Tag Archives: NATO

Ties between Russia and the Taliban worry Afghan, U.S. officials

Members of the Taliban gather at the site of the execution of three men accused of murdering a couple during a robbery in Ghazni province, Afghanistan

By Hamid Shalizi and Josh Smith

KABUL (Reuters) – Afghan and American officials are increasingly worried that any deepening of ties between Russia and Taliban militants fighting to topple the government in Kabul could complicate an already precarious security situation.

Russian officials have denied they provide aid to the insurgents, who are contesting large swathes of territory and inflicting heavy casualties, and say their limited contacts are aimed at bringing the Taliban to the negotiating table.

Leaders in Kabul say Russian support for the Afghan Taliban appears to be mostly political so far.

But a series of recent meetings they say has taken place in Moscow and Tajikistan has made Afghan intelligence and defence officials nervous about more direct support including weapons or funding.

A senior Afghan security official called Russian support for the Taliban a “dangerous new trend”, an analysis echoed by the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, General John Nicholson.

He told reporters at a briefing in Washington last week that Russia had joined Iran and Pakistan as countries with a “malign influence” in Afghanistan, and said Moscow was lending legitimacy to the Taliban.

Russia’s ambassador to Kabul, Alexander Mantytskiy, told reporters on Thursday that his government’s contacts with the insurgent group were aimed at ensuring the safety of Russian citizens and encouraging peace talks.

“We do not have intensive contacts with the Taliban,” he said through an interpreter, adding that Russia favored a negotiated peace in Afghanistan which could only happen by cultivating contacts with all players, including the Taliban.

Mantytskiy expressed annoyance at persistant accusations of Russian collaboration with the Taliban, saying the statements by American and Afghan officials were an effort to distract attention from the worsening conflict.

“They are trying to put the blame for their failures on our shoulders,” he told Reuters.

ANOTHER “GREAT GAME”?

Afghanistan has long been the scene of international intrigue and intervention, with the British and Russians jockeying for power during the 19th Century “Great Game,” and the United States helping Pakistan provide weapons and funding to Afghan rebels fighting Soviet forces in the 1980s.

Taliban officials told Reuters that the group has had significant contacts with Moscow since at least 2007, adding that Russian involvement did not extend beyond “moral and political support”.

“We had a common enemy,” said one senior Taliban official. “We needed support to get rid of the United States and its allies in Afghanistan and Russia wanted all foreign troops to leave Afghanistan as quickly as possible.”

Moscow has been critical of the United States and NATO over their handling of the war in Afghanistan, but Russia initially helped provide helicopters for the Afghan military and agreed to a supply route for coalition materials through Russia.

Most of that cooperation has fallen apart as relations between Russia and the West deteriorated in recent years over the conflicts in Ukraine and Syria.

Incoming U.S. president Donald Trump, who takes office in January, has signaled a desire to improve relations with Russia, meaning future U.S. and Russian policies could change.

FOREIGN MEETINGS

In recent months, Taliban representatives have held several meetings with Russian officials, according to Taliban and Afghan government sources.

Those meetings included a visit to Tajikistan by the Taliban shadow governor of Kunduz province, Mullah Abdul Salam, said Kunduz police chief Qasim Jangalbagh.

Another recent meeting occurred in Moscow itself, according to an official at the presidential palace in Kabul.

Earlier this week Afghan lawmakers said they planned to investigate reports of Russian aid to the Taliban, and had sent a letter to Moscow seeking clarification.

Afghan officials did not produce evidence of direct Russian aid, but recent cross-border flights by unidentified helicopters and seizures of new “Russian-made” guns had raised concerns that regional actors may be playing a larger role, Jangalbagh said.

“If the Taliban get their hands on anti-aircraft guns provided, for example, by Russia, then it is a game-changer, and forget about peace,” said another senior Afghan security official.

ISLAMIC STATE OR UNITED STATES?

According to Afghan and U.S. officials, Russian representatives have maintained that government security forces, backed by U.S. special forces and air strikes, have not done enough to stem the growth of Islamic State in Afghanistan.

Militants loyal to the radical Middle East-based network have carved out territory along the border with Pakistan, and have found themselves fighting not only Afghan and foreign troops, but also the Taliban, who compete for land, influence, and fighters.

Taliban officials dismissed the idea that their ties to Russia had anything to do with fighting Islamic State.

“In early 2008, when Russia began supporting us, ISIS(Islamic State) didn’t exist anywhere in the world,” the senior Taliban official said. “Their sole purpose was to strengthen us against the U.S. and its allies.”

That was echoed by Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid, who said “ISIS is not an issue”.

Nicholson said the talk of Islamic State is a smokescreen designed to justify Russian policies.

“Their (Russia’s) narrative goes something like this: that the Taliban are the ones fighting Islamic State, not the Afghan government,” Nicholson said.

“So this public legitimacy that Russia lends to the Taliban is not based on fact, but is used as a way to essentially undermine the Afghan government and the NATO efforts and bolster the belligerents.”

(Additional reporting by Jibran Ahmad in Pakistan and Tatiana Ustinova and Andrew Osborn in Moscow; Editing by Mike Collett-White)

Europe gets Trump ‘wake-up call’, but can it step up?

U.S. President-elect Donald Trump greets his running mate Mike Pence during his election night rally in Manhattan, New York

By Alastair Macdonald and Gabriela Baczynska

BRUSSELS (Reuters) – For Europe, already reeling from Britain’s decision to leave its 28-member club, Donald Trump’s election introduces a host of new uncertainties it is ill-equipped to tackle.

Preoccupied by a growing anti-establishment mood across the continent, the European Union’s leaders gave little thought to the idea a man dubbed “the pioneer of a new authoritarian and chauvinist international movement” by Germany’s deputy chancellor could take power in the United States.

The day before, one of the EU’s leaders had confided a contingency plan of “crossing ourselves and praying”. The day after, as they pledged to work with Trump, a senior EU diplomat summed up their dilemma.

“Since we have refused to really think through this scenario, we have a list of questions that need to be answered, but almost everything is a big unknown,” the envoy told Reuters.

For some, Europe must now step up and take more responsibility, both for its own security and the wider world, if the entrepreneur makes good on campaign talk of limiting U.S. defense commitments and other engagements abroad.

Trade relations, climate change, Russia and tackling Islamic State are all areas where Europe may have to forge its own path if a Trump-led Washington pulls back from the global stage.

“This is another wake-up call,” said Manfred Weber, a German ally of Chancellor Angela Merkel who leads conservatives in the European Parliament. “It is now up to Europe. We must be more self-confident and assume more responsibility.

“We do not know what to expect from the USA.”

Belgian Foreign Minister Didier Reynders told Reuters a Trump White House “may help some people in Europe understand that we need to reinforce defense cooperation among Europeans”.

But EU leaders know that euroskeptic radicals, inspired by Trump and Britain’s vote to leave the bloc in June, could exploit any attempt to tighten cooperation to condemn them to the same ignominious electoral fate as Hillary Clinton.

East Europeans fret President Vladimir Putin may use Trump’s vow to improve ties with sanctions-hit Moscow to extend Russian influence, as in Ukraine. The Norwegian head of NATO felt obliged to spell out that Trump could not renege on security guarantees.

“PUTTING ON A BRAVE FACE”

“Europe cannot blink after Brexit, after the election of Donald Trump,” French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault said of the political earthquake in Washington, which, 27 years to the day since the fall of the Berlin Wall, continues to provide the lion’s share of military muscle to defending the continent.

“Europe must stand together more, be more active and go more on the offensive,” Ayrault said. “Even just to protect itself.”

Privately, senior officials question its ability to do that.

“Europe will need to do more to take care of its own – but are we capable?” a senior European diplomat asked. The EU has been riven with tensions over economic policy, the Syrian refugee crisis and Britain’s exit, and remains very divided.

Another senior EU diplomat told Reuters: “This changes the business model of the EU. But we have no idea how.”

He dismissed suggestions a U.S. withdrawal from some engagements could offer benefits by obliging Europeans to invest more in their cooperation and spend more on their own defense: “That’s not a silver lining. That’s putting on a brave face.”

EU foreign ministers called a special meeting over dinner on Sunday to discuss what Trump’s America will mean for Europe.

Giles Merritt of pro-EU Brussels think-tank Friends of Europe said leaders had no time to lose to “head off trouble” and could revive their own Union by helping defend global stability. They “must … fashion a common European response … before President Trump sets foot in the Oval Office”, he said.

CHANGE THE WHOLE SYSTEM?

It was a result few in Europe had wanted, barring Hungary’s authoritarian prime minister Viktor Orban. European leaders — and Obama Administration envoys — were reduced to highlighting the lowest common denominators of shared history and ideals in giving assurances of continued cooperation.

After a U.S. campaign marked by accusations of racism and sexism, Merkel, preparing for her own election battle next year, said she would work with Trump on the basis of shared values that included “respecting … people’s dignity regardless of their origin, the color of their skin, religion (or) gender”.

Donald Tusk, the former Polish premier who chairs EU summits, responded to what he called “new challenges” and “uncertainty over the future of our Transatlantic relations” by stressing centuries of blood ties across the ocean.

French President Francois Hollande stressed a need for even stronger Transatlantic cooperation to tackle climate change, Islamist security threats and the global economy.

Washington’s ambassador to NATO could offer no detail on the incoming administration’s policy but reassured European peers in Brussels that NATO had always been a “bipartisan venture”.

Anthony Gardner, outgoing President Barack Obama’s envoy to the EU, said change was possible in areas including sanctions on Russia, support for Ukraine, nuclear proliferation, trade, NATO and the Middle East, but added: “Let’s wait to see who appoints as his key advisers.”

He did not see Washington abandoning a key partner for the past 50 years, but his reassurance did not quell a sense of near panic among some senior officials in Brussels.

One said grimly: “This is bad. Brexit was a stupid and damaging mistake but the people running it are not complete lunatics. Now we have a populist in power who can change the whole system as we know it.”

(Editing by Philippa Fletcher)

Anxious world leaders seek clarity on Trump policies

Donald Trump arriving at election night speech

By Angus MacSwan

LONDON (Reuters) – World leaders reacted to Donald Trump’s victory in the U.S. presidential election with offers to work with him tinged with anxiety over how he would deal with a host of problems, from the Middle East to an assertive Russia.

Several authoritarian and right-wing leaders commended the billionaire businessman and reality TV star who against the odds won the leadership of the world’s most powerful country.

Trump, who has no previous political or military experience, sent conciliatory signals after his upset of Democratic rival Hillary Clinton, pledging to seek common ground, not conflict, with the United States’ allies.

During his election campaign, Trump expressed admiration for Russian President Vladimir Putin, questioned central tenets of the NATO military alliance and suggested Japan and South Korea should develop nuclear weapons to shoulder their own defense burden.

Putin was among the first to send congratulations after Trump declared victory.

Ties between Washington and Moscow have become strained over the conflicts in Ukraine and Syria, and allegations of Russian cyber attacks featured in the U.S. election campaign.

“We heard the campaign statements of the future U.S. presidential candidate about the restoration of relations between Russia and the United States,” Putin said.

“It is not an easy path, but we are ready to do our part and do everything to return Russian and American relations to a stable path of development.”

Among other issues causing concern among allies are Trump’s vows to undo a global agreement on climate change, ditch trade deals he says have been bad for U.S. workers and renegotiate the nuclear accord between Tehran and world powers which has led to an easing of sanctions on Iran.

Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif urged Trump to stay committed to the Iran deal. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said the election result would have no effect on Tehran’s policies and the nuclear accord with six world powers could not be dismissed by one government.

Elsewhere in the Middle East, Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu, who had a poor relationship with President Barack Obama, said he hoped to reach “new heights” in bilateral ties under Trump.

Obama and Netanyahu sparred over the issue of Israeli settlements, while Trump has said they should expand.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas also congratulated Trump, but analysts said his rule may be profoundly negative for Palestinian aspirations.

And despite Trump’s negative rhetoric about Muslims during his campaign, including threats to ban them from the United States, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi said he hoped the business magnate’s election would breathe new life into U.S.-Egyptian ties.

UNCERTAINTY

In Britain, where Trump’s victory had echoes of last June’s referendum in which voters showed dissatisfaction with the political establishment by voting to leave European Union, Prime Minister Theresa May said the “enduring and special relationship” between the two countries would remain intact.

Nigel Farage, a leader of the Brexit campaign who spoke at a Trump rally during the election campaign, tweeted: “I hand over the mantle to @RealDonaldTrump! Many congratulations. You have fought a brave campaign.”

But some European officials took the unusual step of denouncing the outcome, calling it a worrying signal for liberal democracy and tolerance in the world.

“Trump is the pioneer of a new authoritarian and chauvinist international movement. He is also a warning for us,” German Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel told Funke newspaper group.

Some leaders are smarting from insults that Trump doled out in the past few months, such as calling German Chancellor Angela Merkel “insane” for allowing more than 1 million migrants into the country last year.

“We’re realizing now that we have no idea what this American president will do,” Norbert Roettgen, a conservative ally of Merkel and head of the German parliament’s foreign affairs committee, told German radio. “Geopolitically we are in a very uncertain situation.”

President Francois Hollande said France wanted to begin talks with Trump immediately to clarify his stance on international affairs.

“This American election opens a period of uncertainty,” Hollande said.

French officials had openly endorsed Clinton and warned that Trump’s “confused” foreign policy objectives were alarming for the rest of the world.

“The U.S. is a vital partner for France and what’s at stake is peace, the fight against terrorism, the situation in the Middle East, economic relations and the preservation of the planet,” Hollande said.

But like-minded right-wing European parties that are hoping to make inroads of their own in 2017 — a year in which Germany, France and the Netherlands hold elections, and Italy and Britain could also do so — hailed Trump’s victory.

“Their world is falling apart. Ours is being built,” Florian Philippot, a senior figure in France’s far-right National Front (FN), tweeted.

CHINA CONCILIATORY

In Asia, Chinese President Xi Jinping sent a message with a conciliatory tone, telling Trump that Beijing and Washington shared responsibility for promoting global development and prosperity.

“I place great importance on the China-U.S. relationship, and look forward to working with you to uphold the principles of non-conflict, non-confrontation, mutual respect and win-win cooperation,” Xi told Trump, who said on the campaign trail to take on China and to tax Chinese imports to stop currency evaluation.

South Korea expressed the hope that Trump would maintain current U.S. policy of pressuring North Korea over its nuclear and missile tests. Seoul was concerned Trump may make unpredictable proposals to North Korea, a ruling party official said, quoting top national security officials.

A Japanese government official, speaking before Trump clinched the election, urged him to send a message as soon as possible to reassure the world of the United States’ commitment to its allies.

“We are certainly concerned about the comments (Trump) has made to date about the alliance and the U.S. role in the Pacific, particularly Japan,” the Japanese official said.

(Reporting by Reuters bureaus in Europe, Asia and the Americas, Editing by Sonya Hepinstall and Angus MacSwan)

Two U.S. service members, many civilians dead in Afghanistan

Dust from rocket strike in Afghanistan

By Sardar Razmal

KUNDUZ, Afghanistan (Reuters) – Two American service members were killed fighting the Taliban near the northern city of Kunduz on Thursday, the U.S. military said amid reports that air strikes called in to protect the troops had caused heavy civilian casualties.

Although the U.S. military gave no details, Afghan officials said there had been heavy fighting overnight about 5 km (3 miles) from the city center, which Taliban fighters succeeded in entering as recently as last month, and air strikes had caused many casualties.

There were angry protests by civilians who brought the bodies of at least 16 dead into Kunduz, Mafuzullah Akbari, a police spokesman said. Some reports put the death toll higher but there was no immediate official confirmation.

“The service members came under fire during a train, advise and assist mission with our Afghan partners to clear a Taliban position and disrupt the group’s operations in Kunduz district,” the U.S. military said in a statement.

In a separate statement, the NATO-led Resolute Support mission confirmed that air strikes had been carried out in Kunduz to defend “friendly forces under fire”.

“All civilian casualty claims will be investigated,” it said.

In a statement, the Taliban said American forces were involved in a raid to capture three militant fighters when they came under heavy fire. An air strike hit the village where the fighting was taking place, killing many civilians.

The deaths underline the precarious security situation around Kunduz, which Taliban fighters came close to over-running last month, a year after they briefly captured the city in their biggest success in the 15-year long war.

While the city itself was secured, the insurgents control large areas of the surrounding province.

The U.S. military gave no details on the identity of the two personnel who were killed or what units they served with and there was no immediate detailed comment on the circumstances of their deaths.

Although U.S. combat operations against the Taliban largely ended in 2014, special forces units have been repeatedly engaged in fighting while providing assistance to Afghan troops.

Masoom Hashemi, deputy police chief in Kunduz province, said police were investigating to try to determine if any of the dead were linked to the Taliban.

Thousands of U.S. soldiers remain in Afghanistan as part of the NATO-led Resolute Support training and assistance mission and a separate counterterrorism mission.

The deaths come a month after another U.S. service member was killed on an operation against Islamic State fighters in the eastern province of Nangarhar.

Afghan forces, fighting largely on their own since the end of the international combat mission, have suffered thousands of casualties, with more than 5,500 killed in the first eight months of 2016.

(Additional reporting by Hamid Shalizi; Writing by James Mackenzie; Editing by Simon Cameron-Moore, Robert Birsel)

NATO seeks to manage Russia’s new military deployments

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg addresses a news conference during a NATO defence ministers meeting at the Alliance headquarters in Brussels, Belgium,

By Robin Emmott

BRUSSELS (Reuters) – President Vladimir Putin’s high-profile military deployments aim to showcase Russian power in any global confrontation with the West, NATO officials say, but the alliance will not seek to match Moscow’s actions.

Curtis Scaparrotti, the U.S.-led alliance’s top commander, told allied defense ministers on Wednesday that more than 120,000 Russian troops took part in exercises in September which culminated with the firing of a missile capable of carrying nuclear warheads, diplomats said.

As Russia’s sole aircraft carrier passed Europe’s shores this week, reports of its warships equipped with nuclear-capable missiles in the Baltic alarmed allies. The alliance is also concerned by Moscow’s deployment of ballistic Iskander missiles in the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad.

“The main challenge is not individual events or deployments,” NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg told reporters. “It is the overall picture, where we see a substantial increase in Russia’s capabilities at sea, in the air and on land; exercises with a more aggressive patterns.”

Stoltenberg declined to say publicly what he thought Russia’s overall aims are. But Scaparrotti, who is also a U.S. army general, told defense ministers that Russia was seeking, in military parlance, “escalation dominance,” according to people briefed on the discussions.

That strategy holds that a military power can best contain and control conflicts if it is dominant at each step in an escalation with an adversary, potentially all the way to the biggest threat of nuclear weapons.

Some military analysts believe Putin holds this doctrine close to his heart.

“Putin is showing a desire for dominance,” said a senior NATO diplomat. “From the Arctic, to the Baltic and the Black Sea, sometimes simultaneously, Russia wants to use sophisticated weaponry mixed with ships of a Soviet vintage.”

NATO-RUSSIA COUNCIL “WITHIN WEEKS”

In written remarks to reporters, Scaparrotti said only that “actions speak louder than words” and noted the Kremlin’s decision to consolidate control of the armed forces in Moscow and nuclear missile tests.

NATO says its decision to send 4,000 troops, planes, tanks and artillery to former Soviet republics in the Baltics and to Poland next year is a measured response compared to what NATO believes are 330,000 Russian troops amassed near Moscow.

“We will not mirror what Russia is doing,” Stoltenberg said. “We are not in a Cold War situation,” he said, referring to when 300,000 U.S. service personnel were stationed in Europe. NATO generals want to adhere to a 1997 agreement with Moscow not to station substantial combat forces on the NATO-Russia border.

Norway, which has a long border with Russia, will allow 330 U.S. troops to be stationed on its soil for a limited period from next year, the first time foreign troops have been posted on its territory since the end of World War Two.

Stoltenberg hopes to convene another NATO-Russia Council – the forum bringing together Russia’s top diplomat to the alliance and NATO envoys – in the next few weeks, diplomats say. Stoltenberg, who hails from Russia’s neighbor Norway, insists there is no attempt to isolate Moscow.

However, diplomats also complain that discussing such issues as Moscow’s 2014 annexation of Crimea and near-misses between Western planes and Russian jets, have come to nothing.

That leaves NATO trying to learn more about Russia’s aims if Putin continues to escalate the stand-off with the West.

“One thing we need to address is if we all have the capacity to read Russia’s behavior satisfactorily. Russia is doing a lot of new, unfamiliar things,” said Britain’s ambassador to NATO Adam Thomson, who served as a diplomat in Moscow in the 1980s.

“It is obviously trying to signal but it is not clear that we know how to understand those signals,” he told reporters.

(Reporting by Robin Emmott; Editing by Richard Balmforth)

Russia beefs up Baltic Fleet amid NATO tensions

(L-R) Russian navy corvette Steregushchy, destroyer Nastoichivy and frigate Admiral Gorshkov are anchored in a bay of the Russian fleet base in Baltiysk in Kaliningrad region, Russia

By Andrew Osborn and Simon Johnson

MOSCOW/STOCKHOLM (Reuters) – Russia is sharply upgrading the firepower of its Baltic Fleet in Kaliningrad by adding warships armed with long-range cruise missiles to counter NATO’s build-up in the region, Russian media reported on Wednesday.

There was no official confirmation from Moscow, but the reports will raise tensions in the Baltic, already heightened since Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea, and are likely to cause alarm in Poland and Lithuania which border Kaliningrad.

The reported deployment comes as NATO is planning its biggest military build-up on Russia’s borders since the Cold War to deter possible Russian aggression and will be seen as a riposte to that.

Russia’s daily Izvestia newspaper cited a military source as saying that the first two of five ships, the Serpukhov and the Zeleny Dol, had already entered the Baltic Sea and would soon become part of a newly formed division in Kaliningrad, Russia’s European exclave sandwiched between Poland and Lithuania.

Another source familiar with the situation told the Interfax news agency that the two warships would be joining the Baltic Fleet in the coming days.

“With the appearance of two small missile ships armed with the Kalibr cruise missiles the Fleet’s potential targeting range will be significantly expanded in the northern European military theater,” the source told Interfax.

Russia’s Defence Ministry, which said earlier this month the two ships were en route to the Mediterranean, did not respond to a request for comment, but NATO and the Swedish military confirmed the two warships had entered the Baltic.

“NATO navies are monitoring this activity near our borders,” said Dylan White, the alliance’s acting spokesman.

The Buyan-M class corvettes are armed with nuclear-capable Kalibr cruise missiles, known by the NATO code name Sizzler, which the Russian military says have a range of at least 1,500 km (930 miles).

Though variants of the missile are capable of carrying nuclear warheads, the ships are believed to be carrying conventional warheads.

“The addition of Kalibr missiles would increase the strike range not just of the Baltic Fleet, but of Russian forces in the Baltic region, fivefold,” said Ben Nimmo, a defense analyst at the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, who has been tracking the ships’ progress.

“The two small corvettes, with their modern, nuclear-capable missiles, may yet have an impact out of proportion to their size in the Baltic.”

SWEDEN WORRIED

Izvestia said Russia’s Baltic Fleet would probably receive a further three such small warships armed with the same missiles by the end of 2020.

It said the Baltic Fleet’s coastal defenses would also be beefed up with the Bastion and Bal land-based missile systems. The Bastion is a mobile defense system armed with two anti-ship missiles with a range of up to 300 km (188 miles). The Bal anti-ship missile has a similar range.

Sweden’s Defence Minister said his country was worried by the presence of the warships in the Baltic Sea, complaining the move was likely to keep tension in the region high.

“This is … worrying and is not something that helps to reduce tensions in our region,” Defence Minister Peter Hultqvist told Sweden’s national TT news agency. “This affects all the countries round the Baltic.”

Swedish media said the Kalibr missiles had the range to hit targets across the Nordic region. The Russian Defence Ministry said in August that the two corvettes had been used to fire cruise missiles at militants in Syria.

When asked about the deployment, a Polish government spokesman said Warsaw was not commenting on the situation in the Baltic sea “for the moment.”

Earlier this month, Russia moved nuclear-capable Iskander-M missiles into Kaliningrad leading to protests from Lithuania and Poland.

(Additional reporting by Jack Stubbs in Moscow, Justyna Pawlak in Warsaw and Robin Emmott in Brussels; Editing by Alistair Scrutton and Andrew Heavens)

After failed coup, what sort of Turkey does Erdogan want?

A supporter holds a flag depicting Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan during a pro-government demonstration in Ankara, Turkey,

By Luke Baker

ISTANBUL (Reuters) – Looking across Istanbul’s skyline, it is impossible not to be struck by the array of red-and-white, star-and-crescent flags fluttering from buildings, monuments, bridges and flagpoles.

Patriotism in Turkey has always been strong, but in the wake of July’s failed coup by members of the military, President Tayyip Erdogan has tapped freely into the populist, banner-draped fervor to remould the nation in his image.

The questions are, what sort of Turkey does Erdogan want, and what steps will this powerful and sometimes unpredictable leader take to achieve his vision?

The answers could have far-reaching implications for the global role played by the Muslim-majority NATO member, whose assistance is seen in the West as vital in the war against Islamic State and in tackling the migrant crisis.

At one level, diplomats and analysts say, Erdogan has made his aims perfectly clear. In the three months since the coup attempt, authorities have suspended or dismissed 100,000 civil servants, judges, lecturers, military personnel and police – purging some of the most established pillars of society.

Anyone with suspected links to U.S.-based cleric Fethullah Gulen, who Erdogan accuses of masterminding the putsch, is a possible target. Gulen has denied plotting against the state and any involvement in the coup.

More than 30,000 people have been arrested. Five percent of the entire police force has been removed from duty. Whole ministerial departments have been shut down.

Some Western allies fear creeping authoritarianism and a shift toward a political model built around a strong leader and dominant single party but lacking checks and balances in Turkey, whose size, military power and location between Europe, the Middle East and Asia give it significant strategic clout.

“He wants a Turkey where he is the undisputed, unchallenged decider without the constraints of a normal democratic system,” said James Jeffrey, a former U.S. ambassador to Ankara and a senior fellow at the Washington Institute.

“He won’t overturn the constitution or get rid of democracy, but he wants to render the opposition incapable of challenging him and to exercise clear power over them,” he told Reuters.

By contrast, Erdogan’s loyal supporters see him as the champion of the pious masses, forging a proud and independent nation that will not be dictated to by outside powers.

The president and his aides bristle at the notion he is dictatorial. They point to his succession of election victories, first as leader of the ruling AK Party, and then in Turkey’s first popular presidential election in 2014.

OTTOMAN PRIDE

But Erdogan’s ambitions likely go further than taking back control and projecting authority.

While the 62-year-old may have no desire to recreate the Ottoman empire, political analysts and diplomats say he wants to draw on that sense of greatness to craft a Turkey that bestrides the world, respected and perhaps a little feared by neighbors and peers.

In speeches and comments before and since the failed putsch, Erdogan has frequently referenced the Ottoman period, when Turkey’s forefathers held territory stretching from southeast Europe to the Caucasus, North Africa and Iraq.

He often laments the concessions made by Turkish leaders after World War One, with the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne that brought modern Turkey into being in 1923, as if to suggest only he can restore the nation’s illustrious past.

“What you’re witnessing in Turkey is tied up with an almost constant desire to reclaim the heritage of the Ottoman empire, which was of course a polyglot, multi-ethnic entity,” said Bulent Aliriza, director of the Turkey project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

“In almost every one of Erdogan’s speeches there are these themes: You can be proud you are a Turk, proud that you are a Muslim, we have influence in our region and beyond. The expression ‘Great Turkey’ is used almost all the time.”

In August, with great symbolism and fanfare, Erdogan inaugurated a new bridge over the Bosphorus between Europe and Asia. The span, the third over the strait, was named after a 16th-century Ottoman ruler, Yavuz Sultan Selim. “Be proud of your power, Turkey,” announced adverts on television.

At the U.N. General Assembly in September, the most high-profile speech Erdogan has made abroad since the failed coup, he expanded on two of his favorite themes: how Turkey helps the oppressed and serves as a role model in the Muslim world, and how power at the United Nations is too narrowly held.

“The world is greater than five,” he said, referring to the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council. “A Security Council that does not represent the entire world can never serve to re-establish peace and justice around the world.”

Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan and his wife Emine Erdogan attend Democracy and Martyrs Rally, organized by him and supported by ruling AK Party (AKP), oppositions Republican People's Party (CHP) and Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), to protest against last month's failed military coup attempt, in Istanbul, Turkey

Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan and his wife Emine Erdogan attend Democracy and Martyrs Rally, organized by him and supported by ruling AK Party (AKP), oppositions Republican People’s Party (CHP) and Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), to protest against last month’s failed military coup attempt, in Istanbul, Turkey, August 7, 2016. REUTERS/Osman Orsal/File Photo

‘CRITICAL JUNCTURE’

Since coming to power in 2003, first as prime minister and then as president, Erdogan has overseen a period of rapid economic growth and increased regional influence.

While he may have no territorial ambitions, Turkey does have troops in northern Syria, is training militias in Iraq – to the growing concern of the government in Baghdad – and has hopes of turning itself into a regional energy hub, a crossroads between Russia, Iran and the East Mediterranean.

“He’s trying to exercise influence in the region by dint of Turkey’s large and powerful economy and its claim to be an Islamic power,” said Jeffrey. “There is a bit of going back to Ottoman times and going back to Turkish dominance of the region – he wants a more Islamic alternative to the West.”

It appears a popular formula. A poll in late July, two weeks after the coup attempt, showed Erdogan with two-thirds approval among Turkey’s 78 million people, his highest rating ever.

Yet in striving for that more self-confident and perhaps more feared Turkey, Erdogan has at times walked a thin line, straining ties with the European Union and the wider West, which are wary of what they see as his creeping authoritarianism.

Turkey’s $720 billion economy is fueled in large part by trade and investment with Europe. Its working week runs from Monday to Friday to align with business in London and New York, not the rest of the Muslim world. In theory, Turkey still plans to join the European Union and is a central player in NATO.

The country’s annual average growth rate has been tapering, to around 3 percent from 5 percent, and there is a need for a new impetus to bring unemployment down among millions of younger Turks. That requires staying open to the West.

Andrew Duff, a former member of the European Parliament who was vice-chairman of the Turkey-EU joint parliamentary committee, sees Erdogan as “entirely fickle” regarding Europe and focused for now on exploiting Islam and nationalism.

“I’m afraid this is only going to get worse,” said Duff, who has been accused by Turkish authorities of being a “Gulenist”, a charge he dismisses with a laugh. “I’m sure Erdogan’s aim is to remain in power at least until 2023, the centenary of the founding of the republic.”

Duff does not think Erdogan will pivot to the East permanently. But for now, Europe, NATO and the West find themselves with a volatile partner.

“From the historical point of view, it’s fascinating because Turkey is really poised,” said Aliriza. “Whether it continues to look to its nation-state past and its opening to the West, or a hoped-for glorious future in which Turkey will draw closer to its brethren in the East. It’s at a critical juncture.”

(Writing by Luke Baker; Editing by Nick Tattersall and Pravin Char)

Residents flee as Afghan troops battle Taliban in city of Kunduz

Afghan security forces fight Taliban

KABUL (Reuters) – Thousands of residents have fled or face deteriorating conditions as fighting between Afghan forces and Taliban militants entered its third day in the embattled northern city of Kunduz, officials said on Wednesday.

Taliban fighters easily penetrated the city’s defenses on Monday, raising questions about the capacity of the Western-backed security forces, even as international donors meet in Brussels to approve billions of dollars in new development aid for Afghanistan.

“Most civilians have abandoned Kunduz city and have gone to neighboring districts or provinces,” said Kunduz provincial governor Asadullah Amarkhel. “There is no electricity, no water and no food. Many shops are closed.”

Government troops, backed by U.S. special forces and air strikes, have made slow but “significant” progress in clearing the city, said Kunduz police chief Qasim Jangalbagh.

He acknowledged, however, that the situation remained dangerous for many residents.

“There are security problems in the city,” he said. “People do not have enough food, water and other needs so they are evacuating the city to go to safe places.”

In social media posts, the Taliban rejected claims that the government had retaken Kunduz and accused security forces and U.S. troops of committing abuses against civilians.

The U.S. military command in Kabul said there was “sporadic” fighting within Kunduz but Afghan security forces controlled the city.

American aircraft conducted at least two air strikes on Wednesday to “defend friendly forces who were receiving enemy fire”, the military said in a statement online.

“The city is locked down,” said Hajji Hasem, a resident leaving Kunduz with his family on Wednesday. “If the Taliban and air strikes do not kill you, hunger and thirst will.”

Increased attacks by insurgents hoping to topple the Western-backed government and install Islamist rule have tested the Afghan security forces who are struggling to defend major cities and roads a year and a half after a NATO-led force declared an end to its combat mission.

The violence has displaced nearly 1 million Afghans within the country, according to the United Nations, and contributed to an exodus of tens of thousands to Europe and other areas.

The two-day, EU-led donor conference in Brussels is seeking fresh funds despite Western public fatigue with involvement in Afghanistan, 15 years after the U.S. invasion that ousted the Taliban weeks after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States.

(Reporting by Afghanistan bureau; Writing by Josh Smith; Editing by Robert Birsel)

North Korea conducts fifth and largest nuclear test, drawing broad condemnation

South Korean emergency meeting

* Test seen as North’s most powerful yet

* Japan protests, sends jets to monitor for radiation

* China begins emergency radiation testing

* South accuses North of “maniacal recklessness”

* UN Security Council to hold closed-door meeting Friday –
dips

(Adds UN, CTBTO estimate, further condemnations)

By Ju-min Park and Jack Kim

SEOUL, Sept 9 (Reuters) – North Korea conducted its fifth
and biggest nuclear test on Friday and said it had mastered the
ability to mount a warhead on a ballistic missile, ratcheting up
a threat that its rivals and the United Nations have been
powerless to contain.

The blast, on the 68th anniversary of North Korea’s
founding, was more powerful than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima,
according to some estimates, and drew condemnation from the
United States as well as China, Pyongyang’s main ally.

Diplomats said the United Nations Security Council would
discuss the test at a closed-door meeting on Friday, at the
request of the United States, Japan and South Korea.

Under 32-year-old dictator Kim Jong Un, North Korea has
accelerated the development of its nuclear and missile
programmes, despite U.N. sanctions that were tightened in March
and have further isolated the impoverished country.

South Korean President Park Geun-hye, in Laos after a summit
of Asian leaders, said Kim was showing “maniacal recklessness”
in completely ignoring the world’s call to abandon his pursuit
of nuclear weapons.

U.S. President Barack Obama, aboard Air Force One on his way
home from Laos, said the test would be met with “serious
consequences”, and held talks with Park and with Japanese Prime
Minister Shinzo Abe, the White House said.

China said it was resolutely opposed to the test and urged
Pyongyang to stop taking any actions that would worsen the
situation. It said it would lodge a protest with the North
Korean embassy in Beijing.

There were further robust condemnations from Russia, the
European Union, NATO, Germany and Britain.

North Korea, which labels the South and the United States as
its main enemies, said its “scientists and technicians carried
out a nuclear explosion test for the judgment of the power of a
nuclear warhead,” according to its official KCNA news agency.

It said the test proved North Korea was capable of mounting
a nuclear warhead on a medium-range ballistic missile, which it
last tested on Monday when Obama and other world leaders were
gathered in China for a G20 summit.

Pyongyang’s claims of being able to miniaturise a nuclear
warhead have never been independently verified.

Its continued testing in defiance of sanctions presents a
challenge to Obama in the final months of his presidency and
could become a factor in the U.S. presidential election in
November, and a headache to be inherited by whoever wins.

“Sanctions have already been imposed on almost everything
possible, so the policy is at an impasse,” said Tadashi Kimiya,
a University of Tokyo professor specialising in Korean issues.

“In reality, the means by which the United States, South
Korea and Japan can put pressure on North Korea have reached
their limits,” he said.

UNPRECEDENTED RATE

North Korea has been testing different types of missiles at
an unprecedented rate this year, and the capability to mount a
nuclear warhead on a missile is especially worrisome for its
neighbours South Korea and Japan.

“The standardisation of the nuclear warhead will enable the
DPRK to produce at will and as many as it wants a variety of
smaller, lighter and diversified nuclear warheads of higher
strike power,” KCNA said, referring to the country’s formal
name, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

It was not clear whether Pyongyang had notified Beijing or
Moscow of its planned nuclear test. Senior officials from
Pyongyang were in both capitals this week.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said she
had no information to provide when asked if China had advance
warning of the test, and would not be drawn on whether China
would support tougher sanctions against its neighbour.

Although Beijing has criticised North Korea’s nuclear and
missile tests, it has repeatedly expressed anger since the
United States and South Korea decided in July to deploy the
Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) anti-missile system
in the South.

China calls THAAD a threat to its own security and will do
nothing to bring North Korea back to the negotiating table on
its nuclear programme.

Preliminary data collected by the Vienna-based Comprehensive
Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO), which monitors
nuclear tests around the world, indicates the magnitude – around
5 – of the seismic event detected in North Korea on Friday was
greater than a previous one in January.

Jeffrey Lewis of the California-based Middlebury Institute
of International Studies said the highest estimates of seismic
magnitude suggested this was North Korea’s most powerful nuclear
test so far.

He said the seismic magnitude and surface level indicated a
blast with a 20- to 30-kilotonne yield. Such a yield would make
this test larger than the nuclear bomb dropped by the United
States on the Japanese city of Hiroshima in World War Two.

“That’s the largest DPRK test to date, 20-30kt, at least.
Not a happy day,” Lewis told Reuters.

South Korea’s military put the force of the blast at 10
kilotonnes, which would still be the North’s most powerful
nuclear blast to date.

“The important thing is, that five tests in, they now have a
lot of nuclear test experience. They aren’t a backwards state
any more,” Lewis said.

(Reporting by Jack Kim, Ju-min Park, James Pearson, Se Young
Lee, Nataly Pak, and Yun Hwan Chae in SEOUL; Additional
reporting by Ben Blanchard in BEIJING, Kaori Kaneko and Linda
Sieg in TOKYO, Kirsti Knolle in VIENNA and Eric Beech and
Michelle Nichols in WASHINGTON; Writing by Tony Munroe; Editing
by Raju Gopalakrishnan and Ian Geoghegan)

Gunmen attack American university in Kabul, students flee

A wounded man lies inside an ambulance following an attack at American University of Afghanistan in Kabul, Afghanistan

By Hamid Shalizi

KABUL (Reuters) – Suspected militants stormed the Kabul campus of the American University of Afghanistan on Wednesday with some students jumping from second floor windows to escape the gunfire and explosions, witnesses and officials said.

Foreign staff and dozens of pupils were trapped in the compound hours after the attack began at about 6:30 p.m. (10 a.m. ET).

News of casualties was sketchy, but the head of hospitals in the Afghan capital said at least one person had been killed and 14 students wounded in the assault.

“Many students jumped from the second floor, some broke their legs and some hurt their head trying to escape,” Abdullah Fahimi, a student who escaped, told Reuters. He injured his ankle making the leap.

“We were in the class when we heard a loud explosion followed by gunfire. It was very close. Some students were crying, others were screaming.”

A senior interior ministry official said that elite Afghan forces had surrounded the university and witnesses at the scene said special forces had entered the walled compound where gunfire that had lasted for more than an hour had since stopped.

“There are two gunmen hiding inside the building and a clearing operation is ongoing to eliminate them,” interior ministry spokesman, Sediq Sediqqi, said.

CAR BOMB

Ahmad Mukhtar, another student who fled the scene, said the gunmen had got into the university buildings despite security measures including three or four armed guards and watchtowers.

He added that he believed the attack had started at the main gate into the compound.

“I finished my class and was about to leave when I heard a few gunshots and a huge explosion, followed by more gunfire,” he said. “I ran toward the emergency exit with other students, climbed the wall and jumped outside.”

Kabul police chief, Abdul Rahman Rahimi, told Reuters that the attack began with a car bomb and several attackers had entered the campus.

Islamist militant groups, mainly the Afghan Taliban and a local offshoot of Islamic State, have claimed a string of recent atrocities aimed at destabilizing the country and toppling the Western-backed government of President Ashraf Ghani.

No one has claimed the university attack.

It is the second time this month that the university or its staff have been targeted.

Two teachers, an American and an Australian, remain missing after being abducted at gunpoint from a road nearby on Aug. 7.

Taliban insurgents control large swathes of Afghanistan, and local armed forces are struggling to contain them, especially in the provinces of Helmand to the south and Kunduz to the north.

NATO ended its combat mission in December 2014, but thousands of troops remain to train and assist Afghan forces, while several thousand more U.S. soldiers are engaged in a separate mission focusing on al Qaeda and Islamic State.

(Writing by Mike Collett-White; Editing by Louise Ireland)