03/15 to 03/21 ***The***Winds***of***WAR***

[BREWER]

Posted for fair use and discussion.
http://www.debka.com/article/21837/

Iran threatens Hormuz and world oil supply after trade links cutoff
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report March 18, 2012, 9:11 AM (GMT+02:00)
Tags: Iran nuclear sanctions Strait of Hormuz US aircraft carriers
Saudi Ras Tanura oil export terminal

Former Intelligence Minister Ali Falahian, Iran’s senior spokesman on sanctions, said Sunday, March 18, that if the US and Europe think they can ignore international law to promote their interests, they should know that Iran will respond in kind everywhere it can. “I suggest that the West take seriously our threat to close the Strait of Hormuz,” he said in Tehran’s first response to the SWIFT decision to sever ties with Iranian banks to enforce European sanctions on its nuclear program.

A large fleet of 4 US and French nuclear aircraft carriers and a dozen or more minesweepers and mine-hunting helicopters have piled up on both sides of the Strait of Hormuz, through which 17 percent of the world’s daily oil supply passes, and Israeli naval vessels have deployed in the Red Sea.

debkafile’s military and intelligence sources estimate Tehran may make good on its threats by trying to drop sea mines in the strategic strait and/or the approaches to the huge Saudi Ras Tanura oil export terminal. A small explosion by an unknown hand hit a major Saudi pipeline between Awamiya and Safwa on March 1. The damage was not great because the saboteurs used a small quantity of explosive, but it appeared to be the work of professionals.

While Saudi officials denied the incident, photos of a large fire appeared on the Internet. Gulf oil sources suspect that it was a warning from Tehran of the hazards facing the world’s largest oil exporter.

The SWIFT cutoff of ties with Iranian banks has gone a long way toward isolating Iran from global commerce. It will affect Iranian oil sales to its biggest customers in the Far East, China and Japan, as well as India. The economic noose tightening around its neck is bound to produce a response from Iran, it is estimated in Washington and European capitals. The US-led European sanctions on Iranian oil world trade were boosted in recent weeks by the United Arab Emirates which stopped handling Iranian rials, further reducing its ability to trade and obtain hard currency.

After its foremost ally, Bashar Assad, proved his ability to survive - largely with abundant Iranian help - Tehran is unlikely to let this achievement be marred by a US and European economic stranglehold. The ordinary Iranian may care about his government’s international standing, but he cares a lot more about the fast depreciating value of the money in his pocket and his financial assets.

Anticipating that Iran may kick back hard against the tough penalties building up against its nuclear program, three US aircraft carriers are standing by in the Persian Gulf – The USS Abraham Lincoln, the USS Carl Vinson and the USS Enterprise together with the French Charles de Gaulle and their strike groups.

Thursday, US Navy Chief Adm. Jonathan Greenert said he was doubling the American mine sweeping fleet in the Persian Gulf by adding another four vessels as well as mine-hunting helicopters to bolster Persian Gulf security and keep the Strait of Hormuz open to international traffic.

France, Britain, Holland and Germany have also deployed minesweepers in these strategic Gulf waters.

Tuesday, March 13, two Israeli missile corvettes, the INS Lahav and INS Yafo, crossed the Suez Canal on their way to the Red Sea accompanied by the French Imidisi supply ship.

The vast naval buildup of powerful warships confirms that the United States, Europe and Israel are braced for harsh Iranian retaliation across more than one part of the Middle East for the crippling sanctions now taking hold.

[Housecarl]

Hummm....

For links see article source...
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news...-1226303201113

Japan may shoot down North Korean rocket

* by: Rick Wallace, Tokyo correspondent
* From: The Australian
* March 19, 2012 12:00AM

JAPAN is considering shooting down the rocket North Korea has threatened it will launch next month if the missile, or parts of it, falls into Japanese territory.

The move comes as the US all but declared the recent food-for-denuclearisation dead if the North went ahead with the launch. Even China, the north's sole significant political and economic supporter, said it was concerned by the plan.

Japanese Defence Minister Naoki Tanaka revealed on the weekend that his ministry was considering deploying ground-based Patriot missiles and Japan's Aegis-equipped destroyers to activate its missile shield.

"We are currently doing a mental exercise to prepare, using the previous incident as our guide," Mr Tanaka said, referring to the government's decision at the time of the launch of a long-range ballistic missile by Pyongyang in April 2009.
Top 50 Tech Rec Coverage

In March 2009, in the next most recent missile crisis, Japan issued an order for its Self-Defence Forces to destroy a North Korean rocket or its debris if it fell on to Japanese territory.

The move provoked a tit-for-tat threat from Pyongyang to attack Japan if it shot down the rocket, but in the end no interceptor missile was fired by Japan in response to that launch.

News of the proposed launch of the latest rocket - which the North says is carrying a satellite but the rest of world believes is a de facto ballistic missile - has raised tensions in North Asia.

It came amid one of the North's periodic "charm offensives", under which it had secured a commitment for 240,000 tonnes of US food aid in exchange for agreeing to halt nuclear and missile testing activities.

The fact that the North has broken that accord in less than two weeks has led to speculation that young leader Kim Jong-un had been "rolled" by powerful figures behind the throne or that the internal stability in the Stalinist state was deteriorating to the extent the regime needed the launch to appease public dissatisfaction.

Leading North Korea watcher Narushige Michishita, of Tokyo's National Graduate Institute of Policy Studies, said the deal was still salvageable if the US agreed to additional support in exchange for the North cancelling the launch.

"The US wants to keep the deal and so does North Korea. Pyongyang will demand the US provide additional aid for it to reconsider the 'rocket' launch," he said.

Yet the fact the North had broadcast details of the launch - to be conducted amid festivities for the 100th anniversary of Kim Il-sung's birth - would make it harder for Pyongyang to cancel it.

In 2009, the rocket's path overflew Japan, but this time the North has said it will fire the three-stage Taepodong rocket in a southerly direction from the launch pad on its west coast, making the likelihood of it entering Japanese territory minimal.

The last test was a failure and showed that despite the North's desire to develop a ballistic missile capable of striking the US, its technology remains far from perfect; there is the prospect the rocket or parts will fall to earth in areas sensitive to the US, Japan or China.

The missile shield being developed by Japan, the US and other aligned countries has had teething problems, although it is a more ambitious project than developing an inter-continental ballistic missile.

[BREWER]

dupe

[OldArcher]

Posted for fair use and discussion.
http://www.debka.com/article/21837/

Iran threatens Hormuz and world oil supply after trade links cutoff
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report March 18, 2012, 9:11 AM (GMT+02:00)
Tags: Iran nuclear sanctions Strait of Hormuz US aircraft carriers
Saudi Ras Tanura oil export terminal

Former Intelligence Minister Ali Falahian, Iran’s senior spokesman on sanctions, said Sunday, March 18, that if the US and Europe think they can ignore international law to promote their interests, they should know that Iran will respond in kind everywhere it can. “I suggest that the West take seriously our threat to close the Strait of Hormuz,” he said in Tehran’s first response to the SWIFT decision to sever ties with Iranian banks to enforce European sanctions on its nuclear program.

A large fleet of 4 US and French nuclear aircraft carriers and a dozen or more minesweepers and mine-hunting helicopters have piled up on both sides of the Strait of Hormuz, through which 17 percent of the world’s daily oil supply passes, and Israeli naval vessels have deployed in the Red Sea.

debkafile’s military and intelligence sources estimate Tehran may make good on its threats by trying to drop sea mines in the strategic strait and/or the approaches to the huge Saudi Ras Tanura oil export terminal. A small explosion by an unknown hand hit a major Saudi pipeline between Awamiya and Safwa on March 1. The damage was not great because the saboteurs used a small quantity of explosive, but it appeared to be the work of professionals.

While Saudi officials denied the incident, photos of a large fire appeared on the Internet. Gulf oil sources suspect that it was a warning from Tehran of the hazards facing the world’s largest oil exporter.

The SWIFT cutoff of ties with Iranian banks has gone a long way toward isolating Iran from global commerce. It will affect Iranian oil sales to its biggest customers in the Far East, China and Japan, as well as India. The economic noose tightening around its neck is bound to produce a response from Iran, it is estimated in Washington and European capitals. The US-led European sanctions on Iranian oil world trade were boosted in recent weeks by the United Arab Emirates which stopped handling Iranian rials, further reducing its ability to trade and obtain hard currency.

After its foremost ally, Bashar Assad, proved his ability to survive - largely with abundant Iranian help - Tehran is unlikely to let this achievement be marred by a US and European economic stranglehold. The ordinary Iranian may care about his government’s international standing, but he cares a lot more about the fast depreciating value of the money in his pocket and his financial assets.

Anticipating that Iran may kick back hard against the tough penalties building up against its nuclear program, three US aircraft carriers are standing by in the Persian Gulf – The USS Abraham Lincoln, the USS Carl Vinson and the USS Enterprise together with the French Charles de Gaulle and their strike groups.

Thursday, US Navy Chief Adm. Jonathan Greenert said he was doubling the American mine sweeping fleet in the Persian Gulf by adding another four vessels as well as mine-hunting helicopters to bolster Persian Gulf security and keep the Strait of Hormuz open to international traffic.

France, Britain, Holland and Germany have also deployed minesweepers in these strategic Gulf waters.

Tuesday, March 13, two Israeli missile corvettes, the INS Lahav and INS Yafo, crossed the Suez Canal on their way to the Red Sea accompanied by the French Imidisi supply ship.

The vast naval buildup of powerful warships confirms that the United States, Europe and Israel are braced for harsh Iranian retaliation across more than one part of the Middle East for the crippling sanctions now taking hold.

Why no mention of the U.S.S. John C. Stennis?

That will make four American and one French carriers in theater... Too bad that the PTB want them to be in too close a proximity... Lots of fish in the barrel... Some, those with testicular fortitude, would call such a move, TREASON!

OA, out...

[Housecarl]

Why no mention of the U.S.S. John C. Stennis?

That will make four American and one French carriers in theater... Too bad that the PTB want them to be in too close a proximity... Lots of fish in the barrel... Some, those with testicular fortitude, would call such a move, TREASON!

OA, out...

Stennis is listed as having returned to Bremerton on 2 March 2012 (having been on deployment from home port since 25 July 2011).

[Housecarl]

For links see article source....
Posted for fair use....
http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/184...obert-d-kaplan

1848: History's Shadow Over the Middle East, by Robert D. Kaplan
March 15, 2012 | 1546 GMT

By Robert D. Kaplan

1848 in Europe was the year that wasn't. In the spring and summer of that year, bourgeois intellectuals and working-class radicals staged upheavals from France to the Balkans, shaking ancient regimes and vowing to create new liberal democratic orders. The Arab Spring has periodically been compared to the stirrings of 1848. But with the exception of the toppling of the Orleans monarchy in France, the 1848 revolutions ultimately failed. Dynastic governments reasserted themselves. They did so for a reason that has troubling implications for the Middle East: Conservative regimes in mid-19th century Europe had not only the institutional advantage over their liberal and socialist adversaries but also the moral advantage.

Conservative orders, epitomized by the Habsburg Austrian Chancellor Clemens von Metternich, had provided continent-wide stability following the Napoleonic Wars, which in proportional terms killed as many Europeans as World War I. Metternich's Habsburg Empire, encompassing 11 different nationalities, was the geopolitical key to a stable European system (even as the Habsburgs themselves were weak as a power compared to Great Britain and France). Nevertheless, the 1848 reformists were -- like people everywhere and in every age -- insufficiently grateful. By 1848, the horrors of Napoleon were more than a generation past, and Metternich was consequently viewed as merely a reactionary. But liberal hopes of 1848 would come to naught amid ethnic and national questions that the weakening of the Metternichian system unleashed -- ethnic and national questions comparable to the inter-communal tensions that plague the Arab world today.

Indeed, ethnic interests in Europe soon trumped universalist longings. While ethnic Germans and Hungarians cheered the weakening of Habsburg rule in massive street protests that inspired liberal intelligentsia throughout the Western world, there were Slavs and Romanians who feared the very freedom for which the Germans and Hungarians cried out. Rather than cheer on democracy per se, Slavs and Romanians feared the tyranny of majority rule. Among the Slavs were Slovaks, Serbs and Croats who were soon at the throats of their new Hungarian overlords. The Habsburg regime in Vienna exploited these divisions, as well as those between Ukrainians and Poles to the north.

There are fundamental differences between 1848 in Europe and 2011-2012 in the Middle East. Metternich, unlike Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and Bashar al Assad in Syria, did not symbolize the decadent rule of one man and one ruling clique; rather, he governed through laws and institutions. Moreover, his polyglot Habsburg system, lying at the geographical center of Europe, constituted a morality in and of itself, necessary as it was for peace among the ethnic nations. This is why Metternich's system survived, even as he himself was replaced in 1848.

While there is no equivalent in the Middle East of the Habsburg system, not every dictatorial regime in the Arab world is expendable for some of the same reasons that Habsburg Austria's was not. That is the burdensome reality of the Middle East today: If conservative -- even reactionary -- orders are necessary for inter-communal peace, then they may survive in one form or another, or at least resurface in places such as Egypt and Iraq.

Iraq in 2006 and 2007 proved that chaos is in some respects worse than tyranny. Thus, a system is simply not moral if it cannot preserve domestic peace. "Progress includes Order," John Stuart Mill wrote in Considerations on Representative Government (1861), "but Order does not include Progress." In other words, nobody is saying that conservative-reactionary orders will lead to social betterment. Nonetheless, because order is necessary before progress can take hold, reactionary regimes could be the beneficiary of chaos in some Middle Eastern states, in a similar way that the Habsburgs were after 1848. For it is conservative regimes of one type or another that are more likely to be called upon to restore order.

To wit, if the military is seen to be necessary for communal peace between Muslims and Copts in Egypt, that will give the generals yet another reason to share power with Islamists, rather than retreat entirely from politics. The overthrow of Mubarak will therefore signify not a revolution but a coup. If democracy falters in Libya, with the state itself crumbling, then a new strongman may emerge over time, barring an informal break-up of the country. (Yemen is already in such disarray. The recent election in Sanaa cannot mask the fact that the regime, such as it exists, has lost control of significant swaths of the country -- to a greater extent than had the old order before 2011.)

While Syria's al Assad is seen as illegitimate, that does not mean that the future in Syria automatically means either democracy or sectarian chaos. It may mean eventually a new form of authoritarianism that alleviates or better manages such instability in the first place. Remember that a system is not defined by the name it gives itself, but by how the power relationships actually work behind the scenes. Thus, Iraq may call itself a democracy, but in truth it is a sectarian "thugocracy" that barely keeps order, and if it continues to falter in that regard, it may eventually be replaced by a full-fledged authoritarian regime (hopefully one far less brutal than Saddam Hussein's).

Indeed, democratic uprisings in 1848 did not secure democracy, they merely served notice that society had become too restive and too complex for the existent monarchical regimes to insure both order and progress. In Political Order in Changing Societies (1968), Harvard political scientist Samuel Huntington wrote that the more complex a society becomes, the greater the number of institutions that are required to govern it.

So one should not confuse the formation of new regimes in the Middle East with their actual consolidation. This will require coercive power in the form of new police forces and intelligence agencies, notes Antonio Giustozzi of the London School of Economics in his provocative new book, The Art of Coercion (2011). And such extreme forms of compulsion are only alleviated by the building of civilian institutions of the kind Huntington talks about, which can then maintain order in a more benign manner. If new bureaucratic institutions do not emerge in a more socially complex Middle East, the Arab Spring will be a false one, and it will be remembered like 1848.

Meanwhile, the authoritarianism of the al-Saud family lingers on in Saudi Arabia, the strategic linchpin of the Arabian Peninsula. And lesser monarchs from Kuwait south to Oman appear not to be in danger. With the exception of the oppressed Shia in Bahrain and in eastern Saudi Arabia, the peoples of the Persian Gulf still broadly associate stability and progress with conservative orders. Thus, the emirs and sultans have the loyalty of their populations and hence the moral advantage.

Syria is at this very moment a bellwether. It is afflicted by ethnic and sectarian splits -- Sunnis versus Shia-trending Alawites versus Druze and Kurds. But Syria also can claim historical coherence as an age-old cluster of cosmopolitanism at the crossroads of the desert and the Mediterranean, a place littered with the ruins of Byzantine and medieval Arab civilizations. The Western intelligentsia now equate a moral outcome in Syria with the toppling of the present dictator, who requires those sectarian splits to survive. But soon enough, following the expected end of al Assad's regime, a moral outcome will be associated with the re-establishment of domestic order and the building of institutions -- coercive or not. Because only with that can progress be initiated.

1848 had tragic repercussions: While democracy in Europe flowered briefly following World War I, it was snuffed out by fascism and then communism. Thus, 1848 had to wait until 1989 to truly renew itself. Because of technology's quickened advance, political change is faster in the Middle East. But for 2011 to truly be remembered as the year of democracy in the Arab world, new forms of non-oppressive order will first have to be established. And with the likely exception of Tunisia -- a country close to Europe with no ethnic or sectarian splits -- that appears for the moment to be problematic.

[Housecarl]

For links see article source...
Posted for fair use....
http://www.stratfor.com/geopolitical...persian-gulf-0

U.S. To Increase Minesweeping Presence in the Persian Gulf
March 16, 2012 | 0612 GMT

The United States is planning to substantially expand its forward-deployed minesweeping presence in the Persian Gulf. The U.S. Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday, stating that four minesweepers would be moved to Bahrain, joining eight others, including four UK Royal Navy minesweepers. The current detachment of four minesweeping helicopters will be increased to eight. The paperwork, published in February, calls for the mine countermeasures (MCM) ships to transported to their destination onboard a larger civilian vessel.

In January it was announced that the USS Ponce (LPD 15) would undergo a conversion to an afloat staging base for MCMs -- essentially a mothership that can facilitate and coordinate at-sea and aerial operations. The USS Ponce is expected to arrive in region this summer and should represent an important expansion of capability and capacity above the simple doubling of the U.S. MCM presence discussed in the CNO’s testimony.

This expansion is fairly rapid and is notably the first substantive change in the MCM presence in the Persian Gulf since the mid-2000s. The lack of change thus far is a stark contrast to tensions and war-like rhetoric that have routinely characterized the Strait of Hormuz and the wider Persian Gulf. Recent months have seen signs of a renewed tension between Washington and Tehran, which reflects a cyclical crisis of escalation and de-escalation that can be a hallmark of political manipulation. North Korea has made it an art for two decades. Yet through it all, the American forward-deployed MCM presence has remained largely constant.

The sudden doubling of that presence after years of tension and rhetoric is inherently noteworthy. Stratfor has long argued that the military question is only part of the equation, and that no military force can control the markets’ reaction to even limited action in the Strait. During Iranian naval exercises in the Strait in late December and early January, Brent crude rose 4 percent. A rapid and proficient military response to Iranian attacks in the Strait -- whether naval mines, anti-ship missiles or small-boat swarm tactics -- can attempt to mitigate but not manage market reaction. Given the global economic crisis -- including the ongoing European economic crisis and the fragile beginnings of an American recovery -- even the threat of a temporary disruption has taken on new credibility in recent years.

This is the essence of Iran’s military deterrent, by which it has protected not only its nuclear efforts but also the larger resurgence of its power and influence throughout the region from military reprisal in the form of an American-led air campaign. (Stratfor has long held that while Israel maintains plans to act independently, the geographic realities, sheer scale of the necessary target set and the hardening of key Iranian facilities simply exceeds the capacity of the Israeli air force.)

But Iran’s deterrent is inherently indirect and blunt. While a third of traded crude passes through the Strait, less than a quarter of American consumption is transported through the Strait. So by threatening the Strait and the flow of oil, Tehran has been threatening more than just Washington. This has often included not only close allies of the United States, but also those that have provided support or remained neutral on Iran and other issues important to Washington.

For many years, this was sufficiently balanced by Iran’s ability to threaten a large and tenuous U.S. military presence in Iraq. But while a substantial U.S. diplomatic presence remains even today, that deterrent has now significantly declined. And while recent years saw the Iranian deterrent in the Strait become more compelling in accordance with the deepening global economic crisis, it also probably reached its peak effectiveness, particularly as the United States begins to recover vis a vis Europe and East Asia.

That is the heart of the issue for Iran. The United States is now more than doubling its MCM presence in the Gulf, thereby creating new uncertainty for the efficacy of the Iranian deterrent and making Iran’s challenge of maintaining a credible deterrent more difficult. But more important, other countries -- including India and China, that are more sensitive to the economic nature of Iran’s deterrent -- face the prospect of being hurt considerably more than the United States, both in terms of wider economic vulnerability and the physical flows of oil.

Perhaps most notable, earlier this year Tokyo stated that should there be an attempt to close the Strait, the Japan Self-Defense Forces would consider deploying its own MCM assets (Japan’s MCM fleet is larger than that of the United States and the United Kingdom combined). This serves as a reminder that threatening the global economy and the flow of crude oil is not simply a threat to the United States: it inherently threatens other countries more opposed to conflict in the Strait than even the United States. Any increase in Washington’s confidence and willingness to engage in an attack against Iran actually increases American leverage over Iran and those who have so far resisted more aggressive non-military action against Iran.

[OldArcher]

Stennis is in 7th Fleet AOO, Washington is out of Yokosuka, Vinson is in the Gulf, Enterprise is entering the Gulf, where is Eisenhower? Anywhere from four to five US carriers could be on station in very short order... Toss in the Frogs, and it could be a hot time in the old town, tonight...

OA, out...

[Countrymouse]

Stennis is in 7th Fleet AOO, Washington is out of Yokosuka, Vinson is in the Gulf, Enterprise is entering the Gulf, where is Eisenhower? Anywhere from four to five US carriers could be on station in very short order... Toss in the Frogs, and it could be a hot time in the old town, tonight...

OA, out...

OA or ANYBODY---

I have begged 3 times on the op-ed "WW III" thread for this info, and haven't got it yet---

I know someone has posted (more than once) here on TB2K in the past, maps that show real-time locations of major ships, including our aircraft carriers.

I would REALLY like to know exactly where the Enterpise is now, due to both what you posted above AND to shane's post on the "WW III" thread.

If whomever knows those links would post them again (or the most current map or info) I would be so grateful.

Thanks in advance,
CM

[Housecarl]

OA or ANYBODY---

I have begged 3 times on the op-ed "WW III" thread for this info, and haven't got it yet---

I know someone has posted (more than once) here on TB2K in the past, maps that show real-time locations of major ships, including our aircraft carriers.

I would REALLY like to know exactly where the Enterpise is now, due to both what you posted above AND to shane's post on the "WW III" thread.

If whomever knows those links would post them again (or the most current map or info) I would be so grateful.

Thanks in advance,
CM

Sorry, I haven't found a map yet.....

http://www.gonavy.jp/CVLocation.html

[CGTech]

OA or ANYBODY---

I have begged 3 times on the op-ed "WW III" thread for this info, and haven't got it yet---

I know someone has posted (more than once) here on TB2K in the past, maps that show real-time locations of major ships, including our aircraft carriers.

I would REALLY like to know exactly where the Enterpise is now, due to both what you posted above AND to shane's post on the "WW III" thread.

If whomever knows those links would post them again (or the most current map or info) I would be so grateful.

Thanks in advance,
CM

Sorry CA, have never found a 'live' map showing the current postitions of the carriers, all the info i have ever found only gets updates about once a week.

[Housecarl]

Hummm....

For links see article source....
Posted for fair use....
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/297...ly-development

Philippines ready to take up Chinese offer for talks on joint Spratly development
By Desiree Caluza
Inquirer Northern Luzon
7:50 pm | Saturday, March 17th, 2012

FORT DEL PILAR, Baguio City, Philippines—The Philippines continues to assert its claim over the disputed Spratlys in the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea) but is ready for joint development negotiations being proposed by China, Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin said here on Saturday.

The defense chief also said the country was concerned about the increase in China’s military buildup but “as long as it is transparent about how they spend their military budget,” it would not be a problem.

Gazmin graced the pre-graduation program for the Philippine Military Academy’s “Bagwis” Class of 2012. President Benigno Aquino is the guest speaker at Sunday’s graduation where he will also commission new officers from the 187 members of the class.

“We are amenable to the [Chinese offer of joint cooperation] for as long as it conforms to our laws,” Gazmin said. “As [President Aquino] said, what is ours is ours. China can be allowed to have a joint venture, but it should be based on our rules.”

Newly installed Chinese Ambassador to the Philippines Ma Keqing had offered to hold talks for cooperation in developing the contested Spratlys. While she acknowledged in a recent press briefing the 11.2 percent increase in China’s military appropriations, she said her country would not pose any threat to Southeast Asian nations that are also claiming ownership of the Spratlys.

Reacting to reports that China would increase its defense budget to 670.27 billion yuan ($106.41 billion) this year, Gazmin said: “It is in China’s interest to increase its [military] budget. We maintain that we are a little bit worried about [the increased arms spending].”

But he backtracked: “For as long as there is transparency, we should not be worried about it. Basta transparent iyong pag-gastos nila ang makikita natin (As long as they are transparent in how they spend their military budget).”

Last week, the Armed Forces of the Philippines formally received four of eight new combat utility helicopters which it bought from a Poland-based aircraft manufacturer.

The helicopters, which landed at the Air Force City in Clark Field in Pampanga, are far more advanced than any helicopters currently used by the Philippine Air Force, officials said.

But Gazmin stressed the country is banking on internationally accepted laws and regulations to settle disputes.

China “also accepts the rules-based approach, which is our main approach,” Gazmin said.

The Philippines pegs its claim over parts of the Spratlys on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea , which prescribes how each nation defines maritime territories and how it may use maritime resources.

Both the Philippines and China signed and ratified this convention.

“But [China is] saying that it is not only UNCLOS that should be considered,” Gazmin said, adding that the treaty is only one of the mechanisms for addressing the Spratly dispute.

[Housecarl]

Hummm....

For links see article source....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.mb.com.ph/articles/354691...vade-neighbors

Ma: China Won’t Invade Neighbors
By ROY C. MABASA
March 18, 2012, 11:10pm

MANILA, Philippines — China has no ambition of invading other countries or interfering in their affairs through military force, the new Chinese ambassador to Manila declared in a discussion with media in Makati City over the weekend.

Ambassador Ma Keqing said these were not part of the intention of her government in increasing its military budget this year as she sought to assuage fears that Beijing poses a threat to other nations.

“What we want to do is to protect China’s interest, protect its borders and sovereignty… that’s all,” said the lady ambassador. “We have no intention or ability to pose threat to other countries.”

The Chinese government’s published 2012 military budget is about $106.4 billion, the second largest in the world and up about 11.2 percent from 2011.

China’s double-digit increase in military budget has been perceived as a move by Beijing to impose its might in the region raising concerns not only among neihboring Asian countries such as Japan, Vietnam and the Philippines, even the United States, which earlier announced to heighten its military presence in the Asia-Pacific region.

“This has raised suspicions,” said Ambassador Ma. However, she clarified that China’s decision to increase its military budget is simply in accordance with the advancement of the country’s economy.

“For a long time in the past, the growth of Chinese military budget has been very minimal,” she said. “But later on we increased the budget to compensate the previous years’ neglect of the military budget.”

She pointed out that a major part of China’s military budget has been used for logistics, for the improvement of the well-being of the officers and members of the military including the increase in their wages.

Only in the last few years, did China use the increase in budget to purchase some hardware for the military, she said.

In addition, Ambassador Ma disclosed that China’s military budget is only 1.3 percent of the total budget which is much lower than that of the United States, United Kingdom, Russia, and even lower than India and Brazil.

“So with such military budget, I believe the Chinese army will not pose any threat to other countries,” said Ma. “I should also stress that Chinese defense policy is fully defensive in nature.”

Currently, the Chinese military armory includes the home-built J-10 jet fighter, new nuclear submarines and modern surface vessels armed with supersonic anti-ship missiles.

In 2011, China began testing a new J-20 stealth fighter and launched sea trials of its first aircraft carrier, a refurbished hulk purchased from Ukraine.

[Housecarl]

Hummm....

For links see article source....
Posted for fair use....
http://www.chinapost.com.tw/commenta...039/US-can.htm

US can lead in Spratlys diplomacy

Monday, March 19, 2012
By Joe Hung

It is true that the Philippines is trying to manufacture a war scare over the Spratly Islands, a large archipelago that rides atop very rich oil reserves in the South China Sea.

The Philippines claims Reed Bank — an islet of the Spratlys, which submerges in full tide, 80 kilometers from Palawan Island which it administers — and after a survey ship sent to explore oil reserves was chased away by Chinese vessels in March last year, Manila has hardened its stance on sovereignty rights, quickened its efforts to modernize its military capability by spending billions, and sought help from the United States. Uncle Sam is ready to stage a joint sea maneuver near Reed Bank later this month or early April, which the People's Republic of China is bound to view as provocative.

On the other hand, the UK-based Forum Energy, that is exploring for oil with the Filipinos, has decided to sail to Reed Bank within months to, for the first time in decades, drill a well in the area for oil and natural gas, an event that could spark a military crisis for Philippine President Benigno Aquino III, if the People's Republic responds more aggressively. Filipino strategists believe the American move and the probable Chinese response will be a litmus test of where the People's Republic stands on the South China Sea issue. They are convinced that the Chinese navy certainly will chase away Forum Energy's ships or send in warships to make sure the drilling isn't done. Reed Bank has become a flashpoint.

But that is about all Aquino can do to involve the United States that is reasserting its return to Asia. No matter what the Philippines does, the United States will never be induced to get into a confrontation, not to speak of war, with the People's Republic, which claims sovereignty over the Spratly archipelago with Reed Bank included.

Aquino should not forget what Vietnam's attempt to create a war scare over the Spratlys resulted in more than a year ago. Hanoi knows full well it's no match for the Chinese navy in sea battles. So the Vietnamese wish to draw the United States into any possible fray with Beijing. The Vietnamese navy conducted a live-fire sea maneuver near the Paracel Islands to flex its military muscle in a show of force against the People's Republic of China. The People's Liberation Army retaliated in kind by sending its naval flotilla to the Spratlys.

At one time, Washington was willing to back up Hanoi. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary R. Clinton said so not in so many words at an ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) meeting in Hanoi, but Uncle Sam changed his mind before you can say Jack Robinson. A State Department spokesman wasted no time in announcing that military exercises were not conducive to the mitigation of tensions in the region. As a consequence, the only thing Hanoi could do was to scale down its defense buildup. The Philippines has no reason whatsoever for a round of shadow-boxing with the People's Republic just because Vietnam did..

Aside from the Philippines, Vietnam and China, the Republic of China in Taiwan claims sovereignty over the Spratly archipelago and stations coastguardsmen on its largest and only habitable island of Taiping. The archipelago is known in Chinese as Nansha Jundao (South Sand Islands). As a matter of fact, this only habitable island was first occupied by the Japanese shortly before World War II as a base for its Southeast Asian invasion and placed the whole group under jurisdiction of Takao-shu, which is the present-day special municipality of Kaohsiung.　

What the Japanese called Nagashima (Long Island) was renamed Taiping (Peace) after the warship of the Republic of China of that name that brought a small contingent to take over it after the restoration of Taiwan to the Republic of China at the end of the war in 1945.

Taiwan isn't much concerned, though tensions are mounting over the Spratlys. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has kept mum, though it has to express concern at the very least over the new Philippine oil drilling at Reed Bank.

To tell the truth, the Waichiaopu should have lodged protests with the Philippines when the Chinese expelled the Forum Energy survey ship. It didn't, and that was wrong. No protests are considered acquiescence to the right of sovereignty to the Philippines, whose claim is weak in the first place. Manila has a legitimate claim to an exclusive economic zone for Palawan to include Reed Bank, but even that claim has to be arbitrated because Taipei has the solid claim to the entire Spratly archipelago. The Ministry of National Defense has no plan to patrol the Nansha Jundao. It stationed marines on Taiping Island when the dispute occurred over sovereignty when large oil resources were discovered in the 1960s. Taiwan withdrew marines from Taiping in 1999 and coastguardsmen replaced them.

There won't be any armed conflict over Reed Bank, of course. But at least a regular naval patrol of the Spratly Islands is necessary to prevent the Philippine oil and natural gas drilling so as to protect Taiwan's right to tap the undersea resources of Reed Bank. Such a patrol isn't an act of aggression the Philippines described as such its encounter with the People's Republic of China in March last year. However, there's a much better way for the United States to remove the tensions over Reed Bank and the entire Spratly Islands.

Washington tried to call an international conference last year to reach a modus vivendi for sovereignty disputes in the South China Sea but there has been no follow-up action. The United States should hold that conference where all parties to the dispute can find a way to shelve the issue of sovereignty and jointly tap the oil and other resources in the entire region.

Copyright © 1999 – 2012 The China Post.

[Housecarl]

For links see article source....
Posted for fair use....
http://www.eurasiareview.com/1603201...uth-china-sea/

China, Vietnam In Sovereignty Spat In South China Sea

Written by: UCAN
March 16, 2012

Vietnam hit out at China yesterday, accusing Beijing of violating its sovereignty in the latest row over disputed islands in the South China Sea.

The foreign ministry says China has recently offered oil and gas tenders for 19 lots in the South China Sea, including Lot 65/24, which lies about one nautical mile from one of the hotly disputed Paracel Islands – or Hoang Sa Islands as Vietnam calls them.

Vietnam also accused China of conducting recent live fire drills near the islands and criticized last week’s announcement from the National Administration of Tourism of China that it is looking to expand tourist activities on the archipelago.

Hainan provincial authorities also plan to organize a yacht race from Sanya to the archipelago on March 28.

“China’s actions have seriously violated Vietnam’s sovereignty over the Paracel archipelago and international law,” foreign ministry spokesman Luong Thanh Nghi said yesterday.

This goes “against the spirit of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the East Sea [South China Sea] signed in 2002 between ASEAN [Association of Southeast Asian Nations] and China,” he added.

He called the Paracels an inseparable part of Vietnam’s territory and that China’s actions were not beneficial to the development of friendship and co-operation between the two sides.

He called on China to end all activities that violate Vietnam’s sovereignty over the archipelago and to make practical contributions to maintaining peace and stability in the South China Sea.
About the author:

UCAN

UCA News reports about the Catholic Church and subjects of interest to the Church in Asia. Through a daily service, UCA News covers lay activities, social work, protests, conflicts and stories on the faith lives of the millions of Catholics in Asia.

[Housecarl]

For links see article source....
Posted for fair use....
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...075207704.html

* ASIA BUSINESS
* March 16, 2012, 1:46 p.m. ET

Vietnam Protests Cnooc's Plans in Disputed South China Sea

* Article
* Stock Quotes
* Comments (95)

more in Asia | Find New $LINKTEXTFIND$ »

By BRIAN SPEGELE

BEIJING—Vietnam is protesting plans by a Chinese oil company to take bids on developing energy deposits in the contested South China Sea, in a fresh sign that territorial disputes in the region may rise as Beijing, Hanoi and other regional claimants push ahead with development plans.

Vietnam said in a statement dated Thursday that it protests a decision last year by state-controlled China National Offshore Oil Corp. to open up bidding for 19 blocks in the South China Sea, which Vietnam refers to as the East Sea. The statement singled out a block that it said is one mile from an island in the Paracel Island chain, which both countries claim.

"The Chinese activities constitute serious violations of Vietnam's sovereignty over Hoang Sa archipelago," the statement read, referring to the islands by the Vietnamese name. "Vietnam asks China to respect Vietnam's sovereignty … and make substantive contribution to maintaining peace and stability in the East Sea."

At a daily Foreign Ministry news briefing in Beijing Friday, spokesman Liu Weimin reiterated long-standing assertions by Beijing that the South China Sea was an inseparable part of Chinese territory. The sea is also partly claimed by the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan.

The oil company, known as Cnooc, didn't respond to requests for comment.

The flare up marks the second incident between the countries this month. Earlier in March, Vietnamese officials accused Chinese forces of assaulting and attempting to rob a group of Vietnamese fisherman and blocking them from seeking refuge during a February storm. China has denied those allegations.

The South China Sea is thought to contain large oil and natural gas reserves, particularly the area near the Spratly and Paracel islands. The sea's energy reserves have emerged as a critical part of Beijing's energy security goals, particularly as it attempts to wean a reliance on oil and gas suppliers in the Middle East, including Iran, and fears shipping disruptions in the volatile Strait of Hormuz and elsewhere.

The growing participation of foreign energy companies in exploring energy reserves in the disputed territories threatens to further complicate disputes. Forum Energy FEP.LN +6.57% PLC, a U.K.-based company, is exploring for oil under an agreement with the Philippines, and vowed last month to continue work in the region despite objections from China.

ONGC Videsh, a subsidiary of India's main state oil company, Oil & Natural Gas Corp., has said it will begin drilling in the area under a deal with Vietnam.

U.S. officials view growing territorial disputes as one of the region's more volatile military flashpoints. Fearing growing maritime clashes with China's rapidly modernizing navy, both Vietnam and the Philippines have strengthened military ties to Washington. China has repeatedly warned the U.S. to stay out of the dispute.

China has occupied the Paracel Islands since military clashes there with then South Vietnam in 1974.
—Nguyen Anh Thu contributed to this article.

Write to Brian Spegele at brian.spegele@wsj.com

[Housecarl]

Hummm....

For links see article source...
Posted for fair use.....
http://businessmirror.com.ph/home/na...ns-at-spratlys

PHL told: Counter China’s intrusive actions at Spratlys
Sunday, 18 March 2012 18:56 Rene Acosta / Reporter

THE Philippines must counter China’s intrusive actions in the disputed Spratly islands and protect its territory, an Australian expert on political and security issues in Southeast Asia said.

Carlyle Thayer, emeritus professor at the University of New South Wales and the Australian Defence Force Academy, prodded the Aquino administration and even Vietnam to take steps in enhancing their “national sovereignty” over their exclusive economic zones.

In his paper, titled “Security Cooperation in the South China Sea: An Assessment of Recent Trends,” Thayer, a Southeast Asia regional specialist, said Manila’s weakness will only invite Beijing “to act more assertively.”

He also prodded the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and the international community, whose ships transit through the South China Sea, to diplomatically confront China over its “aggressive assertiveness.”

Thayer went to Manila last year where he spoke during the two-day conference on the South China Sea.

He raised concerns over China’s behavior in the disputed territory through “its actions and deliberate encroachments into the islands legally owned by the Philippines under international laws and agreements, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea [Unclos].”

He noted of the wave of Beijing’s intrusions into the Kalayaan Island Group (KIG) last year, including the harassments by Chinese patrol boats of Filipino vessels that were conducting seismic surveys in the Reed Bank near Palawan.

Absurd sovereignty claim

ANALYZING China’s behavior, Thayer said its incursions into the country’s territory and even in areas occupied by Vietnam is a way of demonstrating its legal jurisdiction over the South China Sea, which it had falsely claimed through the so-called 9 dash line, 9-dotted line or Ox tongue, whose map it submitted to the United Nations Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf in May 2009.

“China’s claim is based on the nine rocks it occupies in the Spratly archipelago. In other words, China claims that the rocks are in fact islands in international law and thus attract a 200-nautical-mile EEZ,” he said.

“This is a legal fiction. Islands must be able to sustain human habitation on their own and have an economic function. Rocks, which do not meet these criteria, cannot claim EEZ or continental shelf,” he added, echoing the belief of marine specialists.

Beijing’s 9-dash mark cut into the EEZ of the Philippines and even Vietnam that have been firmly established under Unclos.

Still, the oil explorations in the Reed Bank and other areas in the KIG and even in Hanoi’s occupied territory were viewed by China as acts of “plundering of resources” and a challenge to its existence.

Soong Enlai, chairman of the board of the China National Offshore Oil Corp. (CNOOC), had said his country had been losing about 20 million tons of oil annually or about 40 percent of China’s total offshore production owing to such activities in the South China Sea.

Thayer said that in March last year, Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi declared that Beijing’s foreign policy would serve the country’s economic development.

The pronouncement was immediately followed by a warning against any exploration in waters it claimed in the South China Sea, increased maritime patrols and the recruitment of additional 1,000 personnel for China’s marine service that would bring its staff to 10,000.

Big powers’ assistance

SINCE the South China Sea is not only being used by Southeast Asian countries but also by other countries, including India, the United States and its big allies as a shipping route, these regional powers should assist the Philippines and Vietnam in countering China’s aggressiveness, Thayer said.

“It is in the interest of the United States and its allies as well as India to assist both nations [Philippines and Vietnam] in capacity building in maritime security. At the same time, this coalition of like-minded states should back Asean in its efforts to secure an agreement on a code of conduct for the South China Sea,” Thayer said.

He added that the Asean could draw up a “Treaty on Conduct in the South China Sea,” which after its ratifications should open it to accession by nonmember-states.

Thayer, however, doubted whether such could work among the members of the Asean, since there are “nervous nellies” among its members.

Thayer revealed an alarming analysis over China’s actions in the Reed Bank when it harassed Filipino vessels that are doing seismic surveys.

“Chinese actions in the Reed Bank area are designed to expose ambiguities in the US-Philippine Mutual Security [Defense] Treaty over whether or not the Kalayaan Island Group is covered by this treaty,” he said.

[Housecarl]

Hummm....

For links see article source....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Com...20315-844.html

March 18, 2012

"Dealing With Iran" Two Opposite Views from the Left.

By Ismael Hossein-zadeh

Instead of blaming the US-Israeli axis of aggression for the never-ending and escalating turbulence in the Middle East, Dr. Zogby blames Iran!

::::::::

Dr. James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute and brother of the well-known pollster, John Zogby, recently published an article on "Dealing with Iran" in the Huffington Post that is problematic on a number of grounds.

To begin with, Dr. Zogby claims that Iran harbors "aspirations for regional hegemony," and it is, therefore, a "threat" to its neighbors: "Make no mistake, the regime in Tehran is a meddlesome menace and their aspirations for regional hegemony do pose a threat, not to Israel . . . but to the Arab Gulf States." Dr. Zogby goes even one step further, arguing that Iran is more than just a threat; it is "the real danger to its neighbors."

Israel's Education Minister, Gideon Sa'ar, recently admitted (boastfully) that the Israeli government had succeeded in distracting the attention of the entire world away from the Palestinians to the Iranians. Dr. Zogby's argument that Iran is "the real danger to its neighbors" shows that, indeed, Mr. Sa'ar is justified in boasting about the fantastic success of Israel's policy of distraction. Instead of blaming the US-Israeli axis of aggression for the never-ending and escalating turbulence in the Middle East, Dr. Zogby blames Iran!

But let us examine Dr. Zogby's allegation in light of reality: (1) Iran has not invaded (or threatened invasion of) any country for over 250 years. (2) Iran was invaded in 1980 by Saddam Hussein, which culminated in the devastating 8-year war--a war that was instigated, supported and sustained by Western powers and their proxy regimes in the Persian Gulf region. (3) The "Arab Gulf States," headed by the Saudi kingdom, are collaborating with the US-Israeli axis of aggression in their efforts to destabilize and overthrow the Iranian government. (4) The "Arab Gulf States," not Iran, serve (literally) as military bases for Western powers that support Israel and its policies of settlements and occupation.

Against this background, Dr. Zogby's claim that Iran is a "meddlesome menace" is obviously counterfactual and preposterous.

Ironically, Dr. Zogby's claim that Iran poses "the real danger to its neighbors" is flatly rejected by the Arab people. Public opinion polls have consistently shown that the overwhelming majority of the Arab neighbors of Iran view the U.S. and Israel as the real threats, not Iran. For example, the most recent (2011) and most comprehensive public opinion survey to date, which covered 12 Arab/Muslim countries and 16,731 face-to-face interviews, and which was conducted by the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies (ACRPS), found that "by a 15-1 ratio, Israel and the US are seen as more threatening than Iran."

Iran may be a real danger to some of its neighbors, but not in the manner Dr. Zogby dangerously mantains. The real threat Iran poses is not a military threat. Nor is it a threat to the Arab people or their territory--Iran has no territorial ambitions. It is, rather, a threat to the autocratic Arab rulers; a threat that results from Iran's example or model of national sovereignty, not its "aspirations for regional hegemony," as Dr. Zogby claims. As Iran's policies of national independence and resistance to external pressure make the Arab client regimes pale in the eyes of the Arab people, those policies tend to threaten the legitimacy of their dictatorial rulers. And as those policies earn respect from the Arab people, they also earn the wrath of the Arab leaders. This means that Dr. Zogby's arguments against the Iranian government reflect the views of the dictatorial Arab leaders and their imperialist backers, not those of the Arab people.

One salutary point in Dr. Zogby's article seems to be his advice against military threats toward Iran. Unfortunately, he offers that advice for the wrong reasons; he opposes military action against Iran not because such action would be unlawful and immoral, but because (a) military threats "only serve to embolden Iran," (it is not clear why or how); and (b) "continued targeted sanctions...are having a real impact."

Dr. Zogby is either uniformed about the sanctions on Iran, or uses a peculiar definition of targeted sanctions. The brutal sanctions imposed on Iran are way beyond targeted sanctions; they are comprehensive sanctions, designed to be "crippling," as they include Iran's oil exports and its banks, which, in effect, mean its international trade. Targeted sanctions are almost always expanded to broader, comprehensive sanctions, as is the case with Iran. Furthermore, sanctions are essentially a disguised and an insidious form of war whose primary victims are the poor, the children, the elderly, and the infirm. And when sanctions fail to bring about "regime change," military action logically follows.

In his article, Dr. Zogby also writes (with a dash of sarcasm): "What, one might ask the leaders of Iran, will they do with their nuclear program and their provocation? Can it feed their people, rebuild their neglected and decayed infrastructure, give hope to their unemployed young, or secure their role in the community of nations? . . . As the Gulf States make significant progress, providing a model for development and growth, Iran remains trapped in an archaic system which feeds off of fear and anger, and goes nowhere."

It is only fair to ask Dr. Zogby: how can "Arab Gulf States provide a model of development for Iran" when they are essentially consumer markets for foreign products? What product line, manufacturing process or technological know-how can Iran learn from these states? Dr. Zogby seems to confuse financial services, extravagant consumerism (made possible by abundant oil and smaller populations), the unrestricted import of luxury goods from abroad, glossy shopping malls, ballooning skyscrapers, and man-made islands with such fundamental nation building economic activities as manufacturing, industrialization, labor productivity and real development. With the exception of oil, which is produced, processed and managed largely with the help of foreign experts, Persian Gulf kingdoms do not produce much of what they consume.

By contrast, Iran does produce much of what it needs or consumes. It has made considerable progress in scientific research and technological know-how. It has taken advantage of the imperialist sanctions and boycotts to become self-reliant in many technological areas. For example, Iran is now self-sufficient in producing many of its industrial products, such as electric home appliances (television sets, washing machines, dryers, refrigerators, and the like), textiles, leather products, pharmaceuticals, agricultural products, processed food, and beverage products. The country has also made considerable progress in manufacturing steel, copper products, paper, rubber products, telecommunications equipment, cement, and industrial machinery. Iran has the largest operational stock of industrial robots in West Asia.

Iran's progress in automobile and other motor vehicle production has been especially impressive. Motor vehicles, including farming equipment, now count among Iran's exports . The most remarkable industrial progress, however, can be seen in the manufacture of various types of Iran's own armaments needs. Its defense industry has taken great strides in the past few decades and now manufactures many types of arms and equipment. Iran's Defense Industries Organization (DIO) produces its own tanks, armored personnel carriers, guided missiles, radar systems, military vessels, submarines, fighter planes, and more. Despite these achievements, Iran's military spending is relatively modest. For example, while Iran's military spending is currently about $7 billion, or nearly 2% of its GDP, that of Saudi Arabia is about $43 billion, or nearly 11.2% of its GDP, and that of Israel is about $13 billion, or 6.3% of its GDP. And while Iran produces most of its military equipment at home, Saudi Arabia imports its military hardware ( source ).

Contrary to Dr. Zogby's claims, Iran's military preparedness and its nuclear program have not meant neglect of its infrastructure. Iran has invested considerably in both physical infrastructure (such as transportation and communication) and soft/social infrastructure (such as education and healthcare services). Health care is free for those who can't pay . All public education, including university, is free.

Although women are required to comply with the official dress code, they are encouraged (both by their families and the government) to excel in educational and professional pursuits. The results have been quite impressive. Women now constitute the majority of university students. Despite the very high level of unemployment, which is largely due to the economic sanctions and military threats from abroad, more and more women are joining the workforce. They are doctors, engineers, teachers, scientists, writers, artists, business owners, salespersons, firefighters and taxi drivers. Working women in Iran are entitled to 90 days of maternity leave at two-thirds pay, with the right to return to their previous jobs. Women in the US do not have these benefits. Sex change operations and abortion under certain circumstances (and before the ensoulment, i.e. during the first four months of pregnancy) are legal.

In a number of the "Arab Gulf States," by contrast, women cannot hold public office, are denied the right to vote, cannot get a university education, drive a car, or even leave home without a chaperone. How Dr. Zogby thinks these states can "provide a model of development and progress for Iran" is unfathomable.

Dr. Zogby also chides Iran for not supporting the ongoing efforts by the US and its allies, including the "Arab Gulf States," to overthrow the Syrian regime. Yet, there is undeniable evidence that the Syrian opposition is hatched largely by NATO, Israel and their cringing allies in the Arab League. "The Free Syria Army (FSA) fighting against Assad inside Syria is a creation of NATO. Sources indicate 600 to 1,500 fighters from the Islamic Fighting Group in Libya, now known as al-Qaeda in Libya, are working with the FSA to topple the Assad regime. An Arab League report revealed last month that Mossad, MI6, the CIA, and British SAS are in Syria working with the Free Syrian Army and the Syrian National Council." It is a shame that Dr. Zogby would allow himself to support this orgy of mercenary forces, benignly called the "Syrian opposition."

In his article, Dr. Zogby refers to the Persian Gulf simply as the "Gulf," without the word "Persian." I suspect this omission is not fortuitous. Let me explain why. As mentioned earlier, Iran's resistance to US-Israeli aggression infuriates the autocratic Arab rulers because such resistance exposes the complicity of these rulers with the imperialist powers in the occupation and militarization of their lands. To counter this "problem" and to turn Arab public opinion against Iran, the Arab client regimes (with the help of their imperialist patrons) have cooked up a scheme in recent years that is based on a harebrained idea that the word "Persian" should be dropped from the name of the Persian Gulf and replaced with the word "Arab." Magically, the Persian Gulf will become the Arab Gulf. The scheme is, obviously, part of an insidious strategy that is designed to pit the Persian/Iranians against the Arabs, and the Shias against the Sunnis. Regrettably, Dr. Zogby has fallen for this wicked but vintage tactic of divide-and-conquer.


Submitters Bio:

Ismael Hossein-zadeh is a professor of economics at Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa. He is the author of the newly published book, The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism His Web page is http://www.cbpa.drake.edu/hossein-zadeh

[Housecarl]

Hummm.....

For links see article source....
Posted for fair use....
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/20...ng-blind-iran/

U.S. Intelligence Flying Blind on Iran
Jonathan S. Tobin | @tobincommentary 03.18.2012 - 2:20 PM

Today’s front page New York Times feature detailing the consensus of the U.S. intelligence agencies that Iran isn’t working to build a nuclear weapon ought to provide encouragement for those opposed to tough American action on the issue. Bookended with parallel arguments being put forward by many in the Washington foreign policy establishment that a nuclear Iran would be easily contained, this presents the country with a pair of calming notions: Iran isn’t going nuclear but even if it is, it’s no big deal.

However, the most distressing aspect of the piece, which is the product of highly placed anonymous sources within the intelligence establishment, is not so much the lack of alarm on the part of those who are supposed to be the nation’s eyes and ears so much as the fact that they are also willing to admit that they haven’t a clue as to what is actually happening in Iran. The article contains startling admissions that the Islamist tyranny is a mystery to American officials. One went so far as to say that U.S. intelligence agencies view it as even more of a closed book to them than the hermit-like regime in North Korea. Considering their disgraceful failure to prepare the government for the possibility that the North Koreans were on the brink of nuclear capability, this confession should undermine the credibility of the same officials’ boast that they are certain no Iranian nuke is in the works.

Many writing about the intelligence about Iran continually speak of the days before the invasion of Iraq when we were assured by the government that Saddam Hussein was building weapons of mass destruction. Since it was already proven that he had used chemical weapons on his own people and had a nuclear program before Israel destroyed the Osirak reactor in 1981, these were not unreasonable conclusions even if they turned out to be wrong. However that failure, which led to charges that the intelligence community’s convictions about Iraq were wrongly influenced by political considerations, has led to a passionate determination on the part of those in charge that they will never sign off on any conclusion about this sort of an issue again if it will be used as an excuse to go to war. Like generals who always prepare for the surprises they faced in the previous war, America’s spies will never raise the alarms about WMDs again.

Fear of repeating mistakes is understandable. But history rarely repeats itself in this manner. That makes beliefs grounded in that fear often as wrongheaded as the original errors. If the intelligence community’s beliefs about Iraq were incorrectly influenced by a desire to agree with the Bush administration’s predilections then it is just as easy to argue that its current views about Iran might be just as mistaken.

But no matter what is influencing their opinions, it is difficult to work up much confidence in the conclusions of agencies that are so open about the fact that they are flying blind in Iran. Though the anonymous officials have confidence in their non-human assets, they are quick to dismiss any evidence, such as the recent satellite images that have led the International Atomic Energy Agency to suspect that work on weaponization of nuclear material is being carried on in Iran simply because it does not fit into their preconceptions about the regime. But it’s clear that the lack of input about Iranian intentions that can only come from real human intelligence has crippled American agencies to the point where it has become an article of faith on their part that they must be right, even if they can’t back up those conclusions with any evidence.

What we are witnessing here is the sort of cyclical group-think that will be reversed once again if the Iranians confound our spooks the way the supposedly easier to read North Koreans did. Another U.S. intelligence failure will simply make their analysts lean more on the side of action the next time around. But the problem for Israel, the Middle East and the world is that if they are wrong about Iran, the consequences of that mistake will be far worse than even those generated by the Iraq disaster.

[Housecarl]

Hummm....

For links see article source....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.defensenews.com/article/2...xt|FRONTPAGE|s

Nuclear Weapons Cuts Diminish U.S. Power
Mar. 18, 2012 - 03:46PM |
By BRADLEY THAYER | Comments

The recent revelation that the Pentagon is considering reducing its nuclear arsenal by as much as 80 percent, to as few as 300 warheads, raises a critical question: Is the United States tempting fate with such drastic cuts?

Since President Barack Obama has made nuclear disarmament a cornerstone of his foreign policy, the answer for this administration is clearly: “No.” Unfortunately, the broader answer is that nuclear weapons will continue to serve critical foreign and defense policy objectives.

Such deep cuts create unacceptable risks, especially when such proposals are not accompanied by clear plans to modernize the aging nuclear enterprise. For this administration, it’s not cut and replace, it’s just cut, and that’s not good strategy.

For the United States, nuclear weapons matter for purposes of deterrence and coercion — two of the major tools in the U.S. toolbox to advance and protect its interests. To serve these important and complicated ends, the U.S. must not cut its nuclear arsenal.

For the purposes of deterrence, nuclear weapons matter for six reasons:

• They help to deter war and maintain stability among the great powers.

• They deter direct attacks on the U.S. homeland by other nuclear powers.

• Nuclear weapons — both strategic and tactical — allow the United States to extend deterrence credibly, effectively and cheaply to allies such as Germany, Japan and Saudi Arabia. This provides them with security and removes their incentive to acquire nuclear weapons.

• Nuclear weapons can deter attacks against the U.S. military.

• Nuclear weapons play a role in deterring escalation of conflict. For example, if China attacked Taiwan, U.S. nuclear weapons would deter escalation to a strategic exchange between the United States and China.

• Nuclear weapons deter the use of other weapons of mass destruction, such as biological or chemical weapons, against the U.S homeland, allies or U.S. military.

Nuclear weapons also aid Uncle Sam’s ability to coerce opponents. In a crisis, nuclear weapons help convince a challenger not to escalate to a higher level of violence, or move up a rung in the escalation ladder.

Although laden with risks, they also provide the possibility of attacking first to limit the damage the United States or its allies would incur. Whether the U.S. would do so is another matter. But possessing the weapons provides the U.S. with coercive capabilities in crisis situations or war.

Nuclear weapons also give the United States the ability to threaten nuclear first use to stop a conventional attack or limited nuclear attack, and to signal the risk of escalation to a higher level of violence.

Slashing the current nuclear stockpile without an actionable plan to replace aging systems with newer systems will reduce the credibility of the stockpile, thus weakening the deterrent and coercive ability of Washington.

The real problem is not just the magnitude of the cuts but the lack of a plan to maintain an effective deterrence posture. All of the nuclear warheads and delivery systems in the U.S. stockpile entered service in the last century, and some legs of the system, including the long-range bomber, the B-52H, entered service in 1961.

The cold facts are the clock cannot be turned back; nuclear weapons cannot be “uninvented”; and they remain key tools to advance the interests of the United States and international stability. The global deterrent and assuasive commitments of the United States do not permit additional cuts. They cannot be eliminated or dramatically reduced without a cost and penalty for the interests of the United States.

The Cold War changed much, but it did not change the need to be able to deter and coerce foes, a need as identifiable to the ancient Greeks as it is to us today. No state has given up key tools, certainly not China, Russia, India, Pakistan, Israel, North Korea, France or the United Kingdom, and the United States should not be first.

No superpower has contemplated such drastic muscle loss, such reductions in essential weapons that it and its allies need now and in the future.

Bradley Thayer, a professor of political science at Baylor University.

[Housecarl]

Israelis agree Iran hasn't decided on atom bomb
Started by Hfcomms‎, Today 01:09 PM
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showt...d-on-atom-bomb

For links see article source....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.jpost.com/IranianThreat/N...aspx?id=262381

Iran: West must accept success of our nuclear program
By JPOST.COM STAFF
03/18/2012 23:08
Senior Iranian lawmaker says Iran will make no concessions on its nuclear program, P5+1 group must accept Tehran's advances in nuclear energy, technology in order to avoid "heavy losses," Press TV reports.
By Reuters/ Raheb Homavandi

The international community must accept Iran's civilian nuclear program or incur "heavy losses," a senior Iranian lawmaker told the official Islamic Republic News Agency on Sunday.

The international group tasked with negotiating with Iran over its nuclear program, known as the P5+1, has accepted an Iranian offer to restart talks with Tehran.
Related:

*
Obama: Window for diplomacy in Iran shrinking
*
Salehi: If Israel strikes Iran, it will meet its end

Alaeddin Boroujerdi, the head of Iran's Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, said that the P5+1 must acknowledge Iran's achievements in its civilian nuclear program, including advances in nuclear energy production and medical technology.

Iran would not make concessions on its nuclear program, Boroujerdi said according to the report.

He advised the P5+1 to avoid a "policy of confrontation" with Iran over its nuclear program, and called on the United Nations Security Council to lift sanctions on the Islamic Republic, which targeted Iranian assets, banned the supply of nuclear-related materials to Iran, and imposed an arms embargo.

US President Barack Obama has warned that Iran must "seize this opportunity of negotiations with the P5+1 to avert even worse consequences for Iran in the future.”

Western nations have turned up the heat on Iran over its nuclear program, with EU regulators ordering SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) to deny Iranian banks access to its system, delivering a serious blow to the Iranian import-export market.

Iran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, while the US and Israel have said that unless Tehran abandons its nuclear course, all options remain on the table.

[Housecarl]

Hummm.....

For links see article source....
Posted for fair use....
http://afr.com/p/opinion/obama_faces...1N96tIZ8D0pG8I

Obama faces foreign policy test
PUBLISHED: 8 hours 19 MINUTES AGO | UPDATE: 2 hours 23 MINUTES AGO

Ben Potter

For most of the time since the assassination of Osama Bin Laden by US Navy Seals last May, The New York Times/CBS poll had Barack Obama’s foreign policy approval in the upper 40s and low 50s. But this month it dipped to 40 per cent from 50 per cent in February, with approval of the overall job he was doing as President.

Polling is now extremely volatile. Things could quickly turn around again. In the same poll, Obama as commander-in-chief retains the confidence of 58 per cent of voters. Even so, you don’t have to be on the Council on Foreign Relations to guess why the President’s foreign policy ratings are wobbling now.

The past month has been a bad one for the Obama administration in its two most contentious foreign endeavours: Afghanistan; and the stand-off over Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

Tensions have bubbled over in Afghanistan over the clumsy partial burning of copies of the Koran by American soldiers – retaliations have taken the lives of 29 Afghans and six Americans – and with Iran as international sanctions bite and the drums of war echo across the desert from Jerusalem.

Previously the state of the US economy alone was expected to determine the presidential election in November. Now it looks as though foreign policy could play a role. But things may have to deteriorate further for this to happen. Voters rate foreign policy a low priority – 1 per cent say it’s most important – compared with jobs and the economy, rated by 51 per cent as the top issues.

Unhappily for Obama, it’s not difficult to see things going wrong. Afghanistan is increasingly a nightmare. The Koran burning may have been inadvertent, but it is an inexplicable lapse after more than 10 years in the country that much greater care wasn’t taken of religious materials. That is not to say any excuse can be made for the murderous response of some Afghans.

The incident confirms the invading Western force has outlived its welcome among the people it sought to protect without achieving the goal of subduing the Taliban or equipping the Afghan government to subdue them after the American-led forces withdraw during 2013-14.

The massacre of 16 Afghan villagers at the hands of US Staff Sergeant Robert Bales does more irreparable damage. It is correct in a sense to say the actions of a deranged individual should not influence the pace of withdrawal. This should be decided by commanders in the field based on conditions on the ground within the framework laid down by the President. But the potential for further such incidents to undermine the good work being done by the vast majority of US-led troops now becomes one of those conditions on the ground that must go into the assessment.

So the three-year draw-down becomes an exercise in managing a fractious and hostile partner in Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who is understandably looking to his uncertain future in a post-occupation Afghanistan and taking out insurance.

Could anything be worse? To Afghanistan’s west lies Iran, where the government is busily enriching uranium to concentrations far in excess of those required for the civilian or medical uses it claims to be pursuing, causing Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to bristle.

As Republican presidential candidates accuse Obama of “weakness”, the President is banking on ever tougher sanctions to bring the government in Tehran to its knees, forcing it to abandon the pursuit of nuclear weapons.

However, this could also prompt Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, to conclude that his best protection is to secure a nuclear weapon as quickly as possible, and push oil prices up to intolerable levels for the West.

Obama is also banking on the sanctions – which the International Energy Agency says will cut Iran’s oil exports in half by July – convincing Netanyahu to stay his hand for the time being.

Neither US nor Israeli intelligence agencies believe Tehran is actively pursuing nuclear weapons, a report in The New York Times says. But the uncertain intelligence from Iran makes it impossible to be categorical, and it seems to be putting in place some building blocks.

The uncertainty could foster suspicion and miscalculation, and lead to the disaster of another Middle Eastern war. The stakes are immense, all the players are aware of the pressure on Obama in an election year, and if something goes wrong, foreign policy could suddenly become a 51 per cent issue for Americans.

The Australian Financial Review

[Housecarl]

For links see article source...
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...s-options.html

N. Korea Rejects Rocket Launch Criticism as China Cautions Ally
By Andy Sharp - Mar 18, 2012 8:00 AM PT

North Korea rejected international criticism of its planned satellite launch next month as China cautioned its ally in the first sign of tension since Kim Jong Un succeeded his father as head of the totalitarian state.

U.S., Japanese and South Korean condemnation is “a base move to deny the DPRK’s right to use space for peaceful purposes and encroach upon its sovereignty,” the official Korean Central News Agency said yesterday, referring to the country’s official name, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. North Korea has no intention of canceling its plans, KCNA said.

Enlarge image North Korea Leader Kim Jong Un
North Korea Leader Kim Jong Un
North Korea Leader Kim Jong Un

KNS/AFP/Getty Images

Kim Jong Un, leader of North Korea.

Kim Jong Un, leader of North Korea. Source: KNS/AFP/Getty Images

Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Zhang Zhijun expressed his “worry” over the March 16 announcement to North Korean ambassador Ji Jae Ryong, the Foreign Ministry said in a statement. The U.S. said the launch, which is to mark the 100th anniversary of state founder Kim Il Sung’s birth, would negate an agreement to provide food aid in exchange for a North Korean moratorium on nuclear and missile tests.

North Korea is dependent on energy and food assistance from China, which has sought to support its neighbor to avoid unrest that could hinder trade and prompt a wave of refugees across its border. Kim Jong Un took over after his father Kim Jong Il died in December and the launch is part of an effort by the regime to bolster his image ahead of his grandfather’s April 15 centennial.

China “doesn’t want to give the impression it’s supporting what North Korea is doing,” said Robert Dujarric, director of the Institute of Contemporary Asian Studies at Temple University in Tokyo. “It’s tough for Beijing. They have to criticize it, but they can’t do much more.”

‘Sincerely Hope’

“We sincerely hope parties concerned stay calm and exercise restraint and avoid escalation of tension that may lead to a more complicated situation,” Zhang told Ji, according to the statement. China has noted the international reaction to North Korea’s announcement, Zhang said.

Japan is considering using its Aegis missile defense system to shoot the North Korean rocket down if it enters its territory, the Nikkei and Yomiuri newspapers said, without saying where they got the information. Japan made similar considerations in 2009, when North Korea fired a rocket it claimed was a satellite in defiance of the United Nations.

“You may want to hit it before it looks like it’s going to hit Japan,” Dujarric said. “You don’t want to fire at it if it clearly isn’t going to hit Japanese territory because no one wants an escalation with North Korea.”

International experts and journalists will be invited to watch the launch, KCNA said on March 17.

‘Peaceful Purposes’

The Kwangmyongsong-3 satellite will be mounted on a Unha-3 rocket and sent from a station in North Phyongan province between April 12 and April 16, a spokesman for the North Korean Committee for Space Technology said in a statement reported by KCNA. The launch is for “peaceful purposes” and will “strictly abide by relevant international regulations,” the unidentified spokesman said.

The announcement is “highly provocative” and a launch would violate UN resolutions prohibiting North Korea’s use of ballistic missile technology, U.S. State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said last week. The Obama administration has told North Korea going ahead with the mission would be a “deal breaker” for the food-aid agreement, she said.

Under the deal reached in February, the U.S. agreed to provide an initial 240,000 metric tons of food in monthly 20,000-ton increments. The accord opened the possibility for the resumption of six-party talks to persuade North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons development.

North Korea backed out of the talks, which include Russia, China, the U.S., Japan and South Korea, shortly after its April 2009 satellite test and has shown no sign that it’s willing to resume them.

To contact the reporter on this story: Andy Sharp in Tokyo at asharp5@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Paul Tighe at ptighe@bloomberg.net

[Housecarl]

For links see article source...
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...s-options.html

N. Korea Rejects Rocket Launch Criticism as China Cautions Ally
By Andy Sharp - Mar 18, 2012 8:00 AM PT

North Korea rejected international criticism of its planned satellite launch next month as China cautioned its ally in the first sign of tension since Kim Jong Un succeeded his father as head of the totalitarian state.

U.S., Japanese and South Korean condemnation is “a base move to deny the DPRK’s right to use space for peaceful purposes and encroach upon its sovereignty,” the official Korean Central News Agency said yesterday, referring to the country’s official name, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. North Korea has no intention of canceling its plans, KCNA said.

Enlarge image North Korea Leader Kim Jong Un
North Korea Leader Kim Jong Un
North Korea Leader Kim Jong Un

KNS/AFP/Getty Images

Kim Jong Un, leader of North Korea.

Kim Jong Un, leader of North Korea. Source: KNS/AFP/Getty Images

Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Zhang Zhijun expressed his “worry” over the March 16 announcement to North Korean ambassador Ji Jae Ryong, the Foreign Ministry said in a statement. The U.S. said the launch, which is to mark the 100th anniversary of state founder Kim Il Sung’s birth, would negate an agreement to provide food aid in exchange for a North Korean moratorium on nuclear and missile tests.

North Korea is dependent on energy and food assistance from China, which has sought to support its neighbor to avoid unrest that could hinder trade and prompt a wave of refugees across its border. Kim Jong Un took over after his father Kim Jong Il died in December and the launch is part of an effort by the regime to bolster his image ahead of his grandfather’s April 15 centennial.

China “doesn’t want to give the impression it’s supporting what North Korea is doing,” said Robert Dujarric, director of the Institute of Contemporary Asian Studies at Temple University in Tokyo. “It’s tough for Beijing. They have to criticize it, but they can’t do much more.”

‘Sincerely Hope’

“We sincerely hope parties concerned stay calm and exercise restraint and avoid escalation of tension that may lead to a more complicated situation,” Zhang told Ji, according to the statement. China has noted the international reaction to North Korea’s announcement, Zhang said.

Japan is considering using its Aegis missile defense system to shoot the North Korean rocket down if it enters its territory, the Nikkei and Yomiuri newspapers said, without saying where they got the information. Japan made similar considerations in 2009, when North Korea fired a rocket it claimed was a satellite in defiance of the United Nations.

“You may want to hit it before it looks like it’s going to hit Japan,” Dujarric said. “You don’t want to fire at it if it clearly isn’t going to hit Japanese territory because no one wants an escalation with North Korea.”

International experts and journalists will be invited to watch the launch, KCNA said on March 17.

‘Peaceful Purposes’

The Kwangmyongsong-3 satellite will be mounted on a Unha-3 rocket and sent from a station in North Phyongan province between April 12 and April 16, a spokesman for the North Korean Committee for Space Technology said in a statement reported by KCNA. The launch is for “peaceful purposes” and will “strictly abide by relevant international regulations,” the unidentified spokesman said.

The announcement is “highly provocative” and a launch would violate UN resolutions prohibiting North Korea’s use of ballistic missile technology, U.S. State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said last week. The Obama administration has told North Korea going ahead with the mission would be a “deal breaker” for the food-aid agreement, she said.

Under the deal reached in February, the U.S. agreed to provide an initial 240,000 metric tons of food in monthly 20,000-ton increments. The accord opened the possibility for the resumption of six-party talks to persuade North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons development.

North Korea backed out of the talks, which include Russia, China, the U.S., Japan and South Korea, shortly after its April 2009 satellite test and has shown no sign that it’s willing to resume them.

To contact the reporter on this story: Andy Sharp in Tokyo at asharp5@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Paul Tighe at ptighe@bloomberg.net

And let's not forget the Iranian program.....from last month....

For links see article source...
Posted for fair use....
http://presstv.com/detail/227804.html

Iran to launch domestically-built Fajr satellite into space
Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:10AM GMT

Head of Iranian Space Agency (ISA) Hamid Fazeli says the country plans to launch its domestically-built Fajr (Dawn) satellite into space during early months of the new Iranian calendar year (commencing on March 20).

Fajr is a measurement and imaging satellite that will examine subsystems used in previous satellites, Fazeli told IRNA on Tuesday.

He added that the manufacturing work of the satellite is still underway and nearly complete.

He noted that the national Fajr satellite will be placed in elliptical orbit of 400 km in radius and will remain in space for a year and a half.

The ISA head stated that the project was originally scheduled to launch during the Ten Days of Dawn (February 1-10) celebrations, marking the 33th anniversary of the victory of the Islamic Revolution, but was postponed for better preparedness”

On November 12, 2011, Iran’s Defense Minister Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi announced that the country is set to launch into space three domestically-manufactured satellites dubbed Fajr (Dawn), Navid (Harbinger) and Tolou (Rise).

He added that Fajr would blast into space with the thrusting power of 'Safir-e-Fajr' satellite carrier while Navid and Tolou would be mounted on Iran's Simorgh (Phoenix) carrier for lift-off.

Iran launched its first domestically-developed satellite, Omid (Hope), in 2009, an effort that made the Islamic Republic the ninth nation with the capability to launch satellites.

On June 20, 2011, Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the country has gained access to the technology of developing various satellites and will soon launch larger satellites that will be placed in circular orbits at an altitude of nearly 35,000 kilometers (21,748 miles).

Iran is one of the 24 founding members of the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of the Outer Space, which was established in 1959.

SF/MB

_____

For links see article source....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/i...tour-1.3565948

Iran opens space program site for first media tour

Originally published: February 29, 2012 2:55 AM
Updated: February 29, 2012 6:12 AM
By The Associated Press ALI AKBAR DAREINI (Associated Press)

MAHDASHT, Iran - (AP) -- Iran opened a key space facility to visiting journalists for the first time Wednesday in an apparent effort to show its willingness to allow glimpses at sensitive technology even as Tehran and U.N. inspectors trade accusations about access to nuclear sites and experts.

The press tour of the Alborz Space Center, about 40 miles (70 kilometers) west of Tehran, also sought to showcase Iran's advances in aerospace sciences less than a month after it announced another satellite was launched into orbit.

Iran's ambitious space program has raised concerns in the West because of possible military applications. The same rocket technology used to send satellites into orbit -- including the Feb. 3 launch of the domestically made Navid, or Gospel -- can also be retooled to create intercontinental warheads.

Iran says Navid was designed to collect data on weather conditions and monitor natural disasters.

The space center visit -- by nearly 50 journalists for international media in two separate groups -- comes as Iran and the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency are locked in disputes over access to officials and key sites in the Islamic Republic's atomic program.

The West and allies fear Iran's uranium enrichment labs could eventually produce weapons-grade material. Iran says it only seek nuclear power for energy and medical research.

Allowing journalists into the space facility could be an attempt to discredit U.N. claims that Iran is keeping a tight lid on its technological capabilities. Officials said the space center has no military role, and is used to control and collect data from various satellites, including Navid.

The facility is on a sprawling tract at the base of hills. Inside are huge satellite dishes, buildings housing the control rooms monitoring satellites, including display panels nearly three feet (a meter) across.

"We are the control station for Navid satellite, which has been designed to take pictures from the earth's orbit," director of project, Mojtaba Saradeghi, told the visiting journalists, who were shown a model of the Navid satellite.

Saradeghi said sanctions prevented Iran from buying some of the key equipment needed to build Navid, but Iranian space experts were able to design and produce the equipment.

"We needed various equipment, including sun sensors, for Navid. We could not buy them because of sanctions. So we designed and produced sun sensors ourselves," Saradeghi said.

Kamal Yazdani, another official at the site, said experts here monitor Terra, a multinational NASA scientific research satellite, and other satellites available to the international scientific community.

"We receive data from these satellites and provide the pictures to research and scientific centers including student projects," he said.

Iran is intent on highlighting technological successes as signs Iran can advance despite Western sanctions over its disputed nuclear program.

Iran sent its first domestically made satellite, called Omid, or Hope, into orbit in February 2009. Iran's space plans are wide-ranging and even hold out the goal of putting a man in orbit within a decade, though it appears Iran is still far from that capability.

In 2005, Iran launched its first commercial satellite on a Russian rocket in a joint project with Moscow, which is a partner in transferring space technology to Iran along with North Korea and China. That same year, the government said it allocated $500 million for space projects in the next five years.

Iran has said it wants to put its own satellites into orbit to monitor natural disasters in the earthquake-prone nation and improve its telecommunications. Iranian officials also point to America's use of satellites to monitor Afghanistan and Iraq and say they need similar abilities for security.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

[Housecarl]

For links see article source....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...ipri-says.html

China Buys Fewer Weapons as Local Industry Expands, Sipri Says
By Daniel Ten Kate - Mar 18, 2012 4:00 PM PT

China, the world’s top weapons importer for much of the past decade, fell to fourth from second on an annual list from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute as it produces more arms at home.

China received 5 percent of the volume of international transfers of “major conventional weapons” from 2007 to 2011, Sipri said in a report released today. The total was half that of India, which last year overtook China as the world’s largest recipient of arms, and less than South Korea and Pakistan.

“In certain sectors such as combat aircraft, with the exception of certain parts like engines, China is able to put together these systems largely from their own indigenous base now,” Paul Holtom, director of Sipri’s arms transfer program, said by phone. “India is still struggling there.”

China is set to increase military spending 11 percent this year as rising economic interests, territorial disputes and expanding global commitments drive demand for warships, missiles and fighter jets. Defense outlays of more than $100 billion per year are second only to the U.S., which along with Europe has maintained an arms embargo against the leadership in Beijing since a 1989 crackdown against protesters.

The volume of worldwide arms transfers in 2007-2011 was 24 percent higher than in 2002-2006, the report said. The Asia- Pacific region led the world, accounting for 44 percent of arms imports. It was followed by Europe at 19 percent, the Middle East at 17 percent and the Americas at 11 percent.

China Exports Double

China’s arms exports nearly doubled in 2007 to 2011 from five years earlier, Sipri said, making it the world’s sixth biggest supplier after the United Kingdom. About two-thirds of China’s weapons were sold to neighboring Pakistan, it said, including 50 JF-17 combat aircraft, 203 tanks and three warships.

Asia-Pacific spending on fighters, missiles and other equipment is set to grow an average 4.2 percent annually to $114 billion in 2016, according to Frost & Sullivan. China’s defense budget alone may rise 14 percent each year through 2015, according to Goldman Sachs Group Inc.

India last week said it will increase defense spending by 13 percent next year to 1.93 trillion rupees ($38.4 billion) as it seeks to counter China’s buildup.

India’s purchases range from naval to aircraft to ground forces, Holtom said, including Russian-made 120 Su-30MK and 16 MiG-29K fighter jets. Paris-based Dassault Aviation SA (AM) is in final talks on a contract to supply at least 126 Rafale combat planes to India to clinch the first-ever export deal for the jet, Chief Executive Officer Charles Edelstenne said March 9.

‘Status Element’

Brazil and South Africa are also stepping up weapons purchases, reflecting the emergence of middle-income powers on the global stage, Holtom said. Brazil’s orders of 4 Scorpène class submarines, a nuclear-powered submarine, and 50 transport helicopters will contribute to a “dramatic increase” in imports in the coming years, Sipri said.

“There is a status element there as well as an ability to project power over distance,” Holtom said. “The emerging powers desire to be seen having the equipment of a power, and in some of those cases it’s upgrading and modernizing from Cold War-era equipment.”

The U.S. remains the world’s largest exporter of military equipment, accounting for 30 percent of arms deliveries between 2007 and 2011, followed by Russia at 24 percent, the report said. The Pentagon is asking for $613.9 billion next year, which also includes $88.5 billion in supplemental spending for wars.

Stockholm-based Sipri, founded in 1966, conducts research into conflict, armaments, arms control and disarmament, according to its website. A substantial part of its funding comes from the Swedish government, it said.

The institute says it measures the volume of arms moved around the world using an index that is “based on the known unit production costs of a core set of weapons and is intended to represent the transfer of military resources rather than the financial value of the transfer.”

To contact the reporter on this story: Daniel Ten Kate in Bangkok at dtenkate@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Peter Hirschberg at phirschberg@bloomberg.net

[Housecarl]

Bandits on the Border: Bloody Opportunity in the American Southwest
Started by Housecarl‎, Today 05:57 PM
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showt...ican-Southwest

__

For links see article source....
Posted for fair use.....
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/new...out-to-europe/

Mexican Cartels Branch Out to Europe

Published March 15, 2012

Fox News Latino

*

A Fox News report from Wednesday night's On the Record with Greta Van Susteren indicates violent Mexican cartels have infiltrated Europe, specifically, Britain, France and the Netherlands.

Oscar Hagelsieb, a U.S. Homeland Security special agent, says intelligence and sources have indicated cartels have spread to Europe, Africa, and in the Middle East.

"Compared to a year, and I point back to my time in Mexico, I believe that the cartels have grown in violence and in tactics and ruthlessness," Hagelsieb said.

"Right now what we see is that this cartel violence has taken hold. We attribute to that perhaps the cartels are in a wait-and-see posture with an election coming up. They are trying to determine if the new administration will be as vigorous in pursuing them as the Calderón administration."

The video clip is above and the transcript of the exchange between Van Susteren and Hagelsieb is below.

VAN SUSTEREN: This is the ignored crisis. We have been telling you this almost nightly ON THE RECORD. We have taken you to Mexico. Mexican cartels are vicious, violent and growing out of control. It is no longer a war in Mexico saving their citizens and spilling onto our streets.

Tonight, we can report that they are in Europe, in Britain, France, and the Netherlands.

Oscar Hagelsieb is a U.S. homeland security special agent. He joins us. Good evening, sir. And tell me, am I right that these Mexican cartels have now spread to Europe?

OSCAR HAGELSIEB, HOMELAND SECURITY INVESTIGATIONS: Yes, you are correct. We have intelligence and our sources have indicated that they have spread to Europe, including England, the Netherlands, France, and as far away as Africa, and in the Middle East.

VAN SUSTEREN: What is being done, if anything? I understand that the British are talking to you -- is that right, sir?

HAGELSIEB: Yes. We have established the contact with the British authorities, specifically, this organized crime agency. The British have visited us here in El Paso to see how we tackle the cartels. We have experience investigating high-level cartel members all over the world. We have offices all over the world. So they have reached out to us and we are now beginning to share intelligence and information.

VAN SUSTEREN: If you were to compare a year ago with right now, has it gotten better, the control over the cartels, or are the cartels grown and spread out over the world in a year?

HAGELSIEB: Compared to a year, and I point back to my time in Mexico, I believe that the cartels have grown in violence and in tactics and ruthlessness. Right now what we see is that this cartel violence has taken hold. We attribute to that perhaps the cartels are in a wait-and-see posture with an election coming up. They are trying to determine if the new administration will be as vigorous in pursuing them as the Calderón administration.

VAN SUSTEREN: You are talking about the administration in Mexico.
You are not referring to our election in the United States, right?

HAGELSIEB: No. Exactly. I am referring to the Mexican elections.

VAN SUSTEREN: Do the British seem to have the same level of urgency or more of a greater level of urgency to this problem than the Americans?
Or are they both on the same page?

HAGELSIEB: I think we are both on the same page. The only difference is that they haven't been exposed to these kinds of investigations. They have never had to deal with the ruthlessness of the Mexican cartels and to how they operate. So they took this opportunity to communicate with us to see exactly what our methods are, to investigate and dismantle them. We have done this for years. We have investigated the cartels for numerous years in the United States and Mexico. So who better to teach them our methods than us?

VAN SUSTEREN: When you talk about the cartels spreading to Europe, are you talking about a distribution network for their drugs? Or are you also including the vicious violence that we see -- that we have heard about in Mexico, like beheadings and tortures? Is that also spreading to Europe?

HAGELSIEB: Well, from what we have gathered from our intelligence is that right now what spread to Europe is a distribution network.
Specifically the Sinaloa cartel has been very adept at doing that and setting up distribution networks throughout Europe. They don't have much competition there, so you won't see the level of violence that there is in Mexico where they are battling against each other for the lucrative wraps.

So at this point, what Europe and anybody else in Africa, the Middle East should be concerned is that they set up and entrench themselves in the society to launder money and try to legitimize their illicit money. And at this point, we don't foresee the violence spreading there, but it has the potential. For example, we see how lucrative the distribution is in Europe, who is to say they don't muscle there way over there and continue the violence there.

VAN SUSTEREN: Agent, thank you and good luck, sir.

HAGELSIEB: Thank you.

Catch On the Record with Greta Van Susteren weeknights at 10pm EST and visit their website here.

[Housecarl]

For links see article source....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp...2dd84d5724.641

Mexican cartel to stop violence for pope's visit

(AFP) – 4 hours ago

MEXICO CITY — The Knights Templars drugs cartel is calling a short truce -- but only to welcome Pope Benedict XVI to Mexico, an official said Sunday.

"They did put up signs announcing this," a Guanajuato state government source told AFP privately.

"The Knights Templars are holding off on all violent action, we are not killers, welcome to the pope," the official said paraphrasing one of the signs put up in the town of Irapuato, Guanajuato state.

The signs were seen in at least seven towns statewide.

The pope arrives March 23 in Leon, in the neighboring state of Michoacan, where the Knights Templars were founded.

President Felipe Calderon has launched a military crackdown against the cartels battling it out for control of the lucrative drug trade, in which some 50,000 Mexicans have lost their lives since 2006.

Copyright © 2012 AFP. All rights reserved. More »

Related articles

* Mexican drug cartel hangs banners promising no violence during pope's visit to ...
Washington Post - 15 minutes ago
* Pope asks for prayers before Mexico-Cuba trip
Boston.com - 10 hours ago
* Pope Benedict XVI to Visit Mexico from March 23 to 26
Mexidata.info - 5 hours ago

[Housecarl]

For links see article source....
Posted for fair use....
http://www.wgme.com/template/inews_w...wgme.com.shtml

Mexico police find 10 heads outside slaughterhouse
March 18, 2012 23:01 GMT

ACAPULCO, Mexico (AP) -- Mexican authorities have found 10 severed heads dumped outside a slaughterhouse in a town in northern Guerrero state. They are still looking for the bodies.

A statement from the Teloloapan police says the heads of seven men and three women were left with a message that appears to threaten the La Familia Michoacana drug cartel. The warning says: "This is going to happen to all those who support the FM."

La Familia is based in Michoacan state, adjacent to Guerrero. Both Mexican states have suffered in recent years from fighting among drug gangs. Authorities say La Familia has been severely battered in the fighting.

[Housecarl]

For links see article source....
Posted for fair use.....
http://mexidata.info/id3298.html

Monday, March 19, 2012
Mexico's War vs. Organized Crime, Goons and Savage Gangsters

By Jerry Brewer

It has taken many years for the U.S. to answer a wakeup call to the Mexican border. As far back as 2005, when the sophistication of Mexican and other transnational organized criminals graphically manifested their superior tactics and armament on the streets of Nuevo Laredo, a nation scrambled to demand walls and fences regardless of the associated costs.

The "gang" culture of violence from Latin America had long since penetrated the U.S. border and set up shop in many major U.S. cities. As well, these gangs had been building personnel infrastructures for years, assimilating with U.S. prison gangs -- particularly in southwestern states and California. People were later shocked to learn that there were well over 300,000 gang members in California alone.

While local U.S. police jurisdictions were valiantly working to interdict gang crime activities and violence at local levels, for the most part many remained narrowly focused on a continuing problem of illegal migrants. Other astute strategic intelligence forecasters began to place their eyes on U.S. Border Patrol reports of being stalked along the border and mountainous regions, shot at, and speaking of tactical and military-like strategies in cover and concealment used against them, surveillance, and the use of radios in communication to "spot" law enforcement movements and patrols.

We would later learn that these new violent and cancer-like enemies, known as Los Zetas, were former Mexican tactical military troops that had abandoned their ranks and quickly became enforcers contracting to another drug cartel. Many of those subsequently recruited into their ranks had similar military specialties, such as those from the tactical Kaibiles of Guatemala.

The evil criminal drug empire that remained in the shadows while pumping billions of dollars in drugs into the U.S. was now looking to build and expand drug routes, eliminate competition, and confront any police, government, or military interdiction effort head on. They needed to graphically make their presence and strength known - and they did.

Now, seven years later, we continue to scratch our heads, stare in bewilderment, and try to figure where to stick our finger in the dike and plug the border.

Reportedly more than 50,000 people have been killed due to drug trade violence in Mexico alone since late 2006. This new culture of extreme violence goes well beyond a war on drugs. The weary, as well as armchair quarterbacks are quick to offer easy solutions to end the massive violence and deaths. Their options range from legalizing drugs, to leave the traffickers alone and they won't bother anyone, let them work it out among themselves, and stop the extreme enforcement methods that are driving the violence.

The war on drugs is most definitely a war against crime. The fact is that there will always be a war to confront murder with impunity, lawlessness, mayhem, and graphic examples of barbaric brutality. Should the aggressive crime interdiction efforts be curtailed?

It was astonishing to recently hear, during a top military commander's testimony before the US Senate, the claim that the targeting of drug cartel leaders "did not have an apparent positive effect in Mexico."

U.S. Northern Command leader General Charles Jacoby told the Senate's Armed Services Committee that Mexico had successfully killed or captured 22 out of 37 of Mexico's most wanted drug traffickers, as identified by the Mexican government -- adding that the results had "no appreciable effect," as violence continues to escalate in Mexico.

What he failed to acknowledge is that violence has sky-rocketed in many of the nations of Central America -- some rising to world record homicide rates.

The United Nations joined the quick-fix pundits to urge "the withdrawal of military forces from public safety operations." A noble thought but an impossible and unrealistic suggestion since the transnational organized criminal insurgents could easily defeat nearly any armed enforcement action against them, with their superior firepower and web of corrupting influences via their massive wealth.

As it applies to a "drug war," much of the drug cartels' power is now centralized in low-level decision-making, and not consolidated in hierarchy or top-down accountability as was most prevalent before the aggressive enforcement interdiction.

This fragmented nature has unleashed and relaunched traditional crime gangs in Honduras and Guatemala, and in some neighboring nations, where gang members have stepped-up acts of murder for hire, extortion, human trafficking, kidnapping, and other violent actions. Moreover, when it comes to drugs -- the Mara Salvatrucha gangs have been in U.S. cities since the early 1990s.

In essence, outside of a "war on drugs" there must be a war on crime in Mexico and Central America, with appropriate law enforcement and judicial processes overhauled.

Powerful street gangs are increasingly approaching a take-the-lead posture. And a Latin American culture of violence could experience a renaissance with these new "super-powered" street gangs.

----------

Jerry Brewer is C.E.O. of Criminal Justice International Associates, a global threat mitigation firm headquartered in northern Virginia. His website is located at http://www.cjiausa.org/.

[The Flying Dutchman]

=

New Hezbollah arms, training jeopardize
Israel's aerial supremacy: report

March 19, 2012 11:55 AM
The Daily Star
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Pol...#axzz1pYdGPMzY

BEIRUT: Hundreds of Hezbollah fighters have been receiving training in the use of advanced anti-aircraft weapons in Syria and Iran in recent months, an Israeli newspaper reported over the weekend, in a development the Israeli military says could jeopardize the Jewish state’s aerial supremacy.

Haaretz reported Sunday that a senior officer in Israel’s Northern Command said hundreds of Hezbollah fighters were being taught to use surface-to-air missiles in Syria and Iran.

Hezbollah declined comment when contacted by The Daily Star Monday.

Haaretz, which in January reported concerns by the Israeli army of possible future chemical weapons transfers from Syria to Hezbollah, said Israeli army officers were also concerned about the transfer to Hezbollah of huge quantities of surface-to-air missiles. The Israelis suspect that the transfers take place from Iran through Syria to Hezbollah.

"We will have to find answers to the transfer of anti-aircraft weaponry, and chemical and biological weapons. It could be a cause to change Israel's retaliation policy," the senior officer told Haaretz.

"The potential of escalation in Lebanon is huge, and Hezbollah continues to strengthen [itself] with regard to long-range weaponry and potential 'surprises' on the battlefield," the source said.

The source said that arms transfers from Syria to Hezbollah would likely increase as President Bashar Assad loses his grip on power.

"The more Assad loses his grip, the [more] transfers will increase," the officer said, adding, "We're troubled by the transfer of strategic components from Syria to Lebanon, and if that happens, it might be cause for a more active response.”


Read more: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Pol...#ixzz1pYdMGpMb
(The Daily Star :: Lebanon News :: http://www.dailystar.com.lb)



=

[The Flying Dutchman]

=

Israel using Gaza as trial run for Iran strike: Hamas chief

March 19, 2012 11:50 AM
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Mid...#axzz1pYdGPMzY

ANKARA: Israel is using the the Gaza Strip as a testing ground for a possible military strike on its arch foe Iran, the head of Hamas said on Monday.

"Israel is warming up the region for a possible war against Iran," Khaled Meshaal said in an interview with Turkey's Anatolia news agency.

Accusing Israel of pursuing "state terrorism" in Gaza, Meshaal defended the Islamist group's firing of rockets into southern Israel from the impoverished coastal strip which is run by Hamas.

"The only purpose of these rockets is to defend ourselves. Israel is attacking us and naturally our brothers in Gaza are exercising their right to self-defense," said Meshaal, who is the head of the powerful Hamas politburo.

Militants in Gaza reached a truce with Israel last week after four days of violence in which 25 Gazans died and 200 rockets were fired at the Jewish state.

Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has consistently warned that he will not tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran, saying the country had a "duty to defend" itself from any existential threat.

During an unannounced visit to Turkey, Meshaal met on Friday with Turkey's Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Although Turkey was once seen as Israel's closest ally in the Muslim world, relations have chilled under Erdogan who has been particularly outspoken in his criticism of Israel's bombing of Gaza.

Hamas is considered a terrorist organization by Israel and many Western countries, but not by Turkey.

The head of the Hamas government in Gaza, Ismail Haniya, received an enthusiastic welcome on a visit to Turkey in January as part of his first regional tour.


Read more: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Mid...#ixzz1pYe8de1g
(The Daily Star :: Lebanon News :: http://www.dailystar.com.lb)



=

[The Flying Dutchman]

=

Monday, March 19, 2012, 09:46

Updated:
Israel 'horrified' by France school attack

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles...-attack.411815

Israel said today it was "horrified" by a shooting attack at a Jewish school in the French city of Toulouse, which witnesses said left three children and a teacher dead.

"We are horrified by this attack and we trust the French authorities to shed full light on this tragedy and bring the perpetrators of these murders to justice," Israeli foreign ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor told AFP.

Children aged three, six and 10, and a religious education teacher were killed in the shooting.

This was the third shooting in a week in the region by a man who fled on a motorbike.





=

[The Flying Dutchman]

=

Augmented Avengers Off To The Persian Gulf

March 19, 2012:
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/hts.../20120319.aspx

The U.S. Navy is sending four more Avenger class mine hunters to the Persian Gulf, along with four more minesweeper helicopters. This is a precaution in case Iran makes good on its threat to interfere with ship traffic in the Persian Gulf. Naval mines would be a very effective weapon for this sort of thing.

The Avengers are 72.3 meter (224 foot) long ships that draw only 4.8 meters (15 feet) of water, enabling them to operate close to shore. They are armed with two .50 cal. (12.7mm) machine guns, two 7.62mm machine guns, two 40mm automatic grenade launchers, and have a crew of 84. The four Avengers currently in the Persian Gulf operate out of Bahrain. Another four are based in Sasebo, Japan. The other six are based at San Diego, California.

The U.S. Navy recently upgraded the sonars on its Avenger class mine hunter ships. The new AN/SQQ-32(V)4 mine hunting sonar improves the ability of the sonar to spot mines on sea bottoms cluttered with other stuff (natural or manmade). In many parts of the world shallow coastal waters are used as a dumping ground for junk that won’t float ashore. This has been found to help hide bottom mines. The Avengers have also received new engines. The four original diesel engines in each Avenger have never been very reliable. With their new engines the Avengers can still move at up to 27 kilometers an hour. Normally, however, the Avengers move much more slowly (3-4 kilometers an hour) when searching for mines. The Avengers also got improved hydraulics, and new mine destruction systems.

The upgrade is also part of an attempt to deal with delays in the new LCS class ships or at least the ones equipped for mine hunting. So for the last six years the navy has been hustling to refurbish its existing Avengers. The 3,000 ton LCS ships are designed for minesweeping (and a lot of other jobs) but the 1,400 ton Avengers specialize in minesweeping. Built mostly of wood and very little iron the fourteen Avengers entered the fleet between 1987 and 1994 and all are still in service. The upgrades will enable the Avengers to remain in service at least until 2016 and probably until the end of the decade.

The navy also had a dozen smaller Osprey class coastal mine hunters (900 tons displacement, crew of 51), but these were all given away to foreign navies and replaced by the LCS (which has been delayed) and new minesweeping helicopters (which are on schedule).






=

[The Flying Dutchman]

=

EUROPEAN OPENING NEWS INCLUDING:
Iran will make absolutely no concessions on its nuclear program

8:05 am
http://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/...gram-8706.html

ASIA

JGBs prices remained steady as bids were seen strengthening in the 20-year sector. On-the-runs in 5s and 10s are also firm. (RTRS)

Less than two weeks before a deadline to craft a tax-hike plan, the ruling DPJ continues to struggle to find support within the party needed to push the measure forward. (Nikkei) Officials are hinting at scaling back the plan to win more backing, as well as reaching out to opposition parties to make up for the shortfall. Failure to advance the bill could force PM Noda to dissolve parliament and call a snap election.

IMF’s Lagarde said China’s efforts to reduce its dependence on exports and investment for economic growth should incorporate financial reforms that include a stronger and more flexible exchange rate. Lagarde said that the IMF is to review valuation of the CNY and other currencies later this year, and that with financial reforms CNY can become a global reserve currency. (Sources) Lagarde added that China has space for modest fiscal stimulus and must continue to shift toward consumption.

New home prices fell in most of China's major cities in February as the market corrects in part due to government polices aimed to dispel speculation. (Xinhua) In February, new home prices dropped in 45 cities of the 70 major Chinese cities monitored by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), and 21 cities recorded no changes month-on-month

Moody’s have said that China’s containment of local government debt is credit positive. (Sources)

GLOBAL

IMF’s Lagarde said she sees signs of stabilization in the world economy and the world economy has stepped back from the brink, however she also noted that the rising price of oil is a new threat that could derail the recovery. (Sources/Telegraph)

US

T-notes finished in negative session on Friday, with moves off the lowest levels attributed to a big buyer of long P-Strips, with the 30-year bond outperforming the 10-year. Central banks were also sizeable buyers at the 10-year point, buying most of their paper before the Michigan number. T-notes settled at 128.19+, down 7+ ticks. Finally the DJIA finished down 0.15% at 13232.55; the SPX finished up 0.11% at 1404.17 and the NDX 100 finished down 0.07% at 2712.78. For the week the DJIA finished up 2.40%, the SPX finished up 2.43% and the NDX 100 finished up 2.24%. T-notes were trading down 1 tick at 128.18+ heading into the European session, following relatively quiet trading overnight. Last price taken at 0645GMT. (RANsquawk)

Fed's Evans called for more QE, despite signs of economic recovery, and said that the Fed should avoid premature rate hikes until unemployment falls below 7% or inflation threatens to top 3%. (RTRS)

EU

An IMF staff report released on Friday night said that without official support and access to ECB funding, a disorderly Greek exit from the Euroarea was unavoidable. Such an event would be very costly, and even so, Greece would probably not settle into a good state. (RTRS) The report also said that it estimate for Greek bank losses to total EUR 30-35bln over 3 years, but that the IMF has put aside EUR 50bln to help the banks cope with recession and restructuring of government debt.

IMF’s Thomsen said that Greece’s latest bailout program will fail if the new government doesn’t push through the reforms according to a report. (Vima) In other news IMF’s Lagarde said Euro-area 2012 government debt rollovers are worth 23% of GDP. (Sources)

The EFSF announced it will immediately disburse EUR 25bln for the recapitalization of Greek banks, out of the package of EUR 48bln budgeted for this purpose this year. However Greek Central Bank chief Provopoulos said the country's banks may not need all the aid provided by the EU and the IMF to recapitalize them. (EU and the IMF estimated that banks will require EUR 50bln) (ekathimerini)

Ex-Greek finance minister Venizelos has claimed victory in the leadership vote of the PASOK party, in which he ran unopposed. (Sources)

According to a Barclays survey, a majority see a second EUR member restructuring their debt, with Ireland or Portugal expected to follow the same routine as Greece. (Sources) Elsewhere in the survey, investor sentiment regarding the Euroarea has improved significantly and shows a broader optimism on the global economy.

A group of financial market players today will determine that holders of the USD 3.2bln in Greek credit-default swaps will receive around USD 2.5bln in compensation for Greece’s debt-restructuring. (WSJ)

German chancellor Merkel said that the Euro-region crisis no longer poses a threat to the German budget and she’s confident that Germany can cut its net new borrowing. (Sources/Le monde) However, ECB’s Praet said that the situation is still fragile in the Eurozone and after the ECB injected massive liquidity into the banking system it is up to governments and banks to act further.

PIMCO’s CEO El-Erian said Portugal will need a second rescue as the original package of EUR 78bln falls short, adding that it will make the financial markets nervous because they are worried about a participation of the private sector. (Der Spiegel)

Ireland may be able to defer a EUR 3.1bln promissory note payment on Anglo Irish Bank Corp. due on March 31st according to a senior European Commission official. (Sunday Business Post) In other news a pledge by French Socialist candidate Hollande to renegotiate the EU’s budget-discipline treaty if he is elected president will likely influence the timing of Ireland’s looming public referendum on the pact according to a report.

Total government debt in Spain rose 14.3% in 2011, according to statistics released by the Spanish Central Bank. (La Vanguardia) Total government debt reached EUR 734.961bln at the end of December last year. At the end of 2007, public debt was around EUR 382.307bln.

FX

JP Morgan has cut its Q4 EUR/USD target to 1.36 from 1.38. (Sources)

The CFTC said in its weekly report that the net EUR short position was USD 16.2bln, a decrease of 15% from the previous week; the net JPY short position was USD 6.4bln, more than doubling from the previous week; the net USD long position was USD 17.9bln, unchanged from the previous week; the net CHF short position was USD 2bln, a decrease of 24%. (RTRS)

Australia’s RBA Governor Stevens has urged more action on economic reform in the country, adding that interest rates have limits in the extent to which they can improve the domestic economy. The governor has further commented that capital flows are adding inflationary pressures to the AUD. (Sources)

GEOPOLITICAL

Iran will make absolutely no concessions on its nuclear program according to a key lawmaker. (Sources)

North Korea rejected criticism of its planned long-range missile launch which threatens to upset its only major benefactor, China, and put relations with the United States back in the freezer just as they seemed to be starting to thaw. (Al-Arabiya)

South Korea have said that North Korea is seeking to develop a missile for nuclear weapon use. (Sources)

COMMODITIES

WTI crude futures were seen trading up USD 0.27 at USD 107.33 heading in the EU session, as market participants note, the market is signalling fuel demand is at its strongest point seen in around 20-years. Last price taken at 0640GMT. (RANsquawk/sources)

Iraq is to operate a 2nd oil export floating terminal in a few months that will boost the country’s oil exports to 3.55 MBPD according to state-run Kuwait News Agency Kuna. (Kuna)

Saudi oil output hit 9.871 MBPD in Jan vs. 9.810 MBPD in Dec. (Sources)





=

[The Flying Dutchman]

=

Iran to West:
Respect Nuclear Program or Suffer 'Losses'

Iranian lawmaker warns Western countries of “losses” they
will sustain unless they respect Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

By Elad Benari
First Publish: 3/19/2012, 6:44 AM
Reuters
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/153894

The head of the Iranian parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Commission warned Western countries on Sunday of “losses” they will sustain unless they respect Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

Alaeddin Boroujerdi gave the warning to Britain, China, France, Russia, the United States and Germany in an exclusive interview with the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA).

“In recent months, the U.S. and its allies have witnessed the Iranian scientists who produced the required fuel for the country's nuclear power plants and fuel Tehran’s research reactor with domestically-built 20-percent-enriched rods to yield radio medicines for treatment of 800,000 Iranian patients,” Boroujerdi said.

He pointed out that the key message of such achievements is that Iran has fully mastered nuclear know-how, and that the countries will incur losses in case they refuse to accept the reality that the Islamic Republic of Iran is capable of in the field of nuclear technology.

Boroujerdi also said that Iran would not compromise over its nuclear energy program.

The lawmaker called on nuclear powers to avoid confrontation vis-a-vis Iran's nuclear energy program, and instead engage in constructive interactions with Tehran.

“Lawmakers expect the Iranian nuclear negotiating team to bring about change to the present situation, to obtain the cancellation of (UN) resolutions on Iran, and that the Iranian nuclear issue is taken from the Security Council and put back before the International Atomic Energy Agency board of governors,” Boroujerdi said.

The comments come as Iran is feeling increased pressure from the latest round of sanctions imposed on it.

Belgium’s Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT), which handles most international bank transfers, has eliminated Iran from its services.

The move is a “direct result of international and multilateral action to intensify financial sanctions against Iran," said SWIFT CEO Lazaro Campos. The embargo on Iran took effect Saturday and reduces Iran’s ability to use a secure network to receive payments. It also will affect Iranians wanting to receive money from relatives outside the country.

In response, the Islamic Republic warned on Sunday it may impose a blockade on oil exports that threaten the world’s economies.

On Friday, a senior Iranian official Friday said Tehran is prepared to allow "permanent human monitoring" of its nuclear program in exchange for "Western cooperation."

Mohammad Javad Larijani, a key advisor to Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said the West should accept Iran's "peaceful nuclear program," sell Iran 20 percent enriched uranium, and provide the customary assistance nuclear nations provide to those building nuclear power plants.

In return for cooperation from the West Iran would offer "full transparency," Larijani said.






=

[The Flying Dutchman]

=

Sanctions' Squeeze On Iran Tightens

by Tom Gjelten
March 19, 2012
http://www.npr.org/2012/03/19/148902...ns?ft=1&f=1004

The squeeze on the Iranian economy due to international sanctions is turning into a stranglehold. The latest sign of Iran's economic trouble is a new drop in the country's oil output.

And last week brought a new punishment: Iranian banks were barred from participating in a key international clearinghouse. Iran will have a harder time importing food, apparel, electronics and other foreign goods, which could heighten consumer discontent. U.S. officials hope that Iranian government anxiety about its popular support will prompt a rethinking of its nuclear program.





=

[The Flying Dutchman]

=

First Published: 2012-03-19

Preparing to ‘Mow the Grass’ in Gaza

Even as Israeli leaders focus the world on a possible war with Iran, the neocons are prepping
public opinion for another bloody assault on Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, what one article likened
to “mowing the grass.” Ex-CIA analyst Paul R. Pillar sees the need for serious peace talks.

Middle East Online
http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=51288

The 140-square-mile patch of misery known as the Gaza Strip suffers from two degrees of inattention.

First, any hope of being lifted permanently out of the misery rests on Israeli-Palestinian diplomacy that is now moribund. Benjamin Netanyahu’s war-mongering on Iran has succeeded in pushing the unresolved plight of Palestinians almost entirely off the Israeli-American agenda.

This was demonstrated earlier this month when a visit to Washington by Netanyahu and a major AIPAC conference were remarkable for how little either one explicitly addressed the unresolved Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Second, to the extent that conflict gets any attention, the attention focuses more on the West Bank (including East Jerusalem), where continued Israeli colonization of conquered land is pushing a two-state solution ever closer to infeasibility.

There once were a few thousand Israeli settlers in the Gaza Strip (in contrast to the half million in the West Bank), but as these numbers indicate, Israelis never coveted this piece of sand as much as they do lands to the east. Seven years ago Ariel Sharon pulled Israelis out of the strip, successfully dealing with the few diehard settlers who resisted.

Since then Israeli governments seem to have wished that the Gaza Strip could somehow just go away. That not being possible, they instead have dealt with it as if it were a den of unruly, infectious creatures that could be cordoned off, with an occasional overt use of force to swat the creatures down. The well-being of the people who really live in the strip, and the ways in which Israel’s assault on that well-being redound to Israel’s own disadvantage, do not seem to have figured into Israeli government thinking.

Whether or not anyone gives due ethical regard to the welfare of Gazans, the short-sighted cordon-and-swat Israeli approach will continually make the Gaza Strip a locus of trouble and instability.

The most recent reminder of that has occurred within the past week. The trouble began with the latest Israeli swat: the killing last Friday with an air-to-ground missile of Zuhair al-Qissi, the leader of a militant group called the Popular Resistance Committees. Palestine Islamic Jihad took the lead in retaliating by firing rockets back into Israel, which in turn led to more Israeli airstrikes in the Gaza Strip. By Tuesday the Egyptians had brokered a truce, which was still shaky as of mid-week.

The latest round of fighting demonstrates anew how Israel’s iron-fisted approach of blockades, airstrikes and invasions never has and never will bring peace to Israel’s southwestern border. It is little more than three years since Operation Cast Lead, a full-scale Israeli invasion that killed around 1,400 Palestinians, including hundreds of civilians, and inflicted such extensive physical damage to the Gaza Strip that, combined with the effects of the previous blockade, it caused a humanitarian crisis that in some ways continues today.

Neither Israeli nor Palestinian leaders seem anxious for a new war right now in Gaza. Some Israeli politicians have warned that such a war would risk undoing the success the war-mongering talk about Iran has had in diverting attention from the Palestinians’ plight and focusing it instead on the Iranian nuclear program. The successful operation of Israel’s Iron Dome anti-rocket defensive system has relieved what might otherwise have been greater popular pressure on Israeli leaders to strike back faster and even more forcefully.

There nonetheless is talk in Israel about launching at some point another war against Gazans. Israel’s finance minister, Yuval Steinitz, said “sooner or later, and I don’t want to quote dates, we will have to do a ‘root canal’.”

The talk reflects another Israeli idée fixe, one that is just as short-sighted as the reliance on cordon-and-swat: an absolute refusal to have anything to do with Hamas except to try to crush it (and occasionally to exchange prisoners with it). This obsession continues no matter what Hamas does and no matter how substantial a portion of Palestinian opinion it may represent.

Hamas has not been involved in the most recent round of rocket-firing, and it was Hamas that sought Egyptian help to negotiate a cease-fire. Hamas’s staying on the sidelines of this latest round follows months in which it has spoken more of moving away from violent resistance and has tried anew to reconcile with the Fatah of Mahmoud Abbas.

Steinitz’s comments nonetheless indicate that making things as difficult as possible for Hamas is at least as important to the Israeli government as stopping any rockets. Israel “cannot accept in the long run,” he said, a Hamas regime in Gaza.

The counterproductive (if one were interested in peace, that is) Israeli attitudes at play are vividly displayed in a paper published this week by Efraim Inbar and Max Singer of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, a version of which appeared as an op-ed in the Jerusalem Post. Their piece is titled “The Opportunity in Gaza” — it’s interesting how a violent, destructive clash is viewed as a “opportunity.”

They argue for a full-scale invasion of the Gaza Strip now — one even bigger and more damaging than Cast Lead, with the objective of destroying as much of Hamas as possible. They blatantly recommend exploiting the U.S. electoral calendar, arguing that “until November, the U.S. is likely to restrain rather than promote international action against Israel in response to an action in Gaza.” They say “deterrence created by Cast Lead” is “wearing thin,” and “military action now could restore deterrence.”

Someone should point out to Inbar and Singer than when you repeatedly have to go to war that means deterrence isnot working. But they don’t seem to care, fully accepting the prospect that in the future “Israel will probably have to ‘mow the grass’ again.” There is not a single word in their paper about the lives and livelihoods of the residents of the Gaza Strip, or the effect what they are recommending would have on those lives.

May both Palestinians and Israelis be spared from such perverse thinking.






=

[The Flying Dutchman]

=

Rebels eye border launchpad to 'liberate' Syria

March 19, 2012 12:41 PM
By Michel Moutot
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Mid...#axzz1pYdGPMzY

IDLIB PROVINCE, Syria: In a mountain hideout on Syria's border with Turkey, amid olive trees and Roman ruins, Abu Suleiman's band of fighters barely flinch as Syrian army shells crash in the distance.

The rebel fighters rule the roost over dozens of square kilometres of steep, rocky terrain and fertile red soil, dotted with hamlets and villages, in the northwestern province of Idlib.

Some of them fought in the city of Idlib, overtaken by government forces last week as rebels pulled back to the safety of the mountains.

"Their tanks can't climb up here, and they're scared of ambushes," said Abu Suleiman. "And we're so near the Turkish border that (President) Bashar (al-Assad) wouldn't dare use planes because he fears the Turks."

The son of a prominent figure from the city of Hama in central Syria who was killed in the notoriously brutal suppression of a 1982 revolt, Abu Suleiman has assembled one of the multitude of armed groups fighting the regime.

Abu Suleiman, 35, who finances the weapons for the unit which carries his name, greets the young gunmen posted at crossroads and entrances to villages as he makes his daily rounds at the wheel of a white saloon car.

He says the unit has 1,000 fighters.

Housed in four breezeblock cabins at the top of a hill rich with springtime greenery, circled by the ruins of Roman baths, an AFP journalist spotted 30 of them on Sunday.

A fighter wounded at Idlib by a bullet in the shoulder, Nasser, 24, lay under a blanket with a sad smile on his face, bandaged and attached to a drip, as he took in some sunshine.

Abu Suleiman's men are lightly armed, with Kalashknikov assault rifles, some machineguns, a launcher with a single grenade. The way many of them carry their arms show they are new to the game, although some are army deserters.

"Our aim is to drive Bashar's army off the whole mountain," said Abu Suleiman. "We will make them flee the villages where they're still around and this will be our region: launchpad of the liberation," he said.

"We don't need men. What we do need is arms: anti-tanks rockets, surface-to-air missiles. Modern and effective stuff," said the rebel chief.

"How long will it talk? Who can say? But the United Nations may take two years to finally take some kind of decision. We can wait. This war will be a long one," he predicted.

The Abu Suleiman fighters hold a slice of territory and say they cooperate with nearby units to carry out raids on security forces. But they are no admirers of the Free Syrian Army (FSA), based across the border in Turkey.

"I've been three times to Turkey to see its leader, Riyadh al-Asaad," said Captain Ayub, a second-in command.

"I asked him to give us money, guns. He didn't do a thing. He's all talk. He's a liar. What he wants is to take Bashar's place in the palace, nothing else!" he charged, angrily.

Fighters who don't sleep in the small base are put up in safehouses, one in each hamlet.

They spend their time watching videos on laptops of how to assemble bombs and roadside bombs. They carry homemade grenades and say their modest arsenal also includes large versions capable of taking out armoured cars.

On a rooftop, thousands of automatic weapons rounds were spread out for drying from several days of rainfall in the region.

"We need more," said Abdullah Zarzur, 30, who was an Arabic teacher before the anti-Assad revolt broke out last March that has cost thousands of lives in a regime crackdown.

"These come from Lebanon but we need more powerful weapons. If the UN and NATO don't help us, our battle will drag on for years. Bashar is strong. He's been arming his people for the past 40 years" of rule by the Assad family.

As Abu Suleiman's men fired off practice rounds at rocks, alarmed young men on donkeys loaded with olive wood kicked their spurs to hurry off.


Read more: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Mid...#ixzz1pYlOokft
(The Daily Star :: Lebanon News :: http://www.dailystar.com.lb)



=

[The Flying Dutchman]

=

Tanks storm eastern Syrian city to quell rebels

Published: 03.19.12, 13:01 / Israel News
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...204849,00.html

Dozens of Syrian tanks stormed the Sunni Muslim city of Deir al-Zor on Monday to seize major districts from Free Syrian Army rebels who have been mounting increasing attacks on government forces, witnesses said.

Tanks and armoured troop carriers entered the tribal city from the north and were met by resistance from lightly armed rebels as they headed to southeastern neighbourhoods that have fallen under insurgent control, residents said by telephone. (Reuters)





=

[The Flying Dutchman]

=

Monday, March 19, 2012

Heavy Fighting Reported In Damascus

http://www.rferl.org/content/heavy_f.../24520294.html

Fighting between rebels and government forces has been taking place in the Syrian capital, Damascus.

Activists were quoted as saying that the clashes were some of the heaviest since the uprising against President Bashar al-Assad's regime began just over one year ago.

The clashes between government forces and rebels from the Free Syrian Army occurred in Damascus's al-Mezze district, where residents say several security installations are located.

The reports said the sound of heavy machine-gun fire and rocket-propelled grenades was heard in al-Mezze.

The fighting lasted for at least two hours before ending early in the morning of March 19.

The British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights cited its activists in Damascus as saying that 18 government soldiers were wounded in the fighting.

The clashes came after bomb explosions in Damascus and Aleppo, Syria's second-largest city, killed some 30 people over the weekend.

In Aleppo on March 18, a car bomb killed at least two people and injured some 30 others.

A day earlier, twin blasts killed 27 people in Damascus and wounded nearly 100.

The government blames "terrorists" for the bombing, but the opposition has alleged that the regime itself may be carrying them out to discredit the uprising.

International Cease-Fire Efforts

The United Nations says more than 8,000 people have been killed in the yearlong Syrian conflict. Another 30,000 people have fled the country, and 200,000 have been internally displaced, according to the UN.

The overnight clashes in Damascus come as Jakob Kellenberger, president of the International Committee of the Red Cross, has flown to Moscow for talks on March 19 with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on the humanitarian situation in Syria.

Russia is a longtime ally of the Syrian regime ally and has twice blocked -- along with China -- resolutions condemning Assad's crackdown on opponents of his regime in the UN Security Council.

Speaking ahead of his mission to Moscow, Kellenberger said that a daily cease-fire of at least two hours was "imperative" to allow the evacuation of the wounded from centers of protest against Assad's regime.

Former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, the joint UN-Arab League special envoy on Syria, has ordered a team of experts to visit Syria to discuss a possible cease-fire and an international monitoring mission.

Annan's spokesman said the team was expected to head to Damascus from New York and Geneva on March 19.





=