From the Welfare State to the Caliphate

How a Swedish suburb became a breeding ground for foreign fighters streaming into Syria and Iraq.

By Magnus Ranstorp, Linus Gustafsson, Peder Hyllengre February 23, 2015

GOTHENBURG, Sweden — When he was 3 years old, Ahmed arrived in southern Sweden from Iraq, together with his older brother and parents. The family settled in one of their new country’s cut-off suburbs, where its many new immigrants come to live, but mostly to be forgotten.

The family found a home in one of the many rows of gray, faceless apartment buildings that make up these deeply segregated suburbs that ring Sweden’s urban centers — in Angered, outside Gothenburg. As he grew into his teenage years, Ahmed began to scold his siblings to be more religious. He spent considerable time in front of his computer, becoming engrossed in graphic, violent videos from the civil war in Syria. Inspired, he read the biographies of martyrs who had died in battle, waging jihad in the holy land. And gradually he turned inward, withdrawing from society and his former life.

Another century, another long war

Tuesday, 21 October 2014   By: Peter Leahy

     Another century, another long war – PDF (335.4 KB)

Australia is involved in the early stages of a conflict that may last for the rest of the century and potentially beyond. Terrorism is but a symptom of a broader conflict in which the fundamental threat is from radical Islamists who are intent on establishing Islam as the foundation of a new world order.

While the violence, so far, is mostly confined to Islamic lands, some of the radicals are engaged in a direct war against Western secular nations. The home-grown threat from terror remains and is likely to worsen as radicals return from fighting overseas and the internet dumps unconstrained radical propaganda across the globe. If the caliphate in Iraq and Syria established by the Islamic State survives, it will be a worrying portent of worse to come.

Three Possible Scenarios for Iran’s Nuclear Talks

Sunday, November 23, 2014

Tayebeh Mohammadikia
PhD Candidate of International Relations in Allameh Tabatabai University, Tehra

Iran‘s nuclear negotiations have reached their sensitive stage. Now, the time is ripe to review future prospects of these negotiations more accurately and talk about the final outcome of the nuclear talks with more precision. However, the way ahead is still surrounded by ambiguity and problems. Under the present circumstances, analysts focusing on these negotiations are faced with three main assumptions: inability of the two sides to reach an agreement, achievement of a final agreement, and finally, further extension of the negotiations. Each of these possible scenarios is discussed in more detail below.

1. Achievement of a final agreement

Any analysis of conditions that may surface after “achievement of an agreement” will be a function of the arrangement of powers on the two main sides of the equation; that is, Iran and the United States, as well as the analysis of other forces that have their own influence at international, regional and global levels. Here, possible options available to powerful political forces within domestic political scene of these two countries will be explained first before turning to major influential powers in international arena.

   1.1. Arrangement of powers in Iran and the US if an agreement is not achieved

A nuclear agreement has staunch supporters and proponents both in Iran and the United States. However, the other possibility, that is, inability to reach an agreement, has also its own important and influential proponents.

The Importance of Financing in Enabling and Sustaining the Conflict in Syria (and Beyond)

Western Asia in most contexts. Possible extensions. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

Vol 8, No 4 (2014) > Keatinge

by Tom Keatinge

Abstract

The availability, sources, and distribution of funding are critical issues to consider when seeking to address an on-going conflict such as the one we are witnessing across Syria and Iraq. In the Syrian case, whilst funds from states such as Russia, Iran, the U.S., Saudi Arabia, and Qatar support various elements, a key factor to consider in addressing extremist groups is funding provided by private donors, some of whom are attracted by the concept of ‘jihadi finance’, seeking the honour and reward of waging jihad by proxy. This article reviews the importance of financing for insurgent groups, focusing in particular on the highly influential enabling role played by private donor financing in the current conflict in Syria, as well as the sustaining role of the war economy as the conflict spreads. Finally, it considers whether, in its fourth year, this conflict can still be influenced by targeting sources of financing.

Keywords: Terrorism finance, Syria

Introduction

The Syrian conflict has drawn support in the form of weapons, spare parts, supplies, and fighters from across the globe. But most importantly, the conflict has been enabled by the ready and generous supply of financing provided by a broad array of states and private individuals and it is sustained by the development of a highly lucrative war economy. It is thus not an exaggeration to say that financing is extremely important to all parties in the conflict, and that the availability of financing has substantially influenced  the course the conflict has taken thus far.

Iraq crisis: ISIS militants push towards Baghdad -June 13 as it happened

Group claims mass killings of Iraqi troops, as militants battle security forces 50 miles from Baghdad – follow latest developments – follow latest developments

A man is executed in a new video released by ISIS

By Hannah Strange and Arron Merat

6:04PM BST 13 Jun 2014

 

The Iraqi official confirmed numerous eyewitness reports that the militants flew a captured helicopter

20.50

Interesting if true. It is not a one nutter show according to Mosul governor. Although he is perhaps not in the best position to speak freely.

 

20.24

Quite wonkish but very revealing analysis of how Iranian proxies such as Kataib Hezbollah, Asaib Ahl al-Haqq and Liwa Abu Fadl al-Abbas have relocated from Syria to fight ISIS in Iraq.

20.05

A new New York Times article paints a picture of the Iraqi government in crisis, appealing for the US for help, threatening Iran will fill the gap if they refuse.

“If you’re in an antique shop there’s a sign, ‘If you broke it, you bought it,’  ” the official, who is an adviser to Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, said. “I am not saying the Americans are responsible for everything, but they did not leave a well-trained army and they left us without any real air support, and the Obama administration really shares much of the blame.”

What to do in Iraq

Frederick W. Kagan, William Kristol | The Weekly Standard

June 16, 2014

Reuters

Members of the Iraqi security forces patrol an area near the borders between Karbala Province and Anbar Province, June 16, 2014

It’s widely agreed that the collapse of Iraq would be a disaster for American interests and security in the Middle East and around the world. It also seems to be widely assumed either that there’s nothing we can now do to avert that disaster, or that our best bet is supporting Iran against al Qaeda. Both assumptions are wrong. It would be irresponsible to embrace a premature fatalism with respect to Iraq. And it would be damaging and counterproductive to accept a transformation of our alliances and relationships in the Middle East to the benefit of the regime in Tehran. There is a third alternative.

Iran News Round Up March 18, 2014

Nuclear power plant “Kernkraftwerk Emsland” (Photo credit: flokru)

A selection of the latest news stories and editorials published in Iranian news outlets, compiled by the AEI Critical Threats Project’s Iran research team. To receive this daily newsletter, please subscribe online. 

(E) = Article in English

Excerpts of these translations may only be used with the expressed consent of the authors

Nuclear Issue

• The second day of negotiations between Iran and the P5+1, towards a final nuclear deal  concluded in Vienna. Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif doubted the possibility of reaching a final agreement in this latest round of talks, adding that he and his counterpart, EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, would guide the negotiations process, while their respective deputies would take the lead.
• After landing in Vienna yesterday, Foreign Minister Zarif stated that the topics of discussion in this latest round of negotiations will include “uranium enrichment, the Arak heavy water reactor, peaceful nuclear cooperation, and the lifting of sanctions.”
• Atomic Energy Organization of Iran Spokesman Behrouz Kamalvand asserted that Iran has not abrogated its “right” of enrichment above 20% and noted, “We have said that we will not produce for six months in order to build trust.” He added that the country can resume 20% enrichment “in less than a day; two-three hours. Of course I have announced the approximation of this time.” Kamalvandi also announced that Iran and Russia will sign an agreement to construct at least two new nuclear power plants, each with desalination and a minimum of 1,000 megawatts capacity, within the next two-three months.
• At Saturday’s open session of Parliament, Speaker Ali Larijani threatened that Iran would break nuclear negotiations in reaction to the recent UN human rights report and announced, “American and UN officials must know that they will be the cause of breaking up negotiations and should not say that Iran has left the negotiations table.”