The untold story of why the U.S. is bound to fail in Afghanistan

By Ann Jones

The first of 20,000 to 30,000 additional U.S. troops are scheduled to arrive in Afghanistan next month to re-win the war George W. Bush neglected to finish in his eagerness to start another one. However, "winning" the military campaign against the Taliban is the lesser half of the story.

Going into Afghanistan, the Bush administration called for a political campaign to reconstruct the country and thereby establish the authority of a stable, democratic Afghan central government. It was understood that the two campaigns -- military and political/economic -- had to go forward together; the success of each depended on the other. But the vision of a reconstructed, peaceful, stable, democratically governed Afghanistan faded fast. Most Afghans now believe that it was nothing but a cover story for the Bush administration's real goal -- to set up permanent bases in Afghanistan and occupy the country forever.

Whatever the truth of the matter, in the long run, it's not soldiers but services that count -- electricity, water, food, health care, justice, and jobs. Had the US delivered the promised services on time, while employing Afghans to rebuild their own country according to their own priorities and under the supervision of their own government -- a mini-Marshall Plan -- they would now be in charge of their own defense. The forces on the other side, which we loosely call the Taliban, would also have lost much of their grounds for complaint.

Instead, the Bush administration perpetrated a scam. It used the system it set up to dispense reconstruction aid to both the countries it "liberated," Afghanistan and Iraq, to transfer American taxpayer dollars from the national treasury directly into the pockets of private war profiteers. Think of Halliburton, Bechtel, and Blackwater in Iraq; Louis Berger Group, Bearing Point, and DynCorp International in Afghanistan. They're all in it together. So far, the Bush administration has bamboozled Americans about its shady aid program. Nobody talks about it. Yet the aid scam, which would be a scandal if it weren't so profitable for so many, explains far more than does troop strength about why, today, we are on the verge of watching the whole Afghan enterprise go belly up.

What's worse, there's no reason to expect that things will change significantly on Barack Obama's watch. During the election campaign, he called repeatedly for more troops for "the right war" in Afghanistan (while pledging to draw-down U.S. forces in Iraq), but he has yet to say a significant word about the reconstruction mission. While many aid workers in that country remain full of good intentions, the delivery systems for and uses of U.S. aid have been so thoroughly corrupted that we can only expect more of the same -- unless Obama cleans house fast. But given the monumental problems on his plate, how likely is that?

* The jolly privateers

It's hard to overstate the magnitude of the failure of American reconstruction in Afghanistan. While the US has occupied the country -- for seven years and counting -- and efficiently set up a network of bases and prisons, it has yet to restore to Kabul, the capital, a mud brick city slightly more populous than Houston, a single one of the public services its citizens used to enjoy.

When the Soviets occupied Afghanistan in the 1980s, they modernized the education system and built power plants, dams, factories, and apartment blocs, still the most coveted in the country. If, in the last seven years, George W. Bush did not get the lights back on in the capital, or the water flowing, or dispose of the sewage or trash, how can we assume Barack Obama will do any better with the corrupt system he's about to inherit?

Between 2002 and 2008, the U.S. pledged $10.4 billion dollars in "development" (reconstruction) aid to Afghanistan, but actually delivered only $5 billion of that amount. Considering that the U.S. is spending $36 billion a year on the war in Afghanistan and about $8 billion a month on the war in Iraq, that $5 billion in development aid looks paltry indeed. But keep in mind that, in a country as poor as Afghanistan, a little well spent money can make a big difference.

The problem is not simply that the Bush administration skimped on aid, but that it handed it over to for-profit contractors. Privatization, as is now abundantly clear, enriches only the privateers and serves only their private interests.

Take one pertinent example. When the inspectors general of the Pentagon and State Department investigated the US program to train the Afghan police in 2006, they found the number of men trained (about 30,000) to be less than half the number reported by the administration (70,000). The training had lasted eight weeks at most, with no in-the-field experience whatsoever. Only about half the equipment assigned to the police -- including thousands of trucks -- could be accounted for, and the men trained were then deemed "incapable of carrying out routine law enforcement work."

The American privateer training the police -- DynCorp -- went on to win no-bid contracts to train police in Iraq with similar results. The total bill for American taxpayers from 2004 to 2006: $1.6 billion. It's unclear whether that money came from the military or the development budget, but in either case it was wasted. The inspectors general reported that police incompetence contributed directly to increased opium production, the reinvigoration of the Taliban, and government corruption in general, thoroughly subverting much ballyhooed U.S. goals, both military and political.

In the does-no-one-ever-learn category: the latest American victory plan, announced in December, calls for recruiting and rearming local militias to combat the Taliban. Keep in mind that hundreds of millions of dollars, mostly donated by Japan, have already been spent to disarm local militias. A proposal to rearm them was soundly defeated last fall in the Afghan Parliament. Now, it's again the plan du jour, rubber-stamped by Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

Afghans protest that such a plan amounts to sponsoring civil war, which, if true, would mean that American involvement in Afghanistan might be coming full circle -- civil war being the state in which the US left Afghanistan at the end of our proxy war against the Soviet Union in the 1980s. American commanders, however, insist that they must use militias because Afghan Army and police forces are "simply not available." Maj. Gen. Michael S. Tucker, deputy commander of American forces, told the New York Times, "We don't have enough police, [and] we don't have time to get the police ready." This, despite the State Department's award to DynCorp last August of another $317.4 million contract "to continue training civilian police forces in Afghanistan," a contract DynCorp CEO William Ballhaus greeted as "an opportunity to contribute to peace, stability and democracy in the world [and] support our government's efforts to improve people's lives."

* America first

In other areas less obviously connected to security, American aid policy is no less self-serving or self-defeating. Although the Bush administration handpicked the Afghan president and claims to want to extend his authority throughout the country, it refuses to channel aid money through his government's ministries. (It argues that the Afghan government is corrupt, which it is, in a pathetic, minor league sort of way.)

Instead of giving aid money for Afghan schools to the Ministry of Education, for example, the US Agency for International Development (USAID) funds private American contractors to start literacy programs for adults. As a result, Afghan teachers abandon the public schools and education administrators leave the Ministry for higher paying jobs with those contractors, further undermining public education and governance. The Bush administration may have no particular reason to sabotage its handpicked government, but it has had every reason to befriend private contractors who have, in turn, kicked back generously to election campaigns and Republican coffers.

There are other peculiar features of American development aid. Nearly half of it (47%) goes to support "technical assistance." Translated, that means overpaid American "experts," often totally unqualified -- somebody's good old college buddies -- are paid handsomely to advise the locals on matters ranging from office procedures to pesticide use, even when the Afghans neither request nor welcome such advice. By contrast, the universally admired aid programs of Sweden and Ireland allocate only 4% and 2% respectively to such technical assistance, and when asked, they send real experts. American technical advisors, like American privateers, are paid by checks -- big ones -- that pass directly from the federal treasury to private accounts in American banks, thus helping to insure that about 86 cents of every dollar designated for US "foreign" aid anywhere in the world never leaves the USA.

American aid that actually makes it abroad arrives with strings attached. At least 70% of it is "tied" to the purchase of American products. A food aid program, for example, might require Afghanistan to purchase American agricultural products in preference to their own, thus putting Afghan farmers out of business or driving even more of them into the poppy trade. (The percentage of aid from Sweden, Ireland, and the United Kingdom that is similarly tied: zero.)

Testifying before a congressional subcommittee on May 8, 2001, Andrew Natsios, then head of USAID, described American aid as "a key foreign policy instrument [that] helps nations prepare for participation in the global trading system and become better markets for U.S. exports." Such so-called aid cuts American business in right from the start. USAID has even developed a system for "preselecting" certain private contractors, then inviting only those preselected companies to apply for contracts the agency wants to issue.

Often, in fact, only one of the preselected contractors puts in for the job and then -- if you need a hint as to what's really going on -- just happens to award subcontracts to some of the others. It's remarkable, too, how many former USAID officials have passed through the famed revolving door in Washington to become highly paid consultants to private contractors -- and vice versa. By January 2006, the Bush administration had co-opted USAID altogether. The once independent aid agency launched by President Kennedy in 1961 became a subsidiary of the State Department and a partner of the Pentagon.

Oh, and keep in mind one more thing: While the private contractors may be in it for the duration, most employees and technical experts in Afghanistan stay on the job only six months to a year because it's considered such a "hardship post." As a result, projects tend not to last long and to be remarkably unrelated to those that came before or will come after. Contractors collect the big bucks whether or not the aid they contracted to deliver benefits Afghans, or even reaches them.

These arrangements help explain why Afghanistan remains such a shambles.

* The Afghan scam

It's not that American aid has done nothing. Check out the USAID website and you'll find a summary of what is claimed for it (under the glorious heading of "Afghanistan Reborn"). It will inform you that USAID has completed literally thousands of projects in that country. The USAID loves numbers, but don't be deceived by them. A thousand short-term USAID projects can't hold a candle to one long, careful, patient program run, year after year, by a bunch of Afghans led by a single Swede.

If there has been any progress in Afghanistan, especially in and around Kabul, it's largely been because two-thirds of the reconstruction aid to Afghanistan comes from other (mostly European) countries that do a better job, and partly because the country's druglords spend big on palatial homes and services in the capital. But the one-third of international aid that is supposed to come from the U.S., and that might make a critical difference when added to the work of others, eternally falls into the wrong pockets.

What would Afghans have done differently, if they'd been in charge? They'd have built much smaller schools, and a lot more of them, in places more convenient to children than to foreign construction crews. Afghans would have hired Afghans to do the building. Louis Berger Group had the contract to build more than 1,000 schools at a cost of $274,000 per school. Already way behind schedule in 2005, they had finished only a small fraction of them when roofs began to collapse under the snows of winter.

Believe me, given that same $274,000, Afghans would have built 15 or 20 schools with good roofs. The same math can be applied to medical clinics. Afghans would also have chosen to repair irrigation systems and wells, to restore ruined orchards, vineyards, and fields. Amazingly enough, USAID initially had no agricultural programs in a country where rural subsistence farmers are 85% of the population. Now, after seven years, the agency finally claims to have "improved" irrigation on "nearly 15%" of arable land. And you can be sure that Afghans wouldn't have chosen -- again -- the Louis Berger Group to rebuild the 389-mile long Kabul/Kandahar highway with foreign labor at a cost of $1 million per mile.

As things now stand, Afghans, as well as Afghan-Americans who go back to help their homeland, have to play by American rules. Recently an Afghan-American contractor who competed for reconstruction contracts told me that the American military is getting in on the aid scam. To apply for a contract, Afghan applicants now have to fill out a form (in English!) that may run to 50 pages. My informant, who asked to remain anonymous for obvious reasons, commented that it's next to impossible to figure out "what they look for." He won a contract only when he took a hint and hired an American "expert" -- a retired military officer -- to fill out the form. The expert claimed the "standard fee" for his service: 25% of the value of the contract.

Another Afghan-American informed me that he was proud to have worked with an American construction company building schools with USAID funds. Taken on as a translator, he persuaded the company not only to hire Afghan laborers, but also to raise their pay gradually from $1.00 per day to $10.00 per day. "They could feed their families," he said, "and it was all cost over-run, so cost didn't matter. The boss was already billing the government $10.00 to $15.00 an hour for labor, so he could afford to pay $10.00 a day and still make a profit." My informant didn't question the corruption in such over-billing. After all, Afghans often tack on something extra for themselves, and they don't call it corruption either. But on this scale it adds up to millions going into the assumedly deep pockets of one American privateer.

Yet a third Afghan-American, a businessman who has worked on American projects in his homeland, insisted that when Bush pledged $10.4 billion in aid, President Karzai should have offered him a deal: "Give me $2 billion in cash, I'll kick back the rest to you, and you can take your army and go home."

"If Karzai had put the cash in an Afghan bank," the businessman added, "and spent it himself on what people really need, both Afghanistan and Karzai would be in much better shape today." Yes, he was half-joking, but he wasn't wrong.

Don't think of such stories, and thousands of others like them, as merely tales of the everyday theft or waste of a few hundred million dollars -- a form of well-organized, routine graft that leaves the corruption of Karzai's government in the shade and will undoubtedly continue unremarked upon in the Obama years. Those multi-millions that will continue to be poured down the Afghan drain really represent promises made to a people whose country and culture we have devastated more than once. They are promises made by our government, paid for by our taxpayers, and repeatedly broken.

These stories, which you'll seldom hear about, are every bit as important as the debates about military strength and tactics and strategy in Afghanistan that dominate public discourse today. Those promises, made in our name, were once said to be why we fight; now -- broken -- they remind us that we've already lost.

Spanish DM: Peacekeepers to stay in S Lebanon

Spanish Defense Minister Carme Chacon stressed Thursday from south Lebanon, that the Spanish peacekeepers under UN Interim Forces in Lebanon (UNIFIL) will stay in their task until UN resolution 1701 is implemented, local Elnashra website reported.

The Spanish defense minister inspected her country's troops in south Lebanon accompanied with UNIFIL commander Claudio Graziano.

"We regret the rocket launching from south Lebanon into northern Israel," she said, pointing out that Spain is seeking to end the fighting in Gaza as well.

The minister denounced the "massacres" committed against the Palestinian people in Gaza, and pledged for the end of the fighting.

Spanish troops are part of around 13,000 other peacekeepers that are deployed in south Lebanon in accordance with UN resolution 1701, which ended the 34-day devastating war between Hezbollah and Israel in 2006.

Zio-Nazi regime hopes world will forget Gaza genocide soon

[ 15/01/2009 - 10:51 PM ]

Khalid Amayreh from Occupied Palestine

With the holocaust-like Israeli onslaught in Gaza entering its fourth week, and with thousands of Palestinian civilians mercilessly killed and maimed by the Israeli war machine while hundreds others still buried under rubble, Israel is planning a public relations campaign aimed at “making the world forget the bad images” from Gaza very soon.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry this week contacted an American PR firm requesting a “detailed PR plan” that would enhance Israel’s image following the Gaza blitz.

Some military experts have compared the rampant havoc wreaked on Gaza with conditions in the German City of Dresden following the devastating aerial bombings by the Royal Air Force (RAF) in the closing weeks of the Second World War.

According to the Israeli press, the Israeli Foreign Ministry Hasbara (propaganda) department has created a special task force to prepare for the aftermath of the Israeli blitz in Gaza.

The Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz said the task force would be charged with repairing damage to Israel’s image.

“The working assumption is that Israel has suffered a blow to its image in the West in the wake of heavy civilian casualties in the Strip.”

Palestinian activists and human rights organizations operating in occupied Palestine have released gruesome images of hundreds of badly mutilated children killed or maimed by the continuing Israeli aerial bombing and artillery bombardment of residential areas.

Palestinian officials have described the ongoing Israeli offensive as a real holocaust.

“What Israel is doing to the Palestinians in Gaza is a real holocaust. Israel is murdering civilians en mass, destroying homes, mosques and public institutions,” said Ismael Haniya, the Prime Minister of the Hamas government during a speech on Tuesday.

On Thursday, Palestinian hospital sources of more than 1100 Palestinians, mostly children and other innocent civilians, killed and over 5000 people injured, many critically, as a result of the wanton bombings by Israeli F-16 fighters.

Israel has been using excessively disproportionate fire power, including Bunker buster bombs and White Phosphor shells, against a totally defenseless civilian population.

The Israeli paper said Israeli officials were worried that “negative sentiment” toward Israel would grow the moment the full picture of the Israeli blitz emerged.

Israeli hasbara officials have recommended several steps aimed at enhancing Israel’s image, including the intensive involvement of the Israeli army in facilitating the transfer of food and medicine to the bombed-out inhabitants of Gaza...

One Israeli press officer reportedly recommended the employment of the so-called “ candy tactic” as an “image booster.” The “candy tactic” takes the form of filming Israeli soldiers while giving candies to Palestinian kids, especially after the perpetration of an especially-terrible massacre.

Non the less, Israeli sources admit that no matter how effective Israeli hasbara efforts could be, the shocking reality on the ground in Gaza will be proven indelible.

This is why the Israeli foreign ministry is suggesting that the Jewish state embark on a reactivated peace process with the Palestinian Authority (PA).

Algeria's President To Run For 3rd Term In April -Report

ALGIERS (AFP)--Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika will run for a third term in elections in April, the leader of Algeria's nationalist party said Friday, according to local media.

National Liberation Front (FLN) chief Abdelaziz Belkhadem told Chaine III radio that Bouteflika, in power for 10 years, would run again, but declined to give an exact date of any official announcement, the APS news agency reported.

Bouteflika, 71, would make an announcement once the country's electoral council meets, Belkhadem said.

The electoral council is required by law to meet no later than 60 days before any election.

Although no exact date has been announced, the election is set for April.

The Rally for Culture and Democracy, a secular opposition party, announced Thursday that it would not field a candidate in the election, which its leader, Said Sadi, slammed as "a pathetic and dangerous circus."

Algeria's parliament voted Nov. 12 to abolish the mandatory limit of two presidential terms.

Candidates who wish to contest the presidential elections in Algeria must garner at least 600 signatures from elected officials and 75,000 from voters.

Bouteflika's ruling coalition enjoys a comfortable majority in the Algerian parliament.

Israel's Next War: Today Gaza, Tomorrow Lebanon?

By Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya

URL of this article: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11800

Global Research, January 17, 2009

The March to War: Today the Gaza Strip, Tomorrow Lebanon...

In the Middle East, it is widely believed that the war against Gaza is an extension of the 2006 war against Lebanon. Without question, the war in the Gaza Strip is a part of the same conflict.

Moreover, since the Israeli defeat in 2006, Tel Aviv and Washington have not abandoned their design to turn Lebanon into a client state.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told France's President Nicolas Sarkozy, in so many words, during his visit to Tel Aviv in early January that today Israel was attacking Hamas in the Gaza Strip and that tomorrow it would be fighting Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Lebanon is still in the cross-hairs. Israel is searching for a justification or a pretext to launch another war against Lebanon.

Washington and Tel Aviv had initially hoped to control Beirut through client political forces in the March 14 Alliance. When it became apparent that these political forces could not dominate Lebanon politically the Israeli military was unleashed on Lebanon with a goal of bringing about the ultimate downfall of Hezbollah and its political allies. Areas where support for Hezbollah and its political allies were strongest saw the harshest Israeli attacks in 2006 as part of an attempt to reduce, if not remove, popular support for them.

After the 2006 war, the second Israeli defeat in Lebanon, Washington and Tel Aviv with the help of Jordan, the U.A.E., Egypt, and Saudi Arabia started arming their clients in Lebanon to wield an internal armed option against Hezbollah and its allies. In the wake of both the short-lived internal violence between the Lebanese National Opposition and the March 14 Alliance and the Doha Accord, which was reached in Qatar on May 21, 2008 as a result of the failure of this internal armed option against Hezbollah and its allies, the Israeli-U.S. objective to subdue Lebanon has been dramatically impaired.

A "national unity government" was formed in which the Lebanese National Opposition — not just Hezbollah — hold veto power through one-third of the cabinet chairs, including that of the post of deputy-prime minister.

The objective in Lebanon is "regime change" and to repress all forms of political opposition. But how to bring it about? The forecast of the 2009 general-elections in Lebanon does not look favorable for the March 14 Alliance. Without an internal political or armed option in Lebanon, which could result in the installation of a U.S.-sponsored "democracy," Washington and its indefictible Israeli ally have chosen the only avenue available: a military solution, another war on Lebanon.

Crossing Arms III: Israel Simulates a Two-Front War against Lebanon and Syria

This war is already in the advanced planning stage. In November 2008, barely a month before Tel Aviv started its massacre in the Gaza Strip, the Israeli military held drills for a two-front war against Lebanon and Syria called Shiluv Zro'ot III (Crossing Arms III).

The military exercise included a massive simulated invasion of both Syria and Lebanon. Several months before the Israeli invasion drills, Tel Aviv had also warned Beirut that it would declare war on the whole of Lebanon and not just Hezbollah.

Israel's justification for these war preparations was that Hezbollah has grown stronger and become a partner in the Lebanese government since the Doha Accord. The latter was signed in Qatar between the March 14 Alliance and the Lebanese National Opposition. It is worth noting that Hezbollah was a member of the Lebanese coalition government prior to the 2006 Israeli war on Lebanon.

No doubt, Tel Aviv will also point to Hezbollah's support of Hamas in Gaza as another pretext to wage under the banner of combating Islamic terrorism a pre-emptive war on Lebanon. In this context, Dell Lee Dailey the head of the counter-terrorism section of the U.S. State Department, had told Al-Hayat in an interview that an Israeli attack on Lebanon was "imminent" as part of the fight against terrorism.

Blitzkrieg in the Making

Tel Aviv has been mapping a large-scale blitzkrieg against Lebanon as a whole, which includes an immediate land invasion. Just before the Israeli massacre in the Gaza Strip started, Israeli officials and generals had promised that no Lebanese village would be immune from the wrath of Israeli aerial bombardments, regardless of religion, sect, and/or political orientation.

In substance, Tel Aviv has promised to totally destroy Lebanon. Israel has also confirmed that in any future war against Lebanon, the entire country rather than Hezbollah will be the target. In practice, this was already the case in 2006's Israeli aerial attacks on Lebanon.

The Jerusalem Post quotes Brigadier-General Michael Ben-Baruch, one of the individuals who oversaw the invasion drills, as saying, "In the last war, we fired to disrupt Hezbollah activity," and, "The next time we will fire to destroy."

In the wake of Israel's 2006 defeat, the Israeli government admitted that its "big mistake" was it exercised restraint rather than attacking Lebanon with the full strength of its military. Israeli officials have intimated that in the case of a future war against the Lebanese that all civilian and state infrastructure will be targeted.

Beirut's New Defense Doctrine: A Threat to Israeli Interests and Objectives to Control Lebanon

Why is Lebanon in the cross-hairs again?

The answer is geo-political and strategic. It is also related to the political consensus process and the upcoming 2009 general-elections in Lebanon. Following the formation of a unity government in Beirut under a new president, Michel Suleiman (Sleiman), a new proactive defense doctrine for the country was contemplated. The objective of this defense doctrine is to keep Israel at bay and bring political stability and security to the country.

At the "National Defense Strategy" dialogue, held by the 14 Lebanese signatories of the Doha Accord, all sides have agreed that Israel is a threat to Lebanon.

In the months prior to the Israeli military campaign against Gaza, important diplomatic and political steps were taken by Beirut. President Michel Suleiman accompanied by several cabinet ministers visited Damascus (his first bilateral state visit; August 13-14, 2008) and Tehran (November 24-25, 2008).

In turn, General Jean Qahwaji (Kahwaji) the commander of the Lebanese Armed Forces was also in Damascus (November 29, 2008) for consultations with his Syrian counterpart General Al-Habib. While in Damascus, General Qahwaji also met with General Hassan Tourkmani, the defence minister of Syria, and the Syrian President. His trip followed the visit of Lebanon's interior minister, Ziad Baroud, to Syria and was within the same framework. Meanwhile, Lebanon's defense minister, Elias Murr, went on an official visit to Moscow (December 16, 2008).

What started to emerge from these talks was that both Moscow and Tehran would provide weaponry to the Lebanese Armed Forces, which previously had been the recipients of lower-end U.S. made ordinance. The U.S. has always forbidden the Lebanese military from purchasing any heavy weapons that could challenge Israel's military strength.

It was also revealed that Russia would donate 10 MiG-29 fighter jets to Beirut in line with Lebanon's new defense strategy. The use of the Russian MiG-29s would also entail the required installation of early warning and radar systems. Russian tanks, anti-tank rockets, armoured vehicles, and military helicopters are also being sought by Lebanon.

Iran has offered to supply the Lebanese military with medium-range missiles as part of a five-year Iranian-Lebanese defense agreement. While in Iran, Michel Suleiman held talks with Iranian defense officials and went to an Iranian defense industry exposition.

While the talks with Moscow and Tehran aimed at arming the Lebanese Armed Forces, the talks with the Syrians were geared towards establishing and strengthening a joint security and defense framework directed against Israeli aggression.

Integrating Hezbollah into the Lebanese Armed Forces

Moreover, Michel Aoun, leader of the Free Patriotic Movement and the Reform and Change Bloc in the Lebanese Parliament also visited Tehran (October 12-16, 2008; ahead of Michel Suleiman's official visit), and later Damascus (December 3-7, 2008). Michel Aoun who is a central figure in the "political consensus" has endorsed and reaffirmed his political alliance with Hezbollah.

While calling for the peaceful disarmament of Hezbollah within a Lebanese defense strategy, he has accepted that Hezbollah fighters will eventually integrate into Lebanon's army. This disarmament process would only occur when the time is right and Israel no longer poses a threat to Lebanon. Hezbollah has broadly agreed to this, if and when there no longer exists an Israeli threat to the country's security. This position on Hezbollah's arms is spelled out in clause 10 (The Protection of Lebanon) of the February 6, 2006 memorandum of understanding (MoU) with Hezbollah that Michel Aoun signed on behalf of his political party, the Free Patriotic Movement.

Following his return from Tehran, Aoun also presented his case for the formation of a new Lebanese defense strategy and promised that the outcome of his visit to Iran would materialize in about six months. Aoun has also said that Iran, as the "major regional power between Lebanon and China" is of strategic importance to Lebanese interests.

Hezbollah Paramilitary Forces

Washington's political cohorts in Lebanon are alarmed at the direction Lebanon is taking under its new defense strategy. They have criticized weapons purchases from Iran and defensive cooperation with Syria. This includes attacks on General Jean Qahwaji's visit to Syria, which was mandated by the entire Lebanese cabinet. Additionally, within these pro-U.S. forces in Lebanon there has been a push for a "Swiss-like" "neutral defense policy" for Lebanon within the Middle East. Such a "neutral" position would benefit the U.S. and Israel geo-politically and strategically. Needless to say, with the threat of Israeli military aggression looming, this position is proving to be rather unpopular within Lebanon.

Ending Israeli-American pressure on Beirut to Naturalize Palestinian Refugees

The formation of a new proactive defense doctrine implies that Hezbollah fighters would be incorporated in the Lebanese Armed Forces and that the existing paramilitary forces of Hezbollah would be disbanded once certain conditions are met.

Therefore, one of Lebanon's key political questions would be resolved. With the integration of Hezbollah fighters into the country's army together with military aid from Russia and Iran, Lebanon would acquire defensive capabilities, which would enable it to confront the threat of Israeli military aggression. These developments, which go against the prevailing pattern of U.S. client regimes in the Middle East modeled on Egypt and Saudi Arabia, have sounded an alarm bell in Tel Aviv, Washington, and London.

In response to Lebanon's rapprochement with Russia and Iran, two senior US State Department officials were rushed to Beirut in December. During this mission, Dell Lee Dailey and David Hale, respectively Coordinator of the State Department's Office of Counterterrorism and Deputy-assistant Secretary responsible for Middle Eastern affairs, renewed the veiled threats of an Israeli attack against Lebanon, while casually placing the blame on Hezbollah. These threats are aimed at Lebanon as a whole. They are intended to disrupt the creation of Lebanon's new defense doctrine.

The clock is ticking for Israel, the U.S., and NATO to obstruct the implementation of Beirut's new national defense doctrine.

Israel would no longer have any justifications for carrying out military incursions into Lebanon if Hezbollah were to become a full political party under a new Lebanese defense strategy. Moreover, if Beirut were able, under a new defense arrangement, to protect its borders against Israeli military threats it would not only end Tel Aviv's ambitions to politically and economically dominate Lebanon, but it would also end Israeli pressure on Lebanon to naturalize the Palestinian war refugees waiting to return to their ancestral lands that are occupied by Israel.

The issue of Palestinian naturalization in Lebanon is also tied to Lebanon's political consensus process and new defense strategy and was discussed by Michel Suleiman with Iranian officials in Tehran.

The Middle Eastern Powder Keg: A World War III Scenario?

In 2006, when Israel attacked Lebanon, the war was presented to international public opinion as a conflict between Israel and Hezbollah. In essence the 2006 war was an Israeli attack on all of Lebanon. The Beirut government failed to take a stance, declared its "neutrality" and Lebanon's military forces were instructed not to intervene against the Israeli invaders. The reason for this was that the political parties of the Hariri-led March 14 Alliance that dominated the Lebanese government were expecting the war to end quickly and for Hezbollah (their political rival) to be defeated, and eventually excluded from playing a meaningful role on the Lebanese domestic political scene. Exactly the opposite has occurred since 2006.

Moreover, had the Lebanese government declared war on Israel, in response to Israeli aggression, Syria would have been obligated through a Lebanese-Syrian bilateral treaty, signed in 1991, to intervene in support of Lebanon.

In the case of a future Israeli war against Lebanon, the structure of military alliances is crucial. Syria could indeed intervene on the side of Lebanon. If Syria enters into the conflict, Damascus could seek the support of Tehran in the context of a bilateral military cooperation agreement with Iran.

A scenario of escalation is, therefore, possible, which could potentially spin out of control.

If Iran were to enter on the side of Lebanon and Syria in a defensive war against Israel, the U.S. and NATO would also intervene leading us into a broader war.

Both Iran and Syria have military cooperation agreements with Russia. Iran also has bilateral military cooperation agreements with China. Iran is also an observer member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). Iran's allies including Russia, China, the member states of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) could all be drawn into the broader conflict.

Source: Global Research.
Link: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11800.

Israeli rabbis to Olmert: It doesn’t matter even if you kill million Palestinians

[ 18/01/2009 - 02:02 AM ]

GAZA, (PIC)-- A report issued by the Saudi Al-Watan news paper revealed Saturday that Jewish rabbis in the Zionist entity have issued a religious edict allowing the killing of Palestinian women and children and exonerating every Jew doing such horrible thing.

According to the paper, the rabbis opined that the Israeli massacres in Gaza Strip falls in line with Jewish teachings that consider such killing as "mass punishment to the enemies".

The paper also added that one of the rabbis opined that there would be no problem at all in exterminating the Palestinian people even if one million or more of them were killed at the hands of the occupation troops.

Citing verses from the Book of Geneses, Jewish rabbi Mordachi Elyaho, who is the religious reference of the popular religious current in the Zionist entity sent outgoing Israeli premier Ehud Olmert a weekly leaflet containing articles allowing the Jews to carryout the idea of massive punishment against the enemies in accordance with the ethics of war in the Torah, the paper pointed out.

"This standard could also be applied to the case of Gaza as all Gaza inhabitants bear the responsibility because they didn’t do anything to stop the firing of Qassam Brigades" said Elyaho in his letter to Olmert, urging him to continue the military aggression on the Palestinians because "harming innocent Palestinians was a legitimate matter."

Yesrael Rozin, another fanatic rabbi, was also quoted as saying that law of the Torah stipulates the killing of men, children, women, elderly, infants, and animals [of the enemy], the paper furthermore added.

For his part, Safad rabbi Sholomo Elyaho underlined, "If we kill 100 of them but they refuse to halt this [firing of rockets] them we should kill 1000; and if we kill 1000 of them but they didn’t stop, then we should kill 10000 of them, and we must continue killing them even if they reach one million and despite the time spent in killing them".

"The Psalms says "I should continue chasing my enemies and arrest them, and I won't cease till I finish them completely", the rabbi said according to the report.

Russian intelligence: USA participating in Israeli war on Gaza

MOSCOW, (PIC)-- American aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean Sea are assisting the Israeli occupation forces in the military campaign on Gaza Strip, a well informed source in the Russian intelligence said on Wednesday.

The source explained that the American aircraft carriers were extending information and logistical support to the IOF air force in its savage raids on the Strip.

The source, who requested anonymity, said that the White House had endorsed a proposal by senior staffers to offer a batch of advanced weaponry to the IOF on condition that the deal would not be disclosed at present due to the current sensitive conditions in the USA such as transfer of power and the economic crisis.

The source also revealed that the American defense department, the Pentagon, had advised the IOF to surprise the Palestinian resistance in Gaza and launch an attack from Egyptian lands.

The proposal also stipulated dividing the Strip into three sectors in a bid to reduce the expected IOF losses to the minimum, the source elaborated.

Senior American officers had toured the Egyptian-Palestinian borders shortly before the IOF massive air offensive on the Strip.

The American administration, which has only three weeks left before leaving the White House, had supported the IOF bloody aerial bombardment of the Gaza Strip that left about 400 killed and almost 2000 wounded since Saturday, claiming that Israel was defending itself.

NATO leader blasts Afghan government

WASHINGTON (AFP) – The head of the NATO alliance publicly took on the Afghan government Sunday, insisting that the current Afghan authorities were almost as much to blame for the country's dire straits as the resurgent Taliban.

While avoiding mentioning Afghan President Hamid Karzai by name, NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer insisted that the Afghan government was plagued by corruption and lacked efficiency in solving problems.

"The basic problem in Afghanistan is not too much Taliban; it's too little good governance," de Hoop Scheffer wrote in an op-ed article in The Washington Post.

"Afghans need a government that deserves their loyalty and trust; when they have it, the oxygen will be sucked away from the insurgency," he added.

The NATO head said the international community must step up its support of the elected Afghan government and the Afghan people.

"But we have paid enough, in blood and treasure, to demand that the Afghan government take more concrete and vigorous action to root out corruption and increase efficiency, even where that means difficult political choices," de Hoop Scheffer said.

Between 60,000 and 70,000 foreign troops are in Afghanistan, about three-quarters of them under NATO command, to help the government of President Karzai tackle the mounting Taliban-led insurgency.

About 20,000-30,000 more US soldiers are due to begin deploying in the coming weeks, as US president-elect Barack Obama has pledged to pay more attention to Afghanistan's struggle to fight extremists.

The NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) comprises just over 51,000 troops from nearly 40 countries, according to the latest update released last month.

Most of them are deployed in the south and east of the country, where Taliban militants are most active, to help bring security and extend the government's authority to allow reconstruction and development.

Russia says no ISS space tourists after 2009

MOSCOW, January 21 (RIA Novosti) - The International Space Station (ISS) will be off limits to space tourists after 2009 as its crew grows from three to six, the Russian space agency head said on Wednesday.

Roscosmos director Anatoly Perminov said in an interview with the daily Rossiiskaya Gazeta that the last commercial flights would be made in March 2009 by Charles Simoniy (his second trip) and by a Kazakh national in the fall of 2009.

The Kazakh National Space Agency previously said that a Kazakh cosmonaut would fly to the ISS in October 2009.

Perminov also said Russia would not cancel any space launches slated for 2009 due the global financial crisis.

"I hope that we'll cope. So far we are preparing to make four manned launches, not two, as previously planned, and send five, not four, freight modules into space," he said.

He also said the Russian segment of the ISS included a total of 156 projects, 19 of which have already been completed.

Roscosmos earlier said a Russian space tourist hopeful would miss out on a trip to the ISS in the autumn of 2009, and that a Kazakh cosmonaut would be likely to take his place.

Al Jazeera moves ahead in Lebanon

Al Jazeera Network has secured the distribution of its free-to-air channels (Al Jazeera Arabic, Al Jazeera English, Al Jazeera Documentary Channel and Al Jazeera Sport 1 & 2) with the leading cable operators in Lebanon on ECOnet and Cablevision.

This is the first time Al Jazeera Network has bundled all of its Free-To-Air (FTA) channels in Lebanon in this way - the deals are strategic as they help to support Al Jazeera's partners in a challenging market in which piracy is a key issue. The deal takes Al Jazeera's FTA channels into subscribers' homes across Lebanon, enabling viewers to watch Al Jazeera's comprehensive coverage of the region and international events.

Phil Lawrie, Al Jazeera Network's Director of Global Distribution comments: 'We are celebrating our new strategic partnerships with ECOnet and Cablevision. These agreements further strengthen our presence in Lebanon and are testament to Al Jazeera Network's position as the Arab World's most watched and trusted broadcaster.'

ECOnet's Joseph Maalouf says: 'ECOnet is proud to be taking its partnership with Al Jazeera Network to the next level - this new agreement enables our subscribers to have official and uninterrupted access to some of the Middle East's premier television channels.'

Cablevision's General Manager, Mr. Mazen Ismail remarks:

'We are delighted to be building on our historic partnership with Al Jazeera Network. This deal delivers the very best in international News, Sports, Business and Documentary programming to our viewers.'

Jordan's king orders authorities to facilitate entry of Iraqis

Amman, Jan 22 (New Kerala): King Abdullah II of Jordan Wednesday issued instructions for authorities to take 'urgent and immediate steps' to facilitate entry of Iraqis to the country and grant them residence permits, the royal court said.

He made the remarks as he presided over a meeting of top officials to discuss moves for easing measures which have been adopted by the Jordanian border authorities over the past months to limit the influx of Iraqis to the Hashemite Kingdom.

Jordanian Prime Minister Nader Dahabi, who attended the meeting, said the government would take "swift measures to remove obstacles" that Iraqis willing to come to Jordan face.

Jordan currently hosts about 500,000 Iraqis who fled their country after the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Obama to spend 2nd full day on foreign affairs

By PHILIP ELLIOTT, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is making good on his promise to close the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and appears ready to name a veteran politician to guide his new administration in the Middle East conflict.

A senior Obama administration official said the president would sign an order Thursday to shutter the Guantanamo prison within one year. The U.S. naval facility has been a major sore point for critics around the world who say it violates domestic and international detainee rights. The aide spoke on condition of anonymity because the order has not yet been issued.

The executive order was one of three expected on how to interrogate and prosecute al-Qaida, Taliban or other foreign fighters believed to threaten the United States. The administration already has suspended trials for terrorist suspects at Guantanamo for 120 days pending a review of the military tribunals.

Obama also had in hand executive orders to review military trials of terror suspects and end harsh interrogations, a key part of aides' plans that had been assembled even before Obama won the election on Nov. 4.

"In view of the significant concerns raised by these detentions, both within the United States and internationally, prompt and appropriate disposition of the individuals currently detained at Guantanamo and closure of the facility would further the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States and the interests of justice," said the draft executive order that would close Guantanamo. The draft was obtained by The Associated Press.

On Thursday, Obama was visiting the State Department to meet with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and his top national security advisers.

White House aides announced that the president would meet with retired military officers to discuss the executive orders in the morning, but would not confirm that Obama planned to sign them immediately.

The Obama-Clinton meeting also was to include Vice President Joe Biden and national security adviser Jim Jones and his deputy. It was to be followed by an address by Obama and Clinton to State Department employees.

The address could provide an opening for Obama to enter the daunting thicket of Middle East diplomacy, long dodged by deferring to President George W. Bush, who left office Tuesday. It could also be the time he announces George Mitchell, the former Senate Democratic leader, as his special envoy to the region.

During his two-month stint as the president-elect, Obama promised he would have plenty to say on the conflict as soon as he was in office, but the country could only have one foreign policy voice at a time.

Some of Obama's other promises, though, have already been attended to. On Wednesday, he signed executive orders to limit his staff's ability to leave the administration to lobby their former colleagues. He also limited pay raises for his senior aides making more than $100,000 a year — a nod to a flailing economy and voters' frustrations.

He also opened the doors to the White House to visitors on Wednesday, meeting with guests in the White House's Blue Room.

"Enjoy yourself, roam around," a smiling Obama told one guest as he shuffled through the room. "Don't break anything."

Obama was starting his day Thursday with a private meeting on the nation's struggling economy, a signal to the millions of Americans struggling with tighter credit, increasing home foreclosures and the dollar's shrinking value.

Obama to sign series of anti-torture orders

by Stephen Collinson

WASHINGTON, (AFP) – President Barack Obama was to sign Thursday a series of executive orders to close the Guantanamo "war on terror" prison, end harsh interrogation tactics and shutter secret prisons, marking a dramatic reversal of policy from his predecessor.

The announcement that Obama would close Guantanamo within a year and issue more intelligence policy changes came after a whirlwind first full day in power, when Obama also dove into tricky Middle East diplomacy and ordered a troop drawdown in Iraq.

The new president, determined to honor his vow to forge fundamental political change, also called in top economic chiefs for a progress report on the dark domestic crisis he inherited from George W. Bush.

From Thursday, he will have his top foreign policy lieutenant on the job: Hillary Clinton was confirmed as secretary of state by the Senate on a 94-2 vote Wednesday and the Middle East will top her agenda of problems.

The president was to kick off the day by signing an executive order that would start the process of closing the Guantanamo Bay detention camp in Cuba, a White House official said.

"The detention facilities at Guantanamo for individuals covered by this order shall be closed as soon as practicable, and no later than one year from the date of this order," said the draft order, posted on the website of the American Civil Liberties Union and confirmed by a White House source.

White House counsel Greg Craig told Democratic and Republican lawmakers late Wednesday "to expect 'several' executive orders on Guantanamo Bay," the Washington Post said citing sources familiar with the briefings.

The orders involve "altering CIA detention and interrogation rules, limiting interrogation standards in all US facilities worldwide to those outlined in the Army Field Manual, and prohibiting the agency from secretly holding terrorist detainees in third-country prisons," it said.

A revised version of the Army Field Manual was released in 2006, explicitly banning controversial techniques such as beating, using dogs to intimidate them, electric shocks and waterboarding, which critics say is tantamount to torture.

The New York Times said the "orders would bring to an end a Central Intelligence Agency program that kept terrorism suspects in secret custody for months or years."

Earlier, at the start of his first full day as president, Obama spent a few poignant moments alone in the Oval Office, reading a private letter left for him by Bush when he ceded power on Tuesday.

Then, flexing his diplomatic muscles in the Middle East for the first time, Obama telephoned Palestinian leader Mahmud Abbas, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and King Abdullah II of Jordan.

Obama "used this opportunity on his first day in office to communicate his commitment to active engagement in pursuit of Arab-Israeli peace from the beginning of his term," his spokesman Robert Gibbs said in a statement.

During the 2008 presidential election campaign, Obama had vowed to meet top military brass on his first day in office and order them to start planning a withdrawal from Iraq, and Wednesday, he followed through on the promise.

"I asked the military leadership to engage in additional planning necessary to execute a responsible military drawdown from Iraq," Obama said in a statement.

The meeting included US ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker, the top US war commander in the Middle East and Central Asia David Petraeus and Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Obama also sought to make a splash on his ambitious domestic agenda, in line with a promise to purge the influence peddling and corruption staining US politics by signing a string of executive orders dealing with political ethics.

"Let me say it as simply as I can. Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency," he said, at a swearing-in ceremony for senior staff members.

The orders tightened rules on contact between lobbyists and members of the government and restricted contact between former administration members with ex-colleagues when they leave public service.

With many Americans feeling the economic pinch, Obama also clamped a salary freeze on top staff earning more than 100,000 dollars a year.

"During this period of economic emergency, families are tightening their belts, and so should Washington," Obama said.

Analysis: US, Israel could coax Hamas to moderate

By STEVEN GUTKIN, Associated Press Writer

JERUSALEM – Postwar Gaza could become a test of President Barack Obama's inauguration speech offer to Muslims to "extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist."

The extended hand would be open borders and international reconstruction money for the Hamas militants who rule Gaza. The unclenched fist would be the Islamic militants of Hamas giving their moderate Fatah rivals a foothold in Gaza and holding its fire against Israel.

After an Israeli offensive that killed nearly 1,300 Palestinians and left much of Gaza in ruins, the new U.S. administration and a soon-to-be new Israeli government have a chance to forge a fresh strategy toward Hamas.

The war appears to have shaken up Mideast politics and the international community could leverage Gaza's postwar reality to boost moderates in the region, taking advantage of the fact that Hamas desperately needs help following the Israeli onslaught.

That could mean giving Hamas what it most wants — an open border with Egypt — as long as Fatah and international monitors control it. Any such deal would also require providing assurances to Israel that Hamas will stop smuggling weapons over the Egyptian border.

Extending Hamas a hand runs the risk of cementing the militants' power in Gaza. But a deal with strings attached could chip away at Hamas' stranglehold on the territory, which has been the main impediment to U.S.-backed Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.

Hamas, which has been holding victory rallies in Gaza despite suffering enormous losses from Israel's assault, is not about to suddenly recognize the Jewish state or join the peace talks between Israel and the moderate Palestinian leadership in the West Bank.

But the war proved Hamas is not a monolith. Divisions emerged between the group's Syria-based leadership, which opposed a cease-fire, and those inside Gaza who felt the bloodletting had to stop.

Hamas appears to have evolved since the days when it regularly invited youngsters to strap on bombs and blow themselves up inside Israel. Today, after violently seizing control of Gaza in June 2007, the group seems as interested in successful governance as attacking Israel.

Many Israelis believe Hamas' decision to fire rockets at Israel at the end of a six-month truce — a decision that sparked the latest war — was based solely on the group's hatred of Zionists. But the reality is more complicated.

Hamas was deeply disappointed the original truce did not bring a deal to reopen the borders of Gaza, which Israel and Egypt have blockaded since Hamas seized power. The closure destroyed almost all private enterprise in the territory of 1.4 million people, exacerbating misery in a place where 80 percent of the people need U.N. food handouts to survive.

Gazans found themselves without cement to build new apartments or make gravestones for the dead. Ninety percent of the territory's 3,600 factories shut down because of a lack of spare parts and raw materials.

And Israel's military offensive inflicted an estimated $2 billion in damage.

Rebuilding would seem impossible under the current border regime.

"Nobody in his right state of mind can talk about reconstruction in Gaza with the crossings continuing to be ... closed," Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad said in the West Bank this week.

Since trade links between Israel and Gaza are unlikely as long as Hamas remains sworn to Israel's destruction, efforts to ease the blockade are concentrating on opening the border with Egypt.

Fayyad made an urgent plea for reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas, saying the alternative is a permanent rift that will destroy Palestinians' dreams for a state of their own.

Current international proposals for a durable Gaza truce envision allowing Fatah back into Gaza to help monitor a reopened crossing into Egypt, an outcome that could be a first step toward moderates regaining a foothold in Gaza.

Hamas leaders have been defiant since a tentative cease-fire took hold Sunday, But Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum made a point of not rejecting Obama's inaugural overture.

Israel remains Hamas' enemy, he said. "That does not mean we cannot open a new page with the whole world, including the new elected American administration if they support the Palestinian people's just rights."

To be sure, no truce deal will be possible unless Israel is assured Hamas will stop firing rockets at Israel and smuggling increasingly lethal weapons across the Gaza-Egypt border.

Israel has scheduled an election Feb. 10 and none of the top candidates for prime minister has shown any willingness to rethink the position on Hamas. And the front-runner is hawkish former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has made clear he favors sticks over carrots when it comes to Hamas.

Gitmo war crimes court halted at Obama request

By BEN FOX, Associated Press Writer

GUANTANAMO BAY NAVAL BASE, Cuba – The Guantanamo Bay war crimes court came to an abrupt halt Wednesday as military judges granted President Barack Obama's request to suspend proceedings while he reviews his predecessor's strategy for prosecuting terrorists.

The judges quickly agreed to a 120-day suspension of the cases of a Canadian accused of killing an American soldier in Afghanistan and five men charged in the Sept. 11 attacks. Similar orders are expected in other pending cases pending before the Guantanamo military commissions.

Judge Stephen Henley, an Army colonel presiding over the Sept. 11 trial, accepted the prosecution argument that it would be in the "interests of justice" to give the new administration time to review the commission process and decide what to do next, a decision tied closely to Obama's pledge to close the detention center.

The five charged in the Sept. 11 attacks had said they wanted to plead guilty to charges that carry potential death sentences and their alleged ringleader, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, told the court he opposes the delay.

"We should continue so we don't go backward, we go forward," said Mohammed, who shrugged off the prospect of a death sentence at a pretrial hearing at the base earlier in the week.

Another judge agreed to a suspension in the case of Canadian Omar Khadr with a one-sentence order.

Obama's order to seek a suspension of the proceedings came just hours after his inauguration.

Prosecutor Clay Trivett said all pending cases should be suspended because the new administration's review of the military commissions system may result in significant changes that could have legal consequences for the defendants.

In Washington, the administration circulated a draft executive order that calls for closing the detention center within a year and reviewing the cases of all the nearly 245 still held. The government would release some, transfer others and put the rest on trial under terms still to be determined. It was not known when Obama intended to issue the order.

The suspension of the war crimes trials "has the practical effect of stopping the process, probably forever," said Navy Lt. Cmdr. William Kuebler, Khadr's defense lawyer.

Khadr, a Toronto native, faces charges that include supporting terrorism and murder for allegedly killing U.S. Army Sgt. 1st Class Christopher Speer of Albuquerque, New Mexico, with a grenade during a 2002 battle in Afghanistan when he was 15.

Khadr faces up to life in prison if convicted by the military commission. His lawyer says he should now be prosecuted, if at all, in a civilian court, though he would prefer to be repatriated to Canada.

"He is anxious. He doesn't know what's going to happen," Kuebler said after discussing the delay with the 22-year-old prisoner. "But we are all hopeful and somewhat optimistic that this ruling now creates a space for the two governments to do something constructive to solve this case."

Khadr has received little sympathy in Canada, where his family has been called the "first family of terrorism." His father was an alleged al-Qaida militant and financier who was slain by Pakistani forces in 2003, and a brother, Abdullah Khadr, is being held in Canada on a U.S. extradition warrant, accused of supplying weapons to al-Qaida.

Reached in Toronto, Omar Khadr's older sister expressed mixed feelings at the news.

"I'm glad my brother is not going to trial, but I really would have preferred he was coming home, and he's not," Zaynab Khadr said.

War crimes charges are pending against 21 men being held at Guantanamo. Before Obama became president, the U.S. had said it planned to try dozens of detainees in a system created by former President George W. Bush and Congress in 2006 and has faced repeated challenges.

Relatives of Sept. 11 victims, who were at the base this week to observe pretrial hearings, and listened as one of the Sept. 11 defendants said he was "proud" of the attacks, told reporters they oppose halting the trials.

"The safest place to have these trials is Guantanamo Bay. If they were to move to the homeland it would endanger all of us," said Lorraine Arias Believeau of Barnegat, New Jersey, whose brother, Adam Arias, was killed at the World Trade Center.

Jim Riches of Brooklyn, N.Y., whose 29-year-old firefighter son, Jimmy, was killed in the attacks, said he would support another system, but doesn't want to wait much longer. "We'll go along with whatever process it is, but let's get it done. It shouldn't take another eight years," he said.

Hamas tells Obama to learn from Bush's mistakes

GAZA CITY (AFP) – Hamas on Wednesday called on President Barack Obama to learn lessons from the mistakes of his predecessor George W. Bush and said it would judge the new US leader by his acts.

"We will judge him by his policies and actions on the ground and how he will learn lessons from the mistakes of the previous administrations, especially that of George Bush and his criminal and unjust policies," Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhum told a press conference in Gaza City.

Dozens dead from carbon monoxide poisoning in Algeria

ALGIERS, Jan 21, 2009 (AFP) - Dozens of people in Algeria have been asphyxiated by carbon monoxide from heaters in recent weeks as temperatures in the north African country plummeted, the government said on Wednesday.

Since the beginning of December, the country's civil protection agency said it had intervened 180 times, saving 343 people using heaters in badly ventilated homes, the APS news agency reported.

Another 66 people died, however.

Analysis: Israel's plans for Lebanon

By CLAUDE SALHANI, UPI Contributing Editor

BEIRUT, Lebanon, Jan. 19 (UPI) -- The question that was being asked around Beirut this past week was if the bombing of Gaza by Israel -- now in its third week -- would come to a halt before Lebanon got dragged into the Middle East's latest conflict.

That question was on the minds of those attending a chic dinner party held in one of Beirut's more affluent suburbs, which included a government minister, local reporters and a visiting journalist; that same question was also on the minds of the working-class Shiites living in a neighborhood south of Beirut known simply as "the suburbs," or in Arabic, "Dahiyeh."

At the weekend Israel announced a unilateral cease-fire, and hours later so did Hamas, which in essence solves nothing in the long term, leaving the region in an uncertain limbo. But in the interim the great fear in Lebanon is that the country may get pulled into the Palestinian fight, as it has on multiple occasions in the past. What is encouraging this time is that it appears, at least for the moment, that neither Lebanon nor Israel is anxious for a fight.

Two prominent members of the pro-independent March 14 Alliance, often referred to as the anti-Syrian coalition, told this correspondent that Hezbollah seemed aware of the potential consequences and would stay out of the fight.

Samir Geagea, the leader of the Christian Lebanese Forces, as well as Samir Franjieh (who stands politically apart from the rest of the pro-Syrian Franjieh clan), told this correspondent in separate meetings in Beirut last week that the next week -- the one before Obama's inauguration -- would be crucial. At the same time both leaders told this correspondent they believed the Lebanese Shiite organization Hezbollah would stay out of the current fight.

The economic crisis affecting many of the world's economies might actually play in favor of Lebanon. With the price of a barrel of oil currently at $35, the Iranians, who had planned their 2009 budget at $90 a barrel, will face a severe economic shortfall -- this in turn translates as less hard cash for Iran to hand down to Hamas and Hezbollah. One immediate outcome is that, unlike in the aftermath of the 2006 war with Israel, when Hezbollah was able to distribute piles of cash to those who lost homes in the battle, this is hardly going to be possible in Gaza, or in Beirut in case of a repeat performance.

And for once there seems to be unanimous agreement from just about every leader across the political spectrum in Lebanon -- which runs the gamut from the far left to the far right and includes pro- and anti-Syrians, Iranians, Saudis, etc. -- that it would be counterproductive for Lebanon to jump into this fight.

Since the fighting in Gaza began on Dec. 27, the Lebanese have been well aware of the consequences of getting pulled into another war. And one of the big fears here is that Iran may pressure Hezbollah to open a second front on Israel's northern border to alleviate some of the pressure on Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

The good news amid this dire environment is that some analysts believe Israel is not itching for a fight on its northern border, at least not now.

Ariel Cohen of the Heritage Foundation in Washington told this correspondent that "Israel doesn't want a war with Lebanon, as it has no territorial claims towards it. It certainly doesn't want an escalation in southern Lebanon now, when the business in Gaza may not be over yet. However, if Hezbollah gets into action now, the Israeli response will be massive, overwhelming and harsh."

Last year several high-ranking Israeli army generals published an outline of their plan of retaliation against Lebanon in the event of an attempt by Hezbollah to attack Israel.

Dubbed the "Dahiyeh Doctrine," after the Arabic world for suburb, in reference to Hezbollah's stronghold in Beirut's southern suburbs, often simply called "Dahiyeh," the Israeli generals said in the next war with the Lebanese Shiite organization they would "unleash unprecedented destructive power against the terrorists' host nation of Lebanon."

Speaking to the Israeli daily newspaper Yediot Ahronoth, the head of Israel's Northern Command, Gen. Gadi Eisenkot, announced that his Dahiyeh Doctrine for fighting Hezbollah had gained official approval. "This is not a threat," he was quoted as saying, "This is policy."

Under Eisenkot's plan, in the event of war the civilian centers from which Hezbollah operates will be viewed exclusively as military installations. If and when the next conflict breaks out, Israel, said a group of senior army generals, would refrain from chasing mobile Hezbollah missile teams around southern Lebanon. Instead, they would "create deterrence" by punishing Lebanon and the individual towns and villages that provide the terror group with its fighting force and cover.

"We will wield disproportionate power against every village from which shots are fired on Israel, and cause immense damage and destruction," said Eisenkot.

In so doing, implementation of the Dahiyeh Doctrine would cause massive casualties among the Lebanese civilian population.

And indeed, the Lebanese were given a pretty accurate sneak preview of what Israel's Dahiyeh Doctrine, if implemented, would look like. It was hard for anyone here to escape the non-stop coverage from Gaza being transmitted over the multitude of Arabic-language television satellite news networks broadcasting 24 hours a day.

Watching those television images beamed from the war zone into hotel lobbies, bars, popular hookah bars and individual homes across the country, many Lebanese remain cognizant that all Israel's war planners need to do to implement their deadly doctrine is change the word "Gaza" to "Dahiyeh." The result would be catastrophic for Lebanon.

'Kurdish militias' eyed ahead of elections

MOSUL, Iraq, Jan. 20 (UPI) -- Baghdad should send a neutral security force to the northern city of Mosul to protect voters from Kurdish militias, the head of the Iraqi National List said.

Osama al-Nujaifi with the Iraqi National List called on the Iraqi government to send a neutral security force to Mosul ahead of the Jan. 31 provincial elections, saying Kurdish militias may threaten voters in the region, the Voices of Iraq news agency reported Tuesday.

"The security situation in Mosul has greatly improved and it is ready for the elections, except for the regions of Sinjar, Zamar, Shiekhan and al-Hamadaniya, which are under the control of Kurdish militias who terrorize voters and force them to vote for their candidates," he said.

Iraq holds provincial elections Jan. 31 in all but the three Kurdish provinces and Kirkuk, as those provinces are in the midst of a territorial dispute.

Ninawah Deputy Gov. Khisro Kouran with the Kurdistan Democratic Party denied the allegations, saying the concerns stem from allegations Kurdish militias were responsible for attacks against the Christian minority in the region.

Nujaifi was offered as a candidate for the position of parliamentary speaker by his party. The vetting process for that position is expected to take place in February.

Source: United Press International (UPI).
Link: http://www.upi.com/Emerging_Threats/2009/01/20/Kurdish_militias_eyed_ahead_of_elections/UPI-95191232467307/.

73 percent of Iraqis plan to vote Jan. 31

BAGHDAD, Jan. 20 (UPI) -- Roughly three-fourths of all eligible voters in Iraq said they plan to take part in the provincial elections Jan. 31, a government poll shows.

The Iraqi National Media Center of the Iraqi Parliament said 73 percent of those surveyed said they plan to vote Jan. 31.

The poll showed the most anticipated voter turnout was in the province of Karbala, which expected around 85 percent of voters to head to the polls. The National Media Center said Najaf province expected the lowest turnout, but did not provide the percentile.

Among the reasons for voting, 30 percent of the Iraqis participating in the survey said they were doing so because of their national obligation. Support for their candidates was given as the reason by 20 percent of those surveyed, while 19 percent said they hoped to improve the leadership of the provincial council.

Meanwhile, 42 percent of those surveyed said they were likely to vote for secular candidates, while 31 percent said they favored candidates supported by the various religious parties in the country.

The Iraqi Independent High Electoral Commission is charged with overseeing the Jan. 31 elections in all but the three Kurdish provinces and Kirkuk. Those elections are delayed because of territorial disputes. Iraq held its last round of elections for provincial and parliamentary positions on Jan. 30, 2005.

The National Media Center did not provide statistical analysis of the survey.

Source: United Press International (UPI).
Link: http://www.upi.com/Emerging_Threats/2009/01/20/73_percent_of_Iraqis_plan_to_vote_Jan_31/UPI-40301232465233/.

Pro-Chavez students demonstrate in Venezuela

By RACHEL JONES, Associated Press Writer

CARACAS, Venezuela – Hundreds of students marched Wednesday in support of President Hugo Chavez's proposal to eliminate term limits — a day after police clashed with students opposed to the measure.

The red-clad supporters, many of whom arrived on government buses, marched from a state university to a downtown plaza, urging Venezuelans to approve a Feb. 15 referendum that would let Chavez and other public officials run for re-election indefinitely.

The leftist leader is currently barred under the constitution from seeking another term in 2012.

Medical student Damaseliana Vargas, 30, said Chavez has helped her and other low-income families, and she fears the support would go away if he is termed out.

"Studying medicine was too expensive before," said Vargas, who attends school through a government social program.

Police used tear gas, plastic bullets and a water cannon Tuesday to disperse the opposition protesters. Chavez has mocked those protests and urged police to break up marches if they turn violent.

Caracas Police Chief Carlos Meza told state television that authorities found bottles and gasoline inside a sound truck used by the students, alleging that they planned to make Molotov cocktails. He said its driver was detained.

But opposition student leaders accused Meza on Wednesday of planting the items, showing a video of Meza filling bottles with a liquid resembling gasoline inside the truck.

Justice Minister Tareck El Aissami denied police planted the materials, and the government said that the video had been manipulated.

Information Minister Jesse Chacon said Meza had been demonstrating for the cameras how Molotov cocktails were made.

In Venezuela's western Lara state, students also demonstrated to show support for Chavez.

Al-Qaeda active in Russia's North Caucasus - Interior Ministry

ROSTOV-ON-DON, January 21 (RIA Novosti) - Members of Al-Qaeda are active in Russia's North Caucasus republics of Chechnya and Daghestan, a deputy interior minister said on Wednesday.

"Al-Qaeda training centers exist around the world, and in southern Russia they are active on the territory of the Chechen republic and the republic of Daghestan," Arkady Yedelev told journalists.

He added that representatives of the international terrorist network carry out regular inspections of armed groups in the republics and provide them with weapons and explosives.

Yedelev said the process was "natural" as Russia was "becoming stronger" and enemies "had to have an influence on operations [in the country]."

"We know this and are prepared for it," he added.

White Panther founder hails Obama

LONDON, Jan. 21 (UPI) -- President Barack Obama's inauguration is a victory for whites who joined the call for an end to the "American apartheid" in the 1960s, a longtime activist says.

John Sinclair, founder in 1968 of the White Panther Party, which supported civil rights for African-Americans, said Tuesday's swearing-in of the United States' first black president was a moment he thought would never come, The Times of London reported.

"I've been waiting for this day all my adult life. I never thought it would be possible," said Sinclair, whose two-year imprisonment on marijuana charges in the 1960s became a cause celebre for musicians John Lennon and Stevie Wonder.

Sinclair was in London Tuesday night to play a special concert in honor of Obama's inauguration. He told The Times, "Obama has used the mechanisms of the social order against itselt. He's like John F. Kennedy -- he's fresh, young and smart. It's just something that the Establishment has never authorized before."

Sinclair told the newspaper that "when you are a white person in America, you have a horrible racist history that you were always uncomfortable with, but you think 'what can I do?' And now they've made the ultimate choice."

Court: Arab parties can run in election

JERUSALEM, Jan. 21 (UPI) -- Israel's High Court of Justice, contradicting an elections committee, says two Arab parties have a right to run in next month's national elections.

The court overturned a ruling by Israel's Central Elections Committee, which last week banned the Arab parties United Arab List-Ta'al and Balad from running in February's parliamentary elections because they allegedly did not recognize Israel's right to exist, the Haaretz newspaper reported Wednesday.

"We have defeated fascism, but this battle is not quite complete, discrimination has become centralized. We will finish this operation in Israel on the day of elections," Member of Knesset Ahmed Tibi told reporters after the court ruling.

During the CEC session in which the ban was instituted, Arab faction delegates walked out of the hall before the vote, shouting, "This is a fascist, racist state," as CEC deputy chairman David Tal of the Kadima Party and the Arab delegates pushed each other.

A Knesset guard had to intervene and separate them, Haaretz said.

Iran warns BBC Tehran staff not to help Farsi service

TEHRAN (AFP) – Iran on Wednesday warned the BBC Tehran bureau against contributing to the network's newly-launched Farsi-language television channel, which is banned from operating in Iran, Fars news agency reported.

"BBC English channel will be confronted if it abuses its legal rights by producing reports for BBC Persian and we are continually on watch for that," Culture Minister Mohammad Hossein Saffar Harandi said.

"This Persian channel is not planned with good intentions and they reflect the same issues differently in Persian and English services," said Harandi, whose ministry is in charge of licensing and monitoring foreign media.

He reiterated that the Farsi-language BBC channel is banned from "presence and making field reports in Iran" and warned local journalists against cooperating with it.

"BBC and Britain have a clear record of inciting unrest and provoking different groups against each other in countries," he said, according to the ILNA news agency.

Reacting to the Iranian comments, a BBC spokesman said: "We have a long established bureau in Tehran and we have no plans to change how it is run and operated.

"BBC World Service has launched a separate BBC Persian Service, which we believe will be valued by Persian speakers across the globe," he added.

BBC Persian TV began broadcasting on January 14, aimed at around 100 million Farsi speakers in the region -- 70 million in Iran, 20 million in Afghanistan and 10 million in Tajikistan and central Asia.

The BBC has had a radio service in Farsi since 1940 and has a Farsi-language website used by 700,000 people worldwide, the British public broadcaster said.

The British government is providing 15 million pounds (23 million dollars) a year for the Farsi service.

Despite a ban on satellite television, dishes dot Iranian rooftops with dozens of US and Europe-based Farsi channels -- including the Voice of America Persian service -- broadcasting a daily dose of politics and entertainment to Iran.

International news agencies, a number of foreign television networks and newspapers have correspondents based in Iran.

"News agencies are different from BBC Persian and the issue is a medium launched in our language and focused on Iran," the minister said. "They (BBC Farsi) want to carry out some operations and we should not naively allow them."

California expects fast Obama move on car pollution

By Peter Henderson and Nichola Groom

SACRAMENTO/LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – California's top climate change official on Wednesday predicted President Barack Obama's administration would let the state impose its own tough limits on greenhouse gas emissions from cars by May, in what would be a victory for environmentalists.

California asked the new Environmental Protection Agency chief to revisit the Bush administration's 2007 decision that denied the state's request to impose its own regulations.

"We think we should have our decision in hand by late May," Mary Nichols, California's top air quality regulator, said in an interview. Nichols, the state Air Resources Board chairman, sent a letter to designated EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson on Wednesday requesting the review.

If the EPA reverses the Bush administration ruling, more than 12 U.S. states could proceed with plans to impose stricter limits on greenhouse gas emissions from cars. California wants to reduce the emissions by 30 percent by 2016 -- the most ambitious federal or state effort to address global warming.

Environmentalists have said granting California a waiver that allows it to set its own emissions regulations would signal Obama's commitment to tackling climate change.

California wants to require carmakers to use paints that reflect more heat, tires that roll smoother and improved air conditioning to boost efficiency beyond the fuel mileage requirements already facing automakers.

EPA officials were not immediately available for comment.

'ALLIES IN OUR EFFORTS'

President George W. Bush's administration denied the request by California, which needs federal clearance to set clean air standards alongside the U.S. government.

Jackson has said she that she would revisit the so-called California waiver. She comes from New Jersey, which is one of more than a dozen states that will follow California's lead if the EPA grants the waiver.

"We've been allies in our efforts," Nichols said.

It would take the federal government until May to clear several procedural hurdles, and then California could proceed, she predicted.

"If the California waiver is granted, states that represent over half the population of the United States and an even larger part of the market for new cars will be committing themselves to require the auto manufacturers to produce and sell vehicles that are 30 percent cleaner," she added.

Bush often drew criticism from environmentalists, who said his administration favored industry and politics over environmental science. His EPA administrator came under fire after he denied California's request. California and other states sued over the decision.

Automakers have said the changes could add substantially to sticker prices. Nichols said it would add a little over $100 to the price of car, and the improvements would pay off within a year through improved efficiency.

In a letter to Obama, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger also pressed for the EPA to reconsider.

"I ask that you direct the U.S. EPA to act promptly and favorably on California's reconsideration request so that we may continue the critical work of reducing our greenhouse gas emissions and their impact on global climate change," Schwarzenegger wrote.

NKorea, Iran open to US efforts to defuse tension

By JAE-SOON CHANG, Associated Press Writer

SEOUL, South Korea – North Korea and Iran, two nations with nuclear aspirations the U.S. wants to thwart, both signaled Wednesday that they were open to new initiatives from President Barack Obama that could defuse tensions.

A newspaper considered a mouthpiece for the North Korean government said the communist regime is willing to give up its nuclear weapons if the U.S. agrees to conditions imposed by the North, including establishing formal diplomatic relations.

Iran said it was "ready for new approaches" from Obama after his predecessor George W. Bush shunned the country.

"With old friends and former foes, we will work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat," Obama said in his inauguration speech Tuesday.

"To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist," the new American president said.

The Japanese-based newspaper Choson Sinbo said in a story posted on its Web site hours before the inauguration that the North was waiting to see what position the new president would take on the nuclear standoff. The North holds a stash of weapons-grade plutonium that experts say could fuel as many as 10 nuclear bombs and it has already tested a nuclear device.

Last week, the North said it would give up its nuclear weapons only if Washington establishes diplomatic relations and ceases to pose a nuclear threat — an apparent reference to the regime's long-standing claim that American nuclear weapons are hidden in South Korea. Both South Korea and Washington deny the accusation.

The Choson Sinbo report said the North put forward conditions for its nuclear abandonment "ahead of the launch of the Obama administration," and it was now up to Washington to act.

"It is too early to predict whether the Obama administration will endorse the North's nuclear possession or try to realize denuclearization through normalization of relations," the newspaper report said. "But what is sure is that the North side is ready to deal with any choice by the enemy nation."

The newspaper is closely linked to the North Korean government and its articles are considered a reflection of the North's positions.

Obama has said he would meet North Korean leader Kim Jong Il if it helps the international process to disarm the North.

The North's main Rodong Sinmun newspaper called the U.S. "bloodthirsty" Wednesday in a routine commentary that accused Washington of planning to invade. The official Korean Central News Agency also briefly reported Obama's inauguration without any assessment of the new leader.

Iran's foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, urged Obama to change American policies in the Middle East.

"We are ready for new approaches by the United States," Mottaki told the English-language Press TV, part of Iran's state media.

For now, though, Iran would wait to see what "practical policies" Obama will adopt before making any judgment about his stance toward Iran, Mottaki said, according to the official IRNA news agency.

In his campaign, Obama spoke of a need to engage Iran, which would be a significant departure from the Bush government's approach.

Mottaki said Obama needed to take action to correct a bad image of America in the world and to employ new advisers who would tell the "truth" about the Middle East.

"A new Middle East is in the making," IRNA quoted Mottaki as saying. "The new generation in this region seeks justice and rejects domination. A change in Mideast policy is one of the areas ... if the new U.S. government claims to follow a policy of change."

In recent years, the two foes have been deeply at odds over Iran's nuclear program. The U.S. says Iran's uranium enrichment program is aimed at producing nuclear weapons, but Iran denies that.

At Least 12 Killed In Somalia Fighting - Officials, Witnesses

MOGADISHU, Somalia (AFP)--At least 12 Somalis, many of them civilians, were killed and 19 wounded in clashes between government forces and Islamist insurgents in Mogadishu, officials and witnesses told AFP Wednesday.

A group of armed insurgents attacked government forces manning a checkpoint in the northern neighborhood of Sinay late Tuesday while fighting also erupted in the Madina district, the sources said.

"The stooges of the enemies of Allah attacked our forces in a police station in Madina neighborhood and we repelled them," Islamist commander Sheikh Mohamed Ibrahim said, referring to the government's support for Ethiopia's two-year occupation of the country.

"They opened indiscriminate fire on areas populated by civilians, killing innocents," said the commander, from a faction close to hardline Islamist leader Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys.

"I saw the bodies of two soldiers on the street in Madina and several others were also wounded near my house," resident Hared Ahmed said.

Several other witnesses gave at least the same death toll for the incident.

A government official argued that his forces were attacked first.

"The Islamists also attacked residents in Madina neighborhood and we defended ourselves and that is what we are going to do," said Wadajir district commissioner Ahmed Hasan Daci, whose forces were involved in the fighting.

Witnesses said residents had started fleeing the area as both sides reinforced their positions, sparking fears of further clashes.

In another incident, Islamist insurgents took over a checkpoint manned by government forces in the Sinay district following an intense exchange of fire.

"The Somali government forces were defeated in Sinay and their checkpoint was taken by the Islamists. Three soldiers and an Islamist fighter died in the area, " eyewitness Yusuf Abdallah said.

Medics told AFP that at least 19 wounded civilians were hospitalized following Tuesday night's fighting in the capital, including one who later died of injuries sustained during the violence in Madina.

Ethiopian troops, who had invaded Somalia in late 2006 to prop up a weak transitional government and remove an Islamist militia from power, pulled out of Mogadishu this month.

Their withdrawal had been one of the main demands of the country's Islamist- led opposition, but hardline militias have vowed to continue fighting against government forces and African peacekeepers.

The Ethiopian forces' pullout has also created a security vacuum drawing clan- based militias and warlords into a scramble for control over the capital's various districts.