The Global Intelligence Files,
files released so far...
2588
The Global Intelligence Files

### Index pages

List of Releases

### by Date of Document

unspecified
2001
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011

### by Date of Release

2001-03-13
2010-03-10
2011-03-05
2011-03-15
2012-01-29
2012-02-27
2012-02-28
2012-02-29
2012-03-01
2012-03-02
2012-03-03
2012-03-04
2012-03-05
2012-03-06
2012-03-07
2012-03-08
2012-03-09
2012-03-10
2012-03-11
2012-03-12
2012-03-13
2012-03-14
2012-03-15
2012-03-16
2012-03-17
2012-03-19
2012-03-20
2012-03-23
2012-03-25
2012-03-26
2012-03-27
2012-04-01
2012-04-02
2012-04-24
2012-04-26
2012-04-30
2012-05-10
2012-06-18
2012-06-20
2012-07-01
2012-07-24
2012-07-28
2012-07-29
2012-07-30
2012-07-31
2012-08-01
2012-08-02
2012-08-05
2012-08-06
2012-08-07
2012-08-08
2012-08-09
2012-08-10
2012-08-11
2012-08-12
2012-08-13
2012-08-14
2012-08-15
2012-08-16
2012-08-17
2012-08-18
2012-08-19
2012-08-20
2012-08-21
2012-08-22
2012-08-23
2012-08-24
2012-08-25
2012-08-26
2012-08-27
2012-08-29
2012-08-30
2012-08-31
2012-09-01
2012-09-02
2012-09-03
2012-09-04
2012-09-05
2012-09-06
2012-09-07
2012-09-09
2012-09-10
2012-09-11
2012-09-12

### Our Partners

ABC Color - Paraguay
Al Akhbar - Lebanon
Al Masry Al Youm - Egypt
Asia Sentinel - Hong Kong
Bivol - Bulgaria
Carta Capital - Brazil
CIPER - Chile
Dawn Media - Pakistan
L'Espresso - Italy
La Repubblica - Italy
La Jornada - Mexico
La Nacion - Costa Rica
Malaysia Today - Malaysia
McClatchy - United States
Nawaat - Tunisia
NDR/ARD - Germany
Owni - France
Pagina 12 - Argentina
Philip Dorling - Fairfax media contributor - Australia
Plaza Publica - Guatemala
Publica - Brazil
Publico.es - Spain
Rolling Stone - United States
Russian Reporter - Russia
Ta Nea - Greece
Taraf - Turkey
The Hindu - India
The Yes Men - Bhopal Activists
Sunday Star-Times - New Zealand

### Community resources

Supporters Support Wikileaks Follow us on Twitter Twitter this Follow us on Facebook

courage is contagious

# The Global Intelligence Files

On Monday February 27th, 2012, WikiLeaks began publishing The Global Intelligence Files, over five million e-mails from the Texas headquartered "global intelligence" company Stratfor. The e-mails date between July 2004 and late December 2011. They reveal the inner workings of a company that fronts as an intelligence publisher, but provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations, such as Bhopal's Dow Chemical Co., Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and government agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security, the US Marines and the US Defence Intelligence Agency. The emails show Stratfor's web of informers, pay-off structure, payment laundering techniques and psychological methods.

## Re: [alpha] INSIGHT - Some thoughts on US, UK, France, Turkey

Released on 2012-03-06 07:00 GMT

Email-ID | 67353
Date | 1970-01-01 01:00:00
From | bhalla@stratfor.com
To | alpha@stratfor.com

no one said the entire reason Libya is happening is because of these
reasons. what they were explaining was that on the mil side of the
equation, they're getting a lot out of the mission and it's not a total
drain on them
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Marko Papic" <marko.papic@stratfor.com>
To: "Alpha List" <alpha@stratfor.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2011 11:11:53 AM
Subject: Re: [alpha] INSIGHT - Some thoughts on US, UK, France, Turkey
Zagros... sounds like Lord of the Rings (yes, I know, the mountains).
I call bullshit on the entire reason Libya is happening is so that
Americans can teach UK-France how to do command and control. That is
post-facto reasoning by military guys who see that as the biggest
positive, so they are rationalizing it after the fact.
On 5/19/11 10:50 AM, Emre Dogru wrote:
Yeah, same in NATO. NATO sometimes organizes simulations based on
totally faked countries, flags and geography. I worked in one of those.
But this one is a bit different. Because everything is based on real
facts except for Iran.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "scott stewart" <scott.stewart@stratfor.com>
To: "Alpha List" <alpha@stratfor.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2011 6:44:32 PM
Subject: Re: [alpha] INSIGHT - Some thoughts on US, UK, France, Turkey
But that is actually a pretty common longstanding practice.
When I was in the Army used to always make up goofy country names for
the scenarios we created for exercises. But of course anybody who read
the scenario could tell exactly what country the scenario was referring
to.
From: alpha-bounces@stratfor.com [mailto:alpha-bounces@stratfor.com] On
Behalf Of Emre Dogru
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2011 11:38 AM
To: Alpha List
Subject: Re: [alpha] INSIGHT - Some thoughts on US, UK, France, Turkey
hahaha, gotta love this part. and you know why
They're about to do what sounds like a pretty elaborate war game within
NATO, and they complain that every time they do this, they're not
allowed to call Iran 'Iran' in the game. It's referred to as 'Zagros'.
Why? Because the Turks insist on not calling Iran by it's name in these
things.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Reva Bhalla" <bhalla@stratfor.com>
To: "Alpha List" <alpha@stratfor.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2011 6:24:55 PM
Subject: [alpha] INSIGHT - Some thoughts on US, UK, France, Turkey
My briefing yesterday with the USAF's strategy group was to help prep
the USAF chief of staff before his trip to Turkey the first week of
June. In this meeting, there was a US lt col, French lt col guy and
British group captain, as well as the Europe guy from the State Dept's
Office of the Secretary (who I completely owned in the discussion. he
finally quit trying and then literally applauded stratfor's knowledge of
these issues). Most of the discussion I had with them centered on our
view on Turkey, the intermarium, Turkey's power struggle, etc. so
nothing new to add there. The State Dept is still trying to wrap its
head around how to deal with Turkey more effectively when it's becoming
clear that Turkey isn't ready to handle everything on its plate. THere's
also a lack of understanding on why Azerbaijan matters in this mix.
They're about to do what sounds like a pretty elaborate war game within
NATO, and they complain that every time they do this, they're not
allowed to call Iran 'Iran' in the game. It's referred to as 'Zagros'.
Why? Because the Turks insist on not calling Iran by it's name in these
things.
When I brought up Libya, and asked what's next in terms of the air
campaign, the British adn French guys had an interesting response. The
talk of UK only having 6 more months of funding for this air campaign is
all about inter-service rivalry, justifying budgets, etc. The Brits and
the French really don't seem concerned at all about the financial
aspect. THey said it's an expense, but it's not expensive. It's costing
each 1.3 million euro per month to do Libya (including the daily patrols
and everything else). By comparison, Afghanistan costs them 1.4 million
per month.
They are fine with the stalemate. The British guy, who had met with the
British air force chief a few days ago, said that no one is really
trying to force the issue at this point. the rebels don't want to ask
for state recognition until they get the West back. No one seems really
prepared to force regime change and give that commitment, but they're
willing to wait this one out until something gives within to make
Ghadafi fall (non-militarily.)
The money isn't what matters. What the Brits and the FRench are really
getting out of this mil campaign is a good, hard lesson from their
"American cousins" on command and control for these missions. The lesson
here is vital for them. THey gave all sorts of examples. When the LIbya
campaign began, France was still coordinating its mission with the UK
through this lt col French liaison in the Pentagon instead of directly
with UK. Now, finally, the Brits have set up a command office in Paris
for them to coordinate. Little things like that make a huge difference,
and the US is helping them along the way so that they can prove they can
do missions like this more independently and manage their neighborhood.
Classic balance of pwoer, as they put it. French-UK cooperation has
really benefited from this whole thing. They could really care less that
it's about Libya. They see this mission as a very useful boost for NATO
and that this raises the bar for new entrants.
I countered that you can't consider it a boost for NATO when you're
missing GERMANY (!) They acknowledged that NATO's original purpose is
broken. These regional realignments, with France, UK adn US working
closely together is the new future. They still seem to think that
despite warming German-Russian ties, they don't need to worry yet about
Germany. Their military is still largely seen as irrelevant, and so in
that sense, NATO is still doing the job of keeping Germany down and
Russia out.
The French guy joked that now Strauss-Kahn is out of the running,
Sarkozy doesn't need to continue the war in Libya anymore. He's got the
election
--
--
Emre Dogru
STRATFOR
Cell: +90.532.465.7514
Fixed: +1.512.279.9468
emre.dogru@stratfor.com
www.stratfor.com
--
--
Emre Dogru
STRATFOR
Cell: +90.532.465.7514
Fixed: +1.512.279.9468
emre.dogru@stratfor.com
www.stratfor.com
--
Marko Papic
Senior Analyst
STRATFOR
+ 1-512-744-4094 (O)
+ 1-512-905-3091 (C)
221 W. 6th St, Ste. 400
Austin, TX 78701 - USA
www.stratfor.com
@marko_papic