Britain, European Union, Foreign Affairs, Government, Iraq, Islamic State, Middle East, Military, Politics, United States

Britain supports the Kurds in northern Iraq…

IRAQ

BRITAIN is set to provide anti-tank weapons, night vision googles, radar and body armour to Kurdish forces in northern Iraq who are battling Islamic State jihadists.

The region’s fighters say they will ask the UK for specific equipment after Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond said a request for weapons and other equipment would be ‘considered favourably’.

An emergency meeting of EU ministers has condemned the ‘atrocities and abuses’ against religious minorities – such as the Yazidis – and backed the arming of Kurdish forces.

RAF Chinooks sent by Britain to the region are already ferrying weapons supplied by other countries, including France, to Kurds in the city of Irbil. It is here where British and US Special Forces are helping plan an offensive against the IS militants.

Map of Iraq and surrounding areas highlighting IS advances and aid-drop points.

Map of Iraq and surrounding areas highlighting IS advances and aid-drop points.

They are also providing training in the use of the newly supplied weapons, including ‘Milan’ anti-tank missiles and Belgian-made machine guns.

Kurdish fighters would like the UK to provide Javelin anti-tank missiles, mortars, heavy-calibre machine guns and sniper rifles as well as body armour, infrared night vision googles and helmets. They may also be given a portable radar called MSTAR used to locate incoming fire and enemy positions.

Britain had previously said it would only ferry weapons to the Kurds, not supply them. The change of stance could risk drawing the UK back into Iraq’s conflict.

The weapons supply and training are in addition to the RAF Tornados, Hercules transport planes, and other support vehicles and troops already in the region.

The chancellor of the Kurdish region’s security council, Masrour Barzani, said he welcomed the ‘British decision to supply us with the effective weapons that we’ve been asking for’.

The British Government insists that tackling the dire humanitarian situation in Iraq remains the UK’s top priority.

A Downing Street spokesman, said: ‘Ensuring that Kurdish forces are able to counter IS advances is also vital. We have made clear that we will consider any requests from the Iraq or Kurdistan Regional Government favourably.’

No 10 highlighted the plight of the Dahuk region in northern Iraq where 450,000 displaced people are taking shelter – a 50 per cent increase in the area’s population. Farhad Atushi, the governor of Dahuk, said the US and UK are ‘politically and ethically responsible for helping Iraq’.

Mr Atushi has also warned of the threat of ‘genocide’, adding: ‘We have hundreds of thousands (of refugees). We’re going to face an international humanitarian catastrophe because many of those are children who are going to die.’

Former Lib Dem leader Lord Ashdown also welcomed the Government’s decision as he warned that conflicts in Iraq and Syria would result in redrawing Middle Eastern borders.

He said the Kurds could act as a ‘northern bulwark’ against the advancing IS, but added: ‘We are acting as handmaidens to Kurdish independence, with implications for Turkey, which is why you have to have a wider strategy.’

Lord Ashdown continued: ‘It really is time we joined the dots. Instead of having a series of plans for a series of humanitarian catastrophes, we need to have an integrated strategy for containing a widening war.’

Mr Hammond has hailed the announcement that Iraq’s prime minister Nouri al-Maliki was relinquishing his post, calling on his replacement Haider al-Abadi to form an inclusive government.

It is hoped Mr al-Abadi will be better placed to unite Iraqis in fighting back against IS militants.

Standard
Economic, Europe, European Union, Financial Markets, Government, Russia, Society, United States

Tough Western sanctions hit Russia…

RUSSIA

Europe has imposed the toughest sanctions against Russia since the Cold War, sending the rouble into a tailspin and prompting warnings that British firms will be hit hard.

EU leaders have agreed to embargoes against vast sectors of the Russian economy, designed to cripple its banks, energy firms and defence capabilities.

The most drastic measure will prevent Russia’s banks from issuing stocks or bonds in Europe, potentially forcing them into the arms of the Russian state for support.

Nearly half of the bonds issued by big state-run Russian lenders are in European markets. There will also be a blanket ban on all future arms sales to Moscow.

Another eight names of individuals and three firms will be added to an EU blacklist, meaning they will be subject to asset freezes and travel bans. Of those, four are described as personal ‘cronies’ of President Vladimir Putin.

President Barack Obama said the US has also expanded sanctions against Russia. He added: ‘If Russia continues on this current path, the costs on Russia will continue to grow.’ EU leaders said Russia would be shown that ‘destabilising Ukraine, or any other Eastern European neighbouring state, will bring heavy costs to its economy’.

‘Russia will find itself increasingly isolated by its own actions,’ they added. ‘Illegal annexation of territory and deliberate destabilisation of a neighbouring sovereign country cannot be accepted in 21st-century Europe.

‘Furthermore, when the violence created spirals out of control and leads to the killing of almost 300 innocent civilians in their flight from the Netherlands to Malaysia, the situation requires and urgent and determined response.’

The rouble crashed to its lowest level since early May against the dollar as leaders prepared to implement the new sanctions.

Downing Street conceded that the British economy, particularly financial services, would suffer.

BP warned sanctions could ‘adversely impact our business.’ BP has a 20 per cent stake in Russian energy giant Rosneft.

Moscow is likely to retaliate , with one group of Russian lawmakers suggesting banning international accounting firms and consulting groups from the country. Targets were said to be Deloitte, KPMG, Ernst & Young, PwC, Boston Consulting Group and McKinsey. David Cameron said: ‘We want to make it clear that Russia’s behaviour in destabilising another country – Ukraine – is unacceptable.’

In another dramatic escalation of tensions between Russia and the West, Mr Obama has accused Putin of conducting tests in violation of a 1987 nuclear missile treaty.

Mr Obama wrote to the Russian leader protesting about a breach US officials described as ‘a very serious matter’.

 

Standard
Britain, Economic, Europe, European Union, Financial Markets, Government, Politics, Society

The sanctions on Russia should not be borne solely by London…

EUROPE

Germany and the rest of the Eurozone trade far more with Russia than Britain does. Our European partners buy billions of pounds worth of oil and gas, hugely profitable cash-flows which props up the regime of Vladimir Putin.

Yet, Europe’s proposed sanctions on Russia have been carefully designed to inflict as much damage as possible on the City of London, while shielding other economies from collateral damage. The stench of hypocrisy fulminates through the corridors of power.

The aim of the European establishment is to punish Mr Putin, whose behaviour has been appalling. But the cost should not be borne solely by London. According to Europe’s plans, German companies will still be able to sell their wares with relative impunity; Italy will continue to receive their energy supplies courtesy of Moscow; and, France will deliver its warships to Russia as promised. The bulk of the cost will be paid for by British workers who will lose their jobs to satisfy Europe’s desire to be seen to be acting and doing the right thing.

This is the latest example of the European elites showing their expertise in turning every crisis to their advantage. The higher echelons of the European establishment are clearly seeking to use the need to punish Russia as an excuse to intensify their long-standing campaign against the City.

The EU often makes grandiose claims about being a global force for democracy and human rights. Splendid as those values are, time and time again the EU reveals itself as merely an alliance of competing national interests. On matters of global conflict, Brussels not only struggles to produce a united front, but also often ends up pursuing its own internal vendettas instead. This prejudice is seen within the corporatist view of the Eurozone elites when, for example, they are happy enough to sign massive energy deals with corrupt and authoritarian regimes, but don’t either like or understand the workings and mechanisations of genuine free markets. The creation of the single currency too saw much of the financial activity previously conducted in Frankfurt and Paris shift to London.

****

Effective sanctions should mean moving beyond the freezing of Russian assets in EU capitals and foreign travel bans on Mr Putin’s inner circle. Financial services, defence, and energy are some of the areas that should come under tighter sanction.

Financial sanctions operate in two ways. They restrict the access of Russian companies to working and investment capital, impeding not just their growth but their continuing activity, so hurting the Russian economy. They also make overseas investors much less likely to continue investing in Russia, with a similar effect. Defence sanctions, essentially the sale of Russian military equipment to other EU members, has the same consequence with the additional value of Russia becoming increasingly isolated. Sanctions on energy can range from tougher regulatory action to an effective blockade on the sales of oil and gas to the EU. Germany’s recent withholding from Gazprom of permission to use a pipeline is illustrative of the effectiveness of such action.

Further sanctions like these would, however, act like a two-edged sword. Certainly, they will injure Russia’s economy, but they will also wound Europe. Some parts of Europe could not get through a winter without severe difficulties if homes and offices were not heated by Russian gas. Some economies remain distinctly shaky and probably wouldn’t want to commit to a sanctioning agenda that would likely rebound on their own trading position.

Of course, it is only right that where Mr Putin’s regime can be targeted, given his ongoing refusal to face up to the consequences of his support for Ukraine’s separatists, such action be taken. Weaning Europe from its addiction to Russian gas is one real way to punish the Russian president and his cronies. Germany gets around a third of its gas and oil from Russia. Given that energy accounts for around 68 per cent of Russia’s exports, an opportunity to hit the regime hard should have been taken by now.

Standard