« January 2008 | Main | March 2008 »

February 29, 2008

Visas for War Zone Translators Halted

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/28/AR2008022803809.html
Visas for War Zone Translators Halted
Current Quotas Are Nearly Filled
By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, February 29, 2008; A10 [bush white house] [post-IRTPA intelligence reform] [IC both military and other] [the pulblicized need for fluency in languages common to Jihadis including Pashto, Dari, Urdu, others] [VISA reform] [department of state one of the lead agencies in visas along with DHS;s immigration entitites] [************]
The State Department has stopped processing the applications of 551 Iraqi and Afghan translators seeking special visas to come to the United States, because the current legal quota of 500 visas for the program this year is about to be reached, [******] according to department officials.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/28/AR2008022803809.html
Visas for War Zone Translators Halted
Current Quotas Are Nearly Filled
By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, February 29, 2008; A10 [bush white house] [post-IRTPA intelligence reform] [IC both military and other] [the pulblicized need for fluency in languages common to Jihadis including Pashto, Dari, Urdu, others] [VISA reform] [department of state one of the lead agencies in visas along with DHS;s immigration entitites] [************]
The State Department has stopped processing the applications of 551 Iraqi and Afghan translators seeking special visas to come to the United States, because the current legal quota of 500 visas for the program this year is about to be reached, [******] according to department officials.
The applicants, all of whom have worked for U.S. military forces, received an e-mail notice from the State Department's National Visa Center last week. "We have temporarily stopped processing cases," the message said, adding that "the applicant should NOT make any travel arrangements, sell property or give up employment until the US Embassy or Consulate General has issued a visa." [sounds like a big bureaucratic FUBAR] [*****]
The halt is the latest obstacle for many of the several thousand translators who have worked for U.S. military units in Iraq and Afghanistan, risking their lives and leaving their families vulnerable to retaliation from insurgents who see them as accomplices of American troops. More than 250 interpreters working for U.S. forces or their contractors have been killed in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. Many American service members have worked to help their former translators gain a visa to come to the United States under a 2006 congressional program initially designed to admit 50 translators per year, a quota later increased to 500.
Because most of the 551 whose applications are now held in abeyance must travel to Jordan, Syria or Kuwait to meet with U.S. Embassy personnel as part of the application process, the notice has created concern not just among the hundreds of potential refugees, but also among their sponsors, many of whom are current or former U.S. military personnel who worked with the translators in the war zone.
A bill sponsored by Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) and signed into law by President Bush last month raised to 5,000 the number of special visas available this year to Iraqi translators and other Iraqis who worked for the U.S. government or American contractors in the war zone. Officials with the departments of State and Homeland Security are still analyzing the legislation to work out the details of how the new program will be implemented. [still analyzing?] [good god] [****]
"We are working on this now with Congress, USCIS [U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service], and PRM [State's Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration] to see if we can get a broader interpretation that would make it immediately applicable to the Iraqis who have already applied," said one official involved in the process, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the policy is under development.
One sticking point, according to State Department officials, is that the new legislative language calls for any Iraqi seeking a special visa to have "experienced or is experiencing an ongoing serious threat as a consequence" of being employed by the United States. The officials are attempting to work out what type of evidence is needed to substantiate "an ongoing serious threat as a consequence of that employment."
The visa program that has been halted contained no such provision, although the translators had to provide a letter signed by a flag officer or the U.S. ambassador in Iraq attesting to their honorable service.
Kennedy, in a statement issued yesterday, said: "It's appalling that the administration is taking so long to issue the guidance necessary to continue the Special Immigrant Visa program for Iraqis with close ties to our government. . . . Every day we delay only further endangers these heroic Iraqis who have saved American lives."
Kirk W. Johnson, who runs the List Project, a nonprofit group seeking to bring threatened Iraqis who worked for U.S. forces to the United States, criticized the suspension and called on the Bush administration to simplify the application and processing system.
"If this doesn't prove why it's President Bush's responsibility to whip these bureaucracies into shape, and why the best intentions of Congress can only nudge things, I don't know what else can," [******]said Johnson, a former staffer with the U.S. Agency for International Development in Iraq. "Until the president weighs in, the bureaucracies will not solve this."
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

Officials Split on Viability of Border-Fence Project

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/washington/29fence.html
February 29, 2008
Officials Split on Viability of Border-Fence Project
By JULIA PRESTON [bush white house] [the tricky issue of immigration reform] [may have reached NSC level at certain times] [president Bush, for instance, has been on record for comprehensive reform which GOP rights has savaged him for] [this appears mostly bureaucratic, however] [DHS and those whom he’s trying to get under control] [Mr. Chertoff has become a favorite target of GOP right] [************]
A top Homeland Security Department official said Thursday that a pilot project to create a virtual fence along parts of the Mexican border had been a success, but he said the technology was never intended to be used — and would not be used — across the entire length of the border. [********]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/washington/29fence.html
February 29, 2008
Officials Split on Viability of Border-Fence Project
By JULIA PRESTON [bush white house] [the tricky issue of immigration reform] [may have reached NSC level at certain times] [president Bush, for instance, has been on record for comprehensive reform which GOP rights has savaged him for] [this appears mostly bureaucratic, however] [DHS and those whom he’s trying to get under control] [Mr. Chertoff has become a favorite target of GOP right] [************]
A top Homeland Security Department official said Thursday that a pilot project to create a virtual fence along parts of the Mexican border had been a success, but he said the technology was never intended to be used — and would not be used — across the entire length of the border. [********]
“It is working, and it met the requirements,” Jayson P. Ahern, deputy commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, said of the pilot project during a briefing with reporters in Washington.
Mr. Ahern’s assessment was in line with an announcement last Friday by Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff but contradicted testimony on Wednesday by an official from the Government Accountability Office, a nonpartisan watchdog arm of Congress. [*******]
The official, Richard M. Stana, who handles domestic security and justice issues for the accountability office, told a House subcommittee that the pilot project had “resulted in a product that did not fully meet user needs.” He also said “the project’s design will not be used as the basis” for future development of a virtual fence [****] along the border because of the problems.
The conflicting accounts about the pilot project and its applicability elsewhere add to the confusion and debate that has surrounded the virtual fence almost since its inception.
The project is known as P-28, [****] for the length in miles of Arizona border where it has been installed. The equipment includes ground sensors and 90-foot mobile towers mounted with cameras and radar that communicate images to laptops inside Border Patrol vehicles and to command centers.
Last Friday, Mr. Chertoff announced that his agency was satisfied with the $20.6 million project, despite some early “defects,” and had given final acceptance of it to the Boeing Company, its developer. He indicated the department intended to use the technology at other locations, though far short of the entire 2,000-mile border.
But in his statement to the House subcommittee, Mr. Stana said the department projected new delays in expanding the use of the technology. Some version of the virtual fence would be put into use along additional areas near Tucson by the end of this year, [***] Mr. Stana said, and it would be extended to remaining areas of the Tucson border and to Yuma, Ariz., and El Paso, Tex., by 2011. As recently as October, Homeland Security Department officials said all the P-28 technology would be in use by the end of this year.
After a series of high-profile failures during the P-28 tests, which began in June 2007, department officials told investigators for the Government Accountability Office that they hoped to develop the newer phases of the technology “right, not fast,” [****] Mr. Stana said Wednesday.
Early in the testing last year, the original software Boeing used did not relay images from cameras and radar. For a time the system failed when it rained. Border Patrol agents were not consulted by Boeing in the early phases of the P-28 project.
“That should never have happened,” Representative Christopher Carney, a Pennsylvania Democrat who is chairman of the subcommittee, said Thursday. He disputed the Homeland Security officials’ assessment of the pilot project’s success.
“It did not work,” Mr. Carney said. “It was sold as a force multiplier. It was going to have images so accurate it could distinguish between a coyote and a deer and a blowing bush. Well, guess what: it has not done that.”
Mr. Carney said that when he visited the Tucson border in January, the P-28 cameras went out of focus when they spotted a group of illegal crossers, causing Border Patrol agents to lose track of them.
Boeing gave the Department of Homeland Security a $2.2 million credit on the original contract because of delays in the pilot project. Since August, Boeing has received two new contracts to further develop the virtual fence, for a total of $133 million. [****]
Mr. Ahern said Thursday that border officials always expected that they would have to get new software and equipment to expand the pilot project.
Lakiesha R. Carr contributed reporting from Washington.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Russia’s Last Hope

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/opinion/29erofeyev.html
February 29, 2008
Op-Ed Contributor
Russia’s Last Hope
By VICTOR EROFEYEV
Moscow [oped] [Czar Putin’s upcoming election charade] [use psci 350] [ir text] [***]
IF I recover from a bout of stomach illness by Sunday, I will cast my ballot in Russia’s presidential election. But there’s no need to rush to get well, because my vote will make no difference.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/opinion/29erofeyev.html
February 29, 2008
Op-Ed Contributor
Russia’s Last Hope
By VICTOR EROFEYEV
Moscow [oped] [Czar Putin’s upcoming election charade] [use psci 350] [ir text] [***]
IF I recover from a bout of stomach illness by Sunday, I will cast my ballot in Russia’s presidential election. But there’s no need to rush to get well, because my vote will make no difference.
There was a day when it did seem that my vote mattered. In 1996, I found myself in Ireland on Election Day and made a huge effort to go to the embassy in Dublin and vote for Boris N. Yeltsin, because I feared that the Communists could return to power under his opponent, Gennadi A. Zyuganov, and I would again have serious problems. Mr. Zyuganov is running for president again this year, but I no longer fear him. He will lose.
This not only reassures me, but also leads me to think about how President Vladimir V. Putin, [****] in his eight years in power, managed to destroy Communism. He finished it off so brutally that it’s silly to even think about the possibility of its return. [****] Yet some people outside Russia believe that Mr. Putin did away with only the democrats, the liberal parties and the independent news media. No, he also threw out power-seeking oligarchs, who are very unpopular with the Russian people, and he rid the country of chaos and instability, which, he tells us, were rampant in the 1990s.
No matter how you look at it, President Putin also brought order to Chechnya: at least they’re no longer flying young Russian soldiers back in body bags every day. And if television is offering more humorous programs and songs from around the world instead of political discussions, people only welcome this. As for opposition parties, the real ones, they quarreled among themselves and became so indistinguishable in their radical demands that the people, with President Putin’s help, stopped taking note of them. [*****]
For the majority of Russians, Mr. Putin will enter history as a positive figure. That during his rule he actively relied on his K.G.B. colleagues doesn’t bother a lot of people. [****] Whom else should he lean on in his struggle to impose order? He worked with the human material that came to him from the depth of Russian history, people who to this day drink, steal and consider politics a source of personal power and enrichment. [****] If Mr. Putin preferred not to be trusting, it was because he clearly sensed the rot in the national gene pool.
That he went too far in some things, that he irritated Europe, that he was sometimes vindictive — these are separate matters. His friends in the K.G.B. were raised on hatred for the West. Now, at least, they limit themselves for the most part to negative rhetoric about the West. So there is progress. Mr. Putin gave his people faith in tomorrow: It’s no accident that Russia today is full of packed restaurants, game parlors, casinos, discothèques, cars and books about everything from Buddhism to homosexuality. Mr. Putin was lucky all eight of his years in office: oil prices rose, Russia grew rich and life became good. Private life remains remarkably free. [******]
His biggest mistake was his longing to make Russia the successor to the Soviet Union: this gave rise to the imperial discourse that so frightened neighboring countries, his defense of the Soviet Union’s aggressive foreign policy and the damage to Russia’s image in the world. [****]What’s worse is that our next president, Dmitri A. Medvedev, whom President Putin chose as his heir as if he were a czar, will have to deal with the Russian weaknesses that were hidden from the population under propaganda slogans. The failure to modernize industry or agriculture, the growing corruption in government, the ubiquitous drunkenness, the record numbers of murders and suicides, the terrible state of Russian health care and the problems that come with a shrinking population will fall on Mr. Medvedev’s young shoulders. [*******]
Nobody, probably not even President Putin, knows Mr. Medvedev’s real goals and values. He was never a public politician — though the talk on the street, not shared by dissidents, makes him out to be liberal, cultured, moderate and even pro-Western. As a young man he fought for democracy on the side of the future mayor of St. Petersburg, Anatoly Sobchak, [*****] and he was never noted for professional connections to the secret services. Yet his close ties to his current chief speak, at least, to limitless patience and self-limitation.
Whether Mr. Medvedev emerges as a new Khrushchev, ready for an ideological thaw, or a new Gorbachev, who also came to office without his own team, is impossible to say. [***] Mr. Putin has not died, as Stalin and a series of aged Communist leaders did when they gave up power. He is there, smilingly holding Mr. Medvedev by the hand. The king is not dead, and it is too early to shout: “Long live the new king!” [*******]
Once again the future of Russia is wide open and unpredictable. Will there be dual rule? Will there be confrontation between two leaders or will they peacefully coexist? Might Dmitri Medvedev disappear along the way, leaving power once again to Vladimir Vladimirovich? I have no answers. But I will say this: For better or for worse, Mr. Medvedev is the last hope for me and for the Russia I love. [****] If he proves to be a false figure of history, then Russia, no matter how hard it tries to look like a superpower, will sink to the depths like that submarine Kursk. Dmitri Anatolevich, the choice is yours.
Victor Erofeyev is the author of the short-story collection “Life With an Idiot.” This article was translated by The International Herald Tribune from the Russian.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Kenya Rivals Reach Peace Agreement

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/world/africa/29kenya.html
February 29, 2008
Kenya Rivals Reach Peace Agreement
By JEFFREY GETTLEMAN [Kenya] [horn of Africa and just south] [redoubt for various factions-actors in Somalia and elsewhere] [bush white house] [state department] [sec state Rice] [NSC principals and beyond] [factions within the administration] [president bush’s “freedom agenda”] [perhaps progress at last?] [************]
NAIROBI, Kenya — Kenya’s rival leaders broke their tense standoff on Thursday, agreeing to share power in a deal that may end the violence that has engulfed this nation but could be the beginning of a long and difficult political relationship.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/world/africa/29kenya.html
February 29, 2008
Kenya Rivals Reach Peace Agreement
By JEFFREY GETTLEMAN [Kenya] [horn of Africa and just south] [redoubt for various factions-actors in Somalia and elsewhere] [bush white house] [state department] [sec state Rice] [NSC principals and beyond] [factions within the administration] [president bush’s “freedom agenda”] [perhaps progress at last?] [************]
NAIROBI, Kenya — Kenya’s rival leaders broke their tense standoff on Thursday, agreeing to share power in a deal that may end the violence that has engulfed this nation but could be the beginning of a long and difficult political relationship.
The country seemed to let out a collective cheer as Mwai Kibaki, the president, and Raila Odinga, the top opposition leader, sat down at a desk in front of the president’s office, with a bank of television cameras rolling, and signed an agreement that creates a powerful prime minister position for Mr. Odinga and splits cabinet posts between the government and the opposition.
The two sides, which have been bitterly at odds for the past two months, will now be fused together in a government of national unity.
But there are still many thorny issues to resolve, starting with how the new government will function with essentially two bosses who have tried unsuccessfully to work together before. The government must also deal with the delicate business of reassigning the choice positions already given to Mr. Kibaki’s allies.
There is also a deeply divided country to heal. More than 1,000 Kenyans have been killed and hundreds of thousands driven from their homes in an uncharacteristic burst of violence set off by a deeply flawed election in December. Much of the fighting, like the voting, has been along ethnic lines.
The two-page power-sharing agreement, which came after intense international pressure and mediation by Kofi Annan, the former United Nations secretary general, seemed to serve as a contract to pull Kenya back from the brink. Both leaders urged their supporters, who have battled viciously across the country in recent weeks, to respect it.
“I call on Kenyans to embrace the spirit of togetherness,” Mr. Kibaki said.
Mr. Odinga was beaming next to him. He said that Kenyans should “celebrate and love each other” and “destroy the monster that is called ethnicity.”
Kenyans were glued to their television sets and radios across the country as the news broke. In downtown Nairobi, the capital, a crowd poured into the streets and danced and shouted until they were run off by police officers shooting tear gas. In offices across town, business executives, who have watched their profits fall and their investments fail over the past two months, finally exhaled.
“Yes, I’m relieved; you don’t know what we’ve been through,” said Ngovi Kitau, the managing director of a large car dealership. He had just come from a meeting at which his company had decided to let go 10 employees a month because business was so bad.
Still, he injected a note of caution that many Kenyans seemed to feel. “It’s a marriage of convenience, and it’s the best way out because it’s going to get the country moving again,” Mr. Kitau said. “But it’s not a solution.”
The agreement is pretty close to what opposition leaders had been demanding. It appears that the Kenyan government, reluctant at first to cede any substantial power, finally gave in after American officials, among others, insisted on “real power sharing” and threatened to punish anyone who blocked a deal.
One person close to the talks, who was not authorized to speak publicly, said that the Kenyan government felt as if “it had its back against the wall.” Alfred Mutua, a government spokesman, seemed to say as much.
“The outside pressure was relatively important,” Mr. Mutua said. “We are responsive to our neighbors and friends.”
Kenya used to be considered one of the most prosperous and stable nations in Africa, known as an oasis of peace in a turbulent region. But the country spun into chaos on Dec. 30 after the national election commission declared Mr. Kibaki the winner of a closely contested race against Mr. Odinga, who claims to have won the most votes.
Election observers have been unanimous in saying that the results were tainted by irregularities, with some saying that the government rigged the tallying of votes to give Mr. Kibaki a slender, 11th-hour edge.
The controversy spawned bloodletting across the country, with supporters of Mr. Odinga and Mr. Kibaki attacking one other in brutal battles. Few were spared. Entire villages were razed. Women and children were burned alive.
Mr. Odinga and Mr. Kibaki are from different ethnic groups, and the election seems to have kicked the lid off a set of simmering political, ethnic and economic issues. Many people have fled ethnically mixed areas in convoys of overloaded trucks, creating a degree of ethnic segregation that this country has never experienced.
The violence has cooled down in the past few weeks, but the tension and displacements have continued. Many Kenyans have said that the country will not return to peace until the dueling politicians agree to some sort of solution.
Mr. Annan took the lead in trying to bring the two sides together. For the past month, he has been meeting nearly every day with negotiators for Mr. Kibaki and Mr. Odinga, searching for a political compromise. More than anyone else, Mr. Annan has been the hope of this country. A baby rhino recently born in one of Kenya’s fabled game parks was even named after him.
But earlier this week, Mr. Annan seemed to have run into a brick wall. Negotiators deadlocked over whether they would share responsibilities or share power, with the government refusing to give Mr. Odinga substantial authority or to amend the Constitution to create the position of prime minister. Mr. Annan then decided to bypass the negotiation teams and go directly to Mr. Odinga and Mr. Kibaki. He met with them behind closed doors for more than four hours on Thursday.
At 4:30 p.m. local time, Mr. Annan, Mr. Kibaki and Mr. Odinga emerged. The two leaders signed the agreement with Mr. Annan standing behind them, his hands clasped, as a crowd of diplomats, cabinet ministers and political supporters clapped.
Under the deal, the party that holds a majority in Parliament — currently Mr. Odinga’s — will elect a prime minister to “coordinate and supervise” government affairs. The cabinet positions will be divided, based on parliamentary strength. Parliament will pass an act and a constitutional amendment guaranteeing all this.
One concern, though, is that this is not the first time Mr. Kibaki, 76, and Mr. Odinga, 63, have vowed to work together. The two were close political allies in 2002, when Mr. Kibaki was elected president, but they soon had a falling out. The issue back then was the same issue as today: whether to make Mr. Odinga prime minister, which Mr. Kibaki initially promised but then refused to do.
The two men are now supposed to spearhead the effort for constitutional reform, land reform, electoral reform and a complete overhaul of Kenya’s political system.
Their supporters seemed more or less placated on Thursday.
Rono Kibet, an opposition supporter who less than two months ago was burning down the houses of members of Mr. Kibaki’s ethnic group, said: “We will now stop the fighting. The agreement is very good.”
Nicholas Kamau, a Kibaki supporter, said some of his friends were grumbling that Mr. Kibaki sold them out.
“But most people have been waiting for this agreement,” he said. “We did not want another war.”
Mr. Annan said the deal was Kenya’s only way out of the crisis.
“Today we have reached an important staging post, but the journey is far from over,” Mr. Annan said. “Let the spirit of healing begin today. Let it begin now.”
Kennedy Abwao contributed reporting.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Strikes in Gaza Kill 18 Palestinians; Hamas Rocket Barrage Injures 2 Israelis

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/27/AR2008022700620.html
Strikes in Gaza Kill 18 Palestinians; Hamas Rocket Barrage Injures 2 Israelis
By Griff Witte
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, February 29, 2008; A15 [Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [following the Annapolis conference and the agreement to seek agreement by end of 2008] [more tit-for-tat violence] [just days after first suicide attack inside Israel for some time, rockets pouring down in Israel again] [now disposed and angry Gazans, not Hamas per se, exercised over Israel again instead of Hamas] [followup] [escalation dynamic underway] [*****]
JERUSALEM, Feb. 28 -- Israeli airstrikes in the Gaza Strip on Thursday killed at least 18 Palestinians -- including five children -- as Palestinian gunmen fired 45 rockets and mortar shells into southern Israel. Israel warned that Hamas's use of more sophisticated rockets could trigger a full-scale invasion.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/27/AR2008022700620.html
Strikes in Gaza Kill 18 Palestinians; Hamas Rocket Barrage Injures 2 Israelis
By Griff Witte
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, February 29, 2008; A15 [Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [following the Annapolis conference and the agreement to seek agreement by end of 2008] [more tit-for-tat violence] [just days after first suicide attack inside Israel for some time, rockets pouring down in Israel again] [now disposed and angry Gazans, not Hamas per se, exercised over Israel again instead of Hamas] [followup] [escalation dynamic underway] [*****]
JERUSALEM, Feb. 28 -- Israeli airstrikes in the Gaza Strip on Thursday killed at least 18 Palestinians -- including five children -- as Palestinian gunmen fired 45 rockets and mortar shells into southern Israel. Israel warned that Hamas's use of more sophisticated rockets could trigger a full-scale invasion.
Israel carried out 11 airstrikes in northern Gaza that officials said were aimed at rocket-launching sites and Hamas fighters. But four boys playing soccer, the youngest of whom was 8, were also killed in the strikes, according to Palestinian hospital officials. One other child was also killed, along with two adult civilians. At least nine of the others who died Thursday were fighters, the officials said.
The Israeli military said Palestinian rocket and mortar fire injured two Israelis.
Seven rockets have landed in the city of Ashkelon in the past two days, prompting accusations from Israeli officials that Hamas is using more formidable rockets than it has in the past. Ashkelon, a coastal city of about 120,000 people, is six miles north of Gaza. Israeli officials said the rockets that landed there have been Iranian-made, Grad-style rockets, which have a longer range and are considered more lethal than the relatively crude Qassam rockets that Hamas has traditionally used.
"What we saw today was really an escalation," said Foreign Ministry spokesman Arye Mekel, asserting that the greater range of the Grad rockets means that "a quarter of a million Israeli citizens are in danger." Mekel indicated that a stronger Israeli response may be in the offing. "Israel left Gaza not in order to return to it. However, the continuation of terror may put Israel in a position where we have no choice," he said.
Israel pulled its settlers out of Gaza in 2005. Last June, Hamas seized control, ending a power-sharing deal with the secular Fatah party, which favors negotiations with Israel. Since then, the volume of rocket fire has increased and pressure has grown on the Israeli government of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to topple Hamas, a radical Islamic movement that has both a military wing and a network of social services and that seeks to eradicate Israel.
Olmert, traveling in Japan on Thursday, said Israel is "at the height of this battle."
"We are taking painful blows and we will hit back with even more painful blows," he said.
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is due to visit Israel next week to prod Israel and the Fatah-led Palestinian Authority to continue peace negotiations. Israeli officials said her visit could end up delaying any major Israeli offensive in Gaza.
Thursday's violence brought the two-day death toll to at least 28, including an Israeli college student killed Wednesday, and the intensifying hostilities seemed likely to complicate any efforts to forge a peace deal this year. A spokesman for the Palestinian Authority accused Israel's government of trying "to destroy the peace process."
Many Gazans stayed off the streets Thursday to avoid being caught in the wrong place during an airstrike. "The mounting number of casualties is disturbing to everyone. People are seriously scared that this is becoming an all-out kind of war. It's really disturbing," said Eyad Sarraj, head of Gaza Community Mental Health.
On the Israeli side, residents were also seeking assistance to deal with the stress of the attacks. Leah Malul, spokeswoman for Barzilay Hospital in Ashkelon, said Thursday evening that 72 people had been admitted for treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder. "The population of Ashkelon is living under fear," Malul said. "As a result of these rockets, people are losing their senses."
Special correspondents Islam Abdulkarim in Gaza City and Samuel Sockol in Jerusalem contributed to this report.
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

Israel Sees Escalation in Gazans’ Longer-Range Strikes

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/world/middleeast/29mideast.html
February 29, 2008
Israel Sees Escalation in Gazans’ Longer-Range Strikes
By ISABEL KERSHNER [Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [following the Annapolis conference and the agreement to seek agreement by end of 2008] [more tit-for-tat violence] [just days after first suicide attack inside Israel for some time, rockets pouring down in Israel again] [now disposed and angry Gazans, not Hamas per se, exercised over Israel again instead of Hamas] [followup] [escalation dynamic underway] [*****]
JERUSALEM — Palestinian militants in Gaza fired at least eight imported, Katyusha-style rockets on Thursday at Ashkelon, on the Israeli coast, [***]in what Israeli officials said was a serious broadening of the conflict.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/world/middleeast/29mideast.html
February 29, 2008
Israel Sees Escalation in Gazans’ Longer-Range Strikes
By ISABEL KERSHNER [Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [following the Annapolis conference and the agreement to seek agreement by end of 2008] [more tit-for-tat violence] [just days after first suicide attack inside Israel for some time, rockets pouring down in Israel again] [now disposed and angry Gazans, not Hamas per se, exercised over Israel again instead of Hamas] [followup] [escalation dynamic underway] [*****]
JERUSALEM — Palestinian militants in Gaza fired at least eight imported, Katyusha-style rockets on Thursday at Ashkelon, on the Israeli coast, [***]in what Israeli officials said was a serious broadening of the conflict.
Ashkelon has been an occasional target of these longer-range rockets, but never of so many in one day. [****]The attack scored a direct hit on a house there for the first time.
The rocket attacks came on the second day of deadly Israeli airstrikes on Gaza. These attacks killed at least 19 Palestinians,[****] among them four boys, Palestinian hospital officials said.
Many of the others killed were from the military wing of Hamas, known as the Qassam Brigades, [****]which claimed responsibility for the latest rocket fire.
Hamas, the Islamic group that controls Gaza, also continued to fire locally made rockets known as Qassams at Sderot, on the Israeli border, where a civilian was killed by a rocket on Wednesday. Thousands of these rockets have been fired at Israel over the past seven years.
The 122-millimeter Katyushas, based on a Russian design, are manufactured in many countries and have a range of at least 10 miles, longer than the relatively crude Qassams. [****]Israelis refer to the Katyushas fired at Ashkelon as “grad” rockets.
No one was hurt in the attacks on Ashkelon, a city of 120,000 whose center lies about 10 miles north of the Gaza Strip, but there was significant damage to the building that was hit, said Micky Rosenfeld, an Israeli police spokesman. Six of the rockets hit central areas and residential neighborhoods, he said, while the others landed in open fields outside the city.
Israel’s strikes in Gaza on Thursday started in the early morning and were aimed at armed men and rocket-launching squads, an army spokeswoman said.
Among the militants killed was Hamza al-Hayya, the son of Khalil al-Hayya, a senior Hamas leader and legislator, the senior Mr. Hayya said. The Israeli Army said the attack was a strike against a squad about to launch rockets. [****] Hamas confirmed that Hamza al-Hayya was leading a rocket squad.
In Gaza, reacting to the news of his son’s death, Khalil al-Hayya said, “I thank God for this gift,” according to The Associated Press, adding, “This is the 10th member of my family to receive the honor of martyrdom.”
Seven members of the Hayya family and a neighbor were killed in May in an Israeli airstrike that hit the family home in Gaza. Khalil al-Hayya was not in the house at the time. Military officials said at the time that the army had “identified and hit a five-member terrorist cell” that was the target of the attack. That month, Hamas had also intensified its rocket fire from Gaza, killing two Israelis in Sderot.
Images filmed by cameramen in Gaza on Thursday showed distraught family members gathering in blankets the body parts of the four boys, ages 8 to 12, who were killed in one of the Israeli strikes. Relatives said they had been playing soccer outdoors not far from their homes near Jabaliya, in the northern Gaza Strip.
The army spokeswoman repeated that the strike was aimed at rocket launchers and that anyone in the vicinity of rocket launchers was at risk.
An Israeli security official said the rockets that landed in Ashkelon on Thursday were “probably made in Iran” and had most likely reached Gaza via Egypt. He was speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to give out such information. An examination of the remains of similar rockets that struck Ashkelon earlier this year led Israeli officials to conclude that they had been made in Iran.
David Baker, an Israeli government spokesman, said the attacks constituted “a definite escalation, and one that we will not tolerate.” He said Israel was “well aware of the steps it must take to halt the rocket fire,” but did not elaborate on any additional Israeli response. [*****]
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who was in Tokyo on Thursday at the end of an official visit, told reporters there, “We will reach out for the terrorists and we will attack and we will try to stop them.”
Ehud Barak, the defense minister, was quoted by Israeli news media as saying that the possibility of a large-scale Israeli ground operation in Gaza was “real and tangible,” and that Israel was not afraid of undertaking one. [*******]
The Israeli government and the military have so far indicated reluctance to embark on a large ground invasion of Gaza, with some officials saying privately that they fear a heavy toll in lives on both sides and are skeptical about what such a move would achieve.
In what appeared to be a signal to Hamas, the Israeli Air Force struck one of its police posts in the Shati refugee camp near Gaza City on Thursday evening, close to the home of Ismail Haniya, the leader of the Hamas administration. Two Hamas militants were killed but Mr. Haniya was unharmed, Palestinians said. After Israeli threats of retaliation in the recent widening of rocket fire into Israel, many of the Hamas leaders are reported to have gone into hiding.
The rockets that slammed into Sderot left the streets mostly deserted.
A bodyguard for Avi Dichter, Israel’s public security minister, was lightly wounded by shrapnel when a rocket hit the campus of a college on the outskirts of Sderot shortly before Mr. Dichter arrived. A 47-year-old man who was studying logistics at the college was killed by rocket fire there on Wednesday, the first Israeli fatality from rocket fire in nine months.
The latest surge of hostilities started on Wednesday morning, when the Israeli Air Force carried out a strike in southern Gaza and killed five members of the Qassam Brigades. [***] Hamas then bombarded Sderot in retaliation.
Three Palestinian boys and a 5-month-old baby were among those killed in subsequent Israeli strikes on Wednesday, medical officials in Gaza said.
Taghreed El-Khodary contributed reporting from Gaza City, and Rina Castelnuovo from Sderot.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Harry Withdrawn From Afghanistan

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/world/asia/28cnd-harry.html
February 29, 2008
Harry Withdrawn From Afghanistan
By SARAH LYALL [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] [after far too many accidential noncombatants hit in early 2007, year ended with far fewer] [the winter lull is upon the region?] [apparently the Drudge report blabbed on this side of the pond]] [******] [ditto]
LONDON — The defense ministry announced on Friday that Prince Harry, the third in line to the British throne, would have to come home from Afghanistan because it was too risky for him to stay there.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/world/asia/28cnd-harry.html
February 29, 2008
Harry Withdrawn From Afghanistan
By SARAH LYALL [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] [after far too many accidential noncombatants hit in early 2007, year ended with far fewer] [the winter lull is upon the region?] [apparently the Drudge report blabbed on this side of the pond]] [******] [ditto]
LONDON — The defense ministry announced on Friday that Prince Harry, the third in line to the British throne, would have to come home from Afghanistan because it was too risky for him to stay there.
Harry, 23, has been in Helmand Province with the British Army since December with the knowledge of most of the British news media, who agreed to keep the news secret for security reasons. Details of his deployment only became widely known when they were reported by The Drudge Report on Thursday and the British media decided that the agreement was off.
The defense ministry said in a statement that although Harry had been expected to remain in Afghanistan for a few more weeks with his unit from the Household Cavalry Regiment Battlegroup, “the situation has now clearly changed.” As a result, the chief of the defense staff, Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup, had decided “to withdraw Prince Harry from Afghanistan immediately,” the ministry said.
“This decision has been taken primarily on the basis that the worldwide media coverage of Prince Harry in Afghanistan could impact on the security of those who are deployed there, as well as the risks to him as an individual soldier,” the statement added.
The ministry also asked that the news media refrain from reporting or speculating on where Prince Harry is right now, what time he would come home and what route he would take.
The awkwardly timed dissemination of the prince’s whereabouts had several immediate repercussions. Politicians including Prime Minister Gordon Brown and the Conservative leader, David Cameron, leapt all over one another in lavishing praise on Prince Harry, 23. British reporters whipped out their notebooks and unleashed into the public domain all the interviews and video scenes of him discussing his deployment, wearing fatigues and firing his machine gun that they had been saving for later.
And Gen. Sir Richard Dannatt, chief of the general staff of the army, said he was “very disappointed” that “foreign Web sites” had thoughtlessly posted the story without asking for permission.
“This is in stark contrast to the highly responsible attitude that the whole of the U.K. print and broadcast media, along with a small number of overseas, who have entered into an understanding with us over the coverage of Prince Harry on operations,” General Dannatt said in a statement.
The prince, who graduated from the Sandhurst military academy and was denied the chance to go to Iraq when the army said it was too risky, has been working as a battlefield air controller in Afghanistan since December, the army said.
Mr. Brown said that “the whole of Britain will be proud of the outstanding service he is giving.” General Dannatt said Prince Harry’s conduct had been “exemplary.” In a series of interviews with the news media given during his deployment but not released until now, Prince Harry revealed that he had not washed in four days and that he was enjoying a life of seminormalcy among regular soldiers.
Describing how he felt when he learned he was to be sent to Afghanistan, he said, “A bit of excitement, a bit of ‘phew,’ finally, get the chance to actually do the soldiering that I wanted to do ever since I joined, really.”
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Prince Harry's Seeing Combat, And British Media Kept Quiet

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/28/AR2008022801881.html
Prince Harry's Seeing Combat, And British Media Kept Quiet
By Kevin Sullivan
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, February 29, 2008; A01 [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] [after far too many accidential noncombatants hit in early 2007, year ended with far fewer] [the winter lull is upon the region?] [apparently the Drudge report blabbed on this side of the pond]] [******]
LONDON, Feb. 28 -- Prince Harry has been fighting on the front lines in Afghanistan for 10 weeks, his presence there kept secret until Thursday in a remarkable deal between the British military and news media.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/28/AR2008022801881.html
Prince Harry's Seeing Combat, And British Media Kept Quiet
By Kevin Sullivan
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, February 29, 2008; A01 [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] [after far too many accidential noncombatants hit in early 2007, year ended with far fewer] [the winter lull is upon the region?] [apparently the Drudge report blabbed on this side of the pond]] [******]
LONDON, Feb. 28 -- Prince Harry has been fighting on the front lines in Afghanistan for 10 weeks, his presence there kept secret until Thursday in a remarkable deal between the British military and news media.
British military officials confirmed that Harry, 23, third in line to the British throne, deployed to Afghanistan on Dec. 14 and has been fighting Taliban forces from a forward operating base in southern Helmand province.
News of Harry's deployment immediately became sensational news here and rekindled an emotional debate about whether the red-haired second son of Prince Charles and Princess Diana should be risking his life in war.
When the news was posted Thursday on the Drudge Report Web site, British newspapers and television stations instantly rolled out extensive special reports on the first British royal to see combat since the Falklands War more than 25 years ago. [******]
Those reports included lengthy taped interviews with Harry just before his deployment in December and last week at his Afghan base. Photos and video showed Harry firing a machine gun, patrolling on foot in full combat gear in an Afghan village and washing his socks in a camp sink.
"All my wishes have come true," Harry told reporters in last week's camp interview, wearing a brown military T-shirt and camouflage pants and noting that he had not showered in four days.
"It's very nice to be sort of a normal person for once; I think it's about as normal as I'm going to get," said Harry, now addressed with his rank as Cornet Wales. "It's much better being here experiencing it rather than hearing all the stories of people coming back."
"Prince Hal at last!" said Robert Lacey, a noted royal biographer, referring to Shakespeare's famous warrior prince.
Harry's military adventures have been tabloid fodder in Britain since last year, when military commanders decided to deploy him to Iraq, then changed their minds in the face of extensive publicity. Officials said Harry could too easily become an irresistible target for enemy forces, putting himself and his fellow soldiers at unnecessary risk. [********]
In the December interview, one of the most extensive of his life, Harry said he considered leaving the army after being denied an Iraq deployment. The reason he didn't, he said, was "the possibility of this" mission to Afghanistan.
"I would never want to put someone else's life in danger when they have to sit next to the bullet magnet," he said. "But if I'm wanted, if I'm needed, then I will serve my country as I signed up to do."
Perhaps the most startling disclosure Thursday was not that Harry finally got his wish to see combat, but that Britain's famously feisty media agreed, en masse, to keep quiet about it.
Harry and his older brother, William, are tabloid favorites because of their youthful good looks, their status as sons of one of the world's most famous women and their appetite for late-night drinking sessions at London's most exclusive nightclubs.
The idea that Britain's diverse and highly competitive media outlets could keep a secret about anything struck many observers as remarkable -- particularly when that secret was England's favorite young hell-raising party boy. [*******]
"It makes me wonder what else is going on," said John Harmer, 30, a London office worker. "I don't think it can be the first time" that the media have agreed to keep information from the public.
Some wondered whether an agreement among leading media outlets to withhold information would damage the media's credibility. "One wonders whether viewers, readers and listeners will ever want to trust media bosses again," TV broadcaster Jon Snow wrote in his blog. "Or perhaps this was a courageous editorial decision to protect this fine young man?"
Every major news outlet in Britain signed on to the deal, which was struck in three meetings called by top military officials between September and December, according to a media source involved in the process.
At the first session, Gen. Richard Dannatt, head of the British army, and other top officials told 30 to 40 media representatives that they wanted to give Harry a chance to deploy to a war zone -- without specifying which one.
"If he was to have a future in the army, he needed to go," Dannatt said, according to the source, who asked not to be identified because he is not authorized to speak for his company.
Dannatt asked whether the media would agree to a collective blackout. In return, the military would provide photos and a written description of Harry's tour after he returned home.
The media representatives told Dannatt the proposal was "absurd" but said they would consider a blackout that allowed greater access to Harry in the war zone.
Details of the arrangement were hammered out at the second and third meetings. In return for their silence, the media would get access to a pre-deployment interview. They would also be allowed several "embeds" with Harry's unit. Pooled interviews, video footage and photographs of Harry in Afghanistan would be made available to all. [*****]
The media agreed not to publish those materials until after Harry's tour ended in April, the source said.
According to an account of the deal posted on the Guardian newspaper's Web site, the military also agreed to bring Harry home on a Friday, which would be convenient for both daily and Sunday papers in Britain.
"I think most people thought this would last for at most a week before it leaked out," the source said. "It lasted much, much longer than anybody thought."
British media critic Roy Greenslade called the Harry story "an incredible piece of self-censorship."
"But in the circumstances, it's understandable," he said. "I believe this young man wanted to serve and do his duty. I think it was right to both let him go and to keep quiet."
Greenslade said editors periodically agree to withhold information if they believe it is in the public interest. He recalled a time in the early 1990s, when he was editor of the Daily Mirror newspaper, that he learned police had discovered a large cache of Irish Republican Army weapons in Wales.
He said he and other editors agreed to a police request not to reveal that information because the police were hoping that staking out the weapons would lead to the capture of key IRA figures. Greenslade said that police did capture key suspects and that the media blackout was justified.
Dannatt issued a statement Thursday praising the British media for their "highly responsible attitude" and saying he was "very disappointed that foreign websites have decided to run this story without consulting us."
"What the last two months have shown is that it is perfectly possible for Prince Harry to be employed just the same as other Army officers of his rank and experience," Dannatt said. "His conduct on operations in Afghanistan has been exemplary. He has been fully involved in operations and has run the same risks as everyone else in his battlegroup."
With the news of Harry's presence in Afghanistan out, Dannatt said he would review whether to keep him there.
Lacey said Harry was maintaining a long British royal family tradition of military service. His uncle, Prince Andrew, served in the Falklands, and his grandfather Prince Philip was a decorated World War II veteran. [****]Harry's father, Prince Charles, served in the British navy but never saw combat. [the queen used to work in bomb shelters as Hitlers missiles rained down] [********]
Although William, who is in line to become king after Charles, is also a military officer, he was much less likely to be put in harm's way, Lacey said.
"There is a convention that the principal heir should be kept away from real danger," he said. "As the 'spare' rather than the heir, Harry is expected by the royal family to take the ultimate military risks."
Most Britons interviewed said they support Harry's decision to fight for his country. But others worried that his death on the battlefield would be a terrible blow to Britain, particularly given his mother's tragic death in a 1997 car accident.
"There is a sense in which these two boys, bearing the banner of Diana as they do, have created a reassuring and cheering partnership out of the tragedy of their mother's death," Lacey said.
"Apart from the obvious sadness people would feel if Harry were killed, for the royal family it would mean the loss of this important partnership of William and Harry. It would be devastating."
© 2008 The Washington Post Compan

Despite Problems, Iraqi Leader Boasts of Success

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/28/AR2008022804209.html
Despite Problems, Iraqi Leader Boasts of Success
Rivals See Maliki's Confidence as Rash, but Publicly Deny a Move to Topple Him
By Amit R. Paley and Joshua Partlow
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, February 29, 2008; A12 [-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] [on-again-off-again political reconciliation] [currently off again] [***]
BAGHDAD, Feb. 28 -- Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki gazed out at a sea of chanting Shiite pilgrims Thursday and offered a brash appraisal of his administration's 21-month tenure.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/28/AR2008022804209.html
Despite Problems, Iraqi Leader Boasts of Success
Rivals See Maliki's Confidence as Rash, but Publicly Deny a Move to Topple Him
By Amit R. Paley and Joshua Partlow
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, February 29, 2008; A12 [-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] [on-again-off-again political reconciliation] [currently off again] [***]
BAGHDAD, Feb. 28 -- Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki gazed out at a sea of chanting Shiite pilgrims Thursday and offered a brash appraisal of his administration's 21-month tenure.
"We promised we would bring national reconciliation to the sons of Iraq, and we have succeeded!" [this man is more delusional than any of us realized] [*****]Maliki thundered to hundreds of thousands of Shiites gathered at the golden-domed Imam Hussein Shrine in Karbala. "Iraqis are once again loving brothers!"
Maliki is facing a drumbeat of criticism that his government has achieved little progress as well as constant calls for his ouster, but these days he hardly sounds like a man fighting for his political survival. [****]He acts as if he has the upper hand over his political rivals, brusquely rejecting demands from key allies and making a bold grab for greater control of the federal bureaucracy.
The 57-year-old Shiite and former exile feels little cause for concern, according to his aides, because he enjoys the strong backing of the Bush administration, which worries that the chaos triggered by the collapse of Maliki's government would prompt a new wave of sectarian bloodletting across Iraq. With the infighting by the political class in Iraq as bitter as ever, Maliki believes the odds are remote that any coalition could come together to oust him, his aides say.
"The message is that he is tough and he is not going to compromise," said Sami al-Askiri, a Shiite member of parliament who is a confidant and informal adviser to Maliki. "I think now the prime minister feels that he is more secure, both for himself and for the country in general."
Maliki's confidence seems untethered to political reality. [that’s being fat-too charitable] [****] Predicting when his government will fall has become a parlor game in certain circles in Baghdad. And some of his pronouncements -- like one on Thursday that "sectarianism has been eliminated" -- have struck Iraqi and American officials as bordering on the delusional. Sectarian killings are still common and political reconciliation remains elusive, a fact underscored by the veto this week of a law calling for nationwide elections, one of the few major pieces of legislation approved by parliament.
"He's failed at governing," acknowledged a senior U.S. official in Baghdad, who was granted anonymity so he could speak candidly, but the official said there was no better option. "If Maliki were to be removed by a vote of no confidence, we'd go into an extended period of stagnation."
Publicly, at least, Maliki's major political rivals have expressed support for him and denied persistent rumors that they are plotting to topple him. One of the figures most regularly listed as a potential successor, Vice President Adel Abdul Mahdi, has no current plans to unseat Maliki, [****]his associates said.
"For the time being, our strategy is to see that he remains," Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, the leader of Abdul Mahdi's Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, a powerful Shiite political party, said in an interview. "It's necessary to see a change happen in the government, not a change of the government." [see yesterday’s external on ISCI] [****]
But the emerging braggadocio displayed by Maliki has tested the limits of that support.
Perhaps the most serious showdown came in December, when a group of senior Kurdish officials flew to Baghdad to discuss a list of demands with Maliki.
The delegation, led by the prime minister of the Kurdistan Regional Government, Nechirvan Barzani, wanted to ensure that the Kurds would receive 17 percent of Iraq's $50 billion budget, a figure that Maliki believed was far too high. The Kurds also wanted the central government in Baghdad to fund their regional military, known as the pesh merga; to allow them to pursue independent oil contracts with foreign companies; and to support their push to bring the oil-rich northern city of Kirkuk under Kurdish control.
Maliki didn't mince words. "Everything the constitution says is your right, we will give you," Askiri, his informal adviser, recalled him saying. "Everything the constitution says is not your right, I will take it from you."
The next morning, the Kurdish delegation canceled its remaining meetings and flew back to northern Iraq, according to Askiri. "So they got a message," he said.
A few days later, the Kurdish leadership sent a letter outlining its concerns over the direction of the government and calling for immediate changes. The implicit threat was that the Kurds could pull out of the government at any time, and some members of the bloc seriously considered a campaign to oust Maliki, according to U.S. and Iraqi officials.
"The prime minister cannot go solo," said Abdul Khaliq Zangana, a Kurdish member of parliament. "We are not obligated to stay in this government. We could bring it down."
The Kurds ultimately did not engage in a sustained effort to topple Maliki, but they did set in motion a number of changes to the political landscape. In late December, the two top Kurdish leaders -- Iraq's president, Jalal Talabani, and the president of the Kurdish region, Massoud Barzani -- announced a new political alliance with the top Sunni official in the government, Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, a longtime enemy of Maliki.
Not long after, Maliki agreed to hold his first meetings in months with some of his fiercest political rivals. The sessions of the "three plus one" group -- Maliki and the three-member presidency council, which is made up of Talabani, Hashimi and Abdul Mahdi -- began in January after a six-month hiatus during which some of the leaders hardly spoke to one another.
The parliament also passed a budget that gives the Kurds the 17 percent they had demanded.
The tense relationship between Maliki, the top Shiite in government, and Hashimi, the highest-ranking Sunni, had been particularly acrimonious. "That is one relationship that really is genuinely bad," said the senior U.S. official, calling it "dysfunctional."
"The levels of fear and mistrust are so great between every party," the official said. "Nobody trusts anybody else. There is no background or history of political compromise."
In an interview, Hashimi said the prime minister recently seemed more comfortable in exchanging information with top government officials whom he had previously shut out of the process.
"There is a sign of improvement in mentality and attitude," said Hashimi, whose party pulled out of Maliki's cabinet last year and continues to boycott it. "He's now sharing views with us about the candidates for high-ranking posts in the government. For the first time he is telling us what has been done, what he is going to do. I myself have been invited for the first time to attend high-level meetings."
Maliki's associates said he is more willing to engage in dialogue with Hashimi because he now feels less apprehensive that the Sunnis are prepared to launch a coup, something he previously felt was a strong possibility. [************]
At the same time, however, the prime minister is reluctant to cede any actual control to rival politicians. In a move that would greatly expand his control over the government, Maliki proposed a radical overhaul of the cabinet that would result in the dismissal of nearly all the ministers and concentrate more power in his hands. Specifically, the measure would reduce the number of ministries from 37 to 32; forbid the selection of ministers affiliated with political parties; and grant Maliki control over appointing them. [********]
The measure would be such a blow to the other political parties that even Maliki's aides said it is unlikely he will be able to push the project through the legislature.
"I'm not too optimistic about a positive response," said Sadiq al-Rikabi, a political adviser to the prime minister.
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

Turkey Withdraws Troops From Northern Iraq

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/01/world/middleeast/01turkey.html
March 1, 2008
Turkey Withdraws Troops From Northern Iraq
By SABRINA TAVERNISE and RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. [Turkey] [more attacks of PKK in northern and north-western –ir] [-ir] [hydra] [insurgency] [bush administration’s “surge option” or “new way forward” underway] [followup] [Turkey’s “incursion” looks bigger than first reported] [dilemmas presented to –iraqi Kurds] [-Iraqi govt has demanded retreat and sec def Gates has “urged” prudence] [yesterday’s external featured reports of some Turks are wondering about the timing of this latest incursion which appears the biggest thus far] [****]
Turkey’s military announced it had withdrawn all of its troops from northern Iraq by Friday morning, bringing an eight-day ground offensive against Kurdish guerrillas to a close, just one day after Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates warned Turkey to pull out its troops.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/01/world/middleeast/01turkey.html
March 1, 2008
Turkey Withdraws Troops From Northern Iraq
By SABRINA TAVERNISE and RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. [Turkey] [more attacks of PKK in northern and north-western –ir] [-ir] [hydra] [insurgency] [bush administration’s “surge option” or “new way forward” underway] [followup] [Turkey’s “incursion” looks bigger than first reported] [dilemmas presented to –iraqi Kurds] [-Iraqi govt has demanded retreat and sec def Gates has “urged” prudence] [yesterday’s external featured reports of some Turks are wondering about the timing of this latest incursion which appears the biggest thus far] [****]
Turkey’s military announced it had withdrawn all of its troops from northern Iraq by Friday morning, bringing an eight-day ground offensive against Kurdish guerrillas to a close, just one day after Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates warned Turkey to pull out its troops.
The Turkish military bristled at the suggestion that it had been influenced by the United States, and said that the ground campaign in which 24 Turkish soldiers and as many as 243 Kurdish fighters were killed had simply run its course as its goals had been met. [****]
“Both the start and the ending of the operation were fully determined on our part,” the military said in a statement. “Any internal or outside influence on the decision of the Turkish armed forces is out of discussion.”
Iraq’s foreign minister, Hoshyar Zebari, said in a telephone interview that the Turkish troops began pulling out of Iraq and crossing back into Turkey early Friday morning.
Despite some reports that it was only a partial pullout, he said that his contacts in Iraqi Kurdistan had assured him that all of the Turkish forces had crossed over the border back into Turkey.
“Sources on the ground informed us that they started pulling back their troops in the early hours of the morning,” Mr. Zebari said.
Mr. Zebari, who is himself a Kurd, said he believed that pressure from American officials including from Mr. Gates was critical to convincing the Turks to withdraw. [*****]
“It was a combination of reasons, but the United States’ position was very instrumental,” Mr. Zebari said.
“The United States position was admirable for reminding the Turkish side of the gravity of the situation,” he added.
The Turks have not made any promises ruling out another invasion again. [****]But Mr. Zebari said the Iraqi government does not want to see any more operations inside its own borders.
“This has been a serious distraction for all of us,” he said. “It was very awkward for everybody, for the United States, for the Iraqi government, and even for Turkey.”
The Kurdish guerrillas — from the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, known as the P.K.K. for its initials in Kurdish — have bases in Turkey and Iraq and have been fighting the Turkish military since the 1980s. [****]The United States lists the P.K.K. as a terrorist organization.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Panel Is Set to Examine Security at U.N. Sites

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/world/29nations.html
February 29, 2008
Panel Is Set to Examine Security at U.N. Sites
By WARREN HOGE [UN] [brave new world] [UN has become the object of ire among many] [included notably are jihadis who see Western modernity and international law and organizations as ananthema] [other to be sure but jihadis have targeted UN programs killing high-level UN officials] [***********]
UNITED NATIONS — The director of a new panel that will look into attacks on United Nations offices said Thursday that the organization had to accept the fact that in many parts of the world it was no longer viewed as impartial and was therefore increasingly vulnerable.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/world/29nations.html
February 29, 2008
Panel Is Set to Examine Security at U.N. Sites
By WARREN HOGE [UN] [brave new world] [UN has become the object of ire among many] [included notably are jihadis who see Western modernity and international law and organizations as ananthema] [other to be sure but jihadis have targeted UN programs killing high-level UN officials] [***********]
UNITED NATIONS — The director of a new panel that will look into attacks on United Nations offices said Thursday that the organization had to accept the fact that in many parts of the world it was no longer viewed as impartial and was therefore increasingly vulnerable.
“We have got to recognize that things have changed, and our blue flag does not protect us any more,” [*******] [himself a Sunni Muslim from Algeria] [***] said the official, Lakhdar Brahimi.
Mr. Brahimi, a former foreign minister of Algeria and a longtime United Nations troubleshooter, made the comments in announcing the makeup of the panel. It will study security at United Nations offices around the world in the aftermath of the bombing of its building in Algiers on Dec. 11, which killed 17 staff members.
The six-member panel includes officials from the police and security services of Egypt, India and South Africa, a retired senior diplomat from Turkey and a former assistant secretary general from Sweden.
Responsibility for the Algiers bombing was claimed by Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, a regional militant group that has sworn allegiance to Al Qaeda. The attack deepened fears at headquarters that the United Nations had become the target of anti-Western terrorist groups. [***********]
In addition, United Nations officials and leaders of the staff union contended that Algeria had not provided adequate security before the attack and had ignored recommendations for improvements.
When Secretary General Ban Ki-moon announced in December that he was creating an independent body to investigate the attack, the Algerian government protested that it had not been consulted and said that it feared that the United Nations was looking to blame Algeria for lapses in its own security. It said it would not cooperate with the inquiry.
In an interview on Thursday, Mourad Benmehidi, Algeria’s deputy ambassador, said that his country’s objections had been addressed and that it would answer any questions the panel raised.
“We consider Mr. Brahimi above any suspicions,” he said. “Being a national from Algeria is not the point; we have full confidence in his impartiality and independence of mind.”
Mr. Brahimi emphasized that the panel would conduct a “review” rather than an “investigation” and that its objective was to study United Nations security around the world, not just in Algeria.
Asked if he could exercise independence in judging the actions of a government he once represented, he replied that the bombing had affected him personally. He noted that he was in Algiers that day, that a sister of his lived close to the site and that the son of a “very, very close friend” had been killed as he passed by at the time of the blast.
Pressed on whether he would identify who was “culpable,” Mr. Brahimi said: “I am not Sherlock Holmes. I will do it my way.”
“Whether the Algerians were a little overconfident or U.N. people were overconfident, we will look into that.” [************]
In a letter to Mr. Ban, the staff union complained that it had played no role in setting up the panel, despite concerns that it had repeatedly voiced about protecting personnel, dating from the bombing of United Nations headquarters in Baghdad in August 2003. That blast killed 22 staff members, including the chief of the mission, Sergio Vieira de Mello.
The union said it was concerned that the Brahimi panel would not examine the circumstances behind the Algiers bombing “but rather be a global examination of security threats.”
It said, “We believe that without accountability, there is impunity,” and urged Mr. Ban “not to be complicit in a cover-up of what happened.”
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Germany: Gallery Shut After Muslim Threats

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/world/europe/29briefs-gallery.html
February 29, 2008
World Briefing | Europe
Germany: Gallery Shut After Muslim Threats
By BLOOMBERG NEWS [germany] [EU] [hydra] [jihadis] [followup] [on 11-01-07 spain’s end of the trial for the 3/11 2004 attacks] [fall 2007 had external on MI-5 director again pointing out large number of cells under investigations in U.K.] [alleged jihadis, 2nd generation German of Turkish heritage] [German al Qaeda sympathizer] [followup from February 16] [**********]
The authorities in Berlin closed a gallery whose exhibition included satirical works by Danish artists that caricatured the Kaaba shrine in Mecca after Muslims protested, [****] the German news agency Deutsche Presse Agentur reported, citing the local arts council. The protesters had threatened to use violence if the posters of the Danish art group Surrend were not removed from the gallery, [****]Galerie Nord, the report said.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/world/europe/29briefs-gallery.html
February 29, 2008
World Briefing | Europe
Germany: Gallery Shut After Muslim Threats
By BLOOMBERG NEWS [germany] [EU] [hydra] [jihadis] [followup] [on 11-01-07 spain’s end of the trial for the 3/11 2004 attacks] [fall 2007 had external on MI-5 director again pointing out large number of cells under investigations in U.K.] [alleged jihadis, 2nd generation German of Turkish heritage] [German al Qaeda sympathizer] [followup from February 16] [**********]
The authorities in Berlin closed a gallery whose exhibition included satirical works by Danish artists that caricatured the Kaaba shrine in Mecca after Muslims protested, [****] the German news agency Deutsche Presse Agentur reported, citing the local arts council. The protesters had threatened to use violence if the posters of the Danish art group Surrend were not removed from the gallery, [****]Galerie Nord, the report said.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

U.S. Embrace of Musharraf Irks Pakistanis

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/world/asia/29pstan.html
February 29, 2008
U.S. Embrace of Musharraf Irks Pakistanis
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] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis] [recent external reported that retired officers calling for Musharraf to step aside] [more evidence that al Qaeda and new crop of younger jihadis have regrouped-grouped] [what I characterized last November as possible tipping point cointinues to tip!] [elections where Musharraf’s party pummeled around Feb 18] [more evidence of the Bush administration’s bankrupt Musharraf policy instead of AfPak policy] [******]
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — The Bush administration’s continued backing of President Pervez Musharraf, despite the overwhelming rejection of his party by voters this month, is fueling a new level of frustration in Pakistan with the United States.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/world/asia/29pstan.html
February 29, 2008
U.S. Embrace of Musharraf Irks Pakistanis
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] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis] [recent external reported that retired officers calling for Musharraf to step aside] [more evidence that al Qaeda and new crop of younger jihadis have regrouped-grouped] [what I characterized last November as possible tipping point cointinues to tip!] [elections where Musharraf’s party pummeled around Feb 18] [more evidence of the Bush administration’s bankrupt Musharraf policy instead of AfPak policy] [******]
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — The Bush administration’s continued backing of President Pervez Musharraf, despite the overwhelming rejection of his party by voters this month, is fueling a new level of frustration in Pakistan with the United States.
That support has rankled the public, politicians and journalists here, inciting deep anger at what is perceived as American meddling and the refusal of Washington to embrace the new, democratically elected government. John D. Negroponte, the deputy secretary of state, said Thursday during a Senate panel hearing that the United States would maintain its close ties to Mr. Musharraf. [*****] [see today’s individual-role] [Negroponte has been noticeably AWOL] [************]
Pakistanis say the Bush administration is grossly misjudging the political mood in Pakistan and squandering an opportunity to win support from the Pakistani public for its fight against terrorism. [*****]The opposition parties that won the Feb. 18 parliamentary elections say they are moderate and pro-American. By working with them, analysts say, Washington could gain a vital, new ally.
The American insistence that Mr. Musharraf play a significant role, they say, will only draw out a power struggle with the president and distract the new government from pushing ahead with alternatives to Mr. Musharraf’s policies on the economy and terrorism, [****]which are widely viewed here as having failed.
“I’ve never seen such an irrational, impractical move on the part of the United States,” said Rasul Baksh Rais, a political scientist at the Lahore University of Management Sciences. “The whole country has voted against Musharraf. This was a referendum against Musharraf.”
Over the last week, more than a dozen editorials and commentaries have appeared in Pakistan’s leading newspapers accusing the United States of “meddling” in the country’s affairs. Many have taken particular umbrage at statements by President Bush and other senior officials praising Mr. Musharraf, despite his lack of support among voters. [*****]
A series of postelection meetings between American Embassy officials and Asif Ali Zardari, the head of the victorious Pakistan Peoples Party, have also been criticized.
American officials have met three times with Mr. Zardari since the election. They have met twice with Nawaz Sharif, a former prime minister whose own opposition party won the second most seats in Parliament.
In the meetings, American officials urged both leaders to work with moderate forces and Mr. Musharraf, according to officials from the two parties and the United States. It is the insistence to include Mr. Musharraf that rankles Pakistanis.
American officials said the meetings were routine. “This is standard diplomacy,” said an American official who spoke on condition of anonymity.
But Pakistani observers called the request that the parties work with Mr. Musharraf inappropriate, given his sweeping defeat. Typical of the outrage was an editorial published Sunday by The News, an English-language newspaper, with the headline “Hands Off, Please!” [******] [on the other hand, he was “elected” late last year—albeit highly questionable elections]
“No further efforts must be made to intervene in the democratic process in Pakistan,” the editorial read. “The man who the U.S. continues to back has in many ways become a central part of Pakistan’s problems.”
A senior American official in Washington acknowledged that there was worry within the Bush administration about being seen as meddling. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly on the issue, conceded that American attempts last year to construct a power-sharing deal between Mr. Musharraf and former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto “didn’t really work out quite as we’d hoped.” [boy is that an understatement] [more like blew up in their faces (and Bhutto’s)] [****] Differences remained between the president and Ms. Bhutto, who was killed Dec. 27.
“The last thing we need is to be seen by the Pakistanis as interfering again,” he said.
But while American officials have sought to portray the United States as neutral, their statements underscore that Mr. Musharraf remains at the center of the United States policy here.
On Monday, Dana Perino, the White House spokeswoman, said President Bush continued to support Mr. Musharraf for “all of the work that he’s done to help us in counterterrorism.” [************]
“Now it will be up to the people of Pakistan to see what their new government will look like,” she said. “But the president does certainly support him.”
During his Senate hearing on Thursday, Mr. Negroponte said, “I think we would, as a general proposition, urge that the moderate political forces work together, and of course President Musharraf is still the president of his country, and we look forward to continuing to work well with him as well.”
Mr. Negroponte refused to call for the reinstatement of the judges dismissed last year by Mr. Musharraf when he imposed emergency rule. “We have been silent on this subject,” he said. Then he added, “to the best of my knowledge.” [********]
That silence by American officials has led Pakistanis to accuse the United States of ignoring the will of voters, analysts say. The issue fueled anger [****] against Mr. Musharraf and the protest vote against him. [moreover, stands in stark contrast to Bush’s “freedom agenda”] [just yesterday Bush chided Dems for willingness to talk to tyrnants such as Raul Castro] [yet here they not only talk with him but give him $10.3 billion since 9/11] [if he were actually acting in ways that aligned with US interests, that would be one thing] [**********]
In Pakistan, each American statement has been dissected in the media and widely perceived as overt American pressure.
In an editorial on Monday, the Daily Business Recorder, a leading English-language newspaper, criticized a call Mr. Bush made to Mr. Musharraf after learning of what it called his allies’ “electoral debacle.” It also cited Richard A. Boucher, an assistant secretary of state, as saying after the election that Mr. Musharraf “remains important to Washington.”
Mr. Bush and other administration officials still regard Mr. Musharraf as a significant player and as a force for stability in Pakistan, and one who could regain his standing, said an official involved in the policy deliberations.
The official said that American officials were waiting to see if the opposition could form the two-thirds majority needed to render Mr. Musharraf a powerless, ceremonial president, or even impeach him. The Americans recognize that the opposition parties have long feuded and think they could fail to unite.
“Musharraf still thinks he has options, which he does,” said an administration official who spoke on condition of anonymity. “The administration thinks so as well, but only so long as he does not overplay his hand.”
Over the last year, American assessments have repeatedly proven wrong. Before the Feb. 18 elections, a senior American intelligence official predicted in a briefing to journalists that no party would win a clear majority and that Mr. Musharraf would remain the strongest political figure in the country.
Wamiq Zuberi, chief editor of the Daily Business Recorder, said Washington “obviously doesn’t have the correct appreciation of the environment here.” He and others said the American backing for Mr. Musharraf had generated consternation among analysts who believe that Mr. Musharraf is not only deeply unpopular but also that he has performed poorly of late in the campaign against terrorism, polarizing Pakistan and striking a series of truces with militants.
“I’ve followed this for years, and I’ve never seen it so clear, apparent and continuous,” Nasim Zehra, a Pakistani analyst and writer, said of what she considered the American interference. “It’s not surprising, given the mindset in Washington.”
Central to the Bush administration’s support is the feeling that Mr. Musharraf retains the loyalty of the Pakistani Army, even though he stepped down as army chief in December. Current and former administration officials say they fear that withdrawing American support from Mr. Musharraf would alienate Pakistan’s military, country’s most powerful institution. [I think that assumption is increasingly arguable] [the military has been trying to create distance] [the Japanese business model where colleagues move away from the person in the room who’s the sacrificial offering] [********]
“He is still valuable for his relationship with the army,” said Daniel Markey, who helped coordinate Pakistan policy in the State Department from 2003 to 2007. “He is someone who the United States should work with — and will work with — for fear of alienating that important partner.”
Western military officials say Pakistan’s armed forces — Mr. Musharraf’s last potential bastion of support — have shifted loyalty to his chosen successor, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.
And they say General Kayani will choose stability over saving Mr. Musharraf. “If Kayani and Musharraf were diametrically opposed,” said a Western military official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, “I think Kayani would prevail.”
Ms. Zehra, the analyst, said that General Kayani had distanced himself from Mr. Musharraf by issuing a surprise order in January barring all officers from holding government posts or engaging in politics.
The move effectively prevented Mr. Musharraf from using Pakistan’s military intelligence agencies to manipulate the election. The loyalty of Pakistan’s military is irrevocably shifting behind General Kayani, [****]she said. “The army will be led by its chief always,” she said. “The former chief is always the former chief.”
Jane Perlez and Salman Masood contributed reporting from Islamabad, and Helene Cooper from Washington.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Missile Attack, Possibly by NATO, Kills 8 in Pakistan

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/world/asia/29peshawar.html
February 29, 2008
Missile Attack, Possibly by NATO, Kills 8 in Pakistan
By ISMAIL KHAN [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [apparently the Bush administration used a UAV to hit jihadis again in Pakistan] [drones are based inside Pakistan so question of sovereignty problematic] [repeat of end of January when al Qaeda # 5, al Libi killed] [followup] [******]
PESHAWAR, Pakistan — Eight suspected Islamic militants, including four men of Middle Eastern origin and two from Central Asia, were killed early Thursday in a triple missile attack on a house used as a training facility in Pakistan’s tribal [****]areas, a security official and residents said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/world/asia/29peshawar.html
February 29, 2008
Missile Attack, Possibly by NATO, Kills 8 in Pakistan
By ISMAIL KHAN [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [apparently the Bush administration used a UAV to hit jihadis again in Pakistan] [drones are based inside Pakistan so question of sovereignty problematic] [repeat of end of January when al Qaeda # 5, al Libi killed] [followup] [******]
PESHAWAR, Pakistan — Eight suspected Islamic militants, including four men of Middle Eastern origin and two from Central Asia, were killed early Thursday in a triple missile attack on a house used as a training facility in Pakistan’s tribal [****]areas, a security official and residents said.
The missiles appeared to have been launched from territory controlled by NATO forces across the border in Afghanistan, the second deadly aerial strike in a month. [****] [perhaps, but sounds similar to past UAV launches] [*****]Residents said three other occupants of the house were wounded in the strike, in the village of Kalosha in South Waziristan, one of the most restive tribal regions.
The security official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the nature of his job, said the dead had belonged to a little-known group affiliated with Al Qaeda, working under the name Abu Hamza. [*******]
Local residents said they had heard three loud explosions about 2 a.m. that destroyed the house. They said the three wounded occupants were from Turkmenistan.
They also said the house had belonged to Shero Wazir, an Ahmadzai Wazir tribesman who had rented it to an unidentified man of Arab nationality. They said they thought the launching site might have been an American NATO base in Machi Dat, just across the border in Afghanistan.
NATO officials in Afghanistan said they had no information about the attack. But this would not be the first time American-led NATO forces had launched missiles aimed at Qaeda and Taliban targets on the Pakistan side.
A senior Qaeda commander, Abu Laith al-Libi, was reportedly killed by a Predator missile in Mirali, North Waziristan, on Jan. 29. [****]The Pakistan government has yet to officially confirm his death.
An official of the political administration of the tribal areas confirmed eight deaths in the Thursday attack, but did not identify any victims by name. He said four Arabs, two Turkmens and two Pakistani militants from Punjab Province had been killed, but others said it was difficult to know precisely who died.
The security official said the bodies were charred beyond recognition. They were buried at a graveyard in Kalosha. He said the destroyed house had been used as a training facility.
A spokesman for Maulvi Nazir, a local militant commander, denied that Arabs or Turkmens were killed in the attack, asserting instead that Afghans had died. [****]
“They were common Afghans and have been living in the area for the last few years,” the spokesman said.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Missile Strike in Pakistan Kills 10 At Suspected Taliban Safe House

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/28/AR2008022802682.html
Missile Strike in Pakistan Kills 10 At Suspected Taliban Safe House
By Imtiaz Ali and Candace Rondeaux
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, February 29, 2008; A14 [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [apparently the Bush administration used a UAV to hit jihadis again in Pakistan] [drones are based inside Pakistan so question of sovereignty problematic] [repeat of end of January when al Qaeda # 5, al Libi killed] [followup] [******]
PESHAWAR, Pakistan, Feb. 28 -- A missile strike on a suspected Taliban safe house in a remote tribal area of northwest Pakistan killed at least 10 people early Thursday, according to residents and local officials.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/28/AR2008022802682.html
Missile Strike in Pakistan Kills 10 At Suspected Taliban Safe House
By Imtiaz Ali and Candace Rondeaux
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, February 29, 2008; A14 [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [apparently the Bush administration used a UAV to hit jihadis again in Pakistan] [drones are based inside Pakistan so question of sovereignty problematic] [repeat of end of January when al Qaeda # 5, al Libi killed] [followup] [******]
PESHAWAR, Pakistan, Feb. 28 -- A missile strike on a suspected Taliban safe house in a remote tribal area of northwest Pakistan killed at least 10 people early Thursday, according to residents and local officials.
The attack targeted a home in the village of Kaloosha in volatile South Waziristan, near the Afghan border. [****]There were conflicting reports on the number of casualties and the identities of those killed, but local residents and officials said the home belonged to a farm owner who had recently offered it as a guesthouse to several foreign fighters. [****]
Accounts of how the attack unfolded were also mixed. Several residents said they heard three explosions at about 2 a.m. One of the missiles apparently missed its target, while two others destroyed the house. A tribal leader in South Waziristan, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter, said that women and children were among the dead, [****]and that at least six others were injured.
The attack, less than 20 miles from the Afghan border, marked the second targeted missile strike in a month in the rugged mountainous region, [al Libi was late January] [****] a key battleground in Pakistan's fight with the Taliban and al-Qaeda. Thirteen people, including top al-Qaeda lieutenant Abu Laith al-Libi, were killed Jan. 29 in an airstrike in the village of Khushali Torikhel in North Waziristan.
The United States is officially barred from conducting operations in Pakistan, but it has launched several aerial attacks in the country's tribal areas,[****] including the one that killed Libi, according to U.S. intelligence sources.
In Washington, U.S. intelligence officials declined to comment on Thursday's attack.
A Pakistani army spokesman said he had no information about the incident, and officials with the Interior Ministry could not be reached for comment.
A local official in the Pakistani town of Wana, near the site of the strike, said 10 people were killed, but he could not confirm their identities or the number of injured. [****] The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly on the matter, said Pakistani security forces began monitoring the area recently after receiving reports that several foreign fighters had been sighted.
According to local residents, Sher Mohammed Malikkheil, the owner of the home, is a member of the Yargulkhel, a sub-tribe of the Wazir, the predominant tribe in South Waziristan. A farmer by profession, Malikkheil, also known as Sheroo, has been suspected of links to local and foreign fighters. [*******]
"Sheroo's house has been home to some outsiders and strange people for the last few months and he himself was living in another home," said Shah Nazar, a shop owner in the neighboring village of Azam Warsak.
Kaloosha has long been considered a stronghold of foreign and local fighters with ties to al-Qaeda. The village was home to Nek Mohammed, a commander who was killed in an apparent missile strike in June 2004 after sheltering hundreds of al-Qaeda fighters following the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. The Taliban, an extremist Islamic militia, ruled most of Afghanistan before the invasion and provided a haven to al-Qaeda.
Mufti Jan Amir, a Taliban commander with close ties to top Pakistani militants in Wana, said all those killed in Thursday's attack were Afghans who had lived in the area for years.
Rondeaux reported from Islamabad. Staff writer Joby Warrick in Washington contributed to this report.
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

February 28, 2008

Serbia Withdrew Police, Intelligence Chief Says

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/27/AR2008022703383.html
Serbia Withdrew Police, Intelligence Chief Says
By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, February 28, 2008; A14 [bush white house] [nsc principals and byond] [DNI McConnel as statutory principal] [IC] [interesting testimony that belies Serbia’s foreign minister’s oped, yesterday’s societal] [and may belie the admininstration’s contention that with the “Protext America Act’s” expiration, the IC is at dangerous disadvantage] [apparently working well enough to discern Serbia intentions and actions] [110th, 2nd session] [unitary theory of executive powers] [TSPs] [effectively spying on folks in the US without FISA court warrant] [**********]
The Serbian government decided to pull back its police in Belgrade last Thursday so that demonstrators could attack the U.S. and British embassies, Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell told a Senate committee yesterday.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/27/AR2008022703383.html
Serbia Withdrew Police, Intelligence Chief Says
By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, February 28, 2008; A14 [bush white house] [nsc principals and byond] [DNI McConnel as statutory principal] [IC] [interesting testimony that belies Serbia’s foreign minister’s oped, yesterday’s societal] [and may belie the admininstration’s contention that with the “Protext America Act’s” expiration, the IC is at dangerous disadvantage] [apparently working well enough to discern Serbia intentions and actions] [110th, 2nd session] [unitary theory of executive powers] [TSPs] [effectively spying on folks in the US without FISA court warrant] [**********]
The Serbian government decided to pull back its police in Belgrade last Thursday so that demonstrators could attack the U.S. and British embassies, Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell told a Senate committee yesterday.
"We have good information that when the U.S. embassy and the British embassy and others were attacked, a decision was taken by the government of Serbia actually to pull the police back and allow them to be attacked, burn the embassy and conduct the violence they conducted," [******]McConnell told the Senate Armed Services Committee in answer to a question during his testimony on worldwide threats.
But after his testimony, a spokesman for McConnell, Ross Feinstein, played down the statement. "There was no final conclusion or determination on this," he said. Feinstein later called to say McConnell's statement was "based on what we knew from eyewitness accounts" reported in a Belgrade newspaper, Danas. But, Feinstein added, "I'm not going to say it was the only thing" the director drew on in making the remark.
Although witnesses had reported that Serbian police had appeared to withdraw when demonstrators approached the embassies, this was the first time a U.S. official said the Serbian government deliberately permitted the violence to proceed. [*********]
The assault on the U.S. embassy came after a rally in Belgrade by Serbs incensed by the U.S. recognition of Kosovo's independence. Hundreds of protesters overran and burned part of the embassy.
On the day of the attack, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters that the department had spoken to the Serbian government about its obligation to protect the embassy. "They have been, up until this point, very good in providing police assets to ensure that the embassy facility was protected," adding that "we are in contact with them, to make sure that they devote the assets to deal with this situation."
One day after the attack, White House spokesman Scott Stanzel attributed the attacks to "hooligans and thugs." He added, "We don't believe that this is the face that Serbia wants to present to the world."
Attempts to reach Serbian government officials in Washington and New York late yesterday were unsuccessful.
McConnell, however, described yesterday a disagreement between Serbian Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica and Serbian President Boris Tadic. Kostunica, he said, "is more closely aligned with Russia" and "is determined to roll [the independence of Kosovo] back if at all possible. [*********]Without elaborating, McConnell said that "some level of violence is probably going to ensue." At the rally that preceded the embassy attack, Kostunica told the crowd: "As long as we live, Kosovo is Serbia."
Tadic "is convinced that integration with the European Union . . . is a better course of action," McConnell said. Last week, Tadic condemned the violence and told reporters it must "never happen again."
Discussing another troubled area, McConnell provided a downbeat report on Afghanistan, disclosing that an intelligence study had determined that the Kabul-based government of President Hamid Karzai controls about 31 percent of the country's population. [*******]He said the Taliban controls about 11 percent and that the rest is under local tribal control.
McConnell said violence had gone up because U.S. and NATO forces have taken aggressive actions and that many Taliban leaders had been killed or captured. But those actions provoked an increase in the use of suicide bombers and roadside explosive devices.
Overall, however, the growing insurgency in Afghanistan has "been sustained in the south. It's grown a bit in the east, and what we've seen are elements of it spread to the west and the north," McConnell said. The key to the increase has been the "de facto safe haven in Pakistan [that] gives them the ability to train and recruit, rest and recuperate, and then come back into Afghanistan."
On North Korea, McConnell said intelligence analysts believe that Pyongyang has enough plutonium for "at least six nuclear weapons." But he added that analysts are less certain that North Korea has begun to produce highly enriched uranium, a probability now considered medium instead of high. [***********]
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

Bush and Czech Leader Close to Deal on Radar

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/washington/28prexy.html
February 28, 2008
Bush and Czech Leader Close to Deal on Radar
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG [bush white house] [nsc principals and diplomatic and military expertise bureaucracies] [state, dod, perhaps energy] Poland] [former WTO member] [Rummsfeld’s new Europe] [increasingly close ally to the US and NATO] [however, understandably not eager to paint bullseye on Czech Republic with part of US missile defense in Poland] [thus, Czechs wisely extracted concessions from bush administration as quid pro quo] [*****]
WASHINGTON — President Bush and the Czech leader said Wednesday that they were close to an agreement on a plan for the United States to install an early warning radar system in the Czech Republic, a key component of a missile defense system that has drawn stiff opposition from Russia.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/washington/28prexy.html
February 28, 2008
Bush and Czech Leader Close to Deal on Radar
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG [bush white house] [nsc principals and diplomatic and military expertise bureaucracies] [state, dod, perhaps energy] Poland] [former WTO member] [Rummsfeld’s new Europe] [increasingly close ally to the US and NATO] [however, understandably not eager to paint bullseye on Czech Republic with part of US missile defense in Poland] [thus, Czechs wisely extracted concessions from bush administration as quid pro quo] [*****]
WASHINGTON — President Bush and the Czech leader said Wednesday that they were close to an agreement on a plan for the United States to install an early warning radar system in the Czech Republic, a key component of a missile defense system that has drawn stiff opposition from Russia.
“There are only three words remaining to resolve,” said the Czech prime minister, Mirek Topolanek, speaking through an interpreter, after meeting with Mr. Bush in the Oval Office. He described the sticking points as “minor details” and said they had to do with environmental protection issues.
Asked how close the two were to reaching agreement, Mr. Bush said, “Close.” He added, “There’s a will to get this done, for the sake of mutual security.”
Under the plan, which would be subject to the approval of the Czech Parliament, the United States would install a radar system in the Czech Republic.
The plan includes 10 missile interceptors in silos in Poland. Negotiations with Poland are continuing, and the issue is likely to come up in April, when Mr. Bush attends a meeting of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in Bucharest, Romania.
The Bush administration says that the defense system will be capable of shooting down missiles aimed at the United States or its NATO allies, and that it is necessary to fend off threats from nations like Iran and North Korea.
But Russia, which regards the system as a threat to its security, has objected strenuously — so much so that President Vladimir V. Putin has threatened to point missiles at Eastern Europe.
At a meeting of heads of state of the leading industrialized nations over the summer, Mr. Putin surprised Mr. Bush with a plan of his own: to have the United States use one of the early warning radar systems that the Kremlin leases from Azerbaijan. Mr. Bush agreed to engage in what he called “serious discussions,” though he has repeatedly insisted that he will not abandon his own plan.
On Wednesday, he once again defended the American plan and insisted that it was not intended to undermine Russian security.
“Russia’s not a threat to peace,” Mr. Bush said. “Regimes that adhere to extremist ideologies which may have the capability of launching weapons to those of us who love freedom, they’re the threats to peace. The missile defense system is aimed to deal with those threats.”
Experts in missile defense, however, say that those reassurances are not enough to ease Moscow’s concerns and that any final agreement could be delayed while the Bush administration discusses the plan with Russian officials.
“At this point, I think they haven’t gotten the reassurances they are looking to get,” said Guy Ben-Ari, an expert in missile defense at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “Assuming everything goes very quickly, and the Czechs give the green light, I think there will still not be a formal announcement made, because the Russians need some more placating.”
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Senate Continues Debate on Iraq Pullout

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/27/AR2008022703382.html
Senate Continues Debate on Iraq Pullout
2 Bills Unlikely to Pass, but Both Parties Square Off With Eye Toward Elections
By Paul Kane
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, February 28, 2008; A03 [congress] [110th 2nd session] [-ir] [versus gsave more generally] [old question of whether –ir is central to winning or more a diversion] [here the Dems suggest the latter by highlighting how much treasure has been consumed] [bush white house] [nsc principals and well beyond] [making –ir integral to gsave?] [for me there’s a simple question or test I posed to my students recently] [if-when the U.S. is attacked again on 9/11 like scale, will it have originated in –Iraq or AfPak?] [*********]
The Senate yesterday continued a heated but largely theatrical debate on a bill to start withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq within 120 days and began considering another that would require the Bush administration to develop a new strategy against terrorism.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/27/AR2008022703382.html
Senate Continues Debate on Iraq Pullout
2 Bills Unlikely to Pass, but Both Parties Square Off With Eye Toward Elections
By Paul Kane
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, February 28, 2008; A03 [congress] [110th 2nd session] [-ir] [versus gsave more generally] [old question of whether –ir is central to winning or more a diversion] [here the Dems suggest the latter by highlighting how much treasure has been consumed] [bush white house] [nsc principals and well beyond] [making –ir integral to gsave?] [for me there’s a simple question or test I posed to my students recently] [if-when the U.S. is attacked again on 9/11 like scale, will it have originated in –Iraq or AfPak?] [*********]
The Senate yesterday continued a heated but largely theatrical debate on a bill to start withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq within 120 days and began considering another that would require the Bush administration to develop a new strategy against terrorism.
Republicans relished the opportunity to joust over war policy, confident in their political standing because of security gains in Iraq since President Bush's troop buildup took hold there last year. But Democrats said the debate offers them a new chance to highlight Republican support for a still unpopular war, setting the stage for them to run a general-election campaign this fall largely against Bush's policies in Iraq.
Under the complicated rules set up for the congressional debate, however, it is all but certain that neither bill introduced by Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) would be approved. It is possible that neither would even approach a final vote, despite knotting up the chamber in as many as three days of floor debate.
Rather than distancing themselves from Bush's Iraq policy, Republicans embraced the improvements on the ground since the president sent an additional 30,000 U.S. troops to Iraq last year, and they criticized Democrats for wanting to change course.
"The surge has worked. This is coming from someone who was a cynic," Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) said during the floor debate. Brownback had criticized Bush's policies in Iraq last year. [************]
"The Democrats are sort of in denial. It's almost as if they're sorry things have gotten better," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said in a brief interview. [that’s close to a below the belt response] [moreover, GOP ought to be particularly careful] [signs of deterioration of the miniscule amount of political reconciliation in –Iraq are ubiquitious now] [*************]
Democrats used the debate to test their emerging line of political attack on Bush's war policy, contending that the mounting cost of the conflict in Iraq is stealing resources from domestic priorities that could help prop up the sagging economy.
Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) called the Iraq war the "$800 billion gorilla in the room" that is diverting funds that could be used to address the subprime mortgage crisis in the housing market.
"The spending issue is becoming a new dynamic here," Schumer, chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said in an interview. "They are misreading public opinion dramatically. The closer we get to November, the more apparent that will be," he added, referring to Republicans.
Schumer, who also chairs Congress's Joint Economic Committee, is holding a hearing today that he said will demonstrate how funding for Iraq displaces federal spending on economic recovery programs.
"The world should understand America has done its share," Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said, closing the debate before a second procedural vote on the Feingold measures. "When is enough going to be enough?"
The debate in the past two days centered on Feingold's bill to begin troop withdrawals within 120 days of its passage and, at that point, to prohibit expenditures not meant for running counterterrorism operations, protecting the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad or training Iraqi forces. The second bill would require the administration to draw up a new strategy on the battle against al-Qaeda and to present it to Congress within 60 days.
Arranging a pair of votes on preliminary motions that they expected Republicans to block, Democrats did not expect to have a lengthy debate on either measure. Reid had already scheduled a Tuesday-afternoon debate on a package of bills dealing with the housing crisis.
But, in a surprise move on Tuesday, most Republicans supported opening the debate on the first Iraq measure, even though not a single one had backed five previous bids to take up Feingold's withdrawal bills. Yesterday, 42 Republicans voted with 45 Democrats and two independents to begin a debate on Feingold's second measure.
The complicated parliamentary procedure used to bring the Feingold bills to the floor makes it likely that the bills would simply be withdrawn sometime today. Rather than hold a final vote on either measure, the Senate could just shift its attention to the housing legislation.
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

U.S. Commander Wants Brief Pause in Troop Cuts

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/world/middleeast/28military.html
February 28, 2008
U.S. Commander Wants Brief Pause in Troop Cuts
By THOM SHANKER and ERIC SCHMITT [bush administration] [bureaucracy] [dod pentagon] [CENTCOM’s CINC or CENTCINC] [Admiral Fallon] [-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] [seems obvious that despite the Awakening Councils or, perhaps because of them, some of the usual suspects are attempting to re-initiate sectarian bloodletting] [archive in external too] [***]
TAMPA, Fla. — The commander of American forces in the Middle East says he will endorse a brief pause in troop reductions from Iraq this summer, but then will seek a resumption of withdrawals to ease stress on the overall military [****]and allow him to balance deployments across the volatile region. [not totally surprising but a little] [he’s previously expressed concern about what –Iraq is doing to the military] [probably a fair bit of pressure on him to acquiesce to Patraeus’ requests] [***********]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/world/middleeast/28military.html
February 28, 2008
U.S. Commander Wants Brief Pause in Troop Cuts
By THOM SHANKER and ERIC SCHMITT [bush administration] [bureaucracy] [dod pentagon] [CENTCOM’s CINC or CENTCINC] [Admiral Fallon] [-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] [seems obvious that despite the Awakening Councils or, perhaps because of them, some of the usual suspects are attempting to re-initiate sectarian bloodletting] [archive in external too] [***]
TAMPA, Fla. — The commander of American forces in the Middle East says he will endorse a brief pause in troop reductions from Iraq this summer, but then will seek a resumption of withdrawals to ease stress on the overall military [****]and allow him to balance deployments across the volatile region. [not totally surprising but a little] [he’s previously expressed concern about what –Iraq is doing to the military] [probably a fair bit of pressure on him to acquiesce to Patraeus’ requests] [***********]
Those comments by Adm. William J. Fallon, leader of the military’s Central Command, [*********] added to indications that American troop levels in Iraq would hold at about 140,000, at least temporarily, after the departure by July of five additional combat brigades ordered to Iraq last year by President Bush.
But Admiral Fallon, in an interview on Tuesday at his headquarters at MacDill Air Force Base here, made clear his appraisal that the halt in reductions should be temporary — and brief — just long enough to allow “all the dust to settle” and to provide an opportunity for “a clear-eyed view” of the way ahead.
Admiral Fallon’s comments struck a somewhat different tone from the one voiced privately by Bush administration officials who have said they advocate holding to troop levels before the “surge” for some months, perhaps even until the end of the administration. Some ground commanders in Iraq also support a delayed timetable for further reductions, to maintain security advances earned by the troop increase. [*****]
Admiral Fallon said he advocated a strategy that would “transfer more and more responsibility for security in Iraq to Iraqi security forces and, at the same time, withdrawing a substantial amount of our combat forces.” American military personnel remaining in Iraq, he said, would mostly be in the “supporting, sustaining, advising, training and mentoring role.”
The admiral did not offer a specific timetable for reducing troop levels in Iraq, which is expected to be a central part of the recommendations presented to President Bush over coming weeks by Admiral Fallon, Gen. David H. Petraeus, the senior commander in Iraq, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. [************]
Senior military officers already say it is quite possible that no specific timetable for troop withdrawals beyond July will emerge from the commanders’ sessions with the president this spring, and that instead a series of monthly reviews will be put in place for assessing, and ordering, troop levels beyond the summer. [*******]
The monthly reviews would allow the military to manage troop levels in Iraq more efficiently, reshaping the force to fit an evolving security situation — instead of the current system, in which General Petraeus, Admiral Fallon and the Joint Chiefs reported to the president last September and are set to return six months later.
Achieving success in Iraq has “gone a little slower than I anticipated,” Admiral Fallon said. “Nonetheless, it is progressing.”
In the interview on Tuesday, Admiral Fallon also revealed that as American forces were reduced in Iraq, he hoped to increase deployments to Afghanistan by adding “a couple of thousand” military trainers to support Afghan Army and police forces.
In previewing his stance on force levels in Iraq, Admiral Fallon appears to be in step with Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, the Joint Chiefs and General Petraeus, at least in the sense that all are determined to avoid a repeat of tensions among commanders overseas and at the Pentagon over the allotment of limited numbers of troops to Iraq, Afghanistan and other trouble spots around the world. [********]
Pentagon planners confirmed this week that the American troop level in Iraq when the five additional brigades returned home would be about 8,000 more than when the surge began. That is because some of the support, logistics and aviation troops that joined the extra combat brigades will remain, keeping the total at about 140,000.
Even so, Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the Army chief of staff, said Tuesday that he planned to reduce combat tours to 12 months from the current 15 months by the end of summer.
General Casey told the Senate Armed Services Committee that he would not endorse sustaining 15-month tours even if the president ordered a halt to troop reductions after the fifth additional brigade returned home in July.
“The cumulative effects of the last six-plus years at war,” he said, “have left our Army out of balance, consumed by the current fight and unable to do the things we know we need to do to properly sustain our all-volunteer force and restore our flexibility for an uncertain future.” [***********]
The debate over future force levels in Iraq has a direct and immediate effect on operations in Afghanistan, which civilian and military officers concede has been “an economy of force” mission because of the overwhelming demand for troops in Iraq. Admiral Fallon’s area of command includes Afghanistan.
Previewing the top-to-bottom review of Afghan strategy he ordered late last year, Admiral Fallon said that the United States, NATO and other allies currently had sufficient combat forces in Afghanistan to carry out the security mission.
“All the talk about how many guns and how many troops are there — we are O.K.,” he said. “Could we do better with a few more folks? Of course. But the real challenge is: Where is the economic viability for this place?”
The goal of NATO commanders in Afghanistan, he said, should be to get more effective results from the combat forces already deployed. He specifically declined to echo recent criticism of NATO combat troops expressed by several administration officials, including Mr. Gates. But Admiral Fallon did acknowledge, “If we could get the right results from not a significant difference in number of people, we would be well on the way.”
As American troop levels are reduced in Iraq, and Army and Marine Corps ground forces are given time to rest and retrain, Admiral Fallon said he would move to order “a substantial investment in training a very nascent Afghan Army and police.”
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

GOP Halts Effort to Retrieve White House E-Mails

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/26/AR2008022602312.html
GOP Halts Effort to Retrieve White House E-Mails
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, February 27, 2008; A02 [bush white house] [Republican National Commitee] [technically wholly separate from white house but during Rove’s day’s it was an office of the white house] [emails that have disappeared and whose retrival has been promised] [now, RNC saying f.o.] [**********]
After promising last year to search its computers for tens of thousands of e-mails sent by White House officials, the Republican National Committee has informed a House committee that it no longer plans to retrieve the communications by restoring computer backup tapes, the panel's chairman said yesterday.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/26/AR2008022602312.html
GOP Halts Effort to Retrieve White House E-Mails
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, February 27, 2008; A02 [bush white house] [Republican National Commitee] [technically wholly separate from white house but during Rove’s day’s it was an office of the white house] [emails that have disappeared and whose retrival has been promised] [now, RNC saying f.o.] [**********]
After promising last year to search its computers for tens of thousands of e-mails sent by White House officials, the Republican National Committee has informed a House committee that it no longer plans to retrieve the communications by restoring computer backup tapes, the panel's chairman said yesterday.
The move increases the likelihood that an untold number of RNC e-mails dealing with official White House business during the first term of the Bush administration -- including many sent or received by former presidential adviser Karl Rove -- will never be recovered, said House Democrats and public records advocates.
The RNC had previously told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that it was attempting to restore e-mails from 2001 to 2003, when the RNC had a policy of purging all e-mails, including those to and from White House officials, after 30 days. But Chairman Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) disclosed during a hearing yesterday that the RNC has now said it "has no intention of trying to restore the missing White House e-mails."
"The result is a potentially enormous gap in the historical record," Waxman said, including the buildup to the Iraq war.
Spokesman Danny Diaz said in a statement that the RNC "is fully compliant with the spirit and letter of the law." He declined further comment.
Administration officials have acknowledged that Rove and many other White House officials routinely used RNC accounts for government business, despite rules requiring that they conduct such business through official communications channels. The RNC deleted all e-mails until 2004, when it exempted White House officials from its e-mail purging policy.
About 80 White House aides used RNC accounts for official government business, committee staff members said. Rove, for example, sent or received 140,000 e-mails on RNC servers from 2002 to 2007, and more than half involved official ".gov" accounts, [******] the panel has said.
The RNC dispute is part of a broader debate over whether the Bush administration has complied with long-standing statutory requirements to preserve official White House records [*******]-- including those reflecting potentially sensitive policy discussions -- for history and in case of future legal demands.
The committee is investigating allegations that vast stores of official Bush administration e-mails have also gone missing from the White House, which scrapped a Clinton-era archiving system and has struggled with data retention problems. [*******]
A former White House technology manager told the committee in statements released yesterday that the Bush administration's e-mail system "was primitive and the risk that data would be lost was high."
Steven McDevitt, who left the White House in 2006, said he supervised an internal study that found hundreds of days in which no electronic messages were stored for one or more White House offices from January 2003 to August 2005. The study stated a range when tallying the total number of days in which an office had no recorded e-mails, from 473 -- which had been previously reported -- to more than 1,000, McDevitt said.
McDevitt also said security was so lax that e-mail could be modified by anyone on the computer network until the middle of 2005.
Administration officials defended their efforts to fix the problems, and said they are still working to locate and identify e-mails reported as missing. "We are very energized about getting to the bottom of this," said Theresa Payton, chief information officer at the Office of Administration.
At the hearing, Payton and GOP lawmakers attacked the 2005 White House study overseen by McDevitt, calling it flawed and unreliable. McDevitt said the 250-page study involved numerous senior technology officials as well as outside contractors.
Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (Va.), the committee's ranking Republican, said in a statement that the missing e-mail allegations are "based on a discredited internal report conveniently leaked to the media." He also said that yesterday's hearing was "less about preserving records and more about resurrecting the spurious claim that the White House 'lost millions of official e-mails.' " [political to be sure but the “dog eat our emails” sort of dodge is simply ridiculous] [**************]
Davis also said, based on a briefing by Payton, that the actual number of days with missing e-mails was 202. "A substantial portion of the so-called 'missing' e-mails appear not to be missing at all, just filed in the wrong digital drawer," Davis said. No other committee member followed up on that allegation during the hearing.
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

U.S. Steps Up Deportation Of Immigrant Criminals

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/26/AR2008022603705.html
U.S. Steps Up Deportation Of Immigrant Criminals
By Ernesto Londoño
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, February 27, 2008; A01 [bush white house] [DHS and other uber agency parts tasked with immigration] [recent charges that ICE agents act as if the Constitution does not apply to them which has caused some consternation on the hill and elsewhere] [congress] [110th, 2nd session] [**********]
Immigration officials are increasingly scouring jails and courts nationwide and reviewing years-old criminal records to identify deportable immigrants, efforts that have contributed to a steep rise in deportations and strained the immigration court system.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/26/AR2008022603705.html
U.S. Steps Up Deportation Of Immigrant Criminals
By Ernesto Londoño
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, February 27, 2008; A01 [bush white house] [DHS and other uber agency parts tasked with immigration] [recent charges that ICE agents act as if the Constitution does not apply to them which has caused some consternation on the hill and elsewhere] [congress] [110th, 2nd session] [**********]
Immigration officials are increasingly scouring jails and courts nationwide and reviewing years-old criminal records to identify deportable immigrants, efforts that have contributed to a steep rise in deportations and strained the immigration court system.
Long accused of failing to do enough to deport illegal immigrants convicted of crimes, federal authorities have recently strengthened partnerships with local corrections systems and taken other steps to monitor immigrants facing charges, [*****]officials said.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement said that in the 12-month period that ended Sept. 30, it placed 164,000 criminals in deportation proceedings, a sharp increase from the 64,000 the agency said it identified and placed in proceedings the year before. The agency estimates that the number will rise to 200,000 this year. [***********]
The heightened scrutiny, fueled by post-9/11 national security concerns and the growing debate over illegal immigration, has introduced a major element to the practice of criminal law in the Washington region and other parts of the country with large immigrant populations.
"It used to be two parties in the courtroom: the state and the defense," said Mariana C. Cordier, a Rockville defense lawyer. "Now you know immigration is waiting in the wings."
Two groups of people are now more likely to be placed in deportation proceedings: illegal immigrants who might once have been criminally prosecuted without coming to the attention of immigration authorities, and legal immigrants whose visas and residency permits are being revoked because of criminal convictions.
The number of deported immigrants with criminal convictions has increased steadily this decade, from about 73,000 in 2001 to more than 91,000 in 2007, according to ICE.
Julie L. Myers, the assistant secretary of homeland security who heads ICE, said in a recent interview that she has strived to use technology and improved relationships among local and federal law enforcement officials to multiply her agency's eyes and ears in all levels of the criminal justice system. [************]
"It's such a high priority of mine to make sure that people are not released from criminal institutions onto the street," said Myers, noting that when she took the helm of the agency in January 2006, ICE did not check all federal detention facilities for immigration violators.
Since then, she said, the agency has studied the demographics of correctional facilities across the country and has assigned more agents to check facilities with higher numbers of foreign-born offenders. ICE's Criminal Alien Program created partnerships between immigration officials and jailers at nearly 4,500 detention facilities. Federal agents now frequently visit courthouses and jails to comb through court files. In 2006, the agency opened a division in Chicago that is responsible for screening federal inmates nationwide for deportation.
Additionally, a growing number of police departments -- including those in Frederick and Prince William counties and the city of Manassas -- have enrolled in an ICE training program that deputizes officers to enforce immigration law. [********] [which has been constroversial]
Probation and police officers are also tipping off federal authorities to cases involving suspected illegal immigrants, defense lawyers say.
"What's happening more and more is the police, when investigating a case, will research immigration status," said Rob Robertson, an Annandale lawyer who practices criminal and immigration law.
As a result, defense lawyers and prosecutors are increasingly confronting the complexities of immigration law -- a task some have assumed grudgingly.
"It's a minefield that defense attorneys need to understand before entering into plea negotiations in a criminal case, before resolving the case in any way," Montgomery County Public Defender Paul DeWolfe said.
An immigration judge who requested anonymity because he is not authorized to speak publicly said his cases increasingly involve illegal immigrants charged with relatively minor offenses, such as driving without a license. [*********]
"What's growing is the kinds of offenses being brought to ICE's attention," said the judge, who is not based in the Washington area. The judge said he believes that is partly due to the growing concern about illegal immigration in many parts of the country.
"Cities are overwhelmed with the consequences and costs of illegal immigration," the judge said. "It's a concerted effort to get rid of them, get them out of their community."
Denise Slavin, vice president of the National Association of Immigration Judges, said that when she joined the bench 10 years ago, local law enforcement officials frequently complained that their calls to immigration agents went unheeded.
"Now, even something that turns out to be a false charge, they get turned over to the department," she said, referring to ICE.
Slavin said Congress has increased funding for immigration enforcement initiatives but has not provided commensurate financial support to the immigration court system. The flood of cases of immigrants convicted of crimes has been especially vexing, she said, because judges must evaluate the complex and fluid intersection of criminal and immigration law, which varies from state to state.
"It's been a big burden on our system," said Slavin, who is based in Miami. "We're dealing with more complex cases and fewer resources."
Elaine Komis, spokeswoman for the immigration court system, acknowledged that the number of immigration judges has remained steady, despite the steep increase in cases they hear. "We feel comfortable that we will be able to deal with any increased caseload," she said in a statement.
Immigration judges and lawyers say the case volume is forcing judges to rule quickly on complicated cases and is keeping people in custody longer as they await their day in court -- an issue Myers says the government is addressing by streamlining the removal process in certain cases. [********]
In 1996, a new immigration law dramatically increased penalties for immigrants convicted of crimes. The law established that immigrants -- even those who have obtained permanent residence -- can be deported if they are convicted of "aggravated felonies," a term for offenses labeled as serious under immigration law.
Christopher Bailey, 23, a Jamaican man convicted of armed robbery last year in Montgomery County, is among the local illegal immigrants whom ICE promptly identified and placed in deportation proceedings last year. ICE expects to deport him after his expected release from prison in 2011.
Damion O. Brissett, 23, a permanent legal immigrant from Jamaica, was sentenced to three years of unsupervised probation for a marijuana possession charge in 2003. But the Baltimore mechanic was recently placed in deportation proceedings because of the case.
His criminal record came to the attention of a customs agent who processed his arrival in October on his return from a visit to Jamaica. Because he had been a permanent resident for more than five years, he was ultimately permitted to remain in the country, according to his attorney, Mary Ann Berlin. The process, however, cost his family $7,000 in attorney's fees and kept him in jail for two months, said his father, Junior Brissett.
"It was crazy," Junior Brissett said. "He'd never been in jail before. He was far away from home."
Didi Bonilla, 29, a Salvadoran mother of four, was never convicted of a crime but came to ICE's attention because of charges brought against her. Montgomery County police charged her in April with failing to report child abuse to authorities.
Bonilla had failed to renew her legal status two years earlier and was ordered deported during a 2005 hearing, which she did not attend. If not for her arrest, Bonilla and her lawyer said, her illegal status could have gone undetected for years, as hers was one of hundreds of thousands of outstanding deportation orders.
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

In Wiretap Law’s Stead, Uncertainty

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/us/27fisa.html
February 27, 2008
In Wiretap Law’s Stead, Uncertainty
By ERIC LICHTBLAU [bush white house] [justice department] [under Mukasey] [CIA waterboard cases] [destroyed tapes] [IC and decicions apparently made by NSC principals shortly after 9/11] congress] [110th, 2nd session] [unitary theory of executive powers] [TSPs] [effectively spying on folks in the US without FISA court warrant] [**********]
WASHINGTON — All last week, intelligence officials fielded calls from nervous lawyers for the country’s phone companies. With a wiretapping law allowed to lapse in Congress, they were no longer certain what they were supposed to do when the government came to them with a wiretapping order, administration officials said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/us/27fisa.html
February 27, 2008
In Wiretap Law’s Stead, Uncertainty
By ERIC LICHTBLAU [bush white house] [justice department] [under Mukasey] [CIA waterboard cases] [destroyed tapes] [IC and decicions apparently made by NSC principals shortly after 9/11] congress] [110th, 2nd session] [unitary theory of executive powers] [TSPs] [effectively spying on folks in the US without FISA court warrant] [**********]
WASHINGTON — All last week, intelligence officials fielded calls from nervous lawyers for the country’s phone companies. With a wiretapping law allowed to lapse in Congress, they were no longer certain what they were supposed to do when the government came to them with a wiretapping order, administration officials said.
“They’re raising questions, and they’re saying, ‘Look, we’ve got an expired piece of legislation,’ ” recounted a senior administration official who was involved in the conversations. “It’s not crystal clear.” [**************]
President Bush and his senior aides have been warning for the last 10 days that the country was left more vulnerable by the expiration of the surveillance law on Feb. 16, and said last week that the government had already lost valuable counterterrorism intelligence because of Congressional inaction.
But as a practical matter, the issue is less about harm that has actually been done than about the prospect that such harm will be done because of uncertainty in the government and the telecommunications industry over what is now allowed, [******]officials involved in the discussions say.
Even with the law lapsed, intelligence officials continue to be able to put wiretaps on terrorism and espionage suspects under directives that were approved before the expiration of the six-month law, the Protect America Act, which gave the government a freer hand in deciding whom to wiretap without court approval. [********]
Theoretically, intelligence officials would have to revert to older — and, they say, more cumbersome — legal standards if they were now to stumble onto a new terrorist group that was not covered by a previous wiretapping order. [*******]But that has not happened since the surveillance law expired, administration officials said.
One lawyer in the telecommunications industry, who spoke on condition of anonymity because wiretapping operations are classified, said he had seen little practical effect on the industry’s surveillance operations since the law expired. Most operations appear to have continued unabated, the lawyer said.
Democrats have been arguing for days that the administration has exaggerated the actual national security harm.
A group of former intelligence officials chimed in Tuesday in a letter to Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence. The administration’s recent comments about wiretapping tools “have distorted rather than enhanced” the debate over the law, said the letter, signed by Rand Beers, Richard A. Clarke, Lt. Gen. Donald L. Kerrick, retired, and Suzanne E. Spaulding, all of whom have served in senior intelligence capacities in recent years. [*************]
The expiration of the temporary law “does not put America at greater risk,” the group said, adding that “America’s security cannot be captive to partisan bickering and distortions.”
Administration officials said that in the wake of the surveillance law’s expiration, most phone providers had continued to carry out valid wiretapping orders, but that at least one company had expressed reluctance over particular operations.
The issue, according to Congressional and administration officials, hinged on whether the government could expand existing wiretapping orders to include new phone numbers or e-mail addresses in surveillance of the same targets covered by the original orders.
By the end of last week, the question had been worked out in the government’s favor “for the time being,” administration officials said. But they emphasized that the uncertainty of the legal landscape threatened to disrupt future operations.
Fueling that uncertainty, officials said, is the continuing debate in Congress over whether phone providers that helped in the National Security Agency’s post-Sept. 11 program of wiretapping without warrants should be given retroactive immunity to shield them from some 40 lawsuits over the program. [********] Divisions in Congress over that question led to the decision by House Democratic leaders to allow the surveillance law to lapse rather than approve a White House-backed bill, passed by the Senate, that included immunity.
Mr. Bush said this week that the lack of immunity for the telecommunications industry would make it harder for the government to enlist private companies as partners in spying operations.
“They’re getting sued for billions of dollars, and it’s not fair,” he said Monday in remarks to the National Governors Association. “And it will create doubt amongst private-sector folks who need to help protect us.”
“If you’ve done something that you think is perfectly legal,” the president added, “and all of a sudden you’re facing billions of dollars of lawsuits, it’s going to be hard to provide — with credibility — assurances that we can go forward.”
Democratic aides in the House and the Senate have been meeting for two weeks to negotiate compromise legislation. The aides have been discussing several options short of an all-or-nothing approach to the immunity question. One idea, officials said, is to have a special court examine the companies’ role in the N.S.A. program, while another proposal might allow the federal government to substitute itself as a defendant for the companies in pending lawsuits.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Senate Democrats Focus on Economic Cost of War

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/washington/27congress.html
February 27, 2008
Senate Democrats Focus on Economic Cost of War
By DAVID HERSZENHORN [congress] [110th 2nd session] [-ir] [versus gsave more generally] [old question of whether –ir is central to winning or more a diversion] [here the Dems suggest the latter by highlighting how much treasure has been consumed] [bush white house] [nsc principals and well beyond] [making –ir integral to gsave?] [for me there’s a simple question or test I posed to my students recently] [if-when the U.S. is attacked again on 9/11 like scale, will it have originated in –Iraq or AfPak?] [*********]
WASHINGTON — Undeterred by President Bush and Senator John McCain proudly pointing to progress in Iraq, Congressional Democrats are trying to mount new lines of attack against the administration’s war policies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/washington/27congress.html
February 27, 2008
Senate Democrats Focus on Economic Cost of War
By DAVID HERSZENHORN [congress] [110th 2nd session] [-ir] [versus gsave more generally] [old question of whether –ir is central to winning or more a diversion] [here the Dems suggest the latter by highlighting how much treasure has been consumed] [bush white house] [nsc principals and well beyond] [making –ir integral to gsave?] [for me there’s a simple question or test I posed to my students recently] [if-when the U.S. is attacked again on 9/11 like scale, will it have originated in –Iraq or AfPak?] [*********]
WASHINGTON — Undeterred by President Bush and Senator John McCain proudly pointing to progress in Iraq, Congressional Democrats are trying to mount new lines of attack against the administration’s war policies.
In a shift from last year’s failed legislative efforts to force a reduction of troops, the Democrats’ new approach is aimed primarily at framing the issue for the November elections by focusing on the financial cost of military operations and on the war’s implications for the nation’s troubled economy.
With the fifth anniversary of the war fast approaching, the Democrats, citing testimony by the Pentagon’s own commanders, are also emphasizing the strain on the armed forces. In addition the Democrats contend that the war against terrorism should be waged primarily in Afghanistan and Pakistan, not Iraq.
The change in tactics by the Democrats is one of necessity. The closest they came last year to forcing the administration to alter its war plans was in September, when they mustered 56 votes — 4 short of the 60 they needed — to advance legislation that would have required troops to be given as much time back in the United States as they spent overseas before being redeployed.
The Democratic presidential candidates have seized on the Pentagon’s announcement that when the troop escalation ends in July, there will still be 8,000 more soldiers in Iraq than when the so-called surge started because some support units will remain.
And on Monday a coalition of Democratic advocacy groups, with support from John Edwards, who ended his bid for the Democratic presidential nomination, announced a $20 million public awareness campaign to highlight “the crushing cost of the war.”
“We have to send a message here,” said Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, a West Point graduate and former Army paratrooper who has emerged as one of the Democrats’ most authoritative voices on the war.
“We have to have a long-term sustainable strategy; 140,000 troops is not sustainable in the longer term,” he said.
While they sought to focus last year on the all-consuming chaos in Iraq, Democrats now acknowledge that there have been recent security gains. But they say those gains may prove temporary, that political progress has been too slow and that given domestic concerns, the human and financial cost is just too steep.
Republicans, including the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, say they are happy to spend a few days talking about Iraq.
“We welcome a discussion,” Mr. McConnell said Tuesday, “which would give us a chance to talk about the extraordinary progress that has been made in Iraq over the last six months, not only on the military side but also with civilian reconciliation beginning to finally take hold.”
The war issue had faded from focus on Capitol Hill early this year as lawmakers spent the first weeks of the term negotiating an economic stimulus package. But it came gusting back onto the Senate floor on Tuesday with debate over two bills sponsored by Senator Russ Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin.
The first bill would restrict the financing of military operations to fighting terrorism, protecting American troops and training Iraqi forces. The second would give the Bush administration 60 days to report to Congress on its global strategy for defeating Al Qaeda and would limit the length of troop deployments.
On war-related measures last year, Republicans repeatedly blocked Democrat-backed bills outright. But on Tuesday, Republicans appeared so confident and so eager to talk about the war that they voted overwhelmingly to bring Mr. Feingold’s first bill up for 30 hours of debate.
That vote was 70 to 24, with 43 Republicans joining 26 Democrats and one independent in favor of debating the bill, while 20 Democrats, 3 Republicans and one independent voted against it.
Mr. Feingold’s bills, which are certain to be defeated, are the first of several efforts by Democrats to press the war issue. [******]
Senators Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware and John Kerry of Massachusetts returned from a trip to Afghanistan and Pakistan warning of a resurgence of Al Qaeda because of the continuing concentration of resources in Iraq. [while doubtless partly political surely they fear what’s happening in Afghanistan?] [*******]
And on Thursday the Joint Economic Committee, led by Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, will hold a hearing on the costs of the war.
This flurry of largely uncoordinated activity suggests that Democrats will take an aggressive stance ahead of the next report by Gen. David H. Petraeus, the commander in Iraq, who will testify before Congress in early April. [**********]
General Petraeus is expected to recommend that the reduction in troop levels now under way be halted for at least a short period, starting in July, to assess the progress that has been made.
Despite the recent military gains, Senator Reed and other Democrats said they were confident that voters remained as weary of the war as ever.
“I think they are beginning to ask themselves questions like, ‘O.K., now that everyone says we have made real progress on the ground, why can’t we start coming out more dramatically?’ ” Mr. Reed said. “And now with the economy becoming such a central issue — $190 billion a year — why are we spending there instead of here?”
The Democrats are also focusing on the strain on the military. [********]
In testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday, Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the Army chief of staff, said, “The cumulative effects of the last six-plus years at war have left our Army out of balance, consumed by the current fight and unable to do the things we know we need to do to properly sustain our all-volunteer force.” [******]
The majority leader, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, said Democrats would continue to emphasize the cost of the war.
“We are not going to lose this subject; it’s too important to the American people,” he said. “If this war goes on another year, we will have borrowed a trillion dollars to pay for this war in Iraq.”
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Imam From Va. Mosque Now Thought to Have Aided Al-Qaeda

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/26/AR2008022603267.html
Imam From Va. Mosque Now Thought to Have Aided Al-Qaeda
By Susan Schmidt
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, February 27, 2008; A03 [bush white house] [mostly bureaucracies] [dod, doj, IC, federal judiciary, so on] [jihadis among us] [the continued recruitment of manipulative youth] [still seem to be plenty of them to recruit] [archive in societal too] [*******]
Even before the 2001 terrorist attacks, American-born imam Anwar al-Aulaqi drew the attention of federal authorities because of his possible connections to al-Qaeda. Their interest grew after 9/11, when it turned out that three of the hijackers had spent time at his mosques in California and Falls Church, but he was allowed to leave the country in 2002.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/26/AR2008022603267.html
Imam From Va. Mosque Now Thought to Have Aided Al-Qaeda
By Susan Schmidt
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, February 27, 2008; A03 [bush white house] [mostly bureaucracies] [dod, doj, IC, federal judiciary, so on] [jihadis among us] [the continued recruitment of manipulative youth] [still seem to be plenty of them to recruit] [archive in societal too] [*******]
Even before the 2001 terrorist attacks, American-born imam Anwar al-Aulaqi drew the attention of federal authorities because of his possible connections to al-Qaeda. Their interest grew after 9/11, when it turned out that three of the hijackers had spent time at his mosques in California and Falls Church, but he was allowed to leave the country in 2002.
New information later surfaced about his contacts with extremists while in the United States. Now, U.S. officials are saying for the first time that they believe that Aulaqi worked with al-Qaeda networks in the Persian Gulf after leaving Northern Virginia. In mid-2006, [******]Aulaqi was detained in Yemen at the request of the United States. To the dismay of U.S. authorities, Aulaqi was released in December.
"There is good reason to believe Anwar Aulaqi has been involved in very serious terrorist activities since leaving the United States, including plotting attacks against America and our allies," [******] said a U.S. counterterrorism official who spoke on the condition of anonymity. [sounds like IC leaker] [******]
U.S. authorities were limited in how far they could push Yemen to hold Aulaqi, officials said, because they have no pending legal case against him. The officials said ongoing intelligence-gathering efforts here and abroad prevented them from providing details about Aulaqi's suspected activities.
Aulaqi, 36, was the spiritual leader in 2001 and 2002 of the Dar al-Hijrah mosque in Falls Church, one of the largest in the country. In a taped interview posted this New Year's Eve on a British Web site, Aulaqi said that while in prison in Yemen, he had undergone multiple interrogations by the FBI that included questions about his dealings with the Sept. 11 hijackers.
"I don't know if I was held because of that, or because of the other issues they presented," Aulaqi said without elaborating. He said he would like to travel outside Yemen but would not do so "until the U.S. drops whatever unknown charges it has against me." Aulaqi did not respond to requests for an interview.
In several terrorism cases in Britain and Canada over the past 18 months, investigators found in the private computer files of some suspects transcripts and audio files of lectures by Aulaqi promoting the strategies of a key al-Qaeda military commander, the late Yusef al-Ayeri, a Saudi known as "Swift Sword." [*************]
Federal prosecutors in New York alleged in a 2004 terrorism-related trial that a U.S. branch of a Yemeni charity for which Aulaqi served as vice president was a front that sent money to al-Qaeda. [********]Documents filed around the same time in federal court in Alexandria assert that a year after 9/11, Aulaqi returned briefly to Northern Virginia, where he visited a radical Islamic cleric and asked him about recruiting young Muslims for "violent jihad." That cleric, Ali al-Timimi, is now serving a life sentence for inciting followers to fight with the Taliban against Americans.
After leaving the United States in 2002, Aulaqi spent time in Britain, where he developed a following among ultraconservative young Muslims through his lectures and audiotapes. He moved to Yemen, his family's ancestral home, in 2004.
State Department officials said they are barred by privacy law from discussing Aulaqi's detention because he is a U.S. citizen. A senior official of Yemen's embassy in Washington said Aulaqi was arrested over family and tribal matters -- "kidnapping, stuff like that" rather than terrorism. "Nothing has led them to believe he's part of al-Qaeda," he said.
Before his arrest, Aulaqi lectured at an Islamist university in Sanaa run by Sheik Abd-al-Majid al-Zindani, who fought with Osama bin Laden in the Soviet-Afghan war and was designated a terrorist in 2004 by the United States and the United Nations.
U.S. and U.N. authorities accuse Zindani of recruiting for al-Qaeda camps and raising money for weapons for terrorist groups. Students at his university, the United States said, are suspected in terrorist attacks and assassinations; among its attendees before he joined the Taliban was American John Walker Lindh.
Aulaqi's lectures and Internet postings on Islamic principles excoriate the West and speak of Muslims as a besieged people. In one speech apparently made in 2006, he predicted an epic global clash between Muslims and "kufr," or nonbelievers.
"America is in a state of war with Allah," he said, referring to the fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. He praised the insurgency in Iraq and "martyrdom operations" in the Palestinian territories. Muslims must choose sides between President Bush and the "mujaheddin," he said. The solution for the Muslim world, he said, "is jihad." [*********]
Aulaqi is "a huge inspiration to home-grown terror cells in the U.K. and Europe," [*****]said Evan Kohlmann, a terrorism researcher who testified as a government witness in a British bombing conspiracy trial. Kohlmann, an American whose work is funded by the Nine Eleven Finding Answers Foundation, a privately funded research group, said: "He is one of the very few respected extremist Salafi clerics who can write and speak in English."
Aulaqi's father, Nasser Aulaqi, a former Yemeni government minister, said Yemeni security police confiscated his son's computer and copies of a lecture series he gave at Zindani's al-Iman University. He said his son lectured four times at the university about six months before his arrest, on the history of Muslims in Spain. [*****]"He was not a faculty member," Aulaqi's father said in a telephone interview. "There is no radical things in them."
"My son is not a terrorist," he said. "He never advocated violence against anybody."
Anwar al-Aulaqi was born in New Mexico in 1971 while his father studied for a college degree. He spent part of his childhood in Yemen and returned in 1991 to study engineering at Colorado State University. After graduating, he became a mosque leader, first in Fort Collins, Colo., and then in San Diego. [****************]
Tax records show that in 1998 and 1999, while in San Diego, [****]Aulaqi served as vice president of the now-defunct Charitable Society for Social Welfare Inc., the U.S. branch of a Yemeni charity founded by Zindani. Three years ago, federal prosecutors in a New York terrorism-financing case described the charity as "a front organization" that was "used to support al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden." [**********]
The 9/11 Commission and the joint House-Senate Inquiry into the intelligence failures that allowed the attacks to take place reported that in 1999 the FBI opened a short-lived investigation of Aulaqi when it learned he may have been visited by a "procurement agent" for bin Laden.
Law enforcement sources now say that agent was Ziyad Khaleel, who the government has previously said purchased a satellite phone and batteries for bin Laden in the 1990s. Khaleel was the U.S. fundraiser for Islamic American Relief Agency, a charity the U.S. Treasury has designated a financier of bin Laden and which listed Aulaqi's charity as its Yemeni partner. [***********]
The FBI also learned that Aulaqi was visited in early 2000 by a close associate of Omar Abdel Rahman, known as the blind sheik, [********]who was convicted of conspiracy in connection with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and that he had ties to people raising money for the radical Palestinian movement Hamas, according to Congress and the 9/11 Commission report.
But the bureau lacked enough evidence to bring a case, and closed its investigation. Around the same time, two future Sept. 11 hijackers -- Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, fresh from an al-Qaeda summit in Malaysia -- turned up at Aulaqi's San Diego mosque in early 2000.
Witnesses later told the FBI that Aulaqi had a close relationship with the hijackers in San Diego. "Several persons informed the FBI after September 11 that this imam had closed-door meetings in San Diego with al-Mihdhar, al-Hazmi and another individual," the Joint House-Senate Inquiry reported. In press interviews at the time, Aulaqi denied having such contacts.
In January 2001, he enrolled in a PhD program at George Washington University and was hired at Dar al-Hijrah, which regularly draws about 3,000 people to Friday prayers. [**************] [I used to go by on Fridays—usually on way to go grocery shopping—and the place was brimming with faithful Muslims] [********]
In April 2001, Hazmi left San Diego and showed up at Aulaqi's new mosque, along with another future hijacker, Hani Hanjour. They were quickly aided in securing an apartment by a Jordanian man they met there -- Eyad al-Rababah.
"Some [FBI] agents suspect that Aulaqi may have tasked Rababah to help Hazmi and Hanjour. We share that suspicion, given the remarkable coincidence of Aulaqi's prior relationship with Hazmi," the 9/11 Commission concluded. [****] Further, the phone number for Dar al-Hijrah had been found in the Hamburg apartment of one of the planners of the attacks, Ramzi Binalshibh.
The FBI told the 9/11 Commission and Congress that it did not have reason to detain Aulaqi.
Former Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Bob Graham, who led the congressional panel on Sept. 11, accused the FBI of bungling investigations of Aulaqi before and after 9/11. "Some believe that Aulaqi was the first person since the summit meeting in Malaysia with whom al-Mihdhar and al-Hazmi shared their terrorist intentions and plans," [*********]Graham wrote in his 2004 book "Intelligence Matters."
After 9/11, Aulaqi publicly condemned the attacks. But in comments published in English on Sept. 17, 2001, on IslamOnline, Aulaqi suggested that Israelis may have been responsible for the 9/11 attacks and that the FBI "went into the roster of the airplanes and whoever has a Muslim or Arab name became the hijacker by default."
Weeks after leaving the United States in the spring of 2002, he posted an essay in Arabic titled "Why Muslims Love Death" on the Islam Today Web site, lauding the fervor of Palestinian suicide bombers. Months later he praised them in English at a lecture in a London mosque that was recorded on videotape.
Aulaqi briefly returned to the United States in fall 2002, visiting the Fairfax home of Timimi, spiritual leader of an Islamic center a few miles from Dar al-Hijrah, according to court records.
"Aulaqi attempted to get al Timimi to discuss issues related to the recruitment of young Muslims," [*****]according to a court filing by Timimi's attorney, Edward MacMahon, who asserted that those "entreaties were rejected."
Timimi was sentenced in 2005 to life in prison for inciting young Muslims to go to Afghanistan after 9/11 and to wage war against the United States. Eleven of his followers were convicted of charges including weapons violations and aiding a terrorist organization. [*******]Some had simulated armed conflict by playing paintball in the Virginia countryside, and some went on to camps in Pakistan run by the group Lashkar-i-Taiba, which trained foreign and local fighters for Muslim militant groups including the Taliban.
Court records show that Aulaqi had been driven to the meeting by one of Timimi's followers, who later testified as a government witness. Another convicted member of the group had Aulaqi's phone number on his cellphone, according to court testimony.
Dar al-Hijrah's spokesman and others in leadership positions at the mosque did not respond to requests for interviews for this article.
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

The Fading Jihadists

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/27/AR2008022703179.html
The Fading Jihadists
By David Ignatius
Thursday, February 28, 2008; A17 [oped] [columnist] [on the global Sunni-Salafi-Wahab-Jihadis movement] [***********]
Politicians who talk about the terrorism threat -- and it's already clear that this will be a polarizing issue in the 2008 campaign -- should be required to read a new book by a former CIA officer named Marc Sageman. It stands what you think you know about terrorism on its head and helps you see the topic in a different light. [********]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/27/AR2008022703179.html
The Fading Jihadists
By David Ignatius
Thursday, February 28, 2008; A17 [oped] [columnist] [on the global Sunni-Salafi-Wahab-Jihadis movement] [***********]
Politicians who talk about the terrorism threat -- and it's already clear that this will be a polarizing issue in the 2008 campaign -- should be required to read a new book by a former CIA officer named Marc Sageman. It stands what you think you know about terrorism on its head and helps you see the topic in a different light. [********]
Sageman has a résumé that would suit a postmodern John le Carré. He was a case officer running spies in Pakistan and then became a forensic psychiatrist. What distinguishes his new book, "Leaderless Jihad," is that it peels away the emotional, reflexive responses to terrorism that have grown up since Sept. 11, 2001, and looks instead at scientific data Sageman has collected on more than 500 Islamic terrorists -- to understand who they are, why they attack and how to stop them. [*********]
The heart of Sageman's message is that we have been scaring ourselves into exaggerating the terrorism threat -- and then by our unwise actions in Iraq making the problem worse. [******] He attacks head-on the central thesis of the Bush administration, echoed increasingly by Republican presidential candidate John McCain, that, as McCain's Web site puts it, the United States is facing "a dangerous, relentless enemy in the War against Islamic Extremists" spawned by al-Qaeda. [********]
The numbers say otherwise, Sageman insists. The first wave of al-Qaeda leaders, who joined Osama bin Laden in the 1980s, is down to a few dozen people on the run in the tribal areas of northwest Pakistan. [*****] The second wave of terrorists, who trained in al-Qaeda's camps in Afghanistan during the 1990s, has also been devastated, with about 100 hiding out on the Pakistani frontier. [*******] These people are genuinely dangerous, says Sageman, and they must be captured or killed. But they do not pose an existential threat to America, much less a "clash of civilizations." [****************] [I need to read this book because I have assumed they do represent an existential threat to the U.S. and that they are bigger and more diverse than he allows: they are throughout Europe and elsewhere] [*********************************]
It's the third wave of terrorism that is growing, [******] but what is it? By Sageman's account, it's a leaderless hodgepodge of thousands of what he calls "terrorist wannabes." Unlike the first two waves, whose members were well educated and intensely religious, the new jihadists are a weird species of the Internet culture. [al Qaeda 2.0] [******] Outraged by video images of Americans killing Muslims in Iraq, they gather in password-protected chat rooms and dare each other to take action. Like young people across time and religious boundaries, they are bored and looking for thrills.
"It's more about hero worship than about religion," Sageman said in a presentation of his research last week at the New America Foundation, a liberal think tank here. Many of this third wave don't speak Arabic or read the Koran. Very few (13 percent of Sageman's sample) have attended radical madrassas. Nearly all join the movement because they know or are related to someone who's already in it. [*******]Those detained on terrorism charges are getting younger: In Sageman's 2003 sample, the average age was 26; among those arrested after 2006, it was down to about 20. They are disaffected, homicidal kids -- closer to urban gang members than to motivated Muslim fanatics.
Sageman's harshest judgment is that the United States is making the terrorism problem worse by its actions in Iraq. [I don’t know anyone who seriously challenges that thesis] [even my friends at FDD are concerned that the U.S. has attracked jihadis to Iraq] [*******]"Since 2003, the war in Iraq has without question fueled the process of radicalization worldwide, including the U.S. The data are crystal clear," he writes. We have taken a fire that would otherwise burn itself out and poured gasoline on it.
The third wave of terrorism is inherently self-limiting, Sageman continues. As soon as the amorphous groups gather and train, they make themselves vulnerable to arrest. "As the threat from al-Qaeda is self-limiting, so is its appeal, and global Islamist terrorism will probably disappear for internal reasons -- if the United States has the sense to allow it to continue on its course and fade away."
Sageman's policy advice is to "take the glory and thrill out of terrorism." Jettison the rhetoric about Muslim extremism -- these leaderless jihadists are barely Muslims.[*****] Stop holding news conferences to announce the latest triumphs in the "global war on terror," which only glamorize the struggle. And reduce the U.S. military footprint in Iraq, which fuels the Muslim world's sense of moral outrage.
I don't agree with all of Sageman's arguments, especially about the consequences of a quick drawdown in Iraq, but I think he is raising the questions the country needs to ponder this election year. If Sageman's data are right, we are not facing what President Bush called "the decisive ideological struggle of the 21st century and the calling of our generation," but something that is more limited and manageable [******]-- if we make good decisions. [I hope Sageman is correct but fear he’s constructed a third-wave strawman of sorts] [granted, they are muts compared to OBL and company] [but data suggest the number of disaffected Muslims watching –Iraq and gsave is significant and they all are not muts] [just consider the damage they’ve done in recent years] [true enough that another 9/11-like attack has not materialized] [so far!] [*******]
The writer is co-host ofPostGlobal, an online discussion of international issues. His e-mail address isdavidignatius@washpost.com.
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

A Little Nuke Music

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/opinion/28thu1.html
February 28, 2008
Editorial
A Little Nuke Music
[editorial] [NYC’s philharmonic in Pyongyang] [version of ping-pong diplomacy?] [**]
The New York Philharmonic’s concert in Pyongyang was a tantalizing taste of what might be in America’s relationship with North Korea. It was also a reminder of the missteps and dangerously wrongheaded judgments that have kept the two countries apart and at saber-point for more than a half century.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/opinion/28thu1.html
February 28, 2008
Editorial
A Little Nuke Music
[editorial] [NYC’s philharmonic in Pyongyang] [version of ping-pong diplomacy?] [**]
The New York Philharmonic’s concert in Pyongyang was a tantalizing taste of what might be in America’s relationship with North Korea. It was also a reminder of the missteps and dangerously wrongheaded judgments that have kept the two countries apart and at saber-point for more than a half century.
The Philharmonic drew sustained applause and even some tears, playing Gershwin, a beloved Korean folk song and the two countries’ national anthems. The concert would have had even more significance if it could have celebrated continuing progress toward shuttering North Korea’s nuclear weapons program.
That effort unfortunately has stalled, and the fault — at least this time — is undeniably Pyongyang’s. It would take a serious diplomatic push by the Bush administration and the leaders of China, Russia, Japan and South Korea to ensure that it does not fall apart. [*****]
North Korea agreed last year to disable its Yongbyon nuclear reactor and produce a “complete and correct” accounting of all its nuclear activities, facilities and weapons-usable material by the end of last year. In exchange, it was to get 950,000 tons of heavy fuel oil and start down the road toward normalizing diplomatic and economic relations with the United States and others.
While North Korea is disabling the reactor, it has not turned over the promised list. That has revived serious doubts about whether it would ever abandon a program that has already tested a nuclear device and produced fuel for 10 or more weapons. Russia’s delay in delivering some of the promised fuel oil may be a factor, but there are more serious disputes as well.
North Korea has said it would produce the accounting, but first it wants Washington to remove it from the list of state sponsors of terrorism and lift certain sanctions. Washington says the sequencing can be worked out if Pyongyang is prepared for full disclosure.
The Bush administration has a long history of using any excuse to scuttle any diplomatic deal, but in this case it is right. Pyongyang clearly agreed to full disclosure and the deadline. Since then serious questions have also arisen about Pyongyang’s nuclear cooperation with Syria. That must also be disclosed. [well on this matter part of the bush administration has an interest in not seeing it fail] [editorial assumes a monolithic administration when it and others have demonstrated time and again anything but monolithic] [**********]
President Bush wasted years refusing to deal with North Korea, and that expanded stockpile of weapons-grade plutonium is the result. Having belatedly embraced diplomacy, the president deserves credit for not overreacting — for continuing negotiations and fuel deliveries — despite fierce criticism from members of his party, including former members of his administration.
The United States and its partners should continue to explore creative solutions to the impasse and stand ready to lift sanctions and quickly take North Korea off the terrorism list if it fulfills its obligations. China, North Korea’s chief benefactor (and frequent enabler), must press Pyongyang to keep its commitments. Plans by South Korea’s new president to link economic integration to nuclear progress could be important leverage.
If the stalemate drags on, the United States and its partners may have to get tougher and implement United Nations sanctions that they are now choosing to ignore. North Korea needs to know that the international community has patience — but that such patience has limits.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

The Problem With Biofuels

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/26/AR2008022602827.html
The Problem With Biofuels
More proof that there are no easy solutions to climate change
Wednesday, February 27, 2008; A16 [editorial] [climate change and the biofuel problems] [****]
AS THE United States searches for alternative ways to feed its addiction to petroleum, ethanol and other biofuels derived from organic material have been considered a miracle motor vehicle elixir. The energy bill signed by President Bush in December mandates that at least 36 billion gallons of biofuels a year be used by 2020. Yet separate studies released this month by Princeton University and the Nature Conservancy reveal that biofuels are not a silver bullet in the battle against global warming. In fact, they could make things worse.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/26/AR2008022602827.html
The Problem With Biofuels
More proof that there are no easy solutions to climate change
Wednesday, February 27, 2008; A16 [editorial] [climate change and the biofuel problems] [****]
AS THE United States searches for alternative ways to feed its addiction to petroleum, ethanol and other biofuels derived from organic material have been considered a miracle motor vehicle elixir. The energy bill signed by President Bush in December mandates that at least 36 billion gallons of biofuels a year be used by 2020. Yet separate studies released this month by Princeton University and the Nature Conservancy reveal that biofuels are not a silver bullet in the battle against global warming. In fact, they could make things worse.
Corn and sugar cane are common sources of ethanol. Aside from emitting fewer greenhouse gases than coal or oil when burned as fuel, these biofuel crops remove carbon from the atmosphere while they are growing -- thus making them nearly carbon-neutral. But the studies show that ethanol may be even more dangerous for the environment than fossil fuels are. As the Princeton study points out, clearing previously untouched land to grow biofuel crops releases long-sequestered carbon into the atmosphere. While planting corn and sugar cane in already tilled land is fine, a problem arises when farmers churn up new land to grow more fuel or the food and feed displaced by biofuel crops.
The impact of these land-use changes is enormous. As the study from the Nature Conservancy warns, "converting rainforests, peatlands, savannas, or grasslands to produce biofuels in Brazil, Southeast Asia and the United States creates a 'biofuel carbon debt' by releasing 17 to 420 times more carbon dioxide than the fossil fuels they replace." There are other negative effects. Massive amounts of water are needed to irrigate cornfields, setting up potential competition between farms and homes. The runoff of pesticides and nitrogen-based fertilizers used by farmers could lead to increased pollution and oxygen-depleted waterways. The natural gas used to make the fertilizer adds to the carbon deficit created by biofuels.
An essay in the May-June 2007 issue of Foreign Affairs by two professors from the University of Minnesota highlighted still another problem: The biofuels craze could starve people. "By putting pressure on global supplies of edible crops, the surge in ethanol production will translate into higher prices for both processed and staple foods around the world," they wrote. "If oil prices remain high -- which is likely -- the people most vulnerable to the price hikes brought on by the biofuel boom will be those in countries that both suffer food deficits and import petroleum."
The problems with corn-based ethanol, long regarded as a transitional fuel source, have been debated for years. One alternative is to squeeze ethanol out of cellulose from switch grass, cornhusks and other biomass sources. But because cellulosic ethanol remains experimental, it might be years before it makes it from the laboratory to the gas tank. It all adds up to another example that there is no quick, cheap and easy way to confront the menace of global warming.
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

Begrudging His Bedazzling

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/opinion/27dowd.html
February 27, 2008
Op-Ed Columnist
Begrudging His Bedazzling
By MAUREEN DOWD
CLEVELAND [oped] [columnist] [Dowd is famous for getting her teeth into someone and not being able to let go] [she’s had a piece of Hillary for months now] [ouch] [***]
A huge Ellen suddenly materialized behind Hillary on a giant screen, interrupting her speech Monday night at a fund-raiser at George Washington University in Washington.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/opinion/27dowd.html
February 27, 2008
Op-Ed Columnist
Begrudging His Bedazzling
By MAUREEN DOWD
CLEVELAND [oped] [columnist] [Dowd is famous for getting her teeth into someone and not being able to let go] [she’s had a piece of Hillary for months now] [ouch] [***]
A huge Ellen suddenly materialized behind Hillary on a giant screen, interrupting her speech Monday night at a fund-raiser at George Washington University in Washington.
What better way for a desperate Hillary to try and stop her rival from running off with all her women supporters than to have a cozy satellite chat with a famous daytime talk-show host who isn’t supporting Obama?
“Will you put a ban on glitter?” Ellen demanded.
Diplomatically, Hillary said that schoolchildren needed it for special projects, but maybe she could ban it for anyone over 12.
Certainly, Hillary understands the perils of glitter. The coda of her campaign has been a primal scream against the golden child of Chicago, a clanging and sometimes churlish warning that “all that glitters is not gold.”
David Brody, the Christian Broadcasting Network correspondent whose interview with Hillary aired Tuesday, said the senator seemed “dumbfounded” by the Obama sensation.
She has been so discombobulated that she has ignored some truisms of politics that her husband understands well: Sunny beats gloomy. Consistency beats flipping. Bedazzling beats begrudging. Confidence beats whining.
Experience does not beat excitement, though, or Nixon would have been president the first time around, Poppy Bush would have had a second term and President Gore would have stopped the earth from melting by now.
Voters gravitate toward the presidential candidates who seem more comfortable in their skin. J.F.K. and Reagan seemed exceptionally comfortable. So did Bill Clinton and W., who both showed that comfort can be an illusion of sorts, masking deep insecurities.
The fact that Obama is exceptionally easy in his skin has made Hillary almost jump out of hers. She can’t turn on her own charm and wit because she can’t get beyond what she sees as the deep injustice of Obama not waiting his turn. Her sunshine-colored jackets on the trail hardly disguise the fact that she’s pea-green with envy.
After saying she found her “voice” in New Hampshire, she has turned into Sybil. We’ve had Experienced Hillary, Soft Hillary, Hard Hillary, Misty Hillary, Sarcastic Hillary, Joined-at-the-Hip-to-Bill Hillary, Her-Own-Person-Who-Just-Happens-to-Be-Married-to-a-Former-President Hillary, It’s-My-Turn Hillary, Cuddly Hillary, Let’s-Get-Down-in-the-Dirt-and-Fight-Like-Dogs Hillary.
Just as in the White House, when her cascading images and hairstyles became dizzying and unsettling, suggesting that the first lady woke up every day struggling to create a persona, now she seems to think there is a political solution to her problem. If she can only change this or that about her persona, or tear down this or that about Obama’s. But the whirlwind of changes and charges gets wearing.
By threatening to throw the kitchen sink at Obama, the Clinton campaign simply confirmed the fact that they might be going down the drain. [******]
Hillary and her aides urged reporters to learn from the “Saturday Night Live” skit about journalists having crushes on Obama.
“Maybe we should ask Barack if he’s comfortable and needs another pillow,” she said tartly in the debate here Tuesday night. She peevishly and pointlessly complained about getting the first question too often, implying that the moderators of MSNBC — a channel her campaign has complained has been sexist — are giving Obama an easy ride.
Beating on the press is the lamest thing you can do. It is only because of the utter open-mindedness of the press that Hillary can lose 11 contests in a row and still be treated as a contender. [*******]
Hillary and her top aides could not say categorically that her campaign had not been the source on the Drudge Report, as Matt Drudge claimed, for a picture of Obama in African native garb that the mean-spirited hope will conjure up a Muslim Manchurian candidate vibe.
At a rally on Sunday, she tried sarcasm about Obama, talking about how “celestial choirs” singing and magic wands waving won’t get everybody together to “do the right thing.”
With David Brody, Hillary evoked the specter of a scary Kool-Aid cult. “I think that there is a certain phenomenon associated with his candidacy, and I am really struck by that because it is very much about him and his personality and his presentation,” she said, adding that “it dangerously oversimplifies the complexity of the problems we face, the challenge of navigating our country through some difficult uncharted waters. We are a nation at war. That seems to be forgotten.”
Actually it’s not forgotten. It’s a hard sell for Hillary to say that she is the only one capable of leading this country in a war when she helped in leading the country into that war. Or to paraphrase Obama from the debate here, the one who drives the bus into the ditch can’t drive it out.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

One Nation, Indivisible

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/opinion/27jeremic.html
February 27, 2008
Op-Ed Contributor
One Nation, Indivisible
By VUK JEREMIC
Belgrade, Serbia [oped] [Serbia’s foreign minister on Serbia’s perspective] [*****]
THE international system that has brought unprecedented prosperity to the world since 1945 is based on rules that apply without exception. This system is supposed to protect the basic, legitimate national interests of every country, whether rich or poor, strong or weak. Its binding principles include the sovereign equality of states, the respect for the territorial integrity and the inviolability of internationally recognized borders. [***]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/opinion/27jeremic.html
February 27, 2008
Op-Ed Contributor
One Nation, Indivisible
By VUK JEREMIC
Belgrade, Serbia [oped] [Serbia’s foreign minister on Serbia’s perspective] [*****]
THE international system that has brought unprecedented prosperity to the world since 1945 is based on rules that apply without exception. This system is supposed to protect the basic, legitimate national interests of every country, whether rich or poor, strong or weak. Its binding principles include the sovereign equality of states, the respect for the territorial integrity and the inviolability of internationally recognized borders. [***]
Yet on Feb. 17, the Serbian province of Kosovo, which has been under United Nations administration since 1999, unilaterally declared independence from my country. This illegal act has, [******]unfortunately, been recognized by the Bush administration and some European countries including Britain, France and Germany. Others in Europe — including Greece, Romania and Spain — have withheld recognition, as have most other leading global and regional players, including Brazil, China, Egypt, India, Israel, Russia and South Africa.
As things stand, the number of countries that will recognize an independent Kosovo will plateau at around 40, leaving it unrecognized by a vast majority of the close to 200 members of the United Nations. This includes, of course, the Republic of Serbia. [*******]
A peaceful demonstration of close to half a million people in Belgrade last week condemned this act of illegal secession. Unfortunately, a few hundred hooligans attacked several embassies, [belied by DNI McConnel’s testimony reported in tomorrow’s govt] [*********] including that of the United States, and looted stores; they even attacked my ministry. Our government has condemned these acts, and will prosecute the offenders.
The case against recognition is based not only on the Security Council’s 1999 resolution reaffirming Serbia’s sovereignty over Kosovo, but also founded on the view that the international system has, as a result of this hostile act by the Kosovo Albanians, become more unstable, more insecure and more unpredictable.
Here’s why. Recognizing the unilateral declaration of Kosovo’s independence from Serbia legitimizes the doctrine of imposing solutions to ethnic conflicts. It legitimizes the act of unilateral secession by a provincial or other non-state actor. It transforms the right to self-determination into an avowed right to independence. It legitimizes the forced partition of internationally recognized, sovereign states. [**********]
It violates the commitment to the peaceful and consensual resolution of disputes in Europe. It supplies any ethnic or religious group that has a grievance against its capital with a playbook on how to achieve its ends. It even resurrects the discredited cold-war doctrine of limited sovereignty.
A historical injustice is being imposed on a European country that has overcome more obstacles since we democratically overthrew Slobodan Milosevic in October 2000 than most other nations have in a much longer time. Recognizing Kosovo means saying, in effect, that Serbian democracy must be punished because a tyrant — one who committed heinous deeds against the Kosovo Albanians in the 1990s — was left unpunished. Such misplaced revenge may make some feel better, but it will make the international system feel much worse. [***********]
To act out of a false moral imperative to right a supposed historical wrong will contribute neither to international security nor to the region’s prospects of European Union membership. It is time to take a step back and examine the damage done.
If we can find a creative way to step back from the abyss that is Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence, we could not only salvage the credibility of the international system, but even strengthen it through a re-commitment to its basic principles. [******]Some will say that it’s too late to put the genie back in the bottle. I don’t believe that’s true, because it’s never too late to forge a prosperous future for all stakeholders to share.
What is absolutely certain is that trust needs to be rebuilt and values must be reaffirmed. The way forward lies in coming together and securing an agreement between the two parties: a negotiated, compromise solution to Kosovo’s future status that addresses the legitimate right to broad self-governance for Kosovo’s Albanians, while preserving a democratic Serbia that is whole and free, integrated into Europe, and engaged with a world set aright through prudent statecraft.
The legitimacy of the international system hangs in the balance.
Vuk Jeremic is the foreign minister of Serbia.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Vladimir Putin’s Russia

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/opinion/27wed2.html
February 27, 2008
Editorial
Vladimir Putin’s Russia
[editorial] [Czar Putin’s Russia as Medvedev prepared to assume the position] [***]
The eight years of Vladimir Putin’s presidency have faithfully reflected his formative years in the Soviet secret police. Mr. Putin’s term ends this spring, but he is nearly certain to become prime minister. That means, we fear, that little will change. The next American president will have to deal with a Russia that is not only nuclear-armed but increasingly wealthy and increasingly authoritarian. [*******]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/opinion/27wed2.html
February 27, 2008
Editorial
Vladimir Putin’s Russia
[editorial] [Czar Putin’s Russia as Medvedev prepared to assume the position] [***]
The eight years of Vladimir Putin’s presidency have faithfully reflected his formative years in the Soviet secret police. Mr. Putin’s term ends this spring, but he is nearly certain to become prime minister. That means, we fear, that little will change. The next American president will have to deal with a Russia that is not only nuclear-armed but increasingly wealthy and increasingly authoritarian. [*******]
Mr. Putin has not tried to reimpose the bankrupt Communist economic system or reopen Stalin’s Gulag Archipelago. He has used the Kremlin’s full powers to quash all serious political opposition, recreating a virtual one-party state. That was the depressing message reported this week by our colleague Clifford J. Levy in an account of December’s parliamentary election contest in Nizhny Novgorod, a city once synonymous with Russia’s brightest hopes for democratic renewal.
It was there that an elderly Andrei Sakharov emerged from internal exile to wage his final campaign of speaking truth to power and urging those who held power to finally tell the Russian people the truth. And it was there that Boris Nemtsov, one of the most promising leaders of a new generation of Russian reformers, tried to build a new model of democratic governance.
Things are very different these days in Nizhny Novgorod. Mr. Putin’s allies have used threats of physical harm and other tactics — chillingly reminiscent of Soviet days — to crush rivals. A foreman warned workers that they risked punishment if they did not vote for Mr. Putin’s party. Children were told by their teachers that their grades could suffer unless they encouraged their parents to vote correctly.
Mr. Putin’s party would have triumphed without these tactics. The goal was to create a climate of permanent political intimidation. How like the credo Mr. Putin learned in his old K.G.B. days. [*********]
President Bush, and soon his successor, will have to come to terms with the authoritarian Russia that is — not the democratic Russia that recent American administrations had hoped would take root after Communism. They will have to deal pragmatically with the realities of Russian power, [*******]as the Nixon and George H.W. Bush administrations once did, seeking cooperation when possible over issues like Iran, Kosovo and arms control.
And, as in the Carter and Reagan administrations, America will need to champion Russia’s persecuted democrats, journalists and other embattled minorities: amplifying their voices and calling international attention to the very real dangers they face. Descending back into cold war rhetoric and reflexes will not help anyone. But neither will pretending that Mr. Putin and his allies are people of good will and democratic intentions.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Putin’s Anointed Heir Shows Hints of Less Icy Style

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/world/europe/28medvedev.html
February 28, 2008
Putin’s Anointed Heir Shows Hints of Less Icy Style
By C. J. CHIVERS [Russia] [former USSR] [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 string of provocative events including this one from last year] [Czar Putin’s hand-picked successor has now made noises similar to the Czar’s vis-à-vis Serbia and Kosovo] [but he has a “softer” side] [use psci 350] [use ir text] [*********]
ALABINO, Russia — Dmitri A. Medvedev, the man chosen to be the next Russian president, sat surrounded by soldiers. It was Feb. 23, Defenders of the Motherland Day, and Mr. Medvedev had traveled to the parade grounds of the Tamanskaya Motorized Rifle Division outside Moscow.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/world/europe/28medvedev.html
February 28, 2008
Putin’s Anointed Heir Shows Hints of Less Icy Style
By C. J. CHIVERS [Russia] [former USSR] [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 string of provocative events including this one from last year] [Czar Putin’s hand-picked successor has now made noises similar to the Czar’s vis-à-vis Serbia and Kosovo] [but he has a “softer” side] [use psci 350] [use ir text] [*********]
ALABINO, Russia — Dmitri A. Medvedev, the man chosen to be the next Russian president, sat surrounded by soldiers. It was Feb. 23, Defenders of the Motherland Day, and Mr. Medvedev had traveled to the parade grounds of the Tamanskaya Motorized Rifle Division outside Moscow.
The division has long been a fixture of Russian political life. Its battalions have marched for decades in formation in Red Square.
Eight years ago, as President Vladimir V. Putin introduced himself to the world, its platoons fought for the capital of Chechnya, helping to forge Mr. Putin’s persona as a leader of icy resolve. [*******]
Now, Mr. Medvedev, the presidential successor personally selected by Mr. Putin, is creating his own public identity according to a choreographed script. And here, in a mix of Soviet and Russian symbols, the man rising to Kremlin power avoided the stern themes that have often accompanied Mr. Putin’s appearances. [*********]
He wanted to talk about living conditions, for soldiers and civilians alike. “Let’s talk about the problems that exist,” he said to the soldiers beside him before a bank of television cameras. “Let’s have a normal conversation. Please.”
The outcome of the monthlong presidential campaign, which culminates Sunday, when voters will cast ballots, is already known. Barring something extraordinary and unforeseen, Mr. Medvedev, 42, an unprepossessing bureaucrat who has never held an elected office, will win by a landslide and become the Kremlin’s new leader.
Mr. Medvedev, who lacks the imposing K.G.B. résumé of his sponsor, has said he will appoint Mr. Putin as his prime minister. [***********]
As he has become the country’s second most-watched man, he has implicitly presented himself as both a Putin loyalist and a president-in-waiting who will wield power in a manner more gentle than the world has seen under Mr. Putin’s brand of rule.
Whether this is a pose is an open question. Mr. Medvedev, in commentary outside of official Russian circles, has been cast as a puppet, a president who will labor according to Mr. Putin’s command.
But he has made unanticipated moves. In a speech on Feb. 15, he said liberty was necessary for the state to have legitimacy among its citizens. And he has laid out domestic policy goals in what seems like a communiqué to Russia’s expanding consumer class.
Mr. Medvedev has also struck a campy pose — hamming it up with Deep Purple, the British heavy metal band whose music was popular in Soviet times — that suggested a dormitory-life playfulness that is decidedly not Putinesque. [***********]
His words and behavior have raised unexpected but pervasive questions. Does Mr. Medvedev mean what he seems to say? Can he ease the grip on Russian political life that has been a central characteristic of Mr. Putin’s rule?
And if he does, will he clash with Mr. Putin, his principal source of power?
Analysts are split. Michael A. McFaul, director of the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law at Stanford University, said Mr. Medvedev had a more Western orientation than many Kremlin insiders. But he suggested that his official embrace of freedom was more packaging than substance. “That’s public relations,” he said. “That’s not strategic shift.” [*********]
Sergei Markov, a political scientist who is close to the Kremlin and a member of Parliament, said Mr. Medvedev, a lawyer with roots in St. Petersburg, had an affinity for the West. He expects that Mr. Medvedev will push for more political freedom, to a point. [*******]
“Medvedev will try to encourage political competition within the system without destabilizing the system,” he said. “How he does this, we will see. But I think stability will be the priority.”
He also said the model Mr. Putin had chosen for his transition from Russia’s highest office, and Mr. Medvedev’s flashes of liberal inclinations, could lead to unintended divides in Russia’s circles of power. That, he said, is a reason Mr. Medvedev will push only so far.
“The Russian government has weak institutions,” Mr. Markov said. “A split between two personalities could destabilize the political situation, and because politics plays a main role in the Russian economy, if there is a split it could destabilize the economy, too. So that is a major risk.”
As Russians and analysts contemplate the future with Mr. Putin out of the presidency, the contrasts between him and the president-to-be, and between the Kremlin’s latest words and its recent history, are visible in many ways, no less than in the very context of the discussion.
The election season here is not an election season as a Westerner would understand it. It is a certification.
Mr. Medvedev, who is a first deputy prime minister and chairman of the board at Gazprom, Russia’s gas monopoly, has toured the country without the distractions of competition, in part because the government blocked the sole true opposition candidate from the ballot.
There are three other candidates: Gennadi A. Zyuganov, the Communist Party leader, who has been marginalized in part by Mr. Putin’s popularity and his mastery of Soviet nostalgia; Andrei V. Bogdanov, the almost unknown head of an even less powerful Democratic Party; and Vladimir V. Zhirinovsky, an ultranationalist who has served as an unofficial jester in the Kremlin’s court.
The remnants of the organized opposition have suggested that these candidates are a troika encouraged to run by the Kremlin to create the appearance of a race. Polls predict that they may capture as little as a combined 20 percent of the vote.
With no viable candidate to compete against, the Kremlin has used the prelude to the formalities of inauguration to introduce a new leader. Mr. Medvedev, who emanates intelligence and calm but little intensity, is one step short of supreme; only Mr. Putin remains above him.
State-controlled television covers him extensively and warmly. There is little public contest over ideas about Russia’s course, much less questioning of Mr. Medvedev’s qualifications to be the next leader of a country with 140 million people, a nuclear arsenal and the world’s largest hydrocarbon reserves.
Instead, Mr. Medvedev has used the campaign as an open microphone, outlining an agenda to make Russia — which has rebounded from the financial crisis of the 1990s but has enduring problems with infrastructure, public health, corruption and an economy that relies on resource extraction — a vibrant and economically diversified state. [*******]
He has promised to improve schools, build housing, encourage business and amend the tax code in ways that will encourage household and social stability, including offering tax breaks for retirement savings, charitable donations and education and medical costs. Changes, he says, are on the way.
He has said he will modify the health care system to allow more choice. And he has challenged the persistent sense that Russia’s government, whose bureaucracy has expanded under Mr. Putin and remained inefficient and corrupt, is inevitably elephantine and beyond the ability of citizens to change.
Much of his agenda overlaps domestic plans Mr. Putin has himself outlined, including fighting corruption and reversing Russia’s poor state of public health
But the differences between the men’s styles can be stark. When Mr. Medvedev arrived to meet the soldiers here, he had to walk past a huge banner that bore Mr. Putin’s face beside scenes of weapons and combat.
“The work of a real man — to defend homeland, family and loved ones,” the banner read.
Mr. Putin, an exercise buff and martial arts expert, can emanate a catlike fitness and a comfort with conflict. Mr. Medvedev is trim but has no similar aura. He walked briskly by the poster, looking at the ground.
Unlike Mr. Putin, Mr. Medvedev, in most of his appearances, has also avoided dwelling on foreign policy or Russia’s tensions with the West.
Western capitals are hoping for a shift from Mr. Putin’s assertiveness. But aside from a statement of support for Serbia and a refusal to recognize Kosovo, Mr. Medvedev has not offered point-by-point proposals of how he will manage Russia’s role in the world. Few analysts expect significant changes.
“Personalities change, but that doesn’t change a nation’s interests,” said Boris Kagarlitsky, director of the Institution for Globalization Studies and Social Movements in Moscow.
Mr. McFaul, of Stanford, said he also expected the United States and Russia to still face diplomatic difficulties when Mr. Medvedev moves to the Kremlin, no matter what his inclinations may be.
“He’s more pro-Western, and more Western in his attitudes, than any of the other candidates out there,” he added. “Having said that, he is weak.”
One senior Western diplomat said that those following Russia closely have come up with a possible test of whether Mr. Medvedev will marshal power.
In the summer, the Kremlin will send a delegation to the Group of 8 meeting in Japan. Already informal bets are being taken, he said. Will Mr. Putin attend, or Mr. Medvedev, or both?
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Strikes Destroy Ministry in Gaza, Kill 10 Palestinians

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/27/AR2008022703683.html
Strikes Destroy Ministry in Gaza, Kill 10 Palestinians
Rocket Attacks By Hamas Leave One Israeli Dead
By Griff Witte
Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, February 28, 2008; A11 [Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [following the Annapolis conference and the agreement to seek agreement by end of 2008] [more tit-for-tat violence] [just days after first suicide attack inside Israel for some time, rockets pouring down in Israel again] [now disposed and angry Gazans, not Hamas per se, exercised over Israel again instead of Hamas] [followup] [both sides appear poised for war again!] [*****]
JERUSALEM, Feb. 27 -- An Israeli airstrike Wednesday evening destroyed the Interior Ministry building in the Hamas-run Gaza Strip just hours after fighters from the movement launched a barrage of rockets into southern Israel.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/27/AR2008022703683.html
Strikes Destroy Ministry in Gaza, Kill 10 Palestinians
Rocket Attacks By Hamas Leave One Israeli Dead
By Griff Witte
Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, February 28, 2008; A11 [Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [following the Annapolis conference and the agreement to seek agreement by end of 2008] [more tit-for-tat violence] [just days after first suicide attack inside Israel for some time, rockets pouring down in Israel again] [now disposed and angry Gazans, not Hamas per se, exercised over Israel again instead of Hamas] [followup] [both sides appear poised for war again!] [*****]
JERUSALEM, Feb. 27 -- An Israeli airstrike Wednesday evening destroyed the Interior Ministry building in the Hamas-run Gaza Strip just hours after fighters from the movement launched a barrage of rockets into southern Israel.
The Israeli strike on the ministry -- apparently unoccupied at the time -- capped a day of intensive operations from both sides of the Gaza boundary that killed at least 10 Palestinians as well as one Israeli in the southern town of Sderot.
Palestinian hospital officials in Gaza said the Israeli strike on the ministry killed a 6-month-old baby and injured more than 25 other people living in the densely populated neighborhood around it.
Earlier in the day, Israeli strikes killed at least nine Palestinians, including four civilians, officials in Gaza said.
Israeli military officials said the attacks were aimed at Palestinian gunmen in Gaza who fired more than 40 rockets into Israel over the course of the day. In an afternoon strike, an Israeli college student was killed when shrapnel hit him in the chest. He was the 14th Israeli in the past seven years to be killed inside Israel by the sort of crude Palestinian rockets known generically as Qassams, and the first since May.
Even before Hamas seized power in Gaza last June, the Israeli government was under pressure to stop the rocket fire from the strip. But small-scale ground incursions, artillery fire and severe restrictions on the flow of goods into Gaza have all failed to eliminate the rocket strikes.
Residents of Sderot, a working-class town of 20,000 that sits a few miles from Gaza's boundary, have demanded that the government do more to stop the rockets, even if it means a full-scale invasion of Gaza.
Israeli spokesman David Baker said Wednesday that the government would "take whatever steps are necessary to bring these attacks to an end."
"Israel is compelled to undertake defensive measures to prevent these repeated Qassam rocket barrages," Baker said. "We cannot allow a situation where our citizens are continuously hounded by terrorist rockets."
Hamas, an armed movement with a network of social services, has vowed to continue the attacks, saying it is carrying out legitimate resistance to Israeli occupation in Gaza and the West Bank. The Hamas charter calls for the creation of an Islamic state across territory that now includes Israel, although its military focus is to end the Israeli occupation of land taken in the 1967 Middle East war.
Gaza's 1.5 million people have been suffering in recent months from a tight economic embargo imposed by Israel that has limited the availability of basic supplies. The Israeli government evacuated its Gaza settlements in 2005 but still controls the cargo crossings between the strip and Israel.
"We have to resist in order to protect our land and our people and put an end to this occupation," said Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum.
Barhoum said the airstrike on the Interior Ministry "is a message that everything inside Gaza is a target."
An opinion poll released Wednesday showed that a significant majority of Israelis -- 64 percent -- favor a cease-fire with Hamas. The group, which Israel considers a terrorist organization, has said it is willing to negotiate such a truce. The Israeli government has rejected the idea.
Previous opinion polls have shown that most Israelis would also favor an invasion of Gaza, if it would help stop the rockets.
The violence Wednesday began with an Israeli airstrike on a van transporting Hamas military trainers near the central Gazan city of Khan Younis, according to Palestinian and Israeli military sources. Five people were killed.
In the afternoon, Hamas began launching rockets. The deadly strike on the student came as he was walking in the parking lot of Sapir College. Paramedics declared him dead at the scene.
Another rocket hit a factory cafeteria just after the employees had left, and a third hit a house. Two people were injured in the strikes.
"The situation here is very tense. Rockets landed here for two hours without a break," said Michael Amsalam, a council member in Sderot. "It is a very unpleasant situation here today. There is a strong feeling of helplessness."
[Early Thursday in Japan, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the Hamas rocket attacks against Israel "need to stop," the Associated Press reported. She met with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who also was visiting the country.]
At dusk, rockets also struck the Israeli city of Ashkelon, six miles north of Gaza, although they did not cause any injuries. One landed next to a hospital where the wounded in Sderot are often taken for treatment.
As the rockets streamed out of Gaza, Israeli forces attacked the rocket launchers. Palestinian hospital officials said four civilians were killed in those strikes, including two boys younger than 10 and a 17-year-old. The officials said the boys had gone to the scene where rockets were fired earlier in the day and may have been mistaken for fighters.
The Interior Ministry strike came late Wednesday and was accompanied by attacks on five other targets suspected of being sites for manufacturing rockets or for launching them, the Israeli military said.
In the West Bank town of Nablus on Wednesday, a member of the armed wing of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah movement was killed in an undercover operation by the Israeli military. The man was being sought after recently escaping from prison.
Special correspondents Samuel Sockol in Jerusalem and Islam Abdulkarim in Gaza City contributed to this report.
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

Israel Continues Airstrikes in Gaza

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/world/middleeast/29mideast.html
February 29, 2008
Israel Continues Airstrikes in Gaza
By ISABEL KERSHNER [Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [following the Annapolis conference and the agreement to seek agreement by end of 2008] [more tit-for-tat violence] [just days after first suicide attack inside Israel for some time, rockets pouring down in Israel again] [now disposed and angry Gazans, not Hamas per se, exercised over Israel again instead of Hamas] [followup] [both sides appear poised for war again!] [*****]
JERUSALEM — Palestinian militants in Gaza fired four long-range rockets into the Israeli coastal city of Ashkelon on Thursday, hitting a house, the Israeli police said. Israeli airstrikes in Gaza killed at least 11 Palestinians, including four young boys, Palestinian medical officials said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/world/middleeast/29mideast.html
February 29, 2008
Israel Continues Airstrikes in Gaza
By ISABEL KERSHNER [Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [following the Annapolis conference and the agreement to seek agreement by end of 2008] [more tit-for-tat violence] [just days after first suicide attack inside Israel for some time, rockets pouring down in Israel again] [now disposed and angry Gazans, not Hamas per se, exercised over Israel again instead of Hamas] [followup] [both sides appear poised for war again!] [*****]
JERUSALEM — Palestinian militants in Gaza fired four long-range rockets into the Israeli coastal city of Ashkelon on Thursday, hitting a house, the Israeli police said. Israeli airstrikes in Gaza killed at least 11 Palestinians, including four young boys, Palestinian medical officials said.
No one was hurt in the attacks on Ashkelon, but the attack will probably be seen in Israel as an escalation of the conflict. Ashkelon, a city of 120,000 people, has been an occasional target of rockets in the past but the scale of attacks on Thursday was unprecedented.
The police in Ashkelon said six rockets were fired at Ashkelon and four landed in the city. It was the first time there had been a direct hit on a house. The Israeli Army said that five rockets had been fired into Ashkelon.
The rockets were manufactured Grad-type rockets, which have a longer range than the homemade, relatively crude Qassam rockets that are usually fired at the Israeli town of Sderot and farming communities bordering the Gaza Strip, and were made in Iran, according to an Israeli security official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to give out such information.
Israel kept up its airstrikes Thursday against militants in the Gaza Strip, one day after an Israeli civilian was killed in a rocket attack on Sderot, the first such fatality in nine months.
The Israeli army said it had carried out five airstrikes since the early hours of Thursday morning against armed men and rocket launching squads in Gaza. Five militants were killed in those strikes, according to Hamas and Palestinian medical officials, bringing the total of Palestinians killed in Gaza since Wednesday to 17.
Two more militants were killed in two later attacks, according to local reports, and an airstrike in northern Gaza Thursday killed four young boys, aged 8, 9, 11 and 12, Palestinian medical officials said.
Among the dead in Gaza since Wednesday were six civilians, including three young boys and a 5-month-old boy killed in airstrikes on Wednesday night, the medical officials said.
Most of the dead militants belonged to the military wing of Hamas, the Qassam Brigades. One of them was Hamza al-Hayya, the son of Khalil al-Hayya, a senior Hamas leader and legislator. Hamza was killed on Thursday morning in what the Israeli army said was a strike against a squad about to launch rockets.
Seven members of the Hayya family and a neighbor were killed in May in an Israeli airstrike that hit the family home. Khalil al-Hayya was not in the house at the time. Military officials said at the time that the army had “identified and hit a five-member terrorist cell” that was the target of the attack. That month, Hamas had intensified its rocket fire from Gaza and two other Israelis were killed by rockets in Sderot.
Rockets again slammed into the Israeli border town of Sderot on Thursday, leaving the streets mostly deserted and the few people who ventured out running for cover.
Many residents were in a state of panic as a series of rockets fell in the center of town.
A bodyguard of Avi Dichter, Israel’s minister for public security, was lightly wounded by shrapnel when a rocket hit the campus of Sapir College, on the outskirts of Sderot, where the Israeli civilian was killed on Wednesday.
The Qassam Brigades issued a statement in Gaza on Thursday saying they had fired 70 rockets into Israel since Wednesday, with 41 aimed at Sderot.
The latest surge of hostilities started on Wednesday morning, when the Israeli air force carried out a strike in southern Gaza hitting a minivan on a road west of Khan Yunis and killing five members of the Qassam Brigades.
Southern Israel then came under heavy rocket fire, with more than 40 rockets launched from Gaza on Wednesday, the Israeli Army said. Hamas, the Islamic militant group that controls Gaza, claimed responsibility for the rocket fire, saying it had been retaliating for the Israeli strike.
In a second Israeli airstrike carried out amid the rocket fire, two Palestinian youths were killed and 12 other civilians were wounded, Dr. Muawiya Hassanein, director of emergency medical services in Gaza, said. A third young boy died later. An Israeli army spokeswoman said the strike had been aimed at a rocket-firing squad, and witnesses in Gaza told Palestinian news media that the civilians had been hit while watching Hamas militants fire the rockets.
Late Wednesday night, Israeli aircraft fired more missiles into Gaza, hitting the empty building of the Hamas-run Interior Ministry and metal workshops in Gaza City and Khan Yunis. The 5-month-old boy, Muhammad al-Burei, was killed by shrapnel from the attack on the Interior Ministry, and several civilians were wounded, Dr. Hassanein said. The ministry building is in a residential area.
The army spokeswoman confirmed strikes against various locations in Gaza, and said they were all aimed at Hamas compounds and headquarters used by militants to plan or launch attacks.
The Israeli victim, Ronnie Yichia, 47, was struck in the chest by shrapnel from a rocket that landed in the parking lot of the Sapir College campus on the outskirts of Sderot. According to Israeli police figures, he was the 14th civilian to die from rockets fired from Gaza since 2001.
Wednesday’s rocket fire also struck Ashkelon. One rocket fell in the grounds of Barzilai Medical Center in Ashkelon. A 10-year-old Sderot boy hurt in a rocket attack on Monday was recuperating there after surgery.
Israel is engaged in what Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has called a “daily war” against the militants launching rockets from Gaza. Responding to Wednesday’s events from Japan during an official visit, Mr. Olmert said that “no one in Hamas, neither the low-level officials nor the highest echelon, will be immune in this war.”
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice met with Mr. Olmert in Tokyo on Thursday morning and said afterward that Hamas rocket attacks against Israel “need to stop,” The Associated Press reported.
Palestinians said two of the militants killed in the first Israeli strike were Abdullah Edwan, a rocket engineer, and Muhammad Abu Aker, a rocket squad commander. Residents said the men were going to a training camp in southern Gaza. Two were masked, they said, and returned from Iran three weeks ago.
Relatives of Mr. Edwan, who was said to have been the main strike target, said he was trained in Syria and Iran. Two other militants were wounded, medical officials said.
The chief of Israeli military intelligence, Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin, told Parliament’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on Tuesday that Gaza militants had undergone intensive training in Syria and Iran and had taken advantage of the recent 11-day breach of Gaza’s border with Egypt to return to Gaza.
An Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman, Arye Mekel, called the Hamas practice of firing rockets at Israeli civilian centers from areas populated by Palestinian civilians a “war crime that hurts Israelis and Palestinians alike.”
Another militant group, Islamic Jihad, said that Israeli forces killed one of its gunmen near the Bureij refugee camp in central Gaza early on Wednesday. [****]
But the army spokeswoman, who spoke on condition of anonymity under army rules, said that a Palestinian had been spotted approaching the border fence and had tried to lay a bomb, but that he was killed in a blast probably caused by explosives he carried.
Hamas took over Gaza last June after routing forces loyal to the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah. The two groups, which had shared power, are now bitter rivals. Mr. Abbas was quoted Wednesday in the London-based newspaper Al Hayat as saying that members of Al Qaeda had infiltrated the Gaza Strip with Hamas cooperation. [*************]
“I can say without doubt that Al Qaeda is present in the Palestinian territories and that this presence — especially in Gaza — is facilitated by Hamas,” he said.
Mr. Abbas has called for a halt to the rocket attacks from Gaza.
Sami Abu Zuhri, a spokesman for Hamas, said Mr. Abbas’s statements gave “justification for the Israeli aggression.” He forecast an escalation in violence.
Ms. Rice is to arrive in the region on Monday to follow up on talks that Mr. Olmert and Mr. Abbas began at the peace conference in Annapolis, Md., in November, Tom Casey, a State Department spokesman, said Wednesday.
A Palestinian member of the armed wing of Fatah was killed Wednesday in a raid in Nablus by undercover Israeli commandos, the Israeli military and Palestinian officials said.
The Israeli forces were there to arrest five wanted men from the Fatah military wing and opened fire when they tried to escape, killing one of them, Ibrahim Masimi, 22, Israeli military officials said. They said Mr. Masimi was armed and had recruited suicide bombers in the past.
Omri Sharon, a son of Ariel Sharon, the former Israeli prime minister, began a seven-month prison term on Wednesday after being convicted in 2006 of violating party campaign finance laws, fraud and perjury. The sentence had been delayed because the elder Mr. Sharon, 80, had a severe stroke.
Taghreed El-Khodary contributed reporting from Gaza City, and Rina Castelnuovo reported from Sderot.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Sunni Forces Losing Patience With U.S.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/27/AR2008022703842.html
Sunni Forces Losing Patience With U.S.
Citing Lack of Support, Frustrated Iraqi Volunteers Are Abandoning Posts
By Sudarsan Raghavan and Amit R. Paley
Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, February 28, 2008; A01 [-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] [seems obvious that despite the Awakening Councils or, perhaps because of them, some of the usual suspects are attempting to re-initiate sectarian bloodletting] [I’ve frequently characterized the U.S.-Sunni Awakening Councils as short-term expediencies only with predictable whirlwinds to reap] [***]
BAGHDAD, Feb. 27 -- U.S.-backed Sunni volunteer forces, which have played a vital role in reducing violence in Iraq, are increasingly frustrated with the American military and the Iraqi government over what they see as a lack of recognition of their growing political clout and insufficient U.S. support.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/27/AR2008022703842.html
Sunni Forces Losing Patience With U.S.
Citing Lack of Support, Frustrated Iraqi Volunteers Are Abandoning Posts
By Sudarsan Raghavan and Amit R. Paley
Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, February 28, 2008; A01 [-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] [seems obvious that despite the Awakening Councils or, perhaps because of them, some of the usual suspects are attempting to re-initiate sectarian bloodletting] [I’ve frequently characterized the U.S.-Sunni Awakening Councils as short-term expediencies only with predictable whirlwinds to reap] [***]
BAGHDAD, Feb. 27 -- U.S.-backed Sunni volunteer forces, which have played a vital role in reducing violence in Iraq, are increasingly frustrated with the American military and the Iraqi government over what they see as a lack of recognition of their growing political clout and insufficient U.S. support.
Since Feb. 8, thousands of fighters in restive Diyala province have left their posts in order to pressure the government and its American backers to replace the province's Shiite police chief. [*******]On Wednesday, their leaders warned that they would disband completely if their demands were not met. In Babil province, south of Baghdad, fighters have refused to man their checkpoints after U.S. soldiers killed several comrades in mid-February in circumstances that remain in dispute.
Some force leaders and ground commanders also reject a U.S.-initiated plan that they say offers too few Sunni fighters the opportunity to join Iraq's army and police, and warn that low salaries and late payments are pushing experienced members to quit. [******]
The predominantly Sunni Awakening forces, referred to by the U.S. military as the Sons of Iraq or Concerned Local Citizens, are made up mostly of former insurgents who have turned against extremists because of their harsh tactics and interpretation of Islam. [******]The U.S. military pays many fighters roughly $10 a day to guard and patrol their areas. Thousands more unpaid volunteers have joined out of tribal and regional fealties.
U.S. efforts to manage this fast-growing movement of about 80,000 armed men are still largely effective, [***]but in some key areas the control is fraying. The tensions are the most serious since the Awakening was launched in Anbar province in late 2006, according to Iraqi officials, U.S. commanders and 20 Awakening leaders across Iraq. Some U.S. military officials say they are growing concerned that the Sunni insurgent group al-Qaeda in Iraq has infiltrated Awakening forces in some areas.
"Now, there is no cooperation with the Americans," said Haider Mustafa al-Kaisy, an Awakening commander in Baqubah, the capital of Diyala province, an insurgent stronghold that U.S. and Iraqi forces are still struggling to control. "We have stopped fighting al-Qaeda."
U.S. military officials and commanders say they are seeking to defuse the rising tensions before hard-won U.S. gains are jeopardized. "Despite some of the frustrations, the frictions and the attacks on the Sons of Iraq, they are continuing to volunteer. As an interim solution, it seems to be working well," said Col. Bill Buckner, a senior U.S. military spokesman. "It's clear Iraq remains a fragile security environment. We want to address many of their concerns as best as we can, so that they continue to be part of the solution to the security situation in Iraq." [these tension will invariably be just about to boil over as the relationship continues over time] [it’s set up to fail eventually] [*****]
Growing Threats
Awakening leaders say threats against their fighters are rising. Attacks against Awakening members went from 26 in October to 100 in January, according to a U.S. military official, who added that February's numbers are on track to be nearly as high as January's.
But the growing threats have not been matched with added resources. Rafah Kassim, 37, an Awakening leader in the oil-producing city of Baiji, lost two fighters in mid-February when gunmen ambushed their car. Speaking at their funeral, Kassim said he did not expect the Shiite-led Iraqi government, which fears the Awakening movement could one day turn against it, to embrace his fighters. He had applied six times to join the Iraqi army and police, he said, but was never accepted. He said he expected his new ally, the U.S. military, to back his struggle. [*******]Instead, he said, U.S. commanders have limited his force to 40 fighters when he needs at least 100 to protect his area of 2.7 square miles.
"They should make me stronger. They should not weaken me," said Kassim, a former commander in the Islamic Army, an insurgent group. "We need weapons. We need vehicles. We do not even have gas for the few cars we have. When we joined, the Americans promised to provide all necessities. Now we know those were only words."
In the past two months, he said, 20 of his fighters have quit. Many felt their monthly salary was no longer worth the risk of fighting al-Qaeda in Iraq. His men also have not received their salaries in two months, he said. "We'll all be patient for another two months. If nothing changes, then we'll suspend and quit," Kassim said. "Then we'll go back to fighting the Americans."
'Why Am I Standing There?'
Inadvertent U.S. killings of Awakening fighters -- five such incidents have occurred in the past three weeks -- are adding to the frustrations. In the southern town of Jurf al-Sakr, U.S. soldiers killed three fighters Feb. 15. U.S. commanders said that the men had fired upon the soldiers first and that the troops acted in self-defense.
Within hours, more than 1,000 fighters walked away from their posts. Sabah al-Janabi, who heads the Awakening in the area, publicly criticized the U.S. military, alleging it had killed 19 of his men in the past 45 days, which U.S. commanders deny.
"Now, I have fighters who refuse to go back to their positions," said Fadhil Youssef, another Awakening leader in the area. "They are saying, 'I am standing on road, securing my neighborhood, and Americans come and kill me. So why am I standing there?' "
In the village of Zaab, west of the northern city of Kirkuk, police officials and witnesses said U.S. forces on Feb. 14 killed six relatives of an Awakening leader, Issa Muhsin al-Jubouri, and detained him and others. In an interview last week, after his release, he said U.S. soldiers had "raised their weapons in my face and shouted at me, 'Confess or I will shoot you.'
"They beat me and cursed me and made me face the wall, saying to me, 'You have exploited the Awakening to support the terrorists,' " Jubouri said. "I kept saying, 'You are mistaken, because I and my family have been victims of terrorists.' " [******]
U.S. military officials confirmed that six people, including two women, were killed, among them several Awakening members, and that a dozen were detained. But the officials said U.S. troops were targeting al-Qaeda in Iraq and acted in self-defense after being fired upon. When asked about Jubouri's allegations, Maj. Brad Leighton, a U.S. military spokesman, replied: "It's combat. I would not expect our guys to be gentle when conducting an operation on a place where we suspect there are terrorists."
The incidents illustrate a vexing problem for the American military: The Awakening movement has grown so fast that it has become difficult for U.S. commanders to monitor the fighters and their loyalties. [***********] [bigger problem: their nature makes them vulnerable to infiltration by jihadis pretending to have come back to the –Iraqi Sunni fold] [how long before we hear of horror stories due ot infiltration?] [*****]
"It's clear there are extremist groups that have penetrated the Concerned Local Citizens, that there may be in fact al-Qaeda amongst the Concerned Local Citizens," [exactly my point] [******] said Rear Adm. Gregory J. Smith, a senior military spokesman.
Jubouri said his 800 fighters had taken huge risks to ally with the U.S. military and faced allegations that they are "agents for the Americans."
"If there is no apology, or no compensation, or failure to produce the informers before us, we will carry arms against the Americans," Jubouri said.
Demands in Diyala
Nowhere are the tensions more serious than in Diyala, one of the major battlegrounds in the U.S. fight against al-Qaeda in Iraq. Awakening groups, also known here as Popular Committees, are demanding the resignation of the Shiite provincial police chief, Maj. Gen. Ghanem al-Qureishi. They accuse him of running death squads and torturing Sunnis, allegations that Qureishi denied in an interview. The Awakening leaders are also seeking recognition as an official force.
On Wednesday, they vowed to dissolve the committees if their demands were not met. "In the last 10 months, we haven't received any kind of assistance or help from Americans or Iraqi government," said Abu Talib, a top Awakening leader. "On the contrary, the police started to hunt us down."
Interior Minister Jawad al-Bolani said that Qureishi was highly valued and that such "good men" would be protected. "An accusation does not mean the crime actually took place," Bolani said.
The U.S. military acknowledges that it is caught in the middle of a political struggle. [one of its own making for short-term gains] [*****] "Yes, they are frustrated," said Lt. Col. Ricardo Love, commander of the 1st Battalion, 38th Infantry Regiment, who works in Baqubah, the provincial capital. "They think we can make the government of Iraq do anything. We tell them we don't control the government. But they think we are the mighty power."
"The position of Americans is hesitation," said Abu Imad al-Zuhaidi, another Awakening official in Baqubah. "They don't have any independent opinion, despite the fact they know it is the Awakening who restored order."
U.S. commanders said the Awakening's strike has not affected security, but Love and others are concerned about fighters who may be tempted, or forced, to rejoin the insurgency.
"AQI and JAM will take advantage of the situation," he said, using military abbreviations for al-Qaeda in Iraq and the Mahdi Army, the country's largest Shiite militia, which is loyal to anti-American cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. [***********]
In Baghdad and other parts of Iraq, concern is mounting over a U.S. proposal that calls for about 20 percent of the volunteer forces to be integrated into the nation's army and police. The rest would be provided with civilian jobs and vocational training.
"The Sunnis were always the leaders of the country. Is it reasonable that they are turned into service workers and garbage collectors?" said Khalid Jiyad Abed, an Awakening leader in the city of Latifiyah and an engineer. "We had not anticipated this from the American forces. Of course we will not accept that," Abed added.
Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, who for the past 14 months was the second-ranking U.S. commander in Iraq, said only 20 to 30 percent of the Awakening fighters could pass physical and written exams to enter Iraq's security forces. [*********]
"Overall, you will never satisfy everybody," Odierno said, adding that 10,000 fighters had been accepted so far.
But Awakening leaders view the plan as an attempt by the Iraqi government to marginalize them.
"This is a big failure -- either they take us all in or this is not going to work," said Brig. Gen. Shija al-Adhami, who heads the Awakening force in Baghdad's Ghazaliya neighborhood.
Sami al-Askari, an adviser to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, said recruiting too many Awakening fighters would allow al-Qaeda in Iraq to infiltrate the security forces, [*******] in much the same way Shiite militias have. But Sunni leaders warn that without the Awakening's help in securing the country, Iraq's future will be grim.
"You need these people," said Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, a Sunni. "What sort of risk are you going to take if this 100 percent is stripped to 20? We cannot afford to lose all this success, which is paid by the blood of the people."
Special correspondents Zaid Sabah, Saad al-Izzi and K.I. Ibrahim in Baghdad and Washington Post staff in Diyala province, Anbar province, Najaf, Tikrit, Baiji, Kirkuk and Mosul contributed to this report.
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

Heralded New Law Is Vetoed by Iraq’s Presidency Council

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/world/middleeast/28baghdad.html
February 28, 2008
Heralded New Law Is Vetoed by Iraq’s Presidency Council
By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. and KHALID AL-ANSARY [-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] [seems obvious that despite the Awakening Councils or, perhaps because of them, some of the usual suspects are attempting to re-initiate sectarian bloodletting] [so much for political reconciliation] [***]
BAGHDAD — Political momentum in Iraq hit a sudden roadblock on Wednesday when a feud between the largest Shiite factions led to the veto of a law that had been passed with great fanfare two weeks ago. [******] The law had been heralded by the Bush administration as a breakthrough for national reconciliation.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/world/middleeast/28baghdad.html
February 28, 2008
Heralded New Law Is Vetoed by Iraq’s Presidency Council
By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. and KHALID AL-ANSARY [-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] [seems obvious that despite the Awakening Councils or, perhaps because of them, some of the usual suspects are attempting to re-initiate sectarian bloodletting] [so much for political reconciliation] [***]
BAGHDAD — Political momentum in Iraq hit a sudden roadblock on Wednesday when a feud between the largest Shiite factions led to the veto of a law that had been passed with great fanfare two weeks ago. [******] The law had been heralded by the Bush administration as a breakthrough for national reconciliation.
The law called for provincial elections by October, and it was hoped that it would eliminate severe electoral distortions that have left Kurds and Shiites with vastly disproportionate power over Sunni Arabs in some areas, [******] a factor in fueling the Sunni insurgency. It would also have given Iraqis who have long complained of corrupt and feckless local leaders a chance to clean house [****]and elect officials they believe are more accountable.
But the law was vetoed at the last minute by the three-member Iraqi presidency council, which includes President Jalal Talabani and two vice presidents. [****]The veto came after officials in a powerful Shiite party, the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, objected to provisions that they contend unlawfully strip power from Iraq’s provinces. [shows the 3-member presidency beholden to SIIC] [********]
Politicians involved in the debate said the main objections came from Vice President Adel Abdul Mehdi, a Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council member. The bill now goes back to Parliament, where its prospects are unclear, given the acrimonious debate over the issue that led to the veto.
Even if the law is approved, Parliament must fill vacant election commission seats and approve an elections law before provincial contests can occur.
The veto is “somewhat of a setback,” Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence, acknowledged Wednesday during a hearing in Congress. [*****]
A common refrain among American combat commanders is that new local elections could help sweep out ineffective leaders while remedying deeply uneven provincial councils, a legacy partly of the Sunni Arab boycott of previous provincial elections.
In Sunni-dominated Nineveh and Salahuddin Provinces, for example, Kurds enjoy far more power on provincial councils than their numbers would otherwise dictate. And in Diyala, Shiites dominate the government even though Sunnis account for a majority in the region, a situation that has exacerbated the fierce sectarian violence there. [*******]
The veto exposed the deep rift between the ambitions of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, or S.I.I.C., which controls provincial governments throughout most of Shiite-dominated southern Iraq, and the more nationalist Shiite factions that include lawmakers loyal to the firebrand cleric Moktada al-Sadr. [**************]
S.I.I.C. officials want provincial leaders to be allowed to operate with little interference from Baghdad. They also fear that they will lose power in some southern provinces to more popular slates put up by Mr. Sadr’s movement if new provincial elections are held. And they contend that the bill wrongly allowed the prime minister to fire provincial governors and diminished the provinces’ budgetary and administrative powers.
The Sadrists, who were furious at the veto, want to retain a strong central government that has the legal muscle to deal vigorously any province that Baghdad leaders believe is acting against the country’s best interests. [ironically, Sadr and US with shared interests on this legislation] [******] They said the veto breached the historic agreement among political blocs two weeks ago that allowed the simultaneous passage of the provincial powers bill, the 2008 budget and another law granting amnesty to thousands of Sunnis and others in Iraqi jails.
“It’s a struggle of two wills,” said Nassar al-Rubaie, a legislator from the Sadr movement. “One side wants to strengthen the central government and federal authority, and the other wants to undermine it and grant the provinces greater powers.”
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Gates Urges Limits on Turkish Raids

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/world/middleeast/28iraq.html
February 28, 2008
Gates Urges Limits on Turkish Raids
By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. and MARK MAZZETTI [-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] [seems obvious that despite the Awakening Councils or, perhaps because of them, some of the usual suspects are attempting to re-initiate sectarian bloodletting] [sec def Gates fresh from Indonesia then India on way to Turkey—unclear whether he’s there as this info occurs] [archive govt too] [***]
BAGHDAD — Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates urged Turkish leaders on Wednesday to abandon their invasion of guerrilla-controlled lands in the northernmost reaches of Iraq by mid-March. [********]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/world/middleeast/28iraq.html
February 28, 2008
Gates Urges Limits on Turkish Raids
By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. and MARK MAZZETTI [-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] [seems obvious that despite the Awakening Councils or, perhaps because of them, some of the usual suspects are attempting to re-initiate sectarian bloodletting] [sec def Gates fresh from Indonesia then India on way to Turkey—unclear whether he’s there as this info occurs] [archive govt too] [***]
BAGHDAD — Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates urged Turkish leaders on Wednesday to abandon their invasion of guerrilla-controlled lands in the northernmost reaches of Iraq by mid-March. [********]
American and Iraqi leaders seem increasingly worried that fighting along the Turkey-Iraq border could widen into a broader and bloodier conflict.
“It’s very important that the Turks make this operation as short as possible and then leave,” [*******]Mr. Gates told reporters in New Delhi on Wednesday as he prepared to leave for Turkey.
His words reflected the Bush administration’s sharper tone toward the Turkish government over the cross-border raids and stood in contrast to earlier American statements backing the Turks in their operations against guerrillas from the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, known as the P.K.K., [******] the initials of the group’s name in Kurdish.
“I measure quick in terms of days, a week or two, something like that, not months,” Mr. Gates said. It was the first time he had demanded a strict timeline for the Turkish operation to end.
The Turkish military has vowed to destroy the havens inside Iraq that P.K.K. fighters have long used to stage attacks and assassinations in Turkey. Last week, the Turks carried out their most ambitious operation against the guerrillas in years, with what Turkish news reports described as thousands of troops.
Turkey claims that it has killed 230 P.K.K. guerrillas since last Thursday, including 77 rebels since Tuesday. Ahmed Denis, a P.K.K. spokesman, scoffed at the Turkish numbers and said more than 100 Turkish soldiers had been killed. Neither claim could be independently verified.
American officials have supported the right of Turkey, a crucial NATO ally, to defeat the P.K.K., which the United States classifies as a terrorist organization. The United States has also been providing intelligence to the Turks about the guerrillas.
Turkey has sometimes sent troops over the border in temporary “hot pursuit” raids against guerrillas. But this is the first time that American officials have been so adamant about urging a Turkish withdrawal.
Though the Turkish invasion has been limited so far, Iraqi officials say they fear what it could become. The Iraqi cabinet issued a statement on Tuesday night condemning the operation as a violation of Iraqi sovereignty and warning that “unilateral military action is not acceptable.”
But, publicly at least, the Turks show no sign of letting up. Ahmet Davutoglu, a senior adviser to Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, said Wednesday that there was no “timetable” for ending the operation. Meeting in Baghdad with Iraq’s foreign minister, Hoshyar Zebari, Mr. Davutoglu warned that the operation would not stop until P.K.K. bases inside Iraq were “eliminated.” [**************]
Mr. Gates’s stop in Turkey had been planned long before Turkish troops entered Iraq, and aides to the defense secretary said he considered canceling the visit once the raids began. But, they said, he decided to deliver the administration’s message in meetings with Turkish leaders. [*********]
“Military activity alone will not solve this terrorist problem for Turkey,” Mr. Gates said.
Richard A. Oppel Jr. reported from Baghdad, and Mark Mazzetti from New Delhi and Ankara, Turkey. Sebnem Arsu contributed reporting from Istanbul, and an Iraqi employee of The New York Times from Sulaimaniya, Iraq.
Richard A. Oppel Jr. reported from Baghdad, and Mark Mazzetti from New Delhi and Ankara, Turkey. Sebnem Arsu contributed reporting from Istanbul, and an Iraqi employee of The New York Times from Sulaimaniya, Iraq.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Some Turks Question Timing of Iraq Push

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/27/AR2008022703324.html
Some Turks Question Timing of Iraq Push
Did Incursion Just Happen to Coincide With Easing of Ban on Head Scarves?
By Ellen Knickmeyer
Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, February 28, 2008; A14 [Turkey] [more attacks of PKK in northern and north-western –ir] [-ir] [hydra] [insurgency] [bush administration’s “surge option” or “new way forward” underway] [followup] [Turkey’s “incursion” looks bigger than first reported] [dilemmas presented to –iraqi Kurds] [-Iraqi govt has demanded retreat and sec def Gates has “urged” prudence] [some Turks are wondering about the timing of this latest incursion which appears the biggest thus far] [may be paranoi but even paranoids have real enemies] [secular military and head scarves recent tussle] [****]
ANKARA, Turkey, Feb. 27 -- Turkey's military offensive in northern Iraq has clear objectives: attack Kurdish separatist guerrillas in their mountain bases, destroy their camps and weapons caches, and show them they can be pursued anywhere, anytime.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/27/AR2008022703324.html
Some Turks Question Timing of Iraq Push
Did Incursion Just Happen to Coincide With Easing of Ban on Head Scarves?
By Ellen Knickmeyer
Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, February 28, 2008; A14 [Turkey] [more attacks of PKK in northern and north-western –ir] [-ir] [hydra] [insurgency] [bush administration’s “surge option” or “new way forward” underway] [followup] [Turkey’s “incursion” looks bigger than first reported] [dilemmas presented to –iraqi Kurds] [-Iraqi govt has demanded retreat and sec def Gates has “urged” prudence] [some Turks are wondering about the timing of this latest incursion which appears the biggest thus far] [may be paranoi but even paranoids have real enemies] [secular military and head scarves recent tussle] [****]
ANKARA, Turkey, Feb. 27 -- Turkey's military offensive in northern Iraq has clear objectives: attack Kurdish separatist guerrillas in their mountain bases, destroy their camps and weapons caches, and show them they can be pursued anywhere, anytime.
But many Turkish observers say that the operation, launched last week, also paved the way for something else entirely: head scarves. [********]
Did the Islamic-oriented government, some Turks ask, use the start of the largest offensive into northern Iraq in more than a decade to divert attention from its controversial decision to legalize head scarves in universities? [one would necessarily presume that the pro-secular military allowed itself to be used thusly or that it was duped] [*****]
“There’s an obvious connection,” said retired Gen. Haldun Solmazturk, an administrator at Ahmet Yesevi University in Ankara, the capital.
In founding modern Turkey in the 1920s, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk encouraged Western attire and restricted religious dress in public as principles of the republic.
Turkey’s military, which has long viewed itself as the enforcer of Ataturk’s secular vision, was angered by recent legislation aimed at lifting the long-standing head scarf ban at public colleges. But the religiously observant president, Abdullah Gul, signed the amendments into law late last Friday, the first full day of the military’s strike into northern Iraq.
At the time, “the attention of the Turkish public was firmly focused on the operation,” Solmazturk said. For the observant Muslims who lead Turkey’s government, “it was a very clear and very successful strategy.” [*********]
"Many people take it with some worry, that they are trying to take away from the secular republic while keeping the people busy with something else," [*******] said Edip Baser, a retired general in Istanbul, Turkey's commercial center.
Spokesmen for the government and the ruling Justice and Development Party did not return telephone calls and text messages seeking comment Wednesday.
Government leaders, once reluctant to allow the military to go after Kurdish rebels in Iraq, canceled state trips this week to attend funerals of soldiers killed in the operation. Meanwhile, two secular political parties asked the country's constitutional court Wednesday to restore the head scarf ban.
On the front pages and in opinion columns of Turkish newspapers this week, the two battles were linked. [**********]
A cartoon in the national daily Milliyet depicted Gul rallying ground troops rushing into northern Iraq. "Onward!" he shouts, thrusting an arm into the air. Another panel of the cartoon showed the president rallying legions of female Islamic activists in head scarves to storm Turkey's universities. "Onward!" he shouts again. [**********]
For Turkey’s military, fresh off the loss of its generals’ political battle to stop the return of the head scarf, the offensive has garnered shows of public support.
“Our soldiers are the best soldiers!” young men shouted at rallies across Turkey as they saw off other young men for compulsory military service. Friends gathering at train stations tossed departing soldiers in the air, and fathers wept openly as they bade their sons goodbye.
Meanwhile, at funerals across Turkey – at least 24 troops have been killed in the offensive – the young sons and daughters of dead soldiers held the red Turkish flag aloft and stood on tiptoes to wave it high.
“If I had 10 sons, I would send them all to the war,” Yasar Armutla, a 46-year-old coal miner from the western Turkish town of Kutahya, said Tuesday, expressing a sentiment heard often here. “In Turkey, the military fights not just for our security but for our honor.” [**************]
Like many Turks, Armutla sometimes takes his wife and children to the base where he served years ago, to introduce them to old commanders who greet him with kisses.
Turkey's military says that more than 230 Kurdish guerrillas have been killed in the Iraq offensive; the rebels say they have lost only three fighters.
In past strikes in northern Iraq, Turkey has relied largely on warplanes. This operation differs in part in its use of large numbers of ground troops, allowing soldiers to charge into caves where rebels are hiding from Turkish pilots,[****] said Lale Sariibrahimoglu, a military affairs writer and analyst in Ankara.
Former Turkish generals say the push became all but inevitable last October, when Kurdish rebels killed 12 Turkish soldiers and seized eight in Turkey's southeastern Hakkari province. The rebels later released the eight abductees alive.
The following month, President Bush declared the rebels' group, the Kurdistan Workers' Party, or PKK, a common enemy of the United States and Turkey. The U.S. military stepped up its sharing of satellite imagery and other intelligence revealing the rebels' positions.
Turkish officials expect the United States to request return favors when Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates visits here Thursday. Many Turks believe the Bush administration will ask for more troops in Afghanistan, where European members of the NATO alliance have been increasingly reluctant to commit forces.[******]
The intelligence collaboration has also boosted normally dismal Turkish support for the United States. [*******]
Still, the U.S. actions have put Washington in the position of backing one of its allies, Turkey, against another, the Kurds. U.S. support has helped Iraqi Kurds establish a semiautonomous homeland in Iraq's north. Turkish leaders have assured Iraqi Kurdish leaders that this month's operation was aimed only at PKK targets, not at destabilizing Kurdish northern Iraq.
"I don't understand why the United States would make an enemy of its only friend in the Middle East," said Nazmi Gur, a Kurdish analyst and a former vice president of the Kurdish political party in Turkey.
On Wednesday, Gates again urged Turkey to end the military operation quickly and to make changes that address the grievances of its Kurdish minority, whose members accuse Turkey of trying to erase their language and culture.
"The question is when the political will and determination will emerge to complement the military operation with nonmilitary policies that will permanently address" the Kurds' grievances, said Sariibrahimoglu, the military analyst.
Gur said the military operation had increased support for the PKK, while hurting it little. Turkey can continue hitting empty camps maintained by the group, but "the PKK never cared about camps," he said. "For the PKK, every mountain is a camp."
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

Spain: 20 Sentenced in Court Bomb Plot

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/world/europe/28briefs-plot.html
February 28, 2008
World Briefing | Europe
Spain: 20 Sentenced in Court Bomb Plot
By REUTERS [Spain] [EU] [Barcelona-Morocco nexus?] [hydra] [along with Britain, Germany, Netherlands, lesser extent France, the Euro front line of gsave] [follwoup] [jihadis in Europe] [*****]
The National Court sentenced 20 Islamic radicals arrested in October 2004 to 5 to 14 years in prison on charges linked to the formation of a group whose leader plotted to blow up the court’s Madrid building. [****] Ten others were acquitted. Abderrahmane Tahiri, a Moroccan described by the court as “nearly obsessed” with his plan to kill Spanish judges [******]by bombing the court, was sentenced to 14 years for forming the terrorist group he led.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/world/europe/28briefs-plot.html
February 28, 2008
World Briefing | Europe
Spain: 20 Sentenced in Court Bomb Plot
By REUTERS [Spain] [EU] [Barcelona-Morocco nexus?] [hydra] [along with Britain, Germany, Netherlands, lesser extent France, the Euro front line of gsave] [follwoup] [jihadis in Europe] [*****]
The National Court sentenced 20 Islamic radicals arrested in October 2004 to 5 to 14 years in prison on charges linked to the formation of a group whose leader plotted to blow up the court’s Madrid building. [****] Ten others were acquitted. Abderrahmane Tahiri, a Moroccan described by the court as “nearly obsessed” with his plan to kill Spanish judges [******]by bombing the court, was sentenced to 14 years for forming the terrorist group he led.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Qaeda Suspect Escapes

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/world/asia/28singapore.html
February 28, 2008
Qaeda Suspect Escapes
By RAYMOND BONNER [Singapore] [SEA] [home to cells of Jemaah Islamia, perhaps Abu Sayaff, others] [rarely has Singapore been among the frontlines areas—perahsp because of its vaunted security organs] [which makes this smell oderiforous] [how does al Qaeda escape from Singapore without inside help?] [**********]
A Singaporean man who was once one of the most hunted terrorist suspects in Southeast Asia escaped from a detention center in Singapore on Wednesday, [****]the government announced.
The suspect, and now fugitive, Mas Selamat bin Kastari, [****] was a member of Jemaah Islamiyah, Al Qaeda’s Southeast Asia affiliate, and a confidant of Riduan Isamuddin, better known as Hambali, [*****]who was Al Qaeda’s military commander in Southeast Asia.
The government gave no details but said Mr. Kastari was not known to be armed.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/world/asia/28singapore.html
February 28, 2008
Qaeda Suspect Escapes
By RAYMOND BONNER [Singapore] [SEA] [home to cells of Jemaah Islamia, perhaps Abu Sayaff, others] [rarely has Singapore been among the frontlines areas—perahsp because of its vaunted security organs] [which makes this smell oderiforous] [how does al Qaeda escape from Singapore without inside help?] [**********]
A Singaporean man who was once one of the most hunted terrorist suspects in Southeast Asia escaped from a detention center in Singapore on Wednesday, [****]the government announced.
The suspect, and now fugitive, Mas Selamat bin Kastari, [****] was a member of Jemaah Islamiyah, Al Qaeda’s Southeast Asia affiliate, and a confidant of Riduan Isamuddin, better known as Hambali, [*****]who was Al Qaeda’s military commander in Southeast Asia.
The government gave no details but said Mr. Kastari was not known to be armed.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

13 Suspected Militants Killed in Pakistan

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-pakistan-missile.html
February 28, 2008
13 Suspected Militants Killed in Pakistan
By REUTERS
Filed at 4:59 a.m. ET [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [apparently the Bush administration used a UAV to hit jihadis again in Pakistan] [drones are based inside Pakistan so question of sovereignty problematic] [repeat of end of January when al Qaeda # 5, al Libi killed] [followup] [******]
WANA, Pakistan, Feb 28 (Reuters) - A missile struck a house in a Pakistani region known as being a safe haven for al Qaeda early on Thursday, killing 13 suspected militants including foreigners, [*****] intelligence officials and residents said.

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-pakistan-missile.html
February 28, 2008
13 Suspected Militants Killed in Pakistan
By REUTERS
Filed at 4:59 a.m. ET [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [apparently the Bush administration used a UAV to hit jihadis again in Pakistan] [drones are based inside Pakistan so question of sovereignty problematic] [repeat of end of January when al Qaeda # 5, al Libi killed] [followup] [******]
WANA, Pakistan, Feb 28 (Reuters) - A missile struck a house in a Pakistani region known as being a safe haven for al Qaeda early on Thursday, killing 13 suspected militants including foreigners, [*****] intelligence officials and residents said.
The attack took place near Kaloosha village in the South Waziristan tribal region on the Afghan border.
"The blast shook the entire area," said resident Behlool Khan.
A security official said he believed the missile was fired by U.S. forces who are operating in neighbouring Afghanistan, and the house belonged to a Pashtun tribesman, [implying that it was hot pursuit from Afghanistan when it almost certainly was a UAV in Paksitan’s airspace] [********] Sher Mohammad Malikkheil, known as Sheroo, who is believed to have links with militants.
"Ten people, most of them believed to be of Arab origin, [******]were killed and seven wounded," said an intelligence official, who declined to be identified.
Another intelligence official later revised the death toll to 13 and said it included three Pakistanis.
He said the house, about 25 km (16 miles) inside Pakistan's border and opposite an American base in Afghanistan, was rented out a couple of months ago.
U.S. forces have fired missiles at militants on the Pakistani side of the border several times in recent years, most recently on Jan. 28 when one of Osama bin Laden's top lieutenants, Abu Laith al-Libi, was killed in a strike in North Waziristan.
That missile was believed to have been fired by a U.S. pilotless drone.
However, neither U.S. nor Pakistani authorities officially confirm U.S. missile attacks on Pakistani territory, which would be an infringement of Pakistani sovereignty. [******]
SANCTUARIES
Pakistan, an important U.S. ally despite widespread public opposition to the U.S.-led campaign against al Qaeda and the Taliban, says foreign troops would never be allowed to operate on its territory. [***]
Many al Qaeda members, including Uzbeks and Arabs, and Taliban militants took refuge in North and South Waziristan, [*****]as well as in other areas on the Pakistani side of the border after U.S.-led forces ousted the Taliban in Afghanistan in 2001.
From sanctuaries in the lawless border belt, the Taliban have orchestrated their insurgency against the Afghan government and the U.S. and NATO forces supporting it. [********]
Increasingly, so-called Pakistani Taliban have been mounting attacks in Pakistani towns and cities, many aimed at security forces and other government targets. [*****]
Al Qaeda's second-in-command, Ayman al-Zawahri, vowed revenge for Libi's killing. [******] [with any luck he was among the recent victims] [*****]
"No chief of ours had died of a natural death, nor has our blood been spilled without a response," Zawahri said in a video posted on an Islamist Web site on Wednesday, referring to Libi's killing.
Up to 13 foreign militants were killed in the late January strike.
Copyright 2008 Reuters Ltd.

Ousted Premier Is Set to Return to Thailand, Officials Say

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/world/asia/27thailand.html
February 27, 2008
Ousted Premier Is Set to Return to Thailand, Officials Say
By SETH MYDANS [Thailand] [SEA] [le ancient regime returns] [military coup supplanted former regime] [among other changes, the new regime tookt eh position that it could negotiate with jihadis and separatist in south] [********]
BANGKOK — Seventeen months after being ousted in a military coup, former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra was set to return to Thailand on Thursday, officials close to him said Tuesday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/world/asia/27thailand.html
February 27, 2008
Ousted Premier Is Set to Return to Thailand, Officials Say
By SETH MYDANS [Thailand] [SEA] [le ancient regime returns] [military coup supplanted former regime] [among other changes, the new regime tookt eh position that it could negotiate with jihadis and separatist in south] [********]
BANGKOK — Seventeen months after being ousted in a military coup, former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra was set to return to Thailand on Thursday, officials close to him said Tuesday.
With the installation of a sympathetic government that replaced a military junta, Mr. Thaksin was prepared to face corruption charges that have been filed against him, Foreign Minister Noppadol Pattama said.
Mr. Thaksin was removed in a nonviolent military coup in September 2006 while he was abroad and has mostly lived in London since then, although he has traveled often to Asia and has remained active behind the scenes in Thai politics.
Mr. Thaksin has not publicly announced his plans, but on Tuesday his official Web site posted a notice to his supporters to greet him at the airport at 9 a.m. on Thursday.
“Welcome home Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra whom we love, miss and have been waiting to return for more than a year,” the Web site said.
The secretary general of the Supreme Court, Rakkiat Wattapong, said Mr. Thaksin would be detained as soon as he arrived. His lawyers said he would surrender to the police and would seek immediate release on bail.
He and his wife, Pojaman, face charges of corruption and conflict of interest in connection with her purchase of land from a state agency while he was in power. Mr. Thaksin also faces separate charges of concealing his assets.
His wife returned in January, was taken into custody and was released on bail pending trial.
The army commander, Gen. Anupong Paochinda, who was one of the coup leaders, said Mr. Thaksin would be provided extra security on his return.
An anti-Thaksin group, the People’s Alliance for Democracy, has said it will protest his return. General Anupong said “a third hand” might take the opportunity to cause trouble.
After the coup, a court disbanded Mr. Thaksin’s political party, Thai Rak Thai, for election abuses and barred him and 110 other party executives from political activity for five years.
A new pro-Thaksin party, the People Power Party, was elected in December, and its leaders have said they would bring him back and clear his name. The new prime minister, Samak Sundaravej, said he would pardon the party leaders but has been vague about the timing.
Over the past months, the prospect of Mr. Thaksin’s return has raised worries among political analysts of a resumption of the political tensions that culminated in the coup.
“I want to urge the Thai people not to be concerned,” Mr. Samak told reporters. “I do not anticipate any unwanted incidents. There will be no chaos.”
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Cubans Wary of Raúl Castro’s Hints at Change

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/world/americas/27cuba.html
February 27, 2008
Cubans Wary of Raúl Castro’s Hints at Change
By JAMES C. McKINLEY Jr. [Cuba] [general politics] [after months of inactivity, Fidel finally makes his resignatioin formal] [today the national assembly or its plenary group of some 30-plus members will select the next president] [the tension is mounting but I’m going to take a wild guess and say it’s going to be Raul] [now comes, eating Raul] [******]
HAVANA — In his first state reception as Cuba’s president, Raúl Castro met Tuesday not with leftist Latin American leaders like Hugo Chávez and Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, nor with Chinese officials, but with the secretary of state of the Vatican, a traditional enemy of Communism and a critic of Cuba’s record on human rights.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/world/americas/27cuba.html
February 27, 2008
Cubans Wary of Raúl Castro’s Hints at Change
By JAMES C. McKINLEY Jr. [Cuba] [general politics] [after months of inactivity, Fidel finally makes his resignatioin formal] [today the national assembly or its plenary group of some 30-plus members will select the next president] [the tension is mounting but I’m going to take a wild guess and say it’s going to be Raul] [now comes, eating Raul] [******]
HAVANA — In his first state reception as Cuba’s president, Raúl Castro met Tuesday not with leftist Latin American leaders like Hugo Chávez and Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, nor with Chinese officials, but with the secretary of state of the Vatican, a traditional enemy of Communism and a critic of Cuba’s record on human rights.
Mr. Castro’s decision to begin his tenure by meeting the Vatican’s top diplomat, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, a possible go-between with the United States and Europe, reflects his practical, no-nonsense style as well as his greater willingness to put ideology aside to achieve his goals than his brother often showed.
Mr. Castro, who is 76 years old, is hardly a fresh face to Cubans, having served as the defense minister for the past half century. Many people doubt that he intends to upend his brother’s legacy. Yet he does seem inclined to govern more pragmatically than his more doctrinaire and romantic brother, who ran this country for 49 years as if it were his own business, signing off on almost every government decision.
Raúl Castro has said the government needs to shrink and become more compact. He has promised “structural changes” and “big decisions.” “We have to make our government’s management more efficient,” he said Sunday, adding, “We have to plan well, and we cannot spend more than we have.”
Since he became acting president after Fidel Castro fell ill and disappeared from public view in July 2006, Raúl Castro has sought to improve public transportation and shake up the state-controlled dairy monopoly. He also shocked people when he acknowledged that the average salary of about $19 a month was too little to live on. As he took office Sunday, he raised the possibility of revaluing the Cuban peso to give salary-earners greater buying power. Raúl Castro’s decision on Sunday to put his closest friends and loyalists in the major positions of vice president and defense minister also suggests that he has control of the government, even though he has promised to consult Fidel Castro on important matters.
Despite such steps, many Cubans say they see few signs of real change. Some say they suspect that Fidel Castro will continue to rule from behind the scenes. Others see little ideological difference between the ex-president and his brother. Still others argue that the centralized bureaucratic apparatus of the state is too rusty to be reformed.
A young man stood in Havana’s central park on Monday, scanning the faces of the new government leaders, his face scrunched up in puzzled concentration. When a reporter asked him what he thought of the new president, he muttered, “It’s good,” rattled the paper shut and marched quickly away, casting a furtive glance at a nearby police officer.
“Everyone is afraid to talk,” said a student sitting on a park bench nearby who identified himself only as Alejandro. “This is the time when the people should go to the street, but they are afraid. My country is like a prison.”
A few blocks away, José, a store clerk in his 30s, was waiting in line outside a post office in Old Havana to send an e-mail message to a family friend through a secure Internet connection that allows no other contact with the outside world.
“There was no change,” he said, echoing the views of others. “Look, if you paint this tile here and you paint it with the same color, there is no change. The brothers think alike.”
Many experts on Cuba, however, say the two brothers often have not seen eye to eye. They have clashed over the years on everything from Fidel Castro’s short-lived flirtation with the American public in 1959 to the necessity of allowing some private enterprise during the economic crisis here in the 1990s.
Fidel Castro, who is 81, was renowned for his ability to recall arcane details and second-guess his cabinet members, fostering an atmosphere in which even high-ranking officials were afraid to act without the president’s explicit approval.
Raúl Castro, who spent much of his life at the head of Cuba’s military, has a reputation for delegating authority and demanding results from managers, people who know him say. “He once said to me after I had given a report at a meeting, ‘All right, this is your report, if one word of this is not true, I’m going to cut you in half,’ ” recalled Vladimiro Roca, a former fighter pilot who fell out with the authorities and has become a leading dissident.
Fidel Castro often rambled on for hours in sometimes dull but occasionally stunning oratory. Raúl Castro gives short, precise speeches, always going directly to the heart of his subject. Where Fidel Castro sought the international limelight, his brother focuses more on bread-and-butter domestic issues.
In recent public speeches, Raúl Castro appears to have calculated for political reasons that he cannot distance himself too much from his brother, who, despite his long illness, continues to lead the Communist Party and to cast a large shadow over Cuban politics.
For example, the new president made it clear in his first speech to the National Assembly over the weekend that he would continue to consult Fidel and even asked for a vote to authorize him to do so, drawing extended applause from party regulars.
But the younger Castro’s actions show that he is willing to take Cuba in a different direction from that of his more dogmatic brother. Over the last year and a half, Raúl Castro has openly criticized state salaries as too low to live on, and speaking to the Congress, he raised the possibility of revaluing the Cuban peso to give salary-earners more buying power.
Mr. Castro has taken steps to decentralize the production and distribution of milk. He has imported hundreds of buses from China to alleviate transportation woes and rid the streets of tractor-trailers fitted out for public transportation, eyesores known as camels. He has all but done away with the obligatory mass demonstrations Fidel Castro often organized to rally people against the United States.
The younger Castro has even encouraged a measure of public debate about government programs, something his brother rarely allowed. Last fall, he authorized town hall meetings across the island to let people vent their frustrations with the system, though he made it clear that decisions about changes would rest with the ruling party.
Indeed, one of the two state newspapers, Juventud Rebelde, has done exposes on the filching of goods and food from state-run businesses that has become part of life here. Leading cultural figures, meanwhile, have called for dropping onerous visa requirements and other limits on personal freedom.
Raúl Castro seems firmly in control of the Council of State, the main governing body. He named his old friends and military comrades — José Ramón Machado Ventura and Gen. Julio Casas Reguiero — as first vice president and defense minister, respectively.
The upper echelon of the council is stacked with other military leaders who are considered close to the new president, among them Gen. Abelardo Colomé Ibarra and Juan Almeida Bosque.
“This is Raúl’s team, the group of vice presidents,” said Brian Latell, a former C.I.A. analyst who wrote the book “After Fidel” and has studied the brothers for years. “I do think that Raúl is in charge. He’s going to pay proper homage to Fidel but not obeisance.”
What is more, Raúl Castro says he will not officially appoint the rest of his cabinet until December at the earliest. Some political analysts says this gives him time to purge the cabinet members considered to be more loyal to his brother than to him if he wishes.
Still, after 49 years of living under Fidel Castro, many Cubans are skeptical of their new leader’s ability to get things done. They are waiting for Raúl Castro to do something concrete to improve their lives, like raise salaries.
“His speech sounded more or less like more of the same,” said Alberto, a veteran driver for the official government taxi service. “There is a big gap between what is said and what is done.”
Yoani Sánchez, who writes a political blog, said: “In general there is a sense of frustration because we had expected more. There is talk of changes, but he puts off defining those changes.”
Still, many Cubans took heart that Mr. Castro had promised in his speech to lift some regulations and restrictions that stifle economic growth.
For starters, he said it was time to revalue the Cuban peso, a step toward getting rid of the dual-currency system that has impoverished millions of Cubans. For years, the government has used a nearly worthless peso to pay government salaries while restricting the distribution of a so-called convertible peso that can be exchanged for foreign currency.
The system has led to a kind of economic apartheid. Cubans with access to convertible pesos live far better than their compatriots. Those who live solely on government salaries can barely survive, even with free health care and subsidized rations of some basic foodstuffs and tobacco.
Restrictions on travel and access to the Internet also rankle many Cubans, who believe the rules are virtually imprisoning them on their island. University students recently clashed with the president of the National Assembly over travel rights, a scene that was filmed and distributed clandestinely. Some Cubans expect Mr. Castro might lift some travel restrictions as a crowd-pleaser. Others said they hoped they would be allowed to own cellphones and to stay at tourist hotels, small but symbolically important steps.
In the long run, however, his biggest challenge is revamping Cuba’s centralized economy. Raúl Castro said in his first speech to Parliament that the government needed to be streamlined and decentralized. No institution was safe from reforms, he said.
Yet his appointees are themselves members of the old guard, mostly men in their 70s. That disappointed some here who had hoped a younger generation of technocrats might rise.
In some circles there is a feeling the veterans of the revolution can never dismantle the current economic system, which offers people little incentive to work.
“Raúl has to make the country more efficient and give incentives to for work because really no one works in Cuba now,” said Juan, a man in his forties who acts as a consultant to importers. “How to you put a country to work that isn’t used to working? That is the trick.”
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

China Says It Will Resume Human Rights Talks

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/world/asia/27china.html
February 27, 2008
China Says It Will Resume Human Rights Talks
By DAVID LAGUE [China] [PRC] [stepping up in terms of world leadership] [what is China’s strategic need for forward force projection] [becoming global power] [perhaps only new-fond humanitarian impulse for upcoming Olympics] [use psci 350] [use ir text] [***********]
BEIJING — China said Tuesday that it would resume a human rights dialogue with the United States, in a move that appeared to be aimed at countering criticism from activists ahead of the Olympic Games here in August.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/world/asia/27china.html
February 27, 2008
China Says It Will Resume Human Rights Talks
By DAVID LAGUE [China] [PRC] [stepping up in terms of world leadership] [what is China’s strategic need for forward force projection] [becoming global power] [perhaps only new-fond humanitarian impulse for upcoming Olympics] [use psci 350] [use ir text] [***********]
BEIJING — China said Tuesday that it would resume a human rights dialogue with the United States, in a move that appeared to be aimed at countering criticism from activists ahead of the Olympic Games here in August.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice won agreement to restart the talks after discussions with Chinese officials here on Tuesday on the second leg of a three-nation tour that began in South Korea and will end in Japan on Thursday.
But she said no date had been set for the next round.
China suspended the exchanges in 2004 after the Bush administration sponsored an unsuccessful resolution at the United Nations Human Rights Commission attacking China’s human rights record.
“We are ready to resume the human rights dialogue,” the Chinese foreign minister, Yang Jiechi, said at a news conference with Ms. Rice in Beijing, Reuters reported. “We are willing to have exchanges and interactions with the U.S. and other countries on human rights on a basis of mutual respect, equality and noninterference in each others’ internal affairs.”
China is anxious to prevent critics and activists from linking its human rights record with the Olympic Games.
“The Olympics, which is a great gathering for the Chinese and the people of the world, shouldn’t be politicized or subject to boycott for political reasons,” the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman, Liu Jianchao, told a separate news briefing in Beijing on Tuesday. “That’s against the general will of the people of the world.”
This month, China dismissed Steven Spielberg’s decision to withdraw as artistic director for the Games. Mr. Spielberg resigned in protest over what he said was China’s failure to use its influence to halt the humanitarian crisis in the Darfur region of Sudan.
Games organizers and Chinese government officials said connecting Darfur with the Olympics would not help resolve the issue.
Ms. Rice told reporters she raised three specific rights cases in talks with Chinese officials, including the arrest of Hu Jia, a prominent human rights advocate.
Mr. Hu, an advocate for people with AIDS, dispossessed farmers and the environment, has accused the authorities of failing to live up to promises to improve human rights before the Olympics.
He has been charged with subverting state power.
Ms. Rice said she had also called on China to use its influence to persuade North Korea to speed the dismantling of its nuclear weapons program.
North Korea, in a 2005 agreement with the United States, China, South Korea, Japan and Russia, pledged to dismantle its nuclear weapons program in return for economic and diplomatic incentives.
North Korea also promised to disclose all of its nuclear arms programs by the end of 2007. But it has failed to meet this deadline.
The North counters that the other parties have not moved quickly enough on promises to provide fuel and to remove North Korea from the United States’ list of nations that sponsor terrorism.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Gaza: Israeli Army Clears Itself in 21 Deaths

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/world/middleeast/27briefs-israelistrike.html
February 27, 2008
World Briefing | Middle East
Gaza: Israeli Army Clears Itself in 21 Deaths
By ISABEL KERSHNER [Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [following the Annapolis conference and the agreement to seek agreement by end of 2008] [more tit-for-tat violence] [just days after first suicide attack inside Israel for some time, rockets pouring down in Israel again] [now disposed and angry Gazans, not Hamas per se, exercised over Israel again instead of Hamas] [followup] [both sides appear poised for war again!] [*****]
The army said no legal action would be taken against military officials over an artillery strike in Beit Hanun in 2006 in which an errant shell hit residential buildings and killed 21 Palestinian civilians. An army investigation concluded that the shell was fired based on information that militants were intending to fire rockets from the area, an army statement said. The civilian deaths, it said, were “directly due to a rare and severe failure” in the artillery control system. The army’s military advocate general concluded that there was no need for further investigation.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/world/middleeast/27briefs-israelistrike.html
February 27, 2008
World Briefing | Middle East
Gaza: Israeli Army Clears Itself in 21 Deaths
By ISABEL KERSHNER [Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [following the Annapolis conference and the agreement to seek agreement by end of 2008] [more tit-for-tat violence] [just days after first suicide attack inside Israel for some time, rockets pouring down in Israel again] [now disposed and angry Gazans, not Hamas per se, exercised over Israel again instead of Hamas] [followup] [both sides appear poised for war again!] [*****]
The army said no legal action would be taken against military officials over an artillery strike in Beit Hanun in 2006 in which an errant shell hit residential buildings and killed 21 Palestinian civilians. An army investigation concluded that the shell was fired based on information that militants were intending to fire rockets from the area, an army statement said. The civilian deaths, it said, were “directly due to a rare and severe failure” in the artillery control system. The army’s military advocate general concluded that there was no need for further investigation.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Roadside Bomb Kills 6 in Afghanistan

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/world/asia/27afghan.html
February 27, 2008
Roadside Bomb Kills 6 in Afghanistan
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS [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] [after far too many accidential noncombatants hit in early 2007, year ended with far fewer] [the winter lull is upon the region?] [indicator of how badly 2007 was on balance: neither Afghanis nor Westerners feel safe] [******]
KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — A roadside bomb hit a vehicle carrying five policemen and a 3-year-old in eastern Afghanistan on Tuesday, killing all six, officials said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/world/asia/27afghan.html
February 27, 2008
Roadside Bomb Kills 6 in Afghanistan
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS [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] [after far too many accidential noncombatants hit in early 2007, year ended with far fewer] [the winter lull is upon the region?] [indicator of how badly 2007 was on balance: neither Afghanis nor Westerners feel safe] [******]
KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — A roadside bomb hit a vehicle carrying five policemen and a 3-year-old in eastern Afghanistan on Tuesday, killing all six, officials said.
The blast happened in the eastern Khost Province, close to the border with Pakistan, said the provincial police chief, Gen. Muhammad Ayub. He blamed Taliban militants for the attack.
The Taliban have increasingly aimed their attacks at the police, killing more than 925 officers in 2007. Afghan police officers often work in small groups in remote and dangerous territory, where they are outnumbered and outgunned by insurgents.
The victims in the attack on Tuesday were in a private vehicle, said Lutfullah Babakarheil, a local government official.
The lack of an effective training program for the police is often cited as one of the West’s biggest failings in Afghanistan. The United States began a new training program this year in which small teams of American soldiers will train and act as mentors for police officers for several months.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

France Weighs Shifting Forces in Afghanistan

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/world/europe/27france.html
February 27, 2008
France Weighs Shifting Forces in Afghanistan
By REUTERS [Afghanistan] [France] [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] [after far too many accidential noncombatants hit in early 2007, year ended with far fewer] [the winter lull is upon the region?] [indicator of how badly 2007 was on balance: neither Afghanis nor Westerners feel safe] [pressure among French public to withdraw]] [******]
PARIS (Reuters) — France may send hundreds of ground troops to eastern Afghanistan, where NATO-led forces are fighting insurgents backed by Al Qaeda, Le Monde reported Tuesday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/world/europe/27france.html
February 27, 2008
France Weighs Shifting Forces in Afghanistan
By REUTERS [Afghanistan] [France] [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] [after far too many accidential noncombatants hit in early 2007, year ended with far fewer] [the winter lull is upon the region?] [indicator of how badly 2007 was on balance: neither Afghanis nor Westerners feel safe] [pressure among French public to withdraw]] [******]
PARIS (Reuters) — France may send hundreds of ground troops to eastern Afghanistan, where NATO-led forces are fighting insurgents backed by Al Qaeda, Le Monde reported Tuesday.
It said the move would be part of a new Afghan policy being worked out by President Nicolas Sarkozy and his advisers.
A French presidential spokesman declined to confirm or deny the newspaper report. “The president has not made a decision,” he said. “We are in discussion with our partners, inside NATO but not exclusively.”
France has about 1,900 soldiers under NATO’s Afghan command, most of them based in relatively calm Kabul, and Le Monde said the fresh troops would be deployed outside the capital.
“Their destination would be zones of potentially fierce fighting, preferably the eastern region of Afghanistan close to the tribal areas of Pakistan,” it said.
Early last year, France withdrew 200 special forces soldiers who had been operating under United States command in Afghanistan, but Le Monde said France was now expected to sanction the return of the special forces. About 50 remained to train Afghan commandos.
Under the plan, the deployment of French soldiers to the east would free United States forces there to help Canadian troops fighting insurgents in the south.
The United States is leading a campaign for what it calls a fairer sharing of the burden in the fight against Taliban insurgents. Britain, Canada, Poland and others have backed the American demand.
Germany, Italy and Spain have troops in relatively secure areas and have refused to send troops to southern and eastern provinces where the militants are most active.
The NATO secretary general, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, said last week the alliance’s future rested on its mission in Afghanistan.
Since his election in May, Mr. Sarkozy has sent more combat aircraft to Kandahar in southern Afghanistan and intensified French efforts to train the Afghan Army.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Iraq Cabinet Demands Turks Leave Kurdish Area in North

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/world/middleeast/27iraq.html
February 27, 2008
Iraq Cabinet Demands Turks Leave Kurdish Area in North
By MICHAEL KAMBER [-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] [more attacks of PKK in northern and north-western –ir] [-ir] [hydra] [insurgency] [bush administration’s “surge option” or “new way forward” underway] [followup] [Turkey’s “incursion” looks bigger than first reported] [dilemmas presented to –iraqi Kurds] [-iraqis demanding Turkey cease and desist!] [****]
BAGHDAD — The Iraqi government on Tuesday condemned Turkey’s raids into northern Iraq and demanded that Turkey withdraw its troops, as fighting continued for a sixth day between Turkish forces and Kurdish rebels.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/world/middleeast/27iraq.html
February 27, 2008
Iraq Cabinet Demands Turks Leave Kurdish Area in North
By MICHAEL KAMBER [-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] [more attacks of PKK in northern and north-western –ir] [-ir] [hydra] [insurgency] [bush administration’s “surge option” or “new way forward” underway] [followup] [Turkey’s “incursion” looks bigger than first reported] [dilemmas presented to –iraqi Kurds] [-iraqis demanding Turkey cease and desist!] [****]
BAGHDAD — The Iraqi government on Tuesday condemned Turkey’s raids into northern Iraq and demanded that Turkey withdraw its troops, as fighting continued for a sixth day between Turkish forces and Kurdish rebels.
“The council expresses its rejection and condemnation to the Turkish military incursion which is considered a violation to the Iraqi sovereignty,” the Iraqi cabinet said in a statement. “The cabinet stresses that unilateral military action is not acceptable and threatens good relations between the two neighbors.”
The semiautonomous Kurdistan Regional Government also condemned the raids in a special session on Tuesday.
“The Turkish incursion into Iraqi Kurdistan is a violation of Iraqi sovereignty,” Falah Mustafa Bakir, head of the Department of Foreign Relations of the Kurdistan Regional Government, said in an interview on Tuesday.
The Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, defended the operations against the rebel group, the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, which Turkey and the United States consider a terrorist organization. In a televised speech on Tuesday, Mr. Erdogan said the military action was “not aimed at northern Iraq but only the terror organization,” the semiofficial Anatolian News Agency reported.
He said that the Turkish government was “in communication with” the United States and the Iraqi government, and that Turkey was grateful for “the strong, cooperative attitude of the Iraqi administration” and for “intelligence support and cooperation” from the United States.
Turkish television showed troops slogging through heavy snow in the rugged Kurdistan mountains. Casualty figures from Turkish sources and sources for the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or P.K.K., have varied widely. Turkey has reported killing more than 150 rebels, while confirming the deaths of 19 Turkish soldiers. The P.K.K. contends it has lost only a handful of fighters, while killing 81 Turkish soldiers.
The P.K.K. demands autonomy for Kurds in southern Turkey and has been attacking Turkish soil from Kurdish bases in Turkey and northern Iraq since 1984. Tens of thousands of people have been killed in the conflict.
In an interview on Tuesday, a P.K.K. spokesman expressed confidence that the rebels had the backing of the Kurdish regional government, which has repeatedly demanded the removal of Turkish troops. But the spokesman, Ahmad Danes, said the rebel group felt betrayed by the United States, which has said Turkey warned it of the raid. He said the Kurdish rebels kept the mountainous north of Iraq free of insurgent terrorists.
“The U.S.A. must not stand against Kurdish rights,” he said.
In other violence in the north, an explosion on a crowded bus traveling to the Syrian border from Mosul killed at least nine passengers on Tuesday morning, Iraqi officials said.
The source of the attack was unclear. Military officials said a passenger detonated a suicide vest on the bus, but bus company employees attributed the explosion to a roadside bomb.
The attack occurred about 500 yards from an Iraqi Army checkpoint in Tmerat, 50 miles west of Mosul, where scores of recruits routinely gather at an Iraqi Army base, said a military official who spoke on condition of anonymity. The bomber was probably trying to attack them, he said, and the bomb may have exploded prematurely.
United States military pressure — with the alignment of some Sunni tribes against the insurgency and a cease-fire by Shiite militias in southern and central Iraq — has pushed the remaining insurgents north to Mosul, United States and Iraqi officials say.
The city has been the scene of fierce fighting in recent months, and the Iraqi prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, promised a “decisive” battle with insurgents there after dozens of people were killed and more than 200 wounded in an explosion a month ago when Iraqi soldiers entered a booby-trapped building.
In other violence, a Mosul policeman was killed and two others wounded by a car bomb, Iraqi police sources said.
In Kirkuk, the district police said two Awakening Council members had been killed in an attack by unidentified gunmen. The police also confirmed that a roadside bomb had killed two civilians. And an Iraqi security forces source said an Iraqi Army major had been killed in clashes with elements of Al Qaeda.
In Tuz Khurmato, Lt. Col. Abdullah al-Bayati said attackers killed one soldier and kidnapped one of his relatives.
The American military issued a statement confirming that it had killed seven insurgents in a clash near Khan Bani Sa’ad in Diyala Province.
Also, the Iraqi Ministry of Information said gunmen had robbed a Health Ministry building in Al Waziriya in north Baghdad, taking six million Iraqi dinars, about $5,000.
Balen Y. Younis contributed reporting from Baghdad, Iraqi employees of The New York Times from Mosul and Sulaimaniya, and Sebnem Arsu from Istanbul.
Balen Y. Younis contributed reporting from Baghdad, Iraqi employees of The New York Times from Mosul and Sulaimaniya, and Sebnem Arsu from Istanbul.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

British Government Ordered to Release Notes on Iraq

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/world/europe/27london.html
February 27, 2008
British Government Ordered to Release Notes on Iraq
By JOHN F. BURNS [U.K.] [under Blair regime, Bush administration’s closest ally on the –Iraq War] [followup] [what they knew and when they knew it?] [how much of Bush’s line did Blair blithely accept while knowing otherwise?] [**********]
LONDON — Britain’s information commissioner has ordered the government to release the minutes of two cabinet meetings held in March 2003 under Tony Blair, then the prime minister, to discuss the legality of the allied invasion of Iraq that began later that month.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/world/europe/27london.html
February 27, 2008
British Government Ordered to Release Notes on Iraq
By JOHN F. BURNS [U.K.] [under Blair regime, Bush administration’s closest ally on the –Iraq War] [followup] [what they knew and when they knew it?] [how much of Bush’s line did Blair blithely accept while knowing otherwise?] [**********]
LONDON — Britain’s information commissioner has ordered the government to release the minutes of two cabinet meetings held in March 2003 under Tony Blair, then the prime minister, to discuss the legality of the allied invasion of Iraq that began later that month.
The commissioner, Richard Thomas, acting on a request made under the Freedom of Information Act, said his ruling was based on “the gravity and controversial nature” of Britain’s decision to go to war and would not, as government officials have argued, set a “dangerous precedent” for releasing cabinet papers that have traditionally remained secret for 30 years.
Mr. Thomas cited the controversy surrounding the ruling by the Blair government’s attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, that going to war was legal, and the protest resignations of several of Mr. Blair’s ministers that followed.
“The commissioner considers that the decision on whether to take military action against another country is so important that the accountability for such decision-making is paramount,” Mr. Thomas’s ruling said.
A spokesman for Prime Minister Gordon Brown said the government would decide whether to appeal the ruling to the courts, a step that must be taken within five weeks.
Officials said cabinet minutes had often been sparse in their detail of discussions held by ministers, and would not necessarily disclose as much about the war planning as critics of the Blair government had hoped.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

February 26, 2008

Pentagon Says Satellite’s Tank Was Destroyed

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/us/26brfs-PENTAGONSAYS_BRF.html
February 26, 2008
National Briefing | Washington
Pentagon Says Satellite’s Tank Was Destroyed
By THOM SHANKER [bush administration] [dod and intelligence community, IC] [bush white house] [nsc principals and beyond] [intelligence community] [congress] [110th congress, 2nd session] [an older spy satellite??? (c. 1979) lost power and is falling to earth] [new twist: it could be an experiemental launched from Vandenberg in 2006!] [followup from Jan. 27] [in any event, the president gave the defense department authority and it shot it out of space lastWednesday p.m.] [**********]
The Pentagon said the mission to launch a Navy missile-interceptor at a dead spy satellite appears to have succeeded in destroying a tank filled with toxic rocket fuel. The Pentagon said it had reached the conclusion based on studying remnants from the missile strike on Wednesday. The statement said a joint space operations headquarters based at Vandenberg Air Force Base, in California, was tracking less than 3,000 pieces of debris, “all smaller than a football.” [******]Most of the debris, the statement said, had already re-entered the atmosphere or would within coming weeks. There had been no reports of debris hitting Earth, the statement said, adding that “it is unlikely any will remain intact to impact the ground.”
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/us/26brfs-PENTAGONSAYS_BRF.html
February 26, 2008
National Briefing | Washington
Pentagon Says Satellite’s Tank Was Destroyed
By THOM SHANKER [bush administration] [dod and intelligence community, IC] [bush white house] [nsc principals and beyond] [intelligence community] [congress] [110th congress, 2nd session] [an older spy satellite??? (c. 1979) lost power and is falling to earth] [new twist: it could be an experiemental launched from Vandenberg in 2006!] [followup from Jan. 27] [in any event, the president gave the defense department authority and it shot it out of space lastWednesday p.m.] [**********]
The Pentagon said the mission to launch a Navy missile-interceptor at a dead spy satellite appears to have succeeded in destroying a tank filled with toxic rocket fuel. The Pentagon said it had reached the conclusion based on studying remnants from the missile strike on Wednesday. The statement said a joint space operations headquarters based at Vandenberg Air Force Base, in California, was tracking less than 3,000 pieces of debris, “all smaller than a football.” [******]Most of the debris, the statement said, had already re-entered the atmosphere or would within coming weeks. There had been no reports of debris hitting Earth, the statement said, adding that “it is unlikely any will remain intact to impact the ground.”
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Pentagon Releases Projections for Forces

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/washington/26troops.html
February 26, 2008
Pentagon Releases Projections for Forces
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS [bush white house] [sec def Gates] [nsc principals and deputies involved on some levels] [however, primarily bureaucratic politics] [DOD and pentagon, uniformed and civilian] [future force projections as telling indicator of where the US military sees itself in X-years’ time] [sec def Gates] [********]
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Pentagon is projecting that when the United States troop buildup in Iraq ends in July there will be about 8,000 more troops on the ground than when it began in January 2007, a senior general said Monday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/washington/26troops.html
February 26, 2008
Pentagon Releases Projections for Forces
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS [bush white house] [sec def Gates] [nsc principals and deputies involved on some levels] [however, primarily bureaucratic politics] [DOD and pentagon, uniformed and civilian] [future force projections as telling indicator of where the US military sees itself in X-years’ time] [sec def Gates] [********]
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Pentagon is projecting that when the United States troop buildup in Iraq ends in July there will be about 8,000 more troops on the ground than when it began in January 2007, a senior general said Monday.
Lt. Gen. Carter Ham, head of operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters that by July the troop total was likely to be 140,000. There were 132,000 troops there when President Bush approved orders to send five more Army brigades to Iraq to improve security and avert civil war. [negligible] [all the crap about a surge was simply wrong] [there appears nothing temporary about it] [********]
General Ham also announced that the Pentagon believed that United States force levels in Afghanistan would be at 32,000 in late summer, up from about 28,000 now. The current total is the highest since the war began in October 2001, and 3,200 more marines are scheduled to deploy to Afghanistan this spring.
It had been widely expected that some support troops sent to Iraq with the five extra brigades would need to remain, even after July. But until now it was not clear what the number would be.
General Ham stressed that his projected number of 140,000 was subject to change depending on security conditions, but it was the first time the Pentagon had publicly estimated the total.
Asked if the total would be below 132,000 by the time President Bush leaves office next January, General Ham said, “It would be premature to say that.” [*****]Among the support forces needed beyond July, General Ham said, are military police officers, logistics troops, aviation forces and a headquarters staff to command combat forces in an area south of Baghdad. The headquarters of the Third Infantry Division was installed there as part of President Bush’s increase in forces in April. It will be replaced this summer by an unspecified unit, General Ham said.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Immigration Agency Accused of Illegal Searches

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/25/AR2008022503369.html
Immigration Agency Accused of Illegal Searches
By N.C. Aizenman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, February 26, 2008; A04 [bush white house] [post-9/11, post-IRTPA reforms] [bureaucratic politics] [ICE] [DHS as uber agency with smaller fiefdoms fighting among themselves] [recent reports that customs and border agents taking it upon themselves to ignor the constitution] [whether regulations permit it or not the Constitution trumps regulations] [follwoup] [SIGs fighting back] [********]
A privately convened commission of labor and immigrant advocates held the first of several planned nationwide hearings yesterday to publicize allegations that U.S. immigration officials routinely violate constitutional protections against unreasonable search and seizure during workplace raids.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/25/AR2008022503369.html
Immigration Agency Accused of Illegal Searches
By N.C. Aizenman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, February 26, 2008; A04 [bush white house] [post-9/11, post-IRTPA reforms] [bureaucratic politics] [ICE] [DHS as uber agency with smaller fiefdoms fighting among themselves] [recent reports that customs and border agents taking it upon themselves to ignor the constitution] [whether regulations permit it or not the Constitution trumps regulations] [follwoup] [SIGs fighting back] [********]
A privately convened commission of labor and immigrant advocates held the first of several planned nationwide hearings yesterday to publicize allegations that U.S. immigration officials routinely violate constitutional protections against unreasonable search and seizure during workplace raids.
At the gathering at the Hay-Adams hotel in the District, witnesses and members of the 10-person panel accused Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials of using arrest warrants for a limited number of illegal immigrants who work at a given company as a pretext to detain the entire workforce, including many U.S. citizens, while agents determine whether there are additional illegal immigrants among them.
"Tens of millions of workers in America go to work every day without . . . an awareness that at their workplaces, without any warning, they could be swept up in a massive raid conducted by heavily armed government agents," said Joe Hansen, president of the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union and chairman of the National Commission on ICE Misconduct and Violations of 4th Amendment Rights. "Workers are not aware that they could be detained at gunpoint. That they could be handcuffed. . . . That they could be denied any contact with family members or legal counsel."
The commission heard testimony from two workers who are U.S. citizens who said they were detained for several hours during an ICE raid of six Swift meatpacking plants in December 2006. The union has filed a class action on their behalf. [******]
Afterward, Pat Reilly, an ICE spokeswoman who attended the hearing as an observer, said the agency's procedures for questioning workers during raids at businesses are fair and humane and have been routinely upheld by courts.
"I would imagine that some people may be detained beyond what they feel is reasonable. But it's subjective," she said. "What we're trying to do is get to the bottom of who has the right to be here and who might be posing as a U.S. citizen." [*******]
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

Gates Promises Help for Indonesian Military

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/world/asia/26gates.html
February 26, 2008
Gates Promises Help for Indonesian Military
By MARK MAZZETTI [bush white house] [sec def Gates] [nsc principals almost certainly vetted this] [bureaucratic politics also] [Indonesia a long-time recipient of U.S. arms sales] [at time controversial when they’ve used them to suppress Timorese, etc] [sec def Gates recent whirlwind trip] [********]
JAKARTA, Indonesia — Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates pledged arms upgrades and other Pentagon support for Indonesia on Monday, as the Bush administration forged closer ties to the military of a country still viewed skeptically by some in Congress for past human rights abuses.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/world/asia/26gates.html
February 26, 2008
Gates Promises Help for Indonesian Military
By MARK MAZZETTI [bush white house] [sec def Gates] [nsc principals almost certainly vetted this] [bureaucratic politics also] [Indonesia a long-time recipient of U.S. arms sales] [at time controversial when they’ve used them to suppress Timorese, etc] [sec def Gates recent whirlwind trip] [********]
JAKARTA, Indonesia — Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates pledged arms upgrades and other Pentagon support for Indonesia on Monday, as the Bush administration forged closer ties to the military of a country still viewed skeptically by some in Congress for past human rights abuses.
During a series of meetings in Jakarta, Mr. Gates tried to broaden the focus of American relations with Indonesia beyond the fight against terrorist networks, giving only passing mention to the threats they represent, in a speech before a group of foreign policy experts.
Instead, he emphasized the emergence of Indonesia as the “bedrock” of Southeast Asia and vowed that the United States would help to shore up the country’s aging military hardware. He was not specific in the types of upgrades he would approve, but Indonesian officials have, among other things, sought replacement parts for its fleet of C-130 cargo planes.
Aides to Mr. Gates said that in the years immediately after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, American policy toward Indonesia was driven too often by the Bush administration’s demands for an aggressive campaign against terrorist cells in Indonesia.
During a visit in 2006 by Donald H. Rumsfeld, the defense secretary at the time, his Indonesian counterpart, Juwano Sudarsono, publicly warned the Bush administration that its counterterrorism policies were overbearing and self-defeating. [*******]
In his speech on Monday, Mr. Gates occasionally struck humble chords, admitting that at times the United States had been “arrogant” in dealings with other countries. [****]
Mr. Gates called the development of Indonesia’s military “a key component” of relations between the United States and Indonesia, and “a vital aspect of Indonesia’s emergence as a prosperous and stable democracy with global reach.”
In 1992, Congress restricted arms sales and most American training for Indonesia, citing human rights abuses by the Indonesian military under Indonesia’s longtime dictator, Gen. Suharto. Internal dissent forced Mr. Suharto to resign in 1998, but Congress enacted new curbs the next year, after a rampage by an army-backed militia in what was then East Timor Province, and again in 2003, after the killings of two American teachers in Papua Province in 2002.
Meanwhile, Islamic separatists within Indonesia and Al Qaeda were believed to have begun collaborating. Security experts blamed the groups for a series of terrorist strikes on Indonesian territory, including the bombings in Bali in 2002 that killed more than 200 people. Military ties between Jakarta and Washington were restored in late 2005. [********]
Indonesia has largely emerged from the economic woes that crippled the country in the late 1990s, but is still viewed by many Western security experts as a potential hotbed of Islamic radicalism. More recently, the Indonesian government has been credited for cracking down on militants through a combination of successful police work and a campaign to turn the population against them.
Senior American military officials have long railed against the restrictions on training and equipping Indonesia’s military imposed by Congress, saying they served only to weaken American influence over a country of growing strategic importance. [*******]
During a visit to Jakarta last September, the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin, signed an agreement with Indonesian officials to use a $1 billion Russian loan to sell the country Kilo-class submarines, helicopters and tanks.
American officials worry that even though the ban on weapons sales has been lifted, labyrinthine procedures and what Mr. Gates on Monday called “bureaucratic inertia” could still hold up the flow of military hardware.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Overlooked Air Force Launches Ads

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/24/AR2008022402083.html
Overlooked Air Force Launches Ads
By Josh White
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, February 25, 2008; A13 [bush white house] [bureaucracies first and foremost] [pentagon, dod, and the different military services] [how will high-tech airforce fit into this century’s asymmetrical warfare?] [air force is seeking to show how] [follwoup] [previously the marines deftly did same] [********]
The public faces of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been almost exclusively those of troops in Army and Marine Corps uniforms, whose efforts attract widespread attention -- positive and negative -- for those services.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/24/AR2008022402083.html
Overlooked Air Force Launches Ads
By Josh White
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, February 25, 2008; A13 [bush white house] [bureaucracies first and foremost] [pentagon, dod, and the different military services] [how will high-tech airforce fit into this century’s asymmetrical warfare?] [air force is seeking to show how] [follwoup] [previously the marines deftly did same] [********]
The public faces of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been almost exclusively those of troops in Army and Marine Corps uniforms, whose efforts attract widespread attention -- positive and negative -- for those services.
Often lost in the discussion is the U.S. Air Force, which flies above them, gathering intelligence, attacking targets, providing transportation and securing the skies, its officials say.
The publicity gap may be about to change a bit. The Air Force is launching a multimillion-dollar advertising campaign this week to reinvigorate America's love for fighter jets and high technology, and to highlight the service's wartime activity. [*****]
The campaign is designed to reverse losses at the Pentagon and on Capitol Hill for billions of dollars to buy new aircraft and advanced technology, as well as provide a boost for recruiting. The Air Force plans to spend $26 million this year and $55 million next year to better compete with the other armed services for America's admiration. [******]
Its "Above All" campaign began on yesterday morning's talk shows on ABC, CBS and NBC, and will include print and online advertising.
"The program seeks to change a mind-set by educating the American public on how today's Air Force is the most engaged, versatile and high-tech of all military services," the Air Force wrote in fiscal 2009 budget request documents, first described by the Air Force Times last week.
"Without the funding, the ability to educate the American public about Air Force roles and mission will be limited and ultimately [create] a gap between the public and the Air Force that will influence public opinion and the Air Force's ability to maintain its stature amongst the other services."
Keith Lebling, the Air Force's chief of marketing and branding, said last week that focus groups and surveys have found a disconnect between what people think about the Air Force and what it does to defend the country. Though there are 25,000 airmen deployed overseas in support of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and more than 250 daily Air Force flight operations, much of it goes unnoticed, even as aerial bombing has increased substantially in both countries over the past few years, [****]he said.
Col. Michael G. Caldwell, an Air Force spokesman, said the service wants to ensure that potential recruits and their "influencers" -- such as parents, coaches and teachers -- understand that the Air Force is an option. He said the service hopes to direct people to its Web site to highlight its role in "dominating air space and cyberspace."
Such a message comes as the Air Force scuffles with the Defense Department over its request for more F-22 fighter jets -- an aircraft that, as Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates recently emphasized to Congress, has never flown a mission in support of the war in Iraq [*******]-- and new C-17 cargo planes.
Air Force officials also recently have written about the service's exclusion from the nation's counterinsurgency policy, with Maj. Gen. Charles J. Dunlap Jr., deputy judge advocate general, writing that the nation is thinking too much about "boots on the ground" in combat and not enough about the potential of air power.
While the price tag of the advertising effort is high, the Air Force says it is emulating Army advertising efforts that are far more expensive. The "Army Strong" campaign, which aims to attract troops in one of the most difficult recruiting environments in history, was slated to cost $1.35 billion over five years when it was awarded in 2006. According to the Army, the campaign has a $240 million price tag in fiscal 2008, nearly 10 times what the Air Force will spend this year on "Above All."
"Advertising is one major way that we have to reach young people today," said Paul Boyce, an Army spokesman.
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

A Diplomatic Note, Addressed to North Korea

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/24/AR2008022402163.html
A Diplomatic Note, Addressed to North Korea
Monday, February 25, 2008; A02 [bush white house] [nsc principals] [north korea and wmd] [bureaucratic politics polarized by ideological turf wars between neoconservatives and traditional internationalists] [both insided and outside the administration] [rice and other insider traditionalists have extended their necks on dprk, Israel, iran] [revenge of the neoconservatives has been unfolding with important salvos from outside: John Bolton, AEI hawks, so on] [follwoup] [see today’s external for DPRk] [use psci 455] [********]
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has travel scheduled in Asia this week, from attending the inauguration ceremony for President Lee Myung-bak in Seoul to meetings in Beijing and Tokyo. But hers is not the only U.S. diplomatic endeavor planned for that part of the world this week.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/24/AR2008022402163.html
A Diplomatic Note, Addressed to North Korea
Monday, February 25, 2008; A02 [bush white house] [nsc principals] [north korea and wmd] [bureaucratic politics polarized by ideological turf wars between neoconservatives and traditional internationalists] [both insided and outside the administration] [rice and other insider traditionalists have extended their necks on dprk, Israel, iran] [revenge of the neoconservatives has been unfolding with important salvos from outside: John Bolton, AEI hawks, so on] [follwoup] [see today’s external for DPRk] [use psci 455] [********]
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has travel scheduled in Asia this week, from attending the inauguration ceremony for President Lee Myung-bak in Seoul to meetings in Beijing and Tokyo. But hers is not the only U.S. diplomatic endeavor planned for that part of the world this week.
The New York Philharmonic is set to perform tomorrow evening in North Korea's capital, at the East Pyongyang Grand Theater (story, Page A8). Assistant Secretary of State Christopher R. Hill, the State Department's chief diplomat for negotiations with North Korea, spoke glowingly about the prospect of the concert and what it represents when it was announced in December.
Will the reviews of the concert itself -- which will feature Wagner's Prelude to Act III of "Lohengrin," Dvorak's Symphony No. 9 ("From the New World"), and Gershwin's "An American in Paris" -- be as glowing?
Howard Pollack, author of "George Gershwin: His Life and Work" and a University of Houston professor of music, expects so. "Gershwin is internationally loved. He travels well everywhere around the world, even remote corners of the world," Pollack said.
And the composer's history makes his famous piece -- a "very jaunty, very French-sounding melody that draws on people's feelings about Paris . . . while at the same time putting an American spin on it" -- a particularly apt choice, Pollack said. Gershwin's musical "Porgy and Bess" was presented by an all-black company in the Soviet Union in 1956 -- the first time American theater had been staged behind the Iron Curtain.
Apart from its composer's history, the music itself will serve well as an American ambassador, Pollack said. It displays "a certain ingenuousness and kind of directness that might be part of an American character." And Gershwin himself would be sorry to miss his Pyongyang debut, Pollack said: "I think he would have thought this was a great idea."
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

A War We Must End

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/25/AR2008022502438.html
A War We Must End
By John Podesta, Ray Takeyh and Lawrence J. Korb
Tuesday, February 26, 2008; A17 [oped] [politicos entering the fray at important time when Mc Cain seems to have locked up GOP primary nod and Obama seems to have the momentum to lock up Dems primary nod] [Obama could lock it up one week from today] [*************]
Despite the Democratic presidential candidates' expressed commitment to ending the war in Iraq, there is unease among the party's base. Some ardent activists have suggested that upon election, a new Democratic president will come under inordinate pressure to sustain the U.S. military commitment to Iraq, albeit with some modifications. This concern demonstrates both the difficulty of ending a controversial war and the necessity of doing so. [********]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/25/AR2008022502438.html
A War We Must End
By John Podesta, Ray Takeyh and Lawrence J. Korb
Tuesday, February 26, 2008; A17 [oped] [politicos entering the fray at important time when Mc Cain seems to have locked up GOP primary nod and Obama seems to have the momentum to lock up Dems primary nod] [Obama could lock it up one week from today] [*************]
Despite the Democratic presidential candidates' expressed commitment to ending the war in Iraq, there is unease among the party's base. Some ardent activists have suggested that upon election, a new Democratic president will come under inordinate pressure to sustain the U.S. military commitment to Iraq, albeit with some modifications. This concern demonstrates both the difficulty of ending a controversial war and the necessity of doing so. [********]
Even a cursory examination of American history reveals the complexity of concluding a war that has taken on such a stark partisan tint. The shadow of Vietnam looms, as it has become standard Republican narrative that back then it was the Democrats in Congress who stabbed America in the back by cutting off funding for a winning cause. [****] The fact that the war was lost in Southeast Asia, as opposed to the halls of Congress, is no matter. The Republican machine will press this same theme should it lose the White House in November. A Democratic administration would be accused of surrendering to evildoers, as once more the dovish successors of George McGovern are wrongly said to have pulled defeat out of the jaws of victory. [america’s zero-sum politics with two-party system] [*******]
Such self-serving claims do not diminish the need and justification for ending one of America's longest and most misguided wars. Republicans will claim that after four years of disastrous mistakes, the Bush administration finally got it right with its troop "surge." Yet even despite the loss of nearly 1,000 American lives and the expenditure of $150 billion, the surge has failed in its stated purpose: providing the Iraqi government with the breathing space to pass the 18 legislative benchmarks the Bush administration called vital to political reconciliation. To date it has passed only four. Moreover, as part of the surge, the administration has further undermined Iraq's government by providing arms and money to Sunni insurgent groups even though they have not pledged loyalty to Baghdad.
Beyond the impracticalities of the surge, it is important to realistically measure the costs and consequences of a categorical U.S. withdrawal. The prevailing doomsday scenario suggests that an American departure would lead to genocide and mayhem. But is that true? [***]Iraq today belongs to Iraqis; it is an ancient civilization with its own norms and tendencies. It is entirely possible that in the absence of a cumbersome and clumsy American occupation, Iraqis will make their own bargains and compacts, heading off the genocide that many seem to anticipate. Opponents of the war seem to have far more confidence in Iraqis' abilities to manage their affairs than do war advocates. Moreover, a U.S. withdrawal would finally compel the region to claim Iraq, forcing the Saudis, Iranians, Jordanians and others to decide whether a civil war is in their interests. [********]Faced with that stark reality, they may seek to mediate rather than inflame Iraq's squabbles.
The strategic necessities of ending the war have never been more compelling. In today's Middle East, America is neither liked nor respected. Iran flaunts its nuclear ambitions, confident that a bogged-down Washington has limited options but to concede to its mounting infractions. Afghanistan is rapidly descending into a Taliban-dominated state as the Bush administration responds only with plaintive complaints about NATO's lack of resolution. [******]And the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is nowhere near resolution. America's occupation of Iraq is estranging an entire generation of Arab youths, creating a reservoir of antagonism that will take decades to overcome. A Democratic president who may enjoy a modest honeymoon in the Middle East simply by virtue of not being George W. Bush can take a giant step toward reclaiming America's practical interests and moral standing by leaving Iraq. [the question I posed in class yesterday was this. If and when the next 9/11-like attack comes, will it have originated in –Iraq or AfPak?] [if the latter, then US necessarily must change situation and focus on AfPak] [*******]
A Democratic president would also be wise to realize that perpetuating the war conflicts with a robust domestic agenda. At a time of mounting deficits, when we are spending about $10 billion a month in Iraq, issues such as reforming the health-care system and repairing the national infrastructure are likely to remain neglected. The United States has too many national priorities that cannot be realized if yet another beleaguered administration prolongs this costly and unpopular war.
The plight of the Bush presidency should be a lesson on what not to do. An administration without any consequential domestic achievements and a divisive foreign policy, hostage to an endless conflict, is what awaits anyone seeking to perpetuate the war. Remarkably, Sen. John McCain stakes his claim to the presidency on continuing down this path. This is a legacy that Democratic presidential aspirants would be wise to avoid.
John Podesta, president of the Center for American Progress, was White House chief of staff from 1998 to 2001. Ray Takeyh is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. Lawrence J. Korb is a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress.
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

Kenya's Last Chance

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/25/AR2008022502463.html
Kenya's Last Chance
As the country's political leaders dither, the risk of civil war is mounting.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008; A16 [editorial] [Kenya’s proximity to the abyss] [*****]
KENYA, a country that for decades has been the anchor of East Africa, is perilously close to an implosion that could destroy what until recently looked like a promising future. In the past two months, ethnic violence has killed more than 1,500 people, displaced 300,000 more and polarized the country along tribal lines. [****] Neighborhoods of Nairobi and swaths of the western part of the country have been swept by ethnic cleansing. The economy, dependent on exports and foreign aid, is reeling, and Kenyans fear the country is close to a merciless civil war -- the "moment that the U.S. was at in 1861," as Maina Kiai of the National Commission on Human Rights put it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/25/AR2008022502463.html
Kenya's Last Chance
As the country's political leaders dither, the risk of civil war is mounting.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008; A16 [editorial] [Kenya’s proximity to the abyss] [*****]
KENYA, a country that for decades has been the anchor of East Africa, is perilously close to an implosion that could destroy what until recently looked like a promising future. In the past two months, ethnic violence has killed more than 1,500 people, displaced 300,000 more and polarized the country along tribal lines. [****] Neighborhoods of Nairobi and swaths of the western part of the country have been swept by ethnic cleansing. The economy, dependent on exports and foreign aid, is reeling, and Kenyans fear the country is close to a merciless civil war -- the "moment that the U.S. was at in 1861," as Maina Kiai of the National Commission on Human Rights put it.
Whether that can be avoided depends on two proud and powerful political leaders who have spent the last few weeks alternately negotiating and threatening each other: President Mwai Kibaki and opposition leader Raila Odinga. The trouble began after a Dec. 27 election that, in all likelihood, Mr. Kibaki stole from Mr. Odinga. Mr. Kibaki at first tried to ride out the crisis and entrench himself as president, while Mr. Odinga at first insisted that the president resign. By late last week, guided by former U.N. secretary general Kofi Annan, they appeared close to a compromise under which Mr. Kibaki would remain president but Mr. Odinga would assume the new post of prime minister, with the cabinet to be shared between their two parties. [*****]
By yesterday, however, the agreement had still not been completed. Mr. Kibaki is still resisting handing over substantial powers to Mr. Odinga; in the background is the reluctance of the ethnic Kikuyu, the country's traditional elite, [*****]to yield power and economic privilege. Mr. Odinga, a member of the Luo tribe, has threatened new mass demonstrations for later this week if no agreement is reached. That could be the spark that renews the ethnic warfare now precariously on hold.
The United States, along with most of Africa, has a vital interest in preventing Kenya's destabilization. The Bush administration, which initially seemed to tilt toward Mr. Kibaki, has lately pressed for a settlement: Last week, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice warned that without an agreement the government would not enjoy "business as usual" with the United States. The administration now must push both sides -- but in particular Mr. Kibaki -- still harder. Even if a political accord can be reached in the coming days, Kenya will face a steep challenge to overcome its sudden polarization. But each day that the two leaders fail to reach a deal increases the chance that their country will be destroyed by civil war. [********]
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

Playing Politics With Intelligence

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2008/02/25/BL2008022501469.html
Playing Politics With Intelligence
By Dan Froomkin
Special to washingtonpost.com
Monday, February 25, 2008; 1:52 PM [oped] [Fromkin’s in the loop not quite oped columnist but close] [govt too] [as it addresses the bush administrations use of TSPs] [potential pow abuse] [*******]
As President Bush and his aides reject the accusation that they are playing politics with matters of national intelligence, it's worth noting that they have done precisely that many times.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2008/02/25/BL2008022501469.html
Playing Politics With Intelligence
By Dan Froomkin
Special to washingtonpost.com
Monday, February 25, 2008; 1:52 PM [oped] [Fromkin’s in the loop not quite oped columnist but close] [govt too] [as it addresses the bush administrations use of TSPs] [potential pow abuse] [*******]
As President Bush and his aides reject the accusation that they are playing politics with matters of national intelligence, it's worth noting that they have done precisely that many times.
Bush and his top associates have a tradition of selectively disclosing intelligence findings that serve their political agenda -- while aggressively asserting the need to keep secret the information that would tend to discredit them. Think the run-up to war in Iraq. Think Valerie Plame. (See, for example, my March 31, 2006, column.)
Both aspects of this pattern are on full display in the White House's current pursuit of a surveillance bill that would permanently expand its warrantless wiretapping authority -- and would provide retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that for years complied with Bush's possibly illegal requests for private information.
In attempting to block the lawsuits being pursued by the ACLU and others, the White House is trying to eliminate the last opportunity Americans have to find out what the government has done in their name (at least until the next president takes over).
But now that it's politically advantageous, the administration is alleging all sorts of previously secret intelligence successes based on its expanded powers -- even while it refuses to provide any way to verify its claims.
On Friday afternoon, Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey and national intelligence director Mike McConnell sent a six-page letter to Congress that said the return to older standards for wiretapping -- necessitated by the House's refusal to pass a Senate-backed extension earlier this month -- was hurting intelligence collection.
Although they backtracked within hours -- saying that after a hiccup, the government was once again receiving the necessary intelligence -- they justified the expanded program with some bold assertions: "Using the authorities provided in the Protect America Act, we have obtained information about efforts of an individual to become a suicide operative, efforts by terrorists to obtain guns and ammunition, and terrorists transferring money. Other information obtained using the authorities provided by the Protect America Act has led to the disruption of planned terrorist attacks."
A suicide bomber? Where? Terrorist attacks that have been disrupted? That's huge news.
But should we believe a word they say? Were these plots serious -- or imaginary, like those of the bumblers in Miami who the Justice Department originally said were planning an attack on the Sears Tower in Chicago? Would they withstand public scrutiny -- or vanish like the dirty bomb charges against Jose Padilla? And if these plots were for real, where's the proof that they wouldn't have been found out within the framework of the old law? The last time McConnell made just such an assertion, he ended up having to withdraw it.
In short, it's not just the timing of these disclosures that's suspect -- it's the disclosures themselves. Another example, which I described on NiemanWatchdog.org, came in October when Bush listed four terrorist attacks he said his administration had prevented as a result of the CIA's harsh interrogation tactics. Under examination, it wasn't clear whether any of those attacks were much more than a fantasy.
In the News
Eric Lichtblau wrote in Saturday's New York Times: "A new round of political sparring erupted Friday over the government's wiretapping powers, as the Bush administration asserted that the lapsing of a surveillance law a week ago has already led to the loss of important intelligence information and made private phone carriers less willing to cooperate.
"Democrats immediately returned fire over the suggestion that they had compromised national security. The Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, accused President Bush of 'crying wolf' and said, 'These latest scare tactics represent the president at his most unreasonable, irresponsible and misleading.' . . .
"[I]n a sharply worded letter released Friday, Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey and Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence, said the return to the older standards for wiretapping had hurt intelligence collection. . . .
"'Our experience in the past few days since the expiration of the act demonstrates that these concerns are neither speculative nor theoretical,' the letter said. 'Allowing the act to expire without passing the bipartisan Senate bill had real and negative consequences for our national security. Indeed, this has led directly to a degraded intelligence capability.'
"The letter gave no details on actual intelligence losses.
"Mr. Mukasey and Mr. McConnell said the uncertainty created by the lapse of the law had 'reduced cooperation' from some telecommunication providers, causing them to delay or refuse to comply with wiretap requests.
"Generally, the government has the ability to compel the cooperation of private companies and assure them legal immunity with a valid court order. But intelligence officials said compelling cooperation was a cumbersome process that could require litigation, and they predicted that more private companies might resist cooperating if the current impasse and uncertainty over the law continued.
"Democratic leaders blamed the administration for any problems, saying its refusal to agree to a brief extension of the law had caused any lapses."
Josh Meyer wrote in Sunday's Los Angeles Times: "A day after warning that potentially critical terrorism intelligence was being lost because Congress had not finished work on a controversial espionage law, the U.S. attorney general and the national intelligence director said Saturday that the government was receiving the information -- at least temporarily. . . .
"One Democratic congressional official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the matter, expressed skepticism that any significant gap had existed, noting that existing rules permit continued monitoring of known terrorists and their associates. . . .
"'This is serious backpedaling by the DNI,' the Democratic official said of McConnell. 'He's been saying for the last week that the sky is falling, and the sky is not falling.'"
Reuters reports: "The Bush administration said on Saturday U.S. telecommunications companies have agreed to cooperate 'for the time being' with spy agencies' wiretaps, despite an ongoing battle between the White House and Congress over new terrorism surveillance legislation. . . .
"'Although our private partners are cooperating for the time being, they have expressed understandable misgivings about doing so in light of the ongoing uncertainty and have indicated they may well discontinue cooperation if the uncertainty persists,' the statement said."
The chairmen of the House and Senate intelligence and judiciary committees -- Jay Rockefeller, Patrick Leahy, Silvestre Reyes and John Conyers-- write in a Washington Post op-ed this morning that "instead of working with Congress to achieve the best policies to keep our country safe, once again President Bush has resorted to scare tactics and political games. . . .
"[O]ur country did not 'go dark' on Feb. 16 when the Protect America Act (PAA) expired. Despite President Bush's overheated rhetoric on this issue, the government's orders under that act will last until at least August. These orders could cover every known terrorist group and foreign target. No surveillance stopped. If a new member of a known group, a new phone number or a new e-mail address is identified, U.S. intelligence can add it to the existing orders, and surveillance can begin immediately. . . .
"If President Bush truly believed that the expiration of the Protect America Act caused a danger, he would not have refused our offer of an extension. . . .
"So what's behind the president's 'sky is falling' rhetoric?
"It is clear that he and his Republican allies, desperate to distract attention from the economy and other policy failures, are trying to use this issue to scare the American people into believing that congressional Democrats have left America vulnerable to terrorist attack.
"But if our nation were to suddenly become vulnerable, it would not be because we don't have sufficient domestic surveillance powers. It would be because the Bush administration has done too little to defeat al-Qaeda, which has reconstituted itself in Pakistan and gained strength throughout the world. Many of our intelligence assets are being used to fight in Iraq instead of taking on Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaeda organization that attacked us on Sept. 11 and that wants to attack us again.
"The president may try to change the topic by talking about surveillance laws, but we aren't buying it."
White House press secretary Dana Perino responded to the op-ed this morning with the following statement: "There is an old rhetorical tactic in Washington: you repeat something often enough, regardless of whether it's true, and hope people will start to believe it."
As I've often noted, this tactic is one of the White House's signature approaches to communication. But Perino wasn't talking about her boss.
"This has been the preferred tactic of many Democrats involved in the FISA debate," she said, "and the Democratic chairmen of the House and Senate Intelligence and Judiciary committees employ it again in an op-ed published today in the Washington Post. . . .
"The President has listened to the judgment of these same professionals that the absence of long-term legislation creates uncertainty that poses a risk to those tools and could lead to the loss of intelligence information and that further short-term extensions of the PAA do not solve the problem. Stating that fact is not a scare tactic -- it reflects the considered judgment of the intelligence community, whose principal concern is not politics, but doing their jobs."
Here's Bush in his Saturday radio address: "When Congress reconvenes on Monday, Members of the House have a choice to make: They can empower the trial bar -- or they can empower the intelligence community. They can help class action trial lawyers sue for billions of dollars -- or they can help our intelligence officials protect millions of lives. They can put our national security in the hands of plaintiffs' lawyers -- or they can entrust it to the men and women of our government who work day and night to keep us safe. As they make their choice, Members of Congress must never forget: Somewhere in the world, at this very moment, terrorists are planning the next attack on America. And to protect America from such attacks, we must protect our telecommunications companies from abusive lawsuits."
Bush weighed in on the issue once again this morning: "I want to share with you the core of the problem," he told a gathering of governors. "And the problem is, should companies who are believed to have helped us -- after 9/11 until today -- get information necessary to protect the country, be sued. And my answer is, absolutely not; they shouldn't be sued, for a couple of reasons.
"One, it's not fair. Our government told them that their participation was necessary, and it was -- and still is -- and that what we had asked them to do was legal. And now they're getting sued for billions of dollars -- and it's not fair, and it will create doubt amongst private sector folks who we need to help protect us.
"Secondly, such lawsuits would require disclosure of information, which will make it harder to protect the country. You can imagine when people start defending themselves, they're going to be asked all kinds of questions about tactics used. Makes absolutely no sense to give the enemy more knowledge about what the United States is doing to protect the American people.
"Finally, it'll make it harder to convince companies to participate in the future. I mean, if you've done something that you think is perfectly legal and all of a sudden you're facing billions of dollars of lawsuits, it's going to be hard to provide -- with credibility -- assurances that we can go forward."
Torture Watch
Ron Suskind wrote in his book The One-Percent Doctrine that Abu Zubaydah, one of the Bush administration's most celebrated terror suspects and a man responsible for many domestic terror alerts in 2002, was in fact a mentally ill minor functionary who under torture made up imaginary plots against Americans.
Joseph Margulies and George Brent Mickum write in a Washington Post opinion piece: "We represent Saudi-born Abu Zubaydah in a legal effort to force the administration to show why he is being detained. And this week, with our first meeting, we begin the laborious task of sifting fact from fantasy. Yet we worry it may already be too late. . . .
"Zubaydah's mind may be beyond our reach. Regardless of whether he was 'insane' to begin with, he has gone through quite an ordeal since his arrest in Pakistan in March 2002. Shuttled through CIA 'black sites' around the world, he was subjected to a sustained course of interrogation designed to instill what a CIA training manual euphemistically calls 'debility, dependence and dread.' Zubaydah's world became freezing rooms alternating with sweltering cells. Screaming noise replaced by endless silence. Blinding light followed by dark, underground chambers. Hours confined in contorted positions. And, as we recently learned, Zubaydah was subjected to waterboarding. We do not know what remains of his mind, and we will probably never know what he experienced. . . .
"It was the Cold War communists who perfected the dark art of touchless torture. And with it, they brought U.S. soldiers to the tipping point, where the adult psyche shatters, leaving behind a quavering child. At the end of their ordeal, these soldiers made fantastic admissions of American perfidity and spoke unreservedly about their supposed misdeeds. . . .
"What will we be able to learn, at this point, from Zubaydah? Will we be able to recreate the interrogations without the tapes? Will we get access to the material that led Coleman to a conclusion so different from the administration's? . . .
"The American system of justice is founded on the idea that truth emerges from vigorous and informed debate. And if that debate cannot take place, if we cannot learn the facts and share them with others, the truth is only what the administration reports it to be. We hope it has not come to that."
Waterboarding Investigation
Dan Eggen writes in The Washington Post: "An internal watchdog office at the Justice Department is investigating whether Bush administration lawyers violated professional standards by issuing legal opinions that authorized the CIA to use waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques, officials confirmed yesterday.
"H. Marshall Jarrett, counsel for the Office of Professional Responsibility, wrote in a letter to Democratic lawmakers that his office is investigating the 'circumstances surrounding' Justice opinions that established a legal basis for the CIA's interrogation program, including a now-infamous memo from August 2002 that narrowly defined torture and was later rescinded by the department.
"'Among other issues, we are examining whether the legal advice contained in those memoranda was consistent with the professional standards that apply to Department of Justice attorneys,' Jarrett wrote.
"This is the second publicly disclosed Justice Department investigation related to the CIA's use of waterboarding, a type of simulated drowning that is considered torture by most human rights groups and legal scholars. Jarrett's inquiry got underway in 2004, but was not confirmed publicly until now, officials said. . . .
"The results of OPR investigations are usually kept confidential because they focus on allegations of professional misconduct or other personnel issues. But in his letter Monday to Sens. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Jarrett wrote that investigators will consider releasing a 'non-classified summary' at the conclusion of the investigation 'because of the significant public interest in this matter.'"
In a statement, Whitehouse asks how the Department of Justice could have overlooked its own precedents to authorize waterboarding and concludes that "the answer was preordained and the Department was driven by politics and obedience, not law and independence. I welcome OPR's report in our continuing effort to reclaim DOJ from the 'loyal Bushies' who have besmirched a great institution.'"
Scott Shane writes in the New York Times: "Mr. Jarrett's report could become the first public accounting for legal advice that endorsed methods widely denounced as torture by human rights groups and legal authorities. His office can refer matters for criminal prosecution; legal experts said the most likely outcome was a public critique of the legal opinions on interrogation, noting that Mr. Jarrett had the power to reprimand or to seek the disbarment of current or former Justice Department lawyers. . . .
"Mr. Whitehouse, a former United States attorney, said in an interview that he believed the August 2002 memo on torture, as well as classified opinions he had reviewed, fell far short of the Justice Department's standards for scholarship. He said that in approving waterboarding, the opinions ignored both American military prosecutors' cases against Japanese officers for waterboarding American prisoners during World War II and a federal appeals court's decision that upheld the 1983 conviction of a Texas sheriff for using 'water torture' on jail inmates."
Bush Library Watch
Michael Abramowitz writes in The Washington Post: "President Bush's future presidential library and public policy institute will be housed at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, officials announced yesterday, launching a project that could require hundreds of millions of dollars in private donations.
"The location of the project has not exactly been a state secret -- representatives of Bush's library foundation have been negotiating with the university for months -- but the announcement means Bush's friends and associates will soon begin raising money to bring the project to fruition."
In a letter to SMU's president, Bush wrote: "When he dedicated the first presidential library, President Franklin Roosevelt said that he hoped the public would use it to 'learn from the past' and 'gain judgment in creating their own future.' I hope the same will be true of this library. I look forward to the day when both the general public and scholars come and explore the important and challenging issues our Nation has faced during my presidency -- from economic and homeland security to fighting terrorism and promoting freedom and democracy."
The End Times
Here's Bush at a state dinner for the nation's governors last night: "You know, I've developed a unique perspective on this event. For six years I sat and watched the President speak; for eight years I was the President and spoke. (Laughter.) And next year, I'll be watching on C-SPAN. (Laughter.)"
Oscar Goes Easy
At last night's Oscars, host Jon Stewart's joke about the war in Iraq was directed more at Sen. John McCain than at Bush. Stewart: "The films that were made about the Iraq war -- let's face it -- did not do as well. But I am telling you -- if we stay the course and keep these movies in the theaters, we can turn this around. I don't care if it takes 100 years, withdrawing the Iraq movies would only embolden the audience. We cannot let the audience win."
And only one award winner said anything negative about the administration: Alex Gibney, the director of "Taxi to the Dark Side," who said upon winning the Oscar for best documentary feature: "This is dedicated to two people who are no longer with us. Dilawar, the young Afghan taxi driver, and my father, a Navy interrogator who urged me to make this film because of his fury about what was being done to the rule of law. Let's hope we can turn this country around and move away from the dark side and back to the light."
Cartoon Watch
Ann Telnaes on rendition flights; Jeff Danziger on Bush's America; Rob Rogers on Bush's earful; Joel Pett on Bush in foreclosure; and all 12 of the Bush cartoons that won John Sherffius the Herblock Award last week.
© 2008 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive

Scare Tactics and Our Surveillance Bill

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/24/AR2008022401668.html
Scare Tactics and Our Surveillance Bill
By Jay Rockefeller, Patrick Leahy, Silvestre Reyes and John Conyers
Monday, February 25, 2008; A15 [oped] [note the heavy-hitter congressional authors] [govt too as it addresses the bush administrations use of TSPs] [potential pow abuse] [**]
Nothing is more important to the American people than our safety and our freedom. As the chairmen of the House and Senate intelligence and judiciary committees, we have an enormous responsibility to protect both.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/24/AR2008022401668.html
Scare Tactics and Our Surveillance Bill
By Jay Rockefeller, Patrick Leahy, Silvestre Reyes and John Conyers
Monday, February 25, 2008; A15 [oped] [note the heavy-hitter congressional authors] [govt too as it addresses the bush administrations use of TSPs] [potential pow abuse] [**]
Nothing is more important to the American people than our safety and our freedom. As the chairmen of the House and Senate intelligence and judiciary committees, we have an enormous responsibility to protect both.
Unfortunately, instead of working with Congress to achieve the best policies to keep our country safe, once again President Bush has resorted to scare tactics and political games.
In November, the House passed legislation to give U.S. intelligence agencies strong tools to intercept terrorist communications that transit the United States, while ensuring that Americans' private communications are not swept up by the government in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
Almost two weeks ago, the Senate passed similar legislation. The Senate bill also contains a provision to grant retroactive legal immunity to telecommunications companies that assisted the executive branch in conducting surveillance programs after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
While the four of us may have our differences on what language a final bill should contain, we agree on several points.
First, our country did not "go dark" on Feb. 16 when the Protect America Act (PAA) expired. Despite President Bush's overheated rhetoric on this issue, the government's orders under that act will last until at least August. These orders could cover every known terrorist group and foreign target. No surveillance stopped. If a new member of a known group, a new phone number or a new e-mail address is identified, U.S. intelligence can add it to the existing orders, and surveillance can begin immediately.
As Assistant Attorney General Kenneth Wainstein acknowledged while speaking to reporters on Feb. 14, "the directives are in force for a year, and with the expiration of the PAA, the directives that are in force remain in force until the end of that year. . . . [W]e'll be able to continue doing surveillance based on those directives."
If President Bush truly believed that the expiration of the Protect America Act caused a danger, he would not have refused our offer of an extension.
In the remote possibility that a terrorist organization that we have never previously identified emerges, the National Security Agency could use existing authority under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to track its communications. Since Congress passed FISA in 1978, the court governing the law's use has approved nearly 23,000 warrant applications and rejected only five. In an emergency, the NSA or FBI can begin surveillance immediately and a FISA court order does not have to be obtained for three days.
When U.S. agencies provided critical intelligence to our German allies to disrupt a terrorist plot last summer, we relied on FISA authorities.
Those who say that FISA is outdated do not appreciate the strength of this powerful tool.
So what's behind the president's "sky is falling" rhetoric?
It is clear that he and his Republican allies, desperate to distract attention from the economy and other policy failures, are trying to use this issue to scare the American people into believing that congressional Democrats have left America vulnerable to terrorist attack.
But if our nation were to suddenly become vulnerable, it would not be because we don't have sufficient domestic surveillance powers. It would be because the Bush administration has done too little to defeat al-Qaeda, which has reconstituted itself in Pakistan and gained strength throughout the world. Many of our intelligence assets are being used to fight in Iraq instead of taking on Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaeda organization that attacked us on Sept. 11 and that wants to attack us again.
The president may try to change the topic by talking about surveillance laws, but we aren't buying it.
We are motivated to pass legislation governing surveillance because we believe this activity must be carefully regulated to protect Americans' constitutional rights. Companies that provide lawful assistance to the government in surveillance activities should be legally protected for doing so.
We are already working to reconcile the House and Senate bills and hope that our Republican colleagues will join us in the coming weeks to craft final, bipartisan legislation. A key objective of our effort is to build support for a law that gives our intelligence professionals not only the tools they need but also confidence that the legislation they will be implementing has the broad support of Congress and the American public.
If the president thinks he can use this as a wedge issue to divide Democrats, he is wrong. We are united in our determination to produce responsible legislation that will protect America and protect our Constitution.
Jay Rockefeller, Patrick Leahy, Silvestre Reyes and John Conyers are chairmen, respectively, of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, the Senate Judiciary Committee, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the House Judiciary Committee.
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

On Signing Statements, McCain Says 'Never,' Obama and Clinton 'Sometimes'

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/24/AR2008022401995.html
On Signing Statements, McCain Says 'Never,' Obama and Clinton 'Sometimes'
By Michael Abramowitz
Monday, February 25, 2008; A13 [societal] [also govt] [bush administration’s use of signing statements] [unitary theory of executive power] [now candidates must answer whether they would] [similarly, whether veep will be of the power and influence of beep cheney] [use role] [*********]
Republican presidential candidate John McCain (R-Ariz.) made an arresting claim on the campaign trail last week: If elected president, he would issue no signing statements [********] reserving the right to disregard parts of laws passed by Congress.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/24/AR2008022401995.html
On Signing Statements, McCain Says 'Never,' Obama and Clinton 'Sometimes'
By Michael Abramowitz
Monday, February 25, 2008; A13 [societal] [also govt] [bush administration’s use of signing statements] [unitary theory of executive power] [now candidates must answer whether they would] [similarly, whether veep will be of the power and influence of beep cheney] [use role] [*********]
Republican presidential candidate John McCain (R-Ariz.) made an arresting claim on the campaign trail last week: If elected president, he would issue no signing statements [********] reserving the right to disregard parts of laws passed by Congress.
Asked by my colleague Glenn Kessler whether he would ever consider issuing a signing statement as president, Sen. McCain was emphatic: "Never, never, never, never. If I disagree with a law that passed, I'll veto it." [***********]
The comment brought to life the question of whether President Bush's aggressive defense of presidential prerogatives will outlast his administration. Bush has been heavily criticized by lawmakers and others over his extensive use of signing statements, in which, rather than veto a bill, he makes it clear he will not be bound by what he considers unconstitutional provisions included by Congress. [****] [unitary theory of executive . . . ] [************]
All three of the leading presidential contenders have suggested they would take a different approach than Bush: [*****]What's striking is that McCain appears perhaps even more radical than his Democratic rivals in adopting a seemingly ironclad refusal to issue signing statements. [****]If he truly were to follow that approach, it would represent a sharp break in presidential practice, according to lawyers on both sides of the ideological divide.
Responding to a questionnaire late last year by the Boston Globe, Sens. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) made clear their view that Bush has gone too far in issuing signing statements -- but that there are circumstances in which such statements are necessary. [equivocation] [ironic that McCain the most adamant about not using them] [********]
"The problem with this administration is that it has attached signing statements to legislation in an effort to change the meaning of the legislation, to avoid enforcing certain provisions of the legislation that the President does not like, and to raise implausible or dubious constitutional objections to the legislation," Obama answered. But, he added: "No one doubts that it is appropriate to use signing statements to protect a president's constitutional prerogatives."
In her own Globe questionnaire, Clinton made a similar point about legal issues. "I would only use signing statements in very rare instances to note and clarify confusing or contradictory provisions, including provisions that contradict the Constitution," she wrote. "My approach would be to work with Congress to eliminate or correct unconstitutional provisions before legislation is sent to my desk."
SMU to Vet Bush Institute Fellows
As plans for Bush's presidential library and museum take shape, also coming into view is the public policy institute that Bush wants to see as a companion on the Dallas campus of Southern Methodist University.
On Friday, officials with the university and Bush's presidential library foundation formally announced that the library complex will be housed at SMU, the alma mater of first lady Laura Bush. After they raise the hundreds of millions of dollars in private donations necessary to build the library, it will be turned over to the National Archives system.
The institute, by contrast, will be run by the foundation, an arrangement that has raised the hackles of some SMU faculty. University officials say there will be a strict separation of powers: Any fellow at the Bush institute, for instance, will have to go through the normal university hiring process for a joint appointment at SMU. [********]]
From the looks of it, the Bush institute could be something like the Hoover Institution, the conservative-leaning think tank housed at Stanford University. It will have its own scholars and seminars and have joint programs with the university,[****] according to library and university officials.
Donald L. Evans, Bush friend, former commerce secretary and chairman of the Bush foundation, said in an interview Friday that he expects global leaders to visit the institute to share their insights, while scholars focus on issues that dominated the Bush presidency, such as terrorism, education reform and -- in particular, he said -- democracy promotion around the world.
"It will be a place where scholars and fellows and researchers come to discuss a wide range of views," Evans said.
'Pell for Kids' Plan Gets Cautious Support
At least one Democrat appeared to be listening closely last month when Bush went through his final-year agenda, including a plan to provide $300 million in scholarships for poor children to attend private or parochial schools. During his State of the Union address, Bush called it "Pell Grants for Kids," adopting the name of the popular program for college aid rather than the more politically problematic term "vouchers."
Last week, Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) announced he would introduce a bill in the next several weeks that would give such grants to kids in failing schools -- but only to attend charter schools, independently operated schools that are part of the public school system.
Emanuel is known as a fierce partisan on Capitol Hill, having helped lead the way to the Democratic takeover in 2006, but he has also looked for ways to work with the White House. He has tried to bond with White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten, attending a Nationals baseball game with him last year, and spent the day with Bush recently when the president visited Emanuel's home town, Chicago. Given the antipathy many Democrats have to vouchers, Emanuel described his plan as a way of trying to split the difference with the administration.
"I didn't think much of his State of the Union, but that was one idea worth looking at," Emanuel said last week, describing himself as a big proponent of charter schools. "If they want to do it for private schools, they need to find someone else. But if the president wants it, he can have a success."
White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said Emanuel's idea shares characteristics with Bush's plan and said he deserves credit for trying to expand educational opportunity through charter schools. But, said Stanzel, "it's not fair to concede that a low-income child has a right to a better education and then severely limit the available options."
A Danish Double
The prime minister of tiny Denmark has received an honor reserved by Bush for only six other world leaders: an invitation to both Camp David and the presidential ranch in Crawford, Tex.
In 2006, Anders Fogh Rasmussen went biking with Bush at Camp David. This weekend, he will spend the night at the Bush ranch in Texas and almost certainly use the bike trails Bush and his staff have built over the past several years.
Britain's Tony Blair, Spain's Jose Maria Aznar and Japan's Junichiro Koizumi have long departed the world stage, leaving Rasmussen as one of the long-standing Bush favorites still in office. The brainy economist who leads a conservative government has backed Bush on Iraq and Afghanistan -- and seemingly paid no political price, winning reelection handily last November.
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

Russian Candidate Denounces Kosovo

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/world/europe/26serbia.html
February 26, 2008
Russian Candidate Denounces Kosovo
By C. J. CHIVERS [Russia] [former USSR] [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 string of provocative events including this one from last year] [Czar Putin’s hand-picked successor has now made noises similar to the Czar’s vis-à-vis Serbia and Kosovo] [use psci 350] [use ir text] [*********]
MOSCOW — Dmitri A. Medvedev, Russia’s first deputy prime minister and the presumptive successor to President Vladimir V. Putin, on Monday committed the Kremlin to long-term support for Serbia against an independent Kosovo.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/world/europe/26serbia.html
February 26, 2008
Russian Candidate Denounces Kosovo
By C. J. CHIVERS [Russia] [former USSR] [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 string of provocative events including this one from last year] [Czar Putin’s hand-picked successor has now made noises similar to the Czar’s vis-à-vis Serbia and Kosovo] [use psci 350] [use ir text] [*********]
MOSCOW — Dmitri A. Medvedev, Russia’s first deputy prime minister and the presumptive successor to President Vladimir V. Putin, on Monday committed the Kremlin to long-term support for Serbia against an independent Kosovo.
Mr. Medvedev appeared in Belgrade, the Serbian capital, with Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica. It was Mr. Medvedev’s first significant foreign-policy appearance since he became the front-runner for Russia’s highest office, and he restated Mr. Putin’s position and made clear that it would be his own.
“We proceed from the understanding that Serbia is a single state with its jurisdiction spanning its entire territory, and we will stick to this principled stance in the future,” he said in remarks reported widely on news broadcasts in Russia.
“Serbia,” he added, faces “conditions of illegitimate actions to unilaterally recognize Kosovo.” [*********]
The United States reacted quickly to Mr. Medvedev’s statements, restating its own support for Kosovo, and made clear that its break from Serbia was final, in Washington’s view.
“We are going to continue to try to work with both the Russians and the Serbs on this, but I think that it ought to be clear to everybody at this point that Kosovo is never going to be a part of Serbia again,” Tom Casey, a State Department spokesman, [****]told reporters, according to The Associated Press.
Mr. Kostunica said Monday that state-sponsored protests against Kosovo’s declaration would continue until foreign governments that had recognized Kosovo changed their position.
Kosovo, a province of Serbia that had been under United Nations administration since 1999, declared its independence on Feb. 17. Russia had long objected to Kosovo’s intention to seek independence and has called the declaration illegal and a threat to international stability. [***********]
The Kremlin has also complained bitterly about Western governments’ recognition of Kosovo, warning that it could increase its support for separatist regions in Georgia and Moldova. [********]
In his brief visit, Mr. Medvedev struck notes emphasizing the traditional and continuing ties between Serbia and Russia. [****]He visited the Cathedral of St. Sava in Belgrade with President Boris Tadic, and an oil refinery as well.
Mr. Medvedev, who is also chairman of Gazprom, Russia’s natural gas monopoly, signed an agreement to build a section of the South Stream gas pipeline through Serbia. The line will carry Russian gas through the Balkans to the Mediterranean Sea.
Mr. Medvedev has used his presidential campaign to cast himself as a progressive who wants to promote freedom in Russia. His speeches have raised questions about whether he might soften some of Russia’s image and ease some of the state’s grip on political life. His remarks on Monday, however, overlapped with those of his primary sponsor, Mr. Putin. [he knows well who pulls his strings] [*******]
At one point, for example, he blamed the West for the unrest that has followed Kosovo’s declaration, and any future repercussions. “It is absolutely obvious that the crisis that has happened and is the responsibility of those who have made the illegal decision will unfortunately have long-term consequences for peace on the European continent,” he said.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

North Korea Welcomes New York Philharmonic

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/arts/music/26symphony.html
February 26, 2008
North Korea Welcomes New York Philharmonic
By DANIEL J. WAKIN [DPRK] [wmd] [some evidence that despite Kim’s petulance, DPRK is still moving, however more slowly, toward dismantlement] [the culutural exchanges a la ping-pong diplomacy with Nixon and Mao] [******][gala]
PYONGYANG, North Korea — Projected on a scrim, the gently falling “snow” speckled the precisely twirling figures at the Mansudae Art Theater in a dance depiction of Korean Communists’ guerrilla action against the Japanese. At the climax, a nighttime scene of downtown Pyongyang materialized, with warm lights glowing in the high-rise buildings.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/arts/music/26symphony.html
February 26, 2008
North Korea Welcomes New York Philharmonic
By DANIEL J. WAKIN [DPRK] [wmd] [some evidence that despite Kim’s petulance, DPRK is still moving, however more slowly, toward dismantlement] [the culutural exchanges a la ping-pong diplomacy with Nixon and Mao] [******][gala]
PYONGYANG, North Korea — Projected on a scrim, the gently falling “snow” speckled the precisely twirling figures at the Mansudae Art Theater in a dance depiction of Korean Communists’ guerrilla action against the Japanese. At the climax, a nighttime scene of downtown Pyongyang materialized, with warm lights glowing in the high-rise buildings.
Outside, in real Pyongyang, where electricity is often scarce, most buildings were dark. Malnutrition persists in the countryside. Yet North Korea presented a lavish welcome on Monday to its latest visiting delegation, the New York Philharmonic: a gala performance of traditional music and dance, and an endless banquet with quail eggs, roast mutton and pheasant-ball soup.
American and North Korean diplomats are now haggling over Pyongyang’s promise to abandon its nuclear weapons program, and the United States has dangled the prospect of a formal peace treaty to end the Korean War if the country ultimately complies. But the orchestra’s heavily choreographed visit — to include master classes, tours of the town and a concert on Tuesday night — is the first hint of a broader thaw in a half-century-long cultural standoff.
The North Koreans opened the door to some 400 people, the largest contingent of Americans to visit this isolated, totalitarian state since the Korean War ended in 1953. The group includes musicians, orchestra staff, television production crews and 80 journalists, as well as patrons who paid $100,000 a couple.
They came bearing bows and basses rather than the arms and armor Americans carried the last time this large a contingent set foot in the North Korean capital. The brass will issue fanfares, not orders.
Critics hold out little hope that this updated version of ping-pong diplomacy, sports and cultural exchanges that helped warm relations with Maoist China in the 1970s, will do much to transform North Korea under Kim Jong-il. Mr. Kim has cracked open North Korea’s door to outside businessmen, sports teams and diplomats in the past without allowing significantly more pluralism in the country’s regimented economic and political life, and there are few signs that the arrival of the New York orchestra signals a major shift in direction. [*******]
The Bush administration has kept its distance from the event. Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state, visited Seoul on Monday for South Korea’s presidential inauguration, but said she had no plans to come to Pyongyang and sought to play down the performance as a diplomatic instrument. [********]
Even so, some proponents of engagement with North Korea say they hope that the visit will nudge North Korea to greater contact with the outside world as China, the United States, South Korea, Japan and Russia press Pyongyang to end its nuclear program. [*****] [when such tactic has worked it’s typically required many confidence-building measures] [the accretion then moves principals]
Whatever the political results, the visit will take its place with other orchestral diplomacy, including the Philadelphia Orchestra’s concert in China in 1973 and the Boston Symphony’s triumphant appearance in the Soviet Union in 1956. The New York Philharmonic also visited the Soviet Union in 1959.
“There’s no color here, everything is so gray,” said Stephen Freeman, the bass clarinetist. He pointed out the lack of traffic lights in the streets, or even traffic. “My initial reaction is it’s kind of depressing.”
Some of the musicians were troubled by the disparity between the country’s poverty and the luxury of the banquet.
“It’s painful,” said Katherine Greene, a violist. "It’s the duality of people who want to show you everything beautiful that represents their country. At the same time, it’s very sobering because I know what’s beyond the hotel and the banquet."
But Mr. Freeman gave a more upbeat review of the dance performance held after the orchestra’s arrival, which was presented especially for the Philharmonic and included numbers called “The Fan Dance,” “Winnowing” and “Water Jar Dance.” An amplified orchestra mixing Asian and Western instruments accompanied the pieces, which were models of precision.
“Beautiful costumes, excellent coordination and dancing,” he said. “I was captivated by it.”
The Philharmonic will play in the East Pyongyang Grand Theater, where music of Gershwin, Dvorak and Wagner, not to mention the American and North Korean national anthems, is to be broadcast live on state radio and television. That will be a novelty for a populace shut off from the world by government censorship.
In a special gesture, the orchestra planned to play a folk song deeply resonant to all Koreans, “Arirang,” as an encore. [********]
The trip has been stirring for the eight orchestra members of Korean origin.
Michelle Kim, who went to the United States from Seoul at 10 and whose parents had left the North during the Korean War, said the performance of music so familiar in a place so seemingly remote was moving.
“I didn’t think for a second they were North Koreans, or South Koreans,” she said. “The concert was mesmerizing.”
The works were introduced by a woman in the characteristic tones of official North Korean public speech, with translation. After the final number, Lorin Maazel, the Philharmonic’s music director, was invited to present a bouquet to the performers massed on the stage. He handed the flowers to a dancer who was wearing the red scarf of revolutionary struggle.
Buses then took the contingent for a banquet at the Palace of Culture, with its giant lobby painting of the late Kim Il-sung at the head of a crowd of people. The first half of the menu was Korean: dried fish strips, heart-shaped rice cakes and kimchi. The second was Western: roast salmon, mutton, crab au gratin and mushrooms. Bottles of beer and ginseng rice wine crowded the center of each table.
The vice minister of culture, Song Sok-hwan, gave a speech calling the visit a “big stride in cultural exchange.” Mr. Maazel expressed admiration for the performers seen earlier. “We feel quite close to them,” he said.
An elaborate welcome ceremony began earlier in the day, when Asiana Flight OZ 1004 from Beijing, the previous stop on a three-week tour of Asia, arrived with the orchestra and followers. A light snow was falling. After journalists poured down the plane staircase and took up positions, Mr. Maazel walked down the steps followed by top orchestra officials. He was greeted by Mr. Song of the Culture Ministry. [*********]
The orchestra posed as a group for a “class picture” on the tarmac, a sign of the historic nature of the trip. Meanwhile, interpreters and guides identified the journalists they had been assigned to serve and mind.
Because North Korea does not allow mobile phones from outside the country, passengers had to drop theirs in individual plastic bags and hand them over in Beijing to Philharmonic officials.
North Korea, with its tight controls on the daily lives of its people, remains firmly in the grip of its leader, Kim Jong-il. But it also has begun to encourage expanded trade with China, Japan and South Korea, and has made concessions regarding its nuclear program. It has begun dismantling its Yongbyon reactor but missed a deadline to reveal the details of its program and denuclearization efforts have stalled. [Amanpour of CNN reported yesterday that they have slowed the pace to about half or one-third previous rate of dismantlement] [************]
Only a trickle of foreigners come regularly to North Korea. A resident Western diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the delicate position of envoys here, reported the words of one foreign ministry official: “Yes, this is something big.”
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Gazans Demonstrate at Border Against Israeli Blockade

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/world/middleeast/26mideast.html
February 26, 2008
Gazans Demonstrate at Border Against Israeli Blockade
By ISABEL KERSHNER and TAGHREED EL-KHODARY [Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [following the Annapolis conference and the agreement to seek agreement by end of 2008] [more tit-for-tat violence] [just days after first suicide attack inside Israel for some time, rockets pouring down in Israel again] [now disposed and angry Gazans, not Hamas per se, exercised over Israel again instead of Hamas] [followup] [both sides appear poised for war again!] [*****]
EREZ CROSSING, Israel — Several thousand Palestinians, many of them schoolchildren bused in from their classes, joined peaceful protests in the Gaza Strip along sections of the border with Israel for several hours on Monday, forming human chains in some locations as part of a public campaign against the Israeli blockade.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/world/middleeast/26mideast.html
February 26, 2008
Gazans Demonstrate at Border Against Israeli Blockade
By ISABEL KERSHNER and TAGHREED EL-KHODARY [Israeli-Palestinian conflict] [following the Annapolis conference and the agreement to seek agreement by end of 2008] [more tit-for-tat violence] [just days after first suicide attack inside Israel for some time, rockets pouring down in Israel again] [now disposed and angry Gazans, not Hamas per se, exercised over Israel again instead of Hamas] [followup] [both sides appear poised for war again!] [*****]
EREZ CROSSING, Israel — Several thousand Palestinians, many of them schoolchildren bused in from their classes, joined peaceful protests in the Gaza Strip along sections of the border with Israel for several hours on Monday, forming human chains in some locations as part of a public campaign against the Israeli blockade.
But the turnout, estimated at about 5,000, was far smaller than had been expected, and fears in Israel that masses of Gaza residents might try to break through the Israeli-built barrier along the border, [*****]as they breached the border with Egypt last month, proved unfounded. Most protesters kept a safe distance from the barrier.
The demonstrators dispersed around noon, and shortly after militants in Gaza fired a number of rockets at Israel. [****]One landed outside an apartment block in the Israeli border town of Sderot. A boy, Yossi Yadlin Haimov, 10, was badly wounded in the shoulder by shrapnel and underwent surgery at a hospital in Ashkelon.
In northern Gaza, some of the protesters started marching toward the Erez crossing, but they were stopped by a line of armed Hamas policemen. The police officers blocked the road about half a mile south of the crossing, seeking to prevent a confrontation with Israel.
After the main protest ended, a group of Palestinian youths rioted at the crossing, throwing stones. When they tried to cross, Israeli troops fired shots into the air, an army spokeswoman said, speaking on condition of anonymity under army rules. She said an Israeli officer was slightly wounded in the clash. At least two Palestinians were wounded, according to Palestinian reports. The spokeswoman said 49 Palestinians had been arrested.
Palestinian advocates had called for Gaza residents to form a human chain along the roughly 30-mile border with Israel from Rafah in the south to Beit Hanoun in the north to protest Israel’s closure of the main passages into Gaza since the Islamic militant group Hamas took control there last June. [******]Israel recently tightened the blockade in response to intensified rocket fire from the strip.
Despite the low numbers, the main organizer of the protest, Jamal el-Khoudary, declared the event a success. “It was peaceful, and that was what we were aiming for,” said Mr. Khoudary, an independent lawmaker in Gaza with ties to Hamas.
Hamas leaders have been encouraged by recent calls by European officials for Israel to reopen the passages to Gaza and ease the conditions of the 1.5 million residents of the strip.
On Monday, though, fear kept many Gazans at home: the Israeli Army made it clear that it was taking the threat of a border breach very seriously, and thousands of extra troops and police officers were deployed along the Israeli side of the barrier.
A joint statement released by the offices of the Israeli foreign minister and defense minister on Sunday night said, “Israel does not interfere in demonstrations taking place inside the Gaza Strip, but Israel will protect its borders and will prevent any violations of its sovereign territory.” If the situation did deteriorate into violence, the statement warned, Israel would lay sole responsibility for the consequences on the shoulders of Hamas, which had placed Palestinian civilians “on the front lines.”
Israel bolstered its artillery units along the border and occasionally fired smoke bombs, either to conceal troop movements or deter the protesters. Soldiers in full camouflage hid in the lush green wheat fields of Israeli farming communities near the border line. [*****]As the tension dissipated, the soldiers picnicked on army rations to the sound of a loud chorus of muezzins calling the faithful to midday prayers in mosques on the other side of the barrier.
The deputy defense minister of Israel, Matan Vilnai, told Army Radio on Monday evening that the deployment of the security forces, led by the army, was the main factor that led the Palestinians “to rethink whatever they were doing.”
But there was also a feeling on both sides that the event on Monday was an exercise or rehearsal for another time. [*****]
A Hamas lawmaker, Ismail al-Ashqar, said at the protest in northern Gaza on Monday, “If the world does not respond and end the siege, then what is coming will be worse.” [************] [Hamas could end the siege but won’t] [ergo such threats are the worst kind of cynicism] [************]
Another Hamas lawmaker, Yihya Musa, threatened that the human chain formed Monday could in the future turn into a series of “bombs ready to explode.”
Separately, an American tourist drowned Monday in a flash flood while hiking in a riverbed near the Dead Sea, an Israeli police spokesman said. The spokesman, Micky Rosenfeld, identified the tourist as David Tauber, in his mid-30s, from New York. Rescue units searched for a woman who had been hiking with Mr. Tauber and found her alive, Mr. Rosenfeld said.
Isabel Kershner reported from the Israeli side of the Erez crossing, and Taghreed El-Khodary from the Gaza side.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Taliban Threatens Afghan Cellphone Companies

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/world/asia/26afghan.html
February 26, 2008
Taliban Threatens Afghan Cellphone Companies
By TAIMOOR SHAH [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] [after far too many accidential noncombatants hit in early 2007, year ended with far fewer] [the winter lull is upon the region?] [indicator of how badly 2007 was on balance: neither Afghanis nor Westerners feel safe] [NATO’s de Hoop Scheffer making ominous warning!] [******]
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan — The Taliban have demanded that all four cellphone companies in Afghanistan cease operating at night or face attacks on their offices and communication towers, according to a statement released to journalists on Monday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/world/asia/26afghan.html
February 26, 2008
Taliban Threatens Afghan Cellphone Companies
By TAIMOOR SHAH [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] [after far too many accidential noncombatants hit in early 2007, year ended with far fewer] [the winter lull is upon the region?] [indicator of how badly 2007 was on balance: neither Afghanis nor Westerners feel safe] [NATO’s de Hoop Scheffer making ominous warning!] [******]
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan — The Taliban have demanded that all four cellphone companies in Afghanistan cease operating at night or face attacks on their offices and communication towers, according to a statement released to journalists on Monday.
The statement, issued by a Taliban spokesman, Zabihullah Mujahid, complained that NATO and American forces in Afghanistan, which it called “occupying forces,” were tracking the whereabouts of militants through their mobile phones and conducting espionage through cellphones. [***********]
“It has caused heavy casualties to Taliban and sometimes to civilians,” the statement said.
United States counterterrorism forces have tracked insurgents and Taliban commanders in Afghanistan using satellite and cellphone signals, and have conducted airstrikes and raids based on such information. The Taliban have also often accused villagers of alerting counterterrorism forces of their movements.
The Taliban said they had already contacted the companies, but without result. Some companies said they were not able to stop foreign forces from tracing their signals, [****]the statement said.
So the Taliban council decided to demand that all companies shut off their signals across Afghanistan from 5 p.m. to 7 a.m., [*****]the statement said.
“If they do not heed it, the Taliban will target their offices, suboffices and tower stations,” it said. “The council has decided to give a three-day deadline to all mobile telephone companies to stop their signals in order to prevent the enemy obtaining intelligence though cellphones and to prevent Taliban and civilian casualties.” [********]
The cellphone companies represent one of the most successful new industries in Afghanistan, where telephone communications were virtually nonexistent under the Taliban.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

NATO Confronts Surprisingly Fierce Taliban

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/25/AR2008022503089.html
NATO Confronts Surprisingly Fierce Taliban
Militia Undermines Rebuilding Efforts in Southern Province of Uruzgan
By Molly Moore
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, February 26, 2008; A01 [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] [after far too many accidential noncombatants hit in early 2007, year ended with far fewer] [the winter lull is upon the region?] [indicator of how badly 2007 was on balance: neither Afghanis nor Westerners feel safe] [more evidence of just how badly 2007 was for US-NATO and west] [while the Bush administration obsesses over the “surge” in –ir, Afghanistan is heading south fast!] [******]
TARIN KOT, Afghanistan -- Lt. Col. Wilfred Rietdijk, a 6-foot-7 blond Dutchman, took command of his military's reconstruction team in the southern Afghan district of Deh Rawood in September. Tranquil and welcoming, it seemed like the perfect place for the Netherlands' mission to help rebuild this country.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/25/AR2008022503089.html
NATO Confronts Surprisingly Fierce Taliban
Militia Undermines Rebuilding Efforts in Southern Province of Uruzgan
By Molly Moore
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, February 26, 2008; A01 [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] [after far too many accidential noncombatants hit in early 2007, year ended with far fewer] [the winter lull is upon the region?] [indicator of how badly 2007 was on balance: neither Afghanis nor Westerners feel safe] [more evidence of just how badly 2007 was for US-NATO and west] [while the Bush administration obsesses over the “surge” in –ir, Afghanistan is heading south fast!] [******]
TARIN KOT, Afghanistan -- Lt. Col. Wilfred Rietdijk, a 6-foot-7 blond Dutchman, took command of his military's reconstruction team in the southern Afghan district of Deh Rawood in September. Tranquil and welcoming, it seemed like the perfect place for the Netherlands' mission to help rebuild this country.
Intelligence reports indicated that the district was free of the Taliban, allowing the soldiers greater freedom of movement than elsewhere in Uruzgan province.
"We could go out on foot," Rietdijk said.
Reconstruction teams, escorted by a platoon of soldiers, fanned across the fertile countryside, building bridges over streams and canals, repairing irrigation systems, and distributing books and pens to local schools. [*******]
But the day after Rietdijk arrived in Afghanistan, his field officers reported hundreds of villagers suddenly fleeing parts of Deh Rawood. "Within a few weeks, everybody was gone," Rietdijk said. "We didn't understand why."
Now the Dutch say they realize what happened. Even as the soldiers believed they had won the support of the local population, the Taliban had secretly returned to reclaim Deh Rawood, home district of the group's revered leader, Mohammad Omar. It took only a few months for the Taliban to undermine nearly six years of intelligence work by U.S. forces and almost two years of goodwill efforts by Dutch soldiers. [*********]
In the year and a half since NATO took over southern Afghanistan from U.S. forces, its mission has changed dramatically. Dispatched to the region to maintain newly restored order and help local Afghans reconstruct their shattered communities, Dutch and other troops from the alliance now find themselves on the front lines of a renewed fight with a more cunning and aggressive Taliban. [***********]
More foreign soldiers and Afghan civilians died in Taliban-related fighting last year than in any year since U.S. and coalition forces ousted the extremist Islamic militia, which ruled most of the country, in 2001. [***********]Military officials here expect the coming year to be just as deadly, if not more so, as the Taliban becomes more adept militarily and more formidable in its deployment of suicide bombers and roadside explosives.
The Taliban's growing strength, which surprised Dutch forces here, helps explain why NATO members are reluctant to send more troops to an increasingly dangerous battlefield and have instead adopted a strategy based less on military force. [****] [can win the hearts and minds unless they have security!!!!!] [old Viet Nam truism]
In his recent criticism of NATO's refusal to deploy more forces, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates accused the alliance of being ill-prepared for counterinsurgency operations. NATO countries, however, while not opposed to the war effort in Afghanistan, have always viewed the key to success as one that relied on giving Afghans new schools, health clinics and other elements of a sturdy civil society.
Taliban fighters began arriving in the heart of Deh Rawood -- a triangle-shaped district about seven miles long and seven miles wide -- late last summer. They came one by one, or in groups of twos and threes. They rented mud houses, befriended neighbors with gifts of cellphones and motorcycles and appealed to villagers on the grounds that the Taliban was fighting for the cause of Islam.
By autumn, for reasons even some villagers didn't understand, the Taliban turned on them, driving them out of their houses and ripping up the new NATO-built bridges. The Dutch have since pushed Taliban fighters out of the district, but have decided not to push them beyond the surrounding territory. [*****]
They have learned difficult lessons already.
"Nobody saw it coming," Rietdijk said, referring to the Taliban offensive. "They were there before anybody knew it. I keep asking myself: 'Did we miss something? Was there someone to blame it on?' "
'Intelligence Was Wrong'
In late November, a new commander arrived in Uruzgan to take charge of Dutch combat forces in the region. Lt. Col. Tjerk Hogeveen had a grip of steel and a passion for paragliding off mountaintops.
Just as his reconstruction counterpart, Rietdijk, had been briefed on his arrival, Hogeveen had been told to expect little or no trouble from the Taliban in his sector of Deh Rawood.
Although Taliban fighters had routed villagers from their homes, they had made no major effort to attack coalition forces. [*****]Rietdijk's troops halted most of their reconstruction work and concentrated on providing food, blankets and other humanitarian aid to the hundreds of refugees who had descended on impoverished friends and relatives south of the Tarin River.
"The Americans told us there were no Taliban on the east bank," Hogeveen said. "Everyone told us it was safe -- no Taliban."
But the Taliban had good reason to want to reclaim Deh Rawood. As the district surrounding Omar's home town of the same name, it held symbolic importance to the Islamic militia. It held strategic importance, too: [*****]The district sits at the confluence of the Helmand and Tarin rivers on the most important drug- and arms-trafficking route in rugged Uruzgan province, connecting it to Iran to the west and Pakistan to the south.
As Hogeveen was settling into his armor-plated metal bunker at the main Dutch base, Camp Holland, near the provincial capital of Tarin Kot, Taliban fighters were evicting local police from three of Deh Rawood's most strategic checkpoints. They bribed officers to abandon one post, kidnapped the son of a policeman at a second checkpoint and attacked the third, sending officers fleeing. They turned a local school into their headquarters and stocked it with weapons and ammunition, Hogeveen said he learned later.
Then they lay in wait and ambushed the first unsuspecting Dutch convoy they spotted.
"They were better prepared than anyone led us to believe," Hogeveen said.
Hogeveen's troops and the Taliban skirmished almost daily.
In mid-December, fighters yanked a 60-year-old woman and her 7-year-old grandson off a bus in Deh Rawood. They interrogated the pair and, after finding a U.S. dollar bill in the boy's pocket, accused the two of spying and executed them in front of the other passengers and bystanders, [******]according to accounts by Afghan human rights groups, news services and Dutch officers.
Meanwhile, on the advice of U.S. and Dutch intelligence officers, Hogeveen prepared a battle plan for routing the Taliban: "The intelligence guys said, 'If you go in with large forces, they will leave,' " Hogeveen recalled in an interview.
He sent larger contingents of heavily armored troops into the heart of the Taliban stronghold in northern Deh Rawood, a jumble of mud houses connected by mazes of narrow lanes.
"Everyone thought the Taliban would not fight," Hogeveen said. "The intelligence was wrong."
Taking up defensive positions in the warrens of mud compounds, the Taliban fighters didn't need large numbers to put up a strong fight against Hogeveen's men. In the darkness and chaos of the unexpectedly strong Taliban defenses, Hogeveen lost two soldiers. Two Afghan army troops also died in the fighting. The Dutch military is now investigating whether all four may have been killed by "friendly fire."
Today, after 2 1/2 months of often intense combat, Dutch troops have reclaimed some of the villages of Deh Rawood and are helping villagers repair the damage caused by weeks of fighting between NATO forces and the Taliban. They have also started many new projects and are working more closely with tribal leaders, the Afghan army and local police to provide better security for the residents. [but all that time and effort and resources wasted] [********]
Even so, the Dutch say, the Taliban forces have merely relocated to the fringes of the district, and thousands of villagers remain too frightened to return to their homes.
The resilience of the Taliban, a shortage of NATO forces and the Dutch philosophy that the Afghan people need to take charge of their own lives have prompted the Dutch to adopt a precarious strategy for Uruzgan: evict the Taliban from small enclaves while ceding the surrounding territory to them in hopes that neighboring communities will oust them on their own. [*********]
"We still don't have the full view of what happened below the radar in Deh Rawood," said Col. Richard van Harskamp, commander of all Dutch forces in Uruzgan.
"There are no quick wins in Afghanistan," he added. "People who want to have quick wins better know how to deal with disappointments."
'He Is Afraid'
The Dutch have confronted obstacles off the battlefield as well.
On one of the coldest days yet in an usually brutal winter, Rietdijk, the Dutch reconstruction chief, met with Uruzgan Gov. Assadullah Hamdam in his ramshackle compound in Tarin Kot. The men responsible for the security of Uruzgan sat around a wood stove: the police chief, the general of the local contingent of the Afghan army, the chief of the highway patrol.
Rietdijk asked the governor to help him find an influential tribal leader to help coordinate new construction projects in his district.
"I have met with him twice," Hamdam said quietly. "He will not help you. He is afraid."
Rietdijk persisted, taking a sip of steaming green tea the governor had poured into a glass mug.
"He is not the man," Hamdam said more firmly. "He is afraid."
The subject turned to the three new police substations and four new police checkpoints planned for Deh Rawood. The police chief urged the Dutch to provide supplies and better accommodations while the new facilities are being built.
"We don't have tents, we don't have food, we don't have transportation," complained the chief, Juma Gul, a hefty man with the jowls of a bulldog.
"We need to get out there with police and make sure the region is safe," Rietdijk said. "We can't wait for a checkpoint. We have to go out. I don't think we can wait."
"A checkpoint is important," pressed the police chief.
"I can't give birth to a checkpoint tomorrow," Rietdijk said, a bit testily.
Gul later turned to another problem with his officers. "Some of my men don't want to go back to Deh Rawood," the chief warned. "They're possibly going to leave without permission."
Half a dozen times during the meeting, Gul pleaded with Dutch representatives for more money to run his department.
"I need money for food for my men, this is not for my own pocket," the police chief said. "Do you know the price of bread in Tarin Kot these days?"
"I know all the problems," an exasperated Rietdijk said. "I've heard them 30 times."
Rietdijk said that despite the constant nagging, he respects Gul.
But after about five months on the job, Gul is ready to quit, according to Uruzgan's governor.
"He wanted to quit. The job is too much," said Hamdam, whose wife and children live in London. "I told him, 'It's going to take patience.' "
Gul complained that he was sending recruits with only two weeks' training to the front lines to fight the Taliban. Their salaries were weeks late because the money had to be hand-carried from Kabul to Tarin Kot and winter snows had canceled many flights. There is no functioning bank in all of Uruzgan. The Interior Ministry in Kabul will not even tell the governor or the police chief how much money they have to run their department, Hamdam said. [********]
Hamdam paused, then sighed. On this day, the heater was not working in his ice-cold office. He has heard the Dutch say dozens of times that it is up to him and his security team to provide security for his people.
He shook his head. He knows the Dutch are committed to remain in Afghanistan only another 2 1/2 years. He now has just over 1,300 police officers; his police chief says they need 3,000. [*************]
"There's not enough force," Hamdam said. "The police are not strong enough, and we can't depend on the Afghan army. The police can't go alone without the coalition forces.
"If they were not here," he said, "who knows what would happen." [*****] [*****]
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

Iraqi Pilgrims Endure Another Attack

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/world/middleeast/26iraq.html
February 26, 2008
Iraqi Pilgrims Endure Another Attack
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] [seems obvious that despite the Awakening Councils or, perhaps because of them, some of the usual suspects are attempting to re-initiate sectarian bloodletting] [***]
BAGHDAD — Another attack on Shiite pilgrims marching to the holy city of Karbala killed at least four people on Monday, just a day after a suicide bombing left 52 dead. [*****]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/world/middleeast/26iraq.html
February 26, 2008
Iraqi Pilgrims Endure Another Attack
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] [seems obvious that despite the Awakening Councils or, perhaps because of them, some of the usual suspects are attempting to re-initiate sectarian bloodletting] [***]
BAGHDAD — Another attack on Shiite pilgrims marching to the holy city of Karbala killed at least four people on Monday, just a day after a suicide bombing left 52 dead. [*****]
In the latest attack, two car bombs exploded in the Karada district of southeast Baghdad, killing four people and wounding at least nine, [*****] [one would think the Shiia have a better handle on what happens in Karbala and other Shiia cities] [****] according to Iraqi and American officials.
The blasts were the third attack on Shiite pilgrims observing Arbaeen, which commemorates the end of the 40-day mourning period for the death of Imam Hussein, the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad and one of Shiite Islam’s most revered holy men.
At least 57 pilgrims have been killed during two days of attacks and more than 100 have been wounded.
“We condemn this atrocity against innocent Iraqi citizens who were exercising their right to participate in a religious commemoration,” said Col. Allen Batschelet, the chief of staff at Multinational Division Baghdad.
In the remote mountains of northern Iraq on Monday, Turkey’s military battled fighters from the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, known as the P.K.K., for a fourth day, attacking Kurdish hide-outs with fighter jets and ground artillery. [**********]
The fighting brought the death toll to 17 Turkish soldiers and as many as 153 Kurdish fighters, [*******]the Turkish military said, though the P.K.K. has reported far lower numbers of its own deaths.
Farther south, neither the continuing violence nor the rainstorms that swept over central Iraq on Monday stopped the thousands of Shiite pilgrims walking along highways, bearing red, green and black banners to the Shrine of Imam Hussein in Karbala for the Arbaeen observance.
Iraqi security officials announced new measures to safeguard the pilgrims, and the minister of state for national security, Shirwan al-Waeli, was investigating the circumstances of Sunday’s bombing in Iskandariya, 25 miles south of Baghdad.
Aqeel al-Khazaaly, the governor of Karbala, estimated that five million pilgrims had traveled to the city by Monday and said he expected more than nine million by the time the commemoration ends [some perspective] [compared ot total, miniscule numbers of attacked Shiia] [****] Thursday. Maj. Gen. Ali Ghedan of the Iraqi Army said he had deployed additional soldiers to reinforce security along roads leading to Karbala.
Meanwhile, the Babel provincial police chief reassigned the Iskandariya police chief and staged joint raids with American officials in neighborhoods near the attack.
In a police station in Samarra, 60 miles north of Baghdad, a suicide bomber in a wheelchair killed a police general and wounded two other people, according to Iraqi police officials.
Violence also swept through Diyala Province, just north of Baghdad. Gunmen killed an Iraqi man in a garage in Baquba [Sunni area] [****] and a woman in a residential area on the city’s southern outskirts. In Balad Ruz, about 15 miles west of Baquba, an improvised bomb detonated near an Iraqi security official’s house, wounding two people.
Elsewhere in Diyala Province, American forces in Khan Bani Sad killed a suspected insurgent during a raid.
In the northern city of Mosul, American military officials announced Monday that insurgents had fired on a military convoy on Sunday, killing an Iraqi boy who was playing in the street nearby.
In Baghdad, American troops detained Hafidh al-Beshara, the news editor of a prominent Shiite-run television station, and his son in a Friday night raid aimed at disrupting Iranian-backed militia groups, The Associated Press reported Monday. Troops had sought the son in the raid, but Mr. Beshara was detained as well after an unauthorized machine gun was found on the premises, the report said.
Turkish officials have withheld precise figures for the number of soldiers involved in the Turkish military’s ground operation against Kurdish rebels in northern Iraq. But Turkey’s ambassador to the United States, Nabi Sensoy, said the figure initially cited by the Turkish news media — 10,000 troops — had been “very exaggerated.”
The ambassador said in a telephone interview: “This operation will be limited in size, scope and duration. It has one target and one target alone and that is P.K.K. terrorist organization.”
Beyond that, a ghoulish video showing the executions of 12 Nepalese contract workers surfaced on jihadist Web sites on Monday. The men had been kidnapped in 2004, and their abduction highlighted the peril faced by tens of thousands of so-called “third-country nationals” [*********]working in Iraq, many of them from impoverished nations, working for little pay and few benefits. [a return to the Zarqawi tactics that estranged him from al Qaeda or seemed to] [but he’s dead and was replaced by al Masri?] [*******]
The video shows insurgents decapitating a man and shooting others.
Sabrina Tavernise contributed reporting from Istanbul, and Iraqi employees of The New York Times from Baghdad, Hilla, Karbala, Samarra and Diyala.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Iraq Demands That Turkey Withdraw

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/world/middleeast/27iraq.html
February 27, 2008
Iraq Demands That Turkey Withdraw
By MICHAEL KAMBER [-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] [more attacks of PKK in northern and north-western –ir] [-ir] [hydra] [insurgency] [bush administration’s “surge option” or “new way forward” underway] [followup] [Turkey’s “incursion” looks bigger than first reported] [dilemmas presented to –iraqi Kurds] [-iraqis demanding Turkey cease and desist!] [****]
BAGHDAD — An explosion aboard a crowded bus traveling to the Syrian border from Mosul killed at least nine passengers on Tuesday morning, according to Iraqi officials.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/world/middleeast/27iraq.html
February 27, 2008
Iraq Demands That Turkey Withdraw
By MICHAEL KAMBER [-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] [more attacks of PKK in northern and north-western –ir] [-ir] [hydra] [insurgency] [bush administration’s “surge option” or “new way forward” underway] [followup] [Turkey’s “incursion” looks bigger than first reported] [dilemmas presented to –iraqi Kurds] [-iraqis demanding Turkey cease and desist!] [****]
BAGHDAD — An explosion aboard a crowded bus traveling to the Syrian border from Mosul killed at least nine passengers on Tuesday morning, according to Iraqi officials.
There was confusion about the source of the attack. Military officials said a passenger detonated a suicide vest aboard the bus. Employees at the bus company where the driver worked attributed the explosion to a roadside bomb.
The attack took place about 500 yards from an Iraqi Army checkpoint in the town of Tmerat, 50 miles west of Mosul, [***]where scores of recruits routinely gather at an Iraqi Army base, according to a military official who spoke on condition of anonymity. The recruits were probably the target and the bomb may have exploded prematurely, he said. Brig. Khalid Abdulsatar confirmed that nine had been killed and eight injured.
United States military pressure coupled with a change of allegiances by Sunni insurgents and a cease-fire by Shiite militias in southern and central Iraq has pushed remaining insurgents north to Mosul, US and Iraqi officials say. The city of two million has been the scene of fierce fighting in recent months and Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki recently promised a “decisive battle” with insurgents there after 45 civilians were killed a month ago when a building was blown up in a Mosul neighborhood.
In northern Iraq, fighting continued for a fifth day as Turkish forces attacked P.K.K. rebel bases, while the Iraqi cabinet in Baghdad condemned the incursion and, in a statement, demanded its immediate halt.
"The cabinet expressed its rejection and condemnation for the Turkish military interference, which is considered a violation of Iraq’s sovereignty," the cabinet said in a statement , according to Reuters. "The cabinet stresses that unilateral military action is not acceptable and threatens good relations between the two neighbors."
[sic] . That was echoed by Falah Mustafa, head of the Kurdistan Regional Government’s Department of Foreign Relations in an interview on Tuesday. “The Turkish incursion into Iraqi Kurdistan is a violation of Iraqi sovereignty,” he said.
Balen Y. Younis contributed reporting from Baghdad and Iraqi employees of The New York Times from Mosul.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

In Turkey, Students Test a New Policy on Head Scarves

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/25/AR2008022502620.html
In Turkey, Students Test a New Policy on Head Scarves
By Ellen Knickmeyer
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, February 26, 2008; A10 [Turkey] [democracy in the Muslim world] [bush administration’s “freedom agenda”] [Turkey is a NATO ally and one of the West’s best allies in the Muslim world and broader middle east] [for past few years, at least since Erdogan and his Islamist party have gained popularity, recurring issue of religious symbols, class identity, and their respective place in modern Turkey] [followup] [****]
ISTANBUL, Feb. 25 -- One of the agents of Turkey's cultural transformation stood, 5 feet tall and less than 100 pounds, at the gate of Istanbul Bilgi University on Monday, a flying wedge of social change in a fuzzy purple winter coat, brown hiking boots and a black wool scarf wrapped around her head.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/25/AR2008022502620.html
In Turkey, Students Test a New Policy on Head Scarves
By Ellen Knickmeyer
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, February 26, 2008; A10 [Turkey] [democracy in the Muslim world] [bush administration’s “freedom agenda”] [Turkey is a NATO ally and one of the West’s best allies in the Muslim world and broader middle east] [for past few years, at least since Erdogan and his Islamist party have gained popularity, recurring issue of religious symbols, class identity, and their respective place in modern Turkey] [followup] [****]
ISTANBUL, Feb. 25 -- One of the agents of Turkey's cultural transformation stood, 5 feet tall and less than 100 pounds, at the gate of Istanbul Bilgi University on Monday, a flying wedge of social change in a fuzzy purple winter coat, brown hiking boots and a black wool scarf wrapped around her head.
Sabiha Gimen, a 21-year-old student of international trade, had risen at 5 a.m. A woman with an angular face and eyebrows quick to shoot upward in exclamation, Gimen had been determined to wear a head scarf to campus Monday but uncertain just how she should tie it. She searched for a way to accommodate both Turkey's newly eased restrictions on women's head coverings and her own lasting outrage at the government telling her what she could wear on her head. [********]
"We've been fighting this issue for years," said Gimen, who defines herself as a strongly religious Muslim and a feminist. [******]
Monday was the first day of classes since Turkey's president, Abdullah Gul, a member of the Islamic-oriented Justice and Development Party, [*****]signed into law Friday a constitutional amendment lifting a ban on wearing head scarves at public universities. In a bow to the secular principles of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkey, Gul's administration stipulated that women could wear onto campus only scarves that were tied in a bow under the chin.
Turks regard that style as traditional, in contrast to Islamic styles that cover a woman's hair and neck completely, as some Muslims believe their religion prescribes.
Neither Gimen nor anyone else was sure whether universities would yet allow any head scarves. Ataturk's political party, the strongly secular Republican People's Party, had pledged court challenges to keep women who cover their heads out of public buildings. Politicians and higher education officials had debated over the weekend whether the amendment should be honored. [**********]
"These women are being used by the fundamentalist movement," [****] [that boundf to go over poorly with women who have chosen the veil for their own reasons] Nur Serter, a Republican People's Party member of parliament and a professor at Istanbul University, said in an interview. "I believe the majority of Turkey is still secular, and determined not to yield any ground."
Standing in her home, Gimen had considered tying the scarf "granny style," she said later Monday -- knotting the ends under her chin in a bow. That way was most likely to get her past guards at her university. But it also smacked of what she saw as decades of compromise by Muslims in Turkey.
Gimen, who considers the current government too weak on Islam, settled for letting the ends trail around her neck. She spent the last minutes before class calling friends who would join her on the front line of Turkey's head scarf battles.
"Hat or head scarf?" the young women asked each other. They made guesses about which universities would allow scarves.
Standing across from her university Monday, preparing to test the question, Gimen shook off a question about what Ataturk -- still deeply revered by most Turks -- would say if he were standing at the gate.
"He wouldn't say anything," Gimen blurted, then entreated, "Please don't ask me that question."
Ataturk, a Turkish military officer, came to power at a time when the failure of the old ways of the Ottoman Empire left him looking to the West for examples of modernity and efficiency. He made secularism a bedrock principle of the new Turkey. [******]
His government mandated that Turkish men give up their Ottoman fezzes and Muslim turbans for Western hats, hanging some opponents of the requirement to make the point. [******]Ataturk urged Turkish women not to cover their hair and Turks in general to look to others besides Islamic "sheiks, dervishes [and] disciples" for leadership.
Eight decades later, Turkey is in the sixth year of government by Gul's Justice and Development Party. Many economists say the party has brought unprecedented economic prosperity to the country.
The party affirms its commitment to Ataturk's secular tenets. But opponents who fear Turkey is on the way to becoming rigidly religious point to what they say are worrying signs.
The government has appointed strongly religious Muslims to some high positions. It has announced plans to begin censoring scenes from TV shows in which characters drink alcohol. But above all was the partial rollback by Gul's party of the ban on women wearing head scarves in public buildings.
Turkey's military, the top guardian of Ataturk's secular principles, sought last year to prevent Gul from becoming president, in part because his wife wears a head scarf. But voters endorsed Gul's party in the early election that followed, dealing a setback to the military.
"The day 30 or 40 students come into class in head scarves is the day I go out," Hasan Koni, a professor of international law at Bahcesehir University in Istanbul, declared Sunday over coffee at a sunny sidewalk cafe. Koni cited the example of Iran: "I cannot accept this."
On the steps of Istanbul University, Huseyin Hatemi, a retired professor of civil law, stood among a gaggle of news cameras and microphones Monday and argued for tolerance.
"These things should be left to the woman to choose," Hatemi said. "Iran is wrong in forcing them to wear the head scarf, and Turkey is wrong in forcing them not to."
Some analysts argue that the conflict here is demographic rather than religious. Millions of Turks have moved from the traditionally more religious countryside to the more liberal cities in recent decades, as Gimen's mother did at age 14. [******]
As the newcomers swell the ranks of Turkey's middle class, they are challenging the urban secular elite. [*********]
In an apartment overlooking the shipping channels of the Bosporus, Ilter Turan, a political science professor at Istanbul Bilgi University, contemplated the question of what Ataturk would have thought about the head scarves, and sighed. "That's an area where I'm confident to say he would not be delighted," Turan said.
But Ataturk "was quite a pragmatic and flexible man," Turan added. Turks today have some good reasons not to follow Western ways as fully as Ataturk did, but "I think the basic principles will endure," Turan said.
Ataturk's early companions gave one example of his pragmatism and flexibility. As a young officer of the Ottoman Empire, Ataturk would wear the rimless cap of the Ottoman military but travel with a Western-style fedora in his bag, ready at any opportunity.
At Istanbul Bilgi University on Monday, Gimen stood at the gate. She wore the scarf around her head but stuffed a floppy knit purple cap in her book bag. She squared her shoulders and plowed toward the university gate.
"We have no orders to allow the head scarf," one guard told her.
"Other universities are allowing it," she told them.
"Go to the other universities then!" another guard yelled, driving her off.
Gimen pulled on the purple cap to hide the scarf and thus satisfy the secular rules.
"Here I am, cleansed of my identity," Gimen joked, wincing.
Eventually, "we will win," she said, before disappearing through the university gates. "My friends and I joke, we say the day that happens we will pull off our scarves and dance, hand in hand."
Throughout the morning, other women with covered heads tested the gates of college campuses in Turkey. Some universities admitted the women. Others did not.
Midmorning at Gimen's school, she spotted student friends of hers across the grounds. They were wearing head scarves and weeping, overcome by surprise and happiness at being allowed in, she said. Dry-eyed, Gimen pulled off her cap.
© 2008 The Washington Post Company

Blast Kills Surgeon General of Pakistani Army

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/world/asia/26pstan.html
February 26, 2008
Blast Kills Surgeon General of Pakistani Army
By SALMAN MASOOD [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis] [recent external reported that retired officers calling for Musharraf to step aside] [more evidence that al Qaeda and new crop of younger jihadis have regrouped-grouped] [what I characterized last November as possible tipping point cointinues to tip!] [elections where Musharraf’s party pummeled plus 6 days] [more post-election chaos while Musharraf still in US I believe] [******]
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — A top Pakistani Army general was killed Monday when a suicide attacker approached his car at a traffic light in Rawalpindi [****]and blew himself up, military officials said. [seems obvious bomber knew either whom he was targeting or that the target was high level] [**] [why the surgeon general?]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/world/asia/26pstan.html
February 26, 2008
Blast Kills Surgeon General of Pakistani Army
By SALMAN MASOOD [Pakistan] [south asia] [Pakistan as the new Afghanistan] [hydra central] [Pakistan seemingly teetering on the brink] [islamists, tribals, and jihadis striking back] [followup] [it appears truly the frontline of the jihadis] [recent external reported that retired officers calling for Musharraf to step aside] [more evidence that al Qaeda and new crop of younger jihadis have regrouped-grouped] [what I characterized last November as possible tipping point cointinues to tip!] [elections where Musharraf’s party pummeled plus 6 days] [more post-election chaos while Musharraf still in US I believe] [******]
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — A top Pakistani Army general was killed Monday when a suicide attacker approached his car at a traffic light in Rawalpindi [****]and blew himself up, military officials said. [seems obvious bomber knew either whom he was targeting or that the target was high level] [**] [why the surgeon general?]
In a separate development, three Pakistani workers were killed when bombs exploded at the office of Plan International, a British aid agency, [****] in Mansehra in the North-West Frontier Province, according to Pakistani officials.
In addition to killing the surgeon general, Lt. Gen. Mushtaq Ahmad Baig,[***] the attack on his staff car claimed the lives of eight other people, including the attacker and five civilians.
The attack took place at 2:45 p.m. in a crowded commercial neighborhood in Rawalpindi, a garrison town just outside the capital, Islamabad. The blast tore through a busy road and damaged at least four vehicles. The general’s car was mangled.
More than 25 people were wounded, including several pedestrians. One pedestrian, a woman, was among those killed. There was no immediate claim of responsibility.
Pakistani officials said the suicide bomber was on foot when he attacked the car. “The attacker was a pedestrian who was waiting for the target,” said Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas, the main spokesman for the Pakistani military. “At a traffic signal, he approached the vehicle and blew himself up.” [********] [thank god that only 1% of Pakistanis for al Qaeda and 3% for Taliban—according to recent report of Pakistan poll] [yes, I was going for sarcasm] [******]
General Abbas said the bomber had not singled out the medical corps as a target. “In my judgment, he was just waiting for a senior army officer,” the general said. “When he saw a staff car with the signature of a senior officer, he carried out the attack.” [that sounds more plausible] [******]
General Baig’s guard and driver in the car were also killed. General Baig led the Army Medical Corps and was the principal of the Army Medical College in Rawalpindi.
Plan International, an agency working for children, said that the motive for the attack on its office in Mansehra was not known and that the agency had not been given a warning. Six to 12 armed men burst into the office and set off the bombs, a statement on the agency’s Web site said.
“The men, who were carrying guns and grenades, marched into the office and fired indiscriminately before setting off the devices at 4:15 p.m. local time,” the statement said. In addition to those killed, the statement said, one staff member was critically wounded and the office was “burned to the ground.”
In recent months, Rawalpindi, the headquarters of the Pakistani Army, has been the scene of a spate of attacks on military personnel, including officials from the powerful Inter-Services Intelligence agency. Benazir Bhutto, the former prime minister and opposition leader, was assassinated at a political rally in Rawalpindi on Dec. 27. [*****]
The car bombing on Monday was the second recent attack on officers in the Army Medical Corps. Last month, a suicide bomber on a motorcycle rammed a military bus carrying doctors in Rawalpindi, killing six people.
Pakistan’s military has been battling militants in the country’s semiautonomous northwestern tribal regions straddling the border with Afghanistan. In retaliatory attacks, the militants have aimed at military installations and personnel.
Pakistani officials have blamed Baitullah Mehsud, a tribal militant sympathetic to the Taliban and Al Qaeda, for the attacks on the military. Mr. Mehsud is from the restive South Waziristan tribal region. [******]
However, Mr. Mehsud had declared a cease-fire before the recent parliamentary elections, and other groups are active in the tribal region.
The suicide attack took place as militants sympathetic to the Taliban in the tribal areas issued statements to the Pakistani news media urging the new government to stop the military operations and initiate dialogue to restore peace. [********]
Pakistani political parties are in negotiations to form a government after the Feb. 18 elections, in which the Pakistan Peoples Party of Ms. Bhutto emerged with the most seats.
No political party secured a majority in the Parliament, and the next government is expected to be a coalition led by the Peoples Party.
Nawaz Sharif, the former prime minister and opposition leader who heads the Pakistan Muslim League-N, [****] has said he will support the Peoples Party in forming a government.
On Monday, Mr. Sharif reiterated his demand that President Pervez Musharraf resign. “Musharraf should realize the situation; accept the verdict of the people,” Mr. Sharif said at a news briefing in Islamabad.” [********]
In a signal that he was opposed to the use of force and military operations in the tribal areas, Mr. Sharif urged a different approach.
“We want to know whose war of terror it is,” Mr. Sharif said. “What is the definition of this war on terror? Only after that we can decide whether to use bullets or dialogue.” [*****] Mr. Sharif was echoing a popular sentiment here among many Pakistanis who view Mr. Musharraf as blindly following America’s orders. [*******]
“Britain solved the Northern Ireland issue with dialogue,” Mr. Sharif said. “When we can talk with India, can’t we talk with our own?”
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Europeans Plan Incentives, as Iran Says Sanctions Won’t Halt Nuclear Program

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/world/europe/26diplo.html
February 26, 2008
Europeans Plan Incentives, as Iran Says Sanctions Won’t Halt Nuclear Program
By HELENE COOPER and WARREN HOGE [Iran] [wmd] [nuclear-energy production] [while the soverign right is taken seriously by most Iranians, so too are there factions driving the issue and conflating it with WMD] [Ahmadinejad’s annoiuncment a coulpe weeks ago which amounted to fingers in the West’s eyes] [UN] [IAEA reporting on malfeascnece] [in response, EU3 has come up with carrots] [if that works, fine!] [****]
WASHINGTON — European countries are planning to offer new incentives to Iran if it agrees to halt its uranium enrichment program, [****]European diplomats said Monday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/world/europe/26diplo.html
February 26, 2008
Europeans Plan Incentives, as Iran Says Sanctions Won’t Halt Nuclear Program
By HELENE COOPER and WARREN HOGE [Iran] [wmd] [nuclear-energy production] [while the soverign right is taken seriously by most Iranians, so too are there factions driving the issue and conflating it with WMD] [Ahmadinejad’s annoiuncment a coulpe weeks ago which amounted to fingers in the West’s eyes] [UN] [IAEA reporting on malfeascnece] [in response, EU3 has come up with carrots] [if that works, fine!] [****]
WASHINGTON — European countries are planning to offer new incentives to Iran if it agrees to halt its uranium enrichment program, [****]European diplomats said Monday.
Meanwhile at the United Nations, Iran’s ambassador said that his country would continue to defy Security Council directives to halt the program, and that documents cited as possible evidence of Iran’s effort to develop nuclear weapons were “forgeries.” [********]
The Security Council is expected to vote in the coming days on a third resolution to tighten sanctions against Iran.
The European plan is the latest part of the West’s long-running and so far unsuccessful carrot-and-stick strategy aimed at getting Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions. [****] The diplomats outlined the plan after a meeting at the State Department, where top officials from Britain, France, China, Russia, Germany and the United States discussed their Iran strategy.
While the United States is not opposed to the European plan to offer a few more incentives to Iran, Bush administration officials said that at this point the United States did not plan to join the proposal. [*****]A senior State Department official said the United States was hoping that the “stick” part of the Iran strategy — the latest sanctions resolution — would be approved by the Security Council in the next week or so.
The European and American officials spoke on condition of anonymity, under normal diplomatic rules.
Iran contends that it is entitled to enrich uranium under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and that its program is peaceful. [there’s no question that it’s entitled] [the question is whether exercising its right is wise?] [what effects will it have in the region?] [how unified may it make Sunni regimes already suspicious of Iran] [********]
“We think that from a logical point of view and legal point of view that there is no basis to even consider the Iranian nuclear program in the Security Council,” said the Iranian ambassador, Mohammad Khazaee.
Speaking to reporters at the Iranian mission, Mr. Khazaee said Iranians would not be deterred by the resolution, which would be the third in 15 months to impose travel and money sanctions on individuals and financial institutions with involvement in the nuclear program. [************]
“Nobody can say that sanctions are not hurting anybody, but the point is we are not concerned with the measures in this resolution,” he said. “We have learned to live with them.”
Mr. Khazaee brought up a new report released by the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna on Friday, which said that suspicions about many Iranian activities had been laid to rest but that questions still remained about the program’s ultimate purpose. He said that in his view the report had “proved the allegations made against Iran’s peaceful nuclear program by a few countries have been totally flawed and baseless” and that actions by the Council had been “unfair, unwarranted and unlawful.” [******]
In particular, he singled out new documents supplied by the West and presented by the agency to Iran this month that included a schematic diagram showing what appeared to be the development of a warhead [****]that could accommodate a nuclear device.
Mr. Khazaee said that they were forgeries made by a terrorist group and that officials in Tehran doubted the documents’ authenticity the moment they heard the names in them. [*****]
“They said, for example, Joe and George and this one and that one had been involved, but we knew these people had nothing to do with the program and didn’t understand anything about nuclear issues,” he said. “Obviously you know this is a fabrication.”
Speaking in Seoul, South Korea, on Monday, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice disputed the Iranian assessment of the I.A.E.A. report, The Associated Press reported, saying it provided “very strong” grounds for the Council to move ahead quickly with new sanctions. [********]
The Council vote this time will probably not be unanimous because Libya, a new member that was once itself under sanctions, signaled its opposition on Monday. Envoys from three other Council members, Indonesia, South Africa and Vietnam, have also expressed reservations. [*******]
Resolutions need at least nine votes to pass, as long as there is no veto from one of the permanent members: Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States. All five back the measure.
The European incentives package discussed Monday in Washington was not likely to be completed until May at the earliest.
It could include proposals for joint ventures between European and Iranian oil companies, the diplomats said, and talks with Iran on regional security issues.
The world powers’ strategy on Iran has been in disarray since American intelligence agencies issued a National Intelligence Estimate in December [hardly] [the disarray predated that NIE] [the NIE simply contributed to it] [******] concluding that the country had suspended its work on a nuclear weapons program in late 2003.
Because of those doubts, Russia and China, which have deep commercial ties to Iran, have dragged their feet over a new sanctions resolution and agreed only recently to a watered-down set of sanctions to be brought before the Council.
But many diplomats, and even some administration officials, say privately that they do not expect much to come from the next sanctions resolution, even if it is passed, because the resolution is so weak.
Helene Cooper reported from Washington, and Warren Hoge from the United Nations.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company