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.
Friday, March 26, 2010
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)