Mediaboss Marketing

Mohammed bin Salman's ascension as Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia could lead to a more assertive Saudi oil policy within OPEC, as the kingdom puts its own needsfirst. Expect Iraq to follow Qatar as its next target.

The elevation of the king's son is no surprise. Having already handed him the reins to guide the country forward, it would have been odd indeed if the king didn'tensure his son could continue his policies.

Prince Mohammed, or MbS as he is known widely, has already pursued a robust regional strategy and will probablyintensify as his power grows. He's led a military campaign against Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen and, more recently, has been central to the isolation of neighboring Qatar.

In oil, Saudi Arabia has already shownitself willing to pursue its own interests over those of its neighbors. Two oil fields shared with Kuwait, with a combined daily production capacity of some 500,000 barrels, have been shut since late 2014 and early 2015 and show no sign of being reopened, despite repeated statements from the Kuwaiti side that their restart is imminent.

Oil Under MbS

While Mohammed bin Salman has been responsible for oil policy, prices have struggled

Source: Bloomberg

Saudi Aramco, the state-owned oil company, says the shutdown of the offshore Khafji field was triggered by environmental concerns, but some in Kuwait see the prolonged closure as payback for the emirate's unwillingness to supply troops in Yemen.

Sanctions on Qatar result from claims that the emirate has been funding terrorist groups and is too close to Iran. Qatar denies these allegations and is still waiting for a list of specific Saudi demands. It sees the sanctions -- which include restrictions on tankers carrying Qatari oil and gas -- as an attempt to undermine its independent position on big regional issues, or even to bring about regime change.

Saudi regional policy under Prince Mohammed has been characterized by a far harder stance against Iran and its spreading influence. That's unlikely to change.

There's another big country falling under Tehran's sway: Iraq. Iran-backed militias, along with Kurdish counterparts, have been at the forefront of driving back Islamic insurgents in the country. Bilateral Iraqi-Iranian trade has increased every year since 2003, according to a report in the Tehran Times.

By chance, Iraq is also the OPEC member that's mostexceeding its agreed crude output target. That puts it in line for stronger criticism from Saudi Arabia as oil prices languish near levels not seen since the group adopted its output target back in November.

Iraq's Over-production

Iraq is lagging other OPEC members in meeting pledged output cuts

Sources: OPEC, Bloomberg

OPEC's overall compliance with the production limitsis better than for any similar deal in its history, but that's largely down to Saudi cutting much more deeply than agreed. That willingness to bear more of the burden probably won'tpersist, particularly if we eventually start to see a more balanced market and higher prices.

Even the tensions in the Middle East, which would usually send oil prices rocketing, have had little impact so far. A more aggressive Riyadh might well see traders starting to price the political risk again. Even more soif Iraq becomes the next Qatar.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg LP and its owners.

To contact the author of this story: Julian Lee in London at jlee1627@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: James Boxell at jboxell@bloomberg.net

Continue reading here:
Iraq Might Be Saudi Arabia's Next Target - Bloomberg

Martyn Day: I understand why what they went through is upsetting, but Im a lawyer. My job is to represent my clients. Photograph: David Levene for the Guardian

The decision to prosecute human rights lawyers at the law firm Leigh Day was politically influenced, a senior partner has said in his first interview since being cleared of professional misconduct charges.

Martyn Day said he and his colleagues did not need to apologise for doing their jobs and making British soldiers accountable for their actions in Iraq. Speaking nearly two weeks after the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal also found his fellow solicitors Sapna Malik and Anna Crowther as well as the London firm not guilty of all 20 misconduct allegations, Day said it was an outrage that the prime minister interfered in the case by making comments about an industry of vexatious claims before the trial.

The seven-week hearing at the tribunal, which ended the day after the general election, cost about 10m and followed a three-year investigation by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

The SRA alleged that legal claims advanced by Leigh Day and Phil Shiner of Public Interest Lawyers suggesting that British soldiers tortured and murdered Iraqi detainees after the so-called Battle for Danny Boy near Basra in 2004 had been pursued unprofessionally.

The 31m al-Sweady inquiry in 2014 found the claims of murder and torture to be fictitious. It also revealed that the Iraqi claimants were not innocent civilians but members of a Shia militia, the Mahdi army.

The inquiry did, however, conclude that a number of prisoners had been abused and that British troops breached the Geneva convention. In February, Shiner was struck off for dishonesty and lack of integrity. At a separate, subsequent hearing Day and his colleagues were cleared.

In his rooftop office at Leigh Day, Day radiates an aura of uncoiled relief. Aged 60, he is anticipating the challenge of his next case, against a mining company in Sierra Leone, rather than the indignity of being professionally disqualified.

I have always felt that the SRA, whether directly or indirectly, was influenced by the political background to the case, Day said. It was clear that the government took a very strong interest in the prosecution both of Phil Shiner and us.

And the fact that [the Ministry of Defence] said it was disappointed by the [tribunal] outcome is an indicator. It was totally inappropriate. It was an outrage that the prime minister was putting the boot into us at the time that the regulator was investigating us. [Ministers] said we were bringing spurious claims but 90% of them were settled.

The idea that we apologise to people for doing doing our job, I think thats nonsense

The [government] agenda was clear: they hate human rights, they hate human rights lawyers and theres a big agenda for supporting the army ... They could restore crown immunity [for the armed forces] but I think even [senior officers] are warning that the army should not be above the law.

Part of the SRAs case against Leigh Day was that it should have handed over a list from the Office of the Martyr al-Sadr, a Shia militia group, to the al-Sweady inquiry earlier as it demonstrated the claimants were members of the Mahdi army. Day admitted they should have appreciated its significance sooner.

Normally we would have gone through a [case] file with a fine-tooth comb, he explained, but this [claim against the MoD] had been stayed at a very early stage [pending the outcome of the inquiry]. Even though I now understand how we missed it, I dont move away from the fact that we should have spotted it.

Asked whether he should also express regret to soldiers brought before the inquiry, Day replied: I dont think its appropriate to apologise. I understand why what they went through is upsetting, but Im a lawyer. My job is to represent my clients.

We put their case forward in the best way we can. Thats the way the legal process works. The idea that we apologise to people for doing doing our job, I think thats nonsense.

Leigh Day pioneered the development of class compensation actions, spearheading numerous high-profile cases. Its lawyers have always been careful in assessing clients, Day said. The firm invests millions of pounds [in claims]. Take the Mau Mau case, for example: we only took on clients who had been registered as Mau Mau members before the litigation started.

We had testimonials from QCs who had been against us ... who said one of the reasons we were successful [was that] we had gone the extra mile to make sure that our claims were genuine.

Day acknowledged that the al-Sweady claims turned out to be a very complicated mixture of truth, lies and exaggeration. What was confusing, he said, was Iraqi detainees saying they wanted to get at the truth yet lying in some areas.

The evidence was pretty overwhelming that they were Mahdi army combatants ... [yet] Im convinced they were strongly of the view that those deaths had occurred [in custody]. They put two and two together and made five.

To blindfold detainees, the crack of metal tent pegs banged on chairs by British interrogators might have sounded like gunshots. Asked whether the claimants should have been prosecuted for perjury, Day said they should be given a chance to tell their side of the story.

Other unorthodox events including the armys decision to remove bodies from the battlefield and an army officer throwing computers containing photographs of the bodies into the sea had reinforced initial suspicions, Day said.

The SRA prosecution, he said, would have a chilling effect on those seeking justice in future. Within the world of human rights law, theres been enormous concern, not just in this country but abroad.

I have had many messages saying how relieved people were that [the case against us] was not proved. They were very, very worried that the government could have such influence over the regulator. It will have an impact. We will be that much more wary as to quite what cases we take on. It may well be that there are cases that people wont [touch].

The tribunal will give the reasons for its judgment in August. At that stage, the SRA could decide to appeal to the high court. Both the SRA and the MoD have denied that improper pressure was brought to bear on the SRA to bring the prosecution.

Day said he hopes his ordeal is over. Even though I felt we were innocent, many an innocent man has gone down.

Follow this link:
No need to apologise to British soldiers over Iraq claims, says Martyn Day - The Guardian

A record number of women were killed in US-led coalition air strikes against Isis targets in Syria and Iraq last month, a monitoring tracking civilian casualties caused by airstrikes in the Middle East has said.

At least 57 women died in coalition air strikes in May, along with a minimum of 52 children, according to Airwars, a British non-profit organisation.

According to the group's estimates, last month was the second deadliest month for civilians since coalition air strikes began in August 2014, with likely civilian deaths from coalition air strikes rising by 23 per cent compared to April.

A minimum of between 348 and 521 civilians were killed across Syria and Iraq in likely coalition in air strikes, its May report found.

Used as a human shield by Isis: "My family was blown pieces in the street"

It has reported "an unprecedented and sustained rise" in reported civilian deaths since the campaigns to liberate the Isis-held cities of Raqqa and Mosul began to escalate in January.

In the first five months of this year, the group tracked a third more likely civilian deaths from coalition strikes in Iraq and Syria than during the entirety of 2016.

Such a rise supports Donald Trump's pledge to "bomb the s**t" out of Isis while he was campaigning to become President of the US.

Meanwhile, Russia has scaled down its campaign after a partial ceasefire was agreed in December 2016, meaning civilian casualties linked to the coalition outnumbered those allegedly perpetrated by Russia in Syria for the fifth month in a row.

Over two and a half times more casualty events were attributed to the coalition in Syria and Iraq than to Moscow's actions in Syria, the report said.

Airwars' report for May said more civilians are dying even though fewer targets are being hit in Raqqa, which they said suggests a possible change to the coalition's rules of engagement which is placing civilians in greater risk.

However, US military officials have previously insisted there have been no changes to the rules of engagement in Iraq and Syria, despite Mr Trump's campaign pledges.

It said as the campaigns to liberate Mosul and Raqqa intensified, civilians were repeatedly put at risk, whether in their homes or as they attempted to flee the wartorn cities and towns.

A CENTCOM spokesperson said: "The Coalition takes all allegations of civilian casualties seriously and assesses all credible allegations of possible civilian casualties.

"Coalition forces work diligently and deliberately to be precise in our airstrikes. Coalition forces comply with the law of armed conflict and take all reasonable precautions during the planning and execution of airstrikes to reduce the risk of harm to civilians.

"The Coalition respects human life and is assisting partner forces in their effort to liberate their land from Isiswhile safeguarding civilians. Our goal is always for zero civilian casualties."

Airwars uses various methods to investigate and confirm civilian casualties, relying on local news outlets, NGOs, civilian volunteers and social media.

Read this article:
Record number of women killed in US-led air strikes in Syria and Iraq in May - The Independent

By Morgan L. Kaplan and Ramzy Mardini By Morgan L. Kaplan and Ramzy Mardini June 21 at 6:00 AM

Amid the backdrop of a fight against the Islamic State, the Kurdistan region of Iraq plans to hold an important vote to determine its direction on statehood. Earlier this month, Kurdistan Regional Government President Masoud Barzani announced that a long-awaited referendum on independence would be held Sept. 25, 2017. Importantly, the vote will not only take place within the borders of the Kurdistanregion, but also within disputed territories that are now under de facto Kurdish control since their liberation from the Islamic State.

Barzani has called for a referendum many times before, but this time an official date has been set and the vote will probably take place. An informal referendum passed overwhelmingly in the Kurdistan region in January 2005, and there is good reason to believe a positive result will be replicated in this years official process.

The referendum is not equivalent of a declaration of independence. Nor will it trigger any immediate change to the nature of Kurdish sovereignty in northern Iraq, as the vote has neither a legal framework to empower the referendum as a binding measure, nor support from the international community. The referendum will simply ask voters if they want an independent Kurdish state. However, the referendum is a way for Iraqi Kurds to signal their intention to pursue independence more aggressively in a post-Islamic State Iraq, and the vote will likely give Kurds more leverage in that process.

The referendum is also viewed as a way for the Kurds to help legitimize their hold on newly gained territory from the fight against the Islamic State. After nearly three years of war, the Kurdistan Region has gained control over many of the disputed territories in contention with the central government in Baghdad, most importantly the oil-rich city of Kirkuk.

Knowing that their bargaining position vis--vis Baghdad (and Washington) will diminish once the fight against the Islamic State ends, and with the battle for Mosul reaching its final stages, the Kurds are acting fast to solidify their territorial gains before pressure is refocused to withdraw from those areas. A pro-independence vote in Kurdish-held disputed territories will undermine American and Iraqi efforts to have those territories returned to Iraqi control.

The referendum will be used as a mechanism to gain political leverage over Baghdad. Since the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003, Iraqs divisive sectarian politics sometimes award a united Kurdish front a powerful brokerage role, especially in the high-stakes government formation processes that have followed a national election.

However, this influence is limited in the areas of sustainment and enforcement. For example, during the 2010 government formation stalemate, the Kurds backed Nouri al-Maliki for a second term as prime minister in exchange for his agreeing to enforce Kurdish interests. Maliki took the deal and sealed his premiership, but the Kurds could not keep him from reneging on those agreements shortly thereafter.

By holding the referendum in September 2017, before the April 2018 Iraqi national elections, the Kurds are changing the way they leverage Iraqi national politics. In the past, the Kurds would wait until after the election to wield its influence. But now, Kurds view the pre-election period as a more favorable time to negotiate their terms of separation. By unilaterally moving ahead with its own referendum process, the Kurds may use the vote to bid for allies in Baghdad.

Another angle to interpret the referendum and its effects is through intra-Kurdish competition. While nearly all Kurds want independence, they disagree about the process, and the referendum has become a high-stakes venue for political jockeying.

The decision to hold the September vote is being pushed by Barzanis Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), and has received only conditional support from the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan. Other parties, like Gorran and the Kurdistan Islamic Group, are in favor of independence in principle, but are against the procedure of the vote namely, that the referendum will take place outside of a deadlocked Kurdistan Parliament, which has been out of session for nearly two years. Gorran has refused to join the KDP-led referendum committee, saying that the vote should be coordinated through a reactivated Kurdistan Parliament, where they insist on resuming the speakership.

The referendum vote itself will probably alter the balance of power between Kurdish political parties. Announced alongside with the referendum, parliamentary elections in the Kurdistan region are set to take place Nov. 6. Should the referendum pass without a hitch, those parties actively promoting the vote may use the referendum as an electoral strategy to convert nationalist fervor into additional votes.

Iraqi Kurds are using the referendum to gauge how regional and international actors will react to more concrete steps toward independence in the future. The referendum is serious enough to elicit real reactions from Baghdad and the international community, but the outcome is limited enough to avoid costly forms of prevention and backlash.

So far, Washington has responded with rhetorical support for the Kurdistan regions legitimate aspirations, but overall disapproval over the vote itself.

Baghdad has complained about the timing of the vote which it callsillegal but is distinctly not in favor of northern Iraq breaking away. Turkey and Iran have offered a strongly negative reaction, fearing Iraqi Kurdish independence will trigger similar requests at home. However, Turkish anger may be more muted in private, given that the vote is happening at all.

The Kurdish referendum holds the possibility of affecting the balance of leverage between Irbil, Baghdad and regional powers, as well as shaking up internal Kurdish politics. With control over disputed territories and a referendum at hand, the Kurds are making a play for bargaining power on the road to independence. This does not represent a declaration of independence but it is a strong indicator of where the focal point of Kurdish politics will lie in post-Islamic State Iraq.

Morgan Kaplan is a postdoctoral research fellow in the International Security Program at the Harvard Kennedy Schools Belfer Center.

Ramzy Mardini is a nonresident fellow at the Atlantic Council and PhD student at the University of Chicago.

Visit link:
The Kurdish region of Iraq is going to vote on independence. Here's what you need to know. - Washington Post

(Beirut) The Kurdistan Regional Governments (KRG) Peshmerga forces are stopping thousands of civilians fleeing territory held by the Islamic State (also known as ISIS) for up to three months at checkpoints, including on the front lines, apparently based on general security concerns, and in many cases preventing their access to humanitarian assistance, Human Rights Watch said today. The KRG is obliged to facilitate rapid and unimpeded humanitarian assistance to all civilians in need and to allow those fleeing to reach safety.

Peshmerga forces stand guard at a checkpoint in northern Iraq.

The civilians, including entire families, have been fleeing Hawija, 60 kilometers south of Mosul, and Tal Afar, 55 kilometers west of Mosul, which have been under the control of ISIS since June 2014. There are still 80,000 civilians in Hawija and another 20,000 in Tal Afar, United Nations staff told Human Rights Watch.

All armed forces in Iraq should be doing their utmost to help civilians reach safety, and to get food, water and medicine, said Lama Fakih, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. The situation will become even more urgent when anti-ISIS forces begin operations to retake Hawija and Tal Afar.

Four individuals with their families, who had been stopped at checkpoints, and two people with direct knowledge of the movement of people fleeing these areas told Human Rights Watch that at each of the four checkpoints where families tried to enter KRG-held territory, Peshmerga forces stopped civilians for days, weeks, and even in one case up to three months, in many cases leaving them vulnerable to ISIS mortar and suicide attacks and without food and badly needed assistance.

One man who was held at a checkpoint with his family for three days in Maktab Khalid, a destroyed village on the frontline and within ISIS shelling range, said: I spent those three days scared that ISIS would kill all of us, and, at the same time, that my children would freeze to death. Those three days were the most horrible days of my life.

Another described how his 6-month-old baby died of lack of milk as his family waited to be allowed to cross.

One of those with direct knowledge of the movement of people fleeing via the Maktab Khalid crossing told Human Rights Watch that on several occasions in April and May 2017, Peshmerga forces prevented dozens of civilians from crossing for up to 14 days and prevented humanitarian organizations from delivering humanitarian assistance to them. Another person with direct knowledge of the movement of people fleeing via the Peshmergas Daquq checkpoint, 17 kilometers from the frontline, also said that Peshmerga forces prevented civilians from crossing there for up to 16 days and limited their access to aid.

An Iraqi government official said that he interviewed dozens of families who had passed through Maktab Khalid over the past year who said that when they arrived Peshmerga forces took their names and then told them that they would only allow them to cross once the size of the crowd had reached at least 300 families. He said that he raised concerns about not allowing the civilians to cross in a timely way with the Kirkuk governor and Peshmerga commanders, and was told these measures were needed to screen civilians for ISIS affiliation before allowing them through.

This stated security rationale, however, contradicts statements from families who told the official and Human Rights Watch that they were only allowed to cross when large numbers amassed at the checkpoint. Other families said that when they arrived, a large number of families were already at the checkpoint, they were only kept for a few hours before being allowed to cross.

Since April 18, more than 5,000 people fleeing Tal Afar attempted to enter KRG-held territory via a Peshmerga checkpoint in Shindukhan, a village on the front lines, and were held by Peshmerga forces there for one to three days with no food, water, or shelter before they were taken to Sahlej, a nearby village 10 kilometers from the frontline and within ISIS shelling range, said one of the people with direct knowledge of the movement of people fleeing in the area.

According to the UN, Peshmerga forces held an estimated 200 civilians fleeing Tal Afar for more than two months at a checkpoint in al-Fadhilya, 15 kilometers north of Mosul and 22 kilometers from the frontline. Aid agencies and partners were not allowed direct access to provide aid. A source following developments said that in early June, after three months, the families were allowed through and on to camps for displaced people.

In June 2017, Human Rights Watch shared its findings with the KRGs High Committee to Evaluate International Organizations Reports and asked for comment but at the time of publication had not received a response.

Security forces may have genuine security concerns and are entitled to screen those fleeing ISIS-controlled areas. But authorities should make medical care, including first aid, promptly available to everyone at screening sites. Authorities running the screening centers should locate them as far from hostilities as possible. Authorities should also promptly identify vulnerable people and give them priority in the screening process, including those needing immediate medical assistance, and provide them with any assistance needed including shelter, food, milk for infants, and water.

Under international humanitarian law, parties to the conflict should take all feasible steps to evacuate the civilian population from the vicinity of fighting or military objects, and take all feasible precautions to protect civilians from harm. All parties are also obliged to facilitate rapid and unimpeded humanitarian assistance to all civilians in need. KRG authorities should ensure prompt independent judicial review of detention and allow detainees to have access to lawyers and medical care and to communicate with their families. Anyone held for an extended period without being able to leave should be considered as being detained.

These families have lived for years under the horrific abuses of ISIS, months with limited food, water, and medicine, and have just risked their lives trying to get to safety, Fakih said. Delaying people fleeing ISIS from reaching safety and getting the help they need is inhumane.

Families Describe Being Held at Checkpoints

Many families fleeing Hawija and Tel Afar have tried to enter KRG-held territory via several main checkpoints, including at Maktab Khalid, 15 kilometers west of Kirkuk; Daquq, 30 kilometers south of Kirkuk; Shindukhan, 40 kilometers northwest of Mosul; and al-Fadhilya, 15 kilometers north of Mosul.

Human Rights Watch interviewed four men who said they and their families were kept at Maktab Khalid for between one and three days.

One man from Hawija said he arrived at Maktab Khalid in November 2016, with six members of his family and enough food for one meal for the whole family. He said that Peshmerga officers prevented him and his family and hundreds of others from crossing for three days, saying they would only let families cross once the number waiting was big enough. The family sought shelter in a destroyed, abandoned building with no blankets. During that time, on a few occasions, officers gave him a bit of dry bread, which he gave to his children, he said.

Despite raising concerns with a Peshmerga officer at the checkpoint about ISIS attacks and his familys security, he said the officer dismissed these saying, Your safety is not our responsibility. We are not responsible if ISIS attacks you because you are not yet in our territory. He added:

By the third morning, my 9-year-old daughter was no longer moving or speaking, because of the severe cold and the lack of food. When they finally let us through, I had to carry her the whole way. Finally, an officer gave her some water.

Another man, 25, from Hawija, who arrived at Maktab Khalid on December 24 with his family and about 300 other people said Peshmerga officers informed him that they would only allow the families to cross once there were more than 500 people there. He said he was able to call relatives in Kirkuk who delivered them food via Peshmerga officers there but that in the three days they were there many other families went without. We were lucky, but many families spent those days without any food, he said. I saw old men and women too weak to walk by the last day.

Another man from Hawija said he reached Maktab Khalid in January, with his family and about 200 other people, only to have Peshmerga forces stop them there for days without any food. He said:

My 6-month-old son, Khalid, started crying on the first day, it was so cold and we had no milk to give him, because my wife had not eaten for three days. I went to the Peshmerga officers and asked if they had any food or milk, but they said they didnt. I begged them to let us cross but they refused, saying the number of people had to be bigger before they would let us all cross. I knew Khalid would die, and he did the next day. It was a sad day for me. I escaped ISIS in order to give my children a chance to survive and have a better life, but I lost him. I had to bury him right there in the desert.

The man said that his daughter, Khalids twin sister, survived but suffered severe dehydration. She was still receiving medical treatment when Human Rights Watch interviewed him on May 23.

The person who had knowledge of people who were stopped at Maktab Khalid said that 140 civilians were stopped on April 3 for 14 days and that assistance was only provided on Day 10; that 81 civilians were stopped on April 18 for six days; 31 on May 5 for 12 days, with assistance after nine days; 61 including eight with critical health conditions, on May 27, with two critically ill civilians allowed to cross around May 30, and the rest held for nine days.

One of the people with knowledge of the Daquq checkpoint said that eight families were stopped on April 3 for 16 days, with a local aid group only able to provide them 10 assistance kits containing food and water.

Then, on May 15, the source said the Peshmerga stopped a family with a sick elderly family member. The ailing woman was taken to a hospital on May 20, but returned later the same day. Her situation continued to deteriorate and on May 24 the family requested that the Peshmerga forces take her back to the hospital, but they refused. The person said that the Peshmerga refused permission for aid to be delivered at the end of May and as of June 6, the family was still stuck there, and had been joined by two more families.

An Iraqi government official confirmed the presence of the three families, saying the relatives had contacted him with the same concerns.

More:
Kurdistan Region of Iraq: Thousands Fleeing Kept Waiting Near Front Line - Human Rights Watch