Geopolitical thread

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 13 Nov 2009 03:06

Paul,

I would always agree that elements of history repeat themselves, because of geographical, cultural and economic continuities.

However, it is just as important to see what is different each time. Geography may change very slowly, but economics and culture are dynamic.

The German-Soviet agreements of 1923-33 and 1939-41 were the tactical agreements between outcasts from the international system, rather than the result of a long-term alignment. Their ideological and territorial ambitions were incompatible.

It is true that Russia has from Peter the Great onwards periodically turned to Europe to assist with modernisation, which Russia intended to use in every direction, east, west and south.

However there are very significant differences from the past;

- For the first time Russia is no longer either an ideologically nor territorially expansionist in a way that is seriously threatening to Europe as a whole.

- The main areas of competition are economic and political influence, rather than outright ownership of territory or military strength

- the relationship that is developing between the EU and Russia is much more than strategic agreements between two autarkic states - it is going to be a deep, structural interdependence, with strong people to people contact.

What Russia really, really wants is visa-free travel for its citizens to the EU. They will eventually get it.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 13 Nov 2009 22:00

Politics Today: Mending Relationships in Asia
1 comments Posted by Steve Chaggaris
http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/politic ... ontentBody

** The president meets with world leaders...

** Afghanistan decisions to come next month...

** The story on WH counsel Greg Craig's resignation...

(CBS)
PRESIDENT OBAMA: "President Barack Obama arrived in Japan today to start an eight-day swing through Asia, meeting with major U.S. creditors and trading partners to assure them he intends to maintain American influence in the region," write Bloomberg News' Edwin Chen and Julianna Goldman.

"After a meeting and news conference with Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama ... in Tokyo, Obama will deliver a speech tomorrow intended to articulate his vision for a Pacific alliance that focuses on geopolitical and economic issues including trade, climate change and halting the spread of nuclear weapons."

During today's news conference, Mr. Obama said the U.S. and Japan must "find ways to renew and refresh the alliance for the 21st century," reports the Associated Press.

Hatoyama noted that Japan will no longer refuel ships that supply Afghanistan, but he promised aid for Afghan civilian needs such as schools, agriculture and police. He also vowed to cooperate with the United States on combatting climate change and nuclear proliferation.

On the nuclear issue, Mr. Obama and Prime Minister Hatoyama" also "agreed to host a conference in January on nuclear security," Reuters reports.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 14 Nov 2009 05:03

Hatoyama meets Obama, no major sparks to report.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 14 Nov 2009 06:46

The tricky politics of population in the former Yugoslavia

A prelude to what could happen in Asom and our NE perhaps, thanks to relentless BD ingress?

I know, no exact parallels but too many similarities to ignore also...

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 14 Nov 2009 11:30

The Saudis up the ante in Yemen.

Saudi imposes naval blockade on northern Yemen
Thu, 12 Nov 2009 00:14:19 GMT
Font size :

Saudi forces have expanded the scope of the attacks into civilian areas, pounding residential areas kilometers inside Yemen.
Saudi Arabia has imposed a naval blockade on northern Yemen's Red Sea coast amid its offensive on Houthi fighters in the mountainous region.

A Saudi government adviser said on Wednesday that the blockade was imposed to stop weapons from reaching the fighters, Reuters reported.

The adviser said earlier that Saudi warships were ordered to search suspicious ships sailing near northern Yemen.

Last week, Saudi Arabia launched its offensive against Shia fighters who accuse the kingdom of supporting the Yemeni government in its crackdown on them.

The government launched Operation Scorched Earth in August in an effort to crush the Houthis whom it accuses of seeking to restore an imamate that was overthrown in 1962.

The Houthis dismiss the accusations saying they are seeking to end what they call the government's discriminatory policies against them.

N Korea Calls Naval Clash A South Korean "Conspiracy" - Media

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-200 ... 16156.html

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 17 Nov 2009 05:06

Bloomberg's William Pesek asks us not to believe that Japan is blowing off USA.Linky

It doesn’t involve Russia, China or even the forces of communism, but Japan. The nation’s new government is pulling away from the U.S. and telling officials in Washington what they can do with their policy ideas. At least that’s the impression one gets reading the media these days.

Don’t believe the hype. The theory that Yukio Hatoyama’s Democratic Party of Japan is blowing off the U.S. is as fanciful as it is wrong. Those losing sleep over the state of this vital economic and security relationship aren’t thinking through how much Hatoyama needs Barack Obama, and vice versa.

But he goes on to add:

The U.S.-Japan dynamic is indeed changing. Yet think of it more as evolution than confrontation. This story is about more than Tokyo and Washington. It’s about the rise of China and a vibrant region amid deepening U.S. troubles.

{ my suspicion: Japan is seeing through the smokes the future, and want to diversify just to be safe}

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 17 Nov 2009 05:51

x-posting only

Hari Seldon wrote:Sri Ambrose Evans Pritchard on why cheena's mercantilism is the #1 threat to world peace and economic stability:

By holding the yuan to 6.83 to the dollar to boost exports, Beijing is dumping its unemployment abroad – "stealing American jobs", says Nobel laureate Paul Krugman. As long as China does it, other tigers must do it too.

Western capitalists are complicit, of course. They rent cheap workers and cheap plant in Guangdong, then lobby Capitol Hill to prevent Congress doing anything about it. This is labour arbitrage.

At some point, American workers will rebel. US unemployment is already 17.5pc under the broad "U6" gauge followed by Barack Obama. Realty Track said that 332,000 properties were foreclosed in October alone. More Americans have lost their homes this year than during the entire decade of the Great Depression. A backlog of 7m homes is awaiting likely seizure by lenders. If you are not paying attention to this political time-bomb, perhaps you should.
Now this much is well known. Question is what will yamerika do about it?

It is fashionable to talk of America as the supplicant. That misreads the strategic balance. Washington can bring China to its knees at any time by shutting markets. There is no symmetry here. Any move by Beijing to liquidate its holdings of US Treasuries could be neutralized – in extremis – by capital controls. Well-armed sovereign states can do whatever they want.

If provoked, the US has the economic depth to retreat into near autarky (with NAFTA) and retool its industries behind tariff walls – as Britain did in the 1930s under Imperial Preference. In such circumstances, China would collapse. Mao statues would be toppled by street riots.
Aha. Do I smell a threat here? PRC better not get cocky, you say? And just in case the message didn't hit home...

Beijing is indeed boosting pensions and extending health insurance to the countryside so that people feel less need to save, but cultural revolutions take time. All we have seen so far are "baby steps", says Morgan Stanley's Stephen Roach.

The reality is that much of Beijing's $600bn stimulus has been spent building yet more plant and infrastructure so that China can ship yet more goods, or has leaked into property and stocks.

Credit has exploded. Allocated by Maoist bosses for political purposes, it has become absurd. China is rolling as much steel as the next eight producers combined. It is churning more cement than the rest of the world. Fixed investment is up 53pc this year. Once you know that Hunan authorities have torn down two miles of modern flyway so that they can soak up stimulus by building it again, or that the newly-built city of Ordos is sitting empty in Inner Mongolia, you know what must come next.

Pivot Asset Management said lending has touched 140pc of GDP, "well beyond" levels that have led to crises in the past. With the revolution's 60th birthday out of the way, the central bank has begun to tighten. New yuan loans halved in October. So be careful. Pivot said a hard-landing in China could prove as traumatic for world markets as the US sub-prime crash.

The world economy is still skating on thin ice. The West is sated with debt, the East with plant. The crisis has been contained (or masked) by zero rates and a fiscal blast, trashing sovereign balance sheets. But the core problem remains. The Anglo-sphere and Club Med are tightening belts, yet Asia is not adding enough demand to compensate. It is adding supply.

My view is that markets are still in denial about the structural wreckage of the credit bubble. There are two more boils to lance: China's investment bubble; and Europe's banking cover-up. I fear that only then can we clear the rubble and, very slowly, start a fresh cycle.
Well, there we have it. Moi only fear is that unrest in cheen don't spill out over the sino-yindian border since CCP feels a need to unify its populace by raking up wartime nationalism.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 19 Nov 2009 22:37

Anybody get a sense that Obama just allowed China to hold to the baton? Slowly the baton will be passed wholly to them. Japan suffered defeat in WWII. But had rebuilt itself, when British handed over the baton to USA. Now if USA is indeed handing over the baton to China, Japan seems to be positioning itself to rebuild itself again (after its two decades of economic meltdown) with the help of China.

Are we witnessing History?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Nov 2009 22:44

SwamyG wrote:Anybody get a sense that Obama just allowed China to hold to the baton? Slowly the baton will be passed wholly to them. Japan suffered defeat in WWII. But had rebuilt itself, when British handed over the baton to USA. Now if USA is indeed handing over the baton to China, Japan seems to be positioning itself to rebuild itself again (after its two decades of economic meltdown) with the help of China.

Are we witnessing History?

By mentioning a role for China in the India-TSP relations the US is assuring the TSP that it wont be let down. This might appear a cheap alternative but usually when the TSP gets such assurance they launch on their bold initiatives. Every war with India had Western or PRC backing for TSP.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 19 Nov 2009 22:58

^^^ Err, its not that simple.

UK-stan and khanistan were in some sense worthy empires because their alliances were built on some level of trust, their leadership inspired some confidence that ally interests would be protected. Hence, the allies weren't arming themselves against the alliance leaders.

In PRC's case, the CPC doesn't inspire either trust or confidence. Strictly IMHO, of course. A regime that doesn't afford its own people rights will accommodate its allies' interests? Really?

Ok, maybe Beijing's generous heart will. Sure, it will. What are the odds anyway?

PRC's current set of allies - NoKo, TSP are ones that are too small, too insecure, too yucky to ever seriously challenge Beijing's natural and sweet smelling claim to alliance leadership. Tokyo is a different kettle altogether. Beijing is yet to show it can handle leadership of an alliance of equals. Somehow, the endgame of such an alliance wouldn't appeal to any nation with an democratic ethos, IMHO.

But but but but ... time will tell, I guess. Until then, MaoA is the mantra. Jai Hu! Jai Hu!

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 19 Nov 2009 23:29

Hari Seldon wrote:
In PRC's case, the CPC doesn't inspire either trust or confidence. Strictly IMHO, of course. A regime that doesn't afford its own people rights will accommodate its allies' interests? Really?

This baton passing is designed to bring down CPC. That is the last autocratic institution which gives support to islamic dictators and proliferates WMD.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 20 Nov 2009 00:47

We talk about 'Arab and the Camel' story. Our great grand kids will be talking about the "American and the Panda" story. Once upon a time lived an American. The world was getting hotter, while the American lived in a air-conditioned house. There lived a Panda, nearby, that could not take the heat anymore, it requested the American to open one window of the ACed house, so that cool air flowed outside. Then it stuck its nose through the window, then......

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 20 Nov 2009 23:53

Belgian PM nominated EU president.......................

OMG. This guy was and is nobody. After election there were so many reconciliation meetings (to choose PM) that everybody lost interest. People started asking why we need a govt at all...............we were doing without one for long. Then some how all part agreed to give post to the least harmful guy............Mr nobody.......who happened to sit on the table. Same way now .............UK like to think they are important member of EU and rest of the Europe knows it is not.No body listen to BBC (talking about average Antonio,Mark and Leonard) so they do not know that Tony Blair was an important world leader. So the old Europe decided to choose least harmful guy................the host. It is like ..............cameramen takes girl on date after the shooting....because hero, director and producer could not make mind.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 21 Nov 2009 00:37

Tony Blair had two strikes against him

- firstly, he was far, far too high profile for the taste of national leaders, who do *not* want the EU President or foreign representative to set the EU agenda, only to oversee its organisation and execution it in a consistent manner. That is why both choices (the EU's new foreign representative chosen at the same time as the President is British) are relatively unknown figures without much star power.

- secondly, although a Europhile up until 9/11 he made few real efforts to deepen UK integration with the EU once it was clear that it would be politically costly. His overall thrust from 2001 until he stepped down was in favour of the American alliance rather than the European project. Germans in particular will always remember him for chosing America over Europe on the question of Iraq, even though Sarkozy didnt care about that. And Brown, Blair's reluctant backer for the EU jobs was far from enthusiastic about adopting the Euro both as Chancellor of the Exchequer and as PM.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 21 Nov 2009 00:42

x post from the Afghan thread;

I think we have to separate economic and geopolitical groupings to a degree.

When I say economic I'm not talking about 'thematic' economic groupings - energy exporters vs. energy importers, or countries with lots of poor farmers (i.e. 'developing') vs. countries where the rural poor are a small minority('developed').

China and America are an economic dyad. The Democrats from Clinton onwards prefer to focus on economic cooperation, while attempting to soften geopolitical tensions. The Republicans on the other hand fear the kind of world Chinese power will create

Russia and Europe are fast becoming another economic dyad, even though their remain significant geopolitical rivalries in the buffer zone between them.

The point is that these economic relationships, even under hawkish governments affect how far each party is willing to go in a crisis. Both China and America do not want to see a real confrontation with each other over Taiwan. Russia and the EU do not want to see a real confrontation with each other about Ukraine. Economic interdependency create real incentives to meet each other halfway.

While India is increasingly important to everyone, there isnt the same kind of mutual economic interdependence with any of the big economic players. It gives India greater independence, but it also means less influence. Interestingly, one of the most likely candidates for an exceptionally close economic relationship is the Middle East - a place with large energy surpluses, domestic technology deficit, serious needs for skilled manpower, and chronic insecurity. Despite political differences with the GCC over Pakistan and Sunni activism, and Iran over the nuclear and pipeline issues, I believe economic forces will draw India closer to both at least in the medium term.

Whether its the GCC, Iran, or both will I think have an indirect influence on India's approach to Afghanistan and Pakistan in the same time frame, and will influence the GCC and/or Iran's approach to the region as well.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Nov 2009 01:55

On the evolution of the Velvet Revolution since 1989.

From New York Review of Books.

Excerpt

In the autumn of 1989, the term "velvet revolution" was coined to describe a peaceful, theatrical, negotiated regime change in a small Central European state that no longer exists. So far as I have been able to establish, the phrase was first used by Western journalists and subsequently taken up by Václav Havel and other Czech and Slovak opposition leaders.[1] This seductive label was then applied retrospectively, by writers including myself, to the cumulatively epochal events that had unfolded in Poland, Hungary, and East Germany, as in "the velvet revolutions of 1989."

Twenty years later, in the summer of 2009, the Islamic Republic of Iran staged a show trial of political leaders and thinkers it accused of fomenting enghelab -e makhmali—that is, precisely, velvet revolution. Across the intervening years, dramatic events in places including Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, South Africa, Chile, Slovakia, Croatia, Serbia, Georgia, Ukraine, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, and Burma were tagged with variants of adjective + revolution. Thus we have read about singing (Baltic states), peaceful, negotiated (South Africa, Chile), rose (Georgia), orange (Ukraine), color (widely used, post-orange), cedar (Lebanon), tulip (Kyrgyzstan), electoral (generic), saffron (Burma), and most recently, in Iran, green revolution. Often, as in the original Czechoslovak case, the catchy labeling has been popularized through the interplay of foreign journalists and political activists in the countries concerned.

I guess India was alwasy having some sort of khadi revolution if that is the descriptive phrase(Catchy phrase and foreign journalists) for the 'velvet' revolution!

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Nov 2009 12:39

Cross posted in the OIL thread.The US planning for "ful spectrum" conflict in oil rich S.America,using nuclear bases in Colombia.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 25398.html

Raju · Post by **Raju** » 22 Nov 2009 12:56

rsingh wrote:Belgian PM nominated EU president....................... OMG. This guy was and is nobody. After election there were so many reconciliation meetings (to choose PM) that everybody lost interest. People started asking why we need a govt at all...............we were doing without one for long. Then some how all part agreed to give post to the least harmful guy............Mr nobody.......who happened to sit on the table. Same way now .............UK like to think they are important member of EU and rest of the Europe knows it is not.No body listen to BBC (talking about average Antonio,Mark and Leonard) so they do not know that Tony Blair was an important world leader. So the old Europe decided to choose least harmful guy................the host. It is like ..............cameramen takes girl on date after the shooting....because hero, director and producer could not make mind.

If you have noticed something, EU never elects its leaders.
IOW the people who are subjects to EU have no say in matter of electing their leadership.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 23 Nov 2009 21:12

1. Chinese, Japanese FM meet on bilateral ties, int'l issues

The Japanese Speakers of the Diet said China and Japan should not only closely cooperate on bilateral issues, but also work together to settle regional, international and global issues. They emphasized communication between the legislation bodies are important and the Japanese Diet will exert every effort to boost bilateral ties. They also said Japan is actively preparing for the participation of Shanghai Expo and believed the Expo will be a success.

2. Hatoyama eyes visit to India in late December Looks like Hatoyama is keen to meet MMS.

3. China envoy hears Hatoyama fraternal pitch

Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama and visiting Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi agreed Friday to develop bilateral diplomatic ties in a "spirit of fraternity," in line with the Hatoyama's political philosophy.

"I want to build win-win relationships based on a spirit of fraternity and expand them from between Japan and China to the Asian region and the world," Hatoyama was quoted as saying by the ministry. "Doing so, I believe, will lead to the building of an East Asian community."

4. Meanwhile looks like Japan and USA had secret deals in 1960 concerning some nuke weaponary ships.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 23 Nov 2009 23:00

Raju wrote:If you have noticed something, EU never elects its leaders.
IOW the people who are subjects to EU have no say in matter of electing their leadership.

Hi Raju,

Its been one of the strongest criticisms of the EU superstate, what's been called the 'democracy deficit'

Its the biggest source of popular opposition to the EU within the UK, and why countries like Switzerland, Norway and Iceland have refused to join the political union even though they are part of the economic union. Its also why a lot of people even within core EU states like France or Holland are not happy with the way things work.

The Lisbon treaty is supposed to repair the deficit by increasing the power of the directly elected European parliament, by giving it co-equal power with the council of ministers to approve or block EU legislation. While thats a good thing many are still skeptical of whether that goes far enough, given the executive powers of the entirely unelected European Commission.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 24 Nov 2009 06:10

The China List
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/31/opini ... inski.html

By MARK BRZEZINSKI and MARK FUNG
Published: October 30, 2009
As the White House prepares for President Obama’s inaugural visit to China in November, it’s faced with two possible approaches in planning for what the trip can achieve.

The first is to follow the safe “laundry list” technique, which identifies a long, sometimes unwieldy set of policy objectives, but which China may or may not view as being in its own national interest.

This list would include important topics such as environmental, energy and monetary issues. Raising these at the presidential level could well result in incremental progress, but they and other themes can also be advanced through the ongoing Strategic and Economic Dialogue (S&ED) at a ministerial level.

President Obama is in a unique position to break the mold of presidential summitry. Three overarching “deliverables” could be identified that if implemented would significantly reshape the U.S.-China relationship and address serious challenges the two countries face together.

One, establish a formal mechanism among the leaders of the United States, China and Pakistan. China is Pakistan’s most important supporter both because of their geographic proximity and China’s perception of Pakistan as a counterweight to India.

Coordinating policy and economic support for Pakistan would yield a higher return for all three nations. The interests for the United States and China are consonant in Pakistan: removing extremist fundamentalist activity, stabilizing the leadership and encouraging economic growth.

While Pakistan and Afghanistan remains a pivotal challenge to U.S. policy, “AfPak” policy should not be commingled in the context of China, as these two countries mean two entirely different things for Beijing and Washington.

For China, Pakistan holds geostrategic, political and economic importance. Afghanistan is for China primarily an economic opportunity with less, if any, strategic value.

The United States should make clear it does not want to displace Beijing’s influence in Islamabad, but a tripartite approach would advance shared interests and deliver more tangible results in Pakistan.

Two, accelerate the proposed mining schedule for development of the Aynak Copper Reserve in Afghanistan, where the state-owned China Metallurgical Group holds the concession and where Afghan authorities are protecting the copper fields.

Aynak is located about 20 miles southeast of Kabul and is the site of one of the world’s largest undeveloped copper deposits.

With a bid of approximately $3 billion, which includes infrastructure upgrades in Logar Province, where Aynak is situated — and that is known to Afghans as the “gates of jihad” — there is the opportunity for development in this critical region.

Breaking ground at Aynak with American and Chinese officials present would be of great symbolic value. Moreover, China possesses the actual wherewithal to develop the concession in these forbidding lands. Any progress toward increased stability by generating employment would have ripple effects throughout the community.

Three, support the “Sanya Initiative,” a little known but important program that brings together retired service chiefs from each of the armed forces of the U.S. and China. The first meeting was held last year in the resort town of Sanya in China, and this year, it was held in Hawaii, with follow-up trips to Washington and New York.

The initiative is important because it opens up new channels of communication. Furthermore, by its very existence, it is creating greater military transparency and could lead to a better understanding on both sides.

In potential crisis situations, this channel could be even more valuable if official communications were blocked.

The Sanya Initiative is currently funded entirely by private donations. For the program to really succeed, however, it must have support from leaders of both China and the United States. Hence strengthening military ties must be a deliverable, particularly since both sides agree that military-to-military relations are not where they should be.

The United States and China should also strive to build and use other informal contacts on security issues. These could allow discussion of topics that might be difficult or sensitive to raise in formal government channels.

Today one often hears the refrain that America is becoming an economic satellite of a rising China.

The Obama trip to Beijing provides an opportunity to elevate the relationship to include constructive engagement in concentric areas of shared interest — stabilizing Pakistan, advancing soft power interests in Afghanistan, and cooperating on security matters and shared challenges in East Asia.

Mark Brzezinski, a partner at a law firm in Washington, served on the National Security Council in the Clinton Administration. Mark Fung, associate in research at the Fairbank Center at Harvard University, was general counsel of the China-Africa Development Fund in Beijing.

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 24 Nov 2009 06:32

Ah, son of Brzezinski is no doubt seeking to follow in his father's legacy. For this, Atlanticists need to manage the Sino-American relationship to keep it on an even keel, in order to use both countries to pin the Russians down. Oh, and they need to maintain the jihadi card in order to use that against Russia as well, hence the desire to keep Pakjihadism alive and well.

As we all know, Brzezinski Sr is interested in a "G-2" consisting of China and the USA.

http://business.rediff.com/column/2009/ ... -china.htm

No doubt Brzezinski Jr is interested in the same thing as well. The rotten fruit doesn't fall far from the rotten tree.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 26 Nov 2009 17:09

Where on earth (pun intended!) do you post this?IN recent times,there has been a spate of unexplained crop circles appearing all over westrn Europe that defy explanation,some related to UFO sightings.Here is an astonishing offical report from the Bulgarian govt.,who claim that their scientists are already in contact with the aliens.The recent Vatican statement about the possibility of alien life in the Universe could be a hint of the future .

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... claim.html

Aliens 'already exist on earth', Bulgarian scientists claim
Aliens from outer space are already among us on earth, say Bulgarian government scientists who claim they are already in contact with extraterrestrial life.

Published: 8:00AM GMT 26 Nov 2009

"Aliens are currently all around us, and are watching us all the time," Mr Filipov told Bulgarian media. Photo: GETTY IMAGES

Work on deciphering a complex set of symbols sent to them is underway, scientists from the country's Space Research Institute said.

They claim aliens are currently answering 30 questions posed to them.

Lachezar Filipov, deputy director of the Space Research Institute of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, confirmed the research.

He said the centre's researchers were analysing 150 crop circles from around the world, which they believe answer the questions.

"Aliens are currently all around us, and are watching us all the time," Mr Filipov told Bulgarian media.

"They are not hostile towards us, rather, they want to help us but we have not grown enough in order to establish direct contact with them."

Mr Filipov said that even the seat of the Catholic church, the Vatican, had agreed that aliens existed.

He said humans were not going to be able to establish contact with the extraterrestrials through radio waves but through the power of thought.

"The human race was certainly going to have direct contact with the aliens in the next 10 to 15 years," he said.

"Extraterrestrials are critical of the people's amoral behavior referring to the humans' interference in nature's processes."

The publication of the BAS researchers report concerning communicating with aliens comes in the midst of a controversy over the role, feasibility, and reform of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences.

Last week it lead to a heated debate between Bulgaria's Finance Minister, Simeon Djankov, and President Georgi Parvanov.

Email

Kanson · Post by **Kanson** » 27 Nov 2009 23:08

“India’s growing international stature gives it strategic relevance in the area ranging from the Persian Gulf to the Straits of Malacca …..India has exploited the fluidities of the emerging world order to forge new links through a combination of diplomatic repositioning, economic resurgence and military firmness”--India’s Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh

“We see the Indian Navy as a significant stabilising force in the Indian Ocean region, which safeguards traffic bound not only for our own ports, but also the flow of hydrocarbons and strategically important cargo to and from the rest of the world across the strategic waterways close to our shores…..And so, the safety of SLOCS will always remain a priority for India in the foreseeable future”…….Admiral Sureesh Mehta former Chief of Naval Staff at the Shangri la Dialogue Singapore May 2009

The above statements have given grist to China to defend itself on what has been touted by a US researcher as ‘China’s String of Pearls’ of bases in the Indian Ocean. Naval analyst Zhang Ming recently proclaimed that the Islands of India’s Andaman and Nicobar Archipelago could be used as a ‘metal chain’ to block Chinese access to the Straits of Malacca. China has gone further to claim that India is building an ‘Iron Curtain’ in the Indian Ocean, which is debatable. In recent years, a number of analysts have drawn attention to the similarities of nationalism, between the rise of modern China and the rise of Wilhelmine Germany. Newsweek's Fareed Zakaria, says that "like Germany in the late 19th century, China is growing rapidly but uncertainly, into a global system (including the Indian ocean) in which it feels it deserves more attention and honor. The Chinese military ( CMC) is a powerful political player, as was the Prussian officer corps. Like Germany, the Chinese regime is trying to hold onto political power even as it unleashes forces in society that make its control increasingly shaky."

More recently President Obama has stated that the future of the world will depend on the USA- China relationship, and that could well turn out to be a truism. The 19th century strategic thinker Mahan had prophesised that the future of the world in the 21st Century would be decided on the waters of the Indian Ocean and in this, India’s expansion of its maritime power and Navy, and inroads in to the Indian Ocean Region (IOR) is very much on China’s radar, which deserves introspection.

It is less publicised or talked about, but in the last two decades India has stealthily straddled its interests in the Indian Ocean Rim which includes the islands of Mauritius, Maldives, Seychelles and Madagascar and the rim states of South Africa, Tanzania and Mozambique by very deft moves in foreign policy, economic sops like the double taxation exemption with Mauritius, and military inroads. This is the classical strategy of gaining influence by conjoining economic perks and power, with military diplomacy called ‘Showing the Flag’, so well perfected by larger maritime naval powers in the past. The Indian Navy has transferred offshore naval patrol vessels, provided staff and training, and refit facilities and most importantly provided naval hydrographic support to the island nations of the IOR, which steps have left strategic imprints on the recipients.

It is less known, that in the late 80s the Indian Navy moved in a Leander pretending it needed repairs, and concurrently flew in armed personnel to Victoria from Mumbai, to help ward off a coup against President Albert Rene of the Seychelles. The coup was engineered by Col Mike ‘Mad’ Hoare of the Longreach Company of South Africa, now made public in a book ‘Mercenary Invasion of Seychelles’, by Aubrey Brooks and Graham Linscoff. In 1998 the Indian Navy’s INS Godavari berthed at Maldives, and Army troops flew in by IL-76s in Op Cactus and staved off a coup. Dissident Abdullah Luthufi had led 80 armed mercenaries of the Sri Lankan organisation (PLOTE), in an attempt to capture and overthrow President Gayoom.The Indian Navy has deputed warships and helicopters to provide security at the African heads’ meetings, a move very much appreciated by the population at large.

INDIAN NAVY’S HYDROGRAPHIC ARM’S INROADS IN TO THE IOR

The Indian Navy possesses a sophisticated hydrographic cadre, with 8 well equipped survey ships , numerous survey craft, a large world class electronic chart production facility in Dehra Dun and a hydrographic school at Goa which trains several foreign naval and civilian personnel. Much funding for the Navy’s survey ships has been contributed by the Ministry of Shipping, which allows easier induction of latest equipment, and a swifter procurement route than the cumbersome MOD’s DPP-08, which is still to prove its efficacy. China views India’s hydrographic activities as strategic inroads in to the Indian Ocean.

The Indian Government appreciative of the hydrographic work done by the Indian Navy swiftly ordered six, 600 ton Austal (Australia/USA) design Catamaran Survey ships in 2006 at the Alcock Ashdown Shipyard at Bhavnagar. The IN’s Chief Hydrographer Vice Admiral B A Rao has stated the first platform will be in service by 2010, and balance in annual series production. Indian Navy will then be the second Navy in the world to employ low draught catamarans with on board helicopters, which will have the advantage to speedily survey close inshore, doing away with the age old time consuming ‘boat work for survey’, which requires meticulous re- validation.

As a silent strategic arm, Indian Navy’s hydrographic branch’s has made significant forays in the IOR to undertake over a dozen survey assignments for island nations and recently executed surveys in Oman and now is set to advise Saudi Arabia, for which an MOU has been signed in March this year. These successes have almost blocked out the more expensive western navies that had provided essentially needed hydrographic support to the island nations which possess large coast lines and EEZ. India’s hydrographic policy has already paid off, and will pay richer dividends in the future to compete and ward off China’s influence in the region, and its ‘ String of Pearls’ that has funded ports like Gwadar in Pakistan, Chittagong in Bangla Desh, Humbantota in Sri Lanka and Sittwe in Mynmar covering the rim of India.

THE INDIAN OCEAN MATRIX FOR INDIA CHINA RELATIONS

The Indian Ocean holds importance for India’s development in the 21st century and the Chatham House paper states, “India’s strategy is deepening not only commercially but due to concerns over its security and hegemony in the region, which are underpinned by India’s 2004 Maritime Doctrine.” The Chinese views aired at the 2009 Malacca Straits Kula Lumpur Conference was that ‘India is looking East and forming an Iron Curtain in the Indian Ocean’. The Chinese view the Indian Navy’s gathering of 28 IOR Naval Chiefs including France, a riparian state under one roof at the Indian Ocean Naval Symposium (IONS) in February 2008 in New Delhi and Goa for a retreat, as ganging up in the IOR. When confronted with the String of Pearls, Chinese brush it off as small change provided to poor nations for port development, adding India gets easy ADB and World Bank loans for port development. The swords were out on this.

India’s Indian Ocean African Rim grouping called IOR-ARC(the Arrangement for Regional Cooperation ), and India Brazil South Africa(IBSA) forum which are groupings for commercial links, provision of energy and other resources from Africa, are viewed by the Chinese in security terms, as there is another ‘Scramble for Africas’, made famous in a book by that title by Thomas Pakenham. India’s maritime military strategy and the Navy’s 2004 maritime doctrine, both issued by the Indian Navy are very clear that it is the Indian Navy’s responsibility to ensure stability in the IOR, which irks the Chinese as they view the Indian Ocean as their life line for trade and energy. Chi Haotin had said, ‘it is Indian Ocean not India’s ocean’. India’s out going Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Sureesh Mehta made his mandate clear at the recent Shangri la dialogue in Singapore in the presence of Chinese General Mao stating, “Concerted efforts at capability enhancement and capacity building of the smaller countries of the region(IOR), through active assistance of larger neighbours, would be crucial to such efforts in the long term”.

India has developed a special relationship with Mauritius, which is a fulcrum island state because of its strong Indian diasporas. India has instituted a favourable taxation treaty that makes it India’s largest offshore investor. The Indian Navy set up the Mauritius Coast Guard in the 70s, and has provided ships and personnel, and Mauritius has close security coordination with India’s CIA, the RAW. Chinese and Pakistan activities in the IOR are closely monitored by India’s intelligence and India has forestalled Chinese expansionist moves to lease islands in the Seychelles. The India-China competition to seek influence in the region is set to intensify as China’s cheque book diplomacy currently finds favour in small African states especially in Sudan and Zimbabwe. Deng’s philosophy of ‘the colour of the cat does not matter as long as it catches rats’, is still relevant.

When the IOR-ARC, was formed Mauritius, Madagascar and Mozambique supported India’s move to block Pakistan’s membership and later China’s access to India Brazil South Africa- IBSA. The Indian Navy has also made in roads to gain over flying and berthing rights in Oman, which holds a strategic location especially for the fight against piracy off the Gulf of Aden, and Indian Navy can monitor the SLOCs of Hormuz and Aden. India has signed an MOU to provide piracy patrols to Mozambique . It was also reported India has established a listening post in Madagascar in 2007. No denial was issued by the Government. Chinese alluded to these issues at the Malacca Conference held in Kula Lumpur, offering all support for the security of the Straits, in what is termed as China’s Malacca dilemma.

INDIA’S MILITARY MARITIME STRATEGY IN THE IOR. C3I

India’s maritime strategy envisages a swath of area as its watch from Aden and the Straits of Hormuz to the Straits of Malacca and Mahan appears to have seen the coming importance of this region which provides 70% of the world’s hydro carbons. K Santhanam former Director of the Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis(IDSA) and one of the architects of India’s nuclear programme , has coined the C3I theory for India- China relations and needs heeding. It envisages that India and China will seek active cooperation as China has become India’s largest trading partner, and yet both will always be in competition, for the same markets. In the future confrontation cannot be ruled out if both nations’ interests clash, hence the three Cs, as India has an unresolved border dispute with China. The I stands for which nation will obtain superior Intelligence and includes space and cyber warfare abilities. This writer feels the world has to be prepared for C3I as nation’s juggle to balance China and India in their relations as both are growing economic powers.

China has invested $ 200 million and China Harbour Engineering Company has assisted Pakistan to set up Phase One of the Gwadar deep water port which is 75 nautical miles east of the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas. India uses Bandar Abbas, which is at the narrow entrance of the Hormuz as a transit hub, to transport its $ 1.2 bill worth of on going aid projects in Afghanistan. The Chinese plan to use Pakistan’s Gwadar as the transit hub for its energy and other imported resources, especially from Africa to be ferried by road and pipe line to Central China in the not so distant future. This is a core national endeavour and aspiration for China. Hence China supports Pakistan and this leads to the importance of Pakistan – China vis a vis India’s - Iran relations. This triangle needs to be factored as it could lead to challenges if any nation’s national interests, like Iran’s nuclear ambitions are at stake.

Much of India’s oil and gas arrives by sea from the Middle East. Hence ensuring no disruption of the sea lanes of communication in the Indian Ocean are not only vital for the world’s economy but for India too, and China feels it has a stake in providing maritime forces and resources in the IOR when it has the capability or havens, to do so. The Nippon Foundation and China contribute generously to the Tripartite Technical Expert Group (TTEG) of Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore that administer the Malacca Straits. India recently decided to contribute $ 1.2 million as a response, and advanced $ 774,000 to the TTEG on 31st March, 2009. India has volunteered to survey wrecks in the Malacca Straits which has been accepted by the TTEG, another red rag to the Chinese. The PM of Malaysia whose speech was delivered at the 2009 Malacca Straits Conference in Kuala Lumpur stated some nations( USA and India that patrolled the straits arbitrarily post 9/11 in Op Sagittarius) look at Malacca Straits in terms of hard power, but we would like to look at it in soft power terms, implying TTEG does want to see military assets of other nations to come to the region, though Singapore has been ambivalent on this issue.

The Chinese and Indian swords are sheathed for the time being, but could be out and India has to be prepared for the String of Pearls vs the Iron Curtain debate in what Santhnam has coined as C3I, for it was Chi Haotin who had said, “Indian Ocean is not India’s Ocean”. As the Chinese warn never dig a spear in to the Dragon’s eye, and do not hammer at a stone, chisel it. The stationing of three PLA Navy ships to fight piracy off Aden and Somalia is China’s way of chiseling in to the Indian Ocean. In the 21st century China’s PLAN may well straddle the Indian Ocean, to protect its national interests. It would be in India’s interest to add a C to C3I to make it C3IC so that India can cope with the rise of China.

(Cmde (retd) Ranjit B Rai is Vice President Indian Maritime Foundation, International Correspondent for India Strategic Broadcaster, former Director Naval Intelligence and Operations and author of a Nation and its Navy At War. He visited China recently.

Courtesy: Indian Defence Review

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 29 Nov 2009 21:51

Will the faithful stop buying Swiss army knifes?

http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/po ... 86882.html

Neshant · Post by **Neshant** » 30 Nov 2009 02:42

I was just coming to post that.

Not a word from the EU/western states human rights bodies.

------
Switzerland 'approves minaret ban'

GENEVA (AFP) - Over 57 percent of Swiss voters on Sunday approved a blanket ban on the construction of Muslim minarets, according to official results posted by Swiss news agency ATS.

A final tally of 26 cantons indicates that 57.5 percent of the population have voted in favour of the ban on minarets -- the turrets or towers attached on mosques from where Muslims are called to prayer.

The SVP had forced a referendum under Swiss regulations on the issue after collecting 100,000 signatures within 18 months from eligible voters.

Switzerland has an uneasy relationship with its Muslim population of some 400,000 in a country of 7.5 million people. Islam is the second largest religion here after Christianity.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/091129/w ... lam_result

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 04 Dec 2009 07:05

Found this book. .. You'll see that the most imp. country is not mentioned much but you'll understand..
You can download for free from the site

http://www.takeoverworld.info/grandchessboard.html

Zbigniew Brzezinski

The Grand Chessboard

American Primacy And It's Geostrategic ImperativesKey Quotes From Zbigniew Brzezinksi's Seminal Book

"... But in the meantime, it is imperative that no Eurasian challenger emerges, capable of dominating Eurasia and thus of also challenging America. The formulation of a comprehensive and integrated Eurasian geostrategy is therefore the purpose of this book.” (p. xiv)

"In that context, how America 'manages' Eurasia is critical. A power that dominates Eurasia would control two of the world's three most advanced and economically productive regions. A mere glance at the map also suggests that control over Eurasia would almost automatically entail Africa's subordination, rendering the Western Hemisphere and Oceania (Australia) geopolitically peripheral to the world's central continent. About 75 per cent of the world's people live in Eurasia, and most of the world's physical wealth is there as well, both in its enterprises and underneath its soil. Eurasia accounts for about three-fourths of the world's known energy resources." (p.31)

Moreover, as America becomes an increasingly multi-cultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat."

"...To put it in a terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together." (p.40)

"Henceforth, the United States may have to determine how to cope with regional coalitions that seek to push America out of Eurasia, thereby threatening America's status as a global power."

The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values (like liberty and democracy). Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities.
- Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era, 1970

"In the technotronic society the trend would seem to be towards the aggregation of the individual support of millions of uncoordinated citizens, easily within the reach of magnetic and attractive personalities exploiting the latest communications techniques to manipulate emotions and control reason."
- Between Two Ages : America's Role in the Technetronic Era - 1970

"This regionalization is in keeping with the Tri-Lateral Plan which calls for a gradual convergence of East and West, ultimately leading toward the goal of one world government. National sovereignty is no longer a viable concept." --- Zbignew Brzezinski, National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter (It's not that I'm "nationalist". It's that the Bill of Rights will fade away too.)

"What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Muslims or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?" - 1998 interview

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 04 Dec 2009 07:36

Another old book written in 1973 - Incredible Rocky

http://www.takeoverworld.info/Rockefell ... y_1973.pdf

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 04 Dec 2009 07:53

Jarita wrote:Found this book. .. You'll see that the most imp. country is not mentioned much but you'll understand..
You can download for free from the site

http://www.takeoverworld.info/grandchessboard.html

Zbigniew Brzezinski

The Grand Chessboard

Most important country to Brzezinski is Poland

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 04 Dec 2009 22:25

More from the book

It
is noteworthy that as recently as 1940 two aspirants to global
power, Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin, agreed explicitly (in the secret
negotiations of November of that year) that America should
be excluded from Eurasia.

France, Germany, Russia, China, and
India are major and active players, whereas Great Britain, Japan,
and Indonesia, while admittedly very important countries, do not
so qualify. Ukraine, Azerbaijan, South Korea, Turkey, and Iran play
the role of critically important geopolitical pivots, though both
Turkey and Iran are to some extent—within their more limited capabilities—
also geostrategically active.

The involvement of Pakistan and India is more remote still, but
neither is indifferent to what may be transpiring in these new
Eurasian Balkans. For Pakistan, the primary interest is to gain
geostrategic depth through political influence in Afghanistan—and
to deny to Iran the exercise of such influence in Afghanistan and
Tajikistan—and to benefit eventually from any pipeline construction
linking Central Asia with the Arabian Sea. India, in reaction to Pakistan
and possibly concerned about China's long-range influence in
the region, views Iranian influence in Afghanistan and a greater
Russian presence in the former Soviet space more favorably.

For China, America across the Pacific should be a natural ally
since America has no designs on the Asian mainland and has historically
opposed both Japanese and Russian encroachments on
a weaker China. To the Chinese, Japan has been the principal enemy
over the last century; Russia, "the hungry land" in Chinese,
has long been distrusted; and India, too, now looms as a potential
rival. The principle "my neighbor's neighbor is my ally" thus
fits the geopolitical and historical relationship between China
and America.

Geography is also an important factor driving the Chinese interest
in making an alliance with Pakistan and establishing a military
presence in Burma. In both cases, India is the geostrategic
target. Close military cooperation with Pakistan increases India's
security dilemmas and limits India's ability to establish itself as
the regional hegemon in South Asia and as a geopolitical rival to
China. Military cooperation with Burma gains China access to
naval facilities on several Burmese offshore islands in the Indian
Ocean, thereby also providing some further strategic leverage in
Southeast Asia generally and in the Strait of Malacca particularly.
And if China were to control the Strait of Malacca and the
geostrategic choke point at Singapore, it would control Japan's access
to Middle Eastern oil and European markets.

As in Sino-Russian relations, it suits China to avoid any direct
collision with India, even while continuing to sustain its close military
cooperation with Pakistan and Burma. A policy of overt antagonism
would have the negative effect of complicating China's
tactically expedient accommodation with Russia, while also pushing
India toward a more cooperative relationship with America. To
the extent that India also shares an underlying and somewhat anti-
Western predisposition against the existing global "hegemony," a
reduction in Sino-Indian tensions is also in keeping with China's
broader geostrategic focus.

The potential for an eventual grand accommodation with China
could also be aborted by a future crisis over Taiwan; or because internal
Chinese political dynamics prompt the emergence of an aggressive
and hostile regime; or simply because American-Chinese
relations turn sour. China could then become a highly destabilizing
force in the world, imposing enormous strains on the American-
Japanese relationship and perhaps also generating a disruptive
geopolitical disorientation in Japan itself. In that setting, the stability
of Southeast Asia would certainly be at risk, and one can only
speculate how the confluence of these events would impact on the
posture and cohesion of India, a country critical to the stability of
South Asia.

India proves that antidemocratic
"Asian values," propagated by spokesmen from Singapore to
China, are simply antidemocratic but not necessarily characteristic
of Asia. India's failure, by the same token, would be a blow to
the prospects for democracy and would remove from the scene a
power that contributes to greater balance on the Asian scene, especially
given China's rise to geopolitical preeminence.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 04 Dec 2009 22:40

Jarita wrote:Found this book. .. You'll see that the most imp. country is not mentioned much but you'll understand..
You can download for free from the site

http://www.takeoverworld.info/grandchessboard.html

Zbigniew Brzezinski

The Grand Chessboard

http://sandiego.indymedia.org/media/2006/10/119973.pdf

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 04 Dec 2009 23:52

Does anyone know abt the Bodra deep oil drilling project in West Bengal in 1983?

The White Tiger project was the first outside Russia to openly exploit and showcase this ultra-deep technology and oil production from basalt rock to the world, though the original intent was to do so much earlier in India during 1983. During that year a large drilling rig in the Ganges Delta was scheduled to drill down to below 22,000 feet into basalt, and then dramatically flare "impossible" ultra deep oil. Oil well Bodra #3 was directly supervised by teams of experienced Russian drillers and scientists from the Moscow Institute of Drilling, with the author the only westerner on site, contracted to control one of the critical advanced systems needed to reach target depth smoothly and efficiently.
If Bodra #3 had been allowed to drill ahead unhindered, there is no doubt the resulting impact would have sent shock waves around the oil world, and gained enormous international prestige for the Russians. Even more importantly perhaps, the desperately poor people of West Bengal would have gained access to their own energy reserves. Unfortunately, Bodra #3 was not allowed to drill ahead unhindered. The Americans were determined to stop the project one way or the other, and played on New Delhi's obvious fear of the Communist State Government in West Bengal. After bribing a handful of corrupt central government officials, US intelligence sent in professional American saboteurs, who managed to wreck the drilling project

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 05 Dec 2009 03:53

The Welfare State and Military Power

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 05 Dec 2009 14:05

Not unexpected!The head of infamous US "contract killers" Blackwater,pet of equally infa,our US ex-Veep,Dick-the-prick Cheney,has been found to be a CIA operative.

Erik Prince, head of US security firm Blackwater, ‘was CIA operative’

Giles Whittell in Washington

In public he was the lean and ruthless face of American military outsourcing in Iraq. Erik Prince, as founder of the Blackwater security company, packed a mobile phone on one hip and a handgun on the other as he flew in and out of the world’s troublespots co-ordinating protection teams for American VIPs — and handling the backlash when his employees were accused of shooting dead 17 Iraqi civilians at a Baghdad crossroads in 2007.

In private, he was a CIA operative, with his own file as a “vetted asset” at the agency’s headquarters, and a mission to build “a unilateral, unattributable capability” to hunt down and kill al-Qaeda militants for the US Government wherever they could be found.

These claims, made by Mr Prince and supported by others who knew of his activities, form part of a potentially explosive investigation into the life of America’s best-known mercenary.

Mr Prince, aside from his work in Iraq, set up America’s closest forward operating base to the Pakistani border in Afghanistan, and helped to train a CIA assassination team that hunted an alleged senior al-Qaeda financier in Germany, and included A. Q. Khan, a Pakistani nuclear scientist, on its list of targets, according to Vanity Fair magazine.

Related Links
Blackwater 'set up hush fund after shootings'
Iraqis allege random attacks by Blackwater
Blackwater boss and staff accused of murder

Mr Prince is a billionaire and former member of the US Navy Seal special forces, who avoided publicity during his long and lucrative period as a favoured security contractor for the Pentagon, the State Department and the CIA. Between 2001 and 2009 his company won government contracts worth an estimated $1.5 billion (£900 million) and built a private air force of Black Hawk helicopters and troop-ferrying aircraft based at a 7,000-acre facility in North Carolina.

Despite the political uproar, and a 15-month investigation by the Department of Justice that followed the 2007 massacre in Baghdad, Mr Prince has to date made few public comments on his company’s work, and none on his own relationship with the CIA.

He now has more reason to go public: according to three sources who spoke to Vanity Fair, Mr Prince was recruited by the agency in 2004 and ran intelligence-gathering operations in an unnamed Axis of Evil country until only two months ago, but was partially “outed” by leaks that followed a closed-door briefing of congressional leaders by Leon Panetta, the CIA director, last summer.

Mr Prince regards those leaks as a betrayal: “When it became politically expedient to do so, someone threw me under a bus,” he said. He claims that his company is now paying $2 million a month in legal bills to defend itself against lawsuits in both Iraq and the US, and has been singled out because of who he is. “I’m an easy target,” he told the magazine. “I’m from a Republican family and I own this company outright. Our competitors have nameless, faceless management teams.”

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/postin ... f=1&t=3850

PS:See the bit about him going after AQK.Why didn't the hit happen? A question one must ask the ISI!

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 05 Dec 2009 16:10

Philip wrote:
Mr Prince, aside from his work in Iraq, set up America’s closest forward operating base to the Pakistani border in Afghanistan, and helped to train a CIA assassination team that hunted an alleged senior al-Qaeda financier in Germany, and included A. Q. Khan, a Pakistani nuclear scientist, on its list of targets, according to Vanity Fair magazine.

PS:See the bit about him going after AQK.Why didn't the hit happen? A question one must ask the ISI!

This team could also be the extraction team to secure any loose nukes when any "coups" happens inside Pakistan. They could be getting intelligence from ISI and their own intelligence independent of ISI. They could also be connected to some of the tanzeems inside Pakistan to do the killings.

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 05 Dec 2009 21:27

Ayan Hirsi Ali writes that the Swiss vote against minarets was an expression of tolerance:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/1205/p09s01-coop.html

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 05 Dec 2009 21:49

Frustrated With West, Turks Revel in Empire Lost

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 07 Dec 2009 07:08

The Futenma dispute Background.

Okinawa hosts most of the 36,000 U.S. military personnel based in Japan, and the Futenma Marine air station, located in a densely populated part of the island, has become a symbol of the noise, pollution and crime that many Japanese associate with the American military presence. Under the terms of the deal, Futenma would be moved from the center of a city to Okinawa's relatively unpopulated southeastern coast. But Okinawa voted unanimously in August for DPJ candidates who opposed the deal and want a smaller American footprint on an island where 19 percent of the land is occupied by U.S. forces. . . .

But Hatoyama's government made clear this week that it has no intention of meeting the Americans' hurry-up-and-decide demands. "We are not discussing this on the premise that it has to be decided by the end of the year," Hatoyama told reporters. A big reason is that Hatoyama this week faced the prospect of a revolt by a coalition partner whose votes he needs to pass legislation in the upper house of parliament. The leader of the Social Democratic Party, Mizuho Fukushima, said her party might quit the coalition if Hatoyama honors the deal to move the Futenma air station.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 08 Dec 2009 19:20

Gerard,more on your theme here,cross-posted in the M-East thread.

"The West has 'lost' Iran and Turkey, with an assist from Russia and to China's benefit ."

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribun ... _12_07.asp

Senior Russian officials do not believe that the pragmatically-based new relationships with Tehran and Ankara change underlying mutual suspicions. One very senior Russian Federation minister recently told Defense & Foreign Affairs: "We have been dealing with the Turks and the Persians for 500 years. We do not believe that they have changed, and they do not believe that we have changed."

In stark contrast, Persia — now Iran — and China have a long tradition of close cooperation and interaction along the Silk Road. These contacts can be traced back at least three millennia. With the exception of the Mongol surge, there has never been a major conflict between Persia/Iran and China, let alone war. That these countries are thousands of miles apart contributed to the absence of war. However, in Iranian political culture and tradition there is a profound difference between the hostile attitude toward Russia and friendship toward and trust in China.

The Iranian clerical leadership is aware that internal schisms are its biggest threat. It is significant that, in the face of this, however, there is unity in overarching strategic objectives in Tehran and Qom: retention of clerical rule; growing regional dominance and security; and projection of authority into the Indian Ocean and Mediterranean. These objectives demand a reintegration of Iran into the global energy markets, particularly through overland links to Europe and the PRC, and an ability to control oil and gas sea lanes through the Persian Gulf, Arabian Sea, and Red Sea (all Indian Ocean sea lanes). The strategic alliances with the PRC and Russia are critical elements of this, as is Iran's participation in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 09 Dec 2009 03:39

India displays multi-vector diplomacy
IMO, it is the old NAM with contemporary shades.