Elsewhere today (381)
Aljazeera:
Lebanon fighting continues as UN meets
Tuesday 08 August 2006, 17:59 Makka Time, 14:59 GMT
Israeli forces and Hezbollah fighters are fighting pitched battles in southern Lebanon as international diplomats meet at the UN headquarters in New York to try to resolve the conflict.
The renewed diplomatic effort comes after Israeli military officials announced their army is now operating 8km inside southern Lebanon, where they are continuing to meet fierce resistance from Hezbollah fighters.
Fighters from the Shia militia killed three Israeli soldiers on Tuesday, hours after Israeli aircraft struck again in Beirut and across southern Lebanon.
At least six people were killed in raids on the village of Ghaziyeh, close to the south Lebanese city of Sidon.
Police said: "The raids struck the village of Ghaziyeh at 1130GMT, killing three civilians and destroying two buildings.
"An hour and half later, Israeli planes launched three further strikes killing another three civilians."
Hezbollah has continued to fire rockets at civilian areas of northern Israel.
Israel has said it will evacuate 15,000 civilians from areas hardest hit. More than 160 rockets landed in Israel on Monday, wounding several people.
More than 1,000 Lebanese – mostly civilians - are now thought to have died in the four-week conflict along with 99 Israelis, including 63 soldiers.
The number of Hezbollah fighters killed is not known and it is not clear if they are included in the total Lebanese death toll.
United Nations meeting
UN troops already in Lebanon have failed to keep the peace
In New York, representatives from the United Nations security council, together with Israeli, Lebanese and Arab diplomats have continued to search for a solution to the conflict.
Amid the diplomatic wrangling, the US and France appear to be persuading other countries to support an international peacekeeping force.
From his ranch in Texas, George Bush, the US president, outlined his plan to deploy an UN-backed international force.
"As these Lebanese and international forces deploy, the Israeli Defence Forces will withdraw and both Israel and Lebanon will respect the Blue Line that divides them," Bush said on Monday.
However diplomats are struggling to bridge the massive gulf between the Israeli and Lebanese demands.
Fouad Siniora, Lebanon’s prime minister, has said that Israel should withdraw from all south Lebanon even before an international force arrives. Israel says that it will not withdraw until Hezbollah stops firing rockets.
Lebanon has already rejected one draft resolution because it did not call for an immediate withdrawal of Israeli forces. A final version of the resolution is expected to be approved on Wednesday.
Expanding offensive
Despite heavy casualties Israel is expanding its offensive
On Tuesday Israeli military officials announced that the Israeli army was now holding land up to 8 kms inside Lebanon. This claim has been confirmed by Hezbollah which reported heavy fighting near the village of Dabel.
Amir Peretz, Israel’s defence minister, told the Israeli cabinet that he might expand operations up to the Litani river which is 30km north of the border.
"I have instructed all the IDF (Israel Defence Forces) commanders to prepare for an operation aimed at taking over launching areas [to] reduce as much as possible Hezbollah's rocket launching capability," he told Labor lawmakers on Tuesday.
"If we see that the diplomatic efforts do not yield the results we expect, we will have to do it ourselves," he said.
In Lebanon’s southern port city of Tyre, Israeli aircraft on Tuesday dropped leaflets warning that any vehicle moving south of the Litani would be attacked, reported Aljazeera television.
The leaflets also repeated earlier calls for the city’s residents to leave the city. Tyre is 8km south of the Litani river. Israeli aircraft have already cut roads and bridges leading to the city.
Lebanon to deploy army
Lebanese soldiers could soon find themselves on the frontlines
Lebanon’s cabinet also voted on Monday to deploy 15,000 of its own troops to try and stop the fighting. On Tuesday morning it is reported to have begun calling up reservists.
Lebanese Information Minister Ghazi al-Aridi said that the Lebanese army did not intend to remove Hezbollah from the area.
Instead, he said, the Shia Muslim group would be allowed to remain there "as a party that represents an entire segment of the population". The decision was supported by Hezbollah’s two cabinet members.
Ehud Olmert, the Israeli prime minister, said Lebanon's offer to deploy troops was “an interesting step”.
"We are studying the proposals. We do not want to occupy Lebanon. We do not want to stay in Lebanon. We want to apply the goals of the operation - to prevent rocket fire and to push Hezbollah from the region," he said.
The Lebanese army has not formally taken part in the fighting, although dozens of its soldiers have been killed after their barracks and positions have been hit by Israeli bombs.
Individual army units have also fired on Israeli aircraft flying over Lebanon.
Aljazeera + Agencies
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/AC0BB9BA-4029-46CE-AAAA-826F39551E6A.htm
allAfrica:
Bakassi - FG Pulls Out Troops
By Funke Oduwole With Agency Reports
Daily Champion (Lagos) NEWS
August 8, 2006
Nigeria has begun pulling its troops out of the Bakassi peninsula ahead of Friday's deadline to hand it over to Cameroon, Defence Headquarters said yesterday.
The International Court of Justice ruled in 2002 that Nigeria should turn over the oil-rich Bakassi to its eastern neighbour after decades-long dispute which nearly brought the two countries to war in 1981.
Nigeria cited "technical difficulties" for missing a September 2004 deadline to pull out, but agreed on June 12 this year to withdraw within 60 days.
"The pullout has already started and I assure you that by Monday next week at the latest the total pullout by the Nigerian Army will be complete," Brigadier General Felix Chukwuma, head of information at the Defense Ministry was quoted by Reuters as saying.
Nigeria has a brigade, normally numbering between 1,500 and 3,000 soldiers, stationed in the remote, swampy peninsula on the Gulf of Guinea coast.
"The media will be escorted to Bakassi on Friday to witness the withdrawal, and a military ceremony marking its completion will probably be held on Monday, Chukwuma added.
After almost four years of delays, Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo finally agreed to implement the international court ruling at a meeting in June with Cameroonian President Paul Biya at the United Nations in New York.
The June agreement was overseen by Germany, Britain, France and the United States, and those countries will also monitor its implementation.
Under this deal, Nigerians who remain in Bakassi can keep their citizenship and Nigeria will continue to administer the western part of the territory for two years.
The handover presents few problems from an oil perspective, because the existing offshore concessions mostly respect the court-sanctioned boundary. Bakassi itself has no proven oil or gas deposits on land.
Many Nigerian residents of Bakassi have opposed a handover, arguing that they did not want to become Cameroonians. Nigeria has offered them the option of moving to an alternative site nearby in Nigeria.
Some youth groups have threatened to secede from both countries, but local government authorities and traditional monarchs have said they will go along with the decision.
U.N. officials say the population varies from 25,000 to 250,000 as fishermen flock to the peninsula's rich waters at certain times of the year.
Copyright © 2006 Daily Champion. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com).
http://allafrica.com/stories/200608080083.html
allAfrica:
10,000 Homeless in Flood-Hit Eastern Town
UN Integrated Regional Information Networks NEWS
August 8, 2006
Addis Ababa
At least 10,000 people have lost their homes in the eastern Ethiopian city of Dire Dawa after a flash flood hit the area, killing hundreds, officials said on Tuesday.
"The city administration has so far registered more than 10,000 [homeless people]," said Getachew Asres, Dire Dawa city administration police commander. "They are temporarily sheltered in schools and tents and getting food and other necessary support."
More than 300 people are still unaccounted for after 197 bodies were recovered. The search for more bodies was continuing on Tuesday. "Most of the homeless people lost their houses and family members to the flood," Getachew added.
The Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi visited the area on Monday and said the government would send more emergency food assistance and shelter to those who were made homeless.
Heavy rains in Dire Dawa, 525 km east of the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa, caused the Dechatu river to burst its banks, prompting flood waters to hit the country's second-largest city. Many of the dead, including 40 children, drowned because they were sleeping. The city was also dark because the electricity supply was off.
The police warned that the risk of flooding was still high because heavy rains were falling in the highland areas outside the city.
Meanwhile, another flood induced by heavy rainfall in the Kombolcha district of East Harrarghe zone, 400 km east of Addis Ababa, has destroyed more than 100 homes, the police said. The four-hour downpour that occurred on Monday night displaced 500 people.
The rainfall caused a landslide in Jarso Woreda, blocking the road that connects the zone with Harar town and Kombolcha, said Seyoum Degefu, the zonal police spokesman.
Flooding in southern and eastern Ethiopia is a frequent occurrence, and according to weather experts, occurs due to unseasonal heavy rains in the highlands that flow into the lowland areas.
[ This report does not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations]
Copyright © 2006 UN Integrated Regional Information Networks. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com).
http://allafrica.com/stories/200608080007.html
Asia Times:
Pakistan's port in troubled waters
By Elizabeth Mills
Aug 9, 2006
The port at Gwadar is without doubt currently Pakistan's flagship infrastructure project. A source of great pride for the Pakistani government, its much anticipated inauguration as the country's energy hub has been twice delayed and it is envisaged to become operational by year's end.
Built with Chinese assistance - just how much is debatable, though US$200 million for the first phase is an accepted figure plus loans - this multibillion-dollar scheme is regarded as not only an important economic asset but also a strategic one.
The first phase included the construction of three multi-purpose ship berths, while the second, to be completed by 2010, involves nine more berths, an approach channel and storage terminals, by which time it will provide full warehousing, trans-shipment and industrial facilities. The Pakistani government is positioning Gwadar as "an energy port and hub for storage and refining".
No country knows the strategic value of the port more than India, which is unsettled at the prospect of having at the very least a possible Chinese listening post so close to home and at worst a possible Chinese naval presence on the Indian Ocean.
Consider for one minute, however, the possibility that despite the hype, fears, euphoria and general interest, Gwadar might just be a big, lumbering white elephant. Consider also the possibility that the security situation is now so poor in the area surrounding the port - and more widely in the surrounding province of Balochistan - that even the port's authorities are reportedly questioning whether the facility can become operational in the near term.
Autonomy-seeking rebels are fighting for greater political rights and a bigger share of profits from gas-rich Balochistan's natural resources. According to official data, there were 187 bomb blasts, 275 rocket attacks, eight attacks on gas pipelines, 36 attacks on electricity-transmission lines and 19 explosions on railway lines in Balochistan in 2005. At least 182 civilians and 26 security-force personnel died in the province during last year.
Consider further the possibility that the Chinese became entangled in Gwadar's construction as a mere investment opportunity rather than as a part of a grand strategic plan, and may have come to regret the decision as the death toll of their engineers working on the project has risen and the obstacles to the port's construction and operation increased.
These considerations aside, let's take a look at the development and its proposed facilities. Gwadar is in the restive southeastern province of Balochistan, sitting on the southern Makran coast, about 70 kilometers from the border with Iran and about 320km from Cape al-Hadd in Oman.
Pakistan already has one major commercial port at Karachi, but it is envisaged that while Karachi - due for expansion and modernization - will remain the key commercial and naval port, Gwadar, given its position, will be a regional energy hub.
Given that it is situated alongside sea lanes near the Strait of Hormuz, through which about 40% of the world's oil tankers pass, the government is eyeing Gwadar's position as a key entry point for energy supplies for Central and South Asia, as well as western China.
Alongside this, the Pakistani government has ambitions to develop Gwadar into a South Asian Las Vegas, a regional entertainment hub filled with casinos and five-star hotels.
This is a far cry from what Gwadar was just five years ago. Before the port's construction began (2002), Gwadar was considerably smaller, with just one high school, basic infrastructure and limited job opportunities.
In fact, most employment centered on fishing and small-scale smuggling in what is the country's poorest province. As a result, when the authorities made the port announcement, the town's inhabitants welcomed the decision, envisaging better prospects. After all, they had benefited from the construction of the Makran coastal highway, linking Gwadar with Karachi. Why should the port be any different?
Inevitably, there were dissenting voices, not least the tribal bigwigs who feared that urbanization would deprive them of their traditional power bases and influence. That said, for the man in the street, the positives of such a large project looked set to outweigh suspicions and fears.
In fact, what has unfolded is a tale of displacement, lost job opportunities, dubious land deals and increasing local violent hostility. The insurgency-related problems of Balochistan are well documented, but have been exacerbated in recent years by the new security threat emanating from the discontent surrounding the port's construction. A sense of local nationalism has emerged, fueled by disengagement with the fruits of the project.
The rapid increase in land prices in the region has made a small elite extremely wealthy, though for the everyday resident of Gwadar the reality is very different. Allegations of land grabs and shady deals are rife with the benefits accrued by influential outsiders and their cronies coming at the expense of the town's indigenous inhabitants. Most residents have also found themselves running short on water as well as displaced, rehoused inland, a considerable distance from the sea and their traditional fishing areas. And Gwadar reportedly still has just one high school, despite its burgeoning size.
Too little and too late, the authorities are now acting. The director general of the Gwadar Development Authority (GDA), Mir Ahmed Bukhsh Lehri, is on record as having in May pledged a huge infrastructure package. Lehri announced that infrastructure would be of an international standard and include a 350-bed hospital, a sports complex, a park, a mosque and a desalination plant as well as two new harbors and housing for locals. Perhaps this would have been welcomed several years ago, but it is difficult to envisage anything but a cold and skeptical reception to this news now.
If proof were needed of the local population's changed attitude, it is witnessed in the security situation. When the port's construction first started, it was reported that about 200 Chinese engineers operated freely in the town, welcomed by its inhabitants and housed without security fears among the population. As the project has developed and local grievances increased, the number of engineers has steadily decreased and the 20 or so who are now left are stationed at the army's barracks, under guard 24 hours a day. A number have died in attacks, the largest of which occurred in May 2004 when three were killed and 11 others (nine of whom were Chinese) injured in a car-bombing.
At odds with this disconcerting reality is the international attention being paid to the port. Admittedly, some of the key international port operators are notably absent from bidding for the project, but even so, the past few months has seen a flurry of speculation over which international company would win the rights to operate the port. Will it be DP World of the United Arab Emirates or Hutchison Port Holdings of Hong Kong, or perhaps even Singapore's PSA International, all of whom have submitted an expression of interest (EoI)? Perhaps, however, the question that should be asked is whether the whole scheme is actually viable.
Currently, the Pakistani government forbids foreigners from traveling without its permission in parts of Balochistan because of the broad security risk. In fact, anyone seeking to do so first has to secure a no-objection certificate. It is unclear just how the authorities are going to get around this obstacle once Gwadar the tourist city is up and running.
As the situation stands, a five-star entertainment resort in a part of Pakistan surrounded by barely controlled desert (and not forgetting that Afghanistan's Taliban-heavy provinces border Balochistan) will surely top the attack list for a range of militant and terrorist elements. Partying aside, the prospects similarly look poor for the viable operation of the port.
Its inauguration has been delayed twice, and even now it is not entirely clear when it will begin operating. It appears that the port is at the stage of becoming operational but remains unsupported by surrounding infrastructure.
President General Pervez Musharraf has belatedly urged the various ministries to work together on this, with the failure to put in place rail, road and communications links to the rest of the respective networks preventing the port's grand opening. So what's causing this delay? A bit of ministry rivalry, perhaps, or a lack of funds? Apparently not. No, instead, the security situation is the key problem.
This is evidenced in the current debate over rail links. All that was required was a link from Gwadar to the network at the Quetta-Kohi-Taftan junction. Reports that emerged last month suggested that a feasibility study had been concluded and that "problems" had been identified, prompting the ministry to consider alternative routes. The original proposed route ran through a particularly restive central part of the province, but the alternative poses topographical challenges, given the area's steep gradients.
Add to this the security situation in Gwadar itself and the vision of that white elephant looms large. Sources who spoke to Asia Times Online were allowed on a recent visit to the area and secured the rare opportunity to talk with port officials. Surprisingly, they proved to be candid in their views, openly expressing their fears that poor security in the area would constitute such a deterrent that the port would not be able to function normally. Certainly, the regular news reports detailing bombings in and around Gwadar underline this continuing threat. A recent selection reveals attacks on hotels under construction and even the GDA's offices.
The government cannot be oblivious to the situation around Gwadar, though it has arguably been overshadowed by the wider ongoing separatist insurgency in the province. It is notable that a dual strategy for Balochistan's troubles has emerged more clearly during 2006.
The federal authorities currently favor a policy of targeted military action accompanied by effective development spending. Interestingly, negotiation does not appear to be an option, with regional leaders either in detention or served with exit certificates, preventing their return to the province without arrest.
A total of Rs10 billion (US$167 million) has been funneled into developmental projects in Balochistan and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, though it is unclear whether any of these funds will be targeted on the needs of residents or whether they will service the requirements of a burgeoning tourist center.
In many respects, the government is warranted in trying to exploit the location of Gwadar and should be both commended and supported for its foresight in looking to tap into the lucrative energy-transit network.
That said, if it fails to surmount the security problems and, even more basically, cannot put the fundamental infrastructure in place for the development, Gwadar's port looks set to fail at the first hurdle.
Not only will this come at considerable economic cost, but it will undermine relations with China and simply make the Pakistani authorities look foolish. If Gwadar is a test case for Pakistan's wider aptitude for diversification and grand-scheme expansion, it appears it will receive a poor report card.
Elizabeth Mills is an analyst covering political and security issues, with an emphasis on South Asia.
Copyright 2006 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/HH09Df03.html
Asia Times:
Iran's changing fortunes
By Neda Bolourchi
In the immediate aftermath of the Israeli onslaught against Lebanon - instigated by the Hezbollah kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers early last month - many blamed the Islamic Republic of Iran for the chaos. As a result of the broad US acceptance that Tehran lay behind Hezbollah's decision to seize the Israeli soldiers, neo-conservatives in the United States made new demands for a military confrontation.
However, as increasing numbers of women, children, and the elderly became casualties of the Israeli military and evidence arose that Tehran remained unaware of Hezbollah's intended actions, the Islamic Republic's political tide began turning. As a result, two dominant schools of thought regarding Iran's political prospects within the international community and on the world stage have emerged.
Iran is too dangerous
In the days immediately after Hezbollah seized the two Israeli soldiers, Tehran suffered international condemnation for its decades of support of Hezbollah. In vilifying the Islamic Republic, analysts argued that the scale and strategic repercussions of Hezbollah's operations required Tehran's pre-approval.
The basis of this theory argues that Hezbollah is not an independent group but the cat's paw. As such, some go as far as to argue that "that Iranian-backed radicals opened another front in a war that, in their minds, stretches from Gaza to Iraq". At a minimum, proponents of the theory argue that the Islamic Republic intended to use the Hezbollah kidnappings as a tool to bolster Tehran's deterrence image.
Hezbollah's actions were to serve largely as a warning to the United States and Israel, whereby both countries would cease verbal assaults and discard plans for attacking Iranian nuclear installations because the repercussions against Israel would be too great. However, Israel used the opportunity to bolster its own deterrence image and to send its own message to Tehran - Israel's military superiority is still intact, is ready to respond to any threat, and this is a sample.
Proponents argue that Israel's disproportionate response has left Hezbollah and its backers reeling. With Israel asserting its military superiority, Hezbollah and Iran's dangerous adventurism are shown to include many miscalculations and severe repercussions.
As such, Israel proves that not only are Hezbollah and Iran unwilling partners in peace negotiations, but that they are costing countries thousands of civilian lives and billions of dollars. Thus Israel's response weakens Hezbollah and its backers who lose prestige, support and financial resources by sparking the conflict and by potentially being the target of Israel's military. As a result, proponents of the theory argue, Iran is too dangerous, so no compromise, bargain or negotiation will mollify the regime.
In immediate response to Israel's destruction of Lebanon, the international community shunned and blamed Hezbollah, Iran and Syria. United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan, while condemning Israel, declared that Hezbollah and its supporters had been holding Lebanon hostage for some time and reiterated his April call for a peaceful Hezbollah.
In addition, foreign dignitaries did not attempt to include Iran in negotiations. Unlike the shuttle diplomacy of Operation Grapes of Wrath in 1996, where Syrian president Hafez Assad entered the international diplomatic stage and US secretary of state Warren Christopher made several visits to Damascus, Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad only seemed to be making matters worse for Tehran.
As a result, Iran and not Israel appeared to the international community as the bigger and more immediate danger to Middle Eastern stability. Thus not only did European Union representative Javier Solana not include Tehran in his early-July trips, but when Arab foreign ministers held a meeting to discuss the Lebanon crisis on July 15, the Arab ministers politely but firmly rejected Tehran's offer to attend. Buoyed by the Saudis, Egyptians and Jordanians, the Arab governments did not include the Islamic Republic in regional matters because they viewed the Hezbollah operation as a means to benefit Iran at their expense. Fears of Persian domination and the Shi'ite crescent pervaded the Arab monarchies.
Finally, the United States, Israel, Europe and the Middle East appeared aligned against Iran.
Iran cannot be ignored
On the other side of the coin, some analysts argue that because Tehran maintains open communications with Hezbollah, Iran cannot be ignored. While some of these observers argue that Hezbollah is an agent of Iran and others argue that Hezbollah serves as no one's pawn, many agree that Iran can and will serve a positive role in the Middle East, if given the chance.
Once the Israeli military bombed Qana and a UN post, Hezbollah, and with it Iran, gained the upper hand. Middle Eastern and international outrage descended on Israel and left the US, particularly a midair Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, hapless.
With Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah denying Iranian knowledge of the planned kidnappings, Tehran's stock in the international community rose further. Israel's miscalculated response to Hezbollah's miscalculations gave a virtual permission slip to pragmatists openly to declare Tehran capable and necessary to shorten the Lebanon crisis.
Simultaneously, however, many suspect that the West will have to negotiate with the Islamic Republic not only on Iran's nuclear file, but on including Tehran in summits regarding Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and Lebanon.
The end result
At this juncture, it is not possible to say whether the Islamic Republic's political standing will be hurt or not. In the early days of the war, a premature assessment concluded that Tehran would suffer. However, as the conflict changed so, too, has Iran's standing. Tehran's final standing will be determined on the outcome and the duration of the conflict. The key determining factor when the bombing stops will rest on the standing of Hezbollah within the Lebanese context and the wider region.
In preparation for the eventual ceasefire, both Israel and Hezbollah have begun their public relations campaigns. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, a career bureaucrat, must ensure that Israel is seen as having won a decisive victory over Hezbollah. In such a military victory, Israel not only sends a message to Hezbollah but also to the Palestinians, Hamas, Syria and Iran that attacks on Israel will be met with overwhelming force. Yet with its original stated intent being the destruction or dismantling of Hezbollah, Israel must also receive the mandate of any multinational force that substantively moves toward curtailing Hezbollah.
In turn, victory for Hezbollah means simply avoiding defeat. By maintaining the ability to fire short-range rockets, the greater Islamic world will perceive Hezbollah as the victors and defenders of a weak Lebanon. Despite the relatively little damage caused by such rockets, Israel's continuous statements regarding the rockets will actually bolster Hezbollah's claims of victory. Moreover, Hezbollah will remind the world that the Middle East's most powerful fighting force (Israel), supported and equipped by the world's most powerful military (the United States), bungled against a guerrilla faction that, while poorly armed, remained fastidiously resolute.
In terms of the Islamic Republic, Tehran will likely neither gain nor lose on the nuclear issue in the relative short future. As another war whose aftermath may resolve nothing, the Europeans and Iranians have already begun an attempt to open a diplomatic channel that will be necessary for the eventual political resolution of this crisis.
As the dust settles, Iran's nuclear dossier will become a front-burner issue once again. On this occurrence, European attitudes may have hardened because of the presumed perception of Tehran's irresponsibility regarding the events in the Levant. However, the extent of the European perceptions will also depend on the current diplomatic efforts of Iranian officials.
On the other side, Iran will likely be a winner in the long term on three points. First, Iran has gained politically in the broad Muslim world as the only country standing by the Muslim and Arab cause in the face of Israeli aggression. Regardless of what the regimes of Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan say, the Arab street has and does support Iran's populist policies. By attacking Hezbollah, Hamas or Iran, "America's Arab allies" are merely seen as puppets of US hegemony in the Middle East. Such an issue is more and more relevant in the context of today's digital world politics.
Second, as Iran is one of very few parties that have contact with Hezbollah, the crisis conveys that Tehran can be a restraining and pragmatic power. Thus the international attention given to the Islamic Republic during the crisis demonstrates that Iran is a large power to be reckoned with and not discounted regarding regional power politics. As a result, the Lebanese crisis displays the centrality of Iran in the future political arrangements of the region.
Third, Hezbollah by virtue of its political victory will play an even more political role in Lebanon. In turn, Iran gains more leverage and influence in the regional context. In gaining more influence in Lebanon, the Islamic Republic reinforces its centrality in the Middle East's political agreements.
With the temperature rising in the Middle East, the United States finds itself in yet another difficult position that posits it as complacent in the deaths of Arab civilians and Muslims. While neo-conservatives believed the destruction of Lebanon and the death of civilians would incite the Lebanese to act against Hezbollah, Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, Speaker Nabih Berri, Saad Hariri (son of assassinated prime minister Rafik Hariri), General Michel Aoun, President Emile Lahoud and other major leaders of Lebanon have predictably rallied against Israeli actions, despite Hezbollah's initial steps.
Thus pragmatists argue that the administration of US President George W Bush may have no other option but to include Tehran in negotiations in the Lebanon crisis or be left out in the cold - a reality that has befallen US administrations since 1979.
Copyright 2006 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HH09Ak02.html
Asia Times:
Hezbollah - a clever and determined enemy
By Richard M Bennett and David McKenzie
As the Israeli response to Hezbollah's attacks enters the fourth week, it is a good time to assess the current military position.
The reactions of the popular media in the West, the Middle East and indeed even Israel once again highlight the difficulties ordinary journalists have in grasping the true significance of military tactics and events on the battlefield.
Those who expected a war of dramatic military movement with lines of tanks and armored vehicles racing north to the Litani River and a ceasefire agreed within a week or so have been, and will continue to be, disappointed.
It was an unrealistic expectation based on experience and not on today's rather different situation. Hezbollah is not just a rag-tag militia; it is a well-trained, well-armed, disciplined and highly motivated fighting force.
With considerable help from Iran and Syria and using even some North Korean expertise, Hezbollah has created a vast network of well-hidden tunnels, bunkers and missile-storage dumps over a wide area of south Lebanon and the Bekaa Valley.
Missiles and other arms have been stored on farms and in garages, workshops and office blocks as well as in the cellars and roof spaces of private homes. Each village has a network of "stay behind" bunkers from which small groups of Hezbollah reappear each time the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has "captured" the area.
Hit-and-run tactics by small, well-armed units have caused more of an ongoing nuisance and created additional casualties for the IDF than any serious military defeat. However, the unwanted losses and the embarrassment of apparent failure have been difficult for the IDF to swallow. The terrain is also much in favor of the defenders and against the rapid deployment of massed armored vehicles.
Israel's military response
Israel has therefore opted, out of necessity, for a twin-track approach characterized first by sustained, but occasionally wayward, air strikes to paralyze Hezbollah's ability to move significant quantities of men and weapons to the south and to hinder the resupply of the fighters by Iran and Syria while degrading Hezbollah's command network. The Israeli Air Force has had some success in this so far, but nowhere near enough to satisfy its many critics.
The second part of this approach has been to "fix the battlefield" in an 8-kilometer strip inside the Lebanese border. This has had far more success than is currently being believed by the news media. First, the IDF's combat engineers have found and destroyed a considerable portion of Hezbollah's military infrastructure directly threatening northern Israel. Large quantities of arms and many hidden facilities have now been neutralized.
Though the IDF has been unable completely to prevent the infiltration of additional Hezbollah fighters into the newly captured areas, Israeli commanders on the ground have turned this to their own advantage. The IDF has been presented with the opportunity to kill many more of the Hezbollah than they could possibly have hoped. Indeed, it is more than likely that many of the civilian casualties being repeatedly mentioned in the media are in fact Hezbollah fighters killed while hiding in civilian clothes.
This does not excuse Israeli mistakes that have undoubtedly cost the lives of genuinely innocent civilians, but exaggeration and Hezbollah tactics of mixing combat fighters among civilians clearly accounts for a fair percentage of the lives lost so far.
Intelligence failed at a vital moment
There is justified criticism of the lack of intelligence on the ground in the Lebanon. Intelligence that should have been available to find, fix and eliminate many of the so far elusive Hezbollah targets has simply not been available to the IDF.
The Lebanese government is in part responsible for this. Several months ago the Lebanese Security Service, working in close cooperation with Hezbollah's own counter-intelligence unit, smashed an Israeli spy ring. As many as 80 Lebanese Christian, Sunni Muslim and Druze agents working for Mossad were arrested in a series of police operations.
Crucially, in the last few weeks before Hezbollah launched its missile offensive, Israel was deprived of one of its vital sources of intelligence in the cities and towns of south Lebanon. During this critical period, Hezbollah was able to move much of its weaponry and support infrastructure to new sites, leaving the Israeli Air Force partly blinded.
This is one of the explanations for a series of Israeli air strikes on what turned out to be non-Hezbollah targets. Israel has not chosen to use this to explain away its mistakes, for to do so would endanger its operatives held in Lebanese secret-police interrogation cells and, of course, admit to a major intelligence failure.
What next for Israel?
Assuming that the US and British governments successfully resist mounting international pressure to force Israel to agree to an immediate ceasefire before it has done significant and long-term damage to Hezbollah, then much greater use of special forces and a possible full-scale ground invasion to seal off south Lebanon are undoubtedly being closely considered.
Should Israel opt for this high-risk strategy, it would at the very least provide the opportunity to cut Hezbollah off from reinforcement and allow the IDF to destroy the remaining forces trapped behind the new front line without the risk of incurring politically unsustainable Israeli casualties.
Only then would Israel be able to put a stop to the Hezbollah barrage of shorter-range missiles.
There are two pointers to this becoming the preferred option: First, the call-up of about four full divisions of reservists, something that Israel finds hard to maintain economically for any length of time, and second, the special-forces raids on Baalbek in eastern Lebanon and the one carried out in Tyre by the elite naval commandos of Shayetet-13 (S-13).
However, whatever option Israel chooses, it will still be faced by a determined and clever enemy that has growing popular support and the patronage of two major states prepared to rearm it in an attempt to force the international community to accept them both once again as major players in Middle East politics.
It's fair to say that the paymasters sitting in Damascus and Tehran are quite happy to fight their war to the last Lebanese, or Israeli, civilian.
There are no bombs dropping on Syria or Iran ... yet.
It remains to be seen whether an international force will ever have the will or military capability or be backed by sufficient political resolve to enforce any resolution that requires Hezbollah being disarmed. Signing ceasefires or peace settlements may please protesters and the media, but it doesn't stop missiles.
Ultimately the Israeli armed forces may still be called on to fight this war all over again, though one suspects using rather more aggressive tactics.
AFI Research provides expert information on the world's intelligence services, armed forces and conflicts. Contact rbmedia@supanet.com.
(Copyright 2006 AFI Research. Used with permission.)
Copyright 2006 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HH09Ak04.html
Clarín: "Creo que EE.UU. no se arriesgará
a atacar Cuba, pero con Bush nunca se sabe"
En su juventud, Alberto Granado recorrió Sudamérica con el "Che". Hoy vive en Cuba y tiene vínculos con el gobierno. En una entrevista con Clarín.com, aseguró que Fidel se encuentra estable y estimó que pasará al menos cuatro semanas en reposo. Sentenció además que "el pueblo cubano se agiganta en los momentos más difíciles".
Mariano Zucchi, 08.08.2006
Alberto Granado, el amigo que viajó con Ernesto "Che" Guevara por Sudamérica, es uno de los fundadores de la Escuela de Medicina de Santiago y del Centro Nacional de Investigaciones. Hoy cumplió 84 años, pero antes de los festejos con su familia se puso serio y habló con Clarín.com sobre la situación de Cuba y la salud de Fidel Castro. "Una invasión de Estados Unidos puede darse en cualquier momento, pero el pueblo cubano está dispuesto a pelear hasta el final", dice desde la isla en la que, ratifica, reina la calma.
A Granado se lo escucha de buen ánimo y cuenta que no se queda quieto. Planea visitar Italia en unos días y Argentina, su país natal, en octubre para dar conferencias sobre la revolución cubana. A pesar de la incertidumbre sobre el futuro político de Cuba, para él la vida de Fidel no corre peligro. "Está perfectamente bien y sigue en reposo, algo que le hacía mucha falta. Estimo que deberá guardar cama por lo menos cuatro semanas más. Conozco algunos de los médicos que lo operaron y sé que son los mejores de Cuba."
Granado había seguido por televisión el discurso de más de dos horas que dio Fidel en la Universidad de Córdoba, acompañado por el presidente venezolano, Hugo Chávez, en su reciente viaje a la Argentina. "Cuando lo vi sin la gorra y con el frío que hacía en Córdoba, no me gustó ni medio. En ese momento sentí que hay había que cuidarlo más", comenta Granado.
Repite igualmente que el país está en calma bajo el gobierno provisorio a cargo del ministro de Defensa y hermano menor de Fidel, Raúl Castro. "Acá estamos tranquilos. El pueblo cubano se agiganta en los momentos más difíciles, tiene un espíritu heroico. Nadie teme una invasión de Estados Unidos", dice Granado. Y remarca: "Nos podrán borrar del mapa, pero nunca podrán eliminar la Revolución".
Cuba reforzó el jueves pasado sus medios de defensa y combate, luego del repetido llamado que hicieron el presidente de Estados Unidos, George W. Bush, y la secretaria de Estado, Condoleezza Rice, a un cambio de régimen en la isla. Aunque no fue la primera manifestación en ese sentido de la Casa Blanca, la declaración tuvo otro impacto ahora que Fidel cedió el poder provisionalmente a su hermano Raúl Castro, por una intervención quirúrgica en la zona intestinal.
"Estamos preparados para recibirlos -dice Granado- porque acá nadie tiene miedo. Hace 20 años que buscan atacarnos, por eso el pueblo cubano siempre está en lucha contra el imperialismo".
Copyright 1996-2006 Clarín.com - All rights reserved
http://www.clarin.com/diario/2006/08/08/um/m-01248605.htm
Clarín: Cesaron los bombardeos israelíes
pero recrudecieron los combates en el sur y este de Líbano
Las fuerzas de Israel se desplegaron desde el litoral hasta la parte occidental del territorio libanés. En los enfrentamientos murieron tres soldados israelíes. Hezbollah lanzó hoy 70 nuevos misiles sobre la región de Galilea, sin dejar víctimas.
Clarín.com, 08.08.2006
Israel ceso hoy los bombardeos luego que ayer llevaron a cabo su ofensiva más intensa que dejó al menos 69 muertos. Sin embargo, se siguieron llevando a cabo violentos enfrentamientos entre soldados israelíes y combatientes del Hezbollah en el sector occidental de la zona fronteriza.
Según informó el ejército israelí, no hubo hoy cambios significativos en el terreno de combate. "Ahora estamos desplegados desde el mar, al oeste, hasta Metula, en el este. Nuestras fuerzas operan en profundidad hasta 8 km al interior del territorio libanés", afirmó una fuente de la seguridad israelí.
Hubo combates en Debel y Labbouné (sur de Líbano), y el Hezbollah afirmó en un comunicado haber "matado y herido a varios soldados israelíes".
De su lado, un portavoz militar israelí reconoció que un soldado murió y cinco quedaron heridos por un cohete antitanque en Debel, a 7 km al oeste de Bint Jbeil, localidad considerada como plaza fuerte del partido shiíta libanés.
Asimismo, milicianos de Hezbollah mataron esta madrugada a dos soldados reservistas israelíes e hirieron a otros dos en un tiroteo en la localida de Laguna, en el sur de Líbano, según confirmaron fuentes militares de Israel.
Por otra parte, el Hezbollah afirmó haber destruido un tanque israelí al este de Ainata, en el mismo sector. La artillería israelí también disparó contra Kfar Tebnit y las colinas del este de Nabatiye, al norte del "dedo de Galilea", indicó la policía.
En el sector oriental de Líbano, en Ibn Saqi, un civil fue muerto por un obús de artillería y otros dos quedaron heridos en Srira, según la misma fuente. La aviación israelí efectuó ocho ataques en esta región.
En el suburbio sur de Beirut, los equipos de socorristas continuaban hoy tratando de ubicar a 26 personas sepultadas bajos los escombros de un edificio bombardeado ayer por la aviación israelí, indicó el lunes la Defensa Civil.
Asimismo, la población libanesa esta a la espera de una nueva lluvia de misiles israelíes luego que este ejercito advirtiera hoy en los panfletos lanzados por sus aviones que bombardeará "cualquier vehículo que circule al sur del río Litani", es decir, el extremo sur de Líbano, que engloba la zona donde está la ciudad de Tiro.
Los ataques israelíes a Líbano causaron al menos 1.064 muertos y 3.493 heridos, en el vigésimo octavo día de la ofensiva, según un balance establecido por la agencia France Press a partir de fuentes oficiales.
Bombardeos sobre Israel
A pesar de que las tropas israelíes han logrado diesmar la capacidad de ataque del Hezbollah, la milicia todavía puede atemorizar a la población israelí con sus misiles. Sesenta cohetes disparados por Hezbollah desde el Líbano se abatieron hoy sobre el norte de Israel sin causar heridos, anunció la policía israelí.
"Fueron disparados sesenta cohetes sobre el norte a media jornada y siete de ellos alcanzaron varias localidades, lo que causó daños, aunque no heridos", afirmó un portavoz de la policía israelí.
Un misil impactó en una fábrica en Ma'ale Yossef, en Galilea, causando daños en la estructura, pero ninguna víctima. Además, dos Katiusha cayeron cerca de Tiberíades, en una zona no habitada.
El lunes cinco personas resultaron levemente heridas por la caída de más de 160 cohetes sobre el norte de Israel , un día después de que el mismo tipo de proyectiles dejaran 15 muertos, en la peor jornada desde el inicio de la guerra el pasado 12 de julio.
Copyright 1996-2006 Clarín.com - All rights reserved
http://www.clarin.com/diario/2006/08/08/um/m-01248590.htm
CommonDreams:
I Am Pro-Israel, Therefore I Criticize Israel
by Ira Chernus
Published on Monday, August 7, 2006
I am pro-Israel. That’s why I criticize Israel’s violence in Palestine and Lebanon every chance I get.
I don’t say much about the immorality of Israeli actions. They are shockingly immoral. But talking about it won’t make much difference. So I appeal to naked self-interest. I point out the obvious: Every time a Palestinian or Lebanese is hit by an Israeli bomb or bullet, it spells more risk for the safety of Israel.
Most Jews who say they are pro-Israel act as if they are deaf to the moral arguments, anyway. They do have hearts and consciences. They are not unmoved by the TV pictures of the carnage their military creates. But precisely because they are touched by the suffering of their foes, they’ve become very skilled in rationalizing Israeli violence. For every moral criticism they have a rebuttal ready at hand to ease their consciences. They and their ancestors have being doing it for over a century now, so they have a whole arsenal of moral justifications.
In living rooms, town meetings, and op-ed pages, the morality of Israeli policy ends up like a ping-pong ball, batted back and forth by both sides. Since there is no objective referee to keep score, the game just goes on forever. While we all have the right and duty to speak the moral truth as we see it, that’s not likely to change anyone’s mind very soon.
So it seems more fruitful to set the ethical issues aside and appeal to the self-interest of Israeli Jews and their pro-Israel American supporters. What they want most, they say, is for the Jewish state and all of its citizens to be able to live normal lives, free from worry about terrorist rockets and suicide attacks. It’s a perfectly understandable, indeed laudable, goal. Who would argue with it?
In that sense, I am pro-Israel too - not least because I have close family living there, just a few miles from Lebanon, within easy rocket range. And that’s precisely why I criticize Israel’s actions in Palestine and Lebanon every chance I get - because every day, those actions make it harder and harder for Israeli Jews to live normal lives, free from worry.
The latest development in the conflict is a perfect example. Diplomats at the UN have finally hammered out a resolution to end hostilities in Lebanon. According to Aluf Benn, the top diplomatic correspondent for the top Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, “diplomatic sources in Jerusalem expressed satisfaction with the draft” resolution. And well they should, because it is, as Benn says, “asymmetric.” It puts all blame for the conflict on Hezbollah. Though it calls on Israel to halt its assault, it gives Israel the right to keep shooting in “self-defense,” while it demands that Hezbollah must cease fire completely, as if the Lebanese were not defending themselves.
Moreover, it says that all forces should remain where they are, meaning that the Israelis can stay in Lebanon. And it calls for an international force (in effect controlled by the U.S. and France) to join the Israelis there. So it would leave Hezbollah fighters seeing their own towns and villages occupied by armed foreigners, while they themselves are required to stop using their weapons completely. It’s hardly surprising that Hezbollah, and the Lebanese government, have rejected this draft plan.
What is more surprising is that, according to Aluf Benn, “Israel was very involved in its formulation. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's chief of staff, Yoram Turbowicz, conducted talks with the Americans and French from Jerusalem; Tal Becker, an advisor to Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, flew to New York to take part in talks conducted at the UN.” These Israelis surely knew that the resolution they helped to draft would be rejected. They knew that this would delay an end to hostilities. That means more days, perhaps weeks or even months, of Hezbollah rockets falling on Israeli Jews. Yet they call this a diplomatic victory.
Israelis are well aware of what’s happening. It’s now taken as a given that Israel’s original aim of destroying Hezbollah won’t happen. The fighting will end in a negotiated compromise that removes all Israeli troops from Lebanon. So why not make that final deal now? Why not go back to the way things have been in Israel for the last five years, with no fear of Hezbollah rockets because there were virtually none fired?
In a column titled “Cease Fire Immediately,” Haaretz journalist Uzi Benziman makes the argument succinctly: “The experience of the past three days, in which a broader ground operation has unfolded, has also involved an increase in the number of Israeli losses - both at the front and the rear - and in the number of rockets landing inside the country. … In this confrontation, we will not emerge clear winners. Hezbollah is about to emerge from the battle smoke with the aura of one who did not succumb to the IDF. In view of the fact that this is the expected outcome of the battle, it is best to end it immediately.”
Unfortunately few Jews, in Israel or the U.S., will admit that the Israeli government’s effort to postpone peace is just another example of a long-standing pattern. When offered a chance to reduce the violence and make its own people safer, the government typically responds in ways that perpetuate the violence against their own people. This summer’s conflict was set in motion when the elected political leaders of Hamas clearly signaled their willingness to accept Israel’s existence, start an immediate cease-fire, and then negotiate a lasting peace. Israel responded with a massive bombing campaign. The rest is tragic history: Israelis have spent weeks running to bomb shelters and living in fear, and their own government's policies insure that there’s no end of it in sight.
The practical argument for peace is one that most pro-Israeli people can easily understand. Arguments about who is more justified and more ethical will put them on the defensive. They’ll dig in their intellectual heels and just stop listening. But arguments based on the pro-Israel concern about safety and security are turning the tide of Israeli public opinion. One Israeli journalist predicts that “very soon, it won't be just the Four Mothers [a group that sparked the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000] who will be tired of this deterrence, bur rather thousands of families.”
If those of us who speak out for peace stress the pragmatic benefits, we may turn the tide of American opinion, too. By focusing on the very concrete benefits of an end to the shooting, we can stand in solidarity with Israelis and Jews everywhere. We can make it clear that we are pro-Israel. And at the same time we can be solidly pro-Lebanese, pro-Palestinian, pro-everyone in the Middle East.
Ira Chernus is Professor of Religious Studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder and author of American Nonviolence: The History of an Idea and the forthcoming book "Monsters to Destroy: The Neoconservative War on Terror and Sin." He can be contacted at chernus@colorado.edu
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0807-29.htm
Harper's Magazine:
Weekly Review
Posted on Tuesday, August 8, 2006. By Theodore Ross
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert insisted that the war with Lebanon would continue, and the Lebanese government rejected an internationally-brokered peace plan, claiming it favored Israel.[Washington Post] Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah boasted that his forces were inflicting “maximum casualties” and warned Israel that if it “bombed our capital Beirut, we will bomb the capital of your usurping entity”; he also called on his fellow Arab leaders to “be men for just one day.”[NY Times][CNN] Lebanon's stock exchange reopened,[NY Times][NY Times][BBC] and the mayor of Beirut said war with Israel was bad for the environment.[Globe and Mail] English Prime Minister Tony Blair said there was an “arc of extremism” stretching across the Middle East that could be defeated, he proposed, by “an alliance of moderation.”[BBC] In Cairo, Muslims took to the street carrying posters of Hassan Nasrallah, chanting "O Sunni! O Shiite! Let's fight the Jews.”[NY Times] In Iraq, President Jalal Talabani vowed to “terminate terrorism” by 2007;[BBC] in Baghdad, 100,000 Shiites attended a “million-man” march in support of Hezbollah. [The Australian] U.S. General John Abizaid told the Senate Armed Services Committee that “Iraq could move toward civil war.”[NY Times] A lawyer who represents one of four American paratroopers accused of murdering three Iraqi detainees told a military court in Tikrit that the dead men “got exactly what they deserved,”[BBC and BBC] and Staff Sergeant Frank D. Wuterich sued Congressman Jack Murtha for defamation of character.[Washington Post] Corporal Phillip E. Baucus, 28, nephew of U.S. Senator Max Baucus, was killed in action in Iraq,[Bloomberg via Google News] and Lance Corporal Mark Beyers, an Iraq war veteran and double amputee, was attacked and robbed outside a restaurant in Bethesda, Maryland.[Local6.com]
The Senate Permanent Investigations subcommittee reported that law enforcement agencies were powerless to prevent the super-rich from cheating on their taxes, [NY Times] and the Food and Drug Administration almost approved over-the-counter sales of the oral contraceptive Plan B.[NY Times] President Bush encouraged the people of Cuba to seek regime change,[Reuters] and Senator Hillary Clinton called on Donald Rumsfeld to resign.[allheadlinenews.com via Google News] In California, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said Tony Blair should be named United Nations secretary-general when he steps down as prime minister. “It's a big job that he has right now,” Schwarzenegger said, “and I think whatever job he wants he will get, because he has such a great success rate at home and he has done such a remarkable job, I think.”[CNN] The London School of Economics determined that good-looking couples are 36 percent more likely than their ugly counterparts to have female offspring,[Washington Post] and a Chicago woman was suing Borders Books after she was “permanently disfigured” in a toilet seat accident.[CBS2 Chicago] A study conducted at Texas A&M University found that cigarette smoking reduced the impact of alcohol on inebriated rats. “I hope people won't interpret that as a good thing,” said lead researcher Wei-Jung Chen.[Seed Magazine] Scientists at the Centers for Disease Control failed in their attempts to create a more virulent strain of bird flu,[Washington Post] and threatening letters sent to federal officials by Donald Ray Bilby, 30, who is currently serving time for auto theft in Trenton, New Jersey, included his full name, signature, and inmate number.[Mail and Guardian] Naveed Afzal Haq, the man accused of an anti-Semitic shooting attack in Seattle, was described as a “hothead” with a “chip on his shoulder,” by his former boss, Thomas de Winter: “He didn't take instruction well.”[UPI via Google News]
In Japan, on the Day of the Dog, Princess Kiko prayed for the safe delivery of her third child.[BBC] In China 50,000 dogs died in Yunnan province when government-authorized “killing teams” crept into villages at night and beat the dogs to death.[Local6.com] Basketball player Yao Ming announced he would no longer eat shark fin soup because “endangered species are our friends.”[NY Times] In New Delhi, the commuter rail authority was using a black-faced langur monkey to frighten other monkeys,[BBC] and in New York a man bit the head off a rooster that he accused of harming his pigeon.[AOL News] England's Alton Towers theme park canceled “National Muslim Fun Day,”[Reuters] and hotel owners in Italy made plans to open women-only Muslim beaches.[Breitbart.com] Wild bison took over a small Canadian town. “Try and get an insurance claim done after your car was kicked by a buffalo,” said one local resident. “The adjustor will just laugh at you.”[Mail and Guardian] A 14-foot blue marlin stabbed angler Ian Card in the chest during a fishing rodeo off Bermuda.[Daily Mail] Racer Cristiano da Matta's Champ Car collided with a deer in Elkhart Lake, Wisconsin,[cnnsi.com] and a laser-equipped research aircraft owned by NASA was being used to locate woodpeckers in the Mississippi Delta.[CNN] An English paleobiologist announced that the crests of giant prehistoric flying reptiles signified sexual maturity, much like a “giant cockerel's comb.”[BBC] At least 25,000 chickens died in Indiana from the heat,[CNN] and geologists in Ohio were baffled by the earthquakes in suburban Cleveland.[CNN] Nacreous clouds, which occur only in temperatures lower than minus 176 degrees Fahrenheit, were observed above Antarctica,[Yahoo News] and a fireball streaked through the night sky over Lakeway, Texas.[Local6.com] Bungs, drugs, and wholesale cheating were declared to be the norm in all major sports.[Observer UK]
This is Weekly Review by Theodore Ross, published Tuesday, August 8, 2006. It is part of Weekly Review for 2006, which is part of Weekly Review, which is part of Harpers.org.
Written By
Ross, Theodore
Permanent URL
http://harpers.org/WeeklyReview2006-08-08.html
il manifesto:
Una storia vera a Johannesburg
Autrice di «The Invisibles», una raccolta di racconti-verità sulla comunità indiana degli hijiras, la statunitense Zia Jaffrey ambienta questo testo inedito nel Sudafrica del dopo apartheid Al termine di una giornata di lavoro come tutte le altre, Cynthia è sul punto di rientrare a casa insieme ai suoi tre figli. Ma un fatto inatteso è destinato a imprimere una svolta alla sua vita
Zia Jaffrey
All'ingresso dell'edificio nel quale ha sede il Tribunale per i diritti di famiglia, proprio al centro di Johannesburg, mi hanno perquisito, volevano accertarsi che non avessi armi, poi mi hanno detto di andare al secondo piano. Lassù, ad attendermi sul pianerottolo in cima alle scale ho trovato Cynthia Molefe, una donna prossima alla quarantina, alta, che portava una sciarpa di seta e numerosi bracciali al polso. Cynthia lavora come interprete presso il tribunale. Mi ha guidato verso una rotonda, un posto, mi ha detto, dove avremmo potuto sederci e parlare con tranquillità.
Questa è la storia che mi ha raccontato.
Era un mercoledì, la fine di una normale giornata di lavoro, quando il maggiore dei suoi figli, Sishle, che l'aveva raggiunta in ufficio con i fratellini, le aveva chiesto di andare al gabinetto. Sishle aveva undici anni e portava ancora indosso la divisa della scuola. Cynthia aveva appena chiuso a chiave la porta dell'ufficio e non vedeva l'ora di tornare a casa. «Non ce la fai proprio ad aspettare?» aveva domandato al bambino. «No, mamma, ti prego» aveva risposto lui. «Allora vai, ma fa' presto», aveva ribattuto la donna.
A pochi metri di distanza da quell'ufficio sorgeva la famigerata stazione di polizia di John Vorster Square, l'edificio nel quale, ai tempi dell'apartheid, attivisti neri e indiani erano stati torturati con scariche elettriche, costretti a strisciare sul pavimento con le mani spezzate o scaraventati giù dalle finestre del decimo piano, ancora vivi. Orrori che le audizioni del Tribunale per la Verità e la Riconciliazione avevano portato alla luce ponendoli dinanzi agli occhi distratti della popolazione bianca del Sudafrica. Gli altri, coloro che erano stati costretti a soggiornare per tempi anche brevi in quei locali, al solo sentir nominare John Vorster Square si sentivano percorrere il corpo da brividi gelati.
L'ombra di quel passato incombeva ancora sul presente. Ma erano passati otto anni, il Sudafrica adesso era un paese libero e Sishle, il figlio di Cynthia, voleva semplicemente andare al gabinetto.
Si era fatto tardi, erano passate le sei del pomeriggio, e Sishle percorse correndo il corridoio per raggiungere il bagno degli uomini, accanto al ballatoio su cui si affacciavano le scale. Il bambino entrò. Lo investì un tanfo insopportabile. Era un locale piccolo, senza finestra, con un lavandino e un gabinetto. Quando Sishle aprì la porta, quello che vide lo bloccò di colpo. Ritornò indietro di corsa, urlando: «Mamma, vieni, presto, nel gabinetto c'è un bambino appena nato!». «Non dire sciocchezze, - rispose Cynthia - avrai disturbato qualcuno; sicuramente la madre del bambino è ancora in bagno...». Sishle però insisteva: «No, mamma, il bambino è lì da solo, ed è tutto nudo». La donna si precipitò allora verso il bagno, e quando vide quello che suo figlio - poveretto - aveva dovuto vedere, anche lei si spaventò a morte.
Buon Dio, il neonato c'era davvero, ed era per terra. Era stato abbandonato lì, accanto alla tazza del gabinetto. Il cordone ombelicale ancora umido, tagliato di fresco. Attorno a una caviglia c'era la fascetta di un ospedale, ma i dati erano stati cancellati. Chi mai aveva potuto infilare nella minuscola bocca del proprio bambino due palline di carta igienica arrotolate con cura lasciandolo lì, a morire? A terra, senza una coperta, un pannolino, niente di niente!
Il piccolo respirava ancora, ma il corpo era gelato. La donna aveva persino paura a prenderlo in braccio. In preda al panico ordinò a Sishle di correre al piano di sopra a chiamare sua sorella che lavorava nell'infermeria, perché portasse in fretta una coperta. Insieme, le due donne corsero al quinto piano, dove c'era la cucina, accesero la stufa e vi si accostarono, per dare al piccolo un po' di calore. Con il cellulare, Cynthia chiamò immediatamente la sorveglianza del palazzo, e subito dopo telefonò alla polizia, nell'edificio di John Vorster Square. L'addetto della sorveglianza in servizio quel pomeriggio, un giovanotto che si chiamava Polite, a sua volta si mise in contatto con il suo capo, un giovanotto bianco di nome Stols.
Cynthia attese la polizia a lungo, molto a lungo, ma non arrivò nessuno. Apparve invece Mr Stols, insieme a un'amica. Decisero che sarebbe stato lui, con la sua macchina, a portare il neonato in ospedale. Nel frattempo il piccolo non aveva mai aperto gli occhi. Per non vedere quanto male c'è a questo mondo, pensava Cynthia. Era un maschietto dai lineamenti delicati, un piccolo africano dalla pelle piuttosto chiara. Doveva avere all'incirca due giorni.
Si era fatta sera. Prima di lasciare l'edificio Cynthia decise di telefonare ai giornali. Era furiosa nei confronti della polizia, al solo pensiero di essere stata lasciata sola, con un neonato in quelle condizioni. Il comportamento dei poliziotti non le era davvero andato giù. Telefonò al Sowetan. Raccontò tutto quello che era accaduto e sottolineò: «È passata un'ora, ormai, e qui non si è ancora fatto vedere nessuno. Quando li ho chiamati per insistere, ho parlato con un poliziotto molto maleducato, mi ha ripetuto più volte che sarebbero arrivati, mi ha detto che non stava a me ricordargli che è loro dovere intervenire».
Con il poliziotto il tono della donna era stato sarcastico: «Siete a John Vorster Square, a pochi minuti a piedi da questo ufficio: cosa c'è?, vi serve forse un visto apposito, per arrivare fin qui?», e aveva interrotto la comunicazione. «Questa cosa deve uscire sulla stampa, - Cynthia disse al giornalista del Sowetan - bisogna scriverlo, che la polizia si comporta così. E che noi non abbiamo nessuna fiducia». Il giornalista le domandò se era d'accordo che pubblicassero il suo nome. No, rispose lei, preferiva conservare l'anonimato.
Cynthia tornò a casa. Si sentiva a pezzi. Perché aveva consegnato ad altri quel bambino? In fin dei conti avrebbe potuto portarlo a casa con sé. Ma sapeva che era sbagliato. Era furiosa e disgustata. Non riusciva a immaginare come qualcuno avesse potuto abbandonare quel piccino in un gabinetto. Pensava, come è possibile fare una cosa del genere a un bambino appena nato, oggigiorno ci sono assistenti sociali, e tante persone che avrebbero potuto rendersi utili, proprio in quello stesso edificio. Pensava, il neonato è innocente, non è stato lui a chiedere di venire al mondo, perché deve soffrire in questo modo? Immagina, si chiedeva, che cosa sarebbe successo se qualcuno, entrando in quel gabinetto, avesse trovato il piccolo già morto? Immagina.
L'indomani Cynthia stava ancora peggio. Si sentiva morire. Ormai fra lei e quel bambino si era creato un legame. Mio Dio, devo assolutamente ritrovarlo, pensava. E così cominciò a telefonare, uno dopo l'altro, a tutti gli ospedali della zona. Ma tutti le rispondevano che no, di quel neonato non sapevano proprio niente. Cynthia rifletté, perché continuo a chiamare gli ospedali? è quel Mr Stols che devo cercare. Chiamò la sorveglianza e si fece dare il numero. L'uomo le raccontò che aveva tentato di far accettare il piccolo in ospedale: «Ma nessuno ha voluto prendersene cura, alla fine l'ho portato al Cotlands Baby Sanctuary, un istituto per bambini abbandonati». Mr Stols aggiunse che era riuscito a rintracciare quel ricovero solo intorno a mezzanotte. E che, una volta là, gli avevano chiesto di dare un nome al piccolo. Così lo aveva chiamato Mark.
Di nuovo Cynthia si arrabbiò. Il bambino, pensava, avrebbe dovuto chiamarsi Victor, il vincitore. Una vittoria che si era guadagnata. Oppure Blessing, Benedetto. Era stato suo figlio, Sishle, a suggerirglielo la sera prima, quando aveva detto: «Mamma, questo bambino per noi è una benedizione, una benedizione che ci arriva dal cielo».
Il giorno dopo sul Sowetan uscì un articolo, e un altro anche su Beeld, un quotidiano di lingua afrikaans, e questo per merito di Mr Stols. Fu solo allora che Cynthia venne a sapere con precisione quanto era accaduto quella sera all'uomo. Dopo che ebbe lasciato l'edificio del tribunale, Mr Stols era andato al Coronationville Hospital dove era riuscito con grande fatica a fare in modo che il neonato venisse visitato. Ma il medico gli aveva detto che l'ospedale non poteva ricoverare un bambino abbandonato. Uscito di lì, mentre correva sull'autostrada alla ricerca di un altro ospedale - nel frattempo il piccolo si era svegliato e urlava per la fame - Mr Stols era stato fermato dalla polizia che lo aveva multato per eccesso di velocità, nonostante i suoi tentativi di spiegare la situazione. Era stato però proprio il poliziotto a suggerirgli di andare alla stazione di polizia di Brixton dove, aveva detto, c'era uno speciale ufficio che si occupava dell'infanzia abbandonata.
Arrivato sul posto, però, l'uomo era stato informato che quell'ufficio non esisteva più. E che doveva rivolgersi al comando centrale di polizia di John Vorster Square. Che doveva tornare al posto da cui era partito. E una volta lì la polizia gli aveva comunicato che avrebbe dovuto sporgere una denuncia. Gli avevano dato dei moduli da riempire, ma l'uomo era esploso: «Non è mio compito, aprire una pratica, - aveva gridato schiumando di rabbia - questo è compito vostro, della polizia di John Vorster Square!».
Era calata la notte. Per fortuna, mentre Mr Stols discuteva con i poliziotti, la sua amica, Nicolette Parry, aveva saputo per telefono dalla sorella dell'esistenza del Cotlands Baby Sanctuary. E così i due ci erano andati, ancora furibondi: «Per tutto il tempo in cui abbiamo avuto a che fare con la polizia, sembrava che il piccolo fosse un animale, o qualcosa del genere», avrebbe detto più tardi Nicolette Parry.
Fu allora che il sovrintendente della stazione di polizia di John Vorster Square chiamò Cynthia al cellulare. Come avesse fatto a procurarsi il suo numero, lo sapeva il cielo. La donna aveva la sensazione che, per coprire il fatto che la polizia non era intervenuta al momento giusto, quell'uomo cercasse di insinuare qualcosa sul suo operato. Si aspettava forse che lei lo aiutasse a dare della vicenda la versione che gli faceva comodo? A un certo punto, il poliziotto disse addirittura: «Eravate a pochi metri di distanza da John Vorster Square, perché non siete venuti voi stessi, velocemente, al distretto di polizia?». Ma Cynthia fu svelta a ribattere: «In che modo, con quel bambino, nudo e gelato, che avrebbe potuto morirmi tra le braccia? Voi davvero avreste preteso che io arrivassi correndo fino a John Vorster Square?». Sì, la donna era davvero molto arrabbiata con quel poliziotto.
Qualche giorno dopo Cynthia chiamò il Cotlands Baby Sanctuary. La sua decisione era presa. Era una madre di tre figli che allevava da sola, spiegò. Ma doveva assolutamente continuare a rivedere il piccolo Mark (o Victor, o Blessing). La sua richiesta fu accolta. Anche Nicolette Parry e Mr Stols chiesero di poter mantenere un contatto con il bambino. E anche a loro fu risposto di sì.
Marzo 2002. A pochi chilometri di distanza dall'edificio del tribunale, a Rosebank, una zona elegante della città, su un muro di mattoni, qualcuno ha dipinto a grandi lettere a stampatello la frase: «Madri, vi preghiamo, non abbandonate i vostri figli a causa dell'Aids».
Una giovane donna africana, dritta come un fuso, se ne sta lì davanti, completamente immobile, ferma a un incrocio, con le macchine che le sfrecciano accanto. Pare uscita da un dipinto di Monet. Indossa una camicetta bianca in stile vittoriano, colletto alto e maniche lunghe, e una gonna bianca di cotone che le arriva alle caviglie. Con una mano tiene un quadrato di cartone su cui c'è scritto, «Sono disoccupata. Vi prego, aiutatemi. Che Dio vi benedica». Con l'altra regge un parasole aperto sulla testa, sostenendolo per il manico sottile, leggermente piegato per fare ombra al suo bambino che porta legato sulla schiena con una stoffa di colore giallo luminoso, e ripararlo dal sole.
(traduzione di Maria Antonietta Saracino)
http://www.ilmanifesto.it/Quotidiano-archivio/06-Agosto-2006/art53.html
Jeune Afrique: A Dire Dawa,
les survivants errent à la recherche de proches
ETHIOPIE - 7 août 2006 – AFP
Choqués et épuisés, les survivants des inondations catastrophiques ayant frappé ce week-end Dire Dawa, dans l'est de l'Ethiopie, erraient lundi dans les rues boueuses de la ville à la recherche de leurs proches, alors que les secours continuaient à creuser les décombres.
"J'ai perdu mon mari et mon enfant, ma vie ne vaut plus rien", confie Bezunesh Abegaz, 32 ans. "Je ne vois aucun espoir ou futur pour moi", lâche-t-elle.
"Je les ai vu mourir sous mes yeux d'une terrible façon, mais au moins, je trouve du réconfort dans le fait que j'ai pu retrouver leurs corps et les enterrer", raconte-t-elle, ajoutant que "maintenant, j'ai du chagrin pour mes voisins qui n'ont toujours pas retrouvé les corps de ceux qu'ils aiment".
"Mon entrepôt de café et les stocks ont été complètement détruits (...) J'ai aussi perdu les camions qui assuraient le transport du café jusqu'à Djibouti (...) Mon gardien a pu être sauvé mais sa femme et ses enfants ont été tués", a indiqué Kassim Ahmed, ajoutant: "je suis complètement dévasté".
Au moins 206 personnes ont été tuées, 96 blessées et quelque 10.000 déplacées par ces inondations à Dire Dawa (environ 500 km à l'est de la capitale éthiopienne Addis Abeba) et ses environs, selon des responsables éthiopiens.
Ces inondations ont été provoquées par le débordement dimanche vers 02H00 locales (23H00 GMT samedi) des rivières Dechatu et Dire Dawa traversant la ville, après des pluies torrentielles qui ont duré plus d'une heure et demie.
La saison des pluies va de juin à septembre en Ethiopie.
Lundi, les équipes de secours continuaient à fouiller les décombres et les débris boueux à la recherche d'éventuels survivants ou de nouveaux corps.
Ne pouvant arrêter ses larmes, Berhane Zewde, explique qu'il a perdu trois de ses proches dans la catastrophe.
"Je ne les ai pas retrouvés (vivants, ndlr), ni leurs corps. Je vais continuer à courir entre les hôpitaux, les maisons démolies ou le long du lit de la rivière pour les retrouver", lance-t-il, les larmes coulant sur ses joues.
D'autres habitants, sous le choc, erraient dans la ville en se lamentant et passant devant les échoppes, baraquements et maisons détruits.
"J'ai été sauvée, mais je n'ai aucune idée du sort de ma famille ou de mes voisins", déplore Zahara Ali.
"Ca été un vrai cauchemar et c'est un miracle de me voir en vie, mais ce cauchemar me hante toujours", décrit-elle.
Des résidents tentaient de réconforter les déplacés et sans-abris en leur offrant de l'eau et de la nourriture.
"Nous avons organisé toute l'aide que nous pouvions, comme fournir des abris, de la nourriture et du soutien médical", a déclaré à l'AFP Simon Mechale, responsable de la Commission fédérale éthiopienne pour la prévention et la capacité de réaction aux désastres.
En déplacement sur les lieux de la catastrophe, le Premier ministre éthiopien Meles Zenawi a fait part de sa "tristesse".
"Le gouvernement éthiopien fera tout ce qui est en son pouvoir pour permettre aux habitants de Dire Dawa de retrouver une vie normale et pour leur apporter l'aide dont ils ont besoin", a-t-il déclaré à la presse.
© Jeuneafrique.com 2006
http://www.jeuneafrique.com/jeune_afrique/article_depeche.asp?
art_cle=AFP54006adiresehcor0
Mail & Guardian:
Can you support both sides of a war?
John Matshikiza: WITH THE LID OFF
07 August 2006
History repeats itself with mind-numbing regularity. I had just put down Canadian General Romeo Dallaire’s account of his failed United Nations peacekeeping mission to Rwanda in 1994 when another war exploded in the Middle East, and yet another feeble UN mission donned their blue berets and stumbled into the line of fire between the belligerents.
Within days, one of their observation posts had been blown apart by supposedly wayward Israeli precision bombing, another surgical strike in South Lebanon, four blue berets dead and the perpetrators denying everything. Just a mistake, they said. Besides, the so-called peacekeepers, like the Lebanese civilian population, should have known better than to hang around in a war zone. Especially when the Israeli army and air force are in the vicinity. The soldiers of Zion allow nothing to block their vengeful path.
The whole world, once again, appears to be sitting on its hands as the innocents are slaughtered. “War is hell,” as Marvin Gaye gently wailed in his album What’s Going On? What’s going on indeed?
War, from all angles, seems to be senseless, except to the politicians and generals who insist on making it happen. Condoleezza Rice looks on, apparently unmoved, as the remains of babies, women and children are removed from the rubble in makeshift body bags. The tears of hysterical men tearing through the chaos go unheard. So much for the feminine touch.
But what’s the war all about? And could it be, as all the signals seem to be saying, that this is a war that is not going to end - that indeed we are seeing the beginning of World War III, with no one announcing that hostilities, in this conflagration that will ultimately consume us all, have indeed been initiated.
Not that I want to scare anybody. Not that I want to scare myself. But that seems to be the way things are heading.
The problem in the Middle East, as my old friend Sacha, who happens to be Jewish, never stops reminding me, is that it is a lethal confrontation between cousins. The Arabs and the Jews are all Semites and neither side can claim exclusive right to that title. But this itself seems to be the reason for claiming exclusivity and ultimately for lobbing bombs and rockets at each other. A broedertwis (brotherly conflict), as we might say in South Africa. Except that it has been going on for an unconscionable time. Several thousand years, to be precise.
The rest of us get tired of this nonsense. But that doesn’t mean that the killing, the outrageous destruction of the infratructure of sovereign states such as Lebanon, the roughshod treatment of other people’s native lands, stops.
The Muslim community of the world is unanimous about where it stands - it is an unacceptable Israeli invasion. The Jewish community across the world, and no less in South Africa, is divided. To pray for Israel or to condemn its excesses. In the end, politics is the problem.
All this seems to smack of a central problem of crisis of identity - what and who you choose to identify with. Many Jews are terminally defensive of the right of the Jewish state of Israel to exist at whatever cost. These include Jews who also choose to defend the right to be part of countries such as South Africa, excercising rights of citizenship in two places at once. Why not? It’s useful to carry two passports sometimes. Belt and braces, as the old folks used to say.
But in identifying with one thing, are you not condemning the other? South Africa, ancient site of implacable identity clashes turned rainbow nation, has finally officially stuck its neck out and condemned Israel’s invasion of Lebanon. Under these circumstances, can any of us straddle the fence and support both sides of the war at the same time? Can we be both pro-Israel and its wrath, and have sympathy with those innocent civilians who fall in the way of that fiery holocaust from the sky? I don’t think so.
And what does Hizbullah stand for? It stands for another kind of identity - the profile of the oppressed, seeing itself as permanently at war with a colonising power, in this case Israel, and its supporters (big guys walking softly, in their own words, and carrying big sticks) and a powerful, post-Crusade world that seems to talk in profane language. This cannot be brushed over.
And so the rockets rain down on the Holy Land. Holy to all the sides that have historically existed there for centuries. In the streetside cafes of Beirut and Haifa, people talk to each other like brothers and sisters, almost touching cousinly noses across a great religious divide.
But in the bigger picture, those same people are ranged against each other in implacable opposition, based on ancient issues of identity and man-made belief. Cousin Jew is inbred to hate Cousin Arab, even though they drink the same coffee and eat from the same field of wheat and lambs brought to the slaughter, sometimes even out of the same dish.
The walls go up, the bombs rain down. Where to now?
It is worth noting that these issues of identity, among others, will be the subject of an exploratory debate at the inaugural session of the Saturday Club, Melville Grill, 7th Street, Saturday August 5, Melville, Johannesburg, at 3 pm. Who are we? Who do we think we are?
Not that I am allowed to advertise any such events. But it will be well worth looking at what we think of ourselves as South Africans, Africans and citizens of this war-torn world from that relatively neutral space. Be there.
All material copyright Mail&Guardian.
http://www.mg.co.za/articlePage.aspx?
articleid=279996&area=/columnist__john_matshikiza/#
Página/12:
“Fidel se reincorpora en semanas”
EL ENTORNO DE CASTRO DICE QUE EVOLUCIONA DE FORMA FAVORABLE
Lo dijo Carlos Lage, el vicepresidente cubano. Mientras, el nuevo líder de la isla, Raúl Castro, sigue sin aparecer. Y Bush insistió con que los cubanos tienen el derecho de decidir su futuro (una versión light de las declaraciones que salen de Miami).
Martes, 08 de Agosto de 2006
Cada vez más funcionarios y figuras del gobierno cubano afirman que la salud de Fidel Castro está mejorando. Estas intervenciones contrastan con el largo e inmutable silencio del gobierno provisional, liderado por Raúl Castro, pero parecen orientadas a contrarrestar las declaraciones y las amenazas que llegan desde Washington y Miami. “Los cubanos en la isla tienen derecho a decidir sobre su futuro”, dijo ayer Bush. “Fidel sigue evolucionando favorablemente y estamos seguros de que va a recuperarse, como él mismo lo dijo, para que en unas semanas se reincorpore nuevamente; eso se dará en unas semanas”, pronosticó el vicepresidente cubano Carlos Lage.
El clima de calma, que tiene en vigilia al mundo entero, seguía dominando ayer La Habana y el resto del país. Después de una semana sin Fidel, la Central de Trabajadores de Cuba (CTC) estimó que ya se han realizado unos 80 mil encuentros en centros de trabajo y fábricas para reafirmar su apoyo al veterano dirigente y a su hermano menor y actual líder de la isla, Raúl. En total habrían participado más de 3 millones de obreros. Para poder hacerse una idea del nivel de movilización que se alcanzó en estos siete días, después del traspaso de mando, habría que sumar los varios cientos de personas que participaron, durante la semana pasada, en los actos masivos realizados en el céntrico Parque Central. Más aún: desde el domingo pasado, las iglesias católicas se han convertido también en espacios para abogar por la recuperación del líder de la Revolución Cubana y concientizar sobre la importancia de mantener el clima de calma y paz social. Las religiones animistas de la isla también se sumaron ayer a las manifestaciones en favor de la recuperación del veterano dirigente cubano, realizando distintos rituales en las calles de La Habana.
Otro que habló sobre la evolución médica fue el amigo del dirigente cubano, Roberto Fernández Retamar. Luego de leer la solicitada de intelectuales de todo el mundo en contra de una eventual agresión de Estados Unidos (ver aparte), el presidente de la Casa de América y miembro del Consejo de Estado confirmó que Fidel está mejor, aunque dijo que necesitará unos meses para poder retomar sus funciones. El resto del mensaje de Retamar estuvo destinado a cuestionar los rumores que circulan por las calles de Miami sobre la posibilidad de un levantamiento de la oposición en la isla. El escritor cubano aseguró que la sucesión fue pacífica y sin problemas. “La idea de la administración de Estados Unidos era que si Fidel no estaba al frente de Cuba, el caos se iba a apoderar de este país. Fidel no está al frente y el caos no se ha apoderado de este país”, afirmó.
La Casa Blanca, sin embargo, sigue apostando por un cambio en el pequeño país caribeño. El presidente George Bush volvió a referirse a la situación en la isla y a advertir a la comunidad cubana que se concentra en Miami. “Cuando el pueblo de Cuba decida formar un gobierno, entonces los cubanos estadounidenses podrán implicarse en los asuntos de dicho país y tratar los temas de las propiedades confiscadas”, aseguró el mandatario desde su rancho en Texas, en donde disfruta de sus vacaciones. “Los cubanos en la isla son los que tienen que decidir”, reiteró Bush.
Las reacciones desde la Pequeña Habana –la zona de Miami en donde se concentra la comunidad cubana– no se hicieron esperar. La mayor organización anticastrista estadounidense, la Fundación Nacional Cubano Americana (FNCA), rechazó la cautela de Washington y adelantó que no obedecerá sus directivas. “Nuestras preocupaciones y participación en los desarrollos en Cuba no esperarán hasta que ocurra una transición porque estamos muy interesados en ayudar y acelerar una transición a la democracia tanto como podamos”, advirtió la vocera de la organización, Camila Ruiz. Sin embargo, la FNCA todavía no definió cómo piensa ayudar y acelerar los cambios en la isla, aunque la semana pasada instó a los cubanos a que se levantaran contra el régimen comunista.
Frente a las voces de la comunidad cubana en Miami, la del presidente Bush parece ser una de las posturas moderadas de su país. Sin embargo, nada es tan simple como parece. La semana pasada, varios congresistas estadounidenses de origen cubano les hicieron saber a los medios locales sobre reuniones no oficiales con autoridades de la Casa Blanca, en las que se habrían discutido –y, algunos dicen, acordado– cambios en la política migratoria que el país mantiene con la isla.
Han pasado siete días desde que Fidel Castro cedió el poder provisionalmente, siete días que no se ve ni se escucha a Raúl Castro, y seis días desde el último mensaje atribuido directamente a Fidel, en el que explicó que su salud se había convertido un secreto de Estado. Las cotidianas intervenciones de dirigentes, funcionarios y figuras reconocidas del régimen no han conseguido tapar el cada vez más ruidoso silencio que rodea al joven gobierno de Raúl y a la salud de Fidel. En la isla defienden la decisión del dirigente cubano de mantenerse alejado por el momento. Retamar aseguró ayer que Raúl saldrá cuando “lo estime necesario”. Otros afirman que se trata de una muestra de lealtad a su hermano y que no quiere interrumpir la cotidianidad de la vida de los cubanos. Pero la verdad es que, a pesar de lo que desee el nuevo gobierno, esta cotidianidad fue interrumpida hace una semana cuando el único líder que conoció la isla en los últimos 47 años dejó por primera vez el poder.
© 2000-2006 www.pagina12.com.ar|República Argentina|Todos los Derechos Reservados
http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/elmundo/4-71121-2006-08-08.html
Página/12:
Respeto a la soberanía de Cuba, piden los intelectuales
Cuatrocientos pensadores, artistas y académicos del mundo, entre ellos ocho Premios Nobel, repudiaron las declaraciones de EE.UU. que exhortan a un cambio en Cuba.
Martes, 08 de Agosto de 2006
“La soberanía de Cuba debe ser respetada.” Así titularon unos 400 intelectuales y ocho Premios Nobel una solicitada publicada ayer en el diario oficial Granma. En el texto, cientos de reconocidos pensadores, artistas y académicos repudiaron las recientes declaraciones de Estados Unidos sobre sus expectativas y sus planes para “la verdadera transición hacia una verdadera democracia” en la isla, como lo describió el secretario de Comercio y co-presidente de la Comisión para una Cuba Libre. Entre los firmantes se destacan el escritor portugués José Saramago (Premio Nobel de Literatura), Adolfo Pérez Esquivel y la líder indígena guatemalteca Rigoberta Menchú (Premios Nobel de la Paz), Wole Soyinka, Dario Fo, Desmond Tutu yNadine Gordiner. También la firman artistas como el cantante Manu Chao y el actor Dany Glover e intelectuales como el estadounidense Noam Choms-ky, Atilio Boron, Juan Gelman y el periodista de Le Monde Diplomatique Ignacio Ramonet, los escritores uruguayos Mario Benedetti y Eduardo Galeano, el ex fiscal general de los Estados Unidos Ramsey Clark , el escritor Miguel Bonasso y el artista plástico León Ferrari.
En la solicitada también rescataron la declaración que hizo días atrás el vocero de la Casa Blanca, Tony Snow, en la que aseguraba que Washington estaba “listo y ansioso para otorgar asistencia humanitaria, económica y de otra naturaleza al pueblo de Cuba”. Y el texto continúa: “Ya la Comisión para una Cuba Libre, presidida por la secretaria de Estado, Condoleezza Rice, había destacado en un informe a mediados de junio ‘la urgencia de trabajar hoy para garantizar que la estrategia de sucesión del régimen de Castro no tenga éxito’, y el presidente Bush señaló que este documento ‘demuestra que estamos trabajando activamente por un cambio en Cuba, no simplemente esperando a que ocurra’. El Departamento de Estado ha subrayado que el plan incluye medidas que permanecerán secretas ‘por razones de seguridad nacional’ y para asegurar su ‘efectiva realización’”.
Ante las críticas que suscitó este informe, el gobierno de Washington decidió volver a declaraciones más cuidadosas y ambiguas. El video que grabó Condoleezza es un buen ejemplo. La secretaria de Estado les recuerda que Estados Unidos apoyará a la sociedad cubana en el caso de que se produzca una “transición” –léase un cambio de régimen–, pero luego asegura que de ninguna manera serán ellos los que inicien esa “transición”. A tal punto habían llegado los rumores que la funcionaria tuvo que salir a garantizar que no invadirán la isla.
Este grupo de intelectuales, sin embargo, no está tan seguro de ello.
“No es difícil imaginar el carácter de tales medidas y de la ‘asistencia’ anunciada, si se tiene en cuenta la militarización de la política exterior de la actual administración estadounidense y su actuación en Irak”, cuestionó la solicitada, en referencia a los ambiguos planes de la Casa Blanca para la “transición” cubana. Estas sospechas no parecen tan descabelladas si se tiene en cuenta que en la pasada semana la comunidad cubana en Miami ha amenazado con formar una flota y cruzar a Cuba, e incluso llamó a un levantamiento cívico-militar entre los cubanos que continúan viviendo en la isla.
Hacia el final, el grupo de intelectuales se dirige a la Casa Blanca. “Ante esta amenaza creciente contra la integridad de una nación, la paz y la seguridad en América latina y el mundo, los abajo firmantes exigimos que el gobierno de los Estados Unidos respete la soberanía de Cuba. Debemos impedir a toda costa una nueva agresión”.
© 2000-2006 www.pagina12.com.ar|República Argentina|Todos los Derechos Reservados
http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/elmundo/subnotas/71121-23100-2006-08-08.html
Página/12:
Tres fechas clave para la isla
EN ELLAS SE PODRA VER EL ESTADO DE SALUD DE FIDEL
Por Mauricio Vicent*
Desde La Habana, Martes, 08 de Agosto de 2006
En el futuro próximo de Cuba hay tres fechas clave para comprobar el estado de las cosas, sobre todo la salud de Fidel Castro y la de la revolución. La primera es el 13 de agosto, fecha en la que el líder comunista cumplirá 80 años. En teoría, debido a la operación quirúrgica de urgencia a la que fue sometido la semana pasada, Castro, obligado a cumplir un reposo estricto como parte del proceso de recuperación, no podrá aparecer en público. En principio...
Las celebraciones por su onomástico, que habían sido organizadas por la Fundación Guayasamín e incluían exposiciones, conciertos y talleres, fueron pospuestas a petición del propio presidente cubano en la misma “proclama” en la que delegó poderes en su hermano Raúl y un equipo de seis personas. En estas actividades debían participar personalidades de todo el mundo –ya habían confirmado su participación el Nobel argentino Adolfo Pérez Esquivel y el español Federico Mayor Zaragoza, ex director general de la Unesco– y se esperaba además a los presidentes de Venezuela y Bolivia, Hugo Chávez y Evo Morales, respectivamente.
El 13 de agosto servirá de termómetro por dos motivos principales, según los observadores: será la oportunidad de que Raúl Castro aparezca por primera vez en público, si no lo ha hecho todavía, o incluso de que el mandatario salga en televisión o envíe un mensaje a sus compatriotas. Y habrá que ver si su gran amigo Hugo Chávez hace un viaje relámpago a la isla para saludarlo, como hizo en 2004, cuando Fidel sufrió una aparatosa caída por la que hubo de ser operado de la rodilla.
La segunda cita importante es la XIV Cumbre del Movimiento de los Países No Alineados, que se celebrará en La Habana entre el 11 y el 16 de septiembre. Está prevista la asistencia de más de 60 mandatarios y de cientos de periodistas, y tanto si oficia Fidel como Raúl de anfitrión y jefe de ceremonias, lo que suceda será revelador.
Si es Fidel, opinan diplomáticos en La Habana, será la oportunidad de ver hasta qué punto se ha recuperado Castro y si es capaz de resistir seis días de intenso ajetreo diplomático. También será la oportunidad de comprobar si comparte responsabilidades y con quiénes; y en caso de que sea su hermano Raúl el único protagonista, será su presentación internacional y su primera gran prueba de fuego.
La última fecha clave en el horizonte cubano es el 2 de diciembre, cuando se conmemora el 50° aniversario de la creación de las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias, el día elegido por Fidel Castro para realizar las celebraciones pospuestas de su cumpleaños. Y ese día sí que tiene que estar.
* De El País de Madrid. Especial para Página/12.
© 2000-2006 www.pagina12.com.ar|República Argentina|Todos los Derechos Reservados
http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/elmundo/subnotas/71121-23101-2006-08-08.html
Página/12:
La ofensiva israelí no tendría límite
ISRAEL INTENSIFICO SUS BOMBARDEOS EN EL SUR Y ESTE LIBANES
Si no se llegara a una salida por vía diplomática, el gobierno de Ehud Olmert afirmó que la campaña militar seguirá hasta acabar con la milicia Hezbolá. Los ataques contra el Líbano causaron casi cuarenta muertos y decenas de heridos. En los combates cuerpo a cuerpo murieron catorce guerrilleros y tres soldados israelíes.
Martes, 08 de Agosto de 2006
Israel anunció que terminará con los ataques de Hezbolá, sea por la vía diplomática o por la militar. El ministro de Defensa israelí, el laborista Amir Peretz, aseguró ayer que si no llegan a un acuerdo en el Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU para un cese al fuego desde territorio libanés, su gobierno ampliará la ofensiva militar, de ser necesario, a todo el territorio libanés. La determinación israelí tuvo su contraparte en el discurso del primer ministro libanés, Fuad Siniora, en el que, entre llantos, les pidió a los países de la Liga Arabe que unan fuerzas para presionar en Nueva York hasta conseguir la retirada de las tropas israelíes y el cese de los ataques al sur del país. En una nueva jornada sangrienta de ofensivas aéreas y terrestres murieron al menos 39 libaneses, 14 milicianos de Hezbolá y tres soldados israelíes –Hezbolá afirmó que fueron ocho los soldados israelíes que fallecieron–.
Nuevamente –pero ahora gozando con el apoyo de los 22 países de la Liga Arabe–, Siniora le pidió a la comunidad internacional que presionara para la retirada de las tropas israelíes de su territorio. La respuesta de la comunidad internacional vino de su principal representante, Estados Unidos. Desde su rancho de Texas, donde disfruta de unas vacaciones, George Bush se negó a ceder a la demanda de Beirut. “También nosotros queremos el fin de los combates. Pero las fuerzas armadas libanesas tienen que estar en condiciones de llenar el vacío que había hasta ahora en el sur. Cuando las fuerzas libanesas e internacionales estén desplegadas (en el sur del Líbano), entonces se retirarán las fuerzas armadas israelíes”, explicó el mandatario. En un “acto de buena voluntad” –y de dejar en evidencia la falencia del argumento de Washington–, el gobierno libanés aprobó ayer a última hora el envío de 15 mil soldados al sur del país, para asegurar la región del sur, tan pronto se retiren las tropas israelíes.
La decisión, que claramente tuvo el visto bueno de Hezbolá –los dos ministros del gobierno de Beirut que responden al movimiento chiíta apoyaron la iniciativa–, intenta modificar la posición de las principales potencias occidentales en el Consejo de Seguridad (ver aparte). El objetivo es garantizar el control de la zona fronteriza con Israel a través de la presencia del ejército libanés, impidiendo así la posibilidad de futuros ataques desde los bastiones de Hezbolá al norte israelí. La propuesta libanesa supone movilizar a miles de reservistas para poder cumplir con una de las principales demandas de la ONU: el control efectivo de todo el territorio. Aunque no lo dijo, Siniora apuesta a que este despliegue esté apoyado por los soldados de paz de una eventual misión internacional.
Aunque este plan podría parecer viable para algunos políticos europeos, es dudoso que la Casa Blanca lo vaya a considerar como una solución viable. Bush se refirió a los que considera las raíces de este conflicto y llamó a atacarlas. “Siria e Irán financian y patrocinan las actividades de Hezbolá, que busca generar caos y frenar el avance de la democracia con el terrorismo”, aseguró el mandatario. Teherán no tardó en contestar y volvió a advertir que cualquier ataque contra su país provocaría una respuesta “cien veces más dura”.
En medio de estos tiras y aflojes entre los gobiernos involucrados, lo cierto es que Israel atacó otra vez con fuerza al Sur y al Este –zona fronteriza con Siria– del Líbano, causando casi 40 muertos y decenas de heridos. Los civiles libaneses murieron en dos ataques aéreos en el sur de Beirut y en uno en la localidad de Hula, en el sudeste del país, en el que cinco personas quedaron bajo los escombros de un edificio derrumbado. Más de 60 civiles lograron ser rescatados, luego de ese ataque. En un episodio, que todavía no fue del todo explicado, el ejército israelí aseguró haber derribado un avión no tripulado supuestamente de Hezbolá. Tel Aviv investigaba anoche si la nave transportaba armas para la milicia chiíta.
Los combates cuerpo a cuerpo, en el sur del Líbano, tuvieron lugar nuevamente en las afueras de Bint Jbeil. En esos enfrentamientos murieron14 milicianos de Hezbolá y tres soldados israelíes. Según la milicia chiíta, otros cinco soldados israelíes habrían muerto cerca de Hula. Sin embargo, el ejército israelí todavía no confirmó esta información, aunque aseguró que hubo varios heridos en esa zona.
La incapacidad de Washington y Beirut de encontrar un punto en común se volvió más peligrosa después de la declaración del premier israelí en la que afirmó que “no ha impuesto ninguna limitación” a las ofensivas del ejército contra el Líbano. Este anuncio, sumado a la advertencia de Peretz sobre la posibilidad de expandir la guerra a todo el territorio libanés en caso de no llegar a una solución diplomática, preocupó a Beirut, que ahora apuesta todas sus fichas a las negociaciones en el Consejo de Seguridad.
© 2000-2006 www.pagina12.com.ar|República Argentina|Todos los Derechos Reservados
http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/elmundo/4-71131-2006-08-08.html
Página/12:
Los tests de inteligencia
Por Adrián Paenza
Martes, 08 de Agosto de 2006
Quiero volver a hablar sobre el tema de la inteligencia. No sólo porque es un tema apasionante, debatible y del que se sabe muy poco, sino porque sería interesante discutir sobre los métodos que se usan comúnmente para medirla. De hecho, es curioso que algunas personas –de cuya buena fe no tengo por qué dudar (bueno, está bien... de algunos desconfío)– ofrecen tests para medir algo cuya definición no se conoce. ¿Qué es lo que se evalúa entonces?
Por ejemplo: Se da una tabla de números en la que falta uno. ¿Puede usted decir qué número falta y explicar por qué?
54 (117) 36
72 (154) 28
39 (513) 42
18 (?) 71
El test, supuestamente, consiste, no sólo en que usted pueda decir qué número es el que debería ir en lugar de los signos de interrogación, sino también en medir su capacidad de análisis, para deducir una ley de formación. Es decir, alguien pensó en un patrón que subyace detrás de la gestación de esos números, y se pretende que usted lo descubra.
Acá, si fuera usted, pararía un rato y pensaría alguna solución. Yo voy a proponer una abajo pero, en todo caso, puede entretenerse buscándola sola/o.
Una potencial solución
Uno podría decir que el número que falta es el 215. Mire los números que hay en la primera fila en la primera y tercera columnas: 54 y 36. La suma de los dos exteriores (5 + 6) = 11. La suma de los dos interiores (4 + 3) = 7.
De esa forma, se obtuvo el número 117: juntando la suma de los dos exteriores con la de los dos interiores.
Pasemos a la siguiente fila y hagamos el mismo ejercicio. Los dos números de la primera y tercera columnas son: 72 y 28. Sumando los dos exteriores (7+8) = 15 y sumando los dos interiores (2+2) = 4. Luego, el número que va en el centro entonces es 154.
Si uno sigue en la tercera fila, tiene 39 y 42. La suma de los dos exteriores (3+2) = 5 y los dos internos (9+4) = 13. Por lo tanto, el número que va en el centro es 513.
Por último, con este patrón, dados los números 18 y 71, los dos exteriores suman (1+1) = 2. Y los dos centrales (8+7) = 15. Corolario: si quien diseñó pensó igual que usted (o que yo) el número que falta es 215.
Me apresuro a decir que ninguno de estos métodos es confiable ni mucho menos exacto. De hecho, habría (y en general hay) infinitas maneras de encontrar un número que pueda ir en lugar del signo de interrogación. Se trata, en todo caso, de ser capaz de buscar el que pensaron los que diseñaron el test.
Otro ejemplo (muy ilustrativo)
Hace unos días, Alicia Dickenstein (la brillante matemática argentina) me escribió un mail invitándome a pensar un poco más sobre las personas que producen estos tests. “Creo que estos IQ tests son muy peligrosos. No son más que algo standard que puede aprenderse y sólo miden el aprendizaje cuadrado en una dirección. Es decir: no se sabe bien qué miden y algunas personas, inescrupulosas y mal intencionadas, se permiten sacar conclusiones sobre la supuesta ‘inteligencia’ o ‘no’ de un sujeto. De hecho, en Estados Unidos hubo una gran controversia sobre este tipo de tests, ya que se usaban para ubicar a los ‘afro-americanos’ en clases más retrasadas con una obvia intención segregacionista. Lo único que se puede comprobar es que hay gente que no está entrenada para este tipos de tests. Y nada más.”
Sigo yo: el peligro latente (o no tanto) es que cuando a un chico o joven lo someten a este tipo de problemas, contesta como puede; en general, con bastante miedo a equivocarse. La sensación que prima en el que rinde el test (y en sus padres) es que lo están juzgando para siempre. Es que, de hecho, como supuestamente mide la inteligencia, y salvo que uno la pueda mejorar con el paso del tiempo (“lo que natura non da, Salamanca non presta”) la suposición de que es algo final está siempre presente.
Es decir, una sensación de alivio recorre a todos, al que rindió el test y a la familia, si el implicado contesta lo que pensaron los que lo prepararon. En todo caso, eso demuestra que es tan inteligente como para hacer lo que ellos esperaban.
Si, por el contrario, o bien no encuentra la respuesta o se equivoca, se expone a encontrar una cara circunspecta (y exagero, obviamente) de quien llega con una mala noticia: “Lamento comunicarle que usted será un estúpido toda su vida. Dedíquese a otra cosa”.
Aunque más no sea por eso, cualquier test que presuma de medir algo tan indefinible como la inteligencia debería ser hecho en forma hipercuidadosa.
Lo que sigue más abajo es un ejemplo que me mandó Alicia, que invita a la reflexión. De hecho, le pido que lea el test (es una verdadera pavada) y piense qué respuesta daría. Usted verá cómo este caso sirve para mostrar que, aun en los casos más obvios, no hay una respuesta única. Ni mucho menos.
Aquí va: si uno encuentra la siguiente serie de números (agrupados de la forma que se indica):
1 2 3
4 5 6
7 8 ?
¿Qué número pondría en donde están los signos de interrogación? (Aquí, pare por favor, y piense qué haría usted.)
Ahora sigo yo: sólo le pido, por favor, que no me diga que no pensó o consideró el número nueve porque no le creo. Claro, ése sería el pensamiento que Alicia Dickenstein denomina “rutinario”, o bien, el que “responde lo que el que pregunta quiere escuchar”. Y esta última afirmación es muy importante. Vean si no. ¿Qué pasaría si yo dijera que la serie se completa así:
1 2 3
4 5 6
7 8 27
Claro, usted pensaría que leyó mal o que hay un error de imprenta. No. El último número es veintisiete. Y le muestro el patrón que podría estar buscando quien pensó el problema.
Tome el primer número. Elévelo al cuadrado (o sea, multiplíquelo por él mismo). Al resultado, réstele cuatro veces el segundo, y a lo que obtenga súmele 10.
En la primera fila entonces, al elevar uno al cuadrado, se obtiene otra vez uno. Le resto cuatro veces el segundo, o sea, cuatro veces el número 2 y luego, le suma 10. Resultado: 3.
1 - 8 + 10 = 3 (que es el tercer número de la primera fila)
En la segunda fila, hago el primer número al cuadrado, es cuatro al cuadrado, o sea cuatro por cuatro, y se obtiene 16. Se le resta cuatro veces el segundo número (4 x 5 = 20) y sumamos 10. Resultado: 6.
16 - 20 + 10 = 6
En la tercera fila se tendría siete al cuadrado (49), menos cuatro veces el segundo (4 x 8 = 32) y luego sume 10. Resultado: ¡27!
49 - 32 + 10 = 27.
Moraleja 1: Trate de entrenarse haciendo este tipo de tests y verá cómo, al final, le salen todos o casi todos. Ese será el momento en el que quizás usted crea que es más inteligente. Lo curioso es que quizás haya aprendido a someterse mejor al pensamiento oficial.
Moraleja 2: Pretender usar la matemática como un testeador de la inteligencia puede producir un efecto no sólo negativo y frustrante sino también falso. Aunque más no sea, porque no se sabe qué se mide.
© 2000-2006 www.pagina12.com.ar|República Argentina|Todos los Derechos Reservados
http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/contratapa/13-71105-2006-08-08.html
The Independent:
Crocodile tears of leaders as city burns
Robert Fisk,
Published: 08 August 2006
Shortly after 4am, the fly-like buzz of an Israeli drone came out of the sky over my home. Coded MK by the manufacturers, Lebanese mothers have sought to lessen their children's fears of this ominous creature by transliterating it as "Um Kamel", the Mother of Kamel. It is looking for targets and at night, like all the massacres being perpetrated by the Israeli air force across southern Lebanon, you usually cannot see it.
The latest model can even fire missiles. Well, it flew around for a few minutes before it moved south-west over the city in search of other prey. Then an hour later came the hiss of jets and five massive blasts as the southern suburbs received their 29th air raid. The Israelis must be convinced that beneath the rubble of their previous strikes, the Hizbollah have secret bunkers to direct their war in the south, that Hizbollah's television station - its four-storey headquarters a pancaked pile of rubble - must be staying on air because it has ever-deeper studios beneath the debris. I doubt it.
After dawn, I drive out to see friends in the suburbs, among the few Shias not to have abandoned their homes. Hassan and Abbas live in two decaying blocks of chipped stone stairs and damp walls; each lives with only two other families in these rotting eight-storey tenements, their neighbours having sought refuge with Lebanon's 700,000 internal refugees - another 200,000 have fled abroad - in the Druze Chouf mountains or the Christian mountains to the north or in Beirut's slum parks and crowded schools.
"I don't have any other place to go," Hassan tells me mournfully as his two-year-old plays tug of war with a toy Pink Panther. "In the Chouf now, a two-room flat costs $800." Well, the Druze are certainly making money, I say to myself. "Nobody is coming to our help"
We glower at Al Manar, Hizbollah's TV station, in the corner of the room, whose Hizbollah announcer is proclaiming the merits - and demerits - of the Arab foreign ministers meeting to start shortly in Beirut. These wealthy princes and emirs of the Gulf and the utterly boring Amr Moussa of Egypt roared and strutted upon the stage, remaining silent only when Fouad Siniora - Lebanon's sweet Prime Minister - went through another of his public weeping sessions and demanded an immediate ceasefire. Lebanon's proposals must be added to the UN draft resolution, he said between sobs, sniffles and whimpers. Shebaa Farms must be returned to Lebanon. The Israelis must leave Lebanon. Only then can Hizbollah abide by UN Security Council resolution 1559 and lay down its arms.
The ministers decided to send a delegation to the UN in New York - which will have Washington shaking in its boots - and the Saudis agreed to an Arab summit in Mecca, but one which should not be rushed because it must be carefully prepared - which sounded very like George W Bush's equally mendacious remark that a ceasefire had to be carefully prepared. And that will have them shaking in the shoes in Tel Aviv.
It was preposterous, scandalous, shameful to listen to these robed apparatchiks - most of them are paid, armed or otherwise supported by the West - shed their crocodile tears before a nation on its knees. The Egyptian Foreign Minister, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, had already said in Cairo that the Beirut meeting "is a clear message to the world to demonstrate Arab solidarity with the Lebanese people". In the southern suburbs - where they do not take this nonsense seriously - Abbas was telling me of a female neighbour who had supported the rival Shia Amal movement until her house was destroyed by the Israelis. "She told us, 'We are all Hizbollahi now'," And I recall that less than three years ago, we - we Westerners, we brave believers in human rights - were saying that we were all New Yorkers now.
What sent Fouad Sinioura into his bout of crying was a report that 40 Lebanese civilians had been massacred in the village of Houla by an Israeli air strike - 18 people were confirmed buried in one house. Two other buildings in the village collapsed. Yet there are far more terrible fears that hundreds more may lay dead in the ruins of their homes after the Israelis had blasted their villages, hill towns and hamlets.
According to the UN, 22,000 Lebanese are still - dead or alive - in the 38 most southern villages, out of an original population of 913,000. In Mays al-Jabal, for example, 400 civilians are believed to have stayed out of 10,000, though no one knows their fate. The Lebanese death toll - including the conservative figure for Houla - is 932, almost all civilians, although it may well have reached more than 1,000. There are 3,293 wounded.
At lunchtime, I paid a call on Suheil Natour, a Palestinian official in the little Mar Elias camp. His people - the Palestinians and their descendants of the 1948 flight from Palestine - are now hosting thousands of Shia refugees from southern Lebanon, just as those refugees' grandparents once hosted the Palestinians of 1948. This irony is not lost on Natour who points out that the Shias - the largest single community in Lebanon - are now spread over all the country after their flight. "What kind of Lebanon will emerge from this?" he asks me. "How many months have to pass before the Shias feel they belong to the areas of Lebanon to which they have fled - rather than to the wreckage of the homes they were forced out of by the Israelis?"
And when I go home, I find my landlord has treble locked the iron front door of my apartment block, just in case the refugees decide that they belong to his building - or that his building belongs to them.
Day 27
* Israeli attacks kill at least 45 people in Lebanon, mostly in eastern Bekaa Valley and border village of Houla. Five die in strike on crowded area in Shi'ite-dominated south Beirut. Israeli aircraft also hit last coastal crossing on Litani river between Sidon and Tyre.
* UN Security Council vote on a resolution to end conflict is delayed until tomorrow after Arab nations object to draft.
* Three Israeli soldiers are killed in battles with guerrillas in southern Lebanon. Hizbollah guerrillas fire rockets into northern Israel, wounding one.
* Lebanese health minister Mohammad Khalifeh says conflict has killed 925 people. About one-third of the dead have been children under the age of 13.
© 2006 Independent News and Media Limited
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/article1217570.ece
posted by attilav at 22:14
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home