News Archive July 2004

0330 GMT July 31, 2004

DAFUR Agencies say the UN Security Council has passed an unanimous resolution [China, Pakistan abstaining] giving Sudan 30 days to stop violence in Dafur or face consequences.
Orbat.com comment For diplomatic reasons the resolution is not worded in straightforward terms and should be regarded as something less than a warning of impending sanctions. Nonetheless, some action is being taken. Meanwhile, France is considering the dispatch of "humanitarian" troops to the region. We may guess this means medical, engineer, and signals units plus force security. We may also guess the number will be as small as possible, so that France can partially assuage the critics of inaction without getting into what Paris considers could be a big mess if it was to openly intervene. "Humanitarian" troops also offers the UK and Australia a way of beginning a low-profile intervention, in the manner African countries are considering: the Africans are to send security to protect their observers.
In case anyone is wondering where the observers came from: earlier, the Africans negotiated a ceasefire between Khartoum and the Dafar rebels; as part of the agreement the Africans were to station observers in the region. It appears that the current crisis began when the observers reported that Khartoum was continuing military and terrorist action through its surrogate Arab militia. The latest proud action of the militia, either this week or the previous one, was to raid a Dafur village or camp, put people in chains, and then set fire to them. Possibly the militia thinks the Africans are too low a life form to deserve a clean death?
IRAQ Al-Sadr and Sunni clerics warn Muslim countries working with Saudi Arabia to send troops to Iraq to do no such thing, because they will be considered as puppets of the occupier.
That the Sunnis don't want a Muslim security force is understandable, because Muslim troops would go after the Sunnis involve in the violence and mayhem. As for Al-Sadr, we have been repeatedly saying the Shia clerics should get rid of him and take the consequences, which we feel will be zero. The longer they allow this bantam to strut, the more inflated his ego will become. Our way is negotiation, compromise, and co-option, the Shia clerics will reply. We cannot shed the blood of a co-religionist. Guess what? Blood is going to be shed regardless because Al-Sadr wants power. Since you are standing in his way to power, it's going to be your blood. If you are prepared to make that sacrifice to make nice to Al-Sadr, then of course we have nothing to say.
BAGHDAD MURDERS The Independent reports that the number of bodies arriving at the Baghdad morgue has increased: at the start of the year it was about 400/month; in 20 days of July it has been over 500. Does the report refer solely to numbers of people killed in criminal related violence, or does it include casualties from the insurgency? Do bodies of people who die of causes other than murder and insurgency also at times arrive at the morgue?
We'd like to know this because we'd like to know if the Independent is stretching facts to make its case that the people of Baghdad are feeling terrorized by the violence around them. We know from a dozen media reports each week they feel that way and the Independent need not stretch any facts to convince us of that.
Here is a callous, perhaps even a cruel comment. Saddam is supposed to have killed 300,000 Iraqis to maintain his regime. We wont count the Iraq dead from the 1980-88 war, because that was a war, not killing for political reasons. Saddam was in power some 33 years, so that means 9,000 a year above and beyond what the normal toll from murders/violence might have been. Are the Iraqis saying Saddam's days were better because at least there was not this violence sure that the killing today is in excess of that during the Saddam era? If so, how do they know? Saddam didn't allow the Independent to visit the Baghdad morgue and to talk freely to his citizens. Could it be the situation appears worse because ordinary Iraqis see it as random violence?
Of course, the perception is what counts. The Independent article should be required reading for our civil liberties friends - yes, we do have friends even among those groups and we respect them. May be they will be less sure that you must apply the standards of the west to Iraq in this matter. We have said before, and repeat it again: Baghdad's population is roughly the size of the Washington Metro area's. We suspect that if, in Washington, 20 people a day were dying in bombings, shootings, kidnappings, and political murders, our HR friends would not be talking so casually about civil liberties.
LETTERS We have a number of interesting, informative letters that need discussion, but your editor is already 40 minutes over his new quota for the update page. Tomorrow, perhaps.

POWER IN IRAQ

Apparently the power situation in Baghdad is even worse than it was last year.

Please, please let's avoid the standard platitudes, which are [1] Iraq's power network was on the verge of collapse due to sanctions before the March 2003 invasion; [2] Iraqis themselves destroyed a good amount of the distribution system by looting; [3] Power is now given fairly to the whole country and not just reserved for Baghdad; [4] The demand for power has surged because Iraqis can now freely import appliances; [5] Insurgents keep blowing up oil/gas pipelines.

All this is true, but is utterly irrelevant. We 100% support the argument the Iraqis have been making: "You mean to tell us America could not give us power if it wanted to?". Your editor has never heard Americans give so many excuses. Isn't America the country where you have to do the work, regardless, and no excuses? Isn't this attitude that made America the great nation it is today? So when American officials trot out the same old excuses, 16 months after the invasion began, are we to assume that Americans have lost their will, their drive, their determination?

Well, your editor does not think so. Americans are the hardest working people on earth, which is why no West European in their right mind wants to live here. As a teacher, your editor's wife is paid for 1300 hours a year. She is required to spend 2000 hours a year to do the job assigned, or else she is in trouble with her employer. She is not paid one cent for the extra 700 hours - its part of her job. To a greater or lesser extent, this is common experience of most Americans. Even the one's that get paid for their extra work have to slave flat-out. Your editor's brother is a lawyer, and he is required to put in 80 hours a week, 50 weeks of the year, or he's going to get fired. You editor works a standard 110 hours a week, 52 weeks of the year. Some consider that a bit excessive, but certainly for professionals, 80 hours a week is quite normal. Your editor could sit and give a thousand more examples from people he personally knows, but we doubt anyone familiar with America wqill disagree with our point.

So if it isn't a loss of will or whatever, why is there still such a power shortage in Iraq? Here's your editor's theory. It's because those darn Iraqis should be so grateful to us for having freed them, we don't need to do a thing more. Besides, they're - well, Iraqis, not Americans you know [Subtext: they're a 3rd world country so should we care?]

Your editor agrees completely that Americans don't need to do anything more. At the start of the year your editor's students invariably ask him: "Do we need to do this? Do we need to do that?" His response: "This is a free country and you don't need to do a thing you don't want. This being a free country, however, I am free to give you the grade I feel you deserve". So in some existential sense, let the Iraqis cool their behinds in the desert breeze, Americans don't need to provide power.

Now lets turn up the thermostat so that America has 110-degree summer days and the power is off or intermittently on for 20 hours of 24, second year running. Are Americans going to have a single fond thought for their government? Especially if their country is occupied by foreigners?

Now look, people. Your editor is a firm supporter of American imperialism. He believes it is a Good Thing. But can we at least get this imperialism thing right? This is not the 19th Century or even the early 20th Century. You would be well advised to be working 24/7 to get power to the Iraqis. Trust us: give them power, give them security, and they'll look at you differently.

0330 GMT July 30, 2004

UKRAINE IN IRAQ AFP says Ukraine is negotiating with the US the withdrawal of its Iraq contingent. With an election approaching, and the public being overwhelmingly against the deployment, a withdrawal is understandable. Orbat.com is of the opinion that Ukraine will say Iraqi security forces are in any case taking over from them, obviating the need to keep Ukraine troops in Iraq.
BAGHDAD KIDNAPPINGS Reuters says that while kidnappings of foreigners get the attention, ordinary Iraqis are having to suffer through a wave of kidnappings for ransom. Orbat.com notes that this, of course, has been happening since the first days after Saddam's fall; the steep increase in crime after Baghdad's liberation has surely much to do with Saddam's emptying his jails of criminals before the onset of war. A senior police official in Baghdad says that recent days have seen a sharp decline in reported kidnappings as Iraqi police have aggressively moved to arrest criminals.
FALLUJAH Agencies say unidentified aircraft attacked Fallujah. The unidentified label is required because a US spokesperson said he had no information about any US operation in the area. Assuming the US conducted the strike, this would be the 8th known air attack against the terrorist Zarqawi's group.
AIR STRIKE VIDEO Reader Jerry M sends what we considered a fascinating gun-camera video of an F-16 strike in Fallujah. The video shows perhaps 20 terrorists running in a street when the are enveloped in a cloud of black smoke, presumably the result of a bomb strike. Two issues here.
First, if this is a video of one of the strikes where the US said it killed several terrorists, whereas locals say the targets ran out and so an empty house was bombed, we have one of those odd situations where both sides are telling the truth. The terrorists figured out an attack was underway and escaped to the street, only to be killed there.
Second, we did not want to carry the video for various reasons. One, we are waiting while Jerry M checks the source to ensure it is authentic. Two, while the matter is of great interest to all us armchair warrior types, we are not sure it is appropriate for us to carry it. After all, if we don't carry pictures of terrorists executing their victims etc., we have no justification for carrying the F-16 video.
SADDAM'S HEALTH Reader Michael Thompson sends a UK Daily Mirror story filed from Amman reporting that Saddam's lawyers say he has suffered a minor brain stroke and that he could die before his trial. They are also concerned about an attempt on his life. Other stories have said that Saddam may have prostrate cancer but is refusing to permit his jail doctors to conduct tests. A US spokesperson denies any Saddam illness.
WE WEEP FOR SADDAM'S LAWYERS Saddam's lawyers have not been permitted as yet to meet with him. They say they are worried they may soon not have a client to represent. Orbat.com has decided to take up a collection to help pay the lawyers in case Saddam dies. Your editor found an Indian 5-paisa coin in an old box of his, and he has donated that to the Save Saddam's Lawyers Fund. In case anyone wonders, very roughly the coin is worth one-tenth of one US cent. Should we have told everyone about our contribution? We don't want to sound boastful...
ARROW INTERCEPTS SCUD Haartez of Israel says the first ever live intercept of a Scud by an Arrow missile was conducted successfully in the United States.
Everyone is entitled to hyperbole in promoting their defense products. Still: should Israel claim credit for Arrow as an Israeli system when it has been jointly developed with Boeing? And is it really relevant that Arrow is better than Patriot? Shouldn't we be saying it is better than the 1991 Patriot? Thirteen years have passed since Gulf I, and we think it is unlikely the US has been keeping its Patriots at 1991 versions. Further, what exactly does one staged test prove? Patriot 1991, whatever its faults, is battle tested. If Arrow is so wonderful, why is the US not rushing to buy it?
BTW, is the US going to at all buy Arrow? India is said to have ordered 3 batteries, in addition to its SAM-10 batteries - about which little is known for certain. Uh Oh - your editor has to give himself twenty smacks on the hand. Just this Monday he was sitting with the person who knows more about the Indian Air Force than anyone else, and it didn't occur to your editor to ask. This person doesn't use email; your editor does not write regular mail letters and avoids the telephone...so we'll have to wait until chance again brings this person your editor's way.

0330 GMT July 29, 2004

IRAQ In what appears to be a major Iraq-US-Ukraine operation, coalition forces killed 35 insurgents south of Baghdad and captured 40. Seven Iraqi soldiers were killed.
The media being what it is, the suicide car bomb attack at Baquba which killed 70 has hogged the headlines; in our opinion, the above operation is considerably more significant.
PAKISTANI HOSTAGES Terrorists executed two Pakistani civilian drivers they had kidnapped.
Orbat.com has made a big slip-up: we have not mentioned what for some weeks has been obvious, but can now be taken as confirmed: most of the Iraq kidnapping are being carried out not by real terrorists, but by criminals - in some case, of course, there is little difference - for the purpose of ransom. We do not as yet have details on the Pakistanis, but it is possible to reasonably speculate that they were murdered because there was no one to pay ransom for them. The Pakistan government cannot pay ransom: Pakistan has hundreds of thousands of workers in the Gulf region, pay once and 10 more of your nationals will be kidnapped. Further, the Pakistan Government's stand is its nationals are in the region with a full awareness of the risks, and why should the government have to pay ransom. It's hard to disagree with the Pakistani position.
KIDNAPPINGS: THE REAL ISSUE The publicity given to the kidnapping and executions has tended to obscure the real issue: why are there so many foreign civilians working in a war zone? Given the dangers, which include IEDs and shootings, should not soldiers be doing the job?
Yes, they should, but the US doesn't have the soldiers for reasons we need not repeat. So contractors are being used in a war zone in unprecedented numbers; contactors are there to make money, and it makes for more profit if you use South Asians for drivers and East/South Europeans for engineers and so on.
If Mr. Rumsfeld had been running the Allied invasion of Europe in 1944, he would probably be boasting how he did the job with just 1 million soldiers. Behind them would be 9 million unseen contractors. Imagine this in 1944: civilian airlines are hauling cargo into the war zone, immigrants are driving the trucks to keep the US armies supplied, private security guards are protecting important officials, more immigrants are cooking food for the troops at the front lines etc. etc. Sounds like a farce, but that is exactly what the US is doing in Iraq.
If there was some point to doing it this way, there still might be some justification. There is no point here except the massive ego of some US defense officials, who in the smoke and mirrors typical of US corporations, want to demonstrate "efficiency" by reducing their own work force and outsourcing everything else. The number of people supporting the US occupation force may well equal 100,000 or more, but Mr. Rumsfeld can smugly assert his theories are right.
MERCENARIES Question to Mr. Rumsfeld: could not the civilian contractors - including the Americans - be construed as mercenaries?
And if you are so enamored of mercenaries, why not abolish the US armed forces altogether, achieving 100% efficiency? You could win your next war without any US personnel at all. We've mentioned this ten times before, but obviously no one from your side reads us. There are 600,000 South Asian troops happy to go to Iraq at a quarter of the money you are spending.
DAFUR For once we agree with the Washington Post, which has blasted Mr. Colin Powell's sudden conversion to proceeding with all deliberate speed re. Dafur. One thousand people a day are dying, says the Post. We had earlier praised Mr. Powell for bringing Dafur to the world's attention. Today we are not so sure we did right to praise him.
For one thing we are told our assumption he was the leader on this is plain wrong. Apparently many countries have been trying to bring the issue to the US's and UN's attention, and Mr. Powell entered the game last, not first
Consider this: even the Africans are so fed up they want to send troops to Dafur, regardless of what Sudan thinks. They are asking only for western money and logistic support. They are so concerned that even without any international authorization, they are working to send 300 troops to protect their 118 person observer mission in Dafur. Shame on you, Mr. Powell. You are a man of unequalled integrity, and you have earned sainthood for refusing to criticize your boss even though he has systematically under-cut you at every step. But on Dafur, we cannot agree with you. Enough already.
HIJACKERS PROBING US AIRLINE DEFENSES Since we ran the story on Syrians probing US airline defenses, we have received many letters with leads to other reports. Your editor is so confused by the implications of the reports that he has decided not to present a summary and a commentary for at least one more day. Maybe he'll be able to make some sense of what is happening in another day. Otherwise he would not be right to publicize such a serious matter and perhaps add to the worry, fear, panic, and frustration that appears to be building up in the US civil aviation industry.

0300 GMT July 28, 2004

IRAQ The heroic resistance against the foreign infidel continues. In a daring operation that showed what the resistants are made of, and showed they fear no one or thing, they shot dead - two cleaning women working for the Coalition. Such bravery! Such courage! Such self-sacrifice! Such scum of the earth. And why are the Muslim nations, the third world nations, even many of the Europeans, so quiet at the weekly shootings of women, doctors, university professors? This is warfare? We say again and again: show these insurgents no mercy: they will show you none when they have you in their cross-hairs.
DAFUR Sudan orders mobilization of all government departments - whatever that means - to meet the threat of foreign intervention. Mr. Colin Powell says it is too early to talk of military intervention. The French government - oh so realistic - says Sudan is integral to a solution. All true. But you know what? Any proposition is true depending on its context. The truth also is that genocide is being committed. So which truth will those who warn against "hasty" action in Dafur choose?
TIMES OF INDIA DOES IT AGAIN The Times of India was once reckoned as among the 20 best newspapers in the world - by the measure of the western press. Your editor clicked on after a long interval, he was so disgusted he has been avoiding the E-edition. Now he is smacking himself on the head for visiting. Among the headlines: "Are breasts woman's best assets?" Even in the worst days of male chauvinism and sexism you would never have seen a headline like that in a serious American newspaper. Your editor has to admit the US media may be a bunch of idiots, but they are not an uncouth bunch of idiots. By the way, those Americans should not expect any sort of uproar among Indian women. Indian women are convinced - with just cause - that Indian men are a retarded bunch of uncouth idiots, and they will simply refuse to dignify the matter by commenting.
We offer the above because from time to time our Indian readers write in. "You quote the Jang of Pakistan every day," said one person "you say you are Indian, but I think you are a Pakistani." Okay, my friend, if you are reading this: why don't you send us an India brief, say twice a week? Your editor finds the TOI inane, the Hindu unreadable, the Indian Express and Hindustan Times lightweight, and worse, unenlightening. PTI and UNI are wire services, they give very little analysis - and rightfully so - but they also refuse to put their stories in context. Meanwhile, if our Indian friends will please excuse us, we'll continue with the Jang of Pakistan. At least it carries news.

1300 GMT July 27, 2004

[2nd Update]

DRPK DEFECTORS AFP says the first batch of 200 DRPK defectors has arrived in ROK via air from a 3rd country; 250 more will come in the next batch. To avoid angering DPRK, Seoul is releasing no details.
ZARAQAWI AFP says US troops in Iraq have captured an associate of the Jordan terrorist Al-Zaraqawi. No further details. The latter has claimed responsibility for several major car bomb attacks. His hideouts in Fallujah have been attacked seven times from the air; the last three attacks have been with Iraqi permission; the last two have involved information supplied to the Iraq government.
DEBKA.COM has two stories of interest. It says the US has dropped leaflets over Fallujah warning $102 million in funds for Fallujah will be withheld unless attacks on US troops stop. Debka also says the first live test of an Arrow missile against a Scud at high altitude will take place today at a California range.
We are confused: Israel has been making claims that the Arrow is a better anti-ballistic missile weapon than Patriot, but if this is the first live test against a real target, on what basis has the claim being made? Patriot has been combat tested numerous times. Incidentally, the Arrow is in a different class altogether of ABM interceptors. It is a much bigger and heavier missile, possibly in the Russian SAM-10/12 category.
The US has been reporting mixed success with its ABM intercepts. The warheads used, however, are conventional. There is no reason to believe the warheads used in the limited strategic system under installation in Alaska will be other than nuclear, which changes the intercept dynamic dramatically.

0330 GMT July 27, 2004

DAFUR AFP says Australia is prepared to join the UK in sending troops to Dafur under UN auspices. The EU has asked the UN Security Council to pass a resolution authorizing sanctions against Sudan, including military intervention. There is some improvement in Sudan's allowing aid convoys to reach the region, but the EU says that nothing significant has changed.
In Orbat.com's opinion, the west is imoving swiftly because its wants to avoid charges of abetting genocide, as happened in Rwanda crisis 1994. Then it was all talk-talk, and even the UN troops on the scene were not permitted to interfere with the killings.
IRAQ-IRAN Washington Post says the new Iraqi Defense Minister has denounced Iranian interference in Iraq. He charged Teheran with sending terrorists into Iraq and of seizing border posts.
SADDAM CNN quotes a UK newspaper as saying the Iraq Human Rights minister paid a visit to Saddam in jail. The ex-dictator has a 15 square meters cell with air conditioning, gets one MRE and two hot meals a day, spends his time reading the Koran and writing poetry, gets three hours exercise time, like American muffins and tends a small garden. He has even put a ring of white stones around a palm. While Saddam is not allowed to mix with other prisoners, the latter are free to talk with each other during the three-hour exercise period.
Orbat.com is totally overcome. This is so unbearably cute - the garden, we mean. We repeat out standard advice: execute him right now and be done with it. Else we at Orbat.com will soon be so moved we'll be petitioning Saddam be allowed his bunny slippers and French monogrammed toilet paper.

US-IRAQ The US is considering a plan to perhaps halve its occupation force and confine the remainder to remote bases, to be held ready to support Iraqi forces as needed. The Army has been saying its very presence as it goes about doing its job is an irritant to the Iraqis. According to the Washington Post, the majority of Iraqis would like to see less of the US Army but a high percentage does not want the US to leave till Iraqi forces are strong enough.
ISLAMIC TROOPS TO IRAQ Jang of Pakistan reports the Pakistan prime ministers says several Islamic countries are working to evolve a consensus on sending troops to Iraq.
PLA EXERCISES China News Agency says 3000 troops are exercising in Fujian Province as part of the big air-sea-land exercises aimed at Taiwan.

0330 GMT July 26, 2004

IRAQ AFP says US-backed Iraqi troops killed 15 insurgents north of Baghdad, while US troops captured 15 suspects insurgents at Baquba. In the first incident, insurgents sought shelter in a farm. Iraqi troops chased them, but US forces did not enter the farm. Interestingly, the local US commander had made a deal with the locals that his troops would not enter - we do not know what the locals gave in return, but we may guess they promised to take care of insurgents themselves. The US provided fire and air support from outside the perimeter.

DAFUR CNN and other agencies say the Europeans have joined the US in strongly condemning the Sudanese Government for failing to stop the genocide in Dafur. Britain has gone to the extent of having its top military officer say he can put together 5000 troops for dispatch to Dafur on short notice.

Your editor's relationship with the British is ambiguous, understandably, as he is Indian. Sometimes, however, one has to get over one's petty feelings. Well done, UK. Meanwhile, dare we ask where our friends the French are? If foreign intervention has to take place, Chad is the logical base.

NEWS OF THE ABSURD Sudan says there is no need for foreign intervention because the government is doing everything it can in Dafur. No doubt, my dears, no doubt. It does not, however, follow that foreign intervention is not needed. After all, your policy is to exterminate the people of Dafur one way or the other and you are doing everything you can to ensure you are not thwarted.

ANGOLA - THE LOUISIANA ONE After 9/11 your editor has been advocating "rendering" suspected terrorists to Angola prison in the US, as the prisoners will break anyone faster than the US government ever could. Well, hold that thought. Apparently in the last five years there has been a huge change at Angola. A new warden has used to religion to alter the behavior of the prisoners, 70% of whom will never see freedom again, and many of the rest will die before they finish their terms. Violence is way down, both prisoner-on-prisoner, and prisoner-on-guards. Guards-on-prisoners is not mentioned, but we would presume that too is down. The ACLU is upset because - strange, is it not? - the warden is using mainly the Christian religion. How weird he should do that: after all, isn't the US a predominantly Christian nation? The warden says he does not discriminate: any religion is welcome at Angola. The ACLU is still not happy: the warden is violating the separation between Church and State. But even the ACLU is not stupid enough to take this matter to court, because Angola was not part of the state as much as it was part of hell.

We leave readers with a happy thought brought to our notice. While people are writhing in moral outrage against US treatment of Iraqi prisoners, consider this: the new SuperMax prisons being built are generally entirely underground. Prisoners will spend 23 hours a day in solitary, and never see the light of day again. We've said this before: that one hour does not mean you get to have human contact. If the guards feel like it, they can take away your one hour, and even if they let you exercise, they can stop you from speaking to anyone. A European friend finds it peculiar we should seek to justify US treatment of Iraqis using analogies to American prisons. We are not justifying US treatment, only trying to explain it. The Iraqis have it good compared to many American prisoners, and many Guard MPs are correctional officers in peacetime. Cant expect the Americans to treat foreign prisoners better than their own.

HOSTAGES, AUSTRALIA, AND THE SPANISH FACTOR

IS THERE A "HOSTAGE CRISIS"? The media keeps talking about approaching deadlines for the hostage crisis - insurgents have seven truckers working for a Kuwaiti firm in their custody and are threatening to start killing them if the Kuwaiti firm does not leave Iraq. Seeing as there are fresh hostages abducted every week, we are wondering if the term "hostage crisis" is appropriate. After all, the media do not refer to the "insurgent crisis" in Iraq.
One of the truckers is an Indian whose wife has offered to take his place if they will release him. She says he is the family's sole bread winner, and better she die than him. Your editor knows his Indian women - much to his misfortune - and he, at least has no doubt she is absolutely serious. Courage comes in many forms, and we think this woman is demonstrating real courage. There is a lesson here, but we'll leave it people to think it through themselves.
AUSTRALIA ON SPAIN The media says Australia today attacked Spain, saying the terrorist threat against Australia is a direct consequence of Madrid's bowing to pressure. We knew the threat would get a reaction from the Australians, and that it would not be what the terrorists want, but this development we did not see. The Australians are very polite people: there must be real anger in their country that they are so directly criticizing a friend.
The Spanish deny the two matters are linked, insisting that they have been fighting terrorism and have taken serious casualties in the process. Besides, they say, Spain withdrew it was the will of the people.
WHY IS SPAIN WASTING OUR TIME? We really do not get why governments waste so time in mouthing garbage. That Spain has been fighting domestic terrorists for decades and is helping Afghanistan with its election in no way mitigates Madrid's actions in Iraq. The reason you do not give in to terrorists is where does it stop? As for the will of the Spanish people, we have two comments.
SHOULD WE ALWAYS FOLLOW THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE? First, the Spanish people were against the Iraq venture from the start. Their then prime minister took a principled stand to help the US and Iraq. He lost his position as a consequence. But whatever Spain's feelings may have been before the country went into Iraq, by withdrawing, Spain has only made itself much more vulnerable, and of course encouraged the terrorists to strike everywhere else.
Second, why one earth would any Spaniard believe that if her had not gone into Iraq, the terrorists would have spared Spain? Yes, they would not have staged the Madrid rail bombings - but only for now. When next they needed to pressure Spain to distance itself from its allies, they would have struck.
More on the will of the people. Problem here. Democracy is not about the will of the people - no government can function on such a basis. Democracy is the right to elect leaders who will do what is best for the people AND the country. Often what is right does not coincide with what the people want. Case in point: the people of the United States did not want to enter World War 2 at any cost. Had Japan not attacked, the US would have waited until the Germans invaded England - and probably the majority of Americans would still have said "it's the Old World - nothing to do with us." Because the US did not enter the war till 1942, the Germans had a free hand for 2 1/2 years. The cost of defeating them was that much more.
THIS IS NOT BUSH'S WAR The Spanish people have to face facts: they let their hatred of George Bush top their common sense. The war against fundamentalist Islam is not George Bush's war. He did not start it. The other side did, and it started planning as far back as 1990. Had Mr. Clinton been legally entitled to a third term, he would have won hands done. So the terrorists would not have staged 9/11 had he won? Like it or not, Iraq is a critical way station in the new war - we spare our readers our usual lecture, because we assume the Spanish are smart enough to know this.
SPAIN WILL NOT ESCAPE THIS WAR Come on people, let's act our age here. And what astonishes us is that when the last war between Islam and Christianity took place, Spain was a front-line state. Have our Spanish friends already forgotten their own history?

0345 GMT July 25, 2004

COMMENT ON NEW TERRORIST TACTICS Reader Dean Brunkhardt has his doubts about the veracity of yesterday's story by an air traveler. The doubt is not that it happened, but on 3 points. [1] The stewardess tells the traveler not to worry, there are several air marshals abroad. [2] The security agent is holding 14 Syrian passports in his hand while interrogating the traveler. [3] The fasten seat-belts comes on, seven of the Arab-looking passengers who have already caused panic by their odd behavior jump up and move to the rear, and no marshal intervenes.
While Mr. Brunkhardt is careful not to make his own interpretation and sticks to describing what rings false to him, we have to say that it seemed to us yesterday the drama was an exercise. To what end we do not know. Our immediate guess was that the passengers were used as guinea pigs by the authorities, and that the affair was oriented toward seeing how they/crew behaved undress stress. Again, this is only a guess.
Mr. Brunkhardt's observation about the air marshals/crew making no effort to intervene after the fasten seat-belt sign comes on and 7 of the suspects leap up to head for the rear is, by itself, proof that the drama was a sham.
We had one other point. You would find it difficult, if not impossible, to get 14 men to commit collective suicide - we doubt most of the 9/11 lot knew the real mission was to crash the aircraft. Potential terrorists know by now their chances of taking over the aircraft are zero, because of the measures taken to secure the cockpit. Moreover, they know that air marshals are deployed on flights; 14 Arab-looking men with Syrian passports would arose comment among the most lax of security contingents, and so on. So presumably they are looking simply to crash planes and kill everyone on board. That makes no political point.
Further, you don't need to put anyone on board if the aim is simply to blow up an aircraft in flight. There are still hundreds and thousands of ways to get bombs on board. Mr. Brunkhardt observes that airline personnel and perimeter safety is poor, why can't one of the baggage handlers or flight caterers or refueling crews and so on get a bomb on board?
Nonetheless, whatever the truth of the matter, it's an interesting story.
PAKISTAN AND 9/11 The Times of India quotes UPI as saying that an anonymous senior Pakistani source presented papers to the 9/11 commission as the latter were wrapping up. The papers say that Pakistan ISI is ensuring Osama gets his dialysis treatments in Pakistan, and give detailed evidence of the Pakistani involvement in 9/11.
Our reaction would be to ignore the UPI story. That someone waited till the commission was almost ready to release its finds indicates the anonymous source wanted to be sure what track the commission was taken to ensure his "evidence" fit the commission's findings. It could also be no such person existed, and the story was planted on UPI.
We would particularly ignore the story on another ground: the Times of India implies there is a massive cover-up by the commission, and that US media are at best negligent, and at worst complicit in refusing to mention the matter to their readers. The aim of the cover-up would be to protect people like President Musharraf who is seen as helping the US in the War on terror.
This may surprise the Times of India, but the 9/11 commission is not comparable to the an Indian inquiry commission where everything can be manipulated by the government. There were people of many ideological convictions on that committee, plus there were hundreds of staffers involved. The staffers also have their own views. To assume everyone got together in a conspiracy is a bit much: any one of those people who does not like Mr. Bush would have blown the cover-up in a trice. The commission was responsible to the Congress, not to the President. It was made high-level precisely to get to the truth about what Presidents Clinton and Bush knew or did not know, what they hid, what mistakes they made. So if someone from the Administration saunters to the commission and says: "Mr. Bush does not want President Musharraf embarrassed, so don't write anything based on the anonymous report", both the official and Mr. Bush would have been in the dock next week. Mr. Bush might even be impeached for interfering, and he might very well lose the election even without impeachment.
BUT: that said, the Times of India is on much firmer ground when it says a simple word search of the document finds 200 references to Pakistan and only 100 to Iran. Why is everyone making a big deal that Iran let the highjackers transit when the hijack chief worked in Pakistan, many of the men were trained in Pakistan, and money was wired from Pakistan to one of the highjackers? Good point. We know the answer, but the Times of India does not pay us, so it can go find the answer itself. This may seem unfair, but any intelligent 10th Grader knows the answer. We suggest Mr. Rajghatta - the Times of India man in Washington - get going here. We know him personally and can attest he is quite a bit smarter than an intelligent 10th Grader.
ARAFAT AFP reports that 50 militants seized a government office and demanded that Mr. Arafat's cousin resign his security job and that 50 other officers must go. AFP notes that the militants just under the banner of Fateh consist of dozens of small groups, and that Fateh officials have denied they had anything to do with the group.
The AFP story serves to further underline the potential dangers of the current leadership crisis. The whole thing could blow up into a civil war.
PAKISTANI TROOPS TO IRAQ? Jang of Pakistan reports that the government has said it will seek the approval of Parliament before sending troops to Iraq.
The situation here is quite straightforward. The Pakistan government is ready, willing, and able to send troops. It is concerned about a domestic counter-reaction. It is slowly, carefully, working its way through the shoals and seeking to get a consensus on the question. If there is a consensus, the Pakistan government earns much leverage with Washington. Pakistan can send 20,000 troops without much effort. If there is no consensus, the Pakistan government can say: "Look, we gave it our very best shot. The people are against it." Washington is properly appreciative of Islamabad's work, even if it did not pay off, the domestic opponents are happy. Win-win. Fairness disclosure: your editor is a great admirer of Pakistan's diplomacy.
AL-QAEDA THREATENS AUSTRALIA Jang of Pakistan reports that an Al Qaeda website threatens "pools of blood" if Australia does not withdraw its troops from Iraq.
There You Go Again. This advice to Mr. Bin Laden et al is not free. We are tired of giving free advice, and suspect Mr. Bin Laden et al do not take it seriously because it is free. We are the Rodney Dangerfield of the defense analysis business, that's for sure.
Okay, in brief, the pools of blood will be yours. The Australians have been quite restrained in their commitment to Iraq because of the intense domestic opposition. Still, they take their commitments to the US alliance seriously, unlike some US allies, and they have done a great deal considering the domestic situation. If, Sir, you would for once learn something about your adversaries, you would find:
1. The Australian establishment feels it has done its duty to the US, and is working to reduce the Australian military presence in Iraq/nearby. 2. Just because you have made a white country cringe - Spain - does not mean that because Australia is also white, it too will cringe. You need to go back to Elementary Logic, freshman year college. Spain and Australia are quite different countries. 3. The fastest way to unite Australians and get them panting and drooling for your blood is to threaten them or worse, to hit them. 4. If you say the Australian of today is not the Australian of yesteryear when it comes to toughness, we'd agree. But neither is your lot as tough as the Arab warriors of yesteryear. There are very few societies that relish war as a blood sport and need only an excuse to go out there and kill people. America is, of course, the leader here. Interestingly, Australia is also one of the few.
The reason you probably don't know this is that Australia kind of stays below everyone's radar, by choice. It has its relaxed, fun-loving, whatever side. It also has another side: "Dudes, this Osama is getting an attitude. We need to pick up our guns and go talk some sense into him." [Australians don't speak that way: our Oz Lingo is very outdated so we had to improvise. But please, Sir, just accept our point that's the way they're going to react.]
In sum: Back off. Apologize. Remind the Australians Al Qaeda is a loose grouping of many different organizations. Release videotapes of the responsible group's leader on the mat, with you giving him a sound thrashing for insulting your best friends, the Australians. Who knows? It's always possible some Australians may actually buy your spiel.

0330 GMT July 24, 2004

TERRORISTS PREPARING NEW AIRPLANE BOMBING TECHNIQUES? A reader sends us an article which we advise not reading if you travel by air. The article includes a lengthy quote from the UK Observer which says that terrorists have been making dry runs for a new bombing technique: different people bring parts of a bomb [technically IED] on board the aircraft, and the device is assembled on the aircraft.

If you wish, now read the experience of one family on a domestic US flight: click
http://www.womenswallstreet.com/WWS/article_landing.aspx?titleid=1&articleid=711. We'd like to hear what readers think about the article. One question: wouldn't the explosive part of an IED be "sniffed" by dogs or machines if a passenger attempted to carry it on to an aircraft?

GAZA/WEST BANK Washington Post reports an Israeli peace group as saying despite pledges from the government, settler expansion in the Occupied Territories continues unabated. 8000 settlers live on 40% of the land in Gaza; 1.3 million Palestinians live on the remaining 60%.

If these figures are correct, then Houston, we have a problem. Your editor is not one of those who believes if the US abandons Israel to its fate, that Arab relations with the US would turn to milk and honey instead of the sulfuric acid they are today. Moreover, he most emphatically believes that the current fundamentalist threat is motivated little, if at all, by the US support of Israel. The fundamentalists are people who want to return to the world to the 15th Century, Israel or no Israel. At the same time, those figures have to give anyone pause for thought. What is going on here?

AN AMERICAN VIEWPOINT Our argument is this: the US is engaged in a war with Islamic fundamentalism, it needs to clear its rear. This does not mean abandoning Israel. To our mind, it means one of two things. The US needs to convince the Israelis to withdraw to their UN-mandated borders pre-1967, and it has to guarantee their security. If the Israelis won't listen, make it their problem, not the Americans' problem. Or the US has to persuade the Jordanians that Jordan is the true home of the Palestinian people. How will the US do that? We keep getting told by every second Washingtoon how brilliant s/he is. Your editor would let the Washingtoons figure it out. [To our non American friends: that is not a misspelling.]

DAFUR Another poll on Arab attitudes toward the US is out, and - surprise! - more Arabs hate the US now then they did before Gulf II, yada yada yada. A friend of ours had two weights on his desk: the small one said "Little Deal" and the large one said "Big Deal". Being subtle, he would never say "Big Deal!". He would simply slam the larger one in front of you. We are sure Americans everywhere are crying that they are hated so much. Okay, but what has this to do with Darfur?

Everything. In Darfur, Sudanese Arabs are trying to kill or drive Sudanese black people out of the country. It is called genocide, and in the real sense of the term, not like some Iraqis saying the US is committing genocide in Iraq. One of the things they don't teach much to American school kids - because of political correctness - is that if Americans were buying slaves from Africa, someone had to be selling them. Those someone were the North African Arabs.

We have been waiting for some time for the Arab leaders and their people to denounce Arab genocide. We continue to wait.

NEW ZEALAND Haartez of Israel says a New Zealand citizen who lived in Israel for 13 years and served in the IDF is likely involved in the passport affair. Austrian sources say that another person involved is an Israeli diplomat.

Okay, we accept this was a Mossad operation - let's not argue about this. We go back to the same question we asked a couple of days back: Mossad can't forge good passports? Seems every second Islamic terrorist is wandering all over the placed with forged documents. We have no clue as to the truth of the New Zealand affair, but it's making less and less sense.

POSSIBLE ISRAELI STRIKE AGAINST IRAQ N-ASSETS A reader reminds us to mention that Israel now has air-to-surface missiles with 150-300 kilometers range, so that if anyone is sitting around plotting how the Israelis might conduct an attack against Iran's N-assets, to please take that into account. Good point. We think, however, the Israelis will use their ASMs to clear the way for their F-15s. There are some targets that need 2000-pounders. The Popeye ASM, for example, carries a 750-lb warhead.

0330 GMT July 23, 2004

RAMADI US Marines from the 1st Expeditionary Brigade fought a battle with 75-100 insurgents in Ramadi, killing 25 and capturing 25. The Marines had 14 wounded, of whom 10 returned to their units after first aid. The Marines also used air strikes.

These are the sort of figures we like to see. What concerned us about the inevitable toll of 2, 3 4 Marines a day in Anbar Province is that the US has been giving no details of the engagements or the enemy losses.

IRAQ PRIME MINISTER Newsweek reports that the new Iraqi Prime Minister is cracking down ruthlessly in areas under his control. In one raid alone, 500 suspects were rounded up, and no one was talking about their legal rights. Police have again become confident because people know that the government will not stand for any nonsense. Apparently the Prime Minister has either executed a few people himself to set the general tone, or he has unleashed stories to this effect to instill fear.

Before we get all weepy about human rights, consider this. When an American policeman tells you to stop, you stop. Why? Not because you live in a democracy with human rights and love your police to death. Its because you know darn well if you don't stop, he will kill you, and the courts will take his side. American police keep the peace the way all police keep the peace: by fear. The human rights comes in because once you stop, you have rights, for example, the policeman cannot search you without due cause. So even if you have five machine-guns in your car, he is going to have to prove in court he stopped you not because his instinct told him you were up no good, but because he had due cause - your right brake-light wasn't working.

What's happening in Iraq is a war between the criminals/insurgents and the state/US. In wartime civil liberties are suspended. Would Hitler have been defeated if at every meter US troops had to read everyone their rights etc.? Obviously not.

THE ABSURDITY OF IT ALL If you have ever wondered why the US has not been able to keep any law and order in Iraq, consider this story which an Iraqi policeman told Newsweek. When US forces were in charge, he brought in an insurgent. Near the gate of the police-station, the insurgent started fighting with the policeman. The policeman subdued him by force. The US soldiers standing outside the police station arrested the policeman.

Now, you say, this is altogether too crazy for words. We agree. Were the soldiers being over-zealous? By no means. If they had done nothing, and a US cameraman or reporter had been on the scene, here's the headline: "US troops stand casually by smoking cigarettes and drinking water while Iraqi police brutally beat a suspect." Next thing you know, the headline reads: "Iraqi victim sues US Army in New York, alleging that Iraqis under US control beat him."

So - you say to your editor - tell us again how America is going to build a world empire? We need a good laugh, its been a tough day at the office. Well, the Americans already have a world empire, they just want to make sure every bit is under their control. Your editor has his theories on how the US manages despite the strong Three Stooges element in modern American society, one day he'll share them.

SAMARRA: MIGHT THIS BE THE REAL MISTAKE THE US MADE IN IRAQ?

Washington Post reports that residents are fleeing this city of 300,000 because of fears the US is about to launch an offensive against the insurgents there. Some say 40% of the residents have already left.

Samarra is a city between Tikrit and Baghdad, and another hotbed of pro-Saddam people. The Washington Post quotes a local as saying "Samarra drove Saddam crazy," because there are seven tribes resident. The tribes were often at odds. At least one of them specialized in criminal activity.

US 1st Infantry Division (Mechanized) is responsible for Sammara, and its spokesperson all but explicitly says an offensive is coming, says the Post. 1st Division is studying how to avoid a Fallujah-type situation, where Iraqi forces failed to fight. Apparently, however, after a mortar attack this week which killed five US soldiers and an Iraqi, large numbers of the National Guard have deserted [this is the former ICDC].

What we find interesting is the information that Saddam did not really control Samarra. We already know he did not control Fallujah. It may just be possible that he managed to remain dictator for so long because in most of Iraq he played one faction against another, and did not try to impose what we think of as law and order except in Baghdad - and that too we don't know if his writ ran to Sadr City. If this is so, the US has made a terrible mistake in trying to do things the American way: this may be the first time people in Iraqi cities are being forced to function in a way that makes sense to most people, be they American or European or Chinese or Indian.

There have been repeated hints in the media that the arrival of the Americans upset the local balances of power. No media source has particularly explored this facet of the resistance. We cannot particularly blame them, because it would never occur to outsiders that this is the way Iraq is run.

Nonetheless, it is not as if the Americans did not have any idea at all. Somalia functioned, and continues to function, on a pure tribal basis. Everyone was basically getting along once the UN arrived; the trouble started when Ms. April Glaspie of State decided Adeed had to go. Afghanistan and Yemen are two other countries your editor knows for a fact that operate on a tribal basis, with balances of power carefully negotiated. Every now and then the balance breaks down as one side pushes and the others push back, and you get bloody violence. After a few days of shooting, the balance is readjusted and restored.

We want to carefully point out that the above system does not mean there was no law and order. Except when someone sought to change the balance, there was strict law and order because tribal law was in force. We want to note only that it's a very different system from the way most of the world functions.

If our thinking is along correct lines, it would follow that overthrowing Saddam would be easy. But after overthrowing him, the US would need to accept local balances of power in each city, district, province. They would need to pay off people and tribes Saddam paid off - this is happening in situations like the oil pipelines. It was how the 1st Armored Division defeated Al-Sadr. But it for sure is not the way things have been done in Baghdad, Fallujah, Mosul and so on.

Given the above, the US is in really big trouble. The issue is not building a democracy where none existed. Its highly condescending for westerners to assume democracy cannot be brought to Iraqis. India is one of the poorest and least literate major countries in the world, and it also happens to be a country where with the exception of two years, democracy has thrived. Of course the Iraqis can learn about democracy. But the issue is something else: the US occupation has to be based on the understanding every local area has its own politics, and the US has too work within the politics.

It is not as if the US military is not capable of so doing: it has been doing so very well in Afghanistan, and it has developed a high degree of understanding of Iraq realities. Its that the media is not active in Afghanistan, so we don't have a spate of stories of US forces accepting corrupt warlords, buying off people, turning a blind eye when intra-tribal politics result in some human rights abuse and so on. And again, it's not as if the press wouldn't understand the realities on the ground: almost without exception all the non-Indian journalists your editor has met overseas are highly intelligent. But the press cannot do without its stories. And if it could, how would a headline like this play in Preoria: "US puts local tribal leader on taxpayer's payroll; agrees to look the other way if he leaves US forces alone"? In this case we cant put all the blame on the press, or even most of it.

What's the solution? Oddly enough mostly what the US is doing right now. Turn over power to the locals, help build up security forces, not judge the local leaders, and provide backup in terms of money and armed force. We say "mostly" because the US is not doing this on a city-by-city basis. It is still treating Iraq as a nation the way we think of the US, or India, or China as a nation, with a single legal code, a single government, a unified armed force under central control etc etc.

0330 GMT July 22, 2004

IRAN N-BOMB Reuters say Israeli defense officials believe that Iran will have its first N-bomb by 2007. They have pushed back the date because, they say, Iran is now under watch and is having trouble getting the equipment it needs.

Orbat.com would be a lot happier if anyone has seen evidence of an unsafeguarded plutonium production reactor. In 1984 your editor forecast a Pakistan bomb by 2000, though people were assuming it already had several warheads. His current estimate is 2005, and Pakistan seems well on track. But what about the six test explosions Pakistan staged in 1998? Doesn't that indicate Pakistan must have several bombs. Well, there is a lot of mystery about those "explosions". Readers cannot expect your editor to solve every thing: he to earn a living. When he did his original work on the Pakistan non-bomb, it took him from 1984 to 1986 to make his point. These things take time. Our Indian readers, particularly the science types, are the ones who should answer this question.

US CLEARS ARMS SALES TO IRAQ President Bush has authorized the sales of American arms to Iraq. Also, the IAEA is to send a team to Iraq to certify Iraq's nuclear program has been dismantled. The certification will clear the way for lifting of UN embargoes.

AFGHANISTAN US and Afghan forces fought a gun battle with insurgents, killing ten and capturing five wounded, at a cost of five wounded to their side. In another incident, however, a pickup conveying 11 government militiamen was ambushed by insurgents and all the soldiers were killed.

SAUDI'S MOST WANTED Agencies say the Saudis have accounted for 14 persons on their Most Wanted list of 26. The Saudis do not rank their wanted.

YEMEN AFP says that the Yemen government is still battling a fundamentalist cleric who has been under attack now for some months. He had about 3000 followers, of which 800 have been arrested and 300 killed. The government is said to have a similar number of dead. The cleric says he is being targeted because he speaks out against the Americans.

Give it a rest, Mr. Cleric. The one thing you get medals and rewards for these days is to speak out against the Americans. The US government does not own Yemen. You are under attack because you are a fundamentalist and a threat to Yemen. How boring. Blaming America inflates your opinion of yourself. We doubt any American thinks s/he is as powerful as you make out.

In the good old days of the Cold War, leftists frenziedly attacked the CIA: watch out, this is a CIA plot and that is a CIA plot and we are in danger from the CIA and they control the factory that makes our toilet paper etc. A CIA acquaintance once drolly said to your editor: "Given that our plots are so easily revealed and foiled, we must be as incompetent as the Three Stooges. No one fears the Three Stooges."

MR. BUSH'S PERSONALITY

This is not irrelevant. Just about everyone we know is seriously aggravated by Mr. Bush, and its a deep visceral hatred that no one can really explain. Seeing as lot of what goes on in the world turns on Mr. Bush's personality, your editor offers the insights below - gleaned from the US media, of course.
WHY PEOPLE HATE BUSH So, we all know by now how dumb Dubaya is. A US columnist says, however, he is not dumb. He deliberately speaks the way he does because he's talking to his core constituency and not to the liberals or even - gasp! - the Euro-intellectuals. We are not referring to his mashing words and sentences - that's a learning disability and your editor suffers from it too. The columnist is referring to the content/accent of Bush's words. Everyone in his family speaks standard American, and Bush's connections with Texas are a bit weak till he became Governor. The cowboy accent and the hard black-vs-white language is deliberate. It's driving a good percentage of the world insane. But the people who vote for him love this accent and his words. And - you guessed it - the Indians, French, Germans etc. do not get to vote in the US presidential elections. So if you hate Bush, you can hate him even more now.
DOONESBURY ON BUSH Gary Trudeau, author of the Doonesbury cartoon strip, gives an interview to the latest Rolling Stone. He was two years younger to Mr. Bush at Yale and while he is careful not to claim he knows Mr. Bush well, their paths crossed often. He says Bush has a genuine ability to relate to people, but he also has seemingly innocuous ways of putting a person down if he is displeased. The bestowing nicknames on everyone is an example, says Mr. Trudeau.
We don't doubt Mr. Bush can be very sharp, but we always thought Mr. Bush gave everyone nicknames because that's what preppies do. Your editor grew up a la Preppie mode. He still prefers to give a nickname to everyone rather than use their real name. He does it as short-hand, and not as a put down: in India we call nicknames pet names and they're used affectionately. But what do we know, we're from Iowa.

OUR HEAD HURTS

This is no way to title a news story, but we are simply stating a matter of fact.
It now appears that according to UK and US parliamentary/congressional investigations on the "failure" of WMD intelligence before Gulf II, there was plenty of reason to believe Saddam had by no means given up his dream of reacquiring WMDs. The evidence was not conclusive that he had managed to reacquire them. But his efforts were not in doubt.
Further, while we have been told for months that the US envoy to Niger had said there was no evidence of Iraq's attempts to procure uranium ore, apparently it appears that his report and other evidence show there was an attempt, which did not succeed. This is the same envoy who's diplomat wife was outed by the Washington Post as being a senior CIA officer, blowing her long-established cover.
We should add that in a peculiar fit of nationalism, the US media has not gone after her, and the few photographs of her published show dark glasses, scarves, and little of her face to be seen. We say nationalism because we want to be generous to the US media. Their restraint could also have been sympathy for her at being made to suffer because her husband told the US government things on WMD it did not want to hear.
The Washington Post says that there was enough evidence that Mr. Bush need not have exaggerated anything. He could have made his case - presumably with patience, tact, and diplomacy- on the evidence.
The problem with today's reality is that reality is what the media says it is. Everyone is convinced that Mr. Bush lied outright, and now no matter what the evidence, most people are going to hold that belief till they day they die. Moreover, it's a standard propaganda technique that if you repeat a lie long enough and loudly enough, the truth will no longer matter.
Thank you, US media for telling us President Bush lied. Thank you US media for telling us he didn't lie, but he exaggerated the evidence. Of course, had he sat in Solomon-like judgment, decided the evidence was insufficient to justify war, and it turned one day that Saddam did have WMDs, you would have been calling for Bush's head. Us teachers have a word for this: oppositional. You say yes, your student says no. You say, okay, its no. He says yes. This behavior is normally seen between the ages of 5-10, in your editor's experience. That's much more mature than the US media.
We've taken two aspirin but won't call the doctor in the morning. No doubt there will be some other story altogether tomorrow.
In any case, who gives a darn? Iraq needed to be taken care of even if WMD-wise it was pure as driven snow - or should that be yellow as driven sand? No one your editor talked to in the run-up to Gulf II was at all interested in the WMD question. Take a broad view, and Iraq is about the return of the Crusades. Take an even broader view, and it is about establishing a world empire. Our readers should be no more interested in did Mr. Bush lie or not lie or whatever than they should be in what brand of toothpaste he uses. Come to think of it, the toothpaste information would have greater utility...

0330 GMT July 21, 2004

WAZIRISTAN Jang of Pakistan has been reporting skirmishes between militants and Pakistan security forces in South Waziristan, North West Frontier Province. On Tuesday, reports say 10 militants were killed. The Pakistan Army has between 70-80 militants boxed up in two valleys, and has taken all commanding mountain top positions. PAF F-7s have been attacking bunkers and fortifications.
AFGHANISTAN Jang of Pakistan reports that a brother-in-law of Mullah Omar, the Taliban leader, has been captured in Afghanistan. On information received, Afghan security forces "flooded" the area of his sighting. He attempted to fight it out with the security forces, killing one police officer before being subdued.
LEBANON AFP reports subsequent to a gun battle on the Israel-Lebanon border, in which two Israeli soldiers and a militant were killed, two Israeli fighters made a low level pass over Beirut, setting off sonic booms and panicking the population. Lebanese AA batteries opened fire with no results. The gun battle, which began when Hezbollah snipers killed two Israeli soldiers near Galilee. The actions come after a top Hezbollah leader was killed in Beirut. While his group is blaming Israel for hid death, the Israelis say they are not responsible. Debka says that the security for the particular gentleman was very tight
SAUDI AP quotes the two Arab TV stations as saying Saudi security forces have been engaging in shoot outs in Riyadh with terrorists. One report says several Saudis police were killed. CNN says over 100 security forces vehicles arrived in a one square mile area, possibly on information received, and that two terrorists have been killed. One may the man who succeeded the top Al-Qaeda man in Saudi Arabia, killed last month in a shoot-out.
The Saudis say 61 terrorists have surrender under the amnesty declared by the Kingdom, including four top men. The amnesty ostensibly offers immunity only from the death penalty.
US BASE IN ISRAEL? Debka says a Central Israel base is being constructed that will be used by the US for training and as a forward staging post for US Marine Corps and Army deployments to the Middle East. Orbat.com question: are we, as usual, the last to know or is this report not authentic?
NEW ZEALAND Haartez of Israel reports that the New Zealand government believes the passports that Mossad agents tried to obtain were to be used for an assassination bid in a third country. This would have created severe problems for New Zealand. The two men arrested and sentenced for the affair apparently belong to a criminal organization, suggesting they were not Mossad but working on the Israeli agency's behalf. Two other men are being sought.
What Orbat.com would like to know is: has Mossad become so inefficient at forgery that it had to try and get real passports? Whose photographs were supposed to be on the passports? If they were to be of the two men, were they also the assassins? If the passports were to be altered with pictures of the assassins, why couldn't Mossad simply alter other New Zealand passports? Passports are quite easy to obtain without actually stealing off the individuals carrying them. One common "scam" is to work with a travel agent who obtains visas for his clients - any good travel agent does this work. This is particularly good to use if you don't have access to a good forger: the travel agent keeps bringing you passports until you find ones that could pass for the passports of your operators, and then the travel agent says "so sorry, your passport was mislaid by the visa people - " - or whoever. Is the New Zealand government so efficient it can immediately inform passport controls worldwide that passports Numbers ABC12345 and -6 are no longer valid? There are many questions here.
The biggest question is: should your editor be complaining about lack of time if he spends time on such trivial issues as above? Well, perhaps he shouldn't. But any analyst who is any good will tell you that to do your analytical job you have to have a penchant for sniffing out stuff that makes no sense.
CORRECTION Reader Gholam Kian reminds us that the Nobel laureate lawyer representing the Canadian-Iranian journalist who was killed in Iran is not Arab: she is Iranian. We knew this, of course, because she received a lot of publicity, and in case of doubt we could easily have checked. In reality, sparing even a minute to check is often difficult in a one-person show like our news page.

0330 GMT July 20, 2004

ISRAEL-IRAN

ISRAEL PLANNING IRAN ATTACK Joseph Stefula forwards an article from the Sunday Times July 18, 2004, which says Israel is preparing to attack the Bushire nuclear power plants should Russia start sending fuel to Iran. Fuel is supposed to arrive late next year, the Sunday Times says that payment disputes have delayed matters. Israeli sources tell the newspaper that attacks have been rehearsed. The operation might be expanded to cover other potential nuclear weapons facilities such as the gas centrifuge plant at Nantaz. Both air and commando strikes would be undertaken, with the Israelis quoted as saying they are absolutely sure they will succeed.
FISSION 001 Once slightly enriched uranium is "burned" inside a nuclear reactor to produce heat, which in turn produces steam, Plutonium 239, 240, and 241 are produced in the fuel rods. The plutonium you want is 239, because that is fissile; 240 and 241 you don't want, because they dampen the chain reaction. Normally, when used for power production, the percentage of Pu 240 etc. gets much too high for a practical bomb. What Israel is worrying about is that [1] high Pu 240 etc may be unsuitable for bombs, but can be used as a radiological weapon, particularly given Israel is so small geographically. [2] Unless the monitoring is very tight, Iran could run short burns, maximizing Pu 239 production and minimizing Pu 240 etc. Then it could build bombs.
EFFECTIVE IRANIAN BOMBS MAY STILL BE IMPOSSIBLE Now, the situation is much more complicated than that so often described by arms controls groups. Its not clear to your editor, at least, that Bushire's core design will be conducive to plutonium production. Once you have plutonium, extracting it from the fuel rods and making plutonium spheres causes much loss of the plutonium, so you need much more than the theoretical figures some people use. Further, once the explosion is set off, below a certain threshold, the amount of Pu-239 needed to sustain criticality falls and the reaction stops.
THERE WILL BE NO 20 IRANIAN BOMBS A YEAR So please ignore the Sunday Times' estimate that 20 bombs a year or whatever could be made by Iran.
BUT ISRAEL CANNOT AFFORD TO TAKE CHANCES Nonetheless - and we emphasize the word - if someone is crazy enough and determined enough and lucky enough, they could make warheads from less than ideal Pu 239, keep them from blowing up prematurely, firing the launch vehicle successfully, getting the vehicle to arrive with reasonable accuracy, and getting a reasonable explosion at the end of it all. It is fine for your editor to sit there and make calculations, but no country would want to take a chance, particularly when your enemy is Iran, which has said time and again with utmost clarity that it is going to destroy you. So Israel has to attack.
WON'T DETERRENCE APPLY? We could start arguing deterrence theory: Israel is assumed to have warheads, and if even a single missile reached Israel, and produced the slightest explosion, it can be assumed that Israel would wipe Iran out of existence. This should suffice to deter Iran.
Problem is, [1] deterrence theory is an American construct and there can be all sorts of reasons why it might not work, particularly when you have a "suicidal" nation; and [2] military men cannot just sit there and keep giving up their "buffer" between the possibility and the actuality. They have to assume the worst. War is not a game of calculated probabilities and rational actions. It is a state of extreme chaos; the more insurance you can build for yourself, the better.
[THE IRRELEVANCY OF DETERRENCE THEORY Note: deterrence theory says that the threat of losing even one major city to nuclear attack is a catastrophe beyond bearing. So, assume the worst and assume 90% of your warheads don't arrive or function as they should. Rationally, 100 city busters should be more than enough to deter anyone. The US, however, went on to build 40,000 warheads and the Soviets 25,000. There are reasons for this, but one reason is that deterrence theory is just that - theory. In real life, you want as much insurance as you can get. This is quite off-track, but it's been a pet peeve of your editor for decades, and one reason he refused to study deterrence theory: he has better things to do than play mind games and make himself look important to himself.]
SO ISRAEL HAS TO ATTACK So we go back to the same thing: Israel has to attack, ergo it will; there is nothing anyone can do about it - other than eliminating Israel's arsenal and building a terrifically efficient air defense system for Iran and manning it with westerners. That's unrealistic, so lets go back to the statement that Israel has to attack. When it does, Iran will retaliate by any means possible, and that's where the US comes in, as a fireman to douse the fire, limiting damage to everyone else, and in the process make sure Iran gets burnt down.
Is this the October surprise? Orbat.com doesn't have the faintest clue, so we are not going to waste our readers' time with fake, pretentious analysis.

0330 GMT July 19, 2004

IRAQ AFP reports the US bombed a Fallujah house where 25 insurgents had gathered; local reports say 14 people including a woman were killed. The US made a point of emphasizing the strike was authorized by the Iraqi government.
In another development that shows, in a small way, that Iraq really is a sovereign nation, the Iraq government has permitted Al-Sadr's newspaper to appear again. The US shut it down because it was inciting locals against US troops, and the decision was a major factor in Al-Sadr's uprising.
AFP also says a Republican Guard major-general who was financing insurgents has been captured. This officer was found in Tikrit, and had been responsible for the defense of Baghdad in the 2003 war.
PALESTINE Agencies report the leadership crisis in Palestine has escalated. The Prime Minister is the latest official to resign.
Giving into international pressure Mr. Arafat finally reorganized the several Palestine security forces into three units, but instead of appointing an independent as the head of the security forces, as demanded by the international community and many Palestinians, he put his cousin in charge. The cousin, a former intelligence chief, is said to both corrupt and brutal.
Mr. Arfat's move led to unrest, and about 150 militants staged a demonstration in Rafah against him. The demonstration as fired upon apparently on orders of the new security chief, wounding 18. In retaliation, militants sacked a security office in Khan Yunis, setting free detainees and stealing weapons.
Orbat.com comment: if the unrest grows, this is the end of Mr. Arafat. What interests us most is Israel's alarm. Israel hates Mr. Arafat with a vengeance, but because the opposition to him is being led by younger elements in his armed Fatah party, Tel Aviv is now worried that a battle is brewing between the "moderates" - i.e. Mr. Arafat and company, and the "extremists", the Fatah rebels. Assuming that Tel Aviv is not dissimulating, it must be disconcerting to Israel that here is a situation it cannot influence or control.
This is nothing personal, but we suggest anyone reading Debka.com at this time on the Palestine trouble should be extremely careful.

IRAN

In Teheran a drama is taking place that typifies how out of touch Iranian hardliners are with the rest of the world.

A JOURNALIST IS KILLED In 2003 a Canadian woman journalist of Iranian origin was arrested some months back, and struck on the head by a member of the security forces. She then was taken to several police stations in different cities; what happened is not known, but she died. Her crime? Taking pictures outside a Teheran prison.

This sad story is quite common in authoritarian regimes. What came next, however, shows the problem with Iran's hardliners.

WORLD OPINION PREVAILS Normally the journalist's death in custody would have been a routine affair. Because, however, of international media pressure and the acute interest taken by the Canadian and EU governments at what they saw was a serious human rights violation by Iran, a trial was begun. The pressure got serious at times, such as when to protest Iran's dilly-dallying Ottawa was preparing to recall its ambassador.

The first round of the trial ended inconclusively nine months ago, and resumed on Saturday.

BUT TEHERAN MESSES UP At the trial, the victim's family protested that the proceedings were a cover-up. An innocent security officer was being blamed for striking the journalist. The journalist's legal team demanded that more witnesses be called. The judge refused and said the trial was over. The legal team refused to sign the court record and stormed out.

At the same time, foreign journalists and diplomats were barred from attending the trial on Sunday, though on Saturday they were allowed.

NO LIMIT TO STUPIDITY To understand the complete stupidity of the trial court, consider this. The world has been watching Iran since the journalist's death. Any normal country today - no matter how proud - would have been doing it's best to at least pretend the trial was fair. Iran's position has been that the journalist's Canadian citizenship mean nothing: she was an Iranian and therefore what happened to her is none of anyone's business.

In full view of the world, aside from barring the journalists the trial court refused to let Canadian, Dutch, French, and British diplomats attend. A Justice Ministry official flippantly opined that perhaps there were not enough chairs for the foreigners and so they were barred.

Further, the defense team is headed by the only Arab woman ever to be awarded a Nobel prize: she is a lawyer by profession.

TEHERAN IN THE FIRE Teheran has willingly jumped into the frying pan. The Canadians and Europeans are incensed: the Canadian ambassador has been withdrawn as of yesterday; European action is yet to be announced. The defense lawyer has threatened to take the Iranian Government to the World Court: no idle threat this, she is backed by some of the most powerful government's in the world.

HAS EUROPE LEARNED ITS LESSON? To our Canadian friends - and our European friends - we offer a strong rebuke. You have been cozying up to Teheran to forestall tough US action against Iran on its nuclear program. Your justification was you had a better way than Washington, the way of negotiations and not threats of war. The Iranian took you for a ride. Then they promised an open trial on the journalist's death; they have pointedly told you to go home. There is no better way. After the rigged elections - were they not a serious breach of human rights? - you should have taken the lead in isolating Iran. Instead you chose to keep dealing with it.

You should go home as the Iranians want, but to mobilize your armies, and prepare for war. Else it wont be your ambassadors being barred from a trial: it will an Iran telling you to do what it wants you do, or else it will put a warhead on your capital. We understand you think Mr. Bush is an idiot. But please end your petulant behavior right now. It's your future that is at stake. Mr. Bush's personality or lack of it has no bearing on the situation.

THE IRANIANS REALLY DON'T UNDERSTAND Meanwhile, we refrain from giving our usual free advice as far as Iran is concerned. Iran can simply not understand that the death of one woman is of such major significance. The hardliners are possibly cynically saying: "this will blow over: how can one woman, an insignificant woman, dominate our relations with the west?" Indeed, however, she can. The hardliners do not understand the west and they do not understand the importance of human rights today. Even the US, the mightiest power the world has ever seen, had to grovel when its soldiers mistreated a few Iraqi prisoners. You will have to grovel too. But of you say you will not, at least at Orbat.com understand your position. No amount of groveling is going to avert the hammer blows that are being prepared for you.

THE RECKONING IS COMING ANYWAY In a sense you are right: the woman is unimportant, and even if you make amends for her, the US is still coming after you. If you do make amends, however, you can complicate America's position with the Europeans, as happened with Iraq. Pride goes before a fall.

Your editor suspects that we are still some way from military action against Iran because this time the US will not, so readily, act unilaterally. It will seek to build coalitions. Nonetheless, there is a third player in this game, Israel. If Israel strikes on its own and Iran retaliates, then the US will be at war.

MR. BUSH, ARE YOU LISTENING, SIR? Personal plea to your editor's favorite president: Sir, assuming you are the one that has to give the "Go" order, can you PLEASE not mess things up this time? If you do, you will set the US back by a quarter century. The stakes are high. Fortunately, messing up on Iran is very, very difficult...[but we still worry - the things your team has done in Iraq surpass rational belief...okay, so you are getting it right at last. Its so much easier not to mess up to start with...are you listening, Sir?

0100 GMT July 18, 2004

IRAN-9/11 LINK Agencies say the 500-page US 9/11 Commission report to be released says Iran facilitated passage for 8-10 of the hijackers from Afghanistan to Europe by ordering border guards not to stamp their passports with Iranian stamps. Iran also provided clean passports.

First, let us clearly state that we do not doubt that Iran is one of the biggest backers of terrorism in the world. We support the hardest of hard lines against the fascist ayatollahs of Iran and Iran's nuclear program.

This said, the news above is highly underwhelming. We understand the almost insuperable difficulties in getting to the truth of 9/11. At the same time, in our opinion the US is going to have to do better if it wants to lay a case for punishing Iran. And, of course, we are doing the US government the courtesy of assuming the information it provided the Commission is true and unbiased.

Why is the US Administration not doing a propaganda build up against Iran's nuclear weapons program? Seems to us that would be more productive because very little slanting of facts is needed.

AL-QAEDA THREATENS ITALY Of all the threats floating around, the US is inclined to take Al-Qaeda threats against Italy to be the most credible. Now Al-Qaeda has said that unless the Italian Prime Minister is thrown out of office, there will be rivers of fire and blood or whatever.

We've heard just about every excuse for the language the Arabs in general and Al-Qaeda in particular use when issuing threats: this is the way people in those parts speak, it resonates with their people, etc etc, till the cows come home and die of old age. We nonetheless believe that threatening Italy unless its PM is thrown out of office - by whom, we could ask - is a mark of Grade Triple A stupidity.

Is Al-Qaeda bent on arousing support by its violent and vile words, or does it hope to influence Italy? Some terrorism types are saying Al-Qaeda does not particularly care what effect its terror activities is having in the West, its words are aimed at Arabs only. If this is true, then may we suggest the west increase by a factor of 10 its war against Muslim extremism? Anyone who kills for "raising the consciousness" of their people is pathologically ill and must be put down with no more thought a municipality would give to putting down rabid dogs attacking people.

If Al-Qaeda aims to influence Italy, here is some free advice. Its not for the west to understand you. Its for you to understand the west. The type of threat you have issued will have exactly the opposite effect, of hardening the minds of the believers, and forcing more liberal-minded Italians to shift to the right. Moreover, using words like yours leads westerners to think you are a bunch of flatulent, homicidal, clowns.

To a westerner, the person who threatens and threatens and threatens is weak. The person who shuts his fat mouth and puts forth deeds instead of words is an enemy to respect.

En passant: thank you Spain for knuckling under the terror threat. We understand you can't stand the Americans in the reign of Bush 43. But if you are willing to shoot yourselves in the tush just to spite the Americans, then the cows will come home, and you will die.

Yes, we know how you oppose terrorism etc. and have stepped up your commitment to Afghanistan. That is a Good Thing Needing to Be Done. But that's not where the war is. Despite the American doom and gloom brigade, things are going quite nicely in Afghanistan, thank you. A lot better than in the Balkans, considering the west has been in Afghanistan less than 3 years and has seriously undermanned its missions.

Notice the terrorists don't issue threats "Get out of Afghanistan or rivers of blood will flow." That's because they mostly have been killed, and the remnants are in the process of being killed. If you need proof of this, look at the Taliban's hopelessly pathetic effort to derail the Afghan election: some women workers and a few policemen killed, this is the best the Taliban can do. Bosh and Nonsense. Washington's drug gangs do a better job of intimidating the people.

NATO/AFGHANISTAN We are not entirely clear on this, and welcome clarification/correction. It seems that NATO is sending two more battalion groups to Afghanistan, to provide security for the elections, one group for the North and one for the South. Additionally, two brigade HQs and four battalions are to be kept on alert for deployment if needed.

US-SOUTH AFRICA The US is to train and provide resources for two more SANDF infantry battalions to ease the strain on South Africa's Africa peacekeeping deployments.

Please note: Africa is one thing the US got right. Some years ago, it began training battalions from several African armies for peacekeeping. This was a low-cost effort, and it is paying off handsomely. The Africans are taking an increasingly greater load for in-continent peacekeeping.

1200 GMT July 17, 2004

GAZA EMERGENCY Agencies including AFP and Reuters say a state of emergency has been declared in Gaza after 4 French aid workers and six officials were abducted. All have been freed. Two top security officials have tendered their resignations; Mr. Arafat has refused to accept them.
Apparently the crisis arose because of the younger Palestine militants, who want to be rid of Mr. Arafat and other senior leaders they accuse of corruption. This unrest may be tied to jockeying for power ahead of the Israeli pull-out from Gaza, but of course the roots lie much deeper, in Mr. Arafat's inability or unwillingness to provide a functioning, fair, and honest government, plus the situation vis-�-vis Israel.
IRAQ AFP reports its cameraman was beaten and shots fired over his head when he tried to take pictures of the aftermath of an explosion aimed at killing Iraq's justice minister as he was traveling in Baghdad. Two of the minister's guards were killed.
We mention this because with the Americans having taken a step back and the Iraqis a step forward, this sort of thing is going to happen with ever greater frequency. Already the media is afraid to move around because of the insurgents and outlaws, but now they will have to reckon with the Iraqi government. Understandably, the Iraqi government feels no particular obligation to ensure foreign journalists conduct their business safely. Doubtless there will be "investigations" and "apologies", all of which will amount to nothing. Foreign journalists clearly have a right to be safe in their own countries, but do they have a right to be safe in other countries? We do not know the answer; nonetheless, expect that coverage of Iraq will keep becoming sketchier.

0400 GMT July 17, 2004

US OPPOSES GERMANY Reuters says that a senior US diplomatic [not identified] has said that the US opposes Germany's big for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. The only reason given was Bonn's opposition to the US push for immunity for its troops.
IRAQ Even we are surprised at the speed with which the US media has reduced its Iraq coverage. The only news of interest - and this is admittedly a stretch - is that some Sunni cleric in Ramadi has called for the US to withdraw or face a holy war. He was recently released after 3 months in US detention, and his house was raided last week. We are sure Washington is undergoing many sleepless nights. Are the delusions of this person of any import? He is said to be a major Sunni cleric, but right now the only major clerics are the Shia clerics.
TEL AVIV - WELLINGTON ROW Israeli-New Zealand relations are under strain after the arrest and sentencing of two persons who Wellington says are Mossad. These gentlemen were apparently doing something fraudulent in connection with New Zealand passports. Israel has informally regretted the incident but Wellington wants a formal apology.
Some sources we read say the Israelis were forging New Zealand passports, another report seems to suggest they tried to get a passport using the name of a person confined to a wheelchair.
The Mossad is now getting caught trying to forge passports? And it is doing so in New Zealand what is going on here?
Moreover, why had Orbat.com been reduced to such pathetic straits that this is all the news we can dredge up for today?
ISRAEL'S WALL We are corrected by a reader when he tells us that most of the 425 km fence between Israel and Palestine, about a quarter of which is complete, is a wall only in some sectors: otherwise it is a fence and not a wall. Debka says 30km out of 40km built to stop attacks on the capital will have to be rerouted. This has nothing to do with the World Court: the Israeli high court has also ruled that particular section must be rerouted.
NEWS OF THE MILDLY ABSURD Jang of Pakistan reports that after a visiting US official again told Pakistan that it had to stop terrorist activity in Indian Kashmir, a Pakistani official said that Pakistan was not involved in said terrorist activity. The CIA has it wrong, says the official. After all, says the official, the CIA had admitted it was wrong on Iraq. Suggestion to Pakistan Government: send this official back to college to study logic. It is a good thing only a few weird people like Orbat.com's editor read the Pakistan press, otherwise many people would be shaking their heads in disbelief that any government can hire any one as stupid as this official.
NEWS OF THE ABSURD Jang of Pakistan also reports that the same Pakistan official says that Islamabad has asked Washington to review its immigration policies vis-�-vis Pakistan because the policy "is (a) violation of human rights". Say what again? Your editor frankly admits many who know him well feel he is a dimwit, and he freely admits he is not an expert on the US Constitution or the UN Charter or whatever on human rights. So he apologies for having missed Section 1548 of the Charter, which states: "The United States is specifically obliged to permit citizens of other countries to migrate to the United States under terms other countries lay down. Any failure to meet the expectations of other countries in this regard will be deemed to constitute a violation of Human Rights." We ask our readers to send protest letters to their Congressmen at this heinous HR violation, and we loudly condemn Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch etc. for their failure to note Washington's crime.
BUMPER STICKER There is an American bumper sticker that seems to fit the above situation: "If you aren't outraged, you haven't been paying attention."

0230 GMT July 16, 2004

IRAQ REQUESTS TROOPS Iraq has requested peacekeepers from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Egypt, Morocco, and Oman.

We'd be interested to see how this request will be treated in Delhi. India was preparing to send a division to Iraq at the US's request when domestic pressure against deployment became overwhelming. Now, however, the Iraqi government has asked, and whatever India's thoughts on the matter may be, the request puts Delhi squarely on the hot seat. Not to respond would constitute a big setback in relations between the two countries, who have traditionally had close ties.

Bangladesh, in our estimation, will send troops. It has become a major peacekeeping contributor, and has recently raised fresh brigades and units to permit continued expansion of its international commitment. Most people in Bangladesh are Muslim. Pakistan also should now have no problem sending troops, because Iraq has asked, and presumably the troops will be under UN control. For the 3 countries together to send 5-6 brigades is a simple matter. This could free an equivalent number of US troops to return home.

If Washington has any sense left after the second summer in Iraq, it will accept the diminution of its security role and facilitate the arrival and maintenance of South Asian troops by providing support and money. More likely, Washington will start haggling over small sums of money, in the tens of millions, even though it spends a billion dollars a week on its own forces. There is something about seeing brown faces that triggers Washington's bazaar mentality. There is an old, old rule in human relationships: treat others as you would have them treat you. Show respect to the South Asians, accept if a brown soldier dies his family is as grieved as if he had been American, and stop bargaining as if you are an impecunious customer at Delhi's GB Road - that's the euphemistically titled "Red Light District".

ISRAEL PLANS FOR ARAFAT's FUNERAL The world press is abuzz with the release of a planning document that discusses several issues that will arise when Arafat dies. His followers will want him buried in Jerusalem, that must not be allowed. Chaos will overcome Palestine, start making contacts with the younger Palestine leaders and militants. No matter how he dies, if it is in Palestine, Israel will be blamed, so put no obstacles in his transfer to an overseas hospital for treatment. Arafat, 75, is said to be on a diet of boiled vegetables.

We have much sympathy for the Palestine people, none for Arafat. We were even mildly amused at the Israeli pyswar planning for Arafat's death while he sits like a cornered rat in his compound. The Israelis take care to mention he could die in three ways: after a prolonged illness, after a short illness, or by Israeli action. Nice move to slip that in casually. Nothing boosts a man's morale as much as his enemies making plans for his funeral.

This man has done nothing but make his people suffer so that he can fill his coffers and hold power. Working as your editor does in a Catholic school, he cannot say more than a polite "Bye Bye Afraat, We Hate To See You Go [Not!]". Its a good thing your editor's head nun does not read Orbat.com, because she'd have a few words even for that mild expression of your editor's feels. In case any one is interested, she reads/watches only the sports news. All the editor can say in his own defense is to bet that anyone who sees the way the people of Palestine live is going to agree the above words are very mild.

Its okay to blame the Israelis for the plight of the Palestine people, and your editor does - as a third worlder, however, not as an oh-so-chic European liberal. But the Israelis are only half the story. The other half is the Arab states and people like Arafat. Israel being a democracy, a significant fraction of the people - perhaps even more than half - accept their responsibility. Now let's hear the other side accept their responsibility.

No other excuse for the Arab tyrants has worked so well as "we need a state of emergency because of the Israeli aggression against the Palestine people, and we have to hate the Americans because they back Israel." Now its time for Washington to show some smarts. Bribe Israel to give back as much land as possible. Let Israel build a wall or whatever it wants. Start building houses, roads, hospitals, schools, power plants in Palestine. Give them away free. Guarantee the security of Israel AND Palestine. Sure this is all going to cost tens of billions, if not more. Sure there will still be Arabs that want to kill every Israeli and every American. They, however, will be marginalized. And if it doesn't bother Americans that the Europeans cant stand them, why should it bother them if a bunch of Arab lunatics cant stand them? The old ways have not worked. Try new ways. You have nothing to lose.

DAFUR Mr. Colin Powell, we understand you are an American first, last always, and the color of your skin is of no consequence to you. We approve: that is the way an American should think. Nonetheless, our thanks for your intervention in Dafur. We hear that but for you, there would have been no intervention. Of course we are grateful that you are working on ending the slaughter of black people. More than that we are grateful that at last America is upholding American principles in Africa. Its not just the Islamic world that needs help.

PRC & TAIWAN Agencies say a Beijing backed Hong King paper says that Taiwan must return to China or else in 20-years China will retake Taiwan by force.

Note to Beijing: with all respect, when the US protection of South Africa and Israel became too onerous, Washington turned a blind eye to their development of nuclear weapons programs. Orbat.com's editor has assumed that since the early 1970s the US has a similar plan for Taiwan.

Right now Taiwan is protected by the US nuclear umbrella. Twenty years from now, its quite likely you will use your economic power to force America to stand off. For one thing, thanks to the suicidal Democrats and Republicans alike, you will probably own at least half the American debt. For another, your anti-US trade embargo will push the US into a very serious depression. With millions of unemployed Americans venting their fury on Washington, of course Washington will withdraw its nuclear umbrella. But will that clear the way for your assault crossing of the Straits?

Within six months of the US slipping off the leash, Taiwan can have crude nuclear weapons ready, within three years, perhaps 20+ reasonably sophisticated ones, in five years perhaps 50+.

We suggest: forget the past. The old ways don't work. Time is not on your side. You lost this battle decades ago. Set up a Chinese federation. Give federation units genuine autonomy and the right to secede if Beijing breaks the central compact. Tibet, South China, Hong Kong, Taiwan are obvious candidates for federated status. Look to the future: space is the next frontier. Spend your energies on being Number 1 there.

By the way, we suspect you will not be able to take Taiwan by conventional force in 2020 even if the US abandons Taiwan and a nuclear Taiwan is not an issue. A lot of your planning is static and tends to assume that will you leap 4 squares while Taiwan advances only one. This is not sensible. Some of your military planners, we hear, are trying to tell you this. Listen to them.

0315 GMT July 15, 2004

IRAQ BRIEFS Al-Zarqawi, the Jordanian terrorist who is working either with, or as part of. Al-Qaeda, claims responsibility for the July 7 mortar attack on the Iraqi Prime Minister Allawi's residence, and says that "If one of the arrows lost its way, more are coming toward you and targeting your heart." Al-Zarqawi also terms the Prime Minister as "Iraq's traitor". [Mr. Zarqawi, your poetic lyricism is indeed inspiring. Nonetheless, might we point out the obvious to you? You first have to know where the Iraq prime minister is at the time of your attack; you have to register your mortar(s), and then fire. Since you cannot and will not know where he is at a particular time, and since you cannot afford to waste time registering, may we suggested the metaphor of aimed arrows is mildly unsuitable? Try this instead: The archer/Blindfolded/Shoots at the sky and runs/Steel rain falls randomly/Allawi sips a cool lemonade. Just trying to help you out with the poetry thing.][Re. the traitor thing: at least the PM is Iraqi. And you are from...remind us again?]
The same statement claims Katyusha rocket attacks against Marine positions in Ramadi.
Iraq police have arrested a Libyan who they say has confessed to the 2003 Ashura holy days bombings in Najaf, and to working for Al-Qaeda.
The US Marine who says he was kidnapped by Iraq insurgents has not been questioned on his story. The authorities are simply focusing on routine tests. He will be question when he returns to Quantico, VA. NPR says, without giving details, that his story may be a hoax.
ISRAELI BARRIER Agencies say Israel is redrawing the part of its barrier wall that has drawn criticism from the World Court. A reader reminds us that World Court rulings are not judicially binding. Incidentally, when visualizing "wall", better to visualize the Mother of All Walls. Short of using a powered hang-glider to fly over it, there is no way any one is getting through this barrier. A point we don't understand, and on which we welcome comments from our readers: as we see it, Israel deals with Palestine because of the latter's cheap labor. From the security viewpoint, might it not be cheaper just to simply terminate all dealings with Palestine?
TUN [TOTALLY USELESS NEWS] Former US defense official Strobe Talbott's new book mentions that the Indian defense minister, George Fernandes, was "strip-teased" twice on official visits to the US. The Indian media has been having a field day savoring this insult to the national honor by the Americans. We haven't seen the book, but the word "strip-teased" sounds more like it was made up by the Indian press rather than used by Mr. Talbott. Nonetheless, Mr. Fernandes says there was no "strip-tease"; he was asked to remove his shoes, socks, and coat, and then to raise his arms. He says he complied, and that was the end of the matter. We are waiting for the Indian media to mention that just the other day Senator John McCain was thoroughly searched by screeners at a Washington airport; while the process was underway, other passengers who recognized the senator greeted him. The senator was good natured about the incident, and said words to the effect of the rules should be applicable to everyone. A gracious attitude, just as the Indian defense minister's attitude was gracious - he never bothered to mention it to the press.

0300 GMT July 14, 2004

IRAQ BRIEFS CNN says Philippines has begun an early pull-out of its 51 soldiers from Iraq, apparently in response to threats by insurgents to kill a Filipino civilian hostage. Eight soldiers have left. The original withdrawal date was August 20; it remains to be seen if the 8 were scheduled to return home at around this time anyway. [Regardless, score one for the bad guys. The loss to the allies is,