US military says pulls 12 fighter jets from base in Turkey

The U.S. military said on Wednesday it was removing 12 fighter jets from Incirlik air base in Turkey after sending them there last month to bolster the fight against Islamic State and to help reassure Turkey after Russian incursions its airspace.

US supreme court refuses to let Texas close 10 abortion clinics

By The Guardian

The US supreme court stepped in to postpone reproductive-rights restrictions that would have left the vast state of Texas with fewer than 10 abortion clinics, allowing healthcare providers and women’s rights groups time to petition the nation’s highest tribunal to review their fate.

El Supremo de EEUU aprueba el matrimonio gay en todo el país

Vía El Mundo

Las diferencias entre estados a la hora de reconocer el matrimonio de parejas del mismo sexo llega a su fin en Estados Unidos. El Tribunal Supremo ha fallado por cinco votos a favor y cuatro en contra, que es un derecho nacional.

Al Qaeda confirma la muerte de su líder en Yemen en un ataque de EE UU

Vía El País

La rama yemení de Al Qaeda ha confirmado en un vídeo publicado en Internet este martes que su líder, Naser Al Wuhayshi, ha muerto en un bombardeo de Estados Unidos. El grupo ha nombrado a su antiguo jefe militar en la península Arábiga, Qasim al-Raymi, como su sustituto. Al Wuhayshi fue uno de los fundadores de Al Qaeda en la Península Arábiga, organización responsable del atentado terrorista que acabó en 2007 con la vida de ocho turistas españoles en Yemen. En una información exclusiva publicada recientemente por EL PAÍS, un topo de la red terrorista, Hani Mujahid, responsabiliza a Al Wuhayshi de ser uno de los terroristas que planificó el ataque.

Jeb Bush promises to 'fix' the US if elected president

By BBC News

Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush has officially launched his US presidential campaign, promising to "run with heart" and "take nothing and no one for granted".

Mr Bush, the son and brother of two former presidents, spoke in his hometown of Miami, Florida.

A gripping glimpse into bin Laden's decline and fall

By CNN

Newly released al Qaeda documents, including letters to and from Osama bin Laden in the year or so before his May 2011 death, show an organization that understood it had severe problems resulting from the CIA drone program that was killing many of the group's leaders in Pakistan's tribal regions bordering Afghanistan.

As a result of this pressure, al Qaeda officials were seriously considering relocating elements of the organization to other countries such as Afghanistan or Iran. They also entered into ceasefire discussions through intermediaries with elements of Pakistan's intelligence service, ISI, although the documents suggest that nothing came of these discussions and there is no evidence in the documents indicating that the Pakistani government had any clue about bin Laden's location or presence in Pakistan.

CIA efforts to spy on the group and kill its leaders were so effective that in June 2010 an al Qaeda official urged bin Laden, "You should have fewer exchanges of correspondence with us during this period. Make the period between contacts longer and further apart. Take excessive caution and care, especially this year."

This was wise counsel. Within a few weeks of this letter being written, the CIA would track bin Laden's trusted courier to his longtime hideout in Abbottabad, Pakistan, and on May 1, 2011, a U.S. Navy SEAL operation ordered by President Barack Obama killed al Qaeda's leader.

The new al Qaeda documents are part of a trove of many thousands that the SEALs recovered at bin Laden's compound. Several were released during the Brooklyn trial last month of al Qaeda operative Abid Naseer.

Seventeen of these documents had also been released around the first anniversary of bin Laden's death. It's long past time for the government to release more of these thousands of captured documents -- with any necessary redactions for national security purposes -- as they help us to understand better what precipitated the decline and fall of the terrorist group that once dominated the attention of the world, just as ISIS does today.

The documents show how al Qaeda's 9/11 operation unleashed so much force against it, including the CIA drone program, that it had to hide in the shadows and couldn't pull off any successful operation in the West for many years before the death of bin Laden.

The documents demonstrate that almost a decade after 9/11 al Qaeda was struggling to get any kind of operation going against Western targets. In a report on "external operations," an al Qaeda official explained that a plot to attack the U.S. Embassy in Russia had fizzled and that despite sending al Qaeda members to the UK to hit "several targets" these operations had also come to nothing.

Al Qaeda had also sent "three brothers" on a terrorist mission to Denmark, a country that bin Laden loathed because of the publication by a Danish newspaper of cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed, but had "lost contact with them."

Given all the problems the group was having, an al Qaeda strategist suggested refocusing efforts on carrying out terrorist attacks using the "simplest things such as 
household knives, gas tanks, fuel, diesel and others like airplanes, trains and cars as 
killing tools."

2011: U.S. offers details about bin Laden raid

A major theme of the documents is how much punishment the CIA drone program was inflicting on al Qaeda. Al Qaeda officials considered moving to Nuristan, a remote mountainous region of eastern Afghanistan, or to other parts of Pakistan such as Sindh or Balochistan and even to Iran, which had been a key sanctuary for a number of al Qaeda's leaders after the fall of the Taliban in late 2001. Al Qaeda mulled opening an office in Iran, but "we backed off this idea due to financial costs and other considerations."

In a letter to bin Laden, an al Qaeda official provided a vivid description of the death by drone of Mustafa Yazid, then the No. 3 leader of the group, on the night of May 22, 2010.

The al Qaeda official wrote that Yazid was staying at the house of a "well-known" supporter of al Qaeda when a drone started making "distinctive loops that we all know and all the brothers have experienced. They all know that if a plane starts doing these turns, it is going to strike."

Yazid and his wife and three daughters and granddaughter were all killed in the drone strike, according to the official.

The official lamented that drones are "still circling our skies every day" and the only relief from them came when weather conditions worsened and there was cloud cover. The official wrote but "then they come back when the sky is clear."

Al Qaeda had tried to use jamming technology and to hack into the drones "but no result so far," according to the al Qaeda official.

Underlining al Qaeda's weakness, during the summer of 2010 the group was contemplating some kind of ceasefire with the Pakistani government and had entered into negotiations with it via intermediaries to explain that al Qaeda's battle was "primarily against the Americans. You became part of the battle when you sided with the Americans. If you were to leave us and our affairs alone, we would leave you alone."

Highlights of bin Laden documents released in 2012

The documents show that such a ceasefire was purely tactical rather than the beginning of some kind of rapprochement between al Qaeda and the Pakistanis. At one point an al Qaeda official referred to "bin Laden's call to jihad against the apostate government of Pakistan." Apostasy is a grave crime in Islam and punishable by death in the eyes of members of al Qaeda.

According to the documents, Pakistani intelligence officials "reached out to" al Qaeda through longtime jihadist sympathizers who had formerly held positions in the Pakistani intelligence agency, ISI, as well as the leaders of militant groups such as the Haqqani Taliban faction that have contacts with the ISI.

The documents suggest that nothing came of these discussions, and there is no evidence in them that the Pakistanis had any idea that bin Laden was in Pakistan or indeed was even alive.

Bergen in 2013: Bin Laden's life on the run

Moreover during the course of reporting the book "Manhunt," about the CIA's long search for bin Laden, I spoke to several senior U.S. officials who said that the U.S. intelligence community was covertly monitoring the communications of Pakistani army chief Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and ISI director Ahmed Shuja Pasha the night of the bin Laden raid and they were both surprised about him being in Abbottabad.

The documents did show one area of real success for al Qaeda, which was kidnapping for ransom, a tactic ISIS has been using so effectively.

In 2008, al Qaeda had captured Afghanistan's former ambassador to Pakistan, Abdul Khaliq Farahi. After two years of negotiations he was exchanged for $5 million. An al Qaeda official told bin Laden that some of this money would be a "gift" to him "from all the brothers." Bin Laden cautioned al Qaeda's leaders to be careful with the ransom money, as it might have to last the terrorist group several years.

The documents show that al Qaeda's leaders were in regular contact with Tayeb Agha, a close aide to Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar. Agha has met with U.S. officials on a number of occasions to discuss peace negotiations.

2011: How U.S. forces killed Osama bin Laden

Far from the image of the isolated man in the cave that was prevalent before he was killed, the documents portray bin Laden as a hands-on manager of al Qaeda.

In a 10-page letter that bin Laden wrote in August 2010, he had reams of advice for the al Qaeda-aligned group Al-Shabaab in Somalia, ordering that the group not attack Sufi Muslims in Somalia and also suggesting a plan to assassinate the President of neighboring Uganda who had sent his troops to fight Al-Shabaab.

Bin Laden gave detailed notes about how Al-Shabaab could raise its agricultural output by using small dams for irrigation, and he suggested planting palm olive trees imported from Indonesia. He also advised Al-Shabaab against cutting down too many trees because it is "dangerous for the environment of the region." Bin Laden had lived in nearby Sudan in the mid-'90s, establishing a number of business and farming enterprises.

Bin Laden, something of a micromanager, told his top lieutenant to "send us the resumes of all the brothers who may be nominated now or in the future for important management positions." He also cautioned against sending any emails, including even encrypted ones, urging that hand-delivered letters were the only safe method of communication.

Bergen on 2012 documents: Seized documents show delusional leader and micromanager

Bin Laden also ordered that some of the tens of thousands of documents leaked by U.S. Army Pvt. Bradley Manning to WikiLeaks in 2010 be translated so that al Qaeda could better understand "the enemy's policies in the region." And he suggested that his lieutenants reach out to Ahmed Zaidan, an Al Jazeera reporter based in Pakistan who had interviewed bin Laden in the past, so that he could have plenty of time to prepare a report to mark the 10th anniversary of 9/11. Bin Laden said he didn't want Zaidan to interview any members of his family, but he told his team to get in touch with the reporter "promptly" to get a sense of the questions he wanted bin Laden to answer.

Bin Laden was killed four months before the 10th anniversary of 9/11. As the new al Qaeda documents make clear he died knowing that his dream of another terrorism spectacular in the West was just that: a dream. And the organization that he had founded was in deep trouble because of the CIA drone program.

US and Europe 'on the same page' in pursuit of Iran nuclear deal, says Kerry

By The Guardian

US and European diplomats said on Saturday they are united in their strategy and goal in trying to achieve a nuclear deal with Iran.

“We are on the same page,” the US secretary of state, John Kerry, said after meeting the French foreign minister, Laurent Fabius. “We know what we are chasing after and we are chasing after the same thing.”

Kerry and Fabius cited progress in the talks, with the last round just wrapping up on Wednesday in Switzerland. But the officials acknowledged big gaps that must be bridged if the sides are to reach a deal by the end of March deadline that the negotiators have set.

“There is progress in certain areas but there are also divergences,” Fabius said.

The next round of talks is set to begin on 15 March.

Kerry said Iran still needed to make decisions that would allow it to prove to the world that it is not trying to develop nuclear weapons. Tehran claims its nuclear programme is peaceful and exists only to produce energy for civilian use.

“We have a critical couple of weeks ahead of us,” Kerry said. “But we are not feeling a sense of urgency that we have to get any deal. We have to get the right deal.”

Iran’s vice-president, meanwhile, said technical roadblocks hampering a final nuclear accord with world powers had been eliminated during ongoing discussions with American negotiators.

Ali Akbar Salehi, who is also in charge of Iran’s nuclear agency, told state television on Saturday that Tehran offered proposals to remove “fake concerns” over the country’s nuclear programme, paving the way for a final deal.

But the hardline daily paper Kayhan slammed the negotiations, saying that an American proposal of a 10-year suspension of Iran’s uranium enrichment activities is a first step aimed at finally toppling Iran’s ruling Islamic government.

Iran and the six-country group – the US, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany – hope to reach a rough deal on Iran’s disputed nuclear programme by March and a final agreement by 30 June.

Don't Arm Ukraine

By John J. Mearsheimer, from New York Times

The Ukraine crisis is almost a year old and Russia is winning. The separatists in eastern Ukraine are gaining ground and Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin, shows no signs of backing down in the face of Western economic sanctions.

Unsurprisingly, a growing chorus of voices in the United States is calling for arming Ukraine. A recent report from three leading American think tanks endorses sending Kiev advanced weaponry, and the White House’s nominee for secretary of defense, Ashton B. Carter, said last week to the Senate armed services committee, “I very much incline in that direction.”

They are wrong. Going down that road would be a huge mistake for the United States, NATO and Ukraine itself. Sending weapons to Ukraine will not rescue its army and will instead lead to an escalation in the fighting. Such a step is especially dangerous because Russia has thousands of nuclear weapons and is seeking to defend a vital strategic interest.

There is no question that Ukraine’s military is badly outgunned by the separatists, who have Russian troops and weapons on their side. Because the balance of power decisively favors Moscow, Washington would have to send large amounts of equipment for Ukraine’s army to have a fighting chance.

But the conflict will not end there. Russia would counter-escalate, taking away any temporary benefit Kiev might get from American arms. The authors of the think tank study concede this, noting that “even with enormous support from the West, the Ukrainian Army will not be able to defeat a determined attack by the Russian military.” In short, the United States cannot win an arms race with Russia over Ukraine and thereby ensure Russia’s defeat on the battlefield.

Proponents of arming Ukraine have a second line of argument. The key to success, they maintain, is not to defeat Russia militarily, but to raise the costs of fighting to the point where Mr. Putin will cave. The pain will supposedly compel Moscow to withdraw its troops from Ukraine and allow it to join the European Union and NATO and become an ally of the West.

This coercive strategy is also unlikely to work, no matter how much punishment the West inflicts. What advocates of arming Ukraine fail to understand is that Russian leaders believe their country’s core strategic interests are at stake in Ukraine; they are unlikely to give ground, even if it means absorbing huge costs.

Great powers react harshly when distant rivals project military power into their neighborhood, much less attempt to make a country on their border an ally. This is why the United States has the Monroe Doctrine, and today no American leader would ever tolerate Canada or Mexico joining a military alliance headed by another great power.

Russia is no exception in this regard. Thus Mr. Putin has not budged in the face of sanctions and is unlikely to make meaningful concessions if the costs of the fighting in Ukraine increase.

Upping the ante in Ukraine also risks unwanted escalation. Not only would the fighting in eastern Ukraine be sure to intensify, but it could also spread to other areas. The consequences for Ukraine, which already faces profound economic and social problems, would be disastrous.

The possibility that Mr. Putin might end up making nuclear threats may seem remote, but if the goal of arming Ukraine is to drive up the costs of Russian interference and eventually put Moscow in an acute situation, it cannot be ruled out. If Western pressure succeeded and Mr. Putin felt desperate, he would have a powerful incentive to try to rescue the situation by rattling the nuclear saber.

Our understanding of the mechanisms of escalation in crises and war is limited at best, although we know the risks are considerable. Pushing a nuclear-armed Russia into a corner would be playing with fire.

Advocates of arming Ukraine recognize the escalation problem, which is why they stress giving Kiev “defensive,” not “offensive,” weapons. Unfortunately, there is no useful distinction between these categories: All weapons can be used for attacking and defending. The West can be sure, though, that Moscow will not see those American weapons as “defensive,” given that Washington is determined to reverse the status quo in eastern Ukraine.

The only way to solve the Ukraine crisis is diplomatically, not militarily. Germany’s chancellor, Angela Merkel, seems to recognize that fact, as she has said Germany will not ship arms to Kiev. Her problem, however, is that she does not know how to bring the crisis to an end.

She and other European leaders still labor under the delusion that Ukraine can be pulled out of Russia’s orbit and incorporated into the West, and that Russian leaders must accept that outcome. They will not.

To save Ukraine and eventually restore a working relationship with Moscow, the West should seek to make Ukraine a neutral buffer state between Russia and NATO. It should look like Austria during the Cold War. Toward that end, the West should explicitly take European Union and NATO expansion off the table, and emphasize that its goal is a nonaligned Ukraine that does not threaten Russia. The United States and its allies should also work with Mr. Putin to rescue Ukraine’s economy, a goal that is clearly in everyone’s interest.

It is essential that Russia help end the fighting in eastern Ukraine and that Kiev regain control over that region. Still, the provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk should be given substantial autonomy, and protection for Russian language rights should be a top priority.

Crimea, a casualty of the West’s attempt to march NATO and the European Union up to Russia’s doorstep, is surely lost for good. It is time to end that imprudent policy before more damage is done — to Ukraine and to relations between Russia and the West.

* John J. Mearsheimer, a professor of political science at the University of Chicago, is the author of “The Tragedy of Great Power Politics.”

USA: State of the Union

Via Bussiness Insider.

President Barack Obama delivered his annual State of the Union address on Tuesday and focused on a slew of progressive proposals he dubbed "middle class economics." Obama also announced he would ask Congress to officially authorize military action against the jihadist group Islamic State (also known as ISIS or ISIL).

"We are 15 years into this new century. Fifteen years that dawned with terror touching our shores; that unfolded with a new generation fighting two long and costly wars; that saw a vicious recession spread across our nation and the world," Obama began. "It has been, and still is, a hard time for many. But tonight, we turn the page."

After his introduction, Obama began touting what he described as "a breakthrough year for America" that saw the fastest job growth since 1999 and the end of the US combat mission in Afghanistan.

"The shadow of crisis has passed, and the State of the Union is strong," Obama said. 

However, despite describing America as having been bounced back, Obama went on to say there was room for improvement. 

"Will we accept an economy where only a few of us do spectacularly well?" he asked, according to a copy of his prepared remarks distributed by the White House. "Or will we commit ourselves to an economy that generates rising incomes and chances for everyone who makes the effort?"

Obama focused the bulk of his speech on economic policies. He branded his plans as "middle class economics."

"That's what middle-class economics is  —  the idea that this country does best when everyone gets their fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules," Obama said. "We don't just want everyone to share in America's success  — we want everyone to contribute to our success."

While the Republican-led Congress will most likely block many of the economic proposals Obama outlined in the speech, it was an opportunity for the president to brand himself and the Democratic party ahead of the 2016 election.

One policy Obama called for in his speech was a $3,000 tax cut to provide childcare for middle-class and lower-income families.

"It’s not a nice-to-have," Obama said of childcare. "It's a must-have."

The president also said he wanted Congress to vote on paid sick leave. 

"Today, we're the only advanced country on Earth that doesn't guarantee paid sick leave or paid maternity leave to our workers," Obama said. 

Additionally Obama said he wanted laws passed to ensure equal pay for women and an increased minimum wage. He noted these laws wouldn't be a panacea but suggested they could make a "meaningful difference" if Congress put them in place.

"These ideas won't make everybody rich, or relieve every hardship; that's not the job of government," Obama said. "To give working families a fair shot, we'll still need more employers to see beyond next quarter's earnings and recognize that investing in their workforce is in their company's long-term interest. We still need laws that strengthen rather than weaken unions, and give American workers a voice. But things like child care and sick leave and equal pay; things like lower mortgage premiums and a higher minimum wage — these ideas will make a meaningful difference in the lives of millions of families. That is a fact. And that's what all of us — Republicans and Democrats alike — were sent here to do."

Another plan Obama described in the speech would provide qualifying students with two free years of community college.

"I am sending this Congress a bold new plan to lower the cost of community college — to zero. Forty percent of our college students choose community college. Some are young and starting out. Some are older and looking for a better job. Some are veterans and single parents trying to transition back into the job market," Obama said. "Whoever you are, this plan is your chance to graduate ready for the new economy, without a load of debt. Understand, you’ve got to earn it — you've got to keep your grades up and graduate on time."

Some Republicans have already expressed opposition to that proposal because of its estimated $6 billion annual cost.

Obama also outlined a series of tax reforms designed to subsidize credits for middle-class workers with a series of taxes on the wealthy and the financial industry. These will include an increase in the top capital gains tax.

"Let's close loopholes so we stop rewarding companies that keep profits abroad, and reward those that invest in America," Obama said. "Let's use those savings to rebuild our infrastructure and make it more attractive for companies to bring jobs home. Let's simplify the system and let a small-business owner file based on her actual bank statement, instead of the number of accountants she can afford. And let's close the loopholes that lead to inequality by allowing the top one percent to avoid paying taxes on their accumulated wealth." 

The Republican-led Congress is extremely unlikely to allow these tax reforms to become law. Obama's remarks included an allusion to this opposition.

"So the verdict is clear. Middle-class economics works. Expanding opportunity works. And these policies will continue to work, as long as politics don't get in the way," he said. 

The economy won't be the only major part of Obama's speech. Obama also plans to ask Congress to authorize use of force against the jihadist group Islamic State (also known as ISIS or ISIL). He had previously beencriticized for not taking the effort to fight the group to Congress by lawmakers from both parties.

According to the prepared remarks, Obama will frame the war on ISIS as an example of the "smarter kind of American leadership" he has advocated, which focuses on combining "military power with strong diplomacy."

"In Iraq and Syria, American leadership — including our military power — is stopping ISIL's advance," Obama said. "Instead of getting dragged into another ground war in the Middle East, we are leading a broad coalition, including Arab nations, to degrade and ultimately destroy this terrorist group. We're also supporting a moderate opposition in Syria that can help us in this effort, and assisting people everywhere who stand up to the bankrupt ideology of violent extremism. This effort will take time. It will require focus. But we will succeed. And tonight, I call on this Congress to show the world that we are united in this mission by passing a resolution to authorize the use of force against ISIL."

Obama also touted US diplomatic efforts in Cuba and Iran. His administration announced plans to normalize diplomatic relations with Cuba last month and has been engaged in ongoing talks about Iran's nuclear program.

On the national security front, Obama also pushed his cybersecurity plan and efforts to combat climate change.

"I’ve heard some folks try to dodge the evidence by saying they're not scientists; that we don't have enough information to act," Obama said. "Well, I'm not a scientist, either. But you know what — I know a lot of really good scientists at NASA, and NOAA, and at our major universities. The best scientists in the world are all telling us that our activities are changing the climate, and if we do not act forcefully, we'll continue to see rising oceans, longer, hotter heat waves, dangerous droughts and floods, and massive disruptions that can trigger greater migration, conflict, and hunger around the globe. The Pentagon says that climate change poses immediate risks to our national security. We should act like it."

Obama described by referring to "values" as the "last pillar" of American leadership. He praised US efforts to protect religious minorities and become more inclusive to people regardless of sexual orientation. Obama also noted he planned to close the prison on the US military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. 

The president concluded by referencing the speech the propelled him onto the national stage at the Democratic National Convention in 2004. Obama recalled how he said "there wasn't a liberal America, or a conservative America; a black America or a white America — but a United States of America" in those remarks.

"Over the past six years, the pundits have pointed out more than once that my presidency hasn't delivered on this vision," Obama said. "How ironic, they say, that our politics seems more divided than ever. It’s held up as proof not just of my own flaws — of which there are many — but also as proof that the vision itself is misguided, and naïve, and that there are too many people in this town who actually benefit from partisanship and gridlock for us to ever do anything about it.

"I know how tempting such cynicism may be. But I still think the cynics are wrong."