The US and Japan are preparing for a possible Chinese invasion of the Senkaku Islands. Using a small island off the coast of California, US and Japanese forces are mimicking an armed invasion and an amphibious assault to prepare for a real-life scenario.

The unprecedented drills, code-named Dawn Blitz, are being conducted on San Clemente Island, which is 75 miles northwest of San Diego, the Christian Science Monitor reports.  They began with an assault led by 80 US Marines and three MV-22 Osprey aircraft, and were followed by a Japanese counterattack using 1,000 troops and two warships. Although Japanese officials claim they are not preparing to target a third country, the exercises have made Chinese officials uncomfortable.

China and Japan have long disputed the Senkaku Islands, which are located in the East China Sea but which the Japanese government purchased from private owners in 2012. The islands are uninhabited, but believed to hold rich oil and gas deposits. The purchase triggered violent protests that tens of thousands of Chinese took part in, and harmed Sino-Japanese relations.

In the months after the purchase, the Chinese navy practiced military exercises near the islands, and joint US-Japanese naval drills subsequently occurred in the waters of the island chain. The latest drills off the California coast are only adding to tensions regarding the Senkaku Islands. Chinese officials reportedly objected to the drills, but their concerns were ignored by Washington, the Christian Science Monitor reports.

"We're aware of China's objections, but from a Japanese and US perspective, the object of the exercise is to build a powerful deterrent and demonstrate that the two forces are seamlessly connected – to show the Chinese that they are battle-ready," an official source familiar with Dawn Blitz told the Monitor on condition of anonymity. "There is nothing unusual in that."

The exercises began just two days after President Obama met with Chinese leader Xi Jinping at a California summit on June 8. But even though some believe the US is in a tricky position, the official does not believe the US is in the wrong, since the US-Japan security treaty requires the country to help Japan deter any attacks on its territory.

"I don't think Dawn Blitz puts the US in a tricky position," the official said. "They started the drill just after the Obama-Xi summit to avoid any diplomatic repercussions. But the fact that Japan and the US went ahead with the exercise also sends a message – that they are on the same page when it comes to deterring possible Chinese aggression."

Lt. Gen. Koichi Isobe, Japan’s vice chief of staff, told reporters that Japan’s self-defense forces (SDF) need to develop the capabilities to ward off any attacks that might occur on the remote islands.

"The defense of remote islands is a pressing issue, but the SDF [Japan's self-defense forces] has just begun training to develop such capabilities, which are required of US Marines," Japan's vice chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Koichi Isobe, told reporters. "Japan needs to determine its defense strategy and procure necessary equipment and train SDF members for this purpose."

The US has publicly refused to take sides regarding the Senkaku Islands, but its training exercises with Japan may inadvertently cause a shift in its neutrality.

US military commanders are examining ways the US could bolster security in Syria’s neighboring countries, and have recommended sending military trainers to Lebanon and Iraq.

Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, on Wednesday revealed US plans to strengthen military assistance in Lebanon and Iraq as the conflict in Syria begins to spill over its borders. Dempsey noted that Iraq is suffering the re-emergence of al-Qaeda. Terrorist fighters, including members of the al Nusra Front, are crossing from Iraq into Syria, he said.

"We've made a recommendation that as we look at the challenges faced by the Lebanese armed forces, the Iraqi security forces with a re-emerging al Qaeda in Iraq, and the Jordanians, that we would work with them to help them build additional capability," Dempsey told reporters at the Pentagon on Wednesday.

To strengthen US security assistance in the region, he recommends that the US accelerate arms sales and send military training teams to Lebanon and Iraq. He already asked Gen. Lloyd Austin, the head of the US Central Command, to consider small deployments in upcoming weeks, Dempsey spokesman Col. Edward Thomas told CNN.

Thomas said that “it’s in the realm of the possible” that training teams will be sent back into Iraq – a move that would mark the first significant deployment since the US withdrew its troops in 2011. Dempsey emphasized that the US was not sending combat troops into Lebanon or Iraq, but noted that a Patriot missile battery and about a dozen F-16 fighter jets had already been left in Jordan, bringing the total number of American forces in the country to 1,000.

"Militarily, what we're doing is assisting our partners in the region, the neighbors of Syria, to ensure that they're prepared to account for the potential spillover effects," Dempsey said during Pentagon briefing. "As you know, we've just taken a decision to leave some Patriot missile batteries and some F-16s in Jordan as part of the defense of Jordan. We're working with our Iraqi counterparts, the Lebanese Armed Forces and Turkey through NATO."

Syria’s two-year war has already killed more than 100,000 people, and both Iraq and Lebanon have witnessed an increase in violence as the Syrian conflict has divided supporters of President Bashar al-Assad and the Syrian rebels.

Ali al-Moussawi, the media adviser for Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki, on Thursday told AP that Baghdad would be welcome to increased arms sales and US training teams to address instability in the region.

The US has long maintained that its involvement in the conflict would be limited. But if military commanders agree to send trainers to the region, the US would have a more direct role in addressing the violence along the Syrian border.

“When you say would we send the United States Army or the United States military into Lebanon, I'm talking about teams of trainers, and I'm talking about accelerating foreign military sales for equipment for them," Dempsey said, trying to reassure Americans that combat troops would not be deployed. "This is about building their capability, not ours."

Members of the Free Syrian Army aim their weapons as they take up a defensive position in Aleppo's Salaheddine district June 25, 2013.(Reuters / Hamid Khatib)

 The CIA is stockpiling arms in Jordan for US-trained Syrian rebels, which they will use in an offensive against Damascus starting August, according to The Wall Street Journal. Up to hundreds of fighters are to be armed and sent to the battlefield monthly.

The intelligence agency had stored Soviet-made arms at a network of secret warehouses in advance of the Obama administration’s decision to provide military assistance to the militants fighting against the government of Bashar Assad, the newspaper reports. The weapons include anti-tank missiles, which may be handed over to the Syrian rebels.

The CIA was chosen to deliver arms to the Syrian revels to limit public disclosures and restrict oversight to a small group of lawmakers, who would oversee the clandestine operation, the report explains.

Other countries may join the US program for arming the rebels. Washington is in talks with France about pre-positioning European-procured weapons in Jordan. Saudi Arabia is expected to provide some portable anti-aircraft weapons as well, the WSJ says.

The weapons are meant for Syrian rebels trained by US instructors, the report says. The CIA says it has an “elaborate” vetting system, which will supposedly prevent the American-trained and armed fighters from joining jihadist forces among the anti-Assad troops. The agency may co-opt aid from the US special operations forces and similar units in other countries like Jordan and the United Arab Emirates to train the rebels, the report says.

Up to several hundred troops may be sent into Syrian territory every month under the program, the newspaper says, citing diplomatic sources. The rebel troops will be deployed starting early August and will need four to five months before making “a meaningful difference” in the Syrian civil war, unnamed US officials told WSJ.

Earlier media reports said the CIA played an important part in funneling weapons, which countries like Qatar and Saudi Arabia have been smuggling to Syrian rebels for more than a year. The participation was expected to prevent the arms from ending in the hands of Al-Qaeda-linked militants fighting in Syria.

A Free Syrian Army fighter cleans his weapons.(Reuters / Muzaffar Salman)

  The Obama administration announced plans to provide military support to rebel forces this month after accusing the Assad government of using chemical weapons against rebel forces. Earlier, similar allegations came from France and UK. The UN and several nations, including Russia, said the evidence of the alleged chemical attacks by the Syria army, which the US showed them, was inconclusive.

Two separate reports on the issue sent to the UN by the US and Britain described 10 cases of suspected use of chemical weapons in Syria, a UN diplomat told AP on Wednesday. The US accuses Damascus of being behind at least two of those, according to a letter sent by US envoy to the UN Susan Rice to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

The US and Russia are engaged in a joint effort to arrange a peace conference in Geneva, with hopes of paving the way for a political solution to the Syrian crisis. The conference is meant to gather all parties with stakes in the conflict to agree on a way to end the bloodshed, which has already claimed an estimated 100,000 lives.

The effort however is stalled by a number of obstacles, including the differences over who should get invited. Damascus objected to Saudi Arabia’s participation, while some of the organizers stood against inviting Syria’s ally Iran. There is no unity among the opposition forces over their participation and representation.

Amid the ongoing organizational problems, the planned date of the conference has been postponed several times. UN peace envoy to Syria Lakhdar Brahimi said Tuesday he didn’t expect the meeting to happen before August.

After the US announced plans for arming Syrian rebels, Moscow, Washington’s partner in organizing the peace conference, said the move didn’t help their joint effort.

Members of the Free Syrian Army walk down the stairs holding their weapons in Aleppo's Salaheddine district.(Reuters / Hamid Khatib)

Launching the stern of the first Russian Mistral type dock assault helicopter carrier "Vladivostok" at the Baltic Shipyard. (RIA Novosti)

The stern portion of the first Russian Mistral-class helicopter carrier has been launched in St. Petersburg and will sail to France, where its body is to be assembled. It is due to be completed in October, and its twin will be delivered in 2014.

A bottle of champagne was smashed on Wednesday on the new helicopter-carrying amphibious assault ship ‘Vladivostok’ to celebrate the timely launch of its stern part, RT’s Maria Finoshina reports from St. Petersburg’s Baltiysky shipyard.

The launch follows the pledge by Russia’s Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin that the ship “will be ready on time,” and return from France fitted with its bow this October. By this he refuted the earlier remarks by a defense official that the stern might not be completed within deadline.

A scale model of Mistral helicopter carrier showcased at the 2011 International Maritime Defence Show at St. Petersburg's Lenexpo exhibition center. (RIA Novosti)

  In October 2014, the second Mistral-class ship will be delivered to Russia, Rogozin added, referring to the helicopter carrier ‘Sevastopol’, which was laid at the DCNS shipyard in France's Saint-Nazaire on June 18.

The Mistral-class multipurpose ships have enough capacity to carry 16 helicopters, up to 40 tanks and some 600 troops. With addition of their operational range of nearly 40,000km, the new-generation vessels are said to be of a strategic importance for the Russian navy.

“This ship is like a Swiss knife, it can be used both for military and civilian purposes. It’s a hospital, it’s a command point, it’s an assault ship, and it’s a headquarters. It would be great for each of our four fleets to have that ship,” military expert Ruslan Pukhov told RT. 

Mistral class amphibious assault ship (AFP Photo)

Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, Hezbollah’s secretary-general, announced his party’s entry into the Syrian conflict on May 25, 2013. The Syrian National Coalition immediately denounced Hezbollah while the US Department of State reacted to Nasrallah’s announcement on May 29 by demanding an immediate withdrawal of Hezbollah’s fighters from Syria. The rubber stamp Arab League would eventually, and very predictability, condemn Hezbollah’s entry into the Syrian conflict, whereas it has ignored the involvement of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and their allies. 

Qusayr, situated on the road between Damascus and the Mediterranean coastline of Syria in the northwestern portion of the Syrian Governate of Homs, would become a central focus of Hezbollah’s involvement inside Syria. After the victory in Qusayr, the war hawk Charles Krauthammer would embarrassingly proclaim that the US was hesitating too much while Russia and Iran were taking charge of the situation in Syria with Hezbollah.

The US had not hesitated in reality, but had failed to topple the government in Damascus. Most probably prompted by the pressure of their Saudi and Qatar paymasters, Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood government would react to the victory in Qusayr by cutting its ties with Syria, calling for a no-fly zone, and attacking Hezbollah for its involvement in the Syrian conflict. As an indicator of the failure of its regime change project, the Obama Administration would leak to the press that it was considering a no-fly zone too. Ironically, Egypt’s President Morsi and many of the same people that criticize Hezbollah, Iran, and Russia for their involvement in Syria refuse to criticize Turkish, Saudi, Qatari, British, French, Jordanian, Israeli, and American involvement.

Undoubtedly Hezbollah did discuss its intentions to enter the Syrian conflict with its patrons in Tehran and coordinated with Iran and then, to a lesser extent, with Russia through Iranian officials and through consultations with Aleksandr Zasypkin, Russia’s ambassador to Lebanon, and then Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov during his April 2013 visit to Beirut. The involvement of Hezbollah in Syria, however, is purely defensive. Moreover, Hezbollah is one of the last external players to be involved in Syria.

It is the same type of reports that constantly claim there is a substantial Iranian military presence in Syria, but can never manage to give solid proof or any form of confirmation about their claims, that are the ones that simplistically de-contextualize Hezbollah’s involvement in Syria. For example, rockets were launched into Dahiyeh, the working class southern suburb of Beirut that is the political stronghold of Hezbollah in Lebanon’s capital district, and the town of Hermel, in Bekaa, hours after Nasrallah announced his party would enter the Syrian conflict.

Most reports about this failed to recognize the nature of the rocket attacks. The rocket strikes were more than a mere warning from the anti-government forces inside Syria, in fact they were part of a steady stream of escalation that deliberately aimed at expanding the war into Lebanon and spreading the fires of sedition. Attacks were being conducted in areas inhabited by Hezbollah supporters much earlier and before Hezbollah even intervened in Syria. Whether it is done intentionally or unintentionally, this type of reporting conceals the fact that Hezbollah intervened in Syria mainly to protect itself and Lebanon’s diverse population, and it fails to identify who the real perpetrators of the violence are. The mainstream media in places like the US and UK also fails to mention that key divisions of the anti-government forces inside Syria have sworn to kill all the Shiite Muslims they get their hands on, and to march straight into Lebanon after Syria. 

Syrians and Lebanese wave Syria's former independence flag which has been adopted by the rebels forces fighting agianst Syrian pro-government forces in Syria, and the green Sunni Muslim Jamaa Islamiya flag as they gather in the main sports stadium in the southern Lebanese city of Sidon on June 9, 2013 in solidarity with the Syrian central city of Qusayr which fell to government forces, aided by Lebanon's Hezbollah fighters, earlier in the week. (AFP Photo)

 From the beginning of the Syrian conflict Hezbollah agreed that the Syrian people should have the democratic freedoms that Hezbollah itself enjoys in Lebanon and it has agreed that Syria is in need of political reforms. Its entry into the Syrian conflict is aimed at preventing the takfiri death squads that have amassed in Syria from marching against Lebanon and committing the same type of crimes in the towns and homes of the Lebanese people they have been committing against the Syrian people. Because the takfiris have announced that they will purge the Levant of the Shiite Muslims and all others that they do not accept, the conflict was unavoidable. Rather than wait, Hezbollah chose to act in a war that the anti-government forces in Syria deliberately initiated against Hezbollah through a stream of assaults on the Shiites living on the Lebanese-Syrian border. As a preview of what is in store for the Shiites, after their defeat in Qusayr, the anti-government militias marched into Hatla and massacred many of its residents, including old people and young children who all had their throats slit. One video of the massacre titled “The storming and cleansing of Hatla” surfaced with the man filming it stating that all the Shia Muslims would suffer the same fate. What happened in Hatla, including stories about vicious rapes and mutilations, has only strengthened the support in Lebanon for Hezbollah’s intervention.

Hezbollah is protecting Lebanon and the Levant’s minority groups

On July 14, Nasrallah went on Lebanese television to say that Hezbollah was fighting to defend both the people of Lebanon and Syria from the abominations of “an American, Israeli and takfiri project to destroy not only Syria but the entire region.” Speaking on Al-Manar, he told his supporters and allies that the entire world had gone to Syria to fight in one way or another using their money or shipping weapons or through media warfare. It was only natural for Hezbollah as one of the main targets of the war to get involved. He added that the Lebanese government had unfortunately failed to protect the 30,000 Lebanese Christians and Muslims that have been attacked by the Syrian anti-government forces on their borders. Hezbollah acted to protect them. Nasrallah’s sentiments are widely shared inside and outside Lebanon.  According to Mohsen Saleh, a professor of political philosophy at the Lebanese University and an expert on Hezbollah, the threat of “takfirism” is now working to terminate all diversity in the region in league with Israel and the US. The Muslim Brotherhood is tied to this project too, but “it is now collapsing and in a state of decay” according to Saleh. “The Brotherhood came into power a hundred years too late,” he told me. While visiting him at his office, he explained that all of Lebanon’s different communities are afraid of the takfiris as they have witnessed their crimes in Syria. This is why the Maronite Catholic Church and the multitude of Christian denominations in Lebanon are increasingly standing behind Hezbollah. He confidently said that all of Lebanon’s different sects will improve their relations with Hezbollah due to the mutual threat they all face. When I asked Saleh about Lebanon’s Prime Minister-designate, who is linked to Hezbollah’s rivals in Lebanon, he pointed out that Tamman Saeb Salam is not a puppet. In a discreet gesture of support distinguishing him from the Hariri camp, Tamman has said that Hezbollah will remain a resistance group no matter what happens due to its intervention in Syria.

Sunni Muslim gunmen roam the streets and block roads with burning tires, expressing their solidarity with Salafist leader Ahmad al-Assir in Tripoli, northern Lebanon, June 23, 2013. (Reuters)

 The Druze community, which is the Lebanese group that is the most vulnerable to a takfiri attack on the country, is reconsidering its relationship with Hezbollah. The Druze community is also unhappy about the statements of Walid Jumblatt, its prime chieftain, which have been supportive of anti-government activities in Syria. Trying to please his Saudi paymaster in Riyadh, Jumblatt has gone as far as to say that he personally supports the Saudi-backed Jubhat Al-Nusra. Well aware of the dangers to their community, the Druze of Syria have shunned Jumblatt and continued to support the Syrian government. Russian officials have also supported Hezbollah’s stance, Moscow views Hezbollah’s position as one that aims to protect the different people of Lebanon and Syria. Moscow does not want the takfiri brigades to enter the North Caucasus or to attack any of its sister-republics and allies in Central Asia. As opposed to the United States and its allies, Russian foreign policy in the Middle East openly promotes diversity and the protection of Christians and minority groups.

Unlike Hezbollah, the US Does Not Give a Damn about Arab Christians

Dr. Naji Hayek, a Lebanese Christian, sums it all up by stating: “Hezbollah is fighting for us, for me!”  He made the statement after we watched Michel Aoun live on Orange TV declaring that he supported Hezbollah after fighting erupted in the Lebanese city of Sidon. If the takfiris make inroads into Lebanon, he assured me that he would pick up his gun and fight too. Hayek, a surgeon, a professor at the Lebanese American University, and an advisor to Michel Aoun - the leader of the Free Patriotic Movement, the largest Christian political party in Lebanon—helped draft the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act and used to submit intelligence reports about Syrian activities in Lebanon to the US Senate. He was once a member of Lebanon’s National Liberal Party and a close friend of Samir Geagea, the Christian warlord extraordinaire allied to the US and Saudi Arabia. Hayek was even injured while fighting against the Syrians for Michel Aoun.

A man carries a placard bearing the portraits of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, during a gathering to celebrate the capture of the city of Qusayr by Syrian pro-government forces, in the southern Lebanese city of Sidon, on June 6, 2013. (AFP Photo)

Things have changes since then and new alliances have formed. Syria is an enemy no longer and Samir Geagea is no longer a friend. Hayek told me bitterly that the US has never hesitated to manipulate and then drop the Christians in Lebanon. He even showed me a heated email exchange between him and Jeffrey Feltman, while Feltman was serving as a US assistant-secretary in the US  State Department, where Feltman in reference to Hezbollah accused the Free Patriotic Movement of being aligned with “evil.” In retrospect, Hayek realizes that the US had different motives when the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act was drafted. Furiously, he talked about “the twenty-five year old kids working at the Lebanon Desk in the [US] State Department with [Bachelor of Arts] in history” that are disconnected from reality in the Middle East which he has had to deal with.

“I am not a fan of Bashar Al-Assad, but I support him one hundred percent, because the alternative in Syria is an extremist government,” Hayek emphasized. Should the Syrian government fall, Hayek’s fear was that the corrupt Hariri family and the March 14 Alliance would invite a Muslim Brotherhood government in Damascus to invade and occupy Lebanon. As a key interlocutor between Michel Aoun and the United States, he explained to me that the Hariri family had no problem with the Syrian presence in Lebanon and in fact they were opposed to a Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon and would obstruct his work in the United States. He explained that the reason for this was that the Hariris used the Syrian military to enforce their hegemony in Lebanon. “Hariri corrupted the Syrians,” he explained. The Hariri clan would bribe all the high ranking Syrian officers in Lebanon by paying them millions of dollars. The problems between the Hariris and Syria began when Bashar Al-Assad wanted to put an end to corruption in Syria and refused to let the Hariris continue with their game.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Twelve US-based brigades will be deactivated by 2017 to fit a slashed military budget. Despite cuts of over 80,000 troops, top brass assures that combat readiness will not suffer because the remaining brigades will have more battalions and firepower.

Army Chief of Staff General Ray Odierno announced Tuesday plans have been approved to inactivate 10 Brigade Combat Teams (BCTs) with headquarters on the US territory. This comes under the $487 billion military budget cuts mandated in 2011 by the Budget Control Act, a fourth round of military budget cuts since President Barack Obama entered office.

It has been announced that the final cut of the service in five years is expected to be 80,000 service personnel, most of which is to come through attrition, Orieno said giving the difference from a wartime high of 570,000 soldiers to 490,000 by the end of 2017.

Overall drop in the number of BCT will be from current 45 to 33, as the US Army plans to return to about the same number of enlisted servicemen it had before the Iraq war started, it was announced at General Odierno’s press conference. 

A standard American infantry BCT currently has roughly 3,500 servicemen. The announced cuts, which are mainly to affect the active-duty force, could also be regarded as reorganization of the military, which has been conducting wars for the last 12 years. The Army Reserve will remain at 205,000 soldiers and the state-based National Guard militia will lose 8,000 soldiers, dropping to 350,000 from 358,000. 

‘Increasing tooth-to-tail ratio’

General Odierno explained that whereas the number of BCT is decreasing, the number of battalions in them will grow from present two to three thus increasing the Army’s “tooth-to-tail ratio.” Besides an additional battalion, which is usually 600-800 soldiers, BCTs will have more engineers assigned. It is expected that remaining brigades would be somewhere close to 5,000 personnel instead of the today’s 3,500 servicemen and women.

 “We will add a third maneuver battalion and additional engineer and fires capability to each of our armor and infantry brigade combat teams in order to make them more lethal, more flexible and more agile,” Odierno said. 

Reportedly, the decision to beef up the number of servicemen in a BTC came as a recommendation from commanders with combat experience in Iraq and Afghanistan. In their view personnel proliferation will extend fighting capabilities of the brigades on a battlefield. In this way the impact on combat power will be minimized and the savings will be made at the expense of support units outside of BCT and logistics. 

 General Ray Odierno insists the cuts were thoroughly calculated after thousands of hours of planning, personnel interviews and simulated combat tests. Naturally, because the brigades are slashed for economic reasons, the final selection was based on cost and logistic effectiveness, required training resources, ranges, airspace and infrastructure, as well as local economic impacts once BCTs are gone, Odierno said.

“I know in the local communities it will have its impact,” Odierno told reporters on Tuesday. “But we've done our best to reach out to them so they understand what the impacts are. We've tried to make it as small an impact as possible for as many communities as we could,” he said.

The deactivation of 10 BCTs comes as the first round of military reduction, because if the Congress does not reconsider austerity in military spending, the number of service personnel will be reduced even lower than the planned 490,000 troops.

A member of the Armed Services Committee, Democrat US Congressman Adam Smith warned that, “The real hazard to military effectiveness will persist as long as Congress fails to act on sequestration. If sequestration is not removed, then more extensive force structure changes will need to be made.”

The chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Howard P. McKeon, promised his panel “will carefully examine the implications of this initial restructuring, but we all must understand that this is only the tip of the iceberg, much deeper cuts are still to come.”

Whether they will be accompanied by same ‘tooth-to-tail ratio increases’ remains to be seen. 

BCT Reduction by military installation

Fort Bliss, Texas – infantry BCT

Fort Bragg, North Carolina – airborne infantry BCT

Fort Campbell, Kentucky – infantry BCT

Fort Carson, Colorado – armor BCT

Fort Drum, New York – infantry BCT

Fort Hood, Texas – armor BCT

Fort Knox, Kentucky – infantry BCT

Fort Riley, Kansas – infantry BCT

Fort Stewart, Georgia – armor BCT

Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington – Stryker BCT 

Taliban has launched an attack in central Kabul, targeting the presidential palace, the CIA and ISAF headquarters, the Ministry of Defense, as well as an international hotel. All the assailants have been killed in the 90-minute showdown.

A Reuters reporter who was at the palace to cover a presser by president Karzai along with some 20 other journalists said heavy gunfire was heard, and smoke from an explosion had blanketed the area.
First of all, one insurgent reportedly opened fire with an automatic rifle at a gate to the palace.
Then, palace guards, as well as guards from the adjacent CIA compound, reportedly fired back when several attackers fired on the west gate as journalists were waiting to enter the compound for the president’s press conference.

All the insurgents were killed in the 90-minute showdown, according to Kabul police chief Mohammad Ayoub Salangi. 

“What I saw from the outside of that gate is more of a blast wall around the green zone area, as there were giant holes in the concrete walls, and the entire gate was destroyed. Apparently, one vehicle was able to get inside, and one vehicle was stopped at the gate, and that’s when the attack began,” local journalist Courtney Body told RT.

It was not immediately clear whether Karzai was in the compound at the time. The area of the city where the attack took place is the site of several important organizations, including the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, as well as the headquarters for the CIA and the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF).

Up to 10 blasts heard in Kabul, near Palace, CIA, ISAF HQ, UNAMA. Smoke rising over central #Kabul pic.twitter.com/9F54LmmdAb via @nohodge
— Harun Najafizada (@BBCNajafizada) June 25, 2013

The American Embassy in Kabul was reportedly placed on lockdown, with ISAF confirming a lockdown over its Twitter feed; other facilities in the area are said to be under lockdown as well. According to the BBC, SMS messages were sent on behalf of the Taliban stating that targets were the presidential palace, the Ministry of Defense, as well as the Ariana Hotel, which is popular with international visitors.  

The CIA building in central Kabul was reported to be on fire shortly after the attack, according to 1TV News, a local news broadcaster.

Ambassador James Dobbins, the US special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, was currently in Kabul after returning from Doha over the weekend, where talks with the Taliban were derailed after the insurgent group opened an embassy-like compound, declaring it the 'Political Office of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.'

Taliban officials stated that the newly opened office in Qatar was a response to calls by opponents for the launch of a political process to reach some measure of peace, and end three decades of fighting in Afghanistan. 

Steve Zunes, a professor of international studies at the University of San Francisco, pointed out to RT, that the Afghan army would never succeed unless the Afghan people support the country's leadership in the first place.

“Even if they are very well trained, even if they have the very best equipment, the strength of the Afghan government <…> doesn’t have credibility with the Afghan people. While the Afghans don’t subscribe to the Taliban’s ideology, they are very frustrated with corruption, inaptitude, and arbitrariness of the Afghan government, including the ongoing repression. They’re resentful of the foreign presence to prop up this government. And it’s this kind of environment that leads to the rise of extremists. So it’s not a security question.”

More than 400 US soldiers are preparing for their deployment to Egypt in anticipation of violent protests, riots, and the possibility of having to protect the country’s border with Israel.
Training at Fort Hood for a nine-month deployment in the “near future” concluded on June 20, KCEN-TV reports, noting that the soldiers encountered Molotov cocktails and “other dangerous items” in their training.

“Just what I’ve seen over the course of the past week, this unit is already far more ready for this type of threat than we were last week,” Lt. Matthew Wilkinson told the television station. According to KDH News, the training lasted about six months. “We want to be as professional as possible so that whatever situation we may encounter, [so] the opposing force knows that we mean business and we know what we’re doing,” said PFC Perez Alexander.

Troops from 13 nations, including the 400 from the US, will man posts and security checkpoints along the Sinai Peninsula, report any peace treaty violations between Egypt and Israel, and be prepared to respond to threats.

A spokesman of the Egyptian armed forces on Saturday confirmed that 400 US troops will be deployed to Egypt, Ahram Online reports.

"The 400 US soldiers coming to Egypt as mentioned in the media are part of the periodical renewal routine for the US faction of the 13-state multinational force deployed in Sinai since the peace treaty. They are not armed with military operations gear," said spokesman Ahmed Ali on behalf of the Egyptian military.

“We are providing this clarification as we respect the right of the great Egyptian people to know the truth from its original sources and to prevent distortion of information by any instigators,” he added.
Anti-government protests calling for the removal of Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi are scheduled to occur on June 30. Since the 2011 uprising that removed former president Hosni Mubarak from power, the Sinai Peninsula has suffered growing unrest and disorder, but Egypt’s military presence there is limited under the 1979 Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty. The treaty required that Israel’s armed forces withdraw from the Sinai Peninsula, which the Jewish state had captured in 1967. Egypt was required to keep the area demilitarized, but in during widespread 2011 protests, Israel agreed to allow several hundred Egyptian troops into the region.

The Multinational Force and Observers (MFO), which is made up of international peacekeepers from 13 countries, ensures that Israel and Egypt abide by the treaty and avoid a military build-up along the border. The MFO operates checkpoints, observation posts, and patrols the border. The observers also verify the terms of the peace treaty at least twice a month, and ensure free marine navigation in the Strait of Tiran. 

The US destroys millions of dollars’ worth of equipment as it prepares to withdraw troops from Afghanistan saying bringing it back is too expensive. But economist Lew Rockwell tells RT it is because of a corruption scheme by the “US military junta”.

The US military has already destroyed more than 77,000 metric tons of military equipment. More of it to be destroyed as the US military is expected to engage in an unprecedented “massive disposal effort.”

The US says that leaving the equipment and vehicles to Afghan security forces, which after the US pullout in 2014 are supposed to keep peace on their own, is “challenging because of complicated rules governing equipment donations to other countries.” There is concern that Afghan troops will end up shooting themselves.

However, Lew Rockwell, chairman of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, says the reasons have nothing to do with that.

“Government is sort of anti-commercial. They just want to spend; they want tax they want to spend; they want to destroy,” he says.

RT: Why not leave these vehicles in the hands of the Afghans as part of the handover instead of destroying them?

Lew Rockwell: They just don’t trust the Afghan government. Also you can think of what governments loved to do – they love to spend. They especially love to spend on important corporate interests. So, all the ex-generals end up as high-ranking officials of the arms manufacturers. Are the arms manufacturers and military equipment manufacturers upset to have this equipment destroyed? They love it. Right, they would just buy more. And they could not care less about the tax payers; they could not care less about all the poor people having their incomes, their property also wracked by this empire. What is going on in Afghanistan is just a tiny taste of what the US empire is doing all around the world. So, even though in one sense it is an outrage, it is just sort of a standard operating procedure for an empire like US. 

RT: The US says the transportation costs for the equipment are too high to ship them back home. But doesn't it look like another corruption scheme, by destroying the military vehicles so that no one could find out how many were bought?

LR: You can be a 100 per cent sure there is corruption involved. That’s government. The US government in Afghanistan – remember how many millions of dollars in cash were lost from the Iraq invasion - I am sure they have shipped vast numbers of hundred dollars bills to Afghanistan, this is how they operate. Of course there is tremendous corruption, but they did not dare give them to Afghan government, sell them. If this were normal, this were a company, there would be a sale and they would say ‘Who wants to buy them and what is the price you want to pay’. But that’s not government. Government is sort of anti-commercial. They just want to spend; they want tax they want to spend; they want to destroy. If you think, what is the job of the military besides killing people? That’s good to destroy property. So, they have no problem destroying property. But I agree, there is a corruption story here. I hope, if any American journalists who still brave enough to look into these kinds of things. And I must say frankly I don’t blame them if they are not brave enough, because it is dangerous to look into what the military junta is doing in these various countries. I hope somebody looks into it and I hope they can tell us what is actually behind it, But it is somehow makes sense, again, the government destroys property all the time, sort of their daily bread.

RT: The financial cost of war in Afghanistan amounts to almost 636 billion dollars. Taxpayers' money seems to be being thrown out the window. Is destroying the equipment really the thing to do?

LR: They are getting the equipment destroyed and then getting new equipment bought from them. That’s a great thing for them – they get more sales. I imagine they would like all their equipment destroyed, all over the world and the government buys all news stuff from them.  I am sure they are happy. I would also say we can’t believe the government about the cost of these things. They always lie, or maybe they are just incompetent, maybe that’s the nature of a non-profit course of operation like government that you can’t know the cost. I guarantee that’s far more than 636 billion dollars. It is over a trillion dollars in Afghanistan. It is horrendous what they have done and of course killed a lot of people, destroyed a lot of property, destroyed a society. They never did anything to the US. Again, Afghanistan never did anything to the US and yet they have been destroyed, their society destroyed. Who knows how many corpses are piled up? And [they are] supposed to be thankful to the US military for having done largely protecting us. No, they are not protecting us. They are stimulating more terrorism; they are making more trouble and they are conquering other land – we are seeing Syria – so many other countries. The troops? Forget their equipment; bring the troops not in 2014. Bring them home tomorrow.

Thousands of Palestinian children were systematically injured, tortured and used as human shields by Israel, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child reported. Israel’s foreign minister denied the report’s accusations, calling it "recycled old stuff." During the 10-year period examined by UN human rights experts, up to 7,000 children aged 9 to 17 were arrested, interrogated and kept captive, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) said in its new report. At least 14 cases of abuse were reported to have taken place in the past three years. As conflict in the Gaza Strip and West Bank continues, children on both sides continue to be killed and wounded; however, the majority of victims are Palestinian. "Hundreds of Palestinian children have been killed and thousands injured over the reporting period as a result of the state party military operations, especially in Gaza where the state party proceeded to [conduct] air and naval strikes on densely populated areas with a significant presence of children, thus disregarding the principles of proportionality and distinction," Reuters reported, citing the CRC’s report. It was revealed that the IDF used Palestinian children to enter potentially dangerous buildings, forcing them to stand as human shields to discourage stone-throwing at military vehicles and troops. "Almost all those using children as human shields and informants have remained unpunished and the soldiers convicted for having forced at gunpoint a 9-year-old child to search bags suspected of containing explosives only received a suspended sentence of three months and were demoted," the watchdog's panel of 18 independent experts said. Throwing stones at soldiers of Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) is the most common felony for which underage Palestinians are taken to prison – convicted Palestinian minors face penalties of up to 20 years in jail, the CRC reported.