MS Risk Blog

The U.S Lifts the Embargo on Weapons Sales to Vietnam

Lift of the embargo and the impact on Vietnam’s weaponry

After decades of ban, the U.S President Obama lifted the embargo on sales of weapons during his visit to Vietnam in May 2016. The decade-long embargo was on sales of weapons to Vietnam and was already partially lifted in 2014. Today, the U.S decided to fully lift this embargo.

The lift of the embargo is unlikely to affect immediately the acquirement of weapons by Vietnam, mostly because the government would not rush to acquire only American weapons but might use the lift as way to diversify its sources. Indeed, even though the embargo is lifted, the Vietnam might not be ready yet to use weapons as sophisticated and expensive as the American’s ones. In the past decade, the Vietnam defence’s spending has doubled but it is not proven that Vietnam will rush into the American technology. The greatest potential for US sales probably lies in areas like military surveillance systems and coastal defence. Vietnam would welcome technology that helps it track Chinese naval forces. The partial lifting of the embargo two years ago was with the specific aim of improving U.S’ sales in this area. Hence, Vietnam, currently relying mostly on Russian’s defence equipment, is likely to diversify its equipment’s sources but without focusing on the U.S.

The context of South China Sea’s tensions and the U.S policy towards China’s influence

This decision occurs in a time of tension in the South China Sea where the regional States have disputes of territorial claims over several island of the Sea for economic and politic purposes. China is one of the biggest claimers (80% of the claims) and numerous incidents occured in the past few years, including some between Vietnam and the Chinese Republic. For example in 2014, a dispute over a oil rig near the Paracel islands led to clashes between Chinese and Vietnamese vessels along with anti-China riots in Vietnam.

Within these disputes and this tension, the U.S defends the freedom of navigation in this area and has tried to bolster its relations with the other countries involved in the dispute, such as Vietnam or the Philippines. Even though the President Obama affirmed that this decision is not related to the American policy within the region, this lift of the embargo would allow the U.S to strengthen the Vietnamese army, which is currently weaker than China. The Chinese Republic expressed concerns about this lift as the China’s privately-owned portal Sina News said that the lifting of the arms embargo “is a cause for concern” because it may have an impact on territorial disputes in the South China Sea.

Moreover, the lift of the sanction is also a mean for the U.S to bolster and strengthen its relation with Vietnam, both economically and politically. Indeed, Vietnam is also a key partner for the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP). The TPP has currently 12 members including Vietnam but excluding China and aims at facilitating global trade, especially for Made-in America exports. This US-led trade deal is seen as a counter to China’s growing influence, a policy where Vietnam plays an important role for the U.S.

The condition for selling: respect of the human rights

During his announcement of the lift, President Obama assured that the arms ban would be lifted only if human rights in Vietnam improved. He was pushed by Activist groups who called for him to require a greater respect of human rights in Vietnam. Indeed, as Human Right Watch describes: “Basic rights, including freedom of speech, opinion, press, association, and religion, are restricted. Rights activists and bloggers face harassment, intimidation, physical assault, and imprisonment.” The juridical system based arrests on the Article 258 (abusing democratic freedoms to infringe upon the interests of the state, the legitimate rights and interests of organizations and/or citizens) of the 1999 Penal Code. Vietnam has about 100 political prisoners and seven activists were sentenced in March for spreading anti-state propaganda. And during May 2016, a BBC reporting team has seen its accreditation revoked and was not allowed to cover Obama’s visit.

This condition of respecting human rights before any selling could make the access to weapons more difficult. Indeed, the U.S President assured that any military contracts would still be subject to provisos on human rights. This condition might be difficult to respect for the Vietnamese government as explained above. Given the Vietnamese government’s poor human rights record, it might hold up possible arms sales in Congress.

Hence, the lift of the embargo on sales of weapons to Vietnam might not bring immediate changes neither for the Vietnamese doctrine warfare nor for its equipment. Russia is likely to remain the first partner of Vietnam on the defence area even though the lift could allow Vietnam to diversify the sources of its weapons. Moreover, this decision of lifting the embargo is to analyse within the regional context of tensions and the U.S policy of countering China’s growing influence.

Surge of violence in the Pacific state of Colima likely to be fuelled by a battle between the Sinaloa Cartel and the CJNG over access to the strategic port of Manzanillo, underlining security threats at ports in Mexico

According to this month’s government statistics, the small Pacific state of Colima in the west of Mexico is experiencing rocketing homicide rates, with a staggering 942% increase in April 2016 comparative to April 2015, displacing Guerrero as the homicide hotspot this month. As Mexican security expert Alejandro Hope noted in El Daily Post, this is particularly worrisome given Colima’s regional position. If the situation continues to deteriorate it could result in significant spill over violence, triggering a conflict in Michoacán akin to that which gained global attention in 2013/2014.

The statistics outline that April wasn’t a one-off violent month in Colima, the homicide rate has been inclining steadily since 2015. So far, there has been little official comment or significant press coverage on the deteriorating situation and analysts are trying to piece together what might be driving the violence in the once relatively calm state.

Firstly, it’s important to think about Colima’s geographical location. Nestled in between the embattled state of Michoacán and Jalisco (home to the Jalisco New Generation Cartel) hugging the Pacific coast, it is home to one of Mexico’s largest ports, Manzanillo, a key gateway and exit point for legal and illicit trade. This is likely the hotspot that is fuelling the violence, as groups battle to gain control over strategic corridors of the Pacific.

Sinaloa Cartel vs Jalisco New Generation Cartel

While the head of the Sinaloa Cartel, notorious two-time fugitive “El Chapo”, fights his extradition to the US from his prison in the border city of Ciudad Juárez, the Sinaloa Cartel continues to operate throughout the country.

In 2015 they declared on social media their arrival in Colima and ambition to “cleanse” the region from criminals carrying out kidnaps and extortion. Since then, MS Risk believes that the Sinaloa Cartel has been involved in a battle with the more local CJNG, which most likely is over the port where shipments of ingredients to manufacture synthetic drugs are brought in, as well as numerous other illegal goods.

Port security

While the situation in Colima points to an increasingly worryingly situation at the Manzanillo port, it also outlines the issue of port security at large. In 2014 the Navy had to fight to take control of the busy port of Lazaro Cardenas, which was being defacto run by the Michoacán-based Knight’s Templar Cartel. After the group gained control of numerous mines in the vicinity they began to trade iron ore with China through the port, threatening any businesses or workers that refused to cooperate. The case underlined how organised crime groups fuse illegal and legal trades, severely hampering the economy and ensuring that such groups have access to supplies and weaponry that far supersede those of state authorities.

Kidnap and extortion

While the government security statistics around homicide rates do not show the full picture of what is happening on the ground, its monthly kidnap and extortion statistics are virtually meaningless. Few report cases of extortion or kidnap for fear of reprisal as well as a lack of faith in the state’s ability to react, noting that Mexico has a rate of near 90% impunity for violent crimes and homicides. However, trends and MS Risk’s sources suggest that where homicide rates increase significantly, extortion and kidnaps are likely to follow suit. In particular, when two organised crime groups are involved in a battle to gain territory, they use violent threats to gain key “plazas” and extort local businesses to fund their operations.

Afghanistan Taliban Announces New Chief

The Afghan Taliban have announced a new leader to replace Mullah Akhtar Mansour, who was killed in a US drone strike on 21 May.

In a statement, the Taliban acknowledged Mansour’s death for the first time and named his successor as Mawlawi Hibatullah Akhundzada. The statement disclosed that “Hibatullah Akhundzada has been appointed as the new leader of the Islamic Emirate (Taliban) after a unanimous agreement in the shura (supreme court), and all the members of shura pledged allegiance to him.” The statement further indicated that Mullah Mohammad Yaqoob, son of Mullah Omar, would become a joint deputy head of the movement, alongside current deputy leader Sirajuddin Haqqani. Sirajuddin Haqqani, who is much more well known, is leader of the Haqqani network, which has been blamed for some of the most violent attacks inside Afghanistan.

The group is known for its daring raids on Western and Afghan targets, particularly in Kabul. Taliban sources have reported that Mansour named Akhundzada as his successor in his will, in what may be an attempt to legitimize the transition.   Analysts have reported that it is unlikely that the group will change direction under hardline religious scholar Akhundzada. Mansour was killed in a strike, which targeted his car in Pakistan’s Balochistan province on Saturday. Last year, the Taliban was plunged into turmoil when Mansour replaced the group’s founder Mullah Mohammad Omar. Under his stewardship, the Taliban refused to take part in peace talks and instead, militant attacks increased and became more daring. Mawlawi Hibatullah Akhundzada, a former head of the Taliban courts, was a deputy leader to Mansour.

Profile of New Taliban Chief

 The Afghan Taliban’s new leader Hibatullah Akhundzada is a hardline religious scholars from Kandahar. The fact that he comes from the Taliban’s traditional stronghold is likely to please rank-and-file fighters.

Born in Panjwai district in Kandahar, during the 1980’s, Akhundzada was involved in the Islamist resistance against the Soviet military campaign in Afghanistan. He was quick to join the Taliban, however his reputation is more that of a religious leader as opposed to a military commander.

He served as a deputy to previous Taliban chief Akhtar Mohammad Mansour. According to Gharzai Khwakhogi, a political commentator who worked in intelligence for a while under the Taliban: “(Hibatullah Akhundzada) has lived most of his life inside Afghanistan and has maintained close links with the Quetta Shura.” When the Taliban captured Afghanistan’s western Farah province, he was put in charge of fighting crime in the area. Later, he was appointed to the Taliban’s military court in Kandahar and then as head of its military court in eastern Nangarhar province. As the Taliban consolidated its grip on power in Afghanistan, Hibatullah Akhundzada became the head of the group’s military court and deputy head of its supreme court. When the Taliban was toppled by the US-led coalition in 2001, he became the head of the group’s council of religious scholars.   He is a member of the Taliban’s leadership council and has been responsible for issuing most of the Taliban’s fatwas. He also reportedly ran a madrassa (religious school) near Quetta. Experts have indicated that Hibatullah Akhundzada maintained close links with the Quetta Shura, which is understood to make the Taliban’s main decisions as well as appointing its leaders.

The new Taliban chief is not as controversial as his predecessor, who led the militants for two years before news emerged that Taliban founder Mullah Omar was actually dead. Hibatullah Akhundzada was appointed by senior Taliban figures who are said to have met somewhere near Quetta in Pakistan. However, not all members of the shura (council) were there, with many not appearing over fears of being attacked.

While the Taliban has called the new appointment unanimous, they did the same when Mullah Mansour took over last summer. Shortly after his appointment, splits emerged, with sources disclosing that this time, there could still be some disagreements, however they will probably be not enough to challenge the new leader’s authority.

Finland Tightens Restrictions on Asylum Seekers

On 17 May, Finland tightened its restrictions on giving residence permits to asylum seekers from Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia, stating that it was now largely safe for them to return to their war-torn home countries.

Authorities in Helsinki, where anti-immigration political groups have been on the rise, disclosed that security had improved to such an extent that refugees would generally not be at risk in any parts of the three countries, despite ongoing conflicts. While there was no immediate reaction from refugee agencies, the statement released by the Finnish Immigration Service comes in the face of a string of international assessments of the scale of the ongoing bloodshed and refugee crisis. In its statement, the immigration service disclosed that “it will be more difficult for applicants from these countries to be granted a residence permit,” adding, “it is currently possible for asylum seekers to return to all areas in Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia without the ongoing armed conflicts of such presenting a danger to them only because they are staying in the country.” Under the new rules, asylum seekers will only be allowed to stay if they can prove that they are individually at risk. In 2015, around 32,500 people applied for asylum in Finland. This was up from 3,600 in 2014. Most of those applying for asylum were from Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia. This year, the numbers have declined significantly.

Somalia has been slowly recovering from more than two decades of war. The internationally-backed government, which is based in Mogadishu and which has little control outside the capital, continues to fight an Islamist insurgency by the militant group al-Shabab, which regularly launches gun and bomb attacks in the capital and in other areas of the Horn of Africa country. In Iraq, the so-called Islamic State (IS) group continues to hold key cities and vast swathes of territory in the northern and western regions of the country, which it seized in 2014. Furthermore, despite battlefield setbacks over the past year, IS militants have continued to attack civilians in areas that are under government control. This includes a string of attacks that occurred earlier this month in and around the capital, which killed more than 100 people. In Afghanistan, the Taliban launched a spring offensive last month, vowing to drive out the Western-backed government in Kabul and restore strict Islamic rule.

New Report Shows Number of Displaced People

According to a new report released in mid-May, the number of people internally displaced by conflicts around the world increased last year to a record 40.8 million people.

According to the new report, which was co-authored by the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) and the Geneva-based Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC), some 8.6 million internally displaced people (IDPs) linked to conflict were recorded in 2015. This figure includes 4.8 million IDPS in the Middle East and North Africa. The report indicates that “displacement…has snowballed since the Arab spring uprising in 2010 and the rise of the Islamic State (IS),” with Yemen, Syria and Iraq accounting for more than half of the total. Jan Egeland, head of the NRC has disclosed that “this is the highest figure ever recorded and twice the number of refugees worldwide.”

Outside the Middle East, the countries with the highest numbers of people fleeing were Afghanistan, Central African Republic (CAR), Colombia, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Nigeria, South Sudan and Ukraine. Out of the top ten countries for IDPS, the report found that five – Colombia, DRC, Iraq South Sudan and Sudan – have featured on the same ranking every year since 2003.

The report also indicates that 19.2 million people were internally displaced last year by disasters, adding that India, China and Nepal accounted for the highest numbers with 3.7 million, 3.6 million and 2.6 million. Conflicts and natural disasters made for a total of 27.8 million new IDPs last year.

For the first time, the report also measured the numbers displaced by criminal violence associated with drug trafficking and gang activity, which, according to the report, is a problem that has remained “unquantified and unaddressed.” The report estimated that as of December 2015, there were a million IDPs in El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico as a result of this type of violence.