Just Foreign Policy News
March 16, 2011
*Action: Urge your Rep. to Vote Yes on Kucinich-Jones Afghanistan withdrawal resolution
On Thursday, the House is expected to vote on a resolution introduced by Dennis Kucinich and Walter Jones that would require the president to withdraw all U.S. military troops from Afghanistan by the end of this year. An amendment last month to the same effect narrowly missed getting a majority of House Democrats.
FCNL has provided a toll free number: 800-530-1748. When talking to your Rep’s office, you can also ask them to co-sponsor Rep. Lee’s bill which would restrict military funds to being used for a safe and orderly withdrawal.
For a sample script for your call, go to:
https://www.justforeignpolicy.org/act/hconres28-call
Alternatively, you may email your Representative here:
https://www.justforeignpolicy.org/act/kucinichandlee
Washington Smackdown: Petraeus vs. "Substantial Drawdown"
A substantial drawdown of U.S. forces from Afghanistan would save many American and Afghan lives and tens of billions of dollars. It would open political space in Afghanistan for a negotiated political resolution that ends the civil war.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/washington-smackdown-petr_b_836207.html
CISPES: Oppose Pacific Rim’s Lawsuit Against El Salvador
Pacific Rim has invoked "investor protection" provisions of the US-Central American Free Trade Agreement, claiming to be owed enormous "lost profits" because the Salvadoran government rejected its mining permits in defense of the environment. Reps. Baldwin, DeFazio, Payne, and Michaud have authored a letter calling on President Obama to fulfill his campaign promise and strike the corporate "right" to sue El Salvador or any other country from US trade agreements, and to support El Salvador in the Pacific Rim case.
http://www.cispes.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=817&Itemid=1
Help Support Our Advocacy for Peace and Diplomacy
The opponents of peace and diplomacy work every day. Help us be an effective counterweight.
https://www.justforeignpolicy.org/donate
Summary:
U.S./Top News
1) Following General Petraeus’ testimony, Members of the Out of Afghanistan Caucus issued a statement calling for a swift withdrawal of troops beginning no later than July, according to Rep. John Conyers’ office. "We are at a moment where the needs of the American people and the needs on the ground in Afghanistan have clearly converged," the statement said. "A swift withdrawal of troops beginning no later than July will stabilize Afghanistan by ending an unpopular occupation, allow us to focus on political reconciliation with local and regional stakeholders, improve our country’s flexibility to respond to more immediate and pressing national security challenges, and improve our fiscal and economic situation at home."
2) 80 Members of Congress sent a letter to President Obama calling for a significant and sizeable reduction in U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan beginning no later than July, according to Rep. Barbara Lee’s office.
3) Doctors in Manama said security forces in Bahrain stormed the main hospital, beating doctors, CNN reports. Bahraini officials denied these accounts. The Bahraini government expelled CNN’s Mohammed Jamjoom from the country Wednesday without explanation. "King Hamad’s decree does not give the authorities a blank check to commit abuses," said Joe Stork of Human Rights Watch. "The world is watching to see whether Bahrain will respect the basic rights of all its citizens."
4) Hundreds of riot police and military troops moved early Wednesday into Pearl Square, using tanks, helicopters and jeeps with machine guns mounted on their roofs to expel demonstrators clamoring for reform, the New York Times reports. A doctor who volunteers at Salmaniya Hospital described the hospital as "under siege." "They are not allowing ambulances in," he said. "Doctors are being attacked and asked to leave" at gunpoint, he said.
In Iraq, followers of Moktada al-Sadr rallied in Sadr City to protest the crackdown in Bahrain. Sadr called for a much wider demonstration across Iraq on Friday.
The situation in Bahrain is "alarming," said Secretary of State Clinton. She urged Bahrain’s rulers to focus on the economic and political grievances raised by the protests: "We have said not only to the Bahrainis but to our Gulf partners that we do not think the security is the answer to what is going on."
5) Gen. Petraeus raised the possibility of operating joint military bases with local forces long after foreign troops are scheduled to withdraw in 2014, the New York Times reports.
6) Haley Barbour, a likely Republican candidate for president in 2012, said America should slash defense spending and consider shrinking its presence in Afghanistan, Politico reports. "What is our mission?" Barbour said. "How many Al Qaeda are in Afghanistan. … Is that a 100,000-man Army mission?"
Afghanistan
7) Life for ordinary Afghans has become untenable, the Red Cross said on Tuesday, with security seriously deteriorating in the first two months of the year, Reuters reports. On Tuesday, Afghan officials said two children were killed in an air strike by NATO-led forces as they were watering fields in eastern Kunar province late on Monday.
Bahrain
8) The Obama administration and its support for democratic change in the Middle East has been on a collision course with Saudi Arabia, the UAE and other monarchies of the Persian Gulf, writes David Ignatius in the Washington Post. The crunch finally came this week with a sharp break over how to deal with protest in Bahrain. "We don’t want Iran 14 miles off our coast, and that’s not going to happen," said a Saudi official. U.S. officials counter that Iran, so far, has been only a minor player in the Bahrain protests and that Saudi military intervention could backfire by strengthening Iran’s hand.
The crackup was predicted by a top UAE sheik in a February meeting with two visiting former U.S. officials. According to notes made during the conversation, the UAE official said: "We and the Saudis will not accept a Shiite government in Bahrain. And if your president says to the Khalifas what he said to Mubarak [to leave office], it will cause a break in our relationship with the U.S." The UAE official warned that Gulf nations were "looking East" – to China, India and Turkey – for alternative security assistance.
The White House hasn’t yielded to such pleas and threats, Ignatius says. U.S. officials believe the Saudis and others have no good option to the US as a guarantor of security. They note that military and intelligence contacts are continuing, despite the sharp disagreement over Bahrain.
9) While both Arab and Iranian leaders may seek to influence the outcome in Bahrain, the central tension is between Bahrain’s ruling Khalifa family and an increasingly resolute protest movement, the Christian Science Monitor reports. Jean-François Seznec, a professor at Georgetown University’s Center for Contemporary Arab Studies, called the Saudi troop presence on Bahrain soil a "terrible mistake" that would escalate tensions. "It could have been solved very easily by having the Shiite liberals and Sunni liberals come together with the crown prince to establish a constitutional monarchy," he said.
Rashid Khalidi, Edward Said Professor of Arab Studies at Columbia University, said the problems in eastern Saudi Arabia and Bahrain would exist even if there was no Iran. "The problems are discrimination, denial of human and political rights, arbitrary authority which does not derive from the consent of the governed, and diversion of resources to a tiny minority on a gigantic scale," he said. "The same problems exist in nearly all the Arab countries, with local variations of course. Of course Iran is happy to fish in troubled waters, but that has nothing to do with why they are troubled."
10) Bahrain’s decision to invite in hundreds of Saudi troops on Monday signaled that the two governments have grown impatient with U.S. calls for reforms to offer greater standing to the impoverished Shiite majority and are focused on reasserting control over the streets, the Los Angeles Times reported yesterday. If the Bahrainis suppress the protesters [as they are now doing – JFP], the US may be seen as siding with an autocrat against his people, the LAT says. Stephen McInerney, executive director of the Project on Middle East Democracy, said the administration already is perceived as supporting the Bahraini and Saudi governments’ approach, a perception that would be strengthened if the protests were snuffed out. As the Saudi troops moved in this week, "the perception on the street has been, ‘This would not be happening without U.S. support,’ " he said.
State Department officials said the US was "advised but not consulted" on the Saudi intervention in Bahrain.
Israel/Palestine
11) Fatah and Hamas leaders appeared to be taking practical steps on Wednesday toward ending their schism, a rare response to public pressure for national unity, the New York Times reports. Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah said Wednesday he was ready to go to Gaza and meet with Ismail Haniya, the leader of the Hamas government. Haniya issued a statement saying he had started discussions with other Hamas leaders to arrange to receive Abbas. It would be Abbas’ first visit to Gaza since Hamas took control of Gaza in June 2007. The new initiative came a day after popular demonstrations in Gaza and the West Bank that were organized by independent Palestinian youths calling for national reconciliation. Still, the sides seemed to have different agendas for a meeting, indicating that true unity could be a long way off.
Contents:
U.S./Top News
1) Out of Afghanistan Caucus: United States’ Fiscal and Security Needs Demand A Swift Withdrawal Beginning in July
Out of Afghanistan Causus, Mar. 16, 2011
http://www.conyers.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=News.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=bfe70f56-19b9-b4b1-1246-b7f6d44fcfa5
Washington, D.C.- Members of the Out of Afghanistan Caucus issued the following statement today following two days of congressional testimony by General David Petraeus on the war in Afghanistan. Representative John Conyers (D-MI), chair of of the Out of Afghanistan Caucus, was joined by Reps. David Cicilline (D-RI), Keith Ellison (D-MN), Bob Filner (D-CA), Walter Jones (R-NC), Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ), Michael Honda (D-CA), Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Barbara Lee (D-CA), John Lewis (D-GA), Jim McDermott (D-WA), James McGovern (D-MA), John Olver (D-MA), Ron Paul (R-TX), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Rep. Jose Serrano (D-NY), Pete "Fortney" Stark (D-CA), and Lynn Woolsey (D-CA).
"As we approach the planned drawdown of military forces beginning in July 2011, it is clear that large majorities of the American people have endorsed a new way forward in Afghanistan. According to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, nearly two-thirds of Americans now say the war is no longer worth fighting and three-quarters of Americans believe that the President should withdraw a "substantial number" of combat troops this summer.
The American people understand that our country’s fiscal state renders the continued funding of a war that costs over $2 billion a week unsustainable. A substantial withdrawal of troops later this year will go a long way towards rebalancing our domestic and overseas priorities and reduce government spending by billions of dollars.
Despite the assurances offered by General Petraeus this week, we believe that our status quo, military-first strategy is not achieving its promised results. The rampant corruption present in the Karzai government and contractor community has made establishing a central government capable of administering effective governance all but impossible. Additionally, the record number of civilian deaths this past year, including the large number of targeted killings of government officials, suggest that the population is not being secured. If you can’t protect the population or establish a government people can believe in, you can’t win a counterinsurgency.
We are at a moment where the needs of the American people and the needs on the ground in Afghanistan have clearly converged. A swift withdrawal of troops beginning no later than July will stabilize Afghanistan by ending an unpopular occupation, allow us to focus on political reconciliation with local and regional stakeholders, improve our country’s flexibility to respond to more immediate and pressing national security challenges, and improve our fiscal and economic situation at home."
2) Congresswoman Barbara Lee, Bipartisan Group of House Members Call on President Obama to Meaningfully Fulfill Promise of Military Drawdown in Afghanistan
Office of Rep. Barbara Lee, March 16, 2011
http://lee.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=57§iontree=35,57&itemid=2313
Washington, DC – Today, Representative Barbara Lee led a bipartisan group of 80 Members of Congress in sending a letter to President Obama calling for a significant and sizeable reduction in U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan beginning no later than July of this year.
Below is a statement from Representative Lee:
"Our service men and women have performed with incredible courage and commitment in Afghanistan. But they have been put in an impossible situation where there is no military solution.
"Twice, President Obama has doubled down on a counterproductive military-first strategy in Afghanistan based upon the perpetual recommendation of the Pentagon for more troops, more time, and more resources. This letter sends a clear signal to the President that the redeployment of a minimal number of U.S. troops from Afghanistan in July will not meet the expectations of Congress or the American people, and further that we will strongly support a shift toward ending this war and bringing all of our troops home.
"The American people overwhelmingly favor action to speed up U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan. It is time to end this war and to refocus our efforts on job creation and strengthening our economy."
Last month, Representative Lee introduced The Responsible End to the War in Afghanistan Act, legislation that would limit funding in Afghanistan for the safe and orderly withdrawal of U.S. troops and military contractors. A bipartisan group of 56 House members have joined Representative Lee in supporting that legislation.
The text of the letter and list of co-signers follows:
March 16, 2011
Dear Mr. President,
[…] We write to you to express our utmost support for your planned drawdown of the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan beginning no later than July of this year. We, the undersigned members of Congress, believe the forthcoming reduction in U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan must be significant and sizeable, and executed in an orderly fashion.
Our nation’s economic and national security interests are not served by a policy of open-ended war in Afghanistan. At a time of severe economic distress, the war in Afghanistan is costing the United States more than $100 billion per year, excluding the long-term costs of care for returning military servicemembers. At the same time, military and intelligence officials agree that Al Qaeda’s presence in Afghanistan is diminished and that there will not be a military solution to resolve the current situation. It is simply unsustainable for our nation to maintain a costly, military-first strategy in Afghanistan.
A significant redeployment of U.S. troops from Afghanistan beginning in July 2011 will send a clear signal that the United States does not seek a permanent presence in Afghanistan. This transition will provide incentive for internal stakeholders to improve upon the political status quo, reduce corruption, and take meaningful steps toward the establishment of an effective, trustworthy, and inclusive governance structure. A meaningful start to withdrawal will also empower U.S. diplomatic engagement with regional and global stakeholders who share a common interest in the long-term stability of Afghanistan.
The majority of the American people overwhelmingly support a rapid shift toward withdrawal in Afghanistan. In fact, a Gallup Poll released on February 2, 2011 indicated that 72% of Americans favor action this year to "speed up the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan." Let us be clear. The redeployment of a minimal number of U.S. troops from Afghanistan in July will not meet the expectations of Congress or the American people.
Mr. President, as you work to finally bring an end to the war in Iraq by the end of this year, we must commit ourselves to ensuring that our nation’s military engagement in Afghanistan does not become the status quo. It is time to focus on securing a future of economic opportunity and prosperity for the American people and move swiftly to end America’s longest war in Afghanistan.
Mr. President, we look forward to working with you to make that goal a reality.
Sincerely,
Full list of co-signers:
Joe Baca; Tammy Baldwin; Karen Bass; Lois Capps; Michael E. Capuano; Andre Carson; Yvette D. Clarke; Steve Cohen; John Conyers Jr.; Jerry F. Costello; Elijah E. Cummings; Danny K. Davis (IL); Peter A. DeFazio; Rosa L. DeLauro; Theodore E. Deutch; John J. Duncan Jr. (TN); Donna F. Edwards; Keith Ellison; Sam Farr; Bob Filner; Barney Frank; Marcia L. Fudge; John Garamendi; Raúl M. Grijalva; Luis V. Gutierrez; Alcee L. Hastings; Maurice D. Hinchey; Mazie K. Hirono; Rush D. Holt; Michael M. Honda; Jesse L. Jackson Jr.; Sheila Jackson Lee; Eddie Bernice Johnson; Hank Johnson Jr.; Timothy V. Johnson; Walter B. Jones; Barbara Lee; John B. Larson; John Lewis; Zoe Lofgren; Ben Ray Luján; Carolyn B. Maloney; Edward J. Markey; Doris O. Matsui; Jim McDermott; James P. McGovern; Michael H. Michaud; George Miller; Gwen Moore; James P. Moran; Christopher S. Murphy; Grace Napolitano; Eleanor Holmes Norton; John W. Olver; Bill Pascrell Jr.; Ron Paul; Donald M. Payne; Chellie Pingree; Jared Polis; David E. Price; Mike Quigley; Rep, Charles B. Rangel; Laura Richardson; Lucille Roybal-Allard; Linda T. Sánchez; Loretta Sanchez; Janice D. Schakowsky; Bobby Scott; José E. Serrano; Albio Sires; Louise McIntosh Slaughter; Jackie Speier; Pete Stark; Mike Thompson (CA); John F. Tierney; Edolphus Towns; Niki Tsongas; Maxine Waters; Anthony D. Weiner; Peter Welch; Lynn C. Woolsey
3) Witnesses: Security forces attack protesters and doctors in Bahrain
CNN, March 16, 2011
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/03/16/bahrain.protests/
Manama, Bahrain – Security forces in Bahrain stormed the main hospital, beating doctors, and attacked demonstrators in Manama’s Pearl Roundabout on Wednesday, witnesses in the Bahraini capital said. Bahraini officials deny these accounts.
[…] Cell phone networks in several areas were disrupted. Security forces blocked highways leading to the capital and formed a ring around the country’s main hospital, Salmaniya Medical Complex, not letting people enter or leave, witnesses said. Security forces then stormed the hospital and beat staffers, several doctors there said.
Doctors have been hiding in rooms, said Yousif Sharaf, a doctor at the hospital. "We are trapped," Sharaf said. "We are asking for the security forces to please stay outside the hospital. They are beating the staff."
Fatima Haji, another doctor, also said she was trapped in the hospital. "We are in a small group hiding," Haji said, her voice rising with emotion. "This is a government hospital. How can this happen in a government hospital?"
Haji said two people had died in the hospital Wednesday morning, and she feared for the other patients there because the doctors were not able to work.
Eventually, the army told hospital workers that they could leave, but they had to give their names and have their pictures taken, Haji said. Some of her colleagues were taken to the gates and beaten, she said.
CNN could not independently confirm the doctors’ claims.
The Bahraini government expelled CNN’s Mohammed Jamjoom from the country Wednesday without explanation. Reporting from Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates Jamjoom said two Bahraini information ministers came to his hotel and told him that the rest of the CNN crew was welcome to stay, but he was not. "I was then escorted to the airport and made to leave the country," Jamjoom said.
[…] Calls made to various hospitals turned up multiple accounts of witnesses being attacked, including medical staff and doctors, Jamjoom said.
On state-run television, a banner read, "Official source: Media allegations that medical care is being denied to patients are baseless." Dr. Nazar Al Baharna, Bahrain’s minister of health, resigned later in the day. He did not elaborate on the reason why.
[…] "King Hamad’s decree does not give the authorities a blank check to commit abuses," Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch, said Wednesday. "The world is watching to see whether Bahrain will respect the basic rights of all its citizens."
4) Forces Rout Protesters From Bahrain Square
Ethan Bronner, New York Times, March 16, 2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/17/world/middleeast/17bahrain.html
Manama, Bahrain – Hundreds of riot police and military troops moved early Wednesday into Pearl Square, the stronghold of the antigovernment protest movement here, using tanks, helicopters and jeeps with machine guns mounted on their roofs to expel demonstrators clamoring for reform.
Two days after the Sunni monarchy of Bahrain brought in 2,000 troops from Saudi Arabia and other neighboring allies under the auspices of the Gulf Cooperation Council, and the day after it declared martial law, security forces rolled across the center of town, taking it from the Shiite protesters who had moved in a month ago and leaving it in flames.
"The G.C.C. troops are for fighting against foreign forces," a protester, Syed al-Alawi, told Al Jazeera. "Instead they are targeting the people of Bahrain."
[…] Activists said soldiers had arrived in villages outside the capital, including Sanabis and Sitra. There were reports on Facebook and Twitter of injured civilians unable to get to hospitals because ambulances were said to be barred from operating.
"Right now, no one is allowed to leave their houses and the hospital is under siege," a private doctor who volunteers at Salmaniya Hospital said, speaking on condition of anonymity because he feared arrest. "They are not allowing ambulances in," he said.
"Doctors are being attacked and asked to leave" at gunpoint, he said. "The army has control of the roads and questions any movement." He said makeshift first-aid areas were being set up in mosques and private homes but few had medical supplies.
[…] In Iraq, home to the region’s second largest Shiite population after Iran, followers of Moktada al-Sadr, the powerful anti-American cleric, rallied in the streets of Sadr City on Wednesday to protest the crackdown in Bahrain. Mr. Sadr, who is currently in Qom, Iran, but has perhaps more power than any Iraqi official to fill the streets with protesters, called for a much wider demonstration across Iraq on Friday.
On Wednesday, as Iraqi state television provided steady coverage of the unrest in Bahrain, about a thousand people rallied in Sadr City, chanting, "Yes, Yes for Bahrain! Yes, yes for Islam," and burning an effigy of Bahrain’s prince.
By the time first light came to the waters of the Persian Gulf, scores of jeeps and tanks were drawn up along the coastal area. Some reports said tanks had also rolled toward the financial district. Buildings neighboring Pearl Square lost electricity and Internet connections at around 6:30 a.m., as the authorities sought to block the communications that had enabled demonstrators to marshal their forces here, just as they had across the Arab world.
The situation in Bahrain is "alarming," said Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, speaking to reporters in Cairo before boarding a plane to Tunisia, where a wave of popular unrest sweeping the Middle East began. She urged Bahrain’s rulers to focus on the economic and political grievances raised by the protests: "We have said not only to the Bahrainis but to our Gulf partners that we do not think the security is the answer to what is going on."
[…]
5) General Sees Joint Bases For Afghans After 2014
Thom Shanker, New York Times, March 15, 2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/16/world/asia/16petraeus.html
Washington – The American commander in Afghanistan and the Pentagon’s top policy officer on Tuesday described the value of sustaining a long-term relationship with Kabul, and raised the possibility of operating joint military bases with local forces long after foreign troops are scheduled to withdraw in 2014.
Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of American and coalition forces, told members of the Senate Armed Services Committee that "it’s very important to stay engaged in a region in which we have such vital interests."
[…] He and Michele A. Flournoy, the under secretary of defense for policy, noted that any continuing military relationship with Afghanistan would require negotiations with the government there.
"The president’s been also very clear from the beginning that we do not seek any permanent bases in Afghanistan – that we don’t seek to have a presence that any other country in the region would see as a threat," Ms. Flournoy said.
[…]
6) Barbour: Cut Pentagon’s budget, reduce Afghan forces
Kasie Hunt, Politico, March 15, 2011 09:32 PM EDT
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0311/Barbour_breaks_with_rivals_on_Afghanistan_defense_spending.html
Davenport, Iowa – America should slash defense spending – and consider shrinking its presence in Afghanistan, Haley Barbour said Tuesday night.
Barbour, a likely candidate for president in 2012, told Iowa county leaders and activists here that the GOP won’t have any credibility on cutting spending if they’re not willing to trim the defense budget – often considered sacrosanct for Republicans.
"Anybody who says you can’t save money at the Pentagon has never been to the Pentagon," the Mississippi governor said. "We can save money on defense and if we Republicans don’t propose saving money on defense, we’ll have no credibility on anything else."
After the speech, Barbour told reporters that he couldn’t identify specific programs that should be cut from the Pentagon budget, but claimed savings could be found across the board.
He also said that the U.S. should consider reducing the number of troops in Afghanistan. "I think we need to look at that," he said when asked if the U.S. should scale back its presence.
But he said his reasoning isn’t financial. "What is our mission?" Barbour said. "How many Al Qaeda are in Afghanistan. … Is that a 100,000-man Army mission?"
[…]
Afghanistan
7) Security deteriorating in Afghanistan, life "untenable"-ICRC
Jonathon Burch and Hamid Shalizi, Reuters, Tuesday, March 15 03:15 pm
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/22/20110315/tpl-uk-afghanistan-civilians-61a15b8.html
Life for ordinary Afghans has become untenable, the Red Cross said on Tuesday, with security seriously deteriorating in the first two months of the year due to a surge in Taliban attacks and accidental NATO strikes on civilians.
Violence in Afghanistan is at its worst since the Taliban were overthrown nearly a decade ago, despite the presence of around 150,000 foreign troops, and with Afghan forces to start taking over securing parts of the country in a few months.
The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said January and February were particularly bad for Afghans, with more suicide bombings in public places, more roads strewn with bombs and more international military operations gone wrong.
On Tuesday, Afghan officials said two children were killed in an air strike by NATO-led forces as they were watering fields in eastern Kunar province late on Monday.
"The first two months of 2011 have seen a dramatic deterioration in the security situation for ordinary Afghans," Reto Stocker, the head of the ICRC in Afghanistan, said in a statement. "It is an untenable situation. Civilians must be protected from harm as much as possible, not become victims of the fighting."
Civilian casualties caused by NATO forces are a major source of tension between Afghan President Hamid Karzai and his Western allies. They also anger Afghans, complicating efforts to win their support for a war that, for most people, has brought only misery.
Abdul Marjan, district chief of Chawki in Kunar where the two brothers, aged 10 and 15, where killed, said the boys had been working on irrigation channels before they were hit. "They might have been mistaken for insurgents as they were carrying spades on their shoulders," Marjan told Reuters.
Shahzada Shahid, a lawmaker from Kunar, said the pair were students who had gone out to help work their father’s fields.
Irrigation agreements between villagers in the area mean the family’s land gets access to river water only in the evening.
A spokesman for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force,(ISAF) said an air strike in Chawki on Monday evening had targeted two suspected insurgents, killing one and wounding another after they were seen planting a roadside bomb. He added ISAF was looking into media reports of civilian casualties.
The children’s deaths come less than three weeks after two foreign helicopters gunned down nine boys as they collected firewood in the same province, a volatile area bordering Pakistan where international forces have stepped up operations in recent weeks.
The incident followed a spate of reported civilian deaths by foreign troops, mainly in the east, and prompted a sharp rebuke Karzai and a rare and candid apology for the killings by U.S. General David Petraeus, the commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan.
U.S. President Barack Obama also expressed his "deep regret" over the killings and U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates, on a visit to Afghanistan last week, said the killings were a "setback" to bilateral relations.
Last year was the most lethal for civilians since the war started, with a 15 percent rise in civilian deaths to 2,777, according to a U.N. report last week. The report said insurgents were responsible for three-quarters of the deaths.
NATO-led forces have significantly tightened rules governing air strikes and night raids in the past two years, leading to a drop in civilian casualties, but deaths are still relatively frequent and highly sensitive.
The U.N. report found that, while there was a 52 percent decline in civilian deaths from air strikes in 2010 compared to 2009, there was a 48 percent rise in deaths in the second half of last year compared to the first half.
This was due to "significant increases" in the use of air power during the second half of 2010.
Bahrain
8) High stakes over Bahrain
David Ignatius, Washington Post, Tuesday, March 15, 7:48 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/high-stakes-over-bahrain/2011/03/15/AB7ykyZ_story.html
The Obama administration and its support for democratic change in the Middle East has been on a collision course with Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and other traditional monarchies of the Persian Gulf. The crunch finally came this week with a sharp break over how to deal with protest in Bahrain.
[…] U.S. officials have been arguing that Bahrain’s Sunni monarchy must make political compromises to give more power to the Shiite majority there. The most emphatic statement came last weekend from Defense Secretary Bob Gates, who said during a visit to Bahrain that its "baby steps" toward reform weren’t enough and that the kingdom should step up its negotiations with the opposition.
This American enthusiasm for change has been anathema to the conservative regimes of the Gulf, and on Monday they backed Bahrain’s ruling Khalifa family with military force, marching about 2,000 troops up the causeway that links Bahrain to Saudi Arabia. A senior Saudi official told me the intervention was needed to protect Bahrain’s financial district and other key facilities from violent demonstrations. He warned that radical, Iranian-backed leaders were becoming more active in the protests.
"We don’t want Iran 14 miles off our coast, and that’s not going to happen," said the Saudi official. U.S. officials counter that Iran, so far, has been only a minor player in the Bahrain protests and that Saudi military intervention could backfire by strengthening Iran’s hand.
"There is a serious breach" between the Gulf countries and Washington over the issue, warned a second Saudi official. "We’re not going in [to Bahrain] to shoot people, we’re going in to keep a system in place," he said.
The Bahrain issue is the most important U.S.-Saudi disagreement in decades, and it could signal a fundamental change in policy. The Obama administration, in effect, is altering America’s long-standing commitment to the status quo in the Gulf, believing that change in Bahrain – as in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya – is inevitable and desirable.
The split reflects fundamental differences in strategic outlook. The Gulf regimes have come to mistrust Obama, seeing him as a weak president who will sacrifice traditional allies in his eagerness be "on the right side of history." They liken Obama’s rejection of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt to Jimmy Carter’s 1979 abandonment of the shah of Iran.
The crackup was predicted by a top UAE sheik in a February meeting with two visiting former U.S. officials. According to notes made during the conversation, the UAE official said: "We and the Saudis will not accept a Shiite government in Bahrain. And if your president says to the Khalifas what he said to Mubarak [to leave office], it will cause a break in our relationship with the U.S." The UAE official warned that Gulf nations were "looking East" – to China, India and Turkey – for alternative security assistance.
The Obama White House hasn’t yielded to such pleas and threats from the Gulf. U.S. officials believe the Saudis and others have no good option to the United States as a guarantor of security. They note that military and intelligence contacts are continuing, despite the sharp disagreement over Bahrain.
[…]
9) Why Bahrain is unlikely to turn into an Iran-Saudi battleground
The intervention of Saudi forces has escalated tensions between Bahrain’s protesters and the country’s Sunni rulers, leaving at least one dead and drawing criticism from Iran.
Jackie Spinner, Christian Science Monitor, March 15, 2011 at 3:39 pm EDT
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2011/0315/Why-Bahrain-is-unlikely-to-turn-into-an-Iran-Saudi-battleground
[…] While both Arab and Iranian leaders may seek to influence the outcome in Bahrain, ultimately the central tension is between the tiny nation’s ruling Khalifa family and an increasingly resolute protest movement.
"The main issue is that [the] Khalifas have been extremely poor managers of their country," says Jean-François Seznec, a professor at Georgetown University’s Center for Contemporary Arab Studies. "They have promised reform for many, many years and never delivered."
He called the Saudi troop presence on Bahrain soil a "terrible mistake" and, while only a symbolic gesture, one that will likely escalate tensions between the protesters and Bahrain’s ruling Sunni family. "It could have been solved very easily by having the Shiite liberals and Sunni liberals come together with the crown prince to establish a constitutional monarchy," he adds.
[…] Saudi Arabia’s intervention was made under the GCC umbrella and by invitation from Bahrain, but was nevertheless perceived by the predominantly Shiite protesters as well as Shiite-run Iran as a foreign invasion.
[Michael C. Hudson, director of the Middle East Institute at the National University of Singapore] says the presence of Saudi troops will radicalize the more extreme elements of the protest movement. Wire services reported that at least one Saudi soldier was killed Tuesday during clashes with protesters in Manama, Bahrain’s capital.
"They will see this basically as an occupation and crude threat or warning for them to stand down and it’s probably what it is," says Hudson. "That may not calm the situation at all. It may make it actually worse. It also has given the Iranians an opportunity, and it seems they’ll take advantage of it in an astute way."
Seznec says that the Iranians will "take advantage" of the upheaval to bolster their standing with Bahrain’s 70 percent Shiite majority. "The Bahraini Shiites aren’t necessarily pro-Iranian," he adds. "It’s an excuse for the Iranians to put some pressure on their own Shiite brothers to get more support."
But Rashid Khalidi, Edward Said Professor of Arab Studies at Columbia University, says Arab rulers will take advantage of the situation as well by stirring up fear about the perceived dangers of a stronger Iran and its militant allies.
"Saudi Arabia, all the other dictatorial Arab regimes, and their enablers and allies in Washington and Israel have long been obsessively focused on the Iranian bogeyman, which they see under every bed," he says. "I have just come from Cairo where the old regime’s harping on about Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas have been exposed by the revolution for the tired lying propaganda that it is."
Mr. Khalidi said the problems in eastern Saudi Arabia and Bahrain would exist even if there was no Iran.
"The problems are discrimination, denial of human and political rights, arbitrary authority which does not derive from the consent of the governed, and diversion of resources to a tiny minority on a gigantic scale," he said. "The same problems exist in nearly all the Arab countries, with local variations of course. Of course Iran is happy to fish in troubled waters, but that has nothing to do with why they are troubled."
[…]
10) U.S. May Lose Either Way In Bahrain Crisis
As a standoff in Bahrain teeters near violence, the U.S. faces a hard choice between maintaining support for an unpopular monarchy or pushing for change that could weaken the U.S. strategic position.
Paul Richter, Los Angeles Times, 6:09 PM PDT, March 15, 2011
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-us-bahrain-20110316,0,2161609.story
Washington – As a standoff between troops and protesters in Bahrain teeters near violence, the Obama administration is facing a difficult choice between maintaining support for an increasingly unpopular monarchy or pushing for change that could weaken the U.S. strategic position in the vital Persian Gulf.
Administration officials have been struggling for a month to persuade Bahrain’s royal family and its Saudi backers of the need to enact political reforms in the island nation that would offer greater standing to the impoverished Shiite majority but also keep the Sunni royal family in power. Jeffrey Feltman, the chief U.S. diplomat for the Middle East, arrived in Bahrain on Monday for a new round of talks.
But Bahrain’s decision to invite in hundreds of Saudi troops on Monday signaled that the two governments have grown impatient with the U.S. approach and are focused on reasserting control over the streets. Much of the Bahraini opposition, meanwhile, has spurned the monarchy’s American-backed offer of a dialogue and remains suspicious of the government’s intentions.
As a standoff between troops and protesters in Bahrain teeters near violence, the Obama administration is facing a difficult choice between maintaining support for an increasingly unpopular monarchy or pushing for change that could weaken the U.S. strategic position in the vital Persian Gulf.
Administration officials have been struggling for a month to persuade Bahrain’s royal family and its Saudi backers of the need to enact political reforms in the island nation that would offer greater standing to the impoverished Shiite majority but also keep the Sunni royal family in power. Jeffrey Feltman, the chief U.S. diplomat for the Middle East, arrived in Bahrain on Monday for a new round of talks.
But Bahrain’s decision to invite in hundreds of Saudi troops on Monday signaled that the two governments have grown impatient with the U.S. approach and are focused on reasserting control over the streets. Much of the Bahraini opposition, meanwhile, has spurned the monarchy’s American-backed offer of a dialogue and remains suspicious of the government’s intentions.
The hardening of the two sides’ positions suggests that the Obama administration may face a setback no matter how the crisis is resolved. If the Bahrainis suppress the protesters, the United States may be seen as siding with an autocrat against his people. If the government falls and the Shiite majority takes control – which appears to be the less likely outcome – Washington will lose a key ally and Shiite-led Iran may gain one.
U.S. officials acknowledge that they are worried about the increasingly sectarian cast of the conflict, which deepened when the troops of Sunni-led Saudi Arabia and police forces from the Sunni-led United Arab Emirates entered the island kingdom.
[…] The Obama administration is taking pains not to alienate the Bahrainis, who provide a home for the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet, or the Saudis, a strategic partner on oil, counter-terrorism and regional diplomacy, such as the containment of Iran.
Stephen McInerney, executive director of the Project on Middle East Democracy, said the administration already is perceived as supporting the Bahraini and Saudi governments’ approach, a perception that would be strengthened if the protests were snuffed out. As the Saudi troops moved in this week, "the perception on the street has been, ‘This would not be happening without U.S. support,’ " he said.
The White House stepped up its criticism of the military intervention Tuesday but stopped short of condemning Saudi Arabia. "There is no military solution to the problems in Bahrain," Tommy Vietor, spokesman for the National Security Council, said in a statement. "A political solution is necessary, and all sides must now work to produce a dialogue that addresses the needs of all of Bahrain’s citizens."
Despite the cautious U.S. language, the crisis comes at a time when the historically close American relationships with the Saudi and Bahraini governments are under stress.
Saudi King Abdullah was angry with the Obama administration for pushing former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to resign in February. Saudi officials also have been displeased that the White House has prodded them to accelerate their own reforms, a process they insist cannot be rushed because of the kingdom’s change-resistant clergy.
The Saudis appear to have again signaled their displeasure this month, cancelling planned visits to the kingdom by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates. Saudi officials said the king was too ill, but U.S. officials acknowledged that the recent tensions may have prompted the move.
The Saudis, like the Bahrainis and other governments of the Gulf Cooperation Council, also are "angry that Washington has let staunch allies such as President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt be forced from power, while doing little to push Col. Moammar Kadafi of Libya from his position," wrote Simon Henderson, a specialist on the Arabian Peninsula at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
Last month, U.S. officials said the Saudis were supportive of their plans for political change in Bahrain, and appeared willing to provide massive financial aid to help relieve the poverty of its Shiite population. But the Saudi government changed course as the protests continued and the opposition’s demands increased.
On Saturday, Gates had made a public appearance in Bahrain and called for an acceleration of the reform effort, saying "baby steps" weren’t enough.
Two days later, Bahraini authorities asked the Saudis to send military help.
Pentagon officials said Gates had no advance notice of the move. In a clear sign of the Saudi willingness to ignore U.S. advice, State Department officials said they were "advised but not consulted" on the intervention.
[…]
Israel/Palestine
11) Rival Palestinian Leaders Agree to Meet in Gaza
Isabel Kershner, New York Times, March 16, 2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/17/world/middleeast/17mideast.html
Jerusalem – The rival Palestinian leaderships of the West Bank and Gaza appeared to be taking practical steps on Wednesday toward ending their schism, in a rare response to public pressure for national unity after years of deep division.
The new talk of unity came as Israel displayed weaponry it seized after intercepting a merchant ship on Tuesday. Israeli leaders said the weapons, including six advanced antiship missiles, originated in Iran, were loaded aboard the ship in Syria and were ultimately bound for Gaza.
President Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah, who leads the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, said Wednesday that he was ready to go to Gaza and meet with Ismail Haniya, the leader of the Hamas government, who on Tuesday had invited Mr. Abbas and Fatah to resume unity talks. Mr. Abbas said the purpose would be to reach agreement on the formation of a new government that could prepare for Palestinian presidential and parliamentary elections within six months.
Mr. Haniya issued a statement saying that he had started discussions with other Hamas leaders and aides to arrange to receive Mr. Abbas. It would be Mr. Abbas’s first visit to Gaza since Hamas, the Islamic militant group, took control of the Palestinian coastal enclave in June 2007.
The new initiative came a day after popular demonstrations in Gaza and the West Bank that were organized by independent Palestinian youths calling for national reconciliation. Despite the political outreach by Mr. Haniya, Hamas security forces violently dispersed Tuesday’s mass rally in Gaza and repressed attempts to hold more protests on Wednesday.
Both the Palestinian Authority and Hamas have been wary of allowing popular demonstrations to take place, given the upheavals in the region and the risk that public frustration will turn against them. So the quick response by the two leaderships to popular demands was a rare convergence of interest.
Still, the sides seemed to have different agendas for a meeting, indicating that true unity could be a long way off. Mr. Abbas said he was going to Gaza only to form the new government, and not to engage in a national dialogue. An aide clarified that the government would be made up of "neutral national leaders," according to the official Palestinian news agency Wafa.
Mushir al-Masri, a Hamas official, said in a telephone interview that the agenda of the visit should be "discussed when the factions meet at the negotiations table, not before." He added that it was "unacceptable for any party to impose its partisan conditions on the other."
[…] –
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. The archive of the Just Foreign Policy News is here:
https://www.justforeignpolicy.org/blog/dailynews