US Navy Destroyer USS Gonzalez (DDG 66) off Mombasa, Kenya. This image can grace your office or den. Visit the PatriArt Gallery for a poster or framed art print.

The U.S. and international military forces are taking more aggressive action off the African coast as bolder and more violent pirates imperil oil shipments and other trade, reports the Navy Times.

The area is a key shipping route for cargo transported to and from the U.S. and elsewhere. In response to pirate attacks, the U.S. has stepped up its patrols to deter them and sometimes intervened to rescue hostages and ships. It also has increased its intelligence-sharing in the area, said Navy Lt. Nate Christensen, a spokesman for the 5th Fleet in Bahrain, which patrols Middle Eastern and African waters.

The U.S. is “very concerned about the increasing number of acts of piracy and armed robbery” off the Somali coast, he said. Somalia’s weak government has admitted it can’t control its territorial waters, and Nigeria is fending off a rebel group.

A U.N. Security Council resolution, pushed by the U.S. and passed June 2, allows the U.S. and its coalition allies to intervene by “all necessary means” for the next six months to stop piracy off the Somali coast. Coalition ships have since scared off pirates in at least two attacks, said the London-based International Maritime Bureau.

Read the full article at the Navy Times.

One of the major criticisms that Bush Republicans have of people who wish to pull out of Iraq ASAP is that they are dwelling on the past and not looking towards the future. I have to say that they make a point, although I wonder about the future they are looking towards themselves. Lamenting our involvement 5 years ago can do nothing to change today or tomorrow. So many of us wish we could have said that we stood against the war as America was building up to it at the end of 2002, when in fact we were excited that we had a President who was actually doing something, who was defying the UN, and willing to do whatever it took to protect America against terrorism.

I remember I was in Toulouse a month before the invasion. A woman come up to me in front of the Capitol, and when she discovered that I was an American and my companion was an Englishman, she openly wept for the civilians of Iraq and begged us to do something to try and prevent it. Our response was something to the effect of “we’re a little busy here, but you can write George Bush yourself.” The truth of the matter is that the American missionaries were privately very supportive of the war, whereas the French membership whom we worked with were vehemently opposed to it, and it served as a perpetual source of conflict and dissonance. I initially looked forward to vindication. I said to myself “when this thing blows over in a month or two, they will see that it wasn’t such a bad idea after all.” As I learned more about the war and how our government had been handling it, I changed my tune. Americans made-fun of the French for being “surrender monkeys,” but we ignored the fact that their country has known military occupations, including collaboration with the Nazis, and from experience they knew about the sort of things that Iraq would be going through.

To pull out, or not to pull out, that is the question.

To me, an unconditional pull-out ASAP would be more naive and selfish than the motives behind our invasion. We have destroyed their economy, infrastructure, government, security, and independence- it would be morally wrong to ditch them before our debt to them has been paid and those elements have been acceptably restored. Rather than set goals and benchmarks based on ideal circumstances, we have to be flexible, pragmatic, and be willing to do some satisficing in the process. The bottom line is that we must set our objectives based on the needs and wishes of the Iraqi people, and not based on our own aspirations for their country.

We are not at home in Iraq, and are only mildly welcome to serve as a means to an end, like a plumber fixing a toilet in someone’s home. Above all we must respect their wishes, their values, their rights, and their sovereignty. Our troops must be altruistic and honorable in their comportment. I was very impressed and inspired by the story of the American commander who humbly asked forgiveness from tribal elders after a sniper under his command used a Koran as target practice. I hope we are on the right track; it is such a shame when the positive efforts of so many of our brave soldiers are overcome by the indiscretions of a few.

Opinions of us in Iraq seem to vary depending on the quality of life we have supplied in each circumstance. There is never unanimous support or opposition. I fear that Iraq is more of a land of opportunists than a land of opportunity at this point. Many want the US and Britain to leave ASAP so that their militia can assume control, many just want us to leave because they think they will be better off no matter what the circumstances may be. Many want us to stay and rebuild, and provide security against the influence of their neighbors (like Iran and the cross-border raids of the Turks) and protect them from internal crimes and hostilities, but opinions vary on for how long or to what point we should remain. Intentions and loyalties seem blurred in a country that has been turned upside down.

I believe that there is a moderate to severe degree of corruption and war profiteering within both governments, and that any degree of scrutiny or inquiry into government affairs by the Iraqi and American people is merited under the present circumstances. It is of major concern; we must investigate, try, expose, root out, hinder, and safeguard against those who would use the war in Iraq to achieve their own personal and financial ends.

I think it is important to acknowledge the perspective that Iraq is a country which is heavily occupied by foreign military powers, and will not enjoy any lasting level of internal peace until it has been liberated from our direct influence, either by our own accord or by force. It is critical to realize that the primary motive for terrorist attacks against the West is to oppose our influence and control in the Middle-East (with an emphasis on our biased support for Israel), a region which has since been over-run by Western armies. Our presence in Iraq has created new conflict and criticism of the US, and has also provided a new front for old enemies. We took the fight to the terrorists, but we also created more of them as a by-product, and gave them more immediate causes to fight for.

I have heard the war-cry of “victory!” many times, but rarely hear the conditions required to achieve victory. Victory in this war is arbitrary. To me, the war in Iraq became a serious Defeat for America the very moment our bombs were dropped and our military forces set foot on their soil. However, I believe in a victory for Iraq, I have hope for them and I don’t think we should leave until they are satisfied. I also agree with John McCain and others that to leave Iraq prematurely would only strengthen those who oppose America and lure them to our country. The only hope for the long-term foreign relations of America is to give back to Iraq what we have taken away; it is our only chance for redemption, for reconciliation, and for lasting peace. The terms of victory must be set by the Iraqis, for the Iraqis, and we must comply with their order to go when they ask us to go. It would be nice if Iraq turns out to be better off when we leave from when we came, but we must accept the possibility that it may not be the case, and that achieving it is a decision that should be made primarily by the Iraqis.

These also happen in Mauritius.

In Kenya.

In Morocco. Sri Lanka. Thailand. Honduras. Colombia. Bangladesh.

But even faced with brutal labor repression, labor activists continue to work for unionization and workers’ rights. And activists in North America and Europe can play a vital role in supporting their organization efforts.

If you’re in North America or Europe, here is where you can help.

The EPZs thrived on luring foreign investment and maintaining foreign consumers. So instead of focusing on pressuring the government to act for women’s rights, the workers focused on allies who target the foreign investors and their consumers.

In early example, a CEPZ shoe factory refused to give separation pay to 300 employees. The workers tapped into an international network of parishes, whose members then launched a massive letter-writing campaign to Reebok, which subcontracted from the shoe firm. The external pressure from the consumers and from Reebok forced the zone authorities and the shoe factory to resolve the issue with the workers.

In the past few years, zone authorities have gotten more brutal in their labor repression. Last September 2006, over 300 union members working at two garment factories went on strike after their managements refused to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement. These factories produce sleepwear, t-shirts, blouses, and other clothes for buyers like WalMart. Workers at both picket lines, most of whom were female, were attacked with wooden clubs, punched, and beaten. Many women later reported being molested, and two sustained serious head injuries. At least sixty-six garment factory workers have been fired in the wake of the strike.

Activists with the Canada-based Maquila Solidarity Network and the US-based and the Workers’ Rights Consortium organized a new round of campaigns. They called on WalMart to act in accordance with its own code of conduct by holding its international subsidiaries to international labor standards. WalMart and corporations such as American Eagle Outfitters and Polo Ralph Lauren have released statements condemning the violence and urging the Philippine government to take action against the zone authorities.

The hope is that the threat of bad publicity and public boycotts, as well as the labor disruptions, will make the corporations leery. They will have to support worker rights in order to maintain their consumer base here. Or they could move operations to another country, an option that the Philippine government would not want to happen.

Such campaigns are ongoing, and labor struggles in the economic zones continue around the world.

If you want to help, the websites of the following organizations detail campaigns and what you can do as a member of a society that consumes products made under these conditions:

Maquila Solidarity Network

International Labor Rights Forum

Clean Clothes Campaign

These links take you directly to the campaign pages of these organizations. They detail the actions you can take here to support union workers in areas like Cavite.

The need is urgent. In a report issued by the Center for Trade Union and Human Rights (pdf) back in 2006, the group documented 982 cases of human rights violations committed by the Arroyo regime, involving an estimated 80,000 workers.

More than half of these violations occurred in the country's export processing zones.

Please do what you can to ensure that workers around the world do not remain voiceless links in the global supply chain.

]]> http://malaysian88antics.wordpress.com/?p=59 Thu, 17 Jul 2008 17:00:31 +0000 malaysian88antics http://malaysian88antics.wordpress.com/?p=59 I couldn't agree more.  The US is keeping an eye on us.  The whole world is keeping an eye on us, waiting for a tumultous event to take place.  The whole world wanna see Anwar's next move.  They want to see the next tactic by BN, currently the ruling coalition of 50 years.  The article can be read here.

http://www.malaysianinsider.com/index.php/headlines/42-lead-stories/1922-anwar-pak-lah-and-malaysia-will-be-on-trial

Whatever move they make, it is being watched.  And every move must be well calculated and well analyzed.  The one little mistake they make could be pretty costly.  However, in my eyes, Anwar has the upper hand here.  He has an unfavourable and mounting international and local support behind him. Badawi on the other hand, has made some unpopular decisions that angers the public generally.

It is interesting to see where all these are heading, but I am excited to know that a great wave of change will take place by faith soon!  That will be the day I will truly celebrate being Malaysian!

But other countries are facing similar challenges.  In India, the continuing debate over the status of the country’s nuclear deal with the United States has prompted a minor political crisis, as Prime Minister Manmohan Singh attempts to keep his fragile coalition together.  Singh’s government is comprised of a coalition of center-left parties.  Earlier this month, the Communist Party of India (Marxist), the coalition’s junior member to Singh’s Congress Party of India, withdrew from the coalition over a nuclear deal signed with the United States.  The Communists argued that the deal represented a transfer of India’s sovereignty to the United States opened the way for the further colonization of India’s economy.  A confidence vote by the Lok Sabha, the lower house of the Indian Parliament, is scheduled for Tuesday.  If the government loses the vote, snap elections will be called.

A vote on the nuclear deal, which would see the US sell nuclear fuel and civilian nuclear technology to India, is also scheduled for a vote in the Indian Parliament later this month.  Ironically, the outcome of that vote may be inconsequential for the nuclear deal, as the deal is currently stalled in the US Congress and appears unlike to move forward before the November elections.

The ruling coalition in Belgium is in even worse shape.  On Monday, Prime Minister Yves Leterme resigned.  Leterme took office in March after a nine month political deadlock in which the country officially had no Prime Minister or government.  The crisis sparked by Leterme’s resignation has been called the worst political crisis faced by Belgium in the country’s history.  Strong divisions between Belgium’s Flemish-speaking population in the north and the French-speaking population in the south have intensified in recent years, and it seems difficult to imagine how a new government, which because of Belgium’s electoral system will almost certainly have to develop out of a multi-lingual coalition involving four or more political parties, will be any more stable. 

So why all this political instability?  Certainly the nature of the parliamentary systems in Belgium and India play a role.  It’s widely held that parliamentary systems, particularly when based on proportional representation electoral systems, are inherently less stable than presidential systems based on single-member district electoral systems.  But for every unstable PR-based parliamentary system like Belgium or contemporary India, there is South Africa or historical India, which has the same political system but is far more stable.  Clearly the issues at play must also be important.  The unique status of identity politics in Belgium, given the country’s status as an artificial creation as a buffer zone between major European powers, clearly has an important influence.  Similarly, in India, the debate over the relative influence of the United States in Indian society is a serious one, as many Indian political leaders continue to hold to the tradition of non-alignment and home rule.

It's a great mix: independent (not too dogmatic), supportive of several new and creative initiatives, well put together. So, join up!

Oh, Dr. Paul, you seem to have really laid the foundation of a lasting r3VOLution. Perhaps we are a 'great' generation after all.

Although the statement was a harsh accusation from the Afghan camp, it was not the first in recent weeks. Just last month, the Afghan president threatened to send his forces into Pakistan “to fight militants operating in the tribal areas there," amid concerns over the increased infiltration of militants across the border, [see related post]. On Monday, Karzai's cabinet announced that "Afghanistan would boycott a series of upcoming meetings with Pakistan unless 'bilateral trust' was restored." A statement from the cabinet read, Pakistan's "intelligence agency and military have turned that country (in) to the biggest exporter of terrorism and extremism to the world, particularly Afghanistan."

Pressure on Pakistan to rein in the militant threat has significantly increased, a fact further exemplified (and arguably exacerbated) by Western media coverage. Today, an interesting piece in the NY Times, entitled, "Pakistan Marble Helps Taliban Stay in Business," reported on the Taliban takeover of the Ziarat marble quarry, a coveted national asset located in the FATA region [see NY Times image to the left]. According to the news agency, this takeover "is one of the boldest examples of how the Taliban have made Pakistan’s tribal areas far more than a base for training camps or a launching pad for sending fighters into Afghanistan." Taxes and fees on the marble quarry have reportedly brought the organization tens of thousands since April. Moreover, noted the Times, "From the security of this border region, they deploy their fighters and suicide bombers in two directions: against NATO and American forces over the border in southern Afghanistan, and against Pakistani forces — police, army and intelligence officials — in major Pakistani cities."

An Associated Press story reported yesterday that, according to the U.S. military, militant attacks in eastern Afghanistan have increased 40 percent this year over 2007. And for two straight months, the death toll of foreign troops in Afghanistan has exceeded that of Iraq. The attack Sunday, which killed nine U.S. soldiers, was labeled by media outlets as "the deadliest single attack for the U.S. since June 2005." Although the ambush occurred in the country's Kunar province, where Gulbuddin Hekmatyar's radical Hezb-i-Islami has a stronghold, the group is said to have close contacts with militant organizations operating Pakistan.

Therefore, the common denominator in all of these equations is, unfortunately, Pakistan. As a result, it is nearly impossible for our government to avoid taking a stronger stance against these militant forces. However, Pakistan must strike the difficult balance of quelling these international pressures and still maintaining at least an illusion of sovereignty. Islamabad cannot be perceived as a U.S. lackey by a public that is largely anti-American (according to recent polls). So far, the country's leaders have taken steps to ensure this occurs. In an interview on Saturday with the Associated Press, Pakistani foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi said there are no U.S. or other foreign military personnel on the hunt for Osama bin Laden in his nation, and, moreover, none will be allowed in to search for the Al Qaeda leader. He told the news agency,

Our government's policy is that our troops, paramilitary forces and our regular forces are deployed in sufficient numbers. They are capable of taking action there. And any foreign intrusion would be counterproductive.

PM Yousaf Raza Gilani echoed such statements on Sunday, asserting that Pakistan was an independent state and "no one could dare challenge its sovereignty." Likewise, PPP co-chairman Asif Ali Zardari was cited by the Daily Times stating, "Pakistan was in favor of the war on terror, but it was unjustified of the United States to expect miracles from a four-month old government."

How much can and should the U.S. expect from Pakistan on this issue? Moreover, how can Pakistan sell a policy to its people in a way that is digestible and acceptable to these outside actors?

Just seven weeks after terrible sectarian violence erupted in Lebanon, the worst since civil war broke out in 1990, Lebanon has established a 30-member national unity government.  The designated Prime Minister, Fouad Siniora commented, “The government of national unity is the government of all the Lebanese…Our differences will not be resolved overnight, but we have decided to resolve them through institutions and dialogue rather than in the streets.”

Lebanon’s breakthrough – largely a product of negotiations in Doha – emphasizes Qatar’s success as the Middle East’s new mediator.  Read more here at The New York Times about why some are calling the Qatari emir a “modern-day Metternich.”

From 2003, hundreds perhaps thousands of lives have been lost needlessly through ethnic clashes, police killings, violent crime and road accidents. Scores of businesses have shut down due to lop-sided taxation and ministerial directives aimed at benefiting pro-Kibaki merchants. Ethnic tension has increased as top government positions are filled with members of Kibaki's Kikuyu tribe. Unemployment figures in Kenya currently stand at 65%, not very far from Zimbabwe's 80%. The latest saga involving the Grand Regency Hotel is proof that corrupt practices reign in the corridors of State power.

All these make for a very dissatisfied populace, and the Kenya of 2002 - as bad as it was - is largely forgotten amidst the problems of today. Critics say that President Kibaki's tenure makes the 24 years of ex-President Daniel arap Moi's administration look like a Swiss democracy.

In spite of implementing projects that had been lagging for years and thus spurring the highest rate of economic growth Kenya has seen in thirty years, President Kibaki is not exactly the most popular president. Within his Kikuyu ethnic base, Kibaki is refered to as one who avoids confrontation. Indeed, majority of the Kikuyu support Kibaki because they fear the alternative, represented by Prime Minister Raila Odinga.

President Kibaki's administration suffers from a poor legacy because of a lingering perception that his allies in government exhibit arrogance towards other Kenyans. Cabinet ministers disobey court orders, others have unleashed the wrath of the security forces on the citizens while yet others are responsible for meddling in state corporations in an attempt at micro management.

President Kibaki's cabinet is seen to veer between 1960s development plans on one hand and the panicky appeasement of voters on the other hand by creating new districts or dishing out land titles. Today, almost every clan of each tribe has its own district. There have been so many districts created in the past two years that few people in Kenya know the total number of districts in the country.

When Kibaki took office in 2003 on the National Rainbow Coalition (NARC) party, he pledged to respect the rule of law. This was to distinguish the NARC administration from the previous 40-year administration of the Kenya African National Union (KANU) whose flouting of the constitution were among many reasons its popularity tumbled over the years. However, Kibaki's allies generally behave as though the law does not apply to them.

Disgraced Kibaki protege, Amos Kimunya, went against government procedures by secretly selling the Grand Regency Hotel to a company whose ownership is a mystery. In the past year, Kimunya ignored public opinion as well as the views of the opposition and sold a substantial government stake in Safaricom, Kenya's leading mobile phone company. Two years earlier, Kimunya publicly announced that he would ignore a court decision stopping the Kenya Revenue Authority from forcing traders to install electronic tax registers. When he was minister for lands, Mr Kimunya dismissed a court order obtained by residents of the Mau forest and which was supposed to stop the government from evicting them. The eviction went ahead resulting in destruction of property and several deaths when the residents were rendered homeless. Kimunya famously said that title deeds, "are nothing more than a piece of paper."

Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta broke the law when he nominated more councilors than prescribed. In some cases, he ignored the lists provided by political parties and appointed his own people. Uhuru created a mess that the current Minister for Local Government, Musalia Mudavadi is attempting to clean up. But the damage has been done.

Amidst all these, Kibaki kept quiet and made not a few infractions of his own.

Last December, President Kibaki broke the tenets of the 1997 Inter Parties Parliamentary Group (IPPG) agreement that specified the manner in which political parties would appoint commissioners for the Electoral Commission of Kenya. It was a deal that even ex-President Moi, for all his tendencies, followed to the letter. Not so with Kibaki. He dismissed IPPG as a gentleman's agreement not rooted in the constitution. True enough. But by going against IPPG, Kibaki set the stage for suspicion in the conduct of the Electoral Commission. When he was declared winner of the 2007 elections, the opposing parties cited the composition of the Electoral Commission as grounds for dismissing the results. Violence by opposition supporters left hundreds, possibly, thousands dead and close to half a million homeless.

If you thought that the Kibaki administration had learnt its lesson from the violence of early this year, then you are mistaken. Nothing has changed and the bad old ways continue. As the violence raged, Kibaki's ministers ordered internally displaced persons to, "go home." The refugees protested, saying that they had no homes to return to. However, police were sent to forcibly remove people from the Nairobi showground and other areas. Apparently, the sight of refugee camps in the capital city was an embarrassment to the government.

In the Rift Valley province, which bore the worst of the violence, the government launched "Operation Go Home." Without going into the sordid details, Operation Go Home involved pushing refugees into army trucks then dumping them in isolated, violence-prone farming fields with no food supplies, no housing and no sanitation facilities. Ironically, many of these refugees are from Kibaki's Kikuyu ethnic group. They had initially been promised some form of monetary compensation to help them rebuild but the money is yet to come. Those lucky enough to get the promised funds were given Shs10,000 (US$150) each. A few refugees who have been mobilizing resistance to the forceful closure of camps have been tortured and shot.

The most blatant flouting of the law and the most overt display of the kind of arrogance associated with Kibaki's henchmen (and women) is the, still unexplained, presence of the Artur brothers in Kenya. The obnoxious duo introduced themselves as businessmen but it was obvious that they had powerful state connections. In the end, they were deported from the country after they over-stretched the patience of whoever was hosting them. In their lavish home at the exclusive Runda estate were found police uniforms, government issue firearms, government cars and identification documents linking them to national security apparatus. However, the Artur brothers saga was the height of public contempt that the Kibaki government has exhibited to Kenyans.

It all began in early 2006 when police raided the newsroom and printing plant of the East African Standard, Kenya's second biggest daily newspaper. The Standard had printed several articles critical of President Kibaki. When questioned about it, the Minister for Internal Security, John Michuki, proudly boasted that he was behind the whole operation and that he was willing to do it again. "When you rattle a snake, prepare to be bitten," were Michuki's remarks that drove newspaper cartoonists to draw him with a snake's tongue protruding from his mouth. Video images of the police operation indicated that it was led by foreigners. Opposition leader, Raila Odinga, claimed these were mercenaries hired by top government officials to assassinate critics of the government. It was after this that the Artur brothers came into the public limelight to deny they were mercenaries.

The Artur brothers were linked to Ms Mary Wambui and her daughter Winnie Wangui. The two women are beleived to be part of Kibaki's family and enjoy massive state security. Mary is usually seen traversing the country campaigning for President Kibaki and dishing out large sums of money whose source is the subject of very telling speculation. At one time, Winnie was said to be President Kibaki's daughter born out of a liaison with Mary but the President subsequently held a televised address denying the links. Winnie was an ally of the Artur brothers and almost married one of them.

How is it possible that a 77 year old politician, with close to 50 years of experience, can display such incompetence? Why does Kibaki allow such blunders to ruin his leadership? Why is Kibaki so blind to the day to day realities of his voters? The Makerere University graduate of economics is, in many ways, an intelligent man. He has very sound policies on development and economic growth.

Maybe its because of his character. Kibaki has long been cited as a man without a distinguishable position on anything - a fence sitter. Kibaki procrastinates on making important decisions. He delegates too much authority to his cronies and proteges. The result is a class of people who use the president's authority to make dubious decisions aimed at benefiting themselves. It has nothing to do with tribe, its a matter of economic and political class. That explains why Kibaki failed to stop the massacre of his own people in Eldoret, almost 300km northwest of Nairobi. However, when violence spread to Naivasha - just 90km outside the capital - Kibaki was quick to send helicopter gunships.

Because of his failings, Kibaki's legacy is similar to that of a tattered rag. Kibaki's presidency is like the building whose construction stops at the foundation level, then slowly crumbles into a dust heap with bits and pieces of steel rods poking out everywhere. History provided Kibaki with the opportunity to create a memorable leadership that could be an example to the whole of Africa. Instead, Kibaki trampled on the opportunity. What folly!

Kibaki: Worst president of Kenya

Text of editorial in Pashto entitled "Regarding arbitrary bombing raid in Nurestan, one cannot fight wildness with wildness" published by pro-government Afghan newspaper Weesa on 6 July

The arbitrary bombing raid in Nurestan the other day which killed more than 20 of our innocent compatriots cannot be considered anything other than a crime. It is deplorable that foreign troops based in Afghanistan have committed such a crime. Unfortunately, such arbitrary bombing raids, brutal killings and unprecedented wildness have been repeated so many times during the past nearly seven years that now it is difficult to believe that these foreign forces have come to our country for assistance and restoration of security.

The killing of innocent people in bombing raids is a painful and bitter aspect of the ongoing miseries suffered by our people. Senior Afghan officials, including the president, have time and again given reactions to this and have called for an end to such arbitrary and unjustifiable wild acts. Our nation has given its reaction to this. The world leaders have commented and voiced concerns over this. Unfortunately, a practical step has not been taken yet in this regard. Such acts have been repeated so many times that they cannot use a technical fault [as an excuse] for its justification.

We do not know how the international forces, particularly those responsible for this crime will justify them. It is surprising that the international community has been trying to eliminate terrorists by bombing homes in rural areas of Afghanistan for the past seven years. Thousands of fighters walk freely and there are several [terrorist training] centres on the other side of the border. They chant slogans against the international community and threaten to attack London and Washington. There are such faces behind them which have started this bloody game.

Why does the international community help these circles and bomb our innocent and defenceless people in rural areas? If it is the war on terror, we condemn such a war. Do the international forces think that they will ensure security and protect their cities by carrying out such acts? It is merely a dream and imagining that you can ensure security through such wild acts. They should realize that they will not only lose their friends, but dozens of people will join the ranks of the enemy every time they carry out such a merciless bombing raid. Those responsible for the arbitrary bombing raid in Nurestan should at least refer to their conscience and evaluate their activities. Is there any name other than wildness for such acts in the dictionary of humanity? Can anyone fight wildness with wildness? No, never.

Source: Weesa, Kabul, in Pashto 6 Jul 08

Und die Opposition?

Die Grünen waren großteils kaum wahrnehmbar und befanden sich in einer Art Dornröschenschlaf. Die FPÖ dagegen punktete laufend mit teilweise schmutzigen Meldungen und Diffamierung von Minderheiten. Ich erinnere nur an Meldungen eines Karlheinz Klement, der behauptete "Homosexualität ist eine Kultur des Todes".

Was ist nun vom Wahlkampf zu erwarten?

Nun, vermutlich wird dieser erstens der teuerste Wahlkampf aller Zeiten werden. Die SPÖ hat gestern einen Antrag auf Begrenzung der Wahlkampfkosten abgelehnt und gab vor der ÖVP klein bei. Auch wenn die großen Parteien, SPÖ und ÖVP, beteuern, einen Sachthemenwahlkampf führen zu wollen, wage ich zu bezweifeln, dass dies letztendlich der Fall sein wird. Zu tief sind die Gräben zwischen der "beleidigten" ÖVP , bei der letzten Wahl nicht erster geworden zu sein, und einer zerrütteten und wankenden SPÖ.

Die FPÖ wird wieder einen "hetzerischen" Wahlkampf führen. HC Strache gab schon das Thema vor: "Österreicher zuerst!" Was dies zu bedeuten hat, scheint klar. Die FPÖ wird einen ProtestwählerInnen- und ausländerInnenfeindlichen Wahlkampf führen. Ersteres ist nicht verwunderlich, da die FPÖ einzig und allein ProtestwählerInnenstimmen setzt und keine zukunftstauglichen Programme präsentieren kann. Letzteres war traurigerweise schon bei  vergangenen Nationalratswahl Thema Nummer 1 der FPÖ. Hier waren wirklich niveaulose Plakate zu "bestaunen" (Stichwort: "Daham statt Islam" oder Deutsch statt nix verstehen").

Persönlich bin ich gespannt, wie die Grünen den Wahlkampf bestreiten werden, und ob sie es schaffen werden, sich als echte soziale Alternative für enttäuschte SPÖ-WählerInnen zu präsentieren und einen tauglichen Gegenpool zur rechtspopulistischen FPÖ darstellen können.

Die Grünen haben heute etliche Anträge im Nationalrat eingebracht, doch die SPÖ-Abgeordneten konnten (oder durften oder wollten auch) nicht für diese Anträge stimmen und stimmten somit in Einklang mit den ÖVP-Abgeordneten dagegen.

Welche Anträge waren das?

• Abschaffung der Studiengebühren
• Änderung des Sicherheitspolizeigesetz
• Einführung des Zivilpaktes für homosexuelle PartnerInnenschaften
• Einführung "Papa-Monat"
• etc...

Was bleibt vom heutigen Tag? Ein Trauerspiel der SPÖ zum Abschied und viele vergebene Chancen, verpasstes noch vor dem (zu erwartenden "schmutzigen") Wahlkampf zu erledigen. Übrigens, Wahltermin wird der 28. September sein.

Just one day after the Islamabad attack, one of the capital's most deadly blasts in recent history, another Pakistani city, Karachi, was struck by a series of bombings that wounded at least 37 people. Six blasts occurred throughout the country's bustling port city, and media outlets reported that one person was killed, although children were among those injured. Karachi police told CNN a motorbike, a bicycle and a truck were involved in three of the bombs. According to the AFP, "One of the blasts happened near a school, injuring several of the children. Another completely destroyed a car, leaving half a charred chassis and two wheels." Both the news agency and The News reported, "Tension gripped several neighborhoods affected by the bombs, with mobs pelting cars with stones, burning tires and chanting anti-government slogans." [Image from CNN]

Although there was no "immediate claim of responsibility," police said "the blasts appeared to be small and aimed at raising tensions in the city, rather than major attacks." Karachi police chief Babar Khattak told the AFP, "Apparently the purpose was to create panic in the city. There is also a possibility that these people who planted the bombs wanted to fan ethnic tensions in the city." According to a Pakistani media outlet, PM Yousaf Raza Gilani sent a message from Malaysia appealing to "Pakistanis to remain peaceful and united."

Although the bombings in Islamabad and Karachi may not be directly connected, the fact that they occurred just a day apart further signifies the country's degenerating security situation. Although there are many militant groups that espouse different ideologies and rhetoric in Pakistan, it is often in their common interest to perpetrate acts of violence that further destabilize the current security environment. As a result of such attacks, tensions and anti-government sentiment are often exacerbated, which is ultimately detrimental for the country's current state of affairs. Although the Pakistani government has indicated their commitment to countering such forces, their responses to such attacks must be stronger and far more united. Rather than just releasing generic condemnations, responses from all members of the ruling coalition (PPP, PML-N, ANP, etc.) should continue to vilify these groups so that blame is shifted towards those conducting the attacks, rather than just those in power.

Afghanistan: A War That's Still Not Won ( Time Magazine, June 26, 2008 )

Afghanistan: Marines' Tour Extended ( Time Magazine, July 4, 2008 )

Military Death Toll Rises in Afghanistan ( NYTimes.com, July 2, 2008 )

Afghans Say New U.S. Strike Killed Civilians ( NYTimes.com, July 7, 2008 )

U.N. Warns of Food and Security Crises in Afghanistan ( NYTimes.com, July 2, 2008 )

Faces of the Fallen: Iraq and Afghanistan Casualties ( washingtonpost.com )

Bush admits to 'tough month' in Afghanistan ( CNN.com, July 2, 2008 )

Coalition troop deaths in Afghanistan surpass Iraq ( CNN.com July 1, 2008 )

Bush signs bill funding wars into 2009 ( CNN.com, June 30, 2008 )

Und selbst heute ist die SPÖ nochmal umgefallen! Broukal wollte einen Antrag auf Abschaffung der Studiengebühren einbringen, schließlich war das auch das Wahlversprechen des "Sandkastenkanzlers" Gusenbauer! Doch Broukal wurde vom SPÖ-Klub "zurückgepfiffen! Eine Peinlichkeit der SPÖ zum Abschluss.

Nun gilt es, eine hetzerische und rechtspopulistische FPÖ in der Regierung und einen Vizekanzler Strache zu verhindern. Die Alternative für (enttäuschte) SPÖ-WählerInnen heißt daher GRÜN. Die WählerInnen werden im Herbst die Entscheidung zu treffen haben, in welche Richtung sich Österreich entwickeln soll. Eine Veränderung wird, nein muss passieren. Bleibt nur zu hoffen, dass sich das Kräfteverhältnis nicht zum rechten politischen Rand verschiebt, und sich andere Regierungsformen außer einer Neuauflage von ÖVP und SPÖ oder einer FPÖ-Regierungsbeteiligung ausgehen...

Gründe, GRÜN zu wählen gibt's genügend:

Nevertheless, reported the Associated Press, "Boucher said that he tried to get this message across to Pakistan's new ruling coalition. He met with Sharif, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani and Musharraf during his three-day visit that ended Wednesday." Although a recent poll found that 73 percent of Pakistanis had an unfavorable view of Musharraf, the AP noted that the new ruling coalition is also facing increasing criticism and, "Pakistanis voice frustration that the government has been preoccupied with internal disputes — particularly over how to restore senior judges that were fired by Musharraf — despite deepening economic hardships faced by the general public and concern over the spread of Islamic militancy."

This spread of militancy and violence appeared evident today, when media outlets reported that a bomb blast in Quetta killed a four year old girl and wounded 11 people. The AP cited a Quetta police officer, who said, "The bomb was rigged to a motorcycle and it exploded outside a commercial bank." The AFP reported that the girl was actually eight years old, and was a beggar. The blast in Mannan Chowk also wounded her mother, who is also a beggar. Although no group has so far claimed responsibility for the attack, the bombing further emphasizes what most of us already know - that the militancy issue is a problem that is not only growing, but is increasingly closer to our door steps. [Image from the AP]

]]> http://oliverritter.wordpress.com/?p=266 Fri, 04 Jul 2008 09:04:53 +0000 Oliver http://oliverritter.wordpress.com/?p=266 Das Chaos, der Stillstand, die Ohnmächtigkeit, die gegenseitigen Vorwürfe in der SPÖ-ÖVP-Regierung unter dem Umfaller-Kanzler Gusenbauer wird mit jeden Tag unerträglicher. Die Tagespolitik liefert längst keine Lösungsansätze mehr, um die Inflation einzudämmen, um Klimaschutz zu betreiben, die fehlene Energiewende, um Menschen mit geringen Einkommen zu entlasten, um das Bildungssystem zu reformieren,...

Die SPÖ ist in sämtlichen Belangen vor einer "beleidigten" ÖVP in die Knie gegangen. Die ÖVP hat es offensichtlich bis heute nicht verkraftet, bei der letzten Nationalratswahl als stärkste Kraft abgelöst worden zu sein. Anstatt sich inhaltlich und personell zu erneuern, hält sie an alten Grundsätzen fest, betreibt (Gesellschafts)politik aus dem vorgestern. Die "pseudomäßig" installierte Perspektivengruppe unter Landwirtschaftsminister Josef Pröll hat zwar interessante Ansatzpunkte und längst fällige Änderungen des Parteiprogramms geliefert, doch ist die Umsetzung in der Partei kläglich gescheitert, da sich die konservativen Hardliner unter dem Ex-Bundeskanzler Wolfgang Schüssel durchgesetzt haben.

Die SPÖ widerrum hat in keinster Weise den Wandel von der Oppositionspartei hin zu einer Regierungspartei geschafft. Gusenbauer hat sich durch fragwürdige politische Schachzüge selbst ins Out befördert. Noch nie war ein Bundeskanzler derart unbeliebt bei den österreichischen WählerInnen. Doch was macht er? Anstatt die Konsequenzen zu ziehen und freiwillig seinen Sessel im Bundeskanzleramt zu räumen um den Weg für eineN NachfolgerIn frei zu machen, bleibt er ein beleidigter und beharrlicher Sesselkleber.

Gemeinsam mit dem designierten SPÖ-Chef Faymann hat Gusenbauer es nun geschafft, die letzte Glaubwürdigkeit der SPÖ durch einen Kniefall vor dem "Boulevard" namens "Kronen Zeitung" zu verspielen.

Stellt sich nun die Frage: Was ist die Alternative? Soll Rot-Schwarz bis zum nächsten regulären Wahltermin "weiterwurschteln"? Soll es einen Neustart mit einem neuen SPÖ-Führungsteam geben? Soll es Neuwahlen geben, die womöglich neue Regierungskonstellationen ermöglichen?

Letzteres hat seinen Charme, doch der Wahlkampf würde schmutzig, sehr schmutzig werden. Mit welchem Ergebnis?

Die rechtspopulistische FPÖ unter H.C. Strache wäre wohl der große Gewinner, wie dies aus aktuellen Umfragen zu schließen wäre. Würde die ÖVP als stärkste Kraft, nachdem die SPÖ massivst abgestürzst wäre, wieder das Experiment von Schwarz-Blau wagen? Ich vermute Ja.

Ich möchte mir einen Vizekanzler Strache in keinster Weise vorstellen. Ich denke mit Schaudern an diverse Äußerungen bzw. an diverse Fotos, die ihn in bedenklichen Posen zeigen. Doch würde diese bedenkliche Regierungskonstellation einen Neustart für eine im Chaos versinkende SPÖ und für ein weiteres Erstarken der Grünen ermöglichen? SPÖ und Grüne könnten sich wieder als Alternative zu einer menschenverachtenden Politik einer Strache-FPÖ positionieren, den Fokus auf soziale Themen setzen, wie Einführung der Homo-Ehe, Ganzestagesbetreuung für jedes Kind, Entlastung kleiner Einkommen, Verkleinerung der Einkommensschere, etc.

Sollte es tatsächlich zu Neuwahlen kommen, hoffe ich jedoch, dass sich das Schauermärchen ÖVP-FPÖ nicht wiederholt, sondern dass die WählerInnen rechtzeitig erkennen, dass sich mit einer rechtspopulistischen, hetzerischen Politik einer FPÖ keine vernünftige und lösungsorientierte Politik machen lässt. Ich möchte mir in so einer Regierungskonstellation auch gar nicht ausdenken, was das für die Gleichstellungsbestrebungen von Schwulen und Lesben bedeutet. Dann würde nämlich jeglicher Versuch der Öffnung der Ehe oder zumindest der einer "Eingetragenen LebenspartnerInnenschaft" bereits seitens der homophoben und diskriminierenden FPÖ im Keim ersteckt werden.

Oder entblößt sich die SPÖ noch mehr und geht eine Koalition mit der Strache FPÖ ein? Wäre nicht das erste mal, dass die SPÖ eine FPÖ "salonfähig" macht...

Damit sich SPÖ-WählerInnen rechtzeitig vor dem nächsten Wahltermin an ihren Entschluss erinnern, nicht mehr die SPÖ (sondern die bessere Alternative Die Grünen) zu wählen, können sich Interessierte auf der Homepage "Rückgrat zeigen - Die Grünen" registrieren.

The government spent $2.4bn (€1.5bn, £1.2bn) during the fiscal year that ended yesterday to subsidize domestic fuel prices and protect consumers from rising global oil prices. But this has resulted in a rise in the budget deficit, which is expected to reach about 6.5 per cent of gross domestic product, leading to a rethink by government ministers.

One government minister told the FT, "The deficit is unsustainable...We have to pass on all the increase in fuel prices to our consumers. By December 2008, there [will] be no fuel-related subsidies in Pakistan." According to the AFP, the government, "amid spiraling global oil prices," raised natural gas prices by 31 percent and petrol prices by up to 20 percent this week to help reduce the deficit. However, the FT reported, "Prices of diesel and kerosene, which are used by far more people, would have to be raised by much more [55-58% and 75-80% respectively], prompting fears of unrest."

Although the decision to raise fuel prices amid an already burgeoning food crisis promises to further antagonize the Pakistani public, Pakistani PM Yousaf Raza Gilani defended the measure on Tuesday, asserting that "his government wouldn't flinch from unpopular measures needed to stabilize the economy," reported Reuters. Gilani told reporters today, "Our government is committed to restoring macroeconomic stability in a reasonable timeframe...Economic liberalization, deregulation and privatisation in a transparent manner will be the core principles of our economic reform agenda."

Despite these assurances, the rise in the price of petrol was the fifth increase for Pakistanis in four months, noted the BBC. The news agency added, "A liter of petrol now costs 75.69 Pakistani rupees ($1.11), compared with 53.70 in February. Diesel is now 49.05 a liter and a kilogram of compressed natural gas, which many people in South Asia use for cooking, costs 52 rupees." Moreover, soaring oil and food prices "have pushed inflation in Pakistan to its highest level in more than 30 years," a development that has deeply affected the country's population, in particular the poor and middle income people.

To make matters potentially worse, Dawn reported Wednesday, "A ‘calculation/conversion error' admitted by the federal government in announcing a 13 Rupee increase in price of compressed natural gas (CNG) could have earned gas stations windfall gains overnight, but consumers lost millions of rupees." Officials "woke up to the error" about 20 hours late, issuing a clarification that the intended increase was actually 5.58 Rupees a kilogram. Although the government "regretted" the inconvenience this mistake may have caused, Dawn quoted some local consumers who were (not surprisingly) outraged. One local Pakistani told the news agency, "It shows the government’s incompetence and its non-serious attitude towards the people already hit hard by price hikes." [Image from the BBC]

A clear sign of Mr Turnbull and his wife, former Mayor of Sydney Lucy Turnbull, have every confidence in the real estate market, between them they have purchased two commercial properties and one residential in Potts Point, in the Eastern Suburbs in Sydney and incidentally Marquette Turner's HQ.

These details were tabled in the changes to the register of MP's interests in Federal Parliament on Thursday 26 June.

Simon Turner

BAGHDAD -  Bombers killed nearly 40 people Thursday in Iraq, half of them at a meeting of tribal sheiks in Anbar province, where the United States and tribal forces had been thought largely to have defeated Sunni Muslim insurgents.

Details of the Anbar bombing were sketchy, but U.S. officials confirmed that American service members were among the casualties.

The attack came just days before the United States was to turn Anbar security over to the Iraqis. That plan is now on hold, American officials said.

The bombing was carried out by a man wearing a suicide vest who struck at a meeting between tribal sheiks and American officials in a municipal building in Karmah, early reports said. Iraqi officials said the toll was at least 20 dead and at least 30 wounded. Most of the victims were Sunni tribal leaders who were allied with the U.S. military in the fight against the militant group al Qaida in Iraq.

In a separate attack, insurgents targeted the governor of Nineveh province as he left the government headquarters in Mosul, a mostly Sunni city north of Baghdad in which Sunni extremists are said to have concentrated after being pushed from Baghdad and Anbar province.

Police said a roadside bomb exploded on the governor's route as the convoy passed. Five minutes later, attackers detonated a car bomb in a second attempt further down the governor's route. That bomb resulted in dozens of casualties, most of them civilians shopping in a nearby open-air market, police said.

Police said at least 18 Iraqis were killed and 62 injured in Mosul. The governor escaped unharmed, though his bodyguards were among the wounded, according to Iraqi authorities.

The bombings came in a bloody week with several attacks on local government offices and security targets that have killed at least 10 American service members, four U.S. government civilian employees and scores of Iraqis. Still, Iraqi officials said that the spurt of violence wasn't a long-term setback to the security gains of recent months.

"The general atmosphere is that they are out: the militias and al-Qaida and the affiliated gangs," said Abdul Kareem Khalaf, a spokesman for the Iraqi Interior Ministry. "Can I say they are completely finished? No, that would be unrealistic. But now they are no more than outlaw gangs in the throes of death. Formerly, whole institutions would fall within minutes as a result of their activities, but now they need to really plan and go to great lengths to find a weak link in our security."