| |||||
Antagonism at sea, U.S.-Russia edition. Earlier this week, Russian aircraft ignored repeated U.S. warnings and flew within one nautical mile of the USS Ronald Reagan just east of the Korean peninsula, Stars and Stripes reports this morning. "In the latest in a series of incidents involving Russian aircraft, two Tupolev Tu-142 Bear aircraft flew as low as 500 feet Tuesday morning near the Reagan, which has been conducting scheduled maneuvers with South Korean navy ships. Four F/A-18 Super Hornets took off from the Reagan's flight deck in response to the Russian advance, 7th Fleet spokeswoman Lt. Lauren Cole said Thursday." That story, here. In Europe, NATO wants to add troops to its eastern flanks—and might sooner than later if Germany weren't opposed, WSJ's Julian Barnes reports from Brussels. "Under one plan, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization would have a battalion in Poland and each of the three Baltic states—roughly 800 to 1,000 soldiers in each unit. A more modest version would have a single NATO battalion in the area… NATO officials say Berlin is unlikely to back the biggest deployment, but could support the more modest increase…telling the allies in private discussions that they don't want to treat Moscow as a permanent enemy or lock it out of Europe, despite the frictions over Ukraine and other provocations." More here.
| |||||
Beijing is officially steamed that the U.S. Navy sailed so close to two artificial islands in the South China Sea earlier this week. And China's military this morning vowed to use "all necessary measures according to the need" to deter a future passage like the one the destroyer Lassen made on Tuesday past the Subi and Mischief reefs. So far, AP reports, the response fits a "pattern in similar such incidents in recent years," noting the defense ministry "offered no details on how Beijing might respond differently in the future." But "there is little doubt that China is thinking big about how these islands could limit America's military options, about how control over these waters could give it leverage over key trade routes and about how making the United States look hapless could strengthen its diplomatic clout in the region," the New York Times writes. The two nations' naval chiefs hurriedly set up a chat by video teleconference schedule for today, Defense News reports. The Pentagon wanted to send a ship past the fake islands roughly five months ago, but were delayed by "repeated stalling" from the White House and State Department, an anonymous U.S. defense official told Reuters. The official said the administration wanted to a) to ensure the move wasn't seen as a direct response to high-profile hacks like the OPM breach in the spring and b) to ensure "every possible measure was being taken to minimize the risk of a U.S.-China military confrontation at sea." The consequence: "The months leading up to the patrol allowed Beijing to harden its stance and, according to some U.S. officials and security experts, blew the operation out of proportion," Reuters reports. "Washington's caution also caused disquiet among some military officials in Japan and the Philippines, both U.S. security allies, feeding concerns that China's ambitions in the South China Sea would go unchecked." | |||||
But there is a right way to enforce freedom of navigation in the South China Sea: "Send U.S. naval vessels through traditional sea lanes, but [without] bragging, taunting, or making a big rhetorical deal of it," The Atlantic's James Fallows writes, with input from Judah Grunstein of World Politics Review. "The patrols must be clearly seen as reinforcing the maritime norm involved, without bias or prejudice to who is claiming the features. Otherwise they can be portrayed as the U.S. provoking China, which is in neither side's interest. This is not as easy as it sounds." More here. And there are a few key lessons from Washington's global counterterrorism fight that inform best tactics for confronting China, says Rear Adm. Paul Becker, former intelligence director for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in this conversation with Defense One's Deputy Editor Bradley Peniston. Becker: "One, in order to achieve success, we need to understand and fight an adversary's strategy, not just their forces. Two, we need to provide a detailed context to a complex battlespace. And three, we need to build an intelligence-sharing network that's fully integrated — within our U.S. intel community, but also incorporating our allies and partners." The one-star elaborates at length, here. And before we leave China, Beijing shares one thing with its southern neighbors in Pyongyang: "China and North Korea are ill equipped to defend themselves against cyberthreats despite what the Pentagon deems their strong offensive capabilities in cybercrime," according to a report released Monday night from the Australian Security Policy Institute, which provides independent security advice to Australia's government and military. More from the Wall Street Journal, here. | |||||
 From Defense One | |||||
Blimp goes rogue! The military's runaway surveillance blimp was everyone's favorite story yesterday, with even Edward Snowden weighing in from exile on the Raytheon JLENS that snapped its tether at Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Maryland, and drifted for hours and more than 100 miles. The military scrambled two F-16 fighter jets to keep an eye on the 3.5-ton aerostat (not technically a blimp), but could not prevent it from dragging its cables on the ground for 20 miles, damaging ground wires and cutting power along the way. The helium-buoyed craft, which cost more than $100 million to build and was developed as part of a multibillion-dollar program, eventually came to rest in Moreland Township, Pennsylvania. Technology Editor Patrick Tucker followed the story of the blimp (as did the Washington Post, AP, and lots of others). | |||||
The student has become the master. At the third presidential face-off Wednesday night, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush tried to take out Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, his former protégé, and backfired. In Boulder, Colo., Bush hit Rubio for being an absentee senator: "I mean, literally, the Senate—what is it, like a French work week? You get, like, three days where you have to show up?" Bush said. "You can campaign, or just resign and let someone else take the job." But the Bush campaign has been hitting this same note for a week, and Rubio was ready: "Someone has convinced you that attacking me is going to help," he responded. "I'm not running against anyone on this stage. I'm running for president because there is no way we can elect Hillary Clinton to continue the policies of Barack Obama." Read more debate coverage from Politics Reporter Molly O'Toole, here. | |||||
ICYMI: the Senate passed the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act, or CISA, 74-21. Senators will now meet with House colleagues to craft a common version of the cyber-information-sharing legislation. "Opposition to the bill, which would provide incentives to private businesses to share information about online threats with each other and with the federal government, was led by the Senate's privacy hawks...and backed by civil liberties groups and tech companies who were unhappy with the bill's privacy protections." That from National Journal, here. | |||||
Made your reservation yet? The Defense One Summit 2015: The Age of Everything is next Monday, Nov. 2. Top national security leaders from military, government, and politics will gather to discuss how they are confronting today's threats: from terrorism to cyberattacks, Russia, Iran, and in space, at sea, even in Chattanooga. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper will appear in a live keynote interview. Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley will talk about setting his service's priorities to face ground threats. Join us! Register here. | |||||
Welcome to the Thursday edition of The D Brief, from Ben Watson, Bradley Peniston and Molly O'Toole. Tell your friends to subscribe here: http://get.defenseone.com/d-brief/. Want to see something different? Got news? Let us know: the-d-brief@defenseone.com. | |||||
Kerry frames Vienna talks on Syria's future as a moment of truth for Russia. "Is Russia there just to shore up Assad or is Russia there to actually help bring about a solution? We'll know. We'll put that to the test," Kerry said Wednesday in remarks at the Carnegie International Endowment for Peace. He offered this tough talk for Moscow's strategy, which he said could "perhaps even strengthen the illusion on Assad's part that he can just indefinitely maintain his hold on power...And if that's what he thinks, I got news: there's no way that a number of the other countries involved in this coalition are going to let up or stop. It won't happen." Still, he outlined shared areas of interest with the Russians and called the talks, which will now feature Iran, the most promising opportunity. "While finding a way forward on Syria will not be easy—it's not going to be automatic—it is the most promising opportunity for a political opening ... the best opportunity we have is to try to come to the table and recognize there has to be the political solution that everybody has talked about." But earlier in the day, Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker had found some daylight between Kerry's closed-door testimony this week and that of retired Marine Corps Gen. John Allen, outgoing Special Presidential Envoy for the Global Coalition to Counter ISIL, on Russia's intentions and kinetic options. "I expect that as time goes on, as we continue to build our military options on the ground in Syria, we may well find that we'll have other European partners join us in that process," Allen said, hinting that allies are considering expanded action along with the U.S. "There may be opportunities in the south as well as in the north where our coalition partners—our European coalition partners could, in fact, play an important role and—and I'm thinking special operations, but I won't become more specific than that." But Allen was decidedly more pessimistic on Russia's role as mediator: "Russia is going to suffer from this incursion in ways they can't even begin to imagine," he said. "We're going to have to deal with Daesh, but when the Russians stop killing the moderate Syrian opposition, which is both their hope for the future as well as our hope for the future, then perhaps we can get to where we need to be. But they're going to have to feel some pain on this and I think they're going to relatively soon." | |||||
Emptying Gitmo continues. Early this morning, the Pentagon transferred Ahmed Ould Abdel Aziz from Guantanamo to be repatriated by Mauritania. The move follows a few recent transfers, whittling away at the population amid Obama's first veto of the annual defense authorization bill, in part due to restrictions intended to freeze out such transfers. The House has set an override vote on Nov. 5 but doesn't have the votes. Today, 113 remain at Guantanamo. Read the latest on the Pentagon's effort to find a home for detainees stateside, or take a deep dive into the long-delayed effort to close the prison from our Molly O'Toole, here. | |||||
U.S.-Israel defense relationship picks back up. What is the U.S. prepared to offer Israel to shore up its long-time ally whose support has been wavering since the forging of the Iran nuclear deal? "The 'entire spectrum' of strategic cooperation…from cyber defense and high-end attack capabilities down to a joint program aimed at combating terror tunnels," Defense News reports from Defense Secretary Ash Carter meeting yesterday with Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon. "This is one of the most trusted relationships we have in the world," said Carter, "and so when we discover something that is critical to both of us, we share it, and we do that from electronic warfare to cyber to all kinds of … tremendous intelligence sharing." Carter also pledged more U.S. funding for Israel's anti-missile systems Iron Dome, David's Sling and Arrow. More here. | |||||
Lastly today: Our Thursday #LongRead comes from NYT's Charlie Savage, who reports on four U.S. attorneys who helped set the legal stage for the 2011 raid on Osama bin Laden, making it "all but inevitable that Navy SEALs would kill the fugitive Qaeda leader, not capture him." The legal parties involved: Stephen W. Preston, the C.I.A.'s general counsel; Mary B. DeRosa, the National Security Council's legal adviser; Jeh C. Johnson, the Pentagon general counsel; and then-Rear Adm. James W. Crawford III, the Joint Chiefs of Staff legal adviser. "Just days before the raid, the lawyers drafted five secret memos so that if pressed later, they could prove they were not inventing after-the-fact reasons for having blessed it," Savage writes. "The lawyers decided that a unilateral military incursion would be lawful because of a disputed exception to sovereignty for situations in which a government is "unwilling or unable" to suppress a threat to others emanating from its soil...There was also a trump card. While the lawyers believed that Mr. Obama was bound to obey domestic law, they also believed he could decide to violate international law when authorizing a 'covert' action." Read the report in full, here. | |||||
Thursday, October 29, 2015
Russia buzzes US carrier; China steamed over Lassen passage; How to improve Pacific intelligence; Blimp goes rogue!; and a bit more...
Tuesday, October 27, 2015
Sunday, October 25, 2015
Iguala & Tlatlaya Cases: U.S.blocking Merida funds to Mexico due to human rights abuses ...
Borderland Beat |  |
Iguala & Tlatlaya Cases: U.S.blocking Merida funds to Mexico due to human rights abuses Posted: 25 Oct 2015 05:50 AM PDT By Lucio R for Borderland Beat
Reforma is reporting the United States has again blocked a portion of funds due to be given to Mexico through the Merida Initiative. The initiative was established to support Mexico in funds and equipment, in its fight against drugs. The U.S. with withhold 15% of the total annual budget allocated, until the State Department issues a certification that Mexico has met the human rights standards. The U.S. decided on this action in part based on the Iguala case of the killing and kidnapping of 49 persons on September 26-27, 2014. 43 of the 49, mostly normalistas, are missing and presumed dead, ( the majority of people in Mexico are discounting the official explanation by the Enrique Peña Nieto administration). Other cases are of extrajudicial killings such as the 22 in Tlatlaya. And 16 in Apatzingán, Michoacán where police were heard saying “mow them down like dogs” when killing or injuring the unarmed citizens including children. Some photos reveal a few of the citizens, with the only weapon they had in their vehicles, sticks. Citizens reported federal police of planting the few weapons shown in photos.  The US government significantly strengthened its partnership with Mexico in combating organized crime in 2007 when it announced the Merida Initiative, a multi-year US security assistance package for Mexico. Aside from funds, the U.S. has provided equipment and training. Since the 2008 onset, the United States congress highlighted the importance of tying in assurances that Mexico respect human rights from the outset, US Congress recognized the importance of ensuring that the Mexican government respect human rights in its public security efforts, thereby mandated that 15% of funding be withheld of Merida funds until the State Department issued a report to the US Congress which showed that Mexico had demonstrated it was meeting four human rights requirements.
In the years since the initiative began, Mexico has been chastised by the U.S. for human rights violations. Critics have said it has not been effective or that punitively at 15% funding freeze is not harsh enough. (What it calculates to this year is meager 5 million USD) The U.S. threatened to withhold money unless cases of violations by military elements, and Federal Police, are prosecuted in public court, instead of military court. In 2010 U.S. congress set forth these following requirements to be met by Mexico. Astonishingly, in the same year it was determined by the State Department in a report to congress, that that Mexico was meeting the Merida Initiative's human rights requirements,and it stated its intention to obligate roughly $36 million in security assistance that had been withheld from the 2009 supplemental and the 2010 omnibus budgets. However, research conducted by organizations, including Mexico's National Human Rights
Commission, and the State Department's own reports, demonstrates conclusively that Mexico has failed to meet the four human rights requirements set out by law. In consideration of these facts congress should not have been releasing funds. In doing so and liberating previous fund withholding's, the Obama administration sent a message to Mexico, that the United States will not react punitively to grave human rights violations. In effect, establishing the United States, tolerates human rights violations that include torture, rape, murder and disappearance. Four requirements: 1) Requirement: Ensuring that civilian prosecutors and judicial authorities are investigating and prosecuting members of the federal police and military forces who have been credibly alleged to have violated human rights. In a report to congress it states that Mexico's military justice system continues to "systematically claim" jurisdiction over the investigation of these cases. The reports also states; "information on military prosecutions is difficult to obtain," the "limited information on military prosecutions and complaints filed suggest that actual prosecutions are rare." According to the Mexican military's own reports, military courts have only sentenced one soldier for a human rights violation committed since 2007. Up to 2015, not a single soldier has been prosecuted in civilian courts since the Merida Initiative came into effect in July 2008. In this sense, the State Department's assertion in its September 2010 report that civilian prosecutors are investigating and prosecuting members of the military accused of human rights violations is inaccurate. To date, no bill has been introduced in the Mexican Congress to amend this practice. Requirement: Ensuring that civilian prosecutors and judicial authorities are investigating and prosecuting members of the federal police and military forces who have been credibly alleged to have violated human rights. Requirement: Enforcing the prohibition on the use of testimony obtained through torture. Mexico claims to have addressed this practice of abuse, however the systematic practice of torture to obtain confessions have continued unabated. This is a critical issue most effecting Mexico’s system of justice, as most often confessions are the sole or primary evidence in criminal conviction. Amid the tactics documented in force confession abuses, are the use of electric shocks, beatings, water boarding and suffocation with plastic bags. Meanwhile, the practice of “arraigo” in which a suspect may be detained for up to 80 days before being charged, in itself creates an environment that, facilitates torture. Requirement: Improve the transparency and accountability of federal police forces and work with state and municipal authorities to improve the transparency and accountability of state and municipal police forces. Mexico has agreed to changes that would create effective accountability and transparency, it does not provide clear guidelines for human rights complaints nor does it provide mechanisms that ensures transparency in the investigation, court hearings and disciplinary actions Requirement: Conduct regular consultations with Mexican human rights organizations and civil society on recommendations for the implementation of the Merida Initiative. Mexico has for all intents and purpose have kept meetings private to only a few select groups of representatives by making it impossible to improbable all groups can attend. By holding the meetings in D.F. with only a few days’ notice, rarely opened to the public, and exclusion of all groups having the right to set the agenda for the meetings, set only by the government. As a result few groups are left participating in the consultations.
Obama administration adjustments and goals The Barrack Obama administration has made wide changes in the implementation of the treaty, by shifting funds pegged for security, to social programs targeted at facilitating Mexico's economic and justice system. The administration implemented four goals: 1) The disruption of organized criminal groups2) Establishing the rule of law and respect for human rights reforms3) 21st century border structure with the utilization of equipment, technology, and training”4) The creation of strong, stable communities (ex. Micro loans, workshops, education) In the face of these changes, the deterioration of the situation in Mexico has proved the initiative of being a colossal failure, and yet it has continued. All the good intentions will fall flat without stringent safeguards, if the beneficiary is immersed in a bed of criminal collusion and corruption. The 2014 Iguala nightmare set the stage for a global spotlight to shine of the chaotic state of culpability, organized crime collusion, corruption, and human rights abuses, threaded through all layers of municipal, state and federal governments. Dr. John Ackerman, an author as well as a professor at the Institute of Legal Research of the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México and vice president of the International Association of Administrative Law puts it this way in speaking about the Merida Initiative; “Through two United States presidents, and 3 billion dollars later, Mexico is more unsafe, chaotic and authoritarian than ever”.
In a September 2015 report from Small Wars Journal (authored by Michael Hoopes) this was the conclusion: Conclusions Despite the official policy goals expressed by the U.S. and Mexican governments, U.S. support of Mexican security forces through training and cash transfers, has remained at high levels. Moreover, while U.S. net assistance to Mexican security forces has declined from its historically high levels of the George W. Bush administration, data show that said decline has not coincided with an increase in U.S. funds devoted to non-security initiatives that seek to remedy Mexico's crime problem, despite public promises by the Obama administration. While this report does not explore arguments in favor of the United States supporting Mexican security institutions through training and equipment transfers/sale, Mexico's human rights catastrophes of 2014 support the critics who say that U.S. funds continue to support a state security apparatus rife with corruption. Thus, an analysis of both the nature of the U.S. foreign aid budget to Mexico and the events of 2014 clearly show that the institution-building efforts enshrined in the Mérida Initiative elude achievement. The U.S. government, specifically the agencies who administer Mérida Initiative and Department of Defense funds to Mexico, by all accounts lacks a program that methodically and specifically assesses the outcomes of their financing and training experts. The 2010 recommendation of the U.S. Government Accountability Office that the Secretary of State “incorporate into the strategy for the Mérida Initiative outcome performance measures that indicate progress toward strategic goals” remains largely unfulfilled, and the more complete implementation of the recommendation would be the crucial step in allowing the U.S. government to properly assess the impacts of the military assistance that those inside and outside the U.S. government continue to deem negative. In writing this post a portion of info or material was used from; Gov Track, SMJ, Reforma and Human Rights Watch, BB archive |
The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) discontinued the release of official reporting on airstrikes in Syria from October 23 - 24 amidst reports of high civilian casualties...
|
 |
|
Here’s How Many Radical Muslims Obama Let Into America. Are You Sitting Down?
Here’s How Many Radical Muslims Obama Let Into America. Are You Sitting Down?
As if you needed another reason to like Trump and his immigration stance, we’re going to give you another one.
Breitbart has done something really excellent. It’s analyzed public, government data showing who exactly immigrated into our country in 2013. Why would this be important? Given the recent heightened scrutiny of immigration on the whole by GOP front-runner, the previously mentioned Mr. Trump, it’s a hugely hot topic for this presidential campaign.
According to the report nearly 118,000 Muslims were let in during 2013, but there are more than that allowed in each year.
radicalmuslim
In 2013 alone, 117,423 migrants from Muslim-majority countries were permanently resettled within the United States— having been given lawful permanent resident status. Additionally in 2013, the United States voluntarily admitted an extra 122,921 temporary migrants from Muslim countries as foreign students and foreign workers as well as 39,932 refugees and asylees from Muslim countries.
Thus, twelve years after the September 11th hijackers were invited into the country on temporary visas, the U.S. decided to admit 280,276 migrants from Muslim countries within a single fiscal year.
To put these numbers into perspective, this means that every year the U.S. admits a number of Muslim migrants larger in size than the entire population of Des Moines, Iowa; Lincoln, Nebraska; or Dayton, Ohio.
And that’s completely insane. With the worldwide rate of 15-25 percent of all Muslims being radicalized and in support of sharia law and barbaric states like ISIS, the Obama administration is literally letting tens of thousands of people into the country that wish to destroy everything we stand for.
Why is the U.S. letting these people here freely? Oh that’s right, Obama doesn’t care about the safety of American lives. We need Trump now.
(Source: Breitbart)
Saturday, October 24, 2015
Like the Assad regime, Russia is likely willing to inflict heavy civilian casualties in the process...
|
|
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Share it Tweet it Donate Ad Feedback Four Charged with Hate Crime, Kidnapping, Assault After Facebook Live Video...
-
Sandra Ávila Deported from the U.S.-But Legal Troubles Follow her... Eduardo Arellano Félix, El Doctor, Sentenced to 15 years in Prison 7 di...
-
THESE CARTOONS ARE ALL FROM OVERSEAS... None of these are from U.S. newspapers > NONE OF THESE ARE FROM USA PAPERS. HOW IS IT T...
