Policy Brief 09 November, 2016
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Rebooting U.S. Security Cooperation in Iraq
Rebooting U.S. Security Cooperation in Iraq MICHAEL KNIGHTS POLICY FOCUS 137 Rebooting U.S. Security Cooperation in Iraq MICHAEL KNIGHTS THE WASHINGTON INSTITUTE FOR NEAR EAST POLICY www.washingtoninstitute.org The opinions expressed in this Policy Focus are those of the author and not necessarily those of The Washington Institute, its Board of Trustees, or its Board of Advisors. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publica- tion may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. © 2015 by The Washington Institute for Near East Policy The Washington Institute for Near East Policy 1828 L Street NW, Suite 1050 Washington, DC 20036 Design: 1000colors Photo: A Kurdish fighter keeps guard while overlooking positions of Islamic State mili- tants near Mosul, northern Iraq, August 2014. (REUTERS/Youssef Boudlal) CONTENTS Acknowledgments | v Acronyms | vi Executive Summary | viii 1 Introduction | 1 2 Federal Government Security Forces in Iraq | 6 3 Security Forces in Iraqi Kurdistan | 26 4 Optimizing U.S. Security Cooperation in Iraq | 39 5 Issues and Options for U.S. Policymakers | 48 About the Author | 74 TABLES 1 Effective Combat Manpower of Iraq Security Forces | 8 2 Assessment of ISF and Kurdish Forces as Security Cooperation Partners | 43 FIGURES 1 ISF Brigade Order of Battle, January 2015 | 10 2 Kurdish Brigade Order of Battle, January 2015 | 28 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS My thanks to a range of colleagues for their encouragement and assistance in the writing of this study. -
Mcallister Bradley J 201105 P
REVOLUTIONARY NETWORKS? AN ANALYSIS OF ORGANIZATIONAL DESIGN IN TERRORIST GROUPS by Bradley J. McAllister (Under the Direction of Sherry Lowrance) ABSTRACT This dissertation is simultaneously an exercise in theory testing and theory generation. Firstly, it is an empirical test of the means-oriented netwar theory, which asserts that distributed networks represent superior organizational designs for violent activists than do classic hierarchies. Secondly, this piece uses the ends-oriented theory of revolutionary terror to generate an alternative means-oriented theory of terrorist organization, which emphasizes the need of terrorist groups to centralize their operations. By focusing on the ends of terrorism, this study is able to generate a series of metrics of organizational performance against which the competing theories of organizational design can be measured. The findings show that terrorist groups that decentralize their operations continually lose ground, not only to government counter-terror and counter-insurgent campaigns, but also to rival organizations that are better able to take advantage of their respective operational environments. However, evidence also suggests that groups facing decline due to decentralization can offset their inability to perform complex tasks by emphasizing the material benefits of radical activism. INDEX WORDS: Terrorism, Organized Crime, Counter-Terrorism, Counter-Insurgency, Networks, Netwar, Revolution, al-Qaeda in Iraq, Mahdi Army, Abu Sayyaf, Iraq, Philippines REVOLUTIONARY NETWORK0S? AN ANALYSIS OF ORGANIZATIONAL DESIGN IN TERRORIST GROUPS by BRADLEY J MCALLISTER B.A., Southwestern University, 1999 M.A., The University of Leeds, United Kingdom, 2003 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSPHY ATHENS, GA 2011 2011 Bradley J. -
Shia Strength - Iraqi Militants Adapt to the US Drawdown
TERRORISM & INSURGENCY Date Posted: 30-Sep-2011 Jane's Intelligence Review Shia strength - Iraqi militants adapt to the US drawdown Key Points Iranian-backed Shia militants in Iraq are responsible for a disproportionately high number of the US casualties suffered in recent months. Kataib Hizbullah, the most sophisticated group, is considered a direct extension of Iran's Qods Force and could become involved in international operations in support of Iranian goals. Asaib Ahl al-Haq and Promised Day Brigades are Iraqi Shia insurgent groups, whose links to Iran peaked in 2008 and have slowly reduced since then. Iraq's 'special groups', such as Kataib Hizbullah and Promised Day Brigades, have stepped up attacks as US forces look to withdraw. Michael Knights looks at Iran's support for the Shia militants, their operations and their post-US future. The US military suffered its heaviest monthly casualties in Iraq in three years in June, when 14 of its soldiers were killed in action. At least 12 of them were killed by Iranian-backed 'special groups', prompting fresh complaints from the US that Iran was encouraging its Iraqi allies to step up their attacks as the scheduled withdrawal of all US forces from Iraq looms. The surge in attacks highlighted the threat posed by Shia militants, especially if the US and Iraqi governments sign an agreement allowing US forces to stay beyond the 31 December withdrawal deadline. Even if the US leaves as previously agreed, Iran is expected to continue to back Iraqi proxies in order to influence the political situation and retain an ability to strike Western assets in the country and possibly elsewhere. -
Iran's Foreign and Defense Policies
Iran’s Foreign and Defense Policies Updated May 8, 2019 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R44017 SUMMARY R44017 Iran’s Foreign and Defense Policies May 8, 2019 Iran’s national security policy is the product of many overlapping and sometimes competing factors such as the ideology of Iran’s Islamic revolution, perception of threats Kenneth Katzman to the regime and to the country, long-standing national interests, and the interaction of Specialist in Middle the Iranian regime’s factions and constituencies. Iran’s leadership: Eastern Affairs x Seeks to deter or thwart U.S. or other efforts to invade or intimidate Iran or to bring about a change of regime. x Has sought to take advantage of opportunities of regional conflicts to overturn a power structure in the Middle East that it asserts favors the United States, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and other Sunni Muslim Arab regimes. x Seeks to enhance its international prestige and restore a sense of “greatness” reminiscent of ancient Persian empires. x Advances its foreign policy goals, in part by providing material support to regional allied governments and armed factions. Iranian officials characterize the support as helping the region’s “oppressed” and assert that Saudi Arabia, in particular, is instigating sectarian tensions and trying to exclude Iran from regional affairs. x Sometimes disagrees on tactics and strategies. Supreme Leader Ali Khamene’i and key hardline institutions, such as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), oppose any compromises of Iran’s national security core goals. Iran’s elected president, Hassan Rouhani, and Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif support Iran’s integration into regional and international diplomacy. -
UK Home Office
Country Policy and Information Note Syria: the Syrian Civil War Version 4.0 August 2020 Preface Purpose This note provides country of origin information (COI) and analysis of COI for use by Home Office decision makers handling particular types of protection and human rights claims (as set out in the Introduction section). It is not intended to be an exhaustive survey of a particular subject or theme. It is split into two main sections: (1) analysis and assessment of COI and other evidence; and (2) COI. These are explained in more detail below. Assessment This section analyses the evidence relevant to this note – i.e. the COI section; refugee/human rights laws and policies; and applicable caselaw – by describing this and its inter-relationships, and provides an assessment of, in general, whether one or more of the following applies: x A person is reasonably likely to face a real risk of persecution or serious harm x The general humanitarian situation is so severe as to breach Article 15(b) of European Council Directive 2004/83/EC (the Qualification Directive) / Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights as transposed in paragraph 339C and 339CA(iii) of the Immigration Rules x The security situation presents a real risk to a civilian’s life or person such that it would breach Article 15(c) of the Qualification Directive as transposed in paragraph 339C and 339CA(iv) of the Immigration Rules x A person is able to obtain protection from the state (or quasi state bodies) x A person is reasonably able to relocate within a country or territory x A claim is likely to justify granting asylum, humanitarian protection or other form of leave, and x If a claim is refused, it is likely or unlikely to be certifiable as ‘clearly unfounded’ under section 94 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. -
Asaib Ahl Al-Haq and the Khazali Special Groups Network
Backgrounder #38 Asaib Ahl al‐Haq and the Khazali Special Groups Network By Marisa Cochrane, Research Manager, Institute for the Study of War January 13, 2008 Introduction Multi‐National Force‐Iraq has identified various Shia extremist groups operating in Iraq, often using the label Special Groups or Secret Cells (first described in a press conference on July 2, 2007). MNF‐I named Asaib Ahl al‐Haq (AAH, or the League of the Righteous) as an active group on August 19, 2008 and released information that AAH is “affiliated” with Special Groups. This paper evaluates how the two groups are affiliated by testing four hypotheses about the relationship between the Special Groups network, led at one time by Qais Khazali, and Asaib Ahl al‐Haq (League of the Righteous): 1) Asaib Ahl al‐Haq (AAH) is the same as the Khazali Special Groups Network (referred hereafter as Special Groups or SGs); 2) AAH was an affiliate of SGs in 2006 and its successor after Khazali’s arrest in early 2007; 3) AAH was an affiliate of SGs in 2006 and remains so today; and 4) AAH is not related to SGs. After a brief description of Special Groups and AAH, this paper will explore the evidence in support of each hypothesis. The first two hypotheses are most plausible given what is known about these two groups. Because the evidence is ample but indirect, the paper will list the assumptions or qualifications required for each of these hypotheses to be true. The third and fourth hypothesis can be ruled out given the amount of contradictory evidence, the clear connections between the leadership of the two groups, and the statements by MNF‐I. -
Iranian Proxies Terrorist Sanctions
MDM18679 S.L.C. 115TH CONGRESS 2D SESSION S. ll To impose sanctions with respect to certain militias in Iraq that are backed by the Government of Iran. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES llllllllll Mr. PERDUE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on llllllllll A BILL To impose sanctions with respect to certain militias in Iraq that are backed by the Government of Iran. 1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- 2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Iranian Proxies Ter- 5 rorist Sanctions Act’’. 6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 7 Congress finds the following: 8 (1) As-Saib Ahl al-Haq (referred to in this sec- 9 tion as ‘‘AAH’’) is an Iraqi paramilitary group that 10 was founded in 2006. MDM18679 S.L.C. 2 1 (2) Harakat Hizballah al-Nujaba (referred to in 2 this section as ‘‘Nujaba’’) is an affiliated faction of 3 AAH and the United States-designated foreign ter- 4 rorist organization Kata’ib Hizballah, which was 5 formed in 2013. 6 (3) AAH and Nujaba receive training, funding, 7 and arms from the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary 8 Guard Corps Quds Force and are mentored by Leb- 9 anese Hizballah. 10 (4) AAH leader, Qais Khazali, has pledged alle- 11 giance to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. 12 (5) AAH conducted numerous attacks against 13 the United States and coalition forces in Iraq be- 14 tween its inception in 2006 and the United States 15 withdrawal from Iraq in December 2011, including 16 an attack on January 20, 2007 on the Karbala Pro- 17 vincial Headquarters, which resulted in the killing of 18 Captain Brian S. -
Download Original 489.8 KB
Frazer 1 Risky Behavior: Understanding Iranian Foreign Policy Sarah Frazer Class of 2019 Senior Honors Thesis Government 490 Advisor: Professor Jennifer Kibbe Department of Government Franklin & Marshall College Date of Honors Defense: 1 May, 2019 Frazer 2 Acknowledgements Firstly, I would like to thank Professor Jennifer Kibbe for being my thesis advisor and guiding me through this process with support and enthusiasm. Thank you for always pushing me to do my best and for this great opportunity. I would not have thought to pursue an honors thesis without your suggestion and confidence in me. I have greatly enjoyed working with you over this past year.. To my mom, thank you for always encouraging me and believing in me. I’m grateful that you raised me to work hard and follow through to accomplish my goals. Lastly, thank you to my sister, Marie, for many hours and late nights of listening to my ideas, editing drafts, and giving constructive criticism. Frazer 3 Abstract Since its founding in 1979, the Islamic Republic of Iran has played a pivotal role in Middle East politics and beyond; therefore, understanding the factors that influence Iran’s international behavior is essential to understanding regional politics. In this paper, I will analyze Iran’s foreign policy towards three neighboring states: Saudi Arabia, Iran’s archrival; Turkey its “frenemy,” and Syria, its closest state ally. I will consider Iran’s relations with these countries during the Khatami (1997-2005) and Ahmadinejad (2005-2013) presidencies and will apply prospect theory to explain Iran’s behavior. Through my research, I discovered that the Islamic Republic’s behavior is best explained by prospect theory, which contends that Iran will behave differently when it is in a domain of loss as opposed to when it is in a domain of gain. -
WEEKLY CONFLICT SUMMARY | 30 March - 5 April 2020
WEEKLY CONFLICT SUMMARY | 30 March - 5 April 2020 SYRIA SUMMARY • NORTHWEST | Levels of Conflict in northwest Syria remained elevated for the second consecutive week, as Turkish military personnel and equipment continued to arrive to Idleb. Inside the Turkish-held areas of northern Aleppo Governorate, opposition armed groups continued their looting and extortion activity against civilians. An attack against an opposition affiliated National Police Officer highlighted the growing number of attacks against the entity in the previous month. • SOUTH & CENTRAL | Tensions over kidnapping and clashes continue between communal militias Dara’a and As-Sweida. Government of Syria (GoS)-aligned personal faced continuing attacks in Daraa Governorate. • NORTHEAST | Shelling exchanges around Turkish-held Operation Peace Spring areas increased, while Turkish-backed opposition armed groups and the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) clashed on the ground. Jailed ISIS members staged a riot to escape a prison in Hassakah. ISIS also attacked SDF and pro-Iran forces in Deir-ez-Zor. Members of the Asayish (Kurdish Intelligence) and National Defense Forces (NDF) exchanged fire in Qamishli City. Figure 1: Dominant actors’ area of control and influence in Syria as of 5 April 2020. NSOAG stands for Non-state Organized Armed Groups. Also, please see the footnote on page 2. Page 1 of 5 WEEKLY CONFLICT SUMMARY | 30 March – 5 April 2020 NORTHWEST SYRIA1 For a second consecutive week, there were elevated levels of conflict activity in the northwest of Syria. The Government of Syria (GoS) shelled 14 locations, 26 times2 during the week, compared to 22 locations targeted 36 times by shelling and small arms fire the previous week. -
SMA CENTCOM Reach-Back Reports
SMA CENTCOM Reach-back Reports This is Part 4 of a 9 part series of SMA Reach back responses to questions posed by USCENTCOM. Each report contains responses to multiple questions grouped by theme. 7 February 2017 1 At the request of United States Central Command (USCENTCOM), the Joint Staff, Deputy Director for Global Operations (DDGO), jointly with other elements in the JS, Services, and U.S. Government (USG) Agencies, has established a SMA virtual reach-back cell. This initiative, based on the SMA global network of scholars and area experts, is providing USCENTCOM with population based and regional expertise in support of ongoing operations in the Iraq/Syria region. The Strategic Multi-Layer Assessment (SMA) provides planning support to Commands with complex operational imperatives requiring multi-agency, multi-disciplinary solutions that are NOT within core Service/Agency competency. Solutions and participants are sought across USG and beyond. SMA is accepted and synchronized by Joint Staff (JS/J-3/DDGO) and executed by ASD(R&E)/EC&P/RRTO. 2 Table of Contents What are the strategic objectives and motivations of indigenous state and non-state partners in the counter-ISIL fight? ......................................................................................................................................... 4 In light of their divergent goals and interests, what are the necessary factors that would permit the U.S.- led Coalition, regional stakeholders (including Israel, Russia, and Iran), or jihadist groups to achieve their aims in Iraq? Where do disparate groups’ interests align and where do they diverge? What can the U.S. coalition do to deny adversaries the ability to achieve their goals? ....................................................... 107 What are near and long term Turkish interests and intentions in Syria and Iraq? What are Turkish interests and intentions with respect to al-Bab? .................................................................................................... -
The Virtual Entrepreneurs of the Islamic State
Combating Terrorism Center at West Point Objective • Relevant • Rigorous | March 2017 • Volume 10, Issue 3 FEATURE ARTICLE FEATURE ANALYSIS The Virtual Entrepreneurs The Islamic of the Islamic State State’s War on How the group’s virtual planners threaten the United States Turkey Seamus Hughes and Alexander Meleagrou-Hitchens Ahmet S. Yayla FEATURE ARTICLE 1 The Threat to the United States from the Islamic State’s Virtual Editor in Chief Entrepreneurs Paul Cruickshank Seamus Hughes and Alexander Meleagrou-Hitchens Managing Editor FEATURE ANALYSIS Kristina Hummel 9 The Reina Nightclub Attack and the Islamic State Threat to Turkey Ahmet S. Yayla EDITORIAL BOARD Colonel Suzanne Nielsen, Ph.D. ANALYSIS Department Head Dept. of Social Sciences (West Point) 17 The German Foreign Fighters in Syria and Iraq: The Updated Data and its Implications Lieutenant Colonel Bryan Price, Ph.D. Daniel H. Heinke Director, CTC 23 Australian Jihadism in the Age of the Islamic State Brian Dodwell Andrew Zammit Deputy Director, CTC 31 The Taliban Stones Commission and the Insurgent Windfall from Illegal Mining Matthew C. DuPée CONTACT Combating Terrorism Center U.S. Military Academy In our feature article, Seamus Hughes and Alexander Meleagrou-Hitchens 607 Cullum Road, Lincoln Hall focus on the threat to the United States from the Islamic State’s “virtual entrepreneurs” who have been using social media and encryption applica- West Point, NY 10996 tions to recruit and correspond with sympathizers in the West, encouraging and directing them to Phone: (845) 938-8495 engage in terrorist activity. They find that since 2014, contact with a virtual entrepreneur has been a Email: [email protected] feature of eight terrorist plots in the United States, involving 13 individuals. -
Iran-Backed Shiite Militias in Iraq
Behnam Ben Taleblu September 26, 2018 Chairman Poe, Ranking Member Keating, distinguished members of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Trade, and Nonproliferation at the House Foreign Affairs Committee, on behalf of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, thank you for inviting me to testify. It is a privilege to present my analysis alongside Dr. Kimberly Kagan, Mr. Michael Pregent, and Ambassador Barbara Leaf, all of whose work on Iraq and Iran, as well as their service to our country, I respect and admire. Today, I will focus my comments on Iran’s proxy strategy and militias while highlighting measures to counter these forces in Iraq. Designating Iran’s armed agents of influence can serve as a predicate for a new Iraq policy beyond the anti-Islamic State mission. It can also help implement the regional component of a more comprehensive Iran policy, which the current U.S. administration called for almost one year ago.1 Broader Iranian Motivations and Strategy Properly orienting the present discussion about Iranian militias in Iraq begins not in Baghdad but in Tehran. The radical Khomeinist interpretation of Shiite Islam underpinning the 1979 Islamic Revolution was something Iranian revolutionaries intended for export. Despite emphasis on the prioritization of “regime survival”2 in assessments of Iranian strategy, the regime’s ideology and desire to export the revolution remain important drivers of Iranian foreign and security policy. Indeed, surveying the chaos in the Middle East in 2015, the commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ Quds-Force (IRGC-QF), Qassem Soleimni, boasted, “We are witnessing the export of the Islamic Revolution throughout the region.