The events now unfolding in the Middle East, which have been set in motion by Hezbullah’s takeover last week of much of Beirut, do not bode well for American or Israeli interests, warns one of France’s leading historians and journalists, Alexandre Adler.

Writing for France’s Le Figaro newspaper, Adler writes that Iranian President Ahmadinidjad, hemmed in by opponents at home and abroad, has turned to one of the last cards he holds in his hand: the Lebanese Hezbullah:

“Let us first turn to Iran, which is in a fever and where the most decisive threats originate. Iran’s President and his trusted accomplices - and a pro-Iranian faction of al-Qaeda - hope to recreate unity among all people of Muslim faith for a renewed jihad against America and Israel. Voices have been heard, notably among the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt, who hope for such an outcome and support Iran’s nuclear program, which many Islamists - not only in Cairo - regard as a liberating force that should be immediately employed against Israel, whatever the risks.”

After discussing Hezbullah’s plans for civil war in Lebanon to dislodge its pro-Western opposition, Adler warns:

“Israel cannot tolerate a military victory for Hezbullah over its [pro-West] Lebanese opponents - any more than it can allow Ahmadinejad to pursue nuclear blackmail, especially in this very strange context: There is the probability that a Democratic candidate - indeed an Obama election victory - could bring to the White House a supporter of negotiations at all costs. … Clearly, this is a distressing 60th anniversary for Israel.”

This is a seminal article about what the United States now confronts, and it should be read by anyone interested in understanding this very important and hard-to-penetrate topic.
Read the rest of this entry »

Representative Vito Fossella of New York continues to provide one of the more tawdry stories of the current political season. Having been found driving to Virginia with a blood alcohol content level of .17 (more than twice the legal limit) was only the beginning of the story. It turned out he had been on his way to visit his girlfriend. She, it came to pass, was the mother of a young daughter they shared. Needless to say, none of this made Mrs. Fossella terribly pleased. And now, it turns out that while his wife was at home taking care of the Congressman’s other children, Vito and his girlfriend were off on taxpayer funded junkets to Europe and points beyond.

Fossella and his lover took several trips together overseas on official taxpayer-funded congressional business, including to Europe in July 2003. Questions remain about earlier congressionally approved trips Fossella took, where Fay may have joined him in exotic European and Mideast locales on the taxpayers’ dime.

Now by this point, you may well be rolling your eyes and thinking, “What? Another one?” Following the affairs of governors in New York and New Jersey, among others, such stories seem to be all too commonplace. This one, however, has a bit of a twist. The missing element is the tearful apology before the media with the devoted wife standing quietly behind her man, garnering far more sympathy than anyone would have for the politico in what must be one of the most horrid, embarassing moments of her life.

Not so with Mrs. Fossella.

A close family friend said Fossella’s wife was considering divorce - and if so, planned to go after the house and custody of the couple’s three children.

“She’s mad,” said the source, who asked not to be identified. “She wants to move on.”

Mad? That may be putting it mildly. Vito may want to stay away from the family home for a while or his wife may be cutting him off from more than his checking account. Good for you, Mrs. Fossella! I feel bad for the experience you’re going through, but at least you aren’t being paraded around like Mrs. Spitzer making the entire episode even more painful to watch.

For those who may have missed it, President Bush has enraged much of the nation of India, by appearing to blame its growing middle class for rising food prices.

In addition to a series of articles on this subject, WORLDMEETS.US just posted this tongue-in-cheek warning to President Bush, about the growing demand for pet food among new members of India’s middle class.

Amit Baruah writes for the Hindustan Times of India:

U.S. President George W Bush should be a worried man. Not only are Indians eating more and better and driving up food prices, their dogs and cats are eating better, too … Read the rest of this entry »

Some reports coming out of North Korea indicate that people are beginning to openly question the regime’s explanation of why once again, starvation looms.

This article from The Daily North Korea, a publication headquartered in Seoul dedicated to reporting on the regime and getting word into the Hermit Kingdom about the outside world, reports:

“It appears that North Koreans are expressing increasing doubt about government claims that South Korea and the United States are responsible for the latest food crisis.”

According to one source, located in the North Korean Province of Ryanggang reported on a party meeting held recently in the city of Hyesan:

“During the conference, a speaker is said to have explained the state of international and domestic affairs by saying, ‘the U.S. and the puppet regime (the Lee Administration in South Korea) have overridden peaceful agreements between North and South (referring to the June 15th Joint Declaration and the October 4th Agreement) in order to create a serious food crisis in our Republic.’ … there was an awkward atmosphere in the hall after the chairperson of a People’s Unit from Hyehwa-dong in the city of Hyesan asked forthrightly, “We understand that the Americans and Lee’s puppet faction aren’t helping us with rice, but why won’t China help us, since it’s our closest ally?” The speaker’s face turned pale at the question and a silent tension filled the hall.”

By Lee Sung Jin

May 8, 2008

South Korea - Daily North Korea - Original Article (English)

Yanji, China: It appears that North Koreans are expressing increasing doubt about government claims that South Korea and the United States are responsible for the latest food crisis.

In a telephone interview on May 1st, a source from Ryanggang Province told The DailyNK, “At a conference of the Union of Democratic Women, called to commemorate the founding of the Korean People’s Army on April 25th, one speaker humiliated herself by blaming [South Korean] President Lee” for the crisis.

One of a series of meetings now being held across the country to extol the military, this meeting was held at the conference hall of the General Federation of Korean Trade Unions in Ryanggang Province.

The source reported that, “A lecture was given, entitled ‘Our revolutionary weapons are an invincible force for building a strong military-first country.’ During the lecture, he said that the politics of putting the military first were, “praised even more highly than the People’s Army itself.”

During the conference, a speaker is said to have explained the state of international and domestic affairs by saying, “the U.S. and the puppet regime (the Lee Administration in South Korea) have overridden peaceful agreements between North and South (referring to the June 15th Joint Declaration and the October 4th Agreement) in order to create a serious food crisis in our Republic.”

Then our source reports that there was an awkward atmosphere in the hall after the chairperson of a People’s Unit from Hyehwa-dong in the city of Hyesan asked forthrightly, “We understand that the Americans and Lee’s puppet faction aren’t helping us with rice, but why won’t China help us, since it’s our closest ally?” The speaker’s face turned pale at the question and a silent tension filled the hall.

READ ON AT WORLDMEETS.US, along with continuing foreign press coverage surrounding American involvement with North Korea.

‘Retribution, swift vengeance, eternal malice were in her whole aspect, and spite of all mortal men could do - the said solid white buttress of her forehead smite the ship’s starboard bow.’
(apologies to Moby Dick)

It seems that a global consensus against Senator Hillary Clinton is forming, after her razor-thin victory in Indiana and significant defeat in North Carolina.

This editorial from Lebanon’s Daily Star not only lambastes Hillary for pandering - pointedly in regard to her threat to ‘obliterate’ Iran - but it uses her bad example as a way of pointing out a glaring deficiency in Democratic government as it is presently conducted.

In the words of the Daily Star of Lebanon - which has been relatively friendly in its stance toward the United States and the West:

“Whatever she does in the future, nothing will erase her demonstration of the worst aspects of American politics - particularly her recent statement that she would ‘obliterate’ Iran if it ever threatened Israel with nuclear weapons … The context of her threatening statement is telling, in that it exposes the weak link in America’s democratic system - or any democratic system: the inclination of candidates running for public office to pander to the basest prejudices, sentiments and fears of the voting public.”

Then in regard to the anti-Iranian sentiment in America, the editorial says:

“The United States and Iran may disagree about many things; but for one to use threats of obliteration as a policy toward the other strikes us as a rather crude and offensive strategy, especially for a world power.”

One interesting question to ponder is whether Hezbullah’s takeover on Friday of much of Beirut, will also put an end the the independence of the pro-West Daily Star.

EDITORIAL

May 8, 2008

Lebanon - The Daily Star - Original Article (English)

In the coming days or weeks, Hillary Clinton’s fate as a presidential hopeful will be decided. But whatever she does in the future, nothing will erase her demonstration of the worst aspects of American politics - particularly her recent statement that she would “obliterate” Iran if it ever threatened Israel with nuclear weapons. The substance of the New York senator’s words are hard to evaluate due to the hypothetical nature of the damage she threatens to impose. Were she ever to become president and order such an attack, many other Americans would have to agree with the decision in order for it to be implemented, particularly the top military brass.

The context of her threatening statement is telling, in that it exposes the weak link in America’s democratic system - or any democratic system: the inclination of candidates running for public office to pander to the basest prejudices, sentiments and fears of the voting public. Clinton has been a particularly dynamic panderer this year, jumping on every opportunity to make her appear to be a woman of the people, whether drinking shots of whisky or calling for gas-tax holidays. In this case, she chose to play on widespread American opposition to Iran, which is in turn a function of several factors. In American politics these days, Iran is the bad guy par excellence, whether for its role in Iraq, its strategic ambitions in the Middle East, its nuclear policy, its rhetorical threats against Israel, or to its a general assertion of Islamist identity and politics. Americans also remain angry at Iranians for overthrowing the Shah in 1979 and then taking and holding Americans hostages for many months.

READ ON AT WORLDMEETS.US, along with continuing foreign press coverage of the U.S. election.

While at WORLDMEETS.US, we have seen a good deal of support for John McCain in the Portuguese-speaking countries ofBrazil and Portugal, chiefly due to McCain’s promise to include Brazil in the G8 and his relatively liberal trade policies, this op-ed from Portugal’s Jornal de Negicios is decidedly concerned about what might happen under a McCain presidency.

After examining some of the specifics of McCain’s foreign policy plans, including his plans to create a “League of Democracies,” “expand NATO to include all democratic states,” exclude Russia from the G-8 and include Brazil and India, João Carlos Barradas writes for Jornal de Negocios:

“McCain’s plans are frightening in their incoherence, total lack of realism and underestimation of economic and financial constraints. … Even before Beijing or Moscow put the heat on the eventual Republican president, the apprehension of allies in Berlin, Tokyo and Riyadh would be such that either McCain will have to change course or he will condemn the United States to a proactive interventionism capable of bringing even greater misfortune.

Barradas concludes:

“It is a worrying state of the mind that animates McCain in his desire to reform the world.”

Read the rest of this entry »

After six years at Guantanamo Bay prison, the only journalist yet to be incarcerated there, Sami Al-Hadj, was released last week. The case of Mr. Al-Hadj, who was a cameraman for Al-Jazeera, has sparked renewed outrage around the world.

It’s not easy reading for an American, but a good sampling of the emotion in the Arab world over the case can be found in this article from Algeria’s French-language Le Quotidien d’Oran.

K. Selim writes for Le Quotidien d’Oran in part:

“The United States is indeed a democracy: Within its own borders, the rule of law is enshrined. But beyond its walls, only the law of the jungle prevails. Read the rest of this entry »

There is angst on North Africa - otherwise known as the Maghreb - over the second-class treatment meted out to the region by the Bush Administration.

And since this is where the Pentagon intends to headquarter its new African Command - and since it hosts a blossoming al-Qaeda presence - this is not an inconsequential matter.

In the latest in a series of articles WORLDMEETS.US has translated that one might call “we can’t get no repect,” Read the rest of this entry »

Could the Northern Alliance - America’s allies who helped bring down the Taliban Government in 2001 and bring Hamid Karzai to power - be behind the brazen attempt on his life during a military parade last week?

This theory has been making the rounds in Russian circles and has been enunciated by analyst Pyotr Goncharov for Russia’s Novosti news service.

Goncharov writes in part:

“Who was behind the April 27 attempt on the life of the President of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, and what did they have to gain? Read the rest of this entry »

Now as President Bush prepares to leave office and the ‘Three Amigos’ have said their last goodbyes, Mexican columnists have begun to weigh in on the success of their final NAFTA Summit.

While NAFTA has become increasingly unpopular in the United States, the same can be said in Mexico - but for far different reasons.

There, the dissatisfaction stems from the feebleness of NAFTA’s mechanisms for enforcing its decisions on the three federal governments, and the perceived lack of respect given Mexico in relation to its two other North American Read the rest of this entry »

When one of Brazil’s leading columnists, William Waack, visited the Nimitz-class USS George Washington this week, what he came away with might surprise American readers.

Among some of the interesting observations Waack made were these:

“The George Washington has 85 combat aircraft, including the Super Hornet, the most powerful carrier-based aircraft. On a single aircraft carrier of this class (the Nimitz) there are more late-generation fighter aircraft flying than the total number available to the entire Brazilian Air Force. … American pilots and technicians probably fly more hours per week in conditions similar to the real thing (45 percent of flights, for example, are nocturnal) than their Brazilian and Argentine colleagues do in a year.” Read the rest of this entry »

What’s poses the greatest danger to NATO’s effort in Afghanistan? According to Dutch Scholar Gunnar Heinsohn, the answer is clear: Afghanistan’s birth rate.

Heinsohn writes for the NRC Handelsblad of The Netherlands:

“In 2008, there are 4.5 million male Afghans within the traditional warrior age of 15 to 29 years. Out of that group come the insurgents that the approximately 35,000 NATO soldiers are now dug in to confront … and behind Read the rest of this entry »

Even under ordinary conditions, if you are the newly-elected president of a small Central American nation like Guatemala, coming to Washington to meet the U.S. president is a singularly important and daunting event.

Unfortunately for Guatemala, President Alvaro Colom’s visit comes during an election year in which the idea of legalizing the undocumented is the political kiss of death. According to this editorial from Guatemala’s Prensa Libre, the trip also proved a lesson in the global pecking order:

“Meetings between Guatemalan officials and their Washington colleagues stand out, due to a failure to comprehend how the complicated American political system works Read the rest of this entry »

It seems that the Iraq invasion has doomed the United States to being an object of suspicion for many nations, and for some time to come.

A case in point is this article written by a member of the Brazilian lower house, the Assembly of Deputies.

After describing how the United States invaded Iraq under false pretexts and pointing out his perception that the U.S. actually invaded for the sake of the region’s oil resources, Eliene Lima, a member of parliament from a Brazilian state bordering Amazonia, writes for Brazil’s Jornal Nortao:

As we all know, this is the country with the largest reserves of drinking water in the world. And where is the water? In the Amazon! Read the rest of this entry »

One must hand it to the Beijing authorities. It takes tremendous gall for a regime that outlaws press freedom or open criticism of any kind, to liken the failure of Western reporters to parrot the Communist Party line to a lapse of journalistic ethics.

According to Shen Xinggeng, senior Desk Editor at the strictly state-controlled People’s Daily:

“If news reporters don’t respect basic facts, how can they talk so glibly about ‘objectivity and fairness’? Read the rest of this entry »

I was happy to read Jimmy Carter’s op-ed in yesterday’s New York Times arguing in favor of broad engagement with foreign leaders. Indeed, the policy of enforced diplomatic isolation, which the United States has instituted against a number of countries, has brought few positive results. Time and time again, continued dialogue has yielded far more favorable outcomes.

What concrete benefits can we see from our policy of shunning discussion with Syria, for example?

Few, if any.

America’s refusal to talk has not led Damascus away from continued cooperation with Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas. Nor has it elicited greater assistance in Iraq. Or consider the Iranian example: what are the effects of America’s longstanding refusal to sit down directly with Iranian leaders? How about continued Iranian involvement in Iraq and Lebanon, steady progress on the country’s nuclear program, and deteriorating relations.

Again, no tangible Iranian policy changes to speak of. American policy towards Hamas provides a similar narrative. It is now over two years since the United States declared a strategy of enforced isolation against the militant-cum-political group; it is difficult to see what has been accomplished.
Read the rest of this entry »

How do Iraqis feel about Muqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army, and the fact that for the past three years, it has been permitted to operate as a de-facto part of the Iraqi state - in the process driving away a good portion of Baghdad’s non-Shiite population? Now that Baghdad seems serious about putting a stop to the Mahdi Army, Fateh Abdusalam asks in Iraq’s Azzaman newspaper:

“One of the many questions that are forbidden or that can only be asked with great difficulty - like something that’s so hard to swallow, one needs a drink afterwards - is this one: Why was the Mahdi Army permitted to operate day and night for three years … Why was the Mahdi Army allowed to parade in front of the public and guard areas of central Baghdad, flouting what passes for democracy, the rule of law and the fiction of a “just constitution?” … Why is a person who was above the law three years ago, now wanted by the law? What has changed: the person or the law or the ones in charge of overseeing that law?

By Fateh Abdusalam

Translated By Nicolas Dagher

April 24, 2008

Iraq - Azzaman - Original Article (Arabic)

There’s a king of perverse equality in Iraq, which is that no one has a right to ask questions. Or everyone has a right to ask questions, according to Democratic theory, but not everyone who asks a question has a right to an answer.

The same can be said about questions on political matters. There are those who excuse this situation and exempt the Iraqi government from any responsibility on the grounds that, ‘the eye cannot overcome the will” … or the American administration of Iraq, where the file of outstanding problems remains suspended in the Pentagon.

One of the many questions that are forbidden or that can only be asked with great difficulty - like something that’s so hard to swallow, one needs a drink afterwards - is this one: Why was the Mahdi Army permitted to operate day and night for three years - and especially the last two years - since the eruption of sectarian strife [since the bombing of the Golden Mosque] and the failure of the notorious government of al-Jaafari, which showed leniency toward all parties involved and failed to control the strife, all of which only served to pour oil on the fire?

Why was the Mahdi Army allowed to parade in front of the public and guard areas of central Baghdad, flouting what passes for democracy, the rule of law and the fiction of a “just constitution?” The public airwaves reported on these “authorities” as though they comprised part of the new Iraqi state - until three-quarters of Baghdad’s original population comprised of various sects and groups were forced to flee because they weren’t “loyal” to those who prevailed in the street … or to those who prevailed in the secret/or open headquarters of public authorities or armed parties.

Why does the Mahdi Army remain silent about the “renegades and infiltrators” who used its name and address for years, through the consent of alliances and friendships. … until a crisis of “existence” and “authority” broke out with a party that was smarter and better equipped logistically [the Badr Brigades of al-Hakim?] and which caused all parties to expose the dirty laundry of their opponents.

READ ON AT WORLDMEETS.US, along with continuing translated coverage of the Iraqi side of the war.

Why is it that Iraq’s wealthy Arab neighbors refuse to forgive its debts or restore full relations with in the country, while Western and Asian countries have forgiven billions and long ago reopened their Baghdad Embassies?

According to this analysis of the results of the Third Expanded Ministerial Conference of the Neighboring Countries of Iraq, which was held last week in Kuwait, Maria Appakova of Russia’s Novosti news service writes:

“One can understand their reasons. The damage done to many of them during the years of the Saddam Hussein regime was simply too great, despite the fact that today, Iraq is ruled by a different regime. … one would have though that this page would have been turned long ago. … However, Iran stated in the conference’s final communique that relations with Iraq during the dark past would not prevent it from developing new relations with Baghdad. And it is here that we see the true cause of Arab reluctance. It is Iran’s influence on the new Iraqi Government, which largely represents the Shiite community, that is making the Sunni-led governments of Iraq’s Arab neighbors so reluctant to develop new ties and cancel its debts.”

By political commentator Maria Appakova

Translated By Igor Medvedev

April 23, 2008

Russia - Novosti - Original Article (Russian)

MOSCOW: For some reason, the outcome of the Third Expanded Ministerial Conference of the Neighboring Countries of Iraq, in Kuwait City on April 22, which was designed to combine the efforts of countries interested in stabilizing Iraq, has instead created a sense of unease.

The opening speech by Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and the final communiqué released by the conference raises the question of who needs Iraq more - its neighbors or the West (and Russia, for that matter).

The Kuwait conference was already the third event of its kind in the past year. The first meeting of Iraq’s neighbors, with the participation of other concerned nations, was held in May 2007 in Egypt; the second, in November in Turkey. And in that intervening year, very little of the underlying intrigue in regard to the U.S.-Iran standoff has changed, nor has the agenda of these meetings - discussing the possibility of writing off Iraq’s debts to other Arab countries and the reopening of their embassies in Baghdad.

In his speech, Nouri al-Maliki appealed to creditor countries to forgive Baghdad’s debts - a legacy of the government of Saddam Hussein. And he asked Arab countries to re-open their embassies in Baghdad.

According to Maliki, it’s difficult to understand why they have yet to restore diplomatic relations with Iraq, while many other countries have reopened embassies in Baghdad despite ongoing difficulties in the security sphere. With regard to Arab countries, they seem to be biding their time - Saudi Arabia promised to reopen its embassy a year ago, but still hasn’t implemented its intentions. Now Kuwait and Bahrain are making vague promises, careful not to mention specific dates.

On the one hand, one can understand these Arab countries. The first attempts some of them made to reopen embassies in Baghdad ended tragically - in August 2003, during a terrorist attack mounted against Jordan’s diplomatic mission, 17 people were killed. In 2005, several Algerian and Egyptian diplomats were abducted and killed. And then, for example, there was the murder of Russian Embassy staff in 2006, although this was not used as a pretext to close the mission.

Granted, security is a sensitive issue. But what prevents Arab countries - and these countries are not poor - from easing Baghdad’s debt burden?

Over the past three years, $66.5 billion of Iraq’s $120 billion debt burden has been forgiven. Along with Russia’s $12 billion in debt relief, the Paris Club waived a total of $42.3 billion, while non-Paris Club members cancelled another $8.2 billion under the same conditions as the Club. Commercial creditors relieved Iraq of $16 billion. Of the remaining amount - between $56.6 and $79.9 billion - about half is owed to the nations of the Arab Gulf, which seem in no hurry to help.

READ ON AT WORLDMEETS.US, along with continuing translated foreign press coverage of the War in Iraq.

Readers of the Moderate Voice and WORLDMEETS.US won’t be surprised to hear that people in Europe find this election to be particularly baffling. But the post-Pennsylvania death-lock that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are presently engaged in has only served to make the apparent chaos even more pronounced.

In describing the perceived advantage now being enjoyed by John McCain, Jean-Claude Kiefer writes for Les Dernieres Nouvelles d’Alsace of French Normandy:

“Republican candidate John McCain must be radiating with joy. … From one state to another, millions are spent in a fratricidal struggle that will last until June. Perhaps even longer if the outcome of these primaries ultimately depends on the “super-delegates” and their obscure machinations. What a windfall for John McCain, that atypical Republican, the outsider septuagenarian who is now credibly “presidential!”

But in sizing up the election in general, Kiefer says:

“One has to admit that from this side of the Atlantic, it’s hard to comprehend an American presidential election. The candidate (he or she) matters more than the program. Charisma is more important than political commitment. You “support” one candidate or another as if you were a “fan” of a pop singer or a football star.”
Read the rest of this entry »

As the craze for Obama spreads across the French countryside, the concern of Democrats Abroad is growing, as fear that Hillary could be doing irreparable harm to the Party’s likely standard-bearer in November starts to take hold.

Expressing frustration in this news account from France’s Le Monde newspaper, one member of Democrats abroad says:

“She’s playing the Bush card and the politics of fear. It’s because of her that we have the shameful racial bias that has been introduced into the country! It makes me crazy!”

Reflecting the kind of global attention Senator Obama’s candidacy has generated, Samuel Solvit, President of the French Committee to Support Barack Obama says in part:

“This election concerns the entire planet … it’s important to us … we are attentive to the emergence of this candidate bearing hope and who is open to the world.” Read the rest of this entry »