World Overview

The International Crisis Group (ICG), in CrisisWatch N°55, March 1, 2008 (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5325) found that “twelve actual or potential conflict situations around the world deteriorated in February 2008, and four improved.” “The situation deteriorated in Armenia, where – as CrisisWatch went to press – a violent crackdown sought to suppress eleven days of protests after presidential elections that the opposition claimed were rigged. A state of emergency has been declared, and armed forces are reportedly mobilizing for broader repression. Attacks on Timor-Leste‚s president and prime minister underlined the need for security sector reform in the fragile country. Yet their aftermath – including the killing of former head of military police Alfredo Reinado, who led the attack on the president – presents an opportunity for the government to address key issues. Rebels in Chad launched a major assault on the capital N‚Djamena in which hundreds were killed and thousands displaced. A state of emergency is still in place amid reports of a heavy government crackdown. In Darfur, the Sudanese government attacked three towns and an IDP camp from both ground and air, marking the worst violence in the region in months. The situation also deteriorated in Cameroon, Comoros Islands, DR Congo, Ethiopia/Eritrea, Israel/Occupied Territories, Philippines, Serbia and Somalia. The situation improved in Kosovo, as its 17 February declaration of independence was met with widespread celebrations and limited unrest in Serb enclaves. In Kenya, a power-sharing deal ended a month of difficult negotiations between President Mwai Kibaki and opposition leader Raila Odinga, as the country began to move forward from its post-election political crisis, though the situation is still very fragile. In Pakistan, opposition parties swept to power in relatively peaceful mid-month elections. And in Cyprus, President-elect Christofias vowed to meet at the ‘earliest possible date’ for reunification talks with his Turkish-Cypriot counterpart”.

CrisisWatch N°56, April 1, 2008 (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5368) reported “Eight actual or potential conflict situations around the world deteriorated in March 2008, and four improved,” Early results of Zimbabwe’s 29 March presidential, parliamentary and municipal elections were strongly disputed, underlining the risk that escalated repression and unrest may follow but also highlighting the possibility of positive change. As CrisisWatch went to press, reports suggested President Mugabe was under pressure from close associates to resign and/or negotiate a transfer of power. Protests in Tibet turned violent on 14 March and unrest spread to Tibetan-populated areas of neighbouring provinces, prompting the deployment of thousands of police. Casualty numbers were difficult to verify after foreign media access was heavily restricted; Beijing said there were 22 deaths, while the Tibetan government in exile said over 140. In Kosovo, violence in Mitrovica and Belgrade’s push for partition underscored the fragility of the post-independence situation. Hundreds were killed in Iraq after the government mounted a major operation against Shiite militias operating in Basra, with serious clashes also in Baghdad and cities across the south. The situation also deteriorated in Armenia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Nagorno-Karabakh (Azerbaijan), North Korea, and Somalia. The situation improved in Cyprus as President Christofias and Turkish Cypriot leader Talat met in Nicosia for the first time, where they agreed to open the Ledra border crossing and begin preparations for formal reunification talks. In Pakistan, new Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani ordered the release of several members of the judiciary, including former Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, amid a relatively peaceful political transition after February’s elections. In the Comoros Islands, the government, backed by African Union troops, restored control over rebel-held Anjouan island quickly and with little resistance. The situation also improved in the Taiwan Strait following the election of Ma Ying-jeou as President, who pledged to improve relations with China. For April 2008, CrisisWatch identifies Zimbabwe and Nepal as both Conflict Risk Alerts and Conflict Resolution Opportunities.” It also identifies Cyprus and Uganda as Conflict Resolution Opportunities.” ICG rated as deteriorated situations: Armenia, China (internal), Democratic Republic of Congo, Kosovo, Iraq, Nagorno-Karabakh (Azerbaijan), North Korea, Somalia and improved situations: Comoros Islands, Cyprus, Pakistan, Taiwan Strait. Considered unchanged situations: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Basque Country (Spain), Belarus, Bolivia, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Chechnya (Russia), Colombia, Côte d‚Ivoire, Ecuador, Egypt, Ethiopia/Eritrea, Georgia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, India (non-Kashmir), Indonesia, Iran, Israel/Occupied Territories, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Liberia, Macedonia, Mali, Moldova, Morocco, Myanmar/Burma, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, North Caucasus (non-Chechnya), Northern Ireland (UK), Peru, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Sierra Leone,  Somaliland (Somalia), Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Western Sahara, Yemen, Zimbabwe. For April, conflict risk alerts are Nepal and Zimbabwe, while conflict resolution opportunities are Cyprus, Nepal, Uganda, and Zimbabwe.

Retired U.S. Army Colonel Daniel Smith conducted his annual overview of armed conflicts across the globe in “Special Issue: The World At War,” the Defense Monitor, Vol. XXXVII, No. 1 – January/February 2008 (http://www.cdi.org/program/document.cfm?DocumentID=4198&from_page=../index.cfm). In listing serious armed conflicts, Smith finds one global conflict, the U.S. World-Wide War on Terror against “terrorists with global reach, begun in 2001 after the September 11 attacks, and involving the UN and multiple countries.” He notes two wars in the Middle East, the Iraq government and multinational forces vs. Iraqi resistance forces and al-Quaida-in-Iraq; and Israel vs. Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad In Asia and others. In Asia, Smith lists four wars: Afghanistan, with the Kabul government vs. al-Qeada and the Taliban, with involvement by the U.S., NATO, Russia, Iran, Tajikistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan; India vs. Assam (ULFA) insurgents seeking independence, since 1978, with involvement by the UN, Bhutan, Myanmar and Bangladesh; Philippines vs. the New Peoples Army since 1969, involving the U.S., Malaysia, Libya and Indonesia; and Sri Lanka vs. Tamil Eelam in an ethnic, religious and independence struggle, involving India, since 1978, and restarted in 2002. In Latin America Smith sites two serious armed conflicts in Columbia, between the government and: the New Liberation Army (ELN), and against the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia (FARC), both concerned with the Drug trade and socio-economic-political issues, involving the U.S. He lists five wars in Africa: The Democratic Republic of Congo vs. Indigenous and foreign renegades, since 1997 over political-socio-economic issues, using ethnic divisions, with the involvement of Angola, Uganda, Rwanda, Chad, Zimbabwe, France, Burundi, South Africa, African Union and the UN; Nigeria: ethnic and religious communal violence, with no foreign involvement; Somalia” TFG vs CIC, Somaliland, Puntland and other factions, partly since 1978. and partly since 2005, pver power and ethnic issues, involving the UN (humanitarian aid), the U.S., Ethiopia and Kenya; Sudan vs. Sudan Liberation army (splinter)  and Justice and Equality Movement, since 2003. over autonomy and ethnic issues, involving the UN, US, EU, and NATO; Uganda vs. the Lords Army, since 1986 over power, Involving Sudan. Over all Smith finds one less serious conflict (1000 or more deaths during the year) than last year, with the one European conflict at the beginning of 2006, in Chechnya, ceasing to be “serious.” The complete report provides explanation and analysis.

Raúl Zibechi, “Americas Program Special Report: The Militarization of the World’s Urban Peripheries,” (http://americas.irc-online.org/am/4954), February 9, 2007, reports that, “Urban peripheries in Third World countries have become war zones where states attempt to maintain order based on the establishment of a sort of ‘sanitary cordon’ to keep the poor isolated from ‘normal’ society.” Increasingly the worlds militaries are developing strategies and tactics for dealing with the growing poor peripheral areas around cities, that are increasingly sources of unrest, which have at times exploded movements against governments. Zibechi, quotes Urban theorist Mike Davis, “‘It’s the slum peripheries of poor Third World cities that have become a decisive geopolitical space,” “one of the most challenging terrains for future wars and other imperialist projects.’” “In fact, a study by the United Nations estimates that one billion people live in peripheral neighborhoods outside Third World cities and that the poor in the largest cities in the world number some two billion, that is, a third of all human beings. These statistics will double within the next 15 or 20 years, and ‘all future growth of the world’s population will occur in cities, 95% of it in cities of the Global South and the majority in slums.’ The situation is much more serious than the numbers indicate: urbanization, as Davis explains, has become disconnected and autonomous from industrialization as well as from economic development, which implies the ‘structural and permanent disconnection of so many city dwellers from the formal world economy.’ On the other hand, he notes that, ‘over the last decade … the poor-and not just the poor in classical urban neighborhoods [with high levels of organization]-but … this new poor, on the fringes of the city, have begun organizing themselves massively … whether that’s Sadr, in Iraq, or an equivalent slum-based social movement in Buenos Aires.’”

Several reports indicate increasing threats of terrorist acts from the Middle East to other areas. In February, the director of U.S. national intelligence, Mike McConnell, told a Senate committee that al Qaeda is gaining in strength from its refuge in Pakistan and steadily improving its ability to recruit, train, and position operatives to carry out attacks in the west, including the U.S. Spanish police, around the same time, stated that they were finding an increased threat of attacks with terrorists in Pakistan connecting with supporters in Pakistani neighborhoods in Spain. However, French authorities said, in March, that their earlier expectations of terror spreadingto Europe were overblown.

Center for Defense Information CDI Director Theresa Hitchens, “Space Wars – Coming to a Sky Near You?” Scientific American, March 2008 (http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=space-wars-coming-to-the-sky-near-you) states that a recent change of course in U.S. military space strategy, along with last year’s anti-satellite test by China threaten to signal a new space arms race.

Iraq and Iran

The resignation of Admiral William J. Fallon, the military commander of US Middle East operations, on March 12, who has been critical of Bush Administration Middle East policy, saying an attack on Iran would not happen “on my watch,” and is widely believed to have a threatened, along with a number of other top generals and admirals, to quit the service if the Bush administration were to launch an air attack on Iran, combined with the movement of the Eisenhower nuclear aircraft carrier strike force toward Iran, has raised fears the Bush administration may be preparing to launch such an attack. Several other events have been sited by some (See: Terry Atlas, “6 Signs The US May Be Headed for War in Iran,” US News & World Report, Thursday, March 13, 2008, available at: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/03/13/7676/) as supporting the possibility of U.S. attack on Iran being planned. This includes the recent deployment of two U.S. warships, including the antiaircraft destroyer U.S.S. Ross, off Lebanon to signal U.S. concern over the political stalemate in Lebanon and the influence of Syria in that country. The argument is that the U.S. would want its warships in the eastern Mediterranean in the event of military action against Iran to keep Iranian ally Syria in check and to help provide air cover to Israel against Iranian missile reprisals. An attack on Iran would most likely bring American troops, already warn out and over burdened in the occupation of Iraq, to become under heavy attack by Shiia forces there, who for several years now have been largely leaving them alone, while most probably greatly increasing interethnic conflict in the country. Iran may well undertake massive launches of small boats armed with missiles and torpedoes, as well as sophisticated anti-ship missiles from shore batteries at U.S. ships in the Gulf, which would be expected to take possibly heavy casualties. Almost surely, tanker traffic in the Gulf, which carries at least 20% of the world’s oil, would stop as insurance rates for vessels operating in the gulf become prohibitive. With growing demand for oil, with production peaked, already rising to record levels above $110 a barrel, a great energy shortage would result, likely at least doubling petroleum prices, rapidly bringing on a major world wide recession, just beginning, and turning it into a deep depression. This in turn is likely to create additional conflict, especially in the Middle East. An additional cause for concern, in late March, is that the day after U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney spoke with government officials in Saudi Arabia, the leading Saudi newspaper reported that the Saudi government council was discussing emergency plans to deal with atomic fallout in case the U.S. bombed Iranian nuclear facilities. Then, on April 5, Damien McElroy, “British Fear US Commander is Beating the Drum for Iran Strikes,” said in the Daily Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/05/wiran105.xml) that British officials have warned that in the wake of the worst violence in Iraq in 18 months. U.S. commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, will declare that Iran is waging war against the US-backed Baghdad government (even though Iraqi’s Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, is a Shiite, with some support from Iran, who ordered the Iraqi forces to attack the militia, in Basra, of cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, who is a Shiite, with some support from Iran, fighting against the militia of another Shiite, with some support from Iran, who al-Maliki is now allied with. One could say that Iran is two-thirds in support of the United States and one-third opposed to it. In contrast, since the Bush administration, by invading and occupying Iraq has given Iran influence in Iraq, and increased its influence in the region, while giving al Qeada entrance into Iraq and boosting its recruiting, and grinding down the U.S. military while greatly reducing U.S. diplomatic power, that the United States is the enemy and that Bush ought to attack it. Or perhaps he already has!).

In mid-February, the Associated Press reported that Iran had begun using new centrifuges to process small amounts of gas that can be used to make cores of nuclear weapons, but the amount is too small for an atomic weapons program. At the beginning of March, the U.N. Security Council passed its third resolution increasing sanctions on Iran for continuing to enrich uranium. The resolution authorizes inspections of cargo to and from Iran suspected of carrying prohibited equipment, tightens the monitoring of Iranian financial institutions as well as travel bans and assets freezes on people and companies involved in the nuclear program.

Iraq, having had violence drop significantly last fall, and then level off, was recently experiencing some increases in fighting, including in Baghdad, when a huge explosion in fighting, including shelling of the Green Zone in Baghdad, when Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, ordered Iraqi forces to attack Mahdi Army militia, in Basra, of cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, the largest militia in Iraq, whose forces were fighting for control of Basra with the second largest, also Shiite, militia, The U.S. provided air support for the Iraqi army, which was only slightly effective (including having over 1000 troops dissert or refuse to fight) with al-Sadr’s militia giving up almost no ground, until al-Sadr offerd a deal to al-Miliki to withdraw, in return for the release of members of his militia being held by the government, who had not committed crimes, and other demands. Basra is now relatively quiet, under Iraqi army control, but with militiamen still patrolling back alleys. Clashes continue in Baghdad, as of April 15, with U.S. troops trying to clear militia forces from the Sadr City neighborhood, but with some Iraqi army troops refusing to fight or hold positions. This shows the government and its armed forces to be weak. Because the situation in Basra had broken down into factional struggle prior to the Iraqi army move there, and the situation remains tenuous, Brittan has delayed bringing home its last forces from Iraq, who are located near Basra. The current White House plan is to keep troop deployment level through the end of 2008. Meanwhile, progress towards political reconciliation continues to be virtually non-existent. In February, some important measures did pass parliament, that showed some potential of advancement on reconciliation. However, a month later, a national reconciliation conference made little progress, especially with three of the most important political blocks boycotting the ‘dialogue’.

An important background to the situation as it has been developing for some months is that one of the largest reasons for reduced violence in Iraq has been a cease fire by al-Sadr. In early March, he extended the cease fire by his militia for another six months, despite strong objection from several factions in his organization. Especially in the current situation, in which many of the militia’s factions are engaged in an internal struggle for control of oil in southern Iraq, there has been a danger that one or more of the factions will breakaway and cease to recognize the cease fire, pulling other factions, and perhaps the entire militia with them. This is what happened in Northern Ireland, when at a time of reduced tensions and an opening fro peace, the IRA declared a cease fire, only to have a faction, calling itself the Real IRA, undertake a major bombing, returning the situation to a high level of violence. That may have been beginning to happen with the incremental upsurge in attacks, before the Basra fighting. Whether Basra has now escalated that process, or if the al-Sadr – al-Maliki agreement will calm it, remains to be seen. As of April 15, violence levels in Iraq remained higher than before the Basra campaign.

The Internatinal Crisis Group (ICG), “Iraq’s Civil War, the Sadrists and the Surge”(http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5286&l=1), February 7, 2008, asserts that “If the downturn in violence in Iraq is to continue, Muqtada al-Sadr’s unilateral ceasefire must urgently be converted into a comprehensive multilateral one that creates conditions for his movement to evolve into a legitimate political actor.” “Muqtada al-Sadr’s decision to curb his movement is a major reason for the dramatic decline in bloodshed. It was a positive step, under U.S. and Iraqi military pressure and as a result of growing discontent within his Shiite base, but it is fanciful to expect the Mahdi Army’s defeat. Excessive pressure is likelier to trigger fierce resistance in Baghdad and an escalating intra-Shiite civil war in the south. Now that its leadership has denounced sectarian violence and seeks to impose greater discipline on its unruly base, every effort should be made to encourage the shift toward a non-violent political movement. The Sadrist leadership should ensure greater discipline and accountability within the ranks by prolonging and strictly enforcing the ceasefire and articulating a clear and comprehensive political program. The U.S. and the Iraqi government should narrowly circumscribe operations against the Mahdi Army and the Sadrist movement by focusing on legitimate military targets and Sadrist-manned patrols or checkpoints. They should tolerate non-military Sadrist activities and freeze recruitment into the Shiite sahwa (awakening), the U.S.-backed tribe – and citizen-based militia set up to fight the Mahdi Army. Instead they should concentrate on building a professional, non-partisan security force, integrating vetted Mahdi Army fighters. The Najaf-based clerics should allow Sadrists to visit religious sites in the holy cities as long as they are unarmed and show appropriate restraint.” Peter Harling, Crisis Group‚s Iraq, Syria and Lebanon Project Director, comments, “Among Sadrist rank and file, impatience with the ceasefire is high and growing. They equate it with a loss of power and resources and eagerly await Muqtada’s permission to resume the fight, as early as this month. The Sadrist leadership has resisted the pressure, but unless the U.S. and the Iraqi government alter their approach, this may not last.”

Meanwhile, another reason for the lower violence in Iraq last fall and this winter has been that the U.S, has been arming and paying Sunni militias not to fight coalition forces, which the Shi’ia dominated Iraqi government has been unhappy about. There have been reports that the payments have stopped reaching the Sunni militiamen, and they are unhappy about that. If so, and if that continues, that presents an additional danger of escalating strife. Unrelated to the pay question, in February, there were reports that in Diyala and Anbar provinces conflicts between Sunni militias and provincial governments were increasing. Local militias can play an important local security role, but unless they are integrated into a national security arrangement there is a significant risk of their violently increasing sectarian violence, and/or being loose cannons using deadly force, or the threat of it, for their own interest.

Former U.S. Army colonel Douglas Macgregor, “Sheikhs for Sale: U.S. Cash Diplomacy in Iraq Will Fail in the End ” (first published by Defense News, Jan. 28, 2008, available at: http://www.cdi.org/program/document.cfm?DocumentID=4193&StartRow=1&ListRows=10&appendURL=&Orderby=D.DateLastUpdated&ProgramID=37&from_page=index.cfm), states “Of the many factors contributing to the reduction of U.S. casualties in Iraq, none has been more critical than the decision by the generals in Baghdad to pay more than 80,000 of Iraq’s Sunni Arab insurgents a quarter of a billion dollars a year not to shoot at U.S. forces. It’s not the first time that a foreign army in the Middle East has bought off troublesome Arab sheikhs and their cohorts with cash. The British used gold to sedate tribal enemies from the Khyber Pass to the Nile delta while they extracted billions from their colonies. However, it is the first time in American history that buying off the enemy has been presented to the American people as evidence for progress in a war or good generalship.” “Unfortunately, the expedient policy to reduce U.S. casualties in the ru-nup to the ‘08 presidential election is not only reinforcing the sectarian and ethnic division of Iraq. It’s also breathing new life into the tribalism that plagues not only Iraq, but most of the Middle East and Africa. Anbar’s tribal leaders were the first to benefit. With millions of dollars in hand, the sheikhs could reward the loyalty of their armed supporters, determine who would hold office, staff the police, and reassert their control over Anbar’s towns and villages with their own arbitrary justice system. Today, tribal sheikhs across central Iraq are on the payroll. Even Baathist insurgent organizations dependent on tribal support for recruits are enmeshed in the Sunni Arab tribal network. But tribal identity is a dangerous step backward on the road to modernity, and cash payments now make crushing tribalism later impossible for whatever regime rules in Baghdad. In Western Europe, it took centuries to eradicate tribalism, whose last great European bastion did not capitulate to the forces of modernization until well into the 18th century.” The Army drafted a new manual, early this year, raising the mission of stabilizing war-torn nations to be equal to defeating adversaries on the battlefield.”

Mathew Lee, “Memo slams U.S. in Iraq,” Albuquerque Tribune, February 9, 2008. p. 1, reports that a former top Republican party activist and congressional aid, Manuel Miranda, who worked in the U.S. embassy in Iraq stated in a memo that the State Department is incapable of carrying out President Bush’s policies in Iraq, saying the embassy staff failed to understand the urgency of the situation, delayed critical measures, and was tied up in institutional red tape. Miranda said that the embassy exhibited a “near complete lack of coordination” with other agencies and the Iraqi government, withheld information, blamed Iraqis for all shortcomings, wasted millions of dollars and gave bad advice to Congress,

Turkey has made a number of incursions and aerial attacks into Iraqi Kurdistan (with acquiescence of the U.S., who also supplied intelligence – but against the will of the Iraqi government), in pursuit of violent Turkish Kurdish separatists and their supporters. There are reports of Iran, which also has a Kurdish minority, of firing artillery into Iraqi Kurdistan. However, Turkey announced a new development policy, in March, to develop better relations with Kurds through a broad series of investments of up to $12 billion, to create jobs in the poor Kurdish southwest of Turkey, and draw young people away from militancy. The government will also fulfill a long time Kurdish wish in dedicating a television station to Kurdish language. Reversing a policy of severely restricting use of Kurdish language, the Turkish government will now honor it and Kurdish culture. Turkey is also moving to improve relations with Iraq, including opening a consulate in the southern city of Basra.

The Defense Department inspector general told Congress in January that weapons the U.S. provides to Iraqi security forces still might be ending up in the hands of terrorists, insurgents and criminals. For over a year, Turkish officials have been complaining to the U.S. government that weapons intended for Iraq’s growing military and police forces were being used by militant groups in Turkey. For more go to: http://www.thonline.com/article.cfm?id=188966. It was reported in mid-March that at least one third, and possibly significantly more, of fuel from Iraq’s largest refinery have been diverted to the black market, with some of the money going to insurgents (Richard Oppel, Jr. Stolen Oil Profits Keep Iraq’s Insurgency Running,” The New York Times, March 16, 2008, p.1).

It has been reported that, “An Iraqi MP who preferred to remain anonymous told the newspaper that highly confidential negotiations took place by representatives from American oil companies, offering $5 million to each MP who votes in favor of the Oil and Gas law [which has not passed] (For details go to: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19246.htm). Aaron Glantz, “Bush Won’t Ban Permanent Bases Pushes For Iraqi Oil Law” (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19247.htm) reports that Antonia Juhasz of the group Oil Change International told Institute for Policy study (IPS) that President Bush sees U.S. troops being in Iraq for a very long time, “We’ve got the Bush administration pushing aggressively for an (Iraqi) law that would give oil companies 20 to 25 year contracts for oil in Iraq and if they were to be at work for an extended length of time, they would need security.”

The current best estimate is that over 1 million Iraqis (and as of March 10, almost 1.2 million) have died as a result of the invasion and occupation. That number is an extrapolation of a scientific study led by researchers from Johns Hopkins that estimated that as of July 2006, 650,000 Iraqi deaths were attributable to the invasion and occupation. The extrapolation was done by the organization Just Foreign Policy: w.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq/iraqdeaths.html. The New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/04/world/middleeast/04youth.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin) reported, March 4, “After almost five years of war, many young people in Iraq, exhausted by constant firsthand exposure to the violence of religious extremism, say they have grown disillusioned with religious leaders and skeptical of the faith that they preach. Iraqi women have been particularly impacted by the civil war, with many of them threatened and attacked if they are openly active outside their homes – in business, professions, etc,. As a result, a large number of them do not leave their homes unless it is absolutely necessary. In two months of interviews with 40 young people in five Iraqi cities, a pattern of disenchantment emerged, in which young Iraqis, both poor and middle class, blamed clerics for the violence and the restrictions that have narrowed their lives.” As of March 24, the number of officially reported U.S. military combat casualties reached 4000 killed (the latest numbers are available at: http://icasualties.org/oif/). The National Priorities Project (http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home) states the cost of the Iraq occupation to the U.S. at $275 million a day, on April 15, the total cost to date was estimated at over $511 trillion. Go to: http://app.bronto.com/public/?q=ulink&fn=Link&ssid=596&id=4ibuym20c3vgctn5qmw101gnej0rc&id2=90g9ve5pz2wp2xkdjx52j4s6g1uby to hear “A $ Trillion Here, a $ Trillion There” a discussion with Winslow Wheeler, director of the Straus Military Reform Project, Michael O’Hanlon of the Brookings Institution, Linda Bilmes of Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government and Robert Hormats of Goldman Sachs of the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the economic impact in the U.S. and the absence of ethical, forthright leadership from anyone in the executive branch of government or Congress to confront the disturbing issues. The discussion occurred on National Public Radio’s The Diane Rehm Show on Tuesday, March 4, 2008. Mental statistics made public in January show that suicide rates among active-duty US soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan have reached a record high, indicating the great stress from extended tours of duty. Details are available at: http://snipurl.com/1yphc. In early April, the Pentagon expressed concern that the stress from continued. Long, redeployments was causing mental problems for many military people.

In Central Iraq, 91.8% of women polled by Women for Women International say that violence against women is increasing. 74.5% of Iraqi women avoid leaving their homes. 63.2% have regularly not sent their children to school. 65.3% report that US security forces are only making security worse.

Nick Turse, “The Military-Petroleum Complex,” Foreign Policy In Focus, March 24, 2008 (www.fpif.org), quotes Michael Klare, Blood and Oil, “The American military relies more than that of any other nation on oil-powered ships, planes, helicopters, and armored vehicles to transport troops into battle and rain down weapons on its foes. Although the Pentagon may boast of its ever-advancing use of computers and other high-tech devices, the fighting machines that form the backbone of the U.S. military are entirely dependent on petroleum. Without an abundant and reliable supply of oil, the Department of Defense could neither rush its forces to distant battlefields nor keep them supplied once deployed there.” Turse goes on to say, “And the deployments DoD has “rushed its forces” to in recent years – in Afghanistan and Iraq – have sucked up massive quantities of oil. According to Fuel Line, the official newsletter of the Pentagon’s fuel-buying component, the Defense Energy Support Center (DESC), from October 1, 2001, to August 9, 2004, the DESC supplied 1,897,272,714 gallons of jet fuel, alone, for military operations in Afghanistan. Similarly, in less than a year and a half, from March 19, 2003, to August 9, 2004, the DESC provided U.S. forces with 1,109,795,046 gallons of jet fuel for operations in Iraq. In 2005, Lana Hampton of the DoD’s Defense Logistics Agency revealed that the military’s aircraft, ships, and ground vehicles were guzzling 10 to 11 million barrels of fuel each month in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere. Yet, while the Pentagon reportedly burns through an astounding 365,000 barrels of oil every day (the equivalent of the entire nation of Sweden’s daily consumption), Sohbet Karbuz, an expert on global oil markets, estimates that the number is really closer to 500,000 barrels. With such unconstrained consumption, recent U.S. wars have been a boon for big oil and have seen the Pentagon rise from the rank of hopeless addict to superjunkie. Prior to George Bush’s Global War on Terror, the U.S. military admitted to guzzling 4.62 billion gallons of oil per year. With the Pentagon’s post-9/11 wars and occupations, annual oil consumption has grown to an almost unfathomable 5.46 billion gallons, according to the Pentagon’s possibly low-ball statistics. As a result, the DoD had some of the planet’s biggest petroleum dealers, and masters of the corporate universe, on its payroll.”

Developments in Asia (including the Middle East) and the Pacific

The situation in Afghanistan continues to be difficult, bringing numerous calls for increased energy and revisions of approach. In late February, the NATO Secretary General Jaap de Koop Sheffer stated that militant suicide attacks, causing large numbers of casualties are trying to turn public opinion in Afghanistan in their favor, and in NATO nations into tiring of their efforts, there. Australia’s Defense Minister, stated, in February, that, “I have to say that the west isn’t pursuing a coherent strategy in Afghanistan.” “We want to see more done to raise the number of both the Afghan National Army troops and Afghan National Police; We want to see a better strategy on narcotics; we want much more done on the civil side.” He said Australia will not increase its 970 troops in Afghanistan until improvements are made. NATO and other nations have 43,000 troops, and are seeking 6,000 more. Canada is planning to pull out its 2,500 troops next year, if its allies are unable to provide an additional 1000 soldiers to support its mission. The British charity Oxfam, reported March 25, that donor nations have yet to provide $10 billion of the $25 billion non-military aid promised between 2002-08, with the U.S. responsible to half the shortfall. Oxfam stated that the economic assistance, at $7 million a day compared to $100 million a day, well short of recent aid to other post-conflict countries, had been insufficient, and in many instances ineffectual or wasteful, jeopardizing economic progress and security. The report also criticized the Afghan government for corruption and inability to absorb all of the aid. The government could not account for where one-third of the $15 billion in aid since 2001 had gone. The report called for a review of international assistance, two-thirds of which by passes the government, and fails relieve poverty sufficiently. It was seen as shocking that 40% of the aid did not remain in the country, but returned abroad in consultant fees and foreign company profits. A UN report, released a few days earlier, found that Taliban attacks were putting 10% of Afghanistan off limits to aid workers. A report of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, found in early February, that this year’s opium crop in Afghanistan (driven in large part by lack of alternative income) was expected to be close to last year’s record, despite attempts at eradication. In Taliban controlled area’s of the south and west of the nation, expansion of Opium poppy production is occurring with the Taliban encouragement, as it brings the movement considerable tax revenue.

The Center for Defense Information (CDI), “Afghanistan Update: March 1-31, 2008,” April 11, 2008 (http://www.cdi.org/program/document.cfm?DocumentID=4272&from_page=../index.cfm), founnd: “The unrest in the southern provinces of Afghanistan, particularly Kandahar and Helmand continues to gravely affect the work of international troops. The instability in the Afghan/Pakistan border regions also threaten operations in Afghanistan, as vital supply lines running through Pakistan continue to be threatened – most recently over 20 fuel trucks were blown up on in Pakistan while on their way to coalition forces in Afghanistan. NATO, accordingly, is looking toward Russia to potentially provide alternative supply routes into Afghanistan. Meanwhile, the uncharacteristically harsh winter combined with drastic price increases for staples such as wheat threaten to create a food crisis. While the United Nation’s World Food Programme is working to distribute aid and relief, many areas of Afghanistan remain unsafe for aid workers to operate. Additionally, the Taliban attacked a series of telecommunications towers this month. In February the insurgents threatened to attack towers that did not shut down at night.”

ICG, “Afghanistan: The Need for International Resolve,” February 6, 2008 (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5285&l=1), states, “Afghanistan is not lost, but the international community must urgently strengthen its resolve if the negative trends are to be reversed.” “Six years after the Taliban’s ouster, the international community lacks both a common diagnosis of what is needed to stabilize the country and unity of effort. Stability has proved elusive, and insurgent violence is severely affecting government outreach and development efforts in around half the country. Without greater coordination and a more strategic approach by the many international actors – both civilian and military – the increased attention and resources now directed at quelling the conflict could prove counterproductive by furthering a tendency to seek quick fixes. Troop contributing countries, including major NATO member states like Germany, France and Italy, have to be prepared to deploy troops, with the required mandates, wherever in the country they are needed. All allies, including the U.S., must commit to genuine coordination mechanisms. Within Afghanistan efforts must focus on institution building, not individual Afghan players, and tackle a culture of impunity. The international community must also reassess strategic interests in the region, notably the need to address the Pakistan problem more realistically and to insulate Afghanistan as much as possible from the U.S.-Iran confrontation.”

Paul Eckert, “US studies fear Afghan decline to terrorist haven,” published by the Washington-based Center for the Study of the Presidency (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19250.htm), reported, January 30, that two studies conclude that “The prospect of again losing significant parts of Afghanistan to the forces of Islamic extremists has moved from the improbable to the possible.” “Afghanistan’s failure would deal a strategic defeat to the U.S. fight against Islamic extremism that would destabilize neighboring Pakistan and threaten the future of NATO, the studies warned. ‘Urgent changes are required now to prevent Afghanistan from becoming a failing or failed state,’ said a report by the Atlantic Council, a Washington think tank. ‘If Afghanistan fails, the possible strategic consequences will worsen regional instability, do great harm to the fight against Jihadist and religious extremism, and put in grave jeopardy NATO’s future as a credible, cohesive and relevant military alliance’, it said”

The Israeli-Palestinian situation deteriorated over the past three months, with Israel intensifying raids into Gaza, creating the worst clashes in a year, and reducing supplies and electricity to already very short supplied Gaza, in response to continued sporadic missile firings – including for the for the first time with longer range missiles (and the Israeli response being countered by more missile firings), continued in the West Bank: Israeli raids, some deadly, and assassinations; building of the security wall – often taking Palestinian land without compensation, allowing and at times directly taking part in settlement and Israeli housing expansion, often confiscating Palestinian land, maintaining and increasing road blocks (despite pledges to the United States to remove some of the existing ones) – finally removing  few minimally important road blocks under U.S. pressure – making life increasingly very difficult for Palestinians. Some of the more extreme Israeli actions have greatly increased Palestinian anger, including a rare unity on the West Bank, with a general strike in March. In late February thousands of Gazans demonstrated peacefully at the Israeli boarder, against the Israeli blockade. One impact on Palestinians has been to increase support for Hamas. Another response, in February, was the first suicide bombing in a year in Israel, with the military wing of Hamas taking responsibility, apparently signaling the end of a three year moratorium. In early March, a Palestinian gunman shot eight students to death in an Israel Yeshiva, before being killed. In late March, Israel announced that it will outfit its airliners with a missile defense system.

As in the past, many of the Israeli government raids and assassinations have taken place just prior to negotiations with the Palestinians – giving the impression that the government wants to undermine any chance of progress – and only participates in them for public relations purposes. As a result, particularly of Israel’s actions against Gaza and its people, Palestinian President Abas broke off negotiations with the Israeli government, in protest. However, under pressure from U.S. President Bush and Secretary of State Rice, the talks were restarted in March, with an agreement, in April, that both sides would continue them until their conclusion, with the hope of attaining President Bush’s goal of reaching a peace settlement by the end of the year. The White House appeared to change its position, in March, giving tacit support to Israeli negotiations with Hamas. In late February, Arab leaders pressed Israel to respond positively to their peace initiative, threatening to withdraw the offer of full normalization of relations in return for restoring the occupied lands to the Palestinians. The Arab communication, is an indication of growing disillusionment in the possibility of a two state solution in Arab nations,

David Rose, “The Gaza Bombshell,” Vanity Fair, April Edition, (Posted March 3 at http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19458.htm) reports, that following the White house failure to anticipate Hamas’ victory over Fatah in the 2006 Palestinian election, “Vanity Fair has obtained confidential documents, since corroborated by sources in the U.S. and Palestine, which lay bare a covert initiative, approved by Bush and implemented by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Deputy National Security Adviser Elliott Abrams, to provoke a Palestinian civil war. The plan was for forces led by Dahlan, and armed with new weapons supplied at America’s behest, to give Fatah the muscle it needed to remove the democratically elected Hamas-led government from power. (The State Department declined to comment.) But the secret plan backfired, resulting in a further setback for American foreign policy under Bush. Instead of driving its enemies out of power, the U.S.-backed Fatah fighters inadvertently provoked Hamas to seize total control of Gaza.”

While the economy and living conditions in Gaza continue to be miserable, because of the Israeli blockade, the West Bank is advancing financially. Since the end of the freezing of the foreign money supply, after Hamas won the elections in 2006, which was reversed when Hamas took over in Gaza last June and PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas sacked the short-lived Hamas government, and installed a new one in Ramallah to function as a caretaker until the next elections, the West Bank private sector has recovered and was estimated to be expanding at a 10% annual rate, at the end of 2007. ICG, “Ruling Palestine I: Gaza Under Hamas,” March 19 (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5341&l=1), pointed out that, “The policy of squeezing Gaza and isolating Hamas has not worked. A new approach is needed if violence is to end and a viable peace process is to be promoted.” Nicolas Pelham, Crisis Group‚s Senior Analyst in Jerusalem, finds, “The policy of isolating Hamas and Gaza is bankrupt and, by all conceivable measures, has backfired. The population’s suffering has only increased its dependence on its rulers.” The report states that, “Though difficult, a different way forward is imaginable: a mutual ceasefire in Gaza; a credible international effort to prevent arms smuggling from Egypt into Gaza; and an opening of Gaza‚s border crossings to alleviate Palestinian suffering. At the same time, efforts toward intra-Palestinian reconciliation are needed.” “If trends continue, the worst is imaginable: increased firing of rockets against Israeli towns and cities as well as the resumption of bombings and attacks inside Israel; intensified Israeli military incursions, targeted assassinations and attacks on key installations; the collapse of the peace process; the discrediting of pragmatic Palestinian leaders; and, potentially, the conflict’s spread to the West Bank or Lebanon.”

Gareth Evans, “Punishing Hamas Has Backfired,” The Christian Science Monitor, March 27, 2008 (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5354&l=1) writes, “The policy of isolating Hamas and applying sanctions to Gaza has been a predictable failure. Violence to both Gazans and Israelis is rising. Economic conditions are ruinous, generating anger and despair. The credibility of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and other pragmatic forces has been grievously damaged. The peace process is in tatters. Meanwhile, Hamas’s hold on the Gaza Strip, purportedly the principal target of the policy, has been strengthened.” A plan is being completed to arrange a meeting between exiled senior Hamas leader Khalid Mash`al and former US President Jimmy Carter in Damascus on April 18, Palestinian sources told the London-based Arabic newspaper Al-Hayat on April 8. If the meeting is held, Carter will become the highest-ranking American official ever to publicly meet with Hamas leaders. For more go to: http://www.kibush.co.il/show_file.asp?num=26224.

Israeli forces raided money changers shops in the West Bank confiscating NIS 3 million, in February (“Army confiscating NIS 3 million from West Bank money changers,” Ma`an News, February. 12, 2008, http://www.maannews.net/en/index.php?opr=ShowDetails&ID=27739). Ma`an News Agency reported, April 8, 2008 (http://www.maannews.net/en/index.php?opr=ShowDetails&ID=28671) Thirty Israeli military vehicles entered the northern Gaza Strip city of Jabalia early on April 8, stopping 100 meters from a Palestinian residential neighborhood, witnesses said. Jabalia residents said the Israeli forces have been firing heavily towards the Palestinian houses, but no casualties have yet been reported. The mood in Jabalia is tense, with residents fearing that the vehicles could signal the beginning of a major Israeli incursion.

Israel is proceeding with the construction of 1100 new apartments in East Jerusalem, which the Palestinians hold is their territory, and wish to be their capital (<http://www.kibush.co.il/show_file.asp?num=25125>http://www.kibush.co.il/show_file.asp?num=25125). James Kitfield reported in the National Journal, with help from the Israeli Supreme Court, Peace Now has obtained documents on building permits and demolition orders from the Israeli Defense Ministry, which administers the West Bank. In the last seven years, the ministry has rejected 94 percent of Palestinian construction requests, approving only 91 of 1,624 applications. Over the same period, Israeli settlers constructed 18,472 houses in their West Bank settlements. Israel likewise issued demolition orders against 4,993 illegally built Palestinian houses, one-third of which were carried out. For every construction permit granted to a Palestinian, 18 houses were torn down. “What those figures show is that the de facto policy of Israel is a quiet transfer of land to settlers and the expulsion of Palestinians,” Hagit Ofran said. “They don’t accomplish that by force, nor do they roll up with trucks to take Palestinians away. They just don’t allow them to rebuild their villages or repair their homes.” For more go to: http://www.kibush.co.il/show_file.asp?num=26227

The other Israel, April 8 (http://www.kibush.co.il/show_file.asp?num=26229) carried Yariv Oppenheimer, of bitterlemons.org, report, “The settlement of Modiin Illit, which in early March was declared a full-fledged municipality, offers an excellent example of the way Israeli governments have obliterated the green line and de facto annexed territory while simultaneously proceeding with peace negotiations. In 1993 when the Oslo accord was signed, the land adjacent to the Palestinian village of Bil`in was empty. Yet within three years, even as a process unfolded whereby Israel recognized the right of the Palestinian people to a state in the West Bank, construction began on the Modiin Illit settlement to provide housing solutions for the ultra orthodox sector. Today, this settlement comprises 37,500 residents. Plans are advancing to expand it deeper into the West Bank; just this week two new enlargement plans were released. [[NB] This is what the struggle of Bil`in is all about. ed].” The other Israel also stated that Akiva Eldar wrote in Haaretz “According to the transcript of the February 25 meeting, which addressed the outposts and the implementation of the Sasson Report, committee chairman MK Zevulun Orlev asked Ramon: “To add 20 more homes in Ofra has political implications? I want to understand the point.” Ramon responded: “From many standpoints Ofra is not a good example for you, because all of it is build on private Arab land, private Palestinian property.” (…) Ramon`s official statement has both political and legal implications. This may include compensation demands by the Palestinian property owners”. For more go to: http://www.kibush.co.il/show_file.asp?num=26221. On April 7, The Israeli High Court of Justice ordered the evacuation of an illegal settlement outpost. which was constructed by settlers on privately owned Palestinian land in Al Khader town, west of the West Bank city of Bethlehem. The appeal of landowner Moneer Mousa was lodged through Hagit Ofran of the Peace Now Settlement Monitoring Team. For more go to: http://www.imemc.org/article/54020.

Police, in early April, shut the Jerusalem studio of RAM-FM, a radio station aimed at promoting reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians, owned by the South African Jewish businessman Issy Kirsh and modeled after a South African station that provided a venue for reconciliation after apartheid. Police shut down the Jerusalem transmitter and closed the studio, taking away staff for questioning and hauling away equipment. After the raid, the station remained on the air from Ramallah as usual. For more go to:http://www.kibush.co.il/show_file.asp?num=26222. Early in the morning of Friday April 11th IDF troops invaded the home of the Abu Maria family and arrested Mousa Abu Maria. Mousa is a well known nonviolent activist and a co-founder of the Palestinian Solidarity Project. He has been a lead organizer in peaceful protest involving hundreds of Israelis and internationals and has been committed to nonviolence for several years. When Mousa was arrested his family was not told of the reason of his arrest or his whereabouts. When his lawyer managed to locate him, it turned out he was being held in military jail, but still no reason for his arrest was given. Days later was his lawyer was told that he was suspected of membership in a terrorist organization, but when his interrogation did not turn up any evidence the prosecution admitted that there ‘may’ not be enough evidence to put him on trial. But he was not released! The prosecution has said they are considering putting Mousa in Administrative Detention, in which he has no right to trial, no matter how little evidence there may be against them.

An agreement was made, in July, between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, providing a mechanism, based on behavior during a probation period, by which militants could be removed from Israel’s lists of individuals to be arrested or assassinated. At the beginning of the probation period, the men sign a document obligating them to refrain from taking part in any military activity, surrender their weapons to the PA, and accept a series of restrictions on their activity. In November, three months after the start of the program, a statement issued by Israel’s General Security Service announced that “the results of the amnesty deal indicate a change on the ground and we are seeing that some of the militants are indeed abandoning the path of terror.” This spring, a report issued by the, typically-hawkish Israeli Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center (ITIC), found that the second three-month phase of this program “concluded successfully with most of the wanted men, upwards of 200, fulfilling its requirements. Only a few of the participants made marginal violations of their agreements. In parallel, the atmosphere that was created in the West Bank contributed to a general drop in the number of terror attacks and in their gravity, including among terrorists that were not included in the agreement.” This change in the behavior of those not covered by the program is attributed to “a positive dynamic that was established following [the agreement].” The ITIC report found also that “the contribution of the PA’s security services to the success of the program was limited. The success of this phase comes principally from the motivation of the wanted men in the program to improve their personal standing by returning to the routine of civilian life.” For more go to: http://www.peacenow.org/mepr.asp?rid=&cid=4538.

A poll prepared by Dr. Nabil Kukali of the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion (PCPO), on March 12 revealed that 73% of the Palestinians support, at present, a Palestinian-Israeli calm period. 49.4 % oppose the suicide bombings inside Israel as being opposed to Palestinian national interest. 67.4% are in favor calling on Hamas leadership in Gaza to retreat from the “military decision”. 70.5% oppose the decision made by the Palestinian government in favor of necessitating a “clearance certificate” requiring of every citizen to submit first an evidence that he/she has paid all his/her financial liabilities to the Tax Department, to the water and electricity companies and others, and cleared off any penalties or fines recorded against him/her before starting or filing an official treatment at a governmental department or institution. 72.5% evaluated their economic situation as ‘bad’. The support shown for Marwan El-Barghouthi as a possible president of the Palestinian Authority has increased in this poll by 1.5% compared with a poll published September 22, 2007 and reached 24.3%, while the support for Mahmoud Abbas, the acting PA-president, dropped by 3.0% to 23.1%. 63.3% of the Palestinian public supported the call of Hamas’ activists, who are released from the jails of the Palestinian Authority in Nablus governorate, on their companions to hand over their arms to the official security bodies to put an end to their persecution by these officials, while 27.7% were opposed. Furthermore, 67.4% of Palestinians supported the call of the released Hamas group on their leadership in Gaza to retreat from the “military decision” and to reinstate the situation as it was before June 14th of last year, in order to create the proper ground for the resumption of the dialogue between the two major Palestinian parties, while 23.7% were opposed. In the same context, 64.4% of the respondents are in favor of halting the closure of Hamas institutions and licensing them as mentioned in the call of the released Hamas activists, while 26.1% oppose that. 76.1% of the Palestinian public are in favor of the said call in respect of what has been said about the necessity of effecting a change in Hamas and the listening to Hamas young people and to their opinions, while 14% are opposed.

Responding to the question: “What’s your attitude towards a Palestinian – Israeli truce at present?” 37.8% answered “I strongly support it”, 35.2% “I somewhat support it”, 14.5% “I somewhat oppose it”, 9.8% “I strongly oppose it” and 2.7 % answered “I don’t know“. Responding to the question:” Do you support or oppose the deployment of multinational forces in Gaza Strip?“, 32.9% answered: “strongly oppose”, 26.3% “somewhat oppose”, 25% “somewhat support”, 13.4 % “strongly support” and 2.3 % answered ” I don’t know “. In respect of the question:” Now think of the future when your children are your Age! Do you think there would be at that time peace between Israelis and Palestinians?” 2.5% answered “definitely”, 19.8% “Likely”, 6.7% “Possible”, 23.4% “Unlikely”, 34.2% “Definitely not” and 3.3% answered “I don’t know”.

Responding to the question: “Up to which extent are you satisfied or not satisfied with the performance of the PA-President, Mr. Mahmoud Abbas?” 15.0% answered “quite satisfied”, 41.7% “Somewhat satisfied”, 23.7% “Somewhat not satisfied”, 17.5% “Quite unsatisfied” and 2.1% answered “I don’t know”. 10.9 % evaluated the performance of the Palestinian PM, Mr. Salam Fayyad at “very good”, 30.2% at “good”, 24.2% at “mediocre”, while 15.7% evaluated his performance at “bad”, 15.7% at “very bad” and 3.2% declined to answer the question. Upon the question:” Do you support a polling at present for the election of the PA-President?” 29.0% answered “I strongly support”, 25.5% “I somewhat support”, 27.9% “I somewhat oppose”, 13.4% “I strongly oppose” and 4.5% answered “I don’t know”.

Responding to the question: “Up to which extent are you worried about the naked subsistence of your family at present?” 39.3% answered “worried”, 38.4% are “too much worried”, 17.0% “Not so much worried”, 3.5% “Not worried at all” and 1.8% answered “I don’t know”. 72.6% of Palestinians evaluated the general economic condition in the Palestinian territories as “bad”, 23.1% said “it’s mediocre”, 2.8% described it as “good” and 1.6% declined to answer. Regarding the question: “Up to which extent are you worried about your personal security?”, 31.% answered “too much worried”, 37.5% are “worried”, 23.9% are “not so much worried”, 5.6% are “not worried at all” and 2.% answered ” I don’t know”. 34.7% of the respondents answered that they, notwithstanding the prevailing political and economical conditions of the country, are “optimistic”, while 60.1% said they are ” pessimistic ” and 5.2% declined to answer. Responding to the question: “What is your main concern at present?” 25.0% answered “job/money”, 35.9% “The security”, 17.5% “The health” and 20.3% “The future” and 1.2% answered “I don’t know”. Answering the question: “How much are you in general content with your life?” taking into consideration that the answers were in figures from 1 to 10 where 1 stands for the utmost degree of discontent and 10 for the utmost degree of content. The outcome was in average 3.98 and the standard deviation was 2.29. For more information and the complete poll, contact Dr. Nabil Kukali and Elias Kukali, P.O. Box 15, Beit Sahour – Palestine, Tel: 00970 2 277 4846, kukali@p-ol.com, www.pcpo.ps.

A poll taken by Khalil Shikaki, in mid-March, found that the overwhelming majority of Palestinians supported the attack in the Jewish Yeshiva that killed eight students, as well as an ending of peace negotiations and the firing of rockets from the Gaza strip at Israeli towns, the first time in 15 years of poling that a majority supported violence against Israelis. Shitaki, agreeing with views expressed widely in Palestinian media, believes that the change n view is the result of the increased Israeli attacks in Gaza and the West Bank, especially attcks in Gaza that had killed almost 130 people, the undercover operation in Bethlehem just before peace talks were to commence, killing four militants, and the announced expansion of several West Bank settlements, creating despair and rage.

Ynet News reported, April 7, that a recent survey, conducted by Agenda and the Teleseker polling company, finds that the majority of Israelis are ready for increased visibility of Israeli Arabs in the media.

At a conference sponsored by the Van Leer Institute in Jerusalem, in February, a team of Israeli military experts, composed of senior reserve officers in the IDF, including former heads of Military Intelligence and the Civil Administration, as well as division, brigade, and battalion commanders presented an alternative to Israel’s current use of roadblocks in the West Bank, sending its recommendations to Defense Minister Ehud Barak. The officers argued that while West Bank checkpoints prevent terror attacks in the short term, they also motivate terror. The officers suggested that reducing the number of checkpoints which then stood at 550 (as of April 13, 2008 at 500) – could help calm the atmosphere in the West Bank and undermine the status of Hamas in Gaza. Their alternative plan would employ a system of roving roadblocks, a rear defense line adjacent to the Green Line, better protective measures on the roads used by Israelis, and improved coordination with the Palestinian security forces. For more go to: peacenow.org/mepr.asp?rid=&cid=4538.

Ha’aretz,reprted April 8, that a mosque in Israel showed its national pride in honor of the country’s 60th year anniversary, by painting the dome of their mosque in the national colors: blue and white. The Arab village mayor stated, “We are residents of Israel. Our religion encourages love and closeness among nations. Jews, Muslims, we are all cousins, right?”

Peter Harling, “Lessons of the Franco-Syrian Fiasco,” Syria Today, March 2008  (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5345&l=1), comments “The key to ending the stalemate between Syria and the West starts with understanding why the French initiative failed. French mediation efforts in Lebanon were based above all on the assumption that initiating a dialogue with Syria would bear more fruit than the pressures exerted by the Bush administration. The failure of this enthusiastic push now leaves many Western and Arab officials under the impression that dialogue is in itself sterile, thus reactivating a policy of isolation and sanctions, of questionable effectiveness. If the next American administration is to break the stalemate, it will have to learn the lessons of this aborted rapprochement.” “a hasty solution was not to Damascus’ liking, as – from its perspective – the stakes involved should induce caution. Indeed, since the Syrian withdrawal in 2005, the Lebanese scene has undergone dramatic changes, creating both temptation and angst. Syrian influence may emerge strengthened or considerably weakened – a stated objective of Washington and its Lebanese allies. Notably, the replacement of the pro-Syrian President Lahoud is likely to have profound repercussions on a political system founded on subtle balances and on rules that are up for renegotiation. The question of whether Syria wants to restore its full hegemony over its neighbor remains open to debate. What is certain is that Lebanon is of crucial importance to Damascus, something French enticements could not eclipse.” “Hezbollah, which remains a bargaining card for the return of the Golan Heights (occupied by Israel), appears at present as Syria’s key asset in maintaining its influence in Lebanon, thwarting the perceived malevolent projects of a pro-Western majority, and projecting its strategic importance. Thus it is doubtful that Damascus would try to force a solution that Hezbollah would begrudge. However, the French, by delegating dealings with Hezbollah to Syria, deprived themselves of the means to understand – and therefore overcome – its red lines.” “But Syria is only part of the solution in Lebanon, and dialogue is no substitute for a genuine mediation effort aiming to reduce the still-yawning gaps. From Syria’s point of view, France also was only part of the solution. The rapprochement only made sense if it initiated a wider dynamic, heralding a package deal: recognition of its interests in Lebanon, reconciliation with Arab states, a change of mind of the United States and negotiations over the Golan.“

Don Duncan, “Lebanese struggle with broken economy” Pulitzer Center on Global Reporting, March 25, (http://www.pulitzercenter.org/openitem.cfm?id=835) finds the Lebanese economy has been declining, with 28% of the population now living below the poverty line. The economic problems parallel the continuing political crises, which includes parliament again and again putting off a vote to elect a new President, because the underlying political divisions remain unbridged, and the possibility persisting of a new civil war, with assassinations and outbreaks of conflict occurring periodically. In early March, Saudi Arabia recalled its Ambassador from Syria, and told all its citizens to leave that country, as Saudi Arabia considered itself a target of Syria and it allies after depositing $1 billion dollars in the national bank of Lebanon, in support of the Lebanese government, currently headed by those seeking an end to strong Syrian influence in Lebanon’s affairs.

Michael Slackman, “Dreams Stifled, Egypt’s Yong Turn to  Islamic Fervor,” The New York Times, February 17, 2008, p. 1, points out that in Egypt, as in some other countries of the Middle East, the government’s failure to develop an effective economy, has left many young people with no jobs, money or status (a dangerous situation for the rise of radial and violent movements), leading many of them into religion for solace and meaning, bringing along families, and the government.

>>>

Military repression continues in Burma (“Myanmar“) with the democratic opposition remaining active, underground, while its economy remains in poor condition. In late February, the military government announced that a new constitution had been approved, after 14 years, for a referendum, in May. Its terms would bar Nobel Prize winning democracy leader, Suu Kyi, still under house arrest, from running for public office, because she had been married to a foreigner. The International Crisis Group, “Burma/Myanmar: After the Crackdown, January 31, 2008 (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?l=5&id=5273&m=1), states, “A three-level approach, drawing on the respective strengths of the UN, the country’s neighbours and the wider international community, is needed to promote change in Burma/Myanmar.” “Myanmar’s neighbors, especially China and members of ASEAN, need to seize the moment,” says John Virgoe, Crisis Group’s South East Asia Project Director. “Regional multi-party talks ˆ coordinated with the UN Secretary-General”s special envoy, Ibrahim Gambari, and backed by the wider international community – hold out the best hope for launching a meaningful process of national reconciliation and broader reform.” “While new opportunities for change exist, there are profound structural obstacles. The balance of power is still heavily weighted in favor of the army, whose top leaders insist that only a strongly centralized, military-led state can hold the country together. Myanmar faces immense challenges, too, in overcoming the debilitating legacy of decades of conflict, poverty and institutional failure, which fuelled the recent crisis and could well overwhelm any future government. All international actors with some ability to influence the situation need to become actively involved in working for change, including the emergence of a broader, more inclusive, better organized political society. At the core, Special Envoy Gambari plays a vital role promoting dialogue and coordinating unprecedented international efforts. He deserves strong, consistent international backing, including from Ban Ki-moon personally, whose direct involvement in talks would be a powerful signal.”

The military junta in Burma announced, this winter, a set of wide-ranging reforms, including a new constitution, a referendum, elections, and transition to a civilian government. Foreign Policy in Focus (FPIF) (http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/5063) analyst May Oo reflected skeptically of the government’s plans, while urging the opposition and the international community to come up with a serious response. “The Burmese government’s approach – which involves the National Convention, the constitutional drafting, a referendum, and elections in 2010 – does not seem to promise the people of Burma the future they have long been anticipating, which is a genuinely peaceful union, and peace requires participation. People cannot be forced into a democracy not of their own making. The people of Burma will not participate as long as they are under attack, militarily and otherwise. They cannot participate in a transition if they remain as refugees in Thailand. A democratic transition cannot proceed as long as there is a war against Burma’s minorities.”

After decades of repression under Chinese rule, the Tibetan people’s frustrations burst onto the streets oh Lahsa and other cities, and spread to Tibetan population in neighboring provinces of China, in mid-March, in protests and riots, which the Chinese put down violently, with at least 100 deaths reported unofficially. Chinese security forces went house to house, after the street demonstrations, searching for suspected demonstrators. The Dalai Lama has called for restraint by China and Tibetan-China dialogue. Many Tibetans now want to push harder for independence. Numerous groups and governments around the world have criticized Chinese repression of Tibetans and are calling for the Chinese government to begin a more respectful policy toward Tibetans. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called on both Chinese forces and demonstrators in Tibet to show restraint after days of rioting, urging a peaceful resolution (for more go to: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7301912.stm). International protest has been exceptionally strong, including interruptions, beginning in Europe, and then in San Francisco of the carrying of the Olympic torch to the site of this summers Olympic Games, in Beijing. The Presidents of France and Germany, and the British Prime Minister have said that they will not attend the games official opening ceremony, and there are calls for President Bush to do the same, unless China changes its policy. Some say the same should be done to force China to put pressure on Sudan, where it extracts oil, to pressure the government to change policy on Darfur. There are indications, which China publicly denies, that international pressure has caused China to begin to Press Sudan to cease its ethnic cleansing in Darfur.

China’s crackdown on Tibetans, in and around Tibet, had some impact on the late March election in Taiwan. But while poling indicates it made the vote closer, it did not prevent the election of Ma Ying-jeou as President, who has pledged to work for closer ties with the Mainland. Some initial discussions toward improving relations between Taiwan and the mainland have begun.

World Security Institute (WSI) Program Assistant Todd Fine, “Missile Defense: A Wrong Turn for U.S.-India Cooperation?” (http://www.cdi.org/program/document.cfm?DocumentID=4227&from_page=../index.cfm) comments that the possibility of U.S. India cooperation on missile defense, which, if it occurs, would transfer advanced anti-missile technology to India, that arose at meetings arranging for large scale U.S. arms sales to India by the U.S., in New Delhi on Feb. 27, would be of doubtful benefit to the United States, while likely creating serious difficulties. “introducing American missile defense know-how into South Asia would create a new strategic dynamic that could be hugely destabilizing. India and Pakistan have relatively small nuclear forces with immature and unsophisticated command and control systems.” Although even the American technologies still face significant technical hurdles, simply the prospect of an advanced Indian missile defense, whether ultimately effective or not, could force Pakistan to re-evaluate its nuclear posture. Pakistan might feel compelled to invest in additional missile construction and countermeasure technology to ensure the ability to overwhelm and thwart the system. In particular, the Pakistanis would likely increase investment in their “Babur” (Hatf-7) cruise missile delivery program based on the Chinese DH-10 design. [3] A great deal of the needed missile technology would likely come from China, further fueling the arms race in South Asia. Pakistan, like India , largely keeps its nuclear warheads separate from their delivery vehicles. Missile defenses, however, may generate fears about the implications of India possibly altering its no-first-use policy during a crisis. In order to ensure its ability to overwhelm missile defenses in a retaliatory strike, Pakistan might shift to a more sensitive alert posture with warheads increasingly mated to their delivery systems, thereby increasing the risk of nuclear accidents. Although the details of Pakistan’s command and control system are unknown, Pakistani nuclear planners are increasingly mulling launch-on-warning options, a route which might appear even more attractive in the face of an oncoming Indian missile defense. Since India is simultaneously developing both missile defense and a more survivable, triad-like force structure (underlined by India ’s test of an undersea missile as Gates arrived in India), in a rapidly escalating strategic crisis, Pakistan might even consider using its nuclear arsenal before it loses further viability.” “In addition to the negative strategic implications, the United States would take an immediate political hit from Russia and China, countries increasingly concerned about the Indian nuclear arsenal and the continued U.S. development of an international missile defense network.”

The new Liberal government of Australia, in January, reversed its predecessor’s policy, telling India it will not sell it uranium unless it sighs the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The new Australian government also has apologized to its Aboriginal citizens for many years of mistreatment.

Nepal continues to struggle with ethnic divisions with the approach of the important April 10 election of a constitution writing assembly, which had been delayed three times since its original date last June. In February, several ethnic rights groups called a general strike to demand increased autonomy and additional guaranteed seats in the legislature. The strike caused a fuel shortages shutting down a considerable amount of transportation in the capital, resulting in shut schools, other services and businesses. ICG, “Nepal’s Election and Beyond,” April 2, 2008 (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5369&l=1) stated, “Elections for Nepal’s Constituent Assembly on 10 April could be marred by political violence, but if all parties cooperate, it will open the next stage in the peace process.” “There are many encouraging indications for the upcoming elections. Party campaigning has built up momentum and, combined with critical media scrutiny, has been boosting public awareness of the electoral system and party positions. The country has considerable experience of elections, although this is the first time Nepalis will elect a constitution-drafting body.” “The main challenges concern the violence and intimidation that have dogged the campaign. Public security has been dismal throughout the ceasefire. Armed groups active in the Tarai plains have vowed to disrupt the elections, and the main parties have also engaged in misconduct. The Maoists are responsible for the most systematic attacks on other parties, but they have also been the greatest victims, with eight of their activists killed. The widely respected Election Commission has to manage a complex parallel electoral system, which poses considerable technical and logistical challenges, as well as dealing with likely appeals. The post-poll period will likely be difficult and dangerous. Under the best of circumstances, it will probably take three weeks to determine final results, and the behavior of powerful losers will shape the immediate aftermath. Therefore, the parties‚ first commitment must be to respect the election’s outcome, as long as it is broadly free and fair. Whatever the results, seven-party cohesion would smooth the way forward, but leaders will need to prepare for a broader unity government that includes other parties that do well at the polls. The priority will then be to tackle the sensitive remaining parts of the peace deal, starting with grasping the nettle of security sector reform and converting the extended military ceasefire into structural support for sustainable peace”.

.

With the ethnic division of Sri Lanka worsening, as its civil war escalates, ICG, “Sri Lanka’s Return to War: Limiting the Damage,” February 20 (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5305&l=1), recommends, “With Sri Lanka again in civil war, the international community must concentrate on protecting civilians from the war’s worst effects and supporting those working to preserve its embattled democratic institutions.” At this point, the conflict “has no resolution in sight. The government‚s desire to defeat the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and end the war definitively is understandable. But by failing to protect human rights or share power with moderate, unarmed Tamil and Muslim political forces, its military approach has strengthened extremists on both sides in an escalating cycle of violence.” Crisis Group Senior Adviser, Sidney Jones, comments, “The military and much of the government leadership believe they can defeat or permanently weaken the Tigers by the end of 2008. But even assuming the Tigers can be defeated militarily, it remains unclear how, without large-scale repression, the government would pacify and control the large Tamil-speaking areas in the north that have been under their domination for a decade or more.” “The current conflict is worse than what preceded the 2002 ceasefire, and much of the blame for the resumption in violence lies with the LTTE. Its ceasefire violations and abuses of the population under its control helped push the government towards war. However, President Mahinda Rajapaksa has also overplayed his hand. Relying on support from Sinhala extremists, his agenda is based almost entirely on a military approach. Human rights violations, attacks on civilians and political repression from both sides have accompanied the return to war. As unpromising as present circumstances are, the government should be alert to any opportunities that arise to promote a new peace process. Meanwhile, the international community needs to use its limited leverage to prevent further deterioration, while developing strategies to strengthen the moderate, non-violent forces still committed to a peaceful and just settlement and to building the middle ground. Ultimately, the answer will be a political arrangement significantly beyond the unitary state but far short of a separate Tamil state. This will require pressing the Tigers and their supporters to abandon terrorism and separatism, while simultaneously encouraging a new consensus in the south in support of constitutional and state reforms. But such a lasting political solution will only gain traction once conditions on the ground improve.” “With no chance of a new ceasefire or major peace initiatives soon, responsible parties in Sri Lanka and the international community must defend those caught in the middle,” says Michael Shaikh, Crisis Group Advocacy and Research Analyst. “Human rights defenders, Sinhalese good governance activists and Muslim, Tamil and Up-Country Tamil parties that are still committed to peaceful change are the political forces on which hope for the future depends.”

Pakistan, which was suffering increased violence and turmoil, amidst confrontation between opposition parties and pro-democracy advocates with the military rule of General Musharraf, has taken a taken a major turn with the crushing defeat of Musharraf in his Presidential run, and with the victory of opposition parties at the poles. With Musharfif having to resign his military post, to run for President, there is a new head of the army, who has supported the return to democracy by having all military officers in government posts resign from their civil positions. Detained judges and lawyers have been released. The new government intends a different approach to the troubles in tribal areas, including the presence of Afghani Taliban and al Queda members, some important leaders among them. The new government wants a halt to U.S. attacks on Taliban and al Qaeda elements within its boarders, and wants to begin talks with tribal leaders. The Bush administration is unhappy with this change – and with its lessened influence, partly due to its considerable support for Musharraf – but this writer suspects that the governments approach is more likely to increase peace and stability in the country, and might lead to a lessened Taliban el Queda presence. The former vacillating policy of escalated Pakistani Army attacks against the foreign fighters and their domestic friends, alternating with truce agreements, was accomplishing very little. To this writer, it seems time to give domestic diplomacy a serious try. It was reported, prior to the elections (Carotta Gali, “In Tribal Pakistan, Religious Parties Are Foundering,” The New York Times, February 14, 2008), that religious parties in the tribal areas, and perhaps in the rest of Pakistan, were losing support, and were likely to lose most of the 50 seats they held in parliament, that had made them king makers, and allowed them to give Musharraf important support.

Peace Campaign Group (PCG) (RZ-I-91/211, West Sagarpur, New Delhi-110046, India, Tel: + 91-11-2 539 8383, pcgoffice@yahoo.co.in or pcgonline@gmail.com), February 23, 2008 reported that the Bangladeshi military was forcing Muslim settlers to occupy lands of the Jumma indigenous people in the CHT, under a State of Emergency and de facto military rule placed in the country since mid-January, forcing all indigenous human rights defenders to cease their activities. The Jumma indigenous peoples led by the Parbatya Chattagram Jana Samhati Samiti (PCJSS-United People’s Party) have been fighting with the Bangladeshi authorities for recognition and protection of their distinct identity and culture and for self-determination since 1972. In response, the authorities have adopted a policy of demographic invasion or ŒIslamization‚ the term as the local people prefer to use for it, under which hundreds of thousands of Bangladeshi Muslim Bengalis are transferred to and settled in the land of the indigenous peoples with government funds and active involvement of state-actors, particularly the military. The policy is aimed at cleansing the indigenous peoples ethnically and culturally, and resulted in killing of over 10,000 Jummas in the 13 major genocides (Jumma Committee for International Campaign, 1999, http://www.angelfire.com/ab/jumma) and other forms of human rights violation as well as in migration of about 70,000 Jummas into the Indian State of Tripura in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

While some violent terrorist attacks continue to occur in Indian Kashmir, including a March 26 bombing, in Sinagar, that wounded at least two dozen people, that act was the was the first major terrorist attack in five months of relative calm.

North Korea is experiencing increasing food shortages, leading the government to cut food rations in the capitol at the beginning of April.

ICG, “Indonesia: Jemaah Islamiyah’s Publishing Industry,” February 28, (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5324&l=1) warns that, “The Indonesian government should more closely monitor publishers associated with Indonesia’s most prominent extremist organization, Jemaah Islamiyah (JI).” But the publishing house should not be closed. The publishers are “disseminating a radical message, but they also may be playing a positive role by channeling JI energies into jihad through the printed word rather than through acts of violence.” “Publishing also provides a meeting ground between leading figures in the JI mainstream, opposed to al-Qaeda-style bombings on Indonesian soil.” Some of the works are tracts by well-known Middle Eastern radicals who have rejected terrorist tactics”.

Increasing tensions among the three main ethnic groups in Malaysia, especially unhappiness in the Indian community about having done poorly in the struggle over prestige, power and religion, led to a weakening if the multicultural governing coalition of Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi in national and state parliamentary elections, in March, as the coalition lost in numerous important races, but still holds a majority. This is the first time in four decades that the ruling coalition has been seriously challenged.

Rebels, in early February, attacked the homes of the President and Prime Minister of Timor Leste, resulting in the deaths of three people, and the serious wounding of President Jose Ramos Horta, who recovered from the attack. ICG, “Timor-Leste’s Displacement Crisis.” (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5355&l=1), March 31, 2008, reported, “If Timor-Leste, which was rocked with violence in 2006 and whose president was seriously shot earlier this year, is to avoid conflict in future, it needs to do more and faster to solve a festering problem that has kept a tenth of its population displaced.” The report “explores why 100,000 people remain displaced, two years after political and sectarian violence drove them from their homes. It notes that some of the IDPs fear renewed violence; some have no home to return to, or are unable to reclaim their property because of inadequate property registration and dispute-resolution mechanisms; others stay in camps for the free rice.” “The IDP camps in Dili are not just a humanitarian disaster zone, but also a visible reminder of the failure of the government and international forces to create a secure environment,” according to John Virgoe, Crisis Group’s South East Asia Project Director. “Resolving the displacement crisis is essential if Timor is to move beyond the 2006 conflict.” “The government finally has a plan – the national recovery strategy – which contains many of the elements needed to promote IDP returns. But only the first pillar – rebuilding houses – is funded in the 2008 budget. No money has been provided for the equally important non-infrastructure elements, such as bolstering security, livelihood support, reconciliation and social safety nets. These elements are important to reduce the risk that social jealousy will obstruct the resettlement process and to promote reconciliation within communities. The strategy also excludes important issues. It does not address options for rebuilding those properties ˆ the majority ˆ that are the subject of ownership disputes. Timor badly needs a functioning land and property regime. Its absence, coupled with the general pressure on housing, lay behind many displacements, with people taking advantage of the 2006 chaos to chase neighboors out of their houses. Draft land laws exist, but successive governments have considered them too controversial. They need to be passed, but, important as it is, land law reform will take time and alternative solutions are needed for IDPs whose houses are the subject of ownership disputes. The recovery strategy also overlooks the need to bring arsonists and the authors of the 2006 violence to justice – important for deterring future displacements. None of those responsible for the violence are behind bars, and several remain in senior leadership positions. Robert Templer, Crisis Group‚s Asia Program Director, notes,”Arson and displacements have become almost routine events in Timor-Leste. The cycle of impunity must be broken, and potential arsonists need to feel that they may face punishment for their actions.”

Following an election in Armenia, in February, that observers from the Organiaation for Security and Cooperation in Europe say was deeply flawed, resulting in the Prime Minister, Serge Sargsyan, being announced as the elected president, days of protest were tuned into riots, in March, after police began attacking peaceful demonstrators. That incident catalyzed growing unrest, and the government imposing a state of emergency. ICG, “Armenia: Picking up the Pieces,” April 8, 2008 (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5385&l=1), stated, “As Armenia inaugurates a president tomorrow amid its worst political crisis this century, the international community must press it to defuse tensions and release political prisoners to ensure stability and the environment to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict with Azerbaijan.” “The current prime minister and president-elect, is President Robert Kocharian‚’s hand-picked successor, but questions about his election and its violent aftermath will undermine his authority. The vote was marred by serious irregularities, and the excessive force and wide arrests by the authorities have caused a deep rift in society.” Crisis Group’s Caucasus Project Director, Magdalena Frichova, comments, “Armenia‚s democracy has in most respects been in retreat for over a decade, with flawed elections, concentration of power in the hands of the executive and an army and security services which enjoy virtual impunity. These latest events further worsen a situation that has been deteriorating for far too long.” “The Sarkisisan administration must begin by urgently seeking credible dialogue with the opposition, releasing prisoners detained on political grounds, stopping arrests and harassment of the opposition and lifting all measures limiting freedom of assembly and expression. But it also needs to address the root causes of the current political stability. European governments and institutions, the U.S. and other actors with leverage over Armenia need to say that cooperation will be more difficult unless an independent investigation into the post-election violence is conducted, and meaningful measures are taken to reconcile the resulting divisions in society and return the country to the path of democratic reform. Unless prompt steps are taken to address the crisis, the U.S. and EU should suspend foreign aid and put on hold negotiations on further and closer cooperation.”

ICG, “Azerbaijan: Independent Islam and the State,” March 23, 2008 (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5351&l=1), warns that “The Azerbaijani government’s policy of controlling all religious life and harsh treatment of some independent Islamic communities risks radicalizing peaceful groups.” The report concludes that the government should respect the independent Muslim groups and include them in a broad debate on state and religion.”

ICG, “Political Murder in Central Asia: No Time to End Uzbekistan‚s Isolation,” February 14, 2008 (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5293&l=1), finds that, “The murder of prominent journalist Alisher Saipov, a strong critic of the Uzbek regime, raises serious new doubts about Western attempts to accommodate the authoritarian government in Tashkent.” “The murder of Alisher Saipov suggests the Uzbek regime may be both more ruthless and more fragile than even its strongest critics would have guessed,” states Paul Quinn-Judge, Crisis Group‚s Central Asia Project Director.”„It hints at possible willingness to risk negative international publicity and condemnation in return for a demonstrative murder that sows fear and a sense of vulnerability among the regime’s enemies.” “The EU and the U.S. need to heed the warnings. Attempts to engage the Uzbek regime are riddled with inconsistencies. Genuine communication presupposes dialogue and ultimately, mutual accommodation. But President Karimov shows little sign he is genuinely disposed to either. Softening the approach taken by Brussels and Washington since the May 2005 massacre in the Uzbek town of Andijon in the hope, for example, of regaining U.S. military use of the K2 airbase for operations in Afghanistan or to check Russian influence in Central Asia is likely only to encourage a dangerous and unpredictable regime.”

ICG, “Kyrgyzstan: The Challenge of Judicial Reform, April 10, 2008 (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5387&l=1). Finds, “If Kyrgyzstan is to become a viable state, it needs to reform its judiciary, which is still highly corrupted and under governmental control.” Paul Quinn-Judge, Crisis Group’s Central Asia Project Director, states, “A lack of faith in the independence of judges, widespread corruption and the extremely slow speed of many legal processes have all fuelled a worrying public disaffection with the court system. People are turning elsewhere to resolve disputes, and informal local leaders -  many with criminal connections or promoting Sharia law – are filling the void.”

Developments in Europe

The Albanian lead government of Kosovo, declared independence, in February. The United States and most European countries quickly recognized the new nation, but Serbia and Russia strongly objected. Serbia officially proposed dividing the country along ethnic lines, but the Albanian leadership in Kosovo rejected the proposal. Serbs in the North of the country, in March burned border posts on the Serbian boarder, seized some government buildings, and engaged in other activity apparently aimed at making the Serbian areas ungovernable, and creating movement for a separation of Serbian areas from the rest of Kosovo. Serbian resistance has been a challenge to NATO peacekeepers. On March 17, when police and NATO personnel raided a court house in Mitrovica that Serbs had occupied, Serbian activists fired weapons and through grenades, wounding dozens of police and NATO troops. ICG, “Kosovo’s First Month,” March 18, (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5335&l=1), observes, “The first month of independence has mostly gone well, but violence in Mitrovica yesterday shows that the opponents of independence can still threaten the new state and that there is a risk that Serbian-inspired partition will harden and Kosovo become a frozen conflict.” “The major population displacements and widespread violence that many feared in the wake of independence have not happened. Independence celebrations included positive words to the Serb minority expressed in Serbian by the prime minister and president and a pledge to implement the plan for conditional independence devised by the UN Secretary-General’s special representative, Martti Ahtisaari. EU foreign ministers issued a supportive statement and agreed on deployment of a special representative and a rule-of-law mission.” “Belgrade, however, is pushing Kosovo Serbs to break all contacts with Kosovo institutions and is strengthening its own control in the north. It has instructed Kosovo Serbs to oppose the new EU missions and insists that the only international presences with which it will cooperate are the UN mission (UNMIK) and NATO. The end-goal is to regain international recognition of Kosovo as sovereign Serbian territory and then carry out an internal partition of that territory into Serb and Albanian entities. The UN, NATO and the EU have been caught unprepared by Serb tactics and need to coordinate better. The UN and NATO should seek to effectively control the border, police stations, courts and jails, and cooperate in reshaping their northern presence to aid transition and gradually introduce the EU rule-of-law mission (EULEX), first at border and customs posts.” Sabine Freizer, Crisis Group‚s Europe Program Director, says, “Serbia and Russia need to receive some very clear messages that partition of Kosovo is unacceptable, and the UN Secretary-General needs to reaffirm that the UN and the EU are working towards the same goals, including a UN hand-over to EU structures.”

Serbia will hold parliamentary elections May 11, as the result of the coalition government collapsing, in mid-March, over disputes between nationalist and western looking members of the government The results will be important in determining future Serbian actions over Kosovo and other issues. The President of Montenegro, Filip Vojanovic, who has been in favor of developing strong collaborative ties with Western Europe, was reelected, in early April. He won an outright majority of the vote, while the pro=Serbian candidate won only slightly over 20%.

Russia and the Ukraine settled a dispute over gas, in February, preventing a shut off of natural gas from Russia to the Ukraine. In mid-March, talks between the U.S. and Russian presidents eased Russian anger at U.S. plans to deploy (nonfunctional!) antimissiles in East Europe, although Russia still opposes the plan, and some agreements were reached on other issues. The World Health Organization reported, in late February, that drug resistant tuberculosis rates in regions of the former Soviet Union have risen to world record levels, presenting a potential threat of the spread of the deadly disease

The long government crisis in which the ethnic split in Belgium had become so strong that a government could not be formed, and there was the possibility the country might split in two, ended, March 20, with the formation of a coalition government, this spring, and movements to bring reconciliation.

The election of Communist Party leader Demetris Christofias as President of Cyprus, in February, has brought a new collaborative effort between the Greek and Turkish communities to reunite and reintegrate the Island nation.

The murder of a former city councilman near his home in the Basque region of Spain, allegedly by a member of the Basque Militant group ETA, in early March. Caused Spain’s two main political parties to cease campaigning just before the general election.

The Vatican opened a new dialogue with Muslims, in March, with the launching of a Catholic-Muslim forum, aimed at improving relations between the religions.

Developments in Africa

The fighting, which killed more than 1000 people, and led to ethnic cleansing, in Kenya over the President’s stealing the election, at the end of February, stopped when the President agreed to join with the opposition in a government of national unity, with international facilitation, including efforts by U.N, Secretary General, Kofi Annan, began negotiations between the President and the opposition. Parliament met in early March on the theme of reestablishing National unity. In early April, however, negotiations on power sharing broke down, when the President refused to undertake any real power sharing, and the opposition withdrew. The immediate reaction in the country was renewed, at times deadly, conflict. However, on April 13, a power sharing arrangement with a greatly expanded cabinet was achieved. The leading opposition presidential candidate became Prime Minister, and the opposition received a few of the leading cabinet posts, and many of secondary importance. ICG, “Kenya in Crisis,” February 21, 2008 (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?l=1&id=5316), contained the warning of Donald Steinberg, Crisis Group Deputy President, “The crisis in Kenya reaches far beyond that country. Kenya is the platform for relief operations in Somalia and Sudan, a regional entrepot for trade and investment, and a key anchor for long-term stabilization of Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi. The quicker a solution to the crisis is found, the better the prospects will be for the entire region.”

The various deadly conflicts continue in Sudan. The situation is now even worse in Darfur. With too few peacekeepers (9000 are in place of the 28,000 African Union and UN troops and police that will not complete deployment until the end of this year, on the current time table), unable to receive they equipment they need, the government of Sudan supporting the Janjaweed militia are again attacking and killing in a scorched earth campaign, also attacking and killing peacekeepers and aid workers. As of February, 200,000 had been murdered and 2.5 million driven from their homes. Large numbers of refugees are being pushed into Chad. The refugee camps are increasingly in danger of attack and are very low on food and other supplies. For a time, China, bowing to international pressure (which it would not admit was the case), put some pressure on the government of Sudan, to back off. But more recently has ceased to do so. China drills for oil in Sudan – and some of the ethnic cleansing is to remove local people from oil drilling areas, and is the major economic support and military equipment supplier to Sudan, which gives it leverage if it chooses to exert it.

The International Crisis Group, “Beyond Sudan’s Latest North-South Crisis,” March 13, 2008(http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5329&l=1), warns, “Sudan’s North-South peace will remain at risk and Darfur will be unsolvable unless the parties to the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) and the international community actively recommit to its implementation.” “In October 2007, the Sudan Liberation People’s Movement (SPLM) suspended its participation in the Government of National Unity because the National Congress Party (NCP) was not implementing key aspects of the CPA. After two months of military posturing and aggressive rhetoric, the parties agreed on a series of measures, and the SPLM re-joined the government on 27 December. There has been progress on most issues, but there are few guarantees that the new commitments and timetables will be honored.” “„The CPA contains the seeds to a national transformation, and the beginning of the end of Sudan’s multiple conflicts,” states David Mozersky, Crisis Group’s Horn of Africa Project Director. “Full implementation is ultimately in the best interest of both the NCP and SPLM”. “The risk of new fighting is growing in the oil-rich Abyei area, and three main factors still put the CPA at risk. First and foremost, some in the NCP continue to view full implementation and the promised 2009 elections as a threat to its survival and are undermining core aspects of the deal. Secondly, the SPLM remains divided on its priorities, between those who favor a southern-first strategy and those who support a national agenda. The infighting has weakened CPA implementation, and the SPLM should use its May 2008 National Convention to reconcile the splits. Thirdly, the international guarantors and the UN remain dangerously disengaged, due in part to preoccupation with Darfur and in part to a lack of consensus on the way forward. Both parties must urgently re-commit to full CPA implementation. The international community must also re-engage robustly in support of the still shaky deal, most immediately to help resolve the crisis in Abyei, and must recognise that CPA implementation would create the best environment for peace in Darfur and beyond. International policies should no longer be bifurcated between the CPA and Darfur. Sudan’s conflicts are outgrowths of a common set of national problems.”

Chad continues to suffer its own strife. On February 3, a group of rebels based in Sudan invaded the capital, but their attempted coup failed, and they withdrew.

Turmoil continues in Somalia, with Islamist forces making military gains over the weak government, despite continued support from Ethiopia, and other nations. The government is considered by numerous observers to be threatened with collapse.

The election in Zimbabwe, on March 29, the election commission admitted after some days, brought about an opposition victory in the parliament, but the election commission has continued to delay releasing the official results of the Presidential election (and the courts have refused to interfere) – which unofficial tallies of the results posted outside of polling stations at the end of election day show to be a clear opposition victory over President Mugabe. As of April 13 President Mugabe is beginning another crackdown to hold on to power. ICG, cautioned, on March 20, “Zimbabwe: Prospects from a Flawed Election (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5347&l=1),” that, “The international community needs to have contingency plans ready in anticipation of rigged elections in Zimbabwe on 29 March that could precipitate a potentially violent crisis.” “The Southern African Development Community (SADC) mediation by South Africa‚s President Thabo Mbeki, which once offered the most realistic chance of resolving Zimbabwe’s eight-year crisis, has failed. Primary responsibility lies with Mugabe, who unilaterally called snap elections and ruled out passage before the polls of the new constitution. His ruling ZANU-PF party has subsequently been using all the extensive means at its disposal to maintain an unfair advantage in the campaign. The bitterly divided opposition must also share blame: it gained relevancy from the mediation but was unable to agree on an electoral strategy at a time of acute national crisis. If the election leads to further confrontation, the African Union (AU) should be ready to promptly offer mediation for a power-sharing agreement to produce a transitional government with a reformist agenda. A settlement need not necessarily remove Mugabe. He might serve as a non-executive head of state during a transitional period in advance of fresh elections. The important point is for the region to be prepared to act quickly if the elections do not produce a legitimate government that can deal with a national crisis whose consequences are increasingly being felt beyond Zimbabwe’s borders. With South Africa and the SADC having lost some credibility, the AU needs to take the lead. The wider international community must also be ready to provide concerted backing to AU-led mediation.”

The Ugandan government and rebels of the Lord’s Resistance Army agreed, in late February, to terms for prosecution of war crimes, in the now ended 21 year war. A final peace agreement was to be signed on April 11, but the Lord’s Resistance Army chief negotiator quit, and its leader failed to show up for the signing, leaving the final peace agreement in doubt.

Hundreds of Camoros and African Union soldiers, in late March, seized the rebel held island of Anjouan, one of the three islands that make up Camoros, capturing the rebel leader.

South Africa, which has long had a high crime rate, now has so much crime and violence in schools, that children as young as 7 simulate sexual assaults, according to a report by the South African Human Rights commission, published in March.

Nigeria, which continues to experience violent conflict in several regions, including the oil producing Delta, in February was awaiting a decision of an election tribunal on whether the flawed Presidential election of 2007, should stand.

Developments in Latin America

CDI Senior Analyst Rachel Stohl and Research Assistant Doug Tuttle, “The Small Arms Trade in Latin America,” published by the NACLA Report on the Americas (http://www.cdi.org/program/document.cfm?DocumentID=4238&from_page=../index.cfm), comment that “Small arms and gun violence present the most dramatic threat to public safety in Latin America and the Caribbean. After decades of uncontrolled proliferation, at least 45 million to 80 million small arms and light weapons are circulating throughout the region. Gunshots kill between 73,000 and 93,000 people each year in Latin America, and guns are the leading cause of death among Latin Americans ages 15 and 44.”

Laura Carlsen, “2008: Latin America’s Hope and Challenge,” Americas Program Column at: http://americas.irc-online.org/am/4902, January 18, 2008, points out three major challenges for the U.S. if it is to improve long term relations in the Americas. The first is developing normal relations with Cuba, as the situation there is changing with Fidel Castro’s retirement. 2. Defeat the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement, due to concerns about human and labor rights violations in Colombia and the government’s ties to paramilitary forces – which the Democrats in Congress are working to do. The Bush administration, however, counts Colombian president Alvaro Uribe as its most important ally in the region and has vowed to fight for the FTA. Carlson states, “If today Colombian labor leaders organizing in Coca-Cola and other foreign firms are assassinated to maintain ‘business as usual,’ it’s likely the situation will get worse when the country is locked into an FTA-model of development that stakes the national economy on foreign investment. The militarization of Colombia as a result of U.S. aid under Plan Colombia has empowered repressive military and paramilitary forces and distanced Colombia from its Latin American neighbors who criticize its allegiance to northern interests and fear “spill-over” of the violence into their territory. The FTA is seen as divisive by other Andean nations.” 3. Reject Funding for Plan Mexico. Carlson comments, “Although $500 million appears a paltry sum compared to military intervention in Iraq and the Middle East, binational relations between the two neighbors with a fractious border would take an ugly turn if the so-called “Merida Initiative” were approved. Also known as Plan Mexico, this program for “regional security cooperation” would provide money and equipment to the Mexican military, police, and intelligence services. None of the aid contemplated in this first package of a $1.5 billion-dollar deal goes where it’s most needed, such as addiction prevention and rehabilitation or development financing-and much of it is downright dangerous. Sending equipment to the Mexican police and military in the context of unprosecuted human rights violations empowers impunity. Increased intelligence-gathering with expanded powers and insufficient protections puts the civil liberties of the general population at risk. The physical presence of U.S. military companies such as Blackwater doing training and equipment maintenance, and direct U.S. involvement in Mexican security could lead to a proxy relationship that compromises national sovereignty and subordinates a traditional Mexican foreign policy of neutrality to a U.S. interventionist foreign policy. Plan Mexico, with its emphasis on interdiction in the drug war, anti-terrorist measures to confront an international threat that does not demonstrably exist in Mexico, and the reinterpretation of immigration as organized crime, corresponds to a logic that heightens violence on all fronts and strains binational relations. Mexico needs and deserves U.S. support, but not to impose regional militarization.”

ICG, “Improving the Fight against Drugs in Latin America,” March 14, 2008 (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5327&l=1), warns, “The international community will lose its struggle against drugs unless it urgently changes ineffective, partly counter-productive policies.” The report evaluates drug policies from a conflict prevention perspective, finding, The threat posed by drug trafficking and organized crime and the failure of counter-drug policies are two sides of the same coin, according to Mauricio Angel, Crisis Group Colombia/Andes Senior Analyst. “It is taking a heavy toll on democratic institutions, political systems and societies at large in several Latin American countries, including Colombia, Bolivia, Peru, Venezuela and Mexico.” “Governments should immediately expand exchange of policy-relevant information, forge a new political consensus and step-up cooperation between intelligence and law-enforcement agencies on both sides of the Atlantic. In Latin America, innovative thinking is needed on reversing state abandonment, massively expanding rural development, starting with reduced reliance on aerial spraying and forced eradication of coca crops, and taking appropriate action against increasing domestic drugs use.  Education and treatment programs should be expanded and the lessons of European harm reduction measures taken into account. The focus should be on preventing new users and the surge of new drugs markets as well as on substantially reducing demand.” Crisis Group Senior Vice President, Mark Schneider, states, “With South American cocaine increasing 40% in 2007, tinkering is fruitless. The criminals win unless governments focus on rural poverty reduction, not aerial spraying, target law enforcement at the drug chain’s high end and look seriously at the public health side of demand reduction.”

Ariela Ruiz Caro, “Energy Integration and Security in Latin America and the Caribbean,” Americas Program Column, March 27 (http://americas.irc-online.org/am/5109) states that Latin America needs to design and build an adequate energy integration system.

Mexico’s, often very violent war on drugs, by the military has increased the use of torture and serious violation of civil liberties in the course of 22,000 arrests and the seizure of 50 tons of cocaine along with 40,000 weapons in the 16 months prior to this April. It is estimated that Mexican drug cartels have been denied about $9 billion of the alleged $23 billion they make from drugs in a year. Hundreds of human rights violations have been alleged in the states in which the army antinarcotics program has operated, and brought about 5300 deaths. The Army’s new human rights office, which can only pass on complaints that it thinks meritorious, for investigation, dismissed more than 100 of the 421 complaints it received, and no soldier has been convicted of a human rights violation. For more see Manuel Roig-Franzia, “Crackdown Taking Wide Toll: Reports of Killings, Torture Up as Military’s Pursuit of Drug Cartels Grows,” Washington Post, April 15, 2008.

Mexico’s Congress passed legislation overhauling the justice system, in March, which includes a presumption of innocence until proven guilty and the establishing of public trials a which lawyers will orally argue cases before judges, and trials are now to be sped up, aimed at ending having defendants languish in jail for years without being tried, when a prosecutor has decided the defendant is guilty. The police were given the power to investigate crimes, where previously only prosecutors had that power. The justice system has been plagued by wide spread corruption, which while not directly reversed by the reforms, will be harder to carry out if the new rules are followed. Human Rights Watch reported, in mid-February, that the Mexican Human Rights Commissions findings are rarely acted on at all, or investigations are merely begun and forgotten, by police and prosecutors, and the commission rarely follows up to find out what has been done to act on its findings.

In Guatemala, decades of having Presidents with various degrees of leaning to the right ended, in January, with the swearing in of Alvaro Colon as President, for a four-year term. He is a businessman who campaigned for social justice and reducing poverty.

Once again so called anti-terrorist legislation is being used to commit an act of terror. This time in El Salvador, where 14 activists were pulled from their cars and arrested enroute to a peaceful demonstration in Cuchitoro, protesting President Saca’s “National Decentralization Policy,” which many critics believe is move to privatize water resources. On July 7, a Specialized Judge for Organized Crime, established by El Salvador antiterrorist legislation, ordered 13 of the activists to three months preventive detention to allow prosecutors time to gather evidence. Human rights and civil liberties advocates have strongly criticized both the law and its application to this case.

At the beginning of March, Columbian troops raided a FARC camp in neighboring Ecuador, killing 24 guerillas including a FARC leader. The raid was condemned by the organization of American States as a violation of Ecuador’s sovereignty, and set off tensions between Columbia and Ecuador, Venezuela and Nicaragua – which were later eased in negotiations at the annual summit meeting of Latin American leaders, in the Dominican Republic, in early March. In February, hundreds of thousands of demonstrators, around Columbia and in some cities abroad, protested FARC’s kidnappings and killings. There was also criticism of Venezuelan President Chavez considering removing FARC from his nation’s official list of terrorist groups. The United States has been trying to find information linking Chavez to supporting terrorism, and in April the U.S. Congress was considering legislation naming Venezuela a state that supports terrorism. In Chavez legal battle with Exxon Mobil over compensation for nationalization of a large oil project in Venezuela, in February, Chavez backed off threats to stop supplying the U.S. with oil. Chavez government has lost some popularity in Venezuela as inflation has risen and there continue to be problems with some government programs, including age old corruption. An analysis of some of the ongoing developments in Venezuela is provided by Daniel Wilkinson, “Chavez’s Fix,” The Nation, March 10, 2008. The killings of 2500 union leaders and members in Columbia, since 1985, with less than 100 convictions for the crimes, is contributing to opposition in Congress against the free trade pact negotiated by the Bush administration and the government of Columbia.

In Columbia, Indigenous people, attempting to remain neutral in the extended civil war, have long been caught in the middle, suffering assaults from both pro-government paramilitary forces and rebel troops. Survival International reported, March 12, that the Nukak, one of the Amazon’s last nomadic tribes, has become caught up in the aftermath of the recent hostage deal negotiated in Colombia between the government and left-wing FARC guerrillas. The Nukak have been bombed by the Colombian army in its battle against guerrillas who have violently taken control of much of the Nukak territory. Many Nukak fled their territory to a local town, in early March, and many more are expected to follow. “The bombings come after the recent assassination of a Nukak man called Monikaro by Battalion 44 of the FARC. Monikaro had fled Nukak land in 2004 after conflict between the army, guerrillas and paramilitaries fighting for control of the lucrative coca crop, the raw material for cocaine. The Nukak’s land is also being eyed up as a potential site for palm oil plantations for biofuel, and for its known petroleum reserves…. The latest violence comes just months after many Nukak had started the long journey home, hoping that the fighting which has wracked their remote rainforest had died down.” For more information contact Miriam Ross on (+44) (0)20 7687 8734 or email mr@survival-international.org, http://www.survival-international.org/news/3130.

The government of Bolivia has set an April 30 deadline for the Bolivian subsidiaries of British Petroleum, Repsore and Ashmore International, purchased by BP when the Bolivian state oil company YPFB was privatized in the 1990s, to return to state control, under the 2006 government renationalization. Long delayed talks to complete the process are set for May 1. The Bolivian government has scheduled a national referendum on a draft constitution, which would increase indigenous rights, drawn up by supporters of President Morales in Congress, and boycotted by opponents largely representing wealthy people of European background in low land regions. The early scheduling of the vote interrupted negotiations between government and opposition representatives over amendments to increase regional autonomy. The proposed constitution if a focal point in the political struggle dividing the country. Jean Friedman-Rudovsky, “”Recruiting Spiess in the Peace Corps: Washington’s Blunder in Bolivia Strains Relations with the Morales Government,” In These Times, April 2008, discusses, “In February allegations surfaced that the U.S. embassy in La Paz, located in western Bolivia, as been asking Peace Corps Volunteers and Fulbright scholars to provide intelligence information to the U.S. embassy about foreign nationals in Bolivia. ‘It flies in the face of what the Fulbright Program is all about,’ says John Alexander van Schaick, 23, a Fulbright scholar… We’re supposes to help with mutual understanding, not intelligence operations’.”

UN and Other International Developments

UN Secretary Kofi Annan stated in March that that the United Nations was ‘overstreached’ in conflict areas because it has not been given the necessary resources to undertake all of its current peacekeeping assignments, and should resist taking on new peacekeeping work until the major powers provide the needed support. Annan sited the serious shortcomings of peacekeeping in Darfur as an example of the under support problem.

U.S. and Canada Developments

The Center for Defense Information (CDI) has expressed concern over U.S. military aid. CDI Senior Analyst Rachel Stohl, “Questionable Reward: Arms Sales and the War on Terrorism,” Arms Control Today January/February 2008 (http://app.bronto.com/public/?q=link&fn=Key&id=bgnljfuvgbplhvuitddzzpyzxndpboh&link=boqpdcjdbqofszoxedpwrqfigiihbfn), notes that since the September 11, 2001 attacks, the United States has made the “global war on terror” its priority in determining arms transfers and military assistance. Stohl sees a serious problem, that in the last six years, the United States has stepped up its sales and transfers of high-technology weapons, military training, and other military assistance to governments, regardless of their respect for human rights, democratic principles, or nonproliferation. All that matters is that they have pledged their assistance in the global war on terrorism. She argues that U.S. foreign policy would be better served by looking at other ways of cooperating with new allies and ensuring that U.S. weapons do not undermine U.S. security in the longer run. CDI research assistant Doug Tuttle, “Fueling the Arms Race in the Middle East,” posted January 28 at: http://app.bronto.com/public/?q=link&fn=Key&id=bgnljfuvgbplhvuitddzzpyzxndpboh&link=aaykbocccbwhupqdsjibfpvmurnbbji, finds that President George W. Bush’s July announcement of a $20 billion arms sales to the countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council, including a controversial deal for 900 Joint Direct Attack Munitions for Saudi Arabia, continues the arms build up in the region and fails to improve regional security, contradicts U.S. foreign policy, and may be in violation of U.S. export regulations.

Maria Cramer. “Fewer batterers put into programs; Victims’ advocates fault plea bargains,” Boston Globe, April 8, 2008, “As domestic homicides more than doubled in Massachusetts, judges across the state sent only about half as many batterers to abuse intervention programs last year as they did in 2003, according to public health officials. The plunging numbers are raising concerns among victims’ advocates that judges are too readily accepting plea bargains that allow offenders to attend shorter anger management classes instead of the more rigorous batterer-intervention programs. Beyond that, state officials and advocates worry that fewer victims are taking their cases to court, for a variety of reasons. Among them: victims afraid of retaliation, illegal immigrants who are afraid to become involved in the criminal justice system, and a key Supreme Judicial Court ruling that puts more pressure on victims to provide often difficult testimony in their cases.”

The Southern Poverty Law Center reports that in 2007 there were 888 active hate groups in the U.S., up from 844 in 2006.

The United States economy is particularly vulnerable, at this time of rising oil prices raising the cost of everything. To begin with, the dollar has been weakening for some time in comparison to other leading currencies, in large part because of the huge U.S. unbalanced budget, leading it to become the biggest debtor nation in world history. This is compounded by the continuing to expand trade imbalance in which the U.S. imports far more than it exports. U.S. trade policies have encouraged the movement of manufacturing out of the U.S. since President Regean took office, causing the sinking dollar to increase prices at home – including for oil – much more than it can encourage exports. The situation will get considerably worse when the world moves away from using the dollar as the international currency, which is being encouraged by aversion to U.S. foreign policy by some nations, as well as by the weakening dollar. The crises in the housing market, following from improper lending and investment practices, is similar to the one that brought on the stock market crash in 1929, that brought on the great depression (and is similar to the smaller savings and loan collapse that brought double digit inflation in the ‘80s). The fact that a great many Americans have huge credit card, mortgage, and other debts, places a significant part of the population at risk when the economy turns downward, potentially greatly multiplying the impact of economic decline and bringing on a deep depression, just as the nation, and the world need to meet the problems of global warming and related environmental degradation. The situation involves many dangers, but also offers opportunities to move to better policies and ways of living and acting. The Congressional Budget Office projected, in March, that rising prices and vanishing jobs would bring the number of people in the U.S. receiving food stamps to a record level of over 28 million by the end o the year.

As the gap between the rich and poor in the U.S. widens, with the middle class eroding, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services released a report in late March, showing that health of Americans is declining as income falls, and that there is a widening gap in life expectancy mirroring the growing disparity in income. In 1980-82, wealthier Americans lived 2.8 years longer than people in the least well to do of 10 identified wealth groups. By 1998-2000 the difference had more grown to 4.5 years.

The Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, who founded Transcendental Meditation, advocated that when a large number of people meditate, it has a calming affect around them. Several studies done did show a decline in crime and violence coinciding with a large number of people undertaking meditation in an urban area. The Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, who walked on February 5, had stated that if 1% of a population meditates the people become more conscious and peaceful. In 2000 he created the Global Country of World Peace, a country “without boarders,” to build at least one meditational peace palace in or near the 3000 largest cities on the planet. Several peace palaces are in the process of being developed around the United States.