A Blog Reporting on Reports, Conjecture,and Opinions on International Affairs

Friday, December 28, 2007

Pakistan on the Precipice

Yesterday's assassination of Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto has created shockwaves all over Pakistan and the world. Her assassination should not be too surprising, since Pakistan is a hotbead of Islamic fanaticism and political intrigue. Like Lebanon, nothing seems to get solved. When the former Prime Minister returned to Pakistan in October, there was an attempt on her life while she was parading in Karachi. The suicide bombing failed to kill her but killed over a hundred civilians. Even on Wednesday, the day before she was assassinated, she held a rally where, a fifteen year old was arrested carrying a bomb trying to sneak in to her rally. Islamic Fundamentalists from Al Qaeda and the Taliban have threatened her in the past. Pakistani military hardliners also despised her for attempting to weaken the military's hold of the government.

Her supporters in the People's Party, sadly took the streets in violent protests over the assassination, accusing the government of President Musharraf of not doing enough to secure her. Although Musharraf and Bhutto were political rivals, Musharraf needed Bhutto's political party to compete in the upcoming elections so the elections would look legitimate. Now the elections are in disarray. Nawaz Sharif another former Prime Minister and leader of the Muslim League is already planning to boycott the elections.

Al Qaeda and the Pakistani Taliban are benefiting the most from this turmoil, now that the main secular camps are fighting each other. The government has not been making it easy for itself either by fueling suspicions that it has been covering up her assassination by taking over the crime scene, preventing and independent investigation and coming up with answers that the public let alone the witnesses, did not corroborate.

The situation in Pakistan is becoming increasingly unstable. On Sunday Benazir's son will read out her final wishes, which hopefully will calm the tensions down. Regardless of what happens, there will be continued infighting between the military regime and the moderately liberal opposition. Expect the Islamic Fundamentalists to capitalize and expands its base closer to the heart of Pakistan.

Wednesday, December 12, 2007

Neo-Con for the White House: Rudy Giuliani

This edition of the Daily Centre focus on the Campaign 2008 and the possible foreign policy implications of having former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani as President and what type of foreign policy we would expect to see if he were to win the general election. Currently he leads the Republican polls. According to the New York Times he may be very much a hawk of the neo-conservative variety. His foreign policy team consists of quite a few neo-cons who advocate racial profiling, the bombardment of Iran, and ending the ban on assassinations.

One of his chief advisors, Charles Hill signed a letter to Bush right after 9/11 calling for the removal of Saddam irregardless of its involvement with the 9/11 attacks. Giuliani subscribes to the belief that "weakness invites attack" and that America must project its power and use it in order to meet its interest. The Bush administration has also subscribed that theory. Iraq was an example of its usage. By doing so the Administration, ended up showing unprecedented weakness, with the failure to solve Iraq and Afghanistan,the tense situation in Pakistan, the weak US economy, and also bad diplomacy. The War on terror is in a precarious position. The power projection has only emboldened the terrorists and their sponsors. The war is can not be won militarily. Bloating the defense budget is not going to strengthen those cards. Supporting Israel blindly is not going to bring peace in the Middle East either. With his advisors, and his own statements over the years, Giuliani may show that the neo-conservative movement is not dead.

Saturday, December 01, 2007

Losing Lebanon in Annapolis

After last Saturday's failed election to elect Lebanon's next President, the political crisis escalated leaving little room for the Pro-Western government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora to maneuver. On Tuesday in Annapolis the US held a summit with Arab and Israeli leaders to help solve the Arab Israeli conflict. Syria was invited by the US while they snubbed Iran. On wednesday the Pro-Western Lebanese factions took an about face and supported the candidacy of Gen. Michel Suleiman for President.

The issue in the piece is the candidacy of Gen. Suleiman and what it means to the Lebanese Nationalists of the Cedar Revolution. The Cedar Revolution occurred after the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. It triggered mass protests and forced Syria to withdraw its military from Lebanon. A few months ago when the idea of nominating Suleiman for President was first floated, it was rejected by the ruling "March 14" coalition, soundly. For the General to become President would mean that the Lebanese Constitution would have to be amended. The Constitution stipulates that the President cannot be a person who is currently in the military and if he was he would have to be out of the military for at least two years. Then this week they suddenly agreed to the nomination. March 14 previously expressed its reservations, discreetly accusing him of having close ties to Syria but mainly playing the constitution as a card. Michel Suleiman does have close ties to Syria; his brother in law was former Syrian President Hafez Assad's spokesman, Gebran Kuriyyeh. He was also selected as Army Commander under Syrian domination and by former President Emile Lahoud MEIB. He is also known in some circles to be pro-Hezbollah. His election as President would continue to stonewall the March 14th coalition until the next elections. During the next parliamentary elections for there to be a victor, the victor would have to garner the support of the Pro-Syrian-Iranian Shia parties of Amal and Hezbollah. These powerful parties on their own have already proven that they can stop any pro-American agenda.

In regards to the Annapolis summit, this event might have been the catalyst for the turn around in Lebanon. Some people have come to the opinion that in order for the US to isolate Iran they needed Syria to attend. Publicly the US said that they managed to get Syria to appear because the issue of the Golan Heights would be highlighted. Due to the Presidential crisis in Lebanon, induced by Syria, this issue would almost have to come up as well. A compromised might have well been in order UPI. Suleiman might have appeared alright to the US since he never openly to got in the way of Pro-Western government. The US has sold Lebanon once back in 1990 in order to extract concessions from Syria(Support for the Gulf War) it might gently do it again this time over the Iranian dossier.

According to the Israeli perspective, it was the Saudis who compromised with Syria during the meetings. It was the Saudi Foreign Minister and the Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister who met while Bush was meeting Israeli Prime Minster Olmert. The Saudis along with the US and France are the main backers of the March 14th coalition. The Saudis and Syrians at the very least have common ground with their loathe of Israel.

At this point the March 14th coalition maybe seeing its last days as a force of hope and change in Lebanon. Iran, Syria and Hezbollah will have the last laugh. Lebanon's future has never seen dimmer. Civil war might have been averted in the short term, but sadly it may just cloud it's future.