ICSR is delighted to announce the ICSR Peace and Security Summit at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel in New York City on June 30th and July 1st.

The most important event of its kind in 2010, the Summit will bring together 400 leading policymakers, diplomats, senior officials and experts from across the globe, encouraging them to share their experiences and approaches in a number of working groups and high-level panels.

The Summit will explore the greatest security challenges of our time, ranging from domestic radicalisation and violent extremism to ongoing conflicts and the struggle for peace in places such as Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, and the Middle East.

Among the many keynote speakers and panellists are:

•    Dr. Abdulkarim Al-Eryani, former Prime Minister of Yemen
•    Amb. Daniel Benjamin, Counterterrorism Coordinator, State Department
•    Noman Benotman, former leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group
•    Amb. Peter Galbraith, former UN Deputy Special Representative
•    Christopher Hitchens, Vanity Fair
•    Hekmat Karzai, director of Centre for Conflict and Peace Studies, Kabul
•    Tsipi Livni, leader of the Israeli opposition
•    Fran Townsend, Homeland Security Advisor to President George W. Bush
•    Lord David Trimble, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate

The ICSR Peace and Security Summit is organised in partnership with the Near East South Asia Center for Strategic Studies at the National Defense University, and receives support from The Rockefeller Foundation, Public Safety Canada, as well as Rena and Sami David.

Thanks to our supporters, there will be no attendance fee. However, places are strictly limited and will not be allocated on a first come first serve basis. If you would like to attend, write to Katie Rothman at katie.rothman@icsr.info before June 25th. Make sure you include your full name, title, affiliation, and current position.

Contract article -

The International Crisis Group has just published a new report on Central Asia. The report underlines the growing numbers of Islamists in prisons and argues that the governments' tough policy on political Islam only increases the risk of violent militancy. It has interesting details (and numbers) about radical detainees and prison management in Central Asia, here (pdf).

This is of particular interest for ICSR who is engaged in a comparative study of 15 countries and their approach towards radicalisation and de-radicalisation in prisons. Though it is not final yet, you can learn more about it here.

Contract article -

Jean-Pierre Filiu, a leading expert on jihadism, former French diplomat, now a professor at Sciences-Po Paris (who also blogged for a bit on Jihadica) has just published a book which looks at the future of Al Qaeda.

In his most recent book: The Nine Lives of Al Qaeda (in French "Les Neuf Vies d'Al-Qaïda"), he explains that after twenty years of existence, the organisation has never been closer to disappearing.

His central argument is that the election of Obama is the worst thing that has happened to Bin Laden. AQ had planned on a Republican victory with John McCain. But when Obama was elected, they had no plan B. "That's the weakness of Al Qaeda," he says "despite its mobility on the field its ideology is very rigid". With Obama as president Al Qaeda had to improvise: the racist hatred came first, calling him a house slave and then accusing him of betraying his Muslim roots.

Filiu explains that the desire to demonize Obama stems from the lack of directions for Al Qaeda to attack the US. Similarly, Al Qaeda's old propaganda favourites (the war in Iraq, Guantanamo) had vanished in the first months of the Obama administration.

Today Al Qaeda is fighting for its ninth life in Pakistan, in the same zones along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border where the organisation was born 21 years ago, back in 1988 when its militants were fighting against the Red Army in Afghanistan.

With a very thorough analysis Filiu identifies 9 crucial moments in the history of the organisation:

1.    The Great Work : 1988-1991 (Abdallah Azzam, Osama Bin Laden and Ayman Zahawiri support the Afghan resistance in Peshawar)
2.    The Sudanese Exile : 1991-1996 (thanks to Hassan Abdullah al-Turabi)
3.    The Challenges to America : 1996-1998 (bombing against the US embassy in Nairobi which killed 213 in August 1998)
4.    The Afghan Jihadistan : 1998-2001 (with Mollah Omar and the Afghan talibans)
5.    The Collapse of the Sanctuary : 2001-2003 (the September 11 attacks and the American invasion in Afghanistan)
6.    The Campaign of Arabia : 2003-2004 (attempted Jihad in Bin Laden's natal country)
7.    The Blood of Iraq : 2004-2006 (attempt to take advantage of the American and allies' hodgepodge there)
8.    The Caliphate of Shadows : 2006-2007 (development of AQ in Maghreb and Pakistan)
9.    The Headlong Rush : 2007-2009 ( AQ setbacks in Iraq and its other "mission territories")

The apogee of AQ on 9/11 was also the beginning of its decline, he says "the attack generated a feeling of disgust and reject throughout the Arab world, even the most radicals Sheikhs did not support these actions."

The War in Iraq is another missed opportunity for AQ who lost the fight against the Arabic and Sunni guerrillas. While venturing for the first time on Arab land, AQ suffered its most patent failure and has now lost most of its impact in the Arab world.

In a final spurt of effort Al Qaeda has recently tried to generate support in Maghreb (Algeria) and Sub-Saharan Africa, namely Somalia. But AQIM failed to recruit outside Algeria and Al Shabaab's (Somalia) allegiance to Bin Laden was more of a dare to their direct rivals Hizbul Islam than an utter celebration of Al Qaeda's leadership in Islamic jihad.

The story of AQ, as told by Jean-Pierre Filiu, is one of lucky accidents, gross mistakes made by its enemies and rivalry. That does not mean that people will not be fighting in Jihad anymore, but that the type of Jihad that AQ created, the global Jihad, the cult of Jihad for Jihad will soon cease to exist.

 

For those of you who understand French, Rue89 has a podcast of an interview with Jean-Pierre Filiu. Listen here.

Contract article -

Today gunmen in Pakistan have killed up to 39 people in attacks on the Pakistan security services.

These most recent attacks have seen gunmen storming security installations in Lahore and a suicide bombing in the north-western town of Kohat.

These were allegedly carried out by the Taliban in revenge for the US missile strike that killed their leader Baitullah Mehsud in August of this year. These follow a spate of attacks throughout Pakistan, which are becoming increasingly brazen and have left up to 100 dead in the past two weeks alone.
What is most concerning about these attacks is they are show a resilient response to the death of one of their top commanders, demonstrating their ability to quickly regroup after such a setback. They also suggest the Taliban is becoming increasingly brazen by setting their sights at the security services, rather than the "softer" option of civilian targets.

Furthermore, Lahore and other towns throughout the Punjab had until recently maintained a level of relative stability, but are now increasingly becoming the target of such attacks, with three occurring in Lahore alone this year. Some have suggested that the Punjab is becoming a new front line in Pakistan's fight against militancy. 

As Pakistan's cultural capital, instability in and around Lahore has enormous implications for the rest of the country. A security official in May said, "Whoever wants to destabilise the country or the government, would go after Lahore."

The government's response seems to reiterate this and Interior Minister Rehman Malik has recently been quoted as saying "All roads lead to South Waziristan…now the government has no choice but to launch an offensive."

 

Here is a reminder of the major attacks in Pakistan since Oct. 5 (h/t to The Long War Journal):

Oct. 15, 2009:
Terrorist assault teams attacked the Federal Investigation Agency building, the Manawan police training centre, and the Elite Force Headquarters in Lahore.

Oct. 15, 2009:
A suicide bomber rammed a car into a police station in Kohat, killing eight people, including policemen and children.

Oct. 12, 2009:
A suicide bomber detonated a car packed with explosives as a military convoy passed through a checkpoint in a market in Alpuri in Shangla. Forty-one people, including six security personnel, were killed in the attack.

Oct. 10, 2009:
An assault team attacked the Army General Headquarters and took 42 security personnel captive. Eleven soldiers were killed, including a brigadier general and a lieutenant colonel, along with nine members of the assault team; and 39 hostages were freed.

Oct. 9, 2009:
A suicide bomber detonated a car packed with explosives in a bazaar in Peshawar, killing 49 civilians.

Oct. 5, 2009:
A suicide bomber entered the World Food Program office in Islamabad and detonated his vest, killing five UN workers, including an Iraqi.

 

This article was written by Charlie Pembroke

Contract article -

Ilyas Kashmiri, the operational chief of the Harkat-ul Jihad Islami (HuJI) and al Qaeda's Brigade 313, is still alive it appears.

He was wrongly confirmed dead after the US September 14th airstrike in the village of Turikhel in Taliban-controlled North Waziristan.

Kashmiri was recently listed as the fourth most wanted terrorist by Pakistan's Interior Ministry and is considered by US intelligence to be one of al Qaeda's most dangerous commanders.
Ilyas Kashmiri is thought to have taken part in several terror actions such as last week's assault on Pakistan's Army General Headquarters in Rawalpindi. 

You can read more about his previous feats of arms here.

Today, Asia Times journalist Syed Saleem Shahzad publishes an interview with Ilyas Kashmiri in which he tells of his strategy for reaching his ultimate goal "the defeat of American global hegemony".

"Should the world expect more Mumbai-like attacks?" asks the reporter. "That was nothing compared to what has already been planned for the future," Ilyas replies.

You can (and should) read the whole interview here.

Contract article -

The Nobel Committee said he was awarded it for "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples".

"His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population" said the Norwegian committee.

There were a record 205 nominations for this year's prize.

UPDATE

Here are a few reactions from around the world: 

Shimon Peres:  "Very few leaders if at all were able to change the mood of the entire world in such a short while with such profound impact. Under your leadership, peace became a real and original agenda.”

Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahi: "We condemn the award of the Nobel Peace Prize for Obama, We have seen no change in his strategy for peace. He has done nothing for peace in Afghanistan”

Hamid Karzai's spokesman Siamak Hirai: "His hard work and his new vision on global relations, his will and efforts for creating friendly and good relations at global level and global peace make him the appropriate recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize."

Ehud Barak : "I believes the prize will strengthen President Barack Obama's capability to contribute to regional peace in the Middle East, and to an agreement between us and the Palestinians that will bring security, growth and prosperity to all the nations in the region."

 

 

Contract article -

It was a violent blast which woke up Kabul this morning. A kamikaze detonated a car bomb near the Indian embassy, wounding dozens of people and killing twelve.

The Indian foreign secretary, Nirupama Rao, says the embassy was clearly the target: "The suicide bomber came up to the outside perimeter wall of the embassy with a car loaded with explosives obviously with the aim of targeting the embassy."

Rings a bell? Last year, on July 7th 2008 the insurgents had already targeted the Indian embassy, killing and injuring more than 100 people, including two Indian diplomats.

Since then the road in front of the embassy has been barricaded and the diplomatic compound is surrounded by a double layer of high-rise walls.

Even though Nirupama Rao states that she believes "that those measures have worked effectively and have been able to prevent what could have been a tragedy similar to what had occurred in July, 2008," it is clear what the insurgents are trying to prove.

They want the Afghan people as well as the international community to know that they can strike anywhere in Afghanistan, even in central Kabul at rush-hour, despite reinforced security around their target.

An interesting timeline of deadliest attacks in Afghanistan, here.

 

Photo courtesy of AFP

Contract article -

Still talking about Iran... No I'm not obsessed with it, it's just that Iran is the talk of the week/month/2009.

Last week when the Calais "jungle", a refugee camp in the North of France, was 'evacuated' by the French government, many young Iranians were among the refugees looking for asylum. Some of them explained that even though they weren't part of "the ethnic minorities who would normally make the perilous journey into exile", they were fleeing the repression following the pro-reform demonstrations, especially the violence acts perpetrated by the "Basij".

The Basij (Farsi for mobilisation) is an omnipresent paramilitary organization with multiple roles which acts as the eyes and ears of the Islamic regime. Basij militia are present in schools, universities, state and private institutions, factories, and even among tribes.
They were put in place by the Ayatollah Khomeini in November 1979 and are still celebrated every year in Iran during what is called "Basij week".

Yesterday Walid Phares from the Counterterrorism blog told us about the Declaration Condemning Human Rights Abuse in Iran which calls for an investigation of "the so-called "Basij militia" for alleged abuse of human rights". 

Among talks of international security it is crucial to remember that the Iranian regime is also a threat to its own population.

Contract article -

After 14 months of silence, the meeting between Iran and the 6 (Russia, China, France, US, UK and Germany) comes after a week full of surprises.

Last Friday, Iran disclosed that it was building a second nuclear facility in Qom.On Monday, Tehran tested its new missile the Shahab -3 despite the nuclear dispute.

And yesterday, though the news didn't really get out of France yet, the satirical weekly newspaper "Le Canard Enchaîné" revealed that Iran owns about 10% of the uranium enrichment plant Tricastin which produces 25% of the global enriched uranium production.

The factory which belongs to Areva supplies a hundred nuclear power plants in the world and 58 French ones.  Areva says that "Iran never received a single gram of uranium from France" and insists there hasn’t been any nuclear "technology transfers" between the two countries.
Tehran contributed more than one billion dollars to the construction of the uranium enrichment plant back in 1974 by signing an agreement on civil nuclear with Paris.

Just 35 years ago though, the Shah, then a US ally, was deemed a visionary when he ambitioned "producing, as soon as possible, 23 000 megawatts of electricity using nuclear plants." He had even approved plans to construct, with US help, up to 23 nuclear power stations by the year 2000.

After the 1979 Revolution France refused to give any enriched uranium to Iran. But Iran didn't get back his investments in the plant either.

Today Iran is still economically cooperating to French nuclear enrichment. Meanwhile France is hoping to forbid Iran to produce any uranium "it's a matter of peace and stability" Sarkozy said in Pittsburgh at the G20.

Oh well, "l'argent n'a pas d'odeur"...

 

Image: Advertisement from the 1970's by American nuclear-power companies.

Contract article -

Amid threats of sanctions from Western countries over its nuclear program Iran decided to look the other way where their Shahab-3 and Sejil missiles were being tested this morning.

Despite Tehran's defense that the missile tests had been planned for a while and have nothing to do with the current nuclear dispute they have been deemed "deeply destabilizing" by the French Foreign Ministry, Bernard Kouchner. It "sends the wrong signal to the international community" said the U.K. Foreign Office said in an e-mailed statement.

A former U.K. ambassador to Iran, Richard Dalton, had a more cynical view and stating that Iranian officials have "been poked and they think this is a good moment to show off their capabilities."

For all of you ballistics people, you can read more about Shahab-3 here.

I just wanted to give you details on how far these missiles can reach in more geographical terms than the approximate 2000 km-range recorded in 2008 when the missiles were last tested.

In Europe, shot from North West of Iran a Shahab 3 missile reaches the eastern part of the EU: that is Bucharest, Sofia, Athens. It can also target Kiev and Moscow.
It's already been said that these missiles can reach Israel, but basically the whole Near East could be at risk especially Cairo in Egypt and Turkey. A missile could also reachAfrica as far as Djibouti if fired from the extreme South of the country. All the ex-soviet republics of Central Asia, Afghanistan and the extreme West of China, as well as Pakistan and the North-west of India (including New Delhi and Mumbai) are also at range.

 

h/t to French journalist Jean-Dominique Merchet and his blog on Libération who concludes "one certainly understands why this is worrying to a lot of people".

Contract article -

Echoing to my brief article on the situation in Somalia, I interviewed Roland Marchal, an expert on the politics of Africa. Hoping he could clear up some questions for us.

ICSR: Why do you think Al-Shabaab wanted to publicise its allegiance to Al-Qaeda despite its previous denials of any ties with the organisation?

Roland Marchal: Websites affiliated to al Shabaab have already sworn allegiance once or twice to Al-Qaeda and have received a positive response from Zahawiri.

In the current context, their latest video seems to be more like a distress call: Al-Shabaab is losing in Mogadishu and fears a more offensive behaviour of the AMISOM. This does not mean the latter will win or that the Transitional Federal Government would emerge as a credible alternative but the power struggle would be less visibly favourable to Al-Shabaab and Hizbul Islam.

Al-Shabaab could also be weakened by the fight over the port of Kismayu (a very lucrative source of income for Al-Shabaab) against Ras Kamboni (likely to be supported by the CIA).

This umpteenth call to foreigners mostly underlines that the previous ones have been unsuccessful.

ICSR: Many say that the Somali president is the best chance to fight Al-Shabaab because he has a strong legitimacy and he is a religious man. What do you think?

Roland Marchal: Sheikh Sharif was indeed a popular personality especially within the Hawiye and appeared as a moderate figure, a good listener. I myself shared this appreciation but two elements have to be taken into account since February 2009.

On the one hand he has "inherited" the TFG and its illegitimacy and he has appeared much more dependent on "foreigners": AMISON, European Union, etc ... But the population because it hasn't seen any improvements and hasn't received any benefits from this connection, is now bitter (especially because some members of the government have helped themselves).

On the other hand, he has appeared much weaker and less political than expected: his political "brain" is his minister of Finance who seems to always agree with the last person he talks to and has missed several opportunities to improve the political climate.

ICSR: The UN food agency has recently published a report saying that Somalia was facing its worst food crisis in 18 years. Can one expect the Somali government to tackle the insurgency and the food crisis? What part can the international community play?

Roland Marchal: The TFG spends all his time focused on its own survival; it is true that this team is different from the former team and much more positive towards humanitarian workers: they do not impose any restriction, but this is also the case because they cannot do anything.

The International community must discuss directly humanitarian aid and the rest with the armed opposition. Without that war will happen. And nobody can win it.


Roland Marchal is a senior research fellow at the National Center of Scientific Research, based at the Center for International Studies and Researches, Paris. He was the chief editor of the French academic quarterly Politique africaine from 2002 to 2006. He has been researching and publishing on the conflicts and politics in Africa.

Contract article -

Yesterday and for the first time, Somali Islamic militant group Al-Shabaab has pledged allegiance to Al-Qaeda in a video which was spread through Jihadi blogs. In the video, militants can be seen shouting their support to Osama Bin Laden chanting: "At your service Osama!” and vow to avenge a US raid that killed one of their leaders this week.

Al-Shabaab militants have always officially denied links to al Qaeda and it is still unclear why this video was released at this particular time. But in the recent context of terrorist attacks by Islamist insurgents in the country, this video might be just another way for the insurgency to assert itself against the West. 

Somalia's President Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed  has been growing ties with the international community and the US has shown more interest and implication towards Somalia. Sharif met last month with Hillary Clinton, who pledged to expand American support for Somalia's government.

It may seem odd that the US would support a President who imposes the Sharia (Islamic law) on its people. But the US probably wouldn't back an Islamic President unless its legitimacy and credibility made him the strongest ally the Obama administration can have in the region. "Washington has [...] labelled him a moderate, despite his imposition of sharia law, and sent his forces 40 tonnes of weapons, while the international community has committed more than $200m to train Somali security services" reports Daniel Howden in The Independent.

Listen to this interview with Jeffrey Gettleman of the New York Times which explains why Sheik Sharif Sheik Ahmed is the best thing that has happened to Somalia for decades.

Also the UN has just released a report stating that Somalia is facing its worst food crisis in the last 18 years.

I'm sure the international community, as well as sending weapons, will help the Somali government fight this battle against hunger. Right?

Contract article -

Barack Obama was heard on five US talk-shows yesterday saying that the strategy on Afghanistan had to be re-thought.

He was notably questioned on General McChrystal's report in which the top military commander in Afghanistan makes it very clear that unless additional troops are sent, the conflict "will likely result in failure."

President Obama however refused to say if he planned to send in more troops or not:

"We're going to test whatever resources we have against our strategy, which is if by sending young men and women into harm’s way, we are defeating Al Qaeda and, and that can be shown to a skeptical audience, namely me — somebody who is always asking hard questions about deploying troops, then we will do what’s required to keep the American people safe."

 

Now I am not going to argue here on what should be done. This, readers, is for YOU to debate.

On a more hopeful note, today is Peace Day.

McChrystal said that the troops will be on the defensive but "will not conduct offensive military operations [...] to observe the United Nations' International Day of Peace".

Afghan defence minister's spokesman Mohammad Zahir Azimi expressed that "the people of Afghanistan are more thirsty for peace than any other nation. They have experienced decades of war and they want peace now".

Contract article -

Today Noordin Mohammad Top, often described as South East Asia most wanted terrorist was killed in a police shoot-out in Central Java. Some might say it has lifted a major security threat in the region but Rohan Gunaratna says the fight is not over yet.

ICSR:  Firstly, who was Noordin Mohammad Top?

Rohan Gunaratna: Noordin Mohammad Top was a Malaysian terrorist driven by al Qaeda's philosophy. He had been on the run since the devastating Bali bombing of October 2002 which was executed by Jemaah Islamiya and funded by al Qaeda.

In the years that followed, he emerged as the de-facto operational leader of Jemmah Islamiyah. He worked with multiple groups, clusters of cells and individuals, and built the most threatening network in the region.
 
After the J.W. Marriott and Ritz Carlton bombings in July 2009, the government intensified the hunt for Noordin Mohammad Top. It had been going on for eight years.

ICSR:  His death is a real success to them, then.

Rohan Gunaratna: Indeed, Detachment 88, Indonesia's elite Counter Terrorism Unit should be congratulated: they managed to hunt down and kill Southeast Asia's most wanted terrorist.

After capturing and interrogating his couriers, Rahmat Budi Prabowo alias Bejo and Supono alias Kedu of D88 tracked him down to Solo in Central Java, the nerve centre of Islamic radicalism in Indonesia.

The gun battle lasted eight hours starting at 11 p.m. on September 16. D88 strike team breached the safe house where Noordin Mohammad Top was hiding and killed him along with Aji, a master bomb maker, Urwah, a top recruiter and Susilo, a logistician.


ICSR:  International cooperation was crucial in this particular case. Which countries participated and how did they work together?
 
Rohan Gunaratna: There is extensive security and intelligence cooperation both within and outside the region.

Detachment 88 was created after the Bali bombing that killed 202 civilians including 88 Australians. Although Australia was reluctant to acknowledge it, without its initial and sustained assistance D88 would not have reached this level of competence.

Furthermore, the US, the UK, Singapore and other countries worked with D88 to build their specialist capabilities. Today, with extensive operational experience D88 trains other elite forces.
 
As intelligence is the spearhead of counter terrorism, there is excellent intelligence sharing between the countries affected by Jemaah Islamiyah. There is ongoing intelligence exchange between Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, and Australia. And because Jemaah Islamiyah's operational leader Hambali is in US custody, the US has also shared intelligence with all the regional partners.
 
Both operational and intelligence cooperation was central in neutralizing Noordin Mohammad Top: as long the threat is persistent this cooperation will continue.
 
ICSR:  What impact will Noordin Mohammad Top's death have on the terrorism network in the region?
 
Rohan Gunaratna: As Noordin Mohammad Top skillfully built and operated a network, he will be replaced by a multiplicity of leaders. None of them will have the skill and the experience of Noordin Mohammad Top but they will pose a long term strategic and national threat to Indonesia and the region.   

However Noordin Mohammad Top's death should not lull Indonesia into a state of complacency. Ideologues of hatred like Abu Bakar Bashir, the co founder of Jemaah Islamiyah and Abu Jibril, the leader of Majlis Mujahidin Indonesia (Mujahidin Council of Indonesia) are still active.

Unless Indonesia has the will and skill to dismantle the ideological and operational infrastructure of Jemmah Islamiya and other likeminded groups, Indonesia will continue to suffer from periodic terrorist attacks.

This means not only hunting and killing terrorists but building a legal framework that criminalizes terrorist propaganda, recruitment, fund raising and other support activities that enable and facilitates terrorism, and its parent, ideological extremism.


 

Rohan Gunaratna is the author of Inside al Qaeda: Global Network of Terror published by Columbia University Press. He debriefed detainees in several countries including in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, US and in Indonesia. He is the head of the International Center for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR) at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore.

Contract article -

Today's big news is certainly the freeing of New York Times journalist Stephen Farrell, a British national, who was abducted four days ago in Kunduz Province, Afghanistan. His interpreter Sultan Munadi (picture) an Afghan journalist who paired with Farrell to investigate the aftermath of a NATO air strike that killed at least 70 people, didn’t have the same luck and was killed during the raid.

Foreign journalists are often taken hostages with their local translator or driver. But where the journalist's life has a real bargaining value and is therefore more protected, it is a known fact that the interpreter's is often much more at stake.

As they were held hostage together, Sultan Munadi told Stephen Farrell, "I think you're going to be O.K., but they've got it in for me." The British journalist himself recalls: "I did not think they were going to kill me, I did think they were going to kill him." Eric Schmitt also recount Farrell’s words in the New York Times:

"While Mr. Farrell said he was treated well — given food, water and blankets and never harmed — the militants increasingly taunted Mr. Munadi. At one point one of the Taliban reminded Mr. Munadi of a case two years ago in which an Italian journalist taken hostage in Helmand Province was freed while his Afghan translator was beheaded."

There have been several other instances of such double-standards notably in Iraq and Afghanistan between foreigner and local lives. As such the tragic case of the kidnapping of an Italian journalist in 2007, who was kidnapped alongside his translator and eventually freed whereas his Afghan interpreter was beheaded by the abductors.

Several reasons can explain those double-standards.

Firstly, foreigners in general (NGO workers, journalists, etc.) have more value to the eyes of the kidnappers than the life of a local driver, journalist or translator.

Interpreters who work with foreigners are also more likely to be targeted by kidnappers or attacks as they are considered as traitors by the insurgency. At the beginning of the war in Iraq, AP considered translating Arabic to Americans "one of the most dangerous civilian jobs in one of the world's most dangerous countries".

Finally, Western governments are more prone to negotiating/paying ransoms to the kidnappers rather than having one of their nationals brutally executed abroad. When the kidnapped translator for an Italian journalist was killed, the Taliban 'spokesman' said at the time that:

"When we demanded the exchange for the Italian journalist, the government released the prisoners, but for the Afghan journalist, the government did not care."

Thus a question springs to mind: should the government of a kidnapped journalist also take responsibility for the local journalist, translator or driver who accompanies him? They certainly are essential in enabling journalists to do their job.

I'll leave you with this quote from Barry Bearak, a Times correspondent who worked with Mr. Munadi in 2001 and 2002:

"The story calls [Sultan Munadi] an 'interpreter,' which misleads the reader about what these great people do for us. They serve as our walking history books, political analysts, managers of logistics, taking equal the risks without equal the glory or pay."

 

 

 

Photo courtesy of Tyler Hicks/The New York Times

Contract article -

Who is Salah Ezzedine? If you had asked the Lebanese people two weeks ago, you might have heard that Ezzedine was a pious man, a wealthy business man, sure, but a philanthropist as well who ran a charity organizing pilgrimage trips to Muslims holy cities of Mecca and Medina in Saudi Arabia.  But today you'd hear a different story.  

Already dubbed the "Lebanese Madoff", in reference to Bernard Madoff, the New York failed financier whose multibillion-dollar Ponzi scheme wiped out thousands of investors and charities worldwide, Salah Ezzedine is currently being held in custody on suspicion of fraud after he invested hundreds of millions of dollars of other people's money before declaring bankruptcy.

Hundreds of people had invested with him, including at least four senior members of Hezbollah who are said to have suffered serious financial losses as the result of this scheme which is suspected to amount to more than one billion dollars.

It's a strong blow to Hezbollah's image who had built up its prestige on its austere religious image and squeaky-clean reputation for financial and political probity.

Indeed many Muslims believe that bank interest is un-Islamic, which is why the Lebanese Shia put their money in businesses run by Salah Ezzedine, who had created the image of a religious and trustworthy investor who was close to and protected by Hezbollah.

The party now denies all involvement with financial misconduct. "Neither Hezbollah, nor its leadership, nor its members have any link to this matter," Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah told the BBC. He also said the aim of the media reports was to harm the image of many of the party's leaders.

Hezbollah highly values its legal and political standing in Lebanon and the impact of the financial loss which has just been unveiled in public standing should not be underestimated. Especially after the feeble results that Hezbollah scored in the last elections.

Journalists known to be close to the group have already expressed strong and rare criticism towards the "Party of God". Sateh Noureddine, managing editor of the Lebanese As-Safir daily, which is close to Hizbullah, wrote on Monday that "Hizbullah is not the first and will not be the last revolutionary movement that gets corrupted with money."

Contract article -

 Dr. Radwan Ziadeh is one of the most accomplished researchers in Syria. His book "The Near Peace: The Syrian-Israeli Negotiations" was the first book about this issue to be published in Arabic.
After his seminar for the ICSR at King's College London, he agreed to a short interview.

ICSR: How crucial is the agreement between Israel and Syria as part of a peace process in the Middle East?

Radwan Ziadeh: It's very important. In order to have a comprehensive peace in the region, we need to have peace with all the parties, and not only with the Palestinian Authority. Syria still has some occupied territories by Israel such as the Golan Heights. Without having peace between Syria and Israel peace in the region is unconceivable.

ICSR: During Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's visit to Syria last week, Bashar al-Assad said: "Israel is not ready to make peace either in the short term or the long term... all Israeli governments since 1991 are identical. [...] opinion polls show that Israelis are not ready to make peace because they do not want to give the land back". With a statement like this it's hard to imagine that these two countries could come to an agreement soon.

Radwan Ziadeh: These kinds of statements aren't new between Israel and Syria. But when we get in a climate of negotiations, then the statements will change.
Peace needs serious and difficult steps.We need to create some hope on both sides, show that we have alternatives, that we have a peace agreement.
Without any of this we find ourselves now in a state called 'no peace, no war'.
Neither side can go ahead with the war: it would cost too much, nobody can deal with that. And neither side can promote peace by fear of another refusal of a peace agreement.

ICSR: We recently published a brochure called "15 ideas to fix the Middle East". If you had to contribute your own idea to progress towards peace, what would it be?

Radwan Ziadeh: To look towards the future rather than looking back. Looking back at history we get stuck in history. Only the future holds the solution.

You can listen to the podcast of the seminar by clicking the link below.

 

Radwan Ziadeh is a visiting Scholar at The Center for the Study of Human Rights at Columbia University, New York and a visiting Fellow at Chatham House, London.
Previously, he was a visiting scholar at Carr Center for Human Rights at Harvard University and a Senior Fellow at United States Institute of Peace in Washington D.C.
Radwan is the founder and director of the Damascus Center for Human Rights Studies in Syria and the co-founder and executive director of the Syrian Center for Political and Strategic Studies in Washington D.C.
 

Contract article -

Welcome to Free Rad!cals, the official ICSR blog! This blog aims to serve as an essential resource for people interested in the issues of radicalisation, political violence and as a way to carry over ICSR’s study of these subjects to an open forum for debate, ideas and discussion between experts, stakeholders and the public.

Let me firstly introduce myself; my name is Alex Matine and I will be your ‘blogmistress’, reporting on ICSR activities and serving as a link between you the public and our bloggers.

Seven writers will be contributing regularly to this blog, sharing expertise and unique insights on their areas of focus and awaiting your reactions and comments:

• Omar Ashour on North Africa
  
• Ahron Bregman on the Middle East and Israel/Palestine
• Jeni Mitchell on Central Asia
• Peter Neumann on the UK and Europe
• ‘Amm Sam’ on North America
• Tim Stevens on cyberspace
• Stephen Tankel on Afghanistan and Pakistan

You will also be able to receive blog updates by following us on Twitter.
For privileged content, exclusive interviews, pictures of our events, or simply to get in touch drop us a line on our Facebook page!

Contract article -