Persian Gulf & Middle East Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

US backing of el-Sissi reminiscent of Mubarak era

With ex-army chief Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi sworn in as Egypt's president, Washington has promised that it will cooperate with his government. Are US-Egyptian ties returning to the Mubarak-era status quo of military rule?
More than three years ago, US President Barack Obama withdrew Washington's long-standing support for Hosni Mubarak, accelerating the former air force marshal's overthrow by mass demonstrations. Today, the White House is cooperating with Egypt's latest military-commander-turned-president, Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi, in what some analysts say is a return to the old status quo of US support for military rule.
"The United States looks forward to working with [Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi], the winner of Egypt's presidential election, to advance our strategic partnership and the many interests shared by the United States and Egypt," the White House said in a news release.
The Obama administration also expressed concern about the restrictive political environment in which the elections took place, calling on el-Sissi to adopt political reforms that would fulfill the "democratic aspirations of the Egyptian people."
But in his May 28 foreign policy speech, President Obama made clear that US-Egyptian relations are primarily rooted in national security interests, not democracy promotion.
"In countries like Egypt, we acknowledged that our relationship is anchored in security interests, from peace treaties with Israel to shared efforts against violent extremism," Obama told the West Point Military Academy's graduating class.
"So we have not cut off cooperation with the new government, but we can and will persistently push for reforms that the Egyptian people have demanded," the president continued.

Security trumps democracy

According to Amy Hawthorne, an Egypt expert with the Atlantic Council, the White House has adopted a pragmatic approach in its relations with post-Mubarak Cairo. Hawthorne said that the Obama administration would prefer to deal with a democratic government. But with the political situation in Egypt unpredictable, Washington fears a complete break in its ties with Cairo, which could jeopardize its core security interests in the peace treaty with Israel and counterterrorism cooperation.
"This administration does not believe that the US has very much ability to influence or shape Egyptian domestic politics," Hawthorne told DW.
"And given a choice between maintaining relations and taking such a strong stance that ties might be ruptured, the US is going to choose working with the Egyptian government and continuing the relations," she said.
Hawthorne believes that the White House's Egypt policy does differ from the Mubarak era in important respects. She said that although the Obama administration is willing to work with el-Sissi on a narrow set of security issues, it is not willing to protect him from the will of the Egyptian people, as Washington protected Mubarak for decades.

'Business as usual'

But Emad Shahin, an expert on Egyptian politics at the American University in Cairo, said that current US policy is worse than during the Mubarak era. According to Shahin, although Mubarak was an autocrat, he originally came to power through a legal succession of power after the assasination of President Anwar Sadat in 1981.
In the case of el-Sissi, he led the military overthrow of Mohammed Morsi, an Islamist and Egypt's first democratically elected president. The military subsequently cracked down on the Muslim Brotherhood and Morsi's supporters, leading to hundreds of deaths and thousands of arrests. Morsi has been imprisoned and is now facing the death penalty.
"This is a coup," Shahin told DW. "This shows that the United States is willing to be with any government regardless of any kind of legitimacy or background."
Washington, for its part, has avoided labeling el-Sissi's putsch as a military coup. Had the White House called Morsi's overthrow a coup, the US would have been obligated under federal law to cancel all military aid to Egypt. Instead, the Obama administration froze only a portion of the more than $1 billion in annual military aid to Egypt.
"Those [Egyptians] who are against the coup look at America as part of this process; as part of overthrowing a democratic process; as part of trying to contain the popular uprisings; and as part of trying to manage the process of potential change in the region," Shahin said, referring to US policy in Egypt as "business as usual."

DW.DE

Click to expand...

Israel has phased out the AH-1S Cobra helicopter gunship, in favour of using more drones, the Reuters news agency reports. The increasing reliance on unmanned aerial vehicles (drones) has evolved through the years, as the unmanned aircraft assumed increasingly complex missions, and proved themselves as an indispensable asset in the continuous war against terror along and beyond Israel’s borders.

Despite the improvements and extensive support, the Cobras have encountered significant ageing challenges, some causing fatal accidents. One squadron has been disbanded few years ago, the second was closed late in 2013. But, according to Reuters, The Cobras were axed as part of budget cuts. “They were sort of stuck in the middle in terms of the role they could fulfil, so we decided to do without them,” a senior military officer told Reuters on condition of anonymity.


The air force aims to carry out strikes “within minutes” of receiving a request from ground troops – a timing that he said would likely be met by drones and helicopters rather than jets

Israel has retained two squadrons of Apache helicopters, operating AH-64A and D models. Squadron 161, formerly the second Cobra squadron, was commissioned in 2012 at the Palmahim base, as a Hermes 450 (Zik) UAV squadron. Squadron 160 decommissioned in August 2013 is likely to follow.

According to Reuters, operations have been shifted toward drones rather than manned aircraft and helicopters. According to the agency’s correspondent Dan Williams, the mission of the Cobras are now performed by unmanned aircraft, currently operating under several squadrons. Israel is known to be operating the Elbit Systems’ Hermes 450 and newer Hermes 900, as well as the IAI Heron TP dubbed Eitan. Officially these drones are operated on intelligence gathering and targeting missions only, but, according to foreign sources, they are also carrying guided weapons. subscribe


All UAVs operated by the IAF are locally made the country’s defense industries. These drones are increasingly used to patrol combat zones such as the Gaza Strip and South Lebanon.

Click to expand...

New developments in guided weapons such as the SDB-I are enabling the F-15, to carry four guided bombs in place of each unguided bomb it used to carry. This will result in a pair of F-15s carrying over 50 individually targeted guided weapons – more than a full squadron would carry few years ago. Israel has reportedly received the SDB-I in 2008. Photo: IDF Spokesman

At a time when Israel’s Ministry of Defense (IMOD) is striving for cash and the Israel Air & Space Force (IASF) is shutting down training due to lack of funding, it is encouraging to listen to the commander of the IASF, Maj. General Amir Eshel talks about the state of air force and how much it has evolved and strengthened in recent years. Following are excerpts from a post originally published by the IDF Blog.

An IAF F-15C loaded with three JDAM bombs during the 2006 2nd Lebanon War. SInce 2006 the IAF has quadrupled its strike capability, IAF commander Maj. General Eshel stated. Photo: ISF Spokesman.

“I believe our capabilities are only second to the United States, from both an offensive and defensive standpoint” General Eshel told the audience at the Israel conference of National Security, in April 2014. IAF commander said, referring to a significant leap in capabilities over the past two years. The commander said he has based his assessment on an evaluation of IDF abilities and conversations with officials from foreign militaries.

“We have an unprecedented offensive capability, which allows us to accurately strike thousands of targets in one day. We have doubled our abilities twice in the past two years. By the end of 2014, we will see an improvement of 400 percent to our offensive capabilities relative to the recent past, as a result of a long improvement process.”

“By the end of this year (2014) the Air Force can do in less than 24 hours what it did in three days of fighting during the Second Lebanon War of 2006. It will be able to do in 12 hours what it did in a week of fighting during Operation Pillar of Defense in 2012.”


Eshel: “We have doubled our abilities twice in the past 2 years”


Eshel did not elaborate on the means that have contributed to this dramatic increase in air power, but Maj. Gen. Eshel explained the reasons behind the investments in such powerful and extensive strike capabilities: “Israel can not afford lengthy attacks. We need to win quickly. A short time, in my opinion, is a few days. I do not believe in conducting long wars.”

The air force chief argued that accurate and quality firepower is the main variable in achieving victory. To do so, he said, “It’s not enough to have just technical ability – we need to adopt an approach. We’re talking about an operation with full power, all of the air force, all encompassing, from the opening of the offensive effort in order to strike as powerfully as possible and shorten the war.”


Analysts: The increased capability is likely to associate with improved intelligence acquisition, targeting capabilities, and deployment of smaller precision guided weaponry

In few years, the F-16I Sufa seen here carrying two laser guided bombs, will be able to launch 16 smaller but more lethal Spice 250 bombs, currently under development at RAFAEL advanced defense systems company.
In few years, the F-16I Sufa seen here carrying two laser guided bombs, (in addition to four air/air missiles) will be able to carry 16 smaller but more lethal Spice 250 bombs, that could be used to attack 16 targets simultaneously. The new weapon is currently under development at Rafael Advanced Defense Systems company.

“We can destroy the military capabilities and infrastructure that support the activities of Hezbollah on a scale that would require decades to rebuild. [We could achieve] a direct hit on the terror organization and all that supports it on an unimaginable scale,” the IAF commander said.

“Unfortunately Hezbollah took its assets and moved them into the cities,” he added. Hezbollah terrorists position themselves deep within urban areas, where they use homes and civilians as shields against Israeli counterattacks. In recent years, they have also mastered the technique of disappearing underground.

“This is a very significant challenge because we do not want to hurt innocent bystanders. We’ve more than once that houses that are inhabited by citizens will be harmed…These are military targets that support their war effort.”

In the face of these challenges, the IDF uses precision strikes to eliminate terror targets – a method which also prevents operations from spiraling into wars. “What characterizes [our] air power is our ability to control its impact, and this is very important during incidents of combat between wars,” Maj. Gen. Eshel explained. “Everything is flexible and subject to change. This is the advantage of the air force: the ability to take the hammer that was made for wars and use it in a more limited capacity.”

Click to expand...

Israel: Hezbollah is now stronger than any Arab army

Israel's top military officer warned today that Hezbollah's capabilities have grown substantially since the 2006 war, putting much of Israel within the reach of the Lebanese Shiite militant organization.
By Nicholas Blanford, Correspondent / June 9, 2014

BEIRUT, LEBANON
Israel’s top military officer warned today that Hezbollah is more powerful than most of the world’s armies and that a confrontation between Israel and the Lebanese Shiite militant organization was a near certainty.

While the threat posed by conventional Arab armies has diminished in recent years, Israel now faces highly mobile enemies like Hezbollah, skilled in asymmetric warfare and equipped with advanced weapons systems, Gen. Benny Gantz said. However, the massive destruction Israel can inflict on Hezbollah’s assets and Lebanon’s infrastructure continues to deter Hezbollah from overt aggression against Israel.

“Bring me four or five states that have more firepower than Hezbollah: Russia, China, Israel, France, and England,” he told Israel’s annual security-oriented Herzliya Conference. “What is this enormous power that they [Hezbollah] have that can cover every area of the state of Israel?”

Gantz’s comments reflect Israel's longstanding concern about Hezbollah’s growing might, which has soared in terms of weaponry, technology, and personnel since the two enemies last fought each other in open war in 2006.

Last week, an anonymous Israeli intelligence officer wrote in Israel’s Maarachot military magazine that in the next war, Hezbollah would not merely defend against an Israeli invasion but could make a “ground offensive and multi-pronged attack on Israeli territory."

In the past eight years, the Iran-backed group is believed to have acquired GPS-guided Syrian-manufactured missiles fitted with 1,100-pound warheads with ranges of at least 150 miles. That puts Tel Aviv within range of the Lebanese border. It also has drones that can carry dozens of pounds of explosive. In October 2012, a drone operated by Hezbollah penetrated Israeli airspace in the south before being detected and shot down by Israeli jets.

Hezbollah’s reconnaissance and communications capabilities have also improved. Fighters serving in Syria use thermal imaging cameras to monitor rebel movements and prepare ambushes, including one in February that killed 175 rebel fighters near Otaiba, east of Damascus. It has built a few dozen training camps across the Bekaa Valley in recent years to process the steady influx of new recruits.

But the most significant change may be the crucial combat experience Hezbollah's cadres have gained from fighting in Syria's war on behalf of the regime of President Bashar al-Assad. Hezbollah is credited with helping turn the tide against the rebel forces in the past year, granting Mr. Assad the confidence to hold a presidential election last week that saw him earn his third seven-year term in office in a poll widely derided by the Syrian opposition and the West.

“Iran is investing a lot in Hezbollah in Syria.... Hezbollah is involved up to their necks in it,” Gantz said.

It is fortunate for Israel that Hezbollah's attention is divided between domestic politics, military preparations against Israel, and its intervention in Syria, Gantz said. Fear of a damaging war has served as a mutual deterrence.

“Hezbollah is like a state and they know exactly what is going to happen in Lebanon if they start a war with us, and that this would set Lebanon back decades,” he said.

Despite that, tensions rose in February and March after an Israeli airstrike on a Hezbollah facility in the Bekaa Valley. The target was a 2,450-sq.-ft. utility building, possibly a temporary arms storage facility, beside a track used by Hezbollah to smuggle weapons into Lebanon from neighboring Syria, according to comparisons of satellite imagery on Google Earth.

It was the first Israeli air attack against Hezbollah in Lebanon since 2006. In response, Hezbollah detonated a roadside bomb against Israeli troops on Lebanon’s southern border. It is also thought responsible for staging three other attacks against soldiers in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, wounding four.

Click to expand...

A top Iranian defense official's claim that a U.S. military base in the Indian Ocean is now within missile range served both as a threat to American interests and a revelation that, if true, Tehran has doubled its striking distance.

"In the event of an irrational attack by the U.S., America's military bases will not be safe from our missiles, whether in Bahrain or at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean," the senior official, Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) adviser Mojtaba Zonnour, was quoted as saying to Iran's "Defa Moghadas," or Holy Defense.

"They are not negotiating and never have negotiated in good faith. They are taking us for fools."
- Claire Lopez, Center for Security Policy

The U.S. Navy operates a naval ship and submarine support base, military air base, space-tracking facility at Diego Garcia, an atoll some 1,000 nautical miles off the southern tip of India. If the regime in Tehran really can hit Diego Garcia with its ballistic missiles, it means they have a range of at least 3,100 miles -- more than double current estimates. And the boast came even as Iranian officials were in Switzerland, meeting with their Western counterparts to finalize a nuclear deal.

Zonnour spoke in response to boilerplate U.S. assertions that “all options are on the table,” regarding efforts to force Iran to comply with international efforts to curb its nuclear program. But it was the first time Iran has mentioned Diego Garcia, particularly in the context of a potential missile strike. The base was used to launch sorties into both Iraq and Afghanistan following the 9/11 attacks.

"Diego Garcia is a very critical base in the Indian Ocean," said Claire Lopez, vice president for research and analysis at the Center for Security Policy.

Although Iranian military leaders have often made improbable boasts about their ability to strike at the U.S., Lopez said Zonnour's claim is not so outlandish.

"The Pentagon has more than once issued open-source reports that the Iranian [intercontinental ballistic missiles] would be able to reach the continental U.S. by next year," she noted. "So Diego Garcia may not be such a stretch."

Missile range, coupled with nuclear capability, could make Iran a major threat to its enemies. Western officials accuse the Iranian regime of wanting to maintain a uranium enrichment capability exceeding the limits appropriate for civilian nuclear power stations, while the Iranian regime maintains its program is for peaceful purposes.

U.S. and Iranian officials reconvened in Geneva this week in hopes of breaking the present deadlock regarding a permanent deal with Iran ahead of the July 20 deadline. The P5+1, including the U.S., Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China, agreed on Nov. 24, when the interim deal was announced, to allow for an extension of up to six months if a final deal could not be reached. It was that interim deal that allowed Iran to wriggle out of crippling sanctions imposed by the West.

Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has already mentioned a possible six-month extension if the deadline passes.

"We hope to reach a final agreement but, if this doesn't happen, then we have no choice but to extend the Geneva deal for six more months while we continue negotiations," Araghchi was quoted as saying by Iran's state news agency IRNA. "It's still too early to judge whether an extension will be needed."

The U.S. raised the possibility of limiting Iran's missile program as part of the talks two months ago, prompting Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to say it would be "stupid and idiotic" to expect Iran to comply. Subsequently, he ordered that Tehran's defense contractors to increase production of the missiles, according to reports. The U.S. appears to have scrapped the idea of limiting Iran's missile capabilities, with Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel stating that the P5+1 is focused only on Iran's nuclear program.

The latest threat, coming even as negotiations proceed, is part of Iran's long history of duplicity, said Lopez.

"They are not negotiating and never have negotiated in good faith," she said. "They are taking us for fools. Their nuke program at home continues apace, and whatever is being said in Geneva is irrelevant."

As for the threat, Lopez said the U.S. should listen.

"It's a little foolish not to take seriously a country that not only continuously threatens genocide against Israel, but the U.S. as well, all while developing the means to carry out the threat," she said.

Click to expand...

Broccoli said:

At this moment ISIS has already formed small caliphate.

Click to expand...

Jeff Head said:

And that, IMHO, is their entire objective.

A growing Al Queda led Calliphate. Right now it makes up half of Syria and haf of Iraq. They hope to defeat all of Iraq...but will have a tought to impossible time of controlling the South (IMHO).

They also hope to defeat Assad.

At some point, they will form (and are foriming) a defacto country. That will bode badly for the future in terms of extremists and terror camps and breeding grounds.

I expect they will ally themselves with the Taliban, and that the Taliban and affiliates of these people will make a push to completely control Afghanistan as soon as the US pulls out.

Syria is fighting them. I expect Iran will try and co-op them or bring them into its sphere. If Iran is successful in doing this...Iran will then itself be an effectual calliphate from the middle of Syria to the Pakistan border. If Pakistan falls to them...they will then be nuclear armed and even larger. THey are also making in roads into Africa.

Sadly, I believe all of this is possible in current geo-strategic situation in the Mid-East.

Click to expand...

Jeff Head said:

And that, IMHO, is their entire objective.

A growing Al Queda led Calliphate. Right now it makes up half of Syria and haf of Iraq. They hope to defeat all of Iraq...but will have a tought to impossible time of controlling the South (IMHO).

They also hope to defeat Assad.

At some point, they will form (and are foriming) a defacto country. That will bode badly for the future in terms of extremists and terror camps and breeding grounds.

I expect they will ally themselves with the Taliban, and that the Taliban and affiliates of these people will make a push to completely control Afghanistan as soon as the US pulls out.

Syria is fighting them. I expect Iran will try and co-op them or bring them into its sphere. If Iran is successful in doing this...Iran will then itself be an effectual calliphate from the middle of Syria to the Pakistan border. If Pakistan falls to them...they will then be nuclear armed and even larger. THey are also making in roads into Africa.

Sadly, I believe all of this is possible in current geo-strategic situation in the Mid-East.

Click to expand...

SouthernSky said:

Some very big if's in that post Jeff.

Click to expand...