Abdullah May Withdraw from Second Round

Abdullah Abdullah is threatening to withdraw from the presidential runoff contest in Afghanistan if the head of the Electoral Commission is not replaced. That commission oversaw the fraud-ridden first round. President Obama has put off his decision on Afghanistan policy until the presidential election is concluded, but what if it never really takes place and the US is willy-nilly stuck with Hamid Karzai and his wounded legitimacy?

Over 1,000 US troops have been wounded in Afghanistan in the past 3 months.

Congress is pressing the Pentagon to find more effective ways of combating roadside bombs or improvised explosive devices.



End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Baltzer and Barghouti on Jon Stewart

Jon Stewart this week showed his usual stone cold courage in having on to his show Palestinian activist Moustafa Barghouti and Jewish-American peace worker Ann Baltzer for a frank discussion of the Israeli-Palestinian impasse. A hard line Likudnik audience member heckled them and ultimately had to be escorted from the studio. Here is an eye witness account at MondoWeiss.

Part 1 of the interview:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Anna Baltzer & Mustafa Barghouti Extended Interview Pt. 1
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

Here is part 2:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive - Anna Baltzer & Mustafa Barghouti Extended Interview Pt. 2
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

As usual, the Likudnik Dirty Tricks squad has been pressuring Stewart and Comedy Central over this outbreak of frank talk about Israel.

Rawstory has more on the controversy.

Please support Stewart: at http://www.comedycentral.com/
help/questionsCC.jhtml, selecting The Daily Show with Jon Stewart in the menu. If you prefer to call, the number is 212 468 1700. If you liked what you saw, give it support. Numbers matter in these things and actually the Likudniks aren't all that numerous, it is just that so few in the mainstream bother to speak out.

End/ (Not Continued)


For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Pakistan Press: Clinton 'White Goddess'; US should Leave Afghanistan

The USG Open Source Center translates or paraphrases Urdu editorials on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's controversial visit to Pakistan

Pakistan: Urdu Press Roundup Discusses Hillary Clinton's Visit to Country
The following is a roundup of excerpts from editorials and articles on the visit of the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton to Pakistan, with particular reference to Washington's policy towards Islamabad, war on terror, and the Taliban, published in the 30 October editions of seven Urdu dailies.
Pakistan -- OSC Summary
Friday, October 30, 2009
Document Type: OSC Summary

Ausaf Editorial Sees Shift in USPolicy Regarding Taliban

Maintaining that the United States wants to hold talks with the moderate Taliban for resolving the Afghan imbroglio, the 30 October editorial says: " US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that those who were forced to become Taliban members would have to be separated from the militants.

She said that every gun-wielding individual was not a terrorist,but there were those, who were supporting the extremists out of compulsion.

The policy that the United States is deliberating these days concerning the Talibanis that the Taliban should be divided into two groups, good and bad, then the good members of Taliban should be isolated from the bad ones, and talks should beheld with them."

Jinnah Editorial Holds US Responsible for Talibanization

Recalling that it was the United States that had organized and provided resources to these people (Taliban) in its war against the Soviet Union; the 30 October editorial states: "The United States itself is the motivator for the apprehensions that the US secretary of state hasbeen expressing during her visit to Pakistan.

The United States used to provide weapons and other paraphernalia to the Taliban to fight against the Soviet Union and declared them as jihadists.

It used the shoulder of the Taliban jihadists to shatter the Soviet Union. Later, when the shattered Soviet Union retreated from Afghanistan, the United States left the Taliban unmonitored."

Mashriq Editorial Claims US Mulling Change in Policies

Referring to the joint press conference of Hillary Clinton with Foreign Minister Qureshi, the 30 October editorial states: "Anyhow, it can be guessed from the news conference of the US secretary of state that her country wants to bring change in its policies.

She has acknowledged to the extent that the United States had not benefited with direct contact with the rulers, rather they have suffered losses. Therefore, it now intends to establish direct contact with people."

Express Article by Tanvir Qaisar Shahid Discusses Impact of Visit

Talking about the statement of the Indian prime minister about holding talks with Pakistan on the eve of Hillary Clinton's Pakistan visit; the 30 October article comments: "The visit of the US secretary of state proved hard for Pakistan.

As soon as she reached Pakistan, a bomb blast occurred in Peshawar. Over 100 hundred people were killed, and 200 otherswere critically injured.

One benefit of her visit was that on the very first day of her visit, the Indian prime minister announced that his country was willing to hold unconditional talks with Pakistan."

Islam Editorial Urges US To Review Policies

Advising the United States to bring about changes in its policy for peace and security in the region, the 30 October editorial says: "Ignoring the international norms and diplomatic demands, the US secretary of state talked about, with full comfort, the appointment of the chief of the most sensitive agency of the Pakistan Army.

If the United States wants to improve its image, it should pull out of the Afghan war.
At the same time, it should also abandon its conspiracy to bog down the Pakistan Army into this war."

Islam Article by Khawar Chaudhry Links Operation With Visit

Emphasizing that stepping up of operation was imperative to pave the way for the visit of the US secretary of state; the 30October article states: "Preparations had been ongoing since the start of October for getting a glimpse of the white goddess (Hillary Clinton).
The series of offering sacrifices was also underway to appease her.

It is obvious that the visit of the goddess was necessary for a glimpse and a particular environment was also required for her arrival."

Khabrain Editorial Criticizes US Approach Toward Pakistan

Highlighting the recent US measures that prove contrary to Pakistan's sovereignty and independence; the 30 October editorial says: "The way in which people have suffered hardships because of Hillary Clinton's visit it says that if the US secretary was facing grave threats, whywas this visit to Pakistan organized?

Talking to the media, the US secretary of state said that her country would always support Pakistan.

However, when asked about the illegal measures of the United States, she evaded to answer. Pakistanis are questioning Pakistan's sovereignty and independence after the US drone attacks and armed patrolling by the US soldiers in Islamabad."

Nawa-e Waqt Editorial Exhorts Leaders To Reject US Aid, Presence of Soldiers

Goading the rulers to show national honor and dignity and rise to the occasion; the 30 October editorial comments: "Keeping in view the national sovereignty the US secretary of state should be asked to withdraw the US aid and troops.

At the same time, she should be told that we cannot sell away our independence and sovereignty for the sake of the US aid, and that weare capable of defending our independence and integrity in our capacity as anuclear power."

Nawa-e Waqt Article by Dr Hussein Ahmed Piracha Questions Double Standards of US

Deploring that the United States has been conniving at the Indian intrusion into Pakistan and its backing of the terrorists, the 30 October article says: "It should have been asked from Hillary Clinton that on one hand you have been praising the Pakistan Government and Army for launching effective operation against the terrorists in Swat and Malakand, and on the other, India has been providing weapons and dollars to the same terrorists by setting up consulates in border areas under the US patronage. India continues to cater to these elements."


End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Should US Troops in Iraq be held Hostage to the next Election?

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that the Iraqi parliament again on Thursday failed to pass an electoral law to govern the holding of the planned January 16 parliamentary elections. The Kurdish delegates refused to come into the parliament building, thereby denying the session a quorum. The Turkmen and Arab delegates had demanded that Kirkuk be treated differently in the legislation than other provinces (Kurds are now a majority in Kirkuk, and the Kurds wish to annex the province to their Kurdistan Regional Government, a semi-independent confederacy in northern Iraq; Turkmen and Arabs consider the majority artificial, the result of Kurdistan-backed Kurdish in-migration, and consider having an ordinary election there a reward to the Kurds for land-grabbing. Kurds maintain that the province has long been theirs and that they are just correcting the 'Arabization' or ethnic cleansing and settlement policies of Saddam Hussein, who brought Arab families north to make the oil-rich province indisputably Arab).

Many pundits are maintaining that the failure to hold parliamentary elections on time will, perhaps, force US troops to stay longer and in greater numbers than envisaged in the Status of Forces agreement.

Meanwhile, the Iraqi government arrested dozens of security officials, saying that they were implicated in Sunday's attacks.

Back to elections. Elections in Iraq cannot be held to international standards. There typically are no big public rallies, for fear that they would be blown up by Sunni Arab guerrillas. Candidates can seldom campaign publicly for fear of assassination. For the election itself, the US military declares a curfew and prohibits vehicular traffic for 3 days. Everyone is reduced to walking to the store to buy bread and other necessities. You can't drive. This measure prevents car bombings of the polling stations.

So why does the US still have 120,000 troops in Iraq? They aren't for the most part doing patrols anymore. They are just being kept in place so that they can swing into action as soon as the election date is fixed, and protect the electoral process from sabotage by bombing.

Is this rationale really a good enough reason to keep so many troops in Iraq? Shouldn't the Iraqi army by now be able to supervise a vehicular curfew on its own? And, why should the Obama administration care if the election is held or not? Saudi Arabia hasn't held any elections lately and it is our ally. The Iraqis were made by the US to have several elections, and they know how to do it if they want to. Why allow their interminable parlays on basic things like an electoral law to hold US troops hostage in the country with nothing much to do for a year?

The parliamentary and provincial elections and the referendum on the constitution were always imagined by the Bush administration as propaganda exercises on behalf of the Republican Party and Neoconservatism. Although the elections have not been meaningless, and a lot of Iraqis obviously express their political spirit through them, they have been highly flawed and artificial. The first, in January 2005, completely excluded the Sunni Arabs because it was not based on voting districts, and it appears to have been stolen by Iran, much to the delight at the time of the Red States (?). In some ways that election provoked the Great Sunni-Shiite Civil War. The constitution was rejected by a majority in each of the major Sunni Arab-majority provinces and so is not a national constitution, and it has a strong theocratic overtone (read it and weep, Christopher Hitchens). Islam is the state religion and parliament may pass no legislation contradicting sharia or Islamic canon law. Kurdish separatism is virtually enshrined in it. The Muslim fundamentalists won the December 2005 parliamentary elections as well. Critics accused Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki of using intimidation by tribal forces and the advantages of incumbency to skew the results of the provincial elections of January, 2009 toward his Islamic Mission (Da'wa) Party. (Some charge al-Maliki of increasingly adopting the techniques and rhetoric of the region's 'soft' dictators).

Iraq is a poor candidate for successful transition to democracy or for social peace. It has a low per capita income if you subtract the notional petroleum income, which is not exactly shared out with the people. Poor countries often fail in their attempt to democratize. It does not have a long-established, respectable business class. It has no effective trade unions to speak of, since the Baath Party had coopted them and then Paul "Jerry" Bremer dissolved them by viceregal fiat. The UN/ US sanctions of the 1990s and the US occupation has pushed literacy down to 58% from more like 78% in the heyday of the pre-Saddam Baath Party. The country has come to be strongly divided by ethno-religious divisions. Its economy is dominated by a pricey primary commodity, petroleum, and gasoline is easily stolen and fought over, producing militia competition and deaths. . All of these factors have been cited to explain failure at democratization and/or high rates of political violence, and all are present in Iraq in spades.

Me, I don't think the US troop withdrawal should be tied to the successful holding of a parliamentary election, in which US troops are assigned the role of watchmen. The Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) should be adhered to, and the Iraqis will just have to decide if they want to hold an election or not, and if they do, their troops should supervise it.

I'm as in favor of democracy as anyone else. But I'm a also skeptical that it can be imposed at the point of a gun on a deeply divided society that is at the moment dirt-poor.

The time for elections as US propaganda victory has passed.

End/ (Not Continued)

For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Blast At Peshawar Bazaar Kills 105

The story of the gigantic car bombing of the area between Meena and Kochi bazaars in Peshawar, which killed at least 105 persons, is especially heartbreaking. Muslim extremists in Darra Adam Khel appear to have planned and carried out the attack, done by remote-controlled car bomb. They had threatened the markets with retribution if they did not forbid women to shop there. Pakistani extremists often preach 'char divari' or the immuring of women-- keeping them within the four walls of their homes and forbidding them to go out at all. This idea, typical of Taliban sorts of thinking, is not Islamic and is contradicted by what we know of early Muslim history, in which women played an active and public role.

In any case, the extremists then bombed the area around these markets, since Kochi is a women's market. At least 70 of the victims were women and children.

Darra Adam Khel is an Afridi Pashtun village in the North-West Frontier Province between Peshawar and the Federally Administered Tribal Area of Kohat (which itself witnessed a big bombing last week). Darra Adam Khel is notorious as a center for arms and munition production, using artisanal techniques. Adam Khel tribesmen can reproduce virtually any rifle or other weapon with which they are presented.

Of course, a further context for the attack is the ongoing Pakistani military campaign against the Tehrik-i Taliban Pakistan in South Waziristan.


Aljazeera English has video of the Peshawar tragedy:



Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke in Islamabad after the attack. ITN has video:



Clinton pledged the Pakistanis American aid in increasing and making more reliable their electricity production. Pakistan has been plagued by brown-outs, referred to in India and Pakistan as 'load-shedding.' These electricity outages are more than mere annoyances. You cannot run a factory if the electricity keeps going off. Details of the energy aid plan are here.

The USG Open Source Center translates from Jang for Weds. October 28:

"Pakistan is facing stern energy crises. The industrial, trading, and domestic consumers are affected so severely that approximately 24000000 workers will face unemployment only in the textile sector because of energy crisis. These crises will badly affect the textile sector and other sectors also. During the past week, the Standing Committee of Senate on Petroleum has been informed that the Oil and Gas Development Company Limited (OGDCL) is facing problems in producing 300 MMCFD (millions of cubic feet per day) gas and 7000 liters of oil daily and there are cases filed in several courts, while 250 stay orders are there in this regard."

The aid of which Clinton spoke, assuming it is efficiently delivered and used, could therefore be key in preventing a big rise in unemployment, and thus could help forestall disturbances deriving from bitter and unemployed workers (who are more numerous and more potentially disruptive than mere rural Taliban). Pakistan will grow a little over 3% this year, though to tell you the truth, that is their population growth, as well. So their net collective increase in gross deomestic product will be . . . zero.

Clinton's press conference was overshadowed by the bombings, and most channels put her on a split screen with the bombing aftermath, rather undermining her message of reconstruction.


End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Corey: What Afghanistan (Should) Mean to Us

Scott Corey writes a guest op-ed for IC:

The Afghanistan debate is mired in the very shortcomings that have kept us from doing well there up to now. We need a qualitative shift of policy, but we dither about metrics and troop levels. We ask ourselves if we should “get out” as if there is somewhere to go that is out of range. Meanwhile, our enemies control the political meaning of everything we do. We need to take that control away from them, and that requires us to know our world, our enemy, and this struggle.

Today, power is so diffuse that empire and isolation are equally dead. Control of information, money, natural resources, and ideological persuasiveness all move parts of the political world. Still, all of it hangs on a framework of formal authority residing in a collection of states that wield force, legitimacy, representation, and diplomacy.

Terrorism prospers in the complexity of this political world. Political identity is no longer simple and fixed, so friend and enemy are hard to know. If I hit you, we fight, because the enmity is clear. If I coerce you with weapons, you might be intimidated or you might defy me, but the choice is clear. However, if I kill someone else in a spectacular manner, you need to know why before you can react. My cause might be just. My enemy might be your enemy. Or I might be coming for you and yours if you take the wrong path.

So “terrorist” is not just a dirty word for your enemy. Terrorism exists and has character that can be understood and fought. Using violence to raise uncertainty in an audience is terrorism. It earns the terrorist the authority to relieve that uncertainty about who will be killed and why. Making “war” on terrorism is usually just an attempt to build authoritarian power on the back of someone else’s atrocities. If the terrorist is demonic, the pretended savior can claim to justify methods drawn from “the dark side.”

Terrorism is strong because it is indirect. It appears to attack one group in order to persuade a different group. On the other hand, terrorism is weak because it is so often hypocritical. In the French Revolution, the vast majority of guillotine victims were commoners executed as “aristocrats.” In the Algerian Revolution, the bombings mostly killed Arab Muslims in the name of evicting French colonialism. The audience really is the victim, but does not see that truth.

Thus, terrorism (from above or from below) is different from ordinary coercion because it depends less upon credible threats than viable lies. It gets away with these lies because the terrorist establishes control over what people think the violence means. This control can be so strong that it dominates the thinking of friend and foe alike. It took 200 years of research to reveal that the French Revolution was not a class war.

This is where we are in Afghanistan and the struggle with Muslim radicalism generally. Muslim terrorists are seeking a level of authority over Islam that no one has exercised since the Prophet Muhammad. Muslims die from Muslim radical violence in vastly greater numbers than do Americans. All the ramblings about destroying the West or creating a global caliphate are just background noise. The biggest debate al Qaeda ever had was whether to attack the US at all.

That attack on America transformed a band of fewer than 400 militants into global rebels because the US embraced the imperial role al Qaeda cut out for us. Yet there is no serious, ongoing attempt to overthrow the West. The true goal of the radicals is shown in the brutal rule of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the Swat region of Pakistan. It showed itself in parts of Iraq controlled by the al Qaeda affiliate there.

No movement of US troops (or drones) into or out of Central Asia will help in this struggle as long as the radicals control what our coming and going means to the Islamic world. If we stay we are imperialist, if we leave we are defeated. To succeed, we must take control of the meaning of the struggle.

The only viable posture is a self-limited commitment. This is a struggle within Islam. We are useful victims, and we have a right to hit back. But we are neither the political audience, nor the group that will most suffer under the rule of Muslim radicalism if it wins. Our military power can only be effective if it is explicitly expeditionary, not imperial. We must say that, and prove it, at every opportunity.

Promise Afghanistan two years of major combat support. Proud local rebels who only want us out need only wait – no point in being killed over the inevitable. If the radicals want to come after us without a recruiting pool in the Afghan villages, they are welcome to take the unreplaced casualties. The Afghan government has two years to be viable, or it will be thrown to the wolves, and Afghanistan will revert to the status of international shooting gallery. In the meantime, the better it does, the better we do.

Such a posture is credible. We were deeply involved in Afghanistan against the Soviets, and we left then, and we are leaving Iraq now. It is sustainable, because it matches how the American public sees our legitimate use of force in the world. It makes our point about who we are and what the terrorists really want, no matter how well Kabul fares down the road. It puts our allies on notice – we can give many forms of ongoing help, but when it comes to military force our help comes tailored to a sink or swim world of independent states, and we are not afraid to invade a place twice if we need to do so.

There will be fighting, but this is not a war. It is a violent argument and it is a race. The argument is about whether the US is an imperial foe, or a tough friend, of the Islamic world. The race is to get Kabul to rebuild its power on its own people, not our might. If we lose the race, Afghans suffer. If we try to make this an open-ended war, we lose the argument. Should that happen, the next generation of Muslims may justly curse us for abetting the oppressive radical movement that prospered when we were strong, but not wise.

Scott Corey

---

Scott Corey has a PhD in Political Science from UC Berkeley, and did his dissertation on political violence. He now works at a small non-profit crisis center in the Sierra Nevada.

End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

UN Guest House Attacked in Kabul; 8 More US Troops Killed in Bombings; FSO Resigns in Protest; President's Brother CIA Agent, Drug Lord

Afghanistan continues to generate bad news at an alarming rate. Gunmen stormed a UN guest house in Kabul, deploying small arms fire and killing 3 UN staff members along with 4 other persons. A Taliban spokesman said his group was behind the attack and that it was aimed at disrupting the Nov. 7 presidential runoff election. At the same time, a rocket slammed into a five star hotel in Kabul.

Heavy gunfire reverberated through the streets shortly after dawn and a large plume of smoke rose over the city following the attack on the hostel in the Shar-e-Naw district. Kabul police chief Abdul Rahman Rahman said seven people were killed, including some attackers.

The killing of 8 US troops by roadside bombs on Tuesday has brought the number of US troops slain in October in Afghanistan to 55, making this the deadliest month so far in the 8-year US war in that country. The US currently has 66,000 troops in Afghanistan, in addition to NATO forces.

AP has video:



Matthew Hoh, a former Marine and a Foreign Service officer in Afghanistan has resigned in protest against the conduct of the US war in Afghanistan, the first such FSO known to have done so. He protests that we are simply propping up a corrupt and feckless urban-based government that is being opposed by a rural religious-nationalist movement, and that we are highly unlikely to succeed in settling this three decades-old conflict. Karen DeYoung of WaPo reports that Hoh believes many Pashtun guerrillas have taken up arms against the US and NATO simply because these foreign troops are in their country, so that we are generating the conflict we say we are ameliorating.

Underlying Hoh's point about corruption, the NYT reports that Ahmed Wali Karzai, the brother of President Hamid Karzai, who has been accused of involvement in the drug trade, has for some years been on the CIA payroll. So it makes you wonder, has the US been winking at Ahmed Wali's alleged drug running because he is an asset who is doing something for Washington? If so, how far up does this operation extend? Afghanistan looks more like Vietnam every day.

Meanwhile, Washington is abuzz with plans and counter-plans on Afghanistan. They include paying the Taliban not to fight the US, focusing mainly on Pakistan, and withdrawing US troops to the major cities.

The Soviets more or less withdrew to the cities in the mid-1980s, and it didn't stop them from being forced ultimately to withdraw from the country. And they even had loyal Communist Party cadres and large numbers of urban women on their side. I doubt there is any similar genuine support group for US and NATO presence in the country, though the Tajiks don't so far seem to mind it the way elements among the Pashtuns do.

What I still don't hear is what the objective of the war is, and how it will be accomplished in some reasonable time frame. If the objective is that Pashtun tribesmen shouldn't feud with each other and with their government, and should become secularized, then this really is a 40-year war.

End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Bittle & Johnson: Will America's Short-Term Memory Loss Kill the Climate Bill?

Scott Bittle & Jean Johnson, Authors of Who Turned Out the Lights: Your Guided Tour to the Energy Crisis, write in a guest op-ed for IC:

Imagine if the Senate hearings about a climate change bill had been held a year ago.

Think of the context: $4 per gallon gas and oil over $130 per barrel. Waiting lists to buy popular fuel efficient cars. Polls in summer 2008 found 7 in 10 Americans saying there was solid evidence of global warming, and presidential candidates of both parties reiterating that it was real and had to be addressed.

It wouldn't have been an easy debate. Most Republicans were busy chanting "drill baby drill" while most Democrats were swooning at the very mention of green jobs and solar panels. But at least the public would have been engaged.

Now? Not so much. Certainly there's strong and urgent rhetoric from world leaders about the need to come up with a plan to cut greenhouse gases at the international climate conference in Copenhagen. But gas has settled back to $2 per gallon, the number of Americans who say there's evidence of global warming has dropped 14 points, and surveys show climate change and energy policy as dead last among priorities for Congress. The twin problems we face on energy -- controlling global warming and ensuring we've got enough fuel to go around -- are just not registering with the public.

"How quickly we forget" is one possible reaction, but Ronald Reagan's "There you go again," is better.

The United States has been around the block multiple times on energy policy, much like Bill Murray living the same sequence of events over and over again in Groundhog Day. Oil and gas prices shoot up. Voters get upset. Politicians say we absolutely, positively need to change the way we get and use energy. We make a few adjustments here and there -- both in the country's overall policies and in our own personal habits. Then a couple of years later, we seem to forget the whole thing. At least Bill changed his line of attack after hearing Sonny and Cher sing "I Got You Babe" on his radio alarm for the umpteenth time.

Our boom-or-bust mind-set on energy poses a genuine hazard to our economy -- one that could last decades. The notorious energy crises of the past (for those too young to remember) were painful, but relatively brief. They were generally set off by events that caused problems somewhere in the supply system -- war in the Middle East, American diplomats held hostage in Iran, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita pushing up prices because some refineries were knocked out by the weather. However troubling and unpleasant these situations were, they were temporary.

The conditions that generated the country's more recent energy problems are not going to go away quickly, even though they have been tempered by the worldwide economic slowdown. We're competing with many more people worldwide for the energy that's available. There are truly astonishing levels of growth in China, India, and elsewhere. These countries need massive amounts of energy for their factories and transportation. As they become more prosperous, people living there will start buying cars and refrigerators and microwaves and computers. All these things use energy.There's also a pretty solid expert consensus that humans are beginning to use up most of the oil that's easy to get to. It's not going to be Mad Max exactly, because the world is not actually going to run out of oil in our lifetimes, but chances are that it's going to get tougher and more expensive to find it.

Plus, if we're going to do anything about controlling greenhouse gases, we need a steady, consistent effort to change our energy mix. You can't do this by fits and starts. We need both steady investment in new technology and long-term commitment to changing the economic rules of the game so that clean energy is a reliable, affordable alternative to fossil fuels.

Is there any hope that Americans will support (or at least not oppose) major changes in energy policy? In fact, there is some. According to research by our organization, Public Agenda, 73 percent of Americans disagree with the statement that "If we get gas prices to drop and stay low, we don't need to be worried about finding alternative sources of energy," and fully 53 percent "strongly disagree." Moreover, despite partisan debate, Americans find common ground on at least 10 major energy proposals that would provide incentives for more energy efficiency, reducing gasoline usage and supporting alternative energy have widespread support -- at least in concept.

It's quite possible that prices for oil and gas will stay relatively low in the next few years due to the global economic shake-up, and there have been some new oil discoveries and production breakthroughs that are exciting the industry. They won't produce enough oil and gas to solve the world's long-term problem, but it may be enough to hold prices down for a while.

This puts an even greater burden on leaders to help Americans understand that, for the sake of the planet and our economic stability, we need to get a sound energy plan together and stick with it even when the pressure is off. Besides, there are so many avenues for addressing our energy challenge. People will and can disagree over which ones are best, and no doubt the country will make some mistakes along the way. But the most damaging mistake of all would be to assume that just because energy prices are lower now, our energy problems are behind us. That would be a truly gigantic error.


©2009 Scott Bittle & Jean Johnson, authors of Who Turned Out the Lights: Your Guided Tour to the Energy Crisis

Author Bios

Scott Bittle, co-author of Who Turned Out the Lights: Your Guided Tour to the Energy Crisis, is executive editor of PublicAgenda.org, where he has prepared citizen guides on more than twenty major issues including the federal budget deficit, Social Security, and the economy. He is also the website director for Planet Forward, an innovative PBS program designed to bring citizen voices to the energy debate.

Jean Johnson, co-author of Who Turned Out the Lights: Your Guided Tour to the Energy Crisis, is co-founder of PublicAgenda.org, and has written articles and op-eds for USA Today, Education Week, School Board News, Educational Leadership, and the Huffington Post Website.

For additional energy resources and supplemental material, please visit www.whoturnedoutthelights.org

End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Cole in Salon: "Obama's Foreign Policy Report Card"

My Salon column , "Obama's foreign policy report card," is available online.

Excerpt:

' When Obama came into office in January, 142,000 U.S. troops were in Iraq, conducting regular patrols of the major cities. His Republican rivals were dead set against U.S. withdrawal on a strict timetable. He faced something close to an insurrection from some of his commanders in the field, such as Gen. Ray Odierno, who opposed a quick departure from Iraq. Moreover, Obama assumed the presidency at a time when Iran and the U.S. were virtually on a war footing and there had been no direct talks between the two countries on most of the major issues dividing them. In February, the government of Pakistan virtually ceded the Swat Valley and the Malakand Division to the Pakistani Taliban of Maulvi Fazlullah, allowing the imposition of the latter's fundamentalist version of Islamic law on residents, and Islamabad had no stomach for taking on the increasingly bold extremists.

Eight months later, it is a different world. '

Read the whole thing.

Also, if you haven't checked in on Tomdispatch.com in the past week, you'll find three closely argued new articles there on the drawbacks of the new American militariesm.

End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Rivals Blame al-Maliki for Poor Security Arrangements

The death toll of Sunday's twin bombings in Baghdad has risen to 155, and tragically it turns out that two dozen children were among the victims.

I still disagree with those who have been alleging that the bombing puts the upcoming parliamentary election in question, or raises questions about whether the Iraqi troops can keep order. These big bombings have been going on for years, and they went on when the US was in charge of security, as well. In fact, civilian deaths from political violence have fallen in recent months.

Although initial reports about the massive bombings in Baghdad on Sunday said that they were car bombs, McClatchy is now reporting that they were large trucks. One was packed with C4 explosives and the other with TNT. The Sunni Arab guerrillas in Iraq are still mining old Baath weapons depots, but my suspicion is that the C4 probably was imported from outside the country. Al-Hayat transmits from AFP in Arabic that one of the trucks was a Renault from the Water Department in Falluja, a city to the west of Baghdad that has been a center of Sunni Arab fundamentalist resistance to the US and the Shiite government. In November-December of 2004, the US military invaded and destroyed Falluja, so there may be people there for whom Sunday's bombings were a form of revenge on the capital.

Many in Baghdad are scratching their heads and wondering how in the world these big trucks filled with explosives were allowed to get anywhere near government ministries. Dark suspicions of security personnel bribed or traitorous are circulating.

Al-Sharq Al-Awsat reports in Arabic that public confidence in Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has been shaken by the bombings, and quotes opposition politicians from rival groups such as the Sadrists as slamming the PM for not doing enough to provide security in the capital.

In the light of the security lapses for which he is now being taken to task, al-Maliki's decision to stay out of the National Iraqi Alliance coalition joined by most other Shiite parties may have been the wrong move. He is now running against parties which can depict themselves as out of power and so not responsible for the steady drumbeat of bombings. Al-Maliki has no larger coalition partners in whom he could take cover. If his Da'wa Party loses big time in the parliamentary elections, that loss could help destabilize Iraq. A new prime minister will have to struggle to get hold of the security and intelligence forces, and the US military will have to work with a new cast of characters.

Government workers who reported for work on Monday, according to CBS, said that they felt as though they were at a funeral. Some were afraid there might be more attacks on government offices:



Al-Zaman reports in Arabic that there is a great deal of popular anger over the slowness of the rescue operations in Baghdad.

Aljazeera English reports on popular anger at the government and security forces over the lapses that allowed the drivers of the trucks to position themselves downtown in the morning.



Russia Today's Baghdad offices were devastated by the blasts, and that channel reports from Baghdad:



End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

MPs Wounded in Blast; al-Maliki Decries Baathists, al-Qaeda; Kurds Threaten Election Boycott

Al-Hayat reporting in Arabic surveyed the reactions of Iraqi politicians to the massive bombings on Sunday. As with Prime minister Nuri al-Maliki, they blamed remnants of the former, Baath, regime and "al-Qaeda" (Sunni fundamentalist militants). I was struck by how they for the most part responded technocratically, by pledging a review and an improvement of security procedures.

As I predicted yesterday, some figures are already using the blasts for politics. Hadi al-Ameri, a member of parliament and a leader of the paramilitary hard line Shiite Badr Corps, implicitly came after al-Maliki. "We've heard a lot of brouhaha about successes on the security front," he said. "Where are these successes?" The Badr Corps is aligned with its parent organization, the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI), which is running against al-Maliki's State of Laws coalition in January.

Al-Zaman reports on some of the casualties. A woman member of parliament, Maha al-Duri, was wounded and two of her bodyguards were killed. The lieutenant governor of Baghdad Province was wounded. Several members of the Sadr Bloc were wounded as they were commemorating the anniversary of the death of Muhammad Muhammad Sadiq al-Sadr in the Justice Ministry building.

Meanwhile, one of the more contentious issues in the upcoming parliamentary elections is how to deal with the contested province of Kirkuk. The USG Open Source Center translates an article from the Kurdish press in which major Kurdish parties threaten to boycott the elections if a special election law for Kirkuk is passed. (Kirkuk is by now probably majority Kurdish, so the Kurds will dominate its provincial council unless the Kurdish bloc is diluted by special provisions in the electoral law).

Iraqi Kurdish lists to boycott elections if consensus not reached
Patriotic Union of Kurdistan
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Document Type: OSC Summary

Iraqi Kurdish lists to boycott elections if consensus not reached

The Kurdistan Alliance and the Islamic Union of Kurdistan (IUK) lists have said they would boycott the Iraqi upcoming parliamentary elections if a special election law for Kirkuk is passed, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) media website reported on 24 October.

The alliance and the IUK's representatives expressed their concerns in a press conference which was held today in the Iraqi parliament's office in Arbil Governorate.

The deputy head of the alliance, Sa'di Barzinji, said in the press conference that there were elements in the Iraqi parliament who wanted to pass a special election law for Kirkuk, adding that such efforts were contrary to the country's constitution.

We, the Kurds, work in accordance with the Iraqi constitution, and the country's High Constitutional Court has rejected a special election law for Kirkuk, Barzinji said.

Barzinji said that no changes were made to the voter registration, referring to these elements' demand for a special election law.

He said that the increase in Kirkuk's voter registration was only 30 per cent, while in other parts of Iraq was 100 per cent. He added that the number of Kurds in the city was significantly reduced during the country's former regime and thousands of them were killed in the area.

Barzinji said that they would not allow the special election law to pass, even if it is passed, Iraqi president Jalal Talabani, a Kurd, can veto it twice and that the law also needed 66 per cent of the parliamentary votes to be passed.
Barzinji said that the Kurds would not participate in the elections if such law is passed; and the Kurds wanted an open election system.

Meanwhile, the IUK's MP in the Iraqi parliament, Zuhair Khoshnaw, said that his list would not allow a special election law to pass for Kirkuk, adding that the efforts to pass the law were contrary to the constitution.

Khoshnaw said that the Kurds wanted Kirkuk to be treated like other parts of the country. He added that if they did not reach an agreement with the other parties in the parliament, they would refer the issue to the Iraqi political council.

(Description of Source: (Internet) Patriotic Union of Kurdistan in Sorani Kurdish -- Patriotic Union of Kurdistan media website)

End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Baghdad Devastated by Massive Blasts, 136 Killed, 500 Wounded, Ministries Destroyed

Two massive blasts shook central Baghdad on Sunday, killing at least 136 people and wounding 500, and destroying three government ministry buildings, according to the Times of London's Oliver August reporting from Baghdad. It was the most destructive attack of 2009. August notes that the likely perpetrators were either Baathists from the old regime or Sunni Muslim extremists, both of whom want to stop a new, Shiite- and Kurdish- dominated status quo from settling upon Iraq.

AFP Arabic service says that the first car exploded at 10 am Baghdad time at a crowded intersection near the ministry of justice and the ministry of municipalities. The second was detonated ten minutes later on Salihiya St. in front of the Baghdad Province administrative office. Many dead bodies are suspected of still being beneath the rubble of the ministries of justice and public works buildings, which collapsed on the employees.

The ministries were protected by blast walls and the truck bombs could not get that close, but the explosives used were so ungodly powerful that they swept the blast walls away. I have no pretensions to forensics expertise, but that sounds like a clue to me; where are the guerrillas getting such remarkable high explosives?

Aljazeera English has video:



The particular ministries that were struck may be significant, since Iraq operates on a spoils system and ministries tend to be dominated by political parties and ethnic groups. The Minister of Public Works is Riyadh Gharib, a prominent member of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, which is close to the clerics in Tehran. Public Works as a ministry would thus have a lot of ISCI party members as employees and it is also a huge source of political patronage. Baathists or Sunni extremists would have every reason to hit it.

The Ministry of Justice had been less politicized, but from 2007 was in the control of the Shiite United Iraqi Alliance. The Minister of Justice from last February is Judge Dara Nur al-Din, an independent Kurd. He had been a member of the Interim Governing Council under Paul Bremer, for which some groups in Iraq may not have forgiven him. The ministry of justice also oversees court cases and executions, including of prominent Baathists, executions that Nur al-Din has defended, and which have angered the anti-government guerrillas.

As for the Baghdad Provincial government (it is both a province and a city), it has been dominated since the January, 2009, provincial elections by the State of Law coalition of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, the leading element of which is the Shiite Islamic Mission Party (Da'wa).

So if the guerrillas who set these bombs were trying to kill party cadres attached to ministries, you'd have to conclude they were trying to kill those of the ruling Shiite religious parties, and also to take revenge on the new regime for the Ministry of Justice's executions of Baathists and Sunnis.

The attacks inevitably had implications for the January, 2010, parliamentary elections, insofar as they make Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and his ascendant Islamic Mission Party look incompetent in providing security. Since al-Maliki has done a fair job of restoring security to cities such as Basra, this success is a campaign talking point for him, which the guerrillas are attempting to deflect.

There are two dangers here. One is that US hawks will make such attacks a pretext for delaying US troop withdrawal. These sorts of attacks happened all the time when the US troops were patrolling Baghdad, and they only ever were stopped by extreme measures that were impractical for the long run, such as walling off whole neighborhoods and producing 80 percent unemployment.

The second is that Nuri al-Maliki will attempt to deflect any blame for the blasts onto Syria, which he views as harboring Baathist elements who plan these attacks out. Shaky revolutionary regimes like that of Baghdad often go to war to shore themselves up, and Iraq-Syria border clashes are not impossible.

The US Republican Party's avaricious and illegal war on Iraq destabilized the eastern Mediterranean, perhaps for decades, creating long-term challenges to US and global security of which the Baghdad blasts are very possibly only minor omens.

End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Pakistan Army Takes Militant Stronghold

The Pakistani military announced Saturday that its troops have taken Kotkai in South Waziristan, the erstwhile headquarters of the Tehrik-i Taliban Pakistan or the Taliban Movement of Pakistan. Both Hakimu'llah Mahsud and Qari Husain, leaders of the TTP, hail from the city. Dawn adds that Pakistani military spokesman Major General Athar Abbas said:

' 21 terrorists have been killed in South Waziristan on Friday and Saturday while three security personnel laid down their lives and another eight sustained injuries. About Kotkai, he said the place was a militant stronghold where most of the houses stood converted into bunkers. The town also has a training camp run by Qari Hussain for suicide bombers. Security forces are in the process of clearing the built-up area of IEDs, mines and booby traps.'

Aljazeera English has video:



Meanwhile, the head of the Pakistan Muslim League, Qa'id-i A`zam (PML-Q) said Saturday that only a US withdrawal can bring peace in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Muslim League split into several groups, with the most numerous one now being Nawaz Sharif's branch. But the PMLQ had been popular earlier in the decade, but shrank dramatically in the 2008 parliamentary elections and now really only has a vague coalition in Baluchistan province to support it.

End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Taliban Attack Pakistan Air Force Base

A suicide bomber at the gates of the Pakistan Aeronautical Complex (an Air Force base) detonated his payload on Friday, killing 8 and wounding 17. Kamra is northwest of the capital, Islamabad, on the way to Peshawar, the capital of the North-West Frontier Province.

AP has video:



The Pakistani Taliban also set off a bomb in Peshawar, a major northern city.

Aljazeera English reports on the negative effect of militants' violence on Pakistan's retail sector, as most people prefer to stay home than to risk bombings.



The USG Open Source Center looks at Pakistani editorials on the attack in Islamabad on a Brigadier General:

Pakistan: Urdu Press Roundup Denounces Security Arrangements in Islamabad-- OSC Summary
Friday, October 23, 2009
Document Type: OSC Summary

Maintaining that the terrorists targeted the military officer in reaction to the operation against the terrorists in South Waziristan; the editorial states: "It isquite clear that it will not be difficult for the militants, who can target theGeneral Headquarters and military van in Islamabad, to target the Army in their own stronghold Waziristan. A police officer believes that the attack on the military van on 22 October can be the reaction to the ongoing operation in Waziristan.It appears that the assailants had fully monitored the areas beforehand."

Jinnah Editorial Points Finger at Blackwater

Discussing the free movement of the US security agency in Islamabad, the editorial says:"US vehicles were checked many times and weapons were found in it. It is probable that Blackwater personnel are involved in gunfire on the sensitive agency's van because this organization is famous for target killing. No matter whether it functions under a cover name, its objective is to create turmoileverywhere."

Jang Article by Farooq Baloch Deplores Insufficient Security Arrangements

Terming the incident proof of security agencies' failure to hunt down terrorists in the federal capital; the article comments: "Long queues of vans on blockadesand shanty towns in the city can prove prelude to some great devastation.However, no attention has since been paid on these problems. This led to a great tragedy in G-11 sector of Islamabad on 22 October, where a brigadier and a soldier were shot dead by the terrorists."

End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Phase 2 of Waziristan Campaign; Pakistan Closes Schools; Mahsud Civilians Barred from Roads

Pakistan's military began "Phase 2" of its campaign in South Waziristan on Thursday, with a siege of Kotkai, the home town of Hakimullah Mahsud, the leader of the Taliban Movement of Pakistan. So far the army claims to have killed 100 militants, and 300 homes are said to have been damaged. Locals maintain that some of those killed are actually innocent civilians, and most of the houses were unconnected to the Taliban. Even if they were accurate, these numbers suggest that the Taliban have not stood and fought, but rather have melted away, since they only have light arms and would have been killed in large numbers by the Pakistani army, which has artillery and fighter jets.

AP has video of the fighting:



France24 has video of local reactions to the fighting in S. Waziristan (locals are critical of the federal government and sympathetic to the militants).



Indeed, Amnesty International worries that the Pakistani military is simply engaged in a vendetta with even the civilian members of the Pashtun Mahsud tribe. AI notes:

'
The Pakistani military has refused to allow members of the tribe, some of whom are involved in the senior leadership of the Pakistani Taleban, to use major roads to flee the conflict zone, witnesses told Amnesty International.

"Mehsud tribespeople, including women and children, are being punished on the roads as they flee simply because they belong to the wrong tribe," said Sam Zarifi, director of Amnesty International’s Asia-Pacific programme. "This could amount to collective punishment, which is absolutely prohibited under international law." '

Blake Hounshell considers the evidence from David Rohde and others that Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence is backing the Haqqani network in North Waziristan, and, indeed, he notes that the Haqqani fighters appear to have let the Pakistani military use their territory as a staging ground for attacking the Tehrik-i Taliban Pakistan (TTP or Taliban Movement of Pakistan) in South Waziristan. As I noted a couple of days ago, the current campaign in Waziristan does nothing to weaken the groups most active in killing US and NATO troops across the border in Afghanistan.

Gunmen in Islamabad killed a brigadier general and a soldier of the Pakistani army on Thursday, underlining the way in which the army's Waziristan campaign has become a feud of sorts, with the militants targeting officers. Ironically, the Pakistani officer corps had once generally backed the militants, as a means of projecting influence into southern Afghanistan and into Kashmir.

A police dragnet in Islamabad and Rawalpindi has resulted in some 300 arrests, including of Afghans and a Saudi. Some of those arrested had suicide belt bombs or bullet belts on their persons at the time of arrest, according to the police, and appear to have been on the verge of carrying out a terrorist attack in the capital.

All schools and universities in most of Pakistan have been closed until at least Sunday, in response to the recent bombing at Islamic International University. An exception is Sindh Province, where there is no history of Taliban activity.

Dawn has video on the impact of the move on students. Footage includes outraged students insisting that they will not be made afraid by the militants, and protesting the schools closure.



Aljazeera English reports that 150,000 civilians have now left South Waziristan (pop. 600,000), and another 100,000 are trying to get out.




End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Iraqi Parliament Gives up on Drafting Electoral Law; Cross-Sectarian Political Coalition Announced

President Barack Obama's meeting with Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki on Tuesday generated few deadlines, but some important things were said.

Obama stressed the need for the Iraqi parliament to pass an election law to enable parliamentary elections to be held on January 16. If the law isn't passed soon, the elections won't be held on schedule.

This delay would be a severe problem for the US military, which is stuck in Iraq without much to do but waiting to play one last big role, in closing down the country and providing enough security so that elections can be held. While the Iraqi army has gotten better at doing independent patrols and taking on gangs and militias in Shiite areas, it still is not very much in control of the Sunni regions, and it is not clear that it could oversee elections even in the wilder Shiite provinces such as Maysan. (That Iraq still cannot hope to have a simple election without massive security and the prohibition of vehicular traffic for 3 days speaks eloquently to how hard a row genuine democracy still has in that country. That US troops are available for joint patrols with the Iraqi army, which it helped train, but that the Iraqi army is studiedly disinterested, shows how much Americans are actually disliked in Iraq, a very nationalistic country that feels itself run roughshod over).

Al-Zaman reports in Arabic that the Iraqi parliament has thrown up its hands in despair about crafting an election law. Many parliamentarians haven't even been coming to the sessions, because there is such bad blood among the MPs over this and other issues. Some blame the intransigence of the Kurdistan Alliance, which is sensitive about the conditions under which elections are conducted in Kirkuk Province, which the Kurdistan Regional Government wants to annex, but the annexation of which is opposed by Arabs and Turkmen.

So parliament is asking the Political Council for National Security to draft the legislation, and to have parliament simply conduct an up and down vote on the resulting bill. The PCNS consists of President Jalal Talabani, Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, Vice President Adil Abdul Maliki, Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, and Kurdistan Regional Government president Massoud Barzani. The council is not specified in the constitution, much less having been given a legislative role, and some critics of this plan are complaining that it is unconstitutional.

It takes 90 days to organize an election in Iraq, so last Monday was technically the deadline for the passage of the legislation. The election must be held by Jan. 31 to be constitutional. The prospect of another sketchy election, after the fiasco in Afghanistan, is worrying the UN and the US military.

Meanwhile, what is probably the last of three major political coalitions was announced on Tuesday, and is analyzed by Reidar Vissar. It comprises both the Sunni Awakening Councils of al-Anbar under the leadership of Abu Risha, and the coterie of Interior Minister Jawad al-Bulani, a Shiite independent. Reidar hails it as cross-sectarian but admits that it may not amount to much in the actual election. I concur in his pessimism. My guess is that the Shiite religious coalition and the Government of Laws coalition (mainly the Islamic Mission or Da'wa Party) of PM al-Maliki will be the major Arab forces in the election, and will likely go into a post-election coalition with one another, preserving the dominance of the religious Shiites.

One wild card is that the Iraqi constitution stipulates that the largest single party in parliament gets the first shot at forming a government. If al-Maliki's party doesn't do as well as he expects, he could well lose the prime ministership. Since some of the improved security in Iraq derived from al-Maliki's talent in gaining control of the army and security forces, and since a new prime minister may not be as adept, the post-election situation in Iraq could be very unstable. That situation would in turn put pressure on the Obama administration to slow the US troop drawdown, at a time when Afghanistan will likely still be very hot and making demands on the administration's resources. Bush bequeathed Obama two major wars, and it would be ironic if Iraq and Afghanistan both deteriorate simultaneously, putting a squeeze play on the administration and endangering its reelection prospects.

Here is the White House video of the Obama/al-Maliki press conference. (Al-Maliki looks a little impatient during the long preface on Afghanistan issues, which surely signal which country is more important to President Obama). The emphasis on investment opportunities in Iraq is probably premature; if a country can't hold elections without a large foreign army's help, it is too soon to make big investments in it.




End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Taliban Attack Islamabad University, kill 6, wound 37

Two suicide bombers attacked the campus of the Islamic International University in Islamabad on Tuesday (with one of them tageting the women students), killing 6 persons and wounding 37. The attacks had two contexts. They were meant as revenge for the Pakistani government campaign against the Taliban in Waziristan. But they also were patriarchal protests against higher education for women and assertions of extreme Puritanism.

The three women known to have bee killed by the bombing strike as as every bit martyrs to the cause of educated women standing up to authoritarian religious regimes as Neda Agha Soltan, who was killed in Tehran this summer.

CNN has video:




Aljazeera English has raw video from the scene in Islamabad:



The USG Open Source Center translates an article from the Pakistani press on the Taliban's campaign for puritanism:

Pakistan: Public, Clerics Join Hands Against Cable Network in Balakot
Unattributed report: "Demand To Stop Cable Network Over Spreading Immorality"
Shamal
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Document Type: OSC Translated Text

Haripur -- Strong voice of religious scholars from Balakot has shaken the religious scholars of Haripur from their deep slumber.

Public pressure has also been increased in Haripur after the religious scholars acted against the cable network saying that it spreads immorality and obscenity.

Strong protest of people led by religious scholars against cable network also forced the religious scholars of Haripur to stand up against the spread of obscenity through cable network.

Cable network has been blocked after the protest of religious scholars in Balakot.

That is the reason that people of Haripur stressed that their religious scholars lead the public for rising up against the cable network.

(Description of Source: Abbottabad Shamal Online in Urdu  The North, a conservative daily focusing mostly on issues related to Hazara, Mansehra Region of North-West Frontier Province (NWFP). Its chief editor and publisher is Niaz Pasha Jadoon.
It is also published in Swat and Karachi.
Claims it has the "highest" readership in NFP; URL: http://www.dailyshamal.com)

End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

ECC: Karzai must Stand in Runoff Election

The UN-sponsored Electoral Complaints Commission in Afghanistan has determined that after fraudulent ballots are thrown out, incumbent Hamid Karzai received less than 50% of the vote, forcing him into a runoff with challenger Abdullah Abdullah.

Karzai is now expected to accept on Tuesday that he must face a second round of elections, though over the weekend he was making noises about standing firm and refusing to accept the ECC verdict. This intransigence probably in itself delayed President Barack Obama's decision on whether to send more troops to Afghanistan, since he could hardly decently do so to support a corrupt and discredited government that stole the election no less surely than had Ahmadinejad in Iran.

Update Karzai just formally acquiesced in the runoff, which has been set for November 7.

CBS reports this morning on the pressure applied to Karzai by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Sen. John Kerry.



ITV reports on the downside of having a runoff election in Afghanistan, including the potential for violence. When the runoff is held this fall, it will exclude many Afghans who live in snowy places or high altitudes, since winter is arriving in some of the country. There is also danger of Pashtun- Tajik violence, since the two ethnic groups are backing different candidates.



Aljazeera English has video on the ECC decision and its tussle with the local, Karzai appointed electoral commission.



On Iranian official television, outspoken MP George Galloway debates Dr Michael Williams, an Afghanistan expert at Royal Holloway College who has advised President Obama. Galloway argues that people are dying like flies in Afghanistan and that hopes for "developing" the country by military might are 'doomed.'




End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Pakistani Army Advances into Waziristan; Effect of Campaign on US in Afghanistan Doubted; Taliban threaten India

Islamabad's campaign against the Pakistani Taliban in South Waziristan is largely irrelevant to the struggles of the US and NATO in Afghanistan across the Durand Line, according to Afghanistan News Net. The relevant groups are the Old Taliban led by Mullah Omar, based in Quetta; the Haqqani Network of Siraj and Jalaluddin Haqqani, based in North Waziristan and targeting the Afghan provinces of Khost, Paktia, and Paktika; and the Hizb-i Islami or Islami Party of Gulbadin Hikmatyar, which is mainly based in Afghanistan but has a presence in Bajaur, the northernmost of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas in Pakistan.

So what is in South Waziristan? Groups that are targeting Pakistan itself. These include the Tehrik-i Taliban Pakistan [TTP] or Pakistani Taliban Movement and elements of anti-Shiite Sunni extremist groups from the Punjab, who have begun hitting Pakistani government targets. The campaign will thus have little effect on the fighting in Afghanistan, except to the extent that some militants may be displaced from Pakistan north to Afghanistan.

Dawn reports on the Pakistan military's advance into South Waziristan on the campaign's second day.

I picked out some worrisome parts of this report which are mentioned but not highlighted:

South Waziristan's population is 600,000; the campaign has already displaced 100,000 of them.

Afghan Taliban commander Mullah Sangin has brought in 1,500 Afghan Pashtun fighters to support the Pakistani Taliban Movement in South Waziristan.

Azam Tariq, spokesman for the Pakistani Taliban Movement, said that militants’ supporters from Muslim seminaries in Punjab, Sindh and the North-West Frontier Province were in touch with the Taliban and were coming to the battle zone through various routes.

(In support of this last point, police teams intensively investigated seminaries or madrasahs in the capital of Islamabad and some other areas on Sunday.)

Pakistan may even have to close its schools for a week because they have been threatened by the Taliban.

In other words, this military campaign is not just a matter of troops versus guerrillas. It is becoming a rallying point for Muslim radicals, with volunteers coming in from Afghanistan and others from madrasahs from all over Pakistan-- and with Pakistan's own security hanging in the balance.

Tariq took responsibility for the recent horrific bombings in the Punjabi city of Lahore, which targeted Pakistani security forces, thus claiming that South Waziristan had a very long reach into the rest of the country.

Pakistani security forces also arrested some 300 Afghans on Sunday.

CBS reports on the Waziristan campaign:



Reuters also has a video news report.

As if the fighting in Pakistan itself is not worrying enough, the USG Open Source Center translates a threat against India from TTP leader Hakimullah Mahsud:

' Pakistan: TTP Chief Hakimullah Mehsud Says India Next Target After Country
Unattributed report: "We Shall Declare War Against India After Islamic States Is Established in Pakistan: Hakimullah Mehsud"
Khabrain
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Document Type: OSC Translated Text

Islamabad -- Hakimullah Mehsud, chief of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), has threatened that the Taliban will send terrorists to fight against India after succeeding in establishing an Islamic state in Pakistan. He said in the footage shown in a British news channel Sky News : "We wish to make Pakistan an Islamic state, and we are striving for this objective. We are battling against the Pakistan Army, the police, and militia."

(Description of Source: Islamabad Khabrain in Urdu  News, a sensationalist daily, published by Liberty Papers Ltd., generally critical of Pakistan People's Party; known for its access to government and military sources of information. The same group owns The Post in English, Naya Akhbar in Urdu and Channel 5 TV. Circulation of 30,000)'

End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Revolutionary Guard Commanders Killed in Iranian Baluchistan

Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps personnel who traveled to the town of Sarbaz, district Pishin in the southeastern province of Sistan and Baluchistan fell victim Sunday morning to two bombing attacks carried out by the dissident Baluchi group Jundullah. Altogether the death toll in the attacks is about 29 as I write and it is expected to rise.

Iran, a country of 70 million, has 30 provinces. Some 90 percent of Iranians are thought to be Shiite Muslims, and some 51 percent speak Persian as their mother tongue. Baluchis are Sunnis and speak another Iranian language, Baluch, and there are substantial discontents in that province with the rule of the Persian Shiites. The province is vast geographically, but small with regard to population-- a little over 2 million. It is among the poorest provinces in Iran and the most neglected by Iran's authorities. It has been harmed by the spill-over of ethnic violence from Pakistan and Afghanistan, by the drug trade, and by religious radicalization. The mastermind of 9/11, Khalid Shaikh Muhammad, is a Baluch from Pakistan brought up in Kuwait, and he is alleged to have had ties to radical Sunni Baluch groups, some of which later congealed into Jundullah.



The Iranian state is aware of the unhappiness of the Baluch and was attempting to stage a reconciliation meeting with tribal leaders, perhaps influenced by the way the US military dealt with Dulaim tribal chieftains in al-Anbar, Iraq. The Iranian Revolutionary Guards, having come out on top in the recent political turmoil in Iran, spear-headed the reconciliation drive, and thus were targeted by Jundullah, who do not want reconciliation. Presumably they were tipped off by tribal allies in Sarbaz.

Iran charges that US intelligence supports Jundullah's terrorist efforts as a way of destabilizing Iran. Rep. Jane Harman in Congress once seemed to call for breaking up Iran along ethnic lines, apparently in a bid to marshall pro-Israeli lobbying money, but later recanted.

Here is an official Iranian television documentary in English or with subtitles on Jundullah from last summer. I'm not endorsing the point of view, simply diversifying information sources. Caution: some graphic scenes.



End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

Pakistan Begins Major Campaign in S. Waziristan

Dawn reports that about 30,000 Pakistani troops on Saturday moved into South Waziristan, a stronghold of the Mahsud tribe, whence have sprung important leaders of the Tehrik-i Taliban Pakistan or Pakistani Taliban Movement. One such leader, Baitullah Mahsud, was killed by a US drone strike this past August.

The fighting continued for a second day on Sunday morning, with the army meeting stiff resistance.

South Waziristan has a population of about 500,000. It is estimated to have 10,000 armed religious extremists, of whom about 1500 are foreigners, mostly dissident Uzbeks from secular Uzbekistan just north of Afghanistan.

Pakistani officials allege that 80% of the terrorism in Pakistan emanates from militants based in South Waziristan.

Aljazeera English reports on the beginning of the Pakistani army campaign against the Taliban and allied tribes in Waziristan.



AP also did a video report on the beginning of the campaign:



Aljazeera English reports on the frantic civilian exodus from Waziristan:



The USG Open Source Center translates an interview at the GEO Urdu-language satellite news station. This paragraph comparing the new operation to that in Swat last spring struck me as scary: "Not only that the resistance here would be much stronger than that in Swat but also the Taliban will mainly retaliate in the other parts of the country. Secondly, the Swat Taliban did not have many routes to flee the area nor was Swat located near the Afghan border from where they could receive reinforcement or where they could flee." Here is the rest:

'Pakistan: Analyst Says Stronger Taliban Resistance Likely Against Army Operation
Words within double slantlines as received in English
Geo News TV
Saturday, October 17, 2009 . . .
Document Type: OSC Translated Text . . .

Now we will discuss Waziristan operation. We have senior analyst Salim Safi with us on telephone line:

(Begin live relay) (anchorperson Gharida Faruqi) Mr Safi, the Swat operation was very successful and was completed in a short time but certain circles are expressing doubts about Waziristan operation. You are one of them. You have also written a //column// in today's Jang. Why are you opposing this operation?

(Safi) Gharida, in fact, I believe that unless certain other aspects of this issue are resolved we will probably not be able to achieve the desired results only by launching an operation in South Waziristan. Not only that the resistance here would be much stronger than that in Swat but also the Taliban will mainly retaliate in the other parts of the country. Secondly, the Swat Taliban did not have many routes to flee the area nor was Swat located near the Afghan border from where they could receive reinforcement or where they could flee But you can see that foreigners are present in South Waziristan. Foreigners are also there in Ahmadzai Wazir area.

The operation is not going on in North Waziristan but you see that on the very first day a retaliatory action was taken there. The other thing is that during this time....(pauses) Though the government has made full preparations this time and it seems that in this operation the forces will show greater seriousness than the previous operations and aerial and land power will also be used extensively. But on the other hand the Taliban have also made full preparations in that area and then they have //sleeper cells// in different parts of the country who have sent their activists in different areas and especially the banned organizations... (interrupted)

(Faruqi) Mr Safi, you are talking about the preparation of the Taliban and you said that this time a stronger resistance might be faced. What type of greater resistance? What type of greater preparation?

(Safi) In fact, during the past two or three years when operations were initially launched in Waziristan there were only local Taliban or Arab, Uzbek or Chechen militants with were there them. But during the past three-four years this development has taken place that the Taliban have established links with the banned organizations of Pakistan -- some jihadi and sectarian outfits. Leadership of most of these organizations is either in their hands or the Al-Qa'ida is providing //coordination// among these groups. So, now trained people from those outfits are present in every nook and corner of the country. As we have seen in the past week mostly these were the elements active in the attack on the GHQ and in the attacks in Lahore.

(Faruqi) Thank you very much, Salim Safi, for talking to Geo News. (end of live relay)

(Description of Source: Karachi Geo News TV in Urdu -- 24-hour satellite news TV channel owned by Pakistan's Jang publishing group, broadcast from Dubayy. Known for providing quick and detailed reports of events. Programs include some Indian shows and dramas which the group claims are aimed at promoting people-to-people contact and friendly relations with India.) '


End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.

4 US Troops Killed in Afghanistan' Insurgency called too Far Gone for US Surge to Work

A Taliban roadside bomb attack killed 4 US soldiers in the south of the country, it was announced Friday.

Gareth Porter reports on an alternative to Gen. Stanley McChrystal's proposal for an additional 40,000 US troops in Afghanistan. Lt. Col. Daniel L Davis, who has experience in Iraq and Afghanistan and canvassed other officers with Afghanistan experience, believes that the insurgency in some Pashtun provinces has gathered too much momentum for the US now to hope to quash it. He urges what sound like surgical strikes rather than lots of new boots on the ground.

Meanwhile, Aljazeera English reports on an alleged instance of a NATO strike in Ghazni that killed civilians rather than Taliban:




Also on Aljazeera English, Riz Khan explores Pakistan's internal divisions:



End/ (Not Continued)
For "cont'd" postings, click here.