Tag Archives: Iraq

U.S.-led coalition air strike to block Islamic State

A US-led coalition carried out an air strike on August 30th to block Islamic State fighters from reaching eastern Syria after they were evacuated from Lebanon-Syrian border. The fighters were heading for the town of Al Bukamal, which borders Iraq. The area bordering Iraq where the convoy was headed is currently under control of Islamic State.

The evacuation was carried out as part of a deal between Islamic State fighters and Iranian-backed Lebanese Shia terrorist group Hezbollah and the Syrian government, to clear an estimated 300 IS fighters and 300 civilians, primary the wives and children of IS, from the Lebanon-Syrian border. IS claimed they would reveal the fate of nine captive Lebanese soldiers that were being held since 2014, as well as surrender Hezbollah and Syrian army prisoners and bodies from eastern Syria, where IS continues to maintain hold over territory.

The U.S. coalition bombing cratered a road and a small bridge and targeted Islamic state vehicles in an effort to prevent movement.

The location of the convoy group is currently unknown, and could either be in Islamic State or Syrian government controlled territory.

The deal to transport IS members and their families came at the end of a joint Hezbollah and Syrian army military operation to dislodge jihadist groups from the Lebanese-Syrian border by directly targeting IS near the town of Ras Baalbek with rockets, artillery and helicopters. The Lebanese Army in cooperation with Hezbollah and the Syrian army also declared a cease-fire, to allow for the terrorist movement through Syria.  This  deal marks the first time the Islamic State has negotiated a forced evacuation for its fighters.

Hezbollah made a statement this August pledging to remove, and fight the terrorists with the Syrian army.

The Iraqi prime minister Haider al-Abadi faulted Syria for moving the IS fighters closer to their border. In a statement made on August 29th he said, “we do not send them to Syria we kill them in Iraq.”

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah called the deal made with the Islamic State to transport the terrorists, “a great victory” in speech on August 28th. Despite his prior allegations made earlier in August to expel and fight the terrorist group with the Syrian army, the two groups continued with the deal.

The Islamic State’s foot hold is dwindling. At its peak throughout 2014 and 2015, the jihadist group held 1/3 of territory in Iraq and 1/3 of the territory in Syria. Within this landmass the terrorists ruled over around 9 million people.

By 2016 two years later, IS lost about 22% of its territory and in 2017 it continues to decrease. After Mosul was liberated and returned to the Iraqi government this past summer by American forces, the next critical fight to diminish IS looks to the city of Raqqa.

The battles over Raqqa began this past June of 2017. Raqqa is the self-proclaimed capital of the Islamic State currently. In the first month of fighting 20% of the city was taken back by the Kurds and the Syrian Democratic Forces, both aided by the U.S. Special operations troops. Unlike Mosul, Raqqa is much less densely populated, but it is still a critical location to obtain.

The Lebanese and Syrian governments should not be permitting the movement of the terrorist organization. The U.S. led airstrike was necessary for this deal to dismantle. By allowing for the movement of the terrorist group knowingly can prolong battles, allow for the group to regain territory and plan for strategic moves in the future. The current situation to question is the amount of U.S. funding toward the Lebanese army.

This year the U.S. has allotted to give Lebanon 233 million dollars in aid, partially to counter balance Hezbollah, the civil war, and for humanitarian support. However, the Lebanese army working in cooperation to Hezbollah calls to question their motives. As Syria and Iraq are gradually gaining back territory from IS, there are several players looking to gain these areas of land.

Iran is backing Syrian President Bassar al-Assad’s Syrian Army and Hezbollah. The United States backs the Syrian democratic forces, the Lebanese army, and the Kurds in Syria and Iraq. Although the U.S. supports some “rebel” groups, the first intentional attack on the Syrian government only occurred this past April, after the Assad regime fired chemical weapons.

Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the deputy head of Iraq’s state-sanctioned Popular Mobilization Forces, a U.S. designated terrorist with ties to Hezbollah, supported Nasrallah’s decision to allow for IS movement. And while the United States backs the Lebanese army, the support provided by the Lebanese to Hezbollah is concerning.

The decision by Syria and Hezbollah to permit the movement of IS jihadis closer to the border of Iraq should be viewed within the context of the competition between U.S. coalition and Iranian-backed forces to control territories newly liberated from the Islamic State.

Assad’s regime is looking to retake key territory, even while U.S. backed Syrian Democratic Forces continue to advance in Northern Syria. On the Iraqi side of the border Kurdish peshmerga are still pressing forward with their long effort to establish a Kurdistan while Iranian-backed Shia militias have engaged in population transfers to expand Shia controlled areas. At the same time the Iraqi government is looking to regain their final pieces of territory from IS, which consists of a small region that borders Syria, and some desert space in the northern region.

On August 31st, the Nineveh province in Iraq was liberated, as Tal Afar was lost from IS, and regained by the Iraqi armed forces.  Tel Afar was a key route between Iraq and Syria since 2014 and was the last major center in northwestern Iraq controlled by the IS, recently captured by Iraqi forces.

As IS held territory continues to shrink there’s an increased probability that U.S. and Iranian-backed forces will come into conflict.

The Baghdad Bombings and Their Implications

At least 26 civilians killed and dozens wounded from suicide car bombings in Baghdad that occurred late Tuesday evening, May 29. The attacks took place within hours of each other, one in the Karrada district in front of a popular ice cream shop, and the other near the Public Pension Office in the Shawaka area. The Islamic State has claimed responsibility for both attacks via its affiliated Amaq news agency.

Though validity of this assertion is uncertain, it is highly likely that the jihadist group is to blame given that the target was Shia Muslims, who account for more than half of the Baghdad population, breaking their all-day Ramadan fast.

The attacks mirror last year’s suicide bombing in Karrada where over 300 people were killed in the deadliest attack on civilians since the war began. These recent high-profile bombings are representative of IS’s effort to preserve its influence despite mounting pressure from coalition forces.

IS has steadily begun to lose its foothold in Iraq it established in 2014, when it took control over the second largest city in Iraq, Mosul, which would come to serve as a stronghold for the group’s efforts there. In 2014, it also captured cities such as Fallujah as well as conducted many attacks throughout the country. However, in 2015 the Iraqi government’s offensive strategy against IS started to become effective.

From the span of April 2015 to present day the Iraqi forces have worked to regain control over cities such as Tikrit, Fallujah and central Ramadi. October 2016 marked the beginning of their operation to seize Mosul. For the past seven months, the Iraqi forces have been vying to take back control of the city, “the last major IS urban stronghold in the country.” The Tuesday suicide attacks come as Iraqi forces work to recapture Mosul. Presently, they have succeeded in regaining the city’s entire eastern portion and large segments of the western half as well.

The Baghdad bombings point out that IS is losing its territorial grip in Iraq. The Iraqi government is putting pressure on all sides of IS and in turn the jihadists have executed a series of terror attacks aimed at drawing public attention away from recent defeats.

In other words, the jihadists’ loss of territory and power in Iraq has resulted in them wanting to prove their remaining influence by utilizing bold and violent acts. Thus, this violence provides a distraction from their losses in the ongoing war and allows them to maintain influence.

It is clear that the territorial hold IS has in Iraq is decreasing; however, it is also clear that the end of its terror strikes is far from over. And the bombings in Baghdad illustrate that IS is not just targeting the government, but innocent Shia Muslims and other civilians as well seeking to emphasize the sectarian divide that dominates Iraqi politics. Iraqi commanders have conceded that IS attacks are likely to increase at least in the short term as the group continues to face battlefield losses. It is even more likely that these attacks will continue to target Shia Muslims who make up the majority population in Iraq.

Due to the violent conflicts that have ensued over the years, more than 3 million Iraqis have been displaced, and given continued IS attacks their return to their homes will remain delayed, which impacts both internal Iraqi stability as well as puts pressure on Iraqi’s neighbors.

What is certain is that Iraq remains a volatile state. While the government may be regaining territory, the end of IS in this region is not nearing anytime soon. The recent bombings in Baghdad illustrate this conclusion and indicate that, in the short-term at least, IS is here to stay.

Fight Continues to Take Back Mosul Despite Setbacks

After a brief pause in their advance, coalition forces have resumed their attacks on Islamic State in Mosul. Despite slow movement, Iraqi forces have made it within one kilometer of the Great Mosque of Nour al-Din where IS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi publicly proclaimed the virtues of the Islamic caliphate.

While capturing the mosque will not put an end to IS, it would be a significant and symbolic blow. In 2014 IS’s capture of the mosque was a symbolic moment and ignited the group’s lightening sweep across Iraq.

This capture, however, may still be weeks away. Iraqi forces are fighting their way through the winding streets but their movement is slow because the area is still inhabited by civilians. They are crippled by their limited ability to use artillery or mortars at the risk of civilian casualties.

Iraqi forces, backed by the American-led International coalition, began to take the western portion of Mosul back from IS after successfully recapturing the eastern portion just over a month ago.

The western portion of Mosul is home to the ancient western district known for its narrow alleyways, which armored vehicles cannot pass through, and dense population. There is limited space for the movement of the 750,000 civilians that inhabited Mosul at the beginning of the battle.

The United Nations reported that as of March 22, at least 307 people had been killed and at least 273 others had been wounded in just over a month of fighting.

The increase in civilian casualties is impacted both the population density and the sheer number of attacks being carried out. There have been attacks with at least 700 bombs and rockets and another 400 or more strikes using satellite-guided Himars missiles in just the last two weeks.

After a month of fighting in western Mosul, it is estimated that about half of the original 2,000 IS fighters are still in Mosul, fighting to their death. They have become increasingly desperate as coalition forces close in.

Over the past two years, IS made defense preparations in western Mosul including a network of underground passageways and tunnels allowing them to quickly disappear, making them, and civilians, nearly impossible to track.

IS and the coalition are already fighting in tight quarters with civilians present, in and of itself making any strikes high risk. However, instead of simply using civilians as human shields, IS has graduated to baiting the coalition into striking buildings filled with civilians.

At least 61 people were killed on March 17th when an explosion collapsed a house where IS fighters had gathered approximately 140 civilians in the basement.

The U.S. has opened a formal investigation into the explosion. American officials have acknowledged that the coalition was striking in the area but also believe that there is a possibility that IS planted explosives in the building, contributing to much of the death and destruction.

Army Lt. Gen. Townsend told the Pentagon, “My initial assessment is that we probably had a role in these casualties.” However, Townsend also reported that the munitions the US uses in these air strikes should not have been able to collapse a building. U.S. officials are investigating the possibility that IS filled the building with explosives after gathering the civilians.

Unfortunately, this is not the first instance of IS baiting coalition forces to strike civilians. American surveillance caught on video a group of IS fighters forcing civilians into a building and then positioning themselves in the same building to fire on Iraqi forces.

Major General Maan al-Saadi of the Iraqi special forces demanded that the coalition pause its air strikes until they concluded their investigations. In response, coalition forces paused their operations so that residents could gather their belongings and safely flee the area.

The coalition and IS are back to fighting and both Iraqi and U.S. forces are working hard to limit civilian casualties in a difficult situation. As IS continues to fight to the death, the coalition is making its way to the Great Mosque with ambitions to capture it as early as next week, dealing a heavy blow to the Islamic State.

Iraqi Forces Make Final Push to Remove IS from Mosul

After a 100-day operation in Mosul, the Iraqi forces successfully pushed the Islamic State out of the eastern portion of the city. Iraqi forces immediately moved into position after the hundred days to recapture western Mosul and push the Islamic State (IS) out of the city for good.

Eastern and western Mosul are separated by the Tigris River. While the western portion is slightly smaller than the eastern portion, it contains the Old City and is much more densely populated. The old city is Mosul’s ancient western district and contains narrow alleyways that armored vehicles are unable to pass through, making the battle in western Mosul much more difficult.

Additionally, over the past two years IS has developed numerous defensive preparations including a network of underground passageways and tunnels that allow them to hide and fight among civilians, quickly disappear after hit-and-run operations, and track Iraqi forces movement in the city.

Thursday, February 23rd, the Iraqi forces, backed by the International Coalition, gained control of the Mosul airport and nearby al-Ghazlani military base on the southwestern outskirts of Mosul. The International Coalition represents the American-led intervention in Iraq that began in 2014. Over last three years various other European countries and Canada have joined the U.S. in its efforts at different times.

The Iraqi forces reported that they faced limited resistance from IS fighters once inside the airport compound. Iraq’s Counter-Terrorism Service, who specialize in urban warfare, headed to western Mosul and are expected to breach the densely populated urban center.

For the last several months, Shiite militias have been pushing from the northwest to cut off the main road leaving Mosul to block IS fighters from leaving the city. Additionally, the five bridges across the Tigris into the eastern portion of the city were destroyed by IS fighter earlier this year and now Iraqi forces surround the rest of the city leaving approximately 2,000 IS fighters trapped. These fighters will be forced to either fight to the death or surrender to the Iraqis, making this battle all the more difficult.

It is unclear who will govern Mosul after IS is removed. Mosul represents an ethnic and sectarian fault-line home to Sunni, Kurdish, Shabak, Christian, and Turkmen groups. These groups are often divided among themselves and will no doubt jockey for influence and power in the vacuum of IS’ departure.

Another concern for the Iraqi and U.S. governments is the impact of the conflict on the 750,000 civilians still living in western Mosul. Because Mosul is encircled on all sides, civilians are hindered from leaving the city. Even if they could leave Mosul, the destruction of property in the city is likely to ensure that they would be unable to return to their homes in the short-term.

These civilians will be forced to either remain in western Mosul or if they escape the fighting they will be forced to move to the already overpopulated and underfunded camps for internally displaced people. This poses a humanitarian concern for the Iraqi and U.S. governments.

Another factor in the displacement of civilians is the involvement of Shiite militias who are known for ethnic cleansing. The Shiite militias have strong ties to Tehran and an ulterior motive in their involvement in the fight against IS. In the past when cities have been taken back from IS, Shia have quickly swept in and began the systematic killing of Sunnis. These human right violations have had an impact on the displacement of Iraqis.

According to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, there are currently 3.1 million internally displaced people (IDPs) in Iraq and approximately 10 million Iraqis are in need of humanitarian assistance and with  the fighting in Mosul, the number of IDPs is expected to rise considerably.

This poses a security concern as displaced IDPs contribute to instability in a region where ethnic and sectarian conflict is already wide spread. Neighboring countries like Jordan and Syria have virtually shut their borders to Iraqi.

A large displaced population serves as a de-stabilizing force in Iraq particularly because of the role of demographics in areas contested by multiple ethnic and sectarian groups. Additionally individuals in the IDP camps are vulnerable to targeting from insurgent groups for recruit.

IS seized Mosul in June of 2014 when they took control of large portions of northern and western Iraq. As Iraq’s second largest city, Mosul represents IS’s last urban stronghold in the country. The removal of IS from Mosul poses immense consequences for the future of their territorial advances in the Middle East.

U.S. Military command in Iraq believes that the Iraqi forces can retake both of the IS urban bastions within the next six months – these bastions are Mosul and the Syrian city of Raqqa.

It was at the Grand Mosque in Mosul that the IS leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, reestablished Islamic State as the new Caliphate in 2014. Because Mosul is the largest urban center held by IS, the recapturing of Mosul would represent a blow to IS that could possibly end their ambition for territorial rule of the Middle East and would cripple their efforts to expand.

While capturing Mosul could put an end to their present ability to hold and maintain territory, it would not keep IS militants from waging its insurgency – carrying our suicide bombings and other similar activities in the region.

The Truth About John Bolton, The Iraq War and WMD Diplomacy

You’re probably heard the criticism of Ambassador John Bolton by the left that he would not be a good choice to be the next Secretary of State because Bolton was an architect of the Iraq War and a hawk who has little use for diplomacy.

This is completely false. The truth is that Bolton was frozen out of Iraq War planning. This criticism also ignores Bolton’s successful diplomacy as Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security to pressure rogue states to comply with WMD treaties and his work as UN ambassador to take strong and meaningful action in the UN Security Council against WMD proliferation and terrorism.

The record shows John Bolton had little to do with promoting the Iraq war or war planning. Check out the State Department’s archive page of Bolton’s speeches, op-eds in 2002 and early 2003. You won’t find anything calling for military action against Iraq.

Bolton was not involved in any decision-making or planning for the Iraq War because Secretary of State Colin Powell and Deputy Secretary Richard Armitage froze him out. As Bolton’s chief of staff, I witnessed this first hand. I remember well how State Department offices were told by Powell’s and Armitage’s staffs not to share any information with Bolton and his staff about Iraq war planning.

Looking back on this, Bolton believes Powell did him a favor. He says on pages 165-166 of his 2007 book Surrender is Not an Option:

I played no significant decision-making role on Iraq policy, because Powell and Armitage largely excluded me from these issues, no doubt fearing that my views would be similar to Cheney’s and Rumsfeld’s and not their own.  It was the greatest favor Powell ever did for me, utterly unintentionally, to be sure, and my Iraq-related activities were only at the margins of the central decisions.

I believe Bolton’s liberal critics are falsely portraying Bolton as an architect of the Iraq War for two reasons.

First, they want to obscure his successful diplomatic efforts to address cheating on WMD treaties by rogue states. Bolton did this by calling out major violators of treaties to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction like the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and the Biological Weapons Convention.

 Bolton also negotiated the creation of the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), a global effort now composed of 103 countries to stop and interdict shipments of WMD technology to rogue states. PSI’s most important success occurred in September 2003 when it led to the inspection of a ship transporting nuclear technology to Libya. This interdiction was a major reason why Libyan leader Muammar Qadaffi decided to give up his WMD programs.

And second, after holding three confirmed foreign policy positions and a reputation for toughness, John Bolton is the last person the foreign policy establishment wants to see leading the State Department. They know he has an intimate knowledge of the State bureaucracy and will exercise the leadership to ensure it implements the president’s policies. The foreign policy establishment is only too aware that no one is better qualified to drain the swamp at State than John Bolton.

In short, the Iraq War architect argument that Bolton’s opponents are using against him is a ruse intended to play on Mr. Trump’s opposition to the Iraq War. I am confident that as President-elect Donald Trump and his team look at John Bolton’s entire record, they will see a man committed to making America safe again with a sophisticated understanding of national security who knows how to be tough and how to use diplomacy.  They also will find someone who will work hard and loyally to bring the Trump revolution to the State Department and the world.

Iraqi-led Coalition Advances in Mosul Leading to Post Liberation Questions

An Iraqi-led coalition surrounds Mosul, which remains in Islamic State hands. The coalition is made up of the Kurdish Peshmerga, the Iraqi army bolstered by Iranian-backed Shia militias and Iraq’s Sunni Arabs. The United States has troops on the ground and is providing air support and reconnaissance. More than 30,000 troops make up the coalition, not including the US.

Mosul is Iraq’s second largest city and is located right on the banks of the Tigris river. The city is important for transportation between Syria and Iraq. It also has large oil fields and a pipeline that runs into Turkey.

The Iraqi government forces fought IS for Mosul beginning June 4th until the fall of Mosul when insurgents gained total control over the city on June 10th.

By August 3rd, 2014 IS had taken control of the Mosul Dam and began governing the city.

On January 21st 2015, a Mosul offensive was launched by the Kurdish Peshmerga seeking to regain control over key territories northeast of the city. In the year 2015 IS lost around 14% of their territory.

By October 17th 2016 Operation “We Are Coming Ninevah” was a go. Within a few weeks Kurdish Peshmerga had retaken 10 villages east of the city. The coalition is pushing in on Mosul on 3 sides, Iraqis are pushing in from the south and the Kurds are surrounding the north and east of the city.

It is estimated that 3,000 to 5,000 IS fighters are in Mosul, while more than 1.2 million civilians still live in the city. While more than 4,800 American troops are in Iraq and more than 100 US special operations forces are working with Iraqi units.

Most of the civilians remaining in Mosul are Sunni. These people left in the city must decide whether to stay under oppressive Sunni rule by Islamic State, or risk possible retribution at the hands of Shia militias, which have already been documented for targeting and killing Sunni civilians. The Shia terror group Hezbollah based in Lebanon has recently released a video showing the Hezbollah fighters training the Shiite fighters. Hezbollah and IS have a fighting history in Lebanon and they want to see IS be defeated in Iraq.

Civilian casualties remain a concern as the operation to retake Mosul continues. IS fighters are also using approximately 10,000 civilians as human shields,

In addition to the sectarian threat posed by Shia militias, another threat to the stability of the coalition comes from the role, or lack of a role, to be played by Turkey. While Turkey is not formally part of the Mosul operation, they do have troops in theater, where since last December about 500 Turkish troops have been training Sunni and Kurdish fighters.

The tensions between Iraq and Turkey have increased since Turkey insist they assist with the liberation, even though Iraq has told them not to get involved and that they can handle it and has warned that their involvement would violate national sovereignty and would be considered an act of an enemy.

Turkey would want a hand in this ongoing operation for many reasons: diminishing territorial gain for the Kurds, concerns for refugee inflow into Turkey, pushing back Shia dominance in historical Sunni areas, and their desire to influence future political influence in Mosul.  Additional concerns involve the flow of oil from Northern Iraqi oil wells, and insuring that oil flows through pipelines into Turkey, and not South.

With or without the help from Turkey, the Iraqi-led forces are determined to destroy Islamic State’ hold on Northern Iraq, although IS isn’t going down without a fight.

Just in October IS has carried out 120 suicide bomber operations in Iraq and Syria. 79 of these attacks have taken place in the Nineveh province, which is where Mosul resides in. IS has dozens of factories where they’re making bombs and vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices; however, multiple factories have been destroyed during warfare by the coalition.

November 3rd the Iraqi military entered the eastern side of Mosul and later gained control of parts of the area. This is the first time since 2014 that Iraqi forces have set foot in Mosul. Earlier in the week Sayyid Ahmam al-Dhibaniyah and al-Kuhrtah were liberated on the southwestern side by the Iraqi forces.

Advances are still going strong for the Iraqi-led coalition. By November 14th more than 1,000 IS fighters have been killed and 10 neighborhoods have been liberated on the eastern side of Mosul, including Bashiqa.

While the ultimate cost may be high, there is little question that ultimately Mosul will be freed of Islamic State control. The question is who will govern a post-Islamic State Mosul? What role will Kurds, Sunni and Shia play in the city? How would the Turks respond to increased Kurdish influence?

Political leaders in Erbil and Baghdad need to start addressing these questions now.

Iraqi Forces Reclaim Town of Rutbah From Islamic State

On Friday, May 20, 2016, United States (U.S.) military officials announced that Iraqi forces reclaimed the town of Rutbah from the Islamic State (IS).

Rutbah is a small town lying 240 west of Baghdad, in the southwestern Anbar province, but held strategic significance as a key IS supply line route along the road from Baghdad to Amman and the Mosul to the Haifa oil Pipeline.  Rutbah was captured by IS in June 2014 shortly after Mosul, and the surrounding deserts around the city were used as IS training camps.  Rutbah has long been a region of smugglers and jihadists, and was utilized as an al-Qaeda outpost during the U.S. occupation. Iraqi explosive ordinance specialists identified at least  two IED factories and a car bomb plant in Rutbah prior to the city’s liberation.

Prior to the Iraq War, Rutbah saw $1 billion in revenue come through the region annually. U.S. military spokesman, Colonel Steve Warren noted that the liberation of Rutbah was “critical to the economies of Iraq and Jordan.” Brigadier General Yahya Rasoul claimed that taking Rutbah hits IS hard as it is where the enemy lived and trained.

Iraqi forces were reportedly surprised by the lack of resistance the IS put up, and Brigadier General Abdul Ameer al-Khazraji, who leads Iraq’s counter-terrorism forces, was expecting a fierce fight but noted the “enemy just collapsed.” The victory over IS in Rutbah has given Iraqi forces along Iraqi militia who have waged war on IS since they first arrived in 2014, the optimism to liberate Fallujah, which is controlled by IS.

Liberation of Rutbah may have been a given as the IS appear to be withdrawing forces to prepare for the coming attacks on its strongholds in Mosul and Fallujah. Hadi al-Amiri, leader of the Badr Organization, a powerful Shiite militia with close ties to Iran noted, “our next operation will be Fallujah.”  Shiite militia’s view Fallujah as the epicenter of IS IED and bomb making factories.

IS had launched bombing campaign in Baghdad believed to be intended to hamper efforts at retaking Fallujah. The Washington Free Beacon reported as of Friday, May 20, 2016 that the Iraqi military and members of the People’s Mobilization Unit (PMU), a coalition of militia units, have surrounded the city of Fallujah, and are prepared to kill or capture the suspected 800 IS members holding the city.

Multiple Bombings Rock Baghdad Neighborhoods

Four separate explosions occurred in Baghdad in the early morning of May 17th, 2016, claiming at least 70 lives and wounding more than 100. The first two explosions, and the deadliest of the attacks, occurred in a Shia area in the northern Shaad village. Islamic State (IS) has claimed responsibility for the conjoined suicide and car bombings, stating they used a male Iraqi bomber and were targeting Shia militia members; however, Iraqi government authorities claim the bomber was female. The Associated Press, reported that IS claims so far remain unverified, but the IS accreditation appeared on a “jihadist” website, according to SITE Intelligence Group.

The Shaad attacks were followed by a car bombing in a market in the Shia-dominated city of Dora, as well as a suicide car bombing in a Shia neighborhood in Sadr city. The victims of the attacks remain anonymous, as well as all of the attackers involved; however these attacks also bear the marks of previous IS attacks.

Today’s bombing was just one of several in the past week, and combined, terrorist attacks in or around Baghdad have claimed almost 200 in that seven day period.

Iraqi officials and the Western coalition believe that IS is reverting to bombing in populated areas, such as Baghdad, because they are losing ground on the battlefield along Iraq’s northern and western borders. After IS rapidly captured regions of Iraq in 2014, the group has had its territorial stake cut in half. Most recently, Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi and allied militias issued statements indicating increased pressure in Rutba, a town near the Iraqi western border which was captured by IS two years ago and has been in their control since.

Other countries near IS contested borders face similar attacks in prominent cities. Sunday, a bomb blast in the Istanbul district of Maltepe wounded four people. Following attacks, Turkish police issued a nationwide warning about possible Islamic State attacks on the national holiday this Thursday. They perceive a credible threat in all 81 provinces, and are ramping up security for the celebrations.

Promises of increased security and fighting of IS and other Sunni militants come only at a time of political crisis in Iraq. Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi states that deadlock in parliament is slowing down the fighting against IS, as he attempts to reshuffle his cabinet to drive out corruption. Reclaiming cities, such as Rutba, appear hopeful, but only seem to create more terrorist activity in city centers and Shia regions. Confidence in Prime Minister al-Abadi continues to waver following demonstrations in the Green Zone by Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr over two weeks ago. Since then, Iraq’s parliament has yet to meet, only deepening the tensions among citizens and politicians alike.

U.K. Border Forces Lack Powers To Deter Terrorists

A whistle blower within the United Kingdom’s (U.K.) Home Office told the Guardian that the Border Forces, the country’s immigration and custom control division, lack power deter potential terrorists from entering the U.K. The anonymous source noted that “clearskin” jihadi suspects who have remained under the radar pose the biggest threat to the country.

The news came along with a report from Scott Wilson, a senior U.K. Home Office official and coordinator of the Protect and Prepare counter-terrorism programs. He stated that 350 British citizens have returned from fighting in the Syria and Iraq with IS have returned to the U.K. and at least 70 of them are listed as “high” threat risks to the country. More than 800 British citizens have joined IS and gone off to fight in Iraq and Syria with them.

Research from the Henry Jackson Society think-tank showed that the U.K. that 77 Britons who have been convicted of terrorism since 1999, at least 27 had become trained or fought in war-torn countries overseas.

The Border Forces have “zero discretion” in interviewing or detaining travelers trying to re-enter the country if they hold a U.K. passport or are not “flagged” by British police or security services. The Terrorism Act of 2000 was supposed to give authority to border force personnel to stop, detain, question anyone they believe is “concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation acts of terrorism.”

However,  those powers were never granted to the immigration and border forces. The anonymous source within the Home Office said it was a grave injustice that the Border Forces cannot use the powers granted to them under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act. Border forces can only detain travelers if their name appears on the “Warning Index” database, they are wanted for arrest, or they are carrying contra band like, extremist literature.

A Home Office official noted that Schedule 7 is used by counter-terrorism police at ports and is not meant for Border Forces reviewing passports. He also noted that authorization of schedule 7 was used by authorities on British nationals and non-British travelers 27,000 times in 2015.

David Burrowes, a conservative member of the Home Affairs Select Committee that oversees the Border Forces, believes that Border Forces should be given police powers to maintain safety and security of the U.K.

A report from the Manchester Evening News on April 13, 2016, found that Border Forces power is so limited that 147 passengers on a Ryanair flight were allowed to leave the airport without their passports being reviewed.

On Wednesday, April 20, 2016, Home Office Secretary Theresa May announced that two million pounds would be cut from Border Force’s. She claims that budget cuts to Border Forces fall in line the country’s budget plan. The BBC reported a story about a report from chief border inspector David Bolt who in June 2015 noted that the Border Forces had only one vessel patrolling U.K. waters .The ports of Kent and Sussex are seeing more migrants are trying to enter the country including a dinghy of Iranian migrants that had to rescued.

Mrs. May noted hat in the next four years the government will invest $130 million pounds on state-of-the-art technology at the border. This technology may be too little and too late considering that the U.K. already has jihadists within its borders.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Number of IS Fighters in Libya Doubles Over the Past Year

U.S. Gen. David Rodriguez, head of Africa Command, has noted intelligence suggests the number of Islamic State (IS) fighters in Libya has doubled within the last year. It is estimated that the number of IS fighters in Libya could be anywhere from 4,000-6,000, and it may continue to grow in the near future.

Coinciding with this report is news that IS is sending a large number of fighters to Northern Libya, which some worry is the beginning of the group’s attempt to take hold of key oil fields. Daily Mail reports that three oil fields have evacuated their personnel in fear of an attack.

IS has launched several assaults on government and private oil facilities in the past. With the U.S. striking IS oil facilities in Iraq and Syria, the group may be looking for a way to reestablish its production in Libya.

The large move to Libya may benefit IS in the short run. The U.S. and other Western nations have been hesitant to engage the terrorist organization until a Libyan unity government, backed by the United Nations, establishes itself. This will take time to implement, as Libyan factions in both Tripoli and Tobruk have registered their opposition. IS has long shown an ability to take advantage of factional in-fighting to establish a territorial foothold, as shown in Iraq and Syria.

Even though the West has conditioned its fight against IS on the unity government’s implementation, they  have struck IS positions in Libya several times. Earlier this year the U.S. struck an IS training facility in Sirte that killed over 40 IS fighters. There were also rumors that French Special Forces operators had been involved in covert operations against IS.

With Iraqi and U.S. troops pushing against IS in northern Iraq and Syria, the terrorist organization may be seeking a new stronghold. The Free Fire Blog has previously noted the possibility of IS to move forces to its outlaying territories, and that move may already be underway.

The increase in the number of fighters in Libya may also be attributed simply to the growing number of jihadists in North, West, and East Africa wanting to fight for IS. IS has seen recruits come from countries such as Nigeria, Ghana, Egypt, Tunisia, Somalia, and Algeria.

IS in Libya poses a threat to North African and European security. The close proximity to Europe allows fighters to reach Western nations with relative ease, particularly by blending into the waves of refugees attempting to gain entry. Jihadists and refugees have already been caught trying to enter Europe through Spain, where they may be able to link up with pre-existing terror and criminal networks.

The U.S. and other Western countries should continue to pursue their security interests and target jihadist forces regardless of the progress of the unity government, and should be supporting the factions in Libya most motivated to crackdown on jihadist activity and to reestablish stability.