THERE REALLY IS TALK OF NUKING THE GULF OIL LEAK

[THIS IS THE INSANE CROWD THAT BELIEVES THE MOVIE ARMAGEDDON WAS A DOCUMENTARY–THE SAME FOLKS WHO WANT TO NUKE HURRICANES.]

Petroleum leak in the Gulf of Mexico can be eliminated nuclear explosion

Всего одна атомная бомба может спасти США от экологической катастрофы
Only one nuclear bomb could save the U.S. from ecological disaster

In the USSR, and not as fountains and stopped using the peaceful atom

Vladimir Lagowski – 03/05/2010

It is possible that unsuccessful attempts to stop the leakage of oil from the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico through the underwater robots compel professionals to take extreme measures. Namely – to blow up next to the damaged wells nuclear warhead.

It sounds terribly and incredibly – the idiotic joke. But in fact there were several cases where catastrophes in the fields of fighting in this way. In the former USSR – five times. When nothing else has not helped. It’s now in the Gulf of Mexico, where oil oozes out of the way from three places.

First underground nuclear explosion was used to extinguish burning gas wells in “Urt-Bulak (80 km from Bukhara) 30 September 1966. Power charge was 30 kilotons. For comparison, the Hiroshima bomb exploded about 20 kilotons. But in the height of 600 meters. A near Bukhara – at a depth of six kilometers.

The idea of the method is simple: an underground explosion pushes the rock, presses it and actually squeezes the channel well.

Powerful nuclear “plugs” – sometimes 3 Hiroshima – we have enjoyed until 1979. And only once failed. In 1972 in Kharkov region failed to block the emergency gas blowout. The explosion was mysteriously left on the surface, forming a mushroom cloud. Although the charge was minimal – just a 4 kiloton. And laid deep – for more than two kilometers.

Total probability of failure in the Gulf of Mexico – 20 percent. Americans could take a chance. The chance of dying during the flight to the moon they were even higher.
Of course, we used a civilian nuclear program on the ground, the Americans as to the sea – under water where the ocean depth reaches 1500 meters.

But in principle there is no difference – you still need to drill a well at a distance from leaking. And it lowered the bomb. As in the movie “Armageddon” with Bruce Willis in the role of a driller. It is desirable that the calculations were done correctly. Such hope is: the U.S. is full of smart scientists and powerful computers. And Russia could have contributed. We still live peaceful nuclear demolition.

Нефтяное пятно в Мексиканском заливе: вид из космоса
An oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico: a view from space
Край пятна: для сравнения, маленькие точки - это большие корабли
The edge spots: for comparison, the tiny dots – is the big boats

REFERENCE “CC”

Nuclear war in the peaceful uses

of the USSR organized underground nuclear explosions for peaceful purposes in the period from 1966 to 1988. In total, the former Soviet Union tore more than a hundred atomic bombs. According to some data – 124, on the other 169. And that – not counting the military testing of nuclear weapons.

According to the official wording of the explosions were carried out in the interests of the national economy. Among them – the majority – for seismic minerals and for probing the depths. Explosions create underground reservoirs for gas storage, chemical waste, digging canals, building dams, increased the oil recovery. And did not think something harmful. Although, if the estimate, there are hundreds of atomic bombs, perhaps not in every nuclear war to explode.

Peaceful nuclear energy “fooling” and in the U.S.. And they began earlier – in 1962. But in the end produced a much smaller explosions in the interests of the capitalist economy. Although plans were grandiose.

Воронка глубиной 98 м и диаметром 390 м от первого в мире промышленного взрыва Sedan, произведенного в США в 1962 году. Взрыв заряда мощностью 104 кт на глубине 194 м мгновенно переместил 12 млн. тонн земли
Funnel depth of 98 meters and a diameter of 390 m from the world’s first industrial explosion Sedan, produced in the U.S. in 1962. The explosion of the charge capacity of 104 kt at a depth of 194 m immediately moved 12 million tons of earth

What was Halliburton’s role in US oil spill?

What was Halliburton’s role in US oil spill?

By David Usborne

May 30, 2010

Shares in Halliburton, the world’s second-largest energy services company once headed by former US vice-president Dick Cheney, slid in trading on Friday, in part because of the new six-month moratorium on offshore drilling projects imposed last week by President Barack Obama.

But investors have had other reasons to feel concern for the fortunes of Halliburton. As the investigation into the BP oil rig explosion accelerates, new information has been surfacing in congressional hearings in Washington pointing to possible problems with the casings that were put around the bore hole in the sea bed and the cementing that is critical to sealing it up.

Halliburton did the cementing at the well, under contract to BP. It was to inject the cement to seal the casing in the bore hole to make any seepage of gas and oil impossible, and insert the cement plug that would have allowed BP to return at a later date to begin production. Last August, Halliburton was involved in the cementing of a well in the Timor Sea off the coast of Australia that similarly blew out, sending thousands of gallons into the ocean.

Even within days of the US tragedy, which left 11 men dead and unleashed the worst oil spill America has ever seen, investigators were focusing on the type of cement used – it had been infused with nitrogen – and tests that were done to ensure it had set properly. BP investigators told members of Congress that in the hours before the blast, a “fundamental mistake” may have been made in moving forward with placing the plug even when pressure tests had shown a “very large abnormality”.

The notion that blame for the blast could eventually be put on Halliburton might be tempting for BP. Indeed, at early hearings, BP seemed to point fingers both at Halliburton and at Transocean, the owner of the rig, prompting a rebuke from President Obama.

From the start, Halliburton’s lawyers have insisted that its men on the rig were simply following specifications and instructions from BP. In other words, if the cement does turn out to have been at least partly responsible for the tragedy, BP is “bound to hold Halliburton harmless”, as one of the lawyers told Congress last week. Transocean has made a similar case that as the owner of the lease on the well, BP must be ultimately responsible.

:: Article nr. 66494 sent on 31-may-2010 01:20 ECT
www.uruknet.info?p=66494

Link: www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/what-was-halliburtons-role-in-us-oil-s
pill-1987038.html

TAJIKS PROTEST IN KYRGYZSTAN AGAINST UZBEK BLOCK OF RAILOADS

Kyrgyz Tajik saw in the actions of Uzbek attempts to “stifle” Tajikistan
May 31, 2010, 16:58
CA-NEWS (TJ) – Tajikistan Embassy in Bishkek, published on its website the full text of the address of the Association of Kyrgyz and Tajiks Tajik students studying in Kyrgyz universities, who organized last week authorized a protest in front of the Embassy of Uzbekistan in Bishkek. The picketing, according to the Tajik diplomatic mission, attended by over 60 people.

“Recently there has been unfriendly policies on the part of Uzbekistan with regard to Tajikistan, which only contributes to the deterioration of good relations between the brotherly countries and peoples, – the statement says. – Many of the country and abroad send humanitarian aid to victims of natural disasters to the population of Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan tries to block their timely delivery. ”

The authors, referring to the media, reported that on May 18, Uzbekistan on its territory delays and do not allow more than 2000 cars with food, construction materials and humanitarian cargoes destined to people in affected regions of Tajikistan.

“One gets the feeling that the Uzbek authorities deliberately keep such a hostile policy towards Tajikistan, in every way trying to” stifle “it, including the cost” – the statement says.

The authors express concern about the difficult social and humanitarian situation in Tajikistan, stressed that “the embargo against Uzbekistan in Tajikistan will further complicate the situation and could lead to a humanitarian catastrophe.”

Tajiks In Bishkek Picket Uzbek Embassy, Demand Resumption Of Rail Traffic

Tajik protest the disruption of humanitarian aid transports in Bishkek.Tajik protest the disruption of humanitarian aid transports in Bishkek.

May 27, 2010
BISHKEK — About 50 Tajik students and members of Kyrgyzstan’s Tajik Association picketed the Uzbek Embassy in Bishkek today to demand the full resumption of rail traffic between Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, RFE/RL’s Kyrgyz Service reports.

According to the protesters, hundreds of tons of humanitarian aid intended for the victims of recent landslides and floods in Tajikistan are held up at the Uzbek-Tajik border as the Uzbek authorities refuse to allow cross-border rail traffic.

The protesters handed a petition to an Uzbek Embassy official.

Uzbekistan has described the rail delays as technical, but Dushanbe has accused Tashkent of deliberately blocking the shipments.

ISRAEL’S ASSAULT SELF-INFLICTED MORTAL WOUND

Iranian Defense Minister: Countdown of Israel's existence started

Israel‘s attacks on ships with the humanitarian aid initiated the countdown of Israel’s existence, Iran‘s Defense MinisterAhmad Vahidi was quoted as saying Irna.

The Israeli military boarded an international flotilla of ships transporting humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip. During the operation, which the Israeli newspaper Haaretz called the “complete failure”, the militaries killed 19 members of the humanitarian mission and about 30 injured. The Al-Arabiya television channel reported that most of the injured are in serious health condition.

The Turkish humanitarian mission reported that of the killed persons, 16 -15 are citizens of Turkey. Haaretz reported that it could lead to a complete breakdown in relations with Ankara, which already remained strained after the war between Israel and Gaza in December 2008.

ZIONIST FASCISTS CLAIM SELF-DEFENSE–FLOTILLA “TRANSPORTING ARMS”

Israeli gov’t source: ‘Flotilla of freedom’ transport arms

Azerbaijan, Baku, May 31 / Trend, U.Sadikhova /

On board the International flotilla carrying humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip were contraband weapons, using which, the activists attacked by Israeli soldiers, official source in the Israeli Government toldTrend.

Arms were on board of the ships before the arrival of the Israeli Navy, and Israeli soldiers have been forced to defend themselves from attack of the activists, as a result of which two Israeli soldiers were injured, the anonymous source said.

Israel made the organizers of humanitarian action and human rights activists, who were on board responsibility for the accident, he said.

According to exact data, 19 human rights activists were killed as a result of incident, most of which are Turkish citizens, hundreds of people were injured.

Turkey has decided to recall its Ambassador Oguz Celikkol from Israel and to cancel three joint military trainings, Assistant to Turkish Prime Minister Bulent Arinc said at the news conference in Ankara.

Israeli Navy said that their actions were defensive, as the activists began the attack first, using knives, batons and metal objects. However Bulent Arinc at a press conference in Ankara said that there were no weapons on board the fleet.

Freedom Flotilla” consists of six vessels. There were about 600 activists from Europe and Arab countries, including dozens of deputies on the board. The rally was organized by human rights activists from Ireland, Sweden, Greece, Turkey, Algeria and Kuwait. They intended to bring 10,000 tons of humanitarian supplies, including medicines and construction materials to the Gaza Strip.

Kyrgyzstan Reports Uzbek Armor and Assault Force Massing On Border Near Batken

Kyrgyzstan closed the frontier guard on the border with Uzbekistan, the Uzbek enclave Soh arrived paratroopers

Fergana.Ru

May 30 in connection with the latest escalation of the situation on the border with Uzbekistan Border Service of Kyrgyzstan is located closed frontier guard “Kaytpas” said AKIpress citing sources in the Batken Oblast State Administration.

According Acting Akim (Head of Administration) in the Batken region Khayit Aykynova, May 29 residents of Uzbekistan’s village Hushyar destroyed road leading to the Kyrgyz village Charbak. In turn, sends a “24.kg” , residents of the Batken region blocked the road in the Uzbek town of Rishton.

Межгосударственные границы в Ферганской долине
Bizarre line of international borders in the Ferghana Valley. In the photo from space: The road and the Kyrgyz-Uzbek border in the area Rishtan © Google Maps

Currently, according to the Batken regional administration, the Uzbek enclave Soh introduced forces landing assault battalion of Uzbekistan and strengthened law enforcement outfit – without the knowledge of local government and law enforcement Batken region. According to local officials, it is a violation of international agreements.

Recall the night of 26 May a group of villagers Hushyar Sokh region of Uzbekistan beat the passengers of four cars “Tico” and “Lada”, which tried to drive through the enclave Sox in the Kyrgyz village Sogment. The attackers also attempted to draw into the conflict Kyrgyz border guards, but the latter chose not to intervene. Citizens of Uzbekistan tried to capture all the hostages, but the passengers managed to escape. In Hushyare left drivers with cars that were not freed until the next morning.

According to the Batken regional administration, the villagers complained Hushyar caused controversy on the use of pasture in the village Sogment, which until this year hushyartsy used for grazing in the summer. However, after the entry into force of the new international agreement they have lost such an opportunity.

Confrontation villagers Sogment and Hushyar continued and the next day. On each side, on the border of two villages in a crowd of 300-500 people. Local authorities on both sides to take measures to resolve the situation. Evening of May 27 after much persuasion gathered at the border residents Sogment dispersed. But the next day people gathered again at the same place. At the epicenter of the events are regional leaders, acting Governor of Batken region, as well as the head of Batken border detachment.

Uzbek media about what is happening on the border with Kyrgyzstan did not report anything yet.

Kyrgyzstan has closed all frontier guard in Kadamjai area. At the Uzbek border spotted armor

Fergana.Ru

Kyrgyzstan has closed all border posts located in Kadamjai region of Batken region where a May 26 aggravated the situation.

According to “Fergane.Ru” state television and radio correspondent in Kyrgyzstan (NTRC) in the Batken region Mederbek Niyazaliev, located on the ground, now on both sides of the border continue to be several hundred people. Among them are many members of various law enforcement agencies. On the Uzbek side noticed armored vehicles – several armored personnel carriers and BMT, and about 700 guards and 300 paratroopers.

In place of confrontation, according to our source, is acting Governor of Batken region. Expected arrival of the chairman of the Border Service Kurmankula Matenova.

Recall, according to the Kyrgyz side, the night of 26 May a group of villagers Hushyar Sokh region of Uzbekistan beat four passenger cars “Tico” and “Lada”, which tried to drive through the enclave Sox in the Kyrgyz village Sogment. The attackers also attempted to draw into the conflict Kyrgyz border guards, but the latter chose not to intervene. Citizens of Uzbekistan tried to capture all the hostages, but the passengers managed to escape. In Hushyare left drivers with cars that were not freed until the next morning.

According to the Batken regional administration, the villagers complained Hushyar caused controversy on the use of pasture in the village Sogment, which until this year hushyartsy used for grazing in the summer. However, after the entry into force of the new interstate agreement, they were deprived of such opportunities than displeased.

May 29 residents of Uzbekistan’s village Hushyar destroyed the highway leading to the Kyrgyz village Charbak, koitoroe as a result was left without water: a village situated on the territory of Uzbekistan, the road to him and plumbing run through Hushyar.

In turn, residents of the Batken region blocked the road in the Uzbek town of Rishton. In addition, near the village Zhash-Tilek Kyrgyz residents blocked the road with stones, demanding action on the findings of damage people of Uzbekistan from 26 to 31 May ten cars batkentsev.

Conference on Disarmament in Central Asia and Caspian region to Be Held In Turkmenistan on June 24

Conference on Disarmament in Central Asia and Caspian region to take place on June 24

The International Conference “Issues of disarmament in Central Asian region and Caspian littoral states” will be held in Ashgabat on June 24. As the Turkmenistan.ru correspondent reports from Ashgabat, the forum is organized by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Turkmenistan.

The initiative to hold an international conference on disarmament in Central Asia and the Caspian basin in Ashgabat under the aegis of the UN was proposed by Turkmenistan at the 64th session of the UN General Assembly.

Earlier, the Turkmen capital hosted a series of consultative meetings on preparation for the conference attended by representatives of foreign ministries and diplomatic missions of Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.

The program of the conference is expected to include issues such as review and analysis of the situation on disarmament issues in Central Asia and the Caspian basin; international legal framework for disarmament and its improvement; role of international organizations in addressing disarmament issues in global and regional dimensions.

Turkey’s ‘strategic depth’ doctrine turning into ‘tactical breadth’

CİHAN ÇELİK, Analysis
ISTANBUL – Hürriyet Daily News
Turkey’s ‘strategic depth’ in foreign relations appears to be undergoing another transformation, this time with ‘tactical breadth’ as a main ingredient. The White House’s response to Brazil leaking a letter from Obama regarding the Turkey-Iran nuclear fuel swap is putting everyone in an awkward position ahead of a meeting between Clinton and Davutoğlu
AA photo
AA photo

Turkey’s assertive role in regional impasses, from the Gaza crisis to Iran’s nuclear defiance, has acquired new complexity in the wake of an Israeli attack on aid ships bound for the besieged Palestinian strip and since Brazil angered American officials by releasing a confidential April letterfrom the U.S. president that encouraged Ankara and Brasilia to seek a deal with Tehran.

The script of Turkey’s new “strategic depth” doctrine of engagement with neighbors has shifted and reshaped many times in recent years and suddenly it has transformed once again around what might be called “tactical breadth,” centered on policy initiatives that are drawing applause from some quarters, anger from others.

Related
Read the confidential letter that US President Barack Obama sent to Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

For starters, an irate Israel sent its naval forces to storm an aid flotilla carrying hundreds of pro-Palestinian activists in international waters before dawn on Monday, reportedly killing at least 10 activists, some of them Turkish nationals.

In response, the Turkish government warned of “irreparable consequences” and recalled its ambassador. There’s little doubt the attack will further strain Turkish-Israeli relations.

While nominally the project of an international group of nongovernmental organizations, the six-ship flotilla was apparently seen by the Israeli government as an extension of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s increasingly harsh stance toward Israel – a shift that began for many with the “one-minute” tirade last year at the World Economic Forum in Davos when he told Israeli President Shimon Peres: “You know well how to kill people,” referring Israel’s deadly war on Gaza that started in December 2008.

The diplomatic tension between the two allies worsened after Israel’s deputy foreign minister, Danny Ayalon, gave Turkey’s ambassador a public dressing down in January to protest a Turkish television series that criticized Israel. Soon after, the Turkish prime minister called Israel “the main threat to peace in the Middle East,” following Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman’s comments likening him to the leaders of Libya and Venezuela.

Erdoğan’s stance has gained widespread support on Arab streets but many experts, diplomats and observers in Turkey have voiced their concerns over the deteriorating relations, adding their voice to those in Israel who fear Turkey is shifting from East to West.

Aiding allies’ enemy?

While linking the chill in Turkish-Israeli relations to the Justice and Development Party’s, or AKP, change in Turkey’s foreign policy, Israeli professor Efraim Inbar said Turkey was drifting apart from the West, “which also includes Israel.”

“I think, Turkey has moved away from the West after the AKP’s second election victory. The Turkish foreign policy is being reshaped and the clearest example of this shift is the relations with Israel,” Inbar told the daily Cumhuriyet over the weekend.

Responding to a question over an aid convoy to Gaza, Inbar rejected the criticism over Israel’s threat to the flotilla and its blockade on the strip. “We are in an ongoing war with Gaza and Hamas is our enemy. I’ve never heard the United States or the United Kingdom sending aid to Germany during World War II.”

Describing Turkey’s de facto aid to Hamas as a “disappointing” move, Inbar also said: “Gaza is battling against our Jewish state and wants to destroy it. We are sending aid to Gaza and the situation there is not as bad as it has been claimed by some.”

Israel’s ambassador to Turkey, Gabby Levy, also echoed Inbar’s remarks in an interview with private television channel CNNTürk and labeled the aid convoy “provocation” in the already tense region. While insisting that, “there is no humanitarian tragedy” in Gaza, Levy said: “Gaza has witnessed a huge destruction and we don’t deny this. But instead of using them to build a hospital, Hamas is making tunnels with the building materials. That’s why we don’t allow those materials.”

According to Inbar, Turkey is the only Western country that supports Iran’s nuclear drive, Hamas rule in the Gaza Strip and Sudan’s controversial President Omar al-Bashir, who has been accused of crimes against humanity. “We have never heard the Erdoğan government criticizing [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad. On the contrary, it even sent a congratulation message to him after he was re-elected. However, Erdoğan has been only slamming Israel.”

In hot pursuit of ‘tactical breadth’

The nuclear question appears to be a main ingredient in the latest transformation of Turkey’s foreign policy. On the one hand voicing criticism of Israel’s assumed nuclear arsenal while on the other supporting Iran’s ambitions in the nuclear realm are two positions that contradict much of the policy of Turkey’s NATO allies.

Before the bloody confrontation off the coast of Gaza, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva brokered the May 17 nuclear swap deal under which Iran agreed to ship 1,200 kilograms of low enriched uranium to Turkey, and in turn to receive 120 kilograms of nuclear fuel for its Tehran reactor.

Since then, Brazil and Turkey have repeatedly urged the U.N. Security Council to refrain from a new wave of harsher sanctions against the Islamic republic, arguing the deal reflects concessions the West has long sought. But the United States, its allies and even Russia, which has the closest political ties to Tehran of any major world power, voiced their skepticism over the nuclear deal.

But now revelation of a letter outlining a similar nuclear fuel swap deal that the United States had unsuccessfully pursued in October has put the White House in an awkward position. In the April 20 letter, which the White House did not dispute, the U.S. president thanks his Brazilian counterpart for meeting with him and Erdoğan on the sidelines of the U.S.-hosted nuclear security summit about a possible confidence building measure with Iran.

While Obama expresses skepticism in the letter about Iran’s willingness to send its uranium abroad and its motivations for pursuing negotiations with Brazil and Turkey after rejecting a similar deal put forward by the U.N.’s atomic guardian, International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, in October, he also appears to put forward terms for an acceptable fuel swap deal that are very similar to those in an agreement that the Brazil and Turkey signed with Iran.

“For us, Iran’s agreement to transfer 1,200 kg of low-enriched uranium [LEU] out of the country would build confidence and reduce regional tensions by substantially reducing Iran’s LEU stockpile,” Obama wrote, according to a copy of the letter posted May 27 on the website of Brazil’s foreign ministry. Both Brazil and Turkey had protested that their Tehran talks were fully vetted by Washington, but a letter on White House stationary placed the matter in new light.

Guide for swap deal

Brazilian officials, who are shocked that the United States is raising objections to the agreement and its terms, have said Lula and Erdoğan used Obama’s letter as a guide when they negotiated a deal with Tehran.

Brazil’s foreign minister, Celso Amorim, said his government was encouraged “to implement the proposals in October, without deviation, and we did.” As for the 20 percent enrichment, he said, “Nobody told us, ‘Hey, if you do not stop the enrichment to 20 percent, forget the deal.'”

The Washington Post said Erdoğan also received a similar letter.

While dismissing the letter as “selective” leaking, a senior U.S. official also said Obama’s letter was designed to deal with a discrete problem, adding it has been in regular contact with Brazil and Turkey.

“It was a letter that was responding to something they were doing, in which we were pointing out that what you are doing falls well short of what we were seeking,” the Washington Post quoted him as saying on Friday.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is expected to meet with her Turkish counterpart, Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu, next week, where the Iran deal would be further discussed, officials also said.

According to some sources, the letter was clear evidence that Washington was changing the goal in favor of harsher sanctions against Tehran, but the leaked letter was also seen as a sign of Brazilian resentment to what it sees as its and Turkey’s diplomatic triumph that was snubbed by the United States and other big powers.

“Sure, had Brazil and Turkey actually persuaded the Iranians to verifiably end their whole suspected nuclear weapons program, America would have endorsed it. But that is not what happened,” the New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman said. Instead, Friedman said, the deal has weaken the global coalition to pressure Iran to open its nuclear facilities to U.N. inspectors.

“Turkey and Brazil are both nascent democracies that have overcome their own histories of military rule. For their leaders to embrace and strengthen an Iranian president who uses his army and police to crush and kill Iranian democrats – people seeking the same freedom of speech and political choice that Turks and Brazilians now enjoy – is shameful,” he wrote last week.

Ending double standards on NPT

Meanwhile, Obama’s Iran letter surfaced just as the United Nations was concluding a month-long round of talks aimed at updating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, or NPT.

Western diplomats said on Saturday that the United States has agreed on a document that urges Israel to join the treaty and subject its nuclear facilities to oversight by the IAEA in a development widely credited to Turkey’s insistence on an end to double standards.

Muslim nations, led by Turkey and Egypt, have been lobbying hard at international arena to force Israel to disclose its assumed nuclear arsenal and sign the same treaty that Iran has agreed to. Turkey and Egypt’s intention to raise the issue at Obama’s nuclear summit in April had made Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to cancel his visit to Washington. He is expected to meet the U.S. president on Tuesday to discuss Iran, the peace process with the Palestinians and the NPT.

On Saturday, Israel sharply criticized the U.N. move, calling the plan “deeply flawed.” “It ignores the realities of the Middle East and the real threats facing the region and the entire world,” Israel added.

The plan “singles out Israel, the Middle East’s only true democracy and the only country threatened with annihilation,” the statement said. “Yet the terrorist regime in Iran, which is racing to develop nuclear weapons and which openly threatens to wipe Israel off the map, is not even mentioned.”

On Sunday, a senior Israeli official said Netanyahu was given “unequivocal assurances” from Obama that the accord agreeing to talks on a nuclear weapons-free Mideast would not endanger Israel. The premier was “promised that there would be no resolutions adopted at the U.N. that would hurt the vital interests of Israel,” the official added.

BNP activist killed, several arrested in clashes with police

The Baloch Hal News

QUETTA: One protestor was killed while five others wounded in firing in Shahbaz Town, area of the provincial capital, here on Saturday.

Balochistan National Party (BNP-Mengal) and National Party (NP) have held police and personnel of Frontier Corps (FC) responsible for firing on peaceful protestors.

Police had arrested over 50 persons in raids last night from different area of Quetta City in connection with the killing of four police officials, including SHO Satellite Town Police Station who were targeted on Friday morning.

The workers of BNP blocked different roads of the city, including Double Road and Sariab Road by burning old tyres to protest the arrests.

Police resorted to shelling and aerial firing to disperse the protestors, besides arresting Secretary General of BNP Habib Jalib Advocate and former MPA Akthar Hussain Langov.

A group of protestors were trying to block roads in Shahbaz Town area where law enforcing agencies fired tear gas, besides making aerial firing as a result six protestors sustained injuries.

The injured were being shifted to Civil Hospital Quetta for medical aid where one of the injured identified as Naseer Ahmed Langov succumbed to his injuries. The name of three injured protestors were identified as Zubair, Lal Muhammad and Abdul Wahid. Deceased person was cousin of Akthar Hussain Langov, the central leader of BNP.

Following the killing of BNP activists, situation became more tense in different parts of the metropolis and the BNP activists further got infuriated and again blocked roads at Double Road, Sariab Road and Mano Jan Road that caused a massive traffic jam in the city and inconvenience to the commuters.

Later on, protestors brought the dead body of Naseer Ahmed Langov at Quetta Press Club and staged a protest demonstration against the incident.

Protestors were chanting slogans against security forces and demanding humanitarian organizations and United Nations for taking immediate notice of alleged atrocities of state forces.

Addressing a news conference and protestors, the leaders of BNP and NP including, Jahanziab Baloch, Acting General Secretary of BNP, Agha Hassan Advocate, Shafkat Langov and Khalid Langov of NP condemned the killing of Naseer Ahmed and said that police and FC were responsible for his killing and injuring other protestors.

They strongly criticised Governor and Chief Minister of Balochistan and alleged that they had given license to law enforcing agencies to kill innocent Balochs.

They said that both Governor and Chief Minister should learn a lesson from the fate of former Chief Minister of Balochistan Jam Muhammad Yousuf who had no place in Balochistan even for hiding himself.

Speakers said that killing of Baloch was continuing for the last 63 years and they would not make any demand or appeal from state institutions rather they would ask international community and NATO for intervention to save Balochs from the excesses of state institutions.

Announcing a protest schedule, they said that protest demonstrations would be held on 30th, May across the province while shutter down and wheel jam strikes would be held on June 1st, and 2nd respectively against the killing of Naseer Langov.

They said that if the personnel of law enforcing agencies who were responsible for opening firing on a peaceful protest were not arrested, protests would remain continued.

Leaders of Baloch National Front (BNF), including Agha Ashraf Dilsoz and Yousuf Baloch also addressed a press conference outside Quetta Press Club.

BNF leaders strongly condemned the killing of Naseer Langov and firing on protestors, saying state forces wanted to crash Baloch national struggle for their independence.

They said that Balochs would continue their struggle and such acts of killing of innocent Balochs could not deviate Balochs from their genuine struggle.

In the meanwhile, BNP workers also burnt tyres in Khuzdar, Wadh, Kalat and Mastung. They blocked the Quetta-Karachi for all types of traffic that caused inconvenience to the commuters.

Turkey to Call UN Meeting over Israeli Attack, Recalls Envoy

Turkey to Call UN Meeting over Israeli Attack, Recalls Envoy

Readers Number : 413

Turkey will call an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council over Israel’s deadly raid on aid ships bound for the Gaza Strip, a Turkish diplomat told AFP Monday as above tens of thousands of people went out to Turkish streets condemning the Israeli inhumane act.

Turkey also recalled its ambassador from Tel Aviv Monday, Deputy Prime Minister Bulent Arinc said. “Our ambassador to Israel has been recalled to Ankara,” Arinc told a press conference. He said plans for three joint military exercises with Israel had been scrapped.

Turkey’s foreign ministry condemned the Israeli operation following the Israeli attack Gaza-bound aid ships in international waters saying it may lead to “irreparable consequences” in bilateral ties.

“By targeting civilians, Israel has once again shown its disregard for human life and peaceful initiatives. We strongly condemn these inhumane practices of Israel,” the Turkish foreign ministry said in a statement. “This deplorable incident, which took place in open seas and constitutes a fragrant breach of international law, may lead to irreparable consequences in our bilateral relations,” it said. “Israel will have to bear the consequences of this behavior, which constitutes a violation of international law,” it said.

The Israeli envoy was summoned to the foreign ministry. Israeli ambassador Gabby Levy held a 20-minute meeting with a senior foreign ministry official and left the ministry without making a statement. He was told that “Turkey retains all its rights under international law concerning this assault,” a Turkish diplomat, who asked not to be named, told AFP. “We are considering the actions that we may take under international law,” he said. High-ranking Turkish source said that there’s a possibility that the Israeli ambassador would be expelled.

Turkey also asked for a detailed report on the fate of all people who were aboard the vessels, he said, adding that they included nationals from a total of 33 countries. Levy was also told that the Turkish passengers and the wounded should be repatriated to Turkey in the shortest possible time and the vessels released, he said.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyeb Erdogan cancelled his trip to Chile over the Israeli crime and headed to Ankara to follow up the crisis. Also, Turkey’s army chief cut short a visit to Egypt Monday after the deadly Israeli operation and a rocket attack on a navy base in southern Turkey, Anatolia news agency reported. General Ilker Basbug was expected to arrive in Ankara later in the day, the report said.

Turkish vessels were part of an international flotilla carrying aid to the Gaza Strip, which Israeli forces stormed early Monday.

“TANKS AND STONES WILL BE YOUR DEFEAT!”

Meanwhile, Tens of thousands gathered to protest in Turkey’s biggest city Istanbul Monday following the deadly Israeli raid. Under the watch of police, at least 10,000 marched on the city’s central Taksim square from the Israeli consulate.

“Damn Israel!”, “A tooth for a tooth, an eye for an eye, revenge, revenge!” the protesters chanted, carrying Turkish and Palestinian flags, as they marched towards the square, an AFP photographer said. “Close down the Zionist embassy,” read a banner carried by the crowd. Police closed all roads along the protesters’ route to traffic as their numbers swelled.

Passers-by expressed their support by applauding the protesters on their march, television reports said. The group had earlier protested outside the Israeli consulate, chanting anti-Israeli slogans, as police kept them from approaching the building.

In a second demonstration, a crowd of about 500 people gathered outside the residence of Israeli ambassador Gabby Levy in Ankara, calling Israel a murderer and reciting prayers. “Damn the Zionist murderers!”, “Israel will drown in the blood of the martyrs!” chanted the protesters. Several demonstrators threw eggs and plastic bottles into the garden of the residency which is surrounded by a high wall before they were warned by police to cease their actions. A large banner reading “Tanks and stones will be your defeat” was hung at the entrance of the street facing the residency.

Two TV networks reported earlier that Israeli warships attacked the six ships carrying pro-Palestinian activists and aid for blockaded Gaza, killing 20 and wounding dozens of people on board.

A Turkish charity involved with the flotilla told AFP in Gaza that at least 15 people were killed in the Israeli navy raid, most of them Turkish nationals. “Fifteen people were killed in the raid, most of them Turkish nationals,” said Mohammed Kaya, who heads the Gaza branch of the IHH, a Turkish charity involved with organizing the fleet of aid ships. “We were not expecting such an operation in international waters,” Omer Faruk Korkmaz, an official of the IHH, said. “Israel has been caught red-handed and the international community will not forgive it.” Korkmaz said the ship was being escorted to Haifa.

Murat Mercan, a lawmaker from Erdogan’s ruling party, said: “I was expecting an intervention. I was not expecting bloodshed, the use of arms and bullets.” “Israel is engaged in activity that will extremely hurt its image,” he said.

Hamas resistance movement urged Arabs and Muslims to “rise up” in front of Israeli embassies across the globe in protest against the deadly raid.
Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE AR-SA MicrosoftInternetExplorer4   /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:”Table Normal”; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:””; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}

Israeli Massacres Go International–Commandos Kill 20 Free Gaza Activists

Israeli Massacres Go International; Commandos Kill 20 Free Gaza Activists

Readers Number : 1398
Source: Today’s Zaman (Turkey)

31/05/2010 Israeli occupation forces massacred 20 activists on board the Gaza-bound “Freedom” flotilla Sunday overnight and Monday, according to the Israeli TV. 60 other people were also injured. The killing took place in international waters.

Among the injured, leader of the Islamic Movement’s northern branch in the occupied territories Sheikh Raed Salah whose injuries are serious, according to reports.

Israeli marine commandos had opened fire as they stormed one of the ships the (Mavi Marmara). Israeli television justified the commandos’ massacre claiming that the soldiers were attacked with knives and axes, but did not elaborate. The Israeli censor blocks all reports on the activists murdered on the flotilla.

According to a reporter on one of the ships, the Israeli occupation army raided all vessels from the sea and air at the same time and informed all of the passengers that they were under arrest.

The Israeli vessels, the report said, attacked the flotilla in international waters with aerial reinforcement, using gas. A Qatari television channel broadcast live the dramatic images from the ships, with Hamas spokespeople giving interviews and vowing to punish Israel for “the new crime”.

The images showed Commando soldiers with their faces covered. A fighter in uniform, wearing a gas mask, tried to block the camera with his hand, while more and more troops raided the ship after sliding down from a helicopter using a rope.

One of the passengers on the ship called out to the Navy vessels, “Don’t attack us. We are unarmed civilians. There are injured people onboard.”

The calls were first made in English, and were later joined by Knesset Member Hanin Zuabi (Balad), who called out to the ships in Hebrew.

Turkey summoned the Israeli ambassador to the Turkish foreign ministry Monday. “The ambassador (Gabby Levy) was summoned to the foreign ministry. We will convey our reaction in the strongest terms,” the diplomat, who asked not to be named, told AFP.

Hezbollah condemns Israel’s threats against Hariri

English.news.cn
BEIRUT, May 31 (Xinhua) — Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah on Monday slammed Israel’s threats against Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri, saying they are a proof that the Jewish state intends to attack “all Lebanese factions.”

Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Daniel Ayalon said on Saturday that the western-backed Hariri “will pay a heavy price in the event of any war between Israel and Lebanon”.

The country’s state-run National News Agency (NNA) quoted Lebanese Minister of Agriculture Hussein Hajj Hassan, who is also a member of Hezbollah’s parliamentary bloc, as saying that the Israeli threats against Hariri prove that Israel aims to attack all the Lebanese, regardless of their factions.

“These threats will enhance the country’s unity against Israel, ” he said.

Hezbollah fought a devastating war with Israel in 2006. The Shiite group, backed by Iran and Syria, is the only Lebanese armed faction.

Kurdish rebel rocket attack kills six at Turkish navy base

[HAS ISRAEL ACTIVATED ITS KURDISH ALLIES BECAUSE OF ITS FOOLISH BOARDING ASSAULT?   SEE:   Is Israel training Kurds?]

Vodpod videos no longer available.

more about “Mossad Training Kurds In Northern Iraq“, posted with vodpod

Kurdish rebel rocket attack kills six at Turkish navy base

Turkish soldier standing guard

ANKARA : Kurdish rebels fired rockets at a Turkish naval base Monday killing six troops in the latest assault on a military target since a jailed Kurdish rebel leader signalled an end to peace efforts.

Seven soldiers were wounded in the attack on a military vehicle carrying troops to guard duty in the southern city of Iskenderun, Hatay province, provincial governor Mehmet Celalettin Lekesiz was quoted as saying by Anatolia news agency.

The attack was carried out by members of the “separatist terrorist organization”, Lekesiz said, using the official jargon for the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) leading a 25-year insurgency.

“Security operations were continuing,” he said, adding that additional police and troops were deployed after the attack.

Media reports said three of the wounded soldiers were in critical condition in a military hospital in Ankara.

There was no immediate claim of responsibility by the PKK, an outlawed separatist group whose leader Abdullah Ocalan decided to abandon efforts to seek dialogue with the Turkish government.

Five members of Turkey’s security forces were killed on Saturday in a string of attacks that gave a strong sign that Kurdish peace efforts are unravelling.

Army chief General Ilker Basbug cut short a visit to Egypt after the rocket attack and a deadly Israeli operation on an aid convoy headed to the Gaza Strip, which included several Turkish vessels.

Ocalan was jailed for life in 1999 but has retained his influence over the PKK from his prison cell on Imrali island, often issuing guidelines to rebels in statements released through his lawyers.

His calls for dialogue have been rejected by the government, which insists the PKK either lay down its arms or face the army, and he was quoted in a party mouthpiece over the weekend as having given up his pursuit of dialogue.

“Keeping up this process is no longer meaningful and useful. I am quitting after May 31 since I could not find an interlocutor,” Ocalan was quoted by the Ozgur Politika newspaper as telling his lawyers during a recent prison visit.

Ocalan however said his decision did not amount to a call for the PKK to intensify its armed campaign.

“This should not be misunderstood. This is not a call for a war,” he said, according to Saturday’s Ozgur Politika.

Following a usual winter lull, violence has broken out anew in the southeast. The melting of winter snow has allowed the rebels to move out from their mountain hideouts in Turkey and neighbouring Iraq.

The PKK, listed as a terrorist group by Turkey and much of the international community, took up arms in 1984, sparking a conflict that has claimed some 45,000 lives.

Last year, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s government announced it would expand Kurdish freedoms in a bid to peacefully end the conflict.

The initiative however has faltered, amid bitterness over the government’s decision to ban the main Kurdish party and public outrage at bloody PKK attacks.

“What We Have Seen This Morning Is A War Crime”

“What We Have Seen This Morning Is A War Crime”

Dr Erakat:


RAMALLAH, May 31, 2010 (WAFA)- Head of the PLO Negotiations Affairs Department Dr. Saeb Erakat has strongly condemned this morning’s “brutal attacks” of Israeli forces against the Gaza Flotilla.

The Gaza Flotilla is an international effort to break the Israeli siege on Gaza, bringing tons of humanitarian aid to help the 1.5 million Palestinians besieged there.

“What we have seen this morning is a war crime. These were civilian ships carrying civilians and civilian goods – medicine, wheelchairs, food, construction materials – intended for the 1.5 million Palestinians holed up under a cruel and criminal siege by Israel. And for that, many have paid with their lives.  What Israel does in Gaza is appalling; no informed and decent human can say otherwise.”

“The unarmed civilian activists were attacked on foreign vessels while sailing in international waters.   This is another incident confirming that Israel acts as a state above the law.  The international community must take swift and appropriate action. ”

Dr Erakat referred to the current status of Gaza. “The Israeli government has been trying to deny that Gaza is under occupation. But the fact that Israel is preventing humanitarian aid to freely access the besieged strip clearly shows that Gaza is still occupied.”

The chief Palestinian negotiator called on the international community to “act immediately to end the illegal Israeli siege and to protect the civilians savagely attacked by Israeli forces.”

Turks rally against Israeli attack

Turks rally against Israeli attack

Protesters denounced the raid on Gaza aid ships by Israel [Reuters]

Tens of thousands of people have taken to the streets in the Turkish city of Istanbul to denounce Israel over its attack on the convoy of Gaza-bound aid ships that left at least 15 people dead.

Around 10,000 people marched from the Israeli consulate in Istanbul towards the city’s main square on Monday, shouting slogans and waving banners saying “Killer Israel”.

Protests also took place in Ankara, the capital.

A Turkish charity has said most of those killed in the raid on six ships in international waters were Turkish nationals.

Earlier on Monday protesters attempted to storm the Israeli consulate, scaling over the compound’s walls, but were blocked from going further by police.

Israel has advised its citizens to avoid travel to Turkey and instructed those already there to keep a low profile and avoid crowded downtown areas.

Emergency UN meeting

Turkey’s foreign ministry has condemned the Israeli raid, and recalled its ambassador to Israel.

It has also called for an emergency United Nations meeting over the incident, an unnamed diplomat has said.

LIVE BLOGGING
Aftermath of Israel’s attack on Gaza flotilla

“We are preparing to call for a meeting of the UN Security Council on the issue,” the diplomat said without explaining what action Ankara would demand against Israel.

Turkey’s deputy prime minister added that the nation would be cancelling three joint military exercises and recalling a youth soccer team from Israel.

Anita McNaught, Al Jazeera’s correspondent in Istanbul, said relations between Israel and Turkey have deteriorated since the Gaza war.

“Up til that point they had … a constructive military alliance and for many years they saw the issue of domestic terrorism as one they had to share information about.

“But since the Gaza war relations have nose-dived and it would be absolutely fair to say that this is the lowest point,” she said.

International condemnation

Israeli forces stormed the so-called Freedom Flotilla, which was carrying hundreds of pro-Palestinian activists and tonnes of aid, while they were 65km off the Gaza coast in international waters.

The action has brought widespread condemnation, with the EU foreign affairs chief demanding that Israeli authorities mount a “full inquiry” into the attack.

Catherine Ashton also reiterated a longstanding demand for “an immediate, sustained and unconditional opening of the crossings for the flow of humanitarian aid, commercial goods and persons to and from Gaza,” a spokesman said.

France and the UN’s Mideast envoy have also condemned the attack, while Greece suspended a military exercise with Israel and postponed a visit by Israel’s air force chief.

More protests denouncing the action are planned in London later on Monday.

The some 700 activists on board the flotilla included people from many different countries, including United States, Britain, Australia, Greece, Canada, Malaysia, Algeria, Serbia, Belgium, Ireland, Norway, Sweden and Kuwait.

The majority were Turkish.

Multiple Deaths as Israeli forces storm Gaza aid ship

[ISLAND OF DEMOCRACY IN THE MIDDLE EAST, MY ASS!]

Vodpod videos no longer available.
more about “Multiple Deaths as Israeli forces sto…“, posted with vodpod

Deaths as Israeli forces storm Gaza aid ship

More than 10 people have been killed after Israeli commandos stormed a convoy of ships carrying aid to the Gaza Strip, the Israeli army says.

Armed forces boarded the largest vessel overnight, clashing with some of the 500 people on board.

It happened about 40 miles (64 km) out to sea, in international waters.

Israel says its soldiers were shot at and attacked with weapons; the activists say Israeli troops came on board shooting.

The European Union has called for an inquiry to establish what happened.

‘Guns and knives’

The six-ship flotilla, carrying 10,000 tonnes of aid, left the coast of Cyprus on Sunday and had been due to arrive in Gaza on Monday.

Israel says its soldiers boarded the lead ship in the early hours but were attacked with axes, knives, bars and at least two guns.


We were not going to pose any violent resistance

Audrey Bomse Free Gaza Movement

“Unfortunately this group were dead-set on confrontation,” Israeli government spokesman Mark Regev told the BBC.

“Live fire was used against our forces. They initiated the violence, that’s 100% clear,” he said.

Organisers of the flotilla said at least 30 people were wounded in the incident. Israel says 10 of its soldiers were injured, one seriously.

A leader of Israel’s Islamic Movement, Raed Salah, who was on board, was among those hurt.

Audrey Bomse, a spokesperson for the Free Gaza Movement, which is behind the convoy, told the BBC Israel’s actions were disproportionate.

“We were not going to pose any violent resistance. The only resistance that there might be would be passive resistance such as physically blocking the steering room, or blocking the engine room downstairs, so that they couldn’t get taken over. But that was just symbolic resistance.”

She said there was “absolutely no evidence of live fire”.

Israel says it will tow the boats to the port of Ashdod and deport the passengers from there. It says it will deliver the ships’ aid to Gaza.

Condemnation

Turkish TV pictures taken on board the Turkish ship leading the flotilla appeared to show Israeli soldiers fighting to control passengers.

The footage showed a number of people, apparently injured, lying on the ground. A woman was seen holding a blood-stained stretcher.

Al-Jazeera TV reported from the same ship that Israeli navy forces had opened fire and boarded the vessel, wounding the captain.

The Al-Jazeera broadcast ended with a voice shouting in Hebrew, saying: “Everybody shut up!”

Israel’s deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon said his country “regrets any loss of life and did everything to avoid this outcome”.

He accused the convoy of a “premeditated and outrageous provocation”, describing the flotilla as an “armada of hate”.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas condemned Israel’s actions, saying it had committed a massacre.

Most of the people on board the boats were Turkish.

Turkey said it “strongly condemn[ed] these inhumane practices of Israel”, AFP news agency reported.

In Turkey, dozens of protesters tried to storm the Israeli consulate in the Istanbul, while Israeli ambassadors have been summoned to the Turkish, Greek and Spanish foreign ministries to explain what happened.

Blockade

Israel had repeatedly said it would stop the boats, calling the campaign a “provocation intended to delegitimise Israel”.

Israel and Egypt tightened a blockade of Gaza after the Islamist movement Hamas took power there in 2007.

Israel says it allows about 15,000 tonnes of humanitarian aid into Gaza every week.

But the United Nations says this is less than a quarter of what is needed.

The incident comes a day before Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is due to meet US President Barack Obama in Washington after one of the most strained periods in US-Israeli relations in years.

An immediate threat, or a preparatory signal to attack Pakistan in the future?

An immediate threat, or a preparatory signal to attack Pakistan in the future?

The WaPo is a mouth piece front for gossip and posturing for sections of the American intelligence community and Jewish elite of the JEWSA. Most of what it writes is pure fiction, but also crucially represents the views and perspectives of certain important people in the JEWSA who through this particular paper articulate and sound out their fundamental policies to the rest of America.

It played a prominent role in the fake drum beat towards war against Iraq.

That Secretary of State Clinton should be threatening Pakistan with unilateral attacks, just as she has been doing for a couple of years Iran and North Korea is no surprise.

NORTH KOREA is belligerent and tough in the face of USA threats, and is backed by China.

IRAN is belligerent and tough in the face of USA threats, and is backed by Syria, Turkey increasingly it seems, and Russia China to an extent.

PAKISTAN on the other hand is the proverbial monkey dancing to the American organ grinder. The more the Americans grind their repulsive tune of endless attacks against Pakistani civilians, AND shouting/demanding orders for endless security ops in the NWFP the more the Pakistani monkey dances……..lacking the common sense and wit that this is all heading towards ultimate KIAMAT and total disaster for Pakistan.

The Pakistani military and Zardari cannot see that the simultaneous attacks by America and the Pakistani military against the Pakistani people is there to weaken the long term cohesion and survival of the Pakistani state.

The USA has been attacking Pakistan slowly especially since 2006, through destabilization and infiltration under the guise of being an essential friend of Pakistan.

The average Pakistani (90%) applying his simple common sense actually know this reality, but the top brass of the Pakistani military trained in the UK/USA can’t see this, and…………..OR or as with the top politicians of the PPP have simply been bought with big fat Swiss bank accounts. Zardari is protected by mercenary Christian Fundamentalist American forces based in and around Islamabad, not by Pakistani security.

Under International Law, affirmed by cases after cases Pakistan has a duty to aid, shelter, feed and arm the Afghan resistance against any alien occupying power in Afghanistan under the principles of “Self Determination”, just as Pakistan did with the Afghan resistance under Soviet occupation 1980–1989. In 9 years of war the Soviet Union never murmured once about Pakistan’s training of 85,000 Mujaheddin fighters and 12,000 Jihadis from various Muslim countries, armed and funded by the USA, Israel and the Gulf countries.

The Soviet Union after 9 years of fighting lost 20,000 dead/MIA and 50,000 wounded in Afghanistan.

The USA after 9 years of fighting has lost 1000 dead and about 3000 wounded in Afghanistan……….but is already complaining that it is Pakistan’s fault for “not doing enough” or Iran’s fault. For good measure as a strategy of pressure and blackmail the USA has also carried out a false flag terror op in NY and blamed it on the TTP, which also regularly claims to carry out terror ops within Pakistan very successfully, unlike the NY fizzle bomb.

The TTP is believed to be an American intelligence front made of ex-Guantanamo detainees who have subsequently been turned, and thus given freedom.

The criminal Kleptocracy of Zardari along with the all powerful military fully and mysteriously cooperates with this fake narrative AGAINST PAKISTAN’S INTERESTS without the slightest bit of murmur or public contradiction…………just like trained monkey’s to the American organ grinder.

The Pakistani elite and media by aiding the JEWSA with the “al-Qaeda” myth, and sending the same Jehadis into Indian Kashmir since 1989, have turned what was wholly a domestic Afghan resistance movement with very specific local intentions, dominated and run by Pakistan for Pakistan…….have inadvertently conflated the Afghan Taliban through the miscalculated policies of the Pakistan military with international terrorism. The slippery JEWSA is merely exploiting this miscalculation.

I have always argued that the Pakistanis need to disengage from the USA fully, rather than try to maintain the rather paradoxical, unsustainable and one may say deeply dishonest position of being on the one hand an ally of the USA taking billions $ worth of aid, allowing American military personnel and mercenaries into sensitive parts of the country, whilst simultaneously hosting the Taliban Afghan Shura in Quetta, who are directly responsible for the death of American servicemen in Afghanistan.

It can’t go on like this.

Pakistan logically needs to eject the Taliban Afghan Shura, even if they are not related to the TTP……… ……..even if they clearly have no internationalist pretensions, and therefore highly unlikely to have undertaken the false flag attack in NY recently.

The slippery bankrupt JEWSA is desperate, and is groping around for any excuse to attack Pakistan MORE COMPREHENSIVELY, then the current levels through drone attacks.

______________________________________

U.S. To Plan Pakistan Strike

White House eyes retaliation if Taliban pull off major strike inside U.S.

By GREG MILLER (Hopefully not related to Judith Miller)

Washington Post — The U.S. military is reviewing options for a unilateral strike in Pakistan in the event that a successful attack on American soil is traced to the country’s tribal areas, according to senior military officials.

(Thats been the talk since 2004 at least, and is building momentum as more American servicemen and mercenaries swamp Pakistan, and the Zardari government becomes more dependent on USA largess——the actual ultimate objective is of course to secure Pakistan’s nukes for Israel {an Israeli objective since the 1970’s}, so that in the event of an Israeli nuclear attack against Iran {Israeli nuclear armed submarines are already in the Persian Gulf} Pakistan won’t be able to come to the rescue of Iran in any possible way…….as it will have been occupied quietly by the USA …….also an Israeli attack on Iran will obviously have political repercussions on Pakistan, a neighbor.

Also we must remember that Bush in his secret talks with Blair in January 2003 and subsequently leaked by 2 British civil servants, did say that after Iraq, Iran would be invaded, and then Pakistan…….thus the objective has not changed, but the time line has.

In signing the pipeline deal with Iran after 16 years of hard negotiation, perhaps Pakistan is signaling that it does not want to obediently wait in the queue, after Iran is attacked to be occupied by the USA eventually…….though the security cooperation with Iran is superficial and Kiyani has no linkages with his counterparts in Iran. Common sense again tells us that since both countries are on the “list” of to do and attack by the USA that both countries should fully cooperate in the security sphere. This is natural survival instinct, not even high politics and sophisticated strategizing.

OF course there will be counter measures to create schism between the two….such as Shia/Sunni animosity, but the two must act clearly for their mutual interests )

Ties between the alleged Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad, and elements of the Pakistani Taliban have sharpened the Obama administration’s need for retaliatory options, the officials said.

(Disinformation—–There are no ties; TTP have not taken credit, realizing even as American intelligence fronts the very serious nature for them {being attacked by the Pakistan military and the American military simultaneously} should such acts be traced back to them……Shahzad’s sheer amateurish and inexplicable action in NY suggests he had no training in Pakistan under the TTP, and the TTP have not claimed him as their own……the TTP understands that their job for the USA is to destabilize Pakistan which they have successfully done since 2006………..NOT conduct attacks against the USA, which logistically as puppets of the USA they are wholly incapable of doing, but as OBL found out in 2001 which he subsequently denied to the Pakistani media, the American’s often have a habit of changing the job description of their created puppets without telling their puppets…….

Warning to Kiyani

Warning to Zardari

But as Musharaf found out in 2007-8, as Zia ul Haq found out, as Ayub Khan found out eventually…”Friends not Masters”)

They stressed that a U.S. reprisal would be contemplated only under extreme circumstances, such as a catastrophic attack that leaves President Obama convinced that the ongoing campaign of CIA drone strikes is insufficient.

(The American security state is so huge consuming perhaps as much as $1.5 trillion each year, and so sophisticated according to Chalmers Johnson {ex-CIA analyst} that it simply is not possible for two bit organizations such as the TTP to conduct terror ops in the USA. The TTP it must be repeated again and again is an American intelligence front created out of ex-Guantanamo detainees to attack Pakistani targets within Pakistan, and thus squeeze Pakistan towards the USA’s way of thinking……………nearly ALL the big and medium terror ops in the USA are conducted by the USA government for specific agenda’s…….introducing MRE security laws which give the state greater powers, and puts potential foreign targets on their back foot….Afghanistan 2001, Iraq 2003, Iran, Pakistan, Syria and so on)

“Planning has been reinvigorated in the wake of Times Square,” one of the officials said…………..(this has been ongoing since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, and when the Clinton’s came to power in 1993…….2010)

‘(Con)Fusion centers’ (centers for destabilization of Pakistan)

At the same time, the administration is trying to deepen ties to Pakistan’s intelligence officials in a bid to head off any attack by militant groups. The United States and Pakistan have recently established a joint military intelligence center on the outskirts of the northwestern city of Peshawar, and are in negotiations to set up another one near Quetta, the Pakistani city where the Afghan Taliban is based, according to the U.S. military officials. They and other officials spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity surrounding U.S. military and intelligence activities in Pakistan.

(The ISI was created by the departing British Raj, as its primary instrument of influence in its former colony…….so London saab was its initial master, so that in the early 1950’s it destabilized civilian governments and paved the way for eventual military takeover of Pakistan in 1958, with Washington’s blessing.

With increased American military and economic aid $4 billion 1950–1969, naturally the USA became the master of the ISI.

At present the USA is the absolute master of the ISI, as the USA bankrolls most of its operations.

The ISI DOES NOTHING WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF THE USA.

The ISI runs the Afghan Taliban for the USA, but not the Pakistan Taliban which is run directly by the USA.

In internet lingo the Afghan Taliban are known as “ineffective Controlled Opposition”…..by the USA, and that is why THEY HAVE A SAFE HAVEN IN QUETTA DIRECTLY UNDER THE NOSES OF THE Americans for 9 uninterrupted years.

Further for the Pakistani people to win real freedom, and avoid being a perennial nuisance to her neighbors {India, Afghanistan, Iran}……..ALL USA Western aid,….. military and economic must be severed.

For the Pakistani people to win real freedom, and avoid being a perennial nuisance to her neighbors……ALL senior figures within government must be trained in Pakistan and not sent on refresher course to London and the USA, where they develop their official mindset and lingo……..Gilani, Kiyani, Haqqani, Zardari…….fine Iranian sounding names….how about acting like the actual people?

For the Pakistani people to win real freedom, and avoid being a perennial nuisance to her neighbors……Pakistan needs to disengage from the American led security operations within Pakistan)

The “fusion centers” are meant to bolster Pakistani military operations by providing direct access to U.S. intelligence, including real-time video surveillance from drones controlled by the U.S. Special Operations Command, the officials said. But in an acknowledgment of the continuing mistrust between the two governments, the officials added that both sides also see the centers as a way to keep a closer eye on one another, as well as to monitor military operations and intelligence activities in insurgent areas.

Obama said during his campaign for the presidency that he would be willing to order strikes in Pakistan, and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said in a television interview after the Times Square attempt that “if, heaven forbid, an attack like this that we can trace back to Pakistan were to have been successful, there would be very severe consequences.”

Obama dispatched his national security adviser, James L. Jones, and CIA Director Leon Panetta to Islamabad this month to deliver a similar message to Pakistani officials, including President Asif Ali Zardari and the military chief, Gen. Ashfaq Kiyani.

Jones and Panetta also presented evidence gathered by U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies that Shahzad received significant support from the Pakistani Taliban.

Retaliatory blows (major intrusion into Pakistani sovereign territory)

The U.S. options for potential retaliatory action rely mainly on air and missile strikes, but could also employ small teams of U.S. Special Operations troops already positioned along the border with Afghanistan. One of the senior military officials said plans for military strikes in Pakistan have been revised significantly over the past several years, moving away from a “large, punitive response” to more measured plans meant to deliver retaliatory blows against specific militant groups.

The official added that there is a broad consensus in the U.S. military that airstrikes would at best erode the threat posed by al-Qaeda and its affiliates, and risk an irreparable rupture in the U.S. relationship with Pakistan.

“The general feeling is that we need to be circumspect in how we respond so we don’t destroy the relationships we’ve built” with the Pakistani military, the second official said.

U.S. Special Operations teams in Afghanistan have pushed for years to have wider latitude to carry out raids across the border, arguing that CIA drone strikes do not yield prisoners or other opportunities to gather intelligence. But a 2008 U.S. helicopter raid against a target in Pakistan prompted protests from officials in Islamabad who oppose allowing U.S. soldiers to operate within their country.

The CIA has the authority to designate and strike targets in Pakistan without case-by-case approval from the White House. U.S. military forces are currently authorized to carry out unilateral strikes in Pakistan only if solid intelligence were to surface on any of three high-value targets: al-Qaeda leaders Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, or Taliban chief Mohammad Omar. But even in those cases, the military would need higher-level approval.

“The bottom line is you have to have information about targets to do something [and] we have a process that remains cumbersome,” said one of the senior military officials. “If something happens, we have to confirm who did it and where it came from. People want to be as precise as possible to be punitive.”

U.S. spy agencies have engaged in a major buildup inside Pakistan over the past year. The CIA has increased the pace of drone strikes against al-Qaeda affiliates, a campaign supported by the arrival of new surveillance and eavesdropping technology deployed by the National Security Agency.

The fusion centers are part of a parallel U.S. military effort to intensify the pressure on the Taliban and other groups accused of directing insurgent attacks in Afghanistan. U.S. officials said that the sharing of intelligence goes both ways and that targets are monitored in both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Delicate trade off

In the Peshawar fusion cell, which was set up within the last several months, Pakistanis have access to “full-motion video from different platforms,” including unarmed surveillance drones, one official said.

The fusion centers also serve a broader U.S. aim: making the Pakistanis more dependent on U.S. intelligence, and less likely to curtail Predator drone patrols or other programs that draw significant public opposition.

To Pakistan, the fusion centers offer a glimpse of U.S. capabilities, as well as the ability to monitor U.S. military operations across the border. “They find out much more about what we know,” one of the senior U.S. military officials said. “What we get is physical presence — to see what they are actually doing versus what they say they’re doing.”

That delicate arrangement will be tested if the two sides reach agreement on the fusion center near Quetta. The city has served for nearly a decade as a sanctuary for Taliban leaders who fled Afghanistan in 2001 and have long-standing ties to Pakistan’s powerful Inter-Services Intelligence directorate.

U.S. officials said that the two sides have done preliminary work searching for a suitable site for the center but that the effort is proceeding at a pace that one official described as “typical Pakistani glacial speed.” Despite the increased cooperation, U.S. officials say they continue to be frustrated over Pakistan’s slow pace in issuing visas to American military and civilian officials.

One senior U.S. military official said the center would be used to track the Afghan Taliban leadership council, known as the Quetta shura. But other officials said the main mission would be to support the U.S. military effort across the border in Kandahar, Afghanistan, where a major U.S. military push is planned.

__________________________________

The more Pakistan entangles itself with the JEWSA in security and at all other levels, the more problems will multiply as the JEWSA tries out its base instincts and ego against ordinary Pakistanis in the service of Israel.

POSTED BY ALI.MOSTAQUE

Harvard Project–the Essence Of the Anti-Soviet Psywar

“The specialized surveys focused on identifying, collating and grouping personal and psychophysical characteristics of people, especially those characteristics that make a person of leader in a group and in society. To accomplish this, American intelligence gave the experts involved in the Harvard Project an enormous amount of material on the personal characteristics of distinguished world political figures and giants of science, technology and culture. Particular attention was devoted to the study of Lenin’s personality in order to identify the psychophysical qualities of the “leader complex.”

It was found that the majority of world leaders had a pronounced innate authority complex. People with this complex usually win a power struggle, especially if they do not follow generally accepted standards of morality. If they are assisted by a well organized group of specialists (so-called puppet masters) equipped with the knowledge of human psychology gained in the Harvard Project, their opponents simply have no chance of winning.
Today, we can say with complete certainty that a professional group of “puppet masters” is able to identify and move future leaders into positions of power like pawns in an international game of chess.”

Harvard Project

From the history of information-psychological war against the USSR

Vladislav Swede
26.03.2010

The Cold War transformed the former allies in the anti-Hitler coalition – the United States and the Soviet Union – in the opponents. The Americans set the task to fill an information niche for political and psychological operations of its intelligence services in the USSR. As a result, in March 1948 in the U.S. began a secret document entitled “Use of refugees from the Soviet Union in the U.S. national interest.

Stone’s bosom

On the eve of the 65 th anniversary of the Victory many good words said about our allies in the anti-Hitler coalition: the United States and Britain. All true, but we should not forget that in these allied relations has a dark side. It is known that on Aug. 20, 1943 in Quebec (Canada), U.S. leaders and Velieobritanii Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill with American and British Chiefs of staff discussed the question of how the Germans could hold Russian as far as possible in the east.

The meeting adopted two plans: Overlord, which was contemplated in the 1944 Allied landing in France (it was guidance allies informed of the USSR in November-December 1943 in Tehran), and second, top secret, “Rankin”, the purpose of which was – “turn against Russia the power of unbeaten Germany. In April 1945, the development plan, “Rankin”, Churchill gave the British troops the order: prepare for Operation Unthinkable.

The essence of this operation was that the July 1, 1945 troops of Britain, the USA, Canada, along with the Polish Corps and 10-12 nerazoruzhennymi German divisions were supposed to start fighting against the Soviet Union.

Prevented this plan the power of crushing blows, which the Red Army inflicted by Nazi Germany at the end of the war. “Allies” have calculated the prospects of his adventures and realized that a week after the start of “Operation Unthinkable, Soviet tanks would reach the Atlantic Ocean and take control of all of Europe.

However, after mastering the United States nuclear weapons, plans for the strike on the territory of the USSR again became topical. Recall that, starting from the end of 1945, the military leadership of the United States each claimed more grandiose plans for the nuclear bombing of the USSR.

However, the Americans remember that the enormous damage inflicted by Nazi Germany to the Soviet Union bombing and total destruction of infrastructure, failed to weaken its economic power and break the spirit of Soviet people. In this regard, the Air Force United States set a target to determine the ultimate strength of the Soviet people in the case of massive atomic bombing. To solve this problem the Americans helped the following circumstance.

The Second World War gave rise to unprecedented in human history, the movement of peoples. By May 1945 the number of refugees in Europe exceeded 40 million. Many of them were forcibly evacuated by the Nazis in Germany, as the labor force (in January 1944 it was more than eight million people). A considerable part of them were Soviet citizens. Since the end of May 1945 in accordance with the Yalta agreement began their repatriation to the USSR. It should be noted that the bulk of Soviet citizens willingly return to their homeland. However, there were those who did not want to leave Europe. The motives of the Soviet “defectors” were different. Thus, war criminals and those who collaborated with the Nazis, could not count on the “warm welcome” in the Union. However, it was quite a few who did not take the Soviet system with its restrictions and pressure on the individual.

It is believed that in Western Europe by June 1947 left about 250,000 Soviet “defectors”. Many of them appeared in the American zone of occupation. They were chosen object for sociological studies of American experts.

As already mentioned, the U.S. Air Force, Harvard financing the project initially, put the narrow task – by interviewing these individuals to assess the psychological vulnerability of the Soviet civilian population in the massive atomic bombing. But soon, during the Cold War, the project has outgrown the framework.

The initiator of the refugees from the Soviet Union in the framework of the Harvard project was John Paton Davies (John Paton Davies), a member of the Group of Policy Planning U.S. State Department, headed by renowned Sovietologist, future U.S. ambassador to the Soviet Union, George Kennan. As a result, American experts in the early 1950’s were able to handle in 67 refugee camps and in some cities in Germany, more than 13,000 oral interviews and written questionnaires. This gave grounds for American scientists to draw conclusions that have caused American politicians “shock” reaction.

They found that rejection of the Soviet system of refugees from the Soviet Union did not mean that it rejected literally everything. The discontent of the Soviet “defectors”, as it turned out, caused not so much the Soviet political system itself, as the communist leadership of the country. In response to a question that should be retained from the Soviet system in the case, if the regime fell, literally everything prioritized education and then health and social protection.

Moreover, the “defectors” were proud of the successes of industrialization, and those positions that the Soviet Union occupied in the international arena. Most welcomed the commitment regime, its activity and confidence in the future of the country.

Underlines the very significant achievements of the Soviet Union in the field of culture. Revelation for the Harvard researchers has a positive assessment of the former Soviet people the state’s role in the economy.

It was called a lot of negative aspects in the Soviet system, including excessive bureaucratization and poor planning, but in general, “former Soviet” people were convinced: the welfare state can not be built on the basis of private enterprise. About two-thirds of respondents favored the state planning and state ownership in the economy. It must be borne in mind that this was the opinion of people who were dissatisfied with the Soviet system and deliberately did not want to return to the USSR.

More information about the Harvard Project and its development at this stage can be read in a book of doctor of historical sciences, professor Eugenia Codina “Harvard Project” (Moscow: Russian Political Encyclopedia “, 2003). Many interesting things can be found in Arcadia Medvedev “Harvard project: half a century later” (“Union. Belarus-Russia”. 04. 09.2003 town № 35/135).

Birth of “puppeteer”

To implement the plan information and psychological war was necessary to develop effective psychotechnologies impact on the Soviet people. During the Second World War that were active in Nazi specialists from the Office of Alfred Rosenberg, a native of the Baltic and “expert” east of the soul. After the war, experts have begun this “Harvard Project. As already mentioned, the work was carried out on the basis of surveys of former Soviet citizens.

Thus began the famous “Harvard Project» (Harvard Project on the Soviet Social System) – one of the most ambitious political-sociological studies of Soviet society. It was carried out by the Centre of Russian Studies, specially created at Harvard University in 1948.

The project carried out two types of surveys: biographical (A-Schedule interviews), in which collected general sociological data and specialized (B-Schedule interviews). In the past going “sotsioantropologicheskie” data in the field of economic, family relations, social stratification system of power relations, etc.

In conducting specialized surveys focused on identifying, collating, grouping of personal and psycho-physical human qualities, especially those that make him a leader in the community and society. For this to the experts involved in the Harvard project, “American intelligence agencies have provided enormous material relating to the personal characteristics of prominent world political figures, geniuses of science, technology and culture. Particular attention was paid to the study of personality and Lenin, to identify mental and physical qualities, forming a “complex leader.”

Novikov, a professor Stratfordskogo University, notes that “in the process of working on this project, hundreds of Soviet refugees were subjected to special psychological research. For this purpose the so-called Rorschach tests, tests with the ink stains, tests with incomplete sentences, up to the most intimate interviews on sexual themes, where each word was recorded on tape. Giving and other tests, where with the help of psychoanalysis find out various psychological complexes. One of these complexes, as found experts garvardtsy was some weird “set of Lenin.”

It was found that the majority of world leaders have pronounced innate set of authorities. In the struggle for power, people with such a complex, usually win, especially if they do not follow generally accepted standards of morality. If you help them make well-organized group of experts (the so-called puppeteers) with knowledge of human psychology in the Harvard project, then the opponents simply has a chance to win.

Today, with full confidence it can be argued that the professional group “puppeteers” ability to find and promote, as pawns in the global chess game, future leaders to power.

On this he wrote in his scandalous book “God’s people,” one of the former participants of the Harvard Project defector from the Soviet Union Gregory Klimov (Kalmykov Igor): “Any well-organized group of people who have knowledge on this forbidden subject, may find and promote to power future leaders as pawns in the global chess game. It goes without saying that the leaders of the degenerate sects who know this problem on their own skin and practices in this game for several thousand years, have a huge advantage over those who play without knowledge, without preparation, but also blind. ”

Despite the fact that many of the conclusions of Klimov are controversial, and some even can not be accepted, it should be noted the validity of his claim that the effectiveness of such leaders can be comparable to weapons of mass destruction. For the Soviet Union it was even higher.

Examples of the success of the puppeteers are in the post-presidential election Saakashvili, Yushchenko and others

In early 1970 I had the opportunity to observe the use of American methods of testing to identify the leaders among the students the first year of the Vilnius Higher Military-Technical Institute of Radio Electronics. After 3 years of test results were confirmed by more than 80%.

An important outcome of the “Harvard Project” was to develop management techniques, as different groups and individuals. A classic example of effective tactics “puppeteers” in terms of manipulating the human personality is shown in the American film “The Game” with Michael Douglas in the title role. Circumstances formed by a group puppeteers organizers and psychologists, forcing the main character to go on suicide. But all ends happily, as this was a game that was supposed to return the hero Douglas zest for life.

There is no doubt that the “puppeteers” who have technique and knowledge of human psychology, can not only promote the power of future leaders, but to create the desired socio-political situation. However, as practice shows, the knowledge and anticipation of the main techniques used by Western puppeteers, in many cases can successfully resist them. So take Harvard method is absolutely invulnerable and super-efficient should not be.

Unfortunately, dogmatic certainty top Soviet political leadership in the “all-conquering power of Marxist-Leninist doctrine” is not allowed to organize a tribute to the opposition to these methods, when they became widely used against the USSR.

In this regard, it should be recognized that the collapse of socialist values and ideals is largely due to the methods of information-psychological war which the West spent on the basis of the Harvard Project. The results were largely determined the forms and methods of influence of Western special services and the media on citizens of the USSR. This is most clearly traced in radio broadcasts to the Soviet Baltic states and, in particular, to Lithuania. Implicit monitoring of public opinion, systematically conducted after the war, Western experts in Lithuania, is possible to change the tone of information to foreign broadcasts.

For example, until the 1960’s speakers “Free Europe and Voice of America” called Lithuanians resist Soviet power and wait for the combined forces of the West released the Baltic countries. But in the mid 1960’s tone changed. There were calls to join the Komsomol, the party, to enter higher education, work well and achieve a high position in Soviet society and to hold leadership positions.

This theme in the early 1970’s in the Komsomol Central Committee of Lithuania took zamzav. propaganda department Valery P. Systematized them the results of research topics and direction of Western radio stations broadcasting in Lithuania, were impressive. There was no change in tactics and strategy of our main ideological enemy the United States. These materials P. went to the Communist Party of Lithuania. There, however, after listening to them, said they were not of particular interest and suggested that this topic is no longer engaged.

Explain this, later identified as simply. In the event that the objectivity of research results SP are under suspicion significant part of Lithuanian intellectual elite, who came to the high Party and economic positions in the 1960-1970-ies.

Harvard will live?

The major cause of loss in information-psychological war of the West against the Soviet Union was the neglect of the Kremlin leadership to improve the welfare and living standards of the Russian people, as gosudarstvennoobrazuyuschey nation in the broad sense of the word. Having lived nearly half a century in Lithuania, in 1996-2000, I traveled to many regions of Russia and was shocked by the collapse and poverty. Of course, said the last 10 years of perestroika and the collapse of the USSR, but in 1985 the level and the living conditions of the Russian people in order yielded the same Baltic republics. Not accidentally, the Lithuanians, arguing with the Russian, as a rule, said: “What you teach us to live? First learn to live like human beings! “.

To learn how to live in central Russia, in an interview in 1990 suggested the President of Turkmenistan Saparmurat Niyazov: “In fact what is happening today, the Russian people not to blame. His system has brought. I was in the Russian villages, still working in the CPSU Central Committee in 1984, oversaw the Kursk and Belgorod region. Even then, in the villages of peasants ruin oneself by drink. And it is – the black earth! It is not rich in the USSR, not nazhilos or at whose expense. Yes, and at whose expense has been preying? In Indonesia, Khrushchev built the 100-thousand stadium, but we did not have a private playground. In the Congo, shipped heavy machinery, but here in the donkeys and camels to transport oil. So we have a common past, we at no one get offended, especially to Russia.

With the end of the Cold War, “Harvard Project” did not go into oblivion. In August 1997 Harvard Institute through “Nezavisimaya Gazeta» (№ 9, “NY-scripts”) informed the Russian public about the development of the New Harvard Project. Then a number of Russian analysts again rushed to the aid of Harvard experts. However, their advice to Harvard seemed maloprofessionalnymi.

Probably for this reason that in recent years began to appear on the creation of a new “Houston project, which is a logical continuation of Harvard, but focuses on contemporary Russia.

However, believing that technique Harvard-Houston project in the U.S. and in modern Russia are set to “distant” regiment in the archive, prematurely. “Bold” a piece of the pie of the world, which is Russia, will always be coveted Western transnational corporations and states. And for the comfortable consumption of this pie Russia should be weak, fragmented and not able to conduct an independent policy. So Harvard informational-psychological techniques impact on the Russians for a long time to be in the arsenal of our “good western friends.

To understand this truth is enough to analyze the information and mental focus is not only western, but Russian media. But in matters of falsifying the historical path of Russia, “Harvard spirit” felt a mile away. In a word “Harvard lived, Harvard alive, Harvard will live!”. Nevertheless, “Harvard wolf” is not so terrible as it draws some Russian commentators, if the Russians will not forget what world “predators” they live and not repeat past mistakes.

Especially for the

Afghan Taliban Destrot Six NATO Fuel Tankers Headed To Kandahar

Four Afghans killed in blasts, Taliban torch 6 NATO fuel tankers

Four Afghans killed in blasts, Taliban torch 6 NATO fuel tankers

Four civilians were killed in separate blasts in Afghanistan, as Taliban militants torched six fuel tankers destined for NATO forces in southern region, officials said Sunday.

The civilians, including a child and a woman, were killed in a total of four separate blasts in eastern provinces ofKhostNangarhar and Paktika and western province of Ghor on Saturday, the Afghan Interior Ministry said in a statement.

Eight other civilians, including four women, were injured in the attacks, it said. Three of the blasts were triggered by roadside bombs, which were planted by “enemies of our country”, the statement said, referring to Taliban fighters.

The fourth explosion was caused by an old rocket shell, the statement added.

Separately, Taliban militants torched six fuel trucks near the capital city for southern province of Ghazni on Sunday morning, Abdul Ghani, a senior police official in the province said.

The trucks were en route to the southern province of Kandahar for NATO forces, he said, adding that the attackers fled the area before police forces were deployed.

Turkmenistan Takes Delivery of Russian Surveillance Drones

At the armed Border Turkmenistan received drones

In the border troops of Turkmenistan received new aircraft – a plane equipped with special equipment for aerial surveillance, and unmanned aircraft capable of day and night in all weather conditions to fly, “which will allow more control to protect the state border have become even stronger barrier to any trespassing the territory of our country, including drug smuggling, the State News Agency of Turkmenistan (TDH).
Features of the new aircraft were demonstrated on May 27 President of TurkmenistanGurbanguly Berdymukhammedov at a military airfield Akdepe near Ashgabat.

“Turkmenistan’s border – a border of peace and friendship, – said at the conclusion of the demonstration the president. – But we will continue to take all necessary measures to ensure that our borders remain inaccessible in the case of attacks on the peaceful fabric of life of Turkmenistan, on any threats security of the country.

Zala Aero To Deliver UAVs To Ministry of Internal Affairs of Turkmenistan

February 06, 2009

Zala Aero has won a contract to deliver the ZALA 421-12 unmanned aerial system to the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Turkmenistan (the former Soviet Republic Turkmenia).

The ZALA 421-04М unmanned airplane has been built to meet the requirements of law enforcement services and is already used by units of the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs. The flying-wing design features a 1.6 m wing span and 3.9 kg maximum take-off weight and is equipped with a low noise electric motor.

It is capable of performing two hour-long flights within a 40 km radius of the control station a nd can carry a range of payloads including a colour video camera and a thermal surveillance device capable of viewing the whole lower hemisphere below the aircraft.

It is launched by pneumatic catapult and the ground control station can be integrated into any existing data transmission network and used to relay video data from the area of interest to remote receiver terminals in real time.

It is understood that the ZALA 421-12 UAVS will be operated by special units of Ministry of Internal Affairs of Turkmenistan to provide support in surveillance missions and on counterterrorist operations.

Zala Aero company specialises on research and development, manufacture and after sale support services of the UAV systems. So far, Zala have delivered fixed and rotary-wing UAV systems to several Russian customers including Frontier Service, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Ministry of Defense. They are also be used for monitoring main gas pipelines for Gazprom.

British and Israeli companies also bid for the contract.

By Denis Fedutinov – Editor of UAV.RU

Russia and the Kyrgyzstan future

Russia and the Kyrgyzstan future

Kyrgyzstan’s ‘Roza Revolution’ – Cui Bono: (Part 3)

by F. William Engdahl*

In this third part of his work, F. William Engdhal examines the essential geopolitical importance of Kyrgyzstan for Russia, the second geopolitical player for the control of Eurasia’s land space. Considering its military encirclement by NATO and the U.S., a neutral regime in Kyrgyzstan would contribute to stabilize Russia’s regional environment, allowing it to reposition itself on the Central Asian chessboard. Suspected by some of having precipitated the violent events in Kyrgyzstan, Russia recently referred to them as “unconstitutional”.

- Part 1: Kyrgyzstan as a Geopolitical Pivot
- Part 2: China and the Kyrgyz geopolitical future

JPEG - 24.5 kb
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev (R) and his Kyrgyz counterpart Kurmanbek Bakiyev shake hands after signing documents in Moscow February 3, 2009.
(Xinhua/Reuters Photo)

What happens in Kyrgyzstan is clearly also of utmost strategic importance to Moscow. The fact that Russia has been swift to establish recognition of the new provisional government in Bishkek and to extend financial aid clearly signal the importance of politics in that country for Moscow. Not only was Kyrgyzstan an integral part of the Soviet Union before 1991, it remains a key geographic region. Whether friendly to Moscow or hostile, Kyrgyzstan can be of immense help in stabilizing the Central Asian periphery of Russia, or in destabilizing it.

Clearly the Medvedev-Putin regime is creatively using every level — from energy pipeline deals with the state-owned Gazprom, to military trade — to rollback the threatening NATO encirclement that reached its peak in 2004-2005 with Washington’s ‘Color Revolutions’ in Georgia, Ukraine and finally Kyrgyzstan, the Tulip Revolution that brought strongman Bakiyev into power.

As noted in a previous article, Ukraine Geopolitics and the US-NATO Military Agenda: Tectonic Shift in Heartland Power [1], the outcome of Ukraine’s presidential elections earlier this year was a significant positive development from the standpoint of Moscow’s military security. The threat of Ukraine’s joining NATO is now off the table, as well as threats to further disrupt Russia’s gas pipelines that pass through Ukraine to Germany and other parts of western Europe, a residue of the Soviet era of economic integration.

In January Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan all signed a Customs Union agreement. Belarus is a vital partner to Russia on her western border with Ukraine and Poland. Kazakhstan is a pivotal former Soviet state between Kyrgyzstan and Russia, and source of major energy supply to China as location of vast oil and other resources. It is also the world’s largest uranium miner.

The creation of a neutral regime in Kyrgyzstan friendly to both Kazakhstan and Russia would open up a major zone of potential economic development for Russia, as well as helping to stabilize the volatile Ferghana Valley, the agriculturally rich population center of Central Asia bordering Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan in Central Asia.

JPEG - 39.1 kb
The most densely populated area in Central Asia, the Ferghana Valley has seen periodic instability and social unrest since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

On April 19, according to Moscow’s RIA Novosti, Kyrgyzstan’s First Deputy Prime Minister Almazbek Atambayev said after meeting with Kazakh Prime Minister Karim Masimov that his country wants to join the Russian-led customs union. He stated, “We have a common past with Kazakhstan and Russia and obviously our future will be with them in a common economic space and a common customs space.” Atambayev also said Russia and Kazakhstan were not behind the recent events in Kyrgyzstan. “Russia and Kazakhstan are not involved in any intrigues, they just want to help [Kyrgyzstan],” he said [2].

For Moscow, having a pro-Moscow or even a rigorously neutral Bishkek constitutes a major repositioning on the Eurasian chessboard. As of this writing, the situation remains unstable from all accounts, and Russian President Medvedev has sounded a note of caution during an important press conference with Uzbek President Islam Karimov in Moscow. “Russia has given humanitarian aid to Kyrgyzstan, but full-fledged economic cooperation is possible only after the institutions of state are restored,” Medvedev said [3].

Uzbekistan warms to Moscow

One significant apparent gain for Moscow following the turmoil in Kyrgyzstan is a clear warming of previously uneasy relations between Uzbekistan’s President Islam Karimov and the Moscow regime.

On April 20 Karimov flew to Moscow to hold talks with Medvedev and told the Russian press that the two sides had set aside various disputes and shared a common concern about the danger of the instability in Kyrgyzstan spreading. If the Kyrgyz unrest spins out of control, Karimov reportedly fears Uzbekistan might be next [4]. Just weeks before the ouster of Bakiyev in April, US Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke had paid a visit to Karimov in Uzbekistan as part of a careful US attempt to woo him back into the US camp. That seems now to have gotten a significant setback [5].

Since 2003 Russia has enjoyed its own military basing rights at Kant airbase near Bishkek. It was the first established by Russia outside its borders since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. In addition to the airbase, Moscow also has a strategic base at the eastern end of Lake Issyk-Kul where Russia tests submarine and torpedo technology including the super-cavitating VA-111 Shkval torpedo designed originally to sink US aircraft carriers, travelling at a speed of more than 200 knots. Russia signed an indefinite lease for the base in March 2008 for an annual lease of $4.5 million [6].

JPEG - 40.9 kb
Fomer Presidents Vladimir Putin of Russia (L) and Askar Akayev of Kyrgyzstan during the inauguration ceremony at Kant Air Base on 23 October 2003. The Russian base is less than one quarter the size of the U.S. base at Manas.

Russia’s 2003 airbase agreement with Kyrgyzstan was one reason Washington initiated its Tulip Revolution in order to bring in the Washington-friendly Bakiyev regime in 2005.

Some observers were initially convinced that the new transitional government of Roza Otunbayeva would move to cancel US basing rights at Manas on the urgings of Russia. Surprisingly, however, Otunbayeva appears to have reversed an initial commitment and has stated that the base will remain open to the US Central Command, and there has so far been little reaction in Moscow.

Russian sources close to the government report that Moscow is considering whether it might gain more by letting Manas airbase continue to supply the US war effort in Afghanistan for the next couple of years. In exchange, Moscow would step up recent demands on Washington to stop opium flows from Afghanistan into Russia [7]. “The airbase will not be closed,” this source stated, “but will be used as a lever to influence Americans about narcotics, among other things. In a few months the yearly contract (for Manas-W.E.) ends, and it is an occasion to put some conditions to them” [8].

In October 2009 then-Kyrgyzstan President Bakiyev disbanded the country’s Drug Control Agency that had been responsible for intercepting illegal drugs transiting from Afghanistan to Russia. Reports are that Bakiyev’s brother thereby consolidated control over Afghan drug flows through the country [9]. Whether that played a role in Moscow moves to unseat Bakiyev this Spring is not clear.

Whatever the actual thinking in Moscow about Manas as a bargaining chip, both China and Russia having clear strategic interests in a stable and friendly Kyrgyzstan. Moreover, with the three countries along with Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan all founding members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization – the emerging Eurasian economic and military cooperation organization – the significant gains for Russia from closer cooperation with Kyrgyzstan lead some to call it Moscow’s ‘rollback’ of Washington’s encroachment into the Eurasian space [10]. How that develops in the months ahead remains to be seen.

What then are the stakes now for Washington’s Central Asia and Eurasia strategy of Full Spectrum Dominance? This we examine in Part 4. The answer is: everything.

 F. William Engdahl
Author of Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation.. He also authored A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order (Pluto Press). His latest book is Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order (Third Millennium Press)

Beijing suspects false flag attack on South Korean corvette

Beijing suspects false flag attack on South Korean corvette

By Wayne Madsen
Online Journal Contributing Writer

May 28, 2010, 00:18

(WMR) — WMR’s intelligence sources in Asia suspect that the March attack on the South Korean Navy anti-submarine warfare (ASW) corvette, the Cheonan, was a false flag attack designed to appear as coming from North Korea.

One of the main purposes for increasing tensions on the Korean peninsula was to apply pressure on Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama to reverse course on moving the U.S. Marine Corps base off Okinawa. Hatoyama has admitted that the tensions over the sinking of the Cheonan played a large part in his decision to allow the U.S. Marines to remain on Okinawa. Hatoyama’s decision has resulted in a split in the ruling center-left coalition government, a development welcome in Washington, with Mizuho Fukushima, the Social Democratic Party leader threatening to bolt the coalition over the Okinawa reversal.

The Cheonan was sunk near Baengnyeong Island, a westernmost spot that is far from the South Korean coast, but opposite the North Korean coast. The island is heavily militarized and within artillery fire range of North Korean coastal defenses, which lie across a narrow channel.

The Cheonan, an ASW corvette, was decked out with state-of-the-art sonar, plus it was operating in waters with extensive hydrophone sonar arrays and acoustic underwater sensors. There is no South Korean sonar or audio evidence of a torpedo, submarine or mini-sub in the area. Since there is next to no shipping in the channel, the sea was silent at the time of the sinking.

However, Baengnyeong Island hosts a joint US-South Korea military intelligence base and the US Navy SEALS operate out of the base. In addition, four U.S. Navy ships were in the area, part of the joint U.S-South Korean Exercise Foal Eagle, during the sinking of the Cheonan. An investigation of the suspect torpedo’s metallic and chemical fingerprints show it to be of German manufacture. There are suspicions that the US Navy SEALS maintains a sampling of European torpedoes for sake of plausible deniability for false flag attacks. Also, Berlin does not sell torpedoes to North Korea, however, Germany does maintain a close joint submarine and submarine weapons development program with Israel.

The presence of the USNS Salvor, one of the participants in Foal Eagle, so close to Baengnyeong Island during the sinking of the South Korean corvette also raises questions.

The Salvor, a civilian Navy salvage ship, which participated in mine laying activities for the Thai Marines in the Gulf of Thailand in 2006, was present near the time of the blast with a complement of 12 deep sea divers.

Beijing, satisfied with North Korea’s Kim Jong Il’s claim of innocence after a hurried train trip from Pyongyang to Beijing, suspects the U.S. Navy’s role in theCheonan’s sinking, with particular suspicion on the role of the Salvor. The suspicions are as follows:

1. The Salvor engaged in a seabed mine-installation operation, in other words, attaching horizontally fired anti-submarine mines on the sea floor in the channel.

2. The Salvor was doing routine inspection and maintenance on seabed mines, and put them into an electronic active mode (hair trigger release) as part of the inspection program.

3. A SEALS diver attached a magnetic mine to the Cheonan, as part of a covert program aimed at influencing public opinion in South Korea, Japan and China.

The Korean peninsula tensions have conveniently overshadowed all other agenda items on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s visits to Beijing and Seoul.

Previously published in the Wayne Madsen Report.

Copyright © 2010 WayneMadenReport.com

End blockade of Gaza, EU tells Israel

End blockade of Gaza, EU tells Israel

The European Union has called on Israelto immediately end the three-year blockade of Gaza and to allow theFreedom Flotilla to enter the enclave,Press TV reported.

“The continued policy of closure is unacceptable and politically counterproductive,” EU foreign policy chiefCatherine Ashton said in a statement on Friday.

“We would like to reiterate the EU’s call for an immediate, sustained and unconditional opening of crossings for the flow of humanitarian aid, commercial goods and persons to and from Gaza,” she added.

The Freedom Flotilla, a multinational relief mission heading for the Gaza Strip, consists of nine vessels from Turkey, Ireland, Britain, and Greece that are currently off the coast of Cyprus.

The mission was organized by the Free Gaza Movement.

Ashton made the remarks after Israel threatened to divert the flotilla to its southern port of Ashdod and to detain the activists onboard, AFP reported.

The Freedom Flotilla is carrying about 10,000 tons of supplies to the 1.5 million people of Gaza, who have endured many hardships during the three-year blockade.

Obama Supports Nuclear-Free Greater Middle East, But Only After Pacification

U.S. supports Middle East zone free of mass destruction weapons
29.05.2010 07:28
U.S. supports Middle East zone free of mass destruction weapons

U.S. President Barack Obama on Friday welcomed the agreements reached at the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference to strengthen the global non-proliferation regime and reiterated support for establishing a Middle East zone free of weapons of mass destruction, Xinhuareported.

“The United States has long supported such a zone, although our view is that a comprehensive and durable peace in the region and full compliance by all regional states with their arms control and nonproliferation obligations are essential precursors for its establishment,” Obama said in a statement.

The month-long NPT Review Conference concluded on Friday with a final document in which 189 member nations agree on measures toward disarmament and the establishment of a nuclear weapon-free zone in the Middle East.

Gitmo Taliban Leaders–Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen

[The following is proof that American brainwashing efforts at Guantanamo and in Afghanistan’s secret prisons is behind three of the militant insurgencies we fight, either by accident or design.  The main leaders of the Afghan, Pakistani and Yemeni Taliban were imprisoned at Guantanamo for years.

Mullah Abdul Qayum Zakir, aka Abdullah Ghulam Rasoul, second in command Afghan Taliban.

Abdullah Mehsud was a Taleban veteran of Guantanamo Bay, founder of Pakistani Taliban.

Othman Ahmed al-Ghamdi spent four years in Guantanamo prison, now commander “al Qaida” in Yemen (Yemeni Taliban).]

DUBAI – Khaleej Times
A file picture taken on January 26, 2010 shows an armed member of the Yemeni anti-terror unit stands next to relatives of suspected al-Qaeda members outside a court in San'a. AFP photo.
A file picture taken on January 26, 2010 shows an armed member of the Yemeni anti-terror unit stands next to relatives of suspected al-Qaeda members outside a court in San’a. AFP photo.

A fugitive Saudi Arabian man, who was once detained at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, was named as a senior member of al-Qaeda’s Yemen wing, theKhaleej Times website reported, citing al-Arabiya television, which published a tape by the group on Friday.

The tape also confirmed the deaths of three leaders killed in December and January during Yemeni air raids, the Arab broadcaster said.

Among those killed were Abdullah al-Muhdar, the leader of al-Qaeda in Yemen’s Shabwa province, Mohammed Amir al-Awlaki, and Mohammed Saleh al-Kazimi.

Uthman Ahmed al-Ghamdi, the 31-year-old man named as a leading al-Qaeda operative on Friday, had been added to a list of the 85 most wanted people by Saudi Arabia 15 months ago, al-Arabiya said.

He spent four years in Guantanamo prison after he was captured in Afghanistan and was released in 2006.

Yemen, neighbor to top oil exporter Saudi Arabia, has been a key Western security concern since the Yemen-based al-Qaeda arm claimed responsibility for a failed December attempt to bomb a U.S. bound passenger plane.

Last month, the group tried to assassinate the British ambassador to Yemen, Tim Torlot, when a suicide bomber voluntarily jumped into the path of the convoy taking the ambassador to work in capital San’a.

The envoy was unharmed and only the suicide bomber died, but the bold hit signaled that a recent crackdown by San’a on the global militant group has done little to curb its ambitions to carry out attacks on international targets.

Western countries and Riyadh want Yemen, grappling with a northern insurgency and southern separatism, to quell its domestic conflicts in order to turn its focus on fighting al-Qaeda, which they see as a bigger global threat.

Guantanamo prison was set up by U.S. President George W. Bush in Cuba in 2002 to hold foreigners captured after U.S. forces invaded Afghanistan to root out al-Qaeda and the Taliban in response to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the United States.

Moscow, Washington–One Voice On Kyrgyzstan

English.news.cn 2010-05-29 20:36:47
MOSCOW, May 29 (Xinhua) — Russia and the United States have agreed to coordinate efforts to help stabilize the situation in Kyrgyzstan, an official of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs said on Saturday.

The agreement was reached after a meeting between Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Grigory Karasin and U.S. Assistant Deputy Secretary of State George Krol.

The senior diplomats discussed the situation in Kyrgyzstan, including the preparation for the June 27 referendum on the country’s new constitution and parliamentary elections scheduled for October 10, according to Russian media.

The official said Moscow and Washington had similar assessments of the situation in Kyrgyzstan which suffered bloody uprising in early April that killed over 80 people and ousted former president Kurmanbek Bakiyev.

The Unravelling Of Pakistani Society

Lahore terrorist attacks, military actions and future prospects

– by Dr Omar Ali

Terrorists (Punjabi Taliban) simultaneously attacked two Ahmedi sect mosques in Lahore during Friday prayers and killed over 80 people. First thoughts on this evil attack:

1. The choice of target is easy to understand. Ahmedis are a persecuted and vilified minority in Pakistan and “mainstream” news organizations feel no compunction about attacking them, so the ground is already prepared. e.g. GEO TV’s religion presenter (and phony doctor) Amir Liaqat Hussain, a former minister, encouraged people to kill them if they “overstepped their bounds” and an Ahmedi doctor was promptly killed; there was some fuss in the liberal press but Jahil online is still on TV and writes a particularly vicious column in a major newspaper.
2. The day is also significant. It is the anniversary of Pakistan’s nuclear explosion and is a national day of jingoism, so the jihadis probably regarded it as appropriate for such an action.
3. There will be talk of stepped up security and other such BS, but the fact is that such terrorism is unstoppable until you get at the infrastructure that trains and guides these terrorists. This infrastructure of support and guidance is known to everyone in Pakistan, but decisive action is difficult because:

A. The army set up and protected this monster and knows better than anyone how big the operation is. Arif Jamal (in the book “shadow wars”) estimates that the army and its subcontractors trained half a million jihadis. That’s a lot of trained killers even for a country as big as Pakistan. Even if some of the top brass now want to proceed against them, they would prefer to do so slowly and in small increments. Slow and steady action also ensures a long-term American GWOT subsidy, so the top brass may not see any need to hurry.

B. Because the army does not like to admit mistakes, it has never really let the general public know that mistakes were made and enemies within were created by the blessed armed forces themselves. Instead, they rely heavily on the narrative of “foreign hand” and “Indian-zionist agents”. This means the “information war” is a total mess and the general public (whose cooperation is essential for any counter-insurgency) remains confused about who is fighting whom and for what purpose. Again, the confusion may suit the general staff just fine (letting them hang on to some shred of their jihadist/islamist bona-fides while collecting American subsidies and gradually taking action against terrorists who refuse to limit themselves to anti-Indian or anti-Afghan actions. ) but is not helpful to anyone else. Public officials, politicians and media personalities not only add to the confusion, they THEMSELVES remain confused, which inhibits decisive action and allows terrorist supporters to operate unchecked.

C. Several decades of officially sponsored jihadist propaganda have created a significant jihadist constituency in the educated classes. What the Marxists of yore would call the “class interests” of this elite force them to be anti-jihadi (because those “class interests” are intertwined with a capitalist global economy and the modern world in general, and the modern world currently has low tolerance for the jihadist project). But their ideological vocabulary (the story they tell themselves about the world) is heavily colored by Islamist and Jihadist elements. The resulting cognitive dissonance not only gives migraines to the American embassy, it also undermines the anti-terrorist effort in significant ways.

D. And ALL THIS is layered on top of the “baseline” level of violence one expects in any mismanaged, unequal, unfair, over-populated, under-represented, mis-educated and ethnically divided third world population. Some level of organized and unorganized violence against the corrupt state shows up in the Hindu kingdom of Nepal, the secular republic of India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, etc. in various forms, ranging from large scale criminality to Maoist insurgencies. In remote places, the weakness of the state also lets the people organize on ethnic and religious basis and local armed gangs are a feature of all these societies. It sounds almost unbelievably stupid, but our brilliant general staff actually played a role in creating ethnic militias in our largest city as well. These alone would be a large enough set of headaches for any country, but the general staff added an islamist insurgency on top of all these “normal” South Asian problems (and of course, the two merge in various creative ways). When it rains, it pours.

But all this does not mean that Pakistan will not survive. I still think it will survive. In fact, I will stick my neck out and predict that:

1. Very slowly, painfully and very very incompetently, the ruling elite will fight the jihadist insurgency and eventually bring it under control (and some in the elite will get very rich doing so).
2. The baseline “Maoist” component of the insurgency could potentially have grown into a serious problem, but Islamism will co-opt all other grievances and will save the ruling elite in the long run because the hardcore Islamists are so insane, the corrupt and vicious ruling elite will look better by comparison.
3. India, China, Iran and America will spend sleepless nights figuring out how to keep Pakistan in one piece and while their efforts will occasionally work at cross purposes, the overall impact will be positive.

4. Islamism as it currently exists is not compatible with coexistence in the modern world. It will be modified and replaced with a more flexible Islamist vocabulary, but it will take some time. Flexible and accomodating versions of Islam that freely borrowed from local traditions and were more aligned with actual human needs in our part of the world were dominant in folk Islam in India. These flexible forms were mostly sufi-derived and transmitted via everyday folk culture, not through “high church” texts. Now that literacy and concrete thinking are more prevalent and folk culture is increasingly disconnected from people who have moved to new cities and live new lives, the folk versions are at a disadvantage and literal-minded modern people are susceptible to the jihadi-oriented orthodox version. Saudi money, CIA ingenuity and narrow-minded versions of Pakistani ideology did their magic and an entire generation grew up hostile to the flexible and humane folk Islam of our ancestors (usually dismissed as “Hindooana rusoom”).

The Islam regarded as orthodox and correct by these new literate Muslims is susceptible to jihadist interpretation. The elite encouraged this interpretation in the mistaken belief that it would help them gain the upper hand against India. Now that whole project has blown up in their face. Many of them realize that a change of course is needed, but they lack the vocabulary and the stories that would flesh out this new course. Infidels, lacking local knowledge and empathy and frequently having other interests in view, probably do more harm than good when they try to identify “sufi” and “moderate” versions to encourage. But in the long run, the needs of the elite will demand a new orthodoxy compatible with modern needs and the demand will be met. Its hard to see right now because these are still early days in this turnaround. But economic and social pressures are pushing in that direction and will prove unstoppable. Until then, the show must go on. And even when this monster is brought under control, the “normal” problems of South Asia will still remain to be solved.

A Taliban apologist perspective on the Ahmedi massacre in Lahore

A Taliban apologist perspective on the Ahmedi massacre in Lahore

There are a number of Taliban / Sipah-e-Sahaba / Al Qaeda supporters active on the internet in Pakistan and abroad. These people (usually hired by the Hizb ut-Tahrir or Jamaat-e-Islami) have different names and aliases. For example, on Pak Tea House and Pakistaniat, they are active with names such as Mazbut, Adnan Siddiqui, Addu etc. On pkpolitics, they adopt names such as geog, shimatoori and nota etc. As sham writers, they adopt aliases such as Earthman / International Professor, Syed Adeeb, Abidullah Jan, Dr Shahid Qureshi etc.

Here are two gems from Punjabi Taliban apologists, from two Pakistani blogs, commenting on Lahore’s Ahmedi massacre:

geog47 said:
28 May 2010 at 5:17 pm

Correction, these were not Masajid, as Masjid is a place where Muslims worship not Kafirs. These Qadiyanis are Kafirs, hence their structures are defined as places of worship, not Masjid. Plus it should be understood by now that we should be marking these non-Muslims on their ID Cards and Passports. Also, the Pakistanis should know very well that these Qadiyanis do not fit in the catagory of Kafirs, rather a far worse catagory which in Islam is’Wajib-ul-Qatl’ (Permitted to Kill). Kafirs are disbelievers, they know it and they do not accept Muhammad Sallallaho Alaihi Wassallam as the Prophet of Allah Sunhanaho Wata’aalah.

However, these Qadiyanis invoke the anger of Allah Subhanaho Wata’aalah because they impersonate Muslim/Islamic beliefs and call themselves Muslims. Globally, a Muslim is one who submits to the will of Allah Subhanaho Wata’aalah and accepts Muhammad Sallallaho Alaihi Wassallam as the final Prophet of Allah Subhanaho Wata’aalah. This is where they (Qadiyanis) are worse than Kafir and it is permissible in Islam to kill them. It is a duty unto all Pakistani-Muslims to kill and/or kick out Qadiyanis from our lands (Pakistan). Perhaps india, which is where they originate from anyway.

Source: pkpolitics

mazbut
May 28, 2010 at 3:17 pm

The attack on Ahmadiya temples is condemnable but at the same time cursing others is tantamount to spreading more sectarian hatred.

Praising the Mirzais for what they have or haven’t done for Pakistan doesn’t mean that they are infallible.

The Constitution declares them as non-Muslims and minority yet they root cause which led to the present attack on their temples seems to be ‘impersonation of Islamic signs and symbols”. How can a non-Muslim call its place of worship as a Mosque??

No place is a mosque where any Muslim is not allowed to enter and worship. Sadly enough, sectarian divisions among Muslims have barred one Muslim to worship in another Muslims place of worship marked as Imam bargahs , Jama’at Khana, Mosque, etc etc . The present attack seems to occur due to adamancy of Mirzai’s to call their place of worship as Mosque and the objection by all other Muslim sects to that effect. After having invented a prophet of their own they have breached from the Islamic fundamentals and as such ought to refrain from playing with the sentiments of other Muslims by faking Islamic ‘names and symbols’.

Only this way can they be said to be minding their own business and others minding their own!!

…The Sikhs also believe in One God….does that mean they are Muslims and mimic Muslim Kalima or signs and symbols?? No. They have a distinct identity as a religious people of Sikhism. Likewise if the abusive Mirzai’s declared their true identity as non-Muslims and refrained from the profanity of faking Islamic customs they would create less uproar and unrest in the Islamic world!

Source: Pak Tea House

It’s Cool To Kill Ahmadis

Wajibulqatl Ahmedis killed in Lahore, what is the fuss about?

– by Saad Mansoor

At least ninety five people killed and hundreds wounded but what I failed to understand was that what was the fuss about? My family and friends were truly horrified, in fact saddened, disgusted and many other things, but I remain confused, why?! Were not those who died Ahmedis? Correction; Qadiyanis? Were those not Ahmedi Mosques? Correction: Qadiyani places of worship? Didn’t the maulvi sahab say these people were wajib-ul-qatl?


Not long ago I was in a debate with someone at my workplace who advocated how and why ahmedis are wajib-ul-qatl i.e. those whom a Muslim is duty bound to kill. The fact that the term was never present in the days of Prophet Muhammad pbuh or the four succeeding righteous caliphs aside, the term is accepted by almost all the clerics of Pakistan who rely on jurisprudence of the clergy of medieval age of Islam when religion was abundantly used to crush any dissenting voices against the Ummayad, Abbasid and Ottoman caliphs.

The point?! Point of the matter is that all these clerics like Mufti Muneeb and religo-political leaders like Munawar Hasan, Fazal-ur-Rahman and others firmly believe that Ahmedis should be killed. They are not alone, they are joined in the fray by almost the entire educated middle class of Pakistan who firmly believed until a year back that Taliban are good and their version of shariat will prevail, as Islam will emerge victorious over the West.

They also believe that, tazeers that is man made punishments like killing the apostates and the blasphemer, flogging the alcoholics and the unveiled and stoning the adulterer are necessities without which our faith would be incomplete.

They believe that Taliban are on the right path, in fact many women among this ‘educated’ middle class of ours firmly believe that Taliban’s prohibition of female education was entirely justified. Obviously a major chunk of these women remain in denial and would have us believe that it was all media propaganda and not Taliban but Indian agents destroyed these schools in disguise.

The media, staffed by this exact middle class, sympathizes with Taliban. It is the same media who was madly criticizing the government when it was reluctant in signing the Swat Nizam-e-Adal pact and when it was conducting an operation. But today it was a new low altogether, the shameless display of yellow journalism in their relentless effort to link this event with India, the US and Israel was unbelievable.

Today every deobandi, salafi, ahl-e-hadis and ahl-e-tashee madrassa in Pakistan tells its pupils that Ahmedis are wajib-ul-qatal. Every imam of every mosque believes that Ahmedis are to be killed on sight. Our media refuses to call those killed ‘jaan bahaq’ i.e. lost their lives-the proper Urdu term but prefer to use halaak i.e. died and maaray gaye i.e. got killed for the victims of terrorism. And the biggest media group runs a television show where by the faithful are told to take matters into their own hands unhindered by any threats of suo moto notices.

So my point is, what is the fuss about? Is this not what we belief in? Did we finally realize that the mutant in the mirror is us?

The term crocodile tears is not befitting here because there are no tears, just a lot of noise about whether we should be using the words mosques and sect of Islam for the victims. A lot of complains but not a lot of condemnations, be it media, clerics, politicians or the educated workforce every eye is dry. Pakistan committed murder today!!

Russia bombing: Jihadis or sign of other trouble in north Caucasus?

Russia bombing: Jihadis or sign of other trouble in north Caucasus?

A Russia bomb that killed six people in the Russian city of Stavropol has led to speculation about jihadis or Islamic militants. But analysts worry about a widening circle of instability – and players – in the north Caucasus.

Rescuers and investigators work at the site of a deadly Russia bomb that killed six people and wounded 40, outside a cultural center in the southern Russian city of Stavropol, Wednesday.

AP

By Fred Weir

MoscowA deadly Russia bomb that killed six people and wounded 40 outside a theater where a Chechen dance group was about to perform in the southern Russian city of Stavropol has security experts worrying that the circle of instability in Russia’s troubled northern Caucasus may be widening.

Unlike the Moscow metro bombings of two months ago, which were carried out by suicide bombers from the north Caucasus republic of Dagestan and claimed by Islamist “emir” Doku Umarov, analysts are not so sure that the latest bombing fits neatly into the jihadis vs. Russia narrative that is favored by the Kremlin.

“There are a lot of suspects in the Stavropol bombing, and we shouldn’t jump to conclusions,” says Andrei Soldatov, editor of the online journal Agentura.ru, which reports on the security services. “It speaks of rising instability around the north Caucasus region. We may be seeing some dangerous new developments.”

The stakes are high. Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, who put his personal reputation on the line to win the 2014 Winter Olympics for Sochi, now sees his pet project under dire threat amid growing regional turbulence.

“Putin needs to demonstrate peace and stability in the north Caucasus before the Sochi Olympics, not just to ensure the security of the games but to affirm success of the Putin era,” says Nikolai Petrov, a regional analyst with the Carnegie Center in Moscow. “Therefore Putin is very vulnerable. Many different forces have an interest in stirring up instability, with an eye to forcing him to make a deal with them. It’s not just the usual suspects. I fear we’ll see a good deal more trouble down there.”

The blast hit outside a Stavropol community center just minutes before the Vainakh musical troupe, which enjoys the sponsorship of pro-Moscow Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov, was about to perform.

That has led some commentators to suggest that it was carried out by Islamist insurgents against Mr. Kadyrov, the local strongman whom human
rights groups accuse of imposing iron-fisted rule over the tiny republic at the Kremlin’s behest.

Other analysts point out that it is almost exactly the third anniversary of ethnic riots in Stavropol, a Russian city on the edge of the seething north Caucasus that houses a large Muslim minority, that broke out after local Chechens were accused of murdering two Slavic students, in an apparent revenge killing that remains unsolved to this day.

“This could have been an action by right-wing radicals,” such as Skinheads or neo-Nazis, who are a growing force on Russia’s political underbelly, says Alexei Makarkin, director of the independent Center for Political Technologies in Moscow. “They hate minorities from the north Caucasus, and have as much a stake in sowing panic and chaos as the Islamist extremists do.”

Sending a message?

It is also possible the bombing was intended as a message to Alexander Khloponin, a former Siberian governor and businessman who is now the Kremlin’s powerful special emissary to the newly-created “North Caucasus Administrative Zone,” who was due to visit Stavropol on Thursday. Next month, Mr. Khloponin is scheduled to release a plan to fight terrorism and restore stability to the troubled region, which may include firing scores of officials and re-allocating millions of dollars in Moscow aid.

In an unusual interview with the government newspaper Rossiskaya Gazeta on Thursday, Khloponin admitted that Islamist militants might be the least of his problems in the increasingly unsettled region.

“The problem is that criminals and organized crime engaged in property redistribution are trying to operate under the guise of terrorism and religious extremism within the (north Caucasus) district,” Khloponin said. He added that if economic reforms take hold, the small numbers of Islamist insurgents will be easy to deal with. “Those bandits who are running around in the forest may be repelled without any need to impose the counter-terrorism operations,” he said.

The Kremlin has granted Khloponin extraordinary powers, including sole authority to appoint and dismiss the heads of all federal agencies throughout the sprawling region, which includes the Russian territories of Stavropol and Krasnodar (where Sochi is located), plus seven mainly-Muslim ethnic republics strung out along the mountain line between the Caspian and Black Sea.

“Khloponin will make his program public in June, and it seems likely that he will emphasize social and economic development, which is very important in a region where unemployment is soaring and corruption is the number one problem,” says Pavel Salin at the independent Center for Political Trends in Moscow. “His task number one will be to try to stop the theft of federal cash by local elites, who are helped by Moscow officials. This will make him a lot of enemies.”

Though the Stavropol bombing has grabbed headlines this week, Mr. Soldatov says a bigger challenge for Khloponin is unfolding in the formerly peaceful ethnic republic of Kabardino-Balkaria, where there have been at least three terrorist attacks in the past two weeks. He says they are likely connected to a botched Kremlin policy of backing ethnic-Kabardins, who have been seizing the lands of their neighbours, the Balkars.

“There have been few victims in these attacks, but they are indicative of a new process going on in the region that amplifies the challenge facing Khloponin,” says Soldatov. “There are many sources of instability, becoming aggravated all at once. As the Sochi Games approach, it only looks like it will get worse.

CentralAsiaOnline.com [WAS] a Fake News website sponsored by USCENTCOM–(UPDATED, 6/22/2017)

[CENTCOM’S LAST POST LEFT ON INTERNET ARCHIVES, March 15, 2015]

[Evidently, it had become impossible for Pentagon psy-warriors to paint a “Rosy” image of US actions and intentions in Central and Southern Asia…

Sometimes “Bullshit Artists” drown in their own filth.]

CentralAsiaOnline.com is a website

sponsored by USCENTCOM

 

to highlight movement toward greater regional stability both through bilateral and multilateral cooperative arrangements. CentralAsiaOnline.com also focuses on developments that hinder both terrorist activity and support for terrorism in the region. This site features news from across and about the region and features analysis, interviews and commentary by paid CentralAsiaOnline.com correspondents. It is designed to provide a regional audience with a portal to a broad range of information about future stability in the region.

Links Disclaimer

Links from CentralAsiaOnline.com to web sites outside the U.S. government or the use of trade, firm or corporation names within the site, are for the convenience of the user. Such use does not constitute an official endorsement or approval by the U.S. Defence Department of any private-sector website, product or service. The U.S. Department of Defence exercises no editorial control over the information you may find at these locations. Such links are provided consistent with the stated purpose of this site. All links to CentralAsiaOnline.com are welcomed.

As Planned, Pakistani Militants Fill American-Created Vacuum In Nuristan

Taliban fighters seize district in east Afghanistan

KUNAR

Afghanistan (Reuters) – Taliban insurgents overran a remote district in eastern Afghanistan after days of heavy fighting in the area, a provincial police official said on Saturday.

The battle erupted earlier this week in Barg-i-Matal district of mountainous Nuristan province, a remote area bordering Pakistan, when hundreds of Taliban fighters stormed the district center, said Qasim Payman, police chief of the province.

“The police force in the area has tactically retreated from the district after days of fighting,” he told Reuters, adding there were no signs of reinforcements despite repeated requests.

Hundreds of armed villagers, known as Lashkar-i-Qaomi (the army of tribes) have joined with police to try to push back the insurgents, Payman said.

Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said insurgents inflicted heavy casualties on Afghan police and villagers fighting them.

In October 2009, Taliban insurgents killed eight American soldiers after storming their remote outposts in the Kamdesh district of Nuristan province.

U.S. forces announced plans to withdraw from the area as part commander General Stanley McChrystal’s strategy to focus his forces on population centres.

Since the withdrawal of foreign troops from Kamdesh and Barg-i-Matal districts, Afghan police say the area is under immense threat from insurgents infiltrating from Pakistan.

Military Blames Slaughter On Unprofessionalism

US admits blame for civilian deaths

A US drone attack which left 23 Afghan civilians dead when they were mistaken for Taliban fighters occurred due to the “unprofessional” approach of the soldiers involved, an internal military report has found.

The civilians died on February 21 in Uruzgan province when three vehicles were hit by Hellfire missiles fired from a drone on the orders of a special forces commander on the ground.

The report into the incident, released on Saturday, concluded that remote drone pilots, operating from Nevada, USA, provided “inaccurate and unprofessional reporting … which deprived the ground force commander of vital information”.

“The strike occurred because the ground force commander lacked a clear understanding of who was in the vehicles, the location, direction of travel and likely course of action of the vehicles,” the report said.

“Information that the convoy was anything other than an attacking force was ignored or downplayed by the Predator crew.”

Al Jazeera’s Hoda Abdel-Hamid, reporting from Kabul, said people across the country were extremely angry at civilian deaths caused by foreign forces.

“I dont know how much this information, three months after the event, will help,” she said.

“Certainly people will be glad to have an admission of guilt, but these things happen again and again. On a national scale, I don’t know how much of an impact it will have.”

Children ignored

The report paints a damning picture of miscommunication in the hours leading up to the strike, compounded by “poorly functioning” command posts that “failed to properly analyse the situation”.

The investigation reveals how the drone operators saw children near the convoy, but went ahead with the strike regardless.

“Two children were spotted near the vehicles, but inaccurate reporting from the crew of the unmanned Predator aircraft to the forces on the ground led the Operational Detachment Alpha [the special forces unit] to believe that the vehicles contained only armed military age males.”

The US military said that it was planning to improve its training to avoid further civilian deaths in the country. Four officers had been reprimaded as a result of the findings.

“We must always be honest with ourselves about what we do well and what we can do better,” General Stanley McCrystal, the commander of US forces in
Afghanistan, said in a statement released with the report.

Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, described the incident as “deeply regrettable” and said that he believed that the investigation had been “exhaustive.”

“I am also confident that appropriate actions are being taken with regard to those involved in the incident, and most importantly, to ensure measures are taken to prevent such accidents from happening again,” he said in a statement.

The US military has come under intense criticism over civilian deaths in Afghanistan and has repeatedly pledged to do all it can to avoid such incidents.

U.N. Official to Ask U.S. to End C.I.A. Drone Strikes

U.N. Official to Ask U.S. to End C.I.A. Drone Strikes

By CHARLIE SAVAGE

WASHINGTON — A senior United Nations official is expected to call on the United States next week to stop Central Intelligence Agencydrone strikes against people suspected of belonging to Al Qaeda, complicating the Obama administration’s growing reliance on that tactic in Pakistan.

Philip Alston, the United Nations special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, said Thursday that he would deliver a report on June 3 to the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva declaring that the “life and death power” of drones should be entrusted to regular armed forces, not intelligence agencies. He contrasted how the military and the C.I.A. responded to allegations that strikes had killed civilians by mistake.

“With the Defense Department you’ve got maybe not perfect but quite abundant accountability as demonstrated by what happens when a bombing goes wrong in Afghanistan,” he said in an interview. “The whole process that follows is very open. Whereas if the C.I.A. is doing it, by definition they are not going to answer questions, not provide any information, and not do any follow-up that we know about.”

Mr. Alston’s views are not legally binding, and his report will not assert that the operation of combat drones by nonmilitary personnel is a war crime, he said. But the mounting international concern over drones comes as the Obama administration legal team has been quietly struggling over how to justify such counterterrorism efforts while obeying the laws of war.

In recent months, top lawyers for the State Department and the Defense Department have tried to square the idea that the C.I.A.’s drone program is lawful with the United States’ efforts to prosecute Guantánamo Bay detainees accused of killing American soldiers in combat, according to interviews and a review of military documents.

Under the laws of war, soldiers in traditional armies cannot be prosecuted and punished for killing enemy forces in battle. The United States has argued that because Qaeda fighters do not obey the requirements laid out in the Geneva Conventions — like wearing uniforms — they are not “privileged combatants” entitled to such battlefield immunity. But C.I.A. drone operators also wear no uniforms.

Paula Weiss, a C.I.A. spokeswoman, called into question the notion that the agency lacked accountability, noting that it was overseen by the White House and Congress. “While we don’t discuss or confirm specific activities, this agency’s operations take place in a framework of both law and government oversight,” Ms. Weiss said. “It would be wrong to suggest the C.I.A. is not accountable.”

Still, the Obama administration legal team confronted the issue as the Pentagon prepared to restart military commission trials at Guantánamo Bay. The commissions began with pretrial hearings in the case of Omar Khadr, a Canadian detainee accused of killing an Army sergeant during a firefight in Afghanistan in 2002, when Mr. Khadr was 15.

The Pentagon delayed issuing a 281-page manual laying out commission rules until the eve of the hearing. The reason, officials say, is that government lawyers had been scrambling to rewrite a section about murder because it has implications for the C.I.A. drone program.

An earlier version of the manual, issued in 2007 by the Bush administration, defined the charge of “murder in violation of the laws of war” as a killing by someone who did not meet “the requirements for lawful combatancy” — like being part of a regular army or otherwise wearing a uniform. Similar language was incorporated into a draft of the new manual.

But as the Khadr hearing approached, Harold Koh, the State Department legal adviser, pointed out that such a definition could be construed as a concession by the United States that C.I.A. drone operators were war criminals. Jeh Johnson, the Defense Department general counsel, and his staff ultimately agreed with that concern. They redrafted the manual so that murder by an unprivileged combatant would instead be treated like espionage — an offense under domestic law not considered a war crime.

“An accused may be convicted,” the final manual states, if he “engaged in conduct traditionally triable by military commission (e.g., spying; murder committed while the accused did not meet the requirements of privileged belligerency) even if such conduct does not violate the international law of war.”

Under that reformulation, the C.I.A. drone operators — who reportedly fly the aircraft from agency headquarters in Langley, Va. — might theoretically be subject to prosecution in a Pakistani courtroom. But regardless, the United States can argue to allies that it is not violating the laws of war.

Mr. Alston, the United Nations official, said he agreed with the Obama legal team that “it is not per se illegal” under the laws of war for C.I.A. operatives to fire drone missiles “because anyone can stand up and start to act as a belligerent.” Still, he emphasized, they would not be entitled to battlefield immunity like soldiers.

Mary Ellen O’Connell, a Notre Dame University law professor who has criticized the use of drones away from combat zones, also agreed with the Obama administration’s legal theory in this case. She said it could provide a “small modicum” of protection for C.I.A. operatives, noting that Germany had a statute allowing it to prosecute violations of the Geneva Conventions, but it does not enforce domestic Pakistani laws against murder.

In March, Mr. Koh delivered a speech in which he argued that the drone program was lawful because of the armed conflict with Al Qaeda and the principle of self-defense. He did not address several other murky legal issues, like whether Pakistani officials had secretly consented to the strikes. Mr. Alston, who is a New York University law professor, said his report would analyze such questions in detail, which may increase pressure on the United States to discuss them.

US Planners Prepare Pakistan’s Big Surprise

US considers options for strike in Pakistan



Pakistanis outside one of two mosques attacked by gunmen wearing suicide vests in Lahore

WASHINGTON : US military planners are looking at options for a unilateral strike in Pakistan, for use if a successful attack on US soil is traced to Pakistani tribal areas, The Washington Post reported late Friday.

US retaliation would be contemplated only under extreme circumstances, unnamed senior military officials told the Post.

These circumstances might include a catastrophic attack that convinced President Barack Obama that the ongoing campaign of CIA drone strikes was insufficient.

“Planning has been reinvigorated in the wake of Times Square,” one official told the newspaper.

The report comes in the wake of the failed May 1 attack on New York’s crowded Times Square, which is in the city’s busy theater district.

Faisal Shahzad, a 30-year-old Pakistani-born naturalized US citizen, was arrested apparently trying to flee the country on a flight to Dubai 53 hours after street vendors alerted police to smoke coming out of a vehicle there.

The van was found to contain a bomb consisting of timers, wires, fireworks, gasoline, propane tanks and fertilizer.

Shahzad is due for a federal court hearing in New York on June 1.

US officials say Shahzad is connected to Pakistani Taliban insurgents and Obama has sent two senior national security aides to Islamabad to join the investigation into the May 1 car bombing attempt.

According to The Post, the US administration is trying to deepen ties to Pakistan’s intelligence officials in a bid to head off any attack by militant groups.

The two countries recently established a joint military intelligence center on the outskirts of the northwestern city of Peshawar, and were in talks to set up another one near Quetta, the paper said. – AFP/jy

Drone Strikes Resume Near Wana

US drone strike kills 11 in SWA

WANA: At least 11 militants were killed, and three injured in a missile strike carried out by a US unmanned plane in South Waziristan Agency Friday.

According to sources, the pilotless spy plane targeted the suspected militant hideouts located in Nezai Narai area along Afghan border, in which 11 militants were killed.

Following the attack, US drone plane continue to hover over the targeted area.

Afghanistan: The West is Caught On The Wrong Foot

Afghanistan: The West is Caught On The Wrong Foot

The Civil War That Trapped The West Is Propped Up by Karzai et al.

By Khalil Nouri

Pashtun Warriors

Afghanistan is evidently on life support, with severe preexisting symptoms (constantly flaring-up) of ailments ranging from corruption, drug trafficking, and so forth (echoed repeatedly in the media) to recent swelling traumas of tribal feuds, instigated by Karzai family et al in Kandahar. This predicament is rattling all of Southern and Eastern Afghanistan and has doomed, or will cripple, the very foundation of tribal structure and nationalism in the country.

If there is no shift away from the paradigm of Muslim radicalism, certainly a re-emergence of the old bitter civil war between the two powerful Pashtun tribal groups—“Durranis” and “Ghelzais”—that was fought over three centuries ago, will explode upon us today.

KANDAHAR’S POWER BROKERS

This is a complex indigenous phenomenon that requires a versatile perception that is beyond the comprehension of

Karzai Brothers

many in the West, and it is fueled and manipulated by the Karzai’s “Popalzai” clan of Durrani confederacy tribe, headed by Hamid Karzai’s half brother, Ahmad Wali Karzai, who is the head of the Kandahar provincial council and has assumed for himself the role of absolute monarch in this Southern Afghan city.

Also included in the mix are the Karzai family’s closest allies, who are more captivated with their own interests rather than a genuine partnership; but they have excluded all traditional elders in the smaller local communities from governance and planning—an alienation of key provincial constituencies.  In addition, they have imposed lengthy technocratic strategies that are incomprehensible to local tribal leaders, which has alienated tribal communities and fuelled resentment that invites insurgents to infiltrate them and secure their allegiance against the state; the consequence is an imbalance of tribal structure that leads to a dire recipe for civil strife.

Furthermore, at the core level, the Karzai family (pictured) has made an informal division of spheres such that; each Karzai brother has his own arena of influence.  In fact, Hamid is the statesman, Mahmuod built a business empire, Qayum quietly manipulates things behind the scenes as the family’s “eminence grise”, and Ahmad Wali Karzai has proved adept at mastering local political dynamics and leveraging brother Karzai’s control as Head of State to slowly build his own power base in Kandahar.  In a sublevel, however, the cousins, cronies and their limited tribal constituents (pictured: left to right clockwise: Gul Agha Sherzai, Haji Jan Mohammad, Arif Noorzai and Mattiullah), claim their own portions of various government posts, including land ownership that took little to no real purchase power in exchange to obtain.

Karzai Inner Circle

In addition, the family has benefited from using the institutions of the Afghan state to their advantage, and in doing so have formed important synergies linking politics in Kandahar and Kabul.

And as Ahamad Wali affirmed in one of his media interviews, “This is a country ruled by kings. The king’s brothers, cousins, sons are all powerful.” He further states, “This is Afghanistan. It will change but it will not change overnight.” This without a doubt shows how he flaunts himself as the ultimate ruler of the land in southern Afghan.  He also describes himself as the “Nancy Pelosi of Kandahar,” portraying himself as a dealmaker capable of working with allies and rivals to stabilize Afghanistan.

Because of this “arrogance in plain sight”, other tribes in Kandahar are showing their deep displeasure and outright resentment (being deprived of living even a basic everyday life) towards NATO and the U.S., because of the empowerment that “foreigners” are given to the Karzai family and tribe.  As a result, this constitutes the main ingredient for insurgency recruitment; and consequently the impending manifestation for a blowback beyond control.

Furthermore, paradoxically the assertion by U.S. officials, that they see Ahmad Wali Karzai, “as a polarizing figure who could complicate their efforts to win over the population”, makes no sense. This clearly sends a contradictory double message to the population, and many view this as a sign of U.S. weakness.  How can you oppose him and back him up with military might at the same time?

A BRIEF INTRODUCTION OF PASHTUN TRIBAL STRUCTURE:

The multifaceted Pashtun tribes generally consist of multiple subdivisions, including sub-tribes and clans.  In broad

terms, on one side are the “Durranis” – most of the settled population of Kandahar are related to the Karzai “Popalzai” clan; they are the elite, the aristocrats, farmers, traders, and the professional middle class who have gained  certain powers and prestige.  On the other hand of the same body politics are the “Ghilzais”, who are traditionally nomadic, fiercely fundamentalist in religion, and whose tribal and village leaders were dependent on, and subordinate to, the local aristocracy—a class status that was less prominent in other Pashtun areas. Their homelands stretch east into Pakistan as far as Kashmir.

A RELENTLESS PASHTUN TRIBAL BLOWBACK IS ON THE HORIZON

Ever since Afghanistan emerged as a sovereign nation in 1709, when the “Ghilzais” defeated the Persians, its history has been etched in ancient hatreds between “Ghilzai” and “Durrani” groups. During most of that time, the country was ruled by the “Durrani” tribe, who in 1775 moved its capital from the “Ghilzai” stronghold of Kandahar to Kabul in the North.  Nothing more fired up “Ghilzais’” enmity than the many occasions when the “Durranis” attempted to impose their rule from Kabul with the aid of “foreigners”; either “Tajiks” from the north or other outsiders such as the British, who invaded Afghanistan three times between 1838 and 1919 in a bid to secure the North-west Frontier of their Indian empire against the rebellious “Ghilzais.”

When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979, after years of “Durrani” rule, it was to support a revolutionary “Ghilzai” government.  But this new foreign presence inspired general Afghan resistance, and was why (by the late 1980s) the U.S. was supporting the almost entirely “Ghilzai-run-Taliban”—then called Mujahideen—and their ally Osama Bin laden.  In 1996 the “Taliban-Ghilzai” got their revenge, and imposed their theocratic rule over almost the whole country.  In 2001, the West invaded Afghanistan to topple the Taliban, imposing “Durrani” rule again; now under “Durrani” President Karzai—however, he is from an unpopular “Durrani” side of the “Popalzai” clan.

Now, as so often before, the “Ghilzais” have seen their country hijacked by a “Durrani” regime, supported by a largely Tajik army backed by hated outsiders from the West. One reason why it is so hard for the West to win “hearts and minds” amongst the majority of Afghans is because the West is up against a sullenly resentful population, fired up by a timeless hatred and able to call upon unlimited support, in men and materiel, from their “Ghilzai” brethrens across the border in Pakistan.  As aforementioned, the main reason for the overall resentment and growing insurgency to arrive is because the Karzai family and cronies are seen as an artificially imposed dominant tribal group in Kandahar (from the outset).

AN AFGHAN ARMY OF MINIMAL PASHTUNS

Another factor for a civil war in Afghanistan is the 65% Tajik recruitment in the Afghan National Army (ANA).  There has been consistent reporting by Western media sources with the line that NATO troops operate “in support of” the ANA, and that, this genuine force reflects the whole nation.  This misinformation campaign even released erroneous figures of the ethnic composition of the ANA. These artificial figures reflect the rule set up by the top brass in U.S. and NATO forces.   Under this rule, the Afghan army should be 38 percent Pashtun, 25 percent Tajik, 19 percent Hazara and eight percent Uzbek. This would bring the numbers much closer to reflecting the nation’s ethnic composition.

A reliable source within the ANA—a close affiliate of Afghan Joint Chief of Staff General Bismillah Khan—has revealed, “The truth is that the ANA is now over 65% Tajik, and that figure is increasing.” He went on, “The Pashtun figure is hovering below 18% and may have been overtaken by the Uzbeks.”

In other words, the “Afghan National Army” is just the Northern Alliance with very expensive NATO provided gears and uniforms. Therefore, by sending the Northern Alliance supported by U.S. and NATO troops into core Pashtun tribal areas, all these forces are seen as alien occupiers.  Locals vehemently resent this, and since they cannot identify with any of these forces, they are returning to the Taliban. This is further adding fuel to anger, leading to civil war.

HOW TO DEFUSE TRIBAL TENSION IN KANDAHAR

Since 1707 to December 2009 there were 19 grand assemblies of elders (Loya Jirgas) convened in Afghanistan, and mostly prior to 1880 the exact contents of discussions were never recorded due to the traditional nature of the process.  However the results, discussions and decisions were all expressed orally from generation to generation.

Moreover, as I recall from my youth, my elders were in many political discussions about local tribal politics.  They discussed Kandahar’s ancient tribal feud that required genuine thinking over a century ago, so essentially a Loya Jirga was convened.  In that Tribal Jirga, a unanimous decision was made that “a ruling tribe cannot be in the majority.” Apparently the key idea was not to give prominence to a tribe whose supremacy and empowerment –just as now—could jeopardize the balance of the tribal structure.

Thus, one of the main reasons the “Mohammadzai” clan of “Barakzai” dynasty could rule Afghanistan for over a one-half century was because of its minor tribal constituency. The tribal balancing phenomenon has already been solved long ago, and history may need to repeat itself on this issue once again.

Contrary to the present, the old solution allowed tribal balance to be maintained for decades until 1979; and clearly within the Afghan tribal framework, a Jeffersonian style presidential election is doomed to failure.       

A SUCCESSFUL LESSON FROM THE BRITISH

Another tale from two generations ago; when King Nadir Shah—from the “Durrani” tribe of “Mohammadzai” clan—was backed by the British to be the King in Afghanistan in 1929, he was supported mostly by the “Ghelzais” – largely by the “Waziri” and “Mashud” sub-tribes.

In order to keep the tribal balance between the two groups (the “Durranis” and “Ghelzais”) in check, he agreed to give the “Ghelzais” immunity in exchange of their achievements; conquering Kabul and subduing a rival named Habibullah Kalakani; this inaugurated Nader Shah’s reign.  The immunity for the “Ghelzais” was noncompulsory participation in the Afghan military service, but in contrast, they were given higher ranks in brass appointments.

Conversely, if the King could be installed by his own “Durrani” tribe, the balance could also have been tipped by a “Ghelzais’” revolt.  In hindsight, the old solution was a cautionary and well thought out plan for defusing any uprising.

SOME RECENT TRIBAL REPORTS FROM AFGHANISTAN

The tribal feud thus far is in upward swing; I recently received a telephone call from someone named Mr. Burhanuddin Kushkaki, who lives in Germany.  He told me that 11 members of his family including close cousins in Eastern Afghanistan were among the dead due to a U.S. military night raid on their village of “Kushkak” in “Surkhrod” district of Nangarhar Province on May 14th 2010.  Over the telephone, he played a 20 minutes long recorded tape of his cousin who immediately reported the incident from the scene.  As I was hearing the man in the background explaining this dreadful situation, “This incident happened on the same night that Hamid Karzai was in Washington D.C. complaining about U.S. military raids on Afghan villages that caused loss of innocent lives.” He goes on, “we have done no harm to any one, and the provincial governor had no report of this incident.” Then he said, “This is a wrong intelligence report by someone who wanted to send a message to Karzai and Obama.” He then reiterated, “We are caught in a tribal feud and any able body will revengefully recruit and fight those who are killing us.” I later recalled a similar incident by the “Shinwari” tribe of “Mohmand” clan in early March 2010.

I also recently received another telephone call (on a different subject) from an acquaintance—Mr. Aman Gul Khan who is from the “Ghilzai” tribe of “Zazai” clan in Paktia province.  He said, “I along with some tribal elders including the infamous “Haji Baydar Zazai” are working very hard to elevate the ex-King Zahir Shah’s grandson, Prince Mustapha Zahir.”  He went further, “apparently nothing is working from Kandahar and we will do whatever we can to bring him in the same way we brought his great grandfather King Nader Shah to power.”  This clearly is strong opposition to Kandahar’s current tribal imbalance situation that could rise to anarchy.

Some other tribal elders are suggesting a combined government of Amir Amanullah Khan and ex-King Zahir Shah’s siblings would definitely be supported by the majority in Afghanistan.

IN CONCLUSION — WHAT SHALL WE DO?

Prince Mustafa Zahir

In a recent revealed Pentagon report; out of 121 districts critical to stabilizing Afghanistan, only 29 are sympathetic to the Afghan government.  Forty-four are neutral and another 51 are sympathetic to the insurgency.  Indeed, many people have ties—sometimes blood ties—to Taliban fighters.  Obviously the almost decade old government of Hamid Karzai and the tribal imbalance wrought by Ahamad Wali Karzai are the main causes for the downward spiral into instability.

Evidently an old-fashioned military victory in Afghanistan is impossible. This is exactly the problem for the US; The Pentagon can’t let go. The military brass can’t admit that once again they can’t win a war. Clearly there is desperation in these efforts to secure something out of this mess.

Moreover, even if there were more evidence of United States success in Afghanistan, can anyone believe that the current Afghan leadership would be able to sustain whatever gains were made?

By the way, we are stuck with the notion that Karzai is the best partner available and Mr. Obama should not be looking for anyone else. As Fareed Zakaria says, “As a Pashtun and a major figure willing to ally with the U.S., Karzai is indispensable.”

Pull out the troops, because this war can’t be won, but risk lots of blood in another civil war, and maybe a much worse and more dangerous scenario will emerge? Or shall we stay and take the risk of being trapped in a never-ending conflict, which will cost a huge amount of money, blood and tears?

What can we do?  Let’s do the only thing we can do!  Let’s have a Symposium of Afghans from around the world and do like my father’s generation, and the generations before him.  Let’s seek out immediate, mid-range, and long range solutions for Afghanistan.

1) Let’s call for an immediate truce from all sides of this conflict.

2) Let’s seek mid-range economic solutions such as Biz-Jirgah to Biz-Jirgah, and Biomass to Energy.  We can show how rubber dams can supply water for agricultural purposes and create hydropower energy for villages; but, these rubber dams must not be used to produce narcotics; any narcotics producers will lose their rubber dams to villages that obey international law; the Afghan Government should maintain these rubber dams. We will also offer software solutions for the two-year backlog of tax audits in Afghanistan. The Symposium will conclude with a Resolution Statement and an Action Plan.

3) Let’s seek long- range economic solutions by calling upon Afghans around the world to come together in one voice for peace through prosperity… and to change the current status that says that only 20% of Afghanistan’s national income comes from its people; the other 80% is coming from donor nations. This is unsustainable. We need to flip those numbers around… and to start an economic union of nations in South Asia with Afghanistan and Pakistan at its core. This economic union of nations can evolve into a multi-trillion dollar economy and bring peace and stability to the whole region.

Why fight over funds from other nations when we Afghans can build a bright future for and among ourselves.  Just look around the globe and you will see very successful Afghan’s there.  We know how to fight for what we believe in.  The problem is that we have stopped believing in ourselves as a nation.   Our best and brightest thinkers like Zalmay Khalilzad have not focus on what was best for Afghanistan, but instead, in my view, has favored the few over the many.

I have been very critical of Khalilzad lately as many others have been, and for good cause; but I would be the last person to say that he could never change.  It is men like him that we desperately need, but with a different set of core values and principles.

To Zalmay Khalilzad and every other Afghan in the world; it is time we Afghan’s stop fighting among ourselves and put our ancestral homeland ahead of our differences.  As we have learned from living in a democratic nation; we can have our differences; we can debate each other even in public, but when we are called to serve our ancestral homeland we must put those differences aside and work together for the good of all.  That’s how serious I am about solutions for Afghanistan.  I will exclude no one ahead of time (no one with blood on their hands) who is prepared to work on finding real solutions for Afghanistan.

Nelson Mandela was right in setting up a Truth Commission that allowed those who had wronged the people of South Africa to come forward, tell the painful truth, and be allowed to be reintegrated into society without retribution.  Perhaps Afghanistan should go through this process sometime down the road.  But first we have to stop the violence, bring peace, and put hope back into the minds of Afghans. I believe that once people can see, get a taste of, and believe in images of the future, they will move towards it, as John F. Kennedy knew so well.

Let’s do all this before there is a full blown civil war in Afghanistan!

Khalil Nouri is the cofounder of New World Strategies Coalition Inc., a native think tank for nonmilitary solution studies for Afghanistan. www.nwscinc.org

Khalil Nouri is a regular contributor to Opinion Maker

Afghanistan is evidently on life support, with severe preexisting symptoms (constantly flaring-up) of ailments ranging from corruption, drug trafficking, and so forth (echoed repeatedly in the media) to recent swelling traumas of tribal feuds, instigated by Karzai family et al in Kandahar. This predicament is rattling all of Southern and Eastern Afghanistan and has doomed, or will cripple, the very foundation of tribal structure and nationalism in the country.

If there is no shift away from the paradigm of Muslim radicalism, certainly a re-emergence of the old bitter civil war between the two powerful Pashtun tribal groups—“Durranis” and “Ghelzais”—that was fought over three centuries ago, will explode upon us today.

KANDAHAR’S POWER BROKERS

This is a complex indigenous phenomenon that requires a versatile perception that is beyond the comprehension of

Karzai Brothers

many in the West, and it is fueled and manipulated by the Karzai’s “Popalzai” clan of Durrani confederacy tribe, headed by Hamid Karzai’s half brother, Ahmad Wali Karzai, who is the head of the Kandahar provincial council and has assumed for himself the role of absolute monarch in this Southern Afghan city.

Also included in the mix are the Karzai family’s closest allies, who are more captivated with their own interests rather than a genuine partnership; but they have excluded all traditional elders in the smaller local communities from governance and planning—an alienation of key provincial constituencies.  In addition, they have imposed lengthy technocratic strategies that are incomprehensible to local tribal leaders, which has alienated tribal communities and fuelled resentment that invites insurgents to infiltrate them and secure their allegiance against the state; the consequence is an imbalance of tribal structure that leads to a dire recipe for civil strife.

Furthermore, at the core level, the Karzai family (pictured) has made an informal division of spheres such that; each Karzai brother has his own arena of influence.  In fact, Hamid is the statesman, Mahmuod built a business empire, Qayum quietly manipulates things behind the scenes as the family’s “eminence grise”, and Ahmad Wali Karzai has proved adept at mastering local political dynamics and leveraging brother Karzai’s control as Head of State to slowly build his own power base in Kandahar.  In a sublevel, however, the cousins, cronies and their limited tribal constituents (pictured: left to right clockwise: Gul Agha Sherzai, Haji Jan Mohammad, Arif Noorzai and Mattiullah), claim their own portions of various government posts, including land ownership that took little to no real purchase power in exchange to obtain.

Karzai Inner Circle

In addition, the family has benefited from using the institutions of the Afghan state to their advantage, and in doing so have formed important synergies linking politics in Kandahar and Kabul.

And as Ahamad Wali affirmed in one of his media interviews, “This is a country ruled by kings. The king’s brothers, cousins, sons are all powerful.” He further states, “This is Afghanistan. It will change but it will not change overnight.” This without a doubt shows how he flaunts himself as the ultimate ruler of the land in southern Afghan.  He also describes himself as the “Nancy Pelosi of Kandahar,” portraying himself as a dealmaker capable of working with allies and rivals to stabilize Afghanistan.

Because of this “arrogance in plain sight”, other tribes in Kandahar are showing their deep displeasure and outright resentment (being deprived of living even a basic everyday life) towards NATO and the U.S., because of the empowerment that “foreigners” are given to the Karzai family and tribe.  As a result, this constitutes the main ingredient for insurgency recruitment; and consequently the impending manifestation for a blowback beyond control.

Furthermore, paradoxically the assertion by U.S. officials, that they see Ahmad Wali Karzai, “as a polarizing figure who could complicate their efforts to win over the population”, makes no sense. This clearly sends a contradictory double message to the population, and many view this as a sign of U.S. weakness.  How can you oppose him and back him up with military might at the same time?

A BRIEF INTRODUCTION OF PASHTUN TRIBAL STRUCTURE:

The multifaceted Pashtun tribes generally consist of multiple subdivisions, including sub-tribes and clans.  In broad

Pashtun Tribal Structure

terms, on one side are the “Durranis” – most of the settled population of Kandahar are related to the Karzai “Popalzai” clan; they are the elite, the aristocrats, farmers, traders, and the professional middle class who have gained  certain powers and prestige.  On the other hand of the same body politics are the “Ghilzais”, who are traditionally nomadic, fiercely fundamentalist in religion, and whose tribal and village leaders were dependent on, and subordinate to, the local aristocracy—a class status that was less prominent in other Pashtun areas. Their homelands stretch east into Pakistan as far as Kashmir.

A RELENTLESS PASHTUN TRIBAL BLOWBACK IS ON THE HORIZON

Ever since Afghanistan emerged as a sovereign nation in 1709, when the “Ghilzais” defeated the Persians, its history has been etched in ancient hatreds between “Ghilzai” and “Durrani” groups. During most of that time, the country was ruled by the “Durrani” tribe, who in 1775 moved its capital from the “Ghilzai” stronghold of Kandahar to Kabul in the North.  Nothing more fired up “Ghilzais’” enmity than the many occasions when the “Durranis” attempted to impose their rule from Kabul with the aid of “foreigners”; either “Tajiks” from the north or other outsiders such as the British, who invaded Afghanistan three times between 1838 and 1919 in a bid to secure the North-west Frontier of their Indian empire against the rebellious “Ghilzais.”

When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979, after years of “Durrani” rule, it was to support a revolutionary “Ghilzai” government.  But this new foreign presence inspired general Afghan resistance, and was why (by the late 1980s) the U.S. was supporting the almost entirely “Ghilzai-run-Taliban”—then called Mujahideen—and their ally Osama Bin laden.  In 1996 the “Taliban-Ghilzai” got their revenge, and imposed their theocratic rule over almost the whole country.  In 2001, the West invaded Afghanistan to topple the Taliban, imposing “Durrani” rule again; now under “Durrani” President Karzai—however, he is from an unpopular “Durrani” side of the “Popalzai” clan.

Now, as so often before, the “Ghilzais” have seen their country hijacked by a “Durrani” regime, supported by a largely Tajik army backed by hated outsiders from the West. One reason why it is so hard for the West to win “hearts and minds” amongst the majority of Afghans is because the West is up against a sullenly resentful population, fired up by a timeless hatred and able to call upon unlimited support, in men and materiel, from their “Ghilzai” brethrens across the border in Pakistan.  As aforementioned, the main reason for the overall resentment and growing insurgency to arrive is because the Karzai family and cronies are seen as an artificially imposed dominant tribal group in Kandahar (from the outset).

AN AFGHAN ARMY OF MINIMAL PASHTUNS

Another factor for a civil war in Afghanistan is the 65% Tajik recruitment in the Afghan National Army (ANA).  There has been consistent reporting by Western media sources with the line that NATO troops operate “in support of” the ANA, and that, this genuine force reflects the whole nation.  This misinformation campaign even released erroneous figures of the ethnic composition of the ANA. These artificial figures reflect the rule set up by the top brass in U.S. and NATO forces.   Under this rule, the Afghan army should be 38 percent Pashtun, 25 percent Tajik, 19 percent Hazara and eight percent Uzbek. This would bring the numbers much closer to reflecting the nation’s ethnic composition.

A reliable source within the ANA—a close affiliate of Afghan Joint Chief of Staff General Bismillah Khan—has revealed, “The truth is that the ANA is now over 65% Tajik, and that figure is increasing.” He went on, “The Pashtun figure is hovering below 18% and may have been overtaken by the Uzbeks.”

In other words, the “Afghan National Army” is just the Northern Alliance with very expensive NATO provided gears and uniforms. Therefore, by sending the Northern Alliance supported by U.S. and NATO troops into core Pashtun tribal areas, all these forces are seen as alien occupiers.  Locals vehemently resent this, and since they cannot identify with any of these forces, they are returning to the Taliban. This is further adding fuel to anger, leading to civil war.

HOW TO DEFUSE TRIBAL TENSION IN KANDAHAR

Since 1707 to December 2009 there were 19 grand assemblies of elders (Loya Jirgas) convened in Afghanistan, and mostly prior to 1880 the exact contents of discussions were never recorded due to the traditional nature of the process.  However the results, discussions and decisions were all expressed orally from generation to generation.

Moreover, as I recall from my youth, my elders were in many political discussions about local tribal politics.  They discussed Kandahar’s ancient tribal feud that required genuine thinking over a century ago, so essentially a Loya Jirga was convened.  In that Tribal Jirga, a unanimous decision was made that “a ruling tribe cannot be in the majority.” Apparently the key idea was not to give prominence to a tribe whose supremacy and empowerment –just as now—could jeopardize the balance of the tribal structure.

Thus, one of the main reasons the “Mohammadzai” clan of “Barakzai” dynasty could rule Afghanistan for over a one-half century was because of its minor tribal constituency. The tribal balancing phenomenon has already been solved long ago, and history may need to repeat itself on this issue once again.

Contrary to the present, the old solution allowed tribal balance to be maintained for decades until 1979; and clearly within the Afghan tribal framework, a Jeffersonian style presidential election is doomed to failure.       

A SUCCESSFUL LESSON FROM THE BRITISH

Another tale from two generations ago; when King Nadir Shah—from the “Durrani” tribe of “Mohammadzai” clan—was backed by the British to be the King in Afghanistan in 1929, he was supported mostly by the “Ghelzais” – largely by the “Waziri” and “Mashud” sub-tribes.

In order to keep the tribal balance between the two groups (the “Durranis” and “Ghelzais”) in check, he agreed to give the “Ghelzais” immunity in exchange of their achievements; conquering Kabul and subduing a rival named Habibullah Kalakani; this inaugurated Nader Shah’s reign.  The immunity for the “Ghelzais” was noncompulsory participation in the Afghan military service, but in contrast, they were given higher ranks in brass appointments.

Conversely, if the King could be installed by his own “Durrani” tribe, the balance could also have been tipped by a “Ghelzais’” revolt.  In hindsight, the old solution was a cautionary and well thought out plan for defusing any uprising.

SOME RECENT TRIBAL REPORTS FROM AFGHANISTAN

The tribal feud thus far is in upward swing; I recently received a telephone call from someone named Mr. Burhanuddin Kushkaki, who lives in Germany.  He told me that 11 members of his family including close cousins in Eastern Afghanistan were among the dead due to a U.S. military night raid on their village of “Kushkak” in “Surkhrod” district of Nangarhar Province on May 14th 2010.  Over the telephone, he played a 20 minutes long recorded tape of his cousin who immediately reported the incident from the scene.  As I was hearing the man in the background explaining this dreadful situation, “This incident happened on the same night that Hamid Karzai was in Washington D.C. complaining about U.S. military raids on Afghan villages that caused loss of innocent lives.” He goes on, “we have done no harm to any one, and the provincial governor had no report of this incident.” Then he said, “This is a wrong intelligence report by someone who wanted to send a message to Karzai and Obama.” He then reiterated, “We are caught in a tribal feud and any able body will revengefully recruit and fight those who are killing us.” I later recalled a similar incident by the “Shinwari” tribe of “Mohmand” clan in early March 2010.

I also recently received another telephone call (on a different subject) from an acquaintance—Mr. Aman Gul Khan who is from the “Ghilzai” tribe of “Zazai” clan in Paktia province.  He said, “I along with some tribal elders including the infamous “Haji Baydar Zazai” are working very hard to elevate the ex-King Zahir Shah’s grandson, Prince Mustapha Zahir.”  He went further, “apparently nothing is working from Kandahar and we will do whatever we can to bring him in the same way we brought his great grandfather King Nader Shah to power.”  This clearly is strong opposition to Kandahar’s current tribal imbalance situation that could rise to anarchy.

Some other tribal elders are suggesting a combined government of Amir Amanullah Khan and ex-King Zahir Shah’s siblings would definitely be supported by the majority in Afghanistan.

IN CONCLUSION — WHAT SHALL WE DO?

Prince Mustafa Zahir

In a recent revealed Pentagon report; out of 121 districts critical to stabilizing Afghanistan, only 29 are sympathetic to the Afghan government.  Forty-four are neutral and another 51 are sympathetic to the insurgency.  Indeed, many people have ties—sometimes blood ties—to Taliban fighters.  Obviously the almost decade old government of Hamid Karzai and the tribal imbalance wrought by Ahamad Wali Karzai are the main causes for the downward spiral into instability.

Evidently an old-fashioned military victory in Afghanistan is impossible. This is exactly the problem for the US; The Pentagon can’t let go. The military brass can’t admit that once again they can’t win a war. Clearly there is desperation in these efforts to secure something out of this mess.

Moreover, even if there were more evidence of United States success in Afghanistan, can anyone believe that the current Afghan leadership would be able to sustain whatever gains were made?

By the way, we are stuck with the notion that Karzai is the best partner available and Mr. Obama should not be looking for anyone else. As Fareed Zakaria says, “As a Pashtun and a major figure willing to ally with the U.S., Karzai is indispensable.”

Pull out the troops, because this war can’t be won, but risk lots of blood in another civil war, and maybe a much worse and more dangerous scenario will emerge? Or shall we stay and take the risk of being trapped in a never-ending conflict, which will cost a huge amount of money, blood and tears?

What can we do?  Let’s do the only thing we can do!  Let’s have a Symposium of Afghans from around the world and do like my father’s generation, and the generations before him.  Let’s seek out immediate, mid-range, and long range solutions for Afghanistan.

1) Let’s call for an immediate truce from all sides of this conflict.

2) Let’s seek mid-range economic solutions such as Biz-Jirgah to Biz-Jirgah, and Biomass to Energy.  We can show how rubber dams can supply water for agricultural purposes and create hydropower energy for villages; but, these rubber dams must not be used to produce narcotics; any narcotics producers will lose their rubber dams to villages that obey international law; the Afghan Government should maintain these rubber dams. We will also offer software solutions for the two-year backlog of tax audits in Afghanistan. The Symposium will conclude with a Resolution Statementand an Action Plan.

3) Let’s seek long- range economic solutions by calling upon Afghans around the world to come together in one voice for peace through prosperity… and to change the current status that says that only 20% of Afghanistan’s national income comes from its people; the other 80% is coming from donor nations. This is unsustainable. We need to flip those numbers around… and to start an economic union of nations in South Asia with Afghanistan and Pakistan at its core. This economic union of nations can evolve into a multi-trillion dollar economy and bring peace and stability to the whole region.

Why fight over funds from other nations when we Afghans can build a bright future for and among ourselves.  Just look around the globe and you will see very successful Afghan’s there.  We know how to fight for what we believe in.  The problem is that we have stopped believing in ourselves as a nation.   Our best and brightest thinkers like Zalmay Khalilzad have not focus on what was best for Afghanistan, but instead, in my view, has favored the few over the many.

I have been very critical of Khalilzad lately as many others have been, and for good cause; but I would be the last person to say that he could never change.  It is men like him that we desperately need, but with a different set of core values and principles.

To Zalmay Khalilzad and every other Afghan in the world; it is time we Afghan’s stop fighting among ourselves and put our ancestral homeland ahead of our differences.  As we have learned from living in a democratic nation; we can have our differences; we can debate each other even in public, but when we are called to serve our ancestral homeland we must put those differences aside and work together for the good of all.  That’s how serious I am about solutions for Afghanistan.  I will exclude no one ahead of time (no one with blood on their hands) who is prepared to work on finding real solutions for Afghanistan.

Nelson Mandela was right in setting up a Truth Commission that allowed those who had wronged the people of South Africa to come forward, tell the painful truth, and be allowed to be reintegrated into society without retribution.  Perhaps Afghanistan should go through this process sometime down the road.  But first we have to stop the violence, bring peace, and put hope back into the minds of Afghans. I believe that once people can see, get a taste of, and believe in images of the future, they will move towards it, as John F. Kennedy knew so well.

Let’s do all this before there is a full blown civil war in Afghanistan!

Khalil Nouri is the cofounder of New World Strategies Coalition Inc., a native think tank for nonmilitary solution studies for Afghanistan. www.nwscinc.org

Khalil Nouri is a regular contributor to Opinion Maker

A BRIDGE for Democracy in Turkmenistan

A BRIDGE for Democracy in Turkmenistan

Cover

Ashgabat, Turkmenistan, 19 May 2010—Turkmenistan’s continued its progress toward transparent elections with a five-day training of regional election officials. The training is a part of a United Nations Development Programme project to help Turkmenistan nurture an ongoing democratic culture.

Workshop participants received interactive training in election administration and training techniques. Topics covered included establishing election commissions, ethics, voter registration, voter education, and the role of international observers. Topics were presented through examples of election administration experiences of Australia, South Africa, Nigeria, Thailand and Poland.

The trainees—election officials from each of Turkmenistan’s five provinces —are now expected to train city and district level electoral officials in their respective provinces. Members of the Central Election Commission and the National Institute for Democracy and Human Rights also took part in the training.

“I look forward to sharing the literature and skills gained during the training with my colleagues at the district level,” Ismail Mamedov, an election official from Balkan Province, said. “I have some 20 colleagues from six city and six district election commissions who will benefit from this.”

The process of deepening economic and social structural reforms has been under way in Turkmenistan since 2008, opening doors for UNDP to engage with the Government of Turkmenistan in the area of electoral reform to stimulate a review of the electoral framework and bring current electoral practices in Turkmenistan closer to international standards. As part of this process, UNDP helped Turkmenistan to enhance its election administration capacity ahead of the parliamentary elections in 2008, elections to local self-governance bodies in 2009, and now the UNDP training comes just ahead of 2010 people’s council elections.

Launched in 2008, the initiative ‘Cooperation on Enhancing Electoral System and Processes in Turkmenistan’ aims to assist the government in deepening its democratic processes. The five-day training, known as BRIDGE (Building Resources in Democracy, Governance and Elections) is seen as a way to make those reform efforts self-sustaining. Also as part of the project, efforts are underway to amend Turkmenistan’s electoral framework to meet international standards and establish a unified electoral code. Turkmenistan election officials also recently took part in a study tour to Hungary.
“Our project and this BRIDGE exercise are in tune with Turkmenistan’s efforts to enhance the capacity of election officials and part of the ongoing legal reform in Turkmenistan,” Narine Sahakyan, UNDP Deputy Resident Representative in Turkmenistan, said.

UNDP is implementing the project in partnership with the National Institute for Democracy and Human Rights with the financial support of the Government of Norway.

Asst. Sec. St. Confirms “No Competition” Between US and Russia On Pipelines

[SEE: Obama Trying To Make Rape Look Like Seduction]

“We are not trying to build a pipeline bypassing Russia”

George Krol on U.S. policy in Central Asia

Photo:Yuri Martianov / Kommersant
In Moscow, arrived in Bishkek yesterday U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary George Krol, who oversees the State Department relations with Central Asia. Prior to the talks in the Foreign Ministry and the Security Council, he met with a correspondent of Kommersant ALEXANDER GABUEVYM and tried to convince him that Moscow and Washington did not compete in this region.

– What is the agenda of your current visit to Moscow?

– I have just arrived from Bishkek, where he met with the leadership of the interim government: Rosa Otunbayeva, Almazbek Atambayev, Omurbek Tekebayev and others. I’ve also visited the south in Osh, where he met with leaders of the area and the city, Uzbek community leaders, representatives of NGOs. I arrived in Moscow for consultations with colleagues in the Foreign Ministry, the Security Council and State Duma, including Deputy Foreign Minister Grigory Karasin and special envoy of President of Russia in Kyrgyzstan, Vladimir Rushailo.

– I was in Kyrgyzstan during the revolution. And as the situation there now?

– Now the situation is generally calm in the country, in Bishkek, and even in the south of the voltage is not felt. All city services are functioning normally, the bazaars are full. Politically, of course, there is a lot of events. Members of the interim government is now trying to establish the country’s administration, but at the same time think nothing of the changes that occur in the leadership after the election. Meanwhile, in addition to concern for its own legitimacy have to deal with a mass of things, such as food and energy. After the energy crises in Kyrgyzstan occur every year. The economic situation is difficult. Kyrgyzstan – a poor country, and besides, she suffered from the global crisis. Now the members of the interim government are different political games. In short, the usual policy in the unusual time. The common people waiting for the appearance of leadership that will address issues, especially corruption, which has ruined regimes Bakiyev and Akayev.

– Do you think that this is the only factor? Bakiyev himself talked a lot about external factors.

– Anywhere in the world, as soon as there are some difficulties, all begin to blame the external factor – Russia, USA, China, just about anybody. But in most cases use the internal factors. In Kyrgyzstan, it seemed to me that most people are united by dissatisfaction with the growing influence of the family to Bakiev’s politics, economy. Parliament became increasingly controlled by the president and his family. This also added a price increase. For many people the feeling that they were kicked out of the process of governance. This applies to the opposition and ordinary people, and even law enforcement. All of them feel that they do not shape the future. It is the totality of these factors led to the well-known events, which, in my opinion, no one planned. Then began the demonstration, then overgrown in the action with violence. The regime collapsed, there was a power vacuum that the interim government has yet to be filled.

– What kind of assistance the U.S. is ready to provide interim government in Kyrgyzstan?

– The United States is working jointly with international organizations: UN, OSCE, IMF, World Bank. The U.S. continues all the programs that we implemented in Kyrgyzstan before the revolution, supporting the development of democracy, the housekeeper, free and independent media. We will provide technical support for the referendum and subsequent elections, including through the American non-governmental organizations. We sent a team of experts to Kyrgyzstan, which will assess the short-, medium-and long-term prospects for our assistance.This assistance should be directed to those areas and regions that the Kyrgyz government will take priority.

– Meanwhile, Russia has already announced the allocation of Bishkek immediately $ 20 million to Moscow was the first to recognize the interim government. Are not you afraid that because of the slowness of the United States will lose the struggle for influence in Kyrgyzstan?

– You talk about the struggle for influence. But we do not see any struggle. No new big game, which is so often write, no. We are not fighting for influence in Kyrgyzstan, with Russia, nor with any other country. That is why I am now in Moscow. And we always kept in touch and discuss with each other in the region. And now the U.S. is trying to coordinate assistance so that all we did not do the same. We welcome the steps that Russia is doing in Kyrgyzstan. She’s great interests: economic, commercial and military. We also have interests there. But the interaction in Kyrgyzstan – it is not rivalry, but a good example of cooperation. For example, when our presidents met in Prague, they are particularly talking about Kyrgyzstan and, in my opinion, it was an initiative of your President. Our two countries are interested in stability, not only in Kyrgyzstan, but also throughout Central Asia.

– You argue that there is no rivalry. But what about the air base at Manas? After all, Moscow sought its withdrawal. For example, in the Security Council of Russia said that in Kyrgyzstan should be one air base – Russia’s.

– Well, they’re right. In Kyrgyzstan, only one air base – Russian in Kant. And we have at Manas – International transit center. This is not a military air base, and this is the essence of our agreements with the Kyrgyz government. There are no combat aircraft. This is only the center for the transfer of coalition forces in Afghanistan, and from it. And we have always been very transparent on this issue, including Russia, with China and with all other countries. Of course, we understand that the presence of U.S. troops in Central Asia worries many in Moscow. And this is understandable. But the most important question: whether it will be a constant presence?And my answer – no. It will not be a permanent facility, even as a transit center. We are not going to turn our Manas military base. The Centre is there only to supply the needs of the coalition in Afghanistan. We do not have plans for the creation of any American military bases in Central Asia.

– So as soon as the operation in Afghanistan is completed, all these facilities will be withdrawn?

– This is our plan. We hope that the situation in Afghanistan stabilizes in the near future. So the need for U.S. presence in the region, and any other foreign troops are unnecessary.

– You were discussing the fate of the Manas during his visit to Bishkek?

– No, because we have no disagreement on this issue. Kyrgyzstan holds a signed agreement.And we too. The U.S. has all the payments specified in the agreement last year, which is also a source of revenue for the country. When the interim government came to power, they immediately gave us a clear understanding that they are ready to continue this cooperation.

– Are not you afraid that the new government to be elected in October, wish to terminate the agreement?

– Agreement may be revised at any time either party. It provides a procedure under which terminate the Agreement shall notify the other party for six months. Accordingly, to six months to turn an object. But in the case of the interim government that will not happen.

– Will you discuss this issue in Moscow?

– I am here to answer any questions that may arise from my Russian colleagues. We work together and not against each other. And we must try to, and outwardly it was not like the competition. Because this attempt to bleed us can be played by various forces both within Kyrgyzstan and external players.

– For external players you mean China?

– No, we are nothing like the Chinese did not hear. We discuss all our relationships in Central Asia and with China and answering their questions.

– When George W. Bush in Central Asia, the war was active pipelines. Will the U.S. continue to participate in them?

– We do not see any competition on the routes of energy flows from Central Asia. We do not try to build some kind of pipe to bypass Russia. The issue is that in the region enormous reserves of gas and oil. And in order to effectively deliver them to markets, need a variety of routes.Looking for new routes at the same time it is necessary to increase the volume of supply to existing ones. Of course, the main route of transportation of energy will always go through Russia. It is effective, it already exists, there is an opportunity to build up the amount of flow.But because the hydrocarbons in the region so much, it would be advisable to have several ways to transport them in different directions. Often, all this trying to submit as a contest, but in reality we do not want to harm the interests of Russia in the region. Just need a diversified system of pipelines, which will serve the interests of the U.S. and Russia, as well as companies – Gazprom “, Exxon Mobil, Chevron. The main thing is that all these pipes were effective from a commercial point of view. All companies want to make a profit, so that the pipe-laying – is a commercial decision and not solely political.

– Then what explains that in 2007 a grant to develop a feasibility study for Trans-Caspian pipeline has allocated U.S. State Department? Washington now supports this project?

– In any case, it makes sense to study this project because it provides an opportunity to diversify the direction of gas supplies. In Turkmenistan, the huge gas reserves. Of course, it still has to work with Azerbaijan on the issue of demarcation of the Caspian Sea. At that time it was only a proposal to provide technical assistance to all to understand whether the project has meaning. But this was not an attempt to develop a route that led to the resources of the pipeline crossing the territory of Russia.

– The Russian-American relations now are “reset”. Raised whether it is Central Asia?

– I work in post-Soviet space for over 20 years and watching the transformation of our policies.During this time the U.S. and Russia have found the opportunity to speak, understand each other, rather than exercising political rhetoric. We should respect each other’s interests, all the painful point in our countries and the region. And the dialogue, which now leads the Presidents Medvedev and Obama, a completely new phenomenon. Take the same Kyrgyzstan. We work together, and in a very difficult situation. We and you have a domestic political context, a lot of stereotypes about each other, but I hope that our government will cope with this. That concrete cooperation, which so long ago to us, and the world. The Cold War finally ended. Take the parade on Red Square – it’s magical. For America in general is very important to understand the role played by the peoples of the USSR in the end this terrible conflict. Similarly, for Russia it is important to understand what role the war played the U.S. and other coalition allies.

– In Central Asia, now has a new powerful player – China. As the United States are strengthening the position of Beijing in the region?

– You are absolutely right, China’s influence in the region is growing rapidly, especially in the economy. You go to the market in any Central Asian country, and it will be swamped with Chinese products. And they built the gas pipeline from Turkmenistan to China! They had great interests of the region, so that China must also play an important role. Therefore, we are working with China in Central Asia, as well as with Russia.

– “Restart” in Central Asia is clearly affected not only relations with Russia. Recently, for example, dramatically warmed your relationship with Uzbekistan. The United States has forgotten about the Andijan shootings?

– Andijan – a tragedy that should not happen again. Understanding the causes of this conflict is very important for the people and Government of Uzbekistan to understand how to deal with such incidents, such as attempts to revolt. All this is very sensitive domestic issues in Uzbekistan. The U.S. has always been open in their desire to help find out what really happened. The emotions of that period had already subsided. The U.S. has always sought to mutual understanding and mutually beneficial cooperation with Uzbekistan. Tashkent wants to have strong economic and political contacts with us. He plays a very important and constructive role in Afghanistan, in Kabul, electricity comes from Uzbekistan, they are providing humanitarian assistance. United States respects it. So recently we began annual consultations with Uzbekistan, the first round of which took place in November last year. We are looking for ways of how to work together.

Taliban Symbolic Attacks Tarnish American “Warrior” Image

A Mini-Offensive in Afghanistan

The Taliban’s New Threat to NATO

By Ulrike Demmer and Matthias Gebauer

Four high-ranking NATO soldiers were killed in a bloody attack in Kabul on May 18.

DPA

Four high-ranking NATO soldiers were killed in a bloody attack in Kabul on May 18.

The Taliban recently conducted three spectacular strikes against American forces in Afghanistan within the space of a few days. The attacks are creating negative headlines for NATO forces and making it difficult for them to notch up the important successes they need to build support for the deployment back home.

The sign on the sports field reads: “Clean up after using.” But there is no one to be found playing volleyball here on this Sunday morning, and no one is cleaning up either. The field is closed. Two American soldiers are staring at a pile of boards located behind red-and-white barricade tape. The wooden planks are stained with blood.

The site looked different on Saturday. The planks were part of stairs where people used to take coffee breaks. The sports field is surrounded by businesses — there’s the Mamma Mia pizzeria, the United Afghan Carpet company, Green Beans World Café — and all were connected by a veranda. Just after 8 p.m., one of five rockets that had been fired by insurgents at the Kandahar NATO base struck its intended target. Several NATO soldiers and civilian workers were injured.

The missiles struck the ISAF troops in southern Afghanistan in precisely the place where the soldiers were seeking to forget about the war for a few minutes. The four other rockets only caused damage to property. Still, the headlines created by the third Taliban attack in the space of just a few days make uncomfortable reading for NATO. The Taliban, one general conceded, are showing, at the very least, that they are still around.

The insurgents attacked the airport at Kandahar just after sunset. The Kandahar Airfield is so big that it would take a quarter of an hour for a car to cross it from one end to the other. Around 25,000 soldiers live and work here. The base is the staging ground for the last attempt by the alliance to defeat the Taliban. The fresh soldiers being deployed by US President Barack Obama are sent into battle from here.

The tarmac is divided into zones, from A to Z. In Zone W for Whiskey, four airplanes are currently awaiting clearance for takeoff. Flight 073 to Kabul, a Hercules, is full. US solders sit shoulder to shoulder, squeezed into the cargo area of the dark green transport aircraft. Most have their eyes closed. The oppressive heat is only tolerable in body armour if you remain motionless.

War-Like Conditions on Base

It is around 8:45 p.m. when a soldier who is part of the crew on the Hercules hollers: “Is there anybody with ammunition on board?” Three soldiers who are carrying weapons stand up. Rumors circulate of a rocket attack by insurgents, and confirmation follows shortly. Through the loudspeakers over the tarmac, one can hear: “KAF is under ground attack — take shelter in place — force protection are dealing with the situation.”

As the soldiers leave the Hercules and make their way to the bunker, the skies over the tarmac light up as if with fireworks. Six Apache attack helicopters are firing tracer bullets over Zone W, the thunder of an A-10 fighter jet can be heard and sirens are going off.

“Insurgents have fired on the camp with rockets,” says one general. Later it will be reported that 12 ISAF troops were injured and three insurgents were shot as they tried to penetrate the base from the northern edge of the camp.

Meanwhile in the bunker, an interpretation of the attacks is already being discussed. People are saying that, the attack on Kandahar Airfield, the largest base in southern Afghanistan, wasn’t so bad, relatively speaking. In other words, it wasn’t very big, it wasn’t planned very well and it wasn’t as hard to stop as the attack conducted by a handful of suicide bombers against Bagram, the largest US base in Afghanistan, just four days earlier.

It took hours for the US Army to stop attackers at the perimeter of the gigantic Bagram base. Although none of the insurgents breached the perimeter, the skirmishes lasted from midnight to early morning and the Taliban managed to kill an American contractor.

Part 2: The Taliban’s Logistics Appear to Be Working

And on May 18, a suicide attack against a convoy in Kabul resulted in many deaths, including four high-ranking US officers. Two colonels and two lieutenant colonels, more or less the leadership of the US Mountain Warriors from Camp Julien, died in the attack. It had been a long time since the Taliban had succeeded in such a serious strike against the US Army.

The Taliban, which had largely been quiet in recent weeks, have made a formidable comeback. The most one had heard about them previously was that the US Army had detained a mid-range Taliban commander in the south, eliminated a weapons depot or that Afghan President Hamid Karzai had boldly repeated that he wanted to negotiate with the insurgents.

Western intelligence services share the assessment that the attack on Kandahar was largely symbolic. “Naturally this isn’t about a group of fighters trying to capture a base with thousands of soldiers,” says one NATO insider. “The attacks merely served to show their determination.” With their three attacks on Kabul, Baghram and Kandahar, the insurgents certainly succeeded in doing that.

The detailed analysis of the two attacks that preceded the one in Kandahar are sobering. The intelligence services are assuming that a network of one of the most dangerous warlords in Afghanistan, the jihadist legend Jalaluddin Haqqani, dispatched a whole handful of teams of suicide attackers to Kabul to strike American targets. Three Pakistan nationals who had been arrested the day before the attack on the American convoy at the southern edge of the city, and who had hidden explosive vests in the trunk of their vehicle, confessed this after lengthy interrogations.

If the reports of their Afghan colleagues are true, then they provide evidence of the group’s advanced logistical ability. The Haqqani network, which operates relatively freely from the area surrounding the eastern Afghan city of Khost, appears to have dispatched its teams to Kabul from all directions. None of the young Pakistani men knew what had been planned for them. They were first given their deadly instructions in one of the group’s hideouts near the scene of the attack.

Summer 2010 Will Be Decisive

The developments must be especially troubling for the head of the NATO forces. US General Stanley McChrystal knows that summer 2010 will be decisive for his ambitious new strategy as well as his own career. At the very latest, President Obama wants to be able to show at least a small success by the end of the year. Other NATO partners are also under intense domestic political pressure to demonstrate progress in Afghanistan.

Steps toward that goal are expected soon. In the coming weeks, NATO wants to restore the authority of the Kabul government in the Taliban stronghold of Kandahar. But the insurgents have already announced their own offensive, too. If they follow up their threats with action, in the form of hard-to-prevent attacks like those conducted in recent days, then the situation could get very difficult for the alliance. It is hard to counter images of devastated streets with news of minor successes in the south.

For his part, McChrystal is not allowing himself to be influenced by the attacks. But while he may express optimism publicly, McChrystal’s advisers are preparing for the inevitable: If the Taliban is under significant military pressure both in northern and southern Afghanistan, they are likely to switch tactics and carry out more symbolic attacks.

One day after the Kandahar incident, General McChrystal said that the “attacks were not operationally effective.” He and his forces are preparing for possible further attacks in Kabul, a city that is by no means safe.

Attacks like those which took place last week will have to be prevented at all costs during the upcoming peace jirga at the beginning of June and also at the international Kabul Conference to be hosted by Karzai. Such attacks would not bring the Taliban a military victory — but politically they would be a nightmare.

The Shaky State of Indian Supplied Saeed/Mumbai Evidence

India fails to vet Saeed evidence

DC Correspondent

May 27: There appears to be a twist to the Hafiz Saeed tale, which has so far been about India supplying the needed proof to nail his role as a prime mover in the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, but Pakistan treating this as “literature,” rather than “evidence” and refusing to put him away on that basis.

When the Pakistan Supreme Court threw out the case against the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba founder, saying the evidence was not good enough, the foreign secretary, Ms Nirupama Rao, expressed “disappointment” and said all Indians would be disappointed. She urged the Pakistan government to be sensitive to Indian concerns and do more. However, top-level sources, who declined to be identified, appeared to give the benefit of the doubt to the Pakistan judiciary.

“We seem to be in the habit of passing on to Islamabad whatever the (intelligence) agencies are able to put together, without vetting it for its evidentiary value. This is the old Dawood Ibrahim syndrome, when Mr L.K. Advani was the home minister. Then we went to the extent of staking India-Pakistan relations on Pakistan handing Dawood over to us on the basis of the so-called evidence we supplied.”

They noted that the external affairs minister and the Prime Minister had maintained that in the interest of good-neighbourly relations Pakistan should not allow Mr Saeed to roam free as he was in the habit of inciting people to attack India, but these leaders had not staked their reputation on the evidence value of the dossiers on Mr Saeed given to Islamabad.

ISI/JUD Water Alliance–Legitimizing Anti-India Jihad

Saeed-Pak establishment nexus clear from new ‘water-war’ anti-India campaign

Washington, May 28 (ANI): Despite its public stance of wanting a truce with long-time ‘rival’ neighbour, experts have pointed out that the Pakistangovernment has devised a new strategy to continue its traditional ‘proxy war’ through extremists against India.

Pakistani militant groups, particularly the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and the banned Jamaat-ud-Daawa (JuD), under the guidance of country’s security establishments have now adopted the long pending river water sharing issue as a tool to aid their nefarious aims.

The water issue touches millions of Pakistanis, and that is why militant leaders like the JuD chief Hafeez Mohammed Saeed, the mastermind of the 26/11 terror attacks, have been raising the matter amidst people to incite feelings and gain support against the ‘anti-India’ movement.

Saeed recently led a protest of thousands of farmers in Lahore carrying placards which read :”Water Flows or Blood”, which clearly suggested the motives of the ‘jihadi’ organisations.

Analysts underlined that Saeed’s use of the water issue demonstrates his long-standing links to Pakistan’s powerful security establishment, elements of which do not favour peacemaking, The Washington Post reports.

“Hafiz Saeed is trying to echo the establishment’s line. The government is trying to shift the focus of Kashmir as part of a jihadist thing . . . to an existential issue,” said Rifaat Hussain, a professor of security studies at Qaid-i-Azam University in Islamabad.

The LeT has taken its fight against India beyond Kashmir to stage attacks in Afghanistan and work with militant organizations in Pakistan’s northwest, but Saeed in particular has sought to uphold the group’s Kashmir-focused reputation, making water a bit of a departure, the newspaper said.

Blaming India for the water crisis in the country is meant to ‘inflame public passions’ at a time when it appeared that the Pakistanis were starting to denounce terrorism, the paper said. (ANI)

Kyrgyzstan’s ‘Roza Revolution’–Cui Bono? (Part 2)

Kyrgyzstan’s ‘Roza Revolution’ – Cui Bono? (Part 2)

China and the Kyrgyz geopolitical future
by F. William Engdahl*

Continuing with F. William Engdhal’s analysis of what is playing out in this coveted Central Asian region, part two examines China’s geopolitical interest regarding fellow SCO member Kyrgyzstan. Triggering the 2005 Tulip Revolution were, inter alia, the economic ties between the two countries which had grown too close for Washington’s comfort. Today, China’s economic clout remains its strongest weapon in aiming not only to consolidate its foothold in Kyrgyzstan, but also to offset the destabilising effect of the U.S. military presence in that country and in the region.

Part 1: Kyrgyzstan as a Geopolitical Pivot

JPEG - 23.1 kb
Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (R) shakes hands with former Kyrgyzstan Prime Minister Igor V. Chudinov during a welcoming ceremony for the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Summit held at the Great Hall of the People on October 14, 2009 in Beijing, China. Wen gave a red-carpet welcome ceremony for Chudinov, who was the first Kyrgyz Prime Minister to visit China in the past 16 years.
(Photo By Pool/Getty Images)

China’s growing economic ties to the cash-strapped regime of former Kyrgyz President Askar Akayev was a major reason Washington decided to dump its erstwhile ally Akayev after almost a decade of support. In June 2001 China, along with Russia, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, signed the Declaration creating the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). Three days later Beijing announced a large grant to Kyrgyzstan for military equipment [1] .

After 11 September 2001, the Pentagon began what has been called the greatest shake-up in America’s overseas military deployments since the end of the Second World War. The goal was to position US forces along an ’arc of instability’ going through the Mediterranean, Africa, the Middle East, the Caucasus, Central Asia and southern Asia [2].

Akayev at the time offered to lease to the Pentagon its largest military base in the region at Manas. China, which shares a border with Kyrgyzstan was alarmed and, together with Russia, steered the Shanghai Cooperation Organization to oppose it, and to call for ending US military bases in Central Asia.

According to the Wall Street Journal, China was also engaged in secret negotiations for its own base in Kyrgyzstan and for border changes that ignited a political storm against Akayev in March 2002.

The Journal’s Philip Shishkin noted, “Akayev’s moves to align Kyrgyzstan with China through ‘Silk Road diplomacy’ and suppression of the Uighur guerrillas – explained mainly by his desperate need of finances to stem the tail-spinning domestic economy – upset Washington, which saw Beijing as a thorn in its strategic expansion agenda” [3].

Shishkin added, “The American perspective on this dangerous development went as follows: ‘Given the 1,100-kilometer border between Kyrgyzstan and China – and Washington’s already considerable foothold in nearby Uzbekistan and Tajikistan – the fall of the China-friendly government of disgraced president Askar Akayev would be no small victory for the ’containment policy’” [4].

At that point Washington launched massive financing via theNational Endowment for Democracy and used the resources of the Albert Einstein Institute and Freedom House as well as the State Department and IMF to topple the now-unreliable Akayev regime in the 2005 Tulip Revolution [5].

Understandably, one of the major interested parties in the political future of Kyrgyzstan today is China. Kyrgyzstan shares a 530 mile border with China, straddling the politically sensitive Xinjiang Province.

Xinjiang Province is where riots in July 2009 by ethnic Uighurs were supported by the US-financed World Uighur Congress of millionaire “ex-laundress” Rebiya Kadeer, and by Washington’s regime-changing NGO, the National Endowment for Democracy.

Xinjiang, also bordering the sensitive Chinese Tibet Autonomous Region, is a vital crossroads for energy pipelines into China from Kazakhstan and ultimately Russia, and is home to major domestic Chinese oil production [6].

JPEG - 21.8 kb
A China-Kazakhstan pipeline junction. A new pipeline is being built, expanding the existing oil transfer capacity to 400,000 barrels per day. In 1997 China and Kazakhstan signed a pact forming the Sino-Kazakh Oil Pipeline Co. Ltd., a joint venture between the China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) and KazMunaiGas which had as its stated goal pipeline running from the Caspian Sea to Xinjiang.

The borders between Kyrgyzstan and China’s Xinjiang are porous, and the flow of people between Xinjiang in China and Kyrgyzstan is considerable. There are an estimated 30,000 Chinese nationals, including Uighurs, living in Kyrgyzstan. Almost 100,000 ethnic Kyrgyz live in Xinjiang.

In short, US military outposts in Kyrgyzstan have far more significance to Chinese national security than the mere resupply of the Afghan war theatre. It is an ideal breeding ground for US intelligence agencies and for the Pentagon to run covert destabilizing operations into China’s strategically vital and politically fragile Xinjiang. The flow of people back and forth between the two countries provides excellent cover for US-run espionage and possible sabotage [7] .

According to retired Indian Ambassador, K. Gajendra Singh, now heading the Foundation for Indo-Turkic Studies in New Delhi, the Bakiyev regime permitted the US military to use its facilities at Manas Airbase, including highly sophisticated electronic devices, among other purposes, to also monitor key Chinese missile and military sites in Xinjiang [8].

Further adding to concerns in Beijing over US actions inside Kyrgyzstan is the Pentagon’s new Northern Distribution Network (NDN), created ostensibly to supply the Afghanistan war.

The NDN runs through Tajikstan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. Many in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization region suspect that the NDN will be used by the Pentagon to encourage spread attacks by groups like the ‘Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan’ or the ‘Islamic Jihad Union’ and the murky Hizb ut-Tahrir movement – all of which are clustered within the Ferghana Valley between Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan [9].

Beijing is no passive observer in the Kyrgyzstan events. It will clearly play its strongest card, the economic one, to secure closer and far more friendly relations with any new Kyrgyz government.

At the June 2009 meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in Ekaterinburg Russia, China’s President Hu Jintao pledged a fund of $10 billion in future aid to the Central Asian member nations of Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. Nothing Washington has promised to Kyrgyzstan comes even close to those sums.

In one of its first statements, the provisional Kyrgyz Deputy Head, Omurbek Tekebayev, told Russian media that they regarded China among the country’s strategic partners: “The foreign policy will change…Russia, Kazakhstan and other neighbors including China will remain our strategic partners” [10].

One project that the Chinese strategic partner is likely to accelerate in order to weld a closer strategic partnership with its Kyrgyz neighbor is Beijing’s announced plan to build a vast high-speed Eurasian rail grid.

JPEG - 21.4 kb
The Eurasia Land Bridge that will go through Kazakhstan is now under construction. It is one of the highway construction projects that will link Western Europe with West China. The use of this bridge will make it easier to transport goods from China to Europe and also easier for equipment that will be used for the China-Kazakhstan projects to be brought from Europe to China.

China’s Ministry of Railways has unveiled one of the world’s most ambitious infrastructure projects. The rail link will connect Xinjiang via Kyrgyzstan, ultimately to Germany and even on to London by 2025.

China’s plans include linking the China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway into the Eurasian high-speed rail corridor.

China is also building twelve new highways to economically tie Kyrgyzstan and its neighbors by modern roadways with Xinjiang. At some point US militarization of Kyrgyzstan becomes a Chinese national security threat. An economic counter move by China to increase its presence in the country is now clearly on the table [11] .

As further indication of Beijing’s concern to have stability in its neighborhood, China has recently stepped up its economic activities in Afghanistan.

President Hu Jintao talks with visiting Afghanistan counterpart Hamid Karzai after a signing ceremony at the Great Hall of the People on 24 March 2010. China has announced more investment in Afghanistan and pledged to continue aiding reconstruction efforts in the war-torn neighboring country.
[Wu Zhiyi/ China Daily]

As friction increases between Afghan President Karzai and the Obama Administration, relations are clearly warming with Karzai and Beijing. On March 24, Hamid Karzai and Chinese President Hu Jintao signed new economic agreements in Beijing on trade and investment, while agreeing to strengthen triangular cooperation with Pakistan, which traditionally has had close ties to China.

The March 24 agreements reportedly cover China’s investments in Afghanistan’s hydroelectric, mining, railway, construction, and energy projects.

China is already the largest investor in the Afghan economy. Its Metallurgical Group Corporation won a bid in 2007 to invest $3.5 billion in Afghanistan’s Aynak copper mine –one of the largest in the world [12].

And another prize plum is the possibility for Chinese companies to develop Afghanistan’s estimated 1.6 billion barrels of oil and 440 billion cubic meters (bcm) of gas, as well as large deposits of ferrous and non-ferrous metals, iron ore and gold [13].

For China, both Afghanistan and Pakistan are part of its key transportation and trade links to Iran. Beijing has completed a port at Gwadar in Pakistan, allowing it to import 60 percent of its oil coming from the Middle East. China now plans to connect the Gwadar Port with Xinjiang through Afghanistan to secure a more efficient delivery of energy resources to fuel its booming economy. Stability in Kyrgyzstan is essential to China in this broader context [14].

In our next part we examine the essential geopolitical importance of Kyrgyzstan for Russia, the second geopolitical player in the new three-dimensional chess game for control of Eurasia’s land space and its economic and political future.

 F. William Engdahl
Author of Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation.. He also authored A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order (Pluto Press). His latest book is Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order (Third Millennium Press).

ORGANIZED ATTACK UPON TWO AHMADI MOSQUES IN LAHORE

[IN AN ISLAMIC NATION, WHICH HAS A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT THAT BRANDS AN ENTIRE MUSLIM SECT “NOT MUSLIMS,” IT WAS JUST A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE QADIANIS (AHMADIYA) WERE ATTACKED AS IF THEY WERE SHIITES.

CONSTITUTION (SECOND AMENDMENT) ACT, 1974

3- Amendment of Article 260 of the Constitution.
In the Constitution, in Article 260, after clause (2) the following new clause shall be added, namely–

(3) A person who does not believe in the absolute and unqualified finality of The Prophethood of MUHAMMAD (Peace be upon him), the last of the Prophets or claims to be a Prophet, in any sense of the word or of any description whatsoever, after MUHAMMAD (Peace be upon him), or recognizes such a claimant as a Prophet or religious reformer, is not a Muslim for the purposes of the Constitution or law.” ]

2 minority sect mosques attacked in Pakistan

LAHORE, Pakistan — Gunmen armed with grenades attacked two mosques of a minority Islamic sect during Friday prayers in the eastern Pakistani city of Lahore, police said. Casualties were expected.

The attacks were against the Ahmadi group, which radical Sunni groups have targeted in the past, though never on such a large scale or coordinated fashion.

Dunya TV showed one of the attackers atop the minaret of one of the mosques, firing an assault rifle and throwing hand grenades.

The mosques were several miles (kilometers) apart from each other, police officer Haider Ashraf said.

Officers outside one of the mosques in the Garhi Shahu district of Lahore were engaged in a fierce gunfight with the attackers, an Associated Press reporter at the scene said.

Pakistan has seen scores of attacks by groups of Islamist militants against government, Western and security force targets over the past three years. Lahore, the second largest city in the country and a vital a military and political center, has been the scene of several.

Many Islamist militants believe it is permissible or honorable to kill non-Muslims, or even those Muslims who do not share their extreme views.

The Ahmadis call themselves Muslims but believe their founder declared himself a prophet centuries after Muhammad, who other Muslims believe was the final prophet. They have long been subject to informal and state-sanctioned discrimination in Pakistan.

The government has declared them a non-Muslim minority and they are prohibited from calling themselves Muslims or engaging in Muslim practices such as reciting Islamic prayers.

Maoists suspected of sabotaging India train, 65 dead

Main Image

(Reuters) – Maoist rebels are suspected of sabotaging a high-speed train in eastern India on Friday, killing at least 65 people after it smashed into the path of a goods train, officials said.

Maoists suspected of sabotaging India train, 65 dead

NEW DELHI

spected of sabotaging a high-speed train in eastern India on Friday, killing at least 65 people after it smashed into the path of a goods train, officials said.

Local television showed the mangled wreckage of capsized carriages across the tracks and the death toll could rise as many passengers were still trapped. At least 200 people were injured.

“As of now we have got information that 65 dead bodies have been recovered. There may be many more,” Samar Ghosh, Home Secretary of West Bengal state where the incident occurred told NDTV news channel.

Railway Minister Mamata Banerjee said a bomb had hit the train, but police said they were also looking at other sabotage methods such as the removal of the tracks’ “fish plates.”

“From whatever I have been told the apprehension is the Maoists were involved,” Banerjee said.

The crash occurred in an area known to be a stronghold of Maoist rebels. Maoists, who say they are fighting for the rights of the poor and landless, have attacked trains in the past and have stepped up attacks in recent months.

“The driver heard a loud noise which indicates there could be a blast. A detail investigation will reveal more, but definitely there was lot of tinkering done to the tracks,” Vivek Sahay, a senior railway official, told reporters.

“It was definitely sabotage.”

West Bengal official Ghosh said a portion of the tracks was found missing.

The Maoists number thousands of fighters across swathes of eastern and central India. In April, 76 police were killed in an ambush in one of the heaviest tolls in years.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has described the insurgency as India’s biggest internal security challenge and his Congress-led government has been under increasing political pressure to deal with the insurgents.

TRAPPED PASSENGERS

The Gyaneshwari Express, which was going to Mumbai from the eastern metropolis of Kolkata in West Bengal state, was derailed in the state’s Jhargram area at around 1:30 a.m. (2000 GMT).

“The cries of women and children from inside the compartments have died down. They (railway staff) are still struggling to cut through metal and bring out those trapped inside,” Amitava Rath, a local journalist at the scene of the crash, told Reuters.

A reporter of the Telegraph newspaper described a scene of chaos and panic at the site. “Rescuers are struggling to save the survivors and get the bodies out,” Naresh Jana told Reuters.

“I can see body parts hanging out of the compartments and under the wheels. I can hear people, women, crying for help from inside the affected coaches.”

The incident comes days after a passenger airliner crashed in southern India, killing 158 people, underscoring safety issues and concern that India’s aging infrastructure was failing to keep pace with an economic boom.

The Maoists had called a “black week” to condemn what they call police atrocities against innocent villagers and for an immediate halt to an armed campaign against them in India.

In March, police suspected their hand in the derailment of India’s most prestigious high-speed Rajdhani Express. Maoists have also taken over trains in past years in a show of strength, holding them for hours.

The rebels, who often attack police, government buildings and infrastructure such as railway stations, have in recent months stepped up attacks in response to a government security offensive to clear them out of their jungle bases.

The decades-old movement is now present in a third of the country. They are mostly spread in rural pockets of 20 of India’s 28 states and hurt potential business worth billions of dollars.

(Writing by Krittivas Mukherjee; Editing by Alistair Scrutton and Michael Perry)

Egypt Leads Charge For Nuclear Free Middle East

Nuclear treaty talks on brink of failure: diplomats

UNITED NATIONS
Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad gestures in Kerman, 1,064 km (661 miles) south of Tehran, May 26, 2010. REUTERS/Fars News/Hamed Malekpour
Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad gestures in Kerman, 1,064 km (661 miles) south of Tehran, May 26, 2010. REUTERS/Fars News/Hamed Malekpour

(Reuters) – Talks on shoring up the global anti-nuclear arms treaty were on the edge of failure on Friday as the United States and its allies clashed with Egypt over a push to pressure Israel to scrap any atom bombs it has.

For a month the 189 signatories of the 1970 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty have been meeting in New York in hopes of agreeing on a plan to shore up the troubled pact, which analysts say has been hit by Iran‘s and North Korea’s atomic programs and failure by the nuclear powers to disarm.

The latest draft of a final declaration for the NPT review conference calls for U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to organize a meeting of all Middle Eastern states in 2012 on how to make the region free of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction (WMD) as demanded by a 1995 NPT resolution.

The creation of a WMD-free zone would eventually force Israel to abandon any atomic bombs it has. The Jewish state, which like nuclear-armed India and Pakistan never signed the NPT, is presumed to have a sizable nuclear arsenal but neither confirms nor denies it. Israel is not participating in the NPT meeting.

In a radical departure from the previous U.S. administration, President Barack Obama’s negotiators had agreed to join the NPT’s other four official nuclear powers — Britain, France,Russia and China — in backing such a conference while encouraging reluctant Israel to participate.

The five permanent U.N. Security Council members and a group of Arab states led by Egypt are close to a deal that would make the 2012 conference happen, delegates say. But the two sides have reached an impasse on the question of whether Israel should be named in the declaration as a problem state.

The Egyptians insist the declaration must state explicitly that Israel should join the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state, but the Americans are refusing, diplomats said.

LAST-MINUTE COMPROMISE?

One Western diplomat familiar with the talks described the situation as “not looking too hopeful.”

He said there was a “stark choice for the Arabs — name and shame Israel or have a conference in 2012 to move forward the 1995 promise … toward a WMD-free zone in the Mideast.”

“My bet is their (the Arabs’) short-term political needs will trump their long-term strategic interest,” he said.

Other delegates confirmed the possibility that the NPT review conference would fail to agree on a final declaration because of disagreements on the Middle East question, repeating what happened at the last NPT review conference in 2005.

But diplomats said they hoped the United States and Egypt — the key players in the Middle East negotiations — would strike a last-minute compromise that salvaged the conference.

“We’ve worked so hard for the past month,” one diplomat said. “We’ve got a strong draft that would strengthen all three pillars of the NPT — disarmament, non-proliferation and peaceful use of nuclear energy. It shouldn’t be thrown away.”

Western diplomats said Israel had reluctantly agreed to attend the 2012 conference but only on condition that it not be “named and shamed” in the final declaration.

Iran‘s envoy to the U.N. nuclear watchdog, Tehran’s chief delegate, accused the United States of causing the impasse at the NPT talks. Apart from the Middle East WMD-free zone, he said Washington and the other nuclear powers had rejected key demands of Iran and the other non-aligned developing nations.

Ambassador Ali Asghar Soltanieh said those demands were for a precise deadline for nuclear powers to disarm, a call for negotiations on a treaty banning the use of atomic arms, and a pledge from the five nuclear powers not to use atomic bombs on states without them, known as a “negative security assurance.”

“The nuclear weapon states, particularly the United States, have not cooperated to find a solution for these four main issues,” Soltanieh told reporters, adding that the NPT talks had reached a deadlock.

If the nuclear powers refuse to compromise, “they should be blamed for consequences,” Soltanieh said, adding that Tehran was prepared to block a declaration that it viewed as too weak. Since NPT meetings make decisions by consensus, Iran has a virtual veto.

(Editing by Bill Trott)

US Domination Over Non-Proliferation Treaty Threatens To Scuttle UN Nuclear Conference

UN nuclear conference gets last-minute draft statement

Photos


United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon (2R) at a Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) conference (Photo: AP)

UNITED NATIONS : A month-long UN nuclear conference took up a new draft final document in its final 24 hours in a last-ditch bid to resolve a stalemate that has blocked moves on the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) for a decade.

Conference president Libran Cabactulan of the Philippines presented the draft to a plenary session on Thursday, reviewing the 189-nation NPT at United Nations headquarters.

“The document before you is the best that can be offered” amid conflicting national demands, he said.

At stake is a reaffirmation of the validity of the NPT treaty, which since 1970 has set the global agenda for fighting the spread of nuclear weapons.

The NPT is in crisis over how to monitor suspect nuclear programs in Iran and North Korea, and how to get nuclear weapons states to honor their treaty promise on disarmament.

The NPT bargain is that weapon states move to disarm while others forgo seeking the bomb in return for getting help to develop peaceful nuclear programs.

Nuclear powers and non-nuclear-weapon states, represented by the non-aligned movement, clashed here Wednesday over how to get rid of atomic arms.

Non-aligned states suggested some 200 amendments to an earlier draft statement, particularly to get nuclear weapon states to accept the principle of putting a time limit on achieving disarmament, diplomats told AFP.

Nuclear powers Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States reject this.

Approval of a final text, which must be by consensus, would not be a cure-all for the world’s nuclear proliferation problems, but it would mark a new tone of cooperation.

It also would be a success for US President Barack Obama’s ambitious non-proliferation agenda which favors multilateral diplomacy and is a marked departure from the confrontational tactics of his predecessor George W. Bush.

A solution of the diplomatic battles that have set the world’s nuclear haves against the have-nots may come in the carefully crafted new draft that lays out action plans for disarmament, for verifying nuclear programs to keep them peaceful, for promoting the civilian use of atomic energy and for creating a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East.

The action plans take up 11 pages of the 28-page new draft. The remaining review, which is full of controversial items, is expected not to be adopted since there is not enough time for debate. It will be expressed in a presidential summary, diplomats told AFP.

The plenary must approve the action plans within 24 hours since the conference is due to end at 6pm (2200 GMT) Friday.

The conference has been deadlocked, raising fears of a repeat of the disaster of the previous NPT gathering in 2005 when there was no agreement and no final text. Reviews are held every five years.

“Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed,” a Western official cautioned, but he and others expressed confidence the conference was on track to a positive conclusion.

Iranian ambassador Ali Asghar Soltanieh, however, told reporters that Iran could not accept the text unless the date of 2025 was set “to eliminate all nuclear weapons,” something which is not in the disarmament action plan.

Perhaps the most contentious issue is the creation of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East, first proposed at the 1995 conference.

The United States and Egypt have spearheaded talks between nuclear powers and non-aligneds to find a way forward on this matter.

Israel — widely understood to be the region’s lone if undeclared nuclear power — opposes a zone until there is peace in the Middle East but might agree to a non-binding conference, diplomats said.

The draft calls for a conference in 2012 “to be attended by all states of the Middle East, leading to the establishment¨ of a zone.

Iran was not named in this part of the draft despite being in defiance of UN resolutions for it to prove its civil nuclear work does not hide bomb development.

Western states had wanted Iran singled out but do not want to sabotage the chance of a consensus. – AFP/jy

Nation Set To Correct Obama Mistake

Poll: Americans say GOP can better handle threats to U.S.

By Susan Page, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — Americans are increasingly optimistic about the economy, but that brightening outlook hasn’t softened their outrage over the country’s direction and its political leadership, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds.

Two-thirds of those surveyed this week describe themselves as “angry” about the way things are going in the USA, the highest percentage in the decade the question has been asked. By nearly 2-1, they would rather vote for a candidate who has never served in Congress over one with experience.

“We’re just going to have to clean house and get people in who really care about the country,” says Stephen Besz, 63, of Hokendauqua, Penn., who was among those called in the poll. He worries about the future for his son, an electrical engineer who has been looking for a job for 18 months.

On Memorial Day weekend, incumbents in general and Democrats in particular face a hot summer.

The nation’s mood hasn’t eased even though attitudes on the economy have begun to turn around. About half of Americans rated the economy as “poor” in April and May, not a glowing appraisal but the lowest percentage since the economic meltdown in September 2008. Half say it’s getting better, the highest level of optimism in six years.

“I wouldn’t say bad, but you can’t say good,” says John Harbachuck, 51, of Millville, Mass. “It’s reached a level point. You hope it’s going up.”

Still, three of four remain dissatisfied with the nation’s course.

White House adviser David Axelrod says that’s not surprising. “There’s been a lot of frustrations and grievance building up for years,” he says. “For many Americans, it (the recovery) still hasn’t touched their lives.”

The findings are sobering for incumbents who hope an improving economy will ameliorate the throw-the-bums-out sentiment before November. Maryland Rep. Chris Van Hollen, head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, says “confidence is picking up” among voters, but he acknowledges, “Democrats have an uphill battle.”

Texas Sen. John Cornyn, head of the GOP Senate campaign committee, says the party has “the wind at our back” and might regain control of Congress.

The poll finds a huge intensity gap between the parties: 50% of Republicans are “extremely motivated” to vote this year; 30% of Democrats are.

“Normally I vote Democrat, but right now I’m not real sure,” says Sherry Havard, 60, of Newton, Texas. “I just don’t like what they’re doing right now.”

Among registered voters, 42% say their view of Obama is “very important” in their vote for Congress. That’s likely to cut both ways: The group includes 43% of Democrats and 49% of Republicans.

Contributing: Naomi Jagoda

Framing Pakistan

Framing Pakistan

How the Pro-Israel Media Enables India’s Surrogate Warfare

by Maidhc Ó Cathail / May 26th, 2010

In its bitter rivalry with India, Pakistan is at a fatal disadvantage. Unlike its South Asian neighbour, Islamabad lacks an ally with considerable influenceover American mainstream media.

The latest example of US media complicity with the Indo-Israeli alliancecame in the aftermath of the much-hyped Times Square “car-bomb” incident. Typical of the media orgy of Pakistan-bashing that followed the discovery of an SUV packed with 250 pounds of non-explosive fertilizer was a piece written by Newsweek’s Indian-born editor, Fareed Zakaria, in which he brands Pakistan as “a terrorist hothouse.”

“For a wannabe terrorist shopping for help, Pakistan is a supermarket,” writes Zakaria. “There are dozens of jihadi organizations: Jaish-e-Muhammad, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Al Qaeda, Jalaluddin and Siraj Haqqani’s network, Tehrik-e-Taliban, and the list goes on. Some of the major ones, like the Kashmiri separatist group Lashkar-e-Taiba, operate openly via front groups throughout the country. But none seem to have any difficulty getting money and weapons.”

Zakaria is in no doubt about who’s to blame.

“From its founding, the Pakistani government has supported and encouraged jihadi groups, creating an atmosphere that has allowed them to flourish,” claims the CNN pundit.

To back up his assertions, Zakaria cites no less an authority that Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States. In Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military, which Zakaria considers a “brilliant history,” Husain Haqqani claims that support for jihad has been “a consistent policy of the state.”

Case closed for the prosecution? Perhaps not.

The Pakistani diplomat’s credibility as an objective critic of jihadism is undermined somewhat by his intimate ties to the Israel-centricneoconservative network. A former fellow at the Likudnik Hudson Institute, Haqqani co-chaired Hudson’s Project on Islam and Democracy. Its director,Hillel Fradkin, was a Project for a New American Century signatory to a 2002letter to George W. Bush equating Yasser Arafat with Osama Bin Laden in an effort to convince the White House that “Israel’s fight against terrorism is our fight.”

Haqqani also collaborated with another neocon, Stephen Schwartz, on the Institute for Islamic Progress and Peace. A project of the notoriousIslamophobe Daniel Pipes, it is widely suspected to be an attempt to “divide and conquer” the American Muslim community. In short, if Tel Aviv had handpicked Pakistan’s ambassador to Washington, they could hardly have found a more suitable candidate than Haqqani.

Also advancing “the Pakistan Connection” to the Times Square plot is Haqqani’s onetime collaborator Stephen Schwartz. Writing in Rupert Murdoch’s staunchly pro-Israel Weekly Standard, Schwartz pushes “the Pakistani Taliban did it” storyline. Faisal Shahzad’s arrest, he writes, “lends credibility to the claim by Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), the branch of the Afghan terrorist movement operating there, that they planted the unsuccessful car-bomb.”

Like Zakaria, Schwartz holds Pakistani authorities responsible.

“Pakistani reality cannot be evaded,” he writes. “The jihadist domination seen in the Pakistani army and intelligence services (ISI) is visible everywhere South Asian Muslims congregate. It explains the reluctance of the Pakistani government to fulfill its commitment to fighting the Taliban. And it equally accounts for conspiracies like that foiled in Times Square.”

The one evading “Pakistani reality,” however, is Schwartz. If any government is to be held responsible for terrorism carried out by Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), it is not in Islamabad but in Tel Aviv or New Delhi.

As Gordon Duff, senior editor of Veterans Today, revealed in a recentinterview: “We have very little doubt that the Indians and the Israelis, that are all over Afghanistan with German passports pretending to be military contractors, are operating 17 camps along the Taliban regions training and arming terrorists.”

According to Duff, “The Pakistani Taliban is in close cooperation with, supplied, financed, armed and trained by Israel and India to attack Pakistan.”

Duff’s claims are based on a February 2010 fact-finding tour of Pakistan, where he was briefed by the highest levels of the country’s military and intelligence establishment, including Lieutenant General Hamid Gul, former director general of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Admiral Iftikhar Ahmed Sirohey, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and General Mirza Aslam Beg, former Chief of Army Staff.

Fearful of offending their Israel-conscious paymasters in Washington, the Pakistani military and intelligence services have been forced into the humiliating position of leaking their side of the story through the Veterans Today website.

According to the ISI leak, the Times Square terror plot was a “false flag operation to implicate the Pakistani Taliban and then threaten and force Pakistan to ‘do more’ in North Waziristan.” This was followed by “a massive media disinformation war” to induce the belief that “all global terrorism is emerging from the Pakistani tribal pocket of North Waziristan, and that the ISI/army is either hands and gloves with the Taliban or not willing to do more.”

Clearly, Israel and India share a common geostrategic interest in thedestabilization of the nuclear-armed Muslim nation. As Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has stated, “Our ties with India don’t have any limitation….”

Israel, however, has proven itself a rather dubious ally—as a growing number of Americans are beginning to realize. Perhaps one day policymakers in New Delhi will have a similar awakening. But for the time being, the media component of its alliance with Tel Aviv affords India a powerful weapon to wage surrogate warfare against Pakistan.

Maidhc Ó Cathail is a freelance writer. His work has been published by Al Jazeera Magazine, Antiwar.comDissident VoiceKhaleej TimesPalestine Chronicle and many other publications. Read other articles by Maidhc.

Obama Says We Are At War With a Network–Doesn’t Mention That It’s Ours

New Obama security strategy dumps Bush anti-terror doctrine

Photos


New York Counter Terrorism officers patrol in Times Square.

WASHINGTON: President Barack Obama unveiled a new national security strategy on Thursday, replacing George W. Bush’s “war on terror” doctrine with a sweeping blueprint for a world bristling with multiple threats.

Obama also put new constraints on the former president’s concept of pre-emptive war and cited national security implications of economic meltdowns, global warming, cyber warfare, nuclear proliferation and ethnic conflict.

“To succeed, we must face the world as it is,” the document states, turning the page on Bush-era dreams of remaking the global order with American might and recognising the increasing global engagement of Russia and the emergence of rising powers like China and India.

The document also contains warnings for Iran and North Korea, focuses on home-grown extremists who turn to Islamic radicalism in America and says the most serious threats to Americans are posed by nuclear proliferation.

The new doctrine illustrates an evolution of Obama’s pro-engagement policies after 16 months in power, a period that brought the idealism of his election campaign into conflict with the harsh realities of geopolitics.

It describes a world thick with evolving threats and seeks to reframe US foreign policy after two bloody wars and a crippling global financial crisis.

It projects a tough, hard-nosed assessment of American interests and the use of US power, and lays out a dizzying array of threats from cyber warfare to health epidemics to ethnic wars to inequality.

Obama commits to using the sweeping range of foreign policy tools, including diplomacy, economic renewal, development aid, military might and education.

It calls for tough engagement “without illusion” with US foes like Iran and North Korea, but warns they face deepening isolation if they continue to spurn US advances and do not bow to pressure to throw open their nuclear programs.

The document also preserves the US right to launch unilateral military action, but does so in more restrictive terms than those used by the former Bush administration.

It also seeks to widen the scope of US foreign policy
, which became dominated by a doctrinaire “war on terror” following the September 11 attacks in 2001, and led to the war in Iraq, after the invasion of Afghanistan.

“We will always seek to de-legitimise the use of terrorism and to isolate those who carry it out,” said the document, the product of intense internal deliberations during the 16 months of the Obama administration.

“Yet this is not a global war against a tactic – terrorism or a religion – Islam.

“We are at war with a specific network, Al-Qaeda, and its terrorist affiliates who support efforts to attack the United States, our allies, and partners.”   [SEE: WHO IS “AL QAIDA”?]

In his final national security strategy in 2006, Bush targeted terrorism as a concept more specifically, declaring boldly “the war on terror is not over.”

Obama’s document appears to water down the concept of pre-emptive war favoured by the Bush administration, but preserves the option for a US president to deploy military might unilaterally.

It says Washington will “adhere to standards that govern the use of force.”

“We will also outline a clear mandate and specific objectives and thoroughly consider the consequences – intended and unintended – of our actions.”

For the first time, the new strategy makes combating home-grown extremists, “radicalised” on US soil, a key plank of security policy.

“Our best defences against this threat are well informed and equipped families, local communities, and institutions,” the document said.

“The Federal Government will invest in intelligence to understand this threat and expand community engagement and development programs to empower local communities.”

The 52-page strategy however encompasses a much wider reach than the campaign against extremism which has defined US foreign policy since the September 11 attacks.

It sets out a platform for robust engagement, the maintenance of the US military edge and wide social diplomacy and development assistance.

“Our long-term security will not come from our ability to instil fear in other peoples but through our capacity to speak to their hopes,” Obama said in a message introducing the new strategy.

The strategy lists a set of comprehensive threats facing the United States, beginning with the most grave – the threat of weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear weapons. – AFP/de

Our Latest Jewish President Celebrates the Judaization of the United States

White House party to celebrate Jewish culture

In politics, as elsewhere, it’s a sport that’s almost as popular as people-watching: Guest-list watching.

And this week, Associated Press national writer Jocelyn Noveck reports, it’s the Jewish community in Washington and beyond that’s buzzing over who’ll be on the list when Barack and Michelle Obama host the first-ever White House reception marking Jewish Heritage Month.

The White House won’t divulge the guest list for Thursday afternoon’s event in the East Room. But those with knowledge of the list say it’s an eclectic and interesting one — and markedly different from past Jewish-themed events like the president’s annual Hanukkah party.

Where that event brings established Jewish community leaders to the White House, Thursday’s reception is meant to honor American Jews who have made contributions in the arts, music, sports, the space program and other fields.

The most prominent guest on the list, according to several people familiar with it: former baseball great Sandy Koufax, the left-handed Hall of Fame pitcher for the Dodgers who famously refused to pitch in a World Series game on Yom Kippur, the holiest day in Judaism. (Koufax, now 74, could not be reached to confirm his plans.)

Names also mentioned by members of the Jewish community: Olympic swimmer Dara Torres, author Judy Blume, and a young woman who was wounded in a 1999 shooting at a Los Angeles Jewish center, Mindy Finkelstein.

But the list also includes a number of younger Jewish activists involved in interesting initiatives. One of them, Shawn Landres, heads Jumpstart, which he calls a “thinkubator for sustainable Jewish innovation.” He’s traveling to Washington from Los Angeles.

“There’s been excitement about this, people posting on Facebook and talking about who’s coming,” says Landres.

“In the past,” he adds, “when there were Jewish events at the White House, they tended to go to the same well of people — big Jewish organizations, the usual suspects. What I’ve noticed here is a commitment to go beyond that. The administration is trying to engage the Jewish community in different ways.”

Of course, it’s no secret that tensions have surfaced between the administration and some elements of the Jewish community over its policy toward Israel, particularly regarding construction of Jewish settlements in east Jerusalem.

So it’s tempting to see this week’s reception as another step in what many have called Obama’s current “charm offensive” toward American Jewish leaders, including: a meeting last week between the president and Jewish congressional leaders; gatherings of top White House officials and rabbis; addresses by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and National Security Adviser James L. Jones to major Jewish groups; and a private lunch early this month between the president and Noble laureate Eli Wiesel.

But though Thursday’s event certainly can’t hurt, officials point out that plans have been under way for several months. And the pressure actually began years ago.

“Listen, I’ve been trying to get the White House to put on this event for five years,” says Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, the congresswoman who spearheaded the campaign to establish Jewish Heritage Month in the first place. “I really don’t think it has anything to do with the current outreach efforts.”

“I’m really excited about the event,” adds Schultz, who will attend along with many other Jewish members of Congress. “This is a way to demonstrate that President Obama is committed to the Jewish community. But also it’s a way to educate Americans about the contributions of American Jews, to breed tolerance and understanding.”

To illustrate her point, Schultz says that when she was in college in 1984, a fellow student came up to her and asked if she was Jewish. “I’ve never seen a real one,” she says the student told her.

Washington Jewish leader William Daroff adds that it wasn’t so long ago that Jews in the United States were restricted in many ways: where they could live, what colleges they could attend, and what professions they could aspire to.

“We’ve come a long way, and Jewish Heritage Month is there to celebrate that progress,” says Daroff, director of the Washington Office of the Jewish Federations of North America.

But while May was declared Jewish Heritage Month in 2006, set into law by President George W. Bush, this is the first time the White House has agreed to hold a reception to mark it.

“I don’t ascribe a motive,” Schultz says. “Presidents are very busy.”

Asked why Obama had decided to hold the reception, White House spokesman Matt Lehrich told The Associated Press that the Obamas wanted to celebrate Jewish Americans’ contributions to the nation’s history and culture. “The reception also offers a chance to foster partnership, collaboration, and education in the spirit of Jewish American Heritage Month,” Lehrich said.

Daroff himself isn’t on the guest list, and he says that’s logical. “This event is less about those of us in the Beltway,” he says, “and more about the folks out there living the Jewish experience, and breaking down barriers.”

So who else is invited? “This could be interesting, seeing what the mix looks like,” says Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, who said he’s not on the list.

Or, put another way: “Adam Sandler could write a whole new Hanukkah song after this party,” quips Steve Rabinowitz, a Washington public relations executive, referring to the popular song pointing out famous Jewish Americans.

Someone who probably wouldn’t make the song is Rabbi Marc Schneier of New York. He leads two Orthodox congregations and spoke at the 2008 Democratic convention.

But he believes he was invited because of his outreach work to the Muslim community, as president of the Foundation for Ethnic Understanding. He’s also has been active in furthering ties with the black community.

“Our work is very much in concert with President Obama’s agenda,” says Schneier.

A past guest at the White House Hanukkah party, Schneier says this event has a whole different feel to it.

“This is quite unique,” he says. “It’s more exotic than the usual White House event.”

Daroff agrees.

“Listen, anytime there’s a first in Washington, it’s a big deal,” he says.

Yemen tribe in new pipeline blast over airstrike

Yemen tribe in new pipeline blast over airstrike

Mohammed Ghobari
SANAA

(Reuters) – Kinsmen of a Yemeni mediator killed in an errant airstrike targeting al Qaeda blew up an oil pipeline Thursday in the second such attack this week, a government official said.

The airstrike has provoked clashes between tribesmen and the army, stoking instability in Yemen, which is a focus of Western security concerns over a resurgent regional al Qaeda wing based in the impoverished Arabian Peninsula country.

“Tribesmen blew up the same pipeline again. Teams have been sent for repairs,” a government official said, declining to be named. Tribesmen had also damaged four electricity pylons since Wednesday, triggering severe power cuts in the capital, he said. “They are not allowing repair teams to reach the pylons.”

An oil ministry official told Reuters oil exports had not been affected by the blast, the second since Tuesday on the pipeline which carries crude oil to a Red Sea terminal.

The tribesmen earlier threatened to call off a truce with the government and resume hostilities unless an investigation into the strike that killed Jaber al-Shabwani and four others produces results by Friday.

A Yemeni website aligned with the opposition said the strike was carried out by a drone, a weapon Yemen is not believed to have. U.S, forces have used drones in Yemen in fighting al Qaeda in the past, but a U.S. diplomat declined to say if Washington was involved.

Members of Shabwani’s tribe agreed to the truce on condition that it investigate how he was killed and punish those responsible.

“We rejected tribal arbitration in favor of the formation of an inquiry committee to investigate the incident and expose those involved,” Shabwani’s father Ali told Reuters.

In a statement, the tribe set a Friday deadline for the completion of the investigation. It warned that “if (the state) does not present those responsible, it can expect a harsh response.”

Shabwani, deputy governor of Maarib province where the airstrike occurred, had been en route to meet al Qaeda members to seek their surrender, local officials said.

INCREASED INTELLIGENCE GATEHRING

U.S. officials said Tuesday that the U.S. military and spy agencies have stepped up intelligence gathering using surveillance aircraft, satellites, and signal intercepts to track al Qaeda targets in and around their base in Yemen.

Yemen, a neighbor of top oil exporter Saudi Arabia, jumped to the forefront of Western security concerns after the Yemen-based regional arm of al Qaeda claimed responsibility for the botched bombing of a U.S. plane on December 25.

A statement from a top Yemeni security body expressed sorrow over al-Shabwani’s death, calling him a martyr, but did not say who might have carried out the strike or what type of aircraft was used.

U.S. officials asked about the strike said that Washington plays a supporting role by helping Yemeni forces track and pinpoint targets. One official said there was an increasingly “fine line” between support and taking the lead.

The Pentagon announced a $155.3 million security package earlier this year, with $34.5 million earmarked to expand the capabilities of Yemen’s Special Operations Forces to conduct counterterrorism operations.

Analysts say the strike could heighten anti-U.S. sentiment and broaden al Qaeda’s appeal among powerful Yemeni tribes that threaten efforts to stabilize the country, also situated next to busy international shipping lanes.

Separately, a soldier was killed and three were injured in clashes with armed men in southern Lahej province, the site of increasing separatist unrest, a local official told Reuters.

(Additional reporting by Mohammed Mukhashaf in Aden; Writing by Erika Solomon and Firouz Sedarat, editing by Elizabeth Fullerton)

Obama to Ask Netanyahu Not to Wage War on Lebanon ‘No Matter What,’ Report

Obama to Ask Netanyahu Not to Wage War on Lebanon ‘No Matter What,’ Report

U.S. President Barack Obama will reportedly ask Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who will visit the White House next week, not to wage war on Lebanon “for whatever reason, motive or justification.”The daily An-Nahar on Thursday, which carried the report, quoted ministerial sources as saying that Obama will also ask Netanhayu to facilitate success of the U.S.-brokered Middle East peace process.

Netanyahu will hold talks with Obama in Washington June 1 after White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel handed him a personal invitation from the U.S. president on Wednesday.