Wednesday, October 31, 2007

Sniper

Former Spook looks at the sniper threat in Iraq which threatened to surpass IEDs as the most lethal mode of attack, before sharply declining in recent months. But despite that drop, the sniper remains a potent threat in the future.

The lessons of Iraq (and other conflicts) underscore the need to invest in anti-sniper technology and training, even if the number of attacks was over-stated. Future adversaries--think North Korea and China--would present a much more serious sniper threat.

Nothing follows.

Remember Hezbollah

Stratfor believes that while al-Qaeda has declined under US blows, Hezbollah remainds largely intact. If Iran replaces Iraq as the focus of US effort, Hezbollah will inevitably come to the forefront.

Unlike al Qaeda, which has been badly damaged as an organization since 9/11, Hezbollah has never been stronger -- and does pose a strategic threat to the United States. In addition to Hezbollah -- which might be better positioned to conduct attacks in many parts of the world than the Iranian government itself -- Iran's retaliatory plans would include other external surrogates, as well as indigenous Iranian forces such as the Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS) and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which includes its Quds Force and Special Unit of Martyr Seekers.



The political focus may shifting from Iraq to Iran. The Washington Note describes this letter from Chuck Hagel to President Bush to make an unconditional commitment to diplomacy in order to dispel any fears that a new war with Iran is in the offing.

I write to urge you to consider pursuing direct, unconditional and comprehensive talks with the Government of Iran. ... Unless there is a strategic shift, I believe we will find ourselves in a dangerous and increasingly isolated position in the coming months. I do not see how the collective actions that we are now taking will produce the results that we seek. If this continues, our ability to sustain a united international front will weaken as countries grow uncertain over our motives and unwilling to risk open confrontation with Iran, and we are left with fewer and fewer policy options.

The difficulty with Hagel's suggestion is that a unilateral renunciation the possibility of military action may actually reduce the prospect of diplomatic success. The Christian Science Monitor observes that "Iran is the new Iraq", the new foreign policy fault line that divides opinion on how best to handle Islamic radicalism.

God Hates Fred Phelps

The father of a Marine killed in Iraq won a damage suit against funeral protester Fred Phelps. Albert Snyder won on every count of his complaint against members of the Westboro Baptist Church, as well as $2.9 million for compensatory damages and $8 million for punitive damages.

The jury's announcement 24 hours after deliberations first began was met with tears and hugs from the family and supporters of Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder, whose March 2006 funeral was protested by members of the Westboro Baptist Church with signs including "Thank God for dead soldiers."



But some critics warned the judgement against Phelps, while emotionally satisfying, dealt a blow against the Freedom of Speech.

The courtroom fight came down to whether Westboro had a legal right to demonstrate at the March 2006 funeral of Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder or whether the protesters crossed the line because their message impugned the grieving family's reputation and unlawfully invaded the Snyders' privacy.

It is always possible to construct contradictions between the claims of two competing rights. In this case it is between the rights to speech and privacy. Between Phelp's right to express his views and that of a father to grieve in piece. Society often rebalances the competing claims depending on the requirements of the time. Twenty two states enacted laws to prevent such disgusting displays without complete success, setting the stage for the court confrontation. Phelps should have seen it coming.

The Small in History

The Smart Set describes what effect a celebrity diet had on Hitler.

He showed a particular fondness, culinary historians assure us, for oatmeal with linseed oil, cauliflower, cottage cheese, boiled apples, artichoke hearts and asparagus tips in white sauce. Strangely, Hitler was unfazed by the fact that this high-fiber diet was having the opposite effect on his digestion than what he had intended: His private physician, Dr. Theo Morell, recorded in his diary that after Hitler downed a typical vegetable platter, “constipation and colossal flatulence occurred on a scale I have seldom encountered before.”

The dictator had a personal physical who plied him with drugs, too, and eventually turned him into a shambling wreck. In fact Dr. Morell may have accidentally more than anyone else to defeat Nazi Germany.



After the war, U.S. intelligence officers discovered that Morell was pumping Hitler with 28 different drugs, including eye-drops that contained 10 percent cocaine (up to 10 treatment a day), a concoction made from human placenta and “potency pills” made from ground bull’s testicles. But despite the barrage of medicines, Morell’s diaries (which were recovered from Germany and are kept in the National Archives in Washington, D.C.) make clear that the bouts of “agonizing flatulence” remained a regular occurrence.

WTF points out that medicines containing amphetamines and cocaine were available over the counter up until late in the mid-20th century. Toothache drops, throat lozenges, and even pomade. Burnett's Hair Dressing for example, which listed cocaine as an ingredient, was touted to kill dandruff, promote hair growth, and prevent any irritation of the scalp. Mrs. Winslow's Soothing Syrup, which contained morphine, was designed to calm restless infants. And what busy man could dispense with the benzedrine inhaler?

The effect of drug use on history would probably merit a book in itself. It must certainly be a factor. They are used on a scale that beggars the imagination. For example, Michael Yon recently described how the opium trade has rescued the Taliban from the brink of defeat. And the drug lords of Latin America could tell their version of the history of the world. Conventional history tends to focus on the political and rational causes of events. Even today when discussing Iran, many policy analysts minimize the irrational and mystical aspects of Teheran's behavior. The Smart Set story reminds us that people are ultimately behind events; and that world leaders, like modern celebrities are sometimes vulnerable, distrubed or addicted personalities.

Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Political Superbowl

Bala Ambati has a proposal to turn the "boring" Presidential debate into a kind of steel cage death match.

So I propose to make the debates into an NCAA tournament with brackets of a series of 1-on-1 debates. This would allow for real debates and challenges of mettle and grace under pressure. It would give opportunity for Vegas bookies to make money, thereby enhancing the public's interest in the goings-on. We could even get moderators of interest (bring back Bill Clinton, Newt Gingrich, Bob Dole, Al Gore for guest appearances as moderators on themes of their interest). It would transform the boring into a sporting extravaganza!

The finals would resolve to something he calls the "Russert Bowl", which can have all the hoopla of a major sporting playoff. My only question is whether cheerleaders will be allowed. Nothing follows.

Blackwater Again

US Cavalry on Point looks at how the investigation into Blackwater's activities in Iraq is going.

As is usual in this Administration, there is no accountability. No one from State will be quoted “on the record.” No one knows who granted the immunity, or whose idea it was to extend it. Sect. Rice, as usual, had “no comment” on the matter, although it should be noted that Richard Griffith, the head of State’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security, resigned suddenly, and without comment, last week. It is rumored that the immunity came from him, or his office.

Update: ABC News Has Acquired the Terms of Immunity



The security guards were given a limited immunity called "use immunity" in exchange for giving sworn statements about their involvement in the Sept. 16 shooting incident. ...

News of the immunity deal caught State Department officials in Washington off guard. "If anyone gave such immunity it was done so without consulting senior leadership at State," a senior State Department official initially told ABC News.

Pakistan and Iraq

Two reports from Bill Roggio:

Suicide bomber kills seven outside military headquarters in Rawalpindi

As the Pakistani government has negotiated another cease-fire with the Taliban in the settled district of Swat in the Northwest Frontier Province, the terrorists conducted another suicide strike in the heart of President Pervez Musharraf's seat of power. A suicide bomber detonated his vest outside of the Pakistani army headquarters in the military garrison city of Rawalpindi. Seven were killed, including two police officers, and another 14 were reported wounded in the strike. ...

Iraqi police kill al Qaeda commander of western Iraq

Iraqi police in Anbar province scored a victory against al Qaeda in Iraq's leadership in Anbar province on Monday. Iraqi police killed Abu Tiba al Karbuli and two aides and captured another during an engagement north of Ramadi.

Are the relative roles of Iraq and Afghanistan/Pakistan starting to shift?



Maybe (and this pure speculation on my part) the psychological choice of destination for radical Islamists is no longer Iraq -- but Afghanistan/Pakistan. This story is told in the New York Times.

Afghan police officers working a highway checkpoint near here noticed something odd recently about a passenger in a red pickup truck. Though covered head to toe in a burqa, the traditional veil worn by Afghan women, she was unusually tall. When the police asked her questions, she refused to answer.

When the veil was eventually removed, the police found not a woman at all, but Andre Vladimirovich Bataloff, a 27-year-old man from Siberia with a flowing red beard, pasty skin and piercing blue eyes. Inside the truck was 1,000 pounds of explosives.

Afghan and American officials say the Siberian intended to be a suicide bomber, one of several hundred foreign militants who have gravitated to the region to fight alongside the Taliban this year, the largest influx since 2001.

Just as in Iraq, the "foreign fighters" are "are more violent, uncontrollable and extreme than even their locally bred allies", says the NYT. The British Empire was once characterized as "a vast system of outdoor relief for the [British] upper classes" (the words "outdoor relief" in this case meant welfare without the necessity of entering a workhouse). Similarly the Jihad may now fulfill the same function: an outlet where dissatisfied young men can seek meaning in their lives and find adventure into the bargain. With "foreign fighters" being hunted down by the locals in Iraq, they need someplace else to go. The NYT article continues:

Mr. Bataloff, the Russian arrested in a burqa, insists he is a religious student who traveled to Pakistan last year to learn more about his new faith. In an hourlong interview in an Afghan jail in Kabul, he said his interest in Islam blossomed three years ago when he was living in Siberia.

“First, I heard from TV, radio and newspapers about Islam,” he said in Russian. “I found Islam had a lot of good things, especially that Islam respects all prophets, including Jesus.”

From Siberia to Afghanistan and from Jesus to a truck with a thousand pounds of explosive is a long way to go.

The "New Nostradamus"

Can Mathematics predict the future?

If you listen to Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, and a lot of people don't, he'll claim that mathematics can tell you the future. In fact, the professor says that a computer model he built and has perfected over the last 25 years can predict the outcome of virtually any international conflict, provided the basic input is accurate. What's more, his predictions are alarmingly specific. His fans include at least one current presidential hopeful, a gaggle of Fortune 500 companies, the CIA, and the Department of Defense. Naturally, there is also no shortage of people less fond of his work. "Some people think Bruce is the most brilliant foreign policy analyst there is," says one colleague. "Others think he's a quack."


Anybody remember Harry Seldon? Nothing follows.

Two lists

Notes from all over:

  1. The latest primary polls from Real Clear Politics. What will the final face off be? Ron Paul isn't listed. But will he run?;
  2. Right Wing News selects the 10 Greatest Horror Villains of all time. Which one do you hope doesn't exist?
Nothing follows.

Monday, October 29, 2007

Iraqi Troops Free Kinapped Tribal Leaders

Bill Roggio writes:

Just 24 hours after the capture of 11 Sunni and Shia tribal leaders in northern Baghdad, the Iraqi Army has freed eight of the sheikhs. Meanwhile, Multinational forces Iraq has identified the Mahdi Army commander responsible for the kidnappings, and has begun to name other Mahdi Army leaders as being involved in criminal and insurgent activity.

Iraqi soldiers conducted the raid in as of yet unidentified region near Baghdad, likely with the aid of US Special Forces, and killed four of the kidnappers. "We have rescued eight of the hostages and are working to free the others. We killed four of the kidnappers," Defense Ministry spokesman Mohammed al Askari said.

And this time the bad guys were JAM.



Earlier today, Multinational Forces Iraq "identified Arkan Hasnawi, a former brigade commander in Jaish Al Mahdi [Mahdi Army], as responsible for the kidnapping of Shia and Sunni tribal leaders from Diyala Province yesterday." ... The identification of Hasnawi as a former Mahdi Army commander and leader in the Special Groups is new pattern of releasing the names of Shia terror leaders.

Releasing the name of someone who kidnapped a tribal leader in a society like Iraq may have the same effect as putting up a Wanted Poster in the post office. The circumstances suggest that a struggle is now underway for the allegiance of the Shi'a, who must now decide whether to back the Iraqi government or acknowledge the suzerainty of the militias. Maybe the kidnapping of the tribal leaders was intended to convey the message that the Government can't protect you from the JAM. If so, the swift retribution and the public naming of the suspects sends the message that one's life expectancy in the militias is strictly limited. Which argument proves more convincing will become evident in the next days.

No Further

The Guardian inveighs against making money off the universe. "The new space race isn't focused on science or discovery, but is about exploiting lunar minerals"

I first heard about helium-3 (He-3) from the geologist Harrison "Jack" Schmitt, the only scientist among the 12 Americans who walked on the moon between 1969 and 1972, and a tireless campaigner for a US return. He understood a 21st-century programme would never happen without an economic rationale, and he hoped that He-3, which is deposited on the surface by the solar wind, might provide one. If the necessary fusion technology could be made to work, he said, this compound would be a source of clean energy for Earth.

 



But if clean energy is to come from profit-making activity then the price is too high, according to author Andrew Smith.

At present, nations are forbidden under international treaty from making territorial claims to the moon, but the same has hitherto been true of Antarctica, of which the UK government is trying to claim a chunk. Earth's sister has played a role in teaching us to value our environment: how extraordinary to think that the next giant leap for the environmental movement might be a campaign to stop state-sponsored mining companies chomping her up in glorious privacy, a quarter of a million miles from our ravaged home.

Most human conflict and indeed most human misery comes from the scarcity of economic resources. It was the lure of the Western Sea and the land in between that drove the visionaries of Manifest Destiny across the continent to the detriment of the Indians. It was the lure of gold which propelled the Conquistadores across the Atlantic. It was the dream of resources that launched Imperial Japan on its conquest of China and Asia. It was Lebenstraum which beckoned Hitler across the European plains.

Today, for the first time in human history, man can look forward to spreading into truly virgin territory. To go where no man has ever gone before; and consequently where no man ever need be displaced from his abode. The words "we come in peace for all mankind" may have fallen unheard upon the lunar rocks. But the words still have meaning to a mankind trapped not only upon Earth but within his history. If  Marxism was a project to bring History to an end in the near future, Environmentalism is an attempt to freeze History in the distant past. Not for the benefit of mankind, nor even when you come to think of it, for Nature -- unless man is excluded from the account -- but for the sake of having the power to end history on their terms.

They will not succeed and man will go on. No less than the trees and stars we have a right to be here.

The Devil's Poppy

Michael Yon reports that while things are improving in Iraq, Afghanistan has gone from a "near victory" to an uncertain standoff between NATO forces and an opium-fueled al-Qaeda/Taliban. The Afghan experience suggests that certain things do not lead, ipso facto, to victory. These include:

  • multinational involvement and political legitimacy. Unlike the reviled "War in Iraq", the campaign in Afghanistan has wide political support among European allies
  • the lack of adverse media coverage. Afghanistan has gotten a relatively soft ride from journalists
  • international development assistance. The presence of NGOs and development agencies has not directly led to stabilization

And then it's interesting to focus on the things which may of themselves, lend themselves to defeat.



The most important of those factors may include the lack of an easily exploitable mineral resource, like oil. The great thing about the presence of oil in Iraq is that guarantees a relatively high standard of living to the population the moment stability is restored. On the other hand, peace in resource-poor Afghanistan doesn't automatically translate to prosperity. It is in fact entirely possible that lawlessness and violence offer greater prospects for economic gain that ordinary labor. While conventional economic development may take decades, banditry and the drug trade promise direct and immediate money.

Is there any greater prospect of eliminating the al Qaeda/Taliban than destroying the drug fueled insurgencies of Latin America?

But the opium poppy probably poses considerable political dangers to al-Qaeda as well. If experience with terrorist tactics has tarnished the image of the Jihad in the Middle East, a prolonged exposure to the drug trade will sooner or later corrupt al-Qaeda itself. A study of the life-cycle of insurgencies and revolutionary movements shows that when they cannot achieve power or attain their political objectives, they often degenerate into banditry. Men who have known no other life than an armed existence in the underground find it hard to transition to peace. Exactions eventually become an end in themselves and the young Jihadis age the temptation to buy comfort eventually becomes irresistible. 

 

Whose Side Are They On?

How much did the Saudis know? The Associated Press said that "King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia accused Britain on Monday of failing to act on information the Saudis provided that might have averted London's deadly July 7, 2005, suicide bombings."

The king did not specify what information Saudi Arabia provided. However, the BBC reported Abdullah's remark was linked to a long-held Saudi leadership claim that it gave Britain information that might have averted the 2005 attack. Months before the July 7, 2005, attack in which four suicide bombers killed 52 people and wounded hundreds on London's transit network, Saudi Arabia told the British and U.S. governments that it had arrested a young Saudi man who confessed to raising money for a terrorist attack in crowded areas of the British capital, officials have told the Associated Press.



But the information apparently wasn't specific enough to include the names of the actual perpetrators.

The Saudis obtained information that the attack would involve explosives and a Syrian contact for financing, and that at least some of the four attackers would be British citizens, according to officials in several countries with direct access to the information. They spoke on condition of anonymity because the information was classified. The officials said at the time that the investigation had not connected any players from the July 2005 attacks to the original Saudi warning and that the information provided in December 2004 did not provide attackers' names, a date, specific location or time of attack.

The Telegraph thinks the Saudi accusations are an attempt to pre-empt British criticism of the Kingdom. A BBC article says the Saudi King is facing criticism for its human rights record.

Kate Allen, director of Amnesty International UK, urged Prime Minister Gordon Brown to tell the Saudis that their human rights record was "totally unacceptable". She added: "Mr Brown's message should be - reforms need to come, and they need to come quickly."

The leader of one of the British opposition parties, Liberal Democrat leader Vince Cable, is boycotting the state visit to Britain of Saudi King Abdullah, in part to protest a government decision to squelch an investigation charges of corruption in connection with an extremely large arms deal with Saudi Arabia. The Al Yamamah deal "is the name of a series of a record arms sales by the United Kingdom to Saudi Arabia, which have been paid for by the delivery of up to 600,000 barrels of oil per day to the UK government. The prime contractor has been BAE Systems and its predecessor British Aerospace. ... It is Britain's largest ever export agreement, and employs some 5,000 people in Saudi Arabia." Conservative shadow defence secretary Liam Fox,  was quoted as saying that Cable's move would be seen as "juvenile gesture politics" and risked insulting one of Britain's main allies in the Gulf.

The question of "how much did the Saudis know" about the London bombings is really a variant of a larger question which is "on whose side are the Saudis on?" That in turn is part of an even larger political debate which asks whether the West is better off supporting the current government in Riyadh or insisting on reforms and risking bringing another regime even more hostile to the West.

The Invulnerable Networked Insurgency (Part 1)

Armed Liberal at Winds of Change takes on what he describes as the myth of the invincible "networked insurgency". The futility of fighting al-Qaeda  has often been compared to fighting the mythical Hydra and the capture or death of each al-Qaeda "high value target" in Iraq was discounted as being as futile as cutting off the head of the legendary Lernaean serpent since each severed head was immediately replaced by two more. And when the words "network" and "insurgency" are juxtaposed, the public automatically associates the vastness and power of the Internet, the world's best known public network, with the traditional potency of insurgencies to create the nightmare image of an invulnerable al-Qaeda, at once omnipresent and invincible. Armed Liberal writes:
the notion that we can't defeat a networked guerilla force (see John Robb) ... has pretty well taken hold ... there are many heads, and so you can't decapitate such a network, the argument goes. And since every violent act against a member of the network damages the network, and simultaneously helps it heal (by, for example, recruiting others to join the network), the issue is the ratio between damage/healing, and the attacker risks facing an impossible task, since the more damage they do the network, the stronger it may get.
(This has been reprinted from an article I wrote at Pajamas Media)

And those who are  not persuaded by allusions to Greek mythology must surely be silenced by an appeal to mathematics. Network theory, so the public was sometimes told, demonstrates the near-impossibility of disrupting a network like the Internet and hence, al-Qaeda. And as practical proof of this assertion, examples like this, from a.popular primer on networks are cited to put the proposition beyond refutation.
Motivated by the DARPA proposal, in January 2000 we performed a series of computer experiments to test the Internet's resilience to router failures. Starting from the best available Internet map, we removed randomly selected nodes from the network. Expecting a critical point, we gradually increased the number of removed nodes, waiting for the moment when the Internet would fall to pieces. To our great astonishment the network refused to break apart. We could remove as many as 80 percent of all nodes, and the remaining 20 percent still hung together, forming a tightly interlinked cluster. This finding agreed with the increasing realization that the Internet, unlike many other human, made systems, displays a high degree of robustness against router failures. Indeed, a University of Michigan-Ann Arbor study had found that at any moment hundreds of Internet routers malfunction. Despite these frequent and unavoidable breakdowns, users rarely notice significant disruptions of Internet services.
What further proof could one require? What further evidence of the futility of trying to fight al-Qaeda? And yet Armed Liberal wondered what could possibly account for the recent defeats of al-Qaeda in Iraq? How could the AP report that "the civilian death toll in Iraq fell to its lowest level in recent memory"? Could it really be true, as the McClatchy Newspapers claimed, that deaths from terrorism had fallen so low that gravediggers in Iraq were openly complaining of unemployment? How could the apparent defeats suffered by al-Qaeda be reconciled with the confident assurance that it was invincible, however many heads were lopped off; what refutation could be found to the argument that one could remove "randomly selected nodes from the network" ... "as many as 80 percent of all nodes" and still have "the remaining 20 percent" hanging together? The answer to the conundrum is found in a close reading of experiment. What it says is that networks like the Internet are highly resistant to the removal of "randomly selected nodes". It says nothing about how sensitive they are to attacks made non-randomly on  highly connected nodes. Winds of Change notes that the same primer on networks describes a totally different result when an experimental attack is made on highly connected nodes on the Internet. This time the network doesn't shrug it off; it degrades rapidly.
Mimicking the actions of a cracker ... we removed the largest hub, followed by the next largest, and so on. The consequences of our attack were evident. The removal of the first hub did not break the system, because the rest of the hubs were still able to hold the network together. After the removal of several hubs, however, the effect of the disruptions was clear. Large chunks of nodes were falling off the network, becoming disconnected from the main cluster. As we pushed further, removing even more hubs, we witnessed the network's spectacular collapse. The critical point, conspicuously absent under failures, suddenly reemerged when the net¬ work was attacked. The removal of a few hubs broke the Internet into tiny, hopelessly isolated pieces.
But the careful reader would have noticed that neither the "proof" of a network's vulnerability to the removal of key nodes nor the "proof" of invincibility against  random attack necessarily applies to al-Qaeda. Winds of Change could be right in saying that "it's possible to degrade and the destroy the effectiveness of networked insurgencies" -- that attacking high value targets can actually degrade al-Qaeda; but the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the simple analogy to the Internet. In order to show the analysis works, it is necessary to show that the analysis applies. We must ask ourselves in what way the Internet might resemble al-Qaeda -- and why a mode of attack applied to the one might apply to the other. If we could convince ourselves of that, then the analogies presented by Armed Liberal at Winds of Change would be more persuasive. The place to begin is with the structure of al-Qaeda itself. Al-Qaeda's cellular structure is a classic example of what is called a Small World Network. .That's a fancy term to describe an organization where most members know only their immediate neighbors (or cell members) but can reach any other cluster of members by sending messages over a number of "hops" through members who are super-connected -- that is members of more than one cell. The link-men make it possible for any given member to reach another through a very small number of "hops", typically less than six. That's why it's called a Small World Network.. We call these super-connected members "hubs". The diagram below represents this situation. It's clear from the diagram that random members can communicate with the wider organization only through members who belong to two or more cells. With them they can communicate efficiently. Without the link-men they are cut off.  
smallworld.jpg
It is the existence of these link-men (or "nodes") with a high-degree of connectivity that allows a network to expand indefinitely. Without these super-connected nodes communication becomes impractical for a network of a large size. The reason the Internet is scale-free is because it contains a hierarchy of hubs through which a message can find its way. And the speed with which it can find the hub is invariant with respect to size. Another example of the same type is the air-travel network. It's possible to fly to any part of the globe with relatively few connections precisely because of the existence of hubs. Without hubs communications and air-travel become very tedious. Both the Internet and the air-travel system, gigantic though they are, exhibit the properties of a Small World Network because they have nodes which have a high degree of connectivity. Although it is dissimilar in almost everything from the Internet and the air-travel system, al-Qaeda network architecture resembles them in that it shares this crucial property. It might theoretically be possible for al-Qaeda to redesign itself through a supreme effort of will into a random network in which no node is better connected than any other but the cost would be severe. Osama Bin Laden could communicate with his underlings only through a large number of steps in process similar to the game of Telephone or Chinese Whispers and receive a reply only in the same way. In a network with the Small World property the removal of random nodes will hardly affect its operation. For example, there are a vast number of nodes on the Internet and thousands of airports throughout the world and striking one chosen by lottery will probably only damage something trivial. The odds a blow will land on a vital spot purely by chance are remote. An attacker without a detailed knowledge of the system is unlikely to stumble on a critical node purely by accident. Random attacks would probably be futile. But if that attacker understood precisely how the system worked the effect would be very different. Those directed attacks would be devastating. It would be as if an attack were mounted on the Internet Domain Name Servers or O'Hare Airport were shut down. The same applies to attacks on al-Qaeda's hubs. It is the similarity between the structures of the Internet and al-Qaeda that make Armed Liberal's arguments so persuasive. That analysis shows what types of attacks are likely to be effective and which are probably going to be ineffectual.  It suggests that Al-Qaeda will be highly resistant to random damage. Dropping a JDAM on the average Iraqi, Afghan, Saudi or Pakistani walking down the street is unlikely to produce no operational effect on al-Qaeda whatsoever. But dropping JDAMs on a high value target with key contacts and knowledge can be very disruptive. This explains why  intelligence and working in partnership with allied Muslims is so important in fighting a networked insurgency. It explains why General Petraeus has so been effective. By working with Muslims, by "getting into the nodes" is it possible to identify the critical hubs. You can see the network from the inside. Then by taking down the critical hubs is it possible to rapidly degrade al-Qaeda. And by degrading al-Qaeda the effectiveness of its terror operations to intimidate a population into submission correspondingly declines. That's why the partnerships with grassroots communities that the Coalition has formed in Iraq have been so effective. The Iraqis, in partnership with the Coalition have been identifying the hubs. In return the US has used its matchless kinetic warfare assets to take down the hubs. Taken together the partnership between political work and intelligence gathering on the one hand, and targeted attacks on the other hand, have proved very devastating against al-Qaeda. And that's why there's a slump in the graveyard business in Iraq.

Sunday, October 28, 2007

The British in Basra

How exactly did the British strategy differ from the American? And is there a danger that the US strategy in the north will come to the same end as the British? The Daily Telegraph reports:

It is a spectacular U-turn. Until September, when British troops pulled out of the city in what Gordon Brown described as a "pre-planned and organised" move, the fighting was as intense as any since the start of the war in 2003. This year, 44 British soldiers have died as a result of Britain's operations in Iraq. Yet their commanders are now saying they got it wrong.

Rather than fight on, they have struck a deal – or accommodation, as they describe it – with the Shia militias that dominate the city, promising to stay out in return for assurances that they will not be attacked. Since withdrawing, the British have not set foot in the city and even have to ask for permission if they want to skirt the edges to get to the Iranian border on the other side. ...

The British appear to base their new strategy on an almost total faith in one man, Gen Mohan al-Furayji, who came down from Baghdad to take over responsibility for security, promising to sort out the city. The general, a Shia in his early fifties who spent time in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad after falling out with Saddam Hussein in the 1990s, is answerable only to Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi prime minister.

The British are so convinced that he is the answer to Basra's problems that they are making plans to deal with him, instead of the elected provincial governor, Mohammed al-Waily, who one official dismissed as "a problem".




It is a sad ending to a campaign which had been held up as a shining contrast to the US campaign in Iraq, made more invidious with the comparative success the Surge is having even in Shi'ite areas. Recently US Army Colonel Michael Garrett described a process the reverse of Basra in the area south of Baghdad where civilian reconstruction teams were being deployed -- not withdrawn -- into the provinces with increasing success.

Most importantly, successes were being scored not only against al-Qaeda, but against Shi'ite militias. Garrett pointed out that the Shi'ites were starting to provide crucial intelligence which enabled them to neutralize high-value targets.

The Shi'a militia, the JAM special groups remain a problem for us. But interestingly enough, we are seeing the same type of movement that we saw early on in the Sunni communities towards al Qaeda in our Shi'a communities towards JAM and especially the JAM special group members. And so today, with our concerned citizens, with the intelligence that we receive on a daily basis, we are targeting and we are detaining key members of the JAM special group network.

The Surge from the very start was a political and military offensive. Both elements had to be present in order for each to be effective. Without a political process a military effort would be a nothing but coercion. But without a military effort providing security no political solution solution could possibly take root. While it is often said that "there is no purely military solution to the problems in Iraq" it is less frequently realized that there can be no purely political solution either.

Since the final chapter in Iraqi story has not been written it is premature to conclude which strategic approach -- the British or the American -- will ultimately prove the more successful. But the outcomes of military campaigns are often less dependent on initial strategies than the ability to adapt. But crucially, many of the American shortcomings were "software defects" -- deficiencies in doctrine, lack of relevant experience, a lack of institutional memory in "colonial police" type operations -- which the hard experience of several combat tours eventually fixed. On the other hand the British weaknesses where much harder and more expensive to remedy. When the JAM and other Shi'ite militias responded to British political initiatives with sheer violence and mayhem, the British, lacking the means to protect their Iraqi partners, found their strategy collapsing about their ears. Their interpreters were driven into hiding; the inadequately protected pro-British leaders were liquidated or tortured and British operation was too small to recruit forces from outside the power of militia intimidation.

Waterboarding is Torture… Period

Waterboarding is a torture technique. Period. There is no way to gloss over it or sugarcoat it. It has no justification outside of its limited role as a training demonstrator. Our service members have to learn that the will to survive requires them accept and understand that they may be subjected to torture, but that America is better than its enemies and it is one's duty to trust in your nation and God, endure the hardships and return home with honor.

Read the rest at Small Wars Journal.

Nothing follows.

Friday, October 26, 2007

Give Us This Day

With Ramadi now quiet, the Marines have declared war on garbage. That's the LA Times reporting.

"Good. That is good," the lanky Marine said in a quiet, almost reverential tone as he watched workers load filth into the back of an orange dump truck. "It makes me happy, just to see them working."

I think it would be dangerous to assume that success will always continue uninterrupted. Thomas a Kempis, in his Imitation of Christ says "the devil ... never sleeps but goes about seeking whom he may devour." And though they probably haven't read a Kempis, you can be sure al-Qaeda is working on a plan.



BGen David D. Phillips, speaking at a blogger telephone conference I attended, described the joy he experienced recently watching a Unity parade in Ramadi with Boy Scouts, Girls Scouts carrying the Iraqi flag, with the municipal fire department marching behind and a tootling brass band in the van. He thought he'd never see such a sight in Ramadi, of all places. And whether or not it lasts, for a space at least, valor has bought peace.


It is not our part to master all the tides of the world,
but to do what is in us for the succor of those years wherein we are set,
uprooting the evil in the fields we know,
so that those who live after may have clean earth to till.
What weather they shall have is not ours to rule.

All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us.

The Pyramids of Egypt and the Wildfires of California

Some have attributed the recent fires in Southern California to terrorism, but I've kinda waited for firm evidence to be forthcoming before drawing any conclusions. Here's Randi Rhodes putting a few things together about the causes of the fires through some kind of mental operation, but I'm not sure it's addition. She suspects it is terrorism, but you'll never guess who the terrorists might be.



Rhodes said (audio at source):

I started just doing Google searches to try and figure out. You know, arson, arson, it was like crazy trying to figure out why is that being downplayed? Why is that, you know, just a small part of the story? And you know, every time I look for it what comes up, believe it or not, is that Blackwater wants to move to San Diego and build this giant complex in San Diego right where most of the evacuations are taking place and you know. You just know wherever there is fire, this administration will be out there doing what it does best and that is fanning the flames, you know. It just spooks me, I can’t explain to you how creepy this whole thing is that you know, you’ve got these fires. Some of them are thought to be the work of arsonists and in the same breath you’ve got a community that’s on fire that just recently protested Blackwater West. Just recently said no to Blackwater and apparently you don’t do that. I mean, I don’t even know what to think. You know, nobody is saying Blackwater set the fires, that is nobody that doesn’t want their house burned down. Nobody is saying that, but it is all so bizarre that this is America and you have to sort of sit there and wonder … arson, same place Blackwater West wants to be, people protesting. And then you find out that some of the guys that used to work for Blackwater are now in Schwarzenegger’s administration. It’s all so creepy.

It's only fair to point out that Randi Rhodes isn't the only one who thinks like this. Pyramidologists, for example, have long known that if you take the square root of the height of the Great Pyramid and raise it a certain power, it will be exactly the distance between two important stars in a certain Constellation 4,000 years ago. Or some such. Such startling coincidences can only be explained by concluding that the Pyramids were built by aliens from another Galaxy. By putting data through a particular function rule and discovering the result to be close other information put through a another function rule, we can discover all kinds of strange connections in the universe.

The Truth is Out There.

The Media Circus

You've got to sympathize with the father of this deceased Marine. "The father of a Marine killed in Iraq took the stand in his invasion of privacy suit against a fundamentalist church that pickets soldiers' funerals, saying protesters carrying signs at his son's burial made him sick to his stomach."

"They turned this funeral into a media circus and they wanted to hurt my family," Snyder testified. "They wanted their message heard and they didn't care who they stepped over. My son should have been buried with dignity, not with a bunch of clowns outside."

Yep, Fred Phelps strikes again.



Snyder is suing the Westboro Baptist church, whose members have picketed the funerals of military personnel killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, claiming the deaths are punishment for the country's tolerance of homosexuality. ... Asked Wednesday about a sign that read "Thank God for dead soldiers," Snyder said he thinks about it daily.

"I see that sign when I lay in bed," Snyder said.

In a real media circus, facts and fancy fuse until they are all one. Peggy Noonan pokes fun at the Cirque de Soleil version of the clown show. It's more sophisticated entertainment, but entertainment all the same. Writing in the Opinion Journal, she answers the question of why Scott Beauchamp's reports from Iraq seemed so suspicious when she read them by excerpting his writing.

"I love chicks that have been intimate with IED's," he announced to his fellow soldiers sitting in the chow tent in Camp Falcon in Baghdad. "It really turns me on--melted skin, missing limbs, plastic noses." The soldiers laughed so hard they almost fell from their chairs. They enjoy running over dogs in Bradley Fighting Vehicles, luring them in and then crushing their bones as they whelp. When a soldier comes upon a mass grave, he picks up a human skull, places it merrily on his head, and marches around.

Savvy cowboys in the old-time movies would indicate they suspected a trap when they noticed the eerie quiet. "It's quiet. Yeah, too quiet." In the same vein what made Noonan suspicious was that Beauchamp's scenes looked good enough to be in the movies. In fact, they looked like they came from the movies. As she explains:

I thought: That's not Iraq, that's a Vietnam War movie. That's not life as it's being lived on the ground right now, that's life as an editor absorbed it through media. That's the dark world of Kubrick and Coppola and Oliver Stone, of the great Vietnam movies of the '70s and '80s.

If that's what you absorbed during the past 20 or 30 years, it just might make sense to you, it would actually seem believable, if a fellow in Iraq wrote for you about taunting scarred women, shooting dogs, and wearing skulls as helmets. This is the offhand brutality of war. You know. You saw it in a movie.

So why couldn't the editors spot the obvious? How did they miss important clues that seem to sit right in front of them? A filter. When a filter screens out data the signal never makes it to the processor.

Real information is thrown away when it is regarded as noise. Aviation Week and Space Technology tells the story of how even radar can be fooled. USAF analysts gaming various situations found scenarios where a Russian Su-30 fighter could become invisible to an F-15's pulse doppler radar.

The scenario in which the Su-30 "always" beats the F-15 involves the Sukhoi taking a shot with a BVR missile (like the AA-12 Adder) and then "turning into the clutter notch of the F-15's radar," the Air Force official said. Getting into the clutter notch where the Doppler radar is ineffective involves making a descending, right-angle turn to drop below the approaching F-15 while reducing the Su-30's relative forward speed close to zero If the maneuver is flown correctly, the Su-30 is invisible to the F-15's Doppler radar--which depends on movement of its targets--until the U.S. fighter gets to within range of the AA-11 Archer infrared missile.

The reason the Doppler radar could not see the 33 ton supersonic Russian fighter was simply because it was moving at the same course and speed as the F-15. Similarly, when lies fly in formation with our prejudices, we never see them.

The New Republic editors missed the clues because they saw what they wanted to see. In their own special world the cinematic was not anomalous. Reality was anomalous and therefore they refused to believe it. It's hard -- like Fred Phelps -- to live in your own special three ring circus. Above all we see with our minds. Human eyes just provide some of the input. And there are none so blind as they who will not see.

Thursday, October 25, 2007

"What Happens in Vegas, Stays in Vegas"

NRO's Corner has an interesting story.

Yesterday, the University of Delaware asked Asaf Romirowsky to step down from an academic panel at the University of Delaware because another panelist, University of Delaware political scientist Muqtedar Khan, didn't want to share the podium with anyone who served in the Israeli Defense Forces. Romirowsky, who holds joint American/Israeli citizenship and lives in Philadelphia, had been invited to join Khan, his colleague in political science, Stuart Kaufman, a staff member of the National Security Council during the Clinton administration, and a graduate student to discuss anti-Americanism in the Middle East.



Khan is a a Nonresident Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution, and a Pentagon consultant. According to an e-mail he sent to the University, he gave a workshop at the Pentagon yesterday afternoon.

Laura, I have to speak at the Pentagon tomorrow. My workshop is from 12-4. I hope to catch the 5 pm Acela from DC and will be back in town by 7 pm. I will come directly, but may be late. I am also not sure how I feel about being on the same panel with an Israeli soldier who was stationed in West Bank. Some people see IDF as an occupying force in the West Bank. I am not sure that I will be comfortable occupying the same space with him. It is not fair to spring this surprise on me at the last moment.

One of the stock lines that used to be heard in old movies (before the idea of melting pot becoming politically incorrect) was about attitudes that were left behind in the "old country". There are large numbers of Australians of Greek and Turkish origin, but fortunately nearly all of them have left their enmities back in the "old country". You could refuse to share the stage with someone because he had bad breath, owed you money or was a blackguard; but it would be bad form to shun a fellow Australian simply because he was born a Turk or a Greek.

Muqtedar Khan is not even a Palestinian. He is listed as hailing from Hyderabad, India. But at any rate, that's the Old Country. In America -- in the new country -- people are supposed to speak to one another unless they're recently divorced, owe each other money or have some specific reason for avoidance. It's not the done thing to refuse to speak to someone because of his national origin. Because military service is mandatory in Israel, a refusal to speak to someone who has served in the IDF is pretty close to a refusal to speak to any male from Israel.

On this site I've been continuously opposed the collective punishment of groups; opposed the idea of deporting Muslims or Arabs; or otherwise punishing people simply for belonging to an ethnic or national group without regard to their invididual culpability. Are Israelis to be treated differently? If Muqtedar Khan believes he can righteously refuse to sit down with an American of Israeli origin in America, what will he say if he is refused service in a restaurant simply because he is from Hyderabad, India? I should think he would be well within his rights to be angry. Or am I missing something?

One day in Afghanistan.

The Taliban found a SEAL team engaged in surveillance. Here's the rest of the story.



"What Can Men Do Against Such Reckless Hate?"

The joint FBI-Homeland Security bulletin, obtained by CBS News today, bluntly warns that terrorists are still working to use "modified footwear as a concealment method for explosive devices," CBS News correspondent Bob Orr reports.



experts worry that a team of terrorists could beat security by carrying unassembled parts of a bomb past a checkpoint. "Where one person will carry component A, the next person will carry component B, and they will meet together past the safety point, past the checkpoint and reassemble," explained Mike White, the director of training for Michael Stapleton Associates and a former head of the NYPD bomb squad.

If one those shoebombs go off, the average victim will probably a manager or a professional; a little older than most. Women will be in the slight majority. One third will have children under 18. In short the victim will probably not be a military person. He or she will probably be a poor working stiff trying to pay off a mortgage and the last thoughts before the crisis comes will probably include what gifts to bring home to the kids.

Them's The Guys

Benazir Bhutto named the men she feared would take her life in a letter to Musharraf. The Times of India reports:

Former Pakistan Premier Benazir Bhutto has named four well-known persons, including Punjab Chief Minister Chaudhry Parvez Elahi and former ISI chief Hamid Gul, as those who pose a threat to her life in a letter to President Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan media reported on Wednesday.

In the letter written on October 16, two days before she returned to Pakistan from eight years in self-exile, Bhutto said she feared there was a threat to her life from Elahi, Gul, Hassan Waseem Afzal, the former Deputy Chairman of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), and Intelligence Bureau chief Brig (Retd) Ijaz Shah, Geo TV reported.



Hamid Gul is an interesting sort of gent. Here's his thumbnail profile in Wikipedia. He was Bhutto's head of intelligence and reputedly had close ties to the CIA. He was part of the solution before he became part of the problem. Or do I have it the other way around?

General Hamid Gul was director general of Pakistan's ISI (Inter Services Intelligence) from 1987-89, mainly in the time when Benazir Bhutto was Prime Minister of Pakistan. A practising Muslim, he was instrumental in the anti-Soviet support of the mujahideen in the Afghanistan war of 1979–89 [1], a pivotal time during the cold war, and in establishing the Taliban. He also was a vehement supporter of the Kashmir insurgency against India.

Gul worked hand in glove with the American CIA during the Soviet Occupation and considered them to be close allies following the tradition of other ISI directors, when Pakistan first allied with the United States. He has since moderated his views on the United States, declaring in 2003, "God will destroy America," for their unjust policies.

Run Silent, Run Deep

Testing, testing, one, two, three. The Government Executive reports a dramatic increase in the incidence of Chinese cyberattacks on Western targets in September, 2007.

Media reports detailed what appeared to be Chinese attacks against Pentagon networks and government computer systems in Germany, France and the United Kingdom -- putting Defense Department officials on the offensive.

It began in early September when Financial Times reported attacks against Pentagon computer systems, and quoted unnamed Defense Department officials who pinned the blame on China's People's Liberation Army. In France, Germany, the U.K. and New Zealand, officials reported attacks and evidence of spyware traceable to China on government computer systems. In the U.K., Times Online reported that "China leads the list of countries hacking into government computers that contain Britain's military and foreign policy secrets."

Of course, it's all America's fault. The Chinese explained:



China has accused the United States and other Western powers of conducting a campaign of computer infiltration and subversion through the Internet, according to Vice Minister of Information Industry Lou Qinjian. In an article published by Reuters, Lou said Internet technology products exported to China by the United States and other countries contain "back doors" used for technological espionage.

Occasions like this are always a good time to create and seize control of a defense mission.

In June, Lt. Gen. Robert Elder, head of the Air Force's cyber command, told the Defense Technology Forum in Washington that he intends to "redefine air power" and extend the service's "global reach and power into cyberspace." That includes both defensive and offensive operations, Elder added.

A report released in April by the Defense Science Board stated: "Adversaries need to be assured that their attacks against U.S. information systems will be detected, that U.S. functionality will be restored . . . and an adversary needs to know that the U.S. possesses powerful hard- and soft-kill [cyber warfare] means for attacking adversary information and command and support systems at all levels."

Yet the threat is doubtless real. Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they really aren't out to get you.

The Pooch of War

A lot of media controversy has surrounded the use of private military companies like Blackwater to provide VIP protection, facility defense and other ancilliary security services in Iraq. Questions have been asked. Is the use of private military companies good public policy? Isn't it immoral at some level? Tigerhawk, quoting Stratfor, notices that Iran may have no qualms about using their version of private military contractors.

Iran has commissioned Imad Mughniyye, Hezbollah official for foreign operations, to organize cells of Shiite operatives in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates and Bahrain to operate against U.S. and pro-U.S. Arabs in the event of war against Iran, a Stratfor source in Lebanon said Oct. 25. Trainees from the Persian Gulf region reportedly have arrived in Lebanon and are conducting drills in the Bekaa Valley.



Imad Mugniyah (as his name is sometimes spelled) has a fine record as a private military contractor. Wikipedia recounts some of his better known exploits.

Little is known about his adolescence as he did not attract the attention of analysts until 1976 when he joined Yasir Arafat's Force 17. His role at that time was as a sniper, targeting Christians across the Green Line. At some point he spent a year at the American University of Beirut. Mugniyah has been implicated in many of terrorist attacks in the 1980s and 1990s, primarily American and Israeli targets. These include the April 18, 1983 bombing of the United States embassy in Beirut, Lebanon, which killed 63 people including 17 Americans. He was later blamed for the October 23, 1983 simultaneous truck bombings against the French paratroopers and US Marine barracks (see: Marine Barracks Bombing). The attacks killed 58 French soldiers and 241 Marines. Almost a year later on September 20, 1984, he attacked the US embassy annex building. The United States indicted him for the June 14, 1985 hijacking of TWA Flight 847, which resulted in the death of U.S. Navy diver Robert Stethem. He was also linked to numerous kidnappings of Westerners in Beirut through the 1980s, most notably that of Terry Anderson. Some of these individuals were later killed such as U.S. Army Col William Francis Buckley. The remainder were released at various times until the last one, Terry Anderson was released in 1991. He has been described as "tall, slender, well-dressed and handsome ... penetrating eyes," speaking some English but better French.

You'd have to go far into Blackwater to find a man with such an ... impressive ... record. But the best part about him is that he's above sectarianism. He's worked for the Sunnis and the Shia. Why, even such stalwart American allies as France, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan seem to think highly of him or know enough not to mess with him. The Wikipedia article continues.

The United States tried to secure his capture in France in 1986, but were thwarted by French refusal to detain him.

The United States tried to detain him several times afterwards, the first being a 1995 attempt to detain him as the plane he was traveling on was supposed to stop in Saudi Arabia. However Saudi officials refused to allow the plane to land and he was not captured. The next year US military personnel planned to seize him off a ship in Doha, Qatar, but the operation was called off. This plan, dubbed Operation RETURN OX, was carried out by ships and Sailors of Amphibious Squadron Three (USS Tarawa, USS Duluth, USS Rushmore), Marines of the 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit, and Navy SEALS assigned to the U. S. Fifth Fleet. The operation was underway, but was canceled at the last minute when it was not verified that Mughniyah was actually on board the Pakistani ship.

Tigerhawk asks whether it isn't time for America to learn to fight a proxy war.

Sort of makes you wonder why the West no longer has any capacity to organize "cells of operatives" to fight our end of a proxy war. We used to think it was important to have proxy capabilities, back when we knew that direct war with the Soviet Union was too dangerous to be credible. Now, direct military action is too unpopular with the chattering classes to be credible. Is it not time to relearn how to fight war in the shadows?

But wouldn't that be immoral?

A Long Time Till the Big Parade

Norman Podhoretz thinks America is fighting World War IV. Martin Kramer, who together with Podhoretz is a foreign-policy adviser to presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani, thinks that part is the good news. The bad news, Kramer claims, is that this one might be worse than any of the last three.



The 20th-century world wars were preceded by another species of global conflict. For more than a millennium after the rise of Islam in the 7th century, Christendom and Islam were locked in almost constant warfare. Today's war, unlike the last three world wars, is being fought largely across the very same divide of religion and civilization that separated European Christendom and Islam. Their ebb and flow extended over centuries. It is a point our enemies emphasize. “This war is fundamentally religious,” bin Laden has said. “The people of the East are Muslims. They sympathize with Muslims against the people of the West, who are the Crusaders.” That is what bin Laden needs this war to be, if he is to fight it on his terms. ...

For the Bush Doctrine to survive Bush, it will have to incorporate all we have learned since he formulated it. Much of it comes down to this: the Middle East is not Europe, Iraq is not Germany, and Afghanistan is not Japan. (They are not Vietnam either.) The road to hell is paved with bad analogies, which are no substitute for lived experience and specific knowledge. According to the Greek poet Archilochus, “the fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.” The hedgehogs have taken the Bush Doctrine as far as they can. Now it is the turn of the foxes.

The Most Dangerous Game

Rudy Giuliani describes his views on torture and distinguishes it from agressive questioning at NYT's The Caucus. Now look at the horrified comments and see if you agree that "that Rudolph Giuliani is a dangerous man".

Nothing follows.

Wednesday, October 24, 2007

"The darkness has become pitch black"

Bill Roggio carefully analyzes Osama Bin Laden's latest audiotape. Basically Bin Laden is unhappy with how his forces are faring in Iraq. They are split among themselves. Infiltrated by the hated Americans. IED attacks don't work so well. He says "the darkness has become pitch black".

So where are those who prefer the religion to the lives of themselves and their children? Where are the people of Tawheed and those who topple the banner of unbelief and polytheism? Where are those who find torture to be pleasant and don't fear the blows? Where are those who find difficulty to be easy and bitterness to be sweet, because they are certain that the fire of Hell is much hotter? Where are those who go out to fight the Romans, as on the day of Tabuk? Where are those who pledge to fight to the death, as on the day of Yarmuk? Where are the soldiers of the Levant and the reinforcements of Yemen? Where are the knights of the Quiver (Egypt) and the lions of the Hijaz (western Saudi Arabia) and al-Yamamah (central Saudi Arabia)? Come and aid your brothers in Mesopotamia and relieve them by coordinating with them by way of dependable guides.



Where have they gone? Maybe into the camp of those who realize that the real triumph of Islam lies in the power of learning and economic development. That it lies in teaching children how to ride a rocket to Mars instead of strapping a vest full of nails and C4 onto themselves. That it lies in life and not death. Because people are beginning to realize that it's the dead past that Osama really wanted, not the living present or a future by a flowing river springing from some glorious place.

Osama laments that "the darkness has become pitch black." That's him looking into his soul.

The Invulnerable Networked Insurgency

Is it is practical — or even possible — to damage a networked insurgency like al-Qaeda? Is it in fact true that fighting al-Qaeda only makes it stronger? I examine the question at Pajamas Media. Morton Doodslag and Robert Mayer make some pretty interesting comments.

Nothing follows.

The Last Chance Saloon

Journalist Ahmed Rashid looks at the near-term political scenarios in Pakistan. With friends like these, who needs enemies?

At the same time Gen Musharraf's dwindling popularity, his half hearted moves against the extremists and the army's stark failure in defeating the Pakistani Taleban in the tribal borderlands, contrast sharply with Ms Bhutto's determination to confront rather than appease the extremists.

Her defiance goes down well in Washington and other Western capitals, but not with the army which since 11 September 2001 has played a double game of giving sanctuary to some extremists while attacking others.

Moreover other political parties and much of the mainstream media are either too scared to condemn the extremists, or they sympathise with them and do not want to appear pro-American or antagonise that section of the public which has become far more religiously conservative since Ms Bhutto was last in Pakistan nine years ago.



Westhawk comments:

The standard model of analysis in the West is that Ms. Bhutto, supported by a general election mandate, will restore popular legitimacy to Pakistan’s government. This legitimacy, combined with General Musharraf’s cooperation, will then propel Pakistan’s army to a triumph over the various radical Islamists, now secure in their tribal redoubts. So goes the wishful thinking in Washington.

Instead, Ms. Bhutto’s return is likely to expose even deeper fissures in Pakistani society. The list of those who want her dead, and who are actively plotting her demise, is long and almost certainly includes officers within Pakistan’s security services. It would be something of a minor miracle if Ms. Bhutto even survives to see the general election, scheduled in two month’s time. ...

What is likely to result is something resembling a low-grade, multi-sided civil war. The Islamic extremists will seek to protect and expand their sanctuaries while simultaneously acting out to prevent the establishment of an effective Pakistani government. The army will resist fighting in the tribal areas, will offer minimal cooperation to Ms. Bhutto, and will continue to extract gifts from Washington, pleading its indispensability, while whispering rumors about its nuclear weapons stockpile. Similarly, Ms. Bhutto will display herself as the beacon of democracy in Washington in order to ensure an uninterrupted flow of aid from the U.S., part of which she will divert into her family’s accounts. As she feels the assassins getting closer she may see the wisdom of creating a militia tied to her political party, just like the Shi’ites in Iraq have.

If a low level civil war does break out, every faction will inevitably drag their own international patrons into the conflict, and the game will be played for stakes far higher than in Kosovo; higher even than in Iraq. Never will the lack of a bipartisan strategic consensus be more acutely felt than if Pakistan spirals into a crisis.

At one level the current world terrorist crisis is a direct manifestation of the upheavals in Muslim countries. The contradictions inherent in those societies are boiling over. Those upheavals will have to run their course and their consequences managed, for the crisis to abate. And like any ship heading for heavy weather, thoughts should turn to what's needed to ride out the storm. It may be too early to write off Pakistani stability, but not too early to think about what should be done if slides over the edge.

Roll Your Own News

GigaOm looks at how people are using the Internet to cope with the wildfires in Southern California.

Traditional media have been hopelessly outdated in their coverage. We tracked the fires using the National Weather Service’s reflectivity index, which proved far more accurate. But the enterprising folks at the L.A. Fire Department found a better way: they’ve been issuing frequent updates using Twitter.

Google Maps mashups are being usd to provide a relatively current look at data. Some news sources, whose traditional web sites are flooded and broken, have resorted to Google Maps’ new And for homes without power, mobile handsets are making it possible for people to get details on where to go.

Nothing follows.

Navigating Through the Culture Wars

Are you a real liberal? Take the test at the Times Online.Nothing follows.

Tuesday, October 23, 2007

Hillary Clinton: "You Can't Lump All Terrorists Together"

Hillary Clinton lays out her first term strategy in an interview at the Guardian. Read the whole thing. Nothing follows.

The Fundamentals of Faith

The Times Online describes a momentary misunderstanding.

The children of Che Guevara, the revolutionary pin-up, had been invited to Tehran University to commemorate the 40th anniversary of their father’s death and celebrate the growing solidarity between “the left and revolutionary Islam” at a conference partly paid for by Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan president.



But then one of the speakers, Hajj Saeed Qassemi, the co-ordinator of the Association of Volunteers for Suicide-Martyrdom (who presumably remains selflessly alive for the cause), revealed that Che was a “truly religious man who believed in God and hated communism and the Soviet Union”.

Che’s daughter Aleida wondered if something might have been lost in translation. “My father never mentioned God,” she said, to the consternation of the audience. “He never met God.” During the commotion, Aleida and her brother were led swiftly out of the hall and escorted back to their hotel. “By the end of the day, the two Guevaras had become non-persons. The state-controlled media suddenly forgot their existence,” the Iranian writer Amir Taheri noted.

After their departure, Qassemi went on to claim that Fidel Castro, the “supreme guide” of Guevara, was also a man of God. “The Soviet Union is gone,” he affirmed. “The leadership of the downtrodden has passed to our Islamic republic. Those who wish to destroy America must understand the reality and not be clever with words.”

The deluded Guevara children are mistaken. Qassemi is correct. The sole remaining basis of Marxism from this point forward is no longer Dialectical Materialism. Not the Labor Theory of Value. Nor the principle of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. In fact nobody knows what any of these things means any longer except for some old codgers leafing through tattered volumes at the Revolution Bookstore. They are unimportant now. Nobody believes them any more. Nothing is important any longer but revenge -- vengeance for showing up all the lies in the 100 odd years in which Marxism tried to rule the world. Vengeance for the ridicule showered on all Marxism's fevered dreams. Vengeance for unmasking the Worker's Paradise as nothing but the Year Zero with a press release. Vengeance on America however long, and under whatever guise. Allah Akbar!

Hard Times for Baghdad Taxi Drivers

Here's a story from UN sources.

Taxi driver Ahmed Khalil Baqir used to station himself outside Baghdad's main morgue, waiting for grieving families who went there to claim their relatives’ dead bodies. "I was totally dependent on them for my living," Baqir, a 44-year-old father of four, said." I never thought about picking up people in the street as I was being hired five to eight times a day by these families. But now it is a waste of time to wait there and these days I wait only for about three hours in the morning and I continue my work picking up passengers in the street.”

Imagine that you are in the year 1958. Instead of Baghdad the city is Algiers. Instead of being herded into supervised villages as historically occured, the 2 million villagers themselves have become French allies. They themselves are helping to hunt down the FLN. A dispirited Ahmed Ben Bella has just released a recording, from his hideout in a cave in Pakistan, begging all Muslims to unite against France due his recent reverses. And to top it off the Algerian taxi drivers are beginning to complain that the killings are so few that almost nobody goes to the morgue any more.

Algeria marked the beginning of the modern period of terrorist warfare. It was a form of warfare that many have called unstoppable. The Battle of Algiers purported to show how hopeless it was to face this faceless enemy. So the question is: why are taxi drivers at the Baghdad morgue cooling their heels?

Nothing follows.

Back to Normal

This article in the Weekly Standard (hat tip DD) describing the rehabilitation for former insurgents and how they are being redeployed as relatively functional persons is one more suggestion that politics is moving into the "post Iraq war" era. I use the phrase advisedly because combat in that country is likely to continue for some time. But as the diplomatic crisis between Iraq and Turkey over the Kurdish secessionists emphasizes, it is starting to become just another normal messed up Middle Eastern country with this crucial difference: it has gone through occupation, an abortive civil war and an ideological revolution all in about four years time.



The process of moving from the height of crisis into relative normalcy is an interesting one. Roger Simon predicts "the US will win the War in Iraq, and Hillary Clinton will be elected our next President" which in some way reflects the expectation of a kind of American "normalization" too. It would be ironic but not entirely surprising if Hillary Clinton's victory was facilitated by voters feeling they could live with her now that there was nothing left for her to mess up any more. That might not be true yet people might think that.

George H. Bush lost to Bill Clinton after winning Desert Storm and Winston Churchill to Clement Atlee two months after the surrender of Nazi Germany. Sometimes people react to the end of a crisis with a nostalgic yearning for their old messed-up lives. The crisis of course, never truly passes. It just changes form. Who could have guessed that Desert Storm itself would provide a pretext for Osama Bin Laden to launch his Jihad upon America. Britain in 1945 threw itself into itself into the "postwar consensus" which established the welfare state and liquidated the Empire. They were going to build a "land fit for heroes" only to become the economic basket case of Europe. But that was tomorrow's trouble then and no one wanted -- no one could have -- imagined a James Callaghan or his cure: Margaret Thatcher.

If history holds any lesson it is that it never truly stops. But people want it to seem so, at least for a while. Classical Values thinks the public is suffering from information fatigue. It's the weariness of sustained effort. That leaves an opening which a canny politician can exploit. And while it's probably impossible to build a political platform entirely on the prospect of mellowing out maybe part of the public may secretly be waiting for a politician who will offer to lead them to fun times. Waiting for a What the Heck platform. Rick Moran asked whether America had become a pathologically gloomy country with one party focused on apocalyptic threat to America and the other to endlessly decrying "malaise". But being constantly gloomy is tiring work and counterproductive in the end. One of the secrets to Ronald Reagan's leadership was making okay again to be hopeful and have a good time. Reagan made it licit to both fight the Evil Empire while simultaneously affirming the sanctity of going bowling on a Saturday night. He showed us a City on the Hill not as a palace of cold marble, but as a place where you could laugh within its lighted halls and occasionally drink a six pack of beer on its ocean-beaten margins. Even if you had to go to work the next day.

The world crisis is far from over. It will never be over and that's the point: death and sorrow will always be the companions of our journey; so we might as well lighten up. We live in a period of unparalleled opportunity. This century we leave Earth and take our first tentive steps into outer space -- if we can get the environmentalist's permission to do so. This century we end our dependency on oil, get viable robotic servants, self-driving cars, extended lifespans, pervasive connectivity and with any luck, cheaper dentistry. This and nuclear carbombs, maybe. And if the future is dark it is also incomparably bright.

"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times; it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness; it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity; it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness; it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair; we had everything before us, we had nothing before us; we were all going directly to Heaven, we were all going the other way."

Wasn't it that way always?

Saturday, October 20, 2007

Croak and Dagger

The Raw Story has this just up:

CBS News has confirmed, in advance of a 60 Minutes interview with outed CIA agent Valerie Plame to be run this Sunday, that Plame "was involved in operations to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons."

"Our mission was to make sure that the bad guys, basically, did not get nuclear weapons," Plame told 60 Minutes. Plame also indicated that her outing in 2003 had caused grave damage to CIA operations, saying, "All the intelligence services in the world were running my name through their databases" to see where she had gone and who she had met with.

It continues:



CBS states further that Plame "was involved in one highly classified mission to deliver fake nuclear weapons blueprints to Tehran. It was called Operation Merlin, and it was first revealed in a book by investigative reporter James Risen."

Reached on Saturday morning, Alexandrovna said she had known of Project Merlin when she wrote her 2006 article but was not allowed to discuss the operation, as per her agreement with sources, just the country involved. "I cannot confirm or deny that Plame was connected with Project Merlin, only that I was aware of it," Alexandrovna told Raw.

A Guardian story explaining the Risen reference to Merlin does not inspire confidence.

She had probably done this a dozen times before. Modern digital technology had made clandestine communications with overseas agents seem routine. ... by 2004, it was possible to send high-speed, encrypted messages directly and instantaneously from CIA headquarters to agents in the field who were equipped with small, covert personal communications devices. So the officer at CIA headquarters assigned to handle communications with the agency's spies in Iran probably didn't think twice when she began her latest download. With a few simple commands, she sent a secret data flow to one of the Iranian agents in the CIA's spy network. Just as she had done so many times before.

But this time, the ease and speed of the technology betrayed her. The CIA officer had made a disastrous mistake. She had sent information to one Iranian agent that exposed an entire spy network; the data could be used to identify virtually every spy the CIA had inside Iran.

Mistake piled on mistake. As the CIA later learned, the Iranian who received the download was a double agent. The agent quickly turned the data over to Iranian security officials, and it enabled them to "roll up" the CIA's network throughout Iran. CIA sources say that several of the Iranian agents were arrested and jailed, while the fates of some of the others is still unknown.

This espionage disaster, of course, was not reported. It left the CIA virtually blind in Iran, unable to provide any significant intelligence on one of the most critical issues facing the US - whether Tehran was about to go nuclear.

Ha-ha-ha. Somebody prop me up. If that story is false I can hardly stand from laughing. If it's true I can hardly stand for crying. But there's more.

But it's worse than that. Deep in the bowels of the CIA, someone must be nervously, but very privately, wondering: "Whatever happened to those nuclear blueprints we gave to the Iranians?" ...

The story dates back to the Clinton administration and February 2000, when one frightened Russian scientist walked Vienna's winter streets. The Russian had good reason to be afraid. He was walking around Vienna with blueprints for a nuclear bomb. To be precise, he was carrying technical designs for a TBA 480 high-voltage block, otherwise known as a "firing set", for a Russian-designed nuclear weapon. ...

The Russian's assignment from the CIA was to pose as an unemployed and greedy scientist who was willing to sell his soul - and the secrets of the atomic bomb - to the highest bidder. ... But Tehran would get a big surprise when its scientists tried to explode their new bomb. Instead of a mushroom cloud, the Iranian scientists would witness a disappointing fizzle. ... The Russian studied the blueprints the CIA had given him. Within minutes of being handed the designs, he had identified a flaw. "This isn't right," he told the CIA officers gathered around the hotel room. "There is something wrong."

In Vienna, however, the Russian unsealed the envelope with the nuclear blueprints and included a personal letter of his own to the Iranians. No matter what the CIA told him, he was going to hedge his bets. There was obviously something wrong with the blueprints - so he decided to mention that fact to the Iranians in his letter. They would certainly find flaws for themselves, and if he didn't tell them first, they would never want to deal with him again. ...

Just days after the Russian dropped off his package at the Iranian mission, the National Security Agency reported that an Iranian official in Vienna abruptly changed his schedule, making airline reservations to fly home to Iran. The odds were that the nuclear blueprints were now in Tehran.

The Russian scientist's fears about the operation seemed well founded. He was the front man for what may have been one of the most reckless operations in the modern history of the CIA, one that may have helped put nuclear weapons in the hands of a charter member of what President George W Bush has called the "axis of evil".

The point of the Guardian's breathless account is that the CIA may have managed to send the Iranians useful weapons design information by mistake, just like that unnamed "officer" at headquarters sent a list of intel assets in Iran to the Iranians by mistake. And now I guess we're going to hear about how George Bush recklessly endangered National Security by exposing Valeria Plame, thus compromising this travesty of an operation.

The Press is supposed to be the public's intelligence agency. On occasion one gets the impression that it too is a participant in a Wilderness of Mirrors. And not a very smart one either, which isn't to say those on the other side of the fence are always better. Imagine working in an environment where a serious intelligence operation is just a fancy name for planting rumors in a Risen book. And where the press sees itself as "players" in the great game. What is the truth or are they all recycling each other's sea stories? Should I laugh or should I cry?

Darkness By Day

Weekend reading from the Daily Mail, if you can stand it. The article, which bills itself as a background to the Madeleine McCann case opens with this dramatic scene.

A Ferrari engine makes a deep, distinctive sound. When the children at Portugal's most famous orphanage heard the sports car roaring down the driveway, fear swept through the dormitories.

The noise could mean only one thing: the man known as The Doctor was coming to call. Yet this medical practitioner had no intention of adhering to the ancient Hippocratic Oath.

Instead, arriving at Casa Pia (House of the Pious), a 17th century Lisbon orphanage where more than 4,000 children are cared for each year behind high stone walls, the doctor would summon selected boys and girls from their beds for examinations one night each week.

Where possible, he chose deaf-mutes.



After checking that the children were not suffering from any sexual infections, the doctor was joined by the orphanage caretaker, known as Bibi, who ushered the unfortunate children outside to a waiting van.

With the doctor following in his red Ferrari, Bibi drove the van to the prestigious homes of some of the leading members of Lisbon society - ranging from Portuguese government ministers and high-ranking diplomats, to famous television stars and members of the judiciary.

The clear suggestion is that a network of extremely evil people, more evil possibly than even Osama Bin Laden, exists in Portugal. Is it real, or an urban legend? Over to another part of Europe. In 2004, Belgium was rocked by a series of scandals centering around the gang of a man named Marc Dutroux.

a Belgian criminal, convicted of having, in 1995 and 1996, kidnapped, tortured and sexually abused six girls, ranging in age from 8 to 19, four of whom he murdered. He was also convicted of having killed a suspected former accomplice, Bernard Weinstein. He was arrested in 1996 and has been in prison since then. His widely publicised trial took place in 2004. A number of shortcomings in the Dutroux investigation caused widespread discontent in Belgium with the country's criminal justice system, and the ensuing scandal was one of the reasons for the reorganisation of Belgium's law enforcement agencies.

The X-Files

As the Dutroux investigation progressed it became evident that he was hooked up to something far wider. The door opened a crack, but the portal was shut before anyone could get a good glimpse at the slithery things within.

There was speculation that Dutroux was part of a widespread pedophile ring, including prominent Belgians. There were several reasons for these speculations, one of them being the many mistakes that had been made during the time that Dutroux was under observation by the police. Other reasons were the occasional statements from Dutroux about just being a "pawn" in a much larger network, the political connections of Nihoul, or the allegations of pedophilia against politicians Elio Di Rupo and Jean-Pierre Grafe in late 1996. The fact that the parents of Julie, Melissa and An continually voiced their dissatisfaction with the investigation also added to speculations of a cover up.

However, maybe the most important reason for rumors about high-level pedophilia networks were the so-called X-Dossiers, which first came to the public's attention in late 1996 and early 1997. It turned out that in the aftermath of Dutroux's arrest (some had contacted the police before), more than half a dozen purported victims of pedophiliac rings had begun to testify in Neufchateau. Their testimonies have always been extremely sensitive, because besides individuals as Dutroux and Nihoul, many well known Belgians were also accused of pedophilia, including members of the royal family, top politicians, and some of the country's leading bankers. Several of the most important names came up in different testimonies. However, the investigations into these testimonies were ultimately all shut down after senior police officers and Justice department officials ruled they were not reliable, leaving the case wide open to speculation that they were yielding under the weight of powerful individual and institutional interests.

Over the years, several books have been published that make the case that the decisions to shut down the X-investigations were unjustified. The newspaper De Morgen and Humo magazine have been saying the same thing, although they are bitterly opposed by most of the other major media outlets.

Dark Networks

How do these networks of scum form? My intuition is they form in a way not very different from any Small World Network, of which terrorist cells are a familiar example: that there are hubs, to which a new arrival on the scene can easily form an attachment. As with all Small World Networks, there are probably only a small number of "hops" which separate a footsoldier like Marc Dutroux from the evil Mr. Bigs. Th existence of hubs will guarantee that.

One piece of academic research which might help us understand the structure of pedophile rings is The Darknet and the Future of Content Distribution, a monograph by Microsoft which examines how illegally downloaded music or video is shared across a Darknet -- a private network of distribution. It's usefulness lies in that the abstract characteristics of illegal file sharing systems it describes are probably shared to some degree by the pedophile networks. By examining the architecture and vulnerabilities of one, we better understand the organization and weaknesses of the other.

Early attempts to shut down large scale illicit content distribution focused on closing down servers from which the material was downloaded. This would be the equivalent of closing down the Casa Pia orphanage described in opening paragraph. But just as the architects of content distribution sharing systems responded by creating a peer to peer structure where the "goods" were passed from one anonymous system to another, so will the pedophiles have adapted. It was suggested that if Madeleine were indeed abducted, she was "abducted to order". You don't download a child from the server any more, just from another peer node. But even this switch from a client-server model to a peer to peer system did not remove the vulnerabilities entirely. The Small World Property reasserted itself in video and music file sharing networks and created super-peers which were themselves like the old content servers. And these too can be targeted. This means that even in a pedophile network without wholesale warehouses like the Casa Pia orphanage, there are "hubs" of users which occupy important positions in the system. Taking down those hubs will degrade the system seriously.

Finally there is the little appreciated matter of attacking the "search engines" of a Darknet than can be considered. The "search engines" or directories of the content distribution Darknet were themselves attacked, as in the case of Napster. The Microsoft monograph notes that, without a central file server responsible for downloads to shutdown, it was Napster's searchable database that became a legal target. They were finally forced to disallow queries to identify copyrighted material. It's worth digressing to point out why attacking a network's directory is important. All networks face the problem of identifying resources that exist on it to its users. Unless the users know where to find the resources, they may as well not exist. Music or video downloading networks need some way of instructing a joining node where to find what it wants. It needs a playlist. Without the playlist and pointers to where they can be downloaded, the Darknet loses a great deal of its functionality.

What would a search engine for pedophile networks look like? My guess is it would in part look like the hideous sites operated by these perverts on the Internet. The UK Times describes one of these in its article on the children abducted to order.

More than 200 paedophiles in 13 countries had exchanged more than 750,000 images of children through a private internet club called Wonderland. Analysis showed that 1,236 children had been subjected to abuse that officers described as “unimaginable”.

Some were abused live, to order, online. Officers said that they had wept as they catalogued the pictures and that they had been haunted by them for years.

Shutting down these pedophile "search engines" would make things harder for the perverts. So why not close them down? Those who have been following the discussion on Belmont regarding Jihadi websites probably know that it is sometimes better to keep them operating in order to find the key hubs, through traffic analysis and other means, and from there develop the intelligence to take down the network. There is always a tension between the evil caused by leaving enemy cells up and using them to find more enemy cells. Pedophile websites are how they find victims and sick material. But they are also places through which pedophiles can be identified, as the recent arrest of "Swirly Face" pedophile recently arrested in Thailand proves.

But always one returns to the matter of political will. Here we come to the hardest part of the equation. Like Terrorism, there remain many powerful apologists for the sexualization of children. Like the terror apologists, they hide behind words like "civil liberties", "freedom of speech". And maybe as a result the political will to take down pedophilia, like the political mandate to destroy terrorism, leaves something to be desired.

We have the technical tools needed to inflict heavy blows on the pedophile network. In principle every tool designed to uncover terrorism can be used against pedophiles. But do we have a political mandate to use them? And I will say no more on the subject other than to wish, though I am unlikely to get my wish, that the JDAM and bullet in the brain were part of the solution.


Powered by Blogger