International Affairs: January 2006 Archives

I do consider war correspondents to be brave people who risk their lives in dangerous environments to do their jobs, but I hardly think it's fair for Christiane Amanpour to characterize journalists as paying the price for the Iraq war without even mentioning the Coalition troops who have given their blood.

CNN'S CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: 'IRAQ WAR HAS BEEN A DISASTER' Mon Jan 30 2006 21:56:52 ET

CNN's top war correspondent Christiane Amanpour now says the Iraq war has been a disaster and has created a "black hole."

Amanpour made the comments Monday evening on the all-news network.

"The Iraq war has been a disaster, and journalists have paid for it," Amanpour explains to Larry King, a day after ABC NEWS anchor Bob Woodruff was injured by a bomb.

"This is not acceptable what's going on there and it's a terrible situation."

AMANPOUR: "It's a spiraling security disaster... And by any indication whether you take the number of journalists killed or wounded, whether you take the number of Iraqi soldiers killed and wounded, contractors, people working there, it just gets worse and worse."

Worse than when Saddam was killing, by many accounts, thousands of his own people every month?

In 2004 various pundits, including myself, predicted that the Israeli wall around the West Bank would lead to a Palestinian implosion, and it looks like things are finally coming to a head in the wake of Hamas' victory in the Palestinian election.

The leader of Hamas suggested Saturday that the Islamic group could create a Palestinian army that would include its militant wing - responsible for scores of deadly attacks on Israelis - in the aftermath of its crushing victory in parliamentary elections.

Israeli officials condemned the plan, demanding that Hamas renounce violence. Palestinian security officers, including loyalists from the defeated Fatah Party, said they would never submit to Hamas control.

"Hamas has no power to meddle with the security forces," said Jibril Rajoub, a Palestinian strongman.

The Hamas chief, Khaled Mashaal, reiterated that Hamas would not recognize Israel and indicated attacks on Israeli civilians would continue as long as Israel continued to target Palestinian civilians. "As long as we are under occupation then resistance is our right," he said.

And so forth and so on. Sometimes things have to get worse before they can get better.

It appears that hunches from 2003 that Saddam moved his WMD to Syria are turning out to be true: Iraq's #2 airforce commander says Iraqi WMD were moved to Syria in converted civilian jumbo jets disguised as relief supplies after a Syrian dam collapse in June, 2002.

The man who served as the no. 2 official in Saddam Hussein's air force says Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war by loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed.

The Iraqi general, Georges Sada, makes the charges in a new book, "Saddam's Secrets," released this week. He detailed the transfers in an interview yesterday with The New York Sun.

"There are weapons of mass destruction gone out from Iraq to Syria, and they must be found and returned to safe hands," Mr. Sada said. "I am confident they were taken over."

Mr. Sada's comments come just more than a month after Israel's top general during Operation Iraqi Freedom, Moshe Yaalon, told the Sun that Saddam "transferred the chemical agents from Iraq to Syria." ...

The flights - 56 in total, Mr. Sada said - attracted little notice because they were thought to be civilian flights providing relief from Iraq to Syria, which had suffered a flood after a dam collapse in June of 2002.

"Saddam realized, this time, the Americans are coming," Mr. Sada said. "They handed over the weapons of mass destruction to the Syrians."

I'm interested as to why American intelligence agencies haven't leaked this sort of information during the recent deluge. Maybe they don't know about it? It doesn't seem like it would be hard to verify information involving 56 plane flights, there must be hundreds of people who know what happened, if anything.

Anyway, as I've said all along, the WMD angle was only one component of why we deposed Saddam Hussein. Whether or not there turns out to have been WMD, toppling Saddam's fascist regime was necessary for bringing real reform to the rest of the Middle East.

(HT: Clayton Cramer and Michelle Malkin.)

So it looks like the terrorist group Hamas is now the official Palestinian government, but this shouldn't be a surprise to anyone who has read my "Break Their Will" series of posts about the need to undermine the Palestinians' widespread support for terrorism. As I wrote and quoted:

This poll of Palestinians taken in September, 2002, is not very encouraging. Here are some stats:

• 52% oppose peace negotiations with Israel.
• 73% are pessimistic of a reaching a peaceful settlement to the conflict.
• 66% are opposed to the Oslo agreement.
• 80% support the continuation of the al-Aqsa Intifada.
• 53% believe that the Intifada will achieve its object.
• 65% support suicide bombing operations against Israeli civilians [the poll question specifically mentions civilians].

These poll numbers support my belief that the Palestinian people themselves are a part of the problem, and need to be cowed.

Dealing with the Palestinians as a real state for the past 15 years has only made the situation deteriorate, and now we're stuck trying to figure out what to do with a democratically elected terrorist govnerment. Don't forget: the Palestinian government, now Hamas, is almost entirely funded by charity from Western nations.

Overall, this seems like a self-destructive move by the Palestinian people. It's hard to see how a Hamas-controlled government will be able to gain any consessions from Israel or any civilized nation. More likely this election will just hasten the implosion of the Palestinian territory.

This excellent article about Osama Bin Laden's recent tape and the hunt for him in Pakistan contains two notable quotes from sources inside the American defense and intelligence forces.

The tribal region where Zawahiri was said to be has a long history of fierce resistance to central control, as both the British Raj and the Soviets who occupied neighboring Afghanistan found out. But none of those previous powers possessed similar technology to scour the countryside from the sky and to unleash remote-control missiles. The broad message of the Damadola strike, which flattened three houses and killed several families, is that tribesmen need to rethink their code. Those who are supposedly governed by the iron law of Pashtunwali—or automatic loyalty to fellow tribesmen or guests—now have to recalculate the cost of that, U.S. officials said. "The message to them is, 'You have to take a new measure now: your families are not safe if you protect the terrorists'," says one senior Pentagon official who would not speak about the attack on the record because the details are classified.

When terrorists hide behind civilian shields -- especially willing shields -- and those shields are killed, their blood is on the hands of the terrorists.

Although Zawahiri's wife is said to be a "Momand" Pashtun from that region—offering him considerable protection—the CIA has been having more success lately in developing sources in the area, with help from Pakistani intelligence. (According to several U.S. officials, the Pakistani intelligence service has allowed a large "liaison" team into the country, and has accepted a great deal of technical assistance.) Frank Anderson, a former CIA station chief in the region, says Pashtunwali goes only so far, especially with multimillion-dollar prices on the heads of top Qaeda suspects. "The noble savage whose word is his bond exists a lot more in literature than on the ground," he says archly.

It's good to hear that America's human intelligence is improving after being decimated during the Clinton years. For a nation as diverse as ours, it shouldn't be so hard for us to infiltrate operatives into other cultures.

From observing the terrorists in Israel for the past decade-plus, it's pretty clear that terrorists only offer "truces" when they need time to regroup and rebuild. If anything, Osama Bin Laden's truce offer should push America and our allies to greater, more vigorous action against terrorists around the world and we should in no way accept the offer. The last thing we want is to give al Qaeda a chance to regroup; instead, we should press our offensive even more powerfully and hope to wipe out these cancers once and for all.

Al-Jazeera on Thursday aired an audiotape purportedly from Osama bin Laden, who says al-Qaida is making preparations for attacks in the United States but offering a truce "with fair conditions." ...

The speaker did not give conditions for a truce in the excerpts aired by Al-Jazeera.

"We do not mind offering you a long-term truce with fair conditions that we adhere to," he said. "We are a nation that God has forbidden to lie and cheat. So both sides can enjoy security and stability under this truce so we can build Iraq and Afghanistan, which have been destroyed in this war.

"There is no shame in this solution, which prevents the wasting of billions of dollars that have gone to those with influence and merchants of war in America," he said.

It's considerate for him to emphasize that there's no shame in his offer, considering that it should be pretty clear to every observer that he is the one in the weaker position.

Al-Jazeera's editor-in-chief Ahmed al-Sheik would not comment on when or where the tape was received. He said the full tape was 10 minutes long. The station aired four excerpts with what it "considered newsworthy," he said, but would not say what was on the remainder.

So Al-Jazeera is editing al Qaeda's press releases to make sure they maintain the proper imiage? That's nothing new.

President Bush, of course, won't accept the offer. I'm sure his thoughts on the matter a similar to mine, plus there's no way to know that OBL actually has any control over any upcoming terror attacks. He may be funding and training various terror groups, but would they actually stop planning attacks just because he says so?

Here's more speculation about Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad paving the way for Islamic apocalypse (which I first wrote about here.

One of the first acts of Mr Ahmadinejad's government was to donate about £10 million to the Jamkaran mosque, a popular pilgrimage site where the pious come to drop messages to the Hidden Imam into a holy well.

All streams of Islam believe in a divine saviour, known as the Mahdi, who will appear at the End of Days. A common rumour - denied by the government but widely believed - is that Mr Ahmadinejad and his cabinet have signed a "contract" pledging themselves to work for the return of the Mahdi and sent it to Jamkaran.

Iran's dominant "Twelver" sect believes this will be Mohammed ibn Hasan, regarded as the 12th Imam, or righteous descendant of the Prophet Mohammad.

He is said to have gone into "occlusion" in the ninth century, at the age of five. His return will be preceded by cosmic chaos, war and bloodshed. After a cataclysmic confrontation with evil and darkness, the Mahdi will lead the world to an era of universal peace.

This is similar to the Christian vision of the Apocalypse. Indeed, the Hidden Imam is expected to return in the company of Jesus.

Mr Ahmadinejad appears to believe that these events are close at hand and that ordinary mortals can influence the divine timetable.

The prospect of such a man obtaining nuclear weapons is worrying. The unspoken question is this: is Mr Ahmadinejad now tempting a clash with the West because he feels safe in the belief of the imminent return of the Hidden Imam? Worse, might he be trying to provoke chaos in the hope of hastening his reappearance?

Fascinating stuff. Very anti-Christ-ish.

Esteemed expert on Middle Eastern affairs Daniel Pipes suggests that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad may be ratcheting up his nuclear ambitions because of his belief in an imminent Islamic apocalypse.

Mahdaviat derives from mahdi, Arabic for "rightly-guided one," a major figure in Islamic eschatology. He is, explains the Encyclopaedia of Islam, "the restorer of religion and justice who will rule before the end of the world." The concept originated in the earliest years of Islam and, over time, became particularly identified with the Shi‘ite branch. Whereas "it never became an essential part of Sunni religious doctrine," continues the encyclopedia, "Belief in the coming of the Mahdi of the Family of the Prophet became a central aspect of the faith in radical Shi‘ism," where it is also known as the return of the Twelfth Imam. ...

As mayor of Tehran, for example, Mr. Ahmadinejad appears to have in 2004 secretly instructed the city council to build a grand avenue to prepare for the Mahdi. A year later, as president, he allocated $17 million for a blue-tiled mosque closely associated with mahdaviat in Jamkaran, south of the capital. He has instigated the building of a direct Tehran-Jamkaran railroad line. He had a list of his proposed cabinet members dropped into a well adjacent to the Jamkaran mosque, it is said, to benefit from its purported divine connection.

He often raises the topic, and not just to Muslims. When addressing the United Nations in September, Mr. Ahmadinejad flummoxed his audience of world political leaders by concluding his address with a prayer for the Mahdi's appearance: "O mighty Lord, I pray to you to hasten the emergence of your last repository, the Promised One, that perfect and pure human being, the one that will fill this world with justice and peace."

So, if I understand at all, Ahmadinejad expects this Mahdi to appear at any moment to give victory to Iran. That may be why he's taking harder stances rather than backing down... he expects supernatural assistance.

(HT: Clayton Cramer, Stones Cry Out.)

Every country is talking tough on Iran, but it's time for more than just talk. If we and our allies aren't presently preparing and staging for military operations then we're already behind the curve. Even I, a mere blogger, can see the obvious signs that Iran is pushing to develop nuclear weapons despite their claims to the contrary, and even I can comprehend announcements by Iran's president that Israel should be wiped off the map.

Strategically, there's an argument to be made that the West is so complacent that the use of a nuclear weapon by Iran or one of its terrorist cronies may be one of the only events that can rouse us from our slumber in the face of this rising danger. However, I hope that such a terrible attack isn't necessary for us to do what needs to be done to preserve our civilization. President Bush has clearly shown a willingness to strike first when it's needed, and I hope that all the political posturing by his domestic enemies hasn't weakened the President's resolve to protect the American people.

Contra my reserved praise earlier this week for China's gradual liberalization of its economy, Mary Anastasia O'Grady argues that slow-going freedom can be self-defeating and bases her assessment on the 2006 Index oc Economic Freedom.

As they do every year, the index authors observe the average per capita income of countries in each category. Not surprisingly, over the years, they have found a strong relationship between economic freedom and prosperity. Yet there is something more that can be observed in this pattern: Countries that liberalize quickly and thoroughly achieve resounding successes, politically and economically. Conversely, gradualism risks stagnation and even reversals, because the benefits are not evident enough to impress the electorate and generate a momentum in their favor.

However, the situation might be different in undemocratic countries like China.

This matters the most in democracies, where leadership needs to produce results if liberalization is to stick. Clearly, it's not the absolute income level that generates support for reforms but the growth in living standards that seems to hold the key. Halfhearted measures generate immense resentment from the "losers" of the old system but often don't yield large enough gains to create a constituency to support the changes.

In China, the biggest "losers" are the Communist party bosses, but if they have the willpower to push the liberalization through (and the smarts to profit off it themselves) then political freedom can still follow.

The inestimable Mark Steyn has yet another excellent article that goes to great lengths to convince his reader that Western civilization is in serious trouble and that many of us are worrying about the wrong things.

A decade and a half after victory in the Cold War and end-of-history triumphalism, the "what do you leave behind?" question is more urgent than most of us expected. "The West," as a concept, is dead, and the West, as a matter of demographic fact, is dying.

What will London--or Paris, or Amsterdam--be like in the mid-'30s? If European politicians make no serious attempt this decade to wean the populace off their unsustainable 35-hour weeks, retirement at 60, etc., then to keep the present level of pensions and health benefits the EU will need to import so many workers from North Africa and the Middle East that it will be well on its way to majority Muslim by 2035. As things stand, Muslims are already the primary source of population growth in English cities. Can a society become increasingly Islamic in its demographic character without becoming increasingly Islamic in its political character? ...

I watched that big abortion rally in Washington in 2004, where Ashley Judd and Gloria Steinem were cheered by women waving "Keep your Bush off my bush" placards, and I thought it was the equivalent of a White Russian tea party in 1917. By prioritizing a "woman's right to choose," Western women are delivering their societies into the hands of fellows far more patriarchal than a 1950s sitcom dad. If any of those women marching for their "reproductive rights" still have babies, they might like to ponder demographic realities: A little girl born today will be unlikely, at the age of 40, to be free to prance around demonstrations in Eurabian Paris or Amsterdam chanting "Hands off my bush!"

As Mr. Steyn has written before, the West faces a crisis of confidence. Unless we wake up and realize that our enemies are real and present, and unless we decide that Western civilization is worth fighting for, we're going to lose by default.

Update:
The recent ramage of violence on a commuter train in France is a case in point.

Despite protests from the Left that they aren't on the same side as our terrorist enemies, the terrorists, at least, think that they are.

RAFAH, Gaza Strip -- Palestinian gunmen in Gaza Strip early Wednesday tried to kidnap the parents of an Evergreen State College student killed in 2003.

Five gunmen burst into a house and tried to kidnap Rachel Corrie's parents, Craig and Cindy. The gunmen eventually relented after being told who their targets were.

Rachel Corrie, of course, was the woman who stood in front of an Israeli bulldozer while it was in the process of destroying a house used by terrorists (or a tunnel used to smuggle weapons into Israel, depending on the source you read).

(HT: James Taranto.)

Just wanted to point out that yesterday I said Russia would turn Ukraine's natural gas back on soon, and today they did.