0230 March 31, 2007

• Iran Revolutionary Guard Becoming Tiresome Not content with one letter purportedly written by the female British military captive begging forgiveness for violating Iranian waters, Iran produced a second letter. Failing to get that one right, they now have produced a third in 3 days. Just in case the new letter didn't go over well, they have a confession from one of the men.
• Iran is going to have to try once again: the TV confession is a mishmash of scenes taken at different times and crudely edited.
• The IRGC is getting positively tiresome. We say IRGC because the "experts" tell us the IRGC did the deed and the government had nothing to do with it. This may be as may be, but if this is another IRGC provocation, fixing Iran before the country gets N-weapons is going to become even more imperative. Because guess who's going to control the N-weapons?
• We're a bit skeptical about this business of the government not being involved. Quite likely the regular military is not. But these days the IRGC represents mainline Iran. The regular military, foreign affairs etc. are sidelined and losing power. The prime minister and almost all his cabinet are former IRGC officers, so it makes no sense to believe IRGC is acting other than as a government arm.
• A point to be repeated to some in the 3rd World who refuse to believe the Iranians violated Iraqi waters and not the other way around. First, the Iranians themselves initially gave their positions as within Iraqi waters. When the Brits said: "Hold it right there, bros," or whatever, the Iranians hurriedly came up with a correction. This alone destroys any credibility the Iranians might have.
• Second, even if the Iranians believe the Brits trespassed, the correct procedure was to warn them off, given how narrow the Shatt-el-Arab is. There were no grounds to capture the sailors/marines.
• Third, the captives are all uniformed military personnel. Under international law, they cannot be produced on TV, nor can they be humiliated. They cannot be asked for anything more than name, rank, serial number. It is absolutely not allowed to have them "confess".
• When the US seized five Iranians in the north of Iraq, we objected because the men were working as consular officials, though their consular business consisted of helping to kill Americans and Iraqis. International law is international law, though we admit this was a dicey issue because under diplomatic convention you are not supposed to be funneling money, arms, training to groups seeking to kill people in the country to which you are accredited.  The Americans have observed part of international law, at least, by not publishing "confessions" and parading the captives before the media.
• The British were not working to kill any Iranians; they were simply on a routine maritime patrol to check smuggling. Iran has defied international law, and it must be made to pay the price. Its tactics are crude beyond belief. For example, now the Iranians say if EU/UN brings pressure on them they will not release the captives.
• If they do not release the captives, EU/UN need to get much tougher with Iran. From what we hear, the US is willing to do whatever it is the Brits wants done. The problem is that this pussy-footing, gag-inducing supine behavior is coming from 10 Downing Street and from nowhere else.
• The Sound and the Fury Remember David Hicks, the Australian who fought for the Taliban in Afghanistan and then vanished into the American gulag in Guantanamo? Well, he's the first to face a military tribunal, and he has been sentenced to 9-months imprisonment, which he will serve in Australia.
• Can we ask the US administration a question? How much money did you spend keeping this moronic jerk in custody for five years and for his trial? We suspect it's in the millions of dollars. And for what? For a 9-month sentence - readers, pre-sentencing jail time is not counted in these proceedings. In the US criminal justice system, 9 months is not even a slap on the wrist.
• Hicks should have been dealt with under our suggested system. He should have been summarily tried on the battlefield and shot if found guilty. He was not entitled to the protections of the Geneva Convention. If not guilty, he should have been released on the spot. We are either in a war or not. If we are in a war, then war rules should be applied. If we are not in a war, civil rules should be applied. The problem is the Bush Administration lacks the courage of its convictions. It says we are at war, but won't declare one. It then turns around and says suspects must get a fair trail. Then it turns around again and says "we'll determine the rules for a fair trial, not the US Constitution or whatever." The end result is a pointless mess which costs the US taxpayer, and which lowers American prestige worldwide.
• We hope readers are not in doubt about our position on Hicks. He was captured on the battlefield with the Taliban. He was a mercenary and he should have been shot. Of course, the US would have had to say it was at war. Perhaps the one Diet Pepsi the editor allows himself each day had detached him from reality, but from Day 1 Afghanistan has looked like a war to him.
  

0230 March 30, 2007

• [1230 GMT] Ethiopia Push Against Somalia Rebels Reuters says 30 are dead in an Ethiopian offensive against Somali rebels in Mogadishu. An Ethiopian gunship was hit and crashed, apparently either in the International Air Port area or close to it. The objective of the offensive is to clear the rebels out as they have been increasingly attacking Somali and Ethiopian forces. Meanwhile, a reconciliation conference scheduled for next week is going ahead.

• It is unclear to us how many of the rebels are Islamic insurgents and how many are simply clan-based militia refusing to disarm.

• Southern Africa Backs Dictator Mugabe Not just has the 14-member Southern Africa Development Community backed President Mugabe of Zimbabwe, it has demanded the west lift sanctions against the country. SADC is a disgrace to Africa and to the Third World.

• Iranians Continue Playing Silly Buggers Now they say if UK pressures them, they will not release the sole female captive. It seems to us the Revolutionary Guards are incapable of logical thinking. What exactly do they hope to gain from this confrontation? And who do they think they are impressing with their crudely forged letters said to be from the female captive?  It's actions like these that makes Iran very dangerous and makes imperative that it be contained.

• The UK sailors and marines were enforcing a UN mandate when they were captured. The UN needs to take measures to get them back.

• Meanwhile, let the incident be a warning to UK. It wants to be a world power but doesn't want to pay for a robust defense. UK government needs to realize that if it wants to play games with the Big Boys, it cannot do so with an army of 50 battalions, a couple of dozen warships, and a dozen fighter squadrons. The military UK deploys today would embarrass a 3rd rate power.

• Just Another Bad Day In Iraq Suicide bombers killed 130 people in Baghdad and in a town 80-km north of the capital. We feel sorry for the Iraqis, but all we can do is shrug our shoulders. Rightly or wrongly the US gave them a great opportunity to create a new era. Instead of seizing the opportunity, they have divided into a hundred fractious groups with everyone at everyone else's throats.

• All anyone can do is to now await the next round of Shia reprisals, and wonder if this is the point at which the Shias lose it and start a frenzied slaughter of the Sunnis that no one will be able to stop. Assuming anyone but the the US wants to stop it in the first place.

• Our instinct says this is not the tipping point. But we have to join just about everyone who says if this continues, a full-blown civil war is inevitable.

• We learn that Tall Afar has been pacified by the US not just once, as we believed, but twice, thus repeating a wearisome pattern seen all over Iraq. Let's hear it for the Administration's strategists, folks - but wait: what's the sound of one hand clapping? Sounds terribly like silence. Our famous instinct tells us, however, that the US is not going to pacify Tall Afar a third time.

• CIA Says DPRK N-Test A Failure We love the CIA, but frankly, we didn't need the CIA to tell us that. We've said from the start DPRK did not have N-weapons capability. We get so tired of being right so often on these matters.

• What we'd really appreciate is someone doing a proper analysis of Pakistan's N-weapon program. We are convinced they do not have useable N-weapons. We said so more than 20 years ago, and we also carefully noted that by 2000 our prognosis would become moot because Pakistan would have its own unsafeguarded plutonium production reactor. Well, that date slipped, as is the wont of dates. Next year Pakistan will have sufficient plutonium for one bomb, and then enough for one bomb every two years. That is assuming a whole bunch of things, for example, that we won't go into because technical details are always so boring to people who aren't into that sort of thing.

• BTW, we got no thanks from the Indians for our analysis of years ago. With the editor not having visited in 17 years, its out-of-sight out-of-mind as far as the Indians are concerned, so there is not one person in all those years who has come to ask our opinion on the subject.

• We got no thanks because for political reasons it was and is absolutely critical to India that Pakistan have N-weapons. But why bring all that up again? Don't worry, be happy is our motto.

0230 March 29, 2007

• The Reality Of Iraq We are all entitled to our fantasies: without fantasies to disguise life's brutal realities, anyone with imagination would find life intolerable. So, for example, your editor has this fantasy that any day now his genius will be recognized. He will gain the recognition that has eluded him all his life, and the money to lead a secure, modestly comfortable life, and that he will have a conventional family life. The reality is quite different: none of these things have happened in 40 years, and for the editor to disregard the past 40 years and continue saying to himself, against all evidence, "any day now" would be neurotic.

• Now, if your editor is being neurotic, no one but himself suffers. But when you have a government that is fighting a war living on fantasy, then the consequences are vast and the country suffers.

• So it is with Iraq. The US administration believes it can bring peace to Iraq. This neurotic fantasy is costing $75-billion, 750 dead, and 4000+ wounded a year. We hope the US administration learns something from Tal Afar.

• You've heard the name before because its the town where the US defeated the insurgents big-time, and did it so well the campaign has become a valuable case study.

• Well, there have been rumblings from Tal Afar these past few months. We put it down to the hasty reduction of US troops in the north to feed Baghdad Surge I, the one that failed miserably. Others may disagree.

• The rumblings exploded the other day when presumably Sunni insurgents killed 85 Shias in 2 truck-bombings. Yesterday the Shias retaliated, going house to house in a Sunni district, pulling out males as young as 12 according to one report, and shooting them in the back of the head, mostly right there in their homes or in the street outside. At least 60 Sunnis are dead - as usual with Iraq, no one seems to know for sure about anything.

• It seems likely the Shia militia that did this has members who are policemen - big shock here, Washington (Not). Anyway it's not particularly germane. More to the point: the Iraqi Army arrested 20 men, and let them go within hours because "hundreds" of demonstrators agitated for their release. The provincial governor says the government didn't want disorder to spread. But the men are known, and will be dealt with in due course.

• Gee. We are so impressed with the Iraqi Army and the government. Just imagine. Hundreds of demonstrators! (Think Dr. Evil in Austin Powers going "Ten million dollars!") So the government and Army cannot handle a few hundred demonstrators? Of course they can. They didn't want to, and it's not necessarily because the troops were Shia. We don't know their sect, but they equally could have been Kurds who simply didn't want to get involved.

• Now, does anyone seriously believe that in Iraq's tribal setup, the Sunnis are not going to take revenge? And then the Shias will take revenge. The government does not want to put an end to violence. It wants to put an end to Sunni originated violence, and is quite happy to countenance the use of its resources to kill Sunnis. And why should it be otherwise, given the recent history of Iraq?

• And if the US thinks it has a solution to this sort of thing, it's indulging in neurotic fantasy.

• A Political Non-Scandal If the intent of the US Congressional Democrats is to show they as petty and stupid as the Republicans, they are heading for success in the matter of the firing by the Bush administration of 8 US attorneys.

• It is known even to outsiders like us that under the US system, US attorneys serve at the President's pleasure. The Democrats own President, Mr. Clinton, fired every single one when he came to power. He did nothing wrong, as it was his prerogative. Equally it was Mr. Bush's prerogative to fire none, one, 8, or as many US attorneys he wanted.

• Now, if you want to make a case that Mr. Bush has been incompetent in defense of his prerogatives and that his attorney general has shown a singular witlessness, you would be on very firm ground. Last we heard, however, being incompetent was neither scandalous or illegal.

• Why Is Mr. Bush Complaining About Iraq Deadlines? The President has repeatedly said he wants benchmarks in Iraq. The Iraqis either meet the benchmarks, or they pay the price. It so happens, as Fareed Zakaria said in the Washington Post the other day, the Iraq government has failed to meet just about every benchmark the US Government has set since 2004.

• So why is Mr. Bush complaining the Democrats are endangering US security by setting deadlines for Iraq? Is it Mr. Bush's case that from Day 1 his commitment to Iraq was open-ended and limitless? If so, he should have told us before the 2004 and 2006 elections so that the people could have decided if this is what they want. Was Mr. Bush lying to the people when he ordered the surge and said there were to be benchmarks?

• If not - and we do not believe his commitment was ever open-ended or that he has lied about benchmarks, then the Democrats have given Mr. Bush a great present: an excuse for him to get out of Iraq without being blamed. He would do well to seize the moment, and tell everyone: "I respect the will of the American people as expressed through Congress." He would get accolades, and the responsibility for withdrawal would fall square on the Democrats.

• The truth is that Mr. Bush is complaining about restrictions that are being placed on his power. Now, if he had run this war with any competence, he would have a case. But he has messed up at every stage even while his ally Mr. Al-Maliki simply ignores every deadline set for Iraq. The American system is one of checks and balances. The American people have been phenomenally patient in giving Mr. Bush a free rein. even now the opposition to Mr. Bush is muted. Mr. Bush has conclusively shown he cannot effectively fight the GWOT. Congress, in putting constraints on the President, is only asserting checks and balances - something it should have done years ago, but was too cowardly.

• Even now the Democrats are being cowardly. All the time it's "we support the troops, we support America" and so on till it makes one want to barf. There is hardly a Democrat who does not envisage a large residual force in Iraq after 2008. The argument is about numbers, not about what is to be done about the Iraq failure.

• If the Democrats really had the courage of their beliefs, they would simply say No. No question of benchmarks. This is a war that is being fought wrong and we need to get out - that means all quarter-million Americans out. No qualifications, no equivocations, no sitting on the fence. We would support the Democrats if they were honest, because purely from a strategic/military viewpoint we believe the US has blundered badly. But the way they are going about it, they deserve no admiration.

• From Brian Brown On The Rumsfeld Case At present I have been unable to find and read the decision of Judge Hogan dismissing claims against Mr. Rumsfeld.

• Normally, however, when a federal court dismisses allegations against a defendant, the court will assume for the sake of argument the truth of factual assertions made in the complaint filed by the plaintiffs.  In other words, at this preliminary stage, the court has no actual evidence of whether the allegations of the complaint are true - - there has not, after all, been a trial.   Instead, when the court decides a motion to dismiss, it assumes the truth of all facts asserted in the complaint, giving the plaintiffs the benefit of the doubt.
• While I may be shown to be very wrong when the actual text of the judge's opinion is available to me, it appears to me that your statement that the judge accepted the plaintiff's had been tortured must be qualified by the above.

• From Gareth Bowman On Royal Navy Ranks [Mr. Bowman has been assistant editor of  our History magazine.] The Royal Navy does have the rank of Commodore in peacetime, corresponding to that of US Navy Rear Admiral (Lower Half). In the case of the current hostage crisis, the Commander TF 158 is a British Commodore with HMS Cornwall, flag.

• From Richard F. Thatcher On When To Take A Bribe Some time back you related a story about nearly everyone in India being paid off by someone else.    

• I heard something on WLS Chicago today that was interesting.  One of the commentators said that early in his broadcast career he was a DJ and he wanted to do news and an older guy there knew that.  He said this man gave him a rather simple formula on whether to take a bribe (To play a certain song, "forget" reporting a news item, mention a store in his talk, etc.) and that is this "If they offer you more money then you are going to make in your life, grab it.  If not, turn it down."

• That seems pretty straightforward and about as simple as it gets.

0230 March 28, 2007

• US Judge Dismisses Rumsfeld Torture Claim brought by several human rights groups on behalf of 9 prisoners. The decision was based on several factors including: (a) foreigners do not have the same rights as US citizens in constitutional matters; (b) there is nothing in federal law that permits serving officials of the US government to be held personally liable for actions performed on behalf of the government; (c) the plaintiffs were taking a myopic view that torture is unjustified under all circumstances, thus potentially hampering US national security; and (d) "authorizing monetary damages against military officials engaged in an active war would invite enemies to use our own federal courts to obstruct the armed forces' ability to act decisively and without hesitation in defense of our liberty and national interests." [Judge's quote is from CNN.]

• The judge did not doubt the prisoners were tortured - he called the allegations "horrifying".

• In other words, war is war, bad things happen in war, national security concerns top individual rights in such cases, and the courts are not the correct remedy for all wrongs.

• Our good friends the ACLU and Human Rights Watch brought the cases on behalf of the prisoners. Personally, we think Rumsfeld at al including the senior US Army officers at Abu Gharib all need to be tried by military tribunal for incompetence in wartime. There is a lot to be said for the World War 2 Red Army system: you lost a battle and were yourself alive, you were shot to encourage other generals not to lose next time. One reason, in our opinion, that American decision-making is becoming so bad is there are no consequences for wrong decisions any more. People mess up big time and then go on to even bigger and better things.

• whatever we may think of Mr. Rumsfeld, however, does not mean, for a minute, that we have any sympathy for the ACLU/HRW on this issue. They are simply morally wrong to try and bring personal suit and to even think of monetary damages. Both these organizations are famous for self-promotion. We don't doubt ACLU/HRW won while losing: they would have raised a good deal of money from people who get into a frenzy if you creep up and whisper "George Bush" in their ear, and they got a lot of publicity. So no need to feel sorry for them.

• Stuff a Sock In It, Teheran The British Prime Minister said that if Iran did not release the 15 British sailors/marines, Britain would have to move to a different level. Teheran's response: "You're being provocative!".

• Oh please. This is not even vaguely funny, and readers know we are willing to forgive anyone anything as long as they are funny.

• Meanwhile, we are further dismayed at the British military high command. Quote from Times: "The decision to offer no resistance to Iran, although the Britons were said to have been operating in Iraqi waters, was down to the commander of the two boats. There was no air cover at the time because a helicopter had just returned to HMS Cornwall after watching the successful boarding of a merchant vessel."

• This looks terribly like the high command is getting ready to blame the juniormost people involved in the incident instead of taking responsibility for a situation in which their men/women were operating without backup in a high risk situation. So was it up to the commander of the two boats to go to his boss, "Oh I say old bean, I don't think I want to go out today without back-up, don't you know" or whatever? Obviously not. So why blame him? Why not blame the chain of command that simply let the captives be taken away? Seems the Brits are getting affected by the American military disease: blame those who are too insignificant to defend themselves.

• A junior US officer sums up our overall position on the incident so well its best to quote him [from the Times]: "Lieutenant-Commander Erik Horner, second-in-command on USS Underwood, the frigate working in the British-controlled task force with HMS Cornwall, said: “We not only have a right to self-defence but also an obligation to self-defence. [The British] had every right and every justification to defend themselves rather than allow themselves to be taken. Our reaction was, ‘Why didn’t your guys defend themselves?’ ” We'll have to wait till the hostages get back, but we suspect their orders were not to escalate incidents.

• Incidentally, anyone have a clue as to why media was referring to the commanding officer of HMS Cornwall as a "Commodore"? Isn't he a commander, and isn't Commodore in the Royal Navy strictly a wartime rank? Maybe things have changed since we last knew all this.

0230 March 27, 2007

• SADC In Extraordinary Meet Next Week Over Zimbabwe The 14-member Southern Africa regional conference SADC is to meet next week to discuss Zimbabwe. We are still skeptical anything concrete will come of the meeting.

• For example, South Africa is still spewing platitudes about "quiet diplomacy" which manifestly has done nothing to help the situation in the last 7 years. We note the irony of a vibrant democracy, South Africa, being the main supporter of an ossified dictatorship, Zimbabwe. The South Africans could at least tell the world why dictatorship is okay for Zimbabwe when it wouldn't be accepted for a day in their own country.

• Meanwhile, Zimbabwe police have been authorized to open fire if they witness violent incidents. This comes in the wake of 3 attacks with firebombs and tear gas over the weekend, including one against a train and one against a police station. The Government says they are the work of the opposition. The opposition says it does not sanction violence and that the government's goons are suspects. Personally we think if the police have a right to "bash" the opposition, the opposition has a right to bash the government.

• We were wondering the other day how come a nation born of insurgency against a white regime has remained so passively peaceful in the face of a black dictatorship. We are told it is partly because 3 million Zimbabwe citizens have fled the country, leaving the poor and the powerless at home - and the poor do not make revolutions, its the lower-middle class, and partly because President Mugabe's repression is efficient.

• Iran Ties British Marines/Sailors Fate To Its Men In US Hands  says Times London. After 5 men with ties to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard were captured by US forces in Kurdistan, Iran said it would hunt, if neccessary, US forces. Capturing "blue-eyed, blond Americans" would be easier than buying cheap Chinese goods, Iran said.

• Well, these days most Americans are not blue-eyed blonds, so perhaps that's why Iran has not had much luck capturing some. Seriously, Iran is likely learning its not an easy job capturing American troops. Al Qaeda and other insurgent groups have been trying for years, and when they recently did succeed in capturing two officers, they had to murder them because there was no chance they were going to get away alive with their hostages.

• In our opinion, Iran probably struck at the British because they were an easier target. Times London suggests the Brits will be held to trade for Iran's  5 men.

• At the same time, we think the situation is a bit more complicated. We don't think the Iranians are particularly concerned about their five operatives as much as they are concerned about the 3 senior officers who had mysteriously vanished over the last few months. While one may have defected, it is possible the others or all were kidnapped by the US and/or Israelis. Remember, the Israelis very much do have a dog in this fight because Hezbollah, that creature of Iran, is holding two Israeli soldiers.

• If our reasoning is correct, then the British have a problem. The US is neither going to return the 3 senior officers nor stop kidnapping Iranian generals and intelligence people because 15 Brits are in Iranian custody. As far as the US is concerned, the Brits have only themselves to blame.

• Our considered opinion is that Britain is operating without any cards in this crisis. Best for the Brits to join the Americans and capture more high-value Iranian targets. And we suggest that if the Brits are to continue with their high-risk activities in the region, they need to operate more robustly. Anything to do with Iran/Iraq  is not in the same category as policing a shire back home.

0230 March 26, 2007

• Iran Reacts To New Sanctions With Usual Threats which are quite boring. Those backing sanctions will suffer heavily etc etc We are not developing N-weapons but we will never give up our rights etc etc.

• If Iranian is not developing N-weapons its government must be stark raving crazy and could even be charged with dereliction of duty. Iran's only defense against the US is N-weapons. The question really is, when will Iran get its first N-bomb. We belong to the latter rather than sooner school.

• Sri Lanka Media says the country is again spiraling into civil war. The rebel LTTE has taken a severe beating these last few months, but it looks as if it is now striking back. The latest incident is the bombing of a Sri Lanka airfield using light aircraft. The act has no military significance, but is an attention-grabber and morale booster for the rebels.

• A Season Of Apologies To Africans For the Slave Trade Okay, so we're not in favor of apologies such as the one UK has made for its role in the slave trade, because when do the apologies end? Britain did its part by declaring the trade illegal in 1833 and then proceeded to fight to stop others, such as the US, from engaging in the trade. That's 174 years ago, and a lot of what is consider unacceptable now was considered acceptable then.

• What we'd like to see is Africans apologizing to Africans for the slave trade. There would have been no trade had it not been for Africans who enslaved others of their continent and sold them to white traders. Or is this a case of the common enough liberal belief that only white men can be guilty of racism?

• Can Washington Please Explain Why the lack of democracy in Egypt is acceptable but lack of democracy in Iran is not acceptable? We all know why: Egypt is Washington's partner in "stabilizing" the Middle East, i.e., not threatening Israel, whereas Iran is "destabilizing the Middle East, i.e., threatening Israel.

• So that's realpolitik, and that's fine. But is it too much to ask Washington to stop the moralizing? If winning hearts and minds is the object, the moralizing is counterproductive - particularly when Saudi Arabia, a perennial US favorite, represses democracy even more savagely than Egypt. The French play realpolitik as much as the US, but they don't get hated as much as the US because they avoid moralizing. No one expects any better from the French. If the US would also simply say: "folks, we gotta do what we gotta do", people would grumble, mutter "hypocrites" - as they do about the French - and get on with their lives.

• US Marine Officer Awarded British DFC a first since World War II. In 2006 he was an exchange pilot flying the Lynx with No. 847 Squadron RAF in Iraq. A British company was in trouble near Amarah and he responded, first by functioning as a FAC for air strikes, then by evacuating a seriously wounded soldier under fire.

• Iran Forces Under Equipped and Poorly Trained says www.debka.com, relying on analyses of 2006 and 2007 exercised.

• We confess we're a bit taken aback: Debka is normally in the forefront exaggerating military threats out of all proportion, and it's unusual for it to be playing down a threat. Naturally we wonder what's going on - Debka is a highly political source and usually echoes extreme Israeli hard-liners.

• Letter From Anthony Absi The US savings rate does not include Americans' primary saving vehicle, the 401 plan. Mr. Absi sends us a link to http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/2007/02/02/the-myth-of-a-low-savings-rate/ where we learn that till 1977 Americans saved 11%. After that the 401 tax deferred savings plan was made available, and the savings rate, still calculated the old way, plunged. We also learn that 80% of Americans have saved enough for retirement.

• Letter from Jonathan Hisey According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics as of March 9, there were 153.3 million available workers in the US, of which 6.9 million were unemployed.  That would make the 1.3 million Wal-Mart employees roughly 0.9% of the total employed workforce.  That is very small percentage of the workforce to draw conclusions about the state of all American workers.

• Furthermore, let’s consider the Wal-Mart employee a bit more.  If we exclude store managers, purchasing agents, executives, corporate level people etc., who are left?  Mostly cashiers, people who stock shelves, janitors, and the ever cheerful Wal-Mart greeter.  Those jobs require almost no skills or training whatsoever.  The wage of $8.50/hour seems very reasonable to me.  Also, how many of those people work 40 hours/week and are the primary wage earner in their household?  When I was college student (University for international readers) the Wal-Mart where I lived employed many, many students who worked part time.  One more thing to consider is the average household income in the US.  For 2005, in 2005 dollars it was $46,326.  Two people earning $8.50/hour working 2080 hours/year is only $35,360, so obviously the average household in the US is making more than $8.50/hour.

• Editor Reader Hisey is correct. We do not know how many people rely on their Walmart check to live and how many use their check as extra money. To compete with Walmart, however, other companies have to push down their wages and export jobs to China - thus the Walmart Effect.

• Walmart is simply the extreme in squeezing the worker. In 1960, when the editor began working, the minimum wage was $1/hour, equal to about $7.70 in today's money. That is about what a Walmart cashier gets today. That means for - say - the lowest fifth of Americans - earnings are almost flat 47 years later.

0230 March 25, 2007

• US Says Visas To Iranians Issued In Timely Manner and that Teheran is making the excuse its president cannot attend the UN because visas did not come in time only because the president does not want to be embarrassed by the UN imposition of new sanctions.

• The new sanctions include a ban on weapons exports, a ban on new commercial loans to Iran, and the freezing of accounts of 28 individual and organization accounts related to the N-program.

• Orbat.com position on Iran sanctions We don't believe sanctions will work. We believe an N-armed Iran is so dangerous that Iran must be disarmed immediately by all means neccessary, and kept disarmed. If that means the country has to be bombed every five years, so be it.

• At the same time, we believe it does need to be acknowledged that Iran, as an independent state, has every right to develop N-weapons - the same right as the US, Russia, UK, France, China, India, Israel and Pakistan have. We get annoyed when the west through the UN speaks of Iran's duties to observe its international treaty obligations and all that rot. The treaties did nothing to disarm the then existing N-weapons states, and did not apply to countries like India that never signed the NPT. Whatever the reason Iran signed the NPT, it has the right to reassess its position at any time it wants. We are not going to get into the argument "in that case let Iran formally withdraw from the NPT and take the consequences". Why should Iran have to pay any consequences for wanting to strengthen its national security?

• The US has every right to say to Iran: "We will stop you from acquiring N-arms" because an N-Iran is a threat to the US. But using the UN to put pressure on Iran is cynical, immoral, and will further reduce the UN's credibility. If the US really loves the UN so much, then let Washington forgo its right of veto and subject itself to UN resolutions the same as it wants Iran to be subjected to UN resolutions. Fat chance. Might is right, we accept it, but please, Washington, spare us the moralizing. It's tedious and unamusing.

• Zimbabwe We suggest readers click on the London Times's analysis at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article1563672.ece. Basically the Times says that President Mugabe's party is looking to jettison him and that all sides are scrambling to position themselves for this gentleman to exit. We hope Times has it right.

• French Presidential Election: Our Advice To Sego: Ditch Your Boyfriend We haven't the foggiest idea if Ms. Segolene Royal is the best choice for President of France. But after reading in the London Times about her boyfriend - and father of her children - petulantly complaining that he should have been the Socialist candidate even though Ms. Royal has a better chance of winning, our advice to Ms. Royal is to throw out this uncouth lout.

• It was bad enough when after learning of her presidential bid he asked who would look after the children. These new musings of his give men in general, and French men in particular, a bad name. There have to be many men in France more worthy of Ms. Royal than this sniveling custard.

• As for the children, on behalf of normal men the Editor is happy to tell Ms, Royal he would be delighted to look after her kids. Takoma Park, Maryland, where the editor lives, is highly appreciative of children, and there are 3 excellent public schools (sequenced K through 8) within 100 meters of the editor's house.

• 

• We have no idea what the captions say but we do know the gent in the apron is the boyfriend. Source: http://ludovictoro.hautetfort.com/images/medium_segolene-royal.3.jpg

• Letter From Brian Brown Just a comment on your observation of how many Americans life from paycheck to paycheck.There was a generation of Americans who were old enough to remember the hardships and privations of the 1930's and the rationing of World War II.  These people, as they came of age, had a cautious attitude towards debt and financial affairs in general.

• Starting in the 1980s, however, there arose generations who have never known any hardship.  They have no caution when it comes to incurring debt in order to satisfy immediate desires to purchase goods/services.   As an example, credit card debt has replaced the lay-away plan as a standard purchasing technique.  They are collectively living beyond their means to adopt a standard of living which is 10-20% more expensive than they can afford. 

• As a result, Americans have one of the lowest rates for household savings in the world. Permit me to digress - I cite the August, 2005 issue of CnnMoney.com - The US household savings rate circa 1970 was in double digits.  By 1995, it had fallen to 5%.   In 2004, it was 0.4 % (40 cents per $100) and in August, 2005, when the article appeared, it was ZERO!  This timeline matches what I was saying in the prior paragraph and will have disastrous long term consequences for the US economy (or and any other economy).  To quote my college economics professor, "all economic problems can be cured if people would just save money"

• Back from the digression - India, I submit, is still psychologically closer to where the US was in the 1950's or 1960's.  The financial insecurity of which you spoke in your column is a consequence, I believe, of the American "attitude of affluence".  Until some cultural shock occurs which forces a generation of Americans to actually encounter some privation, I see no solution to the group refusal of a substantial percentage of the American public to exercise financial restraint and foresight.  And, until that happens, their well-founded feelings of financial insecurity will continue to be a factor in the future of this country.

• Editor's Addition For 2005 as a whole US savings was negative 0.4 percent, lowest since the 1933 when because of the Depression it was negative 1.5 percent. It was also negative in 2006. India's savings rate in 2005 was 28%, a big jump from the 1960s, when it was around 8%. India's figure may be overstated; the US's may be understated, but these are technical arguments beyond our competence. It is said that since the US has a good social security net, savings is not as important as it is in India, which has no retirement safety net. Oddly, France and Germany, which have excellent safety nets before and after retirement, save about 10%. Japan saves just 6.5%. China saves 30%, though some think the rate is higher.

0230 March 24, 2007

• Iran Revolutionary Guards Capture 15 Royal Marines, Sailors We are perplexed and unhappy about this incident. The marines/sailors had just completed inspection of a dhow when two IRGC Navy vessels seized them. The British reaction has been blah-de-blah-blah and some totally putrid nonsense about territorial waters are hard to demarcate and so on and we hope its a mistake blah-blah.

• None of this is relevant. It does not matter if the Brits were accidentally in Iran waters. We need to be told: do not the British function on a serious basis in an operational area? This is not the London river police inspecting traffic on the Thames or whatever, this is a dangerous area where other incidents with the Iranians have occurred. The one most serious previous was the capture of 8 Royal Marines and RN sailors. Three years later, why are men still being sent out to inspect anything without backup? Why was there no warning that the IRGC Navy was in the area? Why are the British working in so unprofessional a manner, and risking not just their men, but British prestige?

• Pakistan Tribal Fighting with sporadic fighting yesterday the death toll has gone up to 101 Uzbeks and 31 tribals. Dawn of Karachi suggests rivalry between different tribal leaders is the cause of the crisis.

• There seems to be no impact of the lawyers strike against the Pakistan government on account of the Chief Justice's removal. Two former Pakistan civilian prime ministers, Mrs. Bhutto and Mr. Nawaz Shariff have called for protests next week. Both spoke from London - their own country is not safe for them.

• Kinshasa Fighting Reuters says Congo government troops have put down a rebellion by former rebel leader Bemba, who lost to President Kabila in an election Mr. Bemba disputes. The government had ordered Mr. Bemba to cut his 500-man security detail to 12 as he had pledged to disarm his militia. His supporters took to the streets, but were defeated. He is holed up in the South African embassy. Pretoria says he will remain there till it decides what to do.

• Somalia: Cargo Company's Il-76 Shot Down An air freighter operated by a private company was shot down after takeoff from Mogadishu IAP and crashed in the city's northern suburbs, presumably killing the 11 people aboard. Eyewitnesses say it was hit by 3 rockets; others say it was a missile.

• Meanwhile, fighting has died down. It seems rather than insurgents the combatants on the other side were a Somali clan that objected to being disarmed. The clan has entered negotiations with the Government.

The Wal Mart Effect  

• The company competes on price and has successfully built itself up as the world's largest retailer and the second largest company. Its February 2007 US sales, for example, at $26-billion were more than twice the sales of the next seven biggest US retailers. Its US sales in 2006 were about $270-billion and its US workforce was

• It follows a 2-pronged strategy to keep down prices. It buys from China, and it gets labor efficiencies in its American workforce by squeezing wages and benefits. Some 80% of its 6000 suppliers are Chinese. Most of its 1.3 million workers are paid less than $8.50/hour. workers.

• Because  Wal Mart is a major contributor to sending US jobs overseas, and since it pays low wages,  American workers earn less. Since they earn less, they need stores like Wal Mart. So you get a downward spiral for wages, which forces Wal Mart to squeeze employees and suppliers alike some more, which causes American workers to earn less and so on.

• Now this would not be a problem if all of America was a giant Wal Mart and if Wal Mart sold everything an American needs to live. Wal Mart could pay ten cents an hour and it wouldn't matter if your typical American worker could get everything  at Wal Mart. But s/he cannot get houses, utilities, cars and health care at Wal Mart. These three items alone take up at least 50% of a middle-class American's budget, and we suspect they take up much more than 50% of a typical Wal Mart employee's budget. So you have a large number of people working very hard, but getting steadily more impoverished.

• As the market leader, Wal Mart forces competitors to adopt its model or die, and so the Wal Mart Effect permeates America, affecting everyone.

• On a personal note, the editor has noted a curious phenomenon. Mrs. Rikhye regularly travels back home. She came to America in 1989, when India's economic development was just about to take off. Despite our very middle-class wages as school employees, and despite the cost of the ticket, she still had more money to spend than her family and friends in India. Her suitcases by weight of items of necessity were filled with gifts, all the little things that Americans take for granted that were then hard to come by in India or that were very expensive - stuff like jeans, sweat suits, suit cloth, make-up, electronics, cheese, dried fruit, chocolates, aluminum wrap, tapes/CDs, books etc. Also, when she went with friends to a restaurant, she was expected to pay as she was richer.

• The tipping point came somewhere around 2000, when her parents - a retired government servant and a retired school teacher - said "Please don't bring anything as we have everything." Now when she goes home, its expected others will pay, because she has less money to spend than the same family and friends. It seems to the editor that it's just a matter of time before her friends/family will start giving her gifts of money, and then it's a short step to them sending her the ticket to visit home.

• Now, obviously we're really thrilled and delighted family/friends at home are doing so well thanks to the phenomenal economic expansion. But the above may help explain why we both constantly worry about money and are constantly scrimping. Mrs. Rikhye could survive for six months if she lost her job and failed to find a comparable one. For starter's she'd lose her 2-bedroom condo. For the editor it's one month or die. In this, we are hardly unique: we are true Middle Americans.

• So the elite in America can continue expressing puzzlement: America is so very good at generating jobs and the country is so rich and the opportunities are so many, why are people so insecure and why do they feel their economic lot has worsened over the years? And why don't ordinary Americans understand globalization is good for them because it lowers prices?

• Well, we learn from Business Week that America is now starting to outsource architecture work to India, joining the legal, medical, and engineering fields to mention a few. Of course, it's low level: Indians do the tedious jobs of ensuring doors line up and utility pipes are put in correctly, stuff that BW says is 60% of the cost of the job for an architectural company. And its small potatoes, we're talking tens of millions of dollars, not hundreds, and certainly not billions.

• But it's just starting, isn't it? And while the tedious details may be as much as 60% of the cost of the job, that's 60% of a company's workforce that is no longer needed, and instead of being paid $20/hour, must go look for jobs at $15/hour. So the BW news is very good for Indians, and your editor is happy. But he happens to live in America, and he wonders, what's in this for Americans? The lower prices will do no good if Americans don't earn enough.

0230 March 23, 2007

• Valerie Plame Now that journalist Robert Novak has plainly come forward and given the story, there's no reason for us to be coy. Her status was not covert according to the law; she was in an administrative job; and no networks were rolled up because her name was identified (Mr. Novak does not say the last; we do).

• But why then did the Director of the CIA say she was covert? Mr. Novak says it may be because he is friendly to the Democrats. But its more than that. The CIA is good and mad at the administration for making the CIA the fall guy over Iraq intelligence. The CIA is getting back at the administration. Could there be other reasons as well? Sure. We don't know any others, however, our sources are not that great. also, please remember that the CIA was likely still carrying her as covert.

• But if the matter had gone to court as a case of leaking the identity of a covert agent, the point would have emerged that Ms. Plame was wrongfully classified. This is one of the many reasons the special prosecutor wouldn't allow the jury or the defense to go into the point, and somehow he was able to convince the judge to see things his way, that the covert biz was not what the trial was about. As a good prosecutor, he knew once it turned out Ms. Plame was not covert, his real case would have been weakened: not in the eyes of the law or the judge but in the eyes of the jury. His real case was that Mr. Scooter Libby lied to the a grand jury - there was not the teeniest discussion allowed about the leak issue.

• Unlike some, we do not consider the special prosecutor's actions to be sinister. Look, people, he's called the Special Prosecutor for a reason. It's not his job to determine the impartial truth. By the time he comes into the picture, others have determined probable cause exists for starting criminal proceedings. It's his job to get convictions - we ask readers to hold their protests that this is not the way its supposed to work. We don't care about the way it's supposed to work. This is the way it works, period. If you don't want it to work that way, adopt the French system.

• The SP has to convince a jury, and right or wrong, this SP convinced the jury laws had been broken. A SP can, of course, say "I don't see a case exists". US attorneys all the time decide not to go ahead with cases. But they very rarely say: "no case exists", or "the accused is innocent". They say: "We don't think we can make a case for conviction in front of a jury". That's a very different matter

• As for the "leak" and allegations it was done to punish Ms. Plame's husband because he challenged the Administration on Iraq's N-weapons program etc., our information is that there was no leak. Ms. Plame's name came up only as part of gossip along the lines of: So Joe Wilson says the Vice President sent him to Niger? It was his wife recommended him for Niger. She works for the CIA, don't you know. Wait a minute, you will say, haven't we heard this before? Isn't this what Mr. Richard Armitage said when he was questioned about the origin of the "leak"? Well yes, and that is why we said we hesitated to go public about the real story - Orbat.com is hardly considered a mainline credible source, and as there was real dirty stuff going on between the CIA and the Administration, best to sit quiet.

• We warned readers the real story was utterly boring. The story readers saw Just another Noh play about Washington politics in action. In Washington it's the perception that counts, not the truth.

• A last point: we know Ms. Plame was not covert. Her neighbors, however, were quoted by some in the media as saying, in effect, "Wow, even we didn't know she worked for the CIA" to give the impression she was covert. The editor throws a challenge to those who think that's a credible argument. This is his eleventh year living on his street, a short "avenue" of 10 houses. He challenges anyone to try and learn from his neighbors what he really does. It isn't that what he does is secret - far from it. But his neighbors will have no clue because he doesn't tell them what he does. They know he's a teacher, some may know he has an interest in defense/foreign affairs, and that is it.

• When you work for the CIA or the NSA, you aren't supposed to say you work for them. You say you work for the DOD or someone else - in Ms. Plame's case, for a corporation with overseas work. Why should her neighbors know she was with the CIA? And it's not that they are dumb: remember when we said Ms. Plame's covert identity would not last a month in New Delhi? That's when she was afield in the intel thing. She'd be doing her job, and that would give her away. There's no contradiction between that and her neighbors not knowing.

• Hope that's enough said about another boring subject.

0230 March 22, 2007

• [1215 GMT] Zimbabwe: 2500 Angolan Paramilitary Troops To Arrive London Times says Angola is sending 2500 paramilitary troops to Angola starting April 1. Zimbabwe ostensibly has 25,000 police but the force is depleted due to desertions on account of low pay.

• The Angolan paramilitary troops are feared in their own country for brutality.

• Analysis There is apparently now serious doubt about the reliability of the Zimbabwe Army which has largely been absent in the crackdown on the opposition. We'd mentioned a few days ago the reports that the army chief had met envoys from UK, US, and France; obviously from President Mugabe's viewpoint this highly unusual and surprising move could portend no good. Zimbabwe has an army of 30,000 and does not need foreigners if the objective is simply to suppress dissent. President Mugabe has been using party thugs for attacks on the opposition, and while police are involved too, there have been reports that some, at least, are baulking at their orders. Nonetheless, it would seem the Angolans are insurance against a military coup rather than reinforcements for the thugs. It remains to be seen how Africa and the west react to this move. It may be well to keep in mind that any US move against Angola runs up against powerful and rapidly expanding oil interests. The US currently imports 15% of its oil from Angola: in about 4 years, as new production comes on line, the figure is expected to increase to 25% giving this very poor and very corrupt country substantial power over US foreign policy in the region.

• Zimbabwe There are no new developments per se. The government's repression continues, with a steady stream of reported attacks on opposition members. Inflation is said to be 5000% estimated for 2007, three times higher than previous estimates we have seen.

• Zambia's president is the only African leader to have taken a hard line against President Mugabe, in part because 3.5 million Zimbabwe residents have fled their country in the last 7 years, and Zambia is particularly hard hit. With the Zimbabwe government officially announcing 2007 as a drought year, food pressure on this once prosperous nation, Southern Africa's leading food exporter, will increase and so will the refugee flow.

• In sharp contrast to the Zambian president's forthright position, the former president and revered liberation leader Kenneth Kaunda has turned in a mealy mouthed defense of Mr. Mugabe that has left even cynical us at a loss for words. It isn't Mr. Mugabe's fault, says Mr. Kuanda. Its Britain broke its promises for aid and to help with land reform.

• Mr. Kaunda,  the Orbat.com editor remembers you as one of the leaders for third world freedom and he held you in the highest respect. But to now simply stand there and bleat pathetically to defend a dictator, just because once he was your colleague in the anti-colonial fight, is just not acceptable. Sir, has it occurred to you that you left power willingly, as part of the natural order of handing over to a new generation, whereas Mr. Mugabe has used every means possible to cling to power in his senility? Do you not see the contradiction in defending him?

• Former President Kuanda Exhibits The Bigotry of Soft Expectations as reader Walter E. Wallis terms the reaction of western and African leaders to President Mugabe. We in America are very familiar with this syndrome: oh, you see, they're black and therefore the expectations we have of white people cannot be applied. The bigotry of soft expectations now a days extends to the Islamic world too. Both Islamic leaders and defenders of Islam are permitted to get away with behavior that would not be tolerated for one minute in civilized countries of any color.

• It is time for the west to stop this nonsense. President Mugabe is a brutal dictator. He needs to go as much as the rulers of Sudan need to go. Oh dear, stupid us! There's no oil in Zimbabwe, how could we overlook that? Too bad, citizens of Zimbabwe. But if you do discover oil, we'll be there posthaste to save you.

An Essay on Latrine Duty: US Wants UN Force For Chad and CAR

• The US wants a UN force for Chad and CAR.

• Its a great idea, but of course the US isn't going to send any troops. In a great display of faux realism, US says it recognizes the the UN has 100,000 troops on duty and finding troops for Chad and CAR is difficult. But maybe we can arrange to reorganize the logistics and overheads for other missions, says the US, freeing troops for Chad and CAR.

• In a less polite world, the US would be told to go somewhere unmentionable and do something unmentionable. As it is, it will only be the object of much derision among the world community.

• We really advise the US to stop putting forward one scheme after another that involves other people's troops. We agree that the US very skillfully talked the EU into policing the Lebanon-Israel border. But even the US cannot manage to convince UN members to undertake several missions for Africa unless the US also contributes troops.

• The US is the mightiest nation on earth. It has 300-million people and a GDP of $13-trillion. Yet it maintains land forces on active duty of only about 800,000 troops, of which more than half are unavailable because of Iraq and Afghanistan. Given US global commitments, its not unreasonable to expect the US to maintain armed forces of 1% of its population. That translates into perhaps 1.5-million ground troops. Had the US that many, sending US troops to Africa and other places would not be a problem.

• But the US is so shy and sensitive, how can we expect the government and people to countenance land forces that large? So then what is the solution? Pay Bangladesh to raise another 3 brigades for UN duty? You know, at some point this becomes distasteful. Its like saying "we don't like to clean the world's latrines, but its okay for you to do that job, because you're poor and should be happy to take our money."

• Many decades ago the editor had the privilege to attend the Wooster School, a college preparatory boarding school in New England. All the chores at Wooster were done by students: we had 3 cooks and a custodian, and the laundry went out each week. Every bit of the rest was done by the students.

• So one day soon after arriving your editor was assigned latrine duty. Now, your editor came from an upper-caste Indian family. In his day, you would never for a second think of cleaning your own bathroom, let alone a community bathroom. The editor then learned that his co-student on latrine duty was the richest student in the school, heir to a $40-million fortune in the days when a million meant something. So your editor said to himself, if he can do it, I can do it.

• That was a lesson he never forgot: in America, rich or poor, everyone cleans latrines. It seems that having learned this lesson as a new immigrant, your editor has to turn around and teach this lesson to America's rulers. Are you listening, Washington?

0230 March 21, 2007

• Pakistan Tribal Fighting: 42 Uzbeks, 16 Locals Dead Reader Marcopetroni forwards an article from Dawn of Karachi which says fighting has broken out between Uzbek militants and locals in South Waziristan, one of 7 tribal agencies in Pakistan's North West Frontier Province. South Waziristan is one of the areas in the NWFP that has been abandoned by the Pakistan Army because President Musharraf does not want to suppress the Taliban, which is a cornerstone of Pakistan's security policy, and which enjoys much support here.

• The government has no plans to intervene, and perhaps it is wise. We'd suggest readers not read anything into this serious flare up between foreign militants - Uzbek fighters are estimated at 800-1000 in the area- and the locals. This situation has arises because the Uzbeks have been throwing their weight around, and as foreigners they are not supposed to offend their hosts. It does not mean that the Pakistan tribals have suddenly turned against the Taliban, or become peaceful secularists, or whatever.

• Pakistan Lawyers Protest Meanwhile, media says protests against President Musharraf are growing. The flash point is the firing of the independent-minded Chief Justice of Pakistan's Supreme Court. He was seen as an obstacle to the President's plans to continue in power, even though he is a Musharraf appointee, and was ostensibly removed for corruption. The government's motives become suspect, however, because proper judicial procedure was not followed.

• We are inclined to be cautious about what the protests might portend for the future of President Musharraf. The protests may well spread, but the President's job security is determined not by the Pakistani street, but by his corps commanders. Last year there were serious rumors his corps commanders wanted him out. Their reasons were not noble, Pakistani generals get restless when one of them is in power for too long, and want a change. Nonetheless, nothing happened and the President remained in power.

• With the exception of East Pakistan in 1970, change in Pakistan rarely comes from an uprising of the masses. Besides which, the lawyers are not the masses.

0230 March 20, 2007

• Zimbabwe President Mugabe may be the first modern dictator to openly say that his police have the right to beat opposition members. Dictators routinely do have the opposition beaten, but its a bit unusual to actually say claim it as a right. Personally we think the old boy is going senile.

• The US ambassador walked out of a meeting called by the Foreign Minister after the latter said envoys seen as interfering in Zimbabwe's internal affairs will be expelled. No one asked us, but we'd suggest to the FM to make nice with the envoys in case he needs a country to retire to.

• Request A reader sent a letter to the editor about Ms. Valerie Plame on his Hotmail account: unfortunately he deleted it before he realized what he was doing and before he caught the reader's name. Can the reader kindly resend?

• We actually know the real story of how/why etc Ms. Plame's name was leaked, but we've been hesitating to put it up. It is so yawningly boring and mundane that we are concerned our readers will not accept the story.

• Don't Bogart That Joint, Mr. al-Maliki Dang, dwag, you must be smoking some really good (colloquialism for "stuff"). CNN quotes you as saying sectarian violence in Iraq is all but over. It's only Al Qaeda we have to worry about.

• Assuming the Iraqi PM really said that, does the US really want to back a man who lives in a different universe? Or did he mean sectarian violence is all but over in the immediate vicinity of the Green Zone? If that's what he meant, he's correct. The Green Zone is the heavily fortified foreign and top-level Iraqi area of Baghdad, and it looks like the US/Iraqis have managed to clear it of Sunni insurgents who were running loose just a few months ago. Of course, the Green Zone is - what? - about 4-5 square kilometers or so? We're not sure of the exact figure.

• You Are Not Covering The Maoist Insurgency In India says a Pakistani reader, with justification. The thing is that so far the Maoist insurgency has remained a pure law-and-order matter, the Indian Army has not entered the fight and we are inclined to think it is right not to. But because the Army is not involved, our knowledge about the insurgency would fill barely a short paragraph. We promise to read up more on it and we will encourage some of our young and enthusiastic security experts in India to write for us. The best ones, alas, are already taken up by people who can pay them. Expect a short, albeit superficial, report tomorrow on the latest episode where hundreds of Maoist insurgents killed all 70 police and special police officers (sort of like American peace officers deputized for a particular purpose) defending a police station.

0230 March 19, 2007

• Zimbabwe Four opposition leaders were prevented from leaving the country. One man was rearrested as he tried to leave. Two women were to board a medical flight to South Africa for severe injuries received after being beaten by police. One man, an opposition spokesperson, was to go to an international conference; he was attacked and beaten by 8 people at the airport. His attackers then fled in two cars without registration plates. He has a fractured skull and is in critical condition according to the opposition.

• President Mugabe denies his people had anything to do with the airport incident. It is the opposition making trouble, he says. Must have been the opposition who stopped the women from leaving for treatment.

• Meanwhile, IMF says Zimbabwe inflation may reach 5000% for 2007. The GDP has shrunk by 35% in the last 4 years.

• Nigerian Navy Undertrained For Oil Security Operations says US, according to Reuters. The navy has 21 idle patrol boats intended for the oil producing Delta region where insurgents are running amok. US has offered further money, training, and equipment for the navy. 8% of US oil now comes from Nigeria.

• India To Add 100-million Tons Cement Production on top of its 165-million tons capacity, in the next 3-4 years. This will help support the $70-billion infrastructure improvements planned over the next 5-7 years. Critics have said the sums, large as they are, are insufficient. Infrastructure is the one weak spot in India's massive GDP growth, because India as systematically underinvested in this area compared to China. PRC is said to have 1-billion tons cement capacity and is said to be overinvested. Chinese statistics have traditionally been fudged, according to Indian economists, but it is known that China is eliminating smaller, energy inefficient plants by mandate.

• India's per capita cement consumption at 125 kg is among the lowest in the world. China's production figure implies 800 kg per capita. But the US, which spent about $700-billion in construction projects in 2002, had a per capita consumption of about 380 kg that year (125 million tons including imports of 25 million tons ).

•  A source http://www.ibef.org/download/Cement_sectoral.pdf quotes US Geological Survey figures for 2003 giving 250-million tons of cement production. We should note there is nothing intrinsically impossible about China and 1-billion tons of cement: the same source gives 2003 ROK per capita consumption as 1200-kg. But ROK has 10 times the per capita income of PRC. So unless an expert reader tells us otherwise, we'd suggest care in accepting PRC figures.

• In India, incidentally, mega development projects have been hit with increasing resistance from villagers because their land is taken under laws of eminent domain and they feel they get insufficient compensation. So there has been much lamentation and woe-is-India crying, with the inevitable comparisons made with China where there are fewer such problems.

• Well, India happens to be a democracy, and even the most powerful cannot expect to run rough-shod over the poor, unlike China, which is a dictatorship. The woe-is-India lot should get over themselves. India started its race ten years after China and that alone accounts for the 2-1 disparity (or 2.4 - 1 disparity if you go by official PRC estimates of GDP). India has been turning ina respectable 8-9% annual growth; with better infrastructure this will go up to 10-11% annually - without dictatorship.

• Indian GDP figures, incidentally, are hugely understated for a number of reasons. We do need to keep in mind there are all sorts of difficulties with any set of statistics to do with India as much as with China, and each has severe problems with its economy for all the growth.

0230 March 18, 2007

• Zimbabwe Army Chief Makes Nice with Foreign Ambassadors Something is afoot in Zimbabwe - read London Times http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article1530929.ece If the Army chief is meeting US, French, UK ambassadors, it can only be because he is plotting a change of regime. Given the hostile position of western governments to Mr. Mugabe, it cannot be to explain the government's position on the crackdown. Moreover, army chief's do not make the rounds calling on foreign ambassadors - that is a Foreign Ministry responsibility.

• Mr. Mugabe, at least, seems to think his supporters are plotting against him because he has blasted members of his party.

• The Times article details the complexities of Zimbabwe politics and reasons that the people are so badly cowed they cannot make a revolution. The real danger to Mr. Mugabe comes from competing factions within his party - when Zimbabwe became independent there were two major guerilla groups that had fought for independence and Mr. Mugabe managed to get both to work with each other.

• It seems to us that senior leaders of the president's party may be thinking he is a liability because things simply keep getting worse and now the world is sitting up to take notice. The thought that if they step foot in the west they are going to get arrested cannot appeal to many Zimbabwe leaders; nor can the thought that if a revolution comes they are going to be the first targets. The Zimbabwe police commissioner, for example, was seen buying 650 rounds of ammunition at a gun shop - he is a close friend of the president.

• Another sign of trouble is that in the last 5 days the open market Zimbabwe dollar has dropped from $9000 to the US dollar to $17500 in the last 5 days. This is an astonishing devaluation; we agree with Times London when it says this can mean only people are unloading Zimbabwe money because they fear it will soon become worthless.

• US KIA In Baghdad Down In February to 17, compared to 42 in January, despite the increase in troops.

• Meanwhile, everyone seems to have their theory about Al-Sadr and there is no agreement on the theories. The other day Washington Post quoted people as saying he is cooperating with the US because he wants to come in from the cold and wants to get rid of the extremists within who pose a challenge. Yesterday the Post says he has called for resistance to US forces. He hasn't explicitly said armed resistance, but there it is.

• The 21,000 troop surge is now officially tagged at 30,000 troops and climbing.

• The Search For Osama Bin Laden For the latest, read http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article1511700.ece

• Palestine Has Unity Government Haaretz of Israel says 42 of the PA's 132 members are in Israeli jails. The newspaper opines that Fatah's days are numbered: Hamas continues to increase its influence and after spending a whole year trying to checkmate Hamas, the Palestine president, a Fatah man, has had to agree to include Hamas in the government.

• Ms. Plame Washington Post says Ms. Valerie Plame brought a document to her congressional hearing in which the CIA director says she was covert at the time her name was revealed to journalists.

• Far be it for us to doubt the CIA director or Ms. Plame, but it strikes us even more forcibly now that there is something quite peculiar about the lady and her covert career. In the light of the above, why has the CIA not demanded legal action against the leakers? There has been hint of neither deed nor word on this front.

0230 GMT March 17, 2007

• Valerie Plame Testifies First, when everyone in the US seeks her/his 15 minutes of fame, Ms. Plame should not be blamed for seeking hers. Her husband has already managed his, with his attacks on the Administration over the Niger uranium to Iraq thing. Perhaps the Administration lied, but Mr. Wilson did his fair share of lying too to advance his agenda, which is himself.

• Second, it is still not known with certainty if Ms. Plame was listed as covert before a Washington journalist named her as a CIA employee. She claimed yesterday she was still covert and had conducted several missions for the CIA in the last five years, i.e., from when she was assigned to HQ, ostensibly because she wanted to bring up her infants.

• Third, whatever Ms. Plame believes, her identity was blown to the Russians by at least one other CIA spy, Mr. Aldritch Ames, who is serving life in prison. Please ignore all this drama about networks being rolled up because she was exposed. Your editor still runs his own network, he says so about once a week to anyone who asks, and his network has not been rolled up by anyone. You aren't much of a covert agent if your network is rolled up so easily. Besides which, what is her definition of "network"? 

• But again, lets not judge her harshly: if the editor had a seven figure book deal awaiting him, he too would be very dramatic about all the secret missions he has conducted. Like most people who fancy themselves as great spies (not-so-subtle dig at Ms. Plame), your editor has a wild imagination and a hugely, hugely exaggerated sense of his own importance.

• Fourth, whatever Ms. Plame believes, she must think foreign spies are a bunch of idiots if she believes her identity was intact even before Mr. Ames. In the 10 happy years your editor spent  in Delhi in the 70s-80s, he met many spies, and many of them were a whole bunch smarter than he is, and since he thinks he's pretty smart, that's remarkable. Ms. Plame would not have lasted a month in Delhi as a covert agent.

• Fifth, it doesn't matter if her identity was blown before the journalist revealed it: the CIA can classify a bathroom cleaner as classified if it wants; the issue is not if she was still really covert, the issue is, did the CIA carry her as covert? If so, regardless of anything else, revealing her name was a crime. Though it is intriguing and perhaps telling that no one has been prosecuted for revealing her name, not even the hapless Mr. Scooter Libby, a top aide to the US vice president. He has been found guilty of lying to a grand jury, not for revealing her name. It's hard to avoid the inference that she was not covert.

• Sixth, regarding her statement that the leaking of her identity in a public way will discourage others from becoming spies, we have this comment: Bosh Bananas. As long as mentally unbalanced people exist, there will always be more people wanting to be spies - by a factor of 100 - than the demand for spies. In fact, the editor knows of at least six of his former Catholic School girl students who are tres impressed by Ms. Plame and would accept a CIA offer in a jiffy. (They are quite balanced, but of a daring and adventuresome nature.) Of course, the CIA will have to wait a while, since this lot has just started 9th Grade.

• Last, there is a very good reason John Le Carre's master spy, George Smiley, was such a limp, grey rag. Take one look at Ms. Plame's photograph, and a counter-spy would have to blind not to suspect her from Day 1. We are not going to say more, but we do want to let Ms. Plame know that we admire her pizzazz and we wish her not just good luck, but great luck, in her new career.

• Meanwhile, should she ever feel the old urge, your editor urges Ms. Plame to contact him first. He will put in a good word for her with Indian intelligence. Of course, she won't get a fancy house like she has now. Most likely it will be a Class III flat in RK Puram and if the Indians are feeling particularly generous, they'll spring for a used Vespa 250. But then if you're a true spy, money and material comfort are irrelevant.

• Now let me tell you about my network and some of my most highly classified missions...

• BREAKING: ORBAT.COM OUTED Reader Jim Banks Writes: Sorry to say it, but Lovatt and Millen didn't parachute into Normandy, they went ashore on Sword Beach with Millen piping "Road to the Isles" while the commandos carried their assault forward.  How do I know this?  I asked him at the 50th anniversary of D-Day at the Eisenhower Museum in Abiline, Ks. 

• Editor's Comment We hate readers like the good Mr. Banks. Now we will have to scrap our Lord Lovatt stories that we got away with for so long. We must admit we made them all up. Only one thing to do: get on Oprah and gain redemption for our sorry, pathetic, twisted lies.

0230 GMT March 16, 2007

• Zimbabwe Crackdown Reports from the country say the police have cracked down in at least 3 cities and are attacking civilians at random in pro-opposition areas, subjecting them to beatings that are sending a steady stream of people to hospitals says Times London. It is thought, from defiant statements being made by President Mugabe and other officials, that a state of emergency might be declared. While we have no information from Zimbabwe, we do not see the situation requires any such move: aside from some protests and some attacks on police, the violence is being perpetrated by the government. Nonetheless, President Mugabe has zero tolerance for any protests.

• The West and - equally important African leaders - have condemned Mr. Mugabe. While the US/UK are looking to expand sanctions, the UN/EU are worried that this will hurt the ordinary people, who are already reeling from 80% unemployment and 1700% inflation. No one is up for military intervention. It is well known Mr. Mugabe listens to no one, not even his closest friend, South Africa's leader. The leader has urged Mr. Mugabe to change his ways several times, without effect. To us it seems unlikely outside pressure will get the dictator out. The question is now if the people have had it to the point they are ready to revolt. The answer is not necessarily "yes" because the people have shown an amazing capacity to tolerate their lot.

• 9/11 Mastermind Exaggerating His Importance say US sources. He has confessed to killing US journalist Daniel Pearl as well as saying he planned 9/11 - frankly we doubt the latter claim based on limited information we have - and also made several other claims. But US sources says he is exaggerating his importance in Al Qadea as well as the number of incidents in which he has been involved.

• It is thought he has decided since he is in for a penny, might as well be in for a pound. His trial is underway at Guantanamo Bay, and even if he is responsible for only a few of the crimes he says he committed, he can be executed.

0230 GMT March 15, 2007

• Italy Denies Aiding Afghan Border Interdiction According to a news article forwarded by reader Marcopetroni, there are allegations Italians are assisting Spanish troops in interdicting the Afghan-Pakistan border. This would be against the announced mission of Italian troops, which is peacekeeping. Italian sources deny their troops are working with the Spanish.

• Meanwhile, it seems that NATO - or at least the US - has decided to attack the Taliban's transborder sanctuaries in Pakistan without bothering to get Pakistani permission. Some raids have taken place, but it looks like both sides are keeping the matter in low profile to avoid trouble in the court of Pakistani public opinion. Understandably, Pakistanis of all political persuasions are angry at the violation of their nation's sovereignty.

• Conversely, what is NATO supposed to do when the Pakistanis will not control their own border areas? We think the US has been extraordinarily patient with Pakistan and direct action is the only alternative left.

• Also meanwhile, the Pakistani economy has been performing well: GDP is expected to reach $160-billion in current dollars, or about $1000 per capita. India's economy is about $1-trillion, or $900 per capita. Pakistan's security dilemma has worsened because India now has an enormous defense budget at little expense to its economy, and China is no longer considered a threat.

• To meet the Indian threat Pakistan says it has operational nuclear weapons. But one of these days India is going to figure out this is not a credible threat for any number of reasons.

• Defending Pakistan We've done a considerable amount of work to see how Pakistan can provide a very tough conventional defense that India will require months to get through, at an affordable 4% of GDP. There is no chance at all the Pakistanis will adopt our model, which is based on the old Yugoslav people's defense.If one thing is very dear to the Pakistan Army, it is the traditional model. Yugoslavia could adopt people's defense because it went through years of partisan warfare against Germany, and later feared the Red Army's hordes. Pakistan's experience, like India's, has been long-service volunteers organized for short conventional wars, with all the spit-polish, regimental messes, tradition going back 200 years etc etc.

• The thrice that Pakistan has tried another way by using guerillas - 1947, 1965, 1999, it has failed. But that was not the fault of the model, it was the fault of completely ad hoc efforts without planning, training, or execution, as an adjunct to the regular army. If you are going to use the guerilla/infiltration models, its best done the way the Vietnamese do it: very highly trained regular troops.

• Shin Bet Chief Says Palestinians Training In Iran according to Haaretz of Israel. He says hundreds of men are going to Iran for training; smuggling of explosives into Palestine has increased many-fold, a system of underground fortifications is being built along the Israel border, and the range of the firecracker rockets used by Palestine groups is being increased from 15 to 20 km. The term "firecracker" is ours: these rockets almost never do any damage and are not to be compared with the rockets owned by Hezbollah - those are real rockets.

• US Treasuries May Dampen Fall In Dollar Investments says Reuters. The US deficit requires foreigners to buy - gulp! - $3-4 billion a day worth of US securities. Subprime mortgages have till now providing foreigners attractive returns, but as American readers know from the daily news these past few weeks, this market is about to collapse. The worry has been that foreigners will now invest less in US securities. This will lead to a long-term decline in the US dollar and raise inflation.

• Reuters, however, opines that international capital has no alternative but to invest in the US. With riskier investments now taboo, foreigners will have to buy more US Treasury bonds so a collapse should be averted.

• Letter From Michael T.W. Epstein I have been a long time visitor to your web site, and I have always found it to be a vital resource for aspiring defence policy analysts like myself. I think that in most areas your insights are pretty much dead on, but I think you do not fully understand how the American working man really thinks. You have written under today's news that the time is coming when the middle class will revolt against the corruption of the business and political elite of this country.

• With all due respect, you could not be more wrong. The American public for better or for worse has always tried to work with the elite in this country to produce as orderly a society as is possible in the world. And for their part the American elite has always been able to pull themselves back from the brink of being overthrown by one social upheaval or another.

• After all, there have been many serious attempts by various radical populist groups to incite the working classes against the business (The IWW comes immediately to mind). President William McKinley was assassinated in 1901 by a young anarchist who thought he would help spark a social revolution by striking a huge against what he deemed to be an unredeemably corrupt American government; it goes without saying he failed miserably. Additionally, all manner of socialist, communist and other radical ideological groups have operated in this country since the dawn of the 20th century, and as a whole they have made meager progress in convincing their fellow Americans to embrace radical leftist ideals.

• While I do not make any pretensions of being an expert in understanding greater social dynamics, I can make a fair guess as to why Americans have been so resistant to the idea of revolution. To put it simply, Americans enjoy being prosperous above all other considerations, and political chaos would disrupt that prosperity.

• While they may make a big deal about unequal distribution of income and taxes in the U.S., the people of this country would gladly forsake their peers in a second if given the chance to join the ranks of men like Bill Gates or Warren Buffet. Individuals may come forward to attack the flaws of the system, but in the end the great mass of people will hold back from taking action, too afraid to see their chances at obtaining the good life endangered, even if their hesitation leads to a terminal decline in their fortunes. Such is the way of American life. I could list the various historical root causes of this behavior, but I think that is best left for another day.

0230 GMT March 14, 2007

• Russia Stops Delivery Of Bushire N-Fuel but as far as we can tell it is more on account of a payments dispute than any plan to pressure Iran on its N-weapons program.

• China To Set Up Giant Investment Fund with part of its trillion-plus US dollar reserves. Speculation is it will be between $1-200 billion, but since China's export surplus keeps growing by leaps and bounds, the figure will presumably increase. China is said to be inspired by the Government of Singapore's investment fund which has returned 18% a year for many years, versus the 4-5% China earns on its foreign exchange reserves, mostly invested in US treasuries.

• So picture this: to finance consumption of cheap toy, clothes, shows, and electronics, America runs gigantic trade deficits with China. China will now use that money to buy stakes in US companies. So basically US is selling is going to be selling its future to pay for the cheap gimcrack goods it buys from China. This must be the "win-win" situation that those who oppose the US using tough measures to bring trade with China into balance talk about.

• If Anyone Expects China To Voluntarily Revalue The Yuan consider these figures from Times London: (a) China says it will have jobs only for half of the 24 million people entering the labor force; (b) 200 million workers face problems such as unpaid wages, forced overtime, and lost pensions; (c) by government statistics alone, "public disorder" incidents have increased to 87,000 from 10,000 just a decade ago.

• The truth is that just as Latin America stays stable by exporting its unemployed/underemployed to the US, China stays stable by keeping the yuan cheap and creating somewhere between 100-200 million jobs in the export sector. Chinese companies run on such slim profit margins, that even a mere 10% yuan revaluation will cripple export industries, and threaten more unrest.

• So it's really sweet the US is helping out Latin America and China at the cost of its own people and its own future, but we have to start asking: at what point does the US government stop serving the interests of the uber-capitalists who benefit from these imbalances and start thinking of its own people?

• Saying the US per capita income is $45,000 or whatever hides the realities that an enormous fraction of the country lives just one paycheck from disaster and there is no cushion provided by the government. You lose your job to China or Latin America, and you lose everything. The reason there is no cushion is because the uber-capitalists and their allies don't want increased taxes that would at least help those who lose jobs get by with some dignity. So its not just the prosperity of Latin America and China that is being built on the backs of Americans, it's the profits of the uber-capitalists.

• You can distract the public by foreign adventures only for so long. It isn't Al Qaeda American haves need to worry about. Its the American lower middle class. Of course, when we bring this up with People Who Know, we are invariably told that as long as beer and cable TV are cheap, you are never going to get a revolution in America. Marx had it wrong at least with regard to America: it isn't religion that is the opium of the American masses.

• So okay, we do talk to a lot of lower middle class types and we can definitely attest to the growing anger. To us it seems this will become, in the next 10 years, a real national security issue. At the same time, People Who Know, have so far been proved right: the anger has not been translated into action, because heaven knows after a six-pack and six hours of cable TV the strongest brain turns to mush.

0230 GMT March 13, 2007

We delayed the update hoping there'd be some news during the day, but nothing of significance has happened.

• Mugabe Consolidates Dictatorship by arresting two prominent opposition figures. He already is defacto dictator of Zimbabwe.

• President Bush Concludes Tepid Latin American Trip We suppose it's a good thing he went, but if the intent was to counter President Hugo Chavez's growing influence, the trip is a bust.

• The Administration has treated Latin America with benign neglect; we agree with this policy because when people like Mr. Chavez are running amok its better to let the locals alone. We have seen with Mr. Castro how US opposition serves mainly to consolidate a dictator's hold; the more virulent the opposition, the stronger the dictator.

• Also, while the Latins have every right to order their economies the way they want - free trade and economics a la Washington have not served many Latin nations well - we don't see Latin America has a right to set US policy on immigration. That's a rhetorical statement on our part, of course, since the Latins are setting US policy, which is basically to let anyone who can get across US borders stay. Recent US attempts to deport illegals make good headlines, but are not even a drop in the bucket, they are less than the expectation of a drop in the bucket. We can all look forward to the day when the US becomes a colony of Latin America, so what are the Latins complaining about? In the larger scheme of things, does it really matter if this happens in - say - 2060 instead of - say 2030?

• Iraqi PM Says Insurgents Relegated To A Small Part Of Ramadi This is so terribly cute - if it was true, which it is not - considering US has been fighting to gain control of Ramadi every since the onset of Gulf II. That's a single town we are talking about, not the province.

• US Transportation Safety Agency "Crackdown" On Its Workers Another heartwarming story: a week ago a TSA worker used his credentials to get 14 firearms on to an aircraft. So the TSA has cracked down on its workers for - um - is it the 50th time? Or is it the 100th time? Not that it matters, because each crackdown is as ineffective as the last. Most TSA workers are paid what in effect is a minimum wage for the cities in which they work, so you have any number of people working for the agency that shouldn't be working, and not doing much of a job either.

0230 GMT March 12, 2007

• EU Agree To Count Nuclear As Renewable Energy The EU has reached a historic agreement to produce 20% of its power from renewable resources. As a concession to France - which gets 80% of its power from nuclear -and also to the Czech Republic and UK - N-power will be counted as renewable because it has zero carbon emissions.

• The Greens are unhappy. They feel the 20% target is too low. And they are virulently anti-nuclear. Anything that might means more N-power is anathema.

• The thing is the Greens have to come to terms with themselves on N-power. If you say you want to save the environment, N-power is the way to go. It really is the safest and cleanest for production of base-load electricity, and the new  If you say "No nukes at any cost", then you are simply anti-technology and coming from a non-rational starting place. Large scale solar is not an option for the EU, and as for wind, people are already freaking out - correctly in our opinion - because of the noise and unsightliness. Fusion is what we need in the longer term - that's nuclear.

• The 20% in 15 years sounds low. But given the huge amounts of power the EU or any industrial state uses, as a practical matter the 20% target requires an enormous effort.

• Nonetheless, if a Green complains we are not doing enough to conserve power, then no one can disagree. There is always room to conserve. The question to be asked, however, is how much room does the EU have to conserve? It already uses way less oil per capita than the US. At some point conservation becomes non-cost-effective. UK, for example, uses less energy per dollar GNP produced than even Japan, which has the greatest efficiency of energy use in the industrial world. Germany uses somewhat more than Japan. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Energy_Intensity.png

• Personally, your editor sees nothing wrong in going back to an Amish lifestyle - that's about as low-energy as one can get in the modern world. The problem for him personally is the way the US economy is organized, he is forced to dash about madly 365 days a year trying to earn enough to pay his bills. His is no high-roller lifestyle: a 1200 sft house, a 1.3 liter car, thermostat at 60F in the winter and 80F in the summer, a garden/trees he waters perhaps 4 times in the summer if its a dry summer and a lawn he never water, no hobby that uses up energy beyond a couple of light bulbs and power tools, and a near meatless diet of monotonous simplicity. If he is going to go Amish, so will everyone have to, otherwise your editor will not be able to earn even the pathetic income he does. The same is true of most ordinary people.

• Greens also need to keep in mind that China and India are very rapidly becoming the carbon culprits, and that the US at least has vast forest areas that offset part of the carbon its high-energy consumption lifestyle requires. If the Greens can convince 2.4 billion Chinese and Indians that they need to forgo near everything that the west has by way of living standards, then all we can say is, good luck with that.

• You aren't going to get India ($1000/capita) and China ($2000/capita) to get to a even near US life-style (US = $43,000/capita) with energy conservation, solar panels, and windmills.

• Woe Is Us That We Have To Defend President Chirac Unthinkable. Unimaginable. Unbelievable. Us defend President Chirac? This is what the world has come to.

• Just before he retired, the French president inked a deal with Abu Dhabi for a "Louvre" in that country. The real Louvre and other institutions holding French art will collaborate to set up a rotating art display. Abu Dubai will pay $1.7 for the privilege.

• Much to our surprise, the French have gone bananas, claiming this is a sell-out of their heritage. 4650 intellectuals have signed a petition against the deal.

• We think this is a brilliant idea that will expose a whole region to the greatness of French art and culture - and the French are getting paid in the bargain. Usually a country has to pay for this kind of exposure. Congratulations to President Chirac on getting something right.

• But where does this leave Orbat.com? Are we going to have to defend American media next?

0230 GMT March 11, 2007

• The Surge: A Short Report Card The surge continues to improve security in Baghdad.
• We are no fans of the surge because we want the US to get out of Iraq - for purely military/strategic reasons. Further, we are hugely annoyed with Mr. Bush because he permitted his aides to announce the surge would be short. We'd told readers before the surge began that Mr. Bush was going to keep US troops in Iraq at the elevated level through 2008, and this is becoming increasing evident. We don't think lying to the public is a good way to build support for any policy. Mr. Bush's generation went through the political lies of the Vietnam War. It was the lies more than the war itself that destroyed the generation's confidence in the integrity of government. We'd have hoped that Mr. Bush would do better.
• Nonetheless, whatever our personal opinion, our style in the news update is to report the facts, make an analysis, and clearly state our bias/opinion to enable the reader to arrive at her/his judgment on what we write. So just because we are no fans of the surge does not mean we should ignore the facts. Based on the facts as began emerging even before the first surge troops began patrolling, it was clear that violence in Baghdad had dropped suddenly and dramatically. So we have been saying for at least two weeks the surge is working - even as American commanders insist it is too early to draw any conclusion, especially a positive conclusion. Their caution is commendable; nonetheless, excellent results are obvious to anyone.
• Readers should ignore the media's attempts to make false contrasts along the lines of "a suicide bomber killed XYZ people despite the increase in troops" etc. etc. The issue is simply that the surge is taking place in Baghdad. Bombings in Baghdad are way down, and the daily count of executed men has fallen from 50 or so each day to 1-2. What is this except success?
• That violence continues unabated elsewhere, and indeed is increasing in some areas, does not make the Baghdad surge a failure. What it does do, and the media would do well to emphasize the point, is mark the failure of US Iraq strategy.
• No one has ever doubted that the US can win in Iraq - if it commits sufficient troops, money, and time. The questions then narrow to two: should the US be spending so much by way of troops/money/time when it is losing in so many areas of the GWOT - Afghanistan/Pakistan being only the most immediate; and what do we do when very clearly the American government is absolutely, completely, totally unwilling to spend the troops/time/money to win in Iraq? We have debated these points many times, and will continue to do so. This is what the media should be debating.
• But The Rest Of Iraq Continues To Unravel A consequence of Surge I, which began in the summer of 2006 after the Samarra mosque attack, is that violence has increased all over Iraq and previously secure areas have reverted to the usual mayhem. US troops were withdrawn from all over Iraq for dispatch to Baghdad, with all-too-predictable consequences. The Kurdish north, previously quite peaceful as Iraq goes, is descending into ethnic warfare that will rival Baghdad. The formerly British-controlled south never came under allied command and now that the Brits have sensibly thrown in the towel, will continue its journey to heck. Because the violence there is criminal as well as Shia-on-Shia, and because US troops are not in the south, the media ignores the area so most people don't realize just how out of control is the south. In Anbar, the seesaw battles between the Marines and their local tribal allies against Al Qaeda and Sunni insurgents continues daily. Anbar is so dangerous global media has bid it goodbye, so it has become a black hole. One some days the Marines win a few, on other days they lose a few. This vast province is not in anyone's control. Now, however, the Sunni provinces around Baghdad, previously kept down by powerful American contingents, are spinning out of control, most notably Salauddin and Diyala. The situation is so bad that commanders have called for reinforcements for Diyala. The reinforcements will be sent, where they can clear and hold the same territory they cleared and held once, twice, before.
• In Anbar, the north, and in the center, we see the results of American failure to commit sufficient troops to Iraq. These areas were under control/being brought under control, but then off everyone went to Baghdad, and bang, we're back to zero. Since no one in their right mind believes the Iraqi security forces can take over from the US - assuming they want to, which clearly they don't because they too want to join the sectarian fight, not keep Iraq together - the question becomes: what after 2008? If the US leaves Baghdad for Anbar, Baghdad will fall again - for one thing the Anbar lot will simply shift to Baghdad. Which has happened earlier, by the way, which is why Baghdad started falling apart. Round and round and round...Meanwhile, the rest of the country will continue its death spiral.
• There simply are not enough troops for the mission no matter how you slice and dice. You cannot fight the GWOT with 13 divisions, ten of which - the Army - were already short of infantry. All these fake carney tricks of upping the number of brigades by adding a few ten thousand troops - that too over 5 years - and reorganizing existing brigades will not work. We cannot even imagine why the US Army's higher command is fooling itself. Incidentally, there is every evidence if the US Army asked for 100,000 new troops or even more, the government would approve the increase. Opposition to a major expansion is coming from the Army, not from the government.
• We Want The US To Learn A Lesson From India The post World War 2 masters of Counter Insurgency operations are not the Americans, not the British, but the Indians. And what do the Indians have to tell us?
• First, think 40, 50, even more years.
• Second, think manpower. Put away your fancy ideas about brilliant weapons and technology. Think soldiers making the same sweep day after day, year after year, decade after decade. India has shown it does not take only one generation to win a counter insurgency: it takes two generations and more.
• Third, the above has to happen simultaneous with a massive political, economic, police effort.
• Fourth, Iraq is a particularly tough CI environment. The Indians twice intervened in Iraq, as part of the old British-Indian Army, in World Wars I and II. Now, the Indians are not particularly good at their own history, so for the foregoing you need to go to the British. What they'll tell you will sink, forever, any hope you have you can stabilize Iraq in its present form.
• What America Needs To Win In Iraq As things stand now: a very minimum of 10 divisions: three for Baghdad, two for Anbar, one for the South, one for the North, two for the Center, and one in reserve.
• By no means. When you thrust, the enemy will parry, and then he will thrust. Restudy Indochina II and your won history in Iraq 2003-07. Ten divisions is what you start with. Our wild guess is you'll need 10 more within 5-10 years.
• Don't Wanna Send 10 Divisions To Iraq? Then learn to do the Loser's Dance.
• Letter on Our Editorial from Jonathan Hisey   I am a regular reader of you blog, but you should stick to military/terrorist/international news analysis. Personally I think you are acting like a buffoon with your Editorial “Throw Out This Knavish Buffoon”. Why are you acting as if this news is new? It’s been
  widely known since 1999. The Mainstream Media didn’t report it very much in
  1999 because Gingrich was already out of office, so there was not much of a
  point in destroying him. However, the MSM finds it productive to report it widely now with rumors of Gingrich running for President. Plus Gingrich
  admitted it on a Christian radio program which are favorite targets of the
  media. You seem to be just the sucker the MSM is hoping for when they begin retelling the story, because you think it’s new. Do us all a favor and stay
  away from analysis of American politics because you seem quite ignorant.
  Most politicians are liars, cheats, hypocrites, and double talkers. The
  voter’s only choice is to choose the lesser of two evils. I would much
  rather choose Gingrich over Giuliani, Romney, McCain, Clinton, Obama, Gore, or Edwards.
• From the Editor Our first response was to reach for the Kleenex because someone had actually not just read the editorial but taken the trouble to reply. Considering the number of readers we have (~5000) few take the time to comment. Our webmaster has yet to spare the 5 minutes needed to convert the front page into a true blog page; when that happens perhaps we will get more talkbacks.

0230 GMT March 10, 2007

Editorial: Throw Out This Knavish Buffoon

This tract has nothing to do with military or international affairs. It does, however, bear on the pressing issue of American leadership.

• Mr. Newt Gingrich wants to be president of the United States. This engineer of the "permanent Republican majority" helped his cohorts become the dominant force in US politics for 12 years, until Mr. Bush off-handedly destroyed his own party in 2006. The underpinning theme of their campaign for 12 years was Family Values, something the opposing Democrats supposedly do not have.
• Mr. Gingrich was also a leader in the abortive effort to impeach President Clinton for lying about an affair.
• Now this high exponent of family values tells the world that he was having an affair with a young congressional aide while he was still married - and while he was trying to get Mr. Clinton impeached.
• But, says this man, his affair was different from Mr. Clinton's, because he, Mr. Gingrich didn't lie before a grand jury. Mr. Clinton, he so cattily reminds us, was on trial not because he had an affair, but because he lied to a grand jury. He, Mr. Gingrich, is therefor not a hypocrite - according to himself.
• Now, Mr. Gingrich is on his third marriage. We don't know which family values he is supposed to espouse. If it is the biblical kind, marriage is a sacred covenant before God - "for better or for worse". Until Henry VIII split the Christian church, divorce was not allowed. He has twice broken his covenant.
• The first time, he insisted on discussing a divorce with his wife while she was recovering from cancer surgery. The second time, he proved so gutless he couldn't even face his wife. He called his mother-in-law on his wife's birthday to tell her he was filing for a divorce. What a man! What an exponent of Compassionate Conservatism!
• Now, Mr. Gingrich says he is not a hypocrite. Excuse me, Sir, but you are a hypocrite. Accusing someone of wrongdoing when you are doing the same wrong is called hypocrisy. Furthermore, Sir, you broke the biblical Commandment against adultery. And yet further, in both Virginia and the District of Columbia at the time adultery was a criminal offense.
• In case anyone is interested, Mr. Gingrich also had an affair while married to his first wife. Wikipedia quotes a Vanity Fair article in which his married lover says that Mr. Gingrich preferred oral sex because then he could claim he did not sleep with her. Yet this same gentleman got rather hot and bothered when President Clinton received oral sex. Now, since in President Clinton's part of the world many believe that if you are a passive recipient of sex you have not slept with anyone, why does Mr. Gingrich insist that President Clinton lied to the grand jury? Indeed, why did Mr. Gingrich not do what he could to stop the matter from being referred to a grand jury in the first place instead of enthusiastically participating in the game of beating up Mr. Clinton, seeing as he himself was guilty of the same offences?
• So not only have you violated the sacred covenant of marriage, not only are you a hypocrite, not only have you violated at least two commandments, but you are also a criminal. So please tell us again about those family values you defend so vigorously?
• Is the Editor A Supporter Of President Clinton? No. He was sad when Mr. Bush the Elder lost the election. He tore out his hair at Mr. Clinton's foreign policy blunders. He was angry that the US had a de facto two presidents when the constitution provides for only one. He was thrilled and delighted when Mr. Bush the Younger came to power. He loyally supported the Younger until the latter's blunders and betrayals of conservative values became too much for anyone to accept. He was angry at President Clinton when the latter famously announced he had had nothing to do with "that woman": this was the ultimate in caddish behavior, and considering the age difference and the disparity in power between "that woman" and the President of the US, absolutely unforgivable.
• But: like a great many people who did not like Mr. Clinton, the editor was appalled at the impeachment proceedings. The Republicans seemed to have neither morality nor principle behind their push to get Mr. Clinton removed from office. Your editor applauded when Mr. Clinton was acquitted, and then your editor went back to lambasting Mr. Clinton.
• So What Is The Issue Here? So what is the point of this post? Just this. We need to build a new America, to restore America to its past and potential glory. In this process, there is no place for knaves and buffoons, and Mr. Gingrich has amply earned both titles by coming out with his self-serving revelation.
• Did he do it because he felt guilty at the lies he had told, because he felt bad for the women he betrayed, because he repented for his sins? Not a chance. He has undergone no conversion on the road to Rome. He is engaged in damage control, so that if he runs for president, his affair(s) will not come in the way.
• The new America does not need a man like Mr. Gingrich to run for president, leave alone be president. And as yet we have made no mention of his "ethics lapses" that were a factor in his resignation as House leader.
• We need to be able to tell the Once and Future Mr. Gingrichs' that for America's sake and for America's future, people of no integrity like himself need to excuse themselves from public life. America is being brought low not by leaders who have affairs: we are all human, we have human desires. The fact of having had an affair or many affairs is, in our eyes, of no relevance to a man or a woman's fitness to serve. America is being brought low by people who base their claim to lead on a superior morality, and then these prove to be as immoral as those they attack.
• Jesus said let him who is without sin cast the first stone. You cannot be human and be free of all sin. So clearly Jesus was telling us not to judge anyone. Mr. Gingrich was a sinner even as he was pelting President Clinton with a barrage of stones. He should be shown the door before he inflicts more damage on the country he says he loves.

0230 GMT March 9, 2007

• Israel Planned Lebanon War 4 Months In Advance and you can read some details in Haaretz of Israel http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/834572.html
• OK, time for some analysis. First, the story tells only the partial truth. According to Haaretz a northern offensive was decided on after an earlier failed kidnapping of Israeli soldiers and the successful kidnapping of a soldier in Gaza. Should another attempt be made in the north, Israel would retaliate.
• We hate to say this, but this story falls in the bosh-banana category.
• Israel and US had decided the time to defang Hezbollah had come, and the kidnapping of the two Israeli soldiers months later provided the casus belli. 
• Second, while Israel has come partially clean, the US is yet to step up and take its share of the responsibility for the fiasco. The US thinking went like this: "So those blankety-blank Iranians think they're going to create problems for Israel and for us using Hezbollah as a tool, we'll show them a thing or two." US - once again - fooled itself; Hezbollah showed America a thing or two, and the US position in the Muslim world crashed further - incredible as that might seem because the US position was already so bad we couldn't imagine it could get worse.
• Third, even after seeing Israel was getting nowhere, US was frantically encouraging Israel to expand the war by attacking Syria - which had/is been creating acute problems for the US in Iraq. You cannot con the con-miesters, i.e., the Israelis. They saw they were getting nowhere and refused to escalate.  The ease with which the Israelis deflected the US was quite pathetic. All this showed once again US has about zero influence on Israel, the tail wags the dog. Or, to be more accurate, the flea on the tail wags the dog, i.e., the US.
• Fourth, as always in Washington, the decision makers responsible for this snafu were never reprimanded, demoted, or just plain thrown in the brig on bread and water for being dumber than 12 planks.
• Now, back to Israel. The revelation has caused an uproar because the Israel Defense Force is saying, "Gee, it was so sweet of you to decide on this policy; can you tell us why you neglected to tell us so we could prepare?"
• The opinion seems to be that Prime Minister Olmert was/is an idiot, and General Halutz was a bigger idiot. Now generally we at Orbat.com incline to the simplest explanation, and from our experience, it really is quite amazing how many fiascos are caused by knaves and buffoons. There usually is no reason to go further, despite the general disbelief along the lines of "This has to be a conspiracy, no one can be THAT stupid." Oh yes leaders can be that stupid - we have lots of evidence of that right here in the US.
• In this case, however, it just may be the two leaders were not being idiots. We aren't going to go any further with that thought. This is the Israelis' business, let them figure it out themselves.
• A Vague Concession To Seymour Hersh We are no fans of Mr. Hersh for a number of reasons. Nonetheless, we learn from the talkback to the Haaretz article that apparently Mr. Hersh at some point said the Lebanon War was preplanned. If so, we have to congratulate him, because at the time we thought we were the only ones to have publicly said the war was preplanned.
• None of that changes our well-founded belief that Mr. Hersh is simply a Pentagon stooge along with many other eminent American journalists.

0230 GMT March 8, 2007

• US Army To Send 2200 MPs To Baghdad This over and above the 21,500 troop surge, which itself doesn't count support units.
• General Petraeus Says Military Solution Infeasible We assume its a good thing a top military commander is stating the obvious, given the US has neither the will nor the means to force a military solution in Iraq. The difficulty we see is that the political thing is outside US control, aside from periodically beating up the Iraqi government in an attempt to force it to do political.
• And it is far from clear what the US considers is a political solution is the same as what the Iraqis consider is a political solution. The Iraqis have already shown their preference for a solution: split the country and ethnically purify the three regions. It can actually be argued the US is the biggest factor stopping a political solution because the US is the one insisting Iraq remains unified against all logic.
• Former Iranian General "Cooperating" With US Iran still insists he was kidnapped. US says the Israelis persuaded him to defect, the Israelis say they know nothing about it and he may be in the US. Someone says he's very important as a former Revolutionary Guard commander and for his role with Hezbollah; someone else says he's been out of the loop for 4-5 years and is unimportant.
• Ugandan Peacekeepers Arrive In Force In Somalia [Source: BBC] 800 troops have arrived in the capital. The airport has been twice attacked in the last two days, presumably by insurgents seeking to discourage the AU force.
• Brits Produce Duds Too we are happy to report. Times London says an almost $5-billion tactical radio program to replace the Clansman radio entered service 10 years later than scheduled, is too heavy for dismounted infantry to carry, and isn't interoperatable to the required extent. America, you are not alone.
• By the way, India has a very high rate of R and D weapons duds. But then the Indians spend very small sums to develop a particular weapon, no one believes the claims anyway, and some foreign company eventually gets the contract so not much damage is done. The biggest Indian dud of recent years is the Arjun MBT.

0230 GMT March 7, 2007

• NATO Begins Helmand Spring Offensive We'd like to congratulate ourselves for having informed readers the NATO offensive would start before the Taliban got their offensive underway, but we were off by two weeks. We didn't put a date because sometimes one's sources may not know the exact dates, but we believed NATO would begin in the third week of May.
• Unfortunately, two incidents have happened in the last few days that are driving the Afghans crazy. First, a US Marine convoy came under attack and when the shooting was over, 9 civilians were dead. The US first said the insurgents caused the casualties, but there were so many different people on the scene saying the Marines simply started shooting at everything that moved that the US said it was investigating and it was too early to say the Marines were responsible.
• Second, an air strike against insurgents may have killed some civilians. We have no doubt innocents are killed in many airstrikes, but we do want to warn that when you're hitting insurgents who cannot be distinguished from the general population, its easy for the bad guys to pretend they are just ordinary folks. This happens with monotonous regularity in Iraq, to the extent if you believe the locals not a single US strike has ever killed any insurgents, and it happens with some regularity in Afghanistan.
• It does seem unfair that the locals shrug off casualties inflicted on them by the insurgents and start screaming like fury when US/NATO forces kill anyone. But first, that's life: US/NATO are going to be held to a higher standard, and perhaps they should be. Second, its the old din-din-dinero game: US/NATO will pay compensation for genuine civilians killed, insurgents will probably kill a few more should the locals protest. So screaming loudly is mandatory.
• Iraq Bombers At It Again Two suicide bombers killed more than 150 Shia pilgrims walking to the holy city of Karbala. The news comes with the pro-forma US statement that US had warned insurgents would step up activities outside Baghdad once the Baghdad sweep got underway.
• This reminder of the maddeningly obvious in no way exonerates the US from its faulty strategy in Iraq, where instead of the clear and hold we've seen Clear and Bolt because the troops are needed elsewhere. It's no point securing Baghdad while the rest of the country blows up worse than it already has, then going to clear - for the 2nd or 3rd time - other parts of the country while Baghdad blows up again. This is a no-win game; the usual thing in these situations is to pack up and play some other game.
• We Put No Particular Importance On The Loss Of 9 US Soldiers Monday in two road explosions, one in Salahuddin Province north of the capital and one in Diyala Province south of the capital. In a war there are good days and bad days, and the media's pathetic attempt to look very grave while uttering formulaic words such as "Biggest loss in a month" or "Biggest loss since the Baghdad operation began" is meaningless blather which clarifies nothing, explains nothing, and predicts nothing.
• We have no evidence to suggest the deaths were anything more than just another bad day, and no proof that the deaths are because the insurgents are retaliating against the US surge. For one thing the incidents were outside the capital.
• Nonetheless, the retaliation against US troops in Baghdad will come. In our opinion, it will not be severe: why should insurgents of any color risk their lives against US forces when everyone knows the US cannot sustain the surge militarily or politically, and has to leave at some point.
• By the way, just to add to the joy about the broken force, not one single National Guard brigade is combat ready except for the two preparing to rotate to Iraq. Even they will deploy with equipment shortfalls. The lack of readiness is so severe the Guard is worrying it will be unable to properly respond to domestic emergencies such as disaster relief, leave alone a war emergency overseas.
• This Army Medic's Lawyer Is Ensuring A Conviction [Right after we posted this we learned the medic has been given 8 months imprisonment.]
• The Army medic accused of desertion is now standing trial in Germany. Some of our readers had opined the man needs a better lawyer or a better defense, and today it became quite obvious our readers are right.
• The man's lawyer said on National Public Radio March 6 that the man realized right after enlisting that he had made a mistake and that he just could not use his rifle to shoot anyone.
• Message to this DumbBuns masquerading as a lawyer: as Orbat.com readers have said, medics do not shoot anyone. There are any number of cases where medics have picked up guns to protect their comrades in desperate situations such as if you are about to be overrun, but this is their choice and NOT a requirement. Many medics in wartime are pacifists or conscientious objectors; moreover, medics are protected personnel under Geneva, and brandishing guns is normally not a good idea because that unprotects you. Though we have to admit that if the choice is between being overrun and have a fighting chance if you pick up a gun, it would make more sense to pick up the gun - particularly if you are facing an enemy with a record for bad treatment of prisoners.
• Being a medic in wartime requires much greater courage than required of a combat soldier. The medic, of all the people in his platoon, is obligated to aid his comrades not matter how bad the situation, and in many ways he takes greater risks.
• This particular medic has no principles, he is simply a coward and a deserter. We hope they give him the maximum 7 years.

0230 GMT March 6, 2007

• Lancet Study On 650,000 Iraq Deaths Under Attack The study came out in October 2006 and didn't make sense to a lot of people. Like ourselves, however, most people would have been reluctant to criticize the figures because we are no experts on surveys.
• Now Times London says that the controversy has grown rather than abated - see http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1469636.ece If even half of what the Times is saying is true, the study is a complete fraud, and those that were involved at the top guilty of serious negligence - if they were not complicit in the fraud.
• A point that struck us even then was that because of the safety issue, no western experts were involved in the actual conduct of the study. It was farmed out to Iraqis. Your editor is a 3rd worlder himself, and he knows exactly what happens when you conduct a study on that basis: the field people tell you what you want to hear. We don't think those at the top deliberately set out to do a fraudulent survey. When we say complicit, we mean that if they weren't so committed to their thesis they would have seen the warning signs.
• Two warning signs are that (a) 650,000 dead mean there should be three times as many wounded/injured, and there is no sign that that many Iraqis have been treated for violence-related injuries; and (b) a very odd thing: the same survey said that child deaths had dropped by two-thirds since the US invasion.
• First, child deaths do not usually drop in war. And second, this particular war destroyed whatever little health infrastructure as existed in sanctioned Iraq under Saddam. We did not see the original study, having other things to do, so we did not catch the point about child deaths.
• Be that as it may, we are going to make a statement that is going to upset many people. In the editor's experience, any study done by Americans has to be regarded with extreme skepticism. Americans are masters of information warfare, and it doesn't matter what the cause is. Any American with a cause builds her/his case by using the media, and the media wants sensation, not calm reason. You have to exaggerate to get attention. Americans by nature are crusaders, and have few qualms about manipulating studies because they are so convinced they are right that ends justify means.
• This is not to say other nationalities are pure as the driven snow or whatever. American methods of swaying public opinion are starting to take hold everywhere. But in the editor's experience, no other country manipulates so shamelessly as America.
• No other country? Wasn't the Soviet Union worse? Well, did anyone take anything the Soviets had to say seriously? You knew exactly where the Soviets were coming from and so you were forewarned. With the Americans it is very difficult to sort out what people behind a study are really up to because Americans are also good at making their studies look authentic. Johns Hopkins University was involved in the Iraq study, and my goodness, you had better criticize the American flag before you criticize JHU.
• Another Example Of Fraudulent "Studies": the PLA's Defense Budget Every reader will be familiar with the oft-made statement that the PLA's defense budget is 3 times its declared budget. This is said so often that it has become gospel. Usually the Pentagon is sourced for the statement, other times it is "experts".
• In 1980, Sreedhar Rao at the Institute for Defense Studies and myself became suspicious of this "fact" - yes, it was being touted that long ago and more. At Sreedhar's request, I made a very detailed analysis of the PLA's official budget, then $5-billion annually if I recall right. The result? There could be no doubt whatsoever that that was the real PLA budget, i.e., that China was telling the truth.
• Before you ask about the bias, Sreedhar and I were staunch Indian nationalists, and we both passionately hated Communist China and everything it stood for. We had absolutely no reason to say anything in China's favor.
• Like all your editor's work, that study has long ago vanished - he left India 17 years ago, never to return, with one backpack and one file with one study, on the alleged Pakistani N-bomb. Enroute to the US he delivered the study to a friend in England. Due to circumstances he never went back to England nor did he ever see his friend again. So even that one study vanished. Your editor says that in case someone asks for the study. Not that anyone in America will: Sreedhar went on a fellowship to Princeton, and when he mentioned the study, he was immediately dismissed out of hand by the powers that be. They did not even ask to see the study before passing judgment. The attitude of this so-called center of independent learning was: you're a pathetic Indian, what do you know, our CIA knows everything.
• Well, your editor knows the CIA very well, and can honestly say that no CIA person he ever has come across has made any claim to omniscience. They constantly emphasize how little they really know, and they constantly warn that the finished product is a mishmash compromise between many - sometimes dozens - of competing factions, and how they are under constant political pressure to provide "evidence" as suits their political masters.
• Why did our study so radically disagree with what American "intelligence" was saying about the PLA's defense budget? Simple. I costed using the Indian rupee and the expenditure of the Indian military as the base. This was far from accurate. First, however, we did not have the resources to get Chinese prices - Indian intelligence never looked upon your editor with the warmth and affection his sensitive nature requires. Second, India and China were in 1980 at a comparable economic development level - please accept that general statement or we'll never finish this paragraph. This is just before the Chinese reforms that India was not to start emulating till 1990, putting our country way behind.
• So it made much more sense to use rupees and Indian costs. Of course, I adjusted the Indian costs in every category as was possible. For example, in those days the Indian enlisted man at the lowest level was paid many times as much as his PLA counterpart. The PLA grew most of its own food. It had far fewer vehicles per 100 soldiers. It rarely left its bases to exercise. It's weapons were completely obsolete, stuff the Indians would never touch even for junk. And so on and so forth.
• We mention this story because once again, yesterday on the announcement by the Chinese of their annual defense budget, we have the experts saying "of course their real spending is 3 times as much".
• Your editor is quite prepared to show - again - that the Chinese are NOT spending three times as much and that just as in 1980, they are likely telling the truth. He is, however, willing to bet no American is going to take up that challenge.

0230 GMT March 5, 2007

• No Opposition To Sadr City Say what you will about Al-Sadr the fascist thug but his followers are disciplined. US-Iraqi forces began operations in Sadr City with a nominal force - 600 US plus 550 Iraqi troops - and met with no opposition. No arrests and no weapons found. Clearly al-Sadr intends to keep his forces and leadership intact. He knows the Americans will go sooner or later, and he has learned from his two earlier experiences that it's wise not to confront the Americans directly.
• The notion, however, that US-Iraqi forces will bring peace to Sadr City is one that will send residents into splits of laughter. Sadr City relies solely on the Mahadi militia and trusts no one but its own. As far as its residents are concerned, the US effort would be better directed at the Sunnis, as they are responsible for the attacks in Sadr City. And the notion that any Sunnis who have been forced out of Sadr City - overwhelmingly a Shia area - will return just because the US says it's safe is laughable. Families that have returned to other places in Baghdad will find, increasingly, that they have to leave again regardless of what the Americans do. The divisions within Iraq are now too deep and too bitter to heal.
• If the surge had come right after the Sammara bombing early last year it would have had a better chance of working. even then, if peace had been maintained in Baghdad, the rest of the country would have gone to heck. America does not have the troops, or the will, to police Iraq in the same manner as NATO/EU has policed the Balkans.
• Airbus Isn't Dead Yet With United Parcel Service dropping plans to buy 10 Airbus 380 freighters, there are no orders left for the cargo version.
• Nonetheless, for those of us who follow the Boeing-Airbus rivalry, it's worth noting what Business Week says: Airbus's single aisle aircraft such as the 320 family are outselling the Boeing 737-600/700/800 family. The profit margin is low, but Airbus remains very much in business, with 2019 aircraft on order versus 1639 for the 737 (BW March 5, 2007, p. 41).
• Moreover, analysts see a silver lining in the cargo version cancellation, says the International Herald Tribune. The company can now focus its energies on getting the 380, two years off schedule, back on track.
• Of course, if it doesn't get through its latest reorganization, it may well be finished.
• Please note - before some reader bonks us on the head - that the Boeing 737 family as a whole has far outsold the Airbus 320 family. But Boeing had a 20-year lead, so most analysts making comparisons count Boeing's total from the -600 model and later.
• And In Case Americans Start Getting Cocky about the manner in which Boeing has come back and in its turn knocked Airbus to the ropes, Toyota is all set to become the world's number 1 car maker, overtaking GM.
• Wait for the assurances that none of this matters, let whichever part of the world does a job better do the job, no one will catch up with Americans in the things we do best and so on.
• So aside from Brittany Spears and Anna Nicole Smith - reader Walter E. Wallis insists we add Paris Hilton to the list - someone please remind us what exactly is it Americans do better? Weapons is one area that the editor knows well, and with weapons there really is no competition. Americans do weapons better than anyone else - the immense domestic market undoubtedly has a lot to do with this.

0230 GMT March 4, 2007

• Giuliani Ahead Of McCain By 25 Points We're not quite sure how Senator John McCain has managed to sink himself in the contest for Republican presidential nomination. In January he was 44-48 with Rudy Giuliani, former New York City mayor. Of course, there's still over a year to go for the conventions.
• Meanwhile Senator Barack Obama gains on Senator Hilary Clinton for the Democratic nomination. He is now 38-52 versus 35-55 in January.
• Mr. Giuliani runs neck-to-neck with Senator Clinton at this point.
• We've been quite gloomy as we don't see either Republican candidate as capable of beating the Democrats, but Democratic friends tell us there are worries that neither Mr. Obama nor Mrs. Clinton are ultimately electable. So everyone has their problems.
• Baghdad Surge Read what we, at least, consider a balanced article on the Baghdad surge http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1464316.ece
• Meanwhile, much to our surprise, we find William Shawcross not just defending the US intervention in Iraq, but saying that (a) the US intervention in Vietnam was by no means a total defeat because it bought time for the dominos to develop and to protect themselves from the communists, and (b) what followed the US withdrawal from Indochina was far worse than the consequences of the intervention.
• If you are under 40 the name William Shawcross may not mean much. He was a British radical journalist adamantly opposed to the Vietnam War. We now learn, from his website, that he has become a darling of the conservatives. This is simply too much to digest in one go so we will refrain from further comments.
• Somalia AU Force Commitments for half the required 8000 man force have been received: Uganda (1500), 1 tank and 1 infantry battalion; Burundi (1700), 2 infantry battalions; and Nigeria (850), one infantry battalion. Malawi and Ghana are expected to send an infantry battalion each to bring the force up to 5500 troops.
• Russia To Develop New Air Defense System by 2015 says Pravda. Presumably it will be a further development of the S-400 (SAM-20) Triumph air defense system that is currently entering service. The S-400 can use a range of missiles of different capabilities for a variety of missions. The new system will have anti-space capabilities as well as ABM/ATBM/AD capabilities.
• Though S-400 is often compared to the US Patriot, the former is a whacking great strategic SAM system comparable to the US-Israeli Arrow rather than the Patriot, which is a compact tactical system.

0230 GMT March 3, 2007

• US Secretary Of The Army Forced To Resign over the failure to maintain facilities for wounded servicepeople at a major Army hospital in Washington DC. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said that there was too much defensiveness on the part of officials and not enough acceptance of responsibility.
• Sounds good to us. So now we can expect mass firings of Pentagon officials responsible for the mess in Iraq and mass resignations among President Bush's advisors, starting with Mr. Dick Cheney and culminating with the President firing himself? After all, Iraq is a much more serious failure than that at Walter Reed Army Hospital.
• We're Gonna Miss You, Dubya says an article in the London Times. This is a great newspaper for different, yet sympathetic perspectives on the US. A recent article says that when President Bush steps down, the world is going to have face the unpleasant reality that he did not create every problem in the world, and then who are they going to blame?
• We heartily agree. You can blame Mr. Bush for a number of things like Iraq, but equally there are crises he had nothing to do with, and where he has tried to do the right thing, like Afghanistan.
• We Aint Gonna Miss You, Dick Cheney People speak of the Vice President's great intelligence. It must be that same great intelligence that leads him to make pronouncements such as the one the other day: if we leave Iraq then the terrorists will migrate to Afghanistan and make trouble there.
• It's at times like these we at Orbat.com stop bemoaning the reality that we lack great intelligence, and are happy we are just plain average folks in the Big Brain department.
• The reason there are terrorists in Iraq, Mr. Giant Brain Cheney, is that you wanted Saddam overthrown. He was a true bad guy, though way second to the Great Child Of Swans aka Dictator Kim of DPRK with whom you have no trouble talking, and he needed to be overthrown. But when Saddam went, you had nothing to replace him, and the terrorists appeared in Iraq, both local and Al Qaeda. So YOU, Mr. Vice President, created those terrorists.
• And if you don't mind us saying so, it was your predecessor Mr. Ronald Reagan that laid the foundation for the jihadi movement by intervening in Afghanistan. Mr. Reagan quite brilliantly used Islam to defeat the Soviets at an insignificant cost and without the loss of American lives. But when the Soviets withdrew, so did America. Result: tens of thousands of insurgents left looking for new battlefields, and the seeds of the Taliban and Al Qaeda.
• Comforting thought for anti-American leftists: at the rate America is going, it is going to completely tie itself in knots fighting the very threats it created. So there is no need for you to worry about US world domination.
• Speaking Of World Domination Business Week in its March 5 issue points out the obvious: Americans spend more than they earn. This creates a savings shortfall, which has to be made up by borrowing money overseas. America imports capital worth $70+ billion a month.
• So far the world has been happy to lend money to the US for a number of reasons. The US is politically stable, has pro-investor policies, has been financially stable, capital markets in the developing world - which is generating financial surpluses - are not well-developed, and has an economy so huge it can easily lap up near $1-trillion a year of foreign money.
• Say you are China and you want to invest your ~$250-billion a year trade surplus with the US somewhere. You cant buy a whole lot of Euros because you wont get good returns - the Euro zone is anti-investor. Japan is definitely pro-investor, but it has so much surplus capital that its interest rates hover near zero. You can't buy Swiss francs because the pool of Swiss francs is so small you'll push up the price so much you'll cripple the Swiss economy. At that point the Swiss will start charging you money to keep your money in francs instead of giving you interest - they've done this before.
• So you really have no choice but to put your money back in the US. Ditto the Gulf states, ditto the Asian Tigers, ditto to a limited extent even India and Russia which are rapidly building up foreign exchange reserves instead of - at least in India's case, it is argued by some - spending the money to create infrastructure at home.
• So for the US there is no cost to importing capital. You are buying enormous quantities of cheap foreign goods and paying in dollars. The recipients have to send the dollars right back to the US, and America continues living high on the hog.
• BUT - and this is a very, very big But, folks - what happens when capital markets in other parts of the world develop sufficiently to start accepting some of the trillions of dollars of surplus capital that sloshes around the world? What happens when creditor nations start dictating US foreign policy - as China is increasingly starting to do? America is going to have start paying more, much more, for its imported capital. The consequences may be extreme.
• Hegemony and the Economy  Hegemony is ultimately based on economic power. In 1945, the US owned 35% of the Gross World Product. This actually seriously understates US economic power, which was 10 times that of its closest competitor, the UK, because the rest of the industrialized world lay in ruins. Japan's GNP, for example, was down to $5-billion - coincidentally the same figure as India's.
• Before the rise of US hegemony, the world hegemon was the UK - but at its peak it did not exceed 9% of GWP.
• Today the US is down to 18% of GWP and its share will keep falling. This is one reason some say the end of American hegemony is near.
• You can deploy much world influence without the economic backup by focusing on military power. The USSR is the best example of this. Its true economic strength was a near insignificant fraction of America's. But thanks to its command economy, main battle tank tanks were kept cheap and automobiles were kept expensive. People lived in tiny apartments and so money was available for more nuclear submarines than the rest of the world put together. But for a command economy you have to have a dictatorship, and - thanks to the US - dictatorship does not work anymore.
• Ultimately pure military power cannot be a substitute for economic power.
• As a random thought: used to be that if the hegemon had 10 battleships and 10 divisions, to counter him you needed 8 battleships and 12 divisions. Today the US, global hegemon, with a half-trillion dollar defense budget, is being tied up in knots by Islamic fundamentalism, which has less than a $1-billion budget.
• In 1991, the US defined the military paradigm and others could only react. Today it is the US that reacts while others define the military paradigm.
• That is Not A Good Thing.
• Nonetheless, we don't think US global hegemony will wane for two reasons. One, the US may be reluctant to use the full panoply of its military power, but the US has many, many times the military power of the next most powerful state, China. Because the US remains fiendishly innovative at weapons design - mainly because its culture allows it to co-opt scientists from all over the world - we see the US maintaining military hegemony out to 2050 at least.
• Two, perhaps more important, the US has created a new form of hegemony. This is culture. Even in nations that are virulently anti-American, ordinary people aspire to live the American life-style. Of course, you can argue that it isn't a purely American life-style because the Japanese and the Indians - to name two nations - modify American culture to their own needs. Conversely, however, America quickly absorbs the foreign adaptations, making them American again.
• The thing is that American culture appeals to the highest in all of us. It isn't just democracy, which began in the US and has now spread all over the world. It is the respect for the individual. For example, it's no coincidence that women's rights and handicapped people's rights began in America. It isn't a coincidence that environmentalism began in America, ditto for the rule of law. You can easily add to this list.
• From time to time we bemoan the attraction of American culture to the lowest in all of us. Reality TV, Brittany Spears, and Anna Nicole are also uniquely American and the ethos has swept the world in an astonishingly short period. The thing is, you can't have the highest without the lowest. It all comes as one package.

0230 GMT March 2, 2007

• Reuters Reports "Dozens Of Explosions" In Baghdad Iraqi security sources say the explosions are related to security operations. Reuters opines mortar bombs are the cause. There is nothing in the US media so far.
• We recommend to our readers a blog on military/strategic news from around the world. We do not link to others for a variety of reasons, but we make an exception in Mathew Wilson's case because of this unusually comprehensive source. We are hoping readers will tell us that they can get their news better from this source than from us. Then we can restrict ourselves to commentary, and thus hopefully make more sense to our readers.
• Democrats Don't Care either For US Troops In Iraq Some weeks ago we opined that the Democrats do not want a solution to the US involvement in Iraq, they want only to embarrass Mr. Bush. Today their true colors were revealed with no further equivocation possible.
• Senator John McCain made a statement saying that the lives of US soldiers in Iraq had been wasted. We wouldn't have been surprised had Republicans attacked him. But it wasn't the Republicans who attacked him, it was the Democrats. Senator McCain was forced to retract, saying he should have used the word "sacrificed" and not "wasted".
• Excuse us, but are the Democrats saying the lives of US soldiers in Iraq have not been wasted? If so, isn't that a clear way of saying lives have been expended for a worthwhile purpose. If the purpose is worthwhile, why are the Democrats attacking president Bush for being in Iraq?
• The amazing scene of the Democrats trying to pretend they are more patriotic than Senator John McCain is pathetic farce. The patriotism of a ton and half of Democrats could not begin to match the patriotism of this man. We congratulate Senator Barack Obama - a Democrat - for having the integrity to stand up for Mr. McCain. Ironically, Mr. Obama was himself attacked the other day - by Republicans - for saying the lives of US troops had been wasted.
• Many Republicans, however, are being consistent when they talk of "sacrifice" rather than "waste" because they support the war in Iraq. No Democrat who does not support the war has to the right to use the word "sacrifice". This is all of a piece with their spineless position that they oppose the war but they don't want to undermine the troops.
• For heaven's sake, the troops are not an end to themselves. They are tools of the nation's policy. There is no question of supporting or not supporting the troops. Of course we all support the troops, just as we support police who fight crime, firemen who fight fire, doctors who fight sickness, teachers who fight ignorance and so on. Either the mission is right or wrong. If it is right, then Democrats and Republicans alike need to provide the neccessary tools - and the tools do not include giving the troops a garden shovel when they need an industrial strength bulldozer. If you are going to stabilize Iraq, you should be sending five divisions, not 5 brigades - and that is as a start. You should be preparing for 50 years in Iraq, not 6-12 months.
• If you are unwilling to do this, you need to support the demand to get the troops back - because then you are wasting their lives.
• And What Exactly Is Senator Obama Talking About when he says we have a "sacred" duty to support the troops?
• First, in case the very literate Senator does not know, sacred concerns God. Neither the troops, nor their mission, nor the administration, and not Senator Obama have anything to do with God.
• Second, lets not get all weepy and sentimental about the sacrifices of the troops. The troops are regulars. They are warriors. For a warrior the rightness or the wrongness of the cause for which he is sent to fight is immaterial. For him the fight is an end to itself, and if his sacrifice helps the country, jolly good; if it doesn't help the country or is a waste, too bad, but we will judge him by his sacrifice, not by if his country's policy makes sense or not.
• There is something really sick-making at the sight of all these politicians, none apparently prepared to volunteer for combat in the GWOT, living their comfy lives at home and then trying to outdo each other on who supports the troops more.
• Message to US Congress: if you support the troops, enlist, regardless of whether you agree we should be in Iraq or wherever. Otherwise stop trying to make political points by wrapping yourselves in patriotic sounding images centered around the troops.
• Methyl Hydrate Again Readers might recall the promise of methyl hydrates from the ocean floor as a source of natural gas. Now the Japanese are setting up a test production facility in Canada to extract methyl hydrates from permafrost. Traditional natural gas at 370 trillion meters is said to suffice for 60 years. Methyl hydrates could provide 6 to 20 times as much.
• Reader Marcopetroni sends us an article accessible at  http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=8620&size=A which notes that the technology has a way to go before being commercialized. But if it is successful, Canada and the US could become major natural gas exporters as well as substituting for oil in the US.

0230 GMT March 1, 2007

• UK Troops To Leave Bosnia After 15 Years And Bosnia was a cakewalk compared to Iraq. The US Secretary Defense predicted in 1992 that the troops would be home in 12 months.
• Ex-Iranian Revolutionary Guard Commander Kidnapped? Reader Marcopetroni sends a news report saying he was on a private visit to Istanbul when he vanished. The report says a website associated with the Revolutionary Guards says he was on a CIA hit list of 20 Guard commanders and may have been kidnapped.
• Eradicate Opium, Strengthen The Taliban Reports from Afghanistan repeatedly say that the US-sponsored opium eradicated programs are driving poor farmers into the arms of the Taliban. Calls to either buy up the opium crop or to pay farmers not to grow it directly contradict US anti-drug policy, which relies almost exclusively on destruction at source or interdiction. That the policy is a colossal failure bothers Americans not at all.
• Nonetheless, your editor is personally glad he is not the one who has to make policy decisions on how to handle Afghanistan's opium production, now accounting for over 90% of the world's heroin. Seems to us all destruction at source/interdiction options are bad but other options are unlikely to fly with the US public.
• US To Talk Indirectly To Iran & Syria The US administration has repeatedly said it wont talk directly to Iran and Syria. Well, after dramatically changing tack on DPRK, Washington now seeks to preserve its virginity re. Iran/Syria. US says it will only be listening in at an Iraq-sponsored conference on Iraq's security issues starting March 10. Who these prevarications are supposed to impress one doesn't know, but the world of diplomacy has its own logic. The bottom line is that the US is in effect opening talks with the 2 remaining Axis of evil members.
• Romano Prodi Again Italy's Prime Minister He still has a razor thin majority in the Senate - 162 to 157. A defection of 3 could sink him. But - this is Italy, and normal people shouldn't even try and understand how its political system works. Not that it matters, since the country keeps getting richer with or without a government.
• Wowzers: 1-nanometer Circuits On The Way UK scientists have created a carbon film one atom thick. The proof-of-concept technology will open up all sorts of new applications, but one will be 1-namometer circuits for computer chips, with carbon replacing silicon. Presently we are at 10 nanometers.
• Seems to us that since we're looking at 1 nano, this is the end for Moore's Law until quantum computing becomes a reality.
• Indian Defense Budget Now $21.5-Billion An extraordinary half is to be spent on new equipment. India did not adequately fund equipment modernization through the 1990s and also for the last part of the 1980s. Consequently, it has huge stocks of obsolete equipment, particularly with the air force and mechanized forces. In the 2000s it has begun making up the deficit.
• The budget does not include MOD, pensions, and N-programs - the last are actually relatively minor. It also does not include the 4 border protection forces (BSF, ITBP, Assam Rifles, and SSB) which field over 300,000 troops.
• Its difficult to get a good idea of what the Indian GDP is. Figures we often see indicate it is less than $700-billion. But if you go by the 3.3% of GDP deficit financing, India's GDP should be around $1 trillion by the end of the 2007-08 fiscal year. In any case, GDP expenditure on defense is a low 2.0 - 2.2%.
• The Indian defense budget cannot be compared to any western budget because manpower costs are very low. An Indian 2nd lieutenant, for example, gets about $2500 a year. The Operations and Maintenance costs are also considerably lower than in the west despite so much of the army being deployed in difficult operational areas because the Indian standard of living is much lower than that for western nations. Also, many equipment purchases are made under the O and M head.