Police crack down on Iran protests

June 21, 2009
Al Jazeera, June 21, 2009

Protesters fought back with stones and set fires
in the streets of the capital, Tehran [AFP]

Riot police in Iran have used tear gas, water cannon and batons to disperse about 3,000 people attempting to protest over the disputed presidential election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president.

Witnesses said that dozens of people were hospitalised after being beaten by police and pro-government militia in the capital, Tehran, on Saturday.

“Lots of guards on motorbikes closed in on us and beat us brutally,” one protester said.

“As we were running away the Basiji [militia] were waiting in side alleys with batons, but people opened their doors to us trapped in alleys.”

Supporters of Mir Hossein Mousavi, a defeated reformist candidate, had planned to stage a rally in the city’s Revolutionary Square, but arrived to find their way blocked by police.

A witness told Al Jazeera that police were turning people away.

“The roads were pretty much blocked by the militia, they were out with retractable metal batons. It looked like they were very frantically trying to keep people from the area,” he said.

Protests ‘quelled’

Amateur video of Saturday’s protests, which could not be independently verified, showed dozens of Iranians running down a street after police fired tear gas.

Other footage showed protesters trying to give first aid to a badly injured woman in the street.

In depth

Video: Iran supreme leader in ‘power struggle’
Video: Iran’s ‘citizen journalists’
Video: Iran steps up net censorship
Video: Iranians go online to evade curbs
Video: The struggle for power
Video: Rival protests continue in Iran
Video: Iranians rally in Europe

Iran’s Ayatollah under threat?
Mousavi sees election hopes dashed
Iran writer on poll result
Mousavi’s letter to the people
Iran poll result ‘harms US hopes’
West concerned by Iran fraud claims
What next for Iran?
The Iranian political system
Riz Khan: Iran’s disputed election
Inside Story: Iran election recount
Inside Story: Iran’s political future

Your media: submit your clips of the protests to Al Jazeera

The protesters apparently threw stones at the police and set fires in the streets.

Al Jazeera’s Alireza Ronaghi, reporting from Tehran, said that the protests had largely been quelled by Saturday evening.

“The presence of security forces were very high, they definitely wanted to take back the streets of Tehran … right now I don’t expect that many protesters are concentrated anywhere in Tehran,” he said.

He said that state television had quoted the head of Iran’s police force as thanking the Iranian people for not taking to the streets and taking the police warnings seriously.

As the clashes took place, a suspected suicide bomber blew himself up outside the shrine of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the Islamic revolution in 1979, injuring at least two people, local news agencies reported.

As night fell, the protesters kept up their show of defiance shouting “Allahu Akbar” (God is greatest) from the rooftops, a deliberate echo of a move made during the Islamic revolution in 1979.

Barack Obama, the US president, condemned the violence and urged Tehran to allow Mousavi’s supporters to stage peaceful protests.

“The Iranian government must understand that the world is watching,” he said.

“We mourn each and every innocent life that is lost. We call on the Iranian government to stop all violent and unjust actions against its own people.”

Nick Spicer, Al Jazeera’s correspondent in Washington DC, said: “It’s his [Obama] strongest language to date.

“He’s putting the blame for the violence squarely on the Iranian government saying that the world is watching what is going on in Iran, not just that the United States is watching

“Basically he is calling the whole world as a witness to what’s going on in Iran.

“He’s trying to make this not an Iran-America thing, but a global human rights argument that he’s putting to the leaders of Iran.”

‘Ready for martyrdom’

In a statement posted on the website of his Kalemeh newspaper, Mousavi repeated his demand for the elections results to be annulled and hit out at a speech by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader.

“If this huge volume of cheating and changing the votes … which has hurt people’s trust, is presented as the very evidence of the lack of cheating, then it will butcher the republican aspect of the system and the idea that Islam is incompatible with a republic will be proven,” he said.

Anoushka Marashlian, an independent Middle East analyst, told Al Jazeera: “I think the momentum would be very difficult to maintain now because of the nature of the protests that have become more violent.

“They are not only defying the results of the elections but they are now perceived to be defying the directions of the supreme leader, and so, in essence, questioning the foundation of the Islamic Republic,” she said.

In a sermon on Friday, Khamenei ruled out any fraud in the June 12 vote and stressed there could be no doubting the re-election of Ahmadinejad.

An unnamed ally of Mousavi told the Reuters news agency that the former prime minister has said he would continue his fight and was “ready for martyrdom”.

Earlier on Saturday, Mousavi and Mehdi Karoubi, another defeated presidential candidate had declined to meet the Guardian Council, Iran’s highest legislative body, concerning 646 complaints of voting irregularities in the poll.

State television quoted a council spokesman as saying that the Guardian Council had expressed its readiness to “randomly” recount up to 10 per cent of the ballots.

The contested result gave President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a tally of about 63 per cent, to Mousavi’s 34 per cent.

Tony Blair pushed Gordon Brown to hold Iraq war inquiry in private

June 21, 2009

• Former PM feared facing ‘show trial’
• Leak reveals plan to provoke invasion

Prime Minister Tony Blair

Tony Blair announces on 20 March 2003 that British servicemen and women are engaged from air, land and sea in the war against Iraq. Photograph: PA

Tony Blair urged Gordon Brown to hold the independent inquiry into the Iraq war in secret because he feared that he would be subjected to a “show trial” if it were opened to the public, the Observer can reveal.

The revelation that the former prime minister – who led Britain to war in March 2003 – had intervened will fuel the anger of MPs, peers, military leaders and former civil servants, who were appalled by Brown’s decision last week to order the investigation to be conducted behind closed doors.

Blair, who resisted pressure for a full public inquiry while he was prime minister, appears to have taken a deliberate decision not to express his view in person to Brown because he feared it might leak out.

Instead, messages on the issue were relayed through others to Sir Gus O’Donnell, the cabinet secretary, who conveyed them to the prime minister in the days leading up to the announcement of the inquiry last week.

A Downing Street spokesman last night said: “We have always been clear that we consulted a number of people before announcing the commencement of the inquiry, including former government figures. We are not going to get into the nature of those discussions.”

Blair is believed to have been alarmed by the prospect of giving evidence in public and under oath about the use of intelligence and about his numerous private discussions with US President George Bush over plans for war. A spokesman for the former Labour leader would only say last night: “This was a decision for the current prime minister, not for Tony Blair.”

The Observer reveals today that six weeks before the war, at a meeting in Washington, the two leaders were forced to contemplate alternative scenarios that might trigger a second UN resolution legitimising military action.

Bush told Blair that the US had drawn up a provocative plan “to fly U-2 reconnaissance aircraft, painted in UN colours, over Iraq with fighter cover”. Bush said that if Saddam fired at the planes, he would put Iraq in breach of UN resolutions and legitimise military action.

Last night, Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat leader, whose party opposed the war from the outset, said: “If this is true about Blair demanding secrecy, it is outrageous that an inquiry into the biggest foreign policy disaster since Suez is being muzzled to suit the individual needs of the man who took us to war.”

Brown provoked uproar in the Commons on Monday when he announced the inquiry’s scope, membership and remit. Following protests from military leaders and mandarins, including former cabinet secretary Lord Butler, he announced a partial retreat on Thursday, asking the inquiry chairman, Sir John Chilcot, to consider opening a few sessions to the public.

But the move did not ease pressure for a total climbdown. Last night, Brown appeared cornered as MPs of all parties prepared for a Commons debate on Wednesday in which they look certain to back calls for the inquiry to hold sessions in public “whenever possible”.

A Tory motion likely to win wide cross-party backing also calls for the committee to include military experts. The Lib Dems are demanding that it also include constitutional and legal experts to assess the legality of the invasion.

In a sign that the government is preparing to retreat, Chilcot is to meet both Clegg and the Conservative leader, David Cameron, on Tuesday, before the debate. MPs believe that he may then announce a bigger public element to the inquiry in order to avoid the humiliation for Brown of defeat in the Commons.

Chilcot will come under pressure from both leaders to open up the inquiry. Clegg wants a guarantee that witnesses such as Blair will give evidence under oath, while Cameron will ask if the committee can issue an interim report early next year, ahead of a likely spring election.

The Tories say that if Brown does not order a U-turn, an incoming Conservative government will “reserve the right” to widen the scope of the inquiry and increase its powers where necessary after an election.

Sir Christopher Meyer, who was the British ambassador in Washington in the run-up to the war and is likely to be called to give evidence to the inquiry, yesterday backed calls to make it public. “It should be open,” he said. “I think it should also have powers of subpoena and people should give evidence on oath. I would be perfectly comfortable with that.”

He said the case for openness was increased because there had been “a ton of stuff” published in the US, both via official inquiries and in memoirs written by key players, making public what had previously been confidential. “I would be perfectly happy for the whole embassy archive in Washington [to be disclosed],” he added. “I haven’t got a problem with that being made available. Things were very sensitive then, but this is 2009.”

On his blog, Alastair Campbell, Blair’s former spin doctor, says that “on balance” he believes Brown was right to order the inquiry to be held in private. “I can see the arguments for both sides – openness and transparency favours a public inquiry, but it may well be that the inquiry will do a better job freed from the frenzy of 24-hour media.”

In a letter to the Observer, a group of current and former Labour MPs, headed by Alan Simpson, the chairman of Labour Against the War, demands a complete rethink. “Neither the public nor parliament will understand how the prime minister’s ‘new era of openness’ can begin with an Iraq inquiry held behind closed doors,” says the letter.

Iran’s dictator gives up pretence of democracy

June 21, 2009

The Sunday Times/UK, June 21, 2009

By Amir Taheri

Just before noon on Friday, June 19, the Islamic republic died in Iran. Its death was announced by its “supreme guide”, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who had come to praise the system but buried it instead. Khamenei was addressing supporters on the campus of Tehran University, transformed into a mosque for the occasion. Many had expected him to speak as a guide, an arbiter of disputes – a voice for national reconciliation. Instead, he spoke as a rabble rouser and a tinpot despot.

At issue was the June 12 presidential election that millions of Iranians, perhaps a majority, believe was rigged to ensure the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with a two-thirds majority. Since its inception in 1979, the Islamic republic has organised 31 elections at different levels. All have been carefully scripted, with candidates pre-approved by the regime and no independent mechanism for oversight.

Continued >>

Images reveal full horror of ‘Amazon’s Tiananmen’

June 21, 2009

Peru accused of cover-up after indigenous protest ends in death at Devil’s Bend

By Guy Adams in Los Angeles | The Independent/UK, June 19, 2009

The bloodied face of a protester as behind him fellow protestors are arrested by police
The bloodied face of a protester as behind him fellow protestors are arrested by police

First, the police fire tear gas, then rubber bullets. As protesters flee, they move on to live rounds. One man, wearing only a pair of shorts, stops to raise his hands in surrender. He is knocked to the ground and given an extended beating by eight policemen in black body-armour and helmets.

Demonstrators getting worked-over by the rifle butts and truncheons of Peru’s security forces turn out to be the lucky ones, though. Dozens more were shot as they fled. You can see their bullet-ridden bodies, charred by a fire that swept through the scene of the incident, which has since been dubbed “the Amazon’s Tiananmen”.

Continued >>

Gaza: Bombs, Missiles, Tanks And Bulldozers

June 20, 2009

Transcript of former US President Jimmy Carter’s Address to the United Nations Relief Works Agency’s Human Rights Graduation in Gaza, June 16, 2009.

By Jimmy Carter | Information Clearing House, June 16, 2009

Director of UNRWA operations John Ging, thank you for inviting me to Gaza. Distinguished guests, children of Gaza, I am grateful for your warm reception.

I first visited Gaza 36 years ago and returned during the 1980s and later for the very successful Palestinian elections. Although under occupation, this community was relatively peaceful and prosperous. Now, the aftermath of bombs, missiles, tanks, bulldozers and the continuing economic siege have brought death, destruction, pain, and suffering to the people here. Tragically, the international community largely ignores the cries for help, while the citizens of Gaza are being treated more like animals than human beings.

Last week, a group of Israelis and Americans tried to cross into Gaza through Erez, bringing toys and children’s playground equipment – slides, swings, kites, and magic castles for your children. They were stopped at the gate and prevented from coming. I understand even paper and crayons are treated as “security hazards” and not permitted to enter Gaza. I sought an explanation for this policy in Israel, but did not receive a satisfactory answer – because there is none.

The responsibility for this terrible human rights crime lies in Jerusalem, Cairo, Washington, and throughout the international community. This abuse must cease; the crimes must be investigated; the walls must be brought down, and the basic right of freedom must come to you.

Almost one-half of Gaza’s 1.5 million people are children, whose lives are being shaped by poverty, hunger, violence, and despair. More than 50,000 families had their homes destroyed or damaged in January, and parents are in mourning for the 313 innocent children who were killed.

The situation in Gaza is grim, but all hope is not lost. Amidst adversity, you continue to possess both dignity and determination to work towards a brighter tomorrow. That is why educating children is so important.

I have come to Gaza to help the world know what important work you are doing. UNRWA is here to ensure that the 200,000 children in its schools can develop their talent, express their dynamism, and help create the path to a better future.

The human rights curriculum is teaching children about their rights and also about their responsibilities. UNRWA is teaching about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the struggle for these rights all over the world, Gaza’s children are learning that as you seek justice for yourselves, you must be sure that your behavior provides justice for others.

They are learning that it is wrong to fire rockets that may kill Israeli children. They are learning that arbitrary detention and the summary execution of political opponents is not acceptable. They are learning that the rule of law must be honored here in Gaza.

I would like to congratulate both UNRWA and the children who have completed the human rights curriculum with distinction. They are tomorrow’s leaders.

In addition to the tragedy of occupation, the lack of unity among Palestinians is causing a deteriorating atmosphere here in Gaza, in Ramallah, and throughout the West Bank.

Palestinians want more than just to survive. They hope to lead the Arab world, to be a bridge between modern political life and traditions that date back to the Biblical era. The nation you will create must be pluralistic and democratic – the new Palestine that your intellectuals have dreamt about. Palestine must combine the best of the East and the West. The Palestinian state, like the land, must be blessed for all people. Jerusalem must be shared with everyone who loves it – Christians, Jews, and Muslims.

With our new leaders in Washington, my country will move into the forefront of this birth of a new Palestine. We were all reminded of this renewed hope and commitment by President Obama’s recent speech in Cairo.

President Obama’s resolve to resume the Israeli-Palestinian diplomatic process based on the principle of two states for two peoples must be welcomed. This vision of two sovereign nations living as neighbors is not a mere convenient phrase. It is the basis for a lasting peace for this entire region, including Syria and Lebanon.

We all know that a necessary step is the ending of the siege of Gaza – the starving of 1 ½ million people of the necessities of life. Never before in history has a large community been savaged by bombs and missiles and then deprived of the means to repair itself. The issue of who controls Gaza is not an obstacle. As the World Bank has pointed out, funds can be channeled through a number of independent mechanisms and effective implementing agencies.

Although funds are available, not a sack of cement nor a piece of lumber has been permitted to enter the closed gates from Israel and Egypt. I have seen with my own eyes that progress is negligible.

My country and our friends in Europe must do all that is necessary to persuade Israel and Egypt to allow basic materials into Gaza. At the same time, there must be no more rockets and mortar shells falling on Israeli citizens.

I met this week with the parents of Corporal Gilad Shalit, and have with me a letter that I hope can be delivered to their son. I have also met with many Palestinians who plead for the freedom of their 11,700 loved ones imprisoned by the Israelis, including 400 women and children. Many of them have been imprisoned for many years, held without trial, with no access to their families or to legal counsel. Rational negotiations and a comprehensive peace can end this suffering on both sides.

I know it is difficult now, surrounded by terrible destruction, to see a future of independence and dignity in a Palestinian state, but this goal can and must be achieved. I know too that it is hard for you to accept Israel and live in peace with those who have caused your suffering. However, Palestinian statehood cannot come at the expense of Israel’s security, just as Israel’s security can not come at the expense of Palestinian statehood.

In his speech in Cairo, President Obama said that Hamas has support among Palestinians, but they also have responsibilities. To play a full role in fulfilling Palestinian aspirations, to unify the Palestinian people, Hamas must put an end to violence, accept existing peace agreements, and recognize Israel’s right to exist.

I have urged Hamas leaders to accept these conditions, and they have made statements and taken actions that suggest they are ready to join the peace process and move toward the creation of an independent and just Palestinian state.

Khaled Mashaal has assured me that Hamas will accept a final status agreement negotiated by the Palestinian Authority and Israel if the Palestinian people approve it in a referendum. Hamas has offered a reciprocal ceasefire with Israel throughout the West Bank and Gaza. Unfortunately, neither the Israeli leaders nor Hamas accept the terms of the Oslo Agreement of 1993, but the Arab Peace Initiative is being considered now by all sides.

I have personally witnessed free and fair elections in Palestine when Yasir Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas were elected president and when legislative members were chosen for your parliament. I hope to return next January for a similar event that will unite all Palestinians as you seek a proud and peaceful future.

Ladies and gentlemen, children of Gaza, thank you for inviting me and for sharing this happy occasion with me. Congratulations for your achievements.

Longer wars leave millions in limbo

June 20, 2009
Al Jazeera, June 20, 2009
By Antonio Guterres, UN High Commissioner for Refugees
More than 130,000 Somalis have been displaced following renewed fighting in recent months [AFP]

As we mark World Refugee Day on June 20, the number of people forcibly uprooted by conflict and persecution worldwide stands at more than 42 million – including 16 million refugees outside their countries and 26 million others displaced internally.This overall total reflects global displacement figures compiled at the end of 2008 by the UN refugee agency (UNHCR), but the number has already grown substantially since the beginning of this year with more large displacements in Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Somalia totalling well over 2.3 million  people.

And there are more worrisome signs on the horizon.

While some displacement situations are short-lived, others can take years and even decades to resolve. At present, for example, UNHCR counts 29 different groups of 25,000 or more refugees in 22 nations who have been in exile for five years or longer.

This means that nearly 6 million refugees are living in limbo, with no solutions in sight. Millions more internally displaced people (IDPs) are also unable to go home in places like Colombia, Iraq, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Somalia.

Refugee special


In Video:

Burundi’s returning refugees
Refugees in Europe find it hard to fit in
Nomadic refugees flee Philippines fighting
Inequity of Haitian refugees in Mexico

In depth:

UN: ‘wars displace record numbers’
Lebanon’s Palestinian refugees
Witness: A strange kind of freedom

In addition to prolonged conflict and the increasingly protracted nature of displacement, we are also seeing a decline in the number of refugees and internally displaced people going home.In 2008, about 2 million people were repatriated, but that was a sharp drop from the year before.

Refugee repatriation, at 604,000, was down 17 per cent in 2008, while IDP returns dropped by 34 per cent. It was the second-lowest repatriation total in 15 years and the decline, in part, reflects deteriorating security conditions, namely in Afghanistan and Sudan.

Last year, we also saw a 28 per cent increase in the number of asylum seekers making individual claims, with 839,000 people seeking asylum. South Africa was the largest single recipient of individual asylum claims with 207,000 applications, followed by the US with 49,600, France with 35,400 and Sudan with 35,100.

The global economic crisis, gaping disparities between North and South, growing xenophobia, climate change, the relentless outbreak of new conflicts and the intractability of old ones all threaten to exacerbate this already massive displacement problem.

We and our humanitarian partners are struggling to ensure that these uprooted people and the countries hosting them get the help they need and deserve.

Disproportionate burden

Some 80 per cent of the world’s refugees and internally displaced people are in developing nations, underscoring the disproportionate burden carried by those least able to afford it as well as the need for more international support.

It also puts into proper perspective alarmist claims by populist politicians and media that some industrialised nations are being “flooded” by asylum seekers.

Most people forced to flee their homes because of conflict or persecution remain within their own countries and regions in the developing world.

Thousands have been displaced in Pakistan following an army offensive in Swat [AFP]

Major refugee-hosting nations in 2008 included Pakistan, home to 1.8 million refugees before the Swat offensive in early 2009, Syria with 1.1 million, Iran with 980,000, Germany with 582,700, Jordan with 500,400, Chad with 330,500, Tanzania with 321,900 and Kenya with 320,600. Major countries of origin for refugees included Afghanistan (2.8 million) and Iraq (1.9 million), which together account for 45 per cent of all UNHCR refugees.

Others were Somalia (561,000); Sudan (419,000); Colombia (374,000), and the DRC (368,000). Nearly all of these countries are in the developing world.

Unfortunately, however, we cannot say that generosity and wealth are proportional to each other.

As conflicts drag on with no political solutions, the pressure on many of these poor countries is near breaking point. They need more international help now.

Without it, UNHCR and other aid agencies will be forced to continue making heartbreaking decisions on which necessities must be denied to uprooted families.

Of the global total of uprooted people in 2008, UNHCR cares for 25 million, including a record 14.4 million internally displaced people, up from 13.7 million in 2007, and 10.5 million refugees.

The other 4.7 million refugees are Palestinians under the mandate of the UN Relief and Works Agency.

Less protection for IDPs

Although international law distinguishes between refugees, who are protected under the 1951 UN Refugee Convention, and the internally displaced, who are not, such distinctions are absurd to those who have been forced from their homes and who have lost everything.

Uprooted people are equally deserving of help whether they have crossed an international border or not.

Internally displaced
26m IDPs in total with 14.4m under UN care
Colombia: 3m IDPs
Iraq: 2.6m IDPs compared to 2.4m in 2007
DR Congo: 1.5m IDPs
Somalia: 1.3m IDPs not including 2009 displacements

Source: UNHCR 2008

That is why UNHCR is working with other UN agencies to jointly provide the internally displaced with the help they need, just as we do for refugees.My agency’s caseload of internally displaced has more than doubled since 2005.

Displaced populations include Colombia with some 3 million; Iraq with 2.6 million; Sudan’s Darfur region with more than 2 million; Eastern DRC with 1.5 million and Somalia with 1.3 million.

Other increases in displacement in 2008 were in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Georgia and Yemen.

Just as the international community felt an obligation to spend hundreds of billions rescuing the international financial system, it should feel the same urgency to rescue some of the most vulnerable people on earth – refugees and the internally displaced.

And the amount needed is only a fraction of that spent on financial bailouts.

Finding solutions for more than 40 million people forced to flee their homes because of conflict and persecution is difficult, but not impossible.

With the necessary political will and humanitarian support from the international community, we can ease the suffering of the world’s uprooted people and finally bring their exile to an end.

António Guterres, a former Portuguese prime minister, has been UN High Commissioner for Refugees since 2005.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera editorial policy.

Iraq, AfPak, beyond: the global cost of war

June 20, 2009

Paul Rogers, OpenDemocracy, June 18, 2009

The toxic phrase “war on terror” has fallen out of use, but the destructive effects of the real thing continue and even escalate in a period of economic crisis.

A major landmark in the in the United States’s military presence in Iraq arrives on 30 June 2009, when the army is scheduled to withdraw its combat-troops from the country’s cities. The terms of the “status-of-forces agreement” with the Iraqi government will see most of these (currently 133,000)  soldiers relocated to a number of major bases in rural areas, though some will join the 30,000 troops that have left Iraq since the peak of the “surge” in mid-2008.

The process is taking place against the background of continuing violence in Iraq, notwithstanding reports of an overall increase in security. Indeed, Iraq’s foreign minister Hoshyar Zebari is warning that al-Qaida and Ba’athist militant clusters will seek to escalate the level of violence in advance of the 30 June deadline, in order to take credit for forcing the Americans into a humiliating retreat (see Patrick Cockburn, “US troops ask Syria to thwart al-Qa’ida offensive“, Independent, 17 June 2009).

Continued >>

U.S. admits Afghan airstrike may have killed 86 civilians

June 20, 2009

By NANCY A. YOUSSEF | The Miami Herald, June 19, 2009

McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — An internal military investigation into an U.S. airstrike in western Afghanistan acknowledged that U.S. forces may have killed as many as 86 civilians and said the military needs to re-examine its rules to reduce future civilian casualties.

The report, which suggests that troops need a refresher on how to best use airpower, how to avoid civilian casualties and how to communicate with the Afghan civilians they’re being sent to protect, will probably do little to endear the coalition with the Afghans, a cornerstone of the U.S. counterinsurgency plan.

And its issuance raises questions about whether the U.S. should use a B-1B bomber – an expensive Cold War-era supersonic bomber originally designed to penetrate the former Soviet Union’s airspace and drop nuclear weapons – to rout out Taliban hiding among Afghan civilians.

The airstrike, in the western Farah province, has drawn the ire of local and national leaders, strained relations between the U.S. and Afghanistan and become an issue in August elections there. Afghan investigations have placed the civilian death toll as high as 140.

The report found 26 confirmed civilian casualties but concedes that it is impossible to determine a final number because some were buried before investigators arrived. However, it also cites an investigation by the Afghan Human Rights Commission shortly after the May 4 incident, which found 86 casualties. The report doesn’t say how many suspected Taliban fighters were killed in the offensive.

The eight-hour battle began when Afghan security forces discovered that as many as 300 Taliban were amassing nearby and threatening residents. A nearby U.S. Marine Special Operations team told the Afghan forces they should take a few days and plan an attack, but the Afghans decided to go after the Taliban, the report said, and U.S. forces agreed to be on call in case they needed additional help.

When the Afghans came under attack, the Marines deployed ground troops and eventually four F-18s. Despite that, the report said, “enemy direct fire subsided for a brief period, but never completely.” Those attacks didn’t lead to civilian casualties, it said.

When the fighting didn’t subside, the military decided to deploy B-1B bombers that launched three strikes. The report suggests that the criteria for launching attacks were vague.

The first attack occurred when the bomber “spotted a group of similarly-sized adults moving in a tactical manner – definitively and rapidly in evenly spaced intervals across difficult terrain in the dark – behind the enemy’s front lines. The ground force didn’t receive direct fire from this group at any time while the B-1B crew tracked and targeted them,” the report said.

The second strike took place near Afghan forces and targeted a building where suspected fighters had taken cover. However, no one confirmed whether civilian were inside the structure before the attack was launched, the report said. The third strike occurred inside a village, and again U.S. forces saw fighters run into a structure, but didn’t check if civilians were inside before striking it.

In some instances, forces didn’t follow guidance, and that “resulted in civilian casualties.” The report, however, didn’t recommend curtailing the use of the airstrikes.

The seven recommendations included improving coordination with non-governmental organizations, improving investigative skills, a review of U.S. rules governing airstrikes and better strategic communications.

“There are additional changes that I think that we’re going to clearly have to make to ensure that we do absolutely everything to make sure civilian casualties are eliminated, if possible, or certainly minimized in every situation,” said Navy Adm. Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on Thursday.

Pentagon leaders had wavered about whether to release the report’s findings.

Although the report has been complete and approved since June 8, U.S. military officials decided to not release it until late Friday. The military didn’t release a video of part of the incident, despite a promise from Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of U.S. Central Command, shortly after the incident.

KABUL – NATO to send up to 10,000 troops in Afghanistan ahead of election

June 20, 2009

China View, June 19, 2009

Afghan President Hamid Karzai (R) and NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer attend a joint press conference at the Presidential Palace in Kabul on June 17, 2009. (Xinhua Photo)

BEIJING, June 19 — The visiting NATO’s Secretary General Jaap de Hope Scheffer on Wednesday announced sending additional troops to Afghanistan ahead of the second presidential election after the fall of Taliban regime set for August 20 this year.

Soundbite:Scheffer, NATO’s Secretary General “We are bringing extra forces into Afghanistan for a protection role between 8,000 and 10,000, if you want to know the numbers of whom will come on temporary bases to Afghanistan.”

The outgoing NATO chief described Afghanistan’s coming election as“very important” for both Afghans and the international community, saying ISAF along with Afghan security forces would do its best to help Afghans have a transparent election in a peaceful environment.

Scheffer, during his last tour to Afghanistan as NATO Secretary General, once against repeated the military alliance commitment towards the post-Taliban Afghanistan.

“We would be alongside Afghan people and we will support Afghan people,” he stressed.

The NATO top diplomat also expressed concern over civilian casualties during military operations against anti-government militants, saying “we will do everything which is in our power to prevent loss of innocent life, loss of innocent civilian life.” He asserted that the international forces would do its best to minimize civilian casualties.

Repeated harming non-combatants has risen anti-U.S. forces resentment in Afghanistan while President Karzai and Afghan citizens at large have repeatedly asked the international forces to protect civilian life as it would not serve the U.S.-led war on terror.

Xinhua News Agency correspondents reporting from KABUL.

V.I. Kiernan: Marxist historian who opposed Imperialism

June 19, 2009

Bhupendra Yadav | Economic and Political Weekly,  June 13 – 19, 2009

Kiernan pictured at Cambridge in 1935 with the Indian communists Savitri and Somnath Chibber

Kiernan pictured at Cambridge in 1935 with the Indian communists Savitri and Somnath Chibber

Victor Gordon Kiernan (1913-2009), like many other Marxist scholars, stood resolutely with labour in its contest for hegemony with capital, sang paeans to the peasants and condemned imperialism. His unique niche among historians, however, is assured by two things. First, he pioneered a study of cultural imperialism. He was interested in knowing what imperialism meant for its victims and which attitudes shaped it in the metropolis. Second, Kiernan was among the very few who understood the language and idiom spoken in the south Asian subcontinent. He was among the earliest translators of the sublime Urdu poetry of Allama Iqbal and Faiz Ahmed Faiz.

View Full Article