West Asia News and Discussions

[RajeshA]

Vatican is a sovereign country. They should first separate state and religion!

[svinayak]

Vatican is a sovereign country. They should first separate state and religion!

But they want to advice other govts and interfere

[RamaY]

Until someone says STFU to Vatican.

[Philip]

An old but illuminating list,some who may even be active in our neighbourhood,Af-Pak.Check into the link for the details as to how these entities allegedly war profited.

http://www.businesspundit.com/the-25-mo ... rofiteers/

The 25 Most Vicious Iraq War Profiteers

The Iraq war is many things to different people. It is called a strategic blunder and a monstrous injustice and sometimes even a patriotic mission, much to the chagrin of rational human beings. For many big companies, however, the war is something far different: a lucrative cash-cow. The years-long, ongoing military effort has resurrected fears of the so-called “military-industrial complex.” Media pundits are outraged at private companies scooping up huge, no-questions-asked contracts to manufacture weapons, rebuild infrastructure, or anything else the government deems necessary to win (or plant its flag in Iraq). No matter what your stance on the war, it pays to know where your tax dollars are being spent.

Following is a detailed rundown of the 25 companies squeezing the most profit from this controversial conflict.

1.Halliburton
2.Veritas Capital Fund/DynCorp
3. Washington Group INtl.
4.Environmental Chemical.
5.Aegis
6.Intl.American Products
7.Erins
8.Fluor
9.Perini
10.URS Corp.
11.Parsons
12.First Kuwait Gen.Trading and Contracting
13.Armor Holdings.
14.L3 Communications
15.AM Genral.
16.HSBC Bank
17.Cummins
18.MerchantBridge
19.Global Risk Strategies
20.Control Risks
21.CACI
22.Bechtel
23.Custer Battles
24.Nour USA
25.Gen.Dynamics

[sum]

Turmoil in arab world: Attack on secularism

The secular enclaves may have been few, but emphatic secular presence was a check on mindless religiosity.

The luxury bus leaves downtown Cam hotel to Qassion mountains for a panoramic view of the world’s oldest, continuously inhabited city, Damascus. The picture has to be sketched because outside Syria everyone is counting on the level of chaos we did not see.

There are diplomats, journalists, scholars, some NGOs too, invited by a Syrian think tank to study the current situation. Edward Lionel Peck, former US ambassador to several Arab countries was in the group. From the Ahlatala Cafe at the Qassian heights, the vast expanse looks the very picture of tranquility.

The city’s calm is all the more noticeable because, thanks to the media, we have been conditioned to expect tension, conflict, street protests. “No fireworks here” the manager of the Café intervenes. Derra, Alleppo, Homs, Hama – “those are the cities where you might see some action”.

An Indian businessman invites me to spend the evening with a Syrian Sunni family he has known for long years. The husband is a retired civil servant; the wife dons a white chiffon scarf. She has a sad, beatific smile on her face. Her two daughters in frocks are constantly replenishing the centre table with fruits, baklavas, scones, soft drinks, Turkish coffee – endless hospitality.

The negative media focus on Syria in recent months has erased from minds the continuing reality: the country is among the few remaining parts of the Arab world where elegant, gracious living is still possible. “But it may end soon” the wife says, wiping her tears. “Can you imagine – I have to wear this scarf now”. She is Sunni who are supposed to be with the Islamist rebels opposing the Alawi ruling elite. Then why is she unhappy wearing a scarf? Syrian social order is in turmoil.

The population of Syria consists overwhelmingly of Sunnis – say 80 per cent. The biggest minority are Alawis, in their origins a Shia Sect but as a result of decades of Baath party training, have shed their religion. They are secular in a non religious sort of way, rather in the image of Mustafa Kemal Pasha or the more Socialist, left leaning Jawaharlal Nehru, a blend of an abiding local culture and western education.

Until the Ayatullahs came to power in 1979, Teheran, Istanbul, Beirut, Cairo, Amman, Damascus, Baghdad, Algiers, Tunis and any city in Morocco, and even Tripoli had among their populations the most secular elites. The secular enclaves may have been few but emphatic secular presence was a check on mindless religiosity. How was the secular stamp rubbed out in most of these societies in the space of three decades? Each city has a different narrative. The narrative of Damascus is currently in the making.

With the world’s media arrayed on the other side, it is difficult to persuade those who would care to listen, that it is secularism which is fighting with its back to the wall in Syria. But the narrative the media beams about Syria is: Assad brutalizes his people.

Liberal democracy
It can be nobody’s case that Arab monarchies and dictatorships, Kemalist Turkey and Shah’s Iran were paragons of liberal democracy, if that be such a non negotiable value. But a certain elegant urbanity was available in these enclaves. In Cairo and Beirut, this urbanity came along with a sparkling intellectual life. Mubarak’s Cairo stilled the fizz.
An anti intellectual aridity crept in which gradually overwhelmed most of the cities listed above. Damascus, believe it or not, is the last bastion where one can sit with friends and discuss ideas.

What, then, is our hostess that evening so distraught about? The growing religiosity travelling from across a post Kemalist Turkey and post Saddam Hussain Iraq have generated peer pressure for the scarf. And now, the impulses which brought in the scarf are providing hospitality for Islamism to topple the Baathist structure. Islamism is being preferred to secular Baathism by the US, Europe, Israel (Saudi Arabia) because the move removes Syria from the Iran, Syria, Hizbullah, Hamas chain. The regional chessboard changes.

Historically, in Syria Sunnis owned most of the lands and the rather poorer Alawis gravitated towards the army and other services. Just as the great Red Army, in the ultimate analysis, turned out to be a Russian army, the Yugoslav army, a Serbian army, the Syrian army is mostly an Alawi army. This army is the backbone of the Baath structure. Much the largest membership of Baath party comes from the Sunni majority for obvious reason. But they do not have as much of a “control” on power as the Alawis do particularly since the ascent of Hafez Assad in 1971.

There has always been a little bit of Muslim Brotherhood of varying strengths throughout the Arab sub stratum. The Iranian revolution in 1979 and breakdown of the Lebanon power sharing system after the Israeli occupation caused something of a stir in the central city of Hama, inviting a brutal crackdown by Assad in 1982.

The “Arab spring” broke up into three theatres – North Africa up to Egypt. Britain and France are to this day trying to manage the mess they have created in Libya. The Saudis are at the wheel in Bahrain and Yemen. Syria appeared to have been spared. Then Turkey began to look like a good model for Arabs in search of the electoral route. Moreover, if Syria can be fitted into that scheme, Iran will lose an ally and Turkey will gain influence.

The media has taken up the project with its concoctions and exaggerations. Double check this last fact with Ambassador Peck who is quite as puzzled. Meanwhile the lady with the scarf will swear by the holy book that she and her family in Alleppo have seen arms being funnelled in for the protestors from Turkey. Others talk of Protesters being armed from Iraq and Jordan, a story the media will not investigate.

[anmol]

News Reports: Gaddafi have been killed by Libyan forces

Reports: Former Libyan Leader Gadhafi Dead
VOA News

Anti-Gaddafi fighters celebrated the fall of Sirte October 20, 2011.

Provisional government officials in Libya say former leader Moammar Gadhafi has died after being wounded as he tried to flee from the town of Sirte. The reports have not been independently confirmed.

Earlier Thursday, military leaders in the National Transitional Council (NTC) said Gadhafi had been taken into custody. NTC officials said he was badly wounded.

Revolutionary fighters made a final push into Sirte, Thursday, after spending weeks battling well-armed Gadhafi loyalists.

NTC officials have said the capture of Sirte would allow them to declare the country liberated, because it would mean the provisional government controlled all of Libya's ports and harbors.

The coastal town located 360 kilometers east of Tripoli was the last significant stronghold for Gadhafi loyalists after provisional fighters gained control of the desert town of Bani Walid earlier this week.

Television video has shown cheering NTC fighters in Sirte firing celebratory shots into the air and hoisting the new national flag in the city.

[ramana]

Note the uniform reporting that "Gaddafi is dead" not "Gaddafi is killed".

When will we hear "Do Nothing" is killed?

[brihaspati]

Turmoil in arab world: Attack on secularism

The secular enclaves may have been few, but emphatic secular presence was a check on mindless religiosity.

[...]
The media has taken up the project with its concoctions and exaggerations. Double check this last fact with Ambassador Peck who is quite as puzzled. Meanwhile the lady with the scarf will swear by the holy book that she and her family in Alleppo have seen arms being funnelled in for the protestors from Turkey. Others talk of Protesters being armed from Iraq and Jordan, a story the media will not investigate.

Huh!! A self-defeating argument that immediately acknowledges that - all through these years of "secular" forces at the helm, even if a "minority" - still have not managed to sway the substratum majority, and only - only maintains itself in power through an asymmetric distribution of arms.

What is this myth about Kemalites or Baathists somehow being serious contenders of "secularism"? Kemal himself had to back-pedal to a certain extent during the tail-end of his 14 year dominance of Turkey. Once he was gone, the regime did begin to subtly accommodate and compromise with the mullahcracy lying low, and whose roots had never really been dug out from society.

Secularism in Islamist society means liquidation of all mullahcracy, destruction of all its educational and ideological transmission and recruitment mechanisms, destruction of all supporting funding networks, and a systematic attack and delegitimization of the basic tenets of the theology. Neither Kemal nor the Baathists go that far.

Unless those steps are taken, the traditional taqyia and ruthlessness of the mullahcracy simply means that they will lie low, detach themselves overtly from the pre-existing regime or split into two factions with one supporting the regime and the other not - so that the theological backbone can be kept alive and hedged well on opposite sides. Its a long term project with continuous promises of 72's as rewards.

Every nation that has allowed the mullahcracy and the theology's institutional networks to survive - will regrow Islamism of the worst totalitarian variety. The problem lies in the memes, which are allowed to survive through the institutions.

OT, but it is disingenuous to bring in JLN here in the same ranks with Kemal. Kemal enforced the European hat on Turkish men to displace the "fez" - while JLN chose the Mughal-Sultanate inspired figure hugging kurta and chost rejecting the dhoti wrap consciously adopted by his chief patron from the Indian side and colleagues like Sardar or Bose. The very different signals sent out by the two men should set them apart by miles.

[sum]

HT op-ed on the 1027:1 prisoner swap. Somehow BR doesnt seem to have tracked this topic so much

A skewed rate of exchange

A ratio of 1 to 1,027 is a skewed one. The numbers, as anybody observing the latest spectacle in West Asia's political theatre would know, refer to Gilad Shalit, the Israeli soldier captured and detained by Hamas in Gaza for the past five years, and the 1,027 Palestinian political prisoners released by the Israeli government as the price for Shalit's freedom as part of an Egypt-brokered deal. The first batch of 477 prisoners released on Tuesday returned home to an emotional welcome; another 550 will be released next month, though many are debarred from returning to their homes in Gaza or the West Bank and will be deported to a third country like Turkey, Syria or Qatar. The return of a wan, and somewhat underfed Shalit to his home in northern Israel set off the expected national frenzy, characteristic of much of the campaign by his family and the media to get him released.

The obviously off-balance 'exchange rate' - in a way indicative of the differing value of an individual's life on opposite sides of the fence - does not tell the whole story though. Mr Shalit's release had long been an emotive topic in a country where military service is compulsory, making it possible for every other person to identify with his fate. While Zionist blogs may have gone on an overdrive, celebrating the release of one "Jewish soul", the Israeli government - known for a history of lopsided prisoner exchanges - did deem it a fit price to secure Mr Shalit's freedom by releasing the prisoners, many of whom were serving life for killing Israelis in bomb and gun attacks. Hamas, on its part, has exhorted its followers to capture more Israeli soldiers who can be used for future negotiations to release the rest of the 5,000-odd Palestinians languishing in Israeli prisons.

Any political triumph for Hamas ends up weakening Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian Authority president and the only one who can successfully negotiate with Israel, and the former's success in releasing the prisoners is obviously more tangible and immediate than Abbas's bid for Palestinian Statehood at the United Nations last month. Egypt, despite its domestic political upheavals, managed to score points vital in its role as an important political intermediary in the region. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's gesture, on the other hand, in spite of all the popular support, only seems to confirm the notion that it is willing to pay a high price to secure the release of its hostages.

Still wondering whether to applaud Israel for its concern for every single soldier or gasp at releasing 1027 ( including many hardened suicide bombers etc) people for just 1 guy!

[Singha]

if India had released 1000 jailed terrorists for the kandahar hostages imagine the outcry here!

as it is, Jassu got daubed as a mithaiwalla for releasing 3.

[abhischekcc]

5. And he also gave them Rs 400 crore - which is the money that fuelled the spate of large scale bombings in India.

[ManuT]

US to pull all troops from Iraq by end of 2011.

[shyamd]

Indo Oman Air Exercise – Eastern Bridge – II Concludes at Jamnagar

[shyamd]

The best-kept secret
Hamas managed to keep Gilad Shalit's whereabouts hidden during his five-plus years in captivity, handing a humiliating defeat to Israeli intelligence services.
By Yossi Melman

A resounding failure for Israeli intelligence community and an impressive success for Hamas intelligence - this is how the 64 months of Gilad Shalit's captivity can be summed up. This is first and foremost a searing fiasco on the part of the Shin Bet security services, the organization responsible for intelligence coverage in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Lesser responsibility - but also contributing to the failure - lies on the shoulders of Unit 8200, the main intelligence-gathering unit of the Israel Defense Forces, which helps the Shin Bet with intelligence coverage. This coverage includes gathering information from human sources ("humint" ), and from electromagnetic sources such as telephones and computers ("sigint" and "comint" ). Shin Bet chief Yuval Diskin, on whose watch Shalit was abducted, acknowledged his responsibility for this failure upon his recent retirement.

The outcome was that the IDF special operations department, the special units in the IDF and the operations units of the Shin Bet (and perhaps Mossad ) were not able even to explore the feasibility of a rescue operation, which is the preliminary stage even before the actual planning takes place.


This does not mean that if there had been credible intelligence about the safe house where Shalit was held, and about the type of Hamas security there, it would have been possible to implement a rescue operation. Even if there had been reliable and current intelligence, it is always necessary to take into account that there are information gaps and not everything is known - these are lacunae that are liable to lead to the failure of an operation.

That is exactly what happened in the failed operation to rescue captured soldier Nachshon Wachsman from the hands of Hamas in 1994. To all appearances, before the operation the intelligence seemed to be perfect. However, in retrospect, it emerged that just one small detail - the presence of a second door - had not been known, which led to the tragic outcome: Wachsman was killed by his guards and another soldier, 1st Lt. Nir Poraz, was killed during the operation.

In the circumstances of total intelligence blindness in Shalit's case, neither the IDF nor the government had any option other than a painful and unprecedented swap deal. True, such a deal could already have been implemented two and a half years ago, toward the end of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's time in office. However, Olmert, Mossad chief Meir Dagan and Shin Bet chief Yuval Diskin refused, in March 2009, to agree to Hamas' demands and dug in their heels, drawing three red lines: They refused to release 125 terrorists of the most senior rank - the Hamas commanders; they refused to allow terrorists to be released to the West Bank; and they refused to include Arab Israelis in the deal. For its part, Hamas refused to become more flexible and the deal did not go through.

Olmert resigned and Benjamin Netanyahu became prime minister at the end of March 2009. He believed any deal was equivalent to surrendering to terror. He also hoped that, after the war in Gaza, intelligence would succeed in uncovering information that would advance a military solution. Gradually Netanyahu understood that intelligence could not provide the goods. "We worked badly and they worked well," observed an intelligence source familiar with proceedings. Netanyahu realized he had no alternative left to him.

Also contributing to this situation was his weakness on two fronts. At home the "social justice" protests were eroding his status. Abroad he had backed Israel into international isolation with his refusal to become more flexible and to enable the start of diplomatic talks with the Palestinian Authority.

At the same time, Hamas had also been weakened. The riots in Syria undermined the status of President Bashar Assad, Hamas' sponsor. The leadership started looking for an alternative to Damascus for its headquarters. The revolution in Egypt also played a role by increasing Hamas' trust in the new leadership, especially the top echelon of Egyptian intelligence.

Netanyahu and Hamas leader Khaled Meshal, both of them weakened, understood they had no alternative but to be more flexible and compromise. Both were glad to surrender. Netanyahu gave up on the three red lines. Sixty high-ranking terrorists were released - half of the list of 125. Israeli Arabs were included in the deal and some of the terrorists were released to the West Bank. Hamas gave up on the release of 60 terrorists, most of them their own senior people, and had to agree to having only a few of them sent to the West Bank.

It did not have to be like this. The initial conditions were relatively reasonable. In June 2006, the IDF had prior but nonspecific information - an alert - about the possibility of an abduction. Despite this, Hamas succeeded in carrying out the abduction and surprising the army. Later, several more factors exacerbated the failure.

The identity of the abductors should, ostensibly, have helped Israeli intelligence.

The abduction was carried out as the "joint initiative" of a number of organizations, bearing the bombastic name of "the Resistance Committee." In fact, this was a joint action by Hamas and the Dormush clan. This is an extended family Shin Bet has dubbed "the gray people" because of their occupation: They are muscular porters who unload sacks of cement from trucks. At a certain stage they expanded their business, set up a private, clan-based militia and became sort of terror operations subcontractors for Hamas. They were the group who, under contract from Hamas, assassinated Musa Arafat, Yasser Arafat's nephew. They broke into his home, marched him down the stairs to the street and there, in public view and broad daylight, murdered him in cold blood.

A multiplicity of elements involved in an abduction always endangers the secrecy of securing the operation, and should have made it easier for Shin Bet to obtain information. But that did not happen.

That was the first failure. Another one on the part of Shin Bet was its inability to create and to produce what can be defined as intelligence out of thin air. In the absence of information, that organization has at its disposal a technique that is not necessarily unique to Israeli intelligence, known as "extracting information in a vacuum situation." The Shin Bet can carry out a series of actions in the realm of psychological warfare, as well as on the ground, which are aimed at making noise in the field in order to create a chain reaction, almost like tectonic action: Vague signals are sent to the other side that are intended to cause it to suspect that something is happening right under its nose. The purpose of such a move is to cause the enemy to react and to make mistakes. This can help in obtaining missing information.

This happened, for example, in the operations to locate "the Engineer," Yihyeh Ayyash. After he fled from the West Bank to the Gaza Strip in 1966, Shin Bet lost track of him. With the help of a series of actions in which special measures were deployed in the field and agents were put into operation, the Engineer made a number of mistakes that caused him to "surface." Then Shin Bet obtained a lead, which subsequently enabled it to assassinate him with an explosive device hidden in his mobile telephone and operated by remote control, from an unmanned aerial vehicle.

A tectonic action like this did not take place this time. Either Shin Bet did not try such an operation or else it did try, but ineffectively.

When Shin Bet, at a relatively late stage, began to employ its information-collection tools, it was already too late. The time that had passed enabled the abductors to prepare properly and to maintain strict compartmentalization. Shin Bet did manage to identify and locate several of the abductors. Some of them were captured and interrogated; others were killed in pinpoint assassination operations. No real information was elicited from any of them. Immediately after Shalit was taken into captivity, they cut off contact and were removed from the circle of those into whose hands he was transferred.

The significance of this compartmentalization was that the unit guarding Shalit was so secret that few Hamas people even knew of its existence. They were connected only to Ahmed Jaba'ari, the commander of Hamas' military wing (the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades ). He is the man credited with the success of the operation.

It can be said with near certainty that the guards/bodyguards maintained total communications silence. In all likelihood, they were not equipped with mobile telephones, landline telephones, walkie-talkies or computers. They knew that the ears of Israeli intelligence work overtime. In other words, they did not leave any digital signature. And in the absence of such a signature, Israel's means of wiretapping, interception and decoding - via the Shin Bet and Unit 8200 - were not able to do any good.

The abductors apparently did not exchange many messages with the outside world. They communicated among themselves by means of messengers, or even - though this might sound outlandish - using carrier pigeons. They did not reveal their faces in their contacts with Shalit, so he would not be able to recognize them.

In the ongoing shadow war, Hamas had the upper hand this time.

It is a lesson for us too. We can't rely purely on TECHINT. Today enemies are aware of how TECHINT works.

Yossi Melman neglects to mention the fact that after Hamas took over Gaza, the Israeli intelligence was TOTALLY BLIND for over a year (Remember I was first to report this on BR before it was revealed after Cast Lead). In fact Ehud Barak had given the go ahead to totally rebuild the intel network in Gaza before Cast Lead was launched.

-----------------------------
The mystery behind the alleged Iran assassination plot
From blaming the Mossad, to suggesting U.S. is gathering public support for an imminent military operation in Iran, conspiracy theories are spreading, but they are baseless and mistaken.

While everyone in Israel has been preoccupied since Tuesday with the upcoming release of captive Israel Defense Forces soldier Gilad Shalit, they have hardly noticed recent events in the U.S. and the implications they have on the world, the Middle East and even on Israel: the U.S. government's claim that Iran was involved in a plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to Washington, the Israeli ambassador to Washington and to again attack the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires in Argentina.

Very few details were published about the military plan, but those that were published showed the plan was inadequate and amateurish. This created a lack of trust in the American announcement. Specialists on Iran – most of whom frequent Gary Sick's Internet forum, the Gulf/2000 Project – hastened to support Iran and raise doubts as to whether it was really behind the plot. Others went so far as to weave conspiracy theories that the American government, with the support of its intelligence, fabricated the operation to incriminate Iran, so as to create a casus belli and prepare public opinion for a military blow on Tehran.
Ahmadinejad

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Photo by: Getty Images

At the same time, the U.S. is putting pressure on the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to publish evidence it received over the last few months about the Iranian nuclear program. According to the New York Times, this classified intelligence information says Iran is conducting technological experiments for building nuclear weapons.

There were even those who conjured conspiracy theories in their sick minds that blame the Mossad for being behind the act in order to provoke a war between Washington and Tehran. In this context, they reminded that Israel played an important role in gathering "evidence" against Sudam Hussein's regime in Iraq in order to push the U.S. to invade Iraq. But even without these conspiracy theories, the Americans and the world remember that George W. Bush used faulty intelligence information to show Sudam Hussein was developing nuclear weapons – or at least chemical and biological weapons – as a justification for invading Iraq in 2003. If the U.S. intelligence, many in the U.S. claim, was capable of using the information and intelligence assessments for political echelon, who could guarantee they wouldn't do it again?

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Saturday scornfully rejected the Americans' claims, saying they were meaningless. "A meaningless and nonsensical accusation has been raised against a few Iranians in America, which was made into an excuse to present the Islamic Republic as a supporter of terrorism," Khamenei said on a state television station in Iran.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and FBI Director Robert Mueller were the ones to unveil the plot last week. They spoke of an Iranian-American named Mansour Arbabsiar, from Corpus Christi, Texas, and who has a relative serving in the Revolutionary Guards' Quds Force in Iran. Last June, Arbabsiar turned to a man and asked him to obtain weapons from a Mexican drug cartel. That man, it turns out, was a DEA agent. From that moment on, Arbabsiar was put under surveillance until he was recently arrested and charged.

Another suspect, Ali Gholam Shakuri – who is allegedly a member of the Quds Force, got away.

The charges do not mention the plot to attack the Israeli embassies, but it was reported in the American and Argentinean media and was based on conversations with government officials.

The Quds Force, headed by Brig. Gen. Qassem Suleimani, consists of about 15,000 conscripts and is considered the elite force of the Revolutionary Guard. The force is responsible for maintaining contact with different organizations around the world, mainly Shiite groups – and provides arms and funding to Hezbollah, Hamas, Shiite militias in Iraq, Bahrain, Yemen and al-Qaida. It is known that Suleimani was in close contact with Hezbolla's "Defense Minister" Imad Mughniyah, who was killed in February 2008 in an operation attributed to the Mossad. Suleimani also secretly visited Iraq to help organize resistance to the U.S. military.

It's hard to believe that Iran, who has significant intelligence capabilities and has carried out sophisticated terror attacks in the past – would assign such an important task to an Iranian-American whose favorite drink is whiskey.

Furthermore, the last time Iran was involved in a terror plot on U.S. soil was in 1980, shortly after the Islamic Revolution which saw Ruhollah Khomeini rise to power. Dawud Salahuddin, an American who converted to Islam, tried to assassinate Ali Akbar Tabatabai, the former press attaché at the Iranian embassy in Washington. Salahuddin fled to Tehran, where he resides to this day. Last week Salahuddin gave an interview to the Christian Science Monitor, in which he said that based on his experience, the Iranian intelligence agencies would not have operated this way.

Yet one must not forget that Iran's Quds Force and intelligence agency are responsible for various terrorist operations in recent decades, which were carried out by Iranian, Lebanese, or other dissidents. These included attacks in Berlin, Vienna, Rome, Paris, and Israeli and Jewish targets in Argentina.

Despite Israel's official silence on the recent events, security officials know that not only is Iran capable of carrying out such attacks – it is actively initiating them. As evidence, officials point to the botched attacks in Azerbaijan, Cairo, and a West African state. These attempts were carried out in cooperation with Hezbollah, which sought to avenge Mughniyah's death.

The Saudis also believe the Iranian plot is real. Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal said last week in a visit to Austria that "we hold (the Iranians) responsible for any action they take against us." He indicated that this is not the first time Iran is suspected of such operations.

There is no doubt that a terrorist attack on U.S. soil against a Saudi or an Israeli target would be considered a tremendous Iranian success – a "quality" operation. It conforms to the Iranian strategy of proving to its bitter enemies that there no place where they are safe, not even in the capital of Israel's and Saudi Arabia's strategic partner.

Furthermore, Saudi Arabia's ambassador Adel Al-Jubeir is considered a bitter rival of Iran and his actions have been loathed by the Ayatollah regime for years. He is a seasoned diplomat that works tirelessly to progress Saudi-American relationships, and succeeded in no small measure to correct the bad impression left by Saudi Arabia with its involvement, and the funding it provided to the Saudi citizens among the September 11 attackers. Al-Jubeir maintains close ties with the Saudi king, and according to WikiLeaks documents he was one of the people who succeeded in toughening the king's stance toward Iran. Moreover, before being appointed ambassador he was considered an "envoy" to the Jewish community in the U.S. – meeting Jewish leaders and bringing about a certain change in the embassy's traditionally hostile stance towards the Jewish community. There is no chance that the last weapons deal between Saudi Arabia and the U.S. went through almost without opposition in Congress. One of the reasons for this was that the pro-Israeli lobby AIPAC didn't oppose it.

With such a record, the Saudi ambassador could definitely constitute a fitting target for an Iranian plot. It is also possible the inadequate and amateurish plan proves Iran does not have proper terror foundations in the U.S., and therefore found it difficult to carry out the operation by the standards it would hope for. Otherwise, it's hard to imagine that the U.S. Attorney General, the head of the CIA and most of all U.S. President Barack Obama, would risk their reputation by publishing such unequivocal dramatic announcements that Iran is behind the plot. The U.S. administration undoubtedly has additional intelligence evidence – probably from its SIGINT capabilities, like telephone conversations or internet communications – that at this stage they do not want to reveal.

[ramana]

Saudi Crown Prince Aziz is dead. He was 81 years old.
Most likely it will end up leading to constitutional kingship in KSA.

[Singha]

I will start believing in KSA as more than a gutter country when they
- give full and equal rights to women incl right to education, vote, drive etc
- end segregation of the sexes in public
- give full and equal rights to minorities to practise their religion and build places of worship (they may continue to keep the two holy cities off limits if they want)
- stop giving free oil , donations and political cover to TSP
- stop using petrodollars to spread wahabi madarasas worldwide taking advantage of secular countries freedom to worship

not hopeful of seeing even one of these in my lifetime.

[Kamboja]

Saudi Arabia's crown prince, Sultan bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, died in New York after a long battle with cancer, the Saudi royal court said in a statement.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 97488.html

[Philip]

The Saudis and Qataris are reportedly financing fundamenatalist Islamists movements in Egypt,even more radical than the Muslim Brotherhood.The military are trying to maintain ther grip on power making all manner of deals with political parties in typical "carpet-selling" style.Western stooges like Al Baradei and co. are in the running for election to the presidency which might also be contested by the army chief."Plus ca change,plus c'est la même chose" (The more things change,the more they stay the same),first with Egypt and now with Libya.

[shyamd]

The most comprehensive account I have read to date. A must read.

Is Pakistan helping the Saudis with a nuclear deterrent?

October 04, 2011 13:01 IST

Worried by Iran's nuclear ambitions, Saudi Arabia is trying to strike a secret deal with Pakistan to buy readymade nuclear weapons, says Amir Mir.
Click here!

For long, Saudi Arabia has been one of the two foreign hands (the other being the United States) rocking the cradle of Pakistani politics, brokering truce among warring political leaders, providing asylum to those exiled by the military establishment and lavishing funds on a state strapped for cash. But there seems to be a role reversal now keeping in view some recent international media reports about a possible nuclear cooperation between Islamabad [ Images ] and Riyadh.

While highlighting the alleged Pakistan-Saudi nuclear collaboration, the international media has recently reported that worried by Tehran's nuclear ambitions, Riyadh is trying to strike a secret deal with Pakistan to buy readymade nuclear weapons instead of going through the lengthy process of developing its own.

These reports have appeared at a time when the Pakistan army [ Images ] and the royal Saudi land forces are holding a three week-long joint exercise -- Al-Samsaam-IV-2011 -- near the Jhelum district of Punjab [ Images ].

The Pakistan-Saudi Arabia nuclear cooperation was first reported on September 8 (external link) by haaretz.com, an Israeli Web site, followed by another report on September 15 by an American news agency, United Press International.

The haaretz.com report said that concerned by rapid progress being made by Iran towards fulfilling its nuclear ambitions, Saudi Arabia is mulling a secret nuclear cooperation with Pakistan to counter Tehran's military designs in the region.

The report said, although Riyadh has a memorandum of cooperation with the United States over building nuclear reactors for generating electricity, the Saudi royal family is divided over the issue with some heavyweights favouring a secret programme for military uses with Islamabad's help.

Being a Sunni-dominated Muslim-majority State, Pakistan has sought to develop close bilateral ties with Saudi Arabia, the largest country on the Arabian peninsula and home to the two holiest cities of Islam, Mecca and Medina. Both the Islamic countries had faced common enemies in the past successfully and are confronted with yet another common enemy even today -- Al Qaeda [ Images ].

Close geographical proximity, historic trade relations, religious affinity and complementary nature of economic needs have created a strong bondage of trust between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

As early as 1969, the Pakistan air force flew the aircraft of the royal Saudi air force to help fend off an invasion from South Yemen. In the 1970s and 1980s, about 15,000 Pakistani soldiers were stationed in Saudi Arabia to protect the country's oil fields. Against the backdrop of the recent uprisings in the Middle East and the Arab world which led to the ouster of several autocratic rulers of the Muslim world, Pakistan had played a key role in the region by supporting Saudi Arabia to preempt a possible revolt against the Saudi kingdom.

Besides placing two army divisions on standby to help Riyadh should any trouble break out, the Pakistan government helped the Saudi kingdom with the recruitment of thousands of ex-Pakistani military personnel for Bahrain's national guard.

Resultantly, Islamabad has received more financial aid from the Saudis than any other country outside the Arab world. Those in Riyadh who favour the preparation of a nuclear programme for military uses in cooperation with Pakistan include Saudi Defence Minister Sultan Bin Abdul Aziz, and its former intelligence chief, Turki Bin Faisal.

Hence, while progressing towards this end several Pakistani nuclear scientists recently visited Saudi Arabia to meet, among others, Prince Bandar Bin Sultan, the head of the Saudi national security council and former ambassador to the United States. Prince Bandar is considered among those in the Saudi royal family who are encouraging the nuclear connection with Pakistan to put his country on a secret path to becoming nuclear.

According to the UPI report, Saudi Arabia is beefing up its military links with Pakistan to counter Iran's expansionist plans which includes acquiring atomic arms from the only Muslim nuclear power or its pledge of nuclear cover.

'Pakistan has become a front-line State for Sunni Islam and is being positioned by its leaders, particularly in the powerful military and intelligence establishments, as a bulwark against Shia Iran and its proxies. Increasingly, Pakistan is rushing to the defence of Saudi Arabia, with whom it has a long had discreet security links,' the UPI report said.

The UPI report added that the concerns about Saudi plans to buy readymade nuclear weapons were raised in June 1994. A Saudi defector, Mohammed Abdalla al-Khilewi, the No 2 official in the Saudi mission to the United Nations in New York, claimed Riyadh had paid up to $5 billion to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein [ Images ] to build it a nuclear weapon.

Al-Khilewi is a former Saudi Arabian diplomat noted for his brazen May 1994 defection in which he issued a declaration on the Saudi embassy letterhead proclaiming King Fahd to be despotic and calling for a redistribution of the country's wealth and power.

An expert in nuclear proliferation, al-Khilewi had produced 13,000 documents to support his claim that Saudi Arabia was engaged in a secret 20-year effort to acquire nuclear weapons, first with Iraq, which Riyadh backed in the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war, and then with Pakistan.

His documents showed that Riyadh helped bankroll Pakistan's clandestine nuclear project and signed a pact that in the event Saudi Arabia was attacked with nuclear weapons, Islamabad would immediately respond against the aggressor with its own nuclear arms.

Well-informed diplomatic circles in Islamabad believe the recent media reports about a possible nuclear cooperation between Riyadh and Islamabad are credible. According to them, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have developed extensive defence and strategic ties to an extent that Riyadh is now secretly working on an alleged nuclear programme with the help of Pakistani experts.

The nuclear partnership between Riyadh and Islamabad is reportedly aimed at providing the kingdom with a nuclear deterrent on short notice if and when needed.

Determined not to fall behind in the Middle East nuclear race, Saudi Arabia has allegedly arranged to make available two Pakistani nuclear bombs or guided missile warheads which are most probably held in Pakistan's nuclear air base at Kamra in the northern district of Attock in Punjab province.

In fact, the fresh reports about the Pakistan-Saudi nuclear deal were prompted by the International Atomic Energy Agency's recent disclosure that Iran has begun to install the centrifuges in its uranium enrichment facility in Natanz.

'The transfer of centrifuges at Natanz (which is the only Iranian enrichment facility in central Iran) to Fordoo is underway, with all necessary safety measures,' said the head of Iran's nuclear weapons programme, Fereydoun Abbassi Davani, in an interview to Iranian television August 22.

The announcement was described as provocation by the United States which is much concerned at the acceleration of uranium enrichment by Tehran. The West's prime area of concern remains the production by Iran of highly enriched uranium to 20 percent, with a technique closer to Tehran's ability to produce enough enriched uranium (over 90 percent) to make a nuclear weapon.

The 2009 revelation by Western intelligence agencies about the secret construction of the Fordoo uranium enrichment plant in violation of UN resolutions had caused a serious crisis between Iran and the international community which eventually led to a strengthening of economic sanctions and Western policies against Iran in July 2010.

In fact, Saudi Arabia is not known to have a nuclear weapons programme. From an official and public standpoint, Saudi Arabia has been an opponent of nuclear weapons in the Middle East, having signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and is a member of the coalition of countries demanding a Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone in the Middle East. However, over the years, there have been media reports of Saudi intent to purchase a nuclear weapon from an outside source.

In 2003, a leaked strategy paper laid out three possible options for the Saudi government: To acquire a nuclear deterrent, to ally with and become protected by an existing nuclear nation, or to try to reach agreement on having a nuclear-free Middle East.

International apprehensions that Saudi Arabia would seek to acquire nuclear weapons rose periodically over the last decade. Saudi Arabia's geopolitical situation gives it strong reasons to consider acquiring nuclear weapons: The current volatile security environment in the Middle East; the growing number of States (particularly Iran and Israel) with weapons of mass destruction in the region; and the Iranian ambition to dominate the region.

International concerns about Saudi nuclear ambitions intensified in 2003 in the wake of revelations about Pakistani nuclear scientist Dr A Q Khan's proliferation activities. The IAEA investigations showed that A Q Khan sold or offered nuclear weapons technology to Saudia and several Middle Eastern states, including Iran, Iraq, Libya and Syria.

The unearthing of the blackmarket nuclear technology network increased international suspicions that Dr Khan had developed ties with Riyadh, which has the capability to pay for all kinds of nuclear-related services. Even before the revelations about Dr Khan's activities, concerns about Pak-Saudi nuclear cooperation persisted, largely due to strengthened cooperation between the two Islamic countries.

In particular, frequent high-level visits of Saudi and Pakistani officials over the past several years raised serious questions about the possibility of clandestine Pakistan-Saudi nuclear cooperation.

In May 1999, a Saudi Arabian team, headed by Defence Minister Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz, visited Pakistan's highly restricted uranium enrichment and missile assembly factory.

The Saudi prince toured the Kahuta uranium enrichment plant and an adjacent factory with then Pakistan prime minister Nawaz Sharif [ Images ] where the Ghauri missile was being assembled and was briefed by Dr Khan.

A few months later, Khan traveled to Saudi Arabia [in November 1999] ostensibly to attend a symposium on 'Information Sources on the Islamic World'. The same month, Dr Saleh al-Athel, president, King Abdul Aziz City for Science and Technology, visited Pakistan to work out details for cooperation in the fields of engineering, electronics and computer science.

In 2003, President General Pervez Musharraf [ Images ] paid a visit to Saudi Arabia, and former Pakistani prime minister Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali visited the kingdom twice. But the US had warned Pakistan for the first time in December 2003 against providing nuclear assistance to Riyadh.

International concerns over Pak-Saudi nuclear assistance intensified after the October 2003 visit of Saudi Arabia's then de facto ruler Crown Prince, now King, Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz to Pakistan.

During that visit, American intelligence circles alleged, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia had concluded a clandestine agreement on nuclear cooperation that was meant to provide the Saudis with nuclear-weapons technology in exchange for cheap oil.

However, in 2005, the United Stated claimed to have acquired fresh evidence, suggesting that a broader government-to-government Pakistan-Saudi atomic collaboration is still on. Subsequent news reports in American media said that a chartered Saudi C-130 Hercules plane made scores of trips between Dhahran military base and several Pakistani cities, including Lahore [ Images ] and Karachi, between October 2003 and October 2004, and thereafter, considerable contacts were reported between Pakistani and Saudi Arabian nuclear scientists.

Between October 2004 and January 2005, under the cover of Haj, several Pakistani scientists visited Riyadh, and remained missing from their designated hotels for 15 to 20 days.

The intimacy between Islamabad and Riyadh has been exceptional and it is not without significance that the first foreign tour of Musharraf, who ousted Sharif in October 1999, was to Saudi Arabia. Moreover, Sharif himself, his younger brother Shahbaz Sharif and their families took asylum in Saudi Arabia after a secret exile deal between Musharraf and Sharif, in which Riyadh had played a key role.

According to US intelligence findings, as reported by international media, during Nawaz Sharif's second prime ministerial tenure, Saudi Arabia had been involved in funding Islamabad's missile and nuclear program purchases from China, as a result of which Pakistan became a nuclear weapon-producing and proliferating State.

For decades, the Western media and their intelligence agencies have linked Pakistan's dishonoured nuclear scientist Dr Khan and the ISI, to nuclear-technology transfers, and it was hard to credit the idea that the successive governments Dr Khan served had been oblivious of these activities.

In the post-9/11 era, analysts continue to express fears about the possibility of extremist Islamic groups like Al Qaeda gaining access to Pakistan's nuclear weapons or fissile or radioactive materials.

Under these conditions, Islamabad's pursuing any clandestine nuclear deal with Riyadh can only aggravate such risks and international concerns.
Amir Mir

The KSA have the maal. Its a case of establishing a full fledged prog. Thats the issue now. The prog is already in place in Khamis Mushayt

------------
A lot has been made about hte withdrawal of US from Iraq. They will still be in KRG territory and the plan is to base more troops in Kuwait so they can go into IRaq secretly or overtly if need be to get any counter terror work done. So its not really a withdrawal but just no overt presence and its also about iran.

Israel is another issue, US need to defend Israel at all costs as it is getting circled with trouble. So the withdrawal is also about this issue.

[joshvajohn]

India abstains from UNSC vote on Syria
http://zeenews.india.com/news/nation/in ... 35171.html


Indian strategists have to think very carefully and not to stand against all future governments - which may possibly a democratic. Being a democratic country I do not know when Indian govt has changed its policy to support anti democratic rulers. At least show a balance of act in such revolutionary times. India attempts to think these movements as if they are pro-Western! these movements are democratic aspiration of the people and to some extent they had suffered enough in the hands of Islamic fundamentalism and a desperate attempt to renew though such reform and renew is not going to be easy for a bit of time within such reform movements. So this is just a starting point of those times for freedom of expression and freedom from religious dictators.

[suryag]

India should abstain from such issues, given there is no substantial evidence of either side being the lily white in these conflicts. Of course, abstaining keeps our slate clean in the sense that we leave it to the various warring factions to sort it out among themselves. Unless there is an act of external aggression there is no need for India to vote either way. IT is a nuanced stand IMO moreover, in most of these conflicts neither is any one of the factions overtly pro-India nor do these regions share a border with us(for us to have a refugee problem). So what is our locus standi in voting for or against? Let the western powers the great front runners in safeguarding human rights do what they want to we can engage later

[shyamd]

India is backing syria because they don't want the west to have a free run and use UN against any 3rd world nation. Another major reason is that tomorrow Syria, tomorrow they could use our vote against Syria to intervene in Kashmir or North East. Its the same reason why PRC are also together on this issue. India abstained rather than vote against the motion because we realise that Bashaar is going down and is killing its people brutally.

[devesh]

http://www.thenational.ae/thenationalco ... -a-victory

For all of its flaws, Tunisia's election is already a victory

Tunisia now has four or five parties that have made the transition from beleaguered vanguard to mass organisations and are approaching the elections with the levelheadedness that comes with having a hope of actually governing, not just criticising from the outside. These parties have credible identities, ranging from Islamist to social-democratic to liberal, reflecting the broad consensus that exists within society.

In most respects, in fact, the parties do not differ much from one another in terms of their policies. For instance, all major parties - including secular ones - agree on honouring Tunisia's Islamic heritage, while the leading Islamist party Ennahda is bending over backwards to reassure voters that it will maintain Tunisia's liberal laws on women's rights and will respect freedom of expression.

Some secular parties have chosen to present themselves as bulwarks against Islamism, but this appears to be an electoral tactic, not the undemocratic ban on Islamist parties that existed beforehand (with, it must be said, the approval of many secular opposition movements).

very interesting situation in Tunisia. so, before there was a ban on Islamist parties. now there isn't. is there a chance for Islamists to rise with vengeance? also, how "liberal" is Tunisia? it seems they're not the rabid kind like Saudis.

Tunisia set off the process. so, what happens here will have significance, at least symbolically.

[Virupaksha]

India abstains from UNSC vote on Syria
http://zeenews.india.com/news/nation/in ... 35171.html
India attempts to think these movements as if they are pro-Western! these movements are democratic aspiration of the people and to some extent they had suffered enough in the hands of Islamic fundamentalism and a desperate attempt to renew though such reform and renew is not going to be easy for a bit of time within such reform movements. So this is just a starting point of those times for freedom of expression and freedom from religious dictators.

We have seen how the same "democratic" movement in Bahrain was crushed using US and western arms when it is not in their interests. Egypt, Libya, Syria with their "western revolutions" are going towards islamic fundamentalism.

[Agnimitra]

Next step on Iran's to clear the US out of Iraq as much as poss -- Moqtada as-Sadr now says that after the expiration of the SOFA, the staff of the embassy should be considered “occupiers” and must be “resisted”.

Sadr Demands "Resistance" against the US Embassy in Baghdad

This may well be the single most significant item in all the news stories about Iraq this weekend. Everyone should have known for months (if not years) that there would be no new SOFA and no immunities for US instructors. Thanks to the failure of the Iraqi politicians to create a pro-extension coalition – and due to the failure of Washington to stimulate the formation of such a coalition – the projected US mega-embassy in Baghdad has become the next vulnerable element in American Iraq policy.

[Singha]

Sadr is emerging to declare victory and rouse his troops now that US is firmly committed to clearing out of Iraq anyway

[shyamd]

Sadr saiid that because US decided to put a lot of military guys In civvie clothes and operate that way.
Hence why the voIce of Iran has come out strongly. The US embassy in Baghdad is massive.
US will likely withdraw to Kuwait and will still operate in and out of iraq as and when required.

[Agnimitra]

US will likely withdraw to Kuwait and will still operate in and out of iraq as and when required.

And it looks like Iran/Iraq and Kuwait are already having problems over the building of some port facility there...

[RamaY]

The most comprehensive account I have read to date. A must read.

Is Pakistan helping the Saudis with a nuclear deterrent?

Could this be the reason why Pakis are daring unkil to stop military aid?

[shyamd]

It was drummed up by Iran backed guys, all the hot heads kicked off. Shia miltia had even fired a few scuds into kuwaiti territory as warning shots.
The Kuwaiti's said all along that port mubarak will not affect Iraqi ports. The port mubarak was created as a mutually beneficial port wiith kuwaiiti money and iraqI labour.
The port idea from the begining was meant to be to improve iraq/kuwait relations. Kuwait doesn't really need it, it will be more beneficial to iraq than kuwait.
Iraq sent a delegation to look at the port on a technical basis. Same day the problem gets resolved and iraq says we have no issue with the port.

What does this tell us? Iran is causing trouble un-necessarily. It piped up a lot of anti kuwaiit propaganda with some even threatenng invasion of kuwait.

[Agnimitra]

Shyamd ji, I always wonder how the Iranians are ever ready to publicly let a few sparks fly and confront neighboring American satellites, be it Kuwait or Azerbaijan.

[shyamd]

RamaY, I think Paki's are doIng what they are doing what they are doing for these reasons:
--- they think Karzai is pro India. They don't want to be surrounded
- KSA wants an effective deterrence against Iran, so they are both on the same page. Karzaii is pro iran.
- US is down and can't really afford another war.
- pakI's have smuggled maal into western cities and blackmail.
- terror ntelligence, it is no secret pak have the keys.

[shyamd]

Shyamd ji, I always wonder how the Iranians are ever ready to publicly let a few sparks fly and confront neighboring American satellites, be it Kuwait or Azerbaijan.

Easy. Its the Iranian psyche. They are all jingostic. And most importantly they know the US won't fight in a war given their domestic situation and economy.

But when push comes to shove iran knows it will get swatted like a fly.

[Muppalla]

Tunasia got it Islamic party ruling via democracy that defeated a secular party. Egypt and Lybia will follow predictably.

[shyamd]

^^ When you look closely what you will find is that Washington negotiated with them for many years. All their policies are in line with Unkil. Mullah Lite - i.e. have your religion but respect freedom/justice etc.

if rumours are to be believed, you can expect the same in TSP - linked to OBL hand over.

[Agnimitra]

^^^ LOL @ "Mullah Lite"

Meanwhile, Iran's dindoraTV beats out the following:
PressTV: Israel Okayed German tank sales to KSA

Germany approved selling tanks to Saudi Arabia after Israel reportedly permitted Berlin to supply heavy arms to an Arab government for the first time.

In early 2011, the German government asked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's opinion on the matter, German magazine Der Spiegel said in an article.

"Israel had no objections at that point. Contacts between Jerusalem (al-Quds) and Riyadh had improved in the preceding years, with Saudi Arabia becoming one of Israel's most important allies in combating Iran's nuclear program. The United States government also signaled its approval," the article said.

According to the German defense policy, no government is allowed to sell military equipment to an Arab state due to Israel's security interests.

In early July, Der Spiegel revealed that German Chancellor Angela Merkel and her cabinet approved the delivery of more than 200 of Leopard 2A7+ model tanks to Saudi Arabia.

German opposition parties and even members of Merkel's ruling center-right coalition criticized the deal, particularly in light of the recent developments in the Middle East and North AFrica

Social Democrat parliamentary deputy leader Gernot Erler said that selling arms to Saudi Arabia while the country has sent military forces and armored vehicles to Bahrain to help crack down on protesters is "a slap in the face for freedom movements in the whole region."

In March, Saudi Arabia deployed troops and police forces in Bahrain to help crush nationwide protests in the Persian Gulf sheikdom.

The article adds that the decision "broke a German taboo, and broke with the decisions of previous governments in Berlin not to supply heavy military equipment to Saudi Arabia as a matter of principle. It also marked a paradigm shift in German foreign policy."

The deal not only shows that German foreign policy interests are above human rights in Saudi Arabia, where men can drive tanks and women are not even allowed to drive cars, but also that when Germany's geopolitical and economic interests are involved it is acceptable to deliver weapons to any Arab country .

[RamaY]

^^ When you look closely what you will find is that Washington negotiated with them for many years. All their policies are in line with Unkil. Mullah Lite - i.e. have your religion but respect freedom/justice etc.

if rumours are to be believed, you can expect the same in TSP - linked to OBL hand over.

You meant MO?

Anyways what is Mullah Lite under Sharia Law? Or you mean Dubai model where Sharia applies only to Muslims? Even then how can Sharia give equal rights to all its muslim citizens?

[Virupaksha]

^^ When you look closely what you will find is that Washington negotiated with them for many years. All their policies are in line with Unkil. Mullah Lite - i.e. have your religion but respect freedom/justice etc.

if rumours are to be believed, you can expect the same in TSP - linked to OBL hand over.

You meant MO?

Anyways what is Mullah Lite under Sharia Law? Or you mean Dubai model where Sharia applies only to Muslims? Even then how can Sharia give equal rights to all its muslim citizens?

Mullah Lite - is the Dubai/Saudi/Pakistan model, where the suit boot white guy/elite is allowed to have his finest scotch and women and servants at his beck and call, allowed to splurge money and earn money by using the natural resources. and doesnt have to go and look outside. Before, for name sake it was secular in some cases, but that pretense is being dropped now.

Basically the version 2 of saddam & Gaddafi - more islamicised. These revolutions are to make sure that these client states do not develop any dynastic ambitions. Note Saddam, Ben Ali & Gaddafi were all targeted when they were prepping their sons to take over.

[abhishek_sharma]

Exodus: Is there a place for Christians in the new Middle East?

[shyamd]

When I say mullah lite - I mean a constitution based on shariah law to a certain extent. Yes, it will be similar to the UAE or Qatar (which is selective application of shariah anyway).
It won't follow the KSA model where all citiizens are forced to wear hijab/abaya etc.

A crucial aspect will be that they will have freedom, justice and equality. Democratic elections, freedom of speech until someone pisses off the mullah's. But libyans tend to be quite religious anyway, so that shouldn't be a problem.

A more important question is the economics. Can the libyan economy be sustaned if they have enough oil wealth to redistrIbute to all citizens.