Know Your Enemy

I don't have anything really to add to this, but this is a particularly thorough (short-form) explanation of what makes modern political Islam particularly dangerous to what we consider civilization.  The irony is that it is most dangerous to those who consider themselves Muslims.

They call themselves the Army of God (Jund Allah) and claim to be fighting to unite mankind under the banner of Islam as “the only true faith.” To achieve that goal, they believe they should revive the Islamic Caliphate, the theocratic empire developed after the death of Prophet Mohammed in 632 AD.

An image from a propaganda video uploaded on June 8th shows ISIL militants firing near the Iraqi city of Tikrit.Photo: Getty Images

 Adepts of the caliphate movement are present throughout the world, including the United States, under different labels. In many places, from the Philippines to Nigeria, passing by Thailand, India, Afghanistan and Syria, they have taken up arms to capture a chunk of territory as the embryo of their dream empire.

 This is worth the 5-10 minutes it'll take you to read it.

Geopolitical whack-a-mole

I've let this languish for a while, but things are getting interesting again, so time to take a closer look.

Things are on "simmer" in the Ukraine with some signs that the Russians have decided that the low-hanging fruit has fallen (Crimea) and Donetsk has hit the point of diminishing returns.  Trends at this point look like Putin has withdrawn support, or at least most of it, from the militias in east Ukraine and will use them as a tacit bargaining chip with the new government.  In the meantime, NATO tries, still, to figure out what to do about the whole thing.

 Could be a good time for another "Reset" button; the US and Canada (especially Canada for some reason) are out of sync with our continental allies (and the French, not part of NATO) in terms of how to deal with Putin and Russia.  My prescription for the situation is to continue with the tripwire reassurance measures we are taking with our eastern NATO members, but cease the "containment" or expansion efforts into what Russia considers its' sphere of interest/near abroad. Russia these days should be a European problem, time for them to step up and shift some assets east.

Just as well that things are off the boil there, as things in both south-east Asia and the Mid-East are getting hotter.  China is really pushing its' egregious claims to the entire South China Sea+ and is not far from a shooting war with Vietnam over that oil rig in the Spratley Islands.  If there is a group who won't knuckle under to China in the region it's Vietnam; they've given their (much) bigger neighbour a bloody nose more than once and that's not the sort of thing China forgets.  That said, Japan remains the only regional power with a navy which can challenge the People's Liberation Army Navy, but only locally.  To really stand up to the PLAN the US Navy is essential to the regional players.

Pivot to Asia?  So far I don't see it or there'd be a couple of carrier groups cruising around the contested areas daring the Chinese to try something.

At this time of course arrives the whirlwind sown by the US when it knocked over Saddam Hussein.  ISIL, the Islamic State in the Levant, Al-Queda's bastard spawn from Syria, has routed the Iraqi army from Mosul, Tikrit and Falluja in the most embarrassing possible way and taken, at least temporarily those cities and some lesser ones beside.  The threatened march on Baghdad will be stopped, by Iran if need be, and this upsets almost every apple cart in the region, but it's an ill wind which doesn't blow anyone some good.  This exception, and the only probable (maybe even only possible) salvation for Mosul and northern Iraq are the Kurds. 

The possibility of apocalyptic (for the region) sectarian civil war is a distinct one, as this could be "warre to the knife" between Sunni and Shia.  The evaporation of the (Shia) Iraqi army in the north has allowed the Peshmerga to roll into and occupy Kirkuk, and it's unlikely that Baghdad will get it back.  The Kurds will likely build their Kurdistan while the Sunni and Shia Arabs kill each other.  If however it is necessary for the US to support a reliable party in the area, the Kurds are the only game in town.

Obama is again talking, but you can't claim that "everything's on the table" and then instantly say that there will be no US troops on the ground.  ISIL has no chance to create a caliphate out of their recent gains, but they have done a lot of damage and won't go down without a fight.  This isn't time for half-measures.  This is time for Green Berets and smart-bombs, with the Peshmerga as the new Northern Alliance; you have problems, I offer solutions.  Now we see what kind of half-assery Obama can come up with for all of these situations.

Token (non) Forces

I'll continue with yesterday's Boko Haram situation by looking at what is happening vs. the options I suggested for effective action.  From Time:

State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said the team “could provide expertise on intelligence, investigations and hostage negotiations, help facilitate information sharing and provide victim assistance. It would include U.S. military personnel, law-enforcement officials with expertise in investigations and hostage negotiations, as well as officials with expertise in other areas that may be helpful to the Nigerian government in its response.”

Not sounding promising; what else?

White House press secretary Jay Carney said President Obama and Kerry would discuss the ongoing effort to locate the girls in their meeting Tuesday afternoon.
“We are not considering at this point military resources,” Carney said, saying the military personnel being sent are to take on an advisory role for the Nigerian government.
“What I can tell you is that it is certainly Nigeria’s responsibility to maintain the safety and security of its citizens,” Carney added.

Emphasis mine.  The last point about Nigeria being responsible for its' citizens is of course correct, however dismally the government has discharged that responsibility.  I will state that unless things are more than they seem here, precious little will actually be accomplished toward the necessary goal of neutralizing these jihadist assholes.  Getting the girls back is morally imperative but a tactical (bandaid) action.  Smashing the Boko Haram organization (like AQ was smashed in Iraq, and AQIM has been smashed in Mali) is the strategic objective, and only "military resources" can achieve that.

Salafists/jihadists, what-have-you are vermin, and like vermin they can be managed but not exterminated.  There is little to stop the determined lone-wolf terrorist (Boston Marathon bombings as an example), but when they are roaming the countryside in large groups wearing stolen army uniforms with armoured vehicles, the threat has metastasized and requires serious bombs and drones-type action.

The drones are of course a modern tool, guys with infantry weapons and determination have and can still do the job without them. I guess Obama's team figures this gives them a fig leaf to hide behind and say "Look, we did something!", but that's all I see here.  Hostage rescue negotiators? Seriously?

In the slightly-less-useless category we have the ongoing Western response to events in Ukraine.  Canada has sent "several dozen" ground troops to Poland for exercises while six more CF-18s are bound for Romania.  It was confirmed that the planes will not be flying armed, BUT the Chief of Defence Staff was explicit about the weapons being available should the situation change from a "training" one.  That is already more ballsy than the American administration has been; the NATO commander is an American who knows what needs to be done so I won't blame their armed forces.

Things are hotting up in Ukraine and it's already a low-level civil war.  When it gets to the real deal the Russians will move in officially, and then we'll have an actual war to decide what to do about.  Ukraine has decided to fight, and if it comes to it I'm a bit conflicted on if we should help them directly or not.  Geopolitically it should be Europe's problem; that's way above my pay grade, moving into UN Chapter VII territory. 

Legion Etranger a louer?

The world (e.g. mainstream media) has finally figured out that Boko Haram is an unpleasant organisation.  Think of them as Al-Queda of the sub-Sahara and you get the idea; they've been running amok in Nigeria for a few years now, so everyone posting "Bring Back our Girls" to Facebook are both behind the times and useless to the actual situation.

As is my wont, I don't simply enumerate problems, I propose practical solutions.  Knee-jerk response is for Nigeria to get its' head out of its' ass and send the entire army on a search and destroy mission to wipe BH from the face of the earth.  Rank corruption and incompetence make that impractical or it would have happened already, so something else then.

The French have shown the way in Africa (Mali and most recently Central African Republic), and as un-PC as it is, it's 1st-World armies to solve 3rd-World problems.  In my world, if it's locals causing the problem, opposed locals should be able to solve it with minimal assistance.  People on Facebook seem to think this is America's responsibility, a default option with surprisingly racist undertones if you think about it.  Normal media racism is directed solely against whites (damn all that privilege!) but when you assume that Western armies are the only ones capable of dealing with African problems, that's a flat-out colonial attitude.  What's worse is that it's demonstrably true (Rwanda's RPF in 1994 an exception).

The key to an effective military is professionalism, something that the anarchy and crony despotism of most African states doesn't produce a lot of.  I'm reminded of a report I saw from the mess in South Sudan earlier this year.  In an army column sent to rout some rebels there was one young Sandhurst-trained Lt who appeared to know his business, but the rest of them were hopeless.  Individual platoon commanders led by crony generals don't get much done, however.

So Nigeria needs western troops to do the job right, but the West is broke, tired and overstretched, not likely to jump into things.  The necessary ingredients for a successful intervention are:

1. Competent, motivated troops;
2. Political will, and;
3. Money.  

"We" have 1, Nigeria has 3 (pay us in oil if need be), and as long as Nigeria has 2 as well, we can make something work.

I think this was the origin of "Hammer's Slammers" but using our trained volunteer troops as mercenaries is as close to an optimal solution to this problem as we are likely to see.  There is no shortage of type-A adrenalin junkies in Western armies to volunteer for a unit like this and putting an English-speaking international Brigade Group together is feasible, however unlikely it may be. 

Failing that, maybe it's time to bring "Mad" Mike Hoare out of retirement.  He's a bit past it of course, but he and the other Congo Mercenaries showed how it could be done.  Nigeria is unlikely to hire a bunch of primarily white mercs for this job, but I wonder how close we are to the point where the government and the populace will countenance anything that will get the job done?  As things stand, the government is the problem so I don't hold out much hope for improvement in the near term.

Update: the Yanks are sending people to help out at the request of the Nigerian government, so we'll see if they provide the nucleus of a force to wipe Boko Haram off the map. I'm willing to be surprised.

You can do everything with bayonets, except sit on them.

Always on the lookout for the plausible, I saw this and pass it to you with little editorial as it is educated speculation already.

Staunton, April 28 – Many in Russia and the West have speculated that the combination of Vladimir Putin’s policies against Ukraine, Moscow’s increasing isolation internationally, and deteriorating economic conditions at home will eventually lead to a Maidan-style challenge to his rule.

That is possible, of course, but a man identified as a former FSB officer and speaking on condition of anonymity suggests that there may be another and more immediate threat to the Kremlin leader: a coup by the siloviki [power ministers] and groups allied with them who believe that Putin’s policies are hurting not only the country but their personal interests.

“Everyone understands that there is simply no reason to fight with the entire world in the name of some absurd historical principles,” he says, adding that “everyone understands that the Soviet phobia of the FSB that the American enemy is close and will soon attack has lost its significance.”

Instead, he says, they recognize that “war in the 21st century more typically takes the form of economic blockades and information propaganda rather than guns and military technology.”

 A game changer if it comes to pass, with effects to be felt far beyond the current Ukraine mess.  The one thing I am almost certain of is that the Americans would manage to fumble even that magnitude of an opportunity to get Russia back into the world and working with us as they should be.

Proxy confidence building

At the time of my last post, there were two main paths events were likely to follow.  The first was Ukraine and NATO would remain completely supine and allow Putin to do what he wants, and under conditions existing at the time I weighted this course of (in)action at >50%.  The other option was the girding of loins, etc. to put troops in harm's way and tell the Russians that they have gone as far as they are going to go.  I wasn't confident this would happen, mostly due to irresolute Western leadership, and things haven't improved there as much as I'd like, but sometimes it doesn't take much to change conditions significantly.

Ukraine’s military launched assaults to retake rebel-held eastern towns on Thursday in which up to five people were reported killed, a move Russian President Vladimir Putin warned would have “consequences”. …
In Slavyansk, a flashpoint east Ukrainian town held by rebels since mid-April, armoured military vehicles drove past an abandoned roadblock in flames to take up position, AFP reporters saw.
Shots were heard as a helicopter flew overhead, and the pro-Kremlin rebels ordered all civilians out of the town hall to take up defensive positions inside.
“During the clashes, up to five terrorists were eliminated,” and three checkpoints destroyed, the interior ministry said in a statement. Regional medical authorities confirmed one death and one person wounded.
Earlier Thursday, Ukrainian special forces seized back control of the town hall in the southeastern port city of Mariupol with no casualties, Interior Minister Arsen Avakov said. Separatist sources confirmed the loss of the building in the port city, whose population is 500,000.

The moral support which makes this possible is redeployment of NATO forces to Poland and the Baltic states.  The Americans didn't land the entire 101st in Estonia or anything, but like in Georgia in 2008, a tripwire of NATO troops tells the Russians that the rules have changed.  There were some Americans who were dismissive of the half-dozen CF-18s Canada deployed to Poland, but it's important to note two things.  First and foremost, the Poles were NOT dismissive of our small contribution. Second, even six obsolescent fighter bombers (and the Americans sent more) with modern smart munitions and the determination to use them are not to be lightly dismissed.

Would Canada commit those planes and crews to a shooting war?  Over Ukraine itself most likely not, but over an invasion/infringement of a NATO ally, most definitely, and that's what's important here.  The Poles in particular have both the experience to know what Russia is capable of and the determination to not let it happen again, so they're the right group to reinforce.  The Balts have motivation to keep the Russians out too, so they need and are getting some help.

Canada has played a leadership role in all of this, and we are putting what "money" we have where our mouth is, both with the (small) military contribution and now election monitors for the upcoming election in Ukraine.  There is some evidence that even the chary Europeans see the election verification as something sufficiently unprovocative to get behind.  At this point it must be obvious to everyone in NATO (looking at you, Germany) that they still need to be able to project military power, even if it's just next door or your own border, but again I await developments as do we all..

Here we go...

SLOVYANSK, Ukraine — Ukrainian special forces moved in Sunday to confront a separatist revolt in eastern Ukraine, engaging in gunfights with armed pro-Russian militants who had stormed a Ukrainian police station here. At least one officer died in the operation and several others were injured, along with four local residents, Ukrainian officials said.

The police station was one of several security centers in the eastern region of Donetsk seized on Saturday by unidentified masked gunmen in a series of coordinated raids that Ukrainian authorities denounced as Russian “aggression.”

This is the sort of thing that Putin or anyone else trying to make a move on contested territory will be prepared to take full advantage of.   The next few days will tell, but unless there is some serious moves to get NATO troops into Ukraine to counter the nearby Russian forces, it looks like the latter will go for it.  "Special forces" in this case means that numbers are still small and the Speznatz greatly outnumber anything the Ukraine can put in the field, so tit-for-tat fights like this will quickly swing Russia's way.

NATO commanders have been trying to get the politicians to take things seriously, but so far only the Poles are doing so, and they mostly in their own legitimate self-interest.  Were I the Ukraine right now, I'd mobilize everything on a full war/tactical footing and get dug in as advantageously as possible.  A stand up fight is the one thing the Russians don't want, as it destroys any semblance of "will of the people".  Watch and (hopefully don't) shoot.