Divya Kumar Soti
Pak Army’s increasing inefficiency in dealing with extremists is making the matters worse.
Last week ,in a low key event, Governor of Pakistan’s Frontier province Retd. Gen Jan Mohmmad Urugzai submitted his resignation, on ground of some private reasons. Resignation was accepted readily and Governor of Balochistan was given charge of NWFP for the time being.
This is seen as an ominous event in diplomatic circles. Gen Urugzai favored a political solution to current crisis in NWFP. He was a key figure in arranging past ceasefires arranged in this Jehadi hotbed. That is reason he was not liked by hawkish & deeply irritated NATO and Afghan commanders across the Durand line. Western diplomats operating on field in Pakistan who are shocked & overawed by the pace of deteriorating security situation in Pakistan are not in mood to buy any sort of new ceasefire. So, Gen Urugzai had been shown the way.
This many think, is the first sign that US may be planning to attack Al-Qaeda & Taliban in tribal areas. Last year, during same period some ‘ceasefires’ were arranged in the name of political solution ( which proved to be more fragile than what their manufacturers & consumers presumed them to be), resulted in Taliban’s Spring offensive in Afghanistan, catastrophe in Swat & by the Year end whole Pakistan is itself in dire need of a political solution which is no where in sight. Now nobody wants such solutions anymore; be it Americans, Afghans or so called feudal moderate (by Pakistani standards only).
Moreover results of Army’s offensive in Swat are unclear. Pak Army so far is unable to stop bombings and Mullah Fazlullah & other top commanders are still out of its reach. There is no clarity about damage suffered by TNSM. Number of terrorists still hiding in Swat is still unclear, but, with the kind of ease they are striking, it is clear that they still have a lot of strength. There withdrawal from District Headquarters is most probably a classical guerilla tactic. They are still there on streets in disguise and if their leadership is not shocked and eliminated at regular basis, they will continue to have capability to destabilize hinterland anytime through bombings, assassinations and other sabotage activities. Swat offensive started with lot of embarrassment for Pak Army. Lot of soldiers surrendered to terrorists, many deserted and many were taken hostage and then exchanged with terrorists. Some pilots refused to bomb Talibani positions. All this made it evident to policy makers in Washington and Delhi that they were over estimating Pak Army’s capability to take on terrorists as holes; although still pretty small; began to surface in Army and ISI.
Situation across the Durand line is not better either. In last few months, Taliban has demonstrated ability of striking in Provinces which are relatively calm and are considered free of disease known as Talibanisation. Now, Indian Government is also feeling uneasy as there was a bomb blast near Indian Consulate in Jalalabad and ITBP commandos were targeted in a suicide bombing in Nimroze province. US sponsored plan to install Benazir which Ministry of External Affairs supported tacitly, is already in shatters with her assassination.
This all is leading planners in Washington- who for the first time are taking conventional Indian & Afghan wisdom about Pakistan seriously- to consider option of military action inside tribal areas seriously and sincerely. Another very important thing is that this is election year in US. All the Democrat frontrunners are promising voters that they will hunt down terrorists by sending US troops inside Pak tribal areas. So, Republicans may try to outsmart them by doing so before elections and maintain there hawkish image on terror front; which is the only lifeline for them in coming elections. Moreover, this plan does not require crossing many technical barriers and will find support in US as well as Europe. With Iran issue taking a backseat, Pakistan may have to face the heat in coming days.
E-Mail: writing2divya@gmail.com
January 12, 2008
INDIA : Collapse of a culture
The Moving Finger Writes
By M.V. Kamath
The media which tried to cover the event were pounced upon, beaten up and had their cameras smashed. All by the CPM cadres or their police counterparts. Has the RSS ever been guilty of such behavious anywhere in India, including Gujarat? Now Karat is frightening the UPA that if it goes ahead with the talks with the IAEA, then it would withdraw its support to the coalition.
What have we come to? To what depths of political degradation have we fallen that the politicking especially prior to the first phase of elections to the Gujarat State Assembly should be turned into name-calling and mud-slinging? One is ashamed of our leaders. One expected some high class speechifying from the Congress leaders in fighting the elections. As it turned out, both Sonia Gandhi and the party general secretary Rahul Gandhi could only engage themselves in slovenly shouting unworthy of any leader. The idea, apparently, was to run down the Gujarat Chief Minister in whatever way possible. And understandably he hit back in ample measure unworthy of an elder. Sonia Gandhi was badly advised. So was Rahul. They had nothing positive to say and whatever they said reflected poor taste. Is Gujarat a “den of sins” as was made out by Congress leaders? Do they have their own hands clean?
Surprising support to the Gujarat Chief Minister has come from an unsuspected source: columnist Swaminathan S. Anklesaria Aiyar. According to him, the Chief Minister is “factually on firm ground in saying that political parties who have resorted to extra judicial killings in other states are hypocrites in trying to portray Gujarat as a den of sin”. And how right he is. In Punjab, during the rise of the Pakistan-ISI sponsored Sikh militancy, upholding civil rights or the rule of law did not end it. Sikh terrorism was quashed by state terror, by extra-judicial torture, kidnapping and murder.
Ask K.P.S.Gill. Earlier, when Naxalite militants threatened West Bengal in the late 1960s and early 1970s, it was collusion between Congress and CPM that led to the crushing to the insurgents again, through extra-judicial means. As Aiyar noted, “Naxalism was not quashed by the rule of law, but by State terror”. Forget the past. Think of the present. Who halted the Nandigram revolt sponsored by the Bhumi Uchched Pratiridh Committee (BUPC): the West Bengal police? The CRPF? Neither. It was the CPM cadre, fully armed, which ‘invaded’ Nandigram in ‘Operation Recapture’ and took it over. Fully armed CPM cadres? Yes, fully-armed CPM cadres indeed. Not only did the CPM cadres take over Nandigram, they have been, according to The Statesman (November 16) laying down fines on BUPC supporters. The cadres would tell them that if they did not pay the fine they would have to leave their homes. Has the Congress raised its voice against this form of terrorism and utter lawlessness?
The State police simply failed to stop the cadres. And West Bengal’s Chief Minister Buddhadev Bhattacharya boasted about their work, saying the Opposition in Nandigram has been “paid back in the same coin”. He even went to the extent of saying that the CPM cadres were “legally and morally justified in entering Nandigram, armed”. Where, pray, is the rule of law? The media has not identified the so-called ‘Opposition’, which largely consisted of Muslims. Fancy something like that happening in Gujarat with a Gujarat Nandigram being ruthlessly put down, say, by ‘fully armed’ RSS cadres? The media then would have been up in arms. The RSS would have been damned as an anti-Muslim outfit. And the Chief Minister would have been condemned as a fascist, communal monster and killer of Muslims. The CPM has been able literally to get away with murder of Muslims. But what has the media to say about it? Nothing.
The Times of India (December 7, 2007) demanded of the Gujarat Chief Minister that he should “understand the rule of law”. Did it give the same advise to Buddhadev Bhattacharya? A report in The Pioneer (November 10) re-called what happened in Nandigram. It said: Hungry men, women and children, rendered homeless after CPM cadres began to shoot and bomb their way into Nandigram wailed in despair… They had to retreat under the deadly firepower of the Marxist militia armed with sophisticated weapons, including self-loading rifles…” Can one imagine RSS volunteers being thus armed? Where did the Marxist cadres get their arms from? The Congress has no answer. It prefers to look away from the scene.
CPM’s murderous activities are not new. The Marxists have been indulging in Nandigram-type violence against BJP workers in Kerala for decades. It doesn’t serve Congress to remember these foul acts. According to BJP spokesman Rajiv Pratap Rudy, over the last 40 years since 1960s, about 150 RSS and BJP workers have been killed in Kerala, especially in Kannur district. Many more were attacked. As many as 15 survivors of such violent attacks, many of them amputees, told their stories to reporters in Delhi. They said that their hands and legs were cut off often because they had deserted the CPM to join the RSS or BJP. The violence shown by the CPM has never been projected by the media, because the CPM is allegedly ‘secular’. One would like to ask the CPM-led governments in Kerala and West Bengal how many of their party murderers have been booked, let alone tried and sentenced to death. If these state governments would not provide the answer, will Home Minister Shivraj Patil kindly provide one?
The late Nikhil Chakravartty was a confirmed Leftist, but even he had complaints to make against the CPM. Writing in Mainstream (January 23, 1993) a journal he edited, Chakravartty recalled how in a village in Nadia district, a deaf and dumb girl in a poverty-stricken family had been ‘allegedly’ raped by a worker of the ruling CPM. Her mother complained to Mamata Bannerjee, then a Union Minister of State and an M.P. Mamata sought an appointment with a CPM Minister in Kolkata who refused to see her. Mamata decided to observe dharna in front of the Chief Minister’s office. The police encircled her, physically dragged her down the stairs, whisked her away in a police van to police headquarters and locked her up until midnight. And this happened to a Union Minister and an MP. That is the CPM.
The media which tried to cover the event were pounced upon, beaten up and had their cameras smashed. All by the CPM cadres or their police counterparts. Has the RSS ever been guilty of such behavious anywhere in India, including Gujarat? Now Karat is frightening the UPA that if it goes ahead with the talks with the IAEA, then it would withdraw its support to the coalition. When will Congress learn that the BJP Chief Minister of Gujarat comes out smelling of roses when contrasted with the CPM thugs who observe no law and have no respect for authority? And has Congress forgotten that it was the CPM which originated the concept of gherao, torturing Company managers in many ways that was ultimately to lead to the closure of several industrial units in West Bengal? One suspects Sonia Gandhi and Dr Manmohan Singh suffering from loss of memory. Or is it a question of holding on to power at any cost? Answer, Congressmen, answer!
Source: http://www.organiser.org/
By M.V. Kamath
The media which tried to cover the event were pounced upon, beaten up and had their cameras smashed. All by the CPM cadres or their police counterparts. Has the RSS ever been guilty of such behavious anywhere in India, including Gujarat? Now Karat is frightening the UPA that if it goes ahead with the talks with the IAEA, then it would withdraw its support to the coalition.
What have we come to? To what depths of political degradation have we fallen that the politicking especially prior to the first phase of elections to the Gujarat State Assembly should be turned into name-calling and mud-slinging? One is ashamed of our leaders. One expected some high class speechifying from the Congress leaders in fighting the elections. As it turned out, both Sonia Gandhi and the party general secretary Rahul Gandhi could only engage themselves in slovenly shouting unworthy of any leader. The idea, apparently, was to run down the Gujarat Chief Minister in whatever way possible. And understandably he hit back in ample measure unworthy of an elder. Sonia Gandhi was badly advised. So was Rahul. They had nothing positive to say and whatever they said reflected poor taste. Is Gujarat a “den of sins” as was made out by Congress leaders? Do they have their own hands clean?
Surprising support to the Gujarat Chief Minister has come from an unsuspected source: columnist Swaminathan S. Anklesaria Aiyar. According to him, the Chief Minister is “factually on firm ground in saying that political parties who have resorted to extra judicial killings in other states are hypocrites in trying to portray Gujarat as a den of sin”. And how right he is. In Punjab, during the rise of the Pakistan-ISI sponsored Sikh militancy, upholding civil rights or the rule of law did not end it. Sikh terrorism was quashed by state terror, by extra-judicial torture, kidnapping and murder.
Ask K.P.S.Gill. Earlier, when Naxalite militants threatened West Bengal in the late 1960s and early 1970s, it was collusion between Congress and CPM that led to the crushing to the insurgents again, through extra-judicial means. As Aiyar noted, “Naxalism was not quashed by the rule of law, but by State terror”. Forget the past. Think of the present. Who halted the Nandigram revolt sponsored by the Bhumi Uchched Pratiridh Committee (BUPC): the West Bengal police? The CRPF? Neither. It was the CPM cadre, fully armed, which ‘invaded’ Nandigram in ‘Operation Recapture’ and took it over. Fully armed CPM cadres? Yes, fully-armed CPM cadres indeed. Not only did the CPM cadres take over Nandigram, they have been, according to The Statesman (November 16) laying down fines on BUPC supporters. The cadres would tell them that if they did not pay the fine they would have to leave their homes. Has the Congress raised its voice against this form of terrorism and utter lawlessness?
The State police simply failed to stop the cadres. And West Bengal’s Chief Minister Buddhadev Bhattacharya boasted about their work, saying the Opposition in Nandigram has been “paid back in the same coin”. He even went to the extent of saying that the CPM cadres were “legally and morally justified in entering Nandigram, armed”. Where, pray, is the rule of law? The media has not identified the so-called ‘Opposition’, which largely consisted of Muslims. Fancy something like that happening in Gujarat with a Gujarat Nandigram being ruthlessly put down, say, by ‘fully armed’ RSS cadres? The media then would have been up in arms. The RSS would have been damned as an anti-Muslim outfit. And the Chief Minister would have been condemned as a fascist, communal monster and killer of Muslims. The CPM has been able literally to get away with murder of Muslims. But what has the media to say about it? Nothing.
The Times of India (December 7, 2007) demanded of the Gujarat Chief Minister that he should “understand the rule of law”. Did it give the same advise to Buddhadev Bhattacharya? A report in The Pioneer (November 10) re-called what happened in Nandigram. It said: Hungry men, women and children, rendered homeless after CPM cadres began to shoot and bomb their way into Nandigram wailed in despair… They had to retreat under the deadly firepower of the Marxist militia armed with sophisticated weapons, including self-loading rifles…” Can one imagine RSS volunteers being thus armed? Where did the Marxist cadres get their arms from? The Congress has no answer. It prefers to look away from the scene.
CPM’s murderous activities are not new. The Marxists have been indulging in Nandigram-type violence against BJP workers in Kerala for decades. It doesn’t serve Congress to remember these foul acts. According to BJP spokesman Rajiv Pratap Rudy, over the last 40 years since 1960s, about 150 RSS and BJP workers have been killed in Kerala, especially in Kannur district. Many more were attacked. As many as 15 survivors of such violent attacks, many of them amputees, told their stories to reporters in Delhi. They said that their hands and legs were cut off often because they had deserted the CPM to join the RSS or BJP. The violence shown by the CPM has never been projected by the media, because the CPM is allegedly ‘secular’. One would like to ask the CPM-led governments in Kerala and West Bengal how many of their party murderers have been booked, let alone tried and sentenced to death. If these state governments would not provide the answer, will Home Minister Shivraj Patil kindly provide one?
The late Nikhil Chakravartty was a confirmed Leftist, but even he had complaints to make against the CPM. Writing in Mainstream (January 23, 1993) a journal he edited, Chakravartty recalled how in a village in Nadia district, a deaf and dumb girl in a poverty-stricken family had been ‘allegedly’ raped by a worker of the ruling CPM. Her mother complained to Mamata Bannerjee, then a Union Minister of State and an M.P. Mamata sought an appointment with a CPM Minister in Kolkata who refused to see her. Mamata decided to observe dharna in front of the Chief Minister’s office. The police encircled her, physically dragged her down the stairs, whisked her away in a police van to police headquarters and locked her up until midnight. And this happened to a Union Minister and an MP. That is the CPM.
The media which tried to cover the event were pounced upon, beaten up and had their cameras smashed. All by the CPM cadres or their police counterparts. Has the RSS ever been guilty of such behavious anywhere in India, including Gujarat? Now Karat is frightening the UPA that if it goes ahead with the talks with the IAEA, then it would withdraw its support to the coalition. When will Congress learn that the BJP Chief Minister of Gujarat comes out smelling of roses when contrasted with the CPM thugs who observe no law and have no respect for authority? And has Congress forgotten that it was the CPM which originated the concept of gherao, torturing Company managers in many ways that was ultimately to lead to the closure of several industrial units in West Bengal? One suspects Sonia Gandhi and Dr Manmohan Singh suffering from loss of memory. Or is it a question of holding on to power at any cost? Answer, Congressmen, answer!
Source: http://www.organiser.org/
Implications of the New Kurdish-Sunni Alliance for Security in Iraq’s Ninawa Governorate
http://jamestown.org/terrorism/news/article.php?articleid=2373891
By Ramzy Mardini
As the U.S. military “surge” and the activities of Iraq’s Awakening Councils drive al-Qaeda and other insurgent groups into northern Iraq, a new and largely overlooked accord between Kurds and Sunnis could have enormous implications for the security situation in the Ninawa governorate.
On December 24, the two major Iraqi Kurdish parties—the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) and the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP)—signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Sunni Iraqi Islamic Party (IIP). Though the agreement was grossly underreported in Western media, the event may presage a gradual but significant change in Iraqi politics with great importance for the political security of Ninawa and the rest of northern Iraq: the formation of a Kurdish-Sunni alliance.
Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) President and KDP leader Massoud Barzani, Iraqi President and PUK leader Jalal Talabani and Sunni Vice President and IIP leader Tariq al-Hashimi signed the Kurdish-Sunni tripartite agreement in Irbil (al-Jazeera, December 25, 2007). The talks were the latest in a series of political exchanges between Sunni Arabs and Kurds. Three weeks before the signing of the MoU, the Kurdish list in Kirkuk’s provincial council offered their Sunni counterpart a number of concessions, effectively ending a yearlong political boycott by the Sunni Arabs (PUK Online, December 5, 2007).
The apparent alliance may present a significant step for Iraq’s national reconciliation process. But the agreement may also introduce new security implications in Iraq if the relations between the signatories deepen, especially at the expense of the deteriorating Shiite-Kurdish alliance.
Security Implications in Northern Iraq
In the disputed territories of Iraq where Sunni Arab and Kurdish interests clash, the new alliance could create a backlash and increase violence rather than facilitate cooperation. One of those precarious, ethnically mixed areas is Mosul, the capital of Ninawa province—a northern Iraqi governorate that has been plagued with instability and violence since 2004. In October 2007, Ninawa Governor Muhammad Dreid Kashmoula quit his post declaring, “I am tendering my resignation due to the deteriorating security conditions in Ninawa and the failure to impose security and order” (Aswat al-Iraq, October 12, 2007). His exit came at a time when media reports coming out of Iraq were overwhelmingly positive regarding the regression in violence. In Ninawa, Sunni insurgents have waged a brutal campaign against Mosul’s Kurdish Yazidi community, sometimes killing entire families (Rojnama Kurdish Daily, December 10, 2007). Since 2003, almost 120 Kurdish families have left Mosul (Mydia Kurdish Weekly, January 1). One Sunni militant who had been targeting the province’s Yazidi minority was Hatim Sultan al-Hadidi—a key member of the Islamic State of Iraq—who was arrested by Iraqi soldiers in the al-Zahraa neighborhood of Mosul in December. Last April, Hadidi was responsible for the murders of 23 Yazidi workers in Mosul (Aswat al-Iraq, December 5, 2007).
Some of the violence in Mosul can be attributed to disagreements within the Islamic Army of Iraq (IAI), a group formed after the U.S.-led invasion as part of the overall insurgency. The organization’s Mosul sector recently split from the Islamic Army of Iraq, renaming their section al-Fatih al-Mubeen, which can mean “the manifest opener” or “the clear conquest” (Azzaman, November 27, 2007). It appears that the formation of al-Fatih al-Mubeen was motivated by the IAI decision to suspend operations against U.S. soldiers to join the efforts of the Coalition in combating al-Qaeda in Iraq. Though the IAI has some Islamist tendencies, the group is largely comprised of Baathists, giving the organization a nationalist orientation. The shared interest in combating the U.S. military presence had helped keep the IAI from fragmenting earlier.
This interest had also been shared by al-Qaeda in Iraq, but the sectarian nature of al-Qaeda’s activities was blamed by many Sunnis for the rise of Shiite militia violence against them. The IAI has had several clashes with the Islamic State of Iraq, an al-Qaeda-affiliated terrorist organization formed in October 2006 (al-Jazeera, April 12, 2007). Unlike the IAI, al-Fatih al-Mubeen indicated their intent to continue anti-U.S. operations, implying that the pro-U.S. decision on the part of their former comrades was the main factor in contributing to the split. Yet leaflets distributed by members of al-Fatih al-Mubeen officially confirming the separation stated that the splinter group’s formation was not associated with the IAI’s new alliances (Azzaman, November 27, 2007). This would seem to suggest that al-Fatih al-Mubeen could have been formed in consequence of the Islamic Army’s adversarial outlook toward al-Qaeda and the Islamic State of Iraq. From this viewpoint, the foundation of al-Fatih al-Mubeen would seem to be inspired by Islamist motivations, rather than Iraqi nationalism.
The interest-based tribal coalition of the al-Anbar Awakening Council had already joined with U.S. forces in combating al-Qaeda in Iraq. Though the Awakening Council contributed positively to the counterinsurgency strategy in marginalizing al-Qaeda’s power in al-Anbar province, the group has quickly come to politically challenge Tariq al-Hashimi’s power as the Sunni figurehead in the Iraqi government. The IIP leader’s reasons for improving relations with the Kurdish parties are essentially two-fold: 1, Hashimi strengthens the Sunni position against the Maliki government through the new alliance, and 2, Hashimi legitimizes his status as a Sunni leader against the rising power of the tribal council in al-Anbar.
According to sources cited by the Sunni Haq News Agency, the agreement between Hashimi and the Kurdish parties stipulates that two-thirds of Ninawa province will be under Kurdish authority in any future federal region (Haq News Agency, December 29, 2007). The Federal Regions Law, passed by the Council of Representatives in October 2006, specifies that Iraq’s 18 provinces may begin to unite and form federal regions beginning in April 2008. The Sunni-Kurdish MoU is also said to completely discard the insertion of Mosul in any newly formed region and rather suggests that two-thirds of the city’s administration will be given to the Kurds, while the remaining one-third will go to Arabs and other ethnic groups (Haq News Agency, December 29, 2007). Though publicly reported, many of the aspects of the MoU, such as those indicated above, are said to be part of an “unpublished” portion of the agreement. If this is the case, Hashimi certainly had good reason to keep such information secret since public knowledge of the vice president’s compromises might create a political backlash from ordinary Sunnis, especially in Ninawa province. If accurate, the sensitivity of these compromises explains Hashimi’s passive rhetoric when describing the MoU with the Kurds: “We don’t want to send the wrong message that this [agreement] is aimed against any specific sides, but is [instead designed] to activate national reconciliation” (al-Sabah, December 26, 2007).
The Sunnis in Ninawa are conscious of any attempts by Kurdish officials to manipulate the Arab makeup of Mosul. Such prospects may motivate the Islamic State of Iraq and the newly formed al-Fatih al-Mubeen to target Hashimi, along with members and facilities associated with his Iraqi Islamic Party. If these “unpublished” concessions are part of the new alliance, they may present a new problem for the United States in maintaining the focus of the Awakening Councils on al-Qaeda. Such aspects may offer an opening to the Islamic Army of Iraq—among others in the tribal coalition—to work again with al-Qaeda in preventing any efforts to implement the “Kurdization” of Ninawa.
Decline in Shiite-Kurdish Relations
The accord’s announcement has come at a delicate time in Shiite-Kurdish relations. In August 2007, the KDP and PUK saved the central government from political paralysis by uniting in a four-party alliance with Abdul Aziz al-Hakim’s Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (SIIC) and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s Dawa Party (Aswat al-Iraq, December 25, 2007). Since then, political developments have changed the alliance’s status—perhaps compelling Kurdish leaders to spearhead a strategic relationship with their Sunni Arab counterparts, thus redefining their existing rapport with the Shiite political bloc.
Near-term Kurdish interests are weighted around Kirkuk, an ethnically diverse city and the hub of one of Iraq’s largest oil reserves. The December 2007 deadline has passed for the implementation of Article 140 of the Iraqi Constitution, which calls for the normalization of Kirkuk by assigning the city to either the KRG or the Iraqi central government. Kurdish demands to address Article 140 have been delayed and ignored by Maliki’s government, forcing the Kurds to settle for an agreement in 2008. Arab and Kurdish lawmakers now disagree whether Article 140 is constitutionally valid since the government failed to meet the written deadline. This produced deep dissatisfaction among Kurds with Maliki and the Shiite coalition.
The relationship between Shiites and Kurds has deteriorated since last August’s announcement of the four-party alliance. Growing disputes have forced the Kurdish parties to reevaluate their political relations with the United Iraqi Alliance (UIA), the Shiite bloc in the Council of Representatives. In addition to the dispute over Kirkuk, the issuance of foreign oil contracts has become another point of contention between Shiite and Kurdish officials. The August 2007 passage of the Kurdish oil law by the KRG allowed for agreements with international companies in oil development and production in the Kurdish region without the approval of the central government. The Maliki government views the signing of these independent contracts as a method taken by the KRG to bypass the central government. More recently, al-Talabani questioned the validity of the 1975 Algiers Accord, an agreement dealing with territorial claims between Iraq and Iran, including the Shatt al-Arab waterway (Dar al-Hayat, December 24, 2007). Iran reacted to the comments by demanding that al-Talabani reverse his claims, which he eventually did.
The apparent Kurdish-Sunni alliance may have been formed to send a signal to Maliki that his power as prime minister is contingent on Kurdish participation. This is in fact what Salim Abdullah, a leader in Hashimi’s party, indicated when he suggested Sunnis and Kurds could come together to challenge Shiite preference and power (al-Sharq al-Awsat, December 26, 2007). By threatening to ally with the Sunnis and break up the four-party alliance—effectively paralyzing the central government—the Kurdish parties gain political leverage in pressuring Maliki to submit to the KRG’s demands.
Reactivating Shiite Militias?
The prospects of a shift in the Iraqi political power structure may result in severe threats to Iraqi security as each side attempts to regain leverage over the others. The gradual decline in Iraqi and U.S. casualties has much to do with a number of factors in addition to the increase of troop levels. Shiite leader Moqtada al-Sadr has been successful in reining in rogue elements of his Jaysh al-Mahdi militia and maintaining a ceasefire agreement. Recently, reports indicate that Iran has had a positive influence in contributing to the decline of violence in Iraq (IPS, January 2). But the reported successes in the security aspects of the “surge” are largely superficial and contingent on broader political dynamics. Before and during the implementation of the counterinsurgency strategy, the plan for many of the terrorist organizations was to simply become dormant until U.S. troop levels declined. The positive factor represented by the actions of al-Sadr and Iran is temporary and perhaps soon approaching its expiration date. According to U.S. General David Petraeus, the United States is likely to scale down its troop levels soon, leaving the same political void that the strategy was meant to address, consequently welcoming back the violence that was tied to unresolved political issues.
If the new Kurdish-Sunni alliance becomes an obstacle for the Shiite coalition in pressuring the government on the status of Mosul and Kirkuk, it would most likely motivate Sadr’s Jaysh al-Mahdi and Iran to enter the scene—perhaps marked by a heightened level of confrontation with Kurdish peshmerga soldiers, who are present in Baghdad. It will be interesting to watch if the emerging Kurdish-Sunni alliance can mature and prompt these actors to realign the political makeup in Iraq—a prospect that may have local and national consequences in escalating the stakes between Iraqi militias and their affiliated backers in the region.
By Ramzy Mardini
As the U.S. military “surge” and the activities of Iraq’s Awakening Councils drive al-Qaeda and other insurgent groups into northern Iraq, a new and largely overlooked accord between Kurds and Sunnis could have enormous implications for the security situation in the Ninawa governorate.
On December 24, the two major Iraqi Kurdish parties—the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) and the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP)—signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Sunni Iraqi Islamic Party (IIP). Though the agreement was grossly underreported in Western media, the event may presage a gradual but significant change in Iraqi politics with great importance for the political security of Ninawa and the rest of northern Iraq: the formation of a Kurdish-Sunni alliance.
Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) President and KDP leader Massoud Barzani, Iraqi President and PUK leader Jalal Talabani and Sunni Vice President and IIP leader Tariq al-Hashimi signed the Kurdish-Sunni tripartite agreement in Irbil (al-Jazeera, December 25, 2007). The talks were the latest in a series of political exchanges between Sunni Arabs and Kurds. Three weeks before the signing of the MoU, the Kurdish list in Kirkuk’s provincial council offered their Sunni counterpart a number of concessions, effectively ending a yearlong political boycott by the Sunni Arabs (PUK Online, December 5, 2007).
The apparent alliance may present a significant step for Iraq’s national reconciliation process. But the agreement may also introduce new security implications in Iraq if the relations between the signatories deepen, especially at the expense of the deteriorating Shiite-Kurdish alliance.
Security Implications in Northern Iraq
In the disputed territories of Iraq where Sunni Arab and Kurdish interests clash, the new alliance could create a backlash and increase violence rather than facilitate cooperation. One of those precarious, ethnically mixed areas is Mosul, the capital of Ninawa province—a northern Iraqi governorate that has been plagued with instability and violence since 2004. In October 2007, Ninawa Governor Muhammad Dreid Kashmoula quit his post declaring, “I am tendering my resignation due to the deteriorating security conditions in Ninawa and the failure to impose security and order” (Aswat al-Iraq, October 12, 2007). His exit came at a time when media reports coming out of Iraq were overwhelmingly positive regarding the regression in violence. In Ninawa, Sunni insurgents have waged a brutal campaign against Mosul’s Kurdish Yazidi community, sometimes killing entire families (Rojnama Kurdish Daily, December 10, 2007). Since 2003, almost 120 Kurdish families have left Mosul (Mydia Kurdish Weekly, January 1). One Sunni militant who had been targeting the province’s Yazidi minority was Hatim Sultan al-Hadidi—a key member of the Islamic State of Iraq—who was arrested by Iraqi soldiers in the al-Zahraa neighborhood of Mosul in December. Last April, Hadidi was responsible for the murders of 23 Yazidi workers in Mosul (Aswat al-Iraq, December 5, 2007).
Some of the violence in Mosul can be attributed to disagreements within the Islamic Army of Iraq (IAI), a group formed after the U.S.-led invasion as part of the overall insurgency. The organization’s Mosul sector recently split from the Islamic Army of Iraq, renaming their section al-Fatih al-Mubeen, which can mean “the manifest opener” or “the clear conquest” (Azzaman, November 27, 2007). It appears that the formation of al-Fatih al-Mubeen was motivated by the IAI decision to suspend operations against U.S. soldiers to join the efforts of the Coalition in combating al-Qaeda in Iraq. Though the IAI has some Islamist tendencies, the group is largely comprised of Baathists, giving the organization a nationalist orientation. The shared interest in combating the U.S. military presence had helped keep the IAI from fragmenting earlier.
This interest had also been shared by al-Qaeda in Iraq, but the sectarian nature of al-Qaeda’s activities was blamed by many Sunnis for the rise of Shiite militia violence against them. The IAI has had several clashes with the Islamic State of Iraq, an al-Qaeda-affiliated terrorist organization formed in October 2006 (al-Jazeera, April 12, 2007). Unlike the IAI, al-Fatih al-Mubeen indicated their intent to continue anti-U.S. operations, implying that the pro-U.S. decision on the part of their former comrades was the main factor in contributing to the split. Yet leaflets distributed by members of al-Fatih al-Mubeen officially confirming the separation stated that the splinter group’s formation was not associated with the IAI’s new alliances (Azzaman, November 27, 2007). This would seem to suggest that al-Fatih al-Mubeen could have been formed in consequence of the Islamic Army’s adversarial outlook toward al-Qaeda and the Islamic State of Iraq. From this viewpoint, the foundation of al-Fatih al-Mubeen would seem to be inspired by Islamist motivations, rather than Iraqi nationalism.
The interest-based tribal coalition of the al-Anbar Awakening Council had already joined with U.S. forces in combating al-Qaeda in Iraq. Though the Awakening Council contributed positively to the counterinsurgency strategy in marginalizing al-Qaeda’s power in al-Anbar province, the group has quickly come to politically challenge Tariq al-Hashimi’s power as the Sunni figurehead in the Iraqi government. The IIP leader’s reasons for improving relations with the Kurdish parties are essentially two-fold: 1, Hashimi strengthens the Sunni position against the Maliki government through the new alliance, and 2, Hashimi legitimizes his status as a Sunni leader against the rising power of the tribal council in al-Anbar.
According to sources cited by the Sunni Haq News Agency, the agreement between Hashimi and the Kurdish parties stipulates that two-thirds of Ninawa province will be under Kurdish authority in any future federal region (Haq News Agency, December 29, 2007). The Federal Regions Law, passed by the Council of Representatives in October 2006, specifies that Iraq’s 18 provinces may begin to unite and form federal regions beginning in April 2008. The Sunni-Kurdish MoU is also said to completely discard the insertion of Mosul in any newly formed region and rather suggests that two-thirds of the city’s administration will be given to the Kurds, while the remaining one-third will go to Arabs and other ethnic groups (Haq News Agency, December 29, 2007). Though publicly reported, many of the aspects of the MoU, such as those indicated above, are said to be part of an “unpublished” portion of the agreement. If this is the case, Hashimi certainly had good reason to keep such information secret since public knowledge of the vice president’s compromises might create a political backlash from ordinary Sunnis, especially in Ninawa province. If accurate, the sensitivity of these compromises explains Hashimi’s passive rhetoric when describing the MoU with the Kurds: “We don’t want to send the wrong message that this [agreement] is aimed against any specific sides, but is [instead designed] to activate national reconciliation” (al-Sabah, December 26, 2007).
The Sunnis in Ninawa are conscious of any attempts by Kurdish officials to manipulate the Arab makeup of Mosul. Such prospects may motivate the Islamic State of Iraq and the newly formed al-Fatih al-Mubeen to target Hashimi, along with members and facilities associated with his Iraqi Islamic Party. If these “unpublished” concessions are part of the new alliance, they may present a new problem for the United States in maintaining the focus of the Awakening Councils on al-Qaeda. Such aspects may offer an opening to the Islamic Army of Iraq—among others in the tribal coalition—to work again with al-Qaeda in preventing any efforts to implement the “Kurdization” of Ninawa.
Decline in Shiite-Kurdish Relations
The accord’s announcement has come at a delicate time in Shiite-Kurdish relations. In August 2007, the KDP and PUK saved the central government from political paralysis by uniting in a four-party alliance with Abdul Aziz al-Hakim’s Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (SIIC) and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s Dawa Party (Aswat al-Iraq, December 25, 2007). Since then, political developments have changed the alliance’s status—perhaps compelling Kurdish leaders to spearhead a strategic relationship with their Sunni Arab counterparts, thus redefining their existing rapport with the Shiite political bloc.
Near-term Kurdish interests are weighted around Kirkuk, an ethnically diverse city and the hub of one of Iraq’s largest oil reserves. The December 2007 deadline has passed for the implementation of Article 140 of the Iraqi Constitution, which calls for the normalization of Kirkuk by assigning the city to either the KRG or the Iraqi central government. Kurdish demands to address Article 140 have been delayed and ignored by Maliki’s government, forcing the Kurds to settle for an agreement in 2008. Arab and Kurdish lawmakers now disagree whether Article 140 is constitutionally valid since the government failed to meet the written deadline. This produced deep dissatisfaction among Kurds with Maliki and the Shiite coalition.
The relationship between Shiites and Kurds has deteriorated since last August’s announcement of the four-party alliance. Growing disputes have forced the Kurdish parties to reevaluate their political relations with the United Iraqi Alliance (UIA), the Shiite bloc in the Council of Representatives. In addition to the dispute over Kirkuk, the issuance of foreign oil contracts has become another point of contention between Shiite and Kurdish officials. The August 2007 passage of the Kurdish oil law by the KRG allowed for agreements with international companies in oil development and production in the Kurdish region without the approval of the central government. The Maliki government views the signing of these independent contracts as a method taken by the KRG to bypass the central government. More recently, al-Talabani questioned the validity of the 1975 Algiers Accord, an agreement dealing with territorial claims between Iraq and Iran, including the Shatt al-Arab waterway (Dar al-Hayat, December 24, 2007). Iran reacted to the comments by demanding that al-Talabani reverse his claims, which he eventually did.
The apparent Kurdish-Sunni alliance may have been formed to send a signal to Maliki that his power as prime minister is contingent on Kurdish participation. This is in fact what Salim Abdullah, a leader in Hashimi’s party, indicated when he suggested Sunnis and Kurds could come together to challenge Shiite preference and power (al-Sharq al-Awsat, December 26, 2007). By threatening to ally with the Sunnis and break up the four-party alliance—effectively paralyzing the central government—the Kurdish parties gain political leverage in pressuring Maliki to submit to the KRG’s demands.
Reactivating Shiite Militias?
The prospects of a shift in the Iraqi political power structure may result in severe threats to Iraqi security as each side attempts to regain leverage over the others. The gradual decline in Iraqi and U.S. casualties has much to do with a number of factors in addition to the increase of troop levels. Shiite leader Moqtada al-Sadr has been successful in reining in rogue elements of his Jaysh al-Mahdi militia and maintaining a ceasefire agreement. Recently, reports indicate that Iran has had a positive influence in contributing to the decline of violence in Iraq (IPS, January 2). But the reported successes in the security aspects of the “surge” are largely superficial and contingent on broader political dynamics. Before and during the implementation of the counterinsurgency strategy, the plan for many of the terrorist organizations was to simply become dormant until U.S. troop levels declined. The positive factor represented by the actions of al-Sadr and Iran is temporary and perhaps soon approaching its expiration date. According to U.S. General David Petraeus, the United States is likely to scale down its troop levels soon, leaving the same political void that the strategy was meant to address, consequently welcoming back the violence that was tied to unresolved political issues.
If the new Kurdish-Sunni alliance becomes an obstacle for the Shiite coalition in pressuring the government on the status of Mosul and Kirkuk, it would most likely motivate Sadr’s Jaysh al-Mahdi and Iran to enter the scene—perhaps marked by a heightened level of confrontation with Kurdish peshmerga soldiers, who are present in Baghdad. It will be interesting to watch if the emerging Kurdish-Sunni alliance can mature and prompt these actors to realign the political makeup in Iraq—a prospect that may have local and national consequences in escalating the stakes between Iraqi militias and their affiliated backers in the region.
A report from Balochistan : People & Power-Burning Issues
People & Power-Burning Issues, Al Jazeera, Jan 9, 2008: a report from Balochistan, where nationalists struggle for greater control over their region's natural resources.
Insurrection in Iranian Balochistan
From jamestown.org:
Volume 6, Issue 1 (January 11, 2008)
By Chris Zambelis
Issues of dissent and rebellion amongst Iran's elaborate patchwork of ethnic and sectarian minority communities are receiving increasing international scrutiny. Many advocacy organizations representing Iranian minorities accuse Tehran of operating a policy of cultural subjugation aimed at erasing identities distinct from Iran's dominant Persian culture and Shiite brand of Islam. In some cases, these grievances have led to unrest and bloodshed. The latest round of violence between ethnic Baloch nationalists led by Jondallah (“Soldiers of God”) and Iranian security forces in the province of Sistan-Balochistan is indicative of this wider trend in Iranian society. The shadowy Jondallah group emerged sometime in 2003 to advocate on behalf of Baloch rights. It has been known to operate under other monikers as well, including the People's Resistance Movement of Iran (PMRI).
Tehran has implicated Jondallah in a series of high-profile terrorist and guerrilla attacks against the security forces and symbols of the regime in Iranian Balochistan. Bold operations—such as the June 2005 abduction of Iranian military and intelligence personnel along the Iranian-Pakistani border and the February 2007 car bomb attack against a bus transporting members of the elite Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) just outside of the provincial capital of Zahedan that left 11 dead and scores injured—have become a Jondallah signature (see Terrorism Focus, February 27, 2007).
Iranian government sources reported a series of clashes in recent weeks between Jondallah rebels and the IRGC and provincial police forces in Iranian Balochistan. On December 13, Iranian security units reported killing 12 men belonging to Jondallah and arresting others affiliated with the group in the city of Iranshahr. Security officials also reported the discovery of a weapons cache that included automatic rifles, ammunition, detonators and explosives material, as well as communications equipment and what were described as “important internal documents.” They also claimed that the detainees confessed to being part of a cell planning a series of bombings across the province in an effort to foment ethnic and sectarian unrest (Islamic Republic News Agency, December 13, 2007).
Subsequent reports alleged that Jondallah leaders and four men directly implicated in previous terrorist attacks were among those killed and detained by Iranian security forces (Voice of the Islamic Republic TV, December 19, 2007). In a December 14 interview, Jondallah's young leader Abdulmalak Rigi disputed the official casualty count, and claimed that only one member of his group was killed in the battle. Rigi, who is reported to be in his mid-twenties, also claimed that Iranian forces killed civilians during the skirmishes—including women and children—and that his forces killed 26 IRGC officers. He vowed to “take revenge for the women and children who were killed” (Voice of the Islamic Republic TV, December 19, 2007).
In another sign of escalating tensions, Iran hanged two Baloch men convicted of armed robbery and drug smuggling on December 31, in a Zahedan prison and amputated the right hand and left foot of five others convicted on armed robbery and kidnapping charges a few days later (Iranian Students' News Agency, January 6; balochpeople.org, January 7). Baloch activists accuse Tehran of systematically harassing dissidents in the province by accusing them of false criminal charges in an effort to intimidate opposition elements. In a January 3 incident, Baloch sources reported that Iranian security forces opened fire against a vehicle delivering drinking water to a wedding ceremony on a busy street in Zahedan. Witnesses videotaped the alleged incident and the ensuing chaos and posted it online [1].
Nationalism and Rebellion in West Balochistan
The Baloch national question has been a source of simmering tensions for decades. Iran's approximately one to four million-strong Baloch community inhabits the southeastern province of Sistan-Balochistan [2]. This desolate and underdeveloped region is one of Iran's poorest provinces. Unlike most Iranians, the Baloch are predominantly Sunni Muslims. Violent crackdowns and repression by security services in the economically backward province have engendered deep-seated animosity toward the Shiite Islamist regime among the fiercely independent and proud Baloch people.
Iranian Baloch identify with their kin in neighboring Pakistan's southwestern province of Balochistan—home to the region's largest Baloch population at approximately four to eight million—and the smaller Baloch community in southern Afghanistan. The Pakistani Baloch are engaged in their own long-running struggle for greater rights and independence through a violent insurgency against Islamabad. The sum of these circumstances imbues the Baloch national consciousness with a sense of historic persecution at the hands of imperial powers that left the Baloch nation divided and without a state of its own. Baloch nationalists see the unification of their people in an independent “Greater Balochistan” as a historical right. The plight of Iranian Balochistan, referred to as “West Balochistan” by Baloch nationalists, is a pillar of the wider Baloch nationalist cause [3].
Despite a lack of evidence, Tehran accuses Jondallah of serving as an affiliate of both al-Qaeda and the Taliban, claims the group emphatically denies (see Terrorism Monitor, June 29, 2006). Jondallah does, however, rely on religious discourse to highlight its grievances against the Shiite Islamist regime. This most likely represents an effort to highlight the Iranian Baloch position as an oppressed ethnic and sectarian minority within the Shiite Islamist clerical regime. Nevertheless, there are no indications that the group has ties to radical Sunni Islamists. Iran also links Jondallah to other Iranian opposition groups—including the radical People's Mujahideen of Iran (PMOI), more commonly referred to as the Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), and the affiliated National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI)—in an effort to tarnish its reputation. Tehran also accuses Jondallah of harboring secessionist aspirations. Abdulmalak Rigi has stated on numerous occasions that his group's goal is not secession, but the achievement of equal rights for his people in a reformed Iran. Essentially, Jondallah frames its campaign as a war of self-defense. At the same time, Rigi has gone so far as to declare himself an Iranian and Iran as his motherland (roozonline.com, May 10, 2006). This is a position held by other Iranian Baloch dissident groups advocating on behalf of greater Baloch rights. Organizations such as the Balochistan United Front and the Balochistan National Movement coordinate closely with other ethnic and sectarian-minded opposition groups agitating for greater rights and representation in Iran, including the Congress of Nationalities for a Federal Iran [4].
Iranian authorities often describe the group as Pakistani-based in an apparent effort to implicate outside forces in the insurgency, especially the United States. Iran also occasionally accuses Pakistan of turning a blind eye to Jondallah activities, despite a strong record of Iranian and Pakistani cooperation in suppressing Baloch nationalism on both sides of the border. Iran also suggests Jondallah is a creation of the CIA, an allegation strongly denied by Rigi himself. Iran believes that the United States and other hostile forces are providing moral, material and financial support to ethnic and sectarian-based secessionist movements—including insurgent and terrorist organizations—to undermine the Islamic Republic. Tehran is convinced that any potential U.S. attack against Iran stemming from tensions over its nuclear program or alleged support for insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan will include a campaign to destabilize the Islamic Republic from within. Groups such as Jondallah would figure prominently in such a strategy (see Terrorism Monitor, August 2, 2007).
There is no concrete evidence that Jondallah maintains a formal operational base in Pakistan. The difficult terrain that characterizes the Iranian-Pakistani border region is, however, a major crossroads for drug and arms smuggling between locally-based gangs. The porous border also facilitates links between Baloch families and tribes on both sides of the border. In a testament to the extent of Iranian and Pakistani Baloch links, a controversial proposal by Islamabad to construct a wall along the border inspired vocal protests from Pakistani Baloch leaders who labeled the initiative the “anti-Baloch wall” (The News International [Karachi], May 28, 2007). Given this background, it is likely that Jondallah maintains contacts over the border in Pakistan, possibly with Baloch insurgent groups operating there, such as the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA). There is no evidence, however, of formal operational links between the two groups, as both appear committed to furthering their respective causes separately within the Iranian and Pakistani contexts.
The recent assassination of two-time Pakistani Prime Minister and opposition leader Benazir Bhutto raises questions about the trajectory of the Baloch insurgency in Pakistan and—by extension—Iran. As a center of Baloch nationalism, events in Pakistani Balochistan have a profound impact on the Baloch cause in Iran. In an effort to win support in Pakistani Balochistan for her campaign to oust incumbent President Pervez Musharraf, Bhutto promised that her Pakistan People's Party (PPP) would implement a general amnesty for Baloch prisoners and rebels and immediately enter into negotiations with local leaders to help settle the conflict. She also criticized Islamabad's heavy-handed approach in dealing with the Baloch insurgency, accusing Musharraf of exacerbating regional tensions (Dawn [Karachi], December 21, 2007); her assassination was strongly condemned by Baloch activists. Ironically, tensions between Pakistani Baloch and the state during her father Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto's tenure as prime minister in the mid-1970s were high. The senior Bhutto used brutal tactics—as well as direct material and military support from the Shah of Iran that included helicopter gunships and armored vehicles—to quell the armed Baloch uprising [5]. The history of Iranian-Pakistani cooperation in jointly repressing Baloch nationalism—a trend both countries see as a potential threat to their respective territorial integrity and stability—suggests that Iranian accusations of Islamabad's support for Jondallah in Iran are unfounded.
Bhutto's assassination is not likely have a major impact on the situation in Iranian Balochistan, at least not directly. Despite expressions of solidarity and what is most likely limited contact, ethnic Baloch rebels in Iran and Pakistan will continue to devote their efforts to pursuing local agendas, essentially focusing on furthering the Baloch cause in Iran and Pakistan, respectively. Although Bhutto's amnesty proposal may have set an interesting precedent for relations between Tehran and Iranian Balochistan had she lived to implement it, it is unlikely that Islamabad will pursue a similar course of action in the foreseeable future.
Conclusion
The simmering tensions and violence in Iranian Balochistan will continue to characterize Tehran's interface with its Baloch minority. The social, political and economic grievances of the Iranian Baloch will remain a source of resentment toward the clerical regime until Tehran commits to integrating minorities into the fabric of society. Despite Iranian claims, there is no conclusive evidence that the United States is providing material support to Jondallah. It is likely, however, that the group calculates its activities and operations to correspond with periods of tension between the United States and Iran. This enables Jondallah to maximize the effect of its campaign. At the same time, Iran does have cause for concern, as the United States could consider the possibility of supporting active insurgencies as a means to pressure Iran during any potential conflict.
Notes
1. See “Iranian Security Forces Shooting at Furious Baloch Demonstration,” Balochistan News, January 1, 2008. For footage of the alleged incident, see the official website of the Baloch People's Party (BPP), a Baloch nationalist organization based in Sweden: .
2. Demographic figures related to ethnic and sectarian minority representation in Iran tend to be heavily politicized, hence the wide ranging estimates.
3. The Baloch national cause is bolstered by a sophisticated network of activists in the diaspora and online advocating for their kin in Iran and Pakistan. For more details, see ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; and .
4. The Congress of Nationalities for a Federal Iran includes Kurdish, Azeri, Ahvazi (Arab), Turkmen, Baloch and other organizations advocating the federalization of Iran along ethnic and regional lines. For more details, see .
5. Stephen Philip Cohen, The Idea of Pakistan (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 2004), pp. 219-221.
Volume 6, Issue 1 (January 11, 2008)
By Chris Zambelis
Issues of dissent and rebellion amongst Iran's elaborate patchwork of ethnic and sectarian minority communities are receiving increasing international scrutiny. Many advocacy organizations representing Iranian minorities accuse Tehran of operating a policy of cultural subjugation aimed at erasing identities distinct from Iran's dominant Persian culture and Shiite brand of Islam. In some cases, these grievances have led to unrest and bloodshed. The latest round of violence between ethnic Baloch nationalists led by Jondallah (“Soldiers of God”) and Iranian security forces in the province of Sistan-Balochistan is indicative of this wider trend in Iranian society. The shadowy Jondallah group emerged sometime in 2003 to advocate on behalf of Baloch rights. It has been known to operate under other monikers as well, including the People's Resistance Movement of Iran (PMRI).
Tehran has implicated Jondallah in a series of high-profile terrorist and guerrilla attacks against the security forces and symbols of the regime in Iranian Balochistan. Bold operations—such as the June 2005 abduction of Iranian military and intelligence personnel along the Iranian-Pakistani border and the February 2007 car bomb attack against a bus transporting members of the elite Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) just outside of the provincial capital of Zahedan that left 11 dead and scores injured—have become a Jondallah signature (see Terrorism Focus, February 27, 2007).
Iranian government sources reported a series of clashes in recent weeks between Jondallah rebels and the IRGC and provincial police forces in Iranian Balochistan. On December 13, Iranian security units reported killing 12 men belonging to Jondallah and arresting others affiliated with the group in the city of Iranshahr. Security officials also reported the discovery of a weapons cache that included automatic rifles, ammunition, detonators and explosives material, as well as communications equipment and what were described as “important internal documents.” They also claimed that the detainees confessed to being part of a cell planning a series of bombings across the province in an effort to foment ethnic and sectarian unrest (Islamic Republic News Agency, December 13, 2007).
Subsequent reports alleged that Jondallah leaders and four men directly implicated in previous terrorist attacks were among those killed and detained by Iranian security forces (Voice of the Islamic Republic TV, December 19, 2007). In a December 14 interview, Jondallah's young leader Abdulmalak Rigi disputed the official casualty count, and claimed that only one member of his group was killed in the battle. Rigi, who is reported to be in his mid-twenties, also claimed that Iranian forces killed civilians during the skirmishes—including women and children—and that his forces killed 26 IRGC officers. He vowed to “take revenge for the women and children who were killed” (Voice of the Islamic Republic TV, December 19, 2007).
In another sign of escalating tensions, Iran hanged two Baloch men convicted of armed robbery and drug smuggling on December 31, in a Zahedan prison and amputated the right hand and left foot of five others convicted on armed robbery and kidnapping charges a few days later (Iranian Students' News Agency, January 6; balochpeople.org, January 7). Baloch activists accuse Tehran of systematically harassing dissidents in the province by accusing them of false criminal charges in an effort to intimidate opposition elements. In a January 3 incident, Baloch sources reported that Iranian security forces opened fire against a vehicle delivering drinking water to a wedding ceremony on a busy street in Zahedan. Witnesses videotaped the alleged incident and the ensuing chaos and posted it online [1].
Nationalism and Rebellion in West Balochistan
The Baloch national question has been a source of simmering tensions for decades. Iran's approximately one to four million-strong Baloch community inhabits the southeastern province of Sistan-Balochistan [2]. This desolate and underdeveloped region is one of Iran's poorest provinces. Unlike most Iranians, the Baloch are predominantly Sunni Muslims. Violent crackdowns and repression by security services in the economically backward province have engendered deep-seated animosity toward the Shiite Islamist regime among the fiercely independent and proud Baloch people.
Iranian Baloch identify with their kin in neighboring Pakistan's southwestern province of Balochistan—home to the region's largest Baloch population at approximately four to eight million—and the smaller Baloch community in southern Afghanistan. The Pakistani Baloch are engaged in their own long-running struggle for greater rights and independence through a violent insurgency against Islamabad. The sum of these circumstances imbues the Baloch national consciousness with a sense of historic persecution at the hands of imperial powers that left the Baloch nation divided and without a state of its own. Baloch nationalists see the unification of their people in an independent “Greater Balochistan” as a historical right. The plight of Iranian Balochistan, referred to as “West Balochistan” by Baloch nationalists, is a pillar of the wider Baloch nationalist cause [3].
Despite a lack of evidence, Tehran accuses Jondallah of serving as an affiliate of both al-Qaeda and the Taliban, claims the group emphatically denies (see Terrorism Monitor, June 29, 2006). Jondallah does, however, rely on religious discourse to highlight its grievances against the Shiite Islamist regime. This most likely represents an effort to highlight the Iranian Baloch position as an oppressed ethnic and sectarian minority within the Shiite Islamist clerical regime. Nevertheless, there are no indications that the group has ties to radical Sunni Islamists. Iran also links Jondallah to other Iranian opposition groups—including the radical People's Mujahideen of Iran (PMOI), more commonly referred to as the Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), and the affiliated National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI)—in an effort to tarnish its reputation. Tehran also accuses Jondallah of harboring secessionist aspirations. Abdulmalak Rigi has stated on numerous occasions that his group's goal is not secession, but the achievement of equal rights for his people in a reformed Iran. Essentially, Jondallah frames its campaign as a war of self-defense. At the same time, Rigi has gone so far as to declare himself an Iranian and Iran as his motherland (roozonline.com, May 10, 2006). This is a position held by other Iranian Baloch dissident groups advocating on behalf of greater Baloch rights. Organizations such as the Balochistan United Front and the Balochistan National Movement coordinate closely with other ethnic and sectarian-minded opposition groups agitating for greater rights and representation in Iran, including the Congress of Nationalities for a Federal Iran [4].
Iranian authorities often describe the group as Pakistani-based in an apparent effort to implicate outside forces in the insurgency, especially the United States. Iran also occasionally accuses Pakistan of turning a blind eye to Jondallah activities, despite a strong record of Iranian and Pakistani cooperation in suppressing Baloch nationalism on both sides of the border. Iran also suggests Jondallah is a creation of the CIA, an allegation strongly denied by Rigi himself. Iran believes that the United States and other hostile forces are providing moral, material and financial support to ethnic and sectarian-based secessionist movements—including insurgent and terrorist organizations—to undermine the Islamic Republic. Tehran is convinced that any potential U.S. attack against Iran stemming from tensions over its nuclear program or alleged support for insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan will include a campaign to destabilize the Islamic Republic from within. Groups such as Jondallah would figure prominently in such a strategy (see Terrorism Monitor, August 2, 2007).
There is no concrete evidence that Jondallah maintains a formal operational base in Pakistan. The difficult terrain that characterizes the Iranian-Pakistani border region is, however, a major crossroads for drug and arms smuggling between locally-based gangs. The porous border also facilitates links between Baloch families and tribes on both sides of the border. In a testament to the extent of Iranian and Pakistani Baloch links, a controversial proposal by Islamabad to construct a wall along the border inspired vocal protests from Pakistani Baloch leaders who labeled the initiative the “anti-Baloch wall” (The News International [Karachi], May 28, 2007). Given this background, it is likely that Jondallah maintains contacts over the border in Pakistan, possibly with Baloch insurgent groups operating there, such as the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA). There is no evidence, however, of formal operational links between the two groups, as both appear committed to furthering their respective causes separately within the Iranian and Pakistani contexts.
The recent assassination of two-time Pakistani Prime Minister and opposition leader Benazir Bhutto raises questions about the trajectory of the Baloch insurgency in Pakistan and—by extension—Iran. As a center of Baloch nationalism, events in Pakistani Balochistan have a profound impact on the Baloch cause in Iran. In an effort to win support in Pakistani Balochistan for her campaign to oust incumbent President Pervez Musharraf, Bhutto promised that her Pakistan People's Party (PPP) would implement a general amnesty for Baloch prisoners and rebels and immediately enter into negotiations with local leaders to help settle the conflict. She also criticized Islamabad's heavy-handed approach in dealing with the Baloch insurgency, accusing Musharraf of exacerbating regional tensions (Dawn [Karachi], December 21, 2007); her assassination was strongly condemned by Baloch activists. Ironically, tensions between Pakistani Baloch and the state during her father Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto's tenure as prime minister in the mid-1970s were high. The senior Bhutto used brutal tactics—as well as direct material and military support from the Shah of Iran that included helicopter gunships and armored vehicles—to quell the armed Baloch uprising [5]. The history of Iranian-Pakistani cooperation in jointly repressing Baloch nationalism—a trend both countries see as a potential threat to their respective territorial integrity and stability—suggests that Iranian accusations of Islamabad's support for Jondallah in Iran are unfounded.
Bhutto's assassination is not likely have a major impact on the situation in Iranian Balochistan, at least not directly. Despite expressions of solidarity and what is most likely limited contact, ethnic Baloch rebels in Iran and Pakistan will continue to devote their efforts to pursuing local agendas, essentially focusing on furthering the Baloch cause in Iran and Pakistan, respectively. Although Bhutto's amnesty proposal may have set an interesting precedent for relations between Tehran and Iranian Balochistan had she lived to implement it, it is unlikely that Islamabad will pursue a similar course of action in the foreseeable future.
Conclusion
The simmering tensions and violence in Iranian Balochistan will continue to characterize Tehran's interface with its Baloch minority. The social, political and economic grievances of the Iranian Baloch will remain a source of resentment toward the clerical regime until Tehran commits to integrating minorities into the fabric of society. Despite Iranian claims, there is no conclusive evidence that the United States is providing material support to Jondallah. It is likely, however, that the group calculates its activities and operations to correspond with periods of tension between the United States and Iran. This enables Jondallah to maximize the effect of its campaign. At the same time, Iran does have cause for concern, as the United States could consider the possibility of supporting active insurgencies as a means to pressure Iran during any potential conflict.
Notes
1. See “Iranian Security Forces Shooting at Furious Baloch Demonstration,” Balochistan News, January 1, 2008. For footage of the alleged incident, see the official website of the Baloch People's Party (BPP), a Baloch nationalist organization based in Sweden: .
2. Demographic figures related to ethnic and sectarian minority representation in Iran tend to be heavily politicized, hence the wide ranging estimates.
3. The Baloch national cause is bolstered by a sophisticated network of activists in the diaspora and online advocating for their kin in Iran and Pakistan. For more details, see ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; and .
4. The Congress of Nationalities for a Federal Iran includes Kurdish, Azeri, Ahvazi (Arab), Turkmen, Baloch and other organizations advocating the federalization of Iran along ethnic and regional lines. For more details, see .
5. Stephen Philip Cohen, The Idea of Pakistan (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 2004), pp. 219-221.
Israel, Iran and the United States : Trita Parsi discusses
Trita Parsi, author of Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States.
Markos Kounalakis is a print and network broadcast journalist and author who covered wars and revolutions, both civil and technological. He worked as the NBC Radio and Mutual News Moscow correspondent and covered the fall of the Soviet Union as well as the war in Afghanistan.
He reported the overthrow of communism for Newsweek in East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Romania, and Bulgaria, the rise of both democratic institutions in Hungary and of ethnic strife in Yugoslavia. He was based in Rome and Vienna and later ran the magazine's Prague satellite bureau for over a year.
World Affairs Council of Northern California - San Francisco, CA
Trita Parsi discusses Israel, Iran and the United States.
With talk of the Iranian nuclear threat heating up, tension between Iran and Israel is dangerously high and the risk of a war involving the United States looms. To Trita Parsi, efforts to defuse those tensions have failed because the real roots of the hostility between Iran and Israel have eluded Washington policymakers. Drawing on his extensive personal interviews with key policy players in all three countries, Dr. Parsi examines the strategic and geopolitical tensions feeding the growing conflict between Iran and Israel.
In his new book, Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States, Parsi describes the explosive Israeli-Iranian rivalry of the 1990s that poisoned American and Iranian efforts to improve their bilateral relations, and warns of a coming clash under Presidents Bush and Ahmadinejad - World Affairs Council of Northern California
Markos Kounalakis is a print and network broadcast journalist and author who covered wars and revolutions, both civil and technological. He worked as the NBC Radio and Mutual News Moscow correspondent and covered the fall of the Soviet Union as well as the war in Afghanistan.
He reported the overthrow of communism for Newsweek in East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Romania, and Bulgaria, the rise of both democratic institutions in Hungary and of ethnic strife in Yugoslavia. He was based in Rome and Vienna and later ran the magazine's Prague satellite bureau for over a year.
World Affairs Council of Northern California - San Francisco, CA
Trita Parsi discusses Israel, Iran and the United States.
With talk of the Iranian nuclear threat heating up, tension between Iran and Israel is dangerously high and the risk of a war involving the United States looms. To Trita Parsi, efforts to defuse those tensions have failed because the real roots of the hostility between Iran and Israel have eluded Washington policymakers. Drawing on his extensive personal interviews with key policy players in all three countries, Dr. Parsi examines the strategic and geopolitical tensions feeding the growing conflict between Iran and Israel.
In his new book, Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States, Parsi describes the explosive Israeli-Iranian rivalry of the 1990s that poisoned American and Iranian efforts to improve their bilateral relations, and warns of a coming clash under Presidents Bush and Ahmadinejad - World Affairs Council of Northern California
'Queen of Balochistan' passes away
SHAHZADA ZULFIQAR
http://www.nation.com.pk/daily/jan-2008/13/index5.php
QUETTA - Irish-born Jennifer Musa, who had tied the knot with Qazi Mohammad Musa in 1940, the younger brother of Pakistan Movement’s prominent figure Qazi Essa, died in Pishin on Saturday morning. She was 90-years-old. She was suffering from memory loss.
“She breathed her last at 8:30am Saturday,” Hayat Khan, the personal family servant told The Nation. She will be laid to rest at Qazi’s ancestral graveyard close to Sheikh Farid Baba’s tomb on Sunday (today) afternoon. Her son Ashraf Jahangir Qazi, family members and others will attend her funeral.Jennifer Musa chose Pishin town as her permanent residence in 1956 when her husband Qazi Musa died in a road accident.
Jennifer, who was the second wife of Qazi Musa, married him in 1940 in London and agreed to live in the remote town of Pishin, some 50km north of Quetta. She was the mother of Ashraf Jahangir Qazi, a career diplomat who was last posted as Pakistani Ambassador to United States before retirement. He was also appointed as United Nations special envoy to Iraq and then Sudan. She also had four stepsons and a stepdaughter who married to elderly Baloch leader Nawab Khair Bakhsh Marri.
Jennifer Musa was known as Queen of Balochistan for her beauty and charismatic personality. She became Member of Parliament in 1970 and had the distinction of not signing the 1973 Constitution.Collecting her memories few years back, Jennifer Musa told this ascribe that she met her late husband in a restaurant in Ireland in 1948 and fell in love with him and same year both decided to tie the knot.
She had five sisters and two brothers among whom only two sisters are still alive. She used to visit her family members in 1950s, but she had last visited Ireland in early sixties.Hayat Khan, a 40-year-old family servant told The Nation that he had been associated with mummy, popularly known in the family for the last 27 years.
“She always used to explain to the foreigners that the meaning of the Pishin town she had chosen as a permanent abode is ‘cat’ in local Pashto language.” However, he said, nobody knew the meaning of Pishin in Pashto as well as Urdu or other language, but she derived the meaning as it sounded like the meaning of cat in Pashto language.
Although Jennifer Musa spent over sixty years in Pishin and Pathans, she did not learn how to speak Pashto rather she taught English to servants and uneducated family members. She joined defunct National Awami Party for having the sentiments of freedom for being Irish lady. “I joined NAP for being the inhabitant of an occupied land, because NAP demands much autonomy that I liked,” Jennifer told journalists once at her residence in Pishin a few years back.
Our Monitoring Desk adds: Jennifer Musa had lived in Pakistan for almost as long as the country has existed. She came to her husband’s homeland in 1948 and stayed on after he died, becoming a legislator, ice manufacturer and a local legend who refused to wear the Muslim veil. After six decades living in Balochistan, the 89-year-old told ThingsAsian’s Islamabad correspondent Danny Kemp she had no regrets that she was unlikely to see County Kerry again.
Pishin, December 2006 - the tribal-ruled, rust-red deserts along Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan are generally out of bounds to all foreigners - all, that is, apart from an elderly Irishwoman who has spent nearly 60 years here.
Jennifer Musa was such an engrained part of this parched wilderness that she was widely known as the “Queen of Balochistan” and once saw Kalashnikov-wielding feudal lords meekly bow to her will.
The one-time nurse from County Kerry once ran an ice factory, and had long defied local traditions by refusing to cover her head with a veil.“I feel very much like I am at home here, they have always treated me like one of themselves. I couldn’t have gone back to Ireland,” the frail Jennifer Musa told a few years back, the faintest trace of an Irish brogue still clinging to her words.“I know more about this place now than I do about my home.”
Her 113-year-old colonial home in the dusty town of Pishin serves as a museum for a life that has mirrored her adopted nation’s tumultuous history.In the 1940s Pakistan’s founding father Mohammed Ali Jinnah and his wife spent two nights in the four-poster iron bed that dominates the room next door. Four antique sabres ring a photograph of the Quaid in an astrakhan hat.
The barren Khwaja Amran mountains lie on the horizon and on the other side is the insurgency-hit Kandahar province of Afghanistan where the Taliban once again hold sway.
“I married into a progressive family and never wore a veil,” she said.
Are we losing Afghanistan?
http://www.sundayherald.com/
Part two: On the trail of the Taliban
Eyewitness by Nick Meo in Helmand Province
SERGEANT DAVID Baxter, a tall, bearded gunner from Glasgow, was describing life in the forward operating base (FOB) - nicknamed "Incoming" - when the machine gun fire started. It was the third Taliban attack of the day. The noise was a few hundred yards off with no rounds whipping overhead, so even though he was standing out in the open, albeit inside the base's perimeter, Baxter hardly batted an eyelid. Instead, he just muttered something about the Afghan army soldiers shooting at stray dogs. Then the crump of mortars started, much closer this time, and the siren to take cover went off while the gun battle at the Afghan army's position rose to an angry crescendo.
The bunker, a 50-yard sprint across open ground, was full of laughing gunners pulling on body armour and helmets after their lazy afternoon under a winter sun had been rudely interrupted.
"Welcome to Incoming," Baxter grinned as a couple of Royal Marines sprinted into the bunker and crashed into its occupants. At a trestle table, young women soldiers spoke urgently into radios. Scruffy marines joked about "Terry" Taliban - the British soldier's half-affectionate nickname for his enemy. They reckon Terry is a pretty hopeless soldier, returning again and again to the same firing positions where he is routinely killed. Nor is he very good at handling his weapons or planning his attacks. But he is ballsy, and the young men of Incoming respect him for that. It is a uniquely British moniker, like something cooked up by Viz magazine, and a subversive echo of the Vietnam war's "Charlie" that only the British soldier's cheerful sense of subversive black humour could have come up with.
advertisement
A few weeks earlier, the Taliban mortar crews had managed to hit inside FOB Incoming, but their aim was wild today. No bombs landed within the towering perimeter walls constructed from massive plastic containers full of dirt. Most of the rounds seemed to be outgoing, fired from the marines' own mortar pits.
Chatting idly in the bunker while the battle raged outside, the British soldiers explained that they had recently shot a number of Taliban out in the fields where the fire was coming from. Since then the accurate mortar fire had ended. They revealed - with some satisfaction - their theory that they had got the Taliban's mortar crews.
Most of the soldiers were in their 20s or younger, with accents from the poorer parts of the north of England and Wales predominating. They didn't look conventionally military, with a profusion of unkempt beards, sideburns, and scraggly moustaches, which they are allowed to grow on the FOBs but must shave off when they go back to the main base.
The FOB is one of a couple of dozen the British have constructed along the Helmand river at strategic points, looking like the kind of outposts once held by the Foreign Legion. The MoD does not want the Taliban to know the real name of the FOB, so the soldiers - who face more daily mortar fire and machine gun attacks than almost anywhere else in Helmand - nicknamed it Incoming.
Marine Simon Vaughan, from Newport in south Wales, said: "It's pretty tough here. It's cold at night, the living conditions are basic, and the Taliban attack every day. But you join up hoping to fight a war like this. Nobody here wants to be anywhere else."
The soldiers serving in Incoming spend much of their downtime swapping stories. Lance-Corporal Kearan Varley said: "The atmosphere here is so blasé it is unreal. They hardly flinch when mortars come in. At lunchtime on the day I arrived the Taliban launched a big attack and Mitch, the cook, ran out of the kitchen with his gun and went up on the parapet, blazing away still wearing his apron. Where else would you see something like that?"
Like the British military in any campaign, Incoming has its mix of characters and not all of them British. A giant Fijian refueller joked about the cold. At home before joining the army he had never seen snow or imagined what -10˚C at night was like. A small detachment of Gurkha engineers were busy every day extending and repairing the FOB's fortifications, which would have presented a pretty respectable challenge to a besieging army in the Middle Ages.
They had taken over a half-derelict Afghan building and turned it into a little corner of Nepal, complete with national flag, a DVD player with a pile of Bollywood movies, and plenty of milky chai. Afghanistan, with its insurgents, brigands, and dangers, reminded them of home with its Maoist revolutionaries and bitter political problems.
For the British troops, living conditions are rudimentary. The grub is plentiful but basic. Entertainment consists of a giant screen and DVD player in a tent where Steven Seagal movies play endlessly. Hours and hours of duty consist of staring into the dark looking for the Taliban or manning the parapet with a machine gun waiting for the guerrillas to open fire.
The FOB was deliberately set up as a Taliban magnet. On one side is a desert across which British supply convoys can cautiously travel. On the other are poppy fields, trees and deserted villages leading down to the "green zone" of dense vegetation along the Helmand river where the Taliban move around and where the attacks come from.
The FOB controls an approach to the vital town of Sangin. Many of the roving jihadis who want to fight the British are drawn to it. Mostly their attacks are hurried and ineffective. The Royal Marines and soldiers are often fired at but rarely hit, and most of the casualties so far have been minor ones from shrapnel. Its defenders know the risk they are taking in Britain's most high-intensity conflict since Korea 50 years ago. On Christmas Eve at a nearby FOB a young marine ran over an anti-tank mine, losing both of his legs and an arm.
A nurse at Camp Bastion, the sprawling British base in the desert, described having to deal with such a terrible casualty. "The worst thing was thinking about his family, who had been looking forward to Christmas. Then they would have to deal with his injuries," she said. Body armour and battlefield surgery means casualties who would have been deaths in previous conflicts can survive in Helmand, but are often maimed.
Landmines are the biggest threat. The Taliban sneak up to the FOB approach roads and bury them at night, hoping the British will run over them on patrol.
The young soldiers and marines constantly head out of their bases to attack the Taliban and keep their enemy off balance. A few days after the mortar attack, a party of marines were chatting at 8pm before leaving Incoming on a night patrol to the green zone to hunt their enemy. Sitting on the cold ground in the dark with faces blackened and weapons ready, they joked together like a group of Boy Scouts preparing to head out on a lark. In the distance, unexplained flares occasionally lit up the horizon, while overhead mysterious aircraft and drones circled under a sky full of bright stars. The camp was almost pitch black. Lights are banned to make it harder for the enemy to aim mortars at night.
Hours after the patrol left, the dull thump of distant gunfire sounded from the green zone, the noise of the British rifles. The higher-pitched crack of the Taliban's AK-47s was not heard.
As well as fighting their own war in the fields around the FOB, the British are trying to win local hearts and minds as part of a counter-insurgency campaign. Major Adrian Morely, a bearded and cheerful Royal Marine who looked as if he had stepped out of a Victorian expeditionary force, said that, between defending the FOB by day and leading patrols by night, he was attempting to rebuild a bridge and get an irrigation scheme going for farmers, who are deeply suspicious of foreigners, especially foreign soldiers.
The British believe they are slowly prevailing against the Taliban, who they killed in large numbers last year and drove out of key positions, including the strategic town of Musa Qala to the north. But they think that only by winning over the population will they bring stability to Helmand and one day manage to extract themselves from the province.
Not that political matters are of much interest to the enlisted men here. Few of them seem to take much interest in why Britain is in Helmand or the rights and wrongs of the conflict. Where American soldiers will give a lecture about bringing democracy or fighting terrorism, most British soldiers will look uncomfortable and explain with a shrug that they are doing their jobs.
Some soldiers do question what Britain is doing in Afghanistan. "It costs a fortune for us to be here and we don't seem to be really achieving anything," one squaddie said. "When we leave in a few years' time, this place will simply go back to its usual state of mayhem."
Others believe stabilising Afghanistan is worthwhile, and necessary to defeat international terrorism. For most, it is a chance to do some real soldiering against an enemy who is prepared to stand up and fight. Veterans of Iraq enthuse about Afghanistan, a man's war compared with the urban terrorism of roadside bombs and hit-and-run mortar attacks they had to contend with in Basra.
War in Helmand tests everybody in Britain's 7000-strong force. And they know it could continue to do so for years or even decades to come.
Part two: On the trail of the Taliban
Eyewitness by Nick Meo in Helmand Province
SERGEANT DAVID Baxter, a tall, bearded gunner from Glasgow, was describing life in the forward operating base (FOB) - nicknamed "Incoming" - when the machine gun fire started. It was the third Taliban attack of the day. The noise was a few hundred yards off with no rounds whipping overhead, so even though he was standing out in the open, albeit inside the base's perimeter, Baxter hardly batted an eyelid. Instead, he just muttered something about the Afghan army soldiers shooting at stray dogs. Then the crump of mortars started, much closer this time, and the siren to take cover went off while the gun battle at the Afghan army's position rose to an angry crescendo.
The bunker, a 50-yard sprint across open ground, was full of laughing gunners pulling on body armour and helmets after their lazy afternoon under a winter sun had been rudely interrupted.
"Welcome to Incoming," Baxter grinned as a couple of Royal Marines sprinted into the bunker and crashed into its occupants. At a trestle table, young women soldiers spoke urgently into radios. Scruffy marines joked about "Terry" Taliban - the British soldier's half-affectionate nickname for his enemy. They reckon Terry is a pretty hopeless soldier, returning again and again to the same firing positions where he is routinely killed. Nor is he very good at handling his weapons or planning his attacks. But he is ballsy, and the young men of Incoming respect him for that. It is a uniquely British moniker, like something cooked up by Viz magazine, and a subversive echo of the Vietnam war's "Charlie" that only the British soldier's cheerful sense of subversive black humour could have come up with.
advertisement
A few weeks earlier, the Taliban mortar crews had managed to hit inside FOB Incoming, but their aim was wild today. No bombs landed within the towering perimeter walls constructed from massive plastic containers full of dirt. Most of the rounds seemed to be outgoing, fired from the marines' own mortar pits.
Chatting idly in the bunker while the battle raged outside, the British soldiers explained that they had recently shot a number of Taliban out in the fields where the fire was coming from. Since then the accurate mortar fire had ended. They revealed - with some satisfaction - their theory that they had got the Taliban's mortar crews.
Most of the soldiers were in their 20s or younger, with accents from the poorer parts of the north of England and Wales predominating. They didn't look conventionally military, with a profusion of unkempt beards, sideburns, and scraggly moustaches, which they are allowed to grow on the FOBs but must shave off when they go back to the main base.
The FOB is one of a couple of dozen the British have constructed along the Helmand river at strategic points, looking like the kind of outposts once held by the Foreign Legion. The MoD does not want the Taliban to know the real name of the FOB, so the soldiers - who face more daily mortar fire and machine gun attacks than almost anywhere else in Helmand - nicknamed it Incoming.
Marine Simon Vaughan, from Newport in south Wales, said: "It's pretty tough here. It's cold at night, the living conditions are basic, and the Taliban attack every day. But you join up hoping to fight a war like this. Nobody here wants to be anywhere else."
The soldiers serving in Incoming spend much of their downtime swapping stories. Lance-Corporal Kearan Varley said: "The atmosphere here is so blasé it is unreal. They hardly flinch when mortars come in. At lunchtime on the day I arrived the Taliban launched a big attack and Mitch, the cook, ran out of the kitchen with his gun and went up on the parapet, blazing away still wearing his apron. Where else would you see something like that?"
Like the British military in any campaign, Incoming has its mix of characters and not all of them British. A giant Fijian refueller joked about the cold. At home before joining the army he had never seen snow or imagined what -10˚C at night was like. A small detachment of Gurkha engineers were busy every day extending and repairing the FOB's fortifications, which would have presented a pretty respectable challenge to a besieging army in the Middle Ages.
They had taken over a half-derelict Afghan building and turned it into a little corner of Nepal, complete with national flag, a DVD player with a pile of Bollywood movies, and plenty of milky chai. Afghanistan, with its insurgents, brigands, and dangers, reminded them of home with its Maoist revolutionaries and bitter political problems.
For the British troops, living conditions are rudimentary. The grub is plentiful but basic. Entertainment consists of a giant screen and DVD player in a tent where Steven Seagal movies play endlessly. Hours and hours of duty consist of staring into the dark looking for the Taliban or manning the parapet with a machine gun waiting for the guerrillas to open fire.
The FOB was deliberately set up as a Taliban magnet. On one side is a desert across which British supply convoys can cautiously travel. On the other are poppy fields, trees and deserted villages leading down to the "green zone" of dense vegetation along the Helmand river where the Taliban move around and where the attacks come from.
The FOB controls an approach to the vital town of Sangin. Many of the roving jihadis who want to fight the British are drawn to it. Mostly their attacks are hurried and ineffective. The Royal Marines and soldiers are often fired at but rarely hit, and most of the casualties so far have been minor ones from shrapnel. Its defenders know the risk they are taking in Britain's most high-intensity conflict since Korea 50 years ago. On Christmas Eve at a nearby FOB a young marine ran over an anti-tank mine, losing both of his legs and an arm.
A nurse at Camp Bastion, the sprawling British base in the desert, described having to deal with such a terrible casualty. "The worst thing was thinking about his family, who had been looking forward to Christmas. Then they would have to deal with his injuries," she said. Body armour and battlefield surgery means casualties who would have been deaths in previous conflicts can survive in Helmand, but are often maimed.
Landmines are the biggest threat. The Taliban sneak up to the FOB approach roads and bury them at night, hoping the British will run over them on patrol.
The young soldiers and marines constantly head out of their bases to attack the Taliban and keep their enemy off balance. A few days after the mortar attack, a party of marines were chatting at 8pm before leaving Incoming on a night patrol to the green zone to hunt their enemy. Sitting on the cold ground in the dark with faces blackened and weapons ready, they joked together like a group of Boy Scouts preparing to head out on a lark. In the distance, unexplained flares occasionally lit up the horizon, while overhead mysterious aircraft and drones circled under a sky full of bright stars. The camp was almost pitch black. Lights are banned to make it harder for the enemy to aim mortars at night.
Hours after the patrol left, the dull thump of distant gunfire sounded from the green zone, the noise of the British rifles. The higher-pitched crack of the Taliban's AK-47s was not heard.
As well as fighting their own war in the fields around the FOB, the British are trying to win local hearts and minds as part of a counter-insurgency campaign. Major Adrian Morely, a bearded and cheerful Royal Marine who looked as if he had stepped out of a Victorian expeditionary force, said that, between defending the FOB by day and leading patrols by night, he was attempting to rebuild a bridge and get an irrigation scheme going for farmers, who are deeply suspicious of foreigners, especially foreign soldiers.
The British believe they are slowly prevailing against the Taliban, who they killed in large numbers last year and drove out of key positions, including the strategic town of Musa Qala to the north. But they think that only by winning over the population will they bring stability to Helmand and one day manage to extract themselves from the province.
Not that political matters are of much interest to the enlisted men here. Few of them seem to take much interest in why Britain is in Helmand or the rights and wrongs of the conflict. Where American soldiers will give a lecture about bringing democracy or fighting terrorism, most British soldiers will look uncomfortable and explain with a shrug that they are doing their jobs.
Some soldiers do question what Britain is doing in Afghanistan. "It costs a fortune for us to be here and we don't seem to be really achieving anything," one squaddie said. "When we leave in a few years' time, this place will simply go back to its usual state of mayhem."
Others believe stabilising Afghanistan is worthwhile, and necessary to defeat international terrorism. For most, it is a chance to do some real soldiering against an enemy who is prepared to stand up and fight. Veterans of Iraq enthuse about Afghanistan, a man's war compared with the urban terrorism of roadside bombs and hit-and-run mortar attacks they had to contend with in Basra.
War in Helmand tests everybody in Britain's 7000-strong force. And they know it could continue to do so for years or even decades to come.
On the Campaign Trail in Pakistan
dispatches
http://www.slate.com/id/2181778/entry/2181795/
"Why should I vote in a Pakistani election? I don't recognize Pakistan."
By Nicholas Schmidle
Updated Friday, Jan. 11, 2008, at 7:49 AM ET
From: Nicholas Schmidle
Subject: "Benazir Didn't Just Belong to the PPP"
Posted Wednesday, Jan. 9, 2008, at 12:51 PM ET
KARACHI, Pakistan—I arrived in Karachi on New Year's Eve, just as the seaside metropolis was limping back to normal after four days of rioting and looting in the aftermath of the Dec. 27 assassination of Benazir Bhutto. The day felt like the first after a blizzard, but instead of snowdrifts blocking driveways, burnt-out vehicles littered the road. More than 900 cars, buses, and trucks were torched in Karachi alone. Shocked by the violence, investors panicked, and when the Karachi Stock Exchange opened Monday morning, it was down almost 5 percent. Long lines of cars streamed out of gas stations, where pumps had been closed for days. Shopkeepers tentatively opened up, keeping their metal shutters halfway down in case they needed to close in a hurry. Then, around lunchtime, a rumor spread through the city that a top politician from Bhutto's rival party in Karachi, the Muttahida Quami Movement, had been assassinated. The already spooked city of 15 million immediately withdrew back into its shell. Gas stations and stores shut down early in anticipation of more violence. Normalcy would have to wait another day. (The rumors proved false.)
That morning, I met Syed Hafeezuddin, a hopeful for the upcoming parliamentary elections, originally scheduled for Jan. 8 but recently postponed until Feb. 18. Hafeezuddin belongs to the faction of the Pakistan Muslim League headed by Nawaz Sharif, known as the PML (Nawaz). (In 2002, Musharraf's supporters created their own faction, the Pakistan Muslim League [Q].) After Bhutto's murder, many of her enraged supporters blamed Musharraf's government for—at least—negligence and failure to provide adequate security for the two-time former prime minister. Some even alleged that Musharraf's role was more direct and nefarious. As a result, looters attacked the offices of the PML (Q) and the pro-Musharraf MQM, burning everything inside and forcing their candidates underground. Meanwhile, Sharif, who rushed to the hospital after Bhutto's murder and who has pledged to topple Musharraf, received a boost both because of his new bond with Bhutto's Pakistan Peoples Party and because Sharif now leads the opposition to Musharraf. "We are the only ones who can still run a public campaign," Hafeezuddin told me.
Hafeezuddin and I headed to Machar ("Mosquito") Colony, a slum built on top of a swamp, where two days earlier, a teenage boy had apparently been shot and killed by paramilitary Rangers. Hafeezuddin wanted to offer a funeral prayer with the family before they buried the teenager. A small fire burned in a mound of trash just behind us, and the slum smelled like a combination of sewage and spoiled fish. When the residents recognized Hafeezuddin from his campaign posters, they began to complain about the lack of electricity, water, and trash removal. "I take one bath a week, if I am lucky," one man said. Hafeezuddin, who is more than 6 feet tall, towered above them and made lofty promises. Then, a few hundred yards away, gunfire rang out. Unsure which direction it was coming from, people scattered and sprinted for cover. Hafeezuddin and I jumped into his car and sped away. No one will be fully insulated from the security risks of the upcoming elections.
Hafeezuddin drove to another spot in the constituency where, the day after Bhutto's assassination, he had organized a gathering in her memory. "I can't leave the PPP alone right now," he said. The PPP is riding a wave of sympathy, and Hafeezuddin knew that he would lose the election if he didn't seize the initiative by leading the agitation against Musharraf and sympathizing about Bhutto's loss. "I've tactfully taken on the PPP by sponsoring events in Benazir's honor and then inviting PPP supporters," he said. "I make them come to my events." A goat walked down the street wearing a T-shirt. "Benazir didn't just belong to the PPP, just like they didn't own the memory of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. We, the people of Pakistan, own the Bhuttos and their memories."
Most pundits and analysts agree that the PPP is poised to win big in the February elections, in large part because of the sympathy vote they are expected to receive. Hafeezuddin understands this all too well, which is why, even while Sharif united with the PPP in demanding that the elections be held on Jan. 8 as planned, Hafeezuddin quietly prayed for a delay. "I need some time to let the sympathy vote die down," he confided. After all, he is contesting a seat in Karachi, the capital of Sindh province, where the Bhuttos have long been powerful.
But the PPP may not win as big in Punjab and the North West Frontier Province as many expect, in large part because of the ethnic dimension that the riots took on. Pakistan is divided into four provinces—Punjab, Baluchistan, the North West Frontier Province, and Sindh—each one dominated by a different ethnic group. Punjab remains the most important when it comes to electoral politics, since its representation in the National Assembly is roughly equal to that of the small provinces combined.
The bulk of the post-assassination violence occurred in Sindh, much of it directed at non-Sindhis, primarily people from Punjab and the North West Frontier Province. Pashtuns from the North West Frontier Province control most of the transport businesses in Pakistan. One transporter I met in Karachi had 190 of his trailers burned on the stretch of highway running through the province. Moreover, the PPP's decision to tap Bhutto's 19-year-old son, Bilawal, as the new head of the party could alienate voters in other provinces who don't subscribe to the dynastic politics sanctioned by Sindhi customs and feudal traditions. And her husband, Asif Ali Zardari, who is widely perceived as a sleazy crook, will run the party until Bilawal comes of age. "Zardari will damage the PPP's national appeal," said Hafeezuddin. "They will end up confining themselves to the interior of Sindh."
Did Benazir Bhutto herself sow the seeds of this crisis? In the months before she died, Bhutto focused her election campaign almost entirely in Sindh. Though she never pitched herself as a Sindhi leader or employed the rhetoric of Sindhi nationalism, her exhaustive campaigning gave Sindhis the impression that "one of theirs" was about to take power once again. At her burial, mourners chanted, in Sindhi, "We don't want Pakistan!" Such slogans raised concerns over the possibility of militant Sindhi nationalism re-emerging, as it did during the 1970s and '80s. "Bhutto was killed only because she was a Sindhi woman," said Khaled, a 32-year-old member of Jeay Sindh, a party calling for an independent Sindhi state. In the press conference Zardari gave Dec. 30, he made a point of saying, in Sindhi, "We want Pakistan, We want Pakistan." But has the damage been done?
I left Khaled and drove down a muddy, rutted road in Lyari, the section of Karachi worst hit by the violence. It hadn't rained in months, so the pools of slush in the road were actually sewage. I read chalk graffiti dating back to Bhutto's return from exile on Oct. 18. It said, in Urdu: "Go, Go, to the Karachi Airport, Go!" (Hundreds of thousands of people went, but more than 140 never came home after suicide bombers targeted Bhutto's motorcade.) We arrived at the local PPP office, where roughly 100 women sat on the floor, weeping and reading the Quran in Bhutto's memory. "Oh Benazir, Princess of Heaven, we are sorry that your killers are still alive," they chanted. Afterward, Nasreen Chandio, a PPP stalwart and former member of the national assembly, assessed the impact of Bhutto's murder on the Sindhi people. "Sindhi nationalism has definitely been ignited because people realize that there will be no representation of Sindhis in the federation without Benazir," she said. "The people of Sindh have become orphans."
From: Nicholas Schmidle
Subject: A Fight Between Fundamentalism and Moderation
Posted Thursday, Jan. 10, 2008, at 7:57 AM ET
PESHAWAR, Pakistan—A dozen men sat in a circle in a village outside Peshawar on a recent afternoon. Wearing red caps, they gossiped and drank green tea. The sun fell behind a roof, and several of the men wrapped wool blankets around themselves. All belonged to the Awami National Party, a secular political party based in the North West Frontier Province. The ANP is predicted to win big in the coming elections, mostly at the expense of the Islamist parties who've frightened U.S. policy-makers for the past five years. "This election is a straight fight between those who want war and those who want peace," Asfandyar Wali Khan, leader of the ANP, told me. He drew a line between Islamic militants on the one hand, and his own party on the other. "It is between fundamentalism and moderation."
In the last elections, which took place in October 2002, the Muttahida Majles Amal, a six-party Islamist coalition, defeated the ANP, the Pakistan Peoples Party, and all other contenders by a wide margin in the North West Frontier Province and went on to form the provincial government. The MMA's critics, led by the ANP, allege that the Islamists' rhetoric and sympathies allowed so-called "Talibanization" to spread throughout the regions bordering Afghanistan. Sitting in the circle of red-capped men, I asked if any of them had voted for the MMA last time around. One man sheepishly raised his hand. "That was a vote for paradise and the Quran," he said, as if excusing himself. "When they shoved the Quran in my face and said 'Vote!' I had no other choice. But once the MMA got their bungalows in Islamabad, everything changed. They went to Islamabad, not to Islam."
The World Bank praised the MMA government for its fiscal responsibility and health programs, but local perceptions of corruption, broken promises, and excessive politicking tarnished the coalition's image at home. "We expected them to implement Islamic law and establish a system of justice," said Salauddin, a middle-aged civil servant from Chardsadda. In 2002, the MMA pledged to implement sharia law and support the Taliban in Afghanistan. At the time, people couldn't have cared less about fiscal restraint. Now they have turned from the MMA, not because the Islamists were too hard-core, but because they failed to fulfill their campaign promises. What did they have to show for their time in government? "Acts of terrorism only increased under the mullahs," Salauddin exclaimed. During 2007, 60 suicide-bomb attacks killed more than 770 people in Pakistan, according to a recent report by the Pakistan Institute of Peace Studies. Most of the incidents occurred in the North West Frontier Province.
Perhaps the biggest challenge facing the ANP is the desire to rehabilitate the image of Pashtuns, the dominant ethnic group in western Pakistan and southern Afghanistan. Street-level supporters, such as the men in red caps, and party leaders cited this as their greatest concern. More than 25 million Pashtuns live along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, where they've been renowned as fierce fighters for centuries. Pashtun militias have repelled British armies, Sikh armies, Soviet armies, and now American, NATO, and Pakistani ones, too. The majority of the Taliban fighting in Afghanistan and Pakistan today are Pashtuns. "At this moment, if you talk about Pashtuns, the world thinks he is a terrorist, has a beard to his navel, hair to his shoulders, and holds a Kalashnikov," said Khan, the ANP chief. "Islamic fundamentalism is destroying the basic fabric of Pashtun society."
But the success of the ANP's election campaign signals a shift in the politics of the North West Frontier Province, where the rhetoric of secular nationalism is finding more appeal than that of Islamic fundamentalism. For instance, the ANP proposes changing the name of the province to Pashtunistan ("Land of the Pashtuns") or Pakhtunkhwa ("Pashtun Nation"). (The MMA tried to change the name to Dar-ul-Islam, or "Domain of Islam.") Khan said that all the other provinces of Pakistan shared "frontiers" with Iran, Afghanistan, or India. "But if they—Sindh, Punjab, and Baluchistan—can have their own names, why can't we? This is a matter of our identity."
According to Khan and the ANP, Pashtuns are not naturally brash, militant people—an impression that's been created by the Taliban. If anyone can reform the Pashtuns' image, Khan's family history suggests that he's the man for the job. His grandfather Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan earned the nickname "Frontier Gandhi" for his role in leading the Pashtuns in a nonviolent resistance movement against the British Raj during the 1930s and '40s. His organization became known as the "Red Shirts," which is why the ANP's flag is red and its supporters wear red caps. Ghaffar Khan opposed the Muslim League, the main outfit lobbying for the creation of Pakistan, and supported Gandhi's Congress Party. Ghaffar Khan argued that religious identity shouldn't determine the country where a person should live—and thus denied the rationale for the creation of Pakistan. Instead, Ghaffar Khan contended that ethnic identity was more important, and he called for the creation of an independent Pashtunistan. A year before the birth of Pakistan, fellow Muslims physically attacked him for being, in their minds, anti-Muslim, illustrating the tension that's long existed between Pashtun nationalists and Islamists.
To find out how the Islamists felt about their fall from power, I went to Mardan to meet Ata-ur-Rahman. Rahman is a senior leader of Jamaat-i-Islami and a former member of Pakistan's National Assembly. Jamaat-i-Islami is one of the main component parties in the MMA. In December, Jamaat-i-Islami opted to boycott the coming elections in protest against President Pervez Musharraf's regime and what they believe are destined to be rigged elections on Feb. 18. I had met Rahman several times in the past, but when I arrived at his madrasah in late December, he appeared pensive and distracted. He didn't agree with the party's decision to boycott the elections and had argued that doing so would leave the field wide open for the ANP. He lost the argument, and now Jamaat-i-Islami expected him to convince local people of the merits of a boycott.
But what worried him most was the legacy that the Islamists had left behind. "The worst result of our rule was the rise in militancy throughout the region," he said. Rahman is a moderate, with a Ph.D. from the International Islamic University in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, as comfortable speaking English or Malay as he is speaking Urdu or Pashto. He is one of the only Islamists I've heard admit that so-called "Talibanization" was a product of the Islamists being in government.
We discussed the pro-Taliban uprising in the nearby Swat Valley, where a radical cleric determined to implement sharia is waging an insurgency against the state. I asked Rahman if he believes that people's disappointment with the MMA's failure to implement sharia had led some to turn to the Pakistani Taliban, believing they were the only ones capable of doing so. He nodded his head slowly and stared out the window. "If the MMA had been able to bring sharia to Swat, that would have definitely weakened the militants," he said.
With those alternatives, does anyone wonder why U.S. policy-makers are paralyzed when it comes to Pakistan?
From: Nicholas Schmidle
Subject: "Why Should I Vote in a Pakistani Election?"
Posted Friday, Jan. 11, 2008, at 7:49 AM ET
QUETTA, Pakistan—Naiz Mohammad, an illiterate man who doesn't know his age but guesses he's around 50, squatted on a rocky hillside just outside Quetta and told me how he teaches his children. More than a dozen kids, caked head to toe in dust, crowded around, their bellies swollen with worms, greenish snot yo-yoing from their noses. A range of treeless mountains rose behind us, and Quetta's parched cityscape spread in front. Hundreds of rectangular mud huts, all of them inhabited by Naiz's fellow tribesmen, stood scattered along the pitched slope. Spindly desert twigs snagged shreds of plastic shopping bags, which flapped in the biting wind. New Kahan, Naiz's village, has neither phone service nor electricity or running water. There is a government school nearby, but few kids actually attend. "We have a natural cycle of educating our people," said Naiz, who wore a black turban and camouflage jacket. "For instance, you people came today in a big jeep. When you leave, my boys will ask me, 'Why we don't have a jeep like that?' I'll tell them, and then they'll understand the deprivation that the Baluchis suffer."
Quetta is the capital of Baluchistan, the largest—and poorest—of Pakistan's four provinces. The majority of Baluchistan's 10 million inhabitants are Baluchis, though Pashtun tribes form a significant minority in the northern part of the province, and there are Punjabi- and Urdu-speaking "settlers" living in Quetta. Since Pakistan's creation in 1947, a percolating Baluchi nationalist movement has resulted in five insurgencies against the Pakistani army, most intensely 1973-77 and from 2005 to today. The nationalists argue that Pakistan illegally occupied the independent Baluchi state in 1948 and has been treating the Baluchis like colonial subjects ever since. When prospectors discovered natural gas in the remote mountains near Naiz's ancestral village in 1953, it only added to the Baluchis' sense of perceived injustice; they were the last in the country to enjoy gas stovetops and furnaces.
Naiz's tribe, the Marri, is the most militant and nationalist of the Baluchi tribes. During the 1970s rebellion against the government of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto (Benazir's father), Naiz enlisted alongside guerrillas in an insurgency that left nearly 10,000 rebels and soldiers dead. "Then and now, we are only fighting for our rights, for an independent Baluchistan, where we are masters of our own land," he said. According to Naiz, the Pakistani government has punished the Baluchis by refusing to develop the province. But running water and electricity are not his top priorities. "We just want the government to stop bombing us."
Naiz is originally from Kahan, a town in the gas-rich district of Kohlu. In the late 1980s, after a stint living in Afghanistan, Naiz and thousands of fellow tribesmen moved to Quetta and established New Kahan, partly to escape the constant fighting and bombardment in their native lands and partly because they wanted to be near their tribal chief. The tribal system revolves around obedience to the chief, or sardar. President Pervez Musharraf blames a few sardars, including the one from the Marri tribe, for the violence and instability engulfing Baluchistan. Since 2005, a guerrilla outfit known as the Baluchistan Liberation Army has claimed responsibility for hundreds of attacks on army convoys, oil installations, and railroads. The Marris comprise the top leadership of the BLA, which Musharraf declared a banned terrorist organization in April 2006. Yet the BLA aren't alone; politicians, writers, and university students use their own methods to argue for an independent Baluchistan. And while they stress the nonviolent nature of their own tactics, their sympathies are unmistakable. "I pray for the BLA that God will help them remove the Punjabi forces from Baluchistan," said Mohiuddin Baluch, the chairman of the Baluchistan Students Organization.
I arrived in Quetta in early December, just as the election campaign was beginning, to find army and paramilitary forces deployed in the streets. An armored personnel carrier sat just outside the entrance to my hotel, machine-gun barrels poked out of sandbag bunkers at major intersections, and heavily armed convoys patrolled the roads every evening after sundown. Two weeks earlier, a top BLA commander (and son of the chief of the Marri tribe) was killed, setting off a wave of riots and guerrilla attacks on security forces that left dozens dead. I asked Naiz if he considered the dead BLA commander a fallen hero. "We don't live in circumstances where we have time to dream of heroes," he answered. "Independent Baluchistan is our hero. And sometimes we are obliged to carry out attacks on Pakistani forces to achieve this."
On my first night in Quetta, a soldier, standing behind a stack of sandbags near the center of town, took a bullet in the face and died. The intelligence agencies, police, and paramilitaries responded with house-to-house raids in BLA strongholds from Kohlu to Quetta. They cordoned off New Kahan and arrested 12 of Naiz's fellow tribesmen. In many cases over the last two years, young Baluchi men have simply "disappeared," kidnapped by Pakistan's intelligence agencies. Others have been arrested and charged with treason. (In the autumn of 2006, I spent several weeks reporting in Baluchistan; by the time my story was published a few months later, nearly every featured character had been arrested or exiled.) A politician in Quetta told me that 6,000 Baluchi men were missing. Another man described how his cousin had been kidnapped by Anti-Terror Force troops in front of his four nephews in a city park. I asked how the four kids, aged between 4 and 8, knew the identity of the kidnappers. "In America, your children play with toys. That's what they know," he explained. "Our children know about the intelligence agencies and the army. This is what they grow up on."
Nonetheless, not all the Baluchi tribes are fighting against the government. In fact, Musharraf's own party, the Pakistan Muslim League, is stacked with compliant sardars and tribal chieftains. "Though many of these tribes, since the inception of Pakistan, have been bearing anti-state feelings, some of them got on the bandwagon, and they've been ruling this province ever since," said Anwar ul-Haq, a first-time candidate for the parliamentary seat from Quetta, running on the PML (Q) ticket. "For these people, being part of the establishment presents a huge opportunity for personal aggrandizement." Later that day, I attended a PML (Q) rally with Haq in the same part of town where Western intelligence sources have alleged that Mullah Omar and other top Taliban leaders enjoy safe haven; in other words, a neighborhood where Musharraf and his cohorts are none too popular. Bodyguards assigned to protect the PML (Q) candidates stood on nearby rooftops, surrounded the stage, and mingled in the crowd. At one point, a rock hurled over the wall landed in the crowd of spectators. With a half-nervous smirk, my friend said, "At least it wasn't a grenade."
When it was his turn to speak, Haq leaned on the podium with both hands and promoted a candidate for the provincial assembly because he wasn't a sardar and therefore "understands your problems." He added, "We will provide education, not Kalashnikovs, for your children. Now is the time for your decision. Give us your vote, and we will deliver." I asked Haq, a middle-class divorcee in his late 30s with no tribal roots and no obvious constituency, if he planned to campaign in New Kahan. Earlier that day, Naiz told me that no candidate had visited New Kahan in years, although there were roughly 4,000 voters there. "Ideally, no party should ignore any area," Haq answered. "But would the people in the Marri areas even allow me to go there? I doubt it. They only respond to certain social norms, those filtered through the tribe."
Back in New Kahan, I crouched beside Naiz, our jeep, and a horde of children, and shielded my eyes as a dust cloud blew across the exposed hillside. Naiz admitted that any decision about whether or not to vote, and for whom, would be decided by the tribal chiefs. Naiz hadn't participated in an election since 1995. I asked him which way he was leaning this time around. "Why should I vote in a Pakistani election?" he said. "I don't even recognize Pakistan."
Nicholas Schmidle is a Pakistan-based writer and fellow at the Institute of Current World Affairs.
Article URL: http://www.slate.com/id/2181778/
http://www.slate.com/id/2181778/entry/2181795/
"Why should I vote in a Pakistani election? I don't recognize Pakistan."
By Nicholas Schmidle
Updated Friday, Jan. 11, 2008, at 7:49 AM ET
From: Nicholas Schmidle
Subject: "Benazir Didn't Just Belong to the PPP"
Posted Wednesday, Jan. 9, 2008, at 12:51 PM ET
KARACHI, Pakistan—I arrived in Karachi on New Year's Eve, just as the seaside metropolis was limping back to normal after four days of rioting and looting in the aftermath of the Dec. 27 assassination of Benazir Bhutto. The day felt like the first after a blizzard, but instead of snowdrifts blocking driveways, burnt-out vehicles littered the road. More than 900 cars, buses, and trucks were torched in Karachi alone. Shocked by the violence, investors panicked, and when the Karachi Stock Exchange opened Monday morning, it was down almost 5 percent. Long lines of cars streamed out of gas stations, where pumps had been closed for days. Shopkeepers tentatively opened up, keeping their metal shutters halfway down in case they needed to close in a hurry. Then, around lunchtime, a rumor spread through the city that a top politician from Bhutto's rival party in Karachi, the Muttahida Quami Movement, had been assassinated. The already spooked city of 15 million immediately withdrew back into its shell. Gas stations and stores shut down early in anticipation of more violence. Normalcy would have to wait another day. (The rumors proved false.)
That morning, I met Syed Hafeezuddin, a hopeful for the upcoming parliamentary elections, originally scheduled for Jan. 8 but recently postponed until Feb. 18. Hafeezuddin belongs to the faction of the Pakistan Muslim League headed by Nawaz Sharif, known as the PML (Nawaz). (In 2002, Musharraf's supporters created their own faction, the Pakistan Muslim League [Q].) After Bhutto's murder, many of her enraged supporters blamed Musharraf's government for—at least—negligence and failure to provide adequate security for the two-time former prime minister. Some even alleged that Musharraf's role was more direct and nefarious. As a result, looters attacked the offices of the PML (Q) and the pro-Musharraf MQM, burning everything inside and forcing their candidates underground. Meanwhile, Sharif, who rushed to the hospital after Bhutto's murder and who has pledged to topple Musharraf, received a boost both because of his new bond with Bhutto's Pakistan Peoples Party and because Sharif now leads the opposition to Musharraf. "We are the only ones who can still run a public campaign," Hafeezuddin told me.
Hafeezuddin and I headed to Machar ("Mosquito") Colony, a slum built on top of a swamp, where two days earlier, a teenage boy had apparently been shot and killed by paramilitary Rangers. Hafeezuddin wanted to offer a funeral prayer with the family before they buried the teenager. A small fire burned in a mound of trash just behind us, and the slum smelled like a combination of sewage and spoiled fish. When the residents recognized Hafeezuddin from his campaign posters, they began to complain about the lack of electricity, water, and trash removal. "I take one bath a week, if I am lucky," one man said. Hafeezuddin, who is more than 6 feet tall, towered above them and made lofty promises. Then, a few hundred yards away, gunfire rang out. Unsure which direction it was coming from, people scattered and sprinted for cover. Hafeezuddin and I jumped into his car and sped away. No one will be fully insulated from the security risks of the upcoming elections.
Hafeezuddin drove to another spot in the constituency where, the day after Bhutto's assassination, he had organized a gathering in her memory. "I can't leave the PPP alone right now," he said. The PPP is riding a wave of sympathy, and Hafeezuddin knew that he would lose the election if he didn't seize the initiative by leading the agitation against Musharraf and sympathizing about Bhutto's loss. "I've tactfully taken on the PPP by sponsoring events in Benazir's honor and then inviting PPP supporters," he said. "I make them come to my events." A goat walked down the street wearing a T-shirt. "Benazir didn't just belong to the PPP, just like they didn't own the memory of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. We, the people of Pakistan, own the Bhuttos and their memories."
Most pundits and analysts agree that the PPP is poised to win big in the February elections, in large part because of the sympathy vote they are expected to receive. Hafeezuddin understands this all too well, which is why, even while Sharif united with the PPP in demanding that the elections be held on Jan. 8 as planned, Hafeezuddin quietly prayed for a delay. "I need some time to let the sympathy vote die down," he confided. After all, he is contesting a seat in Karachi, the capital of Sindh province, where the Bhuttos have long been powerful.
But the PPP may not win as big in Punjab and the North West Frontier Province as many expect, in large part because of the ethnic dimension that the riots took on. Pakistan is divided into four provinces—Punjab, Baluchistan, the North West Frontier Province, and Sindh—each one dominated by a different ethnic group. Punjab remains the most important when it comes to electoral politics, since its representation in the National Assembly is roughly equal to that of the small provinces combined.
The bulk of the post-assassination violence occurred in Sindh, much of it directed at non-Sindhis, primarily people from Punjab and the North West Frontier Province. Pashtuns from the North West Frontier Province control most of the transport businesses in Pakistan. One transporter I met in Karachi had 190 of his trailers burned on the stretch of highway running through the province. Moreover, the PPP's decision to tap Bhutto's 19-year-old son, Bilawal, as the new head of the party could alienate voters in other provinces who don't subscribe to the dynastic politics sanctioned by Sindhi customs and feudal traditions. And her husband, Asif Ali Zardari, who is widely perceived as a sleazy crook, will run the party until Bilawal comes of age. "Zardari will damage the PPP's national appeal," said Hafeezuddin. "They will end up confining themselves to the interior of Sindh."
Did Benazir Bhutto herself sow the seeds of this crisis? In the months before she died, Bhutto focused her election campaign almost entirely in Sindh. Though she never pitched herself as a Sindhi leader or employed the rhetoric of Sindhi nationalism, her exhaustive campaigning gave Sindhis the impression that "one of theirs" was about to take power once again. At her burial, mourners chanted, in Sindhi, "We don't want Pakistan!" Such slogans raised concerns over the possibility of militant Sindhi nationalism re-emerging, as it did during the 1970s and '80s. "Bhutto was killed only because she was a Sindhi woman," said Khaled, a 32-year-old member of Jeay Sindh, a party calling for an independent Sindhi state. In the press conference Zardari gave Dec. 30, he made a point of saying, in Sindhi, "We want Pakistan, We want Pakistan." But has the damage been done?
I left Khaled and drove down a muddy, rutted road in Lyari, the section of Karachi worst hit by the violence. It hadn't rained in months, so the pools of slush in the road were actually sewage. I read chalk graffiti dating back to Bhutto's return from exile on Oct. 18. It said, in Urdu: "Go, Go, to the Karachi Airport, Go!" (Hundreds of thousands of people went, but more than 140 never came home after suicide bombers targeted Bhutto's motorcade.) We arrived at the local PPP office, where roughly 100 women sat on the floor, weeping and reading the Quran in Bhutto's memory. "Oh Benazir, Princess of Heaven, we are sorry that your killers are still alive," they chanted. Afterward, Nasreen Chandio, a PPP stalwart and former member of the national assembly, assessed the impact of Bhutto's murder on the Sindhi people. "Sindhi nationalism has definitely been ignited because people realize that there will be no representation of Sindhis in the federation without Benazir," she said. "The people of Sindh have become orphans."
From: Nicholas Schmidle
Subject: A Fight Between Fundamentalism and Moderation
Posted Thursday, Jan. 10, 2008, at 7:57 AM ET
PESHAWAR, Pakistan—A dozen men sat in a circle in a village outside Peshawar on a recent afternoon. Wearing red caps, they gossiped and drank green tea. The sun fell behind a roof, and several of the men wrapped wool blankets around themselves. All belonged to the Awami National Party, a secular political party based in the North West Frontier Province. The ANP is predicted to win big in the coming elections, mostly at the expense of the Islamist parties who've frightened U.S. policy-makers for the past five years. "This election is a straight fight between those who want war and those who want peace," Asfandyar Wali Khan, leader of the ANP, told me. He drew a line between Islamic militants on the one hand, and his own party on the other. "It is between fundamentalism and moderation."
In the last elections, which took place in October 2002, the Muttahida Majles Amal, a six-party Islamist coalition, defeated the ANP, the Pakistan Peoples Party, and all other contenders by a wide margin in the North West Frontier Province and went on to form the provincial government. The MMA's critics, led by the ANP, allege that the Islamists' rhetoric and sympathies allowed so-called "Talibanization" to spread throughout the regions bordering Afghanistan. Sitting in the circle of red-capped men, I asked if any of them had voted for the MMA last time around. One man sheepishly raised his hand. "That was a vote for paradise and the Quran," he said, as if excusing himself. "When they shoved the Quran in my face and said 'Vote!' I had no other choice. But once the MMA got their bungalows in Islamabad, everything changed. They went to Islamabad, not to Islam."
The World Bank praised the MMA government for its fiscal responsibility and health programs, but local perceptions of corruption, broken promises, and excessive politicking tarnished the coalition's image at home. "We expected them to implement Islamic law and establish a system of justice," said Salauddin, a middle-aged civil servant from Chardsadda. In 2002, the MMA pledged to implement sharia law and support the Taliban in Afghanistan. At the time, people couldn't have cared less about fiscal restraint. Now they have turned from the MMA, not because the Islamists were too hard-core, but because they failed to fulfill their campaign promises. What did they have to show for their time in government? "Acts of terrorism only increased under the mullahs," Salauddin exclaimed. During 2007, 60 suicide-bomb attacks killed more than 770 people in Pakistan, according to a recent report by the Pakistan Institute of Peace Studies. Most of the incidents occurred in the North West Frontier Province.
Perhaps the biggest challenge facing the ANP is the desire to rehabilitate the image of Pashtuns, the dominant ethnic group in western Pakistan and southern Afghanistan. Street-level supporters, such as the men in red caps, and party leaders cited this as their greatest concern. More than 25 million Pashtuns live along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, where they've been renowned as fierce fighters for centuries. Pashtun militias have repelled British armies, Sikh armies, Soviet armies, and now American, NATO, and Pakistani ones, too. The majority of the Taliban fighting in Afghanistan and Pakistan today are Pashtuns. "At this moment, if you talk about Pashtuns, the world thinks he is a terrorist, has a beard to his navel, hair to his shoulders, and holds a Kalashnikov," said Khan, the ANP chief. "Islamic fundamentalism is destroying the basic fabric of Pashtun society."
But the success of the ANP's election campaign signals a shift in the politics of the North West Frontier Province, where the rhetoric of secular nationalism is finding more appeal than that of Islamic fundamentalism. For instance, the ANP proposes changing the name of the province to Pashtunistan ("Land of the Pashtuns") or Pakhtunkhwa ("Pashtun Nation"). (The MMA tried to change the name to Dar-ul-Islam, or "Domain of Islam.") Khan said that all the other provinces of Pakistan shared "frontiers" with Iran, Afghanistan, or India. "But if they—Sindh, Punjab, and Baluchistan—can have their own names, why can't we? This is a matter of our identity."
According to Khan and the ANP, Pashtuns are not naturally brash, militant people—an impression that's been created by the Taliban. If anyone can reform the Pashtuns' image, Khan's family history suggests that he's the man for the job. His grandfather Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan earned the nickname "Frontier Gandhi" for his role in leading the Pashtuns in a nonviolent resistance movement against the British Raj during the 1930s and '40s. His organization became known as the "Red Shirts," which is why the ANP's flag is red and its supporters wear red caps. Ghaffar Khan opposed the Muslim League, the main outfit lobbying for the creation of Pakistan, and supported Gandhi's Congress Party. Ghaffar Khan argued that religious identity shouldn't determine the country where a person should live—and thus denied the rationale for the creation of Pakistan. Instead, Ghaffar Khan contended that ethnic identity was more important, and he called for the creation of an independent Pashtunistan. A year before the birth of Pakistan, fellow Muslims physically attacked him for being, in their minds, anti-Muslim, illustrating the tension that's long existed between Pashtun nationalists and Islamists.
To find out how the Islamists felt about their fall from power, I went to Mardan to meet Ata-ur-Rahman. Rahman is a senior leader of Jamaat-i-Islami and a former member of Pakistan's National Assembly. Jamaat-i-Islami is one of the main component parties in the MMA. In December, Jamaat-i-Islami opted to boycott the coming elections in protest against President Pervez Musharraf's regime and what they believe are destined to be rigged elections on Feb. 18. I had met Rahman several times in the past, but when I arrived at his madrasah in late December, he appeared pensive and distracted. He didn't agree with the party's decision to boycott the elections and had argued that doing so would leave the field wide open for the ANP. He lost the argument, and now Jamaat-i-Islami expected him to convince local people of the merits of a boycott.
But what worried him most was the legacy that the Islamists had left behind. "The worst result of our rule was the rise in militancy throughout the region," he said. Rahman is a moderate, with a Ph.D. from the International Islamic University in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, as comfortable speaking English or Malay as he is speaking Urdu or Pashto. He is one of the only Islamists I've heard admit that so-called "Talibanization" was a product of the Islamists being in government.
We discussed the pro-Taliban uprising in the nearby Swat Valley, where a radical cleric determined to implement sharia is waging an insurgency against the state. I asked Rahman if he believes that people's disappointment with the MMA's failure to implement sharia had led some to turn to the Pakistani Taliban, believing they were the only ones capable of doing so. He nodded his head slowly and stared out the window. "If the MMA had been able to bring sharia to Swat, that would have definitely weakened the militants," he said.
With those alternatives, does anyone wonder why U.S. policy-makers are paralyzed when it comes to Pakistan?
From: Nicholas Schmidle
Subject: "Why Should I Vote in a Pakistani Election?"
Posted Friday, Jan. 11, 2008, at 7:49 AM ET
QUETTA, Pakistan—Naiz Mohammad, an illiterate man who doesn't know his age but guesses he's around 50, squatted on a rocky hillside just outside Quetta and told me how he teaches his children. More than a dozen kids, caked head to toe in dust, crowded around, their bellies swollen with worms, greenish snot yo-yoing from their noses. A range of treeless mountains rose behind us, and Quetta's parched cityscape spread in front. Hundreds of rectangular mud huts, all of them inhabited by Naiz's fellow tribesmen, stood scattered along the pitched slope. Spindly desert twigs snagged shreds of plastic shopping bags, which flapped in the biting wind. New Kahan, Naiz's village, has neither phone service nor electricity or running water. There is a government school nearby, but few kids actually attend. "We have a natural cycle of educating our people," said Naiz, who wore a black turban and camouflage jacket. "For instance, you people came today in a big jeep. When you leave, my boys will ask me, 'Why we don't have a jeep like that?' I'll tell them, and then they'll understand the deprivation that the Baluchis suffer."
Quetta is the capital of Baluchistan, the largest—and poorest—of Pakistan's four provinces. The majority of Baluchistan's 10 million inhabitants are Baluchis, though Pashtun tribes form a significant minority in the northern part of the province, and there are Punjabi- and Urdu-speaking "settlers" living in Quetta. Since Pakistan's creation in 1947, a percolating Baluchi nationalist movement has resulted in five insurgencies against the Pakistani army, most intensely 1973-77 and from 2005 to today. The nationalists argue that Pakistan illegally occupied the independent Baluchi state in 1948 and has been treating the Baluchis like colonial subjects ever since. When prospectors discovered natural gas in the remote mountains near Naiz's ancestral village in 1953, it only added to the Baluchis' sense of perceived injustice; they were the last in the country to enjoy gas stovetops and furnaces.
Naiz's tribe, the Marri, is the most militant and nationalist of the Baluchi tribes. During the 1970s rebellion against the government of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto (Benazir's father), Naiz enlisted alongside guerrillas in an insurgency that left nearly 10,000 rebels and soldiers dead. "Then and now, we are only fighting for our rights, for an independent Baluchistan, where we are masters of our own land," he said. According to Naiz, the Pakistani government has punished the Baluchis by refusing to develop the province. But running water and electricity are not his top priorities. "We just want the government to stop bombing us."
Naiz is originally from Kahan, a town in the gas-rich district of Kohlu. In the late 1980s, after a stint living in Afghanistan, Naiz and thousands of fellow tribesmen moved to Quetta and established New Kahan, partly to escape the constant fighting and bombardment in their native lands and partly because they wanted to be near their tribal chief. The tribal system revolves around obedience to the chief, or sardar. President Pervez Musharraf blames a few sardars, including the one from the Marri tribe, for the violence and instability engulfing Baluchistan. Since 2005, a guerrilla outfit known as the Baluchistan Liberation Army has claimed responsibility for hundreds of attacks on army convoys, oil installations, and railroads. The Marris comprise the top leadership of the BLA, which Musharraf declared a banned terrorist organization in April 2006. Yet the BLA aren't alone; politicians, writers, and university students use their own methods to argue for an independent Baluchistan. And while they stress the nonviolent nature of their own tactics, their sympathies are unmistakable. "I pray for the BLA that God will help them remove the Punjabi forces from Baluchistan," said Mohiuddin Baluch, the chairman of the Baluchistan Students Organization.
I arrived in Quetta in early December, just as the election campaign was beginning, to find army and paramilitary forces deployed in the streets. An armored personnel carrier sat just outside the entrance to my hotel, machine-gun barrels poked out of sandbag bunkers at major intersections, and heavily armed convoys patrolled the roads every evening after sundown. Two weeks earlier, a top BLA commander (and son of the chief of the Marri tribe) was killed, setting off a wave of riots and guerrilla attacks on security forces that left dozens dead. I asked Naiz if he considered the dead BLA commander a fallen hero. "We don't live in circumstances where we have time to dream of heroes," he answered. "Independent Baluchistan is our hero. And sometimes we are obliged to carry out attacks on Pakistani forces to achieve this."
On my first night in Quetta, a soldier, standing behind a stack of sandbags near the center of town, took a bullet in the face and died. The intelligence agencies, police, and paramilitaries responded with house-to-house raids in BLA strongholds from Kohlu to Quetta. They cordoned off New Kahan and arrested 12 of Naiz's fellow tribesmen. In many cases over the last two years, young Baluchi men have simply "disappeared," kidnapped by Pakistan's intelligence agencies. Others have been arrested and charged with treason. (In the autumn of 2006, I spent several weeks reporting in Baluchistan; by the time my story was published a few months later, nearly every featured character had been arrested or exiled.) A politician in Quetta told me that 6,000 Baluchi men were missing. Another man described how his cousin had been kidnapped by Anti-Terror Force troops in front of his four nephews in a city park. I asked how the four kids, aged between 4 and 8, knew the identity of the kidnappers. "In America, your children play with toys. That's what they know," he explained. "Our children know about the intelligence agencies and the army. This is what they grow up on."
Nonetheless, not all the Baluchi tribes are fighting against the government. In fact, Musharraf's own party, the Pakistan Muslim League, is stacked with compliant sardars and tribal chieftains. "Though many of these tribes, since the inception of Pakistan, have been bearing anti-state feelings, some of them got on the bandwagon, and they've been ruling this province ever since," said Anwar ul-Haq, a first-time candidate for the parliamentary seat from Quetta, running on the PML (Q) ticket. "For these people, being part of the establishment presents a huge opportunity for personal aggrandizement." Later that day, I attended a PML (Q) rally with Haq in the same part of town where Western intelligence sources have alleged that Mullah Omar and other top Taliban leaders enjoy safe haven; in other words, a neighborhood where Musharraf and his cohorts are none too popular. Bodyguards assigned to protect the PML (Q) candidates stood on nearby rooftops, surrounded the stage, and mingled in the crowd. At one point, a rock hurled over the wall landed in the crowd of spectators. With a half-nervous smirk, my friend said, "At least it wasn't a grenade."
When it was his turn to speak, Haq leaned on the podium with both hands and promoted a candidate for the provincial assembly because he wasn't a sardar and therefore "understands your problems." He added, "We will provide education, not Kalashnikovs, for your children. Now is the time for your decision. Give us your vote, and we will deliver." I asked Haq, a middle-class divorcee in his late 30s with no tribal roots and no obvious constituency, if he planned to campaign in New Kahan. Earlier that day, Naiz told me that no candidate had visited New Kahan in years, although there were roughly 4,000 voters there. "Ideally, no party should ignore any area," Haq answered. "But would the people in the Marri areas even allow me to go there? I doubt it. They only respond to certain social norms, those filtered through the tribe."
Back in New Kahan, I crouched beside Naiz, our jeep, and a horde of children, and shielded my eyes as a dust cloud blew across the exposed hillside. Naiz admitted that any decision about whether or not to vote, and for whom, would be decided by the tribal chiefs. Naiz hadn't participated in an election since 1995. I asked him which way he was leaning this time around. "Why should I vote in a Pakistani election?" he said. "I don't even recognize Pakistan."
Nicholas Schmidle is a Pakistan-based writer and fellow at the Institute of Current World Affairs.
Article URL: http://www.slate.com/id/2181778/
January 11, 2008
Golbang : Band of Exile Iranian Baloch in Sweden
Göteborgsposten, Bengt Eriksson
Golbang (consisting of seven exile-iranians and one swede) has brought with them musical memories from their homecountry, and at the same time kept a window open for other influnces. Electronic keyboards interplays with western and arabian drums. Two folksongs, one from Sweden, the other one from Afghanistan harmonizes perfectly. The rest of the melodies, old and new originates from Iran. The word golbang means the nightinglae's song in persian. But Golbang could easily be used to describe the singer Rostam Mirlasharis voice soft yet rythmic, softly and gently swaying. Abdul Rahman Surizehis benjo jingles like a zither. until he turns the power on and makes the benjo sound like an electronical guitar!! Oriental sounds comes out from Daniel Carlssons saxophone. This is one of the best bands in Sweden- all categories!But to most people Golbang is a secret. So far that is.
Vash Malle - Live performing
Iran May not Sign Gas Pipeline Pact with Pakistan Next Week
TEHRAN (FNA)- Iran is unlikely to sign next week a bilateral agreement with Pakistan for export of natural gas and has said it was keen on India joining the tri-nation 'peace' pipeline project.
"As we speak, there is no ceremony scheduled for signing of Gas Sales Purchase Agreement (GSPA) with Pakistan next week," a senior Iranian official told PTI from Tehran.
While New Delhi has since June 2007 left unattended meetings on the seven billion dollar Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline project over the issue of transit fee payable to Islamabad.
Iran and Pakistan have held several rounds of discussions and were reported close to signing a bilateral deal. Pakistan's caretaker Petroleum Minister Ahsan Ullah Khan had earlier this week stated that an economic coordination committee of the Pakistani Cabinet had cleared sovereign guarantees for gas imports from Iran and a GSPA with Iran was likely to be signed next week.
"Those are statements made by Pakistan. We haven't said that we are signing a bilateral GSPA. We are very keen that India joins the project," the Iranian official said. "We are proposing a trilateral meeting in New Delhi next month."
Iran would like a stable and high demand consumer like India to back the multi-billion dollar revenues it expects to earn every year from sale of natural gas.
Indian officials also said though a bilateral meeting with Pakistan was scheduled to take place in Islamabad on February 14-16 to resolve the transit fee issue, no agreement was likely unless elections take place in that country and a new government is sworn in
Iran to Resume Gas Supplies by Next Week to Turkey
TEHRAN (FNA)- Iran is expected to resume gas exports to Turkey by the beginning of next week, ending a days-long cut forced by a supply crunch, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Thursday.
"I talked to an envoy of (Iranian President Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad. He told me they would resolve this issue by Monday at the latest," Erdogan said in televised remarks.
"I believe they will resume the gas flow by then," he added.
Iran halted gas shipments to Turkey on Monday, six days after it was forced to slash exports from 20 million cubic meters (706 million cubic feet) a day to 5.0 million cubic meters (177 million cubic feet).
The cut was brought about by a severe cold snap in Iran that peaked domestic consumption and a halt in gas supplies from Turkmenistan to the Islamic republic.
As a result, Turkey had to stop gas exports to neighboring Greece, media reports said.
Russia's Gazprom said in a statement Wednesday that it had increased gas supplies to both Turkey and Greece to above previously-contracted levels.
In January 2007, Iran was forced to shut down gas exports to Turkey for five days to compensate for a domestic consumption crunch.
Turkey has been buying gas from Iran via a pipeline from the northwestern Iranian city of Tabriz to Ankara since December 2001 under a deal that raised eyebrows in the United States.
"As we speak, there is no ceremony scheduled for signing of Gas Sales Purchase Agreement (GSPA) with Pakistan next week," a senior Iranian official told PTI from Tehran.
While New Delhi has since June 2007 left unattended meetings on the seven billion dollar Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline project over the issue of transit fee payable to Islamabad.
Iran and Pakistan have held several rounds of discussions and were reported close to signing a bilateral deal. Pakistan's caretaker Petroleum Minister Ahsan Ullah Khan had earlier this week stated that an economic coordination committee of the Pakistani Cabinet had cleared sovereign guarantees for gas imports from Iran and a GSPA with Iran was likely to be signed next week.
"Those are statements made by Pakistan. We haven't said that we are signing a bilateral GSPA. We are very keen that India joins the project," the Iranian official said. "We are proposing a trilateral meeting in New Delhi next month."
Iran would like a stable and high demand consumer like India to back the multi-billion dollar revenues it expects to earn every year from sale of natural gas.
Indian officials also said though a bilateral meeting with Pakistan was scheduled to take place in Islamabad on February 14-16 to resolve the transit fee issue, no agreement was likely unless elections take place in that country and a new government is sworn in
Iran to Resume Gas Supplies by Next Week to Turkey
TEHRAN (FNA)- Iran is expected to resume gas exports to Turkey by the beginning of next week, ending a days-long cut forced by a supply crunch, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Thursday.
"I talked to an envoy of (Iranian President Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad. He told me they would resolve this issue by Monday at the latest," Erdogan said in televised remarks.
"I believe they will resume the gas flow by then," he added.
Iran halted gas shipments to Turkey on Monday, six days after it was forced to slash exports from 20 million cubic meters (706 million cubic feet) a day to 5.0 million cubic meters (177 million cubic feet).
The cut was brought about by a severe cold snap in Iran that peaked domestic consumption and a halt in gas supplies from Turkmenistan to the Islamic republic.
As a result, Turkey had to stop gas exports to neighboring Greece, media reports said.
Russia's Gazprom said in a statement Wednesday that it had increased gas supplies to both Turkey and Greece to above previously-contracted levels.
In January 2007, Iran was forced to shut down gas exports to Turkey for five days to compensate for a domestic consumption crunch.
Turkey has been buying gas from Iran via a pipeline from the northwestern Iranian city of Tabriz to Ankara since December 2001 under a deal that raised eyebrows in the United States.
TURKEY : Time for energy in energy policy
Friday, January 11, 2008
Turkey’s energy strategy needs to include domestic sources to reduce dependency on Russia, experts say. Procurement from Iran is another problematic matter, as Tehran’s capability to meet its obligations is questioned
MUSTAFA OÄžUZANKARA - Turkish Daily News
Against the backdrop of a widening energy crisis begun when harsh weather forced Iran to curtail gas exports to Turkey, the chief of the Paris-based International Energy Agency (IEA) yesterday scored the government for idling on development of an energy policy while surrounded with ample and underused resources.
Fatih Birol, the IEA's chief economist, was joined by another prominent energy analyst Faruk Demir in decrying a situation where use of energy resources from neighbhoring countries is less than optimal and Turkey's own ample resources of hydroelectic supplies, solar potential and wind energy are all but untapped.
“Turkey also has a stronger economy that its neighbors; nevertheless, it must develop a national energy strategy to increase energy efficiency,” Birol said in an interview with the Turkish Daily News. "Hydroelectric, solar and geothermal power and energy efficiency are building blocs of that strategy."
Annual natural gas cuts by Iran that have become a recurrent nightmare for Turkey and the most recent round, leading Turkey in domino fashion to curtail transit of Azeri gas to Greece, has prompted a new examination of strategies and options to meet the country's ever-rising energy demands. Energy analysts argue that Turkey has still not developed a comprehensive energy policy and has relied on Turkmenistan and Iran to reduce dependency on Russia.
Quenching Turkey's energy thirst
Energy analyst Demir echoed Birol, underscoring the fact that Turkey can exploit its hydroelectricity, geothermal and wind power. “The state declared a purchase guarantee for 10 years with a unit price of 5 to 5.5 eurocents. Turkey's import need will decrease in two to five years,” Demir said.
Turkey's dependency rate in energy is 73 percent, Demir said. “The potential for wind power stands somewhere between 4,500 to 6,000 MW, whereas geothermal energy can provide 5,000 to 6,000 MW in the first step,” Demir noted. Turkey can boost the percentage of internal sources in energy procurement from 23 percent to 40 percent, said Demir.
Chief economist Birol pointed to Turkey's key geographical location in energy transfer routes, but Turkey must also invest in neighboring countries' energy sector to exploit the geographical asset. “Foreign policy and energy policy must go hand-in-hand, especially in the Hazar region,” he maintained.
Demir pointed to a grave error in Turkey's energy procurement strategy. “The share of natural gas in electricity production surpassed 45 percent. This automatically increases economic and political dependence on Russia, which provides 65 percent of Turkey's natural gas,” he warned.
Think twice before dealing with Iran
Analysts agree on the importance of Iran's energy resources for Turkey, yet they urged decision makers to consider the fine points of the technical and political sides while doing business with Teheran.
Birol noted that Iran had difficulties in extracting its massive natural gas reserves. “They have technological and investment handicaps,” he said. Turkey should look alert on its energy deals with Iran, noting that Teheran does not always hit the headlines with its energy production. “International political implications must be evaluated as well,” he said.
Demir, on the other hand, had a more positive stance toward Turkey's eventual development of three gas fields in Iranian South Pars region. “By the end of 2011, Turkey can produce and transport its own natural gas,” said Demir and denied that the United States will be categorically opposed to such a move. “Turkey's investment will not trigger the Iran Sanctions Act that envisages sanctions on companies investing in Iran's energy sector,” he argued. “The only way Turkey-Iran cooperation in energy would upset the U.S. is by turning it into a support for Iran's position in international politics, which in my view, is not contemplated by Turkish officials.”
Concluding energy deals with Iran perfectly fits the purpose of Energy Independence and Security Act passed by U.S. Congress in 2007 according to Demir, who noted that Turkey would provide a means of reducing Europe's dependence on Russian gas.
“There are two points on which the U.S. keeps silent at this point. First is the fact that China and India flow capital to Iranian energy market and the second is the lack of viable alternative energy routes to smash Russia's energy monopoly over Europe,” Demir said, and added that the Shah Sea reserves, though important, cannot meet demands, while Turkmenistan gas is problematic due to legal disputes over the Hazar Sea. Demir suggested that U.S. officials gave tacit consent to energy contracts with Iran, unless Tehran's position is strengthened.
Iran's trouble keeping its promise
Analysts differed on Iran's performance on its natural gas contract with Turkey. Birol said Iran did not have legitimate reasons to cut the gas off. “Iran classified that harsh winter as force majeur, but only an extraordinary circumstance in which temperatures fell for example, to –50 C, or something as grave as toppling of an oil platform at sea [would qualify as such],” he argued.
Demir, on the other hand, claimed that both Turkmenistan's decision to cut gas flow to Iran and a freezing winter gave Iran a legitimate claim of force majeur. “Iran's natural gas production is slightly above its domestic consumption. It transfers gas from Turkmenistan to Turkey,” noted Demir. Iran's incapability to invest enough in its energy sector to be able to cope with the clauses of its 1996 natural gas deal with Turkey is a matter of contention in international arbitration.
There is no magic bullet to energy procurement problems, said Demir, who urged decision makers to make acute risk analysis shaped by increasing welfare, a burgeoning economy and growing population levels.
Turkey’s energy strategy needs to include domestic sources to reduce dependency on Russia, experts say. Procurement from Iran is another problematic matter, as Tehran’s capability to meet its obligations is questioned
MUSTAFA OÄžUZANKARA - Turkish Daily News
Against the backdrop of a widening energy crisis begun when harsh weather forced Iran to curtail gas exports to Turkey, the chief of the Paris-based International Energy Agency (IEA) yesterday scored the government for idling on development of an energy policy while surrounded with ample and underused resources.
Fatih Birol, the IEA's chief economist, was joined by another prominent energy analyst Faruk Demir in decrying a situation where use of energy resources from neighbhoring countries is less than optimal and Turkey's own ample resources of hydroelectic supplies, solar potential and wind energy are all but untapped.
“Turkey also has a stronger economy that its neighbors; nevertheless, it must develop a national energy strategy to increase energy efficiency,” Birol said in an interview with the Turkish Daily News. "Hydroelectric, solar and geothermal power and energy efficiency are building blocs of that strategy."
Annual natural gas cuts by Iran that have become a recurrent nightmare for Turkey and the most recent round, leading Turkey in domino fashion to curtail transit of Azeri gas to Greece, has prompted a new examination of strategies and options to meet the country's ever-rising energy demands. Energy analysts argue that Turkey has still not developed a comprehensive energy policy and has relied on Turkmenistan and Iran to reduce dependency on Russia.
Quenching Turkey's energy thirst
Energy analyst Demir echoed Birol, underscoring the fact that Turkey can exploit its hydroelectricity, geothermal and wind power. “The state declared a purchase guarantee for 10 years with a unit price of 5 to 5.5 eurocents. Turkey's import need will decrease in two to five years,” Demir said.
Turkey's dependency rate in energy is 73 percent, Demir said. “The potential for wind power stands somewhere between 4,500 to 6,000 MW, whereas geothermal energy can provide 5,000 to 6,000 MW in the first step,” Demir noted. Turkey can boost the percentage of internal sources in energy procurement from 23 percent to 40 percent, said Demir.
Chief economist Birol pointed to Turkey's key geographical location in energy transfer routes, but Turkey must also invest in neighboring countries' energy sector to exploit the geographical asset. “Foreign policy and energy policy must go hand-in-hand, especially in the Hazar region,” he maintained.
Demir pointed to a grave error in Turkey's energy procurement strategy. “The share of natural gas in electricity production surpassed 45 percent. This automatically increases economic and political dependence on Russia, which provides 65 percent of Turkey's natural gas,” he warned.
Think twice before dealing with Iran
Analysts agree on the importance of Iran's energy resources for Turkey, yet they urged decision makers to consider the fine points of the technical and political sides while doing business with Teheran.
Birol noted that Iran had difficulties in extracting its massive natural gas reserves. “They have technological and investment handicaps,” he said. Turkey should look alert on its energy deals with Iran, noting that Teheran does not always hit the headlines with its energy production. “International political implications must be evaluated as well,” he said.
Demir, on the other hand, had a more positive stance toward Turkey's eventual development of three gas fields in Iranian South Pars region. “By the end of 2011, Turkey can produce and transport its own natural gas,” said Demir and denied that the United States will be categorically opposed to such a move. “Turkey's investment will not trigger the Iran Sanctions Act that envisages sanctions on companies investing in Iran's energy sector,” he argued. “The only way Turkey-Iran cooperation in energy would upset the U.S. is by turning it into a support for Iran's position in international politics, which in my view, is not contemplated by Turkish officials.”
Concluding energy deals with Iran perfectly fits the purpose of Energy Independence and Security Act passed by U.S. Congress in 2007 according to Demir, who noted that Turkey would provide a means of reducing Europe's dependence on Russian gas.
“There are two points on which the U.S. keeps silent at this point. First is the fact that China and India flow capital to Iranian energy market and the second is the lack of viable alternative energy routes to smash Russia's energy monopoly over Europe,” Demir said, and added that the Shah Sea reserves, though important, cannot meet demands, while Turkmenistan gas is problematic due to legal disputes over the Hazar Sea. Demir suggested that U.S. officials gave tacit consent to energy contracts with Iran, unless Tehran's position is strengthened.
Iran's trouble keeping its promise
Analysts differed on Iran's performance on its natural gas contract with Turkey. Birol said Iran did not have legitimate reasons to cut the gas off. “Iran classified that harsh winter as force majeur, but only an extraordinary circumstance in which temperatures fell for example, to –50 C, or something as grave as toppling of an oil platform at sea [would qualify as such],” he argued.
Demir, on the other hand, claimed that both Turkmenistan's decision to cut gas flow to Iran and a freezing winter gave Iran a legitimate claim of force majeur. “Iran's natural gas production is slightly above its domestic consumption. It transfers gas from Turkmenistan to Turkey,” noted Demir. Iran's incapability to invest enough in its energy sector to be able to cope with the clauses of its 1996 natural gas deal with Turkey is a matter of contention in international arbitration.
There is no magic bullet to energy procurement problems, said Demir, who urged decision makers to make acute risk analysis shaped by increasing welfare, a burgeoning economy and growing population levels.
Chinese cyberwarfare
Intel Brief: Chinese cyberwarfare
Governments are likely to become targets of increasingly sophisticated Chinese cyber warfare attacks over the next three to five years as the PLA assembles an advanced cybermilitia.
Intel Brief by Rachel F Kesselman for ISN Security Watch (11/01/08)
A Chinese hacker community, referring to itself as "Honker Union," declared war on US government and business websites in 2001. The group claimed responsibility for attacks against the US Geological Survey, NASA, Cornell University and more than 100 other US government and business sites since 30 April of that year.
Honker Union's website directed interested hackers to contact "Lion," a hacker believed to be responsible for spreading the Lion Worm, a program that captures passwords from operating systems and transmits them to an e-mail address in China.
In 2002, another Chinese group by the name of "netXeyes" developed additional Microsoft Windows NT/2000/XP hacking tools, namely a brute force password cracker, a Windows Management Interface cracker and a command line redirection and sniffing tool.
The premier piece of software in the netXeyes armory, however, was a system referred to as Fluxay. According to the Spyware Guide, a public reference site for spyware and greynet research, the program is a backdoor trojan that "enables an attacker to get nearly complete control over an infected PC."
In 2004, Chris McNab, technical director of Matta, a UK-based security consulting firm, predicted that 2004 would be the year of the Chinese hacker. However, it appears that 2006 was likely the landmark year for the return of Chinese malicious internet activity.
According to a 2006 US Defense Department report, the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) began developing information warfare reserves and militia units in 2005, often incorporating them into broader exercises and training. The establishment of this elite Chinese unit is evident by a likely increase in sophisticated attacks on high-risk targets.
Reports in Chinese newspapers also suggest that the Chinese are actively attempting to establish a cybermilitia. A Time Magazine article entitled "Enemies at The Firewall" purports that the military has put forth a concerted effort to carry out nationwide recruiting campaigns in hopes of discovering the country's most brilliant hackers.
A 2005 World Tribune article discusses China's rapid economic expansion in relation to its hacker recruitment program. According to the report, Beijing is actively funding a recruitment drive that in addition to recruiting its own citizens targets some of "best and brightest IT graduates from US universities."
In July 2006, the State Department claimed that Chinese hackers broke into their systems. The attacks originated in the East-Asia Pacific region, affecting unclassified computer systems at US embassies there and eventually working their way to State Department headquarters in Washington, DC.
The US government's Commerce Department admitted in October 2006 that it had sustained heavy attacks on its computers from hackers working through Chinese servers, forcing the bureau to lock down internet access for more than a month.
An attack against computers of the Bureau of Industry and Security, the branch of the Commerce Department responsible for overseeing US exports that deal with both commercial and military applications, forced the unit to disable internet access in early September 2006.
Richard Stiennan, a principal analyst with security consultancy IT-Harvest, mentioned in a 2006 TechWeb article that "this [Commerce attack] is the third or fourth battle that we've lost to China. It's not a digital Pearl Harbor, not yet, but it's getting closer."
In November 2006, hackers from China were also likely behind an intrusion that disabled the US Naval War College's network, forcing it to disconnect from the internet for several weeks.
The stakes were likely raised in June 2007 when Chinese hackers allegedly spent several months probing the US Defense Department's computer network that serves the office of Defense Secretary Robert Gates. The cyberattack forced the Pentagon to shut down its unclassified email for nearly three weeks.
In December 2007, Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee also detected a "sophisticated cyberattack" that might have compromised the personal information of thousands of visitors to the lab. The FBI and US Department of Homeland Security officials told ABC News that they believed the attacks originated in China with entities from there probing US systems.
The attacks are not limited to US networks and also include heavy attacks on the UK, Germany and South Korea. According to a 2007 article in the British newspaper the Guardian, Whitehall officials claim that virtual attacks originating in China were responsible for shutting down part of the UK House of Commons computer system.
Earlier in 2007, the Chinese also allegedly hacked into computer systems in the office of German Chancellor Angela Merkel and three German ministries. The hackers are said to have stolen computer data through the installation of trojan spyware.
In 2004, the Chinese are believed to have compromised 211 South Korean government computers, as well as 67 other machines belonging to companies, media groups and universities. The attackers utilized trojan programs to obtain classified documents on weapons systems.
All of these hacking incidents allegedly perpetrated by the Chinese are likely seen as an ongoing effort to develop computer warfare capability. In a Chinese white paper that describes military strategy, the country establishes "informationised armed forces" as one of three pillars of its military strategy, setting forth the goal of building itself a cyberarmy that could win such a war by 2050.
The 2006 US Defense Department report states that "during a military contingency, information warfare units could support active PLA forces by conducting 'hacker attacks' and network intrusions, or other forms of 'cyber' warfare, on an adversary's military and commercial computer systems, while helping to defend Chinese networks."
In his testimony to US Congress on 25 April 2007, Sami Saydjari, who has worked on cyberdefense systems for the Pentagon since the 1980s, warned President George W Bush that "the situation was grave, with nation-states such as China developing serious offensive capabilities [...]."
A Pentagon report obtained by The Times spells out a detailed plan in which Chinese military hackers are preparing to disable the US aircraft battle carrier fleet with a devastating cyberattack. The planned assault was designed by two hackers working for the PLA and is in line with Beijing's plan to achieve "electronic dominance" over the US, Russia, UK and South Korea.
According to a December 2007 article in the Financial Times, Yuval Ben-Itzhak, chief technology officer for Finjan, a web security group with headquarters in San Jose, California, noted that "in the last three months, the attacks [from China] have almost tripled."
China's information warfare expertise likely stems from a group that refers to itself as the "Red Hackers Alliance." The Alliance operates as a government- or party-backed organization that specializes in network security, software development and patriotic hacker training.
The Alliance was once considered the fifth largest hacking organization in the world. Its website was established at the end of 2000 and had 80,000 members at its peak. Although the network disintegrated at the end of 2004 for no apparent reason, it is highly likely that this organization has regrouped and is now working in conjunction with the PLA and largely responsible for the increase in attacks on global networks.
Cybercrime lawyer and security expert Parry Aftab was quoted in a TechNewsWorld article as saying "The good thing is, the United States has been preparing for this for a long time." The Pentagon released a report in 2000 stating that within two decades, US military forces will "develop the capability to conduct attacks on foreign computers and networks while defending its systems against strategic information warfare strikes."
In 2001, Aviation Week & Space Technology claimed that the US Air Force had begun a "quiet" series of organization changes that were intended to make maximum use of "cyber-weapons."
Recent global attacks have likely prompted NATO to develop a cyberwarfare plan quicker than it had intended. NATO defense ministers met in the Netherlands in October 2007 to discuss cyberdefense, debating the effectiveness of The Organization's own cyberdefense policies as well as how best to support other member states in the aftermath of an attack.
NATO developed cyberdefense capabilities in 2000 after a series of attacks originating from Balkan states, and the organization's finalized policy will be announced in 2008 at a NATO summit meeting for heads of state. However, as the Chinese actively search for new methods to penetrate government networks, it is unlikely that countermeasures will be entirely foolproof.
"I always thought that the face of the new generation of hackers would be Chinese. There is just so many of them, and they are an emerging technology power," said Roger Thompson, chief technology officer at Exploit Prevention Labs in Pennsylvania.
Mercyhurst-ISN intelligence briefs offer foresight into issues that are likely to dominate news headlines and policy agendas. The briefs are a joint initiative of the ISN and Mercyhurst Institute for Intelligence Studies and are composed and referenced using open sources.
Governments are likely to become targets of increasingly sophisticated Chinese cyber warfare attacks over the next three to five years as the PLA assembles an advanced cybermilitia.
Intel Brief by Rachel F Kesselman for ISN Security Watch (11/01/08)
A Chinese hacker community, referring to itself as "Honker Union," declared war on US government and business websites in 2001. The group claimed responsibility for attacks against the US Geological Survey, NASA, Cornell University and more than 100 other US government and business sites since 30 April of that year.
Honker Union's website directed interested hackers to contact "Lion," a hacker believed to be responsible for spreading the Lion Worm, a program that captures passwords from operating systems and transmits them to an e-mail address in China.
In 2002, another Chinese group by the name of "netXeyes" developed additional Microsoft Windows NT/2000/XP hacking tools, namely a brute force password cracker, a Windows Management Interface cracker and a command line redirection and sniffing tool.
The premier piece of software in the netXeyes armory, however, was a system referred to as Fluxay. According to the Spyware Guide, a public reference site for spyware and greynet research, the program is a backdoor trojan that "enables an attacker to get nearly complete control over an infected PC."
In 2004, Chris McNab, technical director of Matta, a UK-based security consulting firm, predicted that 2004 would be the year of the Chinese hacker. However, it appears that 2006 was likely the landmark year for the return of Chinese malicious internet activity.
According to a 2006 US Defense Department report, the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) began developing information warfare reserves and militia units in 2005, often incorporating them into broader exercises and training. The establishment of this elite Chinese unit is evident by a likely increase in sophisticated attacks on high-risk targets.
Reports in Chinese newspapers also suggest that the Chinese are actively attempting to establish a cybermilitia. A Time Magazine article entitled "Enemies at The Firewall" purports that the military has put forth a concerted effort to carry out nationwide recruiting campaigns in hopes of discovering the country's most brilliant hackers.
A 2005 World Tribune article discusses China's rapid economic expansion in relation to its hacker recruitment program. According to the report, Beijing is actively funding a recruitment drive that in addition to recruiting its own citizens targets some of "best and brightest IT graduates from US universities."
In July 2006, the State Department claimed that Chinese hackers broke into their systems. The attacks originated in the East-Asia Pacific region, affecting unclassified computer systems at US embassies there and eventually working their way to State Department headquarters in Washington, DC.
The US government's Commerce Department admitted in October 2006 that it had sustained heavy attacks on its computers from hackers working through Chinese servers, forcing the bureau to lock down internet access for more than a month.
An attack against computers of the Bureau of Industry and Security, the branch of the Commerce Department responsible for overseeing US exports that deal with both commercial and military applications, forced the unit to disable internet access in early September 2006.
Richard Stiennan, a principal analyst with security consultancy IT-Harvest, mentioned in a 2006 TechWeb article that "this [Commerce attack] is the third or fourth battle that we've lost to China. It's not a digital Pearl Harbor, not yet, but it's getting closer."
In November 2006, hackers from China were also likely behind an intrusion that disabled the US Naval War College's network, forcing it to disconnect from the internet for several weeks.
The stakes were likely raised in June 2007 when Chinese hackers allegedly spent several months probing the US Defense Department's computer network that serves the office of Defense Secretary Robert Gates. The cyberattack forced the Pentagon to shut down its unclassified email for nearly three weeks.
In December 2007, Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee also detected a "sophisticated cyberattack" that might have compromised the personal information of thousands of visitors to the lab. The FBI and US Department of Homeland Security officials told ABC News that they believed the attacks originated in China with entities from there probing US systems.
The attacks are not limited to US networks and also include heavy attacks on the UK, Germany and South Korea. According to a 2007 article in the British newspaper the Guardian, Whitehall officials claim that virtual attacks originating in China were responsible for shutting down part of the UK House of Commons computer system.
Earlier in 2007, the Chinese also allegedly hacked into computer systems in the office of German Chancellor Angela Merkel and three German ministries. The hackers are said to have stolen computer data through the installation of trojan spyware.
In 2004, the Chinese are believed to have compromised 211 South Korean government computers, as well as 67 other machines belonging to companies, media groups and universities. The attackers utilized trojan programs to obtain classified documents on weapons systems.
All of these hacking incidents allegedly perpetrated by the Chinese are likely seen as an ongoing effort to develop computer warfare capability. In a Chinese white paper that describes military strategy, the country establishes "informationised armed forces" as one of three pillars of its military strategy, setting forth the goal of building itself a cyberarmy that could win such a war by 2050.
The 2006 US Defense Department report states that "during a military contingency, information warfare units could support active PLA forces by conducting 'hacker attacks' and network intrusions, or other forms of 'cyber' warfare, on an adversary's military and commercial computer systems, while helping to defend Chinese networks."
In his testimony to US Congress on 25 April 2007, Sami Saydjari, who has worked on cyberdefense systems for the Pentagon since the 1980s, warned President George W Bush that "the situation was grave, with nation-states such as China developing serious offensive capabilities [...]."
A Pentagon report obtained by The Times spells out a detailed plan in which Chinese military hackers are preparing to disable the US aircraft battle carrier fleet with a devastating cyberattack. The planned assault was designed by two hackers working for the PLA and is in line with Beijing's plan to achieve "electronic dominance" over the US, Russia, UK and South Korea.
According to a December 2007 article in the Financial Times, Yuval Ben-Itzhak, chief technology officer for Finjan, a web security group with headquarters in San Jose, California, noted that "in the last three months, the attacks [from China] have almost tripled."
China's information warfare expertise likely stems from a group that refers to itself as the "Red Hackers Alliance." The Alliance operates as a government- or party-backed organization that specializes in network security, software development and patriotic hacker training.
The Alliance was once considered the fifth largest hacking organization in the world. Its website was established at the end of 2000 and had 80,000 members at its peak. Although the network disintegrated at the end of 2004 for no apparent reason, it is highly likely that this organization has regrouped and is now working in conjunction with the PLA and largely responsible for the increase in attacks on global networks.
Cybercrime lawyer and security expert Parry Aftab was quoted in a TechNewsWorld article as saying "The good thing is, the United States has been preparing for this for a long time." The Pentagon released a report in 2000 stating that within two decades, US military forces will "develop the capability to conduct attacks on foreign computers and networks while defending its systems against strategic information warfare strikes."
In 2001, Aviation Week & Space Technology claimed that the US Air Force had begun a "quiet" series of organization changes that were intended to make maximum use of "cyber-weapons."
Recent global attacks have likely prompted NATO to develop a cyberwarfare plan quicker than it had intended. NATO defense ministers met in the Netherlands in October 2007 to discuss cyberdefense, debating the effectiveness of The Organization's own cyberdefense policies as well as how best to support other member states in the aftermath of an attack.
NATO developed cyberdefense capabilities in 2000 after a series of attacks originating from Balkan states, and the organization's finalized policy will be announced in 2008 at a NATO summit meeting for heads of state. However, as the Chinese actively search for new methods to penetrate government networks, it is unlikely that countermeasures will be entirely foolproof.
"I always thought that the face of the new generation of hackers would be Chinese. There is just so many of them, and they are an emerging technology power," said Roger Thompson, chief technology officer at Exploit Prevention Labs in Pennsylvania.
Mercyhurst-ISN intelligence briefs offer foresight into issues that are likely to dominate news headlines and policy agendas. The briefs are a joint initiative of the ISN and Mercyhurst Institute for Intelligence Studies and are composed and referenced using open sources.
Bush visit lacks content
When the time comes, will the US and Israel accept a Fatah-Hamas detente and the latter's 10-year ceasefire offer and abide Hamas' control of the Gaza Strip?
Commentary by Dominic Moran in Tel Aviv for ISN Security Watch (11/01/08)
George W Bush's first presidential visit to the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Israel has proceeded as expected, bereft of new initiatives that could move the peace process forward.
Amidst the schmooze of the first day's festivities in Jerusalem on Wednesday, which included an embarrassing recitation of the president's supposed virtues by Israeli Premier Ehud Olmert - engendering considerable mirth in the local press - there were no signs that the Bush administration is willing to play a clear and determined role in nascent negotiations.
The presidential visit is designed primarily to bolster Olmert's domestic political authority ahead of what promises to be a difficult year.
The Israeli prime minister looks set to survive the 30 January submission of a committee report on the leadership failures of the 2006 Lebanon War, but faces a difficult task to hold together his fragile left-right coalition following confirmation this week that the fate of Jerusalem will be on the table in negotiations.
He has won a brief respite, securing the short-term support of the ultra-Orthodox Shas party, at the expense of reinstituting the notoriously corrupt Religious Affairs Ministry, and securing a pledge from Avigdor Lieberman not to withdraw his Yisrael Beiteinu party from the coalition during Bush's visit.
In a sign that the Palestinian-Israeli talks remain a secondary US policy concern, a private Bush-Olmert tête-à -tête Wednesday reportedly focused primarily on the Iranian nuclear issue. Through visiting Israel and the PA first, Bush ensured that allied Arab allies would not play a major role in shaping the nature of his message to Israeli and Palestinian leaders and that the remainder of his Middle East diplomatic jaunt would focus primarily on Iran.
In a surprisingly ill-judged summation speech Thursday, Bush openly undermined initial Palestinian negotiating positions in repeating assertions made in a controversial April 2004 letter to then-Israeli premier Ariel Sharon that final borders must "reflect current realities," while appearing to rule out a return to Israel of Palestinian refugees.
Olmert mentioned the letter in the run-up to the Bush visit, while the Israeli position on future territorial concessions is openly premised on assumed US support for the differentiation of Jerusalem and Israeli-defined settlement blocs from communities beyond the West Bank wall/fence network.
Bush has avoided an open breach with his Israeli hosts on the issue by confining his comments on settlement construction to reiterations of long-standing US calls for the promised removal of settlement outposts created since 2001 - also an Israeli Road Map commitment - and to calls for an end to land confiscations.
The US sought a limited role in peacemaking at Annapolis, with envoy General (ret.) James Jones set to report to Washington on the status of US-sponsored Palestinian security reforms. Importantly, his role in overseeing the implementation of both sides' first phase Road Map commitments appears to have been delimited by post-Annapolis discussions.
Bush has, perhaps intentionally, missed an opportunity to symbolically associate the US presidency with the restart of Palestinian-Israeli talks through failing to create a potential tie-in between his visit and a ceremony marking the resumption of full negotiations.
Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas agreed this week that negotiations on core issues would fall under the aegis of a central committee led by Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and former Palestinian premier Ahmed Qurei.
The move is important in that it may prevent the confusion of negotiating positions on key issues and the sending of mixed or contradictory signals by different elements within the Israeli and Palestinian negotiating teams, which bedeviled the 2000 talks and contributed significantly to their collapse.
The PA has won significant political capital in recent weeks, successfully bringing the subject of settlement construction within the Israeli-defined borders of Jerusalem to the agenda.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has criticized now stalled efforts to expand the Har Homa settlement south of Jerusalem, clarifying that the US sees the current Israeli settlement freeze as applying to all areas of the West Bank. Olmert was recently forced into a public reprimand of official efforts to promote a large-scale settlement project to the north of the city.
PA Premier Salam Fayad's government also scored a major coup in winning US$7.4 billion in international aid pledges last month in Paris, much of which will go to shoring up Fatah-controlled security forces and political patronage systems in the West Bank as the movement moves to counter Hamas.
Nonetheless, these limited successes are unlikely to bolster the Palestinian position in the talks themselves, where Israel continues to hold the best cards in the absence of significant international pressure.
Ongoing militant and Israeli attacks and an outbreak of Fatah-Hamas armed clashes in the Gaza Strip last week underline that the crucial decision that will ultimately determine the success or failure of any future peace pact has yet to be made: When the time comes, will the US and Israel accept a Fatah-Hamas detente and the latter's 10-year hudna (ceasefire) offer and abide Hamas' control of the Gaza Strip?
Dr Dominic Moran, based in Tel Aviv, is ISN Security Watch's senior correspondent in the Middle East and the Director of Operations of ISA Consulting.
The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author only, not the International Relations and Security Network (ISN).
Commentary by Dominic Moran in Tel Aviv for ISN Security Watch (11/01/08)
George W Bush's first presidential visit to the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Israel has proceeded as expected, bereft of new initiatives that could move the peace process forward.
Amidst the schmooze of the first day's festivities in Jerusalem on Wednesday, which included an embarrassing recitation of the president's supposed virtues by Israeli Premier Ehud Olmert - engendering considerable mirth in the local press - there were no signs that the Bush administration is willing to play a clear and determined role in nascent negotiations.
The presidential visit is designed primarily to bolster Olmert's domestic political authority ahead of what promises to be a difficult year.
The Israeli prime minister looks set to survive the 30 January submission of a committee report on the leadership failures of the 2006 Lebanon War, but faces a difficult task to hold together his fragile left-right coalition following confirmation this week that the fate of Jerusalem will be on the table in negotiations.
He has won a brief respite, securing the short-term support of the ultra-Orthodox Shas party, at the expense of reinstituting the notoriously corrupt Religious Affairs Ministry, and securing a pledge from Avigdor Lieberman not to withdraw his Yisrael Beiteinu party from the coalition during Bush's visit.
In a sign that the Palestinian-Israeli talks remain a secondary US policy concern, a private Bush-Olmert tête-à -tête Wednesday reportedly focused primarily on the Iranian nuclear issue. Through visiting Israel and the PA first, Bush ensured that allied Arab allies would not play a major role in shaping the nature of his message to Israeli and Palestinian leaders and that the remainder of his Middle East diplomatic jaunt would focus primarily on Iran.
In a surprisingly ill-judged summation speech Thursday, Bush openly undermined initial Palestinian negotiating positions in repeating assertions made in a controversial April 2004 letter to then-Israeli premier Ariel Sharon that final borders must "reflect current realities," while appearing to rule out a return to Israel of Palestinian refugees.
Olmert mentioned the letter in the run-up to the Bush visit, while the Israeli position on future territorial concessions is openly premised on assumed US support for the differentiation of Jerusalem and Israeli-defined settlement blocs from communities beyond the West Bank wall/fence network.
Bush has avoided an open breach with his Israeli hosts on the issue by confining his comments on settlement construction to reiterations of long-standing US calls for the promised removal of settlement outposts created since 2001 - also an Israeli Road Map commitment - and to calls for an end to land confiscations.
The US sought a limited role in peacemaking at Annapolis, with envoy General (ret.) James Jones set to report to Washington on the status of US-sponsored Palestinian security reforms. Importantly, his role in overseeing the implementation of both sides' first phase Road Map commitments appears to have been delimited by post-Annapolis discussions.
Bush has, perhaps intentionally, missed an opportunity to symbolically associate the US presidency with the restart of Palestinian-Israeli talks through failing to create a potential tie-in between his visit and a ceremony marking the resumption of full negotiations.
Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas agreed this week that negotiations on core issues would fall under the aegis of a central committee led by Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and former Palestinian premier Ahmed Qurei.
The move is important in that it may prevent the confusion of negotiating positions on key issues and the sending of mixed or contradictory signals by different elements within the Israeli and Palestinian negotiating teams, which bedeviled the 2000 talks and contributed significantly to their collapse.
The PA has won significant political capital in recent weeks, successfully bringing the subject of settlement construction within the Israeli-defined borders of Jerusalem to the agenda.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has criticized now stalled efforts to expand the Har Homa settlement south of Jerusalem, clarifying that the US sees the current Israeli settlement freeze as applying to all areas of the West Bank. Olmert was recently forced into a public reprimand of official efforts to promote a large-scale settlement project to the north of the city.
PA Premier Salam Fayad's government also scored a major coup in winning US$7.4 billion in international aid pledges last month in Paris, much of which will go to shoring up Fatah-controlled security forces and political patronage systems in the West Bank as the movement moves to counter Hamas.
Nonetheless, these limited successes are unlikely to bolster the Palestinian position in the talks themselves, where Israel continues to hold the best cards in the absence of significant international pressure.
Ongoing militant and Israeli attacks and an outbreak of Fatah-Hamas armed clashes in the Gaza Strip last week underline that the crucial decision that will ultimately determine the success or failure of any future peace pact has yet to be made: When the time comes, will the US and Israel accept a Fatah-Hamas detente and the latter's 10-year hudna (ceasefire) offer and abide Hamas' control of the Gaza Strip?
Dr Dominic Moran, based in Tel Aviv, is ISN Security Watch's senior correspondent in the Middle East and the Director of Operations of ISA Consulting.
The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author only, not the International Relations and Security Network (ISN).
"Suitcase Scandal" is Another U.S. Foreign Policy Blunder
January 11th 2008, by Mark Weisbrot - AlterNet
The now infamous "suitcase scandal" has deeply alienated the new Argentine government and is likely to further sully Washington's reputation in Latin America.
On December 20 the U.S. government indicted four Venezuelans and one Uruguayan for allegedly acting as foreign agents without notifying the U.S. government. The charges stem from an incident that occurred on August 4 when Guido Antonini Wilson, a Venezuelan/American with dual citizenship, was stopped at Argentine customs with about $800,000 cash in a suitcase.
The U.S. Justice Department alleges that the money was intended for the election campaign of Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, who was elected president of Argentina on October 28. Of course this would not violate U.S. law, even if it were true; nor would the Feds' charge that the money came from the Venezuelan government. What makes it a Federal case is the charge that the defendants, allegedly acting on behalf of the Venezuelan government, tried to convince Antonini to keep quiet about the alleged origin and destination of the money.
Thus the men are indicted for failing to notify the U.S. Attorney General that they were acting as agents of a foreign government (Venezuela).
The charges have deeply alienated the new Argentine government, which by all accounts was poised to increase its engagement with the United States. President Cristina Fernandez immediately dismissed them as "garbage," and her government accused Washington of using "dirty tricks" to intimidate her and attempt to drive a wedge between Argentina and Venezuela. Her husband, former president Nestor Kirchner, demanded that the U.S. surrender the fugitive Antonini, for whom the Argentine government has repeatedly sought extradition from the United States.
The case is clearly a major foreign policy blunder for the Bush Administration. There is no love lost in relations with Venezuela, which have been in the toilet since the Administration backed a failed military coup against President Hugo Chavez in 2002. But U.S.-Argentine relations have been cordial, despite the country's deep resentment of the Washington-run International Monetary Fund (IMF) for its role in Argentina's severe economic crisis (1998-2002), and were set to improve.
Not only Argentina, but most of the region, will likely see this prosecution as a gross political interference on the part of United States government in the internal affairs of its neighbors. No one will believe, nor should they, that it is merely a matter of "enforcing U.S. laws," as State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told the media.
Edmund McWilliams, a retired Senior Foreign Service Officer here in Washington, cited other cases where "the Justice Department subordinated the pursuit of justice to Administration foreign policy objectives." He noted that this prosecution "may have been at the instigation of the Administration itself."
It sure looks that way. There has never been an indictment under this law (18 USC § 951), or its accompanying conspiracy statute (18 USC § 371) - without there at least being another accusation involving some kind of alleged espionage, and some kind of potential U.S. national security issue. In this case, it is really only the failure to notify the Attorney General that is the basis of the alleged crime. And the case may be even weaker than that: almost all of the indictment is devoted to the conspiracy charge, which indicates that the government may not even have any real evidence that the defendants were acting under orders from the Venezuelan government.
This particular case also does not smell good on its merits. The star witness is the man with the suitcase (Antonini), who has not been charged. Since he is wanted for money laundering in Argentina, he might well see his current liberty as dependent on saying and doing whatever the U.S. government wants.
So far the prosecution hasn't released any evidence that either the Argentine government or the Venezuelan government were involved in whatever the bag man was doing with the cash. Other things do not add up: Cristina Kirchner had no serious electoral challenge (the second place finisher got 23 percent to her 45 percent). Why would she risk taking $800,000 from Venezuela? And why send a shady businessman from the U.S. through Argentine customs, when the cash could have been placed securely in a piece of Venezuelan diplomatic luggage, which by law cannot be searched?
The political decision to prosecute this case is just one more example of Washington's failed policies in Latin America, as it has repeatedly isolated itself by trying to isolate Venezuela from its neighbors. George W. Bush ran for President as "a uniter, not a divider." He continues to unite ever more of the world - against him.
Mark Weisbrot is Co-Director and co-founder of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. He received his Ph.D. in economics from the University of Michigan. He is co-author, with Dean Baker, of Social Security: The Phony Crisis (University of Chicago Press, 2000), and has written numerous research papers on economic policy. He is also president of Just Foreign Policy.
Colombian Hostages Reunited With Their Families In Venezuela
January 11th 2008, by Kiraz Janicke - Venezuelanalysis.com
Consuelo Gonzalez de Perdomo (left) and Clara Rojas (far right) with President Chavez at Miraflores (ABN) Caracas, January 10, 2008, (venezuelanalysis.com) - Two high profile hostages Clara Rojas and Consuelo Gonzalo de Perdomo, held by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) for years, were reunited with their families in an emotional welcome at the Simon Bolivar International Airport near Caracas at 4.30 Thursday afternoon - five hours after Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez announced their successful liberation.
Rojas, 44, presidential campaign coordinator of French-Colombian citizen Ingrid Betancourt - still held hostage - and Gonzalez de Perdomo, 59, a former legislator, first touched down in Venezuelan territory in the town of Santo Domingo at 3.30pm before they were quickly transferred to a Falcon executive jet bound for the Caracas.
Red Cross officials affirmed that both women appear to be in good health but will undergo a series of medical examinations in Caracas for a more detailed evaluation.
Venezuelan Foreign Minister Nicolas Maduro and National Assembly President Cilia Flores also welcomed the Rojas and Gonzales at the airport before the arrived at Miraflores Presidential Palace in Caracas where they were then received by President Chavez.
Early Thursday two Venezuelan helicopters arrived in the small town of San José del Guaviare in southeastern Colombia, then flew to a secret rendezvous point in the jungle. Colombian authorities granted a one-hour deadline to collect the hostages.
The Colombian government ordered all other flights over the region suspended and halted military operations in the area while the hostage release was taking place, officials said.
Latin American wide television channel Telesur released unedited footage of the hostage handover at the rendezvous point. Images showed Clara and Consuelo emotionally embracing Colombian Senator Piedad Cordoba, Venezuelan Minister for the Interior and Justice Ramón RodrÃguez ChacÃn, Cuban Ambassador to Venezuela, Germán Sánchez Otero, as well as members of the International Red Cross before conversing by telephone with the Venezuelan President.
"You are completely free now," Chavez told Rojas and Gonzalez.
"Thank you, President Chavez, we are profoundly emotional since we saw the helicopters. We are reborn," Rojas said.
"A thousand thanks, now and always" to all those who believed in the humanitarian mission, Rojas added. She also expressed her hope that the liberation of the all the hostages could be achieved.
Consuelo González de Perdomo said she did not know how to express her thanks to Chavez for his humanitarian gesture and asked Chavez to continue working until the other hostages were released. "Thank you to the Venezuelan people, and a thousand thanks to Senator Piedad Cordoba," she added.
Telesur revealed that along with the two hostages the FARC also released the proof of life of 16 other hostages including Guillermo Solórzano, Commander of the National Police of Colombia.
Speaking to VTV, Yolanda Pulecia, mother of Ingrid Betancourt, praised the "tenacity" of President Chavez and Senator Piedad Cordoba in their work to achieve the liberation of the hostages in exceptionally difficult circumstances.
A joint effort by Chavez and Cordoba to mediate the release of 47 hostages held by the FARC in exchange for 500 guerrilla fighters held in Colombian jails was abruptly terminated by Colombian President Uribe in November.
And an earlier international Venezuelan led mission at the end of 2007 failed after the FARC pulled out citing increased Colombian military activities, however it later emerged that they did not have one of the hostages, Emmanuel, son of Clara Rojas, and that he had been in the care of a foster home for over two years.
Consuelo Gonzalez de Perdomo (left) and Clara Rojas (far right) with President Chavez at Miraflores (ABN) Caracas, January 10, 2008, (venezuelanalysis.com) - Two high profile hostages Clara Rojas and Consuelo Gonzalo de Perdomo, held by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) for years, were reunited with their families in an emotional welcome at the Simon Bolivar International Airport near Caracas at 4.30 Thursday afternoon - five hours after Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez announced their successful liberation.
Rojas, 44, presidential campaign coordinator of French-Colombian citizen Ingrid Betancourt - still held hostage - and Gonzalez de Perdomo, 59, a former legislator, first touched down in Venezuelan territory in the town of Santo Domingo at 3.30pm before they were quickly transferred to a Falcon executive jet bound for the Caracas.
Red Cross officials affirmed that both women appear to be in good health but will undergo a series of medical examinations in Caracas for a more detailed evaluation.
Venezuelan Foreign Minister Nicolas Maduro and National Assembly President Cilia Flores also welcomed the Rojas and Gonzales at the airport before the arrived at Miraflores Presidential Palace in Caracas where they were then received by President Chavez.
Early Thursday two Venezuelan helicopters arrived in the small town of San José del Guaviare in southeastern Colombia, then flew to a secret rendezvous point in the jungle. Colombian authorities granted a one-hour deadline to collect the hostages.
The Colombian government ordered all other flights over the region suspended and halted military operations in the area while the hostage release was taking place, officials said.
Latin American wide television channel Telesur released unedited footage of the hostage handover at the rendezvous point. Images showed Clara and Consuelo emotionally embracing Colombian Senator Piedad Cordoba, Venezuelan Minister for the Interior and Justice Ramón RodrÃguez ChacÃn, Cuban Ambassador to Venezuela, Germán Sánchez Otero, as well as members of the International Red Cross before conversing by telephone with the Venezuelan President.
"You are completely free now," Chavez told Rojas and Gonzalez.
"Thank you, President Chavez, we are profoundly emotional since we saw the helicopters. We are reborn," Rojas said.
"A thousand thanks, now and always" to all those who believed in the humanitarian mission, Rojas added. She also expressed her hope that the liberation of the all the hostages could be achieved.
Consuelo González de Perdomo said she did not know how to express her thanks to Chavez for his humanitarian gesture and asked Chavez to continue working until the other hostages were released. "Thank you to the Venezuelan people, and a thousand thanks to Senator Piedad Cordoba," she added.
Telesur revealed that along with the two hostages the FARC also released the proof of life of 16 other hostages including Guillermo Solórzano, Commander of the National Police of Colombia.
Speaking to VTV, Yolanda Pulecia, mother of Ingrid Betancourt, praised the "tenacity" of President Chavez and Senator Piedad Cordoba in their work to achieve the liberation of the hostages in exceptionally difficult circumstances.
A joint effort by Chavez and Cordoba to mediate the release of 47 hostages held by the FARC in exchange for 500 guerrilla fighters held in Colombian jails was abruptly terminated by Colombian President Uribe in November.
And an earlier international Venezuelan led mission at the end of 2007 failed after the FARC pulled out citing increased Colombian military activities, however it later emerged that they did not have one of the hostages, Emmanuel, son of Clara Rojas, and that he had been in the care of a foster home for over two years.
IntelliBriefs Jargon : I2CAP Countries
I2CAP Countries = India,Iran ,China ,Afghanistan ,Pakistan
Recent RAND's report " Central Asia and Its Asian Neighbors Security and Commerce at the Crossroads" says India,Iran ,China ,Afghanistan ,Pakistan are critical Players in the Security and economic issues of CENTRAL ASIAN COUNTRIES . IntelliBriefs call these 5 countries as I2CAP countries .
Recent RAND's report " Central Asia and Its Asian Neighbors Security and Commerce at the Crossroads" says India,Iran ,China ,Afghanistan ,Pakistan are critical Players in the Security and economic issues of CENTRAL ASIAN COUNTRIES . IntelliBriefs call these 5 countries as I2CAP countries .
Cheney Plans Military Intervention into Pakistan
Jan. 6, 2008 (EIRNS)—Dick Cheney is pushing on the Bush Administration, the British line in favor of running covert intelligence and military operations in the tribal areas of Pakistan, now that the Pakistan Army has been softened up and Musharraf is threatened with his own assassination, according to a leak to the New York Times today, written by David Sanger, Steven Lee Myers, and Eric Schmitt. Cheney emerged from his undisclosed location on Friday to lord it over Condi Rice and George Bush, following the Bhutto assassination, calling for the intervention. National Security Adviser Steven Hadley, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen, and others were there, but Gates was "on vacation and did not attend the meeting," writes the Times.
The Times reports: "Several of the participants in the meeting argued that the threat to the government of President Pervez Musharraf was now so grave that both Mr. Musharraf and Pakistan's new military leadership were likely to give the U.S. more latitude, officials said." The Times says the White House expects that the new head of the Pakistani Army, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, "will be more sympathetic to the American position than Mr. Musharraf." Kayani is described as a former aide to Bhutto. A source is quoted: "After years of focusing on Afghanistan, we think the extremists now see a chance for the big prize—creating chaos in Pakistan itself."
State Department officials and U.S. diplomats in the region are said to oppose any further intervention than the current limited approval for attacks on Bin Laden or Zawahri, when sighted.
Interviewed by Iran's Press TV this morning, Musharraf's spokesman, Gen. Rashid Kareshi, rejected absolutely the announced U.S. intervention. "We reject any joint operations. The U.S. and NATO are responsible for operations in Afghanistan, and the Pakistan Army is responsible for operations in Pakistan—other than extensive intelligence sharing both ways." He also rejected "joint" control of the nuclear arsenal.
The Times reports: "Several of the participants in the meeting argued that the threat to the government of President Pervez Musharraf was now so grave that both Mr. Musharraf and Pakistan's new military leadership were likely to give the U.S. more latitude, officials said." The Times says the White House expects that the new head of the Pakistani Army, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, "will be more sympathetic to the American position than Mr. Musharraf." Kayani is described as a former aide to Bhutto. A source is quoted: "After years of focusing on Afghanistan, we think the extremists now see a chance for the big prize—creating chaos in Pakistan itself."
State Department officials and U.S. diplomats in the region are said to oppose any further intervention than the current limited approval for attacks on Bin Laden or Zawahri, when sighted.
Interviewed by Iran's Press TV this morning, Musharraf's spokesman, Gen. Rashid Kareshi, rejected absolutely the announced U.S. intervention. "We reject any joint operations. The U.S. and NATO are responsible for operations in Afghanistan, and the Pakistan Army is responsible for operations in Pakistan—other than extensive intelligence sharing both ways." He also rejected "joint" control of the nuclear arsenal.
Invitation to Terror -- Frank Furedi
Institute of Ideas - London
Battle of Ideas: Terrorism with discussant
Frank Furedi at the 2007 Battle of Ideas
conference hosted by the Institute of Ideas.
Launching his new book Invitation to Terror at the Battle of Ideas, Frank Furedi calls for a fundamental reorientation of the way that terrorism and global threats are conceptualised. He will argue that the impact of terrorism depends entirely on how society responds to it. Terrorism is a problem, but it is a threat whose source lies in the midst of our culture rather than in the hills of Afghanistan or the slums of Baghdad. Furedi's argument is that risk-averse Western attitudes represent an invitation to risk-taking 'fear entrepreneurs', who are able to take advantage of Western fears with minimal effort. Invitation To Terror shows how the events of 9/11 and the subsequent conflict both express and give shape to society's crisis of meaning and lack of purpose - IoI
Battle of Ideas: Terrorism with discussant
Frank Furedi at the 2007 Battle of Ideas
conference hosted by the Institute of Ideas.
Launching his new book Invitation to Terror at the Battle of Ideas, Frank Furedi calls for a fundamental reorientation of the way that terrorism and global threats are conceptualised. He will argue that the impact of terrorism depends entirely on how society responds to it. Terrorism is a problem, but it is a threat whose source lies in the midst of our culture rather than in the hills of Afghanistan or the slums of Baghdad. Furedi's argument is that risk-averse Western attitudes represent an invitation to risk-taking 'fear entrepreneurs', who are able to take advantage of Western fears with minimal effort. Invitation To Terror shows how the events of 9/11 and the subsequent conflict both express and give shape to society's crisis of meaning and lack of purpose - IoI
CENTRAL ASIA : Security and Commerce at the Crossroads
INTELLIBRIEFS:
I2CAP = India,Iran ,China ,Afghanistan ,Pakistan
I2CAP are critical players in the security and economic issues of CENTRAL ASIAN COUNTRIES with stable Afghanistan acting as Pivot country
_________
SOURCE: RAND
Central Asia and Its Asian Neighbors Security and Commerce at the Crossroads
By: Rollie Lal
The Asian states neighboring Central Asia have historic links and strong interests in the region. China, Iran, Afghanistan, India, and Pakistan are critical players in the security and economic issues that will determine the future of Central Asia and affect U.S. interests in the region. Although these Asian states do not agree on how to secure Afghanistan against threats, there is unanimous agreement that a stable Afghanistan is critical to their own security interests. By assessing the developing relations between Central Asia and its Asian neighbors, it is evident that each country stands to benefit from stability and economic growth in Central Asia, but opinion toward U.S. presence and policy in the region could be a point of conflict. The purpose of this monograph is to provide an assessment of the nature of Asian states’ interest and influence in Central Asia in order to determine the development of these relationships and how they will shape strategic dynamics of Asia in the coming years.
DOWNLOAD
Excerpts
ROLE OF US IN CENTRAL ASIA
INDIA
India views a continued role for the United States in the region as positive for its interests. The continued existence of terrorist groups and drug trafficking in Afghanistan and Pakistan remains a primary concern for India, and it seeks help from the United States in stabilizing Afghanistan and securing the region against terrorist groups. To date, there has been little clear cooperation in Central Asia between the United States and India, and this may be an area in which to explore the possibility of greater coordination. Cooperation could draw upon common interests in the region in countering terrorist groups, stemming drug trafficking, and promoting democracy and stability.
PAKISTAN
A continued U.S. presence in Central Asia presents domestic complications for Pakistan. U.S. forces active on the Afghan-Pakistan border have been forced, on occasion, to enter Pakistan to pursue militants, causing uproar in Pakistan over national sovereignty.20 The government of Pakistan is under domestic pressure to limit its cooperation with the United States in pursuing Taliban and other militants in the area, and there is considerable support from the leaders and public in the Pakistan’s NWFP and Baluchistan for the Taliban.21 Insofar as Pakistan is successful in reigning in extremist groups and activities in Pakistan and Afghanistan, relations between Pakistan and the countries of Central Asia may see improvement. If, however, the situation in Pakistan worsens, Central Asian states will view Pakistan as an increasing
threat.
IRAN
U.S. involvement in Central Asia complicates Iran’s dealings with other countries in the region, leading some to note with concern that close ties with Iran might alienate the United States, even as they recognize the need for peaceful and positive relations with this neighbor. The Central Asian states are apprehensive that tensions between the United States and Iran could eventually escalate, thereby destabilizing the entire region. The evolving situation in Afghanistan also remains a vital interest for Iran, and it has expressed concern that the conflict
in Iraq will draw international attention and resources away from stabilizing and securing Afghanistan. However, Iranian officials oppose a sustained U.S. military presence in the region, particularly U.S. bases in Central Asia and Afghanistan. Iranian officials are apprehensive
that the United States intends to maintain hegemony and inhibit Ira- nian interests in the region.26 Nonetheless, there is no evidence that Iran is making efforts to counter U.S. activities in Central Asia.
___________________
The Asian countries bordering Central Asia have distinct and growing interests in the region. For most states, regional security and economic ties form the central issues of interest. Trade across the region, in the energy sector and otherwise, is difficult if not impossible without
stability and development. Regional organizations such as the SCO could have a role in promoting these common objectives. However, not all of the interested parties have the same perspective or approach to addressing regional security, weakening the effectiveness of
organizations such as the SCO.
China would like to have broader influence in Central Asia, both economically and in security matters. Trade is growing rapidly between China and the states of Central Asia, and China is pursuing energy ties aggressively. Concerns regarding Uighur separatists have driven China to support aggressive policies against militants and to develop cooperative security relationships with the Central Asian states. Chinese apprehension regarding U.S. presence in Central Asia
provides yet more incentives for China to strengthen regional security cooperation through the SCO.
India also seeks to build a relationship with the Central Asian states, but its security focus in doing so has far more to do with counterterrorism efforts than with seeking local hegemony. India’s concerns revolve around the possible resurgence of the Taliban and other militant groups that pose a direct security threat. As most transport routes to the region traverse Afghanistan, for India, a stable Afghanistan is also critical to expanding economic ties with Central Asia. In contrast, Pakistan remains a smaller player in Central Asia, as suspicion toward its role in supporting regional Islamic militants remains throughout the region. Nonetheless, Pakistan is working toward greater economic ties with the region.
Iran’s interests are largely economic in nature. While it, like India, China, and Russia, has been building security relationships with these countries, Iran’s primary focus now appears to be in expanding trade, transport, and energy links with the region. A stable Afghanistan is required for Iran to have a productive relationship with the region. However, Iran also has concerns that U.S. military presence in the region could be aimed at containing Iran, or worse. Friends, allies, and others have watched the recent development of U.S. security ties with the Central Asian states with significant concern and some trepidation. All are curious if the United States
does, indeed, intend a long-term presence in the region, and wonder not only what this means for the region’s future, but also what it indicates about U.S. global policy.
Thus, U.S. actions have enormous potential to shape the future of foreign involvement. While other neighbors and interested parties are concerned about U.S. “neo-imperialism,” they also recognize that the United States can deliver more of the stability everyone seeks for the region than can any other actor. The question is whether it plans to take on that role, and, if so, with what long-term purpose in mind.The solution may well be that the United States must lead with transparency and cooperation, working with India and China (and even, insofar as it is possible, Iran) so as to better leverage and better understand the efforts of others. This would also serve to assuage some aspects of concern in Asia about U.S. policies and it would help demonstrate to the countries of Central Asia that seeking the United States as a patron is far less effective than building friendly and balanced ties with a broad range of interested nations.
I2CAP = India,Iran ,China ,Afghanistan ,Pakistan
I2CAP are critical players in the security and economic issues of CENTRAL ASIAN COUNTRIES with stable Afghanistan acting as Pivot country
_________
SOURCE: RAND
Central Asia and Its Asian Neighbors Security and Commerce at the Crossroads
By: Rollie Lal
The Asian states neighboring Central Asia have historic links and strong interests in the region. China, Iran, Afghanistan, India, and Pakistan are critical players in the security and economic issues that will determine the future of Central Asia and affect U.S. interests in the region. Although these Asian states do not agree on how to secure Afghanistan against threats, there is unanimous agreement that a stable Afghanistan is critical to their own security interests. By assessing the developing relations between Central Asia and its Asian neighbors, it is evident that each country stands to benefit from stability and economic growth in Central Asia, but opinion toward U.S. presence and policy in the region could be a point of conflict. The purpose of this monograph is to provide an assessment of the nature of Asian states’ interest and influence in Central Asia in order to determine the development of these relationships and how they will shape strategic dynamics of Asia in the coming years.
DOWNLOAD
Excerpts
ROLE OF US IN CENTRAL ASIA
INDIA
India views a continued role for the United States in the region as positive for its interests. The continued existence of terrorist groups and drug trafficking in Afghanistan and Pakistan remains a primary concern for India, and it seeks help from the United States in stabilizing Afghanistan and securing the region against terrorist groups. To date, there has been little clear cooperation in Central Asia between the United States and India, and this may be an area in which to explore the possibility of greater coordination. Cooperation could draw upon common interests in the region in countering terrorist groups, stemming drug trafficking, and promoting democracy and stability.
PAKISTAN
A continued U.S. presence in Central Asia presents domestic complications for Pakistan. U.S. forces active on the Afghan-Pakistan border have been forced, on occasion, to enter Pakistan to pursue militants, causing uproar in Pakistan over national sovereignty.20 The government of Pakistan is under domestic pressure to limit its cooperation with the United States in pursuing Taliban and other militants in the area, and there is considerable support from the leaders and public in the Pakistan’s NWFP and Baluchistan for the Taliban.21 Insofar as Pakistan is successful in reigning in extremist groups and activities in Pakistan and Afghanistan, relations between Pakistan and the countries of Central Asia may see improvement. If, however, the situation in Pakistan worsens, Central Asian states will view Pakistan as an increasing
threat.
IRAN
U.S. involvement in Central Asia complicates Iran’s dealings with other countries in the region, leading some to note with concern that close ties with Iran might alienate the United States, even as they recognize the need for peaceful and positive relations with this neighbor. The Central Asian states are apprehensive that tensions between the United States and Iran could eventually escalate, thereby destabilizing the entire region. The evolving situation in Afghanistan also remains a vital interest for Iran, and it has expressed concern that the conflict
in Iraq will draw international attention and resources away from stabilizing and securing Afghanistan. However, Iranian officials oppose a sustained U.S. military presence in the region, particularly U.S. bases in Central Asia and Afghanistan. Iranian officials are apprehensive
that the United States intends to maintain hegemony and inhibit Ira- nian interests in the region.26 Nonetheless, there is no evidence that Iran is making efforts to counter U.S. activities in Central Asia.
___________________
The Asian countries bordering Central Asia have distinct and growing interests in the region. For most states, regional security and economic ties form the central issues of interest. Trade across the region, in the energy sector and otherwise, is difficult if not impossible without
stability and development. Regional organizations such as the SCO could have a role in promoting these common objectives. However, not all of the interested parties have the same perspective or approach to addressing regional security, weakening the effectiveness of
organizations such as the SCO.
China would like to have broader influence in Central Asia, both economically and in security matters. Trade is growing rapidly between China and the states of Central Asia, and China is pursuing energy ties aggressively. Concerns regarding Uighur separatists have driven China to support aggressive policies against militants and to develop cooperative security relationships with the Central Asian states. Chinese apprehension regarding U.S. presence in Central Asia
provides yet more incentives for China to strengthen regional security cooperation through the SCO.
India also seeks to build a relationship with the Central Asian states, but its security focus in doing so has far more to do with counterterrorism efforts than with seeking local hegemony. India’s concerns revolve around the possible resurgence of the Taliban and other militant groups that pose a direct security threat. As most transport routes to the region traverse Afghanistan, for India, a stable Afghanistan is also critical to expanding economic ties with Central Asia. In contrast, Pakistan remains a smaller player in Central Asia, as suspicion toward its role in supporting regional Islamic militants remains throughout the region. Nonetheless, Pakistan is working toward greater economic ties with the region.
Iran’s interests are largely economic in nature. While it, like India, China, and Russia, has been building security relationships with these countries, Iran’s primary focus now appears to be in expanding trade, transport, and energy links with the region. A stable Afghanistan is required for Iran to have a productive relationship with the region. However, Iran also has concerns that U.S. military presence in the region could be aimed at containing Iran, or worse. Friends, allies, and others have watched the recent development of U.S. security ties with the Central Asian states with significant concern and some trepidation. All are curious if the United States
does, indeed, intend a long-term presence in the region, and wonder not only what this means for the region’s future, but also what it indicates about U.S. global policy.
Thus, U.S. actions have enormous potential to shape the future of foreign involvement. While other neighbors and interested parties are concerned about U.S. “neo-imperialism,” they also recognize that the United States can deliver more of the stability everyone seeks for the region than can any other actor. The question is whether it plans to take on that role, and, if so, with what long-term purpose in mind.The solution may well be that the United States must lead with transparency and cooperation, working with India and China (and even, insofar as it is possible, Iran) so as to better leverage and better understand the efforts of others. This would also serve to assuage some aspects of concern in Asia about U.S. policies and it would help demonstrate to the countries of Central Asia that seeking the United States as a patron is far less effective than building friendly and balanced ties with a broad range of interested nations.
PICTURE OF THE DAY : Lady dancer of Punjab ,India
A pretty lady dancer from Punjab Province of India, waiting for her turn to perform at the Surajkund Craft Mela at Faridabad, near Delhi.
Source: Flickr
Source: Flickr
Annual Forecast 2008: Beyond the Jihadist War -- South Asia
Source: STRATFOR
January 8, 2008 | 1803 GMT
Pakistan ended 2007 with the assassination of opposition leader Benazir Bhutto on Dec. 27. Though it is not clear who ultimately ordered the assassination or what they hoped to achieve, the result injected a huge amount of passion and uncertainty into a situation that already stretched the definition of “chaotic.”
In 2008 Stratfor expects the Pakistani army — which is to say, the Pakistani state — to hold together, but just. Political power within the army and governing institutions has become more diffuse as President Pervez Musharraf’s grip has slackened, and Bhutto’s assassination has upended many agreements to share power. With those deals up in the air, Pakistan’s many factions — within and beyond the military — are now competing with each other with few established points of reference.
Yet most of this is simply the sound and fury of internal maneuvering; ultimately, military commanders know that they are the true rulers of Pakistan no matter what elections produce and realize that, should they fall too deeply into infighting, they are only hurting themselves. It will likely take months for this realization to sink in — although general elections currently scheduled for Feb. 18 will serve as an excellent splash of cold water — and the political chaos of 2008 will make 2007 seem orderly in comparison. The United States, of course, stands ready to back nearly whatever actions the military deems necessary to ensure order — if for no other reason than to ensure that the Pakistani military continues to act against the jihadists.
Pakistan’s problems will really only manifest geopolitically where they intersect those anti-jihadist efforts. Though al Qaeda and its allies no longer constitute a strategic threat to the United States, they are a very real and present danger in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Confusion and distractions in Islamabad will greatly reduce the Pakistani government’s ability (and willingness) to rein in those jihadists — especially in concert with American forces. We expect the situation to degrade particularly quickly and deeply in Pakistan’s northwest. Increasing political unrest and instability in Islamabad could lead to the Pashtun regions becoming ungovernable in this coming year.
Beyond Pakistan, the rest of South Asia is obsessed with domestic issues. An upsurge in Sri Lanka’s Tamil insurgency will generate paralysis while Nepal’s Maoist movement — still limping toward the murky world of coalition government — will provide enough ebb and flow to utterly consume any spare bandwidth in Kathmandu. Hotly contested elections in Bangladesh will simply mark the newest chapter in a generation-old power struggle between equally corrupt forces. There will be few changes on the ground in Afghanistan where a resurgent Taliban and a reinforced NATO — while fighting harder than ever — appear positioned to continue the stalemate of the last few years. While there will certainly be successes and failures on both sides, the Taliban is not in a position to drive NATO from the country this year — or likely in 2009. But neither is NATO in a position to impose a military solution of its own.
India will face more international complications than the other South Asian states. New Delhi already faces major problems in its failure to stem insurgent traffic coming in from its border with Bangladesh. With Pakistan in spasms, militants operating along the Indian-Pakistani border will more firmly coalesce under the jihadist umbrella, making the Indian-Pakistani border in the Kashmir region more volatile and thus increasing the ability of Islamist militants to carry out attacks in major Indian cities. The bulk of these attacks are likely to remain focused on triggering and exacerbating communal riots between Hindus and Muslims.
Yet India’s foreign agenda will be held hostage by preparations for another round of elections. The Indian government (currently led by the Congress Party) wants to approve a nuclear agreement with the United States in order to strengthen long-term economic and strategic opportunities.
This is being sabotaged not only by the opposition (currently the Bharatiya Janata Party, whose Hindu nationalist efforts are likely to foment many riots in 2008), but also by leftist elements within the governing coalition. Russia will attempt to capitalize on the government’s failed realignment and reinsert itself into Indian politics, but while the government’s unity is weak enough to not orient toward Washington, it also is strong enough to resist the Russian lure. India, strategically, will stall.
And it may well stall economically as well. In 2007 India experienced myriad economic problems as everything from domestic politics to militants to power outages seemingly took aim at foreign investments. Investors have begun to realize that the miracle of Bangalore is not being repeated elsewhere in the country, even as rising corruption and insufficient infrastructure began to take the shine off of Bangalore.
Despite much talk of “Shining India,” the national, regional and local governments have yet to even begin basic work on battling corruption, coordinating regulations, containing militancy and building infrastructure. In an election year, the ruling government will be even more gridlocked between populist and business interests as the issue of land appropriation for special economic zones continues to flare. The result is that the swarm of investors that has approached India in years past with the hope of using a toehold in one region to launch into others will see its optimism die. The realization is sinking in that doing business in India could be more trouble than it is worth, and 2008 will be the year that foreign direct investment — and with it, India’s hopes of advancing economically — gets a rude reality check.
Annual Forecast 2008: Beyond the Jihadist War
By George Friedman
Editor’s Note: This week’s Geopolitical Intelligence Report is the introduction to Stratfor’s Annual Forecast for 2008. Following the introduction are links to each regional section of the 35-page forecast. We’ve also created a report card of our 2007 forecasts highlighting where we were right and where we were wrong.
There are three major global processes under way that will continue to work themselves out in 2008. First, the U.S.-jihadist war is entering its final phase; the destruction of al Qaeda’s strategic capabilities now allows the United States to shift its posture — which includes leveraging the Sunni world to finish the job begun in Iraq — and enables Washington to begin drawing down its Middle Eastern forces. Second, an assertive Russia is re-emerging and taking advantage of the imbalance in U.S. power resulting from the war. Third, oil at historical highs and continued Asian — particularly Chinese — exports have created a massive redistribution of financial might that is reshaping the international financial architecture. These processes intersect with each other, as well as with a fourth phenomenon: It is a presidential election year in the United States, which remains the center of gravity of the international system. These are the trends tha t shape our global forecast.
Normally in an election year, U.S. attention on global affairs dwindles precipitously, allowing other powers to set the agenda. That will not be the case, however, in 2008. U.S. President George W. Bush is not up for re-election, and there is no would-be successor from the administration in the race; this frees up all of the administration’s bandwidth for whatever activities it wishes. Additionally, Bush’s unpopularity means that each of the White House’s domestic initiatives essentially will be dead on arrival in Congress. All of the Bush administration’s energy will instead be focused on foreign affairs, since such activities do not require public or congressional approval. Contrary to the conventional wisdom, 2008 will see the United States acting with the most energy and purpose it has had since the months directly after the 9/11 attack.
Such energy is not simply a result of this odd hiccup in the American political system but of a major shift in circumstance on the issue that has monopolized American foreign policy efforts since 2003: Iraq. The Iraq war was an outgrowth of the jihadist war. After the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, the United States realized it lacked the military wherewithal to simultaneously deal with the four powers that made al Qaeda possible: Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran and Pakistan. The first phase of the Bush solution was to procure an anchor against Afghanistan by forcing Pakistan into an alliance. The second was to invade the state that bordered the other three — Iraq — in order to intimidate the remaining trio into cooperating against al Qaeda. The final stage was to press both wars until al Qaeda — the core organization that launched the 9/11 attack and sought the creation of a pan-Islamic caliphate, not the myriad local extremists who later adopted its name ̵ 2; broke.
As 2008 dawns, it has become apparent that though this strategy engendered many unforeseen costs, it has proven successful at grinding al Qaeda into nonfunctionality. Put simply, the jihadist war is all but over; the United States not only is winning but also has an alliance with the entire constellation of Sunni powers that made al Qaeda possible in the first place. The United States will attempt to use this alliance to pressure the remnants of al Qaeda and its allies, as well as those in the region who are not in the alliance.
This leaves Iran, the region’s only non-Sunni power, in the uncomfortable position of needing to seek an arrangement with the United States. The year 2008 will still be about Iraq — but in a different way. Iran cares deeply about the final status of Iraq, since every united Mesopotamian government has at some point in its history attempted a Persian invasion. Yet for the United States, the details of intra-Iraqi negotiations and security in Iraqi cities now are irrelevant to its geopolitical concerns. Washington does not care what Iraq looks like, so long as the Sunni jihadists or Tehran do not attain ultimate control — and evolutions in 2007 have made both scenarios impossible in 2008.
Iran recognizes this, and as a result Washington and Tehran are ever less tentatively edging toward a deal. It is in this context — as an element of talks with Iran — that Iraq still matters to Washington, and this is now the primary rationale for continued involvement in Iraq. The United States will not completely withdraw from Iraq in 2008 — indeed, it likely will have 100,000 troops on the ground when Bush leaves office — but this will be the year in which the mission evolves from tactical overwatch to strategic overwatch. (Roughly translated from military lingo, this means shifting from patrolling the cities in order to enforce the peace to hunkering in the desert in order to ensure that Iran does not try to seize Iraq and the Arabian Peninsula beyond.)
In the aftermath of the November 2007 Annapolis, Md., conference and the declassification of a National Intelligence Estimate on the nonexistence of the Iranian nuclear program, the ball is in the Iranians’ court. A U.S.-Iranian deal — no matter how beneficial it would be for both states — is not inevitable. But Stratfor finds it unlikely that Tehran would choose strategic confrontation with both the United States and the Arab world when the benefits of cooperation — and the penalties for hostility — are so potent. A framework for future relations, as well as for co-dominion of Iraq, is likely to emerge in 2008.
Still, frameworks come slowly, and crafting such a framework will require the bulk of American forces currently in Iraq to remain there for most of the year. The United States will draw forces down and eventually regain its bandwidth for other operations, but 2008 will not be the year that the United States returns to policing the world on a global scale. And considering the still-mounting costs of regenerating military capabilities after six years of conflict, manpower expansion and acquisitions, such force recovery might not even occur in 2009. The United States could have more energy and political freedom to act, but military realities will anchor the lion’s share of Washington’s attention on the Middle East for — at the very least — the year to come. And Afghanistan, and therefore Pakistan, will have to be dealt with, regardless of what happens in Iraq.
This means 2008 will be similar to 2007 in many ways: It will be a year of opportunity for those powers that would take advantage of the United States’ ongoing distraction. However, they will face a complication that was absent in 2007: a deadline. The Iraqi logjam is broken. Unlike in 2007, when Iraq appeared to be a quagmire and other powers therefore sensed endless opportunity, those hostile to U.S. interests realize that they only have a limited window in which to reshape their regions. Granted, this window will not close in 2008, since the United States will need to not only withdraw from Iraq but also rest and restructure its forces; but the United States no longer is mired in an open-ended conflict.
The state with the greatest need to take advantage of this U.S. occupation, bar none, is the Russian Federation. Moscow knows full well that when the Americans are finished with their efforts in the Middle East, the bulk of their attention will return to the former Soviet Union. When that happens, Russia will face a resurgent United States that commands alliances in Asia, Europe and the Middle East. Russia must use the ongoing U.S. entanglement in the Middle East to redefine its immediate neighborhood or risk a developing geopolitic far less benign to Russian interests than Washington’s Cold War policy of containment. Russia needs to move — and it needs to move now.
And there are a host of secondary powers that will be interacting within the matrix of American actions in 2008. Some — such as Syria and Saudi Arabia — want to be included in the U.S. Iraqi calculus and will have their chance. Others — namely South Korea, Taiwan, Australia and Japan — are looking for new ways to work with Washington as they adapt to their own domestic government transitions. All of Europe is shifting back to a power structure that has been absent for two generations: the concert of powers, with all of the instability and mistrust that implies.
Others will be pursuing bold agendas, not because of the United States’ distraction but because they are rising to prominence in their own right. Angola will rise as a major African power to rival South Africa and Nigeria. Brazil will lay the groundwork for reasserting its long-dormant role as a South American superpower. Turkey — now the strongest it has been in a century — will re-emerge as a major geopolitical weight in the eastern Mediterranean, albeit one that is somewhat confused about its priorities.
Quietly developing in the background, the global economy is undergoing a no less dramatic transformation. While we expect oil prices to retreat somewhat in 2008 after years of surges, their sustained strength continues to shove a great deal of cash into the hands of the world’s oil exporters — cash that these countries cannot process internally and that therefore will either be stored in dollars or invested in the only country with deep enough capital pools to handle it: the United States. Add in the torrent of exports from the Asian states, which generates nearly identical cash-management problems, and the result is a deep dollarization of the global system even as the U.S. dollar gives ground. The talk on the financial pages will be of dollar (implying American) weakness, even as the currency steadily shifts from the one of first resort to the true foundation of the entire system.
This will be a year in which the United States achieves more success in its foreign policies than it has since the ousting of the Taliban from Afghanistan in late 2001. But the actions of others — most notably a rising Russia — rather than U.S. achievements will determine the tenor and fury of the next major global clash.
January 8, 2008 | 1803 GMT
Pakistan ended 2007 with the assassination of opposition leader Benazir Bhutto on Dec. 27. Though it is not clear who ultimately ordered the assassination or what they hoped to achieve, the result injected a huge amount of passion and uncertainty into a situation that already stretched the definition of “chaotic.”
In 2008 Stratfor expects the Pakistani army — which is to say, the Pakistani state — to hold together, but just. Political power within the army and governing institutions has become more diffuse as President Pervez Musharraf’s grip has slackened, and Bhutto’s assassination has upended many agreements to share power. With those deals up in the air, Pakistan’s many factions — within and beyond the military — are now competing with each other with few established points of reference.
Yet most of this is simply the sound and fury of internal maneuvering; ultimately, military commanders know that they are the true rulers of Pakistan no matter what elections produce and realize that, should they fall too deeply into infighting, they are only hurting themselves. It will likely take months for this realization to sink in — although general elections currently scheduled for Feb. 18 will serve as an excellent splash of cold water — and the political chaos of 2008 will make 2007 seem orderly in comparison. The United States, of course, stands ready to back nearly whatever actions the military deems necessary to ensure order — if for no other reason than to ensure that the Pakistani military continues to act against the jihadists.
Pakistan’s problems will really only manifest geopolitically where they intersect those anti-jihadist efforts. Though al Qaeda and its allies no longer constitute a strategic threat to the United States, they are a very real and present danger in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Confusion and distractions in Islamabad will greatly reduce the Pakistani government’s ability (and willingness) to rein in those jihadists — especially in concert with American forces. We expect the situation to degrade particularly quickly and deeply in Pakistan’s northwest. Increasing political unrest and instability in Islamabad could lead to the Pashtun regions becoming ungovernable in this coming year.
Beyond Pakistan, the rest of South Asia is obsessed with domestic issues. An upsurge in Sri Lanka’s Tamil insurgency will generate paralysis while Nepal’s Maoist movement — still limping toward the murky world of coalition government — will provide enough ebb and flow to utterly consume any spare bandwidth in Kathmandu. Hotly contested elections in Bangladesh will simply mark the newest chapter in a generation-old power struggle between equally corrupt forces. There will be few changes on the ground in Afghanistan where a resurgent Taliban and a reinforced NATO — while fighting harder than ever — appear positioned to continue the stalemate of the last few years. While there will certainly be successes and failures on both sides, the Taliban is not in a position to drive NATO from the country this year — or likely in 2009. But neither is NATO in a position to impose a military solution of its own.
India will face more international complications than the other South Asian states. New Delhi already faces major problems in its failure to stem insurgent traffic coming in from its border with Bangladesh. With Pakistan in spasms, militants operating along the Indian-Pakistani border will more firmly coalesce under the jihadist umbrella, making the Indian-Pakistani border in the Kashmir region more volatile and thus increasing the ability of Islamist militants to carry out attacks in major Indian cities. The bulk of these attacks are likely to remain focused on triggering and exacerbating communal riots between Hindus and Muslims.
Yet India’s foreign agenda will be held hostage by preparations for another round of elections. The Indian government (currently led by the Congress Party) wants to approve a nuclear agreement with the United States in order to strengthen long-term economic and strategic opportunities.
This is being sabotaged not only by the opposition (currently the Bharatiya Janata Party, whose Hindu nationalist efforts are likely to foment many riots in 2008), but also by leftist elements within the governing coalition. Russia will attempt to capitalize on the government’s failed realignment and reinsert itself into Indian politics, but while the government’s unity is weak enough to not orient toward Washington, it also is strong enough to resist the Russian lure. India, strategically, will stall.
And it may well stall economically as well. In 2007 India experienced myriad economic problems as everything from domestic politics to militants to power outages seemingly took aim at foreign investments. Investors have begun to realize that the miracle of Bangalore is not being repeated elsewhere in the country, even as rising corruption and insufficient infrastructure began to take the shine off of Bangalore.
Despite much talk of “Shining India,” the national, regional and local governments have yet to even begin basic work on battling corruption, coordinating regulations, containing militancy and building infrastructure. In an election year, the ruling government will be even more gridlocked between populist and business interests as the issue of land appropriation for special economic zones continues to flare. The result is that the swarm of investors that has approached India in years past with the hope of using a toehold in one region to launch into others will see its optimism die. The realization is sinking in that doing business in India could be more trouble than it is worth, and 2008 will be the year that foreign direct investment — and with it, India’s hopes of advancing economically — gets a rude reality check.
Annual Forecast 2008: Beyond the Jihadist War
By George Friedman
Editor’s Note: This week’s Geopolitical Intelligence Report is the introduction to Stratfor’s Annual Forecast for 2008. Following the introduction are links to each regional section of the 35-page forecast. We’ve also created a report card of our 2007 forecasts highlighting where we were right and where we were wrong.
There are three major global processes under way that will continue to work themselves out in 2008. First, the U.S.-jihadist war is entering its final phase; the destruction of al Qaeda’s strategic capabilities now allows the United States to shift its posture — which includes leveraging the Sunni world to finish the job begun in Iraq — and enables Washington to begin drawing down its Middle Eastern forces. Second, an assertive Russia is re-emerging and taking advantage of the imbalance in U.S. power resulting from the war. Third, oil at historical highs and continued Asian — particularly Chinese — exports have created a massive redistribution of financial might that is reshaping the international financial architecture. These processes intersect with each other, as well as with a fourth phenomenon: It is a presidential election year in the United States, which remains the center of gravity of the international system. These are the trends tha t shape our global forecast.
Normally in an election year, U.S. attention on global affairs dwindles precipitously, allowing other powers to set the agenda. That will not be the case, however, in 2008. U.S. President George W. Bush is not up for re-election, and there is no would-be successor from the administration in the race; this frees up all of the administration’s bandwidth for whatever activities it wishes. Additionally, Bush’s unpopularity means that each of the White House’s domestic initiatives essentially will be dead on arrival in Congress. All of the Bush administration’s energy will instead be focused on foreign affairs, since such activities do not require public or congressional approval. Contrary to the conventional wisdom, 2008 will see the United States acting with the most energy and purpose it has had since the months directly after the 9/11 attack.
Such energy is not simply a result of this odd hiccup in the American political system but of a major shift in circumstance on the issue that has monopolized American foreign policy efforts since 2003: Iraq. The Iraq war was an outgrowth of the jihadist war. After the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, the United States realized it lacked the military wherewithal to simultaneously deal with the four powers that made al Qaeda possible: Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran and Pakistan. The first phase of the Bush solution was to procure an anchor against Afghanistan by forcing Pakistan into an alliance. The second was to invade the state that bordered the other three — Iraq — in order to intimidate the remaining trio into cooperating against al Qaeda. The final stage was to press both wars until al Qaeda — the core organization that launched the 9/11 attack and sought the creation of a pan-Islamic caliphate, not the myriad local extremists who later adopted its name ̵ 2; broke.
As 2008 dawns, it has become apparent that though this strategy engendered many unforeseen costs, it has proven successful at grinding al Qaeda into nonfunctionality. Put simply, the jihadist war is all but over; the United States not only is winning but also has an alliance with the entire constellation of Sunni powers that made al Qaeda possible in the first place. The United States will attempt to use this alliance to pressure the remnants of al Qaeda and its allies, as well as those in the region who are not in the alliance.
This leaves Iran, the region’s only non-Sunni power, in the uncomfortable position of needing to seek an arrangement with the United States. The year 2008 will still be about Iraq — but in a different way. Iran cares deeply about the final status of Iraq, since every united Mesopotamian government has at some point in its history attempted a Persian invasion. Yet for the United States, the details of intra-Iraqi negotiations and security in Iraqi cities now are irrelevant to its geopolitical concerns. Washington does not care what Iraq looks like, so long as the Sunni jihadists or Tehran do not attain ultimate control — and evolutions in 2007 have made both scenarios impossible in 2008.
Iran recognizes this, and as a result Washington and Tehran are ever less tentatively edging toward a deal. It is in this context — as an element of talks with Iran — that Iraq still matters to Washington, and this is now the primary rationale for continued involvement in Iraq. The United States will not completely withdraw from Iraq in 2008 — indeed, it likely will have 100,000 troops on the ground when Bush leaves office — but this will be the year in which the mission evolves from tactical overwatch to strategic overwatch. (Roughly translated from military lingo, this means shifting from patrolling the cities in order to enforce the peace to hunkering in the desert in order to ensure that Iran does not try to seize Iraq and the Arabian Peninsula beyond.)
In the aftermath of the November 2007 Annapolis, Md., conference and the declassification of a National Intelligence Estimate on the nonexistence of the Iranian nuclear program, the ball is in the Iranians’ court. A U.S.-Iranian deal — no matter how beneficial it would be for both states — is not inevitable. But Stratfor finds it unlikely that Tehran would choose strategic confrontation with both the United States and the Arab world when the benefits of cooperation — and the penalties for hostility — are so potent. A framework for future relations, as well as for co-dominion of Iraq, is likely to emerge in 2008.
Still, frameworks come slowly, and crafting such a framework will require the bulk of American forces currently in Iraq to remain there for most of the year. The United States will draw forces down and eventually regain its bandwidth for other operations, but 2008 will not be the year that the United States returns to policing the world on a global scale. And considering the still-mounting costs of regenerating military capabilities after six years of conflict, manpower expansion and acquisitions, such force recovery might not even occur in 2009. The United States could have more energy and political freedom to act, but military realities will anchor the lion’s share of Washington’s attention on the Middle East for — at the very least — the year to come. And Afghanistan, and therefore Pakistan, will have to be dealt with, regardless of what happens in Iraq.
This means 2008 will be similar to 2007 in many ways: It will be a year of opportunity for those powers that would take advantage of the United States’ ongoing distraction. However, they will face a complication that was absent in 2007: a deadline. The Iraqi logjam is broken. Unlike in 2007, when Iraq appeared to be a quagmire and other powers therefore sensed endless opportunity, those hostile to U.S. interests realize that they only have a limited window in which to reshape their regions. Granted, this window will not close in 2008, since the United States will need to not only withdraw from Iraq but also rest and restructure its forces; but the United States no longer is mired in an open-ended conflict.
The state with the greatest need to take advantage of this U.S. occupation, bar none, is the Russian Federation. Moscow knows full well that when the Americans are finished with their efforts in the Middle East, the bulk of their attention will return to the former Soviet Union. When that happens, Russia will face a resurgent United States that commands alliances in Asia, Europe and the Middle East. Russia must use the ongoing U.S. entanglement in the Middle East to redefine its immediate neighborhood or risk a developing geopolitic far less benign to Russian interests than Washington’s Cold War policy of containment. Russia needs to move — and it needs to move now.
And there are a host of secondary powers that will be interacting within the matrix of American actions in 2008. Some — such as Syria and Saudi Arabia — want to be included in the U.S. Iraqi calculus and will have their chance. Others — namely South Korea, Taiwan, Australia and Japan — are looking for new ways to work with Washington as they adapt to their own domestic government transitions. All of Europe is shifting back to a power structure that has been absent for two generations: the concert of powers, with all of the instability and mistrust that implies.
Others will be pursuing bold agendas, not because of the United States’ distraction but because they are rising to prominence in their own right. Angola will rise as a major African power to rival South Africa and Nigeria. Brazil will lay the groundwork for reasserting its long-dormant role as a South American superpower. Turkey — now the strongest it has been in a century — will re-emerge as a major geopolitical weight in the eastern Mediterranean, albeit one that is somewhat confused about its priorities.
Quietly developing in the background, the global economy is undergoing a no less dramatic transformation. While we expect oil prices to retreat somewhat in 2008 after years of surges, their sustained strength continues to shove a great deal of cash into the hands of the world’s oil exporters — cash that these countries cannot process internally and that therefore will either be stored in dollars or invested in the only country with deep enough capital pools to handle it: the United States. Add in the torrent of exports from the Asian states, which generates nearly identical cash-management problems, and the result is a deep dollarization of the global system even as the U.S. dollar gives ground. The talk on the financial pages will be of dollar (implying American) weakness, even as the currency steadily shifts from the one of first resort to the true foundation of the entire system.
This will be a year in which the United States achieves more success in its foreign policies than it has since the ousting of the Taliban from Afghanistan in late 2001. But the actions of others — most notably a rising Russia — rather than U.S. achievements will determine the tenor and fury of the next major global clash.
Russia enters 2008 at geopolitical highpoint - U.S. report
12:59 | 09/ 01/ 2008
WASHINGTON, January 9 (RIA Novosti) - A private U.S. intelligence agency, Stratfor, said Russia is now more powerful than it has been since the fall of Communism.
"Russia enters 2008 in the strongest geopolitical position it has known since the Cold War's end," Stratfor said in a report entitled Annual Forecast 2008: Beyond the Jihadist War - Former Soviet Union, published on January 8.
"The rampant decay of its military has largely been halted, new weapons systems are beginning to be brought on line, the country is flush with petrodollars, its debt has vanished, the Chechen insurgency has been suppressed, the central government has all but eliminated domestic opposition, the regime is popular at home, and the U.S. military is too locked down to make more than a token gesture to block any Russian advances," the report said.
But Stratfor analysts said Russia's extensive influence was being challenged on the energy and political front, including in Asia and Europe.
"Chinese pipelines to Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan (to be constructed in 2008) threaten to divert the energy that until now could only flow northward and serve Russian purposes," the report said, adding that the Kremlin has been ignoring the problem.
"China is stealing Central Asia, building a network of infrastructures that will make it more attractive for the Central Asian states to integrate with China than to use Soviet-era links to Russia."
On another front, Russia has to contend with NATO's eastward expansion, the think tank said.
"NATO and the European Union occupy Russia's entire western horizon and are flirting with expanding their memberships. Rising defense modernizations in Asia are forcing Russia to deal with two military fronts - something at which Moscow never really succeeded during Soviet times."
The agency predicted that Russia's main state oil and gas companies would absorb smaller players this year.
"First, the consolidation that began in Russia's energy sector in 2003 will culminate. This will be the year that state giants Rosneft and Gazprom swallow up - whether formally or through 'alliances' - most of the remaining independent players in the country's energy industry."
Stratfor experts expect this to be part of an effort to consolidate what has proven to be Russia's most effective foreign policy tool - energy - but said the peak of Russia's energy domination may have passed.
"In 2008 a number of natural gas import projects will begin operation in Western Europe, reducing that region's dependency on Russian energy and allowing the Western European states to be more dismissive of Russian interests."
"The Russians need a defining confrontation with the West. Russian power is at a relative peak, and American power at a relative low. It is a temporary circumstance certain to invert as the United States militarily extricates itself from Iraq, and one that Russia must exploit if it seeks to avoid replicating the geopolitical retreat of the 1990s," the report said.
"By 'confrontation' we do not necessarily mean a war - simply a clash that starkly lays bare Russia's strengths against Western weaknesses."
According to Stratfor, one of the options for Russia to demonstrate its strength could be on the issue of Kosovo's independence, backed by Western nations and strongly opposed by Moscow.
"For Russia - which has publicly invested much political capital in opposing Kosovar independence - European success would be more than a slap in the face," the report said. "Moscow must prevent this from happening... Simply put, for the Western world, Kosovo is not even remotely worth an escalating conflict with Russia."
The report also suggests other options, including the conflict between Russia and Georgia over the latter's two separatist republics, Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
"The former pro-Western Soviet republic of Georgia, long a thorn in Moscow's side, has two secessionist regions that rely on Russia for their economic and military existence. Russia could easily absorb them outright and thus break the myth that American protection in the Caucasus is sustainable."
Two other ways is Gazprom's takeover of the Russian-British joint venture TNK-BP and a union with Belarus, a former Soviet neighbor, whose economy is heavily dependent on Moscow.
"Gazprom could swallow up Russian-British joint oil venture TNK-BP, destroying billions in U.K. investment in a heartbeat," the report said. "Union with Belarus would return the Red Army to the European frontier and turn the security framework of Eurasia inside-out overnight."
Stratfor analysts said that once it has finished with the Middle East, the U.S. is likely to concentrate its efforts on former Soviet republics where Russia is struggling to retain its influence.
"When that happens, Russia will face a resurgent United States that commands alliances in Asia, Europe and the Middle East. Russia must use the ongoing U.S. entanglement in the Middle East to redefine its immediate neighborhood or risk a developing geopolitic far less benign to Russian interests than Washington's Cold War policy of containment," the report said.
WASHINGTON, January 9 (RIA Novosti) - A private U.S. intelligence agency, Stratfor, said Russia is now more powerful than it has been since the fall of Communism.
"Russia enters 2008 in the strongest geopolitical position it has known since the Cold War's end," Stratfor said in a report entitled Annual Forecast 2008: Beyond the Jihadist War - Former Soviet Union, published on January 8.
"The rampant decay of its military has largely been halted, new weapons systems are beginning to be brought on line, the country is flush with petrodollars, its debt has vanished, the Chechen insurgency has been suppressed, the central government has all but eliminated domestic opposition, the regime is popular at home, and the U.S. military is too locked down to make more than a token gesture to block any Russian advances," the report said.
But Stratfor analysts said Russia's extensive influence was being challenged on the energy and political front, including in Asia and Europe.
"Chinese pipelines to Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan (to be constructed in 2008) threaten to divert the energy that until now could only flow northward and serve Russian purposes," the report said, adding that the Kremlin has been ignoring the problem.
"China is stealing Central Asia, building a network of infrastructures that will make it more attractive for the Central Asian states to integrate with China than to use Soviet-era links to Russia."
On another front, Russia has to contend with NATO's eastward expansion, the think tank said.
"NATO and the European Union occupy Russia's entire western horizon and are flirting with expanding their memberships. Rising defense modernizations in Asia are forcing Russia to deal with two military fronts - something at which Moscow never really succeeded during Soviet times."
The agency predicted that Russia's main state oil and gas companies would absorb smaller players this year.
"First, the consolidation that began in Russia's energy sector in 2003 will culminate. This will be the year that state giants Rosneft and Gazprom swallow up - whether formally or through 'alliances' - most of the remaining independent players in the country's energy industry."
Stratfor experts expect this to be part of an effort to consolidate what has proven to be Russia's most effective foreign policy tool - energy - but said the peak of Russia's energy domination may have passed.
"In 2008 a number of natural gas import projects will begin operation in Western Europe, reducing that region's dependency on Russian energy and allowing the Western European states to be more dismissive of Russian interests."
"The Russians need a defining confrontation with the West. Russian power is at a relative peak, and American power at a relative low. It is a temporary circumstance certain to invert as the United States militarily extricates itself from Iraq, and one that Russia must exploit if it seeks to avoid replicating the geopolitical retreat of the 1990s," the report said.
"By 'confrontation' we do not necessarily mean a war - simply a clash that starkly lays bare Russia's strengths against Western weaknesses."
According to Stratfor, one of the options for Russia to demonstrate its strength could be on the issue of Kosovo's independence, backed by Western nations and strongly opposed by Moscow.
"For Russia - which has publicly invested much political capital in opposing Kosovar independence - European success would be more than a slap in the face," the report said. "Moscow must prevent this from happening... Simply put, for the Western world, Kosovo is not even remotely worth an escalating conflict with Russia."
The report also suggests other options, including the conflict between Russia and Georgia over the latter's two separatist republics, Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
"The former pro-Western Soviet republic of Georgia, long a thorn in Moscow's side, has two secessionist regions that rely on Russia for their economic and military existence. Russia could easily absorb them outright and thus break the myth that American protection in the Caucasus is sustainable."
Two other ways is Gazprom's takeover of the Russian-British joint venture TNK-BP and a union with Belarus, a former Soviet neighbor, whose economy is heavily dependent on Moscow.
"Gazprom could swallow up Russian-British joint oil venture TNK-BP, destroying billions in U.K. investment in a heartbeat," the report said. "Union with Belarus would return the Red Army to the European frontier and turn the security framework of Eurasia inside-out overnight."
Stratfor analysts said that once it has finished with the Middle East, the U.S. is likely to concentrate its efforts on former Soviet republics where Russia is struggling to retain its influence.
"When that happens, Russia will face a resurgent United States that commands alliances in Asia, Europe and the Middle East. Russia must use the ongoing U.S. entanglement in the Middle East to redefine its immediate neighborhood or risk a developing geopolitic far less benign to Russian interests than Washington's Cold War policy of containment," the report said.
Technological revolution for $2,500
16:26 | 11/ 01/ 2008
MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Dmitry Kosyrev) - The news that India is starting the production of a $2,500 car is now told around the world in the fashion as the story of a fakir (also from India) who put ten cobra snakes in his bosom and stayed alive.
Actually, the story should line up with the risks and benefits for the world economy in 2008 and into the future. The story of such a car is an example of a revolution, not so much technological as consumerist, and revolutions are unpredictable.
First, let us take a closer look at the car. It is probably going to be called the Nano and will have an engine of 624 cubic centimeters. It will seat two people and may be able to accommodate someone or something else in the back seat.
The car incorporates a couple of interesting 21st century ideas, including clean exhaust. Ratan Tata, head of the giant Tata corporation, presented the car at the 9th Auto Show in New Delhi. His company is known for heavy duty trucks and for the Indica, a small $5,000 car that appeared on the roads in India in 1998.
India, a nation of more than a billion people, has a middle class estimated by Indians to be 200 to 300 million people. By the classical standards of Europe or America (per person income), these 200-300 million do not qualify as a middle class. They are, for example, not in the position to buy a $10,000 car.
On the other hand, imported minicars that enjoy no demand in prosperous countries are thronging the Indian streets. There is now a chance that tens of millions people will become mobile in that country. It is likely that within the next ten years, these people driving their new $2,500 vehicles will have something that has never been seen in India before - a well-developed road network with observed traffic laws.
The middle class in India is not developing in the same way as others in other countries. It can afford to exist for less money. The consequences of this are difficult to forecast as it is difficult to foresee how many other countries will come up with their own models of development.
Political observers see that models of imported democracy do not work outside American or European societies. The reason is the difference in cultures, each having its own scale of values and principles of human interaction.
But economic patterns do not work either, because an economy is based on human feelings - a person gets what he has set his or her heart on.
The now out of print Hong Kong magazine Asiaweek once recounted how in the 1980s, seven or eight years after Chinese reforms were set in motion, Western companies conducted a survey in China to see which goods were most sought by the increasingly wealthier Chinese. It emerged that the most sought item was refrigerators, followed by washing machines and televisions.
Almost the same poll, the magazine said, was conducted in Russia, in the mid-1990s, which launched its market reforms ten years after China. Russian priorities were different: a foreign trip, then a television set, followed by a car.
The middle classes of both countries got their first, second and the third desires, plus washing machines, but that is not the point. The point is that new leaders show the world completely unpredictable models of development.
No one expected that a not overly wealthy Russia would be one of the most active buyers of luxury cars: consumers in this country seem to be buying either top models or nothing at all.
This scene is in total contrast to India, where no one considers poverty and frugality a shame; where having a $2,500 car is quite normal, and even the most respected citizens find it especially chic to wear a coat with home-patched elbows.
One can only muse on the political results of all these changes. A Project Syndicate analyst recently commented on China. He wrote: "...China's success story is also the most serious challenge that liberal democracy has faced since fascism in the 1930s. This is not because China poses a great military threat - war with the United States, or even Japan, is only a fantasy in the minds of a few ultra-nationalist cranks and paranoiacs. It is in the realm of ideas that China's political-economic model, regardless of its environmental consequences, is scoring victories and looking like an attractive alternative to liberal-democratic capitalism."
The Chinese model has proven its worth because it has matched the preferences and scale of customer values against the system supplying customer requirements. China is an example for many countries whose peak has yet to arrive.
The Indian model, it stands to reason, is different, but also successful. Brazil and Russia differ from China, India and each other. More success stories are likely to emerge.
Human history has turning points when consumer attitudes alter entire epochs, and do so very suddenly.
Recall the late 1920s and early 1930s. America was already running its first passenger air service between New York and Boston. But in the United Kingdom, the only superpower at its peak, people did not understand why they should go from London to a colony like Singapore by air and take 10 days to do so, when this could be done leisurely during 30 days aboard an ocean liner, with an orchestra, dance halls and smoking lounges.
The U.K. began drawing up a program to build airships with the same lounges to make travel comfortable for passengers. In 1931, a disaster that struck the first such ship in Paris ended the program.
Few if any people at the time predicted that from the failed technological revolution, conservative-minded Britain would win World War II but lose its empire, and the technologically more advanced Americans would usher in America's era of great power.
An era that is now changing into something new and unknown.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Dmitry Kosyrev) - The news that India is starting the production of a $2,500 car is now told around the world in the fashion as the story of a fakir (also from India) who put ten cobra snakes in his bosom and stayed alive.
Actually, the story should line up with the risks and benefits for the world economy in 2008 and into the future. The story of such a car is an example of a revolution, not so much technological as consumerist, and revolutions are unpredictable.
First, let us take a closer look at the car. It is probably going to be called the Nano and will have an engine of 624 cubic centimeters. It will seat two people and may be able to accommodate someone or something else in the back seat.
The car incorporates a couple of interesting 21st century ideas, including clean exhaust. Ratan Tata, head of the giant Tata corporation, presented the car at the 9th Auto Show in New Delhi. His company is known for heavy duty trucks and for the Indica, a small $5,000 car that appeared on the roads in India in 1998.
India, a nation of more than a billion people, has a middle class estimated by Indians to be 200 to 300 million people. By the classical standards of Europe or America (per person income), these 200-300 million do not qualify as a middle class. They are, for example, not in the position to buy a $10,000 car.
On the other hand, imported minicars that enjoy no demand in prosperous countries are thronging the Indian streets. There is now a chance that tens of millions people will become mobile in that country. It is likely that within the next ten years, these people driving their new $2,500 vehicles will have something that has never been seen in India before - a well-developed road network with observed traffic laws.
The middle class in India is not developing in the same way as others in other countries. It can afford to exist for less money. The consequences of this are difficult to forecast as it is difficult to foresee how many other countries will come up with their own models of development.
Political observers see that models of imported democracy do not work outside American or European societies. The reason is the difference in cultures, each having its own scale of values and principles of human interaction.
But economic patterns do not work either, because an economy is based on human feelings - a person gets what he has set his or her heart on.
The now out of print Hong Kong magazine Asiaweek once recounted how in the 1980s, seven or eight years after Chinese reforms were set in motion, Western companies conducted a survey in China to see which goods were most sought by the increasingly wealthier Chinese. It emerged that the most sought item was refrigerators, followed by washing machines and televisions.
Almost the same poll, the magazine said, was conducted in Russia, in the mid-1990s, which launched its market reforms ten years after China. Russian priorities were different: a foreign trip, then a television set, followed by a car.
The middle classes of both countries got their first, second and the third desires, plus washing machines, but that is not the point. The point is that new leaders show the world completely unpredictable models of development.
No one expected that a not overly wealthy Russia would be one of the most active buyers of luxury cars: consumers in this country seem to be buying either top models or nothing at all.
This scene is in total contrast to India, where no one considers poverty and frugality a shame; where having a $2,500 car is quite normal, and even the most respected citizens find it especially chic to wear a coat with home-patched elbows.
One can only muse on the political results of all these changes. A Project Syndicate analyst recently commented on China. He wrote: "...China's success story is also the most serious challenge that liberal democracy has faced since fascism in the 1930s. This is not because China poses a great military threat - war with the United States, or even Japan, is only a fantasy in the minds of a few ultra-nationalist cranks and paranoiacs. It is in the realm of ideas that China's political-economic model, regardless of its environmental consequences, is scoring victories and looking like an attractive alternative to liberal-democratic capitalism."
The Chinese model has proven its worth because it has matched the preferences and scale of customer values against the system supplying customer requirements. China is an example for many countries whose peak has yet to arrive.
The Indian model, it stands to reason, is different, but also successful. Brazil and Russia differ from China, India and each other. More success stories are likely to emerge.
Human history has turning points when consumer attitudes alter entire epochs, and do so very suddenly.
Recall the late 1920s and early 1930s. America was already running its first passenger air service between New York and Boston. But in the United Kingdom, the only superpower at its peak, people did not understand why they should go from London to a colony like Singapore by air and take 10 days to do so, when this could be done leisurely during 30 days aboard an ocean liner, with an orchestra, dance halls and smoking lounges.
The U.K. began drawing up a program to build airships with the same lounges to make travel comfortable for passengers. In 1931, a disaster that struck the first such ship in Paris ended the program.
Few if any people at the time predicted that from the failed technological revolution, conservative-minded Britain would win World War II but lose its empire, and the technologically more advanced Americans would usher in America's era of great power.
An era that is now changing into something new and unknown.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
A “people's car” from India
The one-lakh car
Jan 10th 2008 | DELHI
From Economist.com
Tata Motors reveals a dirt-cheap model
RATAN TATA, chairman of the Tata group of companies, has a cerebral and cordial manner. But the so-called “one-lakh car”, which Tata Motors unveiled in Delhi to a rapt public on Thursday January 10th, is a product of impatience and chutzpah. Instead of waiting for the great swell of prosperity in India and elsewhere to create millions of customers for his company’s products, Mr Tata has decided to wade out—further than any one has gone before—to bring a car to them.
In India one lakh means 100,000, and Tata will sell the most basic version of its new car at 100,000 rupees, or $2,500 (not including taxes and the cost of transporting it to the showrooms). This is roughly half the price of its nearest rival, and little more than the cost of a three-wheeled auto-rickshaw. But the “nano”, as the car is called, is no rickshaw. Apart from the fourth wheel and the doors, it has a 623cc engine that will muster 33 brake horsepower. The car should eke out 50 miles to the gallon, Mr Tata says. It complies with the “Euro III” pollution standards that prevail in India and should meet the tougher Euro IV standards with a bit of tweaking. The firm claims that the car produces less pollution than some two-wheelers produced in India today.
Tata Motors is best known for its trucks, lovingly decorated and recklessly driven, that clatter along India’s highways. It started making small passenger cars only a decade ago. Its low-cost car project has set a trend. Mr Tata says he is “quite gratified” that other firms are following suit. Bajaj Auto, which is known for its two- and three-wheelers, said on January 8th that it hoped to team up with Renault and Nissan to produce its own low-cost car. Fiat, Ford, Honda and Toyota also have cheap models in the works. Tata may discover a market, only for others to crowd into it. “It’s not our God-given domain,” says Mr Tata.
Cheap cars can be expensive to invent. Tata experimented with a smaller engine, but was dissatisfied with its performance. It hoped to use continuous-variable transmission, but had to make do, for now, with manual. Tata’s rivals may be able to free-ride on its efforts, copying the cost-cutting tricks it had to discover through painstaking trial and error. “It will be an easier task for them than it was for us,” Mr Tata admits.
Competitors will, for example, notice how Tata shrank the car into what its chairman calls a “concise package”, with the powertrain at the back and the wheels at the “extremities”. The result is 21% bigger inside than the Maruti 800, says Ravi Kant, the managing director of Tata Motors, but is only 80% as long. That will, at least, shorten the traffic jams to which the nano will contribute. Congestion could be a big problem, if millions more cars are to take to the roads. The country's poor-quality road network is slowly improving, but it is heavily over-used. With India's transport arteries already so badly clogged, a boom in sales of low-cost cars could bring about a seizure.
Commuting in India’s cities can be both cosy and deadly. Children squeeze snugly between father at the handlebars of a motorcycle, and mother riding side-saddle at the back. This precarious balancing act, says Mr Tata was the “visual target” he had in mind when he first conceived of the need “to create another form of transport”. About 1,800 people die on Delhi’s roads each year, perhaps one-third of them on two-wheelers. Only 5% die in cars. Tata’s project may pose risks for investors, but it promises unaccustomed safety for customers.
Jan 10th 2008 | DELHI
From Economist.com
Tata Motors reveals a dirt-cheap model
RATAN TATA, chairman of the Tata group of companies, has a cerebral and cordial manner. But the so-called “one-lakh car”, which Tata Motors unveiled in Delhi to a rapt public on Thursday January 10th, is a product of impatience and chutzpah. Instead of waiting for the great swell of prosperity in India and elsewhere to create millions of customers for his company’s products, Mr Tata has decided to wade out—further than any one has gone before—to bring a car to them.
In India one lakh means 100,000, and Tata will sell the most basic version of its new car at 100,000 rupees, or $2,500 (not including taxes and the cost of transporting it to the showrooms). This is roughly half the price of its nearest rival, and little more than the cost of a three-wheeled auto-rickshaw. But the “nano”, as the car is called, is no rickshaw. Apart from the fourth wheel and the doors, it has a 623cc engine that will muster 33 brake horsepower. The car should eke out 50 miles to the gallon, Mr Tata says. It complies with the “Euro III” pollution standards that prevail in India and should meet the tougher Euro IV standards with a bit of tweaking. The firm claims that the car produces less pollution than some two-wheelers produced in India today.
Tata Motors is best known for its trucks, lovingly decorated and recklessly driven, that clatter along India’s highways. It started making small passenger cars only a decade ago. Its low-cost car project has set a trend. Mr Tata says he is “quite gratified” that other firms are following suit. Bajaj Auto, which is known for its two- and three-wheelers, said on January 8th that it hoped to team up with Renault and Nissan to produce its own low-cost car. Fiat, Ford, Honda and Toyota also have cheap models in the works. Tata may discover a market, only for others to crowd into it. “It’s not our God-given domain,” says Mr Tata.
Cheap cars can be expensive to invent. Tata experimented with a smaller engine, but was dissatisfied with its performance. It hoped to use continuous-variable transmission, but had to make do, for now, with manual. Tata’s rivals may be able to free-ride on its efforts, copying the cost-cutting tricks it had to discover through painstaking trial and error. “It will be an easier task for them than it was for us,” Mr Tata admits.
Competitors will, for example, notice how Tata shrank the car into what its chairman calls a “concise package”, with the powertrain at the back and the wheels at the “extremities”. The result is 21% bigger inside than the Maruti 800, says Ravi Kant, the managing director of Tata Motors, but is only 80% as long. That will, at least, shorten the traffic jams to which the nano will contribute. Congestion could be a big problem, if millions more cars are to take to the roads. The country's poor-quality road network is slowly improving, but it is heavily over-used. With India's transport arteries already so badly clogged, a boom in sales of low-cost cars could bring about a seizure.
Commuting in India’s cities can be both cosy and deadly. Children squeeze snugly between father at the handlebars of a motorcycle, and mother riding side-saddle at the back. This precarious balancing act, says Mr Tata was the “visual target” he had in mind when he first conceived of the need “to create another form of transport”. About 1,800 people die on Delhi’s roads each year, perhaps one-third of them on two-wheelers. Only 5% die in cars. Tata’s project may pose risks for investors, but it promises unaccustomed safety for customers.
January 10, 2008
Executive Pay in the Netherlands - survey
Source: Mercer
The Netherlands
Amstelveen, 9 January 2008
Improved link between pay and performance
Increasing annual bonus plan levels
Pronounced shift from options to performance related shares
"Companies in the Netherlands are continuing to strengthen the link between the executive pay levels and overall company performance," said Ms. Pilv, European Partner at Mercer. "Emphasis is clearly on variable pay – that is, annual bonus and long-term incentive (LTI) plans which have become more effective tools in motivating and rewarding performance."
The majority of organizations (74%) target base pay at the market median level for senior management positions compared to 59% in 2005, according to Mercer’s 2007 Executive Compensation Guide. This means that above market compensation can only be earned through variable, performance-based compensation. Within annual bonus, the spread between target and maximum bonus opportunity has widened, allowing more accurate and individual differentiation based on performance. LTI plans no longer reward only stock price appreciation and now include a clear link with company performance. The majority of LTI plans (80%) include financial performance measures compared to only 22% in 2002.
"In addition, Remuneration Committees now demand direct access to outside consultants for advice on senior management pay programs and levels, which has further improved oversight and compliance with the highest corporate governance standards," Ms. Pilv continued.
Base pay
Median salary increase in 2007 for all senior management positions was 5,0%. However, high demand for certain executive positions fuelled some above-average pay rises during the past year. The median salary increase for the Head of HR position was 6,8%, while financial controllers received a median salary increase of 6,0%.
Annual Bonuses
The target bonus opportunity for the Group CEO now ranges from 83% (market median) to 105% (upper quartile) of base salary, with the maximum bonus opportunity at 120% (market median) and 200% (upper quartile). This represents a significant increase compared to 2005, when the bonus range at market median was 50% (at target) and 68% (at maximum).
The CFO position has the second highest target and maximum bonus opportunities: 60%-88% (target) and 100%-128% (maximum). The highest annual bonus levels are in the financial services and oil and gas industry.
The survey also found that, while target and maximum bonus awards have gone up, actual payments vary significantly from one company to another. For example, actual bonuses for Group Chief Executives in 2007 ranged from € 228,000 (lowest) to € 2 million (highest); for CFOs these respective amounts were € 132.500 and € 1, 2 million.
The majority of bonus plans use a combination of financial and non-financial performance measures; with 2:1 respectively the most widely used combination.
Long-Term Incentives
The majority of organizations (86%) provide some form of long-term incentive. The median actual LTI value in 2007 is 50% of base salary for Group CEO, 34% for CFO and 25% for other senior management positions.
While in 2002 83% of companies offered only a share option plan, the balance has now shifted toward performance-based share plans. The prevalent LTI plan designs in 2007 are: performance share plans (47%), share option plans (47%) and cash plans (26%). 50% companies offer two LTI plans compared to only 17% in 2002.
Majority of plans (80%) include financial performance measures: the prevalent performance measure for both share option and performance share plan is relative Total Shareholder Return.
"In recent years Dutch multinationals have strengthened the alignment of their LTI programs to their business and human capital strategies", said Ms. Pilv. "This has resulted in more varied LTI plan designs and more strategic use of this executive remuneration element."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The effective date of the pay and benefits data analyzed in this survey is April, 1st 2007. The survey covered 683 positions and some six hundred thousand employees at 28 large Dutch companies.
Mercer is a leading global provider of consulting, outsourcing and investment services, with more than 25,000 clients worldwide. Mercer’s global network of 17,000 employees, based in more than 40 countries, ensures integrated, worldwide solutions. Our consultants work with clients to develop solutions that address global and country-specific challenges and opportunities. The company is a wholly owned subsidiary of Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc., which lists its stock (ticker symbol: MMC) on the New York, Chicago and London stock exchanges.
Colombian Hostages Released to Venezuela
January 10th 2008, by Kiraz Janicke - Venezuelanalysis.com
(venezuelanalysis.com) - Venezuelan President Chavez announced that two hostages held by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) have been successfully liberated in a Venezuelan led humanitarian mission today. President Chavez mediated the release of Clara Rojas and Consuelo Gonzalez de Perdomo after receiving the coordinates for where the hostages could be found from the FARC and authorization from the Colombian government to carry out the operation.
At 11.30 am today Chavez confirmed that the hostages had been freed and were in the care of Venezuelan Minister of Justice, Ramón RodrÃguez ChacÃn, who oversaw the rescue mission. Chavez indicated that the rescue operation was carried out with "total normality."
Venezuelan helicopters left from the base Buenaventura Vivas in the state of Tachira, towards San Jose del Guaviare, in Colombia very early this morning, later bearing Red Cross emblems they flew to the place indicated by the FARC, Chavez explained.
"Approximately ten minutes later I received a message directly from the point of the coordinates, a point totally unknown, but from there in a manner audibly emotional, our Minister of Justice told me we are in this moment receiving Clara and Consuelo from the hands of a unit of the FARC."
Chavez also confirmed that he had spoken directly by telephone with Clara and Consuelo and indicated that he had received information from Minister Chacin that they are both, "in good condition and in this moment they are due to begin flying in our helicopters, with the Red Cross, from that point in the jungle in Guaviare directly to Venezuela, where they will arrive in approximately three hours."
Maria Fernanda Perdomo waiting in Caracas to be reunited with her mother after seven years, told Venezuelan state TV, "It is an emotion so big I can´t describe, we are counting the seconds until they arrive."
Chavez informed that the whole rescue operation had been coordinated with the Colombian government, "I want to thank the Colombian government for their disposition and their cooperation so that everything has turned out well."
He stressed that the Venezuelan people "are sending our heart to Colombia, Venezuela without Colombia is not complete, Colombia without Venezuela is not complete, Colombians pardon me for what I say but it is what I feel," and assured that "Venezuela would continue opening paths towards peace in Colombia."
He also said that Cuban Ambassador in Venezuela, German Sanchez Otero had also participated in the mission at the request of the Colombian government in recognition of the efforts of Cuba and its president Fidel Castro, for peace in Colombia.
Chavez also thanked the International Red Cross for their role in the hostage liberation.
Colombian High Commissioner for Peace, Luis Carlos Restrepo said the operation had been carried out with "an excellent spirit of cooperation" between Venezuelan and Colombian authorities and that Colombia would consider new humanitarian operations if they were carried out with discretion, respect and communication.
(venezuelanalysis.com) - Venezuelan President Chavez announced that two hostages held by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) have been successfully liberated in a Venezuelan led humanitarian mission today. President Chavez mediated the release of Clara Rojas and Consuelo Gonzalez de Perdomo after receiving the coordinates for where the hostages could be found from the FARC and authorization from the Colombian government to carry out the operation.
At 11.30 am today Chavez confirmed that the hostages had been freed and were in the care of Venezuelan Minister of Justice, Ramón RodrÃguez ChacÃn, who oversaw the rescue mission. Chavez indicated that the rescue operation was carried out with "total normality."
Venezuelan helicopters left from the base Buenaventura Vivas in the state of Tachira, towards San Jose del Guaviare, in Colombia very early this morning, later bearing Red Cross emblems they flew to the place indicated by the FARC, Chavez explained.
"Approximately ten minutes later I received a message directly from the point of the coordinates, a point totally unknown, but from there in a manner audibly emotional, our Minister of Justice told me we are in this moment receiving Clara and Consuelo from the hands of a unit of the FARC."
Chavez also confirmed that he had spoken directly by telephone with Clara and Consuelo and indicated that he had received information from Minister Chacin that they are both, "in good condition and in this moment they are due to begin flying in our helicopters, with the Red Cross, from that point in the jungle in Guaviare directly to Venezuela, where they will arrive in approximately three hours."
Maria Fernanda Perdomo waiting in Caracas to be reunited with her mother after seven years, told Venezuelan state TV, "It is an emotion so big I can´t describe, we are counting the seconds until they arrive."
Chavez informed that the whole rescue operation had been coordinated with the Colombian government, "I want to thank the Colombian government for their disposition and their cooperation so that everything has turned out well."
He stressed that the Venezuelan people "are sending our heart to Colombia, Venezuela without Colombia is not complete, Colombia without Venezuela is not complete, Colombians pardon me for what I say but it is what I feel," and assured that "Venezuela would continue opening paths towards peace in Colombia."
He also said that Cuban Ambassador in Venezuela, German Sanchez Otero had also participated in the mission at the request of the Colombian government in recognition of the efforts of Cuba and its president Fidel Castro, for peace in Colombia.
Chavez also thanked the International Red Cross for their role in the hostage liberation.
Colombian High Commissioner for Peace, Luis Carlos Restrepo said the operation had been carried out with "an excellent spirit of cooperation" between Venezuelan and Colombian authorities and that Colombia would consider new humanitarian operations if they were carried out with discretion, respect and communication.
New Wine in Old Bottles? The New Salience of Nuclear Weapons
Yury E. Fedorov
Fall 2007
..... by the beginning of the XXIst century two contradictory tendencies are emerging. The first is the appearance of security challenges that cannot be resolved, managed, deterred, neutralized, or otherwise overcome by nuclear weapons. On the one hand, this trend demands the development of new strategies, methods and equipment other than nuclear forces. On the other hand, it produces the illusion that nuclear weapons themselves are being marginalized by the revolution in military affairs and the growing effectiveness of conventional forces. But this belief is fundamentally flawed. Nuclear weapons are not being marginalized. Rather, their roles are evolving in the global strategic landscape. In short, the rise of non-traditional threats does not make nuclear weapons go away, it only serves to distract from their enduring significance.
T The emergence of these new threats risks obscuring a second fundamental trend that is likely to grow ever more significant in the future. The fundamental uncertainty that characterizes international relations today encourages nuclear states to keep their nuclear arsenals, and encourages non-nuclear states to develop their own nuclear weapons as the ultimate guarantee of security. Thus, Chinese and Russian nuclear strategies result in the formation of new axes of nuclear deterrence. Continuing nuclear proliferation is fraught with the growing danger of nuclear terrorism and regional nuclear wars.
Instead of a hierarchical, petrified, and fossilized nuclear order typical of the Cold War a new system is emerging. This system is more dynamic, more decentralized, and far more fragmented than the one it has replaced. The fourth world war outlined by Jean Baudrillard may be acquiring a nuclear dimension.
DOWNLOAD FULL REPORT
Fall 2007
..... by the beginning of the XXIst century two contradictory tendencies are emerging. The first is the appearance of security challenges that cannot be resolved, managed, deterred, neutralized, or otherwise overcome by nuclear weapons. On the one hand, this trend demands the development of new strategies, methods and equipment other than nuclear forces. On the other hand, it produces the illusion that nuclear weapons themselves are being marginalized by the revolution in military affairs and the growing effectiveness of conventional forces. But this belief is fundamentally flawed. Nuclear weapons are not being marginalized. Rather, their roles are evolving in the global strategic landscape. In short, the rise of non-traditional threats does not make nuclear weapons go away, it only serves to distract from their enduring significance.
T The emergence of these new threats risks obscuring a second fundamental trend that is likely to grow ever more significant in the future. The fundamental uncertainty that characterizes international relations today encourages nuclear states to keep their nuclear arsenals, and encourages non-nuclear states to develop their own nuclear weapons as the ultimate guarantee of security. Thus, Chinese and Russian nuclear strategies result in the formation of new axes of nuclear deterrence. Continuing nuclear proliferation is fraught with the growing danger of nuclear terrorism and regional nuclear wars.
Instead of a hierarchical, petrified, and fossilized nuclear order typical of the Cold War a new system is emerging. This system is more dynamic, more decentralized, and far more fragmented than the one it has replaced. The fourth world war outlined by Jean Baudrillard may be acquiring a nuclear dimension.
DOWNLOAD FULL REPORT
For sale: West’s deadly nuclear secrets
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article3137695.ece
ALSO READ
Did U.S. intelligence know that Iran’s nascent nuclear program was intended to produce a weapons capability? If yes, why didn’t the U.S. government act more decisively at that point? And why was the information not shared with the IAEA?
http://intellibriefs.blogspot.com/2007/07/kahn-job-der-physiker-der-mullahs.html
Insight: Chris Gourlay, Jonathan Calvert, Joe Lauria
A WHISTLEBLOWER has made a series of extraordinary claims about how corrupt government officials allowed Pakistan and other states to steal nuclear weapons secrets.
Sibel Edmonds, a 37-year-old former Turkish language translator for the FBI, listened into hundreds of sensitive intercepted conversations while based at the agency’s Washington field office.
She approached The Sunday Times last month after reading about an Al-Qaeda terrorist who had revealed his role in training some of the 9/11 hijackers while he was in Turkey.
Edmonds described how foreign intelligence agents had enlisted the support of US officials to acquire a network of moles in sensitive military and nuclear institutions.
Among the hours of covert tape recordings, she says she heard evidence that one well-known senior official in the US State Department was being paid by Turkish agents in Washington who were selling the information on to black market buyers, including Pakistan.
The name of the official – who has held a series of top government posts – is known to The Sunday Times. He strongly denies the claims.
However, Edmonds said: “He was aiding foreign operatives against US interests by passing them highly classified information, not only from the State Department but also from the Pentagon, in exchange for money, position and political objectives.”
She claims that the FBI was also gathering evidence against senior Pentagon officials – including household names – who were aiding foreign agents.
“If you made public all the information that the FBI have on this case, you will see very high-level people going through criminal trials,” she said.
Her story shows just how much the West was infiltrated by foreign states seeking nuclear secrets. It illustrates how western government officials turned a blind eye to, or were even helping, countries such as Pakistan acquire bomb technology.
The wider nuclear network has been monitored for many years by a joint Anglo-American intelligence effort. But rather than shut it down, investigations by law enforcement bodies such as the FBI and Britain’s Revenue & Customs have been aborted to preserve diplomatic relations.
Edmonds, a fluent speaker of Turkish and Farsi, was recruited by the FBI in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks. Her previous claims about incompetence inside the FBI have been well documented in America.
She has given evidence to closed sessions of Congress and the 9/11 commission, but many of the key points of her testimony have remained secret. She has now decided to divulge some of that information after becoming disillusioned with the US authorities’ failure to act.
One of Edmonds’s main roles in the FBI was to translate thousands of hours of conversations by Turkish diplomatic and political targets that had been covertly recorded by the agency.
A backlog of tapes had built up, dating back to 1997, which were needed for an FBI investigation into links between the Turks and Pakistani, Israeli and US targets. Before she left the FBI in 2002 she heard evidence that pointed to money laundering, drug imports and attempts to acquire nuclear and conventional weapons technology.
“What I found was damning,” she said. “While the FBI was investigating, several arms of the government were shielding what was going on.”
The Turks and Israelis had planted “moles” in military and academic institutions which handled nuclear technology. Edmonds says there were several transactions of nuclear material every month, with the Pakistanis being among the eventual buyers. “The network appeared to be obtaining information from every nuclear agency in the United States,” she said.
They were helped, she says, by the high-ranking State Department official who provided some of their moles – mainly PhD students – with security clearance to work in sensitive nuclear research facilities. These included the Los Alamos nuclear laboratory in New Mexico, which is responsible for the security of the US nuclear deterrent.
In one conversation Edmonds heard the official arranging to pick up a $15,000 cash bribe. The package was to be dropped off at an agreed location by someone in the Turkish diplomatic community who was working for the network.
The Turks, she says, often acted as a conduit for the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Pakistan’s spy agency, because they were less likely to attract suspicion. Venues such as the American Turkish Council in Washington were used to drop off the cash, which was picked up by the official.
Edmonds said: “I heard at least three transactions like this over a period of 2½ years. There are almost certainly more.”
The Pakistani operation was led by General Mahmoud Ahmad, then the ISI chief.
Intercepted communications showed Ahmad and his colleagues stationed in Washington were in constant contact with attaché³ in the Turkish embassy.
Intelligence analysts say that members of the ISI were close to Al-Qaeda before and after 9/11. Indeed, Ahmad was accused of sanctioning a $100,000 wire payment to Mohammed Atta, one of the 9/11 hijackers, immediately before the attacks.
The results of the espionage were almost certainly passed to Abdul Qadeer Khan, the Pakistani nuclear scientist.
Khan was close to Ahmad and the ISI. While running Pakistan’s nuclear programme, he became a millionaire by selling atomic secrets to Libya, Iran and North Korea. He also used a network of companies in America and Britain to obtain components for a nuclear programme.
Khan caused an alert among western intelligence agencies when his aides met Osama Bin Laden. “We were aware of contact between A Q Khan’s people and Al-Qaeda,” a former CIA officer said last week. “There was absolute panic when we initially discovered this, but it kind of panned out in the end.”
It is likely that the nuclear secrets stolen from the United States would have been sold to a number of rogue states by Khan.
Edmonds was later to see the scope of the Pakistani connections when it was revealed that one of her fellow translators at the FBI was the daughter of a Pakistani embassy official who worked for Ahmad. The translator was given top secret clearance despite protests from FBI investigators.
Edmonds says packages containing nuclear secrets were delivered by Turkish operatives, using their cover as members of the diplomatic and military community, to contacts at the Pakistani embassy in Washington.
Following 9/11, a number of the foreign operatives were taken in for questioning by the FBI on suspicion that they knew about or somehow aided the attacks.
Edmonds said the State Department official once again proved useful. “A primary target would call the official and point to names on the list and say, ‘We need to get them out of the US because we can’t afford for them to spill the beans’,” she said. “The official said that he would ‘take care of it’.”
The four suspects on the list were released from interrogation and extradited.
Edmonds also claims that a number of senior officials in the Pentagon had helped Israeli and Turkish agents.
“The people provided lists of potential moles from Pentagon-related institutions who had access to databases concerning this information,” she said.
“The handlers, who were part of the diplomatic community, would then try to recruit those people to become moles for the network. The lists contained all their ‘hooking points’, which could be financial or sexual pressure points, their exact job in the Pentagon and what stuff they had access to.”
One of the Pentagon figures under investigation was Lawrence Franklin, a former Pentagon analyst, who was jailed in 2006 for passing US defence information to lobbyists and sharing classified information with an Israeli diplomat.
“He was one of the top people providing information and packages during 2000 and 2001,” she said.
Once acquired, the nuclear secrets could have gone anywhere. The FBI monitored Turkish diplomats who were selling copies of the information to the highest bidder.
Edmonds said: “Certain greedy Turkish operators would make copies of the material and look around for buyers. They had agents who would find potential buyers.”
In summer 2000, Edmonds says the FBI monitored one of the agents as he met two Saudi Arabian businessmen in Detroit to sell nuclear information that had been stolen from an air force base in Alabama. She overheard the agent saying: “We have a package and we’re going to sell it for $250,000.”
Edmonds’s employment with the FBI lasted for just six months. In March 2002 she was dismissed after accusing a colleague of covering up illicit activity involving Turkish nationals.
She has always claimed that she was victimised for being outspoken and was vindicated by an Office of the Inspector General review of her case three years later. It found that one of the contributory reasons for her sacking was that she had made valid complaints.
The US attorney-general has imposed a state secrets privilege order on her, which prevents her revealing more details of the FBI’s methods and current investigations.
Her allegations were heard in a closed session of Congress, but no action has been taken and she continues to campaign for a public hearing.
She was able to discuss the case with The Sunday Times because, by the end of January 2002, the justice department had shut down the programme.
The senior official in the State Department no longer works there. Last week he denied all of Edmonds’s allegations: “If you are calling me to say somebody said that I took money, that’s outrageous . . . I do not have anything to say about such stupid ridiculous things as this.”
In researching this article, The Sunday Times has talked to two FBI officers (one serving, one former) and two former CIA sources who worked on nuclear proliferation. While none was aware of specific allegations against officials she names, they did provide overlapping corroboration of Edmonds’s story.
One of the CIA sources confirmed that the Turks had acquired nuclear secrets from the United States and shared the information with Pakistan and Israel. “We have no indication that Turkey has its own nuclear ambitions. But the Turks are traders. To my knowledge they became big players in the late 1990s,” the source said.
How Pakistan got the bomb, then sold it to the highest bidders
1965 Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Pakistan’s foreign minister, says: “If India builds the bomb we will eat grass . . . but we will get one of our own”
1974 Nuclear programme becomes increased priority as India tests a nuclear device
1976 Abdul Qadeer Khan, a scientist, steals secrets from Dutch uranium plant. Made head of his nation’s nuclear programme by Bhutto, now prime minister
1976 onwards Clandestine network established to obtain materials and technology for uranium enrichment from the West
1985 Pakistan produces weapons-grade uranium for the first time
1989-91 Khan’s network sells Iran nuclear weapons information and technology
1991-97 Khan sells weapons technology to North Korea and Libya
1998 India tests nuclear bomb and Pakistan follows with a series of nuclear tests. Khan says: “I never had any doubts I was building a bomb. We had to do it”
2001 CIA chief George Tenet gathers officials for crisis summit on the proliferation of nuclear technology from Pakistan to other countries
2001 Weeks before 9/11, Khan’s aides meet Osama Bin Laden to discuss an Al-Qaeda nuclear device
2001 After 9/11 proliferation crisis becomes secondary as Pakistan is seen as important ally in war on terror
2003 Libya abandons nuclear weapons programme and admits acquiring components through Pakistani nuclear scientists
2004 Khan placed under house arrest and confesses to supplying Iran, Libya and North Korea with weapons technology. He is pardoned by President Pervez Musharraf
2006 North Korea tests a nuclear bomb
2007 Renewed fears that bomb may fall into hands of Islamic extremists as killing of Benazir Bhutto throws country into turmoil
ALSO READ
Did U.S. intelligence know that Iran’s nascent nuclear program was intended to produce a weapons capability? If yes, why didn’t the U.S. government act more decisively at that point? And why was the information not shared with the IAEA?
http://intellibriefs.blogspot.com/2007/07/kahn-job-der-physiker-der-mullahs.html
Insight: Chris Gourlay, Jonathan Calvert, Joe Lauria
A WHISTLEBLOWER has made a series of extraordinary claims about how corrupt government officials allowed Pakistan and other states to steal nuclear weapons secrets.
Sibel Edmonds, a 37-year-old former Turkish language translator for the FBI, listened into hundreds of sensitive intercepted conversations while based at the agency’s Washington field office.
She approached The Sunday Times last month after reading about an Al-Qaeda terrorist who had revealed his role in training some of the 9/11 hijackers while he was in Turkey.
Edmonds described how foreign intelligence agents had enlisted the support of US officials to acquire a network of moles in sensitive military and nuclear institutions.
Among the hours of covert tape recordings, she says she heard evidence that one well-known senior official in the US State Department was being paid by Turkish agents in Washington who were selling the information on to black market buyers, including Pakistan.
The name of the official – who has held a series of top government posts – is known to The Sunday Times. He strongly denies the claims.
However, Edmonds said: “He was aiding foreign operatives against US interests by passing them highly classified information, not only from the State Department but also from the Pentagon, in exchange for money, position and political objectives.”
She claims that the FBI was also gathering evidence against senior Pentagon officials – including household names – who were aiding foreign agents.
“If you made public all the information that the FBI have on this case, you will see very high-level people going through criminal trials,” she said.
Her story shows just how much the West was infiltrated by foreign states seeking nuclear secrets. It illustrates how western government officials turned a blind eye to, or were even helping, countries such as Pakistan acquire bomb technology.
The wider nuclear network has been monitored for many years by a joint Anglo-American intelligence effort. But rather than shut it down, investigations by law enforcement bodies such as the FBI and Britain’s Revenue & Customs have been aborted to preserve diplomatic relations.
Edmonds, a fluent speaker of Turkish and Farsi, was recruited by the FBI in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks. Her previous claims about incompetence inside the FBI have been well documented in America.
She has given evidence to closed sessions of Congress and the 9/11 commission, but many of the key points of her testimony have remained secret. She has now decided to divulge some of that information after becoming disillusioned with the US authorities’ failure to act.
One of Edmonds’s main roles in the FBI was to translate thousands of hours of conversations by Turkish diplomatic and political targets that had been covertly recorded by the agency.
A backlog of tapes had built up, dating back to 1997, which were needed for an FBI investigation into links between the Turks and Pakistani, Israeli and US targets. Before she left the FBI in 2002 she heard evidence that pointed to money laundering, drug imports and attempts to acquire nuclear and conventional weapons technology.
“What I found was damning,” she said. “While the FBI was investigating, several arms of the government were shielding what was going on.”
The Turks and Israelis had planted “moles” in military and academic institutions which handled nuclear technology. Edmonds says there were several transactions of nuclear material every month, with the Pakistanis being among the eventual buyers. “The network appeared to be obtaining information from every nuclear agency in the United States,” she said.
They were helped, she says, by the high-ranking State Department official who provided some of their moles – mainly PhD students – with security clearance to work in sensitive nuclear research facilities. These included the Los Alamos nuclear laboratory in New Mexico, which is responsible for the security of the US nuclear deterrent.
In one conversation Edmonds heard the official arranging to pick up a $15,000 cash bribe. The package was to be dropped off at an agreed location by someone in the Turkish diplomatic community who was working for the network.
The Turks, she says, often acted as a conduit for the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Pakistan’s spy agency, because they were less likely to attract suspicion. Venues such as the American Turkish Council in Washington were used to drop off the cash, which was picked up by the official.
Edmonds said: “I heard at least three transactions like this over a period of 2½ years. There are almost certainly more.”
The Pakistani operation was led by General Mahmoud Ahmad, then the ISI chief.
Intercepted communications showed Ahmad and his colleagues stationed in Washington were in constant contact with attaché³ in the Turkish embassy.
Intelligence analysts say that members of the ISI were close to Al-Qaeda before and after 9/11. Indeed, Ahmad was accused of sanctioning a $100,000 wire payment to Mohammed Atta, one of the 9/11 hijackers, immediately before the attacks.
The results of the espionage were almost certainly passed to Abdul Qadeer Khan, the Pakistani nuclear scientist.
Khan was close to Ahmad and the ISI. While running Pakistan’s nuclear programme, he became a millionaire by selling atomic secrets to Libya, Iran and North Korea. He also used a network of companies in America and Britain to obtain components for a nuclear programme.
Khan caused an alert among western intelligence agencies when his aides met Osama Bin Laden. “We were aware of contact between A Q Khan’s people and Al-Qaeda,” a former CIA officer said last week. “There was absolute panic when we initially discovered this, but it kind of panned out in the end.”
It is likely that the nuclear secrets stolen from the United States would have been sold to a number of rogue states by Khan.
Edmonds was later to see the scope of the Pakistani connections when it was revealed that one of her fellow translators at the FBI was the daughter of a Pakistani embassy official who worked for Ahmad. The translator was given top secret clearance despite protests from FBI investigators.
Edmonds says packages containing nuclear secrets were delivered by Turkish operatives, using their cover as members of the diplomatic and military community, to contacts at the Pakistani embassy in Washington.
Following 9/11, a number of the foreign operatives were taken in for questioning by the FBI on suspicion that they knew about or somehow aided the attacks.
Edmonds said the State Department official once again proved useful. “A primary target would call the official and point to names on the list and say, ‘We need to get them out of the US because we can’t afford for them to spill the beans’,” she said. “The official said that he would ‘take care of it’.”
The four suspects on the list were released from interrogation and extradited.
Edmonds also claims that a number of senior officials in the Pentagon had helped Israeli and Turkish agents.
“The people provided lists of potential moles from Pentagon-related institutions who had access to databases concerning this information,” she said.
“The handlers, who were part of the diplomatic community, would then try to recruit those people to become moles for the network. The lists contained all their ‘hooking points’, which could be financial or sexual pressure points, their exact job in the Pentagon and what stuff they had access to.”
One of the Pentagon figures under investigation was Lawrence Franklin, a former Pentagon analyst, who was jailed in 2006 for passing US defence information to lobbyists and sharing classified information with an Israeli diplomat.
“He was one of the top people providing information and packages during 2000 and 2001,” she said.
Once acquired, the nuclear secrets could have gone anywhere. The FBI monitored Turkish diplomats who were selling copies of the information to the highest bidder.
Edmonds said: “Certain greedy Turkish operators would make copies of the material and look around for buyers. They had agents who would find potential buyers.”
In summer 2000, Edmonds says the FBI monitored one of the agents as he met two Saudi Arabian businessmen in Detroit to sell nuclear information that had been stolen from an air force base in Alabama. She overheard the agent saying: “We have a package and we’re going to sell it for $250,000.”
Edmonds’s employment with the FBI lasted for just six months. In March 2002 she was dismissed after accusing a colleague of covering up illicit activity involving Turkish nationals.
She has always claimed that she was victimised for being outspoken and was vindicated by an Office of the Inspector General review of her case three years later. It found that one of the contributory reasons for her sacking was that she had made valid complaints.
The US attorney-general has imposed a state secrets privilege order on her, which prevents her revealing more details of the FBI’s methods and current investigations.
Her allegations were heard in a closed session of Congress, but no action has been taken and she continues to campaign for a public hearing.
She was able to discuss the case with The Sunday Times because, by the end of January 2002, the justice department had shut down the programme.
The senior official in the State Department no longer works there. Last week he denied all of Edmonds’s allegations: “If you are calling me to say somebody said that I took money, that’s outrageous . . . I do not have anything to say about such stupid ridiculous things as this.”
In researching this article, The Sunday Times has talked to two FBI officers (one serving, one former) and two former CIA sources who worked on nuclear proliferation. While none was aware of specific allegations against officials she names, they did provide overlapping corroboration of Edmonds’s story.
One of the CIA sources confirmed that the Turks had acquired nuclear secrets from the United States and shared the information with Pakistan and Israel. “We have no indication that Turkey has its own nuclear ambitions. But the Turks are traders. To my knowledge they became big players in the late 1990s,” the source said.
How Pakistan got the bomb, then sold it to the highest bidders
1965 Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Pakistan’s foreign minister, says: “If India builds the bomb we will eat grass . . . but we will get one of our own”
1974 Nuclear programme becomes increased priority as India tests a nuclear device
1976 Abdul Qadeer Khan, a scientist, steals secrets from Dutch uranium plant. Made head of his nation’s nuclear programme by Bhutto, now prime minister
1976 onwards Clandestine network established to obtain materials and technology for uranium enrichment from the West
1985 Pakistan produces weapons-grade uranium for the first time
1989-91 Khan’s network sells Iran nuclear weapons information and technology
1991-97 Khan sells weapons technology to North Korea and Libya
1998 India tests nuclear bomb and Pakistan follows with a series of nuclear tests. Khan says: “I never had any doubts I was building a bomb. We had to do it”
2001 CIA chief George Tenet gathers officials for crisis summit on the proliferation of nuclear technology from Pakistan to other countries
2001 Weeks before 9/11, Khan’s aides meet Osama Bin Laden to discuss an Al-Qaeda nuclear device
2001 After 9/11 proliferation crisis becomes secondary as Pakistan is seen as important ally in war on terror
2003 Libya abandons nuclear weapons programme and admits acquiring components through Pakistani nuclear scientists
2004 Khan placed under house arrest and confesses to supplying Iran, Libya and North Korea with weapons technology. He is pardoned by President Pervez Musharraf
2006 North Korea tests a nuclear bomb
2007 Renewed fears that bomb may fall into hands of Islamic extremists as killing of Benazir Bhutto throws country into turmoil
Are Gujarati NRIs not Indians?
Indian Govt is in coma on the voilence against NRIs in Kenya.Mistakenly Anti-Hindu Govt thinks that all Gujaratis are onlyHindus. Are Gujarati NRIs of Kenya only Hindus, not Muslims?
Is in Indianless fake secular map, Gujarat is not in India?
Musharraf showed Kashmir as a part of Pakistan in the map to publishin his book: `In the Line of Fire'. This book was sold, is beingstill sold in India without restriction. Even our government doesn't protest this. Accprding to our law nobody can publish or sell such map which contains false bountdaries of India. This foreign hand Italian led government is blind, deaf and dumb. Pray for peace in Pakistan but not for Kashmir…
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/jul_07.htm
China want to omit Arunanchal from the Indian map.
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/114112006.htm
Is India ruled by Mush villain of Kargil or `Hindi Chini Bhai Bhai'?
Indians of all over world are in troublePM of India talk to NRIs on the investment in India. He never thinkabout their safety abroad? UPA Govt treats NRIs as cows only to milk without caring them.
This is the reason ant like little countries Kenya, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Malaysis can dare to torture Indians abroad. Indians of all over world are in trouble due to the weak cowardice India's present government. Tamil MP is gun downed in the temple in Sri Lanka. Hindus in Bangladesh are in trouble as in Malaysia. Indian Govt even don't want to talk on this.
Is safety of Indian in Kenya only duty of Narendra Modi?
He has written twice thrice time to the PM for the trouble facing by NRIs in Kenya but Congress led Govt is unable to care due to Congress defeat in Gujarat.
Mr. Anand Sharma, Minister of State for External Affairs say that Indians in Kenya are not being attacked. Their lives and properties are safe. This Anand Sharma wanted to vote without showing the ID card to the election officer. Even he threatened the officer. Govt do not want to learn lesson from the defeat of Congress in Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh.
"We believe citizens of any country should be allowed to peacefully assemble and express their views," a US State Department official said when commenting on the crackdown of unprecedented street protests in the Malaysian capital Kuala Lumpur this month. Did Indian Govt dare to convey this type of message to the Abdullah Badawi's government of Malysia? Badawai justifies his policy against the Malaysian Tamils to hide his black face by saying that Indians in Malaysia are linkup with RSS and LTTE.
UK, U S and UNESCO save but Indian Govt ruins Hinduism. Rig Veda is added to UNESCO heritage list. UK hails contribution of British Hindus.
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/124112006.htm
Anti-Hindu Govt of Hindustan
Govt kept mum on police harassment of Tamils by the order of Malysian PM in Malaysia. UPA Govt only show sorry before the embassy of Malaysia here after the reqest of Karunanidhi. Defense Minister can visit to Malaysia for expanding military relations. But the minister can't visit there for the cause of NRIs there. The Half Christian Govt shy to say Malaysian Govt for stopping the Islamization of Tamils there. Malaysian and Indian Govt: Sanjha Chulha to burn Hinduism
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/108122007.htm
The U S stops the military supplies to Lanka, as key countries rapped the Mahinda Rajapaksa government for unilaterally abrogating the 2002 Norway brokered truce with LTTE. Opposite to this UPA Govt had stopped the military supply to Nepal on the request of its ally Left to facilitate armed Maoist to capture power in Nepal. This culprit governmet is blind on the Maoist march from Nepal to Kanyakumari. Italian origin Half Christian Congress wants to remain in power to make hidden compromise with naxalites.
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/105092007.htm
Govt became dumb to stop the attack on Sikhism and Sikhs abroad. How did they react on the gundowning of Bauddha Saints by Junta of Myanmar?
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/129092007.htm
Is being Indian Gujarati a fault?
Indianless Christian led UPA Govt is unable to hear the tearful words of the HRIs in Kenya, "We expect the Indian government to reach out to us. We are tense and waiting for a solution to Kenya's political problems. But in case of any eventuality if we need to return to India, the government must help us,"
Modi writes to P M for Indian victims in Kenya
Expressing concern over attacks on Gujarati expatriates in Kenya and loss of property following major clashes after presidential elections in that country, Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi writes letters twice thrice and still equesting continuously to the Prime Minister to take up the issue with the Kenyan government and ensure safety of the Gujarati community there. But Modi's letters are thrown in the dustbin.
Kenya is witnessing bloody riots since last week in which more than 300 people have been killed and more than a lakh people have been evacuated from their homes. Property losses are estimated to be in the millions of dollars.
One Indian victim in Kenya narrated: "On new year's eve, Kisumu was a ghost town. According to the manager of a huge textile firm, "The Kenyan authorities said that anyone attempting to join the demonstrations would face arrest and in the slums the police implemented a shoot-on-sight policy. There is absolutely no food on store shelves in Kisumu." People told rediff.com that many Indian shops have been looted and Indians have been beaten and threatened in their homes
Hindu relatives of Liaquat Ali Khan and Benazir Bhutto are Gujartis and still in Gujarat. Jinnah and Phioze Khan (father in law of Sonia Gandhi) were also belonging to Gujarat.
Liaquat Bagh vs Shimla
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/128122007.htm
Here in India only fake secular media and leader divide Gujaratis in Muslim and Hindus. In abroad Indians are Indians and so Gujartis are Gujaratis in the eyes of natives there. Narendra Modi talks about all five and half crores Gujaratis. akeSecular media and vote bank politician talk for the Muslims over Hindus.
Kalank is Jihadi Chakravyuh to kill Unity and Peace at
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/130102007.htm
Bloody Secular media with red hand of Congress
Now see secular bloody gandhigiri of Karan Thaper in Hindustan Times. What does he want to write in the Anti-Hindu `Hindustan Times' daily `Only the sudden removal of Narendra Modi can stop this.'
Should this be standard of journalism?
In live-telecast Big fight of Rajdeep Sardesai in NDTV, Hasan Johar, a so called human right activist said that the persons, those came to kill Narendra Modi, are may be called murderous, but not terrorists." According to him killing in revenge is not terrorism.
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/125042007.htm
Manekshaw a Pak Spy?: CNN-IBN;
Vajara was paid to kill Soharbuddin: Top story at NDTV; Veer SAvarkar and lokmanya Tilak are terrorists: NCERT IGNOU books; Gandhian award to a naxalite! Jihad gets peace award!!
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/103012008.htm
By Premendra Agrawal
Is in Indianless fake secular map, Gujarat is not in India?
Musharraf showed Kashmir as a part of Pakistan in the map to publishin his book: `In the Line of Fire'. This book was sold, is beingstill sold in India without restriction. Even our government doesn't protest this. Accprding to our law nobody can publish or sell such map which contains false bountdaries of India. This foreign hand Italian led government is blind, deaf and dumb. Pray for peace in Pakistan but not for Kashmir…
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/jul_07.htm
China want to omit Arunanchal from the Indian map.
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/114112006.htm
Is India ruled by Mush villain of Kargil or `Hindi Chini Bhai Bhai'?
Indians of all over world are in troublePM of India talk to NRIs on the investment in India. He never thinkabout their safety abroad? UPA Govt treats NRIs as cows only to milk without caring them.
This is the reason ant like little countries Kenya, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Malaysis can dare to torture Indians abroad. Indians of all over world are in trouble due to the weak cowardice India's present government. Tamil MP is gun downed in the temple in Sri Lanka. Hindus in Bangladesh are in trouble as in Malaysia. Indian Govt even don't want to talk on this.
Is safety of Indian in Kenya only duty of Narendra Modi?
He has written twice thrice time to the PM for the trouble facing by NRIs in Kenya but Congress led Govt is unable to care due to Congress defeat in Gujarat.
Mr. Anand Sharma, Minister of State for External Affairs say that Indians in Kenya are not being attacked. Their lives and properties are safe. This Anand Sharma wanted to vote without showing the ID card to the election officer. Even he threatened the officer. Govt do not want to learn lesson from the defeat of Congress in Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh.
"We believe citizens of any country should be allowed to peacefully assemble and express their views," a US State Department official said when commenting on the crackdown of unprecedented street protests in the Malaysian capital Kuala Lumpur this month. Did Indian Govt dare to convey this type of message to the Abdullah Badawi's government of Malysia? Badawai justifies his policy against the Malaysian Tamils to hide his black face by saying that Indians in Malaysia are linkup with RSS and LTTE.
UK, U S and UNESCO save but Indian Govt ruins Hinduism. Rig Veda is added to UNESCO heritage list. UK hails contribution of British Hindus.
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/124112006.htm
Anti-Hindu Govt of Hindustan
Govt kept mum on police harassment of Tamils by the order of Malysian PM in Malaysia. UPA Govt only show sorry before the embassy of Malaysia here after the reqest of Karunanidhi. Defense Minister can visit to Malaysia for expanding military relations. But the minister can't visit there for the cause of NRIs there. The Half Christian Govt shy to say Malaysian Govt for stopping the Islamization of Tamils there. Malaysian and Indian Govt: Sanjha Chulha to burn Hinduism
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/108122007.htm
The U S stops the military supplies to Lanka, as key countries rapped the Mahinda Rajapaksa government for unilaterally abrogating the 2002 Norway brokered truce with LTTE. Opposite to this UPA Govt had stopped the military supply to Nepal on the request of its ally Left to facilitate armed Maoist to capture power in Nepal. This culprit governmet is blind on the Maoist march from Nepal to Kanyakumari. Italian origin Half Christian Congress wants to remain in power to make hidden compromise with naxalites.
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/105092007.htm
Govt became dumb to stop the attack on Sikhism and Sikhs abroad. How did they react on the gundowning of Bauddha Saints by Junta of Myanmar?
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/129092007.htm
Is being Indian Gujarati a fault?
Indianless Christian led UPA Govt is unable to hear the tearful words of the HRIs in Kenya, "We expect the Indian government to reach out to us. We are tense and waiting for a solution to Kenya's political problems. But in case of any eventuality if we need to return to India, the government must help us,"
Modi writes to P M for Indian victims in Kenya
Expressing concern over attacks on Gujarati expatriates in Kenya and loss of property following major clashes after presidential elections in that country, Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi writes letters twice thrice and still equesting continuously to the Prime Minister to take up the issue with the Kenyan government and ensure safety of the Gujarati community there. But Modi's letters are thrown in the dustbin.
Kenya is witnessing bloody riots since last week in which more than 300 people have been killed and more than a lakh people have been evacuated from their homes. Property losses are estimated to be in the millions of dollars.
One Indian victim in Kenya narrated: "On new year's eve, Kisumu was a ghost town. According to the manager of a huge textile firm, "The Kenyan authorities said that anyone attempting to join the demonstrations would face arrest and in the slums the police implemented a shoot-on-sight policy. There is absolutely no food on store shelves in Kisumu." People told rediff.com that many Indian shops have been looted and Indians have been beaten and threatened in their homes
Hindu relatives of Liaquat Ali Khan and Benazir Bhutto are Gujartis and still in Gujarat. Jinnah and Phioze Khan (father in law of Sonia Gandhi) were also belonging to Gujarat.
Liaquat Bagh vs Shimla
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/128122007.htm
Here in India only fake secular media and leader divide Gujaratis in Muslim and Hindus. In abroad Indians are Indians and so Gujartis are Gujaratis in the eyes of natives there. Narendra Modi talks about all five and half crores Gujaratis. akeSecular media and vote bank politician talk for the Muslims over Hindus.
Kalank is Jihadi Chakravyuh to kill Unity and Peace at
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/130102007.htm
Bloody Secular media with red hand of Congress
Now see secular bloody gandhigiri of Karan Thaper in Hindustan Times. What does he want to write in the Anti-Hindu `Hindustan Times' daily `Only the sudden removal of Narendra Modi can stop this.'
Should this be standard of journalism?
In live-telecast Big fight of Rajdeep Sardesai in NDTV, Hasan Johar, a so called human right activist said that the persons, those came to kill Narendra Modi, are may be called murderous, but not terrorists." According to him killing in revenge is not terrorism.
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/125042007.htm
Manekshaw a Pak Spy?: CNN-IBN;
Vajara was paid to kill Soharbuddin: Top story at NDTV; Veer SAvarkar and lokmanya Tilak are terrorists: NCERT IGNOU books; Gandhian award to a naxalite! Jihad gets peace award!!
http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/103012008.htm
By Premendra Agrawal
HD format wars
OXFORD ANALYTICA
The battle for dominance of the emerging 'high definition' (HD) DVD market appeared one step closer to being resolved this week.
HD offers significantly higher picture quality than existing video formats -- broadcast television and 'first-generation' DVDs, for example. This makes the transition to HD strategically critical to content owners, especially major film studios and television networks.
The film industry is in an HD 'format war'. Two camps -- and, crucially, alternative disc formats -- have been fighting it out, both of which rely on shorter-wavelength 'blue laser technology' to facilitate a significant increase in data storage compared to current discs, which rely on 'red laser technology'. Despite this, the new formats are backwards compatible with first-generation DVDs. There are two key differences between them:
Blu-Ray. The Blu-Ray format offers data capacities from 25-50 gigabytes (GB), with additional space for up to 200 GB (using multiple readable layers).
HD-DVD. The 'HD-DVD' format offers reduced data capacities from 15-30 GB, with additional space for 60 GB (using multiple readable layers).
While both formats are at a relatively early stage of development, major electronic producers and film studios over the past year have been coming out in support of their chosen formats:
Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard and Intel are championing Toshiba's HD-DVD.
Sony is the major proponent of Blu-Ray, with the support of a large number of major film studios and consumer electronics manufacturers.
Recent developments suggest that Blu-Ray is likely to win the format war:
Warner Brothers recently shifted its allegiance from HD-DVD to Blu-Ray.
Blu-Ray discs have been outselling HD-DVD by over two to one in North America.
Nonetheless, speaking at this week's Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, Sony Chief Executive Howard Stringer warned that the format war was not yet over. Indeed, one of the highlights of this year's show has been the emergence of platforms for downloadable HD content.
SyncTV is using the Consumer Electronic Show to demonstrate hardware, usable with a range of devices, which will allow users to download a range of television shows. The service, currently in beta form, will be fully launched later this year. While minimum image quality is comparable to first-generation DVDs, HD content will be increasingly available.
Microsoft has announced that users of its Xbox gaming console will be able to download and store movies and programmes from a range of studios. Panasonic has announced that it will sell flat panel televisions in the United States, which will have internet connectivity. LCD television manufacturer, Westinghouse, and networking company, Pulse-link have unveiled a integrated, wireless television set.
While Blu-Ray is likely to become increasingly dominant, the format war may be short and bloody. A number of factors mean high definition DVDs may well be quickly superseded, as consumers watch downloaded HD content on wireless televisions:
HD discs and players are relatively expensive.
There is a growing consumer preference for downloadable content.
Content has increasingly high image quality thanks to growing bandwidth capabilities.
Wireless internet connectivity will become increasingly central to numerous aspects of daily life.
The battle for dominance of the emerging 'high definition' (HD) DVD market appeared one step closer to being resolved this week.
HD offers significantly higher picture quality than existing video formats -- broadcast television and 'first-generation' DVDs, for example. This makes the transition to HD strategically critical to content owners, especially major film studios and television networks.
The film industry is in an HD 'format war'. Two camps -- and, crucially, alternative disc formats -- have been fighting it out, both of which rely on shorter-wavelength 'blue laser technology' to facilitate a significant increase in data storage compared to current discs, which rely on 'red laser technology'. Despite this, the new formats are backwards compatible with first-generation DVDs. There are two key differences between them:
Blu-Ray. The Blu-Ray format offers data capacities from 25-50 gigabytes (GB), with additional space for up to 200 GB (using multiple readable layers).
HD-DVD. The 'HD-DVD' format offers reduced data capacities from 15-30 GB, with additional space for 60 GB (using multiple readable layers).
While both formats are at a relatively early stage of development, major electronic producers and film studios over the past year have been coming out in support of their chosen formats:
Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard and Intel are championing Toshiba's HD-DVD.
Sony is the major proponent of Blu-Ray, with the support of a large number of major film studios and consumer electronics manufacturers.
Recent developments suggest that Blu-Ray is likely to win the format war:
Warner Brothers recently shifted its allegiance from HD-DVD to Blu-Ray.
Blu-Ray discs have been outselling HD-DVD by over two to one in North America.
Nonetheless, speaking at this week's Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, Sony Chief Executive Howard Stringer warned that the format war was not yet over. Indeed, one of the highlights of this year's show has been the emergence of platforms for downloadable HD content.
SyncTV is using the Consumer Electronic Show to demonstrate hardware, usable with a range of devices, which will allow users to download a range of television shows. The service, currently in beta form, will be fully launched later this year. While minimum image quality is comparable to first-generation DVDs, HD content will be increasingly available.
Microsoft has announced that users of its Xbox gaming console will be able to download and store movies and programmes from a range of studios. Panasonic has announced that it will sell flat panel televisions in the United States, which will have internet connectivity. LCD television manufacturer, Westinghouse, and networking company, Pulse-link have unveiled a integrated, wireless television set.
While Blu-Ray is likely to become increasingly dominant, the format war may be short and bloody. A number of factors mean high definition DVDs may well be quickly superseded, as consumers watch downloaded HD content on wireless televisions:
HD discs and players are relatively expensive.
There is a growing consumer preference for downloadable content.
Content has increasingly high image quality thanks to growing bandwidth capabilities.
Wireless internet connectivity will become increasingly central to numerous aspects of daily life.
Jargon Buster : 'War deterrent'
OXFORD ANALYTICA
North Korea's state media recently warned that the communist country would bolster its 'war deterrent' to fend off what it alleged was a US plot to initiate a nuclear war. It looks like another hiccup in a denuclearisation process that will be fraught with technical and diplomatic difficulty.
Pyongyang, which often uses 'deterrent,' 'war deterrent,' or 'nuclear deterrent' as euphemisms for its nuclear programmes, can now expect to come under mounting pressure over the next few weeks following its failure to declare all its nuclear programmes by end-2007, as required under an agreement reached at the six-party talks last February.
Its threat came just as US Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill embarked on a tour of six-party interlocutors Japan, South Korea, China and Russia. Pyongyang probably sees its threat as a way to pressure Washington in a US election year, but also Seoul, where policy towards Pyongyang is expected to become less accommodative under Lee Myung-bak, who becomes president next month. Lee, who won the December 19 presidential election by a landslide, has said he would repair Seoul's strained relations with Washington and not shy away from criticising Pyongyang.
Washington has repeatedly stressed that it has no intention of attacking or invading North Korea, and would normalise relations with Pyongyang if it yielded its nuclear programmes. Besides seeking to extract further energy aid and political concessions, Pyongyang may hope to engineer some form of compromise over the declaration of its nuclear activities, should there be some it does not want to own up to. For example, it is suspected of having a highly enriched uranium programme, which it denies.
Hill will meet Lee today (Thursday, January 9) and then travel to Beijing. His final stop is Moscow. He will continue to urge patience with the reclusive state, which has a history of missing deadlines and dragging its feet in its limited international dealings. More brinkmanship to extract maximum concessions may become a feature of 2008.
North Korea's state media recently warned that the communist country would bolster its 'war deterrent' to fend off what it alleged was a US plot to initiate a nuclear war. It looks like another hiccup in a denuclearisation process that will be fraught with technical and diplomatic difficulty.
Pyongyang, which often uses 'deterrent,' 'war deterrent,' or 'nuclear deterrent' as euphemisms for its nuclear programmes, can now expect to come under mounting pressure over the next few weeks following its failure to declare all its nuclear programmes by end-2007, as required under an agreement reached at the six-party talks last February.
Its threat came just as US Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill embarked on a tour of six-party interlocutors Japan, South Korea, China and Russia. Pyongyang probably sees its threat as a way to pressure Washington in a US election year, but also Seoul, where policy towards Pyongyang is expected to become less accommodative under Lee Myung-bak, who becomes president next month. Lee, who won the December 19 presidential election by a landslide, has said he would repair Seoul's strained relations with Washington and not shy away from criticising Pyongyang.
Washington has repeatedly stressed that it has no intention of attacking or invading North Korea, and would normalise relations with Pyongyang if it yielded its nuclear programmes. Besides seeking to extract further energy aid and political concessions, Pyongyang may hope to engineer some form of compromise over the declaration of its nuclear activities, should there be some it does not want to own up to. For example, it is suspected of having a highly enriched uranium programme, which it denies.
Hill will meet Lee today (Thursday, January 9) and then travel to Beijing. His final stop is Moscow. He will continue to urge patience with the reclusive state, which has a history of missing deadlines and dragging its feet in its limited international dealings. More brinkmanship to extract maximum concessions may become a feature of 2008.
Iran / Turkey: gas dominoes
OXFORD ANALYTICA
Iran plans to resume pumping natural gas to Turkey on Monday, after dramatically reducing supplies last week.
The reduction of some 25 million cubic metres (mcm) per day was largely the knock-on effect of the interruption of Turkmen gas supplies to Iran, which receives up to 23 mcm from its Central Asian neighbour every day.
The Turkmen government has blamed the halt on technical problems; however, a pricing dispute could be the real motive as Ashgabat tries to leverage better terms from its customers.
Last month, Russia's Gazprom, which remains the main buyer of Turkmen gas, agreed to a 50% price increase to Ashgabat. In exchange, it secured an agreement that the Turkmen government would remain committed to the construction of the Caspian Littoral Pipeline to transport more gas to Russia. Indeed, Turkey generally relies on Russia to help it cover its gas deficit when other suppliers default. However, this year, rising gas shortages in the Russian domestic market and cold weather have led Moscow to reduce its deliveries to Turkey.
This situation raises two questions. First, the interruption of Turkmen gas supplies adds to the plethora of concerns over Ashgabat's reliability as an energy partner, with which Europe could work productively to reduce its reliance on Russia. Second, gas demand in Russia will continue to grow, as will the shortages, forcing the government to prioritise the domestic market. This will leave foreign consumers vulnerable.
Iran plans to resume pumping natural gas to Turkey on Monday, after dramatically reducing supplies last week.
The reduction of some 25 million cubic metres (mcm) per day was largely the knock-on effect of the interruption of Turkmen gas supplies to Iran, which receives up to 23 mcm from its Central Asian neighbour every day.
The Turkmen government has blamed the halt on technical problems; however, a pricing dispute could be the real motive as Ashgabat tries to leverage better terms from its customers.
Last month, Russia's Gazprom, which remains the main buyer of Turkmen gas, agreed to a 50% price increase to Ashgabat. In exchange, it secured an agreement that the Turkmen government would remain committed to the construction of the Caspian Littoral Pipeline to transport more gas to Russia. Indeed, Turkey generally relies on Russia to help it cover its gas deficit when other suppliers default. However, this year, rising gas shortages in the Russian domestic market and cold weather have led Moscow to reduce its deliveries to Turkey.
This situation raises two questions. First, the interruption of Turkmen gas supplies adds to the plethora of concerns over Ashgabat's reliability as an energy partner, with which Europe could work productively to reduce its reliance on Russia. Second, gas demand in Russia will continue to grow, as will the shortages, forcing the government to prioritise the domestic market. This will leave foreign consumers vulnerable.
INDIA : Missile plan: Some hits, misses
9 Jan 2008, 0205 hrs IST,Rajat Pandit,TNN
NEW DELHI: A quarter of a century after the launch of the indigenous integrated guided missile development programme (IGMDP) in 1983, which was dogged by huge time-overruns, cost escalations and technical snags, India on Tuesday virtually signalled the ''closure'' of the long-running programme.
With India on the ''glide path'' to testing the Agni-III-plus missile, with a strike range of around 5,000 km, early next year, as well as hectic work underway to develop submarine-launched missiles and land-attack cruise missiles, further developmental work will not take place under the aegis of the IGMDP, the brainchild of former president A P J Abdul Kalam.
While ''strategic'' programmes like long-range nuclear-capable missiles will still be ''undertaken in-house'', India will increasingly look at foreign collaboration in other armament projects after many years of facing technology denial regimes.
Admitting IGMDP has had a long tortuous history, DRDO chief controller (R&D) Prahlada on Tuesday said India had suffered from denial regimes as well as a poor domestic industrial base. But things are different now. ''Around 14 countries like France, Russia, UK, Germany, Singapore, Israel and now the US are now knocking on our doors for collaboration... Our industrial base, too, has grown,'' he said.
Citing the ''very successful'' example of the 290-km BrahMos supersonic cruise missile, developed with Russian collaboration, Prahlada said India could now develop new missile and weapon systems within five years. India, for instance, is already collaborating with France and Russia to develop an 80-km range 'Astra' beyond visual range air-to-air missile to arm its fighter jets.
The virtual 'closure' of IGMDP comes after DRDO declared that the Akash air defence weapon system, with an interception range of 25 km to guard 'vulnerable areas' against hostile fighter jets, UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) and sub-sonic cruise missiles, was now finally ready.
''With this, we have now completed all the original IGMDP systems (Agni, Prithvi, Akash and Trishul missiles) except for the Nag anti-tank missile, which also will undergo final trials in the coming summer. By December 2008, all the five missile systems will have gone to the users (armed forces),'' said Prahlada.
Akash project in-charge R R Panyam, in turn, said the first two Akash squadrons, each costing around Rs 500 crore, with 48 missiles each, will be available to IAF within three years. DRDO anticipates orders worth Rs 5,000 crore to equip 10 Akash squadrons for IAF and Army at the very least.
But this, of course, cannot detract from the fact that the Army is still not fully convinced about the efficacy of its version of the Akash system. The less said about the 9-km range Trishul air defence system, the better.
In fact, it was Trishul's repeated failure which forced Navy to push for Israeli 'Barak' missile defence systems for its frontline warships during the 1999 Kargil conflict.
Be that as it may, DRDO cannot be denied the progress it has made, especially in last three-four years with successful tests of systems ranging from the 3,500-km Agni-III missile to the two-tier ballistic missile defence (BMD) system.
There are, however, still some gaping holes in the missile arsenal of India, which increasingly fancies itself as a regional superpower. At this point in time, India neither has ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missiles), with strike ranges over 5,500 km, nor SLBM (submarine-launched ballistic missile) capabilities.
Even the missiles inducted by the armed forces like the different variants of Prithvi tactical ''battlefield support'' missiles, with ranges varying from 150 to 250-km, or the 700-km Agni-I and 2,500-km Agni-II, which constitute an important leg of India's nuclear deterrence posture, are not entirely free of operational glitches.
This when Pakistan has steadily built up its missile arsenal, with its 'Shaheen' and 'Ghauri' ballistic missiles or the latest 'Babur' cruise missile, of course with covert help from China and North Korea.
China, however, is in a different league altogether. It even has the US rattled with its modernisation of its strategic forces, which includes DF-31 and DF-31A road-mobile ICBMs and new-generation JL-2 SLBMs, and now even ASAT (anti-satellite) weapons.
rajat.pandit@timesgroup.com
NEW DELHI: A quarter of a century after the launch of the indigenous integrated guided missile development programme (IGMDP) in 1983, which was dogged by huge time-overruns, cost escalations and technical snags, India on Tuesday virtually signalled the ''closure'' of the long-running programme.
With India on the ''glide path'' to testing the Agni-III-plus missile, with a strike range of around 5,000 km, early next year, as well as hectic work underway to develop submarine-launched missiles and land-attack cruise missiles, further developmental work will not take place under the aegis of the IGMDP, the brainchild of former president A P J Abdul Kalam.
While ''strategic'' programmes like long-range nuclear-capable missiles will still be ''undertaken in-house'', India will increasingly look at foreign collaboration in other armament projects after many years of facing technology denial regimes.
Admitting IGMDP has had a long tortuous history, DRDO chief controller (R&D) Prahlada on Tuesday said India had suffered from denial regimes as well as a poor domestic industrial base. But things are different now. ''Around 14 countries like France, Russia, UK, Germany, Singapore, Israel and now the US are now knocking on our doors for collaboration... Our industrial base, too, has grown,'' he said.
Citing the ''very successful'' example of the 290-km BrahMos supersonic cruise missile, developed with Russian collaboration, Prahlada said India could now develop new missile and weapon systems within five years. India, for instance, is already collaborating with France and Russia to develop an 80-km range 'Astra' beyond visual range air-to-air missile to arm its fighter jets.
The virtual 'closure' of IGMDP comes after DRDO declared that the Akash air defence weapon system, with an interception range of 25 km to guard 'vulnerable areas' against hostile fighter jets, UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) and sub-sonic cruise missiles, was now finally ready.
''With this, we have now completed all the original IGMDP systems (Agni, Prithvi, Akash and Trishul missiles) except for the Nag anti-tank missile, which also will undergo final trials in the coming summer. By December 2008, all the five missile systems will have gone to the users (armed forces),'' said Prahlada.
Akash project in-charge R R Panyam, in turn, said the first two Akash squadrons, each costing around Rs 500 crore, with 48 missiles each, will be available to IAF within three years. DRDO anticipates orders worth Rs 5,000 crore to equip 10 Akash squadrons for IAF and Army at the very least.
But this, of course, cannot detract from the fact that the Army is still not fully convinced about the efficacy of its version of the Akash system. The less said about the 9-km range Trishul air defence system, the better.
In fact, it was Trishul's repeated failure which forced Navy to push for Israeli 'Barak' missile defence systems for its frontline warships during the 1999 Kargil conflict.
Be that as it may, DRDO cannot be denied the progress it has made, especially in last three-four years with successful tests of systems ranging from the 3,500-km Agni-III missile to the two-tier ballistic missile defence (BMD) system.
There are, however, still some gaping holes in the missile arsenal of India, which increasingly fancies itself as a regional superpower. At this point in time, India neither has ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missiles), with strike ranges over 5,500 km, nor SLBM (submarine-launched ballistic missile) capabilities.
Even the missiles inducted by the armed forces like the different variants of Prithvi tactical ''battlefield support'' missiles, with ranges varying from 150 to 250-km, or the 700-km Agni-I and 2,500-km Agni-II, which constitute an important leg of India's nuclear deterrence posture, are not entirely free of operational glitches.
This when Pakistan has steadily built up its missile arsenal, with its 'Shaheen' and 'Ghauri' ballistic missiles or the latest 'Babur' cruise missile, of course with covert help from China and North Korea.
China, however, is in a different league altogether. It even has the US rattled with its modernisation of its strategic forces, which includes DF-31 and DF-31A road-mobile ICBMs and new-generation JL-2 SLBMs, and now even ASAT (anti-satellite) weapons.
rajat.pandit@timesgroup.com
India to test advanced version of Agni-III early in 2009 news
http://www.domain-b.com/aero/space/launch_veh/20080108_agni.html
08 January 2008
Visakhapatnam: India will test an advanced version of the indigenous Agni-III ballistic missile with an enhanced strike range, in excess of 5000 km, early on in 2009. Without actually saying it in so many words this Agni version will be India's first ICBM.
A genuine ICBM with a range in excess of 6,000 km is in the pipeline and is often referred to in the media as the Surya. It's existence is not officially confirmed, however.
According to Dr VK Saraswat, chief controller (strategic systems) of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) the enhanced range version is currently at the design stage. "We are looking for trials in early 2009," he told reporters on the sidelines of the 95th Indian Science Congress here.
Dr Saraswat also mentioned that after the acceptance of the medium-range surface-to-air missile Akash by the Indian Air Force, the Indian Army would start user trials for the sophisticated anti-tank Nag missiles this summer.
"User trials for Nag will be held in May-June in the Rajasthan desert," Saraswat said.
Nag is an all weather anti-tank guided missile. Design work on the missile started in 1988 and the first tests were carried out in November 1990.
08 January 2008
Visakhapatnam: India will test an advanced version of the indigenous Agni-III ballistic missile with an enhanced strike range, in excess of 5000 km, early on in 2009. Without actually saying it in so many words this Agni version will be India's first ICBM.
A genuine ICBM with a range in excess of 6,000 km is in the pipeline and is often referred to in the media as the Surya. It's existence is not officially confirmed, however.
According to Dr VK Saraswat, chief controller (strategic systems) of the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) the enhanced range version is currently at the design stage. "We are looking for trials in early 2009," he told reporters on the sidelines of the 95th Indian Science Congress here.
Dr Saraswat also mentioned that after the acceptance of the medium-range surface-to-air missile Akash by the Indian Air Force, the Indian Army would start user trials for the sophisticated anti-tank Nag missiles this summer.
"User trials for Nag will be held in May-June in the Rajasthan desert," Saraswat said.
Nag is an all weather anti-tank guided missile. Design work on the missile started in 1988 and the first tests were carried out in November 1990.
US, Pakistan: Personality politics
Bush only recently described Musharraf as 'truly somebody who believes in democracy,' despite emergency rule and a massive crackdown on all his critics, and experts are calling for a fundamental reassessment.
By Peter Buxbaum in Washington, DC for ISN Security Watch (10/01/08)
The assassination of Benazir Bhutto brought to an abrupt end the Bush administration’s policy of arranging a shotgun marriage between the slain leader of the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and the country’s president, Pervez Musharraf.
The former prime minister’s return to Pakistan after eight years of exile was accompanied by strenuous efforts from Washington to broker a power sharing agreement between Bhutto and Musharraf. Bhutto was regarded in Washington as more secular, more moderate and more determined to fight Islamic extremists than any of Pakistan’s political alternatives, including the other principal opposition leader, former prime minister Nawaz Sharif.
Even after the power-sharing talks broke down, Musharraf and Bhutto could still have come to an accord after the parliamentary elections, originally scheduled for 8 January and now postponed until 18 February.
Personality vs process
The Bush administration’s efforts in Pakistan - and their ultimate failure - illustrates the problems associated with a policy based on personality rather than process.
In November, President George W Bush described Musharraf, much to the consternation of administration critics, as "truly somebody who believes in democracy." This, after Musharraf imposed emergency rule, shut down media outlets, dismissed the judiciary and jailed thousands of lawyers and activists.
Support for Bhutto was also based more on name recognition than on the advancement of democracy in Pakistan. The reins of her PPP were assumed by her 19-year-old son after her death, indicating the continuation of personality-based politics and the lack of political depth offered by her movement.
With Bhutto’s demise and, more so, with the end of the Bush administration on the horizon, many Washington policy thinkers are pushing for a different kind of strategy towards Pakistan, especially as it regards the structure US aid.
Change advocates would dial back all-purpose military aid and instead direct aid toward the promotion of economic and social development, education reform and free elections. The process of leveraging aid to achieve political results is already under way.
“Bush placed nearly all his eggs in Musharraf’s basket and now that basket is badly leaking,” Robert Hathaway, director of the Asia program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, told ISN Security Watch.
Nor is the administration excited about the prospects of a return of Nawaz Sharif.
“Sharif cozied up to religious conservatives and supported the passage of a shari’a law in the 1990s,” Hathaway added. “He also moved against the media and judiciary and conducted nuclear weapons tests in 1988. The administration believes Nawaz would not enthusiastically fight Islamic extremists.”
Tortured relations
The US-Pakistan relationship has been a tortured one, characterized, critics say, by ad hoc, reactive and short-term thinking.
During the 1980s, Pakistan was regarded as a US strategic ally for its support of anti-Soviet forces in Afghanistan. But with the withdrawal of the Soviet Union from Afghanistan in 1988 and the end of the Cold War, US aid dropped from US$726 million in 1988 to US$24 million four years later. This on-again, off-again history of US assistance has left Pakistan’s leaders and its people with serious concerns about the depth and reliability of the US commitment.
After 9/11, the relationship was on again, once Musharraf perceived that his better interests lay in cooperation with Washington than in continued support of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Since then, US aid has surged, mostly in the form of massive amounts of military financing.
Washington policy makers credit Pakistan’s intelligence services for their help in rounding up key al-Qaida leaders, but they are distressed that some US aid money ended up in the hands of jihadi militias in Pakistan’s border areas. The Pakistan military uses those militias in its struggle with India over Kashmir and to conduct operations on the border with Afghanistan.
Post-Bhutto policy
Some strategic thinkers believe that the first US reaction to Bhutto's assassination should be to bolster Musharraf and shore up the Pakistan state.
“The assassination will further poison the political atmosphere,” Lisa Curtis, senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank in Washington, told ISN Security Watch. “The US must stand firmly behind the Pakistan leadership.”
At the same time, Curtis believes the US should convince Musharraf to reconcile with Sharif in an effort to preserve stability.
Others are looking for a fundamental reassessment of the US-Pakistan relationship and a restructuring of US aid.
“The alliance with Musharraf was an alliance of convenience,” Pakistan native Hasim Haqqani, associate professor of international relations at Boston University and a former Bhutto advisor, told ISN Security Watch. “Most US aid has been diverted to Pakistan’s struggle with India.”
He pointed out that deaths in Pakistan attributable to terrorist incidents have risen from 648 in 2005 to 1,471 in 2006, and to around 2,300 in 2007.
Haqqani also noted that the US provided US$22 billion in aid to Pakistan since 1954. During the 34 years of military rule Pakistan has experienced since then, the US sent US$17.7 billion, or around US$650 million per year. In 19 years of civilian rule, the US sent US$3.4 billion, or around US$180 million per year.
Pakistanis would prefer that US aid evince a greater concern for the country’s people and less towards supporting its military establishment, according to Haqqani.
“The vast majority of current US assistance goes to the Pakistani military,” Lawrence Korb, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank in Washington, and a former US Defense Department official, told ISN Security Watch. “This is exactly the opposite of our aid policy prior to 2001, when military aid was the smaller portion.”
Most assistance since 2001 has been directed toward coalition-related activities in fighting terrorism, benefits to the Pakistani military in the form of security assistance, and direct cash transfers to be used at the Pakistan government’s discretion, according to Korb. “This represents an overwhelming proportion, 75 percent or some US$7.5 billion, of the aid given since 9/11,” he said.
How the Musharraf government has managed US military assistance has only compounded the problem, according to Korb.
“The Pakistan government has committed an overwhelming portion of security-related aid to non-counterterrorism-related programs and weaponry,” he said. “The vast majority of US foreign military financing has gone toward the purchase of major weapons systems such as F-16 fighters and other aircraft, anti-ship and anti-missile capabilities.”
The 2006 arms deal between Pakistan and the US, totaling US$3.5 billion, made Pakistan the largest recipient of US arms in the world that year.
Like Haqqani, Korb believes that an effective fight against extremism and terrorism in Pakistan requires that the US “shift from an aid policy centered on short-term military cooperation with an individual leader to one focused on developing a long-term relationship with Pakistan and its people.
“We must place a much greater emphasis on promoting democracy, economic development and education,” he said. “Improvements in these fields are central to eradicating extremism, which thrives in the absence of development. The areas of most concern to the United States, the borderlands of Pakistan, where al-Qaida and the Taliban thrive, have some of the lowest human development indicators in the world.”
There are indications that the Bush administration and the US Congress are already moving in the direction of earmarking foreign aid for economic and social development. The US Agency for International Development’s (USAID) plans to provide US$750 million in economic assistance to Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas “is a move in the right direction,” according to Korb.
Additionally, the US Congress, in legislation passed on 19 December 2007, placed restrictions on military aid to Pakistan and withheld US$50 million of the Bush administration's US$300 million foreign aid request.
The congressional move went further than the administration's November 2007 decision to stop making annual US$200 million cash payments to the Pakistani government, instead converting those funds to programs to be administered by USAID.
To release the US$50 million, the legislation stipulates that Pakistan must make “concerted efforts” to eradicate terrorist havens and to implement democratic reforms such as releasing political detainees, ending harassment and detention of journalists, human rights activists and government critics, and restoring an independent judiciary.
Peter Buxbaum, a Washington-based independent journalist, has been writing about defense, security, business and technology for 15 years. His work has appeared in publications such as Fortune, Forbes, Chief Executive, Information Week, Defense Technology International, Homeland Security and Computerworld. His website is www.buxbaum1.com.
By Peter Buxbaum in Washington, DC for ISN Security Watch (10/01/08)
The assassination of Benazir Bhutto brought to an abrupt end the Bush administration’s policy of arranging a shotgun marriage between the slain leader of the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and the country’s president, Pervez Musharraf.
The former prime minister’s return to Pakistan after eight years of exile was accompanied by strenuous efforts from Washington to broker a power sharing agreement between Bhutto and Musharraf. Bhutto was regarded in Washington as more secular, more moderate and more determined to fight Islamic extremists than any of Pakistan’s political alternatives, including the other principal opposition leader, former prime minister Nawaz Sharif.
Even after the power-sharing talks broke down, Musharraf and Bhutto could still have come to an accord after the parliamentary elections, originally scheduled for 8 January and now postponed until 18 February.
Personality vs process
The Bush administration’s efforts in Pakistan - and their ultimate failure - illustrates the problems associated with a policy based on personality rather than process.
In November, President George W Bush described Musharraf, much to the consternation of administration critics, as "truly somebody who believes in democracy." This, after Musharraf imposed emergency rule, shut down media outlets, dismissed the judiciary and jailed thousands of lawyers and activists.
Support for Bhutto was also based more on name recognition than on the advancement of democracy in Pakistan. The reins of her PPP were assumed by her 19-year-old son after her death, indicating the continuation of personality-based politics and the lack of political depth offered by her movement.
With Bhutto’s demise and, more so, with the end of the Bush administration on the horizon, many Washington policy thinkers are pushing for a different kind of strategy towards Pakistan, especially as it regards the structure US aid.
Change advocates would dial back all-purpose military aid and instead direct aid toward the promotion of economic and social development, education reform and free elections. The process of leveraging aid to achieve political results is already under way.
“Bush placed nearly all his eggs in Musharraf’s basket and now that basket is badly leaking,” Robert Hathaway, director of the Asia program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, told ISN Security Watch.
Nor is the administration excited about the prospects of a return of Nawaz Sharif.
“Sharif cozied up to religious conservatives and supported the passage of a shari’a law in the 1990s,” Hathaway added. “He also moved against the media and judiciary and conducted nuclear weapons tests in 1988. The administration believes Nawaz would not enthusiastically fight Islamic extremists.”
Tortured relations
The US-Pakistan relationship has been a tortured one, characterized, critics say, by ad hoc, reactive and short-term thinking.
During the 1980s, Pakistan was regarded as a US strategic ally for its support of anti-Soviet forces in Afghanistan. But with the withdrawal of the Soviet Union from Afghanistan in 1988 and the end of the Cold War, US aid dropped from US$726 million in 1988 to US$24 million four years later. This on-again, off-again history of US assistance has left Pakistan’s leaders and its people with serious concerns about the depth and reliability of the US commitment.
After 9/11, the relationship was on again, once Musharraf perceived that his better interests lay in cooperation with Washington than in continued support of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Since then, US aid has surged, mostly in the form of massive amounts of military financing.
Washington policy makers credit Pakistan’s intelligence services for their help in rounding up key al-Qaida leaders, but they are distressed that some US aid money ended up in the hands of jihadi militias in Pakistan’s border areas. The Pakistan military uses those militias in its struggle with India over Kashmir and to conduct operations on the border with Afghanistan.
Post-Bhutto policy
Some strategic thinkers believe that the first US reaction to Bhutto's assassination should be to bolster Musharraf and shore up the Pakistan state.
“The assassination will further poison the political atmosphere,” Lisa Curtis, senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank in Washington, told ISN Security Watch. “The US must stand firmly behind the Pakistan leadership.”
At the same time, Curtis believes the US should convince Musharraf to reconcile with Sharif in an effort to preserve stability.
Others are looking for a fundamental reassessment of the US-Pakistan relationship and a restructuring of US aid.
“The alliance with Musharraf was an alliance of convenience,” Pakistan native Hasim Haqqani, associate professor of international relations at Boston University and a former Bhutto advisor, told ISN Security Watch. “Most US aid has been diverted to Pakistan’s struggle with India.”
He pointed out that deaths in Pakistan attributable to terrorist incidents have risen from 648 in 2005 to 1,471 in 2006, and to around 2,300 in 2007.
Haqqani also noted that the US provided US$22 billion in aid to Pakistan since 1954. During the 34 years of military rule Pakistan has experienced since then, the US sent US$17.7 billion, or around US$650 million per year. In 19 years of civilian rule, the US sent US$3.4 billion, or around US$180 million per year.
Pakistanis would prefer that US aid evince a greater concern for the country’s people and less towards supporting its military establishment, according to Haqqani.
“The vast majority of current US assistance goes to the Pakistani military,” Lawrence Korb, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank in Washington, and a former US Defense Department official, told ISN Security Watch. “This is exactly the opposite of our aid policy prior to 2001, when military aid was the smaller portion.”
Most assistance since 2001 has been directed toward coalition-related activities in fighting terrorism, benefits to the Pakistani military in the form of security assistance, and direct cash transfers to be used at the Pakistan government’s discretion, according to Korb. “This represents an overwhelming proportion, 75 percent or some US$7.5 billion, of the aid given since 9/11,” he said.
How the Musharraf government has managed US military assistance has only compounded the problem, according to Korb.
“The Pakistan government has committed an overwhelming portion of security-related aid to non-counterterrorism-related programs and weaponry,” he said. “The vast majority of US foreign military financing has gone toward the purchase of major weapons systems such as F-16 fighters and other aircraft, anti-ship and anti-missile capabilities.”
The 2006 arms deal between Pakistan and the US, totaling US$3.5 billion, made Pakistan the largest recipient of US arms in the world that year.
Like Haqqani, Korb believes that an effective fight against extremism and terrorism in Pakistan requires that the US “shift from an aid policy centered on short-term military cooperation with an individual leader to one focused on developing a long-term relationship with Pakistan and its people.
“We must place a much greater emphasis on promoting democracy, economic development and education,” he said. “Improvements in these fields are central to eradicating extremism, which thrives in the absence of development. The areas of most concern to the United States, the borderlands of Pakistan, where al-Qaida and the Taliban thrive, have some of the lowest human development indicators in the world.”
There are indications that the Bush administration and the US Congress are already moving in the direction of earmarking foreign aid for economic and social development. The US Agency for International Development’s (USAID) plans to provide US$750 million in economic assistance to Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas “is a move in the right direction,” according to Korb.
Additionally, the US Congress, in legislation passed on 19 December 2007, placed restrictions on military aid to Pakistan and withheld US$50 million of the Bush administration's US$300 million foreign aid request.
The congressional move went further than the administration's November 2007 decision to stop making annual US$200 million cash payments to the Pakistani government, instead converting those funds to programs to be administered by USAID.
To release the US$50 million, the legislation stipulates that Pakistan must make “concerted efforts” to eradicate terrorist havens and to implement democratic reforms such as releasing political detainees, ending harassment and detention of journalists, human rights activists and government critics, and restoring an independent judiciary.
Peter Buxbaum, a Washington-based independent journalist, has been writing about defense, security, business and technology for 15 years. His work has appeared in publications such as Fortune, Forbes, Chief Executive, Information Week, Defense Technology International, Homeland Security and Computerworld. His website is www.buxbaum1.com.
Nepal faces new identity crisis
Previously the world's only Hindu kingdom, Nepal is now the only republic with a king, and the election that is expected to signal the final exit of the royal family remains controversial.
Commentary by Sudeshna Sarkar in Kathmandu for ISN Security Watch (10/01/08)
Until last year, Nepal's claim to fame was being a mountaineer's paradise, home to eight of the world’s 14 tallest mountains. But last month, the country acquired a new distinction: the world’s only republic with a king.
It is part of the dramatic changes prompted by the 2001 assassination of King Birendra, culminating last month in parliament declaring the country a federal, democratic republic.
The governing body's decision has left the now-reigning king, Gyanendra, who took over after his brother's murder, stripped of many of his powers. In 1996, the Maoists, demanding the abolition of the constitutional monarchy and an election that would allow the people to write a new constitution, started their 10-year People's War. The conflict, in which over 13,000 people were killed, received an unexpected boost from the new king himself. In 2005, King Gyanendra seized absolute power through an army-backed bloodless coup, declared himself head of the government and began direct rule, much as his ancestors had done.
It proved disastrous for him and his dynasty. The 14-month royal regime brought the marginalized parties and Maoists together, who began a united opposition to the royal government. Called Nepal's "Rhododendron Revolution," the opposition launched 19 days of public protests that though peaceful, paralyzed the country, emptied the treasury and isolated the king in the international community.
The revolution forced Gyanendra to surrender and with the formation of a new government of opposition parties, the Maoists signed a peace accord, ending the insurgency. After the former rebels joined the government in April 2001, plans for a Constituent Assembly election were announced. The people would choose between the king and a republic.
However, the parties' failure to implement the peace accord and the Maoists' refusal to give up violence came to the king's rescue.
The election was postponed twice, and in September 2007, the Maoists walked out of the government, demanding the king's ouster before the balloting and a new election system that would improve their chances.
After Prime Minister Girjia Prasad Koirala refused to meet their demands, the rebels successfully took the battle to parliament, and in December 2007 a republic proposal was accepted.
Though the constitution was amended to oust the king, actual implementation however was to take place only after the election.
The twice-deferred poll is scheduled to be held by mid-April and the newly elected Constituent Assembly will decide the fate of the king at its first meeting: it remains to be seen if this will happen.
The Election Commission says it will require a minimum of 90 days for preparations once the poll date is announced, and the window of time is closing.
By opposing the election once, the Maoists have raised doubts about their intentions. Though their guerrilla troops, the People's Liberation Army (PLA), has been kept confined to barracks under UN supervision to ensure a free and fair election, the UN says over 8,500 soldiers have disappeared from the camps.
With such a large number of trained and possibly armed guerrillas at large, voter intimidation cannot be ruled out.
The election process also remains contentious, with Maoist infighting over whether to back a mixed or fully proportional system. If the rebels fear poor results, they can once again try to sabotage the election by raising a fresh demand for a fully proportional election.
The Maoists are also seeking the integration of the PLA with the state army. Though the Koirala government agreed to the proposal when it signed the peace pact, senior officials of the Nepal army are against such a merger.
This month, army chief General Rukmangud Katuwal spoke strongly against such a move, followed by Koirala himself, which has freshly angered the Maoists. If the future of the PLA is not ascertained, peace will continue to elude Nepal, even if the election is held.
The government also must restore law and order in the southern plains where more than a dozen groups, many of them armed, are waging separate movements for autonomy. Events there prompted the postponement of elections in June 2007. A similar situation could recur unless the government is able to engage the warring groups in dialogue.
Finally, though Nepal is now a republic, the king still musters considerable support. On 7 January, defying the Maoists, hundreds of Gyanendra's supporters rallied in the capital, demanding the restoration of the monarchy.
Kamal Thapa, the king's former home minister, says a republic does not guarantee democracy and Nepal should learn a lesson from four Asian countries that in the last four decades chose to embrace a republic from a monarchy.
"Out of these, one lost its independence," he told ISN Security Watch, referring to Sikkim, which merged with India. "One - Afghanistan - is plagued by a continuous war. The third, Iran, turned into a fundamentalist state and the fourth, Cambodia, returned to monarchy."
Sudeshna Sarkar is a correspondent in Kathmandu for ISN Security Watch.
The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author only, not the International Relations and Security Network (ISN).
January 09, 2008
Naxal Terrorism in India in Numbers, compared to Kashmir and North East
Total number of incidents, casualties in security forces, casualties in civilians, extremists killed and weapons recovered in Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), North-Eastern States (NE) and naxal affected States.
Source of the Data: Rajya Sabha
Source of the Data: Rajya Sabha
United Nations Global Initiative to Fight Human Trafficking
UN.GIFT (United Nations Global Initiative to Fight Human Trafficking ) website www.ungift.org aims to be an extension of UN GIFT activities worldwide. We would like it to evolve into a vibrant online community where people exchange views, showcase their work, talk about their experiences to strengthen the fight against human trafficking. With your help we can make it a valuable resource to take this fight forward. Organized crime of human trafficking needs a fitting organized response.
• It is time to join forces to prevent human trafficking.
• Give this global problem a global solution.
• Rally under the banner of the Global Initiative to Fight Human Trafficking.
• Get involved!
• Together we can save people and put traffickers behind bars.
UN.GIFT was formally launched in London on 26 March 2007. It is designed to have a long-term impact to create a turning point in the worldwide fight against human trafficking. 27million people are trafficked each year. UN.GIFT intends to take action against human trafficking in all its manifestations – commercial sexual exploitation, bonded labour, organ trade, camel jockeying, forced marriages, domestic labour, illegal adoption, and other exploitative work – through creating partnerships at a global level with all sectors of society.
The ultimate goal of the Global Initiative is to contribute to ending human trafficking– estimated to have a total market value of about $32 billion worldwide. UNODC has a two-pronged strategy for achieving this goal – increasing public awareness of the problem and coordinating existing but disparate efforts by international and national groups, governments and non-governmental organizations and by concerned individuals to end the practice.
Numerous regional GIFT events will culminate in Vienna with a Global Forum against Human Trafficking from 13th to 15th Feb 2008.
The objective of The Vienna Forum is to raise awareness, facilitate cooperation and partnerships among the various stakeholders. It will bring together representatives from Member States, UN system organizations, other regional and international organizations, the business community, academia, non-governmental organizations and other elements of civil society. The Forum will allow for an open environment to enable all parties involved to take concrete steps to fight human trafficking, within their spheres of action.
The Forum will be a catalyst for solution-seeking ideas and address three overriding themes on human trafficking:
1.Vulnerability: why does human trafficking happen;
2. Impact: human and social consequences of human trafficking;
3. Action: innovative approaches to solving complex problems.
The Vienna Forum will also consist of plenary sessions and a variety of panel discussions and workshops especially designed to address the multi-faceted dimensions of human trafficking.
Tushar Sampat
tushar.sampat@unodc.org
• It is time to join forces to prevent human trafficking.
• Give this global problem a global solution.
• Rally under the banner of the Global Initiative to Fight Human Trafficking.
• Get involved!
• Together we can save people and put traffickers behind bars.
UN.GIFT was formally launched in London on 26 March 2007. It is designed to have a long-term impact to create a turning point in the worldwide fight against human trafficking. 27million people are trafficked each year. UN.GIFT intends to take action against human trafficking in all its manifestations – commercial sexual exploitation, bonded labour, organ trade, camel jockeying, forced marriages, domestic labour, illegal adoption, and other exploitative work – through creating partnerships at a global level with all sectors of society.
The ultimate goal of the Global Initiative is to contribute to ending human trafficking– estimated to have a total market value of about $32 billion worldwide. UNODC has a two-pronged strategy for achieving this goal – increasing public awareness of the problem and coordinating existing but disparate efforts by international and national groups, governments and non-governmental organizations and by concerned individuals to end the practice.
Numerous regional GIFT events will culminate in Vienna with a Global Forum against Human Trafficking from 13th to 15th Feb 2008.
The objective of The Vienna Forum is to raise awareness, facilitate cooperation and partnerships among the various stakeholders. It will bring together representatives from Member States, UN system organizations, other regional and international organizations, the business community, academia, non-governmental organizations and other elements of civil society. The Forum will allow for an open environment to enable all parties involved to take concrete steps to fight human trafficking, within their spheres of action.
The Forum will be a catalyst for solution-seeking ideas and address three overriding themes on human trafficking:
1.Vulnerability: why does human trafficking happen;
2. Impact: human and social consequences of human trafficking;
3. Action: innovative approaches to solving complex problems.
The Vienna Forum will also consist of plenary sessions and a variety of panel discussions and workshops especially designed to address the multi-faceted dimensions of human trafficking.
Tushar Sampat
tushar.sampat@unodc.org
US-Turkish relations warming
Turkish President Abdullah Gul visits Washington as the US turns a blind eye to Turkish incursions into Iraq and anti-American sentiment in Turkey is on the decline. From EurasiaNet.
By Nicholas Birch for EurasiaNet (09/01/08)
Less than three months ago, the United States and Turkey seemed poised for a political falling out.
Since then, bilateral ties have made a stunning comeback, and Turkish President Abdullah Gul, who arrived in Washington on 7 January, is expected to stress "the new found warmth" during a meeting with US President George W Bush.
Closer strategic cooperation opened the way for the rapid US-Turkish rapprochement. Gul's visit is coming two months after Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan secured a US pledge to provide real-time intelligence support for Turkish raids against Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) bases in northern Iraq.
With US backing, the Turkish military opened an aerial bombardment campaign of PKK camps on 16 December. Two days later, Washington turned a blind eye to a small army incursion into Iraq.
Turks saw the US intelligence support as the first serious sign that Washington was taking their struggle against the PKK seriously. Accordingly, anti-American sentiment in Turkey began experiencing a decline.
"The latest developments have been a turning point" in US-Turkish relations, Gul told Turkish journalists accompanying him to Washington. He added that Turkish "aid to northern Iraq and Iraq as a whole would increase tenfold … once the PKK is out."
"Our relations with the United States have an importance that goes beyond our relations with any other country. The United States is not [just] any ally for us, it is the most important ally," added Gul, as reported in Today's Zaman. "It is a fact that there has been some turmoil in the relations in past years. But today this has been overcome, and a climate of confidence has emerged."
Speaking on CNN-Turk television recently, the government’s chief foreign policy advisor, Ahmet Davutoglu, characterized relations between Ankara and Washington as "the best they have been since the end of the Cold War."
The long-standing US-Turkish alliance seemed on the brink of collapse as recently as last October, when the US Congress appeared poised to adopt a resolution to recognize the World War I-era slaughter of Armenians in Ottoman Turkey as genocide.
In addition, Ankara felt that Washington was not doing enough to contain PKK militants.
Now, to keep diplomatic momentum moving forward, some experts believe Turkey should help advance Washington’s global diplomatic agenda. Along with the Iraqi government and the European Union, the Bush administration is keen to see Turkey rapidly follow up military action against the PKK with political and economic policies aimed at diminishing Kurdish support for militancy. But following a PKK bomb attack that killed six people in southeastern Turkey on 3 January, it is now unclear whether Turkish government talk of a PKK pardon can receive needed support from either the military or the hawkish mainstream media.
Meanwhile, Middle Eastern geopolitics remains a potential stumbling block in US-Turkish relations. With Bush set to depart after his meeting with Gul on the longest Middle Eastern tour of his presidency, few analysts think Washington and Ankara will ever see eye to eye on Iran and Syria, Turkey's neighbors and - more or less - friends.
Some analysts believe that Pakistan, a country in turmoil since the 27 December assassination of presidential hopeful Benazir Bhutto, is one area where Turkey can play an important supporting role for the United States.
"Turkey has a lot of credit in both Pakistan and Afghanistan," says Hikmet Cetin, a former NATO senior representative in Afghanistan. "It has more space for maneuver than the United States in both countries, and it should do more."
With 1,500 troops in Afghanistan, Turkey is the only Muslim state contributing to peacekeeping efforts there.
But Turkey's close interest in the region extends further than that. Pakistan's founders modeled their state on that developed by Turkish founder Kemal Ataturk. Many Turkish 30-somethings can still sing bits of the Pakistani national anthem that they were made to learn when Pakistani dictator Mohammad Zia ul-Haq visited Turkey in the 1980s.
More recently, and more seriously, Turkey played an important behind-the-scenes role in the historic 2005 meeting between the Pakistani and Israeli foreign ministers. Last April, Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf, was in Ankara to broker an agreement with Afghan leader Hamid Karzai to increase cooperation over anti-terrorism.
Gul repaid the compliment to his Turkish-educated, fluent Turkish-speaking counterpart when he traveled to Pakistan on 3 December for talks with Musharraf. He also met with Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, another Pakistani presidential contender.
"Turkey has very close political and military relations with Pakistan," said Zeyno Baran, a Turkish expert at the Hudson Institute in Washington.
Baran suggested that Ankara wouldn't need to offer much to win US gratitude. "As a Muslim country, Turkey has a natural insight that westerners sometimes lack," she said. "Simply translating what is happening on the ground [in Pakistan] to a western perspective would be a great help."
A Pakistan expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, George Perkovich, agrees that members of the Bush administration would appreciate Turkish input on the formulation of a stabilization strategy for Islamabad.
Since Bhutto’s assassination, he says, senior members of the Bush administration have "absolved themselves of Pakistan. They don't know what they want to do. If somebody from Turkey came along and said 'we've got an idea of how to push things forward,' I think the president would say, 'Jeeze, tell me.'"
The issue of Pakistan was on the agenda for the Gul-Bush meeting. Turkish diplomats specializing in the region accompanied the Turkish president to Washington. Responding to a question about Pakistan on 7 January, Gul himself said that Turkey was "the country that knows and understand this region the best."
Yet, beyond agreement with Washington that Pakistan and Afghanistan represent a combined, and growing, security threat, there is little evidence that the Turkish delegation is coming with creative ideas, either large or small.
Most analysts put that lack of creativity down to Turkey's preoccupation with other issues. One senior Turkish official who knows Pakistan well thinks it has more to do with the source of Pakistan’s turmoil. He believes Pakistan’s problem will not be solved until something is done to control the "hundreds of extremist madrasa [religious colleges]" in the country's tribal northwest.
"I don't know how ready Turkey is to take a strong stance in the fight against religious fundamentalism over there," he said.
Editor's Note: Nicolas Birch specializes in Turkey, Iran and the Middle East.
EurasiaNet provides information and analysis about political, economic, environmental, and social developments in the countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus, as well as in Russia, the Middle East, and Southwest Asia. The website presents a variety of perspectives on contemporary developments, utilizing a network of correspondents based both in the West and in the region. The aim of EurasiaNet is to promote informed decision making among policy makers, as well as broadening interest in the region among the general public. EurasiaNet is operated by the Central Eurasia Project of the Open Society Institute.
Nigeria: Fraud gangs evolve with internet
Authorities on both sides of the Atlantic are joining forces to combat a growing problem stemming from West Africa: cybercrime.
By Dulue Mbachu in Lagos for ISN Security Watch (08/01/08)
With the popularity of online communication growing at a rapid pace, West African cybercriminals are increasingly taking advantage of sophisticated tools and the gullibility of their potential victims to increase their profits.
Authorities in Nigeria - which has become synonymous with internet scams and fraudulent online activity - and other countries are cracking down on these criminals in an attempt to boost financial and national security.
Some schemes include fake lotteries where victims are told they have won big prizes and are then asked to pay sundry expenses to collect their non-existent winnings. Others entail a variety of proposals to help the fraudsters move huge sums of money overseas in return for a substantial percentage: The victim is asked to provide an upfront payment which is the actutal object of the scammers.
Of great concern for law enforcement agencies in the US and the UK are scams in which fake postal orders, bank or travelers' cheques are sent to victims first contacted online. After the initial contact, they are asked to cash the financial instruments in return for a share of the proceeds and wire the rest of the money to the fraudsters. It is usually after this last step that the victim discovers the documents were not genuine.
Among Nigerian cybercriminals the most prized tool is a piece of software called an e-mail extractor, which trawls the World Wide Web to gather e-mail addresses. Whatever scheme intended, the criminals desire a deep pool of potential victims from which to choose.
"Whatever the project, we always need all the e-mail addresses we can get because you never know who is going to respond," a self-confessed scammer who identified himself only as "Chike," told ISN Security Watch in Lagos. "And the e-mail extractor does just that."
In addition, scammers also frequent internet auction sites such as ebay.com, autotrader.com and chat rooms and social networking sites in search of potential victims, said Chike.
Dressed in the latest designer clothes and sitting behind the wheels of a gleaming Lexus sports utility vehicle, the middle-aged Chike explains that he coordinates his scams using internet phones or cell phones hacked to show calls as coming from European and US numbers even though they originate from Nigeria.
With the worldwide explosion of information and communication technologies since the 1990s, cybercrime gangs have been quick to deploy these new tools to cheaply expand their global reach. They also have created new threats to the financial systems and national security of the world's richer countries, mainly in Europe and North America.
Different media, same scam
Many of the schemes go back to the 1980s and pre-date the internet, initially relying on postal services and faxed messages to reach their targets. According to the UK Metropolitan Police, fraudulent proposals promising substantial rewards in return for helping move huge sums of money date back to the 16th century when they were known as "Spanish Prisoner Letters."
The proliferation of these crimes in oil-rich Nigeria coincide with a sharp downturn in the country's economic fortunes in the mid-1980s with the collapse of oil prices and mismanagement by a succession of corrupt regimes. Large numbers of unemployed university graduates were subsequently absorbed by organized criminal networks that gained from their knowledge and expertise.
Known as advance fee fraud and nicknamed "419" after the section of the Nigerian law that prohibits it, the schemes quickly became popular and spread to other West African countries. The criminals have also become active in South Africa as well as cities with large West African populations such as London, Amsterdam and New York.
In the past, the US and the UK have put pressure on Nigerian authorities, resulting in crackdowns that have resulted in convictions and the dismantling of major criminal networks. In 2001, Nigeria created the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), charged with tackling local and international financial crimes that had earned the country a place on the blacklist of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) run by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
Since then, more than 290 cases have been brought to court resulting in the successful prosecution of 115 cases and the recovery of more than US$700 million, Ibrahim Lamorde, a senior official of the agency said at a news conference.
Among the cases resulting in arrests and convictions was the US$242 million defrauding of a Brazilian bank Banco Noereste of Sao Paulo over a seven year period that led to its collapse.
These efforts prompted Nigeria's name to be stricken from the FATF's blacklist in 2006. However, Lamorde says the agency still had much to do to stamp out the activities of the criminal gangs and end the image problem they have created for Nigeria.
The fraud 'backbone'
"Whenever you think of their [fraudsters'] activities the first country that comes to mind is Nigeria," Lamorde told reporters during a recent news conference.
New tactics from the criminials, including targeted e-mail messages have caused concern among law enforcement agencies.
"The backbone of these type of scams are highly sophisticated forgery syndicates ready to fake any type of document," a senior official of Nigeria's special anti-fraud squad told ISN Security Watch on condition of anonymity.
In August 2007, organized crime detectives from the US and the UK joined their Nigerian counterparts in a month-long operation in Lagos. Joint raids were conducted in the Oluwole district - known as a haven of master forgers - as well as in internet cafes. The teams also joined in surveillance of outward-bound postal mail at the international airport in Lagos.
"The operation produced startling discoveries of how criminal elements operating from the country ship fake documents and counterfeit financial instruments abroad," Osita Nwajah, a spokesman of the Nigerian financial crimes agency, to ISN Security Watch. "In several packages were found fraudulent identification and counterfeit financial instruments neatly concealed in carbon paper to evade the sensors of scanners."
According to Nwajah, a total of close to 7,000 blank cheques and fake endorsed cheques totaling millions in various currencies were recovered. Also recovered were large quantities of forged passports, visas and other travel documents that may be of value not only to common criminals but also to terrorists seeking to beat security controls, said an official who participated in the operation.
It is estimated that a total of US$2.1 billion was seized in the first nine months of 2007 in international crackdowns on internet financial scams conducted in Canada, the Netherlands, Spain and Nigeria, leading to the arrest of 77 people, according to law enforcement officials.
Public awareness of these scams remains the best antidote to their success, Susan Grant, vice president of the US National Consumers League, told a news conference in New York in September. Citing a survey conducted by the US Postal Service, Grant said two-thirds of Americans received an average of one scam message weekly, with 18 percent acknowledging that at least one family member had been a victim.
According to the UK Metropolitan Police, most people who receive scam messages are wise enough to discard them. "But if 1 percent shows interest and 1 percent of that 1 percent gets hooked then there are still big profits for the fraudsters."
Dulue Mbachu is a correspondent for ISN Security Watch based in Nigeria. He has reported Nigeria for international media outlets including The Washington Post and the Associated Press.
By Dulue Mbachu in Lagos for ISN Security Watch (08/01/08)
With the popularity of online communication growing at a rapid pace, West African cybercriminals are increasingly taking advantage of sophisticated tools and the gullibility of their potential victims to increase their profits.
Authorities in Nigeria - which has become synonymous with internet scams and fraudulent online activity - and other countries are cracking down on these criminals in an attempt to boost financial and national security.
Some schemes include fake lotteries where victims are told they have won big prizes and are then asked to pay sundry expenses to collect their non-existent winnings. Others entail a variety of proposals to help the fraudsters move huge sums of money overseas in return for a substantial percentage: The victim is asked to provide an upfront payment which is the actutal object of the scammers.
Of great concern for law enforcement agencies in the US and the UK are scams in which fake postal orders, bank or travelers' cheques are sent to victims first contacted online. After the initial contact, they are asked to cash the financial instruments in return for a share of the proceeds and wire the rest of the money to the fraudsters. It is usually after this last step that the victim discovers the documents were not genuine.
Among Nigerian cybercriminals the most prized tool is a piece of software called an e-mail extractor, which trawls the World Wide Web to gather e-mail addresses. Whatever scheme intended, the criminals desire a deep pool of potential victims from which to choose.
"Whatever the project, we always need all the e-mail addresses we can get because you never know who is going to respond," a self-confessed scammer who identified himself only as "Chike," told ISN Security Watch in Lagos. "And the e-mail extractor does just that."
In addition, scammers also frequent internet auction sites such as ebay.com, autotrader.com and chat rooms and social networking sites in search of potential victims, said Chike.
Dressed in the latest designer clothes and sitting behind the wheels of a gleaming Lexus sports utility vehicle, the middle-aged Chike explains that he coordinates his scams using internet phones or cell phones hacked to show calls as coming from European and US numbers even though they originate from Nigeria.
With the worldwide explosion of information and communication technologies since the 1990s, cybercrime gangs have been quick to deploy these new tools to cheaply expand their global reach. They also have created new threats to the financial systems and national security of the world's richer countries, mainly in Europe and North America.
Different media, same scam
Many of the schemes go back to the 1980s and pre-date the internet, initially relying on postal services and faxed messages to reach their targets. According to the UK Metropolitan Police, fraudulent proposals promising substantial rewards in return for helping move huge sums of money date back to the 16th century when they were known as "Spanish Prisoner Letters."
The proliferation of these crimes in oil-rich Nigeria coincide with a sharp downturn in the country's economic fortunes in the mid-1980s with the collapse of oil prices and mismanagement by a succession of corrupt regimes. Large numbers of unemployed university graduates were subsequently absorbed by organized criminal networks that gained from their knowledge and expertise.
Known as advance fee fraud and nicknamed "419" after the section of the Nigerian law that prohibits it, the schemes quickly became popular and spread to other West African countries. The criminals have also become active in South Africa as well as cities with large West African populations such as London, Amsterdam and New York.
In the past, the US and the UK have put pressure on Nigerian authorities, resulting in crackdowns that have resulted in convictions and the dismantling of major criminal networks. In 2001, Nigeria created the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), charged with tackling local and international financial crimes that had earned the country a place on the blacklist of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) run by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
Since then, more than 290 cases have been brought to court resulting in the successful prosecution of 115 cases and the recovery of more than US$700 million, Ibrahim Lamorde, a senior official of the agency said at a news conference.
Among the cases resulting in arrests and convictions was the US$242 million defrauding of a Brazilian bank Banco Noereste of Sao Paulo over a seven year period that led to its collapse.
These efforts prompted Nigeria's name to be stricken from the FATF's blacklist in 2006. However, Lamorde says the agency still had much to do to stamp out the activities of the criminal gangs and end the image problem they have created for Nigeria.
The fraud 'backbone'
"Whenever you think of their [fraudsters'] activities the first country that comes to mind is Nigeria," Lamorde told reporters during a recent news conference.
New tactics from the criminials, including targeted e-mail messages have caused concern among law enforcement agencies.
"The backbone of these type of scams are highly sophisticated forgery syndicates ready to fake any type of document," a senior official of Nigeria's special anti-fraud squad told ISN Security Watch on condition of anonymity.
In August 2007, organized crime detectives from the US and the UK joined their Nigerian counterparts in a month-long operation in Lagos. Joint raids were conducted in the Oluwole district - known as a haven of master forgers - as well as in internet cafes. The teams also joined in surveillance of outward-bound postal mail at the international airport in Lagos.
"The operation produced startling discoveries of how criminal elements operating from the country ship fake documents and counterfeit financial instruments abroad," Osita Nwajah, a spokesman of the Nigerian financial crimes agency, to ISN Security Watch. "In several packages were found fraudulent identification and counterfeit financial instruments neatly concealed in carbon paper to evade the sensors of scanners."
According to Nwajah, a total of close to 7,000 blank cheques and fake endorsed cheques totaling millions in various currencies were recovered. Also recovered were large quantities of forged passports, visas and other travel documents that may be of value not only to common criminals but also to terrorists seeking to beat security controls, said an official who participated in the operation.
It is estimated that a total of US$2.1 billion was seized in the first nine months of 2007 in international crackdowns on internet financial scams conducted in Canada, the Netherlands, Spain and Nigeria, leading to the arrest of 77 people, according to law enforcement officials.
Public awareness of these scams remains the best antidote to their success, Susan Grant, vice president of the US National Consumers League, told a news conference in New York in September. Citing a survey conducted by the US Postal Service, Grant said two-thirds of Americans received an average of one scam message weekly, with 18 percent acknowledging that at least one family member had been a victim.
According to the UK Metropolitan Police, most people who receive scam messages are wise enough to discard them. "But if 1 percent shows interest and 1 percent of that 1 percent gets hooked then there are still big profits for the fraudsters."
Dulue Mbachu is a correspondent for ISN Security Watch based in Nigeria. He has reported Nigeria for international media outlets including The Washington Post and the Associated Press.
Dennis Ross on New Middle East
Transatlantic Institute - Brussels, Belgium
Dennis Ross speaks at a Gala Dinner hosted by the Transatlantic Institute.
Less than a week after the Annapolis Conference, key note speaker Dennis Ross, former US Presidential Envoy to the Middle East, offered insights into 'the new Middle East' to an audience of senior diplomats, NATO delegates, European Union officials and journalists. The evening's discussions were opened by EU Special Representative for the Middle East Peace Process, Ambassador Marc Otte and Director of Policy Planning in the Private Office of the Secretary General at NATO, Dr. Jamie Shea - Transatlantic Institute
Jamie Shea is Director of Policy Planning in the Private Office of the Secretary General responsible for advising and assisting the Secretary General, senior NATO management, and the Council in addressing strategic issues facing the Alliance.
Dennis B. Ross is an American author and political figure who served as the director for policy planning in the State Department under President George H.W. Bush and special Middle East coordinator under President Bill Clinton. The envoy and chief negotiator under both Republican and Democratic presidents, Ross was integral in shaping U.S. involvement in the Middle East peace process during his tenure.
Louis Perlmutter, a senior advisor to Corporate Partners, a private equity fund affiliated with the investment bank Lazard, is a retired senior partner of Lazard. He has been chairman of the board of trustees of Brandeis University and the American Jewish Congress, and the chairman of the executive committee of the United Nations Association of the U.S.A.
He is a director of the Charles H. Revson Foundation and his current memberships include the Council on Foreign Relations, board of fellows (directors) of Harvard Medical School, Board of Directors of Harvard Medical International, the advisory board of Foreign Affairs, trustee of the Blaustein Institute for Human Rights and the committee of visitors of the University of Michigan Law School. He has received honors from The Phoenix House Foundation, The Israel Policy Forum, The World Federation of United Nations Associations, and the American Jewish Committee.
His areas of expertise include international finance, economics, and foreign policy with a focus on the Middle East.
Dennis Ross speaks at a Gala Dinner hosted by the Transatlantic Institute.
Less than a week after the Annapolis Conference, key note speaker Dennis Ross, former US Presidential Envoy to the Middle East, offered insights into 'the new Middle East' to an audience of senior diplomats, NATO delegates, European Union officials and journalists. The evening's discussions were opened by EU Special Representative for the Middle East Peace Process, Ambassador Marc Otte and Director of Policy Planning in the Private Office of the Secretary General at NATO, Dr. Jamie Shea - Transatlantic Institute
Jamie Shea is Director of Policy Planning in the Private Office of the Secretary General responsible for advising and assisting the Secretary General, senior NATO management, and the Council in addressing strategic issues facing the Alliance.
Dennis B. Ross is an American author and political figure who served as the director for policy planning in the State Department under President George H.W. Bush and special Middle East coordinator under President Bill Clinton. The envoy and chief negotiator under both Republican and Democratic presidents, Ross was integral in shaping U.S. involvement in the Middle East peace process during his tenure.
Louis Perlmutter, a senior advisor to Corporate Partners, a private equity fund affiliated with the investment bank Lazard, is a retired senior partner of Lazard. He has been chairman of the board of trustees of Brandeis University and the American Jewish Congress, and the chairman of the executive committee of the United Nations Association of the U.S.A.
He is a director of the Charles H. Revson Foundation and his current memberships include the Council on Foreign Relations, board of fellows (directors) of Harvard Medical School, Board of Directors of Harvard Medical International, the advisory board of Foreign Affairs, trustee of the Blaustein Institute for Human Rights and the committee of visitors of the University of Michigan Law School. He has received honors from The Phoenix House Foundation, The Israel Policy Forum, The World Federation of United Nations Associations, and the American Jewish Committee.
His areas of expertise include international finance, economics, and foreign policy with a focus on the Middle East.
US Air Combat Command clears selected F-15s for flight
1/9/2008 - LANGLEY AIR FORCE BASE, Va. (AFPN) -- Air Combat Command officials today cleared a portion of the F-15 Eagle A through D model aircraft for flying status and recommended a limited return to flight for Air Force units worldwide following engineering risk assessments and data received from multiple fleet-wide inspections.
The return to fly order and recommendation applies only to those F-15 aircraft, about 60 percent of the total Air Force F-15 A through D fleet, that have cleared all inspections and have met longeron manufacturing specifications.
The order and recommendation follows more than two months of stand-down actions after an Air National Guard F-15C aircraft experienced catastrophic structural failure and broke apart in flight during a basic fighter maneuver training sortie in Missouri Nov. 2.
"The priority in resuming operations for a portion of the F-15 fleet is the defense of our nation -- America deserves nothing less," said Gen. John D.W. Corley, the Air Combat Command commander. "Aircraft inspection results and counsel from both military and industry experts have made me confident in the safety of a portion of the fleet. As a result, I have cleared those F-15s to return to fly."
Today's decision follows detailed information briefed on Jan. 4 to Air Combat Command from the Air Force's F-15 systems program manager, senior engineers from Boeing and the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center, as well as a briefing received today from the Accident Investigation Board president.
The information included an analysis of the health of the Air Force's F-15 fleet from findings from the Nov. 2 mishap investigation, maintenance inspections and actions completed and taken to date as well as historical science and engineering trend data from F-15 fleet management.
Inspections are more than 90 percent complete. Remaining inspections have primarily focused on the forward longerons. The longerons are a critical support structure.
Time compliance technical order inspections have discovered nine other aircraft with longeron fatigue-cracks. Additionally, approximately 40 percent of inspected aircraft have at least one longeron that does not meet blueprint specifications.
Deviations in these longerons will be analyzed at the WR-ALC. The analysis is expected to take approximately four weeks to complete. Once the analysis is complete, ACC will be able to better determine which aircraft will need further inspection, or repair, before returning them to flight.
Comment on this story (comments may be published on Air Force Link)
Tata Motor's $2,500 car to put India on global autos map
Reuters Tuesday January 8 2008
By Rina Chandran
MUMBAI, Jan 8 (Reuters) - Only 10 years ago, India's Tata Motors Ltd unveiled its first car, a hatchback, that established the truck maker's credentials as a car maker.
On Thursday, the $7.8 billion company unveils its boldest initiative yet, a car that will sell for just $2,500, less than half the cheapest car on the market.
Dubbed the 'People's Car', it will determine Tata's place in the global automotive arena, where the battle is increasingly being fought in emerging economies such as India, China and Russia.
The new model, using re-engineered plastics and modern adhesives, is a far cry from the premium Jaguar and Land Rover brands Tata is negotiating to acquire from Ford Motor Co
Tata Motors' drive to produce a cheap, no-nonsense, small car was born from close observation of a local market where millions often ferry families of four, plus baggage, on motorbikes and scooters.
Critics initially derided Tata's 100,000 rupee, or 1 lakh, price target, more so as oil and steel prices rocketed. But global car makers have taken note and are scurrying for their own versions to meet growing environmental and cost concerns.
"The product has rightfully gained a lot of international attention," said Mohit Arora, managing director for India at research firm J.D. Power Asia-Pacific, who will fly in from Singapore to see the car being unveiled by Chairman Ratan Tata.
"It's a big, big deal for Tata Motors, and will be recorded in history books, whether or not it does well."
Volkswagen, Toyota Motor Corp, Honda Motor Co and Fiat have since said they are looking to build low-cost cars. And the Nissan Motor Co and Renault alliance, which has done well with its no-frills Logan sedan, is developing a $3,000 car with Bajaj Auto Ltd, a local Tata rival.
"Scepticism has given way to imitation," said Ashutosh Goel, auto analyst at Edelweiss Securities.
"Every global car maker has realised the need to be in the emerging markets with a model like this for mass volumes, if not at 100,000 rupees, then perhaps at 150,000 rupees," he said.
NOSTALGIA WAVE
The 'People's Car' hits the market at a time when oil prices are near $100 a barrel, a move to fuel-efficient "green" cars is gaining momentum, and drivers wallow in nostalgia with the revival of the Fiat 500 'Cinquecento' and BMW's Mini.
In Italy, the cheap and efficient Fiat 500 replaced the scooter for millions, and its 2007 relaunch won a warm response.
In India, the mini Maruti 800, made by a venture of the government and Japan's Suzuki Motor, played a similar role in the 1980s, offering a modern alternative to the limited options available.
Today, helped by rising middle-class incomes, small cars, led by models such as Maruti's Alto and the Hyundai Santro, make up more than two-thirds of a domestic car market that should nearly double to 2 million units a year by 2010.
"Small cars have always been popular in India, even when oil prices were low," said Ashvin Chotai, Asian auto analyst based in London, who will be at Thursday's unveiling in New Delhi.
"Globally, higher oil prices are accelerating a shift towards compact and small cars, and regulatory developments such as C02 standards in Europe, and congestion and parking constraints are reinforcing it," he said, adding this was not a short-lived fad.
But environmentalists worry that a car so cheap could be more damaging, adding more pollution and increasing India's dependence on oil imports.
Anumita Roychoudhury, at the Centre for Science and Environment in New Delhi, has said the shift to greater car ownership could be a "timebomb ticking away".
"When you lower the price that drastically, how will you be able to meet safety and emissions standards?" she told The Observer newspaper, adding, to Reuters: "It's just not sustainable, whether from an environmental point of view or in terms of congestion."
Tata, which has said the 4-seater 'People's Car' will have a 600cc engine, will have an initial production run of 250,000 units. It expects eventual annual demand of 1 million cars, which may be assembled by dealers or satellite units.
Tata Motors may also export the car, which would probably sell well in Africa and South and Central America, Chotai said.
INDIA ADVANTAGE
With car ownership in India at just 8 per 1,000, there is huge potential to upgrade two-wheeler owners, who bought about 7 million bikes and scooters in 2006/07. An entry-level motorbike costs 35,000-40,000 rupees. Already, South Korea's Hyundai, which will have the capacity to make 600,000 cars annually, has made India a small car production hub, and Suzuki is increasing its capacity to 1 million units a year.
They will be closely watching reactions to the Tata car.
"The quality of the initial launch must meet minimum expectations of the global industry, otherwise the whole project could be discredited," Chotai said.
But even a thumping success will not have all car makers rushing to build low-cost models.
"The need for an affordable product exists across markets, but we seldom see a mass shift downward," Arora said, pointing to healthy sales of premium brands in India's booming economy.
Still, Tata is best placed to deliver a small, practical and affordable car.
"If Tata can't develop and produce a car at a price of less than $3,000, it's very unlikely any global company will be able to do it," Chotai said, pointing to India's low production costs, cheaper wages and competitive components sourcing.
"And if the vehicle concept can't work in India, it's extremely unlikely to work in any other part of the world."
For related FACTBOX, click ($1=39.15 Indian Rupee) (Editing by Ian Geoghegan & Ranjit Gangadharan)
By Rina Chandran
MUMBAI, Jan 8 (Reuters) - Only 10 years ago, India's Tata Motors Ltd unveiled its first car, a hatchback, that established the truck maker's credentials as a car maker.
On Thursday, the $7.8 billion company unveils its boldest initiative yet, a car that will sell for just $2,500, less than half the cheapest car on the market.
Dubbed the 'People's Car', it will determine Tata's place in the global automotive arena, where the battle is increasingly being fought in emerging economies such as India, China and Russia.
The new model, using re-engineered plastics and modern adhesives, is a far cry from the premium Jaguar and Land Rover brands Tata is negotiating to acquire from Ford Motor Co
Tata Motors' drive to produce a cheap, no-nonsense, small car was born from close observation of a local market where millions often ferry families of four, plus baggage, on motorbikes and scooters.
Critics initially derided Tata's 100,000 rupee, or 1 lakh, price target, more so as oil and steel prices rocketed. But global car makers have taken note and are scurrying for their own versions to meet growing environmental and cost concerns.
"The product has rightfully gained a lot of international attention," said Mohit Arora, managing director for India at research firm J.D. Power Asia-Pacific, who will fly in from Singapore to see the car being unveiled by Chairman Ratan Tata.
"It's a big, big deal for Tata Motors, and will be recorded in history books, whether or not it does well."
Volkswagen, Toyota Motor Corp, Honda Motor Co and Fiat have since said they are looking to build low-cost cars. And the Nissan Motor Co and Renault alliance, which has done well with its no-frills Logan sedan, is developing a $3,000 car with Bajaj Auto Ltd, a local Tata rival.
"Scepticism has given way to imitation," said Ashutosh Goel, auto analyst at Edelweiss Securities.
"Every global car maker has realised the need to be in the emerging markets with a model like this for mass volumes, if not at 100,000 rupees, then perhaps at 150,000 rupees," he said.
NOSTALGIA WAVE
The 'People's Car' hits the market at a time when oil prices are near $100 a barrel, a move to fuel-efficient "green" cars is gaining momentum, and drivers wallow in nostalgia with the revival of the Fiat 500 'Cinquecento' and BMW's Mini.
In Italy, the cheap and efficient Fiat 500 replaced the scooter for millions, and its 2007 relaunch won a warm response.
In India, the mini Maruti 800, made by a venture of the government and Japan's Suzuki Motor, played a similar role in the 1980s, offering a modern alternative to the limited options available.
Today, helped by rising middle-class incomes, small cars, led by models such as Maruti's Alto and the Hyundai Santro, make up more than two-thirds of a domestic car market that should nearly double to 2 million units a year by 2010.
"Small cars have always been popular in India, even when oil prices were low," said Ashvin Chotai, Asian auto analyst based in London, who will be at Thursday's unveiling in New Delhi.
"Globally, higher oil prices are accelerating a shift towards compact and small cars, and regulatory developments such as C02 standards in Europe, and congestion and parking constraints are reinforcing it," he said, adding this was not a short-lived fad.
But environmentalists worry that a car so cheap could be more damaging, adding more pollution and increasing India's dependence on oil imports.
Anumita Roychoudhury, at the Centre for Science and Environment in New Delhi, has said the shift to greater car ownership could be a "timebomb ticking away".
"When you lower the price that drastically, how will you be able to meet safety and emissions standards?" she told The Observer newspaper, adding, to Reuters: "It's just not sustainable, whether from an environmental point of view or in terms of congestion."
Tata, which has said the 4-seater 'People's Car' will have a 600cc engine, will have an initial production run of 250,000 units. It expects eventual annual demand of 1 million cars, which may be assembled by dealers or satellite units.
Tata Motors may also export the car, which would probably sell well in Africa and South and Central America, Chotai said.
INDIA ADVANTAGE
With car ownership in India at just 8 per 1,000, there is huge potential to upgrade two-wheeler owners, who bought about 7 million bikes and scooters in 2006/07. An entry-level motorbike costs 35,000-40,000 rupees. Already, South Korea's Hyundai, which will have the capacity to make 600,000 cars annually, has made India a small car production hub, and Suzuki is increasing its capacity to 1 million units a year.
They will be closely watching reactions to the Tata car.
"The quality of the initial launch must meet minimum expectations of the global industry, otherwise the whole project could be discredited," Chotai said.
But even a thumping success will not have all car makers rushing to build low-cost models.
"The need for an affordable product exists across markets, but we seldom see a mass shift downward," Arora said, pointing to healthy sales of premium brands in India's booming economy.
Still, Tata is best placed to deliver a small, practical and affordable car.
"If Tata can't develop and produce a car at a price of less than $3,000, it's very unlikely any global company will be able to do it," Chotai said, pointing to India's low production costs, cheaper wages and competitive components sourcing.
"And if the vehicle concept can't work in India, it's extremely unlikely to work in any other part of the world."
For related FACTBOX, click ($1=39.15 Indian Rupee) (Editing by Ian Geoghegan & Ranjit Gangadharan)
Kenyan violence to help Indian tea
http://sify.com/finance/fullstory.php?id=14586459
G.K. Nair
Wednesday, 09 January , 2008, 08:33
Last Updated: Wednesday, 09 January , 2008, 09:36
Kochi: Disruption in tea production and trading in Kenya and some other tea producing countries in the region in the wake of the post-election violence in Kenya from December 30 is likely to push up the Indian tea exports.
Sources at a leading tea producing and exporting firm told Business Line that buyers from Egypt and Pakistan had turned towards India following disruption in supply from Kenya, the leading African producer of tea. “Increased activities are taking place on the apprehension that the present Kenyan situation might lead to rise in prices. It may push up exports of quality CTC teas at the prevailing prices from the country, mainly South India,” they said.
Sharp decline
In fact, there has been a sharp decline in the Indian tea exports to Pakistan. According to Upasi statistics, it has dropped substantially from 5,790 tonnes during January-June 2006 to 2,210 tonnes in the corresponding period in 2007. At the same time, shipments of Indian teas to Arab Republic of Egypt has shown an upward trend in 2007. Exports during Jan-June 2007 stood at 1,710 tonnes as against 1,080 tonnes in the same period in 2006.
Indian CTC prices have gone up by Rs 3.44 a kg now compared with that of November and December. Average auction price of CTC during January - mid-November 2007 was Rs 48.40 a kg. Industry sources attributed this increase to ending of the season in north India and the fall in output both there and South India.
If the current situation lasted for a month then it would have a significant negative impact on the tea supply from the African major which exports mainly CTC tea, J.K. Thomas, Managing Director, Malankara Plantations Ltd and former President, Upasi said.
Tea auction has reportedly resumed in Mombasa on Monday. Inferior quality teas would be sold on Mondays and main categories on Tuesdays. Kenyan production during Jan-Oct 2007 has shown a substantial increase by 63.9 million kg (mkg) to 308.4 mkg from 244.5 mkg in the same period the previous year.
Negative impact
However, there has been disruption in plucking and processing. On the other hand, sharp rise in fuel cost is said to have forced several tea factories in the region to down its shutters. Therefore, there could be a negative impact on the supply line for some time at least, industry sources here pointed out.
Kenya is one of the leading producers of tea in the world with around 390 mkg of tea, mostly CTC. The other producers in Africa are Uganda and Tanzania, who occupy the second and third positions with 36 mkg and 30 mkg respectively a year.
Almost all the African tea producing countries such as Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi and Mozmbique sell their teas through Mombasa auction and hence its suspension last week had seriously affected these producers, they said.
Some of the leading buyers of African teas are Pakistan, Egypt, UK, Sudan and United Arab Emirates and they absorb an estimated 70 per cent of the tea produced by these African countries, they said.
G.K. Nair
Wednesday, 09 January , 2008, 08:33
Last Updated: Wednesday, 09 January , 2008, 09:36
Kochi: Disruption in tea production and trading in Kenya and some other tea producing countries in the region in the wake of the post-election violence in Kenya from December 30 is likely to push up the Indian tea exports.
Sources at a leading tea producing and exporting firm told Business Line that buyers from Egypt and Pakistan had turned towards India following disruption in supply from Kenya, the leading African producer of tea. “Increased activities are taking place on the apprehension that the present Kenyan situation might lead to rise in prices. It may push up exports of quality CTC teas at the prevailing prices from the country, mainly South India,” they said.
Sharp decline
In fact, there has been a sharp decline in the Indian tea exports to Pakistan. According to Upasi statistics, it has dropped substantially from 5,790 tonnes during January-June 2006 to 2,210 tonnes in the corresponding period in 2007. At the same time, shipments of Indian teas to Arab Republic of Egypt has shown an upward trend in 2007. Exports during Jan-June 2007 stood at 1,710 tonnes as against 1,080 tonnes in the same period in 2006.
Indian CTC prices have gone up by Rs 3.44 a kg now compared with that of November and December. Average auction price of CTC during January - mid-November 2007 was Rs 48.40 a kg. Industry sources attributed this increase to ending of the season in north India and the fall in output both there and South India.
If the current situation lasted for a month then it would have a significant negative impact on the tea supply from the African major which exports mainly CTC tea, J.K. Thomas, Managing Director, Malankara Plantations Ltd and former President, Upasi said.
Tea auction has reportedly resumed in Mombasa on Monday. Inferior quality teas would be sold on Mondays and main categories on Tuesdays. Kenyan production during Jan-Oct 2007 has shown a substantial increase by 63.9 million kg (mkg) to 308.4 mkg from 244.5 mkg in the same period the previous year.
Negative impact
However, there has been disruption in plucking and processing. On the other hand, sharp rise in fuel cost is said to have forced several tea factories in the region to down its shutters. Therefore, there could be a negative impact on the supply line for some time at least, industry sources here pointed out.
Kenya is one of the leading producers of tea in the world with around 390 mkg of tea, mostly CTC. The other producers in Africa are Uganda and Tanzania, who occupy the second and third positions with 36 mkg and 30 mkg respectively a year.
Almost all the African tea producing countries such as Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi and Mozmbique sell their teas through Mombasa auction and hence its suspension last week had seriously affected these producers, they said.
Some of the leading buyers of African teas are Pakistan, Egypt, UK, Sudan and United Arab Emirates and they absorb an estimated 70 per cent of the tea produced by these African countries, they said.
India-Africa Ties Set For Major Leap Forward: Sharma
http://newspostindia.com/report-30318
Wednesday 09th of January 2008
India Wednesday said that it was poised for 'a major leap forward' in its relations with Africa with the holding of the first India-Africa partnership summit in April to promote stronger economic ties.
'In the next five to 10 years, there will be a major leap in relations between India and Africa,' Minister of State for External Affairs Anand Sharma said here at a session on Africa at the sixth Pravasi Bharatiya Divas, the annual conclave of overseas Indians.
Underlining special ties between India and Africa dating back to the days of the common struggle against colonialism, Sharma announced the first India-Africa partnership summit.
'Its aim is to create a structured format of engagement between India and Africa. We have set up working groups for the first India-Africa summit,' Sharma said.
The summit will be attended by heads of eight regional groupings in Africa, five founding members of the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) and the current and founding chair of the 53-nation African Union.
'It's a reaffirmation of India's commitment to ensure that this partnership grows in the future,' Sharma said.
Without naming China that holds annual summits with Africa, Sharma said the continent had become fashionable but the ties that bind it with India were deep and unique in many respects.
Sharma also lauded the contribution of the Indian diaspora in Africa and commended them for their multi-faceted contribution to their country of origin as well as their adopted homelands.
'We are appreciative of the contribution of persons of Indian origin in the liberation struggle and in the fight against apartheid as well in the economic reconstruction of African countries,' he said.
'India's diaspora has enriched the socio-cultural milieus of the countries they live in,' Sharma said.
Conjuring an upbeat picture of India's burgeoning economic ties with Africa, the minister called for doubling bilateral trade from $10 billion and underlined India's contribution to Africa in the sphere of human resource development.
Mauritian Deputy Prime Minister Ramakrishna Sithanen stressed on 'leveraging social and cultural links' between India and Africa for economic development.
Lauding India's emergence as 'a global player', Sithanen sought more investment from India in Africa, especially in the infrastructure sector.
'Africa needs investment in infrastructure. The continent needs a huge inflow of funds in infrastructure and capacity building,' he said.
'The political will is there. The time is just right for the two sides to increase their economic engagement,' he said.
In a similar vein, Logie Naidoo, deputy mayor of Durban, underlined special historical and cultural ties between India and Africa.
Wednesday 09th of January 2008
India Wednesday said that it was poised for 'a major leap forward' in its relations with Africa with the holding of the first India-Africa partnership summit in April to promote stronger economic ties.
'In the next five to 10 years, there will be a major leap in relations between India and Africa,' Minister of State for External Affairs Anand Sharma said here at a session on Africa at the sixth Pravasi Bharatiya Divas, the annual conclave of overseas Indians.
Underlining special ties between India and Africa dating back to the days of the common struggle against colonialism, Sharma announced the first India-Africa partnership summit.
'Its aim is to create a structured format of engagement between India and Africa. We have set up working groups for the first India-Africa summit,' Sharma said.
The summit will be attended by heads of eight regional groupings in Africa, five founding members of the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) and the current and founding chair of the 53-nation African Union.
'It's a reaffirmation of India's commitment to ensure that this partnership grows in the future,' Sharma said.
Without naming China that holds annual summits with Africa, Sharma said the continent had become fashionable but the ties that bind it with India were deep and unique in many respects.
Sharma also lauded the contribution of the Indian diaspora in Africa and commended them for their multi-faceted contribution to their country of origin as well as their adopted homelands.
'We are appreciative of the contribution of persons of Indian origin in the liberation struggle and in the fight against apartheid as well in the economic reconstruction of African countries,' he said.
'India's diaspora has enriched the socio-cultural milieus of the countries they live in,' Sharma said.
Conjuring an upbeat picture of India's burgeoning economic ties with Africa, the minister called for doubling bilateral trade from $10 billion and underlined India's contribution to Africa in the sphere of human resource development.
Mauritian Deputy Prime Minister Ramakrishna Sithanen stressed on 'leveraging social and cultural links' between India and Africa for economic development.
Lauding India's emergence as 'a global player', Sithanen sought more investment from India in Africa, especially in the infrastructure sector.
'Africa needs investment in infrastructure. The continent needs a huge inflow of funds in infrastructure and capacity building,' he said.
'The political will is there. The time is just right for the two sides to increase their economic engagement,' he said.
In a similar vein, Logie Naidoo, deputy mayor of Durban, underlined special historical and cultural ties between India and Africa.
"We don't want to be part of Pakistan!"
Bhutto Death Stokes Regional Rivalry
By BURT HERMAN – 8 hours ago
KARACHI, Pakistan (AP) — When vast crowds paid their last respects to Benazir Bhutto before her burial, angry mourners from her native Sindh province chanted separatist slogans: "We don't want to be part of Pakistan!"
Although Bhutto, a two-time prime minister and leader of the country's biggest party, was an icon of Pakistani nationalism, her violent death in the heart of Punjab province has laid bare bitter regional rivalries in a nation carved out of the subcontinent after British colonial rule ended 60 years ago.
Many among the ethnically distinct peoples in Pakistan's three minority provinces harbor deep resentment toward the most populous province of Punjab, which dominates the government, military and allocation of federal resources.
Aside from bubbling tensions in Sindh, Pakistan is grappling with outright separatist rebellion in the deserts of Baluchistan, as well as escalating militancy in the North West Frontier province near Afghanistan.
A breakup of the federation is unlikely, but Bhutto's slaying touched a particularly raw nerve as she was the third Pakistani prime minister from Sindh to have died a violent death. The Islamic nation's first premier, Liaquat Ali Khan, was shot dead in 1951, and her father Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was executed in 1979 for allegedly conspiring to kill a rival.
All three died in Rawalpindi, the garrison city of the Punjabi-dominated army — a fact not lost on the thousands who gathered for Benazir's funeral at her ancestral home, where she was buried beside her father. Bhutto herself had also claimed elements of the Punjabi-dominated ruling party were seeking to kill her, claims that it denied.
"After all this they are asking us to calm down ... why should we?" asked Pir Bakhsh Jhakrani, a messenger in his 50s living in Larkana, the Bhutto clan's stronghold. "Those ruling the country should stop conspiring against Sindh if they want to keep the country intact."
Bhutto's death on Dec. 27 sparked the worst unrest in Pakistan in years — most of it focused in Sindh where ethnic nationalists have been calling for more power since the rule of Islamist military dictator Gen. Zia ul-Haq, under whose rule Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was convicted and killed.
"We will only stay in Pakistan which must be a democratic, secular Pakistan where we are an equal partner in state affairs," said Qader Magsi, chairman of the Sindh Taraqi Pasand Party, or Sindh Progressive Party.
Secessionist sentiments remain strongest in neighboring Baluchistan, Pakistan's biggest and poorest province, where the army is deployed to fight ethnic rebels who often attack energy infrastructure — much of the natural gas piped into homes in Punjab originates here.
Sardar Attaullah Mengal, chief of Baluchistan National Party, alleged the rebels were motivated by torture and abduction of young men by government forces.
"Baluchistan has been made a colony of Punjab and Baluchis will never accept living in Pakistan as a colony," said Mengal, a former chief minister of the province. "Punjab will have to give rights to Baluchistan and other provinces on the basis of equality if they have to live in Pakistan. Any other status lesser than that is not acceptable."
Ethnic Pashtuns who live in areas bordering Afghanistan where they are the majority — mostly in the volatile northwest — also said the political balance must shift.
"Pakistan cannot run the way they are running the federation: that Pakistan is Punjab and Punjab is Pakistan," said Asfandyar Wali Khan, president of the Awami National Party, Pakistan's largest Pashtun nationalist group.
Still, few citizens even in the three minority provinces want outright separation from Pakistan. Memories of the country's last painful division are still fresh.
It was under the presidency of Bhutto's father that eastern Pakistan splintered off into today's Bangladesh in the early 1970s after a humiliating military defeat by India. His charismatic rule during that time spawned the political legacy that carried over to his daughter.
Quetta photo shop owner Asadullah Baluch, 28, said his people just want more autonomy.
"If Baluchistan is given control over its resources and the province is allowed to participate in national affairs, and the province is given representation in the establishment and foreign services, this conflict will end," he said.
Rasul Bakhsh Rais, a political scientist at the Lahore University of Management Sciences, said Islamic militancy rather than ethnic movements posed the biggest threat to the federation.
Pro-Taliban militants have grabbed control of lawless, semiautonomous tribal regions such as South and North Waziristan, where the U.S. fears al-Qaida is regrouping. They have also challenged the government's authority further inland in the North West Frontier Province.
"Ethnic nationalists can be negotiated with and many of their demands for sharing power and allocating resources are legitimate. These can be settled," Rais said. "But the Taliban are using force to threaten the border regions of Pakistan."
Associated Press writers Ashraf Khan in Karachi, Sattar Khan in Quetta, Riaz Khan in Peshawar and Zarar Khan in Larkana contributed to this report
By BURT HERMAN – 8 hours ago
KARACHI, Pakistan (AP) — When vast crowds paid their last respects to Benazir Bhutto before her burial, angry mourners from her native Sindh province chanted separatist slogans: "We don't want to be part of Pakistan!"
Although Bhutto, a two-time prime minister and leader of the country's biggest party, was an icon of Pakistani nationalism, her violent death in the heart of Punjab province has laid bare bitter regional rivalries in a nation carved out of the subcontinent after British colonial rule ended 60 years ago.
Many among the ethnically distinct peoples in Pakistan's three minority provinces harbor deep resentment toward the most populous province of Punjab, which dominates the government, military and allocation of federal resources.
Aside from bubbling tensions in Sindh, Pakistan is grappling with outright separatist rebellion in the deserts of Baluchistan, as well as escalating militancy in the North West Frontier province near Afghanistan.
A breakup of the federation is unlikely, but Bhutto's slaying touched a particularly raw nerve as she was the third Pakistani prime minister from Sindh to have died a violent death. The Islamic nation's first premier, Liaquat Ali Khan, was shot dead in 1951, and her father Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was executed in 1979 for allegedly conspiring to kill a rival.
All three died in Rawalpindi, the garrison city of the Punjabi-dominated army — a fact not lost on the thousands who gathered for Benazir's funeral at her ancestral home, where she was buried beside her father. Bhutto herself had also claimed elements of the Punjabi-dominated ruling party were seeking to kill her, claims that it denied.
"After all this they are asking us to calm down ... why should we?" asked Pir Bakhsh Jhakrani, a messenger in his 50s living in Larkana, the Bhutto clan's stronghold. "Those ruling the country should stop conspiring against Sindh if they want to keep the country intact."
Bhutto's death on Dec. 27 sparked the worst unrest in Pakistan in years — most of it focused in Sindh where ethnic nationalists have been calling for more power since the rule of Islamist military dictator Gen. Zia ul-Haq, under whose rule Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was convicted and killed.
"We will only stay in Pakistan which must be a democratic, secular Pakistan where we are an equal partner in state affairs," said Qader Magsi, chairman of the Sindh Taraqi Pasand Party, or Sindh Progressive Party.
Secessionist sentiments remain strongest in neighboring Baluchistan, Pakistan's biggest and poorest province, where the army is deployed to fight ethnic rebels who often attack energy infrastructure — much of the natural gas piped into homes in Punjab originates here.
Sardar Attaullah Mengal, chief of Baluchistan National Party, alleged the rebels were motivated by torture and abduction of young men by government forces.
"Baluchistan has been made a colony of Punjab and Baluchis will never accept living in Pakistan as a colony," said Mengal, a former chief minister of the province. "Punjab will have to give rights to Baluchistan and other provinces on the basis of equality if they have to live in Pakistan. Any other status lesser than that is not acceptable."
Ethnic Pashtuns who live in areas bordering Afghanistan where they are the majority — mostly in the volatile northwest — also said the political balance must shift.
"Pakistan cannot run the way they are running the federation: that Pakistan is Punjab and Punjab is Pakistan," said Asfandyar Wali Khan, president of the Awami National Party, Pakistan's largest Pashtun nationalist group.
Still, few citizens even in the three minority provinces want outright separation from Pakistan. Memories of the country's last painful division are still fresh.
It was under the presidency of Bhutto's father that eastern Pakistan splintered off into today's Bangladesh in the early 1970s after a humiliating military defeat by India. His charismatic rule during that time spawned the political legacy that carried over to his daughter.
Quetta photo shop owner Asadullah Baluch, 28, said his people just want more autonomy.
"If Baluchistan is given control over its resources and the province is allowed to participate in national affairs, and the province is given representation in the establishment and foreign services, this conflict will end," he said.
Rasul Bakhsh Rais, a political scientist at the Lahore University of Management Sciences, said Islamic militancy rather than ethnic movements posed the biggest threat to the federation.
Pro-Taliban militants have grabbed control of lawless, semiautonomous tribal regions such as South and North Waziristan, where the U.S. fears al-Qaida is regrouping. They have also challenged the government's authority further inland in the North West Frontier Province.
"Ethnic nationalists can be negotiated with and many of their demands for sharing power and allocating resources are legitimate. These can be settled," Rais said. "But the Taliban are using force to threaten the border regions of Pakistan."
Associated Press writers Ashraf Khan in Karachi, Sattar Khan in Quetta, Riaz Khan in Peshawar and Zarar Khan in Larkana contributed to this report
Iran Pakistan Gas Pipeline deal to finalise by Jan 25
http://www.newstrackindia.com/newsdetails/1987
New Delhi, Tue, 8 Jan 2008 Binita Tiwari
Dust accumulating Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline project is all set to get finalise between Iran and Pakistan on January 25, 2008, as informed by Iran 's ambassador to Islamabad Mashallah Shakeri on Sunday.
He hailed the project for its various economic, social and security signicance, which would bring extensive benefits for the three countries.
Expressing that this measure is a confirmation of their will to reach a decision to implement the project, he told media that Iran has already started the work on the project and also expected India to join to start the project trilaterally.
Peace through IPI gas pipeline was a major inventiveness to quench the energy thirst of India and Pakistan . This pipeline is also vied as an important strategy to reach peace and stability in the region. The proposed pipeline is 2,775 km long that will deliver gas from the fields of Iran to Pakistan and India .
Though a brainchild of Rajendra K. Pachauri, who conceptualized it in 1989 in partnership with Ali Shams Ardekani, former Deputy Foreign Minister of Iran.
With positive nod from both the government, the project got a major leg up in the annual conference of the International Association of Energy Economics, 1990.
From Asalouyeh in Iran it will pass through Baluchistan and Sind in Pakistan and then will enter India .
Thus a major hurdle to the ongoing peace pipeline as both Baluchistan and Sindh remain hostile to Pakistan government and various terrorist attacks in the region have seen as a method to sabotage the ongoing gas pipeline project thus one of the main cause to India 's reluctance to the project. As security of the pipeline in the region become the main concern.
Earlier the deal faced the major hurdle when Iran , Pakistan and India could not reach to any conclusion on price, as Iran demanded a price of 7.2 dollars per mBtu (per million British thermal units) of gas against India 's offer of 4.2 dollars per mBtu.
India 's point was Tehran 's price is more than 50 per cent the prevailing market determined gas price in India .
India and Pakistan offered $4.93 per mBtu for its gas but it still remains open to negotiation.
The project hold importance to Iran at the time when Western powers have isolated it, it was also reported that Bush administration was against the project and has suggested Turkmenistan- Afghanistan- India pipeline instead of IPI, an opposition to the financial remuneration to Iran.
The pipeline if successfully mooted Iran can use it to fight US sanction and deter them for the same. This will open an opportunity for Iran to unfold its wing in other region too.
Future depends
The success of pipeline depends on security of the pipeline in the areas which evoke serious concern to its safety, though the problem is deep rooted in the economic and social development of the place hence the people and the region should be linked to the process of development by investing a part of profit in it.
As the assumption goes that Iran through opening its energy market to eastern countries it will make an important strategic and political move to counter Western powers but it is also significant in the light that not only the regional influence of the pipeline will get broadened through peace and stability in the market, India will get the gas at four time cheaper rate than other option available even after paying the transportation cost to Pakistan.
New Delhi, Tue, 8 Jan 2008 Binita Tiwari
Dust accumulating Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline project is all set to get finalise between Iran and Pakistan on January 25, 2008, as informed by Iran 's ambassador to Islamabad Mashallah Shakeri on Sunday.
He hailed the project for its various economic, social and security signicance, which would bring extensive benefits for the three countries.
Expressing that this measure is a confirmation of their will to reach a decision to implement the project, he told media that Iran has already started the work on the project and also expected India to join to start the project trilaterally.
Peace through IPI gas pipeline was a major inventiveness to quench the energy thirst of India and Pakistan . This pipeline is also vied as an important strategy to reach peace and stability in the region. The proposed pipeline is 2,775 km long that will deliver gas from the fields of Iran to Pakistan and India .
Though a brainchild of Rajendra K. Pachauri, who conceptualized it in 1989 in partnership with Ali Shams Ardekani, former Deputy Foreign Minister of Iran.
With positive nod from both the government, the project got a major leg up in the annual conference of the International Association of Energy Economics, 1990.
From Asalouyeh in Iran it will pass through Baluchistan and Sind in Pakistan and then will enter India .
Thus a major hurdle to the ongoing peace pipeline as both Baluchistan and Sindh remain hostile to Pakistan government and various terrorist attacks in the region have seen as a method to sabotage the ongoing gas pipeline project thus one of the main cause to India 's reluctance to the project. As security of the pipeline in the region become the main concern.
Earlier the deal faced the major hurdle when Iran , Pakistan and India could not reach to any conclusion on price, as Iran demanded a price of 7.2 dollars per mBtu (per million British thermal units) of gas against India 's offer of 4.2 dollars per mBtu.
India 's point was Tehran 's price is more than 50 per cent the prevailing market determined gas price in India .
India and Pakistan offered $4.93 per mBtu for its gas but it still remains open to negotiation.
The project hold importance to Iran at the time when Western powers have isolated it, it was also reported that Bush administration was against the project and has suggested Turkmenistan- Afghanistan- India pipeline instead of IPI, an opposition to the financial remuneration to Iran.
The pipeline if successfully mooted Iran can use it to fight US sanction and deter them for the same. This will open an opportunity for Iran to unfold its wing in other region too.
Future depends
The success of pipeline depends on security of the pipeline in the areas which evoke serious concern to its safety, though the problem is deep rooted in the economic and social development of the place hence the people and the region should be linked to the process of development by investing a part of profit in it.
As the assumption goes that Iran through opening its energy market to eastern countries it will make an important strategic and political move to counter Western powers but it is also significant in the light that not only the regional influence of the pipeline will get broadened through peace and stability in the market, India will get the gas at four time cheaper rate than other option available even after paying the transportation cost to Pakistan.
IRAN : US Warship asked to " identify themselves in the Strait of Hormuz"
US Claims about Persian Gulf Confrontation a Plot against Iran
TEHRAN (FNA)- Iran's defense minister dismissed White House claims about a hostile confrontation between Iranian and US navy vessels in the Persian Gulf, describing US allegations as a plot to make regional and world countries fearful of Iran.
"No special move or issue has happened and the Islamic Republic of Iran's naval units have been and are carrying out their normal and routine tasks in the Strait of Hormuz," Brigadier General Mostafa Mohammad Najjar told reporters on the sidelines of a cabinet session here on Wednesday.
"These units always ask other warships and vessels (to identify themselves in the Strait of Hormuz) and they should identify themselves, and the same thing happened on Sunday as usual," he added.
Najjar reiterated that the West and the US have scattered such rumors as a part of their plot to make the regional and Persian Gulf littoral states fearful of Iran.
"The project for making others fearful of Iran and portraying Iran as a threat (to other states) has failed," he said, adding, "Regional countries always view Iran as a friendly country and the presence of the Iranian president at the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council (PGCC) and Saudi Arabia indicates the depth of these (friendly) relations."
___________
Embassy Appeals for Incident in Persian Gulf not to be Exaggerated
TEHRAN (FNA)- Iran's Embassy in Baku said that the incident which took place with the US military ship in Persian Gulf was nothing "extraordinary", and dismissed Washington's allegations about the incident.
"Nothing strange took place in the incident between the patrol boat and US ship," the Embassy stated.
Western media said on Monday that five Iranian speedboats warned three US navy ships to keep away from the Islamic Republic's territorial waters in the strategic Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf over the weekend.
Pentagon officials said that no shots were fired during the encounter, which occurred Saturday in international waters adjacent to Iranian borders, but meantime pointed out that the US Captain was on the verge of issuing the required orders for opening fire on Iranian naval vessels patrolling the area.
Iran's embassy stated that such incidents have taken place previously and should not be exaggerated.
The White House called upon Iran to stop such provocative actions in order to avoid dangerous incidents in the future, but Iran played down the incident, describing the event as an "ordinary occurrence" that ended without any disturbance.
"This is an ordinary occurrence which happens every now and then for both sides," Foreign Ministry Spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini told FNA Monday night.
When such incidents take place, he said "the issue is resolved after both sides recognize each other."
Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps confirmed that their naval forces were involved in the incident with US naval ships but said "nothing out of the ordinary" took place.
"Nothing out of the ordinary happened between IRGC's patrol forces and the US boats in the international waters in the Strait of Hormuz," an informed source in the IRGC's naval force told FNA.
The source also said that the incident took place at "7:40 am yesterday" (0410 GMT on Sunday).
"IRGC's naval vessels were patrolling the Straits of Hormuz and patrolling the incoming and outgoing vessels into the Persian Gulf," the source added.
"Three American warships were entering regional waters and as usual they were identified and questioned.
"The American boats, just as in the past, introduced themselves and gave the (identification) number of their boats and continued on their way without any unusual occurrence."
Arab world shares US worries on Iran
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Arab leaders share US President George W. Bush’s concerns about containing Iran ahead of his Mideast trip. But they are also cautious about signing a security pact with Washington, and choose to boost diplomatic moves instead
SALAH NASRAWI
CAIRO - The Associated Press
United States President George W. Bush began his Middle East tour yesterday, with the topics of Israeli-Palestinian peace and Iran high on the agenda.
The Arab nations share Washington's concerns over Iran's growing regional clout – an advantage Bush intends to exploit – but they are wary of containing Iran militarily.
Countries like Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, as well as the Gulf states, fear Iran will dominate Iraq in the coming years through its influence on the country's Shiite politicians.
Iran is the one issue where U.S. President George W. Bush and Arab leaders have shared concerns. Ahead of the president's Mideast trip, Arab nations are eager to contain growing Iranian power, though they're wary of doing so militarily.
Arab countries, particularly those in the Gulf region, are worried the long standoff between Iran and the U.S. could escalate into military action - and that they could get caught in the crossfire and their vital oil exports could be disrupted.
Influence in Iraq and Lebanon:
Arab nations also worry about Iran's increasing influence around the region, particularly in Iraq and Lebanon. Sunni Muslim countries like Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states fear Iran will dominate Iraq in coming years through its influence on the country's Shiite politicians, particularly if U.S. troops withdraw. So they want to ensure the position of Iraq's Sunni Arab minority.
Even before Bush began his Mideast tour, America's Arab allies were pushing an effort to isolate Iran. Their focus was Lebanon, where they fear Iran - through its allies Syria and Hezbollah - could strengthen its foothold on a sensitive border with Israel.
Bush, who will visit several Gulf states, Saudi Arabia and Egypt after his first stop in Israel today, has said he will work with Mideast allies to develop a security plan to counter Iran.
But while they may welcome U.S. support against Iran, Gulf nations would likely be wary of signing a military or security pact with Washington - at least publicly - since they don't want to be seen as collaborators in an American scheme against a Muslim country. Iran has already threatened to hit U.S. bases in the Gulf and Gulf States don't want to make themselves a direct target.
Saudi Arabia "won't do it," Jamal Khashoggi, editor of the leading Saudi newspaper Al Watan, said of any defense pact. "If the Americans want to fight Iran, that is their problem."
Instead, Arab countries are focusing on diplomatic moves, keeping up communications with Iran while trying to blunt its forays into the region.
A strategy of ‘accommodating' Iran:
Steven Cook, a Mideast expert at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, said the Saudis and other Gulf states seem to be "hedging their bets," and appear more interested in accommodating Iran than taking action against it. "There's a general, overall agreement in the region about the challenges that Iran presents," said Cook. "But there are also questions about what the U.S. intentions are."
On Lebanon, Arab allies of the U.S. are worried that if the Syrian-backed opposition gains more power there, it will mean giving Iran an even stronger foothold in the country. That, and Iran's influence with the Palestinian militant group Hamas, would give Tehran greater ability to disrupt the peace process between the Arabs and Israel.
Doubts over Bush's visit:
While Arab countries may see eye to eye with Bush on concerns over Iran, they are deeply skeptical over the other goal of his Mideast visit - pushing the Arab-Israeli peace process. After the Mideast conference in Annapolis, Bush has said he hopes Israel and the Palestinians can reach a peace accord before the end of his term.
But many in the Arab world see Washington's new push on peace as too little too late and doubt the U.S. will pressure Israel to make the concessions they demand.
Arab leaders share US President George W. Bush’s concerns about containing Iran ahead of his Mideast trip. But they are also cautious about signing a security pact with Washington, and choose to boost diplomatic moves instead
SALAH NASRAWI
CAIRO - The Associated Press
United States President George W. Bush began his Middle East tour yesterday, with the topics of Israeli-Palestinian peace and Iran high on the agenda.
The Arab nations share Washington's concerns over Iran's growing regional clout – an advantage Bush intends to exploit – but they are wary of containing Iran militarily.
Countries like Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, as well as the Gulf states, fear Iran will dominate Iraq in the coming years through its influence on the country's Shiite politicians.
Iran is the one issue where U.S. President George W. Bush and Arab leaders have shared concerns. Ahead of the president's Mideast trip, Arab nations are eager to contain growing Iranian power, though they're wary of doing so militarily.
Arab countries, particularly those in the Gulf region, are worried the long standoff between Iran and the U.S. could escalate into military action - and that they could get caught in the crossfire and their vital oil exports could be disrupted.
Influence in Iraq and Lebanon:
Arab nations also worry about Iran's increasing influence around the region, particularly in Iraq and Lebanon. Sunni Muslim countries like Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states fear Iran will dominate Iraq in coming years through its influence on the country's Shiite politicians, particularly if U.S. troops withdraw. So they want to ensure the position of Iraq's Sunni Arab minority.
Even before Bush began his Mideast tour, America's Arab allies were pushing an effort to isolate Iran. Their focus was Lebanon, where they fear Iran - through its allies Syria and Hezbollah - could strengthen its foothold on a sensitive border with Israel.
Bush, who will visit several Gulf states, Saudi Arabia and Egypt after his first stop in Israel today, has said he will work with Mideast allies to develop a security plan to counter Iran.
But while they may welcome U.S. support against Iran, Gulf nations would likely be wary of signing a military or security pact with Washington - at least publicly - since they don't want to be seen as collaborators in an American scheme against a Muslim country. Iran has already threatened to hit U.S. bases in the Gulf and Gulf States don't want to make themselves a direct target.
Saudi Arabia "won't do it," Jamal Khashoggi, editor of the leading Saudi newspaper Al Watan, said of any defense pact. "If the Americans want to fight Iran, that is their problem."
Instead, Arab countries are focusing on diplomatic moves, keeping up communications with Iran while trying to blunt its forays into the region.
A strategy of ‘accommodating' Iran:
Steven Cook, a Mideast expert at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, said the Saudis and other Gulf states seem to be "hedging their bets," and appear more interested in accommodating Iran than taking action against it. "There's a general, overall agreement in the region about the challenges that Iran presents," said Cook. "But there are also questions about what the U.S. intentions are."
On Lebanon, Arab allies of the U.S. are worried that if the Syrian-backed opposition gains more power there, it will mean giving Iran an even stronger foothold in the country. That, and Iran's influence with the Palestinian militant group Hamas, would give Tehran greater ability to disrupt the peace process between the Arabs and Israel.
Doubts over Bush's visit:
While Arab countries may see eye to eye with Bush on concerns over Iran, they are deeply skeptical over the other goal of his Mideast visit - pushing the Arab-Israeli peace process. After the Mideast conference in Annapolis, Bush has said he hopes Israel and the Palestinians can reach a peace accord before the end of his term.
But many in the Arab world see Washington's new push on peace as too little too late and doubt the U.S. will pressure Israel to make the concessions they demand.
TURKEY : First results of the PKK operation
http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=93212
EXCERPT
Mehmet Ali Birand
Wednesday, January 9, 2008We spent the major part of 2007 in discussion and actualization of the operation in Iraq. In fact, it’s too soon for net results. But looking back at the developments up until today, we can safely say that Turkey scored well in political and military areas
The sum total of impressions received before, during and after the operations spells success. The net results are extremely positive.
We do not possess sufficient data to calculate the impact of the operation on the PKK. We do not know how many camps were hit or completely destroyed. If the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) have that information, they are not sharing it with the public for reasons of their own.
However, the way the operation was conducted and the messages it issued to the Turkish public and to northern Iraq were extremely important.
They built up public morale.
The return of the PKK terror after an interval of almost six years was like the return of a nightmare. The revival of terror that everyone had thought was over came as a deep shock. The presence of the Democratic Society Party (DTP) in Parliament had looked like a step in the right direction. When the PKK took up arms despite this development, the public was demoralized and felt stuck between the Kurdish issue and the PKK.
The military operation, on the other hand, helped rebuild morale by reassuring that the state was powerful enough to cope. This was the satisfactory reaction that the public had been waiting for. There was no need for statistical information.
The military operation also sent a very clear message to the PKK: we will return fire for fire, attack for attack, and we are much stronger.
The military operation also proved to the northern Iraqi administration that the United States had preferred to stand by Turkey, and that it always would whenever things came to a head.
In my opinion, the most important decision that the TSK made was to opt for air raids instead of a major land operation.
Another very important result of the operation was to mend relations between the TSK and the Pentagon. Today, Turkey is an ally that cooperates with the U.S. in its fight against the PKK. This fact also carries important messages to the countries within the region.
Those are the current net results.
We must not forget, however, that the public is bound to demand some concrete results after some time. This success against the PKK in terms of security will then be measured against other criteria.
* The translation of M.A.Birand's column was provided by Nuran İnanç. nuraninanc@gmail.com
EXCERPT
Mehmet Ali Birand
Wednesday, January 9, 2008We spent the major part of 2007 in discussion and actualization of the operation in Iraq. In fact, it’s too soon for net results. But looking back at the developments up until today, we can safely say that Turkey scored well in political and military areas
The sum total of impressions received before, during and after the operations spells success. The net results are extremely positive.
We do not possess sufficient data to calculate the impact of the operation on the PKK. We do not know how many camps were hit or completely destroyed. If the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) have that information, they are not sharing it with the public for reasons of their own.
However, the way the operation was conducted and the messages it issued to the Turkish public and to northern Iraq were extremely important.
They built up public morale.
The return of the PKK terror after an interval of almost six years was like the return of a nightmare. The revival of terror that everyone had thought was over came as a deep shock. The presence of the Democratic Society Party (DTP) in Parliament had looked like a step in the right direction. When the PKK took up arms despite this development, the public was demoralized and felt stuck between the Kurdish issue and the PKK.
The military operation, on the other hand, helped rebuild morale by reassuring that the state was powerful enough to cope. This was the satisfactory reaction that the public had been waiting for. There was no need for statistical information.
The military operation also sent a very clear message to the PKK: we will return fire for fire, attack for attack, and we are much stronger.
The military operation also proved to the northern Iraqi administration that the United States had preferred to stand by Turkey, and that it always would whenever things came to a head.
In my opinion, the most important decision that the TSK made was to opt for air raids instead of a major land operation.
Another very important result of the operation was to mend relations between the TSK and the Pentagon. Today, Turkey is an ally that cooperates with the U.S. in its fight against the PKK. This fact also carries important messages to the countries within the region.
Those are the current net results.
We must not forget, however, that the public is bound to demand some concrete results after some time. This success against the PKK in terms of security will then be measured against other criteria.
* The translation of M.A.Birand's column was provided by Nuran İnanç. nuraninanc@gmail.com
Iraq aid tied to taming of PKK
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
President Gül says Turkey’s contribution in Iraq in all areas including the economy could be 10 times greater if the bases of PKK terrorists in the north are eradicated
ANKARA – Turkish Daily News
Turkey's contribution in Iraq could be 10 times greater if the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) bases in northern Iraq are eradicated, President Abdullah Gül said on the eve of a meeting with his United States counterpart George W. Bush.
“Turkey's assistance in Iraq will be in all areas including economic, political and security, if the PKK is removed from the north,” Gül told a group of reporters on the plane en route to Washington. The high-level talks that come after nearly 12 years had not started when the Turkish Daily News went to print yesterday.
The Gül-Bush meeting at the White House is considered a major sign of improved relations between the longtime NATO allies after five years of acrimony over the Iraq war and U.S. policy on Turkey's fight against terrorism. Gül said past difficulties have been overcome.
“The new phase in the fight against terrorism and the developments in Iraq reveal that the difficult period was left in the past and a new era is approaching. A trustworthy environment has been created,” Gül said.
He emphasized that the U.S. is Turkey's leading ally and that his visit is very important given that the results of bilateral meetings have a widespread impact.
The Turkish president said that the policies of Turkey and the U.S. regarding Iraq are overlapping, adding that that Washington also places priority on Iraq's political unity and territorial integrity. Gül's visit follows a visit by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan two months earlier that resulted in a commitment by Bush to share intelligence on the PKK and not to object to limited Turkish airstrikes against the terrorist group's bases in northern Iraq.
The two sides have even established a coordination center in Ankara following the key meeting for Turks, Iraqis and Americans to share information.
In response to a question on whether the cooperation against terrorism is going well, Gül said: “Sure, the joint stance against terrorism marks a turning point.”
The president added that after October's deadly clash with PKK terrorists in Turkey's southeast, extraordinarily high-level contacts with U.S. officials, including commanders, were launched.
“Our plans were ready but we thought it would be more appropriate if we implement them together with our ally. Before the prime minister's visit to Washington, I talked with President Bush. The U.S. is dealing with every part of the world, just like a big machine, but we have managed to attract their interest,” Gül said.
But in the months leading to the Nov. 5 ErdoÄŸan-Bush White House meeting, Turkish-U.S. relations were at the lowest they have been in many years. In 2003, during the buildup to the war on Iraq, the Turkish Parliament rejected U.S. requests to send troops into Iraq through Turkish territory.
Gül was scheduled to have breakfast with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice yesterday and also to meet with Vice President Dick Cheney. On Wednesday he is scheduled to meet with Defense Secretary Robert Gates before flying to New York to hold talks with United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.
President Gül says Turkey’s contribution in Iraq in all areas including the economy could be 10 times greater if the bases of PKK terrorists in the north are eradicated
ANKARA – Turkish Daily News
Turkey's contribution in Iraq could be 10 times greater if the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) bases in northern Iraq are eradicated, President Abdullah Gül said on the eve of a meeting with his United States counterpart George W. Bush.
“Turkey's assistance in Iraq will be in all areas including economic, political and security, if the PKK is removed from the north,” Gül told a group of reporters on the plane en route to Washington. The high-level talks that come after nearly 12 years had not started when the Turkish Daily News went to print yesterday.
The Gül-Bush meeting at the White House is considered a major sign of improved relations between the longtime NATO allies after five years of acrimony over the Iraq war and U.S. policy on Turkey's fight against terrorism. Gül said past difficulties have been overcome.
“The new phase in the fight against terrorism and the developments in Iraq reveal that the difficult period was left in the past and a new era is approaching. A trustworthy environment has been created,” Gül said.
He emphasized that the U.S. is Turkey's leading ally and that his visit is very important given that the results of bilateral meetings have a widespread impact.
The Turkish president said that the policies of Turkey and the U.S. regarding Iraq are overlapping, adding that that Washington also places priority on Iraq's political unity and territorial integrity. Gül's visit follows a visit by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan two months earlier that resulted in a commitment by Bush to share intelligence on the PKK and not to object to limited Turkish airstrikes against the terrorist group's bases in northern Iraq.
The two sides have even established a coordination center in Ankara following the key meeting for Turks, Iraqis and Americans to share information.
In response to a question on whether the cooperation against terrorism is going well, Gül said: “Sure, the joint stance against terrorism marks a turning point.”
The president added that after October's deadly clash with PKK terrorists in Turkey's southeast, extraordinarily high-level contacts with U.S. officials, including commanders, were launched.
“Our plans were ready but we thought it would be more appropriate if we implement them together with our ally. Before the prime minister's visit to Washington, I talked with President Bush. The U.S. is dealing with every part of the world, just like a big machine, but we have managed to attract their interest,” Gül said.
But in the months leading to the Nov. 5 ErdoÄŸan-Bush White House meeting, Turkish-U.S. relations were at the lowest they have been in many years. In 2003, during the buildup to the war on Iraq, the Turkish Parliament rejected U.S. requests to send troops into Iraq through Turkish territory.
Gül was scheduled to have breakfast with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice yesterday and also to meet with Vice President Dick Cheney. On Wednesday he is scheduled to meet with Defense Secretary Robert Gates before flying to New York to hold talks with United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.
Russian defense industry still faces problems
15:38 | 09/ 01/ 2008
MOSCOW. (Military expert Nikita Petrov for RIA Novosti) - The Russian defense industry, which scored some major achievements last year, still faces major problems.
It is unclear whether the 2007-2015 state rearmament program will be implemented because some of its provisions are not being fulfilled completely.
Speaking of achievements, the Teikovo division of the national Strategic Missile Force in the Ivanovo Region, Central Russia, received a battalion of mobile Topol-M (SS-27) inter-continental ballistic missiles last year and currently has one Topol-M regiment. This will help strengthen the potential of Russia's strategic nuclear forces.
Moreover, the Russians have tested a new generation RS-24 ICBM, due to replace the older SS-18 and SS-19 missiles, with multiple independently targeted re-entry vehicles.
A missile brigade in the North Caucasus Military District has received a battalion of Iskander-M shorter-range ballistic missiles. The Russian Air Force has started operating revamped Su-27-SMT Flanker fighters, Su-24 Fencer tactical bombers, as well as two Su-34 Fullback fighter-bombers. An S-400 surface-to-air missile (SAM) system has been placed on combat duty in the Moscow region.
However, the battalion of Iskander-M missiles was to have been supplied by late 2005. The management of the Novosibirsk Aircraft Plant had promised to supply six, rather than two, Su-34 bombers in late 2006.
Although the Defense Ministry planned to adopt the S-400 SAM system in March or June 2007, it did so only last August.
Moreover, the Global Navigation Satellite System (GLONASS) remains only partially operational with 13 spacecraft.
First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov told a recent meeting of the government's Defense Industry Commission that the delays had been caused by the shortage of skilled workers, rapidly aging production facilities and deteriorating product quality.
In the last few months, defense factories have expanded production by 14.1%, boosting military-equipment and civilian output by 19.1% and 7.6%, respectively. Nevertheless, some of them are simply unable to fulfil the state defense order and to effectively spend federal-budget allocations.
This is rather unusual because the government is now lavishing money on the defense industry. For instance, the 2008 defense budget totals an impressive 800 billion rubles ($32.6 billion) and will swell to 900 billion rubles ($36.67 billion) and 1.1 trillion rubles ($44.82 billion) in 2009 and 2010, respectively. But it is unclear whether all this money will be put to good use.
It is impossible to overhaul the defense industry's production facilities in the next two years because modern metal-cutting tools and automatic transfer lines are expensive. Local enterprises turn out only part of their required range, and the rest has to be purchased abroad. Add to this high import duties, which cannot be reduced or abolished. This problem persists despite efforts by the government and corporate managers to solve it.
Right now, the Army can buy only six to seven, rather than ten, fighting vehicles because raw materials, components, fuel, heat and electricity are becoming increasingly more expensive.
One should also mention the gap between real and "official" prices, and the need to support reserve defense factories, which have mothballed production, but which still have to pay heating and power bills and are subject to sanctions for their failure to fulfil the defense order.
Only 36% of strategic defense enterprises are solvent, while another 23% are tottering on the verge of bankruptcy.
Another problem has to do with human resources. Most skilled workers and scientists are nearing retirement age. At the same time, quite a few technical-college graduates are in no hurry to sign up with the defense industry because of low wages and insufficient career opportunities.
The lack of qualified personnel and up-to-date production equipment will inevitably impair product quality. In fact, India, Algeria and some other countries are beginning to file quality claims.
Property rights are a serious problem, too. The state controls some defense factories, while others have been privatized; there are also mixed companies. But the government is delaying the creation of holding companies that could help the defense industry.
Sergei Ivanov said only 16 out of 37 holding companies had been established by late 2007, and that the statutory documents of another 21 companies had to be submitted to the government by January 1, 2008.
He said documents on just half their number were currently available, and that the heads of some ministries and departments had to assume responsibility for failing to fulfil presidential orders.
However, the newly-established holding companies are still unable to restructure production, to get rid of surplus core assets, to choose optimal development scenarios and the best weapons and civilian products.
Since 1992, not a single state defense order has been fulfilled completely and on time. It would be naive to hope that the industry's problems will be solved in a couple of years. Nor should we expect a major breakthrough this year. All we can do is work patiently, without deviating from the preset program.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
MOSCOW. (Military expert Nikita Petrov for RIA Novosti) - The Russian defense industry, which scored some major achievements last year, still faces major problems.
It is unclear whether the 2007-2015 state rearmament program will be implemented because some of its provisions are not being fulfilled completely.
Speaking of achievements, the Teikovo division of the national Strategic Missile Force in the Ivanovo Region, Central Russia, received a battalion of mobile Topol-M (SS-27) inter-continental ballistic missiles last year and currently has one Topol-M regiment. This will help strengthen the potential of Russia's strategic nuclear forces.
Moreover, the Russians have tested a new generation RS-24 ICBM, due to replace the older SS-18 and SS-19 missiles, with multiple independently targeted re-entry vehicles.
A missile brigade in the North Caucasus Military District has received a battalion of Iskander-M shorter-range ballistic missiles. The Russian Air Force has started operating revamped Su-27-SMT Flanker fighters, Su-24 Fencer tactical bombers, as well as two Su-34 Fullback fighter-bombers. An S-400 surface-to-air missile (SAM) system has been placed on combat duty in the Moscow region.
However, the battalion of Iskander-M missiles was to have been supplied by late 2005. The management of the Novosibirsk Aircraft Plant had promised to supply six, rather than two, Su-34 bombers in late 2006.
Although the Defense Ministry planned to adopt the S-400 SAM system in March or June 2007, it did so only last August.
Moreover, the Global Navigation Satellite System (GLONASS) remains only partially operational with 13 spacecraft.
First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov told a recent meeting of the government's Defense Industry Commission that the delays had been caused by the shortage of skilled workers, rapidly aging production facilities and deteriorating product quality.
In the last few months, defense factories have expanded production by 14.1%, boosting military-equipment and civilian output by 19.1% and 7.6%, respectively. Nevertheless, some of them are simply unable to fulfil the state defense order and to effectively spend federal-budget allocations.
This is rather unusual because the government is now lavishing money on the defense industry. For instance, the 2008 defense budget totals an impressive 800 billion rubles ($32.6 billion) and will swell to 900 billion rubles ($36.67 billion) and 1.1 trillion rubles ($44.82 billion) in 2009 and 2010, respectively. But it is unclear whether all this money will be put to good use.
It is impossible to overhaul the defense industry's production facilities in the next two years because modern metal-cutting tools and automatic transfer lines are expensive. Local enterprises turn out only part of their required range, and the rest has to be purchased abroad. Add to this high import duties, which cannot be reduced or abolished. This problem persists despite efforts by the government and corporate managers to solve it.
Right now, the Army can buy only six to seven, rather than ten, fighting vehicles because raw materials, components, fuel, heat and electricity are becoming increasingly more expensive.
One should also mention the gap between real and "official" prices, and the need to support reserve defense factories, which have mothballed production, but which still have to pay heating and power bills and are subject to sanctions for their failure to fulfil the defense order.
Only 36% of strategic defense enterprises are solvent, while another 23% are tottering on the verge of bankruptcy.
Another problem has to do with human resources. Most skilled workers and scientists are nearing retirement age. At the same time, quite a few technical-college graduates are in no hurry to sign up with the defense industry because of low wages and insufficient career opportunities.
The lack of qualified personnel and up-to-date production equipment will inevitably impair product quality. In fact, India, Algeria and some other countries are beginning to file quality claims.
Property rights are a serious problem, too. The state controls some defense factories, while others have been privatized; there are also mixed companies. But the government is delaying the creation of holding companies that could help the defense industry.
Sergei Ivanov said only 16 out of 37 holding companies had been established by late 2007, and that the statutory documents of another 21 companies had to be submitted to the government by January 1, 2008.
He said documents on just half their number were currently available, and that the heads of some ministries and departments had to assume responsibility for failing to fulfil presidential orders.
However, the newly-established holding companies are still unable to restructure production, to get rid of surplus core assets, to choose optimal development scenarios and the best weapons and civilian products.
Since 1992, not a single state defense order has been fulfilled completely and on time. It would be naive to hope that the industry's problems will be solved in a couple of years. Nor should we expect a major breakthrough this year. All we can do is work patiently, without deviating from the preset program.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
French commentator Jacques Attali Admits Financial Crash
Attali Admits Financial Crash:
`Whole World Going Over the Precipice'
PARIS, Jan. 3, 2008 (EIRNS)—In the most dire words, French commentator Jacques Attali, a longtime lackey for the financial oligarchy, and former advisor to French President Francois Mitterand, calls the world financial system, "bankrupt." Writing in his column in the weekly l'Express today, he says, "It is the whole world which seems to be going over the precipice. As if a collision of trains going at full speed was being prepared. As if, in a vortex emptying the bottom of a bathtub...." there is no stability in sight for the global economy.
"That the murder of an opposition leader of a country of the South would so gravely shake the Asian financial markets, and with them those of the entire world, reveals the extreme fragility of the planet," writes Jacques Attali, referring to the murder of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto.
Attali says that "Beyond the sub-primes, many other debts are circulating and no one knows how the banks will be able to honor them: those of hedge funds, of monoline insurers, of LBO funds, and of holders of credit cards, which form a pyramid amounting to much more than the bank's own funds, which would have been closed a long time ago, had the central banks not agreed to refinance them all without restraint."
The European Union is in such bad straits, "with an Italy going financially adrift, to such an extent that the very existence of the euro could be put into question by speculators attacking the Rome Treasury."
He even adds to this already poisonous mix, the crises of the Middle East, and the growth of world poverty. But, like other appendages of the Anglo-Dutch oligarchical system, Attali will not admit that it is gone forever, and must be replaced with the kind of financial reorganization represented by Lyndon LaRouche's New Bretton Woods monetary system, and emergency action in the United States embodied in the Homeowners and Bank Protection Act. Instead he only lists the symptoms, as if he were examining a live patient, not a corpse.
British Trigger Global Mayhem As Financial Crash Accelerates
This article appears in the January 11, 2008 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
by Jeffrey Steinberg
Sir Alan Greenspan, the octogenarian one-time paramour of hedonist philosopher-author Ayn Rand, and the former chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank, delivered a frantic confession on Dec. 27, 2007, in an interview with National Public Radio. Sir Alan candidly admitted that the world financial and monetary system, which he helped to shape during his 20-year tenure at the Fed, is finished. "What I have to forecast," he told NPR, "is that something will happen which is unexpected, which will knock us down.... The odds of that happening, I think, are rising, because we are getting into vulnerable areas." Elsewhere in the brief interview, Greenspan reiterated, "We're in a turning phase, and the extraordinary improvements that have occurred in the world economy in the last 15 years are transitory, and they're about to change.... So, I think this whole process will begin to reverse."
Greenspan's words hardly capture the magnitude of the financial crash that has been onrushing for the past six months, and that has now entered a new, even more volatile phase, as of Jan. 1, 2008 (see Economics lead article). As Lyndon LaRouche announced in a July 25, 2007 international webcast from Washington, the system is doomed, there are no "monetary" solutions to the crisis; and higher-ups in the City of London financial oligarchy are fully aware of the accelerating, irreversible crash of the whole global financial system.
Greenspan is but one among a number of City of London parrots who have been squawking doom and gloom in recent weeks and months. The London Daily Telegraph's Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, a British intelligence asset, who led London's campaign to destroy the Bill Clinton Presidency, and who now resides in Brussels as the "Torygraph's" financial correspondent, has been pouring out a steady stream of remarkably accurate accounts of the financial crash process for months. The "Torygraph" is leading a campaign to bring down the weak-kneed Fabian Prime Minister Gordon Brown, and replace him with a "tough-guy" Conservative, who can better steer Britain into austerity dictatorship at home, and imperial provocations abroad.
And in his weekly column in the French financial weekly L'Express, on Jan. 3, London Warburg asset Jacques Attali was far more shrill than Sir Alan or Ambrose: "It is the whole world which seems to be going over the precipice," he wrote, "As if a collision of trains going at full speed was being prepared. As if, in a vortex emptying the bottom of a bathtub.... [T]here is no stability in sight for the global economy."
Attali also spilled the beans on the vital link between the financial collapse process and the eruption of chaos around the planet, writing, "That the murder of an opposition leader of a country of the South [Pakistan—ed.] would so gravely shake the Asian financial markets, and with them those of the entire world, reveals the extreme fragility of the planet."
Returning again to the details of the escalating financial disintegration, Attali warned, "Beyond the subprimes, many other debts are circulating and no one knows how the banks will be able to honor them: those of hedge funds, of monoline insurers, of LBO funds, and of holders of credit cards, which form a pyramid amounting to much more than the bank's own funds, which would have been closed a long time ago, had the central banks not agreed to refinance them all without restraint." Attali concluded by returning to the situation in Euroland, predicting that the very future of the single European currency is in jeopardy, "with an Italy going financially adrift, to such an extent that the very existence of the euro could be put into question by speculators attacking the Rome Treasury."
Indeed, in the past months, an estimated $1.5 trillion in bank assets have been wiped off the books, and an equal amount of equity has evaporated on world stock markets. The idea that central banks could "solve" this crisis by a hyperinflationary flow of new money, is clinically insane. Crises set to blow during the first quarter of 2008, including a blowout of the insurance sector and a looming derivatives explosion, make the disasters of 2007, like the wipeout of the U.S. mortgage bubble, seem small in comparison.
What Does It Mean?
It is in this context, and only this context, that the global pattern of assassinations, ethnic, religious and tribal eruptions, and all-around chaos, can be understood. None of these are local or regional events. They are all part of a single British strategy—aimed at one, single global objective: The destruction of nation-states, the launching of worldwide asymmetric warfare—to last for generations, and the consolidation of a vise-grip control over the strategic raw materials wealth of the planet, in Anglo-Dutch private cartel hands.
Students of history will recognize the pattern. It is the model of global oligarchical warfare, devised in modern times by Venice, utilizing private mercenary armies, like the Norman conquerers and crusaders, to eliminate any and all pockets of humanist resistance.
By now, some readers of this report are no doubt squirming over the idea that London is any longer a center of imperial power, capable of unleashing global chaos. Indeed, the British, themselves, have championed the idea that the Sun long ago set on the British Empire, and that the United States, not Great Britain, is now the reigning world imperial power. At best, a new "Anglo-American" consort, led by Washington, with London as its junior partner, is the epicenter of global power. But a more careful look reveals a very different picture. There is no "Anglo-American" consort. There is London, the British System of Empire, and a collection of wanna-be British assets and agents, who reside in Washington, on Wall Street, and around the globe.
The purpose of the British promotion of the "Anglo-American" partnership is to conceal the historic fault-lines between the American republican system, and the British empire. The distinction was most starkly clear during the Franklin Roosevelt Presidency, when the American leader vowed to bring an end to the European colonial system, at the end of World War II. FDR's premature death in April 1945 prevented the full realization of that goal, but the differences in principle remain, and leading American statesmen, like Lyndon LaRouche, today carry forward the American republican animus toward British-led European imperialism.
From an historical vantage point, the current shape of the "invisible" British empire is not hard to fathom.
First off, virtually all of the offshore financial centers that dominate the globalized, deregulated financial system today, are located in British or Dutch colonies, like the Cayman Islands, the Dutch Antilles, the Isle of Man, the Grand Bahamas, etc.
Second, for decades the British have dominated the private mercenary industry, through outfits like Executive Outcomes, Sandline, Defence Systems Ltd.—working hand-in-glove with Britain's major strategic raw materials cartels, that already own the lion's share of the precious metal wealth of Africa, Australia, and South America. British counterinsurgency methods, pioneered during the 18th-19th Century heyday of the British East India Company, are still practiced on a global scale, by British intelligence operatives and "former" officers, now operating under private cover. British imperial agents like George P. Shultz and Felix Rohatyn have promoted the privatization of national security inside the U.S. establishment, but these East India Company schemes are alien to the American outlook and tradition—despite Dick Cheney's Halliburton.
Third, the Commonwealth of Nations, headed by Queen Elizabeth II, is made up of 53 nations, spanning the globe, accounting for one-fifth of the land mass of the Earth, and a very high percentage of its strategic resources and population. Though nominally an alliance of independent states, the Commonwealth was itself founded, in the late 19th Century, as a perpetuation of the British Empire.
It is this British apparatus that has been unleashed, all around the globe, to foment chaos and provoke warfare. Since there is no way that the present global financial system can be "reformed," and since London will never voluntarily submit to a bankruptcy reorganization and allow nations to return to sovereign control over credit and currency—as proposed by LaRouche, and earlier implemented through FDR's Bretton Woods System—they resort, instead, to chaos.
At all costs, London and the extended Anglo-Dutch financial oligarchy, are committed to the provocation of conflict among the world's leading powers—the United States, Russia, China, and India. A coordinated effort on the part of those four great sovereign powers, with the enthusiastic support of many smaller nations around the globe, could impose a new, just financial order, and eliminate the power of Anglo-Dutch offshore finance.
It was under far less severe conditions of global financial and monetary breakdown in the late 1920s and 1930s that the Anglo-Dutch financial oligarchy bankrolled Fascism and Nazism in Europe, and provoked world war. Today's circumstances are, in fact, far more desperate. At all costs, London is committed to preventing the emergence of a new "FDR paradigm" in Washington, one that would win the immediate backing of Moscow, Beijing, and New Delhi. Global chaos is its weapon of choice.
It is in this context, that the Dec. 27, 2007 assassination of Benazir Bhutto must be viewed. It is also for this reason, that this EIR strategic study begins with a world map, which shows the total picture of British-orchestrated instability. Consider the global breadth and scope of the actions, first. Then visit the internal details of each hot-spot. The persistent hand of London will then be visible.
by Jeffrey Steinberg
Sir Alan Greenspan, the octogenarian one-time paramour of hedonist philosopher-author Ayn Rand, and the former chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank, delivered a frantic confession on Dec. 27, 2007, in an interview with National Public Radio. Sir Alan candidly admitted that the world financial and monetary system, which he helped to shape during his 20-year tenure at the Fed, is finished. "What I have to forecast," he told NPR, "is that something will happen which is unexpected, which will knock us down.... The odds of that happening, I think, are rising, because we are getting into vulnerable areas." Elsewhere in the brief interview, Greenspan reiterated, "We're in a turning phase, and the extraordinary improvements that have occurred in the world economy in the last 15 years are transitory, and they're about to change.... So, I think this whole process will begin to reverse."
Greenspan's words hardly capture the magnitude of the financial crash that has been onrushing for the past six months, and that has now entered a new, even more volatile phase, as of Jan. 1, 2008 (see Economics lead article). As Lyndon LaRouche announced in a July 25, 2007 international webcast from Washington, the system is doomed, there are no "monetary" solutions to the crisis; and higher-ups in the City of London financial oligarchy are fully aware of the accelerating, irreversible crash of the whole global financial system.
Greenspan is but one among a number of City of London parrots who have been squawking doom and gloom in recent weeks and months. The London Daily Telegraph's Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, a British intelligence asset, who led London's campaign to destroy the Bill Clinton Presidency, and who now resides in Brussels as the "Torygraph's" financial correspondent, has been pouring out a steady stream of remarkably accurate accounts of the financial crash process for months. The "Torygraph" is leading a campaign to bring down the weak-kneed Fabian Prime Minister Gordon Brown, and replace him with a "tough-guy" Conservative, who can better steer Britain into austerity dictatorship at home, and imperial provocations abroad.
And in his weekly column in the French financial weekly L'Express, on Jan. 3, London Warburg asset Jacques Attali was far more shrill than Sir Alan or Ambrose: "It is the whole world which seems to be going over the precipice," he wrote, "As if a collision of trains going at full speed was being prepared. As if, in a vortex emptying the bottom of a bathtub.... [T]here is no stability in sight for the global economy."
Attali also spilled the beans on the vital link between the financial collapse process and the eruption of chaos around the planet, writing, "That the murder of an opposition leader of a country of the South [Pakistan—ed.] would so gravely shake the Asian financial markets, and with them those of the entire world, reveals the extreme fragility of the planet."
Returning again to the details of the escalating financial disintegration, Attali warned, "Beyond the subprimes, many other debts are circulating and no one knows how the banks will be able to honor them: those of hedge funds, of monoline insurers, of LBO funds, and of holders of credit cards, which form a pyramid amounting to much more than the bank's own funds, which would have been closed a long time ago, had the central banks not agreed to refinance them all without restraint." Attali concluded by returning to the situation in Euroland, predicting that the very future of the single European currency is in jeopardy, "with an Italy going financially adrift, to such an extent that the very existence of the euro could be put into question by speculators attacking the Rome Treasury."
Indeed, in the past months, an estimated $1.5 trillion in bank assets have been wiped off the books, and an equal amount of equity has evaporated on world stock markets. The idea that central banks could "solve" this crisis by a hyperinflationary flow of new money, is clinically insane. Crises set to blow during the first quarter of 2008, including a blowout of the insurance sector and a looming derivatives explosion, make the disasters of 2007, like the wipeout of the U.S. mortgage bubble, seem small in comparison.
What Does It Mean?
It is in this context, and only this context, that the global pattern of assassinations, ethnic, religious and tribal eruptions, and all-around chaos, can be understood. None of these are local or regional events. They are all part of a single British strategy—aimed at one, single global objective: The destruction of nation-states, the launching of worldwide asymmetric warfare—to last for generations, and the consolidation of a vise-grip control over the strategic raw materials wealth of the planet, in Anglo-Dutch private cartel hands.
Students of history will recognize the pattern. It is the model of global oligarchical warfare, devised in modern times by Venice, utilizing private mercenary armies, like the Norman conquerers and crusaders, to eliminate any and all pockets of humanist resistance.
By now, some readers of this report are no doubt squirming over the idea that London is any longer a center of imperial power, capable of unleashing global chaos. Indeed, the British, themselves, have championed the idea that the Sun long ago set on the British Empire, and that the United States, not Great Britain, is now the reigning world imperial power. At best, a new "Anglo-American" consort, led by Washington, with London as its junior partner, is the epicenter of global power. But a more careful look reveals a very different picture. There is no "Anglo-American" consort. There is London, the British System of Empire, and a collection of wanna-be British assets and agents, who reside in Washington, on Wall Street, and around the globe.
The purpose of the British promotion of the "Anglo-American" partnership is to conceal the historic fault-lines between the American republican system, and the British empire. The distinction was most starkly clear during the Franklin Roosevelt Presidency, when the American leader vowed to bring an end to the European colonial system, at the end of World War II. FDR's premature death in April 1945 prevented the full realization of that goal, but the differences in principle remain, and leading American statesmen, like Lyndon LaRouche, today carry forward the American republican animus toward British-led European imperialism.
From an historical vantage point, the current shape of the "invisible" British empire is not hard to fathom.
First off, virtually all of the offshore financial centers that dominate the globalized, deregulated financial system today, are located in British or Dutch colonies, like the Cayman Islands, the Dutch Antilles, the Isle of Man, the Grand Bahamas, etc.
Second, for decades the British have dominated the private mercenary industry, through outfits like Executive Outcomes, Sandline, Defence Systems Ltd.—working hand-in-glove with Britain's major strategic raw materials cartels, that already own the lion's share of the precious metal wealth of Africa, Australia, and South America. British counterinsurgency methods, pioneered during the 18th-19th Century heyday of the British East India Company, are still practiced on a global scale, by British intelligence operatives and "former" officers, now operating under private cover. British imperial agents like George P. Shultz and Felix Rohatyn have promoted the privatization of national security inside the U.S. establishment, but these East India Company schemes are alien to the American outlook and tradition—despite Dick Cheney's Halliburton.
Third, the Commonwealth of Nations, headed by Queen Elizabeth II, is made up of 53 nations, spanning the globe, accounting for one-fifth of the land mass of the Earth, and a very high percentage of its strategic resources and population. Though nominally an alliance of independent states, the Commonwealth was itself founded, in the late 19th Century, as a perpetuation of the British Empire.
It is this British apparatus that has been unleashed, all around the globe, to foment chaos and provoke warfare. Since there is no way that the present global financial system can be "reformed," and since London will never voluntarily submit to a bankruptcy reorganization and allow nations to return to sovereign control over credit and currency—as proposed by LaRouche, and earlier implemented through FDR's Bretton Woods System—they resort, instead, to chaos.
At all costs, London and the extended Anglo-Dutch financial oligarchy, are committed to the provocation of conflict among the world's leading powers—the United States, Russia, China, and India. A coordinated effort on the part of those four great sovereign powers, with the enthusiastic support of many smaller nations around the globe, could impose a new, just financial order, and eliminate the power of Anglo-Dutch offshore finance.
It was under far less severe conditions of global financial and monetary breakdown in the late 1920s and 1930s that the Anglo-Dutch financial oligarchy bankrolled Fascism and Nazism in Europe, and provoked world war. Today's circumstances are, in fact, far more desperate. At all costs, London is committed to preventing the emergence of a new "FDR paradigm" in Washington, one that would win the immediate backing of Moscow, Beijing, and New Delhi. Global chaos is its weapon of choice.
It is in this context, that the Dec. 27, 2007 assassination of Benazir Bhutto must be viewed. It is also for this reason, that this EIR strategic study begins with a world map, which shows the total picture of British-orchestrated instability. Consider the global breadth and scope of the actions, first. Then visit the internal details of each hot-spot. The persistent hand of London will then be visible.
Barak to explain to Bush why American intelligence is wrong about Iran's nukes
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/942092.html
By Barak Ravid
Defense Minister Ehud Barak will lay out for U.S. President George W. Bush the differences in interpretation regarding Iran's nuclear program between the Israeli security establishment and the American intelligence community.
Yesterday, Barak, together with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Barak, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, and Strategic Affairs Minister Avigdor Lieberman, met with security officials to discuss the stance Israel will take on the Iranian issue. Advertisement
At the meeting, officials from the defense establishment, intelligence agencies and the Israel Atomic Energy Commission surveyed a series of documents and intelligence overviews on Iran that will be presented to Bush. These deal, among other things, with the differences between the American intelligence estimate published a few weeks ago and Israel's intelligence assessment of the issue.
Also yesterday, Russia's deputy foreign minister for Asian affairs, Aleksandr Losyukov, visiting Israel, discussed the Iranian issue with Deputy Foreign Minister Majali Wahabi and other top ministry officials. Losyukov emphasized that Russia still thinks that "only negotiations with Iran can bring Tehran's military nuclear program to a halt."
Losyukov, who has visited Iran several times in the past year, stressed that "Iran is capable of surviving the sanctions."
"The greater the pressure on the Iranians, the more cohesion there is in the leadership," he said, calling for negotiations with Iran and for "giving them carrots too, not just sticks."
By Barak Ravid
Defense Minister Ehud Barak will lay out for U.S. President George W. Bush the differences in interpretation regarding Iran's nuclear program between the Israeli security establishment and the American intelligence community.
Yesterday, Barak, together with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Barak, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, and Strategic Affairs Minister Avigdor Lieberman, met with security officials to discuss the stance Israel will take on the Iranian issue. Advertisement
At the meeting, officials from the defense establishment, intelligence agencies and the Israel Atomic Energy Commission surveyed a series of documents and intelligence overviews on Iran that will be presented to Bush. These deal, among other things, with the differences between the American intelligence estimate published a few weeks ago and Israel's intelligence assessment of the issue.
Also yesterday, Russia's deputy foreign minister for Asian affairs, Aleksandr Losyukov, visiting Israel, discussed the Iranian issue with Deputy Foreign Minister Majali Wahabi and other top ministry officials. Losyukov emphasized that Russia still thinks that "only negotiations with Iran can bring Tehran's military nuclear program to a halt."
Losyukov, who has visited Iran several times in the past year, stressed that "Iran is capable of surviving the sanctions."
"The greater the pressure on the Iranians, the more cohesion there is in the leadership," he said, calling for negotiations with Iran and for "giving them carrots too, not just sticks."
January 08, 2008
Instability in emerging markets to benefit India, says study
BS Reporter / Mumbai January 9, 2008
India is set to benefit from political and security instability in other key emerging markets during the course of the year, according to the international business risk consultancy, Control Risks.
In Riskmap 2008, its annual study of levels of global, political and security risks, Control Risks rates 57 per cent of emerging markets at Medium political risk or above, indicating significant threats to foreign investment. India is rated at Low political risk.
Control Risks, which is an independent, specialist risk consultancy founded in 1975, provides advice and services that enable companies, governments and international organisations to accelerate opportunities and manage strategic and operational risks.
In many cases, trends towards economic nationalism, a retreat to authoritarianism and reform fatigue are prompting concerns that politics will increasingly impinge on investment decisions. Investments in countries as wide ranging as Russia, Pakistan, Nigeria and Ecuador, could be at increased risk.
By contrast, Control Risks believes that political manoeuvering in India ahead of early elections in 2008 will have only a superficial impact on the business environment and will not check the overall pace and direction of economic reform.
It foresees continued strong economic growth, but voices concerns about the state’s inability to suppress Naxalite and tribal violence in the mineral-rich eastern states where many foreign mining companies are eyeing opportunities.
“Commercial exploitation of these areas is problematic, and MNCs need to fully appreciate the political, security and social complexities involved,” said Steve Wilford, Control Risks country manager for India.
Given their importance in relation to natural resources and manufacturing, the fact that 60 per cent of emerging markets are rated, in whole or in part, at medium, high or extreme security risk should also be of concern to investors.
REGIONAL SUMMARIES:
Asia: The region is gearing up for another election cycle of great significance, including critical ballots in Thailand and Pakistan, with investor concerns over political and security risks on the rise.
India faces possible early elections, while China’s leaders contemplate a nervous year in the Olympic spotlight, but both will continue to attempt to keep reform on track amid huge challenges.
Europe and the FSU: All eyes will be on the 2008 presidential elections in Russia, with investor concerns over political risks on the rise.
However, there will be little uncertainty over the election result and broad policy continuity will prevail. A worsening economic situation in central-east Europe may exacerbate populism and protectionism across the region.
West Asia: The perception of the region as a source of instability and conflict will not change in 2008, but much of the West Asia is a patchwork of resilient regimes that act as guarantors for political stability.
Lingering ethnic and sectarian conflicts in Iraq will continue to have the greatest potential to export instability, while the lingering threat of a US or Israeli attack on Iran will retain the potential to undermine the fragile balance of power.
India is set to benefit from political and security instability in other key emerging markets during the course of the year, according to the international business risk consultancy, Control Risks.
In Riskmap 2008, its annual study of levels of global, political and security risks, Control Risks rates 57 per cent of emerging markets at Medium political risk or above, indicating significant threats to foreign investment. India is rated at Low political risk.
Control Risks, which is an independent, specialist risk consultancy founded in 1975, provides advice and services that enable companies, governments and international organisations to accelerate opportunities and manage strategic and operational risks.
In many cases, trends towards economic nationalism, a retreat to authoritarianism and reform fatigue are prompting concerns that politics will increasingly impinge on investment decisions. Investments in countries as wide ranging as Russia, Pakistan, Nigeria and Ecuador, could be at increased risk.
By contrast, Control Risks believes that political manoeuvering in India ahead of early elections in 2008 will have only a superficial impact on the business environment and will not check the overall pace and direction of economic reform.
It foresees continued strong economic growth, but voices concerns about the state’s inability to suppress Naxalite and tribal violence in the mineral-rich eastern states where many foreign mining companies are eyeing opportunities.
“Commercial exploitation of these areas is problematic, and MNCs need to fully appreciate the political, security and social complexities involved,” said Steve Wilford, Control Risks country manager for India.
Given their importance in relation to natural resources and manufacturing, the fact that 60 per cent of emerging markets are rated, in whole or in part, at medium, high or extreme security risk should also be of concern to investors.
REGIONAL SUMMARIES:
Asia: The region is gearing up for another election cycle of great significance, including critical ballots in Thailand and Pakistan, with investor concerns over political and security risks on the rise.
India faces possible early elections, while China’s leaders contemplate a nervous year in the Olympic spotlight, but both will continue to attempt to keep reform on track amid huge challenges.
Europe and the FSU: All eyes will be on the 2008 presidential elections in Russia, with investor concerns over political risks on the rise.
However, there will be little uncertainty over the election result and broad policy continuity will prevail. A worsening economic situation in central-east Europe may exacerbate populism and protectionism across the region.
West Asia: The perception of the region as a source of instability and conflict will not change in 2008, but much of the West Asia is a patchwork of resilient regimes that act as guarantors for political stability.
Lingering ethnic and sectarian conflicts in Iraq will continue to have the greatest potential to export instability, while the lingering threat of a US or Israeli attack on Iran will retain the potential to undermine the fragile balance of power.
India closes guided missile program
NEW DELHI, January 8 (RIA Novosti) - India is scrapping its strategic integrated guided missile program, and will undertake the development and production of advanced weapons systems with foreign cooperation, the country's top defense scientist said on Tuesday.
However, longer range missiles, sea launched missiles, and futuristic weapons systems like electronic counter-warfare measures would be "undertaken in-house," Dr. S. Prahlada told the Press Trust of India (PTI).
He said the Integrated Development of Guided Missile Program (IDGMP) had been "closed" since most of the missiles under the project had been almost completed and adopted for service in the Armed Forces.
"New missile and weapons systems will be developed within a five-year time frame at low costs, with foreign partners and private industries," Prahalda, chief controller at the Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) headquarters, said.
While India would be collaborating with Israel for development of surface-to-air upgraded Spyder missiles, for Astra missiles, it "has roped in French and Russian" partners, he said.
The Russian-Indian joint venture BrahMos said in late December it had bought a manufacturing plant in south India to double production of its supersonic cruise missiles.
The joint venture bought a plant from state company Kerala Hightech Industries Ltd, the purchase that would allow it to bring production to 50 BrahMos missiles a year.
Established in 1998, BrahMos Aerospace designs, produces and markets supersonic missiles, whose sea-based and land-based versions have been successfully tested and put into service with the Indian Army and Navy.
The Brahmos missile has a range of 180 miles and can carry a conventional warhead of up to 660 pounds. It can hit ground targets flying at an altitude as low as 10 meters (30 feet) and at a speed of Mach 2.8, which is about three times faster than the U.S.-made subsonic Tomahawk cruise missile
However, longer range missiles, sea launched missiles, and futuristic weapons systems like electronic counter-warfare measures would be "undertaken in-house," Dr. S. Prahlada told the Press Trust of India (PTI).
He said the Integrated Development of Guided Missile Program (IDGMP) had been "closed" since most of the missiles under the project had been almost completed and adopted for service in the Armed Forces.
"New missile and weapons systems will be developed within a five-year time frame at low costs, with foreign partners and private industries," Prahalda, chief controller at the Defense Research and Development Organization (DRDO) headquarters, said.
While India would be collaborating with Israel for development of surface-to-air upgraded Spyder missiles, for Astra missiles, it "has roped in French and Russian" partners, he said.
The Russian-Indian joint venture BrahMos said in late December it had bought a manufacturing plant in south India to double production of its supersonic cruise missiles.
The joint venture bought a plant from state company Kerala Hightech Industries Ltd, the purchase that would allow it to bring production to 50 BrahMos missiles a year.
Established in 1998, BrahMos Aerospace designs, produces and markets supersonic missiles, whose sea-based and land-based versions have been successfully tested and put into service with the Indian Army and Navy.
The Brahmos missile has a range of 180 miles and can carry a conventional warhead of up to 660 pounds. It can hit ground targets flying at an altitude as low as 10 meters (30 feet) and at a speed of Mach 2.8, which is about three times faster than the U.S.-made subsonic Tomahawk cruise missile
40,000 Russian adoptees in America
16:00 07/ 01/ 2008
Russia is seeking to regulate and improve the complicated international adoption process
There are many reasons why foreigners adopt Russian children. And while readers of this newspaper may easily see why, these reasons sometimes baffle Russians. Some Russians were suspicious even of Gerhard Schroeder, the former German chancellor, when he adopted two orphans from St. Petersburg.
Every drama that involves Russian children adopted abroad arouses a storm of emotion in their former country. Fourteen Russian children have been driven to death or killed by their foreign adoptive parents in the last 15 years. Many think they were adopted with evil intentions and would have been safer even in an orphanage in their homeland. This is understandable. Americans or Western Europeans would be equally outraged if such a fate befell their country’s children in Russia.
The public mood is, of course, all too often determined by ignorance and biased information. Information today is a commodity to be sold – and it sells all the quicker with tragedy and sensation.
Then again, it is true that Russia is facing a demographic crisis. With far fewer births than deaths, the country is supposed to hold every child precious – including orphans. “They are our strategic reserve,” says a patriotic lady member of parliament.
The situation is easier to understand with a quick glimpse at history.
The October 1917 Revolution replaced adoptions with “guardianship,” with the guardians appointed by government agencies. An amendment to the Family Code re-introduced adoption in 1932. This allowed many children of Spanish Republicans, orphaned during the Spanish Civil War in the late 1930’s, to find new homes in the Soviet Union. That was almost the only example of Soviets adopting foreign children.
Though the Soviet legislation never specifically banned international adoption, the Cold War and the Iron Curtain made it practically impossible. The only exceptions were diplomatic families, who occasionally adopted Soviet children. When the Iron Curtain finally came down in 1991, foreign adoptions skyrocketed. Russia revealed to the world that it was in an economic crisis, with wages and pensions suspended for months. Children and the elderly were the hardest hit, and orphans were in the worst plight of all.
The Education Ministry authorized the foreign adoption of disabled orphans. This was a token qualification as adverse conditions meant that many children in orphanages suffered, if not from disease, then from hereditary health problems or repressed development. Foreigners, for their part, often adopted delicate children, the most miserable of all.
At that time, I met an American couple from Connecticut. They had just completed the adoption formalities to take home little Ilyas, an orphan from a small Siberian town. The boy was 8 months old. He was born with one hand missing, and his shocked mother gave him up. There was no need to ask why they were taking on such a burden—I saw them all together, a loving family.
Adoptions were chaotic and uncontrolled in a country infested by self-styled “mediators”—both individuals and organizations. In an effort to impose some order on this free-for-all, a bill was drafted to prohibit independent (unmediated) adoptions and introduce mediator accreditation. It burned along with other papers when the Parliament House was shelled during the suppression of the mutiny of the fall of 1993. The matter was not taken up again until 2000. Russia has changed since then. Surging oil prices have brought affluence, and there are now many charities helping orphans.
Nonetheless, there are even more orphans and abandoned children needing help. The number of orphanages has doubled since the early 1990s, with a current total of 230,000 orphans living in the facilities.
The federal database has 172,000 files of children eligible for adoption. Earlier this year children’s grants were increased considerably in order to promote motherhood and adoptions. More orphans are finding guardians or foster parents, but the number of adoptions is increasing only slightly. With an average of 130,000 newly orphaned or abandoned children registered every year, these efforts are just a drop in the ocean. Why, then, is Russia so dogged in its opposition to international adoptions?
First, it wants to bring the matter into order. Since this year, adoption agencies can be accredited only after checks by five ministries, rather than the previous one. So far only 17 agencies have qualified.
A bill prohibiting independent adoptions will be debated by parliament soon.
Russia is willing to make bilateral agreements with interested countries, starting with Italy, France and Spain, to guarantee adoptees’ rights. Dealing with the United States will be more complicated, as separate agreements will be necessary with each state.
Education Ministry experts deny that the new legislation will lead to a considerable increase in adoptive parents’ expenses, as the agreements promise greater transparency, and in the case of certain countries – France and Italy in particular – the government will take on part of payments itself.
Second, Russia will soon reform its guardianship agencies in order to reduce child abandonment and encourage foster families.
Third, a majority of Russians regard foreign adoptions as a national embarrassment. Many demand they be prohibited, or at least suspended. Public prosecutors have checked orphanages in every part of the country for procedural violations.
The number of foreign adoptions has drastically fallen this year even though foreigners, unlike Russians, adopt adolescents, children of alcoholic, syphilitic and HIV-positive parents, as well as children with congenital deformities. They also adopt siblings, while Russians prefer one child.
I recently heard about an American couple, who came to Russia to adopt a child from an orphanage for mentally and physically disabled children, based near Moscow. At the age of seven, Sasha looked no older than four, and had bad speech problems. Adoption proceedings were about to start when the couple found out that the boy had two sisters in another orphanage. One was eight years old, and the other thirteen. They decided to adopt all three. As they later learned, the children were taken to the orphanage after their grandmother was brutally murdered in front of them.
Now, six months after the children found their new home, Sasha speaks fluent English. The eldest girl has problems but, at any rate, she has given up smoking and does sports.
Not every story has a fairy tale ending. Some international adoptions are dramatic. Both children and their adoptive parents are at the mercy not only of laws and treaties but also of officials, who occasionally abuse their duties, bully adopters and are prejudiced against orphans. It is these mediators, judges and orphanage principals who settle the fate of foreign and Russian adopters. Don’t think Russians have it any easier when adopting an orphan. They encounter just as many barriers as foreigners.
The main thing Russia must do is to change the public attitude to children, and learn to see them as the greatest hope and of immeasureable value—as they are to every nation. Only then will orphans have a real chance to be happy in a new home.
As I was writing this, I looked through photos the Connecticut family had mailed me. Ilyas is ten years old now. The pictures show him playing football with friends, walking to school and sitting with his adoptive parents. They all look happy, and the boy appears to have adapted well despite his missing hand. They never concealed his Russian origins from him. Some day, he may ask his adoptive parents about his family back in Siberia. Many children brought up in American families now seek their relatives in Russia. -
A list of overseas adoption agencies accredited in Russia is available on the website
www.adopt-in-russia.ru
Facts
The United States leads the list of foreign adoptions, with Spain, Italy, France, Germany, Ireland and Israel following.
Approximate adoption fees: $20,000-30,000 through agencies, and $12,000-15,000 through mediators (according to the press).
About the author
“There is information and then there is propaganda. It’s the difference between reporting events and carrying out somebody’s will. I report impartially from the point of view of a person who observes and draws conclusions.” This is the creed of the noted Russian television and radio presenter Svetlana Sorokina.
Although Svetlana speaks about herself as being very tough, her friends say she is gentle and kind. She may look unapproachable – prim suits, serious topics – but she is also cheerful. Today, she says, it is her adopted daughter Tonya who is her biggest inspiration.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
Source: Rossiiskaya Gazeta
China's navy: Expanding capabilities, evolving roles
The Chinese navy has gone through tremendous changes and improvements since the 1995/96 Taiwan Strait crisis. The growing Chinese naval capability is likely to stir a naval arms competition; only time will tell if this will lead to a regional collision. From RSIS.
By Arthur S Ding for RSIS (08/01/08)
Since the 1995/96 Taiwan Strait crisis, the Chinese navy, or the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN), has experienced rapid change. China has imported and procured many new submarines and destroyers, along with several squadrons of new naval jet fighters and fighter bombers. The Chinese navy makes more frequent foreign port calls and joint sea rescue exercises with other navies. Its submarines have extended their patrol range to as far as Guam and survey ships have been found in the Japan-claimed Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and Taiwan areas. Chinese warships patrolled in the disputed Chunxiao gas and oil field in the East China Sea. A Chinese submarine was reportedly to surface within five miles of the Kitty Hawk aircraft carrier.
How can these changes be interpreted in the context of power shift? What is the PLAN's role as a policy actor in China's politics? How are the changes related to the Chinese navy's doctrine? How robust is the leadership to support the change? What are the PLAN's capabilities? And what is the PLAN's capability to execute anti-access operations in a contingency over Taiwan?
Historical and regional context
Historical studies show that expanding navies are closely related to rising powers that in turn are likely to compete with established powers. In history, almost all rising powers used their naval power as a vital tool to achieve their ends. When a rising economic and political power decides to build a formidable navy, it usually can do so with its wealth and technological prowess. When a rising power builds a strong navy, other strong powers strengthen their own navies in response. All rising powers with rising navies have eventually collided with other great naval powers in combat.
Regional navies, including those of Japan, South Korea, Australia, India and Southeast Asian countries, are also experiencing tremendous changes. "Drivers" vary, ranging from China's military factor, competitions among regional countries, changing maritime requirements, territorial and resource claim, and great power aspiration/prestige consideration. The outcome is one in which regional navies are capable of projecting force for extended range with lethal and precision strike capabilities.
The Chinese navy as a policy actor
The PLAN's sense of mission has been expanded. Long-standing interests such as the Taiwan issue, the defense of China's coast, and territorial and resource claims remain crucial. However, considering China's growing international trade, soaring dependence upon imported energy, and potential technological spin-offs, the PLAN is casting itself not only as a consumer of China's rapid economic growth but also as the protector of and potential contributor to China's economy.
The consensus among scholars is that as the PLAN is regarded as important in China's maritime strategy, its operational range needs to be expanded to the borders of China's claimed EEZ and the continental shelf. But there is no consensus on the actual definition of sea power, the degree of the role played by the navy, roles and status of law and international cooperation for maritime strategy.
The Chinese navy is learning to be an instrument of statecraft. Missile destroyers patrolling in the Chunxiao oil and gas field in the East China Sea in 2005 signaled to claim that the area is within China's EEZ, and emphasized the seriousness of China's position. Submarines patrolling to as far as Guam, and later, surfacing within five miles of the Kitty Hawk aircraft carrier, were aimed at threatening US forces en route to intervene in a Taiwan contingency. Foreign port calls and joint exercises could demonstrate China's global presence and indispensable role in global affairs, along with helping to transform the PLAN itself.
PLAN leadership and doctrine
Personnel-related system is being reformed to buttress robust leadership. It includes the accession of civilian college graduates, the development of a non-commissioned officer system as well as improved welfare. Education programs in military academies are also being adjusted to support duty positions. Emphasis in training has been placed on approximating the battlefield environment with increasing reliance on simulation.
“Offshore defense” remains the PLAN's doctrine, but the range of "offshore" extends as its capability grows. The PLAN endeavors to build a "sea control zone" which approximately reaches the First Island Chain. Beyond the First Island Chain is the "sea contest zone" where anti-access missions will be executed against US forces. A successful sea control requires an around-the-clock surveillance system capable of distinguishing different ships with precision strike capability - a capability that the PLAN has not achieved. That is why submarines and land-based ballistic missiles are heavily relied upon.
PLAN expanding capabilities
Deliveries of advanced surface combatants and submarines in the past decades signify substantial progress in China's shipbuilding industry. Traditional systemic weakness is being remedied through various reforms. Experience from producing civilian ships is tapped for warship production and management with state-of-the-art design and facilities. However, limitations on some key subsystems, sensors, and weapons suites will remain.
"Informationization" has been a key area where the PLA seeks to achieve breakthrough, including through C4ISR (command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance). This is not the mere procurement of C4ISR-related hardware system, but also training and education. Since the late 1990s, Chinese C4ISR modernization has taken off - an achievement which can be illustrated by the deployment of various sensors in space and the installment of nationwide optic cable network. Nevertheless, with the introduction of the C4ISR system, other urgent issues such as real "jointness" among different services, as well as the centralization vs decentralization of authority to lower level officials may have arisen.
Will history go through its cycle?
Like what happened in history, there is no exception for China. With its growing wealth and technological prowess, China is building up a formidable navy. Nevertheless, technological barrier remains a bottleneck impeding the PLAN to develop a solid sea control capability in the near future; how the Chinese navy executes anti-access mission also needs to be observed. The Asia Pacific region is entering a naval arms competition, if not an arms race; only time will tell if the PLAN will collide with other navies eventually.
Arthur S Ding is a Visiting Senior Research Fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
Reprinted with permission from RSIS. Copyright (c) 2007 S Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Blk S4, Level B4, Nanyang Avenue, Singapore 639798.
By Arthur S Ding for RSIS (08/01/08)
Since the 1995/96 Taiwan Strait crisis, the Chinese navy, or the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN), has experienced rapid change. China has imported and procured many new submarines and destroyers, along with several squadrons of new naval jet fighters and fighter bombers. The Chinese navy makes more frequent foreign port calls and joint sea rescue exercises with other navies. Its submarines have extended their patrol range to as far as Guam and survey ships have been found in the Japan-claimed Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and Taiwan areas. Chinese warships patrolled in the disputed Chunxiao gas and oil field in the East China Sea. A Chinese submarine was reportedly to surface within five miles of the Kitty Hawk aircraft carrier.
How can these changes be interpreted in the context of power shift? What is the PLAN's role as a policy actor in China's politics? How are the changes related to the Chinese navy's doctrine? How robust is the leadership to support the change? What are the PLAN's capabilities? And what is the PLAN's capability to execute anti-access operations in a contingency over Taiwan?
Historical and regional context
Historical studies show that expanding navies are closely related to rising powers that in turn are likely to compete with established powers. In history, almost all rising powers used their naval power as a vital tool to achieve their ends. When a rising economic and political power decides to build a formidable navy, it usually can do so with its wealth and technological prowess. When a rising power builds a strong navy, other strong powers strengthen their own navies in response. All rising powers with rising navies have eventually collided with other great naval powers in combat.
Regional navies, including those of Japan, South Korea, Australia, India and Southeast Asian countries, are also experiencing tremendous changes. "Drivers" vary, ranging from China's military factor, competitions among regional countries, changing maritime requirements, territorial and resource claim, and great power aspiration/prestige consideration. The outcome is one in which regional navies are capable of projecting force for extended range with lethal and precision strike capabilities.
The Chinese navy as a policy actor
The PLAN's sense of mission has been expanded. Long-standing interests such as the Taiwan issue, the defense of China's coast, and territorial and resource claims remain crucial. However, considering China's growing international trade, soaring dependence upon imported energy, and potential technological spin-offs, the PLAN is casting itself not only as a consumer of China's rapid economic growth but also as the protector of and potential contributor to China's economy.
The consensus among scholars is that as the PLAN is regarded as important in China's maritime strategy, its operational range needs to be expanded to the borders of China's claimed EEZ and the continental shelf. But there is no consensus on the actual definition of sea power, the degree of the role played by the navy, roles and status of law and international cooperation for maritime strategy.
The Chinese navy is learning to be an instrument of statecraft. Missile destroyers patrolling in the Chunxiao oil and gas field in the East China Sea in 2005 signaled to claim that the area is within China's EEZ, and emphasized the seriousness of China's position. Submarines patrolling to as far as Guam, and later, surfacing within five miles of the Kitty Hawk aircraft carrier, were aimed at threatening US forces en route to intervene in a Taiwan contingency. Foreign port calls and joint exercises could demonstrate China's global presence and indispensable role in global affairs, along with helping to transform the PLAN itself.
PLAN leadership and doctrine
Personnel-related system is being reformed to buttress robust leadership. It includes the accession of civilian college graduates, the development of a non-commissioned officer system as well as improved welfare. Education programs in military academies are also being adjusted to support duty positions. Emphasis in training has been placed on approximating the battlefield environment with increasing reliance on simulation.
“Offshore defense” remains the PLAN's doctrine, but the range of "offshore" extends as its capability grows. The PLAN endeavors to build a "sea control zone" which approximately reaches the First Island Chain. Beyond the First Island Chain is the "sea contest zone" where anti-access missions will be executed against US forces. A successful sea control requires an around-the-clock surveillance system capable of distinguishing different ships with precision strike capability - a capability that the PLAN has not achieved. That is why submarines and land-based ballistic missiles are heavily relied upon.
PLAN expanding capabilities
Deliveries of advanced surface combatants and submarines in the past decades signify substantial progress in China's shipbuilding industry. Traditional systemic weakness is being remedied through various reforms. Experience from producing civilian ships is tapped for warship production and management with state-of-the-art design and facilities. However, limitations on some key subsystems, sensors, and weapons suites will remain.
"Informationization" has been a key area where the PLA seeks to achieve breakthrough, including through C4ISR (command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance). This is not the mere procurement of C4ISR-related hardware system, but also training and education. Since the late 1990s, Chinese C4ISR modernization has taken off - an achievement which can be illustrated by the deployment of various sensors in space and the installment of nationwide optic cable network. Nevertheless, with the introduction of the C4ISR system, other urgent issues such as real "jointness" among different services, as well as the centralization vs decentralization of authority to lower level officials may have arisen.
Will history go through its cycle?
Like what happened in history, there is no exception for China. With its growing wealth and technological prowess, China is building up a formidable navy. Nevertheless, technological barrier remains a bottleneck impeding the PLAN to develop a solid sea control capability in the near future; how the Chinese navy executes anti-access mission also needs to be observed. The Asia Pacific region is entering a naval arms competition, if not an arms race; only time will tell if the PLAN will collide with other navies eventually.
Arthur S Ding is a Visiting Senior Research Fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
Reprinted with permission from RSIS. Copyright (c) 2007 S Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Blk S4, Level B4, Nanyang Avenue, Singapore 639798.
US intelligence suggests coverup in Bhutto assassination
Larisa Alexandrovna
Published: Monday January 7, 2008
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/US_intelligence_suggests_coverup_in_Bhutto_0107.html
Suicide bomber may have been inserted to eliminate evidence
The assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto on Dec. 27, 2007 has created concerns for US intelligence officials, who see US policy toward Pakistan as being held hostage by President Pervez Musharraf and factions of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).
Mrs. Bhutto was shot when she stood up through the sunroof of her vehicle after a campaign rally for her Pakistan Peoples Party in Rawalpindi. Immediately after the shooting, a suicide bomber detonated an explosive, killing 25 people as well as himself.
The Musharraf government's initial reaction was to blame either al Qaeda or other terrorists closely linked to al Qaeda. However, contradictions in official statements, as well as the behavior of police – who hosed down the streets in Rawalpindi just an hour after Mrs. Bhutto was assassinated – quickly began to cast doubt on the official version of what happened, leaving serious questions surrounding Musharraf and the ISI and putting more pressure on the United States to pull back its support for Pakistani leadership.
While President Musharraf initially declined help from the British in investigating the assassination of Mrs. Bhutto, pressure from a distrusting public and a crumbling explanation caused a turnaround this week. An agreement was reached allowing the British to conduct their own investigation, and police from Scotland Yard arrived over the weekend.
US intelligence officials say, however, that very little evidence will be found, especially if investigators are looking for the suspected shooter. Three former US intelligence officials have told Raw Story that not only is the gunman dead, he was likely the actual target of the suicide bomber.
According to a former high ranking US intelligence official, who wishes to remain anonymous due to the delicate nature of the information, the US intelligence community understands the gunman to have been killed in the blast following Mrs. Bhutto's assassination.
"He was killed, probably not knowing that the suicide bomber was there," said this source. "We don't know for sure if the two men arrived together. We do know that the assassin died in the explosion, and was probably meant to."
Several other US intelligence officials concur that the bomber was likely "inserted" to "clean up" evidence of the shooting, including eliminating the gunman.
When asked why it was important to determine the relationship between the gunman and the suicide bomber, one former CIA officer explained that such details are the key to understanding what happened, how it happened, and who was ultimately responsible. Such details also enable investigators to document patterns and methods used, in order to determine if a terrorist attack has indeed taken place or something else has occurred.
Not terrorism
On Thursday evening, just hours after Mrs. Bhutto was assassinated, the FBI and DHS issued a bulletin indicating that the attack had originated from the terrorist group al Qaeda and was carried out by a suicide bomber. That information, which the US acquired from Pakistani intelligence and government officials, came originally from an Italian news agency which claimed to have received a phone call from an al Qaeda representative and was never substantiated.
On Friday, the Pakistani Interior Ministry offered a slightly different version, saying the suicide bomber was associated with Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, a terrorist group linked to al Qaeda. This initial belief that an act of terrorism was responsible for the tragedy that killed Mrs. Bhutto and 25 of her supporters caused a great deal of confusion.
Intelligence sources say that it is precisely these kinds of unsubstantiated claims that create the impression that it is "all al Qaeda, all the time," as one former official noted.
The reports that an al Qaeda suicide bomber had killed Mrs. Bhutto disappeared as quickly as they had surfaced, when footage showing a gunman and an audio capture which clearly indicated several shots fired prior to the explosion began to circulate online and in news accounts.
According to a former high ranking US intelligence official, the involvement of a gunman undercuts the official story that a terrorist attack was responsible for the murder of Mrs. Bhutto.
"Traditionally, al Qaeda coordinates multiple targets and suicide bombers," said the source during a Wednesday conversation. "While it is possible that al Qaeda was behind the assassination, it is not likely, given the operational elements."
A former CIA officer agreed that employing gunmen to assassinate targets is not the way al Qaeda generally operates, saying, "[shooting] at close range is not a traditional al Qaeda technique."
Both sources agreed that it is the general belief within the US intelligence community that the gunman was killed in the attack.
A current US official, who wishes to not be identified for this article, confirmed that the gunman died in the blast but was unable to say whether the suicide bomber was targeting the gunman as suggested by the intelligence officials. "The working assumption is that the gunman [is] dead. But it's by no means clear that the gunman was ignorant of the bomber. I can't confirm that at all."
Other Pakistani candidate also a target
On the same day that Mrs. Bhutto was targeted, supporters of Nawaz Sharif – former prime minister and head of the Pakistan Muslim League-N (PML-N) party – were shot at as they readied a welcome procession to greet their candidate, who was also scheduled to give a speech in Rawalpindi. That shooting resulted in four dead and 16 injured, putting the total death count of Thursday's violence at 30, including Mrs. Bhutto.
Mr. Sharif did not respond to requests for comment, but in statements to the foreign press he has blamed President Musharraf for both the attack on his supporters and the assassination of Mrs. Bhutto.
"The Pakistani people are disgusted and disappointed to see Bush support one man against 160 million of its citizens," Sharif told the Hindustan Times. "I always worked well with the US when I was prime minister. But today I am disappointed."
Contradictory claims, likely cover-up
While no officials interviewed for this article would explicitly say that Pakistani military or ISI officials played a role in the assassination of Mrs. Bhutto and the shooting attack on Sharif supporters, that possibility was not discounted. The evidence thus far does raise many questions about what role, if any, President Musharraf or someone in his administration might have played in the double attack at Rawalpindi.
"I won't say Musharraf was responsible [for the assassination of Mrs. Bhutto] on the record," said the former high ranking CIA official. "At the very least he was responsible for not providing adequate security.”
Originally a suicide bomber on a motorcycle was blamed for the attack on Bhutto, and shortly thereafter the suicide bomber was said to have ties to al Qaeda. However, by late on Friday, December 28th, Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud was fingered as the mastermind behind Mrs. Bhutto's assassination. By Saturday morning, spokespeople for Mehsud had issued a formal denial of his involvement.
The former high ranking CIA official says that the US has gotten the "Mehsud intelligence" from Pakistan, but has not been able to independently confirm it. "The intelligence is in the form of intercepts that are attributed to Mehsud," said the source. "He is said to be sending a congratulatory message, but we have no independent intelligence to confirm this."
A current US official, who was not comfortable being identified in any form due to the delicate situation between the US and Pakistan, confirmed that Mehsud is all the US has in terms of any leads in the assassination.
"In terms of responsibility, there are indications that point to militants, including Beitullah Mehsud. But that's not a firm, final, definitive conclusion. There's more work to be done."
By Sunday, the Guardian was reporting that "The Pakistani authorities are reported to have drafted a plan to 'eliminate' Baitullah Mehsud ... despite widespread suspicion within Pakistan that he is being used as a scapegoat."
However, two former CIA officials say that there is far too much evidence pointing away from militants being behind the attack.
Indeed, the changing official position as to the cause of death indicates that someone was very interested in making it appear that Mrs. Bhutto had died in a suicide bombing, with initial medical reports out of Rawalpindi on Thursday claiming she had died as the result of the explosion.
By Friday morning, as audio of the gun shots surfaced, state-run media in Pakistan reported that Mrs. Bhutto died as a result of a gunshot wound to the neck, combined with shrapnel from the explosion. It was said the suicide bomber had first fired on Mrs. Bhutto and then detonated his explosives.
By Friday evening, however, the official story had changed yet again, with reports coming out that although bullets were fired, none had hit Mrs. Bhutto. On Saturday morning, the story changed once more, with an official medical report ruling that Mrs. Bhutto died from shrapnel received to the head as a result of the suicide bombing.
Yet also on Saturday, General Javed Iqbal Cheema, a spokesman for Pakistan's Interior Ministry – who cited the same medical report – said Mrs. Bhutto had died as a result of a skull fracture sustained when she either fell against the sunroof lever after the explosion or attempted to hide from the explosion inside the vehicle. Medical examiners admitted that no autopsy was done.
As footage of the gunman began to appear in the press, the official story changed again, to the cause of death being two gunshot wounds to the head and one to the neck. The changing versions of what happened, who had committed the crime, and the rising violence in Pakistan as protestors demanded answers, caused Musharref to finally agree to allow a foreign body to investigate the assassination.
US foreign policy held hostage
“The investigation will be opaque and less effective than what happened in Lebanon,” said Larry Johnson, former CIA officer and Deputy Director for Transportation Security, Antiterrorism Assistance Training, and Special Operations for the office of Counterterrorism in the US State Department.
Others interviewed for this article share Johnson's skepticism and believe that the Bush administration will likely look the other way should any connection between Musharraf and the assassination be discovered, because, they say, at this point, the US has “no workable solution” and cannot discontinue support for Musharraf, given the options.
“We are being held hostage to Musharraf's whim,” said one former intelligence official.
“What options do we have now? None. Under Musharraf, al Qaeda has grown. The tribal sheiks have also grown. It is a mess and there is not a damn thing we can do about it.”
Pakistan's possession of nuclear weapons, close ties to both al Qaeda and the Taliban, and funding from Saudi Arabia make Musharraf and his military dictatorship formidable. The only thing that US officials fear more than the Musharraf dictatorship is its alternative, a civil war and violence in a country which possess both WMD and terrorists.
The Bush administration is, however, feeling a great deal of pressure to pull back support for Musharraf. Many believe this will be handled by the US not asking too many questions about what happened to Mrs. Bhutto and why.
When asked why the West was even bothering with an investigation that would surely neither help alleviate pressure for any of the parties nor ease diplomatic tension when there is already no viable political solution, one US intelligence official responded that “This investigation is not being done for [the United States]. We are not the audience. The Pakistani people are.”
Larisa Alexandrovna is managing editor of investigative news for Raw Story and regularly reports on intelligence and national security stories. Contact her at larisa@rawstory.com.
Published: Monday January 7, 2008
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/US_intelligence_suggests_coverup_in_Bhutto_0107.html
Suicide bomber may have been inserted to eliminate evidence
The assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto on Dec. 27, 2007 has created concerns for US intelligence officials, who see US policy toward Pakistan as being held hostage by President Pervez Musharraf and factions of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).
Mrs. Bhutto was shot when she stood up through the sunroof of her vehicle after a campaign rally for her Pakistan Peoples Party in Rawalpindi. Immediately after the shooting, a suicide bomber detonated an explosive, killing 25 people as well as himself.
The Musharraf government's initial reaction was to blame either al Qaeda or other terrorists closely linked to al Qaeda. However, contradictions in official statements, as well as the behavior of police – who hosed down the streets in Rawalpindi just an hour after Mrs. Bhutto was assassinated – quickly began to cast doubt on the official version of what happened, leaving serious questions surrounding Musharraf and the ISI and putting more pressure on the United States to pull back its support for Pakistani leadership.
While President Musharraf initially declined help from the British in investigating the assassination of Mrs. Bhutto, pressure from a distrusting public and a crumbling explanation caused a turnaround this week. An agreement was reached allowing the British to conduct their own investigation, and police from Scotland Yard arrived over the weekend.
US intelligence officials say, however, that very little evidence will be found, especially if investigators are looking for the suspected shooter. Three former US intelligence officials have told Raw Story that not only is the gunman dead, he was likely the actual target of the suicide bomber.
According to a former high ranking US intelligence official, who wishes to remain anonymous due to the delicate nature of the information, the US intelligence community understands the gunman to have been killed in the blast following Mrs. Bhutto's assassination.
"He was killed, probably not knowing that the suicide bomber was there," said this source. "We don't know for sure if the two men arrived together. We do know that the assassin died in the explosion, and was probably meant to."
Several other US intelligence officials concur that the bomber was likely "inserted" to "clean up" evidence of the shooting, including eliminating the gunman.
When asked why it was important to determine the relationship between the gunman and the suicide bomber, one former CIA officer explained that such details are the key to understanding what happened, how it happened, and who was ultimately responsible. Such details also enable investigators to document patterns and methods used, in order to determine if a terrorist attack has indeed taken place or something else has occurred.
Not terrorism
On Thursday evening, just hours after Mrs. Bhutto was assassinated, the FBI and DHS issued a bulletin indicating that the attack had originated from the terrorist group al Qaeda and was carried out by a suicide bomber. That information, which the US acquired from Pakistani intelligence and government officials, came originally from an Italian news agency which claimed to have received a phone call from an al Qaeda representative and was never substantiated.
On Friday, the Pakistani Interior Ministry offered a slightly different version, saying the suicide bomber was associated with Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, a terrorist group linked to al Qaeda. This initial belief that an act of terrorism was responsible for the tragedy that killed Mrs. Bhutto and 25 of her supporters caused a great deal of confusion.
Intelligence sources say that it is precisely these kinds of unsubstantiated claims that create the impression that it is "all al Qaeda, all the time," as one former official noted.
The reports that an al Qaeda suicide bomber had killed Mrs. Bhutto disappeared as quickly as they had surfaced, when footage showing a gunman and an audio capture which clearly indicated several shots fired prior to the explosion began to circulate online and in news accounts.
According to a former high ranking US intelligence official, the involvement of a gunman undercuts the official story that a terrorist attack was responsible for the murder of Mrs. Bhutto.
"Traditionally, al Qaeda coordinates multiple targets and suicide bombers," said the source during a Wednesday conversation. "While it is possible that al Qaeda was behind the assassination, it is not likely, given the operational elements."
A former CIA officer agreed that employing gunmen to assassinate targets is not the way al Qaeda generally operates, saying, "[shooting] at close range is not a traditional al Qaeda technique."
Both sources agreed that it is the general belief within the US intelligence community that the gunman was killed in the attack.
A current US official, who wishes to not be identified for this article, confirmed that the gunman died in the blast but was unable to say whether the suicide bomber was targeting the gunman as suggested by the intelligence officials. "The working assumption is that the gunman [is] dead. But it's by no means clear that the gunman was ignorant of the bomber. I can't confirm that at all."
Other Pakistani candidate also a target
On the same day that Mrs. Bhutto was targeted, supporters of Nawaz Sharif – former prime minister and head of the Pakistan Muslim League-N (PML-N) party – were shot at as they readied a welcome procession to greet their candidate, who was also scheduled to give a speech in Rawalpindi. That shooting resulted in four dead and 16 injured, putting the total death count of Thursday's violence at 30, including Mrs. Bhutto.
Mr. Sharif did not respond to requests for comment, but in statements to the foreign press he has blamed President Musharraf for both the attack on his supporters and the assassination of Mrs. Bhutto.
"The Pakistani people are disgusted and disappointed to see Bush support one man against 160 million of its citizens," Sharif told the Hindustan Times. "I always worked well with the US when I was prime minister. But today I am disappointed."
Contradictory claims, likely cover-up
While no officials interviewed for this article would explicitly say that Pakistani military or ISI officials played a role in the assassination of Mrs. Bhutto and the shooting attack on Sharif supporters, that possibility was not discounted. The evidence thus far does raise many questions about what role, if any, President Musharraf or someone in his administration might have played in the double attack at Rawalpindi.
"I won't say Musharraf was responsible [for the assassination of Mrs. Bhutto] on the record," said the former high ranking CIA official. "At the very least he was responsible for not providing adequate security.”
Originally a suicide bomber on a motorcycle was blamed for the attack on Bhutto, and shortly thereafter the suicide bomber was said to have ties to al Qaeda. However, by late on Friday, December 28th, Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud was fingered as the mastermind behind Mrs. Bhutto's assassination. By Saturday morning, spokespeople for Mehsud had issued a formal denial of his involvement.
The former high ranking CIA official says that the US has gotten the "Mehsud intelligence" from Pakistan, but has not been able to independently confirm it. "The intelligence is in the form of intercepts that are attributed to Mehsud," said the source. "He is said to be sending a congratulatory message, but we have no independent intelligence to confirm this."
A current US official, who was not comfortable being identified in any form due to the delicate situation between the US and Pakistan, confirmed that Mehsud is all the US has in terms of any leads in the assassination.
"In terms of responsibility, there are indications that point to militants, including Beitullah Mehsud. But that's not a firm, final, definitive conclusion. There's more work to be done."
By Sunday, the Guardian was reporting that "The Pakistani authorities are reported to have drafted a plan to 'eliminate' Baitullah Mehsud ... despite widespread suspicion within Pakistan that he is being used as a scapegoat."
However, two former CIA officials say that there is far too much evidence pointing away from militants being behind the attack.
Indeed, the changing official position as to the cause of death indicates that someone was very interested in making it appear that Mrs. Bhutto had died in a suicide bombing, with initial medical reports out of Rawalpindi on Thursday claiming she had died as the result of the explosion.
By Friday morning, as audio of the gun shots surfaced, state-run media in Pakistan reported that Mrs. Bhutto died as a result of a gunshot wound to the neck, combined with shrapnel from the explosion. It was said the suicide bomber had first fired on Mrs. Bhutto and then detonated his explosives.
By Friday evening, however, the official story had changed yet again, with reports coming out that although bullets were fired, none had hit Mrs. Bhutto. On Saturday morning, the story changed once more, with an official medical report ruling that Mrs. Bhutto died from shrapnel received to the head as a result of the suicide bombing.
Yet also on Saturday, General Javed Iqbal Cheema, a spokesman for Pakistan's Interior Ministry – who cited the same medical report – said Mrs. Bhutto had died as a result of a skull fracture sustained when she either fell against the sunroof lever after the explosion or attempted to hide from the explosion inside the vehicle. Medical examiners admitted that no autopsy was done.
As footage of the gunman began to appear in the press, the official story changed again, to the cause of death being two gunshot wounds to the head and one to the neck. The changing versions of what happened, who had committed the crime, and the rising violence in Pakistan as protestors demanded answers, caused Musharref to finally agree to allow a foreign body to investigate the assassination.
US foreign policy held hostage
“The investigation will be opaque and less effective than what happened in Lebanon,” said Larry Johnson, former CIA officer and Deputy Director for Transportation Security, Antiterrorism Assistance Training, and Special Operations for the office of Counterterrorism in the US State Department.
Others interviewed for this article share Johnson's skepticism and believe that the Bush administration will likely look the other way should any connection between Musharraf and the assassination be discovered, because, they say, at this point, the US has “no workable solution” and cannot discontinue support for Musharraf, given the options.
“We are being held hostage to Musharraf's whim,” said one former intelligence official.
“What options do we have now? None. Under Musharraf, al Qaeda has grown. The tribal sheiks have also grown. It is a mess and there is not a damn thing we can do about it.”
Pakistan's possession of nuclear weapons, close ties to both al Qaeda and the Taliban, and funding from Saudi Arabia make Musharraf and his military dictatorship formidable. The only thing that US officials fear more than the Musharraf dictatorship is its alternative, a civil war and violence in a country which possess both WMD and terrorists.
The Bush administration is, however, feeling a great deal of pressure to pull back support for Musharraf. Many believe this will be handled by the US not asking too many questions about what happened to Mrs. Bhutto and why.
When asked why the West was even bothering with an investigation that would surely neither help alleviate pressure for any of the parties nor ease diplomatic tension when there is already no viable political solution, one US intelligence official responded that “This investigation is not being done for [the United States]. We are not the audience. The Pakistani people are.”
Larisa Alexandrovna is managing editor of investigative news for Raw Story and regularly reports on intelligence and national security stories. Contact her at larisa@rawstory.com.
It's the British Empire, Stupid!
This article appears in the January 11, 2008 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
In modern legend, the global British Empire disappeared in the late 19th Century, or at least at the end of World War II. It was replaced by the two superpowers—the Soviet Union and the United States—and now, with the demise of the Soviet Union, with the "hyperpower" the United States.
A more dangerous delusion could not be held. For, as the LaRouche movement has documented extensively, especially in the 1994 to 1997 period,[1] the "new" British Empire has never been so powerful, nor so close to implementing its schemes for global chaos and destruction. This empire is not to be confused with the United Kingdom, nor even the British Monarchy per se. Its model is that of the older Venetian oligarchy, which functions as a financial oligarchic system of families, foundations, and other institutions dedicated to preserving their power in perpetuum, and destroying all systems and forces, most especially the nation-state, which stand in their way.
We summarily provide a review of three major areas of ongoing British imperial power here.
First, there's the economic/financial role played by leading Anglo-Dutch financial institutions, who exercise an astonishingly substantial control over the physical necessities of life, such as food and energy.
Second, there's the military role of British Imperial forces, both visible and invisible, regular and irregular.
Third, there's the British Empire's cultural warfare apparatus, the most aggressive force for the destruction of pro-human scientific culture globally.
The World's Largest Economic Power
"Now, that empire, which the British effectively control, except for dissident nations that don't like it, represents about one-fifth of the world's land area; it represents about 30% of the world's population. It controls 48-50% of the world's financial turnover, including the $3.5 trillion a day derivatives turnover. It controls the majority of the world's international trade in what are called strategic metals, such as the metals that are required for most industry. It controls the majority of the international trade in petroleum.... These interests, the Anglo-Dutch-Swiss, Cargill et al. complex, control the majority of the international food trade, in a time of grave food crisis worldwide."
That is how Lyndon LaRouche summarized the financial power of the British Empire back in March 1996. If anything, the share of world power wielded economically by the "Empire" has increased over the last 10 years.
Much of the control is, admittedly, not on the surface. It is exercised through the London Stock Exchange, through the London International Financial Futures Exchange, through the London Metal Exchange, and the International Petroleum Exchange. These are the institutions where the actual disposition of the physical assets being traded is determined, not to mention the layers upon layers of speculative financial instruments created, that are now in full collapse, and threatening to bring the physical economy down with it. Exemplary of the raw material control is the role of two corporations, Anglo-American and Rio Tinto Zinc, which controlled from 10 to 24% of the Western world's crucial minerals output in 1995.
A British Military Empire
Those forced to admit British imperial power in the financial sphere, would surely object to the assertion that the Empire still wields enormous, often decisive military power today, as it did in launching World War I and II. Again, they would be wrong.
Her Majesty's military forces are not large, but they are strategically placed to control, and instigate, conflicts in dozens of sensitive locations throughout the world. Take the British role in the Iraq wars, for example, or in the Balkan disaster. Look at the disposition of British forces throughout the African continent, or Asia. From these locations the British have let loose with "intelligence," or provocations, that have exacerbated local conflicts, even toward the point of threatening "superpower" confrontation.
Even more significant, as befits the Venetian "East India Company" nature of the modern British Empire, is the role of the "privatized" or irregular forces deployed globally. As EIR's 1997 report The True Story Behind the Fall of the House of Windsor documents, and later EIR feature series further elaborated, London is the home base for dozens, if not hundreds, of private mercenary armies, some of them explicitly terrorist, others simply "contract" employees, who are deployed "in Her Majesty's Service" globally. Utilizing the longstanding ties which the imperial center has with different peoples and tribes around the world, London has created and manipulated ethnic groups, and even small armies, in its own strategic interest of destroying nation-states. It's not for nothing that many nations have dubbed London "Londonistan," for its role in support of Khalistan, Balochistan, Kurdistan, and dozens more breakaway movements.
Empire of the Mind
As EIR's 1997 study emphasized, however, the most dangerous means of control exercised by the new British Empire is not financial, or military, but cultural. It is in this sphere that Britain's "invisible empire" takes the most prisoners of all. The empire works through various media.
Perhaps most ubiquitous is the use of the mass media, epitomized by the British Broadcasting Company. BBC is by far the most widely disseminated broadcasting network globally, and it is heard in dozens of languages other than English. Touting a reputation as "objective," the service's political role on behalf of the Queen's government, to which it is responsible, can be indicated by its role in such incidents as the misrepresentation and then "suicide" of Dr. David Kelly, critic of the Blair government's lies against Iraq, in the summer of 2003.
More hidden, and equally nefarious, is the role of the British Empire through institutions of the United Nations, including the ever-expanding network of so-called non-governmental organizations. NGOs, chartered by the UN, are often run by wealthy families, and there is an astounding number of them in Great Britain itself. (over half a million in 1996) But most destructive is the imperial ideology of the institution, which defines these advocates for "civil society" as ranking above governments, and as instruments for destroying governments which do not kowtow to their demands. One need only look at the role of the NGOs rampant in the countries of the former Soviet bloc to see the transparent anti-nation role they are crafted to play.
No account of the cultural warfare being run by the British Empire against the human race would be complete without reference to its role in advancing the Genocide movement associated with the World Wildlife Fund's radical population control drive, and its spinoff, the Global Warming Movement of today. While Lord Bertrand Russell and other representatives of the "old" British empire carried the flag for this ideology in the 19th century, the flag was well taken up by Queen Elizabeth's Royal Consort, Prince Philip and his son Charles, in the 20th and now 21st. The totally brutal, and false, idea behind this "environmentalism," was exposed by Philip himself, when he told the Deutsche Press Agentur in August 1988 that "in the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation."
That may seem extreme, but note that in our daily press, globally, headlines are given to the danger man represents to gorilla species (and others, even bugs!), even as millions of children die daily for lack of clean water, electricity, and sufficient food. British Malthusian ideology is indeed controlling our institutions, and behavior, without our even recognizing it.
It's time to unleash those chains!
[1] The true story behind the fall of the House of Windsor, Reprints of EIR's 1994-97 groundbreaking exposés, September 1997, available as EIR 97-004.
In modern legend, the global British Empire disappeared in the late 19th Century, or at least at the end of World War II. It was replaced by the two superpowers—the Soviet Union and the United States—and now, with the demise of the Soviet Union, with the "hyperpower" the United States.
A more dangerous delusion could not be held. For, as the LaRouche movement has documented extensively, especially in the 1994 to 1997 period,[1] the "new" British Empire has never been so powerful, nor so close to implementing its schemes for global chaos and destruction. This empire is not to be confused with the United Kingdom, nor even the British Monarchy per se. Its model is that of the older Venetian oligarchy, which functions as a financial oligarchic system of families, foundations, and other institutions dedicated to preserving their power in perpetuum, and destroying all systems and forces, most especially the nation-state, which stand in their way.
We summarily provide a review of three major areas of ongoing British imperial power here.
First, there's the economic/financial role played by leading Anglo-Dutch financial institutions, who exercise an astonishingly substantial control over the physical necessities of life, such as food and energy.
Second, there's the military role of British Imperial forces, both visible and invisible, regular and irregular.
Third, there's the British Empire's cultural warfare apparatus, the most aggressive force for the destruction of pro-human scientific culture globally.
The World's Largest Economic Power
"Now, that empire, which the British effectively control, except for dissident nations that don't like it, represents about one-fifth of the world's land area; it represents about 30% of the world's population. It controls 48-50% of the world's financial turnover, including the $3.5 trillion a day derivatives turnover. It controls the majority of the world's international trade in what are called strategic metals, such as the metals that are required for most industry. It controls the majority of the international trade in petroleum.... These interests, the Anglo-Dutch-Swiss, Cargill et al. complex, control the majority of the international food trade, in a time of grave food crisis worldwide."
That is how Lyndon LaRouche summarized the financial power of the British Empire back in March 1996. If anything, the share of world power wielded economically by the "Empire" has increased over the last 10 years.
Much of the control is, admittedly, not on the surface. It is exercised through the London Stock Exchange, through the London International Financial Futures Exchange, through the London Metal Exchange, and the International Petroleum Exchange. These are the institutions where the actual disposition of the physical assets being traded is determined, not to mention the layers upon layers of speculative financial instruments created, that are now in full collapse, and threatening to bring the physical economy down with it. Exemplary of the raw material control is the role of two corporations, Anglo-American and Rio Tinto Zinc, which controlled from 10 to 24% of the Western world's crucial minerals output in 1995.
A British Military Empire
Those forced to admit British imperial power in the financial sphere, would surely object to the assertion that the Empire still wields enormous, often decisive military power today, as it did in launching World War I and II. Again, they would be wrong.
Her Majesty's military forces are not large, but they are strategically placed to control, and instigate, conflicts in dozens of sensitive locations throughout the world. Take the British role in the Iraq wars, for example, or in the Balkan disaster. Look at the disposition of British forces throughout the African continent, or Asia. From these locations the British have let loose with "intelligence," or provocations, that have exacerbated local conflicts, even toward the point of threatening "superpower" confrontation.
Even more significant, as befits the Venetian "East India Company" nature of the modern British Empire, is the role of the "privatized" or irregular forces deployed globally. As EIR's 1997 report The True Story Behind the Fall of the House of Windsor documents, and later EIR feature series further elaborated, London is the home base for dozens, if not hundreds, of private mercenary armies, some of them explicitly terrorist, others simply "contract" employees, who are deployed "in Her Majesty's Service" globally. Utilizing the longstanding ties which the imperial center has with different peoples and tribes around the world, London has created and manipulated ethnic groups, and even small armies, in its own strategic interest of destroying nation-states. It's not for nothing that many nations have dubbed London "Londonistan," for its role in support of Khalistan, Balochistan, Kurdistan, and dozens more breakaway movements.
Empire of the Mind
As EIR's 1997 study emphasized, however, the most dangerous means of control exercised by the new British Empire is not financial, or military, but cultural. It is in this sphere that Britain's "invisible empire" takes the most prisoners of all. The empire works through various media.
Perhaps most ubiquitous is the use of the mass media, epitomized by the British Broadcasting Company. BBC is by far the most widely disseminated broadcasting network globally, and it is heard in dozens of languages other than English. Touting a reputation as "objective," the service's political role on behalf of the Queen's government, to which it is responsible, can be indicated by its role in such incidents as the misrepresentation and then "suicide" of Dr. David Kelly, critic of the Blair government's lies against Iraq, in the summer of 2003.
More hidden, and equally nefarious, is the role of the British Empire through institutions of the United Nations, including the ever-expanding network of so-called non-governmental organizations. NGOs, chartered by the UN, are often run by wealthy families, and there is an astounding number of them in Great Britain itself. (over half a million in 1996) But most destructive is the imperial ideology of the institution, which defines these advocates for "civil society" as ranking above governments, and as instruments for destroying governments which do not kowtow to their demands. One need only look at the role of the NGOs rampant in the countries of the former Soviet bloc to see the transparent anti-nation role they are crafted to play.
No account of the cultural warfare being run by the British Empire against the human race would be complete without reference to its role in advancing the Genocide movement associated with the World Wildlife Fund's radical population control drive, and its spinoff, the Global Warming Movement of today. While Lord Bertrand Russell and other representatives of the "old" British empire carried the flag for this ideology in the 19th century, the flag was well taken up by Queen Elizabeth's Royal Consort, Prince Philip and his son Charles, in the 20th and now 21st. The totally brutal, and false, idea behind this "environmentalism," was exposed by Philip himself, when he told the Deutsche Press Agentur in August 1988 that "in the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation."
That may seem extreme, but note that in our daily press, globally, headlines are given to the danger man represents to gorilla species (and others, even bugs!), even as millions of children die daily for lack of clean water, electricity, and sufficient food. British Malthusian ideology is indeed controlling our institutions, and behavior, without our even recognizing it.
It's time to unleash those chains!
[1] The true story behind the fall of the House of Windsor, Reprints of EIR's 1994-97 groundbreaking exposés, September 1997, available as EIR 97-004.
NetSecurity Opens State-of-the-Art Computer Forensics Lab
Leading Security Consulting Firm Opens State-of-the-Art Computer Forensics Lab
NetSecurity Forensic Labs Provides Computer Forensics Investigation, Electronic Discovery (e-Discovery), Incident Response, and Forensics Training to Law Firms, Corporate Entities, and Law Enforcement Agencies
STERLING, Va. & BOSTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--NetSecurity Corporation, a leading computer forensics, security consulting and training company, announced today the launch of NetSecurity Forensic Labs, a state-of-the-art secure facility offering computer forensics investigation, electronic discovery (e-Discovery), incident response, and forensics training to legal, corporate, and law enforcement entities.
Intellectual property theft, network hacking, evidence tampering, employee misuse of computers, illicit pornography, policy violation, electronic harassment, identity theft, and other digital crimes continue to be on the rise. This surge in cyber crime creates the need to conduct criminal, civil, or corporate investigations promptly, using forensics experts. Forensic investigation is a time-consuming effort that requires specialized expertise, procedures, tools, and a secure lab environment. Loss or tampering of evidence can result in an unfavorable ruling by a judge or the evidence may be ruled inadmissible in a case.
“Evidence obtained from computers, PDAs, cell phones, and other electronic media is having a greater impact on both civil and criminal investigations more than ever before,” said Inno Eroraha, founder and chief strategist of NetSecurity. “It is imperative that evidence be collected by trained computer forensic experts that follow forensically sound processes to ensure that the resulting digital evidence withstands legal scrutiny in court. This is where NetSecurity Forensic Labs comes into play. Our state-of-the-art forensic lab is equipped with tools and technologies to excavate digital evidence from the latest or most antiquated storage devices to produce admissible evidence.”
To help organizations overcome these challenges, NetSecurity brings unparalleled expertise to assist law firms, law enforcement agencies, public and private companies, and individuals through the investigation of computer crimes. Federal agencies and publicly-traded companies rely on NetSecurity because:
Its forensic experts are trusted and have worked in highly classified Federal and defense agencies.
NetSecurity ensures and preserves the confidentiality of each case, investigation, and engagement.
NetSecurity consultants teach the latest forensics tools and techniques of the trade, using real-world scenarios.
Its professionals have years of experience and have security and forensics certifications, such as: CISSP, ISSAP, ISSMP, CISM, CISA, EnCE, CHFI, CIFI, and CEH.
NetSecurity avoids conflicts of interest by using vendor-neutral products in the choice of its forensics or security tools.
“We partnered with NetSecurity Corporation to develop an incident response plan to ensure we are using state-of-the-art digital forensics processes. We chose NetSecurity not only for their in-depth expertise in security and forensics, but also because they are very responsive and deliver outstanding client service,” says Todd Braithwaite, Vice President of Information Technology, Middleburg Financial Corporation.
“NetSecurity’s deeply rooted expertise in computer and network security, hacking techniques, privacy, information systems audit, and our incident response skills position us to deliver crucial evidence quickly and accurately,” said Inno Eroraha.
About NetSecurity:
NetSecurity Corporation is a digital forensics, security consulting and training company providing timely, high-quality, and customer-focused solutions. Its hands-on security solutions protect organizations from emerging security threats and help manage security risks proactively.
NetSecurity’s consultants acquire, preserve, analyze, and produce digital evidence promptly that will stand up to the highest legal scrutiny. Its proprietary Hands-On How-To® training program provides organizations and individuals with the knowledge of real-world security issues through simulated and "how-to" exercises that enable security professionals to do their jobs successfully.
To find out more about NetSecurity, visit www.netsecurity.com.
NetSecurity Forensic Labs Provides Computer Forensics Investigation, Electronic Discovery (e-Discovery), Incident Response, and Forensics Training to Law Firms, Corporate Entities, and Law Enforcement Agencies
STERLING, Va. & BOSTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--NetSecurity Corporation, a leading computer forensics, security consulting and training company, announced today the launch of NetSecurity Forensic Labs, a state-of-the-art secure facility offering computer forensics investigation, electronic discovery (e-Discovery), incident response, and forensics training to legal, corporate, and law enforcement entities.
Intellectual property theft, network hacking, evidence tampering, employee misuse of computers, illicit pornography, policy violation, electronic harassment, identity theft, and other digital crimes continue to be on the rise. This surge in cyber crime creates the need to conduct criminal, civil, or corporate investigations promptly, using forensics experts. Forensic investigation is a time-consuming effort that requires specialized expertise, procedures, tools, and a secure lab environment. Loss or tampering of evidence can result in an unfavorable ruling by a judge or the evidence may be ruled inadmissible in a case.
“Evidence obtained from computers, PDAs, cell phones, and other electronic media is having a greater impact on both civil and criminal investigations more than ever before,” said Inno Eroraha, founder and chief strategist of NetSecurity. “It is imperative that evidence be collected by trained computer forensic experts that follow forensically sound processes to ensure that the resulting digital evidence withstands legal scrutiny in court. This is where NetSecurity Forensic Labs comes into play. Our state-of-the-art forensic lab is equipped with tools and technologies to excavate digital evidence from the latest or most antiquated storage devices to produce admissible evidence.”
To help organizations overcome these challenges, NetSecurity brings unparalleled expertise to assist law firms, law enforcement agencies, public and private companies, and individuals through the investigation of computer crimes. Federal agencies and publicly-traded companies rely on NetSecurity because:
Its forensic experts are trusted and have worked in highly classified Federal and defense agencies.
NetSecurity ensures and preserves the confidentiality of each case, investigation, and engagement.
NetSecurity consultants teach the latest forensics tools and techniques of the trade, using real-world scenarios.
Its professionals have years of experience and have security and forensics certifications, such as: CISSP, ISSAP, ISSMP, CISM, CISA, EnCE, CHFI, CIFI, and CEH.
NetSecurity avoids conflicts of interest by using vendor-neutral products in the choice of its forensics or security tools.
“We partnered with NetSecurity Corporation to develop an incident response plan to ensure we are using state-of-the-art digital forensics processes. We chose NetSecurity not only for their in-depth expertise in security and forensics, but also because they are very responsive and deliver outstanding client service,” says Todd Braithwaite, Vice President of Information Technology, Middleburg Financial Corporation.
“NetSecurity’s deeply rooted expertise in computer and network security, hacking techniques, privacy, information systems audit, and our incident response skills position us to deliver crucial evidence quickly and accurately,” said Inno Eroraha.
About NetSecurity:
NetSecurity Corporation is a digital forensics, security consulting and training company providing timely, high-quality, and customer-focused solutions. Its hands-on security solutions protect organizations from emerging security threats and help manage security risks proactively.
NetSecurity’s consultants acquire, preserve, analyze, and produce digital evidence promptly that will stand up to the highest legal scrutiny. Its proprietary Hands-On How-To® training program provides organizations and individuals with the knowledge of real-world security issues through simulated and "how-to" exercises that enable security professionals to do their jobs successfully.
To find out more about NetSecurity, visit www.netsecurity.com.
January 07, 2008
A discussion on Pakistan and Afghanistan : Ahmed Rashid , Barnett R. Rubin ,Nermeen Shaikh
View A Discussion on Pakistan and Afghanistan on FORA.tv
Nermeen Shaikh is the Managing Editor of Asia Society Online. Her book _The Present as History: Critical Perspectives on Global Power_ has just been published by Columbia University Press. She studied politics at Cambridge University in England and at Queen’s University in Canada.
Barnett R. Rubin is Director of Studies and Senior Fellow at the Center on International Cooperation of New York University, where he directs the program on the Reconstruction of Afghanistan. He has worked at CIC since July 2000. During 1994-2000 he was Director of the Center for Preventive Action, and Director, Peace and Conflict Studies, at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York. Rubin was Associate Professor of Political Science and Director of the Center for the Study of Central Asia at Columbia University from 1990 to 1996. Previously, he was a Jennings Randolph Peace Fellow at the United States Institute of Peace and Assistant Professor of Political Science at Yale University.
Dr. Rubin is a Director of Gulestan Ariana Ltd., a private company manufacturing essential oils and related consumer products in Afghanistan. In November-December 2001 he served as special advisor to the UN Special Representative of the Secretary General for Afghanistan, Lakhdar Brahimi, during the negotiations that produced the Bonn Agreement. He advised the United Nations on the drafting of the constitution of Afghanistan, the Afghanistan Compact, and the Afghanistan National Development Strategy.
Dr. Rubin received a Ph.D. (1982) and M.A. (1976) from the University of Chicago and a B.A. (1972) from Yale University. He also received a Fulbright Fellowship to study at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales in Paris in 1977-1978. He is currently chair of the Conflict Prevention and Peace Forum (a program of the Social Science Research Council), a member of the Executive Board of Human Rights Watch/Asi