DOCSLIB.ORG

Terrorism in Afghanistan: a Joint Threat Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Terrorism in Afghanistan: A Joint Threat Assessment Terrorism in Afghanistan: A Joint Threat Assessment Introduction 7 Chapter I: Afghanistan’s Security Situation and Peace Process: Comparing U.S. and Russian Perspectives (Barnett R. Rubin) 9 Chapter II: Militant Terrorist Groups in, and Connected to, Afghanistan (Ekaterina Stepanova and Javid Ahmad) 24 Chapter III: Afghanistan in the Regional Security Interplay Context (Andrey Kazantsev and Thomas F. Lynch III) 41 Major Findings and Conclusions 67 Appendix A: Protecting Afghanistan’s Borders: U.S. and Russia to Lead in a Regional Counterterrorism Effort (George Gavrilis) 72 Appendix B: Arms Supplies for Afghan Militants and Terrorists (Vadim Kozyulin) 75 Appendix C: Terrorism Financing: Understanding Afghanistan’s Specifics (Konstantin Sorokin and Vladimir Ivanov) 79 Acronyms 83 Terrorism in Afghanistan Joint U.S.-Russia Working Group on Counterterrorism in Afghanistan Working Group Experts: Javid Ahmad1 Senior Fellow, Atlantic Council Sher Jan Ahmadzai Director, Center for Afghanistan Studies, University of Nebraska at Omaha Robert Finn Former Ambassador of the United States to Afghanistan George Gavrilis Fellow, Center for Democracy, Toleration, and Religion, University of California, Berkeley Andrey Kazantsev Director, Center for Central Asian and Afghan Studies, Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO University) Kirill Koktysh Associate Professor, Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO University) Member, Expert Council, State Duma Committee of Nationalities Mikhail Konarovsky Former Ambassador of the Russian Federation to Afghanistan Col. (Ret.) Oleg V. Kulakov* Professor of Area Studies, Military University, Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation Vadim Kozyulin Member, PIR Center Executive Board Researcher, Diplomatic Academy, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Thomas F. Lynch III2 Distinguished Research Fellow for South Asia and the Near East and Acting Director, Center for Strategic Research, Institute of National Strategic Studies, National Defense University 1 The Joint U.S.-Russia Working Group on Counterterrorism in Afghanistan is an independent project, concep- tualized and implemented by the EastWest Institute. Javid Ahmad contributed to the Joint Working Group activities as an expert in his personal capacity. His writings are based upon his own research and analysis and do not represent the views of the Atlantic Council. 2 The writings of Dr. Thomas F. Lynch III are those based upon his own research and analysis and do not neces- sarily represent the official position of the U.S. Government, the U.S. Department of Defense or the National Defense University. 4 Barnett R. Rubin Director, Afghanistan-Pakistan Regional Program, Center on International Cooperation, New York University Ivan Safranchuk Senior Fellow, Institute for International Studies, Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO University) Denis Sokolov Senior Advisor, Center for Strategic and International Studies Konstantin Sorokin Member of the Board, Eurasian Center for Comparative Studies Ekaterina Stepanova Head, Peace and Conflict Studies Unit, Primakov National Research Institute of the World Economy and International Relations Scott Worden Director, Afghanistan and Central Asia Programs, United States Institute of Peace Irina Zvyagelskaya Head, Center for Middle East Studies, Primakov National Research Institute of the World Economy and International Relations Project Director: Vladimir Ivanov Director, Russia and the United States Program, EastWest Institute Project Coordinator: Teresa Val Program Associate, Russia and the United States Program, EastWest Institute _ This publication was made possible in part by a grant from Carnegie Corporation of New York. The statements made and views expressed are solely the responsibility of the authors and contributors. * Deceased 5 Terrorism in Afghanistan Acknowledgements The EastWest Institute would like to dedicate this report to our dearly departed colleague and friend, Colonel (Ret.) Oleg V. Kulakov. His unparalleled knowledge and wit enriched our discussions, and he will be remembered fondly. We wish to express our deepest gratitude to the members of the Working Group, who generously gave their time and talents to this project; your commitment has been much appreciated. We would also like to thank the many experts and officials in the United States, Russia and other stakeholder countries who shared their insights and feedback on our work, including the following: James L. Creighton Distinguished Fellow, EastWest Institute Catherine Dale Senior Advisor, U.S. Army Futures Command Ramazan Daurov Head, Afghanistan Section, Institute of Oriental Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences Omar Nessar Senior Fellow, Institute of Oriental Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences Alexey Nosov Independent Consultant Igor Panarin Coordinator, CSTO Analytical Association Vladimir Sotnikov Senior Fellow, Institute of Oriental Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences Sergey Sudakov Corresponding Member, Academy of Military Sciences Joshua T. White Associate Professor of the Practice of South Asia Studies and Senior Fellow, Edwin O. Reischauer Center for East Asia Studies, Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies We are extremely grateful to several individuals at the EastWest Institute for their invaluable contributions to this project. Our sincerest appreciation goes to Ambassador Cameron Munter for guiding our discussions with diplomatic finesse and always finding the thread of commonality; Anna Renard-Koktysh for her help with coordinating logistics, research and photography for our meetings; Annie Cowan for her in-house expertise and trans-Atlantic assistance; Brita Achberger for her impeccable notetaking and logistical support; and Jack Strosser for his inestimable help during the publication process. Special thanks go to Henrietta Belaya for her effortless interpretation at all our convenings. Lastly, we are immensely grateful for the sponsorship of the Shelby Cullom Davis Trust, and in particular, Carnegie Corporation of New York, without whom this report and project would not have been possible. 6 Terrorism in Afghanistan Introduction This report aims to provide a clear-eyed assessment of terrorism and armed conflict in Afghanistan and related security threats for the United States, Russia and key stakeholder countries, approaching these issues with a cooperative outlook. The Project and dialogue to inform concrete and persuasive policy solutions is more critical than ever. Its Evolution Five years after the 2014 crisis in Ukraine, the Launched in October 2017, the EastWest United States and Russia remain at odds. The Institute’s (EWI) Joint U.S.-Russia Working initial fanfare following U.S. President Donald Group on Counterterrorism in Afghanistan has Trump’s election—with promises of improved sought to facilitate cooperative engagement bilateral relations—has since diminished as between the United States and Russia by ongoing allegations of election interference, providing a forum for constructive dialogue on continued sanctions and diplomatic joint counterterrorism efforts in Afghanistan. expulsions, among other issues, have dogged prospects for progress. With the U.S.-Russia In contrast to the many issues currently Bilateral Presidential Commission suspended straining U.S.-Russia relations, since 2014, intergovernmental contact counterterrorism and Afghanistan have between the two countries remains episodic. generally stood out as two promising areas Unlike the immediate post-9/11 period of for bilateral cooperation. To that end, the bilateral counterterrorism coordination and project has pursued dual aims: 1) to highlight cooperation, including on Afghanistan, the the extent of the threat of violence posed by current state of policymaking in both countries militant terrorist groups in Afghanistan—not is driven primarily by geopolitical competition. just to the United States and Russia, but also to other regional and global actors; and 2) to As for Afghanistan, the dire state of its national identify avenues for future counterterrorism circumstances—exacerbated by deteriorating cooperation, with the intention to generate security and a struggling economy—has been positive momentum in the bilateral further complicated by the country’s uncertain relationship. politics. Violence, low voter turnout and fraud allegations marred the October 2018 The disintegrating state of U.S.-Russia parliamentary elections. Twice postponed, the relations and the ever-evolving, uncertain September 2019 presidential elections faced political and security context in Afghanistan similar hurdles with preliminary vote results have made this a challenging feat—but by the twice delayed. The outcome of the elections— same token, have made the Working Group’s securing a second term for incumbent discussions and deliberations especially President Ashraf Ghani—was immediately relevant. The need for frequent and sustained contested by his challenger Abdullah Abdullah; 7 however, a May 2020 power-sharing agreement conflict in Afghanistan and related security has since resolved the political deadlock. During threats for the United States, Russia and key the same period, U.S.-Taliban negotiations stakeholder countries, approaching these gathered momentum, and even though formal issues with a cooperative outlook. The Joint intra-Afghan talks have yet to begin, the broader Threat Assessment’s structure
Recommended publications
  • The Regime Change Consensus: Iraq in American Politics, 1990-2003

    The Regime Change Consensus: Iraq in American Politics, 1990-2003

    THE REGIME CHANGE CONSENSUS: IRAQ IN AMERICAN POLITICS, 1990-2003 Joseph Stieb A dissertation submitted to the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History in the College of Arts and Sciences. Chapel Hill 2019 Approved by: Wayne Lee Michael Morgan Benjamin Waterhouse Daniel Bolger Hal Brands ©2019 Joseph David Stieb ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Joseph David Stieb: The Regime Change Consensus: Iraq in American Politics, 1990-2003 (Under the direction of Wayne Lee) This study examines the containment policy that the United States and its allies imposed on Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War and argues for a new understanding of why the United States invaded Iraq in 2003. At the core of this story is a political puzzle: Why did a largely successful policy that mostly stripped Iraq of its unconventional weapons lose support in American politics to the point that the policy itself became less effective? I argue that, within intellectual and policymaking circles, a claim steadily emerged that the only solution to the Iraqi threat was regime change and democratization. While this “regime change consensus” was not part of the original containment policy, a cohort of intellectuals and policymakers assembled political support for the idea that Saddam’s personality and the totalitarian nature of the Baathist regime made Iraq uniquely immune to “management” strategies like containment. The entrenchment of this consensus before 9/11 helps explain why so many politicians, policymakers, and intellectuals rejected containment after 9/11 and embraced regime change and invasion.
  • U.S.-China Sanya Initiative Dialogue

    U.S.-China Sanya Initiative Dialogue

    U.S.-China Sanya Initiative Dialogue Report from the 10th Anniversary Meeting U.S. and Chinese delegates meet with Admiral Miao Hua of the Central Military Commission of the People’s Republic of China. he EastWest Institute (EWI) convened the 10th anniversary of the U.S.-China Sanya Initiative from October 27 to 29, 2018. The dialogue was made possible through the generous support Tof the China-United States Exchange Foundation (CUSEF) and other private donors and was organized in close partnership with the China Association for International Friendly Contact (CAIFC). Retired American and Chinese senior flag officers and executives of the hosting organizations met in Beijing to discuss critical issues of mutual concern and interest impacting the U.S.-China military-to-military relationship, including North Korea, Taiwan, the South China Sea, emerging technologies, as well as other regional security challenges. The dialogue afforded timely opportunities for substantive exchanges prior to the November 9th meeting between U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and Chinese Minister of Defense Wei Fenghe and State Councilor Yang Jiechi. Planned activities included two days of off-the-record discussions at the Diaoyutai State Guesthouse in Beijing with the participation of observers from both China and the United States, as well as official meetings with Admiral Miao Hua, Director of the Political Department of the Chinese Central Military Commission, and Ambassador Terry Branstad, the U.S. Ambassador to the People’s Republic of China. www.eastwest.ngo | t: @EWInstitute | f: EastWestInstitute To learn more about EWI’s Asia-Pacific program, visit: www.eastwest.ngo/pillars/asia-pacific Meet the Delegates CHINESE PARTICIPANTS General (ret.) Qi Jianguo Former Deputy Chief, Joint Staff Department, Central Military Commission General (ret.) Li Andong Former Deputy Director, General Armament Department, Chinese People’s Liberation Army Admiral (ret.) William A.
  • The Lost Generation in American Foreign Policy How American Influence Has Declined, and What Can Be Done About It

    The Lost Generation in American Foreign Policy How American Influence Has Declined, and What Can Be Done About It

    September 2020 Perspective EXPERT INSIGHTS ON A TIMELY POLICY ISSUE JAMES DOBBINS, GABRIELLE TARINI, ALI WYNE The Lost Generation in American Foreign Policy How American Influence Has Declined, and What Can Be Done About It n the aftermath of World War II, the United States accepted the mantle of global leadership and worked to build a new global order based on the principles of nonaggression and open, nondiscriminatory trade. An early pillar of this new Iorder was the Marshall Plan for European reconstruction, which British histo- rian Norman Davies has called “an act of the most enlightened self-interest in his- tory.”1 America’s leaders didn’t regard this as charity. They recognized that a more peaceful and more prosperous world would be in America’s self-interest. American willingness to shoulder the burdens of world leadership survived a costly stalemate in the Korean War and a still more costly defeat in Vietnam. It even survived the end of the Cold War, the original impetus for America’s global activ- ism. But as a new century progressed, this support weakened, America’s influence slowly diminished, and eventually even the desire to exert global leadership waned. Over the past two decades, the United States experienced a dramatic drop-off in international achievement. A generation of Americans have come of age in an era in which foreign policy setbacks have been more frequent than advances. C O R P O R A T I O N Awareness of America’s declining influence became immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic and by Obama commonplace among observers during the Barack Obama with Ebola, has also been widely noted.
  • Syrian Buffer Zone – Turkey-Qatar Pipeline No

    Syrian Buffer Zone – Turkey-Qatar Pipeline No

    ISPSW Strategy Series: Focus on Defense and International Security Issue Syrian Buffer Zone – Turkey-Qatar Pipeline No. 367 Dr Christina Lin Aug 2015 Syrian Buffer Zone – Turkey -Qatar Pipeline Dr Christina Lin August 2015 Abstract Erdogan’s demand for a US-Turkey buffer zone in Syria is likely to prevent Kurdish autonomy and not fight ISIS, and enable the building of the Turkey-Qatar natural gas pipeline proposed back in 2009. With the proposed pipeline traveling through the Aleppo region—the same area for the buffer zone—the Turkey-Saudi-Qatar backed Army of Conquest would be able to establish a sunni salafist statelet in Syria and enable Ankara, Riyad and Doha to share in the future wealth of the pipeline. About the Author of this Issue Dr Christina Lin is a Fellow at the Center for Transatlantic Relations at SAIS-Johns Hopkins University. She is the author of "The New Silk Road: China's Energy Strategy in the Greater Middle East" (The Washington Institute for Near East Policy), and a former director for China policy at the U.S. Department of Defense. Dr Christina Lin About ISPSW The Institute for Strategic, Political, Security and Economic Consultancy (ISPSW) is a private institute for research and consultancy. The ISPSW is objective and task oriented and is above party politics. The increasingly complex international environment of globalized economic processes and worldwide political, ecological, social and cultural change, brings with it major opportunities but also risks: thus, decision-makers in the private sector and in politics depend more than ever before on the advice of highly qualified experts.
  • The Islamic Front by Aaron Y

    The Islamic Front by Aaron Y

    MENU Policy Analysis / PolicyWatch 2177 Rebels Consolidating Strength in Syria: The Islamic Front by Aaron Y. Zelin Dec 3, 2013 ABOUT THE AUTHORS Aaron Y. Zelin Aaron Y. Zelin is the Richard Borow Fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy where his research focuses on Sunni Arab jihadi groups in North Africa and Syria as well as the trend of foreign fighting and online jihadism. Brief Analysis The latest umbrella organization for key rebel factions in Syria may not include U.S.-designated terrorist groups, but it does oppose many U.S. objectives. he recent merger of several Syrian rebel groups into the Islamic Front (IF) is one of the war's most important T developments. Although the political and military opposition has long been fragmented, the new umbrella organization brings seven groups and their combined force of 45,000-60,000 fighters under one command. It also links the fight in the north and the south. Most notably, though, it affirms the troubles Washington will have setting policy in Syria going forward. WHO ARE THEY? F ormally announced on November 22, the IF includes groups from three prior umbrella organizations: the Syrian Islamic Front (SIF), the Syrian Islamic Liberation Front (SILF), and the Kurdish Islamic Front (KIF). From the SIF, Harakat Ahrar al-Sham al-Islamiyya (HASI), Kataib Ansar al-Sham, and Liwa al-Haqq joined, as did the KIF as a whole and former SILF brigades Suqur al-Sham, Liwa al-Tawhid, and Jaish al-Islam. None of these groups has been designated by the U.S.
  • The Jihadi Threat: ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and Beyond

    The Jihadi Threat: ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and Beyond

    THE JIHADI THREAT ISIS, AL QAEDA, AND BEYOND The Jihadi Threat ISIS, al- Qaeda, and Beyond Robin Wright William McCants United States Institute of Peace Brookings Institution Woodrow Wilson Center Garrett Nada J. M. Berger United States Institute of Peace International Centre for Counter- Terrorism Jacob Olidort The Hague Washington Institute for Near East Policy William Braniff Alexander Thurston START Consortium, University of Mary land Georgetown University Cole Bunzel Clinton Watts Prince ton University Foreign Policy Research Institute Daniel Byman Frederic Wehrey Brookings Institution and Georgetown University Car ne gie Endowment for International Peace Jennifer Cafarella Craig Whiteside Institute for the Study of War Naval War College Harleen Gambhir Graeme Wood Institute for the Study of War Yale University Daveed Gartenstein- Ross Aaron Y. Zelin Foundation for the Defense of Democracies Washington Institute for Near East Policy Hassan Hassan Katherine Zimmerman Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy American Enterprise Institute Charles Lister Middle East Institute Making Peace Possible December 2016/January 2017 CONTENTS Source: Image by Peter Hermes Furian, www . iStockphoto. com. The West failed to predict the emergence of al- Qaeda in new forms across the Middle East and North Africa. It was blindsided by the ISIS sweep across Syria and Iraq, which at least temporarily changed the map of the Middle East. Both movements have skillfully continued to evolve and proliferate— and surprise. What’s next? Twenty experts from think tanks and universities across the United States explore the world’s deadliest movements, their strate- gies, the future scenarios, and policy considerations. This report reflects their analy sis and diverse views.
  • The Pivot in Southeast Asia Balancing Interests and Values

    The Pivot in Southeast Asia Balancing Interests and Values

    WORKING PAPER The Pivot in Southeast Asia Balancing Interests and Values Joshua Kurlantzick January 2015 This publication has been made possible by a grant from the Open Society Foun- dations. The project on the pivot and human rights in Southeast Asia is also sup- ported by the United States Institute of Peace. The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher dedicated to being a resource for its members, government officials, busi- ness executives, journalists, educators and students, civic and religious leaders, and other interested citizens in order to help them better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other countries. Founded in 1921, CFR carries out its mission by maintaining a diverse membership, with special programs to promote interest and develop expertise in the next generation of foreign policy leaders; convening meetings at its headquarters in New York and in Washington, DC, and other cities where senior government officials, members of Congress, global leaders, and prominent thinkers come together with CFR members to discuss and debate major in- ternational issues; supporting a Studies Program that fosters independent research, enabling CFR scholars to produce articles, reports, and books and hold roundtables that analyze foreign policy is- sues and make concrete policy recommendations; publishing Foreign Affairs, the preeminent journal on international affairs and U.S. foreign policy; sponsoring Independent Task Forces that produce reports with both findings and policy prescriptions on the most important foreign policy topics; and providing up-to-date information and analysis about world events and American foreign policy on its website, CFR.org.
  • “TELLING the STORY” Sources of Tension in Afghanistan & Pakistan: a Regional Perspective (2011-2016)

    “TELLING the STORY” Sources of Tension in Afghanistan & Pakistan: a Regional Perspective (2011-2016)

    “TELLING THE STORY” Sources of Tension in Afghanistan & Pakistan: A Regional Perspective (2011-2016) Emma Hooper (ed.) This monograph has been produced with the financial assistance of the Norway Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Its contents are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not reflect the position of the Ministry. © 2016 CIDOB This monograph has been produced with the financial assistance of the Norway Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Its contents are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not reflect the position of the Ministry. CIDOB edicions Elisabets, 12 08001 Barcelona Tel.: 933 026 495 www.cidob.org [email protected] D.L.: B 17561 - 2016 Barcelona, September 2016 CONTENTS CONTRIBUTOR BIOGRAPHIES 5 FOREWORD 11 Tine Mørch Smith INTRODUCTION 13 Emma Hooper CHAPTER ONE: MAPPING THE SOURCES OF TENSION WITH REGIONAL DIMENSIONS 17 Sources of Tension in Afghanistan & Pakistan: A Regional Perspective .......... 19 Zahid Hussain Mapping the Sources of Tension and the Interests of Regional Powers in Afghanistan and Pakistan ............................................................................................. 35 Emma Hooper & Juan Garrigues CHAPTER TWO: KEY PHENOMENA: THE TALIBAN, REFUGEES , & THE BRAIN DRAIN, GOVERNANCE 57 THE TALIBAN Preamble: Third Party Roles and Insurgencies in South Asia ............................... 61 Moeed Yusuf The Pakistan Taliban Movement: An Appraisal ......................................................... 65 Michael Semple The Taliban Movement in Afghanistan .......................................................................
  • Reimagining US Strategy in the Middle East

    Reimagining US Strategy in the Middle East

    REIMAGININGR I A I I G U.S.S STRATEGYT A E Y IIN THET E MMIDDLED L EEASTS Sustainable Partnerships, Strategic Investments Dalia Dassa Kaye, Linda Robinson, Jeffrey Martini, Nathan Vest, Ashley L. Rhoades C O R P O R A T I O N For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RRA958-1 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-1-9774-0662-0 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. 2021 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Cover composite design: Jessica Arana Image: wael alreweie / Getty Images Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Preface U.S.
  • Global Extremism Monitor

    Global Extremism Monitor

    Global Extremism Monitor Violent Islamist Extremism in 2017 WITH A FOREWORD BY TONY BLAIR SEPTEMBER 2018 1 2 Contents Foreword 7 Executive Summary 9 Key Findings About the Global Extremism Monitor The Way Forward Introduction 13 A Unifying Ideology Global Extremism Today The Long War Against Extremism A Plethora of Insurgencies Before 9/11 A Proliferation of Terrorism Since 9/11 The Scale of the Problem The Ten Deadliest Countries 23 Syria Iraq Afghanistan Somalia Nigeria Yemen Egypt Pakistan Libya Mali Civilians as Intended Targets 45 Extremist Groups and the Public Space Prominent Victims Breakdown of Public Targets Suicide Bombings 59 Use of Suicide Attacks by Group Female Suicide Bombers Executions 71 Deadliest Groups Accusations Appendices 83 Methodology Glossary About Us Notes 3 Countries Affected by Violent Islamist Extremism, 2017 4 5 6 Foreword Tony Blair One of the core objectives of the Institute is the promotion of co-existence across the boundaries of religious faith and the combating of extremism based on an abuse of faith. Part of this work is research into the phenomenon of extremism derived particularly from the abuse of Islam. This publication is the most comprehensive analysis of such extremism to date and utilises data on terrorism in a new way to show: 1. Violent extremism connected with the perversion of Islam today is global, affecting over 60 countries. 2. Now more than 120 different groups worldwide are actively engaged in this violence. 3. These groups are united by an ideology that shares certain traits and beliefs. 4. The ideology and the violence associated with it have been growing over a period of decades stretching back to the 1980s or further, closely correlated with the development of the Muslim Brotherhood into a global movement, the Iranian Revolution in 1979 and—in the same year—the storming by extremist insurgents of Islam’s holy city of Mecca.
  • The Reverberating Effects of Explosive Weapon Use in Syria Contents

    The Reverberating Effects of Explosive Weapon Use in Syria Contents

    THE REVERBERATING EFFECTS OF EXPLOSIVE WEAPON USE IN SYRIA CONTENTS Introduction 4 1.1 Timeline 6 1.2 Worst locations 8 1.3 Weapon types 11 1.4 Actors 12 Health 14 Economy 19 Environment 24 Society and Culture 30 Conclusion 36 Recommendations 37 Report by Jennifer Dathan Notes 38 Additional research by Silvia Ffiore, Leo San Laureano, Juliana Suess and George Yaolong Editor Iain Overton Copyright © Action on Armed Violence (January 2019) Cover illustration Syrian children play outside their home in Gaziantep, Turkey by Jennifer Dathan Design and printing Tutaev Design Clarifications or corrections from interested parties are welcome Research and publication funded by the Government of Norway, Ministry of Foreign Affairs 4 | ACTION ON ARMED VIOLENCE REVERBERATING EFFECTS OF EXPLOSIVE WEAPONS IN SYRIA | 5 INTRODUCTION The use of explosive weapons, particularly in populated noticed the following year that, whilst total civilian families from both returning to their homes and using areas, causes wide-spread and long-term harm to casualties (deaths and injuries) were just below that their land. Such impact has devastating and lingering civilians. Action on Armed Violence (AOAV) has been of the previous year, civilian deaths had increased by consequences for communities and cultures. monitoring casualties from the use of explosive 50% (from 5,639 in 2016 to 8,463 in 2017). As the war weapons around the globe since 2010. So extreme continued, injuries were increasingly less likely to be In this report, AOAV seeks to better understand the has such harm been in Syria in recent years that, recorded - particularly in incidents where there were reverberating harms from the explosive violence in by the end of 2017, Syria had overtaken Iraq as the high levels of civilian deaths.
  • Letters from Abbottabad: Bin Ladin Sidelined?

    Letters from Abbottabad: Bin Ladin Sidelined?

    Letters from Abbottabad: Bin Ladin Sidelined? Harmony Program Letters from Abbottabad: Bin Ladin Sidelined? Nelly Lahoud Stuart Caudill Liam Collins Gabriel Koehler-Derrick Don Rassler Muhammad al-`Ubaydi HARMONY PROGRAM THE COMBATING TERRORISM CENTER AT WEST POINT www.ctc.usma.edu 3 May 2012 The views expressed in this report are the authors’ and do not necessarily reflect those of the Combating Terrorism Center, U.S. Military Academy, Department of Defense or U.S. government. May 3, 2012 Foreword The death of Usama bin Ladin one year ago understandably generated a significant amount of interest in the professionals who carried out the raid in Abbottabad, Pakistan, on the night of May 2nd. Lost in the focus on this single mission is the fact that United States Special Operations Forces (SOF) have conducted thousands of comparable missions in Afghanistan and Iraq since 2001. The success of “Neptune Spear” was the cumulative result of the experience, relentless focus and professionalism of a community that has been conducting these types of missions for over ten years. A second feature of the raid and one much less apparent to the general public is that the professionals conducting this operation were trained to survey the site and collect any electronic media, papers, or pocket litter that might inform future operations. As discussed in the report, this process, known as F3EA (Find, Fix, Finish, Exploit and Analyze), has helped to revolutionize the fight against al-Qa`ida and created a cyclical operational process for combating networked actors. The end of the raid in Abbottabad was the beginning of a massive analytical effort as experts from across the Intelligence Community (IC) worked to exploit these captured documents, which in turn undoubtedly contributed to additional operations.