« November 2007 | Main | January 2008 »

December 31, 2007

Alleged Taliban Member Detained in Guantanamo Bay Dies of Cancer

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/30/AR2007123002423.html
Alleged Taliban Member Detained in Guantanamo Bay Dies of Cancer
Associated Press
Monday, December 31, 2007; A02 [Guantanamo] [gitmo] [long-time prisoner died in captivity] [unremarkable—cancer] [********]
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico, Dec. 30 -- An Afghan detainee and alleged member of the Taliban died in custody Sunday after an illness at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, officials said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/30/AR2007123002423.html
Alleged Taliban Member Detained in Guantanamo Bay Dies of Cancer
Associated Press
Monday, December 31, 2007; A02 [Guantanamo] [gitmo] [long-time prisoner died in captivity] [unremarkable—cancer] [********]
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico, Dec. 30 -- An Afghan detainee and alleged member of the Taliban died in custody Sunday after an illness at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, officials said.
The detainee, identified as Abdul Razzak, 68, had been undergoing chemotherapy treatments since October, the military's Southern Command said in a statement from its Miami headquarters. He was diagnosed with colorectal cancer after complaining of abdominal pain in September.
Razzak was accused of being a Taliban driver and commander of a Taliban cell in Afghanistan. He arrived at Guantanamo Bay in January 2003 [****] following his capture that same month, a military spokesman said.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

Iraqis Authorize Big Jump in Forces

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/30/AR2007123001922.html
Iraqis Authorize Big Jump in Forces
By Walter Pincus
Monday, December 31, 2007; A13 [bush white house] [-iraq war planning team] [sometimes includes NSC principals and deputies but on a daily basis run by bureaucrats mostly] [here it appears as if some interaction between the levels has produced some SOPs] [dictating how –Iraq will build its future military-defense capabilities] [*******]
Buried in the latest Defense Department quarterly report on Iraq is the disclosure that the Baghdad government is now responsible for setting the size of its security forces, and that it has authorized a level of 550,000 military and police forces -- an increase of more than 40 percent over the level that the U.S.-led coalition reported just three months ago.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/30/AR2007123001922.html
Iraqis Authorize Big Jump in Forces
By Walter Pincus
Monday, December 31, 2007; A13 [bush white house] [-iraq war planning team] [sometimes includes NSC principals and deputies but on a daily basis run by bureaucrats mostly] [here it appears as if some interaction between the levels has produced some SOPs] [dictating how –Iraq will build its future military-defense capabilities] [*******]
Buried in the latest Defense Department quarterly report on Iraq is the disclosure that the Baghdad government is now responsible for setting the size of its security forces, and that it has authorized a level of 550,000 military and police forces -- an increase of more than 40 percent over the level that the U.S.-led coalition reported just three months ago.
"While previous reports have listed numbers authorized by the Coalition and provided estimates of numbers on the payroll, the GoI [Government of Iraq] is now responsible for determining requirements and counting personnel," the Pentagon reported this month. "Therefore, reporting will now reflect GoI statistics."
The new numbers show a jump of more than 150,000 from three months ago, when the coalition put the previously authorized number of military and police at 389,000. According to the Pentagon report, that jump under the Iraqi statistics mainly represents police who "have never been trained, as rapid hiring over the past two years outstripped academy training capacity." [******]
Eight Iraqi provinces have requested more than 45,000 new police slots; the Ministry of Interior has approved hiring 12,000, with orders pending for the rest. But, as the Pentagon report notes, "police force expansions continue on an un-programmed basis" and "increases in provincial police authorizations occur in an ad-hoc fashion."
The Pentagon noted that the Interior Ministry, which is in charge of the police force, not only has recruiting and hiring problems but also does not know "how many of the approximately 376,346 employees on the payroll are regularly reporting for duty."
Unlike the coalition, the Iraqi defense and interior ministries use "the number of authorized and assigned personnel" rather than the number trained as a measure of development of their security forces, the Pentagon reported. At the same time, the Pentagon warned that the two Iraqi ministries "do not accurately track which of those personnel who have been trained as part of U.S.-funded programs are still on the force and which are no longer on the force as a result of being killed in action or leaving for other reasons."
For example, the Pentagon reports that the annual attrition rate for the approximately 255,000-person Iraqi Police Service is running at about 17 percent. The Iraqi army, with an authorized ground force of about 186,000, also had an attrition rate of 17 percent, "in part due to a casualty rate two to three times higher than that of Coalition forces," [***] according to the Pentagon report. But it notes that on average about 2,000 soldiers each week go absent without official leave, and that this year about 21,000 were dropped from the rolls for desertion or for going AWOL.
In the Ministry of Interior, "corruption and sectarian behavior continue to be evident," the Pentagon concludes. However, internal investigations are "increasingly aggressive . . . to uncover perpetrators and reduce their impact." Thirty brigadier generals have been arrested, fired or forced into retirement; "several thousand personnel fired, 700 of whom were fired based on criminal records information"; and 195 police "fired for militia activity and involvement in corruption."
As a result of the firings, the report noted, the Interior Ministry's head of internal affairs and his family received death threats.
The Pentagon expects the security forces to continue growing under the planning of the central government in Baghdad, reaching "between 601,000 and 646,000 by 2010." [****] Police forces would reach near 350,000 and the military would expand to about 280,000, with 260,000 of those in the army. At their peak, Saddam Hussein's military and security forces were estimated to have totaled about 550,000.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

U.S. Urges North Korea to Fulfill Deal

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/world/asia/31korea.html
December 31, 2007
U.S. Urges North Korea to Fulfill Deal
By REUTERS [bush white house] [state department] [bureaucrat] [state’s view of the DPRK’s recent announcement that it was consciously slowing the process] [Kim Jong Il claimed the West had not delivered on fuel oil and other things] [this puts the state department in the bind I’ve written about so often in these pages] [the traditionalist internationalists in the administration have staked a lot on success with DPRK despite the history of DPRK sabotaging such processes] [neoconservative would like few things better than to see DPRK create a major cockup] [they could then say “we told you so”] [*******]
WASHINGTON (Reuters) — North Korea has not met its commitment to account fully for its nuclear activities by the end of 2007 under a disarmament agreement, the United States said Sunday, urging North Korea to comply with its obligations.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/world/asia/31korea.html
December 31, 2007
U.S. Urges North Korea to Fulfill Deal
By REUTERS [bush white house] [state department] [bureaucrat] [state’s view of the DPRK’s recent announcement that it was consciously slowing the process] [Kim Jong Il claimed the West had not delivered on fuel oil and other things] [this puts the state department in the bind I’ve written about so often in these pages] [the traditionalist internationalists in the administration have staked a lot on success with DPRK despite the history of DPRK sabotaging such processes] [neoconservative would like few things better than to see DPRK create a major cockup] [they could then say “we told you so”] [*******]
WASHINGTON (Reuters) — North Korea has not met its commitment to account fully for its nuclear activities by the end of 2007 under a disarmament agreement, the United States said Sunday, urging North Korea to comply with its obligations.
North Korea, which tested a nuclear device in 2006, is facing a deadline at 11 a.m., Eastern time, on Dec. 31 to disclose details of its nuclear program under a disarmament-for-aid deal it reached with the United States, China, Russia, Japan and South Korea.
“It is unfortunate that North Korea has not yet met its commitments by providing a complete and correct declaration of its nuclear programs and slowing down the process of disablement,” [******] a State Department spokesman, Tom Casey, said in a statement.
“We urge North Korea to deliver a complete and correct declaration of all its nuclear weapons programs and nuclear weapons and proliferation activities and complete the agreed disablement.”
American and South Korean officials have called on North Korea to say how much plutonium it has produced — about 110 pounds by the United States’ estimates — and respond to American suspicions about a secret program to enrich uranium for weapons.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

U.S. Experts Criticize Bhutto Post-Mortem

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/world/asia/31examiners.html
December 31, 2007
U.S. Experts Criticize Bhutto Post-Mortem
By LAWRENCE K. ALTMAN
Leading American experts in forensic pathology this weekend deplored the failure of Pakistani officials to order an autopsy of Benazir Bhutto, saying that the standard medical procedure was a crucial part of any credible investigation of a murder.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/world/asia/31examiners.html
December 31, 2007
U.S. Experts Criticize Bhutto Post-Mortem
By LAWRENCE K. ALTMAN
Leading American experts in forensic pathology this weekend deplored the failure of Pakistani officials to order an autopsy of Benazir Bhutto, saying that the standard medical procedure was a crucial part of any credible investigation of a murder.
Exhuming the body of Ms. Bhutto, 54, a former prime minister who was killed Thursday at a political rally, could still be extremely useful in determining more precisely whether she was shot, hit by shrapnel from a suicide bomb or, less likely, died from striking her head against an object in the vehicle in which she was riding, the experts said in interviews.
A reporter for The New York Times read the experts the entire medical report on Ms. Bhutto.
Proper examination of the autopsy material, the clothing Ms. Bhutto wore when she was killed and the debris in the area surrounding the explosion could also help determine which extremist group made a bomb or fired a bullet, if either caused her death.
Ms. Bhutto’s case recalls that of President John F. Kennedy, who was slain in 1963. Controversy still swirls around the assassination, in part because of a flawed autopsy.
Not performing an autopsy of Ms. Bhutto “was a severe mistake, especially in the light of past problems with the murders of national leaders,” because it will fuel speculation, said Dr. Michael M. Baden, who is a top forensic official for the New York State Police as well as a former New York City chief medical examiner.
Seven doctors, but no forensic pathologist, signed Ms. Bhutto’s medical report. None were “trained to pick up the finer points of gunshot wounds” and other causes of criminal deaths, Dr. Baden said. For example, her doctors said they did not feel a bullet or foreign body, but did not probe for evidence of one.
“With Kennedy, the treating doctors were wrong about the entrance and exit wounds” of the bullet-damaged skull, said Dr. Baden, who was chairman of the forensic pathology panel of the House of Representatives select committees on the assassinations of Kennedy and the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Dr. Baden said he suspected that Ms. Bhutto died from a bullet that left two or three tiny fragments seen on X-rays before it exited the skull through a wound that the Pakistani doctors did not notice in part because they apparently did not shave the bloodied thick scalp hair.
Dr. Werner U. Spitz, former chief medical examiner in Detroit, said he could not understand why the government did not try to quench “the thirst of the Pakistani people to know the facts, because they are all angry, and if you confronted them with the facts, maybe the anger” would disappear.
Dr. Spitz said he suspected that Ms. Bhutto died after being hit by a bullet fired from a high-powered rifle.
Dr. Vincent J. DiMaio, a former chief medical examiner in San Antonio, who also deplored the lack of an autopsy in Ms. Bhutto’s case, said he suspected that a fragment that was propelled against her head was a more likely explanation for her death than a bullet wound.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

What Bhutto Was Worried About

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/30/AR2007123002237.html
What Bhutto Was Worried About
By Robert D. Novak
Monday, December 31, 2007; A15 [oped] [columnist] [the prince of darkness on what Bhutto feared and possible American complicity] [**********]
The assassination of Benazir Bhutto followed two months of urgent pleas to the State Department by her representatives for better protection. The U.S. reaction was that she was worried over nothing, expressing assurance that Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf would not let anything happen to her.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/30/AR2007123002237.html
What Bhutto Was Worried About
By Robert D. Novak
Monday, December 31, 2007; A15 [oped] [columnist] [the prince of darkness on what Bhutto feared and possible American complicity] [**********]
The assassination of Benazir Bhutto followed two months of urgent pleas to the State Department by her representatives for better protection. The U.S. reaction was that she was worried over nothing, expressing assurance that Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf would not let anything happen to her.
That attitude led a Bhutto agent to inform a high-ranking State Department official that her camp no longer viewed the backstage U.S. effort to broker a power-sharing agreement between Musharraf and the former prime minister as a good-faith effort toward democracy. [*******]It was, according to the written complaint, an attempt to preserve the politically endangered Musharraf as George W. Bush's man in Islamabad.
President Bush confirmed that judgment with his statement Thursday, within hours of learning that Bhutto was dead, when he urged that the elections scheduled for Jan. 8 be held in furtherance of Pakistani "democracy." That may be Musharraf's position, but it definitely is not the position of his critics. They believed the election would be a sham with Bhutto dead and with Saudi-backed former prime minister Nawaz Sharif boycotting the balloting, though Sharif's party reversed course yesterday. [************]
The Bush administration decided months ago to broker a power-sharing arrangement, with the deeply unpopular Musharraf retiring from the army but remaining as president and the popular Bhutto taking a third try as prime minister (after twice being ousted by the military). That decision was based on Pakistan's strategic importance as a sanctuary for al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters. Bush was in a quandary. Bhutto was much tougher than Musharraf on Islamist extremists, but Bush had invested heavily in the general. [he’s got that right] [the bush administration has had a Musharraf policy not a Pakistan policy] [and they are still to focused on elections as the single exemplar of democracy and pluralism] [*********]
When I last saw Bhutto, over coffee in August at Manhattan's Pierre Hotel, she was deeply concerned about U.S. ambivalence but asked me not to write about it. She had not heard from Musharraf for three weeks after their secret July meeting in Abu Dhabi. She feared the Pakistani military strongman was not being prodded from Washington.
Next came Musharraf's state of emergency and purge of Pakistan's Supreme Court to guarantee legality of his questionable election as president. According to Bhutto's advisers, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice asked Bhutto in a telephone conversation to go along with that process in return for concessions from Musharraf. Bhutto agreed, but she got nothing in return.
The unsuccessful Oct. 18 attempt on Bhutto's life followed the regime's rejection of her requested security protection when she returned from eight years in exile. The Pakistani government vetoed FBI assistance in investigating the attack. On Oct. 26, Bhutto sent an e-mail to Mark Siegel, her friend and Washington spokesman, to be made public only in the event of her death.
"I would hold Musharraf responsible," Bhutto said in the message. "I have been made to feel insecure by his minions." She listed obstruction to her "taking private cars or using tinted windows," using jammers against roadside bombs and being surrounded with police cars. "Without him [Musharraf]," she said, those requests could not have been blocked.
In early December, a former Pakistani government official supporting Bhutto visited a senior U.S. government official to renew Bhutto's security requests. He got a brushoff, a mind-set reflected Dec. 6 at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing. [********]
Richard Boucher, assistant secretary of state for South and Central Asian affairs, was asked to respond to fears by nonpartisan American observers of a rigged election. His reply: "I do think they can have a good election. They can have a credible election. They can have a transparent and a fair election. It's not going to be a perfect election." Boucher's words echoed through corridors of power in Islamabad. The Americans' not demanding perfection signaled that they would settle for less. Without Benazir Bhutto around, it is apt to be a lot less. [*************************]
A more sinister fallout of a free hand from Washington for Pakistan might be Bhutto's murder. Neither her shooting on Thursday nor the attempt on her life Oct. 18 bore the trademarks of al-Qaeda. [others have said the opposite] [I’m not certain yet] [*****]After the carnage, government trucks used streams of water to clean up the blood and, in the process, destroyed forensic evidence. If not too late, would an offer and acceptance of investigation by the FBI be in order?
¿ 2007 Creators Syndicate Inc.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

George Smiley's War

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/30/AR2007123002236.html
George Smiley's War
By Donald Gregg
Monday, December 31, 2007; A15 [oped] [intelligence community] [comparisons of the Cold War versus post-9/11 eras] [Donald Gregg is an old Cold Warrior but from the traditionalist camp of GOP: realist internationalists] [*********] [use nsc?] [use psci 455?]
Many years ago I was given the job of making the final payment to a foreign diplomat who had worked as a recruited agent for the CIA. With the man's retirement, his covert relationship with the agency was ending. The old agent was in an expansive mood when we met, and he told me how much he valued his work for the CIA, not just because it had paid for his children's educations. The information he had passed along about his country and resulting U.S. actions "had stopped us from doing all kinds of stupid things," he said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/30/AR2007123002236.html
George Smiley's War
By Donald Gregg
Monday, December 31, 2007; A15 [oped] [intelligence community] [comparisons of the Cold War versus post-9/11 eras] [Donald Gregg is an old Cold Warrior but from the traditionalist camp of GOP: realist internationalists] [*********] [use nsc?] [use psci 455?]
Many years ago I was given the job of making the final payment to a foreign diplomat who had worked as a recruited agent for the CIA. With the man's retirement, his covert relationship with the agency was ending. The old agent was in an expansive mood when we met, and he told me how much he valued his work for the CIA, not just because it had paid for his children's educations. The information he had passed along about his country and resulting U.S. actions "had stopped us from doing all kinds of stupid things," he said.
Today, such a conversation would be unlikely for many reasons, chief among them the current reputations of the CIA and of the United States itself. Our bungling of intelligence assessments before the invasion of Iraq and our mismanagement of the occupation; our continued unwillingness to talk to those with whom we disagree; and other missteps, including the mishandling and destruction of detainee interrogation tapes, have shrouded the White House, the Pentagon and CIA headquarters in an aura of incompetence. [too true] [**********]
In the name of the "war on terror," we have abandoned the moral high ground on issues such as prisoner detention, torture and rendition. The Bush administration has become so obsessed by the Sept. 11 attacks that, as former deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage puts it, we are exporting fear, not hope. [*********]
The targets and primary requirements of intelligence agencies change with time. Today's targets are tougher and more dangerous than anything I had to deal with. I worked primarily against the Soviets and the Chinese, and violence was rare. Today's case officers put their lives on the line as they pursue al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups. The draconian positions taken by the Bush administration make case officers' lives harder, not easier. The nightmarish images from Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo are bitter obstacles to the development of dialogue with potential recruits and make the threat of capture by Muslim fanatics all the more horrendous. [yes, I too worry abouth this] [on other hand, many of the worst jihadis surely would and in fact have treated prisoners unconscionably] [that doesn’t make it okay for the US to and I regret we have] [and in fact, it may cause Islamists who might not otherwise use such means more prone to] [distinction between jihadis and Islamists] [*************]
Others who have worked in and studied the intelligence world have suggested taking steps to reinvigorate our intelligence and security community. Earlier this year, Richard Dearlove, the retired director of Britain's MI6 intelligence service, said that at the CIA "there are already solid foundations on which to rebuild" but that this will be a 10-year process. [comes off as pretty perspecacious sort in Tenet’s memoirs] [****] There are no quick fixes, he warned. Tim Weiner, author of the excellent CIA history "Legacy of Ashes," spoke in a television interview of the critical need for talented young people, with linguistic skills and a sense of history, to be willing to contribute years of anonymous service to their country.
Fortunately, such people exist. I frequently talk on college campuses and always refer positively to my 31 years with the CIA. Almost inevitably, a student waits after my talk to quietly express interest in becoming an intelligence officer. I encourage all such young people to learn a foreign language, read history and get some overseas experience.
Within the CIA itself, positive steps are already being taken. The current director has quietly brought back into the service some highly experienced, senior people forced out by his predecessor, Porter Goss. And George Tenet's unfortunate "slam-dunk" remark about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction should not obscure his solid, morale-restoring achievements, particularly in Afghanistan, [I mostly agree] [*****] during his long tenure as CIA director.
The CIA has had many ups and downs during its history. The late Meg Greenfield, the former editorial page editor of The Post, wrote a column in Newsweek, "The CIA Without Romance," in 1975 in which she dismissed former director Allen Dulles (as does Weiner in his book) by saying that "in Dulles the potential for disaster is everywhere apparent." She referred to Bill Colby, then the director, as "presiding over one of the great organizational wrecks of our time, a vast secret intelligence agency that has endured a veritable tornado of blown cover, and which is trying to get in line with a sudden demand for public accountability." (Sound familiar?)
In the end, as Greenfield voiced hope for the CIA's revival, she chose John le Carr¿'s fictional hero, George Smiley, as embodying the key virtues of intelligence work. She wrote: "George Smiley has it all, and has it all just right: a fanatical commitment to the inspection of reality, a corollary distaste for daydream and drama, a willingness to make moral distinctions and an understanding of what the practical limits are." Le Carr¿ was a British intelligence officer who served in Germany in the early days of the Cold War. He knew what he was writing about.
As we move into a new year and further into this tumultuous new century, we will need attributes such as Smiley's to best assess foreign threats. When we at last accurately perceive the nature of terrorist challenges, we will recognize that effectively dealing with them is largely a job for intelligence officers and paramilitary specialists. [*****] Such people, skillfully employing the scalpels of deep insight and, if necessary, excision, are far better guardians of our national security and our global reputation than those who indiscriminately wield the broadswords of threat, force, torture and death. [*****]
The writer was a career Central Intelligence Agency officer from 1951 to 1982, after which he served as national security adviser to Vice President George H.W. Bush, U.S. ambassador to South Korea and chairman of the Korea Society.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

Make-or-Break Time in Iraq?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/30/AR2007123002238.html
Make-or-Break Time in Iraq?
What the U.S. Decides About Post-Surge Troop Levels Could Prove Decisive
By Jackson Diehl
Monday, December 31, 2007; A15 [oped] [columnist] [-ir] [belaboring the obvious] [******]
For five years Washington-based officials and pundits have repeatedly made the mistake of predicting that the next six or 12 months in Iraq would be decisive. Under the hardheaded leadership of Gen. David H. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker such talk has been banned: "Nobody says anything about turning a corner, seeing lights at the end of tunnels, any of those phrases," [****] Petraeus recently declared. [wise] [****] [thank god somebody remembers Viet Nam]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/30/AR2007123002238.html
Make-or-Break Time in Iraq?
What the U.S. Decides About Post-Surge Troop Levels Could Prove Decisive
By Jackson Diehl
Monday, December 31, 2007; A15 [oped] [columnist] [-ir] [belaboring the obvious] [******]
For five years Washington-based officials and pundits have repeatedly made the mistake of predicting that the next six or 12 months in Iraq would be decisive. Under the hardheaded leadership of Gen. David H. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker such talk has been banned: "Nobody says anything about turning a corner, seeing lights at the end of tunnels, any of those phrases," [****] Petraeus recently declared. [wise] [****] [thank god somebody remembers Viet Nam]
Yet, for once, saying that the next six to 12 months will win or lose the war just might be right.
That's not because Iraqis have suddenly developed the capacity to meet the unrealistic timelines drawn up in Washington ever since 2003 -- when the Pentagon planned to reduce U.S. troops to a skeleton force of 30,000 within six months of the capture of Baghdad. On the contrary, Petraeus and Crocker have spent the past year attempting to drive home the point that the U.S. goal of a stable, democratizing Iraq, if it can be achieved at all, will require an American commitment well beyond any of the timetables discussed in Washington -- despite the remarkable success of this year's military surge. [********]
So the next six to 12 months are not crucial because of what will happen in Iraq -- where, at best, violence will continue to decline incrementally, while Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds make painful and partial progress toward political settlements. The test will come in the United States -- where first the Pentagon and the White House, and then the country, will decide whether to invest enough resources in Iraq to keep the hope of eventual success alive.
The number of American soldiers in Iraq started coming down last month. By July it will have dropped from the peak of 180,000 it reached briefly in November to 130,000, or 15 brigades, the force level before the surge. [****] The Pentagon has until March to judge how Iraqis react to the initial withdrawals -- whether violence in volatile places such as Anbar province remains low or escalates again as U.S. troops depart. Then another decision will be made, on whether to reduce the force by five more brigades, to a total of about 100,000 troops, by the end of 2008.
This decision ought to be based entirely on whether Iraq's progress can continue with an American force 40 percent smaller than it was at the surge's peak. But external politics is already intruding: Gen. George Casey, the architect of the failed U.S. military strategy in Iraq pre-Petraeus, is already pushing for the full reduction, on the grounds that the Army needs to reduce its exposure in Iraq. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, whose strategic preoccupation has been arriving at a force level in Iraq that could win bipartisan acceptance in Washington, has said publicly that he'd like to hit the 100,000 target. [******]
And what if 100,000 troops won't be enough to maintain the fragile lull in the fighting between Sunnis and Shiites or the return of something like normal life in Baghdad? In all likelihood, President Bush will have to choose between the competing priorities of Petraeus and the Pentagon.
Let's say Bush backs Petraeus. Then a major subject of the fall presidential campaign will be whether a large U.S. combat force should continue to support the Iraqi government after Bush leaves office. So far, all of the major Republican candidates are saying they are committed to success in Iraq -- which presumably means that, as long as the strategy seems to be working, they will continue to deploy the troops Petraeus and his successors deem necessary.
The three leading Democrats, [*****] in contrast, continue to describe Iraq as an irremediable failure, despite the obvious comeback of the past year. While they have refused to commit to removing all U.S. forces from Iraq by 2013, they have said that they would quickly withdraw all combat forces. Barring near-miraculous Iraqi progress in the next 13 months, that would almost certainly invite the eruption of the civil war that almost all serious observers -- from Crocker to the CIA -- have warned would be the result of a quick withdrawal. [first, to characterize only those who agree with you as “serious observers” is a cheap, transparent device] [second, despite what any of the Dems say, if one becomes president (s)he unlikely to withdrawal precipitously] [let’s us remember how Viet Nam boxed in president after president including Dems and Repubs] [*********]
In a telephone conversation with Washington journalists last week, Crocker said that Iraqis he's spoken with aren't terribly worried so far by the reduction of American forces: "I have not detected a great deal of nervousness that we are simply going to pull the plug and allow this to spiral back downward," he said. "At the most fundamental level there is a view [in Iraq] that things are moving in the right direction; that security is improving; that the surge has worked; that Iraqi forces are more numerous and more capable; and that therefore why on earth would we abandon a winning proposition?" [ambassador Crocker] [********]
Why, indeed. But then, Iraqis are judging politics in Washington from a great distance, and assuming that Americans will act sensibly. More than once, Americans in Washington have made the same assumptions about Iraqis -- and been proved wrong.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

About That Peace Process

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon2.html
December 31, 2007
Editorial
About That Peace Process
[editorial] [the most recent round of Middle East peacemaking that’s gone nowhere fast] [*********]
It didn’t take long for the glow of the Annapolis peace conference to wear off. Israelis and Palestinians have quickly fallen back into predictable destructive patterns. Arab countries have not done anywhere near enough to support the negotiations. Even the United States is behind on its pledges: because of bureaucratic wrangling and Israeli doubts, it has yet to establish a promised “mechanism” to monitor the two sides’ behavior and pressure them into meeting their commitments. [*******]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon2.html
December 31, 2007
Editorial
About That Peace Process
[editorial] [the most recent round of Middle East peacemaking that’s gone nowhere fast] [*********]
It didn’t take long for the glow of the Annapolis peace conference to wear off. Israelis and Palestinians have quickly fallen back into predictable destructive patterns. Arab countries have not done anywhere near enough to support the negotiations. Even the United States is behind on its pledges: because of bureaucratic wrangling and Israeli doubts, it has yet to establish a promised “mechanism” to monitor the two sides’ behavior and pressure them into meeting their commitments. [*******]
The American-led conference late last month achieved the minimum: an agreement by Israelis and Palestinians to begin immediate negotiations with the goal of reaching a peace treaty by the end of 2008. Since then, the two sides have failed even to name working groups that are supposed to grapple with the difficult core issues: borders, refugees, the future of Jerusalem and how to guarantee Israel’s security. [*****]
Next week President Bush will make his first trip since taking office to Israel and the Palestinian territories. His aides should use the time before then to press both sides to set up those working groups and lay out a calendar for negotiations. Annapolis was photo-op enough. Mr. Bush should use this visit to get real work started. [********]
In the last month, Israeli and Palestinian negotiators have held two meetings, in which all they did was revisit old grievances. Palestinians are right to complain that Israel violated its promise to halt settlements by announcing a tender for about 300 new apartments in Har Homa, and Israel is right to demand that the Palestinians act more aggressively to disband terrorist and militant groups.
The Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, and the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, tried to calm tensions when they met last week and promised — again — to refrain from acts prejudicing a final peace treaty. Both are extremely weak leaders who need maximum outside support to make serious compromises.
Before he leaves Washington, Mr. Bush also needs to get his own house in order. His aides have been wrangling for weeks over who will head up the so-called monitoring mechanism and how it will operate. [govt] [*****] [nsc] [use psci 455]Those issues must be settled before Mr. Bush’s trip.
Some officials want to assign the task to the American consul general in Jerusalem. The job — which will entail a lot of arm-twisting — should go to someone with a lot higher profile and direct access to President Bush. Putting Gen. James Jones, a former NATO commander who recently became special envoy for Mideast security, in charge would make a lot more sense.
Arab states also need to do more to support Mr. Abbas and to reassure Israel that its compromises will bring greater acceptance. Given the price of oil, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait can certainly afford to provide more cash to the struggling Palestinian government. Egypt needs to completely disable tunnels used by Hamas militants in Gaza to smuggle in arms.
The danger that some extremist will try to destroy the negotiations with a mindless act of violence is never far. Which is all the more reason for Mr. Olmert and Mr. Abbas to push the process forward as fast as they can — and give their citizens a sense of the possibilities in peace. [********]
The last month’s stagnation, after the enthusiasm of Annapolis, is yet another reminder of why Mr. Bush cannot stand on the sidelines and hope that an agreement will somehow materialize.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Looking at America

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon1.html
December 31, 2007
Editorial
Looking at America
[editorial] [the sacrifices in principles made in gsave] [though early ones are virtually inevitable, these have now gone on for extended periods] [*******]
There are too many moments these days when we cannot recognize our country. Sunday was one of them, as we read the account in The Times of how men in some of the most trusted posts in the nation plotted to cover up the torture of prisoners by Central Intelligence Agency interrogators [****]by destroying videotapes of their sickening behavior. It was impossible to see the founding principles of the greatest democracy in the contempt these men and their bosses showed for the Constitution, the rule of law and human decency.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon1.html
December 31, 2007
Editorial
Looking at America
[editorial] [the sacrifices in principles made in gsave] [though early ones are virtually inevitable, these have now gone on for extended periods] [*******]
There are too many moments these days when we cannot recognize our country. Sunday was one of them, as we read the account in The Times of how men in some of the most trusted posts in the nation plotted to cover up the torture of prisoners by Central Intelligence Agency interrogators [****]by destroying videotapes of their sickening behavior. It was impossible to see the founding principles of the greatest democracy in the contempt these men and their bosses showed for the Constitution, the rule of law and human decency.
It was not the first time in recent years we’ve felt this horror, this sorrowful sense of estrangement, not nearly. This sort of lawless behavior has become standard practice since Sept. 11, 2001. [and well before] [let us not pretend to forget some of the exigent circumstances used to justify equally bad behavior early in the Cold War] [the correction and reformation must come at some point] [but this is not unique to post-9/11 era] [****]
The country and much of the world was rightly and profoundly frightened by the single-minded hatred and ingenuity displayed by this new enemy. But there is no excuse for how President Bush and his advisers panicked — how they forgot that it is their responsibility to protect American lives and American ideals, that there really is no safety for Americans or their country when those ideals are sacrificed. [granted] [but the New York Times and other “reputable media” panicked as well and hardly criticized anything until late 2002] [their hands are not completely clean here] [Judith Miller was practically an administration PR person!] [*******]
Out of panic and ideology, President Bush squandered America’s position of moral and political leadership, swept aside international institutions and treaties, sullied America’s global image, and trampled on the constitutional pillars that have supported our democracy through the most terrifying and challenging times. These policies have fed the world’s anger and alienation and have not made any of us safer.
In the years since 9/11, we have seen American soldiers abuse, sexually humiliate, torment and murder prisoners in Afghanistan and Iraq. A few have been punished, but their leaders have never been called to account. We have seen mercenaries gun down Iraqi civilians with no fear of prosecution. We have seen the president, sworn to defend the Constitution, turn his powers on his own citizens, authorizing the intelligence agencies to spy on Americans, wiretapping phones and intercepting international e-mail messages without a warrant. [again, agreed] [but we have yet to learn the full details and we have learned that some leaders in Congress, including respectable Dem, Jay Rockefellor, Jane Harman, et al., sometimes did little more than acquiesce] [*****]
We have read accounts of how the government’s top lawyers huddled in secret after the attacks in New York and Washington and plotted ways to circumvent the Geneva Conventions — and both American and international law — to hold anyone the president chose indefinitely without charges or judicial review.
Those same lawyers then twisted other laws beyond recognition to allow Mr. Bush to turn intelligence agents into torturers, to force doctors to abdicate their professional oaths and responsibilities to prepare prisoners for abuse, and then to monitor the torment to make sure it didn’t go just a bit too far and actually kill them.
The White House used the fear of terrorism and the sense of national unity to ram laws through Congress that gave law-enforcement agencies far more power than they truly needed to respond to the threat — and at the same time fulfilled the imperial fantasies of Vice President Dick Cheney and others determined to use the tragedy of 9/11 to arrogate as much power as they could. [indeed, they have done this in unprecedented fashion, as far as I can tell] [*******]
Hundreds of men, swept up on the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq, were thrown into a prison in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, so that the White House could claim they were beyond the reach of American laws. Prisoners are held there with no hope of real justice, only the chance to face a kangaroo court where evidence and the names of their accusers are kept secret, and where they are not permitted to talk about the abuse they have suffered at the hands of American jailers.
In other foreign lands, the C.I.A. set up secret jails where “high-value detainees” were subjected to ever more barbaric acts, including simulated drowning. These crimes were videotaped, so that “experts” could watch them, and then the videotapes were destroyed, after consultation with the White House, in the hope that Americans would never know.
The C.I.A. contracted out its inhumanity to nations with no respect for life or law, sending prisoners — some of them innocents kidnapped on street corners and in airports — to be tortured into making false confessions, or until it was clear they had nothing to say and so were let go without any apology or hope of redress.
These are not the only shocking abuses of President Bush’s two terms in office, made in the name of fighting terrorism. There is much more — so much that the next president will have a full agenda simply discovering all the wrongs that have been done and then righting them.
We can only hope that this time, unlike 2004, American voters will have the wisdom to grant the awesome powers of the presidency to someone who has the integrity, principle and decency to use them honorably. Then when we look in the mirror as a nation, we will see, once again, the reflection of the United States of America. [a bit overwrought to say the least] [have they not looked as the slate of potential presidents on either side?] [“integrity, principle and decency” indeed] [**********]
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Taliban Leader Expels Commander

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/world/asia/31afghan.html
December 31, 2007
Taliban Leader Expels Commander
By THE NEW YORK TIMES [Afghanistan] [hydra] [Pakistan became the clear staging area for operations into Afghanistan during 2007] [tactics previously unseen in Afghanistan appeared—beheadings and the like—as the insurgency ramped up] [U.S. not particularly attentive, except of course for the opium part of the puzzle, and 2007 may well be looked on as a tipping point] [the winter lull is almost upon the region] [******]
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan — The Taliban leader, Mullah Muhammad Omar, has ordered his chief commander expelled from the movement for disobeying Taliban rules, [*****] a spokesman said in a statement over the weekend.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/world/asia/31afghan.html
December 31, 2007
Taliban Leader Expels Commander
By THE NEW YORK TIMES [Afghanistan] [hydra] [Pakistan became the clear staging area for operations into Afghanistan during 2007] [tactics previously unseen in Afghanistan appeared—beheadings and the like—as the insurgency ramped up] [U.S. not particularly attentive, except of course for the opium part of the puzzle, and 2007 may well be looked on as a tipping point] [the winter lull is almost upon the region] [******]
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan — The Taliban leader, Mullah Muhammad Omar, has ordered his chief commander expelled from the movement for disobeying Taliban rules, [*****] a spokesman said in a statement over the weekend.
The commander, Mansoor Dadullah, took over after his brother, Mullah Dadullah, was killed in May in Helmand Province. The Taliban statement said that Mansoor Dadullah was no longer the legitimate commander, [******] and that his men were advised to continue their fight without him. [one can hope for internal warfare but unlikely] [if nothing else, al Qaeda and other jihadis groups will probably seek to heal rifts] [*****]
Local news reports suggested that he and his men were giving the Taliban a bad name through their criminal behavior, including robbery and extortion. Mr. Dadullah denied that he had been expelled and said that reports of his dismissal were baseless. He said he continued to respect and obey Mullah Omar. [********]
NATO said in a statement that a roadside bomb killed a NATO soldier and wounded four others in southern Afghanistan on Sunday, The Associated Press reported.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

At Least 16 Dead in Attacks in Iraq

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/01/world/middleeast/01iraq.html
January 1, 2008
At Least 16 Dead in Attacks in Iraq
By SOLOMON MOORE [-ir] [hydra] [insurgency] [bush administration’s “surge option” or “new way forward” underway] [some positive indicators of improvement] [nevertheless, violence while surge unfolds] [pentagon’s recent status report—pretty awful but also predictable] [followup] [“surge” continues amid mixed indicators] [a recent pickup in suicide bombers] [****]
BAGHDAD — Bomb attacks on Monday killed at least 16 people, including two Iraqi soldiers, in one of the most violent days in recent weeks even as Iraqi security forces stepped up their operations against insurgents across the country.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/01/world/middleeast/01iraq.html
January 1, 2008
At Least 16 Dead in Attacks in Iraq
By SOLOMON MOORE [-ir] [hydra] [insurgency] [bush administration’s “surge option” or “new way forward” underway] [some positive indicators of improvement] [nevertheless, violence while surge unfolds] [pentagon’s recent status report—pretty awful but also predictable] [followup] [“surge” continues amid mixed indicators] [a recent pickup in suicide bombers] [****]
BAGHDAD — Bomb attacks on Monday killed at least 16 people, including two Iraqi soldiers, in one of the most violent days in recent weeks even as Iraqi security forces stepped up their operations against insurgents across the country.
In the deadliest attack, a truck bomb exploded at a checkpoint manned by neighborhood security volunteers in the Tarmiya area north of Baghdad. The blast killed at least five volunteers, who are members of a Sunni Arab tribe that has turned against the insurgency in recent months. At least four children were also killed in the explosion. Tarmiya was once a stronghold of the Sunni Arab insurgency.
In the restive Diyala province 60 miles north of the capital explosions killed five people and a woman detonated an explosive vest wounding at least five people in Baquba.
The attacks occurred two days after the appearance on Web sites of an hour-long audio recording by Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. In the message Mr. bin Laden speaks at length about Iraq and the Awakening Councils, a collection of more than 300 tribal councils comprising at least 70,000 Sunni Arabs who have renounced Al Qaeda and have joined forces with the American military.
Bin Laden warns his followers of “plots that are being hatched by the Zionist-Crusader alliance” to “steal the fruit of blessed jihad” in Iraq and urges them to resist American overtures.
“Recruiting hypocrite chieftains of tribes is one axis,” said Mr. bin Laden, according a translation posted by the United States government’s Open Source Center. “America, along with its agents in the region, is seeking through the other axis to form a new government — this government will be called a national unity government.”
Meanwhile, American and Iraqi forces staged several sweeps throughout the country against suspected Sunni Arab insurgents.
Commandos of the Iraqi national police said they killed seven suspected militants in the northern oil hub of Beiji.
In the southern city of Hilla, Brigadier Abdul Amer Kamel Abdullah of the Iraqi army said that his soldiers arrested 70 people over the weekend.
“Sixty of them were Al Qaeda fighters,” he said. The men were responsible for the assassination of a police commander five months ago, Mr. Abdullah said.
Kurdish Peshmerga fighters swept into the Diyala village of Jawalah, north of Baquba, and arrested at least a dozen Sunni Arab men and in the northern city of Kirkuk, American soldiers and Iraqi police detained 17 suspected militants.
And in Mahmoudiyah, about 20 miles south of Baghdad, an airborne force detained 18 suspected insurgents.
Monday’s violence highlighted the fragility of a weeks-long downturn in attacks in Iraq. American and Iraqi military officials have touted the recent lull as a success brought on by the recent surge of American forces, the recruitment of more than 100,000 Iraqi police officers and the 70,000 Sunni Arab security volunteers.
But earlier this week, General David H. Petraeus, the overall commander of United States forces in Iraq, characterized those security gains as “reversible.”
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

New Questions Arise in Killing of Ex-Premier

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/world/asia/31inquiry.html
December 31, 2007
New Questions Arise in Killing of Ex-Premier
By JANE PERLEZ [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [post-Bhutto assassination period] [Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [interesting how Kashmir has been seemingl eclipsed by process] [******]
LAHORE, Pakistan — New details of Benazir Bhutto’s final moments, including indications that her doctors felt pressured to conform to government accounts of her death, fueled the arguments over her assassination on Sunday and added to the pressure on Pakistan’s leaders to accept an international inquiry.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/world/asia/31inquiry.html
December 31, 2007
New Questions Arise in Killing of Ex-Premier
By JANE PERLEZ [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [post-Bhutto assassination period] [Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [interesting how Kashmir has been seemingl eclipsed by process] [******]
LAHORE, Pakistan — New details of Benazir Bhutto’s final moments, including indications that her doctors felt pressured to conform to government accounts of her death, fueled the arguments over her assassination on Sunday and added to the pressure on Pakistan’s leaders to accept an international inquiry.
Athar Minallah, a board member of the hospital where Ms. Bhutto was treated, released her medical report along with an open letter showing that her doctors wanted to distance themselves from the government theory that Ms. Bhutto had died by hitting her head on a lever of her car’s sunroof during the attack. [*****]
In his letter, Mr. Minallah, who is also a prominent lawyer, said the doctors believed that an autopsy was needed to provide the answers to how she actually died. Their request for one last Thursday was denied by the local police chief.
Pakistani and Western security experts said the government’s insistence that Ms. Bhutto, a former prime minister, was not killed by a bullet was intended to deflect attention from the lack of government security around her. On Sunday, Pakistani newspapers covered their front pages with photographs showing a man apparently pointing a gun at her from just yards away. [*******]
Her vehicle came under attack by a gunman and suicide bomber as she left a political rally in Rawalpindi, where the Pakistani Army keeps its headquarters, and where the powerful Inter-Services Intelligence agency has a strong presence.
The government’s explanation, that Ms. Bhutto died after hitting her head as she ducked from the gunfire or was tossed by the force of the suicide blast, has been greeted with disbelief by her supporters, ordinary Pakistanis and medical experts. While some of the mystery could be cleared up by exhuming the body, it is not clear whether Ms. Bhutto’s family would give permission, such is their distrust of the government.
Mr. Minallah distributed the medical report with his open letter to the Pakistani news media and The New York Times. He said the doctor who wrote the report, Mohammad Mussadiq Khan, the principal professor of surgery at the Rawalpindi General Hospital, told him on the night of Ms. Bhutto’s death that she had died of a bullet wound. [*****]
Dr. Khan declined through Mr. Minallah to speak with a reporter on the grounds that he was an employee of a government hospital and was fearful of government reprisals if he did not support its version of events.
The medical report, prepared with six other doctors, does not specifically mention a bullet because the actual cause of the head wound was to be left to an autopsy, Mr. Minallah said. The doctors had stressed to him that “without an autopsy it is not at all possible to determine as to what had caused the injury,” he wrote.
But the chief of police in Rawalpindi, Saud Aziz, “did not agree” to the autopsy request by the doctors, Mr. Minallah said in his letter.
A former senior Pakistani police official, Wajahat Latif, who headed the Federal Investigative Agency in the early 1990s, said that in “any case of a suspected murder an autopsy is mandatory.” To waive an autopsy, Mr. Latif said, relatives were required to apply for permission.
At a news conference Sunday, Ms. Bhutto’s husband, Asif Ali Zardari, said he had declined a request for a post-mortem examination. “It was an insult to my wife, an insult to the sister of the nation, an insult to the mother of the nation,” he said. “I know their forensic reports are useless. I refuse to give them her last remains.”
The question of an autopsy has become central to the circumstances of Ms. Bhutto’s death because of conflicting versions put forward by the Pakistani government, which have stirred an already deep well of distrust of the government among Ms. Bhutto’s supporters and other Pakistanis.
On the night Ms. Bhutto was assassinated, an unidentified Interior Ministry spokesman was quoted by the official Pakistani news agency as saying that she had died of a “bullet wound in the neck by a suicide bomber.” [*********]
The next day, Brig. Javed Iqbal Cheema, the Interior Ministry spokesman, recast that version of events, saying at a news conference that Ms. Bhutto died of a wound sustained when she hit her head on a lever attached to the sun roof of the vehicle as she ducked a bullet and was thrown about by the force of the blast. “Three shots were fired but they missed her,” Brigadier Cheema said. “Then there was an explosion.”
The new images of the men who appear to have been Ms. Bhutto’s assassins showed one dressed in a sleeveless black waistcoat and rimless sunglasses, and holding aloft what appeared to be a gun. He had a short haircut and wore the kind of attire reminiscent of plainclothes intelligence officials, though Al Qaeda and other militants have also been known to dress attackers in Western-style clothing in order to disguise them. [******]
That man is seen standing in front of another whose head is covered in a shawl in the style of Pashtun men from the Pakistan’s tribal areas, where Al Qaeda has regrouped in the past year. He is described in the newspaper Dawn as the suicide bomber.
Mr. Minallah, the hospital board member, said Ms. Bhutto’s doctors raised the likelihood of a bullet killing her in their report, when they wrote, “Two to three tiny radio-densities underneath fracture segment are observed on both projections.”
The report said the doctors tried for 41 minutes to revive her. It said “the patient was pulseless and was not breathing,” when she arrived at the hospital. “A wound was present on the right temporoparietal region, through which blood was trickling down and whitish material which looked like brain matter was visible in the wound,” it said.
Ms. Bhutto’s colleagues who were in the vehicle with her said the interior was covered in blood, and the doctors wrote that “her clothes were soaked with blood.”
An account of her death that did not involve a gunshot wound was the optimal explanation for the government, said Bruce Riedel, an expert on Pakistan at the Brookings Institution in Washington, and a former member of the National Security Council in the Clinton administration. “If there is a gunshot wound, the security was abysmal,” Mr. Riedel said. The government did not want to be exposed on its careless approach to security, [******] he said.
On Sunday, Ms. Bhutto’s husband, Mr. Zardari, said he received a call from the Punjab home secretary on Thursday evening with a request for his permission for a post-mortem examination. He said he refused because he did not trust the government investigation to prove the cause of her death.
In ordinary circumstances, an autopsy runs counter to Islamic belief that a body should not be tampered with and should be buried as quickly as possible. But several Pakistanis said that in certain classes of Muslim society, particularly the better educated and more urban people, autopsies were not ruled out on religious grounds.
There were also provisions under Pakistani law for the exhumation of a body and a delayed post-mortem, Mr. Latif, the former senior Pakistani police official, said. In those cases, the state or a family can ask a magistrate for exhumation. The magistrate then forms a board of doctors to carry out the procedures, he said.
An international inquiry on Ms. Bhutto’s death could not be carried out without an exhumation, a difficult decision in a Muslim country, Mr. Latif said.
In response to a question at a heated news conference Saturday, Brigadier Cheema, the Interior Ministry spokesman, said the government was ready to exhume the body if the family asked.
But Ms. Bhutto’s supporters noted that the family and the party were so furious at President Musharraf, whom many of them blame for her death, that it was unlikely the Bhuttos would trust an exhumation that involved the government.
Pressure came from a number of quarters for an inquiry modeled after one carried out by the United Nations after the assassination of Rafik Hariri, a former Lebanese prime minister, in 2005. [candidate Clinton hitched her star to that the international inquiry a la Hariri model] [yesterday on CNN] [**********]
Though the Lebanon inquiry has moved very slowly, American and British officials, as well as an increasing number of Pakistanis, said that an investigation under the United Nations or some other international effort would restore confidence in the Pakistani government.
On Sunday a conference of Ms. Bhutto’s party, the Pakistan Peoples Party, called for an inquiry led by the United Nations.
The Speaker of the House of Representatives in the United States Congress, Nancy Pelosi, said Saturday that the Bush administration should condition its future aid to Pakistan on its willingness to undertake an independent international inquiry.
David Miliband, the British foreign secretary, said Britain was ready to offer whatever help was needed.
Brigadier Cheema made clear, however, that an international inquiry was not in the cards. “At this point in time we are quite confident with the kind of progress that is going on with our inquiries,” he said Sunday.
Foreign experts did not have the expertise, he said, to deal with the peculiarities of tribal areas that are the base of the nation’s terrorist activities. “This is not just an ordinary criminal case where you only need forensic expert,” he said. “We understand the dynamics better.”
Somini Sengupta contributed reporting from Karachi, Pakistan.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Opposition Parties Vow to Proceed With Jan. 8 Election

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/world/asia/31pakistan.html
December 31, 2007
Opposition Parties Vow to Proceed With Jan. 8 Election
By SOMINI SENGUPTA [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [post-Bhutto assassination period] [Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [interesting how Kashmir has been seemingl eclipsed by process] [******]
NAUDERO, Pakistan — Three days after the violent killing of its leader, Benazir Bhutto, Pakistan’s largest political party on Sunday picked her 19-year-old son to succeed her as chairman and vowed to forge ahead with elections next week, immediately creating a new quandary for the government about whether to delay the vote.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/world/asia/31pakistan.html
December 31, 2007
Opposition Parties Vow to Proceed With Jan. 8 Election
By SOMINI SENGUPTA [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [post-Bhutto assassination period] [Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [interesting how Kashmir has been seemingl eclipsed by process] [******]
NAUDERO, Pakistan — Three days after the violent killing of its leader, Benazir Bhutto, Pakistan’s largest political party on Sunday picked her 19-year-old son to succeed her as chairman and vowed to forge ahead with elections next week, immediately creating a new quandary for the government about whether to delay the vote.
The moves by Ms. Bhutto’s opposition party, the Pakistan Peoples Party, were clearly aimed at marshaling an outpouring of grief and anger to electoral advantage in the Jan. 8 parliamentary election. The other main opposition party, led by Nawaz Sharif, another former prime minister, also decided Sunday to call off his previously announced boycott of the vote.
Aides to President Pervez Musharraf have suggested that the election could be postponed, perhaps for months, because of the chaos that has engulfed the country since Ms. Bhutto, the former prime minister returned from exile, was killed while campaigning Thursday. But now the prospect of a delay could further infuriate Ms. Bhutto’s supporters and allies, pressuring Mr. Musharraf to hold the vote and risk a huge defeat at the polls.
Elections officials in Pakistan said Monday that they would take another day to decide on the timing of the polls, according to The Associated Press.
The announcement that Ms. Bhutto’s first-born son, Bilawal, an Oxford undergraduate with no political experience, would lead her party was made at a chaotic news conference at the family’s ancestral home here in a southern Pakistan village.
His father, Asif Ali Zardari, said he would manage the chairmanship on his son’s behalf until he finished his university degree, for a minimum of three years.
The decision to place burden of blood and history on the son reflects not only an abiding dynastic streak in South Asian politics — three generations of the Nehru-Gandhi family have dominated politics in India, and hereditary politics pervade Sri Lanka and Bangladesh as well — but also how much the Pakistan Peoples Party relies on the Bhutto family name and legacy to bind its supporters.
In keeping with his new mantle, the new chairman took a new name, embracing his mother’s maiden name as the newly anointed Bhutto scion.
“My mother always said democracy is the best revenge,” he told reporters in a brief address.
The elder Mr. Zardari said his son would henceforth be known as Bilawal Bhutto Zardari. He instructed reporters not to ask his son any further questions, saying he was “of a tender age.”
Later, in the backyard of the family’s house, the younger Mr. Zardari said in an interview that he had been tutored by his mother to play a role in Pakistani politics, but only after he completes his university education. “There was always a sense of fear I wouldn’t be able to live up to her expectations,” he said. “I hope I will.”
Asked about his most immediate challenge, he said, “First to finish my degree.”
That would appear to rule out any possibility that Ms. Bhutto’s son could become the new leader of Pakistan until he was significantly older. Nonetheless, the elder Mr. Zardari said in an interview, “As her son, he will become a uniting force.”
The younger Mr. Zardari is a student of history at Christ Church College at Oxford University, his mother’s alma mater.
Mr. Zardari said that his wife had expressed the wish in her will that he be left in charge of the party, but that he had decided, with the consent of the executive committee, which met Sunday afternoon at the close of a three-day mourning period, to pass the baton to his son.
He said the will was written on Oct. 16, two days before her return to Pakistan, and given to him after her death, which is when he learned that she had chosen him to succeed her.
“It’s not an easy chair to sit on,” the elder Mr. Zardari said in the interview. “A, she leaves me. B, she ties me in this. To say the least, it’s overbearing.”
Senior party officials said, too, that the younger Mr. Zardari would be a far less controversial titular head than his father, who had been accused of a raft of corruption charges, jailed for a total of 11 years, and blamed in some quarters for some of Ms. Bhutto’s political woes.
It could not be a more difficult time for the party. Ms. Bhutto had held together a large and diverse organization, and even if, on the back of public grief, it were to win the elections, it would be likely to be under great pressure to bring a semblance of stability to a nation racked by a wave of extremist violence.
At the news conference, the elder Mr. Zardari said he would not run in the election and therefore would not be the party’s prime ministerial candidate.
That job, he said, would probably go to the party vice president, the veteran party leader Makhdoom Amin Fahim, but that was a decision, he added, that would have to be made by party leaders.
Mr. Zardari went on to say later in the interview that it would be “very difficult” for the party to survive without Ms. Bhutto. “My biggest job is to keep it from falling apart,” he said.
Ms. Bhutto, 54, was killed Thursday evening as she left a party rally in the city of Rawalpindi, when her car was struck by gunfire and a suicide bombing. Ms. Bhutto’s party and family insist that she was shot in the head. The government disputes it, saying that she struck her head fatally on the sunroof of her car.
Her party appealed Sunday for an international inquiry into her death, along the lines of the investigation into the killing of Rafik Hariri, the former prime minister of Lebanon.
The younger Mr. Zardari’s rise echoes the chilling, emotionally resonant path of his mother, who was thrust into public life after her father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, was hanged in 1979 by order of the military ruler, Gen. Mohammad Zia ul-Haq.
Shortly before the official announcement of his ascension at a crowded news conference came a ceremonious rearrangement of the dais. His newly constructed name was pinned to the back of a high-backed red chair, which was then adorned with a cushion and placed at the center of a long table. He entered, dressed in a black salwar kameez, the traditional long tunic and pants, and Armani glasses, biting his lips and carrying a portrait of his mother. He promised to carry on his mother’s legacy as “a symbol of the federation.”
Rehman Malik, a senior party official, said Ms. Bhutto had asked him to coach her son in the basic workings of politics and government, from teaching him how to assess others to taking him to the halls of Parliament.
“She has groomed up her husband,” he said. “She was grooming her son also. She was telling me many times he will grow up and take over the party.”
For his part, the younger Mr. Zardari said he had discussed with his mother the prospects of entering politics, but avoided getting into details about who would take over after her. “We always tried not to have this specific conversation because we hoped this day would come, if not never, then far, far in the future,” he said.
In the interview, he spoke quietly, but politely, in the backyard of a crowded house in a remote village in a country where he had spent little time. He and his two younger siblings were raised mostly in Dubai.
A cluster of relatives approached to embrace. “You raised our hopes just now,” one man told him.
The young man took that in, also quietly, and waited for them to pass before speaking again. He said he feared for the survival of the country. When reminded that he had not grown up here, his answer came swiftly. He said he was lucky to have been reared by his mother, who knew the country well. Asked if she had ever encouraged him to succeed her as the leader of the party, he was vague.
“She always said I had to finish my education before I got into politics,” he answered. “She always said I would do something for Pakistan.”
Politics here is as much about matters of the heart as anything else. Which is why Abida Hussain, another senior party official, when asked about the options facing the party at this crucial juncture, said simply, “It’s Bilawal.”
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Bhutto's Son Chosen As Eventual Party Chief

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/30/AR2007123000223.html
Bhutto's Son Chosen As Eventual Party Chief
19-Year-Old's Father To Preside in Interim
By Griff Witte
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, December 31, 2007; A01 [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [post-Bhutto assassination period] [Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [interesting how Kashmir has been seemingl eclipsed by process] [******]
KARACHI, Pakistan, Dec. 30 -- Pakistan's largest and most storied political party chose Sunday to continue its dynastic traditions, anointing the 19-year-old son of slain former prime minister Benazir Bhutto to be her ultimate successor but picking her husband to lead for now.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/30/AR2007123000223.html
Bhutto's Son Chosen As Eventual Party Chief
19-Year-Old's Father To Preside in Interim
By Griff Witte
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, December 31, 2007; A01 [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [post-Bhutto assassination period] [Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [interesting how Kashmir has been seemingl eclipsed by process] [******]
KARACHI, Pakistan, Dec. 30 -- Pakistan's largest and most storied political party chose Sunday to continue its dynastic traditions, anointing the 19-year-old son of slain former prime minister Benazir Bhutto to be her ultimate successor but picking her husband to lead for now.
The selections mean that the Pakistan People's Party, which casts itself as the voice of democracy in Pakistan, will stay in family hands for a third generation.
Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, who had largely been shielded from the spotlight by his mother and has not lived in Pakistan since he was a young boy, will lead the party when he finishes his studies at Oxford University.
Speaking briefly but forcefully at a news conference in the Bhutto family's ancestral home, he said he would strive to honor his mother's legacy. "The party's long and historic struggle will continue with renewed vigor," he said. "My mother always said democracy is the best revenge."
Bhutto's husband, Asif Ali Zardari, whose reputation has long been tainted by corruption charges, will run the party for at least the next several years. He said Sunday that the succession strategy reflected the wishes of his wife, who died in a gun-and-bomb attack at a rally Thursday afternoon.
The party's new leaders -- neither of whom had been a major player in Pakistani politics -- take over at an especially turbulent time for the country, with elections on the horizon and President Pervez Musharraf clinging to power amid widespread unrest.
Asif Zardari quickly announced that the party will compete in the parliamentary vote scheduled for Jan. 8. Another opposition party, led by former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, indicated it will do the same.
But Musharraf allies strongly hinted that the election would be postponed, possibly for months. "Delaying the election is very much in the cards," said Tariq Azim Khan, information secretary for the major pro-Musharraf party. "If you ask me personally if I would go ahead, I would say it would be unfair to go out and campaign in these sad times."
Although the Bush administration pressed Pakistani leaders last week to keep to the election schedule, the State Department said Sunday that it had no objections to a slight postponement.
"If the people on the ground think this is not the time for an election, that is fine," said spokesman Robert McInturff. "But we would want to see an alternative date. We do not want to see an indefinite delay."
Bhutto's killing Thursday was followed by unrest across the country, as rioting broke out in major cities as well as small villages. The atmosphere remained tense Sunday, with army deployments in several key areas, but the violence eased. Still, Bhutto's legions of supporters continued to blame Musharraf for her death.
Zardari called Sunday for the United Nations to lead an international inquiry into his wife's killing, while conceding that he had declined to give Pakistani officials permission to conduct an autopsy. "Their forensic reports are useless," he said angrily, calling the suggestion of an autopsy "an insult to my wife, to the sister of the nation, to the mother of the nation."
The Bhuttos are often compared to the Kennedys because of their tendency toward charismatic leaders who meet tragic ends. Benazir Bhutto's father, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, himself a former prime minister, was hanged in 1979 by the military dictator who overthrew him. Her two brothers died in mysterious and violent circumstances.
The young man representing the newest generation of Bhuttos -- who added the famous name for the first time Sunday -- indicated he is acutely aware of that record, saying the chairmanship of the Pakistan People's Party is a position "that often is occupied by martyrs."
Nonetheless, Bilawal Bhutto Zardari said he planned to return to Pakistan after he graduates from Oxford "to lead the party as my mother wanted me to."
Asif Zardari, [*****] [Bhutto’s husband] meanwhile, left no doubt Sunday that he will be in charge in the interim. He pointedly asked reporters not to address questions to his son, and he lashed out at Musharraf's allies, calling them "the killer party."
Zardari, who wed Benazir Bhutto in an arranged marriage in 1987, is a controversial choice to lead the party, and some insiders worry it could fracture. During his wife's two terms as prime minister in the late 1980s and 1990s, he was known as "Mr. 10 Percent" for his reputation for taking money off the top of government deals. He served an extended jail sentence under Musharraf that stemmed from the alleged corruption.
"Zardari is not very much liked in the party. He goes for big hotels, world's best addresses. He wants to live like a prince abroad," said Rafiq Safi, a longtime party activist.
Zardari also has many critics in Western capitals, including Washington, which could further complicate U.S. hopes that Musharraf and the PPP might form a coalition that would unify moderate forces in Pakistan against extremism. "The U.S. is not going to be excited about working with Zardari," said Daniel Markey, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. [********]
But the pressure to keep the party's leadership in family hands was intense, reflecting the unorthodox nature of the PPP as a party for the impoverished masses that is largely run by a collection of wealthy landlords -- the Bhutto family being by far the most prominent.
For true believers in the magic of the Bhutto name, people who are not members of the clan are ineligible to lead. Even Zardari is viewed with suspicion because he came to the family through marriage, not blood.
"There's something wrong with the region," said former party official Makhdoom Khaleeq Zaman, referring to the South Asian tendency for political dynasties. "It's not very democratic."
While Benazir Bhutto was groomed to lead the party by her father, it is unclear whether her son went through the same training.
His birth in 1988 -- on the eve of elections that Bhutto won, making her the first female prime minister of a Muslim nation -- generated headlines around the world. But after that, she took great pains to guard his privacy. He largely grew up in exile in London and Dubai, and little is known about him outside the family.
In her autobiography, Bhutto described the birth of her first child, calling him "the most celebrated and politically controversial baby in the history of Pakistan."
"There were congratulatory gunshots being fired outside the hospital, the beating of drums" and cries of "Long live Bhutto," she wrote.
On Sunday, when Bilawal Bhutto Zardari was reintroduced to the world, dozens of emotional party activists repeated that cheer and added a new one: "Bilawal, move forward! We are with you."
Correspondent Emily Wax in Islamabad, staff writer Robin Wright in Washington and special correspondent Imtiaz Ali in Peshawar contributed to this report.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

Jihadists in Jails Win Leverage With Protests

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/world/africa/31prison.html
December 31, 2007
Jihadists in Jails Win Leverage With Protests
By MICHAEL MOSS and SOUAD MEKHENNET [Morocco] [Maghreb] [northern Africa] [jihadis] [hydra] [Islamists too] [modus operandi in growing number of countries] [gsave not over] [as has been seen in any number of Islamic countries—as disparate as Morocco, Saudi, Pakistan—the “authorities” are often full on sympathizers to various degrees: from sympathizers of jihadism to sympathizers of Islamists] [**********]
CASABLANCA, Morocco — Ahmed Rafiki sprawled on the makeshift couch in his cell, a fresh red henna dye in his long hair and beard. [*****]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/world/africa/31prison.html
December 31, 2007
Jihadists in Jails Win Leverage With Protests
By MICHAEL MOSS and SOUAD MEKHENNET [Morocco] [Maghreb] [northern Africa] [jihadis] [hydra] [Islamists too] [modus operandi in growing number of countries] [gsave not over] [as has been seen in any number of Islamic countries—as disparate as Morocco, Saudi, Pakistan—the “authorities” are often full on sympathizers to various degrees: from sympathizers of jihadism to sympathizers of Islamists] [**********]
CASABLANCA, Morocco — Ahmed Rafiki sprawled on the makeshift couch in his cell, a fresh red henna dye in his long hair and beard. [*****]
Known to other militants as the father of Moroccan jihadists, he was convicted in 2003 of leading young men to fight Americans in Afghanistan. [****] But here in Oukacha Prison, Mr. Rafiki, an Islamist cleric, is serving the final months of his sentence in style.
His kitchen and larder are stocked three times a week by his two wives. His curtained doorway leads to a private garden and bath. He has two radios and a television, a reading stand for his Koran and a wardrobe of crisply ironed Islamic attire.
“In my case,” he said with a smile, “the people treat me well.”
Hardly a scene of harsh interrogation and detention for which Moroccan prisons are known, Mr. Rafiki’s plush prison life is evidence of an awkward balancing act between the crackdown on militants in many countries and the power those militants can hold over the authorities. [********]
Through hunger strikes and protests, Mr. Rafiki and Oukacha’s 65 other militant inmates have won perks — including exclusive use of the conjugal rooms — that make them the envy of the prison’s 7,600 other inmates. [**********]
One recent morning, a prisoner advocate handed the warden a long list of inmates not linked to terrorism cases who were demanding equal time with their wives.
“‘Why do they get much more rights than we get here?’” the advocate, Assia El Ouadie, said the other prisoners constantly asked her. “‘Do you want us to become terrorism prisoners, and then we will get those rights?’” [*********] [to be sure, a perverse incentive system]
Even as more and more militants are imprisoned around the world — often by governments with records of conducting extreme interrogations — the prisoners are managing to gain a kind of crude leverage [******] over security officials who are struggling to figure out how to handle them.
Draconian, or even strict, treatment of radical inmates can lead to prison unrest and public condemnation, particularly in countries with sizable Muslim populations. [****] At the same time, officials fear that militants given free rein are more likely to turn prisons into prime grounds for radicalization and recruiting. [*****]
“More than any time in the modern history of terrorism, the prisons have become a key front in the war on terror,” [********]Dennis Pluchinsky, a former senior intelligence analyst at the State Department, wrote in a report for the United States government earlier this year.
He estimated that there were 5,000 jihadi inmates and detainees worldwide, not counting those held in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that only 15 percent had received life sentences or the death penalty, meaning the rest would eventually be set free. [*******]
Here in Morocco, across the Arab world and in European countries like Spain and France, there is a growing realization that catching and convicting militants is hardly the end of the problem. [*****] Many are getting sentences of only a few years, and Arab governments continue to release hundreds every year through mass pardons aimed at quelling fundamentalist Islamic movements. [*******]
Last April, a meeting in Morocco on radicalization of Islamic prisoners drew representatives of 21 countries. “There is some confusion as to how, in overcrowded and underfinanced prison systems, you deal with these special case prisoners,” said a British official who helped run the meeting, who spoke anonymously, citing normal diplomatic strictures. British officials acknowledge that they erred in the early 1980s when they gave Irish Republican Army prisoners their own cellblock, only to see them carry out fatal hunger strikes that won public support. But the authorities say militant Islamic inmates are even more sophisticated.
Manuals from Al Qaeda instruct prisoners on how to resist interrogations, wage hunger strikes and use prison time to strengthen religious convictions. This month, Australian officials said a group of 40 Muslim inmates, not previously considered extremists, were found using guidance from a manual to organize themselves and stage protests at a prison near Sydney. [*****] Officials responded by scattering them among other prisons.
But that is hardly a fail-safe strategy. When members of the Qaeda-inspired group Fatah al Islam, which fought the Lebanese Army for three months this year, were locked up in Roumieh Prison near Beirut, Lebanese authorities found they had been using smuggled cellphones to contact other jailed militants [*******] and their families outside.
Some Middle Eastern and European countries are using moderate imams in prisons in hopes of quelling the extremist fervor. “You have to fight their ideology with Islam and against their wrong interpretation of Islam,” [*****] said a top Syrian security official. [*********]
The biggest concern is that militants will return to the fight once released, despite having been imprisoned, or perhaps because of it.
That is what Mohammed Mazouz did after he was freed in 2004 from the American detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. He was picked up last fall in Morocco as he was preparing to leave for Iraq to fight American troops. [****] “I can’t forget what they did with me,” he said of his American captors, during an interview in a Moroccan prison. “I can’t forget all my life. I hate it.”
He was released two days later.
Rise of Fundamentalism
Morocco had few Islamic militants in its prisons during the 1990s, [****] when leftists, angered by the country’s poverty and official corruption, posed more of a threat to the monarchy. King Mohammed VI began a series of liberalizations after assuming the throne in 1999. Yet a new challenge was rising, as the Islamic fundamentalism sweeping the Arab world gathered public support in Morocco. While the most popular Muslim leaders professed nonviolence, radicals began planning terrorist attacks. [*********]
In May 2003, eight weeks after the United States invaded Iraq, Morocco was hit by its worst terrorist attack ever. A dozen suicide bombers struck a cafe, a hotel and Jewish establishments in Casablanca, killing more than 30 people. [*****] The struggle between the militants and the government landed in Morocco’s prisons.
Hundreds of suspects were detained. In prison interviews with The New York Times, five men said they had been tortured during interrogations, subjected to a method of anal rape known as “the bottle treatment.”
In all, more than 1,400 men were convicted of terrorism-related charges and imprisoned. In May 2005, the militants started a 28-day hunger strike, using contraband cellphones to rally compatriots throughout the prison system. [***********]
A militant former convict, Abderahim Mohtad, started a prisoner advocacy group and stirred public support for the strikers. “Their strength comes from their belief in God,” he said in his storefront office, where one wall is covered with pictures of militant inmates. “You tortured him, you didn’t get anything from him. You arrested him and you didn’t get anything from him. You judged them, and some of them had been judged with death, and they are still laughing.”
While the Casablanca bombings had dampened public sympathy for terrorist groups, animosity toward the United States ran strong. The jailed militants were seen as motivated by the war in Iraq and by Morocco’s role in America’s campaign against terrorism. [**]
Morocco has participated in a Sahara-wide counterterrorism effort financed by the United States, by helping to gather and share intelligence and by detaining terrorism suspects. [but it’s happening in many places so the Sahara-wide counterterrorism program financed by the U.S. is hardly a causal connection as suggested here] [*****]
Many inmates protested that they had no role in the bombings, and Moroccan authorities acknowledged in recent interviews that many had been arrested simply for embracing an extreme ideology.
When the strike ended, courts reduced the sentences of some militants, and the king pardoned several hundred more. Those who remained in prison began to get special privileges.
“They started with hunger strikes and problems,” said Abdelati Belghazi, director of Zaki Prison, north of the capital, Rabat. “The media and organizations started to get involved, and because we wanted them to stop, we had to give them some of the things that they have requested. And then they started to feel much stronger because they saw that they received what they wanted. They requested more and more.”
More Space in Cells
At Zaki, one of two prisons where The Times interviewed militant inmates and prison officials, the 309 prisoners held as terrorists have much more space — averaging 3 men in each cell, compared with 22 per cell for the prison’s 3,500 regular inmates, a prison official said.
They also have a system for lodging complaints, a fact that at times irritates Ms. Ouadie, the prisoner advocate appointed by the king to mediate disputes.
“The guards threw a Koran on the ground,” a militant representative in Zaki, Yassine Aliouine, complained. Since the guards are Muslims, too, Ms. Ouadie said, it is more likely that the book simply fell.
“Yes, but they saw it and didn’t pick it up,” Mr. Aliouine replied.
When Ms. Ouadie raised the issue with the prison director, Mr. Belghazi, he played a videotape of the search where the Koran was said to have been abused, and a startlingly different scene emerged.
The video showed the guards collecting a bucketful of contraband electronics, including cellphones. They found a poster that listed militant groups and their leaders. They discovered a jackknife baked in a loaf of bread, and the warden dumped a dozen more blades on a table that he said the militants had tossed out of their windows. [*******]
Despite such periodic seizures, militant inmates in several Moroccan prisons were able to call Times reporters, both before and after the visits.
Oukacha, in Casablanca, is arguably the best address for jailed militants. Even the director, El Maati Boubiza, said he was amazed when he took the job last year. “Their cell doors were open 24 hours,” he said. “Only they could use the conjugal rooms, and they were using them starting at 6 a.m.”
Cellblock 5, where many of the militants live, functions like a small village. The inmates hold boxing matches. Sheep are slaughtered for the holidays. In one of the two kitchens, a cook proudly displayed his cutlery and an array of containers that held fresh deliveries from inmates’ families.
Down the hall, Hassan Kettani, a Islamic theorist renowned in global jihad circles, declined to be interviewed on videotape — until he changed out of his everyday clothes.
A few minutes later, he sauntered down to the lobby, unescorted, and posed in a white robe and golden headdress. “We were in very bad shape when we were captured,” he said of the days before the first hunger strike. “It was hard.”
The militants have also sought to draw public support by writing letters to local newspapers and jihadist Web sites, alternately complaining about their incarceration and presenting it as a duty gladly fulfilled. [***********]
“In our religion, we believe in destiny, and I believe that God has written this to me and I have to go through that,” said Mr. Rifiki, the militant cleric, whose group, Salafia Jihadia — or Fight of Ancestors — is considered a terrorist organization that reaches from North Africa to Europe.
Moderating the views of the hardest militants may be an impossibility, but Ms. Ouadie said prison authorities could help stop the cycle of radicalization by separating moderate Islamist prisoners from the more extreme ones. “I would arrange Islamic teachings and also treat them in a humane way,” she said.
Still, the terrorist attacks continue in Morocco and, despite the concessions to militant inmates, so do harsh interrogations by the police and intelligence agents, according to interviews with inmates.
Allegations of Torture
While Moroccan officials declined to comment on the allegations of torture, the accusers include a former investigations officer with the national security service, Abderahim Tarik, who was arrested last year on suspicion of ties to a militant group, which he denies.
Mr. Tarik said that for six days at a police station named Temara, he was beaten with sticks, stripped naked, doused with cold water and shocked with an electric prod on his feet and anus. “They started to tell me we will bring your wife tomorrow and rape her directly in front of you,” he said.
Abdelfattah Raydi exemplifies the cycle of arrests, incarceration and attacks.
Mr. Raydi, arrested in 2003 as a militant sympathizer, said in a letter he wrote in Oukacha to a human rights group, obtained by The Times, that he underwent both physical and psychological torture. “He beat me until I fainted,” he wrote of one of his questioners. Abdelfatif Amarin and two other cellmates of Mr. Raydi’s said that Mr. Raydi told them that he had been given the “bottle treatment.”
“I remember that he had nightmares and cried during his sleep,” said one inmate, asking not to be identified for fear of reprisal by prison officials. “He told me several times, ‘I swear to God, if I would have known that they would do this to me, I would have killed myself before.’” [***********]
In prison, Mr. Raydi spent time with a militant leader named Hassan al-Khattab, according to inmates, and they were both released in the king’s mass pardon in 2005. [*****]Mr. Raydi married, found work and moved away from the shantytown where he was raised with six brothers in a one-room shack, friends and relatives said.
Then last year, according to the authorities, he joined Mr. Khattab in a disrupted terrorist plot. Mr. Khattab was tried and awaits sentencing. But Mr. Raydi evaded capture, and was being sought by the authorities when he walked into an Internet cafe this March and blew himself up [********]when the owner grew suspicious and called the police.
Chased by the authorities, Mr. Raydi’s brother and four other men wearing suicide vests blew themselves up in the following weeks, and the manhunt has produced dozens of new arrests.
On Nov. 8, 51 suspects, including one woman and two of Mr. Raydi’s brothers, made their first appearance in court. Among them was the son of a man arrested in the 2003 sweeps. “Do they treat you well, Hamid?” his grandmother asked after the hearing, pressing her hand to the glass partition. “How is your health?”
“All is good, grandmother,” he replied. “Are you coming to visit me later?”
Margot Williams contributed reporting from New York.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

December 30, 2007

Immigration Is Defying Easy Answers

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/us/politics/30issuesI.html
December 30, 2007
Immigration Is Defying Easy Answers
By JULIA PRESTON
New immigration and the political reaction against it are nearly as old as the United States itself. Yet the immigration surge of the last decade has awakened tensions of unexpected intensity that have pervaded the presidential campaigns of both parties and stirred voter anger across the country.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/us/politics/30issuesI.html
December 30, 2007
Immigration Is Defying Easy Answers
By JULIA PRESTON
New immigration and the political reaction against it are nearly as old as the United States itself. Yet the immigration surge of the last decade has awakened tensions of unexpected intensity that have pervaded the presidential campaigns of both parties and stirred voter anger across the country.
In 1960, census figures show, the largest national group of immigrants was the Italians, accounting for 13 percent of the foreign-born. Today, Mexicans account for one-third of all immigrants. Spanish-speakers make up nearly half of the 37.5 million foreign-born people in the country. Young Latino immigrants have brought Spanish to states that had had little exposure to it, like Iowa and North Carolina.
In addition, never before have illegal immigrants settled here in such numbers — an estimated 12 million. Almost 70 percent of those immigrants are Spanish-speaking, coming from Mexico and Central America, according to the Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan research group.
Coinciding with the mood of apprehension following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the new immigration has provoked more than the traditional suspicion that foreigners are taking jobs from American workers. For many voters in the primary races, immigration has become an urgent national security concern and a challenge to the American identity.
The new immigration also sharpened the rift between the federal government and the states. Across party lines, frustrated voters accuse the Bush administration of failing to secure the southern border against intruders, of being lax on employers hiring illegal immigrants and of preaching assimilation without providing resources for local schools where Spanish-speaking students are enrolled.
President Bush’s failed effort to push an immigration package through Congress foreshadowed the divisions on the campaign trail. Republicans are split about how to proceed, and Democrats are treading carefully, fearful on the one hand of alienating voters in places like Iowa who are fed up with illegal immigration but concerned on the other about missing what they see as an opportunity to win the allegiance of the fast-growing Hispanic population.
The next president will still face the tricky task of negotiating not just the politics of the issue, but also some concrete realities. While border fences and immigration raids have discouraged some illegal immigrants from coming and encouraged some who are here to go home, millions of illegal workers have had families here and put down roots, and are not going to disappear.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Tapes by C.I.A. Lived and Died to Save Image

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/washington/30intel.html
December 30, 2007
Tapes by C.I.A. Lived and Died to Save Image
By SCOTT SHANE and MARK MAZZETTI [bush white house] [nsc principals] [well documented, if Tenet can be believed, in Tenet memoirs] [bush white house] [nsc statutory and ad hoc principals] [part of Bush’s “national security team”] [bush uses opportunity to stop stonewalling on clearences doj ethics officer to investigate NSA warrant-less spying and other TSPs] [congress] [110th, 1st session] [separation of powers] [followup] [*****] [use 455]WASHINGTON — If Abu Zubaydah, a senior operative of Al Qaeda, died in American hands, Central Intelligence Agency officers pursuing the terrorist group knew that much of the world would believe they had killed him.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/washington/30intel.html
December 30, 2007
Tapes by C.I.A. Lived and Died to Save Image
By SCOTT SHANE and MARK MAZZETTI [bush white house] [nsc principals] [well documented, if Tenet can be believed, in Tenet memoirs] [bush white house] [nsc statutory and ad hoc principals] [part of Bush’s “national security team”] [bush uses opportunity to stop stonewalling on clearences doj ethics officer to investigate NSA warrant-less spying and other TSPs] [congress] [110th, 1st session] [separation of powers] [followup] [*****] [use 455]
WASHINGTON — If Abu Zubaydah, a senior operative of Al Qaeda, died in American hands, Central Intelligence Agency officers pursuing the terrorist group knew that much of the world would believe they had killed him.
So in the spring of 2002, even as the intelligence officers flew in a surgeon from Johns Hopkins Hospital to treat Abu Zubaydah, who had been shot three times during his capture in Pakistan, they set up video cameras to record his every moment: asleep in his cell, having his bandages changed, being interrogated.
In fact, current and former intelligence officials say, the agency’s every action in the prolonged drama of the interrogation videotapes was prompted in part by worry about how its conduct might be perceived [****]— by Congress, by prosecutors, by the American public and by Muslims worldwide.
That worry drove the decision to begin taping interrogations — and to stop taping just months later, after the treatment of prisoners began to include waterboarding. And it fueled the nearly three-year campaign by the agency’s clandestine service for permission to destroy the tapes, culminating in a November 2005 destruction order from the service’s director, Jose A. Rodriguez Jr. [********]
Now, the disclosure of the tapes and their destruction in 2005 have become just the public spectacle the agency had sought to avoid. To the already fierce controversy over whether the Bush administration authorized torture has been added the specter of a cover-up.
The Justice Department, the C.I.A.’s inspector general and Congress are investigating whether any official lied about the tapes or broke the law by destroying them. Still in dispute is whether any White House official encouraged their destruction and whether the C.I.A. deliberately hid them from the national Sept. 11 commission. [*****]
But interviews with two dozen current and former officials, most of whom would speak about the classified program only on the condition of anonymity, revealed new details about why the tapes were made and then eliminated. Their accounts show how political and legal considerations competed with intelligence concerns in the handling of the tapes. [******]
The discussion about the tapes took place in Congressional briefings and secret deliberations among top White House lawyers, including a meeting in May 2004 just days after photographs of abuse at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq had reminded the administration of the power of such images. The debate stretched over the tenure of two C.I.A. chiefs and became entangled in a feud between the agency’s top lawyers and its inspector general. The tapes documented a program so closely guarded that President Bush himself had agreed with the advice of intelligence officials that he not be told the locations of the secret C.I.A. prisons. Had there been no political or security considerations, videotaping every interrogation and preserving the tapes would make sense, according to several intelligence officials.
“You couldn’t have more than one or two analysts in the room,” said A. B. Krongard, the C.I.A.’s No. 3 official at the time the interrogations were taped. “You want people with spectacular language skills to watch the tapes. You want your top Al Qaeda experts to watch the tapes. You want psychologists to watch the tapes. You want interrogators in training to watch the tapes.”
Given such advantages, why was the taping stopped by the end of 2002, less than a year after it started?
“By that time,” Mr. Krongard said, “paranoia was setting in.”
The Decision to Tape
By several accounts, the decision to begin taping Abu Zubaydah and another detainee suspected of being a Qaeda operative, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, was made in the field, with several goals in mind. [improvised under Tenet’s decentralization decision] [****]
First, there was Abu Zubaydah’s precarious condition. “There was concern that we needed to have this all documented in case he should expire from his injuries,” recalled one former intelligence official.
Just as important was the fact that for many years the C.I.A. had rarely conducted even standard interrogations, let alone ones involving physical pressure, so officials wanted to track closely the use of legally fraught interrogation methods. [*****] And there was interest in capturing all the information to be gleaned from a rare resource — direct testimony from those who had attacked the United States.
But just months later, the taping was stopped. Some field officers had never liked the idea. “If you’re a case officer, the last thing you want is someone in Washington second-guessing everything you did,” [****]said one former agency veteran.
More significant, interrogations of Abu Zubaydah had gotten rougher, with each new tactic approved by cable from headquarters. American officials have said that Abu Zubaydah was the first Qaeda prisoner to be waterboarded, a procedure during which water is poured over the prisoner’s mouth and nose to create a feeling of drowning. Officials said they felt they could not risk a public leak of a videotape showing Americans giving such harsh treatment to bound prisoners. [********]
Heightening the worries about the tapes was word of the first deaths of prisoners in American custody. In November 2002, an Afghan man froze to death overnight while chained in a cell at a C.I.A. site in Afghanistan, north of Kabul, the capital. Two more prisoners died in December 2002 in American military custody at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan.
By late 2002, interrogators were recycling videotapes, preserving only two days of tapes before recording over them, one C.I.A. officer said. Finally, senior agency officials decided that written summaries of prisoners’ answers would suffice.
Still, that decision left hundreds of hours of videotape of the two Qaeda figures locked in an overseas safe.
Clandestine service officers who had overseen the interrogations began pushing hard to destroy the tapes. But George J. Tenet, then the director of central intelligence, was wary, in part because the agency’s top lawyer, Scott W. Muller, advised against it, current and former officials said.
Yet agency officials decided to float the idea of eliminating the tapes on Capitol Hill, hoping for political cover. In February 2003, Mr. Muller told members of the House and Senate oversight committees about the C.I.A’s interest in destroying the tapes for security reasons. [****]
But both Porter J. Goss, then a Republican congressman from Florida and the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, and Representative Jane Harman of California, the ranking Democrat, thought destroying the tapes would be legally and politically risky. C.I.A. officials did not press the matter. [********]
The Detention Program
Scrutiny of the C.I.A.’s secret detention program kept building. Later in 2003, the agency’s inspector general, John L. Helgerson, began investigating the program, and some insiders believed the inquiry might end with criminal charges for abusive interrogations.
Mr. Helgerson — now conducting the videotapes review with the Justice Department — had already rankled covert officers with an investigation into the 2001 shooting down of a missionary plane by Peruvian military officers advised by the C.I.A. The investigation set off widespread concern within the clandestine branch that a day of reckoning could be coming for officers involved in the agency’s secret prison program. The Peru investigation often pitted Mr. Helgerson against Mr. Muller, who vigorously defended members of the clandestine branch and even lobbied the Justice Department to head off criminal charges in the matter, according to former intelligence officials
“Muller wanted to show the clandestine branch that he was looking out for them,” said John Radsan, who served as an assistant general counsel for the C.I.A. from 2002 to 2004. “And his aggressiveness on Peru was meant to prove to the operations people that they were protected on a lot of other programs, too.”
Mr. Helgerson completed his investigation of interrogations in April 2004, according to one person briefed on the still-secret report, which concluded that some of the C.I.A.’s techniques appeared to constitute cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment under the international Convention Against Torture. Current and former officials said the report did not explicitly state that the methods were torture.
A month later, as the administration reeled from the Abu Ghraib disclosures, Mr. Muller, the agency general counsel, met to discuss the report with three senior lawyers at the White House: Alberto R. Gonzales, the White House counsel; David S. Addington, legal adviser for Vice President Dick Cheney; and John B. Bellinger III, the top lawyer at the National Security Council. [***********] David Addington—what a shock!] [*******]
The interrogation tapes were discussed at the meeting, and one Bush administration official said that, according to notes of the discussion, Mr. Bellinger advised the C.I.A. against destroying the tapes. The positions Mr. Gonzales and Mr. Addington took are unknown. One person familiar with the discussion said that in light of concerns raised in the inspector general’s report that agency officers could be legally liable for harsh interrogations, there was a view at the time among some administration lawyers that the tapes should be preserved.
Looking for Guidance
After Mr. Tenet and Mr. Muller left the C.I.A. in mid-2004, Mr. Rodriguez and other officials from the clandestine branch decided again to take up the tapes with the new chief at Langley, Mr. Goss, the former congressman. [*****]
Mr. Rodriguez had taken over the clandestine directorate in late 2004, and colleagues say Mr. Goss repeatedly emphasized to Mr. Rodriguez that he was expected to run operations without clearing every decision with superiors.
During a meeting in Mr. Goss’s office with Mr. Rodriguez, John A. Rizzo, who by then had replaced Mr. Muller as the agency’s top lawyer, told the new C.I.A. director that the clandestine branch wanted a firm decision about what to do with the tapes. [****]
According to two people close to Mr. Goss, he advised against destroying the tapes, as he had in Congress, and told Mr. Rizzo and Mr. Rodriguez that he thought the tapes should be preserved at the overseas location. Apparently he did not explicitly prohibit [talk about parsing] [unless there was a wink and a nod, it’s hard for one to conclude that he was giving anything like a green light] [*****]the tapes’ destruction.
Yet in November 2005, Congress already was moving to outlaw “cruel, inhuman and degrading” treatment of prisoners, and The Washington Post reported that some C.I.A. prisoners were being held in Eastern Europe. As the agency scrambled to move the prisoners to new locations, Mr. Rodriguez and his aides decided to use their own authority to destroy the tapes, [****]officials said.
One official who has spoken with Mr. Rodriguez said Mr. Rodriguez and his aides were concerned about protection of the C.I.A. officers on the tapes, from Al Qaeda, as the C.I.A. has stated, and from political pressure. [understandably, but as the cover time and again, worse than the crime] [********]
The tapes might visually identify as many as five or six people present for each interrogation — interrogators themselves, whom the agency now prefers to call “debriefers”; doctors or doctor’s assistants who monitored the prisoner’s medical state; and security officers, the official said. Some traveled regularly in and out of areas where Al Qaeda and other Islamist extremists are active, he said.
Apart from concerns about physical safety in the event of a leak, the official said, there was concern for the careers of officers shown on the tapes. “We didn’t want them to become political scapegoats,” he said.
According to several current and former officials, lawyers in the agency’s clandestine branch gave Mr. Rodriguez written guidance that he had the authority to destroy the tapes and that such a move would not be illegal.
One day in November 2005, Mr. Rodriguez sent a cable ordering the destruction of the recordings. Soon afterward, he notified both Mr. Goss and Mr. Rizzo, taking full responsibility for the decision.
Former intelligence officials said that Mr. Goss was unhappy about the news, in part because it was further evidence that as the C.I.A. director he was so weakened that his subordinates would directly reject his advice. Yet it appears that Mr. Rodriguez was never reprimanded. Nor is there evidence that Mr. Goss promptly notified Congress that the tapes were gone. [very difficult to understand Goss’ thinking] [perhaps there was a wink and a nod] [*********]
The investigations over the tapes frustrate some C.I.A. veterans, who say they believe that the agency is being unfairly blamed for policies of coercive interrogation approved at the top of the Bush administration and by some Congressional leaders. Intelligence officers are divided over the use of such methods as waterboarding. Some say the methods helped get information that prevented terrorist attacks. Others, like John C. Gannon, a former C.I.A. deputy director, say it was a tragic mistake for the administration to approve such methods.
Mr. Gannon said he thought the tapes became such an issue because they would have settled the legal debate over the harsh methods.
“To a spectator it would look like torture,” he said. “And torture is wrong.”
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

How to Divine Foreign Policy of Candidates

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/us/politics/30issuesD.html
December 30, 2007
How to Divine Foreign Policy of Candidates
By DAVID E. SANGER [election-year politics] [societal] [but also on continuity in USFP and national-security policy] [my predictions in my nsc book included that whoever is the next president, (s)he will find it difficult to jettison democracy as an explicit foreign-policy objective] [hopefully, the simplistic notion that election equal democracy will be altered but the shift toward democracy has gained wide-based consensus in the U.S.] [************]
If there is one thing to listen for in judging how the presidential candidates would engage with the rest of the world, it may be how they talk about embracing, changing or abandoning the Bush doctrine. [****]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/us/politics/30issuesD.html
December 30, 2007
How to Divine Foreign Policy of Candidates
By DAVID E. SANGER [election-year politics] [societal] [but also on continuity in USFP and national-security policy] [my predictions in my nsc book included that whoever is the next president, (s)he will find it difficult to jettison democracy as an explicit foreign-policy objective] [hopefully, the simplistic notion that election equal democracy will be altered but the shift toward democracy has gained wide-based consensus in the U.S.] [************]
If there is one thing to listen for in judging how the presidential candidates would engage with the rest of the world, it may be how they talk about embracing, changing or abandoning the Bush doctrine. [****]
That doctrine has been interpreted to mean different things at different times by different people, including President Bush and his aides, who made it up on the fly in the days after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
But it has evolved from Mr. Bush’s black-and-white declaration in 2001 that countries are “with us or against us” in battling terrorism, to his decision a year later to elevate military pre-emption — and by extension, regime change — to a defense strategy, right up there with containment and deterrence.
Along with it came dismissive comments about weak-kneed allies and the importance of never relying on the United Nations for a “permission slip” to act.
Mr. Bush, of course, has strayed far from the doctrine. He is talking, or offering to talk, to the surviving dictators of what he once labeled an “axis of evil,” and he has learned that some allies (read: Pakistan) are with the United States on Mondays and Wednesdays and absent on Tuesdays and Thursdays. [the proper analogy of course is the Cold War where the US frequently bedded dictators as the lesser of two undemocratic evils: Soviet totalitarianism or anti-communist authoritarianism] [*********]
But the Republican candidates, by and large, have tried to sound more hawkish than the man for whom the doctrine is named. Senator John McCain has staked his campaign on the premise that Mr. Bush’s main mistake was failing to use overwhelming force in Iraq, and he has asked whether it might be less risky to take out Iran’s nuclear facilities than to live with a nuclear-armed Iran.
Rudolph W. Giuliani has cast himself as the man who will keep America safe, acknowledging that diplomacy is nice, but effective only if you flash the big club of counterterrorism on regular occasion. Both Mr. Giuliani and Mitt Romney are in a contest to sound more confrontational with the Iranians.
But for all the candidates, the strident declarations carry some risks, as they discovered early this month when the American intelligence community concluded that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003, an assessment that suddenly deadened all the talk of military action against Tehran.
For the Democrats, oddly enough, attacking the Bush doctrine is proving somewhat treacherous territory. [******] [perhaps oddly but not surprisingly]
It is easy for each of them to declare that they would be the anti-Bush. But that is different from abandoning all of the substance — and risking sounding, or being, too soft.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

U.S. Strives to Keep Footing In Tangled Pakistan Situation

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/29/AR2007122901490.html
U.S. Strives to Keep Footing In Tangled Pakistan Situation
By Robin Wright and Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, December 30, 2007; A24 [bush white house] [nsc principals and beyond] both dod and dos] [the problem of pegging U.S. foreign policy on one or even two—as the administration wisely recently urged with Bhutto—when what’s needed is a Pakistani policy] [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [*******]
For the Bush administration, there is no Plan B for Pakistan.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/29/AR2007122901490.html
U.S. Strives to Keep Footing In Tangled Pakistan Situation
By Robin Wright and Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, December 30, 2007; A24 [bush white house] [nsc principals and beyond] both dod and dos] [the problem of pegging U.S. foreign policy on one or even two—as the administration wisely recently urged with Bhutto—when what’s needed is a Pakistani policy] [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [*******]
For the Bush administration, there is no Plan B for Pakistan.
The assassination of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto dramatically altered Pakistani politics, forcing the largest opposition party to find new leadership on the eve of an election, jeopardizing a fragile transition to democracy, and leaving Washington even more dependent on the controversial President Pervez Musharraf as the lone pro-U.S. leader in a nation facing growing extremism. [*******]
Despite anxiety among intelligence officials and experts, however, the administration is only slightly tweaking a course charted over the past 18 months to support the creation of a political center revolving around Musharraf, according to U.S. officials.
"Plan A still has to work," said a senior administration official involved in Pakistan policy. "We all have to appeal to moderate forces to come together and carry the election and create a more solidly based government, then use that as a platform to fight the terrorists. "
U.S. policy remains wedded to Musharraf despite growing warnings from experts, [bodes poorly for 2008] [*****] presidential candidates and even a former U.S. ambassador to Pakistan that his dictatorial ways are untenable. Some contend that Pakistan would be better off without him.
"This administration has had a disastrous policy toward Pakistan, as bad as the Iraq policy," said Robert Templer of the International Crisis Group. "They are clinging to the wreckage of Musharraf, flailing around. . . . Musharraf has outlived all possible usage to Pakistan and the United States."
Templer contends that without Musharraf, moderate forces, coming from Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party, Nawaz Sharif's Pakistan Muslim League-N, the moderate Balochistan National Party and the mostly Pashtun Awami National Party, could create a new, more legitimate centrist political space.
But with Musharraf having won a five-year presidential term in October -- an election perceived by many as tainted and illegitimate -- the looming question centers on who will become prime minister. Bhutto was expected to assume that role after the January election, a move U.S. officials believed would have bolstered both Musharraf and U.S. interests. But now there are no obvious heirs.
"We have a room full of tigers in Pakistan," the senior U.S. official said. "This is a really complicated situation, and we have to use our influence in a lot of ways but also realize we can't determine the outcome. We're not dropping pixie dust on someone to anoint them as the next leader."
Washington's challenges now are far more daunting than they were in brokering a deal between Bhutto and Musharraf that produced her return from exile and the promise of free elections.
At the top of the list is getting former prime minister Sharif to reverse course on boycotting the Jan. 8 parliamentary election. The United States is in the awkward position of trying to coax a party leader with an anti-American platform and close ties to religious parties to cooperate with Musharraf, a secular former general and top U.S. ally in fighting extremism.
The two men are bitter rivals. Sharif has accused Musharraf of treason for toppling his democratically elected government in a military coup in 1999. Musharraf, in turn, believes Sharif tried to kill him, his wife and 200 other passengers when the Sharif government in 1999 initially refused to allow a commercial jetliner carrying Musharraf to land in Pakistan even though fuel was running low. In his autobiography, Musharraf alleges that the airliner had only seven minutes of fuel when it finally landed after the military intervened.
The U.S. Embassy in Islamabad reached out to Sharif's brother and other members of his party the day of Bhutto's assassination, U.S. officials said. "We would certainly encourage him, as well as all others . . . to participate in the process with an eye towards ensuring there is the broadest possible opportunity for the Pakistani people to choose among a variety of legitimate political actors," State Department [****] spokesman Tom Casey said.
But U.S. officials also said Sharif's call for an election boycott on the day of Bhutto's death was unseemly and an obvious ploy to pressure Musharraf when the Pakistan Muslim League-Q -- loyal to Musharraf and a rival of Sharif's faction -- was increasingly isolated.
"Nawaz is not our nemesis. He is likely to be part of whatever political solution evolves out of the present situation," John Stuart Blackton, a former U.S. diplomat in Pakistan and Afghanistan, said. "Nawaz isn't fond of America, but he isn't anti-American."
The other U.S. priority is helping to hold Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party together, officials said.
Pakistan's largest opposition party, ruled by a family dynasty, now must reorganize without a Bhutto in charge, they said. Long divided by competing tendencies, some members wanted to boycott the election after Musharraf imposed emergency rule last month, while others favored running for parliament. When Bhutto opted to participate, the others fell in line. Without her, some experts expect the party to get bogged down in debate or to fragment.
On the day of Bhutto's death, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice telephoned PPP deputy leader Makhdoom Amin Fahim to offer condolences and express hope that the PPP would not change its plans to participate in the election, U.S. officials said.
The future of the PPP depends in part on what Bhutto's husband, Asif Ali Zardari, does and how the party "survives the machinations" of ISI, Pakistan's military intelligence service, [****] Templer said. "For the past eight years, the military and the ISI have done everything to splinter the party, through violence and intimidation. Despite that, it has hung together in a disciplined way."
Zardari's future role is a big unknown, analysts said. The environment minister when his wife was prime minister, he is a controversial businessman imprisoned for 11 years on corruption and attempted murder charges, most of which were dismissed. After his release, he went into exile, where he stayed when Bhutto returned in October.
Two other immediate challenges, U.S. officials said, are encouraging Pakistani leaders to hold the elections on Jan. 8 or shortly thereafter and prodding Musharraf to ensure that they are fair. On timing, they say the PPP should have the greatest say, given its problems since Bhutto's death. "Everyone needs to give them a fair chance," the senior official said.
Longer-term, as part of its original plan, the administration next month will launch a five-year, $750 million development effort to bring education, jobs and better security to the volatile frontier areas.
But critics warn that Plan A -- from rushing into elections already widely viewed as rigged to relying on Musharraf -- is unsustainable without Bhutto.
"It's folly," said C. Christine Fair of the Rand Corp. Even before Bhutto's death, the elections were being questioned because of limited campaign time and Musharraf's manipulation of the Supreme Court, she said. "Pakistanis are going to read [elections] as a sham to prop up Musharraf as Washington's water boy." The Bush administration should instead encourage Musharraf to promote reconciliation across the parties, which would jointly decide the date for elections, and to restore the ousted members of the Supreme Court,[****] she said.
A new round of "farcical elections" will produce a weak government that Musharraf will try to manipulate, warned Stephen P. Cohen of the Brookings Institution. And in an op-ed co-written for yesterday's Washington Post, Wendy Chamberlin, a former U.S. ambassador to Pakistan, warned that a vote without prior political reforms "would almost certainly provoke a violent backlash."
Analysts are also concerned that the administration does not appear to be developing alternatives in case something happens to Musharraf, who has faced several assassination attempts or plots, or growing public disdain makes him an untenable ally.
Democratic presidential candidates have issued harsh criticisms of Musharraf. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) has said there is little reason to trust the Pakistani government, while New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson has called for Musharraf to step down. Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) also questioned the wisdom of sticking with this ally. "As long as we are supporting somebody who the Pakistani people themselves believe has subverted democracy, that strengthens the hand of the Islamic militants," he said in Iowa.
U.S. officials acknowledge that Musharraf's party is more isolated than ever. "It will have to work harder for its own voters and to try and pick up others," the senior official said. Suspicions in Bhutto's party that the government in some way colluded with extremists to murder her will also make it harder for the PPP to cooperate with Musharraf, he added.
Others warn of a political implosion if violence continues and a flawed election is held. "In the best case for the Taliban and al-Qaeda, and the worst case for the world, Pakistan could fall into such turmoil that the very control of the state could fall into Islamist hands, or Pakistan could effectively fracture -- with its massive armaments, including dozens of nuclear weapons, falling into the wrong hands," [*****] said J. Alexander Thier, a former U.N. official now at the U.S. Institute of Peace.
Staff writer Thomas E. Ricks contributed to this report.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

A Chance to Defend Themselves

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122802446.html
A Chance to Defend Themselves
By Thomas B. Wilner
Sunday, December 30, 2007; B07 [oped] [potential pow abuse] [gitmo] [*******]
The Supreme Court heard arguments this month in cases brought by detainees held at Guantanamo Bay. Media reports noted the complicated legal issues involved, such as whether the Constitution extends beyond sovereign U.S. territory, whether foreigners are entitled to constitutional protections and whether habeas corpus would have been available in a place like Guantanamo some 250 years ago under British rule.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122802446.html
A Chance to Defend Themselves
By Thomas B. Wilner
Sunday, December 30, 2007; B07 [oped] [potential pow abuse] [gitmo] [*******]
The Supreme Court heard arguments this month in cases brought by detainees held at Guantanamo Bay. Media reports noted the complicated legal issues involved, such as whether the Constitution extends beyond sovereign U.S. territory, whether foreigners are entitled to constitutional protections and whether habeas corpus would have been available in a place like Guantanamo some 250 years ago under British rule.
Those are all interesting legal questions. But what is at stake here is far less complicated and more fundamental -- the question of whether our government can throw people in prison without giving them a fair chance to defend themselves.
Throughout the civilized world, the right not to be imprisoned without a fair hearing -- one that provides notice of the charges and the opportunity to rebut them before a neutral decision maker -- is fundamental. It is the hallmark of the rule of law.
More than 300 prisoners remain at Guantanamo. Most have been there almost six years. We now know that the great majority were not captured on any battlefield. They were not even captured by U.S. forces. Rather, as the National Journal reported last year after an exhaustive study into government records, many were simply "innocent, wrongly seized noncombatants" who were "handed over by reward-seeking Pakistanis and Afghan warlords" in exchange for bounties.
All these prisoners have asked for is a fair hearing, one in which they have the chance to learn the charges against them and to rebut the accusations before a neutral decision maker. The Supreme Court ruled 3 1/2 years ago that they had that right under the statute giving any prisoner in government custody the right to a fair hearing before a federal court.
Just days after that 2004 decision, however, the Bush administration put in place an administrative process -- known as CSRT -- under which panels of junior military officers would review the decisions already made by their military superiors that the prisoners were all properly held as "enemy combatants." That process was a sham. The detainees were not allowed lawyers, nor were they allowed to see much of the government's evidence, because the government deemed it "classified." They could not confront their accusers, question their reliability, or question whether the accusations resulted from torture and coercion. They were not allowed to present evidence of their own unless the CSRT panels found that it was "reasonably available," something the panels rarely did.
The CSRTs denied every request made by a detainee for a witness who was not already detained in Guantanamo. They denied three-quarters of the requests for witnesses who were there. In addition, the CSRT rules established a presumption in favor of all the government's evidence, including the evidence kept secret from the detainees. Predictably, in more than 90 percent of the cases the CSRT panels simply confirmed the decisions made by the superiors that the detainees were enemy combatants. In cases where the panels concluded that a detainee was not an enemy combatant, new panels were often convened to conclude that he was.
To make matters worse, the administration then persuaded Congress to take away the detainees' rights to a hearing in federal court. Under a new law, detainees were able to obtain only a limited determination from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit of whether the CSRT panels had followed their own rules -- that is, the same rules that deprived detainees of counsel and of the rights to know the accusations against them, to confront their accusers and to present evidence establishing their innocence. (The statute also authorizes the D.C. Circuit to consider whether the CSRT rules are consistent with the Constitution "to the extent" that the Constitution applies, but since the appeals court already decided that the Constitution does not apply, that inquiry is off the table.) The administration asked the Supreme Court to approve that limited review as adequate or at least to delay its decision until the lower courts further consider the issue.
Significantly, the administration does not contend that this process provides the detainees with anything approaching a fair hearing.
Instead, for complicated legal reasons, it contends that these foreign prisoners held outside the United States may be denied a fair hearing because the administration has labeled them "enemy combatants."
What all this means is that as they approach the end of their sixth year of imprisonment, these men have been denied even one fair hearing.
If we observed this conduct by any other country, we would be appalled. We would say, rightly, that you can't jail people without giving them a chance to defend themselves. There is and can be no acceptable legal excuse or explanation for denying people a fair hearing.
That would be so there, and it is so here.
The writer was counsel of record for Guantanamo detainees in the cases decided in their favor by the Supreme Court in June 2004 and is counsel of record for Guantanamo detainees in the cases pending before the Supreme Court.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

A Global Fervor

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122802450.html
A Global Fervor
By Jim Hoagland
Sunday, December 30, 2007; B07 [oped] [columnist] [religion and politics] [I’ve always thought they don’t mix well] [yet the connection seems to be growing more important all the time] [****************]
Americans should broaden their primary-season debate about religion and politics. This debate is not just about Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee, and it is not limited to our shores. Religion has again become, for better and for worse, a far more visible driving force in world affairs.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122802450.html
A Global Fervor
By Jim Hoagland
Sunday, December 30, 2007; B07 [oped] [columnist] [religion and politics] [I’ve always thought they don’t mix well] [yet the connection seems to be growing more important all the time] [****************]
Americans should broaden their primary-season debate about religion and politics. This debate is not just about Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee, and it is not limited to our shores. Religion has again become, for better and for worse, a far more visible driving force in world affairs.
Keeping religion out of politics -- and vice versa -- has seemed a good idea to Americans since the framing of the Constitution. Europeans adopted the same view somewhat later with anti-clerical revolutions that revoked the divine right of kings and czars to rule. Later still, the Muslim world became part of a new secular political system, however haltingly and incompletely, by dividing itself into nation-states and accepting international law as embodied in the United Nations.
But globalization and new opportunities to promote the business of religion for profit have sidetracked or reversed that secularizing trend. The powerful forces of backlash and of telegenic emotionalism now empower radical Islamic jihadists and evangelical Christian proselytizers alike. As the cross-border pressures of intrusive technology collapse traditional family and social structures, individuals seek anchors in religion or, at the other extreme, in an aggressive atheism that is also a backlash phenomenon. [****]
The new era of fervor strikes close to home: The U.S. media by and large once took pride in covering organized religion with the same detachment -- if not skepticism -- used for politics and other subjects. Now growing segments of my business treat faith in an Almighty as a commodity to bring eyeballs to a television screen or Web site. [*****]
The choice by CNN to have candidates in a televised debate address whether they believe every word of the Bible is just one example of this complicity of news- and soul-gatherers. H.L. Mencken would have feasted on the Iowa fracas between Romney and Huckabee over who is the better Republican Christian. Or on the kinder, gentler -- but no less pandering -- declarations of faith from the stump that Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and most of the other Democratic candidates routinely utter.
Instead there is a polite debate about religion and politics that has thus far lacked context and largely misses the global sweep of the psychological sea change that is occurring on the role of religion in state affairs.
President Nicolas Sarkozy raised eyebrows in France when he paid a high-visibility, Christmas-season visit to the Vatican this month to "bear witness" that Catholicism constitutes "one of the major sources of France's civilization." The roots of French society "are essentially Christian," [******]he added.
Previous French presidents have not talked much about their faith. But they did not face the religious polarization in world and national affairs that Sarkozy confronts. For one thing, he vehemently opposes the entry of Turkey, a nation of 70 million Muslims, into the European Union. His remarks underline his concerns about the dilution of Europe's Christian culture.
Sarkozy and other European leaders are also chipping away at a taboo against talking publicly about religion in general and about the tensions between Muslims and Christians in Europe in particular. The jihadists of al-Qaeda and other movements have helped trigger a new examination in the West of the ideological and strategic roles that religious fervor now plays in global politics. [******]
"A West that does not take religious ideas seriously as a dynamic force in the world's unfolding history is a West that will have disarmed itself, conceptually and imaginatively, in the midst of war," George Weigel writes in his challenging new book, "Faith, Reason and the War Against Jihadism."
Weigel goes much further than I would in advocating that Christian values be shaped into a global counter-ideology (my word, not his) to fight al-Qaeda and its partners. [***] But he usefully identifies the theological context of the war on terrorism and provides a global view of the effect on the West of the rise of a perverted, extremist version of Islam.
Weigel, a Catholic theologian, cites Father Richard John Neuhaus's concise definition of jihadism as a religiously inspired ideology built on the teaching "that it is the moral obligation of all Muslims to employ whatever means necessary in order to compel the world's submission to Islam."
The book points out that most Muslims can and do reject the justification for killing innocents in the name of Allah. It is the Muslim majority, rather than Christian ideologists, that will find effective teachings based on justice and moderation to counter jihadism. [****] Fighting religious fire with religious fire is a sure prescription for further disaster. [******]
jimhoagland@washpost.com
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

Immigration and the Candidates

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/opinion/30sun1.html
December 30, 2007
Editorial | In Office
Immigration and the Candidates
[editorial] [election-year politics] [exigencies of the masses actually getting exercised over something] [alas, charlatans such as Lou Dobbs demogogued the issue and whipped the masses into a frenzy exploiting the general dissatisfaction with the Bush administration during 2006 and most of 2007] [as result the candidates have cravenly rushed to embrace the jingoism and nativism stirred up] [*****]
Even by the low standards of presidential campaigns, the issue of immigration has been badly served in the 2008 race. Candidates — and by this we mean the Republicans, mostly — have been striking poses and offering prescriptions that sound tough but will solve nothing. They have distorted or disowned their pasts and attacked one another ferociously, but over appearances, not ideas — over who can claim to be the authentic scourge of illegal immigrants, and who is the Lou-Dobbs-Come-Lately. [*******]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/opinion/30sun1.html
December 30, 2007
Editorial | In Office
Immigration and the Candidates
[editorial] [election-year politics] [exigencies of the masses actually getting exercised over something] [alas, charlatans such as Lou Dobbs demogogued the issue and whipped the masses into a frenzy exploiting the general dissatisfaction with the Bush administration during 2006 and most of 2007] [as result the candidates have cravenly rushed to embrace the jingoism and nativism stirred up] [*****]
Even by the low standards of presidential campaigns, the issue of immigration has been badly served in the 2008 race. Candidates — and by this we mean the Republicans, mostly — have been striking poses and offering prescriptions that sound tough but will solve nothing. They have distorted or disowned their pasts and attacked one another ferociously, but over appearances, not ideas — over who can claim to be the authentic scourge of illegal immigrants, and who is the Lou-Dobbs-Come-Lately. [*******]
Voters deserve much better than what these candidates have given them. The Democrats have done better, though they have not always responded with the courage and specifics this difficult issue demands. Before voters pick a candidate and a president, they should insist on serious answers to questions like these:
What should be the role of immigrant labor in our economy? How does the country maximize its benefits and lessen its ill effects? Once the border is fortified, what happens to the 12 million illegal immigrants already here? Should they be expelled or allowed to assimilate? How? What about the companies that hire them?
And what about the future flow of workers? Should the current system of legal immigration, with its chronic backlogs and morbid inefficiencies, be tweaked or trashed? What is the proper role of state and local governments in enforcing immigration laws? And will a national identity card for immigrants bring on Big Brother for everyone?

The first thing to know about the Republicans’ immigration debate is that it is not much of a debate. The candidates speak essentially with one voice, calling for a bristling border and stiffer penalties against companies that hire the undocumented. Some call for new instruments of law and order, like tamper-proof ID cards.
There is wide support for stricter enforcement. Not many people favor the underground economy. No one is calling for more immigrants to sneak over the border or to overstay their visas, or for less oversight and looser hiring rules in the workplace. Pretty much every candidate in both parties wants the government to bolster the border — even Bill Richardson, the Democratic governor of New Mexico, who calls the fence ridiculous. (He wants more military boots on the ground.)
The problem is that the country cannot build a fence or send troops and expect its problems to go away. Huge numbers of illegal immigrants never go anywhere near the border: about 40 percent enter legally and overstay their visas. Nor can the government purge workplaces of illegal workers without doing vast damage to the economy. At some point it must address the 12 million undocumented, who cannot be deported en masse.
Most of the Republicans have no answer for what to do with those 12 million, except to argue for “attrition through enforcement,” the hard-liners’ strategy of making immigrants’ lives miserable and waiting for them to leave. Some of the Republicans have called on the government to identify and track all who overstay their visas, without specifying how to do that or pay for it.

Instead of answering these questions, the Republican candidates have spent their time blasting one another as coddlers of illegal immigrants and supporters of “amnesty.” This has proved tricky, however, for the candidates who in previous lives had to deal with immigration in the real world, where immigrant energy and low-end labor — both legal and illegal — tend to bolster economies and make life easier for everyone.
Only two years ago, while governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney spoke favorably of a Senate bill that offered illegal immigrants a path to citizenship. Now he says he hates amnesty, condemns Rudolph Giuliani for having been mayor of a “sanctuary city” and has accepted endorsements from hard-liners like Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Ariz., who hounds immigrant day laborers as aggressively as he chases headlines.
Mr. Romney still has had a hard time explaining his own connections to illegal immigration. He was caught — twice — having a landscaping company with undocumented workers tend to his lavish property. When pressed on that he got testy. “Let’s say I go to a restaurant,” he said to reporters. “Should I make sure that all the waiters there are all legal? How would I do that?”
It is a good question — especially since some 12 percent of the workers in the food service industry are believed to be undocumented — and one we would like Mr. Romney and his fellow candidates to answer seriously.
Mr. Romney is not the only one struggling to reconcile his past policies with his present ambitions. Mr. Giuliani once welcomed undocumented immigrants and sued the federal government to preserve an executive order that shielded them from deportation. Now he links immigration and terrorism in the same breath, and talks of cracking the whip through databases and enforcement schemes with names like BorderStat.
For a while it looked as if Mike Huckabee would be a sensibly contrarian Republican. As governor of Arkansas he supported financial aid for illegal-immigrant students, and when Mr. Romney rebuked him for it in a debate, he scolded right back, “Our country is better than that, to punish children for what their parents did.” Then this month he did a stunning backflip, unveiling his “Secure America Plan,” which would require the expulsion of all illegal immigrants within 120 days. And last week, after the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, he used the turmoil in Pakistan as an argument for building a border fence, and said the United States needed to watch whether “there’s any unusual activity of Pakistanis coming into the country.”
The single voice of reason in the Republican camp is Senator John McCain. He was an original sponsor of a comprehensive immigration bill that married enforcement with a guest-worker program and a path to citizenship for those who earn it. For this he saw his presidential hopes nearly blown to bits. He is hanging on, though. He was AWOL for a time when the Senate bill was killed last summer, but has since regained his voice. He speaks of immigrants as “God’s children” and stoutly defends the path to citizenship for the undocumented. Given what he has gone through, his stance is close to heroic.

The Democratic candidates start in a better place, since they and their party are largely on record as firmly supporting the pillars of comprehensive reform. There are no demagogues in their ranks.
But there are timid fumblers, like Senator Hillary Clinton, who first supported then rejected a plan by Gov. Eliot Spitzer of New York to let illegal immigrants earn driver’s licenses. She was right at first to defend Mr. Spitzer’s logic, but wrong to then back away from the firestorm that he ignited. She did not inspire confidence as someone who will have the courage to do what is necessary and right even if it is controversial.
Mrs. Clinton, like Mr. Richardson, Senators John Edwards and Barack Obama, and the rest of the Democratic field, did vigorously support the one piece of legislation that might have led the country out of its immigration morass. That was the ambitious Senate bill that died under a Republican-led assault in June.
The bill was flawed, but it contained the seeds of true reform. It chose assimilation over expulsion for the 12 million. It leveled with Americans by acknowledging that a border fence would never end lawlessness by itself. It grasped a fundamental moral truth that the Republicans — again, with the notable exception of Mr. McCain — have rejected. The truth is this: Americans cannot expect immigrants to serve them — to make their beds and meals, feed their babies and ailing parents, and pick their crops — while living in fear and hopelessness.

One of the strong arguments for passing immigration reform last summer was that it was a last chance. If Congress did not seize it, the presidential race would blot out hopes of reform for two years or more.
Congress did not seize it, and all the problems are still there. The issue has left the country divided, fretful and ambivalent, and voters are yearning for honesty and thoughtfulness. The Republicans are not giving it to them. The Democrats should fill the vacuum. They have said the right things. Amid all the Republican shouting, it would help if they would speak louder.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

The Times Adds an Op-Ed Columnist

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/business/30kristol.html
December 30, 2007
The Times Adds an Op-Ed Columnist
By THE NEW YORK TIMES [incredible] [another neoconservative who has got it wrong time and again since 2002 particularly with respect to –Iraq] [apparently, the more one misjudges and traffics in pseudo analysis of foreign policy, the more one gets rewarded] [he is a world-chapion self promoter which is a principal requisite for self-anointed puditocracy] [********************]
William Kristol, one of the nation’s leading conservative writers and a vigorous supporter of the Iraq war, [****] will become an Op-Ed page columnist for The New York Times, the newspaper announced Saturday. [who like many similar neocons now says implementation was botched by the administration] [the ideology was not flawed, of course] [a central tenet of PNAC and neocon entity was regime change in –Iraq] [the still seem incapable of seeing democracy, while clearly the desired outcome, must have some organic basis in the polity] [***********]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/business/30kristol.html
December 30, 2007
The Times Adds an Op-Ed Columnist
By THE NEW YORK TIMES [incredible] [another neoconservative who has got it wrong time and again since 2002 particularly with respect to –Iraq] [apparently, the more one misjudges and traffics in pseudo analysis of foreign policy, the more one gets rewarded] [he is a world-chapion self promoter which is a principal requisite for self-anointed puditocracy] [********************]
William Kristol, one of the nation’s leading conservative writers and a vigorous supporter of the Iraq war, [****] will become an Op-Ed page columnist for The New York Times, the newspaper announced Saturday. [who like many similar neocons now says implementation was botched by the administration] [the ideology was not flawed, of course] [a central tenet of PNAC and neocon entity was regime change in –Iraq] [the still seem incapable of seeing democracy, while clearly the desired outcome, must have some organic basis in the polity] [***********]
Mr. Kristol will write a weekly column for The Times beginning Jan. 7, the newspaper said. He is editor and co-founder of The Weekly Standard, an influential conservative political magazine, and appears regularly on Fox News Sunday and the Fox News Channel. He was a columnist for Time magazine until that relationship was severed this month. [********]
Mr. Kristol, 55, has been a fierce critic of The Times. In 2006, he said that the government should consider prosecuting The Times for disclosing a secret government program to track international banking transactions.
In a 2003 column on the turmoil within The Times that led to the downfall of the top two editors, he wrote that it was not “a first-rate newspaper of record,” adding, “The Times is irredeemable.”
In the mid-1990s, Mr. Kristol led the Project for the Republican Future, an influential policy study group. Before that, he was chief of staff to Vice President Dan Quayle.
A native of New York City, he holds a bachelor’s degree and a doctorate from Harvard.
His father is Irving Kristol, one of the founding intellectual forces behind modern conservatism.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Riots Batter Kenya as Rivals Declare Victory

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/world/africa/30kenya.html
December 30, 2007
Riots Batter Kenya as Rivals Declare Victory
By JEFFREY GETTLEMAN [Kenya] [eastern Africa just below horn] [shared border with Somalia where a lot of jihadis and islamist activities as well as anarchy] [all sides, including Pentagon’s relativel new Africa Command have used Kenya as staging area] [very volatile with democracy slowly making inroads] [recent elections] [******]
NAIROBI, Kenya — With the results from Kenya’s closely contested elections still up in the air and evidence growing of election mischief, riots erupted across the country on Saturday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/world/africa/30kenya.html
December 30, 2007
Riots Batter Kenya as Rivals Declare Victory
By JEFFREY GETTLEMAN [Kenya] [eastern Africa just below horn] [shared border with Somalia where a lot of jihadis and islamist activities as well as anarchy] [all sides, including Pentagon’s relativel new Africa Command have used Kenya as staging area] [very volatile with democracy slowly making inroads] [recent elections] [******]
NAIROBI, Kenya — With the results from Kenya’s closely contested elections still up in the air and evidence growing of election mischief, riots erupted across the country on Saturday.
Columns of black smoke boiled up from the slums ringing Nairobi, the capital, as supporters of Raila Odinga, the leading presidential challenger, poured into the streets to protest what they said was a plot by the government to steal the vote.
The demonstrators clashed with police officers in riot gear and tore apart metal shanties with their bare hands. The scene replayed itself in Kisumu, Kakamega, Kajiado, Eldoret and other towns across Kenya, with several people killed.
Just 12 hours before, Mr. Odinga, a flamboyant politician and businessman, had been cruising to victory, according to preliminary results. He was leading Kenya’s president, Mwai Kibaki, by about one million votes in an election that was predicted to be the most fiercely fought in Kenya’s history and perhaps the greatest test yet of this young, multiparty democracy.
But that lead nearly vanished overnight. On Saturday morning, the gap had been cut to about 100,000 votes, with Mr. Odinga still ahead, but barely, with 47 percent of the vote compared with 46 percent for Mr. Kibaki. By Saturday night, with about 90 percent of the vote counted, Mr. Odinga’s lead had shrunk to a mere 38,000 votes.
But those results may not be valid. According to Kenya’s election commission, which is considered somewhat independent from the government, at least three areas from Mr. Kibaki’s stronghold of central Kenya reported suspiciously high numbers. [*****] In one area, Mr. Kibaki received 105,000 votes, even though there were only 70,000 registered voters. In another, the vote tally was changed, at the last minute, to give the president an extra 60,000 votes. In a third area, the turnout was reported at 98 percent.
Samuel Kivuitu, the chief of Kenya’s election commission, said his officers would investigate.
“We have powers to refuse results if they have obvious defects,” he said. He delayed announcing final results until Sunday.
Mr. Kibaki’s party denied it did anything wrong and said it had simply gained many votes from areas where the president is immensely popular.
But the sudden reversal immediately ignited suspicions, especially after results showed that many members of Parliament close to the president — including the vice president, the defense minister, the foreign minister and more than 10 other cabinet members — were voted out of office in a wave of seeming dissatisfaction with the government.
Several foreign observers said they feared that the government was using its muscle to swing the election and stay in power, which could be a recipe for chaos, with the results rejected by millions of people [*****] and Kenya’s cherished stability in danger of collapsing.
Kenya is one of the most developed countries in Africa, but this election has exposed its ugly tribal underbelly.
Mr. Odinga is a Luo, a big tribe in Kenya that feels marginalized from the country’s Kikuyu elite that has dominated business and politics since independence in 1963. Mr. Kibaki is a Kikuyu, and the voting so far has split straight down tribal lines, with each candidate winning big in his tribal homeland.
On Saturday, the first signs of a tribal war flared up in Nairobi, with Luo gangs sweeping into a shantytown called Mathare and stoning several Kikuyu residents. In Kibera, another huge slum, supporters of Mr. Odinga burnt down kiosks that they said belonged to Kikuyu businessmen.
“No Raila, no Kenya!” they screamed, with the fires crackling behind them.
The streets were a collage of destruction, strewn with burning tires, broken bottles, fist-size rocks and fresh shell casings from soldiers who fired in the air to scare the demonstrators off. Some men sharpened machetes on the asphalt, vowing to shed blood should Mr. Odinga lose.
Kikuyus responded by forming packs of vigilantes to patrol their neighborhoods. As night fell, the gangs waited on corners, armed with machetes and lengths of wood.
Many Kenyans seemed distressed about what was happening. In Kibera, one man in a suit guided a young girl, her face a mask of panic, through the embers of burning tires.
“Unless they announce the winner soon,” said Lionel Joseph Ochieng, a Kibera resident, “this will only get worse.”
Election officials seemed to feel the clock ticking. They said they were trying to count the votes from Thursday’s election as quickly as possible but that they have been hampered by logistical problems and a record turnout, possibly upward of 70 percent.
Both political parties declared victory on Saturday, saying that by their calculations they had won the most votes. But by 1 p.m., the election commission had counted only 8 million votes out of a projected 10 to 11 million. The hush inside the heavily guarded election headquarters was a marked contrast to the raging street battles not far away.
The foreign diplomats who initially praised the election as being free and fair were beginning to change their tone.
Michael E. Ranneberger, the American ambassador to Kenya, rushed to the election headquarters at midnight on Friday because he said he had heard reports about vote rigging, though he declined to provide details. He urged voters to remain calm.
“This is a time for Kenyans to come together,” he said.
The head of the European Union’s election observer mission said that several election officials in the pro-Kibaki areas of central Kenya had initially kept their poll results secret, which is against Kenyan law.
“This is something we witnessed ourselves,” said Alexander Graf Lambsdorff, chief of the European delegation. “It’s clearly disturbing.”
The European Union is also investigating the high turnouts in the Kikuyu highlands north of Nairobi, where few have broken ranks with Mr. Kibaki’s party and some areas have voted nearly 100 percent in favor of the president.
The scenario that may be unfolding is the exact one that many foreign diplomats were dreading: a questionable razor-thin margin for the president, who had been trailing in just about every pre-election poll. It is not that Mr. Kibaki, 76, is so disliked himself. He has been in government since independence and is known as a courtly gentleman and economics whiz.
But he is seen by many Kenyans as continuing an unfair political system that has favored the Kikuyu at the expense of Kenya’s 30-plus other ethnic groups. Mr. Odinga, 62, boosted his popularity by tapping into those frustrations and building a coalition of many other tribes. His party has already demanded a recount in several districts and said it will not concede defeat if it loses.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Iraq Safer but Still Perilous At Year-End, Petraeus Says

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/29/AR2007122901169.html
Iraq Safer but Still Perilous At Year-End, Petraeus Says
By Joshua Partlow
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, December 30, 2007; A23 [-ir] [hydra] [insurgency] [bush administration’s “surge option” or “new way forward” underway] [some positive indicators of improvement] [nevertheless, violence while surge unfolds] [pentagon’s recent status report—pretty awful but also predictable] [followup] [“surge” continues amid mixed indicators] [****]
BAGHDAD, Dec. 29 -- The top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David H. Petraeus, delivered a positive but cautious assessment Saturday of progress in the country in 2007, citing the drop-off in violence over the latter half of the year but warning that the insurgent group al-Qaeda in Iraq remains the country's preeminent threat.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/29/AR2007122901169.html
Iraq Safer but Still Perilous At Year-End, Petraeus Says
By Joshua Partlow
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, December 30, 2007; A23 [-ir] [hydra] [insurgency] [bush administration’s “surge option” or “new way forward” underway] [some positive indicators of improvement] [nevertheless, violence while surge unfolds] [pentagon’s recent status report—pretty awful but also predictable] [followup] [“surge” continues amid mixed indicators] [****]
BAGHDAD, Dec. 29 -- The top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David H. Petraeus, delivered a positive but cautious assessment Saturday of progress in the country in 2007, citing the drop-off in violence over the latter half of the year but warning that the insurgent group al-Qaeda in Iraq remains the country's preeminent threat.
Petraeus said the number of weekly attacks in Iraq -- such as roadside bombings, mortar attacks and sniper fire -- has fallen by about 60 percent since June, to about 500 a week by late this month. The number of Iraqi civilians killed in December through the 22nd appeared to be about 600, according to a graph of the past two years provided by Petraeus that uses combined Iraqi and U.S. figures. The highest death toll during this period came last December, when about 3,000 civilians were killed.
"The positive security trends and the factors that produced them are changing the context in many parts of Iraq. While progress in many areas remains fragile, security has improved," Petraeus said during a briefing for reporters at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. He added that success "will emerge slowly and fitfully, with reverses as well as advances, accumulating fewer bad days and gradually more good days. There will inevitably be more tough fighting."
The downturn in violence is generally attributed to three factors that emerged over the year: the arrival of 30,000 additional U.S. troops, the emergence of tens of thousands of Sunni fighters who aligned with American troops against al-Qaeda in Iraq, and the decision by Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr to call for a six-month cease-fire by his militia. Petraeus also cited a drop-off in fighters coming to Iraq from Syria and Saudi Arabia, and a decline in recent months in the use of weapons believed to have been made in Iran.
Iraqi Interior Ministry officials, in a separate briefing Saturday, singled out the rise of the Sunni groups, known often as the Sahawa, or Awakening, as a main reason for improvement in 2007, a rare public endorsement from the Shiite-led government, which has been wary of, and sometimes opposed to, those groups. Maj. Gen. Ayden Khaled Qadir, deputy interior minister for security affairs, said there are plans to include 12,641 people from those groups into the police force in Baghdad by the end of April. The Iraqi government has been slow to do that, fearing that many such people are former insurgents with an anti-Shiite outlook.
For a time this year, U.S. officials in Iraq described Shiite militias as the most damaging and destabilizing force in the country, but Petraeus identified al-Qaeda in Iraq as the top threat.
"We call it sometimes 'the wolf closest to the sled.' It is the most significant enemy that Iraq faces precisely because it is the enemy that carries out the most horrific attacks, that causes the greatest damage to infrastructure and that seems most intent on reigniting ethno-sectarian violence," he said.
He said that al-Qaeda in Iraq has been diminished by aggressive military operations and by the rise of the Awakening groups and that the insurgents have responded by attacking those forces. In an audiotape released Saturday purported to be by Osama bin Laden, the leader of al-Qaeda warned Iraq's Sunnis against joining such tribal councils or participating in any unity government. "The most evil traitors are those who trade away their religion for the sake of their mortal life," bin Laden said, according to a translation by the Associated Press.
Petraeus said the al-Qaeda in Iraq network and its affiliates have moved into northern Iraqi provinces such as Nineveh, Diyala and Salahuddin after coming under pressure from U.S. and Iraqi forces in Baghdad and Anbar provinces. The one Iraqi province that has not had a reduction in attacks is Nineveh, where insurgents operate in and around the provincial capital of Mosul. [**************]
In recent days there have been two major bombings in northern provinces, one in the oil refinery town of Baiji and another in Baqubah, the capital of Diyala province. Together, they killed at least 26 people.
Contrary to other trends, the number of suicide car bombings and suicide-vest attacks has risen in each of the past three months, though the frequency is still below peak levels this year. There were about 50 "high-profile" explosions in the first three weeks of December, according to U.S. military figures.
"There will be bombs" in Iraq, Petraeus predicted. "If the metric is that there are no car bombs or no suicide-vest bombs, I think that would just be an unrealistic metric."
Also Saturday, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was flown to London for a medical examination after suffering from what his aides described as fatigue. The Reuters news service quoted an unnamed official as saying Maliki, 57, would undergo cardiac tests.
Earlier in the week, Maliki was examined at a U.S. military hospital in Baghdad's Green Zone, said Col. Steven A. Boylan, a U.S. military spokesman. His doctors and advisers recommended a checkup in London, said Sami al-Askiri, an adviser to the prime minister. A statement from the Iraqi government described Maliki as "fully healthy" but suffering from exhaustion.
Special correspondent Zaid Sabah contributed to this report.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

Iraq Attacks Fall 60 Percent, Petraeus Says

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/world/middleeast/30iraq.html
December 30, 2007
Iraq Attacks Fall 60 Percent, Petraeus Says
By STEPHEN FARRELL and SOLOMON MOORE [-ir] [hydra] [insurgency] [bush administration’s “surge option” or “new way forward” underway] [some positive indicators of improvement] [nevertheless, violence while surge unfolds] [pentagon’s recent status report—pretty awful but also predictable] [followup] [“surge” continues amid mixed indicators] [****]
BAGHDAD — The top American military commander in Iraq said Saturday that violent attacks in the country had fallen by 60 percent since June, but cautioned that security gains were “tenuous” and “fragile,” requiring political and economic progress to cement them.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/world/middleeast/30iraq.html
December 30, 2007
Iraq Attacks Fall 60 Percent, Petraeus Says
By STEPHEN FARRELL and SOLOMON MOORE [-ir] [hydra] [insurgency] [bush administration’s “surge option” or “new way forward” underway] [some positive indicators of improvement] [nevertheless, violence while surge unfolds] [pentagon’s recent status report—pretty awful but also predictable] [followup] [“surge” continues amid mixed indicators] [****]
BAGHDAD — The top American military commander in Iraq said Saturday that violent attacks in the country had fallen by 60 percent since June, but cautioned that security gains were “tenuous” and “fragile,” requiring political and economic progress to cement them.
The commander, Gen. David H. Petraeus, said the “principal threat” to security remained Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, the homegrown insurgent group that American intelligence officials say is foreign led. [I thought the military claimed that AQI had largely been neutered about a month or two ago?] [*****]
Speaking to reporters in an end-of-year briefing at the American Embassy in Baghdad, General Petraeus said that coalition-force casualties were down “substantially,” and that civilian casualties had fallen “dramatically.”
“The level of attacks for about the last 11 weeks or so has been one not seen consistently since the late spring and summer of 2005,” he said. “The number of high-profile attacks, that is car bombs, suicide car bombs and suicide vest attacks, is also down, also roughly 60 percent” since their height in March.
During his 100-minute briefing, General Petraeus used a series of charts showing trends in overall weekly and monthly attacks, car and suicide bombs, weapons-cache finds and Iraqi civilian deaths.
Although the data showed a sharp fall in civilian deaths from their peak between mid-2006 and mid-2007, the rate of decline appeared to level off in the past two months.
The figures were based on American military statistics, but included some joint Iraqi-coalition data.
However, he conceded that while attacks were down in the rest of the country, they had not fallen in the northern province of Nineveh, which includes Mosul, Iraq’s third-largest city, with a population of 1.7 million.
He said that Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia remained active in northern Iraq, where it was pushed after offensive operations in Baghdad and Anbar Province, and that the rate of attacks in Nineveh “has just been variable and probably slightly up.” [********]
One reason for the continuing violence, he said, was that the area remained “very important” to Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia because it is crossed by the routes into Iraq from Syria and Turkey.
Also on Saturday, Iraq’s prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, flew to Britain for unspecified medical treatment. [******]Yassin Majeed, a senior aide to Mr. Maliki, said only that the visit was for “routine” tests.
Iraqiya, the state television channel, showed Mr. Maliki boarding a jet at Baghdad International Airport. “Some time ago I tried to carry out these tests to be sure about some health matters,” he told reporters. “Now I have the chance.”
Gen. Abdul Kareem Khalaf, a spokesman for the Interior Ministry, told reporters in a separate briefing that 75 percent of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia’s networks and safe havens had been destroyed. He said that 18,000 people had been killed by violence so far in 2007, and that insurgent attacks had declined from 25 a day in February in Baghdad to as few as one during some days in December.
The general did not elaborate on the methodology used to determine any of the statistics he reported to the news media.
General Khalaf said the turning point was the rise of the so-called Sunni Awakening Councils in Anbar Province, the insurgents’ former stronghold. He said that once the tribal groups turned against the militants there, the Interior Ministry was able to focus on Baghdad. The general acknowledged, however, that Diyala Province had remained difficult to control because of continuing insurgent attacks.
“That’s the coming fight,” he said of Diyala and other troublesome areas north of Baghdad.
General Petraeus acknowledged that while Iraq had been brought back from “the brink of a civil war” in 2007, Iraqi and American commanders “clearly have more work to do in certain areas in the weeks and months ahead.” [********]
General Petraeus identified numerous reasons for the fall in violence, namely the increase in American troops and the decision to move them to smaller bases where they are “living among those we are trying to protect.” He cited aggressive offensive operations, using a mixture of conventional and special forces, to focus on the insurgents’ strongholds and networks.
He also credited the Iraqis’ own “surge” of more than 100,000 soldiers and police officers, the rejection of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia by the Sunni awakening movement in former insurgent strongholds, and the cease-fire by the Mahdi Army, a Shiite militia loyal to the cleric Moktada al-Sadr, although he said some “splinter elements” continued to operate.
The general said outside factors included the decisions by some countries to curb the flow of foreign fighters into Iraq, singling out Syria.
Regarding Iran, he noted a fall in attacks using what he described as Iranian-provided “signature weapons”: RPG 29 rocket-propelled grenades, the sophisticated roadside bombs known as explosively formed penetrators, large-caliber rockets and portable air-defense systems.
He said he hoped Iran “will live up to the promises its senior leaders made to Iraq’s senior leaders” to stop what the Americans claim are the training, financing, arming and directing of “special groups” within Shiite militias that have attacked coalition forces. [*****]
Iran has consistently denied helping militias attack coalition forces in Iraq.
For his part, General Khalaf said that Iraq’s Interior Ministry, which he conceded had been infiltrated by Shiite militias in the past, was gradually integrating more Sunni Arabs into its ranks and weeding out officers believed to have dubious allegiances. [****]
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Pentagon Releases 10 Saudi Detainees

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/29/AR2007122901403.html
Pentagon Releases 10 Saudi Detainees
Prisoners Held at Guantanamo Bay Are Returned Home
From News Services
Sunday, December 30, 2007; A09 [Cuba] [gitmo] [U.S. military releases 10 more of the roughly 280 still detained at gitmo] [Saudis] [Saudis must have agreed to take them back] [Saudis have frequently be reluctant] [followup] [************]
Ten Saudi detainees at the Guantanamo Bay prison have been released to their home country, Pentagon officials announced Friday, reducing the number of Saudi nationals still held as enemy combatants to approximately a dozen. [*****]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/29/AR2007122901403.html
Pentagon Releases 10 Saudi Detainees
Prisoners Held at Guantanamo Bay Are Returned Home
From News Services
Sunday, December 30, 2007; A09 [Cuba] [gitmo] [U.S. military releases 10 more of the roughly 280 still detained at gitmo] [Saudis] [Saudis must have agreed to take them back] [Saudis have frequently be reluctant] [followup] [************]
Ten Saudi detainees at the Guantanamo Bay prison have been released to their home country, Pentagon officials announced Friday, reducing the number of Saudi nationals still held as enemy combatants to approximately a dozen. [*****]
Washington has returned dozens of men over the past year to Saudi Arabia, the oil-rich kingdom where al-Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden was born and where public anger over the treatment of its citizens at Guantanamo has run high. [****]
Interior Minister Prince Nayef told the official Saudi Press Agency yesterday that efforts were underway to bring home the remaining Saudis, and that U.S. authorities were cooperating.
Fahd al-Shamri, a Riyadh-based lawyer representing families of Saudis held at Guantanamo, called for the release of those still held.
"We hope the next batch will be the last so that we turn this bleak page and bring to an end the suffering of the families of these detainees," he said in a statement.
Those repatriated to Saudi Arabia have received financial help from the government to rebuild their lives, and many have been allowed to go free. [******]
About 136 of the 759 people detained at Guantanamo since 2002 have been Saudi, [*****] the second-largest group after Afghans. The vast majority have been repatriated, even though the Pentagon still regards the vast majority as a terrorist threat.
The United States agreed to return the men with the understanding that Saudi Arabia will mitigate that risk, partly through a state program to reintegrate former detainees into civilian life, [see external in past couple weeks] [****] said Navy Cmdr. Jeffrey Gordon, a Defense Department spokesman.
The Pentagon did not name the men who were released.
If Saudi officials follow past practice, they would probably identify them over the weekend on official government Web sites.
The transfer reduces the number of captives at Guantanamo to about 275, [***]a decline of nearly one-third in the past year.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

Land Mine Kills Spokesman to Mayor of Somalia’s Capital

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/world/africa/30somalia.html
December 30, 2007
Land Mine Kills Spokesman to Mayor of Somalia’s Capital
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS [Somalia] [northern Africa; horn] [historic caliphate] [islamists and jihadis] [versus the transitional government that has been supported by West] [Somalia’s permanent state of anarchy] [jihadis use to their advantage as they may move in and act as a government] [Ethiopia-Eritrea animosities overlay Somalia’s domestic dynamic] [US has set up Africa Command in nearby Djubouti: task force horn of africa] [followup] [anarchy writ large in Somalia] [brigands and crimes of opportunity as much as anything else] [*******]
MOGADISHU, Somalia (AP) — A land mine killed the spokesman for Mogadishu’s mayor on Saturday, the latest casualty in a vicious Islamic insurgency in Somalia’s capital, officials said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/world/africa/30somalia.html
December 30, 2007
Land Mine Kills Spokesman to Mayor of Somalia’s Capital
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS [Somalia] [northern Africa; horn] [historic caliphate] [islamists and jihadis] [versus the transitional government that has been supported by West] [Somalia’s permanent state of anarchy] [jihadis use to their advantage as they may move in and act as a government] [Ethiopia-Eritrea animosities overlay Somalia’s domestic dynamic] [US has set up Africa Command in nearby Djubouti: task force horn of africa] [followup] [anarchy writ large in Somalia] [brigands and crimes of opportunity as much as anything else] [*******]
MOGADISHU, Somalia (AP) — A land mine killed the spokesman for Mogadishu’s mayor on Saturday, the latest casualty in a vicious Islamic insurgency in Somalia’s capital, officials said.
The spokesman, Mohamed Muhuyidin Ali, was headed to his car when the mine exploded, said Abdirashid Ahmed, a regional officer.
“He left his house and was heading to a nearby garage when a land mine went off,” Mr. Ahmed said, adding that police officials had said they believed that the spokesman had been a target because he was a government official.
Thousands of Somalis have been killed this year in fighting between Islamic insurgents and Ethiopian troops supporting shaky Somali government forces. The Islamists vowed to fight an Iraq-style insurgency after the Ethiopians dislodged them from power one year ago. They had taken control of the capital and much of southern Somalia.
Some 900 miles north of here, kidnappers were apparently demanding a $250,000 ransom for the release of two foreign aid workers. The workers, women from Spain and Argentina who work for Doctors Without Borders, the international aid group, were kidnapped Wednesday.
The demand was in a letter sent to local radio stations in Puntland, a semiautonomous region in northeastern Somalia, but the region’s top official said he could not verify its authenticity.
Spain’s foreign minister, Miguel Ángel Moratinos, spoke Saturday with the president of Puntland, Mahmud Musa, who pledged to travel personally to Bossaso, the port city where the women were seized, to work to free them , the news agency Europa Press reported.
Mr. Musa also agreed to meet with the Spanish ambassador to Kenya, Nicolas Martin Cinto, who went to Somalia on Thursday to try to secure a release, the agency said.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Pakistan at Standstill as Discord and Unrest Grow

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/29/AR2007122900972.html
Pakistan at Standstill as Discord and Unrest Grow
Election Delay Considered In Wake of Bhutto's Killing
By Griff Witte
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, December 30, 2007; A01 [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [******]
KARACHI, Pakistan, Dec. 29 -- Nationwide rioting brought life in Pakistan to a standstill Saturday and forced government officials to consider delaying next month's elections, as discord spread over the killing of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/29/AR2007122900972.html
Pakistan at Standstill as Discord and Unrest Grow
Election Delay Considered In Wake of Bhutto's Killing
By Griff Witte
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, December 30, 2007; A01 [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [******]
KARACHI, Pakistan, Dec. 29 -- Nationwide rioting brought life in Pakistan to a standstill Saturday and forced government officials to consider delaying next month's elections, as discord spread over the killing of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto.
The death toll from the violence climbed above 40, [***] with many people fearfully staying indoors while others ventured out to torch government buildings or battle with police firing tear gas.
The unrest turned streets in this normally frenetic city, Pakistan's largest, into empty expanses of asphalt. Dozens of burned-out cars and buses lay by the sides of the roads, evidence of nighttime mobs that roamed the city in defiance of soldiers and police.
Food shortages were reported in some areas of the country, and most gas stations and shops were closed. With a large percentage of the population idle and angry, there was concern Saturday that the violence could worsen.
"These are the sentiments of the people. This is their natural reaction," said Zahid Hussain, 30, a truck driver who had pulled over Thursday night in rural Sindh province, Bhutto's stronghold, and had not moved since for fear of attack.
Pakistanis are scheduled to go to the polls Jan. 8, but with the nation on edge, the election commission was expected to convene an emergency meeting Monday to decide whether to postpone the long-awaited vote. Rioters have targeted the commission's offices, and several have been burned to the ground.
The elections, which will determine who controls Parliament and shares power with President Pervez Musharraf, are seen both here and abroad as a test of Musharraf's willingness to move toward restoring democracy. [*****] In addition to the concerns about violence marring the vote, opposition groups have long said they believe that Musharraf and his allies plan to rig the balloting.
Bhutto had been campaigning for a third term as premier at a rally in the garrison city of Rawalpindi on Thursday when she was killed as her bulletproof sport-utility vehicle was about to leave. The attack -- gunshots and a suicide bombing -- was carried out in broad daylight before hundreds of witnesses. But the exact circumstances of her death remained a source of major controversy Saturday.
The government has blamed Islamic extremists and said Bhutto died because her head hit a lever of her vehicle's sunroof. Her supporters have blamed Musharraf's allies and say she was shot in a well-coordinated assassination. [******]
On Saturday, while paying his respects to her family in its ancestral home, former prime minister Nawaz Sharif said the government should be held responsible for Bhutto's death.
Bhutto loyalists turned their attention Saturday to the question of who will succeed her as leader of her Pakistan People's Party. But many in the party concede that they are still distracted by the trauma of her death.
"Maybe the emotion won't last that long, but right now, I don't care about the People's Party. I don't care about Pakistan. The only thing I care about right now is that they have killed my sister," said Nadeem Qamar, a doctor and a party stalwart for decades.
Bhutto's father founded the Pakistan People's Party in 1967 as a counterweight to the all-powerful Pakistani army, and she took over soon after he was hanged by a military dictator in 1979. [*****] But Bhutto, who held the official title of party chairperson for life, did not leave behind an obvious successor.
The choice is considered crucial at a time when the party is playing a central role in the movement against the deeply unpopular Musharraf, who resigned last month as army chief but managed to engineer a new term as president.
Bhutto’s 19-year-old son, Bilawal, is scheduled to make his mother’s final wishes public at a news conference Sunday. Bilawal himself is considered a possible heir to the dynastic PPP. Bhutto’s husband, Asif Ali Zardari, is thought by party insiders to be a likely candidate to lead the party for the next several years, until Bilawal is older.
Zardari is a divisive figure whose name is associated with corruption allegations stemming from his wife’s two terms as prime minister. Some members of the party fear it could split without Bhutto to unify factions that differ sharply on how best to challenge Musharraf.
While the party’s top leaders have pushed to work for change from within the system, many in the rank and file are making a different choice. In Sindh province, rioters had left a wide swath of destruction Saturday, with still-burning fuel tankers and smoldering tires littering the highways. And young men wearing People’s Party head scarves had set up dozens of impromptu checkpoints along the major roads, looking for targets.
A spokesman for the Interior Ministry, retired Brig. Javed Iqbal Cheema, said 174 banks had been burned and billons of rupees worth of property destroyed across the country.
The violence was met with threats of a stiffer government response.
“We are warning people to stay calm and restrain themselves,” Cheema said. “They will be punished in the toughest way if it does not stop.”
The army was already out in force in many areas of Sindh on Saturday and appeared to be regaining control there. Elsewhere, however, the unrest intensified. In Rawalpindi, riot police and People’s Party supporters clashed near the spot where Bhutto was killed.
In the eastern city of Lahore, workers slept in their offices because public transportation was shut down and many were unable to get enough gas in their cars to go home. Families brought blankets and pillows to the airport, where they waited for flights that never left. All cafes, movie theaters and markets remained closed in Lahore, the country’s cultural capital.
“We had to cancel over 100 weddings in the heat of the season,” said Ali Hassan, a manager at the Avari Hotel, where employees have been sleeping on cots.
“This is worse than the judicial crisis and worse than the emergency. We even called off all New Year’s Eve parties. It’s a sad and violent time for Pakistan,” Hassan added.
Some people said they were profoundly frustrated by Bhutto’s killing and wanted to get away – for good.
“I travel abroad all the time, and I never thought of leaving my country until now,” said Adnan Hassan, 37, an engineer who had waited for days for a flight from Lahore to Islamabad. “We had hopes that Pakistan would do better. But it’s only getting worse.” [brain drain only serves to strengthen al Qaeda’s and Taliban’s efforts to control Pakistan by simply diluting the well-educated middle class] [************]
Correspondent Emily Wax in Lahore and special correspondents Imtiaz Ali in Peshawar and Shahzad Khurram in Rawalpindi contributed to this report.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

In Bhutto Stronghold, Sharif Seeks a Political Alliance Against Musharraf

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/world/asia/30sharif.html
December 30, 2007
In Bhutto Stronghold, Sharif Seeks a Political Alliance Against Musharraf
By SOMINI SENGUPTA [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [******]
NAUDERO, Pakistan — Nawaz Sharif ventured into the political stronghold of his assassinated rival on Saturday and sought to make common cause against Pakistan’s president, laying a wreath on the grave of Benazir Bhutto and echoing her pleas for democracy.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/world/asia/30sharif.html
December 30, 2007
In Bhutto Stronghold, Sharif Seeks a Political Alliance Against Musharraf
By SOMINI SENGUPTA [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [******]
NAUDERO, Pakistan — Nawaz Sharif ventured into the political stronghold of his assassinated rival on Saturday and sought to make common cause against Pakistan’s president, laying a wreath on the grave of Benazir Bhutto and echoing her pleas for democracy.
Mr. Sharif, a former prime minister who had brought a raft of corruption charges against Ms. Bhutto and her family, needs to forge an alliance with her currently leaderless political party to challenge the government of President Pervez Musharraf.
On Saturday, he flew on a chartered plane to Moenjodaro, where South Asian civilization was born some 5,000 years ago, and from there he drove in a long, dusty convoy of cars here to Ms. Bhutto’s ancestral village, where senior leaders of both their parties met briefly to grieve and discuss the future.
Mr. Sharif has already said his party would boycott the polls, scheduled for next month. Aboard the plane to Moenjodaro, he said he hoped Ms. Bhutto’s Pakistan Peoples Party would join the boycott.
The party was noncommittal. Farhatullah Babar, a party spokesman, said it was too early for his organization to make a decision about whether to go ahead and contest the elections. The party’s executive council is scheduled to meet Sunday afternoon to discuss its plans, including “how the party will be led and by whom,” he said.
If Ms. Bhutto’s party does forge ahead with elections, it is unclear whether Mr. Sharif will be persuaded to drop the boycott and join the race. A Peoples Party spokeswoman, Sherry Rehman, said both parties shared the same goal: the restoration of democracy. “We had a very good meeting,” she said Saturday evening. “They were very deeply aggrieved by our loss. They said it’s their loss.”
Mr. Sharif pressed ahead with his attacks on Mr. Musharraf and railed against the Bush administration for backing him. “Now that a major Pakistani political leader has been assassinated, why is he still supporting this man?” he said. “The whole nation is asking these questions. Does Mr. Bush consider Musharraf his friend or Pakistan his friend?”
He warned that Mr. Bush’s support of the Musharraf government would only heighten anti-American sentiment in Pakistan and the region. The Bush administration has long been suspicious of Mr. Sharif, whom it believes to be too close to Islamic militants. Other Pakistani analysts dispute that characterization.
Mr. Sharif blamed Mr. Musharraf’s government for pulling Pakistan into the “grave crisis” that resulted in Ms. Bhutto’s assassination, and he ruled out any negotiations with the president.
“With Musharraf, Pakistan doesn’t have a future,” he said. His words were terse; his eyes were dry. “His policies are responsible,” Mr. Sharif said. “Whether he is responsible or not, an independent commission will have to investigate. No commission can be independent if Musharraf is in charge of this government.”
The journey to Naudero must have been a strange one for Mr. Sharif. The road to the village was lined with portraits of Ms. Bhutto’s beaming face, she being its native daughter and this being the stronghold of her party on the eve of elections. Mr. Sharif met with Ms. Bhutto’s husband, Asif Ali Zardari, as well as members of the executive council, in a private meeting in the Bhutto family home. In the courtyard, hundreds of party members had gathered to mourn for the last two days. Some sat quietly; others shouted slogans when Mr. Sharif’s entourage came in: “By the name of God and his prophet, Benazir is innocent.”
In one corner of the courtyard, a party member named Kaiser Bengali said he could not help but be struck by the slogan. “I see more anger than grief,” he said.
Mr. Sharif was also making a journey across the divide between the Punjab, the richest and most populous province of Pakistan, and Sindh, its poorer, harsher neighboring province, one of Pakistan’s three ethnic minority provinces.
Sindh has been the site of the worst violence in the wake of Ms. Bhutto’s death. The death toll across the country from rioting rose to 38, said Brig. Javed Iqbal Cheema, a spokesman for the Ministry of Interior. But the destruction was particularly intense in Sindh, where protesters have burned buildings and looted shops. Brigadier Cheema said more than 750 shops and 18 railway stations had been burned.
Even political leaders said they noticed a hardening rage against the Punjabi elite that dominates Pakistan’s military and government institutions. Mr. Babar, the Pakistan Peoples Party spokesman, himself a Pashtun, one of Pakistan’s ethnic minorities, described the mood as a “strange kind of resentment against the federation itself.” He and other members of the party have warned that the central government under Mr. Musharraf has alienated the three minority provinces.
“People were shouting slogans,” he said. “The frightening thing was that the federation had lost meaning for them. Yesterday hundreds of thousands of people gathered, they were angry, they were sad, their eyes were full of fire which is hard to describe.”
The controversy over how Ms. Bhutto died has further fueled tension in the country. Three women who washed Ms. Bhutto’s body before burial dismissed the government’s version that she had died from hitting her head on a lever in the car roof and said they had seen a bullet wound in the back of Ms. Bhutto’s head. A party spokeswoman, Ms. Rehman, said she was among those who bathed Ms. Bhutto’s body after her death and said she had seen a wound where a bullet had passed through her neck and exited the back of her head.
Brigadier Cheema stood by his earlier statement that she had died from a fractured skull caused by a fall against a lever of the car. “What we gave you were facts, absolute facts corroborated by the doctors’ reports,” he said at a news briefing on Saturday. The medical report released by the government, signed by six doctors, makes no mention of a bullet wound and describes a single wound “on the right temporoparietal region.” It gave the cause of death as “open head injury with depressed skull fracture, leading to cardiopulmonary arrest.”
Amid rising calls for an international inquiry into Ms. Bhutto’s death, Brigadier Cheema ruled out such an investigation, saying that the government did not need any help.
Late Saturday, a local television channel, Dawn News, showed pictures of the two suspected attackers caught in a series of photos taken by an amateur photographer at the scene. One man, dressed in a jacket and tie and wearing dark sunglasses, is seen aiming a handgun toward Ms. Bhutto, who is standing up through the open roof of her car. In the last of the series of photos, taken just before the bomb explosion, she has already disappeared from view into the car’s interior, suggesting that the blast was not the source of her injury.
The news station showed a second man with a shawl wrapped over his head, standing next to the gunman in one photo, and said he was the suspected bomber.
Carlotta Gall contributed reporting from Islamabad, Pakistan.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Bhutto’s Son and Husband to Lead Party

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/world/asia/30cnd-pakistan.html
December 30, 2007
Bhutto’s Son and Husband to Lead Party
By JANE PERLEZ [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [Bhutto’s young son to takeover?] [******]
LAHORE, Pakistan — Three days after the death of Benazir Bhutto, the Pakistan People’s Party on Sunday chose her 19-year-old son, Bilawal, and her husband, Asif Ali Zardari, as co-leaders of the party, the biggest and most potent in Pakistan.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/world/asia/30cnd-pakistan.html
December 30, 2007
Bhutto’s Son and Husband to Lead Party
By JANE PERLEZ [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [Bhutto’s young son to takeover?] [******]
LAHORE, Pakistan — Three days after the death of Benazir Bhutto, the Pakistan People’s Party on Sunday chose her 19-year-old son, Bilawal, and her husband, Asif Ali Zardari, as co-leaders of the party, the biggest and most potent in Pakistan.
During a meeting of the party executive in Naudero in the western province of Sindh, Ms. Bhutto’s will was read, and the new political line up, which follows the dynastic tradition started with her father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the party founder, follows her wishes, party officials said.
Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, a tall and composed Oxford student, took the center chair at the news conference at the Bhutto family enclave as he read the announcement that the party would contest the coming election. [*****]
“The long and historic struggle for democracy will continue with renewed vigor,” he said. “My mother always said democracy was the best revenge.” [******]
Ms. Bhutto’s husband, Mr. Zardari, said the party had passed a resolution that would be sent to the United Nations calling for an international inquiry into the circumstances of her death. He specified that the British government should help in the inquiry. He added the government did not accept the inquiries being conducted by the government of President Pervez Musharraf.
The decision to contest the election is seen as a pragmatic move to attract the massive sympathy vote that the party expects in the wake of Ms. Bhutto’s assassination. Some analysts said they believed the party could top the government party’s vote, and command a new parliament. [*******]
But the government indicated Sunday that the election, scheduled for Jan. 8, would likely be delayed, perhaps as much as four months, [*****]leaving vast uncertainties over the volatile political scene here.
The news conference was an emotional affair, dominated by Mr. Zardari, who spoke in Urdu, often in a voice of near rage. Mr. Zardari, known as Mr. Ten Percent during his reign as Minister for Investment during Ms. Bhutto’s second term as Prime Minister, was jailed in Pakistan for eight years on corruption charges. Mr. Zardari still faces corruption charges in Switzerland, his lawyer there said earlier this week.
On Sunday, he said the coming election would be a “war against the people in the government of Pakistan now.” It was not a war against the army, [****] he added.
He was particularly tough on President Pervez Musharraf, calling his political party, a faction of the Pakistan Muslim League, the “Qatil” League.The word “Qatil” in Urdu means murderer.
When reporters began directing questions at his son, Mr. Zardari stepped in saying that Bilawal was still of a “tender” age, and that one question was enough. In answer to that question, Mr. Bhutto Zardari said he would return to run the party full time once he had completed his studies at Oxford.
Mr. Zardari urged the main opposition leader, Nawaz Sharif, who heads a faction of the Pakistan Muslim League and promised to boycott the election, to contest the election, too. Mr. Sharif is likely to follow the recommendation. [*******]
For the last several days, Mr. Sharif has gone out of his way to show conciliation towards the Bhutto clan, showing up at the hospital as soon as she was pronounced dead and then following up with a visit to her family compound to offer prayers after her burial.
Mr. Sharif said that together his party and the Pakistan Peoples Party party can make common cause against the Musharraf government.
As pressure increased on Pakistan to accept an international inquiry into Ms. Bhutto’s death, the team of doctors who frantically tried to revive her Thursday said they had requested an autopsy but were rebuffed by the chief of police in Rawalpindi, [****] according to a member of the board of the hospital where she was treated.
The question of an autopsy has become central to the circumstances of Ms. Bhutto’s death because of conflicting versions put forward by the Pakistani government of how she died.
On the night Ms. Bhutto died, an unnamed Interior Ministry spokesman was quoted by the official Pakistani news agency as saying that the former prime minister had died of a “bullet wound in the neck by a suicide bomber.”
The next day, Javed Iqbal Cheema, the Interior Ministry spokesman, said at a news conference that Ms. Bhutto had died of a wound suffered when she hit her head on a lever attached to the sunroof of the vehicle that was carrying her through a crowd after a political rally. “Three shots were fired, but they missed her,” Mr. Cheema said. “Then there was an explosion.”
The explanation was greeted with disbelief by Ms. Bhutto’s supporters, ordinary Pakistanis and medical experts outside the government.
Pakistani and Western security experts said they believed the government’s insistence that Ms. Bhutto was not killed by a bullet was designed to deflect attention from the lack of government security around her vehicle as she left the park in the city where the Pakistani Army keeps its headquarters, and where the powerful Inter Services Intelligence agency has a strong presence, Pakistani and Western security experts said.
Dr. Mohammad Mussadiq Khan, the principal professor of surgery at the hospital, said on the night of her death that Ms. Bhutto had died of a bullet wound, according to the account of Athar Minallah, the board member of the Rawalpindi General Hospital.
Mr. Minallah released the medical report written by Dr. Khan and six other doctors together with an open letter supporting the doctors in their call for an autopsy.
The report did not mention a bullet because the actual cause of the head injury was left to the autopsy required under Pakistani law when a person dies under suspicious or criminal circumstances, Mr. Minallah said.
The report said the doctors had tried for 41 minutes to revive her. It said “the patient was pulseless and was not breathing” when she arrived at the hospital.
“A wound was present on the right temporoparietal region through which blood was trickling down, and whitish material which looked like brain matter was visible in the wound,” it said.
Although Mr. Cheema, the government spokesman, insisted that Ms. Bhutto did not die of a bullet wound, he also insisted that Baitullah Mehsud, a Pakistani militant linked to Al Qaeda, was responsible for her death. In short, his contention at his briefings was this: a gunman fired, but missed; a suicide bomber from Mr. Mehsud’s group then blew himself up, and as Ms. Bhutto ducked from the attack, she hit her head on a lever on the sunroof of her car.
An account of Ms. Bhutto’s death that did not involve a gunshot wound was the optimal explanation for the government, said Bruce Riedel, an expert on Pakistan at the Brookings Institution in Washington, and a former member of the National Security Council in the Clinton administration.
“If there is a gunshot wound the security was abysmal,” Ms. Riedel said. The government did not want to be exposed on its careless security approach, he said.
As the government’s explanation raised questions, new images of the gunman, dressed in a sleeveless black waistcoat and wearing rimless sunglasses, were splashed across the front pages of Pakistan’s Sunday papers.
The man with the gun who is seen opening fire on Ms. Bhutto just a few meters from her wore a short haircut similar to those of plainclothes intelligence officials. He is seen standing in front of a man whose head is covered in a shawl in the style of Pashtun men from the Pakistani tribal areas where Al Qaeda has strongholds. He is described in the newspaper, Dawn, as the suicide bomber who detonated a bomb after the shots were fired.
In the open letter that Mr. Minallah distributed along with the medical report to the Pakistani news media and to The New York Times, Mr. Minallah suggested the doctors felt they were being pressured by the government to back the theory that she had died by hitting her head on the lever of the car’s sunroof.
But the doctors had stressed to him that “without an autopsy it is not at all possible to determine as to what had caused the injury,” Mr. Minallah wrote in his open letter.
The chief of police in Rawalpindi, Aziz Saud, “did not agree” to the autopsy request by the doctors, Mr. Minallah added.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Blamed Radical 'Capable of Doing Such Things'

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/29/AR2007122901185.html
Blamed Radical 'Capable of Doing Such Things'
By Imtiaz Ali and Griff Witte
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, December 30, 2007; A26 [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [******]
PESHAWAR, Pakistan, Dec. 29 -- The man named by Pakistani officials as the chief organizer of Benazir Bhutto's assassination is a widely feared tribal commander at the vanguard of efforts by extremist groups to draw Pakistan deeper into their insurgent campaign.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/29/AR2007122901185.html
Blamed Radical 'Capable of Doing Such Things'
By Imtiaz Ali and Griff Witte
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, December 30, 2007; A26 [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [******]
PESHAWAR, Pakistan, Dec. 29 -- The man named by Pakistani officials as the chief organizer of Benazir Bhutto's assassination is a widely feared tribal commander at the vanguard of efforts by extremist groups to draw Pakistan deeper into their insurgent campaign.
Baitullah Mehsud, [****] a pro-Taliban figure based in the lawless border region of South Waziristan, is believed to lead an army of thousands of followers who over the past year have been looking increasingly to the east in Pakistan for their targets, rather than west to Afghanistan. [*****]
If Mehsud was behind Bhutto's killing, it would be his most audacious attack to date.[***] But he is believed to be responsible for many other high-profile attacks in Pakistan, including an operation this year in which his men held more than 150 army soldiers for weeks.
Pakistani officials said Friday that they had intercepted a phone call in which Mehsud congratulated his men for assassinating Bhutto. That allegation was disputed Saturday, as a purported spokesman for Mehsud denied any link [****] between the insurgent leader and Bhutto's death.
"It's baseless," Maulvi Omar, who claims to be the spokesman for the Pakistani Taliban, told local journalists in the Waziristan region. "Benazir's killing is a political issue."
Bhutto's supporters have said much the same, arguing that elements of the government are responsible for the attack and that pinning the blame on Mehsud is an attempt to provide cover for the true culprits.
But security experts in Pakistan's restive northwest said Mehsud had the motive and the means to order the strike.
"Baitullah Mehsud is capable of doing such things. He has a lot of trained suicide bombers who can carry out such attacks with precision," [****] said Mahmood Shah, a retired brigadier general and former head of security in the tribal areas.
Fazal Rahim Marwat, a professor at the University of Peshawar, said suspicion will inevitably fall on Mehsud because of his alleged ties to al-Qaeda. "The modus operandi in the Bhutto killing was pretty sophisticated, one with resemblance to al-Qaeda's strategies," [******] Marwat said.
But Marwat also noted the long-standing connections between insurgent groups such as Mehsud's and the Pakistani military, which created the Taliban to wage war in Afghanistan in the 1990s, [*****] only to see the movement turn against Pakistan in recent years.
"One should not forget the anti-Bhutto factor in the all-powerful Pakistani military establishment, which has always nurtured right-wing parties and even militant groups in the country to outnumber and compete with liberal voices like that of Benazir Bhutto," [*****] he said.
A tribal fighter and close aide of Mehsud, who identified himself as Qalam Shah, said in an interview that he did not know of any involvement by Mehsud in Bhutto's death. But he expressed contempt for Bhutto.
"By all accounts, she was here in Pakistan to make a joint government with Perez Musharraf on the U.S.'s instructions, and to extend and serve the U.S. agenda in the region," [*****] Shah said. "Her speeches were clearly indicating her tilt toward the United States, and there was an increasing fear among mujaheddins that she may launch more vigorous military operations than Pervez Musharraf at the behest of the United States."
Bhutto had been outspoken about the need for Pakistan to confront Islamic extremism, warning in dire terms that groups such as the Taliban and al-Qaeda pose an existential threat to the nation.
For years, the ability and willingness of insurgents to strike within Pakistan appeared to be limited. But both seem to be growing, and the results have been devastating, with several hundred Pakistanis killed in attacks in the past six months. The pace and scale of the strikes picked up after the military raided the Red Mosque in Islamabad in July, an operation that Bhutto supported.
An October attack on Bhutto's homecoming from exile -- which claimed at least 140 lives -- employed powerful explosives in two blasts. The attack, also blamed on Mehsud by some government officials, bore similarities to the strike that killed Bhutto on Thursday.
The military has allegedly made several unsuccessful efforts to kill or capture Mehsud. In 2005, the government cut a peace deal with Mehsud -- one that locals in South Waziristan say only made him stronger. [*****] Mehsud backed out of the deal after the Red Mosque raid. [*******]
"This deal with the government made Mehsud the uncrowned king of Waziristan," [*******] said Noor Mohammad Wazir, a resident of South Waziristan's main town. "Now he is running the whole show, and Pakistani troops are just spectators."
Witte reported from Karachi.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

December 29, 2007

Ruling Against Muslim Group Is Overturned

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122802657.html
Ruling Against Muslim Group Is Overturned
Former Charity, Others Not Liable in Teen's Death
By Darryl Fears
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, December 29, 2007; A02 [bush administration] [doj; federal judiciary] [prosecution of hydra] [many setbacks] [when critics complain that the Clinton administration was too obsessed with a law-enforcement approach, they forget that the law-emforcement component is integral to the overall strategy] [followup] [******]
A federal appeals court in Chicago overturned a $156 million jury award against a former Muslim charity once billed as the nation's largest and several other defendants yesterday, saying that the plaintiffs failed to prove that financial contributions to a Palestinian terrorist group played a direct role in the slaying of an American teenager in Israel. [********]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122802657.html
Ruling Against Muslim Group Is Overturned
Former Charity, Others Not Liable in Teen's Death
By Darryl Fears
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, December 29, 2007; A02 [bush administration] [doj; federal judiciary] [prosecution of hydra] [many setbacks] [when critics complain that the Clinton administration was too obsessed with a law-enforcement approach, they forget that the law-emforcement component is integral to the overall strategy] [followup] [******]
A federal appeals court in Chicago overturned a $156 million jury award against a former Muslim charity once billed as the nation's largest and several other defendants yesterday, saying that the plaintiffs failed to prove that financial contributions to a Palestinian terrorist group played a direct role in the slaying of an American teenager in Israel. [********]
The decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit voided a lower court judge's 2004 ruling on behalf of Stanley and Joyce Boim, whose son David was shot by Hamas operatives in the West Bank in 1996. [*****]The U.S. government designated Hamas a terrorist organization in 1997.
U.S. District Judge Arlander Keys in Chicago ruled then that the Boims did not have to show that the defendants aided the attack or were aware of it, only that they "were involved in a agreement to accomplish an unlawful act."
Arlander said the defendants -- defunct charities, the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, and the American Muslim Society/Islamic Association for Palestine; [*******] and a man named Mohammed Salah -- were liable for damages because they paid Hamas in 1993 and 1994 for speaking engagements and distributed propaganda for the group.
In yesterday's strongly worded opinion, Appeals Judge Ilana Diamond Rovner wrote: "Belief, assumption, and speculation are no substitutes for evidence in a court of law. . . . We must resist the temptation to gloss over error, admit spurious evidence, and assume facts not adequately proved simply to side with the face of innocence and against the face of terrorism."
The appeals court ruling sends the case back to the lower court for a possible new trial.
"They had no evidence of direct causation . . . of the tragic death of young Mr. Boim," Salah's attorney, Matthew Piers, said of the Boims. "This was a tragedy manipulated in the legal system and mishandled at the trial court level."
Attorneys for the other defendants could not be reached, nor could Stephen Landes, the Boim family's attorney.
David Boim, 17, was killed in May 1996 while waiting for a bus. Two gunmen sprayed the area with bullets. The 11th-grader had Israeli and U.S. citizenship, and was living in Israel with his parents. To honor their son, the Boims vowed to help bring down Hamas.
In separate cases after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, both the Holy Land Foundation and Salah were indicted by the United States on charges of providing material support to a terrorist group. [*************]
Holy Land was forced to shut down after the government froze its assets for conspiracy and tax evasion, and Salah was jailed recently after being found guilty of obstruction of justice, Piers said. Salah's family welcomed the appeal court's decision as a vindication.
"They are pleased that the court system in this country has proven itself once again," Piers said. "My client . . . has always maintained that he's a man of peace. The accusation that he caused this death was really hurtful to him."
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

In Surprise Step, Bush Is Vetoing a Military Bill

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/29/washington/29bush.html
December 29, 2007
In Surprise Step, Bush Is Vetoing a Military Bill
By STEVEN LEE MYERS and DAVID M. HERSZENHORN [bush white house] [nsc principals and beyond] both dod and dos] [surprise move by administration to veto a military authorization bill after a bipartisan process that produced it] [it appears to be more the case of Bush attempting to appear relevant than anything substantive] [******]
CRAWFORD, Tex. — For months President Bush harangued Democrats in Congress for not moving quickly enough to support the troops and for bogging down military bills with unrelated issues.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/29/washington/29bush.html
December 29, 2007
In Surprise Step, Bush Is Vetoing a Military Bill
By STEVEN LEE MYERS and DAVID M. HERSZENHORN [bush white house] [nsc principals and beyond] both dod and dos] [surprise move by administration to veto a military authorization bill after a bipartisan process that produced it] [it appears to be more the case of Bush attempting to appear relevant than anything substantive] [******]
CRAWFORD, Tex. — For months President Bush harangued Democrats in Congress for not moving quickly enough to support the troops and for bogging down military bills with unrelated issues.
And then on Friday, with no warning, a vacationing Mr. Bush announced that he was vetoing a sweeping military policy bill because of an obscure provision that could expose Iraq’s new government to billions of dollars in legal claims dating to Saddam Hussein’s rule. [********]
The decision left the Bush administration scrambling to promise that it would work with Congress to quickly restore dozens of new military and veterans programs once Congress returns to work in January.
Those included an added pay raise for service members, which would have taken effect on Tuesday, and improvements in veterans’ health benefits, which few elected officials on either side want to be seen opposing.
Mr. Bush’s veto surprised and infuriated Democratic lawmakers and even some Republicans, who complained that the White House had failed to raise its concerns earlier. [**]
And it gave Democrats a chance to wield Mr. Bush’s support-the-troops oratory against him, which they did with relish.
“Only George Bush could be for supporting the troops before he was against it,” Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, said in a statement, reworking a familiar Republican attack during his unsuccessful presidential campaign in 2004 that he supported the war in Iraq before he turned against it.
The veto was an embarrassment for administration officials, who struggled on Friday to explain why they had not acted earlier to object to the provision, Section 1083 of a 1,300-page, $696 billion military authorization bill. It would expand the ability of Americans to seek financial compensation from countries that supported or sponsored terrorist acts, including Libya, Iran and Iraq under Saddam Hussein.
It was unclear how the provision had been overlooked by White House lawyers. A senior administration official told reporters in a hastily arranged conference call that the bill’s consequences for Iraq came into “acute focus” only a week to 10 days ago — after Iraqi officials complained to the American ambassador in Baghdad, Ryan C. Crocker. The White House said President Bush had recently spoken with Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki of Iraq about the consequences of the provision.
It was also an embarrassment for some in Congress, including Republican senators who sponsored the provision, like John Cornyn of Texas and Ted Stevens of Alaska. Republicans joined Democrats in overwhelmingly approving the broader military bill, but they backed the White House on Friday. Senator John W. Warner of Virginia, who led Republicans in drafting the military policy bill, said that he was now swayed by the administration’s arguments that it could endanger Iraq’s new government.
“The White House prepared a very detailed legal memorandum, and I am convinced that they are correct,” Mr. Warner said in a telephone interview.
While removing the provision would involve only a minor amendment, the veto could reopen many of the contentious issues that stalled the legislation’s approval in the first place, including efforts by Democrats to impose conditions on spending for the military operations in Iraq.
At a minimum, the veto will provoke a fight over an issue that was put into the legislation after no public debate. The Senate sponsor, Frank R. Lautenberg, Democrat of New Jersey, expressed strong support for the provision on Friday, saying it would help plaintiffs in lawsuits against Iran and Libya, including relatives of Americans killed in the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983 and in the bombing of a Berlin disco in 1986.
“My language allows American victims of terror to hold perpetrators accountable — plain and simple,” said Mr. Lautenberg, who has long championed expanding legislation to let victims sue foreign governments.
In a “statement of disapproval,” or pocket veto that lets the bill expire on Dec. 31, Mr. Bush said that the provision could result in preliminary injunctions freezing Iraqi assets in American banks — $20 billion to $30 billion, according to a senior administration official — and even affect commercial ventures with American businesses. [******]
He also warned that it was written to revive dormant legal claims, including a $959 million judgment won by American pilots who were prisoners of war during the Persian Gulf war in 1991. The administration had declared the new government exempt from claims dating to Mr. Hussein’s government, which the United States overthrew in 2003.
“Exposing Iraq to such significant financial burdens would weaken the close partnership between the United States and Iraq during this critical period in Iraq’s history,” Mr. Bush said in his statement.
A senior administration official said, “The Iraqis certainly did raise very serious and strong concerns about this, which were confirmed as we really dived into this and gamed out the consequences.” The White House allowed the official to speak only if not identified.
Mr. Bush’s aides have already begun negotiations with Congress to remove the provision or rewrite it to exempt Iraq and enact the bill’s other provisions. The White House chief of staff, Joshua B. Bolten, and national security adviser, Stephen J. Hadley, spoke with Republican lawmakers in a conference call on Friday to explain the president’s decision and to build support for quick Congressional action next month, [*****]Mr. Warner said.
The White House also said it would make an added raise Congress approved for service members — a half-percent above the 3 percent increase that will take effect regardless — retroactive to Jan. 1, 2008, no matter when a final bill is approved.
The final military spending bill was adopted by overwhelming margins, 370 to 49 in the House and 90 to 3 in the Senate. [**]
It was Mr. Bush’s eighth veto, an executive power he has used with greater frequency with Democrats in control of Congress. Because he used a pocket veto — allowing the legislation to expire 10 days after it was passed by the House — his decision cannot be overridden. Adding to the uncertainty, Brendan Daly, a spokesman for the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, said Friday evening that the House was reserving its right to schedule an override vote anyway, arguing that the president’s pocket veto was not legally viable.
Mr. Daly said House officials believed that, under their interpretation of the rules, Mr. Bush technically could not use his power to pocket veto the measure.
Still, Ms. Pelosi and the majority leader, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, indicated that Democrats hoped to move swiftly to address the concerns of the White House and get the bill back to the president for his signature. The House returns on Jan. 15 and could send a revised version of the bill to the Senate by the time it returns a week later.
Some lawmakers accused the administration of siding with the Iraqi government over Americans who had suffered in terrorist attacks, a sensitive charge for a president who has made the fight against terrorism the central theme of his presidency.
“It is a shame,” Representative Ike Skelton, Democrat of Missouri, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said in a statement, “that the White House has taken this step to satisfy the demands of the Iraqi government for whom our troops have sacrificed so much.” [**********]
Steven Lee Myers reported from Crawford, and David M. Herszenhorn from Washington.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

U.S. Fears Greater Turmoil In Region

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122802622.html
U.S. Fears Greater Turmoil In Region
Pakistan's Crisis Could Affect War In Afghanistan
By Thomas E. Ricks and Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, December 29, 2007; A01 [bush white house] [nsc principals and beyond] both dod and dos] [the problem of pegging U.S. foreign policy on one or even two—as the administration wisely recently urged with Bhutto—when what’s needed is a Pakistani policy] [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [see 12-27-07 predictions] [*******]
President Bush held an emergency meeting of his top foreign policy aides yesterday to discuss the deepening crisis in Pakistan, as administration officials and others explored whether Thursday's assassination of opposition leader Benazir Bhutto marks the beginning of a new Islamic extremist offensive that could spread beyond Pakistan and undermine the U.S. war effort in neighboring Afghanistan. [presumably NSC principals] [*******] [use psci 455]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122802622.html
U.S. Fears Greater Turmoil In Region
Pakistan's Crisis Could Affect War In Afghanistan
By Thomas E. Ricks and Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, December 29, 2007; A01 [bush white house] [nsc principals and beyond] both dod and dos] [the problem of pegging U.S. foreign policy on one or even two—as the administration wisely recently urged with Bhutto—when what’s needed is a Pakistani policy] [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [see 12-27-07 predictions] [*******]
President Bush held an emergency meeting of his top foreign policy aides yesterday to discuss the deepening crisis in Pakistan, as administration officials and others explored whether Thursday's assassination of opposition leader Benazir Bhutto marks the beginning of a new Islamic extremist offensive that could spread beyond Pakistan and undermine the U.S. war effort in neighboring Afghanistan. [presumably NSC principals] [*******] [use psci 455]
U.S. officials fear that a renewed campaign by Islamic militants aimed at the Pakistani government, and based along the border with Afghanistan, would complicate U.S. policy in the region by effectively merging the six-year-old war in Afghanistan with Pakistan's growing turbulence.
"The fates of Afghanistan and Pakistan are inextricably tied," said
J. Alexander Thier, a former United Nations official in Afghanistan who is now at the U.S. Institute for Peace.
U.S. military officers and other defense experts do not anticipate an immediate impact on U.S. operations in Afghanistan. But they are concerned that continued instability eventually will spill over and intensify the fighting in Afghanistan, which has spiked in recent months as the Taliban has strengthened and expanded its operations.
Unrest in Pakistan and increasing fuel prices have already boosted the cost of food in Afghanistan, making it more likely that hungry Afghans will be lured by payments from the Taliban to participate in attacks, a U.S. Army officer in Afghanistan said.
In a secure videoconference yesterday linking officials in Washington, Islamabad and Crawford, Tex., Bush received briefings from CIA Director Michael V. Hayden and U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan Anne W. Patterson, said National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe. Bush then discussed Bhutto's assassination and U.S. efforts to stabilize Pakistan with his top foreign policy advisers, including Vice President Cheney, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley, as well as Adm. William J. Fallon of Central Command and Marine Gen. James E. Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. [NSC statutory and ad hoc principals] [use psci 455] [*******]
U.S. intelligence and Defense Department sources said there is increasing evidence that the assassination of Bhutto, a former Pakistani prime minister, was carried out by al-Qaeda or its allies inside Pakistan. The intelligence officials said that in recent weeks their colleagues had passed along warnings to the Pakistani government that al-Qaeda-related groups were planning suicide attacks on Pakistani politicians.
The U.S. and Pakistani governments are focusing on Baitullah Mehsud, leader of the Taliban Movement of Pakistan, as a possible suspect. [see today’s external for more—piece by Carlotta Gall] [****] A senior U.S. official said that the Bush administration is paying attention to a list provided by Pakistan's interior ministry indicating that Mehsud's targets include former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, former interior minister Aftab Khan Sherpao, and several other cabinet officials and moderate Islamist leaders. "I wouldn't exactly call it a hit list, but we take it very seriously," the official said. "All moderates [in Pakistan] are now under threat from this terrorism."
Mehsud told the BBC earlier this month that the Pakistani government's actions forced him to react with a "defensive jihad."
After signing a condolence book for Bhutto at the Pakistani Embassy in Washington, Rice said the United States is in contact with "all" of the parties in Pakistan and stressed that the Jan. 8 elections should not be postponed. "Obviously, it's just very important that the democratic process go forward," she told reporters.
The U.S. Embassy in Pakistan warned U.S. citizens Thursday to keep a low profile and avoid public gatherings. A Pentagon official said plans to evacuate Americans from the country are being reviewed.
"We've really got a new situation here in western Pakistan," said Army Col. Thomas F. Lynch III, who has served in Afghanistan and with Central Command, the U.S. military headquarters for Pakistan and the Middle East. He said the assassination marks a "critical new phase" in jihadist operations in Pakistan and predicted that the coming months would bring concentrated attacks on other prominent Pakistanis.
"The Taliban . . . are indeed a growing element of the domestic political stew" in Pakistan, said John Blackton, who served as a U.S. official in Afghanistan in the 1970s and again 20 years later. He noted that Pakistani military intelligence created the Taliban in Afghanistan.
How the United States responds will hinge largely on the actions of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, in whom U.S. officials have mixed confidence. If there is indeed a new challenge by Islamic militants emerging in Pakistan, then the United States will have to do whatever it can to support Musharraf, the U.S. Army officer in Afghanistan said.
"Pakistan must take drastic action against the Taliban in its midst or we will face the prospect of a nuclear weapon falling into the hands of al-Qaeda -- a threat far more dangerous and real than Hussein's arsenal ever was," he said, referring to the deposed Saddam Hussein. [far-more serious than -Iraq ever was as a threat] [******] [and it’s largely been ignored as administration focused on Musharraf’s effects on Afghanistan instead of Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [******************]
But Musharraf has a track record of promising much to Washington but doing little to counter the militants, others said. "My prediction is, Musharraf will go into a bunker mentality and be nicer to the Muslims," said John McCreary, who led the Defense Intelligence Agency's 2001 task force on Afghanistan. "He goes through the pretenses of crackdown but never follows through."
"Pakistan isn't really engaged in a fight against terror," added Blackton. "One of the mistakes amongst many U.S. policymakers is to project the American construct of a war on terror onto the Pakistani regime struggle for survival. There are some congruencies between the two, but even more differences."
The clever move for Musharraf would be to allay such doubts by capturing or killing a major Islamic extremist leader in the coming weeks, said Larry P. Goodson, an area expert who teaches strategy at the U.S. Army War College. But he said he doubts that would happen or that Musharraf would take many concrete actions, aside possibly from declaring a new state of emergency. [he’s right] [look for Musharraf to make some dramatic arrests in coming weeks] [of course, doing so will also open the question if the arrest could be made why weren’t they made months ago?] [*********]
A countervailing pressure on Musharraf is that if he does not respond effectively to an Islamic militant campaign against his government, he also could face falling from power. At some point, said Teresita C. Schaffer, a former State Department official specializing in India and Pakistan, the Pakistani army "could conclude that he's a liability."
Staff writer Joby Warrick and staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

The Pakistan Test

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122802445.html
The Pakistan Test
Some presidential candidates show they can respond quickly to a foreign policy crisis. Some flunk or foul.
Saturday, December 29, 2007; A18 [editorial] [on] [election-cycle politics] [candidates exploit Bhutto death] [some clearly better than others] [psci 455] [use nsc] [******]
THE ASSASSINATION of Benazir Bhutto presented U.S. presidential candidates with a test: Could they respond cogently and clearly to a sudden foreign policy crisis? Within hours some revealing results were in. One candidate, Democrat John Edwards, passed with flying colors. Another, Republican Mike Huckabee, flunked abysmally. Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican John McCain were serious and substantive; Republicans Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani were thin. And Barack Obama -- the Democratic candidate who claims to represent a new, more elevated brand of politics -- committed an ugly foul.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122802445.html
The Pakistan Test
Some presidential candidates show they can respond quickly to a foreign policy crisis. Some flunk or foul.
Saturday, December 29, 2007; A18 [editorial] [on] [election-cycle politics] [candidates exploit Bhutto death] [some clearly better than others] [psci 455] [use nsc] [******]
THE ASSASSINATION of Benazir Bhutto presented U.S. presidential candidates with a test: Could they respond cogently and clearly to a sudden foreign policy crisis? Within hours some revealing results were in. One candidate, Democrat John Edwards, passed with flying colors. Another, Republican Mike Huckabee, flunked abysmally. Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican John McCain were serious and substantive; Republicans Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani were thin. And Barack Obama -- the Democratic candidate who claims to represent a new, more elevated brand of politics -- committed an ugly foul.
Let's start with Mr. Edwards, who managed not only to get Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf on the phone Thursday but also to deliver a strong message. The candidate said he had encouraged Mr. Musharraf "to continue on the path to democratization [and] to allow international investigators to come in and determine what happened, what the facts were." Those are words the Pakistani president needs to hear from as many Americans as possible. He has yet to confirm that the Jan. 8 parliamentary elections will go forward and risks a destabilizing backlash against his own government unless he delivers a full and credible account of the authors and circumstances of Ms. Bhutto's killing.
Ms. Clinton and Mr. McCain also endorsed Pakistan's continued democratization. Each cited an acquaintance with Ms. Bhutto or Mr. Musharraf and opportunistically trumpeted their foreign policy experience -- but both also offered some cogent analysis. Ms. Clinton rightly cited "the failure of the Musharraf regime either to deal with terrorism or to build democracy," adding that "it's time that the United States sided with civil society in Pakistan."
At the other extreme was Mr. Huckabee, whose first statement seemed merely uninformed: He appeared not to know that Mr. Musharraf had ended "martial law" two weeks ago. That was better than the candidate's next effort, when he said an appropriate U.S. response would include "very clear monitoring of our borders . . . to make sure if there's any unusual activity of Pakistanis coming into our country." The cynicism of this attempt to connect Pakistan's crisis with anti-immigrant sentiment was compounded by its astonishing senselessness.
By comparison, the Giuliani and Romney statements were anodyne -- they deployed slogans about fighting terrorism or "jihadism" while avoiding serious comment about Pakistan. Mr. Obama similarly began by offering bland condolences to Pakistanis and noting that "I've been saying for some time that we've got a very big problem there." [****]
Then Mr. Obama committed his foul -- a far-fetched attempt to connect the killing of Ms. Bhutto with Ms. Clinton's vote on the war in Iraq. After the candidate made the debatable assertion that the Iraq invasion strengthened al-Qaeda in Pakistan, [****] his spokesman, David Axelrod, said Ms. Clinton "was a strong supporter of the war in Iraq, which we would submit was one of the reasons why we were diverted from Afghanistan, Pakistan and al-Qaeda, who may have been players in the event today." [really unthoughful statement by Axelrod] [why did Obama not consult zbig or one of his n-s advisers?] [*******]
When questioned later about his spokesman's remarks, Mr. Obama stiffly defended them -- while still failing to offer any substantive response to the ongoing crisis. Is this Mr. Obama's way of rejecting "the same Washington game" he lambasted earlier in the day? If so, his game doesn't look very new, or attractive.
Other editorials in this series can be found athttp://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

Crisis Overseas Is Sudden Test for Candidates

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/29/us/politics/29memo.html
December 29, 2007
Political Memo
Crisis Overseas Is Sudden Test for Candidates
By PATRICK HEALY [election-cycle politics] [candidates exploit Bhutto death] [some clearly better than others] [psci 455] [use nsc] [******]
WEBSTER CITY, Iowa — For the presidential candidates, the assassination of Benazir Bhutto has emerged as a ghoulish sort of test: a chance to project leadership and competence — or not — on a fast-moving and nuanced foreign policy issue. [****]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/29/us/politics/29memo.html
December 29, 2007
Political Memo
Crisis Overseas Is Sudden Test for Candidates
By PATRICK HEALY [election-cycle politics] [candidates exploit Bhutto death] [some clearly better than others] [psci 455] [use nsc] [******]
WEBSTER CITY, Iowa — For the presidential candidates, the assassination of Benazir Bhutto has emerged as a ghoulish sort of test: a chance to project leadership and competence — or not — on a fast-moving and nuanced foreign policy issue. [****]
Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware and Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, Democrats who have struggled to attract voters’ attention, edged into the spotlight on Friday after talking about Pakistan for weeks.
Mr. Biden tried to sound presidential as he expressed concern about loose nuclear weapons in Pakistan, and he also emphasized his foresight by noting that he had long called Pakistan “the most dangerous nation on the planet.” [he’s of course right but that’s hardly a scoop] [and his elections immediately response was lame] [*****]
Mr. Richardson, a former diplomat, made an effort to cast himself as a man of action, meanwhile, calling for President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan to step down. [even dumber than Biden’s insistence on election proceeding] [*****]
Senators John McCain, Republican of Arizona, and Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York, spent the day asserting their own personal expertise: their private conversations with Ms. Bhutto and Mr. Musharraf, [****] their visits to Pakistan and their concerns about fallout affecting the nation’s nuclear arsenal to the hunt for Osama bin Laden.
Mr. McCain, speaking in New Hampshire, also sought to convey leader-to-leader chemistry when he called Mr. Musharraf a “personally scrupulously honest” man who deserved “the benefit of the doubt” on uniting Pakistan.
But Mike Huckabee, the leading Republican in polls of Iowa caucusgoers, found himself on the defensive on Friday, trying to clarify earlier remarks in which he said the chaos in Pakistan underscored the need to build a fence on the American border with Mexico, and that “any unusual activity of Pakistanis coming into the country” should be monitored. A series of misstatements in discussing the issue could buttress criticism that Mr. Huckabee has faced from his opponents that he lacked experience on foreign policy.
The Bhutto assassination is one of those rare things in a presidential race — an unscripted, unexpected moment that lays bare a candidate’s leadership qualities and geopolitical smarts. Think of Mr. bin Laden’s videotape message late in the 2004 election — giving President Bush a chance to look more commanding than Senator John Kerry — or the twists of the Iranian hostage crisis in 1980, as Ronald Reagan made President Jimmy Carter look feckless. And all of the contenders rushed to weigh in, determined and eager to use the moment to show command of issues both large (Pakistan’s relations with India and Afghanistan) and small (the proper pronunciation of Rawalpindi, the garrison city where Ms. Bhutto died). [******]
While there were some stabs at substance — Mrs. Clinton called for an independent investigation into Ms. Bhutto’s death, and Mr. Richardson called for cutting off all aid to Pakistan — most of the candidates concentrated on projecting the aura of a steady hand in a crisis.
“Pakistan is a foreign policy problem that requires nuance and finesse, so it’s a great test of presidential mettle,” [and I’ve yet to see any] [it sounds to me as though virtually all the responses were shaped by political advisers rather than national-security advisers] [*****] said Xenia Dormandy, director of the Belfer Center’s Project on India and the Subcontinent at Harvard University. “There are so many priorities: building a democracy, the war on terror, nonproliferation. I do think we’re going to see a split between those candidates who have the experience to recognize the complexities, and those who are just determined to play the politics on this one.”
Senator Barack Obama of Illinois tried to sound like both a leader and a candidate on Pakistan on Friday. At one point, he said he would suspend some military aid to Pakistan if the government did not hold free elections and clamp down on terrorist groups. At another point, though, he suggested that the war in Iraq — which his rivals Mrs. Clinton, John Edwards and others had voted for — had “resulted in us taking our eye off the ball” in pursuing Al Qaeda and bringing stability to the region.
Some candidates had moments, meanwhile, that sounded a bit out of the presidential loop. Mitt Romney said that, if he had been president, he would have gathered information from “our C.I.A. bureau chief in Islamabad.” The Central Intelligence Agency has station chiefs, not bureau chiefs. (That said, Mr. Romney, a former governor of Massachusetts, invoked Mr. Reagan on Friday as a great foreign policy leader, and noted, “he was a governor, not a so-called foreign policy expert.”)
Most of the candidates talked Friday about the need for democracy in Pakistan, and no one has stressed that theme more frequently than President Bush himself. But as the complexity of the situation there has set in on the Bush administration in recent years, the talk of democracy has contrasted sharply with the need for stability (something Rudolph W. Giuliani talked about Friday).
The Bush administration’s approach so far has been to back Mr. Musharraf at all costs; only Mr. McCain seemed to echo that on Friday.
While the administration has urged the Pakistani government to go through with elections, it has also made clear that it wants Mr. Musharraf to stay in power as long as possible, chiefly because he is the only one Washington trusts to have control over the country’s nuclear arsenal.
Pakistan’s nuclear weapons are the problem that is the focus of intense attention inside the White House — but an issue that the candidates, aside from Mr. Biden and to a lesser extent Mr. McCain, have talked about rarely. The Bush administration has spent a little less than $100 million in a secret program to help Pakistan protect its arsenal. But outside experts question how effective that effort has been. [the effects of having a Musharraf policy rather than a Pakistan foreign policy] [*******]
Discussing the security of another country’s nuclear weapons is something most candidates shy away from. Partly that is because they do not want to strike too much fear into voters. But partly it is because so much of the information is classified, meaning that some of the senators in the race — Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Biden, Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain — may know more than they can say about the American effort. Or, they may have been left in the dark, which, as they seek to project leadership stature, they would not want to admit.
David E. Sanger contributed reporting from Weston, Vt., and Cate Doty from Williamsburg, Iowa.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

2 Israeli Settlers Killed

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/29/world/middleeast/29mideast.html
December 29, 2007
2 Israeli Settlers Killed
By STEVEN ERLANGER [Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [followup] [the usual tit-for-tat violence endemic] [the Israelis should reopen crossings if Abbas can control the target practice only] [the role of spoilers] [*****]
JERUSALEM — Two Israeli settlers out hiking with a friend near Hebron were shot and killed Friday by Palestinians driving by, according to the Israeli police.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/29/world/middleeast/29mideast.html
December 29, 2007
2 Israeli Settlers Killed
By STEVEN ERLANGER [Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [followup] [the usual tit-for-tat violence endemic] [the Israelis should reopen crossings if Abbas can control the target practice only] [the role of spoilers] [*****]
JERUSALEM — Two Israeli settlers out hiking with a friend near Hebron were shot and killed Friday by Palestinians driving by, according to the Israeli police.
The Israelis, David Rubin, 21, and Ahikam Amihai, 20, were on leave from army duty and managed to return fire, killing two Palestinians. Two other Palestinians, who the Israeli police said may have been lightly wounded, escaped.
Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack. The Israelis were hiking to a stream west of Hebron and the Israeli settlement of Telem. The Israeli Army has been attacking Islamic Jihad in Gaza for the past few weeks, trying to suppress rocket fire into Israel. Late Thursday night, Israeli forces killed a senior Islamic Jihad commander in Gaza, Muhammad Abdullah, 43, whom the Israelis said was in charge of manufacturing weapons, including rockets and mortars.
The friend hiking with the two settlers, a woman, hid from the gunmen behind a rock in the riverbed, called the authorities and was later treated for shock. The Israelis were said to be sons of rabbis from the Hebron area, according to David Wilder, a spokesman for settlers there, and they had lived in Kiryat Arba, an Israeli settlement established in 1971 and adjoining Hebron.
Mr. Rubin was a sergeant in the naval commandos, and Mr. Amihai was a corporal in the air force commandos. Their rifles were missing from the scene and believed to have been taken by the Palestinians.
Micky Rosenfeld, an Israeli police spokesman, called the shooting a terrorist attack. “A small group of Israelis who were out hiking near Telem were attacked by terrorists who opened fire,” he said.
The police set up roadblocks and were searching the area, Mr. Rosenfeld said. One Palestinian gunman was killed at the scene, and the other died on the way to a Palestinian hospital.
Uri Ariel, a legislator from the National Religious Party, cited the recent release of Palestinian prisoners and said that the killings were “further proof of intensified terrorist attacks by Arabs, who take advantage of Israel’s weakness and leniency.”
Separately, Israeli forces late Thursday shot and killed a bodyguard for Ahmed Qurei, the former Palestinian prime minister and the chief negotiator in current peace talks. The bodyguard, Mutassem Sharif, 23, was a member of the Palestinian security forces, but Israel said he was suspected of supplying weapons to other armed Palestinian groups.
He was killed fleeing his house in a Ramallah suburb when Israelis arrived to arrest him. Israel said he died in an exchange of gunfire, but Palestinian security officials denied that Mr. Sharif had fired at the Israelis.
In a statement, Mr. Qurei condemned the operation and the killing. Israel, he said, was trying to hinder peace talks “by doing the opposite of its commitments and pledges to the international community, the most dangerous of which is the continuous assassinations of Palestinian fighters.”
Israeli officials said Friday they had made no commitments to stop military operations intended to protect Israeli citizens from attacks, whether from the West Bank or Gaza.
Also on Thursday, Mr. Qurei and the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, met at the official residence of Israel’s prime minister, Ehud Olmert, for talks, and Mr. Qurei said both sides were committed to moving ahead, intending to set up negotiating committees in the next few days.
On Friday, Riad al-Malki, a Palestinian minister on the West Bank, said that Israel had agreed to deliver 25 armored vehicles to Mr. Abbas’s forces with a month, but without mounted guns. And Israeli officials said that Mr. Olmert had ordered the Housing Ministry not to issue any additional building permits on occupied land in the West Bank without his approval.
Mr. Olmert wants to avoid surprises that disrupt the talks, but he has said that construction will continue inside settlements that Israel intends to keep in a future peace deal. Palestinians say that Israel must stop all settlement activity beyond 1967 boundaries.
The Yesha Council, an organization that represents settlers, condemned Mr. Olmert for “another surrender to the Palestinians and Americans.” In Jerusalem, near Mr. Olmert’s home, hundreds of Jewish and Arab women protested the continued Israeli occupation of Palestinian land. The protest was organized by Women in Black, founded 20 years ago after the first Palestinian uprising in 1987.
In Gaza City Friday evening, the Hamas police arrested more than 40 members of its rival organization Fatah inside an affiliated university, Al Azhar University, including the deputy president, Jabir Daour, and the head of student affairs, Ali Najar, and they confiscated hundreds of yellow Fatah flags.
Fatah, the dominant Palestinian faction, has been preparing to celebrate the anniversary of the movement, and Hamas, which runs Gaza, is concerned that a rally could spark political unrest. In the West Bank, Fatah prevented Hamas from celebrating its own anniversary earlier this month.
In Gaza on Thursday, Israeli forces killed at least seven Palestinian gunmen, including Mr. Abdullah, who was known as Abu Murshad, in four separate episodes. Five of the dead were from Islamic Jihad and two from Hamas.
Rina Castelnuovo contributed reporting.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Lebanon: Election Delayed Again

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/29/world/middleeast/29brief-lebanon.html
December 29, 2007
World Briefing | Middle East
Lebanon: Election Delayed Again
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS [Lebanon] [the crazy realities that comprise Lebanese politics] [the Syrians were likely behind the recent assassination of another general] [the bitterness of Shiia, Sunni, Chrisitians, pro- and anti-Syrian forces scattered all around] [followup] [elections again postponed] [********]
The Parliament speaker moved a parliamentary session to elect a president to Jan. 12 from Saturday. It was the 11th postponement since the first attempt by the sharply divided Parliament to elect a new president in September. The Syrian-backed opposition and the anti-Syrian majority bloc have agreed on Gen. Michel Suleiman, the head of the army, as a compromise candidate but remain deadlocked over how to share power after he takes office. [*********]
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/29/world/middleeast/29brief-lebanon.html
December 29, 2007
World Briefing | Middle East
Lebanon: Election Delayed Again
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS [Lebanon] [the crazy realities that comprise Lebanese politics] [the Syrians were likely behind the recent assassination of another general] [the bitterness of Shiia, Sunni, Chrisitians, pro- and anti-Syrian forces scattered all around] [followup] [elections again postponed] [********]
The Parliament speaker moved a parliamentary session to elect a president to Jan. 12 from Saturday. It was the 11th postponement since the first attempt by the sharply divided Parliament to elect a new president in September. The Syrian-backed opposition and the anti-Syrian majority bloc have agreed on Gen. Michel Suleiman, the head of the army, as a compromise candidate but remain deadlocked over how to share power after he takes office. [*********]
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Car Bomber Kills 8 at a Street Market in Baghdad

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/29/world/middleeast/29iraq.html
December 29, 2007
Car Bomber Kills 8 at a Street Market in Baghdad
By STEPHEN FARRELL [-ir] [hydra] [insurgency] [bush administration’s “surge option” or “new way forward” underway] [some positive indicators of improvement] [nevertheless, violence while surge unfolds] [pentagon’s recent status report—pretty awful but also predictable] [followup] [“surge” continues amid mixed indicators] [****]
BAGHDAD — A car bomber killed 8 people and wounded 66 in Baghdad on Friday, timing the blast to catch people emerging from prayers on the Muslim holy day [****] and setting off the explosives directly under a mural of doves of peace. [after multi-month lull, car bombing seems on the increase again] [******]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/29/world/middleeast/29iraq.html
December 29, 2007
Car Bomber Kills 8 at a Street Market in Baghdad
By STEPHEN FARRELL [-ir] [hydra] [insurgency] [bush administration’s “surge option” or “new way forward” underway] [some positive indicators of improvement] [nevertheless, violence while surge unfolds] [pentagon’s recent status report—pretty awful but also predictable] [followup] [“surge” continues amid mixed indicators] [****]
BAGHDAD — A car bomber killed 8 people and wounded 66 in Baghdad on Friday, timing the blast to catch people emerging from prayers on the Muslim holy day [****] and setting off the explosives directly under a mural of doves of peace. [after multi-month lull, car bombing seems on the increase again] [******]
The bomber parked his white sedan at the roadside shortly after noon, but allayed suspicion by dashing to a nearby vegetable stall and asking for five pounds of oranges and five pounds of cucumbers, according to a market vendor in Tayaraan Square. Then the car exploded.
The blast was in a mainly Shiite area, adorned with posters of the radical cleric Moktada al-Sadr and his family, but it was also close to an Armenian Christian church. [*****]
“This is what the terrorists do, attack the poor people, especially on Friday when many people come to buy their fruit and vegetables,” said a vendor, Falah Hassan Hashem, 26, as broken tables and wheel hubs were cleared from the sidewalk.
The spot was apparently chosen carefully, in one of the few unprotected areas of a square that has been hit by insurgents in the past, including in May, when a car bomb killed 23 people.
Five-foot-high uninterrupted concrete blast walls now seal off most of the popular street market from vehicles, but there is no protection on a short, exposed stretch of highway overpass where the bomb exploded.
As the emergency services went through their familiar drills, sealing off the area and clearing debris, the explosion set off an argument between Baghdadis about the extent of improvements in the security situation.
There has been a decline in bombings in Baghdad in recent months, but there have been deadly attacks in the last few weeks at the nearby Ghazil animal market, and on shops that sell alcohol.
“This wasn’t a surprise, their activities have never stopped,” said Mr. Hashem, the vendor. “I don’t think there has been any progress at all.”
“No, no,” interjected Saad Aboud, a customer. “There is hope that things might be better. Compared to what the terrorists used to do, this is nothing.”
Three hours after the blast, the police lifted roadblocks, and traffic poured back into the street.
In a nearby public park, Iraqis enjoying a day off showed little concern about the bombing. Some said that they were letting their children out in public for the first time in months, after being too scared to do so during two major holidays, Id al-Fitr and Id al-Adha, and that even though they expected more bombs, the violence had fallen to a level they found tolerable.
“I was just talking to my friend about this subject,” said Thiaa Adel, 40, from the central Baghdad district of Karrada. “It happens. There will be blasts from time to time.
“Probably this part of the city will be targeted too, 100 percent I think so. But I feel my children are living in a small prison, so I had to bring them here. I walk around looking left and right. I think things will get better.”
Also on Friday in Baghdad, The Associated Press reported, the police said they had discovered a weapons cache beneath a chicken coop at a property owned by the son of Adnan al-Dulaimi, a politician who leads the main Sunni Arab bloc, Tawafiq.
The news agency cited unidentified police officials as saying that they had found 80 mortars, 60 grenade launchers, hand grenades, sniper rifles, ammunition and car bombs. Mr. Dulaimi’s son Maki was already being held by the police after a car bomb was found on the street outside his father’s compound a month ago. His arrest prompted a Tawafiq walkout from Parliament amid claims of victimization.
Mr. Dulaimi confirmed that the police raided a property in front of his house Thursday night, and said he was aware that they claimed to have found explosives. But he said that his family did not own the property in question, and that someone else lived there.
“This is all fabrication because they want to destroy my reputation,” he said.
In another development on Friday, Oil Ministry officials in Baghdad said they had threatened to cut crude-oil exports to South Korea unless it canceled an oil exploration deal with the Kurdistan regional government.
In November, a South Korean consortium including the state-owned Korea National Oil Corporation announced that it had signed an agreement with the semiautonomous Kurdish authorities to explore a field in northeast Iraq over the next three years that has an estimated reserve of 500 million barrels.
The Kurds insist that the deal and other agreements are legal, but the central government in Baghdad has threatened to nullify the contracts, saying that only it can negotiate over Iraq’s oil.
On Friday, Salah al-Ameri, the head of Iraq’s State Oil Marketing Organization, said his agency had warned the Koreans two weeks ago that it would halt exports by the end of this year as punishment. “We told them that we will stop the exports on Dec. 31 because of the deal signed with the Kurdish regional government,” Mr. Ameri said. “We have a friendship with them, and they have forces in Iraq. We would like to continue economic relations with South Korea, but they have to stop making deals with the Kurdish government.”
In Seoul, South Korea’s Parliament voted Friday to extend the deployment of the country’s 650 troops in Iraq for another year, amid protests outside the Parliament building.
Wisam A. Habeeb and Qais Mizher contributed reporting.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Ex-Guantanamo Inmate Released

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122801800.html
Ex-Guantanamo Inmate Released
David Hicks, Caught With Taliban in 2001, Is Freed in Australia
By Rohan Sullivan
Associated Press
Saturday, December 29, 2007; A14 [Australia] [former gitmo celebrity] [Australian Taliban of sorts] [deal struck between bush administration and former PM] [followup] [*****] [ditto]
ADELAIDE, Australia, Dec. 29 -- An Australian who became the first person convicted at a U.S. war crimes trial since World War II left prison Saturday, apologetic for "what he's supposed to have done and what people believe he's done," his father said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122801800.html
Ex-Guantanamo Inmate Released
David Hicks, Caught With Taliban in 2001, Is Freed in Australia
By Rohan Sullivan
Associated Press
Saturday, December 29, 2007; A14 [Australia] [former gitmo celebrity] [Australian Taliban of sorts] [deal struck between bush administration and former PM] [followup] [*****] [ditto]
ADELAIDE, Australia, Dec. 29 -- An Australian who became the first person convicted at a U.S. war crimes trial since World War II left prison Saturday, apologetic for "what he's supposed to have done and what people believe he's done," his father said.
David Hicks was captured fighting with the Taliban in Afghanistan in December 2001 and served more than five years at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. He pleaded guilty in March to providing material support to al-Qaeda and returned to Australia to serve out his sentence.
He was released in his home town of Adelaide but will face strict controls on his movement because he has been judged a security risk.
"He's looking forward to finally stepping out into the open," said Hicks's father, Terry, adding that his son wants to find a job so he can pay for university courses in environmental studies. "All he wants is to get out and try and get some sort of normality."
The 32-year-old former kangaroo skinner's long detention without trial at Guantanamo strained ties between the Bush administration and one of its closest allies in the fight against terrorism.
A U.S. military tribunal sentenced Hicks -- a Muslim convert who has since renounced the faith -- to seven years in prison in March after he confessed to aiding al-Qaeda during the U.S-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.
All but nine months of the sentence was suspended, and under a plea bargain Hicks was allowed to serve the remainder at a maximum-security prison in the state of South Australia. He was told to remain silent about any alleged abuse he suffered while in custody.
Under the deal, Hicks forfeited the right to appeal his conviction and agreed not to speak with news media for a year from his sentencing date.
In a statement released by his attorney, he thanked supporters including rights activists and anti-torture groups who helped get him out of Guantanamo Bay, and said he did not want to do "anything that might result in my return there."First and foremost, I would like to recognize the huge debt of gratitude that I owe the Australian public for getting me home," the statement continued. "I will not forget, or let you down."
Hicks's attorneys described their client as an immature adventurer who traveled to Afghanistan only after his application to enlist in the Australian army was rejected because of his lack of education.
In the months before his plea deal, his attorneys and family said Hicks was depressed and eager to leave Guantanamo, where he was isolated in a small, solid-walled cell.
His case became a cause for human rights campaigners in Australia and a political problem for then-Prime Minister John Howard, who was criticized for letting an Australian spend so long behind bars without trial.
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, who defeated Howard in November elections, was a strong critic of Hicks's treatment and the military tribunal system that convicted him, saying that it could not deliver justice and that the Guantanamo Bay prison should be closed.
But Rudd has not challenged the plea deal and said Friday that Hicks would have to comply with post-release restrictions ordered last week by a court at the request of Australian federal police.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

Australian Terrorism Detainee Leaves Prison

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/29/world/asia/29hicks.html
December 29, 2007
Australian Terrorism Detainee Leaves Prison
By RAYMOND BONNER [Australia] [former gitmo celebrity] [Australian Taliban of sorts] [deal struck between bush administration and former PM] [followup] [*****]
SYDNEY, Australia — David Hicks, the only person sentenced by the military commissions set up by the Bush administration to try suspected terrorists, walked out of prison in Australia on Saturday [******] morning after serving nine months for providing support to a terrorist organization.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/29/world/asia/29hicks.html
December 29, 2007
Australian Terrorism Detainee Leaves Prison
By RAYMOND BONNER [Australia] [former gitmo celebrity] [Australian Taliban of sorts] [deal struck between bush administration and former PM] [followup] [*****]
SYDNEY, Australia — David Hicks, the only person sentenced by the military commissions set up by the Bush administration to try suspected terrorists, walked out of prison in Australia on Saturday [******] morning after serving nine months for providing support to a terrorist organization.
Mr. Hicks, an Australian, had been detained at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, for more than five years before his appearance before the military commission in March. In a plea bargain he acknowledged that prosecutors had evidence to prove he had been a trainee for Al Qaeda who was prepared to fight Americans. [*******]
The deal allowed him to serve the remainder of his sentence in Australia. He also agreed not to speak to the news media for one year.
In a statement read by his lawyer, David McCleod, Mr. Hicks said that he would honor the gag order.
Mr. Hicks also thanked the politicians and organizations that had supported him. “I will not let you down,” the statement said. [********]
Mr. Hicks’s case has been highly politicized. After allowing Mr. Hicks to remain in detention for five years without any significant protest, Australia’s prime minister at the time, John Howard, came under domestic pressure to secure his release, or at least a trial. Mr. Howard made what was tantamount to such a demand on Vice President Dick Cheney when he came to Australia early this year. Formal charges and the plea bargain quickly followed. [******]
Although Mr. Hicks, now 32, is out of jail, he is subject to a “control order,” which the government has imposed under the country’s antiterrorism laws. He is limited to one e-mail account, one cellphone number and one land line, which must be registered with the police. He is also under a curfew between midnight and 6 a.m. and must report to the police three times a week.
It is the last condition that Mr. Hicks’s father, Terry Hicks, finds the most onerous. How is Mr. Hicks supposed to get a job, his father demanded in a telephone interview from Adelaide, “if he has to report to the police three times a week?”
The conditions have surprised many here who thought that the center-left Labor government under Kevin Rudd, which ousted Mr. Howard’s center-right Liberal government in an election last month, would take a less authoritarian line. [*****]
“It is wrong and inappropriate,” Brett Solomon, director of GetUp, an online activist organization that campaigned against Mr. Howard, said about the control order. Mr. Hicks had served the sentenced imposed by the military commission — which Mr. Solomon described as “flawed” — and the control orders had been imposed without any trial.
“No reasonable person could believe that David Hicks is a threat to national security,” he said in a telephone interview.
Australian intelligence and law enforcement officials have been divided over Mr. Hicks’s status. Senior officials in the country’s domestic intelligence agencies describe him as a committed terrorist. Law enforcement officials see him as a lost soul. [********]
The latter was also the view of American military prosecutors.
Mr. Hicks’s life pattern was certainly that of a young man with a wanderlust in search of a purpose. He was kicked out of high school, worked in the Australian outback as a kangaroo skinner, had two children with an Aboriginal woman, then went off to Japan to train horses in 2000.
While there, he was captivated by reports from Bosnia, and went off to join the Kosovo Liberation Army. The war ended before Mr. Hicks could engage in any combat. He went back to Adelaide, and tried to join the Australian Army, but was rejected. [******] On the spiritual side, he tried an evangelical Christian church, but found it wanting. He started going to a mosque.
Eventually, he went off to Pakistan, filled with romantic notions of riding the Silk Road on horseback, he told his parents. But still filled with a military desire, he joined Lashkar-e-Taiba, [******] the guerrilla group run by Pakistan intelligence for the war against India in the disputed territory of Kashmir.
He then made his way to Afghanistan, where Lashkar-e-Taiba had training camps in affiliation with Al Qaeda. After the United States began the war against the Taliban in October 2001, Mr. Hicks was captured by the Northern Alliance, which was fighting with the Americans against the Taliban, and was turned over to the United States military for a bounty of several thousand dollars. [*******]
In seeking the recent control order, the Australian government adopted the view that Mr. Hicks was a threat to national security. Among the evidence the government introduced were letters he had written to his parents when he was in Pakistan and Afghanistan. In them, Mr. Hicks speaks glowingly about Osama bin Laden, and he spouts anti-Semitic rhetoric. [***********]
Mr. Hicks’s defenders argue that the letters were written several years ago, that Mr. Hicks renounced his Islamic conversion when he was at Guantánamo and that almost from the moment of his capture, he cooperated with his American interrogators. [******]
Mr. Hicks’s father said that his son did not plan to challenge the control orders. “He’s just had enough,” his father said.
His son’s main goal, the father said, was to get into a university. He wants to study ecology, geology and zoology. “He’s determined,” Terry Hicks said.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Qaeda Network Expands Base in Pakistan

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/world/asia/30pakistan.html
December 30, 2007
Qaeda Network Expands Base in Pakistan
By CARLOTTA GALL [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [al Qaeda] [hydra] [Osama ibn Laden] [OBL] [another audio tape] [mark it] [in past years OBL released tapes either before or after a al Qaeda operation] [see 12-27-07 for prediction about attack against West] [*******]
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — The Qaeda network accused by Pakistan’s government of killing the opposition leader Benazir Bhutto is increasingly made up not of foreign fighters but of homegrown Pakistani militants bent on destabilizing the country, [*****] analysts and security officials here say. [ironically, Bush administration’s successful punitive response to 9/11 in Afghanistan has pushed al Qaeda and other jihadis into Pakistan] [now they have metastasized into Afhanistan’s and Pakistan’s tribal belts where Pakistan has become the new Afghanistan]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/world/asia/30pakistan.html
December 30, 2007
Qaeda Network Expands Base in Pakistan
By CARLOTTA GALL [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [al Qaeda] [hydra] [Osama ibn Laden] [OBL] [another audio tape] [mark it] [in past years OBL released tapes either before or after a al Qaeda operation] [see 12-27-07 for prediction about attack against West] [*******]
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — The Qaeda network accused by Pakistan’s government of killing the opposition leader Benazir Bhutto is increasingly made up not of foreign fighters but of homegrown Pakistani militants bent on destabilizing the country, [*****] analysts and security officials here say. [ironically, Bush administration’s successful punitive response to 9/11 in Afghanistan has pushed al Qaeda and other jihadis into Pakistan] [now they have metastasized into Afhanistan’s and Pakistan’s tribal belts where Pakistan has become the new Afghanistan]
In previous years Pakistani militants directed their energies against American and NATO forces in Afghanistan and avoided clashes with the Pakistani Army. But this year they have very clearly expanded their ranks and turned to a direct confrontation with the Pakistani security forces [******]while aiming at political figures like Ms. Bhutto, the former prime minister who died when a suicide bomb exploded as she left a political rally Thursday. [what does this auger for those inside internal security and military who sympathize?] [will they cross over all the way or be scared into supporting insitiutions] [******]
The expansion of Pakistan’s own militants and their increasing links with Al Qaeda is a shift deeply troubling to the United States, which has been trying to help stabilize this volatile nuclear-armed country [****] on the front line of the Bush administration’s fight against global terrorism. [Afghanistan has not nukes; it was much easier to attack; Pakistan is the world’s second most populous Muslim country] [********]
It is also one that Pakistan’s own government has been loath to admit, but which Ms. Bhutto had begun to acknowledge publicly in her many warnings that the greatest threat to her country lay in religious extremism and terrorism.
Since Ms. Bhutto’s death rioting has left at least 38 people dead and cost millions of dollars of damage to businesses, vehicles and government buildings. The local terrorist network that has raised new concern for Pakistan includes men like Baitullah Mehsud, the tribal militant named by the government as the mastermind behind the attack, and who now claims to have hundreds of suicide bombers ready to attack government and military targets.
On Saturday, through a spokesman, Mr. Mehsud denied he was responsible and dismissed the allegations as government propaganda. “Baitullah Mehsud is not involved in the killing of Benazir Bhutto,” the spokesman, Maulana Mohammed Umer, said in a phone call to The Associated Press from the tribal region of South Waziristan. “The fact is that we are only against America, and we don’t consider political leaders of Pakistan our enemy.”
One of Pakistan’s leading newspapers, The Daily Times, noted Saturday that such claims and denials are a common tactic used to obscure the origins of the militants’ attacks, and in particular to extend the myth that the bombings are the work of foreign elements, rather than by Pakistanis.
But Al Qaeda in Pakistan now comprises not just tribesmen from the border regions but also Punjabis and Urdu speakers and members of banned Pakistani sectarian groups and Sunni extremists groups, [*****] Najam Sethi, editor of The Daily Times, wrote in a front-page analysis. “Al Qaeda is now as much a Pakistani phenomenon as it is an Arab or foreign element,” [********] he wrote.
Since 2001, when Qaeda and Taliban forces fled the American intervention in Afghanistan and took refuge in Pakistan’s tribal area, the Pakistani militants have steadily grown in strength and boldness.
The tribal groups on the border have a long history of conflict with Pakistan’s central government, but today they have been bolstered and influenced by the foreigners among them. These include a small number of hard-core Arabs, including Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahri, [*******]Al Qaeda’s second in command, as well as a larger number of Uzbeks, Tartars and Tajiks, Pakistani security officials familiar with the region said.
The foreigners have brought an influx of money and fighting and explosives expertise, as well as ideology that includes religious proponents of such tactics as suicide bombing and beheading, which Afghans and Pakistanis have never used before, [*****] the security officials said. More and more these local tribes and foreign networks have overlapping operations and agendas.
“We have irrefutable evidence that Al Qaeda, its networks, and cohorts are trying to destabilize Pakistan which is in the forefront of the war against terrorism,” [******] said Brig. Javed Iqbal Cheema, the director of the National Crisis Management Cell, and main spokesman for the Interior Ministry.
“The country is facing the gravest challenge from these terrorists and extremist elements,” he said. “They are systematically targeting our state institutions in order to destabilize the country.” [grave challenge] [************]
He said Mr. Mehsud was of the “same brand of Al Qaeda and Taliban terrorists,” and was “behind most of the recent terrorist attacks that have taken place in Pakistan.”
Mr. Mehsud in fact is just one commander in that terrorist network, running one of an estimated five groups training and dispatching suicide bombers from Pakistan’s tribal areas, according to officials.
Another man known to be sending out suicide bombers is Qari Zafar, a militant from southern Punjab who was connected to the banned Sunni extremist group Sipa-e-Sahaba, and then Jaish-e-Muhammad, [******] a group originally formed to wage an insurgency in Kashmir but now is fighting the government.
Mr. Zafar escaped capture in Karachi and is now based in South Waziristan, where he runs training courses teaching insurgents how to rig roadside explosions and vests for suicide bombings, one former security official said.
But it is Mr. Mehsud who has emerged this year as the most visible proponent of Al Qaeda’s ambitions, [******]security officials said. Barely two years ago Mr. Mehsud was just an ordinary Pashtun tribesman who did not register on the radar screen of the intelligence services or government officials.
Mr. Mehsud, who is believed to be 32 years old, is a veteran of Afghanistan where he trained and fought with the Taliban against the main anti-Taliban force, the Northern Alliance, [*******]in the 1990s, according to one Pakistani intelligence official.
He became a follower of Abdullah Mehsud, the one-legged commander who was captured when fighting with the Taliban in 2001 in Afghanistan and detained by the United States at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. Abdullah Mehsud was later released and took up the fight against American forces in Afghanistan from his home base in South Waziristan.
Both men are from the Mehsud tribe of South Waziristan, a large warrior Pashtun tribe that is renowned for never being quelled by the British forces during years of fighting in the frontier in the last century. [********]
Abdullah Mehsud was killed in July when Pakistan forces surrounded him in a house in Zhob, a district south of the tribal areas in the province of Baluchistan. Since then, Baitullah Mehsud [****] has risen in importance.
He is believed to be responsible for some of the most spectacular and damaging attacks inside Pakistan in recent months, including larger and larger suicide attacks against sensitive army and intelligence targets as well as high-level politicians and leaders such as Ms. Bhutto. [*****]He has also been identified by officials in Afghanistan as one of the main sources of suicide bombers crossing the border to make attacks there.
After the bloody siege between armed militants and government forces at the Red Mosque in the capital, Islamabad, in July, the militant groups led by Mr. Mehsud have staged increasingly serious attacks in retaliation. [since the Red Mosque debacle in July] [***********]
A suicide bomber set off his explosives in the mess hall of the Special Services Group, killing at least 15 of the American-trained commandos in September. Two other bombers attacked buses of personnel from the Inter-Services Intelligence, Pakistan’s foremost intelligence agency.
Other suicide bombers attacked the army general headquarters and a bus full of children of air force personnel. There were two attacks on the former Interior Minister Aftab Ahmed Khan Sherpao, who has repeatedly advocated a tough line against the militants, and then two attacks on Ms. Bhutto. Both politicians had shown a readiness to work with Afghanistan’s president, Hamid Karzai, in fighting militancy, a stance that clearly riled militants who support the Taliban.
But Mr. Mehsud’s master strike came at the end of July when he captured nearly 300 soldiers who were escorting a supply convoy through the Mehsud tribal lands in Waziristan. He quickly beheaded three soldiers and demanded that the government withdraw from his area, [******]cease operations against militants and release some of his tribesmen who had been captured, including some convicted bombers.
It took the government two months of negotiations through tribal elders to win the release of the soldiers, and only on Nov. 3 did it secure the release of its men. As part of the deal the government handed over 25 of Mr. Mehsud’s men, among them some convicted terrorists, on the same day that President Musharraf imposed emergency rule on the premise that he needed the extra powers to move against terrorists.
Since then the government appears to have done little to move against Mr. Mehsud. He now heads Tehrik-i-Taliban, a newly formed coalition of Islamic militants committed to waging holy war against the Pakistani government, [*****] [Musharraf’s too-clever-by-half strategy of negotiating with them failed badly] [******] which it sees as an ally of the United States in its war on terror. The government has outlawed the group but not moved against it. The army has concentrated in recent weeks on clearing militants from the Swat valley, a region some distance from the tribal areas on the border.
One reason the government appears wary of going after him is the fear of the retaliatory attacks he can employ. The army has concentrated on clearing militants from Swat, a famous tourist spot where militants have taken control in recent months.
Pakistani officials who have worked in the tribal areas say that it is still possible to contain the threat of someone like Mr. Mehsud through tribal pressure, if he can be separated from the foreign fighters. [*****] One official familiar with the region described how a militant religious leader, Maulavi Noor Muhammad, was dealt with in the 1970s.
He was caught and imprisoned for 10 years, and the entire bazaar of Wana, the district capital of South Waziristan, was razed as collective punishment to the tribe, a measure instituted by the British in colonial times. The local scouts, a military force raised from the tribes, scoured the mountains to fight his supporters, and the movement was defeated.
“The only problem is these foreigners,” the official said. “You remove these foreigners and the rest is no problem.” [********]
Yet to remove the foreigners, namely a small number of Arab leaders, who are well protected and well hidden, from among the tribesmen is a task that Pakistan so far has failed to do and according to some may not be capable of. “That can only be done with an operation,” [*******]the official admitted.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Bin Laden Warns Against Iraq Unity Gov't

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/29/AR2007122900995.html
Bin Laden Warns Against Iraq Unity Gov't
The Associated Press
Saturday, December 29, 2007; 2:36 PM [al Qaeda] [hydra] [Osama ibn Laden] [OBL] [another audio tape] [mark it] [in past years OBL released tapes either before or after a al Qaeda operation] [lately that has not held] [never know when it could again become harbinger] [probably Pakistan] [probably As Sahhab] [**********]
CAIRO, Egypt -- Osama bin Laden warned Iraq's Sunni Arabs against joining tribal councils fighting al-Qaida or participating in any unity government, [****] in a new Internet audiotape on Saturday.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/29/AR2007122900995.html
Bin Laden Warns Against Iraq Unity Gov't
The Associated Press
Saturday, December 29, 2007; 2:36 PM [al Qaeda] [hydra] [Osama ibn Laden] [OBL] [another audio tape] [mark it] [in past years OBL released tapes either before or after a al Qaeda operation] [lately that has not held] [never know when it could again become harbinger] [probably Pakistan] [probably As Sahhab] [**********]
CAIRO, Egypt -- Osama bin Laden warned Iraq's Sunni Arabs against joining tribal councils fighting al-Qaida or participating in any unity government, [****] in a new Internet audiotape on Saturday.
"The most evil of the traitors are those who trade away their religion for the sake of their mortal life," bin Laden said in the tape.
He denounced Abdul-Sattar Abu Risha, the leader of the Anbar Awakening Council, a tribal force fighting al-Qaida in western Iraq, [assassinated couple months ago] [****] who was killed in a bombing in September.
Bin Laden said U.S. and Iraqi officials are seeking to set up a "national unity government" joining the country's Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds.
"Our duty is to foil these dangerous schemes, which try to prevent the establishment of an Islamic state in Iraq, which would be a wall of resistance against American schemes to divide Iraq," [******]he said.
© 2007 The Associated Press

December 28, 2007

Sorry, Charlie. This Is Michael Vickers's War.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/27/AR2007122702116.html
Sorry, Charlie. This Is Michael Vickers's War.
By Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 28, 2007; A19 [bush administration] [NSC principals?] [dod and pentagon] [prepraring contingency plans for the “long war” as the pentagon has taken to calling it] [new bureaucracy to watch] [*************] [individual too]
In the Pentagon's newly expanded Special Operations office, a suite of sterile gray cubicles on the "C" ring of the third floor, Assistant Secretary of Defense Michael G. Vickers is working to implement the U.S. military's highest-priority plan: a global campaign against terrorism that reaches far beyond Iraq and Afghanistan.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/27/AR2007122702116.html
Sorry, Charlie. This Is Michael Vickers's War.
By Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 28, 2007; A19 [bush administration] [NSC principals?] [dod and pentagon] [prepraring contingency plans for the “long war” as the pentagon has taken to calling it] [new bureaucracy to watch] [*************] [individual too]
In the Pentagon's newly expanded Special Operations office, a suite of sterile gray cubicles on the "C" ring of the third floor, Assistant Secretary of Defense Michael G. Vickers is working to implement the U.S. military's highest-priority plan: a global campaign against terrorism that reaches far beyond Iraq and Afghanistan.
The wide-ranging plan details the targeting of al-Qaeda-affiliated networks around the world and explores how the United States should retaliate in case of another major terrorist attack. The most critical aspect of the plan, Vickers said in a recent interview, involves U.S. Special Operations forces working through foreign partners to uproot and fight terrorist groups. [*************]
Vickers's job also spans the modernization of nuclear forces for deterrence and retaliation, and the retooling of conventional forces to combat terrorism -- a portfolio so expansive that he and some Pentagon officials once jokingly referred to his efforts as the "take-over-the-world plan," one official said.
Vickers, a former Green Beret and CIA operative, was the principal strategist for the biggest covert program in CIA history: the paramilitary operation that drove the Soviet army out of Afghanistan in the 1980s. The movie "Charlie Wilson's War," released last weekend, portrays Vickers in that role, in which he directed an insurgent force of 150,000 Afghan fighters and controlled an annual budget of more than $2 billion in current dollars. [**************]
Today, as the top Pentagon adviser on counterterrorism strategy, Vickers exudes the same assurance about defeating terrorist groups as he did as a 31-year-old CIA paramilitary officer assigned to Afghanistan, where he convinced superiors that with the right strategy and weapons, the ragtag Afghan insurgents could win. "I am just as confident or more confident we can prevail in the war on terror," Vickers, 54, said in a recent interview, looking cerebral behind thick glasses but with an energy and build reminiscent of the high school quarterback he once was. "Not a lot of people thought we could drive the Soviets out of Afghanistan."
Vickers joined the Pentagon in July to oversee the 54,000-strong Special Operations Command (Socom), based in Tampa, which is growing faster than any other part of the U.S. military. Socom's budget has doubled in recent years, to $6 billion for 2008, and the command is to add 13,000 troops to its ranks by 2011.
Senior Pentagon and military officials regard Vickers as a rarity -- a skilled strategist who is both creative and pragmatic. "He tends to think like a gangster," said Jim Thomas, a former senior defense planner who worked with Vickers. "He can understand trends then change the rules of the game so they are advantageous for your side."
Vickers's outlook was shaped in the CIA and Special Forces, which he joined off the street through a "direct enlistment" program in 1973. In the 10th Special Forces Group, he trained year-round for a guerrilla war against the Soviet Union. One scenario he prepared for: to parachute into enemy territory with a small nuclear weapon strapped to his leg, and then position it to halt the Red Army.
Vickers recalled that the nuclear devices did not seem that small, "particularly when you are in an aircraft with one of them or it is attached to your body." Was it a suicide mission? "I certainly hoped not," Vickers said.
An expert in martial arts, parachuting and weapons, and second in his class at Officer Candidate School, Vickers was also fluent in Czech and Spanish, which made him overqualified when he joined the CIA's paramilitary unit in 1983. Soon after, he received a citation for combat in Grenada.
But Vickers's greatest influence was in the clinically precise way he reassessed the potential of Afghan guerrilla forces and prescribed the right mix of weaponry to attack Soviet weaknesses. This brash plan to create a force of "techno-guerrillas" able to fight year-round called for exponentially more money, which through sheer force of logic Vickers was able to obtain.
Today Vickers's plan to build a global counterterrorist network is no less ambitious. The plan is focused on a list of 20 "high-priority" countries, with Pakistan posing a central preoccupation for Vickers, who said al-Qaeda sanctuaries in the country's western tribal areas are a serious threat to the United States. The list also includes Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, the Philippines, Yemen, Somalia and Iran, and Vickers hints that some European countries could be on it. Beyond that, the plan covers another 29 "priority" countries, as well as "other countries" that Vickers does not name.
"It's not just the Middle East. It's not just the developing world. It's not just nondemocratic countries -- it's a global problem," he said. "Threats can emanate from Denmark, the United Kingdom, you name it." [indeed] [it’s a truly transnational war on a huge scale though each node may be small] [************]
The plan deploys a variety of elite troops around the world, including about 80 to 90 12-man teams of Army Special Forces soldiers who are skilled in foreign languages and at working with indigenous forces. [****]Today, those forces are heavily concentrated in Iraq and Afghanistan, but as their numbers grow, they will increase their presence in other countries.
"The war on terror is fundamentally an indirect war. . . . It's a war of partners . . . but it also is a bit of the war in the shadows, either because of political sensitivity or the problem of finding terrorists," Vickers said. "That's why the Central Intelligence Agency is so important . . . and our Special Operations forces play a large role."
Vickers is pressing Congress to double "train and equip" funding from levels approved in recent years for the military. The funds, which total $325 million for fiscal 2007, allow the U.S. military and Special Operations forces to pay indigenous fighters and paramilitaries who work with them in gathering intelligence, hunting terrorists, fomenting guerrilla warfare or putting down an insurgency. [******]
The funds are "very important . . . so we can move rather rapidly to train and equip foreign security forces" and more will be needed, Vickers told senators at his confirmation hearing in July. "If you don't have close cooperation, you can't fight the war," he said later.
But while local forces can be far more effective in countering terrorism in their regions, creating the forces must be done carefully, said Thomas, the former defense planner. "The last thing we want to do is create a bunch of right-wing goon squads that go out and shoot jihadists with very little legitimacy."
Vickers is also arguing for billions of dollars in new technology: specialized stealthy aircraft able to fly over countries undetected, unmanned aerial vehicles and other equipment for distant and close-up surveillance, and technology to "tag" and "track" individuals and cars for long distances over time.
Finally, Vickers seeks authority for more flexible and rapid "detailing" that would allow Special Operations forces, in larger numbers, to be seconded to the CIA and allowed to work under agency rules.
"It's striking to see how quickly he moves through large amounts of information" and then gives guidance how to get things done, said Kalev Sepp, deputy assistant secretary of defense for special operations, who works under Vickers. "He knows the key players on Capitol Hill. . . . He understands what level of general officer has to be contacted to make decisions," Sepp said.
But with just over one year left in the Bush administration, Vickers is impatient with bureaucratic infighting within the military and between the Pentagon and other agencies, [*****] current and former officials said. One official noted that it took Socom about three years to write the counterterrorism plan, and two years for the administration to approve a classified "execute order" against al-Qaeda.
Vickers, who has advised President Bush on Iraq strategy, is convinced that more U.S. troops are not enough to solve the conflict in Iraq and that working with local forces is the best long-term strategy for both Iraq and Afghanistan.
"Its imperative that the Iraqis provide . . . security, so transitioning to an indirect approach is critical," he said. "The surge has been phenomenally effective . . . but not sufficient," he said, adding that he thinks that without political change the effects of the troop buildup "will dissipate."
Working with proxy forces will also enable the United States to extend and sustain its influence, something it failed to do in Afghanistan, he said. "After this great victory and after a million Afghans died, we basically exited that region and Afghanistan just spun into chaos," he said.
"It's imperative that we not do that again," he said.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

Salvaging U.S. Diplomacy Amid Division

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/asia/28policy.html
December 28, 2007
News Analysis
Salvaging U.S. Diplomacy Amid Division
By HELENE COOPER and STEVEN LEE MYERS [bush white house] [nsc principals and beyond] both dod and dos] [the problem of pegging U.S. foreign policy on one or even two—as the administration wisely recently urged with Bhutto—when what’s needed is a Pakistani policy] [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [12/27/2007 8:23:55 AM] [post-assasination analysis] [***]
WASHINGTON — The assassination of Benazir Bhutto on Thursday left in ruins the delicate diplomatic effort the Bush administration had pursued in the past year to reconcile Pakistan’s deeply divided political factions. Now it is scrambling to sort through ever more limited options, as American influence on Pakistan’s internal affairs continues to decline.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/asia/28policy.html
December 28, 2007
News Analysis
Salvaging U.S. Diplomacy Amid Division
By HELENE COOPER and STEVEN LEE MYERS [bush white house] [nsc principals and beyond] both dod and dos] [the problem of pegging U.S. foreign policy on one or even two—as the administration wisely recently urged with Bhutto—when what’s needed is a Pakistani policy] [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [12/27/2007 8:23:55 AM] [post-assasination analysis] [***]
WASHINGTON — The assassination of Benazir Bhutto on Thursday left in ruins the delicate diplomatic effort the Bush administration had pursued in the past year to reconcile Pakistan’s deeply divided political factions. Now it is scrambling to sort through ever more limited options, as American influence on Pakistan’s internal affairs continues to decline.
On Thursday, officials at the American Embassy in Islamabad reached out to members of the political party of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, according to a senior administration official. The very fact that officials are even talking to backers of Mr. Sharif, who they believe has too many ties to Islamists, suggests how hard it will be to find a partner the United States fully trusts.
The assassination highlighted, in spectacular fashion, the failure of two of President Bush’s main objectives in the region: his quest to bring democracy to the Muslim world, and his drive to force out the Islamist militants who have hung on tenaciously in Pakistan, the nuclear-armed state considered ground zero in President Bush’s fight against terrorism, despite the administration’s long-running effort to root out Al Qaeda from the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.
Administration officials say the United States still wants the Pakistani elections to proceed, either as scheduled on Jan. 8 or soon after. But several senior administration officials acknowledged that President Pervez Musharraf may decide to put off the elections if the already unstable political climate in Pakistan deteriorates further.
The administration official said American Embassy officials were trying to reach out to Pakistani political players across the board in the aftermath of the Bhutto assassination.
“Look, most of the people in Musharraf’s party came out of Nawaz’s party,” the official said, referring to Mr. Sharif and speaking on condition of anonymity because of diplomatic sensitivities. While he acknowledged that an alliance between Mr. Sharif and Mr. Musharraf was unlikely given the long enmity between the men, he added, “I wouldn’t predict anything in politics.”
Foreign policy analysts and diplomats said that if there were one thing that Ms. Bhutto’s assassination has made clear, it was the inability of the United States to manipulate the internal political affairs of Pakistan. Even before the assassination, the United States had limited influence and did not back Ms. Bhutto to the hilt.
“We are a player in the Pakistani political system,” said Wendy Chamberlin, a former United States ambassador to Pakistan, adding that as such, the United States was partly to blame for Mr. Musharraf’s dip in popularity. But, she added: “This is Pakistan. And Pakistan is a very dangerous and violent place.”
That said, Pakistan has never been more important for the United States than it is right now as it teeters on the edge of internal chaos. Bush administration officials have been trying mightily to balance the American insistence that Pakistan remain on the path to democracy and Mr. Musharraf’s unwillingness to risk unrest that would allow Al Qaeda and the Taliban to operate more freely, particularly with American and NATO troops next door in Afghanistan.
That is why the administration had been fighting so hard, amid skepticism from many of its allies, to broker an agreement in which the increasingly unpopular Mr. Musharraf would share power with Ms. Bhutto after presidential and parliamentary elections. American officials viewed the power-sharing proposal partly as a way to force Mr. Musharraf onto a democratic path, and partly to relieve the growing pressure for his ouster.
On the basis of that plan, Ms. Bhutto returned to Pakistan in October after eight years of self-imposed exile.
But the power-sharing deal never came to fruition, as the increasingly besieged Mr. Musharraf imposed a series of autocratic measures that left him politically weakened.
Administration officials continued to prod Ms. Bhutto toward an arranged marriage with Mr. Musharraf even during the emergency rule. Deputy Secretary of State John D. Negroponte traveled to Pakistan in November, and spoke by telephone to Ms. Bhutto while Mr. Musharraf had her under house arrest. With both sides balking at the power-sharing deal — an agreement one Bush official acknowledged was “like putting two pythons in the same cage” — Mr. Negroponte continued to push Ms. Bhutto to agree to the plan, according to members of Ms. Bhutto’s political party.
“I think it was insane,” said Teresita Schaffer, a Pakistan expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, of the proposed alliance. “I don’t think Musharraf ever wanted to share power.”
Until this week, Bush administration officials were still hoping that Mr. Musharraf and Ms. Bhutto would form an alliance between their political parties after Pakistan’s Jan. 8 elections, which would bring about as close to a pro-American governing coalition in Pakistan as the United States was likely to get.
The Bhutto assassination upends that plan, but Bush administration officials on Thursday had still not given up hope that Mr. Musharraf may be able to strike a ruling coalition with whoever becomes Ms. Bhutto’s successor in her Pakistan Peoples Party.
The problem with that scenario, though, is that Pakistani political parties are much more about strong, powerful individuals — like Mr. Musharraf, Ms. Bhutto, or Mr. Sharif — than about the parties themselves. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice telephoned Ms. Bhutto’s second-in-command, Makhdoom Amin Fahim, to offer sympathy, and she pledged to continue to support elections in Pakistan, administration officials said.
Mr. Bush’s continued strong support for Mr. Musharraf could further erode his already declining popular support, even if the administration still sees his leadership as the best guarantor of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal.
“The danger is the centrist elements of Pakistan will be so demoralized,” said Stephen P. Cohen, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. He criticized the administration for not nurturing Pakistan’s opposition for so long after Mr. Musharraf’s coup in 1999. He expressed hope that the United States could still urge moderate parties to ally themselves with Mr. Musharraf, forming a governing coalition, assuming that the elections go ahead.
“It should wake up anybody who thinks that Pakistan is a stable country and that we can deal only with Musharraf,” Mr. Cohen said of the assassination.
Ms. Schaffer and other Pakistan experts say the administration was making a mistake by viewing Mr. Sharif with suspicion. They said that he was a moderate who will work with the United States in the fight against terrorism, citing his cooperation with Clinton administration.
Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, was in Islamabad with Rep. Patrick J. Kennedy, Democrat of Rhode Island, on a scheduled trip and preparing to meet Ms. Bhutto at 9 p.m. Thursday when the news of the bombing broke. They watched the news in their hotel, with initial reports that she had escaped injury giving way to confirmation of her death.
“I think our foreign policy relied on her personality as a stabilizing force,” Mr. Specter told reporters by telephone.
“Now, without her, we have to regroup.”
Helene Cooper reported from Washington, and Steven Lee Myers from Crawford, Tex. David E. Sanger contributed reporting from Vermont and David Rohde from New York.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

U.S. Brokered Bhutto's Return to Pakistan

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/27/AR2007122701481.html
U.S. Brokered Bhutto's Return to Pakistan
White House Would Back Her as Prime Minister While Musharraf Held Presidency
By Robin Wright and Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, December 28, 2007; A01 [bush white house] [nsc principals and beyond] both dod and dos] [the problem of pegging U.S. foreign policy on one or even two—as the administration wisely recently urged with Bhutto—when what’s needed is a Pakistani policy] [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [12/27/2007 8:23:55 AM] [post-assasination analysis] [***]
For Benazir Bhutto, the decision to return to Pakistan was sealed during a telephone call from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice just a week before Bhutto flew home in October. The call culminated more than a year of secret diplomacy -- and came only when it became clear that the heir to Pakistan's most powerful political dynasty was the only one who could bail out Washington's key ally [******]in the battle against terrorism.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/27/AR2007122701481.html
U.S. Brokered Bhutto's Return to Pakistan
White House Would Back Her as Prime Minister While Musharraf Held Presidency
By Robin Wright and Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, December 28, 2007; A01 [bush white house] [nsc principals and beyond] both dod and dos] [the problem of pegging U.S. foreign policy on one or even two—as the administration wisely recently urged with Bhutto—when what’s needed is a Pakistani policy] [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [12/27/2007 8:23:55 AM] [post-assasination analysis] [***]
For Benazir Bhutto, the decision to return to Pakistan was sealed during a telephone call from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice just a week before Bhutto flew home in October. The call culminated more than a year of secret diplomacy -- and came only when it became clear that the heir to Pakistan's most powerful political dynasty was the only one who could bail out Washington's key ally [******]in the battle against terrorism.
It was a stunning turnaround for Bhutto, a former prime minister who was forced from power in 1996 amid corruption charges. She was suddenly visiting with top State Department officials, dining with U.N. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad and conferring with members of the National Security Council. As President Pervez Musharraf's political future began to unravel this year, Bhutto became the only politician who might help keep him in power. [*************]
"The U.S. came to understand that Bhutto was not a threat to stability, but was instead the only possible way that we could guarantee stability and keep the presidency of Musharraf intact," said Mark Siegel, who lobbied for Bhutto in Washington and witnessed much of the behind-the-scenes diplomacy.
But the diplomacy that ended abruptly with Bhutto's assassination yesterday was always an enormous gamble, [*****]according to current and former U.S. policymakers, intelligence officials and outside analysts. By entering into the legendary "Great Game" of South Asia, the United States also made its goals and allies more vulnerable -- in a country in which more than 70 percent of the population already looked unfavorably upon Washington. [********] [the US was already in the Great Game up to its eyeballs]
Bhutto's assassination leaves Pakistan's future -- and Musharraf's -- in doubt, some experts said. "U.S. policy is in tatters. The administration was relying on Benazir Bhutto's participation in elections to legitimate Musharraf's continued power as president," said Barnett R. Rubin of New York University. "Now Musharraf is finished."
Bhutto's assassination also demonstrates the growing power and reach of militant anti-government forces in Pakistan, which pose an existential threat to the country, said J. Alexander Thier, a former U.N. official now at the U.S. Institute for Peace. "The dangerous cocktail of forces of instability exist in Pakistan -- Talibanism, sectarianism, ethnic nationalism -- could react in dangerous and unexpected ways if things unravel further," he said.
But others insist the U.S.-orchestrated deal fundamentally altered Pakistani politics in ways that will be difficult to undo, even though Bhutto is gone. "Her return has helped crack open this political situation. It's now very fluid, which makes it uncomfortable and dangerous," said Isobel Coleman of the Council on Foreign Relations. "But the status quo before she returned was also dangerous from a U.S. perspective. Forcing some movement in the long run was in the U.S. interests."
Bhutto's assassination during a campaign stop in Rawalpindi might even work in favor of her Pakistan People's Party, with parliamentary elections due in less than two weeks, Coleman said. "From the U.S. perspective, the PPP is the best ally the U.S. has in terms of an institution in Pakistan."
Bhutto's political comeback was a long time in the works -- and uncertain for much of the past 18 months. In mid-2006, Bhutto and Musharraf started communicating through intermediaries about how they might cooperate. Assistant Secretary of State Richard A. Boucher was often an intermediary, traveling to Islamabad to speak with Musharraf and to Bhutto's homes in London and Dubai to meet with her.
Under U.S. urging, Bhutto and Musharraf met face to face in January and July in Dubai, according to U.S. officials. It was not a warm exchange, with Musharraf resisting a deal to drop corruption charges so she could return to Pakistan. He made no secret of his feelings.
In his 2006 autobiography "In the Line of Fire," Musharraf wrote that Bhutto had "twice been tried, been tested and failed, [and] had to be denied a third chance." She had not allowed her own party to become democratic, he alleged. "Benazir became her party's 'chairperson for life,' in the tradition of the old African dictators!"
A turning point was Bhutto's three-week U.S. visit in August, when she talked again to Boucher and to Khalilzad, an old friend. A former U.S. ambassador in neighboring Afghanistan, Khalilzad had long been skeptical about Musharraf, and while in Kabul he had disagreed with then-Secretary of State Colin L. Powell over whether the Pakistani leader was being helpful in the fight against the Taliban. He also warned that Pakistani intelligence was allowing the Taliban to regroup in the border areas, U.S. officials said.
When Bhutto returned to the United States in September, Khalilzad asked for a lift on her plane from New York to Aspen, Colo., where both were giving speeches. They spent much of the five-hour plane ride strategizing, said sources familiar with the diplomacy.
Friends say Bhutto asked for U.S. help. "She pitched the idea to the Bush administration," said Peter W. Galbraith, a former U.S. ambassador and friend of Bhutto from their days at Harvard. "She had been prime minister twice, and had not been able to accomplish very much because she did not have power over the most important institutions in Pakistan -- the ISI [intelligence agency], the military and the nuclear establishment," [*******] he said.
"Without controlling those, she couldn't pursue peace with India, go after extremists or transfer funds from the military to social programs," Galbraith said. "Cohabitation with Musharraf made sense because he had control over the three institutions that she never did. This was the one way to accomplish something and create a moderate center."
The turning point to get Musharraf on board was a September trip by Deputy Secretary of State John D. Negroponte to Islamabad. "He basically delivered a message to Musharraf that we would stand by him, but he needed a democratic facade on the government, and we thought Benazir was the right choice for that face," [*******]said Bruce Riedel, a former CIA officer and National Security Council staff member now at the Brookings Institution's Saban Center for Middle East Policy.
"Musharraf still detested her, and he came around reluctantly as he began to recognize this fall that his position was untenable," Riedel said. The Pakistani leader had two choices: Bhutto or former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, whom Musharraf had overthrown in a 1999 military coup. "Musharraf took what he thought was the lesser of two evils," Riedel said.
Many career foreign policy officials were skeptical of the U.S. plan. "There were many inside the administration, at the State and Defense Departments and in intelligence, who thought this was a bad idea from the beginning because the prospects that the two could work together to run the country effectively were nil," said Riedel.
As part of the deal, Bhutto's party agreed not to protest against Musharraf's reelection in September to his third term. In return, Musharraf agreed to lift the corruption charges against Bhutto. But Bhutto sought one particular guarantee -- that Washington would ensure Musharraf followed through on free and fair elections producing a civilian government.
Rice, who became engaged in the final stages of brokering a deal, called Bhutto in Dubai and pledged that Washington would see the process through, according to Siegel. A week later, on Oct. 18, Bhutto returned.
Ten weeks later, she was dead.
Xenia Dormandy, former National Security Council expert on South Asia now at Harvard University's Belfer Center, said U.S. meddling is not to blame for Bhutto's death. "It is very clear the United States encouraged" an agreement, she said, "but U.S. policy is in no way responsible for what happened. I don't think we could have played it differently."
U.S. policy -- and the commitment to Musharraf -- remains unchanged. In a statement yesterday, Rice appealed to Pakistanis to remain calm and to continue seeking to build a "moderate" democracy.
"I don't think it would do any justice to her memory to have an election postponed or canceled simply as a result of this tragic incident," State Department spokesman Tom Casey told reporters. "The only people that win through such a course of action are the people who perpetrated this attack."
Staff writer Thomas E. Ricks and staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

The Void Left Behind

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/27/AR2007122701521.html
The Void Left Behind
By Ahmed Rashid
Friday, December 28, 2007; A21 [oped] [Bhutto assassination yesterday] [implications]
LAHORE, Pakistan -- The assassination of Benazir Bhutto has left a huge political vacuum at the heart of this nuclear-armed state, which appears to be slipping into an abyss of violence and Islamic extremism. The question of what happens next is almost impossible to answer, especially at a moment when Bhutto herself seemed to be the only answer.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/27/AR2007122701521.html
The Void Left Behind
By Ahmed Rashid
Friday, December 28, 2007; A21 [oped] [Bhutto assassination yesterday] [implications]
LAHORE, Pakistan -- The assassination of Benazir Bhutto has left a huge political vacuum at the heart of this nuclear-armed state, which appears to be slipping into an abyss of violence and Islamic extremism. The question of what happens next is almost impossible to answer, especially at a moment when Bhutto herself seemed to be the only answer.
Pakistanis are in shock. Many are numb, and others are filled with unimaginable grief. Thousands have taken to the streets, burning vehicles and attacking police stations in an explosion of violence against the government. Bhutto's death yesterday will almost certainly lead to the cancellation of the Jan. 8 parliamentary elections (already, the nation's second-largest opposition party has called for a boycott if the vote is held) and the possible imposition of extraordinary measures by the military -- another state of emergency or even martial law. President Pervez Musharraf's own political future has never been less certain.
Bhutto's death leaves the largest possible vacuum at the core of Pakistan's shaky and blood-stained political system. Twice elected prime minister in the 1990s, twice dismissed on charges of corruption and incompetence by the military, Bhutto was a giant of a politician in a land of political pygmies and acolytes of the military.
Benazir Bhutto and her Pakistan People's Party were the closest anyone in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan has ever gotten to espousing a secular, democratic political culture. [****] In a country where political advances have been made recently only by the Taliban, the role Bhutto filled, trying to bring modernity to this nation of 165 million people, was immensely brave and absolutely necessary if Pakistan is to remain in the polity of nations. Whatever her shortcomings, she loved her country and gave her life for it.
She and her party commanded the die-hard loyalty of at least one-third of the electorate. Her supporters were vehemently against army rule and Islamic extremism. [************]
In recent weeks, she had publicly taken on the Taliban extremists -- something Musharraf has not dared to do, despite all his bluster [****]and bonhomie with President Bush since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. With Bhutto gone, there is no one who can play such a role.
Her longest-running battle was not with the extremists but with the army, whose leaders never trusted her. She was too secular, too worldly and perhaps too wise. Bhutto was killed leaving a political rally in Rawalpindi, just two miles from where her father, prime minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, was hanged by another military dictator 30 years ago. The tragedy of the Bhutto family -- her brothers also were killed, one poisoned, one shot, and her husband spent seven years in prison -- has become part of the saga and struggle by Pakistanis to create a viable democratic, modern state.
Yesterday, her party's stalwarts were on the streets, accusing Musharraf and the military of perpetrating the latest murder of a Bhutto. That is extremely unlikely, not least because last night the government itself was in despair.
The attack -- a gunman cut her down before a suicide-bomb explosion blew up her vehicle, early reports suggest -- bore the hallmarks of training by the al-Qaeda terrorists ensconced in northwest Pakistan. [*******]
Her death only exacerbates the problems Pakistan has been grappling with for the past few months: how to find a modicum of political stability through a representative government that the army can accept and will not work to undermine, and how to tackle the extremism spreading in the country.
If the elections are canceled, it is imperative that Musharraf drop his single-minded desire for power and establish a national government made up of all the country's leading politicians and parties. [********]Together, they may agree on how to conduct an orderly election while trying to beat back the specter of extremism that is haunting this benighted land. But Musharraf may not survive the fallout of Bhutto's death. His actions have not been honorable, and none of the political opposition is willing to sit down with him. It is unlikely that they will accept Musharraf's continued presidency.
If rioting and political mayhem worsen, if the opposition refuses to cooperate with Musharraf and the United States finally begins to distance itself from him, then the army may be forced to tell Musharraf to call it a day. If that happens, it will be even more urgent that the world support a national government, elections and a speedy return to civilian rule -- and not another military dictatorship. [*********]
Ahmed Rashid, a Pakistani journalist, is the author of "Taliban" and "Jihad: The Rise of Militant Islam in Central Asia."
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

Assassination in Pakistan

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/27/AR2007122702074.html
Assassination in Pakistan
The murder of Benazir Bhutto demands quick action to stabilize the country.
Friday, December 28, 2007; A20 [editorial] [Bhutto assassination yesterday] [implications]
IT IS not known who murdered Benazir Bhutto yesterday, but al-Qaeda and its Islamic extremist allies had by far the most to gain from her death. A graduate of Harvard and Oxford who was twice elected Pakistan's prime minister, Ms. Bhutto was the most powerful advocate of secular democracy in her country; she had the courage to confront both Islamic militants and the autocratic government of President Pervez Musharraf. Though her political record was far from unblemished -- charges of corruption during her time in office appeared well founded -- her return to Pakistan in October and her decision to vigorously contest parliamentary elections scheduled for Jan. 8 offered the hope that Pakistan's moderate forces could shore up the faltering political system by democratic means and then take on the extremists.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/27/AR2007122702074.html
Assassination in Pakistan
The murder of Benazir Bhutto demands quick action to stabilize the country.
Friday, December 28, 2007; A20 [editorial] [Bhutto assassination yesterday] [implications]
IT IS not known who murdered Benazir Bhutto yesterday, but al-Qaeda and its Islamic extremist allies had by far the most to gain from her death. A graduate of Harvard and Oxford who was twice elected Pakistan's prime minister, Ms. Bhutto was the most powerful advocate of secular democracy in her country; she had the courage to confront both Islamic militants and the autocratic government of President Pervez Musharraf. Though her political record was far from unblemished -- charges of corruption during her time in office appeared well founded -- her return to Pakistan in October and her decision to vigorously contest parliamentary elections scheduled for Jan. 8 offered the hope that Pakistan's moderate forces could shore up the faltering political system by democratic means and then take on the extremists.
Her tragic death may open the way to violence and political chaos that could be exploited by al-Qaeda and the Taliban, unless Mr. Musharraf and the country's surviving moderate forces act quickly and wisely. The odds that they will do so are not good. Mr. Musharraf, who only 12 days ago lifted a state of emergency he imposed to ensure his continuance in power, has been at war with the country's political parties, judiciary, media and human rights advocates. His instinct, as his advisers were already hinting yesterday, will be to call off the elections, which he scheduled only under pressure from the Bush administration. For his part, Nawaz Sharif, another former prime minister whose party was running second in pre-election polls to that of Ms. Bhutto, quickly announced yesterday that he would boycott the vote and called on Mr. Musharraf to resign -- in what looked like an irresponsible attempt to take advantage of the outburst of anti-government feeling sparked by the assassination.
With a vital stake in preserving the stability of a country that harbors both a nuclear arsenal and the top leaders of al-Qaeda and the Taliban, the United States must urgently press Mr. Musharraf, Mr. Sharif, and other key Pakistani actors to take steps that will alleviate rather than further inflame the situation. Perhaps most urgent is the capture of those who committed the murder and a full and credible investigation. In the absence of such a clear accounting, conspiracy theories blaming Mr. Musharraf or the military for Ms. Bhutto's death will probably proliferate, to the further benefit of the Islamists. The FBI has worked successfully in Pakistan before, and Ms. Bhutto asked for its help following an earlier assassination attempt against her; the Bush administration should consider whether U.S. investigators could help provide clarity about yesterday's events.
Mr. Musharraf should be restrained from another imposition of martial law, which would again set him at odds with Pakistan's media and civil society but do little to stop al-Qaeda. At the same time, the Bush administration should follow up aggressively on the president's suggestion that Pakistan "honor Benazir Bhutto's memory by continuing with the democratic process for which she so bravely gave her life." Elections -- held on Jan. 8 or soon afterward -- and a restored democracy remain the best way for the centrist majority in Pakistan to rally against the forces of extremism that yesterday realized a great, though despicable, victory. [yes, that is clearly in Pakistan’s and the world’s short-tomeduium term interests] [but ensuring the command and control of nukes must be first] [**************]
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

After Benazir Bhutto

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/opinion/28fri1.html
December 28, 2007
Editorial
After Benazir Bhutto
[editorial] [Bhutto assassination yesterday] [implications]
Benazir Bhutto was a flawed and undeniably courageous leader. Her return to Pakistan two months ago raised hopes that her country might find its way toward democracy and stability. Her assassination on Thursday is yet one more horrifying reminder of how far Pakistan is from both — and how close it is to the brink. [*****]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/opinion/28fri1.html
December 28, 2007
Editorial
After Benazir Bhutto
[editorial] [Bhutto assassination yesterday] [implications]
Benazir Bhutto was a flawed and undeniably courageous leader. Her return to Pakistan two months ago raised hopes that her country might find its way toward democracy and stability. Her assassination on Thursday is yet one more horrifying reminder of how far Pakistan is from both — and how close it is to the brink. [*****]
Ms. Bhutto’s death leaves the Bush administration with no visible strategy for extricating Pakistan from its crisis or rooting out Al Qaeda and the Taliban, which have made the country their most important rear base. [*********]
Betting America’s security (and Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal) on an unaccountable dictator, President Pervez Musharraf, did not work. Betting it on a back-room alliance between that dictator and Ms. Bhutto, who had hoped to win a third try as prime minister next month, is no longer possible. [the administration can’t be blamed for trying] [had they not everyone would be saying the did nothing] [on the other hand, the administration has for far-too long had a Musharraf policy rather than a Pakistan policy!] [******]
That leaves Mr. Bush with the principled, if unfamiliar, option of using American prestige and resources to fortify Pakistan’s badly battered democratic institutions. There is no time to waste.
With next month’s parliamentary elections already scrambled, Washington must now call for new rules to assure a truly democratic vote.
That means a relatively brief delay to allow Ms. Bhutto’s party, probably the country’s largest, to choose a new candidate for prime minister and mount an abbreviated campaign. Washington must also demand that Pakistan’s other main opposition leader, Nawaz Sharif, be allowed to run. And it must insist that Mr. Musharraf reinstate the impartial Supreme Court judges he fired last month in order to block them from overturning his rigged election.
Mr. Musharraf is stubborn. Washington will need to send the same message to Pakistan’s military leaders, perhaps the ex-general’s only remaining backers. [as I suggested elsewhere in today’s comments, surely the U.S. had good contact in the military and ISI as uncle Sam has paid their bills since 2001] [******]
Ms. Bhutto and her father and political mentor, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, were democratic, but imperfect political leaders — imperious, indifferent to human rights and, in her case, tainted by serious charges of corruption. The father was deposed by a military coup and then hanged. The daughter was twice elected and twice deposed. But both had one undeniable asset: electoral legitimacy — legitimacy that the generals and the Islamic extremists could only seek to destroy or, in Mr. Musharraf’s case, hope to borrow.
The Bush administration has to rethink more than just its unhealthy and destructive enabling of Mr. Musharraf. It also must take a hard look at the billions it is funneling to Pakistan’s military. That money is supposed to finance the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban. As a report in The Times on Monday showed, Washington hasn’t kept a close watch, and much of it has gone to projects that interested Mr. Musharraf and the Pakistani Army more, like building weapons systems aimed at America’s ally, India. Meanwhile, Al Qaeda and the Taliban continued, and continue, to make alarming gains.
The United States cannot afford to have Pakistan unravel any further. The lesson of the last six years is that authoritarian leaders — even ones backed with billions in American aid — don’t make reliable allies, and they can’t guarantee security.
American policy must now be directed at building a strong democracy in Pakistan that has the respect and the support of its own citizens and the will and the means to fight Al Qaeda and the Taliban. [******] Pakistan is a nation of 165 million people. The days of Washington mortgaging its interests there to one or two individuals must finally come to an end. [hear, hear]
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Kenyans Vote in Test of Democracy

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/africa/28kenya.html
December 28, 2007
Kenyans Vote in Test of Democracy
By JEFFREY GETTLEMAN [Africa] [proximity to horn and Arabian Peninsula] [Kenya where Somalis have fled] [Kenya has been working with US, so it would appear, in gsave] [sharing intelligence with Africa Command in Djibouti] [democratization] [********]
NAIROBI, Kenya — The lines started at dawn on Thursday and some were literally miles long.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/africa/28kenya.html
December 28, 2007
Kenyans Vote in Test of Democracy
By JEFFREY GETTLEMAN [Africa] [proximity to horn and Arabian Peninsula] [Kenya where Somalis have fled] [Kenya has been working with US, so it would appear, in gsave] [sharing intelligence with Africa Command in Djibouti] [democratization] [********]
NAIROBI, Kenya — The lines started at dawn on Thursday and some were literally miles long.
Millions of Kenyans waited in the muggy darkness for the polls to open and for a chance to scratch their X’s in a presidential election that is predicted to be the tightest race in the country’s history — and perhaps the greatest test yet of Kenya’s young, multiparty democracy.
The contest pits the incumbent, Mwai Kibaki, a man who has a reputation as a courtly gentleman and economics whiz but also as a tribal politician, against Raila Odinga, a rich, flamboyant businessman who rides around in a bright red $100,000 Hummer and is running as a champion of the poor.
The polling places were packed with young women carrying babies on their backs, students chatting on cellphones, wrinkled old men teetering on canes and muscled young men smelling as if they had just tumbled out of a bar. Security was tight. Truckloads of helmeted soldiers prowled the slums. Policemen swung canes to beat back throngs of voters trying to squeeze into voting booths.
“We want change!” yelled Abdi Mubarak, who works in a mosque and who said he voted for Mr. Odinga.
That change may come. Though official results are not expected to be released until Friday, most polls in the past several months forecast that Mr. Odinga would win the popular vote, and the heavy turnout on Thursday was said to work in his favor. It seems that he has tapped into frustrations percolating for some time in Kenya, which enjoys one of the strongest and most stable economies in Africa but suffers from deep tribal divisions. Mr. Odinga has built a coalition of the Luo, the Luhya, the Masai, the Somali and many other tribes who say they feel that the Kikuyu, Kenya’s biggest tribe, accounting for a quarter of the population, has been politically dominant for too long.
On Thursday, this played out behind the cardboard booths where voters hunched over their ballots. Of more than a dozen people interviewed, not one crossed tribal lines when voting. Mr. Odinga, 62, is a Luo. Mr. Kibaki, 76, is a Kikuyu. And the third notable politician in the presidential race, Kalonzo Musyoka, 54, is a Kamba.
“I’m for the president,” said David Ndagwa, a stocky vendor of vegetables who said he was a Kikuyu. “He’s brought progress.”
Tribes aside, there are other issues in this race. Mr. Odinga wants to devolve power from the center of the country and grant Kenya’s rural areas more autonomy. Mr. Kibaki has been running strong on education and has already delivered on his promise of free primary school education for all Kenyans. Mr. Musyoka is a former foreign minister and has said he is the one to expand Kenya’s links to the wider world. He has run a distant third in polls.
However, Kenyan law necessitates that to become president, a candidate must win a seat in Parliament and secure at least 25 percent of the votes in five out of eight of the country’s provinces. This electoral fine print may mean that even if there is a clear winner in the popular vote, there could be a runoff.
The president’s party has been trying to block Mr. Odinga from winning the presidency by backing candidates in Mr. Odinga’s parliamentary district, which includes Kibera, a sprawling shantytown on the outskirts of Nairobi that is known as Africa’s largest slum. At the same time, Mr. Kibaki’s support is concentrated in a few provinces, and there is a real chance he may not clear the five-out-of-eight hurdle. Either situation could produce an inconclusive election result and turbulence.
There are more than 14 million registered voters in Kenya and election officials said the turnout on Thursday seemed substantially higher than the 57 percent in the last presidential race, in 2002. Voters on Thursday also chose members of Parliament and local government officials.
There were some problems, though. Many polling places did not open on time and as a result voters waited in line for hours — without moving. Many people also complained that voter lists were incomplete. Mr. Odinga said that even he could not find his name on the roster in Kibera when he tried to vote in the morning. But after he complained to election officials, he was allowed to cast a vote, along with others who produced valid identification. Mr. Odinga stepped from the voting booth into a sea of cheering fans.
Election observers said that although many polling places were a bit chaotic, the vote seemed to be free and fair.
“We haven’t seen any corruption,” said Rhoda Mackenzi, a Kenyan observer. “And we’ve been looking, for sure.”
Michael E. Ranneberger, the American ambassador to Kenya, seemed pleased.
“The process has not been without its difficulties,” he said, “but over all, when you look at various factors, it has gone well.”
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Russia Denies Iran Missile Plan

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Russia-Iran-Missiles.html
December 28, 2007
Russia Denies Iran Missile Plan
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 4:02 a.m. ET [Iran] wmd] [missiles to deliver wmd] [reportedly relatively sophisticated] [based on Russia scuds and others] [president Putin’s steady march toward returning Russia’s / Soviet’s superpower past] [as so often in Russia’s history, another reminder of Russia’s backward looking progress] [followup] [Czar Putin’s learch backward appears to be accelerating]
MOSCOW (AP) -- The federal agency overseeing Russia's military exports on Friday denied reports that the country is planning to deliver a powerful new anti-aircraft missile system to Iran. [********]
Iran's defense minister had said earlier this week that Russia was preparing to equip Iran with the S-300 missile system, which would dramatically increase the country's ability to repel an attack.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Russia-Iran-Missiles.html
December 28, 2007
Russia Denies Iran Missile Plan
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 4:02 a.m. ET [Iran] wmd] [missiles to deliver wmd] [reportedly relatively sophisticated] [based on Russia scuds and others] [president Putin’s steady march toward returning Russia’s / Soviet’s superpower past] [as so often in Russia’s history, another reminder of Russia’s backward looking progress] [followup] [Czar Putin’s learch backward appears to be accelerating]
MOSCOW (AP) -- The federal agency overseeing Russia's military exports on Friday denied reports that the country is planning to deliver a powerful new anti-aircraft missile system to Iran. [********]
Iran's defense minister had said earlier this week that Russia was preparing to equip Iran with the S-300 missile system, which would dramatically increase the country's ability to repel an attack.
But Russia's Federal Military-Technical Cooperation Service denied the claim in a brief statement.
''The question of deliveries of S-300 systems to Iran, which has now arisen in the mass media, is not currently taking place, is not being considered and is not being discussed at this time with the Iranian side,'' said the agency, known by its Russian initials, FSVTS.
The system is capable of shooting down aircraft, cruise missiles and ballistic missile warheads at ranges of over 90 miles and at altitudes of about 90,000 feet. Russian military officials boast that its capabilities outstrip the U.S. Patriot missile system. [***]
The S-300 is an improvement over the Tor-M1 air defense missile system. Russia delivered 29 Tor-M1s to Iran this year under a $700 million contract signed in December 2005. Iranian media reports have claimed the improved missile systems could inflict significant damage on U.S. or Israeli forces, were they to attack Iran.
The United States had said in the past that it would not rule out military action as a way to halt Iran's nuclear enrichment, claiming it was using the nuclear program as cover for weapons development. But earlier this month, Washington reversed course, concluding in an intelligence assessment that Iran stopped direct work on creating nuclear arms in 2003 and that the program remained frozen through at least the middle of this year.
Russia has provided Iran with submarines and military planes in recent decades.
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press

Israeli and Palestinian Leaders Meet to Ease Tensions

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/middleeast/28israel.html
December 28, 2007
Israeli and Palestinian Leaders Meet to Ease Tensions
By STEVEN ERLANGER [Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [followup] [the usual tit-for-tat violence endemic] [the Israelis should reopen crossings if Abbas can control the target practice only] [the role of spoilers] [*****]
JERUSALEM — The Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, and the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, met here on Thursday to try to dispel the tensions of recent days, and they recommitted themselves to refrain from acts that would prejudice a final peace treaty while they try to negotiate one, officials from both sides said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/middleeast/28israel.html
December 28, 2007
Israeli and Palestinian Leaders Meet to Ease Tensions
By STEVEN ERLANGER [Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [followup] [the usual tit-for-tat violence endemic] [the Israelis should reopen crossings if Abbas can control the target practice only] [the role of spoilers] [*****]
JERUSALEM — The Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, and the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, met here on Thursday to try to dispel the tensions of recent days, and they recommitted themselves to refrain from acts that would prejudice a final peace treaty while they try to negotiate one, officials from both sides said.
This was the first meeting of the two men since the Middle East conference convened by the United States in Annapolis, Md., a month ago, when they agreed to try to negotiate a final peace settlement before the end of 2008. Their negotiating teams had met twice since then, but both times fruitlessly, as mutual grievances were aired.
Mr. Abbas and Mr. Olmert get along well, their aides say, and Thursday’s meeting in Mr. Olmert’s official residence here was described as cordial and positive. The two men met with their three lead negotiators for an hour, then met alone for another hour, but little of substance emerged regarding the task before the two sides.
Instead, they seemed to want to provide a sense of momentum before President Bush arrives for his first presidential visit to Israel and the Palestinian territories, expected on Jan. 9.
Mr. Bush is said by officials to have planned a meeting with Mr. Olmert in Jerusalem and then a meeting afterward with Mr. Abbas in Jericho, and both men want to have something positive to report, their aides say.
The lead Palestinian negotiator, Ahmed Qurei, said the two sides agreed Thursday “to start our negotiations next week,” when they would talk about “forming committees and the structure” of the talks.
“We are going to start in a serious way,” he said in an interview. “Both sides proved that they want to proceed forward.”
The period before this meeting was dominated by Palestinian accusations that Israel was violating its commitments to freeze the growth of settlements on occupied land. In recent days, Israel announced a tender for about 300 new apartments in Har Homa, a Jerusalem suburb built on land annexed by Israel after the 1967 war, when it unilaterally increased the size of Jerusalem to take in West Bank villages.
The Israelis regard Har Homa as part of Jerusalem and not a settlement, while the Palestinians and much of the world regard it as a settlement; the annexation of East Jerusalem and lands expanding the city have not been accepted internationally in the absence of a peace treaty. [***]
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice publicly criticized the Har Homa announcement, which was apparently not approved in advance by Mr. Olmert. Israeli officials said Ms. Rice had called both leaders to urge them to start to make progress.
Mr. Abbas asked her to “encourage Israel to freeze its settlement policy, which is an obstacle on the path to peace negotiations,” said his spokesman, Nabil Abu Rudeineh.
In the meeting, Mr. Olmert reconfirmed the Israeli position that there would be no new settlements, no new expropriation of land and no new settlement activity outside the built-up areas of existing settlements that Israel intends to keep in any final deal. He made no promises on Har Homa, his aides said, but he reassured Mr. Abbas about Israel’s “good will.”
The Palestinians interpret a settlement freeze to mean a freeze on all financing, building and expansion of settlements beyond Israel’s 1967 boundaries.
The Americans are supposed to judge whether both sides meet their commitments under the first stage of the dormant “road map” for peace, agreed upon in 2003. Carrying out the first stage is supposed to be a process parallel to the talks. But no judging mechanism has been established.
Mr. Qurei said that both sides agreed Thursday that “the Americans should take their responsibility as a judge of the obligations under the road map, and Israel will take some procedures to remove the obstacles.”
Asked if Israel had agreed to remove some of the outposts it regarded as illegal, he refused to be more specific, but an Israeli official said Mr. Olmert promised Mr. Abbas to take some actions to show that the path of negotiation would bring “tangible results.”
Under the first stage of the road map, the Palestinians are supposed to begin to dismantle the infrastructure of terrorism by working to disband terrorist and militant groups outside the official security forces. Israel says the Palestinians have done little to meet their commitments, while Israel has not yet disbanded the illegal outposts it had promised Mr. Bush would be gone before the previous Israeli elections.
Israel has interpreted the Palestinians’ earlier refusals to negotiate because of Har Homa as an essentially rhetorical crisis intended to push Washington to intervene to move the talks along, an Israeli government official said on condition of anonymity. But so long as the Islamic faction Hamas controls Gaza, and Mr. Abbas does not, the official said, the “negotiations are virtual.”
In a statement, Mr. Olmert’s spokesman, Mark Regev, said that the two sides “reiterated their commitment to move forward on all the difficult and sensitive issues.” They also “reiterated their commitments to all their obligations under the road map and committed themselves to a continuation of a good faith, serious and continuous dialogue,” Mr. Regev said.
In Gaza on Thursday, seven Palestinian militants were killed by Israel in four episodes, Palestinian medics said. Palestinians said five of the dead were members of Islamic Jihad and two were from Hamas. At least 16 other Palestinians were said to have been wounded.
An Israeli Army spokesman said that ground forces on a “routine operation” inside Gaza shot at militants who had fired a rocket-propelled grenade at a military vehicle. The air force fired at a fourth man who was involved, the spokesman said. Later, he said, Israeli forces fired rockets at two cars loaded with explosives and at a group of gunmen near Khan Yunis.
One of the dead was Muhammad Abdullah, a senior commander of Islamic Jihad in Gaza. In the West Bank, Israeli forces killed a former security force member who fled as they tried to arrest him at his house.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Familiar Threats Constrict Press Freedom in Algeria

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/africa/28algeria.html
December 28, 2007
Familiar Threats Constrict Press Freedom in Algeria
By KATRIN BENNHOLD and SOUAD MEKHENNET [Algeria] [Africa] [northern Maghreb] [recruitment of jihadis for global-jihadis hydra] [democratization or lack thereof] [Maghreb: Arabic for the region of North Africa stretching from Libya to Mauritania] [**********]
ALGIERS — At the height of Algeria’s civil war in the 1990s, Chawki Amari never slept in the same apartment two nights in a row. Like many journalists, he was caught between Islamic militants who threatened to take his life and a military-backed government that threatened to take his freedom. [*******]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/africa/28algeria.html
December 28, 2007
Familiar Threats Constrict Press Freedom in Algeria
By KATRIN BENNHOLD and SOUAD MEKHENNET [Algeria] [Africa] [northern Maghreb] [recruitment of jihadis for global-jihadis hydra] [democratization or lack thereof] [Maghreb: Arabic for the region of North Africa stretching from Libya to Mauritania] [**********]
ALGIERS — At the height of Algeria’s civil war in the 1990s, Chawki Amari never slept in the same apartment two nights in a row. Like many journalists, he was caught between Islamic militants who threatened to take his life and a military-backed government that threatened to take his freedom. [*******]
These days, Mr. Amari, one of Algeria’s best-known commentators and cartoonists, is under pressure once again. In May, a court sentenced him to two months in prison for defamation, his first prison sentence in more than a decade. [*****] In the months since, several editors at prominent newspapers say, they have received faxes, e-mail messages and letters signed by Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, North Africa’s most active militant group, vowing to attack journalists once again. [********]
The situation today remains far different from life during the country’s civil war, which erupted in early 1992 after the military intervened to cancel the second round of the country’s first free parliamentary elections because an Islamist party was expected to win. The government eventually ushered in a tense peace and even a fragile national reconciliation. But the political structure remains under tight control, with little opportunity for people to register dissent.
Media freedom has proved a good barometer for the fragile space between the state and the Islamists, and dozens of people from different backgrounds indicated in conversations in recent days that this space is shrinking. The surge in threats against journalists has coincided with popular discontent over a proposal to allow President Abdelaziz Bouteflika to run for a third term in 2009.
Journalists in Algeria still have more freedom than their counterparts in most Arab countries, thanks to the constitutional changes that in 1989 paved the way for parliamentary elections in December 1991. But, said Ahmed Fattani, a founder of two newspapers who now runs another daily, L’Expression, most newspaper advertising comes from state enterprises. And many journalists depended on the government for protection in the 1990s and increasingly do so today, if on a lesser scale.
Nobody can be certain of the origin of the recent threats and no journalists have been killed since the 1990s, when more than 70 were killed and many more fled the country, [****] according to the Algerian chapter of the International Federation of Journalists. In that era, car bombs exploded nearly every week, intellectuals and women not conforming to Islamic traditions received death threats and as many as 200,000 people were killed.
But after six suicide bombings this year — the most recent two on Dec. 11 — some political analysts say they are worried.
“The climate today recalls, in several ways, that of the early 1990s,” Ali Bahmane, a colleague of Mr. Amari’s at El Watan, an independent newspaper, wrote in a recent editorial. “Fear and anxiety are again taking root in the country with the return of mass killings.”
Some Algerians are beginning to ask whether repression is the best way to ward off Islamic theocracy. [*******]
Mouloud Hamrouche, a former prime minister who had warned against canceling the second round of parliamentary elections in January 1992, said in an interview: “If we don’t democratize, there will be more terrorism or a general revolution. It’s only a question of time.”
Mr. Hamrouche noted that nationwide riots in October 1988 led the government to call the elections in the first place. “Repression breeds militancy — we can see that all across the Arab world,” he added. “We have to take the risk of having a Parliament that is dominated by Islamists. Let them face the challenge of governance. I am persuaded they will fail.”
Other intellectuals are still more concerned about the possibility of an Islamist government.
“Algerian society is not mature enough to experiment with democracy in its most complete sense,” said Mounir Boudjema, deputy editor of the independent newspaper Liberté. “By default, the current government is better than an Islamist regime.”
Algeria’s recent history is scarred with violence, with the war against French rule, ending in independence in 1962, and then the conflict of the 1990s. The first time the country’s Muslims, who make up most of the population, were allowed to vote under French rule, in 1948, ballots were rigged to mute their voice. Today, the Islamic Salvation Front, the party that was expected to win the second round in January 1992, remains outlawed, and the turnout in tightly regulated elections often barely exceeds one-third.
“Civil society has no voice,” Mr. Hamrouche said.
Sporadic threats to national newspapers over the past six months, by fax and mail, have been signed by Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, said the three senior newspaper editors who discussed the threats and who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they had not informed their own staff members.
On June 10, Anis Rahmani, an outspoken national security analyst, received an e-mail message in which Islamic militants threatened to kidnap him and a female colleague at El Chourouk, of which he was then the editor.
The message said, “We don’t attack civilians, but anyone who works for the intelligence service or the government is an unbeliever, and any person that supports them is too,” and it accused Mr. Rahmani of working for Algerian intelligence. A month later, the security services told Mr. Rahmani that evidence had emerged that a Qaeda-related group was planning to assassinate him.
Several journalists said they had also felt state control tighten. Mr. Amari, the commentator and cartoonist, is appealing the two-month prison sentence and a fine for accusing a state governor of corruption. Mr. Fattani said he had been taken to court 105 times since 1992. Last month, the United Nations Human Rights Committee said that it was concerned that the Algerian government continued to intimidate journalists and that it suspected that the government had secret detention centers for terrorist suspects.
“For us as journalists, the situation is especially difficult because we are caught in the middle,” said Faisal Metaoui, editor of the Web site for the newspaper El Watan. “We are attacked from both sides. We are war correspondents, but we are war correspondents in our own country.”
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

The Netherlands: Queen Angers Anti-Islamic Politician

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/europe/28briefs-queen.html
December 28, 2007
World Briefing | Europe
The Netherlands: Queen Angers Anti-Islamic Politician
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS [Netherlands] [EU] [hydra] [jihadis] [followup] [here a xenophobic, ultra-nationalist party and its charismatic leader gaining popularity] [so much so that the Queen and PM have intervened] [followup] [**********]
Geert Wilders, the right-wing leader of an anti-immigration party, sharply criticized Queen Beatrix’s Christmas Day speech, saying it amounted to "multi-culti nonsense" and demanding she limit herself to cutting ribbons. He said the speech, written by the prime minister’s office, was a thinly veiled attack on his party. The Financial Times reported that Mr. Wilders, who has warned of a “tsunami of Islamization" and called for the Koran to be banned, has been named the Netherlands’ politician of the year in a poll by the public broadcaster NOS. [******]
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/europe/28briefs-queen.html
December 28, 2007
World Briefing | Europe
The Netherlands: Queen Angers Anti-Islamic Politician
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS [Netherlands] [EU] [hydra] [jihadis] [followup] [here a xenophobic, ultra-nationalist party and its charismatic leader gaining popularity] [so much so that the Queen and PM have intervened] [followup] [**********]
Geert Wilders, the right-wing leader of an anti-immigration party, sharply criticized Queen Beatrix’s Christmas Day speech, saying it amounted to "multi-culti nonsense" and demanding she limit herself to cutting ribbons. He said the speech, written by the prime minister’s office, was a thinly veiled attack on his party. The Financial Times reported that Mr. Wilders, who has warned of a “tsunami of Islamization" and called for the Koran to be banned, has been named the Netherlands’ politician of the year in a poll by the public broadcaster NOS. [******]
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Bhutto Assassination Sparks Chaos

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/27/AR2007122700122.html
Bhutto Assassination Sparks Chaos
Former Premier, Hit by Gunfire After Rally, Was a Key to Pakistan's Struggle for Democracy
By Griff Witte
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, December 28, 2007; A01 [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [12/27/2007 8:23:55 AM] [post-assasination analysis] [***]
RAWALPINDI, Pakistan, Dec. 27 -- Benazir Bhutto, for decades the central figure in a tortured struggle to bring democratic rule to Pakistan, was assassinated Thursday afternoon as she waved to supporters after a political rally, plunging the country into new turmoil just days before scheduled elections.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/27/AR2007122700122.html
Bhutto Assassination Sparks Chaos
Former Premier, Hit by Gunfire After Rally, Was a Key to Pakistan's Struggle for Democracy
By Griff Witte
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, December 28, 2007; A01 [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [12/27/2007 8:23:55 AM] [post-assasination analysis] [***]
RAWALPINDI, Pakistan, Dec. 27 -- Benazir Bhutto, for decades the central figure in a tortured struggle to bring democratic rule to Pakistan, was assassinated Thursday afternoon as she waved to supporters after a political rally, plunging the country into new turmoil just days before scheduled elections.
The death of the former prime minister creates a massive political void in this nuclear-armed nation of 165 million people and opens the door to potentially greater violence in a year of almost nonstop tumult here. [****]It leaves in tatters Washington's strategy of fighting extremism by pairing Bhutto with President Pervez Musharraf, a close U.S. ally who has been under siege in the streets for months. [see today’s govt] [*****]
Around the world Thursday, government leaders pleaded with Bhutto's countrymen to remain calm. In Texas, President Bush urged the Pakistani people "to honor Benazir Bhutto's memory by continuing with the democratic process for which she so bravely gave her life."
There was no immediate assertion of responsibility for the killing. Musharraf, who addressed the nation on television, condemned the assassination and blamed Islamic extremists. He declared three days of national mourning. But Bhutto's supporters pinned responsibility on allies of Musharraf, the former chief of the army. Partisans of the slain leader rioted in cities and towns across the country, burning police cars, looting shops and firing guns.
Thursday night, grieving supporters carried Bhutto's body in a plain wooden coffin from the hospital where she had been declared dead. Her body was taken to an airport and was being flown to her family's ancestral home in the Larkana district of southern Pakistan for burial at an as-yet-unannounced time.
Musharraf was closeted with advisers late Thursday, debating strategy. It was unclear whether the Jan. 8 parliamentary elections for which Bhutto was campaigning when she was killed would proceed; at least one major party vowed to boycott the vote. [******]
"If there's a lot more violence, then it's possible the whole democratic process will be derailed," political analyst Hasan-Askari Rizvi said.
Other observers saw glimmers of conciliation. "This can turn into anarchy," said Talat Masood, a retired general and political analyst. "Or it can turn into something Benazir Bhutto could not achieve in life but may achieve in death. It could provide the momentum needed for a return to the rule of law and democracy. It could go either way." [two principal things to watch are what her husband says at her funeral today; and second, how the military reacts in coming weeks—do they continue to stand behind Musharraf or do they jettison him for all his troubles?] [presumably US has sources inside the military so it can know what’s coming] [******]
Bhutto, 54, led one of Pakistan's most important political families. She had many fans but also persistent critics who accused her of corruption and derided her position in her party: chairperson for life.
She narrowly survived a similar assassination attempt just two months ago, when attackers killed more than 140 people in coordinated blasts targeting a homecoming procession shortly after she returned from eight years of exile. Since then, she had been campaigning across the country, hoping to win for a third time the job of prime minister, saying all the while that she knew she was likely to be attacked again.
Thursday's strike came at dusk, in a public park where another Pakistani prime minister, Liaquat Ali Khan, was assassinated in 1951. A few miles away is the site of the prison, now demolished, where Bhutto's father, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, was confined. He was president from 1971 to 1973 and then prime minister until 1977, when he was hanged by the military-led government that deposed him. [*******]
Benazir Bhutto, wearing a white head scarf, addressed a rally in the park, then got into her bulletproof sport-utility vehicle. She was being driven out of the park when she asked that the vehicle's sunroof be opened so she could bid thousands of supporters farewell, according to witnesses and several aides, including one who had been sitting next to her.
As she waved, three to five gunshots sounded, aides said. Bhutto sank back into her seat, just as a suicide bomber detonated explosives to the left of her vehicle. People inside the SUV said her face and neck were badly bloodied, apparently from the bullets. As blood poured from her wounds and pooled in the back seat, she lost consciousness, aides said, and never regained it.
The vehicle raced from the park toward Rawalpindi General Hospital, but it was too badly damaged from the blast to complete the journey; occupants had to hoist Bhutto into another vehicle as they desperately sought to get her medical care. At the hospital, a surgeon worked to save her, but she was declared dead on the operating table.
Thousands of supporters had gathered at the hospital by the time an official emerged to announce her death; the report triggered a roar of rage and grief.
Devastated supporters smashed the hospital's glass doors and stormed the building to try to view her body. As ambulances arrived with other casualties of the attack, the crowd tore down and burned campaign posters showing candidates from Musharraf's party. Yelling "Musharraf is a dog," they blamed him for Bhutto's death.
"Today there is no more Pakistan. The woman who has defended us has died," Sher Zaman said, as he beat his chest and tears streamed down his bearded face. "I'm 70 years old, but today I feel like an orphan."
Her husband, Asif Ali Zardari, [*****] said by telephone: "It's a very difficult time for the nation of Pakistan and it's a difficult time for our family. She was a brave lady and she left a legacy of bravery." [*********]
The suicide blast killed at least 20 people outside the car and wounded many others. Police were investigating whether the bomber had first shot Bhutto. Several witnesses said they believed the assailant had fired the shots and then, after being tackled by security personnel, detonated the bomb.
Earlier Thursday, at another preelection rally in this city south of Islamabad, a rooftop sniper opened fire on supporters of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, leaving four people dead and at least five injured.
There was no indication that the two attacks were coordinated. Sharif’s supporters, too, blamed Musharraf’s political allies and accused them of using violence to avoid being on the wrong end of a landslide in next month’s vote.
Sharif, who had been barred from running for office, announced after Bhutto’s assassination that his party would boycott the elections.
That vote, if it proceeds, will determine who serves as prime minister alongside the president. Musharraf has already been elected to a new, five-year term, although the vote was marred by controversy. Musharraf was probably on the verge of being disqualified by the Supreme Court when he declared a state of emergency Nov. 3, suspended the constitution and fired most members of the court. Moderate opponents responded with days of street turmoil. Islamic extremists, meanwhile, stepped up armed attacks.
The Bush administration had played a key role in brokering the agreement between Musharraf and Bhutto that enabled her to return to the country Oct. 18. Officials in Washington had hoped that an alliance of the two moderate leaders might create a robust political force to counter rising extremism in the country.
Despite Washington’s efforts, there was intense and deep-rooted mistrust between the leaders; Bhutto had long assailed Musharraf as a military dictator, while he had referred to her two terms as prime minister in the late 1980s and 1990s as a period of “sham democracy.” [*********]
Her relationship with Musharraf was complicated and constantly shifting and included both public hostility and private negotiation. After Musharraf declared emergency rule, Bhutto was placed under house arrest on two occasions but was allowed to make public appearances, attend receptions and receive high-level visitors in between.
Bhutto was running for Parliament, and her Pakistan People's Party had been faring well in recent polls. She may have had the support to become prime minister for a third term.
Bhutto's death leaves her party in disarray. The PPP, founded by her father, has long been synonymous with the Bhutto name. [*******]Her children are not yet old enough to inherit the mantle of party leadership, however, and there is no obvious successor from outside the family. Two brothers have died under mysterious circumstances.
"She was viewed as the most formidable threat by the pro-Musharraf forces in Pakistan," said Rizvi, the political analyst. "That leaves a void for the anti-Musharraf forces. They'll have a difficult time finding a successor."
Bhutto's public appearances in recent weeks had drawn large crowds and increasingly stringent security checkpoints. At a rally in Peshawar on Wednesday, police stopped a would-be bomber with explosives around his neck. Thursday's rally was not as large as expected, according to those present, apparently because people feared an attack.
Bhutto accused rogue government officials of conspiring with Islamic extremists to assassinate her. The government has vehemently denied the charge.
Distrusting the government, Bhutto relied for protection on her own heavily armed security guards, traveling in a white, bulletproof SUV. She complained at times that the government was not doing enough to ensure her safety.
CNN's Wolf Blitzer reported Thursday that in October, Bhutto sent an e-mail to her U.S. spokesman, Mark Siegel, in which she wrote that if something "bad" happened, Musharraf should be among the people held responsible. "I have been made to feel insecure by his minions," she wrote. [*****]Officials declined to provide her with jammers, to protect against roadside bombs, or four police vehicles to surround her SUV at all times, she wrote. Government officials say they protected her as best they could.
Because of security concerns, she had considered giving up political rallies in favor of less-dangerous campaign tactics, including tape-recorded messages. But large rallies form the fabric of political culture in Pakistan, and ultimately Bhutto could not stay away.
Those who had cheered for her at the rally followed her to the hospital, and wailed when they learned she had died.
"This is the height of brutality. They have hanged her father. They have killed her brothers. The government has killed all the good people of Pakistan," [*****] said Sarfraz Khan, a doctor. "Please pray for us. Pray for our poor country."
Special correspondents Shahzad Khurram in Rawalpindi and Imtiaz Ali in Peshawar, and staff writers Debbi Wilgoren and Pamela Constable in Washington contributed to this report.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

With Pakistan Reeling, Bhutto Is Buried

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/asia/28cnd-pakistan.html
December 28, 2007
With Pakistan Reeling, Bhutto Is Buried
By SALMAN MASOOD and VICTORIA BURNETT [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [12/27/2007 8:23:55 AM] [post-assasination analysis] [***]
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Hundreds of thousands of distraught Pakistanis gathered Friday to bury Benazir Bhutto, the former prime minister assassinated a day earlier at an election rally, while violence flared across the country, leaving at least 10 dead. The government ordered paramilitary forces in Ms. Bhutto's southern home province of Sindh to shoot rioters on sight. [********]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/asia/28cnd-pakistan.html
December 28, 2007
With Pakistan Reeling, Bhutto Is Buried
By SALMAN MASOOD and VICTORIA BURNETT [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [12/27/2007 8:23:55 AM] [post-assasination analysis] [***]
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Hundreds of thousands of distraught Pakistanis gathered Friday to bury Benazir Bhutto, the former prime minister assassinated a day earlier at an election rally, while violence flared across the country, leaving at least 10 dead. The government ordered paramilitary forces in Ms. Bhutto's southern home province of Sindh to shoot rioters on sight. [********]
A senior government official said there were no immediate plans to postpone the parliamentary elections scheduled for Jan. 8, which are intended to restore democracy after eight years of military dictatorship. Ms. Bhutto, as the leader of the country's largest political party, would have been a front runner in the contest; she has no clear successor within the party she tightly controlled.
Muhammad Mian Soomro, the caretaker prime minister, told reporters in Islamabad that the government would hold talks with all political parties to chart a plan of action, but that "Right now, the elections stand as they were announced."
There, chaotic throngs of sobbing mourners gathered in Garhi Khuda Baksh, in the south of the province, as an ambulance carrying Ms. Bhutto's remains crawled slowly through the dusty afternoon haze toward the Mogul-style white marble mausoleum where her father, himself a former prime minister executed in the 1970's, was buried. Wailing mourners along the route frantically stretched their arms to try to touch her casket.
Draped in the red, green and black flag of the Pakistan People's Party, which Ms. Bhutto led for decades, the casket was lowered into a grave next to her father's. Her husband, Asif Ali Zardari, wept, news agencies reported.
Many in the crowed chanted slogans against Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf and the United States, according to Reuters. The United States has backed the former army general through his eight turbulent years of leadership, pressing him to crack down on militants in border areas near Afghanistan but also to return the country to civilian leadership.
"Shame on the killer Musharraf, shame on the killer U.S.," the mourners cried, Reuters said. [********]
Many Bhutto followers openly blame the Pakistani government for her assassination; others fault Mr. Musharraf for failing to provide enough security, particularly in light of the bomb blasts that had greeted Ms. Bhutto upon her return to the country in October. The Musharraf government maintains that Ms. Bhutto should have avoided large open gatherings, and that it provided as much security as it could.
In Garhi Khuda Baksh, in southern Sindh province, grief-stricken supporters thronged the route to in Garhi Khuda Baksh, in southern Sindh province, as an ambulance carrying Ms. Bhutto's remains crawled slowly through the dusty afternoon haze. Wailing mourners lunged at the coffin, reaching to touch it in an apparent gesture of final respect.
Mr. Soomro, the interim prime minister, called for calm and said a judicial commission will be set up to probe Ms. Bhutto's death. He refused to speculate on who might have been behind the combined shooting and suicide bombing, which also killed some 20 security guards and bystanders in the garrison town of Rawalpindi on Thursday. [*****]
Hamid Nawaz Khan, Pakistan's caretaker interior minister, defended the government's efforts to protect Ms. Bhutto Friday and dismissed reports that she had been shot to death from a police van.
"We had received information of a possible attack on her on 21 Dec. We then notified Rehman Malik, the security adviser of Ms. Bhutto, in writing of the threat she faced," he said. "We asked them to be discrete and be cautious."
Mr. Khan said authorities provided Ms. Bhutto with a 24-hour guard and jammers, referring to gadgets that prevent bombs being ignited by remote control.
"Against a suicide bomber, jammers are not effective," he said.
The rioting that continued across Pakistan on Friday in protest over Ms. Bhutto's death extended from the eastern city of Peshawar, near the Afghan border, to the parched province of Sindh. An angry mob looted banks in Karachi, capital of Sindh and Pakistan's largest city, and rioters burned 10 railway stations and several trains across the region, the Associated Press reported. Officials suspended train service between Karachi and the Punjab province to the east.
Thousands of people rioted in the central city of Multan, ransacking banks and gas stations and throwing stones at police, the Associated Press reported. In the generally peaceful capital, Islamabad, a crowd of about 100 protesters set fire to tires.
In Peshawar, an estimated 4,000 supporters of Ms. Bhutto's People's Party chanted "Bhutto was alive yesterday, Bhutto is alive today" and cried "Musharraf dog."
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Musharraf’s Political Future Appears Troubled

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/asia/28assess.html
December 28, 2007
News Analysis
Musharraf’s Political Future Appears Troubled
By DAVID ROHDE [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [12/27/2007 8:23:55 AM] [post-assasination analysis] [***]
Former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto’s death raises the specter of prolonged political conflict between Pakistan’s president, Pervez Musharraf, and the country’s opposition, [*****] according to Pakistani and American analysts. How he handles the next several days could determine whether nationwide antigovernment protests erupt.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/asia/28assess.html
December 28, 2007
News Analysis
Musharraf’s Political Future Appears Troubled
By DAVID ROHDE [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [12/27/2007 8:23:55 AM] [post-assasination analysis] [***]
Former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto’s death raises the specter of prolonged political conflict between Pakistan’s president, Pervez Musharraf, and the country’s opposition, [*****] according to Pakistani and American analysts. How he handles the next several days could determine whether nationwide antigovernment protests erupt.
“I see a lot more trouble for Musharraf in the near future,” said Hasan Askari Rizvi, a leading Pakistani political analyst.
Ms. Bhutto’s party, the largest in the country, is now leaderless, and many of its members already blame Mr. Musharraf’s government for her death.
Mr. Musharraf remains deeply unpopular after declaring a state of emergency in November and suppressing Ms. Bhutto and his other political opponents.
Meanwhile, Nawaz Sharif, the country’s other main opposition leader, is scrambling to reorganize his party after years in exile.
Ms. Bhutto’s death upends the political landscape in a country that has searched, often in vain, for political stability since it achieved independence 60 years ago. [****] Pakistani observers pointed out on Thursday that Ms. Bhutto was shot a few yards from where the country’s first prime minister, Liaqat Ali Khan, was assassinated in 1951. Since then, military coups, fixed elections and bitter political battles have marred attempts to stabilize the country.
How events unfold in the coming days and weeks lies largely in the hands of Mr. Musharraf, Ms. Bhutto’s husband and Mr. Sharif, according to Pakistani analysts. But it is Mr. Musharraf who faces the largest potential threat.
Analysts said the assassination would hurt Mr. Musharraf politically and place him in one of the most difficult positions of his turbulent eight years in power. [******]
At the core of Mr. Musharraf’s problem is a widespread perception that he did too little to protect Ms. Bhutto or that his government carried out the killing itself, analysts said.
On Thursday, members of Ms. Bhutto’s party accused Mr. Musharraf’s government of exactly that. And Mr. Musharraf’s own supporters blamed the government for lax security.
“The government had responsibility to ensure that she was safe,” said Ikram Sehgal, a Pakistani security expert who served in the military with Mr. Musharraf. “There was a concerted effort to get her.”
Demonstrations are expected to peak at Ms. Bhutto’s funeral on Friday outside Karachi, Pakistan’s second largest city. Her husband, Asif Ali Zardari, could call for restraint or for further protests. [********]
If Mr. Musharraf declares a state of emergency to rein in protests, he is likely to meet stronger popular opposition than he did when he declared emergency powers in November, analysts said.
“President Musharraf already does not enjoy a high degree of support,” said Ijaz Gilani, the chairman of Gallup Pakistan, a leading polling agency. “With this incident, his ability to withstand all these negative segments about him is even more difficult.”
If Mr. Musharraf goes ahead with nationwide elections scheduled for Jan. 8, he is likely to encounter street protests as well. [*****]Analysts said holding the elections would be seen as an effort by him to take advantage of Ms. Bhutto’s death.
Without her, Ms. Bhutto’s party, the Pakistan Peoples Party, will struggle to compete effectively in the elections. Ms. Bhutto was the party’s chairwoman for life and tightly controlled its functions, analysts said. Her three children are too young to take her place, and her husband is widely viewed as corrupt and is opposed by many party leaders.
After Ms. Bhutto was killed, Mr. Sharif, the other main opposition leader, announced that his party would withdraw from the elections. Visiting the hospital where Ms. Bhutto was pronounced dead, Mr. Sharif vowed to take on her mantle as the main opposition leader to Mr. Musharraf.
“Free elections are not possible in the presence of Musharraf,” Mr. Sharif said on Thursday, Reuters reported. “Musharraf is the root cause of all problems.” [*****]
If both of the country’s primary opposition parties were out of the election, Mr. Musharraf’s party — which trailed them in recent polls — would probably win control of Parliament. If that occurred, analysts predicted, Mr. Sharif and leaders of Ms. Bhutto’s party would mount nationwide demonstrations calling for Mr. Musharraf’s ouster.
“If Musharraf goes ahead with the elections, it will be a one-sided kind of affair,” Mr. Rizvi said. “These people will try to challenge the whole process in the streets.”
Since returning to Pakistan from exile last month, Mr. Sharif has positioned himself as a more vocal opponent to Mr. Musharraf than Ms. Bhutto was. He has campaigned well, showing more discipline and political savvy than he did during his two tenures as prime minister in the 1990s, according to analysts. His clearer defiance of the unpopular president has attracted large crowds to his rallies.
“This steely determination he’s shown since November is a new thing,” said Teresita Schaffer, an analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “Part of it is his visceral dislike for Musharraf.”
The Pakistan Peoples Party, meanwhile, will struggle to chose a new leader, analysts predict.
Its senior vice chairman is Makhdoom Amin Fahim, [*****] who, like Ms. Bhutto, comes from a feudal family with roots in Sindh Province. Officially, Mr. Fahim should be the successor, party officials said.
Also being mentioned Thursday night as a possible new party chief was Aitzaz Ahsan, [****] the prominent leader of the lawyers’ movement. [*****]Mr. Ahsan was jailed after the Nov. 3 state of emergency was imposed and remains under house arrest.
Mr. Ahsan is an articulate, Cambridge-educated lawyer and a forceful critic of the Musharraf government. But he had a rocky relationship with Ms. Bhutto. According to several members of the party, she resented his high profile as the leader of the campaign to reinstate the chief justice, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, after he was fired earlier this year.
In the end, the arbiter of power in Pakistan will be the country’s powerful army, [*****] according to analysts. Under pressure from the United States, Mr. Musharraf resigned last month from his post as army chief and became a civilian president. While the army is headed by generals appointed by Mr. Musharraf, he is not guaranteed their support. [*******]
“An awful lot depends on how the army reacts,” Ms. Schaffer said. “Do they clamp down? Are they reluctant to clamp down? Do they blame Musharraf?” [*********] [indeed]
Jane Perlez contributed reporting from Sydney, Australia.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

December 27, 2007

President and Mrs. Bush Extend Condolences Regarding Assassination of Benazir

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/12/20071227.html
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
December 27, 2007
President and Mrs. Bush Extend Condolences Regarding Assassination of Benazir Bhutto, Condemn Violence
Prairie Chapel Ranch
Crawford, Texas

9:55 A.M. CST [bush white house] [president bush] [immediate reponse to Bhutto assassination in recent hours] [gsave] [Pakistan as the new Afghaanistan] [******]
THE PRESIDENT: Laura and I extend our deepest condolences to the family of Benazir Bhutto, to her friends, to her supporters. We send our condolences to the families of the others who were killed in today's violence. And we send our condolences to all the people of Pakistan on this tragic occasion.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/12/20071227.html
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
December 27, 2007
President and Mrs. Bush Extend Condolences Regarding Assassination of Benazir Bhutto, Condemn Violence
Prairie Chapel Ranch
Crawford, Texas

9:55 A.M. CST [bush white house] [president bush] [immediate reponse to Bhutto assassination in recent hours] [gsave] [Pakistan as the new Afghaanistan] [******]
THE PRESIDENT: Laura and I extend our deepest condolences to the family of Benazir Bhutto, to her friends, to her supporters. We send our condolences to the families of the others who were killed in today's violence. And we send our condolences to all the people of Pakistan on this tragic occasion.
The United States strongly condemns this cowardly act by murderous extremists who are trying to undermine Pakistan's democracy. [****] Those who committed this crime must be brought to justice. Mrs. Bhutto served her nation twice as Prime Minister and she knew that her return to Pakistan earlier this year put her life at risk. Yet she refused to allow assassins to dictate the course of her country.
We stand with the people of Pakistan in their struggle against the forces of terror and extremism. [*******] We urge them to honor Benazir Bhutto's memory by continuing with the democratic process for which she so bravely gave her life.
END 9:57 A.M. CST

Wars Cost $15 Billion a Month, GOP Senator Says

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/26/AR2007122601542.html
Wars Cost $15 Billion a Month, GOP Senator Says
By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, December 27, 2007; A07 [bush white house] [NSC principals, General Lute, and bureaucracies involved in running operations in –iraq] [congress] [110th congress, 1st session] [balance power between them: constitutional tussles] [unitary theory of executive’s war powers] [neoconservative dogma] [and legitimate issues that need to be decided] [proposition: was the Cold War commitment and consensus worth the cost?] [answer: in retrospect of course] [proposition: could a lot of squandered treasure and blood have been utilized more productively?] [answer” of course] [ergo, it follows that if gsave is a similarly existential war against jihadis and that the US is stuck in –iraq like it or not, then, good leaders must find ways to manage those costs while protecting U.S.’s interests] [*************]
The latest estimate of the growing costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the worldwide battle against terrorism -- nearly $15 billion a month -- came last week from one of the Senate's leading proponents [*****]of a continued U.S. military presence in Iraq.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/26/AR2007122601542.html
Wars Cost $15 Billion a Month, GOP Senator Says
By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, December 27, 2007; A07 [bush white house] [NSC principals, General Lute, and bureaucracies involved in running operations in –iraq] [congress] [110th congress, 1st session] [balance power between them: constitutional tussles] [unitary theory of executive’s war powers] [neoconservative dogma] [and legitimate issues that need to be decided] [proposition: was the Cold War commitment and consensus worth the cost?] [answer: in retrospect of course] [proposition: could a lot of squandered treasure and blood have been utilized more productively?] [answer” of course] [ergo, it follows that if gsave is a similarly existential war against jihadis and that the US is stuck in –iraq like it or not, then, good leaders must find ways to manage those costs while protecting U.S.’s interests] [*************]
The latest estimate of the growing costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the worldwide battle against terrorism -- nearly $15 billion a month -- came last week from one of the Senate's leading proponents [*****]of a continued U.S. military presence in Iraq.
"This cost of this war is approaching $15 billion a month, with the Army spending $4.2 billion of that every month," Sen. Ted Stevens (Alaska), the ranking Republican on the Appropriations defense subcommittee, said in a little-noticed floor speech Dec. 18. His remarks came in support of adding $70 billion to the omnibus fiscal 2008 spending legislation to pay for the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts, as well as counterterrorism activities, for the six months from Oct. 1, 2007, through March 31 of next year.
While most of the public focus has been on the political fight over troop levels, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) reported this month that the Bush administration's request for the 2008 fiscal year of $189.3 billion for Defense Department operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and worldwide counterterrorism activities was 20 percent higher than for fiscal 2007 and 60 percent higher than for fiscal 2006. [********] [$$$$$$$$$$$$]
Pentagon spokesmen would not comment last week on Stevens's figure but said their latest estimate for monthly spending for Iraq, Afghanistan and the war on terrorism was $11.7 billion as of Sept. 30, the end of fiscal 2007.
One reason for Stevens's larger cost figure may be that U.S. troop levels in Iraq peaked at 180,000 in November, which is part of the 2008 fiscal year, and will fall only slightly in the next three months. In addition, in its December report, the CRS noted that the Pentagon does not include intelligence operations and other classified activities in its cost estimates, nor does it tally congressional add-ons for the National Guard and reserve forces.
"Stevens is being realistic," said Gordon Adams, who served as the senior national security official at the Office of Management and Budget from 1993 to 1997, in the Clinton administration.
Pointing out that Bush's request comes out to $15.8 billion per month, Adams said: "Iraq, Afghanistan, and the war on terror are not getting cheaper. . . . This will go down some, as the surge comes home, but not as much as people think."
He added: "More and more of these so-called emergency funds are being used to repair and buy new military hardware," because "the Pentagon is worried that defense budgets will start to go down next year."
The CRS reports that a good part of the increased spending is not only for replacing lost equipment but "more often to upgrade and replace 'stressed' equipment and enhance force protection." It noted that a recent Congressional Budget Office study "found that more than 40% of the Army's spending for repair and replacement of war-worn equipment" was "spent to upgrade systems to increase capability, to buy equipment to eliminate longstanding shortfalls in inventory" and to convert new combat units to more flexible organizational structures.
Stevens made it clear that the $70 billion in the omnibus bill for the wars will cover only costs for the six months ending March 31, when Congress will again have to wrestle with a supplemental spending bill to pay for the wars. By then, Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and Ryan C. Crocker, the U.S. ambassador, will have presented Congress with their update on the situation in Iraq.
Last Friday, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said that he hopes troop levels, which drive costs, could continue to go down in 2008. But he warned that they would continue only "if conditions on the ground" permit sustaining "the gains we have already made."
One indication of how fast costs are rising is that operations and maintenance costs for all of fiscal 2007 were $72 billion, and the entire fiscal year 2008 request was $81 billion, according to the CRS.
The Pentagon has anticipated rising war costs before. In January, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon R. England told a House Budget Committee hearing that, nearly four years into the war, the Pentagon's war costs were rising because it had to replace big-ticket items such as helicopters, airplanes and armored vehicles, which were wearing out or were lost in combat. "We have a backlog and are seeing an increase," England told the panel.
At that time, 11 months ago, Pentagon spokesmen said the monthly costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in 2007 would be $9.7 billion -- $2 billion less than their most recent estimate.
One relatively new cost is the $300 monthly payments to almost all Iraqis recruited as part of the "Concerned Local Citizens" (CLC) program, which arms neighborhood groups to provide local security. The latest quarterly Iraq report by the Pentagon puts the program total at 69,000 people.
Since more than 80 percent of the CLC participants are Sunni, the Shiite-led government has hesitated to integrate them into the police force. That means that the United States will need to continue paying them until the Iraqi government "assumes full responsibility for the program," according to the Pentagon report.
Much of the CLC money is coming out of the Commanders Emergency Response Program, which until now has been used mainly for small local assistance or development projects, such as school rebuilding, roads or sanitary systems. The omnibus spending package includes $500 million in these funds.
Another category Stevens identified in the spending bill was $587 million to reset pre-positioned stocks of military equipment taken from U.S. facilities around the world to support Iraq and Afghanistan. Replenishing such stocks, Stevens said, "enhances our nation's ability to respond to contingencies," noting that "we have forces in 141 different places." [**************************************] [is the US neointerventionist?] [clearly—and no necessarily negative connotation is intended]
Some of the bill's spending figures that Stevens described represent what the administration sought for the full 2008 fiscal year. For example, he listed "$4.3 billion for the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund, which will help our troops detect and defeat the number one killer of our troops in Iraq." That is only slightly less than the figure the administration sought for the full year.
Another category that appears to have been fully funded is the military intelligence program. The administration requested $3.7 billion for the full year, and Stevens said there is "$3.7 billion to continue to enhance our intelligence activities in the theater."
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

Middle East Bog

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/26/AR2007122601487.html
Middle East Bog
One month after the Annapolis conference, Israeli-Palestinian talks are stalled.
Thursday, December 27, 2007; A16 [editorial] [Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [post-Annapolis analysis] [******]
IT'S BEEN one month since Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas met in Annapolis to launch the first Middle East peace negotiations in seven years. When they meet again today, they will have cause to reflect on how much can go wrong when the world's most notoriously difficult "peace process" is taken over by official negotiators, government bureaucrats and military commanders. Far from beginning to hammer out the two-state settlement that Mr. Olmert and Mr. Abbas committed themselves to, Israeli and Palestinian officials have managed to create a somewhat artificial "crisis" that the two leaders must try to untangle.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/26/AR2007122601487.html
Middle East Bog
One month after the Annapolis conference, Israeli-Palestinian talks are stalled.
Thursday, December 27, 2007; A16 [editorial] [Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [post-Annapolis analysis] [******]
IT'S BEEN one month since Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas met in Annapolis to launch the first Middle East peace negotiations in seven years. When they meet again today, they will have cause to reflect on how much can go wrong when the world's most notoriously difficult "peace process" is taken over by official negotiators, government bureaucrats and military commanders. Far from beginning to hammer out the two-state settlement that Mr. Olmert and Mr. Abbas committed themselves to, Israeli and Palestinian officials have managed to create a somewhat artificial "crisis" that the two leaders must try to untangle.
The trouble began within days of the Annapolis meeting, when Israel's Housing Ministry made the first of a series of gratuitous and provocative announcements about construction in Jewish settlements beyond Israel's internationally recognized border.[*****] The most tangible of these was a tender for the construction of 307 homes in Har Homa, a controversial Jerusalem neighborhood that is wedged between Palestinian areas of Jerusalem and the West Bank town of Bethlehem. Palestinian negotiators -- several of whom were closer to former president Yasser Arafat than they are to Mr. Abbas -- seized on the action as a violation of Mr. Olmert's commitment to "immediately" implement the first phase of a 2003 U.S.-sponsored "road map" that calls for a freeze on all settlement construction. [which of course it is] [***]
Israeli ministers, including a couple who oppose the peace talks, rushed to tour Har Homa and to make the point that, in Israel's view, it is part of Jerusalem and thus not subject to the building restriction. The European Union, the United Nations and, somewhat surprisingly, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice criticized the Housing Ministry action. [Israel’s view] [******] When Egypt joined the chorus, Israel's defense minister said the real problem was not settlement-building but Cairo's allowance of massive weapons-smuggling to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip. A low-grade war between the Israeli army and Palestinian militants in Gaza has escalated in the past month, putting further pressure on the talks.
The most hopeful aspect of the new peace process has been the recognition by Mr. Olmert and Mr. Abbas in their private meetings, and occasionally in their public statements, that issues such as the construction in Har Homa are marginal to a two-state settlement. Both recognize that Israel will annex small parts of Jerusalem and the West Bank that are heavily populated by Jews, probably as part of territorial swaps. The "crisis" they are facing is not one of Israeli settlement expansion but of their own failure to impose their priorities on the bureaucracies and competing politicians around them. [good point] [*****] If the Annapolis process is to survive, Mr. Olmert and Mr. Abbas -- perhaps with an assist from President Bush, when he visits the Middle East next month -- will need to begin asserting themselves.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

Serb Lawmakers Pass Resolution Opposing Kosovo Independence

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/27/world/europe/27serbia.html
December 27, 2007
Serb Lawmakers Pass Resolution Opposing Kosovo Independence
By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE [Serbia] [former Yugoslavia] [residual of 1990s] [a pretty good predicter of what can be expected in Kosovo over next several years] [Russia continues to back its Slav bretheren] [otherwise, Perm 5 support Kosovo independence] [Kosovars getting restless over lack of independence] [Serbs cleverly using American history to makes it case of why Kosovo must not separate] [******]
BELGRADE, Serbia (Agence France-Presse) — Serbian lawmakers overwhelmingly endorsed a resolution on Wednesday underlining their opposition to Kosovo’s independence and warning of repercussions for the Serbian province’s integration into Europe. [*********]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/27/world/europe/27serbia.html
December 27, 2007
Serb Lawmakers Pass Resolution Opposing Kosovo Independence
By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE [Serbia] [former Yugoslavia] [residual of 1990s] [a pretty good predicter of what can be expected in Kosovo over next several years] [Russia continues to back its Slav bretheren] [otherwise, Perm 5 support Kosovo independence] [Kosovars getting restless over lack of independence] [Serbs cleverly using American history to makes it case of why Kosovo must not separate] [******]
BELGRADE, Serbia (Agence France-Presse) — Serbian lawmakers overwhelmingly endorsed a resolution on Wednesday underlining their opposition to Kosovo’s independence and warning of repercussions for the Serbian province’s integration into Europe. [*********]
The resolution, which comes before Kosovo’s expected unilateral declaration of independence, was backed by both President Boris Tadic, who favors Serbia’s entrance into the European Union, and the more conservative prime minister, Vojislav Kostunica. [*******]
The opposition hard-line nationalists of the Serbian Radical Party also endorsed the resolution, which said that Serbia would “particularly reconsider diplomatic and all other relations with the states that possibly recognize the independence of Kosovo.”
After almost eight hours of debate, 220 members of Parliament voted for the resolution, 14 were against and 3 abstained.
The United States and a number of European Union countries have indicated that they will recognize a unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo Albanians, after the failure of almost two years of United Nations-sponsored negotiations on the province’s status. [********]
Mr. Tadic told Parliament that Serbia “will do its best to preserve Kosovo in Serbia and Serbia on its European path, but both principles must be carried out by a wise policy, and through peaceful and diplomatic means.”
“Serbia will never accept an independent Kosovo,” he added.
Mr. Kostunica, a moderate nationalist who has put the province at the heart of his political agenda, said an independent Kosovo would be a “pure puppet state that has to disappear.”
He said the United States supported Kosovo’s independence “for its own military and security interest.” [******]
“Kosovo is an example that America, which used to be a symbol of freedom, has become a symbol of the policy of force,” he said.
The resolution would be a message to Kosovo’s Serbian minority to “ignore a declaration of independence as an illegal act,” [a dangerous gambit] [****] Mr. Kostunica said.
The resolution rejects a proposed European Union police mission to the Albanian-majority province and indicates that Belgrade might turn its back on closer integration with Europe if European Union states recognize Kosovo’s independence. [so?] [only Serbia would be harmed by such foolhardy action] [*******]
Mr. Tadic, who will run in the presidential race in January, vowed that the “Serbian Army is ready to help and protect” minority Serbs in Kosovo against any violence “with the approval of all relevant international institutions and respecting international law” if NATO-led peacekeepers in the province failed to do so. [a not-very-thinly-veiled threat] [********]
Kosovo has been run by a United Nations mission since June 1999, when a NATO bombing campaign drove out Serbian forces that had fought ethnic Albanian separatists.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Egypt and Israel Meet Over Arms Smuggling

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/27/world/middleeast/27briefs-israel.html
December 27, 2007
World Briefing | Middle East
Egypt and Israel Meet Over Arms Smuggling
By ISABEL KERSHNER [Israel] [domestic politics] [becomes foreign policy] [the perennial problem of settlers] [obstacle for a Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [Israeli-Egyptian maneuverings as glacial-like progress along the roadmap] [Israel’s recent “one last thing” w/ latest “settlement” move] [Egyptiann may feel compelled to show their pro-Palestinian credentials?] [***********]
Israel’s defense minister, Ehud Barak, met President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt in Sharm el Sheik, Egypt, amid tension over weapons smuggling from Egypt into Gaza. Earlier in the day, Egypt’s foreign minister, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, had complained about “the Israeli lobby’s efforts to harm Egypt’s interests with the Congress,” referring to moves to make some American military aid to Egypt conditional on its taking steps to stop the smuggling and protect human rights. After the meeting, Mr. Barak said, “Whenever we have points of dispute, we will discuss them through face-to-face dialogue in good faith.” [I nice sentiment in any event] [********]
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/27/world/middleeast/27briefs-israel.html
December 27, 2007
World Briefing | Middle East
Egypt and Israel Meet Over Arms Smuggling
By ISABEL KERSHNER [Israel] [domestic politics] [becomes foreign policy] [the perennial problem of settlers] [obstacle for a Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [Israeli-Egyptian maneuverings as glacial-like progress along the roadmap] [Israel’s recent “one last thing” w/ latest “settlement” move] [Egyptiann may feel compelled to show their pro-Palestinian credentials?] [***********]
Israel’s defense minister, Ehud Barak, met President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt in Sharm el Sheik, Egypt, amid tension over weapons smuggling from Egypt into Gaza. Earlier in the day, Egypt’s foreign minister, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, had complained about “the Israeli lobby’s efforts to harm Egypt’s interests with the Congress,” referring to moves to make some American military aid to Egypt conditional on its taking steps to stop the smuggling and protect human rights. After the meeting, Mr. Barak said, “Whenever we have points of dispute, we will discuss them through face-to-face dialogue in good faith.” [I nice sentiment in any event] [********]
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Karzai in Pakistan to Mend Ties

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/27/world/asia/27pakistan.html
December 27, 2007
Karzai in Pakistan to Mend Ties
By SALMAN MASOOD and CARLOTTA GALL [Afghanistan] [hydra] [insurgency] [grappling with counterinsurgency approach] [pivotal 2007 when the Taliban and hydra mounted an important spring offensive into the summer and now fall] [some indicators of improvement] [nevertheless, many indications of backsliding w/ Talibs and other jihadis making overt overtures] [coupled with Bhutto’s assassination while Karzai in town discussing stability and cooperation, the timing seems almost too cute by half] [**]
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan and President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan signaled an improvement in relations between their countries after an unusually cordial meeting here on Wednesday and called for greater cooperation in fighting terrorism.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/27/world/asia/27pakistan.html
December 27, 2007
Karzai in Pakistan to Mend Ties
By SALMAN MASOOD and CARLOTTA GALL [Afghanistan] [hydra] [insurgency] [grappling with counterinsurgency approach] [pivotal 2007 when the Taliban and hydra mounted an important spring offensive into the summer and now fall] [some indicators of improvement] [nevertheless, many indications of backsliding w/ Talibs and other jihadis making overt overtures] [coupled with Bhutto’s assassination while Karzai in town discussing stability and cooperation, the timing seems almost too cute by half] [**]
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan and President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan signaled an improvement in relations between their countries after an unusually cordial meeting here on Wednesday and called for greater cooperation in fighting terrorism.
Mr. Karzai is on a two-day visit here in the Pakistani capital, where he is also to meet with the opposition politician Benazir Bhutto, [unless he already met her or unless he has unusual powers to commiunicate with the dead, chances of this meeting quite slim] [*******] a statement from the Afghan president’s office said. Ms. Bhutto is taking part in parliamentary elections scheduled for January.
The two presidents have regularly leveled harsh accusations at each other over the last two years since a Taliban resurgence shook the Afghan government’s control of much of southern Afghanistan. Mr. Karzai has blamed Pakistan for harboring the Taliban and militant training camps, which he says have allowed the insurgents to stage a comeback, while Mr. Musharraf has blamed lawlessness in Afghanistan and Mr. Karzai’s failure to govern for the creeping insurgency.
But the two men emerged Wednesday from their discussions closer to agreement on how to deal with the militants, who over the last year have extended their reach inside Pakistan.
Mr. Musharraf said their talks focused on the need for cooperation on intelligence to meet “this menace of extremism and terrorism, which is destroying both our countries.”
“I think we have developed very strong understanding of each other’s problems and we look forward to cooperation and coordination in all fields for our mutual benefit,” Mr. Musharraf said during a news briefing, which was broadcast live by Pakistan’s state-run television.
Mr. Karzai said, “The meeting was productive in all aspects.” He said cross-border incursions by pro-Taliban militants from Pakistan had decreased by 40 percent in recent months, but suggested that more needed to be done.
“There is reduced activity on the Afghan side,” Mr. Karzai said. “Unfortunately, there is an increased activity now on the Pakistani side. President Musharraf and I discussed the issue of Swat and South and North Waziristan, and the issues of terrorist activities in Afghanistan. We discussed Helmand. We discussed other parts of Afghanistan.” [******]
Mr. Musharraf said that the reduction in cross-border activity was a positive sign, but acknowledged that suicide bombers and militancy in Pakistan’s tribal areas remained a problem. “The activity of training of suicide bombers and militancy in South and North Waziristan continues,” [Musharraf] [****] he said.
“The two intelligence agencies on both sides must cooperate more strongly, if we are to deal with terrorists and extremists more effectively,” he said.
Salman Masood reported from Islamabad, and Carlotta Gall from Kabul, Afghanistan.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

U.S. Troops Kill 11 in Mahdi Army

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/27/world/middleeast/27cnd-iraq.html
December 27, 2007
U.S. Troops Kill 11 in Mahdi Army
By SOLOMON MOORE [-ir] [hydra] [insurgency] [bush administration’s “surge option” or “new way forward” underway] [some positive indicators of improvement] [nevertheless, violence while surge unfolds] [pentagon’s recent status report—pretty awful but also predictable] [followup] [“surge” continues amid mixed indicators] [sort of odd: though persistent tensions between US and Jaish al Mahdi, Sadr told the mililtia to stand down a couple of months ago and the US and commended him essentially] [******]
BAGHDAD — American soldiers raided a neighborhood in the southern Iraqi city of Kut early Thursday morning, killing 11 members of the Mahdi Army, the militia loyal to hardline Shiite cleric Moktada Sadr.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/27/world/middleeast/27cnd-iraq.html
December 27, 2007
U.S. Troops Kill 11 in Mahdi Army
By SOLOMON MOORE [-ir] [hydra] [insurgency] [bush administration’s “surge option” or “new way forward” underway] [some positive indicators of improvement] [nevertheless, violence while surge unfolds] [pentagon’s recent status report—pretty awful but also predictable] [followup] [“surge” continues amid mixed indicators] [sort of odd: though persistent tensions between US and Jaish al Mahdi, Sadr told the mililtia to stand down a couple of months ago and the US and commended him essentially] [******]
BAGHDAD — American soldiers raided a neighborhood in the southern Iraqi city of Kut early Thursday morning, killing 11 members of the Mahdi Army, the militia loyal to hardline Shiite cleric Moktada Sadr.
Leaders of the Sadr movement, which has abided by a ceasefire for several weeks, condemned the operation but said that they would not conduct any reprisal attacks. [****]
Eyewitnesses said detonations, thumping helicopters and bursts of automatic weapons-fire echoed through the neighborhood of Al Jameea for at least three hours as United States forces fought Mahdi militiamen. At least four people were injured during the clash.
“The American helicopters shelled our neighborhood for three hours,” said Jameel Mohammed, a 27-year-old construction worker. “Dead bodies were scattered here and there. Houses and cars were set on fire, and people were scared and running all over the place.”
Hassan Jassim, a shop owner, said that his sister-in-law was injured in the fighting and walked out of his house to see three dead bodies lying in the street.
“American helicopters fired on our houses,” he said.
The Mahdi Army, which also has a strong presence in Iraq’s security forces, has been linked to the deaths of thousands of Sunni Arabs in Baghdad, Diyala, and Basra other provinces. The militia has also attacked American and British forces. [*********]
In recent weeks, however, such attacks have dramatically decreased because of, in part, a ceasefire imposed by Moktada Sadr. The militant Sadr movement is one of several leading Shiite political groups in Iraq and arguably has the largest paramilitary force in the country.
Abu Sadik, a leader of the movement in Kut, condemned the raid but said that it will not affect the ceasefire.
“The truce is still valid and in accordance with the orders of our leader Sayyid Moktada Sadr,” he said.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

North Korea: Hint at Slowing Disabling

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/27/world/asia/27briefs-korea.html
December 27, 2007
World Briefing | Asia
North Korea: Hint at Slowing Disabling
By AP [DPRK] [wmd] [recent election in ROK and effects on DPRK-ROK relations as well as 6-way talks] [U.S. and international teams recently sent to verify] [context: 6-way talks] [followup] [could this be my long-predicted train wreck where Kim does something so stupid it throws the entire past several years of negotiations into complete disarray?] [wheels coming off?] [******] [Gala]
North Korea indicated it would slow down the dismantling of its nuclear weapons program because of what it said was a delay in the delivery of energy aid it was promised as a reward under an international deal. The United States, China, Japan, Russia and South Korea had set a year-end deadline for the disabling.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/27/world/asia/27briefs-korea.html
December 27, 2007
World Briefing | Asia
North Korea: Hint at Slowing Disabling
By AP [DPRK] [wmd] [recent election in ROK and effects on DPRK-ROK relations as well as 6-way talks] [U.S. and international teams recently sent to verify] [context: 6-way talks] [followup] [could this be my long-predicted train wreck where Kim does something so stupid it throws the entire past several years of negotiations into complete disarray?] [wheels coming off?] [******] [Gala]
North Korea indicated it would slow down the dismantling of its nuclear weapons program because of what it said was a delay in the delivery of energy aid it was promised as a reward under an international deal. The United States, China, Japan, Russia and South Korea had set a year-end deadline for the disabling.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Benazir Bhutto, 54, Lived in Eye of Pakistan Storm

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/asia/28bhuttocnd.html
December 28, 2007
Benazir Bhutto, 54, Lived in Eye of Pakistan Storm
By JANE PERLEZ and JOHN O’NEIL [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [12/27/2007 8:23:55 AM] [***]
The daughter of one of Pakistan’s most flamboyant and democratically inclined prime ministers, Benazir Bhutto, 54, served two turbulent tenures of her own in that post. A deeply polarizing figure, she lived in exile in London for years with corruption charges hanging over her head before returning home this fall [******]to present herself as the answer to her nation’s trouble.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/world/asia/28bhuttocnd.html
December 28, 2007
Benazir Bhutto, 54, Lived in Eye of Pakistan Storm
By JANE PERLEZ and JOHN O’NEIL [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [12/27/2007 8:23:55 AM] [***]
The daughter of one of Pakistan’s most flamboyant and democratically inclined prime ministers, Benazir Bhutto, 54, served two turbulent tenures of her own in that post. A deeply polarizing figure, she lived in exile in London for years with corruption charges hanging over her head before returning home this fall [******]to present herself as the answer to her nation’s trouble.
She was killed on Thursday in a combined shooting and bombing attack at a rally in Rawalpindi, [*****]one of a series of open rallies she had insisted on holding since her return to Pakistan this fall, after years in self-imposed exile.
A woman of grand ambitions and a taste for complex political maneuvering, Ms. Bhutto, 54, was long the leader of the country’s largest opposition political party, founded by her father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. Even from exile, her leadership was firm, and when she returned, she proclaimed herself a tribune of democracy, leading rallies in opposition to Mr. Musharraf, like the one at which she died.
In a foreshadowing of the attack that killed her, a triumphal parade that celebrated her return to Pakistan in her home city of Karachi killed at least 134 of her supporters and wounded more than 400. Ms. Bhutto herself narrowly escaped harm. [******]
Her political plans were also sidetracked: she had been negotiating for months with the country’s military leader, President Pervez Musharraf, over a power-sharing arrangement, only to see General Musharraf declare emergency rule instead.
Her record in power, and the dance of veils she has deftly performed since her return — one moment standing up to General Musharraf, then next seeming to accommodate him, and never quite revealing her actual intentions — stirred as much distrust as hope among Pakistanis.
A graduate of Harvard and Oxford, she brought the backing of Washington and London, where she impressed with her political lineage and her considerable charm. She also became the first female leader of a Muslim nation when she became prime minister in 1988 at the age of 35.
But during her two stints in that job — first from 1988 to 1990 and again from 1993 to 1996 — she developed a reputation for acting imperiously and impulsively. She faced deep questions about her personal probity in public office, which led to corruption cases against her in Switzerland, Spain and Britain, as well as in Pakistan.
Ms. Bhutto saw herself as the inheritor of her father’s mantle, often spoke of how he encouraged her to study the lives of legendary female leaders ranging from Indira Gandhi to Joan of Arc.
She grew up in the most rarefied atmosphere the country had to offer. One longtime friend and adviser, Peter W. Galbraith, a former American ambassador to Croatia, said he and Ms. Bhutto believed they first met in 1962 when they were children: he the son of John Kenneth Galbraith, the American ambassador to India; she the daughter of the future Pakistani prime minister. Mr. Galbraith’s father was accompanying Jacqueline Kennedy to a horse show in Lahore.
They met again at Harvard, where Mr. Galbraith remembers Ms. Bhutto arriving as a prim 16-year-old fresh from a Karachi convent who liked to bake cakes.
After her father’s death — he was hanged by another general who seized power, Zia ul-Haq — Ms. Bhutto stepped into the spotlight as his successor. [********]
Following the idea of big ambition, Ms. Bhutto called herself chairperson for life of the opposition Pakistan Peoples Party, a seemingly odd title in an organization based on democratic ideals and one she has acknowledged quarreling over with her mother, Nusrat Bhutto, in the early 1990s.
She was also wont to self-aggrandize. She recently boasted that three million people came out to greet her in Karachi on her return last month, calling it Pakistan’s ”most historic” rally. In fact, crowd estimates were closer to 200,000, many of them provincial party members who had received small amounts of money to make the trip.
Such flourishes led questioning in Pakistan about the strength of her democratic ideals in practice, and a certain distrust, particularly amid signs of back-room deal-making with General Musharraf, the military ruler she opposed.
“She believes she is the chosen one, that she is the daughter of Bhutto and everything else is secondary,” said Feisal Naqvi, a corporate lawyer in Lahore who knew Ms. Bhutto.
When Ms. Bhutto was re-elected to a second term as Prime Minister, her style of government combined both the traditional and the modern, said Zafar Rathore, a senior civil servant at the time.
But her view of the role of government differed little from the classic notion in Pakistan that the state was the preserve of the ruler who dished out favors to constituents and colleagues, he recalled.
As secretary of interior, responsible for the Pakistani police force, Mr. Rathore, who is now retired, said he tried to get an appointment with Ms. Bhutto to explain the need for accountability in the force. He was always rebuffed, he said.
Finally, when he was seated next to her in a small meeting, he said to her, “I’ve been waiting to see you,” he recounted. “Instantaneously, she said: ‘I am very busy, what do you want. I’ll order it right now.’ ”
She could not understand that a civil servant might want to talk about policies, he said. Instead, he said, ‘’she understood that when all civil servants have access to the sovereign, they want to ask for something.”
But until her death, Ms. Bhutto ruled the party with an iron hand, jealously guarding her position, even while leading the party in absentia for nearly a decade. [****]
Members of her party saluted her return to Pakistan, saying she was the best choice against General Musharraf. Chief among her attributes, they said, was her sheer determination.
Ms. Bhutto’s marriage to Asif Ali Zardari was arranged by her mother, a fact that Ms. Bhutto has often said was easily explained, even for a modern, highly educated Pakistani woman.
To be acceptable to the Pakistani public as a politician she could not be a single woman, and what was the difference, she would ask, between such a marriage and computer dating?
Mr. Zardari is known for his love of polo and other perquisites of the good life like fine clothes, expensive restaurants, homes in Dubai and London, and an apartment in New York.
He was minister of investment in Ms. Bhutto’s second government. And it was from that perch that he made many of the deals that haunted Ms. Bhutto, and himself, in the courts.
There were accusations that the couple had illegally taken $1.5 billion from the state. It is a figure that Ms. Bhutto has vigorously contested.
Indeed, one of Ms. Bhutto’s main objectives in seeking to return to power was to restore the reputation of her husband, who was jailed for eight years in Pakistan, said Abdullah Riar, a former senator in the Pakistani Parliament and a former colleague of Ms. Bhutto’s. [***********]
“She told me, ‘Time will prove he is the Nelson Mandela of Pakistan,’ ” Mr. Riar said.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Bhutto Assassinated at Rally

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/27/AR2007122700122.html
Bhutto Assassinated at Rally
By Griff Witte and Debbi Wilgoren
Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, December 27, 2007; 11:04 AM [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [12/27/2007 8:23:55 AM] [***]
RAWALPINDI, Pakistan, Dec. 27 -- Former Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto was assassinated Thursday at a political rally, two months after returning from exile to attempt a political comeback.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/27/AR2007122700122.html
Bhutto Assassinated at Rally
By Griff Witte and Debbi Wilgoren
Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, December 27, 2007; 11:04 AM [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [after her return iin October, the second attempt on Benazair Bhutto] [Bhutto successfully assassinated: a potential tipping point!] [questions will persist about how much security Musharraf had provided her] [but Musharraf too must now—even more than before—fear for what comes next] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis-West confrontation] [between now and January 2009, I can almost guarantee al Qaeda or jihadis will attempt another spectacular attack in the U.S. or at least West or against said assets] [12/27/2007 8:23:55 AM] [***]
RAWALPINDI, Pakistan, Dec. 27 -- Former Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto was assassinated Thursday at a political rally, two months after returning from exile to attempt a political comeback.
Bhutto, 54, was shot at close range as she waved to supporters from the rooftop opening of a bulletproof car, witnesses said. Seconds later, a suicide bomber detonated explosives just behind Bhutto's car. The explosion killed at least 20 people,[both close-range gunfire and suicide bomber] [*******] and injured many others.
Also Thursday, at a different pre-election rally in this garrison city, a rooftop sniper opened fire on supporters of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif leaving four dead and at least five injured.
Bhutto's death comes 12 days before Pakistanis are set to vote in national parliamentary elections, which have already been marked by enormous political turmoil. President Pervez Musharraf declared a state of emergency in November -- a move that he said was to combat terrorism but was widely perceived as an effort to stave off legal challenges to his authority.
Bhutto was rushed to Rawalpindi General Hospital, where a surgeon worked in vain to save her. Thousands had gathered by the time an official emerged from the hospital to say Bhutto was dead; the announcement triggered a roar of rage and grief.
Devastated supporters smashed the glass doors of the hospital and stormed the building to try and view her lifeless body. Even as ambulances continued to arrive bearing dead and wounded from the bombing, the crowd outside the hospital tore down and burned campaign posters showing candidates from Musharraf's party. Yelling "Musharraf is a dog," they blamed him for Bhutto's death. [jihadis have successfully turned Pakistanis’ wrath against Musharraf rather than the jihadis who killed her] [quite artful really] [***]
Bush administration officials condemned the attack and said President Bush, who is vacationing in Crawford, Tex., was preparing a statement. The administration had played a key role in brokering the agreement between Musharraf and Bhutto that enabled her to return to the country Oct. 18. [******]
Musharraf strongly condemned the attack, and declared a national day of mourning, Pakistani Ambassador to the United States Mahmud Ali Durrani told CNN. “We have lost one of our important, very important . . . leaders,” he said. Wire services reported tht Musharraf was meeting with top advisers to discuss postponing the Jan. 8 elections.
Bhutto was running for Parliament, and her Pakistan Peoples Party was expected to win enough seats for her to become prime minister.
A daughter of a wealthy and politically powerful Pakistani family, she had been elected prime minister twice, in 1988 and 1993, and was the first woman elected to lead a post-colonial Muslim state. She was the most popular candidate running, and had fared well in recent polls.
Bhutto, who survived numerous assassination attempts, becomes the late