Friday, April 29, 2005
Web site claims Bin Laden is dead
Ha'aretz reports that a web site known to be affiliated with Al-Qaeda is citing anonymous (and highly questionable) sources clasiming that Osama Bin Laden is dead.
Tuesday, April 12, 2005
Postscript to the Iran-Israel chat
A nice, welcome coincidence. Better than nothing.
That's how much of the world - those in the world that paid attention - might have initially reacted to the chance meeting reported to have taken place between Israeli President Moshe Katsav and Iranian leader Mohhamed Khatami at Pope John Paul II's funeral.
Now there is a postscript.
Israel is today reported to have handed, just a few days later, photographs of advanced and highly suspect Iranian nuclear facilities directly to US President Bush.
Linked to the same page of this report in the Khaleej Times is the February 25 commentary of Henry Kissinger, emphasizing the ambiguity and complexity involved in containing the nascent nuclear ambition of the likes of Iran. Way back then Dr. Kissinger said:
... By 2050, ...(Iran's)... population is projected to exceed that of Russia. ...
(N)ew nuclear weapons establishments may be used as a shield to deter resistance, especially by the US, to terrorist assaults on the international order. ... We should oppose nuclear proliferation even to a democratic Iran. ...
Proliferating countries invariably present their efforts as goals ... such as participation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy or enhancing electricity generation. In Iran's case, this is clearly a pretext. For a major oil producer like Iran, nuclear energy is a wasteful use of resources....
(S)everal European allies treat Iran's nuclear ambitions as ... defensive. In their view, they spring from Iran's geographic position, wedged as it is between nuclear neighbours or near-neighbours ć»India, Pakistan, Russia and Israel. They believe that Iran's nuclear impulse can be softened, perhaps even ended, by conciliatory diplomacy.
Diplomacy is about demonstrating to the other side both the consequences of its actions and the benefits of the alternatives. No matter how elegantly phrased, diplomacy by its very nature implies an element of and a capacity for pressure. ...
A nonproliferation policy must therefore achieve clarity on the following issues: How much time is available before Iran has a nuclear weapons capability, and what strategy can best stop an Iranian nuclear weapons program? How do we prevent the diplomatic process from turning into a means to legitimise proliferation rather than avert it? We must never forget that failure will usher in a new set of nuclear perils dwarfing those which we have just surmounted.
Friday, April 08, 2005
Leaders of Israel, Iran, Syria shake hands at Pope's funeral
Ha'aretz reports:
President Moshe Katsav, who was at the Vatican as part of Israel's delegation to the funeral of Pope John Paul II, twice shook hands with Syrian President Bashar Assad on Friday.
The two men were in close proximity to one another throughout the procession due to the fact that the Israel and Syrian delegations to the funeral were positioned next to one another.
At the conclusion of funeral services, the Iranian-born Katsav also shook hands with President Mohammad Khatami. The two spoke for almost an hour in Farsi.
Katsav also reportedly embraced Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika.
Also at the Vatican, Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom met with his Moroccan counterpart Mohammed Ben-Issa.
Shalom's wife, Judy Shalom-Nir-Mozes, presented Britain's Prince Charles with a talisman from prominent spiritual leader Rabbi Kadouri on the occasion of his upcoming marriage to longtime girlfriend Camilla Parker-Bowles.
A non-event, but a huge non-event in the context of the history of Arab-Israel conflict, and a heart-warming tribute to the outreach and conciliation efforts of Pope John Paul II, may he rest in peace.
Wednesday, April 06, 2005
From the ashes of ignorance and fear
Australia, under John Howard's stewardship, currently basks in a historic double whammy of South-East Asian attention, with Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi in Canberra and following hot on the heels of the just-departed President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono of Indonesia.
The visit of President Yudhoyono, leader of the world's fourth largest (and largest Muslim) nation and immediate northern neighbour of Australia, is being hailed as an outstanding success.
Prime Minister Badawi, on the other hand, has not hesitated to raise some thorny issues in advance of a head-to-head with Howard.
However, the mere fact of the Malaysian leader's presence in the united continent, anytime let alone at a contiguous juncture to that of the leader of Malaysia's contiguous neighbour and brotherly rival, is a seminal event.
Mr. Badawi's famously outspoken predecessor, Prime Minister Mahathir Muhammed, aggressively clashed with Howard predecessor Paul Keating, and there has not been a tremendous amount of joy in an icy south world relationship ever since.
Not that there was notable warmth beforehand.
It is said in some quarters that Dr. Mahathir's poor impression of Australia might have been cultivated during a visit in his student days. The odour of perceived racist condescension is rumoured to be at its root (this type of thing).
Whatever the reasons, Australian (Labor Party) Prime Minister Keating was bucketed with the brunt of (PM) Muhammedan wrath. This embarrassed him. Keating had been loudly trumpeting economic integration between Australia and Asia at the time.
And so, in a sense, the Hawke-Keating Australia-Asia initiative (Bob Hawke was Keating's Labor predecessor) commenced in bright idealistic hope and ended in smitherines. PM Howard's efforts in the same sphere may be heading in the opposite direction.
*************
The symbolic nadir of bad blood may have peaked in the early millenial years.
Australian troops spearheaded UN-backed intervention in then-Indonesian East Timor. Volleys were fired between Australian and Indonesian troops. Following this was the Islamo-fanatic nightclub bombing in Bali, Indonesia. Amongst hundreds of dead western revellers there was a majority of - holidaying - Australians .
Now we have seen another catastrophic event, the 2004 Boxing Day earthquake-tsunami. The politically adept Howard has recognised and seized upon this variable to showcase Australian goodwill and empathy towards Indonesia.
The last-mentioned event - involving substantial financial and on-the-ground assistance - was the true precursor for the new Indonesian President's visit.
This ostentatiously upward beat in Australia-Indonesian relations - combined with the retirement of Dr. Muhammed - has set off a cascade enabling Malaysia's new Prime Minister to visit Australia.
Such a turnaround is apparently much to the chagrine of Mr. Keating.
The colourful former Australian PM, locally famous as a master of the obnoxiously barbed - and extremely quotable - political quote, has long rued his demise at the hands the man he once derided as "Little Johnny" Howard.
"Little Johnny" dumped Keating on his political behind in 1996, ending Keating's Prime Ministership after just one term. 10 years and three terms later, Little Johnny still rules the roost. The retired Keating evidently still values a legacy .
(To continue ...
... and I never did. Will return to this very important topic sometime though. luv spinbad 2005/5/6)
Tuesday, April 05, 2005
Poll highlighted in NYT misrepresented Australian views
Australian political commentator Gerard Henderson, writing in todays's Sydney Morning Herald, sheds light on distorted recent "poll findings" that Australians are somehow as "worried" about George Bush's United States as they are about Islamofascism:
The crucial finding (of the poll, called "Australians Speak 2005") ... was that Australians regard Australia's alliance with the US as "very important" (45 per cent), "fairly important" (27 per cent) or "somewhat important" (20 per cent), leaving only 7 per cent who believe that the Australian-American Alliance is "not at all important" for Australian security.
Yet the domestic and international reporting gave a different impression. For example, The New York Times ran a heading "US image in Australia isn't so good, polls finds" while the International Herald Tribune headed its report "Australians view US as a threat to peace".
... (T)he committee decided to ask respondents how worried they were "about the following potential threats from the outside world". Included in the list was "Islamic fundamentalism" (which scored a total "worried" response of 78 per cent), "US foreign policies" (79 per cent) and "China's growing power" (61 per cent).
... (O)n what basis did the committee present US foreign policy as a "potential threat"? ...
The survey found that about 66 per cent of Australians support the right to take pre-emptive military action to "strike directly" at "terrorists based in another country".
(emphasis added, throughout)
Strike yet another credit for instinctively mistrusting mainstream media, it seems.
