US admits Afghan civilian deaths
The US military had claimed dozens of Taliban fighters were among those killed [AFP/AFGHAN POLICE]
Far more civilians and children were killed in several US air raids on a village in Afghanistan in August that was first acknowledged, a US military investigation has concluded.
US officials had maintained only about seven civilians had died in the attacks on Azizabad in western Afghanistan on August 22.
The Afghan government and UN officials said at the time about 90 had been killed.
"Our investigation determined approximately 55 persons were killed - 33 civilian and 22 anti-coalition militants" a summary of an investigation by US brigadier general Michael Callan, released on Wednesday, disclosed.
Videos showed the bodies of 12 children, three women and eight men were laid out for burial in the village mosque the day after the fighting, the report said.
The incident brought angry recriminations from Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, and added to fears that support for the US military in Afghanistan was being further undermined by repeated cases of civilian casualties at the hands of US-led forces.
'Self defence'
But the Callan report defended the actions of the US and Afghan forces involved in the incident as "necessary and proportional ... self-defence ... based on the information the on-scene commander had at the time" it said.
The commander had been informed dozens of fighters were holding a meeting in the village, which led to the attack.
"US and Afghan forces did not commit any violations of the law of war or rules of engagement," the report concluded.
Karzai told villagers that those responsible would be punished [EPA]
The lists of dead villagers obtained by Afghan and UN officials that showed that 90 civilians were killed "are unsubstantiated," the report said.
Three men were arrested days after the raids after allegedly providing "wrong information" to US and Afghan forces.
The arrests followed a police investigation into the incident after villagers said US-led forces in Afghanistan had been fed false information about the presence of Taliban members in Azizabad following a tribal dispute, according to interior ministry officials.
President Karzai sacked two senior Afghan army commanders over the incident and pledged to punish those responsible.
Tribal disputeLocals told Al Jazeera at the time that the air raid hit a memorial service at a compound belonging to Reza Khan, a tribal leader who had been in dispute with Nader Tawakal, another local leader.
"We were holding a prayer ceremony when the bombs started to fall ... it was heavy bombardment. The whole village was on fire and about 90 were killed," Abdul Rasheed, the brother of one of the dead, said.
Villagers denied that the gathering was a meeting of the Taliban, which has been fighting Afghan and international forces since being forced from power in 2001.
More than 500 civilians have been killed during military operations by foreign and Afghan forces so far this year, according to the Afghan government and some aid groups.
Source:
Al Jazeera and agencies
torsdag 9 oktober 2008
Global food and fuel crisis will increase malnourished by 44 million
Source: The World Bank Group
Date: 08 Oct 2008
Print E-mail Save
Global food and fuel crisis will increase malnourished by 44 million
Press Release No:2008/107/EXC
WASHINGTON, October 8, 2008 – High food and fuel prices will increase the number of malnourished people around the world in 2008 by 44 million to reach a total of 967 million, a report from the World Bank says.
While food and fuel price increases may have moderated in recent months, prices remain much higher than previous years and show few signs of declining significantly, according to the report entitled "Rising food and fuel prices: addressing the risks to future generations". Poor families around the world are being pushed to the brink of survival, causing irreparable damage to the health of millions of children. As families cut back on spending, there are also grave risks for the educational performance of poor children.
"While people in the developed world are focused on the financial crisis, many forget that a human crisis is rapidly unfolding in developing countries. It is pushing poor people to the brink of survival," said World Bank Group President Robert B. Zoellick. "The financial crisis will only make it more difficult for developing countries to protect their most vulnerable people from the impact of rising food and fuel costs."
The report, due to be presented on Sunday to the Development Committee at the Annual Meetings of the World Bank and IMF, says the food and fuel crisis could have long term effects on poor people and countries. Malnourished children cannot develop into healthy adults and become productive members of society who can contribute to the growth needed to lift themselves and their country out of poverty.
The report says priority should be given to a series of targeted measures. These include:
- Making existing targeted cash (or near cash) transfer programs more generous;
- Getting nutrition to infants and pregnant women;
- expanding so-called "in-kind" food distribution programs including school feeding and the distribution of fortified calorically dense food;
- using fee waivers, lifeline-pricing and other forms of targeted subsidies for poor users/consumers; and
- introducing additional measures to prevent children from dropping out of school, such as fee waivers, subsidies for school inputs, or cash transfers.
The report also argues that allocating the necessary amount of budget to finance an expansion of safety net programs may require pruning less-priority spending in other areas. But it notes that well-designed safety net programs do not have to be prohibitively expensive to be effective. Some of the most successful programs in the world cost well under 1 percent of Gross Domestic Product. Moreover, investing in safety net programs now will give governments new tools to address not just the current crisis, but future ones as well.
In May, the World Bank launched a $1.2 billion rapid financing facility to help poor countries cope with the food crisis. Since then, around US$850 million has been committed to finance seeds, plantings, and feeding programs. In April, Zoellick called for a New Deal for Global Food Policy that included short, medium and long-term measures to provide immediate help to poor people and farmers while increasing food production.
For more information on the Bank's work in nutrition, please visit: www.worldbank.org/nutrition an
Date: 08 Oct 2008
Print E-mail Save
Global food and fuel crisis will increase malnourished by 44 million
Press Release No:2008/107/EXC
WASHINGTON, October 8, 2008 – High food and fuel prices will increase the number of malnourished people around the world in 2008 by 44 million to reach a total of 967 million, a report from the World Bank says.
While food and fuel price increases may have moderated in recent months, prices remain much higher than previous years and show few signs of declining significantly, according to the report entitled "Rising food and fuel prices: addressing the risks to future generations". Poor families around the world are being pushed to the brink of survival, causing irreparable damage to the health of millions of children. As families cut back on spending, there are also grave risks for the educational performance of poor children.
"While people in the developed world are focused on the financial crisis, many forget that a human crisis is rapidly unfolding in developing countries. It is pushing poor people to the brink of survival," said World Bank Group President Robert B. Zoellick. "The financial crisis will only make it more difficult for developing countries to protect their most vulnerable people from the impact of rising food and fuel costs."
The report, due to be presented on Sunday to the Development Committee at the Annual Meetings of the World Bank and IMF, says the food and fuel crisis could have long term effects on poor people and countries. Malnourished children cannot develop into healthy adults and become productive members of society who can contribute to the growth needed to lift themselves and their country out of poverty.
The report says priority should be given to a series of targeted measures. These include:
- Making existing targeted cash (or near cash) transfer programs more generous;
- Getting nutrition to infants and pregnant women;
- expanding so-called "in-kind" food distribution programs including school feeding and the distribution of fortified calorically dense food;
- using fee waivers, lifeline-pricing and other forms of targeted subsidies for poor users/consumers; and
- introducing additional measures to prevent children from dropping out of school, such as fee waivers, subsidies for school inputs, or cash transfers.
The report also argues that allocating the necessary amount of budget to finance an expansion of safety net programs may require pruning less-priority spending in other areas. But it notes that well-designed safety net programs do not have to be prohibitively expensive to be effective. Some of the most successful programs in the world cost well under 1 percent of Gross Domestic Product. Moreover, investing in safety net programs now will give governments new tools to address not just the current crisis, but future ones as well.
In May, the World Bank launched a $1.2 billion rapid financing facility to help poor countries cope with the food crisis. Since then, around US$850 million has been committed to finance seeds, plantings, and feeding programs. In April, Zoellick called for a New Deal for Global Food Policy that included short, medium and long-term measures to provide immediate help to poor people and farmers while increasing food production.
For more information on the Bank's work in nutrition, please visit: www.worldbank.org/nutrition an
onsdag 8 oktober 2008
Guantanamo release angers Bush
Guantanamo release angers Bush
The men come from China's Xinjiang province [GALLO/GETTY]
A US judge has ordered the release of 17 Chinese Muslim detainees from the US detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in what has been seen as a rebuke to the Bush administration.
US district judge Ricardo Urbina said there was no evidence the men were a security risk and that the US constitution prohibits indefinite detention without cause.
Local Uighur residents and human rights activists cheered as he told a Washington courtroom the men, who have been in custody for almost seven years, should be freed.
The ruling is the first court-ordered release of Guantanamo detainees since the facility opened in 2002.
The Bush administration reacted with anger to the ruling, with a spokesman for the department of justice saying it presented "serious national security and separation of powers concerns and raises unprecedented legal issues".
The department said it would file an emergency request on Tuesday evening for a stay with the US court of appeals in Washington to halt the ruling.
If it loses, it has the option of appealing to the US Supreme Court, the highest in the country.
Lawyers 'thrilled'
Lawyers representing the men said they were "thrilled" with the decision.
"Justice has too long been delayed but ... we saw a great judge give a principled and just decision"
Sabin Willett, lawyer for some of the Uighur detainees"Justice has too long been delayed but today we saw a great judge give a principled and just decision," Sabin Willett, a lawyer for some of the men, told Reuters news agency.
The Uighurs, from the Xinjiang province in western China, had been living in a camp in Afghanistan during the US-led bombing campaign in the country that began in October 2001 after the September 11 attacks in the US.
They fled into the mountains and were detained by Pakistani authorities, who handed them over to the US.
The men have been cleared for release from Guantanamo since 2004 as they are no longer considered "enemy combatants", the official designation for those held in Guantanamo Bay, and would have been sent home.
However, the US has not been able to find a country willing to accept them.
Many Muslim Uighurs seek greater autonomy for the region and some want independence, however China has waged a relentless campaign against what it calls their violent separatist activities.
About 265 detainees are still held at Guantanamo, which was opened in 2002 to hold suspects captured during the US's so-called "war on terror" launched after the September 11 attacks.
Most have been held for years without being charged and some allege they have been abused or tortured.
Source:
Agencies
The men come from China's Xinjiang province [GALLO/GETTY]
A US judge has ordered the release of 17 Chinese Muslim detainees from the US detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in what has been seen as a rebuke to the Bush administration.
US district judge Ricardo Urbina said there was no evidence the men were a security risk and that the US constitution prohibits indefinite detention without cause.
Local Uighur residents and human rights activists cheered as he told a Washington courtroom the men, who have been in custody for almost seven years, should be freed.
The ruling is the first court-ordered release of Guantanamo detainees since the facility opened in 2002.
The Bush administration reacted with anger to the ruling, with a spokesman for the department of justice saying it presented "serious national security and separation of powers concerns and raises unprecedented legal issues".
The department said it would file an emergency request on Tuesday evening for a stay with the US court of appeals in Washington to halt the ruling.
If it loses, it has the option of appealing to the US Supreme Court, the highest in the country.
Lawyers 'thrilled'
Lawyers representing the men said they were "thrilled" with the decision.
"Justice has too long been delayed but ... we saw a great judge give a principled and just decision"
Sabin Willett, lawyer for some of the Uighur detainees"Justice has too long been delayed but today we saw a great judge give a principled and just decision," Sabin Willett, a lawyer for some of the men, told Reuters news agency.
The Uighurs, from the Xinjiang province in western China, had been living in a camp in Afghanistan during the US-led bombing campaign in the country that began in October 2001 after the September 11 attacks in the US.
They fled into the mountains and were detained by Pakistani authorities, who handed them over to the US.
The men have been cleared for release from Guantanamo since 2004 as they are no longer considered "enemy combatants", the official designation for those held in Guantanamo Bay, and would have been sent home.
However, the US has not been able to find a country willing to accept them.
Many Muslim Uighurs seek greater autonomy for the region and some want independence, however China has waged a relentless campaign against what it calls their violent separatist activities.
About 265 detainees are still held at Guantanamo, which was opened in 2002 to hold suspects captured during the US's so-called "war on terror" launched after the September 11 attacks.
Most have been held for years without being charged and some allege they have been abused or tortured.
Source:
Agencies
tisdag 7 oktober 2008
DRC: Magnet of violence
DRC: Magnet of violence
Wouter Cools
A month ago I wrote that the Goma agreement was as dead as the idea of a self-regulating free market. The events of the last weeks and a report of Amnesty International reaffirm my position. The peace agreement of 23 of January 2008 is inadequate to forestall a minimum degree of stability and peace in the Kivu and has even some perverse effects that not only stands in contrast with its own regulations but also undermines further the social texture of the region. These evolutions take place in a context of a looming national political crisis and a country that is not only terrorized by violence in the Kivu but also in Ituri and Orientale Province due to attacks of local militias and Kony's Lord Resistance Army (LRA).
Laurent Nkunda's latest offensive, started on the 28 of August, was directed towards Goma and an attempt to extend the fighting to South Kivu. This region was relative peaceful during the latest months, but now there is the danger that it will be drowned in the never ending spiral of violence of its northern neighbour, complicating only more any possible settlement of the conflict. The clashes between the CNDP rebels and the Congolese army (FARDC) demonstrated again the incompetence of the latter to defeat Nkunda's movement and to protect the civilian population. A new element in the latest episode of the conflict is the role of MONUC. After heavy criticism of the latest months, it seems to be that the UN peacekeeping force finally started to act.
This time MONUC troops held their positions (a month ago there were testimonies of withdrawing peace forces, leaving civilians to their fate), beat off in some occasions CNDP attacks (last week MONUC could stop Nkunda's advance to Masisi by intervening with combat helicopters) and send reinforcements to the various fronts. In a very optimistic mood one can say that by this new more active posture of the MONUC, Nkunda's CNDP will come to realize that they can't be victorious and that a negotiated settlement is the only rational option left. The problem with such a train of thought is that the CNDP doesn't want a stabilisation of the situation. Every offensive, every attack is motivated by the fact that it creates chaos and insecurity. Such a chaos and insecurity serve directly what is really on stake for the CNDP: the control over revenues from gold, tin, timber and cobalt. In peacetime the rebels would lose these revenues or at least will have to share them. This logic stands also for all the other armed movements (the Mai Mai militia, the FDLR), including the FARDC.
Moreover, apparently the incompetence of the FARDC inspired Nkunda to announce in a BBC interview to introduce a change in the CNDP's agenda. No longer is the defending of Tutsi-interests in the region, but the liberation of whole Congo now the new adagium. Anxious by these new fights, Alan Doss, UN Special Representative for Congo, asked for more troops and more means during a special session of the UN Security Council.
Given that incompetence, both wished as unintended, of the FARDC to defeat the CNDP, it becomes time that Kabila understands that the Congolese government can't resolve the conflict military. Hence, terms of "using all means" to institute peace like he did mid-September, should be replaced by phrases like: negotiations which deal the underlying causes of the conflict –the issues of land distribution, control over natural resources, political representation, development- instead of only fighting the symptoms, like the Amani program does. The problem is that the Congolese government, like the international community, still have faith in the Amani program. Kinshasa for example refused to comply with Nkunda's request to negotiate directly, saying that negotiations should occur via the Amani program, namely through the Commission of Peace and Security. It's bizarre to see how governments and international organizations keep on sticking to a signed text of conflict resolution; whereas reality demonstrates the inadequacy of the agreement (another example of such an attitude is the Darfur Peace Agreement of May 2006).
The most shocking news fact and one that clearly shows the dead-lock of the Goma agreement is a report of Amnesty International. Based on testimonies, the report states that half of the children that where set free in North Kivu, are again recruited later by one of the armed movements, particularly by the CNDP and Mai Mai militia. An aid worker says even that for every two children that are liberated, five others are recruited. UNICEF already sounded the alarm in April and seems to be that the problem became worse. Although the Goma agreement stipulated that the fighting parties had to set free all their child soldiers, the CNDP has more kadogo than before the agreement. The reason is that the agreement provided to give rebel leaders a rank in the Congolese army in correspondence with the amount of fighters they have under their command.
Another alarming message comes from Ituri and Dungu in Orientale Province. In Ituri a new armed movement called Front Populaire pour la Justice au Congo (FPJC) captured some villages around Bunia which were previously controlled by the FARDC. According to its self-declared colonel, Charif Manda, the FPJC is the first multi-ethnic movement in Ituri.
Although the agenda of this new armed group is unknown, its supporters would be ex members of the Union des Patriotes Congolais (UPC, its former leader, Thomas Lubanga, is arrested by the Congolese authorities and transferred to the ICC against who it issued an arrest warrant for numerous human right violations), the Front Nationaliste et Intégrationniste (FNI) and the Front de Résistance Patriotique de l'Ituri (FPRI), all militias which are responsible for numerous war crimes, crimes against humanity and human right violations in Ituri's latest episode of violence. Ituri as region came for the first time under international attention in June 1999 when it was hit by the first eruption of a large scale conflict between Hema and Lendu elites. Likewise in Kivu, it is the struggle for control and access to land and other natural resources (gold) what was at stake. And just like in the Kivu this competition led to an alliance between rural armed actors, economic entrepreneurs and local authorities and a general environment of violence and despair, causing more than 50,000 deaths since 1999. Although the first European military intervention (Artemis) and later MONUC did improve the situation, leading to a considerable progress in disarmament, demobilization and reintegration of militias, there are still hundreds dissident fighters of various armed movement. Another striking similarity with Kivu is the role of neighbouring countries in both conflicts. Where Kabila blames the regime of Kigali for the agitated situation in Kivu, the FARDC says that leaders of the FRPI have established links with rebels from neighbouring Uganda who are supplying them with guns and ammunition.
Attacks of the Lord Resistance Army in Dungu caused thousands displaced -Caritas speaks of 75,000- of which hundreds sought safety in South Sudan. Since a year Kony's rebels have found a hiding place in the Garamba national park, northeast Congo close to the border with Southern Sudan and Uganda. MONUC estimates the number of LRA fighters in Congo at 800 to 1,000. From its base the LRA attacked and looted several villages and health centres, killing dozens of citizens, abducting over a hundred others, amongst them 90 children. UNHCR is concerned that the humanitarian situation could get worse. The rain season just started and due to the looting of villages the stocks of food is diminished. Although Kinshasa send 2,000 troops to end the LRA's attacks, assisted logistically by 400 MONUC peacekeepers, my experience says that they will not succeed in eliminating the LRA. Meanwhile the peace process between the rebels and Kampala seems to be reached a dead-lock. Kony has made clear that he doesn't sign any agreement as long they have no guarantees that they will be not persecuted for committed atrocities. The ICC has issued arrest warrants against Kony and other commanders.
These events hit Kinshasa exactly on the moment that a governmental crisis is looming. Antoine Gizenga's resign as first minister opens great anxiety about his succession. Needless to say that all political parties have the perfect candidate (sometimes they have more than one) in their ranks. PALU, Gizenga's party and described as followers of Patrice Lumumba, claims that the prime ministers office belongs to them; but UDEMO (supporters of former president Mobutu) and Kabila's party (AMP) led already know that they are more than interested. The Congolese newspapers Le Potentiel fears the break up of the government coalition which would lead to a political crisis. Hence, the question is: in which way Ituri and Kivu are an issue in Kinshasa nowadays, knowing that MONUC fears starvation and lethal diseases (cholera) among the almost 900,000 displaced in North Kivu alone.
Wouter Cools
A month ago I wrote that the Goma agreement was as dead as the idea of a self-regulating free market. The events of the last weeks and a report of Amnesty International reaffirm my position. The peace agreement of 23 of January 2008 is inadequate to forestall a minimum degree of stability and peace in the Kivu and has even some perverse effects that not only stands in contrast with its own regulations but also undermines further the social texture of the region. These evolutions take place in a context of a looming national political crisis and a country that is not only terrorized by violence in the Kivu but also in Ituri and Orientale Province due to attacks of local militias and Kony's Lord Resistance Army (LRA).
Laurent Nkunda's latest offensive, started on the 28 of August, was directed towards Goma and an attempt to extend the fighting to South Kivu. This region was relative peaceful during the latest months, but now there is the danger that it will be drowned in the never ending spiral of violence of its northern neighbour, complicating only more any possible settlement of the conflict. The clashes between the CNDP rebels and the Congolese army (FARDC) demonstrated again the incompetence of the latter to defeat Nkunda's movement and to protect the civilian population. A new element in the latest episode of the conflict is the role of MONUC. After heavy criticism of the latest months, it seems to be that the UN peacekeeping force finally started to act.
This time MONUC troops held their positions (a month ago there were testimonies of withdrawing peace forces, leaving civilians to their fate), beat off in some occasions CNDP attacks (last week MONUC could stop Nkunda's advance to Masisi by intervening with combat helicopters) and send reinforcements to the various fronts. In a very optimistic mood one can say that by this new more active posture of the MONUC, Nkunda's CNDP will come to realize that they can't be victorious and that a negotiated settlement is the only rational option left. The problem with such a train of thought is that the CNDP doesn't want a stabilisation of the situation. Every offensive, every attack is motivated by the fact that it creates chaos and insecurity. Such a chaos and insecurity serve directly what is really on stake for the CNDP: the control over revenues from gold, tin, timber and cobalt. In peacetime the rebels would lose these revenues or at least will have to share them. This logic stands also for all the other armed movements (the Mai Mai militia, the FDLR), including the FARDC.
Moreover, apparently the incompetence of the FARDC inspired Nkunda to announce in a BBC interview to introduce a change in the CNDP's agenda. No longer is the defending of Tutsi-interests in the region, but the liberation of whole Congo now the new adagium. Anxious by these new fights, Alan Doss, UN Special Representative for Congo, asked for more troops and more means during a special session of the UN Security Council.
Given that incompetence, both wished as unintended, of the FARDC to defeat the CNDP, it becomes time that Kabila understands that the Congolese government can't resolve the conflict military. Hence, terms of "using all means" to institute peace like he did mid-September, should be replaced by phrases like: negotiations which deal the underlying causes of the conflict –the issues of land distribution, control over natural resources, political representation, development- instead of only fighting the symptoms, like the Amani program does. The problem is that the Congolese government, like the international community, still have faith in the Amani program. Kinshasa for example refused to comply with Nkunda's request to negotiate directly, saying that negotiations should occur via the Amani program, namely through the Commission of Peace and Security. It's bizarre to see how governments and international organizations keep on sticking to a signed text of conflict resolution; whereas reality demonstrates the inadequacy of the agreement (another example of such an attitude is the Darfur Peace Agreement of May 2006).
The most shocking news fact and one that clearly shows the dead-lock of the Goma agreement is a report of Amnesty International. Based on testimonies, the report states that half of the children that where set free in North Kivu, are again recruited later by one of the armed movements, particularly by the CNDP and Mai Mai militia. An aid worker says even that for every two children that are liberated, five others are recruited. UNICEF already sounded the alarm in April and seems to be that the problem became worse. Although the Goma agreement stipulated that the fighting parties had to set free all their child soldiers, the CNDP has more kadogo than before the agreement. The reason is that the agreement provided to give rebel leaders a rank in the Congolese army in correspondence with the amount of fighters they have under their command.
Another alarming message comes from Ituri and Dungu in Orientale Province. In Ituri a new armed movement called Front Populaire pour la Justice au Congo (FPJC) captured some villages around Bunia which were previously controlled by the FARDC. According to its self-declared colonel, Charif Manda, the FPJC is the first multi-ethnic movement in Ituri.
Although the agenda of this new armed group is unknown, its supporters would be ex members of the Union des Patriotes Congolais (UPC, its former leader, Thomas Lubanga, is arrested by the Congolese authorities and transferred to the ICC against who it issued an arrest warrant for numerous human right violations), the Front Nationaliste et Intégrationniste (FNI) and the Front de Résistance Patriotique de l'Ituri (FPRI), all militias which are responsible for numerous war crimes, crimes against humanity and human right violations in Ituri's latest episode of violence. Ituri as region came for the first time under international attention in June 1999 when it was hit by the first eruption of a large scale conflict between Hema and Lendu elites. Likewise in Kivu, it is the struggle for control and access to land and other natural resources (gold) what was at stake. And just like in the Kivu this competition led to an alliance between rural armed actors, economic entrepreneurs and local authorities and a general environment of violence and despair, causing more than 50,000 deaths since 1999. Although the first European military intervention (Artemis) and later MONUC did improve the situation, leading to a considerable progress in disarmament, demobilization and reintegration of militias, there are still hundreds dissident fighters of various armed movement. Another striking similarity with Kivu is the role of neighbouring countries in both conflicts. Where Kabila blames the regime of Kigali for the agitated situation in Kivu, the FARDC says that leaders of the FRPI have established links with rebels from neighbouring Uganda who are supplying them with guns and ammunition.
Attacks of the Lord Resistance Army in Dungu caused thousands displaced -Caritas speaks of 75,000- of which hundreds sought safety in South Sudan. Since a year Kony's rebels have found a hiding place in the Garamba national park, northeast Congo close to the border with Southern Sudan and Uganda. MONUC estimates the number of LRA fighters in Congo at 800 to 1,000. From its base the LRA attacked and looted several villages and health centres, killing dozens of citizens, abducting over a hundred others, amongst them 90 children. UNHCR is concerned that the humanitarian situation could get worse. The rain season just started and due to the looting of villages the stocks of food is diminished. Although Kinshasa send 2,000 troops to end the LRA's attacks, assisted logistically by 400 MONUC peacekeepers, my experience says that they will not succeed in eliminating the LRA. Meanwhile the peace process between the rebels and Kampala seems to be reached a dead-lock. Kony has made clear that he doesn't sign any agreement as long they have no guarantees that they will be not persecuted for committed atrocities. The ICC has issued arrest warrants against Kony and other commanders.
These events hit Kinshasa exactly on the moment that a governmental crisis is looming. Antoine Gizenga's resign as first minister opens great anxiety about his succession. Needless to say that all political parties have the perfect candidate (sometimes they have more than one) in their ranks. PALU, Gizenga's party and described as followers of Patrice Lumumba, claims that the prime ministers office belongs to them; but UDEMO (supporters of former president Mobutu) and Kabila's party (AMP) led already know that they are more than interested. The Congolese newspapers Le Potentiel fears the break up of the government coalition which would lead to a political crisis. Hence, the question is: in which way Ituri and Kivu are an issue in Kinshasa nowadays, knowing that MONUC fears starvation and lethal diseases (cholera) among the almost 900,000 displaced in North Kivu alone.
Hamas says Abbas must step aside
Hamas says Abbas must step aside
Hamas says Ahmed Bahar will succeed Abbas next year if the president fails to call fresh elections [AFP]
The Palestinian group Hamas that governs Gaza says it will stop recognising Mahmoud Abbas as the Palestinian president in three months.
Hamas, citing a Palestinian law, said one of its own leaders must fill the top post after Abbas's tenure officially expires on January 8.
The announcement came after Hamas legislators voted on a resolution in Gaza City on Monday, a move seen as at attempt to step up pressure on Abbas and his Fatah party ahead of talks brokered by Egypt over a power-sharing deal between the rival camps.
A Fatah member said the vote was simply "an attempt to sabotage the Egyptian effort to reconcile the Palestinian division".
The Basic Law, a forerunner to a Palestinian constitution, says that both president and parliament are elected to four-year terms.
Legal loophole
But a loophole in the law, which Fatah is relying on, suggests that Abbas's term could be extended another year if it were deemed to be in the "national interest".
Hamas says Abbas's tenure as Palestinian president ends on January 8 [EPA]Abbas was elected president in January 2006 but a year later Hamas defeated his movement by a landslide in parliamentary elections in Gaza.
Neither Hamas nor Fatah appear keen to share power in governing the Gaza Strip, which has been under Hamas control following a violent takeover in June last year, leaving Abbas with only nominal control of the occupied West Bank.
During Monday's vote, Hamas threatened to install Ahmed Bahar, the deputy parliamentary speaker, as Abbas's temporary successor if Abbas fails to announce a new presidential election by Wednesday.
Shalit talks
Meanwhile, Khaled Mashaal, the exiled Hamas political leader, said talks with Israel over the possible release of an Israeli soldier have stalled and blamed Israeli negotiators for continuing to rehash previously-agreed issues.
He was quoted in Le Figaro newspaper on Monday blaming "a lack of reliability of Israeli negotiators" in discussions pertaining to Sergeant Gilad Shalit who was captured two years ago.
Source:
Agencies /Aljazeera
Hamas says Ahmed Bahar will succeed Abbas next year if the president fails to call fresh elections [AFP]
The Palestinian group Hamas that governs Gaza says it will stop recognising Mahmoud Abbas as the Palestinian president in three months.
Hamas, citing a Palestinian law, said one of its own leaders must fill the top post after Abbas's tenure officially expires on January 8.
The announcement came after Hamas legislators voted on a resolution in Gaza City on Monday, a move seen as at attempt to step up pressure on Abbas and his Fatah party ahead of talks brokered by Egypt over a power-sharing deal between the rival camps.
A Fatah member said the vote was simply "an attempt to sabotage the Egyptian effort to reconcile the Palestinian division".
The Basic Law, a forerunner to a Palestinian constitution, says that both president and parliament are elected to four-year terms.
Legal loophole
But a loophole in the law, which Fatah is relying on, suggests that Abbas's term could be extended another year if it were deemed to be in the "national interest".
Hamas says Abbas's tenure as Palestinian president ends on January 8 [EPA]Abbas was elected president in January 2006 but a year later Hamas defeated his movement by a landslide in parliamentary elections in Gaza.
Neither Hamas nor Fatah appear keen to share power in governing the Gaza Strip, which has been under Hamas control following a violent takeover in June last year, leaving Abbas with only nominal control of the occupied West Bank.
During Monday's vote, Hamas threatened to install Ahmed Bahar, the deputy parliamentary speaker, as Abbas's temporary successor if Abbas fails to announce a new presidential election by Wednesday.
Shalit talks
Meanwhile, Khaled Mashaal, the exiled Hamas political leader, said talks with Israel over the possible release of an Israeli soldier have stalled and blamed Israeli negotiators for continuing to rehash previously-agreed issues.
He was quoted in Le Figaro newspaper on Monday blaming "a lack of reliability of Israeli negotiators" in discussions pertaining to Sergeant Gilad Shalit who was captured two years ago.
Source:
Agencies /Aljazeera
torsdag 2 oktober 2008
Taliban Pakistan in Hot Waters
Taliban Pakistan in Hot Waters
By Aamir Latif, IOL Correspondent
"If his [Baitullah Mehsud] death is confirmed it will certainly effect the Taliban movement in the tribal areas initially," Yousafzai believes.ISLAMABAD — Security and defense analysts believe that the reported death of Baitullah Mehsud will affect the militancy in Pakistan's restive tribal areas on the short term and could cause a split within the local Taliban ranks.
"If his death is confirmed it will certainly effect the Taliban movement in the tribal areas initially," Rahimullah Yousafzai, a Peshawar based security analyst, told IslamOnline.net.
Baitullah Mehsud, the Amir of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), reportedly died on Tuesday of renal failure.
"Taliban will need sometime to find out such a high-profile commander like Baitullah Mehsud because he was the founder of TTP and definitely fighters have some kind of attachment to the founder."
A letter received Thursday by a Peshawar-based journalist claimed 34-year-old Mehsud was in good health.
Pakistan Taliban Leader Reportedly Dead
The letter did not carry a spokesman name and many observers here doubt its credibility and say Mehsud could have called journalists to tell them that he is alive.
Mehsud had previously met journalists at unidentified places in tribal areas.
Experts think Taliban will announce his death once they find his successor.
"When I say it will affect in the short term that means that Taliban had been used to his towering personality, which was actually exaggerated by intelligence agencies and the media," says Yousafzai.
"No doubt he was or he is an important and experienced commander but to declare him one of the most dangerous and influential persons in the world is nothing but exaggeration."
Baitullah Mehsud, a ghostly top militant, was virtually the uncrowned king of Pakistan's restive tribal belt.
Blamed by the US for the assassination of former premier Benazir Bhutto last year, he was the most wanted man by Pakistani and US intelligence agencies.
Baitullah Mehsud, who was once described by Newsweek as more dangerous than Osama Bin Laden himself, was recently named in Time magazine's 100 most influential people in the world.
Temporary
Ghosi believes the militancy problem in Pakistan's restive border area will remain "until and unless the root cause of the problem is addressed."
Some experts believe his death, if confirmed, could cause the break up of Taliban.
"His death may affect Taliban in a way whereby it may split on the issue of his successor," says Yousafzai.
"There are many Taliban groups under the umbrella of The TTP and each of these groups may won't its leader to be Baitullah Mehsud successor."
Wali-ur-Rehman is believed to stand a better chance of succeeding Baitullah Mehsud because he hails from the same powerful tribe.
Mehsud is the biggest tribe in South Waziristan with 60 percent of the 700,000 population while rival Wazir makes up 35 percent.
Maulvi Faqeer Mohammad, Baitullah Mehsud's deputy, would be a less favorite because he is not a Mehsud.
However, experts believe that whatever impact Baitullah Mehsud's death would have on Taliban, it would be short-lived.
"It will not be a long-lasting effect because the situation in the tribal areas has reached a point where personalities do not count much," says Yousafzai.
Sabihuddin Ghosi, a security and political analyst, agrees.
"His death could be a temporary shock for Taliban but not more than that.
"However I don't see this as a long-term problem for Taliban, especially regarding their operational capabilities. Once they regroup and fight his successor they will again appear as a threat."
The security expert insists that the militancy problem in Pakistan's restive border area will continue.
"The problem will remain until and unless the root cause of the problem is addressed.
"The two sides, specially the government, must understand that guns can't resolve the disputes. They have to come to the table whether before bloodshed or after that," says Ghosi.
"If the government wants to close the chapter of people like Baitullah Mehsud for ever then it has to respect the tribal tradition and give self governance to them otherwise the people will continue to be killed and people like Baitullah Mehsud will continue to emerge."
By Aamir Latif, IOL Correspondent
"If his [Baitullah Mehsud] death is confirmed it will certainly effect the Taliban movement in the tribal areas initially," Yousafzai believes.ISLAMABAD — Security and defense analysts believe that the reported death of Baitullah Mehsud will affect the militancy in Pakistan's restive tribal areas on the short term and could cause a split within the local Taliban ranks.
"If his death is confirmed it will certainly effect the Taliban movement in the tribal areas initially," Rahimullah Yousafzai, a Peshawar based security analyst, told IslamOnline.net.
Baitullah Mehsud, the Amir of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), reportedly died on Tuesday of renal failure.
"Taliban will need sometime to find out such a high-profile commander like Baitullah Mehsud because he was the founder of TTP and definitely fighters have some kind of attachment to the founder."
A letter received Thursday by a Peshawar-based journalist claimed 34-year-old Mehsud was in good health.
Pakistan Taliban Leader Reportedly Dead
The letter did not carry a spokesman name and many observers here doubt its credibility and say Mehsud could have called journalists to tell them that he is alive.
Mehsud had previously met journalists at unidentified places in tribal areas.
Experts think Taliban will announce his death once they find his successor.
"When I say it will affect in the short term that means that Taliban had been used to his towering personality, which was actually exaggerated by intelligence agencies and the media," says Yousafzai.
"No doubt he was or he is an important and experienced commander but to declare him one of the most dangerous and influential persons in the world is nothing but exaggeration."
Baitullah Mehsud, a ghostly top militant, was virtually the uncrowned king of Pakistan's restive tribal belt.
Blamed by the US for the assassination of former premier Benazir Bhutto last year, he was the most wanted man by Pakistani and US intelligence agencies.
Baitullah Mehsud, who was once described by Newsweek as more dangerous than Osama Bin Laden himself, was recently named in Time magazine's 100 most influential people in the world.
Temporary
Ghosi believes the militancy problem in Pakistan's restive border area will remain "until and unless the root cause of the problem is addressed."
Some experts believe his death, if confirmed, could cause the break up of Taliban.
"His death may affect Taliban in a way whereby it may split on the issue of his successor," says Yousafzai.
"There are many Taliban groups under the umbrella of The TTP and each of these groups may won't its leader to be Baitullah Mehsud successor."
Wali-ur-Rehman is believed to stand a better chance of succeeding Baitullah Mehsud because he hails from the same powerful tribe.
Mehsud is the biggest tribe in South Waziristan with 60 percent of the 700,000 population while rival Wazir makes up 35 percent.
Maulvi Faqeer Mohammad, Baitullah Mehsud's deputy, would be a less favorite because he is not a Mehsud.
However, experts believe that whatever impact Baitullah Mehsud's death would have on Taliban, it would be short-lived.
"It will not be a long-lasting effect because the situation in the tribal areas has reached a point where personalities do not count much," says Yousafzai.
Sabihuddin Ghosi, a security and political analyst, agrees.
"His death could be a temporary shock for Taliban but not more than that.
"However I don't see this as a long-term problem for Taliban, especially regarding their operational capabilities. Once they regroup and fight his successor they will again appear as a threat."
The security expert insists that the militancy problem in Pakistan's restive border area will continue.
"The problem will remain until and unless the root cause of the problem is addressed.
"The two sides, specially the government, must understand that guns can't resolve the disputes. They have to come to the table whether before bloodshed or after that," says Ghosi.
"If the government wants to close the chapter of people like Baitullah Mehsud for ever then it has to respect the tribal tradition and give self governance to them otherwise the people will continue to be killed and people like Baitullah Mehsud will continue to emerge."
US passes India nuclear pact
US passes India nuclear pact
The agreement was signed by Bush, left, and Manmohan Singh in July 2005 [EPA]
The US senate has approved a landmark deal that re-establishes bilateral nuclear co-operation with India.
The vote on Wednesday night follows its passage through the House of Representatives last weekend, ending a 30-year ban on US nuclear trade with India.
The senate's 86-13 vote handed George Bush, the US president, a victory on one of his top foreign policy priorities, which he will later sign into law.
The pact, passed by the House of Representatives with a 298-117 vote, comes ahead of a planned trip to India by Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, this weekend.
It contains several amendments related to "the subject of US responses in the event of a future Indian nuclear test".
India has argued that it has the sovereign right to conduct such a test, while Washington has said the deal would be off if tests were carried out.
Landmark deal
In a statement shortly after the bill was passed, Bush hailed the deal saying it will strengthen the US-India "strategic partnership" as well as efforts to halt the spread of atomic weapons.
"This legislation will strengthen our global nuclear non-proliferation efforts, protect the environment, create jobs, and assist India in meeting its growing energy needs in a responsible manner."
Washington banned nuclear trade with India after it carried out its first nuclear test in 1974 and refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Signed by Bush and Manmohan Singh, the Indian prime minister, in July 2005, the deal offers India access to Western technology and cheap atomic energy.
In return New Delhi must allow UN inspections of some of its nuclear facilities.
Critics fear the deal weakens any position taken on nuclear programmes in other countries, such as Iran.
"President Bush and his aides were so eager for a foreign policy success that they didn't even try to get India to limit its weapons programme in return," the New York Times said in an editorial on Tuesday.
"They got no promise from India to stop producing bomb-making material, no promise to to expand its arsenal, and no promise not to resume nuclear testing."
Indians satisfied
The reaction in New Delhi has been marked by relief and satisfaction.
Speaking to Al Jazeera on Thursday, Krishnaswami Subrahmanyam, an Indian defence analyst, said: "[The nuclear deal] will expedite India's economic growth because it will add to India's energy. "So far, India has been denied dual-use technology under the energy guidelines, so these are the benefits that India would receive under the new agreements."
He said India cannot give up its weapons because it is situated between two countries which are nuclear weapon powers, China and Pakistan.
"The non-proliferation community did not stop such proliferation in the past and therefore India is compelled to have its [own] nuclear arsenal," Subrahmanyam said. "While India's record on non-proliferation has been scrupulous, Pakistan cannot make the same claim. You have the whole story of Dr AQ Khan [a Pakistani nuclear scientist who sold nuclear secrets to other countries]. The major powers have decided that Pakistan has not earned the same treatment [as India]."
Al Jazeera and agencies
The agreement was signed by Bush, left, and Manmohan Singh in July 2005 [EPA]
The US senate has approved a landmark deal that re-establishes bilateral nuclear co-operation with India.
The vote on Wednesday night follows its passage through the House of Representatives last weekend, ending a 30-year ban on US nuclear trade with India.
The senate's 86-13 vote handed George Bush, the US president, a victory on one of his top foreign policy priorities, which he will later sign into law.
The pact, passed by the House of Representatives with a 298-117 vote, comes ahead of a planned trip to India by Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, this weekend.
It contains several amendments related to "the subject of US responses in the event of a future Indian nuclear test".
India has argued that it has the sovereign right to conduct such a test, while Washington has said the deal would be off if tests were carried out.
Landmark deal
In a statement shortly after the bill was passed, Bush hailed the deal saying it will strengthen the US-India "strategic partnership" as well as efforts to halt the spread of atomic weapons.
"This legislation will strengthen our global nuclear non-proliferation efforts, protect the environment, create jobs, and assist India in meeting its growing energy needs in a responsible manner."
Washington banned nuclear trade with India after it carried out its first nuclear test in 1974 and refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Signed by Bush and Manmohan Singh, the Indian prime minister, in July 2005, the deal offers India access to Western technology and cheap atomic energy.
In return New Delhi must allow UN inspections of some of its nuclear facilities.
Critics fear the deal weakens any position taken on nuclear programmes in other countries, such as Iran.
"President Bush and his aides were so eager for a foreign policy success that they didn't even try to get India to limit its weapons programme in return," the New York Times said in an editorial on Tuesday.
"They got no promise from India to stop producing bomb-making material, no promise to to expand its arsenal, and no promise not to resume nuclear testing."
Indians satisfied
The reaction in New Delhi has been marked by relief and satisfaction.
Speaking to Al Jazeera on Thursday, Krishnaswami Subrahmanyam, an Indian defence analyst, said: "[The nuclear deal] will expedite India's economic growth because it will add to India's energy. "So far, India has been denied dual-use technology under the energy guidelines, so these are the benefits that India would receive under the new agreements."
He said India cannot give up its weapons because it is situated between two countries which are nuclear weapon powers, China and Pakistan.
"The non-proliferation community did not stop such proliferation in the past and therefore India is compelled to have its [own] nuclear arsenal," Subrahmanyam said. "While India's record on non-proliferation has been scrupulous, Pakistan cannot make the same claim. You have the whole story of Dr AQ Khan [a Pakistani nuclear scientist who sold nuclear secrets to other countries]. The major powers have decided that Pakistan has not earned the same treatment [as India]."
Al Jazeera and agencies
Prenumerera på:
Inlägg (Atom)