Ever since the disruption of the liquid bomb plot in Great Britain, the stress on airline security is clear. As the airlines and TSA implement new security measures, lines have gotten longer and delays at the airports have increased.

In a USA Today article last week titled Checked Luggage Strains Security, it became clear that the system is being overwhelmed by the 20% increase in checked bags since the TSA banned liquids from carry-ons August 10th. The result of the liquid ban has been more than 500,000 new bags each day requiring scanning. That alone would stress the system. But when you realize that the increased volume places a time pressure on the process of scanning luggage, there are concerns about security gaps.

Baggage Facts - CHECKED BAGS 1 billion Annual number on domestic flights, before recent surge
3.6 million Number lost, damaged
120-180 bags an hour Speed of bomb-detection machines
$1 billion Cost of luggage screening Sources: Air Transport Association, Government Accountability Office, Department of Transportation

What are the implications of this, and what is really happening here. Since August 10th, there have also been 17 or more airline incidents reported in the U.S. and Britain, with many requiring emergency landings and very visible baggage inspections on the tarmac by bomb sniffing dogs.

Stratfor’s most recent article provides a revealing analysis of the airline liquid bomb plot, raising the spectre that we are watching a “misdirection play here.”

Airline Incidents: Fear as Force Multiplier
A Google link to the Stratfor article

The following are highlights of this article:

Given the asymmetric nature of the war we are fighting with al Qaeda, its important to understand the propaganda aspect of the attempt at airline terror in Britain, the thinking that may be behind it all, and the real possibility that we are witnessing a misdirection play.

As we fast approach the fifth anniversary of the attacks of September 11th, we may well be advised to remember that misdirection and deception are long practiced tactics of war. Our opponent, al Qaeda is as capable of such deception and misdirection as any other adversary, at any other time in history.

The spate of incidents — each of which rings up significant financial costs to the airline company and governments involved and causes inconvenience and delays for travelers — is a reminder that terrorism, philosophically, is not confined to the goal of filling body bags or destroying buildings. At a deeper level, it is about psychology and the “propaganda of the deed.” And as far as al Qaeda is concerned, it is also about economic warfare: Osama bin Laden personally has stated that one of the group’s strategic objectives is to “bleed America to the point of bankruptcy.”

If among the strategies of al Qaeda is to create havoc, cause the airline industry to spend excessive money in search of the next solution, and perhaps, divert attention from another form of attack, is that strategy not succeeding?

These new security measures already have had a financial impact on the airline industry. On Aug. 25, Irish discount airline Ryanair filed the lawsuit it had previously threatened against the British Department for Transport —- Ryanair officials have publicly called the new restrictions “nonsensical and ineffective” and have called for “a return to common sense” regarding airline security. The company claims it has lost 3.3 million pounds (nearly $5.9 million) in earnings as a result of the new measures.

With that psychological component in mind, terrorist acts do not have to be tremendously successful (in terms of physical casualties or damage) in order to be terribly effective.

“It’s the economy, stupid!” Bin Laden outlined this very clearly in his October 29, 2004, message to the American people. In that recording, he estimated that it cost al Qaeda only $500,000 to carry out the 9/11 attacks, whereas the estimated cost to the United States from the event and its aftermath was measured at $500 billion.

To avoid the finger-pointing, governments have begun shifting the way they investigate potential terrorist acts from an approach based on waiting until a strike is about to be carried out — and then “making the big case” — to an approach based on disruption and pre-emption (or, in other words, taking action at the earliest possible stage).

The tactic of misdirection raises the question of whether, as the U.S., the U.K. and other countries scurry to prevent an attack with liquid explosives on transcontinental airlines, a different form of attack is being planned.

Obviously, the United States and its allies cannot conceivably protect everything, and attempts to do so take great tolls on human resources and finances. Viewed through this lens, the responses to the disrupted airlines plot may, in fact, be a form of success for al Qaeda, despite the failure of the actual plot.

This is not a matter of flag waving or chicken little exclaiming that “the sky is falling.” This is not an “either or” situation or a debate. What this represents is the very nature of the threat faced by our country today. Despite the robes and living in caves and the camels, we are dealing with a sophisticated enemy as embodied in al Qaeda. And they are schooled in tactics and strategies. So, is misdirection afoot here? With the attention being paid to airline security, and to the contents of baggage, is the real threat something else? Hopefully we will not see the evolution of this threat. But the very nature of asymmetric warfare suggests that we may be looking in the wrong place, and if that is true, then at least for this point in the match, it could be “advantage al Qaeda.”

By Jay Fraser at 4:21 PM | Permalink | Feedback (6) | Referenced By (0)

Over at OPFOR, John Noonan makes note that Israel Prepares for War, Again.

Calling it the Iran “front” is accurate, as action against Iran would simply be a different battlefield in Israel’s current war in southern Lebanon. Lebanon is to Normandy as Tehran is to Berlin, if you want the World War II/SAT comparison to engaging the same enemy on different fields of battle.

Such is the tragic reality of being a “one bomb state,” where one nuclear bomb can negate your ability to continue as a functioning nation. Law of the jungle applies in the Middle East, kill or be killed.

The Israelis are being understandably tight lipped on their plans. But their appointment of an Air Force commander indicates that airpower will be a primary actor in any Iranian theater.

Expect 5-6 primary targets, with roughly 5 major aimpoints per targets. Iran has certain “must-hit facilities,” which will be defended by Iran’s newly acquired, state of the art Russian surface to air missiles and the Iranian Air Force.

Also at OPFOR, Major P shares a personal note from a fellow Marine officer currently on the Jordanian border, sharing some experiences with Iraqis there.

One of the few things I am confident of is that none of them see any correlation between what they’re doing (or allowing someone else to do) and the problems their country faces. I did my best to walk them through it step by step – You have to get water from the shepherds because your government can’t get you water… It can’t get it to you because it can’t afford to fix the water trucks it owns (and that you’ve broken) or dig wells…It’s the same reason they can’t get you food or gas for your patrol vehicles on anything approaching a regular basis…They can’t afford it because, 1) they have to spend a fortune cleaning up the messes the “dangerous criminals” (insurgents) keep making and 2) they have no income because the people that should be collecting taxes and customs duties – not to mention the people who are supposed to make sure things actually go through the proper ports of entry instead of across the border – aren’t doing their jobs. I got mostly blank stares, at least from those who hadn’t already gone back to watching Egyptian music videos on TV.

By Steve Schippert at 11:50 AM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

When the representative from the State Sponsor of Terrorism visits America, most will recognize his host…without much surprise.

By Steve Schippert at 11:14 AM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

In case anyone ever wondered why the Israelis would do such a thing in rejecting Bangladeshi troops as part of the UNIFIL bolstering, perhaps the recent naming of a new bridge the ‘Hizballah Bridge’ by the Bangladesh government may have had something to do with it.

A new bridge in southern Bangladesh called Hezbollah after the Lebanese group fighting Israel in a month-long war has been renamed, a highway official said Tuesday.

A junior minister, who named the bridge earlier this month to honour the party, has ordered the highways department drop the name, the official said.

“We have now changed its name to Hazrat Omar Faruq bridge,” said Mofizul Islam, an executive engineer with the roads and highways department which constructed the bridge.

Such impartiality would have been perfect for impartial UNIFIL observation posts.

By Steve Schippert at 8:45 AM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

Just as Judith Klinghoffer says, “You do not need to know French to get the gist of this France 2 showing what Hezbollah bunkers looked like or that they were just a stone throw from a Unifil position.”

Watch the France 2 Video.

Just a stone’s throw indeed. With such detailed observance and publishing of IDF troop movements, surely Hizballah did not construct such elaborate bunkers without UNIFIL noticing, let alone reporting or publishing its location.

Kofi Annan may think Hizballah can be disarmed through negotiations rather than force, Hizballah surely laughs at the thought and the UN - as this bunker’s quiet presence clearly indicates - has no interest in pressing the issue, even through negotiations.

So while the LA Times’ headline reads that Nasrallah “Indicates Regret for Kidnappings,” he does not regret it enough to set them free.

And why should he? Counterterrorism expert and international negotiator Jesse Jackson, after all, has at last arrived to negotiate a prisoner swap on Nasrallah’s behalf, meeting with Syrian President Bashar Assad and Hamas’ Khaled Meshaal.

It’s difficult to imagine even making this stuff up sometimes.

By Steve Schippert at 11:49 PM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

Stanley Kurtz ponders Our Fallout-Shelter Future…

American politics is about to undergo a sea change. Our lives are going to be transformed on a more personal level as well. Sometime between now and five-to-ten years from now we’re going to be forced to choose between preemptive war with Iran, and living in a post-proliferation world. War with Iran will probably mean casualties on American soil. Iran has likely placed terrorist agents in the United States, with instructions to retaliate against civilian targets in the event of war. We’ll also likely see attacks on Persian Gulf oil shipments, and therefore a huge spike in the price of gasoline, with major economic consequences.

But what if there is no preemptive strike? What if Iran gets the bomb?

Go finish reading Our Fallout-Shelter Future.

By Steve Schippert at 5:57 PM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

A report from Olaf Wiig’s native New Zealand states that ‘Al Qaeda rejects’ held the FOX News journalists in Gaza.

Kiwi cameraman Olaf Wiig’s captors were al Qaeda rejects facing a backlash from their own people for the kidnapping, his family have been told.

He said the Archbishop of Canterbury’s peace envoy, Canon Andrew White, who has helped to rescue hostages in the Middle East before, alerted [Wiig’s father] on Sunday morning of the pair’s imminent release.

Mr White had told the family the kidnappers were members of Hamas who broke away and tried unsuccessfully to form links with al Qaeda.

Mr White’s group had helped the kidnappers’ families to rebuild their houses. “That would have given some goodwill,” Mr Wiig said.

The family had been told that the pair’s claim to have converted to Islam was an attempt to keep themselves safe.

“Once they declared themselves as Muslim, their kidnappers had a responsibility to look after them,” Mr Wiig said. [Emphasis added]

Perhaps this is why it was earlier reported that Palestinian officials (read: Hamas officials) knew who the captors were all along. Perhaps it is worth repeating a section of our earlier report on Centalnni & Wiig’s release:

Disturbingly, Haaretz reports that “senior Palestinian security officials said Sunday the name [Holy Jihad Brigades] was a front for local militants, and that Palestinian authorities had known the identity of the kidnappers from the start.”

Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh went one step further, suggesting that not only were the kidnappers local Palestinians, but that al-Qaeda has zero presence in Gaza or the West Bank. Said Haniyeh, “The kidnappers have no link to al-Qaeda or any other organization or faction. al-Qaeda as an organization does not exist in the Gaza Strip.”

While the terrorists who abducted Wiig and Centanni may well have been local Palestinians, the position that there is zero al-Qaeda presence in Gaza or the West Bank runs counter to both Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Egyptian intelligence statements earlier in the year.

By Steve Schippert at 2:05 PM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

In Hit or Missile, Austin Bay brings due attention to the necessity to continue developing various missile defense capabilities.

The rise of rogue states and fanatic, “suicide” terrorist organizations, combined with the proliferation of ballistic missiles and WMDs, turned MAD into utter madness.

A suicide bomber cannot be deterred by the threat of “mutual destruction.”

Hezbollah’s rocket rain offers a chilling example. Hezbollah demonstrated it is quite willing to sacrifice its own people and neighborhoods. Remember, Hezbollah is Iran’s puppet, and Iran is led by a clique that believes the destruction of Israel will accelerate their version of apocalyptic end times. North Korea has already sacrificed its own people (via starvation) to finance its missile and nuclear programs.

In February 2003, I wrote a column titled, “The Hell Formula for the 21st Century.” The formula: terrorists plus rogue states plus WMD. Breaking the Hell formula requires offensive action against terrorists and rogue states — and we’ve taken that, in Iraq and Afghanistan. But I also wrote that “breaking down the Hell Formula will take time.”

A more robust missile defense system buys time and blunts the political effects of “fear us” campaigns waged by North Korean and Iranian despots.

At present, ballistic missiles are employed as psychological weapons against their psychologically targeted enemies. It is wise to develop and perfect missile defenses while our enemies remain deterred from actually using chemical, biological or nuclear warheads.

For, when the day arrives that Iran’s theocracy (or another actor) determines that they are willing to sacrifice their population as martyrs in order to “pave the way for the return of the Mahdi,” will the West be able to defeat a missile-launched weapon intent on killing our own civilians?

Should that day ever arrive, what will the ‘Star Wars’ crowd of missile defense detractors have to say?

Perhaps the best public resource on both missile threats and Ballistic Missile Defense concepts is The Claremont Institute’s MissileThreat.com. They work hard to increase public awareness and maintain an incredibly informative and valuable site.

Update Note: Judith Klinghoffer is not impressed with South Korea’s own perception of the North Korean missile threat, going so far as to call the South Korean perception “self-medicated.”

Why self medicated? [B]ecause they apparently convinced themselves that the North Korean missiles pose greater danger to the US than to South Korea. Their attitude is so reminiscent of the recently proven disastrous Israeli one, that it is pathetic. I suspect that they will learn the lesson as Israel did, the hard way. Iran did not attack the US. It used Hezbollah to attack Israel. It did not use its most sophisticated missiles, it got Hezbollah to use its least sophisticated but most difficult to stop ones.

Some may consider her passionate choice of words as over the top, but her point remains quite valid regardless.

By Steve Schippert at 12:01 PM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

Somalia now represents for al-Qaeda a more user-friendly environment with the establishment of the Islamic Courts Union’s rule over much of the country at the tip of the Horn of Africa. In The New Taliban, Daveed Gartenstein-Ross and Kyle Dabruzzi chronicle in brief the most recent events in the rise of the ICU, the terrorist training camps that are being created under their care and the coming explosion of terrorism that may well result as al-Qaeda takes root with an eye toward further expansion.

Americans and other Westerners frequently have trouble comprehending why they should care about events occurring half a world away in Africa. One reason we should care is that the ICU’s expansion may escalate into interstate warfare.

Ethiopia views the Islamic militia’s rise as a matter of great concern, and has expressed its solidarity with Somalia’s transitional government. Ethiopian information minister Berhan Hailu has said, “We will use all means at our disposal to crush the Islamist group if they attempt to attack Baidoa.”

Ethiopian troops have reportedly been in Somalia since late July. Just as the Ethiopian government has threatened to use military force against the ICU, the ICU has vowed to attack Ethiopian soldiers in Somali territory. Thus far there haven’t been any clashes, but both sides are clearly ready to fight. Each seems to be waiting for the other to strike first.

And there is an even more presing reason why Westerners should care about the ICU’s rise: the striking similarity between its ascendance in Somalia and that of the Taliban in Afghanistan.

The ‘striking similarity’ is not a coincidence.

By Steve Schippert at 1:16 AM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

North Korea is warning the United States against talk of sanctions on the heels of US concerns that North Korea is possibly preparing a nuclear bomb test. A NoKor spokesman said that the DPRK would take “all necessary counter-measures” if the US persists in attempting to shut down North Korean bank accounts overseas. “It is the height of folly for the US to think that it can solve any issue by means of sanctions and pressure.”

The United States has actually been actively pursuing North Korean accounts and transactions over counterfeiting, drug trafficking and money laundering for some time, not simply since suspicions of a North Korean nuclear bomb test.

At risk of making light of the situation, the psychology behind the North Korean response is indeed intriguing, especially considering the fact that North Korea has long relied upon US aid gained through threats in both word and actions, such as firing missiles over the Japanese mainland.

The psychological unraveling continued further.

The warning came as a pro-Pyongyang newspaper said North Korea - which declared it had nuclear weapons in February 2005 - could carry out a nuclear test unless the US stops attempts to “stifle and destroy” the communist state.

Now, the situation is serious. But, nonetheless, the above statement is amusing.

The whole threat of a nuclear test seems akin to the Pittsburgh Steelers threatening to bring out star quarterback Ben Roethlisburger to taunt the Indianapolis Colts with a pre-game warm-up display.

By Steve Schippert at 12:57 AM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

From IDF Captain Dan Gordon’s Prelude to Apocalypse, a lengthy excerpt from an article that should absolutely be read in full…

From a military prospective there can be absolutely no doubt as to the results of Hezb’allah and Iran’s offensive against Israel. It was a defeat. Every part of their war plan except the manipulation of the media failed.

Hezb’allah expected and planned for a massive charge of Israeli armor into Southern Lebanon. The amounts and type of anti-tank weapons they acquired and had operationally deployed in their forward positions as well as their secondary and tertiary bands of fortresses and strongholds through Southern Lebanon attest to this fact.

They intended to do in mountainous terrain what Egypt had so effectively done in the Sinai desert in the Yom Kippur war. In that war, Sinai indeed became a graveyard for Israeli armor. Hundereds of tanks were destroyed. Whole brigades were decimated in single battles by the Egyptians’ highly effective anti-tank missile ambushes. In that war almost three thousand Israeli soldiers were killed. That was Hezb’allah’s plan. It was a good one. And it failed.

Far from the prevailing impression in the media, the IDF was not “badly bloodied” nor “fought to a stand still,” much less “handed a defeat.” Just prior to the cease fire, Israel suffered twenty nine tanks hit. Of those, twenty five were back in service within twenty four hours. Israel suffered one hundred and seventeen soldiers killed in four weeks of combat. As painful as those individual losses were to their families and to the Israeli collective psyche which views all its soldiers as their biological sons and daughters, those numbers in fact represent the fewest casualties suffered by Israel in any of its major conflicts. In 1948, Israel suffered six thousand killed. In 1967, in what was regarded as its most decisive victory, Israel lost almost seven hundred killed in six days. In 1973, Israel lost two thousand seven hundred killed and in the first week of the first war in Lebanon, Israel suffered one hundred seventy six soldiers killed….

…Were I, as an Israeli officer in the Military Spokesperson’s Unit, to have made a statement to the Israeli press about the actual lightness of Israel’s casualties, I would at the least have been relieved of duties, if not also of rank. Indeed, members of my unit volunteered to a man to go into Lebanon under fire to help retrieve the bodies of four fallen soldiers and make sure that reporters (who by that time were reported to be simply driving into Lebanon) could not broadcast pictures before the families were notified. We provided an additional covering force as well against Hezb’allah while medics and a Rabbi safeguarded the sanctity of the remains of four kids, younger than my twenty two year old son. We did so not only not under orders, but in violation of orders, because we were all of us fathers as well as soldiers, and these were not only our comrades in arms, but our sons. We were there to bring them home.

That is the emotion. But the numbers are different. They are the lightest casualties suffered by the IDF in all of its wars. Military historians will spend years deciphering why exactly this was so. Was Israel’s government and its general staff, by its refusal to commit large numbers of forces for the first three weeks of combat, in fact making a highly intelligent strategic choice? Possibly.

Possibly it was dumb luck or devine intervention. Either way it meant three things:

Read it in its entirety to see Gordon’s ‘Three Conclusions’ and understand how he comes to his final concluding thought.

If through appeasement the West fails to take action to prevent the conflagration which looms on the horizon, then let there be no doubt that its flames will engulf us all. For its part, this time Israel must be ready, and it must entrust its fate into no one’s hands but its own.

By Steve Schippert at 8:36 PM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

The intractability of the situation in Pakistan was underlined by today’s violent demnostrations which erupted in the wake of the government killing of a tribal leader and at least 24 others in Baluchistan, in the west of Pakistan. The conflict between the Pakistani government and the Baluch is not related to the global war; it in fact predates the existence of al-Qaeda, and is based on a long-standing fight for autonomy by the Baluch tribe.

Yet the fact that government forces are engaged in a low-level civil war with a significant section of the country may help explain the fact of de facto toleration for the Taliban in other sections of the Afghan-Pakistan borderlands. While operations against al-Qaeda continue, their Taliban partners are tolerated and allowed to operate against Afghan targets from within Pakistani territory with impunity, making life difficult for the elected government in Afghanistan and the international coalition there. And it should be noted that there are indications that anti-Indian jihadist groups are not merely tolerated but have received active assistance from the government.

This is from the Washington Post:

QUETTA, Pakistan — Hundreds of rioters angered by the killing of a rebel tribal leader rampaged through a southwestern Pakistani city Sunday, burning dozens of shops, banks and police vehicles. Police arrested hundreds on the second day of violent protests against the killing of Nawab Akbar Bugti, 79, in a raid on his mountain hide-out. Authorities imposed a round-the-clock curfew in Quetta, the capital of Baluchistan province.

Nine policemen suffered minor wounds in a clash with about 70 protesters, some firing pistols, who tried to loot a bank and several shops in northern Quetta, said police inspector Zahir Shah. Police fired tear gas to disperse the mob. A bomb blast damaged a government building and arsonists set fire to a telephone exchange in Kalat, a town about 155 miles south of Quetta, said local police official Ghulam Farid Jamali. There were no casualties…

Read the rest of the article.

By Kirk H. Sowell at 11:47 AM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

From AP Diplomatic Writer, Anne Gearan: Analysis: Bully Role Won’t Help With Iran…

The Bush administration may be on the verge of getting what it has long sought: United Nations sanctions on a defiant Iran over its accelerated nuclear program. That may not be much of a victory.

The U.N. Security Council isn’t likely to approve tough sanctions anytime soon, analysts said, and Iran can easily shake off light punishments. The United States risks shattering an international coalition it fought hard to build if it plays the bully now.

Perhaps emboldened by what it views as a proxy victory over the West during the monthlong Israeli war with Iranian-backed Hezbollah militants, Tehran is testing the unity of the international front against it.

Ms. Gearan’s relatively light analysis makes some good observations of the week’s events as it continues.

Nonetheless, two things to consider.

First, begging forgiveness for the self-reference, Exploitation Week was indeed put into full swing by Tehran as predicted, beginning this Tuesday past and culminating next Thursday, 31Aug06. From Gearan’s own article:

“If their strategy was to divide the Security Council it seems to be working,”Levi said, citing Friday’s remarks from the Russian Vice Premier Sergei Ivanov that talk of sanctions is premature.

Secondly, and far more importantly, a fundamental question must be asked as Anne Gearan notes that the “United States risks shattering an international coalition it fought hard to build if it plays the bully now.”

If that coalition is unable to affect the Iranian program, what value is there to be had in holding it together? This is not to suggest that there is no value. Clearly there is. But what is that value, exactly?

Is that value worth the cost if the so-called coalition is unwiling to come to consensus on meaningful sanctions?

Within days of August 31 (next Thursday), we will know precisely the value of that coalition. The cost may well be ceding nuclear weapons technology openly to the world’s premier state sponsor of terrorism…all in the name of international unity.

For what it’s worth, the similarities between the Pakistani path to a nuclear weapon and Iran’s current trek are uncanny and underappreciated.

By Steve Schippert at 10:23 PM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

If you’re familiar with the corridor running up and down the East Coast from New York City down to Baltimore, I-95, you know that its dotted with chemical processing plants and manufacturing facilities. Soft targets perhaps. Certainly, the concentration of these plants in areas of high population density makes them a serious risk, whether because of a terrorist attack or due to an accidental release of toxic materials. The lack of security at chemical plants has continued to be an issue with local politicians like Senator Charles Schumer.

On Friday, a leak of the chemical styrene caused a partial evacuation of areas surrounding Reichhold Chemical, a latex manufacturing plant on the outskirts of Cheswold Delaware.

- Witnesses initially reported a fog hovering on the ground near the plant and then a foul odor. At least 23 people were treated at Kent General Hospital in Dover. Two still were being treated at 1 a.m.

- State police said the spill originated from a rail car carrying styrene monomer, which is classified as a possible human carcinogen by the Environmental Protection Agency.

- The leak involved a tanker containing 20,000 to 30,000 gallons of the colorless, oily liquid. Heavy or long-term exposure to styrene can cause respiratory, neurological and reproductive problems, according to federal health and industry reports.

40 homes and businesses were evacuated

The advisory for residents living within a five-mile radius of the Reichhold Chemical plant to stay indoors because of a chemical spill there Friday evening has been lifted.

However, the Delaware Department of Natural Resources today announced a mandatory evacuation of about 40 homes and businesses within a 1,500-foot radius of the plant on the outskirts of Cheswold.

State officials described the mandatory evacuation as a “precautionary measure” but said it’s necessary “to ensure the safety of people in the vicinity of the plant site.”

DNREC said it expects that the mandatory evacuation could last for up to 12 hours, but added that the time frame could change.

Styrene

Dow Reichhold Specialty Latex

Delaware Department of Transportation road closure report

The “after action” reporting on this incident should be interesting to see in the context of how we might respond to an attack on a chemical facility. This incident also supports the contention of many small(er) area politicians that their areas deserve to receive anti-terrorism funding from the DHS (thinking of smaller towns and states where chemical plants like this one exist).

By Jay Fraser at 8:03 PM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (1)

With little more than cable news reports and behind-the-curve newspaper reporting during a week of vacation disconnected from the internet, much has transpired in the Iranian nuclear crisis. Yet, on first glance as I become reconnected, little has been covered with proper context. (Naturally, the good men at Vital Perspective stayed on top of things.)

So, before the first word is scribed into commentary and/or analysis, what is the first piece of information about Iran on this busy Saturday?

That for Iran, ready for negotiations over all things non-nuclear, construction at the Arak heavy water reactor continues, which would give Iran the ability to produce plutonium for smaller, more effective (and more easily missile deliverable) nuclear weapons.

Iran’s president launched a new phase in the Arak heavy-water reactor project on Saturday, saying Tehran would not give up its right to nuclear technology despite Western fears it aims to make atomic bombs.

It should be noted that, in their pursuit of nuclear weapons, both Pakistan and North Korea preferred the heavy water plant production of plutonium but shelved it because light water uranium enrichment could more readily be slipped beneath the proliferation radar, disguised as nuclear power research.

Iran rightly concludes – by feckless world ‘strongly worded’ reaction – that they need not be concerned with such trivial matters as world reaction.

As we noted on August 21 in Exploitation Week: The August 22 Iranian Kickoff, Iran was likely to further pursue a ‘divide and conquer’ diplomatic approach with their much-anticipated August 22 official response to the West’s nuclear incentives package and UN demands.

That Russia – as well as the EU’s Javier Solana - have both announced their desire to renew direct talks with Iran, Iran is maximizing Exploitation Week.

Much more on this and other Iran Nuclear Development issues to come shortly.

By Steve Schippert at 4:48 PM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

If the Katrina and Rita disasters last year proved nothing else, it was that our Nation’s medical and communications infrastructure ran the risk of being overwhelmed if a major CBRN attack occurred. At the same time, the question of how well we are prepared for a repeat of the Katrina and Rita situations remains.

A report from the Partnership for Public Service in 2003 highlighted our inability to respond to a chemical or biological attack because of a shortage of science and medical experts.

Delving deeper into the actual report, among the conclusions were:

· Bio-terror threat growing & represents a security threat

· Response capacity shrinking…1/2 of the federal scientific and medical personnel in bio-defense to be eligible to retire by 2008

· Threat from biological weapons grows larger and more pressing as scientific and technological advances in biology expand.

· al Qaeda has been pursuing plans and materials to develop biological weapons…the possibility of a bio-terrorist attack even more deadly than September 11

· Shortage of scientific and medical personnel jeopardizes federal bio-defense agencies to counter a BW attack

· Local first responders, regional vaccine stockpiling, and bio-weapon monitors in big cities have attracted funding Fed. resources needed to respond to a wide-spread terror attack, such as aerosolized/weaponized anthrax

· Conduct an audit of US bio-defense work force and create a single point of accountability to monitor federal bio-defense staffing.

Why is this important? How is preparedness for a chemical or biological attack related to disaster preparedness? Our medical infrastructure needs to be able to react and respond to a devastating natural disaster just like it needs to be prepared for a mass casualty terrorist attack.

According to a survey of U.S. Gulf Coast emergency rooms indicates that they would be overwhelmed in the event of a repeat of Katrina. While the hurricane season to date seems quite tame by last year’s standard, it appears that if another natural disaster of the proportion of Katrina or Rita occurred, we are simply not prepared.

Key points:

· About 50 million U.S. residents live in hurricane-prone coastal communities, according to the National Hurricane Center

· About 43 percent of all hospital visits begin in the ER, according to national data, but Gulf Coast facilities are overtaxed. Two-thirds of the Gulf Coast doctors surveyed feel patient care is being harmed by overcrowding and lack of resources

· Two of the area’s public hospitals have not yet re-opened, pushing more uninsured patients to emergency rooms. Seven of 22 hospitals remain closed.

· “The whole system is on life support,” said James Moises, an emergency room doctor at Tulane University hospital, one of the only hospitals open in downtown New Orleans.

· The survey also polled doctors in the hurricane-hit Biloxi, Mississippi, region, where most hospitals have re-opened, but a shortage of doctors is leading care to be diverted 60 miles (97 km) across the state to a trauma center.

It doesn’t seem like we’re ready.

By Jay Fraser at 7:57 AM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

The interception of Iranian (and Syrian) airlifted missile shipments to Hizballah may have been even more pervasive than acknowledged to date. An Israeli website, Israel Today, is quoting a Turkish newspaper that reported 5 Iranian cargo jets and 1 Syrian cargo jet filled with missiles and bound for Hizballah at the height fo the Israeli campaign against the terrorist group in Lebanon. From Israel Today’s “Turks intercept Iranian missile shipment to Hizballah”:

The Turkish newspaper Hurriyet is reporting today that Turkish authorities intercepted five Iranian cargo aircraft and one Syrian aircraft carrying missiles to Hizballah.

According to the report the aircraft were forced to land at Diyarbakir Airport in southeastern Turkey. The aircraft were not allowed to take off after US intelligence sources found there were three missile launchers and crates of C-802 missiles on board the planes which were identical to the missile that struck the Israeli Navy Ship “Hanit” during the war.

Israeli Defense Minister Amir Peretz said that Israel will continue to prevent weapons from reaching Hizballah from Syria and Iran. “I will not allow the situation that happened before the war to return,” said Peretz during a meeting with Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul. He also asked Gul that Turkey send troops to the international force deploying in Lebanon.

By Steve Schippert at 1:42 PM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

James Oberg, veteran space shuttle Mission Control specialist the and renowned expert on Russian space program, reports trouble on the horizon as the Russian Baikonur spaceport faces future insecurity without a military presence.

Early last month, Lenin Square in Baikonur echoed again to the sound of marching military feet celebrating the 61st anniversary of the victorious end of the war against Hitler’s Germany. Russia’s famous space center was built by Soviet military forces fifty years ago, and since then they have operated launch pads, managed the infrastructure, and provided security. However, with the nearing of the end of the military withdrawal from the space center, this most recent parade will probably be the last ever: the soldiers, both technical troops and guards, are marching back to Russia.

Although they are to be replaced by civilian contractors, these military units leave behind a space center much more vulnerable to accidents by inexperienced replacements and to theft by the local population and by officials. More ominously, the declining physical security opens opportunities for malicious, even hostile actions by a native population with large segments growing more resentful of the presence of the Russian rocket center in the middle of their own country…

…Nor is the cultural landscape as featureless and benign as it also may first appear. Two years ago, Russian military security forces placed the cosmodrome on the top of its list of potential terrorism targets in Kazakhstan, and local government authorities have made several arrests of members of the Hizb-al-Tahrir “caliphate party”: fundamentalist Moslems whose influence has been growing in the area. Chechen rebel fighters, hiding out among their ethnic kin in Kazakhstan, have also been captured, but how many remain undetected is unknown.

As America’s own space program relies in part upon the Baikonur spaceport, we have a vested interest in its security.

For more information about the author and space program-related news and topics, pay a visit to Jim Oberg’s Pioneering Space.

By Steve Schippert at 12:08 PM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

Last week The Jamestown Foundation took a look at the creative ways in which hizballah leveraged it’s most important new weapon, the anti-tank missile. They leveraged it for far more than just killing tanks, including successful shots on buildings, IDF troop formations and even a possible helicopter shoot down.

The primary target of Hezbollah’s battlefield missiles is the Israeli-made Merkava tank. The Merkava was designed for the maximum protection of its crews, with heavy armor and a rear escape hatch. The emphasis on crew survival is not simply a humanitarian gesture; the small country of Israel cannot provide an endless number of trained, combat-ready tank crews if casualties begin to mount. The tank is also designed to be easily and quickly repaired, a specialty of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). The modular armor plating can be easily replaced if damaged, or replaced entirely with upgraded materials when available. The first generation of Merkavas was built in the 1970s and was soon deployed in Lebanon in 1982. The much-improved Merkava Mk 4 has been Israel’s main battle-tank since its introduction in 2004.

Current battlefield reports suggest that Hezbollah fighters are well-trained in aiming at the Merkava’s most vulnerable points, resulting in as many as one-quarter of their missiles successfully piercing the armor (Yediot Aharonot, August 10). Hezbollah attacks on Merkava tanks during the November 2005 raid on the border town of Ghajar were videotaped and closely examined to find points where the armor was susceptible to missile attack. While some of their missiles have impressive ranges (up to three kilometers), the guerrillas prefer to fire from close range to maximize their chances of hitting weak points on the Merkava. Operating in two- or three-man teams, the insurgents typically try to gain the high ground in the hilly terrain before selecting targets, using well-concealed missile stockpiles that allow them to operate behind Israeli lines (Jerusalem Post, August 3).

Without artillery, Hezbollah has adapted its use of anti-tank missiles for mobile fire support against Israeli troops taking cover in buildings. There are numerous reports of such use, the most devastating being on August 9, when an anti-tank missile collapsed an entire building, claiming the lives of nine Israeli reservists (Y-net, August 10). Four soldiers from Israel’s Egoz (an elite reconnaissance unit) were killed in a Bint Jbail house when it was struck by a Sagger missile (Haaretz, August 6). TOW missiles were used effectively in 2000 against IDF outposts in south Lebanon before the Israeli withdrawal. There are also recent instances of anti-tank weapons being used against Israeli infantry in the field, a costly means of warfare but one that meets two important Hezbollah criteria: the creation of Israeli casualties and the preservation of highly-outnumbered Hezbollah guerrillas who can fire the weapons from a relatively safe distance.

It was suggested that the IDF helicopter brought down by Hezbollah fire on August 12 was hit by an anti-tank missile. Hezbollah claimed to have used a new missile called the Wa’ad (Promise), although the organization occasionally renames existing missiles (Jerusalem Post, August 12). At least one of Israel’s ubiquitous armored bulldozers has also fallen prey to Hezbollah’s missiles.

The Syrian-made RPG-29 was previously used with some success against Israeli tanks in Gaza. Hezbollah also uses this weapon, with a dual-warhead that allows it to penetrate armor. On August 6, the Israeli press reported that IDF intelligence sources claimed that an improved Russian-made version of the RPG-29 was being sold to Syria before transfer to the Islamic Resistance (Haaretz, August 6). In response, Russia’s Foreign Ministry denied any involvement in supplying anti-tank weapons to Hezbollah (RIA Novosti, August 10). The IDF reports that anti-tank missiles and rockets continue to cross the border into Lebanon from Syria, despite the destruction of roads and bridges in the area (Haaretz, August 13).

For a photo that includes the Iranian inscription on the trigger mechanism and more information, see Iran Defense: New Doctrine, Old Doctrine.

By Steve Schippert at 10:59 AM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

In Now, The Fallout, Lee Smith makes a critically important observation about the various Lebanese figures touting Hizballah - though often not using the name - as national heroes of resistance.

Here in Israel the reckoning has been underway at least since the U.N.-brokered ceasefire started Monday morning. The papers are loaded with detailed analysis of varying opinion, but much of the criticism of the military and political leadership has nothing to do with how they waged war against Hezbollah. Among other scandals brewing, it has been reported that IDF Chief of Staff Dan Halutz sold nearly $26,000 worth of stock right after the kidnapping of the two soldiers that sparked the conflict, and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert seems to have gotten a sweetheart deal on a luxury Jerusalem apartment last year.

My Lebanese friends are curious to know if all this means that Israel is tearing itself apart at the seams. They know better, but the man who is de facto leader of their country, Hassan Nasrallah, believes that a free press and dissent are signs of weakness.

Of course, it is very dangerous in Lebanon to disagree with Nasrallah, which might be why future MP Saad Hariri, son of the slain ex-Prime Minister Rafiq al-Hariri, says he is so proud of Lebanon’s “victory,” which he credits to the arms of the resistance. Perhaps Saad means to preserve Lebanon’s illusory “national unity,” a fiction that may only serve to make it easier for IDF planners during the next round of fighting, which many believe to be inevitable. [Emphasis Added.]

As Ehud Yaari pointed out, one of Hizballah’s ideal conditions is to be recognized officially as an arm of the Lebanese armed forces by pushing a measure through parliament under threat of breaking the current coalition government - of which Sa’ad Hariri is a part.

This would surely be a more costly move for Lebanon than resisting it in the face of Hizballah’s threat. As Lee Smith points out, their verbal support is likely dangerous enough…a danger perhaps not worth the peace of mind (and body) that conflict avoidance with Iran’s Hizballah terrorists entices.

To be sure, Hariri, Jumblatt and others in the Lebanese government are in a very tough spot. But at some point, the difficult choice will have to be explicitly made: Does Lebanon support Hizballah or do they want to rid themselves of Hizballah?

As it is for nearly the entire region, none of the choices are free from mortal danger or long term implications. Many hope that Hariri, Jumblatt & Company will make the principled choice…especially the many of us separated by the Atlantic Ocean.

A funny thing, principle, when the immediate safety of one’s family is at stake. Unfortunate predicament, but a fact nonetheless.

This is not a criticism of Lee Smith at all. He simply brings up the issue. It is a criticism of our own actions.

With the Cedar Revolution, Lebanon made the brave principled choice in the face of an occupying Syrian intimidation machine largely because they sensed the support of the world behind them following the assassination of Rafik Hariri.

Now, with the world buckling to a non-state entity - a terrorist Hizballah organization - what have we done to encourage them to once again make the principled choice? On one hand, we have demanded that Hizballah be disengaged from, while on the other we are going to criticize the rest of Lebanon for fearing personal retribution from the most heavily armed terrorist organization in the world right in their own backyard?

We could have done much more to help them, even if they publicly railed against the manner in which it was being done. But there is no other way to disarm Hizballah, regardless of who is making the attempt. And we are back to that principled choice before the Lebanese.

Sadly, the world is full of glass houses and stone throwers and we all take our turns, intentionally or not.

By Steve Schippert at 2:16 AM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

At The Washington Institute, Ehud Yaari describes how the Israeli leadership, political and military, put itself in the position of a perceived draw with Hizballah. He then posits with undeniable clarity:

But the mediocrity and lack of sophistication in some of the army’s upper echelons was not the problem so much as the decision-making process at the highest political levels. War is not just another operation, not a large incursion, and not a pressure tactic. War is war.

With Hizballah effectively in the driver’s seat, Yaari briefly describes the choice before Nasrallah and Hizballah: Either play along with the UN Ceasefire and re-arm before averted eyes or make a political move within the Lebanese parliament to officially make Hizballah an arm of the Lebanese armed forces.

Either way, Round 2 is likely coming in short order. Better for Lebanon to reject Option B.

By Steve Schippert at 12:28 AM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

Armies of Liberation links to a report on Yemen’s failed attempts to prevent Yemenis from joining terrorist groups in Iraq. After a Yemeni man blew himself up in the course of executing a suicide attack, Yemeni officials noted that men under the age of 35 were prohibited from traveling to Saudi Arabia, Jordan or Syria (I suspect that Jordan patrols its border as well as possible, but one can get into Syria from Jordan). I wonder how hard they have been trying. Perhaps not real hard, since Interpol complains that after terrorists recently escaped from prison, Yemeni authorities failed to provide the international organization with fingerprints. And of course, some officials are simply pro-terrorist - remember the court that acquited 19 al-Qaeda members, saying that it was legitimate jihad.

And apparently some Yemeni men are also going to Afghanistan to fight on the side of the Taliban. Does this sound familiar? I haven’t seen any reports of Yemenis traveling to Afghanistan to fight on behalf of the elected government there.

By Kirk H. Sowell at 5:41 PM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

With Indian intelligence blaming Pakistani intelligence for direct involvement with anti-Indian terrorist groups - the most prominent being Lashkir-e-Toiba (a.k.a. Dawa) - and the international consensus being that Pakistan at least tolerates them, it is perhaps not surprising that Indians are not feeling charitable toward Pakistan. According to a recent survey, they favor a fairly hardline approach to the issue, but are divided over precise tactics. These were two questions with responses:

Is Pakistan the real force behind terrorist activities in India?
Agree - 54%
Disagree - 10%
Can’t Say - 36%

Since the survey also shows that while 33% of Indian Muslims disagreed with blaming Pakistan, and only 6% of Hindus did so, there is a clear underlying religious divide. About an equal number were unsure.

What should the government do about Pakistan’s involvement in terrorist activities?
Attack terrorist bases - 40%
Negotiations - 31%
Pressure tactics - 19%
Can’t say - 10%

The original source makes clear that this last question was asked only to those who responded that they thought that Pakistan was involved directly, so only about 25% of Indians favor war with Pakistan, which is what “Attack terrorist bases” would mean.

So overall, while about a third of Indians are unsure about what to think or do about the situation, the vast majority of the rest blame the Pakistani government, although they themselves seem divided on how exactly the situation should be handled. The tilt, however, favors a hardline in America’s most important south Asian democratic ally against America’s most important south Asian Muslim ally. This, not Palestine, involves the greatest danger to American interests from a foreign conflict.

By Kirk H. Sowell at 11:36 AM | Permalink | Feedback (6) | Referenced By (0)

In commenting on a recent InBrief of mine (Second Battle of Baghdad Underway), “Soldier’s Dad” made an important point, but aside from the substantive issue, it raised an issue nomenclature that may need some clarification. During the course of the article I referred to six provinces which the Arab newspaper Al-Hayat indicated were under Iraqi security control. Soldier’s Dad responded, in part: “The August Battlespace Map shows Dohuk, Sallahadin, Sulimaniya, Najaf, Babil, Wasit, Qadisiyah and Muthana under either IA or Provincial Iraqi control.”

Part of the problem is that there is significant inconsistency between his source and mine, and I’ve addressed that issue in the comment. But this also emphasizes the problem of inconsistent spellings and transliterations. I’ve provided a standardized spelling list for Iraqi provinces and capitals below, but bear in mind that the diversity of spellings means that this list will never match exactly those used in maps or other sources elsewhere. As a helpful guide for non-Arabic proficient readers, I’ve developed some guidelines:

1) As a general rule, here at ThreatsWatch we usually spell names as closely to their Arabic pronunciation as possible except where a literal translation would be awkward. Thus An-Najaf becomes Al-Najaf, because the doubling of the ‘n’ depends upon an Arabic grammar rule irrelevant for our purposes here. But we write Muqtada rather than the more commonly used Moqtada, since it is pronounced with an ‘u’ in the first syllable.

2) There is no standardized spelling for many Arab names, and so while the grandson of Muhammad who was killed in the 7th century is usually called “Husayn,” and the former Iraqi dictator “Hussein,” these names are identical. The inconsistency can be seen in the first names of - as we spell them - Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and Shi’a cleric Muqtada al-Sadr as currently used in some prominent news sources:

Washington Post - Moqtada/Nuri
New York Times - Moktada/Nuri [note that it is a ‘q’ in Arabic, not a ‘k’]
Wall Street Journal - Moqtada/Nouri [note that in Arabic the ‘u’ in “Nuri” is a short not a long vowel]

We drop the definite article after first mention, so “al-Maliki” becomes simply “Maliki.”

3) Many place names are spelled with an “-ah” at the end where we drop the “h” (see our spelling of “Sulaymaniya”, etc.). This is because in those names this last sound is the ta marbuta, which sounds just like an “a” in English with no “h.” There is a hard “h” that may appear at the end of a name, but this is a different letter, and has no equivalent in English. An example of this “hard ‘h’” is the Iraqi newspaper Al-Sabah (although note that they use inconsistent spellings for their own name in the website’s url and the English version of their homepage).

4) We do use the ’ diacritic mark to indicate the ‘ayn sound, which has no equivalent in English. This is to indicate that there is a difference between, say, the first syllable in “Ba’quba” and that in “Baghdad.”

5) Where there is a long vowel and some publications double the vowel in English, we do not do so, except where there is an established transliteration for a proper name, as in the famous/infamous satellite channel Al-Jazeera, based in Qatar. (Note that there is also a Saudi newspaper called Al-Jazirah, but the two have the same Arabic spelling.)

I’ll probably link back to this post in the future as a reference whenever I sense a discussion may induce confusion. Below are all the provinces and their capitals; here is a link to some maps of Iraq. The province is first, then the capital (some are the same); typically we include the definite article (“al-“) for provinces and personal names (e.g. Nuri al-Maliki) where relevant (not all have it), but not individual cities. Also, if we decide to change our style sheet on these spellings, I’ll come back and amend this post.

So here is the province/capital list, with some brief comments to tie them to common references in the news (I’ve indicated the predominant ethnic/sectarian group in each, but also bear in mind that a smaller Turkmen minority of 2-3 million people stretches across Ninawa, Arbil, al-Tamim and Diyala):

Province/Capital
1. Baghdad/ Baghdad (mixed Sunni/Shi’a)

2. Al-Anbar/ Ramadi (center of the native Iraqi insurgency)

3. Salah al-Din/ Samarra (top point in the “Sunni Triangle”)

4. Diyala/ Ba’quba (mixed Sunni/Shi’a)

5. Al-Sulaymaniya/ Sulaymaniya (Sunni)

6. Al-Tamim/ Kirkuk (mixed Kurd/Sunni Arab, oil-rich flashpoint)

7. Arbil/ Arbil (Kurd-dominated)

8. Ninawa/ Mosul (mixed Kurd/Sunni Arab)

9. Dahuk/ Dahuk (Kurd-dominated)

10. Karbala/ Karbala (one of two most holy Shi’a cities, site of Husayn’s martyrdom)

11. Babil/ Hilla (predominately Shi’a)

12. Wasit/ Kut (predominately Shi’a)

13. Al-Najaf/ Najaf (one of two most holy Shi’a cities, residence of most Iraqi Shi’a religious authorities)

14. Al-Muthanna/ Samawa (predominately Shi’a)

15. Al-Basra/Basra (key port city, most populous Shi’a-dominated city)

16. Maysan/ Amara (predominately Shi’a)

17. Dhiqar/ Nasiriya (predominately Shi’a)

18. Al-Qadisiya/ Diwaniya (predominately Shi’a)

By Kirk H. Sowell at 12:55 AM | Permalink | Feedback (0) | Referenced By (0)

My good friend Jay concludes his last (“Fear” - A Nation on Edge):

We also know from reports that our security is lacking when it comes to the detection of these purported liquid explosive bombs.

From this perspective, the terrorists (and if it is al-Qaeda), in my opinion, are winning right now. They have us on edge, or at least “off guard.”

“On edge” is agreeable. But, with proper perspective, it just may be demonstrated that al-Qaeda (and their fellow ideological travelers) are not “winning right now.”

Sleeping in consciously blind comfort while 9-11 hijackers trained to fly (not land) jetliners on our own soil embodies terrorists winning.

An economy - and entire industries - frozen or in freefall after terrorist attacks embodies terrorists winning.

A national psyche paralyzed by fear, afraid of shadows, embodies terrorists winning.

But an aircraft and airport cleared after suspicious activity says to me that we are a nation alert, not defeated by fear.

I believe it was a mean, crusty Force Recon Marine that once said:

Pain is God’s way of telling you that you are still alive.
Fear is God’s way of telling you to pay attention.
Embrace them both.

We are not losing. We are simply paying attention. What if we had possessed this alertness five years ago…or sooner?

So some air travelers are potentially inconvenienced by an event that may end as a ‘false alarm.’ A petty – and recoverable – experience.

It would be difficult for me to look Todd Beamer, Chic Burlingame, and nearly three thousand other slain Americans (and their families) in the eye and explain the importance of convenience.

Now, in fairness, I know this is not exactly what Jay was thinking when he wrote the above. But perhaps we should all pause to consider the value of fear rather than simply the cost.

There is an infinite difference between harnessing and embracing fear – a natural, important and useful phenomenon – and submitting to it, frozen and incapable. Ask any Marine.

By Steve Schippert at 10:35 PM | Permalink |