Daily Times
NEW DELHI: According to a survey conducted by the National Council for Applied Economic Research (NCAER) and the University of Maryland of the US, the monthly income of nearly one-third of Muslims in India is less than Rs 550. Three out of every 10 Muslims lived below the poverty line and earned less than Rs 550 a month in 2004-05, the survey revealed. Even among the poor, urban Muslims were better off compared to those in villages, who survived on Rs 338 a month during the year under review, NCAER said last week
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Monday, March 29, 2010
UK special relationship with US is over, say MPs
Guardian
Phrase coined by Churchill out of step with reality, notes committee as it recommends more hard-headed approach to US
Mark Tran
MPs today urged the government to adopt a more hard-headed approach towards the US and avoid the phrase "the special relationship" as Britain's influence over America was likely to diminish.
The 14-member cross-party foreign affairs committee said that the phrase coined by Winston Churchill more than 60 years ago no longer reflects political reality and should be dropped.
"The use of the phrase 'the special relationship' in its historical sense, to describe the totality of the ever-evolving UK-US relationship, is potentially misleading, and we recommend that its use should be avoided," the committee said. "The overuse of the phrase by some politicians and many in the media serves simultaneously to devalue its meaning and to raise unrealistic expectations about the benefits the relationship can deliver to the UK."
Three Labour MPs and two Conservatives voted unsuccessfully for the recommendation to be dropped but were overruled.
In words that will be interpreted as criticism of Tony Blair's decision to stand "shoulder to shoulder" with George Bush on the invasion of Iraq, the committee said: "The perception that the British government was a subservient 'poodle' to the US administration leading up to the period of the invasion of Iraq and its aftermath is widespread both among the British public and overseas. This perception, whatever its relation to reality, is deeply damaging to the reputation and interests of the UK."
Mike Gapes, the chair of the committee, said that Britain needed to have a realistic sense of its own limits and national interests.
"It is likely that the extent of political influence which the UK has exercised on US decision-making as a consequence of its military commitments is likely to diminish," he said. "Over the longer term the UK is unlikely to be able to influence the US to the extent it has in the past."
Gapes added that the UK foreign policy approach advocated by the committee reflected the more pragmatic tone that the US president, Barack Obama, has taken towards Britain.
A Foreign and Commonwealth Office spokeswoman said: "As the report notes, 'the British media's preoccupation with the state of the special relationship is frequently at the expense of coverage of the more substantive aspects of the relationship.' It doesn't really matter whether someone calls it the 'special relationship' or not. What matters is that the UK's relationship with the US is unique, and uniquely important to protecting our national security and promoting our national interest."
In testimony to the committee, British diplomats took a hard-headed view of that relationship.
Sir Jeremy Greenstock, the former British ambassador to the UN, said that British officials themselves do not use the term "special relationship".
"We might have to respond to it in public if it is thrown at us by Americans, but we don't regard it as special," he told MPs. "We regard it as an asset that has to be nurtured and worked at, and the access to the United States in terms of politicians, officials and members of Congress has to be earned because we're bringing something to the table. That is the way we think and work. We do not think it is special unless we are introducing substance to make it special."
David Manning, who was Britain's ambassador in Washington between 2003 and 2007, also said that there was "sometimes a tendency to over-hype the emotional relationship".
One of the difficulties about the term "special relationship", he told MPs, is that it can be overused. "It can give a sense that we can deliver more than is actually going to emerge from this relationship."
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Hamas hails Mauritania's decision over Israel
Press Tv
The Palestinian Hamas resistance movement has praised Mauritania's decision to close the Israeli embassy in Nouakchott and sever its diplomatic ties completely with it, urging Arab states that have relations with Israel to follow.
“We in Hamas highly value and appreciate the decision taken by the Islamic republic of Mauritania to close the Zionist entity's embassy in Nouakchott and break off its diplomatic relations with the state of occupation,”
Palestinain Information Center cited the Hamas statement on Thursday. .
Hamas also called on Arab nations that have diplomatic ties with Israel — Jordan and Egypt — to freeze economic and political ties with Tel Aviv to protest the racist and terrorist policies practiced by Israel against the Palestinian nation. The Palestinian movement also urged Arabs to take measures in response to threats the Tel Aviv regime poses to Middle East peace and security.
Hamas meanwhile advised participants in the forthcoming Arab summit in Libya to adopt a resolution, banning any negotiations with Israel. Tel Aviv has proved its bad faith toward the peace process through its persistent settlement building and Judaization activities in occupied Jerusalem (al-Quds), the movement underlined.
Mauritania's Foreign Minister, Naha Mint Mouknass, said March 20 that the country in northwest Africa had severed its relations in a “complete and definitive way.”
In March 2009, Mauritania expelled Israel's ambassador Michael Arbel and embassy staff from the country following a dispute over the 22-day military offensive in the Gaza Strip, which left over 1,400 people — mostly women and children — killed.
Mauritania's ambassador to Israel was recalled home a month earlier, and Mauritania's embassy in Tel Aviv was also closed.
The Palestinian Hamas resistance movement has praised Mauritania's decision to close the Israeli embassy in Nouakchott and sever its diplomatic ties completely with it, urging Arab states that have relations with Israel to follow.
“We in Hamas highly value and appreciate the decision taken by the Islamic republic of Mauritania to close the Zionist entity's embassy in Nouakchott and break off its diplomatic relations with the state of occupation,”
Palestinain Information Center cited the Hamas statement on Thursday. .
Hamas also called on Arab nations that have diplomatic ties with Israel — Jordan and Egypt — to freeze economic and political ties with Tel Aviv to protest the racist and terrorist policies practiced by Israel against the Palestinian nation. The Palestinian movement also urged Arabs to take measures in response to threats the Tel Aviv regime poses to Middle East peace and security.
Hamas meanwhile advised participants in the forthcoming Arab summit in Libya to adopt a resolution, banning any negotiations with Israel. Tel Aviv has proved its bad faith toward the peace process through its persistent settlement building and Judaization activities in occupied Jerusalem (al-Quds), the movement underlined.
Mauritania's Foreign Minister, Naha Mint Mouknass, said March 20 that the country in northwest Africa had severed its relations in a “complete and definitive way.”
In March 2009, Mauritania expelled Israel's ambassador Michael Arbel and embassy staff from the country following a dispute over the 22-day military offensive in the Gaza Strip, which left over 1,400 people — mostly women and children — killed.
Mauritania's ambassador to Israel was recalled home a month earlier, and Mauritania's embassy in Tel Aviv was also closed.
Friday, March 26, 2010
France to ban veil says Nicolas Sarkozy
Telegraph
The move would protect the dignity of women, the president added.
“The full veil is contrary to the dignity of women,” he said. “The response is to ban it. The Government will table a draft law prohibiting it.”
The president gave no further details during his address to the nation following a heavy defeat in regional elections for his ruling Union for a Popular Movement party.
Speaking from the Elysee Palace Mr Sarkozy gave no indication as to how an outright ban would be imposed and policed.
France is home to six million Muslims.
The move would protect the dignity of women, the president added.
“The full veil is contrary to the dignity of women,” he said. “The response is to ban it. The Government will table a draft law prohibiting it.”
The president gave no further details during his address to the nation following a heavy defeat in regional elections for his ruling Union for a Popular Movement party.
Speaking from the Elysee Palace Mr Sarkozy gave no indication as to how an outright ban would be imposed and policed.
France is home to six million Muslims.
Russia blasts NATO's reluctance to eliminate opium
Press TV
Russia's drug control chief has questioned the US-led alliance's reluctance to eliminate poppy plantations in war-weary Afghanistan.
Viktor Ivanov on Thursday criticized a NATO statement saying the alliance is ready to destroy poppy fields if the UN passes a special resolution.
The statement underscored that NATO has the fate of Afghan poppy farmers in mind.
A NATO spokesman has said that the US-led alliance cannot allow a situation where people in one of the world's poorest nations are left without means of livelihood and receive no compensation.
NATO has rejected Russian calls for it to eradicate poppy fields in Afghanistan. Moscow says Afghan heroin kills 30,000 Russians a year.
According to statistics provided by Ivanov, Russia was the single largest consumer of heroin in 2008.
Moscow blames NATO for the surge in heroin trafficking from Afghanistan to Russia.
The production of opium in Afghanistan has skyrocketed since the US-led invasion of the country in 2001.
The country now accounts for 95 percent of the world's crop.
Russia's drug control chief has questioned the US-led alliance's reluctance to eliminate poppy plantations in war-weary Afghanistan.
Viktor Ivanov on Thursday criticized a NATO statement saying the alliance is ready to destroy poppy fields if the UN passes a special resolution.
The statement underscored that NATO has the fate of Afghan poppy farmers in mind.
A NATO spokesman has said that the US-led alliance cannot allow a situation where people in one of the world's poorest nations are left without means of livelihood and receive no compensation.
NATO has rejected Russian calls for it to eradicate poppy fields in Afghanistan. Moscow says Afghan heroin kills 30,000 Russians a year.
According to statistics provided by Ivanov, Russia was the single largest consumer of heroin in 2008.
Moscow blames NATO for the surge in heroin trafficking from Afghanistan to Russia.
The production of opium in Afghanistan has skyrocketed since the US-led invasion of the country in 2001.
The country now accounts for 95 percent of the world's crop.
Bangladesh sets up war crimes court
Bangladesh has set up a special tribunal to try people accused of committing war crimes during the country's 1971 battle for independence from Pakistan.
The government named three High Court judges to the tribunal to conduct the long-delayed trials of people accused of murder, torture, rape and arson, Shafique Ahmed, the law minister, said on Thursday.
Officials also appointed a panel of retired civil, police and military officials to prosecute suspects who sided with Pakistan during the war, he said.
"The tribunal will hold trials of those suspected of committing crimes against humanity and genocide," he told the AFP news agency, though he did not specify when the trials would begin.
"Only the Bangladeshis who formed auxiliary forces to aid the Pakistani army and committed crimes against humanity will be put on trial."
Bloody campaign
A statement from the law ministry said the tribunal will conduct the trials under a 1973 act outlining prosecution and punishment for people accused of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and other crimes under international law.
If found guilty, some of those tried could face the death penalty.
Bangladesh, formerly East Pakistan, won independence from Pakistan in December 1971 following a nine-month war, which also saw India getting involved that hastened the surrender of Pakistaini troops.
The independence campaign was led by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the country's founding leader.
Rahman, the father of the current prime minister Sheikh Hasina, had planned to put the alleged war criminals on trial before his assassination in a coup in 1975.
Bangladesh's official figures say Pakistani soldiers, aided by local collaborators, killed an estimated three million people, raped about 200,000 women and forced millions more to flee their homes during the war.
However, no one has yet been convicted for the atrocities and a combination of international manipulation and domestic politics has been blamed for the judicial inaction.
Al-Jazeera
A private group that has investigated the conflict has identified more than 1,600 people, including Pakistani generals, as complicit in the atrocities.
But Bangladeshi authorities said Pakistani generals and army officers would not be tried by the tribunal.
The government named three High Court judges to the tribunal to conduct the long-delayed trials of people accused of murder, torture, rape and arson, Shafique Ahmed, the law minister, said on Thursday.
Officials also appointed a panel of retired civil, police and military officials to prosecute suspects who sided with Pakistan during the war, he said.
"The tribunal will hold trials of those suspected of committing crimes against humanity and genocide," he told the AFP news agency, though he did not specify when the trials would begin.
"Only the Bangladeshis who formed auxiliary forces to aid the Pakistani army and committed crimes against humanity will be put on trial."
Bloody campaign
A statement from the law ministry said the tribunal will conduct the trials under a 1973 act outlining prosecution and punishment for people accused of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and other crimes under international law.
If found guilty, some of those tried could face the death penalty.
Bangladesh, formerly East Pakistan, won independence from Pakistan in December 1971 following a nine-month war, which also saw India getting involved that hastened the surrender of Pakistaini troops.
The independence campaign was led by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the country's founding leader.
Rahman, the father of the current prime minister Sheikh Hasina, had planned to put the alleged war criminals on trial before his assassination in a coup in 1975.
Bangladesh's official figures say Pakistani soldiers, aided by local collaborators, killed an estimated three million people, raped about 200,000 women and forced millions more to flee their homes during the war.
However, no one has yet been convicted for the atrocities and a combination of international manipulation and domestic politics has been blamed for the judicial inaction.
Al-Jazeera
A private group that has investigated the conflict has identified more than 1,600 people, including Pakistani generals, as complicit in the atrocities.
But Bangladeshi authorities said Pakistani generals and army officers would not be tried by the tribunal.
Arab ministers agree Jerusalem fund
Al-Jazeera
Arab foreign ministers meeting in Libya have agreed to raise a fund of $500m to support Palestinians living in Jerusalem.
The ministers, who are in the Libyan city of Sirte ahead of an Arab League summit over the weekend, hope the fund will help counter Israel's settlement drive within the Holy City.
"Yes, they have agreed," Amr Moussa, the Arab League's secretary general, told reporters when asked if the fund had been approved.
Final ratification will come when the decision is submitted to Arab leaders when they gather on Saturday and Sunday.
The Middle East peace process is set to dominate the summit after Israel angered Palestinian and Arab leaders earlier this month when it announced plans to build 1,600 new homes for Jewish settlers in East Jerusalem.
Settlement spat
Riyad al-Malki, the Palestinian foreign minister, said: "It is a modest amount compared to what Israel and the Jewish communities around the world spend on settlements in East Jerusalem and which amounts so far to more than $17.4bn."
A senior Palestinian official said the money would go towards improving infrastructure in mostly Arab East Jerusalem, building hospitals, schools, water wells and providing financial support to those whose homes have been demolished by the Israelis.
"We are not asking for too much or for the impossible, or even for an amount of money which our Arab brothers cannot match," al-Malki said.
He said the fund was much-needed "support if we really want to bolster the presence of Palestinians in Jerusalem."
Israel's settlement plans have also frustrated its allies and prompted a growing rift with Washington, a staunch supporter of Israel.
The US has demanded Israel make some concessions to bring the Palestinians back to the negotiating table after they abandoned indirect talks following the settlement announcement.
But Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, has since confirmed plans to expand the Jewish presence in occupied East Jerusalem.
In a speech to America's influential Jewish lobby in Washington on Monday, Netanyahu said that "Jerusalem is our capital" and building will continue there as Israel sees fit.
Separately, ahead of the summit, Hoshyar Zebari, the Iraqi foreign minister, briefly walked out as a protest at a meeting between Muammar Gadaffi, the Libyan leader, and Iraqi opposition figures.
He declined to elaborate on the spat between Tripoli and Baghdad, but said "there were some negative positions concerning political developments in Iraq."
Arab foreign ministers meeting in Libya have agreed to raise a fund of $500m to support Palestinians living in Jerusalem.
The ministers, who are in the Libyan city of Sirte ahead of an Arab League summit over the weekend, hope the fund will help counter Israel's settlement drive within the Holy City.
"Yes, they have agreed," Amr Moussa, the Arab League's secretary general, told reporters when asked if the fund had been approved.
Final ratification will come when the decision is submitted to Arab leaders when they gather on Saturday and Sunday.
The Middle East peace process is set to dominate the summit after Israel angered Palestinian and Arab leaders earlier this month when it announced plans to build 1,600 new homes for Jewish settlers in East Jerusalem.
Settlement spat
Riyad al-Malki, the Palestinian foreign minister, said: "It is a modest amount compared to what Israel and the Jewish communities around the world spend on settlements in East Jerusalem and which amounts so far to more than $17.4bn."
A senior Palestinian official said the money would go towards improving infrastructure in mostly Arab East Jerusalem, building hospitals, schools, water wells and providing financial support to those whose homes have been demolished by the Israelis.
"We are not asking for too much or for the impossible, or even for an amount of money which our Arab brothers cannot match," al-Malki said.
He said the fund was much-needed "support if we really want to bolster the presence of Palestinians in Jerusalem."
Israel's settlement plans have also frustrated its allies and prompted a growing rift with Washington, a staunch supporter of Israel.
The US has demanded Israel make some concessions to bring the Palestinians back to the negotiating table after they abandoned indirect talks following the settlement announcement.
But Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, has since confirmed plans to expand the Jewish presence in occupied East Jerusalem.
In a speech to America's influential Jewish lobby in Washington on Monday, Netanyahu said that "Jerusalem is our capital" and building will continue there as Israel sees fit.
Separately, ahead of the summit, Hoshyar Zebari, the Iraqi foreign minister, briefly walked out as a protest at a meeting between Muammar Gadaffi, the Libyan leader, and Iraqi opposition figures.
He declined to elaborate on the spat between Tripoli and Baghdad, but said "there were some negative positions concerning political developments in Iraq."
War and peace: A Taliban view
Asia Times
By Syed Saleem Shahzad
KARACHI - After an often stormy relationship with the United States over the past 63 years since its independence, Pakistan is in the process of forging an all-embracing strategic relationship with Washington.
A delegation led by Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi is in Washington for meetings at the State Department with a team led by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to discuss matters ranging from the situation in Afghanistan to a civil nuclear deal to commerce and agriculture.
The American military command also specially invited a military contingent, including army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kiani and the director general of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Lieutenant General Ahmad Shuja Pasha. High on their agenda are the recent arrests in Pakistan of senior Taliban officials, including that of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the deputy of Taliban leader Mullah Omar.
Washington and Islamabad will have their own interpretation of their emerging deeper relationship as well as the significance of the arrests: that they will lead to a peace process in which Mullah Omar and al-Qaeda will be isolated and the US will reconcile with moderate Taliban cadre through Pakistan's mediation.
The Taliban, too, have their viewpoint on these unfolding developments. A senior Taliban official contacted Asia Times Online to put their side of the story. The man cannot be identified because the Taliban, since the arrests, are very cautious. For the purposes of this report, the Talib will be called Abdullah.
Rendezvous with the Taliban
The traffic moves slowly on the main arteries of the southern port city of Karachi on weekend evenings as people search out roadside restaurants; their parked cars line the streets, clogging byways that are already overflowing with bustling pedestrians.
All the same, I make it to my appointed meeting place at 9pm. Within a minute a brand-new silver-grey imported Japanese car draws to a halt in front of me. I immediately recognize the man in the front passenger's seat; I interviewed him several years ago. He had a senior position in the Taliban government until it was forced out by the US-led invasion of Afghanistan in late 2001. Abdullah is about 50 years old, but looks much older.
I slip into the back seat behind Abdullah and exchange greetings.
"Against all the odds, given the arrests, we have come to see you," the driver and interlocutor of our meeting tells me. "But we have to follow new arrangements. You will not quote his [Abdullah's] name as since the arrest of Mullah Baradar there have been strict instructions from the ameerul momineen [commander of the faithful - a title the Taliban use for Mullah Omar] to avoid media interviews," the driver says. I have no option but to accept the condition.
The car makes its way through busy roads towards a main northern exit of the city.
"What is your take on the recent arrests of Taliban leaders and commanders?" I say, breaking a heavy silence. We are now cruising past trucks laden with goods destined for northern Pakistan.
"What arrests are you talking about?" Abdullah responds.
"Several people, like Moulvi Abdul Kabir [a former Taliban governor of Nagarhar province in Afghanistan], Mullah Abdul Salam, Mullah Mir Muhammad, Syed Tayyab Agha [Mullah Omar's secretary] and Mullah Mustasim Jan Agha," I say.
"I assure you, 300%, neither Moulvi Abdul Kabir nor Syed Tayyab Agha has been arrested. It was false reporting. Mullah Abdul Salam and Mullah Mir Muhammad were arrested at least a month before Mullah Baradar, but their arrest was shown after Mullah Baradar's. I have not been in direct contact with Mullah Mustasim Jan Agha so I cannot claim with surety about his status, but I was told by his friends that he was not arrested," Abdullah says.
"There are so many conspiracy theories surrounding Mullah Baradar's arrest, what is your understanding. Why was he arrested by Pakistan?"
"Pakistan's compulsions ... the compulsions that are now rising day-by-day," he replies mildly.
By now we were speeding along a main highway, with the city lights fast receding. All of a sudden the driver slows down and turns onto a muddy track. After a short while he draws up at an open-air restaurant frequented mostly by truck drivers. At this time it is not busy and we order a meal of chicken Karahi, a famous Pashtun dish, yogurt, fresh green salad and nan (bread).
"Mullah Baradar's arrest has opened up a Pandora's box of conspiracy theories," I venture. "Some people say he was abandoned by Mullah Omar. Some say he had been talking with the Afghan government and the United Nations and that's why he was disliked by the ISI and was arrested. There is also a theory that through his arrest Pakistan wanted to open communication with the Taliban. What do the Taliban think?"
"Mullah Baradar was part of the Taliban and there was no trust deficit between him and Mullah Omar. However, it is entirely false that he was part of any reconciliation process or that he held any talks with anybody. At the same time, keep in mind that it is a Taliban policy that the minute one of their men is arrested, they abandon all links with him so there is no chance of any communication through him or any other detained leader," Abdullah says.
I interject: "I heard from the Punjabi camp [non-Pashtun militants] as well as from al-Qaeda that Mullah Omar was communicating through Mullah Baradar with [Saudi intelligence chief] Prince Muqrin, who then passed on messages to Washington and the Afghan government. Arsala Rahmani [a former Taliban minister now part of the political process in Kabul] also told me that those talks collapsed only because the Barack Obama administration pushed for a troop surge in Afghanistan."
"There is not a shred of truth in this statement. Neither the Punjabis nor al-Qaeda could know about the Taliban's internal affairs. It is all gossip or their speculation - like the speculation that there were talks in Dubai between Mullah Baradar and Abdul Qayyum [Afghan President Hamid Karzai's brother]. People speculate like this because Karzai and Baradar come from the same tribe [Popalzai Durrani], but it is all speculation. And people like Arsala Rahmani could not be aware of the situation. Whether it is Arsala Rahmani or Abdul Wakeel Mutawakil [a former Taliban minister recently taken off a United Nations list that had banned him from traveling and frozen his assets], the Taliban don't want to keep any contact with them. The Taliban do not even have anything to do with Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef [the Taliban's former ambassador to Pakistan]," says Abdullah.
His comment on Zaeef surprises me. Zaeef was arrested by Pakistan and handed over to the US soon after the Taliban's defeat in Afghanistan in 2001. He spent many years at the US's Guantanamo detention facility in Cuba before being released. He now lives in Kabul but under tight security; officially, he cannot leave the city without informing the local administration. He is widely believed to be an important go-between for the Taliban and the Afghan government. He publicly says he is still loyal to the Taliban.
Abdullah disagrees. "He moves to Saudi Arabia. He goes to Dubai frequently, and you call him a detainee? Mullah Omar sent him a message, telling him to run away and join the resistance. He turned down the order, which means he defied Mullah Omar. We are fully knowledgeable that he is in a position to dodge his security and he could have come to us, but he refused and now he is issuing statements as if he is still a Talib. He is not a Talib. We have nothing to do with him, and neither are we responsible for any of his statements," Abdullah says.
I move the conversation on, asking about supposed talks between the Taliban and the Afghan government.
"I will tell you exactly what happened. You know that the Taliban had close ties with Saudi Arabia, so we received a message from there. Ameerul Momineen [Mullah Omar] sent Syed Tayyab Agha to Saudi Arabia as he is in charge of political affairs. Tayyab Agha met with Prince Muqrin, but you could not call it dialogue for reconciliation," explains Abdullah.
"Prince Muqrin emphasized that there should be a dialogue process between the Afghan government and the Taliban so that foreign forces could leave Afghanistan. Tayyab, on behalf of Mullah Omar, asked Muqrin why Saudi Arabia was interested in such dialogue. Was it because of Osama bin Laden? Muqrin said this was not the case. Then Tayyab asked him whether Saudi Arabia had any particular agenda. He denied this too. Tayyab returned from Saudi Arabia and briefed Mullah Omar. Later, Mullah Omar sent a message to Muqrin, saying that it appeared Saudi Arabia only wanted dialogue with the Taliban on somebody else's behalf. The Taliban do not want to hold such dialogue, so that was the end of the communication," Abdullah says.
"When did Tayyab go to Saudi Arabia?"
"About four to five months ago."
"And nobody spotted Tayyab traveling to Saudi Arabia?"
"Has anybody traced me moving here and there? It is the same with Tayyab."
"But no pictures of you are available. Tayyab's pictures and video footage are available in abundance, especially in the Western media as after 9/11 he delivered dozens of media conferences in Kandahar as the Taliban's spokesperson," I argue.
Abdullah smiles, "While he was in Iran he made a significant change to his appearance. He is completely different from how he appeared in the video footage. He is completely unidentifiable."
"Now you are telling me that Mullah Omar's secretary was in Iran. Did he live there in hiding or was he given shelter by the Iranian government?"
"He was given refuge by the Iranian government in 2002, he lived there for about a year. Even in the past years he has visited Iran occasionally."
"Why did he not go to Pakistan?"
"He feared being arrested because he was close to al-Qaeda."
We fall silent for a while as we enjoy our dinner.
"Do you appreciate that al-Qaeda and the Punjabis carried out attacks on Pakistan's security forces after the arrest of Mullah Baradar?" I ask.
"Saleem! You need to understand that Pakistan arrested Mullah Baradar under compulsion and we have a compulsion as well, that no matter how Pakistan jacks up its actions against us we cannot sanction attacks on Pakistan, or for that matter against any Muslim country. Mullah Omar has many times ordered these people who call themselves the Pakistani Taliban [Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan] or al-Qaeda to stop the attacks in Pakistan and make their focus fighting against NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization in Afghanistan], but these people don't listen," Abdullah says.
"But don't you think that such attacks put pressure on the Pakistani military apparatus and force them to stay neutral?"
"I will put the situation in a different way. Suppose from tomorrow we made our entire focus to attack the Karzai administration and gave up our resistance against foreign troops. What would you think of us? Would the Muslim world consider us a legitimate resistance? These Punjabis and al-Qaeda are obsessed with targeting the Pakistani security forces and their contribution to fighting against NATO is limited."
"But there are several big Punjabi commanders, like Ilyas Kashmiri, in the al-Qaeda camp. Do you question their wisdom as well?"
"There is a weird situation in North Waziristan [tribal area in Pakistan]. If you spend just 20 days there you will talk the way they talk and you will start declaring certain Muslims as heretic and issue decrees of murder and assassination. This is not the Islamic way. The Taliban cannot accept that."
"They have pledged their allegiance to Mullah Omar, even Osama bin Laden and [his deputy] Ayman al-Zawahiri have, then why don't they listen to you?" I ask.
"Neither Osama bin Laden nor Ayman are on the surface. The only person who seems to be in command is Sheikh Saeed [alias Abu Mustafa al-Yazid], but people under him do not listen to him. Al-Qaeda is not a very disciplined body. Unlike the Taliban, where Mullah Omar's order is followed by all, in al-Qaeda and among Punjabis everybody has their own policies. Now in defiance of Mullah Omar they have started taking the baith [pledge of allegiance] to different people. We are not in a position to constantly stay in touch with them and talk to them on all those affairs," Abdullah says.
I switch topics. "Do you think the conflict in Afghanistan will just go on, and that there is no point in talks?"
The Taliban leader looks into my eyes for a while before answering.
"This all comes from real intentions. They want our defeat, not reconciliation. This talks issue is not a new one. The Taliban talked to the Americans, the Saudis and to the Pakistanis even before 9/11. The Taliban wanted to avoid the war [on Afghanistan in 2001] but we felt that the Americans were bent on a war and wanted to dislodge the Taliban government, and they were looking for some excuse.
"They made an issue of Osama bin Laden's presence in Afghanistan and tightened the noose around the Taliban government. We said that Osama bin Laden was just an individual. For argument's sake, say that tomorrow he died. Would the Taliban government then be acceptable to you? The Americans responded with other issues, women's rights and human rights in Afghanistan, as well as education.
"We replied, 'OK, we will work on mechanisms under which we will take steps for women's education and the improvement of human rights.' What then? The Americans raised another issue, about holding elections. At this point we realized the Americans were only concerned about waging war on Afghanistan for whatever reason. Had 9/11 not happened, they would have found any old excuse to wage war," says Abdullah.
He continues, "Even now, if you go through all their arguments concerning talks with the Taliban, their bottom line is 'surrender arms first and then sit at the table for talks'. This is a non-starter. It does not show any serious American intention of talks. Why should we surrender? Recently, they attacked Marjah [in Helmand province in Afghanistan], but within days the Taliban took back control of some areas of Marjah and Nad-e-Ali. There is no intention on their part to initiate talks, so there is no reason for us to start [talks]."
"Not even through Pakistan?"
"If you mean [President] Asif [Ali] Zardari's government. It is impossible that we would talk to it."
"What if the army offers dialogue?"
"So far we have not received any signal that the army wants any dialogue with the Taliban."
I add my observation, "What I gather is that Washington aims through Pakistan to arrest top Taliban leaders and commanders, isolate Mullah Omar and then either force the commanders to change their path or create a situation for Mullah Omar to sit down for talks."
"Those who hatched this plan do not understand the Taliban or Mullah Omar. Whoever among the Taliban is arrested becomes zero. No Talib would listen to his [a captured person's] advice. You know Mullah Omar only interacts with a very few select people. In the last eight years he has not seen his wife or his children or any relative, except if they happen to be a Taliban commander and he meets them in that capacity.
"Once he asked Mullah Baradar to meet him, but Baradar replied that he operated in the field and might one day be arrested, and that would compromise Mullah Omar's position. Remember, nobody can isolate Mullah Omar. Everything in the Taliban starts and ends with Mullah Omar's orders," Abdullah says.
This ends the interview of several hours. I am dropped off on the outskirts of Karachi, left alone at the roadside as the car speeds off into the night to an unknown destination.
Syed Saleem Shahzad is Asia Times Online's Pakistan Bureau Chief. He can be reached at saleem_shahzad2002@yahoo.com This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
By Syed Saleem Shahzad
KARACHI - After an often stormy relationship with the United States over the past 63 years since its independence, Pakistan is in the process of forging an all-embracing strategic relationship with Washington.
A delegation led by Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi is in Washington for meetings at the State Department with a team led by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to discuss matters ranging from the situation in Afghanistan to a civil nuclear deal to commerce and agriculture.
The American military command also specially invited a military contingent, including army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kiani and the director general of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Lieutenant General Ahmad Shuja Pasha. High on their agenda are the recent arrests in Pakistan of senior Taliban officials, including that of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the deputy of Taliban leader Mullah Omar.
Washington and Islamabad will have their own interpretation of their emerging deeper relationship as well as the significance of the arrests: that they will lead to a peace process in which Mullah Omar and al-Qaeda will be isolated and the US will reconcile with moderate Taliban cadre through Pakistan's mediation.
The Taliban, too, have their viewpoint on these unfolding developments. A senior Taliban official contacted Asia Times Online to put their side of the story. The man cannot be identified because the Taliban, since the arrests, are very cautious. For the purposes of this report, the Talib will be called Abdullah.
Rendezvous with the Taliban
The traffic moves slowly on the main arteries of the southern port city of Karachi on weekend evenings as people search out roadside restaurants; their parked cars line the streets, clogging byways that are already overflowing with bustling pedestrians.
All the same, I make it to my appointed meeting place at 9pm. Within a minute a brand-new silver-grey imported Japanese car draws to a halt in front of me. I immediately recognize the man in the front passenger's seat; I interviewed him several years ago. He had a senior position in the Taliban government until it was forced out by the US-led invasion of Afghanistan in late 2001. Abdullah is about 50 years old, but looks much older.
I slip into the back seat behind Abdullah and exchange greetings.
"Against all the odds, given the arrests, we have come to see you," the driver and interlocutor of our meeting tells me. "But we have to follow new arrangements. You will not quote his [Abdullah's] name as since the arrest of Mullah Baradar there have been strict instructions from the ameerul momineen [commander of the faithful - a title the Taliban use for Mullah Omar] to avoid media interviews," the driver says. I have no option but to accept the condition.
The car makes its way through busy roads towards a main northern exit of the city.
"What is your take on the recent arrests of Taliban leaders and commanders?" I say, breaking a heavy silence. We are now cruising past trucks laden with goods destined for northern Pakistan.
"What arrests are you talking about?" Abdullah responds.
"Several people, like Moulvi Abdul Kabir [a former Taliban governor of Nagarhar province in Afghanistan], Mullah Abdul Salam, Mullah Mir Muhammad, Syed Tayyab Agha [Mullah Omar's secretary] and Mullah Mustasim Jan Agha," I say.
"I assure you, 300%, neither Moulvi Abdul Kabir nor Syed Tayyab Agha has been arrested. It was false reporting. Mullah Abdul Salam and Mullah Mir Muhammad were arrested at least a month before Mullah Baradar, but their arrest was shown after Mullah Baradar's. I have not been in direct contact with Mullah Mustasim Jan Agha so I cannot claim with surety about his status, but I was told by his friends that he was not arrested," Abdullah says.
"There are so many conspiracy theories surrounding Mullah Baradar's arrest, what is your understanding. Why was he arrested by Pakistan?"
"Pakistan's compulsions ... the compulsions that are now rising day-by-day," he replies mildly.
By now we were speeding along a main highway, with the city lights fast receding. All of a sudden the driver slows down and turns onto a muddy track. After a short while he draws up at an open-air restaurant frequented mostly by truck drivers. At this time it is not busy and we order a meal of chicken Karahi, a famous Pashtun dish, yogurt, fresh green salad and nan (bread).
"Mullah Baradar's arrest has opened up a Pandora's box of conspiracy theories," I venture. "Some people say he was abandoned by Mullah Omar. Some say he had been talking with the Afghan government and the United Nations and that's why he was disliked by the ISI and was arrested. There is also a theory that through his arrest Pakistan wanted to open communication with the Taliban. What do the Taliban think?"
"Mullah Baradar was part of the Taliban and there was no trust deficit between him and Mullah Omar. However, it is entirely false that he was part of any reconciliation process or that he held any talks with anybody. At the same time, keep in mind that it is a Taliban policy that the minute one of their men is arrested, they abandon all links with him so there is no chance of any communication through him or any other detained leader," Abdullah says.
I interject: "I heard from the Punjabi camp [non-Pashtun militants] as well as from al-Qaeda that Mullah Omar was communicating through Mullah Baradar with [Saudi intelligence chief] Prince Muqrin, who then passed on messages to Washington and the Afghan government. Arsala Rahmani [a former Taliban minister now part of the political process in Kabul] also told me that those talks collapsed only because the Barack Obama administration pushed for a troop surge in Afghanistan."
"There is not a shred of truth in this statement. Neither the Punjabis nor al-Qaeda could know about the Taliban's internal affairs. It is all gossip or their speculation - like the speculation that there were talks in Dubai between Mullah Baradar and Abdul Qayyum [Afghan President Hamid Karzai's brother]. People speculate like this because Karzai and Baradar come from the same tribe [Popalzai Durrani], but it is all speculation. And people like Arsala Rahmani could not be aware of the situation. Whether it is Arsala Rahmani or Abdul Wakeel Mutawakil [a former Taliban minister recently taken off a United Nations list that had banned him from traveling and frozen his assets], the Taliban don't want to keep any contact with them. The Taliban do not even have anything to do with Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef [the Taliban's former ambassador to Pakistan]," says Abdullah.
His comment on Zaeef surprises me. Zaeef was arrested by Pakistan and handed over to the US soon after the Taliban's defeat in Afghanistan in 2001. He spent many years at the US's Guantanamo detention facility in Cuba before being released. He now lives in Kabul but under tight security; officially, he cannot leave the city without informing the local administration. He is widely believed to be an important go-between for the Taliban and the Afghan government. He publicly says he is still loyal to the Taliban.
Abdullah disagrees. "He moves to Saudi Arabia. He goes to Dubai frequently, and you call him a detainee? Mullah Omar sent him a message, telling him to run away and join the resistance. He turned down the order, which means he defied Mullah Omar. We are fully knowledgeable that he is in a position to dodge his security and he could have come to us, but he refused and now he is issuing statements as if he is still a Talib. He is not a Talib. We have nothing to do with him, and neither are we responsible for any of his statements," Abdullah says.
I move the conversation on, asking about supposed talks between the Taliban and the Afghan government.
"I will tell you exactly what happened. You know that the Taliban had close ties with Saudi Arabia, so we received a message from there. Ameerul Momineen [Mullah Omar] sent Syed Tayyab Agha to Saudi Arabia as he is in charge of political affairs. Tayyab Agha met with Prince Muqrin, but you could not call it dialogue for reconciliation," explains Abdullah.
"Prince Muqrin emphasized that there should be a dialogue process between the Afghan government and the Taliban so that foreign forces could leave Afghanistan. Tayyab, on behalf of Mullah Omar, asked Muqrin why Saudi Arabia was interested in such dialogue. Was it because of Osama bin Laden? Muqrin said this was not the case. Then Tayyab asked him whether Saudi Arabia had any particular agenda. He denied this too. Tayyab returned from Saudi Arabia and briefed Mullah Omar. Later, Mullah Omar sent a message to Muqrin, saying that it appeared Saudi Arabia only wanted dialogue with the Taliban on somebody else's behalf. The Taliban do not want to hold such dialogue, so that was the end of the communication," Abdullah says.
"When did Tayyab go to Saudi Arabia?"
"About four to five months ago."
"And nobody spotted Tayyab traveling to Saudi Arabia?"
"Has anybody traced me moving here and there? It is the same with Tayyab."
"But no pictures of you are available. Tayyab's pictures and video footage are available in abundance, especially in the Western media as after 9/11 he delivered dozens of media conferences in Kandahar as the Taliban's spokesperson," I argue.
Abdullah smiles, "While he was in Iran he made a significant change to his appearance. He is completely different from how he appeared in the video footage. He is completely unidentifiable."
"Now you are telling me that Mullah Omar's secretary was in Iran. Did he live there in hiding or was he given shelter by the Iranian government?"
"He was given refuge by the Iranian government in 2002, he lived there for about a year. Even in the past years he has visited Iran occasionally."
"Why did he not go to Pakistan?"
"He feared being arrested because he was close to al-Qaeda."
We fall silent for a while as we enjoy our dinner.
"Do you appreciate that al-Qaeda and the Punjabis carried out attacks on Pakistan's security forces after the arrest of Mullah Baradar?" I ask.
"Saleem! You need to understand that Pakistan arrested Mullah Baradar under compulsion and we have a compulsion as well, that no matter how Pakistan jacks up its actions against us we cannot sanction attacks on Pakistan, or for that matter against any Muslim country. Mullah Omar has many times ordered these people who call themselves the Pakistani Taliban [Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan] or al-Qaeda to stop the attacks in Pakistan and make their focus fighting against NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization in Afghanistan], but these people don't listen," Abdullah says.
"But don't you think that such attacks put pressure on the Pakistani military apparatus and force them to stay neutral?"
"I will put the situation in a different way. Suppose from tomorrow we made our entire focus to attack the Karzai administration and gave up our resistance against foreign troops. What would you think of us? Would the Muslim world consider us a legitimate resistance? These Punjabis and al-Qaeda are obsessed with targeting the Pakistani security forces and their contribution to fighting against NATO is limited."
"But there are several big Punjabi commanders, like Ilyas Kashmiri, in the al-Qaeda camp. Do you question their wisdom as well?"
"There is a weird situation in North Waziristan [tribal area in Pakistan]. If you spend just 20 days there you will talk the way they talk and you will start declaring certain Muslims as heretic and issue decrees of murder and assassination. This is not the Islamic way. The Taliban cannot accept that."
"They have pledged their allegiance to Mullah Omar, even Osama bin Laden and [his deputy] Ayman al-Zawahiri have, then why don't they listen to you?" I ask.
"Neither Osama bin Laden nor Ayman are on the surface. The only person who seems to be in command is Sheikh Saeed [alias Abu Mustafa al-Yazid], but people under him do not listen to him. Al-Qaeda is not a very disciplined body. Unlike the Taliban, where Mullah Omar's order is followed by all, in al-Qaeda and among Punjabis everybody has their own policies. Now in defiance of Mullah Omar they have started taking the baith [pledge of allegiance] to different people. We are not in a position to constantly stay in touch with them and talk to them on all those affairs," Abdullah says.
I switch topics. "Do you think the conflict in Afghanistan will just go on, and that there is no point in talks?"
The Taliban leader looks into my eyes for a while before answering.
"This all comes from real intentions. They want our defeat, not reconciliation. This talks issue is not a new one. The Taliban talked to the Americans, the Saudis and to the Pakistanis even before 9/11. The Taliban wanted to avoid the war [on Afghanistan in 2001] but we felt that the Americans were bent on a war and wanted to dislodge the Taliban government, and they were looking for some excuse.
"They made an issue of Osama bin Laden's presence in Afghanistan and tightened the noose around the Taliban government. We said that Osama bin Laden was just an individual. For argument's sake, say that tomorrow he died. Would the Taliban government then be acceptable to you? The Americans responded with other issues, women's rights and human rights in Afghanistan, as well as education.
"We replied, 'OK, we will work on mechanisms under which we will take steps for women's education and the improvement of human rights.' What then? The Americans raised another issue, about holding elections. At this point we realized the Americans were only concerned about waging war on Afghanistan for whatever reason. Had 9/11 not happened, they would have found any old excuse to wage war," says Abdullah.
He continues, "Even now, if you go through all their arguments concerning talks with the Taliban, their bottom line is 'surrender arms first and then sit at the table for talks'. This is a non-starter. It does not show any serious American intention of talks. Why should we surrender? Recently, they attacked Marjah [in Helmand province in Afghanistan], but within days the Taliban took back control of some areas of Marjah and Nad-e-Ali. There is no intention on their part to initiate talks, so there is no reason for us to start [talks]."
"Not even through Pakistan?"
"If you mean [President] Asif [Ali] Zardari's government. It is impossible that we would talk to it."
"What if the army offers dialogue?"
"So far we have not received any signal that the army wants any dialogue with the Taliban."
I add my observation, "What I gather is that Washington aims through Pakistan to arrest top Taliban leaders and commanders, isolate Mullah Omar and then either force the commanders to change their path or create a situation for Mullah Omar to sit down for talks."
"Those who hatched this plan do not understand the Taliban or Mullah Omar. Whoever among the Taliban is arrested becomes zero. No Talib would listen to his [a captured person's] advice. You know Mullah Omar only interacts with a very few select people. In the last eight years he has not seen his wife or his children or any relative, except if they happen to be a Taliban commander and he meets them in that capacity.
"Once he asked Mullah Baradar to meet him, but Baradar replied that he operated in the field and might one day be arrested, and that would compromise Mullah Omar's position. Remember, nobody can isolate Mullah Omar. Everything in the Taliban starts and ends with Mullah Omar's orders," Abdullah says.
This ends the interview of several hours. I am dropped off on the outskirts of Karachi, left alone at the roadside as the car speeds off into the night to an unknown destination.
Syed Saleem Shahzad is Asia Times Online's Pakistan Bureau Chief. He can be reached at saleem_shahzad2002@yahoo.com This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Israel 'to defy Barack Obama' over settlements
Telegraph
Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, will convene an emergency session of his cabinet on Friday amid signs that the Jewish state was strengthening its defiance of the United States.
By Adrian Blomfield in Jerusalem
Mr Netanyahu and his ministers will discuss a series of demands made by President Barack Obama to end a damaging row over Jewish building in east Jerusalem.
There was no word on what response the inner cabinet would formulate but there seemed to be little prospect of a resolution to the stand-off -- indeed, there were signs that relations between the United States and Israel, already at their most strained in many years, were deteriorating ever more rapidly.
Far from signalling their willingness to accommodate Mr Obama's chief concerns, senior members of Mr Netanyahu's Right-wing coalition indicated their determination to press ahead with settlement construction in parts of Jerusalem that Israel annexed after the 1967 Six-Day war.
"I thank God that I have been given the opportunity to be the minister who approves the construction of thousands of housing units in Jerusalem," Eli Yishai, Israel's hawkish interior minister, said ahead of the cabinet meeting.
Mr Netanyahu was subjected to a humiliating dressing-down at the White House on Tuesday during which Mr Obama reportedly presented him with a list of 13 demands the United States wanted fulfilled in order to end the crisis.
As he flew back to Israel on Thursday, Mr Netanhayu tried to sound upbeat.
"I think we have found the golden path between Israel's traditional policies and our desire to move forward to peace," he told reporters.
Yet, while Mr Netanyahu is likely to agree to make some "confidence building" gestures towards the Palestinians, a gulf remained on the key issue dividing Israel and the United States: Jewish construction in east Jerusalem.
White House officials acknowledged continuing "disagreements" between President Obama and Mr Netanyahu. Shimon Peres, the Israeli president, was blunter, saying that the prime minister had failed "to reach an understanding with the United States".
Mr Netanyahu's ministers urged him to stand firm by rejecting US calls to reverse the construction of 1,600 new homes in east Jerusalem's Ramat Shlomo settlement, the announcement of which triggered the row.
"If we blink now, we will lose everything, and when that happens the government will collapse," said Silvan Shalom, one of Israel's deputy prime ministers.
Were Mr Netanyahu to agree to halt Jewish building in east Jerusalem, seen by Palestinians as their future capital, there is a risk that at least one of the more radical parties in his Right-wing coalition could withdraw.
While aware of such a possibility, Mr Obama is understood to have told the prime minister that he can either choose to ingratiate himself with his coalition partners or commit to serious peace talks by accepting his demands.
The Palestinian leadership has indicated its unwillingness to join indirect peace talks unless settlement construction in the West Bank and East Jerusalem is fully frozen, a step it says Israel is obliged to make under commitments made during previous negotiations.
The centrist Kadima party, which won the most seats in last year's general election, yesterday offered to join the ruling coalition should one its pro-settlement rivals pull out.
For the moment, at least, Mr Netanyahu has shown no inclination to modify his government and many members of his Likud party will bitterly oppose bringing Kadima into the coalition.
Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, will convene an emergency session of his cabinet on Friday amid signs that the Jewish state was strengthening its defiance of the United States.
By Adrian Blomfield in Jerusalem
Mr Netanyahu and his ministers will discuss a series of demands made by President Barack Obama to end a damaging row over Jewish building in east Jerusalem.
There was no word on what response the inner cabinet would formulate but there seemed to be little prospect of a resolution to the stand-off -- indeed, there were signs that relations between the United States and Israel, already at their most strained in many years, were deteriorating ever more rapidly.
Far from signalling their willingness to accommodate Mr Obama's chief concerns, senior members of Mr Netanyahu's Right-wing coalition indicated their determination to press ahead with settlement construction in parts of Jerusalem that Israel annexed after the 1967 Six-Day war.
"I thank God that I have been given the opportunity to be the minister who approves the construction of thousands of housing units in Jerusalem," Eli Yishai, Israel's hawkish interior minister, said ahead of the cabinet meeting.
Mr Netanyahu was subjected to a humiliating dressing-down at the White House on Tuesday during which Mr Obama reportedly presented him with a list of 13 demands the United States wanted fulfilled in order to end the crisis.
As he flew back to Israel on Thursday, Mr Netanhayu tried to sound upbeat.
"I think we have found the golden path between Israel's traditional policies and our desire to move forward to peace," he told reporters.
Yet, while Mr Netanyahu is likely to agree to make some "confidence building" gestures towards the Palestinians, a gulf remained on the key issue dividing Israel and the United States: Jewish construction in east Jerusalem.
White House officials acknowledged continuing "disagreements" between President Obama and Mr Netanyahu. Shimon Peres, the Israeli president, was blunter, saying that the prime minister had failed "to reach an understanding with the United States".
Mr Netanyahu's ministers urged him to stand firm by rejecting US calls to reverse the construction of 1,600 new homes in east Jerusalem's Ramat Shlomo settlement, the announcement of which triggered the row.
"If we blink now, we will lose everything, and when that happens the government will collapse," said Silvan Shalom, one of Israel's deputy prime ministers.
Were Mr Netanyahu to agree to halt Jewish building in east Jerusalem, seen by Palestinians as their future capital, there is a risk that at least one of the more radical parties in his Right-wing coalition could withdraw.
While aware of such a possibility, Mr Obama is understood to have told the prime minister that he can either choose to ingratiate himself with his coalition partners or commit to serious peace talks by accepting his demands.
The Palestinian leadership has indicated its unwillingness to join indirect peace talks unless settlement construction in the West Bank and East Jerusalem is fully frozen, a step it says Israel is obliged to make under commitments made during previous negotiations.
The centrist Kadima party, which won the most seats in last year's general election, yesterday offered to join the ruling coalition should one its pro-settlement rivals pull out.
For the moment, at least, Mr Netanyahu has shown no inclination to modify his government and many members of his Likud party will bitterly oppose bringing Kadima into the coalition.
Israel 'to defy Barack Obama' over settlements
Telegraph
Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, will convene an emergency session of his cabinet on Friday amid signs that the Jewish state was strengthening its defiance of the United States.
By Adrian Blomfield in Jerusalem
Mr Netanyahu and his ministers will discuss a series of demands made by President Barack Obama to end a damaging row over Jewish building in east Jerusalem.
There was no word on what response the inner cabinet would formulate but there seemed to be little prospect of a resolution to the stand-off -- indeed, there were signs that relations between the United States and Israel, already at their most strained in many years, were deteriorating ever more rapidly.
Far from signalling their willingness to accommodate Mr Obama's chief concerns, senior members of Mr Netanyahu's Right-wing coalition indicated their determination to press ahead with settlement construction in parts of Jerusalem that Israel annexed after the 1967 Six-Day war.
"I thank God that I have been given the opportunity to be the minister who approves the construction of thousands of housing units in Jerusalem," Eli Yishai, Israel's hawkish interior minister, said ahead of the cabinet meeting.
Mr Netanyahu was subjected to a humiliating dressing-down at the White House on Tuesday during which Mr Obama reportedly presented him with a list of 13 demands the United States wanted fulfilled in order to end the crisis.
As he flew back to Israel on Thursday, Mr Netanhayu tried to sound upbeat.
"I think we have found the golden path between Israel's traditional policies and our desire to move forward to peace," he told reporters.
Yet, while Mr Netanyahu is likely to agree to make some "confidence building" gestures towards the Palestinians, a gulf remained on the key issue dividing Israel and the United States: Jewish construction in east Jerusalem.
White House officials acknowledged continuing "disagreements" between President Obama and Mr Netanyahu. Shimon Peres, the Israeli president, was blunter, saying that the prime minister had failed "to reach an understanding with the United States".
Mr Netanyahu's ministers urged him to stand firm by rejecting US calls to reverse the construction of 1,600 new homes in east Jerusalem's Ramat Shlomo settlement, the announcement of which triggered the row.
"If we blink now, we will lose everything, and when that happens the government will collapse," said Silvan Shalom, one of Israel's deputy prime ministers.
Were Mr Netanyahu to agree to halt Jewish building in east Jerusalem, seen by Palestinians as their future capital, there is a risk that at least one of the more radical parties in his Right-wing coalition could withdraw.
While aware of such a possibility, Mr Obama is understood to have told the prime minister that he can either choose to ingratiate himself with his coalition partners or commit to serious peace talks by accepting his demands.
The Palestinian leadership has indicated its unwillingness to join indirect peace talks unless settlement construction in the West Bank and East Jerusalem is fully frozen, a step it says Israel is obliged to make under commitments made during previous negotiations.
The centrist Kadima party, which won the most seats in last year's general election, yesterday offered to join the ruling coalition should one its pro-settlement rivals pull out.
For the moment, at least, Mr Netanyahu has shown no inclination to modify his government and many members of his Likud party will bitterly oppose bringing Kadima into the coalition.
Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, will convene an emergency session of his cabinet on Friday amid signs that the Jewish state was strengthening its defiance of the United States.
By Adrian Blomfield in Jerusalem
Mr Netanyahu and his ministers will discuss a series of demands made by President Barack Obama to end a damaging row over Jewish building in east Jerusalem.
There was no word on what response the inner cabinet would formulate but there seemed to be little prospect of a resolution to the stand-off -- indeed, there were signs that relations between the United States and Israel, already at their most strained in many years, were deteriorating ever more rapidly.
Far from signalling their willingness to accommodate Mr Obama's chief concerns, senior members of Mr Netanyahu's Right-wing coalition indicated their determination to press ahead with settlement construction in parts of Jerusalem that Israel annexed after the 1967 Six-Day war.
"I thank God that I have been given the opportunity to be the minister who approves the construction of thousands of housing units in Jerusalem," Eli Yishai, Israel's hawkish interior minister, said ahead of the cabinet meeting.
Mr Netanyahu was subjected to a humiliating dressing-down at the White House on Tuesday during which Mr Obama reportedly presented him with a list of 13 demands the United States wanted fulfilled in order to end the crisis.
As he flew back to Israel on Thursday, Mr Netanhayu tried to sound upbeat.
"I think we have found the golden path between Israel's traditional policies and our desire to move forward to peace," he told reporters.
Yet, while Mr Netanyahu is likely to agree to make some "confidence building" gestures towards the Palestinians, a gulf remained on the key issue dividing Israel and the United States: Jewish construction in east Jerusalem.
White House officials acknowledged continuing "disagreements" between President Obama and Mr Netanyahu. Shimon Peres, the Israeli president, was blunter, saying that the prime minister had failed "to reach an understanding with the United States".
Mr Netanyahu's ministers urged him to stand firm by rejecting US calls to reverse the construction of 1,600 new homes in east Jerusalem's Ramat Shlomo settlement, the announcement of which triggered the row.
"If we blink now, we will lose everything, and when that happens the government will collapse," said Silvan Shalom, one of Israel's deputy prime ministers.
Were Mr Netanyahu to agree to halt Jewish building in east Jerusalem, seen by Palestinians as their future capital, there is a risk that at least one of the more radical parties in his Right-wing coalition could withdraw.
While aware of such a possibility, Mr Obama is understood to have told the prime minister that he can either choose to ingratiate himself with his coalition partners or commit to serious peace talks by accepting his demands.
The Palestinian leadership has indicated its unwillingness to join indirect peace talks unless settlement construction in the West Bank and East Jerusalem is fully frozen, a step it says Israel is obliged to make under commitments made during previous negotiations.
The centrist Kadima party, which won the most seats in last year's general election, yesterday offered to join the ruling coalition should one its pro-settlement rivals pull out.
For the moment, at least, Mr Netanyahu has shown no inclination to modify his government and many members of his Likud party will bitterly oppose bringing Kadima into the coalition.
Iraqi tension rises as poll candidates dispute result on eve of election
Guardian
• Winner faces tough battle to claim mandate to rule
• Election chief says only two seats divide parties
Martin Chulov in Baghdad
After three laborious weeks of counting and foreboding rhetoric, Iraq finally faces its electoral day of reckoning on Friday night, with a result expected in a national poll that is tipped to spark renewed instability on the eve of the planned US withdrawal.
Both key players in the agonisingly close 7 March poll have vowed not to accept the result if they lose, in a clear sign that the winner faces a tough battle to claim a mandate to rule Iraq, which remains deeply divided, despite parts of its war-weary society now starting to function again.
The prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, this week invoked his role as commander in chief of the Iraqi military in a statement condemning the manner in which the 13 million votes cast were counted by officials. His ominous calls for a recount have raised fears that fragile security gains could rapidly unravel. A key Maliki loyalist, Sami al-Askari, said the prime minister would not urge a violent uprising if he loses the vote to his secular rival, Iyad Allawi, but warned that events may spiral beyond his control.
"My fear is that things may go beyond Maliki's control," said Askari. "We have heard from about seven to nine provinces in the south and they are calling us all the time asking what to do, shall they return to the streets, or not.
"My problem is that I cannot tell them to calm down and it will all be OK, because I genuinely believe that there was corruption [in the vote counting process] and we have evidence that this happened."
Allawi's Iraqiya coalition raised similar claims earlier in the counting process. But Allawi, a former prime minister, has shifted position as results have increasingly shown that he is within striking distance of returning to the job he held for nine turbulent months before being ousted in early 2005 as Iraq began to slide towards anarchy.
Allawi is thought to have won at least 91 seats in the 325-seat parliament, largely on the back of strong support from Sunni provinces, which strongly supported prominent Sunni candidates on the Iraqiya party's list.
Maliki's State of Law list also polled well, securing at least 90 seats. But it has not scored the clear victory predicted before the voting. With 95% of the votes counted, the two rivals were separated by a mere 11,000 votes. "The difference between the leader and the second place will be one to two seats," the head of the Independent High Electoral Commission, Faraj al-Haidari, told the Associated Press, though he would not say who was ahead.
Maliki's demand for a manual recount has been firmly rebuffed by the electoral commission, as have claims that some commission employees have fiddled the figures to favour Allawi.
Whoever emerges triumphant when the result is declared will in effect be able to claim a moral victory only, then face the arduous task of trying to form a government. The winner will not necessarily have a claim on the prime minister's office.
"If Maliki wins, he isn't guaranteed to return to his job," said Askari. "And if Allawi wins, he is no certainty to be prime minister - far from it. The mechanism for forming the government is difficult and very complicated."
American officials in Baghdad downplayed the suggestion that the counting process had been compromised, saying the claims were largely political posturing.
The US embassy and military, which will advise President Barack Obama within weeks whether pre-set criteria for a mass withdrawal of American troop have been met, also believe that Maliki's warnings do not amount to a call to arms.
"There is nothing that I have heard that would give rise to concerns about a peaceful transition of power," said a senior American official. "I am sensing no panic and no crisis."
Interest in the result is also strong elsewhere in the region, with neighbouring Iran strongly backing the eventual formation of a government led by a Shia strongman such as Maliki. Officials in Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, have expressed satisfaction about the strong showing of Allawi, which is likely to rejuvenate the political voice of Iraq's minority Sunnis, who have lost status since the downfall of Saddam Hussein from power seven years ago.
However, Allawi faces a difficult battle to translate his success into power, primarily because many of his supporters are Sunnis. Saddam's fall recast Iraq's electoral landscape to reflect traditional sectarian demographics, which show Shias comprise around 60% of the population.
"This is a problem for him [Allawi]," said another Maliki supporter and leading politician, Haider al-Abadi. "He came on a majority Sunni vote."
• Winner faces tough battle to claim mandate to rule
• Election chief says only two seats divide parties
Martin Chulov in Baghdad
After three laborious weeks of counting and foreboding rhetoric, Iraq finally faces its electoral day of reckoning on Friday night, with a result expected in a national poll that is tipped to spark renewed instability on the eve of the planned US withdrawal.
Both key players in the agonisingly close 7 March poll have vowed not to accept the result if they lose, in a clear sign that the winner faces a tough battle to claim a mandate to rule Iraq, which remains deeply divided, despite parts of its war-weary society now starting to function again.
The prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, this week invoked his role as commander in chief of the Iraqi military in a statement condemning the manner in which the 13 million votes cast were counted by officials. His ominous calls for a recount have raised fears that fragile security gains could rapidly unravel. A key Maliki loyalist, Sami al-Askari, said the prime minister would not urge a violent uprising if he loses the vote to his secular rival, Iyad Allawi, but warned that events may spiral beyond his control.
"My fear is that things may go beyond Maliki's control," said Askari. "We have heard from about seven to nine provinces in the south and they are calling us all the time asking what to do, shall they return to the streets, or not.
"My problem is that I cannot tell them to calm down and it will all be OK, because I genuinely believe that there was corruption [in the vote counting process] and we have evidence that this happened."
Allawi's Iraqiya coalition raised similar claims earlier in the counting process. But Allawi, a former prime minister, has shifted position as results have increasingly shown that he is within striking distance of returning to the job he held for nine turbulent months before being ousted in early 2005 as Iraq began to slide towards anarchy.
Allawi is thought to have won at least 91 seats in the 325-seat parliament, largely on the back of strong support from Sunni provinces, which strongly supported prominent Sunni candidates on the Iraqiya party's list.
Maliki's State of Law list also polled well, securing at least 90 seats. But it has not scored the clear victory predicted before the voting. With 95% of the votes counted, the two rivals were separated by a mere 11,000 votes. "The difference between the leader and the second place will be one to two seats," the head of the Independent High Electoral Commission, Faraj al-Haidari, told the Associated Press, though he would not say who was ahead.
Maliki's demand for a manual recount has been firmly rebuffed by the electoral commission, as have claims that some commission employees have fiddled the figures to favour Allawi.
Whoever emerges triumphant when the result is declared will in effect be able to claim a moral victory only, then face the arduous task of trying to form a government. The winner will not necessarily have a claim on the prime minister's office.
"If Maliki wins, he isn't guaranteed to return to his job," said Askari. "And if Allawi wins, he is no certainty to be prime minister - far from it. The mechanism for forming the government is difficult and very complicated."
American officials in Baghdad downplayed the suggestion that the counting process had been compromised, saying the claims were largely political posturing.
The US embassy and military, which will advise President Barack Obama within weeks whether pre-set criteria for a mass withdrawal of American troop have been met, also believe that Maliki's warnings do not amount to a call to arms.
"There is nothing that I have heard that would give rise to concerns about a peaceful transition of power," said a senior American official. "I am sensing no panic and no crisis."
Interest in the result is also strong elsewhere in the region, with neighbouring Iran strongly backing the eventual formation of a government led by a Shia strongman such as Maliki. Officials in Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, have expressed satisfaction about the strong showing of Allawi, which is likely to rejuvenate the political voice of Iraq's minority Sunnis, who have lost status since the downfall of Saddam Hussein from power seven years ago.
However, Allawi faces a difficult battle to translate his success into power, primarily because many of his supporters are Sunnis. Saddam's fall recast Iraq's electoral landscape to reflect traditional sectarian demographics, which show Shias comprise around 60% of the population.
"This is a problem for him [Allawi]," said another Maliki supporter and leading politician, Haider al-Abadi. "He came on a majority Sunni vote."
Despite 'row,' US seals military deal with Israel
Press TV
The US gives written consent to generously boost the Israeli military despite Washington's alleged dissatisfaction with Israeli settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territories.
Upon agreeing on a relevant deal, the United States agreed to hand over roughly 250-million-dollars worth of Hercules C-130J aircraft to the Israeli army, the Israeli Haaretz newspaper said on Thursday.
Later in the day, the US Defense Department is to issue a formal announcement on the deal, which is to be financed by the American foreign assistance funds.
The aircraft have been custom made to suit the Israeli needs, the daily added.
Washington is rated as Tel Aviv's biggest arms supplier and has been reportedly injecting 2-billion-dollars worth of armaments into the Israel's defense industry annually.
The two sides are, meanwhile, carving out a deal which ensures Tel Aviv obtains F-35 stealth fighter jets.
Reports of Washington's still-significant military support for Tel Aviv run counter to an alleged dispute between the two sides over Israel's announcement that it would build a 1,600-unit settlement in the occupied East Jerusalem (al-Quds).
The US gives written consent to generously boost the Israeli military despite Washington's alleged dissatisfaction with Israeli settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territories.
Upon agreeing on a relevant deal, the United States agreed to hand over roughly 250-million-dollars worth of Hercules C-130J aircraft to the Israeli army, the Israeli Haaretz newspaper said on Thursday.
Later in the day, the US Defense Department is to issue a formal announcement on the deal, which is to be financed by the American foreign assistance funds.
The aircraft have been custom made to suit the Israeli needs, the daily added.
Washington is rated as Tel Aviv's biggest arms supplier and has been reportedly injecting 2-billion-dollars worth of armaments into the Israel's defense industry annually.
The two sides are, meanwhile, carving out a deal which ensures Tel Aviv obtains F-35 stealth fighter jets.
Reports of Washington's still-significant military support for Tel Aviv run counter to an alleged dispute between the two sides over Israel's announcement that it would build a 1,600-unit settlement in the occupied East Jerusalem (al-Quds).
Sri Lanka arrests Muslim convert
BBC News
A Sri Lankan woman who converted from Buddhism to Islam has been arrested by the authorities on suspicion of anti-state activities.
The woman, who is resident in the Gulf state of Bahrain, had recently written two books about her conversion.
They were written in Sinhala, the language of Sri Lanka's ethnic majority, who are mostly Buddhists.
She was on holiday in Sri Lanka when she was detained and is now being held in a police station.
The national police spokesman told the BBC he believed there were allegations that she was involved in anti-government or anti-state activities.
He did not know the details but remarked that although her name was Sinhalese, she was acting and wearing clothes in the manner of a Muslim woman.
Unconfirmed reports say that family members have tried to send lawyers but they have not been able to take the case to court - and that she has been detained under emergency laws.
The police spokesman told the BBC's Sinhala service that he did not have enough details to comment on the allegations. The police at the local police station where she is held have refused to comment on the case.
Books published
A report in the Bahrain-based Gulf Daily News named her as Sarah Malanie Perera and said she had lived in the Gulf state since the mid-80s.
But it said she converted to Islam in 1999 and that her parents and sisters also made the conversion.
The newspaper quoted her sister, also a Bahrain resident, as saying she was apprehended while trying to send books out of Sri Lanka through freight. A member of staff was linked to a Buddhist nationalist party and reported the book to police.
A member of the Muslim community in Sri Lanka said that Ms Perera had no pre-existing connection with Sri Lankan Muslims and the local community had nothing to do with the book over whose contents she was arrested.
He said she had been under arrest since Monday and had not yet been produced in court.
The BBC's Charles Haviland in Colombo says that Buddhist nationalism is currently an influential force in Sri Lanka and the party in question is part of the government coalition.
Sri Lankan Muslims are regarded as the third ethnic group in Sri Lanka occupy a respected and prominent position in society. But accounts of conversions from Buddhism to Islam are rare.
A Sri Lankan woman who converted from Buddhism to Islam has been arrested by the authorities on suspicion of anti-state activities.
The woman, who is resident in the Gulf state of Bahrain, had recently written two books about her conversion.
They were written in Sinhala, the language of Sri Lanka's ethnic majority, who are mostly Buddhists.
She was on holiday in Sri Lanka when she was detained and is now being held in a police station.
The national police spokesman told the BBC he believed there were allegations that she was involved in anti-government or anti-state activities.
He did not know the details but remarked that although her name was Sinhalese, she was acting and wearing clothes in the manner of a Muslim woman.
Unconfirmed reports say that family members have tried to send lawyers but they have not been able to take the case to court - and that she has been detained under emergency laws.
The police spokesman told the BBC's Sinhala service that he did not have enough details to comment on the allegations. The police at the local police station where she is held have refused to comment on the case.
Books published
A report in the Bahrain-based Gulf Daily News named her as Sarah Malanie Perera and said she had lived in the Gulf state since the mid-80s.
But it said she converted to Islam in 1999 and that her parents and sisters also made the conversion.
The newspaper quoted her sister, also a Bahrain resident, as saying she was apprehended while trying to send books out of Sri Lanka through freight. A member of staff was linked to a Buddhist nationalist party and reported the book to police.
A member of the Muslim community in Sri Lanka said that Ms Perera had no pre-existing connection with Sri Lankan Muslims and the local community had nothing to do with the book over whose contents she was arrested.
He said she had been under arrest since Monday and had not yet been produced in court.
The BBC's Charles Haviland in Colombo says that Buddhist nationalism is currently an influential force in Sri Lanka and the party in question is part of the government coalition.
Sri Lankan Muslims are regarded as the third ethnic group in Sri Lanka occupy a respected and prominent position in society. But accounts of conversions from Buddhism to Islam are rare.
Monday, March 22, 2010
West Bank town mourns youths killed by Israel
News Watch
Iraq Burin residents protest continued settler efforts to take over land. Har Bracha settlers: Urgent to expand as much as possible Mourners grieving the loss of two Palestinian teenagers killed by Israeli forces this weekend directed their anger on Sunday at Jewish settlers living on occupied land next to their village in the West Bank.
Several thousand people turned out for the funerals of Mohammed Kaddous, 16, and Osaid Kaddous, 17, who were shot by Israeli forces on Saturday in the village of Iraq Burin, which has been occupied by Israel for 42 years.
Teacher Fathi Faqih remembered Mohammed Kaddous as his best student. "He dreamt of being an engineer or doctor. It's a loss for Iraq Burin and Palestine," he said.
The Israeli army said it was firing only rubber bullets at a crowd throwing stones and denied troops used live ammunition. Palestinian doctors who treated the two showed a Reuters journalist images which they said proved live rounds had been used.
Iraq Burin is one of a growing number of places where Palestinians protest regularly against Jewish colonisation of occupied land. Locals call it "popular resistance". They often throw rocks and sometimes petrol bombs, but rarely use guns.
The Palestinians of Iraq Burin focus their anger at the nearby settlement of Har Bracha (Mount of Blessing), one of more than 100 settlements across the West Bank.
"The aim of the settlers is to get our land," said Abdel Rahim Kaddous, head of the village council, who like many villagers shares the same family name. "They want to take more of our land. The army protects them. They exploit this".
'We will continue to resist'
One youth at the funeral said the village would continue its struggle. He would not give his name for fear of arrest: "The settlers come to take our land," he said. "We won't let them. We will continue to resist and to push them out."
On the website of Har Bracha, the settlers, who say they number 90 families, explain their attachment to living in a spot with biblical significance for Jews and their fears that Israel may withdraw from territory that has not been built on by Jews: "It is urgent for us to expand as much as possible," they say.
The international community says the settlements are illegal and pose an obstacle to peace by stunting the viability of a future Palestinian state.
Witnesses said Mohammed and Osaid Kaddous, who were not directly related, had not taken part in Saturday's protest. They had just returned from Nablus when they were hit by what Palestinian medics say were live bullets.
The Israeli army denied that: "Live fire was not used. The Palestinians were hurt by rubber bullets used during the riot."
It said the Palestinians had incited a confrontation and dozens of them had attacked security forces by throwing stones.
Mohammed and Osaid Kaddous were the first Palestinians to die as a result of the recent wave of protests that has swept both the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
The bodies, wrapped in Palestinian flags, were carried through the village before burial on Sunday. Mourners declared them martyrs and chanted defiant slogans against Israel.
Ynet News
Iraq Burin residents protest continued settler efforts to take over land. Har Bracha settlers: Urgent to expand as much as possible Mourners grieving the loss of two Palestinian teenagers killed by Israeli forces this weekend directed their anger on Sunday at Jewish settlers living on occupied land next to their village in the West Bank.
Several thousand people turned out for the funerals of Mohammed Kaddous, 16, and Osaid Kaddous, 17, who were shot by Israeli forces on Saturday in the village of Iraq Burin, which has been occupied by Israel for 42 years.
Teacher Fathi Faqih remembered Mohammed Kaddous as his best student. "He dreamt of being an engineer or doctor. It's a loss for Iraq Burin and Palestine," he said.
The Israeli army said it was firing only rubber bullets at a crowd throwing stones and denied troops used live ammunition. Palestinian doctors who treated the two showed a Reuters journalist images which they said proved live rounds had been used.
Iraq Burin is one of a growing number of places where Palestinians protest regularly against Jewish colonisation of occupied land. Locals call it "popular resistance". They often throw rocks and sometimes petrol bombs, but rarely use guns.
The Palestinians of Iraq Burin focus their anger at the nearby settlement of Har Bracha (Mount of Blessing), one of more than 100 settlements across the West Bank.
"The aim of the settlers is to get our land," said Abdel Rahim Kaddous, head of the village council, who like many villagers shares the same family name. "They want to take more of our land. The army protects them. They exploit this".
'We will continue to resist'
One youth at the funeral said the village would continue its struggle. He would not give his name for fear of arrest: "The settlers come to take our land," he said. "We won't let them. We will continue to resist and to push them out."
On the website of Har Bracha, the settlers, who say they number 90 families, explain their attachment to living in a spot with biblical significance for Jews and their fears that Israel may withdraw from territory that has not been built on by Jews: "It is urgent for us to expand as much as possible," they say.
The international community says the settlements are illegal and pose an obstacle to peace by stunting the viability of a future Palestinian state.
Witnesses said Mohammed and Osaid Kaddous, who were not directly related, had not taken part in Saturday's protest. They had just returned from Nablus when they were hit by what Palestinian medics say were live bullets.
The Israeli army denied that: "Live fire was not used. The Palestinians were hurt by rubber bullets used during the riot."
It said the Palestinians had incited a confrontation and dozens of them had attacked security forces by throwing stones.
Mohammed and Osaid Kaddous were the first Palestinians to die as a result of the recent wave of protests that has swept both the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
The bodies, wrapped in Palestinian flags, were carried through the village before burial on Sunday. Mourners declared them martyrs and chanted defiant slogans against Israel.
Ynet News
Egypt's Mubarak appoints new al-Azhar head
News Watch
CAIRO (Reuters) - Egypt's president has appointed Sheikh Ahmed El-Tayeb as the head of al-Azhar, Egypt's most prestigious seat of Islamic learning, the state news agency said on Friday, nine days after the former head died in Saudi Arabia. President Hosni Mubarak, 81, is in Germany, recovering from gall bladder surgery he had two weeks ago, and has handed presidential power to Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif.
Officials from Al-Azhar were not immediately available for comment.
Al-Azhar, which runs schools, universities and other educational institutions across Egypt and sends scholars to teach in countries across the Muslim world, receives most of its funding from the state.
Reuters
CAIRO (Reuters) - Egypt's president has appointed Sheikh Ahmed El-Tayeb as the head of al-Azhar, Egypt's most prestigious seat of Islamic learning, the state news agency said on Friday, nine days after the former head died in Saudi Arabia. President Hosni Mubarak, 81, is in Germany, recovering from gall bladder surgery he had two weeks ago, and has handed presidential power to Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif.
Officials from Al-Azhar were not immediately available for comment.
Al-Azhar, which runs schools, universities and other educational institutions across Egypt and sends scholars to teach in countries across the Muslim world, receives most of its funding from the state.
Reuters
Iran's supreme leader rejects US engagement call
Al-Arabiya
TEHRAN (Agencies)
Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei On Sunday rejected a U.S. call for engagement and full diplomatic relations saying Washington's actions were opposite to its call for dialogue.
"The new administration and president claimed interest in just and fair relations, they wrote letters and sent messages ... saying they are willing to normalize relations with the Islamic republic but in practice they did the opposite," he said in an address in the holy city of Mashhad on the occasion of the Iranian new year. It was carried by state television.
" If they were able to do it, the U.S. and Zionist regime would have sent troops to Tehran's streets, but they knew it would hurt them. Thus they spread propaganda and supported the rioters "
Iran supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei Khamenei added that the "enemies" of the Islamic republic had plans to start "civil war" after last June's elections.
Blaming the United States and Israel for much of the unrest after the presidential election, Khamenei said: "The enemies wanted to divide the people... and to create a civil war, but the nation was alert.
"If they were able to do it, the U.S. and Zionist regime would have sent troops to Tehran's streets, but they knew it would hurt them. Thus they spread propaganda and supported the rioters."
Iran was plunged into one of its worst political crises after the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in a vote his rivals claim was massively rigged.
TEHRAN (Agencies)
Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei On Sunday rejected a U.S. call for engagement and full diplomatic relations saying Washington's actions were opposite to its call for dialogue.
"The new administration and president claimed interest in just and fair relations, they wrote letters and sent messages ... saying they are willing to normalize relations with the Islamic republic but in practice they did the opposite," he said in an address in the holy city of Mashhad on the occasion of the Iranian new year. It was carried by state television.
" If they were able to do it, the U.S. and Zionist regime would have sent troops to Tehran's streets, but they knew it would hurt them. Thus they spread propaganda and supported the rioters "
Iran supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei Khamenei added that the "enemies" of the Islamic republic had plans to start "civil war" after last June's elections.
Blaming the United States and Israel for much of the unrest after the presidential election, Khamenei said: "The enemies wanted to divide the people... and to create a civil war, but the nation was alert.
"If they were able to do it, the U.S. and Zionist regime would have sent troops to Tehran's streets, but they knew it would hurt them. Thus they spread propaganda and supported the rioters."
Iran was plunged into one of its worst political crises after the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in a vote his rivals claim was massively rigged.
Israelis want MBC shut down over Turkish series
Al-Arabiya
DUBAI (Al Arabiya)
Israelis demanded on Sunday through comments posted on Israeli newspaper websites that MBC1 channel programming be shut down in their country, following the television's announcement that it would air a Turkish TV series that caused a diplomatic spat between Israel and Turkey.
Relationships between Turkey and Israel fell to a serious diplomatic crisis in October 2009 after Turkey's TRT1 state-sponsored channel aired the prime-time TV series Ayrilik (Farewell). The series depicts fictional Israeli characters killing Palestinian children and abusing elderly Arabs.
Several scenes in the series depict the IDF using firearms against unarmed Palestinians whose only weapon is rocks. A soldier is seen kicking the body of a dead Palestinian boy while his mother runs towards him in tears. Another soldier shoots a Palestinian girl who is seen smiling right before she receives a bullet in her.
Israeli Foreign Minister Daniel Ayalon summoned the Turkish ambassador and deliberately humiliated by making him sit on a lower chair, an incident which led Turkey to demand and receive an official apology from Israel.
Yediot Aharonot newspaper published Saturday an article reporting that MBC would soon begin broadcasting the controversial TV show, prompting many of its readers to call for the Arab channel to be shut down in Israel.
The paper reported that Israel had condemned the broadcasting of the series in Turkey and said it incited "hatred against Israel" and was "not worthy of being broadcast even in an enemy state."
Director of Marketing in MBC Group Mazen Hayek said that the Arab TV network would not give in to any pressure and cancel or stop broadcasting the series. He said MBC group was committed to its programming coverage, important to the general public in the region and around the world, reported Palestinian MAAN news agency.
Ayrilik (Farewell) Series is broadcast daily on MBC1 from Saturday to Wednesday at 1 p.m. GMT
DUBAI (Al Arabiya)
Israelis demanded on Sunday through comments posted on Israeli newspaper websites that MBC1 channel programming be shut down in their country, following the television's announcement that it would air a Turkish TV series that caused a diplomatic spat between Israel and Turkey.
Relationships between Turkey and Israel fell to a serious diplomatic crisis in October 2009 after Turkey's TRT1 state-sponsored channel aired the prime-time TV series Ayrilik (Farewell). The series depicts fictional Israeli characters killing Palestinian children and abusing elderly Arabs.
Several scenes in the series depict the IDF using firearms against unarmed Palestinians whose only weapon is rocks. A soldier is seen kicking the body of a dead Palestinian boy while his mother runs towards him in tears. Another soldier shoots a Palestinian girl who is seen smiling right before she receives a bullet in her.
Israeli Foreign Minister Daniel Ayalon summoned the Turkish ambassador and deliberately humiliated by making him sit on a lower chair, an incident which led Turkey to demand and receive an official apology from Israel.
Yediot Aharonot newspaper published Saturday an article reporting that MBC would soon begin broadcasting the controversial TV show, prompting many of its readers to call for the Arab channel to be shut down in Israel.
The paper reported that Israel had condemned the broadcasting of the series in Turkey and said it incited "hatred against Israel" and was "not worthy of being broadcast even in an enemy state."
Director of Marketing in MBC Group Mazen Hayek said that the Arab TV network would not give in to any pressure and cancel or stop broadcasting the series. He said MBC group was committed to its programming coverage, important to the general public in the region and around the world, reported Palestinian MAAN news agency.
Ayrilik (Farewell) Series is broadcast daily on MBC1 from Saturday to Wednesday at 1 p.m. GMT
Drubbing for the right as France loses faith in Nicolas Sarkozy
Guardian
Socialists and allies scoop 54% of vote, say pollsters, but left fails to pull off 'grand slam' in regional elections
Lizzy Davies in Paris
The leader of France's reinvigorated Socialist party hailed an "unprecedented victory" for the left at the ballot box last night after voters dealt a crushing defeat to Nicolas Sarkozy's rightwing party in regional elections.
With almost all votes counted, official figures indicated that a leftwing alliance led by socialists and ecologists had won 54% of the nationwide ballot, leaving the president's beleaguered UMP party with just 35%.
Across mainland France, the left claimed victory in 21 of the 22 regions. The only chink of light for the UMP came in Alsace. Corsica, which in 2004 was retained by the UMP, fell to the left for the first time since 1984. A relative comeback by the far right Front National, which scored over 20% in two regions, added to the ruling party's woes.
Last night, as jubilant supporters gathered at the Socialist party's headquarters, party chief Martine Aubry said French voters had "punished" the government for policies which had failed to protect them from the economic downturn. Although France weathered the recession better than many other countries, unemployment has topped the symbolic bar of 10% and there is widespread anger over factory closures, decreased spending power and the "bling bling" President's perceived fiscal pandering to the rich.
"The French people have tonight given an unprecedented victory to the alliance of the left," said Aubry.
"[They have] expressed their rejection of the policies of the president and his government."
In the wake of elections whose first round last Sunday brought the worst results suffered by the UMP in years, the mood on the right was scarcely more forgiving. Although as head of state Sarkozy was not officially involved in the election, his unpopularity has been blamed for his party's dismal performance.
The vote was a "message of the French people ... to the president of the republic and to him alone", said one UMP member . Jean-Francois Copé , one of the president's most outspoken critics within the UMP, agreed. The results were "a real defeat" and the party must "go back to basics", he told France2 television.
Held over two rounds, the first of which gave a resounding victory to the PS and confirmed the green coalition Europe Ecologie as France's third political force, are the means by which French voters choose the councils and presidents governing the 26 regions.
However, as the vote came at a time when confidence in Sarkozy's much-touted reformist agenda is at rock bottom, it has been viewed by commentators as something of a referendum on his leadership.
UMP chiefs attempted to gloss over the party's defeat by insisting that low voter turn-out made drawing any conclusion from the poll impossible. But critics, even those within the party, have said the right must try to change its ways.
Writing on his blog last week, former prime minister Alain Juppé said the government needed to reflect on "the rhythm of reforms... and the way in which they can be better understood".
Last night a contrite Fillon said he acknowledged "his share of the blame" for the defeat, and said he would discuss it with the president at the Élysée this morning.
The president's adviser Claude Guéant said the expected reshuffle would consist of "small changes".
Socialists and allies scoop 54% of vote, say pollsters, but left fails to pull off 'grand slam' in regional elections
Lizzy Davies in Paris
The leader of France's reinvigorated Socialist party hailed an "unprecedented victory" for the left at the ballot box last night after voters dealt a crushing defeat to Nicolas Sarkozy's rightwing party in regional elections.
With almost all votes counted, official figures indicated that a leftwing alliance led by socialists and ecologists had won 54% of the nationwide ballot, leaving the president's beleaguered UMP party with just 35%.
Across mainland France, the left claimed victory in 21 of the 22 regions. The only chink of light for the UMP came in Alsace. Corsica, which in 2004 was retained by the UMP, fell to the left for the first time since 1984. A relative comeback by the far right Front National, which scored over 20% in two regions, added to the ruling party's woes.
Last night, as jubilant supporters gathered at the Socialist party's headquarters, party chief Martine Aubry said French voters had "punished" the government for policies which had failed to protect them from the economic downturn. Although France weathered the recession better than many other countries, unemployment has topped the symbolic bar of 10% and there is widespread anger over factory closures, decreased spending power and the "bling bling" President's perceived fiscal pandering to the rich.
"The French people have tonight given an unprecedented victory to the alliance of the left," said Aubry.
"[They have] expressed their rejection of the policies of the president and his government."
In the wake of elections whose first round last Sunday brought the worst results suffered by the UMP in years, the mood on the right was scarcely more forgiving. Although as head of state Sarkozy was not officially involved in the election, his unpopularity has been blamed for his party's dismal performance.
The vote was a "message of the French people ... to the president of the republic and to him alone", said one UMP member . Jean-Francois Copé , one of the president's most outspoken critics within the UMP, agreed. The results were "a real defeat" and the party must "go back to basics", he told France2 television.
Held over two rounds, the first of which gave a resounding victory to the PS and confirmed the green coalition Europe Ecologie as France's third political force, are the means by which French voters choose the councils and presidents governing the 26 regions.
However, as the vote came at a time when confidence in Sarkozy's much-touted reformist agenda is at rock bottom, it has been viewed by commentators as something of a referendum on his leadership.
UMP chiefs attempted to gloss over the party's defeat by insisting that low voter turn-out made drawing any conclusion from the poll impossible. But critics, even those within the party, have said the right must try to change its ways.
Writing on his blog last week, former prime minister Alain Juppé said the government needed to reflect on "the rhythm of reforms... and the way in which they can be better understood".
Last night a contrite Fillon said he acknowledged "his share of the blame" for the defeat, and said he would discuss it with the president at the Élysée this morning.
The president's adviser Claude Guéant said the expected reshuffle would consist of "small changes".
'Netanyahu seeks US bombs for Iran attack'
Press TV
As Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu plans a visit to Washington, a report says he will ask the US to release sophisticated bombs needed for a possible strike on Iran's nuclear sites.
Netanyahu will ask Israel's closest ally to supply sophisticated 'bunker-buster' bombs needed to break through to Iran's nuclear enrichment sites, the Sunday Times reported.
The Israeli premier is expected to attend a three-day meeting of the top pro-Israeli lobby in the US, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, commonly known as AIPAC and to meet with senior administration officials.
Despite Tel Aviv's refusal to renounce nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, Israel and its Western allies accuse Iran of seeking to develop nuclear weapons under the guise of a civilian program - a charge strongly denied by Tehran.
Iran, a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), views the claims as "unfounded and baseless" as the non-diversion of Iranian nuclear materials has been repeatedly verified in unannounced visits by UN inspectors.
Israel, reported to have the region's sole atomic arsenal, has a long-standing tendency to bomb Iran's nuclear sites, arguing that the country is seeking to develop nuclear weapons.
Plans for a military attack against Iran have gained momentum in Tel Aviv over the past few months.
On November 7, Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon warned Iran that Tel Aviv's persistent threats of military action were not just a bluff.
Meanwhile, the Sunday Herald has reported that hundreds of powerful US "bunker-buster" bombs are being shipped from California to the British island of Diego Garcia located in the Indian Ocean.
Experts believe that the cargo manifest from the US navy is being put in place for an assault on Iran's nuclear facilities, said the newspaper.
The US military used Diego Garcia as a base to attack Iraq in 1991 and 2003.
The developments come as US president Barack Obama on Saturday once again repeated his offer of "dialogue" with Tehran.
Iran says it is hypocritical of the US to call for normalization of ties with the country but does the opposite in practice.
The new [US] administration and president ... wrote letters and sent messages ... saying they are willing to normalize relations with the Islamic Republic, but in practice they did the opposite," Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said Sunday in a Nowruz address to Iranians in the holy city of Mashhad.
As Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu plans a visit to Washington, a report says he will ask the US to release sophisticated bombs needed for a possible strike on Iran's nuclear sites.
Netanyahu will ask Israel's closest ally to supply sophisticated 'bunker-buster' bombs needed to break through to Iran's nuclear enrichment sites, the Sunday Times reported.
The Israeli premier is expected to attend a three-day meeting of the top pro-Israeli lobby in the US, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, commonly known as AIPAC and to meet with senior administration officials.
Despite Tel Aviv's refusal to renounce nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, Israel and its Western allies accuse Iran of seeking to develop nuclear weapons under the guise of a civilian program - a charge strongly denied by Tehran.
Iran, a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), views the claims as "unfounded and baseless" as the non-diversion of Iranian nuclear materials has been repeatedly verified in unannounced visits by UN inspectors.
Israel, reported to have the region's sole atomic arsenal, has a long-standing tendency to bomb Iran's nuclear sites, arguing that the country is seeking to develop nuclear weapons.
Plans for a military attack against Iran have gained momentum in Tel Aviv over the past few months.
On November 7, Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon warned Iran that Tel Aviv's persistent threats of military action were not just a bluff.
Meanwhile, the Sunday Herald has reported that hundreds of powerful US "bunker-buster" bombs are being shipped from California to the British island of Diego Garcia located in the Indian Ocean.
Experts believe that the cargo manifest from the US navy is being put in place for an assault on Iran's nuclear facilities, said the newspaper.
The US military used Diego Garcia as a base to attack Iraq in 1991 and 2003.
The developments come as US president Barack Obama on Saturday once again repeated his offer of "dialogue" with Tehran.
Iran says it is hypocritical of the US to call for normalization of ties with the country but does the opposite in practice.
The new [US] administration and president ... wrote letters and sent messages ... saying they are willing to normalize relations with the Islamic Republic, but in practice they did the opposite," Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said Sunday in a Nowruz address to Iranians in the holy city of Mashhad.
Israeli jets hit south Gaza again
Press TV
Israeli warplanes have once again struck the southern part of the Gaza Strip overnight, the military says.
Palestinian witnesses and Israeli military sources said Monday that an Israeli aircraft hit a tunnel on the Rafah border with Egypt, AFP reported.
The witnesses said no one was injured in the attack.
The army said the attack came in response to a rocket fire from the Gaza Strip.
The military launched a new series of attacks on the strip as tensions run high over the regime's settlement activities in East Jerusalem (al-Quds).
Its warplanes bombed several sites including a disused airport in southern Gaza Strip late Friday night, leaving more than 14 people injured.
Israeli warplanes have once again struck the southern part of the Gaza Strip overnight, the military says.
Palestinian witnesses and Israeli military sources said Monday that an Israeli aircraft hit a tunnel on the Rafah border with Egypt, AFP reported.
The witnesses said no one was injured in the attack.
The army said the attack came in response to a rocket fire from the Gaza Strip.
The military launched a new series of attacks on the strip as tensions run high over the regime's settlement activities in East Jerusalem (al-Quds).
Its warplanes bombed several sites including a disused airport in southern Gaza Strip late Friday night, leaving more than 14 people injured.
Pakistan ready to introduce constitutional reforms to reverse military backed reforms
Telegraph
Pakistan is to unveil a package of sweeping constitutional reforms on Tuesday to distribute powers seized by military dictators across national and provincial government.
By Javed Siddiq in Islamabad
President Asif Zardari will lose prerogatives under the proposals, which are designed to guarantee the sovereignty of parliament and devolve power to provincial governments in a country plagued by regional insurgencies against the overbearing federal government.
Presidential allies said the proposals would restrict the scope for military chiefs to seize power by using a pliable presidents to oust the prime minister. The prime minister, as head of the executive backed by parliament, would be the most powerful figure in the government.
Members of Pakistan's National Assembly meeting in London in the last week have been recalled to Islamabad as President Zardari's supporters press ahead with plans to introduce the bill on Tuesday.
The Eighteenth Amendment Bill would overturn former military ruler General Musharraf's constitutional changes, which gave the president power to dismiss elected governments and banned two time prime ministers from serving a third term - a move specifically aimed at banning former prime ministers Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, who was overthrown in the 1999 coup, from returning to power.
Two Pakistan governments led by the late Miss Bhutto were dismissed by a president acting with Army support.
"This will make Asif Zardari the president who gave away his powers. It will be the greatest contribution to democracy in this country since the 1973 constitution. It will reform his image and complete Benazir Bhutto's unfinished business," one of the president's closest confidents said last night.
The decision to grant extra powers to the provinces have proven most controversial. An eye-catching measure to rename the North West Frontier Province as 'Pakhtunkhwa' after its ethnic Pashtun majority has ran into opposition. The alternative name Afghania' has been proposed as a compromise.
Mr Sharif's supporters raised fears the measures could fuel ethnic nationalism and thereby weaken the country. "If we accede to the demands of the parties seeking maximum autonomy, then Pakistan will not remain a federation it would become a confederation," said Raja Zafar-ul-haq, an opposition leader.
The move also is aimed at addressing the grievances of Balochistan's insurgents and nationalists who complain the federal government is dominated by Punjab, the country's largest province.
While the move is expected to increase President Zardari's domestic support levels, its long-term success will be measured by the durability of Pakistan's return to democracy.
"Zardari will get some credit, but the past record shows whenever the prime minister has been powerful, we've [then] had martial law," said Najam Sethi, a leading commentator. "It's how the key players, the prime minister, president and army chief work together [that matters]."
Pakistan is to unveil a package of sweeping constitutional reforms on Tuesday to distribute powers seized by military dictators across national and provincial government.
By Javed Siddiq in Islamabad
President Asif Zardari will lose prerogatives under the proposals, which are designed to guarantee the sovereignty of parliament and devolve power to provincial governments in a country plagued by regional insurgencies against the overbearing federal government.
Presidential allies said the proposals would restrict the scope for military chiefs to seize power by using a pliable presidents to oust the prime minister. The prime minister, as head of the executive backed by parliament, would be the most powerful figure in the government.
Members of Pakistan's National Assembly meeting in London in the last week have been recalled to Islamabad as President Zardari's supporters press ahead with plans to introduce the bill on Tuesday.
The Eighteenth Amendment Bill would overturn former military ruler General Musharraf's constitutional changes, which gave the president power to dismiss elected governments and banned two time prime ministers from serving a third term - a move specifically aimed at banning former prime ministers Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, who was overthrown in the 1999 coup, from returning to power.
Two Pakistan governments led by the late Miss Bhutto were dismissed by a president acting with Army support.
"This will make Asif Zardari the president who gave away his powers. It will be the greatest contribution to democracy in this country since the 1973 constitution. It will reform his image and complete Benazir Bhutto's unfinished business," one of the president's closest confidents said last night.
The decision to grant extra powers to the provinces have proven most controversial. An eye-catching measure to rename the North West Frontier Province as 'Pakhtunkhwa' after its ethnic Pashtun majority has ran into opposition. The alternative name Afghania' has been proposed as a compromise.
Mr Sharif's supporters raised fears the measures could fuel ethnic nationalism and thereby weaken the country. "If we accede to the demands of the parties seeking maximum autonomy, then Pakistan will not remain a federation it would become a confederation," said Raja Zafar-ul-haq, an opposition leader.
The move also is aimed at addressing the grievances of Balochistan's insurgents and nationalists who complain the federal government is dominated by Punjab, the country's largest province.
While the move is expected to increase President Zardari's domestic support levels, its long-term success will be measured by the durability of Pakistan's return to democracy.
"Zardari will get some credit, but the past record shows whenever the prime minister has been powerful, we've [then] had martial law," said Najam Sethi, a leading commentator. "It's how the key players, the prime minister, president and army chief work together [that matters]."
Bagram prison in Afghanistan may become the new Guantánamo
The Times
Michael Evans, Pentagon Correspondent
The American detention centre at Bagram in Afghanistan could be expanded into a Guantánamo-style prison for terrorist suspects detained around the world.
This is one of the options being considered as US officials try to find an alternative to Guantánamo Bay, which President Obama promised to close within a year of taking office. The continued use of the prison in Cuba has presented Mr Obama with an embarrassing dilemma because of the difficulty of finding somewhere acceptable to imprison those considered to be the most dangerous detainees.
A decision to send al-Qaeda suspects detained in countries such as Yemen and Somalia to Bagram, which is located north of Kabul, would be highly controversial.
General Stanley McChrystal, the American commander in Afghanistan, has already voiced his opposition, according to the Los Angeles Times newspaper, because of the negative publicity it would generate.
Bagram is synonymous in Afghan eyes with past human rights abuses, although the old prison has been replaced by a new facility at the large US airbase.
A senior Pentagon official said: "No one particularly likes any of the choices before us right now, but Bagram may be the least bad among them."
The other alternative - of using a special prison in the US - is seen as less practical because the detainees would have to be put through the American justice system, and some of the suspects considered by the US as the most dangerous would be difficult to prosecute because of the lack of sufficient evidence. Congress would also oppose such a move.
Bagram currently houses about 800 detainees, including a small number of foreign fighters who were not arrested in Afghanistan. They were taken there under the Administration of George W. Bush.
The other complication for Mr Obama is that, under current plans, Bagram is to be handed over to the Afghan Government next year, so unless the US military retained control over one section of the prison - solely for suspects detained outside of Afghanistan - it is unlikely that the Government of President Karzai would approve of having responsibility for those detained by US special forces or the CIA in another part of the world.
A US official told the Los Angeles Times that General McChrystal supported the idea of Bagram being used for foreign fighters detained in Pakistan, provided they had a direct bearing "on the fight in Afghanistan". That would include Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the alleged Taleban leader captured in Pakistan in February.
The issue of where to put high-risk detainees is so sensitive that when Admiral Eric Olson, commander of US Special Operations Command, was asked at a Senate hearing last week where he would send a terrorist suspect arrested in Yemen, he said that he could answer that question only in closed session.
Michael Evans, Pentagon Correspondent
The American detention centre at Bagram in Afghanistan could be expanded into a Guantánamo-style prison for terrorist suspects detained around the world.
This is one of the options being considered as US officials try to find an alternative to Guantánamo Bay, which President Obama promised to close within a year of taking office. The continued use of the prison in Cuba has presented Mr Obama with an embarrassing dilemma because of the difficulty of finding somewhere acceptable to imprison those considered to be the most dangerous detainees.
A decision to send al-Qaeda suspects detained in countries such as Yemen and Somalia to Bagram, which is located north of Kabul, would be highly controversial.
General Stanley McChrystal, the American commander in Afghanistan, has already voiced his opposition, according to the Los Angeles Times newspaper, because of the negative publicity it would generate.
Bagram is synonymous in Afghan eyes with past human rights abuses, although the old prison has been replaced by a new facility at the large US airbase.
A senior Pentagon official said: "No one particularly likes any of the choices before us right now, but Bagram may be the least bad among them."
The other alternative - of using a special prison in the US - is seen as less practical because the detainees would have to be put through the American justice system, and some of the suspects considered by the US as the most dangerous would be difficult to prosecute because of the lack of sufficient evidence. Congress would also oppose such a move.
Bagram currently houses about 800 detainees, including a small number of foreign fighters who were not arrested in Afghanistan. They were taken there under the Administration of George W. Bush.
The other complication for Mr Obama is that, under current plans, Bagram is to be handed over to the Afghan Government next year, so unless the US military retained control over one section of the prison - solely for suspects detained outside of Afghanistan - it is unlikely that the Government of President Karzai would approve of having responsibility for those detained by US special forces or the CIA in another part of the world.
A US official told the Los Angeles Times that General McChrystal supported the idea of Bagram being used for foreign fighters detained in Pakistan, provided they had a direct bearing "on the fight in Afghanistan". That would include Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the alleged Taleban leader captured in Pakistan in February.
The issue of where to put high-risk detainees is so sensitive that when Admiral Eric Olson, commander of US Special Operations Command, was asked at a Senate hearing last week where he would send a terrorist suspect arrested in Yemen, he said that he could answer that question only in closed session.
Islamic cleric warns against meddling in Nigeria's affairs
AFP
KANO, Nigeria (AFP) - Nigeria's top Islamic cleric warned foreigners against meddling in the nation affairs on Sunday, days after Libya's leader suggested the country be broken up into Muslim and Christian areas.
"External commentators on the Nigerian situation should ... be told in no uncertain terms that Nigeria, despite its difficulties, has come a long way and that it should not be taken for granted or viewed as a simplistic conglomeration of ethnic or religious groups," said the Sultan of Sokoto, Muhammadu Saad Abubakar.
Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi, until recently the chairman of the African Union, suggested last week that Nigeria follow the partition model of Pakistan as a way of ending repeated bouts of inter-religious violence.
Pakistan was formed in 1947 after the Muslim minority of predominantly Hindu India founded their own homeland.
Without making direct reference to Kadhafi, the sultan told a meeting of the supreme Islamic body the Jama'atu Nasril Islam (JNI) in northern Nigeria's political capital Kaduna, that Nigeria was capable of fixing its own problems.
Nigeria, Africa's most populous country, has over 200 different ethnic groups, but its 150 million people are almost equally divided between Muslims and Christians.
"The bonds that keep us together are much stronger than those that divide us," said Abubakar, according to a copy of his speech seen by AFP.
Kadhafi's comments came as new sectarian killings claimed hundreds of lives in the central Plateau State.
The state, with Jos as its capital, is the de facto buffer between the predominantly Muslim north and the largely Christian and animist south.
Kadhafi suggested that a Christian homeland in the south could have Lagos as its capital while a Muslim homeland in the north would have Abuja as its principal city, while the two communities should peacefully agree to share Nigeria's huge oil and mineral wealth.
His comments drew the ire of the Nigerian government which recalled its ambassador from Tripoli.
KANO, Nigeria (AFP) - Nigeria's top Islamic cleric warned foreigners against meddling in the nation affairs on Sunday, days after Libya's leader suggested the country be broken up into Muslim and Christian areas.
"External commentators on the Nigerian situation should ... be told in no uncertain terms that Nigeria, despite its difficulties, has come a long way and that it should not be taken for granted or viewed as a simplistic conglomeration of ethnic or religious groups," said the Sultan of Sokoto, Muhammadu Saad Abubakar.
Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi, until recently the chairman of the African Union, suggested last week that Nigeria follow the partition model of Pakistan as a way of ending repeated bouts of inter-religious violence.
Pakistan was formed in 1947 after the Muslim minority of predominantly Hindu India founded their own homeland.
Without making direct reference to Kadhafi, the sultan told a meeting of the supreme Islamic body the Jama'atu Nasril Islam (JNI) in northern Nigeria's political capital Kaduna, that Nigeria was capable of fixing its own problems.
Nigeria, Africa's most populous country, has over 200 different ethnic groups, but its 150 million people are almost equally divided between Muslims and Christians.
"The bonds that keep us together are much stronger than those that divide us," said Abubakar, according to a copy of his speech seen by AFP.
Kadhafi's comments came as new sectarian killings claimed hundreds of lives in the central Plateau State.
The state, with Jos as its capital, is the de facto buffer between the predominantly Muslim north and the largely Christian and animist south.
Kadhafi suggested that a Christian homeland in the south could have Lagos as its capital while a Muslim homeland in the north would have Abuja as its principal city, while the two communities should peacefully agree to share Nigeria's huge oil and mineral wealth.
His comments drew the ire of the Nigerian government which recalled its ambassador from Tripoli.
A 'model' Islamic education from Turkey?
Today's Zaman
In the Beyoğlu Anadolu religious school in İstanbul, gilded Korans line the shelves and on a table lies a Turkish translation of "Eclipse", a vampire-based fantasy romance by US novelist Stephanie Meyer.
No-one inside the school would have you believe this combination of Islamic and western influences demonstrates potential to serve as a 'moderate' educational antidote to radical Islam.
But there is fresh outside interest in schools like this, which belong to the network known as imam-hatip.
Some people, particularly officials from Afghanistan and Pakistan, have suggested the Turkish system can light the way to a less extremist religious education for their young Muslims.
The interest is understandable. The imam-hatip network is a far cry from the western stereotype of the madrassa as an institution that teaches the Koran by rote and little else.
Originally founded to educate Muslim religious functionaries in the 1920s, the imam-hatip syllabus devotes only around 40 percent of study to religious subjects like Arabic, Islamic jurisprudence and rhetoric. The rest is given over to secular topics.
The network has incubated the elite of the Islamist-rooted AK party which came to power in Turkey in 2002. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan -- who went on to study economics -- and around one third of his party's MPs attended imam-hatip schools.
For Turks, however, it's ironic that a system which for over a decade has been suppressed by the military enforcers of secularism could be seen to champion any institutional accommodation between the Islamic and the secular.
A revised system of university credits introduced in the late 1990s puts imam-hatip students seeking to study non-religious subjects at university at a disadvantage.
"It's very interesting that these schools that are so controversial in our own country have become role models elsewhere," said Iren Ozgur, a Turkish-American academic at New York University who has studied the imam-hatip system.
In his office close to the Golden Horn inlet of the Bosphorus, former imam-hatip pupil Huseyin Korkut believes the schools could work abroad if they remain true to "Islamic values". But he bristles at the idea of the network being pigeonholed into helping solve international security problems.
"We are disturbed by this understanding that these schools would educate 'soft' Muslims that could easily adapt to the needs and requirements of the international authorities," said the moustachioed economist. Calling himself a typical graduate of the system, Korkut works at Kirklareli University and is general director of the imam-hatip alumnae association.
Current students like Kerem Fazil Cinar, an 18-year-old final year pupil at Beyoğlu Anadolu imam-hatip School, see the system as a refuge from the perils of the outside world.
"In the regular school would be the danger of meeting dangerous friends who have not inherited religious values," said the earnest, bespectacled teenager, the beginnings of a beard sprouting from his chin.
"The environment would be more degenerate."
SECULAR FOCUS
Named after the preachers and prayer-leaders it was set up to train, the imam-hatip system has earned less media attention in the west than the moderate international network set up by exiled Islamic scholar Fethullah Gulen. There are many Gulen schools in Central Asia, and other outposts in the Balkans and Western Europe.
Last month, Afghanistan's Education Minister Farooq Wardak visited an imam-hatip school in Ankara and declared the system could be a model for moderate religious education in his country. Pakistan's ambassador to Turkey has said the imam-hatip system was discussed in recent high-level talks. And Wardak's visit followed a Russian delegation, including the deputy minister of education, which came to see the schools last year.
"An education system should not just be an education, it should be a tool to fight extremism," Wardak said, adding that he was impressed by the way the imam-hatip school combined religious instruction with other subjects.
"We need to make sure that graduates of religious schools ... also have skills and vocation, and they get a knowledge to be part of the mainstream of society."
Overseas interest in the schools may also have been partly kindled by Turkey's changing foreign policy priorities, as Ankara seeks to play a greater role among Muslim states -- including Syria and Iran -- and cools on long-term ally Israel.
Turkey's largest ever foreign aid effort is now directed to Afghanistan, and last year it agreed to establish a high-level co-operation council with Pakistan. Russia is Turkey's main trading partner.
In imam-hatip institutions, as in every school in the country, images of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk -- the founder of the Turkish Republic -- are on display. Students can tackle Arabic passages describing the Prophet Mohammad's journey to Medina in classrooms also displaying Ataturk's address to Turkish youth.
"There has always been a tension between orthodoxy and heterodoxy within the framework of Turkish Islam," said Professor M. Hakan Yavuz, of the University of Utah's Middle East Centre.
"As a result Turkish Islam has these sites outside the control of orthodox Islam, and remains more pluralist, more tolerant."
SENSITIVE
But by singling out imam-hatip schools, Afghanistan's minister may unwittingly have been treading on deep Turkish sensitivities.
The network -- which with high standards and low costs proved popular with conservative Turkish families in the past -- was targeted after senior generals pushed out Turkey's first Islamist-led government in 1997.
Whereas in the second half of the 1990s about 600 imam-hatip schools across the country educated half a million pupils, after what was known as the "post-modern coup", imam-hatip middle schools for pupils aged 11-14 were abolished.
Even more damaging were the changes to the university admission system, which calculates the relevance of subjects studied at school to a student's proposed university course. Modifications after 1997 meant that -- unless they chose to study religion -- imam-hatip students found their grades devalued against those of applicants from conventional schools.
Waning prospects for higher education diminished the appeal of imam-hatip schools. Today around 450 educate 120,000 pupils. The AKP has worked towards their rehabilitation, but it has not succeeded yet in changing university entrance requirements.
ANGER
It is in this context that students like Cinar experience the system. Gathered in a mosque in the heart of the old city with two fellow students -- including Nur Sumeyye Karaoğlan, a quiet girl in a patterned headscarf -- the young man's comments reflect an anger with Turkey's secular establishment that makes nonsense of such distinctions as "radical" and moderate".
"Surely religion should have a public role," he said -- a view that flies in the face of Turkey's 87 years of secularism. "Not only in Turkey, but throughout the world."
Sitting among glass-walled cloisters, he warmed to the theme of Turkey's suppression of the imam-hatip network, and by extension of its alumni, saying his country needed men like him to stand up for religion and traditional values.
"We want Turkish society to feel that it is right to fear us," he said.
Over their tea, his fellow pupils murmured in approval.
"I am very proud to be an imam-hatip student," said Karaoğlan, 16, the only girl in the group. "I feel it is in line with human nature."
In the Beyoğlu Anadolu religious school in İstanbul, gilded Korans line the shelves and on a table lies a Turkish translation of "Eclipse", a vampire-based fantasy romance by US novelist Stephanie Meyer.
No-one inside the school would have you believe this combination of Islamic and western influences demonstrates potential to serve as a 'moderate' educational antidote to radical Islam.
But there is fresh outside interest in schools like this, which belong to the network known as imam-hatip.
Some people, particularly officials from Afghanistan and Pakistan, have suggested the Turkish system can light the way to a less extremist religious education for their young Muslims.
The interest is understandable. The imam-hatip network is a far cry from the western stereotype of the madrassa as an institution that teaches the Koran by rote and little else.
Originally founded to educate Muslim religious functionaries in the 1920s, the imam-hatip syllabus devotes only around 40 percent of study to religious subjects like Arabic, Islamic jurisprudence and rhetoric. The rest is given over to secular topics.
The network has incubated the elite of the Islamist-rooted AK party which came to power in Turkey in 2002. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan -- who went on to study economics -- and around one third of his party's MPs attended imam-hatip schools.
For Turks, however, it's ironic that a system which for over a decade has been suppressed by the military enforcers of secularism could be seen to champion any institutional accommodation between the Islamic and the secular.
A revised system of university credits introduced in the late 1990s puts imam-hatip students seeking to study non-religious subjects at university at a disadvantage.
"It's very interesting that these schools that are so controversial in our own country have become role models elsewhere," said Iren Ozgur, a Turkish-American academic at New York University who has studied the imam-hatip system.
In his office close to the Golden Horn inlet of the Bosphorus, former imam-hatip pupil Huseyin Korkut believes the schools could work abroad if they remain true to "Islamic values". But he bristles at the idea of the network being pigeonholed into helping solve international security problems.
"We are disturbed by this understanding that these schools would educate 'soft' Muslims that could easily adapt to the needs and requirements of the international authorities," said the moustachioed economist. Calling himself a typical graduate of the system, Korkut works at Kirklareli University and is general director of the imam-hatip alumnae association.
Current students like Kerem Fazil Cinar, an 18-year-old final year pupil at Beyoğlu Anadolu imam-hatip School, see the system as a refuge from the perils of the outside world.
"In the regular school would be the danger of meeting dangerous friends who have not inherited religious values," said the earnest, bespectacled teenager, the beginnings of a beard sprouting from his chin.
"The environment would be more degenerate."
SECULAR FOCUS
Named after the preachers and prayer-leaders it was set up to train, the imam-hatip system has earned less media attention in the west than the moderate international network set up by exiled Islamic scholar Fethullah Gulen. There are many Gulen schools in Central Asia, and other outposts in the Balkans and Western Europe.
Last month, Afghanistan's Education Minister Farooq Wardak visited an imam-hatip school in Ankara and declared the system could be a model for moderate religious education in his country. Pakistan's ambassador to Turkey has said the imam-hatip system was discussed in recent high-level talks. And Wardak's visit followed a Russian delegation, including the deputy minister of education, which came to see the schools last year.
"An education system should not just be an education, it should be a tool to fight extremism," Wardak said, adding that he was impressed by the way the imam-hatip school combined religious instruction with other subjects.
"We need to make sure that graduates of religious schools ... also have skills and vocation, and they get a knowledge to be part of the mainstream of society."
Overseas interest in the schools may also have been partly kindled by Turkey's changing foreign policy priorities, as Ankara seeks to play a greater role among Muslim states -- including Syria and Iran -- and cools on long-term ally Israel.
Turkey's largest ever foreign aid effort is now directed to Afghanistan, and last year it agreed to establish a high-level co-operation council with Pakistan. Russia is Turkey's main trading partner.
In imam-hatip institutions, as in every school in the country, images of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk -- the founder of the Turkish Republic -- are on display. Students can tackle Arabic passages describing the Prophet Mohammad's journey to Medina in classrooms also displaying Ataturk's address to Turkish youth.
"There has always been a tension between orthodoxy and heterodoxy within the framework of Turkish Islam," said Professor M. Hakan Yavuz, of the University of Utah's Middle East Centre.
"As a result Turkish Islam has these sites outside the control of orthodox Islam, and remains more pluralist, more tolerant."
SENSITIVE
But by singling out imam-hatip schools, Afghanistan's minister may unwittingly have been treading on deep Turkish sensitivities.
The network -- which with high standards and low costs proved popular with conservative Turkish families in the past -- was targeted after senior generals pushed out Turkey's first Islamist-led government in 1997.
Whereas in the second half of the 1990s about 600 imam-hatip schools across the country educated half a million pupils, after what was known as the "post-modern coup", imam-hatip middle schools for pupils aged 11-14 were abolished.
Even more damaging were the changes to the university admission system, which calculates the relevance of subjects studied at school to a student's proposed university course. Modifications after 1997 meant that -- unless they chose to study religion -- imam-hatip students found their grades devalued against those of applicants from conventional schools.
Waning prospects for higher education diminished the appeal of imam-hatip schools. Today around 450 educate 120,000 pupils. The AKP has worked towards their rehabilitation, but it has not succeeded yet in changing university entrance requirements.
ANGER
It is in this context that students like Cinar experience the system. Gathered in a mosque in the heart of the old city with two fellow students -- including Nur Sumeyye Karaoğlan, a quiet girl in a patterned headscarf -- the young man's comments reflect an anger with Turkey's secular establishment that makes nonsense of such distinctions as "radical" and moderate".
"Surely religion should have a public role," he said -- a view that flies in the face of Turkey's 87 years of secularism. "Not only in Turkey, but throughout the world."
Sitting among glass-walled cloisters, he warmed to the theme of Turkey's suppression of the imam-hatip network, and by extension of its alumni, saying his country needed men like him to stand up for religion and traditional values.
"We want Turkish society to feel that it is right to fear us," he said.
Over their tea, his fellow pupils murmured in approval.
"I am very proud to be an imam-hatip student," said Karaoğlan, 16, the only girl in the group. "I feel it is in line with human nature."
Gates admits concerns on US assassins in S. Asia
Gates admits concerns on US assassins in S. Asia
Press TV
The US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates says he is concerned "in principle" about the existence of an alleged private network of assassins in Afghanistan and Pakistan run by the Pentagon.
An earlier report by The New York Times suggested that Michael Furlong, a Defense Department official, set up a network of assassins that tracked and killed suspected militants in the region under the guise of collecting intelligence.
"Quite frankly, in principle, I would have concerns about that but I don't know enough to know whether... it took place and if so, whether there was value added," Gates said Monday in a joint press conference with his Canadian counterpart, Peter MacKay, AFP reported.
Gates said investigations are underway to find out real facts about such a spy network.
"We do have reviews and investigations going on to find out what the story is here, to find out what the facts are," he said. "And if it's necessary to make some changes I'll do that."
Gates added that the Pentagon is deeply involved with about 85 percent of the country's intelligence budget devoted to Defense Department agencies.
Press TV
The US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates says he is concerned "in principle" about the existence of an alleged private network of assassins in Afghanistan and Pakistan run by the Pentagon.
An earlier report by The New York Times suggested that Michael Furlong, a Defense Department official, set up a network of assassins that tracked and killed suspected militants in the region under the guise of collecting intelligence.
"Quite frankly, in principle, I would have concerns about that but I don't know enough to know whether... it took place and if so, whether there was value added," Gates said Monday in a joint press conference with his Canadian counterpart, Peter MacKay, AFP reported.
Gates said investigations are underway to find out real facts about such a spy network.
"We do have reviews and investigations going on to find out what the story is here, to find out what the facts are," he said. "And if it's necessary to make some changes I'll do that."
Gates added that the Pentagon is deeply involved with about 85 percent of the country's intelligence budget devoted to Defense Department agencies.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Some Palestinian Jordanians Lose Citizenship
NY Times
By MICHAEL SLACKMAN
The authorities effectively told him they were doing it for his own good. They said that like thousands of other Jordanians of Palestinian descent, he was being stripped of his citizenship to preserve his right to someday return to the occupied West Bank or East Jerusalem.
“They gave me a paper that said, ‘You are now Palestinian,’ ” he said, recalling the day three years ago that his life changed.
In a report titled “Stateless Again,” issued last month, Human Rights Watch said that 2,700 people in Jordan lost their citizenship from 2004 to 2008, and that at least another 200,000 remained vulnerable, largely those who moved abroad at some point in search of work.
The government says it is trying to help by requiring Jordanians of Palestinian descent who fled the West Bank or Jerusalem after the war in 1967 to keep their Israeli documents valid. This has become a more urgent matter recently, political analysts and government officials said, with the accession of a right-wing Israeli government and its ultraconservative foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman.
“It is no secret that some elements in Israel would like to see the Palestinian areas without the people,” said Nabil Sharif, Jordan’s minister of state and a government spokesman. “We do not want to be party to this.”
Critics and human rights advocates, however, see a different motivation. They said the Jordanian government acted to preserve its own interest, trying to appease non-Palestinian Jordanians concerned about the growing economic and political influence of citizens of Palestinian descent, a charge Mr. Sharif denied. They say it also appears that Jordan is frightened by talk of declaring Jordan a Palestinian homeland as an alternative to a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza.
The critics accuse the government of acting in an arbitrary manner, frequently dividing families between citizens and noncitizens, sometimes based on the timing of their birth, and for not offering effective avenues to appeal of decisions on citizenship.
For years now, Jordanian officials have expressed concern for preserving the demographic balance in a nation of six million people, divided about evenly between those from the East Bank of the Jordan River — considered original Jordanians — and those from the West Bank.
“The government is not doing this to support the Palestinians in their right of return,” said Fawzi Samhouri, director of a human rights organization in Amman, Jordan’s capital. Rather, he said, the government is responding to domestic political pressures because “some people think these procedures will reduce the percentage of the population that is of Palestinian origin.”
In interviews, seven Palestinian men who lost their citizenship described a similar chain of events. They said it was during a routine interaction with the state — renewing a driver’s license, a passport or a document that proved one’s military service. In each case, they said, a clerk typed the person’s name, or a family member’s name, into a computer and told the applicant that there was a problem and that he needed to go to the Interior Ministry’s Follow-up and Inspection Office.
Jordanians of Palestinian descent know what it means to be sent to that office. It is almost never good.
Amran al-Tarsha, 29, said the agent in the office took all his documents, put them in a drawer and closed it.
“He told me to go home,” Mr. Tarsha said.
Muhammad Ramadan, 23, said everyone in his family lost their citizenship when his father applied for identification card for his sister. For her, he said, that meant that a university education was no longer affordable because noncitizens pay higher tuition fees. His brother now cannot work in his profession, as a pharmacist, because only citizens are allowed into the professional union. And he said he could not get a job with the government because only citizens could work for the government.
“I’m Palestinian-Jordanian,” he said. “I have never been to Palestine, neither me nor my siblings.”
Like the others, Mr. Haddad’s family history is linked to the years of turbulence in the region. His father fled his home in 1948 when Israel was created, became a Jordanian citizen and traveled to Jerusalem, where he met his future wife. The two made a home in Amman.
In 1980, however, his mother returned to Jerusalem to be near her family and to give birth to a son, Muhannad. She had him registered under her Israeli documents and returned home, where her son grew up.
Amran al-Tarsha said a government official confiscated all of his Jordanian documents.
When he turned 16, and was no longer on his mother’s identity card, he went to Israel to have one of his own issued. He said they refused to give him one so he eventually returned to Amman. Then last year, he tried to renew a driver’s license and was told to go to the dreaded office in the Interior Ministry.
Mr. Haddad’s aunt, Hitaf Barakat, confirmed the details of her nephew’s circumstances. “He cannot go back, he cannot work here, he cannot go abroad, yet his mother, his father, his brother all retain their nationality here,” said Ms. Barakat, who works with the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration in Jordan.
The government says that this has nothing to do with demographic balance, that the numbers are too small and that only a fraction of its Palestinian population is subject to this kind of review. It says that the process has been going on since shortly after July 31, 1988, when King Hussein delivered a speech in which he gave up any claim of sovereignty to the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
Jordan annexed those lands in 1950 and provided all the residents with Jordanian citizenship. When Israel occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem after the 1967 war, Jordan maintained some administrative control and financial responsibility.
But in 1988, as the first intifada, or uprising, raged, King Hussein announced that the Palestine Liberation Organization would serve as the sole representative of the Palestinian people. He announced that all Palestinians living in Jordan would preserve their Jordanian citizenship while those living in the occupied territories were Palestinian. He did not mention those Palestinians who had moved abroad, including the hundreds of thousands living and working in the Persian Gulf.
Jordan’s rulers were shaken in 1991, after President Saddam Hussein of Iraq occupied Kuwait and hundreds of thousands of Palestinians with Jordanian citizenship fled to Jordan.
“The Jordanians felt this was a very dangerous situation,” said Ali Mahafzah, a history professor at Jordan University. “The Palestinians might become a majority in the country.”
That fear, however, was not enough to prompt the authorities to turn them away. “We were in need of them economically,” Mr. Mahafzah said. “It was against our economic interest at the time to throw them to the West Bank.”
It appears that many of these people are the ones at risk now, though not exclusively. The government says that it issued directives that required all Palestinians who had once been issued Israeli documents after the occupation of 1967 to preserve those documents to maintain their citizenship.
The authorities said that it was incumbent upon each Palestinian to return to Israel every three years — to preserve their right to return to the occupied land and as a condition for keeping their Jordanian citizenship.
An Israeli military spokesman who refused to be identified said that under military law imposed on the West Bank, Palestinian citizens who left the area after 1967 and before 1988 could lose their citizenship after three years, but then they had an additional three years to claim it.
The spokesman said decisions could be appealed to a joint Israeli-Palestinian committee, though the spokesman acknowledged that the committee had not met in years.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)