President Zardari Says Pakistan Won’t Use Nuclear Weapons First

President Zardari Says Pakistan Won’t Use Nuclear Weapons First

By Pratik Parija

Nov. 22 (Bloomberg) — President Asif Ali Zardari said Pakistan won’t be the first country to use a nuclear weapon in any conflict with India and called for improved economic and political ties between the traditional South Asian rivals.

“I don’t feel threatened by India and India shouldn’t feel threatened by us,” Zardari said in a videoconference at the Hindustan Times Leadership Summit in New Delhi today.

India and Pakistan, which have fought three wars since independence from Britain in 1947, have been seeking to improve ties between themselves in the past five years after coming close to a fourth conflict in 2002.

Zardari said the impulse for reaching an accord on the Himalayan territory of Kashmir, divided between the neighbors and claimed by both, should come from the people and politicians. He hoped that the need for a visa to cross the border could be scrapped and that an “e-card swipe” would suffice.

India and Pakistan tested nuclear devices in quick succession in May 1998, leading to sanctions against both. The sanctions were lifted against Pakistan after it joined the U.S.- led war on terrorism in 2001.

India ended more than three decades of nuclear isolation this year, having previously conducted a test in 1974, after reaching an agreement on fuel and technology supplies with the Nuclear Suppliers Group as part an accord with the U.S. India has said it won’t be the first user of an atomic weapon.

The Pakistan president said that he wanted to increase trade with India and China by taking advantage of their geographical closeness. He said trade, and not aid, was what Pakistan needed, saying that nations have been spoiled by aid.

IMF Bailout

He said the Pakistan government has sent a letter of intent to be vetted by the International Monetary Fund.

Pakistan is counting on the $7.6 billion IMF bailout to help build up its foreign-exchange reserves, which shrank 75 percent in a year to $3.5 billion, and to attract investment that will boost an economy predicted to grow at the slowest pace in seven years.

The $150 billion economy may grow 4.3 percent this fiscal year to June 30, lower than the earlier predicted 5.5 percent, Waqar Masood, secretary at the finance ministry, said on Nov. 19. Inflation will exceed the government’s previous target of 12 percent, he said.

Political wrangling left the Pakistan Peoples Party-led government, which came into power in March, unable to tackle inflation at a three-decade high and fix power shortages. Zardari, 52, was elected President in September.

Additional Aid

Pakistan is hoping the IMF loan may help it win additional aid from a group of other lenders and donor nations, including the U.S., the U.K., China and Saudi Arabia. The group’s Nov. 17 meeting in Abu Dhabi adopted a “work plan” for financial help to Pakistan, the Foreign Ministry has said.

Pakistan left its last IMF program in 2004 with a credit rating from Standard & Poor’s of B+, four levels below investment grade. S&P on Nov. 14, one day before the latest IMF loan was announced, cut the nation’s rating to CCC, citing a risk of default on external debt payments.

Moody’s Investors Service, which rates Pakistan’s debt at B3, said Nov. 17 the rating remains on review for a downgrade as the country needs to show it will secure additional assistance from donors and other lenders.

The Pakistani rupee in October plunged to an all-time low and the balance of payments deficit in the first three months of the fiscal year started July 1 widened to $3.95 billion, from $2.27 billion a year earlier. The deficit reached a record $14 billion last year.

India Caucus

Zardari, speaking from Islamabad, said he’s asked for a caucus to be formed in parliament aimed at examining suggestions for improving ties with India.

The Pakistan president said he expects to discuss terrorism and other issues with U.S. President-elect Barack Obama.

Pakistan has repeatedly demanded a halt to U.S. strikes near its border with Afghanistan saying they weaken its ability to fight terrorism. The U.S. says Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters who fled from Afghanistan to the mountains of the tribal region after the U.S.-led invasion of the country in 2001 have crossed back over the border to attack Afghan and coalition targets.

Zardari didn’t answer directly when asked whether he would invite former president and military dictator Pervez Musharraf to join his government.

“That would be up to parliament to decide,” the president said. “But I can assure you this much that he’s having a comfortable time and he’s busy playing, the last I heard, golf, which is more than what I was doing when he was in power.”




Lame duck President Bush speaking recently about the economic depression we now face said: “We must save capitalism,” “Government is not the total solution,” “Capitalism is the only way,” and “The key is sustained economic growth with free trade within the US and with other nations.”

Most of us realize at long last that unregulated capitalism is in fact a total disaster for the human race.  We have given capitalism all possible monetary support and freedom to display its worth.  President Carter deregulated the airlines. President Reagan broke the union movement. The two Bush Presidents and Clinton gave capitalism full military support for its imperialistic expansion abroad.  President Clinton, advised by Robert Rubin, gave Wall Street everything it wanted:  The safety net was abolished, so as to drive more desperate people into the work force who would take whatever wage was offered.  Capitalists were given full legal and military protection to invest abroad.  President Bush installed capitalists who should be regulated to do the regulating, and abolished or weakened regulations that in any way inhibited capitalist investment.  For more than 50 years, we have primed the capitalist pump with “military Keynesianism.”  We have tried capitalist ideas and ideologies of “trickle down economics,” and “neo-liberalism.”  Despite all of this, capitalism has failed us.

The truth is that capitalism has destroyed itself and imposed extreme risk and danger of planet wide economic depression and actual starvation on all of us. The truth is that further “economic growth” and “growing the economy” following the failed capitalistic way will destroy the planet.

So far President-elect Obama and the Democratic leadership seem to be doing a bit of quacking of their own as capitalism implodes. President-elect Obama wants the government to bail out the big three auto makers in Detroit , and seems to want to get things going again the way they were before August 2007.  Do we really want to finance Detroit to build more locomotive sized SUVs and Humvees?  Do we really want to stimulate the construction industry to build more over-priced housing subdivisions that require 50 to 60% of a buyer’s income to finance on long term loans?  Do we really want to restore the real estate bubble?  The Silicon Valley bubble?  Do we really want to give public money to Wall Street’s investment banks to encourage them again to loan money?  Loan money to do what?  Use the money to do what?  Do we want to give Wall Street public money with no conditions, no oversight, and no real controls whatever?  President-elect Obama and the Democratic leadership have done exactly that.  The fact is that capitalism was obviously in deep trouble prior to August 2007.

There are no constructive creative ideas for dealing with the current crisis coming from the left either.  For example the editors of the respected socialist journal, Monthly Review, write in a November editorial:  “It is not our job to fix their (capitalistic) system.”  So, Monthly Review editors, whose job is it?  Who will come up with the ideas that will get us from where we are to where we need to be for a sustainable civilized existence?

We still have the necessary building blocks to maintain a sustainable civilization:

In President Obama we have a towering intellect with inner security, calm pragmatic judgment and a compassionate heart as the new leader of the free world.

This President has the enthusiastic support of voters in the US and people everywhere on the planet.

Although the implosion of capitalism has eliminated many of our jobs and will eliminate many more, we are all anxious and willing to work.

We all have human needs for health care, housing, clothing, a stable food supply, energy, safe bridges and levees, truthful sources of information, and leisure time.

We care about each other. We are willing to work cooperatively together, and to care for each other, to meet our needs.

We are willing to petition, march, rally, and organize between elections to support true leaders and to make sure that our needs are met.

Given that capitalism has imploded, what ideas can we rally around?  What can we demand of President Obama?

We can demand a permanent public planning agency something like the War Production Board of World War II staffed with pragmatic, non-ideological, public spirited, bright persons who are willing to direct lending and production to those sustainable human needs that we share.  If Detroit should not make SUVs, what should it make?

We can demand that our government provide us with security that we will all have nutritious food no matter what.  Many citizens do not now have that peace of mind and some are buying guns to protect themselves from hungry mobs.  Although we hope and pray that farmers will continue to grow food at a profit, and truckers will distribute the food at a profit, there may be a total collapse of the profit system, as some economists predict.  Hence, we demand that our government have an alternate plan to hire farmers to grow food and to hire truckers to deliver it if necessary.   We must terminate our unthinking worship of capitalism.  We must not make the mistake of Franklin Roosevelt who ordered the killing of pigs when thousands were hungry in order to restore profit making for farmers.

We can demand that the government stop relating to us as if we were only consumers, and meet our deep need to be producers and creators with a decent share of the income from our production.

We can demand that our government become our bank, our lending agency of last resort, to finance small businesses and cooperatives that produce products and services that meet our needs.  We can demand that the Federal Reserve Bank, controlled by private bankers, be abolished.

We can demand that our government become our employer of last resort.  If, for example there are no doctors willing to meet our health needs at a price we can afford, let our government subsidize medical schools and hire doctors and physician’s assistants to serve us.

We can demand that our government make available to us radio and TV frequencies so that we can discuss our needs and solutions with each other and with our elected representatives, and so that our President has a means free of the dead hand of capitalist ownership to report to us about how he is implementing our demands and our needs.  We can reinstate the “fairness doctrine” and implement the true purposes of the Federal Communications Act to foster public enlightenment, and to provide the complete and accurate information that we need to govern ourselves.

We can and should tax the extreme wealth and income at the very top of our society.  It is the only source of funding available to do what needs to be done.  It is not only because “it is unjust for some people to have more than they need when others are needy,” but because the wealthy have hugely profited at our expense because of recent policies.  We should studiously avoid bailing out the wealthy and their failed institutions and ideas.  David Chandler, a California Quaker and businessman has calculated the wealth now held by the top 1%:  It is as much wealth as all that we at the bottom 95% own.  Most of us do not know about the immense total wealth held by the wealthiest 1%. It is a well kept secret. It is at least $13 Trillion, and that estimate is conservative and does not count secreted wealth.  This $13 Trillion is held by 30 thousand people. These 30 thousand hold as much wealth as 300 million of us. If we stack up $100 bills, $1,000 stack would be a stack between ¼ inch and ½ inch high. A million dollar stack would be 39 inches high. A billion dollar stack would be 3280 feet high or 6/10 of a mile. A trillion Dollar stack would be 621 miles high.  $13 Trillion would be a stack over 8000 miles high.  See

Free of the propaganda coming from the top 1%, we can evaluate the power and numbers of “terrorists,” and make a determination as to whether there are less expensive and more effective ways such as effective police work and negotiation, to deal with them rather than a permanent planet-wide war.

We must halt all public financial support of capitalism and capitalists.  Let capitalists stand or fall on the true principles of capitalism without public subsidy, and without “socialism for the rich” or “military Keynesianism.”  We need not let capitalism take us humans and civilization down with it.



By: Peter Chamberlin


In the kingdom of the master deceivers black is white, war is peace and freedom is slavery.  The object of the avalanche of lies that washes over us all on a daily basis is to so overwhelm us with lies and half-truths that we can no longer recognize the truth, even when it is staring us in the face.  Whenever a society reaches this stage of disinformation saturation then truth itself becomes the most effective lie.


Fantasy becomes the coin of the realm, as truth no longer reflects its absolute weight, appearing no different from the darkness that surrounds it.  In this world, the imaginings of delusional minds are given life, as people embrace the concept of the suspension of disbelief.  When people are trained to voluntarily dispense with reason, for the sake of entertainment, they become ripe for ultimate deception.  People will believe anything.


Into this darkened delusional realm psychological manipulation devices are introduced, such as television and movies, for the insertion of complex ideas into the unreasoning escapist minds of the masses.  Using these tools, the master manipulators practice their dark arts of psychological manipulation, to eradicate unacceptable ideas and to implant new acceptable versions of “reality” into the minds of the conditioned sheeple. 

Through technology political leaders indoctrinate the people into embracing the elite’s beliefs; the exact opposite of the democratic ideal.  Through this brainwashing process roles are reversed, the people are coerced into representing the will of the “representatives.”  This unholy union of politicians with the scientists and intellectuals who developed the mind-warping sciences is taking America first, and then the rest of the world, into what has been called a “technocratic era” (See: Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages: America’a Role in the Technocratic Era)

New World Order spokesman David Rockefeller (Brzezinski’s sponsor) was not afraid to speak plainly about our planned fate, when he boasted that:


“The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely
preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in the past centuries.”  


The plans to create a “scientific dictatorship” for us have been hidden in plain sight, because very few people cared to open their eyes wide enough to adjust to the overwhelming darkness.  Our movies and television programs echoed with the idea that the planned technocracy is an inevitable “evolutionary” step, that, overall, it will be a good thing for mankind.  Science fiction is the most fertile medium to indoctrinate us with hope in the future and faith in science as our salvation. 


In “The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship Part Two: Science Fiction and the Sirius Connection,” Phillip D. Collins asserts that:

“Traditionally, ‘science fiction’ has appeared to most people as an adolescent genre, the province of time-wasting fantasies. This has been the great strength of this genre as a vehicle for the inculcation of the ideology favored by the Cryptocracy. As J.H. Towsen points out in Clowns, only when people think they are not buying something can the real sales pitch begin. While it is true that with the success of NASA’s Gemini space program and the Apollo moon flights more serious attention and respectability was accorded ‘science fiction,’ nonetheless in its formative seeding time, from the late 19th century through the 1950s, the predictive program known as ‘science fiction’ had the advantage of being derided as the solitary vice of misfit juveniles and marginal adults.” (Hoffman, 205)

Thus, ‘science fiction’ is a means of conditioning the masses to accept future visions that the elite wish to tangibly enact. [Ed. Note: SF also widely uses Darwinian notions and language to project a fantastic future. This is another area of potential research.] This process of gradual and subtle inculcation is dubbed ‘predictive programming.’ Hoffman elaborates: ‘Predictive programming works by means of the propagation of the illusion of an infallibly accurate vision of how the world is going to look in the future’ (Hoffman, 205). Memes are instilled through the circulation of ‘mass appeal’ documents under the guise of ‘science fiction’ literature. Once subsumed on a cognitive level, these memes become self-fulfilling prophecies, embraced by the masses and outwardly approximated through the efforts of the elite.”

Judging by some of the most popular science fiction movies like Matrix, V Is For Vendetta and Children of Men, it would seem that the master manipulators want us to not only learn and accept the concept of a technocratic brotherhood, but also to accept the idea that rebellion is a necessary precursor to that eventual day of global “federation.” 


In order for that “great day” of the technocratic era to arrive, everyone in society will have to be conditioned to accept the official construct, and all those who fight the new system will have to be removed from society.  America must experience martial law day, in order to clear the way for the new order.


Believe it or not, there is an organization that actually promotes acceptance of the technocratic order:

“Technocracy is science applied to society”

“Technocracy is technological social design”.

“Technocracy is a blueprint of a new method of social operation”.    


In my opinion, this organization exists solely to rehabilitate the word “technocracy.”

In keeping with the theme of this paper, we must ask the question, have the master deceivers revealed the actual plan for manipulating the world into accepting this new scientific global dictatorship?  Has the plan been revealed to us, under the clever disguise of fiction?  There is one piece of universally discredited evidence that fits this description, THE PROTOCOLS OF THE LEARNED ELDERS OF ZION.  Because of vague similarities in order and cited examples with an earlier work of fiction, Dialogue In Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquie, the work was discredited as plagiarism, thus eliminating discussions of the accuracy of the descriptions given for the inner workings of the global conspiracy that is pushing the world dictatorship of bankers and intellectuals.  I urge everyone concerned with the plans for the new world order to examine both of these books and judge for yourself whether or not certain powerful individuals do control our press, our banks, our government, etc.

Returning to The Ascendancy of the Scientific Dictatorship Part One, researcher Collins points-out that:

“There was an original text on which the published version of the Protocols was based. This original text was not a forgery. On the contrary, it was authentic. But it had nothing whatever to do with Judaism or an ‘international Jewish conspiracy.’ It issued, rather, from some Masonic organization or Masonically oriented secret society that incorporated the word ‘Sion’.” (Baigent, et al, 194)

Given the Masonic language, one can completely discard the racist contention that the Protocols constitute evidence of an ‘international Jewish conspiracy.’ Nevertheless, the document holds some authenticity:

 ‘The published version of the Protocols is not, therefore, a totally fabricated text. It is, rather, a radically altered text. But despite the alterations certain vestiges of the original version can be discerned’.’ (Baigent, et al, 195)

The remnant vestiges of the original text strongly suggest Masonic origins. Having established the Masonic authorship of the Protocols, one may return to issue at hand: Freemasonic involvement in the promotion of Darwinism. Consider the following excerpt from the Protocols, which reads distinctly like a mission statement:

‘For them [the masses or cattle] let that play the principal part which we have persuaded them to accept as the dictates of science (theory). It is with this object in view that we are constantly, by means of our press, arousing a blind confidence in these theories. The intellectuals of the goyim [the masses or cattle] will puff themselves up with their knowledge and without any logical verification of it will put into effect all the information available from science, which our agentur specialists have cunningly pieced together for the purpose of educating their minds in the direction we want.”

If this is correct, then “we” in the text refers to the conspirators, and “goyim” refers to us sheeple.  Re-reading the original with these changes paints a pretty accurate picture of the multiple deceptions and power plays that comprise the key elements of the conspiracy to enslave this planet to the narrow interests of elitist intellectual financiers. 


Much of the world is about to be reduced to rubble so that we the people might be sifted like sand, to steal from us the little that remains.

Here is the best movie description of the new stateless world of sedated sheeple and the corporate empires that I have come across, from the movie “Network.”


“You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, Mr. Beale, and I won’t have it.

Is that clear?

You think that you have stopped a business deal.

That is not the case.

The arabs have taken billions of dollars out of this country and now they must put it back!

It is ebb and flow, tidal gravity.

It is ecological balance!

You are an old man who thinks in terms of nations and peoples.

There are no nations.

There are no peoples.

There are no Russians.

There are no Arabs.

There are no Third Worlds.

There is no West.

There is only one holistic system of systems!

One vast and immane, interwoven, interacting multi-variant, multinational dominion of dollars!

Petrol dollars, electro dollars, multi-dollars,

Reichsmarks, rins, rubles, pounds and shekels!

It is the international system of currency which determines the totality of life on this planet.

That is the natural order of things today.

That is the atomic and sub-atomic and galactic structure of things today.

And you have meddled with the primal forces of nature!

And you will atone.

Am I getting through to you?

You get up on your little 21-inch screen

And you howl about America and democracy.

There is no America.

There is no democracy.

There is only IBM and ITT.

And AT&T, and Du Pont, Dow, Union Carbide and Exxon.

Those are the nations of the world today.

What do you think the Russians talk about in their councils of state?

Karl Marx?

They get out their linear programming charts, statistical decision theorise, minimax solutions and compute the price-cost probabilities of their transactions and investments  just like we do.

We no longer live in a world of nations and ideologies, Mr. Beale,

The world is a college of corporations,

inexorably determined by the immutable bylaws of business.

The world is a business.

It has been since man crawled out of the slime.

And our children will live, Mr. Beale, to see that perfect world,

In which there is no war or famine, oppression or brutality.

One vast and ecumenical holding company,

For whom all men will work to serve a common profit.

In which all men will hold a share of stock,

All necessities provided,

All anxieties tranquilized,

All boredom amused.

And I have chosen you, Mr. Beale, to preach this evangel.

“Why me?” 

Because you’re on television, dummy.


“I have seen the face of God.”

You just might be right, Mr. Beale.



Supplying Afghanistan looks increasingly sketchy


Supplying Afghanistan looks increasingly sketchy

Yesterday’s Washington Post story about the search for an alternative supply route into Afghanistan was another indicator of the vulnerability of the NATO-American strategy in that country. For seven years, the U.S. has had a military commitment, of varying size, to Afghanistan. If an alternative supply route into Afghanistan from the west and north was so obvious and simple, it surely would have been implemented long ago.

The fact is that such a route is neither obvious nor simple, and no desire for a “surge” strategy for Afghanistan is going to change that fact. Furthermore, the logistical constraints of military operations in Afghanistan apply equally to additional U.S. Army brigade combat teams or to a proposed doubling in the size of the Afghan army. Both alternatives for increasing allied combat power will require external, U.S.-supplied logistics support.

Now to excerpts from the WaPo article:

About 75 percent of NATO and U.S. supplies bound for Afghanistan — including gas, food and military equipment — are transported over land through Pakistan. The journey begins in the southern Pakistani port city of Karachi and continues north through Pakistan’s volatile North-West Frontier Province and tribal areas before supplies arrive at the Afghan border. The convoys then press forward along mountain hairpin turns through areas of Afghanistan that are known as havens for insurgents.

Drivers at this busy border crossing say death threats from the Taliban arrive almost daily. Sometimes they come in the form of a letter taped to the windshield of a truck late at night. Occasionally, a dispatcher receives an early-morning phone call before a convoy sets off from Pakistan. More often, the threats are delivered at the end of a gun barrel.

“The Taliban, they tell us, ‘These goods belong to the Americans. Don’t bring them to the Americans. If you do, we’ll kill you,’ ” said Rahmanullah, a truck driver from the Pakistani tribal town of Landikotal. “From Karachi to Kabul there is trouble. The whole route is insecure.”


Yet the scramble to find new routes appears to indicate the attacks have had some effect. The United States has already begun negotiations with countries along what the Pentagon has called a new northern route. An agreement with Georgia has been reached and talks are ongoing with Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, according to an Oct. 31 Pentagon document. “We do not expect transit agreements with Iran or Uzbekistan,” the Transportation Command told potential contractors.


Meanwhile, heavy security along the Pakistan-to-Afghanistan route has slowed NATO supply traffic to a trickle at Torkham, according to Afghan customs officials and drivers here. To the east, more than 1,000 trucks waited at a near-standstill on the Pakistani side of the pass on Tuesday, engines idling in an hours-long purgatory of dust and unmet deadlines. To the west, a thin stream of tractor-trailers lurched toward the Afghan customs office, churning slowly through an unceasing throng of merchants, day laborers and refugees.

Security restrictions forced customs officials to slow the flow of traffic to 25 trucks every few hours. Before the Taliban raid and border closure last week, an average of 600 to 800 tractor-trailers moved through Torkham a day, according to Afghan customs officials. Customs officials said they hoped at best to see 200 trucks pass
through on Tuesday.

Since 2001, the Bush administration never considered dealing with the bizarre regime in Turkmenistan. For a time, the U.S. used the so-called K-2 base in Uzbekistan until the Bush administration could no longer tolerate the human rights practices in that country. A glance at a map reveals few other realistic approaches into Afghanistan from the north.

Perhaps most damaging, the creation of a main supply route from the north would cede enormous diplomatic leverage over to Russia. It is true that the Russian government has an interest in NATO’s success in Afghanistan. On the other hand, Russia, through its influence in the “near abroad,” most notably Kazakhstan, would have immense authority to turn the northern MSR on and off at its will. How could any Russian government official not be reminded of the German Sixth Army’s plight at Stalingrad?

Pakistan has an interest in keeping the Khyber Pass open. But having the interest doesn’t mean it has the authority to do so.

When President Obama receives his briefings from the Joint Chiefs on military options for Afghanistan, I hope he receives straight talk from the generals about the risks and consequences of these courses of action.

Pakistan called a ‘wild card’ in intelligence forecast

Pakistan called a ‘wild card’ in intelligence forecast

* US intelligence report says northwestern territories will remain ‘poorly governed’
* Food, water will be scarce, advanced weapons plentiful
* China, India likely to join United States atop a multipolar world
* Qaeda’s weaknesses to attract broad-based support might cause it to decay
* Iran, Turkey, Indonesia seen gaining power

WASHINGTON: Pakistan has been called a ‘wild card’, whose northwestern territories will remain ‘poorly governed’, as cross-border activities continue to cause instability in nearby areas of Afghanistan.

According to a report – Global Trends 2025 – issued by the National Intelligence Council on Thursday, Afghanistan will remain an essentially tribally-centred nation facing continual conflict. The future of Iraq does not look much better. China, however, is projected to emerge as the world’s second strongest economic power after the United States, while the latter will have “less power in a multipolar world than it has enjoyed for many decades”. Russia has the potential to be richer and more powerful, but only if it expands and diversifies its economy, predicts the report.

US economic and political clout will decline over the next two decades and the world will be more dangerous, with food and water scarce and advanced weapons plentiful, the report projected.

The analysis also said the current financial crisis on Wall Street is just the first phase of a global economic reordering. The US dollar’s role as the world’s major currency would weaken to become a “first among equals,” the report said.

The outlook is intended to inform US president-elect Barack Obama of factors that will influence global events. It is based on a year-long global survey of experts and trends by US intelligence analysts.

“The next 20 years of transition to a new system are fraught with risks,” said the report, which was more pessimistic about US influence and the potential for conflict than the last outlook for 2020.

Thomas Fingar, chairman of the intelligence council and deputy national director of intelligence for analysis, said harmful outcomes were not inevitable.

“It is not beyond the mind of human beings, or political systems, (or) in some cases (the) working of market mechanisms to address and alleviate if not solve these problems,” Fingar told reporters. “We could have a better world in 2025.”

China and India, following a “state capitalism” economic model, were likely to join the US atop a multi-polar world and compete for influence, the report said.

Russia’s potential was less certain, depending on its energy wealth and internal investment. But Iran, Turkey and Indonesia were also seen gaining power.

A world with multiple power centres has been less stable than one with a single or two rival superpowers, and there was a growing potential for conflict, the report said.

Global warming will be felt, and water, food and energy constraints may fuel conflict over resources.

“Strategic rivalries are most likely to revolve around trade, investments and technological innovation and acquisition, but we cannot rule out a 19th century-like scenario of arms races, territorial expansion and military rivalries,” the report said.

“Types of conflict we have not seen for a while — such as over resources — could re-emerge,” it said. .

There was a greater, but still small, risk of nuclear attack, based on spreading technologies and the weakening of international non-proliferation systems.

The report said terrorism would likely be a factor in 2025 but suggested that Al Qaeda’s ‘terrorist wave’ might be breaking up.

“Al Qaeda’s weaknesses – unachievable strategic objectives, inability to attract broad-based support, and self-destructive actions – might cause it to decay sooner than many people think,” it said.

“Because history suggests that the global Islamic terrorist movement will outlast Al Qaeda as a group, strategic counter-terrorism efforts will need to focus on how and why a successor terrorist group might evolve during the remaining years of the ‘Islamic terrorist wave’.”

The report was vague about the outcome of current conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

In 2025, the government in Baghdad could still be “an object of competition” among various factions seeking foreign aid or pride of place.

Afghanistan “may still evince significant patterns of tribal competition and conflict.”

“The future of Pakistan is a wildcard in considering the trajectory of neighboring Afghanistan,” it said.

The report also identified three potential up and coming powers, all from the Muslim world but not from its Arab core. They are Indonesia, Turkey and Iran. khalid hasan/agencies


U.S. opposes Chinese reactor sales to Pakistan

WASHINGTON, Nov 22: The United States this week objected to Chinese plans to build two nuclear reactors in Pakistan near Chashma.

Senior Pakistani officials announced last month that China had agreed to build two additional reactors at Chashma, where Beijing has already built one nuclear power station and is erecting another. The earlier projects were formalized before China joined the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group, the body that sets nuclear trade guidelines.

Nuclear Suppliers Group rules bar sales of sensitive nuclear technology and materials to nations, such as Pakistan, that have not joined the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and do not allow international monitoring of all their nuclear activities. Earlier this year, the group agreed to exempt India from the sales ban, opening the door for New Delhi to purchase civil nuclear technology from the France, Russia, the United States and others.

“The U.S. position is that cooperation on the construction of two new reactors, Chashma III and IV, would be inconsistent with the commitments China made at the time of its adherence to Nuclear Suppliers Group guidelines in 2004,” said U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Matthew Reynolds in correspondence this week to Representative Edward Markey (D-Mass.). Reynolds was responding to a letter Markey wrote last month to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice expressing concern about the reactor deal.

“At that time, China’s representatives detailed in a statement China’s ongoing nuclear cooperation with Pakistan that would be ‘grandfathered’ upon China’s adherence; nothing in that statement permitted construction of reactors beyond Chashma I and II,” Reynolds stated.

“Any new cooperation, therefore, would require consensus approval by the NSG for an exception to the guidelines,” he continued. “Although Pakistan’s energy needs are real and increasing, we believe Pakistan’s proliferation record would make NSG consensus difficult where China to request an exception.”

Markey praised the State Department opinion and referred to a multinational nuclear smuggling ring once led by top Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan.

“Pakistan is responsible for more nuclear proliferation than any other single country; nuclear cooperation is off the table,” he said in a statement yesterday.

“There is no doubt whatsoever that international nonproliferation rules bar China from providing Pakistan with new nuclear reactors,” Markey added. “This is clear from a plain-language reading of the Nuclear Suppliers Group guidelines, and I am very pleased that the Bush administration has agreed with this view.”

“China should not violate its international obligations by selling new nuclear reactors to Pakistan. The United States has clearly stated that such a sale would be against international nonproliferation rules, and I hope other countries stand up to deliver the same message,” he said.