Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
79. Every word is based in documented facts and reliable sources. I'll leave "the truth" to you and Fox
Mon Oct 5, 2015, 10:48 PM
Oct 2015
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026192755

Proposed UN Sanctions Do Not Go To Most ISIS Funding from Wealthy Donors

There is broad agreement that "substantial" funds are still reaching ISIS from wealthy elites in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other Gulf states. As the Pentagon announced yesterday, oil exports now do not account for most of ISIS finances. ISIS is instead depending on donations, “a lot of donations,” according to Rear Admiral John Kirby, spokesman for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Further sanctions do not threaten the primary source of finance for the so-called Islamic State (IS), reported to be in excess of $2 billion last year. On Thursday, a UN measure was proposed by Russia that would sanction the trade in oil and stolen antiquities that partially funds ISIS funders. However, according to the NYT, it does not add to the existing list of individuals named for sanctions. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/07/world/middleeast/un-prepares-resolution-to-confront-islamic-state-on-oil-and-antiquities.html?_r=0

This spares the US and NATO the difficult task of having to immediately punish most of the same Sunni states with which it has been previously cooperating in prosecuting the war in Syria. The measure discussed on Friday would, however, specifically sanction parties engaged in smuggling oil from ISIS controlled areas, paying ransom, and the sale of stolen antiquities, the latter valued at $35 million last year.

Nobody seems to want to put a finger on exactly how much cash is still flowing to ISIS from wealthy ISIS funders, and who exactly they are. But, everyone agrees that support from the Saudis and Gulf elites continues to be substantial. See, http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-terror/whos-funding-isis-wealthy-gulf-angel-investors-officials-say-n208006

In 2014, Saudi Arabia publicly agreed to clamp down on some donations from its citizens and religious foundations. As a result, most private funding now goes through Qatar. The UN Security Council Resolution 2170 passed last August 15 named only six individual ISIS leaders for direct sanctions. The new measure does not expand that list, but calls for a committee to nominate others for violation of existing UN resolutions.

The effects of the additional sanctions on oil exports proposed would have its primary impact on crude oil smuggling in and out of Turkey. The majority of ISIS oil revenues are derived through the black market in that country. Last June, at its height, a Turkish opposition MP and other sources estimated the annual oil revenues at $800 million. http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/221272-report-isis-oil-production-worth-800m-per-year

If accurate, oil sales was about 40% of the total ISIS operating budget as stated by the group. However, even at its height, petroleum accounted for only a fraction of ISIS funding. Some western estimates placed the IS annual total budget as high as $3 billion. See, http://thehill.com/policy/defense/228465-isis-puts-payments-to-poor-disabled-in-2-billion-budget; http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/isis-news-caliphate-unveils-first-annual-budget-2bn-250m-surplus-war-chest-1481931

The $800 million figure is actually at the top end of the estimates. US sources quoted by CNN last October stated that ISIS oil income was more likely half that figure: http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/06/world/meast/isis-funding/

The U.S. Treasury Department does not have hard figures that it can make public on the group's wealth but says it believes ISIS takes in millions of dollars a month.

Sources familiar with the subject say that ISIS' "burn' rate" -- how much the group spends -- is huge, including salaries, weapons and other expenses. For ISIS' oil sales, sources told CNN, the group probably makes between $1 million and $2 million per day, but probably on the lower end.


Along with everyone else, the returns on ISIS oil are probably a fraction of what they were at the height of world oil prices a year ago. Plus, the US and allies are bombing the group's oil platforms and vehicles. That has cut production and export to the point where US commanders now acknowledged that oil sales aren't the source of most ISIS funds, and that they are coming from donations, "a lot of donations":

The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is no longer relying on oil as its main source of revenue to fund its terrorist activity, according to the Pentagon.

“We know that oil revenue is no longer the lead source of their income in dollars,” Pentagon spokesperson Rear Admiral John Kirby told reporters during a press briefing on Tuesday.

ISIS’ loss of income is compounded by its losses on the battlefield as the group has “lost literally hundreds and hundreds of vehicles that they can’t replace,” Kirby said.

“They’ve got to steal whatever they want to get, and there’s a finite number.”

ISIS is instead depending on “a lot of donations” as one of the main sources of income. “They also have a significant black market program going on,” Kirby said.
http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2015/02/05/Pentagon-oil-is-no-longer-ISIS-main-source-of-income-.html

That leaves a big hole in the Caliphate's budget - that gets filled by someone.

Imposition of expanded UN sanctions would entail difficulties and costs for the US, particularly with Saudi Arabia. Therefore, it should not come as a surprise that the Security Counsel measure is limited, and does not yet show if the world is truly serious about eradicating ISIS.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

But not until they've wiped out Assad's Enemies, first: bobalew Oct 2015 #1
The Russians will kill all the groups there that are not pro-Assad. Rex Oct 2015 #2
Yay for brutality! randome Oct 2015 #3
Brutal to ISIS isn't so bad 6chars Oct 2015 #18
Agree. randome Oct 2015 #24
Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2015 #25
What the fuck is this shit? ellisonz Oct 2015 #28
Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2015 #33
No, I believe that person is sick at your attempts to make a brutal dictator look cuddly stevenleser Oct 2015 #40
Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2015 #45
Yes - I am glad that mess was cleaned up before my return. ellisonz Oct 2015 #78
Library Girl or Go West Young Man or Hannah Bell? nt geek tragedy Oct 2015 #44
Hannah Bell. NuclearDem Oct 2015 #50
And now his watch is ended. nt geek tragedy Oct 2015 #56
ISIS deserves whatever they get, from whoever can do it. CanonRay Oct 2015 #31
....x10+ 840high Oct 2015 #48
If Putin were really serious he'd drone the financial backers as well...nt Jesus Malverde Oct 2015 #61
We will follow them to the gates of hell. Jesus Malverde Oct 2015 #69
I agree. I just won't celebrate Putin's part in it. He's in this to restore the USSR. randome Oct 2015 #96
A group of terrorists NOLALady Oct 2015 #4
I agree they will be brutal, I disagree they will be particularly effective against ISIS. stevenleser Oct 2015 #5
Excellent point. cwydro Oct 2015 #7
The mujahideen were funded and trained by the west and gulf states killbotfactory Oct 2015 #15
Yes and no. Yes the west are not funding them, but no because ISIS is cash rich. stevenleser Oct 2015 #20
Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2015 #38
We've done more than that. We worked with the UN to pass resolutions to make anyone stevenleser Oct 2015 #41
Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2015 #47
IS was never more than 40 percent self-funded. KSA & GCC" leveymg Oct 2015 #55
None of that is really true. stevenleser Oct 2015 #58
Every word is based in documented facts and reliable sources. I'll leave "the truth" to you and Fox leveymg Oct 2015 #79
As are mine. There are many more links that back up the businessweek version. Nt stevenleser Oct 2015 #84
On this, the Joint Chiefs have more crediblity than a Saudi apologist working for a neocon thinktank leveymg Oct 2015 #86
We've been their longer supposedly fighting a weaker foe so rah fucking rah. TheKentuckian Oct 2015 #49
Let's see... Jesus Malverde Oct 2015 #62
It pretty much is at this point. It's a mess of competing rebel groups and religious groups stevenleser Oct 2015 #64
The terrain, the governments and the people's are completely different. Jesus Malverde Oct 2015 #67
Not without tens of thousands of boots on the ground they won't nt geek tragedy Oct 2015 #6
150K enough? cigsandcoffee Oct 2015 #14
Possibly. Depends how ISIS reacts. If they melt into the various cities they took and stevenleser Oct 2015 #21
Just exactly who are you for? Caretha Oct 2015 #51
Tactical analysis has nothing to do with "Who I'm for" stevenleser Oct 2015 #63
It's clear..nt Jesus Malverde Oct 2015 #74
"Melt into various cities" Jesus Malverde Oct 2015 #68
High explosives have been "raining down on their asses" for the past 2-3 months stevenleser Oct 2015 #70
You are aware that 75% of the "coalition" flights weren't dropping their bombs. Jesus Malverde Oct 2015 #72
Which is typical during a bombing campaign against non state insurgents stevenleser Oct 2015 #85
They are way, way off Ex Lurker Oct 2015 #29
sure, if they're actually on the ground. geek tragedy Oct 2015 #43
The Daily Express? oberliner Oct 2015 #82
Good wipe ISIS off the face of the earth workinclasszero Oct 2015 #8
Yah, well, their record of success in such things isn't so hot. MineralMan Oct 2015 #9
[insert Princess Bride quote here] nt MissB Oct 2015 #30
Never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line?... SidDithers Oct 2015 #37
ISIS in Syria is a very different beast than the mujiahadeen in Afghanistan. Xithras Oct 2015 #66
What, were we handing out teddy bears and lollies to the fighters? NightWatcher Oct 2015 #10
Well they have to target ISIS first davidn3600 Oct 2015 #11
Depends on how it goes. Lots of civilian losses and destruction tend to harden TwilightGardener Oct 2015 #12
They proved that in Afghanistan, right? HereSince1628 Oct 2015 #13
Yes, just as the Soviets did to the Mujahideen. yellowcanine Oct 2015 #16
Different leadership yeoman6987 Oct 2015 #76
Not so much really. Putin is a Kremlin retro. yellowcanine Oct 2015 #94
like they whipped the Afghans into submission? mike_c Oct 2015 #17
Beat me to it Egnever Oct 2015 #19
Yes, Russia was SO successful in Afghanistan! BillZBubb Oct 2015 #22
Brutality in a guerrilla war is usually a recipe for defeat (of the Russians, in this case) NickB79 Oct 2015 #23
Recruits won't just be coming from the Arab states but from all Islamic countries snagglepuss Oct 2015 #59
Would Turkey a member of nato support terrorist? Jesus Malverde Oct 2015 #71
Someone's has to buy ISIS oil. nt killbotfactory Oct 2015 #73
The Turks have gone after the Kurds not ISIS they also have snagglepuss Oct 2015 #89
That worked so well for them in Afghanistan. n/t ellisonz Oct 2015 #26
I wouldn't make the mistake of assuming the Russian army is any more or less brutal than ours. Maedhros Oct 2015 #27
They are more than welcome to the quagmire nt arely staircase Oct 2015 #32
Well, which is it? AngryAmish Oct 2015 #34
I agree. They don't mess around. louis-t Oct 2015 #35
It Was During The Iran Crisis. The Iranians Took A Russian National ( A Diplomat I Think) TheMastersNemesis Oct 2015 #87
All I can say is: jack_krass Oct 2015 #36
Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2015 #39
Nope, no one is rooting for the terrorists. I have said publicly we should stevenleser Oct 2015 #42
Oh, go pound sand. NuclearDem Oct 2015 #46
Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2015 #52
I have to admit i was naive in my thinking on this. I thought Putin was going hrmjustin Oct 2015 #53
Welcome back, Justin! ColesCountyDem Oct 2015 #80
Did they decimate the Mujahideen in Afghanistan? former9thward Oct 2015 #54
Russians decimated Afghanistan rafeh1 Oct 2015 #57
russians got their asses handed to them in Chechnya. their military isn't any better now. KG Oct 2015 #60
Here is the alternate approach Jesus Malverde Oct 2015 #65
Putin is protecting the Naval bases and trying to get the sanctions eased underpants Oct 2015 #75
differences DustyJoe Oct 2015 #77
about Russia vs. Isis achsadu Oct 2015 #81
Russia may take out ISIS, but if there are any doctors in the area, that's our specialty. egduj Oct 2015 #83
Yeah, the Russians are much more respectful of non-combatants. Act_of_Reparation Oct 2015 #97
Syria is where WW3 will begin. roamer65 Oct 2015 #88
I don't think fighting ISIS is actually a big priority of Russia's YoungDemCA Oct 2015 #90
DU makes my head spin sometimes... renegade000 Oct 2015 #91
Some Americans would rather live in Putin's Russia YoungDemCA Oct 2015 #92
Like they decimated the mujahideen in the 80s? dilby Oct 2015 #93
This message was self-deleted by its author LanternWaste Oct 2015 #95
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Russians Will Decimat...»Reply #79