distinct from nuclear weapons and require a unique approach. Unlike nuclear weapons, which require highly advanced technology, massive infrastructure, and rare materials that can be closely monitored and secured, biological weapons materials occur naturally, require no significant infrastructure to produce,and can be found in nearly every part of the world.”

The report was released yesterday at a conference hosted by the George Washington University Institute for Homeland Security Policy, which has a long history of interest in biological and other WMD threats.

Key recommendations were structural and resource-related. The Commission said it “strongly recommends that the National Security Council needs a senior official whose sole responsibility is to improve America’s capability for bio defense.” If that person is not there you don't get the balance in the approach between nuclear and bio," Senator Talent said.

NEFA Foundation: Sunni “Jondollah” Claims Suicide Attack on Iranian Revolutionary Guardsmen

By Evan Kohlmann

The NEFA Foundation has obtained and translated a claim of responsibility from a Sunni militant group known as “Jondollah” (“The Army of God”) for the October 18 suicide bombing attack on a delegation of senior Iranian Revolutionary Guard officers in the southeast corner of the country near the border with Pakistan. According to the communiqué, “one of the heroic men of Baluchistan—the land of martyrdom and resistance—named Abdulwahad Mahmadi Sarawani, was able to kill dozens of commanders and units from the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, Basij Militia, and officials from the Ministry of Intelligence… by carrying a martyrdom operation in Sarbaz, one of the cities in Baluchistan Province.” The statement indicated that the bombing attack was a response to the “crimes of the Iranian regime against the Baluchi people; the unarmed and oppressed, who loses everyday a number of its children sacrifices to the crimes of this regime that murdered throughout the last year alone hundreds of young men from this province… amongst them were the pious Ulama Hafidh Salahadin and Mawlawi Khalilallah Zare’i—who were executed for defending the rights of our oppressed people. Additionally, they executed the brothers Tariq and Asad Wafa’i, and three others from the city, and those are: Thabihalla Naro’i, Hajji Noti Zahi, and Ghulam Rasul Shaho Zahi, and all of those were guilty of Baluchi and Sunni. These crimes left to the Baluchi people no other choice except resistance and responding in the same manner to the Iranian regime.”

A translation of the Jondollah communique claiming credit for the attack can be accessed via the NEFA Foundation website.

AQIM Mourns Pakistani Taliban Commander Baitullah Mehsud

By Evan Kohlmann

The NEFA Foundation has obtained a new communiqué from Al-Qaida's network in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) mourning the death of Pakistani Taliban commander Baitullah Mehsud in a U.S. air strike. According to the statement, Mehsud was “graced…with martyrdom at the hands of the ruthless power and the most tyrannical country in the world; not in a battle where men meet face-to-face, but in a cowardly raid operation using a jet, and how shameful that this jet was without a pilot.” AQIM added, “our enemies should know that every time they [kill] a commander from our commanders or a master from our masters, they only provide us with fuel that will…[push] our movement forward on the path of Jihad seeking victory or martyrdom until the banner of unification is above all banners...and our Sheikh Usama rises above their fool Obama.”

A translation of the latest AQIM statement can be downloaded from the NEFA Foundation website.

Taliban’s War on Pakistan: Lessons to draw, options to pursue

By Walid Phares

Taliban Terror in Pakistan

The war between the Taliban and Pakistan continues to accelerate. Just last weekend, Pakistan’s army responded to a long string of Taliban attacks by launching a massive ground operation in Waziristan.

But through this already-long fight, the press and other observers have only focused on the continuing bloodshed rather than the fact that the Taliban continue to launch suicide bombers and other types of attacks inside Pakistan’s cities against its police and military forces. We warned that the Taliban’s war on Pakistan’s government and civil society, would widen since the assassination of Prime Minister elect Benazir Bhutto in December 2007. And so it is today.

It is unfortunate, but nevertheless true, that he most important events – the worst events -- in this war have yet to happen. And analysts must focus on the lessons learned so far so that the worrying projections can be accompanied with parallel policy suggestions.

The jihadi campaign in Pakistan was planned years ago, but the electoral victory in 2007 of the secular Party of the People, headed traditionally by the Bhutto clan, triggered an acceleration of the Taliban general offensive. Initially the Mullahs of the most radical Salafists on the face of Earth – in partnership with al Qaeda -- wanted to seize Pakistan gradually, with further infiltration. They were building their “Emirate” sanctuary in Waziristan and beyond, while penetrating the intelligence agencies and other segments of the bureaucracy.

But since September 2008 when Benazir’s widower Asif Ali Zardari was elected as new President and as he clearly pledged to fight “terrorism,” the Taliban leaped to preempt his designs. In one short year, they escalated their attacks reaching a point 60 miles from Islamabad last April. That week, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said that Zardari's government was "abdicating to the Taliban and the extremists."

In fact when the Jihadist forces entered the Swat valley and began heading towards the capital’s suburbs, the country’s Government was tested strategically. I told Fox News then that this was a “red line.” Crossing it towards Islamabad meant a Taliban advance all over the country. But if the Army would cross it in reverse, it would mean a full fledge war against the Taliban. And in fact it did happen, as we can see today. So what are the lessons so far?

Regional Cooperation in Countering terrorism: Iran has the Nerve

By Michael B. Kraft

Regional cooperation has played an increasingly important role in international efforts to counter terrorism in recent years. Now Iran, the most active state sponsor of terrorism, claims it wants to get into the act.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan discussed the need for regional cooperation against terrorism during a phone conversation Monday, the semi-official Fars news agency reported. The Iranian President said the “Campaign against terrorism would yield fruit only through the presence and joint cooperation of countries in the region," according to Xinhua, the Chinese news agency.

Ahmadinejad’s ostensible embracement of regional cooperation comes after his country’s most powerful ox was gored. When five officials of Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, including the deputy leader, and about 40 other people were killed and dozens wounded in a deadly bomb attack Sunday in Iran's southeastern province of Sistan-Baluchestan near Iran's border with Pakistan. Iranian officials accused the United States, British and Pakistan intelligence agencies of being involved in the attack and called for retaliation. These countries strongly denied by the accusations and condemned the bombings.

Iran’s accusations sound like another case of Iranian leaders blaming outsiders for their problems. The Baluchi insurgent group Jundallah — or Soldiers of God — took responsibility for the bombings, which included a roadside attack on a car full of Guards, near the city of Pishin. The Baluchi minority, who are Sunnis, have long chaffed at Tehran’s Shiite-lead rule and hardly need the help of outsiders to pick and track targets on their own territory.

Ahmadinjad now calls for regional cooperation against terrorism. This is the height chutzpah from a leader not known for understatement. Iran has been behind major terrorist attacks against the United States, Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries. It is a major backer of Hamas and helped create Hezbollah, terrorist groups whose trademarks are suicide bombings and firing of rockets against Israeli civilian targets. Ahmadinejad, furthermore has called for the destruction of Israel, a member of the United Nations, not exactly the stance of a leader who is against terrorism.

Iran’s main regional partner in terrorism, in addition to Hamas and Hezbollah is Syria, which also is on the State Department’s list of countries that are formally designated as repeated supporters of international terrorism and subject to resulting sanctions.

Iran’s newly found show of support for regional cooperation against terrorism comes coincidentally after a useful conference on the subject held earlier this month by The Center on Global Counterterrorism, a non-government agency that promotes stronger international cooperation against terrorism.

At the Center’s day-long conference held in Washington on Oct 8, speakers from the United Nations, Africa, South Asia, the Inter-American Committee Against Terrorism, and emphasized the usefulness in working through regional organizations to enhance working relationships among neighboring countries.
One speaker, Raphael Perl of the Organization for Security and Cooperation In Europe, proposed that the regional organizations develop a cooperative alliance.

Lashkar-e-Taiba - Pakistan's Hezbollah

By Aaron Mannes

One group absent from the concoction of Punjabi groups joining the Pashtun Taliban rebellion is Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT). Although it recruits from the same general area, the other groups are Deobandi (Pakistan’s homegrown Islamic extremists) whereas LeT is Dar Ahl Hadith, which is basically the Pakistani-offshoot of the Saudi Wahabis. The theological divisions are not enormous and there are links. But LeT appears to be more careful and disciplined in its strategic thinking. It has not been involved in significant violence within Pakistan and has not taken on the Pakistani government. It also appears to have independent funding sources (initial stake money was apparently from Saudi Arabia, but it has since developed its own fund-raising networks.) While there are far fewer Ahl Hadith adherents in Pakistan then Deobandis (or Barelvis or Shia), LeT itself is one of the larger groups – the ISI reports they have 150,000 members. LeT runs schools, hospitals, and other social services along with an extensive print media empire. In short, it is a Hezbollah-like organization with multiple facets, the ability to innovate tactically, and choose its operations strategically (like the November 2008 attacks in Mumbai.)

Saeed Stands Alone
This is important background to the recent Pakistani court decision to dismiss incitement charges against LeT leader Hafiz Mohammed Saeed. B. Raman has a fine analysis here. A few additional points are in order. Westerners love the independent Pakistani judiciary when it is “democratic” but not when it is actually doing its job under the law. The real issue is the way in which Saeed was prosecuted. The charges were incitement – these are loser charges that only make Saeed more popular. Incitement against India is in theory illegal – but is also admired by many in Pakistan.

Read the full post here.

Pakistan's Jihadi Stew

By Aaron Mannes

The aftermath of the attack on the Pakistani military’s GHQ earlier this week has brought attention to the complex stew of jihadi groups running around the Punjab. Imtiaz Gul provides an overview at Foreign Policy while the venerable B. Raman provides another at Outlook India. The story starts with the Saudis supporting anti-Shia groups in Pakistan to counter Iranian-backed Shia militancy. This was exacerbated by local animosities in regions were Pakistan’s Shia minority were wealthy landowners. The main anti-Shia group was Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP). Reportedly it received substantial state support under General Zia who wanted to counter his political rivals. SSP became involved in politics and spun-off violent groups, most notably Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ) in 1996. Supposedly there is no connection between the political SSP and the terrorist LeJ. This is an organizational maneuver that has been repeated endlessly in the Pakistani jihadi milieu. Supposedly, both of these groups have been banned – but banned groups in Pakistan never seem to disappear, they just change their names.

Read the full post here.

Transcript: Message from the "Emir" of the "German Taliban Mujahideen" Abu Ishaq al-Muhajir

By Evan Kohlmann

The NEFA Foundation has obtained a new document from the designated terrorist organization known as the “Islamic Jihad Union” (IJU), offering a message from the “German Taliban Mujahideen.” The statement encourages German ISAF soldiers serving in Afghanistan to abandon their posts, or else face grave punishment: “Just as the terrorist crusaders were surprised and shocked, so will also be the unjust German crusaders surprised and shocked.” The statement goes on: ”We observe that your soldiers are being carved up by our Martyrs Brigades, and that your troops in Afghanistan are being wiped out. We promise you that the German troops, who are the protectors of the Zionist Christian Union, will return individually in coffins from the occupied territories.”

An English translation of Abu Ishaq's statement on behalf of the "German Taliban Mujahideen" can be accessed via the NEFA Foundation website.

NEFA Foundation: Bio of Alleged Mumbai Terror Mastermind Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi

By Evan Kohlmann

The NEFA Foundation has obtained a copy of an April 2001 bulletin from the Pakistani terrorist organization Lashkar-e-Taiba unraveling the early history of the organization -- and featuring the founding role of "Abu Waleed" (a.k.a. Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi), who has been named by the Indian and Pakistani governments as the alleged mastermind behind the November 2008 Mumbai terror attacks. According to the document, at the height of the Soviet-Afghan war of the 1980s, "a young man fired with the zeal of Jihad, who quenched his thirst for knowledge at Jamia Salfia Mamoon Kanjan and Jamia Muhammadia Gujranwala, met a commander of Jihadic forces. This meeting resulted into his entry into the field of Jihad. The name of this young man was Abu Waleed Zaki-ur-Rahman. Soon he was entrusted with the responsibility of Jihad. Mujahideen engaged in Jihad under his leadership at different Jihadic centers, for instance Markaz Makkah, Markaz Madina. There he had full co-operation of Arab Mujahideen who taught him the intricacies of Jihad and Qital [combat]. From August,1987 to January 1990, he continued his Jihadic activities at the battlefront of Kabul. He also stayed in touch with Noori and Arab Mujahideen fighting in Noorastan... Young Abu Waleed and some other Pakistani Ulema (Hafiz Seed etc) laid the foundation of Ma’skar-e-Taiba in Kunhar, at Tango on February 22, 1990. Soon the Mujahideen who received training from this centre were fighting at different fronts."

The document can be downloaded from the NEFA Foundation website.

NEFA Foundation: Resources on Al-Qaida's Mustafa Abu al-Yazid (a.k.a. "Shaykh Saeed")

By Evan Kohlmann

Following reports of an alleged connection to NYC terror suspect Najibullah Zazi, attention has focused on Al-Qaida's "number 3" Shaykh Mustafa Abu al-Yazid (a.k.a. "Shaykh Saeed al-Masri.")

Click to see video screenshot montage in full resolution

"...The virtuous Shaykh Mustafa Abu al-Yazid, nicknamed Shaykh Saeed, the overall head of al-Qaida Organization in Afghanistan, who Allah favored to come to Jihad in Afghanistan in 1988. He took part in founding al-Qaida in 1989, and is a member of the Shura council of Qaida al-Jihad."

- Dossier: Shaykh Mustafa Abu al-Yazid (June 2008)

- Shaykh Mustafa Abu al-Yazid: "Light and Fire: An Announcement to the Ummah" (February 2008)
- Letter from Mustafa Abu al-Yazid confirming the death of Al-Qaida lieutenant Abu Sulaiman al-Otaibi (May 2008)
- Communiqué issued by senior Al-Qaida commander Mustafa Abu al-Yazid claiming responsibility for the June 2, 2008 suicide bombing attack on the Danish embassy in Islamabad, Pakistan
- Transcript of Geo TV (Pakistan) Interview of Shaykh Mustafa Abu al-Yazid (June 2008)
- Statement from Al-Qaida leader Mustafa Abu al-Yazid acknowledging the “martyrdom” of most wanted Egyptian Al-Qaida commander “Abu Khabab al-Masri” (July 2008)
- Shaykh Mustafa Abu al-Yazid: "A Message to the People of Pakistan" (April 2009)
- Transcript of audio message from Shaykh Mustafa Abu al-Yazid pleading for financial support on behalf of Al-Qaida (June 2009)
- Shaykh Mustafa Abu al-Yazid's Al-Jazeera Interview, in which he threatens to use "nuclear weapons" against the United States (June 2009).

NEFA Foundation: Al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb Spawns New Media Wing, "The Andalus Foundation"

By Evan Kohlmann

The NEFA Foundation has obtained a new communiqué from Al-Qaida's network in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) announcing the foundation of a specialized media wing known as the "Andalus Foundation." According to the statement, "due to our belief that the battle of pen is no less important than the battle of the sword, and in continuation of our development of jihadi media, despite the many tribulations and hardships of imposed by war, we bring the good news to our beloved Muslim nation, and we announce to the public the establishment of a new media foundation, which we have named, 'The Andalus Foundation for Media Production.' And, this establishment will become, with the help of Allah, the only official party to publish all the media productions that are created by your brothers in the media committee of Al-Qaida's network in the Islamic Maghreb."

A translation of the AQIM declaration can be accessed via the NEFA Foundation website.

Transcript: Al-Qaida's Mustafa Abu al-Yazid Mourns Pak Taliban Commander Baitullah Mehsud

By Evan Kohlmann

The NEFA Foundation has obtained a transcript of a communiqué from Shaykh Mustafa Abu al-Yazid (a.k.a. “Shaykh Saeed”) mourning the death of Pakistani Taliban commander Baitullah Mehsud in a U.S. air strike. In the statement, al-Yazid said, “Emir Baitullah Mehsud was a model of boldness and unyielding as a leader, who not only prepared the fighters of his caravan against the enemies of the Deen in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and made arrangements to train them, but also possessed the desire and determination to attack the kuffar inside their own houses and territories. I myself witnessed him saying, ‘My desire is to advance at America's heart and strike it, and to destroy Americans' pride and self conceit.’” According to As-Sahab, al-Yazid “took part in founding al-Qaida in 1989, and is a member of the Shura council of Qaida al-Jihad.” Open source media reports indicate alleged NYC bomb plotter Najibullah Zazi was in contact with al-Yazid via an intermediary prior to Zazi’s arrest.

A transcript of Mustafa Abu al-Yazid's remarks concerning Baitullah Mehsud can be downloaded from the NEFA Foundation website.

See also: NEFA Foundation Dossier on Shaykh Mustafa Abu al-Yazid (a.k.a. "Shaykh Saeed")

Afghan Taliban Deny Terror Agenda in Western Countries

By Evan Kohlmann

The NEFA Foundation has obtained a communication from the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (the Taliban) titled “On the Occasion of the Eighth Anniversary of the American Attack on Afghanistan”, in which the Taliban noted, “they were promising they would withdraw within three months, in their words, after eliminating the so-called terrorism. Contrarily, today eight years from that time have passed, but they have built up hundreds of military bases in Afghanistan and Iraq. They say that they will raise the level of their troops to almost 110,000 troops. It is clear from this, that they have occupied Afghanistan for the execution of their expansionist plans in the Middle East, Central Asia and the Southeast Asia.” In their anniversary message, the Taliban likewise insisted, "We did not have any agenda to harm other countries including Europe, nor do we have such agenda today."

The statement continued, “We believed from day one, that this is not a war between democracy and the so-called terrorism but rather a war between the western colonialism and the freedom-loving nationalist and Islamist forces.” The Taliban warned, “if you want to turn the country of the proud and pious Afghans into a colony, then know that we have an unwavering determination and have braced for a prolonged war. Have a glance at the history, the Afghans are the people characterized by historical distinction of always sacrificing in the way of their religion and country. Today, we will not fall short of this.”

A copy of the Taliban anniversary message can be downloaded from the NEFA Foundation website.

Pakistan: Multiple Terror Strikes in Lahore Ahead of Waziristan Offensive

By Animesh Roul

While the Pakistani armed forces are readying their guns for another round of military offensive in restive Waziristan, especially in response to a series violent terror strikes over the past weeks across the country, Terrorists have again targeted Lahore city with series of brazen attacks ranging from shooting indiscriminately, lobbing grenades and taking officials hostage.

At least four simultaneous attacks have been reported in Lahore and Kohat in the morning of Oct 15 when armed terrorist stormed into the Federal Investigative Agency (FIA) building, Manawan Police Training Centre and Elite Force Training Centre, Lahore. As per media reports at least 16 people lost their lives in Thursday’s attacks and scores of them were injured in the ensued cross fire between terrorists and security personnel.

Elsewhere, in Pakistan another suicide strike took place in Kohat district today (Oct 15) when suicide attacker rammed an explosive-laden vehicle into the city police station building. At least 11 people were killed in the attack and destroyed the whole structure.
According to Geo News, Tehreek-e-Taliban, Pakistan (TTP) has claimed responsibility of Lahore attacks. These recent attacks certainly signal Taliban's resilience and fire power. More disturbing trend has been the involvement of ethnic Punjabi terror groups in these attacks. Azam Tariq, a Taliban spokesman indicated about the growing alliance between Punjabi militants and Taliban in a recent statement.

Terror Timeline: A bloody week

Oct. 12: Over 40 people got killed in a suicide attack which targeted a military convoy in the Alpuri area, Shangla district in the North West Frontier Province.

Oct. 11: Taliban Terrorists have laid siege of General Headquarters (GHQ) in Rawalpindi for almost 18 hours taking around 39 people hostage. Nine terrorists were killed in that prolonged encounter and the mastermind one Dr Osman was apprehended. Ajmad Farooqi of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) has claimed responsibility for the attack on the GHQ.

Oct. 09: Nearly 50 people were killed including children when a suicide attacker detonated a vehicle borne explosive (VBIED) at the crowded Soekarno Chowk in Khyber Bazaar in Peshawar. The blast reportedly destroyed some ‘30 vehicles and partially damaged over 60 shops in the nearby markets.

Oct. 05 - Suicide bomber dressed as paramilitary (Frontier Constabulary ) soldier attacked the United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) office in Islamabad, killing five persons, including a UN diplomat and two women employees.

The Unnoticed Success in Counter-Terrorism Financing

By Douglas Farah

As David Cohen, assistant secretary of Treasury for Terror Finance recently noted, the United States and its allies have enjoyed some under appreciated success in cutting off the finances of al Qaeda and other radical Islamist groups, a goal that once seemed far out of reach.

As Cohen noted in a recent speech, "In the first six months of this year, al Qaida's leaders made four public appeals for money, including one in June of this year, when an al Qaida leader announced that a lack of funding was hurting the group's recruitment and training. We assess that al Qaida is in its weakest financial condition in several years, and that, as a result, its influence is waning."

This is interesting not only for what it says, but for what it implies. Core al Qaeda does not need vast amounts of money to operate. The amounts are significant, but not what they were al Qaeda core could help finance and direct franchise operations. This means that not even the relatively small sums needed are getting to al Qaeda's leadership.

This has been one of the most interesting success stories about what has gone right in the inter-agency process, and forward thinking that is often absent. Given that I have frequently commented on the short-coming in these two areas -- inter-agency cooperation and lack of adaptability and innovation in the intelligence, military and law enforcement communities, it is only fair to note this success.

Much of the current success began in Iraq, and the Special Operations programs there of collecting tactical financial intelligence on the ground during operations. This not only led to the unraveling of numerous financial networks that fed Al Qaeda in Iraq, it also shed new light on the funding sources and the major donors to the al Qaeda network.

The change in SOF strategy and conduct was deliberate and driven by forces on the ground, who integrated their findings into the inter-agency working group that includes Treasury and other entities with financial specialization. As intelligence accumulates and is exploited, it yields more intelligence and more success. This has been the case in going after core al Qaeda's revenue stream.

Fortunately Cohen was honest enough acknowledge the rest of the picture: The Taliban, with its access to drug money, is not weakened, and is in fact in a far greater position of strength than al Qaeda. My full blog is here.

India and Left Wing Extremism: Impending Battle

By Animesh Roul

I just published one in depth analysis on India’s planned offensive against the Naxalites in the face of increasing violence by the extremists.

Here is an excerpt:

In a brutal show of force, hundreds of left-wing extremists (also known as Maoists or Naxalites) attacked a police unit killing 17 officers in Maharashtra’s Gadchiroli district on 8 October, despite threats from state and federal governments of a strong military response if extremists failed to renounce violence. Earlier that week, Maoists extremists beheaded an abducted senior police official in Chhattisgarh state following a failed bid to swap jailed Maoists leaders.

Reacting to the latest Taliban-style execution, Minster of Home Affairs P Chidambaram told local media that the violence was a possible response to the arrest of some senior CPI-Maoist leaders. Samarji, Maoist leader in Jharkhand, had reportedly demanded through local media that the abducted police official be swapped for three recently arrested cadres — Kobad Ghandy, Chhattradhar Mahato and Chandra Bhushan Yadav.

Maoists have been targeting legislators, security officials and government properties in regular intervals in their so-called Red Corridor, which comprises swathes of territory including parts central and eastern India. According to government sources, the extremists control nearly 40,000 square kilometers across 20 states.

The Indian government now concedes that the Naxalites pose one of the greatest threats to the country’s security.

In India, left-wing extremism emerged from a place called Naxalbari in the Darjeeling district of West Bengal in 1967 under the leadership of Charu Mazumdar. Since then, the movement has come a long way from what was a rather small-scale local rebellion of farmers and tribal peoples. Maoists in India, as elsewhere, have adopted the ‘Protracted People’s War’ (PPW) as the strategy to achieve their political objective. The PPW is divided into three phases: occupy the land; step up the guerilla struggle; and bring power to the people.

Read Full Text Here.

[Originaly published in the ISN Security Watch (Zurich, Oct 12, 2009)]

Afghan Hezbollah? Be Careful What You Wish For

By Matthew Levitt

As I recently wrote for Middle East Strategy at Harvard (MESH), The Washington Post reported last week that some in the administration see the Lebanese Hezbollah as a possible model for transformation of the Taliban. Describing the Taliban as a movement “deeply rooted” in Afghanistan, much like Hezbollah is in Lebanon, proponents of a Hezbollah model for the Taliban see a scenario in which the Taliban participates in Afghan politics, occasionally flexes its military muscles to benefit its political positions at home, but does not directly threat the United States even if it remains a source of regional instability.

According to the Post, while the idea has been discussed informally “outside the Situation Room meetings,” it has not yet been presented to President Obama. That’s a good thing because the notion is deeply flawed, and its implementation would have dire consequences for Afghanistan, the region more broadly, and U.S. counterterrorism efforts all.

Hezbollah in Lebanon is a destabilizing force, as is the Taliban in Afghanistan. Not only does Hezbollah maintain an independent militia in explicit violation of United Nations resolutions, it uses this private army to create semi-independent enclaves throughout the south of Lebanon and the Bekaa Valley where Lebanese Armed Forces are not allowed. In these spaces, Hezbollah maintains training camps, engages in weapons smuggling and drug trafficking, and maintains tens of thousands of rockets aimed at its neighbor to the south, Israel. Hezbollah collects intelligence on people traveling through Beirut international airport, and has built its own communications infrastructure beyond the reach of the national government.

In Afghanistan, an independent Taliban militia that controls territory of its own; maintains bases and training camps; facilitates weapons smuggling; and engages in every aspect of the narcotics production pipeline from poppy cultivation and processing to taxing delivery and smuggling abroad, would certainly seek to maintain its control over its own territory. Indeed, an increasing number of major Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) arrests over the past few months have targeted drug kingpins closely tied to the Taliban, like Haji Juma Kahn and Baz Mohammad.

The full article is available here.

Video: German and American Militants Training for Terror in Pakistan

By Evan Kohlmann

The NEFA Foundation has obtained a new video from the Islamic Jihad Union (IJU) showing a group of alleged German nationals receiving instruction at an IJU terrorist training camp in northwest Pakistan. The video also includes footage of a balding Caucasian male identified as a U.S. national fighting alongside the IJU, "Abu Ibrahim al-Amriki." The IJU has claimed responsibility for a failed terrorist plot in 2007 targeting airports and other critical infrastructure in Germany - including Ramstein Air Base.

The video can be viewed on the NEFA Foundation website.

See also - The October 2008 NEFA Foundation report on the Islamic Jihad Union (IJU) by Ron Sandee: "The Islamic Jihad Union was founded by breakaway fighters from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan in March 2002 in Pakistan’s Tribal Areas. The organization initially called itself the Islamic Jihad Group, but, after failed attacks in Uzbekistan in 2004 and early 2005, changed its name and became closer to core al-Qa’ida. Since then, the organization’s focus has shifted, as the IJU began plotting terror attacks in Pakistan and Western Europe, especially Germany. Based in Mirali in South Waziristan, the IJU is training Western recruits for attacks in the West. The recruits are mainly Turks from Turkey and Turkish communities in Western Europe, but also Muslim converts from Europe."

NEFA Foundation: Focus on New Pakistani Taliban Leader Hakimullah Mehsud

By Evan Kohlmann

Following Hakimullah Mehsud’s meeting with tribal reporters last week, the NEFA Foundation gained access to a brief autobiographical sketch handwritten by the TTP leader to provide a reliable account of his life and origins to the media. The most significant section of Mehsud’s brief autobiographical sketch outlines the early days of the Pakistani Taliban, which, according to Hakimullah, first emerged alongside their Afghan brethren in Khost Province, namely the Haqqani network under the leadership of commander Maulvi Sangeen. Significantly, Amir Baitullah, who Hakimullah succeeded at the helm of the TTP, is mentioned as one of the early leaders, alongside Nek Mohammed Wazir, the first figurehead of the Pakistani Taliban, and Abdullah Mehsud, his successor for a brief period. Also, Hakimullah takes care to mention both Al-Qaida and the Uzbek insurgents, with whom he has reportedly been associated since his early days. He also seems to point out that he directly succeeded Nek Mohammed as the paladin of Uzbek and Al-Qaida fighters, even under Baitullah’s rule.

NEFA has packaged the biography along with an accompanying report by Senior Investigator Claudio Franco and video footage of a recent meeting between Hakimullah Mehsud and the leader of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU), Tahir Yuldashev.

Quetta Front & the Baluchi Factor

By Aaron Mannes

As fighting in Afghanistan, particularly the south, intensifies U.S. policy-makers are beginning to shift their gaze to Afghanistan’s southern border with Pakistan and wondering if the northern regions of Baluchistan are – like the FATA on Afghanistan’s eastern border – serving as a Taliban haven. U.S. officials have even claimed that Taliban head Mullah Omar and his top leaders are living in Baluchistan’s capital Quetta.

This has, unsurprisingly, set off a spasm of denials in Pakistan along with the immediate conclusion in Pakistan that the U.S. was planning drone attacks in Quetta. Not helpful, in the context of American attempts to attach conditions to aid in the Kerry-Lugar bill.

Old News
Two points about this “new” front. First, Quetta should have been on the radar screen from the beginning – back in May 2003 The New York Times reported on Taliban gathering in Quetta. The reporter Carlotta Gall and her Pakistani photographer Akhtar Soomro were beaten up by Pakistani intelligence agents for their trouble.

Pakistan’s Other Insurgency
The second point is that most of the articles speculating about the Taliban leadership residing in Quetta ignore the ongoing Baluchi insurgency in the province. This is not an irrelevant point.

Read the complete post here.

Patriot Bill Extension Passes: Material Support Untouched

By Michael B. Kraft

The Senate Judiciary Committee has passed legislation extending the Patriot Act without a proposal by Senator Feingold that would, in effect, eviscerate an important 13-year old-statute that makes it illegal to provide material support to foreign terrorist organizations.

The committee yesterday approved by an 11-8 vote and sent to the floor a compromise bill that extends, with modifications, Patriot Act provisions allowing “roving wiretaps” on multiple phones, access to business records and a never-used “lone wolf” provision to conduct surveillance of non-U.S. citizens who may not be part of a recognized terrorist group. These provisions expire at the end of this year unless extended by Congress.

The bill is S. 1692, USA PATRIOT Act Sunset Extension Act of 2009, sponsored by Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the Committee Chairman, and co-sponsored by members Senators Benjamin Cardin of Maryland and Ted Kaufman of Delaware, all Democrats. The bill also received the important co-sponsorship of Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA), chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee after modifications were made Oct. 1.

Before passage yesterday, the Judiciary Committee approved several Republican amendments. Reflecting the divided views, however, only two Republicans voted for the bill on final committee passage and three Democrats voted against it, as described in the Wall Street Journal.

The committee did not take up a provision in a substitute bill S 1686, by Senator Russ Feingold (D-Washington) that would gut the Material Support provision of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996.
For more details, see my October 1 posting “Material Support: Killing it with “Humanitarian Kindness.”

Sen. Feingold’s bill would severely undermine the material support provision by inserting into 18 U.S. Code Sec 2339B (a) (1) language that says the contributions to such groups would be illegal only if assistance was provided “knowing or intending that the material support or resources would be used in carrying out terrorist activities.”

If enacted, the Feingold amendment would make it easy for persons indicted for providing funds, financial services, or even physical support such as vehicles, to claim they did not know the assistance “would” be used for terrorist activities—even though the organization had been formally and publicly designated by the State Department as a foreign terrorist organization after a long administrative record process that could be challenged in court.

A committee source said there were some Republican proposals to strengthen the provision but the committee had enough on its plate without getting into that issue.
A close observer of the committee told the Counterterrorism Blog that the Feingold provision appeared dead. The Wisconsin senator’s office has not returned repeated calls and emails seeking their comment.

In a committee statement issued by Senator Leahy's office, the chairman said :“I remain mindful of our responsibility to ensure both security and liberty as we proceed,” said Leahy. “Our bill will provide the tools that are needed to protect us, while increasing the protections of our vital constitutional rights, as well. We have taken the administration up on its offer to work with us to ‘provide additional protection for the privacy of law abiding Americans’ and have done so without undermining the operational effectiveness of the counterterrorism tools provided in the Patriot Act.

Senator Cardin, who chairs the Judiciary Terrorism and Homeland Security Subcommittee said “our priority is to protect the American people – both safety and civil liberties,” We must make sure that our law enforcement and intelligence professionals have the tools they need to prevent and disrupt terrorist attacks, while maintaining an appropriate balance between national security and protecting civil liberties. With these parallel goals in mind, I believe the Judiciary Committee took the right action today to extend the provisions that expire at the end of the year. This legislation provides stronger Congressional and judicial oversight of the Patriot Act, as well as new limits on the use of National Security Letters.”

As expected, the ACLU was not satisfied. Michael Macleod-Ball, Acting Director of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) Washington Legislative Office said in a statement:

“We are disappointed that further changes were not made to ensure Americans’ civil liberties would be adequately protected by this Patriot Act legislation. This truly was a missed opportunity for the Senate Judiciary Committee to right the wrongs of the Patriot Act and stand up for Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights.

The ACLU complained that “Amendments that were offered but failed by voice vote included an amendment by Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) to curb the abuse of the overly broad National Security Letter (NSL) statute and another offered by Senator Russell Feingold (D-WI) to allow the “lone wolf” provision to expire (the never-used provision that targets individuals who are not connected to terrorist groups). An amendment also failed that would make it more difficult for recipients to challenge the gag order that comes with receiving an NSL.”

It is uncertain when the bill will reach the Senate floor in view of other pending business, including health reform legislation. Passage is needed in time to allow for the Senate-House conference on a final version and Congressional enactment before the end of the year.

The New Chavez Militias

By Douglas Farah

In his latest move to insure his permanence in power and control over loyal forces, Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez has established nation-wide armed civilian militias that are answerable only to him.

According to the El Universal newspaper, the Bolivarian Militia of Peasants will become operational very soon.

For a country about to go on line with an AK-47 assault rifle factory, and with a government that has spent some $6 billion on weapons (publicly announced, without counting those that are not disclosed) in the past four years, this is a worrisome development, especially given Chávez's deep and growing authoritarian tendencies.

Yet it fits perfectly with Chávez's conception of the coming asymmetrical battle agains the United States and the need his forces will have to retreat to the hinterlands to wage guerrilla warfare. Here is my posting on this concept and actions.

There is no ambiguity on where the militias' loyalties lie. Not with the Venezuelan state, not with the military, but directly and personally with Chávez.

"We will start training (the militia) next week. We will establish some centers in the farms that have been seized, in the Zamoranos farms (named after Ezequiel Zamora, a leader of the Venezuelan Federal War) and in the fields and plants that have been seized, to defend the farmers and the fatherland, if necessary, against the imperialist occupation," said Jaua, who was in the event as Minister and Vice President of the ruling United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) for the Venezuelan plains region.

Further, Orlando Zambrano, a leader of the Simón Bolívar National Front of Peasants, said, "We must solidify the militia – the people's armed power- to defend ourselves. We are voicing anger, joy and willingness to support Commander Chávez." My full blog is here.

IPT Investigation Finds Hamas Support Drives Viva Palestina Caravans

By The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT)

It was as brash and defiant a move as he could make. British MP George Galloway told a crowd in Gaza (see video here) that “I, personally, am about to break the sanctions on the elected government of Palestine. By Allah, we carried a lot of cash here. You thought we were all fat. We are not fat. This is money that we have around our waists.”

With that, he hoisted a bag filled with cash and handed it to a Hamas minister.

Hamas is a designated terrorist organization in the U.S. and E.U., but Galloway’s Viva Palestina convoy makes a priority of legitimizing Hamas as “the elected government of Palestine.” The Investigative Project on Terrorism has found ample evidence that Viva Palestina's ultimate objective is political – with the elevation of Hamas at its core.

Viva Palestina officials repeatedly said just that. During that March event with Hamas officials, Galloway also said:

"This is not charity. This is politics. The government of Palestine is the best people to decide where this money is needed. We are giving this money now to the government of Palestine. And, if I could, I would give them 10 times, 100 times more."

That sentiment was echoed on the eve of the sendoff of the Viva Palestina USA convoy which left in July. During a rally in Brooklyn, speaker Lamis Deek told the crowd:

"It's not about charity... but in every way that we cut it, it is political."

She added:

"[I]n choosing Hamas, what they chose was one united Palestinian state on all of the 1948 territories from the north to the very south. That is what Palestinians chose. And in supporting Palestinian choice we are saying we support their right to liberation from violent colonialism."

The IPT's findings about Viva Palestina, and its American offshoot Viva Palestina USA, can be read in a thorough report here.
Among those findings:

Viva Palestina USA is not incorporated anywhere. It uses an existing charity, the Interreligious Foundation for Community Organizations/Pastors for Peace (IFCO) to collect donations.

During fundraisers and rallies, Viva Palestina members often invoke Hamas. In addition, a Hamas website promoted a pending trip by "European political figures" that quoted a Viva Palestina organizer.

Viva Palestina USA has struck alliances with a number of extremist groups, including La Voz de Aztlan, an organization that advocates the revolutionary overthrow of U.S. territory that it deems to have been stolen from Mexico; the Al-Awda, Palestine Right of Return Coalition, and Code Pink.

Read more about the investigation here. See the full report here. And read how a New York City Council member was told his participation in the July convoy could serve “a City purpose” here.

Hamas: Ideologically Challenged, Militarily Limited

By Matthew Levitt

Hamas in the Gaza Strip is under significant stress. As a government it has failed to provide for the needs of its purported constituents, and remains an international pariah under economic siege. At the same time, its credentials as a “resistance” movement lose currency by the day as the movement continues to refrain from attacking Israel for fear of reprisal attacks in the wake of Israel’s Caste Lead operation in December 2008 and January 2009.

Al Qaeda itself, which highlights the Palestinian cause in its rhetoric but gives the issue short shrift in its operational planning, has taken advantage of the opportunity to try to lure Hamas operatives away from the movement’s nationalist focus to the cause of global jihad. In February 2008, the elusive Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, head of al-Qaeda in Iraq, denounced Hamas’ leadership for betraying Islam and called on Hamas’ military wing to break off from the group and join the global jihadist movement.

Recognizing the damage such challenges pose to Hamas’s own jihadist credentials, the movement’s Izz al Din al Qassam terrorist wing posted a paper on its website last month entitled “The Concept of Jihad as the Islamic World Understand” [sic] highlighting the work of Sheikh Yousef Qaradawi, famous for his religious edicts (fatwa) justifying suicide bombings targeting civilians in Israel and Iraq. Qaradawi, the paper stresses, “is extremely careful to distinguish between extremist groups that declare war on the whole world, killing indiscriminately, tainting the image of Islam and providing its enemies with fatal weapons to use against it, on the one hand, and on the other groups resisting occupation.” The effort to cloak itself in the mantle of a noted Islamist theoretician like Qaradawi, who is known for his vocal support for violent jihad, is a telling sign of the pressure Hamas feels it is under in the wake of its poor performance fighting Israel last winter and in light of its relative quiet since. Israeli officials have described the current Hamas policy as “industrial quiet,” which includes a pause in violence for the practical purpose of rearming and the strategic aim of consolidating its control in Gaza.

Hamas failed to inflict significant Israeli casualties over the course of the Caste Lead battles, and instead of protecting its civilian population Hamas hid its leaders and armaments behind civilian structures such as mosques and hospitals. According to a new Washington Institute study, Hamas in Combat: The Military Performance of the Palestinian Islamic Resistance Movement, despite the violent threat Hamas poses to regional stability, the movement’s fundamental military strength should not be overestimated.

Engaged in secular politics, failing to institute shariah law, and cracking down on fellow Palestinians who attack Israel or threaten Hamas’s rule, Hamas in Gaza has created a vacuum which salafi-jihadi groups – often populated by disgruntled Hamas operatives – have been keen to fill. To date, however, al Qaeda inspired groups in Gaza have enjoyed very limited success, an issue covered in detail in another, forthcoming Washington Institute study.

Terror Déjà vu: Suicide Blast Targets Indian Embassy in Kabul, Again!

By Animesh Roul

In a brazen act of terror, suspected Taliban and al Qaeda elements have perpetrated a suicide blast near the Indian embassy Thursday morning. The explosion in Kabul has reportedly killed at least 12 and wounded over 80 people. (Al Jazeera.net)

No terrorist outfit has taken responsibility so far, but the fingers of suspicion are pointed towards Afghan Taliban/Al Qaeda combine. Also speculations are rife about Pakistan's involvement, particularly of ISI.

Zemarai Bashary, a spokesman of the Afghan interior ministry confirmed that it was a suicide car bomb attack (vehicle borne IED) and fatalities involved both security personnel and civilians.

Later, Afghan President Hamid Karzai issued a statement condemning the bomb blast. He termed this incident as a heinous act of terror.

Indian Ambassador Jayant Prasad also indicated while speaking to media this morning that there has been some damage to the Embassy watch tower and some security personnel deployed in the outer perimeter of the Embassy sustained injuries. He further said that 'no Indian has been severely injured or killed in this attack.' However, latest report suggests that at least seven Indian have been injured.

In a similar attack in July 07, 2008 over 40 people including four Indians were killed and over 140 others were injured when the suicide bomber rammed his bomb-laden vehicle into the gates of the Indian Embassy in Kabul. Indian diplomat, V. Venkateswara Rao and the military attaché Brigadier Ravi Datt Mehta were also killed in the attack. Investigations into the last year’s attack revealed a direct involvement of Pakistani external intelligence agency.

Fighting Terrorist Financing on the Other Side of the Pond

By The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT)

In its inaugural case, the newly established Supreme Court of the United Kingdom heard arguments in a challenge to the nation's counter-terrorist financing policies. The case, A v. Her Majesty's Treasury will provide an opportunity for the Court to consider the narrow question of asset seizures in terrorism investigations as well as the broader issue of controlling Executive branch actions towards terrorist suspects. As Lord Phillips, the head of the new court, explained in discussing the importance of the case:

"It's one of a number of cases which we have had to deal with where there may be a tension of human rights on the one hand and dealing with the challenge of terrorism on the other."

The consolidated appeals in the case were brought by six unnamed individuals who have been designated by the Treasury under the Terrorism Order of 2006, the equivalent of U.S. Executive Order 13224. Similar to American terrorist-financing laws barring financial support for terrorist groups, once designated, a person's assets may be frozen indefinitely.

The appellants in question were designated because of their alleged connection to Al Qaeda and the attackers behind the London bombings. Following a brief administrative hearing, the total assets of each of the men were frozen by the Treasury. They complained that these actions deprived them of their property without notice or an opportunity for a hearing.

Having had his assets frozen, the named appellant, who has since been identified as Mohammed al-Ghabra, challenged the legality of the order. The trial court dismissed the order on the grounds that the order was too vague and there were insufficient procedural safeguards prior to designation. Interestingly enough, these are the same types of grounds upon which U.S. efforts at counter-terrorist financing prosecutions have been challenged and generally upheld.

Upon review, the UK Court of Appeals reversed in a 2-1 decision, rejecting each of the lower court's findings.

Upholding the ability of the Crown to act absent Parliament, the Court of Appeals explained, that the Treasury was simply applying U.N. Security Council policies regarding the suppression of terrorist financing. In particular, the Court relied upon Security Council Resolution 1373, which requires member states to "freeze without delay funds and other financial assets or economic resources of persons who commit, or attempt to commit, terrorist acts or participate in or facilitate the commission of terrorist acts…"

Stressing the preventative nature of the CTF regime introduced by the Security Council and the need to prevent acts of terrorism, the court ruled that the Treasury acted appropriately in freezing the assets based on a "reasonable suspicion" that the appellants were engaged in financial and logistical support for Al Qaeda.

The Court of Appeals also rejected the lower court's finding that the use of secret evidence at the asset freeze hearing was improper. In the eyes of the court, rather than completely quash the Terrorist Order as the lower court had done, the proper approach would have been to simply provide effective procedural protections.

Having had each of their arguments struck down by the Court of Appeals, the appellants have asked the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom to reverse the decision and reinstate the trial court decision quashing the Terrorism Order. This is a newly established court, and there is little way to know which direction they will rule. This case is reminiscent of the daily battles that federal prosecutors must fight ensuring that those who provide financial assistance to terrorist organizations are punished. It is certainly interesting to see how other nations have chosen to respond to the spread of terrorist financing. Of even greater importance, however, will be whether this newly formed court will recognize the dangers of these crimes and allow the Treasury to combat it appropriately.

NEFA Backgrounder: Abdullah al-Faisal: Extremist Ideologue with Influence in the West

By Madeleine Gruen

The NEFA Foundation has released a new backgrounder on Abdullah al-Faisal; an extremist ideologue based in Jamaica who reaches supporters worldwide via the Internet, and through extensive international travel, particularly to Africa. Al-Faisal formerly resided in the UK, and was of such sufficient concern there that he was arrested for inciting murder, and accused of inspiring young Muslims to travel abroad for training or to participate in violent jihad. Al-Faisal has been credited with providing spiritual mentorship to men connected with terrorist acts and major plots including 7/7 London transit bombers Mohammed Sidique Khan and Germaine Lindsay and James Ujaama, an American who conspired to establish a jihad training camp in Bly, Oregon. In 2003, al-Faisal became the first person in 100 years to be found guilty in British court of soliciting murder under section four of the Offences against the Person Act 1861, on the basis that he "encouraged others to murder persons unknown." He was sentenced to seven years in prison, but was released in May 2007 after serving only four years, and was extradited back to his native Jamaica.

This NEFA Backgrounder shows that, since his release, al-Faisal has resumed preaching the same brand of extremist Islam that had precipitated his arrest and landed him in prison in the UK.

The full report can be accessed here.

"ihad jak joga" - Jihad like Yoga?

By Walid Phares

Following is an interview I conducted with Nowe Panstwo (Our Times), a Politics and History Journal in Poland. The title of the interview in Polish is "ihad jak joga" which translate to "Jihad like Yoga." In this extensive discussion with Olga Doleśniak-Harczuk, we addressed the current state of the strategic structure of al Qaeda, Europe's readiness to confront the threat, the Obama Administration ability to win a war of ideas over the Jihadists, the necessary Western Rethinking of the conflict, indoctrination and penetration in the US, the role of Oil lobbies, the influence of theological texts on Jihadists, the progress of Islamists in Europe, Western inability to fight this war, and Polish American relations in the war with the Jihadists. This discussion published in Nowe Panstow is aimed at stimulating the debate in Poland's academic and research circles regarding the mounting Jihadi threat across the continent. Poland's role overseas but also its experience with totalitarian ideologies is important in the Transatlantic debate about the confrontation with Jihadi forces.

Here is the original discussion in Polish http://fdd.typepad.com/files/interviewpolish-09.pdf

Following is an English translation of the discussion

Confronting the Ideology of Radical Extremism

By Matthew Levitt

Today, President Obama visited the National Counterterrorism Center where he told analysts "We will target Al-Qaeda wherever they take root, we will not yield in our pursuit." But asthe United States continues to fight on multiple fronts to disrupt the efforts of al-Qaeda and its affiliates, the U.S. government has slowly come to realize that military force alone cannot defeat radical Islamist extremism. Today, there is a growing consensus that countering the ideology that drives this extremism is a critical element in the overall effort to prevent extremist acts of violence. Despite this greater realization, developing a precise strategy to counter extremism effectively and empower mainstream alternatives has proved challenging. The issue posed a difficult challenge to the Bush administration and remains a daunting and urgent task for the Obama administration.

This week the Journal of National Security Law & Policy published an article by myself and my colleagues J. Scott Carpenter and Michael Jacobson entitled "Confronting the Ideology of Radical Extremism." The full article is available here.

The Problem With Sanctions on Iran

By Douglas Farah

As the New York Times recently pointed out, the proposition of serious enforcing sanctions against Iran, particularly in the financial field, are not bright.

The reasons are multiple, but the basic one is that there are too many people and countries that simply want to make money and are happy to help evade sanctions. The second is that there is very little the international community can actually do to penalize sanctions busters. I lived through the global sanctions on Haiti in 1994, and if a desperately poor, isolated country like Haiti, with no real allies, could figure out how to break the sanctions, see the odds of meaningful actions against Iran.

Another reason is that, no matter what Western Europe and the United States -- heck, throw in China and Russia just for fun -- want to do, there are many countries that simply will not comply and in fact will go out of their way to aid Iran.

If one is searching for an answer as to what Iran wants with its expensive and sustained push into Latin America, at least part can be found in the desire to build an alternative structure to avoid sanctions through use of its Bolivarian allies. Venezuela has already agreed to sell Iran 20,000 barrels of gasoline a day, something Iran will desperately need if sanctions were to really kick in.

It is not likely to be a coincidence that Iranian banks operate in Venezuela as Venezuelan banks, or that Ecuador is allowing Iran's central bank in to operate. Nicaragua is hosting Iranian financial structures as well. Imagine Hugo Chávez or Daniel Ortega deciding not help Ahmadinejad out of a sense of international pressure. Can't do it? Neither can they.

But one does not have to look to Latin America to see how the sanctions will be circumvented. Ras al Khaimah, a small and poor emirate in the United Arab Emirates, has opened itself as an offshore haven and is busily registering hundreds of Iranian companies. Its airport is little encumbered by such things as strict cargo inspections or rigorous passenger manifestos, one of the reasons Viktor Bout operated there. My full blog is here.

Keeping a lid on homegrown terror

By Lorenzo Vidino

I have an op-ed in today's Boston Globe comparing homegrown terrorism in Europe and the United States:

....Of course, there are differences between the United States and Europe. The first is related to the significantly better economic conditions of American Muslims. While European Muslims generally languish at the bottom of most rankings that measure economic integration, American Muslims fare significantly better. Although economic integration is not always an antidote to radicalization, it is undeniable that radical ideas find a fertile environment among unemployed and disenfranchised youth.

Moreover, the fact that no organized group has an extensive network in the country is no longer a guarantee that radicalization cannot reach America’s shores, as the Internet has replaced the need to have operatives physically spreading the propaganda on the ground. A search of jihadist chat rooms and even of subgroups in “benign’’ social network sites reveal the presence of many American-born youngsters who glorify Al Qaeda’s ideology....

Read more.

Appellate Court Upholds Hamas Supporter's Sentence

By The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT)

A Hamas supporter who refused to tell a federal grand jury what he knew about the terrorist group's activities in the U.S. will serve his full 11-year prison sentence for contempt of court and obstruction of justice, an appellate court ruled Friday.

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected all claims by Abdelhaleem Ashqar that a federal judge improperly added a "terrorism enhancement" to his sentence in November 2007.

Ashqar argued that the judge should not have considered evidence about his Hamas support because jurors acquitted him of racketeering in his trial. But the opinion from Judge Diane P. Wood dismissed that:

"This argument fundamentally misunderstands the meaning of an acquittal. The jury found not that Ashqar was innocent, but that a reasonable doubt existed about his guilt. Because the district court found Ashqar's intent by a preponderance of the evidence, its finding does not contradict the jury's verdict. Sentencing courts routinely rely on acquitted conduct to increase a defendant's sentence, and this reliance does not violate the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial."

During his sentencing hearing, Ashqar acknowledged that his refusal to answer grand jury questions, despite a grant of immunity, stemmed from his desire to stay loyal:

"I don't want to become a traitor or collaborator. I don't want to turn against my people."

His appeal also argued that the government had not sufficiently proved his contempt was part of an attempt to promote a terror-related crime. The 7th Circuit rejected that, too:

"Promoting a crime includes helping and encouraging that crime, and one way of furthering a crime is to try to prevent the government from finding out about it."

Ashqar's cause was championed by a number of Islamist groups in America. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)-Chicago blasted the sentence as "excessive" and "politically-motivated." Then-Muslim American Society President Esam Omeish wrote to Judge St. Eve before the sentencing to urge leniency:

"Never at any time did I sense a radical tone and an extremist agenda in his words or actions. He has never and from what I saw can never aide or abet any terrorist or help finance any act of terror, simply because he does not believe in violence and extremism as a way to voice disenfranchisement or disagreement."

Fellow defendant Mohammed Salah, an acknowledged Hamas member, also was acquitted of racketeering. He was sentenced to 22 months in prison after being convicted of lying in a civil suit concerning Hamas support.

The Long Path to Nowhere: Suing State Sponsors of Terrorism

By The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT)

Over the past decade, victims of terrorist attacks have taken to federal courts in an attempt to hold state sponsors of terrorism civilly liable—a practice that has become nothing more than a "meaningless kabuki dance," the chief U.S. District Court judge in Washington writes in a recent opinion. Calling this system of justice a "failed policy," Judge Royce Lamberth called upon Congress and the President to reexamine the laws permitting these suits to consider whether there might be a viable alternative to private litigation.

The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act ("FSIA") allows foreign governments to be sued if they are engaged in acts of terrorism, either directly or through the provision of "material support or resources." When this law was passed, the popular sentiment was that "terrorism victims were going to 'sue the terrorists out of business.'"

A decade later, hundreds of claims representing thousands of victims have been brought against Iran seeking compensatory and punitive damages for the rogue nation's support for terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Hizballah. The combined results of these suits have been judgments totaling $9 million. As the court points out, however, these are nothing but pyrrhic victories, with victims seldom - if ever - able to recover their damages.

The court's 191-page opinion is dedicated to laying out the substantive hurdles victims of terrorism face, from the technical application of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to more complicated "separation of powers" issues. In the case of Iran, the assets are simply unreachable. Based on a recent estimate, Iranian assets in the United States total $45 million, a mere drop in the bucket compared to the judgments entered against it. As Judge Lambert explained in detailing the problem, courts have tried "with very little success, to locate and attach Iranian government assets in aid of their execution of their civil judgments."

Although the instant opinion dealt solely with the challenges facing victims of terrorism who bring suit under the FSIA, those who file under the Anti-Terrorism Act ("ATA") against individuals who provide "material support or resources" face similar hurdles to enforcing judgments. Just as "the overwhelming majority of successful FSIA plaintiffs with judgments against Iran still have not received the relief," ATA plaintiffs likewise have been denied justice.

In light of these concerns, the court called upon the government, both Congress and the President, to work towards meaningful reform of the FSIA. Although he proposed the creation of an administrative agency-style commission, Judge Lamberth explained that reform should be undertaken by the political branches of government, rather than the courts.

The court properly recognized the need for reform. The current system of justice is simply untenable. As the court warned, "as long as civil litigation is a means by which our political branches choose to redress the harms suffered as a result of terrorism . . . the victims in these cases will continue to be unwitting participants in a meaningless charade."

Material Support: Killing it with “Humanitarian” Kindness

By Michael B. Kraft

The Supreme Court decided Wednesday to review a challenge to a Clinton administration era law that makes it illegal to provide material support to foreign terrorist organizations. Meanwhile an amendment by Senator Russ Feingold also throws into question an extremely important legal tool against terrorists and those who fund them.

The court’s decision to consider a case challenging the prosecution of persons who provide training or advice to terrorist groups for ostensible humanitarian purposes came as Congress considers extending portions of the Patriot Act that are due to expire at the end of the year. Senator Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, last month introduced S. 1692, the USA PATRIOT Act Sunset Extension Act of 2009. The Committee began considering today and is scheduled to take it up again Oct. 8. The Leahy Bill is designed to extend, with additional safeguards, roving wiretaps and other provisions of the PATRIOT Act that were rushed through Congress after 9/11.

(Meanwhile, Senator Dianne Feinstein, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said that as a result of modifications made by Senator Leahy concerning electric surveillance, she had dropped her concerns that the bill might hinder the ongoing investigations into a suspsteced bomb plot in New York,, the Associated Press reported.)

Senator Feingold, a Wisconsin Democrat, in September introduced his bill, S 1686, that would make more drastic revisions. The bill includes two sleeper provisions that could undermine counterterrorism efforts that go back to 1996 and amount to throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

If Congress did pass the Feingold amendment undermining the existing 1996 material support law against supporting foreign terrorist organizations, the United States would lose an extremely important counterterrorism tool conceived and enacted during the Clinton administration to curb the flow of funds and other forms of support to foreign terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah. These and other foreign terrorist organizations have attacked thousands of civilians, including Americans, in numerous countries.

For more background on the Patriot Act legislation, I commend the earlier posts on the blog by the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT): the overview piece on Sept. 25 and the Sept 18 article on Senator Feingold’s amendment to the Material Support provisions originally enacted in 1996.

Those who contend that the material support law blocks humanitarian assistance to needy peoples or amounts to “guilt by association” are wrong and do not understand the realities of the terrorism world.

To help understand the rationale and importance of existing material support law, some additional history and background are important. (I’ll leave it for others for now to comment on the “roving wiretaps” and other provisions of the Patriot Act.)

There are actually two material support provisions enacted in the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (ADEDPA) of 1996. (P.L. 104-132, 100 Stat.)

One, Section, 2339A, makes it a crime to knowingly provide material assistance for individual acts of terrorism, whether or not they were committed by a previously known and designated terrorist group. It is a modified version of an amendment enacted several years earlier.

The issue in the Supreme Court and the Feingold bill revolves around the second provision, Sec. 2339B (1) that makes it a federal crime to knowingly provide financial support or other forms of material support to groups that have been formally designated as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO’s) by the Secretary of State with the concurrence of the Attorney General and the Secretary of Treasury. The measure was developed during the Clinton Administration by career officials. (I was involved in the conception and drafting of the provision while serving in the State Department Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism.) We were prompted by intelligence reports and other signs that some terrorist groups were increasingly using “charitable” organizations or front companies to obtain funds rather than rely on robberies or upon Iraq, Libya, Iran and other terrorist supporting countries.

An interagency team of State, Justice and Treasury Department officials began refining the material support and related provisions in 1994 after an American immigrant to Israel, Dr. Baruch Goldstein, fatally shot 29 Palestinians at a mosque in Hebron and Hamas conducted a string of terrorist bombings in Israel, including bus bombings, killing 53 persons and wounding dozens more. Goldstein was linked to the extremist Kahane Chai group. That small group, as did Hamas and other groups involved in terrorism, raised funds in the United States and overseas. The material support provisions, along with other counterterrorism sections, were incorporated in a major counterterrorism bill introduced in Congress in January 1995, by Senator Joseph Biden, then chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee member, and other members.

The measure has been extremely useful. Since 9/11, Justice Department prosecutors have brought Foreign Terrorist Organization material cases against 120 persons and individuals, and obtained convictions in about half. The pace of cases has continued in recent years as figures obtained from the Justice Department in early 2007 showed 106 cases, with six convictions and 26 persons pleading guilty. Justice Department officials have said that "the material support statutes have been a cornerstone of our success in terrorism financing cases as well as in a wide range of other cases addressing all types of support to terrorism. (From a June 22, 2006 white paper cited in my co-authored book "The Evolution of U.S. Counterterrorism Policy, chapter on legislation, Greenwood Press, December 2007.)

Furthermore, the material support provisions may have had an effect of making some people think twice about where they send charitable contributions. Enactment of the measure in 1996 also helped serve as a model for other countries that were strengthening their counterterrorism laws to comply with UN Security Council Resolutions.

The original Clinton administration material support amendment included a provision that would allow financial contributions to the terrorist organizations if it could be demonstrated that the funds actually went to specific medical and humanitarian purposes such as the purchase of specific medical supplies. However, in a working meeting between administration officials and the Senate Judiciary Committee staff, an aide to then Senator Spencer Abraham, a Michigan Republican with many Arab American constituents in the Detroit suburb of Dearborn, rejected the provision, saying the recipient “charity” organizations would not allow the opening of their books for inspection. The medical and humanitarian provision amendment had no visible support from other staff and it was dropped. In any event, it would be difficult to enforce as these secretive groups are not likely to engage in accurate bookkeeping.

Later, the Senate-House conference that forged the final version of AEDPA incorporated a provision (Sec. 301 (7) that declared: “foreign organizations that engage in terrorist activity are so tainted by their criminal conduct that any contributions to such an organization facilitate that conduct." In effect Congress took the position that money is fungible and that even if an organization has non-terrorist wings, the contributions and other forms of materials support free up resources that can be used for terrorist attacks.

Furthermore, Hamas and terrorist groups in Egypt and elsewhere that run clinics or schools exploit these “humanitarian” operations to recruit supporters and potential operatives. Funds for this purpose are more important than the relatively small amount of money needed to assemble suicide bombs.

Sen. Feingold’s amendment, Section 502 of his bill S. 1686, would severely undermine the material support provision by inserting into Sec 2339B (a) (1) language that says the contributions to such groups would be illegal only if assistance was provided “knowing or intending that the material support or resources would be used in carrying out terrorist activities.”

If enacted, the Feingold amendment would make it easy for persons indicted for providing funds, financial services, or even physical support, such as vehicles, to claim they did not know the assistance “would” be used for terrorist activities—even though the organization had been formally designated as a terrorist organization after a long administrative record process as mandated by the 1996 law. The list of the 45 currently designated terrorist groups is posted on the State Department's website and is also available elsewhere.

In a brief reference to his bill during introduction, Senator Feingold said the provision was intended for humanitarian purposes. His staff did not respond to repeated telephone and email requests for a fuller explanation of the Senator’s rationale for such a sweeping revision.

Professor David Cole of Georgetown University, a long time opponent of the antiterrorism provision who has been involved in some of the court cases, was quoted by Reuters as saying as he has in the past, that the material support provision resurrects “guilt by association” and makes it a crime for U.S. human right groups to provide human rights training.” The professor has made similar statements in the past and they remain hyperbole and inaccurate. Indeed, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which in 2002 supported a challenge to the provision as unconstitutionally too vague in restricting training and personnel, did not agree that the provisions violated the First Amendment by imposing guilt by association rather than through culpable actions.

The Humanitarian Law Project, which brought the case, said it wanted to provide human rights advocacy training to the Tamil Tigers (LTT) in Sri Lanka and the PKK in Turkey. Both groups have committed repeated terrorist attacks directed against civilians. The Tamil Tigers, which are now pretty much defeated, pioneered the use of suicide bombs. If these groups were seriously interested in human rights, they could have stopped targeting civilians long ago. If they put a priority on allowing medical assistance to their own people, they could allow outside medical and relief groups into territory they control without requiring them to work under their auspices.

There are any numbers of organizations, such as the Red Crescent, Doctors Without Borders, that can provide medical and other humanitarian assistance and are not tainted by involvement in terrorist activities. This point was made when senior State Department and Justice Department officials met with representatives of a dozen Arab American groups in late 1994 before the AEDPA was introduced. However they attacked the bill even before reading the legislation, with the humanitarian provision I mentioned. One result was that their protests, made public in the American-American press, apparently resulted at least temporarily in a decline in Hamas fund raising in the U.S.

Some legitimate fine tuning can be considered in the material support provision, especially to streamline consideration of asylum for persons who might have been forced to provide food or other support for terrorists. This was the case with some Burmese and others who provided food or other support under duress, especially in rural areas, to groups such as the Karen National Union and Karen National Liberation Army. The Senate Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law held hearings in September, 2007 and later that year President Bush signed a law (PL 110-161) that contained a provision that streamlined the procedures for persons seeking admission to the U.S. if they had provided material support under duress. Section 212(2) (3) B (i) of the immigration and National Act, 8 U.S.C 1182.

Inserting a killer provision into the existing law as proposed by the Feingold amendment would be using a sledge hammer instead of a chisel. The amendment, allegedly for humanitarian purposes, will make it more difficult to save innocent lives by convicting terrorists and getting them out of circulation and/or deterring their potential supporters.

Senator Feingold’s bill also includes an amendment, Sec. 501 that would narrow one of the definitions in U.S. laws. He would delete the definitions in 18 USC Sec 2331(1) (B), which include “activities intended to coerce civilian populations or governments and to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping.”

Defining terrorism is a controversial and difficult issue. Endless hours of discussions have been held in conferences here, in the United Nations and abroad. Thousands of pages of articles have been printed. By one academic account there are at least 110 published definitions of terrorism. U.S. law contains at least three.

The issue should not be dealt with casually by a "by the way" amendment in a markup or on the Senate floor. This not the time to narrow the definitions, especially as the threat of terrorists obtaining biological or other weapons of mass destruction is a growing concern.

Both Feingold amendments should be shelved. The country would be better served by waiting, while the Supreme Court proceeds with the case in front of it.

Transatlantic Lawmakers Sign Declaration Calling for international investigation of the "Basij" in Iran

By Walid Phares

On Tuesday, September 22, 2009, Members of the US Congress, Members of European Parliament and a Member of the Canadian Parliament signed an historic document condemning Iran’s continued human rights abuses. This document was signed at the second Trans-Atlantic Group on Counter Terrorism, or TAG, summit hosted by TAG co-chairs US Representative Sue Myrick (NC-09) and Member of European Parliament Jaime Mayor Oreja (EU-Spain).

“This is historic because it is the first document signed by a group of international lawmakers addressing the Iranian regime’s human rights atrocities against the Iranian people,” said US Representative Sue Myrick (NC-09), who is also the Co-Chair of the US Bipartisan House Caucus on Counter Terrorism. “We are keeping a close watch on the Iran nuclear weapons situation, but this will not cause us to forget the human rights atrocities committed by the Iranian regime. We say to the Iranian people who continue their fight for freedom, ‘We have not forgotten you. We stand with you". At the signing session which took place inside the US Congress, MEP Jaime Mayor Oreja, who serves as the Vice President for the EPP at the European Parliament, said "it is the first time that legislators from both sides of the Atlantic are coming together to address the threats of Jihadi terror. We are pleased to have accomplished this first step and other important steps will follow." Oreja oversees the European Ideas Network (EIN), the Policy Think Tank of the EPP.

Drugs, Terrorists, Pipelines and Afghanistan

By Douglas Farah

Today I testified in the House Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on the interconnectedness of terrorist and criminal organizations, especially the truly transnational groups. (You can access the testimony of the rest of the panel here.

The central point we all drove home, from different perspectives, was that of the pipeline, or recombinant chains that increasingly allow criminal to co-mingle different types of activity while merging with terrorist organizations that are becoming more criminalized.

At the root of many of the reasons for this is the absence, ineffectiveness or grossly corrupt governments in the regions where these pipelines operate. Without some ability of the government-usually after decades or centuries of absence-to convince people there is a reason to support it, the insurgencies/drug traffickers/non-state actors win by default.

The timing was interesting because the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, was reiterating the need to significantly increase the number of troops in Afghanistan to fight the growing Taliban-led insurgency. The Obama administration is in the beginning of a crucial debate on Afghanistan policy.

What McChrystal's strategy cannot address is the mass corruption that has so thoroughly discredited the Karzai government and turned hope to dispair in much of Afghanistan. The perception of massive fraud (even if the fraud was only significant) in the elections may have been the final straw in the ability to generate the necessary trust in the government to make any difference.

As my fellow panelist David Mansfield noted in the hearing, while the Taliban is undoubtedly heavily involved in opium trafficking, so is the government. People expect the Taliban or other non-state actors to engage in criminal activity, in part because they are not the government.

But when the government acts as the enemy while claiming legitimacy for its actions, the population is not fooled. Rebuilding lost credibility is an enormous and time consuming enterprise. My full blog is here.

NEFA Foundation Special Report: "The Life and Death of Ibn Sheikh al-Libi"

By Evan Kohlmann

When Ibn Sheikh al-Libi died in a Libyan prison in May 2009, the response from the global jihad movement was more intense than anticipated. The NEFA Foundation has released a short report about al-Libi and translated three recently acquired documents concerning his life. Shortly after his death, Al-Qaida's press office released a eulogy of Ibn al-Sheikh, praising him as "honorable and noble." Another highly interesting document, written by one of his companions, was released under the title, “Jihad Basil' Martyr Ibn al-Sheikh al-Libi, May Allah Have Mercy on Him. The last document is the transcript of a speech by Abu Yahya al-Liby, released by As-Sahab media and titled “Ibn al-Sheikh…The Grave and not the Poplar."

The report and documents are available on the NEFA Foundation website.