0230 GMT March 31, 2008

• Zimbabwe: A Peaceful Revolution Something unthinkable seems to have happened in Zimbabwe. In the general election just held, despite all the power the government has to fix elections, as it has done repeatedly in the past, and despite the evidence of large-scale cheating this time around too, the opposition seems to have won a clear majority.

• Despite threats that any announcement by the opposition of victory until the Election Commission would be treated as an attempted coup d'etat, the opposition has this time made sure the results from each individual station are posted on the walls for all to see. The opposition says to wait till the Election Commission announces the results is to forfeit the  election because the Government will rig the results in its favor.

• And it seems that the opposition is running at 60% of the vote, with one-third counted, even though it was not united. In the major towns of Harare and Bulwayo, it appears the ruling party has lost an incredible 40 of 41 seats, with six ministers defeated. One has already announced his resignation.

• The few independent observers that were allowed to monitor say essential the same thing, that the opposition has won. The observers noted in one case 8500 voters were registered to an empty piece of land and there are surely many such cases.

• An ominous silence is said to have descended on Harare. The President has not been seen. People are naturally worried about Mr. Mugabe staging his own coup. Our own guess is that the Army will not go along if that is what he orders because the Army, though favored in the allocation of very scarce food and money resources, has also had a very rough time because there is so little to allot. Moreover, if a coup takes place, even the African Union will have to act against President Mugabe.

• In our opinion there is some danger that while the Army may not back Mr. Mugabe, it's senior officers may cast him aside and stage a military coup. Naturally this will not be to anyone's interest because the country really is ruined. The Army can prosper only if it takes even a bigger share of available resources, squeezing the people even further. It would seem better for the Army to ensure the results are fairly announced and to stand aside while the country rebuilds, giving everyone - the army included - a bigger pie to share. But, of course, we are not privy to what the Army thinks.

• Al-Sadr Calls Ceasefire: Seems A Compromise Has Been Negotiated He has ordered his men off the streets and told them not to tangle with the Iraqi security forces.

• In return he has demanded the release of his arrested followers and amnesty for others.

• The Government of Iraq has said this was a positive development and that it will lift all curfews. It denies any talks took place with Al-Sadr, but the militia leader said talks did take place, resulting in an agreement. Al-Sadr has not said that his followers cannot defend themselves if attacked, he has merely said theya re not to go on the offensive, whatever language is used.

• Now, consider for a moment that Al-Sadr's men were already off the streets when Al-Malaki started his offensive. So a return to the status quo ante is a tacit acknowledgement he has won and Al-Malaki has lost, however the Iraqi prime minister may choose the paint the picture.

• Our suspicion is that a number of people - including the Americans/British, Al-Malaki's senior commanders, Iran, neutral ayatollahs, and Shia factions such as Fidala (part of the government and one of the three rival factions in Basra) - told Mr. Al-Malaki his offensive was not going to work and that if he continued there would be consequences not to his advantage.

• The US is, of course, going to spin this sea change and insist more than ever it did not sanction the offensive. But there is no way the offensive could have begun without US agreement. Anyway, its for the Americans to sort out what all this means for them. Having Al-Sadr break his initial ceasefire and begin attacks against the Americans and Sunnis was not in the American interest one bit. That is why we were surprised the Americans let the whole kit-caboodle proceed. If the offensive has been dropped because of US pressure, more power to the Americans. They are learning to act sensibly.

• In all of this the Americans must have  had to consider the consequences if anti-US factions in the Mideast used the occasion to start their own offensives, such as Hezbollah against Israel, Hamas against Fatah, Syria against Lebanon, Iran against everyone. Really, this reduction in temperature is best for everyone.

• Jonathan Pollard The affair of this American spy for Israel never fades because the Israelis keep trying to get him released. Here is a quote from Jerusalem Post: Pollard has been incarcerated since November 1985. Charged with spying for Israel, he reached a plea bargain which would have meant a 20-year maximum sentence, if not less. The presiding judge, however, ignored the deal and sent Pollard down for life without parole, a punishment considered extremely excessive for passing even highly sensitive information to a friendly country. His information on some matters - such as Iraqi and Syrian unconventional weapons, Soviet arms shipments to Damascus and Libyan air defenses - allegedly covered data that had actually been withheld by the Pentagon in violation of the 1983 Memorandum of Understanding between the two nations.

• We find this position highly offensive. Spying for a friendly country is all right? Israel was in any case entitled to some of the information, so it was okay to steal it? Have the Israelis gone totally crazy? Who are they to tell the US government what to do or not to do with an American spy? Does having dual nationality with Israel excuse this man's heinous acts? Where do the Israelis get off?

• Jonathon Pollard should have been hanged as a traitor to his country, which is America and not Israel. What Pollard did is far more serious than what Aldritch Ames did. Because of Ames, a handful of Soviet double-agents were executed. Big deal. No one forced those soviet citizens to spy for America. America was right to put Ames for life, but Pollard gave the Israelis some of the most secret, cutting edge weapons the technology the US had. And who knows to whom else he sold the secrets?

• There is a standard rule in the spying game: if a man will betray his own country to work for you, be assured he will betray you too when the opportunity arises.

• The US needs to retry this man and execute him, and let the Israelis go sulk all they want. This is not about them, it's about the United States, which last we heard was not a colony of Israel. It is actions like this non-stop barrage - now 21 years - to free Pollard that turns so many normally fair-minded Americans against Israel.

• We ask the Israelis to be sensible: apologize to the US for your part in spying against your ONLY friend and protector, and leave off on Pollard. Would the Israelis expect anything less if and Israeli national was caught spying for America?

0230 GMT March 30, 2008

• Al -Malaki Blinks After giving the Mahadi Army 72-hours to surrender, the Iraqi Prime Minister has pushed back the deadline by 10-days. There is no change in the Basra situation except that USAF/RAF have been giving ground support to Iraq forces. UK's Special Air Service is operating inside Basra as are US Marine snipers. No one has good figures, but the death toll in Basra alone appears to be heading toward 300. Iraq forces are experiencing both desertions and refusing to fight: they had failed to anticipate the level of resistance.

• For an account of yesterday's events, read the New York Times. Also read the NYT's analysis  which discusses difficulties the Mahadi Army faces.

• Al-Sadr has ordered his militia not to hand over their arms. That is one step closer to declaring war on Al-Malaki. Al-Sadr is still stressing diplomacy - we see the hand of Iran in this. He is trying to get the Grand Ayatollah Sistani to mediate, and keeps repeating he wants talks with Al-Malaki - after the Prime Minister leaves Basra. The Prime MInister says he will not leave till the battle is won.

• In Baghdad, the situation is as confused as everywhere else, in part because the US is trying to keep a low profile while at the same time helping the Iraqis. The death toll should be exceeding 100. Hospitals in Sadr City have run out of supplies, doctors are exhausted from treating several hundred wounded, there are no pain-killers in some hospitals.

• Government forces appear to have made no gains in the several other towns in the south which have fallen to the Mahadi Army.

• Has America Betrayed Al-Sadr? We knew from Day 1 this was not an operation against renegade Sadrites, but an attack on the mainstream Mahadi Army. We are unsure why the Americans keep talking of "rogue elements". Some are saying it's because if they spoke the truth, they'd have to admit the ceasefire is broken, and it is, after all, Al-Sadr's ceasefire that permitted the surge to succeed.

• The problem is, for all that the Americans are saying they had nothing to do with the operation, at the very minimum they knew exactly what Al-Malaki was up to and they did nothing to stop him from attacking the Mahadi Army, which in the perverse way of Iraq, had become allied with the Americans.

• Moreover, Al-Malaki is seeking to eliminate Al-Sadr so he can consolidate the Dawa Party's power. This too was undoubtedly known to the Americans. So they are complicit in this offensive.

• The question is why? Alone of all the Iraqi factions Al-Sadr is capable of destroying the surge's gains and exposing American claims of progress as a sham. We thought it would make sense for the Americans to continue with Al-Sadr who clearly was prepared to wait patiently till the Americans left Iraq before unleashing his militia. Surely the Americans don't think Al-Malaki will defeat the Mahadi Army, which has very deep roots in the Iraqi police, National Police, and Army? If Al-Malaki fails, not only is he toast, but America's main man for the last three years is gone, along with any credibility the Americans have in Iraq. The stakes are high, the odds are high, why are the Americans choosing to gamble everything at this stage?

• We have no clue. Doubtless someone will get around to enlightening us, but - as we always warn readers - our sources talk to us when they feel like so doing. Right now there is no sign of any source on the horizon.

• The British Are Not Showing The Least Interest in committing either ground forces or air support to the Iraqi security forces. Even the few sorties and one or two artillery counter-mortar attacks have been done with the great reluctance. Remember, the British have only three battalions in Iraq; one is needed to secure their base, and most of a second to protect their lines of communication to the city proper. They have available only a reinforced battalion at most.

• Intervention for them is very dangerous: they have been preparing to leave, and their public wants the troops back home. If the British have to fight, the consequences for the government may be serious.

• As for the Americans, there are political reasons they cannot send a couple or three brigades to the south. This will look like an expansion of an endless war, and will not play well with the public as elections approach. Many Americans are against a precipitate withdrawal. This does not mean they are for an expansion of the war. On the tactical level, of course, every brigade sent south will weaken the Americans in other parts of the country, particularly now, with every man needed to contain Al-Sadr should the later repudiate his ceasefire.

0230 GMT March 29, 2008

• Iraq The simplest way of approaching this is to copy the CNN headlines:

  • U.S. military intelligence analysis says forces control less than quarter of Basra

  • Officials say militia's forces control many cities in Iraq's southeast

  • Bush called the operation "a defining moment in the history of a free Iraq"

  • "This is going to go on for a while," one U.S. military official said

• If Mr. Bush wants to call this a defining moment in the history if a free Iraq, well, the President has said it, who are we to contradict him? What has been defined is that despite four years of training the US has imparted, and despite tens of billions the US has spent on the Iraqi military, what does the Government of Iraq have to show? Precisely zero. That's your defining movement.

• One of the things that foreigners find so hard to understand about the US is that when it comes to give a task 100%, you will find Americans giving 123%. But the results in no way match the effort. This is particularly true of the US effort to train the Iraqis. Why has this happened?

• Let's approach the question from the flank instead of meeting it head on.

  • Are the Iraqis stupid? No. They are some of the smartest people you will meet, in or outside or inside the Mideast.

  • Are the Iraqis cowards? No. They are as brave as any other people.

  • Are the bad organizers? Not a bit. The Israelis aside, they are among the organizers in the 3rd world.

  • Are the Iraqis just simply not good at fighting? Well, Al-Sadr's militia is composed of 100% Iraqis, so that should give you the answer.

  • Are the Iraqis untrainable? Just remember that till the fall of Saddam, every Iraqi of military age who lacked connections had to serve, and Iraq had tens of thousands of seasons officers and NCOs. You had close to a million men on active duty or less than 5 years out of service. Training them should have been the least of America's problems.

• What's gone wrong is simply the Iraqis are - surprise! - not Americans. When the British trained their colonial armies, they astutely sought to temper their way of doing things with the way the natives did things. The best example of this is the old Indian Army. Agreed that the retreat from Singapore back to Imphal was not the Indian Army's finest hour. That is because British officers held almost all field and general staff command positions, and the British of the day did not, to put it politely, have their act together. But once they got their act together, the Indian Army became a formidable fighting force - its record from 1940 to 1945 speaks fir itself.

• Now, the Americans are hopeless at the imperialism business. This is both their strong point and their weak point. The strong we'll discuss another day. The weakness in Iraq training has been that Head Office has insisted the Iraqi National Police and Army be trained the way Americans believed was correct. That is Point One.

• Point Number Two: every Iraqi trained by the Americans is deeply ashamed of himself on a very deep psychological level. This was not a problem with the South Koreans and even the South Vietnamese for a number of reasons we have to discuss elsewhen. Iraqis have a very strong national identity, and they are exceptionally xenophobic. The Americans invaded and destroyed their country, humiliated them, and then when things started to go wrong, simply turned around and said: "Ahmed, we are your partners now. You are part of the Coalition. Freedom, Democracy and so on."

• Problem is, these Iraqis see themselves as American collaborators, traitors to their country, and most humiliating, forced to take American orders because they need to feed their families. There is not a single Iraqi who would not give the Americans a fast boot in the behind if he could.

• When these American lap-dog Iraqis are required to fight their own countrymen, they simply, absolutely, completely cannot do it because they are haunted by their overpowering sense of illegitimacy.

• There is nothing more complicated going on. The day the Americans leave, the Iraqis will sort out their country right quick. The results will be neither pretty nor what the Americans want. We're amazed only that Americans, who are surprisingly respectful of other cultures, think they can shape the Iraqis to their will, for their preferred outcomes.

• On a tactical level, there are several distinct problems. First, the Americans are the best-equipped army that anyone has seen in modern times. The Iraqi equipment is not just second rate, it is fourth rate. When the Iraqis are on their own - say 1980-88 Gulf War - this does not bother them one bit. They will fight with their bare hands if neccessary - the Kurds, who are also Iraqis, fight like the blazes despite serious shortages of every kind of weapon and equipment. Americans have fought Sunnis and Shias alike, and they know the Iraqis have the will, the heart, the courage to fight. Who but the Iraqis would repeatedly take on vastly superior American forces and go on fighting despite a continuous series of losses going back 5 years.

• But you just cannot, and please take this seriously, you cannot treat the Iraqis as inferiors to be equipped in inferior ways, and then expect them to fight alongside you. We don't understand why the Americans don't see this.

• Second, Iraq is a nation of tribes. What Saddam matter-of-factly said when he was on trial for his life is absolutely true: the only manner in which the Iraqi tribes can be persuaded to work with each other is to kill enough of each tribe that they realize they'd better work together.

• There are some nationally-minded Iraqis, but these are a distinct minority, and in times of trouble every Iraqi falls back on his tribe. This being the case, the entire Iraqi police, National Police, and Army owe their allegiance to anyone but Iraq. If you consider that large numbers of Basra police deserted the minute the offensive began, tossing their uniforms away and hastening to rejoin the Mahadi Army, how can any attacking force expect to succeed? Please note we said "rejoin". Every member of the security forces retains his primary loyalty to his tribe. He checks constantly to see which way the wind blows. If he sees advantage in staying with the security forces, he does. If he sees advantage in deserting, he does - taking his weapons, training, knowledge, savvy back to the tribe to be used against the Government. This factionalism exists in every Iraqi army division. We will likely never learn how much of the 14th Division refused outright to fight the Mahadi Army, or sabotaged their orders passively.

• If you see all that the Basra offensive is an attempt by one Shia faction (Dawa Party) to clobber another (Mahadi Army) with a third faction (SICRI-Badr) an ally of convenience, where is the legitimacy the Government needs to fight? Haven't we seen this time and again in Africa, most recently in Kenya.

• If Al-Malaki had been left to himself with unlimited American support, he would have formed an army of Iraqi Shia loyal to his party, and this lot would have fought like heck. But the Americans say, no, you have to get along with X, Y, and Z, you must recruit so many X, so many Ys, and so many Zs - including Sunnis who have mercilessly oppressed you for four centuries, and who spent three years after the fall of Baghdad killing you with astonishing cruelty and mercilessness, and who we are arming just so they can whack you the minute our back is turned - well, our readers can see the problem. In fact, if the Americans wanted a stable Iraq, they'd have done better to back the Mahadi Army - the Dawa Party has limited support. Mahadi Army would have slaughtered everyone else, but Iraq would have been stable.

• But, you say, in that case what was the point of replacing Saddam? To replace him with another dictator, Al-Sadr?

• At this point the Editor pulls his "I'm only a guest in this great country. You all have to answer the question yourself. It's not his place to answer it." Cop out? Sure. Then why did we support the invasion, and incidentally Orbat's "we" included people from many different countries, but not one American! We also believed that America was doing a noble thing, overthrowing a brutal dictator, even though none of our group of nine was American. Turns out, we were just as naive and stupid as all the other Americans - more so, because we thought the real target was Saudi Arabia. Why did we continue supporting the mission? Because your editor is as patriotic as any of you. My country right or wrong. The other members of Orbat's "we" have simply drifted away, with the general statement "it's your blog to run as you please." Why did the Editor, then by his ownsome lonesome,  turn against the mission? Because he saw the powers that be cared nothing. That's not terribly complicated.

0230 GMT March 28, 2008

• Baghdad Neighborhoods Falling To Mahadi Army says Times London. Iraqi security forces are being pushed out of one neighborhood after another according to the newspaper. There is some fighting, but in most cases Al-Sadr's forces simply demand local police/security withdraw and the government forces leave. There is concern Al-Sadr's troops are preparing to attack a neighborhood where an important leader of the SICRI lives: this the Najaf-Karbala Shia faction which controls the Badr militia.

• We're a bit concerned that none of the other main sources we looked at just now seems to mention this development. Has Times got it wrong? We certainly hope so, because otherwise this whole witches brew is going to explode.

• In Basra, the Iraqi offensive seems to have stalled, with the 16,000 police being repeatedly humiliated by the al-Sadr militia, and many policemen belonging to his faction are - to put it delicately - not doing their job.

• The British say progress is being made, and that the Iraqi forces are merely rebalancing for the next push. Iraq 14th Division is operating inside Basra, but here too we are concerned because the Iraq Army is just as faction-ridden as the rest of the country. There is going to be heck to pay if some fraction of the Army mutinies. we are further worried about a report that says Iraqi AFVs are trapped in some places at Basra because no one bother to measure the width of narrow streets to see if AFVs could travel their length.

• The Iraq police security chief, who from all we hear is a decent man determined to do his job, narrowly escaped an ambush. In Baghdad Al-Sadr militia killed the government spokesperson and burned down his house.

• Someone has blown up the Zubair No. 1 pipeline in Basra, pushing oil to $107 from $104. The Iraqis are saying this is a bad development because so far the Basra pipeline has been relative secure - everyone was making too much money stealing oil. Now it seems some militia faction is making a statement: we don't care about the pipeline, and Mr. Al-Malaki, we are ready to go to the wire in our battle against you.

• Also, attacks against the Green Zone have increased; a reported 16 rockets/mortar rounds landed there yesterday. Iran is thought to be using renegade Al-Sadr militia to stage the attacks, though honestly we've never really bought into this renegade business. We think most of the so-called renegades are acting on al-Sadr's orders - plausible denial, etc. The casualties are minor: 2 Americans killed this week and several wounded. But readers can appreciate that Iran etc, score a tremendous propaganda victory with these attacks.

• Two other problems loom ahead. First, though the Iraq Government had made vague statements about cleaning up Basra, even the local security forces were caught by surprise when the Prime Minister arrived to take charge of the offensive. The people of Basra were not prepared for the crackdown, and again and again the media tells us civilians are running out of food, water, supplies. Unless Iraq Government finishes this quickly, we'll have a humanitarian disaster, and if the block-by-block fighting that Al-Sadr specializes in takes place, you have a potentially heavy civilian toll. Basra's population is 2-million: this is not some village.

• Second, though US has control of all roads in and out of Sadr City - the outer cordon in most places, US troops cannot do a Fallujah against the 2-million people who live in the City. Fallujah was population- and area-wise a town; moreover, US was able to get most civilians to leave before the assault.. The Sadr City people are not going anywhere - even if they want to, Al-Sadr militia will not let them go, and it's not clear they want to because they are the most ardent supporters of Al-Sadr.

• Fighting in other south Iraq towns continues, but unless we hear for a fact that the Government is being run out of a particular town, we'll continue assuming its minor. 100 are reported dead in fighting in Kut and Hilla; again, not many in the larger scheme of things.

• Al-Sadr continues to call for negotiations, but Al-Malaki says this is a fight to the end. Unless this is the usual Arab rhetoric, we're wondering why the man is hanging tough when things are not going to plan.

• Meanwhile, our own President Bush keeps saying we are winning in Iraq and Mr. Al-Malaki has taken a "brave" decision to clean up Basra. why the Prez keeps leaping 10 steps ahead of the American military in claiming results which are not happening, we do know. The Prez has his own reality. The military has at all times since the surge began emphasized how fleeting any gains can prove, they keep emphasizing that we've won some battles but the enemies are many and resourceful, and the tables could turn at any point. The Prez, of course, is doing what some of us suggested during second Indochina: declare the war won, and withdraw. Except he's declaring the war won but is not withdrawing.

• Late news: UK Independent says US troops have sealed off Sadr City; the paper is the second source we've read that says the Basra offensive is stalled. The paper also says that the police in Kut have been expelled by Al-Sadr militia

0230 GMT March 27, 2008

• Iraq There comes a point when one gets fed-up of shouting oneself hoarse from the rooftop, and certainly we at Orbat.com are approaching that point. None of our colleagues particularly bothers about Iraq except the Editor - and he is fading fast. Iraq, to use a colloquial Indian expression, is a Gone Case. Why keep dragging one's weary carcass to the soap-box to deliver another lecture? Old people like the Editor deserve rest. Anyway, enough about us, to paraphrase Mr. Bill Clinton.

• First, the situation is so complex that no one set of explanations - ours included - explains much. Unless we wrote a 20-page single-space paper, there is no way in which we can adequately explain. What you're reading here are gross simplifications; our only excuse is that the people getting paid a bunch of money to pontificate about Iraq are also giving simplistic explanations, and we don't get paid anything.

• Second, though the situation has gotten worse in the last 24 hours, it is still at a stage all sides are posturing. That's not the impression you get from the media, but then the media has to make-up a story and sell it, we have no such compulsions. This being Iraq, people can be fighting one minute and then going kissy-faces the next. There is no such thing as point-of-no-return in Iraq because the Iraqis are busy negotiating even as they fight. For them, negotiations are an extension of fighting; fighting is an extension of negotiating. If you look at the situation in terms of western logic, you'll not just drive yourself nuts, you wont get anywhere near the truth. (You can never get to the truth in Iraq; all is relative, nothing is absolute.)

• Thus, the current fighting may blow over as quickly as it blew up, and it could get better at any point, or it could get worse at any time. (Gosh, we're so brilliant we dazzle ourselves.

• Third, what happened is this. Imagine the following conversation. General Petraeus is Daaved, and President Al-Malaki is Alky. Daaved is reclining in his favorite posture, his feet up on Alky's desk. Alky is as usual looking like he hasn't had a decent bowel movement in a month.

• "Yo, Alky". "You de man, Daaved". "Thanks, Alky. We've secured Anbar and Baghdad. Back home they want us to withdraw. But you know, Alky, the minute we do so the whole place is gonna go down the flush." Yes, Daaved. You are right as always." "Alky, we need to clean up some more so when we draw down you can have a stable government." "Yes, Daaved, you are right as usual." "So Alky, who's the biggest threat to Iraq now that we have Baghdad and Anbar under control?"

• At this point Alky mops his sweaty brow and prays to the Divine for patience. He wants to say "Yeah, right. Anbar is under control because you've armed and trained 60,000 Sunnis who hate your guts as much as the first day you came, and they plus the other 30,000 Sunnis you've co-opted would like nothing better than to whack the Shias the minute your back is turned. And yeah, right, you've brought Baghdad under control. Al-Sadr has managed to ethnically cleanse the city, less than 20% of the population is now Sunni. By stopping the fight he declared victory, and saying it isn't worth his while to aggravate America over the remaining Sunnis, but we'll get them the minute you turn your back."

• But Alky says nothing of the sort. He knows which side of his bread is buttered. The American side. Instead he humbly says, "Al-Sadr is the biggest threat, Daaved. I mean he's the biggest threat to me, but then I am Iraq so he's the biggest threat to Iraq."

• Daveed says, "Right, Alky. What say you we whack Al-Sadr. Of course, we have to keep a low profile. Congress and the American people will not appreciate a major war against Al-Sadr. So we'll advise, write the press releases, do the logistics, keep the heavy artillery on call, and you do the fighting. It'll look so much better." Alky says: "Yes, Daaved. You are right as usual." Alky says to himself, that insolent puppy does need a comeuppance, says he's my ally, but is plotting to overthrow me when the Americans turn their back. Might as well use the Americans to settle scores with the puppy." Of course, the Americans are saying: "Before we seriously withdraw, might as well use the Iraqis to stomp on Al-Sadr. We do have scores to settle."

• So: Iraq, starting 2-weeks ago, launches an all-out offensive throughout the southern provinces against Al-Sadr.

• Meanwhile, Al-Sadr has been doing his own thing after clearing Baghdad. He now wants the south, and he has been steadily expanding his control. With the south and Baghdad under Al-Sadr's control, he will give Alky a well-deserved boot in the rear and become the ruler of Iraq. Forget the dirty Kurds: no one likes them anyway. As for the Sunnis, we'll kill them all, the ones that escape will go to Anbar, and we can forget them too. Iraq will emerge as a pure Shia state, and from there - why, anything is possible. Join with the Iranians to take over the Middle East, then at the appropriate time stab the Iranians in the back, and I, Al-Sadr, will emerge as the next prophet.

• In Iraq/America's grand plan, there is an important ally. That is the Najaf-Karbala lot, who run the Badr militia, and who consider themselves the rightful rulers of Iraq, and who are very keen to shut up that yapping Pomeranian, Al-Sadr. Previously, the Najaf-Karbala Ayotollahs have forbidden the Badr militia to fight Al-Sadr because they want to avoid a Shia civil war. But what has their restraint gotten them? An America that shows no signs of wanting to leave, a US-armed Sunni army waiting to settle scores with all Shias, and Al-Sadr, who has been engaged in precisely the Shia civil war that the wise Ayotollahs have sought to avoid, but have failed.

• In almost all the southern cities that the Iraq government has moved into, Badr militia has been engaging Al-Sadr - who started the contremps. The old Ayotollahs are right, a Shia civil war has been underway for at least the last year.

• Wait a minute, you groan. Our government tells us every day we are winning in Iraq. Where did this completely different war come from? We defeated the Sunnis, we defeated AQI, now you're telling us the whole south has become a battlefield. Yes, folks, that is what we are telling you - and the north is not in such lovely shape either. To have avoided this situation, the US should have put 6 brigades into the north and 9 into the south - in addition to the 20 that pacified Anbar/Baghdad, more or less. The US didn't put in another 15 brigades - which would have required calling up all of the Guard. You say: we have to fight two more campaigns and in the meanwhile Anbar/Baghdad go all to heck? Absolutely. When people tell you we'll need to spend the next 20-100 years in Iraq, they're not kidding, because the US will continue to play Whack-A-Mole. Of course, who tires first, the Iraqis or the Americans is a separate debate. Hint as to likely outcome: Who lives in Iraq?

• The sad reality is from Day 1 US objectives and means in Iraq have been mismatched. America will never lose a single battle in Iraq. But it won't win the war either unless the Doofus Brigade (Washington) comes clean with the American people, makes its case to them, and if they are won over, then America really goes to war. Will it be worth it? Will the American people accept it? Well, look good people. Your Editor loves America and if required is willing to put his body on the line if Bill Clinton also goes. But your Ed is not American. He cannot answer all questions and solve all problems. You have to figure it out.

• Back to Mr. Al-Malaki. The only thing clear at this point is that he has put his political life on the line. He had to, because he has utterly failed to lead Iraq. His credibility was so deep in the sewer, he was having tea with the Ozzie 'roos. He really has nothing to lose. If he wins - chances are about 1% - great. If he loses, he was toast anyway.

• If this new crisis does not calm down, you're going to have the Shia civil war full scale. And by the way, anyone remember the obnoxious lot in Teheran? They are not going to sit back and watch Al-Sadr crash. For all the make-nice, they hate Al-Malaki as an American puppet - truthfully, he is that.

• At which point: what better time time for AQI and Sunnis in general to strike back, with the Shias and Americans bogged down? What better time for our our BFFs the Saudis and all the Arab Sunnis to jump into the act?

• And remember two things. There is a US election coming, and the strongest, most disciplined force in Iraq remains Al-Sadr. The man has genuinely been trying to rein in his renegades, because he wants credibility in Parliament. But now Al-Malaki is pushing him over the edge.

• One last thing. The Americans are saying again and again, as if repeating it enough times will make it true, that they and the Iraqis are NOT fighting Al-Sadr. They are only moving against rogue elements in his Army. The implication is, we're helping Al-Sadr so there's no reason for him to fight us.

• Well, they are giving Al-Sadr the Kiss of Death. If his followers come to believe he is in league with the Americans, a puppet as much as Al-Malaki, they'll put him on a meat hook in Sadr City. But, of course he is not a puppet. as usual with Iraq, things were proceeding on two tracks: the Americans were trying to trim his power while at the same time not aggravate him back into open war.

• Further, if the Iraqis/Americans are fighting only rogue Al-Sadr elements in Basra, how come Al-Sadr's envoy came to Al-Malaki to say: withdraw from Basra, we're willing to talk. But if you don't withdraw, we fight. So Al-Sadr is now also a rogue element of his own army? Look, your Editor is a trusting type. If the Government told him the Moon is made of green cheese, he'd believe that. But please don't ask him to believe the current campaign is only an attempt to control Al-Sadr rogues. Next the Government will try and convince him Santa Claus is actually a communist.

0230 GMT March 26, 2008

• Iraq Forces Move Against  Basra Shia Militias agencies report. There are three militias: Al-Sadr's, SICRI (the Karbala-Najaf Shia nexus), and a small local militia that controls the port and oil jobs. They have been running amok in Basra, fighting each other and the Iraq security forces. This vital city has been under militia/criminal control since the British decided - sensibly - that as there was nothing they could do, best to let the Iraqis sort things out for themselves.

• What role US forces are playing is unclear, but the operation is being touted by the US as Iraqi-led and Iraqi-manned.

• CNN quotes a provincial official as saying 50 have died, including security forces, militia, and civilians, and 30 security forces have been kidnapped.

• Iraq Government says it has most of Basra under control.

• Fighting Breaks Out In Baghdad and Other Cities US troops have sealed off Sadr City in Baghdad, where 2-million poor live, mainly Al-Sadr supporters. US could do this because as part of the surge it has isolated major Baghdad neighborhoods from each other, controlling movement between neighborhoods. a good tactic, which has contributed to the improved security in Baghdad. Of course, if you are an Iraqi you don't think security has improved, because compared to Saddam's time, Baghdad is an absolute mess. But, as the Editor's students say, whatever. Us acted after clashes between Al-Sadr militia and US/Iraqi forces broke out when the US/Iraq moved to capture wanted militants from Sadr City.

• We get the impression the Sadr City fighting is on a small-scale at this time, though several mortar/rocket attacks have occurred against the Green Zone and other areas.

• The fighting coincides with Al-Sadr's civil disobedience movement throughout Iraq, which demands the Government stop misusing its power to punish the militia. Several towns are under night curfew to prevent the spread of violence there.

• We don't know what game al-Sadr is playing, but is party's MPs are refusing to attend parliament. If the SICRI lot also pull out their MPs, it's Bye Bye Al-Maliki. But right now, no one knows what's going on and how the situation will play out. Best to watch before commenting.

• 99% Of US Flights Are Without Sky Marshals according to pilots and sky Marshals who spoke to CNN on background. Transportation Security Agency denies this, but says it obviously cannot talk about the real percentage.

• So the real percentage is 1.1%? TSA is a joke, US Homeland Security Is a joke. Luckily, even without the TSA the US has become a kind of Orwellian nation. American internal security can be pretty good, particularly now that everything is networked. Prior to 9/11, for example, it's not that the Americans didn't know a bunch of Arabs were doing flight-training. But because of their privacy craze, Americans had enacted a series of laws to prevent, rather than to enable, different agencies sharing data. That's all gone now. Everyone talks to everyone. Even the Editor's little City of Takoma Park, Maryland (13,000 population) is installing computers that can access data across a wide range of databases. Right now, for example, the police can stop you for running a traffic light, and using just her/his patrol vehicle computer, the officer can check your immigration status, traffic/parking violations, fines not paid, open warrants in civil/criminal cases, restraining orders, sex offender status, etc etc.

• We realize our Brit friends will go: "So?" in the manner of the Vice President because, thanks to Northern Ireland, they were already way ahead on this sort of stuff, and they already had a gazillion security cameras all over the country.

• In America's defense, we have to point out this is a huge country, with a huge population, 20% of which changes residences every year, with thousands of local police agencies and so on. And not to forget the privacy phobia. City of Takoma Park, believe it or not, has its very own separate police department. We've never been clear on its manpower total, but it has sufficient to keep 3 patrol cars on the streets at all times. This is very typical of America, where local rule has primacy.

0230 GMT March 25, 2008

What Does the 4000th Soldier Death In Iraq Mean?

• Like it or not, it means nothing. In the War of the American Revolution, US dead were ~1% of the population, 25,000 killed from a population of 2.5-million. Heavy losses, but clearly worth the sacrifice. 2% of the population died in the Civil War; we're not going to get into was it worth it or not.  In 1940,  the US population was 132-million and about 420,000 American died in the Second World War, 0.3% of the population. Definitely worth it. The Vietnam War claimed .003% of the population; its doubtful the sacrifice was worth it.

• In Iraq it's been 0.001%, but 65,000 people in the US are victims of homicide and car accidents - and 435,000 die prematurely from tobacco use, 85,000 die due to alcohol (some percentage is in vehicle accidents), 17,000 due to illegal drug use. Figures from http://www.drugwarfacts.org/causes.htm and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_casualties_of_war.

• 4000 Americans have died in Iraq in 5 years, twenty-five times as many were murdered back at home.

• Not to be brutal, even if you believe Iraq is a huge mistake, we think 800 military death a year for five years doesn't mean much.

• Agreed, the Editor has not lost a child in Iraq. On an individual and human level, every Iraq death is terrible. But even if the US has achieved little in Iraq, it has achieved something. What is achieved by the 65,000 deaths to homicide, auto crashes and the like? Nothing at all.

• There are hundreds of individual losses each day that are completely pointless. do the families suffer any the less? A close friend lost his entire family - wife, children, mother and others in a ghastly crash on National Highway 1 in India: there were traveling to join him at his new place of work. Did he suffer less than the parents of the hundreds of Indian security forces that die each year? Don't think so.

• The problem with the media is it creates artificial narratives, and says "we have to do it, people have to realize what's happening." Yes, but we don't have to be told by the media what these narratives mean, we can decide for ourselves. The media should report the facts, not create stories for us.

• The media has acted in a ghoulish manner through the Iraq War, as if the war dead are some kind of sick sports statistic, and not least with its determination to list every soldier who died - Faces of the Fallen, that sort of thing, as if to prove how much it cares about the war dead. And of course the media doesn't care. The government doesn't care. The people of the United states do not care. If they did, they would hold their government accountable, every day, week, month, and year. In five years, your editor has not heard a single person, not one, talk about the Iraq deaths as if it meant something to them personally. Everyone generically says "oh those poor kids getting killed" because you don't want to be left behind in showing you care. But people don't, in fact, care till they lose their boy or girl to the war.

• As such, it would seem reasonable to ask the media to stop imbuing war dead with oh-so-fantastic meaning. Report the casualties factually. Let the families grieve quietly or publicly as they want. Give the dead some dignity, instead of the obscene exploitation shows. Every time a soldier dies, its just another opportunity for the media to write about wonderful the kid was, how much everyone loved and admired him, how much of a great future he had. These are cheap stories and they need to stop. Only the families of the dead have the right to talk - and only if they want.

• The media, and Americans need to understand the deaths are not about us. Our reactions are immaterial. We do not need to wallow in communal agony just to prove we care about the dead, because we do not care. Our guilt at sitting home guzzling beer and chips while a tiny fraction of Americans are doing the fighting cannot be expiated by our pretending to care and by talking about our feelings and how wonderful and how sensitive we are. We need to tell the media to shut up.

• In the Indian military, where even to this day everyone is part of the military family, mourning the dead was permitted only to the military. They grieved privately, accepted that every death was life prematurely snuffed, comforted the soldier's family, and did not say a word to the media. It was none of the media's business, any more than it was anyone's business but mine and my family's when my father died recently. Of course, the psychopathy of the American media is catching on with the Indian media. We are all becoming Americans in that respect.

• One of the things that made a lasting impression on your editor was when as a pre-teen he read that during the Battle of Britain, every time a fighter did not return, someone would  enter the mess where people were drinking and pretending they were having a great time though their country was in the greatest peril, and very quietly call out the pilot's wife or girl-friend to tell her the news privately. The lady immediately left the mess. People grieved with her privately. It was considered bad form to break down in the mess or to make your grief public. That is dignity. What the American media is doing is robbing the dead of dignity. It is cheap exploitation for the sake of making money. It is immoral.

• Another story, told to us who did not witness the incident but had  close connections with the Luftwaffe, concerns the head of the air force. He had two sons, also Luftwaffe. One had previously died in a Starfighter crash - we don't know how many readers remember or know about that period, but we'll be glad to discuss it sometime. The general was at a high-level meeting when an aide entered to give him a note. He read it and put it away, continuing with his meeting. It was only after the meeting was done and he left the room did the other participants learn that the note said his second son had also just died in a Starfighter. This man had great dignity. Americans should learn from people like him.

0230 GMT March 24, 2008

• Should We Be Worried About Anbar? The answer is No. Reuters has a story on how the Sunnis are getting restless after throwing in their lot with the Americans and running AQI out of the province. The problem is that Iraq's government, which happens to be Shia, has deliberately failed to address the Sunnis' problems. For example, basic services are still unavailable and unemployment in Fallujah alone is 20,000. The biggest problem is that the Sunnis want all their fighters taken into the military or police, 90,000 men, and of course there is no way Baghdad will agree because these are the same people who previously were fighting the Shias. Baghdad says it will take 18,000 men, and the reality it that it will take far less.

• So, why are we saying "No, the US shouldn't worry about Anbar?" Because, folks, it's not the US's business to run the country. US has brought security in Central Iraq and Anbar to the point things can function - if the people want them to function. The Baghdad government is essentially non-functional, and there are reasons for that. The old government was largely run by Sunnis, now most of those experienced people are not there, replaced by Shias. You basically have a government that has no clue on how to govern; there is so much bad blood between Sunnis - who ruled the Shias with a heavy hand for 400-years - that the Shias simply don't want do anything for the Sunnis, and no one can blame them.

• There is nothing the US can do about that - unless it wants to send in 20,000 of its own administrators who take over running everything, with the Iraqis in junior positions and as clerks. In other words, a recreation of the British Empire.

• Even then, things will not function because obviously the Iraqis will refuse to be reduced to colony status and will do everything to ruin America's day. And even if by some miracle the US manages to run Iraq efficiently, say 5-20 years down the road, all the ethnic faults still exist and will still erupt.

• When the Brits made their empire, they retained a monopoly of force. People in each colony was isolated from others because there were no cell phones, radio, limited phone service - usually in the cities and intended for government use, few roads and so on. In Iraq the US can never attain a monopoly of force, communications are instant, plus you have foreign countries meddling away.

• So: we maintain the US has done it's job - more than done its job. If the Iraqis cannot make their country work, obviously the Americans cant do it for them.

• If This Is An Example Of A Hamas-Fatah Agreement then we'd suggest negotiators for the two Palestine factions simple retire and lead relaxed lives. Right after the two sides announced they'd reached an agreement and left the table, they began disagreeing on what they'd agreed on.

• Meantime, that supreme diplomat, Mr. Richard Cheney, has told the Israelis he'd like a Palestine-Israeli peace deal before Mr. Bush leaves office. Okay, we know Mr. Cheney lives on a different planet. But why is not kept quarantined there? He's making himself the laughingstock of the Middle East

•  "Ooooh, I'll drop in for a day or two, talk to Fatah, talk to the Israelis, and tell everyone I want a peace deal in 9-months". Has anyone told this brilliant man there is something called Hamas? They're the one's lobbing rockets at Israel, not Fatah,  and stopping the rockets is Israel's No. 1 priority, but we can't talk to them because US doesn't negotiate with terrorists. And that's just for starters. Has anyone told him that when the Israelis say they will halt settlements - one of the several priorities of the Palestinians - they mean something completely different from what you and I think a halt means? Has anyone told him Hamas will not negotiate with Fatah, particularly now that it is in a good position to seize the West Bank too? Has anyone told him about Hezbollah, Syria and Iran? They call a lot of the shots and can instantly derail any peace deal - assuming one is possible. Are they BFF with America so that they will do everything possible to facilitate a peace agreement?

• The situation is insanely complex, probably beyond a solution for the next 50 years - it's already been 60 years and there is no peace between Palestine and Israel, and the US is sending Cheney to jump in with all four of his left feet? Okay America, if you're going to be this dumb, you don't deserve a thing in the Middle East. Don't blame anyone but yourself.

0230 GMT March 23, 2008

• Pro-China Candidate Wins Taiwan Election says the International Herald Tribune. He won 58.5% to 41.5% with 75.6% of eligible voters turning out. He is a cautious person, but wants closer China-Taiwan economic relations and direct flights. He is willing to talk to China, but says the 1000 missiles aimed at his country must be removed. The US wants Taiwan to defuse tensions with China, so Mr. Ma Ying-jeou will be welcomed by the US. Incidentally, Taiwan already has extensive trade with China; several hundred thousand Taiwanese work at their country's factories in China.

• Pakistan To Negotiate With Militants If the US did not see this coming, then it needs to take off its collective shoe and beat some sense into it's own head. We've been saying for a long time a civilian government will go wobbly far sooner than a military government, and even the military did not/do not want a civil war.

• Now, instead of treating our readers with a none-too-entertaining rant, we'll suggest you read this article http://iht.com/articles/2008/03/21/asia/pakistan.php

• Every country has to pursue its own interests, and there is just so much America can do to force anyone to ignore their national interest. We've said time and again: American and Pakistani national security objectives are completely at odds.

• Pakistan Prime Minister Chosen A gentleman who was a close confidant of Mrs. Bhutto, and who is loyal to his party, will become Prime Minister on Tuesday. He will step down once Mrs. Bhutto's widower is elected to Parliament. With the criminal cases against him withdrawn, there should be reason he can't stand for parliament and comfortably win a seat

• Tibet We gather there is some confusion in the west regarding ethnic Tibetan objectives. We doubt that with the exception of a few hot-heads, anyone is talking independence. Tibetans likely understand this is impossible. They are fighting the increasing Hanization of Tibet. They want Beijing to stop destroying their culture, permit freedom of worship, and give ethnic residents a leg up on jobs. It may not seem like a lot to ask, but for China all that would simply be the thin edge of the wedge hammered by the "splitists". They aren't going to agree.

• One unfortunate but almost certain effect these riots will have is that China will step-up its efforts to integrate Tibet. More railways - in any case two more are being surveyed prior to work, extension of the Lhasa railroad to Shigatse and Gyangste - more Han settlers, more People's Armed Police etc. The Chinese are unlikely to be caught unawares the next time.

• The New New York Governor We already like Mr. David Patterson, formerly ceremonial Number 2 to the now disgraced Mr. Elliot Spitzer. Within a day or two of being sworn in, with his wife beside him, he said he had been unfaithful to his wife, and she to him, when their marriage was on the rocks and before they reconciled. And no, just in case anyone asks, he made clear he had not used campaign funds or government perks for his affairs.

• With that one shot he has silenced - even confounded - everyone. Talk about your first strike. The man himself admits - before anyone has a chance to ask - his transgressions; his wife owns up to hers; neither of them attempt to justify their actions except to say they were going through a tough time.

• How human is that?

Opinion

• So, to return to a favorite theme of ours. The question of the US fighting China to defend Taiwan will not happen. One day - we cannot say if it is 20, 30 whatever years, the two countries will come together, no doubt with special status for China. Whether Beijing will keep its word is another matter.

• Aside from the money, every Taiwanese has to feel frightened of the power China will be able to bring against his country. The 1000 missiles mean nothing. They will be equivalent to at best 500 sorties. But that doesn't stop a Taiwanese from being subject night and day to China's propaganda, saber-rattling, and non-stop military buildup. At some point the Taiwanese are going to say, forget about this independence business.

• As long as the US was steady, Taiwanese could take comfort in America's protection. But readers, particularly non-American readers, should not get taken by the sound and fury of American human rights crusaders. If economic relations go bust due to war, the Chinese, who run a dictatorship, will be much better able to handle their people than the US. He who has less to lose is the one on top.

• Yes, it's easy to say - as we have done - that so what if Chinese toys cannot come to the US. What's the big deal? It will help American toymakers. Sure, the product will be more expensive, but it will create more jobs.

• The thing is ultimately even the ordinary Jane in the US does not matter. The hard men who run America will not want to fight an adversary capable of causing serious military and economic damage. These men are not interested in their workers, who are simply interchangeable, disposal parts. They are interested in their profits. And there's no need to even mention America's increasing debtor status.

• As for the death of a democracy, who cares? When the Serbs were oppressing their minorities, the Americans were all bluster and bombing. The Americans had absolutely nothing to lose by beating up Serbia. When the Chinese are beating up the Tibetans, what is the US doing? Using "quiet diplomacy" to urge the Chinese to show restraint. Oh, brother!

• We seriously suggest that all the wargamers who love to game China-US-Taiwan find something else to do. And the Taiwanese are not the Japanese. That lot would have fought to the last civilian had the Emperor ordered it. But with Taiwan and China, it is brother against bother. Sure, no one can take Taiwan if the Taiwanese are determined to hold their country. Look at the huge armadas of ships and bombers the US had to deploy against the Japanese. But Taiwan is split about China to begin with. It is not as if every Taiwanese is ready to fight to the bitter end as were the British, the German, the Russians, the Japanese. The results of the Taiwan election speak for themselves. The majority of Taiwanese want reconciliation, and this trend will grow.

0230 GMT March 22, 2008

• Al-Sadr Militia Breaks Baghdad Truce says Reuters. The militia attacked Iraqi forces in south Baghdad and exchanged fire with US troops. The incident Thursday night follows militia attacks in Kut.

• Two weeks ago, Al-Sadr permitted his militia to fight back if threatened. Presumably this happened because a lot of his militia do not agree to the ceasefire with US-Iraqi forces and were getting restless. Particularly because the US has been picking rogue members of the Mahadi Army, and its a bit difficult in many case to say who is a rogue or not.

• People understandably worry a truce breakdown, but we suggest it's best to wait and see.

• Comment Our personal theory is that Al-Sadr, like a great many other people, expected a major US withdrawal to start this summer. All sides have been holding off so as not to continue providing excuses for the Americans to longer. But now the Americans are not just lingering, they are talking of a decades long stay. This is not going over well with Iraqis. Al-Sadr may just be probing to see how the Americans react, or else someone loyal to him in Baghdad and in Kut decided they'd had enough and went after Iraqi forces. If it works, Al-Sadr can claim victory. If it doesn't, he can always cry "rouge elements".

• What's confusing us is Iraq is now earning ~$1-billion+ a week from its oil exports. But it's banking its money, letting the US spend ~$2.5-billion. Does this matter to anyone?

• Re. contractors We're told that they number 140,000+. This makes sense, because the US uses 48,000 troops to maintain a division. (We're using old figures, but we doubt that's changed.)US has the equivalent of six divisions in Iraq, that gives ~50,000 personnel per division. This is about the same as for the Vietnam War. Again, please, we are talking approximates.

• France To Send 1000 Troops To Afghanistan brining its contribution to 3000. The deployment area has not been decided. The contribution is expected to stead those countries threatening withdrawal because, they say, they are doing a disproportionate share of the fighting.

• Comment People are coming up with all kinds of ingenious excuses why NATO cannot find even 60,000 troops to field for its various commitments: Europe, Afghanistan, ready forces and so on.  We want the excuse-makers to get a grip. The west has been at war for 7 1/2 years. There is absolutely no excuse not to keep 100,000 troops or more in the field.

• The main reason for this laggard behavior is that all NATO countries want the US to do the fighting. They want to contribute money, civil reconstruction, advisors and so on. For the rest, it's been a "Don't Bug Me" attitude. Britain, Canada, France should have by now added a dozen new brigades between them, smaller countries like Holland should have activated another brigade. And Italy and Spain, which should be ready to send at least two brigades each overseas are effectively out of the fight.

• Yes, NATO does feel that since the United States defended Europe for 60 years they owe the US help, just for solidarity. But their deeds are not matching their intent. The US needs deeds, not words. We agree that Europe has a good case about not getting involved in Iraq. That really is America's war. But Afghanistan is completely different. No sense of talking about freedom if the loss of a few score troops from each national contingent causes NATO to cry "Uncle!" - no pun intended. The tree of liberty needs constant refreshment with the blood of patriots, but the Afghan tree is withering away.

• Power Requirements For Battery Cars A friend says that for the US to run 20% of its automobiles on electrical power could means anywhere between 6 and 160 new power plants. Why the immense range? Because, says the friend, if people "fuel" their cars at night, when power a plenty is available, you need only a small increase in power plants. If they want to "fuel" at will, the the high number is needed. Interesting, no?

• Stars 100-150 Larger Than Our Sun? We browsed www.astronomy.com to learn more about a star 40 times bigger than the sun which blew up 7.5-billion light years from earth - 2.5 billion years before our sun lit up. The light just reached us the other day. Apparently you could see the nova/supernova for about an hour without a telescope if you knew where to look. We came upon references to stars 100-150 times larger than our sun. These hyper-giant stars must be something to see.

• And talking about the star that blew up: it would have incinerated its planetary system, assuming it had one. That must have caused a serious disruption to any creatures who had their IRAs all lined up for retirement.

0230 GMT March 21, 2008

• F17 Fighters arrive in Pakistan Six more have reached after the delivery of an initial 2 last summer, says www.strategypage.com  Pakistan will get 25 a year over the next three years toward a total of at least 150, and perhaps as many as 250. With the F-16 situation being what is, Pakistan definitely needs 250, in our opinion.

• Most of the production will shift to Pakistan; after the first 50, other aircraft will feature western electronics. The aircraft is economical, and said to be 80% as effective as later versions of the F-16. We'd love to know who comes up with these figures.

• New Israeli Rules Of Engagement are intended to back the new policy that under no circumstances should an Israeli soldier be kidnapped, says marcopetroni quoting ANSAmed, in turn quoting Israeli public radio,

• The Israelis are naturally not discussing the new policy; it's an operational matter and such stuff is not discussed publicly by any army. The Israelis have said that kidnapping must be avoided even at the risk of added Israeli casualties.

• The Israelis have a point, because just a very few kidnapped soldiers - is it a total of 5? - is causing the country major grief. For example, the Palestinians want 1000 prisoners released by Israel for one soldier, and some of those 1000 have murdered Israeli civilians.

• Problem is, if we were Israeli soldiers, we'd be worried. This sounds very much like your own side is going to shoot you if you are being kidnapped. This makes sense for the state of Israel, but it's not terribly comforting for the unfortunates that are in danger of abduction.

• More Boeing Facts Foreign manufactured parts account for 60% of a Boeing commercial aircraft - we'd said its typically 50%. Nonetheless, Boeing plans to reply on only 15% foreign production for its tanker, versus 40% for Grumman-EADS. We're a bit suspicious of the figure because at least half of the 767 is built overseas. Of course, this is a tanker; basically its wings, fuselage, engines, and avionics; there is no fancy stuff inside the fuselage. Moreover, whereas foreign customers have a choice between US and European engines, presumably the KC-767 will have US engines, and it certainly will have US avionics.

• Nonetheless, this is an academic debate because the USAF decided in favor of Grumman-EADS after a very detailed study; in several areas the KC-45 came out ahead. If Boeing is saying US jobs should be kept in the US, let it first get the manufacture of commercial airliners back to the US instead of whining.

• And if Boeing says US military should buy only US-made equipment, what case can the US make for its considerable military exports? The Europeans, for one, have analogs to just about every US military equipment.

Bye Bye Planet Earth

• Now some are saying that to avert global warming we need to reduce emissions right away, and by substantial fractions. Others are of the opinion that catastrophic global warming can still be averted.

• But it's time to face reality. The west can reduce emissions all its wants, neither India nor China will stop building more coal-generated power plants. The Chinese are absolutely resistant to the need to protect their environment in any case. People familiar with the issue say that the environmental degradation in China is of unbelievable proportions. But both countries are still poor and need decades of economic growth to give their people a decent standard of living.

• Also, how exactly is the west supposed to reduce to zero or to negative emissions? Nuclear is verboten, and in any case the fastest plants can be built, assuming a standardized design, is six years. That's without the green challengers, which can add years to a construction process that usually takes 10 years to complete a plant. Coal has a radiation emission several hundred times that of nuclear plants; coal causes - so we are told - 24,000 deaths in the US alone. N-power casualties are lower by three orders of magnitude. And new designs are meltdown safe. But none of this impresses N-opponents.

• Now, the US does have immense reserves of natural gas. But everywhere you look, any large energy project meets strong opposition. Americans don't want refineries, drilling for offshore oil, pipelines and so on in their backyards.

• The bottom line is we'd better start planning for living with global warming rather than preventing it. There is no point to the west going zero-emission by 2030 or whatever if the developing countries continue yearly increases that keep overall emissions spiraling upward.

• Consider a few random facts. The US has (rounded off) one terawatt of generating capacity or very approximately 3.3-kilowatts per capita. China has 800-gigawatts for approximately 0.7-kw/capita. China would need to install an additional 2.8-terawatts to reach US standards of today. India has ~150-gigawatts, 0.14-kw/capita (China wastes more power than India, but there is a considerable real gap as India began its economic growth 10+ years behind China). For India to reach the US level, it would have to add ~3.4-terawatts. None talks of South America and Africa. There are almost as many people there as in India. So they're going to need <3-terawatts more.

• Again approximately, that's 10-terawatts China, India, South America and Africa will add to come to the US standard of living. And folks, if we're going to have to shift to electricity for transportation, then we are in big trouble.

• Yes, there is a lot of room for added efficiencies. True commercial demand for power in the US could be reduced 40% by greater efficiency and so on. China could really use some efficiency and India too. All this will do is momentarily slow down the growth of power demand. Its likely going to be 2050 before anyone makes a serious dent in overall emissions. And when US costs for power are going to start rocketing on account of environmental restrictions, a whole bunch of Americans are going to say: wait a minute; its 2008 and China is already the biggest carbon emitter, and its power and transportation demand is only going to increase very rapidly, and there's all those other countries soon we're going to be a small fraction of the problem, why should we suffer trying to reduce emissions when no one else cares.

• So: conclusion, better prepare for global warming and accept the climate changes. The west can go to zero emissions tomorrow, by by the day after the west isn't going to be the problem.

0230 GMT March 20, 2008

• Tibet The unrest continues. We were amused at a media person's comment that China has not succeeded in bringing calm to all Tibet. Tibetans live in a 2.5-million square kilometer region, a quarter of China's area. What today is called Tibet is approximately 55% of the country before the Chinese moved in (estimated, we don't have the actual figures). China split up Tibet by annexing much of it to other provinces. Because there are a large number of Tibetans living in the other 45%, and because today's Tibet is exceptionally remote, we doubt anyone could bring the Tibetans under control in just a week plus.

• Mr. Bush's Approval Sinks To 31% compared to 71% before the Iraq War, says CNN. We opine that all this is simply sticks and stones as far as he is concerned. We like that he is a person of faith, but here we see the reverse side of people with strong beliefs. Mr. Bush absolutely is convinced that history will vindicate him.

• In fairness to Mr. Bush, here are other low approval ratings from CNN: "Still, Bush's approval number is still better than the lowest number for his father, George H.W. Bush, who bottomed out at 29 percent in July 1992; Jimmy Carter, who fell to 28 percent in June 1979; Richard Nixon, at 24 percent in July and August of 1974; and Harry Truman, who dipped to 22 percent in 1952."

• And to us this seems strange, but 64% of Republicans still approve of the job he is doing, versus 9% of Democrats.

• Basara, Iraq An Iraqi general sent from Baghdad to restore order in Iraq's south has warned his troops to be ready for a push against the dozen odd competing militias, most criminal, that are terrorizing the city. The Independent of UK says Britain is will to delay further reductions in its forces as the Iraqi Army will need all the support it can get.

• US Navy To Be Short 200 F-18s before the F-35 arrives for fleet service, says Aviation Week That's not the official picture, which sees a shortage of only 70. But Aviation Week says the official estimate is made on "very" optimistic assumptions. 

• The magazine says 200 is 4 carrier air wings worth of aircraft. Actually it's three, because for every 48 aircraft on the wing there are others for training, rework, and attrition. Nonetheless, this is an extremely worrying development. With 10 attack carriers the Navy can permanently forward deploy three, and surge 7-8. This means the remaining F-18s must be flown more which will lead them to wear out even more quickly.

• How American Is The Boeing Tanker? An argument being raised against the Gurmman-EADS tanker choice made by the USAF is that tax-dollars are being exported for overseas job. Keep the tanker American, say the critics, and that means Boeing.

• Now along comes someone who tell us that 50% of the Boeing tanker is built overseas and so is up to 70% of its new 787. The Grumman tanker will create more US jobs than the Boeing tankers, albeit only by a 10% margin, but still.

• Boeing and its supporters need to a grip (including us, we absolutely hate Airbus). It's absolutely wrong to talk about exporting jobs when that's exactly what Boeing is doing. This is plain lying to the public. The truth requires an impartial listing of all facts, not just the ones that buttress your case.

• One of the 100 major reasons America is going down is because everyone from corporations to non-profits to politicians to anyone who is competing against someone tells lies. Leaving facts out cannot be justified as "accentuating the positive" or "taking control of the message". It is pure deceit and if you go trying to deceive others, pretty soon you yourself cannot tell truth from lies and then you are out of touch with reality.

0230 GMT March 19, 2008

• Kenya Power-Sharing Deal Approved By Parliament says Associated Press. The opposition leader, whose party claimed the government had rigged the elections to win, will become the prime minister; the president, from the ruling party, will remain as president.

• Dalai Lama Threatens To Resign As Political Leader of the Tibetan Government in exile if violence continues. His threat is directed  at the protestors, because he solely believes in non-violence, but it is also meant to show that Bejing's allegations he has staged the riots is untrue. He has several times told his followers not to resort to violence, but Beijing keeps insisting the riots are at the Dalai Lama's instigation.

• Opinion We find Beijing's attitude disappointing. We understand why it wants to keep Tibet under control. But we do not understand why it has to lie about the Dalai Lama. Simply say "we recognize locals have grievances, we are ready to listen, but violence must stop first".

• Because the government is so repressive and so arrogant, however, there are thousands of clashes every year with farmers and workers demanding justice. The government smacks everyone down, sometimes it correct the injustice, and sometimes it doesn't. Beijing should remember that a government need the consent of its people to function.

• You can keep people down only for a time. China cannot become a super-power by repressing its citizens. The Soviet Union tried that, didn't work. Okay, the situations are different, but our point is still valid. Maybe the Chinese should look at why their revolution succeeded in destroying the existing order. Same thing could happen to them some day: man does not live by bread alone, particularly when he has sufficient bread. And China is rapidly reaching the point everyone will soon have enough bread.

• Iraq Reconciliation Talks Fall Apart Immediately Best you read this Reuters story yourself. We are sick and tired of saying while the US has had great military success in Iraq thanks to the Surge - and we never doubted this would be the case - the real issues are political and are beyond the US's ability to solve, not matter how much money and force it employs. The politics are absolutely not getting better. Particularly because the successes are so fragile and so heavily engineered by the US they can fall apart any moment. Sure, one day they will. And sure, the Editor will someday win the Miss Universe contest. That's going to have to wait for his next lifetime, and the way political reconciliation is going in Iraq, all of us are going to wait till our next lives before the problems are resolved.

• Palestinians Reject Negotiation In Favor Of Violence: Opinion Poll An International Herald Tribune article cites the result of a poll of Palestinians. Some conclusions: Support the attack on the seminary - 84%; support end to negotiations with Israel - 75%; support rocket attacks on Israel - 66%. In the West Bank, those supporting Hamas is now 47% versus 46% for Fatah.

• The poll taker says he has never seen such support for violence in his 15 years of taking 4 polls at 3-month intervals. He attributes it to Israel's attacks in Gaza that killed 130 Palestinians; a raid on the West Bank that killed 4 militants; and the continuing expansion of Israeli settlements.

• Opinion So there you have it: instead of refraining from attacks on Israel because of Israeli attacks/blockades, the Israelis have succeeded only in pushing moderate Palestinians into the hands of the extremists.

• And Israel's support of Fatah has been a kiss of death. We and others predicted this would happen. We don't anticipate Hamas will take over the West Bank soon. But a show down is coming and Fatah will lose because Hamas fighters to die and Fatah fighters are not. It's nothing more complicated than that. Then there will indeed be a reunited Palestine - under the control of religious extremists. Another great success for Vice President Richard Cheney to crow about. If the radicalization of Muslims continues at this pace, the GWOT is as good as lost and the US will once more be very, very grateful for the protection offered by the Atlantic and the Pacific.

• But let's try and end this opinion on a positive note. It's early days in the 100-year war. Only 8 years have passed. We still have 92 years to get it right.

0230 GMT March 18, 2008

• Five Years On In Iraq Saddam is gone, but he ever a threat to the US? Iraqis have a democratically elected government, but it is incapable of governing. The country is largely pacified, except it went south in the first place because we invaded. AQ Iraq has taken heavy blows; it is down not out, and is regrouping; AQI did not exist before we took over the country. Economic conditions are better; but till we got the UN to impose embargoes on Iraq, it was doing rather well for a 3rd world country in terms of education, health, subsidized food and so on. Shias finally are free of a 400-year Sunni oppression, but this has only strengthened a real enemy, Iran, and the rise of a free Iraq has tolled the death knell for Iraqi Christians, with whom 85% of Americans share a religion.

• Of the US Vice President thinks Iraq has been a great success, we have to conclude he is permanent occupant of La-La-Land, a very nice place to escape to when the real world becomes unbearable. What the Veep thinks is success, the headshrinkers think is major psychosis.

• The truth is, five years on, the US is trapped in Iraq. It cannot reduce to 10 brigades and then pull them out one by one because the entire edifice will collapse, since everyone is waiting and watching for the Americans to go,

• The Iraqis live in Iraq we don't. They can wait a hundred years. Can we wait a hundred years? Don't think so, but then what do we know, we're from Iowa.

• US Makes Proposal For Joint US-Russia ABM Defense Congratulations to the US Administration for making the offer. New York Times says the Russians accept it as a serious proposal, but warn significant areas of disagreement need resolving.

• That's fine, Moscow, but at least get talking. You want reassurance the US system is not aimed at you? What better way than to develop/deploy it jointly.

• Pakistan Parliament Meets The choice of Prime Minister is still to be worked out. The President did not attend, apparently there is no requirement for him to be present, on account of the members's hostility toward him.

• Our sole question is: will the parliament follow through on threats to confront and depose the President? If it does, much chaos will result. Perhaps it has to result so that Pakistan can move on. But if President Musharraf's continuance becomes impossible, the new President - indeed the new Prime Minister - must be Army approved. That is the reality in Pakistan.

• Two Stories From The New York Times Meanwhile, here is an article about US ideas to fight the ABC threat from terrorists http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/18/washington/18terror.html

• And a nice story about a Cold War submarine snoop mission that lasted two months, and was considered so risky the submarine was strip of identifying signs. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/18/science/18arctic.html

• A Bear Market - Literally Bear Stearns, a leading Wall Street financial firm, was selling for about $150/share a year ago. Yesterday it was sold to another financial house, as an alternative to bankruptcy, for $2 a share. This is what happens when you, the ordinary Joan/Joe, entrust your money to these very clever people on Wall Street.

• Spare a thought for the 14,000 Bear employees. They own 30% of the company. The life-savings of many of these people is likely wiped out. Plus many may lose their jobs.

Editor's Home Town Finally Does Something For Its Monkeys

•  This is just another story, nothing to do with anything, now that the Editor has a bit more time on his hands, but its a vignette of life in India, at least the way India was in 1989 when the Editor was last there.

• Simla in Himachal Pradesh has had an increasing monkey problem as the city grows and their habit gets encroached upon. Now a new park is to built for them 8-kilometers away with an environment - food, water etc. - so attractive they will voluntarily move from the city to the park. Lets hope it works.

• Monkeys have been a problem in Simla since as far back as the editor can remember, which is more than 50 years ago. The simians are aggressive in their search for food, Indians are absolutely terrified of animals, and the universal hatred directed at the monkeys gets them in a bad mood. Not helped by tourists who think the way to prove their manhood is to throw things at the monkeys. The only satisfying part of this is the speed with which the tourists run shrieking when the monkeys retaliate.

• The late Mrs. Rikhye (late as in former, she is well, alive, and happy now that she doesn't have to see your Editor) had a troubled relationship with the monkeys because one attacked a lost baby kitten right outside her family's house and killed the kitten. She came to hate the beasts with a passion.

• Your editor, however, taught his children to be friends with the monkeys. We'd feed them by hand, much to the shock of the locals who could not believe we were in physical contact with them. The thing is, these fellows have a phenomenal memory and they never, ever, bugged the Editor's family. They remember kindness and every cruelty done them. They live 25+ years.

• The monkeys actually listened to him when he told them to take food one at a time. One day a monkey looking for food sneaked up behind the Editor to search his trouser pockets for food, and before he could do anything about it, the monkey had his wallet. The Editor then invited the monkey to do another search of his pockets. After the monkey did a second unfruitful check to convince himself the Editor was not lying, the Editor asked for his wallet back and the fellow handed it over without protest. They really are that smart.

• There is a long story which will make no sense to anyone who hasn't actually been to Simla. Basically, while the Editor was away, Mrs. R was walking up the main hangout, the Mall, when she found four young men teasing a monkey. For all her hatred toward the tribe, Mrs. R demanded they stop, which they did, and proceeded instead to harass her the remaining half-mile to the nearest police station. There she told the sergeant on duty about the boys. The sergeant told her to come with him to look for the boys. She identified one.

• He was collared and taken to the police barracks along with Mrs. R. The police on the parade ground took turns smacking the boy in the face until Mrs. R begged them to let him go. Police brutality? Not a bit. He was not hurt, there was no need to make a formal arrest for harassing a woman, no need for bail, no fuss and mess of a trial, no need for time served, no police record. The victim saw justice was done, the boy and his cohorts were never seen again by Mrs. R.

• That's how petty juvenile/youngster crime is handled in Simla. and its a good system. The Editor was forever impressed by Mrs. R's courage in tackling four hooligans, in defense of a creature whose tribe she really hated.

A Question For India's Prime Minister

• Your Excellency, I have made no great effort to get US citizenship, despite having spent 29 years in the country. The half-hearted efforts were only because after my wife left me, I thought of remarrying, and it would be a far easier matter for a wife to join a US citizen husband as opposed to a US Green Card husband. But for my lady wife and her erratic ways, I would not have made any effort for US citizenship.

• Why? For an amazingly stupid reason: India is the country of my birth and I am proud to be an Indian.

• But today I learn from Reuters that half of Indian children are malnourished, with is twice the percentage of malnourished children in Sub-Saharan Africa. You can read the article at http://in.reuters.com/article/topNews/idINIndia-32544320080318?pageNumber=4&virtualBrandChannel=0&sp=true

• India, I am told, has an official GDP of $1-trillion, and some say it's real GDP is north of $1.1-trillion. In your budget for 2008-09 you have proposed a $15-billion write-off of debts owed by poor farmers, who have been killing themselves in scandalous numbers because they cannot make enough to feed themselves and pay interest. I think this is a wonderful move and you deserve blessings.

• Apparently we have 190-million malnourished children if the 50% figure is correct. It seems it costs 33-cents a day for 6 weeks to return a child to health. http://www.projectpeanutbutter.org/science.htm Let's assume assume a worst case, that the child has to be fed for a year. That means $22-billion/year.

• That is a whacking lot of money, 2% of GDP, as much as we spend on defense. So clearly feeding all the malnourished children is infeasible. But can we not at least make a start with 10% of the children and add 10% a year? After all, the economy grows at 8%/year.

• And just maybe at the same time you can correct the corrupt and inefficient food-distribution system. That would enable feeding of hungry adults as well, and surely reduce the burden on the children's program, allowing a larger percent to be fed. Yes, this is all back-of-the-envelope, but you get the idea.

• May I expect a quick answer from you? Otherwise I will have to continue hanging my head in shame. Its hard to be proud of a country where 190-million kids are starving, don't you think, particularly when we are no longer a desperately poor nation.

0230 GMT March 17, 2008

I apologize for not updating March 16. Mrs. Rikhye and I agreed on an amicable parting at her request. I don't like loose ends or delaying what is neccessary, so there was a whole bunch of stuff to be done. Mrs. Rikhye and I have, incidentally known each other since she was 3-months old. I went through three marriages before getting together with her, and we' spent 31 years married. So you can see this relationship is complicated; all the more reason that now its over to move rapidly. told a counselor that marriages break up over two things: sex and/or money. She demurred: marriages break for three reasons: money, money, and sex. No money, no honey, to misquote a 1950s song.   

• Tibet The situation remains unclear. Rioters in Lhasa seem to be off the streets due to a heavy security force presence, but gunfire was still heard. Riots took place in other town/cities on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, from all accounts they involved small number though several people were reported killed in police firing. No clear casualty numbers are available. The Chinese claim of 10 dead is clearly a lie, but some Tibetan claims of 100 dead by Friday remain unverified.

• From an eyewitness: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7299642.stm

• Meanwhile, in our opinion the ponderings by western gurus about China's dilemma in Tibet - not wanting to give in to the monks but not wanting to tarnish its image in an Olympic year - are superficial. You face a dilemma only when you have to decide between two objectives. If it comes top a choice between the Olympics and Tibet, does anyone think that China will not bi