United Arab Emirates Continues Its Policy Of Modernizing Intelligence Services – Analysis

The geopolitical evolutions in the Middle East marked by the so-called “Arab Spring”, the conflict in Yemen, the threat represented by the Iranian nuclear program and other global geopolitical developments determined United Arab Emirates (UAE) to take some important steps for modernizing and improving its intelligence services starting with the middle of the last decade[2].

US backs UN assessment that new al-Qaida leader is in Iran

The United States said Wednesday its assessment aligns with a United Nations report that the new head of the al-Qaeda terror group, Saif al-Adel, is based in Iran.

“When it comes to his presence there, offering safe haven to al-Qaeda is just another example of Iran’s wide-ranging support for terrorism, its destabilizing activities in the Middle East and beyond,” State Department spokesperson Ned Price told reporters.

What role for Europe in the Middle East and North Africa?

Now that Europe is desperate to find new energy suppliers, the resource-rich countries of the Middle East and North Africa are hoping to boost their economy and influence.

  • Europe is unlikely to turn back to Russia for energy even after the war
  • MENA countries have suddenly become much more valuable allies
  • World powers’ competition for influence in the region will intensify

The risks of an ISIS comeback

Islamic State has faced considerable losses in recent years, but not enough to permanently prevent the organization from resurging.

On February 9, 2022, the United States-led Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS issued a communique stating that it “remains resolutely committed to achieving the enduring defeat of ISIS. Recent events in Syria underscore both the success we continue to have in degrading Daesh/ISIS leadership and the continuing threat the terrorist group poses in the region and beyond.” Is the terror organization close to making a comeback? Despite sporadic successes, it still has a long way to go.

APPLY THE LOGIC OF THE AFGHANISTAN WITHDRAWAL TO SYRIA

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has entered its twelfth month. Reporting on the conflict understandably focuses on the day-to-day fighting and destruction, but it is important for Americans and U.S. policymakers to understand the larger issues raised by the war and the U.S. role in it. The following Defense Priorities analysis aims to improve understanding of these issues and what U.S. policy should prioritize as the war continues.

Map of Ukraine and contested territories

Apply the logic of the Afghanistan withdrawal to Syria

Key points

  • The logic President Biden used for removing U.S. troops from Afghanistan applies to Syria. Since a U.S. intervention should be defined by clear, achievable goals, and since long-range strikes, instead of occupying forces, can accomplish U.S. counterterrorism goals, there is no good case for keeping U.S. troops in Syria either.
  • Around 900 U.S. forces currently occupy territory in eastern and southern Syria, risking conflict with Syrian forces and local militias, as well as Russian, Iranian, and Turkish forces.
  • ISIS’s territorial caliphate in Syria was eliminated in 2019. The few, small, remote areas the remnants of ISIS now hold are largely within territory held by Syrian government forces. Local forces can fight the remnants of ISIS.
  • None of the other standard rationales for keeping U.S. forces in Syria—protecting the Kurds, countering Iran and Russia, unseating the Assad regime—justifies keeping troops in Syria either.