Daily Archives: October 19, 2009

Jordan king warns over US Mideast policy

Jordan king warns over US Mideast policy
AP, October 19, 2009

Jordan’s king said in comments published Monday that the U.S. administration seems to be focusing more of its attention on Iran and less on resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, saying time was running out to make peace.

In an interview with Italian daily La Repubblica, King Abdullah II said the region’s hopes for peace were huge at the start of the Obama administration, but now sees the “goal getting farther away.”

“I’ve heard people in Washington talking about Iran, again Iran, always Iran,” Abdullah was quoted as saying. “But I insist on, and keep insisting on the Palestinian question: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the most serious threat to the stability of the region and the Mediterranean.” [continued…]

Editor’s Comment — Having just won the Nobel Peace Prize for advancing global diplomacy, President Obama should reflect some more on how engagement really works. The United States will talk to its adversaries, Obama boldly declared before getting elected. So far so good.

But engagement is sure to lead to a dead end unless it functions effectively as a two-way street. Washington has shown its readiness to talk, but is it ready to listen? Engagement can be as boneheaded as non-engagement if it doesn’t involve listening.

Abdullah, Erdogan and others are telling the US that this administration’s approach to the Middle East is failing. Is the administration listening?

Stop Palestinian suffering for Mideast peace, says Erdoğan
Hürriyet Daily News, October 19, 2009

Peace cannot be established in the Middle East when the suffering of the Palestinians continues and the Gaza Strip remains a wreck, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan said Monday.

Speaking at the Istanbul Forum organized by Stratim, Seta and the German Marshall Fund, Erdoğan said the Palestinian question is at the center of all problems in the Middle East. The prime minister recalled that Turkey vocalized its disapproval of the previous year’s bombing of the Gaza Strip, adding: “We criticized steps that were serving no purpose, but which increased suffering and sabotaged the peace process. We will continue to criticize it today, too. We will criticize anything similar taking place in other areas.” [continued…]

Turkish president: ‘Brave criticism’ of Israel to continue
AFP, October 19, 2009

Turkey will continue to criticize its ally Israel with “courage” if it engages in “mistakes”, Turkish President Abdullah Gül said Sunday, continuing the verbal sparring between the two countries over the situation in Gaza.

Turkey is one of the “rare” countries to have good relations with both Arab countries and Israel, Gul said during an interview with public teleivision TRT.

“But this does not mean that Turkey will not raise its voice against errors if they are made. We should not think that Turkey will keep silent,” he said. [continued…]

How do Turkey and Israel measure each other’s love?
By Zvi Bar’el Haaretz, October 18, 2009

…in Israel’s eyes, Turkey is seen as two states – one in the form of the military, twin sister of Israel, the other political, leaning toward Islam and making friends with Syria and Iran. Thus, insolent Israel decided in a typical manner not to take Turkey’s politicians seriously and to adopt the Turkish army. Israel was also certain all these years that Turkey, backward and poor, needed its sole friend in the Middle East because it was not accepted in the region due to its Ottoman history and close ties with Israel and the United States, and therefore could not do without Israel.

So in Israel, people have been quick to conclude that “something went wrong” in Turkey. Suddenly the government rules the army instead of the army, Israel’s loyal friend, telling the government what to do. Israelis did not think for a minute that the Turkish army might also have had enough.

Turkey has changed; inwardly, for the most part. In a long and difficult process it has become a more democratic country. The army is still dominant, but less public in its role in the civilian domain. Turkey has overcome most of its economic problems and has been transformed into a regional economic power. It is a real strategic asset for the United States, increasing its importance after the Iraq war. It has also developed a different regional strategy.

Whoever reads what Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu says recognizes that Turkey aspires to become an influential player not only in the Middle East but also in the Caucasus and Asia. It is involved in the fighting in Afghanistan, is forming an economic alliance with Iraq, plans to invest billions of dollars in Egypt, and its annual trade with Iran stands at $9 billion, with Syria at $1.5 billion.

And here is the paradox. This is the only Muslim country that is not harshly criticized, whether by Iran or any Arab state, for having such close ties with Israel. As such, it could have served as an excellent mediator between Israel and the Arab countries had Israel not considered it an obvious satellite state. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Goldstone: My mission – and motivation

Goldstone: My mission – and motivation
By Richard Goldstone, Jerusalem Post, October 18, 2009

Israel and its courts have always recognized that they are bound by norms of international law that it has formally ratified or that have become binding as customary international law upon all nations. The fact that the United Nations and too many members of the international community have unfairly singled out Israel for condemnation and failed to investigate horrible human rights violations in other countries cannot make Israel immune from the very standards it has accepted as binding upon it.

Israel has a strong history of investigating allegations made against its own officials reaching to the highest levels of government: the inquiries into the Yom Kippur War, Sabra and Shatila, Bus 300 and the Second Lebanon War.

Israel has an internationally renowned and respected judiciary that should be envy of many other countries in the region. It has the means and ability to investigate itself. Has it the will? [continued…]

Editor’s Comment — The Netanyahu government’s stonewalling of the Goldstone inquiry does not appear to have purely been an act of self-protection; it also seems to reflect a national spirit of impunity rooted in the conviction: “We had no choice.”

Having turned this declaration into a battle cry, violence was cleansed of doubt as Israel embarked on its own jihad. “We went into Gaza and God went into Gaza with us,” was how one Israeli Special Forces soldier put it.

When the enemy’s homes have been flattened, their bodies incinerated, their land defiled and their water poisoned and all of this is being done under God’s watchful eye and under His protection, the killers return to their homes expecting glorification, not to become the targets of an international inquiry.

Facebooktwittermail

Iran says U.S., Britain behind attack

Iran says U.S., Britain behind attack
By Michael Slackman, New York Times, October 19, 2009

Iranian officials claimed Monday that they had evidence of American and British involvement in the country’s worst suicide bombing attacks in years, raising tensions as Iran meets with Western nations for another round of delicate talks on its nuclear program.

At least five commanders of Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps were killed and dozens of other people were left dead and wounded on Sunday in two bombings in the restive southeast along Iran’s frontier with Pakistan, according to Iranian state news agencies.

The coordinated strike, one of the largest against the Guards in the region, appeared to mark an escalation in hostilities between Iran’s leadership and the Baluchi ethnic minority. Iranian officials accused foreign enemies of supporting the insurgents, singling out the intelligence agencies of United States, Britain and Pakistan. [continued…]

Iran accuses Pakistan over attack
BBC, October 19, 2009

Iran’s president has accused Pakistani agents of involvement in a suicide bombing in south-east of the country targeting a group of the elite Revolutionary Guards force.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called on Pakistan to arrest the attackers, who he said had entered Iran from Pakistan. [continued…]

Volatile Sistan-Baluchistan Region Is Base for Insurgents
By Chip Cummins, Wall Street Journal, October 19, 2009

Sunni insurgency in Sistan-Baluchistan has presented Tehran with one of its most vexing domestic security problems. The region, which is located in Iran’s southeast corner, borders Afghanistan and Pakistan and is one of the largest and poorest of Iran’s 30 provinces.

Sistan-Baluchistan is home to a large concentration of Sunni Muslims. Ethnic Baluchi tribes are prevalent in the region, which straddles all three countries. The province’s border areas are considered key smuggling routes for products including opium.

Increasingly, Tehran has grown worried about the influence of the Taliban and al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan on criminal and militant groups operating on the Iranian side of the border. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Iran ‘doubts’ over nuclear deal

Iran ‘doubts’ over nuclear deal
BBC, October 19, 2009

Iran appears to be backing away from a proposed deal to resolve the crisis over its nuclear programme, Iranian media reports suggest.

A state TV channel said Iran wanted to import fuel for its research reactor, without sending its own enriched uranium out of the country. [continued…]

Russia worries about the price of oil, not a nuclear Iran
By Garry Kasparov, Wall Street Journal, October 18, 2009

Last Wednesday in Moscow, the remaining illusions the Obama administration held for cooperation with Russia on the Iranian nuclear program were thrown in Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s face. Stronger sanctions against Iran would be “counterproductive,” said Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, just days after President Dmitry Medvedev said sanctions were likely inevitable. This apparent inconsistency should remind us that Mr. Medvedev is little more than a well-placed spectator, and that Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, who discounted sanctions in a statement from Beijing, is still the voice that matters.

This slap comes after repeated concessions—canceling the deployment of missile defenses in Eastern Europe, muted criticism of Russia’s sham regional elections—from the White House. Washington’s conciliatory steps have given the Kremlin’s rulers confidence they have nothing to fear from Mr. Obama on anything that matters.

And nothing matters more to Mr. Putin and his oligarchs than the price of oil. Even with oil at $70 a barrel, Russia’s economy is in bad straits. Tension in the Middle East, even an outbreak of war, would push energy prices higher. A nuclear-armed Iran would, of course, be harmful to Russian national security, but prolonging the crisis is beneficial to the interests of the ruling elite: making money and staying in power. [continued…]

Iran will up uranium enrichment ‘if Vienna talks fail’
AFP, October 18, 2009

The Iran Atomic Energy Organisation said on Monday it will continue to enrich uranium up to the five percent level or even to the higher 20 percent grade if talks on a third-party enrichment deal fail.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran… will continue its enrichment activities inside Iran up to the five percent level,” the official IRNA news agency quoted the organisation’s spokesman Ali Shirzadian as saying.

“But if the negotiations do not yield the desired results, Iran will start enriching uranium to the 20 percent level for its Tehran reactor. It will never give up this right.” [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Decision on Afghan troops may wait

Decision on Afghan troops may wait
By Peter Baker and Sabrina Tavernise, New York Times, October 19, 2009

The White House signaled Sunday that President Obama would postpone any decision on sending more troops to Afghanistan until the disputed election there had been settled and resulted in a government that could work with the United States.

As an audit of Afghanistan’s Aug. 20 election ground toward a conclusion, American officials pressed President Hamid Karzai to accept a runoff vote or share power with his main rival, Abdullah Abdullah, a former foreign minister. Although Mr. Karzai’s support appeared likely to fall below 50 percent in the final count, together he and Mr. Abdullah received 70 percent, in theory enough to forge a unity government with national credibility.

The question at the heart of the matter, said President Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, is not “how many troops you send, but do you have a credible Afghan partner for this process that can provide the security and the type of services that the Afghan people need?” He appeared on CNN’s “State of the Union” and CBS’s “Face the Nation.” [continued…]

Karzai backers take harder line on recount
By Anand Gopal, Wall Street Journal, October 19, 2009

Supporters of incumbent President Hamid Karzai demonstrated to protest “foreign interference” in Afghanistan’s drawn-out election process, as results of a vote recount were postponed and Karzai campaign officials suggested his camp may not accept the official results.

As they await the recount, which aims to throw out fraudulent votes, officials from the Karzai campaign cast aspersions on the process, centering their criticism on the United Nations-backed Electoral Complaints Commission, which is re-tallying the numbers.

Although the ECC finished its audit Thursday, it said it was reviewing the results to ensure there were no mistakes before releasing it to the Independent Electoral Commission in coming days; the ECC didn’t give a precise date. The Independent Electoral Commission will then subtract from the total count the votes disqualified by the ECC. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Yes, the Taleban are being thumped but . . .

Yes, the Taleban are being thumped but . . .
By Anatol Lieven, The Times, October 19, 2009

The Pakistani Government and Army have finally decided to heed the words of a former ruler: “No patchwork scheme — and all our recent schemes, blockades, allowances etc are mere patchwork — will settle the Waziristan problem. Not until the military steamroller has passed over the country from end to end will here be peace.”

Did Pervez Musharraf, the former President, say that? No, it was Lord Curzon, Viceroy of India, more than 100 years ago. And for both strategic and humanitarian reasons Curzon added: “I do not want to be the person to start the machine.”

The inhabitants of Waziristan have resisted outside conquest since time immemorial. That is why Pakistan continued the British tradition of indirect rule, and kept only minimal forces in the region.

So crushing the local Taleban and establishing Pakistani authority in South Waziristan is going to be a long, bloody business in the face of bitter opposition backed by much of the local population — a population motivated as much by old tribal traditions of resistance as by support for the Taleban. This operation will cause great suffering to civilians and lead to deep unhappiness among many Pashtun troops in the Pakistani Army. That is why, like Curzon’s government of India, Pakistan has hesitated for so long before “starting the machine”. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Awakening leader’s tale illustrates Iraq’s volatility

Awakening leader’s tale illustrates Iraq’s volatility
By Ned Parker, Los Angeles Times, October , 2009

The Sunni Muslim paramilitary leader’s campaign slogan holds the promise of imminent rescue: “Hold on, we are coming.”

But the aspiring parliamentary candidate, Mustafa Kamal Shibeeb, may not be in a position to deliver on his slogan: He’s a fugitive, with murder charges hanging over his head from events at the height of the U.S. troop buildup two years ago.

Already, police commandos have tried to grab him twice, only to be blocked by an Iraqi army unit, with tacit support from U.S. forces.

Shibeeb’s story reveals the volatility of today’s Iraq, where Sunni-Shiite tensions are just one of the conflicts at play. His vulnerability illustrates how the Iraqi government and security forces remain subject to competing political and tribal pressures, and score-settling, that risk igniting new violence. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail

Questions about al Qaeda’s next move

Questions about al Qaeda’s next move
By Greg Miller, Los Angeles Times, October 19, 2009

The plot for the Sept. 11 attacks was set in motion in late 1999 from a cluster of Al Qaeda training camps near Kandahar.

In those dusty Afghan compounds, Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants signed off on the plan, set up a special training program, and selected lead members of the hijack team.

Ten years later, could Al Qaeda return to Afghanistan and use it again as a launching pad for terrorist strikes?

The question has taken on heightened urgency as the Obama administration searches for a new war strategy, and Pakistan carries out its first major military offensive in the tribal region that Al Qaeda has called home since the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. [continued…]

Facebooktwittermail