|
|
|
| Iraq + war on terrorism + Middle East conflict + critical perspectives |
 It's our warBy William Kristol, Weekly Standard, July 24, 2006 Why is this Arab-Israeli war different from all other Arab-Israeli wars? Because it's not an Arab-Israeli war. Most of Israel's traditional Arab enemies have checked out of the current conflict. The governments of Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia are, to say the least, indifferent to the fate of Hamas and Hezbollah. The Palestine Liberation Organization (Fatah) isn't a player. The prime mover behind the terrorist groups who have started this war is a non-Arab state, Iran, which wasn't involved in any of Israel's previous wars. What's happening in the Middle East, then, isn't just another chapter in the Arab-Israeli conflict. What's happening is an Islamist-Israeli war. [complete article]  Comment -- And that's why it's our war?After so much misery from Iraq, the neocons must have been popping open the champaigne bottles in Washington this week. Finally, the real war against Islamism is about to take off. Is it time to resuscitate that good old phrase moral clarity? Maybe not. Maybe we need a bit of cognitive clarity. For starters, that the autocratic regimes in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan, are not rooting for Hezbollah should hardly come as a surprise. Empowered Islamists in Lebanon or Palestine risk stirring up the Islamists (Shia or Sunni) at home. As for Kristol's Islamist domino theory - topple the Iranian regime and the incipient Islamist empire gets nipped in the bud - what would Syria's Islamists have to say? Topple Assad and we'll unget religion? The trouble with this Kristolball gazing is - unless I'm mistaken - the Islamists are really here to stay even if Israel and America's "Iranian problem" is violently struck down. Any regime-toppling, terrorist-assassinating campaign is likely to create more Zarqawis and fewer Nasrallahs. Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah might not be the most popular man in the Western media right now, but the prospects for peace in the Middle East are virtually none existent if we imagine that killing him and destroying his organization will mean the end of Islamism. All it will mean is Israel and the West's message to the Islamists is this: you are permitted no place in politics. That's a very dangerous message!  Hezbollah wields improved arsenalBy Ken Ellingwood, Los Angeles Times, July 15, 2006 The first rocket from southern Lebanon to hit this bayside city [Haifa] has made it clear that Hezbollah now has missiles that can strike targets deep in Israel, and that the militant group is prepared to use them. On Friday, a length of police tape marked the site where a rocket had slammed into a hill the night before in Israel's third-largest city. The strike about 20 miles from the border with Lebanon caused no injuries, but officials said it brought into focus the worrisome improvement in the range of firepower that Hezbollah guerrillas had at their disposal. [complete article] Comment -- As Mark Perry has pointed out:When Hezbollah attacked Haifa Thursday, first Hezbollah said, "We didn't do it." Then they said, "We didn't target Haifa." No one picked up on it. Here's what they meant to say: "We understand hitting Haifia is a major escalation, and we didn't mean to do that."...In the narrative within which this conflict is being reported, Hezbollah is the reckless party and Israel is responding with its overwhelming might. A more realistic narrative would begin by noting this sequence of events: 1. A flaky Israeli patrol operation along the Lebonese border on Wednesday left soldiers exposed to attack and abduction. 2. Hezbollah made good on a long-standing promise: they would capture Israel soldiers whenever they got the chance. 3. The Olmert government having gone ballistic in response to Gilad Shalit's abduction had no alternative but have a proportionately disproportionate response to the Wednesday's abductions. 4. Hezbollah marked a red line by saying that it would attack Haifa if South Beirut was bombed. 5. Missiles aimed at Haifa were fired prematurely, thus meaning that a subsequent strike could not as credibly be described as retaliation. 6. So, far, in spite of the bombing of South Beirut and Hezbullah's chief, Hassan Nasrallah's home, Haifa has not been attacked. Are we to conclude that the original threat was a bluff? Probably not, since the city was already hit. Should we conclude that Hezbollah can be taken at their word? Maybe, but if they can be taken at their word, might we not also conclude that they may be worth talking to? Israel targets Hamas economy ministryBy Nidal al-Mughrabi, Reuters, July 15, 2006 Israeli aircraft targeted the Palestinian Economy Ministry and a house in Gaza on Saturday, part of an offensive to free a captured soldier and prevent the functioning of the Hamas-led government. Doctors said one person was killed in the attack on the house, which was in a densely populated neighbourhood, and eight people were wounded, included a baby and a child. Israel said the house was targeted because it was being used as a place to manufacture and store weapons, including rockets. "The explosion was very large from all the explosives inside," an army spokeswoman said. "We knew militants from Hamas were staying inside and were working to make a rocket." Palestinian medics said it appeared most of the casaulties involved people who were outside the house at the time. [complete article] See also, The Middle East's symbolic slugfest (David N. Myers). Comment -- Whether in Gaza or Lebanon, the phrase, "an offensive to free a captured soldier (or soldiers)" has from the beginning been grotesquely absurd. The only plausible explanation for claiming that the goal is to free captured soldiers would be the same as the rationale for torture: make the victim suffer enough and he will talk. Yet it is clear that the real goal here is not to free prisoners; it is to cripple if not destroy Hamas and Hezbollah. The "rescue" charade in the first operation was sustained by the frequency with which Gilad Shalit's name was repeated, but now with the offensive in Lebanon the names Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev hardly get a mention. This is, as one CNN announcer said without a hint of irony, about "wiping Hezbollah off the map." Should this be dismissed as the passionate rhetoric of war? Or might we attach significance to the fact that in the post 9/11 world the leaders of the so-called civilized world speak not merely of defeating their enemies but seek their annihilation. The phrase "final solution" doesn't roll of anyone's lips, but there's more than a hint of that way of thinking in the air.
Israel expands strikes on LebanonBBC News, July 15, 2006 Israel has expanded its bombardment of Lebanon, attacking a large number of targets across the country. Warplanes fired rockets on the Lebanon-Syrian border and hit the centre of Beirut for the first time. More than 80 Lebanese have died, including 18 fleeing border areas, in the strikes launched after Hezbollah militants seized two Israeli soldiers. [complete article] Israel vowing to rout HezbollahBy Steven Erlanger, New York Times, July 15, 2006 The face-off between Israel and the Lebanese group Hezbollah escalated sharply on Friday as jets hit its Beirut headquarters and southern strongholds and Israeli news reports said that a Hezbollah guided missile struck an Israeli naval vessel, causing severe damage. The Israeli military later reported four sailors were missing. Leaders of the two sides threatened a still more intense war as a barrage of more than 100 Hezbollah rockets flew into Israel, which said it would destroy the power of Hezbollah and drive it from Israel's border. [complete article] Israel PM's bid to free 3 soldiers a gambleBy Steven Gutkin, AP (via WP), July 14, 2006 Ehud Olmert's effort to free three captured soldiers has become a broad campaign to alter the strategic balance of the Middle East -- an enormous gamble for an Israeli prime minister facing growing domestic pressure to hit Islamic militants hard. Israel's assault on Lebanon, which has already killed 73 people and turned much of the country into a battlefield, could backfire if it becomes a protracted quagmire, provokes war with Syria or exposes Israelis to increasingly deadly attacks. But Olmert --who replaced Ariel Sharon when he suffered a stroke seven month ago -- likely sees Israel's simultaneous offensives in the Gaza Strip and Lebanon as a way to strike a decisive blow not only against Hezbollah and Hamas but also against the interests of Syria and Iran, which bankroll and arm the militants. Because of widespread Israeli support for strong action against Hezbollah, which penetrated Israel's northern border and captured two soldiers this week, Olmert could be in even bigger trouble if he backs down. [complete article] Bush blames Hezbollah for Mideast violenceBy Tom Raun, AP (via WP), July 15, 2006 President Bush on Saturday blamed the Islamic militant group Hezbollah and a compliant Syria for the escalating violence in the Middle East, taking a sharper stance than Russian President Vladimir Putin. Bush held Israel blameless while Putin was also critical of Israel's military response. "The best way to stop the violence is for Hezbollah to lay down its arms and to stop attacking. And therefore I call upon Syria to exert influence over Hezbollah," Bush said about the flare-up that could overshadow this weekend's meeting of world powers. [complete article] See also, Syria says fully backs Hizbollah against Israel (Reuters). Comment -- So this is Bush's idea of conflict resolution? He's supposed to be a "world leader" but he wouldn't even make the grade as a kindergarden teacher (no disrespect to kindergarden teachers intended!).
An unseen lifeline in IraqBy James Rainey, Los Angeles Times, July 15, 2006 Black smoke spirals skyward on the horizon, and swarms of Iraqi men in camouflage and dark masks tote rifles by the roadside. But the driver puts me at ease. He has driven other reporters down this road. He names them. They were brave. And all survived. Then there is a sudden thud. The driver's eyes dart across the asphalt and along brown apartments lining both sides of the highway. He fumbles for a walkie-talkie, speaking in Arabic to bodyguards in another car. Even at a distance, the explosion creates a deep tremor. He cranks the wheel to the right, making a hairpin turn. Drivers shuttling Westerners around this beleaguered city change course frequently to throw off kidnappers. But this about-face is sudden and unnerving. Our driver is taking us the wrong way up a highway off-ramp. Cars streak past in the opposite direction, a foot off our left front fender. My chest tightens. "Is this normal?" I ask. "I mean, driving the wrong way like this?" "In Iraq," the driver answers, "broken is the normal." [complete article] Gunmen abduct 50 in BaghdadReuters (via WP), July 15, 2006 Gunmen wearing camouflage uniforms abducted the head of Iraq's national Olympic committee and 50 other people including bodyguards and committee staff as they met in Baghdad on Saturday, police sources said. Police said the body of one of the guards was found dumped in a street in Karrada in central Baghdad shortly afterwards, not far from the conference center where the officials had been meeting. The guard had been shot in the head. Police and Interior Ministry sources said the well-known Olympic Committee chief Ahmed al-Hadjiya and about 20 bodyguards had been taken, along with other committee officials and the convention center's guards. [complete article] An American mediator with Hezbollah interprets the signals from Tel Aviv and the Lebanese militia groupMark Perry interviewed by Laura Rozen, The American Prospect, July 14, 2006 Laura Rozen: We've been hearing the theory that the timing of Hezbollah's Tuesday kidnapping of the two Israeli Defense Force soldiers was planned well in advance and with coordination from Tehran or Damascus. Can you speak to that? Mark Perry: Oy vey. There are a lot of people in Washington trying to walk that story back right now, because it's not true. Hezbollah and Israel stand along this border every day observing each other through binoculars and waiting for an opportunity to kill each other. They are at war. They have been for 25 years, no one ever declared a cease-fire between them. ... They stand on the border every day and just wait for an opportunity. And on Tuesday morning there were two Humvees full of Israeli soldiers, not under observation from the Israeli side, not under covering fire, sitting out there all alone. The Hezbollah militia commander just couldn't believe it -- so he went and got them. The Israeli captain in charge of that unit knew he had really screwed up, so he sent an armored personnel carrier to go get them in hot pursuit, and Hezbollah led them right through a minefield. Now if you're sitting in Tehran or Damascus or Beirut, and you are part of the terrorist Politburo so to speak, you have a choice. With your head sunk in your hands, thinking "Oh my God," you can either give [the kidnapped soldiers] back and say "Oops, sorry, wrong time" or you can say, "Hey, this is war." It is absolutely ridiculous to believe that the Hezbollah commander on the ground said Tuesday morning, "Go get two Israeli soldiers, would you please?" [complete article] Comment -- Forget about Robert Fisk, or Anthony Shadid, or any of the other hotshot reporters - Mark Perry's got the inside story here.
Hizbullah leader: 'You wanted open war. We are ready for an open war'By Rory McCarthy, The Guardian, July 14, 2006 Hizbullah threatened "open war" last night as Israel ramped up its attacks on Lebanon, bombing roads and bridges in the centre of Beirut and warning that its fight would last until the militant group was destroyed. Israeli politicians and army officers brushed aside international criticism and said their goal was to force Hizbullah's disarmament. So far at least 73 people, nearly all civilians, have been killed in Lebanon since the bombing began three days ago. In response, Hizbullah's chief, Hassan Nasrallah, threatened "open war" against Israel, hinting at rocket attacks deep inside the country. He made his threat shortly after he survived an air raid on his home that appeared to be an assassination attempt. "You wanted an open war and we are ready for an open war," he said in a taped statement. [complete article] Bomb-laden drone believed to have hit shipBy Amos Harel and Yoav Stern, Haaretz, July 14, 2006 Four Israel Navy sailors were reported missing after an explosives-laden drone, apparently launched by Hezbollah, hit a naval vessel off the coast of Beirut Friday night. The blast caused a fire on board the ship, which had been stationed 16 kilometers off of the coast of Lebanon. After the fire was extinguished, it became clear that four soldiers were missing. Their families were notified soon thereafter. Israel Defense Forces teams, with the help of planes, helicopters and additional vessels, were searching for the missing troops at the site of the blast. The ship was towed back to Israel. [complete article] See also, Defense Tech. A new war, but both sides recall old onesBy Brian Whitaker, Rory McCarthy, Conal Urquhart, Wendell Steavenson and Oliver Burkeman, The Guardian, July 14, 2006 The three Syrian guest-workers arrived before dawn yesterday, as they did every morning, to set up their coffee stall beneath the flyover, hoping to catch the breakfast trade from early risers in the southern suburbs of Beirut. That was when the bomb blew them away, along with a large section of the road above their heads. Nobody seemed to remember their names: they were just Syrians. Kaseem Moqdad, who lives nearby, had woken in darkness to the sound of jets overhead. By the time the overpass was bombed he was out in the street in a crowd of people, looking up at the sky. In addition to those killed, he said, 20 people were injured by flying glass and rubble. A former corporal in the Royal Fusiliers, Mr Moqdad had been back in his native Lebanon for only a year and a half, and Israel's assault on its capital left him with a sense of torn loyalties. "I don't like Hizbullah and I don't hate Hizbullah," he said, in an accent that was half Lebanese, half north London. "We have to fix why people get mad, and we're not treating the cause." He was proud to be British, he said. "But you do get angry with the west. The Israelis don't see that they kill children and women and innocent people." [complete article] From my home, I saw what the 'war on terror' meantBy Robert Fisk, The Independent, July 14, 2006 All night I heard the jets, whispering high above the Mediterranean. It lasted for hours, little fireflies that were watching Beirut, waiting for dawn perhaps, because it was then that they descended. They came first to the little village of Dweir near Nabatiya in southern Lebanon where an Israeli plane dropped a bomb on to the home of a Shia Muslim cleric. He was killed. So was his wife. So were eight of his children. One was decapitated. All they could find of a baby was its head and torso which a young villager brandished in fury in front of the cameras. Then the planes visited another home in Dweir and disposed of a family of seven. It was a brisk start to Day Two of Israel's latest "war on terror", a conflict that uses some of the same language - and a few of the same lies - as George Bush's larger "war on terror". For just as we "degraded" Iraq - in 1991 as well as 2003 - so yesterday it was Lebanon's turn to be "degraded". [complete article] Syria says fully backs Hizbollah against IsraelBy Khaled Yacoub Oweis, Reuters, July 14, 2006 Syria will support Hizbollah and Lebanon against Israel's attacks on the country, the ruling Baath Party said on Friday, defying the Jewish state and its chief ally Washington. "The Syrian people are ready to extend full support to the Lebanese people and their heroic resistance to remain steadfast and confront the barbaric Israeli aggression and its crimes," said a communiqu? from the party's national command issued after a meeting. It said Israel and the United States "are trying to wipe out Arab resistance in every land under occupation" and that President Bashar al-Assad was aware of the seriousness of the situation in the region. [complete article] Chirac says Israel wants to 'destroy Lebanon'By Philippe Naughton, The Times, July 14, 2006 President Chirac accused Israel today of wanting to "destroy Lebanon" as the United Nations sent a team of senior diplomats to the region to tackle the crisis caused by Hezbollah's abduction of two Israeli soldiers. So far Israel has ignored international concerns about its widespread military offensive in Lebanon and also escaped a UN Security Council motion calling for it to halt its operations in Gaza last night when a draft resolution was vetoed as "unbalanced" by the United States. [complete article] Israel to bombard Hezbollah HQ in BeirutHaaretz, July 14, 2006 The Israel Defense Forces is planning to bomb Hezbollah headquarters in a densely populated area of south Beirut on Friday, a senior General Staff official told Haaretz. The IDF said it has dropped leaflets warning civilians of the impending attack and that many of them have left the Shi'ite Dahiya quarter of south Beirut, where thousands of people live in multi-story residential buildings. "We will atack more significant targets than we have attacked until now," the officer said. "If we had chosen to bomb earlier, it would have ended with hundreds of civilians killed, and we took ethical considerations into account. On the other hand, we will not adopt a naive approach, and the model of terrorists hiding behind civilians will not be accepted." [complete article] South Lebanon feels brunt of Israeli attacksBy Nicholas Blanford, Christian Science Monitor, July 14, 2006 Mohammed Akkash's voice cracked as he listed the names of his 10 grandchildren who were killed just hours earlier in an Israeli air raid on his son's home. "The youngest one, Safat, was just 6 months old. Is a 6-month-old baby a resistance fighter? What happened is a crime," he says, as other mourners sitting on plastic seats outside his home nodded quietly in agreement. Throughout the dusty hill villages and deep valleys of south Lebanon, similar displays of grief and anger were evident Thursday as the district reeled beneath the most intensive series of Israeli airstrikes mounted in 10 years. Roads and bridges here were systematically blown up, part of Israel's strategy of targeting the militant group Hizbullah's infrastructure that has effectively cut off south Lebanon from the rest of the country. [complete article] See also, Escalation ripples through Middle East (CSM). Leader who lacks the military pedigreeBy Richard Beeston, The Times, July 14, 2006 With most of the country's history dominated by conflict with its neighbours, Israeli leaders are judged by their ability to provide security and to use force effectively when needed. Many dominant figures of Israeli politics -- Moshe Dayan, Yitzhak Rabin, Ehud Barak, Ariel Sharon -- had been generals. Their judgments were questioned, but no one could challenge their experience in the task of protecting Israel. This is not the case with Mr Olmert. He left the army to become a lawyer and later entered politics, first as an MP for Likud, then as Mayor of Jerusalem and finally as Mr Sharon's deputy, assuming power when the leader had a stroke in January. Mr Olmert is not alone in lacking military experience. Amir Peretz, the Defence Minister, and Tzipi Livni, the Foreign Minister, have none either. This has limited the Government's room to negotiate and compromise and made a strong military response politically imperative. "Clearly if Olmert and Peretz do not come out looking strong, their tenure is going to be short," Gerald Steinberg, of Bar-Ilan University, said. Past leaders have conducted prisoner swaps, releasing hundreds of Palestinian and Lebanese in return for a few Israelis. Mr Olmert has ruled out this option, possibly under pressure from America, which does not want a precedent set for Iraq. [complete article] Comment -- In responding to the current crisis, President Bush has been described as "more timid and wishful than assertive." Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice meekly requests "that the Israelis exercise restraint, be concerned about civilian casualties, be concerned of course about civilian infrastructure." And Israel expresses its "concern" by dropping leaflets in advance of bombs. Even so, this image of an emasculated America that twiddles its thumbs while Israel goes psychotic, might be keeping out of view the overriding demand from Washington: no deals with "terrorists." The message from Washington to Israel appears to be, you can do whatever you want and we won't do any more than express our concern about the suffering of civilians -- just don't swap any prisoners and don't talk to Hamas or Hezbollah.Olmert, Bush, and Cheney, are each fearful men whose greatest fear is of looking weak. It's possible that this fear is Olmert's only constraint but it's not for the lack of a precident that the option of prisoner exchange is currently off the table. Less than three years ago, Ariel Sharon agreed to just such a deal and released over 400 prisoners in exchange for Israeli businessman, Elhanan Tannenbaum, who had been held by Hezbollah since October 2000. Whatever pathological tendencies Sharon might have displayed they did not seem to include a fear of looking weak. How about one for one?By Yossi Alpher, Bitterlemons.org, July 10, 2006 Israel has a rather peculiar record when it comes to freeing Palestinian prisoners. By the standard of prevailing Israeli cultural and political values, its approach is understandable, even laudable. But by any objective standard of realpolitik, the Israeli approach is counterproductive. Israeli governments all too frequently refuse to free imprisoned Palestinian terrorists as confidence-building gestures aimed at relatively moderate Palestinian leaders like President Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen). They cite legitimate reasons like the Israeli "blood on the hands" of the terrorists and the reaction of the families of those killed by the prisoners. Then they release terrorists by the hundreds in return for small numbers of Israeli prisoners. When that happens, Israel's decision-makers once again cite as justification public pressures, this time by the families of the Israeli prisoners, along with the IDF's admirable ethos of returning every lost soldier. [complete article] Israel's monstrous legacy brings tumult a step closerBy David Hirst, The Guardian, July 14, 2006 The Lebanese people, habitues as few people are of the lethal, violent and unexpected, yesterday awoke to the kind of news they thought they had put behind them. Their brand-new airport, the pride of their postwar reconstruction, had been bombarded by Israeli war planes along with a host of other infrastructure projects, bringing death and devastation on a more than Gazan scale. For some it inevitably brought to mind a bleak winter day in 1968 when, out of the blue, helicopter-borne Israeli commandos landed on the old airport and blew up 13 passenger jets, almost the entire fleet of the national carrier. The pretext: of two Palestinians who killed an Israeli at Athens airport, one came from a refugee camp in Lebanon, then an entirely peaceable country. The significance of this most spectacularly disproportionate reprisal was something the Lebanese could hardly even have guessed at then. But it was a very early portent of the long nightmare to come: military conflict with Israel, eventually to be compounded with an atrocious civil war that it did much to engender. There is something ominously similar, in possible consequences, about yesterday's repeat Israeli performance. [complete article] See also, Behind the crisis, a push toward war (David Ignatius). Attacks could erode Hezbollah's supportBy Anthony Shadid, Washington Post, July 14, 2006 The radical Shiite movement Hezbollah and its leader, Hasan Nasrallah, hold an effective veto in Lebanese politics, and the group's military prowess has heartened its supporters at home and abroad in the Arab world. But that same force of arms has begun to endanger Hezbollah's long-term standing in a country where critics accuse it of dragging Lebanon into an unwinnable conflict the government neither chose nor wants to fight. "To a certain Arab audience and Arab elite, Nasrallah is a champion, but the price is high," said Walid Jumblatt, a member of parliament and leader of Lebanon's Druze community. "We are paying a high price." The conflict will likely prove a turning point in the history of the movement, which was created with Iranian patronage in the wake of the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon. It has since evolved from a terrorist organization blamed for two attacks on the U.S. Embassy and the 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut, which killed 241 Marines, into a sprawling movement with a member and supporter in Lebanon's cabinet, a militia that effectively controls southern Lebanon, and an infrastructure that delivers welfare to its Shiite constituency, Lebanon's largest community. [complete article] Israel kills 23 in GazaBy Nidal al-Mughrabi, Reuters, July 12, 2006 Israel killed at least 23 Palestinians in Gaza on Wednesday, including nine members of one family in an air strike that destroyed a house where the army said senior Hamas commanders were meeting, witnesses said. Wednesday's death toll was the highest in a single day since Israel on June 28 launched an offensive in the Gaza Strip to force militants to free an abducted soldier and halt rocket attacks on the Jewish state. It was also the highest number of Palestinian deaths in one day since September 2004. [complete article] Baghdad starts to collapse as its people flee a life of deathBy James Hider, The Times, July 14, 2006 As I hung up the phone, I wondered if I would ever see my friend Ali alive again. Ali, The Times translator for the past three years, lives in west Baghdad, an area that is now in meltdown as a bitter civil war rages between Sunni insurgents and Shia militias. It is, quite simply, out of control. I returned to Baghdad on Monday after a break of several months, during which I too was guilty of glazing over every time I read another story of Iraqi violence. But two nights on the telephone, listening to my lost and frightened Iraqi staff facing death at any moment, persuaded me that Baghdad is now verging on total collapse. Ali phoned me on Tuesday night, about 10.30pm. There were cars full of gunmen prowling his mixed neighbourhood, he said. He and his neighbours were frantically exchanging information, trying to identify the gunmen. Were they the Mahdi Army, the Shia militia blamed for drilling holes in their victims' eyes and limbs before executing them by the dozen? Or were they Sunni insurgents hunting down Shias to avenge last Sunday's massacre, when Shia gunmen rampaged through an area called Jihad, pulling people from their cars and homes and shooting them in the streets? [complete article] See also, 22 slain in raid at Iraqi bus station (WP). Iraq and Afghanistan: Even out here, all politics is localBy Rory Stewart, New York Times, July 13, 2006 A great many of the failures in Afghanistan and Iraq arise from a single problem: the American-led coalitions' lack of trust in local politicians. Repeatedly the Western powers, irritated by a lack of progress, have overruled local leaders, rejected compromises and tried to force through their own strategies. But the Westerners have little understanding of Afghan or Iraqi politics and rely too heavily on troops and money to solve what are fundamentally political and religious problems. [complete article] Big Bang Theory in ruinsBy E. J. Dionne Jr., Washington Post, July 14, 2006 The most intellectually honest case for the war in Iraq was never about Saddam Hussein's alleged stockpiling of weapons of mass destruction. It was the Big Bang Theory. Not to be confused with theories about the origins of the universe, the Middle East Big Bang idea was simple and seductive. Unlike other arguments for the war, it was based on some facts, though also on some wishful thinking. The point was that the Middle East was a mess. A nest of authoritarian regimes bred opposition movements rebelling against the conditions under which too many people lived and energized by a radical Islamist ideology. Some of them turned to terror. In this bog of failure, moderate Muslims were powerless. They were frequently jailed or killed. The situation's hopelessness argued for a hard shove from the United States to create a new dynamic. Installing a democratic government in Iraq would force a new dawn. Newly empowered Muslim democrats would reform their societies, negotiate peace with Israel and get on with the business of building prosperous, middle-class societies. It was a beautiful dream, and even when the administration was asserting things that turned out not to be true, it held the dream out there for all to contemplate. [complete article] Ice-cool under terror attackBy Anatole Kaletsky, The Times, July 13, 2006 We can draw lessons from India's cool, self-confident behaviour. The first lesson is that Indians, both politicians and ordinary people, seem to respond much more rationally than Americans to the risks of terrorism. While 170 deaths is a terrible tragedy, the Indians seem to recognise that terrorism remains a negligible risk in the greater scheme of things and need not unduly disrupt their lives. Even if the bombings in Bombay were repeated weekly, they would represent a smaller risk than crossing an Indian road. Seen as a one-off event, this bombing was a far less destructive tragedy than the earthquakes, typhoons, tsunamis and other natural disasters that regularly afflict southern Asia. This sense of proportion should allow Indians to get on with their lives after the bombings and discourage the overreaction, the inter-communal bloodshed and the Indo- Pakistani confrontation that the terrorists obviously want. [complete article] Muslims and Hindus unite in backlash against terrorists who bombed MumbaiBy Justin Huggler, The Independent, July 13, 2006 The Mumbai bombings were more than just an attack on the India's financial capital. It is no coincidence that India has already started referring to the attacks as 7/11. Mumbai is India's New York, a city that, more than any other, defines the Indian dream. Every day, hundreds of migrants from the villages and rural hinterland arrive in Mumbai, hoping to make it big. The city has communities from every corner of India; every caste, every ethnic group, every religion is represented. But it is also a city that has been riven by the Hindu-Muslim tensions that have haunted India over the past 15 years, with a history of riots, and bombings blamed on Muslim extremists. Whoever was behind the bombings appears to be trying to exploit those tensions. But this time, there have been extraordinary scenes as Mumbai's Muslims have come out in defiance to defend the unity of the city. Muslims queued for hours to give blood for Hindus injured in the bombings. Even the leaders of the hardline Hindu nationalist Shiv Sena, a party rarely given to praising Muslims, said they were "overwhelmed" by the reaction. "Hindus and Muslims walked hand in hand yesterday," said Manohar Kargaonkar, a party official. [complete article] See also, 3 suspects sought in connection with India train blasts (NYT) and Pakistan-based group eyed after Mumbai (CSM). Comment -- Survival in India requires what I'd call a healthy dose of fatalism. Most visiting Westerners who venture onto the public transportation system - including Mumbai's commuter trains with their open-doored second-class carriages - soon discover that an ordinary journey can seem like a life-threatening experience. Acquiring a philosophical fearlessness depends not so much on a leap of courage as a desire to remain sane.On the other hand, we view the grisly sight of "global terror" from the frail sanctuary of a safety-obsessed society that promotes fear much more readily than fearlessness. India's response to terrorism is quite simple: it refuses to be terrorized. Incentives offered to Iran detailed at Security CouncilBy Colum Lynch, Washington Post, July 14, 2006 The Bush administration agreed last month to consider lifting long-standing sanctions on the sale of commercial jets, agricultural equipment and telecommunications technology to Iran if it agreed to halt its enrichment of uranium and submit to more intrusive U.N. inspections of its nuclear program, according to a copy of the agreement made public Thursday. [complete article] Iran demands patience from West on nuclear incentive offerBy Nazila Fathi, New York Times, July 14, 2006 President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran said in a defiant speech on Thursday that the West should be patient in awaiting his country's response to a package of proposed incentives in return for freezing its nuclear program. "We have tried to be positive in our examination of the package," Mr. Ahmadinejad said in his speech in Mianeh, in northwestern Iran, the ISNA student news agency reported. He said again that Iran would announce a decision in late August. [complete article] Toying with terror alerts?By Joshua Micah Marshall, Time.com, July 14, 2006 In these perilous days, we must be ready to think the unthinkable. No, I don't mean the possibility of a catastrophic terrorist attack. After 9/11, that's all too easy to imagine. No, I'm talking about a thought that even now seldom forces its way into respectable conversation: the quite reasonable suspicion that the Bush Administration orchestrates its terror alerts and arrests to goose the GOP's poll numbers. [complete article] Vice president sued by Plame and husbandBy Eric M. Weiss and Charles Lane, Washington Post, July 14, 2006 Former CIA officer Valerie Plame and her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, filed a lawsuit yesterday against Vice President Cheney, presidential adviser Karl Rove and former vice presidential aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, accusing the three of violating their constitutional rights in retaliation for Wilson's criticism of President Bush. [complete article] My leak case testimonyBy Robert D. Novak, Washington Post, July 12, 2006 Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has informed my attorneys that, after two and one-half years, his investigation of the CIA leak case concerning matters directly relating to me has been concluded. That frees me to reveal my role in the federal inquiry that, at the request of Fitzgerald, I have kept secret. [complete article] Policy rewrite reveals rift in administrationBy R. Jeffrey Smith and Jonathan Weisman, Washington Post, July 14, 2006 Three days of congressional testimony this week by senior Bush administration officials about U.S. treatment of detainees in the war on terrorism have made clear that the administration remains deeply divided on the issue and unsure how to replace a key policy that the Supreme Court declared illegal two weeks ago. [complete article] Military lawyers urge protections for detaineesBy Kate Zernike, New York Times, July 14, 2006 The top lawyers from the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines contradicted the Bush administration on Thursday on how to bring terror suspects to trial, endorsing an approach that extends more human and legal rights to detainees than one that administration lawyers have pressed Congress to authorize. [complete article] Bush would let secret court sift wiretap processBy Eric Lichtblau, New York Times, July 14, 2006 After months of resistance, the White House agreed Thursday to allow a secret intelligence court to review the legality of the National Security Agency's program to conduct wiretaps without warrants on Americans suspected of having ties to terrorists. If approved by Congress, the deal would put the court, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, in the unusual position of deciding whether the wiretapping program is a legitimate use of the president's power to fight terrorism. The aim of the plan, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales told reporters, would be to "test the constitutionality" of the program. The plan, brokered over the last three weeks in negotiations between Senator Arlen Specter and senior White House officials, including President Bush himself, would apparently leave the secretive intelligence court free to consider the case in closed proceedings, without the kind of briefs and oral arguments that are usually part of federal court consideration of constitutional issues. The court's ruling in the matter could also remain secret. [complete article] More troops may be needed in Baghdad, U.S. general saysBy Paul von Zielbauer and David S. Cloud, New York Times, July 13, 2006 Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the senior American commander in Iraq, said Wednesday that "terrorists and death squads" were responsible for the surge in sectarian killings here in recent weeks, and that there might be a need to move more American forces into the capital to prevent the deadly cycle from worsening. His remarks came on a day when at least 30 people were killed and 37 wounded in and around Baghdad, including 20 people who were kidnapped from a bus station 60 miles north of the city and killed, Iraqi officials said. A local police official offered a slightly different account of that episode. [complete article] 22 slain in raid at Iraqi bus stationBy Joshua Partlow and Josh White, Washington Post, July 13, 2006 Gunmen kidnapped a group of people in the parking lot of a bus station on Wednesday and killed 22 of them, according to Iraqi police and military officials. The execution-style slayings occurred on the same day Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld visited Iraq and stressed the need to stem the sectarian violence that has killed scores of civilians in recent days. [complete article] Army plans to end contentious Halliburton logistics pact and split work among companiesBy James Glanz, New York Times, July 13, 2006 The Army plans to terminate and restructure a lucrative and enormously contentious logistics contract that has paid a single company, Halliburton, more than $15 billion to do jobs like deliver food and fuel and construct housing for American troops around the world since late 2001. The changes, described in draft contracting documents on Army Web sites, await final Pentagon approval, said Linda K. Theis, a spokeswoman for the Army Field Support Command in Rock Island, Ill., which oversees the contract. But they have already received extensive review and are moving through the upper echelons of the Army, she said. [complete article] New North Korea resolution offeredBy Warren Hoge and Joseph Kahn, 2006 China and Russia introduced a draft resolution on North Korea in the Security Council on Wednesday and asked the Council’s members to consider it in place of a Japanese-sponsored resolution, to which they both have objected, that would have allowed for military enforcement and sanctions. In offering the new measure, Wang Guangya, the Chinese ambassador, said he had instructions from his government to veto the Japanese resolution if it were put to a vote. [complete article] Battle looms in Congress over military tribunalsBy Jonathan Weisman, Washington Post, July 13, 2006 House Republicans signaled a coming clash with the Senate over the future of military tribunals yesterday when Armed Service Committee members indicated they were inclined to give the Bush administration largely what it wants in the conduct of terrorism trials. The tone at the first House hearing since the Supreme Court tossed out President Bush's tribunals last month was markedly different from Tuesday's Senate hearing, where lawmakers from both parties said they wanted to make significant changes to the White House's plans. [complete article] More ambiguity about tortureBy Dan Froomkin, washingtonpost.com, July 12, 2006 The White House spin yesterday on the reinstatement of Geneva Convention protections for all U.S. detainees -- that it's not a reversal, and won't really change anything -- is another example of the self-contradicting ambiguity that has been a hallmark of this administration's position on torture and inhumane conduct. [complete article] White House prods Congress to curb detainee rightsBy Kate Zernike, New York Times, July 13, 2006 A day after saying that terror suspects had a right to protections under the Geneva Conventions, the Bush administration said Wednesday that it wanted Congress to pass legislation that would limit the rights granted to detainees. The earlier statement had been widely interpreted as a retreat, but testimony to Congress by administration lawyers on Wednesday made clear that the picture was more complicated. [complete article]  EscalationBy Paul Woodward, The War in Context, July 13, 2006 Ever since Ehud Olmert became Israeli prime minister, I imagine he has with some frequency been asking himself two questions: What would Sharon do? And what do most Israelis imagine Sharon would do? Who can say whether he gauges the answer to either question accurately, but I suspect that if Sharon was still in charge he'd actually be showing more restraint than his heir. Beware the civilian who want to look like a general; the actions spawned by his fear of not looking strong are often more dangerous than the actions of those who are confident in their strength. As the crisis is now being driven by its own internal logic, empty appeals for restraint mean nothing if the U.S. response goes no further than a State Department spokesman saying, "all sides must act with restraint to resolve this incident peacefully and to protect innocent life and civilian infrastructure." What's that supposed to mean when President Bush chimes in, but "Israel has the right to defend itself"? Outside Washington and Tel Aviv it is transparent to the whole world right now that Israel is recklessly escalating the situation by over-reacting to every provocation. The U.S., like a fawning butler, might diffidently say to Olmert, "don't kill civilians or destroy the civilian infrastructure," but American duplicity is transparent if it does not vehemently condemn Israel's actions when Israel goes ahead and does exactly what it was asked not to do: target Lebanon's infrastructure. Destroying bridges, bombing Beirut's international airport and other parts of the Lebanese civilian infrastructure, starting a blockade and causing thousands of tourists to flee, is not the answer. We shouldn't forget, that it was Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon that resulted in the creation of Hezbollah in the first place. On the blockade, Lebanese blogger, "Mustapha", writes: Ships and planes will not be allowed to arrive to or leave Lebanon. Goods will not be imported or exported; Lebanese apples will rot in the harbor and Scottish salmons will have to wait. Our huge diaspora, unable to fly home, will be angry. We will always have food, but an extended blockade will turn industry groups, business and farmers against Hezbollah. Panicked businessmen will withdraw their money from banks, pushing hard on the lira. We've seen it all before.While Israel, against all evidence and prior experience, seems convinced that it if it pounds its opponents hard enough they will bow in submission, Hezbollah is now threatening to escalate the violence even further by targeting Haifa. But as an editorial in Lebanon's Daily Star warns: Whatever can be said about Hizbullah, one cannot deny that the party's leaders are true to their word. During a prisoner exchange between Hizbullah and Israel in 2004, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah vowed that if all Lebanese detainees were not freed from Israeli jails, Hizbullah would eventually abduct more Israeli soldiers. Fulfiling this pledge, Hizbullah on Wednesday captured two Israeli soldiers in an operation dubbed "Truthful Promise." Options for U.S. limited as Mideast crises spreadBy Robin Wright, Washington Post, July 13, 2006 The Bush administration suddenly faces three rapidly expanding crises in the Middle East, but it has limited options to defuse tensions in any of them anytime soon, U.S. officials and Middle East experts say. Israel has sent troops into Gaza and Lebanon over three captured soldiers -- one held by Hamas in Gaza and two seized yesterday by Hezbollah in Lebanon. The United States and its allies set a collision course with Iran over its nuclear program. And there is mounting concern that Iraq's sectarian violence is crossing the threshold to a full-blown civil war. A common thread in the three crises is Iran -- for its support of the two Islamist groups, its alleged funding and arming of Iraqi militias and extremist groups, and its refusal to give a final response to the Western package of incentives designed to prevent it from converting a peaceful energy program into one to develop nuclear weapons. [complete article] Israel's next war has begunBy Yossi Klein Halev, The New Republic, July 12, 2006 The next Middle East war -- Israel against genocidal Islamism -- has begun. The first stage of the war started two weeks ago, with the Israeli incursion into Gaza in response to the kidnapping of an Israeli soldier and the ongoing shelling of Israeli towns and kibbutzim; now, with Hezbollah's latest attack, the war has spread to southern Lebanon. Ultimately, though, Israel's antagonists won't be Hamas and Hezbollah but their patrons, Iran and Syria. The war will go on for months, perhaps several years. There may be lulls in the fighting, perhaps even temporary agreements and prisoner exchanges. But those periods of calm will be mere respites. The goals of the war should be the destruction of the Hamas regime and the dismantling of the Hezbollah infrastructure in southern Lebanon. Israel cannot coexist with Iranian proxies pressing in on its borders. In particular, allowing Hamas to remain in power–and to run the Palestinian educational system -- will mean the end of hopes for Arab-Israeli reconciliation not only in this generation but in the next one too. For the Israeli right, this is the moment of "We told you so." The fact that the kidnappings and missile attacks have come from southern Lebanon and Gaza -- precisely the areas from which Israel has unilaterally withdrawn -- is proof, for right-wingers, of the bankruptcy of unilateralism. Yet the right has always misunderstood the meaning of unilateral withdrawal. Those of us who have supported unilateralism didn't expect a quiet border in return for our withdrawal but simply the creation of a border from which we could more vigorously defend ourselves, with greater domestic consensus and international understanding. The anticipated outcome, then, wasn't an illusory peace but a more effective way to fight the war. The question wasn't whether Hamas or Hezbollah would forswear aggression but whether Israel would act with appropriate vigor to their continued aggression. [complete article] Comment -- Yossi Klein Halev is refreshingly honest (in a sickening way) by coming straight out and saying that "convergence" has nothing to do with a two-state solution and everything to do with defining battle lines. Yet the picture that he and Robin Wright paint of Iran as Israel and America's overarching nemesis, pulling all the strings, ignores one important fact in understanding the current crisis: It was Israel and America's choice to treat with contempt the Palestinians' expression of their democratic will. Iran didn't make the Palestinians vote for Hamas and Iran didn't prevent anyone else from recognizing the Hamas government. That choice -- to ignore democracy -- is the one that is now being overlooked in a crisis that supposedly revolves around the fate of three Israeli soldiers.
IAF planes bomb PA foreign ministry building in Gaza CityBy Amos Harel and Avi Issacharoff, Haaretz, July 13, 2006 An Israel Air Force airplane attacked the Palestinian Foreign Ministry in Gaza City early Thursday, severely damaging the building, witnesses said. The building partially collapsed and the bomb caused widespread destruction in the area. Palestinian security officials said no one was hurt in the night-time raid. The Israel Defense Forces confirmed it carried out an airstrike on the Foreign Ministry, saying it is "led by Hamas" and has been used for the "planning of terror attacks." [complete article] A second front opens for IsraelBy Orly Halpern and Nicholas Blanford, Christian Science Monitor, July 12, 2006 Even as Israel dealt with an escalating crisis in Gaza over a captured soldier, Lebanon's Hizbullah militants captured two more soldiers Wednesday, opening a second Israeli front and raising the specter of a broader regional confrontation. The engagement with the Syrian- and Iranian-backed Hizbullah began Wednesday, when militants fired dozens of Katyusha rockets into northern Israel, drawing the Israeli army into the most violent cross-border battle with the Shiite militia since 2000. "Hizbullah has had several failed attempts to kidnap Israeli soldiers in the recent past, but the connection for this attack is clearly what's happening in Gaza," says Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, professor of politics at the Lebanese American University and author of "Hizbullah: Politics and Religion." "Many people will support this attack especially around the region." [complete article] Hezbollah's strategic kidnappingBy Zvi Barel, Haaretz, July 12, 2006 Nasrallah is now presenting himself as the most earnest defender of Palestinian interests in the Arab world. One can assume that his demands, which have not yet been detailed, will include the release of Palestinian prisoners. Conversely, merging the fates of Palestinian and Lebanese prisoners will naturally obligate the Palestinians to coordinate their demands with Hezbollah. The abduction on the Israel's northern border limits the Palestinians' bargaining room, because they never intended to turn Shalit's abduction into a regional affair. Hezbollah has also become Syria's means of exacting revenge for the Israel Air Force's low-altitude flight over the palace of Syrian President Bashar Assad. However, Hezbollah's assumption of this role will not necessary work to the benefit of Damascus, which is under great pressure to help mediate Shalit's release. Against the backdrop of the new abductions and the close relationship between Syria and Hezbollah, the public praise of the Lebanese guerilla group by Syrian officials is likely to turn Damascus into a direct target of an Israeli attack. [complete article] See also, Nasrallah's gamble (Jerusalem Post). Comment -- Ironically, it was only last week that Israeli commentator, Aluf Benn, wrote that the Palestinians needed their own Nasrallah. Now they have: in the form of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah himself.The prospect of hundreds of Katyusha rockets raining down on the cities of northern Israel clearly poses a much more serious threat than the Palestinians' homemade Qassam rockets ever could. Now, in the name of rescuing three captive Israeli soldiers, how many more people -- including Israeli soldiers themselves -- will die in a cycle of violence that is rapidly spinning out of control? But not only that -- how much longer will America confine itself to being an impotent bystander in an arena where until six years ago it generally took an active (if not even-handed) role? 8 soldiers killed, 2 snatched in Hezbollah border attacksBy Amos Harel, Avi Issacharoff, Jack Khoury and Yoav Stern, Haaretz, July 12, 2006 Eight Israel Defense Forces soldiers were killed and two others were abducted Wednesday in attacks by guerillas from the militant Hezbollah organization. Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah said Wednesday evening that a prisoner exchange was the only way to secure the release of the soldiers, who he said were being held in a "secure and remote" location. "No military operation will return them," Nasrallah told a news conference in Beirut. "The prisoners will not be returned except through one way: indirect negotiations and a trade." [complete article] Israel prepares for widespread military escalationBy Amos Harel, Haaretz, July 12, 2006 The attack on Israel's northern border was an impressive military achievement for Hezbollah and a ringing failure for the IDF. Despite Israel's intelligence analyses and despite wide operational deployment, Hezbollah has succeeded in carrying out what it has been threatening to do for more than two years - and it couldn't have happened at a more sensitive time. Israel has until now responded with restraint by bombarding bridges in central Lebanon and attacking Hezbollah positions along the border. But considering the nature of the military high command's current evaluation of the situation, it is clear that the IDF is interested in inflicting a much sharper blow on Lebanon. Senior officers in the IDF say that the Lebanese government is responsible for the soldiers' abduction. According to the officers, if the kidnapped soldiers are not returned alive and well, the Lebanese civilian infrastructures will regress 20, or even 50 years. [complete article] My life in GazaBy Mona El-Farra, Boston Globe, July 10, 2006 The irony is almost beyond belief. Since the capture of an Israeli soldier on June 25, the Gaza Strip has been subjected to a large-scale military operation, what Israel calls "Summer Rain." Because Israel bombed the power plant, and the area needs electricity to pump water, most of Gaza now has almost no access to drinking water. In the heat of summer, rain would be a blessing far more welcome than the ongoing bombings. I am already starting to lose track of days and nights, of how many bombs have dropped. Since the main power plant was destroyed, we have had to live with no electricity. What we do get is patchy, and barely enough to recharge our mobile phones and our laptops so that we do not lose all touch with each other and with the outside world. As a physician, I fear for our patients. Twenty-two hospitals have no electricity. They have to rely on generators, but the generators need fuel. We have enough fuel to last a few days at most, because the borders are sealed so no fuel can get in. The shortage of power threatens the lives of patients on life-support machines and children in intensive care, as well as renal dialysis patients and others. Hundreds of operations have been postponed. The pharmacies were already nearly empty because of Israeli border closures and the cutoff of international aid. What little supplies were left have gone bad in the absence of refrigeration. [complete article] See also, Once again, Gazans are displaced by Israeli occupiers (NYT). Revenge cycle fragments Iraqi capitalBy Dan Murphy, Christian Science Monitor, July 12, 2006 In the month since a new security plan was unveiled in the capital involving 10,000 Iraqi soldiers and police, sectarian murders and tit-for-tat mosque bombings by Shiite and Sunni militias have surged. A visit to Baghdad's Yarmuk Hospital reveals how far the capital has been thrust into civil war. In a 30-minute period Tuesday, the stream of tragedy through its doors included both Shiite and Sunni victims of rival killing squads, civilians and soldiers gunned down at work, and a fiercely angry boy who had just lost both parents. [complete article] See also, Sectarian fights pose risk to Iraq (WP) and Wave of violence in Baghdad puts 3-day death toll past 100 (NYT). New doctrine same as the old doctrineBy Fred Kaplan, Slate, July 11, 2006 Are we really witnessing a "seismic" shift in the Bush administration's foreign policy—"the end of cowboy diplomacy" and the substitution of "patience" for "pre-emption"? Such is the claim of two articles this week: the cover story of Time and a news analysis in the New York Times. Both pieces infer too much significance from the moderating tone in Bush's rhetoric -- and not enough from the fact that his actual policies have barely changed. Yes, Bush talks more about diplomacy than he did in his first term (though he always paid it lip service, even while discussing Iraq in the run-up to the invasion, long after he'd secretly decided to go to war). But where is the actual diplomacy? Where are the results -- or even any serious efforts to achieve results? Where is the real, as opposed to the rhetorical, seismic shift? [complete article] Dogging the torture storyBy Larry Wilkerson, Nieman Watchdog, July 11, 2006 Documents and memos that have already made their way into the public domain make it clear that the Office of the Vice President bears responsibility for creating an environment conducive to the acts of torture and murder committed by U.S. forces in the war on terror. There is, in my view, insufficient evidence to walk into an American courtroom and win a legal case (though an international courtroom for war crimes might feel differently). But there is enough evidence for a soldier of long service -- someone like me with 31 years in the Army -- to know that what started with John Yoo, David Addington, Alberto Gonzales, William Haynes at the Pentagon, and several others, all under the watchful and willing eye of the Vice President, went down through the Secretary of Defense to the commanders in the field, and created two separate pressures that resulted in the violation of longstanding practice and law. [complete article] Geneva-22By Timothy Noah, Slate, July 11, 2006 The Pentagon has sent out a directive ordering civilians and uniformed commanders in the field to review all practices and paperwork to ensure that they follow Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions -- that pesky one outlawing violence, torture, cruel treatment, and "humiliating and degrading treatment" of prisoners of war. The memo is a response to a recent Supreme Court decision affirming that Common Article 3 applies to the war on terrorism. The catch is that the Bush administration, against all evidence, maintains that it has been adhering to the Geneva Conventions in practice even as it's been arguing in court that doing so would make hunting down terrorists impossible. The logic seems to run something like this: 1) The United States is inherently good; 2) Inherently good countries don't violate the Geneva conventions; 3) Ergo, the United States can do anything it wants to suspected terrorists and it still won't be violating the Geneva Conventions. [complete article] Come one, come all, join the terror target listBy Eric Lipton, New York Times, July 12, 2006 It reads like a tally of terrorist targets that a child might have written: Old MacDonald's Petting Zoo, the Amish Country Popcorn factory, the Mule Day Parade, the Sweetwater Flea Market and an unspecified "Beach at End of a Street." But the inspector general of the Department of Homeland Security, in a report released Tuesday, found that the list was not child's play: all these "unusual or out-of-place" sites "whose criticality is not readily apparent" are inexplicably included in the federal antiterrorism database. The National Asset Database, as it is known, is so flawed, the inspector general found, that as of January, Indiana, with 8,591 potential terrorist targets, had 50 percent more listed sites than New York (5,687) and more than twice as many as California (3,212), ranking the state the most target-rich place in the nation. [complete article] Train death toll climbs to 200By Rahul Bedi, News.com.au, July 13, 2006 Islamic militants may have placed bombs concealed in gift boxes on the luggage racks of Mumbai's packed commuter trains timed to detonate within minutes of each other during the rush-hour attacks that killed more than 200 people. Investigators were last night picking through the mangled wreckage and debris of Tuesday's strikes seeking clues to the worst terrorist attack in India in more than a decade. The blasts that struck seven trains within 15 minutes of each other were designed to |