Mediaboss Marketing

Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance, Jr. handed over 33 looted antiquities valued at roughly $1.8 million to Afghan officials yesterdayat a repatriation ceremony in New York.

The objects are linked to disgraced antiquities dealer Subhash Kapoor, from whom U.S. authorities have recovered more than 2,500 relics from all over the world at a total estimated value of $143 million.

Crimes of culture involving looted and stolen religious relics, such as the nearly two dozen Buddhist statues being repatriated today to the people of Afghanistan, not only tear at the societal fabric of nations, but also deprive millions of believers worldwide of the earlier sacred symbols of their faith, Vance said in a statement.

He added that since last August, his team has repatriated 338 stolen objects to seven countries. And we look forward to future ceremonies announcing the return of additional items to their rightful owners, he added.

Yesterdays ceremony was attended by Afghan ambassador to the U.S., Roya Rahmani, as well as acting special agent in charge Eric Silverman of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

The preservation of Afghanistans heritage and history is paving the path for civilization and society to grow, Rahmani said, calling the recovered pieces irreplaceable pieces of Afghanistans diverse culture and rich history.

Pictured (from left to right): Schist statue depicting a Bodhisattva Meditating Under The Tree, Stucco Head of a Bearded Man, and Bronze mask of Silenus. Image via manhattanda.org

Kapoor is currently being held at a jail in India pending completion of a trial in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu. The Manhattan district attorneys office, which issued an arrest warrant for Kapoor in 2012, also filed extradition paperwork for his return to the U.S. last summer.

The antiquities unit of the D.A. has been investigating Kapoor and his co-conspirators since 2011, tracking illegal looting, exportation, and sale of ancient art from Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Cambodia, Thailand, Nepal, Indonesia, Myanmar, and other nations.

Kapoor and seven others allegedlysmuggled looted antiquities into Manhattan and sold the pieces through the dealers Madison Avenue gallery, Art of the Past, according to the D.A.

Artifacts of historical or cultural significance allow the public to experience a nations heritage and these items shouldnt be offered as souvenirs for sale to the highest bidder, said Peter C. Fitzhugh, special agent in charge of Homeland Security in New York.

Go here to see the original:
The U.S. Returns 33 Antiquities Stolen From Afghanistan That Are Linked to Disgraced Dealer Subhash Kapoor - artnet News

After 20 long years, the war in Afghanistan is coming to a close. Yet what does the next chapter for the U.S. military look like?

One projection involves an F-35 pilot shot down by Iran and a U.S. naval destroyer sunk by Beijing in the South China Sea. That is the fictional premise behind a new buzzed-about book, 2034.

The dismal prospects of how the U.S. military might fare in a future war, whether against China, Iran, or some other enemy, has Pentagon planners, defense manufacturers, and service chiefs bracing for a future that will not be kind to the defense budget. Besides ballooning national deficits, non-traditional national security priorities, and pushback against pricey yet unproven fighters like the F-35, the impact of COVID on the U.S. economy, two separate COVID relief packages, and the proposed American Jobs Plan could result in one of the biggest defense budget cuts in modern history.

This very real possibility has the armed services the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, and now Space Force each scrambling for a larger piece of the dwindling pie. A U.S. Air Force general recently stated that the U.S. Armys pursuit of long-range artillery and missiles capabilities was stupid. The Army has had to reassure the Marines that they arent trying to encroach on their efforts in the Indo-Pacific region.

Some services are better at crafting compelling fiscal narratives than others. As the late Congressman Ike Skelton shared with one of us in 2009, Congress understands the strategic utility of a carrier strike group or a bomber wing. They have a harder time with an infantry brigade or an armor battalion.

In the wake of the 2013 sequestration, a similar turf war broke out when the military was set to take a roughly $1 trillion cut to its budget. The Department of Defense conducted a controversial study that included a set of scenarios and potential conflicts. Behind closed doors, each service argued that their strengths would be the greatest contribution of winning and therefore should be prioritized in budget decisions. Clearly, none of the scenarios imagined in 2013 have happened.

Now with the news that the U.S. will pull its last troops out of Afghanistan in September, it is anybodys guess where or how U.S. forces will be deployed next. One camp will argue that the next major war will take place on the high seas while another foresees a grand conflict waged across the skies using state-of-the-art manned and unmanned aircraft. Still another camp will insist that any future war must involve island-hopping campaigns in the South Pacific akin to World War II, while yet another will argue that the future portends clashes in outer space and the cyber domains. And some will simply tag every future concept with an appropriate military modifier (cross-domain, multi-domain, or all-domain) in hopes of maintaining an illusion of equity across the services.

Get the military's most comprehensive news and information every morning

(please select a country) United States United Kingdom Afghanistan Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, The Democratic Republic of The Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote D'ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guinea Guinea-bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Micronesia, Federated States of Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory, Occupied Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and The Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia and Montenegro Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and The South Sandwich Islands Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan, Province of China Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States United States Minor Outlying Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Viet Nam Virgin Islands, British Virgin Islands, U.S. Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe

Subscribe

By giving us your email, you are opting in to the Early Bird Brief.

The British military recently endured their own defense budget war. The end result, based on assumptions that other nations would bear the burden of future warfighting, was major cuts to military end strength and the smallest British army to take the field in 300 years.

Landpower, traditionally the domain of army forces, simply doesnt share the same narrative appeal as technologically advanced and often prohibitively expensive platforms and capabilities. In an information age society, putting boots on the ground is increasingly viewed as unnecessary when other capabilities can achieve the same ends without the commitment of blood and treasure. When the budget strings tighten, armies tend to shrink.

But should they? For many landpower advocates, the answer to that question came in the aftermath of the Korean War. You may fly over a land forever; you may bomb it, atomize it, pulverize it and wipe it clean of life, remarked historian T.R. Fehrenbach in his 1964 book, This Kind of War. [B]ut if you desire to defend it, protect it, and keep it for civilization, you must do this on the ground, the way the Roman legions did, by putting your young men into the mud. The U.S. has a terrible history of cutting landpower after wars despite going into Korea and Vietnam with a depleted Army, it wasnt until the 1980s that land forces were prepared for their next fight.

When deterrence fails, the introduction of significant ground forces signals an unmistakable level of national commitment and will. Although much has changed since the wars in Korea and Vietnam, one immutable fact remains: conflicts are decided in the land domain, where the will of the people ultimately rests. Any future conflict will inherently involve all the services, but without landpower namely tanks and troops to achieve a decisive outcome, we are likely to usher in an era of lengthy and inconclusive wars that are passed on to successive generations.

Dont believe the made-in-Hollywood hoopla about drones or cyber deciding the next war. Being able to decisively take and hold territory whether in Crimea or Taiwan or a sandy patch of the Middle East is what matters. The rest is all sci-fi fantasy.

John Spencer is the chair of Urban Warfare Studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point. Steve Leonard is director of assessments at the University of Kansas School of Business.

Editors note: This is an op-ed and as such, the opinions expressed are those of the author. If you would like to respond, or have an editorial of your own you would like to submit, please contact Military Times managing editor Howard Altman,haltman@militarytimes.com.

See the original post:
What the military needs after Afghanistan - Military Times

As US troops leave Afghanistan, rescued dogs and cats go with them

KABUL, Afghanistan Staff Sgt. Katie Catania found love at Kandahar Airfield, in the form of two puppies.

Charley is the playful one, while Flea is quiet and affectionate. Catania planned to choose one of them to keep, but the looming U.S. troop withdrawal from Afghanistan and the increasing violence in the country weighed heavily on her decision.

I didnt want to just leave one, Catania said. Not knowing the state of the base, and the country itself If I could give these dogs a better life than just leaving them there in Afghanistan with an unknown future, then I was going to try.

Catania, a logistics specialist who has since left Afghanistan, helped to move gear out of Kandahar over the past year during troop drawdowns. The U.S. is expected to complete its withdrawal of about 2,500 troops by Sept. 11, the White House said last week.

As troops leave, others like Catania are taking the dogs and cats they befriended on base with them.

Charlotte Maxwell-Jones, who runs a veterinary clinic in Kabul, helps prepare animals for the long flight from Afghanistan to the U.S. Shes received a number of urgent calls from service members in the past year as troop levels dropped from their peak of about 12,000 last year.

People are calling from bases and saying, can we move these animals out, ASAP? she said, adding that of the dogs she shipped to the U.S. last week, two-thirds were for service members.

There is often a rush to move animals out when bases close, said Michelle Smith, executive director of Puppy Rescue Mission, which partners with Maxwell-Jones.

If theyre shutting down camps and bases, well see an increase in rescues, Smith said, recalling a surge during the 2014 troop drawdown. The guys who are shutting down that location dont want to leave the animals behind that theyve been feeding and caring for.

Troops are not supposed befriend local animals, which can carry disease, but they often do.

Youre so busy and you just miss regular stuff you become attached, said Chief Warrant Officer 3 Stephanie Hall, a helicopter pilot, who until February was deployed to the base at Kabuls airport.

Hall brought back two dogs, Bennie and Mollie, and two cats, Playa and Kiaya.

Getting them from Afghanistan to America was at times incredibly difficult and complicated, Hall said, and cost more than $3,000.

But the process was worth it to ensure the pets she had cared for would get a good life, she said.

I didnt want to have regrets and not know what happened to them, Hall said.

Catania drove to the airport last week to pick up Charley and Flea. Catania, an avid lover of outdoor sports, wants to bring the dogs to Utah.

Id really like to take them out hiking and exploring, Catania said, and just spoil them.

lawrence.jp@stripes.comTwitter: @jplawrence3

Staff Sgt. Katie Catania, an Army reservist, brought Charley, left, and Flea, right, back to the U.S. with her from Afghanistan. The U.S. troop withdrawal and violence in the country weighed heavily on her decision to rescue the dogs.KATIE CATANIA

Read more:
As US troops leave Afghanistan, rescued dogs and cats go with them - Stars and Stripes

hosted by the

Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies

Once completed, the Internet Encyclopedia of Ukraine (IEU) will be the most comprehensive source ofinformation in English on Ukraine, its history, people, geography, society, economy, and cultural heritage. At present, the IEU team isworking on phase 1 of the project: the creation of an Internet database containing the revised and updated contents of the five-volumeEncyclopedia of Ukraine (University of Toronto Press, 1984-93) edited by Volodymyr Kubijovyc (vols. 1-2) and Danylo Husar Struk(vols. 3-5). Close to fifty percent of this information is currently displayed on our site. At the same time, a considerable number of new articles (not contained in the published five-volume Encyclopedia of Ukraine) have also been made available. New entries are being edited, updated, andadded daily. Our ability to update this information and the speed with which we can make it available to Internet users worldwide willgreatly depend on the availability of financial resources for our project. You can greatly contribute to the success of the Internet Encyclopedia of Ukraine by supporting our work morally and financially. Become an IEU supporter! To learn more about our project, click on About IEU.

We invite you to search the materials currently available on this site. First, you may wish to click on the buttons located on the left side of the screen, such as "History" or "Land," to view currently available featured groups of entries, dedicated to particular topics. To search for particular names or entries, use the TITLE SEARCH box in the top right corner to locate entries such as "Kyivan Rus'," "Cossacks," "Carpathian Mountains," "Central Rada," "Archipenko, Alexander," "Bukovyna," "Khmelnytsky, Bohdan," "Ukrainians," andmany others (type any part of a name or entry you are searching for). Alternatively, select one or several letters of the alphabet in theIndex Search to view all available entries starting with the given letter or combination of letters. Navigate between entries throughhyperlinks or by using "Next Entry" and "Previous Entry" buttons. We encourage you to use the Advanced Search functions to findinformation on subjects that do not yet have their own entries but are discussed in various other entries.

See the original post here:
Home, Encyclopedia of Ukraine

As Russia continues to mass military troops and equipment at Ukraines border while deflecting blame on so-called Ukrainian aggressions, the Wests response has been slow and hesitant. As has been the case for many decades, it will be up to the United States to draw red lines in Eastern Europe.

The Biden administration is undoubtedly managing competing priorities. But avoiding confrontation with Russia must also stay at the top of the agenda. To do this, the U.S. will need to develop a strategy that securely safeguards Eastern Europe from Russia while minimizing Western involvement.

Ukraine has become an intractable problem for the West, made worse by an absence of strategy toward the Kremlin. Russia has so far been allowed to blame Ukrainian or NATO aggressions for its military buildup along NATOs Eastern Flank. The West should be vocal in calling out these Russian lies.

We must also realize that Russia is threatened by Ukraines independence, integrity and Western orientation. Ukraine, which has been fighting occupation for more than seven years, is vital to Western and U.S. interests and to European security and stability.

There are three clear steps the Biden administration must take if it hopes to de-escalate the crisis with Russia in Eastern Europe without being drawn into conflict. First, recognize that the Normandy Format has failed. Second, take the lead on peace negotiations with Russia. And third, shape a strategy for the Black Sea region.

Ukrainian Volodymyr President Zelensky was right to accuse France and Germany of lukewarm commitment to the Minsk agreements. The agreements have not progressed in seven years and are now effectively dead. Worse still, the Normandy Format is at risk of threatening regional security amid rising German-U.S. tensions over Nord Stream 2, the end of German Chancellor Angela Merkels tenure and French President Emmanuel Macron calling for greater lenience for Russia.

A new negotiation platform is desperately needed. While it is impossible to find an effective short-term solution to the conflict in Ukraine without Russia, the U.S. should put its weight behind an alternative format that serves Eastern European security interests. The Crimea Platform is a strong place to start, as is Bidens proposed meeting with Putin in the coming weeks. The Budapest Memorandum, which secured Ukraines integrity and independence in 1994, could also be used as a guide in framing future negotiations. This format would offer the United Kingdom a more substantial role in negotiations.

The international community must also acknowledge that peace in Ukraine cannot be achieved with Russia at the negotiating table but the U.S. absent. For 30 years, Ukraine has borne the brunt of a series of Russian-instigated (and still unresolved) conflicts around the Black Sea. Russia has long been granted the right to sit across from its neighbor a neighbor it has repeatedly stolen from only to argue that the theft was justified without being held to account. Moscow has then been allowed to draw on the support of powerful economic allies in negotiation formats like the Normandy Format.

The same can be said for the intractable conflicts in Georgia, Moldova and Nagorno-Karabakh. Eastern Europes Western integration, as well as reasonable solutions for all Black Sea conflicts, will progress only if Washington is willing to counter Russias illegal and unfair territorial and political claims.

Finally, a comprehensive Black Sea strategy is critical if the Biden administration wants to prevent escalation and deter Russia long-term. Russias troop movements at the Ukrainian border should not be viewed in isolation from Russian maritime movement in the Black Sea. Russian aggression extends far beyond Ukraine to encompass the entire Eastern European region.

The military foundations of a Black Sea strategy have already been laid. With the support of its Allies, the U.S. has built NATO deterrence on the Eastern Flank, although there is much still to be achieved militarily. The Black Sea remains dominated by Russia aggression. NATO maritime deterrence and cooperation with non-NATO Georgia and Ukraine is the next step in reducing Russian dominance.

President BidenJoe BidenTroy Carter wins race to fill Cedric Richmond's Louisiana House seat NC sheriff to ask court to release bodycam footage of Andrew Brown shooting How schools can spend 0 billion responsibly MORE has from the outset signaled a sharper focus on corruption. But Western deterrence against Russia hybrid warfare has so far been limited to cyber, election interference and disinformation. A Black Sea strategy will only succeed in defending against Russia if the Biden administration prioritizes anti-corruption in the region, not least in Ukraine, where corruption has long opened the door to Russian influence.

The Biden administration has a unique opportunity to mitigate the risk of protracted insecurity in the Black Sea and military escalation with Russia, as well as to manage the inevitable long-term costs for the U.S. A free and secure Eastern Europe will be possible only if the U.S. offers its support in finding a peaceful solution for Ukraine, demands accountability and predictability in its relations with Russia and develops a comprehensive Black Sea strategy that addresses the full spectrum of hybrid deterrence.

On the other hand, if no action is taken and the West limits itself to statements of disapproval, there is a very real risk of the destruction of Ukraine. The first Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2014 led to thousands of fallen Ukrainians, millions displaced and NATOs reluctant strategic reorientation toward territorial defense and Russias deterrence. A second Russian invasion of Ukraine could put the countrys existence in question. Ultimately, it would reveal the Wests failure to deter Russia and an end to the dream of an Eastern Europe whole and free.

Iulia Joja is a senior fellow for the Middle East Institutes FrontierEuropeInitiative and an adjunctprofessoratGeorgetown University. Her research and teachings focus onEuropeanandBlack Sea security.

Read more here:
Ukraine is an intractable problem, made worse by a lack of strategy | TheHill - The Hill