To One and All....
« November 2007 | Main | January 2008 »
There will be no UN inquiry over Bhutto.
We have heard three different stories now as to the manner of Benazir Bhutto's death. Variously, we have been told that she was killed by one or more bullets (perhaps from the bomber's hand gun before he blew himself up), shrapnel from the bomb or by banging her head on a piece of car hardware during the bombing. The last seems a little far fetched, but, no matter. It's their story, not ours.
Now, Hilary Clinton has spoken up to say that the word of the Pakistan government is not to be trusted because they are obviously an interested party in the killing (Is Musharraf not a politician?) and because Bhutto was killed in Rawalpindi, a largely military town ever since the days of the Raj.
She is right on both counts, and also right to suggest that an outside investigation would be appropriate. Many others have said the same thing.
Unfortunately, there will not be an outside investigation.
Some might ask why not? After all, when Rafik Hariri was killed in Lebanon several years ago, there was an international hue and cry for a UN led investigation with the clear intention of hanging responsibility around Syria's neck. The investigation has come to pass and the result has been -- nothing.
Now we have the Bhutto affair. Will there be an investigation analogous to the Hariri investigation? No.
That investigation took place because it was the policy of the United States to agree to and, indeed sponsor such an inquiry. The French? Ah, yes. The French in this case sided with the United States because Chirac's government had reached a level on alienation from America that needed correction.
Bottom Line: Crimes like these are really matters of international politics, and the large countries' interests still govern. All else is just illusion. International law? A pretty conceit. The strong still are strong.
There will be no effective international investigation into Bhutto's death. pl
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/ny-ushill305519568dec30,0,1049812.story
"What are the odds on Bhutto?" Redux
There were three suicide bombers on foot in the crowd and someone fired several shots that hit the bullet resistant glass where she was supposed to be sitting.
Musharraf has been the target of a number of assassination plots but this set of attacks on Benazir Bhutto just after she descended from the aircraft that brought her home raises once again the question of the future of Pakistan, a country that possesses deliverable nuclear weapons and aircraft configured to do the job.
The Pakistani military is thoroughly infiltrated by men of doubtful loyalty to a Western alliance. Without the past help or passive acceptance of such men the Taliban and al-Qaeda would never have become the menace that they still are.
No. The US did not sponsor either group. We sponsored other groups. Look it up.
Nevertheless, the situation in Pakistan remains largely a question of the survival of a handful of people like Musharraf and Bhutto. Perhaps next time the plotters will have better luck. If they do then, a sudden reversal in Pakistan which produces a government committed to an Islamist course is distinctly possible.
The threat of Iranian nuclear weapons is distant and still inconclusive. The threat that would be posed by Pakistani weapons would be immediate. pl
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article2696680.ece
---------------------------------------------------------------
Someone killed her. Is anyone surprised? As I said, the country is inherently like this. It was a mistake. Now we know what the odds worked out to be. What will we see now? Will there be chaos in the streets? Will Musharraf put his militarized police and army into the streets to shoot rioters? What will we see? pl
The Huron Carol
“Twas in the moon of wintertime, when all the birds had fled,
That God the Lord of all the earth sent angel choirs instead
Before their light the stars grew dim
and wandering hunters heard the hymn
Within a lodge of broken bark, the tender babe was found.
A ragged robe of rabbit skin enwrapped his beauty round;
But as the hunter braves drew nigh,
the angel song rang loud and high
The earliest moon of wintertime is not so round and fair,
As was the ring of glory on the helpless infant there.
The chiefs from far before him knelt
with gifts of fox and beaver pelt
O, children of the forest free, the angel song is true.
The holy child of earth and heav’n is born today for you.
Come kneel before the radiant boy,
Who brings you beauty, peace and joy
Jean de Brebeuf, S.J. Martyr
The Huron Carol
----------------------------------------------------
"The war went on in the central highlands. At Christmas time I decided to hold a detachment Christmas party. I mentioned this to the battalion commander of 3/525, LTC Paul Langford during a visit by Langford to Song Be. As we discussed this, a five gallon water jug of home made “hootch” bubbled happily in a corner of my office under the beneficent warmth of an electric light. Pineapple juice, brewer’s yeast and a daily “feeding” of sugar were creating something within that obviously was alive. The application of sugar invariably produced a tempest in the bottle. The men began to think of it as a pet. Langford ignored the bottle. “Are you going to leave someone to man each station?” he asked. “That’s all right then,” he said when assured. “Let’s not tell Group. They already think you and I are nuts.” I bought cases of Mumm’s Cordon Rouge and other goodies in Saigon, and on the appointed day mysterious personages began to arrive from all over the Border on Air America’s scheduled service. All in all, there were about twenty party goers. The province senior advisor, LTC Ray Suarez and the local CIA boss attended. There was much singing of Christmas carols, as well as a ham, a turkey and such cooked by the kitchen in Special Forces "B" camp in town. They sang the "Huron Carol" to humor me.
“For every boot that tramped in battle,
every cloak rolled in blood,
will be burned as fuel for flames.
For a child is born to us, a son is given...”
Isaiah, 9:1-3, 5-6
At midnight, celebration was interrupted by the sound of machine gun fire in the distance. The revelers trooped outside to see if they were going to have to fight on Christmas Eve. There were hard words concerning the ancestry of the enemy. Across the wire, across the outpost line, across the valley of no-man’s land were the crests occupied habitually by the “opposition.” From these heights there rose a stream of green, Soviet made “tracer.” The celebrants contemplated this for a minute, and then Suarez suggested a reply. An M-60 machine gun emerged from the house, and while one man fired red tracer into the air, another held the bipod above his head and another fed the gun its belted ammunition. The streams of bullets crossed in the black, star-studded sky. The VC gun fell silent, as did the American. There was a hush as warriors waited for some sign that the hope of common humanity yet lived. The VC fire resumed. Now there were three guns shooting green stars into the blackness. The MI men’s gun chattered merrily, spilling a river of shell casings into the street. Red and green filled the night. "
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Every Christmas I post this little excerpt from an autobiographical sketch I wrote once. I will try not to next year. It will be interesting to see if I can do that. This incident is reminiscent of the legendary football game in no man's land in 1914. The men here were of the Third Combat Battalion, 525th Military Intelligence Group and MACV CORDS Advisory Team 94. The place was Song Be, Phuoc Long Province. It was 1968.
The party-goers are long gone. Some never saw another Christmas. Some were killed a couple of months later when the men across the way nearly took the town. We killed several hundred of them repelling their valiant effort. They must have been of the 211th, 212th and 158th VC battalions under VC Military Region 10. By that time these units were mostly North Vietnamese in their manning. pl
Russert vs. Ron Paul
It seems clear that the "pundits in chief" of American television have in mind to "guide" American voters to the election of a candidate who, in their collective "wisdom," is appropriate to the office of president of the United States.
It should be no secret that the "chattering classes" on the left and right coasts believe that they are far wiser than the peasantry residing in "fly over country" in between (or among) their citadels of exalted brooding.
The various preferences of the media Machiavellians are pitifully obvious to those unfortunate enough to need to watch (endlessly).
Christopher Matthews, (MSNBC) (when not abusing and bullying guests) makes it clear that his first choice would have been Giuliani (a man from the "civilized" northeast) but, (sigh) if that is not to be, then Obama will fulfill the civil rights yearnings of his soul. In pursuit of that goal, there is nothing that he will not say, endlessly, boringly, repetitively against the Clintons. God help anyone on his programs who disagrees with this "program."
And then, there is Tim Russert, host of "Meet the Press." Tim holds forth there with an authority reminiscent of the doctrine of papal infallibility and a clear belief that none dare confront him.
Today, his "guest" was Dr. Ron Paul, the previously obscure physician and congressman from coastal Texas. This man has the effrontery to insist that the US Constitution is still an effective document, that the federal government has too much power, spends too much money and that Abraham Lincoln might not have been as wise as the hagiolatry surrounding his name mandates as belief.
Somehow, unbelievably, the masses huddled outside the major cities of America resonate to what Paul says. His message of minimalist government and foreign policy, civil rights for all and a return to balanced budgets appeals to many. To the consternation of the "professional pols" money floods into the Paul "campaign" over the internets. Thus far, this flow of small contributions is not reflected in polling, but, as my favorite political consultant (my wife) suggests, this may be the result of people being reluctant to tell pollsters that they will vote for Paul
With regard to Paul's various "heretical" opinions, Russert poured forth a continuous stream of questions at so rapid a rate that it became clear that the purpose was a hope that the "guest" would stumble over himself in attempting to answer. The purpose of this approach seemed to be destructive rather than constructive.
Both Russert and Matthews are products of schooling that should have done better by them. pl
"Christmas Ball Blues" Leon Redbone
Courtesy of my sister, Maureen who is a big fan of Redbone. pl
A new "strategic partnership agreement"
In January, the United States will also invite the Iraqis to negotiate a new "strategic partnership agreement" to replace the existing U.N. mandate for U.S. troops, starting in 2009. David Satterfield, Rice's special coordinator for Iraq, will ask Baghdad to appoint a negotiating team that represents all the country's factions and ministries. This new agreement will be sensitive for both sides, since it will cover everything from imprisonment of Iraqi detainees to future U.S. basing rights to Special Forces operations against al-Qaeda terrorists. Explains a senior Bush administration official: "There will be new rules of the game. There have to be. It cannot be business as usual." Ignatius
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"" A new "strategic partnership agreement" " As I thought, they are going to be dumb enough to try to maintain themselves with troops in the heart of the Arab World.
I guess they just don't understand that there will not be a peaceful outcome for any of the parties to such an agreement. There will simply be more war.
There are those among them who should know better. Crocker and Satterfield are prime examples, but the siren call of ambition and the desire to maintain one's place seem to trump all, all. The master must be served. The master must be served. What will be amusing is the speed with which these grand functionaries will spin on a dime to take up the policy and values of the opposing party if the Democrats are elected.
I saw that once before in the time when Carter lost to Reagan. The State Department people with whom I was serving all became cowboy conservatives over night. Some of these were among them. pl
Don't Try to Stay in Iraq.
Because of the greatly improved situation in the counterinsurgency war in Iraq there will be a terrible temptation to think that Iraqis have now accepted a long term American military presence in their country. That would be a mistake.
The improved military situation has largely been the result of Iraqi revolt against takfiri jihadi oppression and the emergence of a coalition military leadership philosophy that welcomed that revolt and which provided fnancial, materiel and operational support to the rebels against Al-Qa'ida in Mesopotamia and its freinds. The urge to attribute the success in the last year and a half to the increased presence of American combat forces must be strong, but, in fact, that presence has been helpful but not decisive.
Many problems remain in Iraq. The central government remains the monstrous engine of ethno-religious factional politics that the Coalition Provisional Authority created. It is dominated by returned exiles and politicians who "played the game" with Saddam for their own benefit. Such men are not inclined to abnegation in the "national" interest. The Kurdish/Turkish conflict is reaching crisis proportion in the north and the swirling cockpit of Shia militia competition is now becoming more visible in the south.
These problems can only be resolved through the kind of determined diplomacy throughout the region that I have often advocated.
At present the US has accepted as temporary allies many of those who fought against us before the "Anbar Awakening." That is as it should be. We should continue that policy in other parts of the country.
What we should not think is that our former enemies have become reconciled to a permanent US military garrison in their country. To think that would be a terrible mistake.
If we want to have a reasonable relationship wth whatever Iraq there will be, then we should understand that the basis for resistance to us was rejection of the idea of foreign military occupation.
Bottom Line? Those who fight beside us now will fight us again if we decide to occupy their country permanantly. pl
"Achmed (sic) the Dead Terrorist"
Time for a mood lightener after wandering in the dark forest of post-modern history et al. pl
The Future of South Iraq
"Mowafaq al-Rubaie, Iraq's national security adviser, said his government was ready and called on Basra's citizens to work together.
"Your unity is essential in rebuilding your city. You have to come together and unify — Sunnis, Shiites, Muslims and non-Muslims and nationalists," he said.
Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno, the No. 2 U.S. commander in Iraq, said the handover was "the right thing to do" for southern Iraq, but American officials worry that a power vacuum could heighten the influence of Iran and threaten land routes used to bring ammunition, food and other supplies from Kuwait to U.S. troops to the north.
"What we have to watch is undue Iranian influence," Odierno told a small gathering of reporters in Baghdad." Yahoo News
----------------------------------------------------------------
Glad to see the supply route security issue has their attention now. It did not for a long time. A lack of imagination seems to be a continuing problem in the planning process.
On the issue of Iranian influence in the south, it sounds like Odierno is "channeling" the White House. The Iranians are obviously going to have a lot of influence in south Iraq. They intend to dominate Iraq generally without occupying any of it and they intend to dominate the Basra area most of all. How will they do that? They will continue to play the various Shia factions against each other to their own benefit. This is a winning strategy.
Clearly, the US should look at the possibility of applying the "divide and rule" methods it has applied elsewhere in Iraq to this problem. There is no reason to treat the Shia population as a monolith. There are analogous fissure lines among the various Shia factions and between them and the Shia tribes. Is a diagram necessary? pl
The Athenaeum
Pat Lang's Consultancy
Recent Posts
- Independence Day - 2008
- Guantanamo and the SERE schools
- Andrew Card - A dangerous Boy Scout
- The Republican "Brand" as metaphor.
- Madison, Federalist # 46 and gun rights
- 10 pounds in a 1 pound bag
- The Addington/Yoo Show Yesterday
- FISA and All Those Numbers
- The Oil Meeting at Jeddah - 2
- The Oil Meeting at Jeddah
Donation
Voluntary
Recent Comments