World Media Watch for September 9, 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//Stratfor Strategic Forecasting, USA--U.S. FORCES NUMBERS MAY NOT MATCH WASHINGTON AMBITIONS (...with Afghan resistance on the rise, a withdrawal of the most elite U.S. units from Afghanistan would only worsen the military situation on the ground there. So far at least Washington appears committed to keeping the forces there. But as pressure grows on the military to deploy these forces elsewhere, Washington in the future could have to spread its resources dangerously thin, especially if faced with a war in Iraq and increasing instability in Afghanistan at the same time.)

2//Asia Times Online, Hong Kong--AFGHANISTAN BACK TO DOG BUSH (The same forces also argued that extending ISAF control around the country was the only effective way of asserting the central government's authority over the warlords. But Rumsfeld steadfastly opposed such an effort, insisting that it would interfere with Washington's efforts to track down and eliminate remnants of al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Those efforts have turned out to have been largely fruitless and reportedly are causing a drop in morale among US special forces and ground forces assigned to the task..."One has to wonder how this [Bush] administration thinks that it can invade and then stabilize Iraq with less international support than it had in Afghanistan, when the situation in Afghanistan itself is bordering on chaos 10 months after we went in," noted one Congressional staff member.)

3//Arabia.com, Saudia Arabia--IRAQ'S KURDS SIGN "TIMELY" ACCORD AMID US THREATS OF ATTACK (Under the deal, which was announced after two days of talks in the mountain town of Salahadin where the KDP has its headquarters, the leaders said they agreed to fix a date for "the reactivation of the unified parliament." Parliament is to meet at its seat in Arbil, the main town in Kurdish-held northern Iraq, on October 4, a KDP spokesman in London, Dilshad Miran, told AFP by telephone...The peace deal comes as both parties fear the hard-earned autonomy that the Kurds have won since the US and Britain started enforcing a no-fly zone 11 years ago could be lost in the looming confrontation between Washington and Baghdad.)

4//Tehran Times, Iran--KHARRAZI: U.S. ORGANIZING TERRORIST GROUPS, BANDITS AGAINST IRAN (Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi said here Sunday Iran has documents which show the U.S. is organizing bandits and terrorist groups against the Islamic Republic,IRNA reported. Kharrazi, speaking at a press conference, said Washington is supporting the terrorist groups to confront Iran, and at the same time accuses the Islamic Republic of helping the Al-Qaeda terror network. He pointed out to Iran's efforts to defuse tension in Afghanistan and voiced regret that Washington has taken up the 'accusatory language' against the Islamic Republic.)

5//Far Eastern Economic Review, Hong Kong--SEPTEMBER 11, ONE YEAR ON: NEW WARS TO FIGHT (The silence from Washington has allowed Central Asian leaders to intensify their crackdowns on secular parties, thereby giving underground Islamic extremist parties such as the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and Hizb-ut-Tahrir further justification in their calls for toppling leaders by force...The U.S., without a strategic vision for the region, failed to use its increased engagement to nudge Pakistan, Iran or the Central Asian republics towards greater political and economic reform. It may be a lost opportunity:..With no process in place for leadership change and weak or nonexistent institutions for negotiating a transfer of power peacefully, the danger of longer-term instability in Central Asia appears unavoidable.)

* * *

1//Stratfor Strategic Forecasting 6 September 2002
http://www.stratfor.com/fib/topStory_view.php?ID=206056

U.S. FORCES NUMBERS MAY NOT MATCH WASHINGTON AMBITIONS

Summary

Some U.S. officials reportedly are suggesting that Special Operations troops be withdrawn from Afghanistan and used elsewhere. Such a decision would only contribute to the destabilization there, but the real problem for Washington is that its military resources could be spread increasingly thin in the global war on terrorism, while its priorities do not seem to be clearly set and major war targets have not yet been achieved.

Analysis

The New York Times reported earlier this week that some senior U.S. officers in the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) recently suggested that their forces be freed from hunting Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. These officers believe bin Laden was killed during the bombing of the Tora Bora cave complex last year.

But there is still no proof that bin Laden is dead, and with Afghan resistance on the rise, a withdrawal of the most elite U.S. units from Afghanistan would only worsen the military situation on the ground there. So far at least Washington appears committed to keeping the forces there. But as pressure grows on the military to deploy these forces elsewhere, Washington in the future could have to spread its resources dangerously thin, especially if faced with a war in Iraq and increasing instability in Afghanistan at the same time.

(SNIP)

Regardless of whether bin Laden is dead or alive, Afghanistan is full of forces that are determined to push American and other foreign troops out of the country. Among these are al Qaeda elements, armed followers of other international radical Islamic groups, Taliban fighters and Pushtun tribal warriors from both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Their numbers are on the rise, with some non-Pushtun tribes also considering joining the anti-U.S. flight. On Sept. 2, for example, a new group calling itself the Secret Army of Mujahideen said it had carried out 21 separate attacks against the U.S. military this summer, The Times of India reports.

Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a powerful warlord who was the most feared mujahideen commander during the Soviet-Afghan war in the 1980s, has also renewed his calls for the withdrawal of foreign troops from the country, BBC reported Sept. 3. The Afghan turmoil continues to impact its neighbors, with sweeps by both U.S. and Pakistani troops continuing for Taliban and al Qaeda forces on both sides of the Afghan-Pakistani border.

The anti-U.S. forces in Afghanistan also seem to be uniting their forces and rapidly increasing their attacks, with Afghan sources confirming that the Taliban have sealed a partnership with militant group Hezb-i-Islami. Two car bombings in central Kabul and an assassination attempt on Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai Sept. 5 seem to be well-coordinated attacks.

In these conditions, a withdrawal of Special Operations troops would only worsen the military situation on the ground. Even if bin Laden is dead or out of the country, there are several top ranking leaders planning and executing an anti-U.S. resistance in Afghanistan.

(SNIP)

Without Special Operations forces, the U.S. command in Afghanistan would have to change its tactics. The American forces would have to conduct frequent and exhaustive sweeping operations involving larger amounts of troops. That would highly increase the exposure of the U.S. soldiers to enemy fire and ambushes, and the number of U.S. casualties could rise much faster.

The last example of a large operation of this kind was Operation Anaconda last February, when several U.S. soldiers were killed during the first day because of the ambush tactics of the mujahideen. The next day, the U.S. command had to start relying on air, missile and artillery bombing. No major Afghan operation has been conducted since then. A withdrawal of Special Operations troops could make the U.S. command in Afghanistan resort to large operations again.

But the U.S. government is faced with a dilemma given that it also needs Special Operations forces elsewhere. In plans to attack Iraq, Washington would have to deploy the most elite Special Operations units to destroy suspected Iraqi launching pads for missiles, long-range artillery batteries, and important command and control centers and communication facilities. Such forces would also have to secure control over suspected facilities for making weapons of mass destruction. These units would also likely to be used to hunt down Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and his top lieutenants.

On the al Qaeda front, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld recently said he wants to use Special Operations troops anywhere in the world where U.S. and allied intelligence will be able to identify the presence of al Qaeda or other terrorist rings. Such a mission, even if not coupled with an Iraq war, would probably require at least 10 times the number of Special Operations troops the United States has now.

Of the nearly 46,000 personnel in Special Operations forces, only between 7,000 and 8,000 of them belong to combat units such as Army Rangers, Delta Force, Navy Seals and Air Force Special Operations units. Furthermore, of this group only about 1,000 are designated for counterterrorism missions and constitute front-line teams fully suited to fighting al Qaeda, according to the officers interviewed by The New York Times.

This is one example of Washington running short of key resources as the war spreads globally. It takes years to train Special Operations soldiers, and their current numbers are not enough to accomplish all the missions Washington may soon want. As with logistics and other issues, the problem with the shortage of these troops likely will interfere with the Bush administration's goal to achieve a major breakthrough in its global war efforts in near future.

2//Asia Times Online September 7, 2002
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/DI07Ag01.html

AFGHANISTAN BACK TO DOG BUSH
By Jim Lobe
(Inter Press Service)

WASHINGTON - Thursday's foiled assassination attempt against Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai and blasts in the capital Kabul that reportedly killed at least 10 people are certain to bring the country back into the limelight just when President George W Bush wants to focus world attention on the alleged necessity of ousting Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

(SNIP)

The increasingly high-profile attacks in Afghanistan come as the Pentagon has reportedly reconsidered its opposition to expanding the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) beyond Kabul and into other major cities around the country, including Kandahar.

For most of the past eight months, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld repeatedly rejected appeals from Karzai, European allies, a number of US lawmakers and relief groups operating in Afghanistan to enlarge the 5,000-man ISAF and extend its reach to help stabilize regions where tensions between rival ethnic militias and warlords occasionally erupt into violence.

The same forces also argued that extending ISAF control around the country was the only effective way of asserting the central government's authority over the warlords. But Rumsfeld steadfastly opposed such an effort, insisting that it would interfere with Washington's efforts to track down and eliminate remnants of al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

Those efforts have turned out to have been largely fruitless and reportedly are causing a drop in morale among US special forces and ground forces assigned to the task.

Instead, the Pentagon has concentrated on equipping and training a new, multi-ethnic Afghan army, a process that most observers believe will take years. It pledged to intervene through its air power and special forces personnel, who have been attached to key warlords around the country since last November to prevent local conflicts from getting out of hand.

The latter strategy is increasingly seen in the US and in Afghanistan as counter-productive, especially in Pashtun areas that have borne the brunt of deadly US air and commando strikes against civilians that resulted for the most part from mistaken intelligence or manipulation by rival warlords.

More recently, the disclosure that mainly Uzbek forces under the control of Northern Alliance commander General Abdurrashid Dostum killed hundreds of mainly Pashtun and Pakistani prisoners after the fall of Mazar-e-Sharif and Kunduz last November by sealing them in containers has further inflamed Pashtun opinion against the US, whose denials of any knowledge of the killings have met a skeptical, at best, reception. Dostum has received strong US backing.

Meanwhile, international reconstruction aid has fallen far below targets agreed to by donors last January and has been overwhelmed by the return of as many as 1.5 million refugees from neighboring Pakistan and Iran. Many of the returnees are camped on the dusty outskirts of Kabul and other cities without access to basic services, according to relief agencies.

"One has to wonder how this [Bush] administration thinks that it can invade and then stabilize Iraq with less international support than it had in Afghanistan, when the situation in Afghanistan itself is bordering on chaos 10 months after we went in," noted one Congressional staff member.

3//Arabia.com September 08, 2002, 08:11 PM
http://www.arabia.com/afp/news/mideast/article/english/0,10846,283867,00.html

IRAQ'S KURDS SIGN "TIMELY" ACCORD AMID US THREATS OF ATTACK

ARBIL, Iraq (AFP) - The heads of the two main Kurdish factions in northern Iraq signed an accord to end a longstanding rivalry, as US President George W. Bush looks to topple Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.

Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) leader Massoud Barzani and Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) chief Jalal Talabani told reporters they reached an agreement to resolve any lingering disputes from a 1998 US-brokered peace deal which sought to end almost five years of armed conflict between the factions.

The new accord would reactivate the Kurdish parliament, which is split evenly between the KDP and PUK, that was elected in 1992 but has not convened with all its members since 1996 when fighting between the sides reached its peak, with the PUK briefly aligning itself with Iran and the KDP with Baghdad.

Under the deal, which was announced after two days of talks in the mountain town of Salahadin where the KDP has its headquarters, the leaders said they agreed to fix a date for "the reactivation of the unified parliament."

Parliament is to meet at its seat in Arbil, the main town in Kurdish-held northern Iraq, on October 4, a KDP spokesman in London, Dilshad Miran, told AFP by telephone.

(SNIP)

The agreement "puts an end to all the differences and settles all the questions" remaining from the US-brokered peace accord signed between the rival groups in Washington in September 1998, the statement said.

(SNIP)

Their US-brokered peace process had been stalled despite the 1998 Washington accord that aimed at halting a conflict that cost more than 3,000 lives, fueled by a power struggle and dispute over tax revenues.

Their reconciliation came as Washington has been stepping up threats to embark on military action to oust Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

The United States is moving forward with its plans but the breakaway Iraqi Kurds will not seek independence if the Baghdad regime is ousted, Talabani said on his return from talks in Washington last month with US officials and a wide array of Iraqi opposition groups.

(SNIP)

The peace deal comes as both parties fear the hard-earned autonomy that the Kurds have won since the US and Britain started enforcing a no-fly zone 11 years ago could be lost in the looming confrontation between Washington and Baghdad.

The KDP controls northeastern Kurdistan along the border with Turkey, while the PUK holds the enclave's southeastern region near Iran. The two factions set up their own "governments" in 1996.

4//Tehran Times September 9, 2002
http://www.tehrantimes.com/Description.asp?Da=9/9/02&Cat=2&Num=030

KHARRAZI: U.S. ORGANIZING TERRORIST GROUPS, BANDITS AGAINST IRAN

Tehran -- Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi said here Sunday Iran has documents which show the U.S. is organizing bandits and terrorist groups against the Islamic Republic,IRNA reported.

Kharrazi, speaking at a press conference, said Washington is supporting the terrorist groups to confront Iran, and at the same time accuses the Islamic Republic of helping the Al-Qaeda terror network.

He pointed out to Iran's efforts to defuse tension in Afghanistan and voiced regret that Washington has taken up the 'accusatory language' against the Islamic Republic.

"It is regrettable to see that the U.S. has branded Iran as part of the axis of evil, while Tehran's efforts and its positive role in Afghan developments are a point of praise," the Iranian foreign minister said.

Kharrazi said the international community never welcomed U.S. branding Iran as part of the axis of evil, and stressed that the Islamic Republic never deserves to be juxtaposed with Iraq.

"We have been accused of supporting the Al-Qaeda while we had much earlier than the U.S. condemned the terror network," he said.

The Iranian foreign minister said such U.S. behavior was a token of Washington's insincerity in dealing with world issues, and reiterated that the Islamic Republic had played its share to fight terrorism in Afghanistan by handing over Al-Qaeda suspects to their respective countries.

"Today, we announce once again that whoever has any intelligence on the network, can forward it to us and we will immediately follow up the matter," he said.

(SNIP)

"The U.S. has never sought for a fundamental solution to uproot terrorism in Afghanistan," he said. " Otherwise, how is it possible that terrorism is rooted out in Afghanistan, while its economic woes and the problem of opium poppy cultivation still remain unsolved?" He pointed out Iran's efforts to promote security in Afghanistan, and recalled Tehran's efforts to encourage Afghan groups to cooperate with the interim government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

Kharrazi said Iran has already started projects to reconstruct Afghanistan, stressing that the Islamic Republic is one step ahead of other nations in their pledges to rebuild the war-torn country.

The Iranian foreign minister said the performance of the U.S. government in uprooting terrorism had never been 'positive'.

He criticized the White House for taking up a bullying approach and resorting to violence after September 11 attacks on U.S. landmarks. Kharrazi also regretted that Washington had been trying to propagate anti-Islamic thoughts in the aftermath of the attacks

(MORE)

5//Far Eastern Economic Review Issue cover-dated September 12, 2002
http://www.feer.com/articles/2002/0209_12/p014region.html

SEPTEMBER 11, ONE YEAR ON
New Wars to Fight
By Ahmed Rashid/WASHINGTON

One year after the September 11 attacks, domestic conditions in most of Central and South Asia continue to make the region a fertile breeding ground for terrorists. America's mission now depends more on building better governments than destroying Al Qaeda

(SNIP)

Across the Afghan border, in Pakistan a promised transition to democracy has been stifled by the self-appointed president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf. The military ruler faces increasing opposition as he tries to pre-arrange the outcome of general elections in October. And while tensions with India over Kashmir have abated, the threat of war remains. Add to that Al Qaeda cells and militant groups sowing instability inside the country, economic recession and division between secular democratic parties and Islamic groups. Pakistan's army, with its go-it-alone strategy that ignores civil society and political parties, is unlikely to be able to maintain political equilibrium.

An unstable Pakistan torn apart by political tensions or war with India could give Islamic militants the opportunity they want to establish an Islamic state. Likewise, in the five former Soviet republics of Central Asia, increasing oppression and rising discord, in an era of seething economic malaise and an absence of democratic alternatives, are strengthening Islamic militant groups.

In these five Central Asian republics, whose leaders still hold Soviet-style elections where the ruler is the only candidate and the vote is rigged, the question of legitimacy has never been more prominent. Since last October, Uzbekistan, Kirgyzstan and Tajikistan have hosted Western military forces for the war in Afghanistan. They have also used their new-found importance to the West as a convenient excuse to step up repression of their political opponents.

The silence from Washington has allowed Central Asian leaders to intensify their crackdowns on secular parties, thereby giving underground Islamic extremist parties such as the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and Hizb-ut-Tahrir further justification in their calls for toppling leaders by force.

Although Uzbekistan and Kirgyzstan signed strategic treaties this year with the U.S. that clearly stipulated the need for political and economic reform, President George W. Bush's administration has declined to force the matter by making U.S. financial aid to these countries conditional on reform.

Uzbek President Islam Karimov even refused to allow the Uzbek media to publish the text of his country's treaty. In it, Uzbekistan pledged to "intensify the democratic transformation of society politically and economically," a promise that Karimov does not seem to want his people to know about.

The U.S., without a strategic vision for the region, failed to use its increased engagement to nudge Pakistan, Iran or the Central Asian republics towards greater political and economic reform. It may be a lost opportunity: Attention in Washington has shifted to the debate on toppling the regime of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

Planning an attack on Iraq has deepened the rift between the U.S. Defence Department and the State Department. Senior U.S. diplomats say that because the Pentagon dominates policymaking, its refusal to endanger the future of U.S. military bases in Central Asia has limited what Washington can do to pressure the regimes to carry out reforms.

Ironically, the Western military presence due to the war has revived hopes for greater democracy among Central Asia's secular political forces, both at home and among exiled politicians. For the first time in a decade, presidents Nursultan Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan and Askar Akayev of Kirgyzstan face opposition political movements, street protests and open calls for their resignations.

"The opposition movements are convinced, despite any real evidence, that they have Washington's attention for the first time in a decade," says Anthony Richter, director of the Soros Foundation in New York.

(SNIP)

Yet as long as Washington refuses to use its new-found clout in the region, political crises in several countries are inevitable in the months ahead, starting with Kirgyzstan. Since May, at least five people have been killed by police during violent street protests. Opposition parties have united in calling for Akayev's resignation, and are planning countrywide protests later this month.

With no process in place for leadership change and weak or nonexistent institutions for negotiating a transfer of power peacefully, the danger of longer-term instability in Central Asia appears unavoidable.

(MORE)

* * *

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

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

* * *