Tag Archives: Islamic State

Taliban Attacks Amidst Peace Talks; Rival Group Declares Support for Islamic State

On July 7, the Taliban carried out two attacks in the Afghan capital of Kabul.

In the first incident, a suicide car bomber drove into a vehicle carrying foreign troops in eastern Kabul. The explosion blew a hole in a nearby wall. At least two people were injured.

In the second incident, three suicide bombers invaded a base used by Afghanistan’s intelligence agency. One blew himself up, while the other two were killed by responding security forces. One security guard died and another was hurt.

The two attacks come a week after the Taliban targeted a NATO convoy in Kabul, killing one civilian and injuring 12, and two weeks after heavy fighting between Taliban and Afghan military forces.

Despite the Taliban violence on July 7, Tuesday also marks the first of two days of official discussions between representatives from the Taliban and the Afghan government. Both parties have been engaged in informal talks throughout the past few months, but Tuesday is the first time the Afghan government sent a formal delegation. The meeting took place in Islamabad, Pakistan, where much of the Taliban leadership is based.

As evidenced by the juxtaposition of peace talks and violent suicide bombers, the Taliban’s willingness to negotiate with the Afghan government does not imply a cessation in violent activity. The group wants to control the government but is not concerned with how it obtains power. It is ready to use violent tactics, peaceful tactics, or a combination of the two.

In unrelated news, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the head of the Afghan Islamist organization Hezb-e-Islami, announced on July 5 that his organization supports the Islamic State (IS) and encouraged its fighters to help IS fight the Taliban in Afghanistan. This proclamation of support comes three weeks after the Taliban sent a letter on June 16 to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of IS, warning IS not to intervene in Afghanistan.

Hezb-e-Islami was formed in 1977 but has vied with the Taliban for power after the Taliban rose to prominence in the 1990s. It is believed to have thousands of current fighters that could form a recruitment base for IS in Afghanistan. IS has a history of annexing smaller groups into its folds and calling them wilayat, or provinces. Through pledges of allegiance from jihadist organizations all over Africa and the Middle East, it has become entrenched in many different countries and taken control of vast amounts of territory. Groups aligned with IS receive millions of dollars in funding every month, giving them increased capacity to carry out attacks and protect their holdings while at the same time making them completely dependent upon IS. IS does not have extensive operations in Afghanistan and is already facing opposition. On July 6, Gul Zaman, the second highest-ranking IS supporter in Afghanistan, was killed along with six other militants in an airstrike in the Achin district of the Nangarhar province. The spokesman for the Afghan National Security Directorate would not say who carried out the strike. Due to IS’s weak links to Afghanistan, and Hezb-e-Islami’s struggle to maintain relevance in the face of the more powerful Taliban, an acceptance of Hezb-e-Islami’s pledge of support would be mutually beneficial. It would allow IS to expand while giving Hezb-e-Islami more resources.

The Taliban and IS declared jihad on each other in April, after the Taliban condemned an IS attack that killed 35 people. IS activity in Afghanistan could disrupt the Taliban’s separate attempts to seize control of the country and establish an Islamic state there. The June 16 letter warned of Taliban retaliation if IS continues to act in Afghanistan. Hezb-e-Islami’s declaration of support appears to be taunting the Taliban to see just how much IS can do before the Taliban reacts. It is too soon to know what the exact repercussions of the declaration will be, but it will likely lead to more fighting between IS and the Taliban.

Boko Haram Returning to Terrorist Tactics after Loss of Territory

This spring, media outlets reported that Boko Haram, the jihadist group terrorizing Nigeria, was being pushed out of the land it held by forces from Chad, Benin, Cameroon, Niger, and Nigeria. At the beginning of 2015, Boko Haram controlled 20 districts in Nigeria that, in total, became a territory the size of Belgium. By mid-March, they controlled three.

Despite this loss of land, the threat posed by Boko Haram remains significant. The group is ideologically driven by a divinely-conceived mandate to bring Islam to the world, so setbacks, such as loss of territory, will not cause the group to disappear completely. Instead, loss of ground simply requires a change in tactics. Rather than acting like a state, which provides services to its people and protects its borders, terrorist organizations without territory use more conventional tactics – bombings, gunmen, assassinations, and kidnappings.

These changes in method are evidenced by a number of recent attacks attributed to Boko Haram in Nigeria and nearby countries. Last week, two explosions in Chad killed 11 people. A few days later, approximately 150 people died in Nigeria when nearly 50 people were killed in a shooting in Monguno and almost 100 were killed in Kukuwa. The group has been trying to smuggle weapons through Chad but Chadian police forces have raided two weapons arsenals in the past eight days, seizing massive amounts of arms and information.

On July 5, a restaurant and a mosque in Jos were both targeted and more than 40 people were killed. Boko Haram is suspected to be behind the attacks. A planted bomb blew up at the Shagalinku restaurant, whereas a gunman and suicide bomber attacked the Yantaya mosque. The mosque’s imam, Sheikh Muhammad Sani Yahya Jingir, was likely the target, as he has a history of criticizing Boko Haram while preaching a doctrine of religious tolerance. In the northeast, militants believed to belong to Boko Haram burned down 32 churches and 300 homes.

This resurgence in violence is likely an effect of the group’s affiliation with the Islamic State (IS). Even as Boko Haram lost militarily early this year, it strategically pledged allegiance to IS in March. This affiliation has helped Boko Haram tremendously, adding to its media presence and recruitment efforts while also giving it millions of dollars every month in increased funding. This support has allowed Boko Haram to increase its use of violent tactics. With less territory to control, it has more money that can be used to fund terrorist attacks.

The return of Boko Haram to conventional terrorist tactics provides a small case study of the effects of pushing a terrorist group out of lands it controls. When a group that was once entrenched in an area is forcibly removed, it does not disappear. Boko Haram will follow in the footsteps of Al Shabaab, which has reemerged and become increasingly violent in Somalia after being pushed out of most of its territory. It is not going away; instead, it is changing its methods, moving from symmetric warfare and fighting on battlefields to asymmetric warfare, bombings, and guerrilla attacks. As the US and its allies move to destroy IS and its affiliates, they must be aware of the fluid nature of these organizations in order to be adequately prepared to fight them.

US continues to reject support to Kurds amidst success against Islamic State

More than 600 Islamic State militants stormed Kurdish villages late Sunday night, leaving three villages: Mujamaa al-Shahid, Mariyam Beg and Murra under IS control. In the aftermath of the seizure, there were six Kurds killed and another nineteen reportedly injured. The Kurds, however, did not allow IS to enjoy their success for long. By 6 AM Monday morning local time, Peshmerga forces recaptured the villages, slaying numerous IS militants along the way. A local commander reported up to 100 IS casualties. Western coalition forces provided assistance in the form of airstrikes.

Kurdish forces have faced various clashes with IS in recent weeks. In June, IS militants captured a Syrian military base home to the former Brigade 93. The Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG), successfully recaptured the base from IS control. YPG forces also dueled IS militants in Tal Abyad, a former IS hotspot for transferring weapon and fighters through Turkey. The YPG successfully seized Tal Abyad killing four IS militants in the battle.

IS also attempted to seize an oil refinery in southeastern Kirkuk, beginning on Sunday and continuing into Monday morning. However IS was repulsed after Kurdish fighters successfully destroyed multiple IS Humvees. Since last summer when the Kurdish Peshmerga gained control over Kirkuk, the city and its surrounding area have been the location of intense battles between the two groups.

Peshmerga Commander Anwar Haji Othman, when asked about the recent 600-strong IS attack stated, “The [Coalition] airstrikes were definitely successful, effective and timely, enabling the Peshmerga to drive the insurgents back.” The success the Kurds have seen in their battles against Islamic State emphasizes the need for a US-armed Kurdish force.

Retired Army General Jay Garner has advised supplying the Kurds with more lethal weaponry and vehicles. Garner explained that anti-tanks weapons and other warfare vehicles would enable the Kurds to develop, “rapid reaction forces that can respond to incursions along the front or offensive opportunities,” and would stop truck bombs commonly use by IS. The US however continues to work solely through the Iraqi government, which aggressively opposes arming a Kurdish force. The U.S. reportedly blocked recent efforts by neighboring Arab states to provide direct arms to Kurdish forces.

If the Administration truly seeks to “degrade and destroy” IS, cooperation with the Kurds remains a key element of this strategy that is being overlooked. The Kurds have proven they are capable of giving IS a run for their money, and as the success of Western anti-jihadist airstrikes is questionable absent skilled ground forces, it is time to support a strategy, and a force that is already working.

The Islamic State-Muslim Brotherhood War on Egypt

The Sinai Peninsula region has been under bombardment this week. As previously discussed in the Free Fire Blog on Monday June 29, Egyptian Prosecutor General Hisham Barakat was killed as a result of a car bomb on his convoy in Cairo. Barakat was a member of the Egyptian Judiciary, which has made great strides and efforts to “defeat the Muslim Brotherhood’s terrorist violence”.

Yesterday, militants with the Wilayat Sinai (formerly named “Ansar Bait al-Maqdis”), the Islamic State’s Egyptian affiliate, conducted a number of coordinated attacks on Egyptian military checkpoints in North Sinai. It was reported that more than 100 militants and 64 Egyptian soldiers were killed in the attacks. 13 soldiers were also wounded.

According to security sources, the militants were also targeting two towns in particular, Sheikh Zuweid and Rafah. The militants had closed in around Sheikh Zuweid and placed bombs in and around the town. Egyptian forces were able to thwart the militants’ attempt of a siege there.

Reports out of Israel suggest a growing cooperation between Hamas-the Palestine branch of the Muslim Brotherhood- and the Islamic State.

According to Haaretz news, “Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip have been maintaining close ties with operatives of Wilayat Sinai, the radical jihadist group identified with ISIS”. This indicates that Hamas, the IS-affiliated Wilayat Sinai group in the Sinai Peninsula, and the Islamic State proper all work together at least on some scale, on some occasion. Granted, there is conflict, tension, and attacks between the three groups. But it must be acknowledged the jihadist groups are able to work together, when it works for them.

The cooperation between Hamas and the Islamic State is a reminder that while jihadist terror groups may have disagreements, they are also capable of cooperating to achieve shared goals.

Late yesterday, after security forces reportedly declared that the Northern Sinai situation was under control, Egyptian forces killed a number of Muslim Brotherhood members while attempting to affect an arrest. The exact details of this incident are yet to be confirmed. At this point in time, there seem to be three main versions of the story.

First, an Egyptian security official reported that 13 Muslim Brotherhood members were gathered in a flat in Cairo’s October 6 suburb. The security forces were presumably still searching for individuals responsible for or connected to the vicious attacks from earlier in the day, however there is no confirmed motive behind the officials’ entering of the building. Officials claim that then men inside the flat were armed, and fired on them. Then, as a result the Egyptian security returning fire, 13 Muslim Brothers were killed.

Second, the Interior Ministry (of Egypt) has reported slightly different facts. The Ministry has claimed that 9 Muslim Brotherhood members were killed, and that the leader Abdel Fattah Ibrahim “was leading a meeting…to discuss ‘plots’ to carry out ‘terrorist’ attacks. It is confirmed that Ibrahim was indeed one of the individuals killed in the confrontation. Reportedly, there was previous information that “indicated that this group has supported all recent ‘acts of violence and assassinations’”, which could also shed light on the initiative of police investigating the flat. Police claimed that they were shot at first, and the member deaths resulted from police’s returned fire.

The final version of this incident is reported from Muslim Brotherhood sources and spokesmen. Mohamed Montaser, one of the spokesmen, has said, “The leaders that were executed in the flat were in a meeting [discussing] supporting the orphans of martyrs. They were unarmed, and talk about them clashing with the security is a lie”. The Muslim Brotherhood has released a statement, holding Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi responsible for the “assassinations” of the “members of a legal, humanitarian, and psychological support committee”. The statement went on to further berate President Sisi, as well as issue continued threats against the Egyptian government.

The overthrow in 2013 of previous Egyptian President Mohamed Mursi (a prominent actor in the Muslim Brotherhood group) by current Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi has resulted in the rise of violent actions and threats against the Cairo government. These sentiments stem primarily from the Muslim Brotherhood, who have “called for an ‘uncompromising jihad’ against the Egyptian government”.

While many media outlets have ignored the significant role played by the Muslim Brotherhood in the backing of terrorism, it’s important for U.S. security to back the Egyptian effort against the Brotherhood, as Michael Rubin, an expert analyst on the Middle East noted yesterday:

“As broader violence erupts between Sisi on one hand and the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic State proxies on the other, it’s crucial to back the former and a definitive U.S. interest to seek the defeat of the latter”.

It would be wise to take Mr. Rubin’s advice.

Influx of Syrian Refugees into Greece is a Security Disaster

According to a report by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) released on July 1, Italy is no longer the top destination for migrants and refugees coming into Europe. Greece is.

68,000 people have come to Greece so far this year, a number that is nearly 20,000 people more than arrived in Greece throughout the entirety of 2014. 67,500 people have arrived in Italy in the same amount of time.

Of the many refugees in Greece, only 5,100 have applied for asylum, implying that the rest do not plan to remain in Greece but instead intend on going somewhere else in Europe. Often, they aim to go to Sweden and Germany. Both countries are known for the support they offer to asylum-seekers, and many of refugees have family living there already.

Though the UNHCR has increased its presence in Greece to help deal with the arriving migrants, the refugee camps are becoming severely overcrowded, leading to deteriorating conditions and fighting between people coming from different countries.

Concerns have been raised over Europe’s capacity to handle such a large influx of migrants due to its Common European Asylum System, which states that every refugee that enters Europe is entitled to asylum. However, a deeper security issue lies beyond the simple ability of Europe to take in so many people: it is nearly impossible, with so many refugees entering European countries, to ensure that they all have peaceful intentions.

Many of those coming to Greece are fleeing the war in Syria. Though the vast majority of them are likely hoping for a better life in Europe, the reality is that dozens of terrorist organizations and armed groups are operating in Syria. All of them, especially larger and better-resources ones like Al Qaeda and the Islamic State (IS) have significantly benefited from the refugee crisis. They have been inserting their own fighters in amongst the true asylum-seekers, and the Common European Asylum System has given them the capability to spread throughout Europe to conduct operations. The increase in Syrian refugees will allow even more militants from IS, Al Qaeda, and other smaller groups into Europe because border controls throughout Europe are dealing with more people than they can handle. Finding the terrorists sneaking into Europe, masked by all of the well-intentioned people, will turn into a search for a needles in a haystack. In addition, IS has been running some of the refugee-smuggling operations themselves, which gives it hundreds of millions of dollars in income and a greater ability to place its fighters in amongst those people legitimately fleeing war.

The current political unrest in Greece due to its default on its loans and its potential exit from the Eurozone will only serve to help terrorists groups sending their fighters into Europe. Not only has the Greek government had difficulties controlling its borders, but the turmoil could weaken both the EU and NATO. If its relationship with member countries of both international organizations is damaged, it could become less willing to cooperate with either. If it chooses to ignore security measures put in place by them, the repercussions could include an influx of terrorists throughout the entirety of Europe.

Is Sudan Permitting Students to Join Islamic State?

12 students, who previously attended the University of Medical Sciences and Technology in Khartoum, Sudan, have been reported missing since Friday, June 26. These students reportedly left Sudan sometime during the day on Friday in an effort to travel to Syria to join ISIS. The students were able to fly out of Sudan, and were scheduled to travel through Turkey and then head for Syria.

While more foreigners traveling to join the Islamic State’s fight is worrisome and troubling in and of itself, there is another significant component of this incident. This component is the role that Sudanese top officials may have played.

Ali El Sadig, spokesman for the Sudanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, reported that “the travel was an organized event with high officials involved, otherwise it would have been impossible for them to travel without being caught”.

Sadig is father to one of the students who has fled Sudan. After learning of his daughter’s departure, Sadig went to the Khartoum airport in hopes of learning more about how she was let out of Sudan. After speaking with airport personnel and security, Sadig found no trace of his daughter on any airport registration documents. Sadig knew that his daughter did not have an “exit stamp”, which one needs in order to be able to leave Sudan, nor did she have a visa for Turkey. Sadig’s daughter was also not checked by customs and immigration officers before boarding.

The only evidence available that confirmed his daughter’s departure was security footage showing her walk past all airport personnel and right aboard the aircraft, an extremely abnormal situation under the highly autocratic Khartoum government, raising the question of whether top officials may have been involved in altering the normal rules and regulations.

This is not the first time students from Sudan have left to join the IS cause. In March of this year, 9 students who also attended UMST, left Sudan to head for Turkey. Syria and the Islamic State were also their end destinations.

“Neighbors and friends [of the 9]…all seemed to lay at least some of the blame on the Islamic Civilization student organization which brought clerics like Jizouli to deliver sermons calling for jihad,” according to one report.

After speculations about some of the activities and guests the organization was hosting rose, the university “halted the activities of the clerics” and “introduced awareness programs”. The university’s response to the speculations did not include shutting the organization down, however.

The Jizouli mentioned refers to Sheikh Mohammad al-Jizouli, a well known Islamist cleric the university had previously hosted. It’s logical to assume that characters such as Jizouli and other guests may have initiated conversations with students about leaving Sudan and taking up jihad. Al-Jizouli is well known cleric who has openly supported the Islamic State, and called for jihadist attack, including against civilians. Al-Jizouli has  been a mainstay on Sudanese television, which is tightly controlled by the government. While Al-Jizouli has been repeatedly arrested after his vocal statements in support of Islamic State have made international news, he has also been later quietly released by Sudanese security forces. Despite his run-ins with security forces, Al-Jizouli is the president of the El Jereif Mosques, which was reportedly founded by President Omar Bashir himself.

It should come as a surprise to no one that Khartoum, a State Sponsor of Terrorism, known for waging multiple genocides, blocking international relief aid and food to its citizens, and bombing businesses and hospitals within its own borders, would be willing to involve itself in recruiting individuals for the Islamic State. The Sudanese government is also a known supporter of “Arabization and Islamization” of Africa.

Sudan has also reportedly played a role in training and support for Boko Haram, now Islamic State’s West African province, according to Nigeria’s former ambassador to Sudan, and in May of 2014 it was reported that a masked man speaking Arabic with a Sudanese accent could be seen providing instruction for Boko Haram fighters, according to the Nigerian army, which acquired the tape. Nigerian military officials have repeatedly claimed that foreign fighters were participating in assisting the Nigerian jihadist group.

Involvement in recruiting for Islamic State fighting forces is just one more major strike against the Sudanese government. It’s also one more reason that our government should be involved in holding President Bashir accountable for the crimes he and his regime have committed.

Soft Targets, Not Symbolism, Mark July 4th Terror Alert

The media is seizing on comments from former CIA Director Mike Morell, to raise fears of upcoming attacks over the July 4th holiday. Morrell told CBS news, “I wouldn’t be surprised if we’re sitting here a week from today talking about an attack over the weekend in the United States. That’s how serious this is.”

While The FBI and DHS have released a bulletin warning of potential attacks against law enforcement officers and military personnel, and the FBI is establishing multiple command centers around the country to monitor any potential terrorist threats around the July 4 weekend, there have been no specific or credible threats identified. Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson encourages people to attend Independence Day events but to remain vigilant.

More important to the threat matrix over the July 4th weekend is the fact that it takes place over the Muslim holiday of Ramadan. Islamist terror groups have repeatedly demonstrated an uptick of attacks during Ramadan, and both Islamic State, and the Al Qaeda affiliate Al Shabaab has set a goal of attacking Christians during Ramadan (which lasts until July 17). Al Shabaab indicated that it intended to give disbelievers a “true taste of jihad”.

Typically Islamic terror attacks have more focused on dates that are significant to perpetrators than the victims. Examples include September 11th, which corresponds to the defeat of Muslim armies in the 1683 Siege of Vienna, and the 1st WTC attack, which was scheduled to occur on the anniversary of the ground offensive for the 1st Iraq war but delayed by 3 days, taking place February 26th.

Typically Islamic Terrorists have not used western holidays as significant dates on which to conduct attacks. The possible exception to this is the foiled Christmas Day bomb plot by the so called “underwear bomber.” Notably Christmas is a Western religious holiday, and was chosen for that reason, according to Anwar Al Awlaki who said it represented, “the holiest and most sacred days to you, Christmas Day.“ This is a reminder that jihadists view themselves as engaged in a civilizational/religious conflict, rather than a nationalist conflict.

That said, British authorities did recently foil a jihadist plot to explode a pressure cooker bomb at an Armed Forces Day parade. Notably, the selection of this target appears to be due to the large numbers of British armed forces who would have been present, rather than symbolism related to the date itself. The plotter told a British law enforcement informant, ” It will be big. We will hit the kuffar (unbelievers) hard InshAllah. Hit their soldiers in their own land. InshAllah. Soldiers that served in Iraq and Afganistan will be present. Jump in the crowd and detonate the bomb. They think they can kill Muslims in Iraq and Afganistan then come back to the UK and be safe. We’ll hit them hard InshAllah. By Allah you wont be wasted Akhi (brother).”

July 4th celebrations are likely to make attractive targets because they facilitate the gathering of large crowds in public places, as well large gathering of military personnel in uniform (such as during parades). As Chairman Michael McCaul, for the House Homeland Security Committe recently explained , it is the combination of Ramadan, the one-year anniversary of Islamic State declaring its caliphate coinciding with America’s Independence Day which raises particular concerns.

Americans should exercise caution and remain alert this July 4th, and every day, especially if participating in events near large crowds. But the threat of jihad terror stems primarily from the enemy’s ideological motivations, not reactions to American displays of patriotism .

IS attacks Yemen’s Houthis as violence in Yemen continues

Islamic State militants attacked Houthi rebel leaders in Yemen’s capital late Monday afternoon, killing at least 28 people. Two Houthi leaders, Faycal and Hamid Jayache, were the targets of IS’s self-proclaimed attack on the “Shiite nest”. This attacks comes as the latest in a string of attacks by IS in Yemen. On June 16, 31 people were killed in IS led attacks in Sana’a. Days later two people were killed when an IS car bomb was detonated outside a Yemen mosque. IS launched its assault on Yemen in March with suicide attacks that killed more than 130 people attending prayer at mosques.

In addition to IS’s presence in Yemen, al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula has also made massive moves in Yemen, actively taking advantage of sectarian conflicts in other parts of the nation in order to seize territory in desolate southeastern Yemen. Despite the deaths of multiple of its senior leaders due to US airstrikes, AQAP is showing no signs of slowing down its operations, being the most successful branch of al-Qaeda in recent years. In addition, AQAP militants stormed a Yemeni prison in April and freed 300 inmates, and 1,200 more inmates were free on Tuesday in another jailbreak carried out by AQAP.

The Iranian-backed Houthis have made massive advances as well in their rebellion, forcing President Abedrabbo Mansour Hadi to leave the country. Iran’s funding and arming of their Shiite comrades has led sunni Saudi Arabia to launch an air-campaign beginning in March against the Houthi rebellion. The US has openly supported the Saudi air campaign, attempting to ease tensions which have grown between the US and their Gulf allies who openly opposedU.S. reconciliation with Iran over its nuclear program and activities in Iraq.

US Special Forces were pulled from Yemen in March along with the closing the US Embassy in Sanaa, casting doubts on how the US would collect valuable intelligence with no personnel on the ground in Yemen.

With the Houthis, Saudis, IS and AQAP all staging attacks in and around Yemen, United Nations aid organizations are struggling to aid the 150,000 citizens who have fled their homes due to the violence.

As civil war continues to engulf Yemen, neither Saudi Arabia nor Iran appears to be willing to abandon their respective proxies. Peace negotiations have come and gone in Geneva with little to no progress made in relation to the conflict.    With Yemen the battle ground of a proxy war between Sunni and Shia forces led by Saudi Arabia and Iran respectively, there’s little reason to believe that the violence in Yemen can be ended absent resolution of the wider conflict.

Obama Tries To Make Secret Deal With Iran

According to Iranian newspaper Hamshahri, President Barack Obama recently sent a private message to Ayatollah Khamenei and the rest of Iran’s leadership, just before Tuesday’s deadline. The messenger was implied to be Iraq’s Prime Minister, Haider Al-Abadi. Al-Abadi visited Tehran to meet with Khamenei back on June 17th, less than two weeks after he met with Obama in Germany. Last November President Obama had previously sent a letter to Iran’s government proposing drawing Iran back to the negotiation table as well as cooperation against Islamic State. If the claims are true, then this would be the fourth attempt by the Obama administration to engage Iran’s government in dialogue.

The president clearly views Iran as a key component in stopping Islamic State, and also wishes to establish a nuclear deal with Iran to, what will be in his view, create detente between the USA and the Islamic Republic of Iran. Obama reportedly stated in the November letter that the USA’s military actions inside Syria are not intended to depose the Assad regime, Iran’s ally in Syria.

Iran has previously made secret requests of the US government as well. Back in 2009 Iran had contacted the US government via Omani channels with names of prisoners the Iranian regime wanted released. The released prisoners included convicted arms smugglers, and a diplomat and scientist convicted of illegal exports to Iran. Iran has frequently used American openness towards normalizing relations with Iran to achieve tactical goals. It would be safe to assume that the Iranian regime is not interested in integrating with the world at large and sees talks as a means to buy time for its nuclear program as well as get sanctions lifted.

As if to illustrate the point, former CIA director Michael Hayden voiced concerns that Iran is ahead of the US when it comes to the geopolitical strategy behind nuclear talks during a televised appearance on Fox News Sunday. Hayden believes that the proposed nuclear deal does not do enough to counter Iran, especially when it comes to their activities throughout the Middle East. Of particular criticism is any consideration of waiving weapons inspections of Iranian nuclear facilities. Iranian General Masoud Jazayeri stated firmly on Sunday that any inspection of Iranian military facilities will be forbidden, a sentiment echoed earlier by several high ranking Iranian military officials.

Kurds Push Back against Surprise IS Attack at Kobane

On June 25, fighters from the Islamic State (IS) launched a morning surprise attack on the Syrian Kurdish town of Kobane. Five cars, with approximately 30 fighters, drove through the town’s defenses, carried out a suicide bombing, and then began killing civilians. The assailants wore stolen uniforms of the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG), which controls the town. After fighting all day, most of the IS fighters were killed, captured, or surrounded by YPG forces.

Kobane is on the border between Syria and Turkey, and Turkish officials said that they admitted 63 civilians from Kobane into Turkish hospitals.

At the same time as the attack on Kobane, IS fighters and militias that once supported Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad, launched another attack on Hasakah, a city in the northeast. They took control of western districts and pushed the Syrian army into the center of the city. The Kurds are not involved in the fight for Hasakah.

Earlier this week, YPG forces successfully recaptured areas taken by IS, including the IS military base known as “Brigade 93.” Brigade 93 was IS’s first line of defense to the north of Raqqa, the capital of the IS declared caliphate. Following the capture of the base, the YPG and its allies amongst Syrian rebel groups took control of the town of Ayn Issa.

Kurdish forces have fought in recent months with IS over the control of Kobane, and the town is significant because the YPG seized it from IS in January. The Kurds’ ability to defend the city is more than just a military victory: at a time when IS is suffering at the hands of the Kurds, its inability to effectively recapture land is also incredibly demoralizing to its fighters.

Kobane is along the Syrian border, leading Kurdish activists to accuse Turkey of helping IS. Turkey has denied the accusations and produced CCTV footage that shows the first suicide bomber entered the town from the Syrian side. Though investigations into the origins of the attacking convoy are under way, this is not the first time that Turkey has been blamed for helping IS by turning a blind eye to its activities in Turkey or allowing it to stage attacks from within its borders.

As the Center for Security Policy has previously stated, the Kurds have been integral to the fight against IS. The Senate recently rejected Amendment 1549, which would have directly armed Kurdish forces, but they have emerged as the key to the fight. Rather than trying to form a new, effective strategy for combatting IS, the US should support the Kurds, who already have a plan of action.