West Asia News and Discussions

[Shanmukh]

If Muslims werent in the picture the Jew and the Hindu would have been sworn enemies with the former calling us idolators and with us calling them as Monotheistic and fundamental fanatics with a narrow minded myopoic view.

This is true only of the religious Jews. The non-religious Jews have a more Unitarian view of divinity. Particularly the ones that came from Congress Poland, and Russia, who have spent hundred years or more under the Tsars, and then the Communist atheists, are far more relaxed about religion.

[ramana]

Folks Thread hijack. Please use OT Thread for further discussions on religion.

Thanks,

ramana

[muraliravi]

How do you know if the poster is even Indian, before making the leap into generalization that you did regarding "anti-semitism" in India?

The poster in question has identified himself as Indian (even the state to which he belongs), and has good insight into the politics of the country too. From the sum total of the writings, it seems most likely that the person is indeed an Indian.

Nagesh ji,

I wrote that post.

JE Menon sir,

I am an Indian. I will stick to my views, i guess it is not a crime to be an anti-semite on BR or in India. Me and Nagesh sir agree on a lot of things, but we differ on this. I will spell jews right, but I hope you do use the same yardstick and warn anyone who spells hindus as hindoos, calls muslims as momins, etc.. and those who refer to christianity sarcastically as ROL etc..

There are tons of posts on BR where muslims and christians have been abused openly and sophisticatedly, we call them EJ's etc.. Their religion is criticized openly, we call them names and expose their agenda to the smallest detail. So i guess they have been tested and tried and found guilty, so we can hurl abuses at them. I have been on BR long enough and I hope you can tolerate some opposing views against jews as well.

Someone even made a ridiculous allegation that if I am so enamored by the white race, why dont i accept their culture and become a christian blah blah.. First of all, by praising someone's achievements, you dont extol them, all u are doing is giving them some credit, next white race has nothing do to with christian religion even though they practice it. Philipines converted entirely to christianity, so have they become whites.. Are all brfites who extol the jewish race considering conversion to judaism?? So this whole logic is bankrupt. Anyway my last post on this.

[Vayutuvan]

Is "Jewish" a race? Semitics? Hindus? Muslims? Arabs? Mongols? Aryans?

[Shanmukh]

I will leave out the rest of your post, simply because it is your view, and there is nothing for me to say, save that the link you have given is based on a history site, that is extremely Left oriented. I suspect that if you read Indian history from the same group, it would be more or less unrecognisable. Simply put, that history of Israel is total rubbish, IMO, and their recital of the Deir Yassin massacre is utterly reprehensible. They have left out all facts inconvenient to their narrative. But let be.

Regarding Richard Silverstein, he was discussing T-shirts designed by IDF soldiers. If you don't like his analysis, fine. But I would be interested in your analysis of the T-shirts' slogans, then. I'll be away from a computer for the weekend, but I can respond after that.

First, the Richard Silverstein article is based on an article of the Haaretz as he himself says. The blogger Idan Landau has parts of it.

http://idanlandau.com/2009/03/20/%D7%9E ... %95%D7%A2/

The English version is unavailable on the net (it leads to the Haaretz home page, and the article is unavailable), and only the Hebrew blog version is available, which I have linked above. I read the entire article, and there is nothing at all about the photographs that he is talking about in the article. Sure, in the photographs, there are T shirts supposedly worn by the soldiers (it does not say when the T shirts were worn, nor by whom, nor who were the soldiers who were creating those T shirts). Merely that such T shirts are being designed by the soldiers. A convenient sentence that Silverstein has refrained from pointing out is that these are not done by the IDF commands (as the soldier `Joseph' says). Simply put, there is not a single identifiable event or occurrence. Merely that such things are being done by `soldiers'. Which soldiers? Who is doing these things? No answer. The rest is merely malarkey that Silverstein has added, with no basis in the Hebrew article he has linked. Note, at no point does even Silverstein say that these things are being done by the soldiers - merely that there are T-shirts that purport to intend such things. Simply put, sir, crude fantasies by soldiers in their private lives mean less than nothing. Even if they intended to do such things (and note that there is no evidence in the article that anyone even wanted to do such things), is intent criminal?

[muraliravi]

Is "Jewish" a race? Semitics? Hindus? Muslims? Arabs? Mongols? Aryans?

Jews, arabs and mongols are races. Hindus and muslims are religious classifications. Aryans is too widely used term

[Vayutuvan]

Sire: What race do Ethiopian Jews belong to?

[muraliravi]

Sire: What race do Ethiopian Jews belong to?

Replied in OT thread

[Arjun]

There are tons of posts on BR where muslims and christians have been abused openly and sophisticatedly, we call them EJ's etc.. Their religion is criticized openly, we call them names and expose their agenda to the smallest detail. So i guess they have been tested and tried and found guilty, so we can hurl abuses at them. I have been on BR long enough and I hope you can tolerate some opposing views against jews as well.

Criticizing religion or any set of beliefs in general is perfectly OK - criticizing a community or race is not. Even when a religious group such as EJs is criticized on BR, it is in reference to their fundamentalist beliefs centered around their religious texts, which are clearly understood to be having a negative impact on the ground in India.

You on the other hand are not criticizing Judaism, but making unwarranted inferences about Jews as a race. Further, the Jews who you are making wild accusations of having started world wars and control the strings of global finance - are probably a quite distinct set from the set of fundamentalist or observant Jews.

Now, on the other hand, if you want to objectively track the relative performance in Science and other fields of various races and ethnic groups, that is something I would be highly interested in myself. We can start a separate thread for it. But its important that the tone in any such thread be completely objective - and not accusatory towards any group, like your language sometimes tends to be.

[ramana]

Again folks its going OT. No more discussion on religion, race/vace etc.

ramana

[JE Menon]

^^+1

[RajeshA]

Is "Jewish" a race? Semitics? Hindus? Muslims? Arabs? Mongols? Aryans?

Jews, arabs and mongols are races. Hindus and muslims are religious classifications. Aryans is too widely used term

Don't quite agree on Hindus and Muslims! Anyway off-topic.

[Philip]

This isn't a spat between with Jews and Muslims,though they might be the majority of people affected and involved.The state of Israel and the Palestinians,have been engaged in a vicious spiral of conflict since 1948,more so in the aftermath of the '67 and '73 wars.

The tragedy and death toll now resembles a cricket score.,over 400 Palestinians killed and Israelis killed over a dozen now.The Gaza War has overtaken the death toll in the Ukraine.Anti-Israeli demonstrations have been seen worldwide as the death toll has mounted.Some reports say that Bibi wants to "take over" Gaza.That would involve street-to-street fighting with the toll skyrocketing as has been seen from many other conflicts.He is now being accused of war crimes.

Deadly Sunday in Gaza: At least 87 Palestinians & 13 Israeli soldiers killed
Published time: July 20, 2014

Scores of Palestinians and Israeli soldiers have been killed on Sunday as hostilities continue in the Gaza strip. Both sides earlier agreed to a brief ceasefire to allow medics to reach those wounded by Israeli shells.

Follow RT's live updates on Israel's operation in Gaza

At least 87 Palestinians were killed on Sunday, according to the Palestinian Health Ministry, as the Israeli Defense Forces shelled the Shejaia district in the north east of Gaza. The casualties are the heaviest since Israel launched its offensive on the Palestinian territory on July 8.

Harry Fear, an RT contributor who is in Gaza summed up the scene this afternoon. “For approximately one hour this afternoon, Israel held fire on the Shejaia neighborhood in east Gaza. Just over the last few minutes, Israel has continued to fire on this neighborhood, which has been heavily pounded this morning and last night,” he said.

Both Hamas and Israel agreed to a brief ceasefire earlier in the day, which was broken after just an hour after shots were fired in Gaza.
“The agreement to implement a ceasefire was ended because of Hamas who started shooting at our soldiers. We had to answer back,” said an Israeli army source.
Hamas is yet to comment on Israeli allegations that it had breached the ceasefire.

The death toll was condemned by the Arab League who described Israeli attacks on Gaza on Sunday as a “war crime” against Palestinian civilians.

Over 400 Palestinians have been killed in Israel’s operation Protective Edge, the Palestinian Ministry of Health said on Sunday. 13 Israeli soldiers were killed on Saturday night and early Sunday in several incidents across the Gaza strip, bringing the total number of fatilites in less than two days, according to Haaretz.

During the ceasefire, local Gaza rescue services managed to evacuate 50 Palestinian bodies from the Shejaia neighborhood in the east of Gaza City. The Gaza Health Ministry says the dead included 17 children and 14 women and hundreds of wounded were being treated. The Rafah crossing has been opened, but only for use for humanitarian emergencies.

The ceasefire, requested by the International Committee of the Red Cross, was due to last from 1:30pm to 3:30pm (10:30-12:30 GMT) in the Shejaia district.

According to Haaretz, the Israeli Defense Forces also announced they will set up a field hospital near the Erez Crossing at the northern end of the Gaza strip, to treat wounded Palestinians.

Palestinians react to destroyed homes in the Shejaia neighbourhood, which was heavily shelled by Israel during fighting, in Gaza City July 20, 2014 (Reuters / Finbarr O'Reilly)

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday that Israel will take "whatever action is necessary" to halt Hamas cross-border rocket attacks from Gaza and restore calm but insisted his forces were doing their utmost to avoid civilian casualties there.

"We try to target military targets and unfortunately there are civilian casualties which we regret and we don't seek," Netanyahu told CNN shortly after an Israeli attack on a Gaza neighborhood killed at least 89 Palestinians.

He accused Hamas of deliberately targeting Israeli civilians and of using Gaza residents as "human shields." Asked how long it would take Israel to complete an operation it says is intended to destroy Hamas weapons tunnels, Netanyahu said it was being done "fairly quickly," but gave no time frame.
Qatar ready to host truce talks

Doha has announced it will host a meeting between Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Sunday, which will look to try and push for an end to fighting in the Gaza strip, according to a senior source from the country.

The session is due to take place in Doha and will be chaired by the Gulf state's emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani, who has been acting as a "channel of communication" between the Islamist Hamas group and the international community, said the source.

"Qatar has presented Hamas' demands to the international community. The list has been presented to France and to the UN. The talks tomorrow will be to further negotiate these conditions."

Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip, has rejected Egyptian efforts to end the fighting, saying any deal must include an end to a blockade of the coastal area and a recommitment to a ceasefire reached in an eight-day war there in 2012.

A Palestinian evacuates a wounded man following what police said was an Israeli air strike on a house in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip July 20, 2014 (Reuters / Ibraheem Abu Mustafa)

The conditions include the release of prisoners re-arrested since a 2011 exchange deal with Israel, the opening of Gaza-Israel border crossings and an end to an Israeli blockade on the Gaza seaport, a Hamas source in Doha said.

"In general, Israel must end all forms of aggression and attacks, end the blockade of Gaza and remove the actions that resulted from its military offensive in the West Bank after June 12," Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters in the Palestinian Territories.

Egypt said on Saturday it had no plans to revise its ceasefire proposal, which Hamas has already rejected. And the Hamas source in Doha said the group has no plans to change its conditions for a ceasefire.

"We want the rights of our people. Palestinians on the ground are supporting us and we will get them back their rights," said the source.

An IDF spokesman insisted to RT that Israel does not target civilians.

“We do not target in any way or form civilians, we target Hamas terrorists. The idea of the operation is ongoing in order to secure safety and security for the state of Israel. Hamas decided to have an onslaught against the state of Israel and indeed even when we held our stations yesterday for six hours they continued to bombard Israel indiscriminately and we were left basically with no alternative,” he said.

.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/j ... ls-in-gaza
Israel using flechette shells in Gaza
Palestinian human rights group accuses Israel military of using shells that spray out thousand of tiny and potentially lethal darts[/b]

The Israeli military is using flechette shells, which spray out thousands of tiny and potentially lethal metal darts, in its military operation in Gaza.

Six flechette shells were fired towards the village of Khuzaa, east of Khan Younis, on 17 July, according to the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights. Nahla Khalil Najjar, 37, suffered injuries to her chest, it said. PCHR provided a picture of flechettes taken by a fieldworker last week.

The Israel Defence Forces (IDF) did not deny using the shells in the conflict. "As a rule, the IDF only employs weapons that have been determined lawful under international law, and in a manner which fully conforms with the laws of armed conflict," a spokesperson said in response to a request for specific comment on the deployment of flechettes.

B'Tselem, an Israeli human rights organisation, describes a flechette shell as "an anti-personnel weapon that is generally fired from a tank. The shell explodes in the air and releases thousands of metal darts 37.5mm in length, which disperse in a conical arch 300 metres long and about 90 metres wide".

The munitions are not prohibited under international humanitarian law, but according to B'Tselem, "other rules of humanitarian law render their use in the Gaza Strip illegal. One of the most fundamental principles is the obligation to distinguish between those who are involved and those who are not involved in the fighting, and to avoid to the extent possible injury to those who are not involved. Deriving from this principle is the prohibition of the use of an imprecise weapon which is likely to result in civilian injuries."
Flechette shell darts embedded in a wall in Gaza A image taken in 2009 of darts from a flechette shell embedded in a wall in Gaza. Photograph: Ben Curtis/AP

The legality of flechette munitions was upheld by the Israeli supreme court in 2002, and according to an Israeli military source, they are particularly effective against enemy fighters operating in areas covered by vegetation.

The source said a number of armies around the world deploy flechette shells, and that they were intended solely for use against legitimate military targets in accordance with international law.

The IDF has deployed flechette shells in Gaza and Lebanon before. B'Tselem has documented the deaths of nine Palestinians in Gaza from flechettes in 2001 and 2002. Flechettes have also killed and wounded dozens of civilians, including women and children, in conflicts between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The Israeli military deployed artillery shells containing white phosphorous in densely populated areas of Gaza during Operation Cast Lead in 2008 and 2009, causing scores of deaths and extensive burns. It initially issued a categorical denial of reports of the use of white phosphorous, but later admitted it, saying the weapon was only used to create smokescreens.

Human Rights Watch said its use of the munitions in Operation Cast Lead was indiscriminate and evidence of war crimes.

In response to a legal challenge, the IDF said last year it would "avoid the use in built-up areas of artillery shells containing white phosphorus, with two narrow exceptions." The exceptions were not disclosed.

The total silence of the US at events in Gaza and its unwillingness to stop the carnage exposes its utter hypocrisy.While it rants and raves against Russia about the MH tragedy,which more and more looks like a false flag op,it has done nothing to stop the utter wholesale slaughter in Gaza where US weaponry is being used to kill hundreds of Palestinian civilians in a most indiscriminate attack by Israel.

[vivek.rao]

chadasastry ‏@sastrychada 1h
"@Tawhidicom: Urgent ISIS shoot an entire family in Musul for celebrating the graduation of their daughter. pic.twitter.com/Yyow7AObpe" @SafeensS

[Philip]

ISIS massacres over 260 Iraqi gas workers in a day,Gaza burns with over 400 Palestinians now killed,the Syrian conflict goes on regardless with more inroads by ISIS,and the world is helpless.Bunkum Moon is heading off to Qatar to see if he can persuade the co-sponsors of much of the terror in Iraq (along with the Saudis) ,Syria and the ME in general,to halt this madness that is inexorably sliding the world into a wider conflict.Just as in WW1,whose centenary we've just commemorated,small sparks lit a mighty flame that consumed millions of casualties from all over the world including India. Our interests too are at stake with millions employed in the globe's most volatile region.It is past time for Indian diplomacy to pull its head from the sand where ostrich like it's been hibernating for over a decade.Some headlines and Xcpts.

https://www.google.co.in/search?newwind ... vYUx83lyw0
Israel-Gaza conflict: Gaza suffers its deadliest day after ‘heinous massacre’

A night and day of ferocious violence has resulted in more than 100 deaths in Gaza, with Palestinian accusations that a bloody assault on the town of Shuja’iya by Israeli forces, leaving bodies on the streets and buildings destroyed, was motivated by revenge for the deaths of 13 soldiers.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/j ... -hospitals
Gaza's bloodiest day as at least 100 Palestinians are killed
Hospitals overwhelmed following bombardment in residential area of Shujai'iya described by Arab League as a 'war crime'

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/j ... -offensive
Gaza ceasefire hopes switch to Qatar as Arabs divided over Israeli offensive
Doha provides 'channel of communication' to discuss Hamas's demands as UN chief flies in for emergency talks to end conflict

Khaled al-Attiyeh, Qatar's foreign minister, has emerged as a key figure in the ceasefire effort, not least because he is close to John Kerry, the US secretary of state. The Qataris say they are simply providing a "channel of communication" to discuss an agreement that contains the key Hamas demands: an end to the Israeli blockade of Gaza, an opening of the border with Egypt and a release of scores of recently re-arrested prisoners by Israel.

The secretary of state, John Kerry, on Sunday appeared to criticise Israel’s claims about the targeted scope of its attacks on Gaza, as a open microphone caught him talking to an aide ahead of a TV interview.
Kerry's apparent slip came before the White House said President Barack Obama had spoken with Netanyahu on Sunday morning by phone, their second call in three days, and “raised serious concern about the growing number of casualties, including increasing Palestinian civilian deaths in Gaza and the loss of Israeli soldiers”

Kerry's unscripted remarks about Israeli policy were not the first to have emerged in public. In April, the Daily Beast reported that he had warned a closed-door meeting of world leaders that Israel could become an “apartheid state” if a two-state solution was not found and that if peace talks failed there could be a resumption of Palestinian violence against Israeli citizens.

http://rt.com/news/174264-thousands-vie ... a-protest/
Thousands take to the streets of Vienna in Gaza protest

Almost 11,000 demonstrators have attended a pro-Palestinian protest in the Austrian capital Sunday between the Hofburg Palace and the Rathaus town hall, in anger at Israel’s military campaign which has killed more than 400 people already.

The Vienna protest comes on day after as nearly 15,000 people hit the streets of London and marched from the Israeli Embassy to Downing Street. Same protests took place in Paris Saturday, but resulted in several injuries and at least 38 arrests. Dozens of protesters used stones and bottles to attack police lines for several hours in northern districts of the capital.

[Prem]

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/10632 ... e-east.htm

UAE plans Mars mission in 2021, may trigger space race in Middle East ( (with who)

A new space race has apparently emerged with more and more countries now launching missions to Mars.On Wednesday, the United Arab Emirates joined the ranks of the United States, Japan, China and India in working on projects and missions to the red planet as it announced the creation of its own space agency and intention to send an unmanned mission to Mars by 2021."Despite all the tensions and the conflicts across the Middle East, we have proved today how positive a contribution the Arab people can make to humanity through great achievements, given the right circumstances and ingredients," UAE vice president and Dubai ruler Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum said. "Our region is a region of civilization. Our destiny is, once again, to explore, to create, to build and to civilize."It used to be the Soviet Union and the United States racing for supremacy in spaceflight with the U.S. eventually making it as the first country to successfully send men to the moon in 1969. Now, several countries are eyeing the red planet.India's Mars orbiter, which was launched in November last year, is expected to reach Mars' orbit by Sept. 24. China, on the other hand, plans to send a vehicle to Mars by 2020 after an unsuccessful attempt in 2011. In 2010, the United States, which already has its Curiosity Rover exploring the surface of Mars, unveiled a plan to send manned missions to orbit the red planet by the mid 2030's. Japan is also embarking on a project to send manned mission to Mars.In a statement, the UAE government said that it has joined the space race with a project to send the first unmanned Arab probe to Mars by 2021. It also unveiled the creation of the UAE Space Agency which will take charge of the mission and will be involved in the country's space technology sector.The journey of the Mars probe, which is anticipated to take nine months and will cover over 60 million kilometers, will coincide with UAE's 50th anniversary of independence from Britain. The statement also reported that the country already has an investment of over $5 billion on space technology which includes an earth observation system and a satellite broadcaster.UAE's planned mission to Mars may seem humble compared with those of Japan and U.S. but it appears to be an effort to keep up with an apparent space race in the Middle East. Iran has launched a second monkey into space last year.

[Surya]

what the hell were M113s doing there when they have better equipment?

would be interesting to see the details of the battle which cost the israelis 13 lives

[TSJones]

what the hell were M113s doing there when they have better equipment?

would be interesting to see the details of the battle which cost the israelis 13 lives

what better equipment would that be?

[Virendra]

Just a small nit, Rudradev-ji. Both Wendy Doniger and Martha Nussbaum were born Christians, were raised Christians, and converted to Judaism later in their lives. So, the hardcore Jews would not even accept them as Jews (although, none will probably say so to their faces). I think I mentioned in a previous post of mine that western Jews would be the hardest to get along with for us Indians. It should be mentioned, I think, that there is a significant difference between Israeli Jews and American Jews.

Aren't the neo converts usually more zealous and radical nagesh ji ?

[Shanmukh]

Just a small nit, Rudradev-ji. Both Wendy Doniger and Martha Nussbaum were born Christians, were raised Christians, and converted to Judaism later in their lives. So, the hardcore Jews would not even accept them as Jews (although, none will probably say so to their faces). I think I mentioned in a previous post of mine that western Jews would be the hardest to get along with for us Indians. It should be mentioned, I think, that there is a significant difference between Israeli Jews and American Jews.

Aren't the neo converts usually more zealous and radical nagesh ji ?

Very much so. Also, when you factor in the personalities of the two women, it becomes infinitely worse. Add in evangelistic zeal and exclusivism, to self righteous indignation and contempt for the heathen, and you can compute for yourself the end result. Actually, there is no need to compute. The result is available for us to study.

[Surya]

@TSJ
Achzarits

granted its harder to move around in built up area but is more heavily armored

[Singha]

they have far less number of achzarit and namer than m113.
the m113 can go down narrow lanes the other two cannot.

relatively more open areas like golan or negev would suit these heavies.

[Surya]

@singha

what that would suggest is the IDF neglected this aspect - persisting with M 113s even though they were the object of critics for a long time.
My office colleagues in Israel are furious with the M 113s -
one prefers to go dismounted in built up area - he is a veteran of Gaza

Even fewer numbers of bigger vehicles would have been worth the risk - its not like the IDF cares if houses are damaged as they swing around small lanes in built up areas.

At minimum - would have left the troops hurt but not wiped out

[Singha]

some general probably is a fan of the 'agile' tin can. it doesnt have the engine power to mount heavier protection also I think and is totally vulnerable against any form of late-model RPG, ATGM or landmine.

but its cheap to produce and maintain and has its place as a people mover. the pakis love it and on occasion I have also suggested license building it to solve our x-country troop transport problem.

[Austin]

Turkey's Erdogan: 'I stopped talking to Obama'

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said he ceased direct phone contact with US President Barack Obama once the US backed away from use of military force against Syria last fall.

Erdogan, a supporter of rebel fighters opposed to Syrian President Bashar Assad’s government, was upset, he said, that the United States did not follow through with military action against Damascus amid the fierce civil war there.

"In the past, I was calling him (Obama) directly. Because I can't get the expected results on Syria, our foreign ministers are now talking to each other," Erdogan said Monday in an interview with the pro-government ATV channel.

"And I have talked to (US Vice President Joe) Biden. He calls me and I call him.”

Erdogan indicated that he was disappointed when the US would not boost rebel factions enough at a time when Western opinion began to turn against Assad. I expect justice in this process. I couldn't imagine something like this from those who are championing justice," Erdogan added.

The last phone conversation between Erdogan and Obama took place on February 20, according to AFP, after which the White House released a scathing statement accusing Erdogan of misrepresenting the content of their conversation.

Erdogan has also been at odds with the US over Israel’s current offensive in the Gaza Strip that has killed more than 580 Palestinians in two weeks.

Erdogan accused Israel of “state terrorism” and a “genocide” of Palestinians. He also chastised the US for defending Israel’s “disproportionate” use of force, adding that Israel had “surpassed Hitler in barbarism.”

"[Israelis] have no conscience, no honor, no pride. Those who condemn Hitler day and night have surpassed Hitler in barbarism," Erdogan said.

The US State Department called his comments on Israel “offensive and wrong.” Erdogan fired back saying the United States should partake in “self-criticism.”

Erdogan is expected to win the August 10 presidential election in Turkey. Should he win the race, many analysts expect him to be more assertive with Turkish foreign policy.

[Philip]

And good evening to you all.Here is the latest report and today's closing score from the Gaza test,another exciting day's play between these two great rivals ,exponents of the "noble game" in this series of their fight for the "Ashes".

Israel has now scored around 600 "runs" in its first innings in a devastating display of aggressive "batting",its batsmen also scoring several centuries.The Palestinian bowling attack spearheaded by Hamas,who hurled at the Israeli batsmen "rocket" like thunderbolts ad nauseum,couldn't make any headway against the Israeli openers and middle order now firmly in control of the game,which despatched the Palestinian bowlers to all parts of the battlefield. The massacre of the Palestinian bowling saw the Palestinian fielders scurrying for cover from balls speeding towards them exploding with deadly force,spewing lethal flechettes that couldn't be stopped. Despite many protests from spectators to spare the Palestinians further humiliation, there was no respite from the Israeli onslaught.Israel has lost just a couple of dozen wickets in scoring over 600 kills...sorry runs,and Captain Bibi Netanhayu is in no mood to declare its innings closed,putting the Palestinians truly on the ropes.Some observers are describing this as the finest example of aggressive "batting" since the Nazis devastated the Warsaw ghetto in that infamous Warsaw test way back in 1939.Others are reminded of Douglas Jardine's infamous "Bodyline" Ashes series against Badman's team of Oz.

Bookies are offering short odds on whether Israel's score will cross a record-breaking 1000 in Israel-Palestinian tests. Hectic betting by punters is taking place with some protests about spot fixing.The umpires are conspicuous by their absence.The ICC (International Council of Cretins) are furiously debating whether the game should continue as an unlimited over contest,as the spectators and TV viewers are getting quite fed up at seeing only one side bat all day ,day after day.The Israelis however say that they're only playing by the rules."All's fair in love,and cricket"!

The big Q amongst the spectators is who the winner will be as both sides are claiming victory in this unfinished Test. Universal opinion is that there will ultimately be no winners,only losers.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/j ... -shujaiiya
Israel hits hundreds of targets in Gaza as soldier is confirmed missing
• Israeli soldier captured during intense battle in Shujai'iya
• Palestinian death toll nears 600, with 27 Israeli soldiers killed
• John Kerry to meet UN chief and Egyptian mediators in Cairo

Israel hits hundreds of targets in Gaza as soldier is confirmed missing
• Israeli soldier captured during intense battle in Shujai'iya
• Palestinian death toll nears 600, with 27 Israeli soldiers killed
• John Kerry to meet UN chief and Egyptian mediators in Cairo

Gaza City View larger picture
Smoke rises after Israeli shelling at Shujai’iya neighbourhood in the east of Gaza City. Photograph: Sameh Rahmi/NurPhoto/Rex

Israel continued to pound Gaza overnight, including hitting 100 targets in Shujai'iya, the scene of the most intense fighting of the conflict, as the Israeli military confirmed that one of its soldiers was missing.

Hamas claimed on Sunday that it had captured an Israeli soldier during the intense battle in Shujai'iya.

The Israel Defence Forces (IDF) named the missing soldier as Sergeant Oron Shaul, 21, a combat soldier of the Golani brigade.

Hamas and Islamic Jihad reportedly agreed to a five-hour pause in the fighting. However, Haaretz quoted senior Israeli officials as saying a humanitarian ceasefire was "not on our agenda right now".
Gaza City air strike Palestinians take cover after a warning of an Israeli air strike in Gaza City. Photograph: Finbarr O'Reilly/Reuters

As diplomatic efforts to broker a halt to the conflict continued in Egypt, the Israeli military said its forces had struck almost 3,000 targets in Gaza over the past two weeks – almost half since the start of the ground offensive four days ago.

Twenty-seven soldiers have been killed in fighting, the IDF said in a statement. The Palestinian death toll in Gaza was climbing steadily towards 600, a third of whom are children, according to the UN children's agency Unicef.

As the fighting continued, John Kerry, the US secretary of state, was due to meet the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, and Egyptian mediators in Cairo. Barack Obama said on Monday that Kerry had been authorised to do "everything he can to help facilitate a cessation of hostilities", in a sign that international diplomacy had been galvanised by the weekend carnage in Shujai'iya.
Gaza City Bomb damage in the streets of Gaza City. Photograph: Ezz al-Zanoun/NurPhoto/REX

Kerry described Israel's military offensive as an "appropriate and legitimate effort" to defend itself but added that the consequences were of deep concern.

He pledged that the US would provide $47m (£28m) in humanitarian aid to help Palestinians. He said: "Only Hamas now needs to make the decision to spare innocent civilians from this violence."

Seven people, including four women from one family, were killed in an air strike early on Tuesday, according to Gaza paramedics.

On Monday, 25 members of the Abu Jame' family were killed when Israeli forces struck a house near Khan Younis, apparently without warning, the Israeli human rights organisation B'Tselem said. A Hamas militant was also killed.

The dead included 18 children and five women, three of whom were pregnant. The family was eating iftar, the meal that breaks the Ramadan fast.

B'Tselem called for an immediate ceasefire, saying: "Horrific developments in Gaza have reached intolerable heights: Israel is bombing houses with people in them, entire families have been buried under rubble, and streets lie in ruins. Hundreds have been killed so far, dozens in the last 24 hours only, many of them women and children. The number of refugees is rising: tens of thousands of people have nowhere to go and no safe haven."

Ten Israeli human rights organisations have written to the attorney general to raise concerns about grave violations of international law in the conflict. They questioned the legality of Sunday's operation in Shujai'iya, "in particular, the potential violation of the fundamental principles of the laws of war, specifically the principle of distinguishing between combatants and civilians".

Israeli officials continued to say that Hamas was using civilians as human shields, and it was giving warnings to residents of air strikes.
John Kerry, Sameh Shukri John Kerry with Egypt's foreign minister, Sameh Shukri, in Cairo on Tuesday: Kerry described Israel's offensive as an 'appropriate and legitimate effort' to defend itself Photograph: Stf/AP

A senior officer said there had been a significant decline in rocket fire from Gaza over the past few days, and that the scope of the rocket fire had decreased by 30% since the beginning of the ground operation.

In Cairo, Ban held talks on Monday with the Egyptian president, Abdel Fatah al-Sisi, and the head of the Arab League.

Egypt's proximity to Gaza, its peace treaty with Israel and good relations with the western-backed Palestinian Authority in the West Bank have made it the focus of attempts to defuse the crisis, though its relations with Hamas – which it sees as an offshoot of the banned Muslim Brotherhood – are hostile.

Hamas rejected Cairo's original ceasefire proposal last week, though a senior official said Egypt might be willing to alter its stance.

"Egypt does not mind adding some of Hamas's conditions provided that all involved parties approve," the official told Reuters. Hamas is demanding an end to the blockade of Gaza, an end to hostilities, opening the border to Egypt, the release of prisoners held by Israel and other conditions in exchange for a truce.

Ismail Haniyeh, the former Hamas prime minister, claimed that Israeli forces were being beaten in Gaza. "The Palestinian resistance will meet the demands and expectations of the Palestinian people," he said on Monday evening, adding that Hamas's conditions were "the minimum demands" for any truce.

"Our people's sacrifices are heading for triumph," he said in a pre-recorded TV broadcast. "We see the al-Qassam Brigades and the Jerusalem Brigades and all resistance factions beating the enemy and attack him again and again, under the earth and sea. The ground operation is a declaration of failure on the part of the enemy aerial war against Gaza."

[Surya]

Rpg 29 attack on merkava
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=70 ... =2&theater

i cannot make out whether the trophy intercepted it or not

[Austin]

It hit quite below the tanks not sure APS can actually defend quite low. The video does not show the after effect so we dont know the effect of RPG-29 on Merks

[ramana]

Philip, Tone down the language. Dont get carried away.

[RoyG]

Rpg 29 attack on merkava
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=70 ... =2&theater

i cannot make out whether the trophy intercepted it or not

RPG29 to any tank especially at that height will do some damage. Quite a hit. The crew, if they managed to survive will remember that jolt for sure.

[Surya]

Austin

the reason I suspect Trophy came into play is that the video does not show the aftermath

if it had destroyed am sure they would have been happy to provide the same

so I am suspecting it did minor damage

still would be interesting to see some more footage on effectiveness post Lebanon 2006

[anmol]

Saudi Arabia’s New Strategic Game in South Asia
nationalinterest.org

[..]

A New Game with New Delhi

In early 2012, Saudi authorities arrested Sayeed Zabiudeen Ansari (alias Abu Jundal), a Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) operative accused of playing a central role in planning and executing the 2008 terror attacks in Mumbai, India. After months of behind-the-scenes diplomatic wrangling between Islamabad, Riyadh, New Delhi, and Washington, Ansari was deported to India, where he was publicly re-arrested and interrogated extensively. Today he sits in solitary confinement in Mumbai’s central jail, and Indian sources claim that he has shed significant light on the Mumbai operation, including its links with members of the Pakistani intelligence service, or ISI.

Riyadh’s decision to send Ansari to India was remarkable. Ansari had traveled to Saudi Arabia on a Pakistani passport and his interrogation was almost certain to implicate the ISI—and by extension, provide strong evidence on the question of the Pakistani state’s support to terrorists. Pakistani officials undoubtedly would have preferred that Ansari be returned to their custody, and in the past, the intimate ties between Saudi and Pakistani intelligence services would have trumped Indian requests. In this case, however, Indian authorities prevailed. It helped, of course, that the facts were in New Delhi’s favor: Ansari was actually an Indian whose DNA matched with that of his Indian father. Pressure from U.S. intelligence officials and growing Saudi concerns about the genuine threat posed by groups like LeT may have sealed the deal.

Yet the Ansari case was also part of a wider trend in the Saudi-Indian relationship dating back to the end of the Cold War. For decades, India’s tilt toward Moscow and anemic economy had hindered the full flowering of ties between New Delhi and Riyadh. The new post–Cold War order paved the way for Riyadh to reimagine India’s potential as a growing energy consumer, a powerful regional actor, and even a strategic partner.

More important, in the early 2000s, Riyadh had good reasons for concern that India was growing closer to Iran. In 2000, India and Iran agreed to invest in a transit corridor linking an expanded Iranian port of Chabahar on the Arabian Sea to Afghanistan and Central Asia. In 2001, Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee visited Tehran, and in 2003, Iranian president Mohammed Khatami was India’s chief guest for the annual Republic Day celebration. The 2003 “New Delhi Declaration” included pledges by the two sides to expand and deepen commercial links—especially energy trade—and defense cooperation in a “strategic partnership.” Early signs, such as security-oriented working groups and naval exercises, along with a 35 percent jump in bilateral trade between 2004 and 2005, suggested that this Indo-Iranian partnership had the potential to be more than mere rhetoric.

Riyadh, however, did not sit idly by and watch the Indo-Iranian relationship mature. The Saudis had important cards to play, not least their place as India’s top source for petroleum imports. These existing commercial ties were actively encouraged and bolstered by the diplomatic outreach of Saudi leaders. In 2006, King Abdullah visited New Delhi, the first trip to India by a Saudi monarch since 1955. There the two sides vowed to expand trade and to improve counterterror cooperation. In 2010, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh returned the favor with a three-day, high-profile visit to the kingdom, during which the two sides also declared themselves “strategic partners” and paved the way for a follow-on defense cooperation pact inked in February 2014.

From a Saudi perspective, India is clearly an important energy customer, but the heightened strategic value of closer ties with India is better appreciated when viewed through the lens of Riyadh’s rivalry with Tehran. Here Saudi policy analysts suggest that diplomatic outreach to New Delhi has already achieved significant successes. Point by point, the emergent Indo-Iranian partnership of the early 2000s has been matched by Riyadh’s own diplomatic overtures of the past decade.

In addition, the Saudis have continued to supply about a fifth of India’s petroleum imports, even as total Indian energy demand more than doubled from 1990 to 2009. In an era when India has faced mounting international pressure (especially from the United States) to limit the growth of its oil imports from Iran, reliable Saudi supplies provide a crucial alternative. In 2012, for instance, India cut its Iranian crude imports by 11 percent. In 2013, India cut even further, and Iran fell from number three to number seven on the list of India’s top oil suppliers. Without the confidence inspired by unstinting Saudi energy supplies and royal reassurances, India would also have been less likely to take diplomatic action against Iran by casting multiple important votes in the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) during the period from 2005 to 2009.

To be sure, India has hardly turned into an unabashed supporter of the Saudi agenda. New Delhi remains concerned about the role of Saudi support to Salafist groups throughout the region, including in India itself, home to nearly 10 percent of the world’s Muslims. And Riyadh’s long history of intimate links with Pakistan’s security establishment will remain a source of distrust and tension for the foreseeable future. Moreover, New Delhi tries to maintain cordial, better relations with Iran. Tehran and New Delhi still see eye-to-eye on the situation in Afghanistan, and India has assiduously avoided taking sides in the Syrian civil war.

Nevertheless, the Saudis have clearly mounted an unprecedented effort to minimize India’s dependence on Iran and the gambit has worked in important, if circumscribed, ways.

Reinforced Ties with Pakistan

In April 2014, 130,000 troops took part in Saudi Arabia’s largest-ever military exercises. Dubbed “Abdullah’s Shield,” the show of strength included an impressive parade for visiting dignitaries in honor of King Abdullah’s ninth anniversary on the throne. Pakistan’s army chief, General Raheel Sharif, sat next to Prince Mutaib, the king’s son and National Guard minister, as a public demonstration of their important bilateral ties.

The parade was the latest in a series of recent events that suggest a rekindling of intimate relations between Riyadh and Islamabad, starting in mid-2013. The Saudi crown prince and foreign minister have each visited Pakistan, and General Sharif’s attendance at the military parade in April was his second high-profile trip to the kingdom since ascending to Pakistan’s top army job only six months earlier. Even more striking, however, was Islamabad’s March 2014 announcement that an unnamed friend—undoubtedly Saudi Arabia—had given Pakistan a “gift” of $1.5 billion, aimed at bolstering Pakistan’s currency. Well-placed Pakistani sources have since suggested that the total aid package could actually end up being twice or three times that amount.

Government officials in Islamabad contend that the recent Saudi embrace is nothing new. Saudi Arabia has had a long history of close ties with Pakistan: Islamabad started sending military trainers to the Kingdom in the 1960s, and during the 1970s and 1980s stationed thousands of troops—possibly as many as 20,000—there to bolster internal and external defenses. In return, the Saudis delivered to Pakistan nearly $1 billion in aid per year throughout most of the 1980s.

Also in the 1980s, the Saudis worked hand-in-hand with the United States to funnel billions of dollars to the anti-Soviet Afghan mujahedeen, all by way of Pakistan’s ISI. But the Saudi-Pakistani cooperation in Afghanistan did not end when the United States pulled away at the end of the Cold War. Indeed, the two continued to collaborate in their support to friendly factions—including the Taliban—during the Afghan civil war of the 1990s. Nor did Riyadh withdraw its support when Pakistan tested its nuclear weapons in 1998. To the contrary, the Saudis reportedly provided Islamabad with a desperately needed infusion of free energy, to the tune of 50,000 barrels of oil per day, to offset the pain of international sanctions.

For decades, the Saudis have played an influential political role in Islamabad. Riyadh’s willingness to host exiled Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif throughout most of General Pervez Musharraf’s regime was a tangible manifestation of that influence, as was Sharif’s well-financed return to Pakistan during the 2007-8 national parliamentary campaign. More than that, rumors are rife that many of Pakistan’s elite leaders—from across the political spectrum—quietly receive generous gifts from royal Saudi benefactors.

Saudi largesse and influence thus have a pronounced history in Pakistan, but the first five years of civilian rule after Musharraf’s departure in 2008 never saw the senior Saudi visits or generous aid packages of 2013 and 2014. The cooling of Pak-Saudi relations between 2008 and 2013 was primarily a consequence of Riyadh’s distrust of then-President Asif Ali Zardari. That distrust was rooted in several factors, including the Saudi belief that Zardari, the widower of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and inheritor of the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) that was founded in 1967 by her father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, is less of a loyal friend than Pakistan’s military leaders or the current prime minister, Nawaz Sharif (no relation to the current army chief).

This point was reinforced when Zardari’s PPP lost the May 2013 elections to Nawaz Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League party, and Riyadh and Islamabad quickly got back to business-as-usual. From a Saudi perspective, Sharif’s loyalties—both sectarian and geopolitical—are unimpeachable. Now that they have their man in Islamabad, the Saudis expect that Pakistan will not tilt toward Tehran in any matter of significant concern.

The question is exactly what the Saudis expect to get from Pakistan for their generous financial assistance and friendly diplomacy. Initially thought to be at the top of a speculative quid pro quo list was the idea that the Saudis sought to spring former president Musharraf from house arrest (imposed while he stands trial for actions he took as Pakistan’s president) into a comfortable exile of the sort Nawaz Sharif enjoyed. Although this outcome would still be a plausible way for Musharraf’s current political drama to end, so far he continues to languish in Pakistan despite new rumors cropping up each time a senior Saudi official lands in Islamabad.

Other Pakistani analysts speculate that Riyadh’s friendly coercion was aimed at blocking plans for a gas pipeline from Iran, originally called the IPI for its ambition of running from Iran’s South Pars field through Pakistan to India. Saudi Arabia would clearly like to keep Iran from poking any holes in international sanctions, but it is less certain that Riyadh needed to pay Pakistan in order to kill the IPI. The pipeline deal was already plagued by delays, and major financial and security obstacles remain in the way of a line that would run through Baluchistan, some of the region’s most insecure and violent real estate.

Pipeline or no, Pakistan may be on track to deliver on two far more sensitive issues: Syria and nuclear weapons. Regarding Syria, despite subsequent claims to the contrary, Pakistan appeared to alter its policy stance after the February 2014 visit to Islamabad by the Saudi Crown Prince and Defense Minister, Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud. In a joint communiqué, Pakistan expressed support for the Saudi goals of forming a Syrian “transitional governing body” and removing all foreign (read: Iranian) military forces.

In addition, Pakistani military officers appear to be involved in the training of Syrian groups fighting the Assad regime, and the Saudis may have purchased a range of Pakistani-manufactured small arms, possibly even antiaircraft and antitank missiles, for use by anti-Assad insurgent groups. When asked, Pakistani officials have denied that their troops are training Syrian rebels and claim that the use of any weapons sold to Saudi Arabia would be contractually restricted to the Saudis themselves. But these deflections suggest obvious loopholes; retired Pakistani officers are not “serving troops,” and if the Saudis break end-use restrictions on Pakistan-made weapons, there is no reason to expect Islamabad would ever hold them accountable.

On the nuclear front, the picture is even more opaque. Pakistani officials uniformly insist that they learned their lesson from the experience of Dr. A.Q. Khan’s infamous international proliferation network that being involved in the transfer of nuclear materials and know-how is a dangerous and costly game—one they should never again play. The Saudis are also careful to explain that they have no claim on the Pakistani nuclear program, despite decades of rumors to the contrary, that like any self-respecting state, Pakistan guards its arsenal jealously, and that the only Saudi plan for nuclear development is to improve the nation’s indigenous technological capabilities.

These claims are difficult to accept at face value for two main reasons. First, both Riyadh and Islamabad have every incentive to hide the extent of their nuclear cooperation. If a nuclear transfer were exposed, the two states would not only feel the wrath of the international community for breaking rules enshrined in the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), but they would also give Iran new reasons to accelerate its own nuclear-weapon development—precisely the outcome that Riyadh would prefer to avoid.

Second, if Iran does actually cross the nuclear-weapons threshold, Riyadh has signaled that it would stop at nothing to match Tehran’s feat—and fast. At present, the only realistic, cost-effective, quick way for Riyadh to make good on that threat is through a Pakistani nuclear transfer. No other nuclear state has as intimate a security relationship with Saudi Arabia, and Riyadh currently lacks the wherewithal to build an arsenal of its own.

In that hypothetical scenario, time would be of the essence. If the Pakistanis were to transfer warheads to the Saudis immediately after Iran goes nuclear, the international backlash would probably be muted, with primary blame assigned to Iran for starting the proliferation chain reaction. If, however, the Saudis take months or years to ready their own nuclear capability or negotiate a transfer from Pakistan, both Riyadh and Islamabad would almost certainly run up against a concerted international effort to close the nuclear door after Iran’s breakout. There are other good reasons for Riyadh to want to be able to move quickly. Armed with an immediate and dramatic counter to Iran’s new nuclear status, Riyadh would steal Tehran’s thunder, deny Iran a coercive advantage, and enter a marginally more stable world of nuclear deterrence from day one.

Just how Pakistan would transfer a nuclear capability to Saudi Arabia is a matter of some speculation. A dual-key arrangement with a contingent of Pakistani nuclear forces based in Saudi Arabia would hold some advantages, including that it might not technically violate the NPT (in the same way as U.S. nuclear forces have historically been based within nonnuclear allied territories). Such a deal would require a significant Pakistani military footprint inside Saudi Arabia, presumably a development that might be spotted by U.S. and other intelligence services.

At least as likely, however, both Riyadh and Islamabad would prefer to mask their cooperation, with the Saudis claiming, if implausibly, that they had developed their own indigenous nuclear capability, and the Pakistanis denying any involvement. At best, these fabrications would offer a diplomatically convenient way for states—possibly even the United States—to keep the punitive focus squarely on Iran, rather than on Pakistan or Saudi Arabia.

In almost any conceivable instance of a Pakistani nuclear transfer to Saudi Arabia, Pakistan’s leaders would have to be convinced that they could survive the consequences with neighboring Iran. Pakistan has already suffered a great deal from being caught between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Their sectarian rivalry was exported to Pakistan in the 1980s, when both sides indoctrinated, trained and funded brutal militant proxy groups, in turn contributing to a vicious cycle of communal separation that persists to this day. In 2013 alone, 650 Pakistanis died and over 1,100 were injured in Sunni-Shia violence. Like most acts of terrorism, the death toll pales in comparison to its broader political consequence; Pakistan’s sectarian attacks threaten to shred the unity of a nation nominally founded as an inclusive homeland for South Asian Muslims.

Although there is no longer evidence of official Saudi support to these groups, Pakistanis complain bitterly about private Saudi donations to mosques, madrassas and organizations behind the attacks, and many also fear that Iran could do much more to fuel reprisal attacks by Shia hit squads if Tehran wanted to cause trouble for Pakistan. In the past, Iran has also turned up the pressure on Pakistan in other ways, including by working closely with India to support proxy groups in Afghanistan and by allowing India to use the port of Chabahar along the Arabian Sea as a means to circumvent Pakistan and gain overland access to Central Asia.

Such concerns will almost certainly continue to lead Islamabad to play a diplomatic balancing act in its dealings with Tehran. That said, if Islamabad judges the potential for an Iranian nuclear breakout to be low and believes that preliminary nuclear dealings with Saudi Arabia (prior to the unveiling of an actual nuclear transfer) can be covert and deniable, then the immediate benefits of an offer from Riyadh would be nearly impossible for Pakistani leaders to resist. This is almost certainly the situation they face today.

Consequential New Links for Riyadh…and for South Asia

To make sense of Saudi Arabia’s geopolitical options now and into the future, it will be increasingly necessary to take Riyadh’s relationships with India and Pakistan into account. This holds true even though the primary battleground for Saudi-Iranian rivalry remains the Middle East, and Saudi-U.S. military and intelligence cooperation will persist for years to come. Keeping New Delhi from closer ties with Tehran will be crucial as India grows into a global economic, political, and military power. Utilizing Pakistan as a counter to Iran’s threats at the opposite ends of the security spectrum—terrorist proxies and nuclear weapons—will be even more vital to Riyadh.

The potential for a nuclear transfer from Pakistan to Saudi Arabia is by far the most consequential aspect of Riyadh’s dealings in South Asia. Although fraught with risk, the looming threat of a transfer from Pakistan to Saudi Arabia also holds potential advantages. The more credible the threat, the more Tehran will need to take it into account as it calculates the strategic benefits of crossing the nuclear-weapons threshold. Combined with the threat of Israeli air strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, the risk of a broader nuclear domino effect in the region would also help to motivate other states to enforce the sanctions regime against Iran until a deal is done.

Like any deterrent policy, the greatest costs would be suffered only if it fails; that is, if Iran rejects or circumvents a nuclear deal. Even then, however, the regional-security picture would be made only incrementally worse by the simultaneous emergence of two new nuclear states as compared to a lone Iranian breakout. If anything, the regional nuclear balance against Iran would be easier to maintain, and less of the weight would rest on Israel’s shoulders.

Nuclear issues aside, Riyadh is successfully finding other ways to harness its relationships in South Asia. Whether by purchasing Pakistan-made arms for Syrian rebels, securing favorable Indian votes in the IAEA, or closing potential loopholes in the Iran sanctions regime, the Saudis have played South Asia more effectively than the Iranians have. Riyadh will continue to hold important tools of influence in both Islamabad and New Delhi because of its wealth, energy supplies and status as host to an enormous population of visiting South Asian workers who collectively send home billions in remittances each year.

Viewed from the South Asian perspective, Saudi Arabia’s regional security policy will always be judged by how it plays into the Indo-Pakistani context. There are reasons to hope that Riyadh can play a stabilizing role. For instance, if Saudi counterterror cooperation with New Delhi on Indian-born LeT operatives is just a start, then Riyadh will have other strings to pull as well, from controlling financial networks to limiting travel within its borders, that could also be directed against groups like the Haqqani network that have attacked Indians in Afghanistan. A more muscular Saudi campaign against these groups would improve security in India and would also send a firm message to sympathizers and backers inside Pakistan that the use of terrorist proxies against India is no longer something Riyadh condones.

On the other hand, if such Saudi moves are not handled with great care, they would backfire by contributing to Pakistan’s security anxieties and sense of isolation. For India, unofficial Saudi support to Salafist groups in South Asia and Riyadh’s defense ties to Pakistan will undoubtedly worry policy makers in New Delhi. All told, Riyadh’s pursuit of closer relationships with both India and Pakistan, without being sucked into the paralysis of their own hyphenated (Indo-Pakistani) conflict, will require great diplomatic finesse.

How Washington Should Play the New Saudi Game in South Asia

The United States has never been able to dictate or control Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy, but Washington retains unparalleled diplomatic access to Saudi leadership—owing in part to billions in high-tech defense sales—that affords U.S. policy makers a chance to explain their priorities and interests with respect to South Asia. Washington should make South Asia a regular focal point in future dialogues with Saudi senior leaders.

Although there will be a strong temptation to try and dissuade the Saudis from pursuing a nuclear-weapons capability via Pakistan, that approach will almost certainly be a waste of time. Washington should accept that the Saudis (like the Pakistanis before them) will try to go nuclear if they believe their mortal enemy will otherwise enjoy an overwhelming strategic advantage. Neither sales of conventional armaments, nor realistic U.S. security guarantees will solve Riyadh’s security dilemma. For the United States, the preferred means by which to reduce the likelihood of a Saudi nuclear program will be by successfully concluding and implementing a serious deal with Tehran.

U.S. officials should instead make the best of the Saudi-Pakistani nuclear nexus by embracing the threat as a deterrent against Iran as well as potential defectors from the present international sanctions regime. Through diplomatic channels with friends, allies and the Iranians themselves, U.S. officials should quietly share the assessment that a nuclear transfer between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia is a realistic scenario and nearly impossible to forestall if Iran crosses the threshold. At the same time, U.S. officials should explain that they do not anticipate a Pakistani-Saudi transfer under any other circumstances, given the costs that both Islamabad and Riyadh would incur from moving first.

Separately, Washington should use secure channels to communicate to the Pakistanis and Saudis that as long as any potential nuclear transfer takes place only after an Iranian breakout, the principal U.S. concern would be the safety and security of nuclear materials in transit and after deployment in Saudi Arabia. In the unlikely event that either Riyadh or Islamabad is willing to discuss the topic at length, perhaps as a hypothetical scenario or in a Track II setting, U.S. officials should try to ferret out how the Saudis understand the challenge of balancing a nuclear Iran and how the Pakistanis envision their own ability to weather the likely Iranian reaction. U.S. wargaming exercises that play out the post-nuclear regional balance would be useful ways to inform those conversations.

On other fronts, the deepening of counterterror cooperation between Saudi Arabia and India serves U.S. interests and should be advanced along two tracks in Washington’s dealings with Riyadh. First, U.S. officials should work to improve operational intelligence sharing so that South Asian terrorists like Ansari are more easily tracked, apprehended and extradited. A three-way Saudi-U.S.-Indian counterterror dialogue and standing intelligence coordination cell should be started to advance this effort.

Second, Washington should continue using diplomatic, financial, law enforcement and intelligence ties with the Saudis to press the point that Pakistan-based terrorists, including those lacking direct Al Qaeda ties, represent a significant threat to regional and international security. Despite past efforts, U.S. officials have never managed to translate the aggressive post-9/11 security measures the Saudis have used at home against Al Qaeda into a wider campaign that would dry up resources flowing to other groups engaged in terrorism. Part of the problem is that neither Riyadh, nor Islamabad wishes to pick new fights with the full array of radical groups they now face. Another part of the problem is that both Pakistan and Saudi Arabia also have a long history of using terrorist groups as proxies, and a persistent difficulty drawing lines between the radical organizations they support and those they oppose. Pakistan, for instance, has always tried to differentiate between “good Taliban” and “bad Taliban,” defining different militant groups not by their worldview, but by whether they serve or oppose Islamabad at any given time.

In today’s Syria, a similar problem has emerged. Whereas Washington is acutely concerned that arming anti-Assad groups could easily have Afghanistan-like repercussions, Saudi support (including training rebels and supplying weapons of Pakistani origin) appears to be more focused on the short term. Because the United States shares the basic Saudi desire to remove Assad from power, Washington should first aim to monitor and direct, but if necessary, also to curtail, the flow of Pakistani weapons and trainers in an effort to keep them away from radically anti-Western groups. The paucity of Syrian “moderates,” the stunning battlefield successes of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), and shifting wartime politics will make this more easily said than done.

Finally, U.S. policy makers should recognize Riyadh’s new strategy for South Asia as only a part of a broader trend of new and more meaningful geopolitical ties between different parts of Asia. The breakdown of traditional regional silos is in this case creating opportunities for Saudi Arabia to counter a nearby rival and to extend its influence into Indo-Pakistani relations. As a true global power, the United States should be well positioned to play across the entire Asian region, but to do so, Washington must break its engrained habits of thought and practice that often blind it to the new strategic connections that are being forged.

Daniel Markey is a senior fellow for India, Pakistan, and South Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations. He is the author of No Exit from Pakistan: America’s Tortured Relationship with Islamabad (Cambridge, 2013).

[abhishek_sharma]

The Gaza evasion: Mani Shankar Aiyar

[disha]

^^ Saudi's getting nukes means India is surrounded by Nukes-wahhabis., a very dangerous situation for India.

Americans are preparing ground for transferring nukes from bakis to wahaabis., their goal being to bring down the Iranians - and that is extremely short sighted.

If bakis supply nukes to their ummah brothers, India should help Iran butcher bakistan mercilessly - via covert trade.

[Virendra]

Did anyone see the live broadcast yesterday of UNSC open debate on the Gaza unrest?
There was a lot of emotional dribble from Palestenian side and the Israelis defended themselves well (with arguments by the way).

[Austin]

Palestinian death toll rises to 635, Israeli troop deaths up to 29
U.N. school shelled a second time; aid agency blames Israel
"Stop fighting, start talking," U.N. secretary-general tells Palestinians, Israelis

[Philip]

Bunkum Moon predicts the end of this round of fighting? But to what end? Just a break in the fighting until the next round? Israel wants rocket attacks to stop,period.The Palestinians and Hamas want the 7 yr. blockade of Gaza ,which has made life one of survival for the Palestinians crowded together in the ghetto of Gaza an act of survival to end,and an end to the expansionist settlement policy of the Israeli govt. which is eating up traditional Arab land.Hard liners on both sides have to have their heads knocked together for a middle ground to emerge that will end this appalling slaughter.There has to be give and take on both sides.As I've said before,for Israel to think that it can live forever in wealth and comfort while on the other side of its equivalent of the Great Wall of China,Hadrians Wall,Berlin Wall,whatever,the Palestinians in huge number can scrape together a survival existence ,is an exercise in delusion and self-deception.All walls one day fall down or are breached.In fact the great wall of Israel hasn't stopped Hamas from firing thousands of rockets over it.The latest attack was close to the airport causing flights to be cancelled,no airline wanting another MH style disaster.Perhaps this development might send some sense into those who want to carry on fighting on both sides.

International flights to and from Israel suspended over security concerns
Move likely to alarm Israeli government as Ban Ki-moon says end to fighting in Gaza could be 'very near'
http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... hts-israel

International airlines halted flights to and from Israel indefinitely on Tuesday citing security concerns in an unexpected twist to the two-week-old conflict in Gaza.

The move came as political leaders and diplomats held urgent talks in the region with UN chief Ban Ki-moon saying his "hope and belief" was that an end to fighting could be "very near".

On Wednesday morning the Palestinian decision-making body led by President Mahmoud Abbas said it was backing Hamas's demands that an end to the Israeli-Egyptian blockade of Gaza and other concessions must form part of any deal to end the hostilities.

Delta was the first carrier to halt flights to and from Israel after diverting a flight carrying 273 passengers bound for Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion airport to Paris on Tuesday after "reports of a rocket or associated debris near the airport in Tel Aviv". It was followed by America's Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (FAA) – which has halted all US flights to and from Israel – Air France and Dutch airline KLM.

While easyJet also suspended flights, British Airways said it would carry on with its twice-daily service from London.

On Tuesday night Israel's prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, asked the US secretary of state, John Kerry, to help restore commercial flights. But a White House official, when asked, said: "We're not going to overrule the FAA. Period."

Delta Airlines said it had suspended service until further notice to and from Ben Gurion international airport in Tel Aviv and the airline's New York-JFK hub. It added: "Delta, in co-ordination with the US Federal Aviation Administration, is doing so to ensure the safety and security of our customers and employees."

A spokesperson for Air France announced that the airline had suspended all flights owing to the "evolution of the security situation in Israel". "The decision … will come into effect immediately and remain until further notice," he added.

The surprise decision is likely to alarm the Israeli government and business community, which have so far seen relatively few economic repercussions from the conflict. It will doubtless deliver a substantial blow to the tourism industry, the one sector that has already suffered during the conflict.

High-level diplomatic efforts to resolve the crisis continued in the region, with Ban suggesting in a video link to the UN security council in New York from Ramallah that a breakthrough could be imminent, although he could not disclose details "at this highly sensitive moment".

"Suffice it to say, it is my hope and belief that these talks will lead to results and an end to the fighting in the very near future," he said, while acknowledging "many obstacles and complexities".

On Wednesday morning the Palestinian Liberation Organisation endorsed demands by Hamas for halting Gaza hostilities. "The Gaza demands of stopping the aggression and lifting the blockade in all its forms are the demands of the entire Palestinian people and they represent the goal that the Palestinian leadership has dedicated all its power to achieve," senior PLO official Yasser Abed Rabbo said in Ramallah.

Signalling that Abbas, too, sought a staggered cessation of hostilities, the Palestinian leader's Fatah faction on Tuesday proposed a truce followed by five days of negotiations on terms. There was no immediate response to the PLO statement from Hamas or Israel

Earlier in Tel Aviv, Ban had delivered a blunt message to Netanyahu, saying the bloodshed in Gaza must end. As the Israeli military continued its bombardment of the Gaza Strip, the secretary general urged Israel to exercise "maximum restraint". Ban said he understood the state's security concerns, "but your military response is causing many civilian casualties. I hope we will be able to see the end of this violence as soon as possible."

Representing Israeli frustration at external criticism of its operation in Gaza, Israel's ambassador to the US, Ron Dermer, controversially suggested Israel should be awarded the Nobel peace prize for "fighting with unimaginable restraint". He told a meeting of Christians United For Israel in Washington: "Some are shamelessly accusing Israel of genocide and would put us in the dock for war crimes. But the truth is that the Israel Defence Forces should be given… a Nobel Peace Prize for fighting with unimaginable restraint."

On the 15th day of fighting, the death toll in Gaza topped 600 with more than 3,700 injured.

On Monday, the UN said one of its schools being used to shelter thousands of refugees from the fighting had been hit by shelling. The humanitarian agency also announced that more than 100,000 people had sought shelter in its schools, and 43% of the Gaza Strip had become a virtual no-go zone following Israeli warnings for residents to leave ahead of bombardment.

An air strike on a house near Khan Younis killed 25 members of one family, including 18 children and five women, three of whom were pregnant, as they broke the Ramadan fast on Sunday evening. A Hamas member was also killed.

Israel confirmed that one of its soldiers was missing in Gaza, and that 27 others had been killed. Two Israeli civilians have also died since the conflict began two weeks ago. The missing soldier named by the Israel Defence Forces as Oron Shaul, 20, was probably killed in or following an attack on an armoured personnel carrier during a a bloody battle in Shujai'iya, Gaza City, on Sunday, which killed six others in the vehicle, according to military sources.

Hamas said on Sunday evening it had captured an Israeli soldier, whom it named as Oron Shaul, displaying his ID card and military serial number on video. But it failed to produce evidence that the soldier was alive, leading to speculation that Hamas was holding the soldier's body to use as a bargaining chip with Israel.

Israeli military spokesman Peter Lerner told reporters "extensive forensic examination" of the scene of the attack was being undertaken in order to determine the soldier's fate. The armoured vehicle was struck by possibly multiple missiles, he said.

"The result was dramatic, devastation at the site was huge." On whether the soldier could still be alive, he added: "Ultimately we don't have a clear answer... To be honest we just don't know."

A high-rise apartment block partly collapsed on Tuesday, killing six Palestinians with German citizenship. The body of a woman hung from the wreckage for several hours before it could be retrieved.

Seven people, including four women from one family, were killed in a separate airstrike, according to Gaza paramedics.

The IDF also said it had located 66 shafts leading to 25 tunnels, six of which had been detonated. Col Uri Gordon, commander of the Nahal brigade, told reporters: "We have located the majority of the tunnels, but have not completed the mapping and destruction."

Israel's military and political leadership has said the principal goal of the ground operation was to find and destroy tunnels build by Hamas and other militants.

Ban, who travelled to Ramallah and Tel Aviv after meetings to discuss ceasefire proposals in Cairo, said at a press conference: "My message to Israelis and Palestinians is the same: stop fighting, start talking and take on the root causes of the conflict so that we are not at the same situation in the next six months or a year."

He condemned rocket fire from Gaza, which he described as "shocking", but said Israel must exercise "maximum restraint". He added: "We must address the underlying issues including mutual recognition, occupation, despair and denial of dignity so people will not feel they have to resort to violence as a means of expressing their grievances."

Earlier, Ban met the US secretary of state, John Kerry, in Cairo, who arrived in the region to add his weight to efforts to reach a ceasefire deal. Kerry also met the Egyptian president, Abdul Fattah al-Sisi, and the foreign minister, Sameh Shoukry.

Reiterating his support for an immediate ceasefire, Kerry said: "Hamas has a fundamental choice to make and it is a choice that will have a fundamental impact on the people of Gaza."

He added: "But just reaching a ceasefire is clearly not enough. It is imperative that there be a serious discussion, negotiation addressing the underlying issues that have brought us to where we are today."

He added: "Once a ceasefire has been reached, we are certainly ready to talk through the incredibly complicated underlying issues to this crisis … The Egyptians have provided a framework and forum for them to be able to come to the table to have a series of discussions."

Kerry said Israel has responded to Hamas rocket fire "as any country has the right to do when it's under attack, and we support Israel's right to self defence."

He nevertheless expressed sympathy for victims on "all sides" of the conflict. "We've seen too much bloodshed on all sides, including the death of two American citizens, and we have watched the humanitarian crisis grow worse day after day. People have lost their homes, possessions, access to water and food, their entire way of life."

Hamas has rejected Egypt's week-old proposal for a ceasefire because the group wants guarantees on the easing to the blockade on Gaza, and the release of prisoners.

But Egypt and Israel say such issues can only be discussed after a ceasefire is reached – a stance Kerry strongly endorsed.

More on this story

US Secretary of State John Kerry arrives in Tel Aviv

John Kerry defies flight ban to attend Israel ceasefire talks

US secretary of state arrives in Tel Aviv to meet with political leaders in hopes of ending hostilities in Gaza

Video Israel: flight ban causes disruption at Ben Gurion airport - video

Israel hits hundreds of targets in Gaza as Israeli soldier confirmed missing

Israel soldier's disappearance may hamper ceasefire efforts

Al-Jazeera Gaza offices evacuated after direct hit by Israeli fire

Video 'The children were screaming': Israeli air strikes continue in Gaza - video

UNSC and Obama call for immediate ceasefire – live updates

More than 20 members of one family killed in Gaza strike

'Hamas killed my friend; we need to kill them'

Israeli soldiers killed after 'bloody battle' in Gaza suburb

Israelis gather on hillsides to cheer as military bombs Gaza

[Sathish_A]

Austin

the reason I suspect Trophy came into play is that the video does not show the aftermath

if it had destroyed am sure they would have been happy to provide the same

so I am suspecting it did minor damage

still would be interesting to see some more footage on effectiveness post Lebanon 2006

Exactly at 0.25 the projectile was still few inches away from the Merk, but at 0.26 it was a fireball. It clearly looks like a Trophy killing the RPG-29



Note the fireball and the dust plume, when RPG-29 hits MIA2. We cannot see this on Merk attack.

[Surya]

sathish

i think you are right

the chatter on othr forums too is that this is becoming an advertisement for Trophy

[Yayavar]

How much of this is true? No idea what al-monitor is.

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/origina ... atred.html

When the boys realized that the Hyundai passengers were not Jews but terrorists, one of them succeeded in calling the police emergency call center and whispered, "We've been kidnapped." In the recording of that phone call, one of the abductors was heard shouting in Hebrew, "Heads down!" Then there were sounds of shouting, volleys from an automatic weapon and a weak voice sighing "Ai," of someone who was injured. This was followed by another volley of shots from an automatic weapon, and the boys fell silent. Then the murderers burst out singing.

It was a murder in real-time, horrifying and monstrous. Three Israeli boys who attempted to hitch a ride on their way to their weekend Shabbat at home were murdered in cold blood. And the police had recorded documentation of the murder Like in the movies.

Examination of the burned Hyundai found near Halhul, north of Hebron, only verified what was already known from listening to the tape. The numerous bloodstains and DNA findings left no room for hope. But Israel's defense and political systems closed ranks and transmitted one message, loud and clear: The State of Israel is closely tracking the fates of the three missing boys, who were abducted for bargaining purposes to free Palestinian prisoners. Thus, searches are underway to free them.

The border crossing between Israel and Jordan was closed. The official reason: to prevent the terrorists from smuggling the abductees outside Israel's borders, and even from the Palestinian Authority's limits.