News Archive July 2004

0330 GMT July 31, 2004

DAFUR Agencies say the UN Security Council has passed an unanimous resolution [China, Pakistan abstaining] giving Sudan 30 days to stop violence in Dafur or face consequences.
Orbat.com comment For diplomatic reasons the resolution is not worded in straightforward terms and should be regarded as something less than a warning of impending sanctions. Nonetheless, some action is being taken. Meanwhile, France is considering the dispatch of "humanitarian" troops to the region. We may guess this means medical, engineer, and signals units plus force security. We may also guess the number will be as small as possible, so that France can partially assuage the critics of inaction without getting into what Paris considers could be a big mess if it was to openly intervene. "Humanitarian" troops also offers the UK and Australia a way of beginning a low-profile intervention, in the manner African countries are considering: the Africans are to send security to protect their observers.
In case anyone is wondering where the observers came from: earlier, the Africans negotiated a ceasefire between Khartoum and the Dafar rebels; as part of the agreement the Africans were to station observers in the region. It appears that the current crisis began when the observers reported that Khartoum was continuing military and terrorist action through its surrogate Arab militia. The latest proud action of the militia, either this week or the previous one, was to raid a Dafur village or camp, put people in chains, and then set fire to them. Possibly the militia thinks the Africans are too low a life form to deserve a clean death?
IRAQ Al-Sadr and Sunni clerics warn Muslim countries working with Saudi Arabia to send troops to Iraq to do no such thing, because they will be considered as puppets of the occupier.
That the Sunnis don't want a Muslim security force is understandable, because Muslim troops would go after the Sunnis involve in the violence and mayhem. As for Al-Sadr, we have been repeatedly saying the Shia clerics should get rid of him and take the consequences, which we feel will be zero. The longer they allow this bantam to strut, the more inflated his ego will become. Our way is negotiation, compromise, and co-option, the Shia clerics will reply. We cannot shed the blood of a co-religionist. Guess what? Blood is going to be shed regardless because Al-Sadr wants power. Since you are standing in his way to power, it's going to be your blood. If you are prepared to make that sacrifice to make nice to Al-Sadr, then of course we have nothing to say.
BAGHDAD MURDERS The Independent reports that the number of bodies arriving at the Baghdad morgue has increased: at the start of the year it was about 400/month; in 20 days of July it has been over 500. Does the report refer solely to numbers of people killed in criminal related violence, or does it include casualties from the insurgency? Do bodies of people who die of causes other than murder and insurgency also at times arrive at the morgue?
We'd like to know this because we'd like to know if the Independent is stretching facts to make its case that the people of Baghdad are feeling terrorized by the violence around them. We know from a dozen media reports each week they feel that way and the Independent need not stretch any facts to convince us of that.
Here is a callous, perhaps even a cruel comment. Saddam is supposed to have killed 300,000 Iraqis to maintain his regime. We wont count the Iraq dead from the 1980-88 war, because that was a war, not killing for political reasons. Saddam was in power some 33 years, so that means 9,000 a year above and beyond what the normal toll from murders/violence might have been. Are the Iraqis saying Saddam's days were better because at least there was not this violence sure that the killing today is in excess of that during the Saddam era? If so, how do they know? Saddam didn't allow the Independent to visit the Baghdad morgue and to talk freely to his citizens. Could it be the situation appears worse because ordinary Iraqis see it as random violence?
Of course, the perception is what counts. The Independent article should be required reading for our civil liberties friends - yes, we do have friends even among those groups and we respect them. May be they will be less sure that you must apply the standards of the west to Iraq in this matter. We have said before, and repeat it again: Baghdad's population is roughly the size of the Washington Metro area's. We suspect that if, in Washington, 20 people a day were dying in bombings, shootings, kidnappings, and political murders, our HR friends would not be talking so casually about civil liberties.
LETTERS We have a number of interesting, informative letters that need discussion, but your editor is already 40 minutes over his new quota for the update page. Tomorrow, perhaps.

POWER IN IRAQ

Apparently the power situation in Baghdad is even worse than it was last year.

Please, please let's avoid the standard platitudes, which are [1] Iraq's power network was on the verge of collapse due to sanctions before the March 2003 invasion; [2] Iraqis themselves destroyed a good amount of the distribution system by looting; [3] Power is now given fairly to the whole country and not just reserved for Baghdad; [4] The demand for power has surged because Iraqis can now freely import appliances; [5] Insurgents keep blowing up oil/gas pipelines.

All this is true, but is utterly irrelevant. We 100% support the argument the Iraqis have been making: "You mean to tell us America could not give us power if it wanted to?". Your editor has never heard Americans give so many excuses. Isn't America the country where you have to do the work, regardless, and no excuses? Isn't this attitude that made America the great nation it is today? So when American officials trot out the same old excuses, 16 months after the invasion began, are we to assume that Americans have lost their will, their drive, their determination?

Well, your editor does not think so. Americans are the hardest working people on earth, which is why no West European in their right mind wants to live here. As a teacher, your editor's wife is paid for 1300 hours a year. She is required to spend 2000 hours a year to do the job assigned, or else she is in trouble with her employer. She is not paid one cent for the extra 700 hours - its part of her job. To a greater or lesser extent, this is common experience of most Americans. Even the one's that get paid for their extra work have to slave flat-out. Your editor's brother is a lawyer, and he is required to put in 80 hours a week, 50 weeks of the year, or he's going to get fired. You editor works a standard 110 hours a week, 52 weeks of the year. Some consider that a bit excessive, but certainly for professionals, 80 hours a week is quite normal. Your editor could sit and give a thousand more examples from people he personally knows, but we doubt anyone familiar with America wqill disagree with our point.

So if it isn't a loss of will or whatever, why is there still such a power shortage in Iraq? Here's your editor's theory. It's because those darn Iraqis should be so grateful to us for having freed them, we don't need to do a thing more. Besides, they're - well, Iraqis, not Americans you know [Subtext: they're a 3rd world country so should we care?]

Your editor agrees completely that Americans don't need to do anything more. At the start of the year your editor's students invariably ask him: "Do we need to do this? Do we need to do that?" His response: "This is a free country and you don't need to do a thing you don't want. This being a free country, however, I am free to give you the grade I feel you deserve". So in some existential sense, let the Iraqis cool their behinds in the desert breeze, Americans don't need to provide power.

Now lets turn up the thermostat so that America has 110-degree summer days and the power is off or intermittently on for 20 hours of 24, second year running. Are Americans going to have a single fond thought for their government? Especially if their country is occupied by foreigners?

Now look, people. Your editor is a firm supporter of American imperialism. He believes it is a Good Thing. But can we at least get this imperialism thing right? This is not the 19th Century or even the early 20th Century. You would be well advised to be working 24/7 to get power to the Iraqis. Trust us: give them power, give them security, and they'll look at you differently.

0330 GMT July 30, 2004

UKRAINE IN IRAQ AFP says Ukraine is negotiating with the US the withdrawal of its Iraq contingent. With an election approaching, and the public being overwhelmingly against the deployment, a withdrawal is understandable. Orbat.com is of the opinion that Ukraine will say Iraqi security forces are in any case taking over from them, obviating the need to keep Ukraine troops in Iraq.
BAGHDAD KIDNAPPINGS Reuters says that while kidnappings of foreigners get the attention, ordinary Iraqis are having to suffer through a wave of kidnappings for ransom. Orbat.com notes that this, of course, has been happening since the first days after Saddam's fall; the steep increase in crime after Baghdad's liberation has surely much to do with Saddam's emptying his jails of criminals before the onset of war. A senior police official in Baghdad says that recent days have seen a sharp decline in reported kidnappings as Iraqi police have aggressively moved to arrest criminals.
FALLUJAH Agencies say unidentified aircraft attacked Fallujah. The unidentified label is required because a US spokesperson said he had no information about any US operation in the area. Assuming the US conducted the strike, this would be the 8th known air attack against the terrorist Zarqawi's group.
AIR STRIKE VIDEO Reader Jerry M sends what we considered a fascinating gun-camera video of an F-16 strike in Fallujah. The video shows perhaps 20 terrorists running in a street when the are enveloped in a cloud of black smoke, presumably the result of a bomb strike. Two issues here.
First, if this is a video of one of the strikes where the US said it killed several terrorists, whereas locals say the targets ran out and so an empty house was bombed, we have one of those odd situations where both sides are telling the truth. The terrorists figured out an attack was underway and escaped to the street, only to be killed there.
Second, we did not want to carry the video for various reasons. One, we are waiting while Jerry M checks the source to ensure it is authentic. Two, while the matter is of great interest to all us armchair warrior types, we are not sure it is appropriate for us to carry it. After all, if we don't carry pictures of terrorists executing their victims etc., we have no justification for carrying the F-16 video.
SADDAM'S HEALTH Reader Michael Thompson sends a UK Daily Mirror story filed from Amman reporting that Saddam's lawyers say he has suffered a minor brain stroke and that he could die before his trial. They are also concerned about an attempt on his life. Other stories have said that Saddam may have prostrate cancer but is refusing to permit his jail doctors to conduct tests. A US spokesperson denies any Saddam illness.
WE WEEP FOR SADDAM'S LAWYERS Saddam's lawyers have not been permitted as yet to meet with him. They say they are worried they may soon not have a client to represent. Orbat.com has decided to take up a collection to help pay the lawyers in case Saddam dies. Your editor found an Indian 5-paisa coin in an old box of his, and he has donated that to the Save Saddam's Lawyers Fund. In case anyone wonders, very roughly the coin is worth one-tenth of one US cent. Should we have told everyone about our contribution? We don't want to sound boastful...
ARROW INTERCEPTS SCUD Haartez of Israel says the first ever live intercept of a Scud by an Arrow missile was conducted successfully in the United States.
Everyone is entitled to hyperbole in promoting their defense products. Still: should Israel claim credit for Arrow as an Israeli system when it has been jointly developed with Boeing? And is it really relevant that Arrow is better than Patriot? Shouldn't we be saying it is better than the 1991 Patriot? Thirteen years have passed since Gulf I, and we think it is unlikely the US has been keeping its Patriots at 1991 versions. Further, what exactly does one staged test prove? Patriot 1991, whatever its faults, is battle tested. If Arrow is so wonderful, why is the US not rushing to buy it?
BTW, is the US going to at all buy Arrow? India is said to have ordered 3 batteries, in addition to its SAM-10 batteries - about which little is known for certain. Uh Oh - your editor has to give himself twenty smacks on the hand. Just this Monday he was sitting with the person who knows more about the Indian Air Force than anyone else, and it didn't occur to your editor to ask. This person doesn't use email; your editor does not write regular mail letters and avoids the telephone...so we'll have to wait until chance again brings this person your editor's way.

0330 GMT July 29, 2004

IRAQ In what appears to be a major Iraq-US-Ukraine operation, coalition forces killed 35 insurgents south of Baghdad and captured 40. Seven Iraqi soldiers were killed.
The media being what it is, the suicide car bomb attack at Baquba which killed 70 has hogged the headlines; in our opinion, the above operation is considerably more significant.
PAKISTANI HOSTAGES Terrorists executed two Pakistani civilian drivers they had kidnapped.
Orbat.com has made a big slip-up: we have not mentioned what for some weeks has been obvious, but can now be taken as confirmed: most of the Iraq kidnapping are being carried out not by real terrorists, but by criminals - in some case, of course, there is little difference - for the purpose of ransom. We do not as yet have details on the Pakistanis, but it is possible to reasonably speculate that they were murdered because there was no one to pay ransom for them. The Pakistan government cannot pay ransom: Pakistan has hundreds of thousands of workers in the Gulf region, pay once and 10 more of your nationals will be kidnapped. Further, the Pakistan Government's stand is its nationals are in the region with a full awareness of the risks, and why should the government have to pay ransom. It's hard to disagree with the Pakistani position.
KIDNAPPINGS: THE REAL ISSUE The publicity given to the kidnapping and executions has tended to obscure the real issue: why are there so many foreign civilians working in a war zone? Given the dangers, which include IEDs and shootings, should not soldiers be doing the job?
Yes, they should, but the US doesn't have the soldiers for reasons we need not repeat. So contractors are being used in a war zone in unprecedented numbers; contactors are there to make money, and it makes for more profit if you use South Asians for drivers and East/South Europeans for engineers and so on.
If Mr. Rumsfeld had been running the Allied invasion of Europe in 1944, he would probably be boasting how he did the job with just 1 million soldiers. Behind them would be 9 million unseen contractors. Imagine this in 1944: civilian airlines are hauling cargo into the war zone, immigrants are driving the trucks to keep the US armies supplied, private security guards are protecting important officials, more immigrants are cooking food for the troops at the front lines etc. etc. Sounds like a farce, but that is exactly what the US is doing in Iraq.
If there was some point to doing it this way, there still might be some justification. There is no point here except the massive ego of some US defense officials, who in the smoke and mirrors typical of US corporations, want to demonstrate "efficiency" by reducing their own work force and outsourcing everything else. The number of people supporting the US occupation force may well equal 100,000 or more, but Mr. Rumsfeld can smugly assert his theories are right.
MERCENARIES Question to Mr. Rumsfeld: could not the civilian contractors - including the Americans - be construed as mercenaries?
And if you are so enamored of mercenaries, why not abolish the US armed forces altogether, achieving 100% efficiency? You could win your next war without any US personnel at all. We've mentioned this ten times before, but obviously no one from your side reads us. There are 600,000 South Asian troops happy to go to Iraq at a quarter of the money you are spending.
DAFUR For once we agree with the Washington Post, which has blasted Mr. Colin Powell's sudden conversion to proceeding with all deliberate speed re. Dafur. One thousand people a day are dying, says the Post. We had earlier praised Mr. Powell for bringing Dafur to the world's attention. Today we are not so sure we did right to praise him.
For one thing we are told our assumption he was the leader on this is plain wrong. Apparently many countries have been trying to bring the issue to the US's and UN's attention, and Mr. Powell entered the game last, not first
Consider this: even the Africans are so fed up they want to send troops to Dafur, regardless of what Sudan thinks. They are asking only for western money and logistic support. They are so concerned that even without any international authorization, they are working to send 300 troops to protect their 118 person observer mission in Dafur. Shame on you, Mr. Powell. You are a man of unequalled integrity, and you have earned sainthood for refusing to criticize your boss even though he has systematically under-cut you at every step. But on Dafur, we cannot agree with you. Enough already.
HIJACKERS PROBING US AIRLINE DEFENSES Since we ran the story on Syrians probing US airline defenses, we have received many letters with leads to other reports. Your editor is so confused by the implications of the reports that he has decided not to present a summary and a commentary for at least one more day. Maybe he'll be able to make some sense of what is happening in another day. Otherwise he would not be right to publicize such a serious matter and perhaps add to the worry, fear, panic, and frustration that appears to be building up in the US civil aviation industry.

0300 GMT July 28, 2004

IRAQ The heroic resistance against the foreign infidel continues. In a daring operation that showed what the resistants are made of, and showed they fear no one or thing, they shot dead - two cleaning women working for the Coalition. Such bravery! Such courage! Such self-sacrifice! Such scum of the earth. And why are the Muslim nations, the third world nations, even many of the Europeans, so quiet at the weekly shootings of women, doctors, university professors? This is warfare? We say again and again: show these insurgents no mercy: they will show you none when they have you in their cross-hairs.
DAFUR Sudan orders mobilization of all government departments - whatever that means - to meet the threat of foreign intervention. Mr. Colin Powell says it is too early to talk of military intervention. The French government - oh so realistic - says Sudan is integral to a solution. All true. But you know what? Any proposition is true depending on its context. The truth also is that genocide is being committed. So which truth will those who warn against "hasty" action in Dafur choose?
TIMES OF INDIA DOES IT AGAIN The Times of India was once reckoned as among the 20 best newspapers in the world - by the measure of the western press. Your editor clicked on after a long interval, he was so disgusted he has been avoiding the E-edition. Now he is smacking himself on the head for visiting. Among the headlines: "Are breasts woman's best assets?" Even in the worst days of male chauvinism and sexism you would never have seen a headline like that in a serious American newspaper. Your editor has to admit the US media may be a bunch of idiots, but they are not an uncouth bunch of idiots. By the way, those Americans should not expect any sort of uproar among Indian women. Indian women are convinced - with just cause - that Indian men are a retarded bunch of uncouth idiots, and they will simply refuse to dignify the matter by commenting.
We offer the above because from time to time our Indian readers write in. "You quote the Jang of Pakistan every day," said one person "you say you are Indian, but I think you are a Pakistani." Okay, my friend, if you are reading this: why don't you send us an India brief, say twice a week? Your editor finds the TOI inane, the Hindu unreadable, the Indian Express and Hindustan Times lightweight, and worse, unenlightening. PTI and UNI are wire services, they give very little analysis - and rightfully so - but they also refuse to put their stories in context. Meanwhile, if our Indian friends will please excuse us, we'll continue with the Jang of Pakistan. At least it carries news.

1300 GMT July 27, 2004

[2nd Update]

DRPK DEFECTORS AFP says the first batch of 200 DRPK defectors has arrived in ROK via air from a 3rd country; 250 more will come in the next batch. To avoid angering DPRK, Seoul is releasing no details.
ZARAQAWI AFP says US troops in Iraq have captured an associate of the Jordan terrorist Al-Zaraqawi. No further details. The latter has claimed responsibility for several major car bomb attacks. His hideouts in Fallujah have been attacked seven times from the air; the last three attacks have been with Iraqi permission; the last two have involved information supplied to the Iraq government.
DEBKA.COM has two stories of interest. It says the US has dropped leaflets over Fallujah warning $102 million in funds for Fallujah will be withheld unless attacks on US troops stop. Debka also says the first live test of an Arrow missile against a Scud at high altitude will take place today at a California range.
We are confused: Israel has been making claims that the Arrow is a better anti-ballistic missile weapon than Patriot, but if this is the first live test against a real target, on what basis has the claim being made? Patriot has been combat tested numerous times. Incidentally, the Arrow is in a different class altogether of ABM interceptors. It is a much bigger and heavier missile, possibly in the Russian SAM-10/12 category.
The US has been reporting mixed success with its ABM intercepts. The warheads used, however, are conventional. There is no reason to believe the warheads used in the limited strategic system under installation in Alaska will be other than nuclear, which changes the intercept dynamic dramatically.

0330 GMT July 27, 2004

DAFUR AFP says Australia is prepared to join the UK in sending troops to Dafur under UN auspices. The EU has asked the UN Security Council to pass a resolution authorizing sanctions against Sudan, including military intervention. There is some improvement in Sudan's allowing aid convoys to reach the region, but the EU says that nothing significant has changed.
In Orbat.com's opinion, the west is imoving swiftly because its wants to avoid charges of abetting genocide, as happened in Rwanda crisis 1994. Then it was all talk-talk, and even the UN troops on the scene were not permitted to interfere with the killings.
IRAQ-IRAN Washington Post says the new Iraqi Defense Minister has denounced Iranian interference in Iraq. He charged Teheran with sending terrorists into Iraq and of seizing border posts.
SADDAM CNN quotes a UK newspaper as saying the Iraq Human Rights minister paid a visit to Saddam in jail. The ex-dictator has a 15 square meters cell with air conditioning, gets one MRE and two hot meals a day, spends his time reading the Koran and writing poetry, gets three hours exercise time, like American muffins and tends a small garden. He has even put a ring of white stones around a palm. While Saddam is not allowed to mix with other prisoners, the latter are free to talk with each other during the three-hour exercise period.
Orbat.com is totally overcome. This is so unbearably cute - the garden, we mean. We repeat out standard advice: execute him right now and be done with it. Else we at Orbat.com will soon be so moved we'll be petitioning Saddam be allowed his bunny slippers and French monogrammed toilet paper.

US-IRAQ The US is considering a plan to perhaps halve its occupation force and confine the remainder to remote bases, to be held ready to support Iraqi forces as needed. The Army has been saying its very presence as it goes about doing its job is an irritant to the Iraqis. According to the Washington Post, the majority of Iraqis would like to see less of the US Army but a high percentage does not want the US to leave till Iraqi forces are strong enough.
ISLAMIC TROOPS TO IRAQ Jang of Pakistan reports the Pakistan prime ministers says several Islamic countries are working to evolve a consensus on sending troops to Iraq.
PLA EXERCISES China News Agency says 3000 troops are exercising in Fujian Province as part of the big air-sea-land exercises aimed at Taiwan.

0330 GMT July 26, 2004

IRAQ AFP says US-backed Iraqi troops killed 15 insurgents north of Baghdad, while US troops captured 15 suspects insurgents at Baquba. In the first incident, insurgents sought shelter in a farm. Iraqi troops chased them, but US forces did not enter the farm. Interestingly, the local US commander had made a deal with the locals that his troops would not enter - we do not know what the locals gave in return, but we may guess they promised to take care of insurgents themselves. The US provided fire and air support from outside the perimeter.

DAFUR CNN and other agencies say the Europeans have joined the US in strongly condemning the Sudanese Government for failing to stop the genocide in Dafur. Britain has gone to the extent of having its top military officer say he can put together 5000 troops for dispatch to Dafur on short notice.

Your editor's relationship with the British is ambiguous, understandably, as he is Indian. Sometimes, however, one has to get over one's petty feelings. Well done, UK. Meanwhile, dare we ask where our friends the French are? If foreign intervention has to take place, Chad is the logical base.

NEWS OF THE ABSURD Sudan says there is no need for foreign intervention because the government is doing everything it can in Dafur. No doubt, my dears, no doubt. It does not, however, follow that foreign intervention is not needed. After all, your policy is to exterminate the people of Dafur one way or the other and you are doing everything you can to ensure you are not thwarted.

ANGOLA - THE LOUISIANA ONE After 9/11 your editor has been advocating "rendering" suspected terrorists to Angola prison in the US, as the prisoners will break anyone faster than the US government ever could. Well, hold that thought. Apparently in the last five years there has been a huge change at Angola. A new warden has used to religion to alter the behavior of the prisoners, 70% of whom will never see freedom again, and many of the rest will die before they finish their terms. Violence is way down, both prisoner-on-prisoner, and prisoner-on-guards. Guards-on-prisoners is not mentioned, but we would presume that too is down. The ACLU is upset because - strange, is it not? - the warden is using mainly the Christian religion. How weird he should do that: after all, isn't the US a predominantly Christian nation? The warden says he does not discriminate: any religion is welcome at Angola. The ACLU is still not happy: the warden is violating the separation between Church and State. But even the ACLU is not stupid enough to take this matter to court, because Angola was not part of the state as much as it was part of hell.

We leave readers with a happy thought brought to our notice. While people are writhing in moral outrage against US treatment of Iraqi prisoners, consider this: the new SuperMax prisons being built are generally entirely underground. Prisoners will spend 23 hours a day in solitary, and never see the light of day again. We've said this before: that one hour does not mean you get to have human contact. If the guards feel like it, they can take away your one hour, and even if they let you exercise, they can stop you from speaking to anyone. A European friend finds it peculiar we should seek to justify US treatment of Iraqis using analogies to American prisons. We are not justifying US treatment, only trying to explain it. The Iraqis have it good compared to many American prisoners, and many Guard MPs are correctional officers in peacetime. Cant expect the Americans to treat foreign prisoners better than their own.

HOSTAGES, AUSTRALIA, AND THE SPANISH FACTOR

IS THERE A "HOSTAGE CRISIS"? The media keeps talking about approaching deadlines for the hostage crisis - insurgents have seven truckers working for a Kuwaiti firm in their custody and are threatening to start killing them if the Kuwaiti firm does not leave Iraq. Seeing as there are fresh hostages abducted every week, we are wondering if the term "hostage crisis" is appropriate. After all, the media do not refer to the "insurgent crisis" in Iraq.
One of the truckers is an Indian whose wife has offered to take his place if they will release him. She says he is the family's sole bread winner, and better she die than him. Your editor knows his Indian women - much to his misfortune - and he, at least has no doubt she is absolutely serious. Courage comes in many forms, and we think this woman is demonstrating real courage. There is a lesson here, but we'll leave it people to think it through themselves.
AUSTRALIA ON SPAIN The media says Australia today attacked Spain, saying the terrorist threat against Australia is a direct consequence of Madrid's bowing to pressure. We knew the threat would get a reaction from the Australians, and that it would not be what the terrorists want, but this development we did not see. The Australians are very polite people: there must be real anger in their country that they are so directly criticizing a friend.
The Spanish deny the two matters are linked, insisting that they have been fighting terrorism and have taken serious casualties in the process. Besides, they say, Spain withdrew it was the will of the people.
WHY IS SPAIN WASTING OUR TIME? We really do not get why governments waste so time in mouthing garbage. That Spain has been fighting domestic terrorists for decades and is helping Afghanistan with its election in no way mitigates Madrid's actions in Iraq. The reason you do not give in to terrorists is where does it stop? As for the will of the Spanish people, we have two comments.
SHOULD WE ALWAYS FOLLOW THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE? First, the Spanish people were against the Iraq venture from the start. Their then prime minister took a principled stand to help the US and Iraq. He lost his position as a consequence. But whatever Spain's feelings may have been before the country went into Iraq, by withdrawing, Spain has only made itself much more vulnerable, and of course encouraged the terrorists to strike everywhere else.
Second, why one earth would any Spaniard believe that if her had not gone into Iraq, the terrorists would have spared Spain? Yes, they would not have staged the Madrid rail bombings - but only for now. When next they needed to pressure Spain to distance itself from its allies, they would have struck.
More on the will of the people. Problem here. Democracy is not about the will of the people - no government can function on such a basis. Democracy is the right to elect leaders who will do what is best for the people AND the country. Often what is right does not coincide with what the people want. Case in point: the people of the United States did not want to enter World War 2 at any cost. Had Japan not attacked, the US would have waited until the Germans invaded England - and probably the majority of Americans would still have said "it's the Old World - nothing to do with us." Because the US did not enter the war till 1942, the Germans had a free hand for 2 1/2 years. The cost of defeating them was that much more.
THIS IS NOT BUSH'S WAR The Spanish people have to face facts: they let their hatred of George Bush top their common sense. The war against fundamentalist Islam is not George Bush's war. He did not start it. The other side did, and it started planning as far back as 1990. Had Mr. Clinton been legally entitled to a third term, he would have won hands done. So the terrorists would not have staged 9/11 had he won? Like it or not, Iraq is a critical way station in the new war - we spare our readers our usual lecture, because we assume the Spanish are smart enough to know this.
SPAIN WILL NOT ESCAPE THIS WAR Come on people, let's act our age here. And what astonishes us is that when the last war between Islam and Christianity took place, Spain was a front-line state. Have our Spanish friends already forgotten their own history?

0345 GMT July 25, 2004

COMMENT ON NEW TERRORIST TACTICS Reader Dean Brunkhardt has his doubts about the veracity of yesterday's story by an air traveler. The doubt is not that it happened, but on 3 points. [1] The stewardess tells the traveler not to worry, there are several air marshals abroad. [2] The security agent is holding 14 Syrian passports in his hand while interrogating the traveler. [3] The fasten seat-belts comes on, seven of the Arab-looking passengers who have already caused panic by their odd behavior jump up and move to the rear, and no marshal intervenes.
While Mr. Brunkhardt is careful not to make his own interpretation and sticks to describing what rings false to him, we have to say that it seemed to us yesterday the drama was an exercise. To what end we do not know. Our immediate guess was that the passengers were used as guinea pigs by the authorities, and that the affair was oriented toward seeing how they/crew behaved undress stress. Again, this is only a guess.
Mr. Brunkhardt's observation about the air marshals/crew making no effort to intervene after the fasten seat-belt sign comes on and 7 of the suspects leap up to head for the rear is, by itself, proof that the drama was a sham.
We had one other point. You would find it difficult, if not impossible, to get 14 men to commit collective suicide - we doubt most of the 9/11 lot knew the real mission was to crash the aircraft. Potential terrorists know by now their chances of taking over the aircraft are zero, because of the measures taken to secure the cockpit. Moreover, they know that air marshals are deployed on flights; 14 Arab-looking men with Syrian passports would arose comment among the most lax of security contingents, and so on. So presumably they are looking simply to crash planes and kill everyone on board. That makes no political point.
Further, you don't need to put anyone on board if the aim is simply to blow up an aircraft in flight. There are still hundreds and thousands of ways to get bombs on board. Mr. Brunkhardt observes that airline personnel and perimeter safety is poor, why can't one of the baggage handlers or flight caterers or refueling crews and so on get a bomb on board?
Nonetheless, whatever the truth of the matter, it's an interesting story.
PAKISTAN AND 9/11 The Times of India quotes UPI as saying that an anonymous senior Pakistani source presented papers to the 9/11 commission as the latter were wrapping up. The papers say that Pakistan ISI is ensuring Osama gets his dialysis treatments in Pakistan, and give detailed evidence of the Pakistani involvement in 9/11.
Our reaction would be to ignore the UPI story. That someone waited till the commission was almost ready to release its finds indicates the anonymous source wanted to be sure what track the commission was taken to ensure his "evidence" fit the commission's findings. It could also be no such person existed, and the story was planted on UPI.
We would particularly ignore the story on another ground: the Times of India implies there is a massive cover-up by the commission, and that US media are at best negligent, and at worst complicit in refusing to mention the matter to their readers. The aim of the cover-up would be to protect people like President Musharraf who is seen as helping the US in the War on terror.
This may surprise the Times of India, but the 9/11 commission is not comparable to the an Indian inquiry commission where everything can be manipulated by the government. There were people of many ideological convictions on that committee, plus there were hundreds of staffers involved. The staffers also have their own views. To assume everyone got together in a conspiracy is a bit much: any one of those people who does not like Mr. Bush would have blown the cover-up in a trice. The commission was responsible to the Congress, not to the President. It was made high-level precisely to get to the truth about what Presidents Clinton and Bush knew or did not know, what they hid, what mistakes they made. So if someone from the Administration saunters to the commission and says: "Mr. Bush does not want President Musharraf embarrassed, so don't write anything based on the anonymous report", both the official and Mr. Bush would have been in the dock next week. Mr. Bush might even be impeached for interfering, and he might very well lose the election even without impeachment.
BUT: that said, the Times of India is on much firmer ground when it says a simple word search of the document finds 200 references to Pakistan and only 100 to Iran. Why is everyone making a big deal that Iran let the highjackers transit when the hijack chief worked in Pakistan, many of the men were trained in Pakistan, and money was wired from Pakistan to one of the highjackers? Good point. We know the answer, but the Times of India does not pay us, so it can go find the answer itself. This may seem unfair, but any intelligent 10th Grader knows the answer. We suggest Mr. Rajghatta - the Times of India man in Washington - get going here. We know him personally and can attest he is quite a bit smarter than an intelligent 10th Grader.
ARAFAT AFP reports that 50 militants seized a government office and demanded that Mr. Arafat's cousin resign his security job and that 50 other officers must go. AFP notes that the militants just under the banner of Fateh consist of dozens of small groups, and that Fateh officials have denied they had anything to do with the group.
The AFP story serves to further underline the potential dangers of the current leadership crisis. The whole thing could blow up into a civil war.
PAKISTANI TROOPS TO IRAQ? Jang of Pakistan reports that the government has said it will seek the approval of Parliament before sending troops to Iraq.
The situation here is quite straightforward. The Pakistan government is ready, willing, and able to send troops. It is concerned about a domestic counter-reaction. It is slowly, carefully, working its way through the shoals and seeking to get a consensus on the question. If there is a consensus, the Pakistan government earns much leverage with Washington. Pakistan can send 20,000 troops without much effort. If there is no consensus, the Pakistan government can say: "Look, we gave it our very best shot. The people are against it." Washington is properly appreciative of Islamabad's work, even if it did not pay off, the domestic opponents are happy. Win-win. Fairness disclosure: your editor is a great admirer of Pakistan's diplomacy.
AL-QAEDA THREATENS AUSTRALIA Jang of Pakistan reports that an Al Qaeda website threatens "pools of blood" if Australia does not withdraw its troops from Iraq.
There You Go Again. This advice to Mr. Bin Laden et al is not free. We are tired of giving free advice, and suspect Mr. Bin Laden et al do not take it seriously because it is free. We are the Rodney Dangerfield of the defense analysis business, that's for sure.
Okay, in brief, the pools of blood will be yours. The Australians have been quite restrained in their commitment to Iraq because of the intense domestic opposition. Still, they take their commitments to the US alliance seriously, unlike some US allies, and they have done a great deal considering the domestic situation. If, Sir, you would for once learn something about your adversaries, you would find:
1. The Australian establishment feels it has done its duty to the US, and is working to reduce the Australian military presence in Iraq/nearby. 2. Just because you have made a white country cringe - Spain - does not mean that because Australia is also white, it too will cringe. You need to go back to Elementary Logic, freshman year college. Spain and Australia are quite different countries. 3. The fastest way to unite Australians and get them panting and drooling for your blood is to threaten them or worse, to hit them. 4. If you say the Australian of today is not the Australian of yesteryear when it comes to toughness, we'd agree. But neither is your lot as tough as the Arab warriors of yesteryear. There are very few societies that relish war as a blood sport and need only an excuse to go out there and kill people. America is, of course, the leader here. Interestingly, Australia is also one of the few.
The reason you probably don't know this is that Australia kind of stays below everyone's radar, by choice. It has its relaxed, fun-loving, whatever side. It also has another side: "Dudes, this Osama is getting an attitude. We need to pick up our guns and go talk some sense into him." [Australians don't speak that way: our Oz Lingo is very outdated so we had to improvise. But please, Sir, just accept our point that's the way they're going to react.]
In sum: Back off. Apologize. Remind the Australians Al Qaeda is a loose grouping of many different organizations. Release videotapes of the responsible group's leader on the mat, with you giving him a sound thrashing for insulting your best friends, the Australians. Who knows? It's always possible some Australians may actually buy your spiel.

0330 GMT July 24, 2004

TERRORISTS PREPARING NEW AIRPLANE BOMBING TECHNIQUES? A reader sends us an article which we advise not reading if you travel by air. The article includes a lengthy quote from the UK Observer which says that terrorists have been making dry runs for a new bombing technique: different people bring parts of a bomb [technically IED] on board the aircraft, and the device is assembled on the aircraft.

If you wish, now read the experience of one family on a domestic US flight: click
http://www.womenswallstreet.com/WWS/article_landing.aspx?titleid=1&articleid=711. We'd like to hear what readers think about the article. One question: wouldn't the explosive part of an IED be "sniffed" by dogs or machines if a passenger attempted to carry it on to an aircraft?

GAZA/WEST BANK Washington Post reports an Israeli peace group as saying despite pledges from the government, settler expansion in the Occupied Territories continues unabated. 8000 settlers live on 40% of the land in Gaza; 1.3 million Palestinians live on the remaining 60%.

If these figures are correct, then Houston, we have a problem. Your editor is not one of those who believes if the US abandons Israel to its fate, that Arab relations with the US would turn to milk and honey instead of the sulfuric acid they are today. Moreover, he most emphatically believes that the current fundamentalist threat is motivated little, if at all, by the US support of Israel. The fundamentalists are people who want to return to the world to the 15th Century, Israel or no Israel. At the same time, those figures have to give anyone pause for thought. What is going on here?

AN AMERICAN VIEWPOINT Our argument is this: the US is engaged in a war with Islamic fundamentalism, it needs to clear its rear. This does not mean abandoning Israel. To our mind, it means one of two things. The US needs to convince the Israelis to withdraw to their UN-mandated borders pre-1967, and it has to guarantee their security. If the Israelis won't listen, make it their problem, not the Americans' problem. Or the US has to persuade the Jordanians that Jordan is the true home of the Palestinian people. How will the US do that? We keep getting told by every second Washingtoon how brilliant s/he is. Your editor would let the Washingtoons figure it out. [To our non American friends: that is not a misspelling.]

DAFUR Another poll on Arab attitudes toward the US is out, and - surprise! - more Arabs hate the US now then they did before Gulf II, yada yada yada. A friend of ours had two weights on his desk: the small one said "Little Deal" and the large one said "Big Deal". Being subtle, he would never say "Big Deal!". He would simply slam the larger one in front of you. We are sure Americans everywhere are crying that they are hated so much. Okay, but what has this to do with Darfur?

Everything. In Darfur, Sudanese Arabs are trying to kill or drive Sudanese black people out of the country. It is called genocide, and in the real sense of the term, not like some Iraqis saying the US is committing genocide in Iraq. One of the things they don't teach much to American school kids - because of political correctness - is that if Americans were buying slaves from Africa, someone had to be selling them. Those someone were the North African Arabs.

We have been waiting for some time for the Arab leaders and their people to denounce Arab genocide. We continue to wait.

NEW ZEALAND Haartez of Israel says a New Zealand citizen who lived in Israel for 13 years and served in the IDF is likely involved in the passport affair. Austrian sources say that another person involved is an Israeli diplomat.

Okay, we accept this was a Mossad operation - let's not argue about this. We go back to the same question we asked a couple of days back: Mossad can't forge good passports? Seems every second Islamic terrorist is wandering all over the placed with forged documents. We have no clue as to the truth of the New Zealand affair, but it's making less and less sense.

POSSIBLE ISRAELI STRIKE AGAINST IRAQ N-ASSETS A reader reminds us to mention that Israel now has air-to-surface missiles with 150-300 kilometers range, so that if anyone is sitting around plotting how the Israelis might conduct an attack against Iran's N-assets, to please take that into account. Good point. We think, however, the Israelis will use their ASMs to clear the way for their F-15s. There are some targets that need 2000-pounders. The Popeye ASM, for example, carries a 750-lb warhead.

0330 GMT July 23, 2004

RAMADI US Marines from the 1st Expeditionary Brigade fought a battle with 75-100 insurgents in Ramadi, killing 25 and capturing 25. The Marines had 14 wounded, of whom 10 returned to their units after first aid. The Marines also used air strikes.

These are the sort of figures we like to see. What concerned us about the inevitable toll of 2, 3 4 Marines a day in Anbar Province is that the US has been giving no details of the engagements or the enemy losses.

IRAQ PRIME MINISTER Newsweek reports that the new Iraqi Prime Minister is cracking down ruthlessly in areas under his control. In one raid alone, 500 suspects were rounded up, and no one was talking about their legal rights. Police have again become confident because people know that the government will not stand for any nonsense. Apparently the Prime Minister has either executed a few people himself to set the general tone, or he has unleashed stories to this effect to instill fear.

Before we get all weepy about human rights, consider this. When an American policeman tells you to stop, you stop. Why? Not because you live in a democracy with human rights and love your police to death. Its because you know darn well if you don't stop, he will kill you, and the courts will take his side. American police keep the peace the way all police keep the peace: by fear. The human rights comes in because once you stop, you have rights, for example, the policeman cannot search you without due cause. So even if you have five machine-guns in your car, he is going to have to prove in court he stopped you not because his instinct told him you were up no good, but because he had due cause - your right brake-light wasn't working.

What's happening in Iraq is a war between the criminals/insurgents and the state/US. In wartime civil liberties are suspended. Would Hitler have been defeated if at every meter US troops had to read everyone their rights etc.? Obviously not.

THE ABSURDITY OF IT ALL If you have ever wondered why the US has not been able to keep any law and order in Iraq, consider this story which an Iraqi policeman told Newsweek. When US forces were in charge, he brought in an insurgent. Near the gate of the police-station, the insurgent started fighting with the policeman. The policeman subdued him by force. The US soldiers standing outside the police station arrested the policeman.

Now, you say, this is altogether too crazy for words. We agree. Were the soldiers being over-zealous? By no means. If they had done nothing, and a US cameraman or reporter had been on the scene, here's the headline: "US troops stand casually by smoking cigarettes and drinking water while Iraqi police brutally beat a suspect." Next thing you know, the headline reads: "Iraqi victim sues US Army in New York, alleging that Iraqis under US control beat him."

So - you say to your editor - tell us again how America is going to build a world empire? We need a good laugh, its been a tough day at the office. Well, the Americans already have a world empire, they just want to make sure every bit is under their control. Your editor has his theories on how the US manages despite the strong Three Stooges element in modern American society, one day he'll share them.

SAMARRA: MIGHT THIS BE THE REAL MISTAKE THE US MADE IN IRAQ?

Washington Post reports that residents are fleeing this city of 300,000 because of fears the US is about to launch an offensive against the insurgents there. Some say 40% of the residents have already left.

Samarra is a city between Tikrit and Baghdad, and another hotbed of pro-Saddam people. The Washington Post quotes a local as saying "Samarra drove Saddam crazy," because there are seven tribes resident. The tribes were often at odds. At least one of them specialized in criminal activity.

US 1st Infantry Division (Mechanized) is responsible for Sammara, and its spokesperson all but explicitly says an offensive is coming, says the Post. 1st Division is studying how to avoid a Fallujah-type situation, where Iraqi forces failed to fight. Apparently, however, after a mortar attack this week which killed five US soldiers and an Iraqi, large numbers of the National Guard have deserted [this is the former ICDC].

What we find interesting is the information that Saddam did not really control Samarra. We already know he did not control Fallujah. It may just be possible that he managed to remain dictator for so long because in most of Iraq he played one faction against another, and did not try to impose what we think of as law and order except in Baghdad - and that too we don't know if his writ ran to Sadr City. If this is so, the US has made a terrible mistake in trying to do things the American way: this may be the first time people in Iraqi cities are being forced to function in a way that makes sense to most people, be they American or European or Chinese or Indian.

There have been repeated hints in the media that the arrival of the Americans upset the local balances of power. No media source has particularly explored this facet of the resistance. We cannot particularly blame them, because it would never occur to outsiders that this is the way Iraq is run.

Nonetheless, it is not as if the Americans did not have any idea at all. Somalia functioned, and continues to function, on a pure tribal basis. Everyone was basically getting along once the UN arrived; the trouble started when Ms. April Glaspie of State decided Adeed had to go. Afghanistan and Yemen are two other countries your editor knows for a fact that operate on a tribal basis, with balances of power carefully negotiated. Every now and then the balance breaks down as one side pushes and the others push back, and you get bloody violence. After a few days of shooting, the balance is readjusted and restored.

We want to carefully point out that the above system does not mean there was no law and order. Except when someone sought to change the balance, there was strict law and order because tribal law was in force. We want to note only that it's a very different system from the way most of the world functions.

If our thinking is along correct lines, it would follow that overthrowing Saddam would be easy. But after overthrowing him, the US would need to accept local balances of power in each city, district, province. They would need to pay off people and tribes Saddam paid off - this is happening in situations like the oil pipelines. It was how the 1st Armored Division defeated Al-Sadr. But it for sure is not the way things have been done in Baghdad, Fallujah, Mosul and so on.

Given the above, the US is in really big trouble. The issue is not building a democracy where none existed. Its highly condescending for westerners to assume democracy cannot be brought to Iraqis. India is one of the poorest and least literate major countries in the world, and it also happens to be a country where with the exception of two years, democracy has thrived. Of course the Iraqis can learn about democracy. But the issue is something else: the US occupation has to be based on the understanding every local area has its own politics, and the US has too work within the politics.

It is not as if the US military is not capable of so doing: it has been doing so very well in Afghanistan, and it has developed a high degree of understanding of Iraq realities. Its that the media is not active in Afghanistan, so we don't have a spate of stories of US forces accepting corrupt warlords, buying off people, turning a blind eye when intra-tribal politics result in some human rights abuse and so on. And again, it's not as if the press wouldn't understand the realities on the ground: almost without exception all the non-Indian journalists your editor has met overseas are highly intelligent. But the press cannot do without its stories. And if it could, how would a headline like this play in Preoria: "US puts local tribal leader on taxpayer's payroll; agrees to look the other way if he leaves US forces alone"? In this case we cant put all the blame on the press, or even most of it.

What's the solution? Oddly enough mostly what the US is doing right now. Turn over power to the locals, help build up security forces, not judge the local leaders, and provide backup in terms of money and armed force. We say "mostly" because the US is not doing this on a city-by-city basis. It is still treating Iraq as a nation the way we think of the US, or India, or China as a nation, with a single legal code, a single government, a unified armed force under central control etc etc.

0330 GMT July 22, 2004

IRAN N-BOMB Reuters say Israeli defense officials believe that Iran will have its first N-bomb by 2007. They have pushed back the date because, they say, Iran is now under watch and is having trouble getting the equipment it needs.

Orbat.com would be a lot happier if anyone has seen evidence of an unsafeguarded plutonium production reactor. In 1984 your editor forecast a Pakistan bomb by 2000, though people were assuming it already had several warheads. His current estimate is 2005, and Pakistan seems well on track. But what about the six test explosions Pakistan staged in 1998? Doesn't that indicate Pakistan must have several bombs. Well, there is a lot of mystery about those "explosions". Readers cannot expect your editor to solve every thing: he to earn a living. When he did his original work on the Pakistan non-bomb, it took him from 1984 to 1986 to make his point. These things take time. Our Indian readers, particularly the science types, are the ones who should answer this question.

US CLEARS ARMS SALES TO IRAQ President Bush has authorized the sales of American arms to Iraq. Also, the IAEA is to send a team to Iraq to certify Iraq's nuclear program has been dismantled. The certification will clear the way for lifting of UN embargoes.

AFGHANISTAN US and Afghan forces fought a gun battle with insurgents, killing ten and capturing five wounded, at a cost of five wounded to their side. In another incident, however, a pickup conveying 11 government militiamen was ambushed by insurgents and all the soldiers were killed.

SAUDI'S MOST WANTED Agencies say the Saudis have accounted for 14 persons on their Most Wanted list of 26. The Saudis do not rank their wanted.

YEMEN AFP says that the Yemen government is still battling a fundamentalist cleric who has been under attack now for some months. He had about 3000 followers, of which 800 have been arrested and 300 killed. The government is said to have a similar number of dead. The cleric says he is being targeted because he speaks out against the Americans.

Give it a rest, Mr. Cleric. The one thing you get medals and rewards for these days is to speak out against the Americans. The US government does not own Yemen. You are under attack because you are a fundamentalist and a threat to Yemen. How boring. Blaming America inflates your opinion of yourself. We doubt any American thinks s/he is as powerful as you make out.

In the good old days of the Cold War, leftists frenziedly attacked the CIA: watch out, this is a CIA plot and that is a CIA plot and we are in danger from the CIA and they control the factory that makes our toilet paper etc. A CIA acquaintance once drolly said to your editor: "Given that our plots are so easily revealed and foiled, we must be as incompetent as the Three Stooges. No one fears the Three Stooges."

MR. BUSH'S PERSONALITY

This is not irrelevant. Just about everyone we know is seriously aggravated by Mr. Bush, and its a deep visceral hatred that no one can really explain. Seeing as lot of what goes on in the world turns on Mr. Bush's personality, your editor offers the insights below - gleaned from the US media, of course.
WHY PEOPLE HATE BUSH So, we all know by now how dumb Dubaya is. A US columnist says, however, he is not dumb. He deliberately speaks the way he does because he's talking to his core constituency and not to the liberals or even - gasp! - the Euro-intellectuals. We are not referring to his mashing words and sentences - that's a learning disability and your editor suffers from it too. The columnist is referring to the content/accent of Bush's words. Everyone in his family speaks standard American, and Bush's connections with Texas are a bit weak till he became Governor. The cowboy accent and the hard black-vs-white language is deliberate. It's driving a good percentage of the world insane. But the people who vote for him love this accent and his words. And - you guessed it - the Indians, French, Germans etc. do not get to vote in the US presidential elections. So if you hate Bush, you can hate him even more now.
DOONESBURY ON BUSH Gary Trudeau, author of the Doonesbury cartoon strip, gives an interview to the latest Rolling Stone. He was two years younger to Mr. Bush at Yale and while he is careful not to claim he knows Mr. Bush well, their paths crossed often. He says Bush has a genuine ability to relate to people, but he also has seemingly innocuous ways of putting a person down if he is displeased. The bestowing nicknames on everyone is an example, says Mr. Trudeau.
We don't doubt Mr. Bush can be very sharp, but we always thought Mr. Bush gave everyone nicknames because that's what preppies do. Your editor grew up a la Preppie mode. He still prefers to give a nickname to everyone rather than use their real name. He does it as short-hand, and not as a put down: in India we call nicknames pet names and they're used affectionately. But what do we know, we're from Iowa.

OUR HEAD HURTS

This is no way to title a news story, but we are simply stating a matter of fact.
It now appears that according to UK and US parliamentary/congressional investigations on the "failure" of WMD intelligence before Gulf II, there was plenty of reason to believe Saddam had by no means given up his dream of reacquiring WMDs. The evidence was not conclusive that he had managed to reacquire them. But his efforts were not in doubt.
Further, while we have been told for months that the US envoy to Niger had said there was no evidence of Iraq's attempts to procure uranium ore, apparently it appears that his report and other evidence show there was an attempt, which did not succeed. This is the same envoy who's diplomat wife was outed by the Washington Post as being a senior CIA officer, blowing her long-established cover.
We should add that in a peculiar fit of nationalism, the US media has not gone after her, and the few photographs of her published show dark glasses, scarves, and little of her face to be seen. We say nationalism because we want to be generous to the US media. Their restraint could also have been sympathy for her at being made to suffer because her husband told the US government things on WMD it did not want to hear.
The Washington Post says that there was enough evidence that Mr. Bush need not have exaggerated anything. He could have made his case - presumably with patience, tact, and diplomacy- on the evidence.
The problem with today's reality is that reality is what the media says it is. Everyone is convinced that Mr. Bush lied outright, and now no matter what the evidence, most people are going to hold that belief till they day they die. Moreover, it's a standard propaganda technique that if you repeat a lie long enough and loudly enough, the truth will no longer matter.
Thank you, US media for telling us President Bush lied. Thank you US media for telling us he didn't lie, but he exaggerated the evidence. Of course, had he sat in Solomon-like judgment, decided the evidence was insufficient to justify war, and it turned one day that Saddam did have WMDs, you would have been calling for Bush's head. Us teachers have a word for this: oppositional. You say yes, your student says no. You say, okay, its no. He says yes. This behavior is normally seen between the ages of 5-10, in your editor's experience. That's much more mature than the US media.
We've taken two aspirin but won't call the doctor in the morning. No doubt there will be some other story altogether tomorrow.
In any case, who gives a darn? Iraq needed to be taken care of even if WMD-wise it was pure as driven snow - or should that be yellow as driven sand? No one your editor talked to in the run-up to Gulf II was at all interested in the WMD question. Take a broad view, and Iraq is about the return of the Crusades. Take an even broader view, and it is about establishing a world empire. Our readers should be no more interested in did Mr. Bush lie or not lie or whatever than they should be in what brand of toothpaste he uses. Come to think of it, the toothpaste information would have greater utility...

0330 GMT July 21, 2004

WAZIRISTAN Jang of Pakistan has been reporting skirmishes between militants and Pakistan security forces in South Waziristan, North West Frontier Province. On Tuesday, reports say 10 militants were killed. The Pakistan Army has between 70-80 militants boxed up in two valleys, and has taken all commanding mountain top positions. PAF F-7s have been attacking bunkers and fortifications.
AFGHANISTAN Jang of Pakistan reports that a brother-in-law of Mullah Omar, the Taliban leader, has been captured in Afghanistan. On information received, Afghan security forces "flooded" the area of his sighting. He attempted to fight it out with the security forces, killing one police officer before being subdued.
LEBANON AFP reports subsequent to a gun battle on the Israel-Lebanon border, in which two Israeli soldiers and a militant were killed, two Israeli fighters made a low level pass over Beirut, setting off sonic booms and panicking the population. Lebanese AA batteries opened fire with no results. The gun battle, which began when Hezbollah snipers killed two Israeli soldiers near Galilee. The actions come after a top Hezbollah leader was killed in Beirut. While his group is blaming Israel for hid death, the Israelis say they are not responsible. Debka says that the security for the particular gentleman was very tight
SAUDI AP quotes the two Arab TV stations as saying Saudi security forces have been engaging in shoot outs in Riyadh with terrorists. One report says several Saudis police were killed. CNN says over 100 security forces vehicles arrived in a one square mile area, possibly on information received, and that two terrorists have been killed. One may the man who succeeded the top Al-Qaeda man in Saudi Arabia, killed last month in a shoot-out.
The Saudis say 61 terrorists have surrender under the amnesty declared by the Kingdom, including four top men. The amnesty ostensibly offers immunity only from the death penalty.
US BASE IN ISRAEL? Debka says a Central Israel base is being constructed that will be used by the US for training and as a forward staging post for US Marine Corps and Army deployments to the Middle East. Orbat.com question: are we, as usual, the last to know or is this report not authentic?
NEW ZEALAND Haartez of Israel reports that the New Zealand government believes the passports that Mossad agents tried to obtain were to be used for an assassination bid in a third country. This would have created severe problems for New Zealand. The two men arrested and sentenced for the affair apparently belong to a criminal organization, suggesting they were not Mossad but working on the Israeli agency's behalf. Two other men are being sought.
What Orbat.com would like to know is: has Mossad become so inefficient at forgery that it had to try and get real passports? Whose photographs were supposed to be on the passports? If they were to be of the two men, were they also the assassins? If the passports were to be altered with pictures of the assassins, why couldn't Mossad simply alter other New Zealand passports? Passports are quite easy to obtain without actually stealing off the individuals carrying them. One common "scam" is to work with a travel agent who obtains visas for his clients - any good travel agent does this work. This is particularly good to use if you don't have access to a good forger: the travel agent keeps bringing you passports until you find ones that could pass for the passports of your operators, and then the travel agent says "so sorry, your passport was mislaid by the visa people - " - or whoever. Is the New Zealand government so efficient it can immediately inform passport controls worldwide that passports Numbers ABC12345 and -6 are no longer valid? There are many questions here.
The biggest question is: should your editor be complaining about lack of time if he spends time on such trivial issues as above? Well, perhaps he shouldn't. But any analyst who is any good will tell you that to do your analytical job you have to have a penchant for sniffing out stuff that makes no sense.
CORRECTION Reader Gholam Kian reminds us that the Nobel laureate lawyer representing the Canadian-Iranian journalist who was killed in Iran is not Arab: she is Iranian. We knew this, of course, because she received a lot of publicity, and in case of doubt we could easily have checked. In reality, sparing even a minute to check is often difficult in a one-person show like our news page.

0330 GMT July 20, 2004

ISRAEL-IRAN

ISRAEL PLANNING IRAN ATTACK Joseph Stefula forwards an article from the Sunday Times July 18, 2004, which says Israel is preparing to attack the Bushire nuclear power plants should Russia start sending fuel to Iran. Fuel is supposed to arrive late next year, the Sunday Times says that payment disputes have delayed matters. Israeli sources tell the newspaper that attacks have been rehearsed. The operation might be expanded to cover other potential nuclear weapons facilities such as the gas centrifuge plant at Nantaz. Both air and commando strikes would be undertaken, with the Israelis quoted as saying they are absolutely sure they will succeed.
FISSION 001 Once slightly enriched uranium is "burned" inside a nuclear reactor to produce heat, which in turn produces steam, Plutonium 239, 240, and 241 are produced in the fuel rods. The plutonium you want is 239, because that is fissile; 240 and 241 you don't want, because they dampen the chain reaction. Normally, when used for power production, the percentage of Pu 240 etc. gets much too high for a practical bomb. What Israel is worrying about is that [1] high Pu 240 etc may be unsuitable for bombs, but can be used as a radiological weapon, particularly given Israel is so small geographically. [2] Unless the monitoring is very tight, Iran could run short burns, maximizing Pu 239 production and minimizing Pu 240 etc. Then it could build bombs.
EFFECTIVE IRANIAN BOMBS MAY STILL BE IMPOSSIBLE Now, the situation is much more complicated than that so often described by arms controls groups. Its not clear to your editor, at least, that Bushire's core design will be conducive to plutonium production. Once you have plutonium, extracting it from the fuel rods and making plutonium spheres causes much loss of the plutonium, so you need much more than the theoretical figures some people use. Further, once the explosion is set off, below a certain threshold, the amount of Pu-239 needed to sustain criticality falls and the reaction stops.
THERE WILL BE NO 20 IRANIAN BOMBS A YEAR So please ignore the Sunday Times' estimate that 20 bombs a year or whatever could be made by Iran.
BUT ISRAEL CANNOT AFFORD TO TAKE CHANCES Nonetheless - and we emphasize the word - if someone is crazy enough and determined enough and lucky enough, they could make warheads from less than ideal Pu 239, keep them from blowing up prematurely, firing the launch vehicle successfully, getting the vehicle to arrive with reasonable accuracy, and getting a reasonable explosion at the end of it all. It is fine for your editor to sit there and make calculations, but no country would want to take a chance, particularly when your enemy is Iran, which has said time and again with utmost clarity that it is going to destroy you. So Israel has to attack.
WON'T DETERRENCE APPLY? We could start arguing deterrence theory: Israel is assumed to have warheads, and if even a single missile reached Israel, and produced the slightest explosion, it can be assumed that Israel would wipe Iran out of existence. This should suffice to deter Iran.
Problem is, [1] deterrence theory is an American construct and there can be all sorts of reasons why it might not work, particularly when you have a "suicidal" nation; and [2] military men cannot just sit there and keep giving up their "buffer" between the possibility and the actuality. They have to assume the worst. War is not a game of calculated probabilities and rational actions. It is a state of extreme chaos; the more insurance you can build for yourself, the better.
[THE IRRELEVANCY OF DETERRENCE THEORY Note: deterrence theory says that the threat of losing even one major city to nuclear attack is a catastrophe beyond bearing. So, assume the worst and assume 90% of your warheads don't arrive or function as they should. Rationally, 100 city busters should be more than enough to deter anyone. The US, however, went on to build 40,000 warheads and the Soviets 25,000. There are reasons for this, but one reason is that deterrence theory is just that - theory. In real life, you want as much insurance as you can get. This is quite off-track, but it's been a pet peeve of your editor for decades, and one reason he refused to study deterrence theory: he has better things to do than play mind games and make himself look important to himself.]
SO ISRAEL HAS TO ATTACK So we go back to the same thing: Israel has to attack, ergo it will; there is nothing anyone can do about it - other than eliminating Israel's arsenal and building a terrifically efficient air defense system for Iran and manning it with westerners. That's unrealistic, so lets go back to the statement that Israel has to attack. When it does, Iran will retaliate by any means possible, and that's where the US comes in, as a fireman to douse the fire, limiting damage to everyone else, and in the process make sure Iran gets burnt down.
Is this the October surprise? Orbat.com doesn't have the faintest clue, so we are not going to waste our readers' time with fake, pretentious analysis.

0330 GMT July 19, 2004

IRAQ AFP reports the US bombed a Fallujah house where 25 insurgents had gathered; local reports say 14 people including a woman were killed. The US made a point of emphasizing the strike was authorized by the Iraqi government.
In another development that shows, in a small way, that Iraq really is a sovereign nation, the Iraq government has permitted Al-Sadr's newspaper to appear again. The US shut it down because it was inciting locals against US troops, and the decision was a major factor in Al-Sadr's uprising.
AFP also says a Republican Guard major-general who was financing insurgents has been captured. This officer was found in Tikrit, and had been responsible for the defense of Baghdad in the 2003 war.
PALESTINE Agencies report the leadership crisis in Palestine has escalated. The Prime Minister is the latest official to resign.
Giving into international pressure Mr. Arafat finally reorganized the several Palestine security forces into three units, but instead of appointing an independent as the head of the security forces, as demanded by the international community and many Palestinians, he put his cousin in charge. The cousin, a former intelligence chief, is said to both corrupt and brutal.
Mr. Arfat's move led to unrest, and about 150 militants staged a demonstration in Rafah against him. The demonstration as fired upon apparently on orders of the new security chief, wounding 18. In retaliation, militants sacked a security office in Khan Yunis, setting free detainees and stealing weapons.
Orbat.com comment: if the unrest grows, this is the end of Mr. Arafat. What interests us most is Israel's alarm. Israel hates Mr. Arafat with a vengeance, but because the opposition to him is being led by younger elements in his armed Fatah party, Tel Aviv is now worried that a battle is brewing between the "moderates" - i.e. Mr. Arafat and company, and the "extremists", the Fatah rebels. Assuming that Tel Aviv is not dissimulating, it must be disconcerting to Israel that here is a situation it cannot influence or control.
This is nothing personal, but we suggest anyone reading Debka.com at this time on the Palestine trouble should be extremely careful.

IRAN

In Teheran a drama is taking place that typifies how out of touch Iranian hardliners are with the rest of the world.

A JOURNALIST IS KILLED In 2003 a Canadian woman journalist of Iranian origin was arrested some months back, and struck on the head by a member of the security forces. She then was taken to several police stations in different cities; what happened is not known, but she died. Her crime? Taking pictures outside a Teheran prison.

This sad story is quite common in authoritarian regimes. What came next, however, shows the problem with Iran's hardliners.

WORLD OPINION PREVAILS Normally the journalist's death in custody would have been a routine affair. Because, however, of international media pressure and the acute interest taken by the Canadian and EU governments at what they saw was a serious human rights violation by Iran, a trial was begun. The pressure got serious at times, such as when to protest Iran's dilly-dallying Ottawa was preparing to recall its ambassador.

The first round of the trial ended inconclusively nine months ago, and resumed on Saturday.

BUT TEHERAN MESSES UP At the trial, the victim's family protested that the proceedings were a cover-up. An innocent security officer was being blamed for striking the journalist. The journalist's legal team demanded that more witnesses be called. The judge refused and said the trial was over. The legal team refused to sign the court record and stormed out.

At the same time, foreign journalists and diplomats were barred from attending the trial on Sunday, though on Saturday they were allowed.

NO LIMIT TO STUPIDITY To understand the complete stupidity of the trial court, consider this. The world has been watching Iran since the journalist's death. Any normal country today - no matter how proud - would have been doing it's best to at least pretend the trial was fair. Iran's position has been that the journalist's Canadian citizenship mean nothing: she was an Iranian and therefore what happened to her is none of anyone's business.

In full view of the world, aside from barring the journalists the trial court refused to let Canadian, Dutch, French, and British diplomats attend. A Justice Ministry official flippantly opined that perhaps there were not enough chairs for the foreigners and so they were barred.

Further, the defense team is headed by the only Arab woman ever to be awarded a Nobel prize: she is a lawyer by profession.

TEHERAN IN THE FIRE Teheran has willingly jumped into the frying pan. The Canadians and Europeans are incensed: the Canadian ambassador has been withdrawn as of yesterday; European action is yet to be announced. The defense lawyer has threatened to take the Iranian Government to the World Court: no idle threat this, she is backed by some of the most powerful government's in the world.

HAS EUROPE LEARNED ITS LESSON? To our Canadian friends - and our European friends - we offer a strong rebuke. You have been cozying up to Teheran to forestall tough US action against Iran on its nuclear program. Your justification was you had a better way than Washington, the way of negotiations and not threats of war. The Iranian took you for a ride. Then they promised an open trial on the journalist's death; they have pointedly told you to go home. There is no better way. After the rigged elections - were they not a serious breach of human rights? - you should have taken the lead in isolating Iran. Instead you chose to keep dealing with it.

You should go home as the Iranians want, but to mobilize your armies, and prepare for war. Else it wont be your ambassadors being barred from a trial: it will an Iran telling you to do what it wants you do, or else it will put a warhead on your capital. We understand you think Mr. Bush is an idiot. But please end your petulant behavior right now. It's your future that is at stake. Mr. Bush's personality or lack of it has no bearing on the situation.

THE IRANIANS REALLY DON'T UNDERSTAND Meanwhile, we refrain from giving our usual free advice as far as Iran is concerned. Iran can simply not understand that the death of one woman is of such major significance. The hardliners are possibly cynically saying: "this will blow over: how can one woman, an insignificant woman, dominate our relations with the west?" Indeed, however, she can. The hardliners do not understand the west and they do not understand the importance of human rights today. Even the US, the mightiest power the world has ever seen, had to grovel when its soldiers mistreated a few Iraqi prisoners. You will have to grovel too. But of you say you will not, at least at Orbat.com understand your position. No amount of groveling is going to avert the hammer blows that are being prepared for you.

THE RECKONING IS COMING ANYWAY In a sense you are right: the woman is unimportant, and even if you make amends for her, the US is still coming after you. If you do make amends, however, you can complicate America's position with the Europeans, as happened with Iraq. Pride goes before a fall.

Your editor suspects that we are still some way from military action against Iran because this time the US will not, so readily, act unilaterally. It will seek to build coalitions. Nonetheless, there is a third player in this game, Israel. If Israel strikes on its own and Iran retaliates, then the US will be at war.

MR. BUSH, ARE YOU LISTENING, SIR? Personal plea to your editor's favorite president: Sir, assuming you are the one that has to give the "Go" order, can you PLEASE not mess things up this time? If you do, you will set the US back by a quarter century. The stakes are high. Fortunately, messing up on Iran is very, very difficult...[but we still worry - the things your team has done in Iraq surpass rational belief...okay, so you are getting it right at last. Its so much easier not to mess up to start with...are you listening, Sir?

0100 GMT July 18, 2004

IRAN-9/11 LINK Agencies say the 500-page US 9/11 Commission report to be released says Iran facilitated passage for 8-10 of the hijackers from Afghanistan to Europe by ordering border guards not to stamp their passports with Iranian stamps. Iran also provided clean passports.

First, let us clearly state that we do not doubt that Iran is one of the biggest backers of terrorism in the world. We support the hardest of hard lines against the fascist ayatollahs of Iran and Iran's nuclear program.

This said, the news above is highly underwhelming. We understand the almost insuperable difficulties in getting to the truth of 9/11. At the same time, in our opinion the US is going to have to do better if it wants to lay a case for punishing Iran. And, of course, we are doing the US government the courtesy of assuming the information it provided the Commission is true and unbiased.

Why is the US Administration not doing a propaganda build up against Iran's nuclear weapons program? Seems to us that would be more productive because very little slanting of facts is needed.

AL-QAEDA THREATENS ITALY Of all the threats floating around, the US is inclined to take Al-Qaeda threats against Italy to be the most credible. Now Al-Qaeda has said that unless the Italian Prime Minister is thrown out of office, there will be rivers of fire and blood or whatever.

We've heard just about every excuse for the language the Arabs in general and Al-Qaeda in particular use when issuing threats: this is the way people in those parts speak, it resonates with their people, etc etc, till the cows come home and die of old age. We nonetheless believe that threatening Italy unless its PM is thrown out of office - by whom, we could ask - is a mark of Grade Triple A stupidity.

Is Al-Qaeda bent on arousing support by its violent and vile words, or does it hope to influence Italy? Some terrorism types are saying Al-Qaeda does not particularly care what effect its terror activities is having in the West, its words are aimed at Arabs only. If this is true, then may we suggest the west increase by a factor of 10 its war against Muslim extremism? Anyone who kills for "raising the consciousness" of their people is pathologically ill and must be put down with no more thought a municipality would give to putting down rabid dogs attacking people.

If Al-Qaeda aims to influence Italy, here is some free advice. Its not for the west to understand you. Its for you to understand the west. The type of threat you have issued will have exactly the opposite effect, of hardening the minds of the believers, and forcing more liberal-minded Italians to shift to the right. Moreover, using words like yours leads westerners to think you are a bunch of flatulent, homicidal, clowns.

To a westerner, the person who threatens and threatens and threatens is weak. The person who shuts his fat mouth and puts forth deeds instead of words is an enemy to respect.

En passant: thank you Spain for knuckling under the terror threat. We understand you can't stand the Americans in the reign of Bush 43. But if you are willing to shoot yourselves in the tush just to spite the Americans, then the cows will come home, and you will die.

Yes, we know how you oppose terrorism etc. and have stepped up your commitment to Afghanistan. That is a Good Thing Needing to Be Done. But that's not where the war is. Despite the American doom and gloom brigade, things are going quite nicely in Afghanistan, thank you. A lot better than in the Balkans, considering the west has been in Afghanistan less than 3 years and has seriously undermanned its missions.

Notice the terrorists don't issue threats "Get out of Afghanistan or rivers of blood will flow." That's because they mostly have been killed, and the remnants are in the process of being killed. If you need proof of this, look at the Taliban's hopelessly pathetic effort to derail the Afghan election: some women workers and a few policemen killed, this is the best the Taliban can do. Bosh and Nonsense. Washington's drug gangs do a better job of intimidating the people.

NATO/AFGHANISTAN We are not entirely clear on this, and welcome clarification/correction. It seems that NATO is sending two more battalion groups to Afghanistan, to provide security for the elections, one group for the North and one for the South. Additionally, two brigade HQs and four battalions are to be kept on alert for deployment if needed.

US-SOUTH AFRICA The US is to train and provide resources for two more SANDF infantry battalions to ease the strain on South Africa's Africa peacekeeping deployments.

Please note: Africa is one thing the US got right. Some years ago, it began training battalions from several African armies for peacekeeping. This was a low-cost effort, and it is paying off handsomely. The Africans are taking an increasingly greater load for in-continent peacekeeping.

1200 GMT July 17, 2004

GAZA EMERGENCY Agencies including AFP and Reuters say a state of emergency has been declared in Gaza after 4 French aid workers and six officials were abducted. All have been freed. Two top security officials have tendered their resignations; Mr. Arafat has refused to accept them.
Apparently the crisis arose because of the younger Palestine militants, who want to be rid of Mr. Arafat and other senior leaders they accuse of corruption. This unrest may be tied to jockeying for power ahead of the Israeli pull-out from Gaza, but of course the roots lie much deeper, in Mr. Arafat's inability or unwillingness to provide a functioning, fair, and honest government, plus the situation vis-�-vis Israel.
IRAQ AFP reports its cameraman was beaten and shots fired over his head when he tried to take pictures of the aftermath of an explosion aimed at killing Iraq's justice minister as he was traveling in Baghdad. Two of the minister's guards were killed.
We mention this because with the Americans having taken a step back and the Iraqis a step forward, this sort of thing is going to happen with ever greater frequency. Already the media is afraid to move around because of the insurgents and outlaws, but now they will have to reckon with the Iraqi government. Understandably, the Iraqi government feels no particular obligation to ensure foreign journalists conduct their business safely. Doubtless there will be "investigations" and "apologies", all of which will amount to nothing. Foreign journalists clearly have a right to be safe in their own countries, but do they have a right to be safe in other countries? We do not know the answer; nonetheless, expect that coverage of Iraq will keep becoming sketchier.

0400 GMT July 17, 2004

US OPPOSES GERMANY Reuters says that a senior US diplomatic [not identified] has said that the US opposes Germany's big for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. The only reason given was Bonn's opposition to the US push for immunity for its troops.
IRAQ Even we are surprised at the speed with which the US media has reduced its Iraq coverage. The only news of interest - and this is admittedly a stretch - is that some Sunni cleric in Ramadi has called for the US to withdraw or face a holy war. He was recently released after 3 months in US detention, and his house was raided last week. We are sure Washington is undergoing many sleepless nights. Are the delusions of this person of any import? He is said to be a major Sunni cleric, but right now the only major clerics are the Shia clerics.
TEL AVIV - WELLINGTON ROW Israeli-New Zealand relations are under strain after the arrest and sentencing of two persons who Wellington says are Mossad. These gentlemen were apparently doing something fraudulent in connection with New Zealand passports. Israel has informally regretted the incident but Wellington wants a formal apology.
Some sources we read say the Israelis were forging New Zealand passports, another report seems to suggest they tried to get a passport using the name of a person confined to a wheelchair.
The Mossad is now getting caught trying to forge passports? And it is doing so in New Zealand what is going on here?
Moreover, why had Orbat.com been reduced to such pathetic straits that this is all the news we can dredge up for today?
ISRAEL'S WALL We are corrected by a reader when he tells us that most of the 425 km fence between Israel and Palestine, about a quarter of which is complete, is a wall only in some sectors: otherwise it is a fence and not a wall. Debka says 30km out of 40km built to stop attacks on the capital will have to be rerouted. This has nothing to do with the World Court: the Israeli high court has also ruled that particular section must be rerouted.
NEWS OF THE MILDLY ABSURD Jang of Pakistan reports that after a visiting US official again told Pakistan that it had to stop terrorist activity in Indian Kashmir, a Pakistani official said that Pakistan was not involved in said terrorist activity. The CIA has it wrong, says the official. After all, says the official, the CIA had admitted it was wrong on Iraq. Suggestion to Pakistan Government: send this official back to college to study logic. It is a good thing only a few weird people like Orbat.com's editor read the Pakistan press, otherwise many people would be shaking their heads in disbelief that any government can hire any one as stupid as this official.
NEWS OF THE ABSURD Jang of Pakistan also reports that the same Pakistan official says that Islamabad has asked Washington to review its immigration policies vis-�-vis Pakistan because the policy "is (a) violation of human rights". Say what again? Your editor frankly admits many who know him well feel he is a dimwit, and he freely admits he is not an expert on the US Constitution or the UN Charter or whatever on human rights. So he apologies for having missed Section 1548 of the Charter, which states: "The United States is specifically obliged to permit citizens of other countries to migrate to the United States under terms other countries lay down. Any failure to meet the expectations of other countries in this regard will be deemed to constitute a violation of Human Rights." We ask our readers to send protest letters to their Congressmen at this heinous HR violation, and we loudly condemn Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch etc. for their failure to note Washington's crime.
BUMPER STICKER There is an American bumper sticker that seems to fit the above situation: "If you aren't outraged, you haven't been paying attention."

0230 GMT July 16, 2004

IRAQ REQUESTS TROOPS Iraq has requested peacekeepers from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Egypt, Morocco, and Oman.

We'd be interested to see how this request will be treated in Delhi. India was preparing to send a division to Iraq at the US's request when domestic pressure against deployment became overwhelming. Now, however, the Iraqi government has asked, and whatever India's thoughts on the matter may be, the request puts Delhi squarely on the hot seat. Not to respond would constitute a big setback in relations between the two countries, who have traditionally had close ties.

Bangladesh, in our estimation, will send troops. It has become a major peacekeeping contributor, and has recently raised fresh brigades and units to permit continued expansion of its international commitment. Most people in Bangladesh are Muslim. Pakistan also should now have no problem sending troops, because Iraq has asked, and presumably the troops will be under UN control. For the 3 countries together to send 5-6 brigades is a simple matter. This could free an equivalent number of US troops to return home.

If Washington has any sense left after the second summer in Iraq, it will accept the diminution of its security role and facilitate the arrival and maintenance of South Asian troops by providing support and money. More likely, Washington will start haggling over small sums of money, in the tens of millions, even though it spends a billion dollars a week on its own forces. There is something about seeing brown faces that triggers Washington's bazaar mentality. There is an old, old rule in human relationships: treat others as you would have them treat you. Show respect to the South Asians, accept if a brown soldier dies his family is as grieved as if he had been American, and stop bargaining as if you are an impecunious customer at Delhi's GB Road - that's the euphemistically titled "Red Light District".

ISRAEL PLANS FOR ARAFAT's FUNERAL The world press is abuzz with the release of a planning document that discusses several issues that will arise when Arafat dies. His followers will want him buried in Jerusalem, that must not be allowed. Chaos will overcome Palestine, start making contacts with the younger Palestine leaders and militants. No matter how he dies, if it is in Palestine, Israel will be blamed, so put no obstacles in his transfer to an overseas hospital for treatment. Arafat, 75, is said to be on a diet of boiled vegetables.

We have much sympathy for the Palestine people, none for Arafat. We were even mildly amused at the Israeli pyswar planning for Arafat's death while he sits like a cornered rat in his compound. The Israelis take care to mention he could die in three ways: after a prolonged illness, after a short illness, or by Israeli action. Nice move to slip that in casually. Nothing boosts a man's morale as much as his enemies making plans for his funeral.

This man has done nothing but make his people suffer so that he can fill his coffers and hold power. Working as your editor does in a Catholic school, he cannot say more than a polite "Bye Bye Afraat, We Hate To See You Go [Not!]". Its a good thing your editor's head nun does not read Orbat.com, because she'd have a few words even for that mild expression of your editor's feels. In case any one is interested, she reads/watches only the sports news. All the editor can say in his own defense is to bet that anyone who sees the way the people of Palestine live is going to agree the above words are very mild.

Its okay to blame the Israelis for the plight of the Palestine people, and your editor does - as a third worlder, however, not as an oh-so-chic European liberal. But the Israelis are only half the story. The other half is the Arab states and people like Arafat. Israel being a democracy, a significant fraction of the people - perhaps even more than half - accept their responsibility. Now let's hear the other side accept their responsibility.

No other excuse for the Arab tyrants has worked so well as "we need a state of emergency because of the Israeli aggression against the Palestine people, and we have to hate the Americans because they back Israel." Now its time for Washington to show some smarts. Bribe Israel to give back as much land as possible. Let Israel build a wall or whatever it wants. Start building houses, roads, hospitals, schools, power plants in Palestine. Give them away free. Guarantee the security of Israel AND Palestine. Sure this is all going to cost tens of billions, if not more. Sure there will still be Arabs that want to kill every Israeli and every American. They, however, will be marginalized. And if it doesn't bother Americans that the Europeans cant stand them, why should it bother them if a bunch of Arab lunatics cant stand them? The old ways have not worked. Try new ways. You have nothing to lose.

DAFUR Mr. Colin Powell, we understand you are an American first, last always, and the color of your skin is of no consequence to you. We approve: that is the way an American should think. Nonetheless, our thanks for your intervention in Dafur. We hear that but for you, there would have been no intervention. Of course we are grateful that you are working on ending the slaughter of black people. More than that we are grateful that at last America is upholding American principles in Africa. Its not just the Islamic world that needs help.

PRC & TAIWAN Agencies say a Beijing backed Hong King paper says that Taiwan must return to China or else in 20-years China will retake Taiwan by force.

Note to Beijing: with all respect, when the US protection of South Africa and Israel became too onerous, Washington turned a blind eye to their development of nuclear weapons programs. Orbat.com's editor has assumed that since the early 1970s the US has a similar plan for Taiwan.

Right now Taiwan is protected by the US nuclear umbrella. Twenty years from now, its quite likely you will use your economic power to force America to stand off. For one thing, thanks to the suicidal Democrats and Republicans alike, you will probably own at least half the American debt. For another, your anti-US trade embargo will push the US into a very serious depression. With millions of unemployed Americans venting their fury on Washington, of course Washington will withdraw its nuclear umbrella. But will that clear the way for your assault crossing of the Straits?

Within six months of the US slipping off the leash, Taiwan can have crude nuclear weapons ready, within three years, perhaps 20+ reasonably sophisticated ones, in five years perhaps 50+.

We suggest: forget the past. The old ways don't work. Time is not on your side. You lost this battle decades ago. Set up a Chinese federation. Give federation units genuine autonomy and the right to secede if Beijing breaks the central compact. Tibet, South China, Hong Kong, Taiwan are obvious candidates for federated status. Look to the future: space is the next frontier. Spend your energies on being Number 1 there.

By the way, we suspect you will not be able to take Taiwan by conventional force in 2020 even if the US abandons Taiwan and a nuclear Taiwan is not an issue. A lot of your planning is static and tends to assume that will you leap 4 squares while Taiwan advances only one. This is not sensible. Some of your military planners, we hear, are trying to tell you this. Listen to them.

0315 GMT July 15, 2004

IRAQ BRIEFS Al-Zarqawi, the Jordanian terrorist who is working either with, or as part of. Al-Qaeda, claims responsibility for the July 7 mortar attack on the Iraqi Prime Minister Allawi's residence, and says that "If one of the arrows lost its way, more are coming toward you and targeting your heart." Al-Zarqawi also terms the Prime Minister as "Iraq's traitor". [Mr. Zarqawi, your poetic lyricism is indeed inspiring. Nonetheless, might we point out the obvious to you? You first have to know where the Iraq prime minister is at the time of your attack; you have to register your mortar(s), and then fire. Since you cannot and will not know where he is at a particular time, and since you cannot afford to waste time registering, may we suggested the metaphor of aimed arrows is mildly unsuitable? Try this instead: The archer/Blindfolded/Shoots at the sky and runs/Steel rain falls randomly/Allawi sips a cool lemonade. Just trying to help you out with the poetry thing.][Re. the traitor thing: at least the PM is Iraqi. And you are from...remind us again?]
The same statement claims Katyusha rocket attacks against Marine positions in Ramadi.
Iraq police have arrested a Libyan who they say has confessed to the 2003 Ashura holy days bombings in Najaf, and to working for Al-Qaeda.
The US Marine who says he was kidnapped by Iraq insurgents has not been questioned on his story. The authorities are simply focusing on routine tests. He will be question when he returns to Quantico, VA. NPR says, without giving details, that his story may be a hoax.
ISRAELI BARRIER Agencies say Israel is redrawing the part of its barrier wall that has drawn criticism from the World Court. A reader reminds us that World Court rulings are not judicially binding. Incidentally, when visualizing "wall", better to visualize the Mother of All Walls. Short of using a powered hang-glider to fly over it, there is no way any one is getting through this barrier. A point we don't understand, and on which we welcome comments from our readers: as we see it, Israel deals with Palestine because of the latter's cheap labor. From the security viewpoint, might it not be cheaper just to simply terminate all dealings with Palestine?
TUN [TOTALLY USELESS NEWS] Former US defense official Strobe Talbott's new book mentions that the Indian defense minister, George Fernandes, was "strip-teased" twice on official visits to the US. The Indian media has been having a field day savoring this insult to the national honor by the Americans. We haven't seen the book, but the word "strip-teased" sounds more like it was made up by the Indian press rather than used by Mr. Talbott. Nonetheless, Mr. Fernandes says there was no "strip-tease"; he was asked to remove his shoes, socks, and coat, and then to raise his arms. He says he complied, and that was the end of the matter. We are waiting for the Indian media to mention that just the other day Senator John McCain was thoroughly searched by screeners at a Washington airport; while the process was underway, other passengers who recognized the senator greeted him. The senator was good natured about the incident, and said words to the effect of the rules should be applicable to everyone. A gracious attitude, just as the Indian defense minister's attitude was gracious - he never bothered to mention it to the press.

0300 GMT July 14, 2004

IRAQ BRIEFS CNN says Philippines has begun an early pull-out of its 51 soldiers from Iraq, apparently in response to threats by insurgents to kill a Filipino civilian hostage. Eight soldiers have left. The original withdrawal date was August 20; it remains to be seen if the 8 were scheduled to return home at around this time anyway. [Regardless, score one for the bad guys. The loss to the allies is, of course, no where near as serious as when Spain's contingent was pulled out; nonetheless, in the terror war, this is a definite setback, however symbolic.]

Police detained 525 alleged criminals in just one operation in Central Baghdad.

Al-Sadr is said to have been stabbed but not seriously injured by a person in his office during a disagreement about how much authority he can exercise without referring to his party.

Polls show 60% of Iraqis want US troops gone, but 60% say they fear withdrawal will add to the instability. [If this does not sound logical, not to worry: Iraqis are not operating on western logic.]

Jonathan Steele of the UK Guardian writes July 9 that his analysis of Presidential challenger John Kerry's pronouncements indicates Kerry would probably keep US troops in Iraq longer than Mr. Bush.

TURKEY-KURDS Operations are under way against Turkish Kurd rebels. Between 1999, when the PPK's leader was captured, and 2004, relative quiet was the norm. On June 1, however, the rebels who had refused to take advantage of a Turkish amnesty terminated the ceasefire.

AFGHANISTAN As forecast, the Taliban has stepped up its attacks in Afghanistan. Previously it has been targeting election workers. Now it is killing police. US forces have launched a new operation against the Taliban: Lightening resolve.

PAKISTAN Daily Jang says Pakistan is to spend $1.4 billion to buy 7 AEW twin turboprop aircraft from Sweden. Your editor has been predicting this move for 15 years, but always estimating five aircraft.

CONTINUITY IRA BBC reports that the US has designated the Continuity IRA as a terrorist group. CIRA is one of the two rejectionist factions of the IRA, which agreed to lay down arms. The second faction, Real IRA, is already designated by the US as a terrorist group.

Some of our English friends remain bitter against the US because for years Washington let the IRA openly raise money in America. Then the US was not the victim of terrorism, so "freedom fighters" were okay. When the US started getting by terrorists, "freedom fighters" became bad.

We spoke with one friend earlier today, and he said he does not blame the United States for changing its stance on other people's terrorist only when it was in the US interest to do so. That's realpolitik, he said.

What he objects to is "the [deleted] sermons the [deleted] US gives everyone on [deleted, deleted] terrorism. I can stomach the [deleted] Americans saying "we changed our [deleted] minds about terrorists/freedom fighters when we started getting deleted]". I cannot stomach the [deleted] moralizing that the American are [deleted] shoving up everyone's [deleted, body part reference].

Working as your editor does for a bunch of nuns, he does not approve the [deletes]. Nonetheless, the Englishman does have a point.

We did suggest to our friend that the English language is so rich in [deletes]. Why not do justice to the very expensive education his family bestowed on him by using an expanded vocabulary? We think he must been extra worked up because this normally beautifully-mannered gentleman replied: "And [deleted] you too, Charles". It the use of your editor's nickname Charles that gave him the hint his friend was stressed.

0230 GMT July 13, 2004

PALESTINE RIFT Washington Post says that younger Palestinians fed up of Arafat's corruption are seeking to reduce his power. Fatah, the armed wing of the PLO, is said to have turned against him. The politics of the area are complex, but there has been an anti-Arafat revolt underway for several months, and the Post's story is the latest manifestation.
Among the many who have no interest in a peaceful Palestine, Arafat it is at top of the list. He will lose all his power should peace break out, and even could face charges of corruption and perhaps murder. A survey quoted by the Post showed over 80% of Palestinians believe Arafat is personally corrupt. What surprises us that almost 1 in 5 believe he is not.
IRAQ EMERGENCY POWERS The Iraqi government has divided Baghdad into 8 zones and given police authority for mass arrests of criminals. Among other measures taken is the imposition of curfews in some cities.
WESTERN HR GROUPS AND IRAQ EMERGENCY The world media has been so focused on the insurgency that it has only tangentially covered an even greater problem in Iraq, and particularly in Baghdad, which is the rule by criminals. The United States has so crippled itself that over a period of 15 months it took no action to impose an emergency. This has nothing to do with the Abu Gharib business. Rather, the Americans - as is their wont - have made the issue of human rights into such a black or white affair all over the world and in their country, that they boxed themselves in before they hit Iraq. The Americans have no moral authority left to take harsh measures, even in the United States, after they have blasted much of the world on its human rights shortcomings.
Thus, American HR groups are able to say, with an utterly straight face, that emergency laws are not the way to go in Iraq and not the way to build a democracy. Really?
LETS ASSUME THE CHAOS/VIOLENCE IS TAKING PLACE IN WASHINGTON Lets assume we are talking of Washington, not of Baghdad. Women and children cannot go out of the house without men to escort them. Men cannot drive their cars without the ever-present fear they will be killed and their cars stolen. Shop owners and others engaged in commerce do so at the daily peril of being robbed, beaten, killed, or having their shops burned down. If you in the past have had problems with a neighbor - say he has been harassing your wife, your sister, or your daughter - he now can pay someone to have them abducted and raped, or if he is hit by a fit of kindness, he will have only you beaten/killed.
So, your house has been robbed, and you go to the police. The group of persons at greatest risk in Iraq is the police. While the American media keeps a daily count of US killed, and even revels in publishing the count, that more Iraqi police have died just in the past few months that the total of coalition soldiers is something mentioned in passing. Not only are the police at risk of their own lives from criminals, the criminals have been attacking police families. So what are the police to do? Easy for the Americans to sneer about the Iraqi police's inability to fight. We'd like to know how long the Washington police would operate under such conditions? Our guess is for a week, after which they'd take off their uniforms. And not just the police are being targeted: judges are too. Re. the Washington police: lets give them .38 caliber revolvers, with a handful of bullets, and lets give the criminals assault rifles, machine guns, RPGs, and so on. How long is the Washington police going to last? Maybe 24 hours. But wait a minute, some readers will say. AK-47s in the hands of criminals, okay, we see that. But machineguns and RPGs? Surely Orbat.com is referring to insurgents, not criminals. Here is the problem: there is such a big overlaps between the criminals and the insurgents that at most times its is the same beast.
In the midst of all this violence, which we pretend is taking place in Washington, lets assume a EU human rights group arrives, and starts giving sanctimonious lectures to the victims about the need to protect human rights, and emergency powers are not the way to go. Better still, say the group is in Brussels or Paris, and then giving lectures. What would the American reaction be?
THE KING KILLING RIOTS IN WASHINGTON Your editor happened to be in Washington the day its black residents were burning down parts of the city - their parts - after Rev. Martin Luther King was killed. He was simply minding his own business, trying to get to National Airport to catch a flight to New York to make a flight overseas. He had to pay a cab driver $100 - akin to perhaps $600 now - to take him to Baltimore, 40 miles away: there was no way he was going to National Airport. [In those days the metro area was much smaller, and the Baltimore airport was still functioning.] The government was so frightened of a few thousand rioters that it deployed 12,000 Army and Guard troops in the capital area alone. About a dozen people were killed in Washington DC we mention this because by 3rd world standards the Washington DC riots were barely of note. Your editor hardly remembers the details, and surely has some wrong, but our readers can enlighten us on the state of the Capital of the Free World that day. Does anyone who was in Washington that day have the guts to stand up and say with a straight face that they would have opposed an emergency - even after the rioters moved into the white areas? But that is Baghdad today, even in the elite areas.
So easy for you to say, Ma'am and Sir, to say: Iraq is wrong in using emergency powers. Go live in Baghdad for a month, not in the Green Zone, but anywhere else. Then if you still say there should be no use of emergency powers, we at Orbat.com will be the first to say: we do not agree, but we respect you. Right now at Orbat.com we say: we do not agree, nor do you have any right whatsoever to tell the Iraqis what to do in such a situation.
FALLUJAH: PATRIOTS OR CRIMINALS? Incidentally, the world media has given us moving accounts of the fierce, determined Iraqi patriots who are ready to lay down their lives to force the foreign invader out. Every time your editor reads one of these stories, he yawns. How many of the press know that the trouble in Fallujah and Ramadi started not because of nationalists protesting occupation, but because of ordinary criminals who resented the policing the US was doing? Even Saddam the Mighty, Saddam the Dreadful, Saddam the Feared, could not clean up Fallujah and surrounding areas. He let them do exactly what they wanted, as long as they didn't bother his regime. And he paid them for the privilege of leaving him alone. Ditto the border. If the Americans were really so determined not to get engaged in nation building, they simply should have set up a table, issued all comers with a "I am a criminal" cards, and let them do what they wanted - as long as they left American troops alone
IRAQ-FOREIGN INSURGENTS RIFT Various sources say there has developed a serious rift between Iraqis and foreign terrorists over the foreigners' attacks on Iraqi civilians. Equally, the sources say, before we rejoice, the issue is one of the foreigners' tactics: the Iraqi insurgents are perfectly willing to make common cause with anyone who will help them restore Saddam. Since the real Saddam will be dead, they can always use one of his doubles - if they aren't already dead.

0400 GMT July 12, 2004

PARANORMAL WARFARE Yesterday made so little news that we were forced to read Pravda for entertainment. Pravda says US/UK scientists have, some time ago, discovered a time gate in Antarctica and the CIA and FBI are fighting for control. Balloons released into a stationary swirling fog disappear; when they reappear their on board clocks are set 30 years in the past.
This item reminded us that the Soviets spent much time and money on researching paranormal warfare, and the US was forced to reciprocate. One project the Soviets apparently succeeded at was for a trained person to walk up to a bank window, instruct the teller to hand over money, and then wipe the teller's memory of the incident. Another project which had partial success involved telekinesis: subjects were trained to enter trance, and then proceed to another room - while their body remained where it was - with the aim of flipping a switch.
Now, please don't ask your editor where he got this information from: as it is everybody except his students [all under age 14] think he's crazy.
The purpose of the two projects is obvious. The first allows a person to enter secure areas guarded by humans; the second could enable interesting situations such as switching off missile warning systems and launch systems.
The Chinese have been conducting telekinesis experiments for many years and this is well documented. Your editor's wife used to be a Chinese-to-English technical translator and would get material on defense matters to translate. She wasn't supposed to be talking to your editor about it, but she lacked a comprehensive weapons vocabulary and he had to help. At least twice she had to translate documents on Chinese telekinesis work. Your editor truly has no recollection of the material: in the orbat line you sometimes have to forget stuff so as not to get people into trouble, so he did a mind wipe and that was that.
This was either in the late 1970s or early 1980s: some Congressman found a line item in the DOD budget allocating money for research into Zaire witchcraft, and had a field day talking about waste and lunatic schemes. Unfortunately, the only person who was lunatic was said Congressman.
Your editor does not know if DOD was able to defend itself. But here is one reason DOD might want to study Zaire witchcraft. In your editor's acne days, he was visiting his father in the then Congo. Even then, your editor had Big Ears and a knack for sitting very quietly in a room of people so as not to be noticed. One of his father's officers, a stolid European, told a story of how his jeep was stuck in thick mud, in the middle of nowhere. The officer and three soldiers with him could not get the jeep moving. Out of the jungle stepped a witchdoctor with four zombies. Seeing the jeep, he motioned to his four, who then proceeded - without grunts - to simply lift the jeep right out of the mud and put it down on firm ground. This was done en passant as the lot crossed the road and vanished into the jungle on the other side.
[By the way, your editor foiled his first spy back then. He was waiting in the anteroom of his Dad's office when a European civilian came in, and casually asked: "The general in today?" Somehow, no one is around except us two. Your editor knows his UN Europeans and this one is obviously not one - wrong accent and a huge beer belly and a heavily sweat-stained cotton suit. Your editor said no, and our civilian proceeds right into the office and starts looking at the wall maps which show dispositions of all UN troops in the Congo. Your editor stands at the door to the room, not entering so that he should not be guilty of looking at the maps, and with utmost politeness says: "Excuse me, Sir, I don't think you should be looking at the maps." The gentleman smiles, and says "You think so? You're a feisty pup. I'd best leave before you start yapping," and exits. This is spy/counterspy at its most basic. It also shows some spies do not have Good Manners.]
Okay, if any of our readers know anything about Central African witchcraft [and he forgives you if you don't], this whole thing has a terribly boring explanation. Witch doctors are masters of herbs, among other things. They capture people who get lost in the jungle - or the brush, depending on where you are, and feed them herbs which put the people into trance to the point the do not know they are not supposed to lift a jeep as if it were a kiddy stroller. So if you were a researcher at DOD, and you'd hear stories like the one your editor did. wouldn't you consider it your duty to try and learn more? This one witchdoctor trick has obvious military military implications.
Another story: your editor got to talk to a Tibetan refugee, decades ago. Your editor was trying to get into Tibet, for reasons that wholly escape him. He had the idea if he simply landed up at the border and politely asked the nearest Indian Army post if he could cross, they'd let him. In case anyone is interested, he didn't even get to the Inner Line, because the Army people he talked to, who then went and talked to some other people, came back with the message "fagedabootit". The problem wasn't the Indian Army: in those days it was ready to undertake an adventure at the drop of a hat. The problem was the Chinese border guards on the other side. Run into them, and it would be "goodnight, sweet Mama". Anyway, as part of his research into proper manners while in Tibet he was told by the refugee: "If you ever see a man walking as if in a trance, striding rapidly and purposefully down the track, do not under any conditions touch him or speak to him: you could kill him with shock. Many in Tibet know how to dream walk at a fast pace, and simply keep walking, day and night, without rest, food, or water. Ten days journey like this is nothing." Your editor checked with several other Tibetans: same story. Military implications are again obvious.
ISRAEL'S WALL After spotting our item on the World Court ruling against the Israeli barrier wall, reader Adrian J. English wonders: "Does the World Court consider suicide bombing illegal?". A valid question and we leave it to other better qualified to answer. We have not seen any summary of the judgment, but the way the media is putting it suggests the World Court has not rule the wall itself illegal, only one part which passes through Palestine territory. Thoughts, anyone?

0300 GMT July 11, 2004

IRAN-KURD CLASHES AGAIN Jang of Pakistan says more clashes have taken place between Iran forces and Kurds near the Turkey border. The trouble apparently started when the Kurds who had refused to end the war with Turkey disavowed a five-year ceasefire with Turkey, negotiated by the mainstream Kurd factions who have laid down their arms. Turkey is said to be pleased with the Iranian action.
All very well, but this does not explain why the Iranians have cracked down on the Kurds. A small number has been living in the remote mountains for decades, bothering no one but the Turks. The item below may provide a clue why the Iranians are appearing to do Turkey's dirty work

IRAN-KURDS Reader Paul Danish suggests that if the Israelis are training the Kurds - as apparently Seymour Hersh says - this might be the reason the Iranians have cracked down on their northwestern border. In Afghanistan the US used the Northern Alliance militias as the ground spearhead of the American invasion. Perhaps something similar is being planned for Iran, if only as a contingency among many contingencies. Even if it is not an actual contingency, any enemy of Iran working with the Kurds is going to cause sirens, bells and whistles to go off in Teheran: Iran has to prudently assume a repeat of Afghanistan may be in the works.
OCTOBER SURPRISE Some of our readers have taken to calling the possibility of US action against Iran "October Surprise." You editor has been thinking things over, and even pulled out dusty orbats [metaphorically dusty, as they are all on some server or the other] of Iranian ground forces, and maps of Iran and its neighborhood. He is bugged enough by this issue that in Sunday's Contemporary Orbats update, you will see some basic data to help you make your own scenario. No scenario your editor could come up with envisaged Iran initiating an attack on Iraq.
NO SCENARIO RESULTS IN ANYTHING BUT IRANIAN DEFEAT solution condemning Iran as the aggressor, and calling on its members to forcibly vacate Iranian forces - a 1991 repeat Kuwait-Iraq. Iran will then proceed to lose everything: the US will bomb the heck out of everything it sees, including Iran's nuclear facilities, peaceful or otherwise, and anything that could support those facilities: power plants, industrial factories, ports etc. Iran's ground forces will be annihilated. People who have been quiet for 25 years - and that could be as much as 70% of the population, could rise up and wipe out the mullah regime. Iran will come under UN occupation for the next 10, 20, 50 years. The big difference between Iraq and Iran is that no one in the west, at least, thinks that Iran is no threat on WMDs, and the political split that arose on Iraq will be absent. To sum: an Iranian offensive is so fraught with risk, and so devoid of any purpose, that your editor believes it is not an option.
LOOKING AT THE PROBLEM DIFFERENTLY When one is banging one's head against a problem with no results, a useful trick is to switch the way you are looking at the problem. Instead of worrying what Iran may do, if we agree that Iran is close to become a nuclear threat to Europe and Israel, we have to assume Israel/the West is going to have to attack.
With that assumption, the problem becomes easier. Iran's troop movements can be seen as purely defensive. That does not rule out an offensive: but the offensive will come after the other side attacks. The attempt will be to force dispersal of US forces.
Needless to say, the counter-offensive will be doomed from the start. If at all the US decides to deploy ground troops, it will be as screens, and the British are the logical people to do this job. The US can give up a great deal of ground - its not American territory while continuing to use airpower till nothing moves on the battlefield.
LOGIC DOES NOT ALWAYS RULE Nonetheless, there is something people call honor. Its often not a logical thing: rationally Iran should be cooperating to the maximum with the west, its time to stop the west has gone. Yet, look at Iraq. Its army was in desperate straits before Gulf II even began. Every Iraqi general knew exactly what the outcome would be. Nonetheless, the Republican Guard still fought it out as best it could. We didn't see any big battles because the US simply kept dropping bombs on the RG: there were less than a dozen Iraqi tanks left intact at the end of Gulf II. Guard divisions took 50% and up casualties before calling it a day - their defense was by no means token.
So Iranian forces are going to fight it out even if it makes no sense.
By the way, one of our teams is on the job on the Iran thing: Orbat.info is at Code 2 in terms of the resources we are willing to spend to get information. Code 1 is where we operate routinely to get information, and try for as much as we can get for free. We are not moving to Code 3 or 4 because we have very little money and unless we get some signal that war is a real possibility, we cannot afford to spend more than we are. Conversely, we will be unable to share the information with Orbat.com except in most general terms, and that too with delayed releases. The preliminary report being prepared on Iran's readiness is going to cost buyers Euro 3,000 a copy. Charging that kind of money is unfair to the buyer if s/he can turn around to Orbat.com and get 60% of that information free - which is what was happening under our old system - for people in the business, $50 for a subscription is free.
DOLLARS VS EUROS One seemingly irrelevant matter: in the 45 years your editor has spent in the trade, prices were always quoted in US dollars. American dollars were better than gold - less bulky, and you don't have to running around selling gold. But now of a sudden, people are talking Euros. No one says NO to dollars, but they make is very clear they're taking dollars as a personal favor, and next time the money had better be in Euros. To an old-timer like your editor this is very upsetting. Americans need to wake up: when your money is being dissed, no matter how great you or I may think America is, the market is saying otherwise.
ISRAELI BARRIER To no one's surprise, the World Court has ruled the route of the Israeli barrier though the West Bank illegal. The barrier has proved immensely effective where it has been finished. Now, the court has not said the barrier per se is illegal: Israel has the right to self-defense. Its just that the West Bank is considered occupied territory under international law, and the barrier prevents the residents from going about their lives. We wonder how Israeli history will judge the quarter-million plus settlers: Israel has expended so much blood and treasure for the settlers.
NOTE TO MR. SHARON In the event of an Iran showdown, we know the United States is going to stand by you and work with you. The real beneficiaries of any possible strike you make against Iran's nuclear targets is not Israel but Europe. May be suggest you negotiate a price for doing the work the Europeans really should be themselves doing, rather than you and the United States. One percent of Europe's GNP for one year - $100-billion - seems very reasonable. You could use some of that to pay compensation to settlers and Arabs alike. You must start thinking in terms of getting off the crisis mode high that Israel has been on since 1948. It was necessary for the formation and development of Israel. That's done now. Your people have immense energy and creativity. Settle these petty crises and let your people be free. They will do amazing things, for Israel, and also for the Arabs once their energies are unleashed on creation rather than on destruction.

0500 GMT July 10, 2004

NEWS OF THE ABSURD [1] The lone American on Saddam's defense team has petitioned the US Supreme Court saying Saddam is being denied his rights.
Last we heard, Iraq is not yet the 51st state of the US of A. In case the lawyer has been in a magical sleep for the last some weeks, and just revived by Saddam's magical kiss, here is some news for him. Saddam is not a citizen of the United States. He is not on trial in the United States or any territory that the US controls - the occupation ended June 28th. He is, ergo ipso facto hocus pocus redux etc. not entitled to the rights of a US citizen or resident. We don't even see the lawyer has the right to petition for Saddam, but then, we're from Iowa, what do we know?
Advice to Saddam: even one American lawyer on your defense team is one too many. Are you tired of living and want to commit suicide? If not, give yourself a break: fire this man
Your editor had a flash when he read this report. If this lawyer can petition the US Supreme Court on behalf of an Iraqi citizen/Iraqi prisoner, can Americans petition the EU, saying American prisoners in the US are often treated in ways that clearly violate the EU's human rights standards?
NEWS OF THE ABSURD [2] The Washington Times reports that US air marshals are failing to blend into the crowd on US passenger aircraft because their agency insists on enforcing a rigorous dress code. This includes regulation hair cuts, suits, and dress shoes - for both men and women agents.
Osama is surely greedily reading this news. "O my faithful, here is my next hijacking plan. All teams will board flights at Ft. Lauderdale..." or whichever serves Disney World "... in the coming summer. Thanks to massive stupidity of the American Government, every air marshal will be wearing a big sign on his forehead identifying himself. Take these men first". An aide says "O Osama, you are the greatest, but what about lady agents?" Osama says "You the king, Dawg..." or however Osama praises a clever aide. "Get our man in Milan to organize ladies shoes recognition courses for all hijackers." Since Osama is said to be a meticulous hands on manager, he adds: "the hijackers must be trained not to drool on the lady agents' feet: else they may as well wear a sign on their foreheads saying 'I am an Osama Hijacker'.
[Your editor readily concedes that his attempt to be absurd pales before the US Government's absurdity - competitive though he may be, this is one instance where he is happy to lose.]
NEWS OF THE ABSURD [3] Military.com reports that because the US Army's crack Aggressor troops are deploying to Iraq - two rifle companies of the 1-509th Infantry (Airborne) in this case, the men have been ordered to shave their beards and cut their hair. As Aggressors, these days they trick out as Iraqi insurgents. A normal person would think: these soldiers are the best trained we have, they are comfortable looking like the enemy, maybe its a good idea to keep them that way. Yes, once out of uniform they are not entitled to the protections of Geneva. In case the Army has not noticed, since its opponents have no country that signed Geneva, they are not obligated to follow the rules. This action comes after the Army's orders that SF troops in Afghanistan must look like US Army soldiers, so the scruffy dress and beards etc. must go.
CHINA This news item from UPI has nothing to do with defense or with the terror war, but we feel compelled to mention it. China has lost 15-million manufacturing jobs 1997-2002. The US has lost 2-million.
With China's economy allegedly growing at 7-10% a year, at first sight makes no more sense than the assertion China's productivity is rising at 17% a year. But of course, the job loss/productivity figures make perfect sense when we remember that China has been privatizing/shutting down state owned companies. In the Good Old Days, a Beijing bus carried six conductors...
20,000 INSURGENTS IN IRAQ The US has sharply revised upward its estimate of Iraqi insurgents. As against previous estimates of 5,000, now estimates range up to 20,000. True this figure includes part-timers and insurgents-of-opportunity, but apparently every insurgency has a considerable number of such people. Incidentally, US forces killed 4,000 insurgents in June alone. That figure is one reason for the revision, another reason is that the US has, for some time, gotten its intel act together. The problem, as is being said, is that while US knowledge of the insurgents structure is detailed down to the cell level, that still doesn't mean the US has 'actionable' intel, i.e., warning of what is about to happen. US military sources have said - again - that an Iraq insurgency cannot be won by the Americans. The military has been saying this for several months.
We have no trouble accepting the above prognosis on the outcome of the insurgency, but nonetheless we should warn our readers of two things.
First, no insurgency can be won by outside troops alone, you have to have the cooperation of a large segment of the population. Combine that with local troops to back up foreign troops, you can win an insurgency. Greece post-World War II is an example, and the British have won several post-WW2 insurgencies - Aden, Kenya, Borneo come immediately to mind. So for the US Army to say it cannot win an Iraq insurgency is akin to saying human beings have two feet.
Second, the US Army, for all its new skill at CI ops - as shown by the anti-Al Sadr campaign - absolutely does not want to fight an insurgency. It likes the big, showy wars. Now, just because on a pure CI level the US had very little success in Vietnam does not mean the Army should now quiver with sensitivity to its own feelings every time an insurgency is mentioned. The US fought Indochina II as a conventional war - with great success in purely military terms, we might add. It would have done better to fight it as a CI war - less blood, less treasure, less suffering for everyone.
At the same time, we don't understand why so many people sneer at the US's failure to understand that Vietnam was a CI war. The US military in World War I, II, and Korea was trained, equipped, and organized for mass conventional warfare of almost unimaginable size. After about 1955, it was converted to fight a nuclear war. The ROAD conversion of the early 1960s did not come about because of a switch to conventional warfighting as such, but because the US wanted to have the ability to fight as long as possible without going nuclear. President Kennedy and others were starting to see the need for CI forces - the Green Berets being one result; but 99% of the military was organized for the most likely threat, that of war with the Soviet empire, and rightfully so.
One peculiar thing about that war is that because the US was prepared to drop a 500-lb bomb on a grasshopper, North Vietnam was forced to commit more and more conventional units just to stay alive in the field. Supporters of General Giap (who in our opinion can easily keep company with Field Marshal Haig for utter stupidity) say he was brilliantly following the 3 step communist strategy of warfare. In our opinion, he was brilliantly not following anything. The American way of war forced him into committing larger and larger units before the "operational preparation of the battle space" had taken place, to use current jargon; the bigger his units, the easier it was for the Americans to destroy them. Admittedly, the question of Giap's strategy is complex, because having won the war the Vietnamese are under no obligation to open their files to the world to show their mistakes, nor would it occur to them to do so. Nonetheless, Giap was usually reacting to the Americans, and when he did try and take the initiative - 1968 and 1972, he was badly defeated.
We should also make clear we condemn only Giap's strategic generalship. He never understood the Americans, for which we do not blame him. No one understands the Americans, themselves included. He was a very brave man with remarkable determination. But then so was Haig...

0230 GMT July 9, 2004

TURKEY-IRAQ Agencies report that the Chief of Turkey's General Staff has warned Iraqi Kurds against changing the ethnic balance in Kirkuk, where a significant Turkish minority lives. The Kurds have been pushing out the "Arabs" that were move in to the province in Saddam's era as part of his ethnic cleansing. Turkey, however, says that control of Kirkuk must continue to vest with the Turkish minority, the Kurds, and the Iraqis. Turkey believes the Kurds are planning to declare independence, which would cause an upheaval among the Turkish Kurds who have been fighting for their own state about 25 years. Further, Turkey is said to have protested to the US that Washington is not doing enough to neutralize the 5000 Kurds who form the Kongra-Gel and operate from Iraqi territory.
We have to take a step back here. The Kongra-Gel is the faction of the former PKK that refused to make peace with Turkey. Ankara essentially crushed the PKK and arrested its leader, then offered an amnesty which many accepted.
We are not quite sure why the United States should be sensitive any more to Turkey's interests in Kurd territory. In March 2003, the Turks put their interests before that of their staunch ally of more than 50 years. Their decision not to let 4th Infantry Division and 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment stage through Turkey created a near impossible situation for the US Army. Moreover, Turkey kept haggling over the price of permitting transit, and then went back on its word just before the war began. We are not blaming them for this: they felt allying with the United States was not in their interest. At the same time, keeping the Kurds in line is not necessarily in America's interests. And with everything else that is going on in Iraq, the US is supposed to open a new front by attempting to squash the Kongra-Gel, and invoke the lasting anger of all Kurds? We don't think so. Iraq as it exists today is a creation of imperial powers. If there is nothing sacred about keeping Yugoslavia or the Soviet Union together, or helping Timor Leste to escape Indonesian control, there should be nothing sacred about keeping Iraq together.
INDIAN DEFENSE INCREASE India has jumped its defense spending by a seemingly staggering 30%, to $16+ billion. Few details of specific weapons programs have emerged.
Before anyone starts reading meaning into this, we have to point out that as a percentage of GNP India's defense budget steadily fell from 4% in the mid-1980s to about 2.5% or less around the time of the Kargil War in 1999. The reasons for this are not germane to the argument, but US and World Bank/IMF pressure had much to do with the rundown. The Indian armed forces have built up a huge backlog of equipment modernization. An astonishingly high percentage of airforce fighter, transport, and SAM assets are junk, as is the case with much of the Indian Army's armor and artillery. Big as this increase is, it still not up to mid-1980s spending: For that to happen, the defense budget should have been $22-billion. Several years of high spending as well as a reduction in size will be required before the armed forces undo the damage caused by 20 years of neglect.
Incidentally, India's GNP is given as $550 billion and China's in excess of $1 trillion. Business Week recently calculated Indian manufacturing wages as being 25% higher than the Chinese which would not make sense if the Chinese per capita is twice that of the Indian. One of the worst kept secrets about these countries' GNP is that India has consistently under-assessed its GNP for various reasons, whereas China has consistently over-assessed. We gave up trying long to motivate Indian friends to do the math: too much work, we were told, with no reward.
ON CALLING MULLAH OMAR Jang of Pakistan reports that Mullah Omar's former personal secretary and after 2001 his military assistant, was captured along with his satellite phone on Tuesday. Afghan intelligence forced the man to dial up the good Mullah, who became suspicious after some pleasantries and hung up. Afghan intelligence says they have used the pre-stored numbers to make several calls, but the Mullah does not pick up. Maybe, says an Afghan agent, the Mullah suspects we have his aide in custody. Just imagine the devious cunning of the Mullah! Why would he think that, especially after the Jang story?
Before our readers tell us the story is a plant and the Americans are on to the Mullah etc etc, we ask them to keep in mind that strange as it may seem, in South Asia is entirely possible that the following happened: Aide is captured by Afghans. Afghans go "Oooooh!" when they see the cell phone. Afghans' faces light up. "Hey," says one, "lets get the jerk here to call his boss, we'll show everyone who's the ass around here", and the whole thing is blown, and we are left in doubt as to who the ass is. You can substitute any South Asian nationality for "Afghans". Your editor is highly ADHD, so he sympathizes completely if the above happened. You put a gadget in the hands of a South Asian, and he has to start poking and pushing the buttons even as he says "I wonder if I am holding a bomb and then this must be the trigger..."
[Your editor was in a graduate school class the other day while the instructor droned on and on. Fascinated by the lecture, your editor's attention wandered to the cabinet next to him, where stood a large toy rail engine. Your editor quietly took the object and examined it closely - Made in China - and was putting it back when his right index finger, acting completely on its own, pushed a button. The fire-engine came alive with 100 decibel hoots, choo-choos, sirens etc. You guessed it: he couldn't turn it off and neither could anyone else. He was able to stay in the class only because he was twice as old as the instructor [and three times as old as the students] and the instructor proved well-brought up: she sensibly deferred to age and wisdom and said nothing. But she did roll her eyes, which is very insulting to the teacher...luckily your editor realized he wasn't the teacher in this classroom, she was. Of course, our Indian friends will say: "Its not Indians who do this kind of dumb stuff, it's only you Punjabis". But seriously: this is really the way the whole place functions. We are told that not only do the Indians make a point of keeping their nuclear warheads far away from the launchers, there are no Punjabis assigned to the firing batteries. Rank discrimination.]
The obvious "correct" approach would have been to do the calling with the full majesty of US signals intelligence turned on - with soldiers and fighters airborne.
Maybe this is what happened or is going to happen. Maybe the aide did not have his satphone and the Afghans/US are trying to smoke the Mullah out by spreading disinformation. We learned, however, in 20 hard years in that part of the world, that not only are South Asians spontaneous kind of people who think never and act always, the simplest and most boring explanation is usually the right one. The simplest and most boring explanation here, as in most other cases, is that people goofed up. Nothing more. And, of course, its the same spontaneity that makes South Asia a magical wonderland. No good without the bad, etc.
MARINE BACK SAFE Agencies say the missing US Marine was picked up by the US Embassy as requested by him and at last report was in the embassy at Beirut. Meanwhile, a gunfight broke out between members of his Lebanese family and some others when the latter accused his family of not being loyal to Arab interests. Apparently the region is known for its endless blood feuds.
We went to a forum linked to military.com to learn what Americans thought about this case. He was not surprised when the first comment in the forum abused the Marine. He was surprised that so many people wrote in to say it was wrong to judge without all the facts. One would have thought that since it appeared he deserted his post, and was an Arab, there would be much name calling. But no. America sure has become a more tolerant place in the last 50 years.
Agencies point out there are so many contradictions and different stories regarding this episode that time will be required to get at the truth. The latest theory is that the Marine deserted, Arabs helped him cover up by saying he had been kidnapped, and then he was seen off to Lebanon. If so, why did the first thing he do after calling his family to say he was safe was to ask the US Embassy to come get him? If he did desert, however, even if he had a change of heart, things will not go well for him precisely because he is an Arab and a Marine. The USMC motto, by the way, is "Semper Fideles", Always Faithful.
We saw a bumper sticker the other day: "To err is human, to forgive is divine. Neither is Marine Corps policy." Which just about sums the Corps. Your editor used to have all kinds of useless arguments in his younger days with his European friends: who was tougher, a US Marine, a French Legionnaire, a Royal Marine etc etc. By asking who's tougher one enters on an argument with no resolution, particularly because the Marines do not permit individual ego. The unique process of Marine training was, and though somewhat softened in deference to today's world, still is, involves destroying the individual ego and rebuild the man with a new identity, a Marine, a part of the Corps. And the Marines may be the last significant body of soldiers left in the developed world who go into battle fully accepting dying is part of the business. And we have been wondering of this attitude is somehow responsible for the heavy casualties - relative to the US Army - they have been taking in Anbar Province. We have nothing against the attitude, and even admire it. We were wondering out of curiosity alone.

0230 GMT July 8, 2004

IRAQ EMERGENCY Iraq's government armed itself with limited emergency powers. Restrictions can be announced only for specific areas, for a specified period, and the highest Iraq court is empowered to accept appeals against the emergency laws.
ANBAR PROVINCE The Marines continue to take casualties in Anbar province, and continue refusing to give any details. In a sense this is as it should be: the public's right to know does not take primacy over military requirements. Nonetheless, we are curious as to what's going on. The best we've been able to come up with is the Marines are battling insurgents in Fallujah-Ramadi and on the border.
ONE ANTI-ZARQAWI strike of the five launched failed, according to the Washington Post. The attacking pilot missed his target house, giving the insurgents the chance to make their escape
US INTEL GOOD From a US News and World Report story we get the impression the US military has a good intelligence grasp of insurgent groups, and is informed as to their ideological and political convictions/aims as well as their military operations.
RUMMY VIOLATES GENEVA The Washington Post tells us that among the harsher Category II interrogation tactics approved by Mr. Rumsfeld for Guantanamo, along with dogs, light deprivation, and removal of clothing, is serving prisoners Army standard field rations, the infamous Meals Ready to Eat. Now, if human rights groups were to add the MRE bit to their account of Mr. Rumsfeld's war crimes, they'd have to add the hundreds of thousands of US troops to the list of victims. Of course, the HR types could wiggle out of this one by arguing that Geneva does not say anything about mistreating your own troops! Note to the civilized world: here's a little secret - any one who has been to English or English-style boarding schools would regard the soggiest MRE as gourmet fare.
US MARINE SAFE We'd like to claim the terrorists were influenced by our opinions on the idiocy of killing the Marine prisoner - this was before they retracted their claim - and then decided to free the prisoner and see him to Lebanon, but of course, terrorists don't read Orbat.com. Nonetheless, CNN says the Marine has spoken to his family and is well; contacted the US Embassy.
Sensible young man. True, he gave his word he would lay down arms as part of his deal with the terrorists. But then these self-same terrorists would be in a quandary: if it's okay to lie to save yourself, because the young man's promise was not freely given, he has broken no vow. In the really good old days, of course, if a prisoner was paroled on condition he lay down arms, then everyone darn well respected that promise, even his own side.
And was it not Saladin, Islam's greatest warrior, who when he saw Richard the Lionheart unhorsed on the battlefield, ordered his men to immediately deliver two of his finest steeds to his Christian enemy? True that chivalry was practiced only among the high born, and if you were a foot soldier, your life meant as little to your side as it did to the enemy. Still, at least someone had some standards of civilized behavior back then.
IRAN-KURD CLASH We were unable to get the story link to work in today's Turkishnews.com; IRNA of Iran does not have the story in its headlines going back to July 6th.

0330 GMT July 7, 2004

IRAN-KURD CLASH AFP reports that in ongoing Iranian security forces operations against Turkish Kurd rebels using Iran territory as safe haven, 16 Iranian troops and 4 Kurd fighters were killed. We suspect these clashes are far from rare but are seldom reported. By operating against the Kurds, Teheran is doing Turkey a big favor. So it's natural to ask Teheran is being more than usually obliging because the building nuclear crisis is isolating Iran, or are we reading more into this than it deserves?

AFGHAN-PAKISTAN CLASH Jang of Pakistan quotes Afghan officials as saying heavy firing took place on the border when Pakistani troops opened fire on an Afghan post three times. The Afghans say their troops showed restraint, but after the third incident, hit back with anti-aircraft guns and artillery. In our opinion, this is a routine clash and of little significance.

GITMO DETAINEES REJOIN REBELS The Washington Times reports that five of 57 Afghan detainees released from Guantanamo Bay have rejoined insurgents in Afghanistan; one might have been a senior Taliban commander who is now believed killed. The newspaper quotes American officials as saying they have detailed IDs on all the former detainees and aqre sure of their identification. The Washington Times speculates that more of the 57 may also have rejoined the insurgents.

VENEZUELA Pravda says a US organization gives President Chavez a 10 point lead in the event of a recall ballot. While we have no reason to doubt the figure, in general it's wise to treat such Pravda stories gingerly, particularly when Pravda has not identified the US organization. Nonetheless, the report itself gives fair coverage to the viewpoints both of the opposition and the President's supporters.

AKULA SSN Pravda provides performance figures for the Soviet Akula SSNs, but we do not know if they are from Russian or from other sources. Maximum depth is given at 600 meters, top speed at 33 knots, war load as 40 torpedoes or a combination of torpedoes/sub-launched missiles. The important information is that Pravda quotes a former US CNO as saying that below 6 knots the Akula could not be detected, and between 6 and 9 knots detection was difficult. As such, says the article, Akula's quietness exceeds that of the US SSN-21 class.

Now, your editor is no longer knowledgeable about naval matters, his last major study dates back to 1976. So he welcomes correction. 5 knots as the maximum quiet speed is not particularly significant. In that same study your editor calculated SSN 688's maximum quiet speed as 23 knots, which of course would be quite phenomenal if he is right. He had very basic figures from which to extrapolate. Incidentally, do any of our readers know if the Soviets finally managed to detect and track an American SSBN on patrol?

1300 GMT July 6, 2004

[2nd Update]

ZARQAWI CNN reports an Iraqi group has vowed to capture or kill Jordanian terrorist Zarqawi unless he and his men leave Iraq. Zarqawi and his network are the target of repeated US air strikes in Fallujah, and he has claimed responsibility for dozens of terror attacks that have killed hundreds of Iraqis. The Iraqi group said they were giving their "last warning".
FALLUJAH The Iraq government has said the fifth and latest US air strike against a hideout of Zarqawi and his men was conducted on its intelligence, and after it consulted with the Coalition military authorities.
STATE OF EMERGENCY The Iraq government says it has slightly delayed declaration of a state of emergency to ensure citizens' rights are respected.
The three reports above are good proof that the US was right to hand over authority to the Iraqis. Many analysts were correctly apprehensive at Washington's insistence on adhering to the handover date while terrorists and Al-Sadr sowed chaos, and the Iraqi security forces proved unable to impose order. Nonetheless, Orbat.com believed that once power was in their hands, the Iraqis would hit back. This appears already to be happening - one result we called correctly.
A minor point: readers should be aware of the possibility that the Iraqi group that has promised action against Zarqawi may be an Iraq government front. That would not detract from the significance, because now Iraqis are preparing to fight foreigners - this time Arab foreigners.
AFP ON CHECKPOINTS We don't want to be fulsome in our praise of AFP, particularly as we read only the free briefs and do not know what else AFP is writing. Nonetheless, AFP avoids giving its own opinions as facts. Today it has done a useful public service. In connection with a story that a child was killed when US soldiers at a checkpoint shot at a car that refused to stop despite many warnings, the news agency says: Checkpoints are considered combat areas and soldiers have the right under the rules of engagement to shoot if a vehicle approaching them fails to stop. We kind of knew that, but this is the first clear and straightforward explanation of checkpoint shootings we have seen. Many times the media give the impression that US forces are in the wrong when civilians are killed at checkpoints. The fact of being a civilian does not provide immunity. Sometimes - and we have seen this in India - checkpoints are inconspicuous to the point a preoccupied driver can easily zip through unawares. In Iraq, however, the checkpoints are unmistakable, and surely by now people understand it is a bad idea not to stop. Unless you have more to lose by stopping than you have by running.

0400 GMT July 6, 2004

FALLUJAH Agencies say the US launched a fifth air strike against a terrorist hideout in Fallujah: four 500-lb and two 1000-lb bombs were delivered. Whoever asked for the strike clearly wanted everyone inside dead, and between 10 to 15 people were killed. The US had no comments aside from that it had acted on firm information. So far Orbat.com has not heard anything about what is happening, but we guess that the terrorist Zarqawi has outstayed his welcome in Fallujah and people left and right are reporting on the movements of his men.
SIERRA LEONE CNN reports that war crimes trials in Sierra Leone have begun. This is not a Terror War issue, but the restabilization of Sierra Leone is a good augury because terrorists thrive in countries beset with chaos.

THOUGHTS OCCASIONED BY A SAUDI OP ED:
IS AMERICA RESPONSIBLE FOR THE NEW WORLD WAR?

A SAUDI PAPER PREACHES ON GROWING HATE IN AMERICA AGAINST AMERICAN MUSLIMS An article in Arabnews.com, a moderate Saudi internet paper, on rising anti-Muslim sentiment in America is interesting because in Saudi Arabia not only is anti-American sentiment widespread, Saudis are actually in the business of killing Americans. We agree with Arabnews.com that the situation in America is indeed alarming. At the same time, if American Muslims don't want to be targeted, shouldn't they do more to root out the extremists in their midst who spared hatred of America, and who collect money to further Islam's crusade against America?
WHAT ARE AMERICAN MUSLIMS DOING TO FIGHT THE EXTREMISTS WITHIN? American Muslims have held demonstrations against the killing of hostages in Iraq, and we have to respect those that participated. Yet, the demonstrations have been limited to a few hundred people. We also understand that American Muslims feel vulnerable to threats subtle and not so subtle levied against those who stand up to say the community should not support extremists in their midst.
APPEASEMENT WILL NOT WORK Here is the problem, however: there is a war on, and making compromises to continue living quietly in the middle of a war zone never works. Your American neighbors are going to upset with you, and the extremists hate you anyway. You are unwittingly, or perhaps wittingly, paying them to strengthen their movement, which explicitly requires the extremists to kill you too: by definition every American Muslim is an infidel. Saudi Arabia tried appeasement, and the cows came home with a vengeance.
Many Americans blame their country for starting the new world war. If you as a dissenter say Iraq per se is a tactical mistake, but you are prepared to support tough action otherwise, we have to give you respect. But if you are saying America shouldn't be at war with Islam, we suggest you convince the extreme Islamists to cease-fire in their war against America.
IS AMERICA TO BLAME FOR THE NEW CRUSADE? People come up with all kinds of complicated reasons how America is responsible for the hatred the Arabs bestow. But it is not America who started this war. To say America's support of Israel is at the root of the problem is nonsense. Abandon Israel today, tomorrow the extremists will find new reasons to hate you. Would avoiding offense to the Communists made them any less determined to wipe out what America stands for? The reverse is true: appeasement would have led the communists to believe America had no will to defend itself.
And ultimately isn't that what Bin Laden thought? And why should he not think so? The point about Lebanon and Somalia has been made endlessly, but it still needs to be repeated. Nearly 300 Marines were killed in Lebanon, America departed. 20 American soldiers were killed in Mogadishu, and American departed in obscene haste.
YES, INNOCENT PEOPLE WILL DIE A soft line never works with extremism. Of course, you need to temper the hard line with carrots for those who come over to your side, and as yet see few carrots. But you have to keep up the pressure relentlessly: kill, and keep killing till the other side cannot take it any more. Yes, 90% of the people who get killed are innocent. Thanks to technology, fewer innocents have been killed in Afghanistan and Iran than would have been the case 10 years ago. Even more precise technology is on the way. Yet, innocents will continue to die. But what is the alternative?
REMAINING NEUTRAL WILL DELAY BUT NOT AVOID WAR Many Americans your editor personally knows - almost his entire school community, for example - are horrified at the the thought their country is killing anyone abroad. "Why are we there at all? Why do we need to interfere in anyone's life? Live and let live."
THE EXAMPLE FROM THE THREE WORLD WARS OF THE 20th CENTURY In the short run, there was no need for America to have taken on Japan and Germany, and later the Soviet Union and China. Switzerland stayed neutral and made money off all sides. America could have done that in the 1940s, and again 1945 through 1990. But think about it: do you honestly believe the world would be a better place if America had stayed out the Second World and Cold Wars?
Even the deepest wish to be neutral can not save America. It did not save Scandinavia and the Low Countries 1914-45. But America is no Denmark or Belgium. Its size and latent power suffice in themselves to threaten anyone in the world. No totalitarian state can sleep peacefully at night knowing that America, no matter how neutral, is still out there.
BEATING UP THE BIGGEST MAN Also consider this. We all have experience or know of stories about how the big men get unprovoked fights. Few of the big men we have known want to do anything other than mind their own business. But smaller men cannot leave them alone: the proof of manhood comes from challenging the big man. That almost without exception you will have a number of small men ganging up on one big man in no way bothers the small men. They are not interested in being fair: they simply want to knock you down, for no other reason than you are big.
BIN LADEN EXPLAINED If you need an explanation for Bin Laden's motivation, go no further. Nothing more complex is needed. He's taking on the big man on the block to prove his manhood and to gather more followers to himself. That's all there is to it. Would you tell the big man: "the fault is yours; perhaps you not appear in public and then no one will be provoked to fight you." Obviously not. Similarly our friends who believe America is the one who started the fight.
WE BELIEVE DISSENTERS ARE ALSO PATRIOTS Unlike some other supporters of the new crusade, we are will not call dissenters names, because we know their anguish at the violence America is perpetrating in Iraq is genuine. We know they speak from principle and true belief. A person who seeks personal gain in from non-confrontation is a traitor. But a person who genuinely believes in peaceful means of conflict resolution is not. S/he is as much of a patriot as any hardliner. And if you, as a dissenter, have a better way of resolving the new crusade, we at Orbat. com will listen.
BUT THEN IT BECOMES THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO SUGGEST A BETTER WAY If you oppose war, we ask only you keep in mind it takes two to fight. You can talk to the Americans who want to fight. We think its unlikely that the Islamic extremists will even let you just talk.

1300 GMT July5, 2004

IRAQ Nothing dramatic happened in Iraq yesterday or earlier today. The Iraq police managed to prevent two car bombings, which appears a good start. Al-Sadr's shenanigans we discussed yesterday; CNN's interpretation of the government's position is that Al-Sadr is expected to disarm his militia.
Meanwhile, Debka.com is of the belief that the new Iraqi leader is going to deliberately drag out the trials of Saddam and henchmen because he is now holding them as hostages: any attempt on his life will result in the swift trial and execution of one of the henchmen.
We are unsure what to make of Debka's analysis. Are the insurgents sufficiently united, and sufficiently desiring of keeping the 12 alive that they will eschew attacks on the Prime Minister? Are the 12 going to emerge alive, in any case? Are there loyalists who want the good old days back who have used the year past to build their own leadership and might not benefit from the 12 being kept alive?
Several readers were kind enough to point out our error regarding use of chemical weapons after World War I. We meant to say that Saddam was the first to use CWs from before World War II, and published David Newton's note on that. Paul Danish says there were allegations that Nasser used gas in the Yemen War. Robert Lynn also wrote in on the issue.

Orbat.com's Organization

This slow news day seems a good time to explain Orbat.com's organization.
Several readers write in appreciatively, exhorting Orbat.com's editor and staff to keep up the good work. The difficulty is that there is no staff.
The organizational structure is specially designed around the Internet as its core and the independent-minded nature of orbat enthusiasts. Unlike others who claim to be virtual organizations, we are not a physical organization that uses the Internet as an addition medium. There is no paper.
Our editors and contributors do what they want, within some very broad guidelines. You tell me what you want to do, and I give you the "space". Orbat enthusiasts work best alone or in cooperation with people they have associated with over time, and we are organized to accommodate that. We don't just mouth off about Let A Thousand Flowers Bloom. We implement
There are three downsides.
First, we have yet to find a potential investor who understands the structure. "Please list your planned organizational structure and five-year cash flow projections" is often asked. When we say there is none, and will never be any different, that's the end of the discussion. By the way, lets consider the matter of studies and projections etc. The thing is your editor learned his business management, such as it is, in the school of hard knocks. One of the very first pieces of advice he got, free, from an Ivy League professor who charged - 40 years ago - four figures for consulting, was: paper studies mean nothing. The data can be manipulated to give any result. In any case we can never have enough facts. The money you'd spend on studies, put it into starting the project - you'll soon find out what's feasible and what isn't. So your editor does not do feasibility studies. It's always "We need X bucks to start operations, and I can guarantee we will either succeed or not". That ends a lot of conversations.
Second, both in the new Orbat.com and in the history division we are setting up, almost everyone is unpaid. We haven't figured out how to obtain revenue without ghastly ads - neither has anyone else - for these parts of the operation. The lack of money puts our editors under great pressure. They have to perform to professional standards, for zero money. The burn out rate is high: we've lost three editors this year because they were simply exhausted. A fourth, who edits two magazines, has been hit with existential angst. "Outside of my job, I have given up everything for Orbat.com. Where has it gotten me?" I replied "Nowhere. The work is its own reward. Read the New Testament." This only deepened his angst.
Which brings us to point Three. Your editor gets the job done by giving up everything. As a teacher who does six things at once in the classroom and never brings works home, he is successful with his students and gets paid for 1500 hours of work a year. That leaves him 3000 hours of work free for Orbat.com. His wife initially was very supportive. After a while she started feeling, with total justification, that she was supporting me with my obsession, and why should she have to get a second job for what she considers basics when I was doing what, time-wise in Washington, is considered a half-time job? This led to extreme turbulence at home and where the saga is going to end, your editor does not know.
Last, what this daily news page has done is that it has taken time away from your editor's graduate studies: a graduate degree would increase his income, not by much, but it would at least mollify his wife for a couple of years. Your editor gets a fat grant from the state for his education, there being a shortage of math/computer teachers. But now has started to get Bs instead of As, and has failed Calculus I twice, because he is spending time on the news page [and to be fair, on our expansion]. This is Not Good, and is driving his wife and his professors quite mad with anger.
But, in the end, what do you do? You have to simply bash on, neither rain nor snow nor sleet nor wind or whatever. With his wife away for 7 weeks, your editor has been living on peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, cold cereal, and chocolate bars - and as far as he's concerned, he's spending way too much time on food shopping and meal preparation.

1400 GMT July 4, 2004

[2nd Update]

IRAQ AFP vs CNN AFP today seems to have shot off the blocks and sprinted way ahead of CNN. Perhaps its the time difference between Paris and New York, but we thought news organizations work around the clock. Also, of course, CNN makes use of other news agencies like Reuters and AP, preferring to reserve its reports for the exciting stuff. So CNN is really half entertainment, and this might be responsible for its habitual lag behind AFP. Also AFP does not seem compelled to report news that CNN considers is of national importance. Example: "Ferris Bueller Actor Charged With Sex Register Offense".
The actor in questioned played the school principal in the teen comedy "Ferris Bueller's Day Off". As a convicted sex offender, he is supposed to register with the local police every time he changes residence. This time he did not. We are certain the news is of great importance to the families of his victims. Nonetheless, every second, all over the world, horrible, tragic, and senseless tragedies are taking place. If CNN seeks to provide titillating news, so be it, but then it cannot spend as much effort on international news.
NO EVIDENCE MARINE IS DEAD AFP report the USMC in Iraq says there is no evidence the missing Marine has been killed. They say they have no doubt he has been captured. This is a long shot, and we welcome help from readers: perhaps the Marines are so sure because the masked man shown in the terrorists' video has a mustache and the missing Marine does not? Or perhaps his build does not match that of the missing man. Or perhaps his camouflage outfit is different.
IRAN PREPARES COMPLAINT AFP reports that Iran is preparing its own complaint against Saddam regarding the land-grab that started the 8 year war and on his use of chemical warfare. Teheran is apparently upset that the Iraqis have not made these charges themselves. Iran's complaint is to be presented to the Saddam tribunal.
A thought came up just now. To anyone who has followed the Saddam era, it's obvious this man was a clear and present danger, no matter how weakened he was was after Gulf I. He is the only leader to have used chemical weapons since World War II began, and used them repeatedly. This is aside from the small matter of gassing his own citizens. Put perhaps to others, who may have taken serious note of him only after his invasion of Kuwait, the clear and present danger bit is not so obvious. Looking back, we seem to recall his horrific massacres of the Kurds, and the terrible suppression of the Shia rebellion subsequent to Gulf I, received hardly any coverage in the western press. More important, there are few, if any visuals of the post-Gulf I massacres.
Nonetheless, the issue for those who disagree with the US invasion is not so much the danger that Saddam posed as they feel the US lied about the chemical weapons. But perhaps the opponents oft he war would feel differently had they known more about Saddam's 30 year reign.
US TROOP WITHDRAWAL CNN reports that the US 1st Armored Division and 2nd Cavalry Regiment furled their colors as they prepared to leave Iraq for Germany and the US.
PRC EXERCISES AND IRAQ CONTRACTORS More on this in our July 5 update.
NOTE ON CHEMICAL WEAPONS Sent by David Newton "British chemical munitions were used in Iraq during the early 1920s. However, that was predating the treaty banning chemical weapons from the battlefield. The only other people to order the use of chemical weapons on the battlefield after that treaty were Mussolini and the Japanese. Chemical weapons were used by the Italians during their conquest of Ethiopia in 1936. Chemical weapons were also apparently used during the early stages of the Sino-Japanese War."

0330 GMT July 4, 2004

IRAQ AFP reports that the Iraq government says it will announce emergency regulations soon. The oil pipeline to Basra "ruptured", cutting flow of 80,000 bbl/hour by half; at this time we do not know if it was sabotage or other reasons.
SADR First al-Sadr decides he is going to fight the Americans to the death - his, it goes without saying, but you do have to admire a man willing to go to a certain death rather than act sensible. Then his militia is hammered for weeks in what is going to become a model urban counterinsurgency campaign that will be studied for decades.
For one thing, there was the very low US death toll, 19 to perhaps 1500 al-Sadr militia. Then there were the numbers: the 5,000 US troops barely outnumbered the insurgents. No 4 to 1, 10 to 1, 20 to 1 formula here. Last, the campaign was as much political as military: the Americans spent lavish sums of money to buy information, turn people around, permit them secure passage and so on. So Al-Sadr decides perhaps he should talk.
Then, as handover time comes, and the insurgents step up their bloody, al-Sadr, like a good Iraqi patriot, calls on his militia to fight the insurgents. Then this past week this immature 30-year old decides that no, the new government is only a puppet of the Americans, so his militia has to continue fighting the Americans, and what's more, only a religious Shia regime is legitimate, to heck with this dumb democracy business.
To reason with al-Sadr is like trying to reason with a rabid jackal, and we may be insulting the poor jackal. Earlier our suggestion was kill him.
THE CORRECT WAY TO DEAL WITH AL-SADR But now we think we were wrong. This man appears to have a very serious case of ADHD plus other behavioral disorders. It would be wrong to kill him because we doubt he can help being what he is. He should be captured and brought to the US for "treatment". We doubt he and his cohorts are too terribly afraid of death. But when he is "cured", send him back to Iraq. Seeing the "cured" al-Sadr will strike terminal terror into the hearts of anyone who sees him. His militia will immediately melt away and never trouble the Americans, or the Iraqis again.
The reason for our change of position is that we recalled we once were briefly part of a discussion in a group of Indian Army officers. Your editor forgets why, but they had just learned about American interrogation techniques, and they were plain sickened and shaken. Sorry, we do not refer to the third degree [why third, we've always wondered]. Other people "only" break your body, they were saying, the Americans mess with your head so that you will never be a whole man again.
THE REAL CONSPIRACY BEHIND 9-11 Of course, no one in America is ever "cured" of their mental illness, it's more a question of becoming "functional"; also of course, everyone in America is mentally ill, and in the rest of the world too, its just a matter of time before we are all made to realize it.
We do not understand why Mike Moore did not reveal the real conspiracy behind 9-11 and the invasion of Iraq. Perhaps he does not know? It has nothing to do with oil, you silly boy. Its got to do with getting 1 billion Muslims to adopt the American way of life, thus opening up this hugely underserved market for the American pharma companies. This is the first ever war fought to promote exports of psychotropics like Prozac, Paxil, Ritalin, Ducolax etc. If the entire Arab world can be put on these drugs, they feel so happy all the time they won't want to harm any American. And if you think the oil Arabs are gouging America on oil, wait till the Arabs start buying American drugs. $40 a barrel for oil? Try $1-million a barrel for Prozac
A barrel of oil is 1/7th a ton, our estimate is low because we're keeping mind a barrel of Prozac will be less dense than a barrel of oil. With all the money pharma companies will make, America will own every oil well in the Arab world. Which brings us back to oil - wait a minute, does this mean Mike Moore is right?
800th MP BRIGADE In case anyone missed the laugh-a-minute officers of 800th MP Brigade, campaign honor Abu Gharib, the good brigadier who commanded it in Iraq is back again. Thanks to CNN, first we learn she has given "several" interview to BBC, and when we think about it, why shouldn't BBC seek to interview her repeatedly?
The Europeans are quite convinced the Americans are certifiable loonies, and the good brigadier must be playing well to the converted. Second, CNN tells us, in her latest interview to BBC she says that though there were no Israelis working at Abu Gharib, she met a man who claimed to be an Israeli working at a secret interrogation facility in Iraq. This is going to play really well with an already inflamed Arab public opinion.
The good brigadier is a fine patriot, but perhaps not too smart. If she keep this up, at her trial the Army prosecutor is merely going to play back her own statements, the prosecutor will shake her head sadly, and say: "The good Brigadier should not be punished. She is sick. She needs to be "cured"". If by permitting her to keep talking to BBC the Army intends to destroy what little credibility she had, they are doing a fine job.
DUAL PASSPORTS We do need to note that many Jewish-Americans also hold Israeli passports. The US is not particularly hung up on which citizen has what passports besides an American one. It takes the sensible view that having a second little book does not make you any less of an American. We mention this matter in a gallant attempt to find some justification, however twisted, for the good Brigadier's belief. By the same token, unless she personally verified without doubt that every Jewish-American soldier working under her did not have an Israeli passport, she shouldn't so blithely lay claim to having no Israelis working for her.
By the way, we recently saw a photo of the brigadier. She looks absolutely ruthless, determined to get her way, take-no-prisoners sort of person. In other words, the very model of a successful American business executive. And apparently she is a senior business executive in real life, when not playing Military Police and Everyone Is Responsible Except Me.

TERRORISTS MURDER CAPTIVE US MARINE Agencies report that a terrorist group holding a US Marine says it has beheaded him, and proof will soon be shown on video. Earlier, another group said it had shot a US Army solider it had held in captivity for some time; a video was provided, but the face of the soldier was not shown.

ORBAT.COM COMMENT

Orbat.com tries to avoid commenting on atrocities on any side of a war. First, our comments would not contribute toward an overall understanding of the conflict. Second, we do not want to be a source of inflaming any public opinion.
In the case of the US Marine, we feel a comment is appropriate, because the killing shows the fantastic stupidity of the terrorists. This Marine was of Lebanese descent. According to the USMC, he had become upset when his NCO was blown up in front of him; he deserted, with the aim of somehow getting to Lebanon. According to the terrorists, he had become involved with a local woman; the terrorists set a trap and captured him. Both versions could be simultaneously true.
Presumably, the terrorists want to show the world how tough they are, and want to strike fear in the hearts of other Marines.
WHAT BEING A TOUGH SOLDIER REALLY MEANS We are unclear how killing a prisoner shows toughness. Here is a case which does show toughness: it was sent to us as part of an extract from a book our long-absent contributor Gordon A. MacKinlay was putting together, on DSO citations for British-Indian Army personnel. The DSO is the second highest wartime gallantry award in the British system. One citation caught our eye because it concerned John Masters, then commanding a Gurkha battalion in Burma [if are not mistaken about the country].
The name John Masters is unlikely to mean much to most people today, regardless of their nationality, but in his time he was a best-selling novelist in the Commonwealth. At one point, his battalion was retreating just one step ahead of the pursuing Japanese, when news arrived the enemy would arrive at the battalion's camp shortly. An evacuation was ordered. In the camp were 50 gravely wounded soldiers. The doctor was of the opinion to move them on yet another retreat through the jungle would mean certain death for them. John Masters also knew evacuating the wounded would slow the retreat and putting more lives in danger. If John Masters hesitated, the citation does not tell us. Knowing exactly what the Japanese would do to the wounded, he ordered all 50 men shot.
This horrifying story shows what toughness in a soldier means, and it was all the harder for Masters to make the decision because these were not anonymous draftees, but volunteers who, down to lowest private, had a very close relationship with their British officers. Masters would have known many of the men personally.
ARE THE MARINES GOING TO BE AFRAID, VERY AFRAID? Now let's talk of sowing fear. Probably the terrorists don't realize it, but the Marines are no strangers to no-quarter combat. There was the Pacific Campaign in World War II, Korea, and then Vietnam, and in each case the wars equal any other in human history for a total lack of mercy shown by either side.
What's going to happen is that now few Marines are going to be inclined to take prisoners any more. Far from being fearful, every Marine is going to do his best to go out and find opposing fighters to kill.
WHAT THE TERRORISTS SHOULD HAVE DONE Here is what the terrorists should have done. Treated the captive well. Married him off to the woman. Put them in a vehicle, and passed them off to others who would take them to Lebanon. Videotaped the whole thing and given the tape to Al-Jazerra. The entire world, and particularly the American public, would have seen the video not once, not twice, but ten times or more.
Instead, these gentlemen will create further anger against themselves in the Islamic world. And perhaps more important, a hundred Arab Americans are going to be volunteering for the military this coming week.
WHO's THE ONE CREATING ENEMIES? The US media has had a field day telling us that the Americans are creating more enemies by fighting insurgents. Perhaps they should now explain to the terrorists that they are creating more enemies for themselves. Not just for today. But for the next hundred years or however long this war of religion goes on.

0400 GMT July 3, 2004

IRAQ TO REFUSE JORDAN TROOPS? AFP quotes the Iraq deputy foreign affairs minister as saying his country does not want troops from neighboring countries and will likely refuse a Jordanian offer. BBC adds Iraq has requested troops from Egypt, Oman, and Bahrain; Yemen is prepared to send troops if they operate under UN command. One difficulty with accepting Jordan's offer, says BBC, is then Turkey would also ask to send troops, something the Kurds will not accept.
JUST ANOTHER DAY IN KASHMIR Jang of Pakistan reports 22 people were killed in Indian Kashmir yesterday. The toll included 11 insurgents, 7 police, and 4 civilians.
SPAIN TROOPS TO AFGHANISTAN CNN reports that Spain will send 900 troops to Afghanistan for a 90-day deployment to help ensure peaceful elections. Spain has approximately 150 troops in Afghanistan and 350 sailors and soldiers on a frigate in the Indian Ocean. Approximately 350 medical and aviation soldiers plus a light infantry battalion are to deploy. The frigate will withdraw, giving Spain 1,000 troops in Afghanistan.

IRAQ INFRASTRUCTURE RESTORATION AND LARGER ISSUES

BBC SUMMARIZES PROGRESS BBC says progress of sorts is being made in restoring Iraq's infrastructure. Health was given only $16-million in 2002 by Saddam; the budget has been jumped 60 fold to about $1-billion. Power is still below pre-war levels, 4.1 GW versus 4.4 GW, which itself is well under the estimated demand of 6 GW. Even under Saddam Baghdad power was turned off for 4 hours a day, now because of equitable distribution it can be off between 6 and 12 hours. About 3 GW generating capacity is under addition/refurbishment. Education seems to be back on track with 95% school attendance; teachers were paid $3 - $5 a month, now they get $120, and tens of thousands of educators fired because of Baath membership have been reinstated. Water Treatment is only at 65% of prewar levels, partly because Baghdad has no treatment plant operating, but the lot of people previously denied safe water/water treatment has improved. Oil Against the 3.5 million/bbl/day produced before the 1990 sanctions, Iraq was allowed to export 2.5 million/bbl/day under the UN administered oil-for-food program. Production fell to 200,000 bbl/day after the fall of Baghdad. In the last 6 months it has averaged almost 2 million/bbl/day.
ALMOST NO US RECONSTRUCTION MONEY HAS BEEN SPENT We learn that less than 5% of the $18-billion the US Congress has sanctioned for Iraq has actually been spent. We do not know the reason, but suspect it has to do with the paranoid manner in which American government contracts are awarded and fulfilled. Normally, we'd be rather free with words like "fools", "idiots", and "brain-damaged" to describe this incredible situation. The US Government has not just failed to provide security, it has totally botched up reconstruction. Of course, reconstruction is taking place - only because $11 billion of Iraqi revenue has been spent by the Coalition Authority. But if the money sanctioned had been spent, reconstruction could have been much further along.
THE MEDIA AND CONGRESS ARE LIKELY RESPONSIBLE In this particular case, however, the words "fools", "idiots", and "brain-damaged" would have to apply to the US "muckraking" media and the Congress. Both the media and Congress are ever-ready to prove their vigilance by attacking "waste" and "unfairly awarded contracts", that no bureaucrat in her/his right mind will do other than refer purchase orders for every case of toilet paper and one gross pencils to the lawyers and quintuplet forms and nine approvals. Its no sense blaming the US Government alone.
BUT THE FINAL RESPONSIBILITY IS THE PRESIDENT'S Nonetheless, our point is that the purpose of Presidential leadership is to, well, lead. The President is supposed to motivate everyone into getting the job done. Personally we are very fond of Mr. Bush, partly because we believe he suffers from a disability that also afflicts your editor: the words he wants to speak come out wrong. This has nothing to do with intelligence, and your editor, at least, finds it positively repulsive that the citizens of a country that has done more for handicapped/disabled persons of every kind than any other on earth, feel free to make fun of their president when he fumbles words.
HE IS MORALLY CRIPPLED Mr. Bush, however, has been unable to motivate any one in the last year. Alleged and actual links between the Administration and the companies that specialize in war reconstruction have crippled the authority of the President. On top of that we have genial cretins like the film maker Mike Moore [Fahrenheit 9/11] spreading lies through the country, lies that liberals, at least, seem willing to swallow whole.
BUT THE REPUBLICANS ARE TO BLAME FOR PARTISANSHIP Here again, however, we cannot go blaming liberals and the ilk of Mike Moore alone. If so much of the country seems unable to tolerate even reading the words "President Bush", it is because in the last 10 years the Republicans have pushed partisanship to such extremes that it isn't just Iraq that is polarized. We've heard or Republican friends say "But THEY started it", which may be true, but that still doesn't excuse the enormous divisiveness the Republicans have created.
DIVIDED WE FALL It's fine for your editor to rhapsodize about the new Crusades, the US drive to world empire, and the utopia toward which we are heading, but if the US doesn't get to Step One because petty politics is killing all consensus, then the US is going nowhere, and - we're sorry if we upset our European friends - then the world is going nowhere.

WHY FAILURE IN IRAQ WAS INEVITABLE

THE BOOMERS LACK LEGITIMACY IN THEIR OWN EYES If you know anything about Boomers, it's obvious why the US has messed up in Iraq. Because the Boomers tried so hard to escape service in Vietnam, they have permanently destroyed, in their own minds, their own legitimacy to make tough decisions. Making war is easy, making peace is very hard. They think by paying tribute to their fathers - the so-called Greatest Generation - they have somehow justified their refusal to fight. That was a just war, they say, and we support it. So we are not against all wars, only unjust ones. This attitude is made all the more peculiar because till they reached middle each, the Boomers had nothing but contempt for anything their parents had done.
JUST BEING BORN 1944-64 DOES NOT MAKE ONE A BOOMER Caveat: just because a person was born from 1944 to 1964 does not make them a Boomer attitude wise. There are tens of millions of Americans born during those years who are quite normal human beings. Not coincidentally, they mostly belong to the working classes. When they were called to Vietnam, they were not happy, but they went. At no point did they assume that because they were so smart and so privileged they shouldn't be asked to fight. If you look at the British and Americans [and we are sure any other people] in World Wars I and II, the assumption was: "We are smart, we are privileged, it is our duty to lead, and we will be the first to volunteer". The military that did the fighting has Boomers as its lieutenant colonels, colonels, brigadier, major, and lieutenant generals. They belong to the Normal Boomers. [Of course, we have the odd case of Mr. Rumsfeld. He's ten years older than the first of the Boomers, but at heart he is one.
IN HINDSIGHT WE ARE ALL WISE So, you will ask, how come your editor didn't see this before the Iraq War? Anyone can be wise after the event.
WHY YOUR EDITOR ERRED The answer is quite pathetic. Age wise your editor is a boomer, but emotionally be belongs to the Fifties generation. He is eternally optimistic. He truly believes in America. A nation that survived the Depression, knocked out the Axis, rebuilt ravaged Europe, forced the colonial powers to divest their empires, pushed democracy so vigorously, conquered so many diseases, set America on the path to unparalleled prosperity, and sent humans to the moon had to be a generation that got things right. Vietnam was not got right, but your editor was convinced that the lessons had been learned and the new Crusade would go right.
Here is the problem. Your editor looks at the world through a military lens. He studied in detail how the military recreated itself after Vietnam. He had not one single doubt the military would easily defeat Saddam in Gulf I. He did not doubt even once it would defeat the Taliban. He was equally sure that Gulf II would be even more of a lop-sided victory. He was 100% right on every occasion.
But he forgot is that war is only politics conducted by violent means. The US military delivered perfectly. Like an idiot, he thought: the civilians come from the same population as the military. The military got it right, the civilians will also get it right - no need to even think of it.
He was 100% wrong.
AN EXAMPLE OF BOOMER SOFTNESS Today your editor will illustrate only one point. When disorder broke out in Iraq after the fall of Baghdad, why did the US not declare martial law? To the previous generation, this would be an easy thing to do, because the old-timers were very, very tough-minded. They had no doubt at all that they were doing the right thing, no matter what they did. They had sacrificed, they had no doubts of their own legitimacy to order and carry out tough decisions.
HATING THEMSELVES The Boomers know they lack all legitimacy. So instead of giving tough orders, they've spent their time - as usual - loathing themselves, and attempting to compensate for their guilt by beating themselves up about the first thing they could find - Abu Gharib. Oh we Americans are so awful, so vile, so horrible, etc.
AFTER ABU GHARIB Nor they have another thing to hate themselves for. Every sensible person knows that Saddam has to be tried, convicted, and executed with utmost speed. But that isn't okay by the Boomers: they cannot bring themselves to be associated with any tough decision. So even though the Iraqis would be making the decisions, because we invaded Iraq, we insist that you try him by our rules.
YOU MUST DO IT MY WAY Which brings us to the ever lasting paradox about Boomers. Conservative Boomers like to attribute what we are about to say as a Liberal trait. But your editor believes that this is not a political issue, and Boomers of all political hues are guilty of this paradox. On the one hand, we say that it is wrong for us to impose our views on anyone: You Have Your Way, I Have My Way, And Together We'll Make It A Better World. On the other, we are insisting that the Iraqis do things our way and that our way is morally superior. It's that way back at home, too.
YANKEE, GO HOME No wonder the Iraqis want the Americans to go home. In fact, to be perfectly truthful, now days so does your editor. Go home, rethink, regroup, and try again. But before you go: make sure Saddam is dead.

0330 GMT July 2, 2004

SADDAM appeared in court again today to hear seven charges to genocide, aggression etc. laid against him; others will be brought up as needed. Saddam refused to sign papers after he was charged, denied the court had jurisdiction over him, said the real criminal was Mr. Bush, and called the Kuwaitis "dogs", at which point the judge rebuked him. The Kuwaitis called him a war criminal, and said he should be awarded death. The death penalty has been restored in Iraq. The press was allowed to be present, but in limited numbers: one Iraqi journalist was ordered out as there was already one present.
We found none of the legal developments to be particularly amusing or interesting. Many Americans will agree, for different reasons, with Saddam's characterization of Mr. Bush as the real criminal, but bringing this up is not a good sign. It shows Saddam is getting confused. Whatever Mr. Bush may or may not have done, since it is Saddam who is on trial, the sum of all the crimes committed by human kind till today is irrelevant. This is not even good theatre.
When asked if he could afford a lawyer, Saddam retorted that since he is alleged to have stolen billions of dollars, why should he not be able to afford a lawyer. We have no idea what the Iraq court thinks of this; in an Indian court this statement could have put him in trouble. At the minimum the state would register a case and ask for his remand so he could be interrogated for violating tax and exchange control laws.
Chemical Ali, oddly in our opinion, was happy and relieved when charged with gassing the Kurds. He said that it could have been much worse, and the charge was one he was innocent of. Note to Chemical Ali: nothing stops the state from bringing more charges.
IRAQ In all the excitement about restoration of sovereignty and Saddam, we feel insufficient attention is being paid to US air strikes in Fallujah. On Wednesday night the US again attacked what it said was a safe house for Zarqawi's men: this is the fourth strike in about two weeks. The US estimates 10+ people were killed, local hospitals say 7, but as we well know by now, those killed are usually immediately buried. So what is happening? Has US intelligence improved to the point where its money is buying a non-stop stream of informants? Has the US managed some big break through in signal intercept that the mere use of a certain cellphone - say to order pizza - results in a strike? Is the US closing in on Zarqawi? The US has already once denied rumors it had captured him; we're curious if the rumor was begun as an psyop by the US; if not, what are the circumstances in which the rumor started. This kind of rumor, if used as a psyop, can cause great damage to the enemy, particularly if the leader has been isolated and cannot easily reassure his subordinates he is well. The denial would only serve to increase paranoia. The effect would be to panic the subordinates, who would run around doing stupid things, allowing themselves to be flushed like quail, and gunned down one by one. As usual, the press is not doing its job.
KUDOS FOR THE WASHINGTON POST Of course this kills us, but we have to compliment the Washington Post on a story it did in its July 1 edition, on the exploitation of Indian workers in Iraq by American and other contractors. We've been following the story from the Indian press, and the Washington Post is bang on target with its detailed report.
We found interesting that there can be up to five levels of contractors/sub-contractors in Pentagon contracts. And the story causes us to wonder, not for the first time, how many non-soldiers are really supporting US forces in Iraq? Suppose there are 60,000 civilians doing jobs which in the Vietnam era would have been filled by uniformed personnel: jobs such as facilities construction, transportation, security protection, and food service, which are among the publicly contracted services. That would bring the US total in Iraq to 200,000; add the various HQs and facilities on the periphery of Iraq - Jordan, UAE, Kuwait etc. could give us upward of 220,000+ "troops".
Our question to ourselves as much as to our readers is: suppose we were told the US has 220,000+ troops present. Would we still feel the Pentagon has sent too few soldiers to Iraq?
IRAN Reader Tim Hartigan sends an article from the National Review Online that says that at time of the recent incident, the Royal Navy was laying sensors to protect against planned Iran attacks on Iraqi export infrastructure. This would cripple Iraq, hurt the US, and push oil costs to new highs, making more profit for Iran. A trifecta.
INSURGENTS The former commander of the US 82nd Airborne Division in Iraq says that of the 3500 insurgents and suspects his division captured, only about 50 were foreigners. He disputes the popular notion that the insurgency is being fuelled by foreigners and says it is homegrown.
To us this makes some sense. From what we remember about the Iraqis, they did not like to bow to any foreigner, especially if he was there to "help" them. In those days the Soviets and the British were the villains. America was regarded as perfect - times have apparently changed somewhat. The French were tolerable, the Germans of no consequence, and a Japanese hard to sight. Indians were always welcome - there was a sense of kinship. Indian popular movies and songs were always a rage.

OIL

THERE ARE TRILLIONS OF BARRELS IN THE AMERICAS An article in Wired magazine raised your editor's eyebrows. Apparently, oil production from Canadian tar sands has reached 400,000 barrels/day, and from Venezuelan deposits has reached 500,000 barrels/day. Alberta Province alone is sitting on 300-billion barrels confirmed reserves, 40% of Mideast reserves, and with new technology up to another 1-trillion barrels could be extracted. This is in Alberta alone. Wired says there is 6 trillion barrels in tar sands around the world. Though Wired does not bring this up, there may be that much oil in western United States shales.
THE OIL IS BEING PRODUCED AT $10/BARREL This is the kicker: Canadian and multi-national companies are extracting oil at a cost of $10/barrel. We though at first that Wired, perhaps understandably, got the significance of this wrong. It says this is still three times the production cost of Mideast oil, some of which is also of such high quality it needs minimal refining, saving further on costs. But what oil costs to produce in the Middle East is irrelevant to the issue here: even at $20/barrel, Alberta producers are making a 100% gross margin, and the transport cost is significantly less than Mideast crude.
YET OIL COMPANIES WANT MIDEAST CRUDE BECAUSE ITS MORE PROFITABLE Then we thought again the matter. If oil experts told Wired that Alberta oil was of passing interest and no more because at current prices of about $40/barrel, there is an implication the oil companies are making more than 300% off Mideast oil! If not, wouldn't they be rushing to Alberta because it would be a better bet than the Mideast?
THE REAL ISSUE IS OIL COMPANY PROFITS, NOT AVAILABILITY We freely admit its been 30 years since we last took a close look at the production/supply issues of global oil. But if our reasoning is on track, then we are talking of oil companies' profits, not of the strategic availability of oil. The availability of oil is assured, but the profit does not match that on Mideast oil.
AMERICANS ARE PAYING A HUGE INVISIBLE SURCHARGE FOR THEIR OIL Now let's take a giant intuitive leap - someone has to. Let's assume of the US defense budget of $400+ billion dollars, 20% is tied directly to securing production/transportation of Mideast/North African oil. Let's assume about 4 million barrels a day are coming from the region. In that case, the US consumer is paying an invisible surcharge of $54 a barrel - the benefit of which is going to the oil companies.
THESE ARE ONLY QUICK ESTIMATES Please note we are simply doing back of the envelope calculations. We are quite familiar with all the reasons why this surcharge is not $54. Conversely, however, we are quite familiar with many reasons it might be more. While the problem is not easily amenable to a tangible cost/benefit analysis, Houston, we have a bad, bad problem, not least for the US consumer, who us going berserk at paying $2/gallon for oil, may be paying $5 or more per gallon.
WE ARE HAWKS, NOT LIBERALS It seems to us a gigantic fraud is being committed on the American people. No, we are not liberals. When it comes to American national security, to us an $800-billion defense budget is a worthwhile sacrifice. At Vietnam's 9% of GNP on defense Americans would be paying $1 trillion for defense; by peak World War 2's 43% of GNP defense would take up $5 trillion. We are prepared to argue that the importance of America's wars against present day fundamentalists are of greater importance than Vietnam was, even without hindsight.
WHY YOU WONT SEE A STUDY ON THE ABOVE BY YOUR EDITOR In our good old days, your editor's guru, K. Subhramanyam - even then India's leading strategic thinker, would have listened patiently for 60 seconds to your editor's thesis along the lines above. Then he would have said: "Go do an analysis. Use my name to talk to who you need to talk to", and have gone back to his own work. Your editor would have spent 6 months on the analysis, earned exactly $125 in the money of those days, and been pleased with life. Your editor lived like an Indian university graduate student for 20 years, even then the money would have sufficed only for 15 days of rent, food, books, supplies, and public transportation. So he would have been minus 5 1/2 months of work. Were he to replicate that life here, first, his wife would kick him out before 60 days had elapsed; second, within the next 30 days he be in a shelter and panhandling for food. This is why your editor is not about the do the above study. Send him his modest living costs, and he'll do it.

CASEY JONES

Your editor thanks Tim Hartigan and Mark Pippinger for their suggestion that his nickname Casey Jones came from the Grateful Dead song. Both include the lyrics. Now your editor is even more confused, because he certainly was not driving any train or inhaling.

Mr. Hartigan wonders what your editor doing that he needed to run. Nothing interesting, alas. The thing is, your editor would have liked to have lived a heroic life. Odysseus, perhaps, or at least the German officer who commanded 3rd Panzer Reconnaissance Battalion in the Western Desert - he forgets the gentleman's name - who the perfect life of a soldier for the six years he was in action and five that he was in Russian captivity. Instead, your editor's life has been largely one of utter low-grade insignificance, banality, and boredom, punctuated by episodes of sheer terror and a lot of running - never to anything, always away from something. We'll have to let the friend tell the story of why we ran. Your editor, however, does not think his friend is alive. Your editor can, however, discreetly reveal that on two occasions we ran from his friend's girlfriends. For an affectionately ugly man, he sure had an over abundance of gorgeous girlfriends, each as petite as he was large. When a woman is enraged at her boyfriend's infidelities [the man did everything to excess], however, size does not matter - you run, even if you are an innocent bystander.

But seriously, if the National Review is right and Iran is planning a campaign to attack Iraqi oil export infrastructure, then we are back where we were yesterday: without a clue as to what's going on, but whatever is going on, its not good.

0330 GMT July 1, 2004

IRAN With the release by Iran of the two RN sailors and 6 Marines that were detained by Iran allegedly for intruding into Iran territorial waters comes disquieting news. Associated Press quotes UK defense officials as saying they were not in Iranian waters, but were forced into them by the Revolutionary Guards. They say they had up-to-date charts, moreover, they had accurate fixes at all times thanks to their GPS systems. The British government has demanded the return of all equipment taken from the men. A defense official says that an examination of the GPS tracking will provide the evidence needed to confront Teheran. Further, the British are angry because the men were paraded blindfolded on Iran TV.

WHAT IS GOING ON?

EXPLANATION ONE: IT'S ALL A GENUINE MISUNDERSTANDING Now, while we normally would warn our readers that such an act is very serious - after all, an RN boat was captured in international waters, and that is a legitimate reason to declare war - we have to add another piece of news that our indefatigable Mr. Joseph Stefula sent us.
Apparently some weeks back Iranian forces - and this has to be Revolutionary Guards again - intruded into Iraq to set up posts in the UK AOR. The US commander in Iraq at that time was LT-GEN Ricardo Sanchez, and he ordered the British to attack the posts. The British commander refused and insisted there was a mixup that negotiations would resolve. Negotiations took place, the posts were withdrawn. There was much self-satisfaction that the British had - once again - remained calm and bucked the American cowboy generals. Smug references were made to the Pristina airport incident in the Balkans some time ago, when Russian paratroops made an unauthorized occupation of the airfield. When General Wesley Clark ordered to British to evict the Russians, the UK general on the scene refused, and famously said: "I'm not going to start World War III for you." The incident was later sorted out.
There are two ways of looking at the boat incident. We can say this was another mix-up, assuming the land intrusion was a mix-up. Lacking the necessary precision equipment, the Iranians thought the boat was in their territory; and look, after all, the men were returned using diplomacy.
EXPLANATION TWO: IRAN'S REVOLUTIONARY GUARDS ARE TRYING TO START A WAR The other way of looking at it is to say the Revolutionary Guards provoked the first incident, and provoked the second too. In which case the matter is really serious, but the British may again back down.
Reader David Newton opines that the incident is bad news any way you look at it. If the Revolutionary Guards are acting under central orders, this means Teheran has decided to raise the ante on the Iraq-Iran border. If they are not acting under central command, which mostly they are apt not to do, then you have a few hundred thousand fanatical soldiers that are, in effect, acting as an independent army within Iran. This possibility may be even more dangerous than the first.
EXPLANATION THREE: THE WEST IS PREPARING TO GO TO WAR But there is a third possibility, and if this is one that is being acted out, then war with Iran is inevitable.
IN SUPPORT OF EXPLANATION THREE, LOOK AT THE SITUATION THROUGH IRANIAN EYES To be completely fair to the Iranians, they think that a showdown with the West is coming. Let us not going into the rights and wrongs vis-�-vis both sides, or else we'll never get through this discussion. It is always possible that the US-UK are quietly provoking the Iranians and hoping for a causus belli. We must not automatically assume because its the US-UK that they are as driven snow, etc. These are legitimate tactics in time of crisis, and we are in a crisis because Iran has done such a bad job of concealing its nuclear weapons program from the IAEA, and when called on its bluff, escalated by saying the west had broken its agreements.
Now if the west is trying to provoke a showdown, then you have an imminent war. Create enough of these incidents, put the Iranians totally on edge, and because they are proud people, they are going to fall into the West's trap. It will be the Gulf of Tonkin all over again. In the case of the Revolutionary Guards, there is not just the issue of national pride. This bunch are religious fanatics: they say they defeated Iraq in the 1980-88 War, and there is a definite case to be made they are right. They say they have "safeguarded" the sacred revolution of 1979, and while your editor personally may not think 1979 was either sacred or a revolutionary, here they are on sure ground. A case can be made that but for these gentlemen, Iran would be a free country today.
The reason their fanaticism is relevant is because as far as they are concerned, they are in an inevitable fight to the death with the west. They suspected the west is gunning for true Islam, which they think they manifest. And after the invasion of Iraq they will be 100% sure the showdown is coming. If even most Americans think their government's reasons for going to war with Iraq do not hold up, imagine what the view looks like from the Iranian perspective!
BUT DON'T THE IRANIANS KNOW THEY WILL LOSE? WHY NOT DISMANTLE THE NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM INSTEAD? Now, it is by no means clear to your editor, after he thought about this subsequent to yesterday's news update, that the Revolutionary Guards understand what's going to happen if there is a war. These are the people that cleared minefields by sending children holding hands to walk into the minefields. [A minor digression: the Guards say the children were volunteers. This might be true, we have no way of proving it or disproving it. What we'd like to ask the Guards is, why were you not volunteering for the certain death?]
PERHAPS THEY DO NOT KNOW People believe what they want to believe, and despite the known facts about Gulf I, Gulf II, and the 2001-02 Afghan War, it is entirely possible the Guards believe the Americans in particular are cowards and can be defeated despite their firepower. Why did Saddam and the Taliban not defeat them? Simple: their belief in their God was not strong enough, their hearts were not pure enough, etc. After all, didn't the Vietnamese chase the Americans out?
You and your editor may know the Vietnamese did not militarily win any victory, ever, against the Americans. They lost perhaps two million soldiers, but fortunately for them, the US Congress got tired of the war and decided everyone should go home. [Rationalizations, our Vietnamese friends will say in their gentle, smiling, polite fashion. We defeated the Americans militarily. That is why the wise anti-militarist Congressmen and American people decided to stop supporting South Vietnam.]
SHOULD WE BLAME THEM IF THEY THINK THEY WILL WIN? But can anyone blame the Revolutionary Guards if they think the Americans are cowards? Leave aside the Arab media, they only have to read your editor's favorite paper, the Washington Post, to be convinced beyond any doubt!
WHY WHAT THE IRANIAN THINK MAY BE OF NO CONSEQUENCE: WAR MAY BE INEVITABLE Time to conclude. The realities of the military calculus are of no importance in assessing what is going on in the mind of Iranians. From the Guards' viewpoint - and this means the hardline Teheran viewpoint - war is coming no matter what they do. Unless Iran gives up its nuclear program. Which means defeat without firing a shot. So better to fight and lose than to capitulate like cowards. This line of thinking would be the province of leaders who understand modern warfare, the fanatics are likely convinced they will win - after all, in the global war of Christian versus Muslim, are they not winning right now?
A CAVEAT: YOUR EDITOR HAS NO CLAIM TO SPECIAL INFORMATION We are not at any point saying we know for a fact that the West is going to have at Iran no matter what, because the west believes - rightly or wrongly - Teheran is going nuclear not in years, but before year's end. Your editor could argue the west is wrong; again, however, reality is not the issue, perception is. We believe the Europeans are becoming increasingly convinced the Americans/British are correct about the imminent danger. Even your editor does not doubt that in five years Iran could go nuclear.
We've said earlier we have no clue what is going on, but we repeat, whatever it is, it's not good. We are trying only to make some kind of sense out of what's going on.
SUMMARY We see three choices. [1] The Revolutionary Guards are a bunch of idiots. [2] The Revolutionary Guards are dying for a war and are provoking the west. [Die they will, in numbers that will traumatize Iran for a generation.] [3] The Revolutionary Guards are simply being realistic and preparing for an inevitable war.
A PERSONAL NOTE: CASEY JONES, TROUBLE'S A-COM In the early 1960s your editor had a friend who - if we may turn a famous Bill Clinton statement on its head - never exhaled. This friend was about twice as tall and twice as wide as your editor. He particularly liked your editor because "the Indians have it right, man. Once your head's in the right place, you can see all the pasts, presents, and future there ever were, are, and will be". [This highly puzzled your editor, who while he was born in India, yes, was a brown American preppie and quite ignorant of his native land. It was years later before he figured out what his friend meant. But we digress.] His nickname for your editor was Casey Jones, for reasons your editor still does not comprehend. Now, once his consciousness or whatever was suitably elevated, and he was united with the universal being or whatever, sometimes he'd stop to breathe, stand up, and sniff the air like a dog. And sometimes he'd grab your editor by the arm and start running. It was no problem to keep up with him: your editor's feet never touched ground. And sometimes, while we were running - er, he was running - he'd say "Casey Jones, I can smell it in the wind, trouble's a-comin". [Incidentally, for someone who smoked so much tobacco and other things, he had incredible stamina. Your editor, in those days, lived a pure life and could run 10 kilometers without working up a sweat. So could his friend. But then your editor neither inhaled nor drank, and was not carrying 60 kilos under his arm. But we digress.]
The frightening thing was that he was never, ever wrong. Your editor has often been wrong. But like his friend of long-ago, your editor, who is most assuredly not one with the universe or whatever, sniff something in the wind. He'd assumed Iran was off the calendar because of Iraq. After the news about the British crew, he has become uneasy because he's no longer so sure he's right. It may be that trouble is coming.