Archive for April 21, 2013

Russia dreams of new pyramid scheme in Egypt

April 21, 2013

Russia dreams of new pyramid scheme in Egypt – World – Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper.

Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi declared his government is seeking to make a ‘real political pact’ with Russia, and requested a $2-billion loan to increase its foreign currency reserves. Russia has asked Egypt and Algeria for permission to build a naval base in their territory.

By | Apr.21, 2013 | 11:42 AM
Putin - AP - May 9, 2012

Russia’s acting Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov, left, Russian President Vladimir Putin, centert, and Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev, bottom right, watching the Victory Day Parade. Photo by AP

Is it possible that during a period of Muslim Brotherhood rule, secular Russia will find its way back into Egypt? It seems that as Egypt’s economic millstone grows, ideological differences are being pushed aside.

On Friday, Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi asked his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, for a loan totaling $2 billion. It appears that Russia will accommodate the request, and even encourage Russian investment in Egypt − in addition to supporting efforts to build a nuclear reactor to bolster the nation’s power supply.

During a press conference in Moscow, Morsi declared that his government is seeking to make a “real political pact” with Russia, and that his country needs the Russian loan to increase Egypt’s foreign currency reserves. This is in order to meet the International Monetary Fund’s condition for receiving a $4.8 billion loan that has been stuck in the pipeline for many months.

It seems there is a strategic aspect behind the Russian loan and Putin’s support. “The Americans support the Egyptians with about $2 billion every year. They understand the strategic importance that Egypt has in the area. We also need to fund our foreign policy,” said Yuri Ushakov, a foreign policy adviser to Putin, while speaking to the Bloomberg news agency.

This is not the first such statement made by the Russians that reflects a new direction for the Kremlin. According to the Iraqi newspaper Azzaman, Russia has asked Egypt and Algeria for permission to build a naval base in their territory, to replace their Syrian port of Tartus, if and when Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime falls.

That request could symbolize a new perception in Russia, according to which not only is Assad close to the end, but also that those who replace him are likely to sever ties with Russia over its unreserved support of the Syrian president.

According to the newspaper, which cited sources in Algeria and Cairo, Russia made the request before Morsi’s visit to Russia this week so that the proposal could be discussed.

In return, Russia promised to supply Egypt with wheat at prices lower than the world market, as well as providing military and economic support. According to Egyptian sources, Egypt refused the Russian request after Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika refused the request. Algeria also refused a Russian request for permission to use its seaports in order to create an intelligence-gathering center, and to service its submarines and other naval vessels.

Relations between Egypt and the Soviet Union, close allies during Nasser’s regime during the 1950s and 60s, became strained while Anwar Sadat was in power, after he decided to switch Egypt’s strategic orientation from the U.S.S.R to the U.S.
Now, Russia hopes to renew the countries’ trade pact with a joint committee and increase trade between them − valued at $3.5 billion last year − by almost 70 percent.

“The nearing of Egypt and Russia will not come at the expense of Egypt’s relations with the U.S.,” one Western diplomatic official opined. “The interesting aspect is that Russia has begun to realize that its bet on Syria is going to fail, and that it will have to prepare itself for a strategic alternative.”

An Egyptian analyst told Haaretz that “Egyptians have yet to recover from the trauma of the Soviet presence in Egypt during the 1950s and 60s. Despite the criticism of the U.S., Egypt cannot swap its diplomatic ties with the U.S. for ties with Russia. The global situation today is not like it was, and Egypt cannot play Nasser’s game between Moscow and Washington.”

Higher, Farther, Costlier

April 21, 2013

Higher, Farther, Costlier.

Against the background of the New York Times’ report regarding US intentions to sell the V-22 Osprey to Israel, a review of the qualities and advantages of the unique aircraft and the notes of IsraelDefense’s editor-in-chief, who flew in the aircraft several months ago
(Photo: Boeing) (Photo: Boeing)

It isn’t completely an airplane or a helicopter – however, will the V-22 Osprey be the replacement for the IDF’s Yasur (Sikorsky CH-53) helicopters, which will conclude 50 years of IAF service in 2019?

As of now, the IDF intends to operate a small portion of its Yasur helicopters, at least until 2025. At the same time, initial flights were carried out by IAF pilots on the unusual aircraft being offered to the corps.

An IAF delegation visited a US Marine base in North Carolina in November 2011 and examined the aircraft by carrying out low altitude flights, night flights, and air refueling exercises. Former IAF commander Major General Ido Nechushtan (who finished his service in May 2012) flew the aircraft himself during his last visit to the US in the spring of 2012.

The acquisition of an entire squadron of V-22 aircraft is not expected to be included in the framework of the IDF’s multi-year plan slated for the autumn of 2012 (intended for the 2013 -2017 timeframe). However, it is not inevitable that the IDF will later decide to acquire or lease several such aircraft, as an initial stage. In such a case, the question would be where the funding would come from. Will it come from the IAF budget or from the IDF’s central budget?

An Unusual Aircraft

The V-22 is unusual by any criterion. The aircraft-helicopter is a joint product of Boeing and Bell. Boeing is constructing the hull and Bell is building the “helicopter” parts, which include the propellers. It also possesses a tilt-rotor thrust and engines by Rolls-Royce.

The design for the aircraft began on paper during the Cold War. The intention was to design a unique aircraft that could take off vertically from any vessel at sea or any point on the ground and then switch to a horizontal flight mode as a swift aircraft, after tilting the thrusters at a 90° forward angle.

Initial aircrafts were engineered only at the start of the last decade after aerodynamics engineers overcame considerable obstacles. However, additional years of development were needed to overcome all the problems in the wake of an accident that resulted in the deaths of 19 marines. At the end of development, since the start of 2007, the new aircraft has fully served in missions in Iraq and Afghanistan – and its personnel participated in rescue operations while under fire.

The V-22 does not possess the capabilities of a swift fighter aircraft, nor of a quick assault helicopter. Instead, it integrates the capabilities of both. It always takes off and lands vertically like a helicopter, and after transitioning to flight mode, it can reach a maximum speed of 565 km per hour and a flight altitude of 25,000 ft. The aircraft is intended to carry 24 sitting or 32 standing fighters, and can handle 9,070 kg of internal cargo, or up to 6,800 kg of external cargo. Its two versions – one in service to the US Marines, and the other used by special forces – are difficult to differentiate. The main difference is in the radar systems, most of which are not visible from the outside.

Flight in England

In order to inspect the aircraft closely, which may join the IAF’s aircraft fleet, I joined the flight of a V-22 with a Marines configuration, held by Bell-Boeing in the framework of the Farnborough Air Show in England held in the second week of June 2012.

The V-22 was already prominent at the takeoff point (the backyard of the Embraer aircraft factory). This is not only because it has two pairs of wings and a tail (like any standard aircraft) alongside vertical thrusters (which change angle in flight during the transition from helicopter to aircraft). It also has a wide underbelly that sits atop three pairs of small wheels – one frontal pair and two rear pairs.

“The only way to understand this aircraft is to fly in it. I will be shocked if you aren’t amazed from the flight,” said Bell’s CEO, John Grisso, before taking off. Minutes later, the passengers boarded the aircraft using a rear ramp. We took off after quickly strapping into our seats.

Prior to the take-off, it is difficult to understand how the giant lump of metal rises – but it does so quickly. After dozens of seconds, the aircraft was already hovering low above the infinite meadows that surround Farnborough, to the east of London. The British grass and castles gleamed in the sunlight, which shone brightly after days of continuous rainfall.

The take-off, which was explained by the pilot on the internal communications network, can be done entirely vertically. However, it is usually done at an 80° angle to provide the aircraft with immediate horizontal speed.

During the initial stages of take-off, the aircraft behaves like any other helicopter. It is only at a speed of 40 knots that the wide wings (a wingspan of 25.8 m) take effect. When the pilot decides to switch to airplane flight mode, the maneuver takes him 12 – 15 seconds. He can continue the flight and end it as a helicopter. However, 95% of the flight time is carried out as an airplane, simply because the aircraft is faster and more efficient. The helicopter flight capabilities primarily serve for takeoff and landing, or in situations in which there is a need to fly close to the ground, in order to avoid enemy fire or to search for survivors.

The initial flight stages are reminiscent of the flight of a Yasur helicopter, only one that is more modern. It was possible to see the electrical wiring systems in the aircraft we flew in – most of the aircraft systems are mechanical and do not convey technology that is not known from other helicopters or airplanes. Then comes the significant change – during the transition to airplane mode, the V-22 displays considerably impressive maneuverability capabilities. The takeoff and climbing is carried out sharply. The iPhone in my hand became surprisingly heavy during the climb. Of course, the aircraft did not reach a miniscule portion of its maneuverability capabilities, but at least 2-3 G forces were applied to the generally light device, which nearly slipped from my grasp.

Suitable for Israel?

While in the air, I tried to think whether the V-22 was suitable for the IAF, or would it be more of a luxury? On one hand, its market price is intimidating – something in the area of $70 million, which is about 70% compared to a Hercules C-130I cargo aircraft (the IAF is buying three such aircraft from Lockheed Martin), yet more expensive than a standard cargo helicopter. A squadron of V-22’s could cost a fortune.

On the other hand, the aircraft has clear advantages with regards to the IAF’s combat outline (and not just when discussing the US marines or special forces that have to operate quickly and from any point across the globe). A clear advantage is its ability to take off and land beyond air force bases, which are expected to be within the range of rockets in any future war scenario. Beyond that, the aircraft’s operational range is large and can be suitable for special operations in very distant locations or for a war scenario in Iran.

The V-22 can easily reach an operational radius of nearly 700 km (the precise distance depends on the amount of cargo it carries). This means that it can reach places such as Iran and return, with just a single fueling, compared to the Yasur helicopter that flies slowly and requires at least three refuels. Its refueling is simple and fast in itself. The aircraft is equipped with an opening, and it can fly at the same speed as a Hercules aircraft and get another portion of fuel while still in the air. The Yasur helicopter, on the other hand, must accelerate to top speed and catch up with the Hercules at the point where it is flying as slowly as possible, in order to improvise the refueling. In distinguishing from an ordinary helicopter, the V-22 can fly above clouds and can essentially operate in all weather conditions. Its ability to avoid antiaircraft fire is also considered superior to any helicopter.

However, are these advantages worth $70 million per unit? The IDF has not made a decision, and is perhaps waiting for another US gift. Can the Bell-Boeing factories supply the aircraft to the IAF quickly, should it decide to procure it? According to Bell’s personnel, the answer is yes. The V-22’s production lines are at record activity. Every month, three new aircraft are produced; however, the rate will soon decrease.

The production of an aircraft intended for the IAF can be integrated immediately, and it would be received within two years, once a decision is made. “This aircraft is equipped with safety systems that completely control it. Once I take off, I trust my aircraft almost to the point of being blindfolded,” said US Marine pilot Crew Chief Timothy Guest Bachelor, while trying to convince the IAF to acquire the V-22. The question remains whether he will convince them.

Patriot missiles to be deployed along Jordan-Syria border

April 21, 2013

Patriot missiles to be deployed along Jordan-Syria border | The Times of Israel.

US to relocate two batteries from Qatar and Kuwait in order to protect Hashemite Kingdom, source claims

April 19, 2013, 5:23 pm
An illustrative photo of a Patriot missile system (photo credit: CC-BY-SA Darkone/Wikimedia Commons)

An illustrative photo of a Patriot missile system (photo credit: CC-BY-SA Darkone/Wikimedia Commons)

US Army officials have agreed to deploy two Patriot missile batteries along the Jordan-Syria border, London-based paper Asharq Al-Awsat reported Friday.

According to the report, the decision came after Jordanian officials requested that the US assist in protecting and securing the kingdom’s borders.

Citing a Jordanian source, the report also claimed that the two Patriot missile batteries will be transferred from Qatar and Kuwait.

Earlier this year, several Patriot batteries were redeployed along the Turkey-Syria border after Ankara requested protection from stray mortar shells.

On Wednesday, US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel notified Congress that the Pentagon would send about 200 soldiers from an Army headquarters unit to Jordan. Hagel explained that the troops will assist efforts to contain violence along the Syrian border and plan for any operations needed to ensure the containment of chemical weapons.

Jordanian Information Minister Mohammed Momani confirmed that they would receive the 200 American troops.

“They will be here to bolster our training and defense capabilities in light of the deterioration in Syria,” Momani told The Associated Press.

The Associated Press contributed to this report

‘Israel seeks Turkish airbase to enable Iran strike’

April 21, 2013

‘Israel seeks Turkish airbase to enable Iran strike’ | The Times of Israel.

Yaakov Amidror travels to Ankara offering advanced defense technology in exchange for an airstrike launching platform the Sunday Times reports

Illustrative photo of an F-16 jet (photo credit: Nati Shohat /Flash90)

When National Security Council head Yaakov Amidror arrives in Turkey on Sunday to discuss compensation for flotilla victims, he will also be seeking to lay the groundwork for the stationing of Israeli fighter jets in an airbase near Ankara, ahead of a possible strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, the Sunday Times reported.

“Until the recent crisis, Turkey was our biggest aircraft carrier,” an Israeli military source told the London-based publication. “Using the Turkish airbases could make the difference between success and failure once a showdown with Iran gets underway.”

“Iran is warning openly about its intentions to destroy us and is working with all its might to carry it out,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said at a Holocaust Remembrance ceremony in Jerusalem earlier this month. “We won’t leave our fate in the hands of others, even the best of our friends,” he added alluding to the US’s promise to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

According to the Sunday Times report, Amidror is expected to offer Turkey advanced missile and surveillance technology in exchange for a base and training facilities at Akinci air base, northwest of Ankara. The move would see a resumption of the arrangement that was established in 1996 and remained in place until the two countries all but severed ties in the wake of the May 2010 raid on the Mavi Marmara, when Israeli commandos killed nine Turkish nationals during the takeover of the vessel which was trying to reach Gaza.

A reconciliation between the two former allies was brokered by US President Barack Obama during the final moments of his visit to Israel last month. Just minutes before boarding Air Force One, Obama handed Netanyahu the phone and heard him apologize to his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan for “operational errors” made by Israel during the raid.

Amidror will reportedly be arriving in Ankara with a proposal to sell Turkey a variety of Israeli-developed weapons and military equipment, including Arrow anti-ballistic missiles, an advanced visual intelligence system developed by Elop, and an electronic warfare system made by Elta. The latter two systems were reportedly sent to Turkey for testing before bi-lateral ties deteriorated.

“The Israeli defense establishment has been lobbying hard for the politicians to find a form of apology, in order to restore the Israeli-Turkish alliance against Syria and Iran,” an Israeli defense source told the Sunday Times. “Turkey is very worried by Iran’s missile ambitions — countering this independently would take them years. With Israeli know-how based on the Jericho ballistic missiles, the time-frame will be cut short.”

“Turkey is talking about full normalization and a return of ties to the way they were before,” Turkey’s deputy prime minister Bulent Arinc told Maariv in an interview published on Wednesday. “I expect the talks to succeed. Normalization between Israel and Turkey will increase the chances of regional peace.”

Arinc said that Israel’s apology over the flotilla incident and acquiescence to Turkey’s other demands of paying compensation to the families of those who died, as well as easing the blockade on Gaza, have paved the way for re-establishing ties that broke off after the incident.

On Saturday, however, families of the Marmara victims objected to compensation talks with Israel, saying the Jewish state must first fully lift its blockade of the Gaza Strip.

The relatives also said they would not drop lawsuits filed against former Israeli military commanders they hold responsible for the deaths.

Earlier this month, an Istanbul court heard the charges that were filed against four of the most senior retired commanders, including former IDF chief of staff Gabi Ashkenazi, in absentia, something Israel has characterized as a politically motivated stunt.

Why US-Israel mission to thwart Iran could mean a leading role for China on North Korea

April 21, 2013

Why US-Israel mission to thwart Iran could mean a leading role for China on North Korea | The Times of Israel.

Defense Secretary Hagel’s Mideast visit this week will focus on Iran and Syria, but those crises should also be viewed through the lens of Beijing and Pyongyang

April 20, 2013, 8:25 pm Secretary of Defense Hagel alongside Israel's previous defense minister, Ehud Barak, in early March at the Pentagon (Photo credit: Erin A. Kirk-Cuomo/ Ministry of Defense/ Flash 90)

Secretary of Defense Hagel alongside Israel’s previous defense minister, Ehud Barak, in early March at the Pentagon (Photo credit: Erin A. Kirk-Cuomo/ Ministry of Defense/ Flash 90)

US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel traveled Saturday to Israel, the first stop on a trip that includes Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Hagel is projected to address the two major threats in the region: the unraveling of Syria and the Iranian quest for nuclear arms. Looming large above those, though, is the hermetically sealed dictatorship of North Korea – its nuclear program, its relationship with China, and the US’s so-called pivot toward the Pacific.

Gazing west across the Atlantic, as Israel frequently does, obscures China’s pivotal role in handling the world’s two nuclear crises, and the manner in which US-Sino relations affects them both.

“We have recently seen the results of a wild regime that possesses nuclear weapons,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the Foreign Diplomatic Corps on April 16. “We have also seen that heavy sanctions are not always effective against a sufficiently determined regime. Therefore, we have an obligation to ensure that this will not happen again.”

To Netanyahu, North Korea is a flashing red light, a warning sign posted on the path toward Iranian nuclear power. To the US, amid its quietly roiling competition with China, it is surely that, too. But North Korea also perhaps represents an opportunity for the US to engage in some realpolitik with Beijing, which, of course, requires time – a commodity that Netanyahu lacks.

On February 12, Kim Jong Un, the third in a family line of dictators, the absolute leader of the world’s most militarized state, authorized North Korea’s third underground nuclear test. Three weeks later, the UN Security Council imposed further sanctions on the regime and, one week after that, the US launched a joint military exercise with South Korea. Pyongyang accused the US of carrying out a cyber attack and promptly threatened the US and South Korea with a nuclear response. The US flew stealth bombers over South Korea for the first time. North Korea re-stated its declaration of war with its southern neighbor and, in early April, announced that it would test-launch ballistic missiles. The US, on April 3, began rushing a missile defense system to Guam, an American territory in the Pacific.

These developments, while worrying – Hagel called them “a real and clear danger” — are not uncommon and were seen by many as saber-rattling by Kim Jong Un, generated mostly for internal consumption.

China’s response, though, was uncharacteristic. On April 7, China’s newly appointed President Xi Jinping rebuked the young and untested North Korean leader. “No one should be allowed to throw a region and even the whole world into chaos for selfish gain,” he said.

“That is a significant change,” according to Dr. Yoram Evron, a senior research fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies and a faculty member of the University of Haifa’s Asian Studies Department.

Evron described China as balancing two separate sets of interests – military and economic growth in Asia, and its global position vis-à-vis Iran – but said he was not sure whether amelioration on one front could come in exchange for a united stand on the other.

In Asia, China has seen Obama make, at the very least, rhetorical strides in the direction of advancing US influence in the Pacific. “As we end today’s wars, I have directed my national security team to make our presence and missions in the Asia-Pacific a top priority,” Obama told the Australian parliament in November 2011. “Reductions in US defense spending will not — I repeat, will not — come at the expense of the Asia-Pacific.”

Former secretary of defense Leon Panetta said, before leaving office, that US security in the 21st Century “will be linked to the security and prosperity of Asia more than any other region on earth.”

These comments, along with the early-April stationing of US Marines in Australia and the build-up of troops around the Korean peninsula, Evron suggested in a recent INSS essay, “would impair China’s strategic ability to maneuver in the region and would limit its ability to realize its ambitions to achieve regional dominance.”

This explains the unusually strong language from Beijing. The People’s Republic of China does not want to be seen as financially backing a nuclear-equipped nutcase and it does not want to offer the US an excuse to act in its backyard.

But what about Iran? In terms of China, Evron said, “there is an entire set of interests at play.”

Most tend to focus on China’s energy needs and Iran’s oil, he said, but equally important are China’s global position as “a counterweight” to the US and its self-image as a leader of the world’s developing nations.

For Beijing to allow the US to forcefully strip Tehran of its nuclear program, he said, would be seen as a capitulation.

Nonetheless, there is a chance — depending on where the Americans’ true priorities lie — that Hagel, Kerry, and Obama will offer China additional breathing room in the Pacific, and a chance to deal with North Korea on its own terms. The quid pro quo? Increased support in tackling Syria and, most crucially, Iran.

Boston Marathon Inquiry Shifts to Suspect’s Russia Trip – NYTimes.com

April 21, 2013

Boston Marathon Inquiry Shifts to Suspect’s Russia Trip – NYTimes.com.

 

 

WASHINGTON — With one suspect dead and the other captured and lying grievously wounded in a hospital, the investigation into the Boston Marathon bombings turned on Saturday to questions about the men’s motives, and to the significance of an overseas trip one of them took last year.

Federal investigators are hurrying to review a visit that one of the suspected bombers made to Chechnya and Dagestan, predominantly Muslim republics in the north Caucasus region of Russia. Both have active militant separatist movements. There are concerns in Congress about the F.B.I.’s handling of a request from Russia before the trip to examine the man’s possible links to extremist groups in the region.

Tamerlan Tsarnaev, who died early Friday after a shootout with the police in Watertown, Mass., spent six months of last year in Dagestan.

Tamerlan’s father, Anzor, said his son had returned to renew his passport, but his stay was prolonged and, analysts said, may have marked a crucial step in his path toward the bombing of the Boston Marathon.

Kevin R. Brock, a former senior F.B.I. and counterterrorism official, said, “It’s a key thread for investigators and the intelligence community to pull on.”

The investigators began scrutinizing the events in the months and years before the fatal attack, as Boston began to feel like itself for the first time in nearly a week .

Monday had brought the bombing, near the finish line of the Boston Marathon, which killed three and wounded scores, and the tense days that followed culminated in Friday’s lockdown of the entire region as the police searched for Mr. Tsarnaev’s younger brother from suburban backyards to an Amtrak train bound for New York City.

The motivations of Tamerlan Tsarnaev, and his younger brother, Dzhokhar, who was taken into custody Friday night and is still too wounded to speak, are as yet publicly unknown. Of Chechen heritage, they lived in the United States for years, according to friends and relatives, and no direct ties have been publicly established with known Chechen terrorist or separatist groups.

The significance of the trip was magnified late Friday when the F.B.I. disclosed in a statement that in 2011 “a foreign government” — now acknowledged by officials to be Russia — asked for information about Tamerlan, “based on information that he was a follower of radical Islam and a strong believer, and that he had changed drastically since 2010 as he prepared to leave the United States for travel to the country’s region to join unspecified underground groups.”

The senior law enforcement official said the Russians feared he could be a risk, and “they had something on him and were concerned about him, and him traveling to their region.”

But the F.B.I. never followed up on Tamerlan once he returned, a senior law enforcement acknowledged on Saturday, adding that the bureau had not kept tabs on him until he was identified on Friday as the first suspect in the marathon bombing case.

President Obama and Republican lawmakers devoted their weekly broadcast addresses to the Boston attack, with both sides finding a common voice.

Russia and the United States have since 1994 routinely exchanged requests for background information on residents traveling between those countries on visa, criminal or terrorism issues. It was unclear Saturday whether Russia makes requests of any American traveler of Chechen origin to Russia, or if the Russian government offered the F.B.I. specific evidence in the case of Mr. Tsarnaev.

The bureau responded to the request by checking “U.S. government databases and other information to look for such things as derogatory telephone communications, possible use of online sites associated with the promotion of radical activity, associations with other persons of interest, travel history and plans, and education history,” the statement explained.

In January 2011, two agents from the bureau’s Boston field office interviewed Tamerlan and family members, a senior law enforcement official said on Saturday. According to the F.B.I.’s statement, “The F.B.I. did not find any terrorism activity, domestic or foreign,” and conveyed those findings to “the foreign government” by the summer of 2011.

As the law enforcement official put it, “We didn’t find anything on him that was derogatory.”

The Russian state news agency RIA Novosti quoted the father of the Tsarnaev brothers recalling the F.B.I.’s close questioning of his elder son, “two or three times.”

He said they had told his son that the questioning “is prophylactic, so that no one sets off bombs on the streets of Boston, so that our children could peacefully go to school.”

In an interview in Russia, Zubeidat Tsarnaeva, the mother of the two men, recalled that the agents had told her that Tamerlan was “an excellent boy,” but “at the same time, they told me he is getting information from really extremist sites, and they are afraid of him.”

After the visit to Dagestan and Chechnya, signs of alienation emerged. One month after Tamerlan returned to the United States, a YouTube page that appeared to belong to him was created and featured multiple jihadist videos that he had endorsed in the past six months.

One video features the preaching of Abdul al-Hamid al-Juhani, an important ideologue in Chechnya; another focuses on Feiz Mohammad, an extremist Salafi Lebanese preacher based in Australia. He also created a playlist of songs by a Russian musical artist, Timur Mucuraev, one of which promotes jihad, according to the SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors statements by jihadists.

The aftermath of the arrests has thrust Washington and Moscow into a cooperative mode, a jarring shift coming amid weeks of rancor over American criticism of Russia’s human rights record. Presidents Obama and Vladimir V. Putin spoke by telephone late Friday night, in a conversation initiated by the Russian side, the Kremlin announced. The Kremlin’s statement said both leaders expressed a desire for “the building of close coordination between Russian and American intelligence services in the battle with global terrorism.”

Nevertheless, there were glaring questions about the case, among them how Tamerlan had escaped attention after 2011.

A Russian intelligence official told the Interfax news service on Saturday that Russia had not been able to provide the United States with “operatively significant” information about the Tsarnaev brothers, “because the Tsarnaev brothers had not been living in Russia.”

Andrei Soldatov, an investigative journalist who specializes in Russia’s security services, said he believes that Tamerlan may have attracted the attention of Russian intelligence because of the video clips he had posted under his own name starting in 2010, which were included on a list of banned materials by the Federal Security Service, or F.S.B.

At that point, the agency had just begun routinely scrutinizing materials posted on social networks, and would most likely have sent a request to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, said Mr. Soldatov, the author of “The New Nobility: The Restoration of Russia’s Security State and the Enduring Legacy of the K.G.B.”

On Saturday morning, federal prosecutors were drafting a criminal complaint against Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, 19, who was wounded in the leg and neck and had lost a great deal of blood when he was captured Friday evening. The F.B.I. and local law enforcement agencies continued to gather evidence and investigate the bombings, the killing of a Massachusetts Institute of Technology police officer Thursday night and the subsequent battle with the police that left another officer critically wounded.

An official said the criminal complaint would most likely include a constellation of charges stemming from both the bombings and the shooting, possibly including the use of weapons of mass destruction, an applicable charge for the detonation of a bomb. That charge, the official said, carries a maximum penalty of death. While Massachusetts has outlawed the death penalty, federal law allows it.

Muslim leaders in many cities rushed to hold news conferences and preach sermons at mosques denouncing the bombing suspects, mourning the victims and praising the response of law enforcement and the community in Boston. They were eager to dissociate their faith from the Muslim suspects, and to head off a backlash against Muslims in the United States.

Anzor Tsarnaev and his younger son first came to the United States legally in April 2002 on 90-day tourist visas, federal law enforcement officials said. Once in this country, the father applied for political asylum, claiming he feared deadly persecution based on his ties to Chechnya. Dzhokhar, who was 8, applied for asylum under his father’s petition, the officials said, and became a naturalized citizen on Sept. 11 last year. Tamerlan Tsarnaev came to the United States later, and applied for American citizenship on Sept. 5 last year, federal law enforcement officials said.

Although Anzor Tsarnaev has said his older son’s citizenship application had been denied — and certainly would have been if he were under suspicion as a potential terrorist — the officials said it was still in process and had been neither approved nor denied.

As a routine part of his application, Tamerlan Tsarnaev was subject to a criminal background check by the F.B.I. The authorities confirmed that he had been involved in a domestic violence episode while he was a resident with a green card, the officials said. A review of the case delayed his citizenship application, the officials said, but it was not deemed serious enough to disqualify his application.

Eric Schmitt and Michael S. Schmidt reported from Washington, and Ellen Barry from Moscow. Reporting was contributed by John Schwartz from New York; Andrew Roth and David M. Herszenhorn from Makhachkala, Dagestan; Peter Baker from Washington; and C. J. Chivers from the United States.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: April 20, 2013

An earlier version of this article misidentified the office held by Tim Scott of South Carolina. He is a senator, not a representative.

 

First Take: Don’t blame Chechnya for Boston bombings

April 21, 2013

First Take: Don’t blame Chechnya for Boston bombings.

( A reliable friend of mine told me that Chechnians are known world-wide as being assasins for hire, i.e. “hit men.” – JW )

Oppressed, war-ravaged nations are the breeding ground for great warriors as well as evil terrorists, from Afghanistan to Palestine.

If the bombs that exploded Monday in Boston were indeed set off by two Chechen brothers, it would be the first time radicals from the small, mostly Muslim semiautonomous Russian republic have carried out a terrorist attack outside Russia.

The second Chechen conflict — in which Russian troops waged a merciless war against radical separatists and the civilian population alike — officially ended in 2000 and unofficially in 2009, with the installation of a pro-Russian government.

Even so, the unrest in Chechnya has been constant since then as radical fighters have moved away from battling the Russian military to targeting civilians.

Moscovites are familiar with Chechen terrorism. In the past 15 years, hundreds of civilians have been killed in a series of hostage situations: 130 in a Moscow theater in 2002; more than 330 in a school in the Caucasian peninsula in 2004; 40 in a suicide bombing in a Moscow metro in 2010; and 37 in a bomb in Moscow’s Domodedovo Airport in 2011.

During the wars in Chechnya more than a decade ago, the West stuck to an idealized view of the early Chechen freedom fighters even as the first signs of Muslim radicalization began to emerge. Islamist “brothers” from Russia joined the cause of Chechen independence while fundamentalist “Wahabites,” as Middle East recruits were referred to, fought alongside the rebels.

Chechen fighters were no longer the proud, mostly secular rebels who fought for independence in the first war (1994-96). By the second war (1999-2000), most democrats had died or fled, leaving the country in the hands of mostly criminal clans and radical fighters. By 2000, radical Muslims were using the Chechen war front as a jihadist playground.This radicalization was engineered by Russia – not only through its use of disproportionate violence and the commission of war crimes but also by arming and playing clans against each other in the period between the two wars. The Russian army not only crushed the rebels but turned Chechen civilians into a population of martyrs.

By the time the Russian troops left, the Chechen capital of Grozny had been reduced to rubble. During the 2002 theater hostage disaster in Moscow, Russian special forces ended up killing the hostages they were supposed to free with lethal gas. Putin shamelessly instrumentalized the tragedy to boast about his tough stance on terrorism and boost his popularity.

Now, Chechen terrorists may have hit America. An entire nation is waking up to the existence of Chechnya, a place they wouldn’t have been able to find on a map a day earlier. They see Muslims and hear jihad — one more place harboring extremists who hate America.

Indeed, in recent years, a new generation of Chechen rebels have been advertising their goal of creating a radical pan-Caucasian emirate ruled by sharia, strict Islamic law.

“Our enemy is not Russia only, but everyone who wages war against Islam and Muslims,” proclaims their leader, Doku Umarov.

Are the Chechens trying to bring their cause to the international stage? Or are they just Muslim recruits in the global jihad against the western Satan?

Probably the latter.

There were news reports, for example, of a Danish man released from Guantanamo saying he wanted to join Muslim Chechens in their fight against Russia. Today, international media are speculating on whether Chechens were sent to Guantanamo. No matter what, it wouldn’t be surprising if some Chechens joined an al-Qaeda-style jihad. Oppressed, war-ravaged nations are the breeding ground for great warriors as well as evil terrorists, from Afghanistan to Palestine.

Meanwhile, it is important that Americans see another Chechen people: a nation that has been the victim of ongoing oppression and endless pain. During Russia’s “anti-terrorist operations” (Russia never called it a war), more than 100,000 civilians died. Grozny was reduced to rubble, its inhabitants forced to live in cellars; women were raped, men imprisoned and tortured.

In Chechnya, during the 1990s, what was all too common was the dead gaze of the mothers of murdered children and mournful widows, the wide-eyed children deprived of joy and sunlight and the quiet hopelessness of the elderly, all living in cellars like rats in a city being pounded by Russian artillery. There were no more men.

In 2001, the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum placed Chechnya on its Genocide Watch List. Meanwhile, more than a decade later, Grozny has risen from the ashes, a glittering capital with its new wealth on display everywhere. However, that just masks the true situation there: increasingly conservative Islam diktats from the government and arbitrary arrests and murders under the iron-fisted rule of pro-Kremlin ruler Ramzan Kadyrov.

This horrible tragedy in Boston has now put Chechnya on the map for Americans. But Americans should not blame a nation for isolated crimes committed by individual radicals.

Dictator Kadyrov clearly stated that linking the Tsarnaev brothers to his country would be unfair.

“They grew up in America; their views and convictions were formed there,” he said.

He might have a point. The Chechens have seen too much bloodshed and have other battles to fight.

Nadia Vancauwenberghe is a journalist who covered Russia from 1999 to 2002 for AFP and other news outlets. She is currently chief editor of EXBERLINER magazine.

The Tsarnaev brothers were double agents who decoyed US into terror trap

April 21, 2013

The Tsarnaev brothers were double agents who decoyed US into terror trap.

DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis April 20, 2013, 4:39 PM (GMT+02:00)

TTamerlan Tsarnaev killed. His brother Dzhokhar captured

 

The big questions buzzing over Boston Bombers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev have a single answer: It emerged in the 102 tense hours between the twin Boston Marathon bombings Monday, April 15 – which left three dead, 180 injured and a police officer killed at MIT – and Dzohkhar’s capture Friday, April 19 in Watertown.

The conclusion reached by debkafile’s counterterrorism and intelligence sources is that the brothers were double agents, hired by US and Saudi intelligence to penetrate the Wahhabi jihadist networks which, helped by Saudi financial institutions, had spread across the restive Russian Caucasian.

Instead, the two former Chechens betrayed their mission and went secretly over to the radical Islamist networks.

By this tortuous path, the brothers earned the dubious distinction of being the first terrorist operatives to import al Qaeda terror to the United States through a winding route outside the Middle East – the Caucasus.

This broad region encompasses the autonomous or semi-autonomous Muslim republics of Dagestan, Ingushetia, Kabardino-Balkaria, Chechnya, North Ossetia and Karachyevo-Cherkesiya, most of which the West has never heard of.

Moscow however keeps these republics on a tight military and intelligence leash, constantly putting down violent resistance by the Wahhabist cells, which draw support from certain Saudi sources and funds from the Riyadh government for building Wahhabist mosques and schools to disseminate the state religion of Saudi Arabia.
The Saudis feared that their convoluted involvement in the Caucasus would come embarrassingly to light when a Saudi student was questioned about his involvement in the bombng attacks while in a Boston hospital with badly burned hands.

They were concerned to enough to send Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saudi al-Faisal to Washington Wednesday, April 17, in the middle of the Boston Marathon bombing crisis, for a private conversation with President Barack Obama and his national security adviser Tom Donilon on how to handle the Saudi angle of the bombing attack.
That day too, official Saudi domestic media launched an extraordinary three-day campaign. National and religious figures stood up and maintained that authentic Saudi Wahhabism does not espouse any form of terrorism or suicide jihadism and the national Saudi religion had nothing to do with the violence in Boston.  “No matter what the nationality and religious of the perpetrators, they are terrorists and deviants who represent no one but themselves.”

Prince Saud was on a mission to clear the 30,000 Saudi students in America of suspicion of engaging in terrorism for their country or religion, a taint which still lingers twelve years after 9/11. He was concerned that exposure of the Tsarnaev brothers’ connections with Wahhabist groups in the Caucasus would revive the stigma.

The Tsarnaevs’ recruitment by US intelligence as penetration agents against terrorist networks in southern Russia explains some otherwise baffling features of the event:
1.  An elite American college in Cambridge admitted younger brother Dzhokhar and granted him a $2,500 scholarship, without subjecting him to the exceptionally stiff standard conditions of admission. This may be explained by his older brother Tamerlan demanding this privilege for his kid brother in part payment for recruitment.
2.  When in 2011, a “foreign government” (Russian intelligence) asked the FBI to screen Tamerlan for suspected ties to Caucasian Wahhabist cells during a period in which they had begun pledging allegiance to al Qaeda, the agency, it was officially revealed, found nothing incriminating against him and let him go after a short interview.

He was not placed under surveillance. Neither was there any attempt to hide the fact that he paid a long visit to Russia last year and on his return began promoting radical Islam on social media.
Yet even after the Boston marathon bombings, when law enforcement agencies, heavily reinforced by federal and state personnel, desperately hunted the perpetrators, Tamerlan Tsarnaev was never mentioned as a possible suspect

3.  Friday, four days after the twin explosions at the marathon finishing line, the FBI released footage of Suspect No. 1 in a black hat and Suspect No. 2 in a white hat walking briskly away from the crime scene, and appealed to the public to help the authorities identify the pair.
We now know this was a charade. The authorities knew exactly who they were. Suddenly, during the police pursuit of their getaway car from the MIT campus on Friday, they were fully identified. The brother who was killed in the chase was named Tamerlan, aged 26, and the one who escaped, only to be hunted down Saturday night hiding in a boat, was 19-year old Dzhokhar.

Our intelligence sources say that we may never know more than we do today about the Boston terrorist outrage which shook America – and most strikingly, Washington – this week. We may not have the full story of when and how the Chechen brothers were recruited by US intelligence as penetration agents – any more than we have got to the bottom of tales of other American double agents who turned coat and bit their recruiters.

Here is just a short list of some of the Chechen brothers’ two-faced predecessors:

In the 1980s, an Egyptian called Ali Abdul Saoud Mohamed offered his services as a spy to the CIA residence in Cairo. He was hired, even though he was at the time the official interpreter of Ayman al-Zuwahiri, then Osama bin Laden’s senior lieutenant and currently his successor.

He accounted for this by posing as a defector. But then, he turned out to be feeding al Qaeda US military secrets. Later, he was charged with Al Qaeda’s 1998 bombings of US embassies in Nairobi and Dar es-Salaam.
On Dec. 30, 2009, the Jordanian physician Humam Khalil al-Balawi, having gained the trust of US intelligence in Afghanistan as an agent capable of penetrating al Qaeda’s top ranks, detonated a bomb at a prearranged rendezvous in Kost, killing the four top CIA agents in the country.
Then, there was the French Muslim Mohamed Merah. He was recruited by French intelligence to penetrate Islamist terror cells in at least eight countries, including the Caucasus. At the end of last year, he revealed his true spots in deadly attacks on a Jewish school in Toulouse and a group of French military commandoes.

The debate has begun over the interrogation of the captured Boston bomber Dzhokhar Tsarmayev when he is fit for questioning after surgery for two bullet wounds and loss of blood. The first was inflicted during the police chase in which his brother Tamerlan was killed.

An ordinary suspect would be read his rights (Miranda) and be permitted a lawyer. In his case, the “public safety exemption” option may be invoked, permitting him to be questioned without those rights, provided the interrogation is restricted to immediate public safety concerns. President Barack Obama is also entitled to rule him an “enemy combatant” and so refer him to a military tribunal and unrestricted grilling.

According to debkafile’s counter terror sources, four questions should top the interrogators’ agenda:

a) At what date did the Tsarnaev brothers turn coat and decide to work for Caucasian Wahhabi networks?

b) Did they round up recruits for those networks in the United States – particularly, among the Caucasian and Saudi communities?
c)  What was the exact purpose of the Boston Marathon bombings and their aftermath at MIT in Watertown?
d) Are any more terrorist attacks in the works in other American cities?