By WENDELL MINNICK
TAIPEI - For the first time, a new report details China's signals intelligence (SIGINT) organization, including what role the People's Liberation Army (PLA) has in cyber intelligence collection.
The report, "The Chinese People's Liberation Army Signal Intelligence and Cyber Reconnaissance Infrastructure," by Mark Stokes and Jenny Lin of the Project 2049 Institute, Arlington, Va., provides the first overview of the PLA General Staff Department's Third Department, China's premier cryptologic service responsible for signals and cyber intelligence collection.
The Third Department is comparable to the U.S. National Security Agency and appears to be diversifying its traditional SIGINT mission to include cyber surveillance, also known as computer network exploitation (CNE), the report said.
The Third Department's Seventh Bureau (61580 Unit) is responsible for CNE. Headquartered in Beijing, the bureau's engineers specialize in computer network defense and attack, and have conducted joint studies with the PLA Information Engineering Academy Computer Network Attack and Defense Section. The bureau has been known to conduct research outlining U.S. network-centric warfare and dense wavelength-division multiplexing.
CNE also is conducted by the Technical Reconnaissance Bureaus (TRB), Stokes said: "A senior engineer from the Hainan office was granted awards for network-related work, including possible surveillance of Voice over Internet Protocol."
The Chengdu Military Region's 1st Technical Reconnaissance Bureau also may be involved in cyber surveillance.
The degree of control that the Third Department exercises over the Technical Reconnaissance Bureau bureaucracies of the country's seven military regions is unknown, but Third Department's resources dedicated to high-performance computing and its large arsenal of skilled linguists could comprise China's cryptologic "A-Team."
"The combination of SIGINT and CNE, for example, fusing transcripts of phone conversations with intercepted email exchanges, would enable a powerful understanding of plans, capabilities, and activities of an organization or individual in near real time," Stokes said.
China could be cracking down on its own cyber warfare activities. Lt. Gen. Wu Guohua, who directed the Third Department from 2005 to 2010, allegedly was transferred out due to unauthorized cyber attacks.
"If true, it appears that senior civilian leaders could have some understanding of the political damage caused by overt, hostile network penetration," Stokes said.
Another possible reason for the dismissal could be that the Third Department overstepped its area of responsibility. It is possible the PLA has consolidated computer and network attack missions with electronic warfare into an "integrated Network electronic warfare" activity under the Fourth Department, responsible for electronic countermeasures, said Desmond Ball, a SIGINT and cyber warfare specialist at the Australian National University's Strategic and Defence Studies Centre.
"Use of the doctrinal concept of 'integrated network and electronic warfare' implies an attempt to link computer network attack and jamming," Stokes said.
Both the Third and Fourth Departments are said to jointly manage a network attack and defense training system.
Though the U.S. continues to blame China for alleged intrusions into U.S. government and defense industry computer networks, the Chinese believe the U.S. is the attacker.
"Chinese analysts believe that the United States is already carrying out extensive CNE activities against Chinese servers," Stokes said. "Therefore, from the Chinese perspective, defending computer networks must be the highest priority in peacetime."
Ball points to massive internal problems with malicious hackers and possible intrusions from foreign governments. Chinese officials have said that China is the biggest victim of network hacking.
The Beijing-based National Computer Network Emergency Response Technical Coordination Center released a report in March claiming that more than 4,600 Chinese government websites had their content modified by hackers in 2010, an increase of 68 percent over the previous year, Ball said. An incident in 2000 involving a series of high-technology combat exercises by the PLA was suspended when a computer hacker attacked the military's network.
With US troops occupying Iraq and Afghanistan, conducting military operations in Pakistan, Libya, Somalia, and covertly inside Iran, and troops tied up at more than 820 installations in at least 135 countries, America couldn’t offer Japan much help even if they wanted to.
The United States has approximately 38,000 troops stationed in Japan, however they have neither the equipment nor the training to provide the sort of help needed to deal with Japan’s unprecedented disaster. The Wall Street Journal has reported that US military forces were struggling against a myriad of foreseeable and unforeseeable obstacles to provide even a basic response such as surveying the damage or delivering badly needed supplies to disaster victims.
Despite occupying Japan for 66 years, the Wall Street Journal cites “language barriers” as one such obstacle to the US response. Radiological contamination is also cited, despite the treat of North Korean nuclear, biological, and chemical attack and the defense America supposedly provides against it that has been touted for years as a selling point for America’s continued presence in Japanese territory.
The troops, most of which are likely doing their absolute best given what is on hand, are not to be blamed for this humiliating response. It is the politicians and the corporate interests steering them that have left the United States so far stretched it is incapable of responding to a crisis that threatens an “ally” and even its own shores. The botched response to Hurricane Katrina is another good example of this phenomenon in practice.
Adding Insult to Injury
While the globocrats myopically obsessed over exploiting a contrived crisis in Libya, there were smatterings of interest gravitating not around how to mitigate the ongoing disaster in Fukushima, but rather how Japan should rebuild – expressed amongst the pages of the
corporate-funded think-tank reports.
One such report by Brookings Institute’s Robert Pozen titled, “Japan Can Rebuild on New Economic Foundations” includes calls for Japan to throw its borders open, allowing immigrants to solve their aging population dilemma, reforming its political system to undermine spending in rural Japan, and of course, stimulating economic growth with advances in computer technology, drug discovery, and “financial innovation.” Financial innovation is of course creating and marketing new forms of securities (i.e. derivatives.)
The Council on Foreign Relations’ (CFR) Foreign Affairs magazine article “Tokyo’s Turning Point” sees the disaster as an opportunity for Japan to abandon protectionism and embrace the “free-trade” travesty that is the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). The TPP is yet another bid to further mire nations in the disastrous interdependency that is dragging economies from the US and across Europe into a speculative debt black-hole brought on by international bankers.
The article continues by suggesting future military reforms resulting from March 11 should include removing “anachronistic constraints” on JSDF rules of engagement, interoperability with U.S. forces, and participation in international defense industrial collaboration. It also suggests that faith in nuclear power having been shaken, Japan’s dependency on foreign oil will increase, breathing new life into America’s mandate to maintain the security of sea-lanes from Japan’s coast all the way to the Middle East (China’s “String of Pearls.”)
Patrick Cronin of the corporate lined Center for a New American Security (CNAS) concurs point-for-point, in his article “Japan’s New Deal Opportunity.” He also calls for the full integration of Japan’s military into a”NATO-style military interoperability for a range of missions, perhaps starting with humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.” Such “interoperability” and the range of missions Mr. Cronin would like to see Japan take part in as they get back onto their feet, would undoubtedly be greatly beneficial to the military industrial complex that funds his CNAS think-tank.
Some corporate, foundation, and government supporters of CNAS include AT&T, BAE Systems (UK), Bechtel, BGR, Chertoff Group, Chevron, DynCorp, General Dynamics, General Electric Aviation, Google, Honeywell International, KBR, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Blackstone Group, Boeing, Rockefeller Foundation, Tides Foundation, US Air Force, US Army, USMC, US Department of Defense, and the US Navy.
The consensus emanating from these unelected, extra-legal steering committees of Western policy represent a singular fixation on the pursuit of world government through financial and military hegemony.
It is the lens through which all matters are viewed, including the unprecedented tragedy unfolding in Japan. Such myopic megalomaniacal obsession literally costs people their lives, as the priorities set forth but men driven by such an agenda side step real leadership in any given crisis in favor of shameless exploitation.
As Japan upgrades the crisis to a similar level of urgency seen during the Chernobyl disaster, it would seem necessary to mobilize a tremendous amount of engineering and scientific resources, as well as beginning efforts to relocated the millions of people in the path of deadly radiation spewing forth from the multiple damaged reactors on Japan’s eastern coast. Such mobilization is unprecedented and tragically requires leadership the world and its respective nations lack.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the SPY EYES Analysis and or its affiliates. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). SPY EYES Analysis and or its affiliates will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements and or information contained in this article.
Source: www.activistpost.com
Find feeds ‘speculation’ that regime collaborated with nuclear trafficker who helped Gaddafi.
The reported discovery of a previously unknown complex in Syria has raised UN suspicions that Damascus collaborated with Abdul Qadeer Khan, the architect of Pakistan’s nuclear bomb project, to obtain nuclear technology for a covert weapons programme.
The facility near the Iraqi border is almost identical to the design plans for a uranium-enrichment plant provided to Libya as the North African country developed its nuclear weapons programme with the assistance of Mr Khan and his nuclear trafficking network, the Associated Press news agency reported. Officials apparently visited Damascus to investigate last week.
The UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, is also understood to have copies of correspondence between Mr Khan and a Syrian government official, Muhidin Issa, who apparently suggested collaboration following Pakistan’s successful nuclear test in 1998, AP said, citing a former UN investigator. 
There is no evidence, say investigators, that the plant in the city of Al-Hasakah was ever used for nuclear purposes – it is currently in use as a cotton-spinning plant – but its design, combined with the existence of a second suspected nuclear facility bombed by Israeli warplanes in 2007, suggests a strong possibility that Syria was at one point pursuing nuclear-weapons capability much more vigorously than was previously supposed.
Syria has never admitted to having a nuclear-weapons programme. Israel destroyed what the UN believed was a nuclear plant built with the assistance of North Korea that had not yet gone into operation, but Syria has always maintained that the Dair Alzour facility was a non-nuclear military installation, and that the uranium particles subsequently found at the site came from the missiles used to destroy it.
A popular uprising met with a brutal crackdown by the regime has deflected attention from Syria’s nuclear activities in recent months. IAEA officials visited Damascus last week hoping to revive an investigation into Dair Alzour, but there was no tangible sign of progress. Despite the existence of the two complexes, there is little evidence that Syria has actively pursued nuclear weapons since the Dair Alzour facility was destroyed four years ago, nor is there any suggestion that it has resumed its activities now.
But there has long been speculation that Mr Khan offered nuclear technology to Syria – speculation fuelled by the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s admission to an Austrian newspaper in 2007 that the Pakistani expert had contacted government officials but Syria did not respond.
Hailed as the father of Pakistan’s nuclear programme, Mr Khan shocked his countrymen when it emerged in 2004 that he had sold nuclear secrets abroad.
He was found out when nuclear components destined for Muammar Gaddafi’s Libya were seized in 2003 from a German-owned ship.
It subsequently emerged that Mr Khan sold nuclear technology to Iran and North Korea. He made a televised confession to the country that he later retracted and was held under house arrest by the Pakistani authorities until 2009.
Correspondence between Mr Khan and a Syrian official, Mr Issa, in the 1990s suggest that there was at least a tentative approach even if it did not develop into a formal relationship. Mr Issa, then a Deputy Minister of Education, congratulated Pakistan for its nuclear achievement in 1998 and followed up by suggesting some co-operation with Mr Khan and proposed a visit by Syrian officials to Mr Khan’s laboratory, the former UN official told AP.
It was apparently the belief that Mr Khan may have approached Syria that prompted the hunt by UN investigators for the Al-Hasakah complex, and a Kuwaiti newspaper report claiming that Syria had a secret nuclear site in the city enabled them to hone in on the site.
Satellite imagery showed that the complex was almost identical to that of the Libyan-acquired design for a uranium-enrichment plant, down to the covered area providing protection to cars from the sun.
Damascus has reportedly not responded to IAEA requests to visit the site. The IAEA declined to comment on the reports yesterday.
Abdul Khan: Atomic outcast
Abdul Qadeer Khan, 75, is known as the father of Pakistan’s nuclear programme, and is still revered by many in the country as someone who helped it to match its rival India in the arms race. In the West, he is seen as a dangerous nuclear proliferator, who helped pariah regimes including Iran, North Korea and Libya to develop secret weapons programmes.
After working as a nuclear scientist in Europe in the 1970s, Mr Khan returned home, where the authorities threw resources into efforts to develop a weapon, successfully testing a device in 1998.
But under pressure from Washington, Mr Khan confessed in 2004 that he had sold nuclear know-how to other regimes, and has spent most of the intervening years with his movements restricted.
Mines being planted on Lebanon border
Syria is planting landmines along parts of the country’s border with Lebanon as refugees stream out of the country to escape the crackdown on anti-government protests, officials and witnesses say. A Syrian man whose foot had to be amputated after he stepped on a mine just across from the Lebanese village of Irsal on Sunday was the first known victim of the mines, a doctor who treated him in Lebanon said.
Witnesses on the Lebanese side of the border said they have seen Syrian soldiers planting the mines in recent days in the province of Homs and across from Lebanon’s eastern Baalbek region. A Syrian official claimed the mines were meant to prevent arms smuggling into the country. The exodus to Lebanon and Turkey has proven an embarrassment for the President Bashar al-Assad.
WASHINGTON (AFP) – The US military plans to add a new lethal drone to its fleet — a robotic helicopter for the US Navy equipped with laser-guided rockets, defense giant Northrop Grumman said Wednesday.
The armed Fire Scouts will mark a new era in naval warfare, offering an alternative to pilots flying attack helicopters or fighter jets off ships and reflecting a broader shift to robotic technology across the US military over the past several years.
An unarmed version of the MQ-8B Fire Scout is already flying surveillance and reconnaissance missions for the US Navy, using cameras and sensors inside a cone on the aircraft’s nose.
Northrop Grumman won a contract in September worth $17 million to outfit the choppers with racks capable of carrying up to eight 70 mm rockets, with four on each side, the company said.
“The operational system will be delivered by 2013,” company spokesman Warren Comer told AFP.
“By arming the Fire Scout, the navy will have a system that can locate and prosecute targets of interest. This capability shortens the kill chain and lessens the need to put our soldiers in harm’s way,” George Vardoulakis, Northrop’s vice president for tactical unmanned systems, said in a statement.
The Fire Scout had its first flight in December 2006 and is due to be deployed on new littoral combat ships under construction.
The helicopter, which is seven meters (yards) long and three meters high, can reach an altitude of 20,000 feet (6,000 meters), fly at a speed of more than 115 knots (200 kilometers) per hour and stay in the air for more than eight hours, employing sensors and radar to track targets.
The US Navy had a fleet of about 15 Fire Scouts and plans to build 168 of the helicopters, according to the Pentagon.
One of the unmanned helicopters went down in the NATO-led air campaign in June.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the SPY EYES Analysis and or its affiliates. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). SPY EYES Analysis and or its affiliates will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements and or information contained in this article.
Source: www.activistpost.com
Several Israeli government websites crashed on Sunday in what appeared to be a cyber-attack by Anonymous hackers. The websites of the IDF, Mossad and the Shin Bet security services were among the sites that went down, as well as several government portals and ministries.The Israeli army and intelligence agencies' websites were offline.
In a video that was uploaded to YouTube, Anonymous warns that if the siege on Gaza is maintained, it will have no choice but to go on the attack.. "Your actions are illegal, against democracy, human rights, international, and maritime laws," the statement addressed to the government of Israel and posted on Youtube and Anonymous-affiliated sites said. "Justifying war, murder, illegal interception, and pirate-like activities under an illegal cover of defense will not go unnoticed by us or the people of the world."
"If you continue blocking humanitarian vessels to Gaza or repeat the dreadful actions of May 31st, 2010 against any Gaza Freedom Flotillas then you will leave us no choice but to strike back. Again and again, until you stop," the statement said.
Anonymous said that if the siege continues and Israeli forces intercept additional flotillas, or if they conduct additional operations such as the commandeering of the Mavi Marmara, it will have no alternative but to launch repeated cyber-attacks on Israeli computer systems until the siege ends.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the SPY EYES Analysis and or its affiliates. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). SPY EYES Analysis and or its affiliates will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements and or information contained in this article.
Source: www.thehackernews.com
Dear Members,
This is to Inform you that We have changed the URLs of our blogs:
1. SPY EYES Blog will only be used for the News updates.
Blog. http://spyeyesnews.blogspot.com
Facebook Page. https://www.facebook.com/SpyEyesAnalysis
2. SPY EYES Analysis Blog will only be used for the Analysis of the News and Articles by the experts.
Blog. http://spyeyesanalysis.blogspot.com
Facebook Page. https://www.facebook.com/SpyEyesAnalyse
3. Follow Us on Twitter Account:
@spyeyesanalysis
Your support an co operation in this regard is really appreciated.
Thanks for being with us.
Team SPY EYES.
WSJ's Adam Entous details a shift in policy by the U.S. on the use of drones. The change in policy follows complaints after civilians were killed in recent large strikes. Photo: Reuters/U.S. Air Force/Lt Col Leslie Pratt/Handout
The Central Intelligence Agency has made a series of secret concessions in its drone campaign after military and diplomatic officials complained large strikes were damaging the fragile U.S. relationship with Pakistan.
The covert drones are credited with killing hundreds of suspected militants, and few U.S. officials have publicly criticized the campaign, or its rapid expansion under President Barack Obama. Behind the scenes, however, many key U.S. military and State Department officials demanded more-selective strikes. That pitted them against CIA brass who want a free hand to pursue suspected militants.
Agence France-Presse/Getty Images
Chanting marchers carry a replica of a U.S. drone during a recent protest in Islamabad, Pakistan.
The disputes over drones became so protracted that the White House launched a review over the summer, in which Mr. Obama intervened.
The review ultimately affirmed support for the underlying CIA program. But a senior official said: "The bar has been raised. Inside CIA, there is a recognition you need to be damn sure it's worth it."
Getty Images
Among the changes: The State Department won greater sway in strike decisions; Pakistani leaders got advance notice about more operations; and the CIA agreed to suspend operations when Pakistani officials visit the U.S.
The Pakistan drone debate already seems to be influencing thinking about the U.S. use of drones elsewhere in the world. In Yemen, the CIA used the pilotless aircraft in September to kill American-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, a suspected terrorist. But the White House has for now barred the CIA from attacking large groups of unidentified lower-level militants there.
The CIA concessions were detailed by high-level officials in a series of interviews with The Wall Street Journal. But in a measure of the discord, administration officials have different interpretations about the outcome of the White House review. While some cast the concessions as a "new phase" in which the CIA would weigh diplomacy more heavily in its activities, others said the impact was minimal and that the bar for vetting targets has been consistently high.
"Even if there are added considerations, the program—which still has strong support in Washington—remains as aggressive as ever," said a U.S. official.
Last year, Mr. Obama expanded the CIA program to 14 drone "orbits." Each orbit usually includes three drones, sufficient to provide constant surveillance over tribal areas of Pakistan. The CIA's fleet of drones includes Predators and larger Reapers. The drones carry Hellfire missiles and sometimes bigger bombs, can soar to an altitude of 50,000 feet and reach cruise speeds of up to 230 miles per hour.
The drone program over the past decade has moved from a technological oddity to a key element of U.S. national-security policy. The campaign has killed more than 1,500 suspected militants on Pakistani soil since Mr. Obama took office in 2009, according to government officials.
To some degree, the program has become a victim of its own success. Critics question whether aggressive tactics are necessary following the eradication of senior al Qaeda leaders in Pakistan, including Osama bin Laden, killed in a helicopter raid by Navy Seals in May after drone and satellite surveillance of the compound where he was living.
Many officials at the Pentagon and State Department privately argued the CIA pays too little attention to the diplomatic costs of air strikes that kill large groups of low-level fighters. Such strikes inflame Pakistani public opinion. Observers point to the rising power in Pakistan of political figures like Imran Khan, who held large rallies to protest the drones and could challenge the current government.
All this comes at a time when the State Department is trying to enlist Pakistan's help in advancing peace talks with the Taliban, a key element of a White House drive to end the war in neighboring Afghanistan. Top officials of the CIA, Pentagon, State Department and National Security Council have been pulled into the debate. Among those voicing concerns was Gen. David Petraeus, who commanded the war in Afghanistan before becoming CIA director in September. A senior intelligence official said Gen. Petraeus voiced "caution against strikes on large groups of fighters."
Changing the handling of the drone program doesn't mean the CIA is pulling back. The agency in recent weeks has intensified strikes in Pakistan focusing on the militant Haqqani network, a group believed to be behind a series of attacks in Afghanistan. The Pentagon and State Department have backed those strikes as serving U.S. interests.
The debate in Washington was fueled by a particularly deadly drone strike on March 17. It came at a low point in U.S.-Pakistani relations, just a day after Pakistan agreed after weeks of U.S. pressure to release a CIA contractor who had killed two Pakistanis.
Infuriated Pakistani leaders put the death toll from the drone strike at more than 40, including innocent civilians. American officials say about 20 were killed, all militants.
The March 17 attack was a "signature" strike, one of two types used by the CIA, and the most controversial within the administration. Signature strikes target groups of men believed to be militants associated with terrorist groups, but whose identities aren't always known. The bulk of CIA's drone strikes are signature strikes.
The second type of drone strike, known as a "personality" strike, targets known terrorist leaders and has faced less internal scrutiny.
Signature strikes were first used under former President George W. Bush. His administration began arming unmanned aircraft to hunt al Qaeda leaders in Afghanistan immediately after the Sept. 11 attacks. As al Qaeda militants fled to Pakistan, the CIA began a secret drone program there, with quiet backing from Islamabad.
For the first years, U.S. officials used drones only to target known, top terror suspects. The drone strikes quickly became unpopular with the Pakistani public. In 2008, when Pakistani leaders bowed to public pressure and began to block U.S. requests for strikes, President Bush authorized a major expansion, allowing the CIA to conduct strikes, including signature strikes, without Pakistani permission.
Initially, the CIA was skeptical of the value of expending resources on lower-level operatives through signature strikes, a former senior intelligence official said. Military officials, however, favored the idea. The debate eventually would lead to the CIA and the military reversing their initial positions.
Mr. Obama was an early convert to drones. The CIA has had freedom to decide who to target and when to strike. The White House usually is notified immediately after signature strikes take place, not beforehand, a senior U.S. official said.
The program had some early skeptics, but their concerns gained little traction. Dennis Blair, Mr. Obama's first director of national intelligence, recommended that the CIA measure the program's effectiveness beyond numbers of dead militants, U.S. officials said. It didn't happen.
The CIA and the State Department had been at odds for months over the use of drones. Tensions flared with the arrival in Islamabad late last year of a new ambassador, Cameron Munter, who advocated more judicious use of signature strikes, senior officials said.
On at least two occasions, Leon Panetta, then the CIA director, ignored Mr. Munter's objections to planned strikes, a senior official said. One came just hours after Sen. John Kerry, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, visited Islamabad.
State Department diplomats weren't alone in their concerns. Adm. Mike Mullen, then the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and other military leaders, who initially favored more aggressive CIA methods, began to question that approach.
The debate erupted after the March 17 strike, when National Security Advisor Tom Donilon and others at the White House, taken aback by the number of casualties and Pakistan's sharp reaction, questioned whether the CIA should for large groups, at times, hold its fire. Officials asked what precautions were being taken to aim at highly valued targets, rather than foot soldiers.
"Donilon and others said, 'O.K., I got it; it's war and it's confusing. Are we doing everything we can to make sure we are focused on the target sets we want?'" said a participant in the discussions. "You can kill these foot soldiers all day, every day and you wouldn't change the course of the war."
A senior Obama administration official declined to comment on Mr. Donilon's closed-door discussions but said that he wasn't second-guessing the CIA's targeting methodology and pointed to his long-standing support for the program. The official said the White House wanted to use the drone program smartly to pick off al Qaeda leaders and the Haqqanis. "It's about keeping our eyes on the ball," the official said.
In the spring, military leaders increasingly found themselves on the phone with Mr. Panetta and his deputy urging restraint in drone attacks, particularly during periods when the U.S. was engaging in high-level diplomatic exchanges with Pakistan. "Whenever they got a shot [for a drone attack], they just took it, regardless of what else was happening in the world," a senior official said.
Mr. Panetta made his first concession in an April meeting with his Pakistani counterpart. He told Lt. Gen. Ahmad Shuja Pasha that the U.S. would tell the Pakistanis ahead of time about strikes expected to kill more than 20 militants, officials said.
The debate over the future of the drone program intensified after the death of Osama bin Laden the next month. Pakistani leaders were embarrassed that the U.S. carried out the operation in their country, undetected. They demanded an end to the signature drone strikes.
Mr. Donilon, the National Security Advisor, launched a broad review of Pakistan policy, including the drone program. Officials said the internal debate that ensued was the most serious since the signature strikes were expanded in 2008.
CIA officials defended the signature strikes by saying they frequently netted top terrorists, not just foot soldiers. Twice as many wanted terrorists have been killed in signature strikes than in personality strikes, a U.S. counterterrorism official said.
Adm. Mullen argued that the CIA needed to be more selective. Then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates feared that the Pakistanis, if pushed too hard, would block the flow of supplies to troops in Afghanistan, officials said.
For Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who has supported the CIA's strikes in the vast majority of cases, the biggest focus has been to make sure political ramifications are properly assessed to avoid a situation where the political opposition in Pakistan becomes so great that the country's current or future leaders decide to bar the drones outright.
Independent information about who the CIA kills in signature strikes in Pakistan is scarce. The agency tells U.S. and Pakistani officials that there have been very few civilian deaths—only 60 over the years. But some senior officials in both governments privately say they are skeptical that civilian deaths have been that low.
Some top officials in the White House meetings this summer argued for a broader reassessment. "The question is, 'Is it even worth doing now? We've got the key leadership in al Qaeda, what is it that we're there for now?" one of the officials recalled some advisers asking.
The White House review culminated in a Situation Room meeting with Mr. Obama in June in which he reaffirmed support for the program.
But changes were made. Mr. Obama instituted an appeals procedure to give the State Department more of a voice in deciding when and if to strike. If the U.S. ambassador to Pakistan objected to a strike, for example, the CIA director or his deputy would first try to talk through their differences with the ambassador. If the conflict was unresolved, the secretary of state would appeal directly to the CIA director. If they couldn't reach agreement, however, the CIA director retained the final say.
Since the changes were made, officials say internal tensions over the strikes have eased and agencies were acting more in concert with each other.
Though Mr. Petraeus voiced a preference for smaller drone strikes, officials said the agency has the leeway to carry out large-scale strikes and hasn't been formally directed to go after only higher-value targets and avoid foot soldiers. Since Mr. Petraeus's arrival at CIA, some strikes on larger groups have taken place, the senior intelligence official said.
To reduce the number of CIA strikes on Pakistani soil, the military moved more of its own drones into position on the Afghan side of the border with Pakistan, according to participants in the discussions. That makes it easier for the CIA to "hand off" suspected militants to the U.S. military once they cross into Afghanistan, rather than strike them on Pakistani soil, U.S. officials said.
U.S.-Pakistani relations remain troubled, but Islamabad recently expanded intelligence cooperation and has toned down its opposition to the drone strikes, both in public and private, officials said. Pakistani officials had sought advance notice, and greater say, over CIA strikes so they could try to mitigate the public backlash.
"It's not like they took the car keys away from the CIA," a senior official said. "There are just more people in the car."
—Jay Solomon contributed to this article.
Courtesy: The Wall Street Journal
Washington: The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has created a compound for focusing on different aspects of espionage and for this purpose agency following upto 5 million tweets a day.
According to a feature article on the Associated Press, The CIA’s Open Source Center reviews and analyzes information widely available to the general public, including Twitter and Facebook, and keeps eyes on everything from blogs to tweets to more traditional media.
Along with the vast resources of the agency, the real-time information from an angry blog post to a tweet sent from a BlackBerry, location-based data is gathered and tied to a made phone call to collect as much information as possible. This gives those in the highest offices of the U.S. government a specific picture of a certain place, at a certain time, to predict when an event that may cause national instability, diplomatic harm or suchlike could occur.
The report goes on to suggest that the White House, courtesy of the intelligence gathered from the vast array of resources at their disposal, from the publicly-available content provided by citizens and journalists alike, “saw the uprising in Egypt coming”, but they did not know exactly when it would strike.
When President Barack Obama gave a speech addressing Middle Eastern issues a few weeks later, the center monitored negative Arabic and Turkic tweets denouncing the president as too pro-Israel, and Hebrew tweets criticizing the president for being too pro-Arab.
The center’s of analysis ends up in Obama’s daily intelligence briefing in some form almost every day, reports the AP.
The CIA started reviewing social media after watching Twitter’s influence during the 2009 Green Revolution in Iran, when thousands protested the contested results of an election that kept Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in office.
ISLAMABAD - Opposition benches in the Senate have strongly protested against giving Most Favoured Nation (MFN) status to India by the federal cabinet as well as the decision of two weekly offs by government.
Jamaat-i-Islami Senator Professor Khurshid Ahmad said according MFN status by cabinet to India runs counter to the desires of the people and this decision has been taken without taking parliament into confidence.
“We are not opposed to trade but national interest should be kept supreme in this regard. Our fiscal deficit will further grow owing to trade with India and India will be the main beneficiary in this way”, he cautioned. India has been declared MFN under US pressure, he charged.
Speaking on points of orders, members said two holidays a week were affecting the common man more while bureaucracy was enjoying them. In addition the economy was daily suffering losses of billions of rupees. Prof Khurshid said two holidays are against the interest of the country as it were causing Rs20 to 25 billion losses daily. He said the decision of two holidays was taken by the cabinet and it must bear the responsibility.
Speaking on a point of order ANP Senator Ilyas Bilour said that the house would like to know how much electricity was being saved from the decision. He said he had submitted an adjournment motion on two holidays but it has not been brought to the house. He said with the onset of winter, ACs and fans were not being used in offices and the two holidays were of no benefit to the country. He said the country was already in deep economic crisis and two holidays would further negatively impact it.
PML-Q Senator Wasim Sajjad said that in any country holidays are announced in line with traditions and economic conditions. He said two weekly offs are observed in those countries whose economy is vibrant. No holiday is observed on birth and death anniversaries of its national leaders in UK, for example. In Pakistan, only one holiday is being observed since independence and we cannot afford more holidays. The country cannot afford two weekly offs, he added. JUI-F Senator Azam Khan Swati said problems cannot be resolved through adhoc arrangements. He was of the view that people would have to come to the street to force the rulers to attend to their problems.
Opposition and treasury benches also voiced their strong protest against non-presence of ministers in the house. Senate Acting Vice Chairman Jan Muhammad Jamali adjourned the session for 10 minutes in protest against the absence of ministers.
Taking serious note on the issue, Senate presiding officer directed chief whip and leader of the house to ensure presence of ministers in next session and bring the matter to the notice of the prime minister.
Senator Safdar Abbasi regretted that federal cabinet lacked discipline. Ministers were staging walk out from cabinet meeting, he said, adding that one minister had approached Supreme Court against the government. Cabinet had been split up and there was disorder of top order in the ranks of cabinet, he remarked. He pointed out that funds have not been released to Senators. The prime minister holds Rs28 billion under discretionary funds head then as to why he was not releasing Rs2 billion, he questioned.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the SPY EYES Analysis and or its affiliates. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). SPY EYES Analysis and or its affiliates will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements and or information contained in this article.
Source: www.nation.com.pk
Luis Moreno-Ocampo, the court’s chief prosecutor, told the United Nations yesterday that Nato troops would be investigated alongside rebel soldiers and regime forces for alleged breaches of the laws of war during the battle to overthrow Col Muammar Gaddafi.
As well as the original charges that Gaddafi and his close family perpetrated attacks on Libyan civilians, there are a series of complaints about the Western alliance and its allies in the National Transitional Council (NTC) under consideration.
“There are allegations of crimes committed by Nato forces, allegations of crimes committed by NTC-related forces … as well as allegations of additional crimes committed by pro-Gaddafi forces,” said Mr Moreno-Ocampo. “`These allegations will be examined impartially and independently by the prosecution.”
In the last weeks of the war, the Gaddafi regime alleged that 85 civilians were killed in a Nato air strike near the front line town of Ziltan. Khaled Hemidi, a regime general, filed a lawsuit before a Belgian civil court in Brussels accusing Nato of killing his wife and three children in an air strike on June 20 near the town of Surman.
Mr Moreno-Ocampo also said that reports continued to emerge that Gaddafi’s son, Saif, is trying to flee Libya with the help of mercenaries. He said his organisation had “received questions from individuals linked to Saif al-Islam about the legal conditions attaching to his potential surrender”.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the SPY EYES Analysis and or its affiliates. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). SPY EYES Analysis and or its affiliates will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements and or information contained in this article.
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
Islamabad: Federal Minister for Information and Broadcasting Dr. Firdous Ashiq Awan has said that all the stakeholders, including Pakistan Army were taken on board regarding the issue of giving MFN status to India.
Talking to media after the cabinet meeting, the minister said that, trade relations with India and the decision to declare India as most favourite nation would not affect Kashmir cause. She added that Pakistan would benefit from the step as up to $800 million could be earned through the bilateral trade.
The minister said that the parliament would give final approval in this regard.
A UN report has affirmed that Israel's blockade on the impoverished Gaza Strip is illegal and demanded an immediate end to it.
This came in the 43rd report that was submitted to the UN general assembly during its 66th session by the special committee that is commissioned to probe and report about Israel's violations against the Palestinians in the occupied territories.
The report mentioned at length the blockade imposed by Israel on Gaza and its impacts on education, health, housing, employment and human development.
It condemned Israel's actions against Gaza as mass punishment against civilians, and a violation of the international humanitarian law, adding that Israel also violated its obligations under international law of human rights.
The committee demanded Israel to end its illegal blockade on Gaza and ensure regular and adequate entry of food, medicines and other vital need to it in compliance with resolution 1860 that was issued by the UN security council in 2009.
The committee also called on Israel to end its restrictions on fishing activities in Gaza territorial waters and allow Palestinian fishermen to go 20 nautical miles out to sea according to the Oslo accords it signed in 1994.
The committee recommended in its report that the UN security council and its general assembly should consider imposing sanctions against the Israeli government for its persistent refusal to cooperate with UN bodies and respect their resolutions.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the SPY EYES Analysis and or its affiliates. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). SPY EYES Analysis and or its affiliates will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements and or information contained in this article.
Source: www.palestine-info.co.uk
WASHINGTON: The United States said Monday it is stopping financial contributions to UNESCO after the Palestinians were admitted to the organization as a full member.
The United States also acknowledged that it could lose international influence as it would lose its right to vote in the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization if it makes no payments over the next two years.
“We were to have made a 60 million dollar payment to UNESCO in November and we will not be making that payment,” State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told reporters.
Nuland said the Palestinian admission “triggers longstanding (US) legislative restrictions which will compel the United States to refrain from making contributions to UNESCO.” The United States, Israel’s top ally, in the 1990s banned the financing of any UN organization that accepts Palestine as a full member. The United States provides about 22 per cent of the UNESCO annual budget.
The November payment amounts to a tranche of what US officials say is a total annual US contribution of $80 million to the UN organization.
Nuland echoed earlier remarks by the White House which said UNESCO’s admission of the Palestinians as a full member was “premature” and undermined international peace efforts and hopes of direct talks on a Palestinian state.
The vote, backed by 107 countries in UNESCO, was a symbolic victory for the Palestinian drive towards full statehood recognition.
But the United States, which has vowed to block a separate Palestinian call for statehood recognition at the UN Security Council, believes the campaign detracts from tough bargaining needed with Israel on the terms of a Palestinian state.
Nuland said the United States is aware its own interests could be undermined by its decision to withhold funding to UNESCO.
“Under UNESCO’s constitution, a member state will have no vote in the general conference if it gets more than two years in arrears in its contribution. So our actual arrearage status will begin in January,” she said.
“We now need to have consultations with Congress,” she said.
“Not paying our dues into these organizations could severely restrict and reduce our ability to influence them, our ability to act within them, and we think this affects US interests,” Nuland said.
“So we need to have conversations with Congress about what options might be available to protect our interests,” she said, declining to elaborate.
She conceded that one option would be to gain some sort of flexibility where Washington can still fund UNESCO.
Nuland said the United States is also concerned it could lose influence with other UN organizations if the Palestinians are admitted to them as a full member and Washington is automatically forced to withhold funds.
“We are very concerned about it, which is why we didn’t want it to happen in the first place and why we’re concerned about this move being replicated in other UN agencies,” she said.
State Department and other US officials met business leaders on Monday to warn them that Palestinian membership in the World Intellectual Property Organization could hurt US leadership in the group, the State Department said.
They noted that the organization helps US firms protect their intellectual property rights worldwide, it said.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the SPY EYES Analysis and or its affiliates. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). SPY EYES Analysis and or its affiliates will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements and or information contained in this article.
Source: www.dawn.com
Posts
