In my last post I mentioned that Al Qaeda had formed a new franchise named Al Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent. Well, the group has wasted no time in claiming and conducting attacks.
The first was an assassination targeting a senior officer in the Pakistani army, Brigadier Fazal Zahoor. AQIS claimed that Brigadier Zahoor killed innocent women and children in Waziristan. The attackers rode motorcycles and managed to escape.
The second attack is a bit confusing. Original news reports state on September 11 AQIS operatives attacked a ship in the Karachi port thinking it was a US aircraft carrier. Instead of a carrier, the attackers found a Pakistani Navy frigate and were overwhelmed by security forces before they caused any damage. Later reports claim the attack actually occurred on September 6 and that the Pakistani ship was the actual target. AQIS announced that Pakistani naval officers were part of the assault and the goal was to capture the ship and use its missiles to strike US ships in the Indian Ocean.
So which story is correct? As usual, the truth is probably some combination of the two. However, the story of inept terrorists attacking a US carrier only to find a Pakistani frigate seems to be a bit too far fetched to me. For a change I'm going to believe the AQIS statement. You don't attack a target without knowing what that target is. That's military tactics 101.
Showing posts with label Pakistan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pakistan. Show all posts
Thursday, September 18, 2014
Wednesday, October 2, 2013
Another Aussie Gift
Way back in February, one of my Insider Attack targets was detained in Pakistan. The individual had killed 3 Australian soldiers and wounded 2 more. Australia worked for months to have this individual transferred from the Pakistani authorities over to Afghan control. The knowledge that this guy was detained was kept on the down low since Australia has a better relationship with Pakistan than the US does and Australia didn't want to jeopardize anything. Every once in awhile somebody not in the loop would ask about this guy and all I could say was, "he's detained, but I can't talk about it."
It was a tad frustrating. But that's part of working at a joint/coalition command.
Today, however, I came into work and discovered the glorious news that Australia had announced Hekmatullah's capture and transfer to Afghanistan. Happy happy joy joy. Two months and 2 targets officially off my list, both involving the Australians.
I'm crossing my fingers that one or two more of these guys get actioned by the time I go home.
It was a tad frustrating. But that's part of working at a joint/coalition command.
Today, however, I came into work and discovered the glorious news that Australia had announced Hekmatullah's capture and transfer to Afghanistan. Happy happy joy joy. Two months and 2 targets officially off my list, both involving the Australians.
I'm crossing my fingers that one or two more of these guys get actioned by the time I go home.
Sunday, July 28, 2013
Top 10 "Global Concerns" 2013 Edition
It's that time of the year again (why I originally started this in late July I will never remember) for Warhorse Intel's Top 10 "Global Concerns". I compile this list based on the reading I do throughout the year and is entirely my own biased assessment. 2012's list is here. Here's what it looked like:
10. Greece
9. Iran
8. Mexico
7. Kurd/Arab line Iraq
6. Somalia
5. North Korea
4. Yemen
3. Mali
2. Syria
1. Afghanistan/Pakistan
Once again the list between this year and last year are very similar. I'm not going to go in depth as much with each of these or provide links to back up my statements because 1) I don't have a whole lot of time and 2) I'm feeling especially lazy and 3) I'm in Afghanistan, what do you want from me? You're lucky you get a list at all. Anyway, as for the changes...Greece fell off because I think their economic issues are not going to lead to much violence beyond rioting. Mexico also came off as it appears from my little corner of the world that the narco gangs may be losing influence and power, but we'll see. Yemen was also dropped because Al Qaida In the Arabic Peninsula (AQAP) does not appear to be gaining strength and that conflict may be more tribal than anything else and is unlikely to spread. Now, on to the 2013 list!
10. Nigeria
Violence caused by Boko Haram led to a goverment crackdown in the north. That crackdown has led to more violence. My question is, when will Al Qaida officially jump into the fray and openly support Boko Haram?
9. Iran
Maintaining the spot at #9 only because at any time they could announce that they have a nuclear weapon which would lead to an Israeli airstrike which would then lead to...well...chaos. Will a new president lead to any significant change? This analyst says no.
8. Tunisia
Arab Spring woke up some demons in Tunisia. Extremists are becoming increasingly vocal and political assassinations are on the rise. Al Qaida In the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) is also likely looking for a spot to cause some havoc after being routed in Mali.
7. Somalia
Will Shabaab ever quit? I keep saying they are 6 months from being dead but they keep refusing to die.
6. Mali
The Tuareg tribe took over the north with the help of AQIM and friends. The Tauregs immediately regretted this decision and worked with the French to boot AQIM. Tentative peace has followed. I don't think it's going to last.
5. North Korea
For awhile there I thought war really was going to break out but then cooler heads prevailed. I keep them on this list because one day Best Korea may just actually do it and invade again.
4. Iraq
It's no longer just the Kurd/Arab line that's a problem. Violence has reached 2008 levels throughout the country. Everything Prime Minister Maliki does just creates more tension. At what point do the Sunnis revolt? At what point do the Kurds declare independence? At what point does the US return?
3. Egypt
Holy hell this place escalated quickly. Fallen regimes, Muslim Brotherhood in charge, coups, violence, and a growing extremist threat in the Sinai.
2. Syria
A clusterfuck.
1. Afghanistan/Pakistan
I've spent nearly 9 months here in Afghanistan and now have the hands on experience to repeat what I have said in my previous Top 10s...fuck this place.
10. Greece
9. Iran
8. Mexico
7. Kurd/Arab line Iraq
6. Somalia
5. North Korea
4. Yemen
3. Mali
2. Syria
1. Afghanistan/Pakistan
Once again the list between this year and last year are very similar. I'm not going to go in depth as much with each of these or provide links to back up my statements because 1) I don't have a whole lot of time and 2) I'm feeling especially lazy and 3) I'm in Afghanistan, what do you want from me? You're lucky you get a list at all. Anyway, as for the changes...Greece fell off because I think their economic issues are not going to lead to much violence beyond rioting. Mexico also came off as it appears from my little corner of the world that the narco gangs may be losing influence and power, but we'll see. Yemen was also dropped because Al Qaida In the Arabic Peninsula (AQAP) does not appear to be gaining strength and that conflict may be more tribal than anything else and is unlikely to spread. Now, on to the 2013 list!
10. Nigeria
Violence caused by Boko Haram led to a goverment crackdown in the north. That crackdown has led to more violence. My question is, when will Al Qaida officially jump into the fray and openly support Boko Haram?
9. Iran
Maintaining the spot at #9 only because at any time they could announce that they have a nuclear weapon which would lead to an Israeli airstrike which would then lead to...well...chaos. Will a new president lead to any significant change? This analyst says no.
8. Tunisia
Arab Spring woke up some demons in Tunisia. Extremists are becoming increasingly vocal and political assassinations are on the rise. Al Qaida In the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) is also likely looking for a spot to cause some havoc after being routed in Mali.
7. Somalia
Will Shabaab ever quit? I keep saying they are 6 months from being dead but they keep refusing to die.
6. Mali
The Tuareg tribe took over the north with the help of AQIM and friends. The Tauregs immediately regretted this decision and worked with the French to boot AQIM. Tentative peace has followed. I don't think it's going to last.
5. North Korea
For awhile there I thought war really was going to break out but then cooler heads prevailed. I keep them on this list because one day Best Korea may just actually do it and invade again.
4. Iraq
It's no longer just the Kurd/Arab line that's a problem. Violence has reached 2008 levels throughout the country. Everything Prime Minister Maliki does just creates more tension. At what point do the Sunnis revolt? At what point do the Kurds declare independence? At what point does the US return?
3. Egypt
Holy hell this place escalated quickly. Fallen regimes, Muslim Brotherhood in charge, coups, violence, and a growing extremist threat in the Sinai.
2. Syria
A clusterfuck.
1. Afghanistan/Pakistan
I've spent nearly 9 months here in Afghanistan and now have the hands on experience to repeat what I have said in my previous Top 10s...fuck this place.
Thursday, May 16, 2013
Graveyard of Emprires? Not So Much
Afghanistan has the nickname "Graveyard of Empires" because of some silly notion that no conquering state can seem to control the place. However, if you actually look closely at history other than the British getting trounced a couple of times and the Soviet Union collapsing a few short years after leaving the country, Afghanistan has actually been the "highway of conquest" for many civilizations who were quite capable of conquering and controlling the region now known as Afghanistan, at least until 1842 or so.
Darius I and his Persians controlled the region until the upstart Alexander showed up and took it. Alexander's successors then held Afghanistan for 200 years. There was some back and forth control for awhile between various Indo-Greek nations until the Sassanids/Persians claimed the territory. Those pesky Mongols eventually showed up and had very little to no trouble until Tamerlane arrived. The Timur Empire would eventually move its capital from Samarkand to Herat. Doesn't exactly appear that Afghanistan is the graveyard for any empire.
But what about those Brits? They never actually wanted to absorb Afghanistan into the Empire. Afghanistan was a buffer state between British India and Imperial Russia. London only sent troops into Afghanistan in order to ensure the king in Kabul remained "pro-England" and did not become "pro-Russia". Yeah, I'm simplifying things a bit.
The Soviet Union? They were probably winning against the Mujahideen in Afghanistan up until 1984 or so when the US decided to arm the insurgents with Stinger missiles. Did Russia try and fail in Afghanistan? Yes, of course. But there were numerous factors at play.
Which brings me to now. I just completed reading Ahmed Rashid's Taliban (add that to the long list of books I should have read a long time ago) which describes the Taliban's rise and impact in Afghanistan. It's pretty obvious that the West, and specifically the US, bungled Afghanistan after the Soviets left, mostly because the West chose to ignore Afghanistan and let Pakistan handle things. It continued to be ignored even after 9/11 and the US invasion, mostly because the US focused its attention on Iraq. The challenges ISAF is facing here in Afghanistan can be traced back to the complete lack of security forces and troops from 2002 until about 2008/2009 which allowed for the Taliban to regroup and re-arm. Keeping our head in the sand about Pakistan didn't help either. Don't even get me started on Pakistan.
All of this got me thinking last night, which in itself is always dangerous and makes my head hurt. One question popped into my brain that I will attempt to tackle in my next post and kind of goes against my entire thought process above...
Is Afghanistan the graveyard of NATO?
Darius I and his Persians controlled the region until the upstart Alexander showed up and took it. Alexander's successors then held Afghanistan for 200 years. There was some back and forth control for awhile between various Indo-Greek nations until the Sassanids/Persians claimed the territory. Those pesky Mongols eventually showed up and had very little to no trouble until Tamerlane arrived. The Timur Empire would eventually move its capital from Samarkand to Herat. Doesn't exactly appear that Afghanistan is the graveyard for any empire.
But what about those Brits? They never actually wanted to absorb Afghanistan into the Empire. Afghanistan was a buffer state between British India and Imperial Russia. London only sent troops into Afghanistan in order to ensure the king in Kabul remained "pro-England" and did not become "pro-Russia". Yeah, I'm simplifying things a bit.
The Soviet Union? They were probably winning against the Mujahideen in Afghanistan up until 1984 or so when the US decided to arm the insurgents with Stinger missiles. Did Russia try and fail in Afghanistan? Yes, of course. But there were numerous factors at play.
Which brings me to now. I just completed reading Ahmed Rashid's Taliban (add that to the long list of books I should have read a long time ago) which describes the Taliban's rise and impact in Afghanistan. It's pretty obvious that the West, and specifically the US, bungled Afghanistan after the Soviets left, mostly because the West chose to ignore Afghanistan and let Pakistan handle things. It continued to be ignored even after 9/11 and the US invasion, mostly because the US focused its attention on Iraq. The challenges ISAF is facing here in Afghanistan can be traced back to the complete lack of security forces and troops from 2002 until about 2008/2009 which allowed for the Taliban to regroup and re-arm. Keeping our head in the sand about Pakistan didn't help either. Don't even get me started on Pakistan.
All of this got me thinking last night, which in itself is always dangerous and makes my head hurt. One question popped into my brain that I will attempt to tackle in my next post and kind of goes against my entire thought process above...
Is Afghanistan the graveyard of NATO?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)