Archives: Articles

By William Blum

02 November, 2012

@ Killinghope.org

The Southeast Asian country of Laos in the late 1950s and early 60s was a complex and confusing patchwork of civil conflicts, changes of government and switching loyalties. The CIA and the State Department alone could take credit for engineering coups at least once in each of the years 1958, 1959 and 1960. No study of Laos of this period appears to have had notable success in untangling the muddle of who exactly replaced whom, and when, and how, and why. After returning from Laos in 1961, American writer Norman Cousins stated that “if you want to get a sense of the universe unraveling, come to Laos. Complexity such as this has to be respected.” 1

Syria 2012 has produced its own tangled complexity. In the past 18 months it appears that at one time or another virtually every nation in the Middle East and North Africa as well as members of NATO and the European Union has been reported as aiding those seeking to overthrow the regime of Bashar al-Assad, while Russia, China, and several other countries are reported as aiding Assad. The Syrian leader, for his part, has consistently referred to those in combat against him as “terrorists”, citing the repeated use of car bombs and suicide bombers. The West has treated this accusation with scorn, or has simply ignored it. But the evidence that Assad has had good reason for his stance has been accumulating for some time now, particularly of late. Here is a small sample from recent months:

>> “It is the sort of image that has become a staple of the Syrian revolution, a video of masked men calling themselves the Free Syrian Army and brandishing AK-47s — with one unsettling difference. In the background hang two flags of Al Qaeda, white Arabic writing on a black field … The video, posted on YouTube, is one more bit of evidence that Al Qaeda and other Islamic extremists are doing their best to hijack the Syrian revolution.” (New York Times, July 24, 2012)

>> A leading German newspaper reported that the German intelligence service, BND, had concluded that 95% of the Syrian rebels come from abroad and are likely to be members of al Qaeda. (Die Welt, September 30, 2012)

>> “A network of French Islamists behind a grenade attack on a kosher market outside Paris last month also planned to join jihadists fighting in Syria … Two suspects were responsible for recruiting and dispatching people ‘to carry out jihad in some countries – notably Syria’,” a state prosecutor said. (Associated Press, October 11, 2012)

>> “Fighters from a shadowy militant group [Jabhat al-Nusra] with suspected links to al-Qaida joined Syrian rebels in seizing a government missile defense base in northern Syria on Friday, according to activists and amateur video. …The videos show dozens of fighters inside the base near a radar tower, along with rows of large missiles, some on the backs of trucks.” (Associated Press, October 12, 2012)

>> “In a videotape posted this week on militant forums, the Egyptian-born jihadist Ayman al-Zawahiri … urged support for Syria’s uprisings.” (Associated Press, October 28, 2012)

According to your favorite news source or commentator, President Assad is either a brutal murderer of his own people, amongst whom he has had very little support; or he’s a hero who’s long had the backing of the majority of the Syrian population and who is standing up to Western imperialists and their terrorist comrades-in-arms, whom the US is providing military aid, intelligence, and propaganda services.

Washington and its freedom fighters de jour would like to establish Libya II. And we all know how well Libya I has turned out.

Of backward nations and modern nations

Page one of the October 24 Washington Post contained a prominent photo of a man chained to a concrete wall at a shrine in Afghanistan. The accompanying story told us that the man was mentally ill and that “legend has it that those with mental disorders will be healed after spending 40 days in one of the shrine’s 16 tiny concrete cells”, living “on a subsistence diet of bread, water and black pepper.” Every year hundreds of Afghans bring mentally ill relatives to the shrine for this “cure”.

Immediately to the right of this story, constituting the paper’s lead story of the day, we learn that the United States is planning to continue its policy of assassinating individuals, via drone attacks, for the foreseeable future. This is Washington’s “cure” for the mental illness of not believing that America is the savior of mankind, bringing democracy, freedom and happiness to all. (The article adds that the number of “militants and civilians” killed in the drone campaign over the past 10 years will soon exceed 3,000 by some estimates, surpassing the number of people killed on September 11.)

Undoubtedly there are many people in Afghanistan, high and low, who know that their ancient cure is nonsense, but the chainings have continued for centuries. Just as certain, there are American officials who know the same about their own cure. Here’s a senior American official: “We can’t possibly kill everyone who wants to harm us. … We’re not going to wind up in 10 years in a world of everybody holding hands and saying, ‘We love America’.” Yet , we are told, “Among senior Obama administration officials, there is a broad consensus that such operations are likely to be extended at least another decade. Given the way al-Qaeda continues to metastasize, some officials said no clear end is in sight.”

We can also be confident that there have been people chained to the wall in Afghanistan who were not particularly mentally ill to begin with but became so because of the cure. And just as certain, there have been numerous people in several countries who were not anti-American until a drone devastated their village, family or neighbors.

The Post article also reported that Adm. Mike Mullen, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, returned from Pakistan a while ago and recounted a heated confrontation with his counterpart, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani. “Mullen told White House and counterterrorism officials that the Pakistani military chief had demanded an answer to a seemingly reasonable question: After hundreds of drone strikes, how could the United States possibly still be working its way through a ‘top 20′ list?”

American officials defended the arrangement even while acknowledging an erosion in the caliber of operatives placed in the drones’ cross hairs. “Is the person currently Number 4 as good as the Number 4 seven years ago? Probably not,” said a former senior U.S. counterterrorism official. “But it doesn’t mean he’s not dangerous.” The Post added this comment: “Internal doubts about the effectiveness of the drone campaign are almost nonexistent.”

The next day we could read in the Post: “There is ample evidence in Pakistan that the more than 300 [drone] strikes launched under Obama have helped turn the vast majority of the population vehemently against the United States.”

Wake up and smell the bullshit. Then go vote

After the second presidential debate in early October, Luke Rudkowski of the media group We Are Change asked Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the chair of the Democratic National Committee, about President Obama’s widely reported “kill list” of Americans and foreigners who can be assassinated without charge or trial.

Luke Rudkowski: “If President Romney becomes president, he’s going to inherit President Barack Obama’s secret ‘kill list’? This is going to be debated. How do you think Romney will handle this ‘kill list,’ and are you comfortable with him having a ‘kill list’?”

Debbie Wasserman Schultz: “I have no idea what you’re talking about.”

Luke Rudkowski: “Obama has a secret ‘kill list’ which he has used to assassinate different people all over the world.”

Debbie Wasserman Schultz: “I’m happy to answer any serious questions you have.”

Luke Rudkowski: “Why is that not serious?”

Debbie Wasserman Schultz: “Because I have no idea what you’re talking about.”

Luke Rudkowski: “Of course you don’t.”

The existence of the U.S. ‘kill list’ has been publicly known for nearly two years and was the subject of a 6,000-word exposé in the New York Times in May.

At the same event, Sierra Adamson of We Are Change asked former White House Press Secretary and current Obama campaign adviser Robert Gibbs about the U.S. killing of Abdulrahman Awlaki, the teenage son of Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen.

Sierra Adamson: “Do you think that the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki’s 16-year-old son, who was an American citizen, is justifiable?”

Robert Gibbs: “I’m not going to get into Anwar al-Awlaki’s son. I know that Anwar al-Awlaki renounced his citizenship.”

Sierra Adamson: “His son was still an American citizen.”

Robert Gibbs: “Did great harm to people in this country and was a regional al-Qaeda commander hoping to inflict harm and destruction on people that share his religion and others in this country. And…”

Sierra Adamson: “That’s an American citizen that’s being targeted without due process of law, without trial. And he’s underage. He’s a minor.”

Robert Gibbs: “I would suggest that you should have a far more responsible father. If they’re truly concerned about the well-being of their children, I don’t think becoming an al-Qaeda jihadist terrorist is the best way to go about doing your business.” 2

To demonstrate that the bullshit is bipartisan, we now present Mr. Mitt Romney, speaking during the presidential foreign policy debate: “Syria is Iran’s only ally in the Arab world. It’s their route to the sea. It’s the route for them to arm Hezbollah in Lebanon, which threatens, of course, our ally, Israel.”

However, a look at a map reveals firstly that Iran does not share a border with Syria; there’s something called Iraq in between; and secondly that Iran already has access to the sea on both its north and south; actually about 1100 miles of coastline. Romney has made this particular blunder repeatedly, and the Washington Post has pointed it out on several occasions. Post columnist Al Kamen recently wrote: “We tried so hard back in February to get Romney to stop saying that.” 3

Of course, neither Obama nor the debate moderator pointed out Romney’s errors.

The sanctity of life

“I’m as pro-life as a person gets,” Congressman Paul Ryan, the Republican candidate for vice-president, told the conservative Weekly Standard in 2010. 4

How nice. Yet the man supports all of America’s wars, each of which takes the lives of large numbers of people, both American and foreign; and he’s opposed to national health insurance, which would save countless more lives. The good congressman is also an avid hunter and supporter of gun-owners’ rights, so he apparently is not too pro-life concerning other creatures of God’s Kingdom. Of course, what Ryan actually means by “life” is an embryo or fetus, perhaps even a zygote. Oh wait, that’s not all of it – corporations are also people whose lives Ryan cherishes.

The fate of those who do not love the empire

On October 7 Hugo Chávez won his fourth term in office as president of Venezuela. The feeling of frustration that must have descended upon the Venezuelan and American power elite is likely reminiscent of Chile, March 1973, when the party of another socialist and American bête noire, Salvador Allende — despite the best intentions and dollars without end of the CIA — won about 44 percent of the vote in congressional elections, compared to some 36 percent in 1970. It was said to be the largest increase an incumbent party had ever received in Chile after being in power more than two years. The opposition parties had publicly expressed their optimism about capturing two-thirds of the congressional seats and thus being able to impeach Allende. Now they faced three more years under him, with the prospect of being unable, despite their most underhanded efforts, to prevent his popularity from increasing even further.

During the spring and summer the Agency’s destabilization process escalated. There was a whole series of demonstrations and strikes, with a particularly long one by the truckers. Time magazine reported: “While most of the country survived on short rations, the truckers seemed unusually well equipped for a lengthy holdout.” A reporter asked a group of truckers who were camping and dining on “a lavish communal meal of steak, vegetables, wine and empanadas” where the money for it came from. “From the CIA,” they answered laughingly. 5

There was as well daily sabotage and violence, including assassination. In June, an abortive attack upon the Presidential Palace was carried out by the military and the ultra-right Patria y Libertad.

In September the military prevailed. “It is clear,” said the later US Senate investigating committee, “the CIA received intelligence reports on the coup planning of the group which carried out the successful September 11 coup throughout the months of July, August, and September 1973.” 6 The United States had also prepared the way for the military action through its economic intervention and support of the anti-Allende media.

Chávez has already been overthrown once in a coup that the United States choreographed, in 2002, but a combination of some loyal military officers and Chávez’s followers in the streets combined for a remarkable reversal of the coup after but two days. The Venezuelan opposition will not again make the mistake of not finishing Chávez off when they have him in their custody.

Both Hugo Chávez and Salvador Allende had sinned by creating “nationalistic” regimes that served the wrong “national interest”. The hatred felt by the power elite for such men is intense. The day after the legally and democratically elected Venezuelan leader was ousted, but before being restored to power, the New York Times (April 13, 2002) was moved to pen the following editorial:

“With yesterday’s resignation [what the coup leaders called it] of President Hugo Chávez, Venezuelan democracy is no longer threatened by a would-be dictator. Mr. Chávez, a ruinous demagogue, stepped down after the military intervened and handed power to a respected business leader.”

It should be noted that the “respected business leader”, Pedro Carmona, quickly dissolved the National Assembly and the Supreme Court, and annulled the Venezuelan constitution.

And keep in mind that in the United States the New York Times is widely regarded as a “liberal” newspaper; most conservatives would say “very liberal”, if not “socialist”.

Notes

1. William Blum, Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II, chapter 21 ↩

2. Democracy Now, October 25, 2012 ↩

3. Washington Post, October 24, 2012, column by Al Kamen ↩

4. New York Times, August 12, 2012 ↩

5. Time, September 24, 1973, p.46 ↩

6. Covert Action in Chile, 1963‑1973, a Staff Report of The Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities (US Senate) December 18, 1975, p.39 ↩

–

William Blum is the author of:

>> Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War 2

>> Rogue State: A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower

>> West-Bloc Dissident: A Cold War Memoir

>> Freeing the World to Death: Essays on the American Empire

Portions of the books can be read, and signed copies purchased, at www.killinghope.org

Previous Anti-Empire Reports can be read at this website.

Email: bblum6 [at] aol.com

By Memed Boran

02 November, 2012

@ Hevallo Blog

This blog post was originally written on 15, October , on the 33rd day of the hunger strike

On 12th September 2012, nine women prisoners in Diyarbakir E type prison began an indefinite hunger-strike. In the statement they made via lawyers they highlighted two demands: the right to use their Kurdish mother tongue in the public sphere, including court and the removal of obstacles preventing imprisoned Kurdish leader Abdullah Ocalan from negotiating in peace talks with the Turkish state. Soon after, many other inmates, men and women, from prisons in every corner of Turkey began joining the hunger-strike; sometimes in groups and in certain prisons individually. Now there are 380 prisoners in 39 prisons who are on what has surpassed a hunger-strike and become a ‘death fast.’ This is their 33rd day.

12th September is an infamous day in Turkey’s history; the military coup that took place on this day in 1980 is representative of all that the ‘others’ of Turkey have had to suffer at the hands of the state. The 1980 military coup which opened the path for the Islamist cadres who now lead the AKP government, detained over a million people, imprisoned and tortured tens of thousands, carried out capital punishment on hundreds and pulled a black shroud over the whole of the country. Of course the victims of these inhumane practices were the Kurdish and Socialist Revolutionaries demanding national rights, democracy and independence – just like today.

The aim of the military coup was to silence the opposition and create a monolithic society in Turkey and Kurdistan using any means necessary; and the state was almost successful if it hadn’t been for the resistance of the Kurdish and Turkish cadres of the modern Kurdish Freedom Movement which in those days had recently been founded. It is an irony that these cadres were also imprisoned in Diyarbakir prison when on 14th July 1982 they began what is now termed as the ‘Great Death Fast Resistance’ in protest against the prevention of the right to defence, torture and inhumane prison conditions. The leaders of that ‘death fast’; Kemal Pir, M. Hayri Durmus, Ali Cicek and Akif Yilmaz all lost their lives. But this single event stoked the fire that had been lit by the likes of Mazlum Dogan. Necmi Oner, Ferhat Kurtay, Esref Anyik and Mahmut Zengin who had immolated themselves, and burnt to smithereens the shroud that had been pulled over the people, raising the Kurdish resistance against the Turkish state.

How similar it is today. The AKP regime, like its military counterpart has detained tens of thousands of Kurdish politicians, journalists, health-workers, lawyers, human rights activists and children, imprisoning almost ten thousand since 2009, when the witch-hunt known as the KCK (The Union of Communities in Kurdistan) trials began. It is ironic that almost all these people are members of the legal Peace & Democracy Party (BDP), the AKP’s most fierce and only opposition in the Kurdish areas of Turkey. And that not a single fire-arm, weapon or anything pertaining to terrorist activity was found or discovered about these people who have been in prison for almost four years without sentencing is further proof that the AKP is behind the ‘hostage’ situation. Because with only small changes in the constitution the AKP could bring an end to the unnecessary suffering of these people and their families. However while this grave injustice hangs over the nation like a dark cloud Turkey’s Prime Minister has made ‘one language, one state, one nation’ his favourite slogan, saying that there is no longer a Kurdish issue in Turkey. The AKP dominated Turkish media have followed suit and are not even reporting the clashes between the PKK and Turkish army anymore. Furthermore and to the utter horror of Kurds and democratic circles there is yet to be even a single news item about the ‘death fast’ on mainstream Turkish TV. There is a total black-out regarding all matters Kurdish.

Besime Konca, the chair of the BDP’s women parliament before her imprisonment, and one of the nine who began the ‘death fast’ in Diyarbakir prison has spent 16 of her 38 year life behind bars because of her political activities. In her last meeting with family she told them: ‘ Behind these cold walls we have nothing to sacrifice but our bodies, and we will not refrain from doing this for the freedom of our people and a peaceful solution to the Kurdish issue. Our morale is soaring, we are strong and cannot be defeated by the enemies of democracy and an honourable life.’

As I write this, another statement has been made from prison by Deniz Kaya, the spokesman for prisoners sentenced in PKK (Kurdistan Worker’s Party) and PAJK (Free Women’s Party of Kurdistan) cases. In it he says:

‘From 15th October onwards all PKK and PAJK inmates inTurkey and Kurdistan’s prisons will join in the indefinite hunger-strike. Rather than respond to the demands of people on hunger-strike, the AKP government has attacked prisoners with solitary confinement, disciplinary action and physical torture. There are prisoners who have internal bleeding and are being forced to treatment. If the AKP think they can deter us, they are mistaken, we will not give up our freedom. If there is a price to pay we will pay it, if there is torture we will persist, if there is suppression we will resist, if there is solitary confinement then so be it!

At a time time when our leader Abdullah Ocalan is in intensified solitary confinement and his life is under threat; when our people are attacked and tortured physically, politically and culturally by the racist regime’s military and police, all we have to protect them are our naked bodies. We will not hear the voices of anybody except our leader and movement. We will not heed any calls for us to end the hunger-strikes until our demands are met, the ban on Kurdish is lifted and the path to the freedom of our leader opened.

We are appealing to our people and all revolutionary and democratic public opinion to join in an indefinite act of solidarity and continual period of action to realise the freedom and democratic unity of our people. We are also calling on all sensitive political parties, MPs in parliament, non-governmental and human rights organisations: hear our cries. The people of Kurdistan are under the threat of genocide, our comrades in prison are on the threshold of death, our leader is under savage torture and Kurdistan has been turned into Vietnam.’

Millions of Kurds around the world today are hoping that these ‘death fasts’ do not end in loss. But their voices are going unheard outside Turkey and Kurdistan and Kurdish communities in Europe. Kurds need the support of all individuals, human rights and non-governmental organisations, professional circles, political parties and governments. Everyone can do something to stop these deaths.

What can you do?

By Afro-Middle East Centre

November 2012

The past few weeks have witnessed a convergence of several important issues facing post-uprising Egypt: new Egyptian president Muhammad Mursi’s opportunism in his attempt to reform the judiciary (as he was able to do with the military), the lack of accountability of those responsible for human rights abuses, post-conflict justice and the outstanding new constitution. This has culminated in a battle for the independence of a judiciary that is one of the last bastions of the old regime.

Mursi’s presidency is founded, at a time of uncertain transition, on tenuous popular legitimacy. He must fulfil the demands made during the uprisings while maintaining a broad-based popular legitimacy. One such call was to hold accountable members of the former government, the military and state police for the brutality and human rights abuses that occurred during the uprising. In its report ‘Brutality Unpunished and Unchecked’, Amnesty International concludes that the army used excessive force in the three incidents it studied: the Maspero protest in October 2011, the ‘Cabinet Offices’ events in late 2011 and the Abasseya sit-in. This includes well known incidents such as the woman whose underwear was exposed as policemen dragged her by her hair during the December 2011 protests, a scene that was captured in a video that went viral. Amnesty’s report shows that security forces tortured male and female protesters using beatings, electric shocks, sexual threats and sexual abuse. And worse, the report concludes that victims of these abuses are still waiting for justice and legal remedy.

The president has emphasised that Egypt will chart its own path on international relations, prioritising the country’s national interests. His overall goal appears to be reassertion of Egypt as a regional and global power. He has already pursued several bilateral meetings to bolster Egypt’s international legitimacy.

Mursi has built or strengthened relations with Iran and China on the one hand and the USA on the other; and both Hamas and Israel. In his attempt to reestablish Egypt’s role as a regional powerhouse, he criticised the Syrian regime while conducting bilateral talks with Iran, a key Syria supporter. In August, during his speech at the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) summit in Tehran, Mursi said Egypt was willing to assist and support Iran if it would cease its unconditional support of the Syrian regime and would participate in finding a diplomatic solution to the Syrian crisis. While

2

Mursi’s attempt at pulling together key states to find a diplomatic solution (the ‘Islamic Quartet’) has fallen by the wayside, it remains an example of his push for Egypt to regain its regional influence.

Where many had expected Mursi to be naive and uncharismatic, he has proven adept and has already been able to secure important economic support and financial aid from Qatar and Turkey. Abroad, he risked offending Iran in his criticism of Syria, but was able to enhance perceptions of himself and Egypt as a regional leader, thus increasing his support and popularity at home.

Constitutional crisis and the judiciary fights back

Mursi’s greatest domestic political feat was his reversal of the 18 June 2012 Constitutional Addendum issued by the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) which sought to deprive the new president of full presidential executive powers, including the role of commander-in-chief of the armed forces. With its addendum, SCAF had sought to resist civilian oversight of the military. Although plans are in place, no date has been set for the re-election of parliament after its dissolution by SCAF. The elections, when they occur, will further cement Mursi’s legitimacy as leader of a new democratic Egypt. New parliamentary elections are to be conducted sixty days after the approval of a new constitution via public referendum.

Herein lays the problem. The process of formulating a new constitution has been marred by the politics of the constituent assembly itself. Around forty court cases have been brought against the assembly since the elected parliament was dissolved by SCAF and the judiciary, just prior to Mursi taking office. These were mainly accusations of the constituent assembly being unrepresentative and unbalanced. The composition of the assembly had originally mirrored that of the elected parliament and was dominated by Islamists – the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafi al-Nour party. That first assembly was dissolved by the Supreme Administrative Court in April for having included members of parliament, who are themselves responsible for electing the constituent assembly. An agreement was reached on 7 June 2012 between Islamist and non-Islamist parties on the membership ratio for the assembly, and this was followed by the election of the second constituent assembly. It had been decided that Islamists would hold only fifty per cent of constituent assembly seats. This saw al-Nour forfeiting its twenty per cent of the total Islamist majority of seventy per cent.

While the legality of the second assembly is still being battled in the courts as it again included members of parliament, it has been under pressure to release a draft constitution and avoid further delays. The assembly did release a partial draft of the new constitution on 10 October. The draft was, however, greeted with scepticism as the extracts did not include clauses dealing with the role of

3

Islam, the military and the judiciary. A media frenzy ensued when supposed ‘leaked’ clauses revealed that the constitution would limit the power of the judiciary. There was a fierce reaction from the judicial bureaucracy that resulted in a grand showdown between Mursi and this old-regime institution.

Worsening matters, the prosecutor general, Abdel Meguid Mahmoud, failed to convict twenty-four prime suspects accused of involvement in the ‘Battle of the Camel’, the February 2011 attack on protesters in Cairo ordered by high profile figures from former president Hosni Mubarak’s National Democratic Party. The judges ruled there was a lack of evidence and said there was only one credible witness despite much anecdotal testimony. This followed a string of acquittals in cases against those accused of killing unarmed protesters during the uprisings.

Mursi knows these acquittals can have serious political consequences and are a show of strength by the judiciary, a reminder of the legacy of the previous regime. To counter a possible backlash from the general populace, he issued a decree to pardon all political prisoners detained ‘for all felony and misdemeanour convictions or attempted crimes committed to support the revolution and the fulfilment of its goals’. However, anger over the acquittals overshadowed Mursi’s attempts to fulfil the people’s demand for justice. He tried to remedy the situation by firing Mahmoud and appointing him ambassador to the Vatican. The president’s response, however, lacked legal or popular authority and he was forced to back down and ‘politely ask’ the prosecutor to resign. The move, however, became another in a series of allegations that Mursi is abusing his power.

Neither East nor West

Mursi’s first official visit outside the region was to Beijing at the end of August. He hoped to sign cooperation agreements and discuss regional and international issues of mutual interest with China. This included trade between the two countries which has increased dramatically in the last four years. From Beijing he went to Tehran for the opening of the NAM summit, arriving with the large delegation of business people that had accompanied him to China.

Mursi’s recent diplomatic efforts point to a multi-polar foreign policy. His spokesperson, Yasser Ali, said the president planned to visit Malaysia and Brazil among other Asian and South American countries. He also has Africa high on his agenda for foreign visits and a visit to South Africa could be in the pipeline. The shift towards Africa is significant: Mursi recognises a potential role for Egypt on the continent. His speech at the recent UN General Assembly meeting was indicative of this. In it, he spoke at length on the conflict between Sudan and South Sudan and claimed an African identity for

4

Egypt. He also mentioned the Somali conflict, especially significant since Egypt has been appointed to the African Union’s Peace and Security Council. Mursi’s enthusiasm for participating in African Union (AU) meetings is a sharp departure from his predecessor’s tradition; Mubarak had refused to attend any AU meetings after an assassination attempt on him in Addis Ababa in 1995.

One of Mursi’s very first visits was to Ethiopia as the head of the Egyptian delegation to the AU summit in July. Ethiopia provides Egypt with its largest share of Nile water, although the former has recently been contesting this share. Egypt receives the majority of its Nile stream flow from the Blue Nile which it needs for agriculture, municipal and industrial purposes. However, Ethiopia, one of the key upstream riparians of the Nile, is planning to develop its water sources, to help provide food, energy and jobs to the Ethiopian population, many of whom live in poverty. Egypt believes Ethiopia’s Renaissance Dam project along the Blue Nile, the central project in Ethiopia’s new water plan, would be at the expense of its water flow. This has led to the Nile Tripartite Commission (comprised of Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan) study on the impact the dam will have along the Nile River. This week the International Panel of Experts (IPoE), which consists of six experts from Ethiopia, Egypt and Sudan, and four international experts, reported that it has found no evidence that the dam project will negatively impact on downstream countries, Egypt and Sudan.

The final findings on the impact of the controversial project will be submitted to the relevant governments in under nine months. Ethiopia launched the construction of the Renaissance Dam after Ethiopia, Uganda, Rwanda, Tanzania and Kenya, and later Burundi, signed the Entebbe agreement in April 2010, partly to undo colonial-era agreements which gave countries such as Egypt an advantage over Nile water. Among Mursi’s priorities is to resolve the matter with other countries along the Nile and to secure its water flow for Egypt. In early October he visited Uganda’s capital Kampala to take part in the country’s fiftieth anniversary celebrations. No doubt the talks between Mursi and the Ugandans included issues related to the Nile Basin region. Egypt’s new prime minister, Hesham Qandil, is expected to visit South Sudan, indicating an increased focus on resolving the Nile water issue and establishing stronger links on the continent.

Mursi’s aides have emphasised that foreign policy expansion to the east and the south will not undermine already-established commitments that Egypt has towards the USA and other western allies. His first visit to the USA took place end September when he attended the opening of the UN General Assembly session in New York. While many expected him to prioritise a visit to the USA given Egypt’s dependence on US aid (including 1.3 million dollars annually in military aid) and trade, this was not so. Among other strategic reasons, a visit to Washington after US Secretary of State Hilary

5

Clinton was given a hostile reception in Cairo by protesting crowds a month earlier would have been a domestic public relations disaster for Mursi. Beyond this, two other issues are relevant to Egypt’s relations with the USA: Iran and Israel.

Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood – Mursi’s ideological home – has long had relations with Iran. His participation in the NAM summit marked the first visit by an Egyptian president to Iran since that country’s 1979 Islamic Revolution when diplomatic ties between the two countries were severed. Mursi offered to mediate to improve relations between Iran and the Gulf states that have long viewed Iran with suspicion and whose fears have deepened because of Iran’s nuclear programme.

Regarding Israel, Mursi has repeatedly said he will uphold international agreements entered into by the previous Egyptian regime, including the Camp David peace agreement with Israel. However, he has also repeatedly indicated that the terms of the agreement were disadvantageous to Egypt and that Israel had failed to meet its obligations under the agreement. This has been interpreted as a warning that it might be up for renegotiation, a cause for anxiety among the Israelis.

While security coordination with Israel in the Sinai and border areas as well as the main terms of the agreement will likely be maintained in the long term, the Egyptian president has also declared that Egypt and other Arab states were responsible for the restoration of Palestinian rights and statehood. He emphasised at the last Arab League meeting that diplomatic changes backed by popular sentiment will lead to real political action, and that this was the key to restoring Palestinian rights. He also pledged support for Palestine’s bid for membership at the UN.

Populist rhetoric against Israel may continue, but it is unlikely to impact too severely on diplomatic relations between the countries, as both have much to lose. Most interesting is that the Brotherhood has traditionally taken an anti-Israeli position and, in light of Mursi’s democratic election, he has emphasised that his pro-Palestinian policy was representative of the will of the Egyptian people.

While Mubarak preferred good relations with Palestinian group Fatah, the Islamist Hamas has the ear of the Muslim Brotherhood, a movement from which it originates. Although joint Israeli-Egyptian campaigns to secure the Sinai region have included the destruction of tunnels connecting Gaza to the Sinai – which have provided routes for goods, people, food, medical aid and weapons for years – Hamas has been uncharacteristically silent on the matter. This can be explained by Hamas’ relative contentment with the consolidation of power – including military authority – in Mursi’s favour.

6

Arab solutions for Arab problems

Egypt’s diplomatic actions thus far indicate the return of a more regionally involved, pan-Arab and pan-Islamic Egypt. The key initiative in this regard is Mursi’s ‘Islamic Quartet’, a group of Muslim countries that was to take the lead in resolving the Syrian crisis. The initiative sought to bring together Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Egypt – all supporters of the Syrian rebellion – with Syria’s main regional ally, Iran.

Egypt tried to entice Iran to join the Quartet by promising full restoration of diplomatic ties and has even dangled the carrot of possible purchases of Iranian oil. This would potentially address Egypt’s recent fuel shortages sparked by its dwindling foreign currency reserves and lowered credit ratings. Mursi also offered a ‘safe exit’ for Syrian president Bashar al-Asad, his family and members of his inner circle. However, Saudi Arabia avoided attending the Quartet meetings and the initiative has effectively failed.

Mursi knows all too well that the key to regional stability and leadership depends on uniting the region against foreign interference. Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states are major backers of the Egyptian economy through state and private sector investments. However, they have been wary of the Tunisian and Egyptian uprisings and the risk that these may inspire uprisings in their own states, threatening their long-standing monarchical rule. Relations with Saudi Arabia, which the Brotherhood has historically criticised on the basis of ideological differences, are complicated. Egypt’s taking a lead on the Quartet has not been received well by Saudi Arabia and has increased tension between the two states. Since taking office on 30 June, Mursi has twice visited Saudi Arabia, first for a bilateral visit, and then for an Organisation for Islamic Cooperation summit on Syria.

New alliance with Turkey

The war across Turkey’s border and Egypt’s political and economic crises have brought the two states together. They hope to build an alliance that could lead to a significant geopolitical shift in the region, rooted in political Islam. Recently, Egypt and Turkey discussed lifting visa restrictions and completed joint naval exercises in the Mediterranean in early October. A broader partnership across other sectors will probably be discussed during an upcoming visit to Cairo by Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Turkey needs partnerships with Arab states after its troubles with Syria, and Egypt’s reassertion in the region would be boosted by an alliance with rising hegemon Turkey.

At the end of September, Mursi signed a deal to borrow one billion dollars from Turkey, half of the aid that the latter had promised to Egypt earlier this year. He has spoken frequently of strong

7

regional policy ties with Turkey and praised Turkey for being the first country to support the Egyptian revolution. While the FJP has made it clear it is not looking to Turkey’s ruling AKP as a political model, it will consider learning from the Turkish party’s success in building a regional economic powerhouse which has delivered strong economic growth.

Conclusion

It is clear that the Muslim Brotherhood is more pragmatic and cautious than many had assumed. Mursi has successfully challenged assumptions about Egypt’s foreign policy. His initiation of the ‘Islamic Quartet’, his commitment to uphold the Camp David agreement with Israel and his decisive declarations in support of the Palestinians are, at the very least, audacious. He has been able to clear a path for Egypt’s return to dominance and leadership in the region and globally.

Domestically, the four-month old president has established a powerful, politically pragmatic reputation and has begun actively seeking solutions to Egypt’s socio-economic crisis. He also inserted a new, younger, level of leadership in the military. His rising popularity, increasing financial support from other regional powers and Egypt’s new direction on foreign affairs should not be ignored in light of recent industrial action by workers from various sectors or troubles with the judiciary. Indeed, Mursi remains under pressure to perform a miraculous transformation in the lives of ordinary working class Egyptians, an unrealistic election-time pledge that he has been unable to deliver in his first 100 days in power.

The Brotherhood is politically savvy and pragmatic, as evidenced by events of the last two years, and with numerous competing interests, they may be the only means of ensuring stability and progress in Egypt, particularly with post-uprising expectations of immediate political and socio-economic change. During the formation of the first constituent assembly in April and the dissolution of parliament in June by SCAF, the courts revealed themselves as political actors in Egypt’s transition. With no oversight from an elected parliament, an already controversial new draft constitution and continued, or rather increasing, pressure from the population for justice in the case of human rights abuses during the uprisings, Mursi finds himself in a tricky position. The current showdown between the judiciary and Mursi will be a test of his political power and will determine the nature of Egypt’s democracy in which an independent judiciary is vital.

By Bill Van Auken

02 November, 2012

@ WSWS.org

Speaking in Zagreb, Croatia on Wednesday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced that Washington is reorganizing the front representing the so-called “rebels” in Syria. The shakeup, which includes the withdrawal of US support from the Syrian National Council, is evidently part of the preparations for a more direct US intervention once next Tuesday’s presidential election is over.

Responding to a question about US policy in Syria, Clinton dismissed efforts by United Nations Special Envoy Lakhdar Brahimi, declaring that the US “cannot and will not wait” for the UN to broker a political solution to the war in Syria. Instead, Washington will unilaterally seek to escalate that war with the aim of effecting regime-change and installing a puppet government aligned with US interests in the Middle East.

Clinton went on to describe US efforts to “groom” a new leadership to serve as a front for Washington’s neocolonial project. She allowed that the American government had “facilitated the smuggling-out of a few representatives of the Syrian internal opposition” so that they could appear before representatives of the so-called Friends of Syria, comprised of the US and its allies.

The US Secretary of State treated the Syrian National Council, which only last December she had hailed as the “leading and legitimate representative of Syrians seeking a peaceful democratic transition,” with unconcealed contempt. Syria’s opposition, she proclaimed, could not consist of people who have “not been inside Syria for 20, 30 or 40 years.” Instead, it would have to consist of “those who are on the front lines, fighting and dying today to obtain their freedom.”

This public jettisoning of the front group that Clinton had so recently promoted as the salvation of the Syrian people for an as yet unidentified assemblage of new “revolutionaries”—hand-picked by the US State Department—constitutes an admission of the failure of US policy thus far in Syria.

Clearly, Washington had anticipated that its policy of covertly arming and funding armed militia groups in Syria, with the collaboration of Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar, would have toppled the government of President Bashar al-Assad by now. What has become evident is that large sections of the Syrian population, while hostile to the Assad regime, are even more opposed to and fearful of the so-called rebels, a conglomeration of armed groups that has become ever-more dominated by Islamist jihadist elements, in many cases linked to Al Qaeda, and Sunni sectarian groups.

Clinton’s statements were made in preparation for a conference to be convened in Doha, Qatar next week, where the new opposition council is to be formally constituted under the tutelage of Washington and the former US Ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford. He has been directly involved in identifying and selecting “revolutionaries” who appear likely to toe the US line.

“We have recommended names and organizations that we believe should be included in any leadership structure,” Clinton told the news conference in Zagreb. “We’ve made it clear that the SNC can no longer be viewed as the visible leader of the opposition. They can be part of a larger opposition, but that opposition must include people from inside Syria and others who have a legitimate voice that needs to be heard.”

It is difficult to overstate the cynicism and brazenness of the US Secretary of State’s approach. Having previously anointed the SNC as the “legitimate” representative of the Syrian people, she now decrees that they are no longer serviceable as the “visible leader” of the opposition. In other words, a new public Syrian face for US imperialist intervention is needed, and Washington has handpicked the individuals who will make it up.

No doubt, this is dictated in part by the identification of the leadership of the SNC with the Syrian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood and US concerns that within Syria this only strengthens the hostility of those who see the bid to overthrow the Assad government as a sectarian-based war backed by Washington.

While the SNC leaders would still get a piece of the action—perhaps a third of the leadership—under Washington’s new arrangement, they would have to cede formal control to the new front, including those with “a legitimate voice that needs to be heard.” What Syrian voices are “legitimate” is to be determined by the US State Department, which, no doubt, will want to see a collection of Alawite, Shia, Kurdish and Christian “assets” brought on board.

The SNC itself, however, has rejected the US plan, calling its own conference in Doha in the immediate run-up to the US-sponsored meeting and indicating that it is prepared to fight to preserve its franchise as the “legitimate” opposition backed by the imperialist powers and the Sunni Muslim regimes in Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar. Where these regimes, which have their own interests in the Syrian civil war, will line up is not altogether clear, and it has been reported that Turkey and Qatar still support the SNC.

There is every possibility that the gathering being organized in Doha will turn into an internecine free-for-all, much like a similar conference convened in Cairo last June, where delegates ended up throwing fists and furniture at each other.

“We also need an opposition that will be on record strongly resisting the efforts by extremists to hijack the Syrian revolution,” Clinton told Wednesday’s news conference. Again, the question is what kind of opposition “we,” meaning Washington and its imperialist allies, need, not what the Syrian people want.

In any case, such a formal disassociation from “extremism” and cosmetic change in the exile leaders posing as a government-in-waiting will hardly shift the sectarian lineup of the ongoing civil war. The CIA, which is orchestrating the funneling of weapons supplied by the Saudi, Turkish and Qatari regimes, has acknowledged that the lion’s share of these armaments are going to the Islamist militias.

Washington’s aim is to cobble together a group that can provide the basis for a puppet regime in Damascus, much as it did with various Iraqi exiles in advance of the 2003 US war on Iraq. As one unnamed senior administration official told Foreign Policy, “We call it a proto-parliament. One could also think of it as a continental congress.”

That such a body is being prepared strongly suggests that the Obama administration is preparing a sharp escalation of the US intervention in Syria in the wake of the November 6 election, perhaps including the use of military force to carve out a “safe haven.” Such an intervention would be part of a wider campaign in preparation for war with Iran, posing the threat of a regional and even global military conflagration.

The entire sordid maneuver in Doha has underscored the real character of the so-called Syrian “revolution,” whose leadership is being directly selected and installed by the US State Department. It further exposes the role of pseudo-left forces, such as the International Socialist Organization in the US, the Socialist Workers Party in Britain, and the New Anti-capitalist Party in France, which have sought to promote the US-backed war for regime-change as a revolution and legitimize the “human rights” pretext for imperialist intervention.

By Dr. Elias Akleh

01 November , 2012

@ Countercurrents.org

The so-called courageous Israeli-siege-breaking visit of Qatari Emir to the six years besieged Gaza carries with it so many controversial meanings and more questions than answers. One could not help but question the real motivations behind such a visit at this particular time: did it come as a solidarity visit with Hamas and as humanitarian aid to the devastated starving Palestinians or an attempt to contain Hamas under the pro-Zionist Qatari wing and a manipulation of the suffering Palestinians?

The Qatari Emir; Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani visited Gaza Strip Tuesday October 23 rd accompanied by his wife Sheikha Mozah within a 61 person entourage for only few hours. During his visit the Emir had doubled Qatar’s financial donation to the long-due Gaza Rebuilding Project, promised by the Arab states, to $400 millions. He also promised to provide Gaza with the urgently needed fuel and gas and with the building materials through Egypt. The Emir also will finance a major housing project; The Hamad Village, a hospital for artificial limbs, and the reconstruction of the two important boulevards in Gaza.

The Emir’s visit is the first one for an Arab leader to visit Gaza since 1999 and the first for an Arab leader to break the Israeli siege of Gaza. Many called this a very courageous and historic visit and called upon the other Arab leaders to follow.

Although the visit was praised by many yet it was also condemned by many others not just Israeli officials but also officials in the Palestinian Authority and pro-Fatah politicians. This visit had angered PA President, Mahmoud Abbas, and his assigned, not elected, government headed by Salam Fayyad. They considered the visit a recognition of the Hamas government that Abbas had dissolved. Abbas and Fatah consider themselves to be the only legitimate representatives of the Palestinian people and thus the Qatari Emir should have visited PA in Ramallah rather than Hamas in Gaza. They accused the Emir of bolstering the Palestinian division when they, themselves, had planned the failed coup against the democratically elected Hamas leadership causing the division, and not adopting any of the reconciliation agreements, and lately had run municipality elections without Hamas representatives but, even though, had lost it. Now Mahmoud Abbas started talking about a complete separation between the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Pro-Fatah officials in Gaza had rejected an invitation to receive the Emir side by side with Hamas leadership. Atef Abu Saif, the Fatah official in Gaza had sent an official apology to Hamas refusing to join them in the reception. The Emir himself stated that he, personally, had called Mahmoud Abbas inviting his company in the visit to Gaza, but Abbas refused demanding that Hamas, first, sign the Egyptian reconciliation agreement. The Emir had criticized Abbas and accused him of sabotaging all reconciliation efforts to re-unite the Palestinians. Such criticism and accusation were echoed by some Qatari news writers and Al-Jazeera TV speakers.

Hamas leadership and the Palestinians in Gaza had welcomed the Emir, celebrated his visit, and bestowed on him, and on his wife, the highest honors. Somebody stated that a hungry monkey would dance to the tune of the person who feeds him regardless of the real intentions or any ulterior motives that person might have. This is not meant to belittle Hamas or Palestinians’ patriotism or dignity, rather to point to the wickedness and manipulation of those who abuse their just cause. They are very, very hungry for life and for their inhumane suffering to be recognized and be healed. Any gift that could grant them a breather and refresh their hopes in life is welcomed even though it may come from Zionised American-occupied Qatari Sheikhdom.

One may wonder what the real goals of the Emir’s visit are. Did the visit come out of the pure goodness of his heart and his wish to help deprived Palestinians? If so, then why did the visit come now and not few years earlier or not immediately after the 2009 devastating Israeli attack when the Palestinians needed help so badly? What did remind him of Gaza reconstruction after four long years of its devastation compared to his generous $100 million donation to rebuild the American city of New Orleans immediately after the 2005 Hurricane Katrina? How come Israel did not block the Emir’s visit when its pirating troops violated all international laws and hijacked all humanitarian ships bound to Gaza?

To understand the meaning of this visit one needs to examine the Emir’s background and his political views (if he really has any).

The Emir Hamad is the eldest son of his father Khalifa bin Hamad Al Thani. He was not a particularly smart person. He failed his high school, and was reported to be kicked out of Sandhurst Military Academy in England. Yet his father granted him the title of Major General and appointed him as the Commander in Chief of the Qatari Armed forces. His political ambitions did not surface until he married his second wife; Sheikha Mozah the daughter of Nasser bin Abdullah Al Missned, who was the strongest political opponent to the ruler Sheikh Khalifa bin Al Thani, the father of the present Emir. Al Missned lived in exile until a political alliance with Al Thani was proposed through Marriage of his daughter Mozah to Emir Hamad.

Sheikha Mozah, initially and later on, with Foreign Minister Hamad bin Jassim bin Al Thani, are the real political drivers behind the Emir’s political ambitions. Mozah turned Hamad against his father Khalifa. Hamad deposed his father and took his place in what is dubbed as the TV coup. After locking his father in the bathroom Hamad went out to greet the sheikhdom officials and then broadcasted their greetings as their approval of his coup and designating him the ruler Emir. He exposed his father’s corruption and hired an American law firm to force the Swiss banks to seize his father’s accounts. A counter coup led by the father’s loyalists and Hamad’s own sons from his first wife failed leading to stripping these sons of their titles and positions and replacing them with Mozah’s own sons; a goal Mozah was striving for to strengthen her own family’s, Al Missned, political position.

To strengthen his rule and to prevent any further coups against him, Emir Hamad invited the American administration to establish a military base in Qatar. Through Al-Jazeera TV the Saudi people were incited to demand the shutdown of the American Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia. The Qatari Emir, then, opened his country to the US to establish the largest American air base in the Gulf region; Al Udeid Air Base and Camp As-Sayliyah. The base served as logistics, command and base hubs for the US Central Command (CENTCOM) area of operations that included Iraq, Afghanistan and Yemen. The base was also the source of the cluster bombs Israel dropped on Southern Lebanon in 2006 and of the white phosphorous bombs Israel used to bomb Gaza Strip in 2008/2009. It was reported that these shipments were supervised by the Emir Sheikh Hamad personally.

Similar to all the Arab dictators, subservient to the American military protection and political support, Qatar was instructed to normalize relationship with Israel. This started with opening Israeli trade offices in Doha, then upgraded to mutual official visitations and meetings to establish trade agreements especially supplying Israel with cheap Qatari gas. Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Shimon Peres, was seen shopping in local shops in Doha, and visiting Al-Jazeera TV headquarters to insure it suppresses its criticism of Israeli terrorism against Palestinians. Emir Hamad and his Foreign Minister, Hamad bin Jassim, had visited Tel Aviv to strike gas deals and to ostensibly learn from the Israeli brain-washing scholastic curriculum to use it against Qatari school children. They, also, had frequent meetings with Israeli officials in France. The news and youtube are full of reports and video clips of such meetings.

The Emir’s visit to Gaza came in full Israeli coordination and American approval. The Israelis waited until the Emir had left Gaza in order to conduct a raid allegedly in retaliation for an Israeli soldier, who got injured by a mine on the Gaza border. The Israeli criticism of the Emir’s visit came only to shove another wedge in the Palestinian division claiming that the visit showed that the Emir is backing the Islamist Hamas rulers over the Western-backed Palestinian Authority of president Abbas. The Israeli foreign ministry spokesperson; Yigal Palmor, stated: “We find it weird that the Emir doesn’t support all of the Palestinians, but sides with Hamas over the Palestinian Authority (in the West Bank) which he has never visited”.

As for the fuel and construction materials Qatar promised to ship to Gaza, Israel will easily block their delivery or/and divert most of it to Israel instead. Egyptian military source stated that Israel is expected to oppose the delivery of fuel and construction materials donated by Qatar to Gaza thus Egypt may refuse to deliver Qatari aid to Gaza Strip.

On the regional arena Qatar seems to have appointed itself as an emissary for spreading the American style democracy either through bribery or through financing and arming militia groups and terrorists to affect regime change. After the 2006 Israeli aggression against Southern Lebanon the Qatari Emir hastened to donate millions to rebuild the southern towns in an attempt to gain the residents away from Hezbollah. In Libya Qatar financed, trained and armed rebels and terrorists to topple Gaddafi’s regime, then tried to impose its political solutions on the new government. After the Egyptian revolution and ousting of Mubarak, Egypt has asked the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for a $3.2 billion aid package to support the country’s flagging economy. When the IMF refused the request the Qatari Emir Hamad bin Al Thani visited Egypt, his first visit to the country, and granted the newly elected Egyptian government a $2 billion loan.

It is obvious to everybody by now that Qatar is playing the leading role, as it did in Libya, in the Syrian crises. Qatar has gathered mercenary militias of Al-Qaeda terrorists, religious extremists, and anti-Syrian opposition, financed them, trained them, and armed them to destroy Syria as a whole, not just toppling the government. Qatar has played an aggressive role in calling for international military intervention in Syria. Qatari money has also been invested in recruiting anti-Syrian inciters especially Lebanese and Egyptian Islamic clerics and religious school teachers, who had been put on Qatari payroll for the rest of their lives on the condition of calling for jihad against Syrian government. Many had suspected Qatari/Israeli involvement in the explosion that killed Lebanese Security Chief Wissam al-Hasan on October 20 th to incite March 14 Coalition to topple the pro-Hezbollah government.

During his visit to Mauritania the Qatari Emir lectured the President, Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz, urging him to adopt democracy. As a response Abdel Aziz criticized the Qatari policies of supporting rebels against governments and advised the Emir to adopt what he preaches in his own country first. The Emir had also ignored the calls of his next door neighbors; Yeminis and Bahrainis, for freedom and democracy.

Qatar is a dictatorship who does not respect even the basic human right of speech. In a secret court Qatari judges had sentenced the poet Mohammad al-Ajami, who praised the Arab Spring in Tunisia and criticized the Gulf States who resort to American protection. Even President Obama had criticized the Emir for he, through his Al-Jazeera TV, keeps calling for reforming and democratizing the Arab world while he is not democratizing his own country, whose 75% of its citizens are foreigners not indigenous Qatari.

There is much to say about this Emir’s personality, political views and humanitarian ideology featuring prominent betrayal of his own father, his own children, his own countrymen and his Arab brothers. So, what is the Emir’s motive for his donations to Gaza, which could be considered mere peanuts compared to the billions he spent arming terrorists in Libya and Syria? The comments of his Foreign Minister, Hamad bin Jassim, to members of the so-called Syrian National Council after Khaled Mashal, the Chairman of Hamas Political Bureau, moved his office from Damascus, Syria to Doha, Qatar, could shed some light. Bin Jassim stated that Hamas, as a resistance movement, is finished.

Dr. Elias Akleh is a writer living in Corona, CA., eakleh@ca.rr.com

By Countercurrents.org

01 November, 2012

Countercurrents.org

Across the world, inequality and poverty are increasing as is increasing rich-poor gap. Now, none can ignore the fact.

“Global inequalities in wealth are at their highest level for 20 years and are growing, said a Save The Children report.

The report, Born Equal, how reducing inequality could give our children a better future, says continuing inequality could hinder further progress in improving living standards.

STC found that in most of the 32 developing countries it studied, the rich had increased their share of national income since the 1990s. In a fifth of the countries, the incomes of the poorest had fallen over the same period.

The report said:

“[A]cross the 32 countries […] studied, a child in the richest 10% of households has 35 times the effective available income of a child in the poorest 10% of households. The gaps between the poorest and richest children are considerably larger than the gaps between adults, suggesting that children experience a magnified inequality effect. And the gaps are increasing. Since the 1990s, across the 32 countries […] studied, the effective available incomes of the children in the poorest decile have actually declined as a share of GDP, while those of the children in the richest decile have increased. This means that the gap between the richest and poorest children has grown by 35% since the 1990s, the timeframe used to monitor progress towards the MDGs.”

The gap has become particularly pronounced among children and affects their well-being as well as causing disparities in several key indicators, the STC says.

The report notes that in Tanzania, child mortality in the richest fifth of the population fell from 135 to 90 per 1,000 births over the research period, while the poorest fifth saw hardly any progress with a modest fall of 140 to 137 per 1,000 births.

The report said: “[T]oday, despite the fact that inequalities between countries remain high, more than 70% of the world’s poorest people – up to a billion people – live in middle-income countries. This ‘new bottom billion’ of people in extreme poverty within countries that are growing wealthier has emerged within the last two decades as a crucial challenge for global development.”

The report said:

“[C]hild mortality rates are more than twice as high among the poorest, in countries with high income inequality such as Nigeria. Stunting rates can be up to six times higher in rural than in urban areas in countries with high spatial inequalities and with a big divide between rural and urban populations – for example, China. Gender inequality is still a strong driver of lower educational outcomes for girls. In Indonesia, there are twice as many illiterate women as men, and three times as many girls as boys are never enrolled in schools. In Nigeria, girls’ enrolment rate was 44%, while boys’ was 56%.”

It said: “One of the biggest blind spots in the MDG framework is the failure to address inequality comprehensively. Inequality is a complex issue. It manifests itself through different economic, social and political dimensions – you can experience inequalities in income, in healthcare coverage, in access to school or in political representation. And inequalities exist at many different levels. For example, there are income inequalities between people, and between countries.”

By Q. Isa Daudpota

01 November, 2012

@ Countercurrents.org

Pervez Hoodbhoy, one of Pakistan’s leading public intellectuals, has recently been told by LUMS that it will not be offering him an extension of contract. The background to this unfortunate decision by this well-known University is explored in the light of the decaying educational milieu in the country

We are a country rich in natural resources, currently hobbled by inequity, poor governance, and unable to provide for our burgeoning population. Beyond the basics of survival, the greatest burden faced by the people, especially the youth, is the absence of training for critical thinking. A repressive anti-intellectual environment exists where open rational dialogue is rare and fraught with danger.

Even elite schools and universities fail to make the interventions necessary to reverse the trend set in motion by General Zia ul Haq’s demonic regime. The brain-washed Zia-boomers (unlike the baby-boomer of the post WW II era who opened up societies in the late 60s) now in their 30s occupy most of the teaching positions. The distortion of Pakistan and world history in the curriculum and textbooks is uncritically transferred by them to the budding minds. This cycle needs to be broken.

Among the rare breed of educators who try to do this well is Pervez Hoodbhoy. He, now nearly twice the age of the Zia-boomers, has over the past 40 years countered the false notions of the orthodoxy. This was done while facing considerable animosity from colleagues and administrators during his stint at Quaid-i-Azam University (from which he retired 2 years ago). Incredibly, he almost relishes the noise and the thrill of knocking-out irrational ideas on talk shows fronted by mostly inane anchor-persons – perhaps a delicious reminder of his days in the boxing ring!

On retiring from QAU, PH accepted the repeated invitation of Mr Babar Ali, Chairman, Lahore University of Management Sciences’ Board, to take up employment in the Physics department. The denouement that led to the recent non-renewal of his contract is described meticulously in his letter to the VC, Dr Adil Najam, and others connected with LUMS, including a member of the International Advisory Board. The international board has asked for an explanation from the executives of LUMS. Neither they nor PH have as yet received a response. Also available are letters to Mr Babar Ali on this issue by Naeem Sadiq and I. See:

http://tinyurl.com/9spbj7z ,

http://tinyurl.com/97f6l4n and

http://tinyurl.com/d6mre3w .

PH wouldn’t have moved to LUMS had the vision of his guru, Eqbal Ahmad, to set up Khaldunia University in Islamabad become a reality. It was planned roughly around the time that LUMS started operating in rented houses in Lahore. Had Khaldunia started in a similar modest fashion, Eqbal Ahmad [See his publications at http://tinyurl.com/cg4t86a] leading the effort and with like-minded intellectuals in toe, it would have been a truly enlightened place of learning, markedly different from LUMS. This is run by a bloated Board of 53 men and one woman, wholly corporate types. See composition at:

http://tinyurl.com/9447jwa .

With his letter not receiving a response, PH in an interview to BBC Urdu website:

http://tinyurl.com/9sgd52c

states that his services were no renewed on ideological grounds by misrepresenting the contents of his course, “Science and Contemporary World Order”, hosted by LUMS’ School of Humanities and Social Sciences. The course’s primary purpose is to bridge the gap between science/technology and arts/humanities. There were however false rumors that he was in fact largely discussing the conflict of science and religion. (This of course is the subject of PH’s 1991 book, “Islam and Science” whose chapter titles and summary appears at

http://tinyurl.com/8gzd22q .

Also see his relatively recent essay at

http://tinyurl.com/ydoamf7 .)

The role of religion in every aspect of Pakistani life is very important, so even if PH’s course touched on some aspects of religion it should not have caused the LUMS administration to get its hackles up.

As for the truly significant issue of bridging the gap between the sciences and the arts, little effort has been made here. The notion that our universities, their system and the intellectual life they breed, is characterized by a split between “the two cultures” – the art/humanities on the one hand and science/technology on the other – has a history dating back to C. P. Snow’s 1959 essay, “The Two Cultures”. [Text available at: http://tinyurl.com/bo8z7mr ]

Science and engineering departments in Pakistan are loathe to give up what they think are “essential” courses. But this is precisely what is needed to ease the introduction of arts/humanities subjects into their curriculum. This can follow once the philosophy of the curriculum steers engineering education to principally serve the needs of the largest numbers, i.e. the poor people. Sadly the current narrow focus of our technical graduates is due to the narrow worldview and inertia of many top academics and administrators. The situation for arts/humanities is a lot worse as their graduates enter the job market with virtually no knowledge of science and technology that drives the world.

Why should an academic like PH wishing to excel in his field spend considerable time trying to bridge the divide between the two cultures, popularizing Physics and highlighting societal problems in the media, and for a decade be a voluntary advisor to LUMS’ nascent faculty of which he is currently a member? The reply to this comes from Dr Amer Iqbal, the former head of the Physics department. His is the first entry on the petition by students against LUMS’ decision. See:

http://tinyurl.com/8avqprm .

Newer claims by the LUMS authorities have been met by firm rebuttals by PH. Here is a partial list:

1. Claim: PH cannot be given a visiting contract because he has crossed 60. [BUT there 15+ such persons with visiting contracts, and two are over 70.]

2. Claim: The Physics department does not want PH to continue. [BUT the majority of the department’s teachers are strongly in favor of PH’s continuation as a visiting professor and have committed themselves in writing as well as in meetings with the dean both as a group as well as individually. The exception may be the chairman, who refuses to release the recommendation to the dean, which was supposed to reflect the position of the department.]

3. Claim: PH wants to fix the world and does not have time for LUMS. [BUT the document attached shows that PH taught substantially more than the normal load of courses, supervised more students than any physics faculty member, and gave more open talks on campus than any other faculty member.]

4. Claim: PH is expensive for LUMS to employ. [BUT he simply accepted what LUMS offered and his salary is no different from others in the visiting category.]

There are old reasons for Hoodbhoy doing what he does. To discover them take a peek at the first half of the 1960s, his early teen years in Karachi, a period when kids begin to ask awkward question and seek answers from those around them and from books. Passions developed in those impressionable years often become the driving force in the future. Those were pre-Internet years when students relied on two invaluable repositories of knowledge: The British Council and USIS Libraries.

Riding his pedal bike the considerable distance from his house in Soldier Bazar to Pakistan Chowk, PH often visited the rounded red building of British Council. It was on its shelves that he discovered Bertrand Russell (see his essays at http://tinyurl.com/8bc66wa ) who influenced his early ideas.

For me, perhaps the most moving piece of literature is the short Prologue,“What I Have Lived For”, to Russell’s autobiography (in full at http://tinyurl.com/8mh9erk ) from which I quote the first paragraph:

“Three passions, simple but overwhelmingly strong, have governed my life: the longing for love, the search for knowledge, and unbearable pity for the suffering of mankind. These passions, like great winds, have blown me hither and thither, in a wayward course, over a great ocean of anguish, reaching to the very verge of despair.”

I don’t suppose PH has ever reached the “verge of despair” but he certainly has some of the passions of Russell: single-minded rationality, popularization of knowledge and a distaste of war.

These are passion he also shares with Noam Chomsky, arguably the most important public intellectual of our time. It was at PH’s invitation that Chomsky visited Pakistan to deliver 2001 Eqbal Ahmad Distinguished Lecture in honor of his old friend and comrade. Chomsky also recently talked to PH’s students at LUMS using Skype [See the end of http://tinyurl.com/97f6l4n ]. No other LUMS faculty member would – I hazard a guess – be able to get a such a busy, top world intellectual to agree immediately to interact long-distance with students here.

Despite a lot of knowledge now being available on the Net, libraries and information centers remain indispensable. The British Council libraries of the 50s and 60s had limited stock of books but were excellent cultural centers and places where students could sit and work in air-conditioned comfort.

The lovely USIS library on Karachi’s Bunder Road, with its lovely lawn and Pipal trees under which films were shown, was burnt by hooligans egged on by anti-US groups or political parties. This was well before I left the city in 1969. Later, in the first half of 80s, when I taught at Sindh University, I used the American Center and British Council libraries, with the American place aptly on top of the British! Both these were closed down. When I got to Islamabad in the early 90s, destruction followed me – the American Center suffered a rocket attack, and it and the British Council also boarded up, ending decades of flourishing foreign libraries in Pakistan. Needless to say, our government or philanthropists have not created anything to match what these old libraries offered. Today, Islamabad must be the only world capital without a public library of any significance, if one excludes the National Library, which is inaccessible and mainly houses reference material on Pakistan.

The parties and leaders who supported or turned a blind eye to the wanton destruction of books, today support the violent ideology of the Talibans and their associates. The lack of opposition to the destruction of books and libraries in the past is today mirrored in a listless society where nameless humans are killed daily and forgotten quickly. The brave Malala Yousufzai is thankfully an exception.

If Pakistan is to survive as a civilized nation its leaders and academics must focus on transforming the thinking of its people, over decades warped by fanatics and well-meaning but brain-dead educators. Such a change calls for many Hoodbhoys in positions of influence from where they bring about a speedy change – using TV, the Net and the overhaul of all aspects of the formal education system and facilitate life-long learning for all. That has to be Pakistan’s primary challenge.

Pervez Hoodbhoy, driven by his passions, will continue to bravely jump over hurdles after he says goodbye to LUMS later this year.

Readers who wish to express their views on the refusal of LUMS to extend PH’s contract need to click on the Petition at: http://tinyurl.com/8avqprm .

It would also help if they write individually to:

Key persons in LUMS Administration:

“Vice Chancellor – Adil Najam” adil.najam@lums.edu.pk

“Chairman of the LUMS Board – Babar Ali” syedbabarali@yahoo.com

The author is an Islamabad based physicist interested in the environment.

By Countercurrents.org

01 November. 2012

@ Countercurrents.org

Unemployment in the eurozone has risen to a new record, with more than one in four out of work in Spain and Greece. In Greece, labor is planning to strike.

There are now 18.49 million people without jobs in the 17 countries sharing the euro, said the European statistics office Eurostat on October 31, 2012 with an extra 146,000 joining the ranks of the unemployed last month. Across the whole 27 nation EU, 25.751 million men and women were without jobs last month – an increase of 169,000 from August – while the unemployment rate stayed at 10.6% [1].

Youth unemployment – joblessness among under-25s – rose to 23.3%, up from 21% during the same month a year ago.

Brussels and most eurozone governments have put cuts in spending ahead of schemes to create jobs, despite predictions that the situation will worsen over the coming months.

Greece’s coalition government published €13.5bn of spending cuts and tax rises that will result in a sixth year of falling GDP and increase in the jobless rate.

Eurostat said the jobless rate across the eurozone increased to 11.6% in September, the highest on record, from a revised 11.5% in August.

The lowest unemployment rates were recorded in Austria (4.4%), Luxembourg (5.2%), Germany and the Netherlands (both 5.4%), which are near full employment. Spain (25.8%) and Greece (25.1% in July) had the highest unemployment in the eurozone, while France looks much like Italy (both at 10.8%), with a steady rise in joblessness. August data for Greece will be published next week, although the true picture is probably worse than the official figures show as a growing number of Greek workers remain nominally employed but have not been paid for some time.

Youth unemployment also hit a new high in Spain with 54.2% of under-25-year-olds out of work, up from 53.8%.

By comparison, the unemployment rate was 7.9% in the UK, 7.8% in the US and 4.2% in Japan in September.

Energy prices continued to rise, by 7.8%, but by less than the month before, when they climbed by 9.1% year-on-year. Food became dearer, however, with prices up 3.2% compared with 2.9% in September.

In some countries the unemployment figures are depressed by a rise in emigration. Ireland, Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain have seen a strong rise in the number of people, mainly young, seeking work abroad.

Roughly 370,000 people emigrated from Spain in 2011, 10 times more than before the banking crisis hit the country in 2008.

Although about 86% of them were naturalized immigrants born abroad, there is also a growing number of native Spaniards saying “ya basta” (“enough is enough”). More than 50,000 left last year, up 80% since before the crisis hit.

A BBC report [2] said:

The eurozone as a whole is struggling to generate the economic growth needed to stimulate employment. Its economy shrank by 0.2% between April and June, with Italy and Spain stuck in recession and France registering no growth for the past three quarters.

The notable exception is the German economy, Europe’s biggest, which grew by 0.3% in the second quarter. Growth there is expected to slow when preliminary figures for eurozone GDP between August and October will be published on November 15.

Meanwhile, Greek trade unions vowed on October 31, 2012 to bring the country to a halt next week after agreeing a two-day general strike in protest at the latest round of welfare and wages cuts [3].

The strike call came after the government outlined a series of austerity measures in its revised 2013 budget that predicts a sixth year of contraction and an escalation in its debt-to-GDP ratio to 167%. The prime minister Antonis Samaras said negotiations with the major lenders were concluded and it was time for MPs to vote through measures to secure €31bn (£24bn) of fresh loans.

The €13.5bn of cuts for 2013-14 include a two-year increase in the retirement age from the current average of 65, salary and pension cuts, and another round of tax increases, including the levy on interest from bank deposits, up from 10% to 15%. The vast majority of measures are to be implemented in 2013 and include a €4.6bn cut in pensions and a €1.2bn reduction in salaries.

Unions responded by announcing a 48-hour general strike that could persuade some coalition MPs to join opposition groups in rejecting a bill to be tabled by finance minister Yannis Stournaras next week.

However, there was confusion on October 31, 2012 after some European finance ministers warned they still needed to address some outstanding budget issues before releasing funds to the Greek government.

The strain in the governing coalition was evident earlier, in a parliamentary vote on a bill to allow the government to privatize public utilities. The legislation was passed, but 15 MPs from the Pasok party, which is a junior partner in the coalition, voted against certain articles. Dissenters included former prime minister George Papandreou, who opposed one article in the legislation.

Stournaras submitted the revised budget to parliament on October 31, 2012 but the deputy finance minister cancelled a presentation of the budget due to a 24-hour journalists’ strike in protest at their industry healthcare plan being drawn into spending cuts of €455m.

The coalition is under pressure to pass the budget before the November 11 deadline set by Greece’s international creditors. Officials are also concerned that Greece finds a way to refinance more than €3bn of loans due for renewal on November 16.

Ben May, an analyst at Capital Economics, said he was concerned that Greece’s debts were already unsustainable and further austerity measures would aggravate the situation. He pointed to the International Monetary Fund’s warning in its recent world economic outlook that the country’s debts were likely to reach 183% of GDP next year. May said the expectation that a recovery from 2014 would bring the figure back to 120% by 2020 was nothing more than an illusion.

“There is still a significant risk that Greece will not survive another year inside the eurozone,” he said.

Source:

[1] guardian.co.uk, Julia Kollewe and Phillip Inman, “Eurozone unemployment hits new high”, Oct. 31, 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/oct/31/eurozone-unemployment-record-high-eurostat

[2] BBC, “ Eurozone unemployment jumps to fresh high”, Oct. 31, 2012, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20153497

[3] The Guardian, Phillip Inman, Oct. 31, 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/31/greek-unions-two-day-strike-austerity

Makdessi: Davutoglu’s Statements Reaffirm His Determination to Continue Dragging the Turkish People into Turkish Government’s Policies

Oct 30, 2012

DAMASCUS, (SANA) – Spokesman of the Foreign and Expatriates Ministry Dr. Jihad Makdessi said that the repeated statements of Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu reaffirm his determination to continue dragging the Turkish people into Turkish government’s policies which no longer receive approval and consensus as they contradict the interests and the historic and fraternal bonds between the Syrian and Turkish people.

In a statement, Makdessi said that Davutoglu still adopts the course of escaping forward and refuses to undertake any critical revision of destructive policies that proved to be a filure on the ground, and that he continues  to publically target the security and stability of the next-door neighbor Syria.

He said that it was clear for all observers that Turkey and the Arab Gulf didn’t commit to the success of the decision to suspend military operations which the Syrian leadership committed to, which holds them responsible for the continuing shedding of Syrian blood and forms a clear undermining by these parts of the mission of UN Envoy Lakhdar Ibrahimi through their continuing funding, arming and harboring of armed terrorist groups.

Makdessi affirmed that Syria will remain committed to the historic and fraternal relations between the Syrian and Turkish people which no government will succeed in undermining or damaging.

Armed Forces Inflict Heavy Losses upon Terrorists in Several Areas

Oct 30, 2012

PROVINCES, (SANA)- Units of the Armed Forces on Tuesday clashed with armed terrorist groups in the neighborhoods of Salah-Eddin and al-Khazan in Harasta city in Damascus Countryside.

An official source told SANA reporter that the clashes resulted in killing a number of terrorists and injuring others.

The source mentioned that the military engineering units dismantled scores of explosive devices ready for detonation, planted by terrorists on the main roads and inside the residents’ houses in Harasta.

Terrorists Assassinate Pilot Maj. Gen. Abdullah al-Khalidi in Rukn-Eddin Neighborhood, Damascus

In the framework of targeting the national skills and qualified cadres, an armed terrorist group assassinated Pilot Maj. Gen. Abdullah al-Khalidi in Rukn-Eddin neighborhood in Damascus.

A source at Damascus Police Command told SANA that terrorists shot al-Khalidi in Assadeddin St. in Rukn-Eddin neighborhood while getting off his car, causing his immediate martyrdom.

Ministry of Justice Mourns death of Martyr Judge Nazem Kabalan who passed away in Jaramana Terrorist Explosion

Ministry of Justice today announced the death of Judge Nazem Elias Kabalan, chief justice of the 2nd civil Appeal court in Damascus who was martyred in the terrorist explosion that took place in Jaramana, Damascus countryside on Monday.

An armed terrorist group blew up a booby trapped car at al-Rawda neighborhood in Jaramana claiming the lives of scores of martyrs while many others were injured.

Authorities discover 8 bodies for known persons near in Hama countryside

The competent authorities today discovered 8 bodies for known persons near Jisr Maaren al-Saleb in Misyaf countryside in Hama.

SANA reporter quoted a source in the province as saying that the bodies were for men aging between 15-50 years old who were killed at the hands of terrorists by shooting fires after they were hand-cuffed.

Army Units clashed Terrorists  in Homs and its countryside, inflect heavy losses upon them

Units of the Army clashed with armed terrorist groups in Homs and its countryside, inflecting heavy losses upon them.

A source in the province told SANA reporter that the army carried out qualitative operations against the positions of terrorists in al-Boueda al-Sharkiya, Katena, Kfar Aya, destroying their cars and killing a big number of them.

Army Units destroy dens of terrorists in Aleppo and its Countryside

Units of the armed forces today targeted dens of terrorists in Kfar Naha, Tal Rifaat, Hrietan, al-Atareb and al-Bab in Aleppo countryside, killing a big number of the terrorists and destroying 7 cars loaded with different kinds of weapons.

A unit of the Army also destroyed three boats loaded with weapons and munitions at al-Assad lake in Maskana.

Units of the Army destroyed a number of cars used by the terrorists to transport weapons and munitions in a number of Aleppo neighborhoods.

A source in Aleppo told SANA reporter that the army carried qualitative operations near al-Lermon traffic circle, al-Tirkawi square and in the west area of the indutrail city of al-Sheikh Najar, destroying cars loaded with different kinds of weapons and killing a number of terrorists.

25 Terrorists Killed in Clashes following Dispute over Loot Sharing

A clash broke out on Tuesday between two armed terrorist groups in Izaz area in the countryside of Aleppo following dispute over sharing the loot and stuff stolen from the locals, which resulted in the killing of a number of terrorists.

An official source told SANA reporter that the clash resulted in the killing of more than 25 terrorists and the injury of others.

Armed Forces Eliminate Terrorists in Bab Houd, Homs

An Armed Forces unit clashed with a terrorist group that was firing explosive projectiles at citizens’ homes in Bab Houd neighborhood in Homs city, which led to the burning of some houses.

A source at the province told SANA’s correspondent said that the conflict resulted in the killing and injuring of a number of terrorists.

Armed Forces Clash with Terrorists, Seize Weapons in Deir Ezzor

A unit of the Armed Forces clashed with an armed terrorist group which was terrorizing citizens in al-Mareiyeh area in the countryside of Deir Ezzor.

An official source in the province told SANA reporter that the army members killed and injured a number of the group’s members, in addition to seizing BKC machineguns, a large amount of ammunition and a pick-up car prepared to be equipped with a DShk machinegun and on which the so-called “Ahfad Mohammad (Mohammad’s Descendants) Brigade- Omar Bin al-Khattab Battalion” was written.

Authorities and Locals Repel Terrorist Group in Salamiyeh, Hama

The authorities confronted an armed terrorist group which attempted to attack the citizens in Tal-Durreh town in Salamiyeh in Hama countryside.

An official source in the province told SANA reporter that the authorities, in cooperation with the locals, confronted the members of an armed terrorists group and inflicted heavy losses upon them.

The source highlighted that the terrorists, who were driving 7 cars, some of them equipped with DShK machineguns, attempted to enter the town and attack the citizens using machineguns and RPGs before being repelled by the authorities and the locals.

Three Citizens including Nurse and Ambulance Driver Martyred in Explosion of IEDs in Daraa Countryside

Three citizens, including a nurse and an ambulance driver, were martyred when two explosive devices planted by terrorists exploded on the highway between the towns of al-Hirak and Namer in Daraa countryside.

A source at the province told SANA’s reporter that male nurse Taha al-Zayed and ambulance driver Mohammad al-Hariri were killed when an explosive device went off and damaged their ambulance as they were on their way from al-Hirak Hospital to help people injured in the blast of another explosive device on the aforementioned highway which claimed the life of citizen Bassam Daqaq.

The source said that the explosion that hit the ambulance also caused critical injuries to Dr. Mohammad Deeb al-Adawi and male nurse Jamal al-Hariri.

Premier al-Halqi Condemns Terrorist Groups’ Violations during Eid al-Adha

Oct 30, 2012

DAMASCUS, (SANA)- Prime Minister, Wael al-Halqi, condemned the violations committed by the armed terrorist groups of the declaration on the suspension of military operations during Eid al-Adha holiday, which the Armed Forces committed to.

Heading a Cabinet session on Tuesday, al-Halqi stressed that the Armed Forces, which immediately reacted to the terrorist groups’ violations in protection of citizens and the private and public properties, will continue work on consolidating security and stability in Syria.

Along with the Armed Forces’ efforts, the Prime Minister said, the governmental parties concerned will continue providing all kinds of services and needs to the citizens and work on rehabilitating what the terrorist groups have damaged.

He stressed the necessity of combating corruption with all its various forms, reducing squandering and moving ahead with the administrative reform process.

During the session, Deputy Prime Minister for Economic Affairs, Minister of Internal Trade and Consumer Protection, Qadri Jamil, presented a review of the outcomes of his recent visit to Russia.

Lieutenant Back Homeland: Turkish Government Facilitates Weapon Smuggling into Syria

Oct 30, 2012

DAMASCUS, (SANA)-Lieutenant Hussein Khalifa, one of the officers who deserted his post at the Interior Ministry and returned to the road of right said that he decided to return home after he escaped to Turkey because he felt guilty and disgrace when he crossed the borders, recognizing that there is no dignity without Home.

“The government of Recep Tayyib Erdoan is offering support with weapon and money to the armed terrorist groups in order to infiltrate into Syria and perpetrate massacres against the Syrian people,” Khalifa added in an interview with the Syrian TV broadcast Tuesday.

Lieutenant Khalifa has worked in al-Thawra region which is affiliated to al-Rakka Police Leadership when he was informed last Ramadan that an aggression by armed terrorist groups took place against Afnan Dabsa Town’s police station, and that he along with his colleagues should support the police station.

“When we arrived in the police station, we knew that Brigadier General Adib al-Shalaf, Director of al-Thawara town who told me to go there for support was plotting to cooperate with the terrorists to flee the country into Turkey and that there was no attack against the police station,” Khalifa said.

He added that in turkey they resided in an area which distances 20 KM from Antioch, saying that the concepts which the armed groups believe in are Takfiris and depend on fatwas that come from the Gulf countries.

“The orders were given to those groups from Istanbul council.. their goals were not overthrowing the regime, but overcoming the Syrian state with its army,” Khalifa underlined.

He went on to say that the Syrians in the Turkish camps suffer from humiliation, disgrace, adding that they were treated in an inhuman way and they are ostracized in Turkey.

“Psychological pressures and wars of rumor were being practiced on the deserted officers in Turkey to frighten them and prevent them from returning to Syria,” Lieutenant Khalifa said.

He added that while he was in Turkey, He was suffering an internal conflict because of feeling guilty, so he decided to return Syria as there is no future for anyone who lives there.

Bogdanov Reiterates Russia’s Position on Finding Peaceful Resolution to Syrian Crisis Through National Dialogue

Oct 30, 2012

MOSCOW, (SANA) – Special Representative of the Russian President for Middle East Affairs, Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov reiterated Russia’s principled position which calls for an immediate and full cessation of violence in Syria and finding a solution to the crisis in it through wide-scale national dialogue.

A statement issued by the Russian Foreign Ministry on Tuesday said that during his meeting with Syria’s Ambassador in Moscow Riyad Haddad, Bogdanov exchanged viewpoints in detail on developments in Syria and around it, particularly in light of the recent talks in Moscow with UN Envoy to Syria Lakhdar Ibrahimi.

22 People Involved in Recent Events Who Didn’t Shed Syrian Blood Released

Oct 30, 2012

DAMASCUS, (SANA) – 22 people covered by the recent amnesty decree and who were involved in the recent events in Syria but didn’t shed Syrian blood were released on Tuesday.

A source at Damascus Police Command said that this is the third group of detainees who benefited from the amnesty and were released, with more set to be released within the next few days.

Meetings of Syrian-Democratic Korean Joint Committee for Economic, Scientific, Technical and Commercial Cooperation Kick Off

Oct 30, 2012

PYONGYANG, (SANA) – Meetings of the Syrian-Democratic Korean Joint Committee for Economic, Scientific, Technical and Commercial Cooperation kicked off on Tuesday at Pyongyang, the capital of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

The two sides voiced commitment to boosting bilateral relations in all fields, particularly, industry, agriculture, communications, culture, commerce, energy and media, stressing the need to maintain regular meetings of the Committee, particularly in light of the current situation in Syria and the conspiracy against it.

The two sides agreed to draft 10 memos of understanding and executive programs in the fields of media, free zones, communications, agriculture, industry, environment, and housing, in addition to an agricultural cooperation agreement.

They also called for increasing trade exchange in a balanced manner and exporting Syrian food, textile and chemical products to Korean markets.

The two sides discussed prospects of cooperation in scientific, agricultural and pharmaceutical research in addition to railroads, petroleum and energy, including the possibility of establishing an electrothermal power station with a capacity of 1000 megawatts in Syria that is powered by coal imported from the DPRK.

They also discussed boosting relations in the fields of media, radios, television and news agencies.

The two sides affirmed the depth of the relations between the two countries and their firm rejection of the foreign conspiracy targeting Syria and its people.

During a meeting with Syrian Culture Minister Dr. Lubana Mashouh who heads the Syrian side of the Committee, DPRK Foreign Minister Pak Ui-chun voiced confidence that Syria will be victorious over the conspiracy targeting its stances which reject western plots.

Endowments Minister Honors Families of 144 Martyrs in Dreikish, Tartous

Oct 30, 2012

TARTOUS, (SANA)- Empowered by President Bashar al-Assad, Minister of Religious Endowments (Awqaf) Mohammad Abdul-Sattar al-Sayyed on Tuesday honored the families of 144 martyrs from Dreikish in Tartous.

Al-Sayyed said that this honoring expresses respect and appreciation of the sacrifices of the martyrs to defend the homeland, affirming that Syria will be victorious thanks to the sacrifices of its people.

For their part, the families of martyrs expressed readiness to sacrifice everything for the sake of Syria, calling for striking firmly against terrorists and mercenaries and all those who tamper with Syria’s security.

The martyrs’ relatives voiced pride in the martyrdom of their sons who answered the call of day, affirming that Syria’s victory over its enemies is near.

In turn, Head of Tartous branch of al-Baath Arab Socialist Party Hasan Shaaban said that martyrs live on in the hearts of Syrians, while Tartous governor Nizar Mousa affirmed that the governorate is prepared to offer all that is necessary to the families of martyrs, noting that a committee tasked with caring for them and providing their needs has been formed.

Galloway: Global War on Syria Similar to War on Egypt in 1956… Syrian Leadership Will Not Be Defeated

Oct 30, 2012

BEIRUT, (SANA) – British MP George Galloway affirmed that the global war currently being waged on Syria is similar to the one waged against Egypt in 1956, voicing confidence that Syria will be victorious over this war under the leadership of President Bashar al-Assad similar to the victory of the late Jamal Abdelnasser.

During a meeting with former Lebanese President Emil Lahhoud in Beirut on Tuesday, Galloway stressed that the Syrian leadership will not be defeated, underlining the need for the plan launched by former UN Envoy to Syria Kofi Annan to bear fruit and for countries to stop providing military support to the Syrian opposition.

General Command of the Army and the Armed Forces: Armed Terrorist Groups Continue Violations of Ceasefire

Oct 30, 2012

DAMASCUS, (SANA) – For the fourth consecutive day, the armed terrorist groups continued their violations of the ceasefire declaration announced by the General Command’s statement on October 25th, the General Command of the Army and the Armed Forces stressed on Monday.

The General Command said that on Monday at 05:30 in the morning an armed terrorist group attacked with mortar missiles the Army Command of the southern district in Damascus and targeted a law-enforcement headquarters in Harasta city at 08:50.

The statement added that in Damascus countryside, armed terrorist groups fired at law-enforcement forces in Douma and Harasta and attacked a supplies vehicle near al-Rahma Gas Station.

The armed terrorist groups also attacked the local cemetery checkpoint, al-Sayrian checkpoint and Ras al-Nabe’ checkpoint in Qatana city at 21:30.

On Monday Morning, the armed terorrist groups fired at law-enforcement forces in Irbeen at 07:00, al-Hermelleh checkpoint at 08:30, Zamalka- al-Qaboun Tunnel checkpoint and Irbeen-al-Qaboun tunnel checkpoint at 09:00, and al-Dabbaghat checkpoint at 10:00.

In Homs province, the General Command said that armed terrorist groups attacked law-enforcement members in al-Qarabis, Jouret al-Shayah, and Talbiseh at 20:00 Sunday evening.

The terrorists also attacked law-enforcement members in Jeb al-Jandali at 24:00 and in al-Khaldieh and al-Kalaa at 02:00, in Talkalakh at 03:00, in Bab Hud at 05:00, in Deir Balbeh at 06:00 and near al-Abbasieyin healthcare center at 08:00 and al-Khanda’ St. at 11:00.

In Hama province, the armed terrorist groups attacked Sunday evening al-Hijra and al-Sibahi sqaures checkpoints, and they attacked law-enforcement forces in al-Masafi neighborhood at 21:35, and in Bab al-Taka- al-Madiq Castle- at 07:00 in the morning, according to the statement.

In Aleppo province, law-enforcement forces were attacked by snipers and mortar missles near the Jusice Palace Sunday at 20:30, in Aleppo-Izaz Road-AlLairamoun area- Monday at 00:30, in the southern highway at 00:40, on the main road of Aleppo-Alatareb-Khan Alasal at 01:00, in the old city of Aleppo al-Tilal St. at 03:00.

The armed terrorist groups also attacked law-enforcement forces in Allairamoun area with locally made missiles at 12:25.

In Idleb province, the Army Command said  that armed terrorist groups targeted the law-enforcement  checkpoints in Harem, al-Allaneh at 20:30, and in  Wadi ad-Daif and al-Hamidieh at 21:00. The armed groups also attacked al-Trenbeh checkpoint near al-Mastoumeh at 10:15.

In Deir Ezzor province, the General Command said that the law-enforcement checkpoints were also attacked with RPGs by armed terrorist groups at 07:30.

The armed terorist groups also attacked a military compound at 10:20.

The General Command reiterated commitment to carry out its constitutional duties of defending the homeland, eliminating terrorism and restoring security and stability to the homeland.

Mehmanparast: Western Countries Don’t Want to Create Positive Atmospheres for Finding Peaceful Solution to Crisis in Syria

Oct 30, 2012

TEHRAN, (SANA)- Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast stressed that the western countries do not want to create positive atmospheres for finding a peaceful solution to the crisis in Syria through national dialogue among all spectrums of the Syrian people.

In a press conference in Tehran on Tuesday, Mehmanparast said the tools of these countries inside Syria are committing terrorist acts, adding that the foreign countries seek to achieve their own political goals in the Middle East, therefore they spare no efforts to foil the missions of the UN envoys, Kofi Annan and Lakhdar Brahimi.

He added that the reforms the Syrian people aspire for should be achieved in Syria by the Syrian people and through national mechanisms  far from any foreign interference in Syria’s internal affairs.

He called on all the countries to continue their efforts to create suitable atmospheres for national dialogue and to support Brahimi’s efforts, pointing out that the ceasefire would have been an advanced step if it had succeeded, but its violation by the armed terrorist groups foiled it.

Russian Newspaper: Russia and Turkey Holding Talks to Regain the Syrian Plane’s Cargo Seized at Ankara Airport 

Oct 30, 2012

MOSCOW, (SANA)- The Russian newspaper Kommersant revealed that Russia and Turkey are holding talks to regain the cargo of the Syrian passenger plane which the Turkish authorities forced to land in Ankara Airport on October 10, subjected to search and confiscated its cargo.

In its issue on Tuesday, the newspaper said it is not unlikely that the cargo will not be regained because the Turkish authorities had refused to give the cargo receipt note to the Syrian plane’s pilot when he asked for it.

Kommersant quoted a Russian military source as saying that the main issue is to restore the cargo “because what happened can only be described as a piracy.”

The Foreign and Expatriates Ministry condemned the Turkish act of piracy against the Syrian passenger plane coming to Damascus from Moscow which took place on October 10 as it was forced to land in Ankara Airport and searched before it was allowed to leave the airport after long hours despite the fact that it was not carrying any type of prohibited goods.

By Federico Fuentes

29 October, 2012

@ Green Left Weekly

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez’s re-election on October 7 with more than 55% of the vote was vital for two reasons.

First, the Venezuelan people blocked the return to power of the neoliberal right. Had they won, these US-backed forces would have worked to roll back important advances for the poor majority won since Chavez was first elected in 1998.

These include a huge expansion in government providing basic services (such as education, health and housing), the nationalisation of previous privatised strategic industries, and the promotion of popular participation in communities and workplaces.

Second, Chavez’s re-election provides a new mandate for arguably the most radical, anti-capitalist project under way in the world today.

Having emerged as a response to the crisis the country found itself in under neoliberalism, and at a time when socialism appeared moribund, Venezuela’s Bolivarian revolution has radicalised to the point where it has explicitly stated its goal to be “socialism of the 21st century”.

The ability to further advance this project in Venezuela will depend on the impact of ongoing US intervention and regional integration, the intensifying class struggle within the pro-Chavez camp, and the political fate and health of Chavez.

Background

Understanding the rise of the Bolivarian revolution requires placing it within the country’s oil-rich history.

The rise of oil production in the 1920s fuelled a dramatic transformation in Venezuela’s economy. Agricultural production, until then the main pillar of the economy, slumped as capital poured into the oil sector.

As oil’s contribution to state revenues rapidly rose, power and wealth became fused within the state. The result was a parasitic capitalist class that primarily sought to enrich itself by appropriating state resources.

These developments also shaped the formation of Venezuela’s popular classes. People fled the countryside en masse , flocking to the cities for their share of the oil rent.

They came to create a huge belt of barrios (shanty towns) where impoverished informal workers tried to eke out an existence. State funds were used by different political interests to win the loyalty of these sectors.

These factors underpinned Venezuela’s pervasive culture of “clientalism” and corruption.

This political set-up was sent into crisis by the economic crises and the gyration of oil prices that hit the world economy from the 1970s onwards.

Venezuela’s 1976 oil nationalisation only deepened this trend. The state oil company PDVSA came to operate as a “state within the state”, operating largely independently of any governmental control.

Within PDVSA, private appropriation of public resources continued unabated, while US-based corporations kept control over oil production.

State income instead experienced a steep decline, falling from US$1500 per person in 1975 to $350 per person in 1999 (in 1998 US dollars).

International financial institutions advised Venezuela’s rulers to resolve the state’s fiscal crisis by shifting the burden onto the people.

A February 1989 International Monetary Fund austerity package caused fuel prices to skyrocket overnight. This was the trigger for an explosion of mass discontent: an immense uprising that rocked Caracas for four days, extending outwards to several other cities and towns.

Although quelled by brutal repression, the Caracazo marked a point of no return for a society reeling from a deep economic slump and a crisis of the state and political system.

Throughout the next decade, about 7000 protests took place as new dynamic forms of local organisation began to emerge in the barrios.

Given the state’s role in controlling the nation’s wealth, the state became the focus of a steady stream of demands that progressively became an unstoppable wave.

Rise of Chavez

Within this context, the leader of a clandestine dissident current within Venezuela’s armed forces — Lieutenant Colonel Hugo Chavez — captured the collective imagination of the poor majority when he led a failed military rebellion in 1992.

Jailed after the rebellion, Chavez emerged two years later resolved to stand in the 1998 presidential elections.

He began campaigning across the country, arguing the only way to achieve real independence and eradicate poverty was by giving power to the people.

Alongside setting up a new electoral party, the Movement for a Fifth Republic (MVR), Chavez called for the formation of a Patriotic Pole (PP) to unite all those parties and organisations that supported his candidature.

Chavez’s message enabled him to tap into the deep discontent among Venezuela’s popular classes and unify the various strands of the left.

On December 6, 1998, Chavez was elected as president, winning 56.2% of the vote.

However, from the beginning it was clear that winning elections was not the same as taking state power. PDVSA remained tightly under the control of the traditional business elites and the allegiance of large sections of the military to any project for radical change remained unknown.

The new government was also conscious that its mass popularity was not rooted in well-organised social organisations. The dispersed and unorganised nature of “chavismo” meant the centre of gravity lay with executive power.

As such, the pace and course of reforms has tended to be driven almost exclusively by initiatives taken from above. Critically, with each advance, Chavez sought to organise and consolidate the social base.

Chavez’s first move was to convene a democratically-elected constituent assembly to draft a new constitution. The aim was to shift the rules of a game that had been traditionally stacked in favor of the old political class.

In opposition to the corrupt “representative” democracy that had allowed the same elites to monopolise power for decades, the new constitution proposed a “participatory and protagonist” democracy, where power resided among the people.

The challenge for the Bolivarian forces was to turn this novel idea into reality, which would require an inevitable showdown with the traditional elites, backed and funded by Washington.

Over the next three years, these two competing blocs faced off in three decisive battles. Each time, the pro-revolution forces came out victorious, and consolidated their military, economic and political hegemony.

Showdowns

The first major showdown occurred on April 11, 2002, when an opposition rally against Chavez morphed into a military coup that overthrew him and installed the head of the country’s chamber of commerce.

The coup was defeated by a civic-military uprising. Hundreds of officers who supported the coup were later removed, taking control of the armed forces out of the hands of the old elites.

The second major bid to bring down Chavez took place at the end of the same year, when an alliance between PDVSA management, capitalist elites, the corporate media and corrupt trade union officials sought to halt production in the strategic oil sector.

In response, loyal PDVSA workers, soldiers, and community activists mobilised to break the back of the bosses’ strike.

This mobilisation from below enabled the Venezuelan government to purge PDVSA of its right-wing bureaucracy, and placed the company firmly in the hands of the government.

The leaps forward in worker and community organisation that occurred during this struggle proved crucial to defeating the third major offensive by the opposition: the August 2004 recall referendum on Chavez’s presidency.

Chavez’s victory, in a poll made possible because of democratic reforms introduced by the new constitution, consolidated his democratic credentials.

With the military and PDVSA under control, and resting on an increasingly organised social base, the Chavez government was able to launch a range of experiments during 2003-2005 aimed at deepening peoples’ power.

These included initiatives such as the social missions that provide free health and education, and economic enterprises such as cooperatives and worker-run factories. These helped tackle poverty while simultaneously increasing the organisational capacity of the masses.

By the time of Chavez’s re-election bid at the end of 2006, the Bolivarian revolution could also count on a growing alliance of progressive and left governments in the region. This opened the way to greater regional cooperation and integration, a key objective of the Bolivarian revolution.

However, it was also clear the revolution had not decisively broken the resistance of corporate power and replaced the old, corrupt state that served corporate power with a new power built from below.

Anti-capitalist offensive

After winning the December 2006 presidential elections, Chavez unleashed a new anti-capitalist offensive.

At his January 8 inauguration ceremony, Chavez explained that the goal of this new term was to “transfer political, social, and economic power” to the people. To do so it was vital to dismantle the old state.

Chavez said the goal of 21st century socialism required advancing on three fronts at the same time: increasing social ownership over the means of production, encouraging greater workplace democracy, and directing production toward social needs.

To achieve this ambitious agenda, Chavez called for all revolutionaries to help form a united party of the revolution, the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV). Four-and-a-half million people joined the PSUV in its initial recruitment drive, a clear sign of the level of support for the initiative.

Over the next six years, the Chavez government carried out a wave of nationalisations in the oil, electricity, telecommunications, banking, steel, cement, and food production sector as it tried to reassert national sovereignty over the economy.

The overall result was that the state had the necessary weight across strategic sectors of the economy to dictate production goals. The threat of expropriation loomed for those that refused to cooperate.

The spate of nationalisations was more the result of government initiatives (in response to the needs the poor) than workers’ struggle, and Chavez continuously emphasised that nationalisation alone did not equate with socialism.

To help stimulate worker participation, the government initiated a process of workers’ control in the state-owned steel, aluminium and electricity companies.

The promotion of grassroots communal councils, and later communes (made up of elected representatives from communal councils), was also an important focus of the Chavez government during this term.

These councils were aimed at building upon and linking the various forms of existing community groups. The communal councils were charged with diagnosing the main problems facing their communities and creating a plan to resolve them.

Funding for these projects came from the state, but all major decisions were made in citizen’s assemblies. This was a unique experiment in democratising the redistribution of oil revenue while promoting community empowerment.

In 2009, the government took a further step by promoting the communes. These aim to encompass several communal councils within a self-defined community to collectively tackle problems on a larger scale.

These new forms of organisation have involved unparalleled numbers in community organising. They have come to be seen as the building blocs of a new state.

Internal class struggle

This simultaneous push for nationalisation, workers control and community councils also brought to the fore the class struggle that existed within chavismo.

A 2009 banking crisis led to several banks being nationalised and their owners jailed. This process revealed the existence of a sector within the revolutionary process that had enriched itself through its connections to the state, popularly referred to as the boliburguesia (“Bolivarian bourgeoisie”).

Moves to transfer greater power to workers and communities faced mounting resistance from within the existing state bureaucracy.

Along with the persistent problems of corruption and clientalism, worker and community activists increasingly complained that company and state officials sought to defend their positions of power.

By early last year, Chavez was also denouncing the vices that plagued the PSUV. He warned: “The old way of doing politics is devouring us, the corruption of politics is devouring us … the old capitalist values have infiltrated us from all sides.”

The party needed to return to its principles, otherwise it risked following the path of the MVR, which only really operated as an electoral vehicle.

Recognising these problems, Chavez launched the Great Patriotic Pole (GPP) in October last year, calling on all pro-revolution social movements and parties to unite to ensure a decisive victory in the 2012 presidential elections.

More than 30,000 different groups signed up. In the end, the votes of the non-PSUV parties (which numbered around 1.7 million) and social movements that did not appear on the ballot (as they were not electoral registered) and therefore called for a vote for the PSUV despite not being involved in the party, were decisive in securing Chavez’s victory.

Challenges

As Chavez prepares to start a new term in government, Venezuela’s revolution faces three main challenges.

The first is the threat from the US, which has recently made some gains in the region such as the coup against progressive Paraguayan president Fernando Lugo, and the Venezuelan opposition it backs in its bid to oust Chavez.

The second is the revolution’s ability to deal with the twin problems of corruption and bureaucratism. Overcoming these challenges will require greater popular participation through initiatives such as the communes and the push for workers’ control.

Consolidating the unity achieved through the GPP could help lead in this regard.

The third challenge, which has become ever more apparent since Chavez’s diagnosis with cancer, is the need to create a collective leadership.

History will record that the Bolivarian revolution succeeded in rolling back neoliberalism and laying the foundations for a transition to 21st century socialism.

The dynamic relationship that has existed so far between Chavez and the masses has been a key factor in ensuring this.

Chavez has played a dominant leadership role in the Venezuelan revolution. This has been criticized in some quarters, but his role must be placed within the historic context outlined: one of a Venezuela marked by intense ferment from below but varying organisational strength of the social movements.

At each step, Chavez has launched initiatives to encourage the self-organisation of the people. Through this process the Venezuelan people have increasingly taken the destiny of their country into their own hands.

His role as the key figure in the revolution and the trust placed in him by the poor majority make Chavez, for now, irreplaceable.

His re-election to the presidency in the face of a reinvigorated opposition, demonstrated once again that most Venezuelans believe he is the sole figure capable of leading the country forward.

The future of the process will depend on increasing the self-organisation of the masses and the development of a collective leadership that can support, and be capable of substituting for Chavez’s singular role.

[Federico Fuentes is a Socialist Alliance and Australia-Venezuela Solidarity Network activist. He has lived in Venezuela as part of Green Left Weekly ‘s Caracas bureau. With Michael Fox and Roger Burbach, Fuentes is the co-author of the forthcoming book Latin America Turbulent Transitions: The Future of Twenty-First Century Socialism .]