By ICSR research intern Joana Cook

Following the tragic events in Norway, this week’s news has been dominated by a focus on right-wing political groups both in the UK around the world. That will also be the focus of this week’s NewsBlog.

The Middle East and more

Right-wing Christian fundamentalist Anders Behring Breivik killed a total of 76 people in two major attacks in Norway last Friday. This attack is the deadliest on Norwegian soil since WWII. Breivik first targeted a government building in central Oslo, badly damaging the building after detonating a home-made car bomb. While investigators were on the scene of the first attack, Breivik, dressed like a police officer, went on a shooting rampage on the island of Utoya where a Labor Party youth camp was being held. Breivik posted a 1,500-page memorandum online just days before the attack. The document, entitled, “2083, A European Declaration of Independence,” described (among other things) Breivik’s belief that the spread of Islamisation in Europe was a great danger to ethnic Europeans, feminism was weakening European men and instruction on how to create bombs and avoid suspicion.

The attack in Norway has triggered a debate across Europe on the far-Right, Islam and multiculturalis. MP’s from far-right groups in Italy and Sweden were condemned for blaming the attacks on multiculturalism. In France, a member of the far-right National Front was suspended after praising the attacks. Spectators worry about the potential political fallout that may come as many have began to analyze xenophobia and nationalism more critically in the region as the political left attempts to find new footing across the EU.

The mayor of Kandahar, Ghulam Haider Hamidi, was assassinated on Wednesday. The Taliban have claimed responsibility for the death which was carried out by a suicide bomber concealing explosives in his turban. This is the third high-profile assassination to happen in Afghanistan this month raising concerns that security gains in the south of the country may not be effective, even with increased fighting by NATO forces. The assassination was said to be motivated by Hamidi’s campaign to destroy illegal buildings in Kandahar.

President of the Palestinian Authority, Mamoud Abbas has urged mass, peaceful, demonstrations by Palestinians leading up to the September UN vote where Palestine will seek recognition as an independent state. Israel has threatened to and said that this move by Palestine is an attempt to isolate Israel and may set off more violence in the area. The US has announced this week that they will not support Palestine’s bid for independence, but as this would not be a Security Council Resolution, is unable to veto the vote.

Members of the UN peacekeeping force were the target of a roadside bombing in Lebanon on Tuesday. Three soldiers were injured in the blast that showed many similarities to a bombing that injured six Italian peacekeepers in May. No group has yet taken responsibility for the attack. There are currently 12,000 UN troops involved in the mission in Lebanon, which was originally tasked with monitoring the Israel-Lebanon border following the 2006 war.

The Taliban and emerging right-wing political-religious groups in the US may have more in common that initially meets the eye, a report this week claimed. A number of these groups aim to replace the current secular democracy with a Christian theocracy, only a single focus of their stated "strategic level spiritual warfare". One of these groups based throughout the US, named the New Apolistic Reformation has been linked to popular American politicians such as Sarah Palin and Texas Governor Rick Perry. As the debate about the far-right continues across Europe, this author asks journalists to focus more on this quickly expanding (and as he suggests, worrisome) movement in the US.

The UK

Following the tragedy in Norway, far-right links to shooter Anders Behring Breivik have started to emerge – leading these, The English Defense League (EDL). Among the connections were direct communication with the organization, an invitation for Breivik to join an EDL rally and apparent association with a number of EDL supporters. The EDL has vehemently denied any relationship or support for Breivik. Speculations on this relationship have urged some in the UK to urge the Home Office to label the group a terrorist organisation. The Home Office claimed it is investigating links between Breivik and the EDL, but the EDL would have to meet certain criteria as listed under the Terrorism Act 2000 in order to be deemed a terrorist organisation.

EUROPOL has invited the UK to participate in a European-wide police effort to identify terrorism, claiming that many of the right-wing groups throughout Europe are quickly becoming more professional, aggressive and organized. What is also becoming clear is a shift in these groups focus from Neo-Nazi extremism to more nationalist and anti-Islamic ideals. One article in the Financial Times offers a brief summary of the history of many popular far-right groups as well as current such groups across Europe, many of which will likely be focused on in the upcoming investigation. Among the mentioned are political parties such as Geert Wilders’ Party For Freedom in the Netherlands and France’s National Front, as well as organizations such as Stop Islamisation of Europe.

A British couple were detained last Friday in Afghanistan under suspicion of plotting terrorist attacks in the UK. The married, Afghan-British dual citizens were thought to be seeking out al-Qaeda and Taliban in an effort to learn bomb-making skills. They were arrested in the International Trade Hotel centre in Heart in by British troops who were also accompanied by members of the Afghan intelligence service. Few details have emerged about the case, but the couple had been investigated by Britain’s security intelligence agency MI5.

British citizen David Mockett, a marine surveyor from Plympton, was remembered this week after he was killed in Yemen last Wednesday. Mockett, who had lived in Aden for ten years, died instantly when his car exploded as he turned the engine on. Al Qaeda is suspected for the death, but an investigation is currently underway by Yemeni authorities. Only last October, a diplomatic convoy containing a British diplomat came under a rocket attack, which wounded the diplomat. Violence and unrest continues throughout the country.

Contract article -

By ICSR Research Intern Joana Cook

THE MIDDLE EAST AND MORE

The French and US embassies in Syria were stormed by pro-Assad loyalists this past weekend, defacing and damaging property. The violence was in protest to the recent visit of US Ambassador Robert Ford (whose residence was also attacked in the protests) to the city of Hama, which has recently been a focal point of violent crackdowns on those demanding the departure of President Assad. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton demanded that Syria meet their international obligations and protect foreign mission staff and property in Syria.

Tuesday morning saw the assassination of the highly controversial Ahmed Wali Karzai, the half-brother of Afghan President Hamid Karzai. The killer was Ahmed Karzai’s personal bodyguard who had worked with him for over eight years. The Taliban claimed they were behind the assassination, though this has been disputed. The problems only intensified when a senior Afghan cleric was one of four killed (along with 12 others injured) in a suicide bombing at a funeral service for Karzai being held in Kandahar. President Karzai was not in attendance.

The Israeli parliament passed a law this week that will punish any Israeli individual or organisation who protests the building of settlements in the West Bank. The law, deemed anti-democratic and a violation of free speech by civil rights groups in Israel, was passed by a 47-36 vote. The law would be based on those who engage in a "geographically based boycott" and who could be sued for damages if economic, academic or cultural damage could be expected from such a boycott. There is a plan to challenge this law in Israel’s High Court.

In a less common story for conflict-ridden Libya, two Libyan diplomats affiliated with General Muammar Gadhafi’s regime visited Israel in an attempt to “change Libya’s image.” The two, who apparently were not issued visas by the Israeli interior minister, met with senior members of the Israeli Knesset, including Tzipni Livni. Their visit was not urged out of political considerations, Kadima MK Meir Sheetrit said, but were instead meant to promote business in the country.

Seven Estonian cyclists who were kidnapped in Lebanon over four months ago on a trip across the country have been released in good health. The release was facilitated by the French Embassy as Estonia does not have diplomatic representation in Lebanon. It was not known if a ransom was paid. A previously unknown group called Haraket Al-Nahda Wal-Islah, or Movement for Renewal and Reform was said to be responsible for their kidnapping. Kidnappings have become extremely uncommon in Lebanon since the end of the civil war in 1990.

As the Arab Spring continues to unfold throughout the Middle East, two significant Friday protests were held this week in Syria and Egypt, while a rarer protest occurred in Jordan. Tahrir Square held thousands as citizens pushed for swifter implementation of reforms and trials for ousted President Mubarak and his aides. This week though, protests were not attended by the Muslim Brotherhood who stated that the authorities needed time to implement the changes demanded by the mass protests last week.

Syria has launched its largest protests so far with hundreds of thousands turning out around the country to demand the end of President Assad’s rule. 12 civilians were killed across four locations in the country (including the capital Damascus) by Syrian Security Forces, who were responding to the crowds with live ammunition and tear gas. President Assad has also begun to use irregular militia shabbiha forces from his Alawite minority sect, as well as regular police and military forces to quell the continuous protests.

“Reform of the regime” was demanded in Amman, Jordan as hundreds marched downtown in the capital. The protestors were met by police with batons, but no significant incidences occurred. Protests have been prevented recently by Security Forces in the country, but King Abdullah, who is responsible for appointing the cabinet, has not personally prevented public protests as of yet.

THE UK

Some of the most violent clashes seen in years between police and nationalist youth erupted in Northern Ireland this week after the July 12^th parade, a day Protestants have historically celebrated as the victory of Protestant King William of Orange over Catholic King James II in 1688. Up to 200 masked youth protested the parade and threw petrol bombs and bricks at police, injuring 22 officers. The Ulster Volunteer Force, a loyalist paramilitary group, claimed to orchestrate the violence. The event brought to mind the continued threat of the IRA throughout Northern Ireland and begs the question, “Why are there still groups so resistant to peace in Northern Ireland?”

A new initiative entitled ‘Jihad Against violence’ (JAV) from the British Muslim consultancy Inspire is set to tackle what they believe to be the two largest problems facing the Muslim population in the UK: gender inequality and extremism. The group insists it is time to bring Muslim women leaders in to help tackle these issues, particularly violence. In the UK, Muslim women, they claim, have the poorest health and are the least economically active compared to men and women of other faiths, which further emphasises the importance of their involvement tackling gender equality and condemn extremism.

Australia will be hosting the ‘Quintet’ meeting of the Attorney Generals of the UK, the US, Canada and New Zealand July 14 – 15 to deal with pressing issues of mutual concern. These are set to include national security, counter-terrorism, countering violent extremism, organised crime and legal cooperation. Australia plans to share their experience with their Combating Violent Extremism (CVE) program with the attorney generals, which has focussed on building community resilience to radicalisation and extremist views.

Contract article -

By ICSR Research Intern Joana Cook

THE MIDDLE EAST AND MORE

On Wednesday Goran Hazdic, a Croatian Serb Wartime leader, became the last major war crimes suspect from the 1991 – 1995 Croatian War to be arrested and sent to the Hague. He was being charged with crimes against humanity for ordering the deaths of hundreds and deportations of thousands of Croats and non-Serbs from the region of Croatia he took over. The move is being seen as a boost for Serbia’s entry into the EU.

Those loyal to President Bashar al-Assad surrounded the Harasta suburb in Damascus on Wednesday in a move meant to crush the growing opposition movement in Syria. The same day, the Syrian Foreign Minister banned any foreign diplomats from leaving the capital after visits by the US and French ambassadors to Hama, one of the area’s hardest hit by Assad’s troops. On Thursday, mass shootings were occurring in Syria’s third largest city of Homs as Syrian security forces swept through making mass arrests and conducting raids. The number of those killed in the four month uprising has reached 1,600, with 12,000 detained say human rights groups.

Egypt has laid out plans to hold the first democratic elections since the ousting of President Husni Mubarak’s regime in February. For reasons of national sovereignty, Egypt will not be allowing international monitors to oversee the election, announced the military. With a referendum planned in the spring, the ‘electoral process’ is set to occur this fall. Two significant changes will be introduced in these elections including the quota for the number of women in Parliament being removed and the age of lawmakers being reduced from 30 to 25. Egypt’s new cabinet will also be sworn in this Thursday to include foreign affairs and finance portfolios.

A human rights organisation in Bahrain has accused security forces of terrorizing hospital staff where injured protestors sought treatment in a report released this week. Specific allegations include the security forces attacking doctors and nurses, laying siege to hospitals and clinics, detaining those seeking medical treatment and prosecuting dozen’s of hospital staff. These were said to have occurred after the February, with many further arrests occurring after the uprising was quashed in mid-March. Around 30 people were thought to have died in the Bahraini protests while over 500 were reportedly injured.

The Taliban released a video on Monday showing the execution of 16 men believed to be Pakistani police officers. The policemen were believed to have been abducted in a cross-border raid by the Taliban on June 1 in retaliation to the alleged killings of six children in the Swat Valley. Pakistani authorities deny that the killings of these children took place and accused the Taliban of trying to use ‘terror as a tool’ to further destabilise the region.

THE UK

The UK was particularly busy this week with stories focussed on radicalisation and political violence. As seen in recent weeks, there has been a particular focus on the UK-Pakistan relationship, tackling radicalisation at home and programs abroad that will focus on predicting and addressing countries slipping into political violence.

Pakistan and the UK will be pursuing a comprehensive approach to against extremism and radicalisation, the government announced at a meeting held in London on Tuesday. The meeting was held at Lanchester House and was attended by British Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg and Pakistani Prime Minsiter Syed Yusuf Raza. The importance of economic and bilateral cooperation was also stressed and both sides vowed to continue to work together to promote peace in the region and tackle militancy.

Britain announced on Tuesday that they will be setting up and Early Warning System that will identify and intervene in countries at risk of slipping into anarchy. The system will include new Stabilisation Response Teams and Watchlist, which will identify fragile countries that are at risk of conflict and where Britain has “significant interests at stake”. Countries thought to be analysed by this new program are South Sudan, Nepal, Somalia and Northern Nigeria. The new program will report every six months on political, economic and security shocks around the world that could trigger violence.

Pakistan is enlisting the help of psychologists from around the world to help fight radicalisation in a new non-military ‘war on terror’ strategy. The focus will be on three de-radicalisation facilities that are currently housing al Qaeda and Taliban members in Swat Valley. The new approach will also assist young boys, usually from poor and illiterate backgrounds, that are being recruited by the Taliban, often against their will. A UK psychologist, Dr. Sarah Savage of Cambridge University, has developed a psychological therapeutic approach to extremism called integrative complexity which is currently being used in the UK and now being applied to this program in Pakistan.

An interesting piece to come out of the UK this week was a story by Humza Yousaf, a Scottish Member of Parliament discussing the Scottish approach to radicalisation, including the Solas Foundation which teaches a classical form of Islam flexible enough for 21st century Scotland. Yousaf also states that Western media tends to give excessive air time to ‘fake sheiks’ which is comparable to Middle Eastern news agencies seeking a Christian view from persons like Pastor Terry Jones (the Florida preacher made infamous for burning the Quran) and misrepresents the population.

Senior UK MPs have criticised the UK for arms sales to ‘authoritarian’ regimes in the Middle East such as Egypt, Bahrain, Libya, Syria and Yemen. Following this findings earlier in the year, a review had been conducted and was released this week. Foreign secretary William Hague claimed that the review showed no weapons sold to the varying regimes were used in government offensives during the Arab Spring and there was no evidence of misuse of controlled military goods exported from the UK. MPs rebuffed this report stating that the 157 rejected arms export licenses to the region showed the ‘clearest evidence of misjudgement’ and questioned why these arms exports have, in many cases, still not been fully revoked.

Contract article -

By ICSR Research Intern Joana Cook

THE MIDDLE EAST AND MORE

Syria was the hot spot of the week in Middle Eastern news. This week Syria was openly accused of crimes against humanity by the human rights group Amnesty International in a detailed report which listed instances of torture and assaults on unarmed civilians across the country. This report follows the Syrian army moving into the city of Hama earlier this week where communication to the city was cut and many civilians fled the city. Human rights group state 1,300 civilians have been killed so far. US Ambassador to Syria Robert S. Ford made a surprise visit to Hama on Thursday as well in a show of solidarity with the residents there. Moving late into Friday afternoon, Syrian forces opened fire on protestors in Damascus and killed four. At the time of writing, half a million people were been said to be protesting on the streets of Hama in the largest protest thus far in the city.

The newly retired head of the National Counterterrorism Center in Virginia, Michael Leiter, recently commented on the changes he’s seen in terrorism in the US in his four years at the center. Specifically he touches on the rise of homegrown terror plots in the US, the difficulties of combating jihadists online and the challenges of balancing personal freedoms with public security and the importance of deeper engagement with the American-Muslim community.

An interesting story to come out of Israel this week discusses the radicalisation of the rabbinical community and the effects this is having on Israeli civil society. Specifically, the article focuses on the government’s expansion of the rights of rabbis and how this is having a negative effect on women’s status and equality in marriage, property rights, child custody and, above all, divorce rights.

From Pakistan this week comes an internal view into the countries perception as a hub of radicalisation and the challenges that Pakistanis face in countering the many problems of ethnic, linguistic, sectarian and religious extremism. This article has a section dedicated to the programs being used to deradicalise youth, children and child soldiers, including a UNICEF cricket initiative, and discusses the most vulnerable areas of the country.

Yemen’s President Ali Abdullah Saleh appeared on television Thursday for the first time since an attack on June 3 left him with severe burns and forced him to undergo eight surgeries in neighbouring Saudi Arabia. Saleh said that he welcomed power sharing as long as it was within the constitutional framework of Yemen. Forty al-Qaeda militants were also reportedly killed in Yemen this week by air strikes from the Yemeni air force as the militants were trying to take over a military camp in Abyan.

Historically, Friday is always a busy day in the Middle East and this week proved no different. An attempted “flytilla” visit to show solidarity with the Palestinians was prevented when Israel blocked 200 individuals (a large majority of which were from Europe) from boarding flights to Ben-Gurion airport in Israel. Protestors had been expecting up to 600 people to participate in the protests that were meant to draw attention to Palestinians living in the West Bank.

Thousands rallied across Egypt on Friday both to protest the slow progress of reforms promised after their January revolution and to demand the beginning of trials of those involved with injuring or killing protestors. The demonstrations had the support of almost every political party in Egypt and has been nicknamed “the march of the million.” It is thought today’s rally will have more attendees than any other protests since the fall of President Mubarak on February 11.

 

THE UK

This story was published just before the cut-off for last week’s stories, but found its way into this week’s NewsBlog as it gives unique personal accounts of extremism from a number of different individuals formerly associated with hate groups. Following the Summit Against Violent Extremism (SAVE) in Dublin at the end of June, former neo-Nazi skinheads and affiliates of Al Shabab, the IRA and Hizb ut-Tahrir discuss what led them to extremism and the often difficult realities that caused them to renounce violence.

If you thought airport travel security was already an annoyance, be prepared for more to come. The US has recently reported that there has been an increase in interest in surgically implanting bombs as they can be hidden from even the newly introduced full body imaging machines. The UK uncovered evidence last year about this new method of attack by al-Qaeda, though this method is not necessarily restricted to al Qaeda. The article also states that AQAP is currently the most “inventive terrorist organization these days” thanks in part to the recent printer bombs sent to synagogues in New York as well as the Christmas “underwear bomber.”

Hizb ut-Tahrir, a fundamentalist Islamic political party in the UK, is planning on holding a conference in London this 9^th of July. This highly disputed party, whose stated political goal is to re-establish the Islamic caliphate around the world, will be focussing on the topic “Our Vision for the Ummah.” The far-right English Defense Leauge has said they are planning rallies around the country to counter this conference and bring attention to the organisation.

Contract article -

The Middle East & more

Six Taliban commandos besieged the Kabul Intercontinental hotel on Tuesday after a suicide bomber detonated at the security checkpoint. 11 Afghan civilians and the eight attackers were killed, while 14 others were injured. The five-hour siege ended when a NATO helicopter arrived and Western Special Forces team entered the hotel. The Afghan National Army were also on the scene, but many showed concern about them taking over full Afghan security in 2014.

Senior Haqqani network leader, Ismail Jan, was killed on Wednesday in Afghanistan. The Haqqani’s are said to be responsible for some of the most spectacular attacks of the insurgency and were also shown to have provided material support for the Intercontinental hotel attack in Kabul on Tuesday. Though the Haqqani’s act independent of the Taliban, they are said to associate under the same aegis and have long been associated with the Pakistani intelligence agency.

The International Criminal Court has issued an arrest warrant for Colonel Qaddafi, one of his sons and his Chief of Intelligence, charging them with crimes against humanity for acts that occurred in the first two weeks of the Libyan uprising. This is the second time a standing president has been issued an arrest warrant and as Libya does not recognize the ICC, it could take years (if it does happen) for Qaddafi to face trial at The Hague.

Islamic militants in Yemen have taken over a strategic soccer stadium near the city of Zinjibar, not far from the town of Jaar which they seized earlier this year. With 2,000 Yemeni soldiers guarding the stadium fighting the estimated 300 militants, there are many worries surrounding Yemen’s inability to suppress the AQAP threat in the quickly expanding power vacuum in the country. Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh has said that he would appear on state television this week, though he has yet to be seen. This would be the first time he has done so since the attack on his palace 3 weeks ago that sent him to Saudi Arabia for medical treatment. The UN has also sent a mission to Yemen to analyse the human rights situation.

Two US senators, Ben Cardin and Susan Collins, who proposed Resolution 185 to the U.S. Senate, had it passed this week. The resolution called for a cessation of Palestinian funding from the US if they attempt to claim unilateral recognition at the UN. The senators suggested that unless independence was negotiated in a peace deal, this would be counterproductive to the peace process. A review of the Hamas-Fatah relationship was also suggested.

The UK

The Police Federation for North Ireland (PFNI) warned this week that there are 650 dissident republican terrorists still at large who are set on shattering North Ireland’s power-sharing settlement. These groups include the Real IRA, Continuity IRA and Oghlaigh naEireann who, it was suggested, have been predominantly responsible for approximately 200 gun and bomb attacks against police in the last year alone. To reinforce the severity of this problem, an unexploded pipe bomb was found outside a North Ireland police station this Friday, only 50m from a children’s park. No group has yet claimed responsibility for the bomb, but it is suggested that the IRA was involved.

18 UK military advisors, who were overseeing poorly trained Pakistani Frontier Corps in counter-terrorism around Baluchistan, were expelled from Pakistan earlier this week. Though no official reason was given for this, “security concerns” were vaguely referenced by the Pakistani authorities. It was suggested that Pakistan is trying to strengthen their independence from Western sponsors following the death of Osama Bin Laden earlier this year.

The leader of the Islamic Movement in Israel, Sheik Raed Salah, was detained in London on Tuesday night after he had allegedly broken a travel ban to enter the UK. Saleh had already spoken to a group at Leicester Square that night and was meant to attend a meeting at the House of Commons on Wednesday. While Salah has never been charged with anti-Semitism in Israel, he has been accused of it in the past. Some believe that Britain collaborated with Israel over this arrest.

The al-Shamukh forum, a key site for “e-jihadists” and al-Qaeda, has been removed from the internet in an apparent cyber attack that not only took down the site, but the server as well. The group who was responsible for this remains unknown, but similar instances in the past have been admitted by the US and UK, such as the UK cyber attack on al-Qaeda’s English-language magazine Inspire, where bomb making formulas were replaced with cupcake recipes.

The UN has issued indictments against Hezbollah officials over the 2005 assassination of Rafik Hariri during a meeting with three judges from the UN-backed tribunal. Lebanon has 30 days to respond to the indictment. The current cabinet is led by Hezbollah and its allies and the tribunal has long been a point of contention between rival political parties in Lebanon.

A large conference held in Dublin from June 26 – 29, The Summit Against Violence and Extremism (SAVE), had over 90 former extremists speak at the event which was co-sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations and focussed on why young people are turning to violent extremism. The attendees ranged from academics, NGOs, to inner city-gangs, right wing militias and religious extremists as well as “survivors” - former victims of violence and terrorist attacks.

Contract article -

The Middle East & more

While no stories this week have proved to be as significant as other recent events there were many other events developments around the world that tied in directly to the biggest stories of the year - the Arab uprising and Afghanistan.  

Obama has announced a pullout of 30,000, or approximately one-third, of total US troops by 2012 stating that the US had “largely achieved” its main goals in Afghanistan. The US plans to hand over full responsibility of security to the Afghan authorities by 2014. It was suggested that the US will instead begin to focus more on “clandestine counterterrorist operations” such as the one responsible for the death of Osama Bin Laden and listed both Pakistan and Yemen as potential target areas.

The Syrian army has moved closer to Turkey as they swept through the village of Khirbet al-Jouz, only 500m from the border this week. The violent crackdown on protestors continued after President Assad addressed the nation earlier this week, stating that Syria was the target of “foreign conspiracies” and that Syrian refugees who have fled to Turkey in the past weeks should return to Syria. In a move this Friday, the EU has placed economic sanctions against more companies and individuals who are said to be funding Assad’s regime. According to human rights groups the total death count in Syria is now up to 1,300.

Sources in Hezbollah stated that they were readying themselves for an attack on Israel in order to relieve Western pressure on President Assad in Syria. Sources in the group announced that the West was trying to capitalise upon the protests in Syria in order to install a Western-Israeli friendly ruler who would be hostile towards the group and that they aimed to prevent this. As Syria is considered Hezbollah’s “guardian ally” and a regime change could greatly affect Hezbollah’s position in the region.

Yemeni president Ali-Abdullah Saleh, who is still in Saudi Arabia for medical treatment after an attack on his palace earlier this month, will not be returning to Yemen anytime soon announced a senior US diplomat in the region. There has been a push to transfer full power to the vice-president, who is currently acting President, and end the unrest that has driven the country to the brink of civil war. Another blow was the escape of 40 al Qaeda fighters a prison in the port city of Mukalla on Wednesday.

The former youth wing of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt has separated to create an independent party – The Egyptian Current Party. They are expected to take a softer line than the Brotherhood, with expected policies to embrace the separation of religion and politics, the protection of individual freedoms and a promotion of Islamic values without enforcing Islamic religious law.

The nature of radicalisation in US prisons is quickly changing, according to one article this week. It focused on the difficulties faced by immigrants trying to integrate into their communities, an increase of pro-violence support in US mosques and British policy used to reduce the threat of radicalisation on campuses. The article also analysed the different ways in which the US is tackling these growing issues and the effects this problem will have on Israel.

Yale University has created controversy this week over the announcement of a new institute which will study antisemitism, only three weeks after it closed a similar institute which was accused of acting as a platform for “hate-mongering.” The accusations arose out of conference held last August entitled, “Global Antisemitism: A Crisis of Modernity” which featured numerous speakers who appeared to be anti-Islamic and anti-Arab.
   
The UK

In a visit to Pakistan, British Foreign Secretary William Hague met with Pakistani Minister for Interior Rehman Malik on a visit to the Police Line Headquarters in Islamabad to commemorate policemen who have given their lives while fighting terrorism. Hague reiterated Britain’s interest in combating terrorism and the importance of working together with Pakistan in the interest of international security.

The President of the Muslim Association of Britain, Dr. Omer El Hamdoon, stated in an interview this week that the new UK Prevent strategy is flawed and subjective and instead increases hostility against Muslims in Britain. Hamdoon states his association is trying to raise awareness amongst Muslims in the UK about the importance of their role in British society and good citizenship, but that only “Muslims themselves determine whether to integrate or not.”


Contract article -

By Joana Cook, ICSR Research Intern

Welcome to the ICSR Newsblog of the week. This new blog will summarise important or predominant headlines on stories related to radicalisation, extremism and other significant events of the week, with a focus on the UK and Middle East.

The Middle East

The biggest news story of the week is arguably the appointment of the new al Qaeda leadership, Sheikh Dr Abu-Muhammad Ayman al-Zawahiri, Al Qaeda’s former second in command who is currently thought to be hiding along the Pakistani-Afghan border. Al-Zawahiri has called for a continuation of jihad against the U.S. and Israel, among others. While analysts and experts around the world predict what this will mean for the future of al Qaeda, al Qaeda challenges the death of Bin Laden as the end of their organisation.

The future of Yemen continues to remain unclear. This week the city of Huta was attacked by al- Qaeda gunmen who killed two policeman. The US has also stated it is setting up a secret base in the region to target al Qaeda in a move seen as ‘preparing for the worst’ in the near-failed state. Officials worry the growing power vacuum in Yemen will be exploited by al Qaeda, who appears to be taking a stronger hold in the area.

Syria has been a particular hot spot in this week’s news. A mass influx of refugees from the Idlib province have fled to Turkey after violent government crackdown’s on numerous cities. With over 1,500 civilians now killed in Syria, Ban Ki-moon has again called for Syrian President Assad to ‘engage in inclusive dialogue and to take bold measures before it’s too late.’

The deal between Fatah and Hamas is still alive despite numerous problems. After holding talks this week in Cairo, it is expected that the two groups will announce a new unity government next week and also discuss an agreement made on the release of prisoners, though they have not yet agreed on a Palestinian Prime Minister.

From the Israeli side comes a different perspective. Avigdor Lieberman, the Israeli Foreign Minister, threatened this week that Israel will renounce past agreements, such as the Oslo Accords, if Palestinians continue to push forward with a declaration of independent statehood this September. He claimed that the unilateral move would be a violation of all agreements signed in the past 18 years and cancel any Israeli obligation in those agreements.

A unique piece of the week analyses the growing risk of the radicalisation of women in some Pakistani madrassas, which are attended by over a quarter million women. The article claims these women tend to be more educated and affluent than most male-attended madrassas, as they are considered an ideal environment for unwed women to go as they are considered both respectable and safe-spaces from engaging in relationships outside of marriage. The story is a good example of unique niche populations in radicalisation around the world.

The UK

It’s been another busy week in the UK media for stories of radicalisation and extremism. This is due in part to the recently unveiled Prevent strategy, the UK’s new approach to counterterrorism and the flurry of media responses still analysing what this will translate to on the ground.

The Guardian has published a number of articles and responses to its heavy coverage of the Prevent strategy. An interesting commentary by Unmesh Dasai, who leads the Prevent agenda for the Newham Council, states that we must focus on building communities resilient to extremist activities and highlight our commonalities rather than differences to combat extremism in the UK. He also highlights the importance of attacking the roots of extremist ideology and ensuring British values and a ‘multicultural cohesive identity’ are constantly put into practice.

Another hot topic of the Prevent strategy has been its focus identifying potential extremists on UK campuses. One article by the Editor-in-Chief of Ceasefire Magazine argues that by limiting open discussions of extremism on campus, universities don’t allow a productive forum to challenge extremist ideas and instead risk becoming a part of the problem rather than solution. It has also been revealed that a major UK university has been filming students on campus in an attempt to single out potential extremists in an apparent controversial new form of policing.

Numerous Muslim groups in the UK, such as the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) will challenge ethnic profiling of their community they stated this week. With a rise in Islamophobic attacks in the UK, these groups worry that many of these crimes go unreported specifically as anti-Islam attacks, compared to more prominently reported anti-Semitic attacks.

The English Defense League (EDL) has been quite active this week. Last weekend they held rallies in Dewsbury and Maidenhead that were attended by 400 – 500 people, they claimed. The rally covered topics such as former Dewsbury MP Shahid Malik who gave a controversial speech about Muslims ‘taking over’ Britain. The rally was peaceful, though there was a large police presence on hand as well as counter-protestors from the Muslim Defence League.

The EDL also released three new articles this week highlighting challenging the definition of a ‘moderate Muslim,’ claiming that we should instead be looking for reformist Muslims to help integrate Muslims into UK society. They feature a lawyer, Mr. Gavin Boby, who has offered to work pro-bono for those wishing to campaign against the proliferation of mosques in the UK and finally discussing the arrest of their leader Tommy Robinson for the Blackburn demonstration. Robinson’s charges have not been clarified.

That’s just a quick look at some of the major stories of the week. Please keep an eye on the ICSR’s latest news, reports and FREEradicals blog for a more in-depth analysis of these and other events.

Contract article -

The loss of a figurehead as iconic as Osama bin Laden will come as a blow to al-Qaeda and its supporters, but is unlikely to fatally undermine the movement.

Early responses on jihadist internet forums eulogise him as a figurehead and lament his loss, but insist that this will not diminish their determination to continue the jihadist cause.

In the last few hours jihadist forums monitored by ICSR are carrying a statement from the Taliban which threatens to avenge bin Laden's death by launching attacks against American and Pakistani interests.

A subsequent statement by the Pakistani Taliban made specific threats against Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari, the Pakistani army, and the United States. They warned that Pakistan would be their first target and the United States their second. 

Implications for al-Qaeda

•    A senior member of the Haqqani network – one of the main insurgent factions in Afghanistan led by Jalaluddin Haqqani – claims to have met with bin Laden at his Abbottabad compound less than three months ago. However, al-Qaeda's strategy no longer depends upon a hierarchical structure and bin Laden’s death is unlikely to significantly disrupt the operational dynamics of the organisation. Early responses on jihadist internet forums underline the determination of al-Qaeda members and supporters to continue their struggle.

•    Since the invasion of Afghanistan after 9/11 much of al-Qaeda’s leadership has been unable to operate freely or independently. This led to the ‘franchising’ of the movement with local chapters created around the world: al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), and al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM).

•    Al-Qaeda’s best known strategist Abu Musab al-Suri has previously said: “Al-Qaeda is not an organisation, it is not a group, nor do we want it to be. It is a call, a reference, a methodology”.

•    One participant on a jihadist forum reminds his peers: “We were not fighting for Osama. We were fighting for Allah. The Jihad will continue even if the Amir [leader] is Shaheed [martyred]!!” Another adds: “Those who fought for shaykh usaamah, know that shaykh usaamah has passed away, but those who fought for Allaah, know that Allaah is alive and will never die”.

•    A more stoic observer reminds contributors: “Whatever befalls us, whether martyrdom or victory in battlefield, is a victory for us who believe”.

•  One contributor warned "a million new bin Ladens will be born! And the flag of jihad will be raised! Inshallah".

•    Jihadist groups typically absorb the death of their leaders better than other movements. Al-Qaeda has been sustaining serious blows to its leadership ever since 9/11 with the death or capture of key figures such as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, Mustafa abu al-Yazid, Abu Zubaydah and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

•    Historically, too, the global jihad movement has continued to proceed despite the capture or killing of its senior leaders, including the death of Abdullah Azzam or the incarceration of Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman.

•    It is possible that one consequence of bin Laden’s death will be that al-Qaeda’s bonds with its international chapters – and with AQAP in particular – will weaken, allowing them to enjoy greater autonomy in the future.

The place of bin Laden’s death underlines the importance of Pakistan in the context of global terrorism

•    Osama Bin Laden was killed in Abbottabad which is located in Pakistan’s North West Frontier Province (recently renamed Khyber Pakhtunkhwa), 30 miles (50 km) north of the Pakistani capital of Islamabad.

•    The compound which housed bin Laden was built in 2005, and was heavily fortified with 12-18ft walls, topped with barbed wire. There are also inner walls protecting other parts of the compound and there was no telephone or internet connections linked to the property.

•    Three other people were killed along with Bin Laden in the operation; US officials are saying that one of them was the son of the al-Qaeda leader and the other was a woman used as a human shield.

•    US Special Forces and Marines have a base relatively close to Abbottabad. They are stationed in Tarbela Ghazi, about 60 miles west of Abbottabad.

•    Other significant members of al-Qaeda and the Taliban have previously been captured in big Pakistani cities. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was captured in Rawalpindi. Elsewhere, the Taliban’s military commander Mullah Baradar was captured in Karachi, as was al-Qaeda member Ramzi bin al-Shibh.

A number of key al-Qaeda figureheads could play a similar leadership role in the movement in the future

•    Ayman al-Zawahiri – The most obvious successor to bin Laden, Zawahiri has been a constant figure in al-Qaeda propaganda and operations since 9/11.

Strengths: Often referred to as bin Laden’s second in command, Zawahiri has leadership experience and is an easily identifiable figure in the global jihad movement.

Weaknesses: A senior US administration official notes “As the only al Qaeda leader whose authority was universally respected, [Osama bin Laden] also maintained his cohesion, and his likely successor, Ayman al-Zawahiri, is far less charismatic and not as well respected within the organization, according to comments from several captured al Qaeda leaders.  He probably will have difficulty maintaining the loyalty of bin Laden’s largely Gulf Arab followers”.

•    Abu Yahya al-Libi – Now one of al-Qaeda’s leading propagandists and strategists, gaining renewed prominence since the Libyan uprising. 

Strengths: Libi is an established figure in al-Qaeda propaganda videos and possesses formal scholarly credentials. He currently holds a place on al-Qaeda's Shura Committee.

Weaknesses: Does not enjoy widespread support within the movement and lacks the charisma needed to inspire lone wolves. He is not well known amongst extremist sympathisers in the West.

•    Naser al-Wuhaishi  – Formerly a chief confidant of Osama bin Laden, Wuhaishi is now one of the leaders of AQAP.  The group currently enjoys a high profile among the global jihad movement due to its brazen attacks which include targeting both Saudi Arabia and the United States.

Strengths: Wuhaishi was previously held in Guantanamo Bay, giving him added credibility among some al-Qaeda supporters.

Weaknesses: Is not in Afghanistan or Pakistan and is therefore unable to unite ‘al-Qaeda central’ around his leadership. It would be difficult to stake his claims to a leadership role for the entire movement from Yemen.

•    Anwar al-Awlaki – One of the most senior American citizens in the al-Qaeda network, Awlaki is thought to be hiding in the Shabwa province of Yemen. He is believed to have directed and inspired several attacks against the United States and its interests, including the attack at Fort Hood carried out by Nidal Hasan.

Strengths: Awlaki enjoys a large following among some English speaking radicals and receives extensive attention from the Western media. He is fluent in English, has demonstrated an acute awareness of popular culture, and is a highly charismatic speaker. Awlaki also possess formal scholarly credentials.

Weaknesses: Lacks significant support within the Arab world and would therefore struggle to establish himself among this core constituency. Awlaki is also regarded by some as a late comer to the movement and has not ‘proved’ himself in battle the way his rivals have. Thus, despite his high profile, Awlaki is among the least likely of these candidates to succeed bin Laden.

In the short-term, the threat from al-Qaeda-inspired terrorism is likely to increase significantly, in the West and in Pakistan

•    The prospect of ‘revenge’ terrorist attacks by al-Qaeda and its affiliates is highly likely in coming months, with the primary aim of demonstrating their ongoing resilience.

•    US relations with Pakistan may come under strain in the coming months despite President Obama praising Pakistan for their assistance in his official remarks. Questions will be asked about Pakistan’s involvement in all this. Abbottabad is a garrison town, home to scores of Pakistani military personnel and retired officers. Just how bin Laden was able to establish a sanctuary there without arousing suspicion will raise serious questions. Indeed, the expansive compound in which he was discovered is adjacent to an elite military academy – sometimes referred to Pakistan’s Sandhurst.

•    Political instability in Pakistan is likely to increase significantly in the short term. Jihadists will renew their campaign against the state. Meanwhile nationalist and Islamist parties will express outrage that US military forces were able to conduct a large and delicate operation inside Pakistan so soon after the Raymond Davis incident.

Contract article -

News is breaking that Osama bin Laden, the leader of al-Qaeda has been killed. The United States is believed to be in possession of his body.

Jihadist forums linked to al-Qaeda which are monitored by ICSR have begun eulogising bin Laden, giving a strong indication that the jihad movement confirms the events.

More to follow on this as events develop.

UPDATE:

President Obama has confirmed that United States military personnel operating within Pakistan have killed Osama bin Laden. Here's what we know:

• Bin Laden was killed in Abbottabad which is located in Pakistan's North West Frontier Province (recently renamed Khyber Pakhtunkhwa).
• He was in a compound that was built in 2005.
• The compound was heavily fortified with 12-18ft walls.
• There was no telephone or internet connection linked to the property.
  
• Abbottabad is located about 30 miles north of Islamabad.
• Jihadist forums monitored by ICSR are eulogising Osama bin Laden.

ICSR will be producing an insight on this shortly focusing on:

• Likely successors to Osama bin Laden;
• Reactions from the jihadist community;
• Fallout and consequences.
  

Contract article -

ICSR Associate Fellow, Dr Martyn Frampton, has written an analysis of the evolving threat faced by the rise in violence by dissident Irish Republicans.

For a full PDF of Dr Frampton's analysis, please click here. Contract article -

Speaking yesterday at a conference organised by King’s College London’s ICSR, the Council on Foreign Relations, and Georgetown University’s Center for Peace and Security Studies, British Security Minister Baroness Pauline Neville Jones revealed core elements of the British government’s revised Prevent agenda.

She announced that the new strategy would be broader than it currently is, “confront[ing] all forms of extremism, from the far left to the far right”. At the same time, it will focus “more narrowly… on violent extremism and the pathways that lead to [the] espousal of violence”.

At the core of the new strategy will be “three I’s”: ideology, institutions, and individuals.

•    On ideology, Neville-Jones said that the counter-terrorist message had to be “more sustained” and “more focused”, and that the “exploitation” of the internet by extremists for radicalisation and recruitment had to be “at the centre of our attention”.

•    Among the institutions where people “may be especially vulnerable to the influence of charismatic radicalisers”, she highlighted universities and colleges, prisons, and mosques. Neville-Jones said that the government would work with a broad range of partners – governmental and non-governmental – to make sure that these place do not become “incubators of extremism”.

•    The security minister also stressed the importance of individuals, saying that  “people” should be at the center of a “more granular strategy”. She emphasised the importance of community empowerment and engagement, and praised the so-called Channel programme for preventing vulnerable individuals from becoming terrorists. She said, “Hundreds of people have now been referred through our flagship Channel programme. This type of multi-agency intervention is enormously more cost effective than maintaining an MI5 investigation or dealing with the consequences of a successful attack”.    

Neville-Jones made it clear that the new strategy would not “rely on extremists to combat violence merely because they do not espouse it themselves”. Drawing on Prime Minister David Cameron’s recent speech at the Munich Security Conference, she stressed that the two tasks of fighting terrorism and creating a more integrated and cohesive society were inseparable. She cited Citizenship Surveys according to which segregation and exclusive forms of religious and ethnic identities formed “an enabling context in which the espousal of violence is made easy”.

The minister’s forceful intervention came at a critical point in both countries’ efforts to combat radicalisation. While Britain’s new Coalition government is revising its Prevent strategy, the U.S. government will set out the core elements of its first domestic “countering violent extremism” agenda later this year.

The conference took place at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington DC. Titled “UK and US Approaches in Countering Radicalization”, it featured prominent speakers from both the United Kingdom and the United States, and allowed nearly 200 practitioners, experts and policymakers from both sides of the Atlantic to come together, understand each other’s approaches, and exchange best practices.

To watch the full speech, click here.

To watch other on the record panels, click here. Contract article -

Reproduced below is an analysis by ICSR's newest Associate Fellow, Marisa L. Porges, on the effects that the Arab uprisings may have on al-Qaeda. It was first published in The Philadelphia Inquirer

As popular protests spread through the Middle East and North Africa, al-Qaeda and its affiliates have largely been a nonfactor.

For years, the terrorist group urged Muslims to wage war against insufficiently Islamic regimes and advocated governance by sharia law. But over the past few weeks, as the region's political future was being decided, al-Qaeda remained largely silent. Its leaders ceded the rhetorical ground to the secular, liberal activists leading protests in Egypt, Yemen, Libya, and elsewhere. That's remarkable given that rhetoric and messaging have been such a central part of al-Qaeda's strategy to date.

Take, for example, the video released last week by Ayman al-Zawahiri, al-Qaeda's second-in-command and an Egyptian. The 34-minute clip was the organization's first statement since the revolution began in Egypt, and, oddly, it made no mention of the protests there or of Hosni Mubarak's resignation. Instead, al-Zawahiri bemoaned the state of his home country, calling it a "deviation from Islam" and cautioning against secular, democratic rule. The message was ill-timed, misdirected, and uninspired.

Al-Qaeda affiliates and supporters in the region have done a similarly poor job of taking advantage of the growing crises. Early this month, the Islamic State of Iraq, an al-Qaeda front organization in that country, issued a statement weakly supporting Egypt's revolution, warning against "the tricks of un-Islamic ideologies" and calling for Egyptians to embrace jihad and demand a new government ruled by Islamic law. Meanwhile, the leaders of al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb called for regime change in Tunisia and Algeria, urging other Muslims to follow suit in hopes of spreading sharia law throughout the region.

These statements appear to have been too little, too late. They came weeks after the uprisings began, and they went largely unnoticed by the media and, more importantly, by many in al-Qaeda's core audience. That includes the very individuals who are a driving force in the current protests: young, unemployed Arab men, who are considered especially vulnerable to al-Qaeda's radicalization and recruitment efforts. Al-Qaeda has become a passive observer, riding the bench during the biggest game of the decade.

Does this mean a strategic shift is under way in the al-Qaeda leadership? Not likely. There's no indication that the group's senior leaders are adjusting their tactics.

Does it mean they feel threatened by the political movements sweeping the region? Perhaps for the moment, since the largely peaceful revolutions call into question al-Qaeda's core assertion: that political reform requires violent jihad. But it remains to be seen whether the protests usher in more secular, democratic governments or regimes that are amenable to al-Qaeda.

In the meantime, the United States should focus on keeping al-Qaeda out of the game. U.S. officials should remain committed to supporting political reforms in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain, and beyond, even though the outcome could be unsettling to Western political sensibilities. That may mean encouraging moderate Muslims to point out where al-Qaeda has been proven wrong and downplaying any of its future attempts to influence events.

It remains to be seen whether al-Qaeda will reassert itself and affect the outcome of the protests or, more likely, try to take credit for whatever happens. We should anticipate more posturing not just from al-Zawahiri, who promised more commentaries, but from affiliates such as al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, which has a history of tailoring propaganda to address political issues and gain support in Yemen.

Regardless, it's becoming clear that a transformation of the region is under way, and al-Qaeda isn't part of it. We should do what we can to keep it that way.

Contract article -

This is a guest post by Tony Manson, an MSc in International Relations (London School of Economics) and a researcher in the political and military history of Israel and the Middle East.

If Palestine is to be created on 22% of U.N. mandated territory^[1] then the international community will have to enact a bold plan very soon, assuming it is genuinely interested in a “two state solution.” Future conflicts might destroy any hope of an independent Palestine. An international plan will require promptness, vision, and serious commitment and funding.

The Plan

Any plan that hopes to create a successful Palestine would have to look similar to the one below. If it does not both Israel and Palestine can be sure the international community is not yet serious about a sustainable "two state solution":

1. A Financial Guarantors Coalition: core members - USA, E.U., Japan, Gulf Arab states, to guarantee financial support to Palestine for 20 years. Its remit to include:

     a) compensating refugees

     b) resettling refugees

     c) building 4 new cities for the resettled

     d) building bullet train for Hajj pilgrims from East Jerusalem to Medina that will be         connected to an international airport on the Jordan-Palestine border

     e) building broadband infrastructure on South Korean model

     f) developing East Jerusalem to accommodate Muslim pilgrims

     g) self-sustaining water, power, and transport infrastructure projects

And, if Hamas agrees to abide by the 3 Quartet principles^[2]

     h) a Gazan container port and an international airport on the Egypt-Gaza border as well as a connecting road and rail tunnel link to the West Bank

2. For Palestinians: freedom to work in, and travel to, the Gulf states, open borders with Jordan and Egypt, security guarantees from NATO, the U.N. and Russia, recognition of East Jerusalem as Palestine's capital.

3. For Israelis: freedom to work and reside in the E.U. on 4-year renewable work visas, preferential E.U. status, NATO membership or affiliation and security guarantees including unilateral measures in extremis, financial support for all additional security measures, and international recognition of West Jerusalem and the Kottel area of East Jerusalem as Israel's capital.

4. The freedom to coordinate unilateral acts of withdrawal between Israel and Palestine to be used at both nations' mutually agreed discretion.

5. For China, Russia, South Korea, and Turkey: involvement in building and infrastructure projects including engineering, manpower, organisation, energy supply, building materials.

An international conference in 2011 to declare, allocate, and establish these responsibilities.

The need for, and advantages of, such a plan

The advantage of such a plan is that each of the participants in the Financial Guarantor group would be supporting each other in implementing their individual and collective efforts. Were a party to withdraw it would not only be an international embarrassment but evidence of lack of support for a two state outcome. It would also anchor the Gulf states into the process, something that until now, for many reasons, they have been reluctant to do. Finally the plan would ensure that the West Bank had a realistic chance of becoming part of a stable, prosperous, and successful state, as opposed to yet another potential threat to Israel.

It offers incentives to both Israel and Palestine to overcome their genuine doubts about a two state solution, instead of being trapped in an endless cycle of either having pressure put upon them or endeavouring to create pressure on the other party. Direct exposure to the advantages of the plan to the respective populations would also undermine the propensity of the political leaderships to veto progress in talks. Two other potential benefits to Israel and Palestine would be product and technology transfer via Palestinian economic zones to the Gulf States, and a portion of the Muslim pilgrim tourism to East Jerusalem crossing into Israel.

China would play a vital part in creating the new cities required to absorb the new returnee and refugee populations. China's proven ability to build and complete large projects on time would add credibility to the project.

South Korean involvement in supplying broadband to the new cities would help ensure that they would not become instant backwater dumping grounds for their populations but had a modern urban infrastructure ready and fit for development. U.N. Secretary Ban Ki-moon's influence would be particularly productive in this effort.

Japan's proven success with its high speed rail networks will give credibility to the bullet train project from East Jerusalem to Medina and will be only the first stage in a regional effort to link Istanbul and Damascus in the north with Jordan in the east and Medina and the Gulf states to the south. At the centre of it all would be the international airport on the Jordan-Palestine border which would act as a hub for tourists and pilgrims to go directly by train to East Jerusalem, to Jordan's main tourist sites, to the Red Sea, and beyond. A major highway and rail network would also help integrate Palestine into the regional economy.

Turkey's vital contribution, beyond supplying materials and engineering and manpower skills, would be to extend the network north via Syria into Anatolia. Turkey, having built the original railway linking Damascus to Medina, would not only see the project as a matter of national pride but of economic self-interest, as the network will link Arabia to Turkey and on to Europe.

Russian engagement and involvement in the creation and construction of Palestine has self-evident advantages, and delegating to Russia construction projects, the supply of energy and materials, and security guarantees to Palestine will reinforce Russia's role, satisfy her aspiration to great power status, and undermine the rejectionist camp.

The plan can work with or without Syrian, Iranian, Hizb'allah and Hamas participation and/or veto but it can also be part of a wider comprehensive peace process. Successful investment in the West Bank by the Financial Guarantor powers will act as an incentive to Palestinians in Gaza to get involved and will undermine the rejectionist camp. The plan could also assuage Israel's concern that no progress can occur in relation to a two state outcome until the threat from Iran is dealt with.

If this or a similar plan is not enacted:

1. Unilateral moves by both Israel and Palestine will leave all the main issues unresolved: refugees, Jerusalem, borders, economic and political integration, security, and legitimacy.

2. Radical Islamic forces and the rejectionist camp led by Iran will be strengthened, undermining moderate Arab regimes, and would be further bolstered should there be a pre-emptive strike by Israel upon Iran's nuclear weapons facilities.

3. The losses that Israel expects to endure following a strike upon Iran will make her even less likely to compromise on security.

4. Palestine, as an independent, economically viable nation state, will be increasingly difficult to either create or sustain, and will certainly comprise far less than 22% of Mandate Palestine. Non-violent Palestinian resistance will slowly be replaced by more radical forces, particularly post President Abbas's tenure.

5. The region will remain a centre of political instability and violence for the foreseeable future.

The 5 points above describe, in any event, the most likely future based upon current trends.

[1] 22% of U.N. mandated Palestine constitutes the West Bank and Gaza territories based upon the disputed 1967 borders.

[2] ¹⁾ Unconditional recognition of Israel; ²⁾ Abide by all previous Israel-PLO-P.A. agreements; ³⁾ Renounce violence.

Contract article -

Reproduced below is an interview ICSR's Shiraz Maher gave to Just Journalism, a London-based media monitoring think-tank. Shiraz has just returned from Cairo, and he will be giving a talk on his experiences this Friday at ICSR.

Just Journalism Executive Director Michael Weiss recently spoke with Maher about Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood and the deliberate targeting of journalists.

Michael Weiss: You just returned from Cairo. What were you impressions of the protestors? Is this a revolution that the West ought to be worried about or embrace unequivocally?

Shiraz Maher: There are very few things that should be embraced unequivocally.The Cairo revolt merits close inspection but unfortunately some sections of the commentariat have been too quick to rush to judgment. Quite often, they have done so without going anywhere near Egypt. After spending a week talking to protesters in Tahrir Square and many of the main opposition leaders, my impression is that the West has squandered an amazing opportunity here. This movement emerged as a ‘leaderless revolt’ organised through social networking sites and mobile phones. It started with the youth, but has received broad support from all sections of Egyptian society.

I saw everyone you could think of in the Square: old men and women, peasants from the countryside, gilded urban youth, members of the upwardly mobile middle classes. One man even brought his newborn to Tahrir Square proclaiming her ‘the youngest revolutionary’ (she was one month old). You only had to speak with these guys to realise that they are not seeking an Islamist revolt. This is not 1979 or an attempt to turn Cairo into Kabul. The language of the protesters is framed through the idioms of ‘freedom’, ‘liberty’, and ‘human rights’. These people want their dignity back. Lots of Christians attended the protests too, and people were very alive to the fact that the West fears an Islamist revolt. They went out of their way to make it clear that this is a secular movement. Western leaders, and Obama in particular, have made a disastrous miscalculation by not supporting these protesters with more vigour.

Tahrir Square During the Anti-Mubarak Protests

MW: Journalists have been detained, beaten, threatened and dragged through the streets by pro-Mubarak forces. Any ominous anecdotes of your own to report?

SM: The atmosphere for journalists was fine until Wednesday when the pro-Mubarak mob turned up. Until then we were able to work freely. The protesters were very good to us, they were keen to talk and would offer us food and water. The atmosphere felt like a carnival at times. Of course there were all the usual dangers of reporting from an environment as volatile as the one in Cairo, where vigilante gangs were opening fire at random and seeking out targets for theft, but that was never too bad.

On Sunday I was caught up in two gunfights, but was able to run back to the relative safety of the hotel without too much trouble. The following day I travelled with a Venezuelan TV crew to Shubra, an impoverished area just north of downtown Cairo. A gang of about twenty, I can only assume they were criminals, surrounded the car at some traffic lights and tried to go for our equipment. Luckily the driver threatened to run them over and got us out of there. Even then, the situation didn’t feel too unsafe because journalists were not specifically the target.

Once the pro-Mubarak supporters turned up on Wednesday things turned very bad, very quickly. They had orders to find the foreign press and attack them. I saw scores of foreign journalists being set upon and beaten. Often they were just kicked and punched and had their cameras destroyed. Others were less fortunate and were hit with sticks, poles or, in some cases, with knives. Sadly, one Greek journalist was killed after being stabbed.

The Army was slow to intervene during these incidents, if they intervened at all. When they did, they would disperse the crowd but then turned over the journalists to Egypt’s much feared secret police. I saw that happen with two journalists from the Washington Post. I watched from the hotel balcony as they tried to sprint back but were unable to make it. The mob beat them and then the Army arrested them. I saw them marched under the 6 October bridge to a military checkpoint, after which I don’t know what happened to them. It’s safe to say, the panic set in by that stage.Who was going to protect us? The mob was out to kill us and the police wanted to arrest us.

There were lots of other hairy moments too. For example, the Army turned up at my room late one evening with about ten soldiers, all of them heavily armed. They were upset with us filming from the balcony so we were ordered to stop. Later they confiscated some of the cameras. Most of the journalists were in the same hotel and by late afternoon on Wednesday the mood there was extremely tense. Even seasoned correspondents looked petrified. Almost everyone was carrying some kind of injury. It was an awful 48 hours from that point.

MW: The Muslim Brotherhood was quiet at first. But in recent days their representatives have been increasingly outspoken on everything from their political intentions in any post-Mubarak democracy, to the fate of the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty. At the same time, one has heard and read numerous commentaries that depict the Brotherhood as either politically marginal, bumbling, or benign. You’ve a background in Islamist movements, not to put too fine a point to it, and so I’m wondering what you make of the Ikwhan and their real threat level?

SM: The Ikhwan are a force in Egypt, of that there can be no doubt. I don’t buy the argument that the Ikhwan is changing or that it can somehow be tempered as a movement. Institutionally it remains as reactionary and extreme as it always has been.

With regard to the current troubles in Cairo however, the Ikhwan were nowhere to be seen. Their presence on the ground was small and the main protesters I spoke to were keen to distance themselves from the movement. Yes, the Ikhwan is a part of Egyptian political life, but it is not on the brink of power. It is not even the most popular party among ordinary Egyptians. Mubarak has sold the West a crock by saying if he goes then the Brotherhood is next. I don’t buy that argument and I think we run the risk of turning this into a self-fulfilling prophecy by not supporting the protesters on the ground. They’re already asking why they’re not being supported by the West. If their hope gives way to anger, then that is precisely what Islamists want. It helps them sell the lie that the West is out to undermine Islam and Muslims, or that the West only selectively applies its principles.

So, to answer your question, the Brotherhood might be marginal but it is neither bumbling nor benign. It is an astute movement watching [the West] betray the legitimate sentiments of young, ordinary Egyptians. That is what the Ikhwan is waiting for so it can pounce. A marginal movement could very suddenly find itself in the mainstream. I have good evidence from Alexandria that this is already starting to happen, and it is worth bearing in mind that the Brotherhood is much better organised there than in Cairo.

MW: One aspect of the analysis on the Brotherhood that I’ve not seen addressed yet is their support in the cities versus the countryside. We tend to forget that these protests are taking place in metropolitan centres in Egypt, but not in the rural areas. In Iran in 2009, even though the presidential election was rigged, there seems to be some consensus that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did well among the rural poor. I’m curious to whether or not the comparable areas in Egypt are more or less favorably disposed to Islamism – or to Mubarak, for that matter.

SM: The rural poor tend to support Mubarak. In fact, it seems most Egyptians simply want stability. It was interesting to see how the momentum turned against the Tahrir Square protesters following Mubarak’s statement on Tuesday night. For us looking in, it is hard to appreciate how much of a masterstroke it was. In that speech I thought Mubarak came across as arrogant and defiant, but he struck an emotional resonance with Egyptians. They almost felt sorry for him. In the meantime they are suffering badly. Egypt has plunged into crisis. The shops are out of food, banks are closed, ATMs have no money, and fuel supplies are low; ordinary life has ground to a complete halt. Over a million tourists also fled the country, battering an already struggling economy.

When the extreme violence broke out on Wednesday most Egyptians just had enough. They regard the protesters as having won because Mubarak pledged to stand down later this year. Now they want a return to normalcy. That’s what the overwhelming view among the rural poor is, and an increasing number of Egyptian city-dwellers are starting to share it. The Brotherhood’s main stronghold is in Alexandria among young adult males. In Alexandria they are making their presence more felt than in other parts of Egypt.

MW: The Obama administration has demanded that Mubarak leave and make way for a transitional government, though this would inevitably be run by his hastily appointed Vice President Omar Suleiman with some degree of military oversight. Will this outcome, even if temporary, satisfy the demonstrators?

SM: No. The protesters in Tahrir Square are furious with the suggestion. Interestingly, ever since Omar Suleiman was appointed Vice President, some protesters began naming him in their chants too. Until then, the only person they named was Mubarak. On Tuesday, when the‘million man march’ took place, the names of all the cabinet were read followed by chants of ‘out’. This was before Mubarak offered his compromise.

With regards to the compromise, there are two things you have to bear in mind. The first is that these protesters are not simply calling for the removal of Mubarak, they want everyone out and to start again. The second is much more personal. The hardcore protesters, the few thousand who have largely orchestrated this movement, know that during the interim period they will be arrested, tortured and even killed by Mubarak’s brutal state apparatus. This will be Mubarak’s final revenge. His ship is sinking, but he wants to make sure he takes as many people down with him as possible. The protesters in Tahrir Square know this very well, so their only option is to remain there. Many told me they would sooner die there than leave with Mubarak still in power. I fear, for many, that is precisely what it will come to.

Contract article -

Egypt’s radical revolt? The view from Tahrir Square

Friday, 11 February, 12.30-1.30pm

Speaker: Shiraz Maher, Senior Fellow, ICSR

The crisis in Egypt has attracted global attention. It poses particular problems for Western governments who fear an Islamist takeover in the Middle East’s ‘capital of capitals’. Is this Egypt’s 1979, or are the protesters demanding something different?

ICSR’s Senior Fellow, Shiraz Maher, travelled to Cairo to observe events. Spending a week with protesters in Tahrir Square, and talking to the main opposition leaders, his talk will offer a unique grassroots insight into the ongoing crisis.

His essay on the Cairo revolt will appear in the March edition of Standpoint Magazine.

Moderated by: Dr Peter Neumann, Co-Director, ICSR

Should we talk to Al Qaeda?

Thursday, 17 February, 6.30-8.00pm

A debate between Ambassador Mitchell B. Reiss and Jonathan Powell

Ambassador Mitchell B. Reiss is an internationally recognised negotiator and President of Washington College. From 2003-5 he served as Director of the Office of Policy Planning at the US State Department; in December 2004 he was asked to serve as the President’s Special Envoy for the Northern Ireland Peace Process with the rank of Ambassador, which he did until February 2007. Starting in 1999, Reiss held a number of leadership positions at the College of William & Mary, including Vice Provost for International Affairs, and Dean and Director of the Reves Center for International Studies. His latest book, Negotiating with Evil. When to talk to terrorists was published in late 2010.

Jonathan Powell was a diplomat for 16 years and then went on to serve as chief of staff to Tony Blair from his election as leader of the Labour Party in 1994 until his resignation as Prime Minister in 2007. From 1997 to 2007 he was chief British negotiator on Northern Ireland. He has published two books since thenGreat Hatred, Little Room: Making Peace in Northern Ireland(2008) andThe New Machiavelli: How to Wield Power in the Modern World(2010). He works as a senior adviser to the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue in Geneva.

Moderated by: Dr John Bew, Co-Director, ICSR

If you would like to attend any of these talks, please RSVP to mail@icsr.info

Contract article -

In our latest Insight, ICSR Senior Fellow Shiraz Maher writes a lengthy analysis of the latest issue of AQAP's Inspire magazine. For the full PDF click here. Reproduced below is the executive summary.

• The latest edition of Inspire magazine calls for renewed terrorist attacks against the United States
including directions to ‘blow up Times Square’ and ‘pull off Mumbai [styled attack] near White House until martyrdom’.

• Anwar al-Awlaki, the fugitive American-Yemeni al-Qaeda ideologue, states that attacks should be directed against both government and civilian targets. This is supported in an accompanying article from AQAP’s head of religious affairs, Adil al-Abbab, discussing the jurisprudence on killing civilians.

• Recent terrorist attacks in Sweden and Britain are singled out for praise by AQAP coupled with
renewed threats.

• Roshonara Choudhary, who stabbed Stephen Timms MP, and Taimour Abdulwahab al-Abdaly, who led the abortive terrorist attack in Sweden, are celebrated as embodying AQAP’s spirit of ‘Open Source Jihad’ and displaying ‘borderless loyalty’.

• A new article by Anwar al-Awlaki incites Muslims in the West to jihad, marking an ongoing
campaign by him to produce a jurisprudence of jihad specifically tailored to Muslims in the West.

• The magazine republishes existing material from Osama bin Laden, Adam Gadahn, and chief
al-Qaeda strategist Abu Musab al-Suri. The inclusion of al-Suri’s work is highly significant, and is the second time Inspire has sought to popularise his work in the English language.  

Contract article -

This is an ICSR Instant Analysis of Recent AQAP Propaganda written by Senior Fellow Shiraz Maher

The latest edition of Al Qaeda’s ‘Inspire’ reveals more details about the recent airline bomb plot which emanated in Yemen.

‘Inspire’ is an English-language magazine produced quarterly by al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). Its latest ‘special edition’ reveals more details of the plot and an insight in the strategic mindset of AQAP. The magazine is divided into three parts: a discussion of the strategic objectives (including its economic impact), the religious objectives, and technical information on the bomb itself.

Operational background

• AQAP called this project ‘Operation Haemorrhage’ (in the magazine they use the American spelling: ‘Hemorrhage’).
• AQAP claims to have caused a UPS jet to crash shortly after takeoff from Dubai on 3 September (more on the crash here). The crash has never been attributed to AQAP and was not believed to be suspicious until recently. If it transpires that AQAP was behind the crash then it is highly significant, not least because nine weeks passed between that and the ink cartridge plot.

The magazine asks:

Why didn’t the enemy reveal the truth about what happened with the downed UPS plane? Is it because the enemy could not discover why the plane was brought down?

[...]

We would like to say to Obama: We have struck against your aircrafts twice within one year and we will continue directing our blows towards your interests and the interests of your allies.

• The authors of Inspire say the bomb makers were so confident of their success, and had such ambitious expectations of what the plot would achieve that they placed a copy of Charles Dickens’ Great Expectations into one of the boxes. Anwar al-Awlaki, AQAP’s chief theoretician, has also spoken about Dickens in the past on his now defunct blog. During his incarceration in Yemen, Awlaki was not allowed to read Islamic texts and instead had to make-do with English novels. He came to admire Dickens, noting:

I read Hard Times thrice. So, I ordered more Charles Dickens and read Tale of Two Cities, Great Expectations, Oliver Twist, and his masterpiece: David Copperfield. I read this one twice.
What fascinated me with these novels were the amazing characters Dickens created and the similarity of some of them to some people today. That made them very interesting. For example: the thick and boastful Mr. Josiah Bounderby of Coketown was similar to George W. Bush; Lucy’s father, Mr. Gradgrind, was similar to some Muslim parents who are programmed to think that only Medicine and Engineering are worthy professions for their children; the amazing cruelness of Stephen Blackpool was similar to some people who appear on the surface to be decent and kind human beings; and Uriah Heep was similar to some pitiful Muslims today.

Strategic Objectives

• It now seems clear that the primary objective of this attack was not the synagogues to which the parcels were addressed. The objective of the plot is discussed twice in different articles. The first says:
  

The operation was to be based on two factors: The first is that the packages pass through the latest security equipment. The second, the spread of fear that would cause the West to invest billions of dollars in new security procedures.

The other states:

From the start our objective was economic. Bringing down a cargo plane would only kill a pilot and co-pilot.

• The ‘head of operations’ claims that the primary aim was economic:

The air freight is a multi-billion dollar industry…For the trade between North America and Europe air cargo is indispensable and to be able to force the West to install stringent security measures sufficient enough to stop our explosive devices would add a heavy economic burden to an already faltering economy.

• According to the magazine, the ink cartridge plot cost AQAP just $4200 (£2615), demonstrating how a relatively cheap operation can still inflict massive economic and financial damage. This is something AQAP is keen to underscore, telling readers:

Two Nokia mobiles, $150 each, two HP printers, $300 each, plus shipping, transportation and other miscellaneous expenses add up to a total bill of $4,200. That is all what Operation Hemorrhage cost us. In terms of time it took us three months to plan and execute the operation from beginning to end. On the other hand this supposedly "foiled plot", as some of our enemies would like to call, will without a doubt cost America and other Western countries billions of dollars in new security measures. That is what we call leverage. A $4,200 operation will cost our enemy billions of dollars. In terms of time and effort, three months of work for a team of less than six brothers would end up costing the West hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of hours of work in an attempt to protect itself from our packages of death.

The plot itself

• AQAP confirms that the explosive substance it used was PETN (340 grams per bomb). PETN is a powerful explosive and is very difficult to detect. They boast:

With all the intelligence information the enemy had, they could not detect the explosives even though the printers were inspected twice in the UK. They only discovered the explosives when they had the exact tracking number of the package.

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab – the ‘underpants bomber’ – also used a bomb made of PETN, and managed to carry it onto a flight bound for Detroit last Christmas. The bomb may have failed, but, having been constructed in Yemen, it was carried by Abdulmutallab on three different commercial aircraft, passing through security on each occasion. The third airport, Amsterdam Schiphol, employs some of most sophisticated detection equipment in the world and was an early adopter of the controversial full body scanner.

• It is clear the group has a sophisticated understanding of how current airport screening equipment works. They boast:

We have studied various X-Ray scanners that are in use and those that might be deployed in the future but are too expensive to deploy now. All these scanners work on one principle even if they are different.The ‘technical’ section of the magazine offers a lot of information about the bomb and how AQAP evaded detection. They brand conventional airport metal detectors as ‘amateurish’.

The reason for addressing these packages to the synagogues appears to be primarily symbolic. A passage in the magazine reveals:

How can we forget [Palestine] when our motto is: “Here we start and in al-Aqsa we meet”? So we listed the address of the “Congregation Or Chadash”, a Gay and Lesbian synagogue on our one of our packages. The second package was sent to “Congregation B'nai Zion”. Both synagogues are in Chicago, Obama's city.

The names of the recipients are also revealed, along with the rationale behind those choices:

This current battle fought by the West is not an isolated battle but is a continuation of a long history of aggression by the West against the Muslim world. In order to revive and bring back this history we listed the names of Reynald Krak and Diego Diaz as the recipients of the packages. We got the former name from Reynald de Chatillon, the lord of Krak des Chevaliers who was one of the worst and most treacherous of the Crusade's leaders. He fell into captivity and Salahuddeen personally beheaded him. The name we used for the second package was derived from that of Don Diego Deza, the Inquisitor General of the Spanish Inquisition after the fall of Granada who along with the Spanish monarchy supervised the extermination and expulsion of the Muslim presence on the Iberian Peninsula employing the most horrific methods of torture and done in the name of God and the Church. Today we are facing a coalition of Crusaders and Zionists and we in al Qaeda of the Arabian Peninsula will never forget Palestine.

AQAP remains incandescent at the Saudi regime for thwarting their plot:

We would like to tell the al-Saud government that Allah has exposed your treason and collaboration with the Zionists. The packages were being sent to Jewish [sic] synagoges and yet you interfered to defend them. May Allah’s curse be upon the transgressors.

Strategic implications

• AQAP is clearly goading Western intelligence services. The magazine is littered with direct and rhetorical taunts aimed at security officials, celebrating AQAP’s ability to have repeatedly breached airport security procedures. The magazine says:

We are waiting for the intelligent US intelligence to tell us how we downed the UPS flight out of Dubai on the 3rd of September. Was it an incendiary or explosive device? Was it sent from Sana’a or somewhere else? [...] Isn’t it funny how America thinks AQAP has only one major bomb maker?

Elsewhere they ask:

 

Didn’t your security experts come together to find solutions for the security lapses in your airports and you spent millions of dollars in less than a year even though we already told you then that we knew the weak points of your equipment and by the will of Allah we would be able to exploit them? Nevertheless you were stubborn. […] The British government said that if a toner weighs more than 500 grams it won’t be allowed on board a plane. Who is the genius who came up with this suggestion? Do you think that we have nothing to send but printers?

 

• In another direct reference to security and intelligence agencies, the group promises:

Another suggestion is that the bomb maker needs to be killed… Do you think that our research will only be used by al Qaeda of the Arabian Peninsula and won't be shared with other mujahidin?

• AQAP has become the leading force for inciting Western Muslims to Jihad. Their message is sharply focused on inspiring individuals to launch a series of small-scale attacks which would be almost impossible to detect or stop. Roshanara Choudhary, the student who stabbed Stephen Timms MP in ‘revenge’ for the Iraq war embodies that spirit. She was not radicalised by Inspire but by AQAP’s chief theoretician, Anwar al-Awlaki. The magazine advises readers:

[…] Hasten to join the ranks of the mujahidin or to form cells to perform operations against the disbelievers in their own land. We are paying back America for only a small portion of what they do to our nation.

This is similar to the exhortations in previous editions of Inspire, calling on Muslims in the West to launch sudden, random and small-scale attacks.

• AQAP demonstrates its characteristic sense of theatre and appreciation of propaganda. The magazine carries several pages of quotes from the American media, experts and pundits on the ink cartridge plot, underscoring just how closely the press is monitored. The distinctly American nature of the cultural referencing by AQAP – no British press is mentioned – is almost certainly borne of the American jihadists who moved to Yemen, including Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan.
  

• There is a final point to be made. Debate has raged among scholars and security officials about the true significance of Inspire magazine. I have personally been of the opinion that the magazine is very significant, although questions have persisted over its authenticity and utility. Why would AQAP want to put so much information about itself into the public domain? This special edition names some of the bomb makers and reveals their previous history of fighting jihad in Afghanistan. It is impossible to know AQAP’s exact reasons for choosing to reveal this. What is clear, however, is that Inspire magazine is coming from members of AQAP – or, at the very least, from those with almost unfettered access to it. That much is confirmed by the technical information included in the magazine and by three pictures of the bomb taken before it was dispatched (including a picture of the Great Expectations book).

 

 

Contract article -

In today's Times, ICSR's research on an online network of extremists who promote jihadist violence is featured on the front page.

The report reveals that following the knife attack on British MP Stephen Timms, American jihadist web forum, Revolution Muslim, has encouraged further such actions by publishing the details of other MPs who have voted for the Iraq war. ICSR has also found links between Revolution Muslim and former members of the banned UK group, al-Muhajiroun.

Click here for a full PDF of the story.

ICSR Research Fellow Alexander Meleagrou-Hitchens has also written about this issue here.

For anyone who's happens to be at home this evening, catch Senior Fellow Shiraz Maher discussing this on Channel 4 News at around 7.15.

Contract article -

This is an ICSR instant analysis providedby Senior Fellow, Shiraz Maher

Details of the latest plot by al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) continue to emerge and it will be some time until a full picture emerges of this abortive attack. However, there are some salient conclusions that can be drawn at this early stage.

The current plot

•The choice of target is a new one for AQAP – Synagogues. This may have been part of a more general attempt by AQAP to appeal to Arab sentiments over the Arab-Israeli conflict. That is a conflict in which al-Qaeda has, so far, played little role. The current plot may therefore have been designed to demonstrate al-Qaeda’s intent.

•The bombs were destined to arrive today – on the Sabbath – when Synagogues are busy. The timing would have maximised deaths and insult by striking on the Jewish holy day.

•More broadly, the attack would have come just days before the midterm elections in the United States. Al-Qaeda has traditionally tried to influence American elections, a strategy which even led Osama bin Laden to address American voters before the 2004 Presidential elections.

•AQAP has a sophisticated cultural understanding of the West, not least because some it’s senior leaders are American citizens. Most prominent is Anwar al-Awlaki who has directed a series of terrorist attacks including the failed underpants bomber, Abdulmutallab, and the Fort Hood attacker, Major Nidal Hasan. Samir Khan, an American of Saudi origin, has also emerged as a key propagandist and is believed to be behind AQAP’s quarterly magazine, Inspire.

•Cargo screening is not rigorous as it is for passengers. However all cargo flights from Yemen, Pakistan and Afghanistan have, for some years now, been subject to additional screening for drugs and explosives.

•Preliminary tests suggest the packages contained the explosive material, PETN. The same chemical was used by Abdulmutallab last Christmas. PETN was also used by AQAP during an assassination attempt against a Saudi royal last year.

•The intelligence which foiled this plot emerged from Saudi Arabia, underscoring the importance of intelligence sharing relationships between Western and Arab governments.

•Pressure will now grow on Obama to implement a droning policy in Yemen. So far, the United States has launched sporadic drone attacks in Yemen although it is incomparable to the kind of sustained campaign being waged in Pakistan. Saudi backing and involvement will be crucial if this is to be effective.

AQAP: Background and history

•Yemen is the Middle East’s poorest country with few natural resources. It has an underdeveloped economy and civil infrastructure, and its government has little authority.

•The creation of AQAP was formally announced in January 2009. However, AQAP is not entirely new. The group represents an amalgam of pre-existing terrorist groups affiliated to al-Qaeda which previously operated in Saudi Arabia. The Saudi state smashed al-Qaeda’s infrastructure in the kingdom by killing most of its leaders and arresting hundreds of its supporters. Those who evaded capture fled to Yemen.

•The group has quickly established itself as the most potent chapter of the al-Qaeda franchise, dwarfing the excesses of its counterparts in AfPak. Jonathan Evans, Director-General of the Security Service, recently warned that an increasing number of threats to the UK are emerging from Yemen and the Horn of Africa. Obama’s counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan, has similarly described AQAP as “the most active operational franchise” of al-Qaeda.

•AQAP has staged a series of brazen international attacks with uneven success. Its first major international attack was the attempted assassination of Saudi Arabia’s Deputy Interior Minister, Prince Mohammed bin Nayef. He survived, but it served to announce AQAP’s ambitions and ingenuity – the would-be assassin had concealed the explosives in his rectum.

•The group has frequently targeted British consular staff in Yemen. The deputy chief of the British embassy in Sana'a, Fionna Gibb, was attacked earlier this month. There was also an attempt to assassinate the ambassador, Timothy Torlott, in April.

•Embarrassingly for American and Saudi authorities, AQAP’s deputy leader Sa'id Ali Jabir al-Khathim al-Shihri was released from Guantanamo Bay in 2007. He entered Saudi Arabia’s ‘rehabilitation’ programme for jihadists before being released in Riyadh. From there al-Shihri made his way south and joined AQAP. He appeared in an AQAP video last year saying, “By Allah, imprisonment only increased our persistence in our principles for which we went out, did jihad for, and were imprisoned for”.

•Estimates vary about the number of AQAP fighter though credible reports suggest it is in the low hundreds.

•AQAP is sheltered by powerful tribes, particularly in the provinces of Shabwa and Abyan. With the central government able to exert only minimal influence Yemen risks becoming a failed state and providing al-Qaeda with a new operational base away from AfPak.

Contract article -

A few weeks ago, this blog covered a story from a local Surrey newspaper about the persecution of local members of the Ahmadiyya community. It was reported that leaflets were being disseminating among the local Muslim population which called for the murder of followers of this Islamic sect. The Independent has since undertaken an investigation into the activities of extremists who are targeting Ahmadis.

Here are some relevant extracts from paper’s report:

Members of the Ahmadiyya Community have seen a significant upsurge in threats and intimidation over the past four months, sparked by an extremist attack on two of their largest mosques in Pakistan earlier this year.

[…]

Ofcom has had to reprimand an Islamic satellite channel [The Ummah Channel – available on Sky] for repeatedly calling the sect "Wajib-ul Qatal" - an Arabic phrase used to describe those who digress from mainstream Islam that translates as "liable for death".

[…]
The Ahmadis say that doctrinal opposition towards their community is being spearheaded by Khatme Nubawwat Academy, a British offshoot of a Pakistani group that is dedicated to confronting Ahmadi beliefs.

The group, whose name translates to "The Finality of the Prophet", has close connections to the Pakistani establishment and met Pakistan's high commissioner in the UK earlier this summer.
They also held a conference in Newham on 18th June in which one of their speakers claimed that the attacks on the two mosques on Lahore were an Ahmadi conspiracy.

Imam Suhail Bawa, a leading Khatme Nubbawat preacher, told worshippers: "This will become apparent very soon to you all that Qadiani [a derogatory term for Ahmadis] themselves are behind this whole conspiracy. [They] are responsible for whatever has happened in Lahore. This is all Qadiani conspiracy. They now come to television programs to try to "falsely" demonstrate their victimisation."

The police have now opened a hate crime investigation into extremist activities in Surrey, and these developments must continue to be taken very seriously indeed. The story in the Independent is certainly a good start, but this is not a problem that should be taken lightly, and it will continue to grow if left unchecked.

Contract article -

ICSR Senior Reserach Fellow, Shiraz Maher, recently wrote an analysis of the new al-Qaeda English Language magazine, Inspire.  It is reproduced, in full, below.

Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) has released the second edition of its new English language magazine, Inspire. It only came out last night and there is a lot to say about this so, for now, I'm just going to give a quick overview of the key themes emerging from this important document:

• AQAP has established itself as the primary mouthpiece for al-Qaeda in the English language. Whereas al-Qaeda in Afghanistan has the American Adam Gadhan, AQAP has a number of highly articulate and charismatic leaders who can now project their message into the English speaking world. Not least is the radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki. However, beyond him there is also a recent defector Samir Khan, a Saudi-born US citizen.
• The production values behind Inspire are very high. This is what recruits like Khan bring with them - equally important as their ability to speak English is the intellectual and cultural capital they can offer. Inspire is couched in the idioms of the West speaking to, as it were, the ‘MTV generation'. The previous issue, for example, quotes from The Late Show with David Letterman.
• Awlaki wrote the cover story for the last edition and has another piece in this month's copy, suggesting his increasing involvement in the heart of the AQAP network.
• The level of research which has gone into some of the articles is very high - including a timeline of the cartoon controversy.
• It is clear that that AQ (both in AP and AfPak) is heavily monitoring the Western media and, more generally, Western culture.
• The magazine is deliberately wide ranging covering a number of themes: inspirational and motivational stories, theological views/rebuttals, operational pieces. Some of it is pretty dramatic stuff.
• The most notable is what AQAP calls, ‘open source Jihad', which they define as: "A resource manual for those who loathe the tyrants; includes bomb making techniques, security measures, guerrilla tactics, weapons training, and all other jihad related activities". What al-Qaeda is doing here is teaching its followers in the West how to launch attacks without them ever needing to attend actual training camps.
• This style represents a new strategy for al-Qaeda - which its chapter in the Arabian Peninsula is spearheading. That is, inspiring and creating self-starter and lone wolf cells which are practically impossible to detect or thwart. Indeed, the magazine and other communiqués too tell potential operatives not to try and recreate the kind of big, 9/11 or 7/7 type of ‘spectaculars' because the intelligence and security agencies are able to uncover them. Instead, they want lots of small-scale, autonomous - but more frequent - attacks.
• This is something Jonathan Evans, the head of Mi5 commented on recently when speaking specifically about Anwar al-Awlaki (although the principle applies to AQAP as a whole to): "He speaks perfect English, unlike many al-Qaeda leaders, which gives him a broader appeal. He also encourages his followers to think about mounting small-scale attacks that can cause widespread fear without always trying to stage a September 11-style "spectacular" which risks alerting the authorities".
  

As I say, these are just some initial thoughts - there is a lot to digest here against the wider backdrop of al-Qaeda's changing strategy. Small wonder, then, that the current terrorist threat against Europe is of ‘Mumbai style' attacks.

In one sense there is a positive here: al-Qaeda is weakening and struggling to stage the kind of big operations it did in America, London, and Madrid. The converse, however, is that if its new strategy finds expression then it will represent a mutation of the threat which we are currently ill-equipped to manage.
 

Contract article -

The second panel of the morning, ‘Answering Israel’s Security Needs: Practical Solutions’ was chaired by ICSR’s Co-Director Dr. John Bew. The panel included:

• Brigadier General (ret.) Shlomo Brom – Director of the Programme on Israel-Palestine at the Institute for National Security Studies
• Efraim Halevy – Former director of Mossad and Israeli Ambassador to the European Union
• Dr. Ron Pundak – Director of the Peres Centre for Peace and a member of the official Israeli negotiating team during the Oslo negotiations
• Brigadier General (ret.) Baruch Spiegel – Advisor tot eh Directory of the Board at the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Strategic Dialogue and former senior advisor to the Israeli Minster of Defense

Dr. Pundak began by saying that he believed Israel and Israelis to be very preoccupied with notions surrounding the destruction of their country, and that this needed to change. He believed that eventually a lasting peace could be achieved, and this would ensure Israel’s security. Dr. Pundak also noted that Syria is a key player in the peace process and that there role was ‘pivotal’.

Shlomo Brom agreed that peace brings security, but also noted that security assessments must always be pessimistic, and Israeli’s must plan for two possible negative outcomes: the possibility of the establishment of a hostile Palestinian state; and the possibility that it may become a failed state on Israel’s borders. The only solution to preventing this, according to Brom, was to ensure a demilitarised Palestinian state. He finished by making two broad points: the last ten years have seen an increase in mutual mistrust between Israeli’s and Palestinians; and a two-state solution must be a ‘phased process’.

Spiegel warned that although peace is ‘an asset’ for security, without proper security peace is ‘impossible’. He suggested a bottom up approach whereby a guarantee of Israeli security, through the use of systems like the separation barrier, would help Israelis feel safe enough to think seriously about a lasting solution. The good relationship between Israeli authorities and Salam Fayyad, Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority, will, Spiegel noted, be a very important factor in any future peace agreement

Efraim Halevy concluded the panel discussion by asking what the current capabilities of the Palestinians were. He said that, thus far, the Palestinian Authority has not demonstrated very good political capabilities and has failed to create a working political system and structure. This, Mr. Halevy warned, left open the possibility that any future state could be taken over by extremists and be used as a launching pad to attack Israel again.

Contract article -

ICSR’s second annual Atkin Conference was introduced by the Atkin Fellowship’s benefactor Celia Atkin, who’s generosity has created a unique programme.

The first panel, ‘What Should a Palestinian State Look Like?’ was chaired by ICSR Co-Director Dr. Peter Neumann and included:

• H.E. Sabri Saidam, Advisor to the Palestinian President;
• Professor Yezid Sayigh, King’s College;
• Dr. Said Jamil Haifa, Chair of Economics Department at Birzeit University;
• Professor Majid al-Haj, Vice President and Dean of Research & Professor of Sociology at the University of Haifa
• Diana Buttu – Former spokesperson with the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO)

Buttu kicked off proceedings by offering a blunt, yet realistic, assessment of Palestinian statehood, saying that she does not foresee the creation of a Palestinian state due to the practical difficulties faced by Palestinians that cannot be simply ‘undone’ with the signing of any peace agreement. She noted a number of problems that she has observed over the years, citing the example that, apart from IDF soldiers, none of her Palestinian students had ever met an Israeli.

Dr. Haifa spoke of his vision of a future Palestinian state, based on the 1967 borders, that will put an end to the conflict and flourish as a just, durable and peaceful society. In order for this to happen, he claimed that Israel must pull back to the 1967 borders as defined in UN Resolution 242 and consider some degree of Palestinian right of return.

Dr. Sayigh, like Butto, also offered a bleak assessment of the peace process, referring to it as ‘make believe’. It is a fiction, he said, that Palestinians need institution building, rather the most pressing issue was that of a breakdown of constitutional order. Both the rival governments, Fatah in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza, are unconstitutional and increasingly authoritarian, and this must change if we are to see any real progress.

Professor al-Haj, during his assessment, stressed the many similarities between the Israelis and Palestinians and stressed that any future state must be a secular, democratic one. However, he did concede that it was inevitable that religious groups will wield a lot of influence. He also said that he believed a two state solution was not a realistic prospect, envisioning instead an interim solution that involved a multinational and multicultural state.

Dr Saidam concluded the panel by stating the need for a shift from conflict management, to conflict resolution. The problems on the ground as he saw it were ‘immense’, and one solution could be including Hamas in the process.

Video and pictures of this discussion will be available on the ICSR site shortly.
Contract article -

H.E. Tzipi Livni brought the event to a close with an hour long speech entitled ‘Fighting Against Terror – Fighting for Peace’, in which she discussed a range of issues surrounding the Middle East peace process and Israel’s standing on the world stage. Below is a summary of the speech, the full recording of which will be made available on this site shortly.

She began by explaining that the main threat to Israel emanates from extreme religious ideologies which reject the values of the free world. The extremists who imbibe these beliefs fight to take away the rights and freedoms that they so often claim to represent, and are a threat not only to Israel, but to all liberal democracies.

Livni argued that organisations like Hamas and Hezbollah are at odds with the beliefs of their host governments, the Palestinian Authority and Lebanese government respectively and should not be allowed to take part in the political process. Her study of many of the leading constitutions in the world showed that none allow the participation of a terrorist group, and partaking in democracy is not only about gaining votes and must include a commitment to the values that it represents. Hezbollah are an armed militia and terrorist group, yet they are political partners with the Lebanese government – making the war on terror impossible to win in her opinion.

The existence of the Salafi-jihadi ideology means that the Israeli Palestinian issue is not the primary cause of global terrorism – and solving this issue will not immediately and miraculously placate al-Qaeda. The peace process is therefore first and foremost an Israeli interest, and one which Livni believed that Israel is still committed to.

She was also concerned about about the deep misunderstandings of Israeli actions such as the blockade, as well as their military operations, all measures that are designed to stop Hamas terrorism. It is difficult for Israelis to accept some of the criticism that is leveled against them, although she made it clear that she did not want Israel to be exempt from any censure or for the international community to turn a blind eye to their mistakes.

Kadima’s commitment to peace is unwavering, and the very difficult but necessary decision to force settlers from their homes in Gaza in 2006 – a decision which she claimed that her party was willing to make again – was made in order to expedite this process. However, she was also clear that no agreement can ever be made with Hamas, recognising the Palestinian Authority, as well as politicians such as the Third Way’s Salam Fayad, as the only legitimate actors in the region. She reminded the audience that Hamas have repeatedly refused to meet the requirements of the Quartet, and this is the main reason for the current controversial blockade. Behind closed doors, she said that many Arab leaders agree that Hamas must be stopped, and she had no doubt that the Arab world has a crucial role to play in any successful solution.

She concluded by saying that both sides now owe it to future generations to put aside discussions about who has the right to an embarrassingly small piece of land, and they must now look forward and come to a viable agreement. This she firmly believed was still a strong possibility.

Contract article -

The penultimate panel discussion of the conference, ‘Counter-terrorism Cooperation: Is It Working?’, addressed the important subject of international counter-terrorism cooperation and whether or not it has worked over the last few years.  Chaired by Dr. Peter Neumann, the panelists were Richard Barrett, head of the UN’s al-Qaeda and Taliban Monitoring Team; Ambassador Bill Paterson, Australian Ambassador for Counter-Terrorism; Eric Rosand, the Senior Adviser for Multilateral Engagement in the US State Department’s Office of the Coordinator for Counter-Terrorism; and Dr. August Hanning, Germany’s former State Secretary for Counter-Terrorism.

Dr. Hanning began by explaining the importance of a good relationship among European intelligence agencies due to their countries' close borders, which allows for the relatively easy movement of terrorists.  Unsurprisingly, he also identified Afghanistan and Pakistan as “the biggest problem”, and claimed that around 150 Muslim Germans had received terrorist training in the region. The UN’s Richard Barrett followed up on this, claiming that his organisation played a “central role” in coordinating European counter-terrorism efforts, citing the 2006 UN Global Counter-Terrorism strategy as evidence of an ongoing commitment to this.  This approach was, according to Barrett, constantly evolving and becoming increasingly sophisticated as countries learn from each other’s experiences.

When discussing the main obstacles to cooperation, Ambassador Paterson argued that the most effective partnerships are not “government-government”, but rather “government-NGO”.  He cited his own government’s relationships with NGOs in East and South-East Asia as examples of very effective counter-terrorism partnerships.  All of the panelists agreed that one of the major obstacles was countries that did not abide by human rights laws in their treatment of terrorism suspects – they cannot be co-opted until they improved their practices.  Ambassador Paterson suggested that Western governments make more effort help stop the torture of suspects, and that this is the point where counter-terrorism crosses over to developing and assisting governments.  Rosand added that the US government refuses to train officials who they know are involved with human rights violations, and recognised that sending enemy combatants from the US to countries which may torture them is a “great challenge”, stating that often prisoners have not been extradited from the US for this very reason.   Dr. Hanning insisted that Germany would never participate in torture, and nor would they accept intelligence from other countries that they assess to have poor human rights records.  Barrett summed up this part of the discussion, strongly stating that observance of human rights must be an absolute, and this is one of the four pillars of the UN’s counter-terrorism strategy.

The panel then moved on to discuss the role of multi-lateral organisations in counter-terrorism coordination.  Ambassador Paterson began by describing how the Australian government works with the UN on police and prosecutors workshops in South Asia – bringing together lawyers and judges from Pakistan and India, and providing them with an opportunity to develop important relationships, thus allowing for cross-regional contact that may otherwise not have been possible.   Germany, explained Dr. Hanning, also has a very close relationship with the UN and he placed a lot of emphasis on the importance of multi-lateral organisations, which provide platforms through which different national security agencies could exchange information.

During the audience question and answer session,  the panel was asked about how they assessed the effectiveness of the internet as a tool for terrorist networks.  There was unanimous agreement that the internet was among the chief problems faced by the counter-terrorism community, more so even than radical preachers and recruiters.  They also agreed that, rather than attempting to censor or shut down jihadist sites – an almost impossible task – governments should harness its power and use it to counter extremist messages.

Following a short break, Professor Gary Lafree, Director of START and Dr. Neumann announced the launch of a joint ICSR-START report, Prisons and Terrorism: Radicalisation and De-radicalisation in 15 Countries.  To access the study, click here.

Contract article -

After the morning’s first panel, Lord David Trimble gave a keynote address in which he discussed the Northern Ireland peace process in impressive detail.  Below is a summary, and a full recording of his speech will be available here shortly.

 

In order to understand Northern Ireland there were two types of grievances, which helped fuel the IRA insurgency: a national question and a social question. The former encompassed the question of whether Northern Ireland would remain part of the United Kingdom, or join an all-Ireland unitary state. The latter concerned the rights of the minority community (of nationalists) within Northern Ireland – and had been exacerbated by the perception of injustice inflicted on that community by the majority (Unionist) community.

In the early years of the Northern Ireland, the British government’s failure to establish a long-term strategy exacerbated the problems. However, after 1976, the government settled upon a new approach which compromised three strands:

- Efforts to restore security (a key aspect of which was to fight an ideological war) – which brought the IRA to a point in the late 1980s where 4 out of 5 operations were being interdicted by the security forces

- Policies to tackle the nationalist sense of social exclusion (and improve the economic situation by fostering economic development)

- An attempt to construct a political solution agreeable to the parties in Northern Ireland (though there were no informal party talks from 1975-92)
The ultimate consequence of this effort was the establishment in 1998 of an Agreement to end the conflict. Crucial to this were wider shifts in context –particularly at the regional level. This saw the rise of the EU, which both transformed Ireland into a modern western European nation – and helped render obsolete traditional forms of irredentist nationalism. The end of the Cold War and the collapse of that revolutionary project also had an impact on undermining the IRA’s campaign. 

 

In the end, the IRA was forced to accept a peace process, the outcome of which it could not control. By signing up to the Mitchell Principles, Sinn Fein agreed to abide by the results of a process over which they had no veto?

Why did it take so long to get an Agreement –the shape of which was known from the mid-1970s?

- In the end, details mattered – it took time to get the actual format of the Agreement right – an Agreement that safe-guarded the vital core interests of the communities in Northern Ireland

- Leadership proved crucial – there was a “maturing” process within each community until there were people in place prepared to accept the parameters for settlement

- In the end, there had to be an acceptance that victory was not possible – that the representatives of nationalism and Unionism in Northern Ireland were ready to accept an accommodation

Eventually, however, all the pieces were in place – and the result was a settlement that seems destined to last and should secure a peaceable future for Northern Ireland.

Contract article -

The first discussion of the morning session brought together regional experts to discuss where the major terrorist threats are now emerging from, and what governments must do to counter them.  Moderated by ICSR Deputy Director John Bew, the panel participants were the former Prime Minister of Yemen, H.E. Abdulkarim Al-Eryani; Sabri Saidam, a senior advisor to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas; Dr. Robert Rotberg of Harvard’s Belfer Centre; and Ali Jalali, the former Afghan Interior Minister.  The audience was also given a brief welcome by Carrie Lemack, co-founder of Families of September 11 and the Global Survivors Network.

Dr. Bew began by asking Jalali if al-Qaeda’s recent forays into Somalia and Yemen signaled that they were being defeated in Afghanistan.  He responded by saying that he believed al-Qaeda are still a major threat with significant influence over the Taliban, who have in turn gained a lot of operational and tactical knowledge from the terrorist network.

Discussing al-Qaeda’s gradually increasing presence in Yemen, Al-Eryani reminded the audience that the government there has been combating global terrorists since 2000. He estimated that al-Qaeda’s current numbers in the region are around 700, and noted that they are strengthened by tribal protection in the Eastern mountainous regions.  He also specifically mentioned Anwar al-Awlaki as one of the main al-Qaeda members currently under tribal protection, but perceived him to have no base or major following in the region, instead appealing more to Western Muslims via the internet.   Although al-Qaeda does have a presence in Yemen, Al-Eryani did not assess that they had any capability to topple the current government, and he saw much of their influence to be outside of Yemen.

When asked by Dr. Bew whether or not US intervention in Somalia is exacerbating the situation there, Dr. Rotberg said he believed that to some extent it was creating further problem.  Although he also stressed the importance of working with the Somali people, particularly in the North of the country, where there is a smaller presence of militant jihadist groups.  He added that the al-Qaeda connected militants were mainly in the South of Somalia.

Dr. Bew then shifted the discussion to the importance of stable government in resisting terror networks, and what role ideology played in inspiring these movements.  Ahmed Jalali placed much significance on both of these factors, saying that many terrorist groups were motivated primarily by their ideology, and that they thrive in ungoverned spaces.  It is crucial, he argued, to gain control of these spaces using a combination of military force and political negotiation if countries are to neutralise terrorist groups.  Dr. Rotberg was similar in his assessment, claiming that the main focus must be on improving governance in regions where global jihadist networks are currently thriving.  He also stated that in order to achieve this, negotiations with militant organisations and others who “we wouldn’t normally talk to” was crucial. Saidam echoed this idea but warned the audience that democracy and good governance cannot be “parachuted in” – it must be cultivated and supported from within.

After the initial discussion, an audience member asked Al-Eryani about his views on the strategic benefit of drone attacks, and whether or not they were a necessary tool.  He argued that, although al-Qaeda propaganda benefits from civilian casualties often caused by drones, there are certain circumstances where they must be used.

This signaled the end of the first discussion of the morning, after which the audience was treated to an in-depth analysis of the Northern Ireland peace process by Lord David Trimble (click here for a summary of his speech and pictures).

Contract article -

‘How Terrorism Ends’ was the title of the final panel discussion of the conference, and despite a packed two day schedule, the speakers remained on top form.  Moderated again by Dr. Peter Neumann, the panelists were: Professor Audrey Kurth Cronin, author of How Terrorism Ends; Shiraz Maher, Senior Research Fellow, ICSR and former seniot member of the British wing of Hizb ut-Tahrir; Hekmat Karzai, Director of the Centre for Conflict and Peace Studies in Kabul; and Michael Semple, Fellow at Harvard’s Carr Centre.

Audrey Kurth Cronin kicked off the session by giving the audience a quick overview of the findings of her fine book, in which she identified the six main ways that terrorist groups come to an end:

1)    A decapitation of the group in which the leader is killed or captured and the organisation dissolves;

2)    Successful negotiations;

3)    The group succeeds in achieving its aims;

4)    The group fails, and loses popular support;

5)    State repressed succeeds in crushing the group;

6)    A re-orientation toward different behavior, whereby the group shifts its focus to criminal enterprise or insurgency.

Of these six, it was the fourth outcome that Kurth Cronin found to be the most common.
Shiraz Maher was then asked by Dr. Neumann what prompted him to leave the extremist organisation in which he was involved for a number of years after 9/11.  As well as citing his move to a city where he was not surrounded by former members, Maher also very interestingly noted of Islamist dogmas that “once you pick at them, they can collapse very quickly.”
Dr. Neumann then asked Hekmat Karzai to share with the audience some of the findings of a recent study his organisation had undertaken on how and why young people were becoming suicide bombers or fighting for terrorist groups in Afghanistan.  Karzai gave five main motivators:

1)    Financial: Many fighters join groups for the monetary benefits, and the families of suicide bombers are often very well taken care of;

2)    Revenge:  civilian casualties have sometimes “provided the oxygen” which fuels extremism;

3)    Lack of governance;

4)    Madrassas: many insurgents and terrorists are brainwashed in religious schools;

5)    Ideology: a salafi-jihadist belief system which demanded confrontation with the West.

Addressing the same issue, Michael Semple said that his research also found that many terrorists in Afghanistan join insurgent groups so as to earn a livelihood and gain a status in society unattainable in most other circumstances. He also cited a desire to be part of a peer network.

Asked by the Chair to compare the conditions for Muslims in Afghanistan and Europe, Shiraz Maher said that although there was a crucial dynamic difference, there is also a global and unified “core ideology”, which is shared by all extremists.  He also referred to a number of jihadist defectors in Britain – such as Noman Benotmen and Abdullah Anas – who were working towards dismantling and countering the ideological roots of jihadism.  Maher also recommended that any strategy adopted by the United States to prevent violent extremism should not co-opt non-violent Islamists, but must instead adopt a “values-led approach” that seeks to groups and individuals who represent these values.

The final part of the discussion addressed a question from the audience about how the current conflict in Afghanistan will end. Although the majority of the panelists agreed that there will have to be some form of political solution, which included negotiations with the Taliban.  Karzai was concerned that the current strategy in the country was contradictory to the achievement of a political solution and that the approach had to change.  The only dissenting voice was that of Shiraz Maher, who was skeptical about the effectiveness of any negotiations with the Taliban.  He pointed to the series of failed talks between the Pakistani Taliban and the Pakistani government over the past years, which often reached agreements only for the Taliban to renege on them soon after – using lulls in combat to consolidate and expand.

On this interesting, if pessimistic, note, the final panel discussion of the conference was concluded and the stage was set for the final keynote address delivered by H.E. Tsipi Livni, former Israeli Foreign Minister and no leader of the opposition Kadima Party.

Contract article -

This is the first in a series of blogs covering the panel discussions at our Peace and Security Summit in New York’s Waldorf Astoria hotel.

After morning and afternoon sessions of expert working groups (the findings of which will be posted later), the first panel discussion of the ICSR Peace and Security Summit took place.  Entitled ‘Nine Years After 9/11: Are We Safer?’, the panel brought together an

All four of our panelists: (from left to right) Arif Alikhan, Amb. Cofer Black, Steve Clemons and Fran Townsend

impressive mix of government officials and experts to discuss if the terror threat in the West has changed and if the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as the billions of dollars invested in security, have had any real and positive effect.

Representing the Department of Homeland Security was Arif Alikhan, the Assistant Secretary for Policy Development.  He was joined by Ambassador Cofer Black, former Director of the CIA’s Counter-terrorism Center; Steve Clemons, Senior Fellow at the New America Foundation; and Fran Townsend, who was previously the Homeland Security Advisor to President George W. Bush.

Moderated by our very own Dr. Peter Neumann, the panelists discussed a range of crucial issues, beginning with the simple question of are we safer now than we were nine years ago?  Fran Townsend was optimistic but cautionary, pointing out that although America is now safer, they have become victims of their own success.  Expanding on this point, she noted that a lack of successful terror attacks on the US homeland since 9/11, which was down to successful counter-terrorism measures, meant that a sense of complacency was beginning to creep into the American psyche, whereby a lack of attacks has translated into a dangerous underestimation of the threat.  She also laid out her three main solutions to the threat: a re-strengthening of alliances with foreign intelligence agencies; an improvement of the relationship between central and local government; and encouraging a greater understanding among American citizens of the true extent of the terrorist threat, who without their active involvement and support the government would be unable to prevent future attacks.

Steve Clemons was far less optimistic in his assessment, claiming that the US was far less safe now than it was.  His main worry was that whereas before 9/11 the world perceived America as a dominant country with no bounds, the attacks engendered a global shift in this attitude, whereby the country is now seen as “beset by constraints” both militarily and economically.  In response, Clemons said that the US must now take steps to “reinstate its capacity to change global gravity” and “gain a capacity to sculpt the global system.”  

When the same question was posed to former CIA agent, Ambassador Cofer Black, he seemed to agree more with Townsend, noting that before 9/11 it was very difficult for the US to “accept and validate” the real threat of jihadist terrorism, and was struggling to make the transition from a Cold War mentality.  Crucially, the US military had not undertaken any sort of counter-terrorism training and was wholly unprepared for the emerging threat.  The attacks on New York awoke the government and its security agencies from their collective slumbers, and as a result, Ambassador Black said that the country is far better prepared to face the threat than it was almost a decade ago.  His message did come, however, with a warning: although tactically the US and its allies are now safer, the threat can “change quickly and dramatically”.

Finally, Arif Alikhan concurred that the US was now safer, but warned that threats are not static.  Comparing terrorists with the criminals he had dealt with in the past as a federal prosecutor in Los Angeles, he claimed that they will evolve and adapt over time.  In response, governments must anticipate future threats, and translate this into action.  Like Townsend, Alikhan also stressed the central importance of a strong relationship between central and local governments.

 

In discussion: Alikhan and Amb. Black

Dr. Neumann then shifted the discussion to specifically address the threat of ‘homegrown’ terrorism, asking the panelists if they thought that this represented a sudden change in terrorist tactics, or if indeed it was something that has been coming for some time.  None of the panelists believed that this was in any way a dramatic shift or change, and Townsend referred to two English speaking jihadist ideologues, Adam Gadahn and Anwar al-Awlaki, as evidence of a long term al-Qaeda strategy to appeal to young, Western Muslims.

Alikhan was also asked by Dr. Neumann if he, as the highest ranking Muslim in the Obama administration, believed that American Muslims were less vulnerable than their counterparts in other countries to becoming radicalised.  He began by stressing that there is in fact no ‘Muslim community’, and there are hundreds of different communities that are by no means a homogenous block.  He argued that it is not communities that are susceptible to extremism, but rather it is often isolated individuals who become terrorists and that communities are not the problem, but the solution.

In the closing minutes of the discussion, the floor was opened to the audience who asked a number of incisive and interesting questions.  Chief among them was a request that that each panelist give a short and sharp assessment of the how they saw the future threat.  Ambassador Black commented that an attack on the US homeland was an “actuarial certainty”, and Townsend agreed, also foreseeing that these attacks will likely have a low casualty count, involve a transport target and will emanate from either al-Qaeda or one of its regional affiliates, including the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).

Thus, this impressive and informative discussion was concluded, leaving the audience with much to take in and think about, and setting the tone for a successful conference.

Contract article -

The ICSR Peace and Security Summit began last night at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel in New York with the drinks reception and welcome dinner.  Hosted by the Rockefeller Foundation, speakers  included ICSR Chairman, Henry Sweetbaum and the former Canadian Prime Minister, and ICSR trustee, the Rt. Hon. Kim Campbell.

Running until 1 July, the Summit has brought together some of the world's leading experts to discuss the main counter-terrorism and security issues of our time, including the futures  of Afghanistan and Iraq as well as the role of Somalia in the global jihad and the phenomenon of 'homegrown' terrorism.

Throughout the event, this blog will provide readers with up-to-the-minute updates and pictures from all of the panel discussions, so stay tuned!

Contract article -

At its Peace and Security Summit in New York later this week, ICSR will launch its latest report, ‘Prisons and Terrorism: Radicalisation and De-radicalisation in 15 Countries’.

Based on a survey of prison policies in 15 countries, the report offers the most comprehensive study to date of the role prisons can play in radicalising people – and in reforming them.

The report identifies trade-offs and dilemmas but also principles and best practices that will help governments and policymakers spot new ideas and avoid costly and counterproductive mistakes.

Among the key findings and recommendations are:

•    The current emphasis on security and containment leads to missed opportunities to promote reform. Prison services should be more ambitious in promoting positive influences inside prison, and develop more innovative approaches to facilitate extremists’ transition back into mainstream society.

•    Over-crowding and under-staffing amplify the conditions that lend themselves to radicalisation. Badly run prisons make the detection of radicalisation difficult, and they also create the physical and ideological space in which extremist recruiters can operate at free will.

•    Religious conversion is not the same as radicalisation. Good counter-radicalisation policies – whether in or outside prison – never fail to distinguish between legitimate expression of faith and extremist ideologies. Prison services should invest more in staff training, and consider sharing specialised resources.

•    Individual de-radicalisation and disengagement programmes – such as the ones in Saudi-Arabia, Singapore, Indonesia, and other countries – can make a difference. Their positive and outward-looking approach should serve as an inspiration for governments and policymakers everywhere.

•    Even in the best circumstances, however, such programmes complement rather than replace other instruments in the fight against terrorism. They work best when the political momentum is no longer with the terrorists or insurgents.

Sixteen of the world’s leading experts contributed to the report, which was funded by the governments of Australia, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom, and carried out in partnership with the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START), based at the University of Maryland.

In the words of ICSR’s Director, Dr Peter Neumann, ‘Prisons are not just a threat – they can play a positive role in tackling problems of radicalisation and terrorism in society as a whole. Many of the examples in the report demonstrate how.’

The report will be officially launched at the ICSR Peace and Security Summit on 1 July.

Download it here. 

Contract article -