US and mistrust

Politics

Tuesday, 07 February 2012 08:58

The US State Department has issued an altered advisory for American citizens in Pakistan, modifying the guidelines it last set in place in April 2011. The more stringent warning is a reflection too on the change in the relationship between Washington and Islamabad, and the new tensions that have crept into it. The latest advisory stresses that since the November 2011 Nato air strike inside Pakistan animosity towards Americans has grown and they would be well advised to stay away from demonstrations and gatherings protesting this incident or others similar to it. This of course is a matter of common sense. It would obviously be unwise to venture into a situation where people are protesting the killing of citizens by the US forces or by the unmanned drones that hover over northern skies. But the advisory also cautions against other more insidious action directed against the US – such as the labelling of diplomats or others as intelligence agents, followed by possible action against them. Such events have of course occurred. Warren Weinstein, an aid expert, said to be close to 70 years in age, was abducted in August 2011 from his home in Lahore – soon before he was due to leave the country. Information surfacing in December last year indicates he may be in Al-Qaeda’s hands. Nationals of other western nations have disappeared from other places, presumably picked up by extremist forces, and have yet to be recovered.

The deepening distrust of the US in this country is hardly surprising, given its policies that are perceived to be consistently undermining Pakistan’s sovereignty. What is ironic, however, is that these should rank among the actions of a nation that is also regarded as a key ally. Pakistan’s dependence on the US is well established. Yet over the past year or so we have seen a swift decline in trust; it is hard to work together with a country which is held in such low esteem by our own people, and which in turn, as this advisory clearly states, feels threatened by them. The entire issue of relations with the US is one our government needs to very carefully assess, given the enormous implications it has and the fact that much that happens in our future is dependent on this matter and the manner in which it is handled over the coming months and years.

Attack on Iran ”would be disaster”, must talk: Turkey

Politics

Monday, 06 February 2012 07:02

Turkey's Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu speaks during the 48th Munich Security Conference at the Bayerischer Hof hotel in Munich

MUNICH: Turkey and Qatar urged the West on Sunday not to attack Iran to solve a nuclear row, but to make greater efforts to negotiate an end to the dispute.

Speaking at the Munich Security Conference, a gathering of security officials and diplomats, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said an attack would be a “disaster” and the dispute over Iran’s nuclear programme could be ended very rapidly.

“If there is strong political will and mutual confidence being established, this issue could be resolved in a few days,” he said. “The technical disputes are not so big. The problem is mutual confidence and strong political will.“

Turkey was the venue of the last talks between Western powers and Iran a year ago which ended in stalemate because participants could not even agree on an agenda.

The West has since imposed much tougher sanctions on Iran, which it suspects of seeking nuclear weapons capability. Iran says its nuclear work is purely civilian and peaceful.

Davutoglu added: “A military option will create a disaster in our region. So before that disaster, everybody must be serious in negotiations. We hope soon both sides will meet again but this time there will be a complete result.”

In Tehran, the deputy head of Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guards told the semi-official Fars news agency Iran would attack any country whose territory is used by “enemies” of the Islamic state to launch a military strike against its soil.

Washington and Israel have not ruled out military action if diplomacy fails to resolve the standoff. Iran has warned of firm retaliation if attacked, including targeting Israel and US bases in the Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz shipping lane.

Qatar’s Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, Khalid Mohamed al-Attiyah, whose Gulf country is increasingly active in regional diplomacy, said an attack “is not a solution, and tightening the embargo on Iran will make the scenario worse. I believe we should have dialogue.”

“I believe that with our allies and friend in the West we should open a serious dialogue with the Iranians to get out of this dilemma. This is what we feel in our region.”

Tension between Iran and the West rose last month when Washington and the European Union imposed the toughest sanctions yet on Iran to try to force it to provide more information on its nuclear programme. The measures are aimed at shutting off the second-biggest OPEC oil exporters’ sales of crude.

Mullah Omar sent letter to Obama to end war

Politics

Saturday, 04 February 2012 21:26

WASHINGTON: Reclusive Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar wrote to President Barack Obama last year indicating an interest in talks key to ending the war in Afghanistan, current and former US officials told The Associated Press.

The letter purportedly from Omar was unsigned.

It was passed through a Taliban intermediary in July and was intended for the White House.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the letter and its contents are part of sensitive diplomacy with a fighting force that still targets US troops.

The previously undisclosed communication was considered authentic by people who saw it, but skeptical administration officials said they cannot determine it actually came from Omar.

The Obama administration did not directly respond to the letter, two officials said, although it has broadened contacts with Omar’s emissaries since then.

Sources who described the letter did not disclose its precise contents, but one current and one former official said it addressed Taliban willingness to build trust with the United States.

One official said Omar complained that the United States had not done enough to establish good faith for negotiations, such as arranging the release of Taliban prisoners held in the US military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

An administration official would say only that the message represented views consistent with what Taliban emissaries had been telling US officials during the clandestine meetings.

Those preliminary sessions opened the way for more formal talks that the US officials now publicly welcome.

A direct message from Omar could be a strong signal that the Taliban movement is interested in negotiation at the highest levels.

The Obama administration is trying to foster talks among the Taliban and the US-backed government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai, but remains wary of Taliban motives.

Omar is the spiritual leader of the Taliban movement, and directs the organisation’s guerrilla military campaign.

He was the de facto head of state in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan prior to the US invasion that toppled the Taliban government in 2001.

He has not been seen in public in years, and his exact whereabouts are unknown.

He is wanted by the US government for harbouring Osama bin Laden and helping the al Qaeda terror network.

Republican critics, including presidential candidate Mitt Romney, have criticised the administration for opening talks with an enemy force, saying negotiation only allows the Taliban to run out the clock until most US forces leave Afghanistan in 2014.

Preliminary, clandestine meetings between US and Taliban representatives began last year, after the Obama administration shifted course and decided to explore peace talks while fighting was still fierce.

The message arrived when those early contacts had gone all but dormant, however, because of leaks to the press that sent the chief Taliban emissary briefly underground.

The Obama administration is now considering release of five top Taliban leaders from Guantanamo as a starting point for negotiations.

The five would be sent to custody in the Gulf nation of Qatar, where the Taliban plan to establish a negotiating office. Republicans in Congress oppose the release of the prisoners.

Russia Warns Arab Leaders Against Pressing Syria ‘Too Hard’

Current Affairs

Last Updated on Saturday, 04 February 2012 21:31 Saturday, 04 February 2012 11:56

MOSCOW -- Russia warned Arab leaders against crossing a “red line” in trying to oust Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and said it wasn’t the job of the United Nations to dictate who stays in power and who goes.

Arab League leaders, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and European foreign ministers called yesterday for the Security Council -- and indirectly Russia -- to adopt the Arab-European plan that would have Assad delegate his authority to a deputy who would start talks with the opposition within two months.

“The Arab League is now in the driver’s seat; sometimes you can press the accelerator too hard and you find yourself in a ditch,” Russia’s ambassador to the UN, Vitaly Churkin, said yesterday. “The Security Council cannot prescribe ready recipes for the outcome of domestic political processes.”

Syria was at the center of talks at the world body almost a year after an uprising began against Assad. The UN says more than 5,400 people have been killed in the conflict, which is evolving into a civil war.

As the UN started talks on Syria, Assad’s forces pressed into suburbs in Damascus and other parts of Syria to reclaim areas controlled by the opposition Free Syrian Army, according to Rami Abdel Rahman, head of the U.K.-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. The army has led a wide-ranging offensive to crush the FSA, made up of defectors and armed civilians, since Jan. 27, he said in an interview yesterday.

Dabbling

Russia blocked a December resolution seeking to hold Assad responsible for the violence in his country and has threatened to use its Security Council veto again. Syria hosts Russia’s only military base outside the former Soviet Union and is a buyer of Russian weapons.

Churkin said an agreement to end the violence in Syria is “not only possible, but necessary,” yet went on to reject any language in the draft resolution that can be interpreted as an attempt to force Assad out.

Once countries start dabbling in regime change “it is difficult to stop, then you will start telling what kings need to resign and what prime ministers need to step down,” Churkin told reporters after the council briefing by top Arab League officials.

The measure was introduced by Morocco, the only Arab nation on the Security Council. Arab and European countries will seek a council vote this week, said U.K Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant.

Arab League

“We will hold discussions with Russia and other nations over the next 24 hours to see if we can make progress on this resolution,” U.K. Foreign Secretary William Hague told reporters in New York.

Arab League Secretary-General Nabil El-Arabi and Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim Al Thani made their case before the UN’s decision-making body and sought to reassure Russia on its concerns.

The road map adopted on Jan. 22 should “in no way be interpreted as calling on the Syrian president to renounce power,” El-Arabi said, citing a pledge made to him by Assad in July that he would put his deputy, Farouk al-Sharaa, in charge. “This is very similar to the call of the Arab League as of now.”

‘Clear Message’

“It is time for the international community to put aside our own differences and send a clear message of support to the people of Syria,” Clinton said in a direct appeal to Russia.

“The alternative -- spurning the Arab League, abandoning the Syrian people, emboldening the dictator -- would compound this tragedy, mark a failure of our shared responsibility, and shake the credibility” of the UN, she told the council.

The latest draft of a Western-backed Arab League resolution on Syria also had language directed at Russia: “Nothing in this resolution compels states to resort to the use of force or the threat of force,” says the draft, obtained yesterday.

Syria’s Ambassador Bashar Ja’afari, Assad’s sole representative at yesterday’s meeting, accused foreign powers of meddling.

“Unbridled tendency by foreign states to interfere in our internal and external affairs through various mean is neither sudden nor novel,” he said.

In Washington, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said yesterday that time is running out for Assad.

“It’s a question of time before Assad falls,” he testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee. Still, he said, “It could be a long time” given a protracted uprising and the fragmentation of the Assad opposition.