Arab human rights group barred for year by UN

By Robert Evans

GENEVA, July 27 (Reuters) - The United Nations decided on Monday to bar an Arab human rights group for a year after Algeria argued that it brought in a "known terrorist" to speak on its behalf at a meeting in Geneva.

The decision was taken without a vote, despite reservations voiced by Western countries, at the 54-member Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) in what an official of the barred grouping said was a move to silence its voice.

The action against the Paris-based Arab Commission for Human Rights -- which has been fiercely critical of Israel but also of what it argues is growing oppression in Arab countries -- deprives it of the right to speak in U.N. bodies.

"This was a move taken to silence us," the body's Geneva representative Abdel Wahab Hani told reporters. "We upset everybody, including the Europeans and Americans by criticizing them too, so there was no one to stand up for us."

The suspension of recognition -- formally known as "consultative status" -- was recommended in January by the U.N.'s 19-nation Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) in New York.

Western countries say the Committee has increasingly acted in recent years to keep out genuine NGOs.

The Arab Commission, founded in 1998 and run by 15 human rights lawyers who mainly live in Arab countries although some are based in Western Europe, will now be barred from the Human Rights Council, its main U.N. focus.

In a complaint to the NGO Committee, Algeria said the group violated rules last year by putting up as a speaker Swiss-based lawyer Rachid Mesli, against whom Algiers has issued an arrest warrant as a member of an "armed terrorist group".

Hani said Mesli was a lawyer who fled Algeria after being prosecuted for defending members of the now defunct Islamic Salvation Front (FIS) which fought the state in the 1990s.

U.S. and European Union delegates said on Monday that states on the Committee, which recommends to ECOSOC which NGOs should be admitted, or expelled, appeared to be acting to keep out NGO's who criticized them or with whom they disagreed.

Source: Alertnet.
Link: http://alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/LR298565.htm.

Is China's One-Child Policy Heading for a Revision?

By SIMON ELEGANT / BEIJING

The one-child policy is such a cornerstone of contemporary China that when word got out late last week that Shanghai was encouraging some couples to have more offspring, it made headlines around the world. But on July 25, the same Chinese family-planning official whose remarks set off speculation denied that Shanghai was taking its first steps to reverse the much-hated policy. Apparently reacting to numerous overseas media reports of a change in city birth-control regulations, which was portrayed as being the first sign of a reversal, Xie Lingli was quoted by the official Xinhua News Agency as saying that a citywide policy of allowing couples in which each partner is an only child to have two children had been in place for many years. She also emphasized that the Shanghai city government's family-planning office would never actively encourage any new measure that was counter to national policy.

The reports in question were sparked by remarks Xie had made to the official media that appeared to point to a policy shift designed to address the drain that Shanghai's aging population could have on the city's economy. "We advocate eligible couples to have two kids because it can help reduce the proportion of the aging people and alleviate a workforce shortage in the future," Xie, who is director of the Shanghai Population and Family Planning Commission, was quoted as saying. The report also stated that family-planning officials and volunteers would begin to make home visits and slip leaflets under doorways to encourage eligible couples to have a second child and that emotional and financial counseling would be provided to the families.

"The policy that a couple who are both the only child in their families can have a second child has been around for years," says Wang Feng, professor of sociology at the University of California, Irvine, who is currently lecturing at Shanghai's Fudan University. "The Shanghai government is doing nothing more than reiterating an old policy, but by doing so, it's calling attention to this political hot potato."

Xie's apparent backpedaling over the weekend underscores the sensitivity of the one-child policy in China. First introduced in 1979 as a measure to rein in China's booming population, the law has faced widespread opposition from its first day. Because local levels of compliance with the law make up an important part of whether district bureaucrats get promoted, officials have often turned to harsh tactics - including forced sterilization and late-term abortion - to enforce compliance.

In her original remarks, Xie noted that Shanghai will soon have to deal with a rapidly aging population. About 22% of the city's residents are over age 60 - a figure that is projected to rise to 34% by 2020. The same looming problem faces China as a whole, says Wang, who points out that the number of young people entering the workforce between the ages of 20 and 24 will drop by half in the next decade. Like many other population experts outside China, Wang believes it is only a matter of time before the pressure to change the one-child policy is irresistible. "The government should eliminate the moral barrier that's been imposed by propaganda over the past 30 years for a couple to have a second child," says Wang. "China should learn the lessons from other Asian countries and start acting now before it's too late."

Obama: US-China relations to shape 21st century

By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama, opening U.S. talks with a high-level delegation of Chinese government officials, said Monday that ties between the two countries are "as important as any bilateral relationship in the world."

Saying that Washington and Beijing are in a position to vastly affect life around the world in the 21st century, Obama declared: "I believe that we are poised to make steady progress on some of the most important issues of our times."

He joined Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner in launching a dialogue with a team of Chinese officials led by Vice Premier Wang Qishan.

Obama said the two countries need to forge closer ties to address challenges ranging from lifting the global economy out of a deep recession to nuclear proliferation. And he also said he was under "no illusions that the United States and China will agree on every issue" but said closer cooperation in important areas was critical for the world.

Israeli official: No option off table on Iran

By ANNE GEARAN, AP National Security Writer

JERUSALEM – Tensions between Israel and the United States over Iran bubbled up in high-level talks Monday in which Defense Minister Ehud Barak bluntly told U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates that "no option" should be ruled out.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office subsequently described the talks as occurring "in a highly positive atmosphere."

But before that, the two sides seemed to differ pointedly over a potential military strike to thwart Tehran's progress on the nuclear front.

The visiting Gates urged patience, but Barak declared: "We clearly believe that no option should be removed from the table. This is our policy; we mean it. We recommend to others to take the same position, but we cannot dictate it to anyone."

While the United States also reserves the right to use force if need be, the Obama administration is playing down that possibility while it tries to draw Iran into talks about its disputed nuclear program and other topics. Gates said Washington still hopes to have an initial answer in the fall about negotiations.

"The timetable the president laid out still seems to be viable and does not significantly raise the risks to anybody," Gates said.

The statement issued from Netanyahu's office acknowledged that "a large part" of the discussion here had been devoted to Iran.

"Secretary Gates stated that the U.S. and Israel see eye-to-eye regarding the Iranian nuclear threat and explained that the U.S. engagement with Tehran will not be open-ended," it said.

The statement added: "Prime Minister Netanyahu reiterated the seriousness to which Israel views Iran's nuclear ambitions and the need to utilize all available means to prevent Iran from achieving a nuclear weapons capability."

Iran says it is merely trying to develop nuclear reactors for domestic power generation. Israeli leaders and a significant share of the population fear the U.S. is prizing outreach to Iran over its historic ties to Israel and appears resigned to the idea that Iran will soon be able to build a nuclear weapon.

President Barack Obama says he has accepted no such thing.

The question of how to deal with Iran's rapid advancement toward nuclear proficiency has become one of the most public differences between new administrations in Jerusalem and Washington, despite overall close relations.

Both Barak and Gates said time is short, and Gates stressed that any negotiations would not become cover for Iran to run out the clock while it perfects a nuclear weapon.

"I think we're in full agreement on the negative consequences of Iran obtaining this kind of capability," Gates said. "I think we are also agreed that it is important to take every opportunity to try and persuade the Iranians to reconsider what is actually in their own security interest. We are in the process of doing that."

Gates' brief visit to Israel was partially aimed at dissuading Israel from a pre-emptive attack on Iran's known nuclear sites, although Israel has never announced any specific intention to do that. Barak's no-options-off-the-table comment, uttered three times, seemed to indicate Gates made no visible headway in getting Israel to soften its line.

Obama pledged a new outreach to Iran during last year's presidential campaign. Aides say the recent election-related political upheaval in Iran has complicated, but not derailed, that effort.

Moreover, the United States argues that a strike would upset the fragile security balance in the Middle East, perhaps triggering a new nuclear arms race and leaving everyone, including Israel and Iran, worse off.

On Sunday, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton implicitly urged Israel to set aside any plans it might have for attacking Iran, saying she hopes the Jewish state understands the value of American attempts at diplomacy.

Speaking on NBC's "Meet The Press," Clinton also said she would not reveal any specifics of a possible "defense umbrella" to protect Mideast allies against an eventual Iranian bomb.

The umbrella idea, which Clinton offhandedly mentioned last week, has fueled Israel's uncertainty over U.S. policy under Obama even though Clinton later backpedaled.

Iran rejects the idea of U.S. defensive umbrella to protect Washington's regional allies against a nuclear Iran. Foreign ministry spokesman Hasan Qashqavi told reporters Monday that "there is no need" for a U.S. defensive umbrella, just for Washington to tell Israel to "dismantle its own 200 nuclear warheads."

Britain urges new Afghan govt to defeat Taliban

by Lorne Cook

BRUSSELS (AFP) – British Foreign Secretary David Miliband warned Afghan leaders Monday that their next government must do more to defeat the insurgency and drive a wedge between the Taliban and its backers.

With Britain under pressure over mounting casualties, Miliband sought to reassure Britons about why British troops are on the front-line and called on other NATO countries to carry their share of the burden.

"The biggest shift must now be towards the Afghan state taking more responsibility," he said in a speech at NATO headquarters in Brussels, aimed mainly at the British public.

"Enduring capacity comes through the civilian side, with military support, and our aim in Afghanistan is transition," he said, in an hour-long address and question session focused on civilian, rather than military, efforts.

Afghans go to the polls for provincial and presidential elections on August 20 in a vote seen as a key test of the NATO-led efforts to foster democracy and reconstruction in the strife-torn country.

"I believe we are at an important point in Afghanistan's history and NATO's work there, a testing point," Miliband said. "The elections on August 20th need to be both credible and inclusive."

Ahead of the polls, US and NATO troops have launched major operations in the Taliban heartland near the Pakistan border, but casualties have spiked, undermining support for the alliance's most ambitious operation ever.

Miliband called on the incoming government to weed out hard-line insurgents from those Afghans involved in fighting for money, because they they have no job or who are being coerced.

"We will not force the Taliban to surrender just through force of arms and overwhelming might," he said.

The government with the help of the international community could do so, he said, by "dividing the different groups, by convincing the Afghans that we will not desert them to Taliban retribution, and by building legitimate governance."

"We need to help the Afghan government exploit the opportunity, with a more coherent effort to fragment the various elements of the insurgency, and turn those who can be reconciled to live within the Afghan constitution."

At least 20 British personnel have been killed this month in Operation Panther's Claw in the southern province of Helmund, as international forces seek to take ground from the Taliban and their supporters and hold onto it.

But while Miliband emphasised that the Afghans should do more, he insisted that NATO allies must do their share of the fighting, by sending more troops and equipment and lifting conditions placed on the way forces can operate.

"We will play our part, but we want others to play their part too," he said.

"Burden-sharing is a founding principle of the alliance. It needs to be honoured in practice as well as in theory."

He also sent a message to Afghanistan neighbour Pakistan, noting that any deal with former Taliban on both sides of the border should contain "red lines".

He said any peace deals should only involve former militants who are "prepared to shut out Al-Qaeda, and not use violence against troops or citizens in Afghanistan."

Karzai: Afghans want rules for troops changed

By ROBERT H. REID and KATHY GANNON, Associated Press Writers

KABUL – President Hamid Karzai said Monday he wants new rules governing the conduct of U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan and would be willing to talk with Taliban leaders who publicly renounce violence and endorse peace.

But Karzai, acknowledging shaky relations with his international partners in the war on terror, told The Associated Press in an interview that he was not prepared at this time to discuss the key Taliban demand — a timetable for the withdrawal of all foreign troops.

Karzai said the presence of U.S. and international forces was in the Afghan national interest but should be "based on a new contract" that would minimize civilian casualties, limit searches of private homes and restrict detaining Afghans indefinitely without charge.

He also said he wants the U.S.-run prison at Bagram Air Base, where about 600 Afghans are held, re-evaluated and inmates released unless there is evidence linking them to terrorist affiliation. He said arrests are turning ordinary Afghans against U.S. and NATO forces.

Karzai has promised to pursue those demands for changes in the relationship with foreign forces if he wins a second term in the Aug. 20 presidential election. He is considered the leading contender in the 39-candidate field, though he would be forced into a runoff if he fails to win a majority of votes in the first round.

"The Afghan people still want a fundamentally strong relation with the United States," Karzai said. "The Afghan people want a strategic partnership with America" based on fighting Islamic extremism.

But he added that the partnership must ensure "that the partners are not losing their lives, their property, their dignity as a consequence of that partnership."

The 91,000 international troops based in Afghanistan include about 65,000 under NATO's International Security Assistance Force, or ISAF. The rest are part of a U.S.-led coalition involved in counterterrorism and training Afghan forces. Both groups operate under different rules, which are kept secret for operational security reasons.

It is widely assumed, however, that the U.S.-led counter-terror command enjoys broader powers to search homes and detain people indefinitely if they are suspected of posing a security threat.

Last month, the new U.S. and NATO commander, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, issued new orders saying troops may attack insurgents hiding in Afghan houses only if international forces are in imminent danger. The measures were put into effect to quell a storm of criticism from Karzai's government about civilian casualties, which help fuel the Taliban insurgency.

During his interview, Karzai suggested those measures may not be enough to convince most Afghans to accept a long-term international role, which he said was in the interest of the Afghan people.

Karzai said no Afghan mother would weep over a son killed or wounded in the war "but that Afghan mother would very much want her other son, her husband or her daughter to be safe in their homes, to be safe in their communities, not to be bombed, not to be arrested, not to have their homes broken into at night with their front gate blown up by dynamite."

Karzai also said he wanted a dialogue with Taliban members not affiliated with al-Qaida or "in the grips of foreign intelligence agencies" in order to "reintegrate" them into Afghan society. He said those Taliban members must first repent "and announce that publicly."

He did not specify any foreign intelligence agency, but Afghan officials have in the past accused Pakistan of backing the Taliban, which Pakistan denies.

But Karzai also made clear he was not prepared to call for a timetable for the withdrawal of foreign forces, which some key Taliban figures have demanded before they will enter peace talks.

Karzai acknowledged strong differences over the years with the NATO and U.S.-led forces "but I also know and the Afghan people also know that the presence of international troops in Afghanistan is bringing stability to Afghanistan."

"I would advise the Taliban not to ask for the exit of international forces in Afghanistan because that is not in the interest of the Afghan people," he said.

Instead, both sides should work toward a relationship in which foreign troops show greater sensitivity to Afghan culture and the Afghans display "better management of governmental affairs."

Karzai has come under criticism for embracing some of Afghanistan's most notorious warlords, including his vice presidential running mate Mohammad Qasim Fahim, and his defense adviser, Gen. Rashid Dostum, who has been accused of killing hundreds of Taliban prisoners in 2001.

Karzai defended those ties, saying many of those now branded as warlords had received "million and millions of dollars" from the United States for their help in fighting the Taliban in the 2001 U.S.-led invasion.

Sikhs, Hindus dread Taliban tax in Pakistan

by Sajjad Tarakzai

PESHAWAR, Pakistan (AFP) – Sitting on a broken chair outside a Sikh temple in a crowded part of Peshawar, Aman Deep Singh is frantic about his future after losing his business in Pakistan's tribal district of Khyber.

When the Taliban gave Sikhs and Hindus an ultimatum -- leave the land of your forefathers or pay an Islamic tax in protection money -- Singh packed up and left his native Tirah valley for Peshawar.

"We were living under fear. Fear of militants, fear of Lashkar-e-Islam and fear of other armed groups," said Singh, his hair swept up in a turban, a long beard touching his abdomen and thick moustache covering his upper lip.

He swapped a general store in the mountains for unemployment in the northwest capital, where he struggles to feed the nine members of his family. Aman Deep is a fake name. He wants his real name hidden for his security.

As light fades to dusk, Sikhs gather for evening prayers at the Joga Singh gurdwara (temple) in a narrow street of Peshawar's Dabgari bazaar. Each man removes his shoes, washes his feet in a small pool of water and covers his head.

"I am not the only one. About 400 Sikh and 57 Hindu families migrated from (the town of) Bara and Tirah," said Singh.

Sikhs and Hindus are tiny communities in Pakistan. In the last year, hundreds have fled their homes after receiving death threats from the Taliban and other militant groups in an increasingly unstable northwest.

After US troops invaded Afghanistan in 2001, Taliban and Al-Qaeda ideologues fled to Pakistan, where they have increasingly focused their campaign and where 2,000 people have perished in bomb attacks over the past two years.

Pakistan launched a major offensive in the northwest this summer, under pressure from the United States, after Taliban fighters made deep territorial inroads.

Militants need an endless supply of funds for their weapons, communications and training.

Kidnapping, drugs and extortion are typical sources of income. Taxation and protection scams are others, and vulnerable non-Muslims are easy prey.

Local Sikhs mostly trade in cloth, and also run grocer, garment and herbal medicine shops. They are people who can afford the 1,000 rupees (12 dollars) per man, per year "jizya" tax.

In the region of Orakzai, the Taliban demanded the tax of adult male Sikhs, forcibly occupying Sikh-owned shops and houses. After two months, the tax spread to Khyber, the legendary tribal region on the main supply line to Afghanistan.

It was there that Lashkar-e-Islam, a Pakistani Islamist group headed by Mangal Bagh, announced Sikhs and Hindus would be free to live anywhere -- as long as they paid jizya.

But threats made the situation increasing tense. Hundreds of Sikh and Hindu families fled to nearby areas, especially Peshawar.

"Minorities in Orakzai and Khyber were warned by some militant groups to become Muslims or leave the area. This was a real threat," Singh said.

"They're running a parallel government. Hindu and Sikh families did not feel safe, in Orakzai, in Bara and in Tirah. We preferred to migrate, at least here we can breathe in peace and feel safe," he said.

The same sentiment was echoed by other shopkeepers from Bara.

"No female Muslim or non-Muslim is allowed out without a male relative. All women, even the elderly, have to wear a burka," said Gulab Khan Afridi, a 38-year-old Muslim.

Gulab Khan said growing a beard and wearing a cap had become compulsory, otherwise Lashkar extremists would dole out beatings or a 200 to 500-rupee fine.

"Can you believe it? A man cannot wear a ring in Bara," he added.

Much like the Taliban, Lashkar-e-Islam acts like police, enforces prayers five times a day and punishes people accused of prostitution and other vices.

Sardar Sahib Singh, a Sikh leader in the district assembly in Peshawar, said his community paid 150,000 rupees (1,825 dollars) a year to Lashkar-e-Islam in protection money.

"Our community is better off. We only pay tax, while Muslims have to work, like being guards in Lashkar trenches," he said. But families are dwindling.

"At first there were 500 Sikh families in Bara, now only 150," he said.

Scholars say only a true Islamic government, no one else, can collect jizya and on condition that those who pay feel safe, but Lashkar-e-Islam insisted the tax was proper payment for services rendered.

"Women, children and the handicapped have been exempted," Misri Gul, a spokesman for the group, told AFP.

"Jizya is according to Islamic sharia. We will provide them protection in exchange for this," he said.