|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 2nd, 2013 Kerry Comes to Turkey With Rebuke of Its Leader Over Zionism Remark.By MICHAEL R. GORDONPublished by New York Times on-line already: March 1, 2013ANKARA, Turkey — Secretary of State John Kerry chastised Turkey’s prime minister on Friday for recently {that was the Wednesday talk at the Alliance of Civilizations” meeting in Vienna’s Presidential Rooms} calling Zionism a “crime against humanity,” a comment that could frustrate Mr. Kerry’s desire to see an improvement in estranged Turkish-Israeli relations. Related: The Lede: Video of Turkish Premier Comparing Zionism to Anti-Semitism and Fascism (February 28, 2013)
When Mr. Kerry set off on Sunday on a nine-nation trip, his plan was to use his visit in Turkey to consult on trade, the crisis in Syria and other Middle East issues. But on Wednesday, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan told a United Nations forum in Vienna that the international community should consider Islamophobia a crime against humanity “like Zionism or anti-Semitism or fascism.” The next day, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel described Mr. Erdogan’s remarks as a “dark and false statement.” By Friday Mr. Kerry was faced with the task of trying to discourage another outburst from the Turks and salvaging some chance of an improvement in ties between Turkey and Israel — the first a moderate Muslim-majority nation and important NATO ally, and the other the principal United States ally in the Middle East. The Americans’ sternest message to the Turks was conveyed before Mr. Kerry’s plane even landed by a senior State Department official who spoke under ground rules that he not be identified by name.“This was particularly offensive,” the official said, referring to Mr. Erdogan’s comments. “It complicates our ability to do all of the things that we want to do together.” Once in Ankara, Mr. Kerry initially approached the issue somewhat indirectly. Noting that he had attended a memorial event earlier in the day for a Turkish security guard who had been killed trying to stop suicide bomber at the American Embassy, Mr. Kerry said that this selflessness should inspire a “spirit of tolerance.” “And that,” Mr. Kerry added, “includes all of the public statements made by all leaders.” But in response to a question at a news conference with Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, Mr. Kerry was more direct. “Obviously, we not only disagree with it. We found it objectionable,” Mr. Kerry said of Mr. Erdogan’s statement, noting that he planned to raise the matter Friday evening with the prime minister. The comments by Mr. Davutoglu suggested that it might not be an easy discussion. The foreign minister insisted Turkey was not hostile to Israel and that the downturn in relations was Israel’s fault, referring to a 2010 episode in which eight Turks and an American of Turkish descent were killed when Israeli commandos boarded the lead ship of a pro-Palestinian activist flotilla that was trying to break Israel’s blockade of Gaza. “If Israel is expected to hear positive comments from Turkey, I believe they need to revise their attitudes not only toward us but also toward the settlements in West Bank and the people of the region,” he added. During the 1990s, Turkey and Israel enjoyed close cooperation in ties that were nurtured by the secular Turkish military and the Israeli national security establishment, Dan Arbell, a guest scholar at the Brookings Institution’s Saban Center for Middle East Policy, wrote last year. Relations began to deteriorate after Mr. Erdogan became prime minister in 2003 and Turkey adopted a more assertive regional posture, which often involved sharp criticism of Israel’s policies. Ties between the countries reached a low point with the deadly Gaza flotilla confrontation. American officials said they would like to find some way to foster an improvement in Turkish-Israeli relations, which the official on Mr. Kerry’s plane described as “frozen.” “We want to see a normalization, not just for the sake of the two countries but for the sake of the region and, frankly, for the symbolism,” the official said. “Not that long ago you had these two countries demonstrating that a majority Muslim country could have very positive and strong relations with the Jewish state.” On Friday night, Mr. Kerry dined at Mr. Erdogan’s residence. The session began inauspiciously when Mr. Kerry apologized for being a little late because of his lengthy discussions with Mr. Davutoglu. Mr. Erdogan, who seemed irritated, said that Mr. Kerry and Mr. Davutoglu “must have spoken about everything, so there is nothing left for us to talk about.” “There’s a lot to talk about,” Mr. Kerry said. “We actually didn’t talk about everything.” According to a State Department official, the Turkish prime minister and Mr. Kerry discussed the gamut of Middle East issues, including the recent meeting in Rome on the Syria conflict, the situation in Iraq, Iran and the prospects for reviving the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians. American officials did not provide details on the exchange regarding Mr. Erdogan’s Zionism comments or whether the Turkish prime minister believed they had in any way been excessive. The two men, the State Department official said, had a “frank discussion of the prime minister’s speech in Vienna and how to move forward.”
A version of this article appeared in print on March 2, 2013, on page A4 of the New York edition with the headline: Kerry Comes to Turkey With Rebuke of Its Leader Over Zionism Remark.====================================== The first page of the google of Recep Tayyip Erdo?an: Recep Tayyip Erdo?an is the 25th and current Prime Minister of Turkey, and the chairman of the ruling Justice and Development Party, which holds a majority of the seats in the Grand National Assembly of Turkey. Wikipedia
### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on February 22nd, 2013 Our original posting of February 20, 2013 is right here, but now we have also the moderator’s evaluation of the meeting he chaired. David Ignatius is aware of all sort of misgivings regarding the organizers of the meeting and we can add that there was no interest in having media that you cannot control present at the event – so in effect the David Ignatius comments are the first material we got now to digest. =================================================== European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton urged Iran last week to show flexibility at this month’s talks between Tehran and six world powers aimed at defusing tensions over the Iranian nuclear program. The five permanent U.N. Security Council members – the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China – and Germany will meet with Iran in Kazakhstan on February 26 for the latest round of talks in a 7-year-old attempt by the six powers to end the decade-long nuclear standoff with Tehran. “We hope that Iran will come to this negotiation with flexibility and that we can make substantial progress,” Ashton told the 15-nation Security Council during a meeting on the United Nations’ cooperation with regional organizations. “We’re engaging in intensive diplomatic efforts to seek a negotiated solution that meets the international community’s concern about the Iranian nuclear program,” she said. Ashton has been taking part in and coordinating the so-called P5-plus-one group’s fitful negotiations with Iran. The Islamic Republic has faced four rounds of U.N. sanctions and more draconian EU and U.S. sanctions due to its refusal to halt its enrichment program as demanded by the Security Council. Ashton said the EU was committed to continuing a dual-track strategy of combining pressure with dialogue. “The Islamic Republic of Iran is serious about those talks and expects the other side to be serious and forthcoming so that the next round of negotiations … in Kazakhstan would lead to positive and fruitful results,” an Iranian statement replied. In his annual State of the Union address, U.S. President Barack Obama said world powers were united in their desire to use diplomacy to prevent Iran from developing atomic weapons, though he left a door open to non-diplomatic avenues like force. Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi has said Iran was “counting on there being positive and constructive steps made to resolve this problem at the upcoming meeting.” U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said last week that the six powers were ready to respond if Iran came to the talks prepared to discuss “real substance.” The presumably future Head of the Pentagon, Chuck Hagel, is also known as ready to pursue an attempt at a negotiation process with Iran. =================================================== Discussion
20 February 2013 – 5:00pm
Iran’s Ambassador to the UN Mohammad Khazaee joins former U.S. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Thomas Pickering for a discussion moderated by award-winning journalist and author David Ignatius.
Since diplomatic relations were severed in 1980, the U.S.–Iran relationship has faced a towering legacy of mistrust, conflict, and missteps. Hopes of breaking the decades-long impasse were raised four years ago when President Barack Obama offered Iran America’s hand of friendship if Tehran “unclenched its fist.” In the interim, the United States has led the international community in putting in place the most comprehensive sanctions against Iran, while Iran has accelerated its nuclear program, bringing the long embattled relationship to the brink of conflict. As the current confrontational course becomes increasingly dangerous, are the two nations on the road to war? Or is a political solution possible?
Iran’s highest-ranking official in the United States, Ambassador to the United Nations Mohammad Khazaee, joins former U.S. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Thomas Pickering for a candid discussion on the future of U.S.-Iran relations, moderated by award-winning journalist and author David Ignatius. SPEAKERS:
EVENT DETAILS: 4:30-5:00 pm: Registration This program is part of Asia: Beyond the Headlines, a series of conversations with leading policy makers and thought leaders about the critical issues facing the United States and Asia. ================================================ Iran at the New York Asia Society – points from the pen of the Moderator David Ignatius. On Iran, a deal only in principlePosted by David Ignatius on February 21, 2013 at 6:29 pm Mohammad Khazaee, Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations, took questions this week at an unusual forum hosted by the Asia Society. Critics argued that the forum was simply an opportunity for Iranian propaganda, but as moderator of the discussion, I thought it made an important, if somewhat discouraging, point: There isn’t yet sufficient trust on either side for a broad agreement. The discussion took place a week before the next negotiating session between Iran and the P5+1 group of nations, scheduled for Feb. 26 in Kazakhstan. Khazaee’s stance might be described as forthrightly ambiguous. That is, he suggested a deal can be imagined in principle but cautioned that the environment isn’t conducive for making it happen in practice. For example, when I asked whether Iran was ready to endorse a framework for resolving the nuclear issue that might involve caps on Iranian enrichment and export of existing stockpiles of enriched material, Khazaee answered “yes and no,” and then explained what he meant. The “yes” part was that Iran was prepared to be flexible on such details as the level at which it enriched uranium and the size of the stockpile it maintained, so long as its basic right to enrichment was recognized. But the “no” involved the atmosphere in which such an agreement might be reached. “The point is … the mistrust that exists between the two countries. As soon as one side says something … [the other side] says there is a hidden agenda.” Khazaee elaborated on a statement last week by Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, that he won’t negotiate under pressure. The Iranian ambassador clarified that removal of sanctions wasn’t a precondition for negotiations and that there was no “red line” against diplomacy with the United States and the other P5+1 countries. But he insisted: “More pressure can only beget more distrust, leading Iran, in turn, to lose hope in a negotiated settlement.” Thomas Pickering, a former senior U.S. diplomat who took part in the discussion, saw in Khazaee’s comments a positive sign that the supreme leader was still open to talks and prepared to be “reasonable,” as Khazaee quoted him saying. But Pickering argued that because of the deep suspicions on both sides, any U.S.-Iranian discussions should begin with “small steps” rather than a grand bargain. It’s always useful when officials answer questions in a public forum, and I suspect that many in the audience came away encouraged that progress can be made in the negotiations. But Khazaee is a diplomat, and as his boss, the supreme leader, said bluntly in his statement last week: “I’m not a diplomat, I’m a revolutionary.” The problem is that it’s hard to negotiate agreements with revolutionaries. That may be especially true if they feel there is a gun pointed at their head. A diplomat might compromise, but a revolutionary could well say: Go ahead, pull the trigger. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on February 11th, 2013 After the briefing at the US Mission to the UN I crossed the street to the UN proper and found out that the UN had two extraordinary activities that day: (1) The Launching of an International Year of Water Cooperation in the morning followed by a Press Conference at the Dag Hammarskjold Library Auditorium. (2) The Launching of the United Nations Children’s Tour in the Visitor’s Lobby – to which all accredited Journalists and media affiliates were invited. The second event was easy to reject – this because of the fact that the invitation sounded exclusive and then because we always thought that the UN was established in order to do serious business and we never liked the idea that it is being turned by its leaders into a tourist trap. Oh well! This left the first activity which looked suspicious as well. What is it WATER COOPERATION? As I was looking for a particular journalist I found my way to the Water Cooperation Press Conference and watched three presentation by three people – The UN Ambasssador from Hungary, Mr. Csaba Korosi, a science specialist for UNESCO Ms. Ana Persic, and Mr. Paul D. Egerton the World Meteorological Organization (Headquartered in Geneva) Representative in New York. I understood that the UN General Assembly proclaimed 2013 as International Year for Water Cooperation in 2010 following a request by Tadjikistan that is short of water and has disputes with its neighbor Uzbekistan. Instead of looking at the political dispute and at the shortage of water in that dry part of central Asia, the UN gave the lead to the issue to UNESCO which is running UN Water – a project that looks at the importance of water in general. So what we got was a scientific presentation of climate change, droughts and tsunamis. Instead of having an Ambassador from n Asian dryland we got the Ambassador from Hungary and presentations on the importance of water for poverty reduction. We heard of Climate Security and catastrophic weather, of migration and water vulnerability – BUT WHAT ABOUT COOPERATION BETWEEN THE UZBEKS and the TADJIKS? What about international water-sharing laws and agreements? Yes, from our experience we know that WMD does terrific scientific work as they did when we needed them to prepare information on climate change for the IPCC – but they are not a political organization – not even UNESCO can push for COOPERATION between governments, so what was this event about. I decided to bring up what I learned just last week from the Brahmah Chellaney presentation at the Asia Society, and which I posted as: Asia is poorer in water then Africa, and China’s Tibetan Plateau dominates Asia water supply and could impact all other States. Professor Brahma Chellaney of New Delhi publicizes these problems in his books. Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on February 9th, 2013 My question was about the Water-Hegemony of China because of the fact that most of the rivers originate on the Tibetan Plateau and China does not care to make water agreements with its neighbors. India is a victim of such disputes with China and the development of the whole region will stop because of lack of water and of agreements to share the water. The answer came crystal clear – the studies will be prepared by scientists and not political people – that will be up to the governments. Let us say that if the UN is not ready to accept the task of getting countries together there is no sense in talking of cooperation – just another example that the UN cannot step up to the plate. ============================ And The Revealing Inner City Press Report: UN’s Water Year Is All Wet, Distinguishing Science & Politics, Tajik Sponsors By Matthew Russell Lee UNITED NATIONS, February 11 – The year of 2013 is the year of many things, but according to the UN General Assembly it is the International Year of Water Cooperation, credited to a request by Tajikistan in 2010. Inner City Press covered that 2010 hoopla, here. At the UN on Monday Inner City Press asked at the inevitable UN press conference about the Tajik – Uzbekistan water and dam dispute, and if the press conference panel’s singling out of Tajikistan for praise didn’t constitute taking sides in this dispute. Video here, from Minute 22:13. The World Meteorological Organization’s Paul Egerton replied that WMO and UNESCO, whose Ana Persic was also on the panel, are both scientific organizations. “The starting point is to focus on scientific and environmental issues,” he said. “There may be discussions at the high political level, in the UN Security Council or other venues, of the political issues.” But water cooperation is, of course, a “political” issue. Witness the Nile Basin and an agreement signed by seven countries but not by Egypt or Sudan. Can UNESCO solve this? The Security Council seems unlikely to get involved on the Nile, much less the Uzbek – Tajik conflict. Inner City Press began by thanking the panelists on behalf of the Free UN Coalition for Access. Also on the panel was Hungary’s Permanent Representative Csaba Korosi, who told Inner City Press that “we as member states cannot decide on behalf of other member states to sort out their bilateral problems.” But that is precisely what the Security Council under Chapter VII of the UN Charter purports to do. Sudan, North Korea, Eritrea and others would like what Csaba Korosi said to be true. But it is not. Csaba Korosi went on to say that the International Year of Water Cooperation is also “to raise awareness of solutions” and is about the “SDGs and the post 2015 development agenda.” But isn’t everything? Still, his answer at least acknowledged that these are political problems, and not only scientific. Now who will solve them? Watch this site. ### |
|
The solution to Gaza is – Back to Syria! Says Tariq Alhomayed of Asharq Alawsat published in London. Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on November 20th, 2012 The solution to Gaza is back to Syria! says Tariq Alhomayed of Asharq Alawsat based in London, November 17, 2012 Unfortunately, there is now a race between the wars in our region, which means, every war serves to overshadow another war. In other words, these wars are nothing more than a headlong rush. Therefore, what is happening in Gaza now is an escape forwards, especially in the hope of [Syrian President] Assad, or at least ensures that the costs to topple him, will be higher for all. The greatest architect of such wars is Iran, for instance by means of unmanned drone Ayoub and the countless attempts on the Sinai Peninsula. Since the front line in the Golan Heights is not moving fast enough for Assad and Iran. they have chosen to move to the the Gaza strip, since it can explode in flames much quicker and will also be easier for Israel to react. For Israel, the Gaza Strip is like a punching bag that can be used for training and muscle building, and if succeeded they would kill several birds in one shot. In Gaza, Tel Aviv is able to crush Hamas and expose Egypt and Mursi who will, in any case, become the biggest loser of this fight, no matter what he does. — If Mursi wins politically, he loses his popularity and vice-versa – if the Egyptian President fails to achieve any political wonder that shows his cleverness. — However, he does not really have a choice. As for Israel, an attack on the Gaza Strip is a strong message to Assad and it supports Iran, especially if it should come to an Israeli attack on Iran. Also, an enlarged attack on the Gaza Strip enhances the chances of Netanyahu in the upcoming elections. But what about Syria? Well, the best solution for the war – or the air strikes – to end the Gaza Strip, is to return to the topic of Syria. After all, those responsible for the downing of the homemade rockets from Gaza are fully aware that there is no power balance. The sole purpose was to save Assad, whose days are numbered, his successor is already waiting around the corner for him! It is also a war to distract the Arab actors – and we have seen today, how they outdo each other. The Arabs cannot therefore present a fundamental question: Who ignited the Gaza front? And why now? This is an essential issue, especially since [Hezbollah leader] Hassan Nasrallah calls the Arabs to put pressure on the U.S. to put an end to the aggression. Why does Nasrallah not demand the backers of Iran in the Gaza Strip to stop plunging Gaza into the unknown? Why has he and Iran not demanded from Assad to end the violence against the Syrian people? It is all about outdoing each other, and everybody is involved. What I am saying is: Who knows what will happen? The spirits could quickly turn against the sorcerer’s apprentice: If the Palestinian armed groups in Gaza, including Hamas, do not want to continue to fight because they cannot or if Israel does not want to continue the aggression, because it believes much was achieved already on various levels. As for Egypt’s Mursi, he is not n the position to solve that problem, however this is what the the international community wants. Therefore, the best way to leave Gaza as soon as possible, is to turn back to Syria, since it is a spark which was ignited by Assad. The spirits should turn against the sorcerer’s apprentice, especially since everyone is already convinced of the threat posed by the Assad regime, and the need to overthrow it. The solution to Gaza is the return to Syria, and the acceleration of the fall of the criminal regime of the tyrant of Damascus. =========================================================
We picked this up in German and there it was as follows:
Die Lösung für Gaza – zurück zu Syrien! Von Tariq Alhomayed, asharq alawsat, 17.11.12 Unglücklicherweise gibt es in unserer Region mittlerweile so etwas wie ein Wettrennen der Kriege, das heißt, jeder Krieg dient dazu, einen anderen zu überdecken. Mit anderen Worten sind diese Kriege nichts anderes als eine Flucht nach vorn. Daher ist auch das, was gerade im Gazastreifen passiert, eine Flucht nach vorn, vor allem in der Hoffnung, [den syrischen Präsidenten] Assad zu retten oder zumindest sicherzustellen, dass die Kosten dafür, ihn zu stürzen, für alle höher sein werden. Der größte Architekt solcher Kriege ist der Iran, so etwa mittels der unbemannten Ayoub-Drohne und der ungezählten Versuche auf der Halbinsel Sinai. Als die Front in den Golanhöhen sich für Assad und den Iran nicht schnell genug bewegte, haben sie sich an die Gaza-Front gehalten, da diese viel schneller in Flammen gesetzt werden kann, weil das auch für Israel einfacher ist. Für Israel ist der Gazastreifen wie ein Sandsack, den man für Training und zum Muskelaufbau nutzen kann, während durch einen Erfolg im Gazastreifen mehrere Fliegen mit einer Klappe geschlagen würden. Im Gazastreifen ist Tel Aviv in der Lage, die Hamas zu zerschlagen und Ägypten und Mursi bloßzustellen, der in jedem Fall der größte Verlierer dieses Kampfes sein wird, egal, was er tut. Denn wenn Mursi politisch siegt, verliert er seine Popularität und umgekehrt – falls dem ägyptischen Präsidenten nicht irgendein politisches Wunder gelingt, dass seine Cleverness zeigt. Doch er hat nicht wirklich eine Wahl. Was Israel betrifft, so ist ein Angriff auf den Gazastreifen eine starke Botschaft an Assad und stutzt dem Iran die Flügel, vor allem, wenn es zu einem israelischen Angriff auf den Iran kommen sollte. Vor allem anderen vergrößert ein Angriff auf den Gazastreifen die Chancen Netanyahus bei den anstehenden Wahlen. Was ist nun aber mit Syrien? Nun, die beste Lösung dafür, den Krieg – oder die Luftangriffe – im Gazastreifen zu beenden, ist es, zum Thema Syrien zurückzukehren. Denn wer immer auch für den Abschuss der selbstgemachten Raketen aus dem Gazastreifen verantwortlich ist, war sich dessen vollkommen bewusst, dass es kein Gleichgewicht gibt. Der einzige Zweck war, Assad zu retten, dessen Tage gezählt sind; seine Absetzung wartet schon um die Ecke auf ihn! Es ist auch ein Krieg, der die arabischen Akteure ablenken soll – und wir haben heute gesehen, wie sie einander überbieten. Die Araber konnten daher eine fundamentale Frage nicht stellen, die da heißt: Wer hat die Gaza-Front angezündet? Und warum jetzt? Dies ist eine essentielle Frage, vor allem, da [Hisbollah-Chef] Hassan Nasrallah die Araber dazu aufruft, Druck auf die USA auszuüben, um der Aggression ein Ende zu setzen. Warum also verlangt Nasrallah nicht von den Hintermännern des Iran im Gazastreifen, damit aufzuhören, den Gazastreifen ins Ungewisse zu stürzen? Warum haben er und der Iran nicht von Assad verlangt, die Gewalt gegen das syrische Volk zu beenden? Es geht hier nur darum, einander zu überbieten, und alle machen mit. Was ich sagen möchte, ist: Wer weiß schon, was passieren wird? Die Geister könnten sich schnell gegen den Zauberlehrling richten: Wenn die bewaffneten palästinensischen Gruppen im Gazastreifen, einschließlich der Hamas, nicht weiter kämpfen wollen, weil sie es nicht können; wenn Israel seine Aggression nicht weiter fortsetzen möchte, weil es glaubt, dass es schon viel erreicht hat, und das auf verschiedenen Ebenen. Und was das Ägypten Mursis betrifft, will oder kann es diese Krise nicht ertragen, noch möchte die internationale Gemeinschaft das. Daher ist der beste Weg so schnell wie möglich Gaza zu verlassen und sich Syrien zuzuwenden, da das Feuer aus und in Gaza das Ergebnis eines Funkens ist, der von Assad entzündet wurde. Nun mögen sich also die selbstgerufenen Geister gegen den Zauberlehrling wenden, besonders, da ohnehin alle von der Bedrohung überzeugt sind, die das Assad-Regime darstellt und von der Notwendigkeit, es zu stürzen. Die Lösung für den Gazastreifen ist die Rückkehr nach Syrien und die Beschleunigung des Sturzes des kriminellen Regimes des Tyrannen von Damaskus. Der Autor ist Herausgeber der in London erscheinenden Zeitung „asharq alawsat“. ===================================================================================== Asharq Al-Awsat Asharq Al-Awsat is the world’s premier pan-Arab daily newspaper, Printed simultaneously on four continents in 14 cities. Asharq Al-Awsat was the first Arabic daily newspaper to execute satellite transmission for simultaneous printing in a number of major cities worldwide, and is currently the only newspaper to own the Arabic copyright of renowned international syndicates; The Washington Post, USA Today and global viewpoint. Progressive and comprehensive, Asharq Al-Awsat is the preferred daily Arab- language newspaper, with its readership penetrating all socio-economic groups. Famous for conducting in-depth interviews with prominent and influential personalities alike, Asharq Al-Awsat’s news team provide their world wide readers with objective and impartial news coverage, thus cementing the journalistic integrity of the newspaper. Because of its unrivaled style Asharq Al-Awsat continues to out perform every regional or local Arabic daily newspaper, and this success is attributed to its dedicated and experienced team of skilled journalists, editors and columnists combining editorial talent, professionalism, years of journalistic knowledge and the motivation for news reporting. Email: webmaster@asharq-e.com
Postal address: Arab Press House, 184 High Holborn, London WC1V 7AP Tel: +44 207 831 8181 Fax: +44 207 831 2310 =====================================================
Going to the English postings of „asharq alawsat“ we picked up later the additional article by the same author – that amazes us.
In effect this second article expresses clearly the idea that the author thinks Israel is trying to back now al Assad as it thinks it benefits from the Middle East chaos that the Arab create in effect by themselves. The author is thus not a friend of Israel as the first article seems to imply.
The intricacies of the Middle East intrigue shall never end wondering us. ——
Israel trying to save al-Assad!
13/11/2012By Tariq Alhomayed
What is now clear from the Israeli military response – even if this is a limited one – against the al-Assad forces in the Golan Heights is that Israel is trying to save Bashar al-Assad and is working to drown the region in an ongoing state of chaos. This is in order to complicate the Syrian crisis, which in turn would prevent critical decisions being taken to hasten the toppling of the tyrant of Damascus.
Since the outbreak of the Syrian revolution, we have seen the possible scenarios regarding al-Assad’s response – which are completely expected and contain nothing new – including setting fire to Lebanon, drowning Turkey in refugees, attempting to exploit Turkey’s Alawite community, as well as embroiling Jordan in the crisis and drowning it in refugees, dragging Iraq into the crisis via the gateway of sectarianism, and before all else, playing the sectarian card in Syria itself. However last but not least, we now see al-Assad involving Israel. Of course, it is the al-Assad regime that is responsible for all this; it tried to provoke Turkey but failed, in the knowledge that if the Turkish army took action and reached the heart of Damascus it would find Arab support and cover. Al-Assad tried, and continues to try, to provoke Jordan, but Amman, for its part, continues to practice self-restraint. Al-Assad did what he did in Lebanon, whilst Beirut remains steadfast, however what is strange is that with the first al-Assad provocation towards Israel, Tel Aviv took action and responded! We describe this as “strange” because what al-Assad has done recently in the Golan Heights – which have been quiet for nearly 4 decades – is precisely what Saddam Hussein did during the occupation of Kuwait. He launched “Scud” missiles at Israel in order to drag it into the crisis and “shuffle” the cards. At the time, then US President George Bush Senior confronted Israel and obliged it to exhibit self-restraint and not involve itself in the crisis surrounding the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait. Today, al-Assad is doing the same thing with Israel, and along the same line as Saddam Hussein. The issue does not require an abundance of intelligence to realize that al-Assad is trying to escape forward. In this case, why is Israel getting involved now and trying to save al-Assad by serving his interests? Why now, when we are witnessing quick and dramatic progress in the Syrian file, as well as military advancement in Damascus and political development at the level of the Syrian opposition which is now united, not to mention the positive international position towards this unity, which signals that al-Assad’s days are truly numbered? We say that this is “strange” because it is bizarre that al-Assad’s allies in this crisis should include Iran, Hezbollah and Israel! Of course, each party has their own motives, however these are destructive motivates that demonstrate the threat this tripartite represents to our region, not to mention al-Assad himself! Al-Assad wants to drown the entire region in chaos; whilst Tel Aviv would have no objection in seeing the Syrian crisis last for decades and set fire to the entire encompassing region. Israel has no problem with Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon drowning in chaos, for the weaker Arab states become, the stronger Israel gets. This is what Tel Aviv wants, even with regards to Egypt. For so long as we Arabs our facing problems we have created with our own hands, Israel will not hesitate to pour fuel on the fire. Therefore, it is imperative for there to be an effective diplomatic Arab stances towards the Israeli actions, as well as on the part of the international community, particularly the US and Britain. This is in order to see a similar position taken as that taken by George Bush Senior towards Israel during the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait. Israel must not be allowed to “shuffle” the cards of the Syrian revolution and allow al-Assad the opportunity to extend the life of his regime whose collapse is inevitable. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on November 11th, 2012 Drylands, Deserts and Desertification ![]() The International Conference on Drylands, Deserts and Desertification (DDD) has emerged as an important global gathering of scientists, field workers, industry, government, CSOs, international development aid agencies and other stakeholders from over 60 countries concerned about land degradation in the drylands, and their sustainable use and development.
The program combines plenary lectures and panels, parallel sessions, workshops, field trips and social events. The four day conference provides an opportunity for a diverse group of experts, policy makers and land managers to consider a range of theoretical and practical issues associated with combating desertification and living sustainably in the drylands.
The 4th DDD conference will focus on the outcome of Rio+20 (UN Conference on Sustainable Development – UNCSD) and consider the science required for implementing the UNCSD recommendations relevant to drylands and desertification. Local case studies will be highlighted alongside success stories from around the world with an emphasis on indicators of progress. Additional sessions will be held considering a broad range of topics associated with sustainable living in the drylands and means to address desertification, as well as achieving the target of zero net rate of land degradation.
### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on May 31st, 2012 UN Agencies, Russian Federation Hold Civic Forum for Sustainable Development.The first Civic Forum for Sustainable Development addressed sustainable development issues in the Russian Federation and Central Asia, conserving natural resources for future generations while meeting the needs of the current generation, and the roles of business, civil society and government in sustainable development. The meeting was organized as a contribution to the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD, or Rio+20) process. The Forum, which took place on 25 May 2012, in Moscow, Russian Federation, was convened by the Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation, the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), and UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF), among other UN agencies. It brought together over 100 participants from civil society, business and government from seven countries. Three reports were presented at the Forum: the Institute for Sustainable Development’s report “Towards a Green Economy in Russia;” the UN interagency report “From Transition to Transformation: Sustainable and Inclusive Development in Europe and Central Asia;” and UNEP’s Green Economy report. The two UN reports were formally launched in Russian at the Forum. “Towards a Green Economy in Russia,” presented by Vladimir Zakharov, Institute for Sustainable Development, addresses sustainable development issues in Russia. “From Transition to Transformation” examines challenges in former Soviet republics to integrate policy processes to achieve social equity, environmental protection and economic growth. It calls for phasing out fossil fuel subsidies, investing in green jobs and health, and establishing social protection floors. [Publication: From Transition to Transformation: Sustainable and Inclusive Development in Europe and Central Asia] [Publication: Green Economy] [UNEP Press Release] [UNICEF Press Release] ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on February 19th, 2012 ![]() Foto: Dragan Tatic/HBF
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon with Austrian President Heinz Fischer and Defense Minister Norbert Darabos in the Austrian President’s working room.
————————————————–
Actually, the Ban Ki-moon visit to Vienna was a very serious event – both for the UN and for Austria - but you would not know this by reading the Austrian papers. All what was reflected in these papers was the OPERA BALL where the UN Secretary-General and his wife Lady Ban Soon-taek were guests of the Austrian President Heinz Fischer and his wife Margit. ( Ban Ki-moon met Yoo Soon-taek in 1962 when they were both high school students. Ban was 18 years old, and Yoo Soon-taek was his secondary school’s student council president. Ban Ki-moon married Yoo Soon-taek in 1971. )
Mr. Ban was South Korea’s Ambassador to Vienna in 1998 and his career was linked with Austria since then.
In 1980 Ban became director of the United Nations’ International Organizations and Treaties Bureau, headquartered in Seoul. In 1992, he became Vice Chairman of the South-North Joint Nuclear Control Commission, following the adoption by South and North Korea of the Joint Declaration of the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. He was appointed National Security Advisor to the President in 1996. Much of this had to do with the nuclear arms subject.
Following the nuclear thread, Mr. Ban was appointed Ambassador to Austria and Slovenia in 1998, and a year later he was also elected as Chairman of the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO PrepCom) at the UN in Vienna. During the negotiations, in what Ban considers the biggest blunder of his career, he included in a public letter a positive statement about the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2001, not long after the United States had decided to abandon the treaty. To avoid anger from the United States, Ban was fired by President Kim Dae-jung, who also issued a public apology for Ban’s statement.[1] Ban was unemployed thus the only time in his career and was expecting to receive an assignment to work in a remote and unimportant embassy.[1] In 2001, during the 56th Session of the United- Nations General Assembly, the Republic of Korea held the rotating presidency of the General Assembly and Ban’s career was saved as he was selected to be the chief of staff to his mentor who became then UN general assembly president - Han Seung-soo – Foreign Minister of South Korea and future Prime Minister. In 2003, incoming president Roh Moo-hyun selected Ban as one of his foreign policy advisors. { this from – Warren Hoge (2006-12-09). “For New U.N. Chief, a Past Misstep Leads to Opportunity”. The New York Times. } {we posted on Han Seung-soo several times – see please http://www.sustainabilitank.info/?s=Han+Seung-soo and specifically the book review – www.sustainabilitank.info/2007/10… Mr. Tibor Toth is the Executive Director of CTBTO and the Swedish Foreign Minister(yes – this time it is not a speling mistake – it is Australians not Austrians)
In 2004, Ban replaced Yoon Young Kwan as foreign minister of South Korea under president Roh Moo-hyun, and his popularity in Korea saw an upturn when talks began with North Korea. Ban became actively involved in issues relating to inter-Korean relationships. In September 2005, as Foreign Minister, he played a leading role in the diplomatic efforts to adopt the Joint Statement on resolving the North Korean nuclear issue at the Fourth Round of the Six-party talks held in Beijing. We wrote about this in -
Mr. Ban was the Foreign Minister of the Republic of Korea from January 2004 to November 2006. In February 2006, he began to campaign for the office of Secretary-General. Ban was initially considered to be a long shot for the office. As foreign minister of South Korea, however, he was able to travel to all of the countries that were members of the United Nations Security Council, a maneuver that turned him into the front runner. On 13 October 2006, he was elected to be the eighth Secretary-General by the United Nations General Assembly by beating Mr. Shashi Tharoor from India, the in-house Under-Secretary General in charge of the UN Communications and Information Services, and officially succeeded Kofi Annan on 1 January 2007. Ban has led several major reforms regarding peacekeeping and UN employment practices. Diplomatically, Ban has taken particularly strong views on Darfur, where he helped persuade Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir to allow peacekeeping troops to enter Sudan; and on global warming, pressing the issue repeatedly with former U.S. President George W. Bush. Ban has received strong criticism from OIOS, the UN internal audit unit, stating that the secretariat, under Ban’s leadership, is “drifting into irrelevance”. In 2011, Ban ran unopposed for a second term as Secretary-General. On 21 June 2011, he was unanimously re-elected by the General Assembly and therefore will continue to serve until 31 December 2016. Austria, in its turn at the Security Council, was a strong backer of its old friend Mr. Ban. As Austria is an imporant contributor to UN military deployment in the Middle East, and as host to UN agencies working on Nuclear power and on nuclear non-proliferation, it is only natural to continue a close relationship with Mr. Ban. Further, as host to the largest UN presence outside New York, Austria is always ready to bring to Vienna newly established UN organizations and task forces – the more the better. We already posted the “verbatim of the open interaction between Austria and this visit of the UNSG, now we want to say that it is totally disingenious to say that the main reason of the UNSG visit to Vienna was the Opera Ball where he had to compete for attention with the strange visitors that were brought to the Ball by builder Richard Luegner. Actually, the Vienna trip by the UN was caused by Austria taking over more of the UN focal interaction with the Arab world. There were several activities that went on in Vienna parallel this week: On one track there was the 15 year celebration of the preparation for the CTBTO Prepcom and bi-lateral discussions on the way hence that includes the opening of the Vienna office for disarmament (UNODA). Hungarian Mr. Tibor Toth is the Executive Director of CBTBO, and Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt came for this meeting. Link to press release on UNIS website: www.unis.unvienna.org/unis/pressrels/2012/unissgsm320.html Another track deals with the eventual disengagement from the war in Afghanistan and the fight against the opium trade based in Afghanistan. Mr. Ruslan Kazakbaev, Foreign Minister of the Kyrgyz Republic , came also to Vienna. The Nagorno-Karabakh peace process, Afghanistan and Central Asia were the topics the Secretary General of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, H.E. Mr. Lamberto Zannier, talked about with Mr. Ban. The Armenian Foreign minister was also in town. The third meeting of the Paris Pact partners meeting brings together Ministers and representatives from more than 55 countries as well as from international organizations and regional partners. The participants came to discuss problems related to the trafficking of opiates from Afghanistan and look at ways to block financial flows from the illicit drug trade, prevent diversion of precursor chemicals needed to produce heroin, reduce drug abuse and how regional initiatives can help combat drugs from Afghanistan. But the main reason for this trip was to have a serious of bilateral meetings that dealt with the events in Syria. This was really a Syria in Vienna series with the Foreign Ministers of Russia and France in town. It seems that nobody wants at this moment to see a regime change in Syria despite the fiery talk of some. There is clearly a shrinking away from the reality that the devil unknown might be worse then the killing devil in the Assad family. Who are the Islamists that vie for power – will the pro-Iranians or the pro-Saudis win? It is not a Shi’a-Sunni confrontation – but rather a conflict of interest between the Saudis, Iranians,Turks, and Russians. Is it possible that Russia actually looks after Christian interests in a bifurcated Muslim world. Is secular Bashar al-Assad still the best there is? With the Austrians sitting on the Golan Heights, Austria is very much involved – the security of their military is part of the equation and the interests of the Israelis, in view of confrontation with Iran, is also something to be taken into account. Meeting Mr. Lavrov who just got back from Damascus, and Mr. Alain Juppe who flew in from Paris and seemingly other foreign ministers that came to discuss the situation – turned the event into a Syria event and Ausatria might now look at it offering Vienna for folllow-ups to other Middle East future events as well. Let us see what the Australians (yes, this is not a spelling mistake – it is indeed Australians not Austrians) what do they have to tell us: “The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay said earlier this week “crimes against humanity are likely to have been committed” in Syria since the crackdown began. According to the United Nations, more than 5400 people have been killed, while thousands are missing and tens of thousands more have fled the country. Monitoring groups have put the number of dead at more than 6000. “We might all agree on a very short-term goal; the stopping of massacres,” French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe told a press conference after talks in Vienna with Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov. “We must do everything possible to bring an end to the violence and to allow large-scale humanitarian aid to reach the Syrian population.” But Juppe did not offer much hope that Russia would be on board. He said Lavrov had declined to comment on France’s call for “humanitarian corridors” to allow aid to reach the Syrian population. “There was no specific discussion of the French initiative. From what they said, they have nothing specific at this time,” Russia’s deputy foreign minister Gennady Gatilov told Interfax news agency. “We want to work with the Arab League to implement its plan for political transition,” Juppe said, referring to proposals for a transfer of power from Assad to the vice-president and the creation of a coalition government. Juppe also said France was ready to back the idea of a UN special envoy to Syria.” “If Ban Ki-moon goes that way, we will back him,” he said. Read more on this: www.smh.com.au/world/un-chief-urges-one-voice-on-syria-20120217-1tcnv.html#ixzz1mrCsbAcC – and above tells us that the UNSG visit to Vienna will bring further world attention to Vienna as gateway to the Middle East. Will Vienna host meetings between the Israelis and Palestinians in the not too distant future?
### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on January 11th, 2012 The scare tactics – The pundits say: “In a matter of hours of the Strait of Hormuz being shut down, prices would increase anywhere from $25 to $30 a barrel, after 72 hours, they foresee oil prices spiking to $150 very quickly, and rising much faster from there. From there, prices could climb to $180… even $200.
But what is the likelihood of this scenario? ——————— Tomgram: Michael Klare, Energy Wars 2012
Posted by Michael Klare at 9:37am, January 10, 2012.
Last week, the president made a rare appearance at the Pentagon to unveil a new strategic plan for U.S. military policy (and so spending) over the next decade. Let’s leave the specifics to a future TomDispatch post and focus instead on a historical footnote: Obama was evidently the first president to offer remarks from a podium in the Pentagon press room. He made the point himself — “I understand this is the first time a president has done this. It’s a pretty nice room. (Laughter)” — and it was duly noted in the media. Yet no one thought to make anything of it, even though it tells us so much about our American world. After all, when was the last time the president appeared at a podium at the Environmental Protection Agency to announce a 10-year plan for a “leaner, meaner” approach to the environment, or at the Education Department to outline the next decade of blue-skies thinking (and spending) for giving our children a leg-up in a competitive world? Or how about at a State Department podium to describe future planning for a more peaceable planet more peaceably attained? Unfortunately, you can’t remember such moments and neither can America’s reporters, because they just aren’t part of Washington life. And strangest of all, no one finds this the tiniest bit odd or worth commenting on. Over the last decade, this country has been so strikingly militarized that no one can imagine 10 years of serious government planning or investment not connected to the military or the national security state. It’s a dangerous world out there — so we’re regularly told by officials who don’t mention that no military is built to handle the scariest things around. War and the sinews of war are now our business and the U.S. military is our go-to outfit of choice for anything from humanitarian action to diplomacy (even though that same military can’t do the one thing it’s theoretically built to do: win a modern war). And if you don’t believe me that the militarization of this country is a process far gone, check out the last pages of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s recent piece, “America’s Pacific Century,” in Foreign Policy magazine. Then close your eyes and tell me that it wasn’t written by a secretary of defense, rather than a secretary of state — right down to the details about the “littoral combat ships” we’re planning to deploy to Singapore and the “greater American military presence” in Australia. Of course, the irony of this American moment is that the Republicans, those supposed advocates of “small government,” are the greatest fans we have of the ever increasing oppressive powers of the biggest of governments. In recent years, have they seen a single enhanced power they didn’t put their stamp of approval on or enhance further? Predictably, no sooner did the president’s Pentagon press briefing end than assorted Republicans began attacking Obama and his relatively modest Pentagon plan for reshuffling military funds — from House Armed Services Committee Chairman Howard P. “Buck” McKeon (“a lead from behind strategy for a left-behind America”) and Senator John McCain (“greatest peril”) to presidential candidate Mitt Romney (“inexcusable, unthinkable”) — as if it were a program for unilateral disarmament. So when the U.S. faces a problem in the world — say, keeping the energy flowing on this planet — the first thing that’s done is to militarize the problem. It’s the only way Washington now knows how to think. As Michael Klare — whose upcoming book The Race for What’s Left: The Global Scramble for the World’s Last Resources will certainly be a must-read of the season — makes clear, a further militarization of oil and gas policy is underway with an eye tothe Pacific, and we have another anxious year on the horizon. (To catch Timothy MacBain’s latest Tomcast audio interview in which Klare discusses the crisis in the Strait of Hormuz, click here, or download it to your iPod here.) Tom
### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on October 9th, 2011
This major conference will be attended by some 5,000 people, including the 194 Parties to the Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD). There are also a large number of other events taking place involving civil society and other organizations. It comes just four weeks after the United Nations General Assembly special session in New York, where more than 100 heads of states, heads of government or heads of delegation addressed the issues of desertification land degradation and drought (DLDD) in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication. This sent a clear message about the global threat from desertification, land degradation and drought. World leaders committed to increased international cooperation to combat desertification at all levels. Interesting that the meeting was set up in the home state of he UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. This may get us to think that no more appropriate location was found because the places where aridity is the familiar state of affairs just do not have trust in the UN that it will eventually help them. Let us hope thus that the States that are not coursed with aridity will be ready to open their purses to help – not just to set up conferences that help their tourism by filling empty hotels. The announcement also says that “There will also be the launch of new initiatives which will be of particular interest to news outlets.” This gets us to think that the approach taken by the UN is to entice news outlets rather then governments and businesses that could help. BUT THEN – THE UN MAIN OFFICE IN NEW YORK – THE PRESENT SECRETARIAT’S DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INFORMATION – CHASES AWAY THE MOST APPROPRIATE NEWS OUTLETS – THOSE INTERESTED IN SUSTAINABILITY – UNDER A UN WAY – UNDER UNSG BAN KI-MOON – OF DECIDING WHAT IS PRESS – THAT SEES IN SUSTAINABILITY AN ISSUE APPROPRIATE FOR NGOs AND NOT AS MEDIA. So, this sort of information disseminators can come with the NGOs but will not have access to what the appropriate professional agency would like to pass on to media. Oh Well – this is the UN to you!
### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on September 24th, 2011 NEW TRANSPORT AND ENERGY FORUMS NEEDED IN CENTRAL ASIA, TURKMENISTAN TELLS UN Turkmenistan’s President called for the creation of new mechanisms for Central Asian countries to cooperate on energy and transportation during a speech to the General Assembly’s annual general debate in New York today. “I believe there has come the time to start the development of concrete measures on the settlement of energy transportation issues,” Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov said, recommending the establishment of a new forum for Member States to cooperate in this area. Mr. Berdimuhamedov also pointed to transport as a crucial component to the region’s sustainable development and called for UN support to study and expand transit and transport opportunities among the countries in the Caspian and Black Sea basins, Central Asia, and the Middle East. “Over the years, our country together with partners in the region is actively working on the implementation of major projects on optimization of traffic flow in the Eurasian space. We believe this is a very promising area, given the huge potential of the North-South and East-West corridors,” he said. He also spoke of Turkmenistan’s concern for the environment of the Caspian Sea, and proposed hosting the Caspian Environment Forum in Ashgabat, the country’s capital. “We are convinced of the need to give specific content to international efforts to preserve unique natural resources of the Caspian Sea. In this regard, we propose to organize the Caspian Environment Forum as a permanent body to deal with environmental issues in the Caspian basin, as well as to make appropriate proposals and recommendations.” ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on September 8th, 2011 With Turkey so much in the news – mainly in its attempt at becoming more Arab then the Arabs and reseting itself as the leader of the Middle East by picking up the cause of the Palestinians and doing everything possible in order to annoy the Israelis, here comes a very different set of news – Turkey has become the ultimate test case for Austria – sort of who is better suited to play in the European Soccer games championship. Austria needed a win in order to have a chance to survive – in effect a win by two goals – to be accurate. This in a group of States, in the Qualifying games – that included also Germany and Belgium, but also Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan – call it a situation where three members of the EU had been accidentally paired with three Muslim countries on the outskirts of Europe. The game was scheduled for September 6, 2011, 20:30 or 8:30 PM, at the largest stadium in Austria -that seats 53.000 people. The old, but rather newish looking Ernst Happel Stadium was built between 1929 and 1931 for the second Workers’ Olympiad to the design of German architect Otto Ernst Schweizer. It was called the Prater Stadion until 1992, sometimes also called Wiener Stadion. It is located in Leopoldstadt, the 2nd district of Vienna. The stadium was renamed in honor of Ernst Happel following his death in 1992. Ernst Franz Hermann Happel (29 November 1925 – 14 November 1992) was Austrian – football-player and coach. Ernst Happel is regarded as one of the most successful football team-managers ever, winning both league and domestic cup titles in the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and Austria as well as winning the European Cup twice, the first in 1970 and the second in1983, and a runners-up medal at the 1978 FIFA World Cup. He is the first of three managers to have won the European Cup with 2 different clubs, Ottmar Hitzfeld and Jose Mourinho being the other two. Austria is now desperately looking for a manager that could get close to Happel. These days Austria suffers from manager-collapse and it showed in the games. I sensed that this will not be just a football game – it really had political implications – so I decided to attend in order to get a sniff at the atmosphere these days – how it is to be a Turkish guest-team in an Austria where there is a large Turkish minority that roots naturally for their country of origin, while pushing for their own position of new Austrians and for Turkey’s acceptance into the EU, while it is known that there is probably a majority in Austria that neither would like to see Turkey in the EU nor like the increase in immigration from Turkey to the EU – this latter being a basic cause for the slow progress in the steps the EU handles this Turkey problem. I made my move too late – the Stadium was sold out but two well placed gentlemen that I happened to meet – Mr. Walter Weise, Manager of the Sport-facilities of the city of Vienna – that includes the management of the Stadium – and Mr. Peter Klinglmueller, the Head of all the Press and Public Relations of the Austrian Football Association (OEFB), to whom I was introduced by the first gentleman, extended a courtesy ticket to me when I managed to convince them that the evening has real value to me, though I am no professional football reporter. I came to the Stadium about 6:30 PM and the U-train was all in red – that is people wrapped in the Turkish flag – some with funny hats – all red&white – some with noise making trumpets. When I got off – I saw one flag with a man drawn on it that looked like a Kazakh. I asked – and was told that was Kemal Ataturk. Interesting as he is no more the real favorite of the present government of Turkey. He was a secular dictator while the present government is moving more and more to the Islamic religion. When I sat in my seat in Section B, At 7:00 PM, the Turkish team came out to show itself to the crowd that in my corner – a very Turkish corner, was received by the youth with call “Giul” which I assume meant “Goal.” The same Turkish_Austrians in the stands did actually boo when the Austrian team showed up. When it came to playing the National anthems – the Turkish first, the older kids had to tell the younger brothers or cousins to continue to stand up and clap hands at the end. The pro-Turkish partisanship seemed to have taken hold of the younger and less experienced kids. Think for a moment – while the Turkish side showed a team with all on it having Turkish names, the Austrians had also one Turk on their team – EKREM DAG – who used to play for Besiktas, Istambul. The Austrians also had on their team an Austrian player who plays now for Munich – but was the best player on the field at this game - David Olatukunbo Alaba – born in Austria but clearly of West African parentage. I mention this as clear indication that Austria has overcome some of the personal background problems that are capable to create disunity. I watched the advertisements along the Stadium. They were basically from the companies you would expect: Hyundai, Generali, Raiffeisen Bank (only one bank is my bank), Burgenland for tourism, the arches of McDonald without the name and saying “I’m loving it,” the Kronen Zeitung, Toto, Puma, The City of Vienna etc., but also one single new company – GAZI – which is a Turkish-German company that makes the best Yogurt and cheese. I love it indeed – only that there is not enough chains that carry their products. I bought their yogurt t at Penny’s. On the negative side of the experience, I must mention just that some people managed to smuggle in firecrackers they used to make noise in an attempt to encourage the Turkish team. Still during the first half – it became obvious that both teams were not at their best – so the 0-0 final score was no surprise – but it had the effect that the Turkish team loved. This indecision actually was a decision – it hopelessly eliminated Austria from contention to get the second place and the chance to move on to the UEFA EURO games. It left two contenders for that spot – Turkey and Belgium, but looking up the remaining games, it seems to us that Turkey will be the eventual #2 See please the following: The tough upcoming games Turkey still has to play is with Germany on October 7, 2011 and Belgium still has to play Germany on October 11, 2011. These calculations leave in our opinion Turkey with the advantage to qualify for the second spot in group A for the UEFA EURO 2012 games. So this is the way for Turkey to show they are a power in Europe – at least so far as soccer goes. AHEAD OF THESE LAST TWO GAMES – THE STANDS ARE AS FOLLOWS AND WE BELIEVE THAT THE FINAL ORDER WILL BE THE SAME AS TODAY: Germany 21 7 0 0 22 3
-------------------------------------------------------------
Turkey 14 4 2 2 11 8
-------------------------------------------------------------
Belgium 11 3 3 2 16 11
Austria 8 2 2 3 10 10
Azerbaijan 7 2 1 5 9 21
Kazakhstan 3 1 0 7 5 20
Coming 2012 - Turkey will thus play in the European tournament - Belgium and Austria will stay out. On the other hand, Turkey will play in the Middle East political stakes, and it is highly possible that most of Europe will be out there. So why did we say that this was a political game? Turkey got in soccer what it might not get in geopolitics - or perhaps the soccer will also show the way for how Europe might decide to link to Turkey in their arena where they play in the Islamic World. We wait to see which will be it. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 21st, 2011 Summer days in Vienna and life is fun – so former Vice Chancellor from the OEVP and Women’s Minister, Member of the Parliament, Ms. Maria Rauch-Kallat decided that time has come to change the National Anthem which in one of its lines says “Homeland of Great Sons” – what about daughters, she asked? Surely she was not the first to asks this, but always with so much else one has to worry about – nobody did stake out a position on this. Ms. Rauch-Kallat persisted and her party managed to get the Parliament vote and these days an honored singer Ms. Ildiko Raimondi has sung three variations on this theme: “Homeland Great Daughters, Sons” or “Homeland Great Daughters and Sons” or “Great Daughters, Great Sons.” The verdict is that when Ms. Raimondi sings it is all great no matter what she says – so now the debate will continue after the people will listen to the U-tube presentations. Why do we write about this? Because this sort of public discussion makes people not notice that Austria has extended a friendly hand to some not so nice regimes – just so that there is some benefit for Austria in oil terms while some other European Nations or the US may shun doing so at this time – and that is one of our main interests as our readers know. So what am I talking about? First there was the issue of Mr. Rakhat Aliyev former Ambassador of Kazakhstan and former son in law of Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nasarbajew. The accusation is that he was involved in the abduction, extortion, and the killing of two bank directors from Kazakhstan. This happened in 2008 but the bodies were found only May 2011. The families of those killed have an Austrian lawyer – Gabriel Lansky – and he asks how is it that Aliyev lived peacefully in Austria after his former father in law fired him. What are the personal problems between the two? Whom were the Austrians owing a favor In the meantime Aliyev moved out of reach to Malta – he says it is all fabricated against him. Then exploded the Lithuanian problem that pits now all three former Soviet Baltic Republic against Austria. It all started with a KGB murderer – Michail Golovatov – against whom was an international hold order, passing through the Vienna airport. He was correctly arrested but the Austrians did not wait to get the details of the order against him translated into German from the original – presumably Lithuanian – and let him continue to Russia. Lithuania, fellow members in the EU, withdrew their Ambassador from Vienna – the other two Baltic EU members – Latvia and Estonia are following same protest – but Austria’s Foreign Minister who is also Minister for Inter-European Affairs insists that the border people dealt correctly by not waiting to see the documents. Was this so that Austria avoids a confrontation with Russia, like it avoided confrontation with Kazakhstan in the previous case. Now comes a third case – a tour of two Sudanese Ministers - Ali Ahmed Karti, Federal Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Sudan and Yahia Hussain, State Minister for International Cooperation of the Republic of Sudan, that came to campaign for better relations with Austria after the split-of with South Sudan. The word oil was all over, and it is about the exports via Port Sudan. The problem that this was the wrong Sudan – it was the remaining North Sudan that has just lost to independence of South Sudan which has 60% of the oil and is much better advised to figure out its own pipeline to places like Djibouti, Mombasa, or some better located terminal in between. After all – South Sudan’s new allies will be to the East and West rather then to the North. Austria’s OEMV oil company will be in the running, like it is in relations with the States that were part of the former Soviet Union. Will Austria now run after the oil in complete disregard of who the partners are and what sort of behavior one can expect from them? Does Austria attribute importance to the concept of “Responsibility to Protect” – the all important R2P that asks States to act responsibly towards their own citizens? To top all of this, an opposition leader Heinz-Christian Strache, a follower of Joerg Haider in the Austrian Freedom Party (FPOE) sends another party official, David Lasar, to meet right now with a son of Gaddafi – with whom and with Gaddafi’s oil-money, that party has long standing relationships. The argument was that they try to bring about peace – we ask for whom? So, this is a little comment about weighty issues we see and do not like. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on June 28th, 2011 DRAFY – UNFINISHED ARTICLE. We remember the book RESET by Stephen Kinzer. We reviewed Stephen Kinzer’s ideas The US and the EU in the Middle East – the roles of Israel and Saudi Aeabia and the possibility of a completely new configuration in that region Overall, Kinzer defends the importance of America’s partnership with Turkey and Iran, despite Israel’s and Saudi Arabia’s possible dissatisfaction, and despite significant recent developments in the Middle East. “Reset: Iran, Turkey and America’s Future” consists of four parts, and the sections are entitled:For the people in spite of the people, Our name has not been an honored one, Very far away,and finally The door is so wide open. The book begins with a historical overview of Turkey’s and Iran’s democratization process. In the first part of the book, the author explains the adventure of Turkish and Iranian society’s westernization and the further political, economical and social reforms after the establishment of the Turkish Republic based on Mustafa Kemal Ataturk’s vision of a modern Turkey. He also addresses Morgan Shuster’s and Reza Pahlavi’s struggle against Russian and English influence in Iran. And Kinzer says, “President Mustafa Kemal and Reza Shah took over wretched and miserably poor countries. Our two articles of a year ago can be found via: www.sustainabilitank.info/?s=Step… and Stephen (Steve) Kinzer took his book on the Middle East to The Carnegie Council - Wednesday, July 21st, 2010
Much can be learned from reports of Ambassadors. They watch a country changing and stress to understand intentions. We went to listen to the Book presentation at the Austrian State Archives with hopes to also understand Turkey’s present RESET from North to South with the [pssible future RESET of US foreign policy in the Middle East. We thought that the opening of the Austrian Embassy to Rurkey in 1960 may help us understand what actually did go wrong with the Turkey – EU relationship.
Edited by: Ambassador Rudolf Agstner ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on June 9th, 2011
Chancellor Faymann (SPÖ) of Austria, the host of the Forum, stressed especially the importance of the Nabucco gas pipeline that goes through Turkey for gas originating in Central Asia. Austrian Foreign Minister Michael Spindelegger (ÖVP), who is in the middle of a spat with Turkey because of their rejection of an Austrian candidate for the post of Secretary General of the OSCE – former Foreign Minister, and member of the same party, Ms. Ursula Plassnik, – said that Europe and the Eurasian space would have much to offer each other. (Just watch here please that it goes in stages and it is not a smooth transition – do not expect miracles in the short term – this is our own comment – in the meantime the world will rather be interested in the region’s oil.) Chancellor Faymann stressed the need for “stable and secure energy supply” and praised the growing cooperation between Europe and the States in the Caucasus and Central Asia. He stressed the importance of the Austrian oil company – the OMV – for responsible planning the Nabucco gas pipeline to “stabilize the European gas supply, and relations between Europe and Central Asia and the Black Sea region, strengthened thereoff”. He was seconded on energy import by On Ukraine President Mykola Azarov who criticized the Russian energy policy. The energy dependence of Ukraine on Russia was “not good”, as the oil and gas prices, the Russian government-related utilities are not “what we consider to be optimal. Therefore Kiev cooperation projects with Azerbaijan and other countries have been addressed.” Austrian Federal President Hans Fischer spoke of the need for social impact of economic transformations in post-Soviet States. Spindelegger said that the Central Asian region will continue with its wealth of resources to a new focus of the global economy – Austria can offer to these countries innovative products, he said. “If we find ways to increase cooperation, the conference will have been successful.” Otunbayeva, who on her trip to Vienna also stopped in Budapest, expressed the hope that Central Asia in the future will get more attention in the West. She passed out in her speech, the political foundations for economic development. The downfall of the autocrat Kurmanbek Bakiyev in early 2010 had mapped out the current revolutions in the Arab world. “We could no longer afford the corrupt regime,” she said. CEOs and Muslim economists called on Europe to support the current upheavals in the region, but sounded caution. The Dubai economist Tarik Yousef L. lamented that Europe in recent years rehabilitated the Libyan regime of Muammar al-Gaddafi. He spoke of European “guilt” because of the slow reaction to the upheavals in Egypt and Tunisia that should help these countries now. From the Central Bank of Tunisia Mustapha Kamel Nabli – the governor – demanded above all, a closer cooperation with Europe in migration. Europe must assume a share of the costs incurred by the flow of refugees, he said. The Bahraini banker Khalid Abdullah-Janahi, said about Egypt that the Muslim Brotherhood will continue to take the central role. They would get from the upcoming legislative choice between 40 and 50 percent of the vote, he said. The Kazakh Vice Premier Yerbol Orynbayev and Turkmenistan’s Deputy Prime Minister Akylbek Japarov stressed the need for economic development “to solve their common problems” – such as in the fight against drug crime and poverty. “Poverty is a problem that not all states in the region are equally capable of solving” said Orynbayev. The Turkmenistan speaker Japarov spoke of his country’s economic aid for the unstable neighbors like Afghanistan. Turkmenistan Oil prices were discounted to them. “This contributes to the development of the country and thus to peace in the region,” said Japarov. Chancellor Faymann met on the margins of the WEF yesterday with six heads of state and government for bilateral talks. Emphasis during the discussions with the Heads of State of Hungary (Viktor Orban), Armenia (Tigran Sarkisian), Montenegro (Igor Luksic), Ukraine (Azarov) and Georgia (Nikoloz Gilauri) and with Otumbajewa, was the energy policy and EU issues. Faymann confirmed its rejection of the nuclear power policy and referred to his meeting with Ukrainian Prime Minister. “Premier Azarov has invited me to the Ukraine to show me the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster from today’s perspective may have been his words -” This has to be seen with my own eyes. “ ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on June 7th, 2011 The World Economic Forum on Europe and Central Asia will be held in Vienna, on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday June 7-9, 2011.
Above is the Vienna venue for the WEF meeting – the place will be surrounded by security forces to make it sure the place does not turn into a demonstrators haven. Vienna just survived attacks by German hooligans that came over to accompany the German soccer team playing the Austrians. Papers called them neo-Nazis making the Hitler salute. But those were just one segment of a possible barrage by protesters invoking financial reasons for disaffection with the EU, the US, and the results of government sponsored capitalism. Seattle comes to mind of what Vienna might look in a few days. So, Schengen or no Schengen Austria took note of Denmark closing its borders for immigration reasons and closed its borders as well for Global Economics reasons as per this conference. In the Europe of today – what this means is that vehicles at border crossings will form long lines and have delays with border police checking papers. Same at airports, train crossings and boat landings. What do you do with those crossing on foot on village roads? Oh well – solutions will be found for them too and the idea of a united Europe is out the window because of mutual mistrust. How do you decide that someone is unwanted? Do you check their tatoos or haircuts? Do you have a policy discussion with them or take the example from Turkey and look up past records that made them deny to former Austrian Foreign Minister Ursula Plassnik her job as head of the OSCE - Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. Will they let in UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon, if he decides to show up, considering his leniency on UN member States positions on Human Rights? He will have declared his running for reappointment to his position for a new term by the beginning of the week and might indeed find this conference as a good venue for a revisit. He was years ago Korea’s Ambassador to Vienna and has friendly relations to Austria. The Kronen Zeitung of Sunday June 5th carries two revealing pieces of “Readers Mail” that stress the difference between Denmark and Austria. In both cases the argument goes that Denmark is closing its borders in order to safeguard its own citizens from the effects of migration caused by the events in the Arab World, in the Austrian case this happens always – the Austrian taxpayers’ money is used in order to safeguard foreign political and economic leaders and nothing is done when the issue is the security of the Austrian citizen. This comment hides the fact that Austria is suffering from bands of EU citizens from Eastern countries that come to enrich themselves from break-ins here but nothing is done to check their entree. Oh well, what do you do with the fiction of this Union? The above mention of the closing of Austria’s borders officially is because of the June meeting of the World Economic Forum will convene more than 500 leaders from business, government and civil society to discuss policies and reforms aimed at their views of rebalancing the global economy. The diverse yet highly interdependent economies of Europe and Central Asia have reached a critical juncture, according to experts at the World Economic Forum. While the advanced economies of the European Union are experiencing fiscal austerity and slower growth, emerging economies further east and in Central Asia are grappling with the pressures of rapid growth. In addition to these regional challenges, Europe and Central Asia must respond to far-reaching global events such as the ‘Arab Spring’ and the earthquake in Japan. The objective of the Vienna meeting is set out in the statement from the European Commission’s Communication on Innovation Union: “Europe’s competitiveness, our capacity to create millions of new jobs to replace those lost in the financial crisis and, overall, our future standard of living depend on our ability to drive innovation in products, services, business and social processes and models,” it says. Will the Washington of President Obama push for a similar meeting between the USA and the fast growing economies of Latin America – the backyard in the Western Hemisphere ? —————– The Underground open protests are being organized: Attack WEF summit in Vienna, Austria, June 2011!
|
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on June 5th, 2011 I went today to XANADU as per an email invitation that promised this is a Chinese restaurant – and so it was. The place is frequented by Chinese people and the food is General Asian. It has a well stocked Teppanyaki self-choice buffet, soup, vegetables, fruit, and a good choice of deserts. It is beyond the Naschmarkt at the U4 stop at Kettenbruekengasse 13, 1060 Wien. From there I took the subway to the Am Hoff Square to see those preparations for events next week that will be open to the public. It promises fun. XANADU to me had magical-mystic connotations. After all the name had meanings with the Citizen Caine – his fictitious mansion, with Bill Gates – Xanadu 2.0, the nickname of his futuristic private estate, as well as Mandrake the Magician‘s fictitious home. XANADU is also a mountain in the Arrigetch Peaks in Alaska and an enigmatic bright feature on the surface of Saturn’s moon Titan. XANADU/XANGDU thus migrated to all sorts of places, to Spain, Brazil, and outer space but what I learned looking up the internet it actually originated from China – Xanadu, or more accurately Shangdu, was the summer capital of Kublai Khan’s Yuan empire – so, to my honest surprise – it really has Chinese connotations – a reference to the past and a guide to the future ? ————————————————————————– From Wikipedia at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xanadu : Xanadu (Chinese: ??; pinyin: Shàngd?) was the summer capital of Kublai Khan‘s Yuan Dynasty in China, before he decided to move the seat of his dynasty to the Jin Dynasty capital of Zh?ngd? (Chinese: ??), which he renamed Dàd?, the present-day Beijing. The city was located in what is now called Inner Mongolia, 275 kilometres (171 miles) north of Beijing, about 28 kilometers (17 miles) northwest of the modern town of Duolun. The layout of the capital is roughly square shaped with sides of about 2,200m; it consists of an “Outer City”, and an “Inner City” in the southeast of the capital which has also roughly a square layout with sides about 1,400m, and the palace, where Kublai Khan stayed in summer. The palace has sides of roughly 550m, covering an area of around 40% the size of the Forbidden City in Beijing. The most visible modern-day remnants are the earthen walls though there is also a ground-level, circular brick platform in the centre of the inner enclosure. The city, originally named K?ipíng (??), was designed by Chinese architect Liu Bingzhong and built from 1252 to 1256 during the Mongol invasion.[1] In 1264 it was renamed Shàngd?, the “Supreme Capital”.[2] At its zenith, over 100,000 people lived within its walls. In 1369 Shàngd? was occupied by the Ming army and put to the torch. The last reigning Khan, Toghun Temür, fled the city. Today, only ruins remain, surrounded by a grassy mound that was once the city walls. Since 2002 a reconstruction effort has been undertaken. In March 2008, China submitted a proposal to UNESCO to make the ruin a World Heritage Site under the title “Sites of the Yuan Dynasty Upper Capital (Xanadu) and Middle Capital”.[3]
——————————————————————— Whatever the story – I thought that the fill of Chinese food this Sunday will do me good this coming week. As we posted already - www.sustainabilitank.info/s=+Regi… In the cycle of 2011 World Economic Forum (WEF) meetings Vienna will host the Europe – Central Asia meetings starting June 8-9, 2011 and we picked up already some local rumble. (Monday, May 9th, 2011)
Whatever will be decided there – it is clear that China will be called to finance it. In this context we found funny the news that 31 Chinese weddings were performed to couples at the Ludwig Castle in Bavaria – a neat inflow of money from China to Germany.
This in context of 20 times 10 to the 12th in EU and US Government debt (20 trillion) EURO – you guess how much of this to China. Will the Vienna meeting try to co-opt the Central Asian former Soviet Republics to stand with their oil at the EU side? We think that the best the economists will find in Vienna this coming week will be the Am Hoff activities including the Burgenland Wines and Beers.
In regard to what the papers started to call the “VERGURKUNG” of Europe – this is what happens when the internal disagreements about everything – from basic ideology to money - is bursting in the open because of a serious series of infections by a mutant of Escherichia Coli. The situation is serious indeed and the New York Times editorial of today ( www.nytimes.com/2011/06/05/opinio…) is witness, but the articles in European Press are ridiculous because rather then trying to find the reason for the outbreak, we see attempts at trading blames and in seeking advantage for this or the other agriculture interest. Spain was crucified, but who looks into genetic engineering that might occur right under your own nose at home? Are there any transgressions when switching to Bio-products?
After talking Greece out of the Union – will some local interests want preventively to talk out of the union also Spain and Italy who indeed might pose much higher financial strains on the Union when their turn comes to default? Oh well – we will opt for XANADU. Even though Matteo Ricci and Bento de Góis had already proven that Cathay is simply another name for China, the English cartographer John Speed in 1626 continued the tradition of showing “Cathaya, the Chief Kingdome of Great Cam” to the northeast of China. On his map, he placed Xandu east of the “Cathayan metropolis” Cambalu ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on June 2nd, 2011 For the full article please see: www.opendemocracy.net/od-russia/d… in summary it says: In the midst of chaotic upheavals in neighboring countries like Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova, and local conflicts of smaller or greater degree in Russia, what Lukashenka offered his people was an oasis of financial and political stability with guaranteed wages and pensions: what he termed the “social contract.” In short, they could live life as in the past without resorting to such evils as shock therapy or military alliances with either NATO or the CIS. Today that oasis has been transformed into the most arid part of the desert, from which Belarus lacks the resources to extricate itself. Lukashenka’s position might make sense if the Communist Party controlled Russia, but Moscow’s rulers are committed capitalists. All he can do henceforth, unless he concedes completely to Russia’s economic barons, is postpone the inevitable through more loans and short-term crisis measures, and specifically from the IMF, one organization that has not infrequently emphasized financial stringency and economic pragmatism rather than a free or democratic society. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on May 11th, 2011 The Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) says it has a membership of 57 States on four continents with a total population of 1.3 billion people. Having seen its map we realize it has also at least three “blocked States” – India, Thailand, and The Philippines though it has the Moro National Liberation Front as an observer State, a withdrawn State – Zimbabwe, and at least one non-State – Israel that was replaced by Palestine as a member State. Cote d’Ivoire was the last member to enter – it joined in 2001. Russia became an Observer in 2005. Afghanistan was suspended during the years of Soviet occupation 1980 – March 1989 and Egypt, the fifth largest Islamic population, was suspended May 1979 – March 1984 when it tried for peace in the Middle East. The organisation attempts to be the collective voice of the Muslim world (Ummah) and the official languages of the organisation are Arabic, English, and French. The flag of the OIC has an overall green background (symbolic of Islam). In the centre, there is an upward-facing red crescent enveloped in a white disc. On the disc the words “Allahu Akbar” (Arabic for “The Almighty God”) are written in Arabic calligraphy.
The OIC attracted attention at the opening session of the meeting in Putrajaya, Malaysia, on 16 October 2003, where Prime MinisterMahathir Mohamad of Malaysia in his speech argued that the Jews control the world: “They invented socialism, communism, human rights, and democracy, so that persecuting them would appear to be wrong, so that they can enjoy equal rights with others. With these they have gained control of the most powerful countries and they, this tiny community, have become a world power.” He also said that “the Europeans killed 6 million Jews out of 12 million, but today the Jews rule the world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them.” The speech was very well received by the delegates, including many high ranking politicians, who responded with standing ovations.” India, a country that has 161 million Muslim, only Indonesia with 203 million and Pakistan with 174 million have larger Muslim populations then India, was not welcome even as an observer to OIC – this because of its conflict with Pakistan where India would like to have a referendum of the local population as a means to decide the future of Kashmir. Most OIC member countries are non-democratic. There are no OIC countries which are rated as a “Full Democracy” under the Democracy Index guidelines, and only 3 of the 57 members are rated as high as a “Flawed Democracy.” The rest are rated either an “Authoritarian Regime” or a “Hybrid Regime.” Only 3 OIC member states were rated as Free in the Freedom in the World report in 2010 based on Political Rights and Civil Liberties in the member countries. Reporters Without Borders in its 2011 Press Freedom Index rated only Mali and Suriname among the OIC members as having a Satisfactory Situation. All other members had worse ratings ranging from Noticeable Problems to Very Serious Situation. Freedom of religion is severely restricted in most OIC member states. In 2009, the US Department of State cited OIC members Iran, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Uzbekistan as being Countries of Particular Concern, where religious freedom is severely violated. On August 5, 1990, 45 foreign ministers of the OIC adopted the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam to serve as a guidance for the member states in the matters of human rights in as much as they are compatible with the Sharia, or Quranic Law www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/cai… ) OIC created the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam. While proponents claim it is not an alternative to the UDHR, but rather complementary, Article 24 states, “All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari’ah.” and Article 25 follows that with “The Islamic Shari’ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration.” Attempts to have it adopted by the United Nations Human Rights Council have met increasing criticism, because of its contradiction of the UDHR, including from liberal Muslim groups. Critics of the CDHR state bluntly that it is “manipulation and hypocrisy,” “designed to dilute, if not altogether eliminate, civil and political rights protected by international law” and attempts to “circumvent these principles [of freedom and equality].” Human Rights Watch says that OIC has “fought doggedly” and successfully within the United Nations Human Rights Council to shield states from criticism, except when it comes to criticism of Israel. For example, when independent experts reported violations of human rights in the 2006 Lebanon War, “state after state from the OIC took the floor to denounce the experts for daring to look beyond Israeli violations to discuss Hezbollah’s as well.” OIC demands that the council “should work cooperatively with abusive governments rather than condemn them.” HRW responds that this works only with those who are willing to cooperate; others exploit the passivity. The OIC has been criticised for diverting its activities solely on Muslim minorities within majority non-Muslim countries but putting a taboo on the plight, the treatment of ethnic minorities within Muslim-majority countries, such as the oppression of the Kurds in Syria, the Ahwaz inIran, the Hazars in Afghanistan, the Baluchis in Pakistan, the ‘Al-Akhdam‘ in Yemen, or the Berbers in Algeria. The formation of the OIC happened shortly after the 1967 Arab-Israeli War. Leaders of Muslim nations met in Rabat to establish the OIC on September 25, 1969. OIC is run out of Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, its first Secretary General was Tunku Abdul Ramman of Malaysia (1971-1973) and its current Secretary General, since 2005, is Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu of Turkey. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Muslim_population We found the following map of substantial interest for understanding if there is a realistic chance for change in the Arab world and in the Islamic world at large. Much of the attention of observers of UN debates on terrorism was on how Contradictions between OIC’s and other U.N. member’s understanding of terrorism has stymied efforts at the U.N. to produce a comprehensive convention on international terrorism. The world must be reassured that new leaderships of Islamic States will not equivocate on terrorism – whatever true sentiments they may harbor – it is important to agree that terrorism is not an acceptable tool for attainment of political goals. upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/64/OIC_map.png The list of OIC Member States: Afghanistan · Albania · Algeria · Azerbaijan · Bahrain · Bangladesh · Benin · Burkina Faso · Brunei · Cameroon · Chad · Comoros · Côted’ Ivoire · Djibouti · Egypt · Gabon · Gambia · Guinea · Maldives · Malaysia · Mali · Mauritania · Morocco · Mozambique · Niger · Nigeria ·Oman · Pakistan · Palestine · Qatar · Saudi Arabia · Senegal · SierraLeone · Somalia · Sudan · Suriname · Syria · Tajikistan ·Turkey · Tunisia · Togo · Turkmenistan · Uganda · Uzbekistan · United Arab Emirates · Yemen The Observers are: Bosnia and Herzegovina · Central African Republic · Russia · Thailand · Northern Cyprus (asTurkish Cypriot State), Moro National Liberation Front, Russia.
### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on September 15th, 2010 9/11 of 2001 caused nearly 3,000 death and plunged America into three wars, but we have a proposition that 9/15 – the day two years ago – when the House of Lehman Brothers collapsed – will prove being a much greater turning point in global history. Indeed, 9/11 ended the US euphoria with the end of the Cold War against the now defunct Soviet Empire, but even though no Great Depression resulted from the Lehman Brothers collapse the suggestion is that the event pointed out that it is not military power, but economic power, that eventually gets the upper hand. This observation results from the simple truth that though the US is still the only military superpower, it is being constraint nevertheless by the lack of financing capacity of the military. If nothing else, the retreat from Iraq and Afghanistan comes because of the large expense of these wars. The US must make defense cuts if it is to avoid other financial cuts that might undercut much more seriously its preferred status among nations. The US economy was once based on manufacturing and industry but now it was left to consumerism – and if nothing else – the US does not get anywhere close to the consumers numbers of a China, an India, and perhaps if that of the Islamic World at large. With the large hole in its foreign trade, caused in large part by the outflow of money for imports of oil, the US is now aware of the power of China’s monetary reserves that have been called to help pay for the US financial excesses – be those from imports or wars. What is worse, the world has learned to do well without a US order-making role, and the formerly budding South-South connections have bloomed into a real China-India-Brazil trading pattern that might even lead to the displacement of the US dollar in this new international trade. A Chinese hegemony in the Pacific is just a question of time, even though it is possible still to believe that for the time being there is a US-Chinese symbiotic relationship. But with the growth of further emerging economic powers – at first Brazil and India – then South Africa, Vietnam, South Korea, Indonesia, Turkey and others, eventually the US might find its role changing from the one Super-power to one of two, three, four, or five large powers. The truth seems that the bloated figure of a Bin Laden has come and mostly gone. The idea that an extremist Caliphate is in the making is being undone now by the evidence that countries like Indonesia, Turkey, now even Saudi Arabia, and the Muslim population of India, the bloc of Central Asia countries, and in many ways even the changing Iraq and Afghanistan, are much less inclined to line up behind centralized Islamic militancy, even if propelled by nationalistic feelings, may point to the fact that much of the post-9/11 activities have been misplaced, and could have been handled much better had the US taken the path of disengaging itself from the dependence on the addiction to oil. Clearly 9/15 was not the date of the start of the financial reduction of the stature of the US, but if a single date is needed by history to point at as the moment the changes in the global structure became evident, it will be 9/15 2008 rather then 9/11 2011. In context of what we said above, I would like to point out an April 2010 published volume of which we heard from Dr. Amelia Santos-Paulino at a presentation at the UNU in New York. The book is titled – “Southern Engines of Global Growth.” The book is a result of a UN University – WIDER research project and was published by the Oxford University Press and edited by Amelia U. Santos-Paulino and Guanghua Wan, and it deals with the spectacular performance of the Asian Giants – China and India and the further contributions of Brazil and South Africa under a CIBS hat. In her presentation, and in the Q&A part, we also heard of other countries lined up to join this new emerging South, and the book and presentation will be subject of a further posting of ours. In this posting, all what I was trying to say is that these changes in the US and Global Economy, with all due respect to the people that died on 9/11 – their families and the whole grieving world – it is these changes in the economy following the emergence of China as the second Superpower, and further large economic powers from among the emerging South, this was rather the defining moment of real global change. —————- Regarding the spread of the economic crisis – We learned that one of the UAE’s leading businessmen, Khalaf Al Habtoor, has said he doesn’t think the collapse of US financial services giant Lehman Brothers marked a turning point in the Gulf’s financial fortunes. Instead Al Habtoor, founder and chairman of the UAE-based conglomerate Al Habtoor Group, said the region was let down by poor management in the wake of years of unprecedented growth. “I don’t think Lehman Brothers affected the Gulf,” he told Arabian Business in an interview. “Unfortunately several organisations in the GCC and the Arab world were not well structured – we were fragile already,” he continued. We find these comments not to be in any contradiction to what we said above – they suggest rather that the Gulf State, and others, effectively committed the same transgressions of going over-board, as the US and Lehman Brothers. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 20th, 2010 August 19, 2010, before the UN started its meetings, the Asia Society in New York opened the discussion on the Pakistan Flood response by diving right to the bottom truth – the latest mega-disasters have one common cause – human induced climate change. It was Financier George Soros who injected the topic and the media was allowed by Ambassador Holbrooke to follow up. See what you can do when you go outside the UN! Ambassador Dr. Richard C. Holbrooke, former Chairman of the Board of the Asia Society, and now US Special Representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan, chaired the 8:30 am event at his New York home – the Asia Society – on the day when for 3:00 pm the UN General Assembly scheduled a pledging event for funding Pakistan relief. At the UN, for the US, spoke Secretary of State Hilary Rodham Clinton, and I saw on TV the complete Asia Society American team sitting in the hall. The team included also Judith A. McHale, US Department of State Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, Dr. George Erik Rupp, a theologian, President of the International Rescue Committee and former President of Rice University and Columbia University, and Raymond Offenheiser, President of Oxfam America. The opening speaker after Ambassador Holbrooke was Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi, and the panel included also USAID Administrator Dr. Rajiv Shah. Then there was a list of guests that made their comments, followed by questions from the floor and answers from Administrator Dr. Shah and Ambassador Qureshi.
enlarge image
L to R: USAID’s Dr. Rajiv Shah, Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi, and Ambassador Richard C. Holbrooke. (Else Ruiz/Asia Society) –
Judith A. McHale, a former media head herself ( President and Chief Executive Officer of Discovery Communications – 1987 to 2006), and now with the US Government, said that information is critical. “We work with the government of Pakistan to provide the critical information on the ground. It is posted on www.State.gov
Among the guests were Financier George Soros, whose Open Society Institute and Soros Foundations work on the ground in Pakistan – he announced that he adds another $5 million to the funds that his foundation will work with in helping directly civil society in Pakistan, Christopher MacCormac of the Asian Development Bank, which is leading the effort to assess the flood damage, said much of the economic infrastructure of the area has been destroyed. 2 million ha. of crops were lost and livestock have been devastated, which has taken a large toll on Pakistan farmers. ADB has said that after the immediate contribution of $3 million from the ASia-Pacific Disaster Fund, it would loan Pakistan $2 billion to help the country rebuild, and Pakistan’s rock star turned political activist Salman Ahmad, known as Pakistan’s Bono, or as Holbrooke pointed out, “Bono is the Irish Salman Ahmad,” pointed out a very important topic: “This is a defining moment in Pakistan,” Ahmad said. “This flood has set back Pakistan in a huge way. Out of 175 million people, 100 million are under 25. Those young people are skeptical, and they feel abandoned by the world. The international community has to win hearts and minds of those 100 million youth in Pakistan.” “If there is a sluggish response the terrorists/extremists win.” He also said that last year he had a concert at the UN to show to the young people in Pakistan that there was hope – he said that he is sure the international community will react positively. Ambassador Holbrooke said that in the catastrophe there is also an opportunity, that we should not miss - the people in Pakistan should see that the world is ready to help. He found that these elements of hope in opportunity were missing in the day’s article in The New York Times. For the US the strategic implications are clear. The US pulled out helicopters from the military effort in order to help in the rescue effort. Will the Taliban take advantage of this? A US transport ship with materials arrived to Karachi, and Japan will now also send helicopters to help in the rescue effort. The meeting was summarized by The Asia Society and there is also the full tape at - Further, Ms. Nafis Sadik from the UN, now a Trustee Emeritus of the Asia Society and Chair of the Pakistan Foundation at the Asia Society called for Ramadan giving to the Foundation. Other Pakistan-Americans spoke and told of their own efforts to raise funds for the Pakistan relief program as the State’s capacity to meet the challenge has been overstretched. Today Pakistan , one fifth of its territory submerged, 68 million of its people affected, and 1,600 people dead, crops, animal stock, and infrastructure devastated – Pakistan is calling – humanity is calling they said. We saw a video proving every point. The Pakistan-American Foundation was inspired by Hilary Clinton’s “Pakistani Peacebuilders.” Oxfam America was joined by “Save the Chidren” NGO representative Gorel Bogarde said the obvious – what children most need is food, clean drinking water and shelter. She is most concerned for the moment about the outbreak of water-bourne diseases, such as cholera. We will not repeat here further figures of loss and the size of the calamity. We assume that these are known by our readers by now – we want rather to point out the blunt comments that resulted from the statement by Mr. Soros who linked what happens to our lack of readiness to do something about the human-made climate change. Pakistan is the biggest of the recent disasters he said and we must deal with the root causes he continued. CLIMATE CHANGE IS THE ROOT CAUSE FOR ALL THESE RECENT DISASTERS. Mr. Soros spoke of the coincidence of the Himalaya glaciers melting and the monsoons getting stronger at the same time. He also said “there is a certain amount of fatigue in responding to these disasters… [but] we have to come to terms with the fact that they are in fact connected, that there is climate change.” At the Q & A part of the program, I asked the last question that was intended to bring the attention back to what Mr. Soros said. Ambassador Holbrooke said Thank You and addressed the question first to Mr. Rajiv Shah. When asked if there was a connection between the floods and climate change, USAID’s Shah said “while it’s very hard to attribute any single event to what we’re doing to our global environment it is very clear that that trend is leading to a greater number of large hurricanes, a greater number of floods, hotter and dryer conditions in places that are dependent on weather and rainfall for agriculture, and it’s making it very difficult for the least resilient, the most lower income communities of the world to survive.” We heard from Mr. Christopher MacCormac that after the Earth Quake of 2005 the rebuilding of houses was done according to higher standards – so what we need here in the response to the present calamity is also to build better – but he did not specify, neither did Mr. Holbrooke. This, with the understanding that the increased monsoon floods, joined with the melting of the Himalaya Glaciers, is indeed not a one time shot – but the beginning of a trend – leaves us with very bad premonitions about the future of Pakistan and other low lying lands of the region. This has clearly left me thinking about what means building better? Are we going to take into account these new phenomena resulting from global use of fossil fuels when going from the immediate reaction to the suffering from the floods to the longer range rebuilding stage? This is clearly an area that will be written up much more in the foreseeable future. Ambassador Qurashi was asked by Mr. Holbrooke to react to the climate change implications. Are there additional run-off from the Himalayas? The answer included: The Glaciers melt and what we have in Pakistan are Monsoon water plus glacier melts combined. We have above normal moisture. He also said that “There are local NGOs in Pakistan that help push back the extremists and you have shown the world that you are a helping Nation.” ### |

























Mohammad Khazaee is Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations. From 2002 to 2007, he was Vice Minister for International Affairs and President of the Organization for Economic and Technical Assistance in Iran’s Ministry of Economic Affairs. Concurrently, he served as Governor of the OPEC Fund, Alternate Governor of the Islamic Development Bank, and a board member of the Iran-Misr (Iran-Egypt) Development Bank. Previously, he represented Iran at the World Bank (1988 to 2002) and served as a Member of Parliament (1981 to 1988).
In a diplomatic career with service in each of the major continents, Thomas R. Pickering reached the rank of Career Ambassador, the highest in the U.S. Foreign Service, retiring as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs in 2000. He previously served as U.S. Ambassador to the Russian Federation, India, Israel, El Salvador, Nigeria, and Jordan. He also was the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations in New York. Most recently, he was appointed by Secretary of State Clinton to lead the Accountability Review Board probing the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
David Ignatius (moderator) is an associate editor and award-winning columnist for The Washington Post. He is also creator and co-moderator of “PostGlobal,” an online conversation about international affairs at 





Turkey 1960: Political reports by Ambassador Karl Hartl to Foreign Minister Bruno Kreisky
