WAR 08/09: Hizbullah running scared "The Perfect Storm"

=






Hizbullah’s claim that Israel was behind the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri shows the organization’s deep worry that the international tribunal investigating the murder will place the blame at its doorstep, Israeli officials said on Sunday.

“This is completely ridiculous and – most importantly – everyone knows it,” one senior official in the Prime Minister’s Office said of Hizbullah’s claims. “When they start casting for straws like this, it just shows the degree of pressure they are under.”

Hizbullah, the official said, will have a serious problem on its hands if it is indicted for the murder.

“They are looking for a way out,” he said.

Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah is expected to publicly blame Israel in a speech on Monday for the car bombing that killed the former Lebanese prime minister and 20 others on February 14, 2005. The Ma’an News Agency was told by a Hizbullah source on Sunday that the evidence tying Israel to the assassination, which has not yet been released, is “comprehensive, revealing, conclusive information.”

Last month, Nasrallah criticized the UN tribunal that had been investigating Hariri’s assassination since 2007, amid reports that members of the organization would likely be implicated. Nasrallah called into question the tribunal’s impartiality, stating that some of its members were connected to Israel. Those comments came in a prerecorded announcement aired on Lebanese television.

Nasrallah added that Hizbullah possessed proof that would exonerate its members from involvement in Hariri’s assassination, and that it would reveal it when the time comes.

Officials in the Prime Minister’s Office said they saw no connection between Hizbullah’s concern over the Hariri tribunal and the incident on the Lebanese border last week in which the Lebanese army opened fire and killed an IDF officer.

This prompted counter-fire, during which three Lebanese army soldiers and a journalist were killed. But the officials rejected the notion that this had been an attempt to provoke Israel in order to detract attention form the Hariri tribunal.

Meanwhile, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki met with his Lebanese counterpart, Ali al- Shami, in Teheran on Sunday, and told him that Iran would offer full support to Lebanon and Syria in the event of an Israeli attack. He added that Iran, Syria and Lebanon were in constant contact and shared their opinions on the potential Israeli war threat.

“The government of the Islamic Republic and the Iranian people stand beside the governments and the people of Lebanon and Syria against the violence and the threats of the Zionist regime,” Mottaki said, adding that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was set to make an official state visit to Lebanon after Ramadan, which ends around September 10 this year.

The visit would be the first by an Iranian president to Lebanon since Mohammad Khatami came to Beirut in 2003.

Mottaki said Iran was holding continuous consultations with Beirut and Damascus, and that Teheran was “ready to answer positively any request from its brothers.”

Mottaki and Shami lashed out at Israel for the recent clashes along the Israel-Lebanon border and for the May 31 raid by its commandos on an protest flotilla heading to Gaza.

“The survival of the Zionist regime is facing a serious problem,” Mottaki said, in comments translated by the English-language Press TV channel.

The Iranian Navy took charge of four new Iranian-built submarines as part of Teheran's efforts to upgrade its defenses, the Islamic Republic’s state media said. The official IRNA news agency said Defense Minister Gen. Ahmad Vahidi and navy chief Adm. Habibollah Sayyari attended Sunday’s ceremony marking the delivery of the vessels to the Iranian Navy.

IRNA said the Ghadir-class submarines could fire missiles and torpedoes at the same time and operate in the Persian Gulf’s shallow waters.

Iran has sought to upgrade its air defense systems and naval power, saying any possible future attacks against Iran would be air- and seabased. Iran has also three Russianmade submarines.

Meanwhile, an Israel Navy vessel opened fire on a Lebanese fishing boat over the weekend after it sailed into a restricted zone and ignored warnings to leave, the IDF Spokesman’s Office confirmed on Sunday.

The army’s confirmation came after Lebanese Army reports of the incident surfaced over the weekend.

“Early Saturday morning, a Lebanese fishing boat left the permitted fishing area, and when the ship did not heed calls from the Israeli military to return to the permitted fishing area, shots were fired,” an IDF representative told The Jerusalem Post. “There were no casualties in the incident.”

In response, the Lebanese Armed Forces issued a statement in which it claimed that Israel “continues to violate UN Resolution 1701,” although no specifics were given.

While the incident was comparatively minor, it came less than a week after the flare-up on the northern border.




=

Iran will offer full support to Lebanon and Syria in the incident of an Israeli attack, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said on Sunday after meeting with his Lebanese counterpart Ali al-Shami in Teheran.

He added that Iran, Syria and Lebanon are in constant contact and share their opinions on the potential Israeli war threat.

"The government of the Islamic Republic and the Iranian people stand beside the governments and the people of Lebanon and Syria against the violence and the threats of the Zionist regime," said Mottaki



=

=








In spite of the meeting of the UN Security Council following a totally unprovoked cross-border attack by Lebanese forces upon the Israelis, the only comment emanating from the international body has been one calling for calm on both sides.

As the UN continually and obsessively meets to condemn Israel for the slightest suggestion of wrongdoing, delivering resolution after resolution, inquiry after inquiry, no such UN resolution or inquiry is deemed appropriate for the Lebanese violence which could have sparked another regional or international conflict.

The thunderous silence of the UN in the face of Arab aggression towards Israel is sickening. The moral compass of the UN appears to have been lost in the mire of its anti-Israeli bias.

D ROBERTS

Tredegar, Gwent

=

=








The August 3, 2010 exchange of fire between the Lebanese army and the IDF, which led to causalities on both sides, ostensibly demonstrates the fragility of the ceasefire on the Lebanon border, in effect since the end of the Second Lebanon War in August 2006. The current incident dramatizes a scenario in which an erroneous calculation by one of the sides might spark a far reaching military conflict between Lebanon and Israel. In the media and in the Israeli political arena there were those who were quick to allege a connecting thread between this incident and the firing of rockets from the Gaza Strip to Ashkelon and from Sinai to Eilat and Aqaba. They concluded there was a guiding hand behind all of these incidents: Iran.

Examining the incident more carefully, however, suggests a different assessment. The first conclusion confirms the stability of the ceasefire on the Lebanese border, based on mutual deterrence between Israel and Hizbollah. The second indicates the lack of a connection between this incident and the rocket fire in the other sectors.

Underlying this incident is the dispute between Israel and Lebanon over the demarcation of the Blue Line separating Lebanon and Israel, as well as Lebanon's political reality. In its unilateral withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000, Israel withdrew to the Blue Line. This is not the international border agreed upon by Israel and Lebanon, although its route largely coincides with the 1923 international border. When Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon, it fulfilled Security Council Resolution 425 calling on Israel to return to the recognized border between Israel and Lebanon prior to Operation Litani in 1978. This border, which was demarcated in cooperation with the UN, is called the Blue Line. Part of the Blue Line demarcation is accepted by Israel and Lebanon and is marked jointly on the ground, but there are still points of contention between the sides regarding the unmarked sections and how to translate the Blue Line in those locations into territorial markers.

There are also places where due to topography the Israeli border fence is not situated on the border itself but within Israeli territory, with small pieces of sovereign Israeli land remaining on the Lebanese side of the fence. The Lebanese army has a tendency to view Israeli military activity beyond the fence as an infiltration into Lebanese territory, even if it occurs in these areas. In the August 3 incident, Israeli activity to clear vegetation took place in territory of this category, beyond the fence and in an area with no border marking. The Lebanese claimed after the incident that the route of the Blue Line at this particular point is under dispute.

The Lebanese government could certainly have protested with more moderation and complained to UNIFIL about what it deemed was an IDF violation, instead of opening fire. However it chose to demonstrate a forceful policy and to instruct Lebanese army units in southern Lebanon accordingly. To be sure, there is a question as to whether there was a specific directive from Beirut to open fire in this particular case, but it is clear that the firm policy from Beirut's direction played a key role in decisions by the local Lebanese command.

It seems the main reason for this policy is the political need for the Lebanese army to demonstrate that it – and not Hizbollah – is the defender of Lebanese sovereignty. In the game of internal Lebanese politics, Hizbollah justifies its military force as being Lebanon's defender. Thus Hizbollah rushed in to declare that after this incident, next time its forces would respond to an attack on the Lebanese army, this in order to underline the authenticity of its role as defender of Lebanese sovereignty.

Both Israel and Lebanon hastened to prevent the incident from spreading and expressed their interest in maintaining stability along the border. The most interesting reaction was that of Hizbollah, which did not take part in the incident despite the harsh blow to the Lebanese army. Moreover, Hizbollah senior officials claimed the incident was an expression of Israel's desire to draw Hizbollah into a broad military confrontation. Apparently, Hizbollah has no interest in such a confrontation, at least at this time, and this reflects the extent of the mutual deterrence between Israel and Hizbollah that evolved in the aftermath of the 2006 war.

This deterrence is based on the threat and capability of both sides to seriously damage the home front of the other. Hizbollah threatens to hit Israel's civilian population, not only in the north, while Israel threatens to strike Hizbollah's and Lebanon's prime assets. Hizbollah, which was accused of dragging Lebanon into a war that caused the country extensive damage in order to serve outside interests, is unwilling to pay the military or political price of a second round. For its part, Israel is not interested in inviting any more harm to its civilian population.

This analysis indicates that the Lebanese army does not receive instructions from Tehran, and that the roots of the incident emanate both from the situation on the Lebanese border and from Lebanon's internal political situation. Therefore the fire at Ashkelon and the fire at Eilat are unconnected with this event, even if the coincidence of events creates the sense of a coordinated attack from several directions.

Also important here is UNIFIL's role. If one of the two sides is interested in harming the other, it is not within UNIFIL's power to prevent it, nor is it within its mandate. UNIFIL serves as a mechanism to help prevent conflict eruption when both sides have no interest in friction. In this case it appears that UNIFIL, cognizant of the dispute between the sides, tried to prevent the incident. Although it failed in this regard, it played an important role in contacts between the parties intent on containing the incident and preventing its mushrooming.

Thus the initial conclusion from the August 3 incident is that all of the involved parties – Israel, Hizbollah, and the Lebanese government – want to avoid being drawn into a military confrontation and hence will strive to contain points of friction. The second conclusion is that since the interest of all sides at this time is to minimize points of friction, efforts toward the precise demarcation of the Blue Line on the ground under UNIFIL auspices must be accelerated. The third conclusion is that UNIFIL fulfills a positive and stabilizing role, even if it is unable to satisfy exaggerated Israeli expectations – to forcibly prevent any attempt to strike Israel. Within the limited framework of the mandate under Security Council Resolution 1701, UNIFIL is indeed functioning reasonably.



=

=







The Wayne Madsen Report (WMR) is reporting sources in Lebanon are expecting that the UN Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) report on who was responsible for the 2005 remotely-controlled bomb assassination in Beirut of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri will contain a wealth of phony and contrived "evidence" compiled with the assistance of the CIA, Mossad, and other western intelligence agencies.

It is widely expected that the STL report will blame Lebanese Hezbollah, a member of the current Lebanese government headed by Saad Hariri, the son of the slain ex-Prime Minister, for the assassination.

Lebanese intelligence believes that the concocted "evidence" in the STL report will contain "doctored" voice and video data collected by the CIA and Mossad from intercepted Lebanese cell phone networks before, during, and shortly after the assassination of Hariri, which took place on February 14, 2005.

Some 120 individuals have been arrested in Lebanon for spying for Israel and some of these individuals were involved in Lebanese telecommunications systems.

WMR has learned that the UN International Independent Investigation Commission (UNIIIC) and STL has been provided with tapes and transcripts of cell phone calls which supposedly were made by a very closed ring of assassins (six to eight total) at the scene of the explosion. Lebanese authorities are aware that the call data was provided by a number of cell-phone companies and countries that are viewed suspiciously in Lebanon.

Chief among the providers of the data are the CIA and Mossad, which have extensive networks in Lebanon, but also the French DGSE and German BND intelligence services, as well as Britain's Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), which maintains a large communications intercept station in nearby Cyprus that routinely intercepts cell phone calls in Lebanon.


The role of the Mossad in the doctoring of the cell phone data, expected to be relied upon heavily in the report issued by UN chief investigator Daniel Bellemare, is creating a vigorous debate in Lebanon. Hezbollah is expected to reject the cell phone recordings as fakes and charge that they were engineered by Mossad and the CIA.

Hezbollah's opponents have countered with the argument that if the Mossad agents could doctor cell phone data after the fact, why did they not erase all traces of their own communications with Mossad that eventually resulted in their own arrests?

Meanwhile, Lebanon continues to round up top Mossad agents in the country with the latest arrest being that of retired General Fayes Karam, a close aide and friends of retired General Michel Aoun of the Free Patriotic Movement. Aoun and his party are partners of Lebanese Hezbollah.

From 1988 to 1989, Karam was the head of Lebanese military counter-intelligence while under the command of Aoun. Karam was also in exile with Aoun in Paris for 15 years. Although the evidence compiled against Karam shows his link to Mossad since 2005, the year Hariri was assassinated, as previously reported by WMR, by Mossad and the CIA, Karam may have been working for Mossad much longer.

Karam was trained by the United States and France in military counter-intelligence during the 1980s.

There is also suspicion about the fact that while 120 Lebanese spies for Mossad have been rounded up in recent years, not one CIA agent has been arrested, even though it is well known that Langley has penetrated every major institution in Lebanon.

By Wayne Madsen for Oilprice.com



=

=








MIAMI - Iran's light water nuclear power plant at Bushehr is preparing to go "live" - again.

Iranian and Russian nuclear scientists and officials have announced Bushehr's reactor will soon be receiving its first shipment of nuclear fuel 36 years after construction first began on the project.

This claim may be quietly fueling speculation that a military strike on Iran by Israel - or the United States - may be imminent.

The Persian-language news site Mardom Salari reported on August 3 that members of the Iranian armed forces had been transferred to Bushehr to evaluate the security of the air space



above the site. Three drones were said to have been shot down over Bushehr the previous day as part of an exercise to test Iranian readiness for an aerial attack, intercepted by the defense systems of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC).

Mohammad Hoseyn Shanbodi, a political security deputy, told Khalij-e Fars television news that local officials had no advance warning of an impending readiness test. Because they hadn't been briefed about the drones entering Bushehr's air space, no details were available about what happened to the drones after they were shot down.

The test came as a surprise even to Amir Salahian, said to be in charge of Bushehr's defense system. After the incident, Salahian was quoted as saying, "I believe it would have been better if some of the officials in the province would have known about the drill to avoid tension."

The prospect of Bushehr becoming operational coincides with the proliferation of public statements that claim an attack on Iran by Israel or the US is impending and inevitable. Bushehr is strategically located in southwestern Iran on the Gulf coast, directly across from Kuwait.

An aerial assault on Bushehr would have to take place before any nuclear fuel arrives at the site. Beyond that point, an attack on the reactor would release deadly radioactive fallout into the entire Persian Gulf region and beyond. Besides the catastrophic human and environmental toll of such an attack, the sea lanes through which much of the world's oil supplies pass would be endangered.

The Iranians know this. In 1980, Iran bombed Iraq's Osirak nuclear power plant before it contained any radioactive material.

Osirak was quickly repaired by the French contractors who built it. Eight months later, Osirak was partially destroyed by Israeli jets, aided by Iranian intelligence.

Nothing about Bushehr violates any international agreements to which Iran is a party. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was created to promote the use of "atoms for peace". The nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which Iran signed in 1968 and ratified two years later, obligates the five nuclear-weapon states (the US, Britain, France, Russia and China) to assist non-nuclear weapon states that signed the NPT in acquiring and utilizing nuclear technology for energy production and other peaceful purposes.

Under the NPT, Iran has the right to produce its own nuclear fuel for civilian projects such as Bushehr. However, suspicions have been raised for nearly two decades that Iran might try to convert low enriched uranium for electricity generation into highly enriched uranium.

The IAEA's approval of Iran's nuclear energy program is contingent on Iran buying its fuel from approved suppliers abroad, and exporting its nuclear waste back to its source so that the radioactive material it contains can't be diverted for use in weapons of mass destruction or fall into the wrong hands. Russia qualifies as an approved supplier.

Sergei Kiriyenko, the head of the Russian Federal Atomic Energy Agency (Rosatom), also told the Russian news wire service Interfax on July 27 that Bushehr would not be affected by United Nations Security Council sanctions against Iran.

He said, "No one is against the development of Iran's civilian nuclear program; the construction of the Bushehr nuclear power plant is being carried out under the control of the International Atomic Energy Agency."

Russia has guaranteed that it will supply all the nuclear fuel needed by Bushehr, and that its nuclear waste will be reprocessed in Russia.

Israeli military and politicians usually equate Iranian access to nuclear fuel for electrical generation with Iran's acquisition of a nuclear weapon. A light water reactor, Bushehr won't be capable of producing weapons-grade plutonium (unlike Israel's heavy water reactor at Dimona).

However, Bushehr's becoming operational would affirm Iran's right to develop and utilize nuclear technology, and give Iran the status and prestige of a nuclear power. Israelis claim this would pose an "existential threat" to the Jewish state.

Once Bushehr's nuclear fuel arrives from Russia, whatever military options against Iran that may be "on the table" that include Bushehr will have to come off. Israel and the US have only a few weeks to launch an attack on Iran before Bushehr has the means to begin generating electricity.

Israeli sources have often hinted that a strike against Iran might be conducted with precision-guided drones, in order to minimize casualties among Israeli soldiers. It's a possibility for which Iranians feel they need to prepare, which may explain the report of drones over Bushehr as the nuclear facility prepares to come online.

Both the IRNA and Interfax have quoted Rosatom's Kiriyenko as saying, "Everything is going according to plan." But nothing about Bushehr has ever gone according to plan since Siemens began its construction in1974.

After Iran's 1979 Islamic revolution, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini denounced the project as "un-Islamic". Siemens' work stopped during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, when Bushehr was targeted by Iraqi aerial attacks. Siemens declined to resume work on Bushehr after the war, partly in response to US pressure.

When Iran signed an agreement with Russia to resume Bushehr's construction in 1995, the power plant had to be totally redesigned to Russian specifications. The contract called for completing the reactor by 1999, but technical, political and financial issues arose. The inauguration of the facility has been pushed back at least half a dozen times, most recently from the spring of 2010 to less than a month from now.

Kiriyenko told journalists, "Questions regarding the exact dates should be referred to the Iranian side. The oversight services ... are negotiating the final dates with the Iranian customer. The preparations are continuing according to plan, plus or minus a few days, which will not make any serious difference."

This may be a hint that Bushehr's going live is about to be postponed yet again, leaving the window of opportunity for a possible attack on Iran open a little longer. Iran's political leaders and defense officials are keeping their eyes on the skies. The next drones shot down may not be a test.

(Inter Press Service)



=

=







TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran showed off four new domestically made small submarines Sunday that Tehran said would bolster its defence capability as it vows to confront any military threat from countries opposed to its nuclear program.

State-run Press TV showed the submarines sailing from an Iranian port. Iran's fleet of the 120-tonne Ghadir-class vessels, first produced in 2007, now numbered 11, it said.

They have "excellent shallow depth performance, and can carry out long-term coastal missions," Press TV said.

"With the mass production of this submarine alongside various guided-missile launchers the country's defensive production chain is complete," Defence Minister Ahmad Vahidi said.

"These capabilities will be used to served peace, stability and security in the Persian Gulf region and the Sea of Oman."

The launch of the new submarines comes as Iranian officials deliver daily messages of defiance to the potential threat of a strike by Israel or the United States against the nuclear program Tehran says is entirely peaceful.

Iran has said it could close the Strait of Hormuz -- the gateway to the Gulf through which 40 percent of the world's traded oil travels -- if it comes under attack.

Press TV said Iran also has three Russian-built Kilo class submarines and operates another homemade 500-tonne submarine in its patrol missions in the Gulf.

(Reporting by Robin Pomeroy)



=

=





Reporting from Yichang, China and Seoul — In a pointed example of escalating tensions on the Korean Peninsula, North Korea on Monday fired more than 100 rounds of artillery into the waters off its west coast, according to South Korea's Defense Ministry.

The move came one day after the North seized a South Korean fishing boat and its seven-man crew that officials claimed had violated North Korea's exclusive economic zone.

In recent days, North Korea had vowed "strong physical retaliation" in response to South Korea's launching last week of five days of naval training exercises near the disputed sea border between the two countries. The exercises ended Monday.

South Korea had also participated last month in a series of joint naval exercises with U.S. forces. Pyongyang has routinely said that it considers such operations to be preparations for an invasion.

Analysts said it was still too early to link the boat seizure and the shell firings as any comprehensive North Korean response.

"That's what they said they were going to do, come back with some physical response, but if that's what they had in mind, it's too hard to tell at this point," said Daniel Pinkston, an expert in North-South relations for the International Crisis Group think tank. He said it was important to know where the fishing boat had been taken into custody.

Contrary to earlier reports, some of the artillery shells fired Monday fell on the southern side of the northern limit line, officials said.

The incident is expected to stir up even more tension on the peninsula.

Tensions have remained high since late March, when North Korea torpedoed a South Korean military ship on patrol near the naval border, killing 46 crewmen aboard.

Although a South Korean-led investigation of the incident has pinpointed North Korea as responsible for the sinking, Pyongyang has denied any involvement.

During a briefing late Monday, the South Korean Defense Ministry confirmed that the North had fired the shells into the Yellow Sea and that authorities had evacuated fishing boats in the area, according a source who asked not to be identified.

North Korea first fired about 10 shots around 5:30 p.m., then 120 shots between 5:52 and 6:14 p.m., South Korean officials said. The South's navy raised its alert status and sent warning broadcasts to the North at 5:49 p.m. officials said.

Earlier Monday, South Korea had demanded the release of both the 41-ton fishing boat and its crew -- four South Korean and three Chinese fishermen. The crew had been briefly questioned at sea Sunday before being taken to North Korea's eastern port of Songjin, according to the South Korean coast guard.

South Korean officials said Monday that they were trying to check if the boat had entered North Korean waters. The area is also where the navies of the rival Koreas fought three bloody gun battles in recent years.

Unification Ministry spokesman Chun Hae-sung said Pyongyang had yet to provide any information on the fishermen.

"The government yesterday urged North Korea to take swift action [on the fishermen] in line with an international law and practice, and I'm reiterating that," he said.

In 2009, four South Korean fishermen were detained for a month after allegedly entering North Korean waters.



=

=






Seoul and Pyongyang have started another stage of the verbal war following the start of military drills in the Yellow Sea. The drills are being held to intensify South Korea's response to asymmetrical provocations on the part of the potential enemy. S. Korean officials repeatedly stated that the nation would not tolerate any provocations from the North.

Pyongyang labeled the military exercise in the Yellow Sea as direct military aggression to infringe upon North Korea's right for self-defense.

"Should the U.S. imperialists and (South Korea) finally ignite a new war of aggression ... (North Korea) will mobilize the tremendous military potential including its nuclear deterrence for self-defense and thus wipe out the aggressors," North Korea's defense chief, Kim Yong Chun, said in Pyongyang.

South Korea decided to continue demonstrating its military power, though. About 4,500 military men, 20 warships and 50 fighter jets are taking part in the drills, which started Thursday. The maneuvers will last through August 9.

Russia Today: S. Korean newspaper exonerates north over torpedo

Pyongyang vehemently rejects its implication in the sinking of South Korea's Cheonan vessel on March 26, when 46 sailors were killed. The ship, which was patrolling the area near the border with North Korea, split into two before sinking. South Korea and the USA claim that a North Korean submarine torpedoed the ship.

International independent experts also cast doubts on Pyongyang's implication in the tragic accident. A group of Russian experts, who visited South Korea, have not yet been able to come to certain conclusions about the sinking of the Cheonan.

It is worthy of note that the most recent drills in the Yellow Sea conducted by the South Korean Navy take place shortly after large-scale US-South Korean "Invincible Spirit" maritime exercise, which took place on July 25-28 off the eastern coast of the Korean Peninsula in the Sea of Japan.

USA's Defense Secretary Robert Gates that the joint exercise had been arranged to show North Korea that its aggressive behavior should stop.

Such an active demonstration of force made North Korea nervous. Officials of the isolated nation claimed that they would be ready to use nuclear weapons in the "holy war."

North Korea has already deployed long-range missiles near the border with South Korea. North Korea bought 350 Sa-5 missiles and 20 launching systems from the USSR at the end of the 1980s. The systems were installed on the outskirts of Pyongyang and several other cities of the country.

The Soviet missiles can become a serious obstacle for South Korean Air Force in case the nation launches pinpoint attacks on strategic targets in the north of the peninsula. South Korean warplanes will have to fly at altitudes not lower than 3,000 meters if the missiles are activated.

The Sa-5 missiles have been recently redeployed to the demilitarized zone. The move, military experts believe, will create a serious threat for South Korean fighter jets that patrol border territories.

South Korean experts believe that Pyongyang will never dare to embark on a suicidal adventure. The two neighbors continue the dangerous game of playing with fire.

Ivan Tulyakov
Pravda.Ru



=

The Flying Dutchman said:

=

Iranian and Russian nuclear scientists and officials have announced Bushehr's reactor will soon be receiving its first shipment of nuclear fuel 36 years after construction first began on the project.

=

Click to expand...

In other words, a HUGE RED LINE is about to be crossed compliments of Moscow. In fact, the problem is that Israel likely needs to act BEFORE the line is crossed. Unless I'm mistaken, I believe that once nuclear fuel is put into the Bushehr plant, bombing the site will risk spreading radioactive contamination over populated areas.

The August new moon might be the last new moon around which time Israel can strike under the veil of a darkened, moonless sky before the Bushehr plant is "hot".

Guess what? That's right now:

http://www.almanac.com/moon

However, there might be more time before the 'real fuel' is in place:

Iran-Russia Joint Nuke Plant To Commission Next Month
8/9/2010 10:44 AM ET

(RTTNews) - The Bushehr nuclear plant in southern Iran being built with help from Russia is scheduled to go on stream next month, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman was quoted in the local media as saying on Monday.

Ramin Mehmanparast said construction activities at the plant was going as per schedule and it would start functioning in about one and a half-months.

"The real fuel" will be made available at the facility a couple of months after its opening leading to an optimization of its operations, he said.

Until now "virtual fuel" has been used instead of "real fuel" in tests carried out at the light-water reactor plant owing to International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) curbs on Bushehr's nuclear fuel.

For a variety of reasons, including some political, construction of the plants has often failed to meet deadlines. Moscow has justified the delay on the grounds that work on the plant first started by the Germans in seventies had to be first adapted to Russian technology.

Although there is considerable anxiety among the Western powers regarding the construction of a nuclear plant in Iran, the involvement of Russia as well as Moscow's guarantees that it will transport the nuclear fuel as well as return the nuclear waste have allayed fears somewhat.

Iran for its part claims that its nuclear intentions are peaceful and has also stressed its right for securing access to nuclear energy as a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

by RTT Staff Writer

http://www.rttnews.com/Content/GeneralNews.aspx?Id=1387336&SM=1

Click to expand...

=






(Ma'an) -- Hezbollah's claim that Israel was behind the 2005 assassination of a former Lebanese prime minister reveals that the movement is deeply concerned it will be blamed for the murder, an Israeli official said Sunday.

"They are looking for a way out," an official in the Israeli Prime Minister's Office told The Jerusalem Post newspaper. "When they start casting for straws like this, it just shows the degree of pressure they are under."

"This is completely ridiculous and – most importantly – everyone knows it," the official added.

Hezbollah spokesman Ibrahim Mousawi said the movement's leader Hassan Nasrallah would reveal on Monday "thunderous news" implicating Israel in the assassination of Rafiq Hariri, who died in the 2005 car bombing.

Mousawi told Ma'an that the evidence would be "comprehensive," revealing "conclusive information" that Israel played a role in the murder, which was blamed on Syria and led to that country's withdrawal from Lebanon.

A UN special tribunal set up to investigate the assassination is expected to blame Hezbollah. Reports suggest that the tribunal will announce its findings before the end of 2010.

Speaking to reporters last Tuesday, Nasrallah said a Hezbollah team spent months compiling information on what he described as Israeli efforts to implicate the Shiite movement.

Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad and Saudi Arabian King Abdullah met in July with Lebanon’s President Michel Suleiman in an effort to diffuse the mounting political tension over possible indictments over the assassination.



=

=







The possibility of terrorist groups obtaining nuclear weapons via North Korea or Iran or both has led the United States to insist that South Korea join the global coalition to toughen sanctions on the two, according to security experts.

If the worst-case scenario becomes a reality, they warned it will be a disastrous result for not only the security of East Asia, but also that of the Middle East.

Washington has been deeply concerned about the alleged nuclear cooperation between Iran and North Korea.

“North Korea obtained its weapons-grade nuclear material by reprocessing spent fuel, while Iran is enriching uranium that can be refined to the level of weapons grade,” Lt. General Robert G. Gard Jr., chairman of the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation, told The Korea Times.

Iran incurred the fourth set of U.S. Security Council (UNSC) sanctions in June after it refused to halt its nuclear program by insisting that it only aims to use the nuclear technology peacefully.

So far, the UNSC, the United States and the European Union have adopted a set of additional measures against Iran for its nuclear ambition.

In July, Iran said it holds more than 44 pounds of uranium enriched to 20 percent, far below the level of 90 percent that is needed to produce a nuclear bomb.

Iran claimed that it has the right to use nuclear energy peacefully under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

“Since North Korea is much further along with its nuclear program than Iran, it seems logical that North Korea would offer to sell a wide spectrum of technical nuclear assistance to Iran,” said Gard.

Both Iran and North Korea denied their nuclear technology nexus.

Oil-for-nuke deal?

Siegfried S. Hecker, professor of the Management Science and Engineering Department at Stanford University who has visited North Korea six times since 2005, raised the possibility of an oil-for-nuclear deal between the two.

“Iran has money and oil, just what Pyongyang needs most,” the nuclear scientist said in his article published in the March 2007 edition of Arms Control Today. “Pyongyang has front-end fuel-cycle capabilities that could aid most of Iran’s uranium-enrichment activities from mining through the production of uranium hexafluoride. It has hands-on experience in uranium metallurgy that would prove useful in the fabrication of highly enriched uranium weapons.”

In January 2007, a media report confirmed nuclear cooperation between Iran and North Korea.

Citing a senior European defense official, The Daily Telegraph reported that North Korea had invited a team of Iranian nuclear scientists to study the results of their first underground nuclear test in 2006 to assist Iran in preparations to conduct its own.

North Korea’s technical superiority will allow the Iranians to accelerate the development of their nuclear weapons, the official was quoted as saying.

“The cooperation between the two countries in missile technology is more obvious,” said Gard.

“Officials in the U.S. Department of State have concluded that North Korea has sold materials and provided Iran with technical advice on the development of ballistic missiles.”

A North Korean defector, a former scientist working with North Korea’s ballistic missile program, was quoted by the International Crisis Group in its report that 10-20 North Korean scientists and aerospace engineers have maintained a continuous presence in Iran since the 1980s.

Nukes in the hands of terrorists

If nuclear weapons or fissile materials are handed over to terrorists via or by Iran or North Korea or both, experts say it will pose a grave threat to international security.

The worst-case scenario appears to be probable, given the previous records of the arms trade between North Korea and Iran and terrorist groups.

Iran has been on the U.S. State Department’s list of terrorism sponsors since 1984 and was described as the most significant state sponsor.

Earlier this month, Stuart Levey, undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence at the U.S. Treasury Department, said in an interview that “Iran provides weapons, funding, logistics and training to the Taliban.”

According to WikiLeaks, North Korea signed a deal with al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden’s financial advisor for remote-controlled rockets to use against American and coalition aircraft in November, 2005.

Lebanon’s Hezbollah and Sri Lankan Tamil Tigers reportedly acquired North Korean arms in the past. Rumors have it that Mexican drug cartels have also obtained similar weapons.

In an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal, Paul Wolfowitz, former deputy U.S. secretary of defense, warned of the “likelihood that nuclear weapons could end up in the hands of irresponsible rulers or terrorists who can’t be deterred at all.”

Earlier, Professor Hecker expressed a similar view at the hearing of the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations in 2008.

“The greatest threats we face today are a breakdown of the nonproliferation regime and the possibility that terrorists may acquire nuclear weapons or fissile materials.”



=

Thank you, Dutch - even though reading this thread is truly becoming horrifying.

delete

No problem - they'll just attempt to LIE their way out of it, as usual.


IIRC, islam actually REQUIRES its adherent's to LIE to the infidels when it's convenient to do so.

Mrs Smith said:

Why does every daily thread end with "The Perfect Storm"? I feel like I'm reading another chapter of a book, even though the story changes daily.

Click to expand...

"Perfect Storm"

A George Clooney movie. Concerning two storms coming together (just right) to catch his fishing boat between them and the 30 foot wave-fronts.

"The Perfct Storm"

News-wise: The coming together sevearl facotrs (in the M.E.. in NKorea, [or war]

The economic collaspe in slow motion of the EU.

The economic collaspe of the U.S.

All of which will 'feed off' each other, when one of them goes critical. Thusly hitting the population of the United States of two (or more) fronts at the same time...

FWIW:

"The Winds of War" was a mini-series in the late 70s starring Robert Mitchum. It concerned the days leading up to Dec 7th and Pearl(sp) Harbor.


Either title can be used alone - and I avoid Duping the title of another article someone has already posted (saving my news thread from being merged with the first titled thread - I always post multiple news articles, but I could never seem to get it across, that all one needs to do, is not merge my news thread - just replace the title with another news article's titles at the head of my news thread... *Which is why I always post a series of news articles to one thread, that and try to show the readers a linking of different news articles...


D


=

Posted for fair use.....
http://content.usatoday.com/communi...elping-china-develop-stealth-cruise-missile/1

Aug 09, 2010
Ex-B-2 engineer guilty of helping China develop stealth cruise missile
06:49 PM
Comments

A former B-2 stealth bomber engineer has been convicted of helping China develop a cruise missile that can evade heat-seeking, air-to-air missiles. Prosecutors said he sold the classified technology to pay for his luxury home in Hawaii.

A federal jury in Honolulu convicted Noshir Gowadia on 14 of 17 counts of selling classified materials, money laundering and tax evasion. He was also charged with attempting to sell classified stealth technology to the Swiss government and businesses in Israel and Germany. Jurors acquitted him of three minor espionage charges, the Honolulu Star-Advertiser says.

Prosecutors said the 66-year-old Gowadia, who helped develop the propulsion system for the B-2 when he worked for Northrup from 1968 to 1986, designed the exhaust nozzle for the cruise missile so he could pay the $15,000-a-month mortgage on a luxury home that he built on Maui's north shore.

Gowadia is a naturalized U.S. citizen who was born in India. He has been in custody since being arrested in October 2005 because he was deemed a flight risk. A grand jury indicted him in November 2006.

Sentencing is scheduled for Nov. 22.

(Posted by Michael Winter)

Posted for fair use.....
http://euobserver.com/9/30596

EU diplomat criticises Russian-backed rebels in Georgia

ANDREW RETTMAN

09.08.2010 @ 09:29 CET

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - The head of the EU monitoring mission in Georgia has on the two-year-anniversary of the war criticised the Russian side's lack of co-operation and warned that threat of renewed conflict remains.

Hansjorg Haber, the German diplomat in charge of the 330-man-strong EU mission, noted in a written statement at the weekend that Russian-backed Abkhazia and South Ossetia's policy of keeping EU monitors out of their territories contributes to ongoing tension.

"The de facto authorities' denial of access to South Ossetia and Abkhazia has been hampering the mission's normalisation and stabilisation efforts," he said. "Inability to access areas under the control of Sukhumi and Tskhinvali [the regional capitals] prevents us from helping bring clarity and resolving incidents that take place on the ground."

Mr Haber praised a Georgian agreement to limit military deployment near the disputed borders, adding that "a Russian decision to reciprocate the move would help bring transparency ... and increase security for all."

With unquantified numbers of Russian armour still parked less than one hour's drive from the Georgian capital, Tbilisi, in violation of the August 2008 truce and with some 30,000 ethnic Georgians unable to return home to South Ossetia, the EU official warned against international complacency.

"We are not under the illusion that stabilisation equates to the resolution of the conflict. The Georgian people have had plenty of opportunities to learn these lessons between 1993 and 2008, when, in spite of agreements to stabilise the situation and the presence of international organisations to monitor this process, hostilities reignited."

The unarmed EU monitors, the only international presence in the post-war theatre, are likely to stay in place beyond September 2011, the end of their current mandate, Mr Haber added.

In events that shocked Europe, fighting erupted on the night of 7 August 2008 when Georgian forces shelled Tskhinvali, followed by a five-day-long Russian incursion into Georgia and personal threats by Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin against the pro-Western Georgian leader, Mikhail Saakashvili.

An independent but EU-funded report by Swiss diplomat Heidi Tagliavini in 2009 condemned both sides, saying that Georgia's attack on Tskhinvali was unjustified and that Russia's reaction was "illegal." But attempts to control the war narrative continue unabated as both Russia and Georgia court better relations with the EU and US.

The Russian side at the weekend repeated its claim that the Tagliavini report vindicates its actions.

"It is perceived differently: some think this way, others differently, but anyway there are objective facts and they were laid out by Russian, Abkhaz and South Ossetian sides. Then they were reflected in a report by Heidi Tagliavini and in other documents. That's why I think, that the truth is on our side," Russian President Dmitry Medvedev told press while visiting a Russian garrison in Abkhazia on Sunday.

"The European Union has validated that the [Tskhinvali] attack violated international law ... They [the Georgians] maintain that our country is occupied by the Russian Federation. They are wrong and officials in Washington and Brussels know that," South Ossetian leader Eduard Kokoity said in a statement emailed to Brussels and Washington-based journalists by the US-based PR firm Saylor Company on Saturday.

For his part, Mr Saakashvili kept a low profile at the weekend, speaking of the need to "liberate" Georgia in a TV address beamed over from Columbia while on a state trip.

But he used harsh words while addressing the Georgian army in a speech at home on 4 August, calling the Russian side "barbarians" and saying that "the enemy ... [still] wants to overthrow the Georgian government" and restore its "imperial sphere of influence."

Mr Saakashvili's allies in the US also continue to take a hard line.

"The administration [of US President Barack Obama] has appeared more eager to placate an autocratic Russia than to support a friendly Georgian democracy living under the long shadow of its aggressive neighbor," US Republican senator John McCain said in a comment for the Washington Post, which urged the US to re-arm the Georgian leader.

© 2010 EUobserver.com. All rights reserved.

Posted for fair use....
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/LH10Ak02.html

Middle East
Aug 10, 2010
Drugged and dressed to kill
By Ali Mohammed

BAQUBA, Diyala province - Before sending her off with a suicide bomb strapped to her waist, Rania al-Anbaki's husband made a wish.

"You'll be a martyr and we'll meet in heaven. I hope you'll choose me," she recalls him saying.

Interviewed in an Iraqi police station two years later, Anbaki said she did indeed meet her husband again - but in prison rather than paradise.

"He was arrested in a raid on an al-Qaeda cell," she said. "He'd been carrying a fake identity card."

At the time of their brief reunion, Anbaki had already been in custody for two months. She was stopped by security forces in Baquba, the capital of Iraq's Diyala province, before the device attached to her body could be detonated.

In her late twenties, she is serving a seven-year prison term. Police officials were present throughout her recent interview with the Institute for War and Peace Reporting, occasionally interrupting her.

Anbaki has the hardened manner and dark complexion of a woman who grew up tough in the Iraqi countryside. She showed no emotion as she described her past. She said she was heavily drugged before being fitted with a bomb and was unaware of her actions. When her husband spoke of seeing her in heaven, she did not understand what he meant but felt only that "something strange was about to happen".

However, the security forces in Baquba question whether she was really coerced into becoming a bomber. After being arrested in the city center in August 2008, she argued with the policemen, haranguing them as "traitors".

The Sunni Arab insurgency has maintained a stubborn grip on Diyala, despite a sharp reduction in violence over the past few years. The province lies northeast of Baghdad, along the porous border with Iran.

The violence has deepened fissures in the province's mixed population, which is divided by sect between Sunnis and Shi'ites, and by ethnicity between Kurds and Arabs.

Of the 60 major suicide attacks recorded in Diyala since 2003, 23 were carried out by women.

As in other parts of Iraq, women are thought to have been favored by the insurgency because they initially attracted less attention than their male counterparts. Social norms prohibited men from frisking women at checkpoints, while the recruitment of female officers was at times unable to keep pace with the supply of bombers.

Security officials say groups such as al-Qaeda manage sophisticated networks of female suicide bombers in Diyala, often with the help of older women. The best-known of these handlers was Samira Jassim, nicknamed the "Mother of Believers", who was arrested in early 2009. According to the Iraqi military, she had persuaded 80 women to become bombers, of whom 28 went on to launch attacks, many of them beyond the province.

In a filmed confession, Jassim said her recruits had been the victims of rape or violence, and became convinced that becoming a suicide bomber was a means of vengeance or redemption.

Anbaki is one of five women currently in custody in Diyala who did not complete their mission. In common with other female bombers, she has lost male relatives to the conflict - her father and brother were kidnapped and killed by militiamen in 2006. After their deaths, she was forced to marry her cousin, a blacksmith. Though she said she was unaware of his links to the insurgency, she knew him to be fiercely religious.

"I used to like singing, and I dreamt of becoming a teacher," she said. "After marriage, my husband forbade me from listening to songs. He used to read the Koran a lot and spent many days away from home on some or other pretext. I became lonely."

When Anbaki asked him to buy a television, he refused, saying it encouraged infidelity and devil worship. When he found her listening to an Arabic song on the radio, he flew into a rage. "He smashed the radio and gave me a thrashing, all the while explaining how my actions would send me to hell," she said.

The couple lived in the village of al-Mikhesa, outside Baquba. They had no children and Anbaki said she was not allowed to make friends. One day in the third year of their marriage, her husband took her to the nearby district of al-Ghatoon.

"It was just like a dream," said Anbaki. She said she was introduced to a relative of her husband, a woman in her forties who gave her name as Um Fatima. They exchanged small talk and Anbaki was served a glass of peach juice, which she recalled made her feel "weak and dizzy".

Barely conscious, she said she was fitted out by her husband and Um Fatima in a vest packed with explosives. "My husband kept talking to me about jihad. Um Fatima left us in the room and he kissed me on the forehead."

Drugged and dressed in a suicide vest, Anbaki said she was escorted into Baquba by Um Fatima. The women went to a marketplace, where they ended up being separated by the crowd.

Anbaki said she was stopped by a member of the Sahwa, a Sunni Arab militia that has joined the government in the fight against al-Qaeda. When she gave her name and said she was going home, the militiaman became suspicious as he did not recognize her family from the neighborhood.

The Sahwa member raised the alarm and the security forces cordoned off the area. Anbaki said she was ordered to remove her cloak. She did so, revealing the vest packed with explosives. She was immobilized and the device she was wearing was disabled by an expert.

Anbaki insists she did not know how to detonate the bomb and assumed it was controlled remotely by Um Fatima, whom she had lost in the crowd. "I was pretty sure I had no remote control device. My husband didn't teach me how to use one," she said.

Nor is Anbaki clear what her intended target was. "Maybe the operation was against the crowd in Diyala market, but it failed because Um Fatima lost sight of me ... Maybe the target was a checkpoint, or an official or a leader," she said.

However, the security forces in Diyala believe Anbaki's device was attached to a trigger and she was either unable or unwilling to detonate it. The would-be bomber said she did not act of her own accord and would not want other women to follow her path.

"I didn't know what was going on," she said, explaining that she now feels "shame and regret". "I implore any woman to think a thousand times before committing such an act. It runs counter to our faith, which calls for love and tolerance."

Um Fatima and Anbaki's husband were arrested on terrorism charges and remain in custody. Anbaki's mother was also detained, but has since been released.

Attacks by women bombers have decreased over the past few years, partly as a result of the recruitment of women officers to carry out searches at checkpoints.

Wijdan Adil, the head of a battalion of women recruits to Diyala's security forces, said many of her officers worked in plainclothes. "Our girls work as secret agents, undercover in parks, markets and crowded places. They also take part in raids carried out by the security forces," she said.

Colonel Jalil al-Jiburi of the Diyala police force said women who became suicide bombers were driven by "revenge, poverty and a lack of cultural and religious awareness". He said many of the women had been led to believe unquestioningly that they would go to heaven as a result of their actions.

Ali Mohammed is an IWPR-trained reporter in Baquba.

This article originally appeared in Institute for War and Peace Reporting.

Posted for fair use.....
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/10/2978488.htm?section=justin

Iraqi traffic cops get AK-47s

By Middle East correspondent Anne Barker

Posted 3 hours 33 minutes ago

Traffic police in Iraq will soon have assault rifles to help them do their jobs after a spate of attacks against them by insurgents.

Iraq is arming its traffic officers with AK-47 assault rifles because more and more are being killed or wounded by militants.

In the past five days alone in Baghdad, five traffic officers have been killed and 19 have been wounded, either by bombs or by gunmen using silenced weapons.

Some officers believe militants are targeting them to incite chaos in Iraq and authorities say terrorists shoot them because they are an easy target.

Police chiefs are now equipping officers with a rifle at every intersection.

Posted for fair use.....
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=5&article_id=117985#axzz0w661oDfF

What does ‘reform’ mean in Saudi Arabia?
By NEIL PARTRICK
Commentary by
Monday, August 09, 2010

Under the ageing King Abdullah, those in the Al-Saud family seeking to advance economic, legal, and political (or, perhaps more accurately, administrative) reform seem to be in a race against the clock.

The assumption of many inside the kingdom is that the next two to three years could be decisive. Elite figures sympathetic to reform are concerned that what has been achieved – modest by international standards, significant by Saudi Arabia’s – will stall under a King Sultan or a King Nayef (the more likely of the two, given health concerns about Crown Prince Sultan). Changes made since Abdullah acceded in 2005 lack an institutional basis and have not captured the imagination of Saudis, leading to the impression that they constitute personal whims that can as easily be taken back or put indefinitely on the back burner.

Reform in Saudi Arabia is not the result of a clearly articulated program intended to reach a defined outcome; rather, what is often referred to as reform is more about changing the environment.

A more open environment has certainly emerged in the last few years. Various media outlets controlled by Saudi Arabia’s competitive ruling elite publish different commentaries on local and regional politics. But this is not a true debate; it is more a public posting of distinct opinions. Among the issues receiving the most attention are the appropriate role of women and the related role of the mutaween (religious police), public sector corruption, education reform, and the need for Saudi nationals to be better equipped for a more dynamic private sector.

Thus far reform has largely meant putting putative reformers behind key desks in ministries and public bodies. So, in marked contrast to Saudi tradition and to the wider regional trend, the Education Ministry has become something of a reformist fiefdom, at least as far as the top jobs are concerned, making it an important focus of King Abdullah’s patronage in the intra-Saud power play.

Actual reform of educational practice, however, has not progressed beyond some curricula and course book changes, as well as the establishment of a controversial co-educational island of excellence, the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST) near Jeddah. KAUST, notably, is not under the authority of the Higher Education Ministry, even though it is envisaged that it will eventually be subjected to formal state control.

One area that is likely to get attention, whoever succeeds King Abdullah, is technical training. Saudi Arabia cannot bridge the gap between population and economic growth without obliging Saudi nationals to work more, and for less, in the private sector.

Judicial reforms have in practice seen the creation of a new Supreme Court as the highest court of appeal, but this is essentially a name change for what was previously a function of the Supreme Council of the Judiciary (SCJ). The new role envisaged for the SCJ, the training of often ill-informed judges, has yet to begin. Although many of the salaried ulama, or clergy, remain the same highly conservative old breed, the SCJ is under new management.

Codification of Sharia, or Islamic law – potentially important for a more predictable legal environment for business and those seeking redress for human rights infractions – has been agreed upon. When it will be published in an authorized majalla (gazette) or written compendium of legal judgments designed to constitute legal precedent, is less clear. A previous official majalla dating back to the era of Abdel-Aziz Ibn Saud, who founded the state in 1932, soon fell into disuse.

Getting the Higher Council of Ulama to agree to codification in principle has taken several years. With the exception of big ticket items such as the foreign investment law and Koran-based punishments for social crimes, anything resembling written law is pretty much uncharted territory in the kingdom. An eventual new majalla is not expected to redirect Saudi law onto a new, more liberal, footing, but rather to create a more transparent and predictable legal path for Saudis and for foreign businesses. Controversial social issues, such as male guardianship over adult women and the inequities of child marriage, are the subject of extensive media debate but there is no expectation that the promised majalla will change them fundamentally.

Regarding economic reform, the traditional clientelism of what remains an essentially rentier state stands in the way of an entrepreneurial class that could in time be the basis of political change. A patronized Saudi private sector that is not very private and that depends on state and princely patronage is likely to remain a feature of Saudi political economy. Share offerings may be resumed at pre-recession levels, but these are minority stakes mainly for Saudi nationals. Majority ownership is liable to remain in the hands of the powerful few, while much of public industry is likely to see at most only privatization of a minority holding.

Regarding explicitly political reform, there is little progress. King Abdullah has scaled back his ambitions on this front due to fears among the more conservative senior Al-Saud that even prospective partly elected and relatively disempowered regional councils would create a dangerous precedent. The second round of elections to the local councils originally scheduled for 2009 have been postponed to 2011. The king’s focus is rather on making the public sector more efficient, with corruption in particular being quietly targeted. More significant changes, such as giving the Majlis al-Shura (consultative council, the kingdom’s appointed quasi-parliament) any actual powers, are unlikely for now. There is some attention to the more modest issue of broadening Shura membership to make it represent more of the different strands of Saudi society.

All in all, substantive Saudi reform is largely illusive. While the media commentariat are active, the jury is out on what the practical impact will be. So far, a change in the mood music without an institutional basis for greater progress has had little effect on the attitudes or expectations of Saudi nationals, many of whom are understandably circumspect about the sustainability of current policies after King Abdullah.


Neil Partrick is a Middle East consultant and an associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute in London. This commentary is reprinted with permission from the Arab Reform Bulletin. It can be accessed online at: www.carnegieendowment.org/arb, © 2010, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Housecarl said:

Posted for fair use.....
http://euobserver.com/9/30596

EU diplomat criticises Russian-backed rebels in Georgia

Click to expand...

Wow. Son-of-a-gun. A European begins to get it. They would know best the perils of an aggressive Russia.

IAEA: Iran activates enrichment equipment
By VERONIKA OLEKSYN (AP) – 8 hours ago

VIENNA — Iran has activated equipment to enrich uranium more efficiently in a move that defies the U.N. Security Council, the International Atomic Energy Agency said Monday.

The Vienna-based nuclear watchdog said Iran has started using a second set of 164 centrifuges linked in a cascade, or string of machines, to enrich uranium to up to 20 percent at its Natanz pilot fuel enrichment plant. Another cascade there has been producing uranium enriched to near 20 percent since February.

If enriched to around 95 percent, uranium can be used in building a nuclear bomb. At 20 percent, it can be turned into weapons-grade material much more quickly than less-enriched uranium.

MORE - http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iRqjZV1Meppj40hTs8IBOv4DdsQwD9HG6CTO0