Germany Worries About Its Gold Reserves

Philipp Missfelder, member of Germany’s Christian Democratic Union, tried to inspect German gold reserves stored in New York, but was not given access.
(Getty Images) 

German politicians and accounting bodies want more guarantees concerning the security of Germany’s gold reserves, with Germany’s federal audit office due to report to the finance committee of the German Parliament on the matter.

Read More »

Germany’s Gold Hoard by Ron Fraser and Andrew Miller

Germany’s gold reserves may prove a powerful weapon in the troubled world economy.
(Thomas Coex/AFP/Getty Images)

Gold skyrocketed to over us$1,800 an ounce on Tuesday. One nation gained powerfully as a result: Germany.

As the markets fixate on Europe, seeking to understand the complexities involved in Franco-German moves to stabilize the eurozone and hence the global economy, little attention has been paid to a crucial component of German power in this whole equation—Germany’s gold hoard.

Read More »

Did the Holy Roman Empire Plan the Greek Crisis? by Gerald Flurry

The Greek riots are a sign of a far greater upheaval that is threatening to engulf much of Europe.
(Aris Messinis/AFP/Getty Images)

I’d like to add my thoughts to a critical article written by Richard Palmer, titled “Who Will Stop the Greece Fires?” It was placed on our website Dec. 16, 2008.

Read More »

Italy Calls in the Army to Protect Tax Collectors

Italy’s Interior Minister Anna Maria Cancellieri announced May 13 that Equitalia, the private company that collects taxes, and Finmeccanica, an aerospace and defense conglomerate, may receive military protection after they were attacked by anarchists.

Cancellieri warned that the army may also need to protect Italy’s high-speed rail network. 

Read More »

Britain Tells Germany to Rearm by Richard Palmer

Britain’s military establishment has a shockingly shallow grasp of history. British Defense Secretary Philip Hammond said Germany must recognize “that it can’t continue to be the dominant economy in Europe without also significantly increasing its military capability,” after talks with his German counterpart Thomas de Maiziere in Germany, May 2

Read More »

Merkel and Monti Revive Old Berlin-Rome Axis by Ron Fraser

Ron Fraser examines the next step for Germany as it has already lost an ally in Nicholas Sarkozy as he lost the election to Francois Hollande. Angela Merkel looks to Mario Monti for a new partnership.

Sixty years of work by European elites to create a united Europe consummated recently in two events that bring the seventh and final resurrection of the Holy Roman Empire much closer to being a current-day reality.

First, the “Berlin Group,” a fringe EU group of nations formed out of a German idea promoting the regular meeting of foreign ministers of the European Union’s leading economies (excluding Britain), recently launched the idea of creating the office of a European supremo. 

Read More »

This Is Germany’s Moment! by Brad MacDonald

In this article Brad MacDonald provides an insight into events around Europe and what steps the Germans are taking to take full advantage. Happy reading.

It appears the current phase of Europe’s debt crisis is entering its last hour. We’ll know soon, but it’s possible the weekend of May 5, 2012, will be remembered as a transformative moment in the history of Europe.

Once again, the nation at the center of it all is Germany.

On Sunday, a noteworthy chain of events will culminate in France’s run-off presidential election. While many of the events in this chain appear unrelated, with each unfurling in its own distinct way in a city or within a government in a different country, they’re threaded through with a common theme: frustration with Germany, and specifically, Berlin’s unrelenting demand for Sparmaßnahmen (austerity).

Read More »

Russia's Strategy by George Friedman

The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 reversed a process that had been under way since the Russian Empire's emergence in the 17th century. It was ultimately to incorporate four general elements: Eastern Europe, Central Asia, the Caucasus and Siberia. The St. Petersburg-Moscow axis was its core, and Russia, Belorussia and Ukraine were its center of gravity. The borders were always dynamic, mostly expanding but periodically contracting as the international situation warranted. At its farthest extent, from 1945 to 1989, it reached central Germany, dominating the lands it seized in World War II. The Russian Empire was never at peace. As with many empires, there were always parts of it putting up (sometimes violent) resistance and parts that bordering powers coveted -- as well as parts of other nations that Russia coveted.

Read More »

The Dutch Government's Collapse and the European Implications

Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte announced that his Cabinet would resign April 23. The announcement came after the government failed to agree on budget cuts with its key partner the Party for Freedom, whose support had boosted the minority coalition to a parliamentary majority.

Read More »

China-Philippines Standoff Intensifies

From theTrumpet.com  

 China’s belligerency is on display on the world stage once again.

Beijing intensified a 10-day standoff between the Philippines and China on Friday by sending a third ship to a shoal in the South China Sea where both sides claim sovereignty.

Read More »

EU to Create New ‘Super-President’?

From   theTrumpet.com         Another idea from the ‘Berlin Club’

 A group of EU foreign ministers discussed the idea of merging the European Union’s top jobs into one on April 19, the EU Observer reports, coining the term “super-president” to describe the new top job.

The jobs of European Council president, currently held by Herman Van Rompuy, and European Commission president, currently held by José Manuel Barroso, may be merged. “The new super-president would also chair General Affairs Councils (gacs)—monthly meetings of foreign ministers which discuss internal Union affairs,” writes the EU Observer. Its source reports that experts believe this can be done without a treaty change.

The idea emerged from a meeting of 10 EU foreign ministers organized by German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle to discuss closer European integration. Sometimes called the “Berlin Club,” the group usually has 11 members: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal and Spain. The French foreign minister, however, was not able to attend this last meeting.

These ministers see that for Europe to become better integrated it needs a strong central leader. As the euro crisis pushes those nations that are committed to remaining in the euro closer together, watch for this idea to become more popular. Europe knows it needs a strong central leader to respond to the dangers of today’s world.

Read More »

With Submarines against Pirates

German government advisors are pleading for using submarines in the war on piracy at the Horn of Africa. Thanks to their "highly modern sensor technology," German submarines are not only capable of "covertly observing the pirates' vessels" and following their course, but also of "observing the pirates' potential bases both day and night," according to a statement just published by the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP). The bases could therefore be attacked with greater precision, as the EU decided Friday - in spite of warnings that this could lead to a further escalation of the conflict in Somalia. Geostrategic considerations are at the core of the militarization projects, being promoted by the Bundeswehr. The Indian Ocean has become extremely important in global policy and it will play a pivotal role in future conflicts with China. Under no circumstances should the "new momentum in the greater region of the Indian Ocean" be neglected, warns the director of the SWP. Military strategists are underlining the importance of a strong naval presence in the ocean between Africa and Southeast Asia.

In Violation of International Law

The appeal of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP) for new militarization projects corresponds to the decision taken by the EU's foreign ministers last Friday, to combat piracy also on shore in the future. According to this decision, not the pirates themselves, but their weapons, vessels, fuel and even food supplies should be attacked and destroyed. This should be permitted "on shore," but the military seeks to avoid clarifying, what exactly is meant by "shore," and what is being targeted. The Federal Cabinet plans to endorse these new regulations on Wednesday and the endorsement by the German Bundestag should follow as soon as possible. Experts had explicitly warned against the extension of the mandate, fearing an uncontrollable escalation of the conflict. (german-foreign-policy.com reported.) Even parliamentarians of the opposition, who, in principle, support the war on piracy, point to the illegality of on shore military attacks on pirates. Reinhard Buetikofer (Green Party) reminds that pirates are "criminals and not enemy combatants." To "attack them on land, without them posing a direct danger, is simply in violation of international law."

Combat Unit "Berlin"

These regulations are of particular importance to Germany, not only because of the endorsement by Berlin's foreign minister, but also because of the prominent role the Bundeswehr is currently playing in the EU Operation Atalanta. The Bundeswehr had just dispatched its combat unit logistical support vessel "Berlin" to the Horn of Africa - "not as a logistical support vessel, but as a combat unit," the German Armed Forces underlined. The "Berlin" is therefore carrying more personnel than usual - military police and a so-called boarding team, but also two "Sea King" helicopters. These helicopters are equipped with machine-guns, to be used against alleged piracy infrastructures, in line with the EU's decision. "Particularly the Bundeswehr, at this point" can launch these attacks, writes the press, "because it has the appropriate helicopters in the theater of operations."

Very Experienced in Surveillance

SWP is now proposing another militarization project for the Horn of Africa and calls on the German government to dispatch German submarines to the Somali coast. The crews of the submarines are "familiar with deployment in shallow waters and reconnaissance missions." Thanks to their "highly modern sensor technology," the submarines are not only capable of "keeping potential pirate bases under surveillance day and night with great perseverance (...) and rapidly signaling the surveillance results." They are also capable of localizing pirate vessels and following their course. Other warships, or their board helicopters, could open fire, if Berlin still seeks to avoid the deployment of special forces. The current official EU position does not permit ground troops to engage the pirates on shore. The SWP author, who, during his career in the Navy had served as a submarine commander as well as a fleet command operations officer, points out that submarines, unlike helicopters and reconnaissance aircraft, can operate "undercover" - they are undetectable by the pirates. The German Navy has extensive experience. "For years it has been participating in NATO's undercover surveillance operations in the Mediterranean."

Geostrategic Competition

These militarization plans are certainly not a reaction merely to considerations of how to combat more effectively piracy off the coast of Somalia, but to geostrategic considerations as well. For example, last year Volker Perthes, Director of SWP, pointed out that the "interests" behind the countries' sending their naval vessels to the Horn of Africa are not "limited to the war on piracy." Perthes explains that, over the past few years, the importance of the Indian Ocean, where piracy is being fought in its western sector, has enormously grown. "One third of the world's maritime trade" crosses this route, with the trend rising rapidly. Particularly East Asian countries, especially China, are making large infrastructure investments in the bordering countries - port facilities or transportation means -, which are "also elements of the geostrategic competition." It is, after all, "it goes without saying" that China and even India have "an interest in protecting their maritime links." Even though the United States "will remain the strongest maritime power in the Indian Ocean, for the foreseeable future," it will soon "no longer be the sole maritime power." Perthes warns that "the new momentum in the greater region of the Indian Ocean" should not be neglected and one must also be involved.

The Decisive Maritime Region

Parting from this premise, military experts are emphasizing the need for the strongest possible naval presence in the Indian Ocean. "With the growing geostrategic significance of the Indian Ocean region, the influence also grows for those, participating in the political military architecture of the region," according to a military policy analysis published last year in a renowned Austrian military review. "A gigantic power struggle is currently taking place in the Indian Ocean," a high-ranking Swiss officer is quoted saying. "The navies of China, Japan, India, the USA, the Europeans, the NATO, and the EU are taking up positions, ports are being built, and naval forces are being equipped." The officer sees world historical upheavals. "For the first time since the 16th Century," he writes, "we are seeing the downfall of a western maritime power in this decisive maritime region."The military activities in the Indian Ocean, even at the Horn of Africa, will determine who, in the future, will predominate over an ocean, characterized by the former director of the German Combined Chief of Staff in the Defense Ministry, ret. Vice Admiral Ulrich Weisser as the "decisive region for the seas of the world" and characterized it as "decisive for the future power structure in Asia." (german-foreign-policy.com reported. This is the context, to be considered, if one wants to take up the proposal to station German submarines in the western sector of the Indian Ocean.

From www.german-foreign-policy.com

Read More »

Russia Planning Troops Deployment On Iran's Northern Border And Waiting For A Western Attack By F. Michael Maloof

"Information Clearing House" --- WASHINGTON – The Russian military anticipates that an attack will occur on Iran by the summer and has developed an action plan to move Russian troops through neighboring Georgia to stage in Armenia, which borders on the Islamic republic, according to informed Russian sources.

Russian Security Council head Viktor Ozerov said that Russian General Military Headquarters has prepared an action plan in the event of an attack on Iran.

Dmitry Rogozin, who recently was the Russian ambassador to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO, warned against an attack on Iran.

"Iran is our neighbor," Rogozin said. "If Iran is involved in any military action, it's a direct threat to our security." Rogozin now is the deputy Russian prime minister and is regarded as anti-Western. He oversees Russia's defense sector.

Russian Defense Ministry sources say that the Russian military doesn't believe that Israel has sufficient military assets to defeat Iranian defenses and further believes that U.S. military action will be necessary.

The implication of preparing to move Russian troops not only is to protect its own vital regional interests but possibly to assist Iran in the event of such an attack. Sources add that a Russian military buildup in the region could result in the Russian military potentially engaging Israeli forces, U.S. forces, or both.

Informed sources say that the Russians have warned of "unpredictable consequences" in the event Iran is attacked, with some Russians saying that the Russian military will take part in the possible war because it would threaten its vital interests in the region.

The influential Russian Nezavisimaya Gazeta newspaper has quoted a Russian military source as saying that the situation forming around Syria and Iran "causes Russia to expedite the course of improvement of its military groups in the South Caucasus, the Caspian, Mediterranean and Black Sea regions."

This latest information comes from a series of reports and leaks from official Russian spokesmen and government news agencies who say that an Israeli attack is all but certain by the summer.

Because of the impact on Russian vital interests in the region, sources say that Russian preparations for such an attack began two years ago when Russian Military Base 102 in Gyumri, Armenia, was modernized. It is said to occupy a major geopolitical position in the region.

Families of Russian servicemen from the Russian base at Gyumri in Armenia close to the borders of Georgia and Turkey already have been evacuated, Russian sources say.

"Military Base 102 is a key point, Russia's outpost in the South Caucasus," a Russian military source told the newspaper. "It occupies a very important geopolitical position, but the Kremlin fears lest it should lose this situation."

With Vladimir Putin returning to the Russian presidency, the prospect that he again would order an attack on Georgia as he did in August 2008 also has become a possibility, these informed sources say.

The Russians believe that Georgia would cooperate with the United States in blocking any supplies from reaching Military Base 102, which now is supplied primarily by air. Right now, Georgia blocks the only land transportation route through which Russian military supplies could travel.

Fuel for the Russian base in Armenia comes from Iran. Russian officials believe this border crossing may be closed in the event of a war.

"Possibly, it will be necessary to use military means to breach the Georgian transport blockade and establish transport corridors leading into Armenia," according to Yury Netkachev, former deputy commander of Russian forces in Transcaucasia. Geography of the region suggests that any such supply corridor would have to go through the middle of Georgia approaching Georgia's capital of Tbilisi given the roads and topography of the country.

In September, the Russian military plans to hold its annual military exercises called Kavkaz 2012. However, informed Russian sources say that preparations and deployments of military equipment and personnel already have begun in anticipation of a possible war with Iran.

These sources report that new command and control equipment has been deployed in the region capable of using the Russian GPS system, GLONASS for targeting information.

"The air force in the South Military District is reported to have been rearmed almost 100 percent with new jets and helicopters," according to regional expert Pavel Felgenhauer of the Washington-based Jamestown Foundation.

In 2008, Felgenhauer pointed out, Kavkaz 2008 maneuvers allowed the Russian military to covertly deploy forces that successfully invaded Georgia in August of that year.

Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov already has announced that new Spetznaz, or Special Forces units, will be deployed in Stavropol and Kislovodsk, which are located in the North Caucasian regions.

Russian sources say that the Russian military believes that if the U.S. goes to war with Iran, it may deploy forces into Georgia and warships in the Caspian Sea with the possible help of Azerbaijan, which since has stated that it will not allow its territory to be used by Israel to launch an attack on neighboring Iran.

There had been speculation that given the improved relations between Israel and Azerbaijan, the Jewish state may use bases from which to launch air attacks on neighboring Iran's nuclear sites. Israel recently agreed to sell Azerbaijan $1.6 billion in military equipment.

A further irritant to Georgia's President Mikhail Saakashvili is the prospect that Russian assault airborne troops, or VDV units, with helicopters could be moved into Georgia's two breakaway provinces of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. These two provinces were taken by the Russian military during the August 2008 Russian-Georgian war. Initially they were declared by Moscow to be independent countries, but now the Kremlin is indicating they may be annexed to Russia.

Similarly, Lt. General Vladimir Shamanov, commander of the VDV, has announced that Russian troops in Armenia will be reinforced by paratroopers, along with attack and transport helicopters.

"The Russian spearhead (from the Transcaucasia region) may be ordered to strike south to prevent the presumed deployment of U.S. bases in Transcaucasia, to link up with the troops in Armenia and take over the South Caucasus energy corridor along which Azeri, Turkmen and other Caspian natural gas and oil may reach European markets," Felgenhauer said.

"By one swift military strike, Russia may ensure control of all the Caucasus and the Caspian states that were its former realm, establishing a fiat accompli the West, too preoccupied with Iran, would not reverse," he said.

"At the same time, a small victorious war would unite the Russian nation behind the Kremlin, allowing it to crush the remnants of the prodemocracy movement 'for fair elections,' and as a final bonus, Russia's military action could perhaps finally destroy the Saakashvili regime."

Putin has made no secret that he despises Saakashvili and with his return to the presidency, he may consider taking out the Georgian president as unfinished business. Just as in 2008, Putin will not have much to worry about if he sends Russian troops into Georgia, since there was muted reaction from the U.S. and the European countries to the Russian invasion and subsequent occupation.
 
F. Michael Maloof, staff writer for WND’s G2Bulletin, is a former senior security policy analyst in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. He can be contacted at mmaloof@wnd.com.
This post originally appeared at G2 Bulletin.

Read More »

US Gives Iran 'Last Chance' Warning by Guy Adams

"The Independent"  -Iran must immediately close a large nuclear facility built underneath a mountain if it is to take what President Obama has called a "last chance" to resolve its escalating dispute with the West via diplomacy.

Other "near term" concessions which must be met in the early stages of talks to avoid a potential military conflict, include the suspension of higher level uranium enrichment, and the surrender by Tehran of existing stockpiles of the fuel, senior US officials said yesterday.

Read More »

Iran Warns West Against Military Intervention in Syria

A senior Iranian cleric warned the West and Saudi Arabia on Friday against taking military action in the Syrian crisis.

Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami said that the West, “the Arab hardliner regimes, and the Saudi Arabian government, all should know that if they intervene militarily in Syria, a fire would be started that would burn themselves before anyone else.” 

The ayatollah’s comments come at a time of escalated violence in Syria, which is Iran’s most important regional ally. This week, Syrian forces have intensified attacks against opposition just days before an internationally sponsored ceasefire is set to take hold. This crackdown has prompted thousands of Syrian refugees to flee into Turkey in recent days. 

Iran fears that the upheaval in Syria provides the West and Saudi Arabia with an opportunity to sever Tehran’s critical alliance with Damascus.

The Trumpet believes that, as international pressure against the Syrian government continues to mount, Iranian fears will be realized. A split between Iran and Syria is on the horizon.
From thetrumpet.com

Read More »

EU Militaries Pool Resources, Reduce Dependence on America

EU defense ministers attend a Defense Ministers Council on March 22, at EU headquarters in Brussels.
(Georges Gobet/AFP/Getty Images)

 From Thetrumpet.com

EU nations will invest in joint military projects such as air-to-air refueling and field hospitals as they try to save money and reduce their dependence on the United States, defense ministers from across the European Union decided March 22.

Meeting as part of the European Defense Agency’s Steering Board, they signed declarations of intent in these areas and said they would increase cooperation in procurement and research.

“The EU-led nato operation in Libya last year also exposed hardware and technology deficiencies in the EU military,” wrote the EU Observer.

“Gaps in the EU military were already identified in Afghanistan,” it writes. “The former U.S. defense minister Robert Gates last year said Europe’s lack of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets rendered even Europe’s most advanced jet fighters useless. In Libya, the U.S. was also instrumental in air-to-air refueling.”

Hence the EU’s decision to develop air-to-air refueling as “a matter of priority,” as the European Defense Agency’s press release says. It is also working to fix its shortcomings in other areas.

The United States is encouraging Europe to become more militarily independent, as it focuses its attention more on the Pacific.

European militaries have a lot to gain from working together. Combined, they have a military budget second only to the U.S. They have the potential to be a major military power if they work together.

Many EU nations want to go much further toward a common military. “The UK is reluctant to go ahead with this, but everybody else wants to, so we should move forward,” said Finland’s Foreign Minister Erkki Tuomioja earlier in the month (March 9).

As Britain becomes increasingly sidelined, expect EU nations to integrate their militaries much more. Watch for them to continue to overcome their weaknesses—with American encouragement—so they are less reliant on the U.S. This is something America will deeply regret, however. For more on the agenda behind Europe’s military desires, read Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry’s article “The Holy Roman Empire Is Back!”

Read More »

Poland's Vulnerability Amid Missile Diplomacy

JOHN MACDOUGALL/AFP/Getty Images

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov (L), German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle (C) and Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski in Berlin on March 21

Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski visited Berlin on March 21 to meet informally with German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. The visit, while part of a cooperation and discussions framework, underscores Poland's sensitive position at the center of rising tensions between Russia and NATO over missile defense. Warsaw finds its national security very concretely threatened by the missiles system that Russia reactivated in Kaliningrad and is set to step up its search for supplemental and alternative regional security arrangements.

Analysis

The March 21 meeting marked the second annual reunion of the discussion and cooperation group formed by the foreign ministries of Russia, Germany and Poland in May 2011. Russia pushed for this cooperation format as a counterweight to the "Weimar Triangle" arrangement, which is composed of France, Poland and Germany.
Russia is at a critical juncture in its resurgence. Moscow hopes to take advantage of the economic crisis roiling the Continent to bolster its own efforts to re-establish its control in Central and Eastern Europe, Russia's former area of influence. NATO's level of engagement in Central and Eastern Europe is as low as it has been since the end of the Cold War. But Moscow still faces a critical hurdle regarding the continued implementation of the U.S. ballistic missile defense (BMD) system in Central European countries, which it sees as a strategic threat.
The Kremlin has continued to push back against the BMD deployment. Moscow most recently escalated tensions by reactivating the S-400 missile defense system in its Kaliningrad exclave and has threatened to deploy Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad before the end of the year.
Moscow's attempts to gain negotiating leverage with Washington over the BMD present Poland with an untenable strategic threat: the potential to have Russian short-range ballistic missiles placed along its northern border. Vladimir Putin's re-election to Russia's presidency and his assertive foreign policy rhetoric during the electoral campaign will do little to allay Polish concerns. But Warsaw has a limited hand to play.
The U.S. position on BMD has generated a military buildup and more aggressive rhetoric from Russia, leaving Poland with few realistic options to counter the threat to its national security. This general security imbalance is not new to Warsaw -- it has long known that Russia was on the rise again, that NATO was growing increasingly disengaged in Central Europe, and that the European Union has continued to struggle with its own political and economic crisis, which makes it unlikely to ever become a satisfactory guarantor of security.

In response to these security concerns, Poland has sought to form regional strategic and military cooperation groups within larger EU and NATO structures. The creation of the Visegrad Group in July 2011, under the EU Common Security and Defense Policy, was one such effort. Poland has also recently been looking to establish greater security cooperation in the Baltic region, particularly with Lithuania, with which Warsaw recently agreed to coordinate positions on NATO's missile defense plans in Europe.

However, such plans are in their nascent stages and have so far proved to have little effectiveness. Poland's limited success in this arena is partly due to its focus on issues other than the strategic counterbalance of Russia. Warsaw has concentrated most of its diplomatic efforts on the West -- the source of Poland's continued economic prosperity even amid the crisis -- and on seeking a greater role within the changing EU architecture. In late 2011, Sikorski himself said he saw the collapse of the European Union as Poland's primary existential threat and even called for increased German leadership within the union.

Stratfor expects the recent military buildup in Kaliningrad to remind Poland of its dearth of security options regarding Russia. While any concrete reaction by Warsaw is unlikely, countering the Russian threat will certainly move to the forefront of Polish foreign policy. Poland will intensify its efforts to craft regional strategic and military counterweights, seeking further commitments within and outside NATO and EU structures, though this will not likely achieve Poland's security goals concerning Russia in the short term.

---

Read More »

The Tuaregs: From African Nomads to Smugglers and Mercenaries

The Tuaregs, a nomadic tribe in North and West Africa, dominated the caravan trade through the Sahara Desert for thousands of years. Their entire way of life was disrupted, however, by the imposition of borders, natural desertification, urbanization and the rise of maritime trade. In their quest to survive, the Tuaregs have launched several revolts in Mali and Niger, fought as mercenaries in the Libyan civil war and used their expertise to smuggle illicit goods, which brought them into contact with al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM). It is the development of these skills and links to AQIM that have brought the Tuaregs to Western governments' attention.

Analysis

In late August 2011, Ibrahim Ag Bahanga, a Tuareg rebel who led an uprising in Mali in 2007-2009 before fleeing to Libya, re-emerged in northern Mali. He conducted an interview via satellite phone Aug. 26 with Algerian newspaper Al Watan during which he vowed to renew the Tuareg rebellion. Within hours of the interview, Ag Bahanga was killed in a car crash in Mali's Kidal region -- an event that was probably not an accident.
Ag Bahanga was among an estimated 800 Tuaregs who fought as mercenaries in the Libyan civil war and had begun returning home in late 2011 as the conflict drew to a close. The Tuaregs' native countries, particularly Mali and Niger, had endured a number of Tuareg uprisings over the past several decades, so they were rightfully concerned about the arrival of hundreds of trained and equipped fighters. Ag Bahanga was designated "enemy No. 1" by the U.S.-trained Malian counterterrorism unit tasked with combating the Tuareg rebellion.
The returning Tuareg fighters are more than just rebels and mercenaries, however. They have also taken up weapon, drug and hostage smuggling in a region with which they are intimately familiar, and they have been accused of having links to AQIM. Their knowledge of the terrain, history of militancy and smuggling, and links to an al Qaeda franchise group have brought the Tuaregs to the attention of Western governments, which are concerned that the Tuaregs could become a source of manpower for transnational terrorism.

Read More »

The United States in Korea: A Strategy of Inertia

By George Friedman

After U.S. President Barack Obama visited the Korean Demilitarized Zone on March 25 during his trip to South Korea for a nuclear security summit, he made the obligatory presidential remarks warning North Korea against continued provocations. He also praised the strength of U.S.-South Korean relations and commended the 28,500 U.S. troops stationed there. Obama's visit itself is of little importance, but it is an opportunity to ask just what Washington's strategy is in Korea and how the countries around North Korea (China, Russia, South Korea and Japan) view the region. As always, any understanding of current strategy requires a consideration of the history of that strategy.

The Korean War and the U.S. Proto-Strategy

Korea became a key part of U.S. Cold War-era containment strategy almost by accident. Washington, having deployed forces in China during World War II and thus aware of the demographic and geographic problems of operating on the Asian mainland, envisioned a maritime strategy based on the island chains running from the Aleutians to Java. The Americans would use the islands and the 7th Fleet to contain both the Soviets and the Chinese on the mainland.
Korea conceptually lay outside this framework. The peninsula was not regarded by the United States as central to its strategy even after the victory of the communists in the Chinese civil war. After World War II, the Korean Peninsula, which had been occupied by the Japanese since the early 1900s, was divided into two zones. The North came under the control of communists, the South under the control of a pro-American regime. Soviet troops withdrew from the North in 1948 and U.S. troops pulled out of the South the following year, despite some calls to keep them in place to dissuade communist aggression. The actual U.S. policy toward an invasion of the South by the North is still being debated, but a U.S. intervention on the Korean Peninsula clearly violated Washington's core strategic principle of avoiding mainland operations and maintaining a strategic naval blockade.

U.S. strategy changed in 1950, when the North Koreans invaded the South, sparking the Korean War. Pyongyang's motives remain unclear, as do the roles of Moscow and Beijing in the decision. Obviously, Pyongyang wanted to unite the peninsula under communist control, and obviously, it did not carry out its invasion against Chinese and Russian wishes, but it appears all involved estimated the operation was within the capabilities of the North Korean army. Had the North Korean military faced only South Korean forces, they would have been right. They clearly miscalculated the American intent to intervene, though it is not clear that even the Americans understood their intent prior to the intervention. However, once the North Koreans moved south, President Harry Truman decided to intervene. His reasoning had less to do with Korea than with the impact of a communist military success on coalition partners elsewhere. The U.S. global strategy depended on Washington's ability to convince its partners that it would come to their aid if they were invaded. Strategic considerations aside, not intervening would have created a crisis of confidence, or so was the concern. Therefore, the United States intervened.

After serious difficulties, the United States managed to push the North Korean forces back into the North and pursue them almost to the Yalu River, which divides Korea and China. This forced a strategic decision on China. The Chinese were unclear on the American intent but did not underestimate American power. North Korea had represented a buffer between U.S. allies and northeastern China (and a similar buffer for the Soviets to protect their maritime territories). The Chinese intervened in the war, pushing the Americans back from the Yalu and suffering huge casualties in the process. The Americans regrouped, pushed back and a stalemate was achieved roughly along the former border and the current Demilitarized Zone. The truce was negotiated and the United States left forces in Korea, the successors of which President Obama addressed during his visit.

Read More »

Gunman dead as French siege ends

A police siege in the French city of Toulouse has ended with a man suspected of killing seven people now dead, the French interior minister has said.

Police stormed the flat where Mohammed Merah was holed up at 09:30 GMT, after a siege that had lasted 32 hours.
Merah fired at officers and was found dead after jumping from a window.
The self-confessed al-Qaeda militant was suspected of killing four people outside a Jewish school and three soldiers in three separate attacks.
Merah, 23, said he was acting to "avenge Palestinian children" and protest against French military interventions overseas.
President Nicolas Sarkozy, in a televised address, said everything had been done to try to bring Merah to justice but it was decided that no more lives could be put at risk.
He also vowed a new crackdown on those who visited "hate or terrorism" web sites or travelled abroad to be indoctrinated in terrorism.

Interior Minister Claude Gueant said officers had thrown grenades and entered by the door and windows of the flat.After surveying the scene and finding no sign of the suspect, they proceeded to the bathroom, moving slowly as they were wary of booby-traps.
When officers tried to find out if there was anyone in the bathroom, the suspect came out firing several weapons.
Mr Gueant said the suspect was "shooting very violently. The bursts of gunfire were frequent and hard".
Merah then jumped from a window, continuing to fire. He was found dead on the ground.
One police source told Agence France-Presse that Merah had been killed by police as he fled through the window.
Two officers were reported wounded in the final assault.
Mr Gueant said: "A RAID [special police] officer who is used to this kind of thing told me that he had never seen such a violent assault."
Earlier Mr Gueant had said it was unclear whether Merah was still alive, because there had been no contact overnight.
He had said the object had been to take Merah alive.
A number of explosions had been set off overnight to intimidate Merah, officials said.
They said he was armed with a Kalashnikov high-velocity rifle, a mini-Uzi 9mm machine pistol, several handguns and possibly grenades.
Street lights were switched off in the vicinity of the building on Wednesday evening and surrounding areas evacuated.n his TV address, Mr Sarkozy announced an investigation into whether Merah had accomplices and into possible Islamist indoctrination practices in prisons.
He also said: "The French should not give rein to anger - our Muslim compatriots have nothing to do with the crazy actions of a terrorist. We should not embark on any stigmatisation."
Merah claimed to have received al-Qaeda training in Pakistan's Waziristan area, and also said he had been to Afghanistan.
Mr Gueant defended intelligence services for not preventing the attacks, describing Merah as a "lone wolf".
"The domestic intelligence agency tracks a lot of people who are involved in Islamist radicalism. Expressing ideas... is not enough to bring someone before justice," Mr Gueant said.
Christian Etelin, a lawyer who has previously acted for Merah, said his client had violent tendencies.
"There was his religious engagement, an increasing hatred against the values of a democratic society and a desire to impose what he believes is truth," Mr Etelin said.

He also denied earlier reports that Merah had been jailed for explosives offensives in Afghanistan, saying his client was in jail in France for robbery with violence at the time - from December 2007 to September 2009.

Read More »