Jotman Mid East

Iraq back to being a dictatorship

Jotman — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 10:53:00 -0800

Long term, who stands to benefit the most from the US invasion of Iraq: American oil companies? Saudi Arabia? Israel?

Probably none of the above.

In September the The Economist reported, "The Shia-led government has overseen a ballooning of the country’s security apparatus. Human-rights violations are becoming more common. In private many Iraqis, especially educated ones, are asking if their country may go back to being a police state."

Same as before, under Saddam? Not quite. As one Iranian exile pointed out to me, this new "made in America" Iraqi dictatorship appears to be aligned with Iran.

The Iranian exile explained that Maliki has close ties with Iran, and the Iranian spies have infiltrated the highest ranks of the government of Iraq.

"The Iraqis are imprisoning and torturing Iranian opposition members who have fled Iran," the Iranian told me.

I asked how it was that the Americans had allowed this to happen.

"They [the US government] don't seem to know who some lobbyists represent."

Mormon soldier to US army: Stop the proselytizing!

Jotman — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:40:00 -0700

In his recent resignation letter, former US State Department employee Matthew Hoh wrote, "Eight years into war, no nation has ever known as more dedicated, well trained, experienced and disciplined military as the U.S. Armed Forces."

It's considered patriotic to say stuff like that about the military. But is it the whole truth?

There are two reasons I am asking this question. First, at a time when President Obama is seriously considering a massive escalation of US involvement in Afghanistan, nothing should be taken for granted. Second, I cannot get Joe's words out of my head.

Joe, a Mormon, returned to the US from active duty in Afghanistan in early 2009. At a party I recently attended Joe shared some observations about his experiences over there with me.*

The thing that had most disturbed Joe about his time in Afghanistan was witnessing what he described as the "proselytizing" activities of some of his fellow soldiers.

"I do not agree that soldiers should be distributing religious pamphlets," Joe said in the middle of our conversation.

I could not believe my ears.

"You mean they were handing out Christian religious materials to the Afghans?!"

Joe nodded.

"Doesn't that sort of defeat the whole mission?"

"Look, I did not agree with it." Joe said, "And I wished that someone would have stopped them."

"So the commanders approved of this kind of activity?"

The question was met with silence. Joe was now behaving as if he might have blurted out something regrettable. I suspected that Joe did not want to say something that might betray the army. Or maybe it was that Joe didn't know me. Whatever the explanation, Joe quickly changed the subject.

It was clear to me that, as a Mormon and a soldier in an inhospitable land, the prospect of Evangelical soldiers proselytizing to the locals had made Joe uncomfortable.

Some other things I learned from my conversation with Joe.

"Most of our time was spent on base," said Joe, adding "there were occasional firefights when we were attacked."
Joe said that "don't ask don't tell" (concerns gays in the military) was a ridiculously discriminatory and ineffective policy. "You can't stop human nature," Joe said.
"By far, the most professional soldiers I met in Afghanistan were the Canadians" Joe told me. "I can't say enough good things about those soldiers. Their high standards. I was impressed by the respect they showed toward one another."
On torture: "In the army, all of us have to follow the field manual. The army does not torture." When I asked about water-boarding, Joe replied, "How is water-boarding torture if we subject our own people to these same techniques during training?"

It was Joe's remark about "proselytizing" that left my head spinning -- a revelation that seemed to have come up during our conversation as a "slip of the tongue."

Of course, such allegations have surfaced in the past (see here and here).

Such reports beg the question as to whether Americans have the foggiest idea what they are doing over there.
___
*Not his real name.

Matthew Hoh's resignation letter

Jotman — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 05:11:00 -0700

Excepts from the resignation of Matthew Hoh, a US diplomat assigned to Afghanistan:

I have lost understanding of and confidence in the strategic purposes of the United States' presence in Afghanistan. I have doubts and reservations about our current strategy and planned future strategy, but my resignation is based not upon how we are pursuing this war, but why and to what end....

...Our support for this kind of government, coupled with a misunderstanding of the insurgency's true nature, reminds me horribly of our involvement with South Vietnam; an unpopular and corrupt government we backed at the expense of our Nation's own internal peace, against an insurgency whose nationalism we arrogantly and ignorantly mistook as a rival to our own Cold War ideology.

I find specious the reasons we ask for bloodshed and sacrifice from our young men and women in Afghanistan. If honest, our stated strategy of securing Afghanistan to prevent al-Qaeda resurgence or regrouping would require us to additionally invade and occupy western Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, etc. Our presence in Afghanistan has only increased destabilization and insurgency in Pakistan where we rightly fear a toppled or weakened Pakistani government may lose control of its nuclear weapons.

Full text of letter here.

Israel exploiting Thai workers

Jotman — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 14:58:00 -0700

Reuters (h/t Thai Report) reports that "the most exploited workers in Israel" are Thai.

The Afghan Friend Test

Jotman — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 20:26:00 -0700

Given that Obama is considering whether or not to send more troops to Afghanistan, I would encourage everyone to watch the new PBS Frontline documentary.

Then, putting political considerations aside, take the "Afghan Friend Test."

Jotman's Afghan Friend Test

You get a call from Kandahar.  Mohamed Akbari, your dear Afghan friend says, "I don't know what to do. Should I work with the Americans or should I try to keep my distance from them?"

"What concerns you?"

"I have seen the latest poll numbers," Akbari says. "American public support for the war is wavering -- big time. I fear that even if Obama gives the go-ahead, Americans will eventually decide to cut and run anyway. My question: if I support the Americans, do you suppose they will still be there for my family five or ten years from now? Or do you imagine they will eventually give up hope of victory and leave me and my burka-burning daughters to the Taliban?"

What would you advise your friend to do? Should he openly cooperate with the Americans? Or should he keep his distance?

Your friend asks you another question.

"Let's say I openly support the American war effort, but suppose the Americans then decide to leave prematurely.   What are the chances the American government will grant me and my daughters refugee status in the US?"

Can you assure your friend Akbari that the US will stand behind true friends like him? Supposing worst came to worst, do you you feel confident that you could successfully lobby the US government to compassionately act on your friends behalf? (Before you answer this question, you might want to familiarize yourself with the timeline of Rahman Bunairee's really bad summer.)

What would your advice be?   This is your friend Mohamed Akbari and his family we are talking about.

Americans are good at sales and marketing. Most of the debate in Washington is about whether the Afghans can be won over.   The Afghan Friend Test supposes that this is the wrong question.

Muslim ASEAN

Jotman — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 18:31:00 -0700

According to a recent Pew Forum survey, "Indonesia is the country with the world's largest Muslim population (203 million); about 13% of all Muslims in the world live in Indonesia. Indonesia's Muslim population accounts for about 80% of all Muslims living in Southeast-East Asia."

Some facts that might surprise you:

Malaysia has fewer Muslims than China.
Myanmar has more Muslims than Qatar and Bahrain put together.
Thailand has more Muslims than Oman and the UAE put together.
Philippines has more Muslims than Kuwait.

The Muslim populations of the countries of ASEAN, ordered from most to least, are: 203 million in Indonesia, 16.6 million in Malaysia, 4.7 million in the Philippines, 4 million in Thailand, 1.9 million in Burma, 0.7 million in Singapore, 0.3 million in Brunei, 0.2 million in Cambodia and slightly fewer in Vietnam.

Adding up these numbers, we see that nearly 15% of the world's 1.8 billion Muslims live in ASEAN countries. Just over 40% of ASEAN's population of 560 million is Muslim.

"ASEAN is no WTO"

Jotman — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 09:11:00 -0700

Yesterday I blogged about the "human-chain" protest in Kerala. The protest was organized to rally opposition to the India-ASEAN FTA. Not all Indian leftists are comfortable with challenging their brothers in ASEAN. Keralamnow blogged:

"Yesterday there was a human chain in Kerala, from Kasaragode in the north to the gates of the Rajbhavan in Thiruvananthapuram. Some say it was 777 km long. With only some gaps, one at Changanachery where the Nair Service Society is located, a usual ill omen that, another nearby at Thiruvalla. This chain apparaently was to protest against the recent Free Trade Agreement (FTA) arrived at between the ASEAN nations by the Governmment of India, why the point of end was the Rajbhavan, rekindling the memmories of the British Raj. Deep down it was a desperate attempt to white wash the darkened image of the Communist OParty in the state, which is waiting for the worst in the next elections. The concept of fighting neo-colonialism is fine, but ASEAN is no WTO and this is even a small way of challenging the western hegemony, some how the comrades did not realize that. Good nevertheless, any movement of the people against the vulpine global order is welcome"

The Peninsula (Qatar) notes further support for the agreement:

Opposition leader Oommen Chandy had decried the human chain, saying the crucial trade pact would break duty barriers in the 1.7 billion consumer market in the region and the Central Government had assured of adequate safeguards to protect Kerala’s interests.

The pact on trade in goods under the Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA) was signed by Indian Commerce and Industry Minister Anand Sharma and ASEAN Economic Ministers after more than six years of intense negotiations.

More from Keralamnow, plus other blogger reactions from Kerala here. The anti-ASEAN FTA statement issued by the All India Kisan Sabha on August 15 against the FTA is posted here.

Burma nuclear proliferation ring?

Jotman — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 05:29:00 -0700

Sentator Lugar, ranking member of the Committee on Foreign Relations of the US Senate, issued a statement for the hearing of the East Asian and Pacific Affairs Subcommittee of the Foreign Relations Committee. I am posting the most interesting part below.

The Obama Administration’s policy review includes reference to the growing North Korea-Burma relationship.

The United States has a responsibility to our friends and allies throughout Asia to oppose actively the possible proliferation of weapons of mass destruction to or from Burma.

Since I first discussed the troubling prospects of renewed ties between these two countries in 2004, the Foreign Relations Committee has repeatedly raised the issue of Burma’s growing relationship with North Korea with a wide array of U.S. Administration officials.

For example, we have questioned the basis for hundreds of Burmese officials going to Russia for technical education which included nuclear technology training. The number of persons travelling to Russia for specialized training seemed to be far beyond the number needed for the eventual operation of a nuclear reactor for medical research purposes, intended to be built by the junta with Russian government assistance.

Burma’s multiple uranium deposits, reports of uranium refining and processing plants, and it’s active nuclear program reportedly assisted by North Korea collectively point to reason for concern in a country whose officials resist transparency.

Dr. Sigfried Hecker, Director Emeritus of Los Alamos National Laboratory and now Co-Director of the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University recently wrote, "The A.Q. Khan network connected companies, individuals and front organizations into a dangerous proliferation ring. The revelations of the North Korean reactor in Syria, along with developments in Iran and Burma, appear to point toward a different type of proliferation ring --- one run by national governments, perhaps also assisted by other clandestine networks".

Senator Lugar is not listed as a member of the subcommittee that met, so the question of Burma's nuclear ambitions would appear to be of real concern to him. Interestingly, not a single Republican who is actually a member of the subcommittee bothered to attend the hearing on Burma. The hearing coincided with the announcement of a major change in US policy towards the regime.

Jotman was there, and live-blogged the meeting-- see here. And more to come.
__
Photo: By Jotman shows Burmese monks in the US Senate.

How many Muslims live in Europoe?

Jotman — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 19:35:00 -0700

According to Pew Forum:

'Europe, which includes 50 countries and territories, has about 38 million Muslims, constituting about 5% of its population. European Muslims make up slightly more than 2% of the world's Muslim population.

"Readers should bear in mind that estimates of the numbers of Muslims in Europe vary widely because of the difficulty of counting new immigrants. Nevertheless, it is clear that most European Muslims live in eastern and central Europe. The country with the largest Muslim population in Europe is Russia, with more than 16 million Muslims, meaning that more than four-in-ten European Muslims live in Russia. While most Muslims in western Europe are relatively recent immigrants (or children of immigrants) from Turkey, North Africa or South Asia, most of those in Russia, Albania, Kosovo, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Bulgaria belong to populations that are centuries old, meaning that more than six-in-ten European Muslims are indigenous.

"Despite the limitations of the underlying data for Europe, it appears that Germany is home to more than 4 million Muslims - almost as many as North and South America combined. This means that Germany has more Muslims than Lebanon (between 2 million and 3 million) and more than any other country in western Europe. This also puts Germany among the top-10 countries with the largest number of Muslims living as a minority population. While France has a slightly higher percentage of Muslims than Germany, this study finds that it has slightly fewer Muslims overall.¹ The United Kingdom is home to fewer than 2 million Muslims, about 3% of its total population.

"The European countries with the highest concentration of Muslims are located in eastern and central Europe: Kosovo (90%), Albania (80%), Bosnia-Herzegovina (40%) and Republic of Macedonia (33%). Greece is about 3% Muslim, while Spain is about 1% Muslim. Italy has one of the smallest populations of Muslims in Europe, with less than 1% of its population being Muslim.^"

How many Muslims live in China?

Jotman — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 18:06:00 -0700

There are more Muslims in China (22 million) than either Malaysia or Syria.

According to a recent Pew report, "There are Muslims in every province of China, but the highest concentrations are in the west, primarily in Xinjiang, Ningxia and Gansu, with other significant populations in Henan, Qinghai, Yunnan, Hebei and Shandong. Xinjiang is the only Muslim-majority province of China, with Muslims accounting for approximately 53% of the total population."

Laos Deputy PM Sisoulithto UN: ban cluster munitions

Jotman — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 17:17:00 -0700

In a Sept. 26 press release, the Deptartment of Public Information of the United Nations General Assembly reported Sisoulith's statement to a plenary session.

JotASEAN has reprinted the entire press release as it relates to the Laotian Deputy PM's remarks and highlighted the most important points.

THONGLOUN SISOULITH, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, said United Nations reform was crucial to ensure the Organization’s effective implementation of its mandate. Reform should be comprehensive, transparent and balanced, and consistent with the United Nations Charter. The revitalization of the Assembly, reform of the Council and strengthening of the Economic and Social Council and specialized agencies should help make the Organization truly representative of all Member States. His country welcomed the launch of intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform.

Turning to disarmament, he said the impasse in the multilateral disarmament machinery undermined global peace and security. States should adhere to their nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation obligations. The upcoming 2010 Review Conference would be an opportunity for the States parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to show strong political commitments to resolve the current stalemate in the non-proliferation disarmament agenda.

In particular, the issue of explosive remnants of war, known as cluster munitions or unexploded ordnance, created serious obstacles to development and poverty eradication efforts in more than 80 countries, he said. Cluster munitions victims in the Lao People’s Democratic Republic accounted for more than 50 per cent of the cluster munitions victims worldwide, which had represented about 300 victims annually over the past 30 years since the war ended. About 37 per cent of the country’s territory was contaminated with unexploded ordnance and enormous financial resources and time were needed to remove them from the area most needed for development and daily life. Thus, his country attached great importance to the Oslo Convention on Banning and Eradicating Cluster Munitions and hoped others that had not yet signed the Convention would do so. In order to prepare for the Convention’s future implementation, his country had offered to host the first conference of State parties after it entered into force.

He said his country was greatly dismayed by the prolonged conflict in the Middle East, which had inflicted immense suffering on millions of people, particularly the Palestinians. He also was concerned about the decade-long economic, trade and financial embargo imposed on Cuba. It was time to end the sanction. On the issue of climate change, the integration of the three pillars of sustainable development ‑‑ economic development, social development and environment protection ‑‑ should be enhanced, with a view to effective implementation of the Bali action plan. His Government supported the recommendation to launch a new global compact entailing a “Green New Deal”, which would spur investment in the green economy and lay the foundation to a shift to a low-carbon economy with greater use of renewable energy.

From the perspective of one of the world’s most vulnerable countries, he said it was important to address the unpredictability of the commodity market, to provide preferential treatment to the goods of developing countries and ensure a smooth solution to the debt issue. The fourth United Nations Conference on the Least Developed Countries, scheduled for early 2011, was an opportunity for the international community to review its commitments to the least developed countries and identify solutions, particularly needed since the global economic crisis.

__
Photo by Jotman/JotAsean shows a girl planting rice on an island in the Mekong river, southern Laos.

Balkenende speech to the UN on climate change

Jotman — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 05:23:00 -0700

In a Sept. 26 press release, the Deptartment of Public Information of the United Nations General Assembly reported Balkenende's statement to a plenary session.

Balkenende has served as prime minister on four occasions since 2002, leading four cabinets.

JotEurope has reprinted the entire press release as it relates to the Dutch PM's remarks and highlighted the most important points.

JAN PETER BALKENENDE, Prime Minister and Minister for General Affairs of the Netherlands, opened by focusing on the “harsh reality of a financial and economic system on the brink”, saying that courage and resolve were needed more than ever, especially because the crisis had been so severe and so rapid.

He stressed that it was necessary to place shared interests above narrow self-interest, to adapt existing global governance structures to the new reality, and to make decisive choices that considered all interests, especially the world’s weakest and poorest people. Vital to that process was a strong, decisive and efficient United Nations, one that would deliver stability, solidarity and sustainability. The last few days at the General Assembly and the Group of 20 (G‑20) meeting in Pittsburgh had shown that there was a clear realization that the world had changed. “Our interdependency gives us a shared responsibility. We can now see that the problems we face are too big for any single nation,” he added.

He continued by addressing a few underlying themes: stability; solidarity; and sustainability. With regard to stability, he said that the current crisis was “clear proof that in a globalized world, instability anywhere is a threat to stability everywhere”. The international policy response had shown that that was widely understood in the financial and economic context. “We cannot allow the greed of a few to endanger the jobs of many,” he noted, pointing to the Pittsburgh agreement on compensation, which should end “a bonus culture that has grown out of control”.

Greed of a few. True enough, but what does he have to say about the systemic roots of the crisis? Apparently nothing.

The real danger, he said, was that those who had no part in causing the crisis would suffer most deeply. In rich countries, that meant a loss of jobs and assets; in developing countries, it meant rising child mortality and rising hunger. “In poor countries it is a matter of life and death,” he said, urging countries to renew their old promise to set aside 0.7 per cent of national income every year for development aid. However, development budgets were not enough; the private sector should reform, and there was a greater need for corporate social responsibility. Reform also needed to expand to global governance issues that could effectively address climate change, the food and energy crisis, and the pressing issues of peace, security, poverty and human rights.

Have we not spent enough decades emphasizing quantity of aid, and not enough effort discussing where it ought to go? Often the aid money goes toward counter-productive ends.

On the issue of human rights, specifically, he mentioned a concern for the worsening human rights situation and the violent crackdown on popular protests in Iran. He was concerned about the Iranian nuclear issue, which represented a major challenge to international security, regional stability and non-proliferation. He called for a strong reaction by the international community and for total transparency by Iran, stressing that it was imperative for Iran to regain the international community’s trust.

Climate change:

Concerning climate change, he declared the importance of reaching an ambitious, fair, concrete and comprehensive agreement, one that ensured every country contributed according to its means. Those countries that needed help in designing and implementing sound adaptation policies must receive it, which is why the Netherlands had set aside half a billion euros to promote the use of renewable energy in developing countries. In Copenhagen, the Netherlands would call for worldwide CO₂ emissions to be half what they were in 1990, by 2050.

That is highly commendable.

He concluded by saying the world was smaller and more complex than ever, and that solutions to the issues he had outlined began with “recognizing our mutual dependence and responsibility”. That would require courage. Echoing the words of Nobel Laureate and Senator for Life Rita Levi-Montalcini, he said: “Don’t fear difficult moments. The best comes from them.”

Nice conclusion. Balkenende ought to have spent more of the speech talking about what the Netherlands plans to do in regards to climate change. Too bad he didn't, because there was real substance in that part of the speech.

Daily Show interviews Iranians and Americans

Jotman — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 03:00:00 -0700

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c

Jason Jones: Behind the Veil - Ayatollah You So

thedailyshow.com

Daily Show
Full Episodes

Political Humor

Jason Jones in Iran

Good cop or bad cop, it's one team

Jotman — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 05:47:00 -0700

A CNN reporter attempts to ask a protester some questions, and gets heckled by members of a Republican "tea party" held in Chicago last Thursday. The protesters claimed CNN was "pro-Obama."

What's really going on here?

Recall CNN health expert Sanjay Gupta's treatment of Michael Moore's documentary Sicko). Both CNN and Fox tend to present perspectives on current events that are large-corporation-friendly.

The major difference between the networks is that from the perspective of Americans on the center-left of the political spectrum -- a majority of the US voters in the last election -- Fox plays "bad cop" to CNN's "good-cop."

Fox actually helped organize the turn-out for the Conservative movement's "tea parties" held across the US last week. By targeting CNN as "biased" right wing-groups help the networks to frame the national debate in a way that is safe for corporate America. One way to do this is to convince enough people that Obama and even CNN are on the extreme left.

By and large, Obama continues to govern from the right, pushing policies that are generous to the corrupt banking industry. His administration has actively defended the Bush Administration's efforts to spy on American citizens, committed itself to sending more troops to Afghanistan in the name of fighting the guys who attacked America eight years ago, and suggested that CIA officials accused of war crimes ought not be brought to trial.

Nevertheless, both CNN and Fox both give disporportionate weight to criticisms of Obama coming from the right.

As the right of the Republican Party has governed the US for most of the past eight years, many the most substantial criticisms of Obama come from the left. The right wing movement -- with its one-policy call for "lower taxes" -- has a modest aim at this point. That is, to distract Americans from backing solutions that could change the power structure. Captains of key industries do not want the Obama Administration to make fundamental changes concerning the economy, finance, health care, and foreign policy (defense). Even reforms that could make life better for ordinary Americans, and put the economy and environment on a sure-footing, are anathema to the oligarchs.

Good cop or bad cop, it's the same boss.

A tourist in Iraq?

Jotman — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 02:51:00 -0800

An Italian who recently arrived in Falluja appears to be the country's first tourist in years.

Joe the Plumber now a war reporter

Jotman — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:56:00 -0800

Joe the Plumber, now a correspondent for Pajama's TV based in Israel says:

"I think media should be abolished from, you know, reporting," Wurzelbacher said. "You know, war is hell. And if you're gonna sit there and say, 'well, look at this atrocity,' well you don't know the whole story behind it half the time, so I think the media should have no business in it."

I wonder what my friend Black Joe the Plumber would have to say about that...

Russia won't sanction Iran further

Jotman — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:13:00 -0700

Bloomberg reports:

Russia is refusing to discuss further United Nations sanctions to block Iran's nuclear ambitions, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in a sign of continuing acrimony with the U.S. over last month's war in Georgia.

Georgia's national pride has been of greater importance to US leaders lately than the need to avoid a war with Iran. See my post "Don't Myanmar Iran."

Somali pirates

Jotman — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 18:35:00 -0700

The Tehran Times reports on an issue where Iran and the West ought easily find some ground for cooperation. According to the article:

Somali pirates have hijacked at least 30 ships in the waters off the Horn of Africa country this year and are currently holding about 130 crew members hostage on at least eight vessels from Iran, Malaysia, Thailand, Japan, Germany, and Nigeria.

Pro Koln: anti-islamic group

Jotman — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 18:27:00 -0700

The Local reports on an anti-Islamic group meeting in Cologne this Weekend:

Though the first day of the congress was largely peaceful, police said the right-wing extremists have used “intentional tactics and false messages” to create a “dangerous situation,” and the atmosphere is tense. Eight counter-demonstrators have been arrested so far.

Mayor Fritz Schramma, whose city council recently gave the green light for the construction of what will be one of Europe's biggest mosques, has called on the city's inhabitants to show the far-right "the cold shoulder." Several hundred citizens staged a peaceful demonstration in front the mosque lot bearing signs that read “Temple, synagogue, church – all are OK.”

The US Embassy issued a statement advising Americans to "defer non-essential travel to Cologne at this time."

Iran's foreign minister has criticized the anti-Islamic gathering.

UPDATE: More here.

Afghan women setting fire to themselves

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 09:20:00 -0700

The Guardian reports on an apparent epidemic of attempted suicide by self-immolation among Afghan women. As this NY Times article from 2004 indicates, the problem is not a new one.

Islamabad Marriot Hotel bombing

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 09:27:00 -0700

VOA reports "Police and witnesses say at least 17 people have been killed in a massive explosion at a Western hotel in Pakistan's capital, Islamabad." Althought the hotel is heavily guarded, at least 16 people have been killed in the blast.

Iran-trained Shiite extremists back again

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 01:45:00 -0700

AP reports:

Groups of Shiite extremists trained in Iran are returning to Iraq with plans to bomb high-profile targets, the chief of Dhi Qar province's police said Saturday.
Brigadier General Sabah al-Fatlawi told AFP "Special Groups" (Shiite extremists) of around 10 fighters each are returning by crossing the border from Amara, the capital of Shiite Maysan province in the south.

How will Washington respond?

Expaining agressive US actions in Pakistan

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 11:18:00 -0700

Scott Horton writes in Harper's:Two other points.

First is the obvious proximity of the U.S. elections. The Bush Administration is hoping for an “October surprise” that will lift the tides of the Republican candidates just in time for Election Day. That explains why the extraordinary effort is undertaken now, and why the sensitivities of the U.S.-Pakistani relationship are being ignored. The second is a study in contrasts. For seven years, the Bush Administration told us that it exercised extraordinary restraint in undertaking just the sort of campaign that is evidently now underway. Why? Because it feared for the survival of Pakistani’s military strongman, Pervez Musharraf. Now Musharraf is gone, replaced by a democratically elected government which is both closer to the United States and committed (unlike Musharraf) to dealing a blow to the Taliban/Al Qaeda forces operating in the nation’s western border area. However, in the Bush playbook, a friendly democratically elected government is not entitled to the sort of deference that is owed to a military dictator who has a personal rapport with Bush. This is extremely revealing of the extraordinary personal dimensions of the Bush foreign policy calculus.

The stupidity of these people is truly staggering.

Secret weapon used by US in Iraq

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:43:00 -0700

Greg Greenwald blogs:

I asked [Bob Woodward] this question about the claim Woodward made last week that the U.S. has achieved a new technological "breakthrough" allowing it to use a super-innovative and advanced weapon in Iraq (which Woodward says he knows about but refuses to describe), and Woodward's reply to my question is here (and my further reply/question is here).

This is what Woodward told CBS News'60 Minutes:

This is very sensitive and very top secret, but there are secret operational capabilities that have been developed by the military to locate, target and kill leaders of al-Qaida in Iraq, insurgent leaders, renegade militia leaders. That is one of the true breakthroughs

A writer for Wired magazine speculates what the weapon could be:

I'm going to make a wager about what I think Woodward is talking about, and I'll be curious to see what Danger Room readers have to say. I believe he is talking about the much ballyhooed (in defense geek circles) "Tagging, Tracking and Locating" program; here's a briefing on it from Special Operations Command. These are newfangled technologies designed to track people from long distances, without the targeted people realizing they are being tracked.

Made in America: Iran's Islamic Revolution

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 10:37:00 -0700

According to the LA Times:

A new report based on previously classified documents suggests that the Nixon and Ford administrations created conditions that helped destabilize Iran in the late 1970s and contributed to the country's Islamic Revolution.

A trove of transcripts, memos and other correspondence show sharp differences over rising oil prices developing between the Republican administrations and Mohammed Reza Shah Pahlavi in the mid-1970s, says a report to be published today in the fall issue of Middle East Journal, an academic journal published by the Washington-based Middle East Institute, a think tank.

Here is the abstract from the journal:

What led to the calamitous drop in Iran’s oil revenues in January 1977? Politics, religion, culture, and economics have been identified as factors contributing to the collapse of Iran’s monarchy in 1979. But until now scholars have been unable to access documents that could shed light on the inner workings of the relationship between senior US officials and the Shah of Iran, whom Henry Kissinger lauded as “that rarest of leaders, an unconditional ally, and one whose understanding of the world enhanced our own.”1 The declassification of the papers of Brent Scowcroft, who worked in the Nixon and Ford Administrations, marks a significant milestone in our understanding of the origins of the Iranian Revolution. They reveal that in 1976 the US and Saudi Arabia colluded to force down oil prices, inadvertently triggering a financial crisis that destabilized Iran’s economy and weakened the Shah’s hold on power.

The LA Times article notes:

The report, after two years of research by scholar Andrew Scott Cooper, zeros in on the role of White House policymakers -- including Donald H. Rumsfeld, then a top aide to President Ford -- hoping to roll back oil prices and curb the shah's ambitions, despite warnings by then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger that such a move might precipitate the rise of a "radical regime" in Iran.

That's Rumsfeld: too clever by half.
___
Hat-tip Jacob

Why terrorist group favors McCain

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 12:04:00 -0700

If you honestly believe that McCain will make America strong, make intelligent decisions, appoint the best minds to positions of leadership, and think that Sarah Palin will never be called upon to take over the US presidency, the idea that Al-Qaeda wants John McCain to win would be hard to accept.

But keep this also in mind: Militarizing the fight against terrorists inevitably creates new venues for asymmetric warfare -- something the US is not especially good at fighting. Thus, war levels the playing field. Chaos always brings advantages to terror groups because terror group leaders such as Bin Laden understand the language, religion, culture of Mid East societies far better than John McCain or Obama ever will. Terrorist soldiers will always understand the local terrain better than any US marine. Terror group leaders cannot win the peace, but Iraq and Afghanistan show how they can turn chaotic situations to their own advantage.

If you think McCain is the more likely of the two candidates to resort to war as a means of problem solving, then it's easy to see why terrorists would want him to win.

More here.

Iranian poltiical fortunes mirror price of oil

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 22:05:00 -0700

Thomas Friedman writes in the NY Times:

Watching oil prices fall from $147 a barrel to $57 is not like counting sheep. It’s the kind of thing that gives an Iranian autocrat bad dreams.
After all, it was the collapse of global oil prices in the early 1990s that brought down the Soviet Union. And Iran today is looking very Soviet to me.
As Vladimir Mau, president of Russia’s Academy of National Economy, pointed out to me, it was the long period of high oil prices followed by sharply lower oil prices that killed the Soviet Union. The spike in oil prices in the 1970s deluded the Kremlin into overextending subsidies at home and invading Afghanistan abroad — and then the collapse in prices in the ‘80s helped bring down that overextended empire.
(Incidentally, this was exactly what happened to the shah of Iran: 1) Sudden surge in oil prices. 2) Delusions of grandeur. 3) Sudden contraction of oil prices. 4) Dramatic downfall. 5) You’re toast.)

Under Ahmadinejad, Iran’s mullahs have gone on a domestic subsidy binge — using oil money to cushion the prices of food, gasoline, mortgages and to create jobs — to buy off the Iranian people. But the one thing Ahmadinejad couldn’t buy was real economic growth. Iran today has 30 percent inflation, 11 percent unemployment and huge underemployment with thousands of young college grads, engineers and architects selling pizzas and driving taxis. And now with oil prices falling, Iran — just like the Soviet Union — is going to have to pull back spending across the board. Fasten your seat belts.

The source of future Middle East conflict?

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 12:01:00 -0800

Will aquifers be a source of future conflict in the Middle East region? This UNESCO map suggests it might well become so:

New Scientist reports:

The increasing reliance on aquifer groundwater - because there is more of it and it tends to be less contaminated by industrial run-off - has been called the "groundwater revolution".

But it is a revolution with worrying environmental consequences. In many parts of the world, around the Mediterranean for example, but also in the US and the Middle East, water tables are falling and aquifers are being infiltrated by seawater as agricultural practices pump water out faster than it can be replenished by rain.

When aquifers fall between countries, sustainable management requires international agreement. Yet, historically, many agreements have been weighted towards the richest or more powerful country.

The most well-known example of this is the 1995 agreement between the Israeli and Palestinian authorities. This granted Israel rights to 90% of the water contained in four aquifers (and the Jordan river) which span both territories.

The mid-east game

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 17:42:00 -0800

This game tests your knowledge of mid-east geography.

Live-blogging Israeli attack on Gaza

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 02:26:00 -0800

At my new website "There Live" I am keeping track of who is live-blogging the Israeli attack on Hamas in Gaza. See here for a list of the conflict's live-bloggers -- some jotting from inside Gaza, enduring incredible hardships to tell us what is happening.

Why Gaza exists: Robert Fisk on the war

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 11:06:00 -0800

Fisk writes (hat-tip Aaron):

That is why Gaza exists: because the Palestinians who lived in Ashkelon and the fields around it – Askalaan in Arabic – were dispossessed from their lands in 1948 when Israel was created and ended up on the beaches of Gaza. They – or their children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren – are among the one and a half million Palestinian refugees crammed into the cesspool of Gaza, 80 per cent of whose families once lived in what is now Israel. This, historically, is the real story: most of the people of Gaza don’t come from Gaza.

But watching the news shows, you’d think that history began yesterday, that a bunch of bearded anti-Semitic Islamist lunatics suddenly popped up in the slums of Gaza – a rubbish dump of destitute people of no origin – and began firing missiles into peace-loving, democratic Israel, only to meet with the righteous vengeance of the Israeli air force. The fact that the five sisters killed in Jabalya camp had grandparents who came from the very land whose more recent owners have now bombed them to death simply does not appear in the story.

UN Special Rapporteur Richard Falk on report of Karen AbyZayd

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 01:08:00 -0800

Gaza live-blogger Eva Bartlett has brought to my attention an excerpt from a United Nations press release dated 9 Jan 2009.

9 December 2008

The Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights on Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, Richard Falk, issued the following statement:

GENEVA -- In recent days the desperate plight of the civilian population of Gaza has been acknowledged by such respected international figures as the Secretary General of the United Nations, the President of the General Assembly, and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Last week, Karen AbyZayd, who heads the UN relief effort in Gaza, offered first-hand confirmation of the desperate urgency and unacceptable conditions facing the civilian population of Gaza. Although many leaders have commented on the cruelty and unlawfulness of the Gaza blockade imposed by Israel, such a flurry of denunciations by normally cautious UN officials has not occurred on a global level since the heyday of South African apartheid.

And still Israel maintains its Gaza siege in its full fury, allowing only barely enough food and fuel to enter to stave off mass famine and disease. Such a policy of collective punishment, initiated by Israel to punish Gazans for political developments within the Gaza strip, constitutes a continuing flagrant and massive violation of international humanitarian law as laid down in Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

It is long past the time when talk suffices. As AbuZayd has written, "the chasm between word and deed" with respect to upholding human rights in occupied Palestine creates a situation where "radicalism and extremism easily take root." The UN is obligated to respond under these conditions. Some governments of the world are complicit by continuing their support politically and economically for Israel's punitive approach.

Protective action must be taken immediately to offset the persisting and wide-ranging violations of the fundamental human right to life, and in view of the emergency situation that is producing a humanitarian catastrophe that is unfolding day by day. However difficult politically, it is time to act. At the very least, an urgent effort should be made at the United Nations to implement the agreed norm of a 'responsibility to protect' a civilian population being collectively punished by policies that amount to a Crime Against Humanity.

In a similar vein, it would seem mandatory for the International Criminal Court to investigate the situation, and determine whether the Israeli civilian leaders and military commanders responsible for the Gaza siege should be indicted and prosecuted for violations of international criminal law. As AbuZayd has declared, "This is a humanitarian crisis deliberately imposed by political actors."

It should be noted that the situation worsened in recent days due to the breakdown of a truce between Hamas and Israel that had been observed for several months by both sides. The truce was maintained by Hamas despite the failure of Israel to fulfill its obligation under the agreement to improve the living conditions of the people of Gaza.

The recent upsurge of violence occurred after an Israeli incursion that killed several alleged Palestinian militants within Gaza. It is a criminal violation of international law for elements of Hamas or anyone else to fire rockets at Israeli towns regardless of provocation, but such Palestinian behavior does not legalize Israel's imposition of a collective punishment of a life- and health-threatening character on the people of Gaza, and should not distract the UN or international society from discharging their fundamental moral and legal duty to render protection to the Palestinian people.

Queen Noor of Jordan on Gaza war

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:58:00 -0800

Saudi blogger's perspective on the G20

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Fri, 01 May 2009 09:01:00 -0700

Ahmed Al-Omran of Saudijeans.org attended the G20 meeting in London. Ahmed blogged:

Thanks to a cushion of reserves Saudi Arabia built during six years of soaring oil price, the country was not hit very hard by the financial crisis, and that’s why the US and UK asked Saudi Arabia to increase its contribution to the IMF.

Here are some of his posts relating to the summit and the experience:

__
You can survey other blogger's impressions of the summit here, and my own experience here.

Barack Obama at Cairo University

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 23:18:00 -0700

Here's the video of Obama's speech of 4 June 2009 at Cairo University. White House transcript here. My own reaction here.

Journalists, terrorists, and risk of being taken hostage

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 15:01:00 -0700

A live-blogged a truly extraordinary panel of journalists who cover terrorism at the International Press Institute's World Congress in Helsinki:

Three panelists -- Alan Johnson of the UK (pictured left), Giuliana Sgrena of Italy, and moderator Hamid Mir of Pakistan -- have survived kidnapping by terrorist organizations.

Two members of the panel -- Peter Bergen and Hamid Mir -- have interviewed Bin Laden. CNN analyst and author Peter Bergen -- who conducted the first TV interview with Bin Landen -- has written a biography of the man. Hamid Mir is the only person aside from Robert Fisk to have interviewed Bin Laden on three occasions and Mir was the last person to have interviewed Bin Laden (the interview took place in Kabul in Nov. 2001).

Read the whole post.

Iran: What is the Basij?

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 23:36:00 -0700

Rand (Pdf):

In the provinces, the Basij present a more benign face through construction projects and disaster relief, while in urban areas, they are more apt to be seen quite negatively, quashing civil society activities, arresting dissidents, and confronting reformist student groups on campuses. Urban sentiments may be, moreover, affected by the Basij’s affilia-tion with the “pressure groups” or hardline vigilantes, of which Ansar-e Hezbollah is the most widely known.

Cynthia McKinney's aid boat to Gaza seized

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 17:08:00 -0700

Huff Post reports that Israel stopped a "Free Gaza" aid ship destined for Gaza, diverting it to an Israeli port:

The 20 passengers include former U.S. Representative Cynthia McKinney, Nobel Peace Prize laureate Mairead Corrigan Maguire and other activists from Britain, Ireland, Bahrain and Jamaica.
The ship was flying a Greek flag, but no Greek citizens were aboard. The Greek government issued a statement saying it sent a message to Israel demanding that it release the ship, crew and passengers.

Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said Israel was planning to free the crew and passengers. "Nobody wants to keep them here," he said. "They will be released as soon as they are checked."

The Free Gaza Movement has organized five boat trips to Gaza since August 2008, defying a blockade imposed by Israel when the militant group Hamas seized control of the territory from its Palestinian rivals in June 2007. Two other attempts were stopped by Israeli warshi
ps during Israel's three-week war in the territory in December and January. Nobody on board was harmed.

So Greece will stand up for an old ship, but the US government won't say a word on behalf of a former Congresswoman?

A lot of Americans will hear of this story and not think kindly of what Israel has done. Israel is not playing this very smart. Stopping aid ships is just plain stupid PR, anyway you look at it.

Obama to Israel: Build baby build!

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 21:19:00 -0700

CNN reports:

Prodding Israel and the Palestinian Authority to restart talks aimed at a permanent resolution of their decades-old conflict, President Obama dropped a demand for an Israeli settlement freeze, U.S., Israeli and Palestinian officials said.

"Simply put, it is past time to talk about starting negotiations. It is time to move forward," Obama told reporters before a meeting with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Forward? Obama used the same excuses in justifying why torture didn't need to be investigated. Unbelievable.

Kyrgyzstan PM Chudinov at the UN: uranium tailings waste and the environment

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 12:29:00 -0700

In a Sept. 26 press release, the Deptartment of Public Information of the United Nations General Assembly reported Chudinov's statement to a plenary session.

JotMidEast has reprinted the entire press release as it relates to the Kyrgyzstan PM's remarks and highlighted the most important points.

IGOR CHUDINOV, Prime Minister of Kyrgyzstan, said his country supported broader representation in the Security Council and had nominated itself as a candidate for a non-permanent seat for 2012-2013. Located in the heart of Central Asia, Kyrgyzstan was actively maintaining peace, security and environmental stability in the region and had been elected to the Human Rights Council in 2009.

He said that the outlook for the complicated situation in Central Asia hinged on developments in Afghanistan, which required new approaches to the humanitarian, political and socio-economic sectors. In March, Kyrgyzstan’s President Kurmanbek Bakiev had unveiled the “Bishkek initiative”, which would create a centre for hosting international conferences on security and stability in Afghanistan and Central Asia in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan’s capital. The initiative could become a forum of practical cooperation in the area of security, as the region fought terrorism, extremism, illegal drug trafficking and transboundary organized crime.

As a landlocked, mountainous developing nation, Kyrgyzstan believed that the world community, under United Nations leadership, should use the foreign debt swap for sustainable development, he continued. For example, it could swap its debt in turn for aid for Afghanistan’s socio-economic development, a swap of debt for sustainable development of poor mountainous countries and rehabilitation of uranium tailing ponds. He urged Afghanistan’s neighbours with specific scientific, industrial and agricultural expertise to help in Afghanistan’s recovery.

He noted that the Assembly had adopted several resolutions concerning mountainous countries, which contained an analysis of their socio-economic situation, as well as recommendations for assistance to help those nations develop in a sustainable manner. As an initiator of the resolution “Sustainable mountain development”, Kyrgyzstan would appreciate support for it at the current session.

Regarding the environment, he said the numerous uranium tailing dumps, loaded with large volumes of toxic waste from uranium production and processes, were of great concern in the region. Those dumps were dangerous to health and the cleanliness of transboundary river basins and land. Kyrgyzstan constantly worked with other countries in the region to process international legal documents, which could curtail radiation pollution in the region. The Treaty on a Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone in Central Asia, for example, entered into force on 21 March. He asked the nuclear Powers to support that initiative of the Central Asian countries and sign the protocol on negative security assurances. He noted that the high-level International Forum “Uranium Tailings in Central Asia: Local Problems, Regional Consequences, Global Solution”, held in Geneva in June, had been an example of regional cooperation. He praised the wide range of assistance provided by different United Nations entities and noted the success of the United Nations Regional Centre on Preventive Diplomacy in Ashgabat, created in December 2007.

Obama's Nobel Peace Prize and the Middle East

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 13:28:00 -0700

Greenwald blogs:

. . . .the U.S. -- in a worldwide survey released just this week -- rose from seventh to first on the list of "most admired countries."

All that said, these changes are completely preliminary, which is to be expected given that he's only been in office nine months. For that reason, while Obama's popularity has surged in Western Europe, the changes in the Muslim world in terms of how the U.S. is perceived have been small to nonexistent. As Der Spiegel put it in the wake of a worldwide survey in July: "while Europe's ardor for Obama appears fervent, he has actually made little progress in the regions where the US faces its biggest foreign policy problems." People who live in regions that have long been devastated by American weaponry don't have the luxury of being dazzled by pretty words and speeches. They apparently -- and rationally -- won't believe that America will actually change from a war-making nation into a peace-making one until there are tangible signs that this is happening. It's because that has so plainly not yet occurred that the Nobel Committee has made a mockery out of their own award.

I would call it a gambit that could end up making a mockery of the award. What if Obama were to rise to the challenge?

Despite Nobel Peace Prize, criticisms of Obama on Middle East

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 22:02:00 -0700

From an article in the Jakarta Post (H/T Lowenstein):

A discussion about writers’ views on the United States President Barack Obama and on the Middle East peace process stole the show during the third day of the annual Ubud Writers and Readers Festival on Friday.

Speaking at the discussion were Benazir Bhutto’s niece, Fatima Bhutto, Australian author Antony Loewenstein and novelist Jamal Mahjoub, whose works have been widely translated and received several awards.

Delving into the world’s hottest war zones was never going to be solved in an hour-long discussion, but what panelists did was to dissect the rhetoric from the reality of Obama’s much-hyped potential for global change.

Fatima Bhutto said Obama – who was named on Friday as this year’s Nobel Peace Price laureate – had yet to bring changes in Pakistan and Afghanistan because the US would still add more troops.

Similar sentiments came from Antony Loewenstein, author of My Israel Question, who just got back from a trip to Palestine. He said things had never been worse in the West Bank.

Even novelist Jamal Mahjoub, the most optimistic among the panelists conceded that perhaps the power of Obama was largely as a symbol rather than a testament to change.

Afghanistan: text of resignation letter by Matthew Hoh

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:55:00 -0700

Ambassador Nancy J. Powell
Director General of the Foreign Service and
Director of Human Resources
U.S. Department of State
2201 C. Street NW
Washington, D.C. 20520

Dear Ambassador Powell:

It is with great regret and disappointment I submit my resignation from my appointment as a Political Officer in the Foreign Service and my post as the Senior Civilian Representative for the U.S. Government in Zabul Province. I have served six of the previous ten years in service to our country overseas, to include deployment as a U.S. Marine officer and Department of Defense civilian in the Euphrates and Tigris River Valleys of Iraq in 2004-2005 and 2006-2007. I did not enter into this position lightly or with any undue expectations nor did I believe my assignment would be without sacrifice, hardship or difficulty. However, in the course of my five months of service in Afghanistan, in both Regional Commands East and South, I have lost understanding of and confidence in the strategic purposes of the United States' presence in Afghanistan. I have doubts and reservations about our current strategy and planned future strategy, but my resignation is based not upon how we are pursuing this war, but why and to what end. To put simply: I fail to see the value or the worth in continued U.S. casualties or expenditures of resources in support of the Afghan government in what is, truly, a 35-year old civil war.

This fall will mark the eighth year of U.S. combat, governance and development operations within Afghanistan. Next fall, the United States' occupation will equal in length the Soviet Union's own physical involvement in Afghanistan. Like the Soviets, we continue to secure and bolster a failing state, while encouraging an ideology and system of government unknown and unwanted by its people.

If the history of Afghanistan is one great stage play, the United States is no more than a supporting actor, among several previously, in a tragedy that not only pits tribes, valleys, clans, villages and families against one another, but, from at least the end of King Zahir Shah's reign, has violently and savagely pitted the urban, secular, educated and modern of Afghanistan against the rural, religious, illiterate and traditional. It is this latter group that composes and supports the Pashtun insurgency. The Pashtun insurgency, which is composed of multiple, seemingly infinite, local groups, is fed by what is perceived by the Pashtun people as a continued and sustained assault, going back centuries, on Pashtun land, culture, traditions and religion by internal and external enemies. The U.S. and NATO presence and operations in Pashtun valleys and villages, as well as Afghan army and police unites that are led and composed of non-Pashtun soldiers and police, provide an occupation force against which the insurgency is justified. In both RC East and South, I have observed that the bulk of the insurgency fights not for the white banner of the Taliban, but rather against the presence of foreign soldiers and taxes imposed by an unrepresentative government in Kabul.

The United States military presence in Afghanistan greatly contributes to the legitimacy and strategic message of the Pashtun insurgency. In a like manner our backing of the Afghan government in its current form continues to distance the government from the people. The Afghan government's failings particularly when weighed against the sacrifice of American lives and dollars, appear legion and metastatic:

Glaring corruption and unabashed graft;
President whose confidants and chief advisers comprise drug lords and war crimes villains, who mock our own rule of law and counternarcotics efforts;
A system of prvincial and district leaders constituted of local power brokers, opportunists and strongmen allied to the United States solely for, and limited by, the value of our USAID and CERP contracts and whose own political and economic interests stand nothing to gain from any positive or genuine attempts at reconciliation; and
The recent election process dominated by fraud and discredited by low voter turnout, which has created an enormous victory for our enemy who now claims a popular boycott and will call into question worldwide our government's military, economic and diplomatic support for an invalid and illegitimate Afghan government.

Our support for this kind of government, coupled with a misunderstanding of the insurgency's true nature, reminds me horribly of our involvement with South Vietnam; an unpopular and corrupt government we backed at the expense of our Nation's own internal peace, against an insurgency whose nationalism we arrogantly and ignorantly mistook as a rival to our own Cold War ideology.

I find specious the reasons we ask for bloodshed and sacrifice from our young men and women in Afghanistan. If honest, our stated strategy of securing Afghanistan to prevent al-Qaeda resurgence or regrouping would require us to additionally invade and occupy western Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, etc. Our presence in Afghanistan has only increased destabilization and insurgency in Pakistan where we rightly fear a toppled or weakened Pakistani government may lose control of its nuclear weapons. However, again, to follow the logic of our stated goals we should garrison Pakistan, not Afghanistan. More so, the September 11th attacks, as well as the Madrid and London bombings, were primarily planned and organized in Western Europe; a point that highlights the threat is not one tied to traditional geographic or political boundaries. Finally, if our concern is for a failed state crippled by corruption and poverty and under assault from criminal and drug lords, then if we bear our military and financial contributions to Afghanistan, we must reevaluate and increase our commitment to and involvement in Mexico.

Eight years into war, no nation has ever known as more dedicated, well trained, experienced and disciplined military as the U.S. Armed Forces. I do not believe any military force has ever been tasked with such a complex, opaque and Sisyphean mission as the U.S. Military has received in Afghanistan. The tactical proficiency and performance of our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines is unmatched and unquestioned. However, this is not the European or Pacific theaters of World War II, but rather is a war for which our leaders, uniformed civilian and elected, have inadequately prepared and resourced our men and women. Our forces, devoted and faithful, have been committed to conflict in an indefinite and unplanned manner that has become a cavalier, politically expedient and Pollyannaish misadventure. Similarly, the United State has a dedicated and talented cadre of civilians, both U.S. government employees and contractors, who believe in and sacrifice for their mission, but have been ineffectually trained and led with guidance and intent shaped more by the political climate in Washington, D.C. than in Afghan cities, villages, mountains and valleys.

"We are spending oursleves into oblivion" a very talented and intelligent commander, one of America's best, briefs every visitor, staff delegation and senior officer. We are mortgaging our Nation's economy on a war, which, even with increased commitment, will remain a draw for years to come. Success and victory, whatever they may be, will be realized not in years, after billions more spent, but in decades and generations. The United States does not enjoy a national treasury for such success and victory.

I realize the emotion and tone of my letter and ask you excuse any ill temper. I trust you understand the nature of this war and the sacrifices made by so many thousands of families who have been separated from loved ones deployed in defense of our Nation and whose homes bear the fractures, upheavals and scars of multiple and compounded deployments. Thousands of our men and women have returned home with physical and mental wounds, some that will never heal or will only worsen with time. The dead return only in bodily form to be received by families who must be reassured their dead haves sacrificed for a purpose worthy of futures lost, love vanished, and promised dreams unkept. I have lost confidence such assurances can anymore be made. As such, I submit my resignation.
Sincerely,

MATTHEW P. HOH
Senior Civilian Representative
Zabul Province, Afghanistan
Source of letter: scribd.com

Thais most exploited workers in Israel

jots@jotman.com (Jotman) — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 21:52:00 -0700

Reuters (h/t Thai Report):

About 30,000 migrant workers hired by farms in Israel pay thousands of dollars to middlemen for their jobs but earn less than the minimum wage and are cheated out of overtime, according to an Israeli report.

The rights group Kav LaOved says the workers come mostly from Thailand but also Nepal, Sri Lanka and the Palestinian Territories.

Its report calls them "the most exploited segment of workers in Israel".

"The Thai workers come from rural areas after paying middlemen in Thailand and Israel brokerage fees running from $8,000-10,000," the report says. ...

According to Kav LaOved, "the most common complaint among agricultural workers is that their wages, especially the Thais', are withheld for months, or sent to their home countries without them receiving any accounting".