It looks like the current French government is departing from the trend of the past years. It is abandoning Old Europe, and returning to the future of an even older Europe- in terms of relations with America. No longer will French paratroopers be used solely to land in African capitals and shore up friendly dictators or keep order, nor will they watch mass genocide from across the border a la Rwanda. The French aspire to replace Les Anglais as America’s staunchest allies, in the Middle East anyway, at least for now. That should last until the fall/Christmas season flood of popular American films are unleashed in Europe….then it’ll be Sacrebleue! le nouveau defi Americain, l’invasion culturelle!

The Iran-West rift has shifted toward France now. France’s new Foreign Minister Bernie Kushner is almost as tactful as Iran’s Ahmadinejd. He went to Baghdad, predicted the fall of the Iraqi cabinet, and hinted at the desirability of that outcome. A week later he hinted at a war against Iran that may be inevitable, and all but claimed that France, at least he and Sarko, was getting ready for that war. So far it looks like he was wrong about Iraq. The jury is still out about the Iran war.

Meanwhile, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has criticized all the talk about an Iran war. Elbradei stated that all the noise about Iran reminds him of the noise before the invasion of Iraq. It is possible that El Bradei wants to succeed where Hans Blix failed in 2003 to stop the Bush administration from invading Iraq. Blix was demonized by conservatives and by others in the United States because he publicly doubted claims of Iraqi WMD. I was one of those who suspected Blix at the time- but it is not always true what the old song says, that ‘a fool never learns’. Fools outside Washington anyway.


Perhaps the next war will come in the Fall of 2008, either before of just after the elections, although Fox News has not hinted at a date. It may come just in time to saddle the next administration with three wars in the periphery of the Persian Gulf, some messy unfinished business in Lebanon and Palestine, besides the wider and now largly defensive war on terror.

Speaking of Iran, it is almost UN General Assembly time, and it looks like the Hugo & Mahmoud show will be on again- notwithstanding the bombastic and self-serving demands of Mitt Romney to deny the Iranian president access to NYC. It would be interesting if Libya's Qadhafi (Gaddafi) also shows up; then the meetings will be much more entertaining. Maybe all three will show up on Jay Leno or Letterman, although the staid Jon Stewart is a more likely venue.

The Iraqi government may have put itself in a corner by publicly announcing that it “will revoke the license of” Blackwater Corporation to operate in Iraq. That was after a battle in which the company’s agents killed some 11 Iraqis and wounded many more. US organizations, including the Embassy, have depended on the firm for security and protection in the wild streets of Baghdad.

By mutual agreement, Blackwater staff are not subject to Iraqi laws: this was fine as long as there were no large-scale fights and large numbers of publicized killings. Over time, with more news like this, the special position of Blackwater will be exploited in Iraq and around the Middle East to fan the flames of anti-Americanism. There was a similar legal-status agreement in Iran under the Shah which was publicly derided by Ayatollah Khomeini and others.
Cheers
Mohammed

Are we misunderestimating Baghdad?
Saudi media is already exploiting the assassination of Iraqi tribal Shaikh Abu Reesha in al-Anbar for its own political ends. Asharq Alawsat, owned by a Saudi prince, contains two editorials by its top editors, no less, hinting that perhaps the govenment in Baghdad, or the Shi'a militias, or some 'foreign' party was responsible. They do not absolve al Qaeda outright, after all it did announce responsibility- but they do try to muddy things up. (Isn't al Qaeda a 'foreign' party as well, since most its terrorists are from other Arab states?) Now, if the hapless Baghdad government can get inside and strike this deep inside a Sunni bastion like al-Anbar, then it is being grossly 'misunderestimated', even by the man who coined this term.

A column in the same newspaper takes an interesting position on the jailing of four Egyptian journalists for not being nice enough to President Mubarak and his Dauphin. S. Attallah suggests that jailing them is harsh and perhaps they should get lesser sentences, perhaps fined, even prevented from practicing their profession. Now that is being for free speech in the New New Middle East.

A US State Dept report today notes the decline of religious freedom in the Middle East: it especially notes Iraq, Iran, and Egypt. In Iran the Baha'is are still persecuted, although Christain and Jewish faiths are recognized, probably barely tolerated by the mullahs. (Still, this is not a legit casus belli).The report does not record any decline in religious freedom in Saudi Arabia, since there is none to start with.

In fact the report notes 'some' improvement in Saudi Arabia and Sudan: these relate to promises of improvement and revising some educational texts. The odd thing is that Sudan has citizens of various religions, like Christians and animists and has had a Christian vice president, while Saudi Arabia has only Moslem citizens and does not allow other houses of worship (like churches) or celebration of other religious ceremonies; nor does it allow other religious books like the Bible, the Torah, The Teachings of Don Juan, Journey To Ixtlan or the Road Books of Jack Kerouac (in fairness the last three items are almost certainly not allowed in most other Muslim countries, especially in theocratic Iran).
The report notes that Saudi sanctions were waived due to reforms "to ensure that the rights of Muslims and non-Muslims are protected"- this last one must be news to everyone except the people at State; does that mean they are about to allow churches, temples and Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer in Riyadh?
Yet Cuba is castigated in the report about not easily allowing new churches. Hypocricy is not a four-letter word.

Congressman James Moron (D-Va) opined the other day on MSNBC that we should have learned from history and did as the British did in the 1920's-i.e. appointed a 'moderate' Sunni regime. What the Brits did was bomb Shi'a and Kurdish villages into submission and chose a minority regime (Sunni) to rule Iraq. The minority elite tried to join Nazi Germany as allies in 1941. After a series of bloody coups they dragged the country into three major wars. Is that what Congressman Moron has learned from history?
Cheers
Mohammed

Foreplay in Cairo: an Egyptian state court has sentenced the sditors of four (4) independent newspapers to one year in jail for 'insulting' President Mubarak and 'his son'. I did not realize it was possible to insult an Arab leader, let alone his son. The editors were also accused of spreading rumors and lies about leaders and 'symbols' of the ruling party ( i.e Mubarak et fils). Reports claim there is now some anger in the Egyptian Journalists Union: but don't hold your breath, it was never known for its defense of the freedom of speech- they just want to show that they can think independently of the ruler.

Sheikh Abdul-Sattar Abu Reesha (a.k.a al-Reeshawi) was shown recently on TV basking in the presence of President Bush, eating qoozi (roast stuffed lamb to you infidels), and doing a good PR spin for a desert tribal thane. Today the young leader of the ad hoc Anbar Revival Counci was blown up along with some bodyguards at the entrance to his home. Clearly al Qaeda is not completely finished in al-Anbar, unless it was an inter-tribal rivalry.

In the meantime, a slow case for a nasty war with the ruling mullahs of Iran is being prepared through almost daily media leaks that Iranian-made weapons were found in Iraq. It is almost certain that British, American, German, Russian, and Chinese weapons are also found on a daily basis in Iraq (and Afghanistan). Many countries are the sources of 'normal' weapons that are to be found in Iraq, except Arab countries: Arabs haven't yet learned how to make weapons. However, the IED's and cutom-designed weapons like armor piercing missiles are another thing: no other country is known to make them.

A Sheik Khalil, member of the royal-appointed Council in Saudi Arabia was pissed yesterday while talking on CNN. He was foaming at the mouth that "Iran must get out, be forced out of Iraq, completely out". Fine and dandy, many people inside and outside Iraq agree with the noble sentiment. But the worthy thane did not offer his country's blood and treasure to that end: he was implicitly demanding that American boys AND GIRLS do his bidding, do the fighting for him. But let's not lose faith, his country is 'considering' opening an embassy in Baghdad: now all they need is to find someone who is brave enough to reside in the Iraqi capital. That is what influential countries, like the USA and Iran, have done for the past four years.
Cheers
Mohammed

In Egypt: Ayman Rifa'i, the man who was a witness in the 'trial' of jailed opposition leader Ayman Nour, was found hanged last week in his jail cell. Authorities attributed his death to suicide. Originally he was called as witness against Mr. Nour, but later he recanted, saying that he was 'pressured'. Suicide is rare in the Middle East, unless you are a Salafi with a truckload of explosives among unwary civilians. It is especially rare in Egypt.
Mr. Nour is the only man ever to run against Mr. Mubarak, or against any other Egyptian leader, in a rigged election and live to tell about it- so far, knock on wood. PS: Mr. Nour is still in jail, pending accession of Gamal (Jamal) Mubarak to the throne of Egypt whenever his father realizes that he is in fact brain dead and needs to move on.
Note to the State Department Spokesmen/women: Aymn Nour is definitely not suicidal- not yet.

Meanwhile, speculation has intensified about the health of Mr. Mubarak pere, who already looks quite mummified, thank you. His Prime Minister stated that Mr. Mubarak will be re-elected as leader of the ruling party in November, which was a surprise in this day and age of the New New Middle East. He also said that Mubarak's health is good, but that there is an 'organized'scenario' for accession in Egypt- WTF that means, perhaps that the security services will insure that the Dauphin will sit on the throne.

Syria: last week an Israeli warplane flew over Syria and dropped 'something'. Some claim that it was bombs and Syria crypticallt talked of reserving the right to retaliate. The latest speculation is that Israeli planes have bombed a Hezbollah supply convoy along the Ho Chi Assad Trail. The oddest claim: a Kuwaiti tabloid, Alseyassah, claimed that it was an American warplane that did the bombing and cheered the impending moment of 'Operation Syrian Freedom'. Typically, the newspaper attributed its information to 'reliable sources', almost certainly meaning its own editor's imagination.

In Saudi Arabia many thousands of camels have died over the past few weeks of a mysterious ailment. Some have attributed the cause to food poisoning and blame the substitute feed used recently to nourish the numerous dromedaries that are deeply intertwined with the history and culture of Arabia. Many attribute the cause to a switch in the animal feed, away from barley whose price has been rising. Yet the phenomenon is widespread around the country and has been called in the media a 'national tragedy', and many fortunes have been lost. If it continues, and pending discovering the real cause, this could expand into a regional tragedy beyond the borders of Saudi Arabia. It is not clear yet if international specialists and organizations have been approached for help.
The authorities, in typical fashion, claim to have opened an investigation-which is what authorities are good at doing.
Cheers
Mohammed

(Mis)Quote of the Day: UBL to Bush (whipping out his tax proposal): My Tax Cut Is Bigger Than Yours.

Osama Bin Laden's latest tape today should infuriate Mr. Bush for more than one reason. Not only does it remind the American public, next year's electorate, that OBL (UBL if you will) is alive and well- the wayward Saudi also outdoes W in a couple of points that he thought were his own points of strength.

Take taxes: OBL offers the American taxpayer conversion to Islam and the automatic kind of cuts that not even Bush, Limbough, and Bob Nardelli, combined, dare advocate. Imagine the flatest of the flat taxes: the Moslem 2.5% Zakat tithe will be all you're required to pay- no progressive rates, no worries about taxes on dividends and capital gains, and no estate taxes. And no need for expensive shelters and attorneys. And to think that Osama never went near the University of Chicago nor studied under Milton Friedman- probably never even heard of him, let alone understood the difference between positive and normative economics. Besides, Friedman was Jewish and definitely a no no for any publicly self-denying shaggy Salafi- besides he was not even an orthodox Jew, a la Wahhabis. He did, however, surprise me by mentioning Noam Chomsky- but Arabs of all political. ethnic, and sectarian stripes seem to love to refer to Chomsky these days.

(Disclaimer: Moslem taxes are a little more complex than that, and there is the alms, Sadaqa, which is more voluntary. Nevertheless, they are much much much simpler and cheaper than the IRS Code- that is why H&R Block will never thrive in the Middle East. Besides, most Arab countries do not really need income taxes: extensive public expenditures are financed directly by state oil revenues in the oil states and by foreign aid in the non-oil states. Voila! Simple, n'est-ce pas?).

Osama also tried , unsuccessfully I think, to wrest the mantle of "Uniter Not Divider" away from Bush. He rambled on about Democrats and others and did not do a good job. It is not likely that his appeal to the American people will resonate anywhere- not even on a post-post-housing debacle-Labor-Day Friday, likely the bluest of blue Fridays this year. Not with the NFL season just starting and the Colts convincingly beating the Saints, and the MLB World Series on the line.

Still, the telling blow, the one that I think drew blood, was the taunt of "my tax cuts are bigger than yours". And it was all in Arabic!

The leader of the terrorist al Qaeda also managed to get one below the belt at Arab dictators, kings, and princes. He did that a la Clinton. Remember how Clinton was rumored to steal Republican ideas as his own? Well, Osama stole the regulation jet-black hair-dye from ruling Arab potentates. As they all do, so did he, for the first time, dye his beard jet black. By imitating the potentates, is he having pretensions at "potency"? Perhaps not, it is most likely that he has only dyed his beard. The others, the rulers, are more consistent: they dye everything.....all over. Or so their peoples say- in private gatherings, of course.
Cheers
Mohammed

Terrorism and Kicking AssA Sydney newspaper quotes President Bush telling Australian VP "we're kicking ass". It is also likely right now that, in some cave or lair in the Pashtun areas of Northwest Pakistan, a tall bearded Saudi and his Egyptian sidekick (he jokingly calls him abu arb'a 'ayoon, four-eyes), are saying very much the same thing, but in Arabic. Of course the one who kicks ass last is usually considered the eventual winner, but the situation is complex, with many players. In the short and medium term anyone can claim that they are kicking ass. At the moment al Qaeda in Mesopotamia seems to be at the receiving end (not necessarily a pun here) of the boot. But then again, it looks like the Coalition is firmly at the receiving end in Afghanistan.

Mr. Bush, however, seems to be winning some friends and influencing people in the heart of 'old' Europe- right in that most American-sceptic place, the Elysee Palace. Not only did France's Sarkozy make the right noises about US policy, he also spent his vacation in Maine, not exactly a playground for French politicos. It was a fortuitous choice of destination, because he happened to run into W.
Sarko even seems to be picking up some of Bush'e vernacular- he came close to calling for 'kicking ass' somewhere in the Middle East, perhaps in Lebanon or Iran. Of course the French do not use that vulgar but succinct American term, especially in their own language. And their boots seem to be big enough only for unruly West African derrieres.
It would sound funny for Sarko to claim that he is doing 'ruer le posterieur', or to use a more extensive version, 'le fait de donner un coup de pied au cul'- I'm sure most of you got the very last word. Some may take his use of the term as another example of the famously suspected French prurience.

Arab Military Industry
When it rains it pours: Sudan's defense minister has claimed that his country is producing what he calls pilotless airplanes, i.e drones. Of course they could be just kites. He said that Sudan will become self-sufficient in weaponry and that it is the third African country in terms of military industries. He was too polite to claim that the country was also the top Arab producer of muzzle-loading carbines. Now the Arab world can rightly boast the greatest military-industrial complex south of Israel, west of Iran, and north of Zimbabwe. Of course the really smart Arab rulers, well the 'relatively' smart Arab rulers, have access to the best international weapons that money can buy. But then again, it has nothing to do with cerebral prowess, does it?

We were self sufficient in weapons once. Some years ago, when we were childern along the warm northwestern Arab shores of the Gulf (Persique, pas du Mexique), we used to be self-sufficient. We made our own slingshots, the weapon of choice which we called nabba'ta (plural: nababee't), for use against innocent birds and evil human foes. Nowadays, even the slingshots are foreign-made, mainly in East Asia- but they are still cheaper and, tellingly, they are used much more effectively than the high-tech weapons are used by our military. Besides, the prices of the slingshots do not include exorbitant commissions, kickbacks, or bribes to princes and potentates.
Cheers
Mohammed

A New Turkey in Baghdad
Probably no embassy has been written and talked about for the past 27 years as much as the new American embassy in Baghdad. And for good reasons, that is, for all the wrong reasons. Media comments about it have ranged from "mysterious', "shrouded in mystery" (sort of like Bram Stoker's description of Dracula's castle), "monstrous", "fortress on a hill", to "as cloaked in mystery as a ministate in Rome" (a good one, with Ambassador Ryan Crocker as the Pontifex Maximus?). It has also been plagued by accusations of using slave labor or forced labor through a Kuwaiti sub-contractor: the contractor was accused in congressional hearings of having tricked Asian workers to fly to Baghdad on the pretext of flying them into Dubai and forcing them to disembark at gunpoint- and frankly that doesn't sound far-fetched. The sub-contracting was done through a subsidiary of Halliburton (HAL: the share price has been stuck in the low 30's).

One British newspaper even absurdly claimed that the location of the embassy was a secret, even with 21 buildings over 104 acres of land, and a budget that is estimated at over $ 1 billion (Congress has appropriated about $ 600 million so far).

John Brown, a former diplomate writing in CommonDreams.org, quotes a former US ambassador recalling a Cold War era joke: the Soviets were proud to have the biggest microchip in the world. He hopes the same will not be said about the new embassy- unflattering media descriptions make it sound quite Stalinesque but with an Arab twist: a lot of palm trees.

Ironically and sadly this new embassy will be known as the only major project in Iraq to be completed on time, with its own reliable power and water systems- but it was not built to benefit Iraqis. It may prove to be a public relations and media nightmare for U.S policy in Iraq, and perhaps in the Arab region as a whole. It stands out like the proverbial sore thumb, reminiscent of a Saddam palace only much bigger, telling Iraqis everyday, 24/7, where the real power lies in their country. From the point of view of many detractors of constitutional change in Iraq it makes a mockery of the idea of sovereignty and self-rule.
Who and where are the geniuses who think up such projects? How the hell do they come up with these turkeys?
Cheers
Mohammed

He is back! Iran’s Ahmadinejad apparently is feeling confident enough to opine publicly on regional politics. He has said publicly that there will be no war with the United States- at least not a hot war. This should disappoint some warmongering media in the Gulf monarchies- Uncle Sam is not going to do the little spoiled piggy’s bidding by beating on the big bad mullah wolf next door, not yet. Perhaps this will disappoint some extremists in Iran as well- they remember well how Saddam’s invasion in 1980 solidified the theocrats’ power quickly.
Yet yesterday both sides, Bush and Ahmadinejad, suddenly escalated the rhetoric again, with France's Nicolas Sarkozy putting in his two eurocents. Some in the Paris media have mentioned a new policy by Sarko of le carrot et le stick- but the French don't have much of un stick now in the Middle East.

The Iranian president took time out from cracking down on pretty ladies with too much hair showing in public, and young men flaunting the abs which he does not have, to opine on America in Iraq. He says that the US will leave a vacuum in Iraq and that Iran and her friends and neighbors, including Saudi Arabia, will fill. He is well aware that his term ends in 2009, just months after George Bush leaves office, and he is not guaranteed a second, and last, term with current economic conditions. It all depends on who is allowed to run against him.

Speaking of France, the foreign minister had apologized a day earlier for dissing the Iraqi government soon after leaving Baghdad. But being French and stubborn, M. Bernard Kushner reiterated today that "M. Maliki may leave us soon." I would find the statement ominous if I were in al-Maliki's sandals.

Alarbiya TV reports a new twist that on the face of it reopens the whole Lockerbie (Pan Am bombing) case of December 1988. It quotes an AFP and the Paris daily Le Figaro report that a vital witness in the case has said that he lied in his testimony that implicated Libyan agents. There are hints that the real culprits may be Syria, Iran, and the PFLP Palestinian group. The report hints that the Lockerbie bombing was a retaliation for the US Navy shooting down an Iranian airliner that killed over 120 people over the Persian Gulf in July 1988.
Sounds odd and very convenient though, given the regional poltical rivalries and tensions these days- but, then again, Le Figaro and AFP are not owned by Saudi Arabia. Are they???
The worst of it is that this assertion will wreak havoc, as the cliche says, on the emotions of the families of the victims.

Alzawraa, an Iraqi 'Sunni' site reports an odd but possibly telling development if it is true, quoting an 'unknown' Sadrist spokesman as accusing the government of helplessness in the face of Iranian encroachmnt in southern Iraq. But, the again, Alzawraa is not exactly a nuetral observer. Next day, al-Sadr tried to clarify matters by issuing a statement banning 'others' from speaking publicly on his behalf. He also froze all activities of al-Mahdi Army for six months., presumably to reduce intra-Shi'a tensions and clashes. His very own anti-surge.

Arab news websites today covered extensively the travails, and travels, of GOP Senator Larry Craig, with mucho comments.
Cheers
Mohammed

Colonel David Sutherland in Iraq: "the insurgent group known as the Brigades of the Revolution of Twenty (as in 1920) has been helping the coalition forces in its campaign against al Qaeda in Dialy Province. Now we are calling this group the Baquba Guardians."
Aljazeera TV (August 25): "The Brigades of the Revolution of Twenty has denied their participation with the Americans in any operation against al Qaeda. They did speculate that some other breakaway group may be involved."
Sacrebleu, zee plot thickens, comme on dit en France! The Colonel can't be fibbing, so either Aljazeera is fibbing or there is a misunderstanding somewhere.
An ironic historical segue here: The original 1920 Revolution was led mainly by Shi'as against the British occupation.

Baghdad- J'accuse: A close political adviser to PM al-Maliki this week accused unnamed Gulf countries of fanning the flames of sectarian (inter-Shi'a) strife in southern Iraq. Sami al-Askari accused "Gulf' countries of sending millions of dollars across the border to buy and incite some tribal leaders and create instability in the heretofore stable south. This may explain a group of tribal leaders who declared to the media about a new'southern' alliance of tribes and shaikhs a few weeks ago. This also comes only a few weeks after senior U.S officials, including UN ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, expressed frustration with some of Iraq's neighbors who are considered US allies and their role in undermining Iraqi stability.
al-Askari cliams to the news site Elaph that the device that killed one governor in the south last week was made in a 'neighboring' country, and that there have been arrests and confessions (now, how did they get those?).

NIE Report: predicts that the Iraqi government will grow yet "more precarious"- someone mentioned yesterday on a news website, I forgot which one, that by stating it so publicly the NIE ensures that Iraq's government will become "more precarious". Aren't these guys so good at predicting and forecasting?

Ryan Crocker, ambassador to Baghdad: declares that Iraqi political progress has been "extremely disappointing. Progress on national level issues has been extremely (nice word, this 'extremely') disapppointing and frustrating to all concerned....to us, to Iraqis, and to the Iraqi leadership itself." August 21

Senator Carl Levin, Chair Armed Services: "Iraq's prime minister can't bring peace to his country (ummm, but we have proven over the past four years that we can, senor Carlito?), so the Iraqi parliament should declare a vote of no confidence and replace him." August 21

Sen. Hillary (me too) Clinton: "Iraqi leaders have not met their own political benchmarks to share power (and we have met our security and military goals, senora?), modify the Baathification (that must be de-Baa....) laws, pass an oil law (does she know what is in the oil law and why it is not eagerly accepted by Iraqis of all stripes?), schedule provincial elections, and amend their constitution (she knows how long it took to hammer out and ratify the US constitution). I share Senator Levin's hope that the Iraqi parliament will replace prime minister Maliki with a less divisive (cute) and more unifying figure (does she know that Saddam is dead?)..." August 21

The Daily Standard, Stephen Schwartz: "Almost six years after 9/11....the American media and government have begun to admit something every informed and honest muslim in the world has known all along. That is: the "Sunni insurgency" in Iraq, as well as 9/11 and certain acts of extremist violence...are consequences of the official status of the ultra-fundamentalist Wahhabi sect in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Wahhabi clerics have preached and recruited for terror in Iraq; Saudi money has sustained it; the largest number of those who have carried out suicide bombings north of the Saudi-Iraqi border hav been Saudi citizens. "Counterproductive" is a euphemism for Saudi state subsidies to wahhabi clerics who demand the genocide of Shi'a muslim, urg young men to go north to suicide... It is also a diplomatic way to describe the official policy of ignoring financial contributiuns by rich saudis to support wahhabi terror in Iraq..." July 30

Christian Science Monitor, Sam Dagher: "This years pilgrims to Karbala come amid an unprecedented wave of anger toward Saudi Arabia. Government and religious leaders here charge that the neighboring kingdom is doing little to stem the flow of its national to Iraq to wage 'holy war' om Shiites (Shi'as)" August

Memorabilia from Saudi and Gulf media:

"The historical role and rights (i.e. entitlement) of Iraq's Sunni Arabs must be taken into account in any power structure."
"Al-Maliki and his sectarian government are on the way out. The Americans have already decided."
"Iraq is facing a Safawi (Safavi) Persian invasion."

"No Arab country should allow foreign influences, forces and agents to run amok and alter its culture (not clear if they mean Iraq, all of it, Lebanon, the Persian Gulf states, or all of the above)."

"The Americans are dealing secretly, or soon will be dealing secretly (also the Israelis, depending on who writes where and when) to divide the Arab world into spheres of influence."

"The (American) invasion (of Iran) is imminent. The date has been set."
"The (Ameriacn) invasion (of Syria) is coming soon. The date has been set."

"The system in Iraq is not realy democratic (unlike the ones in other Arab states, for instance?). It is based on a flawed constitution (unlike our nonexistant constitution: ours does not exist, ergo it can't be flawed)."

"Iraq's parliament is divided and sectarian (unlike ours which does not exist, ergo it can't be divided and sectarian)." Imagine, a divided parliament. What will they think of next, a two-party system?

"Bashar Assad inherited power from his father (true, great insight there- and our potentates ar presumably elected?)"

"Hassan Nasrallah (leader of the radical Shi'a Hezbollah) should return Lebanon to its people, so that Lebanon can become a healthy territory breathing the free air of 'real democracy'." Editor of the Saudi daily Asharq Alawsat, August 26.

Angry Arab News: "People in Lebanon have been wondering why there i no monument erected at the tomb of slain former prime minister Rafiq Hariri (it is common among all Lebanese religions and sects to erect headstones on graves). I am told that the reason is due to the Hariri family's deference to Wahhabi doctrine which forbids such measures." August 24

Cultural Coup de grace: Riyadh was selected Arab Cultural capital for 2000 (I know, I know).

Cheers
Mohammed

Will Iraq's hapless prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki be scarificied by BOTH parties to gain some time for an extended surge?
The almost coordinated pressure on the PM from both Republicans and Dems seems to point that way. Nothing would give more time for the surge to continue than a new Iraqi government which would need more time, a courtesy 'grace period'. This would get the Republicans off the hook through 2008. It would also get the major Democrat presidential candidates off the hook through November 2008.

Add to that the suddenly renewed talk in some Arab media, especially the vast Saudi-controlled offfshore media, of an American shift toward the Sunnis in Iraq- and there may be a pattern. This shift seems to coincide with the arrival of Ryan Crocker as ambassador. Some Arab media claim that Crocker, who served in the region and is close to some Persian Gulf monarchies, believes that Iraq may need a Sunni ruling junta or clique to restore stability. There no doubt has been intense pressure on the Bush administration, as well as on receptive senators, to effect a shift in policy toward the Sunni minority. One clear result has been the decision to undermine one foundation of U.S policy in Iraq by arming and encouraging certain new militias who are hostile not only to the elected government but to the whole American enterprise.

All this is most likely wishful thinking, but then again it sounds eerily like the positions taken by Gertrude Lothian Bell when the Iraqi state was being patched together by the British Colonial Office over eighty years ago. Bell firmly believed that the 'moderate and pro-British' Sunnis should run the new Iraqi state. The Shi'a (Shi'ite) majority accommodated her bias by revolting against colonial rule and against a British mandate. They, and the Kurds, were 'severely reprimanded' by land and from the air and many thousands died. Those Sunnis who sided with the British, just as they had sided with the Ottoman Turkish occupiers earlier, were handed political power by the grateful Colonial Office. They lost no time revolting against the Brits and siding with the Nazis in the dark days of early 1941. Saddam Hussein and his Ba'ath henchmen were direct descendants of the political system installed at that time.

It is too late for direct foreign interference in Iraq's internal politics. This sounds odd nowadays, given the situation on the ground, but a foreign government, even the United States can't change the regime in Iraq, at least not to a regime that could survive. Besides, it is almost certain that any successor to Maliki will fail as well, and for the same reasons. The former ruling elites want power back, Iraq's neighboring absolute monarchies want a pliable Sunni elite reinstated (in case you did not know it: they are masochists besides having very short memories: why else would they want their former tormentors back in power?), and the Shi'as and Kurds are armed to the teeth.
Cheers
Mohammed

Levin the Decider
Senator Carl Levin (D), Chair of the Armed Services Comittee today ordered the elected Iraqi parliament to replace the country's prime minister and his cabinet. He claims that the government is not doing its job. Mr. Levin also believes that the current Republican U.S administration is not doing its job properly- does he support impeachment to replace it as well, and would he condone such a call from al-Maliki or Talibani?
Such a statement by a high ranking senator, a member of the wider US government, only helps undermine claims that Iraq is an independent sovereign nation. The senator should remember that it takes two to tango. Mr Levin should specify how the al-Maliki government can become less 'sectarian' as he demands. Would that entail offering the opposition sensitive cabinet posts such as Interior, Security and Defense, the traditional springboards for Iraqi coups d'etat in the past? Would it entail dividing the cabinet posts based on population? Enlighten us, senator.

At the same time, a Saudi newspaper, al-Riyadh has published an article reviving the quite dead idea of a military take-over in Iraq. The author hints that the right military strongman should come from the 'old' Iraqi army, the same one that threatened the Gulf and Saudi Arabia. Ah, but things have changed so much, the toothpaste has been squeezed out of the tube, the genie is out of the lamp, but then again de Nile is a river in the heart of the Arab world......is it not? The proposal is based on a study purportedly done at NYU. P.S: any study published by anyone in the U.S media or academia is accepted in the Arab world as solid evidence of a U.S government plan.

A fierce media war is being waged more openly now between Syria and Saudi Arabia. In the past, Syria refrained from naming Saudi Arabia directly, even as the Saudi press and media, owned mostly be royal princes, directly criticized the Syrian regime and its policies. Some Saudi-affiliated newpapers in the Gulf even gleefully expected a U.S invasion of Damascus. Now the Syrian have named names in a mild attack, so the Saudi press is intensifying its attack on Syria while pointing out that the Saudi government never ever directly criticizes an Arab government. Clever.

For a short time Arab media carried reports that six Iranian 'diplomats' held by US forces in Iraq have been released. That was earlier today, and by evening the news item was erased from all the websites. It was clear that the report was not true, since no American media carried it at the time.

In Kuwait, State Security agents have kidnapped two journalists from outside their offices and roughed them up. Apparently the kidnap/arrests were without warrants. One journalist was released some hours later but another remains in custody. The claim is that they published seditious ideas on their website. Independent media and Assembly members have warned the government not to engage in illegal acts of kidnapping and holding citizens without warrants.

Looks like Saif al-Islam, son of Libyan leader Qaddafi, is being prepared for the succession, just like the son of President Mubarak in Egypt, and like Bashar Assad before them. Both have assumed high visibility positions in government-controlled agencies. Qaddafi Fils is much more outspoken, though, of his criticism and his calls for 'reform' of the judiciary and the media. Chip of the old block? Still, does anybody believe that the Brother Colonel will pass away anytime soon? It is possible that President Saleh of Yemen is also preparing a son for the throne. Not exactly in the spirit of the res public that the early Romans had in mind when they overthrew their weird and 'obsolete' kings.

Soon the whole Arab world will revive its old bygone glory by becoming hereditary. An Arab citizen can take his pick: a hereditary police-state republic or a hereditary police-state absolute tribal monarchy, with the honorific kleptocracy thrown in the bargain.
Cheers
Mohammed

A not so subtle campaign is being waged to align the various forms of demi-democracy and plutocracy in the Arab states. It is the sort of campaign that always finds advocates, and perhaps financers, in the Arab world. The long and hard campaign by Arab rulers, aided and abetted by the likes of Mr Dulaimi and Mr. Allawi, to push for a coup of strongmen in Iraq seems to have failed- so far, the Bush administration seems unwilling to bite, and this is one intelligent thing it is doing in Iraq.

Now the campaign has shifted south along the Persian Gulf region, with the goal of cleansing it of any vestiges of 'unstable' participatory democracy. A couple of months ago Saudi Arabia's Interior Minister Prince Nayef (in charge of police, security, etc) publicly expressed his worries about the 'fate of democracy' in Kuwait. The man really seemed worried about its fate, which is admirable! Some local newspapers with close Saudi links (Alseyassah, Alwatan) have been pushing for an unconstitutional dissolution of the Assembly and a crackdown on dissent. In this particular case 'unconstitutional' means that free elections will not be held within two months as required by the constitution- the preference seems to be for free elections never to be held. Now the royal-appointed speaker of Jordan's pushme pullyou, half-elected half-appointed parliament has joined the fray, publicly calling for Kuwait to switch to a bi-cameral legislature, with one half to be appointed by the Emir.

It is not clear yet who put the Jordanian potentate up to it. This would put the Gulf country in line with Jordan and Bahrain, where half the assemblies are appointed by the rulers and the other half are 'sort of' elected. In Kuwait, fifty members of the legislature are elected and the Emir appoints the cabinet ministers, about 14, who are also allowed the same exact voting powers as elected members. The current Speaker of the legislature, Mr. Kharafi, lost the majority of elected members but won his position anyway with support from unelected government ministers. Still, a 20% unelected legislature is more democratic than a 50% unelected one with the other 50% semi-elected.

Any change would still be way out of line with Saudi Arabia which does not have a unicameral, bicameral or any-cameral legislature for that matter.
Then, on the other shore of the Gulf looms Iran, where all members of parliament are elected freely- except that not everybody is free to run for elections. All candidates are vetted by some uber-body that determines their suitability.
No word yet from the other moderate paragons of democracy in the Nouveau Moyen Orient.
Cheers
Mohammed

It looks like Iraq's Arab neighbors have largely given up the hope, and their tentative encouragement of regime change in Iraq. Saudi Arabia announced two weeks that it will send a delegation to 'look into' opening an embassy. It hasn't happened yet, and it may not. A couple of editorials in the Saudi offshore press critically analyze the Iraqi Sunni rejection of the political process. It is not clear if this is a price for the United States accepting and arming some Sunni militias in parts of Baghdad and western Iraq. Does this mean Mr. Iyad Allawi can stop spending a lot of his time traveling to Arab capitals seeking political support from those who can only give the 'kiss of political death' to an aspiring Iraqi leader?

This would be an unusually clever move by Iraq's neighbors, as it would fill a diplomatic void that mainly Iran has been filling for several years. Besides, Iraq's Sunnis do not necessarily consider many Arab regimes as their true friends. They know that they lost power not only because of American action- they know that American troops, tanks and airplanes entered Iraq across Arab borders, Arab waters and Arab airspaces. The logistics and communications for the invaion were also organized through various Sunni-ruled Arab states, including all the Gulf monarchies and Jordan.

This possible thawing with the Arab governments, which comes after visits to Arab capitals first by VP Cheney then by Secretaries Rice and Gates, also comes as the ruling Shi'a-Kurdish coalition forms a majority government excluding its unwilling former partners. The coalition is seeking independent Sunni politicians to join the cabinet. It looks like one more Shi'a party might join the coalition, and Vice President Tareq al-Hashimi, the leading Sunni politician, has hinted of supporting the new coalition.

It would also be helpful to the Iraqi people if two concrete financial measures are taken by the neighbors, especially the Gulf monarchies: reduction of Iraq's debt and cancelation of the exorbitant reparations that are paid to some neighbors as compensation for the first Persian Gulf War. Iraq's neighbors should remember the experience of Versailles and the German reparations after World War I.
President Bush appointed James Baker a few years ago to renegotiate Iraq's foreign debt, and he had some success with the country's non-Arab debtors. The Paris Club of official debtors did alter its standards three years ago to include Iraq as a target for debt relief. There was some talk of reducing Iraq's Arab debt, but it has not gone far- most Iraq's Arab neighbors seem to want to, foolishly, use the debt as a source of political leverage to influence internal Iraqi politics.
The country's debt exceeded $120 billion before the invasion of Kuwait in 1990 and almost certainly doubled by 2003.

After the al-Qaeda bombing that killed nearly 500 Iraqi Yazidis earlier this week, a group of prominent Moslem clerics from different sects and several Arab countries as well as India, Iran and Bosnia signed a declaration condemning the bombing and condemning the killing of Moslems, Christains, or 'other sects' (of course they shied away from mentioning Jews by name). Notably absent from the list was any shaikh or Imam from Saudi Arabia (Alarabiya.net, Aug 17).

Cheers
Mohammed

This week, the head of a Chinese plant that manufactures toys tainted with harmful chemicals hanged himself. He committed suicide rather than live in shame. The problems started with consumer complaints in the United States and the recall of millions of toys. Before that there was the recall of canned (tinned) food and toothpaste prepared in China.

Reading this, I recalled while we lived in the Gulf region, how most toys, childrens toys not adults', were imported from China- not only in Kuwait, but all across the Middle East. I have been looking through Arab media, especially in the Persian Gulf region- they cover the recall story briefly, but as something that does not concern them directly. Perhaps it is our famous fatalism. I have not seen anything in the Arab media about recalling toys or canned foods from the local markets. Nobody wants to hang himself, figuratively of course- not the potentates who always insist on presiding over what pass for consumer protection authorities, nor the merchants who import and distribute the products.

Falling on one's sword, so to speak, has not been part of the European repertoire in defeat and ignominy either, not since the days of the Roman Republic. But then, the Romans were not really 'Europeans' by today's definition: they were a Mediterranean people, like their early foes the Carthaginians. They also claimed descent from ancient Troy, which was Asian. Napoleon never tried falling on his sword even after two major defeats, preferring exile and perhaps living to fight another day, which he did once. Only a small German/Austrian guy with a silly little moustache did it 62 years ago- but then he was not a balanced man, and besides, he did not want to end up in a Slavic/Bolshevik cage in Moscow, the only alternative available to him. And he took his woman with him....just in case.
Can you imagine Rep. Dennis Hastert falling on his 'gavel' after the 2006 elections? Or Bill Clinton falling on his proverbial and abused 'cigar' after having to confess in public? That sounds painful.

Cheers
Mohammed

Rarely does one read an essay by a head of government, even if it is Lebanon, groveling in praise of a monarch. Today the Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Saniora did it in an article published simultaneously in the Saudi-owned daily Asharq Alawsat and her sister satellite TV station Alarabiya website (both media are owned by Saudi princes). It is in the worst tradition of mercenary journalism that still persists in the Gulf region, especially in the offshore Saudi media. I have translated from Arabic a few pararaphs only of the extremely long piece- The king seems like a simple and amiable fellow personally, but some of the words set my skin crawling.
Warning: the reader may want to have a barf-bag (sick bag) nearby- by the time one gets to the last paragraph one may need a whole bucket and proximity to a.....facility (the very last paragraph is a treat, you'll need a whole bucket for that one alone):

"Writing about King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz, and he being a leader and policy maker, is different frm writing about just a famous person or a friend. But knowledge and impressions about His Majesty the King have been available since he was a crown prince and haed of the national guard.....I have talked to him many times, and I have talked to many who know him- all impressions were the same: a straight personality, with the characteristics of leadership and governance, prefers thr truth and openness over any other, prefres action over words.....but when he talks, the words come from his heart....It is known that Saudi Arabia does not join axes (not even axes of goodness?), and does not participate in inter-Arab and regional disputes.....

"The Saudi leadership has visions and goals related to Arab stability and enabling Arabs to regain control of their own affairs and causes. The KIngdom has deployed energies and resources into unitiatives and abilities to solve internal Arab problems, to correct inter-Arab relations, especially with her neigbors (well, perhaps excluding Iraq?), and to change American policies in the region (is that what has been happening in iRaq lately?)......

"As for King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz, the big human being, the great leader, the noble knight. may God smile upon him, extend his reign, allow us continuance of his existence, as a reward for what he has given and offered and what he has struggled for, toward the glory and progress of his kingdom, the impenetrable castle of Arabs and Moslems, and for the good of the Arab nation, and for the peace and Arab identity of Lebanon, and oits sovereignty and the stability of its democratic system...." Vive le roi!
It must be the King's birthday, it can't be his bar mitzvah. Maybe it is part of a periodic polishing of the image orchestrated by minions, because one or two other papers in the Gulf ragion published similar gusing tracts about the King today. It did not polish the image of Mr. Saniora much, though.

Cheers
Mohammed

A huge new arms deal is near, providing very advanced U.S weapons to Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf monarchies. The deal is reported (New York Times, The Guardian) to total $ 20. In the receiving countries, there will be much more outlays for infrastructure, facilities, training, etc, contracts worth many more billions of dollars. Another side of the deal is increased military aid to Israe. Most Arab media in the Gulf concentrated on a "25% increase" in aid to Israel and ignored the Gulf weapons purchases.

This does not mean that the peoples of these countries can feel secure and rest easy now- but it might make a very few of them richer. It is not clear what is the purpose of these huge deals: the Gulf states, although they live in a notoriously dangerous neighborhood, have proven consistently that they are incapable of defending themselves without direct United States help. Several of these countries rely on foreign military personnel, especially Pakistani pilots to fly their warplanes. Yet these countries spend a higher percentage of their GDP (and GNP) on military expenditure than most other nations. There is always, of course, the lucrative by-product of these deals: some prince or shaikh always ends up with hundreds of millions of dollars in commissions ( or bribes depending on the relevant laws). Or perhaps it is not exactly a by-product, perhaps the commissions (and the bribes) are the goal.

The most famous case of arms commissions was investigated for being illegal (a bribe) by the British SFO, before being killed last spring by the Tony Blair government. That one involved Saudi Prince Bandar Bin Sultan, Head of Saudi National Security and part-time national security adviser to the Bush administration. He was reported by British media to have received only GBP 1 billion (a cool $2 billions). Now the prince can retire comfortably- no need to earn his living by advising the Bush administration on world affairs.

The sale may face some difficulties in the Senate for two reasons: possible Israeli reservations and recent U.S. disclosures that the Saudis not only send jihadist terrorists to Iraq, but also finance and arm them. Recent reports are gradually drawing a picture of what many have suspected for several years: that someone with deep pockets is financing some of the terrorists in Iraq, as was reported on this site some time ago.

Neverheless, the deal will eventually go through.

Iraq beat Saudi Arabia yesterday to win the Asian Cup in soccer (football). It was a victory in spite of being understaffed, in exile, and under-funded. This is ominous for the Saudi's Brazilian coach (trainer). The Saudi princelings who always run the soccer federation and the national team have the habit of quickly firing a coach when the team underperforms. The average tenure for a coach during the past eleven years has been less than a year, which gives a good idea how much soccer bang do they get for their bucks. But there may be some hope for the coach: with the next world cup only two and a half years away, and qualifiers around the corner, changing the coach now would be stupid, perhaps it is better to sack the management, i.e their highnesses.
Most likely, they will keep the coach until they either fail to qualify for the World Cup, or get knocked out in the first round...then it is hasta la vista baby.

Iraqi WTF?
Gulf media report that 45 people, claiming to be tribal shaikhs in southern Iraq, have declared an "autonomous government" for that region. There is to be a legislature and regional security forces. The shaikhs asserted their committment to one Iraqi state, but not "one supported by the occupation". None of the names mentioned by the group are involved in Iraqi politics currently, and it is not clear how this new "idea" relates to the original proposal of SCIRI (now SICI) chief Abdulaziz al-Hakeem for regional autonomy. The shaikhs did not refer to the Biden-Gelb ideas on confederation either- it is possible they never heard of either Biden or Gelb- perhaps they do not read the NY Times or Washington Post on a daily basis.

Cheers
Mohammed

Saudi Alarabiya TV reports (July 26) exciting news! A study by a “famous American institution”, no less, indicates how popular Saudia Arabia and her regime are around the world, especially the Arab world. Saudi King Abdullah is listed as extremely popular across the Middle East. The King is listed as the most admired Arab leader around the world (perhaps not much of a contest, but highly suspect nevertheless in my humble view). The study purportedly covers 47 countries, including 11 Arab and Islamic countries.

According to the study by Pew Research, 91% of Egyptians are happy with Saudi policy! That must include many who voted, or tried to vote, for the opposition. In Jordan, 90% expressed admiration for Saudi Arabia and her policies. In Kuwait 79%. The real shock, and the clincher, the smoking gun if you will, is that 82% of all Lebanese admire Saudi Arabia, her government and her king!
Imagine, in Lebanon, a country with 35-40% Shi’a (Shi’ite) at least! The study claims that 94% of Lebanse Sunnis admire Saudi policy and government and that the percentage declines to 64% among Shi’as. Imagine, a majority of Hezbollah and Amal-supporting Shi’as love and admire the Saudi system! Why, the king can run and win in Lebanon! No need for Saudi surrogates like Mr. Hariri or Iranian surrogates like Hezbollah.

It gets better: Egypt is the second most admired country- I can see the country being loved and admired, but its somnolent government? not so sure about that.

Now, the question is: did Pew Research really do this survey as Alarabiya claims? If they did, how did they manipulate the data to get the results desired by the Saudi regime? Were they supplied with the samples they used? And how much did they get paid for it, and by whom? I could not find an answer on Pew's web site, and no mention of this particular study. Perhaps it was a privately commissioned study?
Pew does list a recent study that indicates support for suicide bombing in Moslem countries has dropped dramatically in recent years, but it includes no squeals of admiration for Saudi or other Arab and Moslem potentates. Now if only the well of avalable and willing suicide bombers would dry up.

NY Times (July 27) reports that U.S officials are publicly exasperated, finally, with Saudi support for Sunni militias in Iraq. Saudi Arabia is also urging other Persian Gulf states to do likewise and funnel money to Sunni armed groups in Iraq, with the goal of destabilizing the Iraqi government. Saudi Arabia has some experience in financing groups, mainly tribals and jihadists, that would destabilize governments: examples are Yemen in the 1960s, Afghanistan in the 1980s, Lebanon, and Iraq.

Cheers
Mohammed

The Saudi Human Rights ‘Authority’ is a government organization, as its name implies. It is run by state-paid bureaucrats, headed by an Arabian uber-shaikh or a red-checkered commissar. It is not concerned with human rights within the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, no there is no such thing: its main concern is to look after Saudi detainees outside the country. Like those incarcerated at Club Guantanamo, and those many being held in Iraq for terrorism, and those being held in Syria for trying to sneak into Iraq, and those being held in Lebanon for leading the Fath al-Islam Salafi jihadist group in the ongoing battle against the Lebanese army.

Saudi media, owned or controlled by the ruling family and its retainers, are claiming that Saudis are being tricked into going to fight in Iraq and Lebanon. Reports indicate that perhaps almost 50% of the bombers in Iraq are Saudi Jihadists, and recent reports claim the the leader of Fath al-Islam is a Saudi.
Mosque imams and shaikhs regularly call for jihad to overthrow the Shi’a-dominated government in Iraq, and apparently there are some who listen and others who are willing to finance them. The kingdom is a tight police state, and it is highly unlikely that so many jihadists can cross its borders without being detected by security agents: they certainly have no difficulty catching in-filtrators, so why not catch the ex-filtrators as well?

Saudi Arabia has a clear interest in a chaotic Iraq right now, because that may be the only way to change the regime and perhaps even push the United States toward a confrontation with Iran, and give the amenable Sunni tribal shaikhs of the western regions a chance to ‘look good’ by opposing their former, and perhaps future, al-Qaeda allies.

Speaking of democracy: Prince Nayef, the powerful Saudi Minister of Interior (the man in charge of police, security, and controlling the borders) provided an interesting, and typical, insight the other day. He said that when he looks at the faces in the Shaura Council (the appointed and powerless consultative council) he sees good and wise faces. He said that is what matters, the presence of good and wise men on the council, regardless of how they got there. That is the message for his people who are not dim-witted and can take a hint: it does not matter if these men were appointed by the king rather than elected, as long as they are the right men. Oh, the oratory, the logic; eat your heart out, Marcus Tullius Cicero.

Meanwhile, al-Jazeera TV reports (7/21) that Saudi police arrested several ‘reform’ activists and that there were two women among them: the women were arrested because they publicly protested the arrest of their husbands. Police have claimed that the women had arms hidden in one of their homes, but al-Jazeera quotes Amnesty International that the weapons were put in place by the police.

Speaking of Amnesty International: it is mounting a campaign to save an Iranian woman from execution by stoning for adultery. Amnesty reports that her co-defendant/lover was stoned to death earlier this month. The couple were arrested eleven years ago, but now the woman’s execution has been postponed due to international pressure. Looks like the Iranian mullahs are picking up the slack after the Taliban left the scene, perhaps temporarily, in 2001.

Al-Jazeera also quotes U.S ambassador in Baghdad Ryan Crocker that Iran continues to arm militias in Iraq. Meanwhile, part of the new U.S policy is to arm Sunni militants who have been shooting at and blowing up American soldiers and Iraqis. Now we have a continued vicious circle in Iraq: oil money from the Gulf for years helped arm Sunni jihadists and terrorists many of whom came from the Gulf- Iran helped arm Shi’a (Shii’ite) groups- now the United States is arming Sunni militias while it complains about Iran arming Shi’as- then Iran will continue arming Shi’as- Iraqi officials are blaming Saudi sources for funding the terrorists- Saudis and their allies are blaming Iran for the situation in Iraq, Palestine, Lebanon- and perhaps Darfur, the Congo and global warming as well for good measure- with the enthusiastic agreement of the Bush administration………ad nauseaum.

One odd question: when U.S troops kill an odd Lebanese Shi’a, or arrest four or five Iranians in Iraq, both rare events that occurred only once, the incidents are touted in the media as evidence of Iranian interference, and perhaps they are. However, when Saudis and others are arrested and killed in the hundreds in Iraq, clearly al-Qaeda jihadists, there is no official comment. Now, if one Lebanese killed in Iraq indicates Hezbollah interference, then tell me s’il vous plait: the many hundreds of Saudis killed and arrested in Iraq indicates…….what???

Saudi Arabia has an "Authority" on Human Rights. It is a government-sanctioned and funded organizaion. That is why it does not advocate human rights within Saudi Arabia. It busiees itself with the human rights of Saudi outside the country: like those in Guantanamo, and those in prison in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, and other countries for involvement or suspicion of terrorism.

Axe kissing journalism:
S. Atallah, a Lebanese pen for hire penned today in the Saudi daily Asharq Alawsat. Saudi media carries a lot of essays and articles about the slef-denial and wisdom of the royals, all 5,000+ of them:

“Before entering the office of Prince Nayef Bin Abdulaziz, one recalls what a British military expert said that 'Saudi Arabia is fighting the battle against terrorism in the name of the whole world'(which would be fair if true, since the kingdom for decades provided the money, ideology and teachers for the schools that produced the terrorists).. And one remembers what Prince Nayef said two weeks ago about the numbers of suspects and detainees....
"While I listened to Prince Nayef I envisioned an Arab world that King Abdullah has said faces dis-integration......I did not know where to start my questioning (apparently he resolved this thorny issue)….Prince Nayef seems, with the background of domestic security challenges and regional security complexities, of steely nerves and determination.”

A Saga of Arab Corruption and Politics:
"If the master of the house plays the tambourine, it is no wonder that the members of the household will take up belly dancing."

"Itha kana rub al-beite biddafi dhariban, fa ina sheemati ahlul beite heeya al raqsu."

That is one famous and beautiful Arabic saying that is not used often enough these days. It succinctly explains how the culture of corruption has seeped from the top, from the ruling classes, down to the lowest bureaucrats. These days, the Arab region is as awash as ever in scandals- perhaps more than ever because oil prices and revenues are up and hence the stakes are higher. For those non-oil states, foreign aid is also at higher levels than ever, so there is more temptation: note the experience of PLO-Fatah over the past decade.

Corruption, always ubiquitous in the Middle East even when not headlined in public, has been making headlines again in the Arab World-at least in the offfshore media and in the few places where the press are allowed some freedom, and in private conversations.

Some Arab and foreign media are reporting, or alleging, that the new Fatah-appointed Palestinian prime minister Fayyad, himself a former World Bank bureaucrat, has confiscated millions from bank accounts of Fatah security chief Mohammad Dahlan, who is currently in Cairo for knee surgery (how many ordinary Palestinians from Gaza are flown to Cairo for medical treatment?). Dahlan was head of the superior Fatah security forces when they were easily defeated in Gaza by the smaller fundamentalist forces of Hamas.

The Independent reports Sunday that some British Labor Party politicians want further investigations into the famous BAE-Saudi bribery scandal- the GBP 1 billion (about US$ 2 billion) that was allegedly paid to Prince Bandar Bin Sultan since the 1980s. This comes as finalization of a deal seems to be near for the sale of more warplanes to Saudi Arabia. Saudi media, and most Gulf and Arab media have studiously ignored these reports.

The prize for the most complex, most convoluted web of corruption easily goes to Kuwait, which is the ountry with the most press freedom on either side of the Persian Gulf. The saga there reads like a multi-layered plot worthy of Alexandre Dumas (complete with dishdasha-clad Rocheforts, some elusive Miladys, but alas, no D'Artagnan). It is not clear as yet how much of the saga is the truth and how much fiction, but what is certain is that there is a lot of truth in it. It can only happen in Kuwait with its robust free media, weakened government, and feuding tribal politicians allied with Islamist fundamentalists, and its potentates grasping for power slipping out of their hands. So, fasten your seat belts, and here goes:

In Kuwait, the Minister of Oil Shaikh Ali al-Jarrah al-Sabah was forced to resign last week. There have been allegations that he has tried to cover up corruption by current and past high officials in the Ministry of Oil and its satellite corporations, all arms of the Kuwait Petroleum Corporation (KPC). As an example, the best he could say when he took over about one KPC CEO, a Mr. H. Hussein, who apparently resigned under pressure, was that "there are no suspicions about him". That was a good one as far as endorsements go- I think it will become a classic some day.
Still, there are no suspicions against the minister himself personally- it is a culture of corruption that he inherited and tried to serve.

The minister who preceded him, Shaikh Ahmad Fahad al-Sabah was also forced to resign from the previous cabinet for the same reasons. But he was kicked up- to Head of National Security, sort of like Condi Rice used to be, or Henry Kissinger (wow! n'est-ce pas?).

But this saga gets mor complex and hence more interesting: Shaikh Ali al-Khalifa al Sabah, Minister of Oil (and for a while of Finance) during the 1980s until 1991, has been ordered apprehended this week because he refused to attend a court-ordered hearing. He claims he is waiting for surgery in the united States scheduled for mid-September- a cute idea but not original. Shaikh Ali owns the conservative daily newspaper al-Watan. He has been accused for years of involvement in scandals in the Ministries of Oil and Finance, in the Kuwait Oil Tankers Company and in Kuwait's foreign investments (KIO) during the period. Some of his alleged co-conspirators, a F. M. al-Sabah, a K. al-Sabah, a F. Jaafar, and an A. F. al-Bader are wanted but refuse to return to the country, reportedly spending their hard-earned money between the Caribbean, Canada, and other desolate places.
Two other royal finance ministers during the 1990s were dumped quickly after clear cases of suspicious financial dealings and gross incompetence.
So what is this obsession with holding the Oil Ministry under 'reliable' people? Is it to cover up past misdeeds? Or do these guys like going to Vienna.....

Now Shaikh Talal M. al-Sabah, the chairman of the state-owned and continually loss-incurring Kuwait Airways is coming under suspicion and questioning for gross financial improprieties in the company. In fairness to the man, corruption in heavily state-subsidized KAC, like in state-owned oil corporations, has been part of the corporate culture long before his arrival. The company has long been a playground and cash cow for unemployed, and otherwise unemployable, sons of influential potentates. I would have thought the KAC scandals would have been investigated long ago, perhaps since the late 1970s when US reports (The Wall Street Journal) published documents about bribery payments by American aircraft producers to the CEO and high KAC officials (all potentates, but not royals at that time). So, corruption has been 'the corporate culture' of the KAC for decades. The current chairman claims that 'all supervisory authorities' agree that the company 'never had any improprieties'- he should be fired for this silly statement alone.

Waiting in the wings, belatedly trying hard to play a statesman, is the Speaker of the legislature Jassim al-Kharafi, a former Minister of Finance during 1985-1990. There are no suspicions of personal corruption about him. But he had the habit of appointing incompetents to high positions in the government and in state-owned corporations, provided they were his cronies or residents of his own district. Apparently he firmly believed in a kind of system of confederation...no, not necessarily a confederation of dunces.

On the other hand, there are some who claim that tribal legislators, clamoring for advantages for their own various tribes, are using scandal-mongering to pressure ministers into hiring thousands of their otherwise unemployable tribesmen. This is only partly true, because where there is smoke, there might be fire. Vive la tribu.

At least the media in Kuwait, unlike the rest of the Persian Gulf states, are allowed to cover these scandals, for now, and some of them do.

Cheers
Mohammed

Also Sprach Feltman?
Arab media gave extensive coverage to a recent interview on a pro-Hariri television station by the U.S ambassador to Lebanon, Mr. Jeffrey Feltman. Probably nobody is disliked more by supporters of the opposition in Lebanon than Mr. Feltman. The interview heartened some media in the Persian Gulf states, who would like the United States to be more assertive in Lebanon and in the region as a whole.

Apparently Mr. Feltman stressed certain developments about Lebanon’s internal politics- he went so far as to stress that the leadership of the army will stand by the Saniora government against the opposition (according to the highly unreliable Kuwaiti daily rag al-seyassah). It is not clear if he actually said that about the army, and alseyassah is notorious for distorting news and statements. However, if he did say it, it was a foolish thing. Lebanon's army must stay out of domestic political rivalries, otherwise it will break up into sectarian factions, which would make it a useless tool for either side.

Predictably, Hezbollah TV was quick to headline that: “There was no need for a TV interview to show that Feltman is the true leader of the March 15 forces (the Saniora-Hariri axis), since everybody already knows that he is their leader”.
The interview was probably aimed at reassuring the Hariri-Saniora followers and perhaps sending signals to the opposition, but its overall effect is highly doubtful.

Meanwhile, in a new twist, Lebanese security are reported to have fingered the Fath al-Islam (Sunni Salafi) terrorist group as being behind the killing of former Minister of Industry Pierre Gemayel last year. This is the same group that the Lebanese army has failed to defeat in a Palestinian refugee camp. Reports indicate that many among its members are neither Palestinians, Syrians, or Lebanese: but rather many of those killed and captured have been Saudi sympathizers of al-Qaeda.
Cheers
Mohammed

Iraqi Politics: a Flashback
Apparently the Sunni insurgents in Iraq are splitting up. Right now, it looks like some are ending their alliance with al-Qaeda. Soon there will be other break-ups along tribal and clan lines as well- there are already signs of splits even within the parliamentary Tawafuq Sunni group. The Shi'as have their own two major divisions, between the Sadrists and the former SCIRI, the al-Hakeem group. The Da'awa Party of PM al-Maliki was the main target of the Ba'ath regime and the scourge of its royal allies in the Persian Gulf tribal monarchies during the 1980s. But the Da'awa does not have a large popular base now: the Sadrist movement has taken over much of that.

Some news reports now claim that part of a major Sunni insurgent group in Iraq, dubbed the "the 1920 Revolution" has been shifting away from al-Qaeda and may be receiving U.S arms to fight its 'former' allies.

Ironically, the 1920 Revolution, later called al-thawra al-Iraqiyya al-Kubra , was a rebellion against the British occupation after World War I and its plan of creating a mandate in Iraq. It led to some cooperation between the majority Shi'as and the Sunni ulema religious elders against the British. Grand Ayatollah Shirazi issued a fatwa at the time, pointing out that it was against Islamic law for Muslims to countenance being ruled by non-Muslims.

The Sunni elites had in the past supported the Tukish-Ottoman rule, and they saw an opening with the Brits, which they exploited. They quickly became the favorites of the likes of Gertrude Bell and Percy Cox. The Shi'as and the Kurds were vehemently opposed to British rule. Those two groups bore the brunt of British anger and armor, as their villages and towns were bombed and shelled.

In the end the British were forced to form an 'Iraqi' government for the new country, but this government was not totally 'Iraqi': it was mainly a Sunni regime, formed largely of imported former Ottoman lackeys from Syria and Hijaz and local Ottoman lackeys from places like Baghdad and Samarra. In the end the British had their revenge on the rebellious Shi'as: they gave the power in the new Iraqi state to the Sunni minority, who held it with force until 2003. The Kurds, as usual, got the worst deal: they were effectively relegated to third-class citizenship, just behind the Shi'as.
Cheers
Mohammed

Failed States:
Foreign Policy magazine has issued its list of "Failed States" for 2007, for all its worth:

The Arabs win the gold, the silver, and the bronze this time: the top three states, i.e the three most failed states on the list, are members of the Arab League. The Africans are close behind, nipping at their heels.

There are eight Arab states among the top 60. Which means that almost half the League members are defined here as failed states of one degree or another. Many other grossly mismanaged Arab states are probably not defined as such only because of three important letters O-I-L. A steep drop in petroleum prices, although unlikely right now, could easily double the number of failed Arab states: remember, when crude prices were at around than $ 10-15 a barrel, Saudi Arabia was largely considered a near-failed state.

The top eight Arab states include, by improving order (from worst to less bad?): Sudan (1), Iraq (2), Somalia (3), Yemen (24), Lebanon (28), Egypt (36), Syria (40).
There are 20 Moslem states among the top 60, and 7 among the top 20.

The top 20 (the worst 20) are all African, Arab, or Moslem states, with the exception of North Korea and Burma (this dubious company should make Kim Jung Il in his Dear Leader tight khakis really pissed).

Palestinian Divisions:
Arab media report that the Fatah-PLO in the West Bank is threatened with a split of its own. Icons (or relics, depending on your politics) of the Old old guard such as Farouq Kaddoumi and Hani Al-Hassan have raised objections to President Abbas' policies regarding the peace process and disarming some militias.

Meanwhile, the prospect of holding U.N supervised elections in both Gaza and the West Bank is being raised, but it looks like neither side wants the elections on his own territory (where are you Jimmy Carter when they need you?)

Then again, what happens if Hamas wins again, in BOTH territories? This possibility cannot be dismissed if the elections are fair and open- the Fatah has dug a deep hole of corruption for itself since the Oslo agreement. And Palestinian voters are crazy and desperate enough to do it. Perhaps all those Fatah ministers and ex-ministers can be persuaded to give back the money, liquidate assets across Europe and points beyond. Perhaps with a little help from their friends....perhaps a few millions of those famous BAE billions that were received by a certain influential Saudi prince-diplomat-ambassador in Washington, and eluded the British SFO, with the help of Tony Blair?

Which brings me to Mr. Blair, mostly a nice guy, really, in spite of his Alfred E. Newman looks- come to think of it, isn't there another very famous Western leader who also resembles Alfred E. Newman?
But don't hold your breath for yo Blair to achieve a breakthrough in his new job as 'mediator' in the Middle East.

Iranians are getting restive over the government's inept economic policies and its renewed crackdown on reformers and women who show some hair. Last week, gasoline had to be rationed, and this hit people where it really hurts, especially in a country that sits on an ocean of petroleum.
Cheers
Mohammed

The Saudi offshore satellite television station Alarbiya, controlled by a royal prince, has been leading a crusade (no pun here) against what it sees as Shi'a (Shi'ite) expansionism. This started ever since a Shi'a- Kurdish led coalition was elected to run Iraq. But it has escalated since the Israeli-Hezballah war last summer and the increased rivalry between the Shi'a block in Lebanon (Hizballah and Amal) and the Saudi-allied Hariri block and its partners (Mr Saad Hariri is also a Saudi citizen). This trend is evident all across the Saudi press, especially the offshore media like Asharq Alawsat (Middle East), Alhayat, and Alarabiya.

These media outlets often, almost daily, exchange their editorials and opinion columns. Alarabiya periodically reports on 'uncovering' Shi'a 'converts' around the Arab world. It has reported on Algerian security uncovering teachers who had 'converted' to Shi'ism, and has extensively reported on allegations of Egyptian, Sudanese, and especially Palestinian conversions. It never mentions whether these converts hide in dark catacombs, but it does imply that there is something sinister about the whole thing.....it is soooo un-Wahhabi.

Today it headlined with a report of a dangerous new trend: Shi'as in Egypt seeking to establish a house of worship!!! Oy vey, what will they try next? A synagogue in Riyadh?
Cheers
Mohammed

The Queen of England bestowing a knighthood on Salman Rushdie has stirred a lot of controversy in the Middle East. Arabs, Pakistanis and Iranians are pissed about it, to put it mildly. No word from the mellow Turks yet, the Afghans don't count in this case, and the wily Nigerians are trying to figure out a way to use the issue in their national specialty: the world renouned oil and banking charity scams. Soon there will be emails and letters flying from Lagos, Abuja and London offering a part of the Rushdie fortune, a knighthood by the Queen, or perhaps a new lofty title by some Pakistani shaikh.

But the furor is not as would have been expected in the past, say a few years ago. Normally this would be a good sign, except for the factors behind it. Too many issues, or regional disasters, compete with the Old Queen and the irreverent author for the headlines these days: Iraq, Lebanon, Gaza, Nuclear weapons, sectarian issues, etc. Perhaps if the Queen had waited until Christmas Eve......

A Pakistani organizaton of 'ulema, Islamic religious leaders, has countered the queen's action with one of its own. The Council of Pakistani 'Ulema, with 2,000 clerical members, has awarded Usama (Osama) Bin Laden a new title: Sword of Allah. Now, old Usama can't go around being called Sir Usama, not yet, but he can be called Saif al-Islam, or just plain 'Saif'. Come to think of it, this is the very same title bestowed on Saddam Hussein in the 1980s by some of the elite 'thinkers' (that is what they were called), and elite poets (and very elite poetesses) among his future Arab victims on the Gulf. Except they called him Sword of the Arabs, instead of Sword of Allah. They weren't as ambitious for him as the Pakistanis are for Usama.

As for old Usama (Osama), you infidel kaffirs in the West can call him plain 'Sword' if you wish.
Cheers
Mohammed

Saudi media, mostly owned or controlled by royal princes, has a large supply of mercenary journalists in reserve. These are often non-Saudi Arabs who have seen the light, discovered the joys of an absolute tribal monarchy, and shifted their ideology toward extolling the virtues of said tribal absolute monarchy. They are supposed to lend outside credibility to whatever the newspaper has to say.

I have selected an article from the Saudi newspaper Asharq Alawsat, one of several candidates for what I have in mind, written by someone named Ghassan al-Imam. Here is an abridged example of such groveling huat journalisme: (the italics in parentheses are my own comments):

“I have always said that the Moslem Brotherhood (such as Hamas) are not qualified to build a democratic and cooperative relationship (such as exists in Saudi Arabia and other Arab states?) with other political forces, once they have taken political control (surprise, surprise). I want to continue talking of the Arabhood of Saudi Arabia (another surprise, give the word ‘Arabia’ in the name), and the necessity of facing up to the fierce foreign and alien (referring to both the USA and Iran) assault on the Arab nation, whether in the call for jihad or in the name of American calls for democratic reform….

“I am not presenting here some propaganda for the Saudi policy, but I am presenting an explanatory vision of the history of the Saudi state through three centuries (try seventy five years). My vision differs from the traditional visions, with the goal of correcting deliberate distortions that are done to a historic Arab state. These are also done from outside by groups that take sanctuary overseas (could they do that in Riyadh, par exemple, without getting their heads chopped off?)

“Several years ago, I explained the history of the Saudi State in a series of articles, on these very same pages. I was shocked to discover that Arabs, and many Saudis, do not know this epic, struggling history (he uses the term ni’dhali, which implies fighting for freedom and justice, or perhaps the right to strike). However, an individual effort is not adequate. We need for historians, academicians, and thinkers (but no booty kissers?) to present a modern vision of the ‘Saudi Project’ to future generations (and how do you present a modern vision of a tribal absolute monarchy-theocracy?).

“The Saudi state had the aim of unification from the outset…...the Saudi family used its alliance with the faith deliberately to promote unity among the tribes….as a precursor to modernizing them (what a sneaky thing to do)…..

“The nineteenth century was a fierce fiery Saudi struggle for liberation, and some Saudi rulers paid a high price for it (so, we do have a Nelson Mandela al-Saud somewhere).

“King Abdulaziz was a visionary, who bided his time wisely for thirty years, before declaring his unified state (of course first he had to defeat and take over such autonomous regions as the birthplace of Islam Hijaz and oil-rich al-A’hsaa, but these are mere details) , and when he did declare his project o Arab unity, he gave the country the name of Arabia (very decent of him, and I thought that has been its name since before Islam, as in Arabia Deserta. He also gave the country his own family name).

“King Abdulaziz’ vision was even socialist, as when he established a cooperative farm (was this on the model of a Soviet Kolkhuz, or an early Zionist Kibbutz? Was the King inspired by Joseph Stalin, Vladimir Jabotinsky, or Ben Gurion? Alas, the writer does not say.) ……”
Such groveling nonsense has been a hallmark of a lot of the media in the Gulf, particularly the Saudi media.
Cheers
Mohammed

Panmunjom of Palestine, Arab Political ED and the Blue Pill
Interesting, Mr. Bush mentioned a possible Korean style situation for Iraq- he meant a South Korean style US presence. Now we might have a different Korean style situation for the Palestinians: a North Korea-South Korea style of division, something like a Gaza- West Bank division. Ironically, that would make Israel the Panmunjom, the truce village, of the divided Palestinian areas.

Speaking of hypocrisy: The US government and other allies are resuming aid to the Palestinian government, now that President Abbas has dissolved the popularly elected Hamas government and installed a pro-PLO unelected cabinet- for the West Bank only, of course.

An Arab League foreign ministers meeting in Cairo stressed the importance of supporting ‘legality’ in both Lebanon and Palestine. Typically, they did not specify who was legal and who was not in these two cases, although it is understood by all what they meant. Normally whoever is in power is considered legal, no matter how they got there.

Who is right and who is not? The constitutionally elected president of Lebanon along with its constitutionally elected Speaker of Parliament (one side of the current Lebanese divide), or the constitutionally elected Prime Minister and his remaining ministers (the other side of the divide)? About one third of the Arab countries boycotted that Cairo meeting: what is the point if the whole system suffers from a severe case of ED? ED here could mean Electoral Dysfunction, but then again, it could also mean something more personal and therefore more serious, as in maybe 'they won't be ready when the moment is right'- quel embarassment!

I suppose in Arab terms an unelected regime in the West Bank is more legal than an elected and nutty one in, say, Gaza. And if there is a way to make it a hereditary regime, as in a hand-me-down, father-to-son regime, then it would be even more legitimate.

An embarrassment: the Lebanese army has been fighting for many weeks to root out the Fath al-Islam terrorist group in the Nahr–el-Barid refugee camp, and it has the support of all major political factions in Lebanon. If there are only about 200 or so armed men, then how come it is taking so long?

I read a comment on the Aalarbiya website about the differences between Lebanon to Syria, in terms of culture and democratic values. A Saudi commentator said that when he crossed from Syria to Lebanon, it was like moving from the 15th century to the 21st century. He did not say how it felt when he got to Lebanon from his own country.
Cheers
Mohammed

Saudi Arabia does not have a good record of successful mediation among warring Arab or Moslem factions. Not even the holy city of Mecca could make warring and feuding factions abide by the accords they sign within her. It is almost worse than during the Jahiliyya (that is the ancient days of paganism to you kaffirs) when accords among Arab tribes were respected, up to a point of course.

Accords signed in Mecca, Riyadh, or Taif to stop bloodshed in areas as diverse as Kuwait (July 1990) Afghanistan (1990s), Lebanon, Iraq, and Palestine have been broken as soon as the parties returned home. In fairness to the Saudis, hardly any accord signed to settle an Arab or Moslem dispute has been respected, no matter where it was signed.

Famously, a few months ago the Palestinian Hamas and Fatah were brought to Mecca, and they agreed to sign a peace accord and agreed to share power. It was an untenable accord between the utterly corrupt (PLO-Fatah) and the hopelessly fundamentalist (Hamas). It also became untenable because some Arab media, especially in the Persian Gulf monarchies, gloatingly pronounced Hamas, until recently the favored recipient of their aid and support, as good as dead. The kleptocracy of Fatah and the PLO were pronounced preferable to the extremist and absurdly anti-peace Hamas- never mind that it was the kleptocratic nature of Fatah leaders, as well as Gulf money, that lead to the growth of Hamas.
Now all the wisdom of King Abdullah, Big Abdullah of Saudi Arabia not Little Abdullah de Jourdanie, and perhaps the huge sums of money disbursed, have been wasted.

Money is made to waste in the Arab World- easy come, easy go: just ask BAE and the now-muzzled British SFO investigators. But wisdom? Now that is a scarce resource in the region (psssst to the Salafis of Arabia, I have heard from several reliable and unimpeachable sources that Solomon was Jewish, but don’t swallow you ghutra in despair. That was a long time ago- he would probably convert to Salafism if he were around these days).

Unfortunately it begins to increasingly look like wisdom is also in short supply in Washington as well. The popularly elected Hamas should have been engaged rather than cornered and starved. Also, the Fatah-PLO boys should learn to play their cards closer to their chests- premature gloating is NOT a good strategy in a poker game where the winner takes all.

Increasingly, the choices facing other Arabs as well are being restricted to traditional despotic kleptocracy or despotic fundamentalism. It pays for Arab regimes to restrict their opposition to the fundies and jihadists (unless they are allied with them): nothing would insure Washington’s support more than waving the fundamentalist threat. Almost like the good old days of the Cold War.
Cheers
Mohammed

A Shift in Iraq Policy? Who Invented Corruption?

The United States has been pressing the Iraqis to disarm the troublesome (Shi'a) militias. The Arab regimes and their owned and paid-for media have been quite noisy about disarming the militias, as well as installing a quasi-military dictatorship. Now the US military is arming new (Sunni) militias, who just happen to be the ones that were busy killing American soldiers and Iraqis over the past four years. They probably also just happen to be the Ba'athist officers who gassed Kurds, massacred Shi'as and pillaged Kuwait.
So what is the policy now: disarm and disband the militias, or arm them??

Prince Bandar Bin Sultan, reported this past week by the British press (The Guardian, etc.)to have received paybacks (a.k.a bribes) worth 1 billion pounds (about $ 2 billion) for an arms sales by BAE deal to Saudi Arabia while he was in Washington, was quoted in the media as having said in an interview that "Saudi Arabia did not invent corruption". Ok, true, but then neither did Hitler invent aggressive wars and genocide- he just perfected them.

Some media in the Gulf are debating whether to blame the last hurricane Guno that devastated the southern Gulf on Iranian mullahs, Syrian Ba'athists, or sneaky Zionists. The fundie Salafis tend to take it as a sign of God's wrath for even thinking of allowing women to drive.
Cheers
Mohammed

Attorney-general knew of BAE and the £1bn. Then concealed it


Goldsmith hid secret money transfers from international anti-corruption organisation

David Leigh and Rob Evans
Friday June 8, 2007
The Guardian


British investigators were ordered by the attorney-general Lord Goldsmith to conceal from international anti-bribery watchdogs the existence of payments totalling more than £1bn to a Saudi prince, the Guardian can disclose.
The money was paid into bank accounts controlled by Prince Bandar for his role in setting up BAE Systems with Britain's biggest ever arms deal. Details of the transfers to accounts in the US were discovered by officers from the Serious Fraud Office during its long-running investigation into BAE. But its inquiry was halted suddenly last December.


Article continues

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

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

The Guardian has established that the attorney-general warned colleagues last year that "government complicity" in the payment of the sums was in danger of being revealed if the SFO probe was allowed to continue.
The abandonment of the inquiry caused an outcry which provoked the world's anti-corruption watchdog, the OECD, to launch its own investigation into the circumstances behind the decision.

But when OECD representatives sought to learn more about the background to the move at private meetings in January and March they were not given full disclosure by British officials, according to sources.

One insider with knowledge of the discussions said :"When the British officials gave their briefing they gave some details of the allegations, but it now transpires, not all of them."

A source close to the OECD added: "We suspected that the British were holding some secret back."

Sources close to the US justice department, whose members help to police the international anti-corruption treaty to which Britain is a signatory, confirmed that UK officials had not disclosed to the group that huge payments had gone to the prince in connection with the al-Yamamah arms deal.

In those confidential briefings at the OECD headquarters in Paris earlier this year, the UK said "national security" reasons were behind the decision to halt the SFO investigation into the case.

They claimed the SFO probe focused largely on old allegations of a slush fund operated by the BAE to provide treats for junior Saudi officials. Last night, a spokesman for Lord Goldsmith said full evidence had not been given to international panel members of the OECD anti-bribery working party at their meetings in order to protect "national security". He said: "The risk of causing such damage to national security had a bearing on the information voluntarily provided to the OECD".

He added: "We have not revealed information which could itself jeopardise our national security. For these purposes the OECD was effectively a public forum, as is illustrated by the fact that you claim to know what [the government] told them."

The Guardian's disclosure of British government complicity in the alleged payment of £1bn to Prince Bandar caused international concern yesterday, with Tony Blair taking a bullish position when questioned at the G8.

Standing beside George Bush, a close family friend of former US ambassador Prince Bandar, Mr Blair said it would have "wrecked" the relationship with Saudi Arabia if he had allowed investigations to go on. "This investigation, if it had gone ahead, would have involved the most serious allegations and investigation being made of the Saudi royal family," he said.

"My job is to give advice as to whether that is a sensible thing in circumstances where I don't believe the investigation would have led to anywhere except to the complete wreckage of a vital interest to our country."

Neither Mr Blair nor the Ministry of Defence made any attempt to deny the allegations revealed by the Guardian.

Prince Bandar last night issued a statement through his lawyers categorically denying that payments made to Riggs Bank in Washington "represented improper secret commissions or 'backhanders'".

He said the payments were made to Saudi ministry of defence and aviation (MODA) accounts of which he was a signatory. "Any monies paid out of those accounts were exclusively for purposes approved by MODA."

He said the accounts were regularly audited by the Saudi ministry of finance and BAE payments were "pursuant to the al-Yamamah contracts". He added: "At no stage have MODA or the Saudi Arabian ministry of finance identified any irregularities in the conduct of the accounts."

BAE last night issued a statement claiming there was full government complicity in any payments it had made with regard to the al-Yamamah deal, which was signed in 1985. The company said transactions were made with the "express approval" of the British government.

"All such payments made under those agreements were made with the express approval of both the Saudi and UK governments".

The fallout from yesterday's allegations may affect BAE's planned expansion in the US.

According to a source in Washington, BAE's $4.1bn (£2bn) proposed takeover of a major US defence company could be in jeopardy because of the disclosures.

The source, assessing the damage yesterday, predicted it will also be harder for BAE to pursue other plans for moves into the US defence market.

BAE could come under scrutiny from a number of US investigatory bodies, including the treasury, the justice department and congressional committees.

Ghosts of Defeats Past:
This day brings out a lot of "soul-searching" in the Arab World- mostly in the media, and perhaps among some "baby boomer" Arabs. Baby boomer here means the generation that was born between 1940 and late 1950s, almost the same American definition, but it has nothing to do with World War II soldiers coming home eager to procreate and do a lot of begetting. Every Arab generation is a baby boomer because there is always a lot of procreating and begetting: what we lack in quality, we try to make up in quantity.As for Arab governments: there is no soul-searching there, because there are no souls there.

A lot of the soul-searching this year is done through official, semi-official, and quasi-official media- is there any other kind in the Arab World? Even the now ubiquitous satellite television stations and offfshore newspapers are official-friendly, at least- often they are owned by the same princes and potentates who rule. So, they are being used to fight old battles and settle old scores. It is interesting how the petro-media that dominates these days uses evasive tactics to kick the dead secular, leftist, pan-Arabist horse. In the case of Egypt under Nasser, the big loser of June 5th 1967, for example, the petro-media takes this opportunity each year to attack everyone who was close to Nasser...except Nasser himself. This is a blatant and repeated case of moral cowardice. It is partly psychological, of course.

To this day, Nasser, with all his shortcomings and defeats, oddly represents a period of hope and healthy anger. Nasser was oppressive, but then which Arab ruler today is less oppressive and less intrusive than he ever was? He still has some hold on the Arab baby-boomers born anywhere between 1940 and the mid-1950s. This is more a judgment on the current trough of Arab political life than anything else.

Perhaps one reason is that the current Arab regimes have led their nations to an even more ignominious defeat than the Israelis ever inflicted on Nasser. They seem to have lost the will and the ability to shape events in their own region. Nasser died of a heart attack when he discovered that he could no longer dominate and shape events- a sort of an involuntary version of the defeated Roman falling on his own sword. While nowadays the kings, emirs, and presidents-for-life strut around their summits for the benefit of their media, the fate of the region is shaped by decidedly non-Arab forces. This is the case wherever one looks, from the Persian-American Gulf (this is a good realistic compromise name) all the way to North Africa. Unfortunately, unlike Nasser, current Arab leaders are too thick-skinned and shameless to even suffer heart attacks. As for falling on their own swords, forget about it: they have no swords and hardly any "intestines".

Al Qaeda in Iraq:
I watched a tape on the internet of the leader of the Islamic State in Iraq. One thing is certain to me: the man is not an Iraqi. Although he used classical Arabic, which is the same all over, one can always tell by the way certain words are pronounced. The man is definitly not Iraqi or Syrian. His pronounciation of classical Arabic indicates that he is someone from Saudi Arabia, the Gulf, or Yemen.
Cheers
Mohammed