Just Foreign Policy News
October 26, 2010
The Taliban Might Negotiate, Even if They Think They’re Winning
The oft-repeated claim that "The Taliban will never negotiate, as long as they think they’re winning," has been used to justify military escalation – 30,000 more U.S. troops, as well as the current military offensive in Kandahar, dangerous to human life. But the reason we should believe this claim has never been explained. As a claim about human nature, it defies the last 5000 years of human diplomatic history. As a claim about the Taliban, it suggests without evidence that the Taliban won’t negotiate, even if the U.S. would agree to a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. forces – a demand that the majority of Americans and 60% of House Democrats think the U.S. should implement unilaterally.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/the-taliban-might-negotia_b_774147.html
5000 letters demanding release of Abdallah Abu Rahmah delivered to State Department
Representatives from four US human rights groups met with State Department officials on October 22nd and delivered a letter to Secretary of State Clinton signed by more than 5,000 individuals calling for the US to demand that Israel free Abdallah Abu Rahmah, a leading Palestinian nonviolent protest organizer.
http://jewishvoiceforpeace.org/blog/5000-letters-demanding-realease-abdallah-abu-rahmah-delivered-state-department
The Iran Nuclear Dispute – A New Approach
Attorney Eric Brill argues that the UN Security Council is acting outside the framework of international law in its sanctions against Iran, notes that Iran’s Safeguards Agreement authorizes it to request binding arbitration of disputes, and suggests that Iran would be likely to win a case brought to arbitration.
http://www.raceforiran.com/the-iran-nuclear-dispute-a-new-approach
Help Support Our Work
Your donation helps us educate Americans and create opportunities to advocate for a just foreign policy.
https://www.justforeignpolicy.org/donate
Summary:
U.S./Top News
1) The Obama Administration continues to dismiss Democratic criticism of human rights violations in Honduras, writes Alex Main on Common Dreams. State Department spokesperson Philip Crowley rejected the demands of 30 House Democrats that progress on human rights be a precondition for Honduras’ return to the OAS. Crowley also announced that the State Department had no intention of suspending any aid to Honduras.
2) A Wikileaks document and the new political alignment between Moqtada al-Sadr and Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki provide fresh evidence that Gen. Petraeus’s war against Shi’a militias in 2007-2008 was futile, Gareth Porter writes for Inter Press Service. The evidence indicates that the Pentagon’s problem in Iraq is not Iranian influence but a confluence of interests among Shia political actors in limiting US influence.
3) "Deficit hawks" who want to cut Social Security and Medicare benefits are turning to racism, xenophobia, and ignorance about basic economics to promote their cause, writes Dean Baker for Truthout. An election TV ad by "Citizens Against Government Waste" suggests that US budget deficits will lead to US domination by China, but it’s the US trade deficit with China, not the US budget deficit, which determines what the US owes to China.
4) BP and other major European polluters are funding the midterm election campaigns of Tea Party favorites who deny the existence of global warming, the Guardian reports. An analysis of campaign finance by Climate Action Network Europe found nearly 80% of campaign donations from a number of major European firms were directed towards senators who blocked action on climate change, including incumbents who have been embraced by the Tea Party such as Jim DeMint and James Inhofe.
5) Ilario Pantano, a former US marine who killed two unarmed Iraqis is on the verge of being elected to Congress from North Carolina with Tea Party support, the Guardian reports. Pantano was acquitted of premeditated murder on the grounds of insufficient evidence, but the military judge said his desecration of Iraqi corpses he had brought disgrace to the armed forces.
Iran
6) A Stratfor analyst says the leak that Iran is funding Karzai is aimed at derailing Iran’s participation in peace talks with the Afghan Taliban, the Christian Science Monitor reports. If the US is forced to take a stand on this and come out and condemn Iran for providing the money, and then condemn the Karzai regime for accepting the money, it basically risks alienating both sides – both of whom the US needs to be able to push forward on this settlement process," Kamran Bokhari said.
7) Noting the obvious fact that the US rents Afghan officials too, the Christian Science Monitor asks: what does Iran want for its rent? Opposition among Afghan legislators to any agreement for permanent US bases in Afghanistan, says one Afghan MP.
Turkey
8) Turkey suspects Israeli interests may be behind a U.S.-led push for an anti-missile defense system in Turkey, the Los Angeles Times reports. Critics in Turkey note that Israel is not a NATO member and therefore is not eligible for NATO protection.
India
9) Novelist and human rights campaigner Arundhati Roy is facing the threat of arrest for sedition after claiming that the disputed territory of Kashmir was not an integral part of India, the Guardian reports. "That the government is considering charging me with sedition has to do with its panic about many voices, even in India, being raised against what is happening in Kashmir," Roy said.
Colombia
10) Colombian President Santos says there will be a new global discussion about the war on drugs if the referendum to decriminalize marijuana passes in California, according to Colombia Reports. Santos opposes the referendum.
Guatemala
11) Vice President Espada says the US carried out 17 different types of medical experiments on Guatemalans by intentionally infecting them with venereal diseases in the 1940s, the Latin American Herald Tribune reports. The Guatemalans were infected intentionally with syphilis and gonorrhea, among other diseases. An investigation financed by the UN could last at least six months, Espada said.
Contents:
U.S./Top News
1) Obama Administration Continues to Disregard Congressional Concern for Human Rights, Democracy in Honduras
Alexander Main, Common Dreams, Tuesday, October 26, 2010
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/10/26-12
In the midst of a particularly busy and nail-biting election season, 30 congressional Democrats have taken time to focus on an issue that isn’t on anyone’s campaign agenda: the appalling state of democracy and human rights in Honduras. In a letter sent to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Oct. 19, California representative Sam Farr and 29 of his House colleagues urged the Obama Administration to reverse its current policy towards Honduran president Porfirio Lobo, elected late last year in a controversial vote held five months after a military coup d’Etat that shook the entire region.
The letter describes a few of the recent killings of opposition activists and journalists – largely unreported in the U.S. media – that are part of the latest wave of politically motivated attacks that have taken place since last year’s coup. Citing a "distinct pattern of political violence" in Honduras, the letter calls for the suspension of U.S. aid to Honduras, particularly police and military aid, until the Lobo government "distances itself from individuals involved in the June 28, 2009, military coup and adequately addresses the ongoing human and political rights violations."
In addition, the 30 representatives – who include notable human rights advocate Jim McGovern, Black Caucus chair Barbara Lee, and Progressive Caucus Co-Chairs Raul Grijalva and Lynn Woolsey – ask the administration to "refrain from supporting the immediate re-entry of Honduras in the Organization of American States."
Both of the letter’s central demands clash with the policy set forth by the administration earlier this year. After having suspended various forms of assistance to Honduras in the wake of the 2009 coup, Clinton announced in early March that all aid would be resumed because the newly inaugurated Lobo government had "taken important and necessary steps that deserve the recognition and the normalization of relations." Similarly, the administration has been actively pressing for the lifting of the suspension of Honduras’ membership in the Organization of American States (OAS), a sanction unanimously agreed to by the members of the hemispheric body on the day of the coup.
For the letter’s 30 co-signers, it simply doesn’t make sense to renew aid to Honduras or push for its return to the OAS – which would entail the normalization of its relations with nearly the entire hemisphere. Targeted killings of opposition activists continue with impunity, and key players in last year’s coup occupy strategic government positions – as is the case of the army official who executed the coup, General Romeo Vásquez Velásquez, who now heads the state telecom company Hondutel. Once aid is restored and Honduras is allowed to return to the OAS there exists little incentive for the Lobo government to carry out the deep reforms that are needed to guarantee the protection of basic human rights and the full restoration of democracy.
This isn’t the first time President Obama’s Democratic allies in Congress have voiced their dismay over the administration’s handling of the political and human rights crisis in Honduras that followed last year’s military coup. On several occasions over the last 14 months, progressive members of the House have politely expressed their frustration with the government’s policy towards Honduras, and on each occasion the administration has either ignored their pleas or attempted to gloss over the constant killings, beatings and kidnappings of members of the National Resistance Front.
[…] This brings us to the latest letter of Oct. 19, which – in reaction to the clear failure of the Lobo government to address the political violence taking place – makes demands that are strongly at odds with the administration’s current policy of unconditional support for the Lobo government. The following day, when State Department spokesperson Philip J. Crowley was asked about the letter he acknowledged that "there have been incidents where activists have been killed, intimidated, jailed, both going back to the previous government and recently." However, Crowley was quick to dismiss the letter’s main asks. He rejected, first of all, the idea that "progress on human rights" should be a "precondition for the return of Honduras to the OAS."
Crowley also announced that the State Department had no intention of suspending any aid to Honduras. According to Crowley, "our assistance is actually directly connected to improving [Honduras’] ability to meet the needs of its people and also improving its human rights record at the same time." He offered no evidence to back up this assertion, and the reality on the ground provides no real signs of any improvement in the situation. Despite some window dressing by the Lobo government[1] – for instance, the creation of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission and a "Ministry for Human Rights" – politically-motivated attacks against activists and independent journalists continue unabated and no serious investigations of these attacks have been carried out.
It seems that though the current policies of the administration have clearly not been working for the people of Honduras, the administration remains inflexible and unwilling to even consider any alternative approaches to the crisis in Honduras.
[…]
2) Leaked Report, New Iraqi Alignment Reveal U.S. War Failure
Gareth Porter, Inter Press Service, Oct 25
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=53283
Washington – A newly released Wikileaks document on Iraq and the new political alignment between Moqtada al-Sadr and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki both provide fresh evidence that Gen. David Petraeus’s war against Shi’a militias in 2007-2008 was a futile exercise.
The Wikileaks document is an intelligence report identifying the Shi’a commander who Petraeus said was the Iranian-backed rogue militia leader behind the kidnapping and killing of five U.S. troops in Karbala in January 2007. In fact, according to the leaked document, it was a Mahdi Army commander.
That new information about the Karbala operation confirms earlier evidence that in 2007 a political axis linking Iran, Sadr and Maliki was working to foil Petraeus’s assault on the Mahdi Army and to hasten the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
That political alignment is not a reflection of Iranian dominance over Iraqi politics but of a convergence of interests among Shi’a actors in the Iraq conflict.
The same political alignment has now resurfaced as a pivotal development in the formation of a new Iraqi government. Maliki and Sadr have agreed to form a new Shi’a-dominated government, and Maliki traveled to Iran last week to meet Sadr and publicly thanked Iran for its help in bringing Sadr into his bloc of deputies.
The Maliki bloc now has two more votes than the Sunni-based al-Iraqiya bloc and hopes to bring in the Kurds to collect enough votes to form a new government.
[…] Petraeus’s spokesman, Gen. Kevin Bergner, later accused Iran of having directed the Karbala attack though it control of networks of "Special Groups" armed and trained by Iran. Petraeus maintained consistently that Iran was backing "rogue" units that had left the Mahdi Army.
The Wikileaks documents show, however, that Petraeus and his command in Iraq were well aware that al-Dulaimi was a Mahdi Army commander in charge of secret operations. The Petraeus "Special Groups" line was aimed at hiding the fact that the U.S. command was determined to destroy as much of the Mahdi Army as possible by claiming that it was actually attacking rogue Shi’a militias.
The New York Times story on Iran-related Wikileaks documents by Michael Gordon, which portrays the documents as reconfirming the Petraeus line on Iran-backed "Special Groups", highlighted the intelligence report on Dulaimi but omitted the central fact that it clearly identifies him as a Mahdi Army commander.
The evidence also indicates that the Mahdi Army Karbala operation was done with the full knowledge of the Maliki government.
Col. Michael X. Garrett, then commander of the Fourth Brigade combat team in Karbala, confirmed to this writer in December 2008 that the Karbala attack "was definitely an inside operation". Both the provincial governor and police chief were suspected of having collaborated in the operation, Garrett said.
Gov. Aqil al-Khazali was not a Sadrist but a member of Maliki’s own Dawa Party and was presumably acting in line with a policy that came from Baghdad.
That was a sign that Maliki, Sadr and Iran were still cooperating secretly, even as Maliki was ostensibly cooperating with the U.S. military against Sadr.
[…] The Sadrists worked out an arrangement with Maliki under which U.S. troops could be kept out of Sadr City. Iraqi troops would take the lead in establishing security in the Sadrist enclave, and U.S. troops would not intervene unless there was resistance by the Mahdi Army.
But the U.S. military refused to honour the agreement and carried out large-scale sweeps and even airstrikes in Sadr City beginning in early 2007, claiming that they were only targeting those "Special Groups".
The Mahdi Army command for secret military operations apparently planned their counter-attack in Karbala in the hope of having some leverage over the U.S. military in Iraq.
Even as Maliki was ostensibly agreeing to U.S. attacks on Mahdi Army commanders in Sadr City, Petraeus told author Bing West in September 2007 that the political link between Maliki and Sadr was far from being broken. "JAM [Jaysh al- Mahdi] has its hooks into the ministries," Petraeus told him. "It took years to get this point, and it will take some time to get rid of it. Maliki is working his way through it."
A series of moves from September 2007 to mid-2008 marked the unfolding of a strategy by Maliki, supported by Iran, to get Sadr to curb the Mahdi Army’s role in order to maneuver the George W. Bush administration into negotiating a timetable for total withdrawal.
Iran prevailed on Sadr to agree to a unilateral ceasefire in September 2007 and to end fighting in Basra and Sadr City in late March and early May 2008. The latter two agreements prevented U.S. troops from carrying out major offensives in both cases.
The quid pro quo for Sadr’s agreement to those ceasefires appears to have been the promise of a U.S. troop withdrawal.
Maliki’s renewal of the alliance with Sadr on the way to forming a new Shi’a government has brought strong protest from the Barack Obama administration. U.S. Ambassador James Jeffries has repeatedly said in recent weeks that Sadr’s inclusion in an Iraqi government is unacceptable to Washington.
But that protest has only underlined the fact that the United States is the odd man out in the Shi’a-dominated politics of Iraq.
3) Keeping Fear Alive: The Deficit Hawks Push Their Agenda
Dean Baker, Truthout, Monday 25 October 2010
http://www.truth-out.org/keeping-fear-alive-the-deficit-hawks-push-their-agenda64506
The deficit hawks must believe that they are in the home stretch of their drive to cut Social Security and Medicare benefits since they seem to be pulling out all the stops. The attack on Social Security and Medicare is heating up, with the opponents of these programs going the route of straight up xenophobia and racism.
The latest shot from the deficit hawks is an ad sponsored by the Citizens Against Government Waste. This ad is apparently being widely shown on TV in addition to being available over the web. It shows a classroom in the year 2030 in which a group of Chinese students are hearing from their teacher about the reasons that great countries decline. Their list is the Roman Empire, the British Empire and the United States.
The teacher explains that all these great empires forgot the principles that made them great. The teacher tells the students that the United States tried to spend and tax its way out of a Great Recession, that the government took over health care and major industries. The teacher then says that because the US built up huge debts "they now work for us," prompting laughter from the students.
This is not the first time that opponents of Social Security and Medicare have appealed to xenophobia and racism. The China threat is a common refrain in much of their literature. But this ad does take this despicable tactic to new heights.
Just in case it is not clear to all readers, the amount that United States owes to China and other foreign countries is determined by the trade deficit, not the budget deficit. So, the connection makes no sense at the most basic level. Cutting the budget deficit will not reduce the amount that the United States owes China if the trade deficit remains the same.
The trade deficit in turn is the result of an over-valued dollar. A high dollar ("strong dollar" for those macho types) makes imports cheap. This causes us to buy more imports. A high dollar also makes our exports more expensive, so foreigners will buy less of our exports. High imports and low exports are the causes of a trade deficit.
This means that if anyone is upset about the extent to which China or other foreign countries are buying up US debt and other American assets then they should be yelling about the over-valued dollar. Blaming the budget deficit for this borrowing is just an effort to use xenophobia and racism to advance an argument that cannot stand on its merits.
[…] The point is that we have no short-term deficit problem. If the budget deficit was smaller we would have higher unemployment. How does having their parents lose their jobs help our kids?
Over the longer term, the country is projected to face a deficit problem only because of its broken health care system. If per person health care costs in the United States were comparable to costs in any other wealthy country, the United States would be looking at huge budget surpluses in the distant future, not deficits.
This is why honest people talk about ways to fix the health care system. The rest produce racist ads about exploding deficits.
4) Tea Party climate change deniers funded by BP and other major polluters
Midterm election campaigns of Tea Party favourites DeMint and Inhofe have received over $240,000
Suzanne Goldenberg, Guardian, Sunday 24 October 2010 22.57 BST http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/24/tea-party-climate-change-deniers
BP and several other big European companies are funding the midterm election campaigns of Tea Party favourites who deny the existence of global warming or oppose Barack Obama’s energy agenda, the Guardian has learned.
An analysis of campaign finance by Climate Action Network Europe (Cane) found nearly 80% of campaign donations from a number of major European firms were directed towards senators who blocked action on climate change. These included incumbents who have been embraced by the Tea Party such as Jim DeMint, a Republican from South Carolina, and the notorious climate change denier James Inhofe, a Republican from Oklahoma.
The report, released tomorrow, used information on the Open Secrets.org database to track what it called a co-ordinated attempt by some of Europe’s biggest polluters to influence the US midterms. It said: "The European companies are funding almost exclusively Senate candidates who have been outspoken in their opposition to comprehensive climate policy in the US and candidates who actively deny the scientific consensus that climate change is happening and is caused by people."
[…] The Cane report said the companies, including BP, BASF, Bayer and Solvay, which are some of Europe’s biggest emitters, had collectively donated $240,200 to senators who blocked action on global warming – more even than the $217,000 the oil billionaires and Tea Party bankrollers, David and Charles Koch, have donated to Senate campaigns.
The biggest single donor was the German pharmaceutical company Bayer, which gave $108,100 to senators. BP made $25,000 in campaign donations, of which $18,000 went to senators who opposed action on climate change. Recipients of the European campaign donations included some of the biggest climate deniers in the Senate, such as Inhofe of Oklahoma, who has called global warming a hoax.
The foreign corporate interest in America’s midterms is not restricted to Europe. A report by ThinkProgress, operated by the Centre for American Progress, tracked donations to the Chamber of Commerce from a number of Indian and Middle Eastern oil coal and electricity companies.
[…]
5) US veteran who killed unarmed Iraqis wins Tea Party support
Murder charges were dropped against Ilario Pantano, who now verges on election victory buoyed by right-wing backing
Ed Pilkington, Guardian, Tuesday 26 October 2010 12.18 BST
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/26/us-veteran-killed-iraqis-tea-party
Wilmington, North Carolina – The basic facts are undisputed: on 15 April 2004 Ilario Pantano, then a second lieutenant with the US marines, stopped and detained two Iraqi men in a car near Falluja. The Iraqis were unarmed and the car found to be empty of weapons.
Pantano ordered the two men to search the car for a second time and then, with no other US soldiers in view, unloaded a magazine of his M16A4 automatic rifle into them, before reloading and blasting a second magazine at them – some 60 rounds in total.
Over the corpses, he left a placard inscribed with the marine motto: "No better friend, No worse enemy."
Six years later Pantano is on the verge of a stunning electoral victory that could send him to the US Congress in Washington. He is standing as Republican candidate in North Carolina’s 7th congressional district, which was last represented by his party in 1871.
With the help of the right-wing Tea Party movement, and with the benefit of his image as a war hero acquired from what happened on that fateful day in 2004, he has raised almost $1m (£630,000) in donations and is now level-pegging with his Democratic opponent, Mike McIntyre.
[…] Pantano is one of the new breed of hardline Republicans thrown up by the turmoil of the economic meltdown and the ensuing Tea Party explosion. He served in the first Gulf war, then worked for Goldman Sachs before rejoining the marines days after the 9/11 attacks.
A few months after he killed the two unarmed Iraqis, a member of his unit reported him to senior officers and he was charged with premeditated murder. At a pre-trial military hearing, prosecution witnesses testified that the detainees, Hamaady Kareem and Tahah Hanjil, were unthreatening and that their bodies were found in a kneeling position having apparently been shot in the back.
[…] In the event, all charges against Pantano were dropped on grounds of insufficient evidence. But the officer presiding over the hearing recommended that Pantano be given non-judicial punishment for having displayed "extremely poor judgment", adding that by desecrating the Iraqi’s bodies with his placard he had brought disgrace to the armed forces.
[…]
Iran
6) Karzai’s acknowledgement of bags of Iranian cash: Why now?
Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s admission that his office has taken ‘bags of money’ from Iran are part of an effort to undermine Tehran’s role in negotiations with the Taliban, argues a regional analyst.
Ben Arnoldy, Christian Science Monitor, October 26, 2010 at 6:56 am EDT
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-South-Central/2010/1026/Karzai-s-acknowledgement-of-bags-of-Iranian-cash-Why-now
New Delhi – The revelations that Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s office has taken "bags of money" from Iran are part of an effort to undermine Tehran’s role in negotiations with the Taliban, argues a regional analyst.
Mr. Karzai confirmed Monday an earlier report that his chief of staff received a bag of cash from the Iranians.
The reaction from most experts was a collective yawn: It’s only natural that a neighboring country would be trying to influence Afghan affairs. But the revelation did pique some analyst interest in why the unnamed officials leaked this information now.
The leak came just days after the United States reiterated it was open to Iran playing a role in the tentative discussions with the Taliban, notes Kamran Bokhari, an analyst with the Texas-based intelligence group Stratfor. "The purpose of such leaks is to at least undermine the existing dynamic … [that includes] involving Iran in this process," said Mr. Bokhari in a video posted on Stratfor’s website.
"If the United States is forced to take a stand on this and come out and condemn Iran for providing the money, and then condemn the Karzai regime for accepting the money, it basically risks alienating both sides – both of whom the United States needs to be able to push forward on this settlement process," he said.
After the press conference, the US Embassy in Kabul delayed responding to an influx of reporter queries. On Monday night, embassy spokesperson Caitlin Hayden finally sent a mass email saying: "The Embassy is going to decline to comment tonight…. We refer you to the State Department in Washington to address."
The White House deputy spokesman did weigh in during a press gaggle. "I think the American people and the global community have every reason to be concerned about Iran trying to have a negative influence on Afghanistan," said Bill Burton. "But they have a responsibility just like all their neighbors to try to have a positive influence on the formation of a government there, and to ensure that Afghanistan is not a country where terrorists can find safe harbor, or where attacks can be planned on their soil.
[…]
7) Why Karzai readily admits receiving bags of Iranian cash
Afghan President Hamid Karzai says he accepts bags of cash from Iran. What do the Iranians want in return?
Ben Arnoldy, Christian Science Monitor, October 25, 2010
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-South-Central/2010/1025/Why-Karzai-readily-admits-receiving-bags-of-Iranian-cash
New Dehli – Afghan President Hamid Karzai admitted in a press conference Monday that his office accepts "bags of money" from the Iranian government.
That bald acknowledgment brings out into the open two uncomfortable facts confronting the US plan to build a modern democracy in Afghanistan. Just as in Iraq, Iran is successfully buying influence with Afghan leaders. And Mr. Karzai – like many members of Afghanistan’s political class – sees bags of cash as a perfectly legitimate tool of statecraft.
[…] What does Iran want for its bags of cash? First and foremost, Iran wants pressure put on international forces to leave its doorstep.
[…] The US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan put American forces on the ground on either side of Iran. In Afghanistan, US forces at Shindand Airbase are less than 75 miles from the Iranian border.
[…] Karzai said his office takes Iranian payments of $700,000 to $975,000 once or twice a year to cover presidential expenses. He was responding to a New York Times report Saturday alleging that his chief of staff received money from Iranian officials.
At press time, the US embassy in Kabul had not released a statement. Before Karzai’s press conference, State Department spokesman Philip Crowley told Bloomberg that "Iran should not interfere with the internal affairs of the Afghan government."
The United States, of course, funnels tens of millions of dollars into Afghanistan to influence internal affairs – even paying "salary supports" to a wide range of Afghans officials.
[…] Ms. Kofi and retiring MP Sabrina Saqib say that they have heard many stories of Parliamentary candidates receiving Iranian money.
"They are worried that Afghanistan will agree with having a base for American troops here," Ms. Saqib told the Monitor last month. Iran wants friendly lawmakers to head off any legislation that would grant permanent basing rights. "They are trying to have people around who – if this would be the case – they would disagree."
[…] Turkey
8) Ankara suspicious that Israel’s security behind U.S. push for regional missile shield
Meris Lutz, Los Angeles Times, October 25, 2010 | 10:31 am
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/2010/10/iran-turkey-israel-missile-nato-united-states.html
Beirut – Is the United States using NATO to protect its special friend in the Middle East: Israel?
That’s what Turkey suspects may be behind a U.S.-led push for an anti-missile defense system in Turkey, intended to ward off an Iranian attack.
According to a report published Monday in the Turkish newspaper Today’s Zaman, Ankara has sought and reportedly received explicit assurances from the U.S. that intelligence gathered using the missile shield’s sensors will not be shared with Israel.
American officials have not been shy about fingering Israel’s enemy, Iran, as the major reason for deploying the system, citing Iranian threats to Europe. But the article in Today’s Zaman was rife with skepticism, pointing out that as a non-member, Israel is not eligible for protection from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
[…] It wouldn’t be the first time that the U.Ss. was torn between its allegiance to NATO and its historic friendship with Israel. When Israeli forces stormed a Turkish aid ship off Gaza in June, resulting in the death of nine Turkish activists, Turkey threatened to invoke the NATO Treaty, which could have obligated the U.S. to become involved militarily.
A recent United Nations report found that several of the Turks aboard the aid ship had been killed "execution-style" at close range, further souring Turkey on Israel just before the scheduled Nov. 19 NATO summit in Lisbon, during which Turkey is expected to make a decision on whether to allow elements of the the missile system to be deployed on its territory.
[…]
India
9) Activist and Novelist, Arundhati Roy, Faces Arrest over Kashmir Remark
Booker prize-winner says claim about territory not being an integral part of India was a call for justice in the disputed region
Gethin Chamberlain, Guardian, Tuesday 26 October 2010 17.28 BST http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/26/arundhati-roy-kashmir-india
Panaji – The Booker prize-winning novelist and human rights campaigner Arundhati Roy is facing the threat of arrest after claiming that the disputed territory of Kashmir was not an integral part of India.
India’s home ministry is reported to have told police in Delhi that a case of sedition may be registered against Roy and the Kashmiri separatist leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani for remarks they made at the weekend.
Under section 124A of the Indian penal code, those convicted of sedition face punishment ranging from a fine to life imprisonment.
[…] In an email interview with the Guardian, she said: "That the government is considering charging me with sedition has to do with its panic about many voices, even in India, being raised against what is happening in Kashmir. This is a new development, and one that must be worrisome for the government."
More than 100 people are estimated to have died in violence in the Kashmir valley since June amid continuing protests against Indian rule in a territory where many of the Muslim majority favour independence or a transfer of control to Pakistan. Hundreds of young protesters have been imprisoned in a string of clashes with security forces.
"Threatening me with legal action is meant to frighten the civil rights groups and young journalists into keeping quiet. But I think it will have the opposite effect. I think the government is mature enough to understand that it’s too late to put the lid on now," Roy said.
Earlier the author, who is currently in Srinagar, Kashmir, said in a statement: "I said what millions of people here say every day. I said what I, as well as other commentators, have written and said for years. Anybody who cares to read the transcripts of my speeches will see that they were fundamentally a call for justice.
"I spoke about justice for the people of Kashmir who live under one of the most brutal military occupations in the world; for Kashmiri Pandits who live out the tragedy of having been driven out of their homeland; for Dalit soldiers killed in Kashmir whose graves I visited on garbage heaps in their villages in Cuddalore; for the Indian poor who pay the price of this occupation in material ways and who are now learning to live in the terror of what is becoming a police state."
After describing her meetings with people caught up in the Kashmir violence, she said: "Some have accused me of giving ‘hate speeches’, of wanting India to break up. On the contrary, what I say comes from love and pride. It comes from not wanting people to be killed, raped, imprisoned or have their fingernails pulled out in order to force them to say they are Indians. It comes from wanting to live in a society that is striving to be a just one.
"Pity the nation that has to silence its writers for speaking their minds. Pity the nation that needs to jail those who ask for justice, while communal killers, mass murderers, corporate scamsters, looters, rapists, and those who prey on the poorest of the poor roam free."
India’s justice minister, Moodbidri Veerappa Moily, described Roy’s remarks as "most unfortunate". He said: "Yes, there is freedom of speech … it can’t violate the patriotic sentiments of the people."
[…] Last week police in Indian-administered Kashmir arrested the separatist leader Masrat Alam for allegedly organising anti-India protests. A curfew was also imposed.
Colombia
10) California pot legalization poll affects war on drugs: Santos.
Adriaan Alsema, Colombia Reports, Sunday, 24 October 2010 10:42
http://colombiareports.com/colombia-news/news/12541-california-poll-on-pot-legalization-affects-war-on-drugs-santos.html
If the state of California approves the legalization of marijuana then the global war on drugs must be redesigned, Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos said Saturday.
According to Santos, a legalization of the sale, transport and consumption of marijuana in the state would be inexplicable to a Colombian farmer who is criminally charged if he cultivates the drug.
"I said this to the United Nations, because I didn’t invent this, that they are asking me if there is a way to explain that to a Colombian farmer who we throw in jail if producing marijuana, while at the same time it is legal there. This will result in a global discussion about the focus we’ve had in the war on drugs," the president said in an interview with Caracol Radio.
[…]
Guatemala
11) VP: U.S. Conducted 17 Types of Experiments on Guatemalans.
Latin American Herald Tribune, October 24, 2010
http://www.laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=373723&CategoryId=23558
Guatemala City – The United States carried out 17 different types of medical experiments on Guatemalans by intentionally infecting them with venereal diseases in the 1940s, Vice President Rafael Espada told the press.
Officials already have data on the medical projects and the information is being investigated by the commission the vice president heads along with the collaboration of the United States, Espada said.
Seventeen types of medical experiments were performed by U.S. scientists on the mentally ill, prostitutes, prisoners and soldiers between in the Central American nation between 1946 and 1948, Espada said. The Guatemalans were infected intentionally with syphilis and gonorrhea, among other diseases.
"We have confirmed 17 types of projects in the experiments with humans conducted in our country," the vice president said, without providing additional details about those programs.
The U.S. government has already provided about 90 percent of the scientific information about the experiments and the documents will be opened when the commission investigating the matter is fully constituted with medical experts and translators to avoid mistakes and misunderstandings, the vice president said.
[…] The investigation, which will be financed by the United Nations, could last at least six months, Espada said.
The experiments performed by the United States on some 1,500 Guatemalans were revealed on Oct. 1 and that same day President Barack Obama contacted his Guatemalan counterpart, Alvaro Colom, to express his profound regret over those acts.
Colom said that the medical experiment directed by U.S. physician John Cutler were "horrifying" and crimes against humanity, adding that the Pan American Health Organization, or PAHO, was aware of them.
–
Robert Naiman
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
Just Foreign Policy is a membership organization devoted to reforming US foreign policy so it reflects the values and interests of the majority of Americans.