Iran and their Rights

02.02.2012 08:04

by Anna Malm *

... "Iran is enriching uranium, it will continue to enrich uranium and has every right to do so in accordance with international law." [1]

With the words of these authors, Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett, it is stressed that the nuclear issue of Iran will never be resolved if Israel, the United States and their European partners do not understand the above stated clearly and unambiguously. To illuminate this point from different perspectives, the authors pointed to arguments of some analysts who also came to similar conclusions. These considerations are intertwined, say Flynt Leverett, Hillary Mann Leverett and Peter Jenkins that we present below.

They point to the fact that the Non-Proliferation Treaty prohibits the manufacture or acquisition of nuclear weapons, but it allows the enrichment of uranium for civilian purposes. This enrichment is at the core of the dispute in the West against Iran ". [1] - [2]

As clearly stated above, the enrichment of uranium for civilian purposes is a right that is provided to Iran by the prerogatives of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Evidence of military activity by Iran has never been presented by Western representatives

They note then that a military strike against Iran, under these circumstances, could only logically be based on the peaceful activities of uranium enrichment by Iran. This enrichment as the treaty states, assures Iran's rights as a subscriber to the nuclear non-proliferation agreement.

Evidence to the contrary has never been presented, despite all efforts. This has always been correctly and accurately argued by Flynt Leverett, Hillary Mann Leveret said Peter Jenkins ..

What we see is that the perspective adopted by western countries involved in the dispute with Iran is aimed at the preservation of Israel's nuclear monopoly in the Middle East. [1] - [2]

It was also argued that recent measures taken by Tehran to change its modern and sophisticated centrifuges for the Fordo site in Qom, as well as to announce the opening of a new nuclear site, followed by their statement in regard to their production of fuel and combustion plates for the Tehran Research Reactor (TRR in acronym) had been taken with the intention of creating a situation of "political equality" in nuclear negotiations with the West. [1] - [2]

It was then said to be exactly equal politics, or something similar to it, that London, Paris and Washington do not want Iran to get. That is in order to secure the advantage for the West. [1] and [2].

It was also argued that even if Washington would look ​​for ways to modify its rigid stance on Iran, one could still observe the following:

a) - that both London and Paris are chronically concerned about the development of a nuclear capability (same threshold) of the important powers in the region (such as Iran) in relation to the relatively small nuclear arsenals of Britain and France. [1] [2]

b) - and what a continuous rise of Iran would represent in relation to the possibilities of the West continuing to dominate the Middle East, as it had been doing until now. [1] [2]

One cannot help but ask what can really be expected from the discussions with the so-called P5 +1, despite many good intentions that Iran and possibly Russia and China might have about reaching a fair and equitable agreement on the issue.

P5 +1 refers to the group discussions about the "nuclear standoff" - the United States, England, France, Germany, Russia and China. The part of the name +1 relates to Germany.

Personally I cannot get rid of the desire to emphasize that it is Germany that offered nuclear submarines to Israel. These submarines Israel used, not many months ago, demonstratively in the waters of the Middle East and well in the vicinity of Iran. These nuclear submarines can be comfortably loaded with nuclear weapons, according to what was reported.

Turning the analysis presented here: The intentions supposedly were to contain the dangers associated with nuclear proliferation. If these intentions were really sincere, the appropriate remedy would be to try to establish a Non-Nuclear Zone for the entire region. [1] [2]

It may be added that making Iran a helpless target does not in any way contribute to global security, quite the contrary. The preservation of Israel's nuclear monopoly in the region does not allow anybody to sleep quietly.

As I am no part of the group of people who have knowledge (de-facto) of the situation, I have to settle for having to say that for my part, I have never seen this monopoly confirmed or denied. So from my perspective, the remedy is to demand that Israel's cards be put on the table. And that's just to begin the negotiations.

Peter Jenkins, [2] as an analyst and expert on the intimate nature of the cause in question, emphasizes the simultaneous increase in two risks in the current situation.

1) the risk of military action
2) great instability for the international economy

All requirements are a result of the disproportionate western demands that Iran give up its rights established by international law-that as a participant in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that permits Iran to enrich uranium for civilian use.

Of the "new suspicions" of the IAEA, one can safely say that they are not "new" and they do not have anything at all. Such suspicions were discarded years ago in regard to not complying with the requirements of relevance and specificity.

A new report by the IAEA, recently welcomed by the West, resurrected some dubious data which was never accepted by the former director of the IAEA, Mohamed El-Baradei, for being just that, dubious. This data was dismissed by El-Baradei for not having inherent credibility. The new director welcomed it and dressed it in new clothes.

More specifically what was said by the new representative is that the idea that such activities had not continued could not be dismissed. Well, ideas based on dubious data, smelling of dubious foundation that have never been proven and accepted are now "new directions" causing "new outrage" followed by a crescendo of economic sanctions against Iran by the leadership of western states (read as the U.S., France, England) leading us to where we are today.

We have no concrete evidence, it is not a shadow. However, the sharp pointed guns are ready to be put into action. Again-in the Middle East. God forbid.

　

REFERENCES AND NOTES:

[1], Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett in "westerners AND HIGHLY Informed Iranians KNOW THE WAY OUT OF THE NUCLEAR IMPASSE ... BUT THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION WILL NOT TAKE IT." - The RACE is on for IRAN www.raceforiran.com on January 28, 2012

[2] Peter Jenkins, Britain's former representative to the IAEA-International Atomic Energy Agency - in "The West Could Strike a Deal With Iran" published in The Telegraph. Source: www.raceforiran.com - The Race for Iran. on January 28, 2012

* Anna Malm is an international correspondent for Patria Latina and Iran News in Stockholm

----------------------------

Afghanistan-The NATO stratagem

The NATO stratagem

The Frontier Post

February 3, 2012 The NATO command in Afghanistan could be excused. After all, over all these years it has fought the Afghan war not on the battlefield but mostly on the airwaves of the embedded western corporate media. And now that the pay time has come, it has nothing spectacular on its slate to show its peoples back home for the enormous treasures they have spent on its upkeep. Throughout, it in fact has only fiddled with its war in Afghanistan, not fought it in reality. As the US-led invaders, hardly a little over 6,000 under the ISAF command and barely 12,000 under the American command, descended on the Taliban-ruled Afghanistan, the Soviet Afghan war veterans were mirthfully amused at this puny force for as difficult a country as their invaded land and were no lesser stunned by the attackers’ hubris that it reflected so pungently. The Soviet invaders, some 200,000-strong had come riding on a formidable war machine backed up by powerful air support. As an ally, they had an equally strong Afghan army and air force, both trained and equipped by them lethally. And yet the Soviet invaders had to kiss humiliation of defeat at the end at an indomitable Afghan resistance’s hands. No different was it going to be for the US-led invaders of Afghanistan, had the Soviet veterans predicted then. And their prediction of years ago is now imminently coming true palpably. The Soviet invaders had at least the control of major cities. The US-led NATO occupiers cannot lay claim even to this much credibly after ten years of their invasion. Lately, they are making so much of the Kandahar "triumph". But the American intelligence community itself in its latest Afghan war assessment terms this "victory" as at best "tenuous". And their once-shrilly-touted Mirjah showcase success of the troop surge has turned out to be such a damp squib that none of them now even talks of it.It is not just that Afghanistan’s south and east are restive, out of the US-led occupiers’ control and under the Taliban’s and other insurgent groups’ sway. Even the rest of the country is under the thumb of former mujahideen commanders, on whose sweet will are dependent both the occupiers and Kabul regime alike, not vice versa. While Ustad Atta Mohammad Noor is a jealous overlord of the northern Balkh province, its capital city Mazar-i-Sharif and its periphery are held by Uzbek strongman Abdul Rashid Dostum who had fought along the Soviet invaders against the Afghan resistance and now brooks no meddling with his fiefdom. And whereas the western province of Herat is largely Tajik-origin warlord Ismail Khan’s sultanate, the central highlands region of Hazarajat stands parceled out between ethnic Hazara strongmen. By every reckoning, the US-led invaders’ occupation of Afghanistan has been such a huge collapse in every manner that their commanders will have no face to show their peoples if the reality is told in all truthfulness. The NATO’s Afghan war is no tale of heroic deeds and impressive soldiering, as been brought home by the embedded media to the western publics. It has been a shameful story of its trepidation and spinelessness. And it has been a narrative of the most devious kind of deceit and deception right from the outset. As the ISAF knights were cooling their heels in their Kabul redoubt and the American warriors in their Bagram nestle immovably for years, fattening their bellies with endless pints of beer and rolls of hamburgers, they kept crying that Taliban had fled and settled in safe havens in Pakistan from where they launched attacks on them and Afghan territories. Neither they themselves explained nor their bosses back home or media or even their people asked them critically why had they not corralled and nabbed the fleeing Taliban rumps in the first place, and if at all they were coming from Pakistan to attack them and the Afghans what were they doing in their nestling places and not moving out to intercept them and decimate them. No questions were they asked and their fictional stories of heroic deeds and brave fighting were lapped up pridefully by their folks back home just like that. It was years later, in late 2005, that they condescended to move out of their redoubts, amid a lot of reluctance, and wrangling and bickering among themselves, to take on the Taliban and other insurgent groups who had lethally regrouped in their erstwhile strongholds in the Pakhtun-dominated southern and eastern Afghanistan unshakably. Yet so delusional were they all, both the pamper-wearing Tarzans and their folks, that when the British army moved out to the Helmand region, a puffed-up British defence secretary squawked blithely that his men would capture the restive province without firing a shot. Over six years down the road, the British army is nowhere nearer even distantly that objective. The leaked NATO report of the ISI’s collusion may give some leeway to the NATO armies to delude and beguile their own peoples, greatly perturbed over their disgraceful fall in Afghanistan. But the pulsating ground realities it too would not be able to change, as couldn’t earlier the similarly misleading BBC documentary. For, up against the US-led occupiers are not just Taliban. It is the Pakhtun nationalism that is pitted against them. And this formidable force has now come to be joined in by disgruntled elements of the Afghan minorities.

Anti-Semitism and Israel's Inherent Contradictions

Anti-Semitism and Israel's Inherent Contradictions

By Ramzy Baroud

February 3, 2012 In a recent article, columnist Yaniv Halili described British author Ben White as 'anti-Semitic'. He also denounced Arab Knesset member Hanin Zoabi for writing a forward to White's latest book, Palestinians in Israel: Segregation, Discrimination and Democracy. Those of us who can see through such distorted thinking know that White is a principled writer who has never displayed a shred of racism in his work. Zoabi is very well-known civil rights leader with a long-standing reputation of courage and poise. How could anti-racist endeavors themselves become the subject of accusation by Halili and others like him? It goes without saying there should be no room for any racist discourse - Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, or any other - in the Palestine solidarity movement, which aims at achieving long-denied justice and rights for the Palestinian people. A racist discourse is predicated on racial supremacy, which is exactly what Palestinians are resisting in Israel and the occupied territories. But the "Jewish and democratic state" of Israel is riddled with so many contradictions, the kind that no straightforward narrative can possibly capture. Many scholars and rights groups have discussed the way in which irreconcilable values defined the very character of Israel from the onset. According to Adalah (meaning "justice" in Arabic), the legal center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, "Israel's Declaration of Independence (1948) states two principles important for understanding the legal status of Palestinian citizens of Israel. First, the Declaration refers specifically to Israel as a 'Jewish state’ committed to the 'ingathering of the exiles.’ (Second)…it contains only one reference to the maintenance of complete equality of political and social rights for all its citizens, irrespective of race, religion, or sex." Adalah further asserts that there is a 'tension’ between the two principles. Perhaps this is the case, intellectually, but in practice the Israeli political establishment has resolved the seeming quandary whereby the Jewishness of the state prevails above every other humanitarian, democratic or legal consideration. Racially discriminating legislation is being churned out in the Israeli Knesset at an alarming speed, and new laws are constantly being proposed. These include "one that would end the status of Arabic as one of Israel's official languages and another that would punish Israeli citizens, including Arab Israelis, for refusing to pledge their allegiance to 'Israel as a Jewish and democratic state,’" according to columnist Linda Heard (Arab News, Jan 24). As for Palestinians living in the occupied territories, their legally enshrined political inferiority has been felt in much harsher and often bloodier ways than their brethren living in Israel. For nearly four and a half decades, the Palestinians living in these territories have been losing their land, livelihood, freedom of movement and even their very lives in the name of the racial superiority of their occupiers. Jewish settlements are illegally constructed on Palestinian land to host Jewish settlers, who use Jewish-only roads to travel between their heavily fortified colonies and the "Jewish state." While numerous intellectuals, activists and ordinary members of Jewish communities around the world have strongly protested Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians, as well as Israel’s misuse of the Jewish religion to attain political goals, Israel relies greatly on the support of Jewish communities, organizations and individuals for vital funds, political support and lobbying. While many Jews identify with Israel as a 'Jewish state’, "younger American Jews are more likely than their parents to be acquainted with the Palestinians and their story," reported TIME magazine on September 29. The TIME story references one such youth, Benjamin Resnick, 27, who decries the fact that Jewish state and American liberal democracy represent two views that are 'irreconcilable’. On the other hand, he "continues to consider himself a Zionist," who "quotes the Torah in support of his view that American Jews should press Israel to end settlement expansion and help facilitate a Palestinian state." Even Resnick’s political dissent is riddled with inconsistencies, where national identity (as an American) clashes with ideology (Zionism) and religion (the Torah) is referenced as a means to resolve the discord. The Torah is put to good use repeatedly among mainstream and ardent Israeli rabbis, whose edicts to kill Arabs are commonplace in Israeli media (although rarely discussed in US media). The so-called King’s Torah – which is endorsed by some prominent Israeli rabbis – has made it permissible to kill Palestinians of all ages, including those who don’t pose a threat. "You can kill those who are not supporting or encouraging murder in order to save the lives of Jews," it states in the fifth chapter, entitled "Murder of non-Jews in a time of war." The BBC elaborates: "At one point it suggests that babies can justifiably be killed if it is clear they will grow up to pose a threat" (July 19). This becomes particularly problematic when the lines between politics, ideology and religion become so conveniently blurred. Israeli and Jewish leaders borrow from the corresponding text as they find suitable to achieve policies to further occupation, war and illegal settlement. Alan Dershowitz, a professor at Harvard Law School, came to represent the latter model. His style lacks diplomacy and logic; however, it is effective in some circles because it centers around the idea of smearing anyone who dares to criticize Israel. The greater tragedy is that Dershowitz is provided with platforms in mainstream and rightwing Israeli media, thus giving his smear campaign the means to turn any genuine discussion of Israel into a controversial hate speech. While critical non-Jews are often smeared as 'anti-Semites’, jurist Richard Goldstone, who lead the UN investigation into the Israeli war on Gaza., was not a mere anti-Semite for concluding that Israel and Hamas had both potentially committed war crimes and crimes against humanity. Dershowitz told Israeli Army Radio that Goldstone is a 'traitor to the Jewish people’. 'The Goldstone report is a defamation written by an evil, evil man,’ Dershowitz said (Haaretz, October 31). While the case for Palestinian rights and statehood can be clear-cut – not many true-to-self intellectuals could justify ethnic cleansing, defend Apartheid and rationalize murder – delving into the political identity of Israel and its ideological and religious supporters becomes immediately 'controversial’. The controversy is embedded in the purposeful intellectual and political elasticity by which Israel defines, or refuses to define itself. It claims to be Jewish as well as democratic. It claims to embody religious ideals but also to be secular. It claims to be liberal, while it is militarily oppressive. It claims to uphold 'equality’ for all, while it is racially exclusive. And if you dare to challenge these irreconcilable contradictions, you are termed an anti-Semite or a traitor - or both. - Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net) is an internationally-syndicated columnist and the editor of PalestineChronicle.com. His latest book is My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza's Untold Story (Pluto Press, London). -------------------------------------------

Morgellons disease: Horror in reality

03.02.2012 12:01

Morgellons disease resembles a scene from a horror movie. The entire body is itchy. Those suffering from the disease have a sensation of something crawling under their skin. Then lesions appear. When they break, colored fibers and substance similar to dark sand grains come out.

Wounds partially heal, leaving welts and scars, but soon appear elsewhere.

It started five years ago, when Mary Leitão took fibers that looked like dandelion fluff from an abscess on the lip of her two-year old son. After three pediatricians, three allergists, two dermatologists and multiple wrong diagnoses, she realized that her Drew had a serious problem. Sores started to appear throughout the body. When they would burst, white, blue and black fibers would come out of them. The kid complained of itching, and said that bugs were crawling under his skin. Mary Leitão continued consulting doctors, but no one believed her.

The last doctor she appealed for help, an infectious diseases specialist at Johns Hopkins University, not only refused to see Drew, but suggested that the mother had Munchausen's syndrome - a psychiatric disorder where a parent pretends that her child is sick to get the attention of physicians. Mary found out what happened to Drew in March of 2004. After her website appeared on the Internet, it turned out that she was not fighting the doctors alone. There were thousands of people like her son. Drew Leitão had Morgellons disease.

In the mid-1930s, a British physician C. Kellet argued in the journal "Annals of British Medicine" that for the first time Morgellons disease was described by French doctors in the 17th century. Then, however, it was described as black hairs growing from children's skin. The first people who suffered from this disease were the children of the Morgellons family residing in Languedoc. While the "early" form of the disease is not exactly the same as the modern one, the name has stuck.  

The fibers that appear on the patients' skin are not textile fibers, as was thought at first, not worms or insects, not fragments of human skin or hair. The fibers do not appear from the outside, they are formed of substance produced in the body, possibly as a result of unknown infection.

In the laboratory the fibers were first subjected to a spectroscopic analysis, but no similarity with any of the 800 fibers registered in the database were found. Then chromatographic analysis was conducted, with the same result. The database contains nearly 90,000 organic compounds, but neither one of them look like the inspected threads. Other symptoms of Morgellons disease include chronic fatigue, forcing patients to leave work and stay home, a sharp decline in mental abilities, especially memory, severe depression, joint swelling, muscle spasms and loss of hair.

The exact number of patients is unknown to date. The site of the Center for Morgellons disease, led by Mary Leitão, has eight thousand registered users. But this, certainly, is just the tip of the iceberg. Some people do not have computers, some do not know about the Center, while others simply gave up and think they cannot be helped and intend to commit suicide. Patients reside not only in all 50 U.S. states, but also in the UK, Australia, and the Netherlands. Doctors do not know how to treat the mysterious disease. Indeed, in most cases they claim that the "insects" and fibers with grains are nothing more than a figment of a sick imagination of the patients. In medicine it is called delusional parasitosis. After this diagnosis many stop going to doctors. Patients try to treat themselves - burn their furniture, clothing and carpets, move to other apartments and homes, but the strange ailment does not go away. Some claim that Morgellons disease is a new type of biological weapon.

In late 2011, experts of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention in the U.S. conducted a new research and found no traces of an infectious agent or parasite on examination of the skin of patients suffering from Morgellons disease. American scientists believe that Morgellons disease is of psychiatric nature. Incidentally, the mysterious fibers were tested again and chemists have found that they are fibers of cotton or nylon. "We found no evidence that this is an infectious disease. Most of the patients, if sick, are sick mentally," said the study's author Dr. Mark Ebenhard.

Vadim Kirillov

Medpulse

Дмитрий Судаков

Americans get closer to building weapon of the future

01.02.2012 18:54

The US Navy may have the world's most powerful electromagnetic gun - the so-called railgun - during the forthcoming 15 years. The "Weapon of the 21^st Century," as Russian specialists described it, was undergoing tests during the recent several years. US defense officials were satisfied with the results. They have already signed the first contract to create the power source for the gun. The railgun needs a lot of energy to accelerate projectiles to supersonic speeds.

Raytheon Company, one of the USA's largest defense suppliers, signed an agreement with the Naval Sea Systems Command for the creation of the power system for the railgun. The agreement was evaluated at $10 billion, a message on the website of the company said.

In accordance with the agreement, Raytheon undertakes to design and build the power module, which will become a part of the Pulse Forming Network (PFN). In the future, the system can be used for the production of railguns and combat lasers.

A railgun is an entirely electrical gun that accelerates a conductive projectile along a pair of metal rails using the same principles as the homopolar motor. Railguns use two sliding or rolling contactsthat permit a largeelectric current to pass through the projectile. This current interacts with the strong magnetic fields generated by the rails and this accelerates the projectile. Particular characteristics are the lack of propellant (only the projectile and the electrical energy to launch it are required to be expended) and the ability to launch projectiles much faster than firearms-based technology allows.

Railguns have long existed as experimental and demonstrator technology. However, in recent years, some are moving towards becoming feasible military technology. For example, in the late 2000s, the U.S. Navy tested a railgun that accelerates a 3.2 kg (7 pound) projectile to approximately 2.4 kilometres per second (5,400 mph). They gave the project the Latin motto "Velocitas Eradico", which they translate as "Speed Destroys".

Apart from military applications, railguns have also been proposed to launch spacecraft into orbit. Unless the launching track was particularly long (and the acceleration required to reach orbit spread over a much longer time), such launches would however be restricted to unmanned spacecraft.

The USA conducted the first tests of the military railgun in 2008. The tests showed that the system was capable of accelerating projectiles to the speed of 9,000 kmh. By firing at greater velocities railguns have greater range, less bullet drop and less wind drift, bypassing the inherent cost and physical limitations of conventional firearms. The most recent test of a railgun took place on December 10, 2010, by the US Navy at the Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division. During the test, the Office of Naval Research set a world record by conducting a 33 MJshot from the railgun

The goal of such tests is to build a new weapon system for surface vessels. When completed, railguns will be able to shoot projectiles at distances of up to 400 kilometers. The main advantage of the electromagnetic gun is that it poses no danger for the crew. There are no explosives used in the system.

Russian military experts admit that the railgun is a prospective weapon system of the new century. The destructive force of the system is very high. The range of the new complex is comparable to the range of missile systems. Since there is no explosive used, the projectiles are safe and lighter.

As for disadvantages, railguns can easily unmask the vessels on which they will be installed. In addition, the system needs enormous mounts of energy for work. To solve this problem, one would have to build a new generation of vessels with the energy system that would supply enough energy to both their engines and weapon systems, Russian officials noted in 2008.

In the middle of 2011, the US Senate was going to cut the funding for two most "futuristic" defense projects - the railgun and the combat laser. President Obama rescued the "weapon of the 21^st century" when he signed the decree to continue the development of railguns. First railguns are to appear on US vessels by 2025. 

Дмитрий Судаков

Iraq’s Crisis: Vice President Hashemi Speaks

Iraq’s Crisis: Vice President Hashemi Speaks

By Ma'ad Fayad, Asharq Al-Awsat

Asharq Al-Awsat Interview: Iraqi VP Tariq al-Hashimi February 2, 2012 Erbil, Asharq Al-Awsat- Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi believes his greatest mistake was, "supporting Al-Maliki twice for the position of prime minister of Iraq." Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat from his temporary residence in Erbil, the capital of the Iraqi Kurdistan region, al-Hashimi rejected standing before any court in Baghdad and stated that he will "sue Nuri al-Maliki constitutionally and legally because he harmed my reputation and honour." Al-Hashimi detailed the raid on his office and his home in the fortified Green Zone in Baghdad by Operation Forces and described his ordeal as "sectarian practices." The following is the full text of the interview: [Asharq Al-Awsat] Do you think you will remain in Erbil for long? [Al-Hashimi] I hope not. I hope that this crisis will end well in the near future. However, I cannot determine a time frame for remaining here. My situation is normal, praise be to God, and I am working with the rest of the leaders to find an appropriate way out. [Asharq Al-Awsat] what scenario do you see resolving this crisis? [Al-Hashimi] The crisis this time is a heavy weight, and I mean what I say. Nuri al-Maliki, the Iraqi prime minister, has created a national crisis and this requires an urgent political surgical resolution. In my opinion, Iraq today is at a crossroad: either we focus the attention of our political leaders to build a true democracy or everyone must give in to what happened over the past six years in terms of obvious polarization of power which could very possibly lead this country to tyranny. This political scene that I am summarizing and I am saying has put the country in great danger and all possibilities in the future are open. It is on this basis that it is now time for everyone to assume their national and legitimate roles, especially leaders of the National Alliance, in order to save Iraq and prevent the country from slipping back into tyranny and losing the opportunity. This could be the last opportunity. [Asharq Al-Awsat] In your opinion what led to this situation? [Al-Hashimi] This problem probably lies in the national project that was adopted by our Al-Iraqiya group. Frankly, this is how I read the situation. Personally over the past six years I have not been a personal rival of Al-Maliki, but I was in opposition. [Asharq Al-Awsat] You were a supporter of Al-Maliki! [Al-Hashimi] I never supported Al-Maliki. [Asharq Al-Awsat] Did you not support his nomination for the prime minister's position twice? [Al-Hashimi] Yes I did, on two occasions, and probably committed the biggest mistake of my life. [Asharq Al-Awsat] Do you regret supporting Al-Maliki? [Al-Hashimi] Yes, very much so. I supported him in 2006 when Al-Maliki was replaced by Ibrahim al-Jaafari. The scene was repeated again when the political position was altered in the final moments before the current government was formed. I deprived Al-Iraqiya the chance of brother Iyad Allawi forming the cabinet and of being the prime minister. We finally agreed on the nomination of Al-Maliki to form the government. I was also one of those people who did not think twice about blessing the nomination of Al-Maliki and this time in the hope that we will benefit from the experience of the previous session. This was the hope and this is what I told Al-Maliki when I met him alone a number of times in the hallways and spoke to him about my point of view on how the Iraqi state should be administrated over the next four years, which I brought down to one issue this time, and said we must steer clear of political one-upmanship and political haggling and focus over the next four years on serving the Iraqi citizen, serving Iraq, and working as contractors, both you and I, to serve Iraq. I have experience and political and security potentials that I want to utilize to serve my country but I was denied the opportunity to help the Iraqis over the past session, so can you this time open your heart to your brothers in the Al-Iraqiya List and strengthen true national partnership, a partnership that would be that of strong people and not one of the powerful with the weak, a leader and a follower which was the impression we had during the previous session? I asked him: Do you have the ability to strengthen this partnership and for everyone to be a supporter of the national project that was announced during the elections campaign? We in the Al-Iraqiya list are ready; in fact Tariq al-Hashimi was ready and I even go further and say clearly that this time we have to succeed and I insist on your personal success, Abu-Isra [REFERENCE to Al-Maliki] so are you ready? Al-Maliki said: I am ready, put your faith in God. However, nothing came out of this promise, the same policy that we had seen in the previous session remained and [continued down] the same path. Therefore, this is what happened. [Asharq Al-Awsat] In your opinion, what is the basis of the disagreement between your Al-Iraqiya grouping and the State of Law grouping or the government? [Al-Hashimi] In my view the basic issue is discrepancy between the two projects, there is a push between a national project that is adopted by Al-Iraqiya that is trying to save Iraq and bring about a tangible transformation in the fields of security, economy, service, and foreign relations with neighbouring countries, and between a project I do not want to describe but its features are clear on the ground and they are manifested in occasional security violations that affect innocent people, and there is no methodological review of this file, but there is arrogance. People are being killed and we say that our security situation is good. On the economic side and eight years after the regime has changed, Iraq depends on one resource and that is the crude oil despite the presence of other resources in Iraq that can be utilized. Therefore, the economic situation is very serious in the event that the sea trade is obstructed by Iran in the Strait of Hormuz. If the export of Iraqi oil is obstructed then Iraq will declare its bankruptcy and will even not be able to pay the salaries of its employees. Do you not think that we should feel ashamed because 36 percent of the Iraqi people, especially in the southern governorates, live below the poverty line and cannot find money for their daily bread? Iraq has huge resources and has huge financial capabilities. The Iraqi budget has not reached over 100 billion dollars throughout its history. As for the services side, we ask where does the Iraqi Government stand now in terms of [providing] electricity and providing fresh drinking water, education, and municipal services? In terms of health there is obvious deterioration and even the UN reports place Iraq in the category of very backward. The other issue pertains to the tense foreign policy with the neighbouring, Arab, and GCC countries in addition to all the countries around the world...the most dangerous aspect are the reports by registered international organizations about the huge degree of corruption that has hit the Iraqi state and the dangerous violations in human rights files which were confirmed by international human rights organizations affiliated to the United Nations, Amnesty, and Human Rights Watch. All these violations took place during the previous session and are happening today regardless of the available international support and the cooperation of the Iraqi people along with groupings and political personalities supporting a peaceful political process as was the case over the past few years. However, the result was tragic in my opinion even though some minor accomplishments were achieved here and there. Lessons should have been learned from what had happened during the previous session and I told Al-Maliki that he has to listen to the other point of view and not to "give yourself immunity and feel that you are not responsible." The accomplishments he had made in the economic, security, and services sectors are the greatest things that should have been achieved in previous years, in fact he should have admitted mistakes and failures and should have been frank with our people. He should have worked in the current session to avoid these shortcomings and to cooperate. However, this did not happen and therefore the disagreement continues between us and Al-Maliki. [Asharq Al-Awsat] Al-Hashimi is the vice president of the republic and Saleh al-Mutlaq is the deputy prime minister and both of you belong to one sect, which is the Sunni sect. I am forced to talk this way as you both belong to one group, which is a rival to the prime minister's group, a group that won the elections but did not form a government. Today you both face marginalization from the rival party in one way or another. Al-Maliki accuses you of terrorism and the prime minister is asking to withdraw confidence from Al-Mutlaq, how do you explain this? [Al-Hashimi] Of course what has happened to me and to brother Al-Mutlaq has a certain dimension. [Asharq Al-Awsat] Do you think it is a sectarian dimension? [Al-Hashimi] Precisely, and proof of this is that today there are people in the National Alliance against whom the courts have issued arrest warrants. But why have they not been implemented? Why is the media announcing the order that Al-Hashimi should be arrested and why was this order not made by the judicial quarters? Later, it transpired that the arrest warrant was issued by the judiciary a few days after it was announced to the public, why? The issue is a sectarian one no doubt and anyone observing this file will see clearly that there is sectarian targeting. A great part of the accusations of terrorism against me and the demands to withdraw confidence from Al-Mutlaq is that (Sunni) entity symbols are being targeted. We in Al-Iraqiya tried through our national project to overcome this sectarian issue. In fact, in our movement there is (renewal) and I am in charge of this renewal. Our first slogan is "Iraq from a country of entities to a country of citizenship." On the other hand, today you see clear bias and oppression from the opposite side. What is the problem in the governorates of Ninawa, Salahaldin, Diyala, and Al-Anbar? The problem is violations in the file of human rights. What is the problem in the southern governorates? Poverty and lack of services. Today, any citizen in these governorates cannot guarantee a secure house for himself or his family. A person cannot guarantee his family for the next day! Why? Therefore, people in these (Sunni) governorates are being targeted and sectarian practices are clear to everyone and they cannot in any way be denied. [Asharq Al-Awsat] The accusations of terrorism against you coincided with the requests by the prime minister to withdraw confidence from Al-Mutlaq and the announcement by the American Administration of the withdrawal of its troops from Iraq. How do you explain this? [Al-Hashimi] There is more than one theory in this regard and they deserve studying. First; has the American Administration given Al-Maliki the green light to do this especially since he says he provided the Americans with information about Al-Hashimi when Al-Maliki was in Washington and therefore they gave him the green light to hassle me upon his return to Baghdad. [Asharq Al-Awsat] Is it possible that a prime minister of an independent and a large sovereign country such as Iraq to give security information about the vice president of the republic to a country that occupied Iraq and to discuss the issue of arresting Al-Hashimi? [Al-Hashimi] This is what happened, and this is very regrettable. This man (Al-Maliki) violated the Constitution, law, and norms. He should have covered up this issue even if Al-Hashimi had made a mistake pertaining to the Constitution or the law. There is a red-line for a public position and when it is said that the vice president of the republic is involved in terrorism then what is left in the Iraqi state? This was an attack not only against Al-Hashimi but the entire Iraqi state and the public position. There was no justification to display our dirty laundry in public had we had any, and this issue was not a fabrication before the world and for us to be led into undermining our symbols and leaders in such a way and offering information to a country that ought to have nothing to do with a sovereign matter pertaining to an employee in the presidency that represents the sovereignty of the Iraqi state! As for the second theory, it pertains to Al-Maliki who probably has his own agenda and he probably needs a long time to implement it. It is an agenda that starts with Al-Hashimi and ends with the symbols of the Iraqi leadership and probably then it will move to symbols of the National Alliance and the leaders of the Kurdish Alliance. Probably what is left of the life of this current session, the two years, is enough. But Al-Maliki will not bring down all the leaders and symbols opposing his policies. He started with Tariq al-Hashimi, and he said it outright: "I have files that will reach other political personalities." However, what stopped him right now from implementing his agenda is the reaction that took him by surprise from within and abroad in defense of the injustice to which Al-Hashimi was subjected. As for the third theory, then probably Al-Maliki faced pressure from a neighbouring country that has proved it is not far from fabricating this incident. Here I mean Iran in particular. The fourth theory is that it was probably a pre-emptive strike for reports that Al-Maliki received said that Al-Hashimi would carry out a coup attempt after the withdrawal of the American forces. [Asharq Al-Awsat] Was it a conspiracy that you were planning? [Al-Hashimi] No...this is laughable. I responded to him and said all that I have in terms of protective weapons are from the Ministry of Defense and they are merely simple Kalashnikov machine guns. The Ministry of Defense for the past four years has refused to complete my security regiment. I am a military officer and I know the number and equipment of the regiment. The only regiment that the Ministry of Defense is refusing to complete is the regiment to protect Al-Hashimi. Al-Maliki deprived patriotic personalities from serving their country and their people. Iraq is in dire need of these services and my dream was to leave public office having achieved something for my country and my people. I have security expertise and I have excellent relations with world leaders. [Asharq Al-Awsat] You mentioned that you were an officer in the Iraqi Army. What was your rank when you left the army? [Al-Hashimi] I was a staff lieutenant colonel when I was expelled from the army in 1975. Had I gone up in my military ranks in the legal way then today I would have held the rank of staff general. However, I altered my rank in 2005 when I put forward a request to take the years I was expelled from the army into account since I was politically expelled and I received the rank of a retired staff major general according to the service log. [Asharq Al-Awsat] Talking about the service log and military ranks, the officers' promotions were carried out according to lists that were published on the Army Day anniversary on 6 January and in July, is this still the case? [Al-Hashimi] In fact, the problem is in the military service and retirement law. I tried before the law was issued two years ago to have a modern law that attracts capabilities and places proper criteria for volunteering to join the Iraq Army and for promotion, end of service, and retirement. This did not happen because of Al-Maliki's insistence that the issues of volunteering, promotion, and end of service for the officers in the Iraqi Army should remain in his hands since he is the general commander of the armed forces when in fact the issue of ranks in the Iraqi Army since it was established was the responsibility of the sovereign and it must be left to the presidency according to the Constitution. However, Al-Maliki insisted despite all the laws that were adopted by the Iraqi state in 1921 to exclude military promotion from being issued by a republican decree and for these to be issued by the diwan [court] (the prime minister's court). Imagine...a decree from the diwan, which appoints a simple employee at the same time, offers a military rank that pertains to national security and sovereignty. It upsets me that the security and defense committee has let me down and has approved this law depriving the military institution of the republican decree. This is why today the estimates of those employed as officers in the army and their promotion and matters pertaining to their retirement are not in the hands of the military institution but in the hands of one person, and that is the general commander of the Armed Forces. [Asharq Al-Awsat] You are responsible for the detainee file as vice president of the republic; do you have a known number of those detained especially in the secret prisons? [Al-Hashimi] We do not have any definite information about the numbers of those detained or the number of secret prisons in Iraq. A year ago I launched a website on the Internet through which I wanted to know those people who disappear all of a sudden without their family knowing their fate, but Al-Maliki and his office objected on the grounds that how can the vice president of the republic launch such a website for the people and therefore embarrass the executive agency in the Iraqi state and they told me I am not a civil society organization. I asked them are you not interested in finding out the number of those who have been kidnapped, those who disappear, or those arrested? I am interested in this number because we have no numbers available. We follow the reports issued by the Supreme Judicial Council that such and such a number entered prison and such and such a number of prisoners were released. In addition to this, are there really no secret prisons in Iraq? So where are the detentions taking place and where is the torture taking place and the extraction of all these fabricated and baseless confessions? Are these practices taking place in normal prisons under the supervision of the Ministry of Justice? I doubt this. It is regrettable that I do not have any answer to your question. There is no number for those detained or the number of secret prisons. There are wide-scale violations pertaining to the detention period specified by the Constitution, which is 24 hours that can be doubled once only. Then you either release the prisoner or he is put on trial. I know that there are some political activists who spent years in prison and have not been released and every time there is a court order to release them they say wait maybe another case would come up in which you are accused. Months go by and they are in prison until new fabricated cases against come up so they stay in prison. As for the human rights file in Iraq, it requires international intervention. The situation today is worse than it was in the past and today I am talking about the new Iraq and the standards on which we agreed; standards the violation of which led to the changing of the former regime. Therefore today we cannot accept a single violation of human rights. The reports by the international human rights organizations bring shame to us all and harm the reputation of Iraq. [Asharq Al-Awsat] What about what happened to your security team and the employees in your office in Baghdad? [Al-Hashimi] What happened was horrific. They say that Al-Hashimi and his guards violated the law pertaining to terrorism, we understand this but it is my right and the right of my guards to defend ourselves before a fair and just trial that is not influenced by rivals. However, what have the women done? There is an employee called Rasha in the media office, she is married and has a child and is supporting a family of 11 people. Also there is another simple Christian woman who is married and has four children. What happened is that the 56th Brigade, the Baghdad Operations Brigade, went to Rasha's house to arrest her and when they couldn't find her they threatened her family and said they would arrest her brothers if she did not hand herself over, so she handed herself over because she was sure of her innocence. I am a witness to her good behaviour and her high ethics over the past years. However, they forced her to confess that she had carried out terrorist operations and that she enticed a police officer in order to kill him. This is what they leaked via the Internet and this is something very frightening; it is distortion of the reputation and honour of an Iraqi woman. I launched a campaign to defend the two women. Yesterday Amnesty International called us because it was horrified by the report to which I had gained access. I have not seen the arrest warrants against the two employees and we do not know the location where they are held. We are not able to assign a lawyer according to the Constitution in order to defend them. [Asharq Al-Awsat] How was it possible for a military force to raid the house and office of the vice president of the Republic of Iraq? Do you not have immunity? [Al-Hashimi] Of course there is immunity in accordance with Article 93 of the Constitution. It is very clear and it points out that any accusation made against the presidency, the prime ministry, or cabinet must be presented to the Federal Court and not to the regular courts. This did not happen and the Constitution was violated. In fact Al-Maliki is the one who received the file on day one and it continues to be supervised by him until this moment; he is speaking instead of the court and is making decisions for the judiciary and accepts or rejects [whatever he wants.] [Asharq Al-Awsat] There is a mayor who decided to obstruct the public highway between Baghdad and the Kurdistan Region in order to arrest you, is this true? [Al-Hashimi] Yes the mayor of Al-Khalis. There are two arrest warrants against him and two months ago before my own crisis with Al-Maliki, I wrote to the judiciary council and asked them why the general prosecution was not pursuing the arrest of Al-Khadran in accordance with the two warrants issued by the executive authority. There are arrest warrants issued by the judiciary against the undersecretary of the Trade Ministry and a former trade minister. There are hundreds of arrest warrants for other people and they have been covered up by Al-Maliki and the executive authority and there is no following up on the matter. They are moving around publicly and are living normal lives. However, an arrest warrant in a fabricated case against Al-Hashimi is made within days and within hours his office is besieged and raided along with his house and his guards' headquarters. Everything in his office and home was tampered with. I also learned that everything has been destroyed; some posters were put up in my office along with some sectarian slogans as though it was a historic battle against the Al-Hashimi office. Computers were seized along with communication equipment and other equipment used for my protection. My house was tampered with and all my equipment was seized. Even my bedroom, office, clothes, and pictures of my family were leaked on the Internet. It is regrettable that when I travelled from Baghdad to Al-Sulaymaniya to meet with President Jalal Talabani I took nothing but a small bag because I would have been returning the next day to my home and office and on the way I heard the miserable and fabricated confessions that were forced out of my guards. [Asharq Al-Awsat] This means that you left normally and you did not escape from Baghdad as it was announced? [Al-Hashimi] Of course I did not run. I left Baghdad with Khudayr al-Khazai, vice president of the republic and everything that was said was lies. They are very good liars and very capable of propaganda. Al-Maliki has committed many humanitarian violations and personally I am going to sue him both constitutionally and legally. [Asharq Al-Awsat] Will you go to court? [Al-Hashimi] Yes I will. [Asharq Al-Awsat] Even if it were in Baghdad? [Al-Hashimi] No, I will not go to Baghdad...certainly not. I will go to court when there is justice that is stipulated in the law in order to provide a fair trial and personal protection. How can I appear in front of a court that has forged facts? I have all the courage to go to court to defend my reputation and my honour. [Asharq Al-Awsat] Have you thought about leaving Iraq? [Al-Hashimi] No. Not at all. I will not leave Iraq. I am here in the Kurdistan Region and it is part of Iraq. I am here among my people and brothers. I thank the generous Kurdish people and the Kurdish leaders for being good hosts to me. There is no reason to force me to leave my country. The message I received was that these practices are aimed at forcing me to leave Iraq. From the first week they said Al-Hashimi's best option is to leave Iraq.

America's pastime game: Bashing Palestinians

Opinion: America's pastime game: Bashing Palestinians

By Daoud Kuttab

February 2, 2012 Apologists for Israel’s continued occupation and control over Palestinian lives have long contended that Israel is more interested in peace than the Palestinians. One exaggerated argument, repeatedly put forward to justify military rule, is that Palestinians teach their children to hate Jews. Politicians in the US, especially during election campaigns, find that bashing Palestinians has no downside and, moreover, yields a vote (and donation) jackpot. Palestinian textbooks are scrutinized for any hostile reference to Israel — or praise of Palestinian nationalism — and every frame broadcast on Palestinian television stations is analyzed by experts to see if it contains any incitement to violence. Palestinian-Israeli committees spent hours researching these issues and concluded that there is no textbook glorification of violence or hate. European and bipartisan American committees reached similar conclusions. But anti-Palestinian attacks never stopped. All the efforts to respond scientifically and comprehensively to the unsubstantiated attacks failed to change the narrative that anti-Palestinian forces, especially in the United States, were keen on perpetuating. Self-declared professor and historian Newt Gingrich led the charge by negating Palestinian existence. Speaking on a Jewish online television station, Gingrich contradicted what the Israeli government did in 1993, when it recognized the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people. By cherry picking historical evidence to back his convoluted argument, Gingrich claimed that Palestinians are an "invented" people. A few days later, when pressed by ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulus, Gingrich repeated the blood libel against Palestinians by saying that Palestinian math books use killing Jews as part of their numeracy education. "They have textbooks that say, if there are 13 Jews and nine Jews are killed, how many Jews are left? We pay for those textbooks through our aid money." Of course, the textbook statement he referred to does not exist. The Associated Press went through the trouble of interviewing Israeli, Palestinian and American experts who have been deeply involved in the issue. Their conclusion was simple. According to researchers, Gingrich’s claim "is not in any of the texts". AP went further and stated: "A review of some texts by the AP, as well as several studies by Israeli, Palestinian and international researchers, found no direct calls for violence against Israel." Fact-checking sites, pundits and politicians failed to deal with the issue. And despite the AP story, no major American journalist, columnist, debater or think tank has called for or demanded that Gingrich admit and apologize for this brazen lie. Neither did the US government, which until recently funded Palestinian ministry of education projects, set the record straight even though the US presidential nominee implicated the US government in paying to print books that "teach terrorism". Worse is what is happening in the US Congress. A hold has been placed on US funding for Palestinian health and educational programs. The hold, which was placed in September by a Republican congresswoman from Florida, is intended to punish the Palestinian Authority because its leader, Mahmoud Abbas, dared to ask the United Nations to recognize Palestine as a state. Even more perplexing is what happened in early January when restrictions were placed on money already approved and allocated by the US Congress, including money for the Palestinian version of Sesame Street. The Washington Post and other US media outlets reported that $2.5 million committed for teaching Palestinian children tolerance and mutual respect was part of the hold instituted by congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. American politicians appear to be using precious little long-term thinking when it comes to Israel and Palestinians. Falsehoods declared on national television about textbooks are debunked by no one in the US government. The silence appears to be less a consequence of ignorance than of fear. Politically, there is little to gain from saying an honest word regarding US policy on Israel and Palestine. Consequently, the Republican-controlled Congress proceeds merrily on its course and holds up the funding that could rectify what experts agree is a non-existent problem of Palestinian textbook incitement. Bashing Palestinians remains an easy political pastime, especially at election time. It is tragic, however, that demagogic electioneering — and outright lies — can lead to the loss of responsible children’s television programming for Palestinians. And it is telling that broader funding for Palestinian civil society can be stopped simply because Palestinian leaders asserted the right of Palestinians to live free in a state of our own. Daoud Kuttab is a journalist and former professor of journalism at Princeton University.

Muslim immigrants want Switzerland to change national flag

A group of Muslim immigrants wants to force Switzerland to abandon the current flag - a white cross on the red background. They say that it violates the rights of the representatives of non-Christian confessions. They seem to have been hurt by the recent ban on minarets construction. However, their proposal is unlikely to be welcomed by the native Swiss and will only increase the number of votes in favor of the treasury of the local far-right People's Party.
   


The first suggestion to remove the cross from the Swiss flag was made not by a Muslim, but (judging by the name) an ethnic Croat and Catholic vice-president of the association of immigrants Secondos Plus Ivica Petrushich. "The cross does not fit today's multicultural Switzerland," he said. The organization of the Turkish, Albanian and other immigrants from Muslim countries followed with a similar initiative. Instead, they suggested using a green-yellow-red flag of Helvetic Republic that existed at the turn of the 18th-19th centuries. It has no cross on it.

It is hardly coincidental that the issue of replacing the flag was raised by the representatives of immigrant organizations. Today, over 20 percent of seven million-strong Swiss population is immigrants. Naturally, the Muslims will be more than others insistent on replacing the flag. There are nearly 400,000 of them (more than five percent of the population). The largest "ethnic Muslim" community is Albanian, followed by the Turkish one. Arabs and Bosnian Muslims also reside in Switzerland. Many of them certainly do not like the cross.

The vast majority of Swiss Muslims virtually broke off with the religion of their ancestors. No more than 50 thousand of the faithful pray five times a day. However, women in headscarves have become an integral part of the cityscape of Zurich or Geneva. Furthermore, the birthrate in religious Muslim families is much higher than among the other population. Finally, all Swiss followers of Islam are not natives, but immigrants and their descendants. Their support of changing the appearance of the flag is, to say the least, ambiguous.


Apparently, this circumstance was taken into account by the head of the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Switzerland Mayzar Hisham, who called the idea of ​​changing the flag "counterproductive." He said that they did not demand anyone to change the ancient traditions of their countries. It is hard not to agree with his words. The relations of the indigenous Swiss and immigrants have already passed a difficult strength test. The desire to change the flag will only add fuel to the fire.
Two years ago the Muslim community wanted to attach minarets to the existing mosques. However, Switzerland is different from all other countries in a way that each more or less relevant issue is solved by holding a referendum. Negotiations with the government officials were not sufficient, and they had to ask the opinion of the population. This opinion was not in favor of the Muslim immigrants.

The initiator of the referendum two years ago was the ultra-right Swiss People's Party that called to stop the "creeping Islamization". A deputy of the Swiss Parliament Ulrich Shlyuer said that minarets were a political symbol of the implementation of Islam. Step by step, Sharia was conquering Switzerland, acting in parallel with the Swiss law. Statistics show that the degree of religiosity of the local Muslim population is exaggerated, but for the ordinary Swiss even a hint of a violation of their habitual way of living was sufficient.



The results of voting on November 29, 2009 shocked Europe. 57.5 percent of the Swiss population was in favor of a ban on construction of minarets. At the same time kosher and halal slaughter of animals was banned (because of cruelty). Islamic organizations, human rights activists, and many European politicians expressed their outrage. However, the law came into force. The EU could not influence Switzerland as it is not its member.
 
Many of those dissatisfied with the verdict (including indigenous Europeans who had departed from the religion) were eager for revenge, and eventually decided to strike from the other side. They inquired why the flag of the Swiss Confederation had a Christian cross on it if construction of minarets was banned. Allegedly, it violated the rights of not only Muslims but also non-believers. That is why the red-green-yellow flag of the Helvetic Republic would be better.

Would the majority of the Swiss agree with this point of view?

Unlike neighboring France and Germany, the Swiss society is rather conservative. While there is no case of absolute religiousness of the Swiss society, the number of believers in Switzerland is higher than in the neighboring countries. This can be partially explained by a high proportion of rural population scattered along numerous mountain valleys in 20 cantons and six half-cantons of the country. Approximately half of the indigenous Swiss are Catholics; a little fewer are Protestant Calvinists. The cross on the flag is something that unites the country, and does not divide it.


As for the flag, the current symbol was first used in Switzerland in 1339, when the union of separate cantons just started to take shape. It achieved its official status in 1848, when the last standoff on this land ended, crowned with a robust Swiss Confederation. To some extent, it is a symbol of freedom and peace, a path to which took many centuries and numerous wars. 
The Helvetic Republic, whose flag is offered instead of the current one, is not particularly respected by the Swiss. It was created by Napoleon who occupied the country and decided to build entities supervised by the French on its territory. For the free-spirited Swiss this flag is a symbol of oppression.

Not to mention the fact that the combination of green, red and yellow colors is characteristic mainly of African countries. In Europe, only Lithuania has a similar flag.
 
Do the immigrants have a right to teach the Swiss tolerance? For over 160 years there has been no bloodshed on this territory. This is all the more surprising considering that the country is multinational. Nearly three-quarters of the indigenous Swiss speak German, one-fifth speaks French, five or six percent speak Italian, and a little less than one percent - the Romansh language. All these languages ​​have the official status, but there is one dominant language group in each canton (with rare exceptions). They managed to combine small mono-national "houses" with a multinational one. The country is not threated by a collapse.
 
Encroaching on the foundation of the state, immigrants cause a reaction from the German Swiss, French Swiss and Italian Swiss.  

Ultra People's Party is gaining popularity among all of them. Its symbol is three white sheep (the number of the top three language groups), kicking the fourth, black one. This is a clear hint to what should be done with immigrants. Four years ago, the party secured 29 percent of the Swiss votes, and it was a shock to Europe. In the parliamentary elections scheduled for October 23, the result may be even higher.



As is evident from the story with the restrictions on ritual slaughter of animals and minarets construction, the Swiss are not afraid to challenge the infamous political correctness. A ban on wearing the veil is to follow. The more you attempt to encroach on the foundation of the Swiss state, the stronger will be the response. It took Switzerland and its people too long to achieve stability and peace of mind to just give up on their values.


Vadim Trukhachev


Pravda.Ru

BOSNIA-Republic of Srpska: 20 years of struggle

Republic of Srpska: 20 years of struggle

02.02.2012 13:44

The beginning of this year marks the 20th anniversary of the establishment of the Republic of Srpska within Bosnia and Herzegovina. Its emergence was dictated by the realities of wars that began as a result of the collapse of former Yugoslavia. Everything pointed to the fact that this formation would not last long.

Orthodox Serbs are indigenous people of Bosnia just as Slavic Muslims (Bosniaks), Croats and Catholics. Before the Second World War, Serbs represented the largest number of ethnic groups in the Bosnian land. Subsequently the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina was established, acknowledged by the formation of three people: Muslims, Serbs and Croats. According to the census of 1991, the Serbs accounted for 31.4 percent of the population.

In 1991, Croatia and Slovenia were considering leaving Yugoslavia, followed by Macedonia. In Bosnia, the situation was not that straightforward. Muslims and Croats thought of separation (the former wanted to establish their own state, the latter - to accede to Croatia). The Serbs did not want to turn into aliens in their homeland and separate from Serbia that remained the "core" of Yugoslavia.

In the spring of 1991 in the current capital of the Republika Srpska, Banja Luka (in the north-west of Bosnia-Herzegovina), the establishment of the Serbian Autonomous Region of Bosnian Krajina was announced. In the fall of 1991, as well as in the beginning of 1992, a few other self-proclaimed Serbian republics emerged, mainly in eastern Bosnia near the border with Serbia.

On October 15, 1991 Muslims and Croats voted to secede from Yugoslavia. The Serbs boycotted the referendum. When in early 1992, the Bosnian Muslim leader Alija Izetbegovic demanded Belgrade to recognize Bosnia's independence, various Serb autonomies merged into the Republic of Serbian people of Bosnia and Herzegovina in Yugoslavia. In August of 1992, the present name - the Republic of Srpska - was announced.

In the spring of 1992 blood was spilt in Bosnia. The Serbs had to defend the right to life with arms. Then-President of Bosnia Izetbegovic dreamt of a united and indivisible Islamic Bosnia-Herzegovina. The notorious "Al Qaeda" marked its presence on Bosnian soil, killing local Serbs and Croats. Parts of the Yugoslav People's Army (JNA) left Bosnia in the spring of 1992. Serbia that was under the pressure of international sanctions could not help.

Under these circumstances, the people who were later wanted by the Hague tribunal for over 10 years came to the forefront. Psychiatrist and poet Radovan Karadzic was a political leader of Republika Srpska (RS), and General Ratko Mladic - a military. Gradually, a large part of Bosnia came under the control of the Serbs. RS was later to reunite with Serbia. However, things turned out differently.

The Bosnian Serbs were struck by all of diplomatic and military might of the West. Their positions were bombed by NATO aircraft on multiple occasions, Karadzic and Mladic had been wanted for years, and in 2008 and 2011, respectively, they were detained in Serbia and taken to the Hague Tribunal. Under pressure from the U.S. and the EU Belgrade stopped helping the Bosnian compatriots. As a result, by late 1995 they were forced to leave part of the occupied territory.

The Dayton Accords signed in late 1995 crowned the war. Bosnia and Herzegovina became a confederation in the Muslim-Croat Federation and Republika Srpska. The latter was prohibited from uniting with Serbia, but its autonomous status was retained. Under pressure from the West, it had to make many concessions to the central government in Sarajevo, but is still holding.

Vladimir Putyatin, a historian, balkanist with the Department of History of Southern and Western Slavs of the MSU History Department commented on the situation in the Republika Srpska and its prospects in an interview with "Pravda.Ru":

"In contrast to the Republic of Serbian Krajina (Croatia), Serbs in Bosnia and Herzegovina were able to defend their independence in the war of 1992-1995 using weapons, despite the international pressure at the final stage of the Bosnian war of 1992-1995.

Muslims and some Croats (e.g., former Croatian President Stipe Mesic) state that the RS was created largely due to the genocide of the Muslims, and therefore this state institution has no right to exist. Continuing the logical series, a unitary Muslim state (for the Muslims with the center in Sarajevo) should be created. However, neither the Bosnian Serbs, nor Croats want this.

17 years ago the Dayton Accords were signed, putting an end to the war in Bosnia. In the Serbian society of the time they were seen as a capitulation, but are now the real basis for the existence of the Republika Srpska. During this long period not only it had defended its independence, but also proved to be successful, as opposed to "big" Bosnia and Herzegovina, existing only by the will of the West.

An important role in this is the personality of President of the RS Milorad Dodik, who is perceived by the Bosnian Serbs as the most sensible politician defending the national interests to the end. Even under international pressure, Dodik was not only able to defend the republic's sovereignty in domestic affairs, but also conduct his own foreign policy. Bosnia and Herzegovina because of the strong position of Dodik still has not recognized the independence of Kosovo, unlike Montenegro and Macedonia.

At the same time strong economic relations with Russia are developing. "Zarubezhneft" undertook the modernization of the refinery in Brod. In November of 2011, negotiations were held on the establishment of a branch from the "South Stream" on the territory of the Republic. The level of the relations between the Republic of Srpska and Russia is immeasurably higher than the federal, due to the obstacles for the Russian business placed by Sarajevo.

Currently a question about the future of Bosnia and Herzegovina is raised at various levels. The country has the right to prove its existence on the basis of the Dayton Accords. However, the creation of a unitary state, the new Yugoslavia, is out of question as its very right to existence was destroyed by direct intervention of several countries in the 1990s.

Dodik is often accused of undermining the foundations of Bosnia and Herzegovina. However, the rights of Croats who had been forced upon the union with the Bosniaks (Muslims) are still not discussed. Sarajevo holds an obvious course for the Islamization of the region, which threatens not only Bosnia and Herzegovina, but also all the Balkans. This policy has led to the fact that the recent enemies - Serbs and Croats - see each other as allies in prevention of the creation of a unitary Islamic Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The Republika Srpska in the past 20 years has shown the world that following the policy of defending the national interests is the only way to preserve the sovereign state, even under the most adverse conditions. No real concessions in the present are worth the bright European future."

Vadim Trukhachev

Pravda.Ru

Israel plans to demolish solar panels in village near Hebron

Israel plans to demolish solar panels in village near Hebron

Middle East Monitor

February 1, 2012 The Israeli occupation authorities have issued notice of their intention to demolish a renewable energy project which generates electricity and represents the only source of lighting for the houses in a Palestinian village near Hebron in the occupied West Bank. The people of Al-Mnazel received the demolition notice advising of Israel's plans to destroy the solar panels which provide them with electricity. The project was established a couple of years ago with funds from the Spanish government. The coordinator of the People's Committees in the district, Rateb Al-Jabour, told the media that the project provides more than 40 Palestinian families with electricity. He warned that the project's destruction by the Israeli "Civil Administration", "will take the village back to the stone age". Mr. Al-Jabour added that the Israeli occupation authorities have also given Khalil Al-Nwaja', who lives in Al-Mnazel, notice that his home will be demolished. The tents and caravans, claim the Israelis, do not have a licence. ---------------------------------------