11 New Messages
Digest #4478
Messages
Fri Aug 31, 2012 5:29 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://news.
Xinhua News Agency
August 31, 2012
NAM, voice of developing countries in a time of drastic change
By Yang Shuyi, Zhu Xiaolong, Du Yuanjiang
TEHRAN: "The preservation of peace...It is in the pursuit of this policy that we have chosen the path of nonalignment in any military or like pact of alliance." Jawaharlal Nehru, India's first prime minister and prominent advocate of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), delivered a well-known speech in 1956 explaining why developing countries should follow the non-alignment course.
With NAM's 16th summit held in Iran's capital of Tehran from Aug. 26 to 31, heads of states or governments and high officials from over 100 countries and regions, many of which bear little economic or political similarities except that they are from the developing world, gathered again to speak in one voice on major challenges the world is facing, especially in this time of drastic change.
Twenty years after the last days of Cold War, the very scenario that prompts the birth of non-alignment concept, the purpose of NAM's summit, or of the NAM organization itself, is just as solid as ever: giving a voice to the developing world, so as to promote world peace and cooperation.
As the largest grouping of countries outside of the United Nations, NAM's membership is particularly concentrated in developing countries.
So far, NAM consists of 120 members, 17 observer countries and 10 observer organizations, representing nearly two-thirds of the United Nations' members, or about 55 percent of the world population, which makes its decisions influential.
As the grouping of developing countries, "we should contribute to the solution of the problems in the world today," Z. Jerkic, a senior official from Bosnia and Herzegovina'
"There are so many issues that are of the interest of the members of the Movement, but certainly political crisis are the ones that the focus of attention should be, and also economic issues," he noted.
Consisting of countries and regions with different economic and political interests, NAM features a loose organizational structure. The one thing that links all the members together, notably, is their common belief in the world peace and cooperation.
Over the years, members of NAM adopt synchronized policies in dealing with various international issues, which leaves a huge impact on the process of policy making at the global level.
NAM's commitment to peace even predates its establishment in 1961, as in the 1950s prominent leaders such as Indonesian President Sukarno and Indian Prime Minister Nehru already echoed the five principles put forth by late Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai, which includes mutual respect for each other's territorial integrity and sovereignty, mutual non-aggression, mutual non- interference in domestic affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful co-existence.
The world is experiencing dramatic changes, especially the Middle East region that has been witnessing a widespread transformational thunderstorm over the past year and a half. The upheaval in Syria, Libya, Tunisia and Egypt, among others, as well as the Iranian nuclear issue, not only affects regional countries but also the whole world.
In May, ministers of NAM countries agreed that the present global scenario pose great challenges in the areas of peace and security, economic development, social progress, as well as rule of law. They also realized that many new areas of concern and challenges have emerged, particularly the global financial and economic crisis.
"It's a very challenging global environment at the moment. The Movement needs to remain true to its principles, but at the same time must adapt to changing global circumstances,
During the summit, one of the main topics is how to ensure a more just global governance, said the Indonesian minister. "The global governance, the global framework, must allow for the contribution by Non-Aligned Movement countries in the promotion of international peace and security, promotion of social and economic development, promotion of good governance and human rights."
As the voice of developing countries, NAM continues to strive for the maintenance of international peace and security, a goal that could not be achieved without strengthening and revitalizing NAM in this time of drastic change. Benin's President Yayi Boni said during the summit that NAM is not against any specific country or government, and called on NAM members to forget about their differences and become "one political voice."
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Xinhua News Agency
August 31, 2012
NAM, voice of developing countries in a time of drastic change
By Yang Shuyi, Zhu Xiaolong, Du Yuanjiang
TEHRAN: "The preservation of peace...It is in the pursuit of this policy that we have chosen the path of nonalignment in any military or like pact of alliance." Jawaharlal Nehru, India's first prime minister and prominent advocate of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), delivered a well-known speech in 1956 explaining why developing countries should follow the non-alignment course.
With NAM's 16th summit held in Iran's capital of Tehran from Aug. 26 to 31, heads of states or governments and high officials from over 100 countries and regions, many of which bear little economic or political similarities except that they are from the developing world, gathered again to speak in one voice on major challenges the world is facing, especially in this time of drastic change.
Twenty years after the last days of Cold War, the very scenario that prompts the birth of non-alignment concept, the purpose of NAM's summit, or of the NAM organization itself, is just as solid as ever: giving a voice to the developing world, so as to promote world peace and cooperation.
As the largest grouping of countries outside of the United Nations, NAM's membership is particularly concentrated in developing countries.
So far, NAM consists of 120 members, 17 observer countries and 10 observer organizations, representing nearly two-thirds of the United Nations' members, or about 55 percent of the world population, which makes its decisions influential.
As the grouping of developing countries, "we should contribute to the solution of the problems in the world today," Z. Jerkic, a senior official from Bosnia and Herzegovina'
"There are so many issues that are of the interest of the members of the Movement, but certainly political crisis are the ones that the focus of attention should be, and also economic issues," he noted.
Consisting of countries and regions with different economic and political interests, NAM features a loose organizational structure. The one thing that links all the members together, notably, is their common belief in the world peace and cooperation.
Over the years, members of NAM adopt synchronized policies in dealing with various international issues, which leaves a huge impact on the process of policy making at the global level.
NAM's commitment to peace even predates its establishment in 1961, as in the 1950s prominent leaders such as Indonesian President Sukarno and Indian Prime Minister Nehru already echoed the five principles put forth by late Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai, which includes mutual respect for each other's territorial integrity and sovereignty, mutual non-aggression, mutual non- interference in domestic affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful co-existence.
The world is experiencing dramatic changes, especially the Middle East region that has been witnessing a widespread transformational thunderstorm over the past year and a half. The upheaval in Syria, Libya, Tunisia and Egypt, among others, as well as the Iranian nuclear issue, not only affects regional countries but also the whole world.
In May, ministers of NAM countries agreed that the present global scenario pose great challenges in the areas of peace and security, economic development, social progress, as well as rule of law. They also realized that many new areas of concern and challenges have emerged, particularly the global financial and economic crisis.
"It's a very challenging global environment at the moment. The Movement needs to remain true to its principles, but at the same time must adapt to changing global circumstances,
During the summit, one of the main topics is how to ensure a more just global governance, said the Indonesian minister. "The global governance, the global framework, must allow for the contribution by Non-Aligned Movement countries in the promotion of international peace and security, promotion of social and economic development, promotion of good governance and human rights."
As the voice of developing countries, NAM continues to strive for the maintenance of international peace and security, a goal that could not be achieved without strengthening and revitalizing NAM in this time of drastic change. Benin's President Yayi Boni said during the summit that NAM is not against any specific country or government, and called on NAM members to forget about their differences and become "one political voice."
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Aug 31, 2012 5:46 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://en.trend.
Trend News Agency
August 31, 2012
2 NATO soldiers killed as helicopter crashes in Afghanistan
Two NATO soldiers were killed Thursday morning when a military helicopter crashed in restive southern Afghanistan, the military alliance said.
"Two International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) service members died following a helicopter crash in southern Afghanistan today," the NATO-led ISAF said in a statement.
...
The statement did not disclose the nationalities of the victims under the ISAF policy, only saying "it is ISAF policy to defer casualty identification procedures to the relevant national authorities.
Meantime, Daud Ahmadi, a spokesman for provincial government in southern Helmand province, told Xinhua that the crash took place in Helmand's Garmser district at early Thursday morning.
The Thursday's crash is the second air crash incident in August.
A total of three U.S. special force, two U.S. Navy SEALS and one Navy explosive expert as well as four Afghan commandos and a local translator were killed when a U.S. Black Hawk helicopter went down in Shah Wali Kot district of southern Kandahar province on Aug. 16.
The Taliban stepped up their attacks on Afghan and NATO-led troops since a spring offensive was launched in May in the war- ravaged country.
The insurgent group claimed responsibility for shooting down the helicopter in Kandahar. The incident brings to nine the number of air crashes so far this year which left 39 foreign soldiers and eight Afghans dead.
The death toll has brought to 319 the number of foreign soldiers killed in Afghanistan so far this year.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Trend News Agency
August 31, 2012
2 NATO soldiers killed as helicopter crashes in Afghanistan
Two NATO soldiers were killed Thursday morning when a military helicopter crashed in restive southern Afghanistan, the military alliance said.
"Two International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) service members died following a helicopter crash in southern Afghanistan today," the NATO-led ISAF said in a statement.
...
The statement did not disclose the nationalities of the victims under the ISAF policy, only saying "it is ISAF policy to defer casualty identification procedures to the relevant national authorities.
Meantime, Daud Ahmadi, a spokesman for provincial government in southern Helmand province, told Xinhua that the crash took place in Helmand's Garmser district at early Thursday morning.
The Thursday's crash is the second air crash incident in August.
A total of three U.S. special force, two U.S. Navy SEALS and one Navy explosive expert as well as four Afghan commandos and a local translator were killed when a U.S. Black Hawk helicopter went down in Shah Wali Kot district of southern Kandahar province on Aug. 16.
The Taliban stepped up their attacks on Afghan and NATO-led troops since a spring offensive was launched in May in the war- ravaged country.
The insurgent group claimed responsibility for shooting down the helicopter in Kandahar. The incident brings to nine the number of air crashes so far this year which left 39 foreign soldiers and eight Afghans dead.
The death toll has brought to 319 the number of foreign soldiers killed in Afghanistan so far this year.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Aug 31, 2012 5:46 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://en.trend.
Trend News Agency
August 31, 2012
Georgian electoral reform discussed at NATO headquarters
N. Kirtskhalia
Tbilisi: NATO headquarters hosted a Georgia-NATO meeting at ambassadorial level on the reform of the electoral system in Georgia and preparation for parliamentary elections on October 1.
As reported by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Georgia, the meeting was chaired by NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen. The Georgian delegation was headed by the permanent representative of Georgia to NATO Ambassador Grigol Mgaloblishvili. It also included the First Deputy Minister of Justice Tina Burjaliani and Deputy State Minister for Integration into European and Euro-Atlantic structures Elene Khoshtaria.
The Georgian side presented information on electoral reform and its results, on the preparations for the elections and the existing challenges.
Information was also provided on the special operation taken place on the Dagestan section of the Georgian-Russian border.
Alliance members praised the achievements of Georgia in the field of democratic reform and stressed the importance of free and fair elections.
They also noted the progress made towards the integration of Georgia into NATO and expressed appreciation for its contribution to Euro-Atlantic security.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Trend News Agency
August 31, 2012
Georgian electoral reform discussed at NATO headquarters
N. Kirtskhalia
Tbilisi: NATO headquarters hosted a Georgia-NATO meeting at ambassadorial level on the reform of the electoral system in Georgia and preparation for parliamentary elections on October 1.
As reported by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Georgia, the meeting was chaired by NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen. The Georgian delegation was headed by the permanent representative of Georgia to NATO Ambassador Grigol Mgaloblishvili. It also included the First Deputy Minister of Justice Tina Burjaliani and Deputy State Minister for Integration into European and Euro-Atlantic structures Elene Khoshtaria.
The Georgian side presented information on electoral reform and its results, on the preparations for the elections and the existing challenges.
Information was also provided on the special operation taken place on the Dagestan section of the Georgian-Russian border.
Alliance members praised the achievements of Georgia in the field of democratic reform and stressed the importance of free and fair elections.
They also noted the progress made towards the integration of Georgia into NATO and expressed appreciation for its contribution to Euro-Atlantic security.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Aug 31, 2012 5:55 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://en.apa.
Azeri Press Agency
August 31, 2012
NATO Secretary General to visit Azerbaijan
Victoria Dementieva
Baku: NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen plans to visit Azerbaijan on September 7, APA reports.
The NATO Secretary General will hold meetings with the Azerbaijani leadership and discuss the issues of cooperation between Azerbaijan and NATO.
Rasmussen will visit Baku within his South Caucasus trip. He will be on a visit to Armenia on September 5-6.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Azeri Press Agency
August 31, 2012
NATO Secretary General to visit Azerbaijan
Victoria Dementieva
Baku: NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen plans to visit Azerbaijan on September 7, APA reports.
The NATO Secretary General will hold meetings with the Azerbaijani leadership and discuss the issues of cooperation between Azerbaijan and NATO.
Rasmussen will visit Baku within his South Caucasus trip. He will be on a visit to Armenia on September 5-6.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Aug 31, 2012 5:55 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://www.b92.
Tanjug News Agency
August 31, 2012
Serbia won’t join NATO, defense minister says
BELGRADE: Serbian Defense Minister Aleksandar Vučić met with Ohio National Guard Commander Major General Deborah Ashenhurst on Friday.
He stressed that Serbia would not join NATO.
The minister explained that Serbia would continue to develop good cooperation with everybody within the Partnership for Peace program.
Vučić and Ashenhurst stressed the importance of cooperation in the State Partnership Program which is mutually important and useful in all segments of bilateral military cooperation, the Serbia’s Defense Ministry stated in a release.
The Serbian minister expressed hope that the Ohio National Guard would continue to support Serbia’s reform of the defense system, especially in professionalization of armed forces, participation in joint training and drills, strengthening of regional cooperation and further education of Serbia’s Defense Ministry and Serbian Army (VS) members.
He thanked the U.S. for its help in modernization of systems and for the donation of 17 Hummer vehicles.
Vučić also stressed the importance of the National Guard’s expert help in further development of the VS Jug base and upcoming training of VS priests.
Ashenhurst noted that the State Partnership Program was one of the best U.S. had and confirmed that her country would continue to support and help Serbia.
She suggested that Vučić Ohio and learn more about capacity and abilities of the National Guard.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Tanjug News Agency
August 31, 2012
Serbia won’t join NATO, defense minister says
BELGRADE: Serbian Defense Minister Aleksandar Vučić met with Ohio National Guard Commander Major General Deborah Ashenhurst on Friday.
He stressed that Serbia would not join NATO.
The minister explained that Serbia would continue to develop good cooperation with everybody within the Partnership for Peace program.
Vučić and Ashenhurst stressed the importance of cooperation in the State Partnership Program which is mutually important and useful in all segments of bilateral military cooperation, the Serbia’s Defense Ministry stated in a release.
The Serbian minister expressed hope that the Ohio National Guard would continue to support Serbia’s reform of the defense system, especially in professionalization of armed forces, participation in joint training and drills, strengthening of regional cooperation and further education of Serbia’s Defense Ministry and Serbian Army (VS) members.
He thanked the U.S. for its help in modernization of systems and for the donation of 17 Hummer vehicles.
Vučić also stressed the importance of the National Guard’s expert help in further development of the VS Jug base and upcoming training of VS priests.
Ashenhurst noted that the State Partnership Program was one of the best U.S. had and confirmed that her country would continue to support and help Serbia.
She suggested that Vučić Ohio and learn more about capacity and abilities of the National Guard.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Aug 31, 2012 6:04 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://english.
Voice of Russia
August 31, 2012
UN Security Council urges humanitarian support for Syria
Konstantin Garibov
====
"This is an attempt to create safe havens for Syrian militants who will be under protection of NATO aircraft. Needless to say, such an approach to creating security zones is unacceptable, for this will become an attempt to oust Assad and extend most favored nation treatment to militants. Such a strategy is also unacceptable because it will weaken the legitimate Syrian government and consolidate the opposition."
Meanwhile, more than 200 British special forces have been sent to Syria, according to the UK’s The Daily Star...Experts recall that this month also saw the deployment of US and French special forces in Syria.
====
The UN has requested 180 million dollars for humanitarian operations in Syria, with half of this sum already allocated. A statement to this effect was made by Jan Eliasson, Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations, during the UN Security Council emergency session on Syria on Friday. According to him, at least 2.5 million Syrians now badly need humanitarian support.
The diplomat urged countries to pump more money into programs pertaining to Syria. He said that Syrians do not need arms, supplied by those who want to further destabilize this Middle Eastern country. He said that he deems it necessary to deploy more UN humanitarian bodies and non-governmental organizations in Syria. Their security should be ensured by both parties to the conflict, according to Eliasson.
For his part, Russia’s UN envoy Vitaly Churkin said that a spate of economic sanctions, slapped on Syria by a number of countries without being endorsed by the UN, makes the lives of ordinary Syrians more complicated. He added that the economic blockade makes it impossible for Syrians to meet their basic needs and duly use their basic human rights.
The Friday session focused on the creation in Syria of “buffer zones” or “corridors”. Earlier, the idea was floated by Turkey which stressed the necessity of protecting at least one million Syrians who have been displaced as a result of the war.
For his part, UN High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres referred to the international community’s experience which he said showed that the idea failed to prove its feasibility, a statement that was echoed by Vitaly Churkin. Moscow-based political analyst Pavel Svyatenkov described a proposal on creating buffer zones as a new attempt to interfere in Syria’s internal affairs.
"This is an attempt to create safe havens for Syrian militants who will be under protection of NATO aircraft," Svyatenkov says, not ruling out these militants’ possible attacks on the Syrian army in the future. "Needless to say, such an approach to creating security zones is unacceptable, for this will become an attempt to oust Assad and extend most favored nation treatment to militants. Such a strategy is also unacceptable because it will weaken the legitimate Syrian government and consolidate the opposition," Svyatenkov concludes.
Meanwhile, more than 200 British special forces have been sent to Syria, according to the UK’s The Daily Star. The troops are tasked with destroying possible arsenals of chemical and biological weapons there, the newspaper reported. Experts recall that this month also saw the deployment of US and French special forces in Syria.
Analysts draw parallels between the latest developments in Syria and last year’s events in Libya, where the West was involved in a military operation to topple Muammar Gaddafi. The deployment of foreign special forces to Syria came right after the withdrawal of a UN observer mission from the country, something that was initiated by the Unites States, France and Britain. Russia was up in arms against the pullout that Moscow warned might be fraught with an outside interference in Syria’s domestic affairs. It seems, analysts say, that the forecast currently comes true.
Friday sees the expiration of a mandate of UN-Arab League envoy to Syria Kofi Annan, whose successor Lakhdar Brahimi is yet to announce an exact plan of his trip to Syria, scheduled for later next month. Earlier this week, Brahimi held talks with representatives of those countries which are interested in the resolution of the Syrian crisis. During the talks, Brahimi specifically urged the diplomats to lend support to his mission.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Voice of Russia
August 31, 2012
UN Security Council urges humanitarian support for Syria
Konstantin Garibov
====
"This is an attempt to create safe havens for Syrian militants who will be under protection of NATO aircraft. Needless to say, such an approach to creating security zones is unacceptable, for this will become an attempt to oust Assad and extend most favored nation treatment to militants. Such a strategy is also unacceptable because it will weaken the legitimate Syrian government and consolidate the opposition."
Meanwhile, more than 200 British special forces have been sent to Syria, according to the UK’s The Daily Star...Experts recall that this month also saw the deployment of US and French special forces in Syria.
====
The UN has requested 180 million dollars for humanitarian operations in Syria, with half of this sum already allocated. A statement to this effect was made by Jan Eliasson, Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations, during the UN Security Council emergency session on Syria on Friday. According to him, at least 2.5 million Syrians now badly need humanitarian support.
The diplomat urged countries to pump more money into programs pertaining to Syria. He said that Syrians do not need arms, supplied by those who want to further destabilize this Middle Eastern country. He said that he deems it necessary to deploy more UN humanitarian bodies and non-governmental organizations in Syria. Their security should be ensured by both parties to the conflict, according to Eliasson.
For his part, Russia’s UN envoy Vitaly Churkin said that a spate of economic sanctions, slapped on Syria by a number of countries without being endorsed by the UN, makes the lives of ordinary Syrians more complicated. He added that the economic blockade makes it impossible for Syrians to meet their basic needs and duly use their basic human rights.
The Friday session focused on the creation in Syria of “buffer zones” or “corridors”. Earlier, the idea was floated by Turkey which stressed the necessity of protecting at least one million Syrians who have been displaced as a result of the war.
For his part, UN High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres referred to the international community’s experience which he said showed that the idea failed to prove its feasibility, a statement that was echoed by Vitaly Churkin. Moscow-based political analyst Pavel Svyatenkov described a proposal on creating buffer zones as a new attempt to interfere in Syria’s internal affairs.
"This is an attempt to create safe havens for Syrian militants who will be under protection of NATO aircraft," Svyatenkov says, not ruling out these militants’ possible attacks on the Syrian army in the future. "Needless to say, such an approach to creating security zones is unacceptable, for this will become an attempt to oust Assad and extend most favored nation treatment to militants. Such a strategy is also unacceptable because it will weaken the legitimate Syrian government and consolidate the opposition," Svyatenkov concludes.
Meanwhile, more than 200 British special forces have been sent to Syria, according to the UK’s The Daily Star. The troops are tasked with destroying possible arsenals of chemical and biological weapons there, the newspaper reported. Experts recall that this month also saw the deployment of US and French special forces in Syria.
Analysts draw parallels between the latest developments in Syria and last year’s events in Libya, where the West was involved in a military operation to topple Muammar Gaddafi. The deployment of foreign special forces to Syria came right after the withdrawal of a UN observer mission from the country, something that was initiated by the Unites States, France and Britain. Russia was up in arms against the pullout that Moscow warned might be fraught with an outside interference in Syria’s domestic affairs. It seems, analysts say, that the forecast currently comes true.
Friday sees the expiration of a mandate of UN-Arab League envoy to Syria Kofi Annan, whose successor Lakhdar Brahimi is yet to announce an exact plan of his trip to Syria, scheduled for later next month. Earlier this week, Brahimi held talks with representatives of those countries which are interested in the resolution of the Syrian crisis. During the talks, Brahimi specifically urged the diplomats to lend support to his mission.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Aug 31, 2012 6:14 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://www.haaretz.
Ha'aretz
August 31, 2012
Bring Israel into NATO
Israeli membership in NATO is a type of long-term structural solution to the ongoing crisis in the Middle East that policy makers should seriously consider.
By Yehuda Lukacs
====
Israel, already a de-facto member of the alliance, maintains close ties with several member states. Germany, for example, has built for the Israeli navy several Dolphin-class submarines, which are capable of carrying cruise missiles with nuclear warheads - viewed as Israel's second-strike capability.
Normalization of relations with Turkey - NATO's largest Muslim member - is a vital Israeli national interest. Such a rapprochement is also a NATO interest.
Perhaps Israeli membership in NATO could become part of the "reconciliation package" between the two countries.
Israeli membership in NATO is a type of a bold, long-term structural solution to the ongoing crisis in the Middle East that policy makers should seriously consider as the foundations of a new security system in the most volatile region of the world.
====
A nuclear Iran is virtually a fait accompli. A military strike by Israel, the United States or both may delay but will not prevent the Islamic Republic from eventually acquiring such capability.
Decision-makers ought to consider devising a new security architecture, one that would deter Iran and guarantee Israel's long-term survival. A radical alternative to war is required - one that would make Israel a member of NATO, protected by the "one-for-all, all-for-one" policy of the 28-member alliance.
Injecting the alliance's reach into the Middle East could provide it with a renewed sense of mission in the post-Cold War environment, especially as the NATO combat presence in Afghanistan is about to draw down in two years.
Iran's quest for a nuclear option dates back to 1957, when it signed a civil-technical cooperation agreement with the United States under the "Atoms for Peace" program. However, eventual development of nuclear weapons was regarded as reflecting the nation's greatness and its ambitions to become the region's preeminent power. After the 1979 revolution, such weapons were also viewed as a potential deterrent vis-a-vis Israel's nuclear arsenal or other external threats. No credible evidence exists that the regime is irrational or suicidal - as claimed by some - but the current Iranian leadership's true intentions are unknown and therefore Israel's concerns are legitimate.
It seems that all the alternatives advocated to deal with the present crisis - sanctions and negotiations, a military strike, or deterrence - will be insufficient by themselves to address Israel's long-term security. Even if Iran acquires an atomic bomb, it would not dare to attack a NATO member. By itself, an explicit guarantee by the United States to defend Israel might not be taken seriously by the Iranians. But Iran cannot ignore a NATO commitment backed by the full membership.
Israel, already a de-facto member of the alliance, maintains close ties with several member states. Germany, for example, has built for the Israeli navy several Dolphin-class submarines, which are capable of carrying cruise missiles with nuclear warheads - viewed as Israel's second-strike capability.
During an interview with this writer in January 2012, a senior member of the German Bundestag acknowledged his country's commitment: "We subsidize and build these submarines for Israel because guaranteeing Israel's security has become an integral part of Germany's identity."
Notwithstanding the unique German-Israeli relationship, the clear obstacles confronting an Israeli membership in NATO include: Turkey, Israel's estranged ally, the protracted Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and Israel's own image as a self-reliant power.
Israeli-Turkish ties deteriorated significantly due to the Gaza flotilla incident in May 2010, among other reasons. In all likelihood, Turkey would veto Israel's accession to NATO (all existing members of the alliance must approve the admission of a new member ). Sooner or later, however, Jerusalem will have to cede to Ankara's demands for a formal apology for the killing of the pro-Palestinian activists on the Turkish boat and compensation to the victims' families. Normalization of relations with Turkey - NATO's largest Muslim member - is a vital Israeli national interest. Such a rapprochement is also a NATO interest.
Perhaps Israeli membership in NATO could become part of the "reconciliation package" between the two countries. A possible incentive for Turkey is to link renewed efforts to seriously address the Israeli-Palestinian dispute to the accession process. Failure to make real progress on the Palestinian issue, as even Defense Minister Ehud Barak has reportedly warned recently in Israel, will likely result in resumption of large-scale violence in the occupied territories, a development dreaded by most Israelis, and could lead to a serious overload on the overstretched Israel Defense Forces. Turkey, which regards itself as a champion of the Palestinian cause, could be offered a special role in restarting the derailed peace process.
Ironically, though, Israel could prove to be the staunchest opponent of its own NATO membership. Its national ethos espouses self-reliance and the motto "never again" is ingrained in the nation's collective psyche. The notion that the international community is taking responsibility for the country's security and survival might be difficult for Israelis to swallow, especially if a genuine compromise on the Palestinian question is also linked to Israeli membership in NATO.
Israelis may have to face up to the fact that despite their potent military, the threats against their country are at such a level that Israel must become a member of a regional security system. Moreover, they also have to realize that as long as the Palestine issue remains unresolved, the survival of Israel as a Jewish state will continue to be challenged, as is the case now with Iran.
Israeli membership in NATO is a type of a bold, long-term structural solution to the ongoing crisis in the Middle East that policy makers should seriously consider as the foundations of a new security system in the most volatile region of the world.
"A bomb or to bomb" - the popular Hebrew expression meaning living with a bomb or bombing Iran - need not be the only options available.
*Yehuda Lukacs is associate provost for international programs and director of the Center for Global Education at George Mason University, in Fairfax, Virginia.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Ha'aretz
August 31, 2012
Bring Israel into NATO
Israeli membership in NATO is a type of long-term structural solution to the ongoing crisis in the Middle East that policy makers should seriously consider.
By Yehuda Lukacs
====
Israel, already a de-facto member of the alliance, maintains close ties with several member states. Germany, for example, has built for the Israeli navy several Dolphin-class submarines, which are capable of carrying cruise missiles with nuclear warheads - viewed as Israel's second-strike capability.
Normalization of relations with Turkey - NATO's largest Muslim member - is a vital Israeli national interest. Such a rapprochement is also a NATO interest.
Perhaps Israeli membership in NATO could become part of the "reconciliation package" between the two countries.
Israeli membership in NATO is a type of a bold, long-term structural solution to the ongoing crisis in the Middle East that policy makers should seriously consider as the foundations of a new security system in the most volatile region of the world.
====
A nuclear Iran is virtually a fait accompli. A military strike by Israel, the United States or both may delay but will not prevent the Islamic Republic from eventually acquiring such capability.
Decision-makers ought to consider devising a new security architecture, one that would deter Iran and guarantee Israel's long-term survival. A radical alternative to war is required - one that would make Israel a member of NATO, protected by the "one-for-all, all-for-one" policy of the 28-member alliance.
Injecting the alliance's reach into the Middle East could provide it with a renewed sense of mission in the post-Cold War environment, especially as the NATO combat presence in Afghanistan is about to draw down in two years.
Iran's quest for a nuclear option dates back to 1957, when it signed a civil-technical cooperation agreement with the United States under the "Atoms for Peace" program. However, eventual development of nuclear weapons was regarded as reflecting the nation's greatness and its ambitions to become the region's preeminent power. After the 1979 revolution, such weapons were also viewed as a potential deterrent vis-a-vis Israel's nuclear arsenal or other external threats. No credible evidence exists that the regime is irrational or suicidal - as claimed by some - but the current Iranian leadership's true intentions are unknown and therefore Israel's concerns are legitimate.
It seems that all the alternatives advocated to deal with the present crisis - sanctions and negotiations, a military strike, or deterrence - will be insufficient by themselves to address Israel's long-term security. Even if Iran acquires an atomic bomb, it would not dare to attack a NATO member. By itself, an explicit guarantee by the United States to defend Israel might not be taken seriously by the Iranians. But Iran cannot ignore a NATO commitment backed by the full membership.
Israel, already a de-facto member of the alliance, maintains close ties with several member states. Germany, for example, has built for the Israeli navy several Dolphin-class submarines, which are capable of carrying cruise missiles with nuclear warheads - viewed as Israel's second-strike capability.
During an interview with this writer in January 2012, a senior member of the German Bundestag acknowledged his country's commitment: "We subsidize and build these submarines for Israel because guaranteeing Israel's security has become an integral part of Germany's identity."
Notwithstanding the unique German-Israeli relationship, the clear obstacles confronting an Israeli membership in NATO include: Turkey, Israel's estranged ally, the protracted Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and Israel's own image as a self-reliant power.
Israeli-Turkish ties deteriorated significantly due to the Gaza flotilla incident in May 2010, among other reasons. In all likelihood, Turkey would veto Israel's accession to NATO (all existing members of the alliance must approve the admission of a new member ). Sooner or later, however, Jerusalem will have to cede to Ankara's demands for a formal apology for the killing of the pro-Palestinian activists on the Turkish boat and compensation to the victims' families. Normalization of relations with Turkey - NATO's largest Muslim member - is a vital Israeli national interest. Such a rapprochement is also a NATO interest.
Perhaps Israeli membership in NATO could become part of the "reconciliation package" between the two countries. A possible incentive for Turkey is to link renewed efforts to seriously address the Israeli-Palestinian dispute to the accession process. Failure to make real progress on the Palestinian issue, as even Defense Minister Ehud Barak has reportedly warned recently in Israel, will likely result in resumption of large-scale violence in the occupied territories, a development dreaded by most Israelis, and could lead to a serious overload on the overstretched Israel Defense Forces. Turkey, which regards itself as a champion of the Palestinian cause, could be offered a special role in restarting the derailed peace process.
Ironically, though, Israel could prove to be the staunchest opponent of its own NATO membership. Its national ethos espouses self-reliance and the motto "never again" is ingrained in the nation's collective psyche. The notion that the international community is taking responsibility for the country's security and survival might be difficult for Israelis to swallow, especially if a genuine compromise on the Palestinian question is also linked to Israeli membership in NATO.
Israelis may have to face up to the fact that despite their potent military, the threats against their country are at such a level that Israel must become a member of a regional security system. Moreover, they also have to realize that as long as the Palestine issue remains unresolved, the survival of Israel as a Jewish state will continue to be challenged, as is the case now with Iran.
Israeli membership in NATO is a type of a bold, long-term structural solution to the ongoing crisis in the Middle East that policy makers should seriously consider as the foundations of a new security system in the most volatile region of the world.
"A bomb or to bomb" - the popular Hebrew expression meaning living with a bomb or bombing Iran - need not be the only options available.
*Yehuda Lukacs is associate provost for international programs and director of the Center for Global Education at George Mason University, in Fairfax, Virginia.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Aug 31, 2012 6:14 am (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://praguemonito
Czech News Agency
August 31, 2012
NATO air forces training starts in Náměšť next week
Namest nad Oslavou, South Moravia: Over one thousand soldiers from 16 countries will take part in NATO's Ramstein Rover 2012 exercise focusing on cooperation of forward air controllers and pilots and starting at the Namest air base next week, Czech military air forces commander Jiri Verner said.
The raising of the qualification of these military specialists deployed in Afghanistan will be one of the tasks of the exercise.
Verner said Ramstein Rover will be biggest international exercise held on Czech territory this year and also the first exercise of its kind that NATO organises in the country.
The exercise will last from September 4 to September 21.
Its commander Harry Schnell, from the NATO command in Ramstein, Germany, said Namest will be the main operational base and the tasks will be performed mostly in the training grounds in Libava, north Moravia, and Boletice, south Bohemia.
The L-159 subsonic aircraft that will participate in the exercise will fly from the air base in Caslav, central Bohemia.
The other participating planes will be the U.S. anti-tank L-39 aircraft and F-16 fighters, Czech L-39 trainers and L-159 combat planes as well as combat and transport Russian-made helicopters.
The Namest air base hosted the Flying Rhino annual exercise that was jointly organised by the Czech Republic and Britain from 2003 to 2010. In 2010, British air forces decided to cancel Flying Rhino.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Czech News Agency
August 31, 2012
NATO air forces training starts in Náměšť next week
Namest nad Oslavou, South Moravia: Over one thousand soldiers from 16 countries will take part in NATO's Ramstein Rover 2012 exercise focusing on cooperation of forward air controllers and pilots and starting at the Namest air base next week, Czech military air forces commander Jiri Verner said.
The raising of the qualification of these military specialists deployed in Afghanistan will be one of the tasks of the exercise.
Verner said Ramstein Rover will be biggest international exercise held on Czech territory this year and also the first exercise of its kind that NATO organises in the country.
The exercise will last from September 4 to September 21.
Its commander Harry Schnell, from the NATO command in Ramstein, Germany, said Namest will be the main operational base and the tasks will be performed mostly in the training grounds in Libava, north Moravia, and Boletice, south Bohemia.
The L-159 subsonic aircraft that will participate in the exercise will fly from the air base in Caslav, central Bohemia.
The other participating planes will be the U.S. anti-tank L-39 aircraft and F-16 fighters, Czech L-39 trainers and L-159 combat planes as well as combat and transport Russian-made helicopters.
The Namest air base hosted the Flying Rhino annual exercise that was jointly organised by the Czech Republic and Britain from 2003 to 2010. In 2010, British air forces decided to cancel Flying Rhino.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Aug 31, 2012 7:33 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://www.thefront
The Frontier Post
August 24, 2012
US drone banditry
As the UN special rapporteur on human rights and counter-terrorism has demanded of the United States to open itself up to an independent probe into its use of drone strikes or let the United Nations do it, Pakistan too has served a strong demarche on it over its stepped-up drone incursions into Pakistani tribal territory, especially the North Waziristan Agency.
Drone attacks are not acceptable in any case as these constitute not only a violation of international laws but also an assault on Pakistan’s sovereignty, said a protest missive handed over to a US embassy official by the Foreign Office yesterday.
But will the United States hearken to these protesting voices? You must be joking. Not even an outside chance. For, America thinks that being the world’s sole superpower it is above every international norm, rule and law.
Others it demands must abide by that international regime strictly but itself it will not.
It strikes the odious notes of exceptionalism and expects all others to respect it as being an exceptional country and an exceptional people, not liable at all to any international laws and conventions or any international justice system, whereas it expects others to be duty-bound to follow them.
Then why would it change its course when it finds its drone banditry so effective in perpetuating its adventurism abroad without putting its own soldiers’ lives at any risk at all? Why would it care for the UN that it uses as its handmaiden or for Pakistan that it deems to be its enslaved colony?
They may cry, but they will simply be crying in the wilderness. Not a leaf would flap in Washington. Indeed, as the criticism of its drone banditry is increasingly escalating worldwide, it has put more punch in its thuggish adventurism.
Not only does President Barack Obama now personally approve the targets to be struck by the drones. He has also decreed that anyone in the vicinity of an intended target will be deemed a combatant, even if a civilian, and hence liable to be slaughtered justifiably.
So the warlords of the United States don't give a damn if the people killed in their drone attacks are real terrorists or innocent civilians. And indeed the data compiled by human rights workers show a heavy toll being exacted on civilian lives in these barbaric drone assaults.
Some terrorists may be killed. But many more among the massacred are innocent children, women and men having nothing to do with militancy or terrorism.
Yet the American warlords are continuing with this savage carnage without any qualms. International laws stipulate that every effort must be made to arrest criminals and bring them to justice. But they find it more convenient just to eliminate them, not least for fear of the eliminated spilling the beans if caught alive and brought to justice.
After all, those on the kill list of the American warlords are the ones who were once their protégés and proxies. And it would not be in any way wrong to assume that with this drone adventurism at this point in time they are indeed pulling a fast one on Pakistan.
In their drone strikes on Eid days in North Waziristan Agency, they slaughtered some two dozen people. And if the media reports are any guide, the slaughtered were all people of Hafiz Gul Bahadur, the militant commander holding a peace accord with the Pakistan military. The American warlords’ game plan appears to be to alienate him from the Pakistani state and push him towards the TTP [Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan] fugitives now holed up in parts of the North Waziristan Agency and the bordering Afghan provinces of Kunar and Nuristan to the great grief of Pakistan.
Whose proxies these TTP fugitives are is anybody’s guess. The American warlords are thus up to a very diabolical game. And the Islamabad establishment would be very foolish if it doesn’t expose their demoniac scheme to the world community. It must open up its tight lips and speak out the home truths at every available forum at home and abroad.
Mere demarches won't do. Already, with their drone banditry they have turned a lot of our tribal compatriots against the Pakistani state. And with the drone adventurism over these recent days they are spawning troubles in our tribal areas that ultimately will prove very disastrous for our country and the nation.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
The Frontier Post
August 24, 2012
US drone banditry
As the UN special rapporteur on human rights and counter-terrorism has demanded of the United States to open itself up to an independent probe into its use of drone strikes or let the United Nations do it, Pakistan too has served a strong demarche on it over its stepped-up drone incursions into Pakistani tribal territory, especially the North Waziristan Agency.
Drone attacks are not acceptable in any case as these constitute not only a violation of international laws but also an assault on Pakistan’s sovereignty, said a protest missive handed over to a US embassy official by the Foreign Office yesterday.
But will the United States hearken to these protesting voices? You must be joking. Not even an outside chance. For, America thinks that being the world’s sole superpower it is above every international norm, rule and law.
Others it demands must abide by that international regime strictly but itself it will not.
It strikes the odious notes of exceptionalism and expects all others to respect it as being an exceptional country and an exceptional people, not liable at all to any international laws and conventions or any international justice system, whereas it expects others to be duty-bound to follow them.
Then why would it change its course when it finds its drone banditry so effective in perpetuating its adventurism abroad without putting its own soldiers’ lives at any risk at all? Why would it care for the UN that it uses as its handmaiden or for Pakistan that it deems to be its enslaved colony?
They may cry, but they will simply be crying in the wilderness. Not a leaf would flap in Washington. Indeed, as the criticism of its drone banditry is increasingly escalating worldwide, it has put more punch in its thuggish adventurism.
Not only does President Barack Obama now personally approve the targets to be struck by the drones. He has also decreed that anyone in the vicinity of an intended target will be deemed a combatant, even if a civilian, and hence liable to be slaughtered justifiably.
So the warlords of the United States don't give a damn if the people killed in their drone attacks are real terrorists or innocent civilians. And indeed the data compiled by human rights workers show a heavy toll being exacted on civilian lives in these barbaric drone assaults.
Some terrorists may be killed. But many more among the massacred are innocent children, women and men having nothing to do with militancy or terrorism.
Yet the American warlords are continuing with this savage carnage without any qualms. International laws stipulate that every effort must be made to arrest criminals and bring them to justice. But they find it more convenient just to eliminate them, not least for fear of the eliminated spilling the beans if caught alive and brought to justice.
After all, those on the kill list of the American warlords are the ones who were once their protégés and proxies. And it would not be in any way wrong to assume that with this drone adventurism at this point in time they are indeed pulling a fast one on Pakistan.
In their drone strikes on Eid days in North Waziristan Agency, they slaughtered some two dozen people. And if the media reports are any guide, the slaughtered were all people of Hafiz Gul Bahadur, the militant commander holding a peace accord with the Pakistan military. The American warlords’ game plan appears to be to alienate him from the Pakistani state and push him towards the TTP [Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan] fugitives now holed up in parts of the North Waziristan Agency and the bordering Afghan provinces of Kunar and Nuristan to the great grief of Pakistan.
Whose proxies these TTP fugitives are is anybody’s guess. The American warlords are thus up to a very diabolical game. And the Islamabad establishment would be very foolish if it doesn’t expose their demoniac scheme to the world community. It must open up its tight lips and speak out the home truths at every available forum at home and abroad.
Mere demarches won't do. Already, with their drone banditry they have turned a lot of our tribal compatriots against the Pakistani state. And with the drone adventurism over these recent days they are spawning troubles in our tribal areas that ultimately will prove very disastrous for our country and the nation.
============
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@
============
Fri Aug 31, 2012 7:33 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Nazar" muratoglunazar
THANK YOU NATO!!! ???
In 2004, Azeri criminal Lt. Ramil Safarov was sentenced to life in prison in Hungary for hacking to death Armenian officer, Lt. Gurgen Markarian.NATO exercise
GURGEN MARGARYAN IN OUR HEARTS FOREVER!
BUT he was sent back to Azerbaijan on Friday and, despite assurances, was immediately pardoned and freed by Azeri President Ilham Aliyev.
In 2004, Azeri criminal Lt. Ramil Safarov was sentenced to life in prison in Hungary for hacking to death Armenian officer, Lt. Gurgen Markarian.NATO exercise
GURGEN MARGARYAN IN OUR HEARTS FOREVER!
BUT he was sent back to Azerbaijan on Friday and, despite assurances, was immediately pardoned and freed by Azeri President Ilham Aliyev.
Fri Aug 31, 2012 7:33 pm (PDT) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://pakobserver.
Pakistan Observer
September 1, 2012
The American blame gun
Ehsan Mehmood Khan
American officials and politicians continue to cry wolf with regard to alleged “sanctuaries” of Afghan Taliban in Pakistan. The Americans, to encapsulate simply, are loaded with responsibility to maintain order in Afghanistan since its occupation in 2001. Failure in any form is blame-fired towards Pakistan.
Latest in the line of blame is the rhetoric of Leon Panetta, the US Secretary of Defense, in the aftermath of a 20-hour siege of NATO headquarters and the US embassy in Kabul by Taliban on September 14, 2011, wherein 15 people were killed and six foreign soldiers injured. The Taliban attack, indeed, exhibits hollowness on the part of such American claims as "we are winning, we have attained partial victory, Kabul is secure and the elected government in Kabul is functioning while insurgents have been rejected by the populace," and so on.
The attack has been embarrassing for the Americans from many angles. Firstly, it had been launched in the Afghan stronghold of Kabul, which many outside observers feel is in the firm security clutches of the government as well as ISAF, thereby raising new questions over the capability of the Afghan government to ensure the security and capacity of the Euro-American forces to retain a foothold therein.
Secondly, it had been launched simultaneously on both the military and civilian nerve centres of the Western powers in Afghanistan, i.e., NATO headquarters and the US embassy.
Thirdly, NATO headquarters Staff and US embassy officials remained hostage-under-
The American rejoinder to the embarrassment suffered at the hands of a handful of Taliban has rather been knee-jerk. On the one hand, Ryan Crocker, the US ambassador in Afghanistan, struggled to downplay the event by commenting on six rockets that landed right inside his embassy compound saying, “This really is not a very big deal – a hard day for the embassy and my staff.” The contradiction lay within the syllable of his statement while he went on to say, “Half a dozen RPG rounds from 800 meters away, that isn’t Tet.”
For the information of readers, Mr. Crocker referred to the Tet offensive, which continues to haunt American polity. Launched by the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong forces in January 1968, employing over 80,000 guerrillas, they attacked virtually all major cities in South Vietnam (which was the portrait of today’s Afghanistan under American occupation). During the Tet offensive, the US embassy in Saigon too came under attack. All the rest is history.
All that has happened to Pakistan’s society, security and economy is known to none more that Americans outside Pakistan. Yet, their blame gun continues to fire bombs of charge and accusation against Pakistan and its institutions.
Mr. Crocker’s confidence and conviction apart, the disparaging non-diplomatic oratory by Leon Panetta reads different. He again blamed Pakistan for the “safe havens” and “sanctuaries” of the Haqqani group. The American disturbance is not off beam either. Earlier, Taliban had attacked an American base with a truck bomb on the eve of 9/11, injuring 77 US soldiers. A major attack was launched last month too, wherein Taliban shot down a U.S. Chinook helicopter, killing 30 American troops, the majority of them Navy SEALs from the unit that had conducted the operation to kill Osama bin Laden.
The point to note herein is that Pakistan, despite deployment of over 150,000 soldiers along the Pak-Afghan border, does not have such surveillances devices as are possessed and in use by the Americans across the border. Let alone detecting the movement of militants from Pakistan to Afghanistan, our forces find it difficult even to keep watch on the terrorists committing ingress and aggression into Pakistani soil from their safe havens located well within Afghanistan.
All said, it is a moment of introspection for American polity and its diplomatic lieutenants. They need to reflect again on the issue and determine as to who will pay in the long run; engagement or estrangement, and cooperation or confrontation?
At any rate, Pakistan is not Cambodia. It is a country of nearly 200 million people, the most resilient, the most devoted and sick-of-terrorism in Pakistan or elsewhere in the world, but hardly affected by the blame-gun “salutes.”
Pakistan already has too much to wrestle with; an ailing economy, internal security, dengue fever and natural calamities. It does not have much time to take care of any “sanctuaries” or “safe havens”. The last words for American politico-military hierarchy: let reality replace the rhetoric and let us work in collaboration taking note of each other’s compulsions and complexities so that the coming American generations do not blame you tomorrow for mishandling the Afghan war despite passionate Pakistanis working alongside you!
Pakistan Observer
September 1, 2012
The American blame gun
Ehsan Mehmood Khan
American officials and politicians continue to cry wolf with regard to alleged “sanctuaries” of Afghan Taliban in Pakistan. The Americans, to encapsulate simply, are loaded with responsibility to maintain order in Afghanistan since its occupation in 2001. Failure in any form is blame-fired towards Pakistan.
Latest in the line of blame is the rhetoric of Leon Panetta, the US Secretary of Defense, in the aftermath of a 20-hour siege of NATO headquarters and the US embassy in Kabul by Taliban on September 14, 2011, wherein 15 people were killed and six foreign soldiers injured. The Taliban attack, indeed, exhibits hollowness on the part of such American claims as "we are winning, we have attained partial victory, Kabul is secure and the elected government in Kabul is functioning while insurgents have been rejected by the populace," and so on.
The attack has been embarrassing for the Americans from many angles. Firstly, it had been launched in the Afghan stronghold of Kabul, which many outside observers feel is in the firm security clutches of the government as well as ISAF, thereby raising new questions over the capability of the Afghan government to ensure the security and capacity of the Euro-American forces to retain a foothold therein.
Secondly, it had been launched simultaneously on both the military and civilian nerve centres of the Western powers in Afghanistan, i.e., NATO headquarters and the US embassy.
Thirdly, NATO headquarters Staff and US embassy officials remained hostage-under-
The American rejoinder to the embarrassment suffered at the hands of a handful of Taliban has rather been knee-jerk. On the one hand, Ryan Crocker, the US ambassador in Afghanistan, struggled to downplay the event by commenting on six rockets that landed right inside his embassy compound saying, “This really is not a very big deal – a hard day for the embassy and my staff.” The contradiction lay within the syllable of his statement while he went on to say, “Half a dozen RPG rounds from 800 meters away, that isn’t Tet.”
For the information of readers, Mr. Crocker referred to the Tet offensive, which continues to haunt American polity. Launched by the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong forces in January 1968, employing over 80,000 guerrillas, they attacked virtually all major cities in South Vietnam (which was the portrait of today’s Afghanistan under American occupation). During the Tet offensive, the US embassy in Saigon too came under attack. All the rest is history.
All that has happened to Pakistan’s society, security and economy is known to none more that Americans outside Pakistan. Yet, their blame gun continues to fire bombs of charge and accusation against Pakistan and its institutions.
Mr. Crocker’s confidence and conviction apart, the disparaging non-diplomatic oratory by Leon Panetta reads different. He again blamed Pakistan for the “safe havens” and “sanctuaries” of the Haqqani group. The American disturbance is not off beam either. Earlier, Taliban had attacked an American base with a truck bomb on the eve of 9/11, injuring 77 US soldiers. A major attack was launched last month too, wherein Taliban shot down a U.S. Chinook helicopter, killing 30 American troops, the majority of them Navy SEALs from the unit that had conducted the operation to kill Osama bin Laden.
The point to note herein is that Pakistan, despite deployment of over 150,000 soldiers along the Pak-Afghan border, does not have such surveillances devices as are possessed and in use by the Americans across the border. Let alone detecting the movement of militants from Pakistan to Afghanistan, our forces find it difficult even to keep watch on the terrorists committing ingress and aggression into Pakistani soil from their safe havens located well within Afghanistan.
All said, it is a moment of introspection for American polity and its diplomatic lieutenants. They need to reflect again on the issue and determine as to who will pay in the long run; engagement or estrangement, and cooperation or confrontation?
At any rate, Pakistan is not Cambodia. It is a country of nearly 200 million people, the most resilient, the most devoted and sick-of-terrorism in Pakistan or elsewhere in the world, but hardly affected by the blame-gun “salutes.”
Pakistan already has too much to wrestle with; an ailing economy, internal security, dengue fever and natural calamities. It does not have much time to take care of any “sanctuaries” or “safe havens”. The last words for American politico-military hierarchy: let reality replace the rhetoric and let us work in collaboration taking note of each other’s compulsions and complexities so that the coming American generations do not blame you tomorrow for mishandling the Afghan war despite passionate Pakistanis working alongside you!
