Likud Government takes Revenge on Palestinians for UNESCO Membership

Posted on 11/02/2011 by Juan

The Pan-Arab London daily, al-Hayat, editorializes today that President Obama’s vote against Palestine’s membership in UNESCO demonstrates that his 2009 Cairo speech was “empty words.” Obama’s forays into outreach to the Muslim world are crashing and burning as he adopts anti-Palestinian positions little different from those of his predecessors.

As for the far rightwing government of Binyamin Netanyahu in Israel, it announced that it was “punishing” Palestine for joining UNESCO. Since Israel isn’t Palestine’s parents, what he really means is that Israel is taking revenge. The vengeful measures consisted of building 2000 more dwellings for Israeli squatters on Palestinian land in and around East Jerusalem, and withholding from the Palestinians tens of millions of dollars a month in custom and sales tax revenue collected for the Palestine Authority at ports and checkpoints by the Israelis, which control them.

As I have asked before, if the Israelis are the good guys, why is it that their leadership so often sounds like a James Bond villain. (“No, Mr. Abbas, I expect you to drop dead.”)

Since the Israelis regularly announce new settlement building on Palestinian land in the West Bank, moreover, this “punishment” (“revenge”) is really just business as usual, and calling it punishment is nothing more than posturing.

Palestine declines to enter into further negotiations with Israel precisely because the Israelis are gobbling up the very land over which the negotiations would be held, so that the talks would really just offer a Palestinian fig leaf to Israeli grand larceny. The Palestinians can’t see why they should do that.

As for the customs revenue, the Israelis regular freeze those payments, and they have a third of the occupied Palestinians, in Gaza, under an ongoing blockade of civilians that prevents them from exporting their made goods and keeps most of them living in penury and on the edge of food insecurity.

In other words, if these measures are actually revenge, then the Israelis have been vengeful for many years toward the Palestinians.

Israel is also excluding UNESCO from that country, probably in a bid to prevent the organization from recognizing Palestinian sites as world heritage sites, strengthening the Palestinian claim to them and the territory on which they stand.

Former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray argues that Palestine can now join the International Criminal Court. Murray writes:

“… the UNESCO membership is crucial recognition of Palestine’s statehood, not an empty gesture. With this evidence of international acceptance, there is now absolutely no reason why Palestine cannot, instantly and without a vote, join the International Criminal Court. Palestine can now become a member of the International Criminal Court simply by submitting an instrument of accession to the Statute of Rome, and joining the list of states parties.

As both the USA and Israel refuse to join the ICC because of their desire to commit war crimes with impunity, acceding to the statute of Rome would not only confirm absolutely that Palestine is a state, it would reinforce the fact that Palestine is a better international citizen with more moral legitimacy than Israel.

There is an extremely crucial point here: if Palestine accedes to the Statute of Rome, under Article 12 of the Statute of Rome, the International Criminal Court would have jurisdiction over Israelis committing war crimes on Palestinian soil. Other states parties – including the UK – would be obliged by law to hand over indicted Israeli war criminals to the court at the Hague. This would be a massive blow to the Israeli propaganda and lobbying machine.”

It is often said that the ICC cannot move against non-signatories. But since the Israelis are operating in Palestinian territory in the West Bank and Gaza, they thereby open themselves to prosecution were Palestine to join the ICC.

The Human Province blog has a complete vote tally for the UNESCO decision. It turns out that Spain, France, Ireland, Austria, Finland and Greece in Europe voted “yes,” which is a pretty big set of defections from US leadership. And, the UK, Italy and Denmark all abstained, which given the way this vote worked, essentially supported the Palestinians.

“No” votes were Australia, Canada, Czech Republic, Germany, Israel, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Palau, Panama, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Sweden, United States of America, Vanuatu.

With all due respect to the island nations, they aren’t very important in world affairs. Germany, Canada and Australia are the only medium-sized countries here, while Sweden, the Czech Republic and the Netherlands are relatively small despite being wealthy. The Rejectionist states toward Palestine are no longer very numerous or weighty, and mostly they are just being arm-twisted by the US to give Washington cover so that it doesn’t look like the US is the only one standing against basic Palestinian human rights.

As for the fall-out for the United States, an informed reader wrote to remind me that if the Palestinians are welcomed into other UN bodies, the US could well lose substantial influence and have its interests adversely affected. He notes that the International Telecommunication Union allocates radio spectrum usage globally, “including the spectrum reserved for military and commercial use.” The World Health Organization is clearly important to the US for combating epidemics. The World Meteorological Organization is a matrix of information about weather that has agricultural and military implications. The World Intellectual Property Organization recognizes patents and copyrights worldwide.

These sorts of UN organizations, which are, whether Americans want to recognize it or not, important to the United States, could be forced to expel the US and cease sharing information with it if it does not pay its dues. Congress in the 1990s, under the influence of the Israel lobbies, passed a law forbidding the US government from giving money to bodies that recognize Palestine.

The upshot: Netanyahu’s talk about “punishment” (“revenge”) seems likely to inspire buyers’ remorse in countries like Sweden and Australia that voted against the Palestinians at UNESCO, and reinforces the very image of Israel as regional bully that led to the vote in the first place. Obama’s vote against the Palestinians has cost him significant political capital in the Muslim world. And, the US now could face a series of debilitating expulsions from a whole range of essential international organizations.

The US and Israel are experiencing these setbacks because both are de facto supporting Greater Israel expansionism, which is illegal in international law. Ironically, there are very unlikely to be enough Israelis actually to displace the Palestinians from the West Bank, and they are probably just paving the way for a one-state solution after a few decades of Apartheid that likely will result in boycotts of Israel.

0 Retweet 2 Share 17 StumbleUpon 1 Printer Friendly Send via email

Posted in Israel/ Palestine | 6 Comments

Romney Flip-Flops on Mideast, Too: Cole in Truthdig

Posted on 11/02/2011 by Juan

My column is out in Truthdig, entitled, “Mitt Romney’s Big Bad Ideas for the Middle East”.

Excerpt:

“The Arab revolutions of 2011 have already removed three dictators and forced governments across the region to abolish draconian states of emergency. Tunisia has had free and fair parliamentary elections, and Egypt’s are scheduled to begin in late November. What is Romney’s response to these epochal events? “We’re facing an Arab Spring which is out of control in some respects because the president was not as strong as he needed to be in encouraging our friends to move toward representative forms of government,” he says.

Romney has conveniently forgotten that as late as Feb. 1 of this year, he was on CNN saying, “I probably would avoid the term ‘dictator’ in referring to Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak.” He was more generous to his predecessors then, not seeking to blame Mubarak’s non-dictatorship (1981-2011) on Obama. Instead, he said, “Over many administrations in this country, we’ve encouraged President Mubarak to move in the direction of providing … freedoms.”

Read the whole thing.

0 Retweet 0 Share 0 StumbleUpon 0 Printer Friendly Send via email

Posted in Uncategorized, US Politics | 4 Comments

UNESCO Palestine Vote Isolates US Further

Posted on 11/01/2011 by Juan

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization recognized Palestine as a full member on Monday setting off a crisis between the United States and the United Nations that seems likely to further isolate Washington in the world and reduce its influence.

The UNESCO vote could start an avalanche of such acceptances among various UN bodies. Although Palestine is unlikely now to get a majority next month at the UN Security Council, there is always next year. And the admission of Palestine by large numbers of UNO organizations might anyway have a similar effect to a UNSC majority vote.

Countries such as Norway and Ireland have signaled that they would like to raise Palestinian representation to full embassy status, and every international vote like the UNESCO one encourages them further in this direction. In turn, embassy status could begin giving Palestine standing in some countries to sue Israel in third-country courts for torts such as land and water usurpation.

Since a law passed by Congress in the 1990s forbids the US from funding UN bodies that recognize Palestine, the Obama administration has no choice but to withdraw the $80 million a year it gives UNESCO, which is a fifth of the agency’s budget. But what this step really means is that the US loses influence over UNESCO, and indeed, it might well lose its membership in the organization. UNESCO may have to close some offices and lose employees. Or someone else, such as Saudi Arabia or China, might pick up the $80 million, gaining influence over UNESCO at US expense.

If the move becomes common, the US could end up further and further isolated and helpless. What if the International Atomic Energy Agency recognizes Palestine as a member? If the US cuts it off, it loses a key arena within which it has been pressuring Iran over its nuclear enrichment program. And so on and so forth.

The overwhelming influence in the US Congress of the Israel lobbies (including those of the Christian Zionists) are leading the US down a path of increasing international isolation and weakness. The US vote against Palestine is the headline on the Arab satellite television news programs, and even in India and Russia it is a vote that makes the US look like an ogre.

The UNESCO vote was 107 for, 14 against, and 52 abstentions; 14 were absent. The vote had to be won by a two-thirds majority of states voting “yes” or “no.” Thus, to abstain in this situation was more or less to help the Palestinians win.

That voting pattern, in turn, reveals the shape of US influence in the world. The vote was not simply the West versus the Rest. Although Latin America, Africa and Asia strongly supported Palestinian membership, so too in the end did France. And Britain and Italy abstained rather than voting against. The rising BRIC bloc, of Brazil, Russia, India, and China all voted for. There appear only to be about 14 pro-Zionist countries left in the world, 12 beyond the United States and Israel itself.

The Israeli ambassador to UNESCO called the vote “science fiction,” since, he said, it recognized an imaginary state. The old Israeli inability to see the 11 million-strong Palestinian people as a nation-state, which once led Israeli consuls in the US to promote letter-writing campaigns against US newspapers that even used the word “Palestinian” in their stories, is obviously still intact.

More important, UNESCO recognition of Palestinian cultural monuments as world heritage sites could well complicate the slow Israeli theft of Palestinian territory on the West Bank and in and around Jerusalem. That usurpation of land and resources is made possible because the Israelis engineered the statelessness, i.e. the national homelessness, of the Palestinians.

Palestine had been scheduled by the League of Nations for statehood, as a Class A Mandate, and as late as 1939 the British government was pledging a Palestinian state within a decade. The ethnic cleansing campaign of militant members of the Yishuv in Palestine and then by Israelis led to the expulsion of 700,000 or so Palestinians from their homes. But they didn’t just become refugees, losing all their property. They became stateless. Statehood is the right to have rights. Palestinians not only have no rights, they don’t have the right to have them. That is why the Israeli pledges to them in the Oslo peace process could be reneged on so easily. Palestinians are the nobodies of the Levant, the non-entities, the marks and fall guys.

The vote demonstrates again the sea change that has taken place in the international community regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I believe that there are several reasons for this change:

1. Everyone can see that the Israeli government of PM Yitzhak Rabin made undertakings to the Palestinians as part of the Oslo peace accords, such as withdrawal from the West Bank, on which the Israelis reneged.

2. The Israeli attack on Lebanon in 2006 made it look like a reckless bully.

3. The Israeli blockade of basic necessities for Palestinian non-combatants and children in the Gaza Strip from 2007 made the Israelis look heartless.

4. The Israeli attack on little Gaza in 2008-2009, where 40 percent of the population is camp-dwelling refugees whose families were expelled from what is now Israel in 1947-1948, made Israel look like a reckless bully.

5. The Israeli attack on the Turkish aid ship the Mavi Marmara on May 31, 2010, in which commandos killed 9 persons, one an American citizen, made Israel look like a reckless bully.

6. Constant Israeli announcements of expanded settlements on Palestinian territory are widely seen as breaking international law, as well as a form of theft.

Disgust with these Israeli policies of continually victimizing the Palestinians is so widespread and deep that even Germany has just threatened to cancel the delivery to Israel of a submarine because of the announcement of settlements in Arab east Jerusalem. Germany, for understandable historical reasons, almost never criticizes Israel. But the Likud attempt to expel Palestinians from their long-time homes in Jerusalem has pushed even Berlin to criticize the policy publicly.

It isn’t just the world community that is dismayed at the setting in of long-term Israeli Apartheid. Even the widow of Israeli war hero Moshe Dayan now laments,

“I’m a peacemaker, but the current Israeli government does not know how to make peace. We move from war to war, and this will never stop. I think Zionism has run its course.”…

“Today we use foreign labor to work in Israel because Palestinians are not allowed. And this continuous expansion of the settlements everywhere-—I cannot accept it. I cannot tolerate this deterioration in the territories and the roadblocks everywhere. And that horrible wall! It’s not right.”

Aljazeera English reports on the UNESCO vote:

0 Retweet 16 Share 70 StumbleUpon 0 Printer Friendly Send via email

Posted in Israel/ Palestine | 30 Comments

Mahoney: New Leadership in Kyrgyzstan Fateful for US Bases in Central Asia

Posted on 11/01/2011 by Juan

Jon Mahoney writes in a guest column for Informed Comment

Many readers of Informed Comment will be interested in the outcome of the presidential elections in Kyrgyzstan held on October 30th. With 99% of votes counted, AP and other news sources are reporting that Alzambek Atambaev received 63% of of the votes, well above the 50% required to forestall a run-off. This result is quite surprising to most. Though Atambaev was the clear front runner, in the run up to Sunday’s election it was widely assumed that no candidate would receive more than 50% of the votes. Two of Atambaev’s most serious challengers, Kamchibek Tashiev and Adakhan Madumarov each received less than 15%; both candidates are currently challenging the results. In an effort to highlight some things to look out for in the near future, this post provides some (by no means complete) background to the current political situation in Kyrgyzstan.

With a population of 5.5 million (approximately 65% Kyrgyz, 14% Uzbek and a number of other ethnic groups including Russians and Uyghurs) Kyrgyzstan has had two revolutions since Russian independence in 1991; the first in 2005 and the second in 2010. This political instability is in stark contrast to neighboring Uzbekistan (ruled by a world class thug, Islam Karimov) and Kazakhstan (ruled by an autocrat Nursultan Nazarbayev). Kyrgyzstan also experienced significant ethnic conflict in June of 2010, several months after the 2010 revolution. According to a 2011 report by the Kyrgyzstan Independent Commission (KIC) approximately 470 people were killed during several days of violence in southern Kyrgyzstan (Osh and Jalal Abad in particular); most victims were Uzbeks. Many suspected of involvement in these events have been subject to harassment and torture. In Osh, many businesses and homes owned by Uzbeks are still in ruins and to this day there is a large group of displaced Uzkek citizens (some in Uzbekistan, some in Kyrgyzstan).

Roza Otunbayeva, (a former philosophy professor and longtime political actor) was appointed interim president after the 2010 revolution; she was not a candidate for the presidential election. Many observers characterize Otunbaeva as a well-intentioned yet mostly powerless political force. This past spring Otunbaeva was given the “Women of Courage” award by the U.S. Department of State; steely eyed readers will rightly wonder if the U.S. Transit Center at Manas near the Kyrgyz capital, Bishkek, has something to do with this.

In addition to ongoing and unresolved tension between Kyrgyz and Uzbek citizens, economic factors are also relevant to understanding instability in Kyrgyzstan. Fuel supplies to the Americans at Manas have in the past been major source of personal prosperity for past Kyrgyz presidents (e.g. Akaev who ruled from 1991-2005 and Bakiev who ruled from 2005-2010). Moreover, the gold mining industry (here Kumtor stands above all other mining corporations, providing between 7-20% of the Kyrgyz GDP–the numbers depend on who does the reporting, and no doubt, accounting) will likely be a central factor in political developments for the foreseeable future. Personal income for most Kyrgyz citizens is very sparse. For instance, primary school teachers often earn less than 50$ a month and for many Kyrgyz citizens the most promising career path is that of a seasonal worker in Russia.

Up to this point, religion has not been a major factor in Kyrgyz politics. Though approximately 75-80% of Kyrgyz citizens self-identify as Muslims, few are devout and public life in Kyrgyzstan can hardly be characterized as having serious religious elements. Some in the Kyrgyz government will claim that there is a rising threat of political Islam yet this should probably be construed as a canard by those who want to ignore real problems (e.g. ethnic tension between Kyrgyz and Uzbek citizens) and to flatter the Western powers who are more likely to both offer foreign aid and overlook political repression when exercised in the name of combatting radical Muslims. Political discourse is often littered with dangerous yet junk phrases such as “foreign elements.” For example, when I spoke with Kyrgyz academics who also work for the Kyrgyz government at a conference this past summer I was told that among the “external factors” that pose a threat to political stability are Baptists who seek converts and militant Islamists with guns stoking the flames of ethnic conflict. These kinds of claims would be on the laughable end of the spectrum were they not so widespread.

Kyrgyzstan matters to the United States. Manas airbase is a major transit center for the war in Afghanistan. Kyrgyzstan is also the only country that “has the pleasure” of hosting both Russian and American military bases (Russia has facilities both in Kant, about 25 kilometers east of Bishkek, as well as in Osh, Kyrygzstan’s second largest city, located in the south). Atambaev has been courted by the Putin government and stated earlier this summer that were he elected he would not renew the lease for the American transit center at Manas; he repeated these claims about Manas in the past few days.

Worries by the American government about the future of Manas is likely one of the factors (this is overlooked by mainstream media sources due to all the focus on the soured relations between the U.S. and Pakistan) that explains Hillary Clinton’s recent trip to Uzbekistan. Tthe U.S. had had a military presence in Uzbekistan in the early stages of the Afghan war yet this ended when Karimov expelled the Americans after the U.S. criticized his regime for a violent crackdown on student protesters in 2005–the “Andijan Massacre”. There is also pressure on Kyrgyzstan to join the Customs Union with Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus. Were this to happen, Western powers, mainly the United States, would likely apply counter pressure, either with threats of financial sanctions under the guise of violating WTO agreements or with a treat in the form of increased foreign aid, in exchange for not joining the Union.

In the immediate aftermath of the elections, some factors that may have a significant effect on political events include: a more pronounced division between those who identify themselves as “northern” and “southern”; rising Kyrgyz ethnic nationalism; efforts at foreign investment by companies with interests in mining and hydroelectric power; and efforts by the United States, Russia and to a lesser extend China to increase their influence in Kyrgyzstan and in Central Asia. The “north-south” division may well be a more prominent factor in the short term. Both Tashiev and Mudumarov are widely perceived to be “southern” politicians and each is capable of mobilizing supporters for street protests, should they choose to do so. As of this morning Radio Free/Radio Liberty is reporting that 1,000 Tashiev were blocking the Bishkek-Osh highway near the southern Kyrgyz city of Jalal Abad. Regardless of how conflicts over the election are resolved, it is reasonable to predict that from a longer term perspective ethnic nationalism and conflicts over how to promote economic development will remain key sources of conflict.

REFERENCES:

The final report on the June 2010 violence by the Kyrgyzstan Independent Commission can be found here.

Readers can also check out the following English language news sources:

Eurasianet (a Soros site devoted to news on Central Asia).

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

Two recent books with insightful analysis include:

Dilip Hiro, Inside Central Asia (London, Overlook Duckworth, 2009)

Eric McGlinchey, Chaos, Violence, Dynasty: Politics and Islam in Central Asia (Pittsburg, Pittsburg University Press, 2011).
———-

Jon Mahoney, Associate Professor of Philosophy, Kansas State University. From January-July, 2011 Jon was a Fulbright scholar at the American University of Central Asia, Bishkek, Kyrgyz Republic.

0 Retweet 0 Share 3 StumbleUpon 0 Printer Friendly Send via email

Posted in Central Asia, Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Syria Promises Response to Arab League Plan, Threatens ‘Volcano’ if Attacked

Posted on 10/31/2011 by Juan

Syria said it would reply Monday to the proposal of the Arab League for ending the violence in that country.

Aljazera has video.

On Sunday, an interview appeared in the Telegraph with President Bashar al-Assad of Syria.

He said, “Syria is the hub now in this region . . . It is the fault line, and if you play with the ground you will cause an earthquake … Do you want to see another Afghanistan, or tens of Afghanistans?” He added, “Any problem in Syria will burn the whole region. If the plan is to divide Syria, that is to divide the whole region.”

Aljazeera Arabic reports on the threat:

There is something to Al-Assad’s sinister warning. If Syria went the way of Libya, it would likely be regionalized. Jordanian clans have ties to those in Deraa. Sunni and Shiite Iraqis have a stake in the outcome. Turkey and Iran have serious interests in Syria. It really could be a volcano. The question is whether it is worth it to risk such a parlous outcome. Many Syrians obviously think it is.

0 Retweet 0 Share 2 StumbleUpon 0 Printer Friendly Send via email

Posted in Uncategorized | 6 Comments

Ganann: Police raids and violence against activists are Un-American

Posted on 10/31/2011 by Juan

Gerald Ganann writes in a guest column for Informed Comment

I opened my local newspaper one morning recently to find that the Occupy movement had made it all the way to page two, albeit as a result of excessive police violence against the activists in Oakland and Atlanta (police excesses in New York, Boston, etc. get a pass). And as I write this, Scott Olsen, a Marine Corps veteran with two tours in Iraq, is scheduled to under-go brain surgery as a result of a head injury from a tear gas canister fired by the Oakland police (according to witnesses on the scene). The AP article described the protesters as “on edge” and “unnerved”. Well, I don’t doubt that if you’re attacked by SWAT teams and police in riot gear, using tear gas, batons, bean bags of lead shot and rubber bullets, you just might be “on edge”, or “unnerved”.

I’m sure there are those out there who think “those people” must have done something to warrant such strong police actions; that, “they got what they deserved.” Let me assure everyone that “those people” are from your neighborhood, they are your children, and your parents, they are people from your church and your workplace; they are truly a cross section of America … I know, I’m one of them.

I have occupied Freedom Plaza in Washington D.C. and People’s Plaza in Minneapolis. No, I don’t have an enslaving student loan hanging over me; my home has not been foreclosed; neither my job nor my financial security has been stolen by Wall Street criminals (so far); like Scott Olsen, I too am a veteran and also a member of Veterans for Peace; however I’m a little older than Scott (who’s 24), I will be 67 years old in a few days. While many of the protesters do suffer the hardships I mentioned and more, most of them are not out there merely to seek personal justice but are, like Scott Olsen and myself, seeking justice for all people.

Much has been made of the fact that this peoples’ uprising is “leaderless”. I’m old enough to remember when we did have leaders, inspirational leaders; Jack and Bobby and Martin, they were killed. Let us now take our cue from Thomas Jefferson and put our faith not in leaders, but in the American people. I can attest to an exhilarating atmosphere generated by the horizontal democracy that’s developing.

Many pundits denigrate us as having no unifying core issues or demands. As is so often the case, the pundits are mistaken. It’s just that the core issues (and the “demands” that will ultimately develop) are too broad for the pundits to grasp. The people standing up publicly for our rights simply want justice, and equality, for everyone; economic justice, and social justice, and criminal justice that is reasonable and applies the same to all. We want to restore the dream that has always been America; the dream embodied in the Declaration of Independence and codified in the Constitution.

The power of vast wealth in the hands of a few has horribly corrupted our environment, our marketplace, our government, and even our electoral process itself. So now we have no option left but to take up the rights and responsibilities bestowed upon us by the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, and restore our country. It is time now, to put aside our differences. It is time for the people to unite and use our lawful collective power to peacefully institute radical alteration of this government which has become destructive of our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

And just as a refresher, the First Amendment reads (in part), “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” These rights of the people are unambiguous and guaranteed not to be restricted or diminished by any law.

—-

Gerald Ganann is a progressive activist and a member of Vets for Peace.

0 Retweet 3 Share 31 StumbleUpon 0 Printer Friendly Send via email

Posted in Uncategorized | 10 Comments

Kabul Bombing of US Bus Leaves 13 Dead

Posted on 10/30/2011 by Juan

The Taliban claimed credit for a bombing of a bus in Kabul, which killed 13 US security personnel (apparently 5 US troops and 8 security contractors). Three innocent bystanders, Afghans and a policemen, were also killed.

Military officers focused on the big picture hate stories like this one, because, they say, ‘if it bleeds, it leads,’ without reference to whether it tells us anything about who is winning the war. In that regard, the bombing seems to me significant because it had to be based on an insider’s information. How many supposed Aghanistan National Army troops are actually sympathetic to the Taliban? The incident raises these questions of who is actually in control.

Aljazeera English reports:

To get a sense of how the event was covered locally, consider this translation by the USG Open Source from a Pashto newspaper:

‘ Some 16 foreign troops killed in separate incidents in Afghan capital, south
Afghan Islamic Press
Saturday, October 29, 2011…

Text of report by private Pakistan-based Afghan Islamic Press news agency

Kabul, 29 October: Sixteen soldiers of the ISAF (International Security Assistance Force) have been killed in two separate incidents. Sixteen soldiers of the ISAF were killed in separate attacks in southern Kandahar Province and in the Afghan capital, Kabul, on Saturday (29 October). According to reports, a car bomb attack was carried out on a foreign military convoy in the Dar-ul Aman area of capital Kabul today.

The ISAF in a statement said that a car bomb attack was carried out in Kabul and preliminary information indicates that 13 ISAF soldiers were killed. The statement said that civilians also sustained casualties in the incident. The interior ministry in a statement said that a suicide attack was carried out through a Corolla vehicle on a coalition military convoy in the Dar-ul Aman area of Kabul at around 1130 hours (0700 gmt) today, killing three civilians and a policeman.

Spokesman for the Taleban Zabihollah Mojahed claimed responsibility for the attack and told AIP that the attack was carried out by a Taleb named Abdol Rahman Hazarboz through a Land Cruiser vehicle in which 700 kg of explosives were placed. Mojahed added that 25 senior foreign (military) officers were killed and many others were wounded in the attack. Many ISAF soldiers have been killed from time to time over the past some years. Thirty-one US special forces members were killed when a Chinook helicopter was shot down by the Taleban on 6 August in Wardag Province. But, it is the first time that so many soldiers have lost their lives in a suicide attack.

Also, an Afghan soldier killed three coalition soldiers in the southern Kandahar Province of Afghanistan today. A statement issued by the ISAF said that a person, wearing the national army uniform, fired shots at Afghan and coalition soldiers today, killing two coalition soldiers, and another ISAF soldier later succumbed to injuries. The commander of Military Corps No 205 in the south, Gen Abdol Hamid, also said that three ISAF soldiers were killed in the incident and told AIP that an Afghan soldier opened fire on internal and foreign soldiers today, killing two ISAF soldiers and an Afghan interpreter.

He said that eight ISAF and one Afghan soldier were also wounded in the attack and an ISAF soldier later succumbed to injuries. The ISAF and Gen Abdol Hamid said that the soldier who attacked them was also shot dead. Military observers say that foreign military causalities caused on Saturday in Afghanistan are very high. They say that as the US has expressed its willingness for talks with the Taleban, these attacks by the Taleban at such a critical time show that the Taleban are not willing to hold talks and still believe that a military approach can resolve Afghanistan’s issue and they can achieve victory in the battlefield. It is worth pointing out that today’s casualties of NATO in Afghanistan brought the total number of foreign soldiers killed in Afghanistan this month [sic, should be 'year'] to 514.

(Description of Source: Peshawar Afghan Islamic Press in Pashto — Peshawar-based agency, staffed by Afghans, that describes itself as an independent “news agency” but whose history and reporting pattern reveal a perceptible pro-Taliban bias; the AIP’s founder-director, Mohammad Yaqub Sharafat, has long been associated with a mujahidin faction that merged with the Taliban’s “Islamic Emirate” led by Mullah Omar; subscription required to access content; http://www.afghanislamicpress.com)’

0 Retweet 0 Share 1 StumbleUpon 0 Printer Friendly Send via email

Posted in Afghanistan | 20 Comments

Why a No-Fly Zone won’t Work in Syria

Posted on 10/29/2011 by Juan

Syrian troops fired into peaceful demonstrations in Hama and Homs on Friday. Repression of protests yesterday is estimated to have cost 40 lives. The BBC reports that some demonstrators are calling for a “no-fly zone” imposed by the international community on Syria. (The BBC video shows a sign demanding a hazr jawwi or aerial curfew.)

This wish for outside intervention on the part of some street protesters contrasts with the position of the opposition Syrian National Council, which has steadfastly rejected foreign meddling in Syria

There are many reasons for which the protesters will not get their wish for a no-fly zone over Syria.

Most important, a no-fly zone is not a practical response to the Baath government’s repression. On Friday, troops just shot into the crowds. Unlike Qaddafi, Bashar al-Assad is not bombing his cities with jets from the air. Nor are helicopter gunships or tank units central to the coercive abilities of the Syrian state. Syrian geography is complex, and plinking tanks from the air is not an option in Syria.

A further consideration is that Syria is in conflict with Israel, and taking out its anti-aircraft abilities would so weaken it as to encourage Israeli adventurism. Libya was not at war with its neighbors this spring and summer and so an intervention there did not upset regional balances of power.

There is no Arab League resolution urging intervention in Syria. There is no United Nations Security Council resolution authorizing war. In the absence of a UNSC resolution, any attack on Syria would be considered an act of aggression and could open US politicians and military men to prosecution in international courts.

Russia and China are against Western intervention, which dooms any condemnatory resolution at the UN security council. In international law since 1945, especially in the UN charter, the only grounds for going to war are self-defense or as a result of a UNSC resolution. Neither obtains in Syria and any foreign intervention would therefore be illegal, and the pilots could be tried in international courts.

It breaks my heart to say all this. The youth of Syria is being cold-bloodedly shot down by army snipers. You wish there was a way to stop it. But there isn’t. There isn’t a practical set of military tactics outsiders could deploy effectively in this situation. There is no international framework of legality for an intervention.

But it should be remembered that the political wing of the Syrian opposition in any case does not want such an intervention, and that most Syrians are determined to go it alone. They want to do what the Tunisians and Egyptians did. They should be given a chance, since that would be the best outcome possible.

0 Retweet 2 Share 7 StumbleUpon 0 Printer Friendly Send via email

Posted in Syria | 25 Comments