Tag Archives: troops

At U.S. troops’ stronghold in Syria, a question of staying

At a makeshift military outpost abutting a natural gas field in eastern Syria, the signs of the country’s violent upheaval are everywhere. Bombed-out concrete buildings lie in ruins. The pipes that once carried liquefied natural gas are shredded and twisted.

A tattered U.S. flag strung between 40-foot-tall gas processing towers flies high over the base, a visible symbol that American troops are here — and not planning on leaving soon.

“We’ve got the flagpole planted,” said Army Lt. Alan Favalora, a Louisiana National Guard soldier at Conoco, the name the base acquired from the long- departed U.S. oil and gas firm that once operated the wells. “We want them to know we are committed to this region.”

How committed President Biden will be to keeping troops in Syria is uncertain, however.

The Biden administration does not appear to be in any rush to pull out the 900 U.S. troops who remain in the country, a relatively small force that some White House officials see as key to preventing a resurgence of Islamic State and a rush to reclaim the area’s oil fields by Syrian President Bashar Assad and his Russian and Iranian allies.

But White House officials have said they are reviewing the troop presence in Syria — an announcement that has raised concerns that Biden could reconsider the deployment as part of a larger scaling back of U.S. troops in the Middle East and a planned shift of Pentagon focus to Asia.

What Biden is going to do “is the one question I got from everybody,” Gen. Kenneth “Frank” McKenzie Jr., the top U.S. commander in the Middle East, said in an interview after visiting eastern Syria on Friday. “I think the new administration is going to look at this, and then we’re going to get guidance.”

Robert Ford, who was an ambassador to Syria during the Obama administration, called the U.S. strategy “deeply flawed” and said Biden should withdraw the remaining troops who have helped the Syrian Democratic Forces — a Kurdish-led militia — carve out a semiautonomous enclave in the country’s northeast.

“I don’t think it’s worth it,” Ford said about the American deployment in an interview. Islamic State “is largely contained and not in a position to threaten the U.S. homeland or even to send fighters to Europe.”

The Arab population in northeastern Syria initially supported Kurdish militias’ efforts to oust Islamic State. But many Arabs now resent being under the Kurds’ governance, creating a new source of recruits as Islamic State tries to recover, Ford added.

Conoco is one of several small outposts used by U.S. troops and the Syrian Democratic Forces, or SDF, to carve out an enclave outside of Assad’s control. That has brought relative stability to a portion of a country fighting a decade-old civil war that has taken a horrifying human toll.

Hundreds of thousands of people have been killed since the civil war broke out in 2011; in 2016, the United Nations estimated the number at 400,000. And millions more — half the population — have been displaced or fled the country, according to the United Nations.

The Syrian army is conducting its own fight against Islamic State, bolstered by Russian mercenaries, Iranian Revolutionary Guard advisors and Iranian-backed irregulars from Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan. The Syrian forces are backed by Russian warplanes and Iranian drones.

Russian and Syrian troops are just across the Euphrates River from Conoco, but both sides avoid straying into the other’s territory.

“There’s a very hard line,” said Favalora. “They can’t come over here, and we can’t go over there.”

In 2018, hundreds of Russian mercenaries and pro-government militia members were killed by U.S. airstrikes and artillery when they crossed the Euphrates only miles away from Conoco.

The U.S. partnership with the SDF has helped cement its control over eastern Syria, creating an alternative to Assad’s rule and maybe a bargaining chip if efforts to reach a political settlement of the civil war move forward.

But keeping troops in eastern Syria also helps the Pentagon control the Iraq-Syria border, containing Iran’s growing influence in the region.

There’s little trace of the Islamic State fighters who held a large swath of eastern Syria and Iraq, including the wells, until they were driven out by Kurdish and Arab militias, aided by U.S. airstrikes and special forces troops. U.S. officials say the group has fewer than 10,000 followers, many of them forced into remote mountain or desert areas, leaving it unable to hold large swaths of territory or mount mass attacks, especially in areas controlled by the SDF.

“We believe they still aspire to hold ground” in Syria and Iraq, said McKenzie. “But it’s hard for them to gather, because when they do, we get them.”

With the Biden administration only beginning to consider options in Syria, U.S. military commanders are careful not to rule out further withdrawals. But they warn that a pullout, along with cutbacks in air support, intelligence and other assistance to the SDF, would create a security vacuum that Islamic State could exploit.

“What would happen if we withdrew is a question that we would need to take a look at,” McKenzie said. “Because we’re there, there’s an element of stability.”

U.S. officials warn that a withdrawal of American troops would probably cripple the SDF, forcing Kurdish fighters to retreat into an even smaller area of northeast Syria and reach an accommodation with Assad.

It could also lead to escapes at Kurdish-run detention camps holding thousands of Islamic State fighters and the exit of militants’ family members and sympathizers from crowded refugee camps. An estimated 70,000 people who once lived under Islamic State rule are at Al Hol, the main Kurdish-run detention center, about 50 miles south of the Turkish border.

Biden is already finding military disengagement from the stew of militias, outside powers and regime forces operating in Syria to be difficult. His first publicly known military action was to order an airstrike in February against a camp in Syria, near the border with Iraq, in retaliation for an Iranian-backed militia’s attack on a U.S. base in Iraq.

How to forge a response to the chaos in Syria has bedeviled American officials since the civil war began.

Aiming to shrink the American military presence in the region, former President Obama focused on providing humanitarian aid and on political negotiations aimed at removing Assad. Obama approved covert military aid in hopes of creating a moderate Syrian rebel force as a counter to more militant fighters, a halfhearted effort that produced meager results.

After Assad used sarin and other chemical agents against rebel-held areas in 2013 near Damascus, the capital, and in the northern province of Aleppo, Obama readied military retaliation against the government but canceled the attack shortly before it was due to begin.

When Islamic State emerged in 2014, seizing a third of Syria and Iraq for its so-called caliphate, Obama rushed troops back to Iraq and approved airstrikes in Syria. In Kobani, a town in northern Syria near the Turkish border, American air bombing helped Kurdish fighters end an Islamic State siege.

Former President Trump pledged repeatedly to pull out after the near-total defeat of Islamic State in early 2019. He announced a withdrawal that December after a U.S. raid killed Islamic State leader Abu Bakr Baghdadi. But the president backed down after Defense Secretary James N. Mattis resigned in protest and White House advisors warned that too fast a withdrawal would allow Islamic State to regroup.

Last year, Trump ordered the removal of U.S. forces from the northern border near Turkey as part of a planned move to pull all American troops out of the country. But under Pentagon pressure, he later agreed to keep U.S. forces in the east to continue working with the SDF and to help protect oil fields from Islamic State.

Now, at Green Village, another base in Syria, just east of the Euphrates River, U.S. soldiers are housed in dilapidated apartments once used by oil field workers. A massive M777 howitzer artillery gun mostly sits idle, since there aren’t many Islamic State fighters to target, said Army Lt. Melissa Cardona.

Every two weeks, though, Cardona said, soldiers fire off a long-range salvo into remote areas where the group’s fighters are believed to be hiding — just to remind them “that we’re still here.”

window.fbAsyncInit = function() { FB.init({

appId : '134435029966155',

xfbml : true, version : 'v2.9' }); };

(function(d, s, id){ var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) {return;} js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Read original article here

U.S. will defend troops after rocket attack in Iraq, Lloyd Austin says

U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin speaks to Defense Department personnel during a visit by U.S. President Joe Biden at the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, February 10, 2021.

Carlos Barria | Reuters

WASHINGTON – Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin warned those responsible for carrying out last week’s rocket attack against an Iraqi base that hosts American troops will be held to account.

“The message to those that would carry out such an attack is that expect us to do what is necessary to defend ourselves,” Austin said in an interview with ABC that aired on Sunday.

“We’ll strike if that’s what we think we need to do at a time and place of our own choosing. We demand the right to protect our troops,” he said, adding that the U.S. is still assessing intelligence with its Iraqi partners.

Defense officials have previously said the attack had typical hallmarks of a strike by Iran-backed groups. Iran has denied involvement.

When asked if Iran would view a potential U.S. response as an escalation of tensions, the new Pentagon chief and retired Army four-star reiterated that Washington would do whatever is necessary to protect Americans and U.S. interests in the region.

“What they [Iranians] should draw from this, again, is that we’re going to defend our troops and our response will be thoughtful. It will be appropriate,” Austin said. “We would hope that they would choose to do the right things,” he added.

On Sunday, the U.S. military’s Central Command, which oversees the wars in the Middle East, flew its fourth bomber deployment to the region.

The show of force mission included two B-52H Stratofortress bombers alongside aircraft from Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar at different points to “deter aggression and reassure partners and allies of the U.S. military’s commitment to security in the region.”

Last month, Iran rejected an invitation from global powers who signed the 2015 nuclear deal to discuss the regime’s potential return to the negotiating table, a significant setback in the Biden administration’s efforts to revive the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA.

The White House said that the Biden administration was disappointed with Iran’s decision to skip the informal meeting but would “reengage in meaningful diplomacy to achieve a mutual return to compliance with JCPOA commitments.”

President of Iran, Hassan Rouhani speaks during the National Combat Board Meeting with Coronavirus (Covid-19) in Tehran, Iran on Nov. 21, 2020.

Iranian Presidency Handout | Anadolu Agency | Getty Images

The Biden administration has previously said that it wants to revive the nuclear deal but won’t suspend sanctions until Tehran comes back into compliance. Tehran has refused to negotiate while U.S. sanctions remain in place.

The 2015 JCPOA, brokered by the Obama administration, lifted sanctions on Iran that had crippled its economy and cut its oil exports roughly in half. In exchange for billions of dollars in sanctions relief, Iran agreed to dismantle some of its nuclear program and open its facilities to more extensive international inspections.

The U.S. and its European allies believe Iran has ambitions to develop a nuclear bomb. Tehran has denied that allegation.

In 2018, then-President Donald Trump kept a campaign promise and withdrew the United States from the JCPOA calling it the “worst deal ever.” Following Washington’s exit from the landmark nuclear deal, other signatories of the pact ⁠have tried to keep the agreement alive. 

Washington’s tense relationship with Tehran took several turns for the worse under the Trump administration.

President Donald Trump speaks during a briefing on Hurricane Michael in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, October 10, 2018. 

Saul Loeb | AFP | Getty Images

People gather to protest the US air strike in Iraq that killed Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani, who headed Iran’s Revolutionary Guards’ elite Quds force in Sanaa, Yemen on January 6, 2020.

Mohammed Hamoud | Andalou Agency | Getty Images

Soleimani’s death led the regime to further scale back compliance with the international nuclear pact. In January 2020, Iran said it would no longer limit its uranium enrichment capacity or nuclear research.

In October, the United States unilaterally re-imposed U.N. sanctions on Tehran through a snapback process, which other U.N. Security Council members have previously said Washington does not have the authority to execute because it withdrew from the nuclear deal in 2018.

A month later, a top Iranian nuclear scientist was assassinated near Tehran, which led Iran’s government to allege that Israel was behind the attack with U.S. backing.

A view shows the scene of the attack that killed Prominent Iranian scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, outside Tehran, Iran, November 27, 2020.

WANA via Reuters

During the summer of 2019, a string of attacks in the Persian Gulf set the U.S. and Iran on a path toward greater confrontation.

In June 2019, U.S. officials said an Iranian surface-to-air missile shot down an American military surveillance drone over the Strait of Hormuz. Iran said the aircraft was over its territory. That strike came a week after the U.S. blamed Iran for attacks on two oil tankers in the Persian Gulf region and after four tankers were attacked in May.

The U.S. that June slapped new sanctions on Iranian military leaders blamed for shooting down the drone. The measures also aimed to block financial resources for Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei.

Tensions soared again in September of 2019 when the U.S. blamed Iran for strikes in Saudi Arabia on the world’s largest crude processing plant and oil field. The strikes forced the kingdom to shut down half of its production operations.

The event triggered the largest spike in crude prices in decades and renewed concerns of a budding conflict in the Middle East.

The Pentagon described the strikes on the Saudi Arabian oil facilities as “sophisticated” and represented a “dramatic escalation” in tensions within the region.

All the while, Iran maintains that it was not behind the attacks.

Read original article here

Rockets hit airbase in Iraq housing US troops

BAGHDAD (AP) — At least 10 rockets slammed into a base housing U.S. and other coalition troops in western Iraq on Wednesday, military officials said. It was not known if there were any casualties, but the Iraqi military said there were no significant losses.

It was the first such attack since the U.S. struck Iran-aligned militia targets along the Iraq-Syria border last week, killing one militiaman and stoking fears of another cycle of tit-for-tat attacks as happened last year. Those attacks culminated in the U.S. drone strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qassim Soleimani in Baghdad.

No one claimed responsibility for Wednesday’s attack, which comes two days before Pope Francis is scheduled to visit the country amid concerns about security and the coronavirus pandemic. The much-anticipated trip will include stops in Baghdad, southern Iraq and the northern city of Irbil.

The rockets struck Ain al-Asad airbase in Anbar province early in the morning, U.S.-led coalition spokesman Col. Wayne Marotto said. In addition to American troops, Danish and British are among those stationed at the base. It’s the same base that Iran struck with a barrage of missiles in January last year in retaliation for the killing of Soleimani. Dozens of U.S. service members suffered concussions in that strike.

The Iraqi military released a statement saying Wednesday’s attack did not cause significant losses and that security forces had found the launch pad used for the rockets — a truck. Video of the site shows a burning truck in a desert area.

British Ambassador to Iraq Stephen Hickey condemned the attack, saying it undermined the ongoing fight against the Islamic State group. “Coalition forces are in Iraq to fight Daesh at the invitation of the Iraqi government,” he tweeted, using the Arabic acronym for IS. “These terrorist attacks undermine the fight against Daesh and destabilize Iraq.”

Denmark said coalition forces at the base were helping to bring stability and security to the country.

“Despicable attacks against Ain al-Asad base in #Iraq are completely unacceptable,” Danish Foreign Minister Jeppe Kofod tweeted. The Danish armed forces said two Danes who were at the base at the time of the attack are unharmed.

Last week’s U.S. strike along the border was in response to a spate of rocket attacks that targeted the American presence, including one that killed a coalition contractor from the Philippines outside the Irbil airport.

After that attack, the Pentagon said the strike was a “proportionate military response.”

Marotto, the coalition spokesman, said the Iraqi security forces were leading an investigation into the attack.

Frequent rocket attacks targeting the heavily fortified Green Zone, which houses the U.S. Embassy, during Donald Trump’s presidency frustrated the administration, leading to threats of embassy closure and escalatory strikes. Those attacks have increased again in recent weeks, since President Joe Biden took office, following a lull during the transition period.

U.S. troops in Iraq significantly decreased their presence in the country last year and withdrew from several Iraqi bases to consolidate chiefly in Ain al-Asad, Baghdad and Irbil.

___

Associated Press writer Jan M. Olsen in Copenhagen, Denmark, contributed to this report.

Read original article here

Rockets fired at Iraqi airbase hosting U.S.-led coalition troops

Ten rockets were fired at an Iraqi military base hosting U.S.-led coalition troops Wednesday, the latest in a series of rocket attacks in Iraq with this one just days before the Pope is due to visit the country.

The rockets targeted Ain Al-Asad airbase, northwest of Baghdad, at 7:20 a.m. local time Wednesday (11:20 p.m. Tuesday ET). The attack was confirmed in a tweet from Col. Wayne Marotto, the military spokesman for Operation Inherent Resolve, the 83-member coalition to defeat ISIS.

Iraqi security forces are leading the response and investigation, he added.

Download the NBC News app for breaking news and politics

Major General Tahseen al-Khafaji of the Iraqi security forces told NBC News that the attack happened at 7:30 a.m. local time (11:30 p.m. ET) and that there were no casualties or damages reported at the base. Security forces were investigating who was behind the attack, he added.

Wednesday’s rocket attack follows a U.S. airstrike last week in eastern Syria that killed one fighter in an Iranian-backed militia and wounded two others, according to the Pentagon.

That operation was the first known use of military force by the Biden administration and was carried out in retaliation for a deadly rocket attack on a U.S.-led coalition base in Irbil in Kurdish northern Iraq last month, as well as two other attacks.

The rocket attack in Irbil on Feb. 15 was the most deadly attack to hit U.S.-led forces in the country for almost a year, and carried echoes of another attack in December 2019 that triggered a dangerous escalation between Iran and the United States.

The latest attack could stoke fears of a repeat of last year’s tit-for-tat escalation, that culminated in the U.S. assassination of top Iranian general Qassem Soleimani in Iraq last January.

Iran retaliated less than a week later by firing missiles at American troops in Iraq, injuring dozens of U.S. service members who suffered traumatic brain injury. Ain al-Asad airbase was one of two bases targeted by Iran.

NBC News had previously reported that Iranian-backed militias were most likely behind the Irbil rocket attack in February, and that the weapons and tactics resembled previous attacks by the Iranian-linked militias. However, it was unclear if Iran had encouraged or ordered the rocket attack.

Following the attack on the Irbil base last month, Iraq’s Balad air base came under rocket fire days later, where a U.S. defense firm services the country’s fighter jets, and then two rockets landed near the U.S. Embassy compound in Baghdad.

The latest rocket attack comes two days before Pope Francis is due to travel to Iraq in what would be the first-ever papal visit to the Middle Eastern country.

Francis had intended to visit Iraq in 2014, as did St. John Paul II in 2000, but both had to call off their trips due to security concerns, according to The Associated Press.

During his trip, from Friday to Monday, Pope Francis is due to visit Baghdad, the holy Shiite city of Najaf and the northern city of Irbil, among other destinations.

He is scheduled to meet with Ali al-Sistani, the spiritual leader of millions of Shiite Muslims, in what is believed to be the first-ever meeting between a pope and an Iraqi grand ayatollah.

Speaking Wednesday at the end of his general audience, Francis asked for prayers that his visit to Iraq may go ahead “in the best way possible.”

“The Iraqi people wait for us, they waited for Saint Pope John Paul II, his visit was not allowed to take place,” he said, according to a Reuters translation. “The people cannot be let down for a second time.”

He made no mention of the deteriorating security situation in the country, according to the news wire.



Read original article here

Trump says he requested 10K National Guard troops at Capitol on day of riot

Former President Trump told Fox News late Sunday that he expressed concern over the crowd size near the Capitol days before last month’s deadly riots and personally requested 10,000 National Guard troops be deployed in response.

TRUMP TALKS AT CPAC

Trump told “The Next Revolution With Steve Hilton” that his team alerted the Department of Defense days before the rally that crowds might be larger than anticipated and 10,000 national guardsmen should be ready to deploy. He said that — from what he understands — the warning was passed along to leaders at the Capitol, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — and he heard that the request was rejected because these leaders did not like the optics of 10,000 troops at the Capitol.

“So, you know, that was a big mistake,” he said.

BIDEN ADMINISTRATION TO OPEN NEW TENT FACILITY IN TEXAS AMID SURGE IN MIGRANTS AT BORDER

Pelosi’s office and the Defense Department did not immediately respond to an email inquiry from Fox News.  Trump told Steve Hilton, the show’s host, that he “hated” to see what unfolded on Jan. 6 at the U.S. Capitol.

Much of what led to the riot at the Capitol remains a mystery.

Last week, former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund told a bipartisan Senate panel that he didn’t know then that his officers had received a report from the FBI’s field office in Norfolk, Virginia, that forecast, in detail, the chances that extremists could bring “war” to Washington the following day.

The head of the FBI’s office in Washington has said that once he received the Jan. 5 warning, the information was quickly shared with other law enforcement agencies through a joint terrorism task force.

Sund and House Sergeant-at-Arms Paul Irving also could not agree on when National Guard assistance was requested.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Sund said he submitted the request at 1:09 p.m. on Jan. 6. But Irving insisted he did not receive the request for National Guard support until after 2 p.m. while in former Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Michael Stenger’s office. When pressed, Irving said he took a call from Sund before while on the Congress floor.

Sund and Irving disagreed on when the National Guard was called and on requests for the guard beforehand. Sund said he spoke to both Stenger and Irving about requesting the National Guard in the days before the riot, and that Irving said he was concerned about the “optics” of having them present. Irving denied that, saying Sund’s account was “categorically false.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told Fox News earlier this month that he is in favor of a 9/11-style commission to examine key details that contributed to last month’s deadly riot at the Capitol.

Republicans have signaled that evidence could show that Democrat leaders were aware of the threat and did little to prevent the Jan. 6 attack.

Pelosi said the commission will “investigate and report on the facts and causes relating to the January 6, 2021, domestic terrorist attack upon the United States Capitol Complex … and relating to the interference with the peaceful transfer of power.”

Trump told Hilton that contrary to reports that have been circulating, he was not watching the riot in real-time and only began following the events later on when he heard about the chaos.

Trump said he hated to see the riot but compared it to unrest that occurred in cities like Portland and Seattle.

“I hate to see any of that, but it is a double standard,” he said.

The Associated Press contributed to this report

Read original article here

US signals it is open to sending more troops to support NATO’s mission in Iraq

“The US is participating in the force generation process for NATO Mission Iraq and will contribute its fair share to this important expanded mission,” Pentagon spokesperson Cmdr. Jessica L. McNulty told CNN. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin spoke about the mission with his NATO counterparts during a meeting with defense ministers on Thursday.

Late Thursday night, Pentagon spokesperson John Kirby clarified that there are “no plans” to send more US troops into Iraq itself. However, US troops could also support the mission from outside the country, a defense official told CNN.

“We support NATO’s expanded mission in Iraq and will continue to do so, but there are no plans to increase U.S. force levels there,” Kirby said on Twitter.
Such a move would have been a reversal of the previous administration’s policy which reduced the number of troops in the country to 2,500 following former President Donald Trump’s election defeat. The Biden administration is also weighing whether to stick to a May deadline to withdraw all American troops from Afghanistan.

At a press conference Thursday, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said the NATO mission would increase in size from 500 personnel to about 4,000.

“The US and its partners in the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS remain committed to ensuring the enduring defeat of ISIS, and the Department looks forward to continued consultations with Iraq, NATO, and the Global Coalition going forward,” McNulty added.

Austin “welcomed the expanded role” of the NATO mission in Iraq, according to a readout of the discussions provided by the Pentagon. He “expressed confidence that all of the work done to date with the Iraqi government and security forces will lead to a self-sustainable mission.”

Stoltenberg stressed the importance of the NATO mission to prevent the resurgence of ISIS.

“Not so long ago, ISIS controlled territory as big as the United Kingdom and roughly 8 million people. They have lost that control,” Stoltenberg said. “But, ISIS is still there. ISIS still operates in Iraq, and we need to make sure that they’re not able to return. And we also see some increase in attacks by ISIS. And that just highlights the importance of strengthening the Iraqi forces.”

The increase in NATO forces would be incremental and comes at the request of the Iraqi government, he added.

Trump’s acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller touted the withdrawal of troops prior to Biden taking office as a sign of the mission’s success, saying, “The drawdown of US force levels in Iraq is reflective of the increased capabilities of the Iraqi security forces. Our ability to reduce force levels is evidence of real progress.”

In early February, Austin announced a global force posture review, in which military leaders would examine US troop levels around the world, including the “military footprint, resources, strategy and missions.”

Austin stressed the importance of alliances and partnerships as part of the review.

“From Afghanistan and the Middle East, across Europe, Africa and our own hemisphere, to the wide expanse of the Western Pacific, the United States stands shoulder-to-shoulder with allies old and new, partners big and small,” Austin said. “Each of them brings to the mission unique skills, knowledge and capabilities. And each of them represents a relationship worth tending, preserving and respecting. We will do so.”

Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said that no final decisions or recommendations have been made as part of the global force posture review.

This story has been updated with additional comment from Pentagon spokesman John Kirby.



Read original article here

India-China border: New satellite images show Chinese troops have dismantled camps on disputed border near Ladakh

Satellite images taken on January 30 by US-based Maxar Technologies showed a number of Chinese deployments along Pangong Tso, a strategically important lake that runs across the two nuclear powers’ de facto border, known as the Line of Actual Control (LAC). In new images taken on Tuesday, dozens of vehicles and building structures had been removed, leaving empty land.

China announced on February 10 that both countries had agreed to disengage along the south and north shores of the lake.

“The Chinese have shown their sincerity of intent of purpose in carrying out the disengagement process,” Indian Lt. Gen. YK Joshi told CNN affiliate CNN-News18 on Thursday. “They have been doing it at a very rapid pace.”

Images and footage released by the Indian Army on February 10 showed excavator trucks and loaded convoys, Chinese soldiers dismantling tents and carrying bags out of camp, and People’s Liberation Army (PLA) tanks on the move.

Wang Wenbin, a spokesperson for China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said Beijing hoped India would “work with China to meet each other halfway.”

Indian Defense Minister Rajnath Singh told Parliament on February 11 that both sides would “remove the forward deployment in a phased, coordinated and verified manner.”

The agreement was reached at a ninth round of talks between the two sides, which have been ongoing since a deadly clash between Indian and Chinese troops at the border last June.

Under the “mutual and reciprocal” disengagement terms, China will maintain troops in the north bank area to the east of a deployment known as Finger 8, while Indian troops will maintain a permanent base near a deployment known as Finger 3, said Defense Minister Singh. Both sides will take a “similar action” in the south bank, he added.

Any structures built by either side after April 2020 will be removed, and all military activities will temporarily halt on the north bank, including patrolling. Modifications to the land, like dugouts and trenches, will also be removed, according to Joshi.

Once disengagement has been completed, senior commanders from both sides would meet within 48 hours to discuss remaining issues, Singh said.

The 2020 border clash

India and China share a 2,100 mile-long (3,379-kilometer) border in the Himalayas, but both sides claim territory on either side of it.

Pangong Tso, located some 14,000 feet (4,267 meters) above sea level, spans an area stretching from the Indian territory of Ladakh to Chinese-controlled Tibet, in the greater Kashmir region where India, China and Pakistan all claim territory.

In 1962, India and China went to war over this remote, inhospitable stretch of land, eventually establishing the LAC — but the two countries do not agree on its precise location and both regularly accuse the other of overstepping it, or seeking to expand their territory. Since then, they have had a history of mostly non-lethal scuffles over the position of the border.

But violence erupted last June when at least 20 Indian soldiers were killed during a hand-to-hand clash near Pangong Tso, marking the deadliest border conflict in more than 40 years. China has never acknowledged any casualties from that incident.

In September, China and India agreed to stop sending more troops to the border, following an escalation in tensions between the countries. The situation was temporarily resolved, with the two sides engaging in several rounds of talks.

The latest round of talks, which led to the agreement to disengage, came after the Indian Army said there was a “minor” face-off between Indian soldiers and China’s PLA near the border last month. It was “resolved by local commanders as per established protocols,” the Indian Army said in a statement, without providing detail on any injuries.

“Our aim is that there should be disengagement and stability at the LAC so that peace and tranquility can be established properly,” said Singh in his statement to Parliament. “We hope this will restore the situation to that existing prior to commencement of the standoff last year.”

But some experts argue that this disengagement alone does not restore the status quo, and that there are still unresolved points of friction between the two countries in other parts of the LAC.

“I don’t think we are going to go back to square one,” said Manoj Joshi of the Observer Research Foundation, a New Delhi-based think tank. He added that there are “other strategic points” under dispute like the Galwan Valley in Ladakh, and that China has continued to aggressively build up its presence along various parts of the border.

“This disengagement is limited to the Pangong area,” he said. “But it is about what we see in other areas. There are other strategic points … We need to be cautious about how this plays out.”

Read original article here

Pentagon May Send Troops to Assist With Vaccines, Enlarging Federal Role

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon is considering sending active-duty troops to large, federally run coronavirus vaccine centers, a major departure for the department and the first significant sign that the Biden administration is moving to take more control of a program that states are struggling to manage.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency is hoping to set up roughly 100 vaccine sites nationwide as early as next month, and on Wednesday night requested that the Pentagon send help to support the effort. The sites, and the use of the military within them, would require the approval of state governments.

While many state governors have turned to their National Guard units to assist with the mass effort to vaccinate Americans and outrace more contagious variants of the coronavirus, the Pentagon’s role has been largely behind the scenes, providing help with logistics.

During his confirmation hearings last week, Lloyd J. Austin III, the secretary of defense, said he would increase military support to manage the pandemic. On Thursday, Max Rose, Mr. Austin’s senior adviser for Covid-19, said his first topic of conversation in meetings with senior leaders had been making this the “No. 1 priority.”

Sending troops to help set up sites, assist with logistics and even put shots in arms is something the Defense Department is “actively considering,” Mr. Rose said. He declined to provide specifics, saying that Pentagon officials would be reviewing the request from FEMA carefully.

“We are obviously going to source this request,” said John F. Kirby, the Pentagon press secretary, noting that, after a review, it would most likely be filled with more National Guard, reserve and active-duty troops.

“I would say we are talking days, certainly not weeks, to get this sourced,” Mr. Kirby said. “We know there’s an urgency.”

The military is likely to provide thousands of troops in the next several months, not unlike the mobilization that the Trump administration put together a few years ago to supplement enforcement at the border with Mexico.

Many states and territories have set up large vaccination sites, and over half are using National Guard members to give shots, drawing on doctors, nurses, medics and others skilled in injections. FEMA, an agency within the Department of Homeland Security, has already told six states, two territories and Washington, D.C., that it would spend $1 billion on vaccine measures, including community vaccination sites.

It was not immediately clear where the vaccines would come from for new federal sites; they would most likely be drawn from the supply already given to individual states and territories. Most states have not come close to administering the vaccine they have been given.

Covid-19 Vaccines ›

Answers to Your Vaccine Questions

Currently more than 150 million people — almost half the population — are eligible to be vaccinated. But each state makes the final decision about who goes first. The nation’s 21 million health care workers and three million residents of long-term care facilities were the first to qualify. In mid-January, federal officials urged all states to open up eligibility to everyone 65 and older and to adults of any age with medical conditions that put them at high risk of becoming seriously ill or dying from Covid-19. Adults in the general population are at the back of the line. If federal and state health officials can clear up bottlenecks in vaccine distribution, everyone 16 and older will become eligible as early as this spring or early summer. The vaccine hasn’t been approved in children, although studies are underway. It may be months before a vaccine is available for anyone under the age of 16. Go to your state health website for up-to-date information on vaccination policies in your area

You should not have to pay anything out of pocket to get the vaccine, although you will be asked for insurance information. If you don’t have insurance, you should still be given the vaccine at no charge. Congress passed legislation this spring that bars insurers from applying any cost sharing, such as a co-payment or deductible. It layered on additional protections barring pharmacies, doctors and hospitals from billing patients, including those who are uninsured. Even so, health experts do worry that patients might stumble into loopholes that leave them vulnerable to surprise bills. This could happen to those who are charged a doctor visit fee along with their vaccine, or Americans who have certain types of health coverage that do not fall under the new rules. If you get your vaccine from a doctor’s office or urgent care clinic, talk to them about potential hidden charges. To be sure you won’t get a surprise bill, the best bet is to get your vaccine at a health department vaccination site or a local pharmacy once the shots become more widely available.

That is to be determined. It’s possible that Covid-19 vaccinations will become an annual event, just like the flu shot. Or it may be that the benefits of the vaccine last longer than a year. We have to wait to see how durable the protection from the vaccines is. To determine this, researchers are going to be tracking vaccinated people to look for “breakthrough cases” — those people who get sick with Covid-19 despite vaccination. That is a sign of weakening protection and will give researchers clues about how long the vaccine lasts. They will also be monitoring levels of antibodies and T cells in the blood of vaccinated people to determine whether and when a booster shot might be needed. It’s conceivable that people may need boosters every few months, once a year or only every few years. It’s just a matter of waiting for the data.

Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, a Republican, has already said he does not want “FEMA camps” in his state. “That’s not necessary in Florida,” he told reporters last week after the Biden administration released its plan to address the pandemic, including the FEMA sites. “All we need is more vaccine.”

The Trump administration largely preferred the states to manage efforts to combat the pandemic, leaving governors to acquire protective gear for health care workers and manage testing, contact tracing and other aspects of response. While it cut deals with pharmaceutical companies to expedite the development of vaccines and offered guidance on whom to prioritize in receiving shots, it largely left states to manage their supplies.

State governments have run into a number of snags in getting their vaccines into arms, including resistance among some health care and nursing home workers and others in prioritized groups to the vaccine, and struggles in medical centers to manage their supplies.

The Biden administration has set goals to get more Americans vaccinated quickly, but it is not clear that there will be enough supply should it succeed in speeding up the logistical system, particularly with many Americans now awaiting second shots.

The federal government had been reimbursing states — many of them struggling from large drops in tax revenue — for only 75 percent of their National Guard costs associated with coronavirus relief. The administration will increase that to 100 percent, including for support needed to distribute and administer vaccines, until the end of September.

Zolan Kanno-Youngs contributed reporting.

Read original article here

Chinese and Indian Troops Clash at Their Disputed Border

NEW DELHI — Indian and Chinese troops have clashed along their disputed Himalayan border, according to media and military reports on Monday, as Beijing quietly intensifies pressure against its southern neighbor with new incursions into territory claimed by both sides.

Details about the latest skirmish remain foggy, and Indian officials played down the events. Indian media outlets and independent military analysts said that the clash happened several days ago, and that soldiers on both sides were wounded, although no fatalities were reported.

The Indian Army has said only that a “minor face-off” occurred last week in northern Sikkim, a mountainous Indian state bordering China.

The face-off was “resolved by local commanders as per established protocols,” an Indian Army statement read, without explaining how the face-off occurred or whether anyone was injured.

Chinese officials were even more tight-lipped. At a regularly scheduled news conference on Monday, Zhao Lijian, a spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, emphasized that the two sides were holding military talks. Hu Xijin, the editor of Global Times, a nationalist tabloid controlled by the Communist Party, called the reports “fake news” and said that small frictions occur often.

Though details were scant, reports of a clash show that tensions are still simmering between the two Asian giants, which fought a war in 1962 and have been eyeing each other warily across their unresolved frontier ever since. Tensions burst into the open in June, when troops from both countries engaged in a deadly brawl along the border of the Ladakh region in northern India.

No shots were fired in that battle, stemming from a tacit understanding that neither side along the tense Himalayan border should use firearms. Still, the deaths of more than 20 Indian soldiers and an unknown number of Chinese troops exposed the increasing aggressiveness of both countries, which are governed by nationalist leaders with little political incentive to back down.

As many as 100,000 troops from the Indian and Chinese armies are now facing off across inhospitable mountain passes in subzero temperatures in the Ladakh region alone, military experts estimate.

Since the summer, both sides have tried to ease tensions. But in India, the government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi is contending with reports that China is far from done encroaching on disputed borderlands.

The NDTV report of new structures built in the harsh mountainous area is difficult to independently verify. Two Indian government officials in Arunachal said the Chinese had recently built villages in disputed areas along the border in places that used to have just a few remote military posts.

“Where the army had been living, some civilians also started living there,” said D.J. Borah, a senior district official based in that area.

When asked about the new village, officials at the Indian Foreign Ministry referred back to a statement given to NDTV in which the ministry said that it was aware of the recent report and that “China has undertaken such infrastructure construction activity in the past several years.”

Leaders of India’s main opposition party have criticized Mr. Modi for staying silent on the matter. “China is expanding its occupation into Indian territory,” Rahul Gandhi, the leader of the party, Indian National Congress, said on Twitter.

Chinese officials don’t deny that there are new villages in the area. But they say that area is in China.

“China’s normal construction on its own territory is entirely a matter of sovereignty,” Hua Chunying, a spokeswoman for the Chinese Foreign Minister, said this month.

Local leaders in Arunachal Pradesh interviewed by The New York Times said the Chinese forces have been slowly but steadily cutting away small pieces of Indian territory, much like the strategy China has shown in the South China Sea and along its border with Bhutan. Military analysts call this salami slicing.

“Longju used to be our land,” said Chatung Mra, a bank manager, using the local name for the general area where the Chinese village now stands. “Our forefathers used to live there.”

“We feel very bad but what can we do?” Mr. Mra asked. “We can’t fight them.”

The area in question is in the foothills of the Himalayas and more than 1,500 miles from New Delhi, the capital. Official Indian maps showed that the Longju area lies several miles inside India, said the local leaders who have visited near the disputed area. But China, they said, has effectively controlled it since 1959.

In recent years, they said, China has engaged in a flurry of construction projects along the border and rendered areas that used to be accessible to people on the Indian side now inaccessible.

The Chinese infrastructure campaign, the local leaders said, far outpaced what India has been doing and has been effective in absorbing disputed areas into China.

“Our place used to be up to five or six kilometers beyond Longju,” said Tungpo Mra, a leader of the Mra, a local ethnic group. “Now all that is in China’s control.”

Taro Bamina, the general secretary of an Arunachal youth group, was especially frustrated and helped organize a protest last week that included hundreds of demonstrators in Daporijo, an Arunachal market town.

“This is our motherland,” Mr. Bamina said. “We wanted to tell the government of India. ‘Why didn’t you take care of that?’’’

What local leaders are reporting in Arunachal is similar to what local leaders in Ladakh have reported more than 2,000 miles away. In the past few years, according to Ladakh leaders, China has stepped up construction projects along the frontier with India, which zigs and zags through high mountain passes and has never been marked. The result is that China can move troops — and civilians — to the borderlands much faster than India.

Chinese and Indian military commanders continue to hold talks along the disputed border in the Ladakh region. In the meantime, Ladakhi herders have complained that they have had to chase away Chinese vehicles that brazenly crossed into India.

Sushant Singh, a senior fellow at the Center for Policy Research in New Delhi and an Indian Army veteran, said the latest clash in Sikkim, an area where India had expected to have a strategic advantage because it has more troops, suggested that tensions would rise as the ground thaws.

“If you see it in light of everything going on,” Mr. Singh said, “it means that, the coming summer, we are looking at a very tense situation.”

Steven Lee Myers contributed reporting from Seoul, South Korea.



Read original article here

Chinese and Indian troops ‘in new border clash’

Sikkim is one of many areas that have seen India-China disputes. File image

Chinese and Indian troops have reportedly clashed again in a disputed border area, with injuries on both sides, Indian media say.

The incident took place in north Sikkim last Wednesday. India’s army said there had been a “minor” incident that had been “resolved”.

Tensions are high along the world’s longest disputed border. Both sides claim large areas of territory.

At least 20 Indian soldiers died in a skirmish in the Ladakh area last June.

What happened in the latest incident?

It happened at Naku La in north Sikkim, the media reports said. Sikkim is an Indian state sandwiched between Bhutan and Nepal, about 2,500km (1,500 miles) east of the Ladakh area.

A Chinese patrol tried to enter Indian territory and was forced back, the officials said. Some reports said sticks and stones were used, but there were no gunshots.

An Indian army statement played down the incident, saying there “was a minor face-off at Naku La area of North Sikkim on 20 January 2021 and the same was resolved by local commanders as per established protocols”.

One source told the Times of India that both sides brought in reinforcements after a “brawl” but there was no gunfire and the situation was under control.

China’s foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian did not give details of the incident, but said China’s troops were “committed to upholding peace” and urged India to “refrain from actions that might escalate or complicate the situation along the border”.

The editor-in-chief of China’s state-affiliated Global Times tweeted there was “no record of this clash in the patrol log of the Chinese side”.

BBC map

Flashpoints and dialogue

Analysis by Vikas Pandey, BBC News, Delhi

The latest reports about skirmishes show that tensions are still running high. The Indian army statement shows that both nations are still keen on keeping the dialogue route open and don’t want skirmishes to derail the process.

They have conducted several military-level talks to ease tensions but nothing concrete has come of them yet.

And troops are still facing each other at several flashpoints along their contested border.

Some former Indian officers say such exchanges can’t be avoided when the situation is so fluid. But they agree that talks need to continue as both nations would not want a war – not even a limited one.

Why are there border disputes?

A lot of the 3,440km (2,100-mile) border is ill defined. Rivers, lakes and snowcaps mean the line can shift, bringing soldiers face to face at many points, sometimes leading to confrontations.

There was a minor clash last May at Naku La, which is at an altitude of more than 5,000m (16,000ft). One month later a deadly clash erupted in the Galwan Valley in Ladakh. In addition to the Indian deaths, China also reportedly suffered casualties although it made no official comment.

Since the savage hand-to-hand fighting there, in which no shots were fired, the two sides have held de-escalation talks. The ninth round of them took place between military commanders on Sunday in eastern Ladakh but there have been no details of any agreements.

The nuclear-armed neighbours have a lot to lose, with China one of India’s biggest trading partners.

Relations have worsened amid the border face-off. Both have stepped up infrastructure construction along some of the border areas.

India’s government has also banned more than 200 Chinese apps, citing cyber security concerns.

The two countries have fought only one war, in 1962, when India suffered a heavy defeat.

An agreement was signed in 1996 barring the use of guns and explosives from the Line of Actual Control, as the disputed border is known. It has held, although China did accuse Indian troops of firing warning shots in Ladakh last September.

What is Sikkim’s strategic significance?

The tiny east Himalayan region has been a key flashpoint between India and China for decades. It saw clashes in their 1962 war. Five years later, fighting along its border left several hundred soldiers dead on either side.

The former kingdom was an Indian protectorate at the time, and only became the country’s 22nd state after a referendum in 1975.

Sikkim is near a high-altitude plateau known as Doklam in India and Donglang in China.

India fears that greater Chinese road access to the plateau would threaten India’s strategically vulnerable “chicken’s neck”, the 20km (12-mile) wide Siliguri Corridor that links seven north-eastern states, including Assam, to the rest of the country.

The border in Sikkim is also crucial for another reason. Indian military experts say it’s the only area through which India could make an offensive response to a Chinese incursion, and the only stretch of the Himalayan frontier where Indian troops have a terrain and tactical advantage. They have higher ground, and the Chinese positions there are squeezed between India and Bhutan.

Read original article here