Xenophobia and stability in Crimea

At Maidan, Halya Coynash writes about attempts by propagandists who derive their support in the Russian federation to aggravate inter-ethnic tension in Ukraine's Crimea, and defends moves to counter this activity:

...when highly-placed politicians of a neighbouring country in no way conceal their position regarding Ukraine’s sovereign rights, and not only did not hide, but openly demonstrated their attitude to the territorial integrity of another neighbour just a few months ago, then surely it is not unreasonable to expect some flickering instinct for self-preservation?

Chavez bars entry to Walesa

Venezuela's Hugo Chavez has said that Polish Solidarity union leader and Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Lech Walesa will be denied entry to Venezuela if he attempts to lend his support to opposition groups. Via VHeadline.com:

Calling Walesa an "Idol with feet made of mud," President Chavez went on national television to admonish the Foreign Minister:  "Nicolas, beware! Evaluate and give me recommendations on how to react!" The text of the President's speech was also made available in a transcript of the broadcast circulated by the Venezuelan Ministry of Communication & Information (Minci), which is generally seen as the government's mouthpiece.

• According to the Minci text Chavez said "We are obliged to demand respect for Venezuela's dignity. He (Walesa) can say whatever he wants abroad, but NOT in here in Venezuela."  Chavez also claimed that the former Polish President is part of an international "plot that aims to generate a violent path" to overthrow his revolutionary government.

Wilders in Moscow

Dutch MP Geert Wilders sings the praises of Western democracy in the studios of Russia Today. Watch out for some odd nuances here and there.

Lex Nokia

Finland's so-called "Lex Nokia", which would allow Finnish companies, including the mobile phone maker Nokia, to spy  on the log data of their employees' email messages, is causing quite a stir in the country. A report on FinRosForum, citing a Russian publication, even suggests that if Nokia does not get its way and the act is not passed, the company may move to Russia. However, it now looks as though the change to the law will go through after all.

The more things change...

Commenting on US Vice-President Biden's Munich Declaration, George Friedman at Stratfor remarks on the striking continuity between the foreign policy of George Bush and that of Barack Obama, and suggests that the course of historical events may be a decisive factor:

Willingness to talk is important, but what is said is much more important. Obama’s first foray into foreign policy via Biden indicates that, generally speaking, he understands the constraints and pressures that drive American foreign policy, and he understands the limits of presidential power. Atmospherics aside, Biden’s positions — as opposed to his rhetoric — were strikingly similar to Cheney’s foreign policy positions.

We argued long ago that presidents don’t make history, but that history makes presidents. We see Biden’s speech as a classic example of this principle.

Anti-Semitism in Sweden and Britain

Z-Word Blog has posts (here and here) on recent manifestations of anti-Semitism in Sweden, where public opinion and government policy appear to be almost universally hostile to Israel, and the UK, where the hostility is even breaking out in senior diplomatic circles.

Stability in the North Caucasus

On WikiLeaks, an interesting study (pdf) by CRS Russian and Eurasian affairs specialist Jim Nichol entitled Stability in Russia’s Chechnya and Other Regions of the North Caucasus: Recent Developments. Among other things, the paper  [published in August 2008] notes that

The Bush Administration generally has supported the Russian government’s efforts to combat terrorism in the North Caucasus. However, the Administration and Congress also have continued to raise concerns about the wide scope of human rights abuses committed by the Russian government in the North Caucasus. The Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2008 (P.L.110-161) included $8 million for humanitarian, conflict mitigation, human rights, civil society, and relief and recovery assistance for Chechnya, Ingushetia, Dagestan, and North Ossetia. The Act also repeats language used for several years that directs that 60% of the assistance allocated to Russia will be withheld (excluding medical, human trafficking, and Comprehensive Threat Reduction aid) until the President certifies that Russia is facilitating full access to Chechnya for international non-governmental organizations providing humanitarian relief to displaced persons.

Biden's Munich Declaration

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Vice President
______________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release February 7, 2009
REMARKS BY VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN
AT 45TH MUNICH CONFERENCE ON SECURITY POLICY
Hotel Bayerischer Hof
Munich, Germany
12:49 P.M. (Local)

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Mr. Ambassador, thank you very much. Ladies and gentleman, it's an honor to be back in Munich. I've attended this conference many times as a United States senator, and three of my congressional colleagues are here with me today. But I am honored to be back here, as well, as the Vice President of the United States, representing a new administration and, hopefully, a new day.
Today I am especially honored to represent this administration. And we've gone through the oldest of our traditions: that is the peaceful transfer of power. And now, I bring the regrets of two friends who are usually here. But because we are still grappling with legislation relating to our so-called stimulus package to deal with our economic issues -- both Senators John McCain and John Kerry were hoping to join my three House colleagues here today, they are usually here, but they send their regrets.
I come to Europe on behalf of a new administration, and an administration that's determined to set a new tone not only in Washington, but in America's relations around the world. That new tone is rooted in a strong bipartisanship to meet these common challenges. And we recognize that these challenges, the need to meet them, is not an opportunity -- not a luxury, but it's an absolute necessity. While every new beginning is a moment of hope, this moment -- for America and the countries represented in this room -- it is fraught with some considerable concern and peril.
In this moment, our obligation to our fellow citizens is to -- in our view -- put aside the petty and political notion that -- to reject the zero sum mentalities and rigid ideologies, and to listen to and learn from one another, and to work together for a common prosperity and security of all of us assembled in this room. That's what, in our view, this moment demands. And that's what this new administration is determined to do.
For 45 years, this conference has brought together Americans and Europeans -- and, in recent years, leaders from beyond the Transatlantic community -- to think through matters of our physical security. But this year, more than ever before, we know that our physical security and our economic security are indivisible. We are all confronting a serious threat to our economic security that could further spread instability and erode the progress we've made in improving the lives of all our citizens.
In the United States -- like many of you -- we're taking aggressive action to stabilize our financial systems, to jumpstart our economy, and, hopefully, lay a new foundation for growth in the 21st century. Working with the Congress, we'll make strategic investments that create and save we believe 3 to 4 million jobs, and in the process, boost our competitiveness in the long run.
Our plan includes doubling the production of alternative energy over the next three years; computerizing our citizens' medical records to drive down cost; equipping tens of thousands of our schools and colleges with 21st century classrooms, laboratories and libraries; expanding the broadband across America; and investing once again in science, research, technology -- all the things that spur innovation. We're looking -- we're also working to stabilize our financial institutions by injecting considerable amounts of capital, purchasing some assets and guaranteeing others. These remedies are going to have an impact, as you all know, far beyond our shores, just as the measures all of you are taking will be felt beyond your borders, as well.
And because of that, to the greatest extent possible, we're going to have to cooperate to make sure that our actions are complementary, and to do our utmost to combat this global crisis. The United States is trying to do its part. And President Obama looks forward to taking our message to the G20 meeting in London in April.
And even as we grapple with an economic crisis, we're also -- have to contend with a war in Afghanistan now in its eighth year, and a war in Iraq well into its sixth year. And we have to recognize, as mentioned by both the Chancellor and President Sarkozy earlier today, that there are other forces that are shaping this new century: The spread of weapons of mass destruction and dangerous diseases, endemic disease; a growing gap between the rich and poor; ethnic animosity in failed states; and a rapidly warming planet and uncertain supplies of energy, food, water. The challenges to freedom and security from radical fundamentalism must be added to that list, as well.
In meeting these challenges, the United States will be guided by this principle –- and the principle is: There is no conflict between our security and our ideals. We believe they are mutually reinforcing.
The force of arms won our independence, and throughout our history the force of arms has protected our freedom. That will not change. But the very moment we declared our war of independence, at that moment we laid out to the world the values behind our revolution and the conviction that our policies must be informed, as we said at the time, by a "decent respect for the opinions of mankind."
Our Founders understood then, and the United States believes now, that the example of our power must be matched by the power of our example. And that is why our administration rejects a false choice between our safety and our ideals. America will vigorously defend our security and our values, and in doing so we believe we’ll all be more secure.
As hard as we try, I know -- I know -- that we’re likely to fall short of our ideals in the future, just as we have in the past. But I commit to you, this administration will strive every day -- every day -- to honor the values that animate American democracy and, I might add, that bind us to all of you in this room.
America will not torture. We will uphold the rights of those who we bring to justice. And we will close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay.
But tough choices lie ahead. As we seek a lasting framework for our common struggle against extremism, we’ll have
to work cooperatively with nations around the world -- and we’ll need your help. We’ll need your help. For example, we will ask others to take responsibility for some of those now in Guantanamo, as we determine to close it. Our security is shared. And so, too, I respectfully suggest, is our responsibility to defend it.
That’s the basis upon which we want to build a new approach to the challenges of this century. America will do more, but America will -- that’s the good news. The bad news is America will ask for more from our partners, as well.
Here’s what we’ll do, and what we hope our partners will consider. First, we’ll work in a partnership whenever we can, and alone only when we must. The threats we face have no respect for borders. No single country, no matter how powerful, can best meet these threats alone. We believe international alliances and organizations do not diminish America's power -- we believe they help advance our collective security, economic interests and our values.
So we’ll engage. We’ll listen. We’ll consult. America needs the world, just as I believe the world needs America. But we say to our friends that the alliances, treaties and international organizations we build must be credible and they must be effective. That requires a common commitment not only to listen and live by the rules, but to enforce the rules when they are, in fact, clearly violated.
Such a bargain is the bargain we seek. Such a bargain can be at the heart of our collective efforts to convince Iran, for example, to forego the development of nuclear weapons. The Iranian people are a great people; the Persian civilization is a great civilization. But Iran has acted in ways that are not conducive to peace in the region or to the prosperity of its own people. Its illicit nuclear program is but one of those manifestations.
Our administration is reviewing our policy toward Iran, but this much is clear: We will be willing to talk. We’ll be willing to talk to Iran and to offer a very clear choice: Continue down the current course and there will be continued pressure and isolation; abandon the illicit nuclear program and your support for terrorism, and there will be meaningful incentives.
Second, we’ll strive to act preventively, not preemptively, to avoid whenever possible, or wherever possible the choice of last resort between the risks of war and the dangers of inaction. We’ll draw upon all the elements of our power -- military and diplomatic, intelligence and law enforcement, economic and cultural -- to stop crises from occurring before they are in front of us. In short, we're going to attempt to recapture the totality of America's strength, starting with diplomacy.
On his second full day in office, President Obama, went to our State Department, where he stressed the centrality of diplomacy in our national security. The commitment can be seen in his appointments, starting with the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. It can be seen in the President's decision to name two of America's most tenacious diplomats -- Senator George Mitchell and Ambassador Richard Holbrooke -- to contend with two of the world's most urgent and vexing and complex challenges: the need for a secure, just, and lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians, and the imperative of stopping the mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan from providing a haven for terrorists.
In both these efforts, America seeks your partnership.
Senator Mitchell just completed his first trip to the Middle East. Above all, he went to listen. In the near term, we must consolidate the cease-fire in Gaza by working with Egypt and others to stop smuggling, and developing an international relief and reconstruction effort that strengthens the Palestinian Authority, and not Hamas. Neither of these goals can be accomplished without close collaboration among the United States, Europe, and our Arab partners.
Then, we must lay the foundation for a broader peacemaking effort. In the past -- well, look at it this way -- it's long time passed for us to secure a just, two-state solution. We will work to achieve it. And we'll work to defeat extremists who perpetuate the conflict. And in building on positive elements of the Arab Peace Initiative put forward by Saudi Arabia, we'll work toward a broader regional peace between Israel and its Arab neighbors, and we'll responsibly draw down our forces that are in Iraq in the process.
The United States will continue to work for a stable Afghanistan that's not a haven for terrorists. We look forward -- we look forward to sharing that commitment with the
government and the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan, and with all of our allies and partners, because a deteriorating situation in the region poses a security threat not just to the United States, but I would suggest somewhat presumptuously, to every one of you assembled in this room.
President Obama has ordered a strategic review of our policy in Afghanistan and Pakistan to make sure that our goals are clear, and that they are achievable. As we undertake that review, we seek ideas and input from you and all of our partners. And we genuinely seek those ideas. I've already had bilateral meetings. I'll have the opportunity to meet with the President of France and others this afternoon. I had an opportunity to meet with the Chancellor this morning. We are sincere in seeking your counsel.
As we undertake this review, there's a lot at stake. The result must be a comprehensive strategy for which we all take responsibility -- that brings together our civilian and military resources, that prevents terrorists a safe haven, that helps the Afghan people develop the capacity to secure their own future. But no strategy for Afghanistan, in my humble opinion, can succeed without Pakistan. We must all strengthen our cooperation with the people and government of Pakistan, help them stabilize their Tribal Areas, promote economic development and opportunity throughout their country. In the case of my government, we feel it's urgent to move from a relationship that was transactional to one that is based upon a long-term relationship.
Thirdly, America will extend a hand to those who, as the President said, will unclench their fist. The United States of America does not believe, our administration does not believe, in a clash of civilizations; there is nothing inevitable about that. We do see a shared struggle against extremism -- and we'll do everything in our collective power to help the forces of tolerance prevail.
In the Muslim world, a small -- and I believe a very small -- number of violent extremists are beyond the call of reason. We will, and we must, defeat them. But hundreds of millions of hearts and minds in the Muslim world share the values we hold dearly. We must reach them. President Obama has made clear that he will seek a new way forward based on mutual interest and mutual respect. It was not an accident that he gave his very
first interview as President of the United States to Al Arabiya. That was not an accident.
To meet the challenges of this new century, defense and diplomacy are necessary. But quite frankly, ladies and gentlemen, they are not sufficient. We also need to wield development and democracy, two of the most powerful weapons in our collective arsenals. Poor societies and dysfunctional states, as you know as well as I do, can become breeding grounds for extremism, conflict and disease. Non-democratic nations frustrate the rightful aspirations of their citizens and fuel resentment.
Our administration has set an ambitious goal to increase foreign assistance, to cut extreme poverty in half by 2015, to help eliminate the global educational deficit, and to cancel the debt of the world's poorest countries; to launch a new Green Revolution that produces sustainable supplies of food, and to advance democracy not through the imposition of force from the outside, but by working with moderates in government and civil society to build those institutions that will protect that freedom -– quite frankly, the only thing that will guarantee that freedom.
We also are determined to build a sustainable future for our planet. We are prepared to once again begin to lead by example. America will act aggressively against climate change and in pursuit of energy security with like-minded nations.
Our administration's economic stimulus package, for example, includes long-term investments in renewable energy. And we believe that’s merely a down payment. The President has directed our Environmental Protection Agency to review how we regulate emissions, start a process to raise fuel efficiency, appoint a climate envoy -- and all in his first week in office, to demonstrate his commitment.
As America renews our emphasis on diplomacy, development and democracy, and preserving our planet, we will ask our allies to rethink some of their own approaches -- including their willingness to use force when all else fails.
When it comes to radical groups that use terror as a tool, radical states who harbor extremists, undermine peace and seek or spread weapons of mass destruction, and regimes that systematically kill or ethnically cleanse their own people, we
must stand united and use every means at our disposal to end the threat that they pose.
None of us can deny or escape the new threats of the 21st century. Nor can we escape the responsibility to meet them.
And we are not unmindful in the United States how difficult it is to communicate these notions to our public who don’t want to hear much of what needs to be said.
Two months from now, the members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization will gather to celebrate the 60th year of this Alliance. This Alliance has been the cornerstone of our common security since the end of World War II. It has anchored the United States in Europe and helped forge a Europe whole and free. Together we made a pact, a pact to safeguard the freedom of our people founded on the principles and the documents referring to democracy, individual liberty, and the rule of law. We made a commitment to cooperate, to consult, to act with resolve when the principles we defended are challenged.
There is much to celebrate. But we there’s much more to be done. We must recommit our shared security and renew NATO, so that its success in the 20th century is matched in the 21st century.
NATO's core purpose remains the collective defense of its members. But faced with new threats, new realities, we need a new resolve to meet them and new capabilities to succeed. Our Alliance must be better equipped to help stop the spread of the world's most dangerous weapons, to tackle terrorism and cyber-security, to expand the writ of energy security, and to act in and out of area more effectively. We continue to develop -- we will continue to develop missile defense to counter the growing Iranian capability, provided the technology is proven and it is cost-effective. We'll do so in consultation with you, our NATO allies, and with Russia.
As we embark on this renewal project -- as we like to think of it -- the United States, like other allies, would warmly welcome, and we do warmly welcome, the decision by France to fully cooperate in NATO structures. That's the main reason the President got our speech. (Laughter.) You were supposed to say nicer things about me when you got the speech, Mr. President. (Laugher.) That's a joke. (Laughter.)
In a recent discussion with President Sarkozy, President Obama underscored his strong support for France's full participation in NATO, should France wish it. France is a founding member of NATO and a major contributor to its operation. We would expect France's new responsibilities to reflect the significance of its contributions throughout NATO's history, and to strengthen the European role within the Alliance.
We also support the further strengthening of European defense, an increased role for the European Union in preserving peace and security, a fundamentally stronger NATO-EU partnership, and a deeper cooperation with countries outside the Alliance who share our common goals and principles.
The United States rejects the notion that NATO's gain is Russia's loss, or that Russia's strength is NATO's weakness. The last few years have seen a dangerous drift in relations between Russia and the members of our Alliance. It is time -- to paraphrase President Obama -- it's time to press the reset button and to revisit the many areas where we can and should be working together with Russia.
Our Russian colleagues long ago warned about the rising threat of the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Today, NATO and Russia can, and should, cooperate to defeat this common enemy. We can and should cooperate to secure loose nuclear weapons and materials to prevent their spread, to renew the verification procedures in the START Treaty, and then go beyond existing treaties to negotiate deeper cuts in both our arsenals. The United States and Russia have a special obligation to lead the international effort to reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world.
We will not agree with Russia on everything. For example, the United States will not -- will not recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent states. We will not recognize any nation having a sphere of influence. It will remain our view that sovereign states have the right to make their own decisions and choose their own alliances. But the United States and Russia can disagree and still work together where our interests coincide. And they coincide in many places.
This conference started in the shadow of the Cold War. Now it takes place in a new century with new threats. As one great poet, an Irish poet, once wrote about another
circumstance, he said: "All is changed, changed utterly: a terrible beauty has been born." Well, all changed, changed utterly. And we must change, too, while remaining true to the principles upon which this Alliance was founded. And we must have the common courage and commitment of those who came before us to work together, to build together, to stand together. In sharing ideals and searching for partners in a more complex world, America and Europeans still look to one another before they look to anyone else. Our partnership has benefitted us all. It's time -- it's time to renew it. And President Obama and I look forward to doing just that.
Thank you for your indulgence. (Applause.)

Biden: no "sphere of influence" for Russia

Speaking at the 45th Munich Security Conference, U.S. Vice President Joseph Biden has rejected the notion of a "sphere of influence" for Russia. In addition, he announced no review of the European missile defence plan, stating that the U.S. will continue to pursue the defence system, provided it is not too costly and can be shown to be effective against the threat from Iran. Furthermore, the IHT reports Biden as saying that the U.S. will not recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent:

"...We will not recognize a sphere of influence. It will remain our view that sovereign states have the right to make their own decisions and choose their own alliances."

The report notes that

...any chance for a rapprochement between Washington and Russia at this conference all but evaporated, foreign policy experts said, after officials of the Obama administration concluded that Russia had pressed Kyrgyzstan, a former Soviet Republic, to close the U.S. military base in that country. The base is crucial to the U.S.-led fight in Afghanistan that Obama has identified as his central national security objective. Obama plans to deploy as many as 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan over the next two years; shaky overland supply routes through Pakistan would make it difficult for the United States to adjust to the loss of the base, in Manas, Kyrgyzstan.

Lines being drawn between Moscow and Brussels

Reports from Moscow indicate  that the beginnings of a gradually increasing confrontation between Moscow and Brussels are now underway. The political murders in Russia, the gas crisis and the Russia's invasion of Georgia have all figured in EC President Barroso's discussions with President Medvedev, with EU representatives also making it plain to the Moscow regime that its thuggish conduct is becoming more and more unacceptable.

Two Poems

By Pia Tafdrup

(my tr.)

THE WHEEL

The west-facing panes of the stable
gather the sun’s rays
one mild evening
         of swallows.
Round and round they chase
                      in a ring
about the tree in the middle of the courtyard.
Round and round,
          my father
holds my head tightly
with both hands, no answer,
                    forces me
to stare in
at the stone wing’s sharply illuminated windows.
A needle pricks a hole,
the swallows cry white.
– “Look!”               
says my father.
– “Look, the sun!”                       
It isn’t the courtyard
going up in flames but me
being dazzled by the light in the glass.
Suddenly I’m certain:
My father doesn’t know
                  what he’s doing.
Against the wheel ―
my head rests,
         the horses
have broken loose.
Long-legged flight
            towards a black horizon.

_______________

PRETTY ROSI

My father doesn’t remember how well-read
                                he is.
In his bookcase I spot
Rilke’s Briefe an einen jungen Dichter.
Like the first peal of a heavily
floating bell
         one bronze-still morning,
Germany presents itself...
I wanted to visit the girl who was my pen friend
in spite of protests.
My mother couldn’t bear
                   the sound
of the German language ―
she heard Hitler
          in every word.
During the war like my mother my father  was                               
forced
to flee to Sweden,
but on his shelves in the bookcase
there were German books.
DA stieg ein Baum. O reine Übersteigung!
O Orpheus singt! O hoher Baum im Ohr!
− Remember,
it doesn’t matter which family you visit,
said my mother
        and sleepless sent
her sixteen year old daughter away,
they all – in different ways
took part in the war.
I understood her pain,
                 but wanted to overcome it.
In “my” family, with Rosi,
                     pretty Rosi,
needles could not be used.
Rosi’s father
couldn't bear the sight
                  of needles ―
he saw Hitler
       in every needle.
Rosi’s father had experienced something during the war
that could not be talked about, not even
in his own house
− was the first thing the women told me.
If I wanted to sew
               I would have to go somewhere else
like Rosi, her mother and old Oma.
− My father knows something about needles
women don’t know,
whispered Rosi one evening
on the way home from the discotheque,
                         where she
and her at least as pretty Gerhard,
on the dance floor
under the brilliance
                of the reflecting glass globe
were chosen as couple of the evening,
without so much as a button popping...
DA stieg ein Baum,
Rosi
wanted to dance round and round,
just be allowed
        to live,
but Rosi’s father had experienced something
to do with needles that burned
                        and stuck into Rosi,
something that long after the war was over
                    still kept her father blindingly awake.


(from Tarkovskijs heste [Tarkovsky's Horses]

Gyldendal, 2006)

The Al Jazeera problem

Ever since Al Jazeera TV began its English-language broadcasts in November 2006, a section of media and liberal opinion in the UK and US has greeted the new news channel, with its extensive list of high-profile Western broadcasters and journalists, as a respectable source of information and analysis related to events in the Middle East. The Independent newspaper even offers readers of its website a daily broadcast of the Al Jazeera headlines. During the Gaza conflict, there was a consensus among "right-thinking" media people that the channel was to be congratulated on its coverage, which was all the more sought after because of the fact that it was one of the few news outlets able to beat the Israeli security blackout.

Now, however, it appears that Al Jazeera has begun to broadcast statements by figures in the Islamic world which are clearly not only inflammatory, but also obviously aimed at stirring up anti-Semitism and extremism in the West, In a recent statement, the Islamic cleric Sheikh Yousuf Al-Qaradawi called for a Second Holocaust and openly endorsed the policies of Adolf Hitler:

Throughout history, Allah has imposed upon the [Jews] people who would punish them for their corruption. The last punishment was carried out by Hitler. By means of all the things he did to them – even though they exaggerated this issue – he managed to put them in their place. This was divine punishment for them. Allah willing, the next time will be at the hand of the believers.

Why is Al Jazeera promoting this kind of material? And what is the reaction of those British, American and European journalists and media personalities who have put their names and talents to work for the channel?

Via Harry's Place

King of kings

The BBC reports that Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi has been chosen as this year's chairman of the 53-nation African Union at the AU summit in Ethiopia.

The BBC's Elizabeth Blunt in Addis Ababa says it was the turn of North Africa to lead the bloc, and Col Gaddafi was seen as the obvious choice. However, some African leaders believe the Libyan leader is too erratic to be AU chairman.

Before he arrived at the summit, he circulated a letter saying he was coming as the king of the traditional kings of Africa and he wanted to be seated as the king of kings, our correspondent says.

Col Gaddafi has previously outlined his vision for African unity.

He wants a single African military force, a single currency and a single passport for Africans to move within the continent.

Last August, a meeting of more than 200 African kings and traditional rulers bestowed the title "king of kings" on the Libyan leader. 

Hat tip: Leopoldo

Brodsky in Iceland

Joseph Brodsky with the Icelandic poet Jóhann Hjálmarsson (left) and yours truly in the garden of Jóhann's home in Reykjavík, June 1978. The tree in the photo was the tallest in Iceland at that time. (Morgunblaðið, 23 October 1987).

Iceland: a chillier Dubai

In an interview for the Sunday Times, Dorrit Moussaieff, the wife of Iceland's President Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson, describes her view of Iceland's future. Excerpt:

Indeed, she’s hoping to turn the country into a sort of deluxe haven where cosseted clients from around the world can come and pick up treats: a chillier version of Dubai, with fish and geysers instead of sand. Moussaieff has stumbled upon a disused airbase in Iceland and hopes to transform it into a store for art collections that people will then be able to visit. She has teamed up with her great friend the art collector and heiress Francesca von Habsburg for the scheme.

Signpost to Munich

At the BBC, William Horsley writes that some kind of turning-point or watershed in Russia's relations with the West appears to be approaching, and points to the upcoming 45th Munich Security Conference as the next arena where some new moves will be made.

A letter from Stalin

In the aftermath of the killing of the journalists Stanislav Markelov and Anastasia Baburova,  Gasan Guseinov has published at Grani.ru a Letter of Advice from Stalin to Russia's Prime Minister Putin and President Medvedev. An excerpt in my tr.:

...One might have thought that a sensational political assassination would free your hands for a mass purge of the bureaucratic organs. But what do we hear from your representatives? That the responsibility for it all is borne by a certain Boris Abramovich Berezovsky, who resides in London. The question arises that if he is such an influential comrade, why is he working not for you but against you? And why are the comrades, who should have complied with your instructions for comrade Berezovsky long ago, not even able to catch his hirelings from your own, Comrade Putin, reserve of cadres?

Comrade Putin, today you do not have a dialectical answer to my questions. Nor do you have a metaphysical one. The other day Comrade Churchill invited Comrade Molotov and myself to visit him – simply for a smoke and a chat. An out-and-out imperialist, but he supports the interests of post-Soviet Russia, and even said that in the lands of bourgeois democracy the politicians, unable to cope with their work, are resigning, declaring general elections and waiting for the voters to decide.

You and I understand that the people now entrusted to you do not yet have the legal means to prevent them seeing any more of the mournful members of your cabinet on their screens. We like you, but we, I am afraid, are dead. And the populace expects from you, if not humanity – we have given up such expectations for three generations into the future – then at least the expression of a careful compassion – either for the victims of the murder which your employees are unable to solve, or for the heroic Chekists who deserve a sheriff’s star, so to speak, for precisely fulfilling the leadership’s cherished dream. There is no third way, comrades: if it is humanity you want, then learn to leave, as Churchill did, or if it is only power you want, then cut off the decomposing cadres, as we did the comrades by using the bared sword of the working class.

A few words about television. Do not forget, please, to tell the masters of the television camera that your joint press conferences with Comrade Timoshenko are not to be broadcast live any more. Semyon Mikhailovich [Budyonny] here says she is a good-looking woman whose words have logic and whose mind has skill. "But our Pan sportsman,” says Comrade Budyonny, “ just sweats and looks nervous all the time." The whole Politburo advises you, even urges you, to go to Tskhaltubo [a spa resort in west-central Georgia] for medical treatment. Demyan Bedny was recently sent there. He returned like a man alive. Transfer the discharge of your obligations for a while to Comrade Sechin, who is glowing with health and the subdued charm of the steppes, take the other political mountain skier – Comrade Medvedev – with you, and go to Tskhaltubo.

Hat tip: Jeremy Putley

Georgia: Moscow's detente trade-off

Commenting on Moscow's recent announcements concerning plans for military bases in Abkhazia, Pavel Felgenhauer has noted that these official statements appear to indicate a hardening of policy which may have consequences both for Georgia and for other countries that neighbour Russia:

It seems that Russia is building up a case and capabilities for a possible new armed conflict to finally overrun Georgia. At the same time, Moscow is seeking a tacit understanding from Washington to allow it a free hand in the Caucasus in exchange for detente on other contentious issues.

Russia planning air force base in Abkhazia

Via civil.ge:

Deployment of unit of the Russian air forces on Bombora airdrome [in Gudauta] is being considered in consultations with the Abkhaz side, along with creation of a naval base in Ochamchire,” Interfax reported quoting the source.

According to this report, Russia wants to deploy up to 20 planes on the Abkhaz airfield, including Su-27 Flanker fighter jets; Su-25 Frogfoot ground attack aircraft and military cargo planes.

Moscow plans to annexe part of Georgia

At Window on Eurasia, Paul Goble writes about Moscow's plans to take formal control of the tunnel that runs from Russian territory into South Ossetia, thus effectively annexing a part of Georgian territory:

Because of Russian power and its control of the situation on the ground, Moscow almost certainly will not only get away with this action but will be spared criticism by countries which in their desire to move forward in their relations with the Russian government want to put the Georgia affair behind them.

But Tbilisi has international law on its side. In 1931, in response to the Japanese invasion of China and Tokyo’s establishment of the puppet state of Manchukuo in Manchuria, the United States articulated the Stimson Doctrine, which holds that the world must not recognize territorial changes achieved by force alone but insist that any change be by negotiations.

That principle, which was the basis for the US-led non-recognition policy with respect to the Soviet occupation of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, is the legal foundation of the unwillingness of the entire international community -- except for the Russian Federation, Nicaragua and Hamas -- to recognize the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

Holocaust Remembrance Day

Via Haaretz:

In her speech to the assembly,[Professor Gabriela] Shalev [Israel's Ambassador to the UN] said the world has the "responsibility not to remain silent" to the genocide perpetrated by the Nazis during World War II.

"To remain silent and indifferent to the horrors of the Holocaust is probably the greatest sin of all, let alone denying it," she said. "We have a responsibility to act against the forces of anti-Semitism, bigotry and racism in any form."

Haaretz notes that UN General Assembly President Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann skipped the ceremony

after American Jewish leaders threatened to demonstratively exit Tuesday's if he used the podium to attack Israel.

D'Escoto, who has repeatedly made virulently anti-Israel statements, was to be the event's host by virtue of his official position and was scheduled give the opening speech.

Red-Green coalition in Iceland

It looks as though Iceland's troubles may be about to take a turn for the worse: in the aftermath of the resignation of the country's prime minister and government yesterday, a minority Red-Green coalition is in the process of being formed, and is likely to govern after the elections scheduled for May. The FT has some comment here.

Russian soldier defects to Georgia

Via civil.ge:

The Georgian Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA) said on January 27, that a Russian soldier, serving in the South Ossetia-based military unit, had defected from the Russian army and sought shelter in Georgia because of “unbearable conditions” in his military unit.

The Georgian television stations aired footage, disseminated by the Georgian Interior Ministry, showing a young man in the Russian military uniform named as Alexandr Glukhov and identified as a Russian soldier who served in the unit deployed in Akhalgori.

“There are bad conditions, no bath; lack of food,” he says in footage. “I request the President of Georgia to let me stay in Tbilisi.”

The Georgian Interior Ministry said in a statement that efforts were underway to arrange his stay in Georgia.

Russia to build naval base in Abkhazia

Abkhazia's Sergei Bagapsh has confirmed that Russia is to begin work this year on the construction of a naval base at Obamchire, on the Black Sea.

Gaza and Basra

In the Spectator, a British soldier who served with the army's Intelligence Corps in Iraq and Afghanistan gives his perspective on Israel's Gaza operation. In the problems faced by the IDF during Operation Cast Lead he sees direct parallels with the difficulties that were encountered by British forces in Iraq, including the public relations dimension opened up urban warfare and the methods needed to combat an enemy such as Hamas, which "is willing to dress in civilian clothing, attack from legally protected sites and use civilians as human shields". He also addresses the issue of so-called "disproportionate" firepower:

A fact often unappreciated by those with no military experience is that the selective use of overwhelming force, aimed at key targets, actually shortens conflict and saves lives. In Basra in 2003 the USA and the UK chose to use extreme force against locations that had been fortified by the Ba’ath Party, in order to spare our troops and the people of Basra the horror of a drawn-out street battle. It appears that the IDF made the same choice in Gaza.

Via Z-Word Blog

Understanding the Russian-Georgian War

The Hudson Institute has published an analysis (pdf) by Andrei Illarionov of the Russian-Georgian War of 2008. Among points raised in the document:

- Russia began to get ready for the war at the latest in the middle of 2001, when the preparations for mass distribution of the Russian passports for South Ossetians and Abkhaz started. But preparatory moves may even have been underway as early as 2000.

- The purpose of the war was political and economic regime change, and the division of Georgia into 7-9 smaller states, "that would eventually come under pressure and protection from the mighty neighbor. It would be the recreation to some extent of the situation in which Georgian kingdoms and principalities spent most of the 17th and 18th centuries."

- The correct name of the war is "The Russian-Georgian War", and not "The August War" or "The 5-Day War". The conflict lasted much longer than Russian media and government sources claimed.

(via Marko Mikhkelson,who also cites an Estonian study of the war published by the International Centre for Defence Studies in Tallinn)

Why the BBC is right this time

In the Observer, a graphic demonstration - if any further proof were needed - that the internal anti-Israel bias among BBC staff and correspondents is so strong that the corporation's decision to reject the broadcasting of a one-sided "charity appeal" is the only one possible if the BBC's charter is to be saved from ridicule and contempt. A former BBC Middle East correspondent expresses his antipathy to Israel in terms that are truly disturbing:

The big question that remains is this: what are the suits scared of? Why do BBC managers try to second-guess our government and even outreach it in grovelling to the United States and Israel?

Markelov/Baburova murders: theories

The Other Russia has published an article by Olga Malysh which examines the various theories concerning the theories that surround the murders of Stanisalv Markelov and Anastasia Baburova. Essentially, Malysh sees the killings as a further stage in the eclipse of civil society in Russia, and as a terrible warning. Excerpt:

Guessing at why Stanislav Markelov was killed is pointless and fruitless.  He was involved in a multitude of high-profile cases.  He could have had enemies from practically every one of them.  Stanislav was a lawyer for the Kungayeva family, which means he was connected with the scandalous case of [Yury] Budanov.  In his time, Markelov represented the interests of the Chechen family in the case of Sergei Lapin (radio call sign “Cadet”), who was accused of torturing Grozny resident Zelimkhan Murdalov.  He was the attorney for Anna Politkovskaya, the victims in Blagoveshchensk (Rus), and “Nord-Ost”.  He fought for the right of amnesty for a Chechen resident, Musikhanov, who refused to serve under [Chechen President Ramzan] Kadyrov.  One can’t list everything.

Recently, Markelov had spoken as a lawyer for Mikhail Beketov, the editor-in-chief of the Khimkinskaya Pravda newspaper who was all but killed in the fall of last year.  Incidentally, they were friends.  The deceased lawyer wasn’t afraid of directly implicating the Khimki city administration in the attack on the journalist.  They say Stanislav was even conducting his own investigation.

Another critical detail – Markelov defended many activists in the Antifa [anti-fascist] movement.   Specifically, he took part in the murder cases of 19-year-old Alexander Ryukhin, teenager and skateboard enthusiast Stas Korepanov, and ecologist and anti-fascist Ilya Borodaenko by right wing [nationalist] radicals.  He was the attorney for the family of anti-fascist Alexei Krylov, and represented Alexei Olesinov, the Moscow leader of Antifa accused of hooliganism, in court.

More responses to murders of Markelov and Baburova

Excerpt from Caucasian Knot:

A rally is now on in the Peoples' Friendship Square in the capital of Chechnya in connection with the murder in Moscow of well-known advocate Stanislav Markelov.

Many people in Chechnya are shocked by Markelov's murder.Representatives of political parties, public and human rights organizations,youth movements and higher school students have held a broad-scale protest action in Grozny.

The action was also attended by several dozens of women who held photos of their killed and missing friends and relatives in their hands.

One of participants of meeting, a woman named Zara, 48, who had lost her daughter and niece in the course of a "counterterrorist operation", related the advocate's murder with Budanov's release.

Usam Baisaev, another participant of the rally and employee of the Human Rights Centre "Memorial", was of a similar opinion, having stated that Budanov had not killed Markelov himself, "but it was done for him and for his sake."

This opinion was also supported by Aslambek Apaev, another human rights activist and expert of the Moscow Helsinki Group (MHG) for Northern Caucasus,who also took part in the action. "I've already said and now repeat: Stanislav's murder is directly linked with Budanov. Yuri Budanov was released not in order to be put back to prison, while Stanislav's execution is a warning to everybody who will further dare investigating the crimes accomplished by militaries in Chechnya and trying punish them," said Mr Apaev.

See also: Chechen responses to murders of Markelov and Baburova

Terror continues to increase in Russian Federation

At Maidan, Halya Coynash writes about the mounting terror in the Russian Federation. Excerpt:

Those who ordered and who carried out the murder of Anna Politkovskaya remain at large, as do those guilty of many similar crimes against Russian journalists, human rights defenders and civic activists. There have been calls for a thorough investigation into the killing of Stanislav Markelov and Anastasia Baburova. This is quite correct and to be wholeheartedly endorsed.

Only nobody expects them to find the killers. A young Chechen refugee, Umar Israilov, was gunned down a week ago in Vienna. There were equally correct calls for the Austrian authorities to investigate given the allegations the young man had made against the current Kremlin-supported President of the Chechen Republic. However, if their investigations hit another dead end as did the British investigation into the murder of Alexander Litvinenko, what then?

How many more people need to die in Russia before others are fully terrified into meek submission? How many more killings will the world tolerate on other countries’ territory?

20 January marked a very special day for the USA and the world. It was a day many of us who grew up knowing Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream” speech never imagined we would live to see.

It is almost 20 years since the events which culminated in the freeing of Eastern Europe and the collapse of the Soviet empire. The latter also seemed impossible to dream of in our lifetime. The world hailed the victory of democratic values in the new republics. Everybody knows that momentous change comes hard and we all knew that stumbling steps, not strides, were to be expected.

However what is happening in Russia, still ruled to a large extent by Vladimir Putin who openly called the breakdown of the USSR the greatest catastrophe of the twentieth century, is about the systematic destruction of the fragile buds of democracy, and in many aspects a return to methods not seen for decades. We are seeing the State using aggression, terror and repression against its own people and against any whom it regards as its enemies.

A Soviet syndrome, not an imperial one

In the recent pages of the Ukrainian news and current affairs analysis service UNIAN there's an interesting interview with the Russian philosopher Igor Chubais in which he discusses the conflict between Russia and Ukraine as a clash of two incompatible systems: Ukraine's, which is based on a painful but liberating movement towards Western Europe, and Russia's, which is essentially a revisiting of the totalitarian past. While the political and social change in Ukraine is accompanied by special problems that have not been encountered by its citizens before, the crisis in Russia is leading to a revival and reinforcement of "old" psychology. This was evidenced in the recent poll of "great Russian names", in which that of Stalin proved to be near the top of the list. "Perhaps," the interviewer suggests, "the Russians are guilty of being unable to abandon the idea of their 'elite status' and Messianism, and it's easier to revive the idea of rebuilding the empire on such sentiments." Chubais disagrees:

One can't put the blame on Russian culture, Russian history and the Russian mentality. Because we're not actually in Russia any more. It's called the Russian Federation now. After 1917, a break occurred ... It was Rozanov who said in 1918 that an Iron Curtain [my link] had descended on Russian history. We were torn up from our own roots. And everything that happens in our country is Soviet and post-Soviet history: for us it's still 1917.

We made no attempt to break free from the shackles of totalitarianism until 1991 - but we failed, and since 2000 the Soviet symbols and Soviet values are once again being inculcated in us.

Obama on America in the world

Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

We are the keepers of this legacy. Guided by these principles once more, we can meet those new threats that demand even greater effort - even greater cooperation and understanding between nations.

From President Barack H. Obama's inaugural address, January 20 2009

Watching the inauguration

Jussi is watching the inauguration, too.

Chechen responses to murders of Markelov and Baburova

Chechnya's human rights ombudsman Nurdi Nukhazhiyev, who is officially appointed by President Ramzan Kadyrov, has said in a public statement that he suspects Yuri Budanov, the Russian army colonel who was found guilty of murdering a young Chechen woman, Elza Kungayeva, but recently released on parole, of complicity in the murders of the lawyer Stanislav Markelov and the journalist Anastasia Baburova in central Moscow yesterday, UNIAN reports. Kadyrov's press spokesman Lyoma Gudayev has also issued a statement carried by RIA Novosti in which he says that Markelov's murder will lead to a worsening of tension in inter-ethnic relations in the republic.

However, Michael Schwirtz, writing in the IHT, reports that

Lela Khamzayeva, another lawyer for Kungayeva's family, was adamant... that the killing of Markelov could not be linked to his connection with Budanov, because his role during the actual proceedings against the former colonel was, as she put it, "insignificant."

"If someone is trying to link this murder with Markelov's participation in the Budanov case, well, that's just ridiculous," she said

The article points out that the list of potential suspects is very long, and may include extremist groups that seek revenge for Markelov's role in pursuing cases that were not specifically Chechnya-related, such as those that concerned the racist killings and attacks that have been carried out in Russia by neo-fascist and xenophobic thugs with increasing frequency in recent years.

von Sydow: "Sweden must arm against Russia"

From BarentsObserver:

“I believe it is time for the Swedish Armed Forces to adjust to a situation with higher level of threats”, former Swedish Minister of Defence Björn von Sydow writes in a newspaper comment. He believes Russia constitutes a growing threat to all of its neighbouring countries.

In his comment in newspaper Dagens Nyheter, the former defence minister gives a remarkably clear picture of his perception of today’s Russia.

“It is around today’s and tomorrow’s Russia that the question about a threat picture must be discussed”, Mr. von Sydow writes. The distinguished former politician in the comment gives a strong signal to current legislators that it is time for the Swedish Armed Forces for step up investments in domestic defence.

Readings of the gas dispute

A number of observers have now pointed out that Russia's main aim in its gas conflict with Ukraine appears to be the division of Ukraine, and ultimately the destruction of its national sovereignty. Jamestown's Roman Kupchinsky, for example, says that

If Gazprom is successful in stopping the flow of gas to southeastern Ukraine by insisting that gas to Europe go via Sudzha, the Kremlin’s strategy of provoking mass disturbances in these regions in order to precipitate a “popular” anti-Tymoshenko-Yushchenko uprising would intensify calls in these critical regions to join the Russian Federation. With the Ukrainian Party of Regions seemingly more loyal to Moscow than to Kyiv, Putin and Medvedev apparently feel confident that such a strategy would transform Ukraine into a second, pro-Russian, Belarus-like puppet state in the CIS and give Russia control over the Ukrainian gas pipeline to Europe. The consequences of this for the EU would be disastrous. For Gazprom, however, it would be a major coup, allowing it to abandon the costly South Stream pipeline project and, at long last, to destroy the Nabucco pipeline scheme.

Other commentators agree with this assessment, but some offer a less pessimistic analysis of the current situation. On Thursday, Marcin Wojciechowski wrote in Gazeta Wyborcza that

The gas conflict is uniting the divided Ukrainian elite. The Russians reckoned that it would be enough to cut off the gas to pro-Russian eastern Ukraine, and Moscow's supporters would descend upon Kiev in fury. There is none of that. Even Ukraine's pro-Russian politicians balk at the thought of a disintegration of the country inspired by Moscow. Ukraine has prepared itself for the gas cut-off much better than one might have expected, and will not submit to brutal pressure.

[my tr.]

In a recent discussion of Russia's use of gas as a political weapon, Norway's Aftenposten quotes Jakub M. Godzimirski at the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs as saying that Russia may be prepared to take financial losses in order to gain political capital.

Update (Jan. 18): a deal has now reportedly been struck.

Turning a blind eye to Hamas

In the Irish Times, David Adams asks why the West turned a blind eye until Israel hit back. Excerpt:

After not having informed the public of thousands of Hamas terrorist attacks over the previous years, television news simply continued in the same vein, content from December 27th to present the Israeli offensive as though it had come entirely out of the blue.

It was only towards the end of the first week that the rocket attacks finally did begin to get a mention, but only in the context of a comparative headcount of the dead and injured on either side to stress how “disproportionate” was the Israeli response.

By then it hardly mattered: the damage was done, the Israelis had already been painted as the bloodthirsty villains of the piece.

Via Z-Word

The News of the Past

The process of de-Nazification that was begun and continued in Germany after World War II may have stalled a bit, especially since the fall of the Berlin Wall and the arrival of generations of Germans who never experienced the de-Nazification programme, as they were confined to East Germany under a repressive regime which forbade discussion of the Nazi era. Now. the Times reports, a British publisher is releasing facsimiles of Nazi-era newspapers - these may even eventually include the rabidly anti-Semitic Der Stürmer -  so that contemporary Germans can become acquainted with this dark era from their country's past. With the current rise of anti-Semitic sentiment in Europe as a whole, the project looks as though it may be distinctly double-edged - but it also marks a watershed:

The appeal of the facsimiles in the first instance is to Germans fascinated by the breach of a taboo that has been intact for more than 60 years. In Germany books are removed from the shelves if they bear a swastika, and the Hitler salute is forbidden. Mr McGee has been given special dispensation to reproduce the Nazi propaganda with all its insignia for its historical value.

Landmark Year

Today is the 200th anniversary of the separation of Sweden and Finland - for 600 years before 1809 they had been part of the same kingdom.

In Dagens Nyheter, Maria Wetterstrand writes about the "class contempt" that is felt for migrant Finns by many Swedes - the disrespect that is shown in Sweden to the Finnish language, the ignorance of Finnish history and of Finland's Swedish-speaking minority which led one Finland-Swedish migrant to Sweden to experience the Kafkaesque situation of being sent on a Swedish-language course for foreigners, even though it was the only language he knew. Wetterstrand believes that Sweden should make a formal apology to Finland for the suffering Finland endured at its hands - rather like the one made to Ireland by Tony Blair in 1999. But no such apology will be forthcoming - instead, the day is being marked by official speeches in Stockholm and a general stifling of awkward resonances from the past.

Russia's political gas tariffs

An extensive but still only partial English translation of Yushchenko's press conference remarks is available here. Andrei Illarionov has published lists of gas and transit prices, based on Yushchenko's data, here. The lists clearly demonstrate that Russia's pricing system is based on political, not market, considerations. For example, this year Belarus will pay $160 per cubic metre, and Armenia will pay only $154. From Ukraine - geographically much closer than Armenia - Gazprom is asking $450 for the first quarter of 2009. Where transit fees are concerned, the situation is equally unbalanced: while the European going rate fluctuates between $4 and $13 per 1,000 cubic metres / 100 kilometres, Russia is offering Ukraine an average payment of $1.7.

(via Marko Mihkelson)

Yushchenko: Russia trying to grab Ukraine's gas transit network

Speaking in Poland, Ukraine's President Yushchenko has said that Russia is exploiting the present gas dispute in order to seize control of Ukraine's has transit network, AP reports.

Chechen exile shot dead in Vienna

In another sign that Russia's special services are prepared to assassinate on foreign soil those whom they perceive to be enemies of the Russian state, Umar Israilov, a Chechen dissident and ex-bodyguard of President Ramzan Kadyrov who exposed Kadyrov's systematic use of torture and abductions, has been shot dead in the street of a Viennese suburb by two attackers. In the IHT, C.J. Chivers writes:

Israilov had been granted asylum by Austria, but his life there had been filled with worries about his safety. In the interview last fall, he said he limited his movements and contacts with strangers after an emissary from Kadyrov visited Austria and tried to dupe him into returning home.

"Ramzan is a very powerful man," Israilov said, "and he can have anyone killed."

Retaking the Philadelphi route

In Haaretz, the paper's military correspondent Amos Harel and and Arab affairs correspondent Avi Issacharoff discuss the current state of Israel's Gaza operation, drawing attention to two particular features: one, the possibility that Hamas may be playing for time in the expectation that President Obama may offer a more conciliatory approach, and two, the real threat to Israel's security posed by the smuggling of arms along the so-called "Philadelphi route" - Israel's 7-mile-long southern border. Excerpt:

Israel's concern that the smuggling of arms will continue along the route running parallel to Sinai centers on the possibility that in the future, missiles capable of striking Tel Aviv will be brought in by Hamas.

If the gap in southern Gaza is not blocked, Iran will be able to, indirectly, threaten central Israel in months, if not weeks.

Only at this stage is the sophistication and extent of the smuggling mechanism in place being understood in Israel, and the role played in that smuggling by officers in Iran's Revolutionary Guards. Since the success of the naval commandos in intercepting the Karin A, a ship carrying weapons to the Palestinians in January 2002, the Iranians have changed their methods. Instead of smuggling large quantities, the arms are brought in small amounts through an intricate network of mediators.

But these small shipments included Katyusha rockets, and there is a possibility that Fajr missiles will follow - reaching targets 70 kilometers from Gaza.

Entropa

A Czech sculptor with a sense of humour. David Cerny's vision of Europe has raised some hackles in Brussels and elsewhere. From ceskenoviny.cz:

Austria, well-known for its strict anti-nuclear stance, is presented as a country full of nuclear power plant towers, Germany is shown as a paradise for highway fans, the Netherlands is flooded by the sea of which only tops of minarets stick out, the British author cut out the UK from the European map to hint at the Britons´ dubious relations to the EU, the map of France is covered with the inscription "Strike!," and Sweden looks like an IKEA box with the Gripen fighters.

"It is great, I think that it represents (particular countries) very well," Silvio, an Italian employee of the EU Council, commented on the artifact.

"You have a sense of humour," said a Bulgarian employee of a European institution with a smile, while looking at the map of Bulgaria with a big Turkish toilet.

The BBC's Mark Mardell has more here.

Loving Stalin

At OpenDemocracy, Arseny Roginsky writes about The Embrace of Stalinism in contemporary Russia. Excerpt:

In the new history textbooks, Stalinism is presented as an institutional phenomenon, even an achievement. But the terror is portrayed as a historically determined and unavoidable tool for solving state tasks. This concept does not rule out sympathy for the victims of history. But it makes it absolutely impossible to consider the criminal nature of the terror, and the perpetrator of this crime.

The intention is not to idealise Stalin. This is the natural side-effect of resolving a completely different task - that of confirming the idea of the indubitable correctness of state power. The government is higher than any moral or legal assessments. It is above the law, as it is guided by state interests that are higher than the interests of the person and society, higher than morality and law. The state is always right - at least as long as it can deal with its enemies. This idea runs through the new textbooks from beginning to end, and not only where repressions are discussed.

A conflict mismanaged

Pavel K. Baev, on Vladimir Putin's mishandling of the latest gas conflict. Excerpt:

Putin never admits mistakes and will certainly insist that the tough line taken against Ukraine’s cheating and bluffing has given Russia a “victory.” Public opinion, however, would hardly be much impressed with this seasonal brawl, particularly as the end of the long holidays marks the start of layoffs and bankruptcies (Ezhednevny zhurnal, January 11). Nor would Europe relax about its energy supplies, as Gazprom has further built on its reputation as an irresponsible bully whose favorite business methods are arm-twisting and hostage-taking. Waging a “gas war” against the background of a deepening crisis, Russia has pushed itself further into international isolation and has fooled itself, maybe for the last time, that it can make the neighbors respect it. Putin has delivered unsteady and blundering leadership, Medvedev was demonstratively irrelevant in conducting this war, and the notion of “stability-of-prosperity” that remains the core value of their regime has evaporated.

Four ethnic Russians cleared by Estonian court

Four ethnic Russians have been acquitted of plotting the riots which shook Tallinn in April 2007 after the Estonian government authorised the moving of a World War II memorial and statue from the centre of the capital to a war cemetery. The case has caused much public controversy, and the Estonian prosecutor will appeal the decision to a district court.

Hating Hamas

At the Gloria Center website, Barry Rubin writes that If you love the Palestinians, you should hate Hamas. Excerpt:

if you want to march for a ceasefire, campaign for a Palestinian state, and criticize Israel, just remember this: don't struggle to support those who will do more harm to the people you purport to care for--even if you blame Israel for it, the cause will be Hamas's policies--than anything else.

If you want to help in real terms, let's work together for a peaceful diplomatic resolution, a two-state solution, in which Palestinians have their own country, receive massive international aid, children can live in security, and there is real peace. For that goal, you will find the overwhelming majority of Israelis will agree with you. But remember, too, Hamas doesn't.

Peaceful pro-Israel rallies across Europe

Rallies have been held in European cities including Berlin, Antwerp, Paris, London and Manchester in support of Israel, and to counter yesterday's street protests, which were frequently anti-Semitic in nature and characterized by violence.

Anti-Semitism and the Gaza crisis - 2

Harry's Place has a report, with a selection of images and photographs, from today's anti-Israel demonstration in London, which has ended in violence.

See also: Anti-Semitism and the Gaza crisis

Double standards in the Gaza conflict

In his blog, Sweden's foreign minister Carl Bildt takes a critical view of Israel's Gaza operation, and writes (excerpt):

A swift Israeli decision to accept the UN resolution, suspend its military operations and open Gaza's borders would lead to enormous pressure on Hamas - in all likelihood, not least from Gaza's population - to stop its terrorist shelling of Israel. And for rapid international action to prevent the smuggling of weapons into Gaza.

And was that not Israel's goal?

Statesmanship does not mean starting wars. History shows that this is often too easy. True statesmanship is the ability to  recognize when it is time to end them.

And that is what is now required.

That we in this respect make higher demands on Israel lies in the nature of things.

[Ett snabbt israeliskt beslut att acceptera FN:s resolution, avbryta de militära operationerna och öppna Gazas gränser skulle leda till ett enormt tryck på Hamas - med all sannolikhet inte minst från Gazas befolkning - att sluta med sin terrorbeskjutning av Israel. Och till snabba internationella insatser för att förhindra smuggling av vapen till Gaza.

Och var det inte det som var Israels mål?

Statsmannaskap är inte att starta krig. Historien visar att det ofta är alldeles för enkelt. Sant statsmannaskap är att inse när det är dags att avsluta dem.

Och det är det som nu krävs.

Att vi i det avseendet ställer högre krav på Israel ligger i sakens natur.]

A reader takes exception to the last paragraph, and responds (excerpt):

In this post you make yourself guilty of the same failure of thinking that has led so many others to go completely wrong on the Middle East question - i.e. in the name of  some kind of morally "higher" logic to make greater demands on Israel to comply with the laws of humanity, as opposed to Hamas (since Hamas, as everyone knows but few will admit, is a terrorist organization). But please consider this approach a little more closely, particularly as it may have consequences in the longer term.

Is it really true that, as a basis for relations between human beings, we should content ourselves with lower requirements for those who have explicitly stated that they do not subscribe to the rights and obligations expressed in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, including Israel's right to exist?

Is it really true that higher demands should be made on those states which have explicitly committed themselves to thse who stay outside?

From what unfathomable wisdom do you derive the notion that the bad guys should be able to do what they want without accountability, while those who try to follow the rules should have a higher responsibility?

If you will reflect for a moment on what such a principle leads to by extension, you will soon realize the following: responsibility is something that many consider they exercise as a kind of lip service. Responsibility is easier to demand from others than to bear oneself.

[Du gör dig i detta inlägg skyldig till den tankekollaps som fått så många andra att hamna helt fel i MÖ-frågan, nämligen den att man av någon slags moraliskt ”högstående” logik ställer högre krav på Israel att följa mänsklighetens lagar, till skillnad från Hamas (eftersom Hamas, som ju alla vet utan att mer än få vill kännas vid det, är en terrororganisation). Men var snäll och fundera lite mer över detta synsätt och särskilt vad det får för konsekvenser i det längre perspektivet.

Är det verkligen så, att vi som en principiell utgångspunkt i samvaron människor emellan ska nöja oss med att ställa lägre krav på dem som uttryckligen uttalat att de inte ställer upp på de rättigheter och skyldigheter som kommit till uttryck i FN-stadgan om de mänskliga rättigheterna, bl.a. innefattande Israels innevånares rätt att ö.h.t. existera?

Är det verkligen så, att det på de stater som uttryckligen förbundit sig att följa denna stadga ska ställas högre krav än på dem som ställer sig utanför?

Från vilken outgrundlig visdom framkallar du tankegången att skurkar ska kunna göra som de vill utan ansvar, medan de som försöker följa reglerna ska ha ett högre ansvar?

Om du för en stund tänker på vad en sådan princip leder till i förlängningen ska du snart inse följande. Ansvar är något som många anser sig utöva som en slags läpparnas bekännelse. Ansvar är lättare att utkräva av andra än att själv stå för.]

Remembering Anne Frank

Watching the remarkable documentary Remembering Anne Frank on BBC4 prompted the reflection that history has stories which demonstrate why later events develop in the way that they do. The Nazi persecution of the Jews was a brutally conceived policy so uniquely vile and directed against humanity itself that later responses to it, and to its reincarnations, operate within a special historical and existential framework. Resistance to a total genocide ultimately needs to be total, for as Hannah Arendt showed, the alternatives usually prove to bring about the triumph of totalitarian ideologies and mindsets, and the denial of the human. The calls for the destruction of the state of Israel now current in much of the world give Israel the right to resist, not only to defend its own citizens, but also the aspirations of mankind in general. 

Russia's goal in the gas dispute

If there were any lingering doubts about the real nature of the gas "dispute" between Russia and Ukraine, they will now have been dispelled by President Medvedev's latest statement on the matter. "Our goal is to show who is to blame for stealing gas," the Russian President is reported to have said. Thus, by repeatedly making this false accusation, the Russian government intends to publicly humiliate Ukraine, and to force the countries of the European Union to acquiesce in the humiliation. As observers have pointed out, the whole episode can serve as a warning to Europe that it needs urgently to formulate a united energy policy, to develop and cultivate alternative energy sources in order to reduce its dependency on Russia, which has now proved itself to be an unreliable supplier, and to reject illusory solutions like the Nord Stream gas project.

Anti-Semitism and the Gaza crisis

In Europe's response to the Gaza crisis, disturbing echoes of an intolerant past are coming from several points, not least from Norway, where violent riots took place in Oslo last night, when pro-Palestinian demonstrators smashed store windows along the city's main thoroughfare Karl Johans Gate, firing rockets, throwing eggs and stones, fighting with police and threatening the members of a small pro-Israeli demonstration. Meanwhile in Rome, leftist Italian labour unions have launched a campaign to "identify and boycott" Jewish-owned shops in a move which has been likened to the anti-Semitic laws of the Mussolini era. In the Wall Street Journal, Rabbi Marvin Hier has claimed that a double standard is being applied to the Gaza conflict because of "an insidious bias against the Jewish state", and has expressed the fear that

There are a great many people in the world who, even after Auschwitz, just can't bear the Jewish state having the same rights they so readily grant to other nations. These voices insist Israel must take risks they would never dare ask of any other nation-state -- risks that threaten its very survival -- because they don't believe Israel should exist in the first place.

Just look at the spate of attacks this week on Jews and Jewish institutions around the world: a car ramming into a synagogue in France; a Chabad menorah and Jewish-owned shops sprayed with swastikas in Belgium; a banner at an Australian rally demanding "clean the earth from dirty Zionists!"; demonstrators in the Netherlands chanting "Gas the Jews"; and in Florida, protestors demanding Jews "Go back to the ovens!"

A veiled threat

In the Guardian newspaper, 14 of "the [UK] government's leading Muslim counter-extremism advisers" have signed a joint letter to Gordon Brown warning that "Israeli actions in Gaza are damaging the British government's efforts to tackle religious extremism at home."

Russia's militarised energy doctrine

IISS defence and security analyst Roger McDermott has recently published two versions (here and here) of an article on Russia's new draft security strategy through 2020, in which one thing becomes patently clear: Russia envisages possible military conflict over energy resources. However, the global economic crisis has overtaken the strategy document, rendering part but not all of its contents currently obsolete. The military aspects, in particular, remain topical:

Strident in its tone, once again portraying an “image” of a resurgent Russia, the new security strategy was conceived and written during a period when the Russian political elites were in denial about the economic downturn that the country is currently experiencing. The devaluation of the ruble four times within one month and the lower price of oil on the world market give reason to doubt whether the tone will be matched in practical terms. Much of that depends on how successfully the Russian government handles its economic challenges. The Kremlin, however, is sending out a powerful signal that it will, if necessary, protect its energy interests with the use of military force; a contentious issue as Russia “pushes” its energy interests in the Arctic Circle.

Illiberals

International crises involving Israel invariably seem to call forth responses among otherwise fair-minded and reasonable media editors which run directly counter to the values and principles they profess to espouse. Recently the Guardian newspaper has published an obituary of a senior Hamas leader, characterizing him as "a man of the street" a "big, bearded man" who was "something of a hero". It has also published a diatribe by another Hamas leader, which contains phrases that read like self-mockery: "Our modest, home-made rockets are our cry of protest to the world." And the Open Democracy website, which advertises itself as "free thinking for the world", leads with a piece by a former legal counsel to the Arab League which repeats an old and timeworn false analogy, of which Bradley Burston, writing in Haaretz, has the best analysis:

It denies and diminishes and exploits the Holocaust, does disrespect to Holocaust victims and survivors alike, alleviates European guilt over complicity with the Nazis, alleviates American guilt over inaction in the face of the annihilation machine, misrepresents both the cruel reality of the Gaza Strip and the cruel reality of the ghetto, dismisses the humanity and the vulnerability of the million Israeli Jews and Arabs within rocket range, and ignores completely the role of Hamas, the Islamic Jihad, the Popular Resistance Committees, and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, in having sent thousands and thousands and thousands of rockets and mortars into Israel.
As a bonus, pro-Palestinian demonstrators in San Francisco [where else?], referencing the the Warsaw Ghetto analogy, recently beat up a small number of pro-Israel demonstrators, reportedly shouting "Slaughter the Jew" at them in Arabic.

Payback

Estonian MEP and head of Estonia's parliamentary European Affairs Committee Marko Mihkelson writes in his blog that the real cause of the gas war between Russia and Ukraine is not merely economic:

This is not about Gazprom or Ukraine's debts, it is about the Russian government's desire to put pressure on the the Ukrainian government and, in the true sense of the word, pay Kiev back for supporting Tbilisi.

Moscow has repeatedly accused Ukraine of providing military support to Georgia during the August war - accusations denied by Kiev - and in his New Year's address on December 31, President Medvedev said that Russia "would never forget" this.

Mihkelson also says that Ukraine's present and ongoing internal power struggle between President Yushchenko and prime minister Tymoshenko is "water to the mill" for Russia's foreign policy ambitions.

Mihkelson believes that Russia's real aim is to thwart Ukraine's efforts to join NATO. He says that the European Union needs to define its interests in relation to Ukraine and Russia, and also overcome its fear that "tougher statements or actions may have a negative influence on the ultimate goal".

Israel rejects Russia's Hamas contact offer

Unsurprisingly, Israel's foreign minister Tzipi Livni has rejected an offer from the Medvedev/Putin government to contact Hamas via Russia in order to arrange a ceasefire, Haaretz reports.

The genocidal goal of Hamas

On the GLORIA Center website, Barry Rubin continues to provide insightful analysis of the Gaza conflict, focusing not only on current developments, but also on the historical context. From his latest article:

Hamas invoked the radical Islamist policy of "one man, one vote, one time. " It staged a coup and kicked out its PA and Fatah rivals. Rather than focusing on economic development or even maintaining peace to build up its own power, Hamas pursued its strategy of permanent war against Israel. Children's programs taught the kiddies that they should grow up to be suicide bombers and kill Jews. Hamas soldiers, or their junior allies, fired rockets and mortars at Israel. And of course Hamas staged a cross-border raid and kidnapped an Israeli soldier.

In spite of this, many in the West think Israel has some kind of choice in this matter, that diplomacy was an option, that Hamas could be reasoned with. Those people have clearly never heard a Hamas leader speak or read anything on the group's Arabic-language websites. In a real sense, Hamas is more extreme than Usama bin Ladin, who periodically offers his enemy the chance to repent. Hamas's goal is genocidal.

This has nothing to do with being dovish or hawkish, left or right. For those who are the biggest peaceniks--and this is true in Israel--know that Hamas must be defeated if Israel is ever to make peace with the PA. Even the PA knows it, and that's what they say in private, no matter what they say in public

Moscow continues to encroach on Europe

The Russian government continues to do all it can to make inroads on Europe's security. In the latest move, Russian warplanes are scheduled to take part in exercises held within the airspace of a NATO country, Greece. The Telegraph notes that

Greek defence officials said that Russian Sukhoi 25 and Sukhoi 33 fighter aircraft would take part in the operations, as well as Kamov helicopters.

They are the first such war games to take place in the Nato member's territory.

The decision could prove controversial with Greece's European Union partners following a series of provocative sorties by Russian aircraft in Western Europe. Moscow has also sent its warships to conduct exercises off Venezuela and Cuba, in moves designed to irritate Washington.

Chechnya and Gaza

Those critics of Israel who like to accuse the country's leadership of using the threat from Islamist radicals of the Hamas type as an excuse for "disproportionate" military responses need to take some lessons from Russia's treatment of its North Caucasus populations. At Z-Word, Ben Cohen shows what a disproportionate response really looks like - in the hands of the Russian government and military:

Oleg goes on to explain in his broken Hebrew that if Russian soldiers were sent into Gaza they would take care of things in three or four days. “They know what war is.” (My emphasis - BC)

Igor is slightly taken aback by his friend’s comments and explains that Oleg is still hung-over from New Year’s Eve.

Whether or not he was suffering from the after effects of too much partying, Oleg - notwithstanding his repellent racist comments - is right about Russian military strategy. When they invaded Chechnya, in 1994 and 1999, the Russians deployed a scorched earth policy. Grozny was burned to a cinder, with complete disregard for the lives of civilians and for the laws of war.

The BBC's anti-Israel bias

In the JC, Stephen Pollard examines the continuing problem of the licence-payer funded BBC's ingrained hostility to the state of Israel, exemplified by its recent reports from Gaza:

As Anshel Pfeffer points out, if you’ve been relying on British media for your information about the ongoing Gaza “siege”, you’d not have a clue that there is a second border, with Egypt — a pretty critical piece of information. But it detracts from the idea of Israel as villain.

There’s one big problem with all of this. If you don’t like the Guardian’s approach, you can stop buying it. If you don’t like commercial TV, it will lose ratings and income and eventually go bust. But we are all forced, under threat of imprisonment, to pay for the BBC’s coverage. Not just its TV reports, but its hopelessly biased website, which has a worldwide audience. And that is plain wrong.

A bullied nation

At Think-Israel, psychologist Babs Barron considers the effects of bullying on nations - in particular, the results of local and worldwide "pressure" on Israel - in terms of Jungian psychoanalysis. Excerpt:

I have been told that Israel is desperate to be liked, but, if that is the case, her government appears to believe that this will happen by magic and without its having to do anything to help the process along. It ignores the importance of the work done by the army of volunteer hasbara advocates throughout the world and seems to assume that the "nice guys really" message will somehow get out even when the government itself does not offer formal support for hasbara/advocacy. Similarly, the Israeli government appears to believe (equally magically) that if it apologises for imagined as well as real mistakes the world will once again accept it on equal terms. Israel's alleged involvement in the Gaza beach bombing is a case in point, where it apologised and took all the blame for having caused the deaths by shelling of eight Palestinians before the full circumstances which absolved it became known.

This last is, in fact, a typical response of the emotionally bullied (and Israel is increasingly aware of the reaction of her shadow self to emotional bullying over which she has no control). Indeed, I would argue that, far from being the bully in the Middle East as she is so often represented in the media, Israel seems more and more to take on the characteristics of the emotionally bullied. 

Although the focus of the article is on Israel, the conclusions it draws are equally applicable to other victims of inter-state bullying around the world.

The threat to liberal civilization

Another significant guest post at Harry's Place. Michelle Sieff of Zword discusses two recent media contributions to the assessment of Israel's Gaza operation -- articles by Yossi Klein Halevi in the New Republic and Benny Morris in the New York Times, both focused on Israel's increasing sense of isolation and encirclement: a feeling, as Morris puts it, that "the walls are closing in on it". As Sieff points out,

Halevi suggests that the future of the civilized world - and not just Israel’s future - is at stake in Gaza. Gaza, Mumbai, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Iraq, Somalia, Pakistan, Iran. These are all fronts in what is, fundamentally, one long war against variations of radical Islamism, a threat to liberal civilization that resembles the Fascist and Stalinist threats of the mid-twentieth century. Liberal democracies are sometimes faced with threats that can no longer be ignored. Halevi and Morris tell us why, for Israel - and for the rest of the civilized world - that moment is now.