Yesterday’s 3%+ stock market plunge was not due to losses in the China stock market or computer glitches. Instead several data points showed a deteriorating economic climate in the U.S. and probably world wide.
After years of low central bank rates and easy credit availability the U.S. housing market last year went nuts. People could get mortgages of 100% of the inflated house value without down payments and many borrowers took out ARM’s, mortgages with adjustable rates. But as rates started to climb through inflationary pressure, the party suddenly, but not unexpectedly, stopped.
Iran-Contra was the subject of an informal “lessons learned” discussion two years ago among veterans of the scandal. Abrams led the discussion. One conclusion was that even though the program was eventually exposed, it had been possible to execute it without telling Congress. As to what the experience taught them, in terms of future covert operations, the participants found: “One, you can’t trust our friends. Two, the C.I.A. has got to be totally out of it. Three, you can’t trust the uniformed military, and four, it’s got to be run out of the Vice-President’s office”—a reference to Cheney’s role, the former senior intelligence official said.
If you can’t trust your friends, cannot include the CIA and can’t trust the uniformed military, who is left to do the action? As money is not a limit could this be something that starts with black and ends with water?
2. Hersh also did interview the Shia leader in Lebanon, Nasrallah. It is interesting how aware he is of the real plans:
Nasrallah said he believed that America also wanted to bring about the partition of Lebanon and of Syria. In Syria, he said, the result would be to push the country “into chaos and internal battles like in Iraq.” In Lebanon, “There will be a Sunni state, an Alawi state, a Christian state, and a Druze state.” But, he said, “I do not know if there will be a Shiite state.” Nasrallah told me that he suspected that one aim of the Israeli bombing of Lebanon last summer was “the destruction of Shiite areas and the displacement of Shiites from Lebanon. The idea was to have the Shiites of Lebanon and Syria flee to southern Iraq,” which is dominated by Shiites. “I am not sure, but I smell this,” he told me.
Partition would leave Israel surrounded by “small tranquil states,” he said. “I can assure you that the Saudi kingdom will also be divided, and the issue will reach to North African states. There will be small ethnic and confessional states,” he said. “In other words, Israel will be the most important and the strongest state in a region that has been partitioned into ethnic and confessional states that are in agreement with each other. This is the new Middle East.”
Nasrallah is likely referring to the map neocon Ralph Peters launched last year in the Armed Forces Journal. We know that this map was even shown at NATO meetings. Some background is here.
If Nasrallah sees this, the Saudis and the Turks, who both lose in these plans, should see this too. But do they?
3. Who, what, in the end, is behind all of this? I am not sure, but Bush senior gives his son a likely answer:
One day during that holiday, according to friends of the family, 43 asked his father, "What’s a neocon?"
"Do you want names, or a description?" answered 41.
"Description."
"Well," said the former president of the United States, "I’ll give it to you in one word: Israel."
Three Arab states in the Persian Gulf would be willing to allow the Israel Air force to enter their airspace in order to reach Iran in case of an attack on its nuclear facilities, the Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Siyasa reported on Sunday.
According to the report, a diplomat from one of the gulf states visiting Washington on Saturday said the three states, Qatar, Oman and the United Arab Emirates, have told the United States that they would not object to Israel using their airspace, despite their fear of an Iranian response.
Qatar, Oman and UAE? Hmmm, yes, makes total sense, doesn’t it? Though I wonder why Polynesia does not join those three …
February 24, 2007
Cordesman on the British Defeat
Excerpts of CSIS’ strategist Anthony H. Cordesman’s latest on Iraq:
[T]he coming British cuts in many ways reflect the political reality that the British "lost" the south more than a year ago. … Iraq’s factions know that the US is involved in a war of attrition where these past [Bush] mistakes have created a political climate where it appears to be steadily more vulnerable to pressures that either will make it leave, or sharply limit how long it can play a major role. One year increasingly seems “long” by American domestic political standards, but the actors in Iraq and the region can play for years. In fact, they have to play for years. They live there and they know the chances of true stability are negligible for years to come. … [The US] has completely failed to set forth a strategy and meaningful operational plan for dealing with Iraq as a country even if it succeeds in Baghdad. … Another key reality is that the US really is no longer in control even of “Plan A;” the Iraqi government is. The British withdrawal plan may simply be yet another warning that the real-world contingency is plan I – one controlled and shaped by Iraq’s internal power struggles. … One of the lessons that both the Bush Administration and its various US opponents and critics may still have to learn is that at a given level of defeat, other actors control events. US discussions of alternative plans and strategies may well be becoming largely irrelevant.
I agree with Cordesman’s analysis. What he does not touch is the Neocons’ view who see Iraq as only one small battle in the long war. They will argue that Iraq may currently be a stalemate, but a decisive victory in the next battle of theirwar can and will solve that problem.
Baghdad is for wimps, real men go to Teheran.
February 22, 2007
More Iranqing
The ninth U.S. helicopter in five weeks has been downed in Iraq – quite a surge. There is really no way for the U.S. to change tactics to avoid this, so expect more of these. For the resistance this is effective as it increases the likelihood of a U.S. retreat.
In contrast, using chlorine containers or tankers as weapons against the civilian population is ineffective. These are no WMDs but stinking chemicals that disperses relativly quickly.
Understanding AFRICOM: A Contextual Reading of Empire’s New Combatant Command
(This is the last part of the Understanding AFRICOM series. You may want to start with reading part I and part II. A PDF version of the complete series is available. Your comments on this are welcome here.)
by b real
A New Cold War in Africa
Apart from its role in protecting oil and natural gas supplies, AFRICOM will inherit additional responsibility on a continent that is fast becoming the geopolitical centerpiece in a new Cold War. Aimed toward countering China, this context will cast the new combatant command on a parallel with that of EUCOM in its task containing the Eastern Bloc during the decades following the Second World War.
Understanding AFRICOM: A Contextual Reading of Empire’s New Combatant Command
(This is part II of Understanding AFRICOM. You may want to start with reading part I. Published now is also part III. A PDF version of the complete series is available. Your comments on this are welcome here.)
by b real
West Africa
Prior to the announcement of AFRICOM, the remaining portion of Africa fell under the AOR of the U.S. European Command (EUCOM), with the exception being U.S. Pacific Command’s responsibility for the island of Madagascar. It is in Western and Sub-Sahara Africa where the most active presence of U.S. forces is taking place. It is also, not surprisingly, where most of Africa’s oil and natural gas resources are located. The Cheney report identified the six largest Sub-Saharan oil-producing African nations as the focus for U.S. attention in expanding reliable oil supplies – Nigeria, Angola, Gabon, Congo-Brazzaville, Chad, and Equatorial Guinea. [18]
As Bellamy noted, the introduction to a 2005 Council on Foreign Relations document, "More Than Humanitarianism: A Strategic U.S. Approach Toward Africa", declared that "By the end of the decade sub-Saharan Africa is likely to become as important as a source of U.S. energy imports as the Middle East." The end of the decade, accordingly, is not very far into the future.
Understanding AFRICOM: A Contextual Reading of Empire’s New Combatant Command
(This is part one of Understanding AFRICOM. Published now are also part II and part III. A PDF version of the complete series is available. Your comments on this are welcome here.)
by b real
AFRICOM
In early February 2007 the White House finally announced a presidential directive to establish by September 2008 a new unified combatant command with an area of responsibility (AOR) solely dedicated to the African continent. While there had been chatter and debate over a period of years about the form that such a military command should take, the announcement to proceed with centralizing military resources in Africa should not have surprised anyone paying attention for the past seven years.
The U.S. African Command (AFRICOM) will replace the AOR for each of three other geographic combatant commands (there are now a total of six) currently tasked with portions of the second-largest continent, with the small exception of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) retaining AOR for Egypt. Further details on operations have not been made public apart from the usual basic press briefings and the formation of a transition team, though it not a mystery to identify what role AFRICOM will play in both the U.S. and Africa’s future.
The Tapped blog points to some funny Ahmadinejad videos on YouTube and guesses "it’s part of somebody’s propaganda war efforts."
Indeed it is. The person under the pseudonym FardaRoshanAst who posts those videossays:
Most of the videos that i’ve host the past 10 months are from the Iranian Resistance Television, Simaye Azadi (INTV – Iranian National Television – www.iranntv.com).
The billionaire has previously said that he is not personally interested in an active political life, but he wants to be the man who determines who becomes prime minister.
The billionaire is Russian-born Israeli Arcadi Gaydamak. The prime minister he wants to install is U.S. neocon’s best friend Bibi Netanyahu.
Gaydamak will start a new party in Israel promising "market economy, increased taxation for high earners and a significantly stronger welfare state." He later wants to join it with Likud.
As his ally Netanyahu is a proven arch neoliberal, the political program is of course a scam. But it helps to buy the needed votes of the hawkish but poor Russian immigrants – a sixth part of the Israeli population.
Gaydamak is wanted for illegal arms-for-oil deals with Angola which fueled the civil war there. He had bought the Angolan government by providing old Russian weapons and bribing it to give him very lucrative oil deals.
The story of that resource war in Angola and Gaydamak’s role is told in All The Presidents Men (this is not the Bernstein/Woodward Watergate book) which I recommend. There are also connections to Cheney’s old company Halliburton, Bush and the GOP.
Politics and policy in Israel are already in bad shape. With a crook like Gaydamak buying himself the Israeli democracy, they will certainly get worse.
The first set of three-way talks among Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice and Israeli and Palestinian leaders, initially billed as a new U.S. push to restart peace efforts, ended Monday with little progress other than a commitment to meet again.
In a 90-second statement following the two-hour meeting, Rice said the three discussed the changed political circumstances arising from a Palestinian power-sharing deal that includes Hamas militants.
Neither Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas nor Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert joined Rice as she delivered her statement, and she left the room without taking questions from reporters.
Rice said she would return soon, although she was not precise, and Olmert and Abbas said they would meet separately. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said there is no date for another three-way meeting.
Think about that. The Secretary of State of the sole superpower convenes a meeting with two minor parties and gets snubbed by both of them. Not even the usual decorum of a joint press conference – nothing, nada, nil.
The influence of the U.S. in the Middle East under the current administration is now zero or below – except for the capacity to bomb anything or anyone to dust.
Thinking about it – that’s a real danger …
When will an Israeli government recognize Palestine, accept previous peace deals and renounce violence?
Obviously only when the U.S. puts up some pressure and stops paying billions of subsidies to Israel to make it do so.
“Be very afraid,” officials say …
… according
to American intelligence and counterterrorism officials … American officials said … The
United States has also identified … including one that officials said … American
analysts said recent intelligence showed … the analysts said … Officials said … different from those
made in recent months by intelligence officials and terrorism experts … American
officials say that the new intelligence is focused … intelligence and counterterrorism
officials … classified intelligence … the
condition of anonymity … not provide some of the evidence
that led them to their assessments, … revealing the
information … sources and methods of
intelligence collection … the officials said … an administration official said. Officials
from several different American intelligence and counterterrorism
agencies presented … But
debates within the administration … officials in Washington
said. One counterterrorism official said … And State
Department officials say … Some of the interviews with officials were granted after … As recently as 2005, American intelligence assessments … But more recent intelligence
describes … said one American
government official, who said … American officials and analysts said … has led counterterrorism officials to what they say are
“clear linkages” … American analysts point out … Other experts questioned
the seriousness … They argued that … according to
American analysts … The analysts said … but officials
in Washington and Islamabad conceded … Officials said
that both American and foreign intelligence services had collected
evidence leading them to conclude … Officials
said … Among the indicators that American officials cited … one official said … American intelligence and counterterrorism
officials said … They said … Pakistani
officials say … Officials said … Officials in Washington say
they believe Al Qaeda Chiefs Are Seen to Regain Powerthe New York Times Offers Stenography Service
I remember past Saturday evenings that the Barflies would at least turn off from the horrors for a reprieve, but things have been so bad for so long that it has totally affected the mood here at Moon of Alabama. I guess just like with the Iraqi’s, you think it can’t get any worse – but it does and it does, again and again.
Stop! Stop! Stop! The world, as a community, needs to dance, just a little. Pretty soon, we will forget how.
Yes Rick, you are right, very right in this and I promise to post some uplifting stuff the next weeks. There is a lot of good development in this world and I tend to lose the focus on that.
Also, I certainly need to dance again and did so today. This is one of the pieces I chose to dance to. The music is better in the studio version, but the video is quite good on its own. It’s too industrialized to become a long term favorite, but the original idea is recognizable.
What music are you dancing to?
A Campaign Against War On Iran
Today the three major U.S. papers carry stories or op-eds that explain why Iran takes the position it takes and why it is "meddling" in Iraq.
The pieces are not generally positive on Iran, but they paint it as a rational actor that defends its legitimate interests in a neighboring country.
Additionally, even the rightwing Washington Post editors are coming out against an attack on Iran. For the wrong reason of course, but they do.
In a strongly worded statement on Friday, the US embassy […] criticised "the suspension – even partial – of civilian rule, the use of lethal force against the civilian population, the abrogation of basic freedoms, and the roll-back of the democratic process. Envoys hold […] crisis talks
Good, yes, but it was not in response to this:
The Iraqi government on Tuesday ordered tens of thousands of Baghdad residents to leave homes they are occupying illegally, in a surprising and highly challenging effort to reverse the tide of sectarian cleansing that has left the capital bloodied and Balkanized.
Addressing the nation on behalf of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, Lt. Gen. Abboud Gambar, the Iraqi commander of the Baghdad security crackdown, also announced the closing of Iraq’s borders with Iran and Syria, an extension of the curfew in Baghdad by an hour, and the setup of new checkpoints run by the Defense and Interior Ministries, both of which Gambar said he now controlled.
He said the government would break into homes and cars it deemed dangerous, open mail and eavesdrop on phone calls. Iraq lays down stiff new rules
Lancet Iraq Study Update
The second study (pdf) on mortality in Iraq after the U.S. led invasion was published last October in the venerable medical journal Lancet.
The authors’ major conclusion was this:
We estimate that as of July, 2006, there have been 654.965 (392.979–942.636) excess Iraqi deaths as a consequence of the war, which corresponds to 2-5% of the population in the study area.
Wikipedia discusses criticisms and defenses of the study.
The study calculated excess death, by comparing mortality in Iraq before the invasion and in various periods after the invasion.
Pre-invasion: 5.5 deaths/1,000/year
March 2003-April 2004: 7.5 deaths/1,000/year
May 2004-May 2005: 10.9 deaths/1,000/year
June 2005-June 2006: 19.8 deaths/1,000/year
As we have not seen a significant decrease of violence in Iraq since the last period covered in the study, it should be valid to extrapolate the numbers.
The excess death in the last study period are 14.3/1,000/year or 1.192/1,000/month. The total calculations are based on a pre-war population of 26 million. As some 1.5 million Iraqis have fled the country, (with another 1 million expected to be displaced this year,) the lower base leads to some 29,200 per month dying in Iraq of war-related causes. Additionally to the study’s number of 650,000 by now another 220,000 have died. By end of June 2007 the estimated number of war-related dead will have exceeded 1,000,000.
In my professional life I have seen similar planning lunacy in business plans of U.S. companies expanding their models into Europe. Highly educated managers believing that their solutions would be welcome because they were unique American solutions.
This is not a unique U.S. attitude. The Daimler-Chrysler drama shows similar defects. But on the level of businesses the consequences of such behavior are not catastrophic and correctable. On the level of war they are not and in a democracy, such mismanagement can not be solely attributed to the CEOs or board members. Especially not when it is repetitive behaviour.
We, the American people—not the Bush administration, nor the hapless Iraqis, nor the meddlesome Iranians (the new scapegoat) – are the root of the problem.
It’s woven into our cultural DNA. Most Americans mistakenly believe that when we say that “all men are created equal,” it means that all people are the same. Behind the “cute” and “charming” native clothing, the “weird” marriage customs, and the “odd” food of other cultures, all humans are yearning for lifestyles and futures that will be increasingly unified as time and globalization progress.
[…]
Americans invaded an imaginary Iraq that fit into our vision of the world. We invaded Iraq in the sure belief that inside every Iraqi there was an American trying to get out. In our dream version of Iraq, we would be greeted as not only liberators from the tyrant, but more importantly, from the old ways.
[…]
Through our refusal to deal with alien peoples on their own terms, and within their own traditions, we have killed any real hope of a positive outcome in Iraq. Our mission there will be over some day, but there will be other fields for our missionary work, other dreams to dream about: Syria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran …
The Daimler mismanaging of its acquisition is a question of manager incompetence. But as Pat implicitly recognizes, the war on Iraq is a question of collective guilt.
