World Media Watch for September 4, 2002

BUZZFLASH NOTE: Once again, these are the views and perspectives of the individual papers, not of BuzzFlash or Gloria. They offer BuzzFlash readers a way of reading what other nations are saying about the crisis, whether we like it or not. We repeat: This is not an endorsement of their viewpoints.

* * *

1//The St. Petersburg Times, Russia--OPINION: VLADIMIR PUTIN, THE MAN WHO WASN'T THERE (What's more, it's not uncommon for a single respondent to lambast the president's foreign and domestic policies, while giving him high marks for job performance on the whole. This can't be passed off as simple inconsistency or diversity of opinion. We are faced with something much more serious. The fact is that, for some time now, Russians have based their assessment of Putin on his job title rather than his performance or his person.... When you get right down to it, anyone could be the president of Russia. The less significant and colorful the better. If the rules of the game are not changed, the next president of Russia could just as well be a trained ape.)

2//Asia Times Online, Hong Kong--SOUTH ASIAN BLOWBACK (Though Afghanistan's strategic situation has improved, Pakistan's has deteriorated sharply. As that instability feeds into Afghanistan's instability and potentially back into Central Asia, our assessment for the future of South Asia and Central Asia must remain guarded because their stability also remains precarious.)

3//The Turkish Daily, Turkey--NEW PKK ORGANIZATIONS IN TURKEY, IRAQ, IRAN AND SYRIA TO UNIFY KURDS (Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) which changed its name to Kurdistan Freedom and Democracy Congress (KADEK) established four different new organizations in Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria in order to unify the Kurds in the region and to act more freely...it was reported on Sunday by Turkish press that PKK/KADEK which has terrorist militants especially on the mountainous areas of Northern Iraq, was continuing its activities under the PCDK name especially in Erbil and Duhok, cities of Northern Iraq which were under control of Mesoud Barzani's Kurdistan Democratic Party.)

4//Tempo Interactive, Indonesia--US PLAN TO BUILD DOCK IN NORTH SULAWESI ANNULLED (The United States' plan to build docking facilities in Bitung, North Sulawesi, has been annulled, as it violates Indonesia's policy on foreign affairs, according to Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Marty Natalegawa. On Saturday (31/8), Bitung local government and the US Embassy in Indonesia signed an MoU stating that the US would build docking facilities for commercial and military ships.)

5//Stratfor Strategic Forecasting, USA-- WHEN IS "NOT A BASE" STILL A BASE FOR U.S.? (Although recent reports of a new U.S. naval facility in Indonesia appear to be mainly rumor for now, Washington is working out agreements for U.S. forces to operate throughout Asia. A look at Washington's agreements with the Philippines counters the assertions by both sides that the United States is not looking to establish a permanent presence there... The next major U.S.-Philippine joint exercises will start in October and are tentatively slated to last nine months, extending the U.S. presence in the Philippines through at least June 2003.)

* * *

1//The St. Petersburg Times #800, Tuesday, September 3, 2002
http://www.sptimesrussia.com/archive/times/800/opinion/o_7276.htm

OPINION: VLADIMIR PUTIN, THE MAN WHO WASN'T THERE
Boris Kagarlitsky
Boris Kagarlitsky is a Moscow-based sociologist.

AFTER every new catastrophe in Russia, the sociologists announce, to great fanfare, that President Vladimir Putin's approval rating remains unchanged. Whatever the president does, and whatever the consequences of his actions, his rating holds at a steady 70 percent.

From the point of view of sociological theory, this is pure nonsense. But, in fact, the result depends entirely on the approach.

As sociologists themselves admit, Putin's approval rating varies between 13 percent and 72 percent, depending on how the pollsters formulate their questions.

What's more, it's not uncommon for a single respondent to lambast the president's foreign and domestic policies, while giving him high marks for job performance on the whole.

This can't be passed off as simple inconsistency or diversity of opinion. We are faced with something much more serious.

The fact is that, for some time now, Russians have based their assessment of Putin on his job title rather than his performance or his person.

Boris Yeltsin was loathed by many Russians, but he was, at least, a colorful and significant figure. You could love him or hate him.

Putin, on the other hand, is unprepossessing and faceless. He is little more than an appendage to his office. And the office can't remain unoccupied, after all.

As a result, when the pollsters ask if people approve of the president they are in effect asking if people believe that Russia needs a president at all.

(SNIP)

The very concept of a political alternative has disappeared during the past three years.

(SNIP)

The president arises in the bowels of the bureaucracy, the product of its secret laws. Elections have become nothing more than a gala before the inauguration.

(SNIP)

The president is no longer the leader of the country. He is the managers' manager, head of the bureaucratic horde. And the bureaucracy will always be with us. It cannot be changed, just like the roads and the fools, which, 150 years ago, Nikolai Gogol called the twin misfortunes of Russia.

Putin seems to understand his role and acts accordingly. He behaves like a conscientious department head, dutifully carrying out other people's orders. No one has given any instructions for three years now, but that's not important Putin's department has grown to the point where it's commensurate with Russia itself.

When you get right down to it, anyone could be the president of Russia. The less significant and colorful the better. If the rules of the game are not changed, the next president of Russia could just as well be a trained ape.

Unless Russians decide one fine day to try to change the rules of the game.

2//Asia Times Online Sep 4, 2002
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/DI04Df02.html

SOUTH ASIAN BLOWBACK
By Stephen Blank
Professor Stephen Blank, Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College, Carlisle Barracks
(The views expressed do not represent those of the US Army, Defense Department or the US Government)

The crisis generated by Pakistani-supported and Kashmir-based terrorists continues. Although both sides' rhetoric has cooled, India's and Pakistan's armies remain mobilized. Pakistan has had to concede that terrorist infiltration into Kashmir continues and that elements of al-Qaeda have also successfully escaped from Afghanistan into Pakistan.

Meanwhile, under pressure to reverse years of support for Islamic terrorists amid key components of Pakistani security policy, President General Pervez Musharraf is unilaterally assuming ever greater dictatorial powers. These developments offer significant and immediate strategic and political implications that must be faced.

Pakistan's policy of support for terrorism in Kashmir and India, and for the Taliban in Afghanistan, destabilized Central Asia and generated the attacks of September 11 and the subsequent attacks on India and Kashmir. Pakistan's policy has also unintentionally endangered its own stability. The foreign pressure to adopt a new policy and the resistance from key domestic constituencies who embraced and implemented the previous policy have forced Musharraf to assume ever more power even though he has failed to subdue the pro-terrorist elements in his armed forces and is rapidly forfeiting popular support. Not only is there danger of a war, with India, that Pakistan cannot win, but the al-Qaeda remnants and the Kashmiri terrorists have also opened what evidently is a permanent second front in Pakistan. That second front continually menaces the American war on terrorism and threatens to destabilize Pakistan.

(SNIP)

The foregoing observations highlight some vital strategic issues. Pakistan and Afghanistan are the strategic prizes in this campaign and their stability is extremely fragile and under constant risk. Despite American victories, the terrorists have survived and gained a relatively immune privileged sanctuary in Pakistan. Exploiting support from their supporters in Pakistan's military and intelligence institutions, they have put the stability and the security of Pakistan at risk, further destabilized Kashmir, and thereby opened up a relatively immune second front in the war on terrorism. Thus they retain the capability to gain at least occasional tactical initiatives while US forces are barred from effectively conducting operations in Pakistan and strategic-political considerations compel India to rely exclusively on coercive diplomacy against Islamabad. The ensuing strategic situation puts Pakistan and Afghanistan at continued, constant and high degrees of risk, and also virtually ensures that the war on terrorism will be a protracted multi-front war.

Undoubtedly the terrorists and their supporters count on prolonging the war to attack both the US military presence in South and Central Asia and the cohesion of the anti-terrorist alliance, particularly at its weakest points, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Today it appears that the victories over al-Qaeda and the Taliban, though impressive, are hardly decisive. They are important tactical victories but their conversion into lasting strategic settlements that decisively terminate this war is far from certain. Though Afghanistan's strategic situation has improved, Pakistan's has deteriorated sharply. As that instability feeds into Afghanistan's instability and potentially back into Central Asia, our assessment for the future of South Asia and Central Asia must remain guarded because their stability also remains precarious.

3//The Turkish Daily News 3 September 2002
http://www.TurkishDailyNews.com/FrTDN/latest/for.htm#f4

NEW PKK ORGANIZATIONS IN TURKEY, IRAQ, IRAN AND SYRIA TO UNIFY KURDS
Murat Unlu
Ankara - Turkish Daily News

Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) which changed its name to Kurdistan Freedom and Democracy Congress (KADEK) established four different new organizations in Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria in order to unify the Kurds in the region and to act more freely.

A source who did not want to be identified said that the PKK established four different organizations under the umbrella of KADEK in the region, and identified their names as Turkey Society and Civilization Party in Turkey, Kurdistan Democratic Solution Party in Northern Iraq, Kurdistan Freedom and Brotherhood Movement in Iran and Selahaddin Eyyubi Movement in Syria.

The same source said that the goal of these type of organizations was explained by KADEK as, "to organize the Kurds living in Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Syria and to unify them on the basis of 'Democratic Middle East Union'."

The source stated that Turkey Society and Civilization Party was acting in Turkey illegally in place of the terrorist organization PKK/KADEK and have five hundred terrorists in strategic mountainous areas of Turkey.

The source pointed out that the PKK/KADEK's strategy had changed after their congress in April and said: "After this congress the terrorist organization decided to carry out its activities in the regional countries: Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria, aiming to unify them afterwards and also that this decision demonstrates the pan-Kurdist structure of the organization.

On the other hand it was reported on Sunday by Turkish press that PKK/KADEK which has terrorist militants especially on the mountainous areas of Northern Iraq, was continuing its activities under the PCDK name especially in Erbil and Duhok, cities of Northern Iraq which were under control of Mesoud Barzani's Kurdistan Democratic Party.

(more)

4//Tempo Interactive 2 Sep 2002 21:13:54 WIB
http://www.tempo.co.id/news/2002/9/2/1,1,33,uk.html

US PLAN TO BUILD DOCK IN NORTH SULAWESI ANNULLED

TEMPO Interactive, Jakarta: The United States' plan to build docking facilities in Bitung, North Sulawesi, has been annulled, as it violates Indonesia's policy on foreign affairs, according to Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Marty Natalegawa.

On Saturday (31/8), Bitung local government and the US Embassy in Indonesia signed an MoU stating that the US would build docking facilities for commercial and military ships.

However Marty, who spoke with Tempo News Room by phone in Jakarta on Monday (2/9), said, "It is the central government that has the authority to make decisions dealing with foreign affairs."

So far, Marty said, he has not received any information about the signing of the agreement which was witnessed by the U.S. Naval Attache in Indonesia, Rick Marthines, Mayor of Bitung Milton Kansil and Bitung Legislative Council Speaker Jantje Takasihaeng.

(SNIP)

"Local government has no authority to make foreign affairs policy," he said.

Marty said the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was still trying to clarify the situation and would not take diplomatic action against the US Embassy.

"We will question the Bitung local government first," he said.

5//Stratfor Strategic Forecasting 3 September 2002
http://www.stratfor.com/fib/topStory_view.php?ID=206002

WHEN IS "NOT A BASE" STILL A BASE FOR U.S.?
Summary

Although recent reports of a new U.S. naval facility in Indonesia appear to be mainly rumor for now, Washington is working out agreements for U.S. forces to operate throughout Asia. A look at Washington's agreements with the Philippines counters the assertions by both sides that the United States is not looking to establish a permanent presence there.

Analysis

Indonesian and U.S. officials have denied a recent report by Indonesian news agency Antara that the two nations have signed a deal to build a U.S. naval dock in Bitung on the island of Sulawesi, Singapore's Straits Times reported. The paper said the facility in question is a civilian commercial venture and that although Washington did look at establishing a naval facility in Indonesia, the idea has been dropped.

While the Indonesian report may have been speculation, Washington is in fact making arrangements to temporarily utilize land, air and sea bases for U.S. forces throughout Asia -- from Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan to Sri Lanka and the Philippines -- to help in operations in Afghanistan and in the wider hunt for al Qaeda. Washington and the various host countries have denied repeatedly that any sort of permanent basing arrangements are being considered. But in the case of the Philippines, for example, it is clear that despite the absence of new facilities, U.S. forces will be there for a long time.

Washington is interested in furthering military ties with the Philippines due to the country's strategic location near both Southeast Asian potential terrorist and militant groups and China. Manila is not the only Asian target of renewed U.S. interest, however. Washington also is strengthening its military ties with Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand, among others.

(SNIP)

The next major U.S.-Philippine joint exercises will start in October and are tentatively slated to last nine months, extending the U.S. presence in the Philippines through at least June 2003. And Manila and Washington are still working out the final details of a Mutual Logistics Support Agreement (MLSA) that will allow the U.S. military to leave supplies in the Philippines and to use Philippine bases both in times of peace during military exercises and in times of international tensions or national emergencies.

The MLSA has come under intense scrutiny inside the Philippines, but the executive branch in Manila has decided to "fast track" the accord, leaving little room for congressional input, according to Philippine media. While the agreement will carry a stipulation that no "permanent" U.S. structures are built in the Philippines, it allows for increased U.S. military coordination with Manila.

(MORE)

* * *

© 2002, Gloria R. Lalumia
insight@zianet.com

Updated listings of Radio for Progressives on the internet at http://www.zianet.com/insightanalytical

* * *