Politics & Policies: Stronger axis of evil

By Claude Salhani
UPI International Editor

Washington, DC, May. 13 (UPI) -- Remember the "axis of evil?" Of course you do. When the matter was first raised by President George W. Bush in his State of the Union address in January 2002, it seemed somewhat disproportioned. Now, the individual "cogs" of the infamous "axis" have taken on a new life.

In his much-publicized speech to the nation and the world, the president singled out Iraq, Iran and North Korea as deserving extra recognition for their evilness and their desire to become nuclear powers. The United States then went to war in Iraq based on the belief that Iraq's then strongman, Saddam Hussein, was harboring weapons of mass destruction.

Iraq, which at the time did not represent a threat to the national security of the United States, was invaded and Saddam was deposed. Not that Saddam deserves tears being shed over his removal from power; power he grossly abused. But subsequently we discovered there were no WMD in Iraq. Just as we were to learn there was no connection between Saddam and the 9/11 terrorists.

But now, you can safely bet that links between former Baathists and international terrorists exist in Iraq. The country has turned into a magnet, attracting all ilk of anti-Americanism, from international Islamists to Arab nationalists.

Notwithstanding Saddam's ruthlessness and complete disregard for human life, three years ago Iraq should not have been included in the "axis of evil." Given the intensity and cadence of terror attacks in Iraq, targeting both Iraqis and Americans, the country now represents one of the sturdiest cogs in the evil axis.

Iran is the second cog in the "axis of evil." If the situation in Iran could be color-coded, sort of like the Homeland Security's domestic threat assessment system, it would be turning from amber to a glowing bright red.

Much to the chagrin of the West, Tehran has all but admitted it intends to join the elite nuclear club. It is only a matter of time before the Islamic republic develops nuclear weapons, or in the very least, the capacity to produce them.

Tehran's mullahs are just a few steps away from acquiring those WMD that were being sought ... in Iraq.

Europe's "big three" -- Britain and France and Germany -- have been playing the "good cop" in a joint Euro-U.S. effort aimed at convincing Iran to drop its nuclear ambitions. The Europeans however, are now beginning to realize that negotiations will fail to stop Tehran from enriching its uranium, allowing them to manufacture weapons grade nuclear material.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair hinted it might be time to bring in the "bad cop," the United States. From the start of the crisis, the United States has viewed Iran's nuclear program with suspicion.

Memo to agents who were searching for Saddam's secret weapons stash: there were none in Eye-rack, but there might be some in Eye-ran, soon.

Blair said he would consider U.N. sanctions against Iran if Tehran went ahead with its threat to continue work on its nuclear program. "We certainly will support referral to the U.N. Security Council if Iran breeches its undertakings and obligations," said Blair.

France, Britain and Germany have offered Iran incentives -- both political and economic -- to drop its uranium enrichment program. But now more than a year since the talks have started, the Europeans are frustrated with little or no progress to show for it. Quite to the contrary, Iran last month said it would inform the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency its plans to pursue uranium conversion.

Tehran insists it only aspires to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, not to build a bomb. Blair said diplomacy could still work, and it is premature to consider military options.

Did he say military options? The very fact Blair made reference to "military options" is indication enough the idea is on the table -- or at least lingering somewhere underneath it.

Want to strengthen axis of evil cog number two? Deploy the military option. Think Iraq is bad? See what happens when Iranian nationalism kicks in.

Evil Axis Cog Number Three:

Talk about Evil Empires. The reclusive, megalomaniac Kim Jong-Il, the despotic leader of North Korea who is having a hard time feeding his people, wants to become a nuclear power.

The typically reclusive nation's Foreign Ministry said Wednesday it had successfully removed 8,000 spent fuel rods from a nuclear power station in Yongbyon, in fact admitting it has "been taking steps to increase our nuclear arsenal."

North Koreans might go to bed hungry at night, but at least they can be proud to know their supreme leader can kick off a nuclear war anytime he wants. Talk about prestige.

And three years after the president first made mention of the "axis of evil," each one of the three cogs is now at a higher threatening level than they initially were.

--

(Comments may be sent to Claude@upi.com.)

Aoun opts for peace, dialogue with Syria

By Claude Salhani
UPI International Editor

Published 5/9/2005 9:42 AM

WASHINGTON, May 9 (UPI) -- Gen. Michel Aoun, a Maronite Christian whom some Lebanese regard as a renegade, others as a savior and who sees himself as the next president of Lebanon, returned to a hero's welcome Saturday after a 15-year exile in France.

Shortly after his arrival in Beirut, Aoun spoke with United Press International by cellular telephone. He discussed some of his plans for the future of the country.

"Democracy comes first," Aoun told United Press International. The former general and one-time prime minister explained that before Lebanon could become fully democratic, it would have to abandon its corrupt "old ways."

"Changes are important if Lebanon is to change for the better," said Aoun to UPI. "The Lebanese must change their ways; they must move away from the bad old habits."

Aoun said he would focus his energy on building a "new Lebanon."

"Lebanon's archaic, feudal and religious fanaticism as well as rampant corruption that in the past has destroyed the people must be done away with," Aoun said.

Addressing reports that he intends to run for the presidency, the former Lebanese army general said: "One must not aim for a specific post, or position. One must plan for a new society."

Aoun, who many blame for some of the worst fighting and violence of the Lebanese civil war, said he held great love for the Lebanese people. "I felt very emotional upon my return."

A crowd of some 400,000 people, according to Aoun supporters, greeted him Saturday in Freedom Square, previously Martyr's Square and the site where monster anti-Syrian demonstrations were held after the Feb. 14 killing of former prime minister Rafik Hariri.

Aoun, who was ousted by the Syrians in 1990, lobbied Washington for support in his quest to have Damascus remove its forces from Lebanon. He played a primary role in convincing the Bush administration to pass the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Act of 2003, meant to impose economic sanctions on Damascus.

His actions brought accusations from the Lebanese pro-Syrian government of trying to foment discord between the two countries and of trying to incite religious discord.

"I have harmed no one. I have good intentions," Aoun told UPI. He indicated he wished peace with Syria.

"There is much Syria and Lebanon can profit from each other," he told UPI.

Aoun said now that Syria has quit Lebanon, his problems with Damascus are over.

"I have already pardoned those who fought me," Aoun told UPI.

The general said however, that his former enemies will not be recompensed unless they prove themselves.

"If they, those who opposed us, want to work with us in rebuilding the country, I am ready to work with them. I have good intentions for Lebanon," he told UPI.

"Peace cannot be waged by one side alone," Aoun said. "War can be waged by one side, but not peace. I hope Syria opts for peace."

--

(Comments may be sent to Claude@upi.com.)

Copyright © 2001-2005 United Press International

Should Iraq be divided

Daily suicide attacks, car bombings and shootings in Iraq.

Lebanon tries peace

Former Lebanese army general Michel Aoun returned to Lebanon to a hero's welcome.

Politics & Policies: Struggles with democracy

By Claude Salhani
UPI International Editor

Published 5/6/2005 8:18 AM

WASHINGTON, May 5 (UPI) -- As the Arab world struggles to accept and adopt concepts of democracy, recent action by two U.S. allies -- Tunisia and Saudi Arabia -- worry human rights and democracy advocates. The recent arrest and conviction of a Tunisian lawyer and three Saudi men is seen as a major setback for pro-democracy advocates in the Arab World.

Despite shortcomings, President Zine El-Abidine Ben Ali's government seemed to be making progress as Tunisia appeared set on the path to showing greater respect for human rights. Georgie Anne Geyer, a well-respected nationally syndicated columnist who covers international affairs, called the pace of progress in Tunisia a "phenomenon."

"We didn't win over the (Islamist) fundamentalists in the 1980s with machine guns," Tunisian officials told Geyer.

But recently attorney Mohamed Abbou found himself on the wrong side of the legal bar when a Tunis criminal court sentenced him to 3? years imprisonment on April 28. His "crime" was publishing statements "likely to disturb public order" and for "defaming the judicial process."

Unfortunately, such verdicts are catchall phrases under which the judicial system becomes elastic, stretching laws to accommodate the political will and policies of government.

The charges brought against Abbou referred to an article he wrote in August 2004 comparing torture and ill treatment endured by political prisoners in Tunisia with the treatment suffered by U.S. detainees at Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq.

"The human rights community in Tunisia has been under sustained pressure from police and other state agents for years, who have thwarted the legitimate activities of judges and lawyers carrying out the duties of their profession and have violently attacked and intimidated these individuals and members of their families," claims Human Rights First, a non-governmental organization working to secure human dignity and respect of the rule of law.

"Mohammed Abbou has been sentenced to a harsh prison term for exercising his right to freedom of expression," Human Rights First said in a release.

But in a memo made available to United Press International, the Tunisian Embassy in Washington, claims there were two cases brought against Abbou.

The first case, the embassy said, "was initiated against Mr. Abbou by one of his female colleagues for severe violence against her. These acts led to the hospitalization of the latter at the emergency room and caused her, according to physicians, 10 percent permanent incapacity."

The second case refers to "defamation of the judicial authorities and spreading false information that may disrupt public order." The government further stated that there have been attempts "by extrazealous (sic) individuals" to disturb the court proceedings.

Neill Hicks, director of International Programs at Human Rights First, told UPI: "The Tunisian government are extremely dirty players in all of this." Hicks said that there was indeed an earlier assault charge, pending from 2002, which the judge added "at a very late date.

"The way the assault charge was introduced was completely unfair," said Hicks, adding Abbou's lawyers were given no time to check the facts of the first charge.

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia, whose Crown Prince Abdullah recently walked hand-in-hand with President George W. Bush when the de-facto Saudi ruler visited the Texas ranch in April, charged three Saudi reformers at a hearing held behind closed doors.

The three men -- Ali Al-Domaini, Matrook Al-Faleh, and Abdullah Al-Hamed -- were charged with calling for a constitutional monarchy in Saudi Arabia. The trial was adjourned several times earlier this year on request of the prosecutor who asked for more time to "collect additional evidence" against the three.

The three men were part of a group of 116 who in December 2003 petitioned the Saudi government for comprehensive reforms in the Kingdom, and among 13 people arrested on March 16, 2004, for introducing "Western terminology" in asking for reforms, according to The Center for Democracy & Human Rights in Saudi Arabia.

The other 10 were released after the Saudi government pressured them into signing affidavits agreeing not to petition or speak publicly about democratic reform, nor to travel outside the country.

The trial of the three remaining reformers took on special significance when they demanded their court hearings be open to the media and the public, a right awarded to defendants in Saudi Arabia -- on paper.

The Center for Democracy & Human Rights in Saudi Arabia describes their detention conditions as "inhumane." It claims there have been "delaying tactics by the prosecution, and verbal acts of intimidation from the judge."

The democratic reformers have so far stood their ground and have refused to crack under intense Saudi government pressure to give up their demands, says the Center for Democracy & Human Rights in Saudi Arabia.

"When we talk about Ali's trial, we shouldn't talk about it singularly. It is the trial of reform in Saudi Arabia," says Fawzia al-Ouni, wife of Ali Al-Domaini.

A judgment is expected within the next few weeks. Few observers, however, anticipate the three will be acquitted and released.

Ali Alyami, Director of the Center for Democracy & Human Rights in Saudi Arabia, called on the Bush administration and the U.S. Congress to "stop regarding the Saudi royal family as sacrosanct and start holding them accountable for their violations of human rights.

"Defeating terrorism and eradicating religious extremism and intolerance require a genuine overhaul of Saudi political, social, religious, and economic institutions," said Alyami.

--

(Comments may be sent to Claude@upi.com.)

Copyright © 2001-2005 United Press International

Politics & Policies: French-U.S. ties closer?

Politics & Policies: French-U.S. ties closer?
By Claude Salhani
UPI International Editor

Published 5/4/2005 8:57 AM

WASHINGTON, May 4 (UPI) -- The recent crisis in Lebanon has brought Paris and Washington closer than the two capitals have been since the outbreak of the Iraq war in March 2003 widened the gap between the Atlantic partners.

The Feb. 14 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, a close and personal friend of French President Jacques Chirac, and the ensuing crisis, narrowed the trans-Atlantic schism that had previously developed. No one on this side of the ocean is pouring Bordeaux wine or fine champagne into the gutters any more. At the same time, the attitude of the French toward the Bush administration, while far from being a love affair, has greatly improved.

Paris and Washington co-sponsored United Nations Security Council Resolution 1559, calling on Syria to remove its military forces and intelligence units from Lebanon, and for Beirut to reclaim sovereignty over all its territory.

As Jean Francois-Poncet, a French senator and former foreign minister told United Press International at a recent lunch, the time for disputes is over. The French and the Americans had their differences, Poncet said, but that is "all in the past."

The two governments must now work together, stressed the French senator. And working together, Paris and Washington have been doing on a number of hot issues. France and the United States have cooperated on working to prevent Tehran from developing nuclear weapons, and they have been working particularly close on the situation in Lebanon.

Yet, despite the renewed rapprochement -- highlighted by the release of a joint French-U.S. statement Monday -- diverging views remain between France and the United States regarding the pace over which the follow-up to the Syrian pullout from Lebanon needs to be implemented.

Being more traditionalists, Europeans are used to slower-moving diplomatic initiatives. They tend to be somewhat more realistic when it comes to long negotiations and time constraints, principally when dealing in the Levant, where Europeans have centuries more experience than their U.S. allies.

"The Americans want to move at a faster pace," said a French diplomatic source, speaking to United Press International, on condition his name not be mentioned.

The joint statement on Lebanon delivered by U.S. Department of State spokesman Richard Boucher demonstrated that Washington and Paris see eye-to-eye, officially at least. In essence, both the French government and the U.S. administration agree, "Lebanon is a sovereign, independent state that aspires to freedom and democracy." Indeed. One rather wonders why this even needs to be stated.

Both countries, together with the "with the rest of the international community," pledged their support for Lebanon by drafting and passing U.N. Security Council Resolution 1559, calling on Syria to quit Lebanon, where its military and intelligence units have been stationed since 1976.

Complying with international pressures, Syria said it removed all its forces by April 30, and a U.N. team is now in Lebanon to verify the completion of the withdrawal.

The joint U.S.-French statement supports "the extension of the sole and exclusive control of the Government of Lebanon over all Lebanese territory." It further states the two countries "stand ready to assist in this." The statement did not detail what form this assistance would entail.

What is particularly interesting in the joint statement, however, is what it does not say. The report makes no mention of anything relating to the Lebanese Shiite paramilitary organization, Hezbollah, or of disarming the Palestinian and other militias in Lebanon.

"No one forgot Hezbollah," the French diplomatic source told UPI. "They are just not a priority at the moment. The question of militias is mentioned in the political accords."

Matthew Levitt, an analyst with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, agrees. "There is no question of not dealing with Hezbollah," he told UPI. The statement makes no mention of the armed militias, because, said Levitt, "It's a recognition that 1559 has to get all (foreign) forces out of Lebanon."

If implementing the first part of 1559 -- calling on Syria to withdraw -- appeared relatively easy, addressing the issue of Hezbollah and its weapons will take much more astute political maneuvering. It is what the British would call a "sticky wicket."

The general consensus is that the issue has to be addressed but needs to be done intelligently and carefully, so as not to re-re-ignite the violence. The issue cannot be forced. A close aide of the former Lebanese prime minister told UPI Tuesday that the situation in Lebanon remained precarious.

"The intent is to have Hezbollah become more of a 'hizb' and less of a militia," said Levitt. (Hezb is Arabic for party, Hezbollah means party of God.)

"It has to be done politically," Levitt said. "No one believes you can disarm Hezbollah," (by force) added the Washington analyst.

France and the United States also expect the establishment of an international commission of inquiry to investigate the assassination of former prime minister Hariri "and the other murdered Lebanese citizens."

"The international community is ready to assist" Lebanon in organizing free elections. "France and the United States stand ready to respond to requests for assistance by a sovereign and democratic Lebanese government formed as a result of the forthcoming elections."

--

(Comments may be sent to Claude@upi.com.)

Copyright © 2001-2005 United Press International

Politics & Policies: Kosovo still disconnected

My idle laptop, unable to connect to the outside world, offered an appropriate analogy to the current political situation in Kosovo. The usual traffic of about 400 e-mails a day were not trickling into my computer, leaving me frustrated -- as many Kosovars I am sure must feel about political stagnation in their region. Both of us were waiting for something to happen. And in both instances, it felt as though the world was passing us by.

Europe's Islamist threats

The exact reach of Islamist extremism in Europe is difficult to identify, but the terror threat -- including nuclear terrorism -- is real, warns a report from the Brussels-based European Strategic Intelligence and Security Center.

Is Syria leaving Lebanon?

Syria's long occupation of Lebanon ended Tuesday with a cocktail party frorm the Lebanese who can turn even war and military occupation into a social event.

The Baghdad mantra

Chances aare if you keep repeating something long enough one of two things are likely to happen. First, you eventually start believing your own mantra, and second, in the long run the odds are that your predictions will come about.

Lebanon's renewed hope

Lebanon has a new government -- and with it, new hope.

Leaving Gaza is hard to do

Israel is beginning to realize that leaving the Gaza Strip is going to be harder than it was occupying it.

Chirac: AUx urnes, citoyens

"La Marseillaise," the French national anthem calls on France's citizens to arms -- "aux armes, citoyens." French President Jacques Chirac, while promoting the "yes" vote for Europe's constitution, might have used a similar line calling "aux urnes, citoyens;" to the ballot boxes, citizens.

Terror threat averted

Authorities in the U.S. this week indicted three Britons of South Asian origin for plotting an attack on financial institutions in Washington, New York and New Jersey. Last August, United Press International revealed details of the plot federal prosecutors outlined this week after the three men's arrest by British authorities.

Politics & Policies: Lebanon fears 'events'

By Claude Salhani
UPI International Editor

Published 4/13/2005 8:33 AM

WASHINGTON, April 13 (UPI) -- Thirty years ago this Wednesday was the official start of the Lebanese civil war. Fears of the conflict re-igniting have recently surfaced following the Feb. 14 assassination of former prime minister Rafik Hariri and the turmoil that ensued.

"Lebanon's political class, notoriously fractured, could create fresh opportunities for outside interference and pave the way for domestic chaos," warns a report issued Tuesday by the International Crisis Group, a Brussels-based think tank.

The war destroyed large parts of the country, killed close to 150,000 people, forced thousands to flee and culminated with foreign occupations.

The 1989 Saudi-sponsored Taif Peace Accord -- which was never fully implemented -- eventually ended the conflict, and the country enjoyed a decade or so of prosperity. But in reality, much as the official debut of the war occurred sometime before April 13, 1975, so too the official end to the conflict remains unclear.

One of the dangers looming over Lebanon is that there was never really a resolution to the conflict. After years of fierce hostilities, it seemed as though the warring factions grew tired of fighting and the war sputtered and stopped, much like a car running out of gas. The causes behind the conflict were never addressed, and there was no attempt at reconciliation.

Not one monument was erected to the memory of the 150,000 casualties of the war, nor has there been any real effort to uncover what became of the 17,000 people who were kidnapped and remain missing. It's almost as though the country is in collective denial over the years of conflict.

Most Lebanese usually refer to the war as simply "the events."

Today the risk of more "events" is very real. In a report titled "Syria After Lebanon, Lebanon After Syria," the International Crisis Group stresses that "the Syrian regime, sensing its survival at stake, may lash out, using its remaining instruments and allies in Lebanon and beyond."

The threat to Lebanon's security is not purely external; there are ample dangers within. In a "country awash with weapons and on the verge of a major redistribution of power and resources, the means and motivations for violence abound," Reinoud Leenders, an analyst with the ICG points out.

There is also the danger, according to the ICG, that "the U.S., feeling its broader regional goals within striking distance, may well over-reach, triggering violent reactions from Syria, Hezbollah or militant Palestinian groups."

The Syrians worry that the Bush administration may attempt to push forward with its vision of regime change. Reacting to pressures from the Lebanese, the United States and the international community, Damascus began withdrawing its forces from Lebanon, where Syrian troops intervened in 1976 to stop the civil war.

Since the Syrians began their pullout, a number of bombs have exploded in Christian areas of Beirut; the obvious intention to spark dissent. But the Lebanese have been wise, so far.

"Most international and Lebanese actors have acted with welcome wisdom," reports the ICG. Marwan Hamade, a prominent opposition leader and former Cabinet minister in Hariri's government, told United Press International that recent events are not likely to re-ignite the Lebanese civil war.

Hamade, himself the target of an assassination attempt, told UPI "the ingredients for civil war are not there." The former minister said he feels this time things are very different and that "the Lebanese people are far more conscious of the situation. "There are neither the ingredients nor the seeds for a civil war," said Hamade. "Civil war is not at the door."

One of the factors working in Lebanon's favor has been the initiative shown by the Lebanese opposition in working together across sectarian and political divides, stressing national unity.

The assassination of Hariri -- which Yasser Accoui, editor-in-chief of Beirut's Executive magazine equated to nothing short of "a coup d'etat" -- resulted in an unexpected popular uprising demanding the withdrawal of Syria.

Syria acquiesced and began to pull out. However, as the ICG report points out, what Syria leaves behind remains uncertain.

In a country "accustomed to being a theater for proxy wars between Arabs, Palestinian and Israelis," the report states, "the means and motivations for violence abound."

For Lebanon to enjoy continued serenity and avoid falling back into civil strife, the Brussels group said it "will require the U.S. to curb its appetite, Lebanon's opposition to maintain its moderation, and Syria to avoid a scorched-earth policy.

ICG recommends a sundry list of steps be taken by Lebanon, the United States, the European Union, Syria, Israel and the United Nations.

It suggests Lebanese political forces, including the opposition and Hezbollah, adopt a joint platform to form an interim government to organize elections, pass a new electoral law, address unimplemented aspects of the Taif Accord and Security Council Resolution 1559.

It recommends that Lebanon take Syrian concerns into account while shaping policies toward Israel, conduct relations with Syria on the basis of equality between sovereign states, and prosecute persons found responsible for Hariri's assassination by the U.N. investigation.

It counsels the gradual integration of Hezbollah's military wing as an autonomous unit under Lebanese army control and the full disarmament of Hezbollah in the context of progress toward Israeli-Lebanese and Israeli-Syrian peace agreements.

The full report can be seen on crisisgroup.org.

--

(Comments may be sent to Claude@upi.com.)

Copyright © 2001-2005 United Press International

Israel’s unsettlement policy

BY CLAUDE SALHANI
KHALEEJ TIMES

13 April 2005

AS ISRAEL prepares to evacuate the Gaza Strip and four West Bank settlements in the coming months, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon faces strong opposition at home, including threats of terror by Jewish extremists aiming to disrupt the evacuation.


Sharon was hoping his meeting with President Bush at the president’s ranch in Crawford, Texas on Monday, would give him additional political support. Instead, Bush talked tough strongly cautioning the Israeli prime minister against any settlement expansions.

"I told the prime minister not to undertake any activity that contravenes the Road Map or prejudices final status obligations," Bush told Sharon, reminding the Israeli prime minister that the Middle East road map calls for Israel to remove unauthorised settlements in the Palestinian territories.

The road map prohibits the creation of any new settlements as well as the expansion of existing ones including on the grounds of "natural growth."

Sharon assured Bush: "I will fulfil my commitment to you, Mr President, to remove unauthorised outposts. As to settlements, Israel will meet all its obligations under the road map."

But plans for expanding the West Bank settlement of Maaleh Adumim by some 3,500 apartments, which would link it with Jerusalem are likely to proceed, despite international criticism. Sharon sees this move as extending a carrot to those opposed to evacuating Gaza.

But if Israel was to proceed with the development, known as E-1, it could seriously affect the future of the peace process. Additionally, there are also real fears of potential terrorist attacks by Jewish extremists on the Al-Aqsa Mosque complex in the occupied Jerusalem in order to disrupt the withdrawal.

Such attack would have a devastating effect on the peace process, setting it back and reviving the risk of all-out violence. An attack on the Muslim holy sites could trigger a Third Intifada, one that would be far bloodier and more harmful to all sides in the conflict. There would be no winners in the next round of Israeli-Palestinian violence.

Already, Palestinian resistance groups have threatened to end the ceasefire with Israel if Al-Aqsa Mosque — Islam’s third holiest Mosque — is attacked.

Indeed, the forced removal of Jewish settlers from the Gaza Strip is likely to test the Jewish state’s strength, resolve and unity as opponents of evacuating the occupied Palestinian territory are not about to make this an easy choice for Prime Minister Sharon’s government.

Several rabbis, right-wing groups and settlers are calling on Israeli security forces to refuse orders asking them to evict the settlers.

The Union of Rabbis for the People of Israel and the Land of Israel issued a statement last week asking "Tens of thousands of people to prepare" for a call up "to be with our brethren," in support of the settlers in Gaza who refuse to leave.

"It will not be easy," said Ehud Olmert, Israel’s deputy prime minister during a telephone conference last week, referring to the planned pullout. "It will be difficult," said Olmert, "it will be heartbreaking." In fact, what was not easy was maintaining and securing those settlements to begin with. Several thousands of Israeli soldiers were required to ensure the security of about 7,500 settlers.

Israel now plans to begin evacuating the Strip on July 20. The risk of violence from those opposed to the evacuation plan exists, said Olmert. "The danger is there. We hope it will be prevented."

"One must not help evacuate settlements in the land of Israel and give them to foreigners. This contradicts the Halacha (Jewish law), the Torah, ethics, and God forbid, one must not be partner to a transgression," declared former Chief Ashkenazi Rabbi Avraham Shapiro last week.

Olmert’s response is that "Gaza was never part of historic Israel. "I don’t remember that Gaza was part of Israel. I don’t remember praying for Gaza," said Olmert. Olmert, who spoke prior to Sharon’s visit to the US, said giving up the settlements was a necessity to achieve peace with the Palestinians. "We trust the good will of Abu Mazen," said Olmert, referring to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas by his more familiar name. "He (Abbas) wants to make peace. There is no reason to doubt him."

Olmert admits that the Sharon government is taking a political gamble in applying such controversial policies as the withdrawal. "We have stuck our necks out politically, now is the time for the Palestinians to take risks," said Olmert.

But the risk the Palestinians fear most is that the Israeli evacuation from Gaza will not lead "Gaza First," but "Gaza only," and to a dead end in the Middle East Road Map.

In any case, Abu Mazen is sure to have his work cut out for him when he visits the US to meet with Bush possibly during the third week in April, according to sources in the Palestinian Authority.

Claude Salhani is International Editor and a political analyst with United Press International in Washington

Politics & Policies: Settlements unsettlement

Published 4/11/2005 9:00 AM

WASHINGTON, April 11 (UPI) -- Israel's forthcoming withdrawal from the Gaza Strip is likely to test the Jewish state's strength, resolve and unity as proponents and opponents of evacuating the occupied Palestinian territory are bound to clash -- in some instances quite literally.

A number of rabbis, right-wing groups and settlers are calling on Israeli soldiers and police to dissent, and to refuse orders that come down the chain of command, asking them to forcefully evict Jewish settlers from Gaza and four West Bank settlements.

The Union of Rabbis for the People of Israel and the Land of Israel issued a statement last week asking "Tens of thousands of people to prepare" for a call "to be with our brethren" in support of the settlers in Gaza who refuse to leave.

The issue of settlements will likely be among the topics Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon will discuss with President George W. Bush when the two leaders meet at the president's Texas ranch, Monday, during the prime minister's six-hour stopover. An Israeli diplomat told United Press International that Bush and Sharon will discuss "the disengagement process and security concerns."

Among the president's concerns is Israel's E-1 plan to add about 3,500 apartments to Ma'aleh Adumim, connecting it with Jerusalem, a plan that was harshly criticized by the Bush administration.

However, in recent days new concerns arose. There are fears of a potential terrorist attack by Jewish extremists on the Al-Aqsa Mosque complex in order to disrupt the withdrawal. Any such attack would set the peace process back, reviving the risk of all-out violence and re-fueling the intifada. Palestinian resistance groups have threatened to end the cease-fire with Israel if the mosque -- Islam's third-holiest site -- is attacked.

"If Zionist extremists carry out their threats of invading Al-Aqsa mosque, it will enflame the region and end the truce," the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade, a militant Palestinian group, said in a statement. The group has in the past claimed responsibility for a number of terrorist attacks in Israel.

"Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa mosque are a red line that no Zionist should be able to cross," the group warned.

Israel, which captured Gaza from Egypt during the June 1967 Six-Day War, plans to begin evacuating the Strip on July 20. About 7,500 Israeli settlers have made their home in the 225-square-mile territory -- an area slightly more than twice the size of Washington, D.C. -- and where about 1.3 million Palestinians live, a majority of them in poverty.

"It will not be easy," said Ehud Olmert, Israel's deputy prime minister during a telephone conference last week, referring to the planned pullout. "It will be difficult," said Olmert, "it will be heartbreaking."

Indeed, it was not easy maintaining those settlements in the first place, where thousands of Israeli soldiers were needed to ensure the security of the Gaza settlers.

The risk of violence emanating from settlers, and their supporters, wishing to resist the evacuation exists, said Olmert. "The danger is there. We hope it will be prevented."

"One must not help evacuate settlements in the Land of Israel and give them to foreigners," declared former Chief Ashkenazi Rabbi Avraham Shapiro last week. "This contradicts the Halacha (Jewish law), the Torah, ethics, and God forbid, one must not be partner to a transgression."

Olmert's reply to those who argue that Israel is "giving part of the Land of Israel away," is that "Gaza was the base of aggression against Israel, and was never part of historic Israel. I don't remember that Gaza was part of Israel. I don't remember praying for Gaza," said Olmert.

"Even Moses took the long way to the Promised Land by avoiding going through Gaza when he guided the Jews out of Egypt," said one analyst.

Olmert, who spoke a few days before Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's visit to the United States, said that giving up the settlements was a necessity to achieve peace with the Palestinians. Olmert said he had "trust (in) the good will of Abu Mazen," referring to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas by his more familiar name.

"He is certainly different from Yasser Arafat," said the Israeli politician. "He (Abbas) wants to make peace. There is no reason to doubt him."

Not everyone in Israel agrees, or trusts, Abu Mazen as much. Olmert concedes that the Sharon government is taking a political gamble in applying such controversial policies as the withdrawal. "We have stuck our necks out politically; now is the time for the Palestinians to take risks," said Olmert.

Mahmoud Abbas is due to visit the United States possibly during the third week in April to meet with President Bush, according to a PA source. The Bush administration had in the past refused to meet with Abbas' predecessor, Arafat, accusing him of being tainted by, and supportive of terrorism. Abbas will come to Washington with a clean slate, but will leave with heavy baggage.

Olmert said he believed Abu Mazen would be forced, in the near future, to confront the "terrorist organizations." That is one issue President Bush will most likely raise with Abu Mazen when they meet.

--

(Comments may be sent to Claude@upi.com.)

Copyright © 2001-2005 United Press International

Saudis continue to battle terror

By Claude Salhani
UPI International Editor

Published 4/6/2005 1:44 PM

WASHINGTON, April 6 (UPI) -- Most analysts agree Saudi security forces have the upper hand in the kingdom's ongoing war on Islamist terrorism whose aim is the overthrow of the royal House of Saud and replace it with a strict Islamic theocracy.

While it is clear the Saudi government had made giant strides -- and enjoyed major successes in its own fight on terrorism -- the war against the pro-al-Qaida insurgency is not entirely over.

Following a fourth day of shootouts between Saudi security forces and Islamist militants, the last day being played out in the capital, Riyadh, one of the kingdom's most-wanted terrorists was killed Wednesday.

Anthony Cordesman, a national security analyst and intelligence specialist with the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, says the Saudis have been overall very successful at fighting the threat of Islamist terror.

"They have systematically been able to roll up the terror threat," Cordesman told United Press International, adding, "by and large, al-Qaida in Arabia," the Saudi branch of the pro-Osama bin-Laden terrorist network "has not been convincing."

The kingdom has done a good job, points out Cordesman, but adds the reality is that infiltrating the desert kingdom from Yemen or other borders, across thousands of miles of unguarded frontiers, is relatively easy and to do and very difficult to guard against.

The raid in Riyadh occurred hours after the end of a similar assault that lasted three days in the remote desert town of al-Ras, some 200 miles northwest of the capital. The result, according to the Saudi Interior Ministry, left 14 terrorists dead and six captured; there were 14 casualties among Saudi security forces.

The suspect killed in Wednesday's shootout was identified by the Interior Ministry as Abdul-Rahman Mohammed Mohammed Yazji, number 25 on a government list of 26 most wanted. According to Saudi government sources, Yazji's death brings to 24 the number of terrorists either killed or captured. A second militant was apprehended in the raid, but the government did not identify him.

An Islamic Internet Web site announced the death of two other militants Wednesday -- Kareem Altohami al-Mojati, a Moroccan national, and Saud Homoud Obaid al-Otaibi, a Saudi Arabian, who it says died fighting Saudi security forces.

Saudi news sources believe al-Mojati was suspected of being connected to the May 2003 suicide attack in Casablanca, Morocco, that killed 33 people.

The town of al-Ras, where the militants sought refuge, is known to harbor pro-Islamist sympathies. Its remoteness, and the fact the insurgents chose it as a base would indicate Islamists are trying to keep a low profile, preferring to remain out of the major centers, say intelligence analysts.

Indeed, the Saudis have gone on the offensive against homegrown Islamist terrorism, launching a campaign last December across the nation to reach out to its citizens. Saudi television ran short docudramas depicting Islamist terrorists trying to recruit young Saudis, interlacing them with messages of nationalism, such as military parades, and footage showing the horrors caused by terrorist acts.

Giant posters depicting bomb-damaged buildings and bloodied corpses were prominently displayed in various parts of Riyadh. During a three-day anti-terrorist conference held in the Saudi capital last February, entire front pages of local newspapers displayed pictures of victims of terrorism.

A senior Saudi official told UPI the government had recruited thousands of undercover agents, deploying them in the field, and the results were being felt.

"We are fighting terrorism, those who support it and those who condone it," said Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdulaziz at the opening session of a first Counter-Terrorism International Conference, last February.

Once one of the safest countries in the Gulf, Saudi Arabia has been shaken by a slew of bloody attacks perpetrated by pro-al-Qaida Islamist militants. The attacks left a trail of terror and blood across the country. The violence reached a crescendo last summer with multiple car bombs and assaults by armed gunmen on compounds housing foreign workers and government buildings.

Analysts believe the Saudis are making headway in their war, though the figures and results remain hazy at best. One source, speaking on condition of anonymity, told UPI that some estimates have put the number of Islamist insurgents in the kingdom at several thousands. That figure, however, could be confused with an earlier report from the London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies, which in its Strategic 2003-4 Survey cited 18,000 potential al-Qaida militants worldwide.

A Saudi official, also speaking on background, told UPI he estimated the number of al-Qaida activists and supporters did not exceed 5,000. But that would include three tiers of terrorist supporters.

The first tier who probably number in the low hundreds, are the real "crazies," the ones that blow themselves up. The second tier, possibly several hundreds, are the "spotters" those who assist in operations. They are the ones who provide logistics and services and support for the bombers. And finally in the third tier are the sympathizers, those who do not directly engage in acts of terrorism, but who might offer a terrorist a room for a night, or hold onto weapons and explosives. Their number is believes to be the highest, possible a few thousand.

It is worth recalling that at its peak in the 1970s, the Irish Republican Army counted no more than 500 militants, of which maybe 150 were extremists. The West German Baader-Meinhoff gang had even fewer militants -- by some estimates as few as 50 hardcore activists. Yet both the IRA and the Baader-Meinhoff caused havoc for years.

--

(Comments may be sent to Claude@upi.com.)

Copyright © 2001-2005 United Press International

Politics of papal legacy

BY CLAUDE SALHANI
Khaleej Times
6 April 2005

POPE John Paul II will enter history books as one of the Catholic Church’s more conservative popes, something for which many Catholics criticised him. But at the same time he will be remembered as one of the most politically proactive popes who helped change the course of history. Already a majority of American Catholics thinks he deserves to become a saint.


The pontiff worked hard to impose his conservative philosophy on the world’s more than 1.1 billion Catholics. He adopted a tough stance on morality issues and was adamantly in favour of maintaining the all-male, celibate priesthood, a point critics say contributed to the children sex abuse scandal.

The pope opposed the use of condoms, even though medical and political authorities — particularly in the developing world — tried hard to encourage their use in preventing the spread of HIV/Aids, a disease that killed more than 30 million people, and continues to kill about 8,000 people a day.

The pope opposed stem cell research, asking US President George W. Bush when the two men met in he Vatican, not to simply limit the research, but to ban it all together.

Still, John Paul II will be remembered as one of the most influential popes of our time, if not as one of the more politicised pontiffs who did not shy away from using his authority and influence, particularly in his fight against communism.

Many things differentiate this pope. He is the first Polish pope; he is the first non-Italian pope in 455 years; and unlike previous popes who largely remained in the Vatican, he became the first pope to break with rigid traditions by taking his papacy to the road. Despite his fragile health and his age Pope John Paul II was a man who seemed to have unlimited energy.

Since becoming pontiff, he made 104 pastoral visits outside Italy and 146 within the country. As Rome’s bishop he visited nearly every parish — 317 of 333.

During World War II, he worked in a quarry and then a chemical factory to avoid deportation to Nazi Germany. He began studying for the priesthood in 1942, was ordained in 1946 and eventually rose to become archbishop of Krakow in 1964 and cardinal in 1967. Following his election as pope on Oct. 16, 1978, he began the crusade against communism.

The Soviet Union long viewed the United States — and its military might — as the greatest threat to its empire. But it was John Paul II, who as pope played a major role in bringing about its demise.

In 1935 then French foreign minister Pierre Laval approached Soviet dictator Josef Stalin asking him to liberalise his views on religion, hoping to appease the church, which in turn would give the French government support from the pope in the buildup against Germany. Stalin was reported to have responded, "The pope! How many divisions has he got?" The fact that this pope did not have military divisions under his command did not stop him from defeating communism.

Less than a year after being elected to the throne of St. Peter, on June 2, 1979, the pope made his first visit back to his native Poland, then still under communist rule. In a landmark speech he told his fellow Poles, "Do not be afraid."

Polish police were given orders to prevent residents from reaching the site where the pope was to celebrate mass. Instead they helped broadcast his speech through loudhailers mounted on their patrol cars. That is believed to be the trigger that encouraged mass resistance to communism breaking the shackles of communist rule across Eastern Europe leading to the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the end of Soviet empire.

In 1983, the Pope visited Poland for a second time in defiance of martial law imposed by the pro-Moscow regime. He survived an assassination attempt two years earlier, on May 13, 1981, when Mehmet Ali Agca, a Turkish national fired three shots at the pontiff in St. Peter’s Square. The pope was hit in the abdomen, the left hand and the right arm.

It is believed that Agca was acting under orders from the Bulgarian intelligence service, who in turn were most likely obeying directives from the Soviet KGB. The Soviets were beginning to feel the pressure from the Vatican. The pope later met with his would-be killer, though details of the encounter in an Italian jail cell were never made public.

John Paul II was also the first pope to reach out to other faiths. He became the first pope to enter a Jewish house of worship when he made an impromptu visit to Rome’s main synagogue, joining Rabbi Elio Toaff in prayer. His actions helped bridge almost 2,000 years of discord between the two faiths.

He also made history as the first pope to ever visit a mosque, when he visited the Syrian capital, Damascus, in 2001 stressing the importance of Christian-Muslim understanding.

The Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations said in a statement, "Muslims worldwide respected Pope John Paul II as an advocate for justice and human rights. His message of international peace and interfaith reconciliation is one that will reverberate for decades to come."

No wonder Muslim and Jewish leaders in the Middle East have been unanimous in praising the pope for his efforts to promote peace in the region.

Claude Salhani is international editor and a political analyst with United Press International in Washington.

Politics & Policies: Lesser Arab expectations

By Claude Salhani
UPI International Editor

Published 4/5/2005 3:25 PM

WASHINGTON, April 5 (UPI) -- Once again the Arab world has been issued a report card -- and once again it has failed, trailing behind other regions. The report found the Arab world had less freedom, less democracy, and the slowness of tectonic plates in implementing reforms.

"Why, among all the regions of the world, do Arabs enjoy the least freedom?" the authors of a United Nations sponsored report ask.

The Third Arab Human Development Report published by the U.N. Development Programme, and titled "The Time Has Come: A Call for Freedom and Good Governance in the Arab World," was released Tuesday in Amman, the Jordanian capital. The results are both depressing and worrying.

The countries of the Arab world get failing grades in democracy, failing grades in freedom of the press, failing grades in freedom of speech and failing grades in movement towards political and social reforms. In some Arab countries -- the report points to Egypt, Sudan and Syria -- the state of emergency has become permanent and ongoing, while "none of the dangers warrant it."

In Cairo meanwhile, thousands of Egyptian university students demonstrated angrily against the government Tuesday, in the largest such protest yet to be staged. Egyptian students of Al Azhar University -- some of them veiled -- held up signs saying "No Emergency Law."

Islamists, liberals and nationalists, united under the umbrella of the "Kifaya" Movement, Arabic for "enough," want an end to Egypt's 24-year-old state of emergency, as well as an end to the presidency of Hosni Mubarak, who has been in power since 1981.

Continued application of so-called "Emergency Laws," and in many cases martial law, deny the citizens many constitutional rights. Basic civil rights and privileges, often taken for granted in most of the world, such as inviolability of the home, personal liberty, freedom of opinion, expression and the press, confidentiality of correspondence, rights of movement and assembly, are widely ignored across much of the Arab world.

While political stagnation generally has been the rule, some changes are creeping in. Lebanon has campaigned for the departure of Syrian forces from its territory, and Jordan's King Abdullah II Tuesday appointed a new prime minister, instructing him to speed up reforms.

In Syria, all hope for reforms now hinges on the forthcoming Baath Party regional conference, expected to take place in May or June. Rumors have it that some "very big changes" are on the way. "The biggest change Syria has seen in 50 years," report Syrian exiles.

SyriaComment.com, a usually well-informed blog site, quotes sources outside the country saying that these changes could include emptying all prisons, allowing a free press, authorizing new political parties, allowing the return of thousands of Syrian exiles and issuing Syrian passports to Kurds. Those are indeed great expectations.

The near-complete consensus among the authors of the report is "that there is a serious failing in the Arab world," the primary cause being political and not cultural reasons.

In a systematic survey of the pace of political change in the Arab world, the report, produced by an independent group of leading Arab scholars and intellectuals, found urgent need for reform.

It warns that violence could erupt unless "a rapid acceleration of democratic reform, with specific proposals for new regional human rights institutions, robust and freely elected legislatures, and truly independent judiciaries," are put into place.

The report recommends immediate steps be taken to:

-- Respect freedoms of opinion, expression and association.

-- End all types of marginalization and discrimination against social groups and minorities.

-- Guarantee the independence of the judiciary and ending reliance on military tribunals and other "exceptional" courts.

-- The end of "states of emergency" that have become permanent features of governance in the region.

In a highly critical appraisal of progress toward democratization in the Arab world, the report issues "a call for urgent corrective action." The authors warn that unless Arab governments move at a faster pace to implement reforms, they could face "chaotic" social upheaval.

The authors of the report warn, "If the repressive situation in Arab countries today continues, intensified societal conflict is likely to follow," leading to violence in "the absence of peaceful and effective mechanisms to address injustice."

The result could be "chaotic upheavals."

"There is a change in mindsets in the region," said Dr. Rima Khalaf Hunaidi, U.N. assistant Secretary-General and director of the Regional Bureau for Arab States in UNDP and the chief overseer of the Arab Human Development Reports. "We are moving with greater confidence in a new direction now, and there is a strong awareness of the irreversibility of change -- change driven by the Arab street, not change adopted from afar."

The popular movements urging political adjustment in Egypt and Lebanon are indications that the Arab world cannot continue to stand still while the rest of the world move along at an accelerated pace.

The continued usurping of power in the hands of Arab leaders, be they royalty, military dictatorship, or civilians elected without any real competition "has created a kind of political black hole at the centre of Arab political life," the authors say.

"By 21st century standards, Arab countries have not met the Arab people's aspirations for development." This status quo "is no longer sustainable."

The U.N. report cautions that if the Arabs themselves do not take real steps towards change, the global powers will step in and lead the process of reform from outside.

"Arab countries cannot ignore the fact that the world, especially the powerful players in the global arena, will continue to safeguard their interests in the region, the report stated.

--

(Comments may be sent to Claude@upi.com.)

Copyright © 2001-2005 United Press International